Philosopher-queen – Review of Catherine the Great: Portrait of a Woman by Robert Massie
“You forget the difference between our two
positions: you work only on paper, which is smooth, supple, and offers no
resistance to either your imagination or your pen; whereas I, a poor Empress,
work on human skin, which is much more irritable and ticklish" –
Catherine the Great in correspondence with French Philosopher, Denis Diderot

I think to understand the life of Catherine the
Great, it is important to understand two things: the first is the unique form
of government that was Romanov Russia and the second is the intellectual and
humanist revolution sweeping Europe in her lifetime (i.e., the enlightenment). I think
much of Catherine’s character is defined by the fundamental contradictions of combining
a renaissance European mind with wielding absolute power over a vast realm that
was barely out of the medieval age. Since
I picked up this book after reading the sweeping narrative history of the
Romanovs by the writer Simon Sebag Montefiore,
I already had a decent sense of Romanov Russia. This was a form of royal rule
that went beyond mere monarchy into full-fledged autocracy: Russian monarchies didn’t
have to be bothered with constraints of constitutions – up to the ascension of
Catherine’s son, there were no rules governing royal succession and Russian
monarchs had absolute discretion to appoint their successors and Peter the
Great used this discretion to appoint his 2nd wife, a former Lithuanian camp laundress, as his successor. However, Russian monarchs had to contend with
running a vast, diverse land and with a regicide rate that was significantly
higher than the European average. That a German lady with tenuous
legitimacy (she was simply proclaimed Empress after the overthrow of her
husband Peter) was able to hold to power for many decades until her death in
old age and expand the wealth and boundaries of her empire all the while maintaining
friendships with the leading intellectuals of her day (Voltaire, Diderot etc.)
is simply remarkable. The author does a great job of demonstrating how she
achieved this feat through a combination of clear vision, prodigious hard work
and a level of political sagacity that would have made Machiavelli proud.
Catherine the Great was a case study in
assimilation. Born Sophie Friederike von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg in 1729 in
Anhalt (in present day Germany), she only moved to Russia around the age of
14/15 when the reigning Empress of Russia (Elizabeth) summoned her to become a
bride-in-waiting for her nephew and heir (the future emperor Peter). She
converted from Lutheranism to Orthodox Christianity (to the chagrin of her
Lutheran father) and threw herself into mastering Russian customs and language –
something her husband Peter never managed. She mastered Russian within a year, learned
to manage a “mother-in-law from hell” who also happened to be empress and
developed a set of relationships within the army and the court that proved
very helpful to her ascending to the throne and keeping it. Throughout her life
she managed this tricky task of assimilation so well that while her husband was
widely reviled for being foreign (and German), she largely avoided that charge
even though she was much less Russian than him – her husband, Peter, had at
least been Peter the Great’s grandson.
Following the coup against her husband and
subsequent regicide, she went on to rule Russia for 34 years and to notch major
achievements. She expanded the boundaries of the Russian state through various
conquests (including the annexation of Poland and the Crimea as well as the
establishment of Alaska), reformed education and health services (she had
herself and her grandchild vaccinated before promoting vaccination amongst her
skeptical subjects) and instituted various administrative reforms (including
chipping at the edges of serfdom). She also sought to spread the fruits of the Enlightenment
in Russia and a lasting homage to this effort stands in the Hermitage Museum in
St. Petersburg, which was initially built to house her large collection of the
leading European art of her day.
The book isn’t all about affairs of state though
as the author devoted significant space to discussing Catherine’s many love affairs.
No it wasn’t hundreds as often claimed by mischief makers – it was more like 12
according to the author and only 4 of these were significant, with the one with
Grigory Potemkin as the most significant of her life (she may have secretly
married him actually). I could not however help but get struck by how someone
with as fine a mind as Catherine the Great came to be as emotionally needy and in need
of such constant affection. However, this deep longing to be constantly in love
may be explained as a psychological response to a loveless and joyless
childhood that was followed by a loveless and joyless marriage. Her marriage to Paul may never have been consummated and the children she bore during their marriage were not fathered by him. Her mother-in-law
(Empress Elizabeth) also effectively “kidnapped” Catherine’s first child as soon as
he was born and raised him personally as a property of the state.
The book however stops well short of a hagiography.
In many ways a legitimate charge of hypocrisy could be leveled at her as she
was more “enlightened” in thought than in action. As a princess of the Russian
empire, she wrote moving criticism of Serfdom. However, on becoming Empress and
getting to fully realize the importance of Serfdom to the wealth of the nobles
and the crown she was happy to go on with that evil system. She wrote glowingly
of what could be termed “17th century human rights” with her pen
pals Diderot and Voltaire but thought nothing of installing a former lover as
king of Poland and conspiring with Prussia and Austria to carve up his kingdom
when it suited her plans. This was a very balanced book and on the whole, I found it to be a very
informative and lively portrayal of a strong, lively woman who lived life on
her own terms and raised the standards of her age.
1 comment:
This is mind-opening for me. Reading this review shows me how much we can learn from the past as we now in the age of gender equality and advancing women's rights...there's indeed nothing new under the sun. To think a woman in Romanov Russia (I saw little documentary on this a while back) would even be a ruler let alone be one of the greatest rulers of her time will be inconceivable by the 21st mind given the obscurity of women in that period...and maybe there's something to learn from the strategy and execution of her ascendancy - what Seun termed 'assimilation' - who knows how much progress we can make in the gender equality and women right crusade by learning one or two lessons from the rare and exceptional great women of the past - I have added this to my reading list!
Post a Comment