Friday, August 04, 2017

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


In the long list of the brilliant, average or downright incompetent people who served as Emperors and Empresses in the c.300 years of the Romanov dynasty, two people stood out in their leadership and impact on the Russian state that they earned the appellation of “Great”. These are Peter I and Catherine II – both widely regarded as the two most competent Russian leaders ever. Peter was the son of a Tsar and raised from birth to lead his nation, so while his achievements are breathtaking they are not necessarily wholly unexpected given his background. However, what strength of character propels a young girl born into a minor German noble family into a position of being rated as one of the two most impressive autocrats in Russian history. This excellent book by author Robert Massie gives us an insight into the character of this extraordinary woman.


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:

Tosin Kiyesi said...

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!