{"id":6694,"date":"2021-11-24T12:30:10","date_gmt":"2021-11-24T11:30:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.historyextra.com\/?p=90491"},"modified":"2021-11-24T14:15:21","modified_gmt":"2021-11-24T13:15:21","slug":"hypocrite-reactionary-usurper-sex-maniac-is-catherine-the-greats-reputation-justified","status":"publish","type":"rss_feed","link":"https:\/\/c01.purpledshub.com\/bbchistory\/rss_feed\/hypocrite-reactionary-usurper-sex-maniac-is-catherine-the-greats-reputation-justified\/","title":{"rendered":"Hypocrite, reactionary, usurper, sex maniac: is Catherine the Great\u2019s reputation justified?"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>

By HistoryExtraAdmin\n \t\t<\/p>

Published: Wednesday, 24 November 2021 at 12:00 am<\/p>

\n\n

<\/p>\n

\u201cI blush for mankind.\u201d That was Nikolay Karamzin\u2019s withering verdict on the reign of Catherine the Great<\/a>. Karamzin \u2013 who, in the early 19th century, penned a wide\u00adranging history of Russia \u2013 wasn\u2019t the only historian to disapprove of the empress\u2019s behaviour. In fact, ever since Catherine died in 1796, it seems that critics have been lining up to attack her reputation.<\/p>\n

So how did Catherine make Karamzin blush? Of all the many criticisms levelled against her, four stand out: that she usurped the Russian throne from her husband; that she was irredeemably promiscuous, preying on a succession of ever younger men; that she masqueraded as an enlightened monarch while doing little to ameliorate the suffering of the poor; and that she pursued a rapacious foreign policy.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a damaging charge\u00adlist indeed. But does it stand up to scrutiny? I believe not. Catherine undoubtedly had her flaws. But examine Catherine\u2019s record within the context of her time and, I would argue, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that she deserves to be judged more sympathetically.<\/p>\n

Take the first of her major \u2018crimes\u2019: her seizure of power. It\u2019s true that Catherine had no claim to the Russian throne \u2013 she was the product of a German princely family that had fallen on hard times. It\u2019s also true that her rise \u2013 from anonymous aristocrat to empress of Russia by the age of 33 \u2013 was utterly remarkable. Yet her elevation was as much the product of her mother\u2019s opportunism, the diplomatic intrigues of the royal court, and her ability to impress the Russian ruler, Empress Elizabeth, as her own naked ambition.<\/p>\n

The key to Catherine\u2019s rise was her betrothal to Empress Elizabeth\u2019s heir, Peter, the Duke of Holstein\u00adGottorp. They married in 1745 and Peter became tsar in 1761. The couple\u2019s marriage was tempestuous and, just over six months after Peter had become tsar (as Peter III), he was overthrown by Catherine with the support of army officers from the elite guards\u2019 regiments, including Catherine\u2019s own lover, Grigory Orlov. A few days after the coup, Peter was killed by Orlov\u2019s brother, supposedly in a drunken brawl.<\/p>\n

Catherine wasn\u2019t the only member of Russia\u2019s elite to benefit from her husband\u2019s downfall <\/blockquote> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div>\n<\/div>
Catherine certainly benefited from her husband\u2019s downfall, but she was far from the only one. A common saying about Russian tsardom is that it was \u201cautocracy tempered by assassination\u201d; that is, the ruler had almost unlimited powers but was always vulnerable to being dethroned if he or she alienated the elites. Peter III had done just that, and in particular had offended the patriotic feelings of the army officer corps by switching sides in the Seven Years\u2019 War, signing a peace deal with Frederick the Great of Prussia, and abandoning Russian conquests in East Prussia. The emperor appeared capricious and unstable, which led to plots against him by top officials. Catherine herself was at risk, as her husband threatened to divorce her, marry his mistress and disinherit her son.<\/p>\n
It is impossible to know how Peter\u2019s reign would have evolved but those officers and officials who engineered the coup could, in later years, look back at Catherine\u2019s record and believe, with some justification, that they had acted in the country\u2019s best interests as well as their own.<\/p>\n
$\""Catherine\"$ <\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>