44 "CONSTITUTIONALISM"
wanted to see the same traits prevail in the administration of his
Empire.
The Emperor's understanding of the term constitution implied the
rejection of all those features of a nation's life rooted in historical
tradition and precedent, which did not develop in a very orderly or
logical way and whose manifestations were not amenable to rigid
bureaucratic control. In a sense, his mechanistic approach, directly
derived from the precepts of Enlightened Absolutism, stood in direct
contrast to the "organistic", historical approach of the Senatorial
party, with its emphasis on the autonomous development of estates and
institutions. Alexander and his friends were, therefore, receptive to
borrowings from Napoleonic models and such imitation in tum served
to reinforce the elements of enlightened bureaucratic absolutism
contained in their plans.^1 The results of their labors illustrated this
bureaucratic bent very clearly: they rejected the principle of collegiate
rule, which under Russian conditions - as even Speransky admitted
later - had a great deal to recommend itself, and they gave their
preference to monocratic ministries (1802). It paved the way to a more
intensive bureaucratization of the Russian government on the model
of the army. The ministers, like staff officers of a commander, were
responsible to their chief, the Emperor, only individually. On the
provincial level, the governors, directly appointed by the Emperor
were subordinated to the ministers, and became the local agents of
execution of a highly centralized, para-military hierarchy. Quite
naturally, throughout the reign of Alexander I, we witness an
increasing monopolization of power and influence by governors. and
ministers, at the expense of the few institutions which could claim to
represent the estates of the realm, as for example the Senate, the
marshals of the nobility, assemblies of the nobility, city assemblies and
mayors. In turn, reliance on a centralized and hierarchical bureaucracy,
led the Unofficial Committee to stress the need of preserving the
autocratic power of the Emperor. Indeed, only the absolute power of
a well-meaning, enlightened autocrat could bring about the necessary1 Cf. the incisive judgment of Otto Hintze that Bonapartism is more an enlightened
absolutism than a constitutional monarchical system; for France, Bonapartism (of
Napoleon I, especially) has played the role enlightened absolutism had played in
Prussia and Austria. O. Hintze, "Das monarchische Prinzip und die konstitutionelle
Verfassung," Staat und Tlerfassu'lg (Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur allgemeinen
Tlerfassungsgeschiohte), (Leipzig 1941), pp. 349-379 (also in Preussische Jahrbucher,
vol. 144, pp. 381-412). Tel'berg and Dovnar.Zapol'skii (op. cit.) have pointed out
the bureaucratic and enlightened despotism features in the ideas of the Unofficial
Committee members. Incidentally, we have in the text, preferred to use the phrase,
"enlightened absolutism" which is more accurate than the contradictory "enlightened
despotism" which has taken root in English historiography.