Birth of the Military Intelligentsia 249
Among the plotters were the generals in command of the Preobrazhensky and
Semenovsky regiments (P. A. Talyzin, L.(?) I. Depreradovich). the Horse
Guards (F. P. Uvarov), and the Keksgol'm infantry regiment (N. I. Verderev-
sky), to name but the most prestigious units. A recent student of the coup
observes that those involved in it were 'the cream of the officer corps'.^95
Paul got wind of what was afoot and to avoid exposure the conspirators had
to act in haste. On the night of 11 March 1801 they sent a posse of guardsmen
to the fortress-like Mikhaylovsky Palace in order to depose the emperor. In
what seems to have been an unpremeditated act he was assassinated.
Was this no more than another palace revolution? The participants' elevated
social status and their lack of a political programme might suggest as much,
yet this conclusion would be too simple. The number of activists was greater
than in the coups of 1725-62, and they had the backing of a movement of
opinion in educated society, not least among the military intelligentsia. Young
officers greeted the news of Paul's demise-officially but implausibly attri-
buted to a fit of apoplexy-with enthusiasm. Two of the conspirators, the
brothers Generals Platon and Valerian Zubov, went to the lengths of securing
control of the two cadet corps, and made use of the informal links among the
students for their own political purposes.^96
On the other hand the affair cannot confidently be labelled 'Praetorian'
since those who carried it out wanted less, not more, military intervention in
public life. They stood for a return to normality, to the leisurely ways of
government characteristic of Catherine's last years. In this sense the coup was
a retrograde phenomenon. On social issues its partisans were conservative:
they do not seem to have thought of improving the lot of the underprivileged.
"[heir constitutional_ideas were vague. They intended to establish a regency
coilncil under Grand Duke Alexander (who was privy to their plans), and a
document to this effect was prepared by D. P. Troshchinsky, a civilian
member of the group. They did not question the principle of monarchy, or
even autocracy. Another paradox is that they had to soft-pedal their nation-
alistic sentiments, since a vital role in the plot was played by von der Pahlen, a
Baltic German aristocrat. Opposition to Paul's military policies occupied a
significant place in their thinking, but blended in with other concerns which at
the time seemed even more important. The conspirators acted largely from
motives of self-preservation, and may have wanted to forestall the emergence
of a broader movement, within the officer corps anded ucated society generally,
which they feared might get out of control.
9l Warner, 'Political Opposition', p. 160. 96 Ibid., p. 159.