The Sphinx is not unraveled to the grave of Alexander. Dynasties of Europe

The personality of Alexander the Blessed remains one of the most complex and mysterious in Russian history. “The Sphinx, unsolved to the grave,” Prince Vyazemsky will say about him. To this we can add that beyond the grave fate of Alexander I just as mysterious. We have in mind the life of the righteous elder Theodore Kuzmich the Blessed, canonized among the Saints of the Russian Orthodox Church.

World history knows few figures comparable in scale to Emperor Alexander. This amazing personality remains misunderstood today. The Alexander era was, perhaps, the highest rise of Russia, its "golden age", then St. Petersburg was the capital of Europe, and the fate of the world was decided in the Winter Palace.

Contemporaries called Alexander I "an angel on the throne", the winner of the Antichrist, the liberator of Europe. European capitals enthusiastically greeted the liberator tsar: the people of Paris greeted him with flowers. The main square of Berlin is named after him - Alexander Platz. I want to dwell on the peacekeeping activities of Tsar Alexander. But first, let us briefly recall the historical context of the Alexander era.

The global war unleashed by revolutionary France in 1795 lasted for almost 20 years (until 1815) and truly deserves the name "World War I", both in its scope and duration. Then for the first time on the battlefields of Europe, Asia and America, millions of armies clash, for the first time a war was waged on a planetary scale for the dominance of a total ideology. France was the hotbed of this ideology, and Napoleon was the distributor. For the first time, the war was preceded by the propaganda of secret sects and mass psychological treatment of the population. Enlightenment-illuminators worked tirelessly, creating controlled chaos. The age of enlightenment, to be more precise, obscuration, ended with a revolution, a guillotine, terror and a world war.

The theomachy and anti-Christian basis of the new order was obvious to contemporaries. In 1806, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church anathematized Napoleon for his persecution of the Western Church. In all the churches of the Russian Empire (Orthodox and Catholic), Napoleon was declared the Antichrist and the enemy of the human race.

On the other hand, the European and Russian intelligentsia hailed Napoleon as the new Messiah, who would make the revolution universal and unite all peoples under his power. Thus, Fichte perceived the revolution led by Napoleon as a preparation for building an ideal world state. For Hegel, in the French Revolution "the very content of the will of the human spirit appeared." Hegel is undoubtedly right in his definition, but with the clarification that this European spirit was apostasy. Shortly before the French Revolution, the head of the Bavarian illuminators, Weishaupt, sought to return man to his "state of nature." His credo: “We must destroy everything without regret, as much as possible and as quickly as possible. My human dignity does not allow me to obey anyone. Napoleon became the executor of this will.

After the defeat of the Austrian army in 1805, the thousand-year-old Holy Roman Empire was abolished, and Napoleon - officially "Emperor of the Republic" - became the de facto Emperor of the West. Pushkin says about him:

Rebellious liberty heir and murderer,
This cold-blooded bloodsucker,
This king, who disappeared like a dream, like a shadow of the dawn.

After 1805, Alexander I, remaining the only Christian emperor in the world, opposed the spirits of malice and the forces of chaos. But the ideologists of the world revolution and globalists do not like to remember this. The Alexander era is unusually eventful: in comparison with it, even the reigns of Peter and Catherine pale. In less than a quarter of a century, Emperor Alexander won four military campaigns, repelling the aggression of Turkey, Sweden, Persia and, in 1812, the invasion of European armies. In 1813, Alexander liberates Europe and in the Battle of Nations near Leipzig, where he personally leads the allied armies, inflicts a mortal defeat on Napoleon. In March 1814, Alexander I, at the head of the Russian army, entered Paris in triumph.

A subtle and far-sighted politician, a great strategist, diplomat and thinker - Alexander Pavlovich was unusually gifted by nature. His deep and penetrating mind was recognized even by enemies: “He is elusive like sea foam,” Napoleon said about him. How, after all this, to explain that Tsar Alexander I remains one of the most maligned figures in Russian history?

He - the winner of Napoleon, is declared mediocrity, and Napoleon defeated by him (by the way, who lost six military campaigns in his life) - a military genius. The cult of the cannibal-Napoleon, who covered Africa, Asia and Europe with corpses, this robber and murderer, has been supported and praised for 200 years, including here in Moscow, which he burned down. The globalists and slanderers of Russia cannot forgive Alexander the Blessed for his victory over the “global revolution” and the totalitarian world order.

I needed this long introduction in order to outline the state of the world in 1814, when, after the end of the World War, all the heads of European states gathered at a congress in Vienna to determine the future order of the world.

The main issue of the Congress of Vienna was the issue of preventing wars on the continent, defining new borders, but, above all, suppressing the subversive activities of secret societies. The victory over Napoleon did not mean victory over the ideology of the Illuminati, which managed to pierce all the structures of society in Europe and Russia. Alexander's logic was clear: whoever allows evil, he does evil himself. Evil knows no boundaries, no measure, so you need to resist the forces of evil always and everywhere.

Foreign policy is a continuation of domestic policy, and just as there is no double morality - for oneself and for others, so there is no domestic and foreign policy. The Orthodox tsar could not be guided by other moral principles either in foreign policy or in relations with non-Orthodox peoples. Alexander, in a Christian way, forgives the French for all their guilt before Russia: the ashes of Moscow and Smolensk, robberies, the blown up of the Kremlin, executions of Russian prisoners. The Russian Tsar did not allow his allies to plunder and divide the defeated France into parts. Alexander refuses reparations from a bloodless and hungry country. The allies (Prussia, Austria and England) were forced to submit to the will of the Russian Tsar, and in turn refused reparations. Paris was neither robbed nor destroyed: the Louvre with its treasures and all the palaces remained intact.

Europe was stunned by the generosity of the king. In occupied Paris, crowded with Napoleonic soldiers, Alexander Pavlovich walked around the city without an escort, accompanied by one adjutant wing. The Parisians, recognizing the king on the street, kissed his horse and boots. It never occurred to any of the Napoleonic veterans to raise a hand against the Russian Tsar: everyone understood that he was the only defender of defeated France. Alexander I granted amnesty to all Poles and Lithuanians who fought against Russia. He preached by personal example, firmly knowing that you can change another only by yourself. According to St. Philaret of Moscow: "Alexander punished the French with mercy." The Russian intelligentsia - yesterday's Bonapartists and future Decembrists - condemned Alexander's generosity and at the same time prepared regicide.

As head of the Congress of Vienna, Alexander Pavlovich invites defeated France to participate in the work on an equal footing and makes an incredible proposal to the Congress to build a new Europe based on evangelical principles. Never before in history has the gospel been laid at the foundation of international relations. In Vienna, Emperor Alexander defines the rights of peoples: they must rest on the precepts of Holy Scripture. The Orthodox Tsar proposes in Vienna to all the monarchs and governments of Europe to renounce national egoism and Machiavellianism in foreign policy and to sign the Charter of the Holy Alliance (la Sainte-Alliance). It is important to note that the very term "Sacred Union" in German and French sounds like "Sacred Covenant", which strengthens its Biblical meaning.

The final Charter of the Holy Alliance will be signed by the members of the Congress on September 26, 1815. The text was personally compiled by Emperor Alexander and only slightly corrected by the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia. Three monarchs, representing three Christian denominations: Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Protestantism, address the world in the preamble: “We solemnly declare that this act has no other purpose than the desire to show before the whole world their unshakable intention to choose as the rule, as in the internal management of their states, as well as in relations with other governments, the commandments of the Holy Religion, the commandments of justice, love, peacefulness, which are observed not only in private life, but should guide the policy of sovereigns, being the only means of strengthening human institutions and correcting their imperfections.

From 1815 to 1818 fifty states signed the charter of the Holy Alliance. Not all signatures were put sincerely, opportunism is characteristic of all eras. But then, in the face of Europe, the rulers of the West did not dare to openly refute the Gospel. From the very beginning of the Holy Alliance, Alexander I was accused of idealism, mysticism and daydreaming. But Alexander was neither a dreamer nor a mystic; he was a man of deep faith and a clear mind, and he loved to repeat the words of King Solomon (Proverbs, ch. 8:13-16):

The fear of the Lord - I hate evil, pride and arrogance, and I hate the evil way and deceitful lips. I have advice and truth, I am reason, I have strength. By me kings reign, and rulers legitimize the truth. I am ruled by chiefs and nobles and all the judges of the earth.

For Alexander I, history was a manifestation of the Providence of God, the Epiphany in the world. On the medal, which was awarded to the victorious Russian soldiers, the words of King David were engraved: “Not to us, Lord, not to us, but give glory to Your Name” (Psalm 113:9).

Plans for organizing European politics on evangelical principles were a continuation of the ideas of Paul I, the father of Alexander I, and were built on the patristic tradition. So, St. Tikhon of Zadonsk in his work "True Christianity" devoted two chapters to the theme of royal power. In Christian society St. Tikhon distinguishes between dual power: secular and ecclesiastical power. He writes: “The monarch must remember that just as Christ himself, the King of kings, was not ashamed to call us brothers, so even more so for him, as a man, people like himself should be considered brothers. A crown adorned with virtues is more glorified than a crown that is victorious over external enemies. Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk. Creations in 5 volumes. M., 1889. T. 3, p. 348).

These words seemed to apply directly to Alexander, the conqueror of Europe. Another great contemporary of Alexander I, St. Philaret (Drozdov), proclaimed Bibliocentrism as the basis of state policy. His words are comparable to the provisions of the Charter of the Holy Alliance. The enemies of the Holy Alliance were well aware of who the Union was directed against. Liberal propaganda, both then and after, in every possible way denigrated the "reactionary" policy of the Russian tsars. According to F. Engels: "The world revolution will be impossible as long as Russia exists." Until the death of Alexander I in 1825, the heads of European governments gathered at congresses to coordinate their policies.

At the Congress in Verona, the tsar said to the French Foreign Minister and the famous writer Chateaubriand: “Do you think that, as our enemies say, the Union is just a word covering ambitions? […] There is no longer the policy of English, French, Russian, Prussian, Austrian, but there is only a general policy, and it is for the common good that peoples and kings must accept it. I should be the first to show firmness in the principles on which I founded the Union.

In his book History of Russia, Alphonse de Lamartine writes: “Such was the idea of ​​the Holy Alliance, an idea that was slandered in its essence, representing it as low hypocrisy and conspiracy of mutual support for the oppression of peoples. It is the duty of history to return to the Holy Alliance its true meaning."

For forty years, from 1815 to 1855, Europe did not know wars. At that time, Metropolitan Filaret of Moscow spoke about Russia's role in the world: "The historical mission of Russia is the establishment of moral order in Europe, on the basis of the Gospel commandments." The Napoleonic spirit will be resurrected with the nephew of Napoleon I, Napoleon III, who will seize the throne with the help of the revolution. Under him, France, in alliance with England, Turkey, Piedmont, with the support of Austria, will unleash a war against Russia. The Europe of the Congress of Vienna will end in the Crimea, in Sevastopol. In 1855 the Holy Union will be buried.

Many important truths can be comprehended by contradiction. Negative attempts often lead to affirmation. The consequences of breaking the world order are well known: Prussia defeats Austria and, having united the German states, smashes France in 1870. The continuation of this war will be the war of 1914-1920, and the consequence of the First World War will be the Second World War.

The Sacred Union of Alexander I has gone down in history as a noble attempt to elevate humanity. This is the only example of disinterestedness in the field of world politics in history, when the gospel became the Charter in international affairs.

In conclusion, I would like to quote the words of Goethe, spoken in 1827 about the Holy Union, after the death of Alexander the Blessed: “The world needs to hate something great, which was confirmed by its judgments about the Holy Union, although nothing greater and more beneficent has yet been conceived. for humanity! But the mob does not understand this. Her greatness is unbearable."

In January 1864, in distant Siberia, in a small cell four miles from Tomsk, a tall, gray-bearded old man was dying. “The rumor is that you, grandfather, are none other than Alexander the Blessed, is this true?” - asked the dying merchant S.F. Khromov. For many years the merchant had been tormented by this secret, which now, before his eyes, was going to the grave along with the mysterious old man. “Wonderful are your deeds, Lord: there is no secret that would not be revealed,” the old man sighed. “Even though you know who I am, don’t call me, just bury me.”
Young Alexander ascended the throne as a result of the murder of Emperor Paul I by Freemasons - those same "loyal monsters, that is, gentlemen with noble souls, the first scoundrels in the world" - Alexander himself was also initiated into the conspiracy. But when the news of his father's death reached him, he was shocked. “I was promised not to encroach on his life!” - he repeated with sobs, and rushed around the room, not finding a place for himself. It was clear to him that now he was a parricide, forever tied by blood with the Masons.

As contemporaries testified, the first appearance of Alexander in the palace was a pitiful picture: “He walked slowly, his knees seemed to bend, his hair was loose, his eyes were tearful ... It seemed that his face expressed one heavy thought: “They all took advantage of my youth, inexperience, I was deceived, I did not know that by wresting the scepter from the hands of the autocrat, I would inevitably endanger his life. He tried to abdicate. Then the "loyal fiends" promised to show him "the blood shed by the river of the entire reigning family" ... Alexander surrendered. But the consciousness of his guilt, the endless reproaches to himself for not being able to foresee the tragic outcome - all this weighed heavily on his conscience, poisoning his life every minute. Over the years, Alexander slowly but steadily moved away from the "brothers". The liberal reforms that had been started were gradually curtailed. Alexander increasingly found consolation in religion - later liberal historians scaredly called it "a passion for mysticism", although religiosity has nothing to do with mysticism and in fact it is Masonic occultism that is mysticism. In one of his private conversations, Alexander said: “As I ascend in spirit to God, I renounce all earthly pleasures. Calling on God for help, I gain that peace, that peace of mind, which I will not exchange for any bliss of this world.
The largest biographer of Alexander I N.K. Schilder wrote: “If fantastic conjectures and folk legends could be based on positive data and transferred to real soil, then the reality established in this way would leave behind the most daring poetic fictions. In any case, such a life could serve as a canvas for an inimitable drama with a stunning epilogue, the main motive of which would be redemption.
In this new image, created by folk art, Emperor Alexander Pavlovich, this "sphinx, unsolved to the grave", without a doubt, would have presented himself as the most tragic face of Russian history, and his thorny life path would have been covered with an unprecedented afterlife apotheosis, overshadowed by the rays of holiness.

Portrait of Alexander I

Metric certificate of the newborn Grand Duke Alexander Pavlovich, signed by physicians Carl Friedrich Kruse and Ivan Filippovich Beck

Ceremonial costume of the seven-year-old Grand Duke Alexander Pavlovich

Portrait of a Count
N.I. Saltykov

Triumphal wreath to the "Liberator of Europe", presented to Emperor Alexander I

Solemn entry of the All-Russian Sovereign Emperor Alexander I into Paris

Medal in memory of the Patriotic War of 1812, which belonged to Emperor Alexander I

Portrait of Empress Elizabeth Alekseevna in mourning

Death mask of Alexander I

The exposition in the Neva enfilade of the state rooms of the Winter Palace has over a thousand exhibits closely related to the life and work of Emperor Alexander I, from the collection of the State Hermitage Museum, museums and archives of St. Petersburg and Moscow: archival documents, portraits, memorial items; many monuments are presented for the first time.

"... The Sphinx, not unraveled to the grave, They still argue about it again ..." - wrote P.A. almost half a century after the death of Alexander I. Vyazemsky. These words are relevant even today - 180 years after the death of the emperor.

The exhibition, which has collected a lot of material and documentary evidence, tells about the era of Alexander and allows you to trace the fate of the emperor from birth to death and burial in the Peter and Paul Cathedral. Attention is also paid to the peculiar mythology surrounding the untimely death of Alexander Pavlovich in Taganrog - the famous legend about the Siberian hermit Elder Fyodor Kuzmich, under whose name Emperor Alexander I, who retired from the world, allegedly hid.

The exhibition presents portraits of Alexander I, made by Russian and European painters, sculptors and miniaturists. Among them are works by J. Dow, K. A. Shevelkin and a recently acquired portrait by the largest miniaturist of the first quarter of the 19th century A. Benner.

Other acquisitions of the Hermitage shown at the exhibition should also be noted: "Portrait of Napoleon", executed by the famous French miniature painter, a student of the famous J.L. David, the court master of Napoleon J.-B. Isabey and "Portrait of Empress Elizaveta Alekseevna", painted from nature by E. G. Bosse in 1812.

Along with unique documents and autographs of Alexander I and those of his inner circle, personal belongings of the emperor are presented: the ceremonial costume of the seven-year-old Grand Duke Alexander Pavlovich, the costume of a holder of the Order of the Holy Spirit, the coronation uniform (it is believed that the vest was sewn to it by the emperor himself), a cypress cross, a medallion with strands of hair of Alexander I and Elizabeth Alekseevna, unpublished letters from the educators of the future emperor F.Ts. Laharpe and N.I. Saltykov, study notebooks.

Valuable exhibits were provided by the collector V.V. Tsarenkov: among them is a portfolio embroidered with gold, which Alexander I used during the days of the Congress of Vienna and three rare watercolors by Gavriil Sergeev "Alexander's Dacha".

The exhibition was prepared by the State Hermitage together with the State Archives of the Russian Federation (Moscow), the Archive of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire of the Historical and Documentary Department of the Russian Foreign Ministry (Moscow), the Military History Museum of Artillery, Engineers and Signal Corps (St. Petersburg), the Military Medical Museum Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (St. Petersburg), All-Russian Museum of A.S. Pushkin (St. Petersburg), the State Historical and Cultural Museum-Reserve "Moscow Kremlin" (Moscow), the State Historical Museum (Moscow), the State Museum of the History of St. Petersburg (St. Petersburg), the State Museum-Reserve "Pavlovsk", the State the Peterhof Museum-Reserve, the Tsarskoe Selo State Museum-Reserve, the State Russian Museum (St. Petersburg), the State Collection of Unique Musical Instruments (Moscow), the Institute of Russian Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Pushkin House) (St. Petersburg), Research Museum of the Russian Academy of Arts (St. Petersburg), Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts (Moscow), Russian State Military Historical Archive (Moscow), Russian State Historical Archive (St. Petersburg), Central Naval Museum (St. Petersburg), the State Museum and Exhibition Center ROSIZO, as well as collectors M.S. Glinka (St. Petersburg), A.S. Surpin (New York), V.V. Tsarenkov (London).

For the exhibition, a team of employees of the State Hermitage prepared an illustrated scientific catalog with a total volume of 350 pages (Slavia Publishing House). The introductory articles to the publication were written by Director of the State Hermitage M.B. Piotrovsky and Director of the State Archive of the Russian Federation S.V. Mironenko.

Alexander I was the son of Paul I and the grandson of Catherine II. The empress did not like Paul and, not seeing in him a strong ruler and a worthy successor, she gave all unspent maternal feelings to Alexander.

From childhood, the future Emperor Alexander I often spent time with his grandmother in the Winter Palace, but nevertheless managed to visit Gatchina, where his father lived. According to Alexander Mironenko, Doctor of Historical Sciences, it was this duality, stemming from the desire to please the grandmother and father, who were so different in temperament and views, that formed the contradictory character of the future emperor.

“Alexander I in his youth loved to play the violin. At this time, he corresponded with his mother Maria Fedorovna, who told him that he was too fond of playing a musical instrument and that he should prepare more for the role of autocrat. Alexander I replied that it would be better to play the violin than, like his peers, play cards. He did not want to reign, but at the same time he dreamed of curing all ulcers, correcting any disorders in the structure of Russia, doing everything as he should have dreamed, and then abdicate, ”Mironenko said in an interview with RT.

According to experts, Catherine II wanted to pass the throne to her beloved grandson, bypassing the legitimate heir. And only the sudden death of the Empress in November 1796 violated these plans. Paul I ascended the throne. A short reign of the new emperor, who received the nickname Russian Hamlet, began, lasting only four years.

The eccentric Paul I, obsessed with drill and parades, was despised by the whole of Catherine's Petersburg. Soon, among those dissatisfied with the new emperor, a conspiracy arose, the result of which was a palace coup.

“It is not clear whether Alexander understood that the removal of his own father from the throne is impossible without murder. Nevertheless, Alexander went for it, and on the night of March 11, 1801, the conspirators entered the bedroom of Paul I and killed him. Most likely, Alexander I was ready for such an outcome of events. Subsequently, from the memoirs it became known that Alexander Poltoratsky, one of the conspirators, quickly informed the future emperor that his father had been killed, which means that he had to take the crown. To the surprise of Poltoratsky himself, he found Alexander awake in the middle of the night, in full uniform, ”said Mironenko.

Tsar Reformer

Having ascended the throne, Alexander I began to develop progressive reforms. Discussions took place in the Unspoken Committee, which included close friends of the young autocrat.

“According to the first reform of government, adopted in 1802, the colleges were replaced by ministries. The main difference was that in collegiums decisions are made collectively, while in ministries all responsibility rests with one minister, who now had to be chosen very carefully,” Mironenko explained.

In 1810, Alexander I created the State Council - the highest legislative body under the emperor.

“The famous painting by Repin, which depicts the solemn meeting of the State Council on its centenary, was written in 1902, on the day the Private Committee was approved, and not in 1910,” Mironenko noted.

The State Council, as part of the transformation of the state, was developed not by Alexander I, but by Mikhail Speransky. It was he who laid the foundation for Russian state administration on the principle of separation of powers.

“We should not forget that in an autocratic state this principle was difficult to implement. Formally, the first step - the creation of the State Council as a legislative body - was taken. Since 1810, any imperial decree was issued with the wording: "Having heeded the opinion of the State Council." At the same time, Alexander I could issue laws without listening to the opinion of the State Council, ”the expert explained.

Tsar Liberator

After the Patriotic War of 1812 and foreign campaigns, Alexander I, inspired by the victory over Napoleon, returned to the long-forgotten idea of ​​​​reforms: changing the form of government, limiting autocracy by the constitution and solving the peasant question.

• Alexander I in 1814 near Paris
• F. Kruger

The first step in resolving the peasant issue was the decree on free cultivators of 1803. For the first time in many centuries of serfdom, peasants were allowed to be liberated, giving them land, albeit for a ransom. Of course, the landowners were in no hurry to free the peasants, especially with the land. As a result, very few were free. However, for the first time in the history of Russia, the authorities gave the peasants the opportunity to leave serfdom.

The second significant state act of Alexander I was a draft constitution for Russia, which he instructed Nikolai Novosiltsev, a member of the Private Committee, to develop. An old friend of Alexander I fulfilled this order. However, this was preceded by the events of March 1818, when in Warsaw, at the opening of the meeting of the Polish Council, Alexander, by decision of the Congress of Vienna, granted Poland a constitution.

“The emperor uttered words that shocked all of Russia at that time: “Someday the blessed constitutional principles will be extended to all the lands subject to my scepter.” It's like saying in the 1960s that Soviet power will no longer exist. Many representatives of influential circles were frightened by this. As a result, Alexander did not dare to adopt the constitution, ”the expert noted.

The plan of Alexander I to free the peasants was also not carried out to the end.

“The emperor understood that it was impossible to free the peasants without the participation of the state. A certain part of the peasants must be redeemed by the state. One can imagine such an option: the landowner went bankrupt, his estate was put up for auction and the peasants were personally liberated. However, this was not implemented. Although Alexander was an autocratic and domineering monarch, he was still within the system. The unrealized constitution was supposed to modify the system itself, but there were no forces that would support the emperor at that moment, ”said the historian.

According to experts, one of the mistakes of Alexander I was his conviction that the communities in which the ideas of reorganizing the state are discussed should be secret.

“Away from the people, the young emperor discussed reform projects in the Unspoken Committee, not realizing that the already emerging Decembrist societies partly share his ideas. In the end, neither of those attempts were successful. It took another quarter of a century to understand that these reforms were not so radical, ”Mironenko concluded.

Mystery of death

Alexander I died during a trip to Russia: he caught a cold in the Crimea, lay “in a fever” for several days and died in Taganrog on November 19, 1825.

The body of the late emperor was to be transported to St. Petersburg. For this, the remains of Alexander I were embalmed, but the procedure was unsuccessful: the complexion and appearance of the sovereign changed. In St. Petersburg, during a public farewell, Nicholas I ordered that the coffin be closed. It was this incident that gave rise to unceasing disputes about the death of the king and aroused suspicions that "the body was changed."

• Wikimedia Commons

The most popular version is associated with the name of the elder Fyodor Kuzmich. The elder appeared in 1836 in the Perm province, and then ended up in Siberia. The last years he lived in Tomsk, in the house of the merchant Khromov, where he died in 1864. Fyodor Kuzmich himself never spoke about himself. However, Khromov assured that the elder was Alexander I, who had secretly departed from the world. Thus, a legend arose that Alexander I, tormented by remorse because of the murder of his father, staged his own death and set off to wander around Russia.

Subsequently, historians tried to debunk this legend. After studying the surviving notes of Fyodor Kuzmich, the researchers came to the conclusion that there is nothing in common in the handwriting of Alexander I and the elder. Moreover, Fyodor Kuzmich wrote with errors. However, lovers of historical secrets believe that the point in this matter has not been set. They are convinced that until a genetic examination of the remains of the old man has been carried out, it is impossible to draw an unambiguous conclusion about who Fyodor Kuzmich really was.