The problem of reforms (or revolutions) "from above" in Russia has long been of interest to historians, political scientists, cultural scientists and other specialists studying the development of society and its institutions. Historical experience shows that the success and failure of reforms is determined not only by the actions of the authorities. The position of society and influential groups within it also plays a significant role in this process. In his study of the Russian nobility during the reign of Emperor Alexander I, British historian Patrick O'Mara aimed to provide a political and social portrait of this class. He asked himself along the way: why did Alexander's reforms stall and not develop? The researcher's answer is twofold. On the one hand, he writes that the emperor was unable to find a common language with the nobility and support from it. On the other hand, he shows that the nobility itself en masse was not ready for active participation in political life either in terms of its level of education or intellectual development. The article places O'Mara's book in a broad historical context, compares the findings of the British historian with the results of other researches and emphasizes that the phrase "There is no one to take" attributed to Alexander I really reflects the shortage of professionally trained to the civil service and progressive-minded people. The layer of "enlightened bureaucracy" was too thin and distant from the bulk of the nobility, so ultimately the reforms were unsuccessful, and the new Emperor Nicholas I relied on the training of such personnel. This policy yielded results a quarter of a century later and made the "Great Reforms" of Alexander II possible, but this required a change in the generation of officials and administrators.
The problem of reforms (or revolutions) "from above" in Russia has long been of interest to historians, political scientists, cultural scientists and other specialists studying the development of society and its institutions. Historical experience shows that the success and failure of reforms is determined not only by the actions of the authorities. The position of society and influential groups within it also plays a significant role in this process. In his study of the Russian nobility during the reign of Emperor Alexander I, British historian Patrick O'Mara aimed to provide a political and social portrait of this class. He asked himself along the way: why did Alexander's reforms stall and not develop? The researcher's answer is twofold. On the one hand, he writes that the emperor was unable to find a common language with the nobility and support from it. On the other hand, he shows that the nobility itself en masse was not ready for active participation in political life either in terms of its level of education or intellectual development. The article places O'Mara's book in a broad historical context, compares the findings of the British historian with the results of other researches and emphasizes that the phrase "There is no one to take" attributed to Alexander I really reflects the shortage of professionally trained to the civil service and progressive-minded people. The layer of "enlightened bureaucracy" was too thin and distant from the bulk of the nobility, so ultimately the reforms were unsuccessful, and the new Emperor Nicholas I relied on the training of such personnel. This policy yielded results a quarter of a century later and made the "Great Reforms" of Alexander II possible, but this required a change in the generation of officials and administrators.