One of the shrewdest critics of international politics that I ever knew
was old Count Nicholas Pablen, whom I mentioned at the beginning of this
paper. A great traveller, and an excellent speaker of modern languages,
he had been for half a century intimately associated with all the chief
makers of the nineteenth century. He had, moreover, a marvellous memory,
of which I may give an example. One day I found him in a great state
of mind, fussing and fuming over some annoyance. I asked what was the
matter. He said: “I am losing my memory! I wanted to write down the
Knights of the Garter—I remembered twenty-four, but for the life of
me I could not recollect the twenty-fifth!” All of a sudden his face
brightened. “I have it,” he said, “the Duke of Westminster.” The honour
of his memory was saved. His memory for political facts never failed him,
and his judgment was not to be denied. His view of the state of affairs
at the end of the Crimean War is given in one of those delightful letters
with which Lord Granville used to keep Lord Canning posted in European
matters whilst the latter was Governor-General in India. Lord Granville
wrote, on the 3rd of August, 1856 (see “Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice’s Life,”
vol. I., page 185):
“Old Pahlen was the most irritable of all on this subject
(the Crimean War). He says it has done no one good; not to
the English, certainly not to the Russians—and has only been
of use to one man in France,[21] whom he is not, as you know,
fond of. He says that in England they considered him as merely
speaking like a Russian parrot when he said that the Emperor
Nicholas did not wish for war, and that he was considered in
Russia almost a treacherous Anglomane when he declared that
our Government did not wish it. He had been right in both
cases, and yet by extraordinary bad management the war had
come. He thinks it will take a whole generation to efface
the recollection of it. He attributes the hatred of us, and
comparative forgiveness of the French, not so much to the
destruction in the Baltic, not so much to our Press and our
public speaking, as to our having been old friends, and their
always having thought of the French as enemies. He does not
believe in any great changes in Russia. The Emperor has good
intentions, but there have always been good intentions at
the beginning of each reign. He has one great advantage over
his father. Alexander during his life told Nicholas nothing.
Nicholas, since his son has been of age, told him everything,
and the latter, being of a very amiable disposition, heard
everything that others did not dare tell his father. He is
supposed not to have military tastes, but he issued new
regulations about uniforms almost before his father was buried;
and he and Constantine appeared in new hussar jackets a day or
two afterwards, which were supposed to be foreign, instead of a
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account