Discontinuitățile și performanțele procesului de centralizare birocratică din Basarabia de la mijlocul secolului XIX. Studiu de caz: guvernatorul Pavel Fedorov
Discontinuities and Performances of Process of Bureaucratical Centralization in the 1840s. Case Study: Governor Pavel Fedorov

Summary/Abstract: The administrative context of Imperial Russia from the 1840s wasn’t absolutely peculiar in Europe. Certainly, the character of reforms was severely limited by the Autocracy, but some institutions, due to their “enlightened” bureaucrats, produced infusions of advanced ideas, especially in state’s scientific tools of information. Despite that, the provincial bureaucracy remained at backward situation in comparison with progressive level of Petersburg’s Chancellery of minister Lev Perovskii. The author tries to present the less explored details of the reign of General-Governor Pavel Fedorov. The author argues that “clientelism”, favouritism and nepotism maintained its roles in provincial political milieu. Frequently, the correlation patron-client, which can be exemplified by the case of cohabitation between Vorontsov and Fedorov, was an indispensable part of political culture, the mood of building of administrative schools and propulsion of reforms. The Civil and Military Governor of Bessarabia have been appointed due to compliance with the political visions of the administration of the General Government of New Russia. The administrative experience performed at the local level and education benefited from Aleksey Greig, the admiral with intellectual activities, represented advantages for his success in the position that he had secured. Fedorov had faithfully adopted a custom political type by resorting to regular inspections and controls for regulation of the bureaucratic apparatus in an attempt to establish a direct patronage of distant regions. However, the policy of Fedorov was not so articulated as Vorontsov’s one and it reached another extreme. In absence of well trained professionals, the lower level of provincial bureaucracy sought to solve the personal issues using the illegal methods.Among all negative aspects, the arbitraries conducted an uncontrolled distortion of veritable intentions of government, facts which depicted in the reports of Third Section of His Imperial Majesty’s Own Chancellery – the secret police of the Tsar. The case of Fedor Gujva is the most relevant example of dichotomy between the Enlightened intentions of the administrators and the dark reality of implementing of reforms into public life of Bessarabia. The pure military official, who got involved in the activity of civil courts, ignored judicial proceedings, committed abuses in order to gain a position of strength in relation to his clients. Having obtained the support of the Governor Fedorov, the Auditor has managed to shrink from responsibility for abuse and escaped from ministerial inquiries. The Auditor’s case is symbolic one for revealing the inconsistency of ruling bureaucracy of the traditional peasant society. Another aspect consists of reviewing the changes in the administrative scheme of Bessarabia that occurred since the transfer of General-Governor Mikhail Vorontsov from Odessa to Tiflis and appointment in the position of Vice-Roy of Caucasus Province. After a short period of preserving the appearances of continuous presence of “iron hand” of viceroy, the authorities decided to modify the structural scheme. Paradoxically, the initial softening policy, expressed in increasing of power of Vice-Governor, Chief of Financial Chamber and respective chancellery, led to further ministerial centralisation expanded after the dismiss of Vorontsov in 1854.

• Details
• Contents