According to one version, he was born in the village of Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district (now Mainsky district, Ulyanovsk region), according to another - in the village of Mikhailovka, Buzuluk district, Kazan province (now the village of Preobrazhenka, Orenburg region). IN lately experts were in favor of the “Orenburg” version of the writer’s birthplace.
Karamzin belonged to a noble family, descended from the Tatar Murza, named Kara-Murza. Nikolai was the second son of a retired captain and landowner. He lost his mother early; she died in 1769. For his second marriage, my father married Ekaterina Dmitrieva, the aunt of the poet and fabulist Ivan Dmitriev.
Karamzin spent his childhood years on his father's estate and studied in Simbirsk at the noble boarding school of Pierre Fauvel. At the age of 14, he began studying at the Moscow private boarding school of Professor Johann Schaden, while simultaneously attending classes at Moscow University.
In 1781, Karamzin began serving in the Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he was transferred from the army regiments (he was enlisted in the service in 1774), and received the rank of lieutenant ensign.
During this period, he became close to the poet Ivan Dmitriev and began his literary activity by translating German language“A conversation between Austrian Maria Theresa and our Empress Elizabeth in the Champs Elysees” (not preserved). Karamzin’s first published work was a translation of Solomon Gesner’s idyll “The Wooden Leg” (1783).
In 1784, after the death of his father, Karamzin retired with the rank of lieutenant and never served again. After a short stay in Simbirsk, where he joined the Masonic lodge, Karamzin moved to Moscow, was introduced to the circle of the publisher Nikolai Novikov and settled in a house that belonged to the Novikov Friendly Scientific Society.
In 1787-1789 he was an editor in the magazine published by Novikov " Children's reading for the heart and mind", where he published his first story "Eugene and Julia" (1789), poems and translations. He translated into Russian the tragedies "Julius Caesar" (1787) by William Shakespeare and "Emilia Galotti" (1788) by Gotthold Lessing.
In May 1789, Nikolai Mikhailovich went abroad and until September 1790 traveled around Europe, visiting Germany, Switzerland, France and England.
Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began publishing the "Moscow Journal" (1791-1792), where the "Letters of a Russian Traveler" written by him were published; in 1792, the story "Poor Liza" was published, as well as the stories "Natalia, the Boyar's Daughter" and "Liodor ", which became examples of Russian sentimentalism.
Karamzin. In the first Russian poetic anthology “Aonids” (1796-1799) compiled by Karamzin, he included his own poems, as well as poems by his contemporaries - Gabriel Derzhavin, Mikhail Kheraskov, Ivan Dmitriev. In "Aonids" the letter "ё" of the Russian alphabet appeared for the first time.
Karamzin combined some of the prose translations in the “Pantheon of Foreign Literature” (1798), brief characteristics Russian writers were given to him for the publication of “The Pantheon of Russian Authors, or a Collection of Their Portraits with Comments” (1801-1802). Karamzin’s response to the accession to the throne of Alexander I was “Historical eulogy to Catherine the Second” (1802).
In 1802-1803, Nikolai Karamzin published the literary and political magazine "Bulletin of Europe", which, along with articles on literature and art, widely covered issues of Russian foreign and domestic policy, history and political life foreign countries. In the "Bulletin of Europe" he published works on Russian medieval history "Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod", "News about Martha the Posadnitsa, taken from the life of St. Zosima", "Journey around Moscow", "Historical memories and notes on the way to the Trinity "etc.
Karamzin developed a language reform aimed at bringing the book language closer to the spoken language of an educated society. By limiting the use of Slavicisms, widely using linguistic borrowings and tracings from European languages (mainly French), introducing new words, Karamzin created a new literary syllable.
On November 12 (October 31, old style), 1803, by personal imperial decree of Alexander I, Nikolai Karamzin was appointed historiographer “to compose a complete History of the Fatherland.” From that time until the end of his days, he worked on the main work of his life - “The History of the Russian State.” Libraries and archives were opened for him. In 1816-1824, the first 11 volumes of the work were published in St. Petersburg; the 12th volume, dedicated to describing the events of the “time of troubles,” Karamzin did not have time to finish; it was published after the historiographer’s death in 1829.
In 1818, Karamzin became a member of the Russian Academy and an honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. He received an active state councilor and was awarded the Order of St. Anne, 1st degree.
In the early months of 1826 he suffered from pneumonia, which undermined his health. On June 3 (May 22, old style), 1826, Nikolai Karamzin died in St. Petersburg. He was buried at the Tikhvin Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Karamzin was married for the second time to Ekaterina Kolyvanova (1780-1851), sister of the poet Pyotr Vyazemsky, who was the mistress of the best literary salon St. Petersburg, where poets Vasily Zhukovsky, Alexander Pushkin, Mikhail Lermontov, and writer Nikolai Gogol visited. She helped the historiographer, proofreading the 12-volume History, and after his death she completed the publication last volume.
His first wife, Elizaveta Protasova, died in 1802. From his first marriage, Karamzin had a daughter, Sophia (1802-1856), who became a maid of honor, was the owner of a literary salon, and a friend of the poets Alexander Pushkin and Mikhail Lermontov.
In his second marriage, the historiographer had nine children, five of whom lived to adulthood. Daughter Ekaterina (1806-1867) married Prince Meshchersky, her son is writer Vladimir Meshchersky (1839-1914).
Nikolai Karamzin's daughter Elizaveta (1821-1891) became a maid of honor at the imperial court, son Andrei (1814-1854) died in the Crimean War. Alexander Karamzin (1816-1888) served in the guard and at the same time wrote poetry, which was published by the magazines Sovremennik and Otechestvennye zapiski. Youngest son Vladimir (1819-1869)
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin is a great Russian writer, the largest writer of the era of sentimentalism. Wrote fiction, lyrics, plays, articles. Reformer of the Russian literary language. Creator of “History of the Russian State” - one of the first fundamental works on the history of Russia.
“I loved to be sad, not knowing what...”
Karamzin was born on December 1 (12), 1766 in the village of Mikhailovka, Buzuluk district, Simbirsk province. He grew up in the village of his father, a hereditary nobleman. It is interesting that the Karamzin family has Turkic roots and comes from the Tatar Kara-Murza (aristocratic class).
Little is known about the writer’s childhood. At the age of 12, he was sent to Moscow to the boarding school of Moscow University professor Johann Schaden, where the young man received his first education, studied German and French languages. Three years later, he begins to attend lectures by the famous professor of aesthetics, educator Ivan Schwartz at Moscow University.
In 1783, at the insistence of his father, Karamzin enlisted in the Preobrazhensky Guards Regiment, but soon retired and left for his native Simbirsk. An important event for young Karamzin takes place in Simbirsk - he joins the Masonic lodge of the “Golden Crown”. This decision will play its role a little later, when Karamzin returns to Moscow and meets with an old acquaintance of their home - freemason Ivan Turgenev, as well as writers and writers Nikolai Novikov, Alexei Kutuzov, Alexander Petrov. At the same time, Karamzin’s first attempts in literature began - he participated in the publication of the first Russian magazine for children - “Children’s Reading for the Heart and Mind.” The four years he spent in the society of Moscow Freemasons had a serious influence on his creative development. At this time, Karamzin read a lot of the then popular Rousseau, Stern, Herder, Shakespeare, and tried to translate.
“In Novikov’s circle, Karamzin’s education began, not only as an author, but also as a moral one.”
Writer I.I. Dmitriev
Man of pen and thought
In 1789, a break with the Freemasons followed, and Karamzin went to travel around Europe. He traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France and England, stopping mainly in large cities, centers of European education. Karamzin visits Immanuel Kant in Königsberg, witnesses the Great french revolution in Paris.
It was based on the results of this trip that he wrote the famous “Letters of a Russian Traveler.” These essays in the genre of documentary prose quickly gained popularity among readers and made Karamzin a famous and fashionable writer. At the same time, in Moscow, from the pen of the writer, the story “Poor Liza” was born - a recognized example of Russian sentimental literature. Many specialists in literary criticism believe that it is with these first books that modern Russian literature begins.
“In the initial period of his literary activity, Karamzin was characterized by a broad and politically rather vague “cultural optimism,” a belief in the salutary influence of cultural success on individuals and society. Karamzin hoped for the progress of science and the peaceful improvement of morals. He believed in the painless implementation of the ideals of brotherhood and humanity that permeated literature XVIII century as a whole."
Yu.M. Lotman
In contrast to classicism with its cult of reason, following in the footsteps of French writers, Karamzin affirms in Russian literature the cult of feelings, sensitivity, and compassion. New “sentimental” heroes are important primarily in their ability to love and surrender to feelings. "Oh! I love those objects that touch my heart and make me shed tears of tender sorrow!”(“Poor Lisa”).
“Poor Liza” is devoid of morality, didacticism, and edification; the author does not teach, but tries to evoke empathy for the characters in the reader, which distinguishes the story from previous traditions of classicism.
“Poor Liza” was received by the Russian public with such enthusiasm because in this work Karamzin was the first to express the “new word” that Goethe said to the Germans in his “Werther.”
Philologist, literary critic V.V. Sipovsky
Nikolai Karamzin at the “Millennium of Russia” monument in Veliky Novgorod. Sculptors Mikhail Mikeshin, Ivan Schroeder. Architect Victor Hartman. 1862
Giovanni Battista Damon-Ortolani. Portrait of N.M. Karamzin. 1805. Pushkin Museum im. A.S. Pushkin
Monument to Nikolai Karamzin in Ulyanovsk. Sculptor Samuil Galberg. 1845
At the same time, the reform of the literary language began - Karamzin abandoned the Old Slavonicisms that populated the written language, Lomonosov’s pomposity, and the use of Church Slavonic vocabulary and grammar. This made "Poor Liza" an easy and enjoyable story to read. It was Karamzin’s sentimentalism that became the foundation for the development of further Russian literature: the romanticism of Zhukovsky and early Pushkin was based on it.
“Karamzin made literature humane.”
A.I. Herzen
One of Karamzin’s most important achievements is the enrichment of the literary language with new words: “charity”, “falling in love”, “freethinking”, “attraction”, “responsibility”, “suspiciousness”, “refinement”, “first-class”, “humane”, “sidewalk” ", "coachman", "impression" and "influence", "touching" and "entertaining". It was he who introduced into use the words “industry”, “concentrate”, “moral”, “aesthetic”, “era”, “scene”, “harmony”, “catastrophe”, “future” and others.
“A professional writer, one of the first in Russia who had the courage to make literary work a source of livelihood, who valued the independence of his own opinion above all else.”
Yu.M. Lotman
In 1791, Karamzin began his career as a journalist. It's becoming important milestone in the history of Russian literature - Karamzin founded the first Russian literary magazine, the founding father of the current “thick” magazines - “Moscow Journal”. A number of collections and almanacs appear on its pages: “Aglaya”, “Aonids”, “Pantheon of Foreign Literature”, “My Trinkets”. These publications made sentimentalism mainstream literary movement in Russia at the end of the 19th century, and Karamzin was its recognized leader.
But Karamzin’s deep disappointment in his old values soon follows. A year after Novikov’s arrest, the magazine was closed, after Karamzin’s bold ode “To Grace”, Karamzin himself lost the favor of the “powerful of the world”, almost falling under investigation.
“As long as a citizen can calmly, without fear, fall asleep, and all your subjects can freely direct their lives according to their thoughts; ...as long as you give everyone freedom and do not darken the light in their minds; as long as your trust in the people is visible in all your affairs: until then you will be sacredly honored... nothing can disturb the peace of your state.”
N.M. Karamzin. "To Grace"
Karamzin spent most of 1793–1795 in the village and published collections: “Aglaya”, “Aonids” (1796). He plans to publish something like an anthology on foreign literature, “The Pantheon of Foreign Literature,” but with great difficulty he makes his way through the censorship prohibitions, which did not allow even the publication of Demosthenes and Cicero...
Karamzin expresses his disappointment in the French Revolution in poetry:
But time and experience destroy
Castle in the air of youth...
...And I see clearly that with Plato
We cannot establish republics...
During these years, Karamzin increasingly moved from lyrics and prose to journalism and development philosophical ideas. Even the “Historical eulogy to Empress Catherine II,” compiled by Karamzin upon the accession to the throne of Emperor Alexander I, is primarily journalism. In 1801-1802, Karamzin worked in the journal “Bulletin of Europe”, where he wrote mainly articles. In practice, his passion for education and philosophy is expressed in writing works on historical topics, increasingly creating the authority of a historian for the famous writer.
The first and last historiographer
By decree of October 31, 1803, Emperor Alexander I granted Nikolai Karamzin the title of historiographer. It is interesting that the title of historiographer in Russia was not renewed after Karamzin’s death.
From that moment on, Karamzin stopped all literary work and for 22 years was exclusively engaged in compiling a historical work, familiar to us as “History of the Russian State”.
Alexey Venetsianov. Portrait of N.M. Karamzin. 1828. Pushkin Museum im. A.S. Pushkin
Karamzin sets himself the task of compiling a history for the general educated public, not to be a researcher, but “choose, animate, color” All "attractive, strong, worthy" from Russian history. Important point- the work must also be designed for foreign readers in order to open Russia to Europe.
In his work, Karamzin used materials from the Moscow College of Foreign Affairs (especially spiritual and contractual letters of princes, and acts of diplomatic relations), the Synodal Repository, the libraries of the Volokolamsk Monastery and the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, private collections of manuscripts of Musin-Pushkin, Rumyantsev and A.I. Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archive, as well as many other sources. An important part of the work was the study of ancient chronicles. In particular, Karamzin discovered a chronicle previously unknown to science, called the Ipatiev Chronicle.
During the years of work on “History...” Karamzin mainly lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver and Nizhny Novgorod, during the occupation of Moscow by the French in 1812. He usually spent the summer in Ostafyevo, the estate of Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky. In 1804, Karamzin married the prince’s daughter, Ekaterina Andreevna, who bore the writer nine children. She became the writer's second wife. The writer first married at the age of 35, in 1801, to Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, who died a year after the wedding from puerperal fever. From his first marriage, Karamzin had a daughter, Sophia, a future acquaintance of Pushkin and Lermontov.
The main social event in the writer’s life during these years was the “Note on Ancient and new Russia in her political and civil relations", written in 1811. The “Note...” reflected the views of conservative sections of society dissatisfied with the liberal reforms of the emperor. “The note...” was handed over to the emperor. In it, once a liberal and a “Westernizer,” as they would say now, Karamzin appears in the role of a conservative and tries to prove that no fundamental changes are needed in the country.
And in February 1818, Karamzin released the first eight volumes of his “History of the Russian State.” A circulation of 3,000 copies (huge for that time) was sold out within a month.
A.S. Pushkin
“The History of the Russian State” became the first work aimed at the widest reader, thanks to the high literary merits and scientific scrupulousness of the author. Researchers agree that this work was one of the first to contribute to the formation of national identity in Russia. The book has been translated into several European languages.
Despite his enormous work over many years, Karamzin did not have time to finish writing “History...” before his time - the beginning of the 19th century. After the first edition, three more volumes of “History...” were released. The last was the 12th volume, describing the events of the Time of Troubles in the chapter “Interregnum 1611–1612”. The book was published after Karamzin’s death.
Karamzin was entirely a man of his era. The establishment of monarchist views in him towards the end of his life brought the writer closer to the family of Alexander I, recent years he spent close to them, living in Tsarskoe Selo. The death of Alexander I in November 1825 and the subsequent events of the uprising on Senate Square were a real blow for the writer. Nikolai Karamzin died on May 22 (June 3), 1826 in St. Petersburg, he was buried at the Tikhvin cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Biography
Russian historian, writer, publicist, founder of Russian sentimentalism. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born on December 12 (old style - December 1) 1766 in the village of Mikhailovka, Simbirsk province (Orenburg region), in the family of a Simbirsk landowner. Knew German, French, English, Italian. He grew up in his father's village. At the age of 14, Karamzin was brought to Moscow and sent to a private boarding school for Moscow University professor I.M. Schaden, where he studied from 1775 to 1781. At the same time he attended lectures at the university.
In 1781 (some sources indicate 1783), at the insistence of his father, Karamzin was assigned to the Life Guards Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he was enrolled as a minor, but at the beginning of 1784 he retired and went to Simbirsk, where he joined the Masonic lodge of the Golden Crown ". On the advice of I.P. Turgenev, who was one of the founders of the lodge, at the end of 1784 Karamzin moved to Moscow, where he joined the Masonic “Friendly Scientific Society”, of which N.I. was a member. Novikov, who had a great influence on the formation of the views of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. At the same time, he collaborated with Novikov’s magazine “Children’s Reading”. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was a member of the Masonic lodge until 1788 (1789). From May 1789 to September 1790 he traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France, England, visiting Berlin, Leipzig, Geneva, Paris, and London. Returning to Moscow, he began publishing the Moscow Journal, which at that time had a very significant success: already in the first year it had 300 “subscripts”. The magazine, which had no full-time employees and was filled by Karamzin himself, existed until December 1792. After Novikov’s arrest and the publication of the ode “To Mercy,” Karamzin almost came under investigation on suspicion that the Freemasons had sent him abroad. In 1793-1795 he spent most of his time in the village. In 1802, Karamzin’s first wife, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died. In 1802, he founded Russia's first private literary and political magazine, Vestnik Evropy, for whose editors he subscribed to the 12 best foreign magazines. Karamzin attracted G.R. to collaborate in the magazine. Derzhavin, Kheraskova, Dmitrieva, V.L. Pushkin, brothers A.I. and N.I. Turgenev, A.F. Voeykova, V.A. Zhukovsky. Despite numerous composition authors, Karamzin has to work a lot on his own and, so that his name does not flash before the eyes of readers so often, he invents a lot of pseudonyms. At the same time, he became a popularizer of Benjamin Franklin in Russia. "Bulletin of Europe" existed until 1803. On October 31, 1803, through Comrade Minister of Public Education M.N. Muravyov, by decree of Emperor Alexander I, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was appointed official historiographer with a salary of 2000 rubles for writing full history Russia. In 1804 Karamzin married the illegitimate daughter of Prince A.I. Vyazemsky to Ekaterina Andreevna Kolyvanova and from that moment settled in the Moscow house of the Vyazemsky princes, where he lived until 1810. From 1804 he began work on the “History of the Russian State,” the compilation of which became his main occupation until the end of his life. In 1816 the first 8 volumes were published (the second edition was published in 1818-1819), in 1821 the 9th volume was published, in 1824 - 10 and 11. The 12th volume of “History...” was never completed (after Karamzin’s death it was published D.N. Bludov). Thanks to literary form“The History of the Russian State” became popular among readers and admirers of Karamzin as a writer, but even then it was deprived of serious scientific significance. All 3,000 copies of the first edition were sold out in 25 days. For the science of that time, the extensive “Notes” to the text, which contained many extracts from manuscripts, were of much greater importance. mostly first published by Karamzin. Some of these manuscripts no longer exist. Karamzin received almost unlimited access to the archives of government institutions Russian Empire: materials were taken from the Moscow archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (at that time a collegium), in the Synodal repository, in the library of monasteries (Trinity Lavra, Volokolamsk Monastery and others), in private collections of manuscripts of Musin-Pushkin, Chancellor Rumyantsev and A.I. Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archives. The Trinity, Laurentian, Ipatiev Chronicles, Dvina Charters, Code of Laws were used. Thanks to the "History of the Russian State" the reading public became aware of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", "The Teachings of Monomakh" and many others literary works ancient Rus'. Despite this, already during the writer’s lifetime, critical works appeared on his “History...”. The historical concept of Karamzin, who was a supporter of the Norman theory of the origin of the Russian state, became official and supported state power. At a later time, “History...” was assessed positively by A.S. Pushkin, N.V. Gogol, Slavophiles, negative - Decembrists, V.G. Belinsky, N.G. Chernyshevsky. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was the initiator of organizing memorials and erecting monuments to outstanding figures of national history, one of which was the monument to K.M. Minin and D.M. Pozharsky on Red Square in Moscow. Before the publication of the first eight volumes, Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only in 1810 to Tver to Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, in order through her to convey to the sovereign his note “On Ancient and New Russia,” and to Nizhny, when the French occupied Moscow. Karamzin usually spent his summers in Ostafyevo, the estate of his father-in-law, Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky. In August 1812 Karamzin lived in the house of the commander-in-chief of Moscow, Count F.V. Rostopchin and left Moscow a few hours before the French entered. As a result of the Moscow fire, Karamzin’s personal library, which he had been collecting for a quarter of a century, was destroyed. In June 1813, after the family returned to Moscow, he settled in the house of the publisher S.A. Selivanovsky, and then in the house of the Moscow theatergoer F.F. Kokoshkina. In 1816, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin moved to St. Petersburg, where he spent the last 10 years of his life and became close to the royal family, although Emperor Alexander I, who did not like criticism of his actions, treated the writer with restraint from the time the “Note” was submitted. Following the wishes of Empresses Maria Feodorovna and Elizaveta Alekseevna, Nikolai Mikhailovich spent the summer in Tsarskoe Selo. In 1818 Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was elected an honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. In 1824 Karamzin became a full-time state councilor. The death of Emperor Alexander I shocked Karamzin and undermined his health; Half-sick, he visited the palace every day, talking with Empress Maria Feodorovna. In the first months of 1826, Karamzin suffered from pneumonia and decided, on the advice of doctors, to go to Southern France and Italy, for which Emperor Nicholas gave him funds and placed a frigate at his disposal. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel and on June 3 (May 22, old style), 1826, he died in St. Petersburg. Among the works of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin are critical articles, reviews on literary, theatrical, historical topics, letters, stories, odes, poems: “Eugene and Yulia” (1789; story), “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-1795; separate publication - in 1801; letters written during a trip to Germany, Switzerland, France and England, and reflecting the life of Europe on the eve and during the French Revolution), “Liodor” (1791, story), “Poor Liza” (1792; story; published in "Moscow Journal"), "Natalia, the boyar's daughter" (1792; story; published in the "Moscow Journal"), "To Mercy" (ode), "Aglaya" (1794-1795; almanac), "My trifles" (1794 ; 2nd edition - in 1797, 3rd - in 1801; a collection of articles previously published in the Moscow Journal, "Pantheon of Foreign Literature" (1798; an anthology on foreign literature, which for a long time did not pass through the censorship, which prohibited the publication of Demosthenes). , Cicero, Sallust, because they were republicans), “Historical eulogy to Empress Catherine II” (1802), “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novgorod” (1803; published in Vestnik Evropy; historical story"), "Note on ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations" (1811; criticism of the projects of state reforms by M.M. Speransky), "Note on Moscow sights" (1818; the first cultural and historical guide to Moscow and its environs ), “A Knight of Our Time” (an autobiographical story published in the “Bulletin of Europe”), “My Confession” (a story that denounced the secular education of the aristocracy), “History of the Russian State” (1816-1829: vol. 1-8 - in 1816 -1817, vol. 9 - in 1821, vol. 10-11 - in 1824, vol. 12 - in 1829; the first generalizing work on the history of Russia), letters from Karamzin to A.F. Malinovsky (published in 1860), to I.I. Dmitriev (published in 1866), to N.I. Krivtsov, to Prince P.A. Vyazemsky (1810-1826; published in 1897), to A.I. Turgenev (1806-1826; published in 1899), correspondence with Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich (published in 1906), “Historical memories and remarks on the way to the Trinity” (article) , “About the Moscow earthquake of 1802” (article), “Notes of an old Moscow resident” (article), “Travel around Moscow” (article), “Russian antiquity” (article), “On the light clothing of fashionable beauties of the ninth to tenth centuries” (article).
__________ Sources of information:"Russian Biographical Dictionary" Encyclopedic resource www.rubricon.com (Big Soviet encyclopedia, Encyclopedic Dictionary "History of the Fatherland", Encyclopedia "Moscow", Encyclopedia of Russian-American Relations, Illustrated encyclopedic dictionary)
Project "Russia Congratulates!" - www.prazdniki.ru
On December 12 (December 1, Old Style), 1766, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born - Russian writer, poet, editor of the Moscow Journal (1791-1792) and the journal Vestnik Evropy (1802-1803), honorary member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences ( 1818), full member of the Imperial Russian Academy, historian, first and only court historiographer, one of the first reformers of the Russian literary language, founding father of Russian historiography and Russian sentimentalism.
|
|
Contribution of N.M. It is difficult to overestimate Karamzin's contribution to Russian culture. Remembering everything that this man managed to do during the short 59 years of his earthly existence, it is impossible to ignore the fact that it was Karamzin who largely determined the person Russian XIX century - the “golden” age of Russian poetry, literature, historiography, source studies and other humanitarian areas of scientific knowledge. Thanks to linguistic research aimed at popularizing the literary language of poetry and prose, Karamzin gave Russian literature to his contemporaries. And if Pushkin is “our everything,” then Karamzin can safely be called “our Everything” with a capital letter. Without him, Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Baratynsky, Batyushkov and other poets of the so-called “Pushkin galaxy” would hardly have been possible.
“No matter what you turn to in our literature, everything began with Karamzin: journalism, criticism, stories, novels, historical stories, journalism, the study of history,” V.G. rightly noted later. Belinsky.
“History of the Russian State” N.M. Karamzin became not just the first Russian-language book on the history of Russia, accessible to a wide reader. Karamzin gave the Russian people the Fatherland in the full sense of the word. They say that, having closed the eighth and final volume, Count Fyodor Tolstoy, nicknamed the American, exclaimed: “It turns out that I have a Fatherland!” And he wasn't alone. All his contemporaries suddenly learned that they lived in a country with a thousand-year history and had something to be proud of. Before this, it was believed that before Peter I, who opened a “window to Europe,” there was nothing in Russia even remotely worthy of attention: the dark ages of backwardness and barbarism, boyar autocracy, primordially Russian laziness and bears in the streets...
Karamzin’s multi-volume work was not completed, but, having been published in the first quarter of the 19th century, it completely defined historical identity nation for many years to come. All subsequent historiography was never able to generate anything more consistent with the “imperial” self-awareness that developed under the influence of Karamzin. Karamzin’s views left a deep, indelible mark in all areas of Russian culture in the 19th and 20th centuries, forming the foundations of the national mentality, which ultimately determined the path of development of Russian society and the state as a whole.
It is significant that in the 20th century, the edifice of Russian great power, which had collapsed under the attacks of revolutionary internationalists, was revived again by the 1930s - under different slogans, with different leaders, in a different ideological package. but... The very approach to the historiography of Russian history, both before 1917 and after, largely remained jingoistic and sentimental in Karamzin style.
N.M. Karamzin - early years
N.M. Karamzin was born on December 12 (1st century), 1766 in the village of Mikhailovka, Buzuluk district, Kazan province (according to other sources, in the family estate of Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district, Kazan province). Little is known about his early years: there are no letters, diaries, or memories of Karamzin himself about his childhood. He did not even know exactly his year of birth and almost all his life he believed that he was born in 1765. Only in his old age, having discovered the documents, did he become “younger” by one year.
The future historiographer grew up on the estate of his father, retired captain Mikhail Egorovich Karamzin (1724-1783), an average Simbirsk nobleman. Received a good home education. In 1778 he was sent to Moscow to the boarding school of Moscow University professor I.M. Shadena. At the same time, he attended lectures at the university in 1781-1782.
After graduating from the boarding school, in 1783 Karamzin entered service in the Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he met the young poet and future employee of his “Moscow Journal” Dmitriev. At the same time he published his first translation of S. Gesner’s idyll “The Wooden Leg”.
In 1784, Karamzin retired as a lieutenant and never served again, which was perceived in the society of that time as a challenge. After a short stay in Simbirsk, where he joined the Golden Crown Masonic lodge, Karamzin moved to Moscow and was introduced to the circle of N.I. Novikov. He settled in a house that belonged to the Novikov Friendly Scientific Society, became the author and one of the publishers of the first children's magazine"Children's reading for the heart and mind" (1787-1789), founded by Novikov. At the same time, Karamzin became close to the Pleshcheev family. For many years he had a tender platonic friendship with N.I. Pleshcheeva. In Moscow, Karamzin published his first translations, in which his interest in European and Russian history is clearly visible: Thomson’s “The Seasons,” Zhanlis’s “Country Evenings,” W. Shakespeare’s tragedy “Julius Caesar,” Lessing’s tragedy “Emilia Galotti.”
In 1789, Karamzin’s first original story, “Eugene and Yulia,” appeared in the magazine “Children’s Reading...”. The reader practically did not notice it.
Travel to Europe
According to many biographers, Karamzin was not inclined towards the mystical side of Freemasonry, remaining a supporter of its active and educational direction. To be more precise, by the end of the 1780s, Karamzin had already “become ill” with Masonic mysticism in its Russian version. Perhaps his cooling towards Freemasonry was one of the reasons for his departure to Europe, where he spent more than a year (1789-90), visiting Germany, Switzerland, France and England. In Europe, he met and talked (except for influential Freemasons) with European “masters of minds”: I. Kant, I. G. Herder, C. Bonnet, I. K. Lavater, J. F. Marmontel, visited museums, theaters, secular salons. In Paris, Karamzin listened to O. G. Mirabeau, M. Robespierre and other revolutionaries at the National Assembly, saw many outstanding political figures and was familiar with many. Apparently, revolutionary Paris in 1789 showed Karamzin how powerfully a word can influence a person: in print, when Parisians read pamphlets and leaflets with keen interest; oral, when revolutionary speakers spoke and controversy arose (an experience that could not be acquired in Russia at that time).
Karamzin did not have a very enthusiastic opinion about English parliamentarism (perhaps following in the footsteps of Rousseau), but he very highly valued the level of civilization at which English society as a whole was located.
Karamzin – journalist, publisher
In the fall of 1790, Karamzin returned to Moscow and soon organized the publication of the monthly “Moscow Journal” (1790-1792), in which most of the “Letters of a Russian Traveler” were published, telling about the revolutionary events in France, the stories “Liodor”, “Poor Lisa” , “Natalia, the boyar’s daughter”, “Flor Silin”, essays, stories, critical articles and poems. Karamzin attracted the entire literary elite of that time to collaborate in the magazine: his friends Dmitriev and Petrov, Kheraskov and Derzhavin, Lvov, Neledinsky-Meletsky and others. Karamzin’s articles affirmed a new literary direction- sentimentalism.
The Moscow Journal had only 210 regular subscribers, but for the end of the 18th century this is the same as a hundred thousandth circulation at the end XIX century. Moreover, the magazine was read by precisely those who “made the difference” in the literary life of the country: students, officials, young officers, minor employees of various government agencies (“archive youths”).
After Novikov’s arrest, the authorities became seriously interested in the publisher of the Moscow Journal. During interrogations in the Secret Expedition, they ask: was it Novikov who sent the “Russian traveler” abroad on a “special mission”? The Novikovites were people of high integrity and, of course, Karamzin was shielded, but because of these suspicions the magazine had to be stopped.
In the 1790s, Karamzin published the first Russian almanacs - “Aglaya” (1794 -1795) and “Aonids” (1796 -1799). In 1793, when the Jacobin dictatorship was established at the third stage of the French Revolution, which shocked Karamzin with its cruelty, Nikolai Mikhailovich abandoned some of his previous views. The dictatorship aroused in him serious doubts about the possibility of humanity to achieve prosperity. He sharply condemned the revolution and all violent methods of transforming society. The philosophy of despair and fatalism permeates his new works: the story “The Island of Bornholm” (1793); "Sierra Morena" (1795); poems “Melancholy”, “Message to A. A. Pleshcheev”, etc.
During this period, real literary fame came to Karamzin.
Fedor Glinka: “Out of 1,200 cadets, it was rare that he did not repeat by heart some page from The Island of Bornholm.”.
The name Erast, previously completely unpopular, is increasingly found in lists of nobility. There are rumors of successful and unsuccessful suicides in the spirit of Poor Lisa. The poisonous memoirist Vigel recalls that important Moscow nobles had already begun to make do with “almost like an equal with a thirty-year-old retired lieutenant”.
In July 1794, Karamzin’s life almost ended: on the way to the estate, in the steppe wilderness, he was attacked by robbers. Karamzin miraculously escaped, receiving two minor wounds.
In 1801, he married Elizaveta Protasova, a neighbor on the estate, whom he had known since childhood - at the time of the wedding they had known each other for almost 13 years.
Reformer of the Russian literary language
Already in the early 1790s, Karamzin was seriously thinking about the present and future of Russian literature. He writes to a friend: “I am deprived of the pleasure of reading much on native language. We are still poor in writers. We have several poets who deserve to be read.” Of course, there were and are Russian writers: Lomonosov, Sumarokov, Fonvizin, Derzhavin, but there are no more than a dozen significant names. Karamzin is one of the first to understand that it is not a matter of talent - there are no less talents in Russia than in any other country. It’s just that Russian literature cannot move away from the long-outdated traditions of classicism, founded in the middle of the 18th century by the only theorist M.V. Lomonosov.
The reform of the literary language carried out by Lomonosov, as well as the theory of the “three calms” he created, met the tasks of the transition period from ancient to new literature. A complete rejection of the use of familiar Church Slavonicisms in the language was then still premature and inappropriate. But the evolution of the language, which began under Catherine II, actively continued. The “Three Calms” proposed by Lomonosov were not based on living colloquial speech, but on the witty thought of a writer-theorist. And this theory often put the authors in a difficult position: they had to use heavy, outdated Slavic expressions where in the spoken language they had long been replaced by others, softer and more elegant. The reader sometimes could not “cut through” the piles of outdated Slavicisms used in church books and records in order to understand the essence of this or that secular work.
Karamzin decided to bring closer literary language to conversational. Therefore, one of his main goals was the further liberation of literature from Church Slavonicisms. In the preface to the second book of the almanac “Aonida,” he wrote: “The thunder of words alone only deafens us and never reaches our hearts.”
The second feature of Karamzin’s “new syllable” was the simplification of syntactic structures. The writer abandoned lengthy periods. In "Pantheon" Russian writers“He decisively declared: “Lomonosov’s prose cannot serve as a model for us at all: his long periods are tiring, the arrangement of words is not always consistent with the flow of thoughts.”
Unlike Lomonosov, Karamzin strove to write in short, easily understandable sentences. This is still a model of good style and an example to follow in literature.
Karamzin’s third merit was the enrichment of the Russian language with a number of successful neologisms, which became firmly established in the main vocabulary. The innovations proposed by Karamzin include such widely known words in our time as “industry”, “development”, “sophistication”, “concentrate”, “touching”, “entertainment”, “humanity”, “public”, “ generally useful”, “influence” and a number of others.
When creating neologisms, Karamzin used mainly the method of tracing French words: “interesting” from “interessant”, “refined” from “raffine”, “development” from “developpement”, “touching” from “touchant”.
We know that even in the era of Peter the Great, many foreign words appeared in the Russian language, but they mostly replaced words that already existed in the Slavic language and were not a necessity. In addition, these words were often taken in their raw form, so they were very heavy and clumsy (“fortecia” instead of “fortress”, “victory” instead of “victory”, etc.). Karamzin, on the contrary, tried to give foreign words Russian ending, adapting them to the requirements of Russian grammar: “serious”, “moral”, “aesthetic”, “audience”, “harmony”, “enthusiasm”, etc.
In his reform activities, Karamzin focused on lively spoken language educated people. And this was the key to the success of his work - he writes not scientific treatises, but travel notes(“Letters of a Russian Traveler”), sentimental stories (“Bornholm Island”, “Poor Lisa”), poems, articles, translated from French, English and German.
"Arzamas" and "Conversation"
It is not surprising that most of the young writers contemporary to Karamzin accepted his transformations with a bang and willingly followed him. But, like any reformer, Karamzin had staunch opponents and worthy opponents.
Led by ideological opponents Karamzin stood up A.S. Shishkov (1774-1841) – admiral, patriot, famous statesman of that time. An Old Believer, an admirer of Lomonosov's language, Shishkov, at first glance, was a classicist. But this point of view requires significant qualifications. In contrast to Karamzin's Europeanism, Shishkov put forward the idea of nationality in literature - the most important sign of a romantic worldview that was far from classicism. It turns out that Shishkov also joined for romantics, but not of a progressive, but of a conservative direction. His views can be recognized as a kind of forerunner of later Slavophilism and Pochvenism.
In 1803, Shishkov spoke with “Discourse on the old and new syllable Russian language" He reproached the “Karamzinists” for succumbing to the temptation of European revolutionary false teachings and advocated for the return of literature to oral folk art, to the vernacular, to Orthodox Church Slavonic books.
Shishkov was not a philologist. He dealt with the problems of literature and the Russian language, rather, as an amateur, so Admiral Shishkov’s attacks on Karamzin and his literary supporters sometimes looked not so much scientifically substantiated as unsubstantiated ideological. Karamzin’s language reform seemed to Shishkov, a warrior and defender of the Fatherland, unpatriotic and anti-religious: “Language is the soul of the people, the mirror of morals, a true indicator of enlightenment, an incessant witness of deeds. Where there is no faith in the hearts, there is no piety in the language. Where there is no love for the fatherland, there the language does not express domestic feelings.”.
Shishkov reproached Karamzin for the excessive use of barbarisms (“epoch”, “harmony”, “catastrophe”), he was disgusted by neologisms (“coup” as a translation of the word “revolution”), artificial words hurt his ears: “future”, “well-read” and etc.
And we must admit that sometimes his criticism was pointed and accurate.
The evasiveness and aesthetic affectation of the speech of the “Karamzinists” very soon became outdated and fell out of literary use. This is precisely the future that Shishkov predicted for them, believing that instead of the expression “when travel became a need of my soul,” one could simply say: “when I fell in love with traveling”; the refined and periphrased speech “motley crowds of rural oreads meet with dark bands of reptile pharaohs” can be replaced with the understandable expression “gypsies come to meet the village girls”, etc.
Shishkov and his supporters took the first steps in studying the monuments of ancient Russian writing, enthusiastically studied “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” studied folklore, advocated the rapprochement of Russia with the Slavic world and recognized the need to bring the “Slovenian” style closer to the common language.
In a dispute with the translator Karamzin, Shishkov put forward a compelling argument about the “idiomatic nature” of each language, about the unique originality of its phraseological systems, which make it impossible to literally translate a thought or true semantic meaning from one language to another. For example, when translated literally into French, the expression “old horseradish” loses figurative meaning and “means only the thing itself, but in the metaphysical sense has no circle of signification.”
In defiance of Karamzin, Shishkov proposed his own reform of the Russian language. He proposed to designate concepts and feelings missing in our everyday life with new words formed from the roots not of French, but of Russian and Old Church Slavonic. Instead of Karamzin’s “influence” he suggested “influx”, instead of “development” - “vegetation”, instead of “actor” - “actor”, instead of “individuality” - “intelligence”, “wet feet” instead of “galoshes” and “wandering” instead "labyrinth". Most of his innovations did not take root in the Russian language.
It is impossible not to recognize Shishkov’s ardent love for the Russian language; One cannot help but admit that the passion for everything foreign, especially French, has gone too far in Russia. Ultimately, this led to the fact that the language of the common people, the peasant, became very different from the language of the cultural classes. But we cannot ignore the fact that the natural process of the language evolution that had begun could not be stopped. It was impossible to forcefully return into use the already outdated expressions that Shishkov proposed at that time: “zane”, “ugly”, “like”, “yako” and others.
Karamzin did not even respond to the accusations of Shishkov and his supporters, knowing firmly that they were guided exclusively by pious and patriotic feelings. Subsequently, Karamzin himself and his most talented supporters (Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Batyushkov) followed the very valuable instructions of the “Shishkovites” on the need to “return to their roots” and examples of their own history. But then they could not understand each other.
The pathos and ardent patriotism of A.S.’s articles. Shishkova evoked a sympathetic attitude among many writers. And when Shishkov, together with G. R. Derzhavin, founded literary society“Conversation of lovers of the Russian word” (1811) with a charter and its own magazine, P. A. Katenin, I. A. Krylov, and later V. K. Kuchelbecker and A. S. Griboedov immediately joined this society. One of the active participants in the "Conversation...", the prolific playwright A. A. Shakhovskoy, in the comedy "New Stern" viciously ridiculed Karamzin, and in the comedy "A Lesson for Coquettes, or Lipetsk Waters" in the person of the "balladeer" Fialkin created a parody image of V. A Zhukovsky.
This caused a unanimous rebuff from young people who supported Karamzin’s literary authority. D. V. Dashkov, P. A. Vyazemsky, D. N. Bludov composed several witty pamphlets addressed to Shakhovsky and other members of the “Conversation...”. In “Vision in the Arzamas Tavern” Bludov gave the circle of young defenders of Karamzin and Zhukovsky the name “Society of Unknown Arzamas Writers” or simply “Arzamas”.
IN organizational structure This society, founded in the fall of 1815, was dominated by a cheerful spirit of parody of the serious “Conversation...”. In contrast to the official pomposity, simplicity, naturalness, and openness prevailed here; a large place was given to jokes and games.
Parodying the official ritual of the “Conversation...”, upon joining Arzamas, everyone had to read a “funeral speech” to his “deceased” predecessor from among the living members of the “Conversation...” or Russian Academy sciences (Count D.I. Khvostov, S.A. Shirinsky-Shikhmatov, A.S. Shishkov himself, etc.). "Funeral speeches" were a form of literary struggle: they parodied high genres, ridiculed the stylistic archaism poetic works"talkers". At the meetings of the society, the humorous genres of Russian poetry were honed, a bold and decisive struggle was waged against all kinds of officialdom, and a type of independent Russian writer, free from the pressure of any ideological conventions, was formed. And although P. A. Vyazemsky, one of the organizers and active participants of the society, in his mature years condemned the youthful mischief and intransigence of his like-minded people (in particular, the rituals of “funeral services” for living literary opponents), he rightly called “Arzamas” a school of “literary fellowship” and mutual creative learning. The Arzamas and Beseda societies soon became centers of literary life and social struggle in the first quarter of the 19th century. “Arzamas” included such famous people as Zhukovsky (pseudonym - Svetlana), Vyazemsky (Asmodeus), Pushkin (Cricket), Batyushkov (Achilles) and others.
"Conversation" disbanded after Derzhavin's death in 1816; "Arzamas", having lost its main opponent, ceased to exist by 1818.
Thus, by the mid-1790s, Karamzin became the recognized head of Russian sentimentalism, which discovered not only new page in Russian literature, and Russian fiction in general. Russian readers, who had previously absorbed only French novels, and the works of the enlighteners, “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and “Poor Liza” were enthusiastically received, and Russian writers and poets (both “besedchiki” and “Arzamas people”) realized that they could and should write in their native language.
Karamzin and Alexander I: a symphony with power?
In 1802 - 1803, Karamzin published the journal “Bulletin of Europe”, in which literature and politics predominated. Largely thanks to the confrontation with Shishkov, a new aesthetic program for the formation of Russian literature as nationally distinctive appeared in Karamzin’s critical articles. Karamzin, unlike Shishkov, saw the key to the uniqueness of Russian culture not so much in adherence to ritual antiquity and religiosity, but in the events of Russian history. The most striking illustration of his views was the story “Martha the Posadnitsa or the Conquest of Novagorod.”
In his political articles of 1802-1803, Karamzin, as a rule, made recommendations to the government, the main one of which was educating the nation for the sake of the prosperity of the autocratic state.
These ideas were generally close to Emperor Alexander I, the grandson of Catherine the Great, who at one time also dreamed of an “enlightened monarchy” and a complete symphony between the authorities and a European educated society. Karamzin’s response to the coup of March 11, 1801 and the accession to the throne of Alexander I was “Historical eulogy to Catherine the Second” (1802), where Karamzin expressed his views on the essence of the monarchy in Russia, as well as the duties of the monarch and his subjects. The “eulogium” was approved by the sovereign as a collection of examples for the young monarch and was favorably received by him. Alexander I, obviously, was interested in Karamzin’s historical research, and the emperor rightly decided that great country you just need to remember your no less great past. And if you don’t remember, then at least create it again...
In 1803, through the mediation of the tsar’s educator M.N. Muravyov - poet, historian, teacher, one of the most educated people of that time - N.M. Karamzin received the official title of court historiographer with a pension of 2,000 rubles. (A pension of 2,000 rubles a year was then assigned to officials who, according to the Table of Ranks, had ranks no lower than general). Later, I.V. Kireevsky, referring to Karamzin himself, wrote about Muravyov: “Who knows, maybe without his thoughtful and warm assistance Karamzin would not have had the means to accomplish his great deed.”
In 1804, Karamzin practically moved away from literary and publishing activities and begins to create the “History of the Russian State,” on which he worked until the end of his days. With his influence M.N. Muravyov made many previously unknown and even “secret” materials available to the historian, and opened libraries and archives for him. Modern historians can only dream of such favorable working conditions. Therefore, in our opinion, talking about “The History of the Russian State” as a “scientific feat” by N.M. Karamzin, not entirely fair. The court historiographer was on duty, conscientiously doing the work for which he was paid. Accordingly, he had to write the kind of history that was currently needed by the customer, namely, Emperor Alexander I, who at the first stage of his reign showed sympathy for European liberalism.
However, under the influence of studies in Russian history, by 1810 Karamzin had become a consistent conservative. During this period, the system of his political views was finally formed. Karamzin’s statements that he is a “republican at heart” can only be adequately interpreted if we consider that we are talking about “Plato’s Republic of the Wise Men,” an ideal social order based on state virtue, strict regulation and the renunciation of personal freedom . At the beginning of 1810, Karamzin, through his relative Count F.V. Rostopchin, met in Moscow the leader of the “conservative party” at court - Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna (sister of Alexander I) and began to constantly visit her residence in Tver. The Grand Duchess's salon represented the center of conservative opposition to the liberal-Western course, personified by the figure of M. M. Speransky. In this salon, Karamzin read excerpts from his “History...”, and then he met the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna, who became one of his patrons.
In 1811, at the request of Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, Karamzin wrote a note “On ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations,” in which he outlined his ideas about the ideal structure Russian state and sharply criticized the policies of Alexander I and his immediate predecessors: Paul I, Catherine II and Peter I. In the 19th century, the note was never published in full and was circulated only in handwritten copies. IN Soviet era the thoughts expressed by Karamzin in his message were perceived as an extremely conservative nobility on the reforms of M. M. Speransky. The author himself was branded a “reactionary”, an opponent of the liberation of the peasantry and other liberal steps of the government of Alexander I.
However, at the first full publication notes in 1988, Yu. M. Lotman revealed its deeper content. In this document, Karamzin made a justified criticism of unprepared bureaucratic reforms carried out from above. Praising Alexander I, the author of the note at the same time attacks his advisers, meaning, of course, Speransky, who stood for constitutional reforms. Karamzin takes it upon himself to prove in detail, with references to historical examples, to the Tsar that Russia is not ready, either historically or politically, for the abolition of serfdom and the limitation of the autocratic monarchy by the constitution (following the example of the European powers). Some of his arguments (for example, about the futility of liberating peasants without land, the impossibility of constitutional democracy in Russia) even today look quite convincing and historically correct.
Along with the review Russian history and criticism of the political course of Emperor Alexander I, the note contained a complete, original and very complex in its theoretical content concept of autocracy as a special, original Russian type of power, closely associated with Orthodoxy.
At the same time, Karamzin refused to identify “true autocracy” with despotism, tyranny or arbitrariness. He believed that such deviations from the norms were due to chance (Ivan IV the Terrible, Paul I) and were quickly eliminated by the inertia of the tradition of “wise” and “virtuous” monarchical rule. In cases of sharp weakening and even complete absence supreme state and church power (for example, during the Time of Troubles), this powerful tradition led, within a short historical period, to the restoration of autocracy. Autocracy was the “palladium of Russia”, the main reason for its power and prosperity. Therefore, the basic principles of monarchical rule in Russia, according to Karamzin, should have been preserved in the future. They should have been supplemented only by proper policies in the field of legislation and education, which would not lead to the undermining of the autocracy, but to its maximum strengthening. With such an understanding of autocracy, any attempt to limit it would be a crime against Russian history and the Russian people.
Initially, Karamzin’s note only irritated the young emperor, who did not like criticism of his actions. In this note, the historiographer showed himself plus royaliste que le roi (a greater royalist than the king himself). However, subsequently the brilliant “hymn to the Russian autocracy” as presented by Karamzin undoubtedly had its effect. After the War of 1812, Napoleon's winner Alexander I curtailed many of his liberal projects: Speransky's reforms were not completed, the constitution and the very idea of limiting autocracy remained only in the minds of future Decembrists. And already in the 1830s, Karamzin’s concept actually formed the basis of the ideology of the Russian Empire, designated by the “theory of official nationality” of Count S. Uvarov (Orthodoxy-Autocracy-Nationalism).
Before the publication of the first 8 volumes of “History...” Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver to visit Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna and to Nizhny Novgorod, during the occupation of Moscow by the French. He usually spent the summer in Ostafyevo, the estate of Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky, whose illegitimate daughter, Ekaterina Andreevna, Karamzin married in 1804. (Karamzin’s first wife, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died in 1802).
In the last 10 years of his life, which Karamzin spent in St. Petersburg, he became very close to the royal family. Although Emperor Alexander I had a reserved attitude towards Karamzin since the submission of the Note, Karamzin often spent the summer in Tsarskoe Selo. At the request of the empresses (Maria Feodorovna and Elizaveta Alekseevna), he more than once had frank political conversations with Emperor Alexander, in which he acted as a spokesman for the opinions of opponents of drastic liberal reforms. In 1819-1825, Karamzin passionately rebelled against the sovereign’s intentions regarding Poland (submitted a note “Opinion of a Russian Citizen”), condemned the increase in state taxes in peacetime, spoke about the absurd provincial system of finance, criticized the system of military settlements, the activities of the Ministry of Education, pointed out the strange choice by the sovereign of some of the most important dignitaries (for example, Arakcheev), spoke of the need to reduce internal troops, about the imaginary correction of roads, which was so painful for the people, and constantly pointed out the need to have firm laws, civil and state.
Of course, having behind us such intercessors as both empresses and Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, it was possible to criticize, and argue, and show civil courage, and try to guide the monarch “on the true path.” It is not for nothing that Emperor Alexander I was called the “mysterious sphinx” by both his contemporaries and subsequent historians of his reign. In words, the sovereign agreed with Karamzin’s critical remarks regarding military settlements, recognized the need to “give fundamental laws to Russia,” and also to revise some aspects of domestic policy, but it so happened in our country that in reality, all the wise advice of government officials remains “fruitless for dear Fatherland"...
Karamzin as a historian
Karamzin is our first historian and last chronicler.
With his criticism he belongs to history,
simplicity and apothegms - the chronicle.
A.S. Pushkin
Even from the point of view of Karamzin’s contemporary historical science, no one dared to call the 12 volumes of his “History of the Russian State” a scientific work. Even then it was clear to everyone that the honorary title of court historiographer could not make a writer a historian, give him the appropriate knowledge and proper training.
But, on the other hand, Karamzin initially did not set himself the task of taking on the role of a researcher. The newly minted historiographer did not intend to write a scientific treatise and appropriate the laurels of his illustrious predecessors - Schlözer, Miller, Tatishchev, Shcherbatov, Boltin, etc.
Preliminary critical work on sources for Karamzin is only “a heavy tribute to reliability.” He was, first of all, a writer, and therefore wanted to apply his literary talent to ready-made material: “to select, animate, color” and thus make from Russian history “something attractive, strong, worthy of the attention of not only Russians, but also foreigners." And he accomplished this task brilliantly.
Today it is impossible not to agree that at the beginning of the 19th century, source studies, paleography and other auxiliary historical disciplines were in their infancy. Therefore, to demand from the writer Karamzin professional criticism, as well as strict adherence to one or another methodology for working with historical sources, is simply ridiculous.
You can often hear the opinion that Karamzin simply beautifully rewrote the “Russian History from Ancient Times” written in a long-outdated, difficult-to-read style by Prince M.M. Shcherbatov, introduced some of his own thoughts from it, and thereby created a book for lovers of fascinating reading in family circle. This is wrong.
Naturally, when writing his “History...” Karamzin actively used the experience and works of his predecessors - Schlozer and Shcherbatov. Shcherbatov helped Karamzin navigate the sources of Russian history, significantly influencing both the choice of material and its arrangement in the text. Whether by chance or not, Karamzin brought the “History of the Russian State” to exactly the same place as Shcherbatov’s “History”. However, in addition to following the scheme already worked out by his predecessors, Karamzin provides in his work a lot of references to extensive foreign historiography, almost unfamiliar to the Russian reader. While working on his “History...”, he for the first time introduced into scientific circulation a mass of unknown and previously unstudied sources. These are Byzantine and Livonian chronicles, information from foreigners about the population of ancient Rus', as well as large number Russian chronicles, which have not yet been touched by the hand of a historian. For comparison: M.M. Shcherbatov used only 21 Russian chronicles when writing his work, Karamzin actively cites more than 40. In addition to the chronicles, Karamzin involved in the study monuments of ancient Russian law and ancient Russian fiction. A special chapter of “History...” is dedicated to “Russian Truth,” and a number of pages are devoted to the just discovered “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”
Thanks to the diligent help of the directors of the Moscow Archive of the Ministry (Collegium) of Foreign Affairs N. N. Bantysh-Kamensky and A. F. Malinovsky, Karamzin was able to use those documents and materials that were not available to his predecessors. Many valuable manuscripts were provided by the Synodal Repository, libraries of monasteries (Trinity Lavra, Volokolamsk Monastery and others), as well as private collections of manuscripts by Musin-Pushkin and N.P. Rumyantseva. Karamzin received especially many documents from Chancellor Rumyantsev, who collected historical materials in Russia and abroad through his numerous agents, as well as from A.I. Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archive.
Many of the sources used by Karamzin were lost during the Moscow fire of 1812 and were preserved only in his “History...” and extensive “Notes” to its text. Thus, Karamzin’s work, to some extent, itself acquired the status of a historical source, to which professional historians have every right to refer.
Among the main shortcomings of the “History of the Russian State,” the author’s peculiar view of the tasks of the historian is traditionally noted. According to Karamzin, “knowledge” and “learning” in a historian “do not replace the talent to depict actions.” Before the artistic task of history, even the moral one, which Karamzin’s patron, M.N., set for himself, recedes into the background. Muravyov. Characteristics historical characters given by Karamzin exclusively in a literary-romantic vein, characteristic of the direction of Russian sentimentalism he created. Karamzin’s first Russian princes are distinguished by their “ardent romantic passion” for conquest, their squad is distinguished by their nobility and loyal spirit, the “rabble” sometimes shows dissatisfaction, raising rebellions, but ultimately agrees with the wisdom of the noble rulers, etc., etc. p.
Meanwhile, the previous generation of historians, under the influence of Schlözer, had long ago developed the idea of critical history, and among Karamzin’s contemporaries, the demands for criticism of historical sources, despite the lack of a clear methodology, were generally accepted. And the next generation has already made a demand philosophical history– with the identification of the laws of development of the state and society, recognition of the main driving forces and laws of the historical process. Therefore, Karamzin’s overly “literary” creation was immediately subjected to well-founded criticism.
According to the idea, firmly rooted in Russian and foreign historiography of the 17th - 18th centuries, the development of the historical process depends on the development of monarchical power. Karamzin does not deviate one iota from this idea: the monarchical power exalted Russia in Kyiv period; the division of power between the princes was a political mistake, which was corrected by the statesmanship of the Moscow princes - the collectors of Rus'. At the same time, it was the princes who corrected its consequences - the fragmentation of Rus' and the Tatar yoke.
But before reproaching Karamzin for not bringing anything new into the development of Russian historiography, it should be remembered that the author of “History of the Russian State” did not set himself the task of philosophical understanding historical process or blind imitation of the ideas of Western European romantics (F. Guizot, F. Mignet, J. Meschlet), who even then started talking about the “class struggle” and the “spirit of the people” as the main driving force of history. Karamzin was not at all interested in historical criticism, and he deliberately denied the “philosophical” direction in history. The researcher's conclusions from historical material, like his subjective fabrications, seem to Karamzin to be “metaphysics”, which is not suitable “for depicting action and character.”
Thus, with his unique views on the tasks of a historian, Karamzin, by and large, remained outside the dominant trends of Russian and European historiography of the 19th and 20th centuries. Of course, he participated in its consistent development, but only as an object for constant criticism and the brightest example there is no need to write how history should be written.
Reaction of contemporaries
Karamzin's contemporaries - readers and fans - enthusiastically accepted his new “historical” work. The first eight volumes of “History of the Russian State” were printed in 1816-1817 and went on sale in February 1818. A huge circulation of three thousand for that time was sold out in 25 days. (And this despite the hefty price of 50 rubles). A second edition was immediately required, which was carried out in 1818-1819 by I.V. Slenin. In 1821 a new, ninth volume was published, and in 1824 the next two. The author did not have time to finish the twelfth volume of his work, which was published in 1829, almost three years after his death.
"History..." was admired literary friends Karamzin and the vast public of non-specialist readers who suddenly discovered, like Count Tolstoy the American, that their Fatherland has a history. According to A.S. Pushkin, “everyone, even secular women, rushed to read the history of their fatherland, hitherto unknown to them. She was a new discovery for them. Ancient Russia seemed to be found by Karamzin, like America by Columbus.”
Liberal intellectual circles of the 1820s found Karamzin’s “History...” backward in general views and overly tendentious:
Research specialists, as already mentioned, treated Karamzin’s work precisely as a work, sometimes even belittling its historical significance. To many, Karamzin’s enterprise itself seemed too risky - to undertake to write such an extensive work in the then state of Russian historical science.
Already during Karamzin’s lifetime, critical analyzes of his “History...” appeared, and soon after the author’s death, attempts were made to determine the general significance of this work in historiography. Lelevel pointed out an involuntary distortion of the truth due to Karamzin’s patriotic, religious and political hobbies. Artsybashev showed to what extent the literary techniques of a lay historian harm the writing of “history.” Pogodin summed up all the shortcomings of the History, and N.A. Polevoy saw the general reason for these shortcomings in the fact that “Karamzin is a writer not of our time.” All his points of view, both in literature and in philosophy, politics and history, became outdated with the appearance of new influences in Russia European romanticism. In contrast to Karamzin, Polevoy soon wrote his six-volume “History of the Russian People,” where he completely surrendered to the ideas of Guizot and other Western European romantics. Contemporaries assessed this work as an “undignified parody” of Karamzin, subjecting the author to rather vicious, and not always deserved, attacks.
In the 1830s, Karamzin’s “History...” became the banner of the officially “Russian” movement. With the assistance of the same Pogodin, its scientific rehabilitation is being carried out, which is fully consistent with the spirit of Uvarov’s “theory of official nationality”.
In the second half of the 19th century, based on the “History...”, a lot of popular science articles and other texts were written, which served as the basis for well-known educational and teaching aids. Based on historical stories by Karamzin, many works were created for children and youth, the purpose of which for many years was to instill patriotism, loyalty to civic duty, and responsibility. younger generation for the fate of their homeland. This book, in our opinion, played a decisive role in shaping the views of more than one generation of Russian people, having a significant impact on the foundations patriotic education youth in late XIX- early 20th century.
December 14. Karamzin's finale.
The death of Emperor Alexander I and the December events of 1925 deeply shocked N.M. Karamzin and had a negative impact on his health.
On December 14, 1825, having received news of the uprising, the historian goes out into the street: “I saw terrible faces, heard terrible words, five or six stones fell at my feet.”
Karamzin, of course, regarded the action of the nobility against their sovereign as a rebellion and a serious crime. But among the rebels there were so many acquaintances: the Muravyov brothers, Nikolai Turgenev, Bestuzhev, Ryleev, Kuchelbecker (he translated Karamzin’s “History” into German).
A few days later Karamzin will say about the Decembrists: “The delusions and crimes of these young people are the delusions and crimes of our century.”
On December 14, during his movements around St. Petersburg, Karamzin caught a severe cold and contracted pneumonia. In the eyes of his contemporaries, he was another victim of this day: his idea of the world collapsed, his faith in the future was lost, and a new king ascended to the throne, very far from the ideal image of an enlightened monarch. Half-ill, Karamzin visited the palace every day, where he talked with Empress Maria Feodorovna, moving from memories of the late Emperor Alexander to discussions about the tasks of the future reign.
Karamzin could no longer write. The XII volume of “History...” froze during the interregnum of 1611 - 1612. The last words of the last volume are about a small Russian fortress: “Nut did not give up.” The last thing that Karamzin actually managed to do in the spring of 1826 was that, together with Zhukovsky, he persuaded Nicholas I to return Pushkin from exile. A few years later, the emperor tried to pass the baton of the first historiographer of Russia to the poet, but the “sun of Russian poetry” somehow did not fit into the role of state ideologist and theorist...
In the spring of 1826 N.M. Karamzin, on the advice of doctors, decided to go to Southern France or Italy for treatment. Nicholas I agreed to sponsor his trip and kindly placed a frigate of the Imperial Navy at the disposal of the historiographer. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel. He died on May 22 (June 3), 1826 in St. Petersburg. He was buried at the Tikhvin Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin is a famous Russian writer, a representative of sentimentalism, an outstanding historian and thinker, and educator. His main service was to his native Fatherland, the pinnacle life path, is a 12-volume work “History of the Russian State”. Perhaps the only Russian historian who was treated kindly by the highest royal favor, who had the official status of a historiographer, created especially for him.
Biography of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin (12/1/1776 - 22/5/1826) briefly
Nikolai Karamzin was born on December 1, 1766 in the family estate of Znamenskoye, not far from Simbirsk, into a wealthy noble family. Primary education, very versatile, received at home. At the age of 13 he was sent to the private boarding school Schaden in Moscow. In 1782, his father, a retired officer, insisted that his son try himself military service, so Nikolai ended up in the Preobrazhensky Guards Regiment for two years. Realizing that a military career is not at all interesting to him, he retires. Not feeling the need to do something he doesn't like to earn his daily bread, he begins to do what interests him - literature. First as a translator, then he tries himself as an author.
Karamzin - publisher and writer
During the same period in Moscow, he became close to a circle of Freemasons and was friends with the publisher and educator Novikov. He is interested in studying a variety of trends in philosophy and, for a more complete acquaintance with French and German enlighteners, goes to Western Europe. His journey coincided with the Great French Revolution; Karamzin even witnesses these events and, at first, perceives them with great enthusiasm.
Returning to Russia, he publishes “Letters of a Russian Traveler.” This work is the reflections of a thinking person about the destinies European culture. The medieval dogma of man as subordinate to someone's supreme reason has been toppled from its pedestal. It is being replaced by the thesis about personal freedom as such, and Karamzin welcomes this theory with all his heart. In 1792 he published in his own literary magazine“Moscow Magazine”, the story “Poor Liza”, in which he develops the theory of personal equality regardless of social status. In addition to the literary merits of the story, it is valuable for Russian literature because it was written and published in Russian.
The beginning of the emperor’s reign coincided with the beginning of Karamzin’s publication of the journal “Bulletin of Europe,” whose motto was “Russia is Europe.” The materials published in the magazine appealed to the views of Alexander I, so he responded favorably to Karamzin’s desire to write the history of Russia. He not only gave permission, but by personal decree appointed Karamzin as a historiographer with a decent pension of 2000 rubles, so that he could work with all dedication on a grandiose historical work. Since 1804, Nikolai Mikhailovich has been engaged only in compiling the “History of the Russian State”. The Emperor gives him permission to work to collect materials in the archives. He was always ready to provide an audience and be sure to report the slightest difficulties if they arose.
The first 8 volumes of “History” were published in 1818 and were sold out in just a month. called this event “absolutely exceptional.” The interest in Karamzin’s historical work was enormous, and although he managed to describe historical events from the first mention of Slavic tribes only until the Time of Troubles, which amounted to 12 volumes, the significance of this historical work cannot be overestimated. This grandiose work formed the basis of almost all subsequent fundamental works on the history of Russia. Unfortunately, Karamzin himself did not see his work published in full. He died from a cold, which he received after spending the whole day on Senate Square in St. Petersburg during. This happened on May 22, 1826.
