"History of the Pugachev rebellion" and the novel " Captain's daughter are dedicated to the same event - the Pugachev uprising, but these two works are very different from each other.
"History of the Pugachev rebellion" is a documentary work based on accurate data. The author examines in detail the appearance of Pugachev in the Ural steppes, the development of the movement of the rebels, his exact route. The information from the documents is stated accurately, dryly, without emotions. Pushkin also tells about the capture and execution of Pugachev. The novel "The Captain's Daughter" is written differently. In it, at the center of the narrative is the story of fictional characters: Grinev, Shvabrin, Masha Mironova. But their personal events take place against the backdrop of historical events, to which neither the author nor the characters remain indifferent.
The meeting of Grinev and Pugachev happens by chance, during a snowstorm in the steppe. Pugachev traveled a lot, and such a meeting of heroes would be quite possible. But the portrait of the hero in the "History ..." and in the novel is completely different. The “History of the Pugachev Revolt” gives a standard verbal portrait: “forty years old, medium height, swarthy and thin; his hair was dark blond, his beard was black, small and wedge-shaped. And in the novel, the portrait of the hero is psychological, that is, it is possible to determine the character of the hero from it: “He was about forty years old, medium height, thin and broad-shouldered ... lively big eyes ran around. His face had a rather pleasant, but roguish expression. Intelligence and cunning are visible in this portrait, in contrast to the documentary presentation.
The author also artistically plays with various details in the novel. Pugachev wandered a lot, inciting the Cossacks to revolt. Pushkin depicts an allegorical conversation with the owner of the inn, where in question about this preparation. It is known that Pugachev was illiterate. This is also drawn by Pushkin in comic scene submission of a petition by Savelich. Pugachev turns the paper over in his hands “with a look of importance” and gives it to his “secretary”: “Why are you writing so cleverly? Our bright eyes cannot make out anything here. Finally, the author shows the character of Pugachev in the most different situations: during the capture of the fortress, at a feast with his "generals", in a conversation with Grinev and Shvabrin.
Everywhere Pugachev is shown as a living person, sometimes cruel, sometimes noble, sometimes an adventurer. And the author does not remain a dispassionate observer. Through the eyes of Grinev, he shows the devastation of Russian villages after the riot, the death of people, their suffering, and, as if on his behalf, says: “God forbid to see a Russian rebellion, senseless and merciless!” The emotionality of the author's position is the main difference between the novel and the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", a documentary work.
(2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
A. S. Pushkin collected historical material about Emelyan Pugachev for a long time. He was worried about the biggest question in Russian history popular uprising. In the novel "The Captain's Daughter", the fate of Russia and the Russian people is clarified on historical material. The work has a deep philosophical, historical and moral content.
The main storyline of the novel is, of course, the uprising of Emelyan Pugachev. The rather peaceful course of the author's narrative in the first chapters is suddenly interrupted. The fate of the main characters is no longer determined by the love and will of the parents, but by a much more terrible force, whose name is "Pugachevism". The Pugachev rebellion is the most terrible and widest rebellion in the history of the Russian people. A. S. Pushkin immerses us in a special atmosphere that reigned then in our country.
At first, the image of the rebellious people arises very vaguely - only from fragments of conversations. However, events are developing quite rapidly. Very soon, what was only guesses, hints, events distant in time, suddenly arises clearly and clearly when Captain Mironov receives a letter about the beginning of the riot.
The people at that Time of Troubles he was agitated, murmured, but this murmuring could not find an outlet. It was during this period that Pugachev appeared, posing as Emperor Peter III. He was in the right place at the right time. Being endowed by nature with the qualities of a leader, Pugachev managed to lead huge masses of the people.
Pushkin very vividly describes the entry of Pugachev into the city after the capture of the Belogorsk fortress. People with bread and salt went out to meet Pugachev, bowed to the ground, bells rang. The leader of the rebels was greeted like a real emperor. Then the author describes the scene of the massacre with two old honored officers and the defenseless Vasilisa Yegorovna. The people do not condemn this murder. Although neither the Mironovs nor Ivan Ignatovich are to blame for anything, although they were known, appreciated and respected by many, no one showed them a drop of sympathy or compassion at the last minute, no one regretted them. They were forgotten about immediately, rushing after Pugachev. The people accepted the massacre of the Mironovs as a legitimate and necessary measure. This event with particular force emphasizes the cruelty and ruthlessness of the uprising.
This is followed by a scene of drinking Pugachev with his comrades, in which Grinev is present. In this scene, the author affirms a very important idea: among the rebels there are strong relationships, camaraderie, they are united by a common goal and self-confidence.
Subsequently, Grinev will again witness the interpersonal relations of the rebels when he is present at the “council”, in which Pugachev, Beloborodov and the fugitive convict Khlopusha took part. Pugachev here manifests himself as a decisive and principled person, a defender of the people, Khlopusha - as a smart, prudent and far-sighted politician, not devoid of peculiar ideas of honesty (he always "destroyed the opponent" only in an open duel). Beloborodov, on the other hand, shows himself to be an ardent opponent of the nobility, he proposes to execute all people noble origin that fell into their hands, regardless of the personal qualities of the nobles.
Creating images of the three leaders of the uprising, Pushkin showed them as bright personalities with their own individual traits. But they are all united by a common understanding of what justice is.
The tragedy of Pugachev's fate and the doom of the uprising are emphasized in the chapter where Pugachev talks about his intention to march on Moscow. He confesses to Grinev that he is afraid of his people, since they can betray him at any moment. This is important for understanding Pushkin's idea: Pugachev sees the hopelessness of the struggle, but does not consider it meaningless. In Pugachev, the national character was clearly manifested, because he is the spokesman for the aspirations and hopes of the people.
Even if the rebellion is doomed to defeat, it is natural and cannot be avoided, because the truth of history is on the side free man. A freedom-loving people must fight for their rights. A. S. Pushkin not only does not condemn the rebels, but also admires them, emphasizing the poetry of the rebellion. However, it is important to remember that with all this the author is quite realistic. He does not hide dark sides rebellion: petty robberies, the possibility of betrayal in the ranks of the rebels, cruel reprisals, the senselessness of some acts, such as the murder of Vasilisa Yegorovna.
So, A. S. Pushkin, calling the rebellion "senseless and merciless", nevertheless understands its great significance. He, perfectly realizing the role of the people in history, revealed it to his readers as well. This novel is one of the best works of fiction not only about the Pugachev uprising, but also about the Russian national character.
Loginov Stepan
Work in the correspondence round of the Olympiad "Conquer Sparrow Hills" 2012 Pay attention to the introduction - this is exemplary justification for choosing a topic. The justification is what is required in the essays at the Pokori Sparrow Hills and Lomonosov Olympiads at Moscow State University.
Download:
Preview:
A. S. Pushkin on the causes of the Pugachev uprising (based on "The Captain's Daughter" and "Pugachev's History")
Introduction
The topic "A. S. Pushkin on the causes of the Pugachev uprising" seems to me especially interesting for a number of reasons.
Firstly , this is the need to analyze two different types of sources that came from the pen of one author - a research historical work ("The History of Pugachev") and a work of art ("The Captain's Daughter").
On the one hand, we have for analysis the work of the historian of the first thirds of XIX century ("History of Pugachev" was published in 1834 under the title "History of the Pugachev rebellion"), when there were no modern approaches to the study historical events and processes, but there was already an understanding that the historian should rely on as many diverse sources as possible, analyzing and comparing them. Pushkin proudly responds to the criticism of his work: “I carefully read everything that was written about Pugachev, and moreover, 18 thick volumes in folio of various manuscripts, decrees, reports, etc. I visited the places where the main events of the era took place, I described, verifying dead documents with the words of still living, but already aged eyewitnesses, and again verifying their decrepit memory with historical criticism. Pushkin used documents from state archives to compile his history (for the first time, by order of Nicholas I, a private person was admitted to state archives!), Folklore sources, and eyewitness memories from various social strata. An interesting detail: in an effort to be impartial, Pushkin nevertheless succumbs to the charm of the heroes of his historical work. So, he hides in the "Pugachev rebellion" the fact that the commandant of the Lower Lake Fortress was drunk when he behaved courageously in the face of death. “I did not dare to say this out of respect for his courage and beautiful death,” Pushkin wrote in his “Remarks”, which he presented to Nicholas I ...
On the other hand, we have for analysis an example of artistic understanding of the theme of the Pugachev rebellion. The Captain's Daughter was conceived before the History, but written later and published in 1836. Based on his research, A. S. Pushkin, by the power of talent, sees the events of the recent past, gives a personal understanding of the characters of historical and fictional (but typical of the era) characters and the motives of their behavior.
In "The Captain's Daughter" and "The History of Pugachev" we have an amazing opportunity to obtain from the same hands both a document and outstanding work fiction. It is definitely attractive.
Secondly , in this topic attracts (no less than the nature of the sources, and perhaps even more), the personality of the author - the genius of Russian literature, one of the most educated and intelligent people of his time. The view of A. S. Pushkin on any event is extremely interesting, since this is the view of a person who knows how to think independently, interestingly, deeply. The look of a genius.
Third , A. S. Pushkin refers in these works to one of the most tragic pages of Russian history, to the most terrible social clash in Russia at that time - the Pugachev rebellion. Pushkin, in fact, is the first historian of the rebellion, the first to approach the topic, relying on a serious array of evidence and documents collected in the "History of Pugachev". And Pushkin was the first who seriously tried to comprehend Pugachevism in work of art. "The Captain's Daughter" remains an unsurpassed literary masterpiece about the era.
Main part
Being a nobleman and a man of honor, Pushkin approaches the history of the peasant war from a position characteristic of a person of his class. Pugachev's "bastard" and "any rabble" does not arouse sympathy in him - both because of the extreme cruelty of the Pugachevites, and because of the violation of order, the guardian of which is the nobility. But being a person capable of thinking critically, Pushkin understands that the Pugachev rebellion, no matter how "senseless and merciless" it may be, has reasons, there are grounds. How else could it be that "the appearance of two or three villains was enough to revolt entire regions"? How could it be that, having remained with three hundred Yaik Cossacks in July 1774, already in August Pugacheva had an army of twenty thousand? Why "the inhabitants were looking forward to it"? ("History of Pugachev")
For Pushkin, it seems to me, the reasons for Pugachevism are obvious and, unlike modern historians, he does not highlight these reasons as a separate topic either in The History of Pugachev, or, even more so, in The Captain's Daughter. A modern historian would not only single out a separate section in his monograph to study the causes of such a large-scale peasant war, but would also systematize these causes depending on the social and ethnic groups participants in the riot. For Pushkin, I repeat, the reasons are so obvious that he does not single them out in particular. (Of course, we must remember that in the Pushkin era, the format of historical research that is accepted in our time has not yet taken shape). What Pushkin sees as the main reason for the rebellion can be judged from the following passages.
In a chapter that was not included in the final edition of The Captain's Daughter, we can find Grinev's (Bulanin's) very revealing reasoning: "The fate of my parents did not ... horrify me ... I knew that mother was adored by peasants and courtyard people, father ... was also loved, for he was just and knew the true needs of subject people. If all the landowners were so reasonable and paternally caring towards the peasants, the uprising would be impossible. It seems to me that this is the opinion of Pushkin. This fiction"The Captain's Daughter" is associated with the documentary "History of Pugachev", where Pushkin repeatedly reports on the facts when peasants and soldiers saved their masters and commanders, interceded for them before Pugachev in those cases when the gentlemen were worthy people.
On the contrary, in the sixth chapter of The Captain's Daughter, a certain "Bashkir" is described, a participant in the uprising of 1741, whose nose, ears and tongue were cut off. This character causes horror and sympathy because of the cruelty shown to him.
Here it is - the most important reason, according to Pushkin - the cruelty and injustice of those who should be fair and "know the true needs of subject people." Pushkin puts the following words into Grinev's mouth: "Young man, if my notes fall into your hands, remember that the best and most lasting changes are those that come from the improvement of morals."
So, the first reason for the peasant war and its scale, according to Pushkin, is the cruel morals of the nobility of the 18th century, their irresponsibility and injustice towards people under their control.
The second reason that Pushkin considers (he pays attention to it in The History of Pugachev) is the incompetence, corruption, deceit and meanness of the officials of the Russian Empire of the 18th century. Especially at the lower and middle levels.
Pushkin speaks of this reason already in the first chapter of Pugachev: “from 1762 itself ... the Yaik Cossacks began to complain about the various oppressions they endure from members of the chancellery established in the army by the government: the withholding of a certain salary, unauthorized taxes and violation of ancient rights and customs of fishing. Officials sent to them to deal with complaints could not or did not want to satisfy them.
The next reason that can be seen in Pushkin's writings dedicated to the Pugachev rebellion is the charisma of the leader of the rebels, the strength of his character, the conformity of Pugachev's character to popular ideas about what a true chieftain who fights for "freedom" should be like. "You rebelled us," the Bashkirs tell him. Pugachev sends out "outrageous letters", which, according to Pushkin, are written in rude but very bright language: "the appeal was written in rude but strong terms and was supposed to make a dangerous impression on ordinary people," Pushkin writes in The Captain's Daughter. In his remarks to "Pugachev" he notes: "Pugachev's outrageous appeal is an amazing example of folk eloquence, albeit an illiterate one."
Pugachev behaves like a real robber chieftain - if he is cruel, then to the extreme, if he is merciful, then in his mercy he is ready to spare anyone. He scatters money in front of the people, he drinks heavily and can bathe in the bath for the longest time, he "robs the treasury and the property of the nobles ... without touching the peasant property," and he is elusive. The people see in him almost a folklore hero. Pushkin draws attention to the fact that even 60 years after the rebellion, the Cossacks are tied to the memory of Pugachev. “He is Pugachev for you,” the old man answered me angrily, “but for me he was great sovereign Pyotr Fedorovich. " Pushkin writes down such a phrase behind an old Cossack.
So, in my opinion, Pushkin considers another reason for the uprising to be the personality of its leader - a bright, intelligent and cruel man.
Conclusion
Relying on the "History of Pugachev" and "The Captain's Daughter" as the main sources, the following conclusions can be drawn regarding what A. S. Pushkin thought about the causes of the Pugachev uprising.
Firstly , the cruelty of the landowners, officials and military commanders to their peasants and subordinates. Instead of administering fairly and taking their own high position as a duty to take care of the subordinates and dependent people, the nobility of the Catherine’s era reveled in their impunity (after all, even complaining about the landlords was forbidden to serfs in 1767!) And for the most part it was cruel and unfair to the serfs, the Cossacks, and the Gentiles, who made up the bulk of the rebels. This cruelty and unreasonableness of the superiors was the reason for such a rapid and large-scale spread of the uprising.
Secondly , bribery, arbitrariness and injustice of officials (especially in the backcountry corners of the Russian Empire) served as another reason for the uprising. This fact was also noted by the authors of the 18th century, such as Fonvizin, Novikov, Radishchev...
Third , the most important reason for the scale of the uprising was the presence of such a powerful and talented leader among the rebels as Emelyan Pugachev.
It is curious that, in general, Pushkin's conclusions coincide with the opinion of modern historians regarding the causes of the uprising. Interestingly, considering the uprising from the position of a nobleman and landowner, Pushkin turned out to be so observant and talented that he managed to develop an independent view of the causes of the Pugachev rebellion.
Pushkin's conclusion regarding the results of the uprising also absolutely coincides with what is written about the Pugachev uprising in our time: "The Pugachev rebellion proved to the government the need for many changes."
Thus, studying Pushkin's works related to the Pugachev uprising, one can find that Pushkin was a serious, thoughtful historian who was able to analyze historical events and draw correct conclusions from the analysis of historical sources. In his historical writings, we also see an amazing combination of the talent of a historian and a great writer.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
MOSCOW STATE REGIONAL UNIVERSITY
COURSE WORK
A.S. Pushkin as a researcher in the work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion".
2nd year student
full-time department
Faculty of History,
political science and law
Volkova S.I.
Scientific adviser:
Ph.D., Assoc. Solovyov Ya.V.
Moscow, 2009
Introduction 3
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II. Pushkin's work on the study of the Pugachev rebellion 18
CHAPTER III. General assessment of Pushkin as a researcher 29
Conclusion 37
List of used literature and sources 40
Introduction
Relevance of the research topic
The theme of the course work “A.S. Pushkin as a researcher in his work on the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" is relevant, first of all, because the work of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin is associated in a modern troubled society among the broad masses exclusively with his literary activity; but, I must say that Pushkin's work was much wider and deeper. Few people know that A.S. Pushkin in the last, most difficult years in his life and work, managed to prove himself as an outstanding historian-researcher. About how the formation of the great poet and writer took place in a new capacity; what kind of contribution he made to historical science; how Pushkin carried out research work on the example of one of his historical works - "The History of the Pugachev Rebellion" - this work tells.
Chronological framework of the period under study
The theme of the course work covers the period of life and work of A.S. Pushkin from 1830 to 1836
Review of sources and literature
An analysis of the problem of Pushkin's research activities in his work on the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" was not widely used in historical science.
Sources who have kept information about research work Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion" are quite few.
They are collected mainly in various editions of the Complete Works of A.S. Pushkin: we get the most detailed information about the research work of the great writer on the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" from the IX volume of the large academic edition of Pushkin's works.
Sources that have preserved information about this research work of A.S. Pushkin can be divided into several categories:
The first category includes the official correspondence of the poet ( Pushkin's correspondence with A.Kh. Benkendorf and A.I. Chernyshev) and correspondence with relatives and friends (letters to his wife during a trip to the "Pugachev" places, a letter from A.S. Pushkin to V.D. Volkhovsky about the difficulty of working with official documents from the time of the Pugachev uprising, a letter from A.S. Pushkin P.A. Vyazemsky about the uprising of military settlers and peasants);
To the second - memoirs, diary entries, Pushkin's reviews of works by other authors (memoirs and memoirs of A.S. Pushkin on the work on the "History of the Pugachev Riot", Pushkin's review of 1836 on the "Collected Works of Georgy Konisky ...");
To the third - official documents of Pushkin's contemporaries (report of the Sergach district police officer of the Nizhny Novgorod province dated October 11, 1833 about Pushkin).
I will conduct a more detailed analysis of the sources in the main part of the work.
I would like to briefly dwell on the question of the degree of study of this problem in Russian historiography.
Genrikh Petrovich Blok (1888 - 1962) – author of the monograph "Pushkin in work on historical sources» – candidate philological sciences, senior researcher at the Vocabulary Department of the Russian Academy of Sciences (LOIYa AN USSR) in the 1950s and 60s. In his work "Pushkin in work on historical sources" G.P. Blok set himself the following task: to study the research skills of Pushkin and stylistic features his presentation of the "History of Pugachev". The writings about Pugachev were subjected to a thorough analysis. foreign languages, from which he took many explicit and hidden quotations (the novel "False Peter III”, a publication by Busching, books by Scherer, Tannenberg, Custer, Took, Bergman, etc.).
Anna Ilyinichna Chkheidze - Doctor of Philology. As a doctoral dissertation, A.I. Chkheidze defended a scientific work on the topic "The History of Pugachev" by A.S. Pushkin "; this book is a somewhat abridged summary of this dissertation. It poses and studies almost all the main issues related to Pushkin's "History of the Pugachev rebellion": the prerequisites for Pushkin's appeal to the theme of the Pugachev rebellion, Pushkin's work on historical sources and archival materials, the history of the creation of the text of the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", comparison of the "History of Pugachev" with the historical reality depicted in it, etc.
Lev Vladimirovich Cherepnin (1905 - 1977), historian, academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In the work "Historical views of the classics of Russian literature" L.V. Cherepnin analyzes Pushkin's historical works in great detail, the environment in which he created them, traces in detail the process of Pushkin's development as a professional historian and, in particular, the brilliant use of the method of criticism of sources when working with historical materials. L.V. Cherepnin also notes the fact that A.S. Pushkin was one of the first in Russian historical science to draw on oral testimonies of contemporaries of historical events: Kazan old men contemporaries of the events of the Pugachev uprising, a 75-year-old Cossack woman who lived in Berd and clearly remembered that time.
Reginald Vasilievich Ovchinnikov (b. 1926) - historian and literary critic, leading researcher at the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences; author of documentary, memoir, epistolary and folklore sources Pushkin's works of the "Pugachev" cycle ("History of Pugachev" and "The Captain's Daughter"). He published the books “Pushkin at work on archival documents (“Pugachev’s History”)”, “Above Pushkin’s Pugachev’s Pages” (M., 1981), “Behind the Pushkin Line” (Chelyabinsk, 1988), as well as articles and essays, covering Pushkin's trip to the Volga region and the Orenburg region, where he met and talked with elderly contemporaries of the Pugachev uprising. Separate aspects of Pushkin's work on documents of that time are touched upon in the researcher's source study monographs - "Manifestos and decrees of E.I. Pugachev" (M., 1980), "Investigation and trial of E.I. Pugachev and his associates” (M., 1995).
Monograph R.V. Ovchinnikov "Pushkin in the work on archival documents ("History of Pugachev")" is devoted to the question of the primary sources of the "History of the Pugachev rebellion". The merit of the author lies in the fact that he was the first to carry out painstaking work to identify all archival documents that were at the disposal of A.S. Pushkin during his work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", and reproduced it in full in his work, and also included in his work full review associated with the Peasants' War of 1773 - 1775. funds of archives, for one reason or another, not used by A.S. Pushkin. This largely allows us to judge the degree of awareness of the great Russian writer.
Genrikh Nikolaevich Volkov (1933 - 1993) - Doctor of Philosophy, publicist. G.N. Volkov in his work “The World of Pushkin: Personality, Worldview, Environment” makes an attempt to recreate the socio-psychological portrait of A.S. Pushkin, to reveal the origins of the formation of his worldview, to show what Russia owes to the many-sided genius of Pushkin. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin was not only a great poet, but also a thinker with a special, complex worldview, a perspicacious historian, a man of statesmanship. Genrikh Volkov tried to expand the scope of studying the socio-historical background of the life and work of the poet, to understand him in connection with the "zeitgeist". An interesting fact from the book. G.N. Volkov compares the dialogue between Nicholas I and Pushkin regarding the latter’s possible participation in the Decembrist uprising and service for the benefit of the autocracy and Grinev with Pugachev from The Captain’s Daughter: “Grinev did not promise the “imposter” not to serve against him, and the “dark man” appreciated this as an act of real courage and thanked for it. Pushkin finally made such a promise to the “legitimate” ruler of the empire, but he tormented the poet to the very end, demanding gratitude and humility for “letting go”.
Natalya Borisovna Krylova - chief librarian of the Chelyabinsk regional library at the end of XX - early XXI centuries, author of the article "Above the "Pugachev" pages of Pushkin" . Not being a professional historian, she, nevertheless, relying on the works of specialists on this research topic (R.V. Ovchinnikova, G.N. Volkova, etc.), managed to describe the famous journey of A.S. Pushkin in the "Pugachev" places of the Urals (in particular, his trip to Uralsk), which enriched contemporary literature a number of interesting facts. For example, N.B. Krylova tells about a conversation at a party with military ataman Vasily Osipovich Pokatilov with contemporaries of the events of the Pugachev uprising and their descendants: with local old-timers-Cossacks Chervyakov and Dmitry Denisovich Pyanov, the son of a man who sheltered E.I. Pugachev.
These works will be analyzed in more detail in the main part of my work.
Purpose and objectives of the study
This topic is one of the relatively new ones in historical science.
The object of the research is the activity of Pushkin as a historian-researcher in general.
The subject of the study is A.S. Pushkin as a researcher in the work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion". The purpose of the study is to analyze the problem of Pushkin's research activities in the work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion" in historical science.
The following research tasks can be distinguished:
Job Notes
Course work consists of three chapters: "The reasons for Pushkin's address to the topic of the Pugachev rebellion", "Pushkin's work on the study of the Pugachev rebellion" and "General assessment of Pushkin as a researcher".
CHAPTERI. Reasons for Pushkin's appeal to the theme of the Pugachev rebellion
The life and work of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin fell on turning point Russian and world history. Late 18th - first half of the 19th century were filled, according to L.V. Cherepnin, "an acute class and political struggle, during which the social system and international relations in Europe were changing" .
We are talking about both the Great French bourgeois revolution and its consequences: the Napoleonic wars; revolutions and national liberation movements that swept through a number of European countries and North America; and, finally, the July bourgeois revolution of 1830 in France, which, in turn, influenced the national liberation movements in Belgium and Poland.
In Russia, the gradual decline of the feudal-serf system falls during this period. In the first half of the 70s. 18th century The Russian Empire was subjected to such a formidable shock as the Peasant War led by E.I. Pugachev. On late 18th century accounted for the activities of the Russian revolutionary A.N. Radishchev, who called for the elimination of the autocracy and the serfdom.
The Patriotic War of 1812 contributed to the growth of national self-consciousness, the split of society into various political groups. Revolutionary-minded representatives of one of them - the Decembrists - organized an uprising on Senate Square on December 14, 1825 against the current government. Then, in the era of the so-called "Nikolaev reaction", public thought subsided for some time, until in the 30s. 19th century new revolutionary circles did not begin to emerge, the members of which, in particular, raznochintsy became.
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin always tried to keep abreast of events taking place in Russia and Europe.
Shortly before the time of the events described in this paper, A.S. Pushkin experienced the most difficult personal tragedy, having lost his close friends - participants in the Decembrist uprising. Nevertheless, Pushkin turned to the study of Russia's past.
The theme of the history of the Pugachev rebellion was prompted to Pushkin by the contemporary conditions of Russian reality.
For the first half of XIX V. had a huge number of spontaneous actions of the peasantry and military settlers. They especially became more frequent in the 30s, reaching, according to A.I. Chkheidze, “in places of such dimensions that in government circles and in wide circles noble society fears of a "new Pugachevism" arose.
According to the researcher of the peasant question V.I. Semevsky, "there were 556 peasant unrest in the reign of Emperor Nicholas I ...
In the first four years there were only 41 unrest, from 1830 to 1834 - 46 unrest, from 1835 to 1839 - 59 ... ". Among the provinces that accounted for the largest number uprisings, V.I. Semevsky mentions Tver, Moscow and Novgorod provinces.
In 1830, a cholera epidemic broke out in Russia and quickly spread throughout the territory of the empire (up to St. Petersburg). The government turned out to be practically helpless in the fight against a terrible epidemic: the quarantines introduced by it were organized so clumsily that they could not prevent the spread of the epidemic. Quarantines also prevented the normal conduct of trade operations, which, in turn, made it difficult for the timely delivery of food and, consequently, caused famine.
According to A.I. Chkheidze, all "this greatly agitated the people and forced them to resort to self-defense against the "help" of the government."
In 1831, an uprising of military settlers broke out in the city of Staraya Russa (not far from St. Petersburg), which rapidly spread to neighboring provinces. The consequence of these unrest was the resignation of Arakcheev. The military settlements were preserved.
Here is how Major General Mayevsky, who at that time was the head of the old Russian military settlements, described the economy entrusted to him: “Imagine a house in which people and food freeze; imagine a compressed room, a mixture of sexes without separation; imagine that a cow is kept like a gun, and food in the field is obtained for 12 miles; that capital forests have been burned, and new ones are being bought for the building from Porkhov, with the heaviest delivery: that in order to save one tree, a sazhen of firewood was used to furnish its cage, and then you will get an idea of \u200b\u200bstate economy. But at the same time, do not forget that the villager has the land by name; and the general way of his life is learning and a gun.
After the uprising broke out in Staraya Russa, it spread to the Novgorod settlements. The rebels were supported by divisions of grenadiers. Petersburg was under threat, as the rebels could move on the capital at any moment.
Pushkin closely followed current events. In August 1831 A.S. Pushkin in a letter to his friend P.A. Vyazemsky reported the following: “... you must have heard about the indignations of Novgorod and Old Rus'. Horror. More than a hundred people of generals, colonels and officers were slaughtered in the Novgorod settlements with all the refinements of malice ... 15 doctors were killed; escaped alone with the help of the sick lying in the infirmary; having killed all their bosses, the rebels chose others for themselves - from engineers and communications ... But the Old Russian rebellion has not yet been stopped. Military officials do not yet dare to appear on the street. There they quartered one general, buried the living, and so on. The peasants were acting, to whom the regiments had given their commanders. “Bad, Your Excellency. When there are such tragedies in the eyes, there is no time to think about the canine comedy of our literature.
This rebellion was suppressed with great difficulty, the government surpassed the rebels in cruelty and savagery.
The theme of the common people was inextricably linked with peasant riots, and it also became one of major topics studied by Pushkin as a historian. According to A.I. Chkheidze, the idea of the role of the people in the struggle against the feudal system arose as early as the 1920s, but now it deepened and led Pushkin to raise the question of a peasant uprising as one of the forms of struggle against "the unbearably difficult conditions created."
The freedom-loving spirit that permeated all of Pushkin's work and, in particular, his historical works, was expressed not only in criticism of despotism, but also, according to L.V. Tcherepnin, found its manifestation in the fact that "the writer devoted his work to the heroes whom noble historians preferred to remain silent about ... namely, the leaders of the peasant wars - Stepan Razin, Emelyan Pugachev". In a letter to his brother, Pushkin called Stepan Razin the only poetic face Russian history. Alexander Sergeevich collected songs about Razin and compared him with Pugachev, saying that Simbirsk in 1671 resisted Stepan Razin and calling him Pugachev of that time.
The lessons of history led Pushkin to the following conclusion: it is necessary to put an end to the age-old Russian disease - serfdom. Pushkin wrote about it this way: “A terrible shock alone could destroy inveterate slavery in Russia; Today, however, our political freedom is inseparable from the liberation of the peasants, the desire for the best unites all states against the common evil, and firm, peaceful unanimity can soon put us along with the enlightened peoples of Europe.
History as a science and history as an art were to a certain extent close to Pushkin, but unevenly. With him, it happened that, turning to a particular topic from the past, Pushkin himself did not yet know where he could find the best creative possibilities for its disclosure: whether in the field of purely historical research, producing quite real facts, or in the field of artistic representation with a certain amount of fiction. “I thought there was no time to write a historical novel dating back to the time of Pugochev,” Pushkin wrote to A.Kh. Benckendorff, but having found a lot of materials, I left fiction and wrote the History of Pugochevshchina. Thus, Pushkin developed the theme of the Pugachev rebellion in terms of a historical novel ("The Captain's Daughter") and in terms of research ("History of the Pugachev rebellion").
One of the most important issues that worried Pushkin as a historian and publicist was the question of "the Russian peasantry and its struggle with the unbearably difficult conditions that have created." On the historical material of the peasant war led by Emelyan Pugachev, Pushkin tried to "reveal the social meaning of modern peasant" riots ".
In 1831 - 1832. interests of A.S. Pushkin as a historian was mainly limited to the study of the era of Peter I. Pushkin would return to this topic back in 1834-1836, but, unfortunately, he would not have time to complete it.
In 1833, under the influence of the aforementioned revolutionary uprisings in Western Europe, the uprisings of peasants and military settlers in Russia in the early 1830s, A.S. Pushkin turned to the study peasant uprisings of the past.
This direction of his historical research was reflected in the following works of Pushkin: in the story "Dubrovsky", "History of the Pugachev rebellion" (1833 - 1834), the novel "The Captain's Daughter" (1833 - 1836).
In the center of attention of the poet-historian in 1833 - 1834. There was a Peasant War under the leadership of Emelyan Ivanovich Pugachev.
The “Pugachev theme” appeared in Pushkin’s work at the beginning of 1833. Pushkin was finishing writing the second part of his story “Dubrovsky” - a work whose main character, Vladimir Andreevich Dubrovsky, led a gang of robbers, consisting of peasants subject to him and robbing landowners, and at this time, materials about the Pugachev nobleman officer Shvanvich fell into Pushkin's hands. Alexander Sergeevich left Dubrovsky and decided to turn to this new character.
The great writer conceived a plan for a new novel - the future "The Captain's Daughter" - which was dated January 31, 1833. But the following was also clear to him: in order to create the brightest possible artistic image peasant war led by Pugachev, it is necessary to carefully study this topic. This was the beginning of Pushkin's study of materials on the history of the Pugachev uprising, which eventually led to the creation at the end of 1833 of a historical work about him.
Pushkin's "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" was published in 1834, shortly after another wave of peasant uprisings swept across the country, when government spheres and circles of the nobility began to talk anxiously about the threat of a "second Pugachevism". N.K. Piksanov pointed out that “Pugachevism, as a symbol of a radical social upheaval, was then a winged formula, an obsession for many. She frightened some, attracted others.
According to R.V. Ovchinnikov, “starting to study the Pugachev uprising in 1833, Pushkin was guided by the desire to comprehend the Peasant War of 1773-1775 against the historical background. the most acute political problems of Russian reality in the 1830s, to understand and imagine possible prospects peasant movement» , because Pushkin in his review in 1836 of the "Collected Works of Georgy Konisky ..." wrote that "only the history of the people can explain the true demands of it."
According to G. Blok, The History of Pugachev was for its time a book not only or not so much historical as political. I partly agree with this point of view, because the importance of this work, of course, is evidenced by at least the fact that Emperor Nicholas I himself was the censor of the History of the Pugachev Riot.
It should be noted that Pushkin's work on The History of the Pugachev Rebellion was complicated by the fact that the Pugachev Rebellion was an episode from the not so distant past. Thus, it was extremely difficult for Pushkin to completely abandon the assessment of the events of the Peasant War of 1773-1775. According to G. Blok, the government had one "well-known goal" of this work, Pushkin had another. The difficulty in the process of studying this problem for the great writer was that among the characters of his "History ..." were both Catherine II, the grandmother of Nicholas I, and people whose children and grandchildren often crossed paths with Pushkin in high society. I also had to solve my problems (scientific, journalistic and artistic) with an eye on censorship, personal relationships.
According to R.V. Ovchinnikov, A.S. Pushkin, who on January 26, 1835 submitted to Emperor Nicholas I "Remarks on the rebellion", noted in them that "The Pugachev rebellion proved to the government the need for many changes." Did this mean that Pushkin was hinting to the Russian Tsar about the need for serious changes in peasant life?
As mentioned above, the great Russian poet was a supporter of the fact that the peasantry would receive freedom, and the nobility - real political freedom.
As you know, changes in political life took place, but they concerned only the external side of the problem of relations with the peasantry: “in 1775, a new establishment of provinces followed. State power was concentrated; provinces, too extensive, were divided; communication of all parts of the state has become faster ... ".
It is also necessary to say a few words about how Nicholas I reacted to the “History of the Pugachev rebellion”, being the personal censor of the work of A.S. Pushkin. The emperor carefully read the main text, made a number of remarks and allowed it to be printed, because, most likely, he considered this work of the poet as a “peculiar peasant“ note ”on the peasant question”, which did not contradict the thoughts inspired by the recent uprisings of military settlements and further government views on this issue .
The published "History of the Pugachev rebellion" did not enjoy wide success, moreover, caused fierce criticism from official circles. “The public is very scolding my Pugacheva and worse, they don't buy. Uvarov is a big scoundrel. He screams about my book as an outrageous work, ”Pushkin wrote in his diary.
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin's appeal to the theme of the Pugachev uprising was influenced not only by the revolutionary upheavals that shook Europe in the 30s. XIX century, but also, to a greater extent, the bloody uprisings of military settlers and peasants in the Russian Empire, which left a noticeable mark on the life of contemporary society. The latter prompted the great master of the pen to delve into the study of the problem of the Peasant War of 1773-1775. in order to, having drawn the appropriate conclusions, to try to predict the further development of events in the country and to offer Emperor Nicholas I the idea of radical changes in the life of the peasants.
The theme of peasant uprisings is reflected in Pushkin's work in such works as "Dubrovsky", "The Captain's Daughter" and, finally, "The History of the Pugachev Rebellion". The last two are interconnected as follows: A.S. Pushkin, in order to make the images of The Captain's Daughter more vivid, decided to study the theme of the Peasant War of 1773-1775 more deeply.
Pushkin could not refuse to evaluate the Pugachev uprising, he managed to draw new, very original conclusions about the nature of the Peasants' War of 1773-1775. Under the influence of French historians Thierry, Guizot and Thiers A.S. Pushkin considered the class struggle as one of the key factors influencing history in The History of the Pugachev Rebellion. So, of course, this historical study was very important, primarily political. The "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" passed the censorship of the tsar, but nevertheless caused a flurry of criticism from the pro-government-minded circles of the nobility and did not have wide success with the public during Pushkin's lifetime and after his death.
CHAPTERII. Pushkin's work on the study of the Pugachev rebellion
"History of Pugachev" - the only completed and published Scientific research A.S. Pushkin on historical theme. The history of the name of this work is interesting: “The History of Pugachev” when the book of Nicholas I was published by order of the censor was renamed “The History of the Pugachev Rebellion” (St. Petersburg, 1834).
"History of the Pugachev rebellion" was based on the study of Russian and foreign literature, documentary sources, memoirs, folklore ...
In 1831 A.S. Pushkin was enrolled in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, which gave the great Russian writer access to the archives, which at that time was extremely difficult.
In January 1832, Pushkin was instructed to study the history of Peter I, for which the archives were opened to him. Subsequently, the writer used this opportunity to compile the history of the Pugachev uprising.
Pushkin's work with archival documents was complicated by the obstacles on the part of officials in issuing the documents he needed to write the work.
February 9, 1833 A.S. Pushkin turned to the Minister of War Alexander Ivanovich Chernyshev with the following request: in order to work on the history of “Count Suvorov”, the writer needed an investigative file on Pugachev and a number of other documents related to A.V. Suvorov. March 8 A.I. Chernyshev sent Pushkin materials related to Suvorov received from Moscow, but at the same time said that "the investigation file on Pugachev is not in the archive." On the same day, Pushkin asks the Minister of War to send him additional "reports from General-General Bibikov to the Military Collegium, and Bibikov's reports to the Military Collegium, and reports from Prince Golitsyn, Mikhelson and Suvorov himself (from January 1774 to the end of that year)".
It is obvious that the writer demanded from the archive exactly the materials that he needed when researching the Pugachev uprising.
March 25, 1833 A.S. Pushkin began to write The History of Pugachev, judging by how this date appears on the initial (rough) draft of the first chapter.
From the first days of work on The History of Pugachev, in parallel with the study of literature and archival sources, Pushkin looked for people who remembered the events of the Pugachev movement, wrote down their memories. He recorded in St. Petersburg the stories of the poet I.A. Krylov and I.I. Dmitriev, legends of N. Svechin, memoirs of D.O. Baranova.
For example, in 1833 A.S. Pushkin asked I.I. Dmitriev to be allowed to publish his memoirs of the execution of Pugachev (of which he was an eyewitness) along with materials from other persons (letters from Catherine II, Bibikov). The writer expressed the hope that his correspondent would not refuse to "take a place between famous people what names and testimonies" will give value to his work. In correspondence with K.F. Tol, who informed Pushkin some information about the suppressor of the uprising Pugachev Michelson, the writer expressed regret that he could not use them in a timely manner, while they would bring him closer to the truth, which " stronger than the king» .
March 29 A.I. Chernyshev sent Pushkin 8 books containing the reports of Bibikov, Golitsyn, Suvorov, but among them there were no reports of Michelson.
As a result, we see that from the St. Petersburg archive of the Inspection Department and its Moscow branch A.S. Pushkin received only twelve "cases", of which two (related to Suvorov) did not contain materials on the Pugachev uprising at all.
Not satisfied with archival materials, A.S. Pushkin, already after writing the first draft edition of The History of Pugachev, wished to visit the regions where the Pugachev uprising took place, to inspect the places of hostilities and, in particular, to see the living witnesses of the uprising.
The writer made a special trip to Nizhny Novgorod, Kazan, Orenburg, Uralsk, Berda, in order to supplement his information about the circumstances of the Pugachev uprising. I would like to say a few words about this trip of Pushkin. For four months, he intended to completely repeat the path of the army of E.I. Pugachev. Pushkin ordered a road trip to visit the fortresses of Verkhne-Yaitskaya (now Verkhneuralsk), Chebarkulskaya, as well as the Avzyan-Petrovsky and Satka factories. In August 1833, the writer received permission to travel to the Pugachev places, and in September he already passed Nizhny Novgorod, Kazan, Simbirsk, Uralsk, Orenburg.
About some local legends and songs of A.S. Pushkin made brief entries in the road notebook at post stations in Vasilsursk, Cheboksary, Berdskaya Sloboda, Iletsk town and Simbirsk in August-September 1833
While in Kazan on September 6 and 7, 1833, Pushkin met with V.P. Babin and L.F. Krupennikov, listened to their stories about the capture of Kazan by the rebels on July 12, 1774. K.F. Fuchs.
From Kazan, Pushkin wrote to his wife: “Here I was busy with the old contemporaries of my hero, traveled around the city, examined the battlefields, asked questions, wrote down and was very pleased that I had not visited this side in vain.”
On the way to Orenburg, Pushkin passed the ancient fortresses of the Samara and Sredne-Yaitskaya distances. Here he recorded the stories of the old Cossack Papkov, the Cossack Matryona, the memories of local residents about the capture of the Lake Fortress by Pugachev's troops.
On September 18, 1833, Pushkin arrived in Orenburg, and in the morning of the next day he was in Berdskaya Sloboda together with V.I. Dal, a writer and ethnographer who at that time served as an official for special assignments under the Orenburg governor V.A. Perovsky. “In the village of Berda,” Pushkin wrote to his wife about a meeting with the old Cossack woman Buntova, “where Pugachev stood for 6 months, “… I… found a 75-year-old Cossack woman who remembers this time, as you and I remember 1830. I did not lag behind her ... ".
In Uralsk, Pushkin was a guest of the commanders of the Ural Cossack army. They gave two ceremonial dinners in honor of the poet, showed the sights of the city, arranged meetings with Pugachev veterans and eyewitnesses of the uprising.
In Uralsk, the poet talked about Pugachev, about the beginning of the uprising he had raised and about the siege of the former Yaitsky town with local old-timers-Cossacks - Chervyakov, an eyewitness of the siege, and Dmitry Denisovich Pyanov, whose father, Denis Stepanovich, at the end of 1772, hid at himself Pugachev. In the main text of The History of Pugachev, Pushkin relied on the testimony of Pyanov in one of the most important assessments of Pugachev as the leader of a popular uprising. The writer was shown a house in Yaik town, which belonged to relatives of Ustinya Kuznetsova, Pugachev's second wife. In the old part of the city, on Kabankovskaya Street, Pushkin saw the stone house of Ataman M.P. Tolkachev, where Pugachev stayed during his visits from Orenburg to Yaitsky town.
While in Uralsk, A.S. Pushkin wrote down the stories of the old-timers about the attitude of the Cossacks towards Pugachev and about the conspiracy of the Cossack foremen against him in the Volga steppes in September 1774.
The names of many of Pushkin's interlocutors have not been preserved. But the attitude towards Pugachev transmitted by them, which Pushkin so carefully reflected on the pages of The History of Pugachev, has been preserved.
Pushkin wrote the following about the attitude of the local population towards Pugachev: “The Ural Cossacks (especially the old people) are still attached to the memory of Pugachev. It’s a sin to say, an 80-year-old Cossack woman told me, we don’t complain about him, he didn’t do us any harm. From here, Pushkin concluded that all "the black people were for Pugachev."
At the time of work on the "History of Pugachev" in the hands of Pushkin were three handwritten copies of the "Description of the six-month siege of Orenburg" historian and local historian, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Pyotr Ivanovich Rychkov. "Description ..." became one of the main sources of the "History of Pugachev". Pushkin also relied on other works by P.I. Rychkov: "Topography of Orenburg", "History of Orenburg", and he referred to them in the notes.
A.S. Pushkin in 1836, recalling his trip, emphasized that he had to carry out a lot of source study work, “verifying dead documents with the words of still living, but already elderly eyewitnesses, and again verifying their decrepit memory with historical criticism” .
October 1 A.S. Pushkin arrived in the village of Boldino. Here Pushkin began to rework the original text. By the beginning of November it was finished.
A secret police supervision was established for Pushkin, which, however, could not reveal anything illegal in the actions of the poet during his stay in Boldin. So, the Sergach district police officer of the Nizhny Novgorod province, in his report of October 11, 1833, wrote about Pushkin: did not accept. Nothing reprehensible was noticed in his life, and on this 9th day, Mr. Pushkin went through Moscow to St. Petersburg.
December 6, 1833 A.S. Pushkin began the chores (with the help of A.Kh.
On January 29, 1834, Pushkin received through V.A. Zhukovsky returned the manuscript and handed over to Benckendorff for Nicholas I the continuation, which made up the second volume. I also want to note that the division into volumes was removed from the press; The "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" was published in two parts (in the second part, all kinds of historical documents and materials were placed as appendices).
On February 26, Pushkin turned to Benckendorff with a request for a loan of 20 thousand rubles from the treasury to print The History of Pugachev. Benckendorff reported to the tsar about Pushkin's petition, after which it was granted.
The second volume was returned by Benckendorff. Diary entry Pushkin dated February 28, the following about this event testifies to us: “The sovereign allowed me to print Pugachev; my manuscript was returned to me with his remarks (very sensible).
Pushkin's work went to press in early July and was published at the end of December 1834.
I would like to elaborate on search work A.S. Pushkin as part of his study of the history of the Pugachev uprising.
Exploring the history of the Pugachev uprising, Pushkin used all the domestic and foreign literature available to him related to this topic, both from his personal library and from the collection of his friends and correspondents.
According to A.S. Pushkin, he "read with attention everything that was printed about Pugachev ...". Among the books reviewed and critically used by Pushkin were the works of Russian authors (A.A. Bibikov, A.I. Levshin, N.Ya. Bichurin, D. Zinoviev, P.I. Rychkov, V.D. Sukhorukov, P. I. Sumarokov, F. Anting and others), the forbidden book by A.N. Radishchev “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”, publications of official acts in the “Complete Collection of Laws” (vols. XIX, XX), works of foreign historians and memoirists (J.-A. Castera, A. Ferran, A.F. Buhling, etc. .), correspondence between Voltaire and Catherine II from the collected works of Voltaire.
In addition to the printed publications of A.S. Pushkin attracted handwritten literature and memoirs for research (notes by A.V. Khrapovitsky, N.Z. Povalo-Shviykovsky, Catherine II, I.I. Dmitriev, memories of V.V. Nashchokin, chronicle of P.I. Rychkov, materials biographical dictionary D.N. Bantysh-Kamensky and others), records oral stories contemporaries and eyewitnesses of the Pugachev uprising. Literature conscientiously reviewed and studied did not provide complete and reliable material on the history of the Peasant War...
In addition to viewing and working on the documents of the Military Collegium, A.S. Pushkin from February 1833 searched for documentary and memoir sources about the Pugachev uprising in private collections and family archives. Among the persons who supplied Pushkin with historical sources were well-known collectors P.P. Svinin and G.I. Spassky, writers I.I. Dmitriev, I.I. Lazhechnikov, P.A. Vyazemsky, N.M. Yazykov, historian D.N. Bantysh-Kamensky, owner of the family archive of A.P. Galakhov, an old friend of V.V. Engelhardt.
Now we need to dwell on the materials of which archives A.S. used. Pushkin in the study of the history of the Pugachev uprising.
In the St. Petersburg branch of the General Archive of the General Staff of the Military Ministry, two folios were kept containing papers on the early stage of the Pugachev uprising - documents of the Secret Expedition of the Military Collegium for September 1773 - January 1774. (reports of the governors I.A. Reinsdorp and Ya.L. von Brandt on the initial successes of Pugachev and on the further spread of the uprising in the territories of the Orenburg and Kazan provinces, correspondence on the departure of the punitive expedition of General V.A. Kara ... correspondence on the organization of the punitive expedition of General A .I. Bibikov in November-December 1773, his reports on the offensive of troops deep into the rebel region and on the first clashes with the Pugachevites) - and which were received by Pushkin in February 1833 with a letter from the Minister of War, Count A.I. Chernyshev, are partly reflected in his "archival notebooks", II - IV chapters of the "History of Pugachev" and partially published in the appendices to them.
In the Moscow branch of the General Archive of the General Staff of the Military Ministry, the files of the Secret Expedition of the Military Collegium and A.I. Bibikov and F.F. Shcherbatov (materials of the Military Board for the management of military operations against the rebels for November 1773 - December 1774: reports of generals A.I. Bibikov, P.M. Golitsyn, F.F. Shcherbatov and others on military operations against the Pugachevites; correspondence about the hasty departure of army and Cossack regiments from St. Petersburg and from the northwestern borders of the empire in July-August 1774 to defend Moscow and defeat the insurgent movement in the Volga region, etc.; field offices of General Bibikov and Shcherbatov, etc.), which in the amount of 8 books were received by Pushkin from the Moscow branch of the General Archive of the General Staff of the Military Ministry with a letter from the Minister of War Chernyshev dated March 29, 1833. Pushkin made numerous and lengthy extracts from these materials , copied some documents and widely used the collected sources in IV - VIII chapters"History of Pugachev", in notes and appendices to it .
The State Moscow Archive kept the files of the Moscow branch of the Secret Expedition of the Senate and part of the files of the Kazan and Orenburg secret commissions for 1773-1774. (inquiries about the inhabitants of Moscow and the Moscow province, who spread rumors about the successes of Pugachev and his manifestos; drafts of interrogations of the Pugachev atamans M.G. Shigaev, A.T. Sokolov-Khlopushi and others; investigative files of many ordinary participants in the uprising).
Part of the "Pugachev" documents of the Moscow branch of the Secret Expedition of the Senate in 1826 was requested to St. Petersburg in connection with the work of M.M. Speransky over the organization of the Supreme Criminal Court in the case of the Decembrists. Pushkin looked through 8 bundles with these documents in 1835, having received them from the State Archive of Old Cases, and ordered copies from them, which were preserved in the “Pugachev” fund of the writer’s manuscripts (the case of Pugachev’s escape from the Kazan prison in May 1773, about Saransk Archimandrite Alexander, about Lieutenant F. Mineev, about Corporal I.S. Aristov).
The Moscow Main Archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs kept documents of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs for the 1970s. XVIII, which characterized the responses to the events of the Pugachev uprising in the diplomatic sphere; collections of documents and manuscripts collected by Academician G.-F. Miller and N.N. Bantysh-Kamensky. The Bantysh-Kamensky collection contained letters from P. Lyubarsky, Archimandrite of the Novospassky Monastery in Kazan, about the development of the insurrectionary movement in the Orenburg and Kazan provinces, a copy of Rychkov’s essay “Description of the six-month siege of Orenburg”, copies of letters from Bibikov, Golitsyn and Reinsdorp about the defeat of the rebels in the spring of 1774.
In the draft version of "Remarks on the Revolt", Pushkin, in the story about the Saransk archimandrite Alexander, directly referred to his source: ("From the letters of Archim. (Andrite) Platon Lyubarsky to B. (Antysh-) Kamensky"), citing a large quotation from a letter dated 16 October 1774; these letters were kept in the said collection...
Using his extensive connections and official position, Academician G.-F. Miller in 1774 - 1775 collected a separate "Pugachev's" portfolio, including notes by the Orenburg priests I. Osipov and I. Polyansky about the siege of Orenburg by Pugachev's detachments, P. Lyubarsky's story about the invasion of the "Pugachevites" on Kazan on July 12, 1774 ... copies of official correspondence. Part of the materials from Miller's "Pugachev" portfolio in October 1835 was received by Pushkin from Moscow. He got acquainted with them and ordered copies from the notes of I. Polyansky and I. Osipov about the Orenburg siege to the scribes; these copies were preserved as part of his papers on the Pugachev uprising.
In 1835, the Bantysh-Kamensky collection, together with Miller's "Pugachev" portfolio, came into the hands of Pushkin, but did not leave any traces in his manuscripts, because the writer was familiar with this collection even before the publication of The History of Pugachev.
Despite the very limited access to the most important archival materials on the history of the Pugachev uprising and surveillance of their actions by officials, A.S. Pushkin, to his credit, managed to do a titanic work, working on the history of the Peasants' War of 1773-1775. He managed to bring together and explore a huge complex of various kinds of historical sources, such as: some government documents, the stories of eyewitnesses of events and their descendants, folklore ... They formed the basis of the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion". The significance of this work is very great: Pushkin was not only one of the first to use eyewitness accounts as a historical source, but also to collect a huge amount of materials that significantly expanded the source base of future researchers of the Peasant War of 1773-1775.
CHAPTER III. General assessment of Pushkin as a researcher
In order to understand what A.S. Pushkin as a historian, what is his merit as a researcher, you need to turn to general characteristics him as a historian.
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin showed deep knowledge in the field of social and historical sciences, historiography. He carefully studied the historical works of both domestic authors (Feofan Prokopovich, Tatishchev, Golikov, Boltin, Shcherbatov, Karamzin, Polevoy, Pogodin, Kachenovsky) and foreign ones (Tacitus, Voltaire, Hume, Robertson, Chateaubriand, Gibbon, Sismondi, Lemonte, Wilmain , Thierry, Guizot, Mignet, Barant, Thiers, Niebuhr). More than 400 history books were stored in Pushkin's library.
A huge number of Pushkin's works have a historical sound. The whole history of the Fatherland passes before the reader of Pushkin: Ancient Rus' is revealed to us in the "Song of the Prophetic Oleg", in "Vadim", in fairy tales; Serfdom Rus' - in "Boris Godunov", the uprising of Stepan Razin - in songs about him; the great deeds of Peter in The Bronze Horseman, in Poltava, in Peter the Great's Moor; Pugachev's uprising - in "The Captain's Daughter"; the assassination of Paul I, the reign of Alexander I, the war of 1812, the history of Decembrism - in a number of poems, epigrams, in the last chapter of Eugene Onegin.
The events of European history, especially those connected with the French Revolution and Bonaparte's wars, worried Pushkin the poet no less.
Pushkin's contribution as a professional historian was as follows. In addition to the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", he, before his tragic death worked on the "History of Peter". In Pushkin's papers, outlines of the history of Ukraine, the history of Kamchatka were found. Alexander Sergeevich was going to write the history of the French Revolution and the history of Paul I - "our most romantic emperor." Sketches relating to the history of pre-Petrine Russia were also found.
How attentive was Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin to history? To this he himself answered as follows: "Respect for the past ... this is the feature that distinguishes education from savagery."
Why did Pushkin study Russian history so carefully? He believed that it was full of exciting interest and testified to the greatness of the Russian people; in a polemic with his friend P.Ya. Chaadaev, he disputed the thesis put forward by the latter about "our historical insignificance."
Pushkin approached the past of his fatherland not as a mere collector of facts or their interpreter, but as an artist and poet. He sought not only to celebrate major events and catch the cause-and-effect relationships between them, but also understand their drama, feel the pulse folk life, to capture all the variety of colors that reflected the changing fate of the country and people over the centuries.
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin was under a certain influence of the ideas of N.M. Karamzin, about which the poet himself spoke as follows: "... our literature can proudly present the History of Karamzin to Europe ...".
However, one cannot speak of a simple reproduction by Pushkin in his historical works of Karamzin's views on the Russian historical process.
IN historical works Pushkin embodied two main ideas:
The first of these is that the emerging Russian nation finds, in his opinion, its unity in a single state, which is being formed in complex historical conditions;
The second is that this nation acquires world-historical significance.
According to L.V. Tcherepnin, both of these ideas are revealed in the works of Pushkin in the images of individual politicians, “because we have before us not just a generalization of a scientist, not a synthetic construction of a researcher, but a work of a writer for whom ideas are embodied in human characters” .
A very strong educational motive can be traced in the work of the great writer. Pushkin understood that the study of national history should awaken in a person a sense of national self-consciousness, pride in those deeds of ancestors that are really worthy of respect and the memory of which should be preserved in posterity. “Being proud of the glory of your ancestors,” the writer pointed out, “is not only possible, but must; not to respect it is shameful cowardice.
The history of his people, according to A.S. Pushkin, was supposed to be a school of truly noble patriotism. In the lessons of history, it was necessary to learn how harmful and groundless the national nihilism or indifference of those people who “do not care about either the glory or the disasters of the fatherland, their history is known only from the time of Prince. Potemkin”, although they “respect themselves as patriots, because they love botvinya and that their children run around in a red shirt”. It should be noted that this problem is still relevant.
A.S. Pushkin believed that the reproduction of the truth requires not only a deep study of the era in all its manifestations, but also the ability to discern the main thing, understanding the specifics of past times, i.e. feelings of true historicism.
Pushkin, being a serious researcher, was well aware that the key to the success of historical research is a painstaking study of sources.
The writer repeatedly repeated that historical truth can only be obtained through hard work and cannot be replaced by hasty judgments, the appearance of innovation, the unfounded discrediting of the conclusions of predecessors, which should be the result of a long and conscientious study of the subject.
As we have already seen, A.S. Pushkin was a hard-working historian. A number of his draft notes on history have been preserved, in which he sought to be aware of the meaning of historical terms, the nature of social phenomena, the character of public institutions …
In addition to written monuments and material remains of the past, Pushkin tried to use as historical sources information that his contemporaries could tell him, involved in certain historical events.
In the study of both written documents and sources of other types, Pushkin paid quite a lot of attention to their criticism. He wrote how difficult it was for him to give the most accurate picture of the military operations of Pugachev’s troops on the basis of very unreliable material, “reports from private commanders, testimonies of Cossacks, fugitive peasants and the like, testimonies that often contradict each other, exaggerated, sometimes completely false ".
Sending a copy of his book about Pugachev to V.D. Volkhovsky, A.S. Pushkin told the latter what difficulties he had to overcome when working with sources: “I tried ...,” the poet wrote, “to investigate the military actions of that time and thought only about their clear presentation, which cost me a lot of work, because the bosses, who acted rather confusingly, were even more confusing wrote their reports, boasting or making excuses with exactly stupidity. All this had to be compared, verified, etc.” .
A.S. Pushkin always rejoiced at the appearance in the press of works that contained reference material required by historians.
Pushkin was a bibliophile. He loved books because they reflected the history of human culture, human thought, human mind. Pushkin greatly appreciated the efforts aimed at bringing into a system what was done by people in various branches of knowledge, so that they could be used for the further development of science and education.
A sense of genuine historicism, an understanding of the ways and nature of the development of the Russian language allowed A.S. Pushkin brilliantly use his wealth in his works dedicated to various eras.
The means of artistic embodiment of the images of the past, along with the riches of the language, are works of painting, sculpture, and architecture. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin skillfully used works of art for the most expressive transmission of the facts and phenomena of national history reflected in his works.
A contemporary of a number of revolutions in Europe, who experienced a national upsurge after Patriotic War 1812 and who witnessed the struggle of the Decembrists, who hated serfdom and tsarist arbitrariness, Pushkin in the study of the past was looking for lessons in political struggle, civic courage, national self-consciousness. Based on the experience of history, both domestic and world, the great poet tried to find answers to questions about the general and peculiar in the development selected countries and peoples, about the conditionality of certain phenomena, about the role played by chance in the course of events.
What prompted the writer to answer these questions? Most likely, his philosophical attitude and political inquisitiveness, which forced Pushkin to think about where society was going.
Pushkin equally had access to the ways of knowing history, both through science and through art.
Being a tireless worker in science, the great poet enriched it with new historical sources, for the search for which he spared no effort. Pushkin strove in his writings to devote more space to criticism of sources and facts. And like Voltaire, he tried to illuminate the facts, cleared of unreliable layers, with the light of philosophy.
A.S. Pushkin believed that history belongs to the poet, hence he did historical themes one of the main elements of his work, which, according to the apt expression of L.V. Cherepnin, "in poetic forms" clothed historical eras, figures of the past, "the struggle of socio-political forces and human passions."
If we talk about the work of A.S. Pushkin over the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", then a few more facts must be added to the above.
Being at the final stage of work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", the great writer especially strictly evaluated each individual source, deciding whether it could be used in the text of the "History ...", in notes and appendices to it. A.S. Pushkin tried not to overload his presentation with petty historical facts and details.
The author of The History of the Pugachev Riot strove for a reasonable relationship between documents, chronicles, memoirs, and living legends of eyewitnesses. At the same time, he gave preference to the most reliable documents. Pushkin, as a historian and as an artist, strove to create in the most concise narrative whole picture Pugachev uprising.
A.S. Pushkin preferred to introduce documents into the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" in his own, author's, processing, exposing their text to ideological, semantic, linguistic and stylistic finishing. He was guided by the tasks of scientific authenticity and artistic expressiveness of his narrative while maintaining the characteristic and colorful features of the language and style of that time ...
A.S. Pushkin as a historian, of course, was characterized by an indefatigable thirst for the new, the breadth and purposefulness of scientific research, and, of course, a rare diligence.
The letters of the great poet to various people are filled with requests for help in the selection of literature and documents. Recalling his work on the study of materials on the history of the Pugachev movement, A.S. Pushkin wrote the following: "I read with attention everything that was about Pugachev, and in addition 18 thick volumes in folios of various manuscripts, decrees, reports, etc." The great Russian writer suggested that his readers turn to the "Appendices to the History of the Pugachev Rebellion" in order to "ascertain the many important historical documents that were made public for the first time."
“It is worth mentioning,” Pushkin wrote, “about the handwritten decrees of Catherine II, about several of her letters, about several of her letters, about the curious chronicle of our glorious Rychkov ... about the many letters of famous people who surrounded Catherine: Panin, Rumyantsova, Bibikov, Derzhavin and others ... ".
Pushkin took into account the opinion of the people, creating the “History of the Pugachev Rebellion”, which ended with the following words: “... the name of the terrible rebel rumbles even in the regions where he raged. The people still vividly remember the bloody time, which - so expressively - he called Pugachevism» .
Presenting the finished manuscript to the court of the authorities, who were deciding the issue of admitting it to print, A.S. Pushkin wrote in a letter to A.Kh. Benckendorff on December 6, 1833: “I don’t know if it will be possible for me to print it, at least I honestly fulfilled the duty of a historian: I sought the truth with zeal and expounded it without crookedness, not trying to flatter either force or fashionable image thoughts." This does honor to Pushkin as a historian-researcher.
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin was a multilaterally gifted person. Being engaged in historical research, he processed the facts extracted from sources into vivid artistic images, which manifested itself in such masterpieces as Boris Godunov, The Bronze Horseman and The Captain's Daughter, or with the utmost carefully depicted the course and nature of certain historical events, as in the "History of the Pugachev rebellion."
A.S. Pushkin, as has been repeatedly noted above, possessed many essential qualities professional historian-researcher: philosophical mindset, diligence, breadth of outlook, a clear civic position and honesty in coverage historical facts. It is they who allow us to say the following: despite the fact that fate gave the great writer not so many years of life, he managed to prove himself as a Historian with capital letter.
Conclusion
As indicated in the introduction, the purpose of this study is to analyze the problem of Pushkin's research activities in his work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion" in historical science. This goal is divided into several interrelated tasks.
Let's try to answer the research questions:
1) the reasons for Pushkin's appeal to the theme of the Pugachev rebellion;
2) Pushkin's work on the study of the Pugachev rebellion;
3) general assessment of Pushkin as a researcher.
Pushkin first acquired a genuine taste for historical research back in 1824-1828, at the time of his work on Boris Godunov, Peter the Great's Arap and Poltava. The ideas of two historical essays by Pushkin, "History of Little Russia" (1829-1831) and "History of the French Revolution" (1831), belong to a later period. These great ideas, which preceded The History of Peter and The History of Pugachev, were reflected in Pushkin's manuscripts only as outlines of plans and pages of the initial chapters, testifying to the enormous scale of the poet's historical erudition.
The writing of the "History of the Pugachev Revolt" by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin was prompted by both revolutionary events in Europe and, to a greater extent, uprisings of military settlers and peasants in the Russian Empire, which shook the whole society. Riots of the 1830s prompted the outstanding Russian writer to seriously look for answers to the questions posed to him by contemporary society in the era of Empress Catherine the Great. Having carefully studied the circumstances of the Peasant War of 1773 - 1775, A.S. Pushkin intended to offer Emperor Nicholas I the idea of radical changes in the lives of the peasants, which could save the country from further unrest.
The “History of Pugachev” (in the amount of 3 thousand copies) was published at the end of December 1834 under the title “History of the Pugachev rebellion” from the “submission” of the emperor himself, who personally wrote a new name on the title page of the manuscript. The book consisted of two parts: “Part one. History" and "Part Two. Applications". The second part contained documentary appendices to the main text (manifestos and decrees, secret reports to the military collegium about the fight against Pugachev, letters from contemporaries and other primary sources). On the back of the title page, instead of the usual censorship permission, it was marked: "With the permission of the Government." Pushkin's hopes that Nicholas I's attention to his manuscript could secure permission for its publication were unexpectedly justified. The "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" passed the tsar's censorship, but, nevertheless, caused a fierce barrage of criticism from the conservative-minded part of the nobility and could not overcome it.
Despite opposition from officials, A.S. Pushkin did a titanic work, collecting unique materials on the history of the Peasant War of 1773 - 1775, which included some of the most valuable government documents; he was one of the first in Russia to use in his historical works the tales of eyewitnesses of events and their descendants, folklore ... All this one way or another formed the basis of the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion". These materials significantly expanded the source base of future researchers of the Pugachev uprising. Unlike previous researchers of the Peasant War of 1773 - 1775, Pushkin made new, very original conclusions about the nature of the Pugachev uprising. Under the influence of French historians Thierry, Guizot and Thiers A.S. Pushkin considered the class struggle in the "History of the Pugachev Rebellion" as one of the key factors influencing history.
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin confirmed his genius in everything: doing historical research, he processed the facts extracted from the sources into vivid artistic images, which manifested itself in such literary masterpieces as Boris Godunov, The Bronze Horseman and The Captain's Daughter, or with the utmost care depicted the course and nature of certain historical events, as in the "History of the Pugachev rebellion." A.S. Pushkin possessed the most important qualities of a serious historian-researcher: a philosophical mindset, diligence, breadth of outlook, a clear civic position and honesty in covering historical facts, which made it possible to speak of him as a Historian with a capital letter.
And finally, the following must be said. Resurrecting in the "History of Pugachev" historical images"people who shook the state", Pushkin, to the best of censorship capabilities, with some reservations, managed for the first time in Russian historiography to show the apparatus in action people's revolution.
List of sources used
1. Pushkin A.S. Full composition of writings. M.-L.: Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1937-1949.
2. Pushkin A.S. Full composition of writings. Moscow: State publishing house of fiction, 1950.
3. Pushkin A.S. Collected works in ten volumes. M.: Fiction, 1976.
List of used literature
1. Blok G.P. Pushkin in his work on historical sources. M.-L.: AN SSSR, 1949.
2. Volkov G.N. Pushkin's world: personality, outlook, environment. M .: Young Guard, 1989.
3. Krylova N.B. Above the "Pugachev" pages of Pushkin // Ural Pathfinder. 2002. No. 9. pp. 20 - 22.
4. Ovchinnikov R.V. Archival investigations by A.S. Pushkin on the history of the uprising E.I. Pugachev. Diss. for an apprenticeship degree cand. history Sciences. M., 1965.
5. Ovchinnikov R.V. Pushkin in his work on archival documents ("History of Pugachev"). L.: Nauka, 1969.
6. Cherepnin L.V. Historical views of the classics of Russian literature. M.: Thought, 1968.
Cherepnin L.V. Historical views of the classics of Russian literature. M., 1968. S. 12. Ibid. pp. 35 – 36. Other Literature
Pushkin the historian essentially refuted official version that the rebellion was caused by the intrigues of "Emelka", the "atrocity" that angered the people. On the contrary, Pugachev was "searched" for a case that had already objectively matured due to a number of social and political reasons. If it were not for Pugachev, another leader of the uprising would be “sought out”.
In this view of the causes of great social upheavals, the mature historicism of Pushkin's thinking was fully revealed, to which we will return later. Volkov G.N. Pushkin's world. - M., 1989. - 133 s
The rebellion was caused by unjust oppression by the government. It, and not the Cossacks, are guilty of it. Here is Pushkin's main conclusion!
Thus began the "Pugachevshchina", which engulfed the vast expanses of the Russian Empire, "shaking the state from Siberia to Moscow and from the Kuban to the Murom forests." Pugachev approached Nizhny Novgorod and threatened Moscow. The government of Catherine II trembled, her military leaders more than once suffered a crushing defeat from the "Emelka", whose forces were multiplying.
Then happiness began to change Pugachev. Then, utterly defeated, he fled with a handful of comrades-in-arms, but after a short time he reappeared at the head of huge peasant militias, terrifying everyone.
Pushkin writes about last period Pugachev’s uprising: “His successes have never been more terrible, the rebellion has never raged with such force. The indignation passed from one village to another, from province to province. The appearance of two or three villains was enough to revolt entire regions.
What is the reason for such a strong explosion? “Pugachev announced to the people liberty, extermination noble family, absolution of duties and non-monetary distribution of salt.
Poorly armed, scattered rebels, led by illiterate Cossacks who did not know how to conduct major military operations, could not, of course, resist regular government troops for a long time.
The uprising was crushed, Pugachev was quartered. “... And the whole thing was ordered to be consigned to eternal oblivion. Catherine, wishing to destroy the memory of a terrible era, destroyed ancient name river, whose banks were the first witnesses of the disturbance. The Yaitsky Cossacks were renamed into the Ural Cossacks, and their town was called by the same name. But, - Pushkin finishes his research, - the name of the terrible rebel rumbles even in the regions where he raged. The people still vividly remember the bloody time, which - so expressively - he called Pugachevism. Volkov G.N. Pushkin's world. - M., 1989. - 135 s
What did Pushkin really want to say with his History of Pugachev? 0 pushed him to the theme of the peasant revolt that shook Russia sixty years before? Long gone times!
Yes, but just two years before the creation of Pugachev, Russia again experienced something similar. In 1831, an uprising of military settlers broke out in the city of Staraya Russa, not far from St. Petersburg, which rapidly spread to neighboring regions and acquired alarming proportions and power. About military settlements - this martinet idea of Alexander and Arakcheev - has already been mentioned. Nikolai removed Arakcheev, but left the settlements. And then there's the cholera epidemic. In the tightness, poverty, overcrowding of barracks life in military settlements, cholera reaped its harvest abundantly. In the minds of the settlers, the blind elements of the cholera epidemic and the wild arbitrariness of the authorities merged into one. Rumors spread that the epidemic was caused by German doctors, that the authorities intended to repel "the entire lower class of the people."
It was a match brought to a long-filled powder keg. Having broken out in Staraya Russa, the uprising spread to the Novgorod settlements. The rebels were supported by the grenadier divisions. They expected that the rebels were about to move on Petersburg.
The riot was bloody and merciless. Pushkin wrote in August 1831
Vyazemsky: “... you must have heard about the indignations of Novgorod and Old Rus'. Horror. More than a hundred generals, colonels and officers were slaughtered in Novgorod settlements with all the subtleties of malice. The rebels flogged them, beat them on the cheeks, mocked them, plundered their houses, raped their wives; 15 healers killed; escaped alone with the help of the sick lying in the infirmary; having killed all their chiefs, the rebels chose others for themselves - from engineers and communications ... But the Old Russian rebellion has not yet ended. Military officials do not yet dare to show themselves in the street. There they quartered one general, buried the living, and so on. The peasants were acting, to whom the regiments had given their commanders. - It's bad, Your Excellency. When there are such tragedies in the eyes, there is no time to think about the canine comedy of our literature.
With difficulty suppressing the rebellion, the government surpassed the rebels in cruelty and savagery.
Isn't that what Pushkin wrote about in his "Pugachev"? He had no time for literary squabbles then, no time for polemics with Grech and Bulgarin. Pushkin plunged headlong into the history of the Pugachev rebellion in order to understand the bloody tragedies that played out before his eyes, in order to tell Russia in the words of the Yaik Cossacks:
“All the black people were for Pugachev,” wrote Pushkin, summing up his work. “The clergy favored him, not only priests and monks, but archimandrites and bishops. One nobility was openly on the side of the government. Pugachev and his accomplices wanted at first to win the nobles over to their side, but their benefits were too opposite.
In 1774-1775, the nobility alone was on the side of the government against the "black people". Half a century later, in December 1825, the nobility, represented by its best representatives, opposed the government, but without the "black people". These two forces remained separate. What if they unite? It's only the beginning!
In 1834, in a conversation with Grand Duke Mikhail Pavlovich, Pushkin dropped:
There is no such terrible element of revolts in Europe either.
Sometimes they write that Pushkin allegedly showed in the "History of Pugachev" the senselessness of the peasant revolt: "God forbid to see a Russian revolt, senseless and merciless!"
Ruthless, cruel - yes. Senseless - only in the sense that it is an uncontrollable terrible element, devoid of strict organization and definite goals, well-thought-out actions. But not in the fact that the uprising did not bear any fruit, it did not make sense for the historical destinies of Russia. The poet-historian himself says: “There is no evil without good: the Pugachev rebellion proved to the government the need for many changes, and in 1775 a new institution followed for the provinces. State power was concentrated; provinces, too extensive, were divided; the communication of all parts of the state became faster, etc. ”137 Volkov G.N. Pushkin's world. - M., 1989. - 137 s
These lines, as well as the words that the rebels did not manage to win over the nobility at that time, were written in “remarks about the rebellion”, intended specifically for Nicholas I. After all, Catherine went
on certain, albeit very minor, reforms after the Pugachev rebellion. Nikolay did not draw any conclusion either from the events of December 14 or from the events in Staraya Russa. "Wishing to draw a lesson from the history of the Pugachev rebellion for the present and future of Russia, Pushkin, of course, did not reduce his task to the role of an instructive, moralizing historiographer. On the contrary, any biased, tendentious attitude to the historical past, the desire to take from it only illustrations for maxims about contemporary problems were, as already mentioned, alien to Pushkin in this period of his life as a historian.He demanded from the historian "accurate news and a clear presentation of incidents", without any "political and moralizing reflections", demanded "conscientiousness in the works and prudence in testimony". Not the subjective position of the historian, but the impartially and objectively presented history itself should have more clearly thrown light not only on modern reader"sick problems", but also on the hidden laws of the entire historical process. In this context, obviously, Pushkin's remark should be understood: "Voltaire was the first to take a new path - and brought the lamp of philosophy into the dark archives of history."
Reflecting on the past of Russia, Pushkin established himself in a clear understanding that people are by no means free in choosing the goals and means of their activities. Great people, even more so. There is something that dictates the direction of the application of their energy and will.
The "spirit of the times" is the source of the needs and demands of the state. This spirit of the times, that is, the urgent need for change, brings to life the energy of great people and major historical figures, forms certain personalities out of them. And so Godunov, False Dmitry, Peter I, Pugachev appear on the historical arena ...
And that is why, we emphasize once again, when talking about Pugachev, Pushkin searches for the socio-economic and political reasons that caused the rebellion, and does not reduce the matter to the personal rebellious intentions of the dashing Yaik Cossack. Pushkin quotes “wonderful lines” from Bibikov’s letter to Fonvizin: “Pugachev is nothing but a scarecrow played by thieves. Yaik Cossacks: it is not Pugachev that is important, it is the general indignation that matters. There would be no Pugachev, another "leader" would be found.
And Pushkin shows that Pugachev often makes his decisions under the power of circumstances, under the pressure of the Cossack elders around him. “Pugachev was not autocratic. The Yaik Cossacks, the instigators of the rebellion, controlled the actions of the newcomer, who had no other dignity, except for some military knowledge and extraordinary audacity. He did nothing without their consent; they often acted without his knowledge, and sometimes against his will. They showed him outward respect, in front of the people they followed him without hats and beat him with their foreheads; in private they treated him like a comrade and drank together, sitting in front of him in hats and in only shirts and singing burlatsky songs. Pugachev missed their guardianship. “My street is cramped,” he said ... "
This idea is further developed by Pushkin in The Captain's Daughter. This whole story illuminates Pugachev from two
different and seemingly incompatible sides: Pugachev himself, in his personal relationship with Grinev. And Pugachev as the leader of the rebels, as the supreme expression of the element of rebellion, as its personification and its blind instrument. Volkov G.N. Pushkin's world. - M., 1989. - 138 s
In the first plan, this is a savvy, muzhik-like smart, insightful person who appreciates courage and straightforwardness in people, in a fatherly way helps the barchuk who has fallen in love with him. In a word, a man who is unusually endearing to himself.
In the second - an executioner, mercilessly hanging people, executing innocent people without blinking an eye old woman, the wife of commandant Mironov. A man of disgusting and senseless, bloody cruelty, acting like "sovereign Peter III."
Indeed a villain! But, Pushkin makes it clear, the villain willy-nilly. In The History of Pugachev, the formidable leader of the rebels utters a remarkable phrase before his execution:
God was pleased to punish Russia through my wretchedness.
He himself understands whether it is good or bad, but he only played " leading role"in the element of rebellion and was doomed as soon as this element began to wane. The same foremen who made him a "leader" handed him over to the government bound.
And yet he was not just a "scarecrow" in the hands of these foremen. Pushkin shows with what energy, courage, perseverance, even talent "Emelka" fulfills the role that has fallen to his lot, how much he does for the success of the uprising. Yes, he is called to the historical arena by the force of circumstances, but he also creates these circumstances to the fullest extent of his capabilities. He, while dominating them, yet in the end always finds himself at the mercy of them. Such is Pushkin, as a historian and a writer, guessing the dialectic of the historical process and historical figure, expressing this process.
Power, Pushkin thought, has its own laws and forms in its own way the person who possesses it. The proof of this was not only the history of Pugachev or the history of Peter I, but, alas, contemporary Russian reality. Volkov G.N. Pushkin's world. - M., 1989. - 139 s
