Russian literature XVIII century

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin

Biography

Karamzin, Nikolai Mikhailovich - famous Russian writer, journalist and historian. Born December 1, 1766 in the Simbirsk province; grew up in the village of his father, a Simbirsk landowner. The first spiritual food of an 8-9-year-old boy was old novels, which developed natural sensitivity in him. Even then, like the hero of one of his stories, "he loved to be sad, not knowing what," and "could play with his imagination for two hours and build castles in the air." In the 14th year, Karamzin was brought to Moscow and sent to the boarding school of the Moscow professor Shaden; he also attended the university, where one could then learn "if not the sciences, then Russian literacy." He owed Schaden a practical acquaintance with the German and French languages. After finishing his studies with Shaden, Karamzin hesitated for some time in his choice of activity. In 1783 he tries to enter the military service, where he was recorded as a minor, but at the same time he retired and in 1784 was fond of secular successes in the society of the city of Simbirsk. At the end of the same year, Karamzin returned to Moscow and, through his countryman, I.P. Turgenev, became close to Novikov's circle. Here began, according to Dmitriev, "Karamzin's education, not only the author's, but also moral." The influence of the circle lasted 4 years (1785 - 88). Serious work on oneself, which Freemasonry demanded, and which was so absorbed closest friend Karamzin, Petrov, in Karamzin, however, is not noticeable. From May 1789 to September 1790, he traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France and England, stopping mainly in big cities like Berlin, Leipzig, Geneva, Paris, London. Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began to publish the Moscow Journal (see below), where Letters from a Russian Traveler appeared. The Moscow Journal ceased in 1792, perhaps not without connection with the imprisonment of Novikov in the fortress and the persecution of Masons. Although Karamzin, starting the Moscow Journal, formally excluded articles “theological and mystical” from his program, after Novikov’s arrest (and before the final sentence) he published a rather bold ode: “To Mercy” (“As long as a citizen is calm, without fear, fall asleep, and freely dispose of life to all your subjects; ... as long as you give freedom to everyone and do not darken the minds of light; as long as the power of attorney to the people is visible in all your affairs: until then you will be sacredly revered ... nothing can disturb the tranquility of your state") and hardly did not come under investigation on suspicion that the Masons sent him abroad. Karamzin spent most of 1793-1795 in the countryside and prepared two collections here called Aglaya, published in the autumn of 1793 and 1794. In 1795, Karamzin limited himself to compiling a "mixture" in the Moscow Vedomosti. “Losing the desire to walk under black clouds,” he launched himself into the world and led a rather scattered life. In 1796, he published a collection of poems by Russian poets called Aonides. A year later, the second book "Aonid" appeared; then Karamzin decided to publish something like an anthology on foreign literature (“Pantheon of Foreign Literature”). By the end of 1798, Karamzin had barely gotten his "Pantheon" through the censorship, which forbade the publication of Demosthenes, Cicero, Sallust, etc., because they were republicans. Even a simple reprint of Karamzin's old works met with difficulties from the side of censorship. Thirty-year-old Karamzin apologizes to readers for the ardor of feelings of the “young, inexperienced Russian traveler” and writes to one of his friends: “There is a time for everything, and the scenes change. When the flowers in the Paphos meadows lose their freshness for us, we stop flying like marshmallows and are locked up in an office for philosophical dreams ... Thus, soon my poor muse will either completely retire, or ... will shift Kant's metaphysics with the Platonic Republic into verse. Metaphysics, however, was just as alien to Karamzin's mental makeup as was mysticism. From the letters to Aglaya and Chloe, he moved not to philosophy, but to historical pursuits. In the "Moscow Journal" Karamzin won the sympathy of the public as a writer; now in the "Bulletin of Europe" (1802 - 03) he is in the role of a publicist. The “Historical eulogy to Empress Catherine II” compiled by Karamzin in the first months of the reign of Emperor Alexander I is predominantly journalistic in nature. During the publication of the journal, Karamzin more and more enters into the taste of historical articles. He receives, through the intermediary of the Deputy Minister of Public Education M. N. Muravyov, the title of a historiographer and 2,000 rubles of an annual pension in order to write a complete history of Russia (October 31, 1803). Since 1804, having stopped publishing Vestnik Evropy, Karamzin plunged exclusively into compiling history. In 1816 he published the first 8 volumes of The History of the Russian State (in 1818-19 the second edition of them was published), in 1821 - 9 volumes, in 1824 - the 10th and 11th. In 1826, Karamzin died without having time to complete the 12th volume, which was published by D.N. Bludov based on the papers left after the deceased. During all these 22 years, the compilation of history was the main occupation of Karamzin; to defend and continue the work begun by him in literature, he left to his literary friends. Before the publication of the first 8 volumes, Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver to the Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna (through her he gave the sovereign in 1810 his note “On the ancient and new Russia”) and to Nizhny, during the occupation of Moscow by the French. He usually spent his summers at Ostafyev, the estate of Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky, whose daughter, Ekaterina Andreevna, Karamzin married in 1804 (Karamzin's first wife, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died in 1802). Karamzin spent the last 10 years of his life in St. Petersburg and became close to the royal family, although Emperor Alexander I, who did not like criticism of his actions, treated Karamzin with restraint from the time the Note was submitted, in which the historiographer turned out to be plus royaliste que le roi. In Tsarskoye Selo, where Karamzin spent the summer at the request of the empresses (Maria Feodorovna and Elizaveta Alekseevna), he more than once had frank political conversations with Emperor Alexander, passionately rebelled against the sovereign’s intentions regarding Poland, “did not keep silent about taxes in peacetime, about the absurd about the provincial system of finance, about formidable military settlements, about the strange choice of some of the most important dignitaries, about the Ministry of Education or Eclipse, about the need to reduce the army that fights only Russia, about the imaginary improvement of roads, so painful for the people, finally, about the need to have firm laws, civil and state ones. By last question the sovereign answered, how could he answer Speransky, that he would “give the fundamental laws of Russia”, but in fact this opinion of Karamzin, like other advice of the opponent of the “liberals” and “servilists”, Speransky and Arakcheev, “remained fruitless for the dear fatherland” . The death of Emperor Alexander shocked Karamzin's health; half-ill, he visited the palace every day for a conversation with Empress Maria Feodorovna, from memories of the late sovereign, moving on to discussions about the tasks of the future reign. In the first months of 1826, Karamzin experienced pneumonia and, on the advice of doctors, decided to go to southern France and Italy in the spring, for which Emperor Nicholas gave him money and put a frigate at his disposal. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel and died on May 22, 1826.

Karamzin as a historian. Starting to compose Russian history without proper historical preparation, Karamzin did not have in mind to be a researcher. He wanted to apply his literary talent to the finished material: “select, animate, color” and thus make Russian history “something attractive, strong, worthy of attention not only for Russians, but also for foreigners.” Preliminary critical work on sources for Karamzin is only a "heavy tribute brought by reliability": on the other hand, the general conclusions from historical story seem to him "metaphysics", which is not suitable "for the depiction of action and character"; "knowledge" and "scholarship", "wit" and "profoundness" "in the historian do not replace the talent to portray actions." Before the artistic task of history, even the moral one, which was set by Karamzin's patron, Muravyov, recedes into the background; Karamzin is not interested in critical history; he consciously dismisses philosophical history. But the previous generation, under the influence of Schlozer, developed the idea of ​​critical history; among Karamzin's contemporaries, the demands of criticism were universally recognized, and the next generation demanded philosophical history. With his views on the tasks of the historian, Karamzin remained outside the dominant currents of Russian historiography and did not participate in its consistent development. Fear of "metaphysics" sacrificed Karamzin to the routine idea of ​​the course of Russian history that had developed in official Russian historiography since the 16th century. According to this idea, the development of Russian history depends on the development of monarchical power. The monarchical power glorified Russia in Kyiv period; the division of power between the princes was a political mistake, the result of which was a specific period of Russian history; this political mistake was corrected by the state wisdom of the Moscow princes - the collectors of Rus'; at the same time, its consequences were also corrected - the fragmentation of Rus' and Tatar yoke. Without introducing anything new into the general understanding of Russian history, Karamzin was heavily dependent on his predecessors in working out the details. In the story about the first centuries of Russian history, Karamzin was guided mainly by Schlozer's "Nestor", however, he did not fully master his critical methods. For later times, the main manual for Karamzin was the history of Shcherbatov, brought almost to the time at which the "History of the Russian State" stopped. Shcherbatov not only helped Karamzin navigate the sources of Russian history, but significantly influenced the presentation itself. Of course, the style of Karamzin's "History" bears the stamp of his literary manner, with all its conventions; but in the choice of material, in its arrangement, in the interpretation of facts, Karamzin is guided by Shcherbatov's "History", deviating from it, not for the benefit of truth, in pictorial descriptions of "actions" and sentimental-psychological descriptions of "characters". Peculiarities literary form"History of the Russian State" brought her wide distribution among readers and admirers of Karamzin as a writer. In 25 days, all 3,000 copies of the first edition of the History of the Russian State sold out. But precisely those features that made the "History" an excellent popular book for its time, even then deprived its text of serious scientific significance. Much more important for the science of that time were the extensive "Notes" to the text. Not rich in critical indications, these "notes" contained many extracts from manuscripts, mostly published for the first time by Karamzin. Some of these manuscripts no longer exist. Karamzin based his history on those materials from the Moscow Archive of the Ministry (then collegium) of Foreign Affairs that Shcherbatov already used (especially the spiritual and contractual letters of the princes and acts of diplomatic relations from the end of the 15th century); but he could use them more fully, thanks to the diligent help of the directors of the archive, N. N. Bantysh-Kamensky and A. F. Malinovsky. Many valuable manuscripts were produced by the Synodal Depository (also known to Shcherbatov), ​​libraries of monasteries (Trinity Lavra, Volokolamsk Monastery and others), which became of interest at that time, as well as private collections of manuscripts by Musin-Pushkin and Rumyantsev. Karamzin received especially many documents from Chancellor Rumyantsev, who collected, through his numerous agents, historical materials in Russia and abroad, as well as from AI Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archive. Extensive excerpts from all this material, to which it is necessary to add the southern chronicle found by Karamzin himself, the historiographer published in his "Notes"; but, confining himself to the role of an artistic narrator and leaving aside questions of internal history almost completely, he left collected material in a completely undeveloped state. All these features of Karamzin's "History" determined the attitude of contemporaries towards it. "History" was admired by Karamzin's literary friends and a vast public of non-specialist readers; intellectual circles found her backward in general views and tendentious; specialists-researchers were distrustful of it, and the very enterprise - to write history in the then state of science - was considered too risky. Already during Karamzin's lifetime, critical analyzes of his history appeared, and soon after his death, attempts were made to determine his general significance in historiography. Lelewel pointed to his involuntary distortion of the truth, "through the message to the past time - the nature of the present" and as a result of patriotic, religious and political passions. Artsybashev showed to what extent Karamzin's literary devices harm "history"; Pogodin summed up all the shortcomings of History, while Polevoy saw the common cause of these shortcomings in the fact that “Karamzin is a writer not of our time” and that all his points of view, both in literature and in philosophy, politics and history, have become outdated since the emergence in Russia of new influences of European romanticism. In the 1830s, Karamzin's "History" became the banner of an officially "Russian" direction, and with the assistance of the same Pogodin, its scientific rehabilitation was carried out. Solovyov's cautious objections (in the 1850s) are drowned out by Pogodin's anniversary panegyric (1866).

Karamzin as a writer. "Peter Rossum gave the body, Catherine gave the soul." Thus, in a well-known verse, the mutual relationship of the two creators of the new Russian civilization was determined. Approximately in the same attitude are the creators of the new Russian literature: Lomonosov and Karamzin. Lomonosov prepared the material from which literature is formed; Karamzin breathed into him living soul and made the printed word the spokesman of spiritual life and partly the leader of Russian society. Belinsky says that Karamzin created a Russian public that did not exist before him, created readers - and since literature is unthinkable without readers, we can safely say that literature, in modern meaning of this word, began with us from the era of Karamzin and began precisely thanks to his knowledge, energy, fine taste And outstanding talent. Karamzin was not a poet: he is devoid of creative imagination, his taste is one-sided; the ideas that he pursued do not differ in depth and originality; it owes its great importance above all to its active love of literature and the so-called human sciences. Karamzin's training was broad, but incorrect and devoid of solid foundations; according to Groth, he "read more than he studied". Its serious development begins under the influence of the Friendly Society. A deep religious feeling inherited from his mother, philanthropic aspirations, dreamy humanity, a platonic love for freedom, equality and fraternity on the one hand, and selflessly humble obedience to those in power on the other, patriotism and admiration for European culture, high respect for enlightenment in all its types, but at the same time, a dislike for gallomania and a reaction against a skeptical-cold attitude to life and against mocking disbelief, the desire to study the monuments of native antiquity - all this was either borrowed by Karamzin from Novikov and his comrades, or strengthened by their influence. The example of Novikov showed Karamzin that outside the state service one can benefit one's fatherland, and he drew up for him a program of his own life. Under the influence of A. Petrov and, probably, German poet Lenz, Karamzin's literary tastes developed, representing a major step forward compared with the views of his older contemporaries. Based on Rousseau's view of the charms of the "state of nature" and the rights of the heart, Karamzin, following Herder, demands from poetry first of all sincerity, originality and liveliness. Homer, Ossian, Shakespeare are in his eyes the greatest poets; so-called new-classical poetry seems to him cold and does not touch his soul; Voltaire in his eyes is only a "famous sophist"; simple-hearted folk songs excite his sympathy. In "Children's Reading" Karamzin follows the principles of that humane pedagogy, which was introduced into use by "Emil" Rousseau, and which completely coincided with the views of the founders of the Friendly Society. At this time, gradually developed and literary language Karamzin, who most of all contributed to the great reform. In the preface to the translation of Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar", he also writes: "His spirit soared like an eagle, and could not measure its soaring", "great spirits" (instead of genius), etc. But Petrov laughed at "long-drawn-out soaring " in Slavic words, and "Children's Reading" by its very purpose forced Karamzin to write in an easy and colloquial language and in every possible way to avoid "Slavism" and Latin-German construction. At the same time, or shortly after leaving abroad, Karamzin begins to test his strength in poetry; rhyme was not easy for him, and in his verses there was no so-called soaring at all, but even here his style is clear and simple; he knew how to find new topics for Russian literature and borrow original and beautiful meters from the Germans. His "ancient Gishpan historical song": "Count Gvarinos", written in 1789, is the prototype of Zhukovsky's ballads; his "Autumn" at one time struck with its extraordinary simplicity and elegance. Karamzin's travel abroad and the Letters of a Russian Traveler that resulted from it is a fact of great importance in the history of Russian education. About the "Letters" Buslaev says: "numerous readers of them were insensitively brought up in the ideas of European civilization, as if ripening along with the maturation of the young Russian traveler, learning to feel his noble feelings, to dream of his beautiful dreams." According to Galakhov's calculation, in letters from Germany and Switzerland, news of a scientific and literary nature takes up a fourth part, and if science, art and theater are excluded from Paris letters, significantly less than a half will remain. Karamzin says that the letters were written "as happened, dear, on scraps in pencil"; meanwhile, it turned out that they contained a lot of literary borrowings - therefore, they were written at least partly "in the silence of the office." In any case, Karamzin really typed a significant part of the material expensively and wrote it down “on shreds”. Another contradiction is more significant: how can an ardent friend of freedom, a disciple of Rousseau, ready to fall on his knees before Fiesco, speak so contemptuously about the Paris events of that time and do not want to see in them anything but a revolt organized by the party of "predatory wolves"? Of course, a pupil of the Friendly Society could not be sympathetic to an open uprising, but fearful caution also played a significant role here: it is known how Catherine sharply changed her attitude towards French journalism and the activities of the Estates General after July 14. The most thorough treatment of the periods in the April letter of 1790 apparently testifies to the fact that tirades in praise of the old order in France are written for show. - Karamzin worked hard abroad (by the way, he learned English); his love of literature strengthened, and immediately upon returning to his homeland he became a journalist. His "Moscow Journal" is the first Russian literary magazine that really gave pleasure to its readers. Here were samples of both literary and theatrical criticism, excellent for that time, beautifully, generally understandable and extremely delicately presented. In general, Karamzin was able to adapt our literature to the needs of the best, that is, more educated Russian people, and, moreover, of both sexes: until then, ladies did not read Russian magazines. In the Moscow Journal (as well as later in Vestnik Evropy), Karamzin had no employees in the modern sense of the word: friends sent him their poems, sometimes very valuable (in 1791, Derzhavin’s Vision of Murza appeared here, in 1792 "Fashionable wife" Dmitriev, famous song“The blue dove is moaning” by him, plays by Kheraskov, Neledinsky-Meletsky and others), but he had to fill all the departments of the magazine himself; this was only possible because he brought back from abroad a portfolio filled with translations and imitations. Two stories by Karamzin appear in the Moscow Journal: Poor Liza and Natalya, the Boyar's Daughter, which serve as the most striking expression of his sentimentalism. Especially big success had the first: the poets praised the author or composed elegies to the ashes of poor Lisa. There were, of course, and epigrams. Karamzin's sentimentalism proceeded from his natural inclinations and the conditions of his development, as well as from his sympathy for the literary school that arose at that time in the West. In Poor Liza, the author frankly declares that he "loves those objects that touch the heart and make her shed tears of heavy sorrow." In the story, apart from the locality, there is nothing Russian; but the vague desire of the public to have poetry close to life has so far been satisfied with this little. In "Poor Lisa" there are no characters, but a lot of feeling, and most importantly, she touched the soul with the whole tone of the story and brought readers into the mood in which they imagined the author. Now "Poor Lisa" seems cold and false, but in theory this is the first link in the chain that, through Pushkin's romance: "In the evening in a rainy autumn", stretches to Dostoevsky's "Humiliated and Insulted". It is from Poor Lisa that Russian literature takes the philanthropic direction that Kireevsky speaks of. Imitators took Karamzin's tearful tone to an extreme, which he did not sympathize with at all: already in 1797 (in the preface to the 2nd book of "Aonid") he advises "not to talk incessantly about tears ... this way of touching is very unreliable." "Natalya, the Boyar's Daughter" is important as the first experience of sentimental idealization of our past, and in the history of Karamzin's development - as the first and timid step of the future author of the "History of the Russian State". "Moscow Journal" was a success, at that time very significant (already in the first year it had 300 "subscripts"; later its second edition was needed), but Karamzin achieved especially wide popularity in 1794, when he collected all the articles from it his own and reprinted in a special collection: "My trinkets" (2nd ed., 1797; 3rd - 1801). Since then, his significance as a literary reformer is quite clear: a few lovers of literature recognize him as the best prose writer, a large public only reads him with pleasure. In Russia at that time, all thinking people lived so badly that, in the words of Karamzin, “the magnanimous frenzy against abuses of power drowned out the voice of personal caution” (“Note on Ancient and New Russia”). Under Paul I, Karamzin was ready to leave literature and sought spiritual rest in the study of the Italian language and in reading ancient monuments. From the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, Karamzin, while still remaining a writer, occupied an unparalleled high position: he became not only a "singer of Alexander" in the sense that Derzhavin was a "singer of Catherine", but was an influential publicist, whose voice was listened to and government, and society. His "Bulletin of Europe" is a literary and artistic publication as excellent for its time as the "Moscow Journal", but at the same time it is also an organ of moderate liberal views. As before, however, Karamzin has to work almost exclusively alone; so that his name does not dazzle in the eyes of readers, he is forced to invent a lot of pseudonyms. Vestnik Evropy has earned its name by a number of articles on European intellectual and political life and by a mass of well-chosen translations (Karamzin subscribed to the editors of 12 of the best foreign journals). Of Karamzin's literary works in Vestnik Evropy, the autobiographical story A Knight of Our Time, which noticeably reflects the influence of Jean-Paul Richter, and the famous historical story Marfa Posadnitsa are more important than others. In the leading articles of the journal, Karamzin expresses "pleasant views, hopes and desires of the present time", shared by the best part society of that time. It turned out that the revolution, which threatened to devour civilization and freedom, brought them great benefits: now “sovereigns, instead of condemning reason to silence, incline it to their side”; they "feel the importance of an alliance" with the best minds, respect public opinion, and strive to win the love of the people by eliminating abuses. In relation to Russia, Karamzin wants education for all classes, and above all literacy for the people (“the establishment of rural schools is incomparably more useful than all lyceums, being a true people's institution, the true foundation of state education”); he dreams of the penetration of science into high society. In general, for Karamzin, “enlightenment is the palladium of good manners,” by which he means the manifestation in the private and public life of all best sides human nature and the taming of selfish instincts. Karamzin also uses the form of a story to convey his ideas to society: in My Confession, he denounces the absurd secular education that is given to the aristocracy, and the unjust favors that are rendered to it. The weak side of Karamzin's journalistic activity is his attitude towards serfdom; he, as N. I. Turgenev says, slips on this issue (in his "Letter from a Villager" he directly speaks out against giving the peasants the opportunity to independently manage their farms under the then conditions). The department of criticism in Vestnik Evropy is almost non-existent; Karamzin is now far from having such a high opinion of her as before, he considers her a luxury for our still poor literature. In general, Vestnik Evropy does not coincide with the Russian Traveler in everything. Far from being as before, Karamzin reveres the West and finds that it is not good for a person and the people to remain forever in the position of a student; he attaches great importance national identity and rejects the idea that "everything of the people is nothing before the human." At this time, Shishkov begins a literary war against Karamzin and his supporters, which comprehended and finally consolidated Karamzin's reform in our language and partly in the very direction of Russian literature. Karamzin in his youth recognized Petrov, an enemy of the Slavs, as his teacher in the literary style; in 1801 he expresses the conviction that only since his time in the Russian syllable has “a pleasantness called elegance by the French” been noticed. Still later (1803), he says this about the literary style: “A Russian candidate for authorship, dissatisfied with books, must close them and listen to conversations around him in order to completely learn the language. Here is a new misfortune: in the best houses we speak more French ... What remains for the author to do? invent, compose expressions, guess the best choice words." Shishkov rebelled against all innovations (moreover, he takes examples from the inept and extreme imitators of Karamzin), sharply separating the literary language, with its strong Slavic element and three styles, from the spoken language. Karamzin did not accept the challenge, but Makarov, Kachenovsky and Dashkov joined the fight for him, who pressed Shishkov, despite the support of the Russian Academy and the foundation of Conversations of Russian Literature Lovers to help his cause. The dispute can be considered over after the founding of Arzamas and Karamzin's entry into the academy in 1818. In his opening speech, he expressed the bright idea that “words are not invented by academies; they are born together with thoughts. In the words of Pushkin, “Karamzin liberated the language from an alien yoke and returned its freedom, turning it to living sources popular word". This living element lies in the brevity of periods, in colloquial construction and in a large number of new words (for example, moral, aesthetic, era, stage, harmony, catastrophe, future, influence whom or what, focus, touching, entertaining, industry ). Working on history, Karamzin realized the good side the language of monuments and managed to introduce many beautiful and strong expressions into use. When collecting material for the History, Karamzin rendered an enormous service to the study of ancient Russian literature; according to Sreznevsky, "Karamzin said the first word about many of the ancient monuments, and not a single word was said inappropriately and without criticism." "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", "Teaching Monomakh" and many other literary works ancient Rus' became known to the general public only thanks to the "History of the Russian State". In 1811, Karamzin was distracted from his main work by compiling the famous note “On ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations” (published together with a note on Poland, in Berlin, in 1861; in 1870 - in “ Russian Archive"), which Karamzin's panegyrists consider a great civil feat, and others " extreme manifestation his fatalism”, strongly inclined towards obscurantism. Baron Korf (The Life of Speransky, 1861) says that this note is not a summary of Karamzin's individual thoughts, but "a skillful compilation of what he heard around him." It is impossible not to notice a clear contradiction between many of the provisions of the note and those humane and liberal thoughts that Karamzin expressed, for example, in the Historical Praise to Catherine (1802) and his other journalistic and literary works. The note, as well as Karamzin's "Opinion of a Russian Citizen" about Poland submitted by Karamzin in 1819 to Alexander I (published in 1862 in the book "Unpublished Works"; cf. "Russian Archive" 1869), testify to some civic courage of the author, since in their sharply frank tone, they should have aroused the displeasure of the sovereign; but Karamzin's courage could not be seriously blamed for him, since his objections were based on his respect for absolute power. Opinions on the results of Karamzin's activities differed greatly during his lifetime (his supporters back in 1798 - 1800 considered him a great writer and placed him in collections next to Lomonosov and Derzhavin, and even in 1810 his enemies assured that he pours in his writings " free-thinking and Jacobin poison" and clearly preaches atheism and anarchy); they cannot be brought to unity even at the present time. Pushkin recognized him as a great writer, a noble patriot, a wonderful soul, took him as an example of firmness in relation to criticism, was indignant at the attacks on his history and the coldness of the articles about his death. Gogol says about him in 1846: “Karamzin represents an extraordinary phenomenon. Here is one of our writers that can be said that he fulfilled his entire duty, did not bury anything in the ground, and for the five talents given to him truly brought another five. Belinsky holds just the opposite opinion and proves that Karamzin did less than he could. However, the enormous and beneficial influence of Karamzin on the development of the Russian language and literary form is unanimously recognized by all.

Literature: I. Works and letters of Karamzin. More complete and correct editions of Karamzin are: "Works" (4th edition, 1834 - 35th and 5th, 1848) and "Translations" (3rd edition, 1835). "Poor Lisa" has been reprinted many times. There are numerous reprints of selected passages from Letters of a Russian Traveler. The best editions of the “History of the Russian State” are the 2nd, Slenin (St. Petersburg, 1842 - 43). Separate volumes of the edition in Suvorin's "Cheap Library" (without notes). “Letters from Karamzin to A.F. Malinovsky" (published by the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, edited by M. N. Longinov, 1860). The most important of the collections of Karamzin's letters is to I. I. Dmitriev, published by Grot and Pekarsky for the anniversary of Karamzin in 1866; on the same occasion, a book by M. P. Pogodin was published: “N. M. Karamzin according to his writings, letters and reviews of contemporaries” (Moscow, 1866). Letters to N. I. Krivtsov (“Report of the Imperial Public Library for 1892”, appendix); to Prince P. A. Vyazemsky, 1810 - 1826 (“Antiquity and Novelty”, book I, 1897; cf. “Bulletin of Europe”, 1897, V); to A. I. Turgenev, 1806 - 1826 ("Russian Antiquity", 1899, I - IV); correspondence with Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich ("Russian Archive", 1906, I). From the papers of N. M. Karamzin (“Antiquity and Novelty”, book II, 1898); "Note on Ancient and New Russia" (edited by V.V. Sipovsky, St.

Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich - Russian writer, historian, journalist. Born December 1 (December 12), 1766 in the Simbirsk province. As a child, I loved to read a lot. I read mostly old novels. Grew up and brought up Karamzin in the estate of his father, there he received home education.

In 1778 he entered the boarding school of Professor Shaden in Moscow. There he continued his education, studied German and French.

The father really wanted his son to receive a military education. After finishing his studies with the professor, in 1783 Karamzin entered the military service, but military activity Nikolai Mikhailovich did not work out and resigned in the same year. For a short time of service, Karamzin is fond of literature.

In 1784, after the death of his father, he returned to Simbirsk and at the end of the same year moved back to Moscow. In Moscow, he became a member of the "Friendly Scientific Society" for four years. From 1789 to 1790 Karamzin travels. He visited France, Germany, England, Switzerland. The result of his trip was the work "Letters of a Russian Traveler". After the publication of this work, Karamzin became a very famous literary figure.

In 1792 he wrote the story "Poor Lisa", which increased his literary fame. He spends 1793-1795 in the village, where he writes two collections "Aglaya". In 1795 Karamzin often appeared at social events and led a wild life. By the end of 1798, the author was faced with difficulties. His works are difficult to pass censorship.

From 1802 to 1803 worked in the journal "Bulletin of Europe" as a publicist. This experience started his interest in historical writing.

October 31, 1803 Karamzin receives the title of historiographer and the task of writing a complete history of Russia. This work completely absorbed him. Karamzin wrote 11 volumes, 12 volumes did not have time to finish due to death. Nikolai Mikhailovich was engaged in compiling history for 22 years. During his life, Karamzin was married twice. The first wife died in 1802, and in 1804 he married again.

Last decade of his life great writer spent in Petersburg. There he became close to the royal family. He often talked with Alexander I on various topics. The death of the emperor greatly crippled Karamzin's health.

In the winter of 1926, he contracted pneumonia. To improve his health, he decides to go to Italy and southern France. But the trip had to be canceled due to the weakness of the Author.

Artworks

Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich - only he could describe in detail, and at the same time briefly, the life of Russia and Russians. He was not only a writer, writer and publicist, he was a participant Imperial Academy Sciences, reformer of the Russian language and State Counsellor.

About his life

Nicholas's mother died when he was barely two years old. Little Kolya was raised by his father, the captain of the guard and a middle-class landowner, Mikhail Yegorovich. Governesses helped him in this. From his beloved mother, he inherited a huge library located in their family estate. It was thanks to the abundance of books that Nikolai Mikhailovich began to pay special attention to books from early childhood.

Having been educated at home future writer graduated from a noble boarding school, and after that he read many books on various topics in the boarding house of Shaden, a professor at Moscow University, and also attended lectures. In 1781 he went to military service, but served only a few months.

About career

8 years after the service, Karamzin went to Europe. This journey had a huge impact on him, so huge that when he returned home he wrote a book, from which they began to count the formation of modern Russian literature. It is called Letters from a Russian Traveler. The writer was able to appreciate the horror of the revolution in France, see the collapse of the Bastille and introduce him to Kant himself.

Upon his return, Karamzin began an active literary and publishing activity. The book “Poor Liza” made a special impression on people, and it was after it that Nikolai Mikhailovich began to be considered the leader of Russian sentimentalism.

Facts about Karamzin

The way Karamzin described the social life of Russia, no one else could. He described it with only one word - steal.

Nikolai Mikhailovich was one of the first to write in texts (where it is supposed to) not “e”, but the letter “e”. And he also introduced many new words into our native language - neologisms (attraction, love, suspicion, charity), and barbarisms (for example, sidewalk).

Karamzin's work had a great influence on the development of the Russian language. He resolutely abandoned the vocabulary and grammar of Church Slavonic in favor of French- his grammar and syntax for Nikolai Mikhailovich were a model.

According to one version, he was born in the village of Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district (now the Mainsky district of the Ulyanovsk region), according to another, in the village of Mikhailovka, Buzuluk district, Kazan province (now the village of Preobrazhenka, Orenburg region). Recently, experts have been in favor of the "Orenburg" version of the writer's birthplace.

Karamzin belonged to a noble family, descending from a Tatar murza named Kara-Murza. Nicholas was the second son of a retired captain, a landowner. He lost his mother early, she died in 1769. By the second marriage, my father married Ekaterina Dmitrieva, the aunt of the poet and fabulist Ivan Dmitriev.

Karamzin spent his childhood years in his father's estate, studied in Simbirsk at the noble boarding school of Pierre Fauvel. At the age of 14, he began to study at the Moscow private boarding school of Professor Johann Schaden, while simultaneously attending classes at Moscow University.

Since 1781, Karamzin began serving in the Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he was transferred from the army regiments (he was enrolled in service in 1774), received the rank of lieutenant.

During this period, he became close to the poet Ivan Dmitriev and began his literary activity by translating from the German language "Conversation of the Austrian Maria Theresa with our Empress Elisabeth in the Champs Elysees" (not preserved). The first printed work of Karamzin was the translation of Solomon Gesner's idyll "Wooden Leg" (1783).

In 1784, after the death of his father, Karamzin retired with the rank of lieutenant and never served again. After a short stay in Simbirsk, where he joined Masonic Lodge, Karamzin moved to Moscow, was introduced into the circle of the publisher Nikolai Novikov and settled in a house that belonged to the Novikov Friendly Scientific Society.

In 1787-1789 he was an editor in the magazine "Children's Reading for the Heart and Mind" published by Novikov, where he published his first story "Eugene and Julia" (1789), poems and translations. He translated into Russian the tragedy "Julius Caesar" (1787) by William Shakespeare and "Emilia Galotti" (1788) by Gotthold Lessing.

In May 1789, Nikolai Mikhailovich went abroad and until September 1790 traveled around Europe, visiting Germany, Switzerland, France and England.

Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began to publish the "Moscow Journal" (1791-1792), which published the "Letters of a Russian Traveler" written by him, in 1792 the story "Poor Lisa" was published, as well as the stories "Natalia, the Boyar's Daughter" and "Liodor ", which became examples of Russian sentimentalism.

Karamzin. In the first Russian poetic anthology Aonides (1796-1799) compiled by Karamzin, he included his own poems, as well as poems by his contemporaries - Gavriil Derzhavin, Mikhail Kheraskov, Ivan Dmitriev. In "Aonides" the letter "ё" of the Russian alphabet appeared for the first time.

Part of the prose translations Karamzin combined in the "Pantheon of Foreign Literature" (1798), brief characteristics Russian writers were given to them for publication "Pantheon of Russian authors, or Collection of their portraits with remarks" (1801-1802). Karamzin's response to the accession to the throne of Alexander I was "Historical eulogy to Catherine II" (1802).

In 1802-1803, Nikolai Karamzin published the literary and political journal Vestnik Evropy, in which, along with articles on literature and art, issues of foreign and domestic policy of Russia, history and political life were widely covered. foreign countries. In the Bulletin of Europe, he published works on Russian medieval history "Martha Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novgorod", "News of Martha Posadnitsa, taken from the life of St. Zosima", "Journey around Moscow", "Historical memories and remarks on the way to the Trinity " and etc.

Karamzin developed a language reform aimed at bringing the bookish language closer to the colloquial speech of an educated society. Limiting the use of Slavonicisms, widely using language borrowings and calques from European languages ​​(mainly from French), introducing new words, Karamzin created a new literary style.

On November 12 (October 31, old style), 1803, by personal imperial decree of Alexander I, Nikolai Karamzin was appointed historiographer "to compose a complete History of the Fatherland." From that time until the end of his days, he worked on the main work of his life - "The History of the Russian State." Libraries and archives were opened for him. In 1816-1824, the first 11 volumes of the work were published in St. Petersburg;

In 1818, Karamzin became a member of the Russian Academy, an honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. He received a real state councilor and was awarded the order Saint Anna 1st degree.

During the first months of 1826, he suffered pneumonia, which ruined his health. On June 3 (May 22, old style), 1826, Nikolai Karamzin died in St. Petersburg. He was buried at the Tikhvin cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

Karamzin was married with a second marriage to Ekaterina Kolyvanova (1780-1851), the sister of the poet Pyotr Vyazemsky, who was the mistress of the best literary salon Petersburg, where the poets Vasily Zhukovsky, Alexander Pushkin, Mikhail Lermontov, writer Nikolai Gogol visited. She helped the historiographer by proofreading the 12-volume History, and after his death she completed the publication of the last volume.

His first wife, Elizaveta Protasova, died in 1802. From his first marriage, Karamzin left a daughter, Sophia (1802-1856), who became a maid of honor, was the mistress of a literary salon, a friend of the poets Alexander Pushkin and Mikhail Lermontov.

In his second marriage, the historiographer had nine children, five survived to a conscious age. Daughter Ekaterina (1806-1867) married Prince Meshchersky, her son - writer Vladimir Meshchersky (1839-1914).

Nikolay Karamzin's daughter Elizaveta (1821-1891) became a lady-in-waiting of the imperial court, son Andrei (1814-1854) died in the Crimean War. Alexander Karamzin (1816-1888) served in the guards and at the same time wrote poems that were published by the magazines Sovremennik and " Domestic notes". Younger son Vladimir (1819-1869)

December 12 (December 1, according to the old style), 1766, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born - Russian writer, poet, editor of the Moscow Journal (1791-1792) and the Vestnik Evropy magazine (1802-1803), honorary member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences ( 1818), full member of the Imperial Russian Academy, historian, the first and only court historiographer, one of the first reformers of the Russian literary language, the founding father of Russian historiography and Russian sentimentalism.

Contribution of N.M. Karamzin in Russian culture can hardly be overestimated. Remembering everything that this man managed to do in the brief 59 years of his earthly existence, it is impossible to ignore the fact that it was Karamzin who largely determined the face of Russian XIX century - the "golden" age of Russian poetry, literature, historiography, source studies and other humanitarian areas of scientific knowledge. Thanks to linguistic searches aimed at popularizing the literary language of poetry and prose, Karamzin presented Russian literature to his contemporaries. And if Pushkin is “our everything”, then Karamzin can be safely called “our everything” with the capital letter. Without him, Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Baratynsky, Batyushkov and other poets of the so-called "Pushkin galaxy" would hardly have been possible.

“Whatever you turn to in our literature, Karamzin laid the foundation for everything: journalism, criticism, a story, a novel, a historical story, publicism, the study of history,” V.G. Belinsky.

"History of the Russian State" N.M. Karamzin became not just the first Russian-language book on the history of Russia, available to the general reader. Karamzin gave the Russian people Fatherland in the full sense of the word. They say that, slamming the eighth and last volume, Count Fyodor Tolstoy, nicknamed the American, exclaimed: “It turns out that I have a Fatherland!” And he was not alone. All his contemporaries suddenly found out that they live in a country with a thousand-year history and they have something to be proud of. Before that, it was believed that before Peter I, who opened a “window to Europe”, there was nothing in Russia worthy of attention: the dark ages of backwardness and barbarism, boyar autocracy, primordially Russian laziness and bears on the streets ...

The multi-volume work of Karamzin was not completed, but, having been published in the first quarter XIX century, it completely determined the historical identity of the nation for many years to come. All subsequent historiography could not give rise to anything more in line with the “imperial” self-consciousness that had developed under the influence of Karamzin. Karamzin's views left a deep, indelible mark in all areas of Russian culture of the 19th-20th centuries, forming the foundations of the national mentality, which, in the end, determined the development of Russian society and the state as a whole.

It is significant that in the 20th century, the edifice of Russian great power, which had collapsed under the attacks of revolutionary internationalists, revived again by the 1930s - under different slogans, with different leaders, in a different ideological package. but ... The very approach to historiography national history, both before 1917 and after, in many respects remained jingoistic and sentimental in Karamzin's style.

N.M. Karamzin - early years

N.M. Karamzin was born on December 12 (1st century), 1766, in the village of Mikhailovka, Buzuluk district, Kazan province (according to other sources, in the family estate of Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district, Kazan province). Little is known about his early years: there are no letters, no diaries, no memories of Karamzin himself about his childhood. He did not even know exactly his year of birth and for almost his entire life he believed that he was born in 1765. Only in his old age, having discovered the documents, he “looked younger” by one year.

The future historiographer grew up in the estate of his father, retired captain Mikhail Yegorovich Karamzin (1724-1783), a middle-class Simbirsk nobleman. He received a good education at home. In 1778 he was sent to Moscow to the boarding house of professor of Moscow University I.M. Shaden. At the same time he attended lectures at the university in 1781-1782.

After graduating from the boarding school, in 1783 Karamzin entered the service in Preobrazhensky Regiment Petersburg, where he met a young poet and future employee of his Moscow Journal, Dmitriev. At the same time, he published his first translation of S. Gesner's idyll "Wooden Leg".

In 1784, Karamzin retired as a lieutenant and never served again, which was perceived in the then society as a challenge. After a short stay in Simbirsk, where he joined the Golden Crown Masonic lodge, Karamzin moved to Moscow and was introduced into the circle of N. I. Novikov. He settled in a house that belonged to Novikov's "Friendly Scientific Society", became the author and one of the publishers of the first children's magazine "Children's Reading for the Heart and Mind" (1787-1789), founded by Novikov. At the same time, Karamzin became close to the Pleshcheev family. For many years he was connected with N. I. Pleshcheeva by a tender platonic friendship. In Moscow, Karamzin publishes his first translations, in which interest in European and Russian history is clearly visible: Thomson's The Four Seasons, Janlis's Village Evenings, W. Shakespeare's tragedy Julius Caesar, Lessing's tragedy Emilia Galotti.

In 1789, Karamzin's first original story "Eugene and Yulia" appeared in the magazine "Children's Reading ...". The reader hardly noticed it.

Travel to Europe

According to many biographers, Karamzin was not disposed towards the mystical side of Freemasonry, remaining a supporter of its active educational direction. To be more precise, by the end of the 1780s, Karamzin had already “been ill” with Masonic mysticism in its Russian version. Possibly, cooling towards Freemasonry was one of the reasons for his departure to Europe, where he spent more than a year (1789-90), visiting Germany, Switzerland, France and England. In Europe, he met and talked (except for influential Masons) with European "rulers of minds": I. Kant, J. G. Herder, C. Bonnet, I. K. Lavater, J. F. Marmontel, visited museums, theaters, secular salons. In Paris, Karamzin listened to O. G. Mirabeau, M. Robespierre and other revolutionaries in the National Assembly, saw many outstanding politicians and knew many of them. Apparently, the revolutionary Paris of 1789 showed Karamzin how much a person can be influenced by the word: the printed word, when the Parisians read pamphlets and leaflets with keen interest; oral, when revolutionary orators spoke and controversy arose (experience that could not be acquired at that time in Russia).

Karamzin did not have a very enthusiastic opinion about English parliamentarism (perhaps following in the footsteps of Rousseau), but he highly valued the level of civilization at which English society as a whole was located.

Karamzin - journalist, publisher

In the autumn of 1790, Karamzin returned to Moscow and soon organized the publication of the monthly "Moscow Journal" (1790-1792), in which most of the "Letters of a Russian Traveler" were printed, telling about the revolutionary events in France, the story "Liodor", "Poor Lisa" , "Natalia, Boyar's Daughter", "Flor Silin", essays, short stories, critical articles and poems. Karamzin attracted the entire literary elite of that time to cooperate in the journal: his friends Dmitriev and Petrov, Kheraskov and Derzhavin, Lvov, Neledinsky-Meletsky, and others. Karamzin's articles asserted a new literary trend - sentimentalism.

The Moscow Journal had only 210 regular subscribers, but for the end of the 18th century it was the same as a hundred thousand circulation at the end of the 19th century. Moreover, the magazine was read by those who "made the weather" in literary life countries: students, officials, young officers, petty employees of various government agencies (“archival youths”).

After the arrest of Novikov, the authorities became seriously interested in the publisher of the Moscow Journal. During interrogations in the Secret Expedition, they ask: did Novikov send the “Russian traveler” abroad with a “special assignment”? The Novikovites were people of high decency and, of course, Karamzin was shielded, but because of these suspicions, the magazine had to be stopped.

In the 1790s, Karamzin published the first Russian almanacs - Aglaya (1794-1795) and Aonides (1796-1799). In 1793, when in the third stage French Revolution the Jacobin dictatorship was established, which shocked Karamzin with its cruelty, Nikolai Mikhailovich abandoned some of his previous views. The dictatorship aroused in him serious doubts about the possibility of mankind to achieve prosperity. He sharply condemned the revolution and all violent ways of transforming society. The philosophy of despair and fatalism permeates his new works: the stories "Bornholm Island" (1793); "Sierra Morena" (1795); poems "Melancholy", "Message to A. A. Pleshcheev", etc.

During this period, real literary fame comes to Karamzin.

Fedor Glinka: “Out of 1200 cadets, a rare one did not repeat by heart any page from the Island of Bornholm”.

The name Erast, previously completely unpopular, is increasingly found in noble lists. There are rumors of successful and unsuccessful suicides in the spirit of Poor Lisa. The venomous memoirist Vigel recalls that important Moscow nobles had already begun to make do with “almost like an equal with a thirty-year-old retired lieutenant”.

In July 1794, Karamzin's life almost ended: on the way to the estate, in the wilderness of the steppe, robbers attacked him. Karamzin miraculously escaped, having received two light wounds.

In 1801, he married Elizaveta Protasova, a neighbor on the estate, whom he had known since childhood - at the time of the wedding they had known each other for almost 13 years.

Reformer of the Russian literary language

Already in the early 1790s, Karamzin seriously thought about the present and future of Russian literature. He writes to a friend: “I am deprived of the pleasure of reading a lot in my native language. We are still poor in writers. We have several poets who deserve to be read." Of course, there were and are Russian writers: Lomonosov, Sumarokov, Fonvizin, Derzhavin, but there are no more than a dozen significant names. Karamzin was one of the first to understand that it was not about talent - there are no fewer talents in Russia than in any other country. It’s just that Russian literature can’t move away from the long-obsolete traditions of classicism, laid down in the middle of the 18th century by the only theorist M.V. Lomonosov.

The reform of the literary language carried out by Lomonosov, as well as the theory of "three calms" he created, met the tasks of the transition period from ancient to new literature. A complete rejection of the use of the usual Church Slavonicisms in the language was then still premature and inappropriate. But the evolution of the language, which began under Catherine II, continued actively. The "Three Calms" proposed by Lomonosov relied not on live colloquial speech, but on the witty thought of a theoretician writer. And this theory often put the authors in a difficult position: they had to use heavy, outdated Slavic expressions where in spoken language they have long been replaced by others, softer and more elegant. The reader sometimes could not "break through" through the heaps of obsolete Slavic words used in church books and records in order to understand the essence of this or that secular work.

Karamzin decided to bring the literary language closer to the spoken language. Therefore, one of his main goals was the further liberation of literature from Church Slavonicism. In the preface to the second book of the almanac "Aonides" he wrote: "One thunder of words only deafens us and never reaches the heart."

The second feature of Karamzin's "new style" was the simplification of syntactic constructions. The writer abandoned lengthy periods. In the Pantheon of Russian Writers, he resolutely stated: “Lomonosov’s prose cannot serve as a model for us at all: its long periods are tiring, the arrangement of words is not always in line with the flow of thoughts.”

Unlike Lomonosov, Karamzin strove to write in short, easily visible sentences. This is to this day a model of a good style and an example to follow in literature.

The third merit of Karamzin was to enrich the Russian language with a number of successful neologisms, which have become firmly established in the main vocabulary. Among the innovations proposed by Karamzin are such widely known words in our time as “industry”, “development”, “refinement”, “concentrate”, “touching”, “entertainment”, “humanity”, “public”, “ generally useful", "influence" and a number of others.

Creating neologisms, Karamzin mainly used the method of tracing French words: “interesting” from “interesting”, “refined” from “raffine”, “development” from “developpement”, “touching” from “touchant”.

We know that even in the Petrine era, many foreign words appeared in the Russian language, but for the most part they replaced the words that already existed in the Slavic language and were not necessary. In addition, these words were often taken in a raw form, so they were very heavy and clumsy (“fortecia” instead of “fortress”, “victory” instead of “victory”, etc.). Karamzin, on the contrary, tried to give foreign words Russian ending, adapting them to the requirements of Russian grammar: “serious”, “moral”, “aesthetic”, “audience”, “harmony”, “enthusiasm”, etc.

In his reforming activities, Karamzin focused on the living colloquial speech of educated people. And this was the key to the success of his work - he does not write scientific treatises, but travel notes (“Letters from a Russian Traveler”), sentimental stories (“Bornholm Island”, “Poor Liza”), poems, articles, translates from French, English and German .

"Arzamas" and "Conversation"

It is not surprising that most of the young writers, modern Karamzin, accepted his transformation with a bang and willingly followed him. But, like any reformer, Karamzin had staunch opponents and worthy opponents.

A.S. stood at the head of Karamzin's ideological opponents. Shishkov (1774-1841) - admiral, patriot, well-known statesman of that time. An Old Believer, an admirer of Lomonosov's language, Shishkov at first glance was a classicist. But this point of view requires essential reservations. In contrast to the Europeanism of Karamzin, Shishkov put forward the idea of ​​the nationality of literature - the most important sign of a romantic worldview far from classicism. It turns out that Shishkov also adjoined romantics, but only not progressive, but conservative direction. His views can be recognized as a kind of forerunner of later Slavophilism and pochvenism.

In 1803, Shishkov delivered a Discourse on the Old and New Syllabus Russian language". He reproached the “Karamzinists” for having succumbed to the temptation of European revolutionary false teachings and advocated the return of literature to oral folk art, to popular vernacular, to Orthodox Church Slavonic book learning.

Shishkov was not a philologist. He dealt with the problems of literature and the Russian language, rather, as an amateur, so Admiral Shishkov's attacks on Karamzin and his literary supporters sometimes looked not so much scientifically substantiated as unsubstantiated and ideological. The language reform of Karamzin seemed to Shishkov, a warrior and defender of the Fatherland, unpatriotic and anti-religious: “Language is the soul of a people, a mirror of morals, a true indicator of enlightenment, an unceasing witness to deeds. Where there is no faith in the hearts, there is no piety in the tongue. Where there is no love for the fatherland, there the language does not express domestic feelings..

Shishkov reproached Karamzin for the immoderate use of barbarisms (“era”, “harmony”, “catastrophe”), neologisms disgusted him (“revolution” as a translation of the word “revolution”), artificial words cut his ear: “future”, “readiness” and etc.

And it must be admitted that sometimes his criticism was apt and accurate.

The evasiveness and aesthetic affectation of the speech of the "Karamzinists" very soon became outdated and went out of literary use. It was precisely this future that Shishkov predicted for them, believing that instead of the expression “when traveling became the need of my soul,” one can simply say: “when I fell in love with traveling”; the refined and paraphrased speech "variegated crowds of rural oreads meet with swarthy bands of reptile pharaohids" can be replaced by everyone understandable expression“Gypsies go towards the village girls”, etc.

Shishkov and his supporters took the first steps in studying the monuments of ancient Russian literature, enthusiastically studied The Tale of Igor's Campaign, studied folklore, advocated rapprochement between Russia and the Slavic world and recognized the need for convergence of the "Slovenian" syllable with the common language.

In a dispute with the translator Karamzin, Shishkov put forward a weighty argument about the “idiomaticity” of each language, about the unique originality of its phraseological systems, which make it impossible to translate a thought or a genuine semantic meaning from one language to another. For example, when translated literally into French, the expression "old horseradish" loses its figurative meaning and "means only the very thing, but in the metaphysical sense it has no circle of signification."

In defiance of Karamzinskaya, Shishkov proposed his own reform of the Russian language. He proposed to designate the concepts and feelings missing in our everyday life with new words formed from the roots of not French, but Russian and Old Slavonic languages. Instead of Karamzin's "influence", he suggested "influence", instead of "development" - "vegetation", instead of "actor" - "actor", instead of "individuality" - "yanost", "wet shoes" instead of "galoshes" and "wandering" instead of "maze". Most of his innovations in Russian did not take root.

It is impossible not to recognize Shishkov's ardent love for the Russian language; one cannot but admit that the passion for everything foreign, especially French, has gone too far in Russia. Ultimately, this led to the fact that the language of the common people, the peasant, began to differ greatly from the language of the cultural classes. But one cannot brush aside the fact that the natural process of the beginning evolution of language could not be stopped. It was impossible to forcibly return to use the already obsolete at that time expressions that Shishkov proposed: “zane”, “ubo”, “like”, “like” and others.

Karamzin did not even respond to the accusations of Shishkov and his supporters, knowing firmly that they were guided by exceptionally pious and patriotic feelings. Subsequently, Karamzin himself and his most talented supporters (Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Batyushkov) followed the very valuable indication of the "Shishkovites" on the need to "return to their roots" and examples own history. But then they could not understand each other.

Paphos and ardent patriotism of A.S. Shishkov aroused sympathy among many writers. And when Shishkov, together with G. R. Derzhavin, founded literary society“A Conversation of Lovers of the Russian Word” (1811) with a charter and its own journal, P. A. Katenin, I. A. Krylov, and later V. K. Kyuchelbeker and A. S. Griboedov immediately joined this society. One of the active participants in the "Conversation ...", the prolific playwright A. A. Shakhovskoy in the comedy "New Stern" viciously ridiculed Karamzin, and in the comedy "A Lesson for Coquettes, or Lipetsk Waters" in the person of the "ballade player" Fialkin created a parody image of V. A Zhukovsky.

This caused a friendly rebuff from the youth, who supported the literary authority of Karamzin. D. V. Dashkov, P. A. Vyazemsky, D. N. Bludov composed several witty pamphlets addressed to Shakhovsky and other members of the Conversation .... In The Vision in the Arzamas Tavern, Bludov gave the circle of young defenders of Karamzin and Zhukovsky the name "Society of Unknown Arzamas Writers" or simply "Arzamas".

IN organizational structure of this society, founded in the autumn of 1815, a cheerful spirit of a parody of the serious "Conversation ..." reigned. In contrast to official pomposity, simplicity, naturalness, openness dominated here, a lot of space was given to jokes and games.

Parodying the official ritual of "Conversations ...", when joining "Arzamas", everyone had to read a "funeral speech" to their "deceased" predecessor from among the living members of the "Conversations ..." or the Russian Academy of Sciences (Count D.I. Khvostov, S. A. Shirinsky-Shikhmatov, A. S. Shishkov himself, etc.). "Tombstone speeches" were a form literary struggle: they parodied high genres, ridiculed stylistic archaism poetry"talkers". At the meetings of the society, the humorous genres of Russian poetry were honed, a bold and resolute struggle was waged against all sorts of officialdom, a type of independent Russian writer, free from the pressure of any ideological conventions, was formed. And although P. A. Vyazemsky is one of the organizers and active participants in the society, in mature years condemned the youthful mischief and intransigence of his like-minded people (in particular, the rites of "burial" of living literary opponents), he rightly called "Arzamas" a school of "literary camaraderie" and mutual creative learning. The Arzamas and Beseda societies soon became centers of literary life and social struggle in the first quarter of the 19th century. The "Arzamas" included such famous people as Zhukovsky (pseudonym - Svetlana), Vyazemsky (Asmodeus), Pushkin (Cricket), Batyushkov (Achilles), etc.

Beseda broke up after Derzhavin's death in 1816; Arzamas, having lost its main opponent, ceased to exist by 1818.

Thus, by the mid-1790s, Karamzin became the recognized head of Russian sentimentalism, which opened not just a new page in Russian literature, but Russian fiction in general. Russian readers, who had previously absorbed only French novels and the works of enlighteners, enthusiastically accepted Letters from a Russian Traveler and Poor Liza, and Russian writers and poets (both “conversators” and “Arzamas”) realized that it was possible and must write in their native language.

Karamzin and Alexander I: a symphony with power?

In 1802 - 1803 Karamzin published the journal Vestnik Evropy, which was dominated by literature and politics. Largely due to the confrontation with Shishkov, in critical articles Karamzin has a new aesthetic program formation of Russian literature as a national identity. Karamzin, unlike Shishkov, saw the key to the identity of Russian culture not so much in adherence to ritual antiquity and religiosity, but in the events of Russian history. The most striking illustration of his views was the story "Marfa Posadnitsa or the Conquest of Novgorod".

In his political articles of 1802-1803, Karamzin, as a rule, made recommendations to the government, the main of which was the enlightenment of the nation in the name of the prosperity of the autocratic state.

These ideas were generally close to Emperor Alexander I, the grandson of Catherine the Great, who at one time also dreamed of an “enlightened monarchy” and a complete symphony between the authorities and a European-educated society. Karamzin's response to the coup on March 11, 1801 and the accession to the throne of Alexander I was the "Historical eulogy to Catherine II" (1802), where Karamzin expressed his views on the essence of the monarchy in Russia, as well as the duties of the monarch and his subjects. "Eulogy" was approved by the sovereign, as a collection of examples for the young monarch, and favorably received by him. Alexander I was obviously interested in the historical research of Karamzin, and the emperor rightly decided that great country you just need to remember your no less great past. And if you don’t remember, then at least create anew ...

In 1803, through the tsar’s educator M.N. Muravyov, a poet, historian, teacher, one of the most educated people of that time, N.M. Karamzin received the official title of court historiographer with a pension of 2,000 rubles. (A pension of 2,000 rubles a year was then assigned to officials who, according to the Table of Ranks, had a rank not lower than that of a general). Later, I. V. Kireevsky, referring to Karamzin himself, wrote about Muravyov: “Who knows, maybe without his thoughtful and warm assistance, Karamzin would not have had the means to accomplish his great deed.”

In 1804, Karamzin practically departed from literary and publishing and proceeds to create the "History of the Russian State", on which he worked until the end of his days. Through his influence M.N. Muravyov made available to the historian many of the previously unknown and even "secret" materials, opened libraries and archives for him. Modern historians can only dream of such favorable conditions for work. Therefore, in our opinion, to speak of the "History of the Russian State" as a "scientific feat" N.M. Karamzin, not entirely fair. The court historiographer was in the service, conscientiously doing the work for which he was paid money. Accordingly, he had to write a history that was in this moment needed by the customer, namely, Tsar Alexander I, who at the first stage of his reign showed sympathy for European liberalism.

However, under the influence of studies in Russian history, by 1810 Karamzin became a consistent conservative. During this period, the system of his political views finally took shape. Karamzin's statements that he is a "republican at heart" can only be adequately interpreted if one considers that we are talking about the "Platonic Republic of the Sages", an ideal social order based on state virtue, strict regulation and the denial of personal freedom. . At the beginning of 1810, Karamzin, through his relative Count F.V. Rostopchin, met in Moscow with the leader of the "conservative party" at court - Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna (sister of Alexander I) and began to constantly visit her residence in Tver. The salon of the Grand Duchess represented the center of conservative opposition to the liberal-Western course, personified by the figure of M. M. Speransky. In this salon, Karamzin read excerpts from his "History ...", at the same time he met Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna, who became one of his patronesses.

In 1811, at the request of Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, Karamzin wrote a note "On ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations", in which he outlined his ideas about the ideal structure Russian state and sharply criticized the policy of Alexander I and his immediate predecessors: Paul I, Catherine II and Peter I. In the 19th century, the note was never published in full and diverged only in handwritten lists. In Soviet times, the thoughts expressed by Karamzin in his message were perceived as a reaction of the extremely conservative nobility to the reforms of M. M. Speransky. The author himself was branded a "reactionary", an opponent of the liberation of the peasantry and other liberal steps taken by the government of Alexander I.

However, during the first full publication of the note in 1988, Yu. M. Lotman revealed its deeper content. In this document, Karamzin made a reasonable criticism of unprepared bureaucratic reforms carried out from above. While praising Alexander I, the author of the note at the same time attacks his advisers, referring, of course, to Speransky, who stood for constitutional reforms. Karamzin takes the liberty of proving to the tsar in detail, with reference to historical examples, that Russia is not ready either historically or politically to abolish serfdom and limit the autocratic monarchy by the constitution (following the example of the European powers). Some of his arguments (for example, about the uselessness of freeing peasants without land, the impossibility of constitutional democracy in Russia) look quite convincing and historically correct even today.

Along with an overview of Russian history and criticism of the political course of Emperor Alexander I, the note contained an integral, original and very complex theoretical concept of autocracy as a special, distinctively Russian type of power closely associated with Orthodoxy.

At the same time, Karamzin refused to identify "true autocracy" with despotism, tyranny or arbitrariness. He believed that such deviations from the norms were due to chance (Ivan IV the Terrible, Paul I) and were quickly eliminated by the inertia of the tradition of "wise" and "virtuous" monarchical rule. In cases of a sharp weakening and even complete absence of the supreme state and church authority (for example, during the Time of Troubles), this powerful tradition led to the restoration of autocracy within a short historical period. Autocracy was the "palladium of Russia", the main reason for its power and prosperity. Therefore, the basic principles of monarchical government in Russia, according to Karamzin, should have been preserved in the future. They should have been supplemented only by a proper policy in the field of legislation and education, which would lead not to undermining the autocracy, but to its maximum strengthening. With such an understanding of autocracy, any attempt to limit it would be a crime against Russian history and the Russian people.

Initially, Karamzin's note only irritated the young emperor, who did not like criticism of his actions. In this note, the historiographer proved himself plus royaliste que le roi (greater royalist than the king himself). However, subsequently the brilliant "anthem to the Russian autocracy" as presented by Karamzin undoubtedly had its effect. After the war of 1812, the winner of Napoleon, Alexander I, curtailed many of his liberal projects: Speransky's reforms were not completed, the constitution and the very idea of ​​\u200b\u200blimiting autocracy remained only in the minds of future Decembrists. And already in the 1830s, Karamzin's concept actually formed the basis of the ideology of the Russian Empire, designated by the "theory of official nationality" of Count S. Uvarov (Orthodoxy-Autocracy-Nationhood).

Before the publication of the first 8 volumes of "History ..." Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver to the Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna and to Nizhny Novgorod, while Moscow was occupied by the French. He usually spent his summers at Ostafyev, the estate of Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky, on illegitimate daughter whom, Ekaterina Andreevna, Karamzin married in 1804. (The first wife of Karamzin, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died in 1802).

In the last 10 years of his life, which Karamzin spent in St. Petersburg, he became very close to the royal family. Although Emperor Alexander I treated Karamzin with restraint from the time the Note was submitted, Karamzin often spent his summers in Tsarskoye Selo. At the request of the empresses (Maria Feodorovna and Elizaveta Alekseevna), he more than once conducted frank political conversations with Emperor Alexander, in which he acted as a spokesman for the opponents of drastic liberal reforms. In 1819-1825, Karamzin passionately rebelled against the intentions of the sovereign regarding Poland (submitted a note "Opinion of a Russian citizen"), condemned the increase in state taxes in peacetime, spoke of the ridiculous provincial system of finance, criticized the system of military settlements, the activities of the Ministry of Education, pointed to the strange choice by the sovereign of some of the most important dignitaries (for example, Arakcheev), spoke of the need to reduce internal troops, about the imaginary correction of roads, so painful for the people, and constantly pointed out the need to have firm laws, civil and state.

Of course, having such intercessors as both empresses and Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna behind her, one could criticize, and argue, and show civil courage, and try to set the monarch "on the right path." It was not for nothing that Emperor Alexander I and his contemporaries and subsequent historians of his reign called the “mysterious sphinx”. In words, the sovereign agreed with Karamzin's critical remarks regarding military settlements, recognized the need to "give the fundamental laws of Russia", as well as to revise some aspects of domestic policy, but it just so happened in our country that in reality - all wise advice government people remain "fruitless for the dear Fatherland" ...

Karamzin as a historian

Karamzin is our first historian and last chronicler.
By his criticism he belongs to history,
innocence and apothegms - the chronicle.

A.S. Pushkin

Even from the point of view of modern Karamzin historical science, to call 12 volumes of his "History of the Russian State", in fact, no one dared to call scientific work. Even then, it was clear to everyone that the honorary title of court historiographer cannot make a writer a historian, give him the appropriate knowledge and proper training.

But, on the other hand, Karamzin did not initially set himself the task of taking on the role of a researcher. The newly minted historiographer was not going to write a scientific treatise and appropriate the laurels of his illustrious predecessors - Schlozer, Miller, Tatishchev, Shcherbatov, Boltin, etc.

Preliminary critical work on sources for Karamzin is only "a heavy tribute brought by reliability." He was, first of all, a writer, and therefore he wanted to apply his literary talent to ready-made material: “select, animate, colorize” and, in this way, make Russian history “something attractive, strong, worthy of attention not only Russians, but also foreigners." And this task he performed brilliantly.

Today it is impossible to disagree with the fact that early XIX century source study, paleography and other auxiliary historical disciplines were in their infancy. Therefore, to demand professional criticism from the writer Karamzin, as well as strict adherence to one or another method of working with historical sources, is simply ridiculous.

One can often hear the opinion that Karamzin simply beautifully rewrote Prince M.M. family circle. This is wrong.

Naturally, when writing his "History ..." Karamzin actively used the experience and works of his predecessors - Schlozer and Shcherbatov. Shcherbatov helped Karamzin navigate the sources of Russian history, significantly influencing both the choice of material and its arrangement in the text. Coincidentally or not, Karamzin brought The History of the Russian State to exactly the same place as Shcherbatov's History. However, in addition to following the scheme already developed by his predecessors, Karamzin cites in his essay a lot of references to the most extensive foreign historiography, almost unfamiliar to the Russian reader. While working on his "History ...", for the first time he introduced into scientific circulation a mass of unknown and previously unexplored sources. These are Byzantine and Livonian chronicles, information from foreigners about the population of ancient Rus', as well as a large number of Russian chronicles that have not yet been touched by the hand of a historian. For comparison: M.M. Shcherbatov used only 21 Russian chronicles in writing his work, Karamzin actively cites more than 40. In addition to the chronicles, Karamzin attracted monuments of Old Russian law and Old Russian fiction. A special chapter of "History ..." is devoted to "Russian Truth", and a number of pages - to the newly opened "Tale of Igor's Campaign".

Thanks to the diligent help of the directors of the Moscow Archive of the Ministry (Board) of Foreign Affairs N. N. Bantysh-Kamensky and A. F. Malinovsky, Karamzin was able to use those documents and materials that were not available to his predecessors. The Synodal depository, libraries of monasteries (Trinity Lavra, Volokolamsk Monastery and others), as well as private collections of Musin-Pushkin and N.P. Rumyantsev. Karamzin received especially many documents from Chancellor Rumyantsev, who collected historical materials in Russia and abroad through his numerous agents, as well as from AI Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archive.

Many of the sources used by Karamzin perished during the Moscow fire of 1812 and survived only in his "History ..." and extensive "Notes" to its text. Thus, Karamzin's work, to some extent, has itself acquired the status of a historical source, to which professional historians have every right to refer.

Among the main shortcomings of the "History of the Russian State" is traditionally noted the peculiar view of its author on the tasks of the historian. According to Karamzin, "knowledge" and "scholarship" in the historian "do not replace the talent to portray actions." Before the artistic task of history, even the moral one recedes into the background, which was set by Karamzin's patron, M.N. Muravyov. The characteristics of historical characters are given by Karamzin exclusively in a literary and romantic vein, characteristic of the direction of Russian sentimentalism he created. The first Russian princes according to Karamzin are distinguished by their "ardent romantic passion" for conquests, their retinue - nobility and loyal spirit, the "rabble" sometimes shows discontent, raising rebellions, but in the end agrees with the wisdom of noble rulers, etc., etc. P.

Meanwhile, the previous generation of historians, under the influence of Schlözer, had long developed the idea of ​​critical history, and among Karamzin's contemporaries, the requirements for criticizing historical sources, despite the lack of a clear methodology, were generally recognized. And the next generation has already come forward with the demand for philosophical history - with the identification of the laws of development of the state and society, the recognition of the main driving forces and laws of the historical process. Therefore, the overly “literary” creation of Karamzin was immediately subjected to well-founded criticism.

According to the idea, firmly rooted in Russian and foreign historiography of the 17th - 18th centuries, the development of the historical process depends on the development of monarchical power. Karamzin does not deviate one iota from this idea: the monarchical power glorified Russia in the Kievan period; the division of power between the princes was a political mistake, which was corrected by the state wisdom of the Moscow princes - the collectors of Rus'. At the same time, it was the princes who corrected its consequences - the fragmentation of Rus' and the Tatar yoke.

But before reproaching Karamzin for not contributing anything new to the development of Russian historiography, it should be remembered that the author of The History of the Russian State did not at all set himself the task of philosophical understanding of the historical process or blind imitation of the ideas of Western European romantics (F. Guizot , F. Mignet, J. Meshlet), who already then started talking about the "class struggle" and the "spirit of the people" as the main driving force of history. historical criticism Karamzin was not interested at all, and deliberately denied the "philosophical" trend in history. The researcher's conclusions from historical material, as well as his subjective fabrications, seem to Karamzin to be "metaphysics" that is not suitable "for depicting action and character."

Thus, with his peculiar views on the tasks of the historian, Karamzin, by and large, remained outside the dominant currents of Russian and European historiography of the 19th and 20th centuries. Of course, he participated in its consistent development, but only in the form of an object for constant criticism and clearest example how history should not be written.

The reaction of contemporaries

Karamzin's contemporaries - readers and admirers - enthusiastically accepted his new "historical" work. The first eight volumes of The History of the Russian State were printed in 1816-1817 and went on sale in February 1818. Huge for that time, the three-thousandth circulation sold out in 25 days. (And this despite the solid price - 50 rubles). A second edition was immediately required, which was carried out in 1818-1819 by I. V. Slyonin. In 1821 a new, ninth volume was published, and in 1824 the next two. The author did not have time to finish the twelfth volume of his work, which was published in 1829, almost three years after his death.

"History ..." was admired by Karamzin's literary friends and a vast public of non-specialist readers who suddenly discovered, like Count Tolstoy the American, that their Fatherland has a history. According to A.S. Pushkin, “everyone, even secular women, rushed to read the history of their fatherland, hitherto unknown to them. She was a new discovery for them. Ancient Russia seemed to be found by Karamzin, like America by Columbus.

Liberal intellectual circles of the 1820s found Karamzin's "History ..." backward in general views and unnecessarily tendentious:

Specialists-researchers, as already mentioned, treated Karamzin's work exactly as a work, sometimes even belittling its historical significance. It seemed to many that Karamzin's undertaking itself was too risky - to undertake to write such an extensive work in the then state of Russian historical science.

Already during Karamzin's lifetime, critical analyzes of his "History ..." appeared, and soon after the author's death, attempts were made to determine the general significance of this work in historiography. Lelevel pointed to an involuntary distortion of the truth, due to the patriotic, religious and political hobbies of Karamzin. Artsybashev showed the extent to which they harm the writing of "history" literary devices lay historian. Pogodin summed up all the shortcomings of the History, and N.A. Polevoy saw the common cause of these shortcomings in the fact that "Karamzin is a writer not of our time." All his points of view, both in literature and in philosophy, politics and history, became obsolete with the appearance in Russia of new influences of European romanticism. In opposition to Karamzin, Polevoy soon wrote his six-volume History of the Russian People, where he completely surrendered himself to the ideas of Guizot and other Western European romantics. Contemporaries rated this work as an "unworthy parody" of Karamzin, subjecting the author to rather vicious and not always deserved attacks.

In the 1830s, Karamzin's "History ..." becomes the banner of the officially "Russian" direction. With the assistance of the same Pogodin, its scientific rehabilitation is carried out, which is fully consistent with the spirit of Uvarov's "theory of official nationality".

In the second half of the 19th century, on the basis of the "History ...", a mass of popular science articles and other texts were written, which formed the basis of well-known educational and teaching aids. Based on historical plots Karamzin created many works for children and youth, the purpose of which for many years was to educate patriotism, fidelity to civic duty, responsibility younger generation for the fate of their country. This book, in our opinion, played a decisive role in shaping the views of more than one generation of Russian people, having a significant impact on the foundations of the patriotic education of young people in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

December 14th. Final Karamzin.

The death of Emperor Alexander I and the December events of 1925 deeply shocked N.M. Karamzin and negatively affected his health.

On December 14, 1825, having received news of the uprising, the historian goes out into the street: “I saw terrible faces, heard terrible words, five or six stones fell at my feet.”

Karamzin, of course, regarded the performance of the nobility against their sovereign as a rebellion and a grave crime. But there were so many acquaintances among the rebels: the Muravyov brothers, Nikolai Turgenev, Bestuzhev, Ryleev, Kuchelbeker (he translated Karamzin's History into German).

A few days later, Karamzin will say about the Decembrists: "The errors and crimes of these young people are the errors and crimes of our age."

On December 14, during his travels around St. Petersburg, Karamzin caught a bad cold and fell ill with pneumonia. In the eyes of his contemporaries, he was another victim of this day: his idea of ​​the world collapsed, faith in the future was lost, and he ascended the throne new king, very far from perfect image enlightened monarch. Half-ill, Karamzin visited the palace every day, where he talked with Empress Maria Feodorovna, from memories of the late sovereign Alexander, moving on to discussions about the tasks of the future reign.

Karamzin could no longer write. Volume XII of the "History ..." stopped at the interregnum of 1611 - 1612. The last words of the last volume are about a small Russian fortress: "Nutlet did not give up." The last thing that Karamzin really managed to do in the spring of 1826 was, together with Zhukovsky, he persuaded Nicholas I to return Pushkin from exile. A few years later, the emperor tried to pass the baton of the first historiographer of Russia to the poet, but the “sun of Russian poetry” somehow did not fit into the role of the state ideologist and theorist ...

In the spring of 1826 N.M. Karamzin, on the advice of doctors, decided to go to southern France or Italy for treatment. Nicholas I agreed to sponsor his trip and kindly placed a frigate of the imperial fleet at the disposal of the historiographer. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel. He died on May 22 (June 3) 1826 in St. Petersburg. He was buried at the Tikhvin cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

"History of Russian Goverment"
is not only the creation of a great writer,
but also the feat of an honest man.
A. S. Pushkin

Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich (1766 1826), writer, historian.

He was born on December 1 (12 n.s.) in the village of Mikhailovka, Simbirsk province, in the family of a landowner. He received a good education at home.

At the age of 14, he began to study at the Moscow private boarding school of Professor Shaden. After graduating in 1783, he came to the Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he met the young poet and future employee of his "Moscow Journal" Dmitriev. Then he published his first translation of S. Gesner's idyll "Wooden Leg". After retiring with the rank of second lieutenant in 1784, he moved to Moscow, became one of the active participants in the magazine Children's Reading for the Heart and Mind, published by N. Novikov, and became close to the Masons. Engaged in translations of religious and moral writings. From 1787 he regularly published his translations of Thomson's The Seasons, Janlis's Village Evenings, W. Shakespeare's tragedy Julius Caesar, and Lessing's tragedy Emilia Galotti.

In 1789, Karamzin's first original story, Evgeny and Yulia, appeared in the magazine "Children's Reading ...". In the spring, he went on a trip to Europe: he visited Germany, Switzerland, France, where he observed the activities of the revolutionary government. In June 1790 he moved from France to England.

In the autumn he returned to Moscow and soon undertook the publication of the monthly "Moscow Journal", in which most of the "Letters of a Russian Traveler" were printed, the stories "Liodor", "Poor Liza", "Natalia, the Boyar's Daughter", "Flor Silin", essays, short stories, critical articles and poems. Karamzin attracted Dmitriev and Petrov, Kheraskov and Derzhavin, Lvov Neledinsky-Meletsky and others to cooperate in the journal. Karamzin's articles asserted a new literary trend - sentimentalism. In the 1790s, Karamzin published the first Russian almanacs, Aglaya (parts 1 2, 1794 95) and Aonides (parts 1 3, 1796 99). The year 1793 came, when the Jacobin dictatorship was established at the third stage of the French Revolution, shocking Karamzin with its cruelty. The dictatorship aroused in him doubts about the possibility for mankind to achieve prosperity. He condemned the revolution. The philosophy of despair and fatalism permeates his new works: the stories "Bornholm Island" (1793); "Sierra Morena" (1795); poems "Melancholy", "Message to A. A. Pleshcheev", etc.

By the mid-1790s, Karamzin had become the recognized head of Russian sentimentalism, opening a new page in Russian literature. He was an indisputable authority for Zhukovsky, Batyushkov, the young Pushkin.

In 1802 1803 Karamzin published the journal Vestnik Evropy, which was dominated by literature and politics. In the critical articles of Karamzin, a new aesthetic program emerged, which contributed to the formation of Russian literature as a nationally original one. Karamzin saw the key to the identity of Russian culture in history. The most striking illustration of his views was the story "Marfa Posadnitsa". In his political articles, Karamzin made recommendations to the government, pointing out the role of education.

Trying to influence Tsar Alexander I, Karamzin gave him his Note on Ancient and New Russia (1811), irritating him. In 1819 he filed a new note, "The Opinion of a Russian Citizen", which caused even greater displeasure of the tsar. However, Karamzin did not abandon his faith in the salvation of the enlightened autocracy and later condemned the Decembrist uprising. However, Karamzin the artist was still highly appreciated by young writers who did not even share his political convictions.

In 1803, through M. Muravyov, Karamzin received the official title of court historiographer.

In 1804, he began to create the "History of the Russian State", on which he worked until the end of his days, but did not complete it. In 1818 the first eight volumes of History, Karamzin's greatest scientific and cultural achievement, were published. In 1821 the ninth volume, devoted to the reign of Ivan the Terrible, was published, in 1824 the 10th and 11th, about Fyodor Ioannovich and Boris Godunov. Death interrupted work on the 12th volume. It happened on May 22 (June 3, NS) 1826 in St. Petersburg.

It turns out that I have a Fatherland!

The first eight volumes of The History of the Russian State came out all at once in 1818. They say that, closing the eighth and last volume, Fyodor Tolstoy, nicknamed the American, exclaimed: "It turns out that I have a Fatherland!" And he was not alone. Thousands of people thought, and most importantly, felt this very thing. Everyone read the "History" - students, officials, nobles, even secular ladies. They read it in Moscow and St. Petersburg, they read it in the provinces: distant Irkutsk alone bought 400 copies. After all, it is so important for everyone to know that he has it, the Fatherland. This confidence was given to the people of Russia by Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin.

Need a story

In those days, at the beginning of the 19th century, ancient, age-old Russia suddenly turned out to be young, a beginner. Here she entered the big world. Everything was born anew: the army and navy, factories and manufactories, science and literature. And it might seem that the country has no history was there anything before Peter, except dark ages backwardness and barbarism? Do we have history? "Yes," answered Karamzin.

Who is he?

We know very little about Karamzin's childhood and youth - neither diaries, nor letters from relatives, nor youthful writings have been preserved. We know that Nikolai Mikhailovich was born on December 1, 1766, not far from Simbirsk. At that time it was an incredible backwoods, a real bearish corner. When the boy was 11 or 12 years old, his father, a retired captain, took his son to Moscow, to a boarding school at the university gymnasium. Here Karamzin stayed for some time, and then entered the active military service at the age of 15! The teachers prophesied for him not only the Moscow Leipzig University, but somehow it did not work out.

Karamzin's exceptional education is his personal merit.

Writer

Military service did not go I wanted to write: compose, translate. And now, at the age of 17, Nikolai Mikhailovich is already a retired lieutenant. A whole life ahead. What to dedicate it to? Literature, exclusively literature decides Karamzin.

And what was it like, Russian literature of the 18th century? Also young, a beginner. Karamzin writes to a friend: "I am deprived of the pleasure of reading a lot in my native language. We are still poor writers. We have several poets who deserve to be read." Of course, there are already writers, and not just a few, but Lomonosov, Fonvizin, Derzhavin, but there are no more than a dozen significant names. Are there too few talents? No, they do exist, but it's up to the language: the Russian language has not adapted yet to convey new thoughts, new feelings, to describe new objects.

Karamzin focuses on the live conversational speech of educated people. He writes not scholarly treatises, but travel notes ("Notes of a Russian Traveler"), stories ("Bornholm Island", "Poor Liza"), poems, articles, and translates from French and German.

Journalist

Finally, he decides to publish a magazine. It was called simply: "Moscow Journal". The well-known playwright and writer Ya. B. Knyazhnin picked up the first issue and exclaimed: "We did not have such prose!"

The success of the "Moscow Journal" was grandiose as many as 300 subscribers. At the time, a very large number. That's how small is not only writing, reading Russia!

Karamzin works incredibly hard. Collaborates in the first Russian children's magazine. It was called "Children's Reading for the Heart and Mind". Only FOR this magazine Karamzin wrote two dozen pages every week.

Karamzin for his time is the number one writer.

Historian

And suddenly Karamzin takes on a gigantic task of compiling his native Russian history. On October 31, 1803, Tsar Alexander I issued a decree appointing N. M. Karamzin as a historiographer with a salary of 2,000 rubles a year. Now for the rest of his life historian. But, apparently, it was necessary.

Chronicles, decrees, lawsuits

Now write. But for this you need to collect material. The search began. Karamzin literally combs through all the archives and book collections Synod, the Hermitage, the Academy of Sciences, public library, Moscow University, Alexander Nevsky and Trinity-Sergius Lavra. At his request, they search in monasteries, in the archives of Oxford, Paris, Venice, Prague and Copenhagen. And how much was found!

Ostromir Gospel of 1056 1057 (this is still the oldest of the dated Russian books), Ipatiev, Trinity Chronicles. Sudebnik of Ivan the Terrible, a work of ancient Russian literature "The Prayer of Daniel the Sharpener" and much more.

They say, having discovered a new chronicle Volynskaya, Karamzin did not sleep for several nights for joy. Friends laughed that he had become simply unbearable only talk about history.

What will she be?

Materials are being collected, but how to take up the text, how to write a book that even the simplest person will read, but from which even an academician will not wince? How to make it interesting, artistic, and at the same time scientific? And here are the volumes. Each is divided into two parts: in the first detailed, written great master, the story is for the common reader; in the second detailed notes, references to sources this is for historians.

This is true patriotism

Karamzin writes to his brother: "History is not a novel: a lie can always be beautiful, and only some minds like the truth in its attire." So what to write about? To set out in detail the glorious pages of the past, and only turn over the dark pages? Perhaps this is exactly what a patriotic historian should do? No, Karamzin decides, patriotism is only not due to the distortion of history. He doesn't add anything, he doesn't invent anything, he doesn't exalt victories or downplay defeats.

Drafts of the 7th volume were accidentally preserved: we see how Karamzin worked on every phrase of his "History". Here he writes about Vasily III: "In relations with Lithuania, Vasily ... always ready for peacefulness ..." It's not that, it's not true. The historian crosses out what was written and concludes: "In relations with Lithuania, Vasily expressed peacefulness in words, trying to harm her secretly or openly." Such is the impartiality of the historian, such is true patriotism. Love for one's own, but not hatred for someone else's.

Ancient Russia seemed to be found by Karamzin, like America by Columbus

The ancient history of Russia is being written, and modern history is being made around it: the Napoleonic wars, the battle of Austerlitz, the Treaty of Tilsit, Patriotic War 12th year, the fire of Moscow. In 1815, Russian troops enter Paris. In 1818 the first 8 volumes of The History of the Russian State were published. Circulation is a terrible thing! 3 thousand copies. And they all sold out in 25 days. Unheard of! But the price is considerable: 50 rubles.

The last volume stopped in the middle of the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible.

Some said Jacobin!

Even earlier, the trustee of Moscow University, Golenishchev-Kutuzov, submitted to the Minister of Public Education, to put it mildly, a document in which he argued in detail that "Karamzin's writings are filled with free-thinking and Jacobin poison." "It's not the order that he should be given, it's time to lock him up."

Why so? First of all, for independence of judgment. Not everyone likes it.

There is an opinion that Nikolai Mikhailovich never in his life lied.

Monarchist! exclaimed others, young people, future Decembrists.

Yes, the main character of Karamzin's "History" is the Russian autocracy. The author condemns bad sovereigns, sets good ones as an example. And he sees prosperity for Russia in an enlightened, wise monarch. That is, a "good king" is needed. Karamzin does not believe in revolution, especially in an ambulance. So, we really have a monarchist.

And at the same time, the Decembrist Nikolai Turgenev will later recall how Karamzin "shed tears" upon learning of the death of Robespierre, the hero of the French Revolution. And here is what Nikolai Mikhailovich himself writes to a friend: "I do not demand either a constitution or representatives, but by feeling I will remain a republican, and, moreover, a loyal subject of the Russian tsar: this is a contradiction, but only an imaginary one."

Why is he not with the Decembrists then? Karamzin believed that Russia's time had not yet come, the people were not ripe for a republic.

good king

The ninth volume has not yet been published, and rumors have already spread that it is banned. It began like this: "We proceed to describe the terrible change in the soul of the king and in the fate of the kingdom." So, the story about Ivan the Terrible continues.

Earlier historians did not dare to openly describe this reign. Not surprising. For example, the conquest of free Novgorod by Moscow. True, Karamzin the historian reminds us that the unification of the Russian lands was necessary, but Karamzin the artist gives a vivid picture of exactly how the conquest of the free northern city took place:

“Ioann and his son judged in this way: every day they presented to them from five hundred to a thousand Novgorodians; they beat them, tortured them, burned them with some kind of fiery composition, tied their heads or feet to a sleigh, dragged them to the banks of the Volkhov, where this river does not freeze in winter, and whole families were thrown from the bridge into the water, wives with husbands, mothers with babies. Moscow warriors rode in boats along the Volkhov with stakes, hooks and axes: whoever of those plunged into the water surfaced, that one was stabbed, cut into pieces. These murders lasted five weeks and were committed by general robbery."

And so on almost every page executions, murders, burning of prisoners at the news of the death of the tsar's favorite villain Malyuta Skuratov, an order to destroy an elephant that refused to kneel before the tsar ... and so on.

Remember, this is written by a person who is convinced that autocracy is necessary in Russia.

Yes, Karamzin was a monarchist, but at the trial the Decembrists referred to the "History of the Russian State" as one of the sources of "harmful" thoughts.

December 14

He did not want his book to become a source of harmful thoughts. He wanted to tell the truth. It just so happened that the truth he wrote turned out to be "harmful" for the autocracy.

And here is December 14, 1825. Having received news of the uprising (for Karamzin, this, of course, is a rebellion), the historian goes out into the street. He was in Paris in 1790, was in Moscow in 1812, in 1825 he was walking towards the Senate Square. "I saw terrible faces, heard terrible words, five or six stones fell at my feet."

Karamzin, of course, is against the uprising. But how many among the rebels are the Muravyov brothers, Nikolai Turgenev Bestuzhev, Kuchelbeker (he translated "History" into German).

A few days later Karamzin would say this about the Decembrists: "The errors and crimes of these young people are the errors and crimes of our age."

After the uprising, Karamzin fell mortally ill - he caught a cold on December 14th. In the eyes of his contemporaries, he was another victim of that day. But he dies not only from a cold - the idea of ​​​​the world collapsed, faith in the future was lost, and a new king ascended the throne, very far from the ideal image of an enlightened monarch.

Karamzin could no longer write. The last thing he managed to do was, together with Zhukovsky, persuaded the tsar to return Pushkin from exile.

And Volume XII stopped at the interregnum of 1611-1612. And so last words the last volume about a small Russian fortress: "Nutlet did not give up."

Now

More than a century and a half has passed since then. Today's historians know much more about ancient Russia than Karamzin, how much has been found: documents, archaeological finds, birch bark, finally. But Karamzin's book history-chronicle is the only one of its kind and will never be the same again.

Why do we need it now? Bestuzhev-Ryumin said this well in his time: "A high moral sense makes this book so far the most convenient for cultivating love for Russia and for the good."