05/22/1826 (06/04). - Writer, historian Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin, author of the 12-volume “History of the Russian State” has died
Karamzin: from Freemasonry to monarchism
Towards knowledge of Russia “from the opposite” – 8
A. Venetsianov. Portrait of Karamzin. 1828
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin (12/1/1766–22/5/1826) was born in the Simbirsk province into the family of a poor landowner (from the old Crimean Tatar family of Kara-Murza). Having been educated in private boarding schools, Karamzin studied at, and served for some time in the Preobrazhensky Regiment. After the death of his father, he retired in 1784 and became close to Novikov’s “religious and educational” group, under the influence of which his views and literary tastes were formed. He studied the literature of the French "enlightenment", German philosophers and romantic poets, and was engaged in translations of religious and moral works (he spoke many ancient and modern languages).
By 1788, Karamzin sensed a danger in Freemasonry, masked by vague religious piety, and broke off relations with the lodge. In the spring of 1789, he went on a long trip abroad, where he stayed until the fall of 1790, visited Austria, Switzerland, France, England, met with I. Kant, I. Goethe, and in Paris witnessed the events of the French Revolution. As a result of personal acquaintance with the West, he became more critical of its “advanced” ideas. “The age of enlightenment! I don’t recognize you - in blood and flame I don’t recognize you - among murders and destruction I don’t recognize you!” Karamzin wrote at that time (“Melodorus to Philalethes”). Karamzin outlined his impressions from a trip to Western European countries in “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (published in the “Moscow Journal”, which he founded, 1791–1792), which brought him all-Russian fame.
When the French Revolution developed into a bloody Jacobin dictatorship, this aroused doubts in Karamzin about the possibility for humanity to achieve earthly prosperity at all. But the conclusion from this was not yet Orthodox. The philosophy of despair and fatalism permeates his new works: the story “The Island of Bornholm” (1793); "Sierra Morena" (1795); poems “Melancholy”, “Message to A.A. Pleshcheev”, etc.
At this time, Karamzin published the first Russian almanacs - "Aglaya" (parts 1-2, 1794–1795) and "Aonids" (parts 1-3, 1796–1799), "Pantheon of Foreign Literature" (1798), the magazine " Children's reading for the heart and mind" (1799). As a writer, Karamzin creates a new direction in Russian literature - sentimentalism ("Poor Liza"), which was highly appreciated by K. Batyushkov, young. At the same time, Karamzin introduces a new form of the Russian language into literary circulation, freeing it from the Western pretentious imitation of the Peter the Great era, bringing it closer to living, colloquial speech.
In 1791 Karamzin wrote: “In our so-called good society, without the French language you will be deaf and dumb. Isn't it a shame? How can you not have people's pride? Why be parrots and monkeys together? And his story “Natalya, the Boyar’s Daughter” (1792) began with the words: “Who among us does not love those times when Russians were Russians, when they dressed up in their own clothes, walked with their own gait, lived according to their custom, spoke in their own language and in their own way.” to your heart..?"
It is indicative of Karamzin’s way of thinking during this period that he became close to the conservative poet. In 1802, he published the “Historical Word of Praise,” which was an order to the new Sovereign, in which he expressed the program and significance of the Autocracy. During this period, Karamzin began to publish the journal “Bulletin of Europe,” from the pages of which he acted as a political writer, publicist, commentator and international observer who defended Russian national interests “The patriot hastens to appropriate to the fatherland what is beneficial and necessary, but rejects slavish imitation in trinkets... It is good and should be studied: but woe... to the people who will be an everlasting student,” wrote. Karamzin on borrowings from the West.
In 1803, through M. Muravyov, Karamzin received the official title of court historiographer. From 1803 to 1811 he writes “The History of the Russian State” (before 1611, the 12th volume was published posthumously), for the first time using sources kept in secret. Each volume had extensive documentary appendices, not inferior in volume to the main text. Karamzin, as a researcher, meticulously strove to comprehend events through the eyes of a contemporary, guided by finding out the truth of history, no matter how bitter it may be. This is what made his “History” very popular. Pushkin wrote: “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 Colomb. They didn’t talk about anything else for a while.” (But unfortunately, residual Westernism was reflected in this work: in particular, in recognition.)
It should be noted, however, that the red thread in Karamzin’s “History” is the idea: the fate of Russia and its greatness lie in the development of the Autocracy. Under strong monarchical power, Russia prospered; under weak monarchy, it fell into decline. Thus, under the influence of his studies in Russian history, Karamzin becomes a convinced, ideological monarchist-statist. Although we must admit that we do not find the proper coordinates of the Orthodox meaning of history during this period even among such outstanding representatives of Russian patriotic thought. History seemed to Karamzin as a continuous movement towards progress, a struggle of enlightenment against ignorance; and this struggle is directed by the activities of great people.
Through his relative F.V. Rostopchina Karamzin meets the leader of the then “Russian party” at the Court - Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, and then the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna, who has since become one of his patrons. On the initiative of Ekaterina Pavlovna Karamzin wrote and submitted to Alexander I in March 1811 the treatise “On Ancient and New Russia in its Political and Civil Relations” - a remarkable document of the reviving Russian conservative thought, containing a complete and original concept of Autocracy as a typically Russian principle of power, closely associated with the Orthodox Church. Autocracy is the main reason for the power and prosperity of Russia - this was the conclusion of the Note.
In the last years of his life, Karamzin lived in St. Petersburg, communicating with such prominent conservative figures as V.A. Zhukovsky, etc. In 1818, for the “History” he compiled, Karamzin was accepted as a member of the Russian Imperial Academy. The significance of his work was accurately expressed: “Karamzin’s creation is our only book, truly state, folk and monarchical.”
Karamzin condemned, which demonstrated to him firsthand the danger of Freemasonry, which he so happily avoided in his youth. He went to Senate Square on the side of the defenders of the legal monarchy and then wrote
(December 1, 1766, family estate Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district, Kazan province (according to other sources - the village of Mikhailovka (Preobrazhenskoye), Buzuluk district, Kazan province) - May 22, 1826, St. Petersburg)
Biography
Childhood, teaching, environment
Born into the family of a middle-income landowner in the Simbirsk province, M. E. Karamzin. Lost my mother early. From the early childhood started reading books from his mother's library, French novels, “Roman History” by C. Rollin, works by F. Emin, etc. Having received his initial education at home, he studied at a noble boarding school in Simbirsk, then at one of the best private boarding schools of Moscow University professor I. M. Schaden, where in 1779-1880 studied languages; He also attended lectures at Moscow University.
In 1781 he began serving in the Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he became friends with A.I. and I.I. Dmitrievs. This is a time not only for intense intellectual pursuits, but also for the pleasures of social life. After the death of his father, Karamzin retired as a lieutenant in 1784 and never served again, which was perceived in the society of that time as a challenge. After a short stay in Simbirsk, where he joined the Masonic lodge, Karamzin moved to Moscow and was introduced into the circle of N.I. Novikov, settled in a house that belonged to the Novikov Friendly Scientific Society (1785).
1785-1789 - years of communication with Novikov, at the same time he also became close to the Pleshcheev family, and for many years he had a tender platonic friendship with N.I. Pleshcheeva. Karamzin publishes his first translations and original works, in which his interest in European and Russian history is clearly visible. Karamzin is 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. Karamzin will retain a feeling of gratitude and deep respect for Novikov for the rest of his life, speaking in his defense in subsequent years.
European travel, literary and publishing activities
Karamzin was not inclined towards the mystical side of Freemasonry, remaining a supporter of its active and educational direction. Perhaps the cooling towards Freemasonry was one of the reasons for Karamzin’s departure to Europe, where he spent more than a year (1789-90), visiting Germany, Switzerland, France and England, where he met and talked (except for influential Freemasons) with European “masters of minds” ": I. Kant, I. G. Herder, C. Bonnet, I. K. Lavater, J. F. Marmontel and others, visited museums, theaters, and social salons. In Paris, he listened to O. G. Mirabeau, M. Robespierre and others at the National Assembly, saw many outstanding political figures and was familiar with many. Apparently, revolutionary Paris showed Karamzin how powerfully a word can influence a person: in print, when Parisians read pamphlets and leaflets, newspapers with keen interest; oral, when revolutionary speakers spoke and controversy arose (an experience that could not be acquired in Russia).
Karamzin did not have a very enthusiastic opinion about English parliamentarism (perhaps following in the footsteps of Rousseau), but he very highly valued the level of civilization at which English society as a whole was located.
"Moscow Journal" and "Bulletin of Europe"
Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began publishing the Moscow Journal, in which he published the story “Poor Liza” (1792), which had extraordinary success with readers, then “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-92), which placed Karamzin among the first Russian writers. These works, as well as literary critical articles, expressed the aesthetic program of sentimentalism with its interest in a person, regardless of class, his feelings and experiences. In the 1890s, his interest in Russian history increased; he gets acquainted with historical works, the main published sources: chronicles, notes of foreigners, etc.
Karamzin’s response to the coup of March 11, 1801 and the accession to the throne of Alexander I was perceived as a collection of examples for the young monarch “Historical eulogy to Catherine the Second” (1802), where Karamzin expressed his views on the essence of the monarchy in Russia and the duties of the monarch and his subjects.
Interest in world and domestic history, ancient and new, and the events of today prevails in the publications of Russia’s first socio-political and literary-art magazine “Bulletin of Europe”, published by Karamzin in 1802-03. He also published here several essays on Russian medieval history (“Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod”, “News about Martha the Posadnitsa, taken from the life of St. Zosima”, “Journey around Moscow”, “Historical memories and notes on the way to the Trinity” etc.), testifying to the plan of a large-scale historical work, and the readers of the magazine were offered its individual plots, which made it possible to study the reader’s perception, improve the techniques and methods of research, which would then be used in the “History of the Russian State”.
Historical works
In 1801 Karamzin married E.I. Protasova, who died a year later. Karamzin’s second marriage was to P. A. Vyazemsky’s half-sister, E. A. Kolyvanova (1804), with whom he lived happily until the end of his days, finding in her not only a devoted wife and caring mother, but also a friend and assistant in historical studies .
In October 1803, Karamzin obtained from Alexander I an appointment as a historiographer with a pension of 2,000 rubles. for writing Russian history. Libraries and archives were opened for him. Before last day During his life, Karamzin was busy writing the “History of the Russian State,” which had an impact significant influence on Russian historical science and literature, allowing us to see in it one of the notable cultural-forming phenomena not only of the 19th century, but also of the 20th. Starting from ancient times and the first mentions of the Slavs, Karamzin managed to bring “History” to the Time of Troubles. This amounted to 12 volumes of text of high literary merit, accompanied by more than 6 thousand historical notes, in which historical sources, works of European and domestic authors were published and analyzed.
During Karamzin’s lifetime, “History” managed to be published in two editions. Three thousand copies of the first 8 volumes of the first edition were sold out in less than a month - “the only example in our land,” according to Pushkin. After 1818, Karamzin published volumes 9-11, the last, volume 12, was published after the death of the historiographer. The History was published several times in the 19th century, and more than ten modern editions were published in the late 1980s and 1990s.
Karamzin's view on the development of Russia
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 of the Russian state and sharply criticized the policies of Alexander I and his immediate predecessors: Paul I, Catherine II and Peter I. In the 19th century. This note was never published in full and was circulated in handwritten copies. IN Soviet time it was perceived as a reaction of the extremely conservative nobility to the reforms of M. M. Speransky, however, with the first full publication of the note in 1988, Yu. M. Lotman revealed its deeper content. Karamzin in this document criticized unprepared bureaucratic reforms carried out from above. The note remains in Karamzin's work the most complete expression of his political views.
Karamzin had a hard time with the death of Alexander I and especially with the Decembrist uprising, which he witnessed. It took away the last vitality, and the slowly fading historiographer died in May 1826.
Karamzin is perhaps the only one in history national culture an example of a person about whom his contemporaries and descendants did not have any ambiguous memories. Already during his lifetime, the historiographer was perceived as the highest moral authority; this attitude towards him remains unchanged to this day.
Bibliography
Works by Karamzin
* "The Island of Bornholm" (1793)
* "Julia" (1796)
* “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod”, story (1802)
* "Autumn"
Memory
* Named after the writer:
* Passage Karamzin in Moscow.
* Installed: Monument to N. M. Karamzin in Simbirsk/Ulyanovsk
* In Veliky Novgorod, on the Monument “1000th Anniversary of Russia”, among 129 figures of the most outstanding personalities in Russian history (for 1862), there is the figure of N. M. Karamzin
Biography
Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich, famous writer and historian, was born on December 12, 1766 in Simbirsk. He grew up on the estate of his father, an average Simbirsk nobleman, a descendant of the Tatar Murza Kara-Murza. He studied with a village sexton, and later, at the age of 13, Karamzin was sent to the Moscow boarding school of Professor Schaden. At the same time, he attended classes at the university, where he studied Russian, German, and French.
After graduating from the Schaden boarding school, Karamzin in 1781 entered service in the St. Petersburg Guards Regiment, but soon retired due to lack of funds. The first literary experiments date back to the time of military service (translation of Gessner’s idyll “The Wooden Leg” (1783), etc.). In 1784, he joined the Masonic lodge and moved to Moscow, where he became close to Novikov’s circle and collaborated in its publications. In 1789-1790 traveled throughout Western Europe; then he began to publish the “Moscow Journal” (until 1792), where “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and “Poor Lisa” were published, which brought him fame. The collections published by Karamzin marked the beginning of the era of sentimentalism in Russian literature. Karamzin's early prose influenced the work of V. A. Zhukovsky, K. N. Batyushkov, and the young A. S. Pushkin. The defeat of Freemasonry by Catherine, as well as the brutal police regime of Pavlov’s reign, forced Karamzin to curtail his literary activities and limit himself to reprinting old publications. He greeted the accession of Alexander I with an ode of praise.
In 1803, Karamzin was appointed official historiographer. Alexander I instructs Karamzin to write the history of Russia. From that time until the end of his days, Nikolai Mikhailovich worked on the main work of his life. Since 1804, he began compiling the “History of the Russian State” (1816-1824). The twelfth volume was published after his death. A careful selection of sources (many were discovered by Karamzin himself) and critical notes give special value to this work; rhetorical language and constant moralizing were already condemned by contemporaries, although they were liked by a large public. Karamzin at this time was inclined to extreme conservatism.
A significant place in Karamzin’s heritage is occupied by works devoted to the history and modern state of Moscow. Many of them were the result of walks around Moscow and trips around its environs. Among them are the articles “Historical Memoirs and Notes on the Way to Trinity”, “On the Moscow Earthquake of 1802”, “Notes of an Old Moscow Resident”, “Travel Around Moscow”, “Russian Antiquity”, “On the Light Clothes of Fashionable Beauties of the Nine-Nine century." Died in St. Petersburg on June 3, 1826.
Biography
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born near Simbirsk in the family of retired captain Mikhail Egorovich Karamzin, a middle-class nobleman, a descendant of the Crimean Tatar murza Kara-Murza. He was educated at home, and from the age of fourteen he studied in Moscow at the boarding school of Moscow University professor Schaden, while simultaneously attending lectures at the University. In 1783, at the insistence of his father, he entered service in the St. Petersburg Guards Regiment, but soon retired. The first literary experiments date back to this time.
In Moscow, Karamzin became close to writers and writers: N. I. Novikov, A. M. Kutuzov, A. A. Petrov, participated in the publication of the first Russian magazine for children - “Children’s reading for the heart and mind”, translated German and English sentimental authors: plays by W. Shakespeare and G.E. Lessing and others. For four years (1785-1789) he was a member of the Masonic lodge “Friendly Scientific Society”. In 1789-1790 Karamzin traveled to Western Europe, where he met many prominent representatives of the Enlightenment (Kant, Herder, Wieland, Lavater, etc.), and was in Paris during the great French Revolution. Upon returning to his homeland, Karamzin published “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-1792), which immediately made him a famous writer. Until the end of the 17th century, Karamzin acted as professional writer and journalist, published the “Moscow Journal” 1791-1792 (the first Russian literary magazine), published a number of collections and almanacs: “Aglaya”, “Aonids”, “Pantheon of Foreign Literature”, “My Trinkets”. During this period, he wrote many poems and stories, the most famous of which is “Poor Liza.” Karamzin’s activities made sentimentalism the leading direction of Russian literature, and the writer himself became the destined leader of this direction.
Gradually, Karamzin's interests shifted from the field of literature to the field of history. In 1803, he published the story “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod” and as a result received the title of imperial historiographer. The following year, the writer practically stopped his literary activity, concentrating on creating the fundamental work “History of the Russian State.” Before the publication of the first 8 volumes, Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver to visit Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna and to Nizhny, during the occupation of Moscow by the French. He usually spent the summer in Ostafyevo, 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). The first eight volumes of “The History of the Russian State” went on sale in February 1818, the three-thousandth edition sold out within a month. According to his contemporaries, Karamzin revealed to them the history of his native country, just as Columbus discovered America to the world. A.S. Pushkin called his work not only the creation of a great writer, but also “the feat of an honest man.” Karamzin worked on his main work until the end of his life: the 9th volume of “History...” was published in 1821, 10 and 11 – in 1824, and the last 12th – after the writer’s death (in 1829). Karamzin spent the last 10 years of his life in St. Petersburg and became close to the royal family. Karamzin died in St. Petersburg as a result of complications after suffering from pneumonia. He was buried at the Tikhvin Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Interesting facts from life
Karamzin has the shortest description public life in Russia. When, during his trip to Europe, Russian emigrants asked Karamzin what was happening in his homeland, the writer answered in one word: “They are stealing.”
Some philologists believe that modern Russian literature dates back to Karamzin’s book “Letters of a Russian Traveler.”
Writer's Awards
Honorary member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences (1818), full member of the Imperial Russian Academy (1818). Knight of the Order of St. Anne, 1st degree and St. Vladimir, 3rd degree/
Bibliography
Fiction
* Letters of a Russian traveler (1791–1792)
* Poor Lisa (1792)
* Natalya, boyar's daughter (1792)
* Sierra Morena (1793)
* Bornholm Island (1793)
* Julia (1796)
* My Confession (1802)
* A Knight of Our Time (1803)
Historical and historical-literary works
* Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod (1802)
* Note on ancient and modern Russia in its political and civil relations (1811)
* History of the Russian State (vol. 1–8 - in 1816–1817, vol. 9 - in 1821, vol. 10–11 - in 1824, vol. 12 - in 1829)
Film adaptations of works, theatrical performances
* Poor Liza (USSR, 1978), puppet cartoon, dir. Garanin's idea
* Poor Lisa (USA, 2000) dir. Slava Tsukerman
* History of the Russian State (TV) (Ukraine, 2007) dir. Valery Babich [there is a review of this film on Kinoposk from BookMix user Mikle_Pro]
Biography
Russian historian, writer, publicist, founder of Russian sentimentalism. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born on December 12 (old style - December 1) 1766 in the village of Mikhailovka, Simbirsk province (Orenburg region), in the family of a Simbirsk landowner. Knew German, French, English, Italian. He grew up in his father's village. At the age of 14, Karamzin was brought to Moscow and sent to a private boarding school for Moscow University professor I.M. Schaden, where he studied from 1775 to 1781. At the same time he attended lectures at the university.
In 1781 (some sources indicate 1783), at the insistence of his father, Karamzin was assigned to the Life Guards Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he was enrolled as a minor, but at the beginning of 1784 he retired and went to Simbirsk, where he joined the Masonic lodge of the Golden Crown ". On the advice of I.P. Turgenev, who was one of the founders of the lodge, at the end of 1784 Karamzin moved to Moscow, where he joined the Masonic “Friendly Scientific Society”, of which N.I. was a member. Novikov, who had a great influence on the formation of the views of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. At the same time, he collaborated with Novikov’s magazine “Children’s Reading”. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was a member of the Masonic lodge until 1788 (1789). From May 1789 to September 1790 he traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France, England, visiting Berlin, Leipzig, Geneva, Paris, and London. Returning to Moscow, he began publishing the Moscow Journal, which at that time had a very significant success: already in the first year it had 300 “subscripts”. The magazine, which had no full-time employees and was filled by Karamzin himself, existed until December 1792. After Novikov’s arrest and the publication of the ode “To Mercy,” Karamzin almost came under investigation on suspicion that the Freemasons had sent him abroad. In 1793-1795 he spent most of his time in the village.
In 1802, Karamzin’s first wife, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died. In 1802, he founded Russia's first private literary and political magazine, Vestnik Evropy, for whose editors he subscribed to the 12 best foreign magazines. Karamzin attracted G.R. to collaborate in the magazine. Derzhavin, Kheraskova, Dmitrieva, V.L. Pushkin, brothers A.I. and N.I. Turgenev, A.F. Voeykova, V.A. Zhukovsky. Despite numerous composition authors, Karamzin has to work a lot on his own and, so that his name does not flash before the eyes of readers so often, he invents a lot of pseudonyms. At the same time, he became a popularizer of Benjamin Franklin in Russia. "Bulletin of Europe" existed until 1803.
October 31, 1803, through Comrade Minister of Public Education M.N. Muravyov, by decree of Emperor Alexander I, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was appointed official historiographer with a salary of 2000 rubles to write a complete history of Russia. In 1804 Karamzin married the illegitimate daughter of Prince A.I. Vyazemsky to Ekaterina Andreevna Kolyvanova and from that moment settled in the Moscow house of the Vyazemsky princes, where he lived until 1810. From 1804 he began work on the “History of the Russian State,” the compilation of which became his main occupation until the end of his life. In 1816 the first 8 volumes were published (the second edition was published in 1818-1819), in 1821 the 9th volume was published, in 1824 - 10 and 11. The 12th volume of “History...” was never completed (after Karamzin’s death it was published D.N. Bludov). Thanks to literary form“The History of the Russian State” became popular among readers and admirers of Karamzin as a writer, but even then it was deprived of serious scientific significance. All 3,000 copies of the first edition were sold out in 25 days. For the science of that time, the extensive “Notes” to the text, which contained many extracts from manuscripts, mostly first published by Karamzin, were of much greater importance. Some of these manuscripts no longer exist. Karamzin received almost unlimited access to the archives of government institutions of the Russian Empire: materials were taken from the Moscow archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (at that time a collegium), in the Synodal repository, in the library of monasteries (Trinity Lavra, Volokolamsk Monastery and others), in private collections of Musin-Musin manuscripts. Pushkin, Chancellor Rumyantsev and A.I. Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archives. The Trinity, Laurentian, Ipatiev Chronicles, Dvina Charters, Code of Laws were used. Thanks to the "History of the Russian State" the reading public became aware of "The Tale of Igor's Host", "The Teachings of Monomakh" and many other literary works of ancient Rus'. Despite this, already during the writer’s lifetime, critical works appeared on his “History...”. The historical concept of Karamzin, who was a supporter of the Norman theory of the origin of the Russian state, became official and supported by the state authorities. At a later time, “History...” was assessed positively by A.S. Pushkin, N.V. Gogol, Slavophiles, negative - Decembrists, V.G. Belinsky, N.G. Chernyshevsky. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was the initiator of organizing memorials and erecting monuments to outstanding figures of national history, one of which was the monument to K.M. Minin and D.M. Pozharsky on Red Square in Moscow.
Before the publication of the first eight volumes, Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only in 1810 to Tver to Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, in order through her to convey to the sovereign his note “On Ancient and New Russia,” and to Nizhny, when the French occupied Moscow. Karamzin usually spent his summers in Ostafyevo, the estate of his father-in-law, Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky. In August 1812 Karamzin lived in the house of the commander-in-chief of Moscow, Count F.V. Rostopchin and left Moscow a few hours before the French entered. As a result of the Moscow fire, Karamzin’s personal library, which he had been collecting for a quarter of a century, was destroyed. In June 1813, after the family returned to Moscow, he settled in the house of the publisher S.A. Selivanovsky, and then in the house of the Moscow theatergoer F.F. Kokoshkina. In 1816, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin moved to St. Petersburg, where he spent the last 10 years of his life and became close to the royal family, although Emperor Alexander I, who did not like criticism of his actions, treated the writer with restraint from the time the “Note” was submitted. Following the wishes of Empresses Maria Feodorovna and Elizaveta Alekseevna, Nikolai Mikhailovich spent the summer in Tsarskoe Selo. In 1818 Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was elected an honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. In 1824 Karamzin became a full-time state councilor. The death of Emperor Alexander I shocked Karamzin and undermined his health; Half-sick, he visited the palace every day, talking with Empress Maria Feodorovna. In the first months of 1826, Karamzin suffered from pneumonia and decided, on the advice of doctors, to go to Southern France and Italy in the spring, for which Emperor Nicholas gave him cash and placed a frigate at his disposal. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel and on June 3 (May 22, old style), 1826, he died in St. Petersburg.
Among the works of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin are critical articles, reviews of literary, theatrical, historical topics, letters, stories, odes, poems: “Eugene and Yulia” (1789; story), “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-1795; separate publication - in 1801; letters written during a trip to Germany, Switzerland, France and England, and reflecting the life of Europe on the eve and during the French Revolution), “Liodor” (1791, story), “Poor Liza” (1792; story; published in "Moscow Journal"), "Natalia, the boyar's daughter" (1792; story; published in the "Moscow Journal"), "To Mercy" (ode), "Aglaya" (1794-1795; almanac), "My trifles" (1794 ; 2nd edition - in 1797, 3rd - in 1801; a collection of articles previously published in the Moscow Journal, "Pantheon of Foreign Literature" (1798; an anthology on foreign literature, which for a long time did not pass through the censorship, which prohibited the publication of Demosthenes). , Cicero, Sallust, because they were republicans), “Historical eulogy to Empress Catherine II” (1802), “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novgorod” (1803; published in "Bulletin of Europe; historical story"), "Note on ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations" (1811; criticism of M.M. Speransky's projects of state reforms), "Note on Moscow monuments" (1818; first cultural -historical guide to Moscow and its environs), “A Knight of Our Time” (an autobiographical story published in “Bulletin of Europe”), “My Confession” (a story denouncing the secular education of the aristocracy), “History of the Russian State” (1816-1829: vol. 1-8 - in 1816-1817, vol. 9 - in 1821, vol. 10-11 - in 1824, vol. 12 - in 1829); letters from Karamzin to A.F. Malinovsky" (published in 1860), to I.I. Dmitriev (published in 1866), to N.I. Krivtsov, to Prince P.A. Vyazemsky (1810-1826; published in 1897), to A.I. Turgenev (1806 -1826; published in 1899), correspondence with Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich (published in 1906), “Historical memories and notes on the way to the Trinity” (article), “On the Moscow earthquake of 1802” (article), “Notes of an old Moscow resident” (article), “Travel around Moscow” (article), “Russian antiquity” (article), “On the light clothing of fashionable beauties of the ninth to tenth centuries” (article).
Biography
Coming from a wealthy noble family, the son of a retired army officer.
In 1779-81 he studied at the Moscow boarding school Schaden.
In 1782-83 he served in the Preobrazhensky Guards Regiment.
In 1784/1785 he settled in Moscow, where, as an author and translator, he became closely associated with the Masonic circle of the satirist and publisher N.I. Novikov.
In 1785-89 - member of the Moscow circle of N.I. Novikov. Karamzin's Masonic mentors were I. S. Gamaleya and A. M. Kutuzov. After retiring and returning to Simbirsk, he met the freemason I. P. Turgenev.
In 1789-1790 traveled to Western Europe, where he met many prominent representatives of the Enlightenment (Kant, Herder, Wieland, Lavater, etc.). He was influenced by the ideas of the first two thinkers, as well as Voltaire and Shaftesbury.
Upon returning to his homeland, he published “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-1795) with reflections on the fate of European culture and founded the “Moscow Journal” (1791-1792), a literary and artistic periodical, where he published works by modern Western European and Russian authors. After the accession to the throne in 1801, Emperor Alexander I undertook the publication of the journal "Bulletin of Europe" (1802-1803) (whose motto was "Russia is Europe"), the first of numerous Russian literary and political review magazines, where the tasks of forming national identity were set by assimilating by Russia the civilizational experience of the West and, in particular, the experience of modern European philosophy (from F. Bacon and R. Descartes to I. Kant and J.-J. Rousseau).
Karamzin associated social progress with the successes of education, the development of civilization, and human improvement. During this period, the writer, generally in the position of conservative Westernism, positively assessed the principles of the theory of the social contract and natural law. He was a supporter of freedom of conscience and utopian ideas in the spirit of Plato and T. More, and believed that in the name of harmony and equality, citizens can give up personal freedom. As skepticism towards utopian theories grew, Karamzin became more convinced of the enduring value of individual and intellectual freedom.
The story “Poor Liza” (1792), which affirms the intrinsic value of the human personality as such, regardless of class, brought Karamzin immediate recognition. In the 1790s, he was the head of Russian sentimentalism, as well as the inspirer of the movement for the emancipation of Russian prose, which was stylistically dependent on the Church Slavonic liturgical language. Gradually his interests moved from the field of literature to the field of history. In 1804, he resigned as editor of the magazine, accepted the position of imperial historiographer, and until his death he was occupied almost exclusively with the composition of “History of the Russian State,” the first volume of which appeared in print in 1816. In 1810–1811, Karamzin, on the personal order of Alexander I, compiled a “Note on ancient and new Russia", where from the conservative positions of the Moscow nobility he sharply criticized internal and external Russian politics
. Karamzin died in St. Petersburg on May 22 (June 3), 1826.
K. called for the development of the European philosophical heritage in all its diversity - from R. Descartes to I. Kant and from F. Bacon to C. Helvetius. In social philosophy, he was a fan of J. Locke and J. J. Rousseau. He adhered to the conviction that philosophy, having gotten rid of scholastic dogmatism and speculative metaphysics, is capable of being “the science of nature and man.” A supporter of experimental knowledge (experience is the “gatekeeper of wisdom”), he at the same time believed in the power of reason, in creative potential
human genius. Speaking against philosophical pessimism and agnosticism, he believed that errors of science are possible, but they “are, so to speak, growths alien to it.” In general, he is characterized by religious and philosophical tolerance towards other views: “He is for me a true philosopher who can get along with everyone in peace; who loves those who disagree with his way of thinking.”
Man is a social being (“we are born for society”), capable of communicating with others (“our “I” sees itself only in another “you”), and therefore, of intellectual and moral improvement.
K. assigned a large role in improving human nature to art, which shows a person worthy ways and means of achieving happiness, as well as forms of rational enjoyment of life - through the elevation of the soul ("Something about the sciences, arts and enlightenment").
Observing the events of 1789 in Paris, listening to the speeches of O. Mirabeau at the Convention, talking with J. Condorcet and A. Lavoisier (it is possible that Karamzin visited M. Robespierre), plunging into the atmosphere of the revolution, he welcomed it as a “victory of reason.” However, he later condemned sansculottism and the Jacobin terror as the collapse of the ideas of the Enlightenment.
In the ideas of the Enlightenment, Karamzin saw the final overcoming of the dogmatism and scholasticism of the Middle Ages. Critically assessing the extremes of empiricism and rationalism, he, at the same time, emphasized the educational value of each of these directions and resolutely rejected agnosticism and skepticism.
Upon returning from Europe, K. rethinks his philosophical and historical credo and turns to the problems of historical knowledge and historical methodology. In “Letters of Melodorus and Philalethes” (1795) he discusses the fundamental solutions to two concepts of the philosophy of history - the theory of the historical cycle, coming from G. Vico, and the steady social ascent of humanity (progress) to the highest goal, to humanism, originating from I. G. Herder, who was valued for his interest in the language and history of the Slavs, questions the idea of automatic progress and comes to the conclusion that the hope for the steady progress of mankind is more precarious than it seemed to him before.
History appears to him as “the eternal confusion of truths with errors and virtue with vice”, “the softening of morals, the progress of reason and feeling”, “the spread of the public spirit”, as only a distant prospect of humanity.
Initially, the writer was characterized by historical optimism and belief in the inevitability of social and spiritual progress, but from the late 1790s. Karamzin connects the development of society with the will of Providence. From that time on, he was characterized by philosophical skepticism. The writer is increasingly inclined towards rational providentialism, trying to reconcile it with the recognition of human free will.
From a humanistic perspective, developing the idea of unity historical path Russia and Europe, at the same time, Karamzin gradually became convinced of the existence of a special path of development for each nation, which led him to the idea of substantiating this position using the example of the history of Russia.
At the very beginning XIX century (1804) he begins the work of his whole life - systematic work in Russian. history, collecting materials, examining archives, comparing chronicles.
Karamzin brought it historical narrative until the beginning of the 17th century, while he used many primary sources that had previously been ignored (some have not reached us), and he managed to create an interesting story about the past of Russia.
The methodology of historical research was developed by him in previous works, in particular in “The Discourse of a Philosopher, Historian and Citizen” (1795), as well as in “A Note on Ancient and New Russia” (1810-1811). A reasonable interpretation of history, he believed, is based on respect for sources (in Russian historiography - on a conscientious study, first of all, of chronicles), but does not come down to a simple translation of them.
"The historian is not a chronicler." It must stand on the basis of explaining the actions and psychology of historical subjects pursuing their own and class interests. The historian must strive to understand the internal logic of the events taking place, highlight the most essential and important in the events, describing them, “must rejoice and mourn with his people. He should not, guided by bias, distort the facts, exaggerate or belittle the disaster in his presentation; he should be truthful first of all."
Karamzin's main ideas from "The History of the Russian State" (the book was published in 11 volumes in 1816 -1824, the last - 12 volumes - in 1829 after the author's death) can be called conservative - monarchical. They realized the conservative-monarchist beliefs of Karamzin as a historian, his providentialism and ethical determinism as a thinker, his traditional religious and moral consciousness. Karamzin is focused on national characteristics Russia, first of all, is an autocracy, free from despotic extremes, where the sovereign must be guided by the law of God and conscience.
He saw the historical purpose of the Russian autocracy in maintaining social order and stability. From a paternalistic position, the writer justified serfdom and social inequality in Russia.
Autocracy, according to Karamzin, being an extra-class power, is the “palladium” (guardian) of Russia,” the guarantor of the unity and well-being of the people. The strength of autocratic rule is not in formal law and legality according to the Western model, but in the conscience, in the “heart” of the monarch.
This is paternal rule. The autocracy must unswervingly follow the rules of such a government, the postulates of the government are as follows: “Every news in the state order is an evil, which should be resorted to only when necessary.” “We require more protective wisdom than creative wisdom.” “For the stability of the state’s existence, it is safer to enslave people than to give them freedom at the wrong time.”
True patriotism, K. believed, obliges a citizen to love his fatherland, despite its delusions and imperfections. A cosmopolitan, according to K., is a “metaphysical being.”
Karamzin took an important place in the history of Russian culture thanks to the fortunate circumstances that developed for him, as well as his personal charm and erudition. A true representative of the century of Catherine the Great, he combined Westernism and liberal aspirations with political conservatism. The historical self-awareness of the Russian people owes a lot to Karamzin. Pushkin noted this by saying that "Ancient Russia seemed to have been found by Karamzin, like America by Colomb."
Among the works of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin are critical articles and reviews on literary, theatrical, and historical topics;
Letters, stories, odes, poems:
* "Eugene and Julia" (1789; story),
* "Letters of a Russian Traveler" (1791-1795; separate publication - in 1801;
* letters written during a trip to Germany, Switzerland, France and England, and reflecting the life of Europe on the eve and during the French Revolution),
* "Liodor" (1791, story),
* "Poor Liza" (1792; story; published in the "Moscow Journal"),
* “Natalia, the boyar’s daughter” (1792; story; published in the “Moscow Journal”),
* "To Grace" (ode),
* "Aglaya" (1794-1795; almanac),
* “My trinkets” (1794; 2nd edition - in 1797, 3rd - in 1801; collection of articles previously published in the Moscow Journal),
* “Pantheon of Foreign Literature” (1798; a reader on foreign literature, which for a long time did not pass through the censorship, which prohibited the publication of Demosthenes, Cicero, Sallust, since they were republicans).
Historical and literary works:
* "Historical eulogy to Empress Catherine II" (1802),
* “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novgorod” (1803; published in “Bulletin of Europe; historical story”),
* “Note on ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations” (1811; criticism of M.M. Speransky’s projects for state reforms),
* "Note on Moscow sights" (1818; the first cultural and historical guide to Moscow and its environs),
* “A Knight of Our Time” (autobiographical story published in “Bulletin of Europe”),
* “My Confession” (a story denouncing the secular education of the aristocracy),
* "History of the Russian State" (1816-1829: vol. 1-8 - in 1816-1817, vol. 9 - in 1821, vol. 10-11 - in 1824, vol. 12 - in 1829; the first generalizing work on history Russia).
Letters:
* Letters from Karamzin to A.F. Malinovsky" (published in 1860),
* to I.I. Dmitriev (published in 1866),
* to N.I. Krivtsov,
* to Prince P.A. Vyazemsky (1810-1826; published in 1897),
* to A.I. Turgenev (1806-1826; published in 1899),
* correspondence with Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich (published in 1906).
Articles:
* "Historical memories and remarks on the path to the Trinity" (article),
* “On the Moscow earthquake of 1802” (article),
* "Notes of an old Moscow resident" (article),
* "Travel around Moscow" (article),
* "Russian antiquity" (article),
* “On the light clothing of fashionable beauties of the ninth - tenth centuries” (article).
Sources:
* Ermakova T. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich [Text] / T. Ermakova // Philosophical Encyclopedia: in 5 volumes. T.2.: Disjunction - Comic / Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences; scientific advice: A. P. Aleksandrov [and others]. – M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1962. – P. 456;
* Malinin V. A. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich [Text] / V. A. Malinin // Russian philosophy: dictionary / edited by. ed. M. A. Maslina - M.: Republic, 1995. - P. 217 - 218.
* Khudushina I.F. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich [Text] / I.F. Khudushina // New philosophical encyclopedia: in 4 volumes. T.2.: E - M / Institute of Philosophy of Russia. acad. Sciences, National society - scientific fund; scientific-ed. advice: V. S. Stepin [and others]. – M.: Mysl, 2001. – P.217 – 218;
Bibliography
Essays:
* Essays. T.1-9. – 4th ed. – St. Petersburg, 1834-1835;
* Translations. T.1-9. – 3rd ed. – St. Petersburg, 1835;
* Letters from N. M. Karamzin to I. I. Dmitriev. – St. Petersburg, 1866;
* Something about sciences, arts and education. - Odessa, 1880;.
* Letters from a Russian traveler. - L., 1987;
* Note on ancient and new Russia. - M., 1991.
* History of the Russian State, vol. 1-4. - M, 1993;
Literature:
* Platonov S. F. N. M. Karamzin... - St. Petersburg, 1912;
* Essays on the history of historical science in the USSR. T. 1. - M., 1955. - P. 277 – 87;
* Essays on the history of Russian journalism and criticism. T. 1. Ch. 5. -L., 1950;
* Belinsky V.G. Works of Alexander Pushkin. Art. 2. // Complete works. T. 7. - M., 1955;
* Pogodin M.P. N.M. Karamzin, according to his writings, letters and reviews of contemporaries. Part 1-2. - M., 1866;
* [Gukovsky G.A.] Karamzin // History of Russian literature. T. 5. - M. - L., 1941. - P. 55-105;
* Medical critics of “History of the Russian State” N.M. Karamzin // Literary heritage. T. 59. - M., 1954;
* Lotman Yu. Evolution of Karamzin’s worldview // Scientific Notes of Tartu State University.” – 1957. - Issue. 51. – (Proceedings of the Faculty of History and Philology);
* Mordovchenko N.I. Russian criticism of the first quarter of the 19th century. - M. – L., 1959. – P.17-56;
* Storm G.P. New information about Pushkin and Karamzin // Izvestia of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Dept. literature and language. – 1960. - T. 19. - Issue. 2;
* Predtechensky A.V. Social and political views of N.M. Karamzin in the 1790s // Problems of Russian education in the literature of the 18th century - M.-L., 1961;
* Makogonenko G. Karamzin’s literary position in the 19th century, “Rus. literature", 1962, No. 1, p. 68-106;
* History of philosophy in the USSR. T. 2. - M., 1968. - P. 154-157;
* Kislyagina L.G. Formation of socio-political views of N.M. Karamzin (1785-1803). - M., 1976;
* Lotman Yu. M. Karamzin. - M., 1997.
* Wedel E. Radiśćev und Karamzin // Die Welt der Slaven. – 1959. - H. 1;
* Rothe H. Karamzin-studien // Z. slavische Philologie. – 1960. - Bd 29. - H. 1;
* Wissemann H. Wandlungen des Naturgefühls in der neuren russischen Literatur // ibid. - Bd 28. - H. 2.
Archives:
* RO IRLI, f. 93; RGALI, f. 248; RGIA, f. 951; OR RSL, f. 178; RORNB, f. 336.
Biography (Catholic Encyclopedia. EdwART. 2011, K. Yablokov)
He grew up in the village of his father, a Simbirsk landowner. He received his primary education at home. In 1773-76 he studied in Simbirsk at the Fauvel boarding school, then in 1780-83 - at the boarding school of prof. Moscow University of Schaden in Moscow. During his studies, he also attended lectures at Moscow University. In 1781 he entered service in the Preobrazhensky Regiment. In 1785, after his resignation, he became close to the Masonic circle of N.I. Novikova. During this period, the formation of worldview and literature. K.'s views were greatly influenced by the philosophy of the Enlightenment, as well as the work of English. and German sentimental writers. First lit. K.'s experience is associated with Novikov's magazine Children's reading for the heart and mind, where in 1787-90 he published his numerous works. translations, as well as the story Eugene and Yulia (1789).
In 1789 K. broke with the Freemasons. In 1789-90 he traveled around the West. Europe, visited Germany, Switzerland, France and England, met with I. Kant and I.G. Herder. Impressions from the trip became the basis of his opus. Letters of a Russian traveler (1791-92), in which, in particular, K. expressed his attitude towards the French Revolution, which he considered one of the key events of the 18th century. The period of the Jacobin dictatorship (1793-94) disappointed him, and in the republication of Letters... (1801) a story about the events of Franz. K. accompanied the revolution with a commentary on the disastrous nature of any violent upheaval for the state.
After returning to Russia, K. published the Moscow magazine, in which he published his own artists. works (the main part of the Letters of a Russian Traveler, the stories Liodor, Poor Liza, Natalya, the Boyar's Daughter, the poems Poetry, To Mercy, etc.), as well as critical works. articles and literature and theater reviews, promoting the aesthetic principles of Russian. sentimentalism.
After forced silence during the reign of the Emperor. Paul I K. again acted as a publicist, substantiating the program of moderate conservatism in the new magazine Vestnik Evropy. His story was published here. the story Marfa Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novgorod (1803), which asserted the inevitability of the victory of the autocracy over the free city.
Lit. K.'s activities played a big role in improving the artist. internal image means the human world, in the development of Russian. lit. language. In particular, K.’s early prose influenced the work of V.A. Zhukovsky, K.N. Batyushkov, young A.S. Pushkin.
From ser. In 1790, K.'s interest in the problems of historical methodology was determined. One of the main K.'s theses: “A historian is not a chronicler,” he must strive to understand the internal. logic of the events taking place, must be “truthful”, and no predilections or ideas can serve as an excuse for distorting the truth. facts.
In 1803, K. was appointed to the position of court historiographer, after which he began work on his chapter. work - History of the Russian State (vol. 1-8, 1816-17; vol. 9, 1821; vol. 10-11, 1824; vol. 12, 1829), which became not only a significant historical work. labor, but also a major Russian phenomenon. artist prose and the most important source for Russian. ist. dramaturgy starting with Pushkin's Boris Godunov.
When working on the History of the Russian State, K. used not only almost all the Russian lists available in his time. chronicles (more than 200) and ed. ancient Russian monuments rights and literature, but also numerous. handwritten and printed Western European. sources. A story about each period of Russian history. state is accompanied by many references and quotations from op. European authors, not only those who wrote about Russia itself (like Herberstein or Kozma of Prague), but also other historians, geographers, and chroniclers (from ancient to contemporary K.). In addition, History... contains many important for Russian. reader of information on the history of the Church (from the Fathers of the Church to the Church Annals of Baronius), as well as quotes from papal bulls and other documents of the Holy See. One of the main concepts of K.'s work were criticized by historians. sources in accordance with the methods of Enlightenment historians. History... K. contributed to increasing interest in Russian history in various layers of Russian. society. East. K.'s concept became official. concept supported by the state. power.
K.'s views, expressed in the History of the Russian State, are based on a rationalistic idea of the course of societies. development: the history of mankind is the history of global progress, the basis of which is the struggle of reason against error, enlightenment against ignorance. Ch. driving force of history process K. considered power, the state, identifying the history of the country with the history of the state, and the history of the state with the history of autocracy.
The decisive role in history, according to K., is played by individuals (“History is the sacred book of kings and peoples”). Psychological analysis of historical actions. personalities is for K. main. method of explanation of history. events. The purpose of history, according to K., is to regulate societies. and cult. activities of people. Ch. the institution for maintaining order in Russia is an autocracy, the strengthening of monarchical power in the state allows for the preservation of the cult. and ist. values. The Church must interact with the authorities, but not submit to them, because this leads to a weakening of the authority of the Church and faith in the state, and the devaluation of rel. values - to the destruction of the monarchy. The spheres of activity of the state and the Church, in K.’s understanding, cannot intersect, but in order to preserve the unity of the state, their efforts must be combined.
K. was a supporter of rel. tolerance, however, in his opinion, each country must adhere to its chosen religion, therefore in Russia it is important to preserve and support Orthodoxy. Church. K. viewed the Catholic Church as a constant enemy of Russia, striving to “plant” a new faith. In his opinion, contacts with the Catholic Church only harmed the cult. identity of Russia. K. subjected the Jesuits to the greatest criticism, in particular for their interference in internal affairs. Russian policy during the Time of Troubles beginning. XVII century
In 1810-11, K. compiled a Note on Ancient and New Russia, where he criticized the internal affairs from a conservative position. and ext. grew up politics, in particular government projects. transformations M.M. Speransky. In the Note... K. moved away from his original views on history. development of humanity, arguing that there is a special path of development characteristic of each nation.
Works: Works. St. Petersburg, 1848. 3 vols.; Essays. L., 1984. 2 vols.; Complete collection of poems. M.-L., 1966; History of Russian Goverment. St. Petersburg, 1842-44. 4 books; Letters from a Russian traveler. L., 1984; History of Russian Goverment. M., 1989-98. 6 volumes (edition not completed); A note on ancient and modern Russia in its political and civil relations. M., 1991.
Literature: Pogodin M.P. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin according to his writings, letters and reviews of contemporaries. M., 1866. 2 hours; Eidelman N.Ya. The Last Chronicler. M., 1983; Osetrov E.I. Three lives of Karamzin. M., 1985; Vatsuro V.E., Gillelson M.I. Through “mental dams.” M., 1986; Kozlov V.P. “History of the Russian State” N.M. Karamzin in the assessments of his contemporaries. M., 1989; Lotman Yu.M. The creation of Karamzin. M., 1997.
About some Pushkin references to journalism and prose of N.M. Karamzin (L.A. Mesenyashina (Chelyabinsk))
Speaking about the contribution of N.M. Karamzin into Russian culture, Yu.M. Lotman notes that, among other things, N.M. Karamzin created “two more important figures in the history of culture: the Russian Reader and the Russian Reader” [Lotman, Yu.M. The Creation of Karamzin [Text] / Yu.M. Lotman. – M.: Book, 1987. P. 316]. At the same time, when we turn to such textbook Russian reading as “Eugene Onegin,” sometimes it becomes noticeable that the modern Russian reader lacks precisely “reading qualifications.” We are talking primarily about the ability to see the intertextual connections of the novel. Almost all researchers pointed out the importance of the role of “someone else’s word” in the novel “Eugene Onegin.” Pushkin's creativity. Yu.M. Lotman, who gave a detailed classification of the forms of presentation of “alien speech” in “Eugene Onegin,” notes, with reference to the works of Z.G. Mintz, G. Levinton and others that “quotations and reminiscences constitute one of the main structure-forming elements in the very fabric of the narrative of the novel in Pushkin’s poems” [Lotman, Yu.M. Roman A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” [Text] / Yu.M. Lotman // Lotman, Yu.M. Pushkin. – St. Petersburg: Art-SPB, 1995. P. 414]. Among the diverse functions of quotes from Yu.M. Lotman pays special attention to the so-called. “hidden quotes”, the identification of which “is achieved not through graphics and typographical signs, but by identifying some places in the text of Onegin with texts stored in the memory of readers” [Ibid]. Such “hidden quotes,” in the language of modern advertising theory, carry out “audience segmentation,” with a “multi-stage system of bringing the reader closer to the text” [Ibid]. And further: “...Quotations, updating certain extra-textual connections, create a certain “image of the audience” of a given text, which indirectly characterizes the text itself” [Ibid., p. 416]. The abundance of proper names (Yu.M. Lotman counts about 150 of them) of “poets, artists, cultural figures, politicians, historical characters, as well as the names of works of art and the names of literary heroes” (ibid.) turns the novel, in a certain sense, into a secular a conversation about mutual acquaintances (“Onegin – “my good friend”).
Special attention to Yu.M. Lotman pays attention to the overlap between Pushkin’s novel and the texts of N.M. Karamzin, pointing out, in particular, that the closest to the collision “Tatyana Larina’s Mother – “Grandison” (“Guard Sergeant”) – Dmitry Larin” is the situation from “A Knight of Our Time” by N.M. Karamzin [Lotman, Yu.M. Roman A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” [Text] / Yu.M. Lotman // Lotman, Yu.M. Pushkin. – St. Petersburg: Art-SPB, 1995. P. 391 – 762]. Moreover, in this context, it is surprising that researchers have not noticed yet another “hidden quote,” or rather an allusion in the XXX stanza of the second chapter of “Eugene Onegin.” Under the allusion, following A.S. Evseev, we will understand “a reference to a previously known fact, taken in its individuality (protosystem), accompanied by a paradigmatic increment of the metasystem” (semiotic system containing a representative of allusion) [Evseev, A. S. Fundamentals of the theory of allusion [Text]: abstract. dis. ...cand. Philol. Sciences: 10.02.01/ Evseev Alexander Sergeevich. – Moscow, 1990. P. 3].
Let us recall that, characterizing the well-known liberalism of Tatiana’s parents in relation to her reading circle, Pushkin motivated it, in particular, by the fact that Tatiana’s mother “was crazy about Richardson herself.” And then follows the textbook:
"She loved Richardson
Not because I read it
Not because Grandison
She preferred Lovelace..."
A.S. himself Pushkin in a note to these lines indicates: “Grandison and Lovelace, heroes of two glorious novels” [Pushkin, A.S. Selected works [Text]: in 2 volumes / A.S. Pushkin. – M.: Fiction, 1980. - T.2. P. 154]. In the no less textbook “Commentary to the novel “Eugene Onegin” by Yu. M. Lotman, in the notes to this stanza, in addition to the above Pushkin note, it is added: “The first is a hero of impeccable virtue, the second - of insidious but charming evil. Their names have become household names” [Lotman, Yu.M. Roman A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” [Text] / Yu.M. Lotman // Lotman, Yu.M. Pushkin. – St. Petersburg: Art-SPB, 1995. P. 605].
The stinginess of such a comment would be completely justified if it were possible to forget about the “segmenting role” of allusions in this novel. According to the classification of Yu.M. Lotman, one of those readers who can “correlate a quote contained in Pushkin’s text with a certain external text and extract the meanings arising from this comparison” [Ibid. P. 414], only the narrowest, most friendly circle knows the “home semantics” of this or that quote.
To correctly understand this quatrain, Pushkin’s contemporaries did not at all need to be part of the narrowest circle. It was enough to coincide with him in terms of reading, and for this it was enough to be familiar with the texts of “Richardson and Rousseau,” firstly, and N.M. Karamzin, secondly. Because anyone for whom these conditions are met will easily notice in this quatrain a polemical, but almost verbatim quotation of a fragment of “Letters of a Russian Traveler.” So, in a letter marked “London, July ... 1790” N.M. Karamzin describes a certain girl Jenny, a servant in the rooms where the hero of “Letters” stayed, who managed to tell him “ secret history her heart”: “At eight o’clock in the morning she brings me tea with crackers and talks to me about Fielding’s and Richardson’s novels. Her taste is strange: for example, Lovelace seems to her incomparably more amiable than Grandison”... That's what London maids are like!" [Karamzin, N.M. Knight of our time [Text]: Poetry, prose. Journalism / N.M. Karamzin. – M.: Parad, 2007. P. 520].
The fact that this is not a coincidence is indicated by another significant circumstance. Let us recall that this quatrain in Pushkin is preceded by the stanza
“She [Tatyana] liked novels early on;
They replaced everything for her...”
For our contemporaries, this characteristic only means the heroine’s quite commendable love of reading. Meanwhile, Pushkin emphasizes that this is not a love of reading in general, but specifically of reading novels, which is not the same thing. The fact that the love of reading novels on the part of a young noble maiden is by no means unambiguous positive characteristic, evidenced by a very characteristic passage from the article by N.M. Karamzin “On the book trade and the love of reading in Russia” (1802): “It is in vain to think that novels can be harmful to the heart...” [Ibid. P. 769], “In a word, it’s good that our public reads novels!” [Ibid. P. 770]. The very need for this kind of argumentation indicates the presence in public opinion of a directly opposite belief, and it is not unfounded, given the themes and the very language of European novels of the Enlightenment. After all, even with the most ardent defense of N.M.’s novels. Karamzin nowhere claims that this reading is the most suitable for young girls, because the “Enlightenment” of the latter in some areas, at least in the eyes of Russian society of that time, bordered on outright corruption. And the fact that Pushkin calls the next volume of the novel located under Tatiana’s pillow “secret” is not accidental.
True, Pushkin emphasizes that there was no need for Tatyana to hide the “secret volume,” since her father, “a simple and kind gentleman,” “considered books an empty toy,” and his wife, despite all her previous complaints, and as a girl I read less than an English maid.
Thus, the discovery of Karamzin’s lines, to which Pushkin’s XXX stanza refers us, adds a new bright shade to the understanding of this novel as a whole. The image of the “enlightened Russian lady” in general and the author’s attitude towards him in particular becomes clearer to us. In this context, the image of Tatiana also receives new colors. If Tatyana grows up in such a family, then she is truly an extraordinary person. On the other hand, it is in such a family that an “enlightened” (overly enlightened?) young lady can remain a “Russian soul.” It immediately becomes clear to us that the lines from her letter: “Imagine: I’m here alone ...” are not only a romantic cliche, but also a harsh reality, and the letter itself is not only a willingness to follow romantic precedents, but also a desperate act aimed at finding a loved one OUTSIDE the circle outlined in a predetermined pattern.
So, we see that Pushkin’s novel is truly an integral artistic system, each element of it “works” for the final plan, the intertextuality of the novel is the most important component of this system, and that is why we must not lose sight of any of the intertextual connections of the novel. At the same time, the risk of losing understanding of these relationships increases as the time gap between the author and the reader increases, so restoring the intertextuality of Pushkin’s novel remains an urgent task.
Biography (K.V. Ryzhov)
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born in December 1766 in the village of Mikhailovka, Simbirsk province, into the family of a middle-class nobleman. He received his education at home and in private boarding schools. In 1783, young Karamzin went to St. Petersburg, where for some time he served as an ensign in the Preobrazhensky Guards Regiment. Military service, however, did not interest him much. In 1784, upon learning of his father's death, he retired, settled in Moscow and plunged headlong into literary life. Its center at that time was the famous book publisher Novikov. Despite his youth, Karamzin soon became one of his most active collaborators and worked hard on translations.
Constantly reading and translating European classics, Karamzin passionately dreamed of visiting Europe himself. His wish came true in 1789. Having saved up money, he went abroad and traveled around different countries for almost a year and a half. This pilgrimage to the cultural centers of Europe was of great importance in the formation of Karamzin as a writer. He returned to Moscow with many plans. First of all, he founded the “Moscow Journal”, with the help of which he intended to acquaint his compatriots with Russian and foreign literature, instilling a taste for the best examples of poetry and prose, present “critical reviews” of published books, report on theatrical premieres and everything else related to literary life in Russia and Europe. The first issue was published in January 1791. It contained the beginning of “Letters of a Russian Traveler,” written based on the impressions of a trip abroad and representing a most interesting travel diary in the form of messages to friends. This work was a huge success among the reading public, who admired not only the fascinating description of life European peoples, but also in the light, pleasant style of the author. Before Karamzin, there was a strong belief in Russian society that books were written and published for “scientists” alone, and therefore their content should be as important and practical as possible. In fact, this led to the fact that the prose turned out to be heavy and boring, and its language - cumbersome and grandiloquent. Many Old Church Slavonic words, which had long since fallen out of use, continued to be used in fiction. Karamzin was the first of the Russian prose writers to change the tone of his works from solemn and instructive to sincerely inviting. He also completely abandoned the pompous, pretentious style and began to use a lively and natural language, close to colloquial speech. Instead of dense Slavicisms, he boldly introduced into literary circulation many new borrowed words, previously used only in oral speech by European educated people. This was a reform of enormous importance - one might say that our modern literary language first emerged on the pages of Karamzin’s magazine. Comprehensively and interestingly written, it successfully instilled a taste for reading and became the publication around which the reading public united for the first time. "Moscow Journal" became a significant phenomenon for many other reasons. In addition to their own compositions and the works of famous Russian writers, in addition to critical analysis of works that were well known to everyone, Karamzin included extensive and detailed articles about famous European classics: Shakespeare, Lessing, Boileau, Thomas More, Goldoni, Voltaire, Stern, Richardson. He also became the founder of theater criticism. Analysis of plays, productions, actors' performances - all this was an unheard-of innovation in Russian periodicals. According to Belinsky, Karamzin was the first to give the Russian public true magazine reading. Moreover, everywhere and in everything he was not only a transformer, but also a creator.
In the following issues of the magazine, in addition to “Letters”, articles and translations, Karamzin published several of his poems, and in the July issue he published the story “Poor Liza”. This small work, which took up only a few pages, became a real discovery for our young literature and was the first recognized work of Russian sentimentalism. The life of the human heart, unfolding so vividly before readers for the first time, was a stunning revelation for many of them. The simple, and generally uncomplicated love story of a simple girl for a rich and frivolous nobleman, which ended in her tragic death, literally shocked her contemporaries, who read it to the point of oblivion. Looking from the heights of our current literary experience, after Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and Turgenev, we, of course, cannot help but see the many shortcomings of this story - its pretentiousness, excessive exaltation, and tearfulness. However, it is important to note that it was here, for the first time in Russian literature, that the discovery of the human spiritual world took place. It was still a timid, foggy and naive world, but it arose, and the entire further course of our literature went in the direction of its comprehension. Karamzin’s innovation also manifested itself in another area: in 1792, he published one of the first Russian historical stories, “Natalia, the Boyar’s Daughter,” which serves as a bridge from “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and “Poor Liza” to Karamzin’s later works, “Marfa.” Posadnitsa" and "History of the Russian State". The plot of "Natalia", unfolding against the backdrop of the historical situation of the times of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, is distinguished by its romantic poignancy. It has everything - sudden love, secret wedding, escape, search, return and happy life to the gravestone.
In 1792, Karamzin stopped publishing the magazine and left Moscow for the village. He returned to journalism again only in 1802, when he began publishing the Bulletin of Europe. From the very first issues, this magazine became the most popular periodical in Russia. The number of his subscribers in a few months exceeded 1000 people - a very impressive figure at that time. The range of issues addressed in the journal was very significant. In addition to literary and historical articles, Karamzin published in his “Bulletin” political reviews, various information, messages from the field of science, art and education, as well as entertaining works of fine literature. In 1803, he published his best historical story “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod,” which told about the great drama of the city humbled by the Russian autocracy, about freedom and rebellion, about a strong and powerful woman, whose greatness was revealed in the most difficult days of her life . In this piece, Karamzin’s creative style reached classical maturity. The style of “Marfa” is clear, restrained, and strict. There is not even a trace of the tearfulness and tenderness of “Poor Lisa.” The speeches of the heroes are full of dignity and simplicity, each word is weighty and meaningful. It is also important to emphasize that Russian antiquity was no longer just a background here, as in “Natalia”, - it itself was the object of comprehension and depiction. It was clear that the author had been thoughtfully studying history for many years and deeply felt its tragic, contradictory course.
In fact, from many letters and references to Karamzin, it is known that at the turn of the century, Russian antiquity increasingly drew him into its depths. He enthusiastically read chronicles and ancient acts, obtained and studied rare manuscripts. In the fall of 1803, Karamzin finally came to the decision to take on a great burden - to take up writing a work on Russian history. This task is long overdue. By the beginning of the 19th century. Russia was almost the only one European country, which until now has not had a complete printed and publicly available account of its history. Of course, there were chronicles, but only specialists could read them. In addition, most of the chronicles remained unpublished. In the same way, many historical documents scattered in archives and private collections remained outside the bounds of scientific circulation and were completely inaccessible not only to the reading public, but also to historians. Karamzin had to bring together all this complex and heterogeneous material, critically comprehend it and present it in easy, modern language. Understanding well that the planned business would require many years of research and complete concentration, he asked for financial support from the emperor. In October 1803, Alexander I appointed Karamzin to the position of historiographer specially created for him, which gave him free access to all Russian archives and libraries. By the same decree he was entitled to an annual pension of two thousand rubles. Although “Vestnik Evropy” gave Karamzin three times more, he said goodbye to it without hesitation and devoted himself entirely to working on his “History of the Russian State.” According to Prince Vyazemsky, from that time on he “took monastic vows as a historian.” Social interaction was over: Karamzin stopped appearing in living rooms and got rid of many not devoid of pleasant, but annoying acquaintances. His life now passed in libraries, among shelves and racks. Karamzin treated his work with the greatest conscientiousness. He compiled mountains of extracts, read catalogues, looked through books and sent letters of inquiry to all corners of the world. The volume of material he picked up and reviewed was enormous. It is safe to say that no one before Karamzin had ever plunged so deeply into the spirit and element of Russian history.
The goal that the historian set for himself was complex and largely contradictory. He had to not only write an extensive scientific work, painstakingly researching each era under consideration, his goal was to create a national, social significant essay, which would not require special training to understand. In other words, it should not have been a dry monograph, but a highly artistic literary work intended for the general public. Karamzin worked a lot on the style and style of “History”, on the artistic treatment of images. Without adding anything to the documents he transferred, he brightened up their dryness with his hot emotional comments. As a result, a bright and rich work came out of his pen, which could not leave any reader indifferent. Karamzin himself once called his work a “historical poem.” And in fact, in terms of the strength of the style, the entertaining nature of the story, and the sonority of the language, this is undoubtedly the best creation of Russian prose of the first quarter of the 19th century.
But with all this, “History” remained in the full sense a “historical” work, although this was achieved to the detriment of its overall harmony. The desire to combine ease of presentation with its thoroughness forced Karamzin to provide almost every phrase with a special note. In these notes he “hid” great amount extensive extracts, quotes from sources, retellings of documents, his polemics with the writings of his predecessors. As a result, the “Notes” are actually equal in volume to the main text. The author himself was well aware of the abnormality of this. In the preface, he admitted: “The many notes and extracts I have made frighten me...” But he could not come up with any other way to introduce the reader to the mass of valuable historical material. Thus, Karamzin’s “History” is divided into two parts - “artistic”, intended for easy reading, and “scientific” - for a thoughtful and in-depth study of history.
Work on “The History of the Russian State” took up the last 23 years of Karamzin’s life. In 1816, he took the first eight volumes of his work to St. Petersburg. In the spring of 1817, “History” began to be printed in three printing houses at once - military, senate and medical. However, editing proofs took a lot of time. The first eight volumes appeared on sale only at the beginning of 1818 and created an unprecedented excitement. Not a single work by Karamzin had previously achieved such stunning success. At the end of February, the first edition was already sold out. “Everyone,” Pushkin recalled, “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. They didn't talk about anything else for a while..."
From that time on, each new volume of History became a social and cultural event. The 9th volume, dedicated to a description of the era of Grozny, was published in 1821 and made a deafening impression on his contemporaries. The tyranny of the cruel king and the horrors of the oprichnina were described here with such epic power that readers simply could not find words to express their feelings. Famous poet and the future Decembrist Kondraty Ryleev wrote in one of his letters: “Well, Grozny! Well, Karamzin! I don’t know what to be more surprised at, the tyranny of John or the gift of our Tacitus.” The 10th and 11th volumes appeared in 1824. The era of unrest described in them, in connection with the recently experienced French invasion and the fire of Moscow, was extremely interesting to both Karamzin himself and his contemporaries. Many, not without reason, found this part of the “History” especially successful and powerful. The last 12th volume (the author was going to finish his “History” with the accession of Mikhail Romanov) Karamzin wrote when he was already seriously ill. He didn't have time to finish it.
The great writer and historian died in May 1826.
Biography (en.wikipedia.org)
Honorary member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences (1818), full member of the Imperial Russian Academy (1818). Creator of the “History of the Russian State” (volumes 1-12, 1803-1826) - one of the first generalizing works on the history of Russia. Editor of the Moscow Journal (1791-1792) and Vestnik Evropy (1802-1803).
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born on December 1 (12), 1766 near Simbirsk. He grew up on the estate of his father, retired captain Mikhail Egorovich Karamzin (1724-1783), an average Simbirsk nobleman. Received home education. In 1778 he was sent to Moscow to the boarding school of Moscow University professor I.M. Schaden. At the same time, he attended lectures by I. G. Schwartz at the University in 1781-1782.
Carier start
In 1783, at the insistence of his father, he entered service in the St. Petersburg Guards Regiment, but soon retired. The first literary experiments date back to his military service. After retirement, he lived for some time in Simbirsk, and then in Moscow. During his stay in Simbirsk he joined the Masonic lodge of the Golden Crown, and after arriving in Moscow for four years (1785-1789) he was a member of the Friendly Scientific Society.
In Moscow, Karamzin met writers and writers: N.I. Novikov, A.M. Kutuzov, A.A. Petrov, and participated in the publication of the first Russian magazine for children - “Children’s Reading for the Heart and Mind.”
Trip to Europe In 1789-1790 he made a trip to Europe, during which he visited Immanuel Kant in Königsberg, and was in Paris during the great French Revolution. As a result of this trip, the famous “Letters of a Russian Traveler” were written, the publication of which immediately made Karamzin a famous writer. Some philologists believe that modern Russian literature dates back to this book. Since then he has been considered one of its main figures.
Return and life in Russia
Upon returning from a trip to Europe, Karamzin settled in Moscow and began working as a professional writer and journalist, starting the publication of the Moscow Journal 1791-1792 (the first Russian literary magazine, in which, among other works of Karamzin, the story “Poor” appeared, which strengthened his fame Liza"), then published a number of collections and almanacs: “Aglaya”, “Aonids”, “Pantheon of Foreign Literature”, “My Trinkets”, which made sentimentalism the main literary movement in Russia, and Karamzin its recognized leader.
Emperor Alexander I, by personal decree of October 31, 1803, granted the title of historiographer to Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin; 2 thousand rubles were added to the rank at the same time. annual salary. The title of historiographer in Russia was not renewed after Karamzin’s death.
Since the beginning of the 19th century, Karamzin gradually moved away from fiction, and from 1804, having been appointed by Alexander I to the post of historiographer, he stopped all literary work, “taking monastic vows as a historian.” In 1811, he wrote “A Note on Ancient and New Russia in its Political and Civil Relations,” which reflected the views of conservative layers of society dissatisfied with the liberal reforms of the emperor. Karamzin’s goal was to prove that no reforms were needed in the country.
“A Note on Ancient and New Russia in its Political and Civil Relations” also played the role of an outline for Nikolai Mikhailovich’s subsequent enormous work on Russian history. In February 1818, Karamzin released the first eight volumes of “The History of the Russian State,” the three thousand copies of which sold out within a month. In subsequent years, three more volumes of “History” were published, and a number of translations of it into the main European languages appeared. Coverage of the Russian historical process brought Karamzin closer to the court and the tsar, who settled him near him in Tsarskoe Selo. Karamzin's political views evolved gradually, and by the end of his life he was a staunch supporter of absolute monarchy.
The unfinished XII volume was published after his death.
Karamzin died on May 22 (June 3), 1826 in St. Petersburg. His death was the result of a cold contracted on December 14, 1825. On this day Karamzin was on Senate Square [source not specified 70 days]
He was buried at the Tikhvin Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Karamzin - writer
“Karamzin’s influence on literature can be compared with Catherine’s influence on society: he made literature humane,” wrote A. I. Herzen.
Sentimentalism
Karamzin’s publication of “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-1792) and the story “Poor Liza” (1792; separate publication 1796) ushered in the era of sentimentalism in Russia.
Lisa was surprised, she dared to look at the young man, she blushed even more and, looking down at the ground, told him that she would not take the ruble.
- For what?
- I don't need anything extra.
- I think that beautiful lilies of the valley, plucked by the hands of a beautiful girl, are worth a ruble. When you don’t take it, here’s your five kopecks. I would like to always buy flowers from you; I would like you to tear them just for me.
Sentimentalism declared feeling, not reason, to be the dominant of “human nature,” which distinguished it from classicism. Sentimentalism believed that the ideal of human activity was not the “reasonable” reorganization of the world, but the release and improvement of “natural” feelings. His hero is more individualized, his inner world enriched by the ability to empathize and sensitively respond to what is happening around.
The publication of these works was a great success among readers of that time; “Poor Liza” caused many imitations. Karamzin’s sentimentalism had a great influence on the development of Russian literature: it inspired [source not specified 78 days], including the romanticism of Zhukovsky and the work of Pushkin.
Karamzin's poetry
Karamzin's poetry, which developed in the mainstream of European sentimentalism, was radically different from the traditional poetry of his time, brought up on the odes of Lomonosov and Derzhavin. The most significant differences were the following:
Karamzin is not interested in the external, physical world, but in the internal, spiritual world of man. His poems speak “the language of the heart,” not the mind. The object of Karamzin’s poetry is “simple life”, and to describe it he uses simple poetic forms - poor rhymes, avoids the abundance of metaphors and other tropes so popular in the poems of his predecessors.
“Who is your dear?”
I'm ashamed; it really hurts me
The strangeness of my feelings is revealed
And be the butt of jokes.
The heart is not free to choose!..
What to say? She...she.
Oh! not important at all
And talents behind you
Has none;
…
(The Strangeness of Love, or Insomnia (1793))
Another difference between Karamzin’s poetics is that the world is fundamentally unknowable for him; the poet recognizes the existence of different points of view on the same subject:
One voice
It's scary in the grave, cold and dark!
The winds howl here, the coffins shake,
White bones are knocking.
Another voice
Quiet in the grave, soft, calm.
The winds blow here; sleepers are cool;
Herbs and flowers grow.
(Cemetery (1792))
Works by Karamzin
* “Eugene and Julia”, story (1789)
* “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791-1792)
* “Poor Liza”, story (1792)
* “Natalia, the boyar’s daughter”, story (1792)
* “The Beautiful Princess and the Happy Karla” (1792)
* "Sierra Morena", a story (1793)
* "The Island of Bornholm" (1793)
* "Julia" (1796)
* “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod”, story (1802)
* “My Confession,” letter to the magazine publisher (1802)
* "Sensitive and Cold" (1803)
* "A Knight of Our Time" (1803)
* "Autumn"
Karamzin's language reform
Karamzin's prose and poetry had a decisive influence on the development of the Russian literary language. Karamzin purposefully refused to use Church Slavonic vocabulary and grammar, bringing the language of his works to the everyday language of his era and using the grammar and syntax of the French language as a model.
Karamzin introduced many new words into the Russian language - as neologisms (“charity”, “love”, “freethinking”, “attraction”, “responsibility”, “suspiciousness”, “industry”, “refinement”, “first-class”, “humane” ") and barbarisms ("sidewalk", "coachman"). He was also one of the first to use the letter E.
The changes in language proposed by Karamzin caused heated controversy in the 1810s. The writer A. S. Shishkov, with the assistance of Derzhavin, founded in 1811 the society “Conversation of Lovers of the Russian Word”, the purpose of which was to promote the “old” language, as well as criticize Karamzin, Zhukovsky and their followers. In response, in 1815 it was formed literary society"Arzamas", which ironized the authors of "Conversation" and parodied their works. Many poets of the new generation became members of the society, including Batyushkov, Vyazemsky, Davydov, Zhukovsky, Pushkin. The literary victory of “Arzamas” over “Beseda” strengthened the victory of the linguistic changes that Karamzin introduced.
Despite this, Karamzin later became closer to Shishkov, and, thanks to the latter’s assistance, Karamzin was elected a member of the Russian Academy in 1818.
Karamzin - historian
Karamzin developed an interest in history in the mid-1790s. He wrote a story on historical topic- “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novagorod” (published in 1803). In the same year, by decree of Alexander I, he was appointed to the position of historiographer, and until the end of his life he was engaged in writing “The History of the Russian State,” practically ceasing his activities as a journalist and writer.
Karamzin’s “History” was not the first description of the history of Russia; before him there were the works of V.N. Tatishchev and M.M. Shcherbatov. But it was Karamzin who opened the history of Russia to a wide educated public. 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.” This work also caused a wave of imitations and contrasts (for example, “The History of the Russian People” by N. A. Polevoy)
In his work, Karamzin acted more as a writer than a historian - when describing historical facts, he cared about the beauty of the language, least of all trying to draw any conclusions from the events he described. Nevertheless, his commentaries, which contain many extracts from manuscripts, mostly first published by Karamzin, are of high scientific value. Some of these manuscripts no longer exist.
In the famous epigram, whose authorship is attributed to A. S. Pushkin, Karamzin’s coverage of Russian history is subject to criticism:
In his “History” elegance, simplicity
They prove to us, without any bias,
The need for autocracy
And the delights of the whip.
Karamzin took the initiative to organize memorials and erect monuments to outstanding figures of Russian history, in particular, K. M. Minin and D. M. Pozharsky on Red Square (1818).
N. M. Karamzin discovered Afanasy Nikitin’s “Walking across Three Seas” in a 16th-century manuscript and published it in 1821. He wrote:
“Until now, geographers did not know that the honor of one of the oldest described European journeys to India belongs to Russia of the John century... It (the journey) proves that Russia in the 15th century had its own Taverniers and Chardiners (en: Jean Chardin), less enlightened, but equally brave and enterprising; that the Indians heard about it before they heard about Portugal, Holland, England. While Vasco da Gamma was only thinking about the possibility of finding a way from Africa to Hindustan, our Tverite was already a merchant on the banks of Malabar ... "
Karamzin - translator In 1792, N. M. Karamzin translated a wonderful monument of Indian literature (from English) - the drama “Sakuntala” (“Shakuntala”), authored by Kalidasa. In the preface to the translation he wrote:
“The creative spirit does not live in Europe alone; he is a citizen of the universe. A person is a person everywhere; He has a sensitive heart everywhere, and in the mirror of his imagination he contains heaven and earth. Everywhere Nature is his mentor and the main source of his pleasures. I felt this very vividly while reading Sakontala, a drama composed in an Indian language, 1900 years before this, by the Asian poet Kalidas, and recently translated into English by William Jones, a Bengali judge ... "
Family
* Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin
* ? 1. Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova (d. 1802)
* Sophia (1802-56)
* ? 2. Ekaterina Andreevna, born. Kolyvanova (1780-1851), paternal sister of P. A. Vyazemsky
* Catherine (1806-1867) ? Pyotr Ivanovich Meshchersky
* Vladimir (1839-1914)
* Andrey (1814-54) ? Aurora Karlovna Demidova. Extramarital affair: Evdokia Petrovna Sushkova (Rostopchina):
* Olga Andreevna Andreevskaya (Golokhvastova) (1840-1897)
* Alexander (1815-88) ? Natalia Vasilievna Obolenskaya
* Vladimir (1819-79) ? Alexandra Ilyinichna Duka
* Elizabeth (1821-91)
Memory
The following are named after the writer:
* Passage Karamzin in Moscow
* Regional Clinical Psychiatric Hospital in Ulyanovsk.
A monument to N. M. Karamzin was erected in Ulyanovsk.
In Veliky Novgorod, on the monument “1000th anniversary of Russia”, among 129 figures of the most outstanding personalities in Russian history (as of 1862), there is the figure of N. M. Karamzin
The Karamzin Public Library in Simbirsk, created in honor of the famous fellow countryman, opened for readers on April 18, 1848.
Addresses in St. Petersburg
* Spring 1816 - house of E.F. Muravyova - embankment of the Fontanka River, 25;
* spring 1816-1822 - Tsarskoe Selo, Sadovaya street, 12;
* 1818 - autumn 1823 - house of E.F. Muravyova - embankment of the Fontanka River, 25;
* autumn 1823-1826 - Mizhuev apartment building - Mokhovaya street, 41;
* spring - 05/22/1826 - Tauride Palace - Voskresenskaya street, 47.
Introduced neologisms
industry, moral, aesthetic, era, scene, harmony, disaster, future, influence who or what, focus, touching, entertaining
Works of N. M. Karamzin
* History of the Russian State (12 volumes, until 1612, Maxim Moshkov’s library) Poems
* Karamzin, Nikolai Mikhailovich in the library of Maxim Moshkov
* Nikolai Karamzin in the Anthology of Russian Poetry
* Karamzin, Nikolai Mikhailovich “Complete collection of poems.” ImWerden Library. (See other works by N. M. Karamzin on this site.)
* Karamzin, Nikolai Mikhailovich “Letters to Ivan Ivanovich Dmitriev” 1866 - facsimile reprint of the book
* “Bulletin of Europe”, published by Karamzin, facsimile pdf reproduction of magazines.
* Nikolai Karamzin. Letters of a Russian Traveler, M. “Zakharov”, 2005, publication information ISBN 5-8159-0480-5
* N. M. Karamzin. A note on ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations
* Letters from N. M. Karamzin. 1806-1825
* Karamzin N. M. Letters from N. M. Karamzin to Zhukovsky. (From Zhukovsky’s papers) / Note. P. A. Vyazemsky // Russian Archive, 1868. - Ed. 2nd. - M., 1869. - Stb. 1827-1836.
Notes
1. Vengerov S. A. A. B. V. // Critical-biographical dictionary of Russian writers and scientists (from the beginning of Russian education to the present day). - St. Petersburg: Semenovskaya Typo-Lithography (I. Efron), 1889. - T. I. Issue. 1-21. A. - P. 7.
2. Wonderful pets of Moscow University.
3. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich
4. Eidelman N.Ya. The only example // The Last Chronicler. - M.: “Book”, 1983. - 176 p. - 200,000 copies.
5. http://smalt.karelia.ru/~filolog/herzen/texts/htm/herzen07.htm
6. V. V. Odintsov. Linguistic paradoxes. Moscow. "Enlightenment", 1982.
7. Pushkin’s authorship is often questioned; the epigram is not included in all full meetings essays. For more information about the attribution of the epigram, see here: B.V. Tomashevsky. Epigrams of Pushkin on Karamzin.
8. A. S. PUSHKIN AS A HISTORIAN | Great Russians | RUSSIAN HISTORY
9. N. M. Karamzin. History of the Russian State, vol. IV, ch. VII, 1842, pp. 226-228.
10. L. S. Gamayunov. From the history of the study of India in Russia / Essays on the history of Russian oriental studies (Collection of articles). M., Eastern Publishing House. Lit., 1956. P.83.
11. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich
Literature
* Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: In 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional ones). - St. Petersburg, 1890-1907.
* Karamzin, Nikolai Mikhailovich - Biography. Bibliography. Statements
* Klyuchevsky V.O. Historical portraits (About Boltin, Karamzin, Solovyov). M., 1991.
* Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman. "The Poetry of Karamzin"
* Zakharov N.V. At the origins of Russian Shakespeareanism: A.P. Sumarokov, M.N. Muravyov, N.M. Karamzin (Shakespearean Studies XIII). - M.: Moscow University for the Humanities Publishing House, 2009.
* Eidelman N.Ya. The Last Chronicler. - M.: “Book”, 1983. - 176 p. - 200,000 copies.
* Pogodin M.P. My presentation to the historiographer. (Excerpt from notes). // Russian archive, 1866. - Issue. 11. - Stb. 1766-1770.
* Serbinovich K.S. Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. Memoirs of K. S. Serbinovich // Russian antiquity, 1874. - T. 11. - No. 9. - P. 44-75; No. 10. - pp. 236-272.
* Sipovsky V.V. About the ancestors of N.M. Karamzin // Russian antiquity, 1898. - T. 93. - No. 2. - P. 431-435.
* Smirnov A.F. Book-monograph “Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin” (“Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, 2006)
* Smirnov A.F. introductory and final articles in the publication of the 4-volume edition of N. M. Karamzin “History of the Russian State” (1989)
* Sornikova M. Ya. “Genre model of the short story in “Letters of a Russian Traveler” by N. M. Karamzin”
* Serman I.Z. Where and when were “Letters of a Russian Traveler” by N.M. Karamzin created // XVIII century. St. Petersburg, 2004. Sat. 23. pp. 194-210. pdf
On December 12 (December 1, Old Style), 1766, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born - Russian writer, poet, editor of the Moscow Journal (1791-1792) and the magazine Vestnik Evropy (1802-1803), honorary member Imperial Academy of Sciences (1818), full member of the Imperial Russian Academy, historian, first and only court historiographer, one of the first reformers of the Russian literary language, founding father of Russian historiography and Russian sentimentalism.
|
|
Contribution of N.M. It is difficult to overestimate Karamzin's contribution to Russian culture. Remembering everything that this man managed to do in the short 59 years of his earthly existence, it is impossible to ignore the fact that it was Karamzin who largely determined the face of the Russian 19th century - the “golden” age of Russian poetry, literature, historiography, source studies and other humanitarian areas scientific knowledge. Thanks to linguistic research aimed at popularizing the literary language of poetry and prose, Karamzin gave Russian literature to his contemporaries. And if Pushkin is “our everything,” then Karamzin can safely be called “our Everything” with a capital letter. Without him, Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Baratynsky, Batyushkov and other poets of the so-called “Pushkin galaxy” would hardly have been possible.
“No matter what you turn to in our literature, everything began with Karamzin: journalism, criticism, stories, novels, historical stories, journalism, the study of history,” V.G. rightly noted later. Belinsky.
“History of the Russian State” N.M. Karamzin became not just the first Russian-language book on the history of Russia, accessible to a wide reader. Karamzin gave the Russian people the Fatherland in the full sense of the word. They say that, having closed the eighth and final volume, Count Fyodor Tolstoy, nicknamed the American, exclaimed: “It turns out that I have a Fatherland!” And he wasn't alone. All his contemporaries suddenly learned that they lived in a country with thousand years of history and they have something to be proud of. Before this, it was believed that before Peter I, who opened a “window to Europe,” there was nothing in Russia even remotely worthy of attention: the dark ages of backwardness and barbarism, boyar autocracy, primordially Russian laziness and bears in the streets...
Karamzin’s multi-volume work was not completed, but, having been published in the first quarter of the 19th century, it completely determined the historical identity of the nation for many years to come. All subsequent historiography was never able to generate anything more consistent with the “imperial” self-awareness that developed under the influence of Karamzin. Karamzin’s views left a deep, indelible mark in all areas of Russian culture of the 19th–20th centuries, forming the foundations national mentality, which ultimately determined the development paths of Russian society and the state as a whole.
It is significant that in the 20th century, the edifice of Russian great power, which had collapsed under the attacks of revolutionary internationalists, was revived again by the 1930s - under different slogans, with different leaders, in a different ideological package. but... The very approach to the historiography of Russian history, both before 1917 and after, largely remained jingoistic and sentimental in Karamzin style.
N.M. Karamzin - early years
N.M. Karamzin was born on December 12 (1st century), 1766 in the village of Mikhailovka, Buzuluk district, Kazan province (according to other sources, in the family estate of Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district, Kazan province). Little is known about his early years: there are no letters, diaries, or memories of Karamzin himself about his childhood. He did not even know exactly his year of birth and almost all his life he believed that he was born in 1765. Only in his old age, having discovered the documents, did he become “younger” by one year.
The future historiographer grew up on the estate of his father, retired captain Mikhail Egorovich Karamzin (1724-1783), an average Simbirsk nobleman. Received a good home education. In 1778 he was sent to Moscow to the boarding school of Moscow University professor I.M. Shadena. At the same time, he attended lectures at the university in 1781-1782.
After graduating from the boarding school, in 1783 Karamzin enlisted in the Preobrazhensky Regiment in St. Petersburg, where he met the young poet and future employee of his “Moscow Journal” Dmitriev. At the same time he published his first translation of S. Gesner’s idyll “The Wooden Leg”.
In 1784, Karamzin retired as a lieutenant and never served again, which was perceived in the society of that time as a challenge. After a short stay in Simbirsk, where he joined the Golden Crown Masonic lodge, Karamzin moved to Moscow and was introduced to the circle of N.I. Novikov. He settled in a house that belonged to Novikov’s “Friendly Scientific Society” and became the author and one of the publishers of the first children’s magazine “Children’s Reading for the Heart and Mind” (1787-1789), founded by Novikov. At the same time, Karamzin became close to the Pleshcheev family. For many years he had a tender platonic friendship with N.I. Pleshcheeva. In Moscow, Karamzin published his first translations, in which his interest in European and Russian history is clearly visible: Thomson’s “The Seasons,” Zhanlis’s “Country Evenings,” W. Shakespeare’s tragedy “Julius Caesar,” Lessing’s tragedy “Emilia Galotti.”
In 1789, Karamzin’s first original story, “Eugene and Yulia,” appeared in the magazine “Children’s Reading...”. The reader practically did not notice it.
Travel to Europe
According to many biographers, Karamzin was not inclined towards the mystical side of Freemasonry, remaining a supporter of its active and educational direction. To be more precise, by the end of the 1780s, Karamzin had already “become ill” with Masonic mysticism in its Russian version. Perhaps the cooling towards Freemasonry was one of the reasons for his departure to Europe, where he spent more than a year (1789-90), visiting Germany, Switzerland, France and England. In Europe, he met and talked (except for influential Freemasons) with European “masters of minds”: I. Kant, I. G. Herder, C. Bonnet, I. K. Lavater, J. F. Marmontel, visited museums, theaters, secular salons. In Paris, Karamzin listened to O. G. Mirabeau, M. Robespierre and other revolutionaries at the National Assembly, saw many outstanding political figures and was familiar with many. Apparently, revolutionary Paris in 1789 showed Karamzin how powerfully a word can influence a person: in print, when Parisians read pamphlets and leaflets with keen interest; oral, when revolutionary speakers spoke and controversy arose (an experience that could not be acquired in Russia at that time).
Karamzin did not have a very enthusiastic opinion about English parliamentarism (perhaps following in the footsteps of Rousseau), but he very highly valued the level of civilization at which English society as a whole was located.
Karamzin – journalist, publisher
In the fall of 1790, Karamzin returned to Moscow and soon organized the publication of the monthly “Moscow Journal” (1790-1792), in which most of the “Letters of a Russian Traveler” were published, telling about the revolutionary events in France, the stories “Liodor”, “Poor Lisa” , “Natalia, the boyar’s daughter”, “Flor Silin”, essays, stories, critical articles and poems. Karamzin attracted the entire literary elite of that time to collaborate in the magazine: his friends Dmitriev and Petrov, Kheraskov and Derzhavin, Lvov, Neledinsky-Meletsky and others. Karamzin’s articles affirmed a new literary direction- sentimentalism.
The Moscow Journal had only 210 regular subscribers, but for the end of the 18th century this is the same as a hundred thousandth circulation at the end XIX century. Moreover, the magazine was read by precisely those who “made the difference” in the literary life of the country: students, officials, young officers, minor employees of various government agencies (“archive youths”).
After Novikov’s arrest, the authorities became seriously interested in the publisher of the Moscow Journal. During interrogations in the Secret Expedition, they ask: was it Novikov who sent the “Russian traveler” abroad on a “special task”? The Novikovites were people of high integrity and, of course, Karamzin was shielded, but because of these suspicions the magazine had to be stopped.
In the 1790s, Karamzin published the first Russian almanacs - “Aglaya” (1794 -1795) and “Aonids” (1796 -1799). In 1793, when the Jacobin dictatorship was established at the third stage of the French Revolution, which shocked Karamzin with its cruelty, Nikolai Mikhailovich abandoned some of his previous views. The dictatorship aroused in him serious doubts about the possibility of humanity to achieve prosperity. He sharply condemned the revolution and all violent methods of transforming society. The philosophy of despair and fatalism permeates his new works: the story “The Island of Bornholm” (1793); "Sierra Morena" (1795); poems “Melancholy”, “Message to A. A. Pleshcheev”, etc.
During this period, real literary fame came to Karamzin.
Fedor Glinka: “Out of 1,200 cadets, it was rare that he did not repeat by heart some page from The Island of Bornholm.”.
The name Erast, previously completely unpopular, is increasingly found in lists of nobility. There are rumors of successful and unsuccessful suicides in the spirit of Poor Lisa. The poisonous memoirist Vigel recalls that important Moscow nobles had already begun to make do with “almost like an equal with a thirty-year-old retired lieutenant”.
In July 1794, Karamzin’s life almost ended: on the way to the estate, in the steppe wilderness, he was attacked by robbers. Karamzin miraculously escaped, receiving two minor wounds.
In 1801, he married Elizaveta Protasova, a neighbor on the estate, whom he had known since childhood - at the time of the wedding they had known each other for almost 13 years.
Reformer of the Russian literary language
Already in the early 1790s, Karamzin was seriously thinking about the present and future of Russian literature. He writes to a friend: “I am deprived of the pleasure of reading much 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 is one of the first to understand that it is not a matter of talent - there are no less talents in Russia than in any other country. It’s just that Russian literature cannot move away from the long-outdated traditions of classicism, founded in the middle of the 18th century by the only theorist M.V. Lomonosov.
The reform of the literary language carried out by Lomonosov, as well as the theory of the “three calms” he created, met the tasks of the transition period from ancient to new literature. A complete rejection of the use of familiar Church Slavonicisms in the language was then still premature and inappropriate. But the evolution of the language, which began under Catherine II, actively continued. The “Three Calms” proposed by Lomonosov were based not on lively colloquial speech, but on the witty thought of a theoretical writer. And this theory often put the authors in a difficult position: they had to use heavy, outdated Slavic expressions where in the spoken language they had long been replaced by others, softer and more elegant. The reader sometimes could not “cut through” the piles of outdated Slavicisms used in church books and records in order to understand the essence of this or that secular work.
Karamzin decided to bring the literary language closer to the spoken one. Therefore, one of his main goals was the further liberation of literature from Church Slavonicisms. In the preface to the second book of the almanac “Aonida,” he wrote: “The thunder of words alone only deafens us and never reaches our hearts.”
The second feature of Karamzin’s “new syllable” was the simplification of syntactic structures. The writer abandoned lengthy periods. In "Pantheon" Russian writers“He decisively declared: “Lomonosov’s prose cannot serve as a model for us at all: his long periods are tiring, the arrangement of words is not always consistent with the flow of thoughts.”
Unlike Lomonosov, Karamzin strove to write in short, easily understandable sentences. This is still a model of good style and an example to follow in literature.
Karamzin’s third merit was the enrichment of the Russian language with a number of successful neologisms, which became firmly established in the main vocabulary. The innovations proposed by Karamzin include such widely known words in our time as “industry”, “development”, “sophistication”, “concentrate”, “touching”, “entertainment”, “humanity”, “public”, “ generally useful”, “influence” and a number of others.
When creating neologisms, Karamzin used mainly the method of tracing French words: “interesting” from “interessant”, “refined” from “raffine”, “development” from “developpement”, “touching” from “touchant”.
We know that even in the era of Peter the Great, many foreign words appeared in the Russian language, but they mostly replaced words that already existed in the Slavic language and were not a necessity. In addition, these words were often taken in their raw form, so they were very heavy and clumsy (“fortecia” instead of “fortress”, “victory” instead of “victory”, etc.). Karamzin, on the contrary, tried to give foreign words Russian ending, adapting them to the requirements of Russian grammar: “serious”, “moral”, “aesthetic”, “audience”, “harmony”, “enthusiasm”, etc.
In his reform activities, Karamzin focused on the lively spoken language of educated people. And this was the key to the success of his work - he writes not scholarly treatises, but travel notes (“Letters of a Russian Traveler”), sentimental stories (“Bornholm Island”, “Poor Lisa”), poems, articles, translations from French, English and German .
"Arzamas" and "Conversation"
It is not surprising that most of the young writers contemporary to Karamzin accepted his transformations with a bang and willingly followed him. But, like any reformer, Karamzin had staunch opponents and worthy opponents.
A.S. stood at the head of Karamzin’s ideological opponents. Shishkov (1774-1841) – admiral, patriot, famous statesman of that time. An Old Believer, an admirer of Lomonosov's language, Shishkov, at first glance, was a classicist. But this point of view requires significant qualifications. In contrast to Karamzin's Europeanism, Shishkov put forward the idea of nationality in literature - the most important sign of a romantic worldview that was far from classicism. It turns out that Shishkov also joined for romantics, but not of a progressive, but of a conservative direction. His views can be recognized as a kind of forerunner of later Slavophilism and Pochvenism.
In 1803, Shishkov presented his “Discourse on the old and new syllables of the Russian language.” He reproached the “Karamzinists” for succumbing to the temptation of European revolutionary false teachings and advocated for the return of literature to oral folk art, to the vernacular, to Orthodox Church Slavonic books.
Shishkov was not a philologist. He dealt with the problems of literature and the Russian language, rather, as an amateur, so Admiral Shishkov’s attacks on Karamzin and his literary supporters sometimes looked not so much scientifically substantiated as unsubstantiated ideological. Karamzin’s language reform seemed to Shishkov, a warrior and defender of the Fatherland, unpatriotic and anti-religious: “Language is the soul of the people, the mirror of morals, a true indicator of enlightenment, an incessant witness of deeds. Where there is no faith in the hearts, there is no piety in the language. Where there is no love for the fatherland, there the language does not express domestic feelings.”.
Shishkov reproached Karamzin for the excessive use of barbarisms (“epoch”, “harmony”, “catastrophe”), he was disgusted by neologisms (“coup” as a translation of the word “revolution”), artificial words hurt his ear: “future”, “well-read” and etc.
And we must admit that sometimes his criticism was pointed and accurate.
The evasiveness and aesthetic affectation of the speech of the “Karamzinists” very soon became outdated and fell out of literary use. This is precisely the future that Shishkov predicted for them, believing that instead of the expression “when travel became a need of my soul,” one could simply say: “when I fell in love with traveling”; the refined and periphrased speech “motley crowds of rural oreads meet with dark bands of reptile pharaohs” can be replaced with the understandable expression “gypsies come to meet the village girls”, etc.
Shishkov and his supporters took the first steps in studying the monuments of ancient Russian writing, enthusiastically studied “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” studied folklore, advocated the rapprochement of Russia with the Slavic world and recognized the need to bring the “Slovenian” style closer to the common language.
In a dispute with the translator Karamzin, Shishkov put forward a compelling argument about the “idiomatic nature” of each language, about the unique originality of its phraseological systems, which make it impossible to literally translate a thought or true semantic meaning from one language to another. For example, when translated literally into French, the expression “old horseradish” loses its figurative meaning and “means only the thing itself, but in the metaphysical sense it has no circle of signification.”
In defiance of Karamzin, Shishkov proposed his own reform of the Russian language. He proposed to designate concepts and feelings missing in our everyday life with new words formed from the roots not of French, but of Russian and Old Church Slavonic. Instead of Karamzin’s “influence” he suggested “influx”, instead of “development” - “vegetation”, instead of “actor” - “actor”, instead of “individuality” - “intelligence”, “wet feet” instead of “galoshes” and “wandering” instead "labyrinth". Most of his innovations did not take root in the Russian language.
It is impossible not to recognize Shishkov’s ardent love for the Russian language; One cannot help but admit that the passion for everything foreign, especially French, has gone too far in Russia. Ultimately, this led to the fact that the language of the common people, the peasant, became very different from the language of the cultural classes. But we cannot ignore the fact that natural process The evolution of language that had begun could not be stopped. It was impossible to forcefully return into use the already outdated expressions that Shishkov proposed at that time: “zane”, “ugly”, “like”, “yako” and others.
Karamzin did not even respond to the accusations of Shishkov and his supporters, knowing firmly that they were guided exclusively by pious and patriotic feelings. Subsequently, Karamzin himself and his most talented supporters (Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Batyushkov) followed the very valuable instructions of the “Shishkovites” on the need to “return to their roots” and examples of their own history. But then they could not understand each other.
The pathos and ardent patriotism of A.S.’s articles. Shishkova evoked a sympathetic attitude among many writers. And when Shishkov, together with G. R. Derzhavin, founded the literary society “Conversation of Lovers of the Russian Word” (1811) with a charter and its own magazine, P. A. Katenin, I. A. Krylov, and later V. K immediately joined this society Kuchelbecker and A. S. Griboyedov. One of the active participants in the “Conversation...”, the prolific playwright A. A. Shakhovskoy, in the comedy “New Stern”, viciously ridiculed Karamzin, and in the comedy “A Lesson for Coquettes, or Lipetsk Waters”, in the person of the “balladeer” Fialkin, he created a parody image of V. A. Zhukovsky.
This caused a unanimous rebuff from young people who supported Karamzin’s literary authority. D. V. Dashkov, P. A. Vyazemsky, D. N. Bludov composed several witty pamphlets addressed to Shakhovsky and other members of the “Conversation...”. In “Vision in the Arzamas Tavern” Bludov gave the circle of young defenders of Karamzin and Zhukovsky the name “Society of Unknown Arzamas Writers” or simply “Arzamas”.
IN organizational structure This society, founded in the fall of 1815, was dominated by a cheerful spirit of parody of the serious “Conversation...”. In contrast to the official pomposity, simplicity, naturalness, and openness prevailed here; a large place was given to jokes and games.
Parodying the official ritual of the “Conversation...”, upon joining Arzamas, everyone had to read a “funeral speech” to his “late” predecessor from among the living members of the “Conversation...” or the Russian Academy of Sciences (Count D.I. Khvostov, S.A. Shirinsky-Shikhmatov, A.S. Shishkov himself, etc.). “Funeral speeches” were a form of literary struggle: they parodied high genres and ridiculed the stylistic archaism of the poetic works of the “talkers.” At the meetings of the society, the humorous genres of Russian poetry were honed, a bold and decisive struggle was waged against all kinds of officialdom, and a type of independent Russian writer, free from the pressure of any ideological conventions, was formed. And although P. A. Vyazemsky, one of the organizers and active participants of the society, in his mature years condemned the youthful mischief and intransigence of his like-minded people (in particular, the rituals of “funeral services” for living literary opponents), he rightly called “Arzamas” a school of “literary fellowship” and mutual creative learning. The Arzamas and Beseda societies soon became centers of literary life and social struggle in the first quarter of the 19th century. “Arzamas” included such famous people as Zhukovsky (pseudonym - Svetlana), Vyazemsky (Asmodeus), Pushkin (Cricket), Batyushkov (Achilles) and others.
"Conversation" disbanded after Derzhavin's death in 1816; "Arzamas", having lost its main opponent, ceased to exist by 1818.
Thus, by the mid-1790s, Karamzin became the recognized head of Russian sentimentalism, which opened not just a new page in Russian literature, but Russian fiction in general. Russian readers, who had previously devoured only French novels and the works of enlighteners, enthusiastically accepted “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and “Poor Liza,” and Russian writers and poets (both “besedchiki” and “Arzamasites”) 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 “Bulletin of Europe”, in which literature and politics predominated. Largely thanks to the confrontation with Shishkov, a new aesthetic program for the formation of Russian literature as nationally distinctive appeared in Karamzin’s critical articles. Karamzin, unlike Shishkov, saw the key to the uniqueness of Russian culture not so much in adherence to ritual antiquity and religiosity, but in the events of Russian history. The most striking illustration of his views was the story “Martha the Posadnitsa or the Conquest of Novagorod.”
In his political articles of 1802-1803, Karamzin, as a rule, made recommendations to the government, the main one of which was educating the nation for the sake of the prosperity of the autocratic state.
These ideas were generally close to Emperor Alexander I, the grandson of Catherine the Great, who at one time also dreamed of an “enlightened monarchy” and a complete symphony between the authorities and a European educated society. Karamzin’s response to the coup of March 11, 1801 and the accession to the throne of Alexander I was “Historical eulogy to Catherine the Second” (1802), where Karamzin expressed his views on the essence of the monarchy in Russia, as well as the duties of the monarch and his subjects. The “eulogium” was approved by the sovereign as a collection of examples for the young monarch and was favorably received by him. Alexander I, obviously, was interested in Karamzin’s historical research, and the emperor rightly decided that the great country simply needed to remember its no less great past. And if you don’t remember, then at least create it again...
In 1803, through the royal educator M.N. Muravyov - poet, historian, teacher, one of the most educated people of that time - N.M. Karamzin received the official title of court historiographer with a pension of 2,000 rubles. (A pension of 2,000 rubles a year was then assigned to officials who, according to the Table of Ranks, had ranks no lower than general). Later, I.V. Kireevsky, referring to Karamzin himself, wrote about Muravyov: “Who knows, maybe without his thoughtful and warm assistance Karamzin would not have had the means to accomplish his great deed.”
In 1804, Karamzin practically retired from literary and publishing activities and began to create “The History of the Russian State,” on which he worked until the end of his days. With his influence M.N. Muravyov made many previously unknown and even “secret” materials available to the historian, and opened libraries and archives for him. Modern historians can only dream of such favorable working conditions. Therefore, in our opinion, talking about “The History of the Russian State” as a “scientific feat” by N.M. Karamzin, not entirely fair. The court historiographer was on duty, conscientiously doing the work for which he was paid. Accordingly, he had to write the kind of history that was currently needed by the customer, namely, Emperor Alexander I, who at the first stage of his reign showed sympathy for European liberalism.
However, under the influence of studies in Russian history, by 1810 Karamzin had become a consistent conservative. During this period, the system of his political views was finally formed. Karamzin’s statements that he is a “republican at heart” can only be adequately interpreted if we consider that we are talking about “Plato’s Republic of the Wise Men,” an ideal social order based on state virtue, strict regulation and the renunciation of personal freedom . At the beginning of 1810, Karamzin, through his relative Count F.V. Rostopchin, met in Moscow the leader of the “conservative party” at court - Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna (sister of Alexander I) and began to constantly visit her residence in Tver. The Grand Duchess's salon represented the center of conservative opposition to the liberal-Western course, personified by the figure of M. M. Speransky. In this salon, Karamzin read excerpts from his “History...”, and then he met the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna, who became one of his patrons.
In 1811, at the request of Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, Karamzin wrote a note “On ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations,” in which he outlined his ideas about the ideal structure of the Russian state and sharply criticized the policies of Alexander I and his immediate predecessors: Paul I , Catherine II and Peter I. In the 19th century, the note was never published in full and was circulated only in handwritten copies. In Soviet 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 of 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 justified criticism of unprepared bureaucratic reforms carried out from above. Praising Alexander I, the author of the note at the same time attacks his advisers, meaning, of course, Speransky, who stood for constitutional reforms. Karamzin takes it upon himself to prove in detail, with references to historical examples, to the Tsar that Russia is not ready, either historically or politically, for the abolition of serfdom and the limitation of the autocratic monarchy by the constitution (following the example of the European powers). Some of his arguments (for example, about the futility of liberating peasants without land, the impossibility of constitutional democracy in Russia) even today look quite convincing and historically correct.
Along with a review of Russian history and criticism of the political course of Emperor Alexander I, the note contained a complete, original and very complex in its theoretical content concept of autocracy as a special, uniquely 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 power (for example, during the Time of Troubles), this powerful tradition led, within a short historical period, to the restoration of autocracy. The autocracy was the “palladium of Russia”, main reason her power and prosperity. Therefore, the basic principles of monarchical rule in Russia, according to Karamzin, should have been preserved in the future. They should have been supplemented only by proper policies in the field of legislation and education, which would not lead to the undermining of the autocracy, but to its maximum strengthening. With such an understanding of autocracy, any attempt to limit it would be a crime against Russian history and the Russian people.
Initially, Karamzin’s note only irritated the young emperor, who did not like criticism of his actions. In this note, the historiographer showed himself plus royaliste que le roi (a greater royalist than the king himself). However, subsequently the brilliant “hymn to the Russian autocracy” as presented by Karamzin undoubtedly had its effect. After the War of 1812, Napoleon's winner Alexander I curtailed many of his liberal projects: Speransky's reforms were not completed, the constitution and the very idea of limiting autocracy remained only in the minds of future Decembrists. And already in the 1830s, Karamzin’s concept actually formed the basis of the ideology of the Russian Empire, designated the “theory official nationality» Count S. Uvarov (Orthodoxy-Autocracy-Nationalism).
Before the publication of the first 8 volumes of “History...” Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver to visit Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna and to Nizhny Novgorod, during the occupation of Moscow by the French. He usually spent the summer in Ostafyevo, the estate of Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky, whose illegitimate daughter, Ekaterina Andreevna, Karamzin married in 1804. (Karamzin’s first wife, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died in 1802).
In the last 10 years of his life, which Karamzin spent in St. Petersburg, he became very close to the royal family. Although Emperor Alexander I had a reserved attitude towards Karamzin since the submission of the Note, Karamzin often spent the summer in Tsarskoe Selo. At the request of the empresses (Maria Feodorovna and Elizaveta Alekseevna), he more than once had frank political conversations with Emperor Alexander, in which he acted as a spokesman for the opinions of opponents of drastic liberal reforms. In 1819-1825, Karamzin passionately rebelled against the sovereign’s intentions regarding Poland (submitted a note “Opinion of a Russian Citizen”), condemned the increase in state taxes in peacetime, spoke about the absurd provincial system of finance, criticized the system of military settlements, the activities of the Ministry of Education, pointed out the strange choice by the sovereign of some of the most important dignitaries (for example, Arakcheev), spoke of the need to reduce internal troops, about the imaginary correction of roads, which was so painful for the people, and constantly pointed out the need to have firm laws, civil and state.
Of course, having behind us such intercessors as both empresses and Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, it was possible to criticize, and argue, and show civil courage, and try to guide the monarch “on the true path.” It is not for nothing that Emperor Alexander I was called the “mysterious sphinx” by both his contemporaries and subsequent historians of his reign. In words, the sovereign agreed with Karamzin’s critical remarks regarding military settlements, recognized the need to “give fundamental laws to Russia,” and also reconsider some aspects domestic policy, but it just so happens in our country that in reality all wise advice statesmen remain “fruitless for the dear Fatherland”...
Karamzin as a historian
Karamzin is our first historian and last chronicler.
With his criticism he belongs to history,
simplicity and apothegms - the chronicle.
A.S. Pushkin
Even from the point of view of Karamzin’s contemporary historical science, to name 12 volumes of his “History of the Russian State”, in fact, scientific work no one decided. Even then it was clear to everyone that the honorary title of court historiographer could not make a writer a historian, give him the appropriate knowledge and proper training.
But, on the other hand, Karamzin initially did not set himself the task of taking on the role of a researcher. The newly minted historiographer did not intend to write a scientific treatise and appropriate the laurels of his illustrious predecessors - Schlözer, Miller, Tatishchev, Shcherbatov, Boltin, etc.
Preliminary critical work on sources for Karamzin is only “a heavy tribute to reliability.” He was, first of all, a writer, and therefore wanted to apply his literary talent to ready-made material: “to select, animate, color” and thus make from Russian history “something attractive, strong, worthy of the attention of not only Russians, but also foreigners." And he accomplished this task brilliantly.
Today it is impossible not to agree that at the beginning of the 19th century, source studies, paleography and other auxiliary historical disciplines were in their infancy. Therefore, to demand from the writer Karamzin professional criticism, as well as strict adherence to one or another methodology for working with historical sources, is simply ridiculous.
You can often hear the opinion that Karamzin simply beautifully rewrote the “Russian History from Ancient Times” written in a long-outdated, difficult-to-read style by Prince M.M. Shcherbatov, introduced some of his own thoughts from it, and thereby created a book for lovers of fascinating reading in family circle. This is wrong.
Naturally, when writing his “History...” Karamzin actively used the experience and works of his predecessors - Schlozer and Shcherbatov. Shcherbatov helped Karamzin navigate the sources of Russian history, significantly influencing both the choice of material and its arrangement in the text. Whether by chance or not, Karamzin brought the “History of the Russian State” to exactly the same place as Shcherbatov’s “History”. However, in addition to following the scheme already worked out by his predecessors, Karamzin provides in his work a lot of references to extensive foreign historiography, almost unfamiliar to the Russian reader. While working on his “History...”, he for the first time introduced into scientific circulation a mass of unknown and previously unstudied sources. These are Byzantine and Livonian chronicles, information from foreigners about the population of ancient Rus', as well as 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 when writing his work, Karamzin actively cites more than 40. In addition to the chronicles, Karamzin attracted monuments of ancient Russian law and ancient Russian fiction to his research. A special chapter of “History...” is dedicated to “Russian Truth”, and a number of pages are dedicated to the just opened “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”.
Thanks to the diligent help of the directors of the Moscow Archive of the Ministry (Collegium) of Foreign Affairs N. N. Bantysh-Kamensky and A. F. Malinovsky, Karamzin was able to use those documents and materials that were not available to his predecessors. Many valuable manuscripts were provided by the Synodal Repository, libraries of monasteries (Trinity Lavra, Volokolamsk Monastery and others), as well as private collections of manuscripts by Musin-Pushkin and N.P. Rumyantseva. Karamzin received especially many documents from Chancellor Rumyantsev, who collected historical materials in Russia and abroad through his numerous agents, as well as from A.I. Turgenev, who compiled a collection of documents from the papal archive.
Many of the sources used by Karamzin were lost during the Moscow fire of 1812 and were preserved only in his “History...” and extensive “Notes” to its text. Thus, Karamzin’s work, to some extent, itself acquired the status of a historical source, to which professional historians have every right to refer.
Among the main shortcomings of the “History of the Russian State,” the author’s peculiar view of the tasks of the historian is traditionally noted. According to Karamzin, “knowledge” and “learning” in a historian “do not replace the talent to depict actions.” Before the artistic task of history, even the moral one, which Karamzin’s patron, M.N., set for himself, recedes into the background. Muravyov. 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. Karamzin’s first Russian princes are distinguished by their “ardent romantic passion” for conquest, their squad is distinguished by their nobility and loyal spirit, the “rabble” sometimes shows dissatisfaction, raising rebellions, but ultimately agrees with the wisdom of the noble rulers, etc., etc. P.
Meanwhile, the previous generation of historians, under the influence of Schlözer, had long ago developed the idea of critical history, and among Karamzin’s contemporaries, the demands for criticism of historical sources, despite the lack of a clear methodology, were generally accepted. And the next generation has already made a demand philosophical history– with the identification of the laws of development of the state and society, recognition of the main driving forces and laws of the historical process. Therefore, Karamzin’s overly “literary” creation was immediately subjected to well-founded criticism.
According to the idea, firmly rooted in Russian and foreign historiography of the 17th - 18th centuries, the development of the historical process depends on the development of monarchical power. Karamzin does not deviate one iota from this idea: monarchical power exalted Russia during the Kiev period; the division of power between the princes was a political mistake, which was corrected by the statesmanship of the Moscow princes - the collectors of Rus'. At the same time, it was the princes who corrected its consequences - the fragmentation of Rus' and the Tatar yoke.
But before reproaching Karamzin for not bringing anything new into the development of Russian historiography, it should be remembered that the author of “History of the Russian State” did not 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. Meschlet), who even then started talking about the “class struggle” and the “spirit of the people” as the main driving force of history. Karamzin was not at all interested in historical criticism, and he deliberately rejected the “philosophical” direction in history. The researcher’s conclusions from historical material, as well as his subjective fabrications, seem to Karamzin to be “metaphysics”, which is not suitable “for depicting action and character.”
Thus, with his unique views on the tasks of a historian, Karamzin, by and large, remained outside the dominant trends of Russian and European historiography of the 19th and 20th centuries. Of course, he participated in its consistent development, but only in the form of an object for constant criticism and the clearest example of how history does not need to be written.
Reaction of contemporaries
Karamzin's contemporaries - readers and fans - enthusiastically accepted his new “historical” work. The first eight volumes of “History of the Russian State” were printed in 1816-1817 and went on sale in February 1818. A huge circulation of three thousand for that time was sold out in 25 days. (And this despite the hefty price of 50 rubles). A second edition was immediately required, which was carried out in 1818-1819 by I.V. Slenin. In 1821 a new, ninth volume was published, and in 1824 the next two. The author did not have time to finish the twelfth volume of his work, which was published in 1829, almost three years after his death.
“History...” was admired by Karamzin’s literary friends and the vast public of non-specialist readers who suddenly discovered, like Count Tolstoy the American, that their Fatherland has a history. According to A.S. Pushkin, “everyone, even secular women, rushed to read the history of their fatherland, hitherto unknown to them. She was a new discovery for them. Ancient Russia seemed to be found by Karamzin, like America by Columbus.”
Liberal intellectual circles of the 1820s found Karamzin’s “History...” backward in general views and overly tendentious:
Research specialists, as already mentioned, treated Karamzin’s work precisely as a work, sometimes even belittling its historical significance. To many, Karamzin’s enterprise itself seemed too risky - to undertake to write such an extensive work given the then state of Russian historical science.
Already during Karamzin’s lifetime, critical analyzes of his “History...” appeared, and soon after the author’s death, attempts were made to determine the general significance of this work in historiography. Lelevel pointed out an involuntary distortion of the truth due to Karamzin’s patriotic, religious and political hobbies. Artsybashev showed to what extent the literary techniques of a lay historian harm the writing of “history.” Pogodin summed up all the shortcomings of the History, and N.A. Polevoy saw the general reason for these shortcomings in the fact that “Karamzin is a writer not of our time.” All his points of view, both in literature and in philosophy, politics and history, became outdated with the advent of new influences of European romanticism in Russia. In contrast to Karamzin, Polevoy soon wrote his six-volume “History of the Russian People,” where he completely surrendered to the ideas of Guizot and other Western European romantics. Contemporaries assessed this work as an “undignified parody” of Karamzin, subjecting the author to rather vicious, and not always deserved, attacks.
In the 1830s, Karamzin’s “History...” became the banner of the officially “Russian” movement. With the assistance of the same Pogodin, its scientific rehabilitation is being carried out, which is fully consistent with the spirit of Uvarov’s “theory of official nationality”.
In the second half of the 19th century, based on the “History...”, a lot of popular science articles and other texts were written, which served as the basis for well-known educational and teaching aids. Based on the historical stories of Karamzin, many works were created for children and youth, the purpose of which for many years was to instill patriotism, loyalty to civic duty, and the responsibility of the younger generation for the fate of their Motherland. 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 patriotic education of youth in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
December 14. Karamzin's finale.
The death of Emperor Alexander I and the December events of 1925 deeply shocked N.M. Karamzin and had a negative impact on his health.
On December 14, 1825, having received news of the uprising, the historian goes out into the street: “I saw terrible faces, heard terrible words, five or six stones fell at my feet.”
Karamzin, of course, regarded the action of the nobility against their sovereign as a rebellion and a serious crime. But among the rebels there were so many acquaintances: the Muravyov brothers, Nikolai Turgenev, Bestuzhev, Ryleev, Kuchelbecker (he translated Karamzin’s “History” into German).
A few days later Karamzin will say about the Decembrists: “The delusions and crimes of these young people are the delusions and crimes of our century.”
On December 14, during his movements around St. Petersburg, Karamzin caught a severe cold and contracted pneumonia. In the eyes of his contemporaries, he was another victim of this day: his idea of the world collapsed, his faith in the future was lost, and a new king ascended to the throne, very far from the ideal image of an enlightened monarch. Half-ill, Karamzin visited the palace every day, where he talked with Empress Maria Feodorovna, moving from memories of the late Emperor Alexander to discussions about the tasks of the future reign.
Karamzin could no longer write. The XII volume of “History...” froze during the interregnum of 1611 - 1612. The last words of the last volume are about a small Russian fortress: “Nut did not give up.” The last thing that Karamzin actually managed to do in the spring of 1826 was that, together with Zhukovsky, he persuaded Nicholas I to return Pushkin from exile. A few years later, the emperor tried to pass the baton of the first historiographer of Russia to the poet, but the “sun of Russian poetry” somehow did not fit into the role of state ideologist and theorist...
In the spring of 1826 N.M. Karamzin, on the advice of doctors, decided to go to Southern France or Italy for treatment. Nicholas I agreed to sponsor his trip and kindly placed a frigate of the Imperial Navy at the disposal of the historiographer. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel. He died on May 22 (June 3), 1826 in St. Petersburg. He was buried at the Tikhvin Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Nikolai Karamzin is a historian and writer of the 18th and 19th centuries. Born on December 12, 1866 in the Kazan province on the family estate of Znamenskoye.
His family comes from the Crimean Tatars, his father is a retired officer, he was an average landowner, his mother died when Kolya Karamzin was still a child. His father, tutors and nannies were involved in his upbringing. Nikolai spent his entire childhood on the estate, was educated at home, and re-read all the books in his mother’s large library.
His work was greatly influenced by his love for progressive music. foreign literature. This was the future publicist, writer, honorary member of the Academy of Sciences, famous critic, reformer of Russian literature and historiographer, who loved to read Rollin, Emin and other masters of the word of Europe.
In 1778 he entered a noble boarding school in Simbirsk, his father assigned him to an army regiment, which gave Nikolai Karamzin the opportunity to study at the prestigious Moscow boarding school at Moscow University. Karamzin studied the humanities and attended lectures.
The future writer found himself in active service in the Preobrazhensky Regiment. His military career was not attractive and he took leave for a year, and in 1784 he received a decree on his resignation with the rank of lieutenant.
In 1789 he made a long trip to Europe. During it, he met with Kant, visited Paris during the revolution, and witnessed the fall of the Bastille. He collected a large amount of material about European events, which served as the basis for the creation of Letters from a Russian Traveler, gained great popularity in society and was enthusiastically received by critics.
At the end of the trip, he took up literature. He founded his own Moscow magazine, in which his bright star of sentimental creativity, Poor Liza, was published.
In 1803 he became a historiographer. At this time, he began to work on the great work of his life - the History of the Russian State.
In 1810 he received the Order of St. Vladimir, 3rd degree. In 1816 he received the high rank of state councilor and became a Knight of the Order of St. Anne, 1st degree.
In 1818, 8 volumes of the History of the Russian State were published for the first time. He did not finish his enormous work; volume 12 was published after his death.
Karamzin’s first wife is Elizaveta Protasova, married in 1801, the wife died after giving birth to her daughter Sophia. The second wife is Ekaterina Kolyvanova.
After the Decembrist uprising on Senate Square, Karamzin died after an aggravated cold. He rests in the Tikhvin cemetery. Karamzin was a fundamentalist of Russian sentimentalism, a reformer of the Russian language. He added many new words to the vocabulary. He was one of the first creators of a comprehensive general work on the history of Russia.
Pushkin was a frequent guest of the Karamzins.
Karamzin owns an expression that he said about Russian reality, to the question - what is happening in Russia, the answer was this - They steal.
Historians believe that Poor Liza was named after Protasova.
Sophia, Karamzin's daughter, was accepted secular society, became a maid of honor at the imperial court, and was friends with Pushkin and Lermontov.
Karamzin had 5 sons and 4 daughters from his second marriage.
Wow!.. That's it!.. Be healthy!..
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin
Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born on December 1, 1766. in the family of a Simbirsk landowner, who came from an old noble family. He was brought up in a private Moscow boarding school. In adolescence, the future writer read a lot historical novels, in which he was particularly fascinated by "danger and heroic friendship." According to the noble custom of that time, enlisted in military service as a boy, he, “coming of age,” entered the regiment in which he had long been enrolled. But army service weighed heavily on him. The young lieutenant dreamed of doing literary work. The death of his father gave Karamzin a reason to ask for resignation, and the small inheritance he received made it possible to fulfill his long-standing dream - a trip abroad. The 23-year-old traveler visited Switzerland, Germany, France and England. This trip enriched him with a variety of impressions. Returning to Moscow, Karamzin published “Letters of a Russian Traveler,” where he described everything that struck him and was remembered in foreign lands: landscapes and the appearance of foreigners, folk morals and customs, city life and political system, architecture and painting, his meetings with writers and scientists , as well as various social events that he witnessed, including the beginning of the French Revolution (1789-1794).
For several years Karamzin published the Moscow Journal, and then the Vestnik Evropy magazine. He created a new type of magazine, in which literature, politics, and science coexisted. The various materials in these publications were written in an easy, elegant language, presented in a lively and entertaining manner, so they were not only accessible to the general public, but also contributed to the development of literary taste among readers.
Karamzin became the head of a new direction in Russian literature - sentimentalism. The main theme of sentimental literature is touching feelings, emotional experiences of a person, “the life of the heart.” Karamzin was one of the first to write about the joys and sufferings of modern, ordinary people, and not ancient heroes and mythological demigods. In addition, he was the first to introduce into Russian literature a simple, understandable language, close to colloquial.
The story “Poor Liza” brought Karamzin great success. Sensitive readers and especially female readers shed streams of tears over her. The pond at the Simonov Monastery in Moscow, where the heroine of the work Liza drowned herself because of unrequited love, began to be called “Lizin’s Pond”; real pilgrimages were made to him. Karamzin had long been planning to take the history of Russia seriously; he wrote several historical stories, including such brilliant works as “Marfa the Posadnitsa” and “Natalia, the Boyar’s Daughter.”
In 1803 The writer received from Emperor Alexander the official title of historiographer and permission to work in archives and libraries. For several years, Karamzin studied ancient chronicles, working around the clock, damaging his eyesight and damaging his health. Karamzin considered history a science that should educate people and instruct them in everyday life.
Nikolai Mikhailovich was a sincere supporter and defender of autocracy. He believed that “the autocracy founded and resurrected Russia.” Therefore, the historian’s focus was on the formation of supreme power in Russia, the reign of tsars and monarchs. But not every ruler of a state deserves approval. Karamzin was indignant towards any violence. For example, the historian condemned the tyrannical rule of Ivan the Terrible, the despotism of Peter and the harshness with which he carried out reforms, eradicating ancient Russian customs.
The enormous work created by the historian in a relatively short time was a stunning success with the public. “The History of the Russian State” was read by all enlightened Russia, it was read aloud in salons, discussed, and heated debates took place around it. When creating “The History of the Russian State,” Karamzin used a huge number of ancient chronicles and other historical documents. To give readers a true understanding, the historian has included notes in each volume. These notes are the result of colossal work.
In 1818 Karamzin was elected an honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences.