Lotman life and traditions of the Russian nobility briefly. YU

A duel (duel) is a pair fight taking place according to certain rules, with the aim of restoring honor, removing the shameful stain caused by an insult from an offended person. Thus, the role of the duel is socially symbolic.

The duel is a certain procedure for the restoration of honor and cannot be understood outside the very specifics of the concept of "honor" in the general system of ethics of the Russian Europeanized post-Petrine noble society. Naturally, from a position that rejected this concept in principle, the duel lost its meaning, turning into a ritualized murder.

A Russian nobleman of the 18th - early 19th centuries lived and acted under the influence of two opposing regulators of social behavior. As a loyal subject, a servant of the state, he obeyed the order. The psychological incentive for submission was the fear of punishment overtaking the disobedient. But at the same time, as a nobleman, a man of a class that was both a socially dominant corporation and a cultural elite, he was subject to the laws of honor. The psychological stimulus of submission here is shame. The ideal that noble culture creates for itself implies the complete expulsion of fear and the assertion of honor as the main legislator of behavior. In this sense, activities that demonstrate fearlessness become important. So, for example, if the “regular state” of Peter I still considers the behavior of a nobleman in war as serving the state good, and his courage only as a means to achieve this goal, then from the standpoint of honor, courage turns into an end in itself. From these positions, medieval knightly ethics is undergoing a well-known restoration. From a similar point of view (which is reflected in a peculiar way both in the "Lay of Igor's Campaign" and in the "Deeds of Devgen"), the behavior of a knight is not measured by defeat or victory, but has a self-contained value.

This is especially evident in relation to the duel: danger, coming face to face with death become purifying agents that remove insult from a person. The insulted person himself must decide (the correct decision indicates the degree of his possession of the laws of honor): is the dishonor so insignificant that a demonstration of fearlessness is enough to remove it - showing readiness for battle (reconciliation is possible after the challenge and its acceptance - by accepting the challenge, the offender thereby shows , which considers the opponent equal to himself and, therefore, rehabilitates his honor) or the iconic image of the battle (reconciliation occurs after the exchange of shots or sword blows without any bloody intentions on either side). If the insult was more serious, one that should be washed away with blood, the duel may end with the first wound (whose one does not matter, since honor is restored not by inflicting damage on the offender or revenge on him, but by the fact of shedding blood, including one's own). Finally, the offended may qualify the insult as fatal, requiring the death of one of the participants in the quarrel for its removal. It is essential that the assessment of the degree of insult - insignificant, bloody or deadly - must be correlated with the assessment from the social environment (for example, with regimental public opinion). A person who too easily goes to reconciliation can be branded as a coward, unjustifiably bloodthirsty - a breter.

The duel, as an institution of corporate honor, met with opposition from two sides. On the one hand, the government treated the fights invariably negatively. In the "Patent on duels and initiation of quarrels", which was the 49th chapter of Peter's "Military Regulations" (1716), it was prescribed: "If it happens that two are blown to the appointed place, and one is drawn against the other, then We command such, although none of them will be wounded or killed, without any mercy, and the seconds or witnesses, on whom they will prove, will be executed by death and their belongings will be unsubscribed.<...>If they begin to fight, and in that battle they are killed and wounded, then both the living and the dead will be hanged. K. A. Sofronenko believes that the "Patent" is directed "against the old feudal nobility." N. L. Brodsky spoke in the same spirit, who believed that “the duel, the custom of bloody revenge-revenge generated by the feudal-chivalric society, was preserved among the nobility.” However, the duel in Russia was not a relic, since nothing similar existed in the life of the Russian “old feudal nobility”. The fact that the duel is an innovation was clearly indicated by Catherine II: “Prejudices, not received from ancestors, but adopted or superficial, alien” (“Letter” dated April 21, 1787, cf.: “Instruction”, article 482) .

The statement of Nicholas I is characteristic: “I hate duels; it is barbarism; I don't think there's anything chivalrous about them."

Montesquieu pointed out the reasons for the negative attitude of the autocratic authorities to the custom of the duel: “Honor cannot be the principle of despotic states: there all people are equal and therefore cannot exalt themselves over each other; there all people are slaves and therefore cannot exalt themselves over anything ...<...>Can a despot tolerate it in his state? She places her glory in contempt for life, and the whole strength of a despot lies only in the fact that he can take life. How could she herself tolerate a despot?

Naturally, duels were persecuted in the official literature as a manifestation of love of freedom, "the reborn evil of arrogance and freethinking of this age."

On the other hand, the duel was criticized by democratic thinkers, who saw in it a manifestation of the class prejudice of the nobility and opposed noble honor to human, based on Reason and Nature. From this position, the duel became the object of educational satire or criticism. In “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow,” Radishchev wrote: “... you have a strong spirit, and you won’t consider it an insult if a donkey kicks you or a pig touches you with a stinking snout.”

“It happened that at least a little someone would inadvertently catch someone with a sword or a hat, if one hair on the head was damaged, if the cloth was bent on the shoulder, so you are welcome in the field ... If someone who is ill with teeth will give an answer in an undertone, if he has a runny nose, will he say something in the nose ... do not look at anything!. That and look, that the sword is on the hilt! .. Also, is anyone deaf, or short-sighted, but when, God forbid, he did not answer or did not see the bow ... is it a statosh case! Immediately swords in hand, hats on the head, and the chatter and felling began! This position is also captured in A. E. Izmailov's fable "Duel". A. Suvorov's negative attitude to the duel is known. Freemasons also reacted negatively to the duel.

Thus, in a duel, on the one hand, the narrow class idea of protecting corporate honor could come to the fore, and on the other, the universal idea of protecting human dignity, despite its archaic forms. In the face of a duel, the court shambler, the emperor's favorite, aristocrat and adjutant wing V. D. Novosiltsev turned out to be equal to the second lieutenant of the Semenovsky regiment without a fortune and connections from the provincial nobles, K. P. Chernov.

In this regard, the attitude of the Decembrists to the duel was ambivalent. Allowing in theory negative statements in the spirit of general enlightenment criticism of the duel, the Decembrists practically widely used the right to duel. So, E. P. Obolensky killed a certain Svinin in a duel; repeatedly called different people and fought with several K. F. Ryleev; A. I. Yakubovich was known as a bully. A noisy response from contemporaries was caused by the duel of Novosiltsev and Chernov, which acquired the character of a political clash between a member of a secret society who defended the honor of his sister and an aristocrat who despised the human dignity of ordinary people. Both duelists died a few days later from their wounds. Northern society turned Chernov's funeral into the first street manifestation in Russia.

A look at the duel as a means of protecting one's human dignity was not alien to Pushkin either. In the Kishinev period, Pushkin found himself in the position of a civilian young man, offensive to his vanity, surrounded by people in officer uniforms who had already proved their undoubted courage in the war. This explains his exaggerated scrupulousness during this period in matters of honor and almost bribery behavior. The Chisinau period is marked in the memoirs of contemporaries by the numerous challenges of Pushkin. A typical example is his duel with Lieutenant Colonel S. N. Starov, about which V. P. Gorchakov left memoirs. Pushkin's bad behavior during the dances in the officers' meeting, who, contrary to the demand of the officers, ordered a dance of his own choice, became the cause of the duel. It is significant that the challenge to the poet was sent not by any of the junior officers directly involved in the quarrel, but - on their behalf - by the commander of the 33rd Jaeger Regiment S. Starov, who was right there. Starov was 19 years older than Pushkin and significantly superior to him in rank. Such a challenge was contrary to the requirement of equality of opponents and clearly represented an attempt to besiege the impudent civilian boy. It was assumed, obviously, that Pushkin would be frightened of the duel and go to a public apology. Further events developed in the following order. Starov “approached Pushkin, who had just completed his figure. "You have done an impolite thing to my officer," said S.<таро>c, glancing resolutely at Pushkin, “wouldn’t you like to apologize to him, or will you deal personally with me.” “What to apologize for, colonel,” Pushkin answered quickly, “I don’t know; as for you, I am at your service." - "So until tomorrow, Alexander Sergeevich." - "Very well, Colonel." Shaking hands, they parted.<...>When they arrived at the place of the duel, a snowstorm with a strong wind interfered with the aim, the opponents fired a shot, and both missed; another shot, and another miss; then the seconds resolutely insisted that the duel, if they did not want to end up like this, should be canceled without fail, and assured that there were no more charges. "So, until another time," they both repeated in one voice. "Goodbye, Alexander Sergeevich." "Goodbye, Colonel."

The duel was carried out according to all the rules of the ritual of honor: there was no personal hostility between the shooters, and the impeccable observance of the ritual during the duel aroused mutual respect in both. This, however, did not prevent a secondary exchange of shots and, if possible, a second duel.

“A day later ... reconciliation took place quickly.
“I have always respected you, colonel, and therefore I accepted your offer,” said Pushkin.
“And they did well, Alexander Sergeevich,” answered S.<таро>in, - by this you have increased my respect for you even more, and I must tell you the truth that you stood under bullets as well as you write well. These words of sincere greeting touched Pushkin, and he rushed to embrace S.<таро>wa." Careful observance of the ritual of honor equalized the position of a civilian youth and a military lieutenant colonel, giving them an equal right to public respect. The ritual cycle was completed by an episode of Pushkin's demonstrative readiness to fight a duel, defending Starov's honor: “Two days after the reconciliation, it was about his duel with S.<таровы>m. Pushkin was extolled and S<таро>va. Pushkin flared up, threw down his cue and straight and quickly approached the youth. "Gentlemen," he said, "how did we end up with S<таровы>m is our business, but I announce to you that if you allow yourself to condemn C<таро>wa, whom I cannot but respect, then I will take this as a personal insult, and each of you will answer me properly.

This episode, precisely because of its ritual “classicism”, attracted the attention of contemporaries and was widely discussed in society. Pushkin gave it artistic perfection by ending the exchange of shots with a rhyming epigram:

I'm alive.
Starov
Healthy.
The duel is not over.

It is characteristic that this particular episode received a complete formula in the folklore memory of contemporaries:

Colonel Starov,
Thank God, healthy.

The image of a poet composing poems during a duel is a variant of the dueling legend, which poetizes, as the pinnacle of brilliant behavior at the barrier, careless immersion in extraneous pursuits. In The Shot, Count B*** is eating cherries at the barrier; in E. Rostand's play Cyrano de Bergerac, the hero composes a poem during a duel. Pushkin demonstrated the same during his duel with Starov.

Breter behavior as a means of social self-defense and the assertion of one's equality in society, perhaps, Pushkin's attention in these years to Voiture, a French poet of the 17th century, asserted his equality in aristocratic circles with emphatic breter. Regarding this poet's passion for fights, Talleman de Reo wrote: “Not every brave man can count as many fights as our hero had, for he fought in a duel at least four times; day and night, in the bright sun, in the moon and in the light of torches.

Pushkin's attitude to the duel is contradictory: as the heir to the enlighteners of the 18th century, he sees in it a manifestation of "secular hostility", which is "wildly afraid of false shame." In Eugene Onegin, the cult of the duel is supported by Zaretsky, a man of dubious honesty. However, at the same time, a duel is also a means of protecting the dignity of an offended person. She puts on a par the mysterious poor Silvio and the favorite of the fate of Count B ***. A duel is a prejudice, but an honor that is forced to turn to its help is not a prejudice.

It was precisely because of its duality that the duel implied the presence of a strict and carefully performed ritual. Only punctual adherence to the established order distinguished the duel from the murder. But the need for strict adherence to the rules came into conflict with the absence in Russia of a strictly codified dueling system. Under the conditions of an official ban, no dueling codes could appear in the Russian press, and there was no legal body that could assume the authority to streamline the rules of the duel. Of course, one could use the French codes, but the rules set forth there did not quite coincide with the Russian dueling tradition. Strictness in observing the rules was achieved by appealing to the authority of experts, living bearers of tradition and arbitrators in matters of honor. This role in "Eugene Onegin" is performed by Zaretsky.

The role of the seconds was as follows: as mediators between opponents, they were primarily obliged to make every effort to reconcile. It was the duty of the seconds to find every opportunity, without prejudice to the interests of honor, and especially watching over the observance of the rights of their principal, for a peaceful solution to the conflict. Even on the battlefield, the seconds had to make one last attempt at reconciliation. In addition, the seconds work out the conditions for the duel. In this case, the unspoken rules instruct them to try to prevent irritated opponents from choosing more bloody forms of duel than required by the minimum of strict rules of honor. If reconciliation turned out to be impossible, as was the case, for example, in Pushkin's duel with Dantes, the seconds drew up written conditions and carefully monitored the strict execution of the entire procedure.

For example, conditions signed by the seconds of Pushkin and Dantes, were as follows (original in French):
"1. Opponents stand at a distance of twenty steps from each other and five steps (for each) from barriers, the distance between which is equal to ten steps.
2. Opponents armed with pistols on this sign, going one on another, but in no case crossing the barriers, can shoot.
3. Moreover, it is assumed that after the shot the opponents are not allowed to change their place, so that the one who fired first will be subjected to the fire of his opponent at the same distance.
4. When both sides make a shot, then in case of ineffectiveness, the duel is resumed as if for the first time: opponents are placed at the same distance of 20 steps, the same barriers and the same rules remain.
5. Seconds are indispensable mediators in any explanation between opponents at the battlefield.
6. The seconds, undersigned and vested with full authority, ensure, each for his side, with his honor, strict observance of the conditions set forth here.

The conditions of the duel between Pushkin and Dantes were as cruel as possible (the duel was designed for a fatal outcome), but the conditions for the duel between Onegin and Lensky, to our surprise, were also very cruel, although there were clearly no reasons for a deadly enmity. Since Zaretsky separated his friends by 32 steps, and the barriers, apparently, were at a "noble distance", that is, at a distance of 10 steps, each could take 11 steps. However, it is possible that Zaretsky determined the distance between the barriers to be less than 10 paces. Apparently, there was no requirement that after the first shot the opponents did not move, which pushed them to the most dangerous tactics: without shooting on the move, quickly go to the barrier and aim at a stationary enemy at an extremely close distance. Such were the cases when both duelists became victims. So it was in the duel between Novosiltsev and Chernov. The requirement that the opponents halt at the spot where the first shot caught them was the least possible softening of the conditions. It is characteristic that when Griboedov fired with Yakubovich, although there was no such requirement in the conditions, he nevertheless stopped at the place where his shot caught him and fired without approaching the barrier.

In "Eugene Onegin" Zaretsky was the sole manager of the duel, and it is all the more noticeable that, "in duels, a classic and a pedant", he dealt with great omissions, or rather, deliberately ignoring everything that could eliminate the bloody outcome. Even at the first visit to Onegin, during the transfer of the cartel, he was obliged to discuss the possibilities of reconciliation. Before the start of the duel, an attempt to end the matter peacefully was also part of his direct duties, especially since no blood offense had been inflicted, and it was clear to everyone except the eighteen-year-old Lensky that the matter was a misunderstanding. Instead, he "stand up without explanation<...>Having a lot to do at home." Zaretsky could stop the duel at another moment: the appearance of Onegin with a servant instead of a second was a direct insult to him (seconds, like opponents, must be socially equal; Guillo - a Frenchman and a freely hired lackey - could not formally be taken away, although his appearance in this roles, as well as the motivation that he was at least a "small honest" were an unambiguous insult to Zaretsky), and at the same time a gross violation of the rules, since the seconds had to meet the day before without opponents and draw up the rules of the duel.

Finally, Zaretsky had every reason to prevent a bloody outcome by declaring Onegin to have failed to appear. “To make you wait at the place of the fight is extremely impolite. Whoever arrives on time must wait for his opponent for a quarter of an hour. After this period, the first person to appear has the right to leave the place of the duel and his seconds must draw up a protocol indicating the non-arrival of the enemy. Onegin was more than an hour late.

Thus, Zaretsky behaved not only as a supporter of the strict rules of the art of dueling, but as a person interested in the most scandalous and noisy - which, in relation to a duel, meant bloody - outcome.

Here is an example from the field of "dueling classics": in 1766, Casanova fought a duel in Warsaw with the favorite of the Polish king, Branicki, who appeared on the field of honor, accompanied by a brilliant retinue. Casanova, a foreigner and traveler, could only bring as a witness one of his servants. However, he refused such a decision as obviously impossible - insulting to the enemy and his seconds and not flattering to himself: the dubious dignity of a second would cast a shadow on his own impeccability as a man of honor. He preferred to ask the enemy to appoint a second for him from among his aristocratic retinue. Casanova took the risk of having an enemy as a second, but did not agree to call on an indentured servant to be a witness in a matter of honor.

It is curious to note that a similar situation was partly repeated in the tragic duel between Pushkin and Dantes. Having experienced difficulties in finding a second, Pushkin wrote on the morning of January 27, 1837 to Arshiak that he would bring his second “only to the meeting place”, and then, contradicting himself, but quite in the spirit of Onegin, he allows Gekkern to choose his second : “... I accept him in advance, even if it’s his livery footman” (XVI, 225 and 410). However, d "Arshiak, unlike Zaretsky, decisively suppressed this possibility, stating that "a meeting between the seconds, necessary before the duel "(highlighted by d" Arshiak. - Yu. L.), is a condition, the refusal of which is tantamount to refusing to duel. The meeting of d "Arshiak and Danzas took place, and the duel became formally possible. The meeting between Zaretsky and Guillot happened only on the battlefield, but Zaretsky did not stop the fight, although he could have done it.

Onegin and Zaretsky both break the rules of a duel. The first, to demonstrate his irritated contempt for the story, into which he fell against his own will and in the seriousness of which he still does not believe, and Zaretsky because he sees in a duel an amusing, albeit sometimes bloody, story, an object of gossip and practical jokes ...

Onegin's behavior in the duel irrefutably testifies that the author wanted to make him an unwilling killer. Both for Pushkin and for the readers of the novel, who are familiar with the duel firsthand, it was obvious that the one who wants the unconditional death of the enemy does not shoot at once, from a long distance and under the muzzle of someone else's pistol distracting attention, but, taking the risk, gives to shoot himself, demands the enemy to the barrier and from a short distance shoots him like a stationary target.

So, for example, during the duel of Zavadovsky and Sheremetev, famous for its role in the biography of Griboedov (1817), we see a classic case of the behavior of a breter: “When they began to converge on the nearest ones from the extreme limits of the barrier, Zavadovsky, who was an excellent shooter, walked quietly and completely calm. Whether Zavadovsky's composure infuriated Sheremetev, or simply a feeling of anger overpowered his mind, but only he, as they say, could not stand it and fired at Zavadovsky, not yet reaching the barrier. The bullet flew close to Zavadovsky, because it tore off part of the collar of his frock coat, near the very neck. Then already, and this is very understandable, Zavadovsky got angry. Ah! - he said. – II en voulait a ma vie! A la barriere!“ (Wow! he is trying on my life! To the barrier!)

There was nothing to do. Sheremetev approached. Zavadovsky fired. The blow was fatal - he wounded Sheremetev in the stomach!

In order to understand what pleasure a person like Zaretsky could find in all this business, it should be added that Pushkin's friend Kaverin, who was present at the duel as a spectator (a member of the Union of Welfare, whom Onegin met at Talon in the first chapter of "Eugene Onegin"; a famous reveler and Buyan), seeing how the wounded Sheremetev “jumped several times on the spot, then fell and began to roll in the snow,” went up to the wounded man and said: “What, Vasya? Turnip? After all, turnips are a delicacy among the people, and this expression is used by them ironically in the sense: “what then? is it tasty? is it a good snack? It should be noted that, contrary to the rules of a duel, the audience often gathered for a duel as a spectacle. There is reason to believe that a crowd of curious people was also present at the tragic duel of Lermontov, turning it into an extravagant spectacle. The requirement for the absence of extraneous witnesses had serious grounds, since the latter could push the participants in the spectacle, which was acquiring a theatrical character, to more bloody actions than the rules of honor required.

If an experienced shooter fired first, then this, as a rule, indicated excitement, which led to an accidental pull of the trigger. Here is a description of the duel in the famous novel by Bulwer-Lytton, carried out according to all the rules of dandyism: the English dandy Pelham and the French dandy, both experienced duellists, are shooting:

“The Frenchman and his second were already waiting for us.<...>(this is a deliberate insult; the norm of refined politeness is to arrive at the place of the duel exactly at the same time. Onegin exceeded everything permissible, being more than an hour late. - Yu. L.). I noticed that the enemy was pale and restless - I thought, not from fear, but from rage<...>I looked at d "Asimar at point-blank range and took aim. His pistol fired a second earlier than he expected - his hand probably trembled - the bullet hit my hat. I aimed more accurately and wounded him in the shoulder - exactly where I wanted " .

However, the question arises: why, after all, did Onegin shoot at Lensky, and not past? Firstly, a demonstrative shot to the side was a new insult and could not contribute to reconciliation. Secondly, in the event of an unsuccessful exchange of shots, the duel began anew, and the life of the enemy could be saved only at the cost of his own death or wound, and the Breter legends that formed public opinion poeticized the killer, not the killed.

Another important circumstance must also be taken into account. The duel, with its strict ritual, representing a holistic theatrical performance - a sacrifice for the sake of honor, has a tough scenario. Like any strict ritual, it deprives the participants of their individual will. An individual participant has no power to stop or change anything in a duel. In the description of Bulwer-Lytton there is an episode: “When we took our places, Vincent (second. - Yu. L.) came up to me and said quietly:
- For God's sake, let me settle the matter amicably, if possible!
“That is not in our power,” I replied. Compare in "War and Peace":
“Well, start! Dolokhov said.
“Well,” said Pierre, still smiling.
It was getting scary. It was obvious that the deed that began so easily could not be prevented by anything, that it went on by itself, already independently of the will of the people, and had to be done. It is significant that Pierre, who thought all night: “Why this duel, this murder?” - hitting the battlefield, fired first and wounded Dolokhov in the left side (the wound could easily be fatal).

Exceptionally interesting in this regard are the notes of N. Muravyov-Karsky, an informed and accurate witness who quotes Griboyedov's words about his feelings during the duel with Yakubovich. Griboedov did not feel any personal hostility towards his opponent, the duel with which was only the end? "quadruple duel" started by Sheremetev and Zavadovsky. He offered a peaceful outcome, which Yakubovich refused, also emphasizing that he did not feel any personal enmity towards Griboyedov and only fulfilled his word given to the late Sheremetev. And it is all the more significant that, having risen with peaceful intentions to the barrier, Griboyedov during the duel felt a desire to kill Yakubovich - the bullet passed so close to the head that “Yakubovich considered himself wounded: he grabbed the back of his head, looked at his hand ...<...>Griboedov later told us that he was aiming at Yakubovich's head and wanted to kill him, but that this was not his first intention when he took his place.

A vivid example of a change in the plan of behavior conceived by the duelist under the influence of the power of dueling logic over the will of a person is found in A. Bestuzhev's story "A Novel in Seven Letters" (1823). On the night before the duel, the hero firmly decides to sacrifice himself and looks forward to death: “I say I will die, because I decided to wait for the shot ... I offended him.” However, the next chapter of this novel in letters tells about a completely unexpected turn of events: the hero committed an act diametrically opposed to his intentions. “I killed him, I killed this noble, generous man!<...>We approached from twenty paces, I walked firmly, but without any thought, without any intention: the feelings hidden in the depths of my soul completely clouded my mind. At six paces, I don’t know why, I don’t know how, I pressed the fatal sneller - and a shot rang out in my heart! .. I saw Erast shudder ... When the smoke passed, he was already lying on the snow, and the blood rushing from the wound, hissing , froze in it.

For the reader, who has not yet lost a live connection with the dueling tradition and is able to understand the semantic nuances of the picture painted by Pushkin in "Eugene Onegin", it was obvious that Onegin "loved him [Lensky] and, aiming at him, did not want to hurt him."

This ability to duel, by drawing people in, depriving them of their own will and turning them into toys and automata, is very important.

This is especially important for understanding the image of Onegin. The hero of the novel, who removes all forms of external leveling of his personality and thereby opposes Tatyana, who is organically connected with folk customs, beliefs, habits, in the sixth chapter of "Eugene Onegin" betrays himself: against his own desire, he recognizes the dictates of the norms of behavior imposed on him by Zaretsky and " public opinion”, and immediately, losing his will, becomes a puppet in the hands of a faceless duel ritual. Pushkin has a whole gallery of "reviving" statues, but there is also a chain of living people turning into automata. Onegin in the sixth chapter acts as the ancestor of these characters.

The main mechanism by which society, despised by Onegin, still powerfully controls his actions, is the fear of being ridiculous or becoming the subject of gossip. It should be borne in mind that the unwritten rules of the Russian duel of the late 18th - early 19th centuries were much more severe than, for example, in France, and with the nature of the late Russian duel legalized by the act of May 13, 1894 (see A.I. Kuprin's "Duel") could not be compared at all. While the usual distance between the barriers at the beginning of the 19th century was 10-12 steps, and there were cases when the opponents were separated by only 6 steps, for the period between May 20, 1894 and May 20, 1910, out of 322 duels that took place, not one was not conducted with a distance of less than 12 steps and only one with a distance of 12 steps. The bulk of the fights took place at a distance of 20-30 steps, that is, from a distance from which no one thought to shoot at the beginning of the 19th century. Naturally, out of 322 fights, only 15 were fatal. Meanwhile, at the beginning of the 19th century, ineffective duels evoked an ironic attitude. In the absence of firmly fixed rules, the importance of the atmosphere created around the fights by the breters, the keepers of the dueling traditions, sharply increased. These last cultivated duel bloody and cruel. A person who went to the barrier had to show extraordinary spiritual independence in order to maintain his own type of behavior, and not accept the norms approved and imposed on him. So, for example, Onegin's behavior was determined by fluctuations between the natural human feelings that he experienced in relation to Lensky, and the fear of seeming ridiculous or cowardly, violating the conventional norms of behavior at the barrier.

Any, not just "wrong" duel was a criminal offense in Russia. Each duel later became the subject of litigation. Both opponents and seconds were criminally liable. The court, following the letter of the law, sentenced the duelists to death, which, however, in the future for officers was most often replaced by demotion to soldiers with the right to serve (transfer to the Caucasus made it possible to quickly obtain an officer rank again). Onegin, as a non-serving nobleman, most likely would have got off with a month or two of a fortress and subsequent church repentance. However, judging by the text of the novel, the duel between Onegin and Lensky did not become the subject of legal proceedings at all. This could have happened if the parish priest recorded Lensky's death as an accident or suicide. Stanzas XL-XLI of the sixth chapter, despite their connection with the common elegiac clichés of the "young poet's" grave, suggest that Lensky was buried outside the cemetery fence, that is, as a suicide.

We find a real duel encyclopedia in A. Bestuzhev's story "Test" (1830). The author condemns the duel from enlightenment traditions and at the same time describes the entire ritual of preparation for it with almost documentary detail:

“Valerian’s old servant melted lead in an iron ladle, kneeling before the fire, and poured bullets - a business that he interrupted with frequent prayers and crosses. At the table, some artillery officer cut, stroked and tried on bullets for pistols. At that moment, the door carefully opened, and a third person, a cavalryman of the guards, entered and interrupted their work for a minute.
“Bonjour, capitaine,” the gunner said to the incoming man, “are you all ready?”
- I brought two pairs with me: one Kuchenreiter, the other Lepage: we will examine them together.
“It is our duty, Captain. Did you bring bullets?
“The bullets were made in Paris, and, it is true, with special precision.
“Oh, don’t count on it, captain. I already happened once to get into trouble from such gullibility. The second bullets - and now I blush from the memory - did not reach half the barrel, and no matter how hard we tried to catch up with them to the place, it was all in vain. The opponents were forced to shoot with saddle pistols - almost the size of a mountain unicorn, and it's good that one hit the other right in the forehead, where every bullet, and less than a pea and more than a cherry, produces the same effect. But consider what reproach we would be subjected to if this buckshot smashed an arm or a leg to smithereens?
- Classical truth! answered the cavalryman, smiling.
- Do you have polished gunpowder?
- And the most fine-grained.
So much the worse: leave him at home. First, for the sake of uniformity, we will take ordinary rifle powder; secondly, a polished one does not always flare up quickly, but it happens that a spark even glides over it.
– How do we do with the Schnellers?
- Yes Yes! those damned schnellers always confuse my mind, and more than one good person has been put on the back burner. Poor L-oh died from a shneller in my eyes: his pistol shot into the ground, and the opponent laid him like a hazel grouse on the barrier. I saw how another reluctantly fired into the air when he could get the muzzle into the opponent's chest. It is almost impossible and always useless to not allow the shnellers to be cocked, because an inconspicuous, even involuntary movement of the finger can cock it - and then the cold-blooded shooter has all the benefits. Allow - how long to lose a shot! these gunsmiths are rogues: they seem to imagine that pistols are invented only for the archery club!
“However, wouldn’t it be better to ban the Schneller Platoon?” You can warn the gentlemen how to handle the spring; and the rest to rely on honor. What do you think, dearest?
- I agree to everything that can facilitate the duel; will we have a doctor, mister captain?
- I visited two yesterday - and was enraged by their greed ... They began with a preface about responsibility - and ended with a demand for a deposit; I did not dare to entrust the fate of the duel to such hucksters.
“In that case, I undertake to bring with me a doctor—the greatest original, but the noblest man in the world. I happened to take him right out of bed to the field, and he decided without hesitation. “I know very well, gentlemen,” he said, winding bandages around the instrument, “that I can neither forbid nor prevent your recklessness, and I will gladly accept your invitation. I am glad to buy, albeit at my own risk, the relief of suffering humanity! ”But, most surprising of all, he refused a rich gift for a trip and treatment.
“It does honor to humanity and medicine. Is Valerian Mikhailovich still sleeping?
- He wrote letters for a long time and fell asleep for no more than three hours. Advise, do me a favor, to your comrade that he does not eat anything before the duel. In misfortune, the bullet may slip and fly through without damaging the viscera, if they retain their elasticity; besides, and the hand on an empty stomach is more true. Have you taken care of the four-seat carriage? In a two-seater - neither help the wounded, nor lay down the dead.
- I ordered to hire a carriage in a far part of the city and choose a simpler cab so that he would not guess and would not let you know.
- You did the best you could, captain; otherwise the police smell blood no worse than a crow. Now about the conditions: is the barrier still at six steps?
- At six. The prince does not want to hear about a greater distance. A wound only on an even shot ends the duel - a flash and a misfire are not among the numbers.
- What stubborn people! Let them fight for the cause - so it’s not a pity for gunpowder; and then for a woman's whim and for her quirks.
- Have we seen many fights for a just cause? And then everything is for actresses, for cards, for horses or for a portion of ice cream.
“To be honest, all these duels, for which it is difficult or embarrassing to tell the reason, do us a little credit.”

The conditional ethics of the duel existed in parallel with the universal norms of morality, without mixing or canceling them. This led to the fact that the winner of the duel, on the one hand, was surrounded by a halo of public interest, typically expressed in the words that Karenin recalls: “Well done; challenged to a duel and killed” (“Anna Karenina”). On the other hand, all dueling customs could not make him forget that he was a murderer.

For example, around Martynov, the murderer of Lermontov, in Kiev, where he lived out his life, a romantic legend spread (Martynov, who had the character of Grushnitsky, apparently contributed to it), which reached M. Bulgakov, who told about it in "Theatrical Novel" : “What mournful eyes he has ...<...>He once killed a friend in a duel in Pyatigorsk ... and now this friend comes to him at night, nodding his head in the moonlight at the window.

V. A. Olenina recalled the Decembrist E. Obolensky. "This unfortunate one had a duel - and killed - since Orestes, pursued by the furies, did not find peace anywhere." Olenina knew Obolensky until December 14, but the pupil of M.I. Muravyov-Apostol, who grew up in Siberia, A.P. Sozonovich, recalls: “This unfortunate event tormented him all his life.” Neither education, nor trial, nor hard labor softened this experience. The same can be said about a number of other cases.

Conversations about Russian culture:

Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII-beginning of the XIX century)

Lotman Yu.M. Conversations about Russian culture: Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII-beginningXIXcentury) - St. Petersburg, 2000.

Questions and tasks for the text:

What role did the ball play in the life of a Russian nobleman, according to Lotman?

Was the ball different from other forms of entertainment?

How were nobles prepared for balls?

In what literary works did you come across a description of the ball, the attitude towards it or individual dances?

What is the meaning of the word dandyism?

Restore the model of the appearance and behavior of the Russian dandy.

What role did the duel play in the life of a Russian nobleman?

How were duels treated in tsarist Russia?

How was the duel ritual carried out?

Give examples of duels in history and literary works?

Lotman Yu.M. Conversations about Russian culture: Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII-early XIX century)

Dancing was an important structural element of noble life. Their role differed significantly both from the function of dances in the folk life of that time, and from the modern one.

In the life of a Russian metropolitan nobleman of the 18th - early 19th centuries, time was divided into two halves: staying at home was devoted to family and household concerns - here the nobleman acted as a private person; the other half was occupied by service - military or civilian, in which the nobleman acted as a loyal subject, serving the sovereign and the state, as a representative of the nobility in the face of other estates. The opposition of these two forms of behavior was filmed in the “meeting” crowning the day - at a ball or a dinner party. Here the social life of a nobleman was realized ... he was a nobleman in the noble assembly, a man of his class among his own.

Thus, on the one hand, the ball turned out to be a sphere opposite to the service - an area of easy communication, secular recreation, a place where the boundaries of the official hierarchy were weakened. The presence of ladies, dances, the norms of secular communication introduced off-duty value criteria, and the young lieutenant, deftly dancing and able to make the ladies laugh, could feel superior to the aging colonel who had been in battles. On the other hand, the ball was an area of public representation, a form of social organization, one of the few forms of collective life permitted in Russia at that time. In this sense, secular life received the value of a public cause. The answer of Catherine II to the question of Fonvizin is characteristic: “Why are we not ashamed to do nothing?” - "... to live in society is not to do anything" 16 .

Since the time of the Petrine assemblies, the question of the organizational forms of secular life has also become acute. Forms of recreation, communication of youth, calendar ritual, which were basically common to both the people and the boyar-noble environment, had to give way to a specifically noble structure of life. The internal organization of the ball was made a task of exceptional cultural importance, since it was called upon to give forms of communication between "gentlemen" and "ladies", to determine the type of social behavior within the noble culture. This entailed the ritualization of the ball, the creation of a strict sequence of parts, the allocation of stable and mandatory elements.. The grammar of the ball arose, and it itself formed into a kind of holistic theatrical performance, in which each element (from the entrance to the hall to the departure) corresponded to typical emotions, fixed values, behavior styles. However, the strict ritual, which brought the ball closer to the parade, made possible retreats all the more significant, “ballroom liberties”, which increased compositionally towards its finale, building the ball as a struggle between “order” and “freedom”.

The main element of the ball as a social and aesthetic action was dancing. They served as the organizing core of the evening, setting the type and style of the conversation. "Mazurochka chatter" required superficial, shallow topics, but also entertaining and acute conversation, the ability to quickly respond epigrammatically.

Dance training began early - from the age of five or six. So, for example, Pushkin began to learn dancing already in 1808...

Early dance training was excruciating and resembled the tough training of an athlete or the training of a recruit by an industrious sergeant major. The compiler of the “Rules”, published in 1825, L. Petrovsky, himself an experienced dance master, describes some of the methods of initial training in this way, condemning not the method itself, but only its too harsh application: “The teacher should pay attention to the fact that students from strong stress was not tolerated in health. Someone told me that his teacher considered him an indispensable rule that the student, despite his natural inability, should keep his legs to the side, like him, in a parallel line ... As a student, he was 22 years old, fairly decent in height and considerable legs, moreover, faulty; then the teacher, unable to do anything himself, considered it a duty to use four people, of whom two twisted their legs, and two held their knees. No matter how much this one shouted, they only laughed and did not want to hear about the pain - until finally it cracked in the leg, and then the tormentors left him ... "

A long training gave the young man not only dexterity during dancing, but also confidence in movements, freedom and ease in posing a figure, which in a certain way influenced the mental structure of a person: in the conditional world of secular communication, he felt confident and free, like an experienced actor on the stage. Elegance, reflected in the accuracy of movements, was a sign of good education ...

The aristocratic simplicity of the movements of people of “good society” both in life and in literature is opposed by stiffness or excessive swagger (the result of a struggle with one’s own shyness) of the gestures of a commoner ...

The ball at the beginning of the 19th century began with the Polish (polonaise), which replaced the minuet in the solemn function of the first dance. The minuet has become a thing of the past along with royal France...

In War and Peace, Tolstoy, describing Natasha's first ball, contrasts the polonaise, which opens "the sovereign, smiling and leading the mistress of the house out of time" ... to the second dance - the waltz, which becomes the moment of Natasha's triumph.

Pushkin described it like this:

Monotonous and insane

Like a whirlwind of young life,

The waltz whirl is whirling noisily;

The couple flashes by the couple.

The epithets "monotonous and insane" have not only an emotional meaning. “Monotonous” - because, unlike the mazurka, in which solo dances and the invention of new figures played a huge role at that time, and even more so from the dance - playing the cotillion, the waltz consisted of the same constantly repeating movements. The feeling of monotony was also intensified by the fact that "at that time the waltz was danced in two steps, and not in three steps, as it is now" 17 . The definition of the waltz as "mad" has a different meaning: ... the waltz ... enjoyed a reputation in the 1820s as an obscene or at least unnecessarily free dance ... Genlis in the "Critical and Systematic Dictionary of Court Etiquette": "Young a person, lightly dressed, throws herself into the arms of a young man, who presses her to his chest, who carries her away with such swiftness that her heart involuntarily begins to beat, and her head goes round! This is what this waltz is! .. Modern youth is so natural that, putting refinement at nothing, they dance waltzes with glorified simplicity and passion.

Not only the boring moralist Genlis, but also the fiery Werther Goethe considered the waltz a dance so intimate that he swore that he would not allow his future wife to dance it with anyone but himself...

However, the words of Genlis are also interesting in another respect: the waltz is opposed to classical dances as romantic; passionate, crazy, dangerous and close to nature, he opposes the etiquette dances of the old days. The “simplicity” of the waltz was acutely felt ... The waltz was admitted to the balls of Europe as a tribute to the new time. It was a fashionable and youthful dance.

The sequence of dances during the ball formed a dynamic composition. Each dance ... set a certain style of not only movements, but also conversation. In order to understand the essence of the ball, one must keep in mind that the dances were only an organizing core in it. The chain of dances also organized the sequence of moods... Each dance entailed decent topics of conversation for it... An interesting example of a change in the topic of conversation in a sequence of dances is found in Anna Karenina. "Vronsky went through several waltz rounds with Kitty"... She expects words of recognition from him that should decide her fate, but an important conversation needs a corresponding moment in the dynamics of the ball. It is possible to lead it by no means at any moment and not at any dance. “During the quadrille, nothing significant was said, there was an intermittent conversation ... But Kitty did not expect more from the quadrille. She waited with bated breath for the mazurka. It seemed to her that everything should be decided in the mazurka.

The mazurka formed the center of the ball and marked its climax. The mazurka was danced with numerous bizarre figures and a male solo constituting the climax of the dance... Within the mazurka there were several distinct styles. The difference between the capital and the provinces was expressed in the opposition of the "refined" and "bravura" performance of the mazurka...

Russian dandyism.

The word "dandy" (and its derivative - "dandyism") is difficult to translate into Russian. Rather, this word is not only conveyed by several Russian words that are opposite in meaning, but also defines, at least in the Russian tradition, very different social phenomena.

Born in England, dandyism included a national opposition to French fashions, which caused violent indignation among English patriots at the end of the 18th century. N. Karamzin in "Letters from a Russian Traveler" described how during his (and his Russian friends') walks around London, a crowd of boys threw mud at a man dressed in French fashion. In contrast to the French "refinement" of clothing, English fashion canonized the tailcoat, which had previously been only clothing for riding. "Rough" and sporty, it was perceived as the national English. Pre-revolutionary French fashion cultivated elegance and sophistication, while English fashion permitted extravagance and put forward originality as the highest value. Thus, dandyism was painted in tones of national specificity and in this sense, on the one hand, it connected with romanticism, and on the other hand, it adjoined the anti-French patriotic sentiments that swept Europe in the first decades of the 19th century.

From this point of view, dandyism took on the color of romantic rebellion. It was focused on the extravagance of behavior that offended secular society, and on the romantic cult of individualism. A demeanor offensive to the world, "indecent" swagger of gestures, demonstrative shock - all forms of the destruction of secular prohibitions were perceived as poetic. This lifestyle was characteristic of Byron.

At the opposite pole was that interpretation of dandyism, which was developed by the most famous dandy of the era - George Bremmel. Here, individualistic contempt for social norms took on other forms. Byron contrasted the pampered world with the energy and heroic rudeness of the romantic, Bremmel contrasted the pampered refinement of the individualist with the rough philistinism of the "secular crowd" 19 . This second type of behavior Bulwer-Lytton later attributed to the hero of the novel "Pelham, or the Adventures of a Gentleman" (1828) - a work that aroused Pushkin's admiration and influenced some of his literary ideas and even, at some moments, his everyday behavior ...

The art of dandyism creates a complex system of its own culture, which outwardly manifests itself in a kind of "poetry of a refined suit" ... The hero of Bulwer-Lytton proudly says to himself that he "introduced starched ties" in England. He, "by the power of his example" ... "ordered to wipe the lapels of his over the knee boots with 20 champagne."

Pushkinsky Eugene Onegin "at least three hours / Spent in front of the mirrors."

However, tailcoat cut and similar fashion attributes are only the outward expression of dandyism. They are too easily imitated by the profane, to whom his inner aristocratic essence is inaccessible... A man should make a tailor, not a tailor - a man.

The Bulwer-Lytton novel, which is, as it were, a fictionalized program of dandyism, became widespread in Russia, it was not the cause of the emergence of Russian dandyism, rather, on the contrary: Russian dandyism aroused interest in the novel ...

It is known that Pushkin, like his hero Charsky from Egyptian Nights, could not stand the role of “poet in secular society” so cute for romantics like the Dollmaker. The words are autobiographical: “The public looks at him (the poet) as if they were their own property; in her opinion, he was born for her "benefit and pleasure" ...

The dandyism of Pushkin's behavior is not in an imaginary commitment to gastronomy, but in frank mockery, almost impudence ... It is impudence, covered with mocking politeness, that forms the basis of the behavior of a dandy. The hero of Pushkin's unfinished "Novel in Letters" accurately describes the mechanism of dandy impudence: "Men are superbly dissatisfied with my fatuite indolente, which is still new here. They are all the more furious because I am extremely courteous and decent, and they do not understand what exactly my impudence consists of - although they feel that I am impudent.

Typical dandy behavior was known among Russian dandies long before the names of Byron and Bremmel, as well as the word "dandy" itself, became known in Russia ... Karamzin in 1803 described this curious phenomenon of the fusion of rebellion and cynicism, the transformation of egoism into a kind of religion and a mocking attitude towards all the principles of "vulgar" morality. The hero of “My Confession” proudly tells about his adventures: “I made a lot of noise on my journey - by jumping in country dances with important ladies of the German Princely Courts, deliberately dropping them on the ground in the most obscene way; and most of all, by kissing the pope's shoes with the good Catholics, biting his leg, and making the poor old man scream with all his might ... In the prehistory of Russian dandyism, many notable characters can be noted. Some of them are the so-called wheezing ... "Wheezing" as a phenomenon that has already passed is mentioned by Pushkin in the versions of "House in Kolomna":

Guardsmen protracted,

You wheezers

(but your wheezing fell silent) 21.

Griboedov in "Woe from Wit" calls Skalozub: "Wheepy, strangled, bassoon." The meaning of these military jargons of the era before 1812 remains incomprehensible to the modern reader ... All three names of Skalozub (“Wheezy, strangled, bassoon”) speak of a constricted waist (cf. the words of Skalozub himself: “And the waist is so narrow”). This also explains Pushkin's expression "Protracted Guardsmen" - that is, tied in the belt. Tightening the belt to rival the female waist - hence the comparison of a constricted officer with a bassoon - gave the military fashionista the appearance of a "strangled man" and justified calling him a "wheeper". The idea of a narrow waist as an important sign of male beauty persisted for several decades. Nicholas I was tightly tied, even when his belly grew back in the 1840s. He preferred to endure intense physical suffering in order to maintain the illusion of a waist. This fashion captured not only the military. Pushkin proudly wrote to his brother about the slenderness of his waist...

Spectacles played a big role in the behavior of the dandy - a detail inherited from the dandies of the previous era. Back in the 18th century, glasses acquired the character of a fashionable part of the toilet. A look through glasses was equated to looking at someone else's face point-blank, that is, a bold gesture. The decency of the 18th century in Russia forbade the younger in age or rank to look through glasses at the elders: this was perceived as impudence. Delvig recalled that at the Lyceum it was forbidden to wear glasses and that therefore all women seemed to him beautiful, ironically adding that, having graduated from the Lyceum and acquiring glasses, he was very disappointed ... Dandyism introduced its own shade into this fashion: a lorgnette appeared, perceived as a sign anglomania...

A specific feature of dandy behavior was also the examination in the theater through a telescope not of the stage, but of the boxes occupied by the ladies. Onegin emphasizes the dandyism of this gesture by the fact that he looks "squinting", and looking at unfamiliar ladies in this way is double insolence. The feminine equivalent of "daring optics" was a lorgnette, if it was not directed to the stage...

Another characteristic feature of everyday dandyism is the posture of disappointment and satiety... However, "premature old age of the soul" (Pushkin's words about the hero of the "Prisoner of the Caucasus") and disappointment could be perceived in the first half of the 1820s not only in an ironic way. When these properties were manifested in the character and behavior of people like P.Ya. Chaadaev, they took on a tragic meaning...

However, "boredom" - the blues - was too common for the researcher to dismiss it. For us, it is especially interesting in this case because it characterizes everyday behavior. So, like Chaadaev, the spleen drives Chatsky out of the border ...

Spleen as a reason for the spread of suicides among the British was mentioned by N.M. Karamzin in Letters from a Russian Traveler. It is all the more noticeable that in the Russian noble life of the era we are interested in, suicide from disappointment was a fairly rare occurrence, and it was not included in the stereotype of dandy behavior. His place was taken by a duel, reckless behavior in war, a desperate game of cards ...

Between the behavior of the dandy and different shades of political liberalism of the 1820s there were intersections ... However, their nature was different. Dandyism is primarily behavior, not theory or ideology 22 . In addition, dandyism is limited to a narrow sphere of everyday life ... Inseparable from individualism and at the same time invariably dependent on observers, dandyism constantly fluctuates between a claim to rebellion and various compromises with society. His limitations lie in the limitations and inconsistency of fashion, in the language of which he is forced to speak with his era.

The dual nature of Russian dandyism created the possibility of its twofold interpretation... It was this duality that became a characteristic feature of the strange symbiosis of dandyism and Petersburg bureaucracy. English habits of everyday behavior, the manners of an aging dandy, as well as decency within the boundaries of the Nikolaev regime - such will be the path of Bludov and Dashkov. The “Russian dandy” Vorontsov was destined for the fate of the Commander-in-Chief of the Separate Caucasian Corps, the Viceroy of the Caucasus, Field Marshal General and His Grace Prince. Chaadaev, on the other hand, has a completely different fate: an official declaration of insanity. The rebellious Byronism of Lermontov will no longer fit within the boundaries of dandyism, although, reflected in Pechorin's mirror, he will reveal this ancestral connection that is receding into the past.

Duel.

A duel (duel) is a pair fight taking place according to certain rules, with the goal of restoring honor ... Thus, the role of the duel is socially significant. The duel... cannot be understood outside the very specifics of the concept of "honor" in the general system of ethics of the Russian Europeanized post-Petrine noble society...

A Russian nobleman of the 18th - early 19th centuries lived and acted under the influence of two opposing regulators of social behavior. As a loyal subject, a servant of the state, he obeyed the order ... But at the same time, as a nobleman, a man of a class that was both a socially dominant corporation and a cultural elite, he obeyed the laws of honor. The ideal that noble culture creates for itself implies the complete expulsion of fear and the establishment of honor as the main legislator of behavior ... From these positions, medieval knightly ethics is undergoing a certain restoration. ... The behavior of a knight is not measured by defeat or victory, but has a self-contained value. This is especially evident in relation to the duel: danger, coming face to face with death become purifying agents that remove insult from a person. The offended person himself must decide (the correct decision indicates the degree of his possession of the laws of honor): is dishonor so insignificant that a demonstration of fearlessness is enough to remove it - a show of readiness for battle ... A person who is too easy to reconcile may be considered a coward, unjustifiably bloodthirsty - a breter.

The fact that the duel is an innovation was clearly indicated by Catherine II: “Prejudices, not received from ancestors, but adopted or superficial, alien” 24 ...

Montesquieu pointed out the reasons for the negative attitude of the autocratic authorities to the custom of the duel: “Honor cannot be the principle of despotic states: there all people are equal and therefore cannot exalt themselves over each other; there all the people are slaves and therefore cannot exalt themselves over anything... Can a despot tolerate it in his state? She places her glory in contempt for life, and the whole strength of a despot lies only in the fact that he can take life. How could she herself endure a despot?"...

On the other hand, the duel was criticized by democratic thinkers, who saw in it a manifestation of the class prejudice of the nobility and opposed noble honor to human, based on Reason and Nature. From this position, the duel was made the object of educational satire or criticism... A. Suvorov's negative attitude towards the duel is known. Freemasons also reacted negatively to the duel.

Thus, in a duel, on the one hand, the narrow class idea of protecting corporate honor could come to the fore, and on the other hand, the universal, despite archaic forms, idea of protecting human dignity ...

The view of the duel as a means of protecting one's human dignity was not alien to Pushkin either. In the Kishinev period, Pushkin found himself in the position of a civilian young man, offensive to his vanity, surrounded by people in officer uniforms who had already proved their undoubted courage in the war. This explains his exaggerated scrupulousness during this period in matters of honor and almost bribery behavior. The Chisinau period is marked in the memoirs of contemporaries by the numerous challenges of Pushkin 25 . A typical example is his duel with Lieutenant Colonel S.N. Starov... Pushkin's bad behavior during the dances in the officer's assembly caused the duel... The duel was held according to all the rules: there was no personal hostility between the shooters, and the impeccable observance of the ritual during the duel aroused mutual respect in both. Careful observance of the ritual of honor equalized the position of a civilian youth and a military lieutenant colonel, giving them an equal right to public respect ...

Breter's behavior as a means of social self-defense and assertion of one's equality in society, perhaps, attracted Pushkin's attention in these years to Voiture, a French poet of the 17th century, who asserted his equality in aristocratic circles with emphatic breter...

Pushkin's attitude to the duel is contradictory: as the heir to the enlighteners of the 18th century, he sees in it a manifestation of "secular enmity", which is "wildly ... afraid of false shame." In Eugene Onegin, the cult of the duel is supported by Zaretsky, a man of dubious honesty. However, at the same time, a duel is also a means of protecting the dignity of an offended person. She puts on a par the mysterious poor Silvio and the favorite of the fate of Count B. 26 A duel is a prejudice, but an honor that is forced to turn to her help is not a prejudice.

Due to its duality, the duel implied the presence of a strict and carefully performed ritual ... No dueling codes could appear in the Russian press under the conditions of an official ban ... Strictness in observing the rules was achieved by appealing to the authority of experts, living bearers of tradition and arbitrators in matters of honor. ..

The duel began with a challenge. He, as a rule, was preceded by a clash, as a result of which either side considered itself insulted and, as such, demanded satisfaction (satisfaction). From that moment on, the opponents were no longer supposed to enter into any communication: this was taken over by their representatives-seconds. Having chosen a second for himself, the offended discussed with him the severity of the offense inflicted on him, on which the nature of the future duel depended - from a formal exchange of shots to the death of one or both participants. After that, the second sent a written challenge to the enemy (cartel) ... It was the duty of the seconds to find all the possibilities, without prejudice to the interests of honor, and especially following the observance of the rights of their principal, for a peaceful solution to the conflict. Even on the battlefield, the seconds had to make one last attempt at reconciliation. In addition, the seconds work out the conditions for the duel. In this case, the unspoken rules instruct them to try to prevent irritated opponents from choosing more bloody forms of duel than required by the minimum of strict rules of honor. If reconciliation turned out to be impossible, as was the case, for example, in Pushkin's duel with Dantes, the seconds drew up written conditions and carefully monitored the strict execution of the entire procedure.

So, for example, the conditions signed by the seconds of Pushkin and Dantes were as follows (original in French): “The conditions for the duel between Pushkin and Dantes were as cruel as possible (the duel was designed for a fatal outcome), but the conditions for the duel between Onegin and Lensky, to our surprise , were also very cruel, although there was clearly no reason for a deadly enmity ...

1. Opponents stand at a distance of twenty steps from each other and five steps (for each) from barriers, the distance between which is equal to ten steps.

2. Opponents armed with pistols on this sign, going one on another, but in no case crossing the barriers, can shoot.

3. Moreover, it is assumed that after the shot the opponents are not allowed to change their place, so that the one who fired first will be subjected to the fire of his opponent at the same distance 27 .

4. When both sides make a shot, then in case of ineffectiveness, the duel is resumed as if for the first time: opponents are placed at the same distance of 20 steps, the same barriers and the same rules remain.

5. Seconds are indispensable mediators in any explanation between opponents at the battlefield.

6. The seconds, undersigned and vested with full authority, ensure, each for his side, with his honor, strict observance of the conditions set forth here.

CH PFDEMSHOSCHI RPYGISI, CHUEZDB SCHMSAEYIUS YULMAYUEOYEN YЪ RTBCHYMB, NPTsOP ZPCHPTYFSH P LHMShFKhTE PDOPZP YuEMPCHELB. op FPZDB UMEDHEF HFPYUOYFSH, UFP NSCH YNEEN DEMP U LPMMELFICHPN, UPUFPSEYN Y PDOPC MYUOPUFY. xCE FP, UFP LFB MYUOPUFSH OYYVETSOP VHDEF RPMShЪPCHBFSHUS SJSHLPN, CHSHUFHRBS PDOPCHTENEOOP LBL ZPCHPTSEIK Y UMHYBAEYK, UFBCHYF HER H RPYGYA LPMMELFYCHB. fBL, OBRTYNET, TPNBOFILY YUBUFP ZPCHPTYMY P RTEDEMSHOPK YODYCHYDKHBMSHOPUFY UCHPEK LHMSHFHTSC, P FPN, UFP CH UPDBCHBENSCHI YNYY FELUFBI UBN BCHFPT SCHMSEFUS, CH YDEBME, EDYO UFFEOOOSCHN UCHPYN UMHYBFEMEN (YUYFBFEMEN). pDOBLP Y H FPK UYFHBGYY TPMY ZPCHPTSEEZP Y UMHYBAEEZP, UCHSSCHCHBAEYK YI S SHCHL OE HOYUFPTSBAFUS, B LBL VSC RETEOPUSFUS CHOHFTSH PFDEMSHOPK MYUOPUFY: "h HNE UCHPEN S UP" DBM NYT YOPK // th PVTBJPCH YOSCHI UHEEUFCHPCHBOSHE "(METNPOFCH n. a. upyu. Ch 6- FY F. n.; M., 1954, F. 1, U. 34).

gyfbfshch RTYCHPDSFUS RP YIDBOYSN, YNEAEINUS CH VYVMYPFELE BCHFPTB, U UPITBOOYEN PTZHPZTBZHYY Y RHOLFKHBGYY YUFPYUOILB.

pTYZYOBMSHOSHCHK FELUF YNEEF RTYNEYUBOYS, UPDETTSBEYEUS CH LPOGE LOYZY Y RTPOHNETPCHBOOSCHE RP ZMBCHBN, B FBLTS RPDUFTPYUOSCHE UOPULY PVP-OBYEOOSCHE CHEEDPYULBNY. DMS HDPVUFCHB CHPURTYSFYS CH OBYEN UMHYUBE RPUFTBOYUOSCHE UOPULY RPMKHYUYMY ULCHPYOKHA, OP PFDEMSHOKHA OHNETBGYA. rPUFTBOYUOSCHE UOPULY, PVP-OBYUEOOSCHE CH LOYSE PTEDEMEOOOSCHN LPMYUEUFCHPN CHEJDPYUEL, YDEUSH YNEAF RPTSDLPCHSHCHK OPNET UP CHEJDPYULPK (OBRTYNET, 1*, 2* Y F.D.). - TEDBLHYS yry "pFLTSCHFSCHK FELUF"

RHYLYO b. y. rPMO. UPVT. UPU. CH 16-FY F. [n.; M. ], 1937-1949, F. 11, U. 40. dBME CHUE UUSCHMLY ABOUT FFP YODBOYE DBAFUUS CH FELUFE UPLTBEEOOOP: RHYLYO, FPN, LOIZB, UFTBOIGB. UUSCHMLY ABOUT "ECHZEOIS POEZYOB" DBAFUUS CH FELUFE, U HLBBOYEN ZMBCHSHCH (BTVULPK GYZHTPK) Y UFTPZHSHCH (TYNULPK).

OEUNPFTS ABOUT CHTBTSDEVOPE PFOPIEOYE L RPRSCHFLBN GETLPCHOSCHI DESFEMEK CHMYSFSH ABOUT ZPUHDBTUFCHEOOHA CHMBUFSH, ABOUT JCHEUFOSHCHE UMHYUBY LPEHOUFCHB, REFT FEBFEMSHOP UPVMADBM RTBCHPUMBCHOSHE PVTS DSh. DBCE OETBURPMPTSEOOSCHK L OENH DIRMPNBF aUF AMSh CHSCHOHTSDEO VSCHM RTYOBFSH, UFP "GBTSh VMBZPYUEUFYCH", B DTHZPK UCHYDEFEMSH, ZHTBOGHH ME-zhPTF CH 1721 ZPDH PFNEYUBM, UFP "GBTSh ZPCHEM VPMEE FEBFEMSHOP, YUEN PVSCHYUOP, U NEB culpa (RPLBSOYEN. - a. m .),LPMEOPRTELMPOEOYEN Y NOPZPLTBFOSHCHN GEMPCHBOYEN OYENMY".

CH OBTPDOYUEULYI LTKHZBI Y CH PLTHTSEOY b. th. ZETGEOB UHEEUFCHPCHBMB FEODEOHYS CHYDEFSH CH UFBTPPVTSDGBI CHSCTBBYFEMEK NOOEIK CHUEZP OBTPDB Y OB FFPN PUOPCHBOY LPOUFTHYTPCHBFSH PFOPYOEOYE LTEUFSHSOUFFCHB L REFTTH. h DBMSHOEKYEN LFH FPYULH TEOYS KHUCHPYMY THUULIE UYNCHPMYUFSHCH - d. NETECLPCHULYK Y DT., PFPTSDEUFCHMSCHYE UELFBOFPCH Y RTEDUFBCHYFEMEK TBULPMB UP CHUEN OBTPPN. ChPRTPU FFPF OHTSDBEFUS CH DBMSHOEKYEN VEURTYUFTBUFOPN YUUMEDPCHBOYY. pFNEFYN MYYSH, UFP FBLYE, UDEMBCHYEUS HCE RTYCHSHCHUOSCHNY HFCHETSDEOYS, LBL NOOYE Y'CHEUFOPZP YUUMEDPCHBFEMS MHVLB d. TSD MYUFCH ABOUT FENH "UFBTYL Y CHEDSHNB" SCHMSAFUS UBFYTBNY ABOUT REFTB, ABOUT RPCHETLH PLBSCCHBAFUS OY OB Yuen OE PUOPCHBOOSCHNY.

CHRPUMEDUFCHYY, PUPVEOOP RTY OILPMBE I, RPMPTSEOIE NEOSMPUSH CH UFPTPOH CHUE VPMSHYEZP RTECHTBEEOIS DCHPTSOUFCHB H bNLOHFHA LBUFH. hTPCHEOSH YUYOB, RTY LPFPTPN OEDCHPTSOIO RPMKHYUBM DCHPTSOUFCHP, CHUE CHTENS RPCHSHCHYBMUS.

RTEDPYUFEOYE, DBCHBENPE CHPYOULPK UMHTSVE, PFTBYIMPUSH CH RPMOPN ЪBZMBCHYY BLPOB: “fBVEMSH P TBZBI CHUEI YUYOPCH, CHPYOULYI, UVBFULYI Y RTYDCHPTOSHCHI, LPFPTSHCHE CH LPF PTPN LMBUUE YUYOSCH; Y LPFPTSCHE CH PDOPN LMBUUE, FE YNEAF RP UFBTYYOUFCHH READING CHUFKHRMEOYS CH YUYO NETsDH UPVPA, PDOBLPTs CHPYOULYE CHSHCHIE RTPFYUYI, IPFS IN THE YUUFBTEE LFP CH FPN LMBUUE RPTSBMPCHBO VSCHM. iBTBLFETOP Y DTHZPE: OBOBYUYCH CHPYOULYE YUYOSCH I LMBUUB (ZEOTBM-ZHEMSHDNBTYBM CH UHIPRHFOSHCH Y ZEOETBM-BDNYTBM CH NPTULYI CHPKULBI), REFT PUFBCHYM RHUFSHCHNY NEUFB I LMBUU B C UFBFULPK Y RTYDCHPTOPK UMHTSVE. MYYSH HLBBOYE UEOBFB, UFP LFP RPUFBCHYF THUULYI DYRMPNBFPCH RTY UOPIEOYSI U YOPUFTBOOSCHNY DCHPTBNY CH OETBCHOPE RPMPTSEOYE, HVEDYMP EZP CH OEEPVIPDYNPUFY I LMBUUB Y DMS UVBFUL PC UMHTsVSHCH (YN UFBM LBOGMET). rTYDCHPTOBS TSE UMHTsVB FBL Y PUFBMBUSH VE CHCHUYEZP TBOZB.

YOFETEUOP, UFP DCHPTSOUFCHP, VSHCHUFTP TBBPTSCHYEUS CH 1830—1840-E ZPDSCH, FPTS CHOEUMP BLFICHOSCHK CHLMBD CH ZHPTNYTPCHBOYE THUULPK YOFEMMYZEOGYY. rTPZHEUYPOBMSHOPE DPTEZHPTNEOOPE YUYOPCHOYYUEUFCHP PLBMBPUSH Y DEUSH OBYUYFEMSHOP NEOEE BLFICHOSCHN.

TENPOF MPYBDEK - FEIOYYUEULYK FETNYO CH LBCHBMETYY, POBYUBAEIK RPRPMOOEOYE Y PVOCHMEOYE LPOULPZP UPUFBCHB. DMS ЪBLHRLY MPYBDEK PZHYGET U LBEOOOSCHNY UHNNBNY LPNBODYTPCHBMUS ABOUT PDOKH Y VPMSHYI ETSEPDOSCHI LPOULYI STNBTPL. rPULPMSHLH MPYBDY RPLKHRBMYUSH X RPNEEILPCH — MYG YUBUFOSHCHI, RTPCHETLY UHNNSC TEBMSHOP YUFTBYUEOOOSCHI DEOEZ ZHBLFYUEULY OE VSCHMP. zBTBOFYSNNY TEBMSHOPUFY UHNNSC DEOETSOSCHI FTBF VSCHMY, U PDOK UFPTPOSCH, DPCHETYE L LPNBODYTPCHBOOPNKH PZHYGETH, B U DTHZPK — PRSHCHFOPUFSH RPMLCHPZP OBJUBMSHUFCHB, TBVYTBCHYEZPUS H UFP YNPUFY MPYBDEK.

OBDP ULBBFSH, YuFP UMHTsVB VEI TsBMPCHBOSHS VSCHMB DPCHPMSHOP YUBUFSHCHN SCHMEOYEN, B b. NEOYILPCH CH 1726 ZPDKh ChPPVEE PFNEOYM TsBMPCHBOSH NEMLYN YUYOPCHOYLBN, ZPCHPTS, UFP POY Y FBL VETHF NOPZP Ch'SFPL.

CH VSHFPRYUBOYSI XVIII UFPMEFIS Y'CHEUFEO UMHYUBK, LPZDB OELIK ZPUFSH UPTPL MEF TEZHMSTOP RPSCHMSMUS ABOUT PVEDBI X PDOPZP CHEMSHNPTSY. pDOBLP, LPZDB LFPF Yuempchel HNET, PLBMBMPUSH, UFP OILFP, CHLMAYUBS IPSYOB, OE OBM, LFP PO FBLPK Y LBLPPCHP EZP YNS.

10* CHUE BLPOSH GYFYTHAFUS RP YODBOYA: RPMOPE UPVTBOYE BLPOCH tPUUYKULPK YNRETYY, RPCHEMEOYEN zPUHDBTS OILPMBS rBCHMPCHYUB UPUFBCHMEOOPE. (1649 -1825). f. 1-45. urV., 1830.

12* UFBTSHCHK RTYOGYR, PDOBLP, OE VSCHM DP LPOGB KHOYUFPTSEO. FP PFTBTSBMPUSH CH FPN, YuFP RETYPDYUEULY CH UYUFENKH PTDEOPCH CHTSCHCHBMYUSH OE HUMPHOSHCHE, B NBFETYBMSHOSHCHE GEOOPUFY. fBL, PTDEOULBS UCHEEDB U VTYMMYBOFBNY YNEMB OBBYUEOYE PUPVPK UFEROOY PFMYUYS

14* PZHYGYBMSHOPE OBCHBOYE - PTDEO UCH. yPBOOB YETHUBMYNULPZP. lBL YЪCHEUFOP, rBCHEM I CHSM RPD RPLTPCHYFEMSHUFCHP PUFTCH nBMShFKH Y CH DElbVTE 1798 Z. PYASCHYM UEVS CHEMYLYN NBZYUFTPN nBMShFYKULPZP PTDEOB. lPOEYUOP, FFP VSHMP UCHETIEOOOP OECHPЪNPTSOSCHN: LBCHBMETSHCH nBMShFYKULPZP PTDEOB DBCHBMY PVEF VEIVTBYUYS, B rBCHEM VSCHM HCE CHFPTYUOP TSEOBF; LTPNE FPZP, nBMShFYKULYK PTDEO - LBFPMYYUEULYK, B THUULYK GBTSh, TBHNEEFUS, VSCHM RTBCHPUMBCHOSCHN. OP rBCHEM I UYUYFBM, UFP PO CHUE NPTSEF (DBCE MYFKHTZYA PFUMKHTSYM PDOBTSDSCH!); CHUE, UFP NPCEF vPZ, RPD UIMH Y THUULPNH YNRETBFPTH.

17* UT. RPDOEKYIE YTPOYYUEULPE YUFPMLPCHBOYE UENBOFIYY UMPCHB "UMKHTSYFSH" CH TEYU DCHPTSOYOB Y TBOPYUYOGB-RPRPCHYUB: "BI, RPCHPMSHFE, CHBYB ZHBNYMYS NOE OBLPNB - TSBO PC. dB, FERETSCH WITH RPNOA. NSCH U CHBYN VBFAYLPK CHNEUFE UMHTSYMY". - URTPUYM tSBOPCH .. FP EUFSH LBL?" - "with OE BOBA, LBL. dPMTSOP VSHCHFSH, UVPTOE. b FP LBL CE EEE?" rPUTEDOIL U OEDPHNEOYEN UNPFTEM ABOUT tSBOPCHB:. dB TBICHE CHBY VBFAYLB OE UMHTSYM CH ZTPDOEOULYI ZHUBTBI?" - oEF; PO VPMSHIE CH UEMBI RTEUCHYFETPN UMHTSYM "" (uMERGPCH h.

18* y’CHEUFOBS OBLMPOOPUFSH HRPFTEVMSFSH CHSHCHUPLYE UMPCHB CH UOYTSEOOP-YTPOYYUEULYI OBBYUEOYSI LPUOKHMBUSH RPTSE Y CHSHTBTSEOIS “UMKhTSYFSH YY YUEUFY”. POP OBYUBMP PVPOBYUBFSH FTBLFYTOHA RTYUMHZH, OE RPMHYUBAEHA PF IPSYOB TsBMPCHBOSHS Y UMHTSBEKHA OB YUBECHSHCHE. ut. CHSHTBTSEOIE CH “PRBUOPN UPUEDE” h. m. 1, U. 670).

FBN TSE, F. 5, U. 16, UP UUSCHMLPK ABOUT: tBVYOPCHYU n. e. - h LO .: tPUUYS CH RETYPD TEZHPTN REFTB I. n., 1973, U 171; vKHZBOPC h. y., rTEPVTBTSEOULYK b. b., FYIPHR a. b. chpmagys zhepdbmyjnb h tpuuy. UPGYBMSHOP-LPOPNYUEULYE RTPVMENSCH. n., 1980, U. 241.

19* FPMSHLP CH RTYDCHPTOPK UMHTSVE TSEOEYOSCH UBNY YNEMY YUYOSCH. h fBVEMY P TBOZBI OBIPDYN: “dBNSCH Y DECHYGSCH RTY DCHPTE, DEKUFCHYFEMSHOP CH YUYOBI PVTEFBAEYEUS, YNEAF UMEDHAEIE TBOZY ...” (rBNSFOILY THUULPZP RTBCHB. chshchr. 8, U. 186) - DB MEE UMEDPCHBMP YI RETEYUMEOYE.

UN: UENEOPCHB m.o. pYUETLY YUFPTYY VSHCHFB Y LKHMSHFHTOPK TSYOY TPUUYY: RETCHBS RPMCHYOB XVIII CHELB m., 1982, U. 114-115; RETERJULB LOSZJOY e.r. hTHUPCHPK UP UCHPYNY DEFSHNY. - h LO .: uFBTYOB Y OPCHYOB. lo. 20. n., 1916; yuBUFOBS RETERYULB LOS S REFTB yCHBOPCHYUB iPCHBOULPZP, EZP UENSHY Y TPDUFCHEOOILPCH. - h LO. fBN CE, LO. 10; ZTBNPFLY XVII - OBUBMB XVIII CHELB. n., 1969.

20* UTEDOECHELPCHBS LOIZB VSCHMB THLPRYUOPK. LOIZB XIX CHELB - LBL RTBCHYMP, REYUBFOK (EUMMY OE ZPCHPTYFSH P BRTEEEOOOPK MYFETBFKHTE, P LHMSHFKhTE GETLPCHOPK YOE HYUIFSHCHBFSH OELPFPTSCHI DTHZYI UREGYBMSHOSHCHI UMHYUBECH). XVIII CHEL BOYNBEF PUPVPE RPMPTSEOYE: THLPRYUOSCHE Y REYUBFOSHCHE LOYZY UHEEUFCHHAF PDOCHTENEOOP, YOPZDB - LBL UPAYOYLY, RPTPK - LBL UPRETOILY.

21* un. CH "rHFEYUFCHYY Y REFETVKhTZB CH nPULCHH" b. O. tBDYEECHB, CH ZMBCHE "OPCHZPTPD", RPTFTEF TSEOSCH LHRGB: "RTBULPCHS DEOYUPCHOB, EZP OPCHPPVTBYOBS UHRTKhZB, VEMB Y THNSOB. ъKhVShch LBL HZPMSH. vTPCHY CH OYFLKH, YETOEEE UBTSY.

TPNBO LMBUUYYUEULYK, UFBTYOOSHK,

pFNEOOP DMYOOSHK, DMYOOSHK, DMYOOSHK,

from TBCHPHYUYFEMSHOSHCHK Y YUYOOSHCHK,

VE TPNBOFYUEULYI OBFEK.

ZETPYOS RPNSCH - obfbmys rbchmpchob Yuyfbmb fblye tpnboshch EEE H OBYUBME XIX CHELB: CH RTPCHYOGYY POY BDETTSBMYUSH, OP CH UFPMYGBI YI CHSHCHFEUOYM TPNBOFYIN, RETENEYCHYK YUYFBFEM SHULYE CHLHUSHCH. ut. H "ECHZEOYY POEZYOE":

b OSHOYUE CHUE HNSCH CH FHNBOE,

nPTBMSh ABOUT OBU OBCHPDYF UPO,

rPTPL MAVEJEO - Y CH TPNBOE,

th FBN KhTs FPTSEUFCHHEF PO. (3, XII))

23* rPCHEUFSH H. M. lBTBNYOB “TSCHGBTSH OBYEZP READING”, ABOUT LPFPTPK NSC H DBOOPN UMHYUBE PUOPCHSHCHCHBENUS, - IHDPTSEUFCHEOOPE RTPIECHEDEOYE, BOE DPLKHNEOF. pDOBLP NPTsOP RPMBZBFSH, UFP YNEOOP CH FYI CHPRTPUBI lBTBNYO VMYPL L VYPZTBJYUEULPK TEBMSHOPUFY.

24* ZhTBOGKHULPE RYUSHNP ZPUHDBTA YMY CHCHUYN UBOPCHOYLBN, OBRYUBOOPE NHTSYUYOPK, VSCHMP VSC CHPURTYOSFP LBL DETPOUFSH: RPDDBOOSCHK PVSBO VSCHM RYUBFSH RP-THUULY Y FPYuOP UMEDHS X UFBOPMEOOPK ZHTNE. dBNB VSCHMB YЪVBCHMEOB PF FFPZP TYFHBMB. zhTBOGKHULYK SJSHCHL UPDBCHBM NETsDH OEA Y ZPUHDBTEN PFOPIEOYS, RPDPVOSCHE TYFHBMSHOSHCHN UCHSSN TSCHGBTS Y DBNSCH. zhTBOGKHULYK LPTPMSh MADPCHYL XIV, RPCHEDEOYE LPFPTPZP CHUE EEE VSCHMP YDEBMPN DMS CHUEI LPTPMEK ECHTPRSC, DENPOUFTBFICHOP RP-TSCHGBTULY PVTBEBMUS U TsEOEYOBNY MAVPZP CHPTBUFB Y UPGYBMSHOPZP RPMPTSEOIS.

YOFETEUOP PFNEFYFSH, UFP ATYDYYUEULY UFEREOSH UPGIBMSHOPK ЪBEIEEOOPUFY, LPFPTPK TBURPMBZBMB THUULBS TSEOEYOB-DCHPTSOB CH OILPMBECHULHA LRPIH, NPTCEF VSHCHFSH UPRPUFBCHME ABOUT U BEYEEOOPUFSHHA RPUEFYCHIEZP tPUUYA YOPUFTBOGB. UPCHRBDEOYE FFP OE UPPMSH HTS UMHYUBKOP: CH YUYOPCHOP-VATPLTTBFYUEULPN NYTE TBOSB Y NHODYTB CHUSLYK, LFP FBL YMYY YOBYUE CHSHCHIPDYF OB EZP RTEDEMSCH, - "YOPUFTBOEG".

25* rTBCHDB, CH PFMYYUYE PF uEO-rTE Yb “OPCHPK IMPIYSHCH”, tCHLPCHULYK - DCHPTSOYO. pDOBLP DCHPTSOUFCHP EZP UPNOYFEMSHOP: CHUE PLTHTSBAEYE OBAF, UFP PO OEBLPOOSCHK USCHO U ZhILFICHOP DPVSCHFSCHN DCHPTSOUFCHPN (UN .: rPTFOCHB y. y., zhPNYO o. l. DEMP P DCHPT SOUFCHE cHLPCHULPZP. - h LO .: cHLPCHULYK Y THUULBS LHMSHFHTB. m., 1987, W. 346-350).

26* FBL OBSHCHCHBMY PVSCHUOP LOYZH "RMHFBTIB iETPOEKULPZP p DEFPCHPDUFCHE, YMY CHPURYFBOY DEFEK OBUFBCHMEOYE. RETECHEDEOOPE U EMMYOP-ZTEYUEULPZP SHCHLB u[FERBOPN] r[YUBTECHCHN]". urV., 1771.

28* CHPNPTSOP, UFP CHOYNBOYE tBDYEECHB L LFPNKH RYYPDKH CHSHCHBOP UPVSHFYEN, RTSNP RTEDEYUFCHPCHBCHYYN OBRYUBOYA FELUFB. rPUMEDOYE SLPVYOGSHCH — TSYMSHVET TPNN Y EZP EDYOPNSCHYMEOOOYLY, PVPDTSS DTHZ DTHZB, YJVETSBMY LBY, FBL LBL BLPMMPMYUSH PDOIN LYOTSBMPN, LPFPTSHK POY RETEDBCHBMY DTH Z DTHZH YЪ THL CH THLY (DBFYTPCHLH RPNSCH 1795-1796 ZZ. UN .: tBDYEECH b. o. uFYIPFCHPTEOIS. m ., 1975, U. 244-245).

29* uFPVShch PGEOYFSH FFPF YBZ DPCHPMSHOP PUFPPTTSOPZP rMEFOECHB, UMEDHEF HYUEUFSH, UFP OBYUYOBS U 1830-ZP ZPDB ChPLTKhZ PGEOLY FCHPTYUEUFCHB rhylyob YMB PUFTBS RPMENYLB Y BCHFPTYFEF EZP VSCM RPLPMEVMEO DBCE CH UPBOBOY OBYVPMEE VMYLLYI L OENH RPLFCH (OBRTYNET, e. vBTBFSCHOULPZP). h PZHYGYPOSCHI TSE LTHZBI DYULTEDYFYTPCHBFSH RP'YA RHYLYOB UDEMBMPUSH CH FY ZPDSH UCHPEZP TPDB PVSCHYUBEN.

30* uKHNBTPLCH b. R. ybvt. RTPYCHEDEOYS. M., 1957, U. 307. mPNPOPUCHB: “p CHS, LPFPTSCHI PTSYDBEF // pFEYUEUFCHP YЪ OEDT UCHPYI ...” USH TSE UNSCHUM RPUMBOYS uHNBTPLPCHB UPUFPYF CH UPDBOY RTPZTBNNSCH DMS CHPURYFBOYS THUULPK DCHPTSOULPK DECHYLY.

33* RETCHPE CHPURYFBFEMSHOPE BCCHEDEOYE DMS DECHKHYEL CHPOYLMP CH DETRFE, BDPMZP DP unNPMSHOPZP YOUFYFHFB, CH 50-E ZPDSH XVIII CHELB. rTERPDBCHBOYE FBN CHEMPUSH ABOUT OENEGLPN SHCHLE.

34* RTYNEYU. RHYLYOB: “oEFPYUOPUFSH. — about VBMBI LBCHBMETZBTD<УЛЙЕ>PZHYGETSCH SCHMSAFUS FBL TSE, LBL Y RTPUYE ZPUFY, CH CHYG NHODYTE, CH VBYNBLBI. bneyuboye PUOPCHBFEMSHOPE, OP CH YRPTBI EUFSH OEYUFP RP'FYUEULPE. UUSCHMBAUSH ABOUT NOEOIE b. th. V. » (VI, 528).

[REFTPCHULYK m.] iBTSHLPCH, 1825, U. 13-14.

35* n. b. OBTSCHYLYOB - MAVPCHOYGB, BOE TSEOB YNRETBFPTB, RPFPNKh OE NPCEF PFLTSCHCHBFSH VBM CH RETCHPK RBTE, HrHYLYOB TSE "mBMMB-tHL" YDEF CH RETCHPK RBTE U bMELUBODTPN I.

ЪBRYULY with. n. oECETCHB. - THUULBS UFBTYOB, 1883, F. XI (GIF. RP: rPNEEYUShS tPUUYS, U. 148). rBTDPLUBMSHOPE UPCHRBDEOYE OBIPDYN H UFYIPFCHPTEOYY CHUECHPMPDB tPTsDEUFCHEOULPZP, UPDBAEZP PVTB VEUFHTSECHB-nBTMYOULPZP, VETSBCHYEZP H ZPTSH Y DELMBNYTHAEEZP UMED HAEK FELUF:

MJYSH ABOUT WEDDGE FPMSHLP OBMSCEF FPUBLB

th OEVP RPLBCEFUS HELLIN,

CHUA OPYUSH EK CH ZBTENE YUYFBA "gSCHZBO",

CHUE RMBYUKH, RPA RP-ZHTBOGHULY.

chPPVTBTSEOYE RPPFB UFTBOOP RPCHFPTSMP ZHBOFBYY RPNEEYLB DBCHOYI RPT.

39* pFPTSDEUFCHMEOYE UMPC "IBN" Y "TBV" RPMKHYUYMP PDOP MAVPRSCHFOPE RTPDPMTSEOIE. DELBVTYUF OYLPMBK FKhTZEOECH, LPFPTSCHK, RP UMPCHBN rhylyob, "GERY TBVUFCHB OEOBCHYDEM", YURPMSHЪPCHBM UMPCHP "IBN" CH UREGYZHYUEULPN ЪOBYUEOYY. according to UYUYFBM, UFP IHDYNY TBVBNY SCHMSAFUS BEIFOYLY TBVUFCHB - RTPRCHEDOYL LTERPUFOPZP RTBChB. DMS OII PO Y YURPMSHЪPCHBM CH UCHPYI DOECHOELBI Y RYUSHNBI UMPCHP "IBN", RTECHTBFICH EZP CH RPMYFYUEULYK FETNYO.

UN. PV LFPN CH LO .: lBTRPCHYU e.r. ъBNEYUBFEMSHOSHCHE VPZBFUFCHB YUBUFOSCHI MYG H tPUUYY. urV., 1874, U. 259-263; B FBLCE: MPFNBO a. n. tPNBO b. y. rHYLYOB "ECHZEOIK POEZYO". lPNNEOFBTYK. M., 1980, U. 36-42.

40* UT. CH FPN CE YUFPUOYLE PRYUBOYE PVTSDB UCHBFPCHUFCHB: “UFPM VSHCHM OBLTSHCHF Yuempchel ABOUT UPTPL. ABOUT UFPME UFPSM YUEFSHCHTE PLPTPLB Y VEMSHCHK VPMSHYPK, LTKHZMSCHK, UMBDLYK RYTPZ U TBOSSCHNY HLTBIEOYSNY Y ZHYZHTBNY.

41* rPDBZPMCHPL "pFTSCHCHPL YЪ RYUSHNB ATsOPZP TsYFEMS" - OE FPMSHLP UPDATED ABOUT VYPZTBZHJYUEULIE PVUFPSFEMSHUFCHB BCHFPTB, OP Y DENPOUFTBFICHOPE RTPFICHPRPUFBCHMEOYE UEVS "RE FETVKhTZULPK FPULE UTEOIS.

42 * FP EUFSH "LBYUEMY CH CHYDE CHTBEBAEZPUS CHBMB U RTPDEFSCHNY ULCHPSH OEZP VTHUSHSNNY, ABOUT LPFPTSHCHI RPDCHEOYOSCH SAILY U UIDEOSHSNNY" (UMPCHBTSH SJSCHLB rhylyob. h 4-I F. n., 1956-1961, F. 2, W. 309). LBL MAVYNPE OBTPDOPE TBCHMEYUEOYE, LFY LBYEMY PRYUBOSCH VSCHMY RHFEEUFCHEOOILPN pMEBTYEN (un.: pMEBTYK bDBN. 8-219), LPFPTSCHK RYCHEM YI YI TYUKHOPL.

44* yBTS YMY EPTS — CHYD FTBCHSHCH, UYUYFBCHYEKUS CH OBTPDOPC NEDYGYOE GEMEVOPK “ChP CHTENS FTPYGLPZP NPMEVOB DECHKHYLY, UFPSEYE UMECHB PF BMFBTS, DPMTSOSCH HTPOYFSH OEULPMSHLP UME YOPL ABOUT RHYUPL NEMLYI VETEJPCHSCHI CHEFPL (CH DTHZYI TBKPOBI tPUUY RMBLBMY ABOUT RHYUPL OBTY YMY ABOUT DTHZYE GCHEFSHCH. — a.m.). FFPF RKHUPL FEBFEMSHOP UVETEZBEFUS RPUME Y UYUYFBEFUS ЪBMPZPN FPZP, UFP CH FFP MEFP OE VHDEF BUHIY" (ETOPCHB b.v. TPCHULPN LTBE - UPCHEFULBS LFOPZTBZHYS, 1932, 3, U. 30).

45 * p EDYOPN UCHBDEVOPN PVTSDE CH HUMPCHYSI LTERPUFOPZP VSHFB ZPCHPTYFSH OEMSHЪS. lTERPUFOPE RTYOHTSDEOYE Y OYEEFB URPUPVUFCHPCHBMY TBTHIEOYA PVTSDPCHPK UFTHLFHTSC. fBL, Ch "YUFPTYY UEMB zPTAIIOB" OEBDBYUMYCHSHCHK BCHFPT zPTAIIO RPMBZBEF, YuFP PRYUSCHCHBEF RPIPTPOOSCHK PVTSD, LPZDB UCHIDEFEMSHUFCHHEF, UFP CH EZP DETECHEE RPLPKOILPCH BT SCHCHBMY CH ENMA (YOPZDB PYYVPYUOP) UTBIH RPUME LPOYUOYOSCH, "DBVSH NETFCHSHCHK CH Y'VE MYOYOEZP NEUFB OE BOINBM". NS VETEN RTYNET YЪ CYOYOY PYUEOSH VZBFSHCHI LTERPUFOSHCHI LTEUFSHSO — RTBUMPCH Y FPTZCHGECH, FBL LBL ЪDEUSH PVTSD UPITBOYMUS CH OETBBTHYEOOPN CHYDE.

46* y RTYNEYUBOYK L SRPOULPNKh FELUPH CHYDOP, UFP THUULPE UMPCHP "CHEOGSHCH" OE PYUEOSH FPYUOP RETEDBEF UPDETTSBOYE. UMPCHP CH PTYZYOBME POBUBEF "DYBDENKH ABOUT UVBFKh VKhDDSH" (U. 360). iBTBLFETOP, UFP YOZHPTNBFPT PFPTsDEUFCHMSEF OPCHPPVTBYUOSCHI OE AT NIGHT CHMBUFYFEMSNY, B AT VPZBNY.

49* OBRPNOIN HCE PFNEYUBCHYHAUS OBNY MAVPRSHCHFOKHA DEFBMSH. TEYUSH YDEF PV LRPIE EMJBCHEFSHCH REFTPCHOSCH. OP LPZDB eETVBFCH ZPCHPTYF P OEK LBL P YUEMPCHELE, PO HRPFTEVMSEF TSEOUULHA ZHPTNKH: "ZPUHDBTSCHOS", LPZDB TSE P E ZPUHDBTUFCHEOOOPK DESFEMSHOPUFY - NHTSULHA: "ZPUHDBTSh".

51* 'DEUSH TEYUSH YDEF PV BOZMYKULPK NHTSULPK NPDE: ZHTBOGKHULYE TSEOULYE Y NHTSULYE NPDSH UFTPIMYUSH LBL CHBYNOP UPPFFCHEFUFCHEOOSHCHE - CH BOZMYY LBTsDBS YЪ OYI TBCHYCHB MBUSH RP UPVUFCHEOOOSCHN BLBLOBN.

65* "PUFTYTSEO RP RPUMEDOEK NPDE" Y "LBL DEODY MPODPOULYK PDEF" FBLCE POEZJO. FFPNH RTPFICHPRPUFBCHMEOSCH "LHDTY UETOSCHE DP RMEU" MEOULPZP. LTYLHO, NSFETSOYL Y RPF, LBL YBTBLFETYYHEFUS MEOULYK CH YUETOPCHPN CHBTYBOFE, PO, LBL Y DTHZYE OENEGLIE UFHDEOFSHCH, OPUIM DMYOOSCHE CHPMPUSHCH CH OBL MYVETBMYYêNB, Y Kommersant RPDTBTSBOYS LBTVPOBTYSN.

CHRECHESCHE UPRPUFBCHMEOYE UATSEFPCH LFYI RTPYCHEDEOYK UN .: yFEKO y. RHYLYO Y ZPZHNBO. UTBCHOYFEMSHOPE YUFPTYLP-MYFETBFHTOPE YUUMEDCHBOYE. dETRP, 1927, U. 275.

66* oEUNPFTS OB FP, UFP TBCHPD Y OPCHSHCHK VTBL VSCHMY BLPOPDBFEMSHOP PZHPTNMEOSCH, PVEEUFCHP PFLBBSCHCHBMPUSH RTYOBFSH ULBODBMSHOSHCHK RTPYZTSCHY TSEOSCH, Y VEDOBS ZTBJYOS TB ЪHNPCHULBS VSCHMB RPDCHETZOHFB PUFTBLYNH. CHSHIPD Y RPMPTSEOIS U RTYUKHEIN ENH DTSEOFMSHNEOUFCHPN OBYEM bMELUBODT I, RTYZMBUYCH VSHCHYHA LOSZYOA ABOUT FBOEG Y OBCHBCH HER RTY LFPN ZTBJOYEK. pVEEUFCHEOOOSCHK UFBFHU, FBLYN PVTBYPN, VSHCHM ChPUUFBOCHMEO.

UN: MELPNGECHB n. J., HUREOULYK v. b. PRYUBOYE PDOPK UYUFENSCH U RTPUFSHCHN UYOFBLUYUPN; eZPTHR c. and. rtpufekyye UENYPFYUEULYE UYUFENSCH Y FYRPMPZYS UATSEFPCH. - fTHDSCH RP ЪOBLPCHSCHN UYUFENBN. hShR. R. fBTFH, 1965.

RPCHEUFY, YODBOOSCHE bMELUBODTPN rHYLYOSCHN. urV., 1834, U. 187 Zh PRHEEO, IPFS LFP PVUFPSFEMSHUFCHP OYZDE CH YODBOY OE PZPCHPTEOP.

67* fBL, r. b. chSENULYK RYYEF P "NYTOPK, FBL OBSCCHCHBENPK LPNNETYUEULPK YZTE, P LBTFPYUOPN CHTENSRTCHPTsDEOYY, UCHPKUFCHEOOPN H OBU CHUEN CHPTBUFBN, CHUEN 'CHBOISN Y PVPYN RPMBN. pDOB THUULBS VBTSCHOS ZPCHPTYMB CH CHOEEGYY: „lPOEYUOP, LMYNBF ЪDEUSH IPTPY; OP TsBMSh, UFP OE ULEN UTBYFSHUS CH RTEZHETBOWIL ". LBCDSCHK CHEYUET VSCHMB UCHPS RBTFYS "" (chSENULYK r. UFBTBS ЪBRYUOBS LOITSLB, Moscow, 1929, U. 85-86).

UFTIHR Fr. RETERYULB NPDSH, UPDETTSBEBS RYUSHNB VETKHLYI NPD, TBNSCHYMEOYS OEPDHYECMEOOOSHI OBTSDHR, TBZPCHPTSH VEUUMPCHEUOSHI YUERGPCH, YUHCHUFCHPCHBOYS NEVEMEK, LBTEF, BRYUOSHI LOYCE L, RHZPCHYG Y UFBTPBCHEFOSHCHI NBOEL, LHOFBYEK, YMBZHPTCH, FEMPZTEK Y RT. otbChUFCHEOOPE Y LTYFYYUEULPE UPYOYOEOYE, CH LPEN U YUFYOOOPK UFPTPOSCH PFLTSCHFSCH OTBCHSCH, PVTB TSOYOY Y TBOBOSCHS UNEOYOSCHS Y CHBTSOSCHS UGEOSCH NPDOZP CHELB. n., 1791, U. 31-32.

69* un. X opCHILPCHB: “rPDTSD MAVPCHOYLPCH L RTEUFBTEMPK LPLEFLE ... NOPZYN OBYN ZPURPDYUYLBN CHULTKHTSYM ZPMPCHSCH ... IPFSF ULBLBFSH ABOUT RPYUFPCHSCHI MPYBDSI CH REFETVKhTZ, YuFPVSH FBLPZP RPMEOPZP DMS OII OE RTPRHUFYFSH UMHYUBS "(UBFYTYYUEULIE TSKHTOBMSCH o. y. oCHILPCHB. n.; m ., 1951, W. 105. r.o. ZOPN 'PT Ch "rPYUFE DHIPCH" LTSCHMPCHB RYEF nBMYLKHMSHNKHMSHLH: "s RTYOSM CHYD NPMPDPZP Y RTYZPTSESP YuEMPCHELB, RPFPNKh YuFP GCHEFHEBS NPMPDPUFSH, RTYSFOPUFY Y LTBUPFB CH OSHCH OEOYOE CHTENS FBLCE H CHEUSHNB OENBMPN HCHBTSEOYY Y RTY OELPFPTSCHI UMHYUBSI, LBL ULBSCCHBAF, RTPYCHPDSF CHEMILIE YUHDEUB "(lTSCHMPCH J. b. rPMO. UPVT. UPU., F. I, W. 43), UT .:

dB, YUEN CE FShch, tskhtskh, Ch UMHYUBK RPRBM,

VEUUIMEO VSCCHNY FBL Y NBM ... (FBN TSE, F. 3, U. 170).

75* h DBOOPN UMHYUBE DMS OBU OECHBTsOP FP PVUFPSFEMSHUFCHP, UFP CH RSEUE zPZPMS "NPMPDPK YUEMPCEL" PLBSHCHCHBEFUS UPCHUEN OE "MEZLPCHETOSHCHN", B FBLTSE SCHMSEFUS HYBUFOILPN YHMETULPK YBKLY .

ENH ZPFCHYFSH YUEUFOSHCHK ZTPV,

th FYIP GEMYFSH H VMEDOSHK MPV

about VMBZPTPDOPN TBUUFPSOSHY.

"vMBZPTPDOPE TBUUFPSOYE" ЪDEUSH - HFCHETSDEOOPE RTBCHYMBNY DHMY. h TBCHOPK UFEREOY HVYKUFCHP ABOUT DHMY IBTBLFETYYHEFUS LBL "YUEUFOPE".

77 * "rPTPYLPCHSCHE" - ZHBMSHYYCHSCHE LBTFSCH (PF YEUFETLY DP DEUSFLY). LBTFSCH OBLMEYCHBAFUS PDOB ABOUT DTKHZHA, OBRTYNET, YEUFETLB ABOUT UENETLH, ZHJZHTB NBUFY CHSHCHTEBEFUS, OBUSCHRBOOSCHK VEMSHCHK RPTPYPL DEMBEF EFP OEEBNEFOSHCHN. YKHMET CH IPDE YZTSCH CHSCFTSIYCHBEF RPTPYPL, RTCHTBEBS YEUFETLH CH UENETLH Y F.D.

79* h IPDE BBTFOSHCHI YZT FTEVPCHBMPUSH RPTPK VPMSHYPE LPMYUEUFCHP LPMPD. rTY YZTE H ZHBTBPO VBOLPNEF Y LBTSDSCHK Y RPOFETCH (B YI NPZMP VSHFSH VPMEE DEUSFLB) DPMTSEO VSCHM YNEFSH PFDEMSHOHA LPMPDH. LTPNE FPZP, OEHDBYUMYCHSCHE YZTPLY TCHBMY Y TBVTBUSCHCHBMY LPMPDSH, LBL LFP PRYUBOP, OBRTYNET, CH TPNBOE d.o. VEZYUECHB "UENEKUFCHP iPMNULYI". YURPMSHЪPCHBOOBS ("RTPRPOFYTPCHBOOBS") LPMPDB FHF TSE VTPUBMBUSH RPD UFPM. LFY TBVTPUBOOSCHE, YUBUFP CH PZTPPNPN LPMYUEUFCHE, RPD UFPMBNY LBTFShch RPTSE, LBL RTBCHYMP, UPVITBMYUSH UMHZBNY Y RTPDBCHBMYUSH NEEBOBN DMS YZTSCH CH DHTBLB Y RPDPVOSHCHE TB CHMELBFEMSHOSHCHE YZTSCH. yuBUFP CH LFPK LHYUE LBTF ABOUT RPMX CHBMSMYUSH Y HRBCHYE DEOSHZY, LBL LFP, OBRTYNET, YNEMP NEUFP PE ChTENS LTHROSHI YZT, LPFPTSHCHE BBTFOP CHEM about. oELTBUPCH. RPDSCHNBFSH LFY DEOSHZY UYUYFBMPUSH OERTYMYYUOSCHN, Y SING DPUFBCHBMYUSH RPFPN MBLESN CHNEUFE U LBTFBNY. h YKHFMYCHSHI MEZEODBI, PLTHTSBCHYI DTHTSVKH fPMUFPZP Y ZhEFB, RPCHFPTSMUS BOELDPF P FPN, LBL ZhEF ChP CHTENS LBTFPYuOPK YZTSCH OBZOKHMUS, YuFPVSH RPDOSFSH U RPMB Khrbchykha OEVP MSHYKHA BUUYZOBGYA, B

82* YUFPLY LFPZP RPCHEDEOYS BLNEFOSHCH HCE CH REFETVKhTZE CH 1818-1820 ZPDSHCH. pDOBLP UETSHESHI RPEDYOLCH H rhylyob Ch FFPF RETYPD EEE OE PFNEYUEOP. DKHMSH U LAIEMSHVELETPNOE CHPURTYOYNBMBUSH RHYLYOSCHN CHUETSHEY. pVIDECHYUSH ABOUT rhylyob bb ryztbnnkh “bb xtsyopn pvyaemus s...” (1819), LAIEMSHVELET CHSCCHBM EZP ABOUT DKHMSH. RHYLYO RTYOSM CHSHCHHCH, OP CHSHCHUFTEMYM CH CHPDHI, RPUME YuEZP DTKHSHS RTYNYTYMYUSH. rTEDRMPTSEOYE CE ChM. obvplpchb P DHMY U tschmeechshchn CHUE EEE PUFBEFUUS RPYUEULPK ZYRPFEEPK.

FBMMENBO DE TEP TSEDEPO. BOYNBFEMSHOSHOSCHE YUFPTYY. M., 1974, F. 1, U. 159. un. PV LFPN: mPFNBO a. FTY OBNEFLY L RTPVMENE: "RHYLYO Y ZHTBOGKHULBS LKHMSHFKhTB". - rTPVMENSCH RHYLYOPCHEDEOYS. TYZB, 1983.

83* h RTEDIEUFCHHAEYI TBVPFBI P "eChZEOOYY POEZYOE" NOE RTYIPDYMPUSH RPMENYUEUULY CHCHULBSCCHBFSHUS P LOYSE vPTYUB yChBOPCHB (CHPNPTSOP, RUECHDPOIN; RPDMIOOBS ZHBNYMYS BCHFP TB, LBL Y LBLIE VSC FP OY VSCHMP UCHEDEOYS P OEN, NOE OEYCHEUFOSHCH). un.: MPFNBO a. "dBMSh UCHPVPDOPZP TPNBOB". N, 1959 noe UMEDPCHBMP PFNEFYFSH, YuFP BCHFPT RTPSCHYM IPTPIEEE BOBOIE VSHFB RHYLYOULPK LRPIY Y UPEDYOYM PVEIK UFTBOOSCHK BUNSCHU U TSDPN YOFETEUOSCHI OBVMADEOYK, UCHIDEFEMSHUFCHHA EII PV PVIYTOPK PUCHEDPNMEOOPUFY. TELPUFSH NPYI CHSHCHULBJSCHCHBOIK, P LPFPTPK CH OBUFPSEEE CHTENS S UPTSBMEA, VSCHMB RTPDYLFPCHBOB MPZYLPK RPMENYLY.

84* RP DTHZYN RTBCHYMBN, RPUME FPZP, LBL PDYO YY HYBUFOILPCH DHMY CHSHCHUFTEMYM, CHFPTPK Refinery RTPDPMTSBFSH DCHYTSEOYE, B FBLTS RPFTEVPCHBFSH RTPFYCHOYLB L VBTSHETH. LFYN RPMShPCHBMYUSH VTEFETSCH.

86* UT. CH "ZETPE OBYEZP READING": "NSCH DBCHOP HTS CHBU PTSYDBEN", - ULBBM DTBZHOULYK LBRYFBO U YTPOYUEULPK HMSCHVLPK. with CHSHCHOHM YUBUSCH Y RPLBBM ENH. PO YJCHYOYMUS, ZPCHPTS, UFP EZP YuBU SC HIPDSF.

UNSCHUM RYJPDB - CH UMEDHAEEN: DTBZHOULYK LBRYFBO, HVETSDEOOSHCHK, UFP REYUPTYO "RETCHSHCHK FTHU", LPUCHEOOP PVCHYOSEF EZP CH TSEMBOY, PRPDBCH, UPTCHBFSH DKhMSH.

87* HYBUFYE CH DHMY, DBCE CH LBYUEUFCHE UELHODBOFB, CHMELMP IB UPVPK OEYVETSOSCHE OERTJSFOSHCHE RPUMEDUFCHYS: DMS PZHYGETB FFP, LBL RTBCHYMP, VSCHMP TBTSBMPCHBOYE Y UUSCHMLB OB LB CHLB (RTBCHDB, TBTSBMPCHBOOSCHN bB DKhMSh OBYUBMSHUFCHP PVSCHLOPCHEOOP RPLTPCHYFEMSHUFCHPCHBMP). uFP UPDBCHBMP Y'CHEUFOSHCHE FTHDOPUFY RTY CHSHCHVPTE UELHODBOFPCH: LBL MYGP, CH THLY LPFPTPZP RETEDBAFUS TJOYOSH Y YUEUFSH, UELHODBOF, PRFYNBMSHOP, DPMTSEO VSCHM VSHCHFSH VMYLYN D THZPN. OP LFPNKh RTPFYCHPTEYUYMP OETSEMBOYE CHPCHMELBFSH DTHZB CH OERTYSFOHA YUFPTYA, MPNBS ENKH LBTSHETH. UP UCHPEK UFPTPOSCH, UELHODBOF FBLCE PLBSCCHBMUS CH FTHDOPN RPMPTSEOYY. YOFETEUSCH DTHTSVSHCH Y YUEUFY FTEVPCHBMY RTYOSFSH RTYZMBYOEOYE HYBUFCHPCHBFSH H DHMY LBL MEUFOSHCHK OBBL DPCHETYS, B UMHTsVSHCH Y LBTSHETSHCH - CHYDEFSH CH FFPN PRBUOKHA HZTPYH YURP TFYFSH RTPDCHYTSEOYE YMY DBCE CHSCCHBFSH MYUOKHA OERTYSOSH IMPRBNSFOPZP ZPUHDBTS.

88 * oBRNOYN RTBCHYMP DHMY: “UFTEMSFSH CH CHPDDHI YNEEF RTBCHP FPMSHLP RTPFYCHOYL, UFTEMSAEYK CHFPTSCHN. rTPFICHOIL, CHCHUFTEMYCHYK RETCHSHCHN H ChPDHI, EUMY EZP RTPFICHOIL OE PFCCHEFYM ABOUT CHSHCHUFTEM YMY FBLTS CHSHCHUFTEMYM CH CHPDHI, UYUYFBEFUS HLMPOYCHYNUS PF DHMY ... ”(dHTBUCH. DKHMSHOSHCHK LPDELU, 1908, U. 104). rtbchimp ffp uchsbop u fen, yufp chshchuftem ch chpdkhi retchpzp yj rtpfhychoylpch nptbmshop pvsschchbef chfptpzp l CHEMYLPDKHYYA, HYHTRYTHS EZP RTBCHP UBNPNKh PRTEDEMSFSH UCHPE RP CHEDEOYE YUEUFY.

VEUFHTSECH (nBTMYOULYK) b. b. OPYUSh ABOUT LPTBVME. rPCHEUFY Y TBUULBSHCH. n., 1988, U. 20.

RTPVMENB BCHFPNBFYNB CHEUSHNB CHPMOPCHBMB rhylyob; UN .: sLPVUPO t. - h LO .: sLPVUPO t. TBVPFSCH RP RPFILE. n., 1987, U. 145-180.

UN: MPFNBO a. n. FENB LBTF Y LBTFPYuOPK YZTSCH CH THUULPK MYFETBFKhTE OBYUBMB XIX CHELB. - HYUEO. bbr. fBTFHULPZP ZPU. HO-FB, 1975. ChSHR. 365. FTKHDSHCH RP OBLPCHSHCHN UYUFENBN, F. VII.

90* VSCCHBMY Y VPMEE CEUFLIE HUMPCHYS. fBL, yuETOPCH (UN. U. 167), NUFS ЪB YuEUFSH UEUFTSHCH, FTEVPCHBM RPEDYOLB OB TBUUFPSOY CH FTY (!) YBZB. h RTEDUNETFOPK ЪBRYULE (DPYMB CH LPRYY THLPK b. VEUFHTSECHB) BY RYUBM: “UFTEMSAUSH ABOUT FTY YBZB, LBL ЪB DEMP UENEKUFCHEOOPE; YVP, COBS VTBFSHECH NPYI, IPYUH LPOYUYFSH UPVPA ABOUT OEN, ABOUT LFPN PULPTVYFEME NPPEZP UENEKUFCHB, LPFPTSCHK DMS RHUFSHCHI FPMLCH EEE RHUFEKYI MADEK RTEUFKHRIM CHUE BLPOSHCH YuEU FY, PVEEUFCHB Y YuEMPCHEYUFCHB ”(DECHSFOBDGBFSHCHK PEOPLE LLO. 1. n., 1872, U. 334 ). RP OBUFPSOIA UELHODBOFPCH DKHMSH RTPYUIPDYMB ABOUT TBUUFPSOYY CH CHPUENSH YBZPCH, Y CHUE TBCHOP PVB HYUBUFOILB ITS RPZYVMY.

92* PVSCHUOSCHK NEIBOYN DHMSHOPZP RYUFPMEFB FTEVHEF DCHPKOPZP OBTSYNB OB URHULPCHPK LTAYuPL, UFP RTEDPITBOSEF PF UMHYUBKOPZP CHSHCHUFTEMMB. yOEMMETPN OBSCCHBMPUSH HUFTPKUFCHP, PFNEOSAEEE RTEDCHBTYFEMSHOSCHK OBTSYN. h TEEKHMSHFBFE KHUYMYCHBMBUSH ULPTPUFTEMSHOPUFSH, OP IBFP TELP RPCHSHCHYBMBUSH CHPNPTSOPUFSH UMHYUBKOSHCHI CHSHCHUFTEMPCH.

94* RPDPVOSCHK LPOFTBUF YURPMSH'PCHBO n. vKHMZBLPCHSHCHN H "nBUFETE Y nBTZBTYFE". ABOUT VBMH, UTEDY RSHCHYOP OBTSEOOSCHI ZPUFEK, RPDYUTLOHFBS OEVTETSOPUFSH PDETSDSCH CHPMBODB CHSHDEMSEF EZP TPMSh iPSYOB. rTPUFPFB NHODYTB oBRPMEPOB UTEDY RSHCHYOPZP DCHPTB YNEMB FPF TSE UNSCHUM. rSCHYOPUFSH PDETSDSCH UCHIDEFEMSHUFCHHEF PV PTYEOFBGYY ABOUT FPYULH ЪTEOYS CHOEYOEZP OBVMADBFEMS. DMS chPMBODB OEF FBLPZP "CHOEYOEZP" OBVMADBFEMS. oBRMEPO LHMSHFYCHYTHEF FH TSE RPYGYA, PDOBLP H VVPMEE UMPTSOPN CHBTYBOFE: chPMBODH CH UBNPN DEME VETBMYUOP, LBL ON CHCHZMSDYF, oBRMEPO YЪPVTTBTSBEF FPZP, LPNKh VETB ЪMYUOP, LBL BY CHCHZMSDYF.

ZHEPZHBOB rTPLPRPCHYUB, BTIYERYULPRB CHEMYLPZP oPCHZPTPDB Y CHEMYLYI MHL, UCHSFEKIEZP RTBCHYFEMSHUFCHHAEEZP UYOPDB CHYGE-RTEYDEOFB... uMPCHB Y TEYUY, Yu. 1, 1760, U. 15 8.

96* fBL, DPUKHZY CHEMYLYYI LOSEK, VTBFSHECH bMELUBODTTB Y OYLPMBS RBCHMPCHYUEK — lPOUFBOFYOB Y NYIBYMB TELP LPOFTBUFYTPCHBMY U NKHODYTOPK UFSOHFPUFSHHA YI PZHYGYBMShOPZP RP CHEDEOIS. lPOUFBOFYO CH LPNRBOY RSHSOSCHI UPVKhFSCHMSHOILPCH DPYEM DP FPZP, UFP YOBUYMPCHBM CH LPNRBOY (CETFCHB ULPOYUBMBUSH) DBNKH, UMHYUBKOP BYBVTEDYHA CH EZP YUBUFSH DCHPTGB YY RPMPCHYOSCH nBTYY ZHEDPTPCHOSCH. yNRETBFPT bMELUBODT CHSCHOKHTSDEO VSCHM PYASCHYFSH, YuFP RTEUFKHROYL, EUMY EZP OBKDHF, VKHDEF OBLBBO RP CHUEK UFTPZPUFY BLPOB. tBHNEEFUS, RTEUFHRROIL OBKDEO OE VSCHM.

p FSH, UFP Ch ZPTEUFY OBRTBUOP

about VPZB TPREYSH, UEMPCEL,

CHOYNBC, LPMSH CH TECHOPUFY HTSBUOP

PO L yPCH Y Y FHYU TEL!

ULCHPSH DPCDSh, ULCHPSH CHYITSH, ULCHPSH ZTBD VMYUFBS

i ZMBUPN ZTPNSCH RTETSCHCHBS,

UMPCHBNY OEVP LPMEVBM

i FBL EZP OB TBURTA ЪCHBM. yFYVMEFSH LBL ZHPTNB CHPEOOPC PDETSDSCH VSCHMY CHCHEDEOSCH rBChMPN RP RTHUULPNKh PVTBGH. URBOFPO - LPTPFLBS RYLB, CHCHEDEOOBS RTY RBCHME CH PZHYGETULCHA ZHPTNKH.

99* CHUE OYFY bZPCHPTTB VSHMY OBUFPMSHLP UPUTEDPFPYUEOSCH CH THLBI YNRETBFPTB, UFP DBTSE OBYVPMEE BLFICHOSCHE Hyubufoyly ЪBZPCHPTTB RTPFYCH URETBOULPZP: OBCHBOOSCHK CHCHYE s. DE UBOZMEO Y ZEOETBM-BDYAFBOF b. d. OGYY H GBTS, U ZTHUFOSHCHN OEDPHNEOYEN RTYOBMYUSH DTHZ DTHZH H FPN, UFP OE HCHETEOSCH, RTYDEFUS MY YN BTEUFPCHSCCHBFSH URETBOULPZP YMY PO RPMHYUYF X YNRETBFPTB TBURPTSEOYE BTEUFPCHBFSH YI. h FYI HUMPCHYSI PYUECHIDOP, UFP bMELUBODT OE HUFHRBM OYUSHENKH DBCHMEOYA, B DEMBM CHYD, UFP HUFHRBEF, ABOUT UBNPN DEME FCHETDP RTCHPDS YЪVTBOOSCHK YN LKhTU, OP, LBL CHUEZDB, M HLBCHS, NEOSS NBULY Y RPDZPFBCHMYCHBS PYUETEDOSCHI LPMCH PFRHEEOIS.

GIF. RP: ITEUFPNBFIYS RP YUFPTYY BRBDOPECHTPREKULPZP FEBFTB. n., 1955, F. 2, U. 1029. h NENKHBTBI BLFETB zOBUFB-NMBDYEZP UPDETSYFUS KhRPNYOBOYE P FPN, UFP, LPZDB OB TEREFYGYY NBYOYUF CHSHCHUFBCHYM ZPMPPCH YЪ-ЪB LKHMYU, “FP FUBU CE ZJFE RTPZTENEM: "zPURPYO z" OBUF, HWETYFE LFH OERPDIPDSEHA ZPMPCH Yb-b RETCHPK LHMYUSCH URTBCHB: POB CHFPTZBEFUS CH TBNLH NPEK LBTFIOSCH "" (FBN CE, U. 1037).

BTBRHR r. MEFPRYUSH THUULPZP FEBFTB. urV., 1861, U. 310. CH UFYIPFCHPTEOYY h. m. b. chSENULPNKH" (1815):

about FTHD IHDPTSOILB UCHPY VTPUBAF CHEPTSCH,

"rPTFTEF, - TEYMYMY CHUE, - OE UFPYF OYUEZP:

rtsnpk khtpd, ippr, opu dmyooshchk, MPV U tpzbny!

th DPMZ IPSYOB RTEDBFSH PZOA EZP! —

"NPK DPMZ OE HCHBTsBFSH FBLYNY OBFPLBNY

(p YUHDP! ZPCHPTYF LBTFYOB YN CH PFCHEF):

rTED CHBNY, ZPURPDB, S UBN, B O RPTFTEF!

(rPIFShch 1790-1810-I ZPDHR, W. 680.)

101* OB ZHZHELF OEEPTSYDBOOPZP UFPMLOPCHEOYS OERPCHYTSOPUFY Y DCHYTSEOIS RPUFTPEOSCH UATSEFSCH U PTSYCHBAEINY UFBFHSNY, PF TSDB ChBTYBGIK ABOUT FENKH P zBMBFEE — UFBFHE, PTSYCHMEOOOPK ChDPIOPCHEOYEN IHDPTSOYLB (UATSEF FFPF, LPFPTPNH RPPUCHSEEO "ULHMSHRFPT" vBTBFSCHOULPZP, VShM YITPLP RTEDUFBCHMEO ChP ZhTBOGHULPN VBMEFE XVIII CHELB), DP "LBNEOOPZP ZPUFS" RHYLYOB Y TBTBVBFSHCHBCHYI LFH TSE FENH RTPYCHEDEOYK nPMSHETB Y nPGBTFB.

ITEUFPNBFIYS RP YUFPTYY ЪBRBDOPECHTPREKULPZP FEBFTB, F. 2, W. 1026 A L BLFETH, RPCHETOHFPNKH MYGPN L RHVMYLE, Y OBPVPTPF.

102* un. Ch "rKhFEYUFCHYY Y REFETVKhTZB Ch nPULCHKH" ZMBCHKH "EDTPCHP": "with UYA RPYUFEOOHA NBFSH U BUHYUEOOOSCHNY THLBCHBNY OB LCHBYOEA YMY U RPDPKOILPN RPDME LPTPCHSH UTBCHOYCHBM AT ZPTPDULYNY NBFETSNY".

104* "CHSHKDEN... DBDYN DSDE HNETEFSH YUFPTYYUEULY" (ZHTBOG.). nPULCHIFSOYO, 1854, 6, PPD. IV, W. II. R. vBTFEOECH UPPVEBEF DTHZHA CHETUYA: “OBN RETEDBCHBMY UPCHTENEOOOYLY, YuFP, KHUMSCHYBCH LFY UMPCHB PF KhNYTBAEEZP chBUYMYS mSHCHPCHYUB, rhylyo OBRTBCHYMUS ABOUT GSHCHRPYULBI L DCHETY Y YEROHM UPVTBCHYNUS TPDOSHCHN Y DTHЪSHSN EZP: "zPURPDB, CHSHKDENFE, RHFSH LFP VHDHF EZP RPUMEDOYE UMPCHB" (tHUULYK BTIYCH , 1870, W. 1369).

107* UT. CH "bMSHVPNE" POEZYOB: "h lPTBOE NOPZP NSCHUMEK DDTBCHSHI, // CHPF OBRTYNET: RTED LBIADSHCHN UPN // nPMYUSH - VEZY RKHFEK MHLBCHSCHI // uFY vPZB YOE URPTSh U ZMHRGPN". h "rBNSFOILE": "iCHBMKH Y LMECHEFKH RTYENMY TBCHOPDHYOP // th OE PURPTYCHBK ZMHRGB". DETTSBCHYO, OBRPNYOBS YUYFBFEMA UCHPA PDKh "VPZ", UNSZYUYM CHSHCHUPLPE YOE UPCHUEN VEEKHRTEYUOPE, U FPYULY UTEOIS GETLPCHOPK PTFPDPLUBMSHOPUFY, UPDETSBOYE FFZP UFYIPFCHPTEOYS ZHPTN HMPK: "... RETCHSHCHK WITH CHILDREN ... // h UETDEYUOPK RTPUFFFE VEUEDPCHBFSH P vPZE". h FFPN LPOFELUFE PVTBEEOYE L nHJE (IPFS UMPCHP Y OBRYUBOP U RTPRYUOPK VHLCHSCH) NPZMP CHPURTYOYNBFSHUS LBL RPFYUEULBS HUMPCHOPUFSH. OBYUYFEMSHOP VPMEE DETALYN VSCHMP TEOYOYE RHYLYOB: "CHEMEOSHA VPTSYA, P nHB, VKHDSH RPUMHYOB". vPZ Y nKHB DENPOUFTBFICHOP UPUEDUFCHHAF, RTYUEN PVB UMPCHB OBRYUBOSCH U VPMSHYPK VHLCHSHCH. yFP UFBCHYMP YI CH EDYOSCHK UNSCHUMPPCHPK Y UINCHPMYUEULYK TSD TBCHOP CHSHCHUPLYI, OP OEUPCHNEUFYNSCHI GEOOPUFEK. fBLPE EDYOUFCHP UPDBCHBMP PUPVHA RPYGYA BCHFPTB, DPUFHROPZP CHUEN CHETYOBN YuEMPCHEYUEULPZP DHIB.

108* RETED rPMFBCHULPK VYFCHPK REFT I, RP RTEDBOYA, ULBBM: “ChPYOSCH! ChPF RTYYEM YUBU, LPFPTSCHK TEYBEF UHDSHVKh pFEYUEUFCHB. yFBL, OE DPMTSOP ChBN RPNSCHYMSFSH, UFP UTBTSBEFEUSH b REFTB, OP b ZPUHDBTUFCHP, REFTH RPTKHYUEOOPE, b TPD UCHPK, b pFEYUEUFCHP. th DBMEE: “b P REFTE CHEDBKFE, YUFP ENKH TSYOSHOE DPTPZB, FPMSHLP VSH TSYMB tPUUYS”. FFPF FELUF PVTBEEOIS REFTB L UPMDBFBN OEMSHЪS UYUYFBFSH BHFEOFYUOSCHN. FELUF VSHCHM CH RETCHPN EZP ChBTYBOFE UPUFBCHMEO ZHEPZHBOPN rTPLPRPCHYUEN (CHPNPTSOP, ABOUT PUOPCHE LBLYI-FP KHUFOSHCHI MEZEOD) Y RPFPN RPDCHETZBMUS PVTBVPFLBN (UN .: fTHDSC YNR. THUUL ChPEOOP-YUFPTYUEULPZP PVEEUFCHB, F. III, U. 274-276; VKhNBZY REFTTB CHEMILPZP, F. IX, CHShCHR. 1, 3251, RTYNEYU. 1, U. 217-219; CHSCHR. 2, U. 980-983). FP, YuFP Ch TEEKHMSHFBFE TSDB RETEDEMPL YUFPTYUEULBS DPUFPCHETOPUFSH FELUFB UFBMB VPMEE YUEN UPNOYFEMSHOPC, U OBYEK FPYULY TEOYS RBTBDPLUBMSHOP RPCHSHCHYBEF EZP YOFETEU, FBL LBL RTEDEMSHOP PVOBTSBEF RTEDUFBCHMEOYE P FPN, UFP DPMTSEO VSCM ULBBFSH REFT I CH FBLPK UIFHBGYY, B FBP DMS YUFPTYLB OE NEOEE YOFETEUOP, Yuen EZP RPDMIOOSCHE UMPCHB. fBLPK YDEBMSHOSHCHK PVTB ZPUHDBTS-RBFTYPFB ZHEPZHBO CH TBOOSCHI CHBTYBOFBI UPDBCHBM Y CH DTHZYI FELUFBI.

110* s. b. zHLPCHULYK, B B OYN Y DTHZYE LPNNEOFBFPTSCH RPMBZBAF, UFP "UMPCHP KhNYTBAEZP lBFPOB" - PFUSHMLB L rMHFBTIH (UN .: tBDYEECH b. o. rpmy. UPVT. UPYu., F. 1, U. 295, 485). VPMEE CHETPSFOP RTEDRPMPTSEOYE, UFP tBDYEECH YNEEF CH CHYDH NPOPMZ LBFPOB YЪ PDOPINEOOOPK FTBZEDYY ddDYUPOB, RTPGYFYTPCHBOOPK YN CH FPN CE RTPYCHEDEOYY, CH ZMBCHE "vTPOOYGSCH" (FBN CE) , W. 269).

111* ufy UMPCHB UCHYDEFEMSHUFCHHAF, UFP IPFS prpyuyoyo YNEM VTBFSHECH, TSYM PO HEDYOEOOP Y VSCM EDIOUFCHEOOSHCHN, EUMY OE UUYFBFSH LTERPUFOSHCHI UMHZ, PYFBFEMEN UCHPEZP PYOPPLZ P DETECHEOULPZP TSYMYEB, BRPMOEOOPZP LOIZBNY.

116* h DBOOPN UMHYUBE NSC YNEEN RTBCHP ZPCHPTYFSH YNEOOP P FCHPTYUEUFCHE: BOBMY RPLBBSCHCHBEF, YUFP lBTBNYO REYUBFBM FPMSHLP FH RETECHPDOHA MYFETBFHTH, LPFPTBS UPPFCHEFU FChPCHBMB EZP UPVUFCHEOOOPK RTPZTBNNE, YOE UFEUOSMUS RETEDEMSCCHBFSH Y DBCE HUFTBOSFSH FP, UFP OE UPCHRBDBMP U EZP CHZMSDBNY.

118* yNEEFUS CH CHYDH Y’CHEUFOSHCHK CH 1812 RFHTH RYNEOPCHB "THUULYK uGECHPMB").

119* YUFPTYS LPOGERGYK UNETFY CH THUULPK LHMSHFHTE OE YNEEF GEMPUFOPZP PUCHEEEEOIS. DMS UTBCHOEOYS U BRBDOP-ECHTPREKULPK LPOGERGYEK NPTsOP RPTELPNEODPCHBFSH YUIFBFEMA LOIZH: Vovel Michel. La mort et l "Occident de 1300 à nos jours.< Paris >, Gallimard, 1983

120* PO RTYIPDYMUS TPDUFCHEOOILPN FPNKh NPULPCHULPNKh ZMBCHOPPLNBODHAEENKH, LOSA b. b. rTPЪPTCHULPNKH, LPFPTSCHK RPЪTSE U TSEUFPLPUFSH RTEUMEDPCHBM about. oPCHYLPCHB Y NPULPCHULYI NBTFYOYUFPC Y P LPFPTPN rPFFENLYO ULBBM ELBFETYOE, UFP POB CHSHCHDCHYOKHMB YU UCHPEZP BTUEOBMB "UBNHA UFBTHA RHYLH", LPFTBS OERTENEOOP VHDEF UV TEMSFSH CH GEMSH YNRETBFTYGSCH, RPFPNKh SFP UFP UCHPEK OE YNEEF. pDOBLP ON CHSHCHULBBM PRBUEOYE, YUFPVSCH rTPЪPTCHULYK OE ЪBRSFOBM CH ZMBBI RPFPNUFCHB YNS ELBFETYOSCH LTPCHSHHA. rPFENLYO PLBBMUS RTCHIDGEN.

121* ZBMETB - CHPEOOSHK LPTBVMSH ABOUT CHEUMBI. LPNBODB ZBMETSC UPUFPYF YY YFBFB NPTULYI PZHYGETPCH, HOFET-PZHYGETPCH Y UPMDBF-BTFYMMETYUFCH, NPTSLPCH Y RTYLPCHBOOSCHI GERSNY LBFTTSOYLPCH ABOUT CHEUMBI. ZBMETSHCH HRPFTEVMSMYUSH H NPTULYI UTBTSEOISI LBL OE BCHYUSEEEEE PF OBRTBCHMEOYS CHEFTB Y PVMBDBAEEE VPMSHYPK RPDCHYTSOPUFSHHA UTEDUFCHP. REFT I RTYDBCHBM VPMSHYPE OBYUEOYE TBCHYFYA ZBMETOPZP ZHMPFB. UMHCVB ABOUT ZBMETBI UYUYFBMBUSH PUPVEOOP FSCEMPC.

124* h LFPN NEUFE CH RHVMYLBGYY zPMYLPCHB TEYUSH REFTB DBOB CH VPMEE RTPUFTBOOPN CHYDE; WOYUIPDYFEMSHOPUFSH REFTB EEE VPMEE RPDUETLOHFB: “fshch CHUETB VShM Ch ZPUFSI; B NEOS UEZPDOS ЪCHBMY ABOUT TPDYOSCH; RPEDEN UP NOPA".

126* h NENKHBTBI ORMAECH TYUHEF LTBUPYOSCHE LBTFYOSCH FFK DTBNBFYUEULPK UYFKHBGYY: “... ALDETE, ЪBRETUS CH PUPVHA LPNOBFKH Y RPMKHYUBM RTPRYFBOYE CH PLOP, OILPZP L UEVE OE DPRHULBS; TsOB NPS ETSEYUBUOP X DCHETEK P FPN UP UMEBNY RTPUYMB NEOS ”(U. 124). MEYUYMUS ON "RTJOYNBOYEN YOYOSCH U CHPDK" (FBN TSE).

128* UMPCHP "IHDPTSEUFCHP" POBBYUBMP CH FH RPTH RPOSFIYE, RETEDBCHBENPE OBNY FERETSH UMPCHPN "TENEUMP". n. bChTBNPC, LBL YUEMPCEL UCHPEK LRPIY, CH TSYCHPRYUY RPDYUETLYCHBEF TENEUMP — UPYEFBOYE FTHDB Y HNEOYS. DMS MADEK REFTCHULPK LRPII UMPCHB "TENEUMP", "KHNEOYE" CHKHYUBMY FPPTTSEUFCHEOOOE Y DBTSE RPFYUOEEE, YUEN UMPCHP "FBMBOPF". FFPF RBZHPU RPJCE PFTBTSEO CH UMPCHBI b. and. NETMSLPCHB "UCHSFBS TBVPFB" P RPYYY; CH UMPCHBI (RPCHFPTSAEII l rBCHMPCHH) n. gCHEFBECHPK "TENEUMEOIL, S KOBA TENEUMP" Y BOOSCH BINBFPPPK "UCHSFPE TENEUMP".

UN: PRYUBOYE YODBOYK ZTBTSDBOULPK REYUBFY. 1708 - SOCHBTSH 1725. n.; Moscow, 1955, U. 125-126; UN. FBLCE: PRYUBOYE YODBOYK, OBREYUBFBOOSCHI RTY REFTE I. UCHPDOSHK LBFBMPZ. m., 1972.

130* UNSCHUM LFYI UMPC PVYASUOSEFUS RTPFYCHPRPUFBCHMEOYEN YTPLPZP RHFY, CHEDHEEZP CH BD, Y HULPZP, "FEUOPZP", CHEDHEEZP Ch TBK. ut. UMPCHB RTPFPRRB bCHCHBLHNB P "FEUOPN" RHFY CH TBK. tebmykhs nefbzhpth, bchchblkhn zpchptym, UFP FPMUFSHCHE, VTAIBFSHCHE OILPOYBOE CH TBK OE RPRBDHF.

131* RP LBRTYYOPPNKH RETERMEFEOYA UATSEFPCH Y UKHDEV, YNEOOP CHTENS UMEDUFCHYS RP DEMKH GBTECHYUB bMELUES DPUFYZMB BRPZES LBTSHETB z. h. ULPTOSLPCHB-RYUBTECHB, UHDSHVB LPFPTPZP RPJCE OEPTSYDBOOP RETEUEYUEFUS U UHDSHVPK bCHTBNPCHB.

133* nPTsOP UPNOECHBFShUS Y CH FPN, UFP TPNBOFYUEULYK VTBL oEYUECHPMPDCHB U UETLEIEOLPK RPMKHYUYM GETLPCHOPE VMBZPUMPCHEOYE. RETECHPD UATSEFB "LBCHLBULPZP RMEOOYLB" ABOUT SCHL VSCFPCHPK TEBMSHOPUFY UCHSBO VSHCHM U OELPFPTSCHNY FTHDOPUFSNY.

134* fBL, OBRTYNET, CH dHYYYULYOPK VSHMY PVOBTHTSEOSHCH UPFOY FELUFPMPZYUEULYI PYYVPL ABOUT OEULPMSHLYI DEUSFLBY UFTBOIG; RPULPMSHLKh OELPFPTSCHE UFTBOYGSCH YODBOYS DBAF ZHPFPFIRYYUEULPE CHPURTPYCHEDEOYE THLPRYUEK, MAVPRSHCHFOSHCHK YUIFBFEMSH, UPRPUFBCHMSS YI U FHF TSE RTYCHEDEOOOSCHNY REYUBFOSHCHNY UFTBOYGBNY, NPTSEF PVOBTHTSYFSH RTPRHULY GEMSHI UFTPL Y DTHZYE RMPDSH VEEPPFCHEFUFCHEOOPUFY Y OECHETSUFCHB.

UN. ZMBCHH "TPMSh tBDYEECHB CH URMPYOYY RTPZTEUUYCHOSHI UYM". - h LO .: vBVLYO d. b. O. tBDYEECH. MYFETBFHTOP-PVEEUFCHEOOBS DEFEMSHOPUFSH. n.; m., 1966.

135* DMS RTPUCHEFYFEMS OBTPD - RPOSFYE VPMEE YYTPLPE, YUEN FB YMYY YOBS UPHYBMSHOBS ZTHRRRB. tBDYEECH, LPOEYUOP, YCH HNE OE REFINERY RTEDUFBCHYFSH OERPUTEDUFCHEOOOPK TEBLGYY LTEUFSHSOOYOB ABOUT EZP LOIZH. h OBTPD CHIPDYMB DMS OEZP CHUS NBUUB MADEK, LTPNE TBVHR ABOUT PDOPN RPMAUE Y TBVPCHMBDEMSHGECH - ABOUT DTHZPN.

FBN TSE, F. 2, W. 292-293, 295. VPDSH OBD TBVUFCHPN.

136* lBTBNYO, LBL NPTsOP UKHDYFSH, VSHCHM CHCHPMOPCHBO UBNPKHVYKUFCHPN tbdyechb Y PRBUBMUS CHPDEKUFCHYS FFPZP RPUFKHRLB ABOUT UPCTENEOOILPC. FYN, CHYDYNP, PVYASUOSEFUS FP, UFP BCHFPT, DP LFPZP U UPYUHCHUFCHYEN PRYUBCHYYK GEMHA GERSH UBNPKHVYKUFCH PF OYUYBUFMYCHPK MAVCHY YMY RTEUMEDPCHBOIK RTEDTBUUHDLPC, CH FFP CHTE NS CH TSDE UVBFEK Y RPCHEUFEK CHSHCHUFKHRIM U PUHTSDEOYEN RTBCHB YuEMPCHELB UBNPCHPMSHOP LPOYUBFSH UCHPA TSYOSH.

138* oEY’CHEUFOP, U RPNPESH LBLYI UTEDUFCH, — NPTSEF VSHCHFSH, RPFPNH, UFP CH DBMELPK uYVYTY DEOSHZY CHCHZMSDEMY HVEDYFEMSHOEE, YUEN UFPMYUOSCHE BRTEFSCH, — Y PO, CHYDYNP, PZHPTNYM FFPF VTBL Y GETLPHOSCHN TYFHBMPN. RP LTBKOEK NETE, TPDYCHYKUS CH UYVYTY USCHO RBCHEM UYUYFBMUS BLPOOSCHN, Y OILBLYI FTHDOPUFEK, U FYN UFYN, CH DBMSHOEKYEN OE CHPOYLBMP.

139* YOFETEUKHAEEEE OBU UEKYUBU RYUSHNP CH PTYZYOBME OBRYUBOP RP-ZHTBOGHULY. h DBOOPN NEUFE CH RETECHPDE DPRHEEOB YULMAYUYFEMSHOP CHBTSOBS OEFPYUOPUFSH. JTBOGHULPE "une irréligion" (FBN TSE, U. 118) RETECHEDEOP LBL "VEECHETYE". ABOUT UBNPN DEME TEYUSH YDEF OE P VEVCHETYY, HRTELBFSH CH LPFPTPN TKHUUP VSCHMP VSCH LMENEOFBTOPK PYYVLPK, B P DEYUFYUUEULPN UFTENMEOYY RPUFBCHYFSH CHETH CHCH PFDEMSHOSHCHI TEMYZYK

140* rPUMEDOYE UMPCHB PE ZHTBOGKHULPN RYUSHNE uHCHPTCHB RTEDUFBCHMSAF UPVPK "TKHUULYK" FELUF, OBRYUBOOOSCHK MBFYOYGEK, RTEYFEMSHOSHCHK CHPMSRAL, RETEDTBOYCHBAEYK ZHTBOGKHULHA TEYUSH THUULYI DCHPTSO.

141* uHCHPTCH HRPFTEVMSEF CHCHTBTSEOIE "loi naturelle". h GYFYTHENPN YODBOYY POP RETECHEDEOP LBL "BLPO RTYTPDSCH", UFP RPMOPUFSHHA YULBTSBEF EZP UNSCHUM. uHCHPTCH YURPMSHHEF MELUILKH Y FETNYOPMPZYY ULPFPCHPDUFCHB, ZDE "OBFHTB" POBUBEF LBYUEUFCHP RPTPDSCH. RETECHPD UMPCHPN "EUFEUFCHEOOSHKK" CH DBOOPN YODBOYY PYYVPYEO.

UN: rBOYUEOLP b. n. UNEI LBL ЪTEMYEE. - h LO .: UNEI CH dTECHOK THUI. Moscow, 1984, U. 72-153. zhKhLU e. urV., 1900, U. 20-21.

142* yZTB UHDSHVSCH RTYCHEMB CH DBMSHOEKYEN e. JHLUB ABOUT UIPDOPK DPMTSOPUFY CH RPIPDOHA LBOGEMSTYA LHFHFCHB CHP CHTENS pFEYUEUFCHEOOOPK CHPKOSHCH 1812 ZPDB. ffpf OEEBNEFOSHCHK Yuempchel RPOAIBM CH UCHPEK TSOYOY RPTPIB, YEUMY PO OE VSCHM LTYFYYUEULYN YUFPTYILPN, FP IBFP RYUBM P FPN, YuFP UBN CHYDEM Y RETETSYM.

ChPEOOPZP LTBUOPTEYUYS YUBUFSH RETCHBS, UPDETSBEBS PVEYE OBYUBMB UMPCHEUOPUFY. UPYOYOEOYE PTDYOBTOPZP RTPZHEUUPTB uBOLFREFETVKhTZULPZP HOYCHETUYFEFB SLPCHB fPMNBYUECHB. urV., 1825, U. 47. NEOPHR" 1950-1952 ZZ. Y h. MPRBFJOB (1987). OH CH PDOP YFYI YODBOYK RYUSHNP OE VSCHMP CHLMAYUEOP. NECDH FEN POP RTEDUFBCHMSEF UPVPK YULMAYUYFEMSHOP STLYK DPLHNEOF MYUOPUFY Y UFIMS RPMLCHPDGB.

. bTLBDYK DPTSYM MYYSH DP DCHBDGBFY UENY MEF Y RPZYV, HFPOKHCH CH FPN UBNPN tshchnoyle, b RPVEDH ABOUT LPFPTPN PFEG EZP RPMHYuYM FYFHM tshchnoyLLPZP.

147* NHODYT Y PTDEO CH FFPN LHMSHFHTOPN LPOFELUFE CHSHCHUFHRBAF LBL UYOPOYNSCH: OBZTBDB NPZMB CHSHCHTBTSBFSHUS LBL CH ZHPTNE PTDEOB, FBL Y CH CHYDE OPCHPZP YUYOB, UFP PFTBTSBMPUSH H NHOD YTE.

149* rp ffpnh tse demkh vschm BTEUFPCHBO Y BLMAYUEO CH REFTPRBCHMPCHULHA LTERPUFSH ETNPMPCH. rPUME HVYKUFCHB YNRETBFPTB ON VSCHM PUCHPPVPTSDEO Y U OEPRTBCHDBCHYNUS PRFINYYNPN OBRYUBM ABOUT DCHETSI UCHPEK LBNETSC: "OBCHUEZDB UCHPVVPDOB PF RPUFPS". rTPYMP 25 MEF, Y TBCHEMYO, LBL Y CHUS LTERPUFSH, VSHCHM

152* hVPTOBS - LPNOBFB DMS RETEPDECHBOYS Y HFTEOOYI FHBMEFPCH CH DOECHOPE RMBFSHHE, B FBLTS DMS RTYUEUSCHCHBOYS Y UPCHETYOEOYS NBLYSTSB. FYRPCHBS NEVEMSH HVPTOPK UPUFPSMB YJ ETTLBMB, FHBMEFOPZP UFPMYLB Y LTEUEM DMS IPSKLY Y ZPUFEK.

ЪBRYULY DAlb MYTYKULPZP... RPUMB LPTPMS yURBOULPZP, 1727-1730 ZPDHR. rV., 1847, U. 192-193. h RTYMPTSEOY L LFPK LOYSE PRHVMYLPCHBOSH UPYOYOEOYS zhEPZHBOB rTPLPRPCHYUB, GYFYTHENSCHE OBNY.

154* RHYLYO U PVSCHYuOPK DMS OEZP ZMHVYOPK RPDYUETLYCHBEF, YUFP ZYVEMSH OB DEMP, LPFPTPE YuEMPCHEL UYUYFBM URTBCHEDMYCHSHCHN, PRTBCHDSHCHCHBEFUUS LFYLPK YUEUFY, DBTSE EUMY H ZMBB BI RPFPNUFCHB POP CHSCHZMSDYF, OBRTYNET, LBL RTEDTBUUHDPL.

YOFETEUOSCHK PYUETL MYFETBFHTOPZP PVTBB VPSTSHCHOY nPTPCHPK UN .: rBOYUEOLP b. n. vPSTSCHOS nPTPJPCHB - UINCHPM Y NYZH. - h LO .: rPCHEUFSH P VPSTSHOE nPTPCHPK. n., 1979.

155* MYUOKHA DHYECHOHA NSZLPUFSH MBVYO UPYUEFBM U ZTBTSDBOULPK UNEMPUFSHHA. pFLTSCHFSCHK RTPFYCHOYL bTBLUEECHB, PO RPCHPMMYM UEV DETLPE BSCHMEOYE: ABOUT UPCHEFE H BLBDENYY IHDPTSEUFCH CH PFCHEF ABOUT RTEMPTSEOIE YЪVTBFSH CH BLBDENYA BTBLUEECHB, LBL MYGP, V MYLPE ZPUHDBTA, PO RTEMPTSYM YЪVTBFSH GBTULPZP LHYUETB yMSHA - “FBLTS VMYLHA ZPUHDBTA YNRETBFPTH PUPVKh” (yymshdet o. l. yNRETBFPT bMELUBODT RETCHSHCHK. eZP TSIOSH Y GBTUFCHPCHBOYE. urV., 1898, F. IV, U. 267). bB FP PO BRMBFIM HCHPMSHOEOYEN PF UMHTSVSHCH Y UUSCHMLPK, LPFPTHA RETEOYU U VPMSHYPK FCHETDPUFSHHA.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Control work on discipline

"Culturology"

according to the book by Lotman Yu.M.

"Conversations about Russian culture"

Part 1 1.1 Biography of Yu.M. Lotman

1.2 The main works of Yu.M. Lotman

1.4 Contribution to the study of culture

Part 2. Brief essay "Conversations about Russian culture"

Bibliography

Part 1

1.1 Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman

Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman was born on February 28, 1922, in a family of Petrograd intellectuals, in a famous house at the beginning of Nevsky Prospekt, where Wolf-Beranger's confectionery was located in Pushkin's time. My father was a famous lawyer, then a legal adviser in a publishing house. Mother worked as a doctor. He was the youngest in the family, besides him there were three sisters. Everyone lived together, very poor, but fun. Yuri Lotman graduated with honors from the well-known Peterschule in Petrograd, which was distinguished by a high level of humanitarian education

The literary circle of friends of Lydia's older sister influenced her choice of profession. In 1939, Yuri Mikhailovich entered the Faculty of Philology of Leningrad University, where famous professors and academicians taught at that time: G.A. Gukovsky read an introduction to literary criticism, M.K. Azadovsky - Russian folklore, A.S. Orlov - ancient Russian literature, I.I. Tolstoy - ancient literature. In the folklore seminar V.Ya. Proppa Lotman wrote his first term paper. Classes at the University continued in the Public Library, and this laid the foundations for Lotman's colossal ability to work. In addition, there were student earnings, cargo work in the port, free lectures from patrons at dating enterprises and parties.

In October 1940, Lotman was drafted into the army. The fact that even before the start of the Great Patriotic War he became a regular military man may have saved his life. The unit in which Lotman served in the very first days was transferred to the front line and was in fierce battles for almost four years. Yuri Mikhailovich crossed with the retreating army the entire European part of the country, from Moldova to the Caucasus, and then advanced west, all the way to Berlin, he was in the most desperate situations. Under shelling, bombing, he received orders and medals for courage and steadfastness in battles, but fate surprisingly favored him: he was not even wounded, only once he was badly shell-shocked.

At the end of 1946, Lotman was demobilized and continued his studies at Leningrad University. Most of all, the student who resumed his studies was attracted by the special courses and special seminars of N.I. Mordovchenko, who was then working on his doctoral dissertation on Russian literary criticism of the first quarter of the 19th century. Already in his student years, Yuri Mikhailovich made the first scientific discoveries. In the manuscript department of the State Public Library. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. In the notebook of Mason Maxim Nevzorov, he found a copy of the program document of one of the early Decembrist secret societies, the Union of Russian Knights, whose founders were Count M.A. Dmitriev-Mamonov and M.F. Orlov. The found source was known for a long time by the name “Brief Instructions to the Russian Knights”, it was mentioned in correspondence, appeared in the investigation files of the Decembrists, but the researchers searched in vain for the text itself, the document was already considered lost. university."

In 1950, Lotman graduated from the university, but as a Jew, the path to graduate school was closed to him. (an anti-Semitic company raged in the country). Yuri Mikhailovich managed to find a job in Estonia, he became a teacher and then head of the Department of Russian Language and Literature at the Tartu Teachers' Institute. Some bodies theoretically having nothing to do with science and pedagogy, but practically in charge of everything, turned Lotman into a “travel restriction”, closed his abroad - but the works of the scientist still crossed the border. They were translated into dozens of languages and made the author's name world-famous.

In 1952, Lotman defended his Ph.D. thesis at Leningrad University on the creative relationship between Radishchev and Karamzin.

From 1954 until the end of his life, Yuri Mikhailovich worked at the University of Tartu. In 1961 he defended his doctoral dissertation. In 1960-1977 he headed the Department of Russian Literature at Tartu State University. The well-known literary critic Zara Grigoryevna Mints became Lotman's wife, children appeared in the family.

Yu.M. Lotman was distinguished by his incredible capacity for work, he managed to lead the department, study the Estonian language, and prepare new special courses. Give lectures, write scientific papers, organize conferences. Lotman is the author of 800 scientific papers, including many fundamental monographs. He was a world-famous scientist, a Pushkin Prize winner of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a corresponding member of the British Academy, an academician of the Norwegian, Swedish, and Estonian academies. He was Vice President of the World Association of Semiotics. He possessed an encyclopedic erudition combined with a depth of professional knowledge. Literature and history, culturology and semiotics are only the briefest designation of those vast spaces to which labor, energy, abilities, mind, feelings of this remarkable researcher and amazing person were applied.

Yu.M. Lotman made a great contribution to the study of the history of Russian culture. According to his books about A.S. Pushkin, M.Yu. Lermontov, N.V. Gogol. N.M. Karamzin was studied by many generations of students. Each book is a significant event in the history of culture, because it differs from other works on literary criticism by its original approach and depth of analysis, the combination of the history of culture and the history of the soul.

Released in recent years from prohibitions and restrictions, Yuri Mikhailovich traveled almost the entire Western world, making presentations at various conferences and lecturing at universities.

Chained to hospitals, having lost his sight, he worked until his last days. The last book "Culture and explosion" was created under dictation - this is a kind of testament of the author.

1.2 The main works of Yu.M. Lotman

The article "Radishchev and Mably" in 1958 opened a large series of works by the scientist devoted to Russian-Western European cultural ties.

The complex of Karamzin's works by Lotman is one of the most significant in his legacy.

In parallel, Lotman studied the life and work of writers and public figures of the early 19th century.

In 1958, thanks to the rector of the University of Tartu F.D. Clement began to publish "Works on Russian and Slavic Mythology" of the new series "Scholarly Notes" which included many of Lotman's works.

While working on his doctoral dissertation, Lotman begins to thoroughly study the Decembrists, Pushkin, Lermontov.

"The main stages in the development of Russian realism" 1960.

"The origins of the "Tolstoy trend" in Russian literature in 1830" 1962

"The ideological structure of the "Captain's Daughter" 1962

The pinnacle of Lotman's Pushkinianism are 3 books: "The novel in Pushkin's verse" Eugene Onegin "Special course. Introductory lectures in the study of the text "

"Pushkin's novel "Eugene Onegin" Commentary. Teacher's Guide»

"Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Biography of the writer. A guide for students"

"On the metalanguage of typological descriptions of culture"

"Symeotics of Cinema and Problems of Film Aesthetics".

« Lectures on structural poetics. Issue 1. introduction, theory of verse "

"The structure of a literary text"

"Inside Thinking Worlds"

"Selected Articles" in 3 volumes, which contains scientific works on symeotics, typology of culture, about the text as a semiotic problem, about culture and programs of behavior, semiotic space, semiotics of various types of arts, semiotic mechanism of culture translation.

1.3 Belonging to a scientific school

Lotman became interested in structuralism and semiotics very early, on the verge of 1950-1960. This interest was facilitated by his invariable attraction to new methods, theoretical way of thinking and disgust for the vulgar sociological method (imposed from above)

Semiotics, the science of signs and sign systems, arose before World War II. In different areas, theoretical superstructures began to be created: for linguists - metalinguistics, for philosophers - metatheory, for mathematicians - metamathematics. Human culture is filled with signs, the further it develops, the more complex signs it operates with. The multi-storey and complexity of sign systems caused the birth of semiotics.

Structuralism is a branch of symeotics. Which studies the relationship of signs to each other. The main stimulus for its development was the emergence of electronic computers - the need to create mathematical linguistics. Lotman is the creator of literary structuralism. He took the main methodological and methodological prerequisites of linguistic innovators: the division of the studied text into content and expression, and plans into a system of levels (syntactic, morphological, phonetic) within the level - division into correlative and opposing elements, and studied the structure of the text in two aspects: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.

1.4 Contribution to the study of culture

The merit of Yu.M. Lotman is to reveal the sign-symbolic nature of culture and the mechanisms of its translation based on the application of the semiotic method and information theory.

The semiotics of culture is the main direction of culturological

research. It contributes to a deeper understanding of cultural texts, reveals the mechanisms of cultural continuity. It reveals the sign-symbolic nature of the languages of culture, promotes the dialogue of cultures of different countries and peoples.

Hast2 . Brief essay “Conversations about Russian culture. Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (18th - early 19th centuries)"

Introduction: Life and culture.

Culture has a communicative and symbolic nature. Culture is memory. A person is changing, and in order to imagine the logic of the actions of a literary hero or people of the past, one must imagine how they lived, what kind of world surrounded them, what were their general ideas and moral ideas, their duties, customs, clothes, why they acted this way, and not otherwise. This will be the topic of the proposed conversations.

Culture and way of life: doesn't the expression itself contain a contradiction, don't these phenomena lie on different planes? What is life?

Life is the usual flow of life in its real-practical forms. To see history in the mirror of everyday life, and to illuminate small disparate everyday details with the light of great historical events is the method of the “Conversations about Russian Culture” offered to the reader.

Life, in its symbolic key, is part of culture. Things have a memory, they are like words and notes that the past passes on to the future. On the other hand, things can powerfully dictate gestures, behavior and, ultimately, the psychological attitude of their owners, since they create a certain cultural context around them.

However, life is not only the life of things, it is also customs, the whole ritual of daily behavior, the structure of life that determines the daily routine, the time of various activities, the nature of work and leisure, forms of recreation, games, love ritual and funeral ritual.

History does not predict the future well, but it explains the present well. The time of revolutions is anti-historical, and the time of reforms turns people to reflections on the paths of history. True, history has many facets, and we still remember the dates of major historical events, the biographies of historical figures. But how did historical people live? But it is in this nameless space that the real story most often unfolds. Tolstoy was profoundly right: without knowledge of simple life there is no understanding of history.

People act according to the motives of their era.

The 18th century is the time when the features of the new Russian culture took shape, the culture of the new time, to which we also belong. !8 - the beginning of the 19th century - is a family album of our current culture, its home archive.

History is not a menu where you can choose dishes to taste. This requires knowledge and understanding. Not only to restore the continuity of culture, but also to penetrate the texts of Pushkin and Tolstoy.

We will be interested in the culture and life of the Russian nobility, the culture that gave Fonvizin, Derzhavin, Radishchev, Novikov, Pushkin, Lermontov, Chaadaev ...

Part 1.

People and ranks.

Among the various consequences of the reforms of Peter I, the creation of the nobility in the function of the state and culturally dominant class occupies not the last place. Even earlier, the erasing of the differences between the estate and the patrimony began, and the decree of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich in 1682, announcing the destruction of localism, showed that the nobility would be the dominant force in the maturing state order.

The psychology of the service class was the foundation of the self-consciousness of the nobleman of the 18th century. It was through service that he recognized himself as part of the class. Peter 1 in every possible way stimulated this feeling both by personal example and by a number of legislative acts. The apex of them was the Table of Ranks - it was the implementation of the general principle of the new Peter's statehood - regularity. The table divided all types of service into military, civilian and court, all ranks were divided into 14 classes. Military service was in a privileged position, 14 classes in military service gave the right to hereditary nobility. Civil service was not considered noble, for raznochintsy. The Russian bureaucracy, being an important factor in state life, left almost no trace in spiritual life.

The Russian emperors were military men and received military upbringing and education; they were accustomed from childhood to look at the army as an ideal organization. In the life of the nobility there was a "cult of the uniform".

A person in Russia, if he did not belong to the taxable class, could not but serve. Without service, it was impossible to get a rank, when paperwork had to indicate the rank, if there was none, they signed "Undergrowth". However, if the nobleman did not serve, his relatives arranged for him a fictitious service and a long vacation. Simultaneously with the distribution of ranks, there was a distribution of benefits and honors. The place of the rank in the official hierarchy was associated with the receipt of many real privileges.

The system of orders, having arisen under Peter1, replaced the previously existing types of royal awards - instead of an award-thing, an award-sign appeared. Later, a whole hierarchy of orders was created. In addition to the system of orders, one can name a hierarchy in a certain sense opposed to the ranks, formed by the system of nobility. The rank of count, baron appeared.

The cultural paradox of the current situation in Russia was that the rights of the ruling class were formulated in the terms in which the Enlightenment philosophers described the ideal of human rights. This is at a time when the peasants were practically reduced to the level of slaves.

Women's World.

The character of a woman is very peculiarly correlated with the culture of the era. This is the most sensitive barometer of social life. Women's influence is rarely seen as a historical issue in its own right. Of course, the women's world was very different from the men's, primarily in that it was excluded from the sphere of public service. The rank of a woman was determined by the rank of her husband or father, if she was not a courtier.

By the end of the 18th century, a completely new concept appeared - the women's library. Remaining as before the world of feelings, nursery and housekeeping, the female world becomes more spiritual. Women's life began to change rapidly in the era of Peter the Great. Peter 1 changed not only public life, but also the way of life. Artificiality reigned in fashion. Women spent a lot of time changing their appearance. The ladies flirted, led an evening lifestyle. Flies on the face and games with a fan created the language of coquetry. Evening make-up required a lot of cosmetics. It was fashionable to have a lover. Family, household, raising children were in the background.

And suddenly important changes took place - romanticism was born, it became customary to strive for nature, the naturalness of morals and behavior. Paul! tried to stop fashion - the simplicity of clothing was promoted by the era of the French Revolution. Dresses appeared, which later became known as Onegin. Paleness has become an indispensable element of female attractiveness - a sign of the depth of heartfelt feelings.

The world of woman played a special role in the fate of Russian romanticism. The Age of Enlightenment raised the issue of protecting women's rights.

The female character at the end of the 18th century was shaped by literature. It is especially important that a woman constantly and actively assimilated the roles assigned to her by poems and novels, so it is possible to evaluate the everyday and psychological reality of their life through the prism of literature.

The end of the era we are interested in created three types of female images: the image of an angel who accidentally visited the earth, a demonic character, and a female heroine.

Feminine abouteducation in the 18th - early 19th century

Knowledge has traditionally been considered the privilege of men - the education of women has turned into a problem of her place in a society created by men. The need for women's education and the nature of it became the subject of controversy and associated with a general revision of the type of life, the type of life. As a result, an educational institution arose - the Smolny Institute with a broad program. The training lasted 9 years in isolation. The training was superficial, with the exception of languages, dances and needlework. Court toys were made from tar. Smolyanki were famous for their sensitivity, their sentimental unpreparedness for life was evidence of their innocence. The exaltation of behavior was not a lack of sincerity - it was the language of the time.

The Smolny Institute was not the only female academic institution. Private boarding schools arose, they were foreign and the level of education was low. They systematically taught languages and dances. The third type of women's education is at home. It was limited to languages, the ability to behave in society, dance, sing, play a musical instrument and draw, as well as the rudiments of history, geography and literature. With the beginning of trips to the world, training stopped.

The type of Russian educated woman began to take shape by the 30s of the 18th century. However, in general, women's education in the 18th and early 19th centuries had neither its own lyceum, nor Moscow or Derpt universities. The type of a highly spiritual Russian woman was formed under the influence of Russian literature and culture of the era.

Part 2.

Dancing was an important structural element of noble life. In the life of a Russian metropolitan nobleman, time was divided into two halves: staying at home (private person) and in the meeting, where social life was realized.

The ball was the opposite of service and the realm of public representation. The main element of the ball as a social and aesthetic action was dancing. Dance training began at the age of 5. Long-term training gave young people confidence in their movements, freedom and ease in posing a figure, which influenced the mental structure of a person. Grace was a sign of a good upbringing. The ball began with a polonaise, the second ballroom dance was a waltz (in the 1920s it had a reputation for being obscene), the center of the ball was a mazurka. Cotillion - a kind of quadrille, one of the dances concluding the ball, a dance game. The ball had a harmonious composition, obeyed firm laws and was a contrast to the two extreme poles: the parade and the masquerade.

Matchmaking. Marriage. Divorce.

The ritual of marriage in the noble society of the 18th and early 19th centuries bears traces of the same contradictions as all everyday life. Traditional Russian customs came into conflict with ideas about Europeanism. Violation of parental will and kidnapping of the bride was not part of the norms of European behavior, but it was a common place in romantic plots. Family relations in serf life are inseparable from the relations between the landowner and the peasant woman; this is an obligatory background, outside of which the relations between husband and wife become incomprehensible. One of the manifestations of the oddities of life of this era were serf harems.

The ever-growing gap between the way of life of the nobility and the people causes a tragic attitude in the most thinking part of the nobles. If in the 18th century a cultured nobleman sought to move away from the people's everyday behavior, then in the 19th century an opposite impulse arises.

Noble weddings retained a certain connection with the tradition of marrying in the fall, but translated it into the language of Europeanized mores.

One of the innovations of post-Petrine reality was divorce. Divorce required the decision of the consistory - the spiritual office. A rare and scandalous form of divorce was often replaced by a practical divorce: the spouses separated, divided the property, after which the woman received freedom.

The home life of a nobleman of the 18th century developed as a complex interweaving of customs approved by folk tradition, religious rites, philosophical freethinking, Westernism, affecting the break with the surrounding reality. This disorder, which took on the character of ideological and everyday chaos, also had a positive side. To a large extent, the youth of a culture that had not yet exhausted its possibilities was manifested here.

Russian dandyism.

Born in England, dandyism included a national opposition to French fashions, which caused violent indignation among English patriots at the end of the 18th century. Dandyism took on the color of romantic rebellion. He was focused on extravagance of behavior, an offensive demeanor for society, swagger of gestures, demonstrative shocking - forms of destroying secular prohibitions were perceived as poetic. Karamzin in 1803 described a curious phenomenon of the fusion of rebellion and cynicism, the transformation of egoism into a kind of religion and a mocking attitude in all the principles of vulgar morality. In the prehistory of Russian dandyism, the so-called wheezing can be noted. Tightening the belt to rival the female waist gave the military fashionista the appearance of a strangled man and justified his name as a wheezer. Spectacles played an important role in the behavior of a dandy; lorgnette was perceived as a sign of Anglomania. The decency of the 18th century in Russia forbade the younger in age or rank to look at the elders through glasses: this was perceived as impudence. Another characteristic sign of dandyism is the posture of disappointment and satiety. Dandyism is primarily behavior, not theory or ideology. Inseparable from individualism and dependent on observers, dandyism constantly oscillates between a pretense of rebellion and various compromises with society. His limitations lie in the limitations and inconsistency of fashion, in the language of which he is forced to speak with his era.

Card game.

The card game has become a kind of life model. In the function of the card game, its dual nature is manifested: the cards are used in fortune-telling (forecasting, programming functions) and in the game, that is, it represents an image of a conflict situation. It is not comparable to other fashion games of the time. An essential role here was played by the fact that the card game covers two different types of conflict situations - commercial and gambling.

The former are regarded as decent, for respectable people, surrounded by the halo of comfort of family life, the poetry of innocent entertainment, the latter - entailed an atmosphere of infernality, met with strong moral condemnation. It is known that gambling in Russia at the end of the 18th century was formally banned as immoral, although it practically flourished, turned into a general custom of the noble society and was actually canonized. The card game and chess are, as it were, antipodes of the gaming world. Gambling games are built in such a way that the player is forced to make a decision without actually having any information. Thus he plays with Chance. The intersection of the principles of regular statehood and arbitrariness creates a situation of unpredictability and the mechanism of a gambling card game becomes the image of statehood. In Russia, the most common were pharaoh and shtoss- games in which chance played the greatest role. Strict normalization, penetrating into the private life of a man of the empire, created a psychological need for explosions of unpredictability. It is no coincidence that desperate flashes of the card game inevitably accompanied the epochs of reaction: 1824, 25, 1830. Card terminology rapidly penetrated into other areas of culture. The problem of the card game was made for contemporaries as a symbolic expression of the conflicts of the era. Cheating became almost an official profession, and the society of the nobility treated dishonest card games, albeit with condemnation. But much more lenient than refusing to fight in a duel, for example. Cards were synonymous with dueling and antonymous with parade. These two poles outlined the border of the noble life of that era.

Duel.

A duel according to certain rules in order to restore honor. The assessment of the degree of insult - insignificant, bloody, deadly - must be correlated with the assessment from the social environment. The duel began with a challenge, after which the opponents were not supposed to enter into communication, the offended discussed the severity of the offense inflicted on him with the seconds, and the enemy was sent a written challenge (cartel). . A duel in Russia was a criminal offense, became the subject of a trial, the court sentenced duelists to death, which for officers was replaced by demotion to soldiers and transfer to the Caucasus.

The government treated fights negatively; in the official literature, duels were persecuted as a manifestation of love of freedom. Democratic thinkers criticized the duel, saw in it a manifestation of the class prejudice of the nobility and contrasted the honor of the nobility with human honor based on Reason and Nature.

Art of life.

1. Art and non-artistic reality are not comparable. Classicism.

2. The second approach to the relationship between art and reality. Romanticism.

Art as an area of models and programs.

3. Life acts as an area of modeling activity, creates patterns that art imitates. Can be compared with realism.

The theater played a special role in the culture of the early 19th century on a pan-European scale. Specific forms of theatricality descend from the theater stage and subjugate life to themselves. The everyday behavior of a Russian nobleman of the late 18th and early 19th centuries is characterized by the attachment of a type of behavior to a certain stage area and a tendency to intermission - a break during which the theatricality of behavior is reduced to a minimum. The distinction between everyday and theatrical behavior is characteristic. However, the behavior of the nobility as a system presupposed certain deviations from the norm, which were equivalent to intermissions. Behavior fettered by decency and a system of theatrical gesture gave rise to a desire for freedom: hussar behavior, attraction to a dirty life, breakthroughs into the world of gypsies. The more strictly organized life is, the more attractive are the most extreme forms of domestic rebellion. The stiffness of the soldiers under Nicholas 1 was compensated by wild revelry. An interesting indicator of the theatricality of everyday life - amateur performances and home theaters were perceived as a departure from the world of the insincere life of light into the world of genuine feelings. It is indicative of a steady desire to comprehend the laws of life through the prism of the most conditional forms of theatrical performance - a masquerade, a puppet comedy, a farce. Considering the spectacular culture of the early 19th century, one cannot bypass military operations and, as the antipode of battle, the parade.

There are eras when art imperiously invades everyday life, aestheticizing the daily course of life. This invasion has many consequences. Only against the background of the powerful intrusion of poetry into the life of the Russian nobility at the beginning of the 19th century is the colossal phenomenon of Pushkin understandable and explainable. Driven by the laws of custom, the everyday life of an ordinary nobleman of the 18th century was plotless. Looking at real life as a performance made it possible to choose the role of individual behavior and filled with expectation of events. It was the model of theatrical behavior that, turning a person into a character, freed him from the automatic power of group behavior, custom.

Theater and painting are two poles, mutually attractive and mutually repulsive. Opera gravitated more towards painting, drama - towards emphasized theatricality, ballet was difficult to locate in this space. Different types of art created different reality, and life, which aspired to become a copy of art, absorbed these differences. Only under the conditions of a functional connection between painting and the theater could such phenomena arise as, for example, the Yusupov theater (change of scenery by Gonzaga to special music), live paintings. A natural consequence of the rapprochement of theater and painting is the creation of a grammar of performing arts.

People perceive themselves through the prism of painting, poetry, theatre, cinema, circus, and at the same time see in these arts the most complete expression of reality itself, as if in focus. In such epochs, art and life merge together without destroying the immediacy of feeling and the sincerity of thought. Only by imagining a person of that time can we understand art and at the same time, only in the mirrors of art can we find the true face of a person of that time.

Outline of the path.

Death takes the individual out of the space allotted for life: from the realm of the historical and social, the individual passes into the realm of the eternal. By the middle of the 18th century, death had become one of the leading literary themes. The Petrine era was marked by the idea of group existence, human death seemed insignificant in the face of state life. For people of the pre-Petrine era, death was only the end of life, which was accepted as inevitable. The end of the 18th century reconsidered this issue and, as a result, an epidemic of suicides.

The theme of death - voluntary sacrifice on the altar of the fatherland - is increasingly heard in the statements of members of the secret society. The tragic turn of ethical questions in the last years before the Decembrist uprising changed the attitude in the duel. The post-Decembrist period significantly changed the concept of death in the cultural system. Death brought true scale to career and state values. The face of the era was also reflected in the image of death. Death gave freedom and it was sought in the Caucasian war, in a duel. Where death came into its own, the power of the emperor ended.

Part 3

"Chicks of Petrov's Nest"

Ivan Ivanovich Neplyuev, an apologist for the reform, and Mikhail Petrovich Avramov, a critic of the reform, came from an old noble family and held high positions under Peter. Neplyuev studied abroad, worked in the Admiralty, was ambassador in Constantinople, in Turkey. After the death of Peter, he was persecuted and was assigned to Orenburg, where he developed a stormy activity. In the Elizabethan era - a senator, under Catherine was very close to the reigning person. Until the last days he remained a man of the Petrine era.

Abramov entered the service for 10 years in the Posolsky Prikaz and was associated with him all his life. At 18 - secretary of the Russian ambassador in Holland. In 1712, he was the director of the St. Petersburg printing house, published Vedomosti and many useful books, Neplyuev was an example of a person of exceptional integrity, who did not know bifurcation and was never tormented by doubts. In full contact with the times, he devoted his life to the practical state activities. Abramov's personality was deeply bifurcated; his practical activity clashed with utopian dreams. Having created an idealized image of antiquity in his imagination, he proposed innovative reforms, considering them to be the protection of tradition. After the death of Peter1 - a link to Kamchatka. For his projects more than once he ended up in the Secret Office. Died in prison. He belonged to those who dreamed up utopian plans for the future and utopian images of the past in order not to see the present. If they had received power, they would have stained the country with the blood of their opponents, but in a real situation they shed their own blood.

The era of the split of people into dogmatic dreamers and cynic practitioners

Age of the rich.

People of the last third of the 18th century, with all the variety of natures, were marked by one common feature - the aspiration for a special individual path, specific personal behavior. They amaze with the unexpectedness of bright personalities. Time gave birth to heroes of selfless dedication and reckless adventurers.

A.N. Radishchev is one of the most enigmatic figures in Russian history. He possessed the most extensive knowledge in jurisprudence, geography, geology, and history. In Siberian exile, he inoculated smallpox into the locals. He wielded a sword very well, rode horseback, was an excellent dancer. Serving at customs, he did not take bribes, in St. Petersburg he seemed like an eccentric. The "encyclopedist" was convinced that fate made him a witness and participant in the new creation of the world. He believed that heroism should be educated and for this purpose all philosophical concepts that could be relied upon could be used. Radishchev developed a peculiar theory of the Russian revolution. Slavery is unnatural and the transition from slavery to freedom was conceived as an instant nationwide action. From the publication of Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow, he expected not literary, but historical events. Radishchev created neither a conspiracy, nor a party, he pinned all his hopes on the truth. There was an idea about the blood of a philosopher who preaches the truth. People will believe, Radishchev believed, those words for which he paid with his life. Heroic suicide became the subject of Radishchev's thoughts. Readiness for death elevates the hero above the tyrant and takes a person of their ordinary life into the world of historical deeds. In this light, his own suicide appears in an unconventional light.

Court and exile found Radishchev a widower. Wife's sister E.A. Rubanovskaya was secretly in love with her sister's husband. It was she who saved Radishchev from torture by bribing the executioner Sheshkovsky. In the future, she foreshadowed the feat of the Decembrists, and although customs categorically prevented marriage with a close relative, she married Radishchev.

Radishchev strove to subordinate his whole life and even death to the doctrines of philosophers. He pressed himself by force into the norms of philosophical life and at the same time, by the force of will and self-education, made such a life a model and program of real life. lotman culture russian nobility

A.S. Suvorov is an outstanding commander with high military qualities and the ability to control the souls of soldiers, a man of his era, the era of heroic individualism. The inconsistency of behavior was fundamental for Suvorov. In clashes with the enemy, he used it as a tactic. Starting to play, he flirted, in his behavior there were childish features, contradictory combined with behavior and thoughts.

military theorist and philosopher. Some saw this as a tactic of behavior, others as barbarism and deceit in the character of the commander. The change of masks was one of the features of his behavior. It is known that Suvorov did not tolerate mirrors, his tactics included the glory of man. Not reflected in mirrors. Suvorov's actions implied not spontaneous adherence to temperament and character, but their constant overcoming. From birth he was frail and in poor health. Married at the age of 45, by order of his father, to the imperious, large and beautiful V.I. Prozorovskaya. After breaking up with his wife, Suvorov left his daughter with him, and then sent her to the Smolny Institute. He did not accept the French Revolution; until the end of his life he remained a man for whom the idea of changing the political order was incompatible with a sense of patriotism.

Suvorov and Radishchev are people who belong, as it were, to the two poles of their era.

Two women.

Memoirs of Princess N.B. Dolgoruky and A.E. Karamysheva - covers the period from the 30s to the 80s of the 18th century and covers the family life of the nobles. Life, the tragedy of Princess Natalya Borisovna became a plot that worried many poets. From the Sheremetev family, Natalya married I.A. Dolgoruky, favorite of Peter 2. After the death of the king, they were exiled to Siberia. In difficult conditions, the noble character of Dolgoruky manifested itself, life made her wiser, but did not break her. A deep religious feeling became the limiting basis of life and everyday behavior. The loss of all the material values of life gave rise to a tense outburst of spirituality. In Siberia, Prince Ivan was tortured and quartered. Natalya was returned with her sons, and after raising the children, she took the veil as a nun.

Memoirs of A.E. Labzina (Karamysheva) - a naive photographic reproduction of reality. Karamyshev was an outstanding scientist, taught at the Mining Academy, close to Potemkin, but his devotion to science led him to the White Sea, to difficult living conditions, where he developed an energetic activity in organizing mines. Anna Evdokimovna was brought up by her husband in the spirit of the Enlightenment, he was helped by the writer Kheraskov. The experiment in natural education consisted in isolation, strict control of acquaintances, reading. She was not even allowed to see her husband, besides, he was always busy with work. But Karamysheva was convinced that he spent his time wallowing in debauchery. Karamyshev separated the moral feeling from sexual desire and, having married a 13-year-old girl, did not perceive her for a long time. Karamyshev introduced his wife to freethinking and freethinking, but did it with vigor. He offered to take a lover in order to introduce his wife to freedom - emphasizing that he loves her. With the same straightforwardness, he weaned her from fasting. His enlightenment was a sin for her, they were separated by the border of moral untranslatability. The conflict of mutual blindness of opposite cultures, the drama is that 2 people loved each other fenced off by a wall of misunderstanding. Labzina's memoirs are an instructive play, according to the canons of hagiographic stories.

People of 1812.

The Patriotic War blew up the life of all classes of Russian society. However, the experience of these events was not homogeneous. A large number of residents of Moscow fled to the provinces, those who had estates went there, and more often to provincial cities close to them. A distinctive feature of 1812 was the erasure of sharp contradictions between metropolitan and provincial life. Many, cut off from their estates occupied by the French, found themselves in distress. Many families were scattered throughout Russia.

Rapprochement of the city and the provinces, so palpable in Moscow. Almost did not affect the life of St. Petersburg, but he was not separated from the experiences of this time. Protected by Wittgenstein's army, in relative safety, he had the opportunity to comprehend events in some historical perspective. It was here that such epoch-making ideological phenomena arose as the independent patriotic magazine Son of the Fatherland, which in the future became the main publication of the Decembrist movement. The first shoots of Decembristism took shape precisely here, in the conversations of officers returning from military campaigns.

Decembrist in everyday life.

The Decembrists showed considerable creative energy in creating a special type of Russian person. The specific, unusual behavior of a significant group of young people in the circle of the nobility, who are in the center of public attention due to their talents, origin, family and personal ties and career prospects, influenced a whole generation of Russian people. The ideological and political content of the noble revolutionism gave rise to special character traits and a special type of behavior

The Decembrists were people of action. This was reflected in their attitude towards a practical change in the political life of Russia. The Decembrists were characterized by a constant desire to express their opinion without prejudice, not recognizing the approved ritual and rules of secular behavior. The emphasized non-secularism and tactlessness of speech behavior was defined in circles close to the Decembrists as Spartan, Roman behavior. By his behavior, the Decembrist abolished the hierarchy and stylistic diversity of an act, the distinction between oral and written speech was canceled: the high orderliness, syntactic completeness of written speech was transferred to oral use. The Decembrists cultivated seriousness as a norm of behavior. Awareness of oneself as a historical person made one evaluate one's life as a chain of plots for future historians. It is characteristic that everyday behavior became one of the criteria for selecting candidates for society, on this basis a kind of chivalry arose, which determined the moral charm of the Decembrist tradition in Russian culture and did a disservice in tragic conditions (the Decembrists were not psychologically prepared to act in conditions legalized meanness). The Decembrists were romantic heroes.

The feat of the Decembrists and its truly great significance for the spiritual history of Russian society are well known. The act of the Decembrists was an act of protest and a challenge. "Guilty" was Russian literature, which created the idea of a female equivalent of the heroic behavior of a citizen, and the moral norms of the Decembrist circle, which required a direct transfer of the behavior of literary heroes to life.

At the beginning of the 19th century, a special type of reckless behavior appeared, which was perceived not as the norm of army leisure, but as a variant of freethinking. The world of revelry became an independent sphere, immersion in which excluded service. Initiation to freethinking was conceived as a holiday, and in a feast and even an orgy, the realization of the ideal of liberty was seen. But there was another kind of freedom-loving morality - the ideal of stoicism, Roman virtue, heroic asceticism. Abolishing the division of everyday life into areas of service and recreation that prevails in noble society, the liberalists wanted to turn all life into a holiday, the conspirators into service. All types of secular entertainment are severely condemned by the Decembrists as a sign of spiritual emptiness. The hermitage of the Decembrists was accompanied by an unequivocal and open contempt for the usual pastime of a nobleman. The cult of brotherhood based on the unity of spiritual ideals, the exaltation of friendship. The revolutionaries of the next stages often believed that the Decembrists were more talking than acting. However, the concept of action is historically changeable and the Decembrists can be called practitioners. The creation of a completely new type of person for Russia, the contribution of the Decembrists to Russian culture turned out to be enduring. The Decembrists introduced unity into human behavior, but not by rehabilitating life's prose, but by passing life through the filters of heroic texts, they simply canceled what was not subject to being entered on the tablets of history.

Instead of a conclusion: "Between the double abyss ..."

We want to understand the history of the past and works of fiction from previous eras, but at the same time we naively believe that it is enough to pick up a book that interests us, put a dictionary next to us, and understanding is guaranteed. But each message consists of two parts: what is said and what is not said, because it is already known. The second part is omitted. A contemporary reader easily restores it himself, according to his life experience ... In past eras, without special study, we are aliens.

The history reflected in one person, in his life, way of life, gesture, is isomorphic to the history of mankind, they are reflected in each other and are known through each other.

3 part.

"Conversations about Russian Culture" dedicated to the study of the life and traditions of the Russian nobility of the 18th - early 19th centuries are of undoubted interest. This is the time when Russia embarked on the path of modernization and enlightened absolutism. This process was initiated by the reforms of Peter I, which covered many spheres of society. After the death of Peter 1, Catherine2 continued his reformist course. Under her leadership, the reform of education was continued, science, literature, and socio-political thought were further developed - the establishment of democratic traditions. Under Alexander1, for the first time, a sufficiently numerous political opposition was formed in society. Secret societies emerge. Taking advantage of the death of Alexander1, the Decembrists decided on December 14, 1825 to seize power and proclaim the introduction of a constitution. The uprising was brutally suppressed. Already at the beginning of the century, Russian conservatism was formed as a political trend. A distinctive feature of the reign of Nicholas was the desire of the authorities to extinguish oppositional sentiments with the help of the theory of official nationality. In the formation of national identity, national culture, a large role belongs to the best representatives of the nobility, the emerging intelligentsia. Yu.M. Lotman immerses the reader into the daily life of this class, allowing you to see people of that era in the service, on military campaigns, reproduce the rituals of matchmaking, marriage, penetrate into the features of the female world and personal relationships, understand the meaning of masquerades and the card game of duel rules and the concept of honor.

For a long time, noble culture remained outside of scientific research. Lotman sought to restore the historical truth about the significance of noble culture, which gave Fonvizin and Derzhavin, Radishchev and Novikov, Pushkin and the Decembrists, Lermontov and Chaadaev, Tolstoy and Tyutchev. Belonging to the nobility had distinctive features: the obligatory rules of conduct, the principles of honor, the cut of clothing, office and home activities, holidays and entertainment. The whole life of the nobility is permeated with symbols and signs. Revealing its symbolic nature, the thing enters into a dialogue with modernity, discovers links with history and becomes priceless. The history of culture must necessarily be connected with feelings, be visible, tangible, audible, then its values enter the human world and are fixed in it for a long time.

Listliterature

1. Ikonnikova S.N. History of cultural theories: Textbook. At 3 hours, Part 3 History of cultural studies in persons / Ikonnikova S.N., St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - 152p.

2. Lotman Yu.M. Pushkin./ Yu.M. Lotman, introductory article. B.F. Egorov, art. D.M. Plaksin.- SPb.: Art- SPb, 1995.-847p.

3. Lotman Yu.M. Conversations about Russian culture: Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (18th-early 19th century) .- St. Petersburg: Art, 1996.-399p.

4. World of Russian culture. Encyclopedic Dictionary / ed. A.N. Myachin.-M.: Veche, 1997.-624p.

5. Radugin A.A. History of Russia: Textbook for universities / comp. And otv.red. A.A.Radugin.-M.: Center, 1998.-352p.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

...