N f sumtsov. Sumtsov N

Prince V.F. Odoevsky.

Preface.

Prince Vladimir Fedorovich Odoevsky is one of the brightest and noblest personalities in the famous galaxy of figures of the forties. His insightful mind embraced almost all the main aspects of the spiritual development of his contemporary society. An outstanding feature of his rich spiritual nature was his deep and active love for people. Odoevsky loved “fathers” and “children,” rich and poor, highly educated and those whom fate had deprived of literacy, and he served everyone to the best of his ability, in word or deed, and managed to offer suitable mental food to everyone. He published philosophical and literary articles that satisfied the spiritual needs of the outstanding minds of his era, through literary evenings brought together figures of science and art on the basis of enlightenment, wrote articles for the people and for children, and organized charitable institutions for the capital's proletariat. Everywhere he was a link in the connection of intellectual workers and the energetic engine of public and popular education.

Our goal is to restore, from printed sources, the bright image of the prince in the spiritual consciousness of modern educated society. V.F. Odoevsky, to bring his name out of the strange and incomprehensible oblivion in which it is currently located. (Note: I am currently looking for unpublished articles and letters of Prince V.F. Odoevsky and collecting memories about him. I will be very grateful to people who will help me with good advice or useful instructions, where and from whom I can find out details about the life of Prince V. F. Odoevsky. Everything that I collect will be published with explanations in a separate book. Address: Nikol. Fedor. Sumtsov, in Kharkov, on Malogoncharovskaya street, own house.)

The Odoevsky princes descended from Rurik. In a direct line, they descended from the glorious sufferer for the Russian land, Prince Mikhail Vsevolodovich, who was martyred by Batu on September 20, 1246. With the division of Rus' into Moscow and Lithuania, the Odoevsky princes were divided into two branches, Moscow and Lithuanian, which were often at enmity with each other. The Odoevsky princes were zealous servants of the Moscow sovereigns and enjoyed their favors. During the time of troubles, the Odoevskys were governors in Novgorod and Vologda. Iv. Nikitich Odoevsky the Lesser defeated and captured Zarutsky. The memory of him has been preserved to this day in folk robber songs, where he is called Nikita Fedorovich (Aristov, “On the historical significance of the Russian analysis.” in “Philol. Zap.” 1874. IV. 29--31.) . During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, Prince. Nikita Iv. Odoevsky enjoyed the Tsar’s great favor. The talented family of Odoevskys managed to stay at the proper height even after Peter’s reforms. Under Elizaveta Petrovna, Prince enjoyed great fame. Iv. Bac. Odoevsky, valid. Privy Councilor, Senator and President of the Patrimonial Collegium. His son Fedor Iv. Odoevsky died with the rank of state councilor. The last branch of the famous family, book. V.F. Odoevsky was the grandson of an Elizabethan nobleman. A contemporary of the book. V. F. Odoevsky was a famous Decembrist poet A. I. Odoevsky (1804-1839), namesake of Prince. V. F. Odoevsky (For details about the family of Prince Odoevsky, see Solovyov’s “History” IV 161; V 109, 110, 124, 345; VI 84; 241; VIII 154; IX 19, 29, 104; X 135, 154 , 361; XI 50, 109, 110, 166, 169, 200, 322, 362; XII 208, 243, 345, 350.).

Prince V.F. Odoevsky was born in 1803 ("Government Bulletin" 1869. No. 50 (formular list of Prince Odoevsky).) His stay at the Moscow University Noble Boarding House played an important role in the development of Odoevsky. Here are the foundations of his mental and moral activity. Ant was the soul of the boarding house. Ant. Prokopovich-Antonsky, a gentle, humane man, inclined towards mysticism, was an excellent teacher in his time. For 33 years (1791-1824) he was the director of the boarding house. What pedagogical principles Prokopovich-Antonsky was guided by can be seen from his book “On Education.” Antonsky attached great importance to education. According to him, education determines the character and moral makeup of a person. The fate of the people depends on the education of young people. According to the pedagogical views that dominated society at the beginning of this century, the whole essence of education was in good morality, in the “education of the heart.” And Prokopovich-Antonsky found that the refinement of the mind without the formation of the heart is the worst ulcer. He put religious and moral education in the foreground and argued “that the days of prosperity of nations were at the same time days of the triumph of religion” (Prokopovich-Antonsky, On Education. M. 1818, 5.).

Antonsky maintained the closest, cordial ties with the students of the boarding school. His pedagogical ideas passed on to his students, were warmly accepted and propagated by them.

Due to the prevailing currents of social thought at the end of the reign of Alexander I, partly under the influence of the religious-mystical mood of the director of the boarding house himself, in the boarding house, during Odoevsky’s stay there, a religious-mystical mood prevailed, which, however, was far from Photius’s obscurantism and hypocrisy . In this mood, the dreamy, philanthropic side prevailed, the side that a little earlier had found excellent expression in the Friendly Learned Society. Prokopovich’s religious and mystical mood affected the boarding school students in different ways. In Inzov, the later famous patron of A. Pushkin, this mood strengthened honesty, piety, kindness, in Magnitsky it developed hypocrisy and hypocrisy. There were cases when boarding school students left the institution and entered the monastery (Sushkov, Moscow Univ. Blag. Pans. M. 1858, p. 58 et seq.). Odoevsky slightly submitted to the boarding school mysticism, which was reflected in his student speeches. So, in 1821, in “A conversation about how dangerous it is to be vain,” Odoevsky, apparently in verba magistri, expressed the idea that “religion should accompany a person throughout the entire path of his life” (Speech, conversation and poetry. Moscow 1821. 18--29.). In 1822, Odoevsky, at a public event, made a speech about how all knowledge and sciences only bring us true benefit when they are combined with pure morality and piety" (Speech, Conversation and Poems. Moscow. 1822. 13.). Nineteen-year-old The speaker, in the presence of his pious superiors, developed the idea that “the sciences should be edifying and religious.”

The boarding school students showed a great inclination towards philosophy, were keenly interested in Russian literature and loved music.

Book Odoevsky listened to Prof. Pavlova. In 1821, Pavlov returned from abroad and began giving lectures on nature at the boarding house. To the questions of what nature is and how it can be known, the gifted professor expounded with plastic clarity the teachings of Schelling and Oken. The impression made by Pavlov's lectures on his students was strong and fruitful. These lectures developed interest in German philosophy among the younger generation. Odoevsky’s passion for philosophy was expressed in his “Speech” of 1822. Here Odoevsky extols the power of philosophy: “philosophy is a universal science that influences all others. Sciences borrow their forces from it, like planets from a source of light - the sun... Philosophy - a measure that we can apply to all our knowledge; it can only determine the correctness or incorrectness of our opinions... Philosophy, so necessary in political life, is equally useful in private, family life... To establish peace and tranquility among millions is What’s the point of placing them in a family, because the way of thinking is the same everywhere, only the relationships are different.”

“The Russian language was the main, favorite subject in the boarding school,” says Pogodin, and Russian literature was the main treasury from which young people drew their knowledge and were educated. And in this school a style was formed, Odoevsky’s taste developed, as well as his comrades, the elders and younger ones" ( " Voice" 1869. No. 171.) . The fact that the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature held meetings in the ceremonial hall of the boarding house and that pupils of the senior classes of the boarding house were allowed to attend the meetings of the Society should have contributed no little to the development of literary inclinations in them. They saw and heard famous writers - Karamzin, Zhukovsky and others. Any reading in the Society evoked new debates and judgments among students. The management of the boarding school encouraged students to engage in literary activities. It offered them topics for public speeches and then published these speeches, which greatly fueled the literary pride of young speakers, challenged them to compete in the art of writing, and strengthened their habit of literary activity.

The noble boarding school had a beneficial influence on Odoevsky in the sense that it developed in him a love of music. Odoevsky recalled with gratitude the boarding school music teacher, Shprevich, who introduced him to the music of S. Bach, then barely known in Moscow (Russian Archives. 1864. 810.).

Leaving the boarding house, Odoevsky addressed the public with the following words in honor of science: “Sciences are useful, necessary, salutary for every civil society.... They are as limitless as nature itself; they are its artificial outline and an explanation of its secret means; limits - the limits of the universe; their last goal is at the foot of the throne of the Most High" ("Speech". 1822.).

This faith in science, this love for science is a kind of certificate of spiritual maturity for Odoevsky, and for the noble boarding school it is a certificate of his moral purity, evidence of his excellent influence on students.

Odoevsky graduated from the boarding school course in 1822 with a gold medal, with golden dreams and hopes, with faith in a bright future.

Upon leaving the boarding house, Odoevsky became close to Raich’s literary circle. Raich is known as the publisher of almanacs ("Northern Lyra", "Galatea"), translator of "Georgik" by Virgil, "Jerusalem Liberated" by Tassa and "Furious Orland" by Ariost and as an educator of F.I. Tyutchev. Raich's literary circle consisted of Pogodin, Oznobishin, Putyata and others. At one of Raich's literary meetings, Odoevsky read his translation of the first chapter of Oken's natural philosophy, which talks about the meaning of zero, in which plus and minus calm down (Russian Archives. 1874. II 258.) .

In 1822-1823, Odoevsky, under the pseudonym Falaleya Povinukhina, published several “Letters to the Elder of Luzhnitsa” in the “Bulletin of Europe”. Here he talks about the bad education of women, the harmful influence of foreign tutors, the extravagance of the nobles, the oppression of peasants by bankrupt landowners, mainly about the ignorance of the “big world”. “Letters to the Elder of Luzhnitsa” included an article entitled “Days of Annoyance,” a picture of Moscow morals, interesting as a commentary on “I’m Burning from Wit” by Griboyedov (Bulletin of Europe. 1823. No. 9, 15--18.). Both works were written at approximately the same time. Arist Odoevsky is partly reminiscent of Chatsky. Griboyedov liked “Days of Annoyance.” Through the editors of Vestnik Evropy he learned about the author, met Odoevsky and became quite close with him. Similarity in beliefs and an equally strong love for music brought the young writers together. Griboyedov wrote to Odoevsky that he highly appreciated the properties of his mind and talent (Russian Archives. 1864. 809.). Odoevsky, in turn, fully recognized Griboedov’s great literary talent. The connection between them did not stop until Griboyedov’s death.

Simultaneously with his rapprochement with Griboyedov, Odoevsky became close friends with another supporter of the Shishkovsky direction in language and literature, V. Kuchelbecker. In 1824, they jointly published the almanac Mnemosynus in four books (the 4th book was published at the beginning of 1825). With the light hand of Karamzin, who published two almanacs, “Aglaya” and “Aonids” at the end of the last century, almanacs multiplied greatly, especially in the 20s. They made up for weak journalism and were more accessible to the reading public in price and content than magazines. The best almanac in the 20s was “The Polar Star” by Ryleev and Bestuzhev, published in 1823-1825 in three books. How popular this publication was can be seen from the fact that the “P. Star” of 1825 sold out 1,500 copies within three weeks. (Domestic Zap. 1860, v. 130. May. 133--144.) " Mnemosyne" was not much inferior in content to "P. star", but its prevalence was negligible. "Mnemosyne" had only 157 subscribers, mainly from excellent and highly excellent persons. Pogodin and Belinsky, however, testify that young people fell in love with this publication. And it was impossible not to love it. A wrote here Pushkin ("Demon", "To the Sea"), Baratynsky ("Leda", not included in the complete collection of poems by B., due to too much sensuality), Prince Vyazemsky ("Evening", "May"), Prince. A. Shakhovskoy (excerpts from the comedy "Aristophanes"), Pavlov (an excellent article "On methods of studying nature"), N. A. Polevoy ("Life Companions"). Most of the articles in "Mnemosyne" belong to the publishers. The main goal of the publishers of the almanac, according to Odoevsky, there was “the dissemination of new thoughts that flashed in Germany, in order to draw the attention of Russian readers to little-known subjects in Russia, or at least force them to talk about them; to put a limit to our passion for French theorists, and finally, to show that not all subjects have been exhausted, that we, looking for trinkets for our studies in foreign countries, forget about the treasures that are close to us" (Menozina 1824. II. 233.). Well, were these treasures? The best answer to this question is found in Küchelbecker’s article, “On the direction of our poetry, especially lyrical, in the last decade,” placed in book 2 of “Mnemosynes.” K. wants to transplant the best aspects of German romanticism, namely the desire, to Russian soil to freedom and the study of the people. Expressing gratitude to Zhukovsky for liberating Russian literature from the yoke of French literature, more precisely the Lagarpov Lyceum, K. rebels against the subordination of Russian literature to German rule. “It is best to have folk poetry,” he notes. The faith of the forefathers, domestic morals, chronicles, songs and folk tales are the best, purest, most reliable sources for our literature."

In “Mnemosyne” Odoevsky owns 18 articles: “Old Men or the Island of Panhai”, “Leaves torn from Parnassian Gazette”, “Aphorisms from various writers on modern German philosophy”, “Helladius, a picture from secular life”, seven apologists, character , “Rainbow - flowers - allegories”, “Consequences of a satirical article”, “Idealistic-Eleatic sect”, an excerpt from the dictionary of the history of philosophy and three polemical articles directed against Bulgarin and Voeikov. The young writer’s satire repeats Novikov’s themes of denunciation, which, however, found justification in Odoevsky’s contemporary reality. Odoevsky's satire is limited to dandies, fashionistas, dog hunts, etc.

“Leaflets” contain the charter of a brilliant gathering, consisting of geniuses, sub-geniuses, brilliant copyists and brilliant messengers. Genius does not require either extensive knowledge or deep intelligence. There are so many geniuses that Apollo does not know what to do with them. Brilliant clerks slavishly imitate genius, calling him the transformer of the Russian language. In gratitude, the genius calls them people with gifts. Diametrically opposed to the crowd of geniuses stands an ultra-linguist. He solemnly declares that nothing new can be invented. In conclusion, Polymnia, through the mouth of the author, announces that the end of prejudice will soon come and the clear sun (i.e., philosophy), rising from the side of the ancient Teutons, will illuminate the endless space of knowledge. Odoevsky’s hints are too clear not to be guessed. Genial gathering - Arzamas; language converter - Karamzin: sub-genii - people like Makarov, a talented follower of Karamzin’s syllable reform; ultra-linguist - Shishkov. "Arzamas" fell silent in 1817, "Conversation" by Shishkov in 1818: but the disputes caused by these literary societies did not subside even during Mnemosyne.

In “Aphorisms”, in their infancy, there are philosophical ideas that ten years later were excellently developed by Odoevsky in “Russian Nights” - ideas about the insufficiency of experimental knowledge alone, about the relationship of the material to the abstract, as the particular to the whole, about the equality of all finite things to the highest ideal, about absolute truth, as the identity of the ideal with the real, that the goal of science is science itself, etc. The aphorisms made an impression in society that was favorable for their young author. The famous scientist Vellansky read them, by his own admission, “with the greatest pleasure” (Russian Arch. 1864. 805.) .

Odoevsky's polemical articles reflect the gentleness and kindness of his character. Bulgarin and Voeikov found fault with Mnemosyne for the most trivial reasons, about the wrapper, typos, individual words. Voeikov found Kuchelbecker’s expression “for me” to be an unforgivable grammatical error. Bulgarin mocked the expressions “dainty girl”, “countrymen all knew him” (News of Literature, Bulgarin 1824. No XIV. 25.). Odoevsky was burdened by arguing with people who resorted to abuse and denunciations. In the last book of “Mnemosyne” Odoevsky wrote: “I am young, I have not yet produced anything that could give me the right even to the name of the author; if I am destined to be a good writer, then your abuse will not reach me; I am destined to be a bad writer - no Mr. Bulgarin’s praises will not save me from oblivion. Now I’m putting an end to the always-magazine squabbles: I’m bored with them... I’ve already humiliated myself enough, in my youth, entering into relationships with people who are not able to reason, and don’t understand jokes and don’t stand” (Mnemosyne. Part 4. pp. 227--228.). Six years later, Odoevsky remembered his bickering with Bulgarin and Voeikov. How bitterly it sometimes happened to him is evident from his following words: “In this shameful era of our criticism, literary abuse went beyond the boundaries of all decency; literature in critical articles was a completely extraneous matter: they were just abuse, vulgar abuse of vulgar jokes, ambiguities, the most malicious slander and offensive uses, which often extended even to the home circumstances of the author; of course, in this inglorious battle, only those who had nothing to lose in relation to their honorable name won. I and my comrades were in complete error; we imagined ourselves at the subtle philosophical debates of the portico or the academy, or at least in the living room; in fact, we were in paradise: the smell of lard and tar around us, they talk about the prices of stellate sturgeon, they scold, stroke their unclean beard and roll up their sleeves; and we invent polite ridicule, witty hints, dialectical subtleties, we are looking for the most cruel epigram against our enemies in Homer or Virgil, we are afraid to stir up their delicacy... It was easy to guess the consequences of such an unequal battle. No one took the trouble to consult Homer in order to comprehend all the causticity of our epigrams. The ridicule of our opponents had a thousand times stronger effect on the crowd of readers, both because they were ruder and because they had less to do with literature" (Odoevsky, Sochin. II. 7.) .

The works of Odoevsky, published in Mnemosyne, are the first still timid steps of a young and inexperienced writer. These works testify to the beneficialness of those guiding moral principles that the Noble boarding house gave to its pupils. In Mnemosyne, Odoevsky discovered gentleness of character, honesty in convictions, and an inclination toward serious philosophical thinking.

With the publication of the last book of Mnemosyne, Odoevsky fell silent for several years, one must think, under the influence of the impression that the event of December 14 was supposed to make on him. The heavy blow, which then crushed almost all the progressive youth, must have had a heavy impact on the soft Odoevsky.

In 1826, Odoevsky moved to St. Petersburg and decided to serve here in the Ministry of Foreign Confessions. internal affairs, which were then in charge of D.I. Bludov.

In 1828, Odoevsky participated in the committee to revise the censorship regulations and here he pursued the idea that hiding the truth only delays the correction of evil. Thirty years later, Odoevsky, in a note on censorship, developed his previous liberal opinions on freedom of the press. He pointed out to the ruling spheres that with censorship strictness between the public and literature, a conventional language arises, the tricks of which no censorship can keep track of (Russian Arch. 1874. VII. 11-39.).

Odoevsky served under Count Bludov until 1846. He was a member of the editorial board of the journal. min. internal Affairs, carried out various special assignments of the minister, which required special knowledge. Eg. bringing weights and measures into uniformity, improving the fire department in St. Petersburg, etc.

In the first years of Odoevsky’s career, one event took place that is highly characteristic of Odoevsky’s moral height. The St. Petersburg City Duma offered one aristocrat the title of a councilor. The important person found it humiliating to intervene in the crowd of citizens and returned the proposal to the Duma with an arrogant reference to her high birth. Having learned about this, Prince. Odoevsky, the first aristocrat by birth in Russia, himself asked the city council to accept him into the public councils, which the council, of course, did very quickly and willingly (Moskovsk. Vedomosti. 1869. No. 50.).

Odoevsky spent the late 20s and early 30s in zealous self-education. At this time, Odoevsky diligently studied philosophy. “My dear sage! Griboyedov wrote to him on June 10, 1825. I sincerely rejoice in your studies. Don’t be cool. They attach meaning to every life” (Russian Arch. 1864. 812.). Odoevsky subsequently recalled with delight his youthful passion for philosophy, how his spiritual thirst tormented him, how he fell with ardent lips to the source of thoughts and reveled in its magical currents (Odoevsky, Works. I. 19.).

The tendency towards philosophical studies in Russian society began to develop in the sixties of the last century.

Voltaire and the encyclopedists, especially Voltaire, were examples of philosophical thinking. G. Poltoratsky in “Materials for the Dictionary of Russian Writers” counts up to 140 translations of Voltaire into Russian, published in the 18th and 19th centuries. Voltaire was published then even in the provinces (in Kozlov). According to Metropolitan. Eugene, the written Voltaire was then as famous as the printed one. As for printed publications, official censorship information for 1797 shows that “Voltaire’s works were then imported in great numbers and were in all bookstores” (A. Veselovsky, Western influence. 1883, p. 59.) . What followed at the end of the eighteenth century. In government spheres, cooling towards the educational ideas of revolutionary philosophers delayed the further spread of these ideas in Russia.

Romanticism, transplanted from Germany to Russia in the tens, developed greatly in the 30s and 40s. Along with romanticism, German philosophy was also adopted. Both were adopted only partially, in a pale and unclear copy, which did not, however, prevent the emergence of zealous worship of German wisdom. All the insignificant brochures published in Berlin and other provincial and district cities of German philosophy, where only Hegel was mentioned, were subscribed to, read to the point of holes, to spots, until the leaves fell off in a few days. Extreme passion for philosophy had its disadvantageous side. “Our young philosophers, notes Herzen, have spoiled not only their phrases, but also their understanding; their attitude towards life, towards reality has become school-like, bookish; it was a learned understanding of simple things, which Goethe so brilliantly laughed at in his conversation between Mephistopheles and a student.”

One should not lose sight of the good side of being interested in philosophical studies. These studies developed the highest spiritual interests, awakened thought, tempered it in the crucible of strong logic, and thus giving it strength and stability, thereby facilitating the transition from boundless wanderings in the field of pointless speculation into the sphere of living practical criticism of the social system.

Especially in the 30s, the influence of Schelling’s philosophy on educated Russian youth was strong. The Schellingists include Pavlov, Vellansky, Venevitinov, and especially Odoevsky. Odoevsky was fascinated by Schelling's ideas about nature as the visible body of the immortal mind, about the powerlessness of pure experience in determining everything that exists, about the need for internal spiritual revelation to understand nature, about poetic creativity as the most essential manifestation of internal spiritual revelation, about the purpose of each people to play on stage world history has its special role. The last idea was the main reason for the emergence of Slavophilism and Westernism, as certain philosophical and political doctrines. In addition to Schelling, Odoevsky was familiar with Plato, Spinoza and Hegel, whom he studied in the original.

Based on Schelling’s idea that science is a harmonious organism living in the human soul, and departments of knowledge such as history, chemistry, philosophy are only parts of this organism, Odoevsky studied the natural sciences, physics, chemistry and even alchemy. In Odoevsky's bookcases one could find Albert the Great, Paracelsus, and Raymond Lull. Sometimes Odoevsky delved into the huge volumes of medieval alchemists and read their sophisticated discussions about the first matter, about the universal electr, about the soul of the sun, about stellar spirits, etc. He was attracted by the boldness of the alchemists’ plans and their inclination to spiritualize the external world. “We have trimmed the wings of the imagination,” he says, we have compiled systems and tables for everything; we have set a limit beyond which the human mind should not go; we have determined what can and should be done... But isn’t this our trouble? Or maybe it’s because our ancestors gave more free rein to their imagination, isn’t that why their thoughts were broader than ours and embraced a larger space in the endless desert, discovered what we will never discover with our mouse horizon” (Odoevsky, Motley Tales. 1833. 9.) .

Odoevsky disseminated his philosophical ideas in two ways - through literary evenings and printed works. Literary evenings in the first half of this century were very common in the capitals and in the provinces. Many literary works of this time, before their appearance in print, were read at literary evenings. Here young talents found support and approval. Here they could hear and learn a lot of things that were not and could not be in books. Odoevsky’s literary evenings were supposed to have a particularly beneficial effect on young talents. The most diverse society gathered with him: poets, scientists, composers, painters. Great freedom reigned at the evenings. The evenings were on Saturdays. Their appearance dates back to the early 20s. “Prince Odoevsky received every writer and scientist with true cordiality and extended his hand to everyone who entered the literary field. One of all literary aristocrats, he was not ashamed of the title of writer, was not afraid to openly mingle with the literary crowd, and for his passion for literature patiently endured ridicule his secular friends" (Panaev, Literary memoirs in "Modern." 1861. I. 125.) ... Odoevsky's literary evenings were attended by Zhukovsky, A. Pushkin, Gogol, Koltsov, Krylov, Prince. Vyazemsky, Pletnev, M. Glinka, Griboedov, Belinsky, Herzen, I. Kireevsky, Lermontov, Dahl, Count. Rastopchina, Maksimovich, book. Shakhovskoy, Sakharov, Count. Salogub, I. Panaev, Bashutsky, Pogodin, Voeikov, Karatygin, Serov, Dargomyzhsky, Counts Vielgorsky, Potulov and other figures of science and art. Count Salogub ("Voice" 1869. No. 72.) and A. Gatsuk (Gatsuk's Newspaper. 1879. No. 8.), pointing to the beneficial significance of the literary evenings of the book. Odoevsky, put in the first place his importance as a connecting link between representatives of literature and art. put forward even to the detriment of his own literary activity, which at the same time seems to be relegated to the background.

Odoevsky wrote under the strong influence of romanticism. Russian romanticism, as far as it was expressed in the works of Zhukovsky, Bestuzhev-Marlinsky, N. Polevago, Odoevsky, consisted of an extreme exaggeration of the importance of the individual in history and a contemptuous attitude towards the “crowd”, society, the desire for freedom of poetic creativity and the glorification of the people. In fact, the romantics, with the exception of Odoevsky, poorly understood what nationality consisted of. When Gogol's works appeared, the romantics did not understand them; they saw in them base words and everyday dirt.

During the St. Petersburg period of social and literary activity, Prince. Odoevsky, which lasted from 1826 to 1862, his mental and moral makeup was fully revealed. At this time, Odoevsky’s best works were published. His broad and beneficial philanthropic activities developed in St. Petersburg. Here his scientific and musical activity also developed, the heyday of which dates back to the half and end of the 60s, when Odoevsky was already living in Moscow.

With the move to St. Petersburg, Odoevsky became close friends with A. Pushkin. The close friendly relations between Odoevsky and Pushkin were never interrupted until the latter’s death. In one letter to Pushkin, Odoevsky subjects The Captain's Daughter to strict analysis. Pushkin, in a letter to Odoevsky, openly expressed what he did not like in La Sylphide and in Zizi. With the publication of Pushkin's Sovremennik, Odoevsky became his permanent collaborator. Odoevsky’s article “Conversation of the Dissatisfied,” intended for the first book of Sovremennik, was politely rejected by Pushkin. In 2 books. Odoevsky published a short article “On Hostility to Enlightenment,” in which he expressed the opinion that literature often conveys thoughts harmful to enlightenment; in book 3 - a short article “How novels are written among us,” where he argued that a novelist, in addition to observing life, needs poetic talent (Sovremennik 1836. III. 48-51.). At the suggestion of Pushkin, Odoevsky wrote a fantastic story "La Sylphide", published in 1 book. "Contemporary" of 1837, published after Pushkin's death. Pushkin, who read The Sylphide in the manuscript, did not like this story.

In 1836, Odoevsky wrote a short article “On the attacks of St. Petersburg magazines on Pushkin,” published only 28 years later in the “Russian Archive” (Russian Archive 1864. II. 824-831.). Odoevsky defends his famous friend from the brutal attacks of literary zoils and points to hard work and education as his distinctive features.

Pushkin's powerful personality could not help but influence Odoevsky. Pushkin encouraged Odoevsky to literary activity and, perhaps, somewhat regulated his activity with his advice and instructions.

After the death of Pushkin, Odoevsky during 1837 still participated in Sovremennik, together with Prince. Vyazemsky, Zhukovsky, Pletnev and Kraevsky.

In 1833, Odoevsky published “Motley Tales” (Motley Tales with Eloquent Words, collected by Irinei Modestovich Gamozeyka, Master of Philosophy and member of various scientific societies, published by V. Bezglasny. St. Petersburg, 1833), eight in number. Five fairy tales were reprinted in the 3rd volume of "Works" of the 1844 edition. "Retort", "New Zhoko" and "Just a Fairy Tale" were no longer reprinted. In the form and order in which the fairy tales appeared in 1833, they are quite understandable and interesting. According to the 1844 edition, they are difficult to understand. Pogodin (Golos. 1869. No. 171.) and Belinsky (Belinsky, Sochin. 1860. IX. 53.) found Motley tales incomprehensible, especially the fairy tale “Igosha”.

"Retort" - the 19th century with its petty interests, with its materialism. Even the little devil heating the retort is surprised at the vulgarity of the people of the 19th century. “Day after day,” he says, you cook and cook, fry and fry, and many, many times, so that our brother the little devil, unable to bear human boredom, will jump out of the retort” (Motley Tales. 23.).

The tales that follow “The Retort” explain the reasons that caused the vulgarization of society. “The Tale of the Dead Body” represents the tendency of the Russian nobles Saveliev Zhaluyev to leave their body and turn into foreign undergrowth Tsverley-John-Louis. In “New Jaco,” apparently, Odoevsky wanted to express the idea that modern man, with all his undoubted gains in the comforts of his material situation, lacks freedom and brotherly love for his neighbor. “Igosha” represents the gradual process of development of myth in the soul of a child. In “The Tale of the Occasion on Which the Kolezhsky Councilor Ivan Bogdanovich Relation failed to congratulate his superiors on Easter Sunday,” one can see a hint of the extreme predilection of Russian people for cards, a predilection partly due to the poor development of education, lack of serious, intellectual interests. The meaning of “Just Fairy Tales” is dark. Apparently, Odoevsky is hinting here at literary flatterers. “The fairy tale about how dangerous it is for girls to walk in a crowd along Nevsky Prospekt” contains an exposure of the shortcomings of women’s education and points to the superficiality of women’s education.

In 1834, Odoevsky published a short story “Princess Mimi”, in which he develops the idea of ​​​​the inadequacy of female education and upbringing. “The canvas, the dance teacher, a little slyness, tenez vous droite, and two or three anecdotes told by the grandmother as a reliable guide in this and the future life - that’s all education.” It is not surprising that the result of such an upbringing is the inability to express oneself in Russian and a tendency towards fashionistas and gossip.

In "Motley Tales" Odoevsky made some, admittedly, unsuccessful changes in punctuation marks, namely: he limited the use of the comma and introduced a reverse question mark (¿) at the beginning of interrogative sentences, while retaining the generally accepted final question mark.

In the thirties, Odoevsky became interested in teaching children from the age of 6. Until the age of 10 (Odoevsky had no children). He prepared a large work on this subject, “Science Before Science,” from which a small part was published under the title “An Experience on Pedagogical Methods in the Initial Education of Children.” This article shows that Odoevsky was thoroughly familiar with the literature of elementary pedagogy. He recognized the following psychological foundations of pedagogy: “At every minute of mental activity, three main figures act: 1) innate ideas, or, better to say, foreknowledge, flowing by themselves from the depths of the soul, 2) consciousness, which convinces us of their existence, pointing to their connection with objects outside of man, and 3) understanding, which, according to Leibniz, is nothing more than the “following of truths” (Domestic Zap. 1845, volume 43, pp. 130-146.). We are born with innate ideas, how a seed is born with the desire to form into a plant, and to them, on the contrary, we cannot reach by mechanical abstraction; but we reach only through the life process, just as the seed is released from a plant again not by mechanical means, but by means of an organic process It is impossible for a person to be content with his unconscious thoughts and impulses, because, left without action, they can perish like an unsown seed, they must necessarily enter the realm of consciousness and understanding, like a seed into the bowels of the earth. Here the conditions for success, both in this and in the other case, can be infinitely different; the seed does not give anything contrary to its essence; the seed of wheat does not produce an apple, and vice versa; but it may not come out, die out, produce a plant with or without fruit, strong or weak, capable or incapable of grafting; it depends on the surrounding circumstances: the same is true in a person. The life of innate ideas or precognitions in the field of conscious understanding is the whole life of a person and the life of all humanity in its forward movement.

The educational subject of pedagogy is to give food to the innate ideas of man; its only true method is to accustom the child’s mental powers to the combination of concepts, through which he could himself move from the known to the unknown, from the particular to the general and from the general to the particular; The first method of pedagogy is to strengthen the child’s mental strength over what the child already knows, but is not yet aware of; then: communicate to him new concepts, although incomplete, but true, and gradually accustom him to see the connection between them and fill in the gaps that remain necessary in any teaching.. Methods for improving pedagogy depend, firstly, on the general improvement of the entire field of science, and secondly , from positive observations of the process of human mental development - almost from his birth."

In 1834, Odoevsky’s first children’s fairy tale, “The Town in the Snuffbox,” was published. It was followed by others, mostly published in the Children's Magazine. In 1871, D. F. Samarin published all of Odoevsky’s children’s fairy tales in the third volume, “Libraries for Children and Youth.” Belinsky recognized Odoevsky’s amazing ability to write for children (Belinsky, Sochin. XI. 180, 542.). Odoevsky's advantages as a children's writer lie in his ability to adapt plots to children's imagination, in the liveliness and fascination of the story, in the clarity of presentation and simplicity of language. Slavophiles reacted hostilely to Odoevsky’s children’s fairy tales. “All our enlightenment,” says Khomyakov, proceeded from a deep conviction in its superiority and in the moral insignificance of the human mass on which it wanted to act. Every member of society thought, just like the elegant narrator of our time, that any girl from any public institution ( an allusion to Odoevsky’s “The Orphan”) can and should produce a spiritual revolution in any community of Russian savages” (Khomyakov, Poln. sobr. soch. 1861. I. 59.). K. Aksakov in the “Moscow Collection” of 1849, without directly calling Odoevsky by name, classifies him in the category of those aristocratic writers who undertake to write stories from common people’s life, without knowing the common people at all (Pypin, Historical Sketches. 1873. 321.). The best proof of the artistic merit of a children's fairy tale is that children and adults read it with great pleasure. Odoevsky has tales of this kind; eg a short, but highly humane and charming tale about a resident of Mount Athos (Odoevsky, Children's tales. 141--143.).

Simultaneously with the publication of the first children's fairy tales, Odoevsky published a “Collection of Children's Songs,” which was unfavorably received by critics. According to Belinsky, the poems are bad (Belinsky, Sochin. XI. 182.) . Odoevsky never wrote poetry, and this experience only proved his incompetence in versification. The collection was no longer published and is currently a bibliographic rarity.

In 1837, Odoevsky published an article about Karatygin’s performance in the role of Hamlet in “Literature. Additions to the Russian Invalid”. The famous tragedian valued Odoevsky’s opinion (Russian Arch. 1864).

In 1839, Odoevsky participated in Kraevsky’s purchase of Svinin’s “Fatherland Notes,” which in the hands of the new editor rose high, thanks to Belinsky’s critical articles and Herzen’s philosophical and fictional articles (Sovremennik 1861. II. 651.).

The rapprochement of the book. Odoevsky with M. A. Maksimovich began back in 1824. The first book published by Maksimovich, “Zoology,” caused the book. Odoevsky gave a very sympathetic review in Son of the Fatherland. Moreover, Odoevsky found Maksimovich himself, got to know him, introduced him to the circle of writers and was very happy about his scientific and literary successes.

In 1833, Maksimovich published “The Book of Naum.” This was the first attempt in our literature to present useful and at the same time attractive reading for the common people. “I am crazy with admiration for your “Book of Naum,” wrote Maksimovich Odoevsky. It is absolutely wonderful. You have completely hit the tone necessary for this kind of book. It never occurred to me that it was possible to make a short geography so wonderful for the common man as Naum made it. The appearance of your book produced in me a joy that I have not experienced for a long time when Russian books appeared; it is good in itself, and with an excellent purpose, and in time." Odoevsky offered Maksimovich joint work on publishing books for the people, took on the costs of publication, providing all the benefits to Maksimovich (Kievsk. Starina. 1883. IV. 843. In a letter to Max. dated June 10, 1833, Odoevsky mentions his article " A Brief Concept of Chemistry", published in book 2 of the "Journal of Generally Useful Information", and in another letter, without chronological notes, he talks about two of his unpublished articles: A scene from Peter the Hermit and a Children's book.). It is not known how Maksimovich reacted to this proposal. The joint publication of folk books did not take place. But a good thought had already sunk into Odoevsky’s soul, and he brought this thought into execution ten years later.

In 1843, Odoevsky and Zablotsky published the first book “Rural Reading”. In 1848, the last book, the fourth, was published. "Rural Reading" has gone through many editions; So, the first book is 11, the second 7. The number of copies sold is enormous. And at present, “Rural Reading” is excellent reading for the common people. In the 40s, this publication was the only and exceptional one. In "S. Thu." They talk to the peasant in a language that is completely understandable to him about subjects that are close and interesting to him. The material accessible to the public understanding has been processed very carefully. Some articles set out the rules of morality, supported by skillfully selected examples of edifying properties; Other articles contain practical information useful for peasants. Odoevsky in "S. Thu." There are 18 articles: “What the peasant Naum repeated to his children, instructing them to do good,” “What is a drawing of the land, otherwise a plan, a map and what all this is suitable for,” “About what Uncle Irenaeus saw in his stove,” “ Who is Grandfather Krylov”, “What is cleanliness and what is it suitable for”, “What is an exhibition of rural works”, “Medical advice”, etc. Odoevsky had a broad and multifaceted understanding of the idea of ​​public education. Quite humanely, he looked at the peasant, as at a rational being, and did not deny him any branch of knowledge. He offered the peasant more than just instructions on neatness, more than just information about sheep, horses, cows, beneficial and harmful insects. Based on the idea that nothing human can be alien to the peasant, as a person, Odoevsky introduced him to book printing, the history of Russian literature, the design of a locomotive, etc. Not many could appreciate Odoevsky’s humane and patriotic feat, but Belinsky could, Maksimovich, Kvitka, Dahl, five or six more outstanding minds, and that’s all. The serf owners looked at Odoevsky with mockery, as if he were an eccentric, inventing some kind of literature for their slaves. Slavophiles fundamentally rejected intelligent literature for the people, seeing in it disrespect for folk wisdom and suspecting the influence of the rotten West.

In 1844, a collection of Odoevsky’s works was published in three parts. Works of the 20s were not included here with the exception of “Sanskrit legends” - two small stories written in 1824. Most of the articles included in the collected works were written in the 30s and were originally published in the magazines: “Sovremennik” , "Otech. Zap." "Bib. d. Thu." and "Northern Flowers".

The first part contains “Russian Nights,” a series of excellent articles that reveal all the unique features of Odoevsky’s literary activity. To make his philosophical thoughts understandable to the reader, Odoevsky uses chemistry, medicine, and mathematics. From the prophetic tone he descends to a light joke; everywhere there is mixture and diversity. Everywhere one can see a heartfelt conviction in the truth of the opinions expressed; Everywhere one can see the art of rising from a simple object to a strong and deep thought. According to Douhaire’s very witty remark, Odoevsky “descend avec facilité de la contemplation idéale à l”observation pratique et sème frequement la raison sous le caprice” (Douhaire, Le Decameron russe. Paris. 1865. Indrat.) .

Odoevsky’s writings reveal amazing erudition: “When you read Odoevsky’s Russian Nights,” says Skabichevsky, you are involuntarily struck by the universality and thoroughness of this man’s knowledge in the most diverse fields. It can be said positively that before him and after him you will find few people in Russia who would have such extensive encyclopedia" (Otechestv. Zap. 1870, vol. 193. XI. 8.).

Among the outstanding features of Odoevsky’s works should also be included the chastity of thoughts and pictures and the inclination to justify a person. It is necessary to compare the description of the first wedding night of Odoevsky and Senkovsky to be convinced of the delicacy of the first. It is worth reading in (Compare Op. Odoevsky II 23. with Op. Senkovsky. 1858. II.) “To Princess Mimi” the words of Odoevsky in justification of the evil character of the old maid, in order to be convinced that Odoevsky did not throw a stone at a vicious person. (Odoevsky, Sochin. II. 303-304.) He found that “all suffering can be measured only by the organization of the being that it affects.” (Ibid. II. 48.)

A remarkable feature of Odoevsky is that he does not give ready-made conclusions, but together with the reader, little by little, step by step he analyzes every thought, every phenomenon, and the conclusion is obtained as a result of mutual work. Odoevsky was aware of the unpopularity of this method of literary work. For this reason, there are few works in the world whose effect would be so beneficial on the mental activity of the reader as the effect of “Russian Nights”.

The form of Odoevsky’s works, understood as the frame into which he inserted his thoughts, is for the most part not original. Of the foreign writers, Hoffmann had a very strong influence on Odoevsky. Countess Rastopchina called Odoevsky Hoffman II (Russian Arch. 1864). In the 20s and 30s, Hoffmann's works were held in high esteem in Russia. Several literary evenings were called Serapion evenings (Modern 1861, book 2, p. 634). Some writers visited wine cellars, following the example of Hoffmann, who loved to spend time in pubs (Modern 1861, book II (XI), p. 45.). The external form of "Russian Nights" is undoubtedly inspired by the Serapion meetings. Just as in Hoffmann’s four brothers get together, and each of them tells some kind of long story, so in Odoevsky do four young people, not connected, it is true, by ties of family kinship, but nevertheless close to each other in spiritual interests. Giambatista Piranesi was drawn under the direct influence of Hoffmann's Serapion. Both faces depict a quiet, calm madness. Both Piranesi and Serapion are obsessed with sublime objects. The madness of both equally arouses pity and compassion in the reader. The writers force both of them to think very logically. Both serve as proof of the position that it is difficult to draw a strict line of demarcation between sane and insane thought (Hoffmann, Complete collection of works, translation, edited by Gerbel and Sokolovsky. St. Petersburg, 1873, vol. I, pp. 18-34. Odoevsky, Op. 1844, vol. I, pp. 40-45.). Beethoven's Last Quartet was influenced by another of Hoffmann's madmen, Crespel. Въ "Last quar. Beth." Odoevsky, among other things, developed Hoffman’s thought that the restless and strange activity of artists and poets, which in other cases seems extravagant, is in fact very natural, as a manifestation of their deep nature, which hastens to express in action what is only a thought in us” (Hoffman , Works, vol. I, pp. 34--64. Odoevsky, Works. 1844, vol. I, pp. 156--173.) “La Sylphide” and “Salamander” by Odoevsky represent the poetic development of the following passage from Hoffmann’s works: "... Earth, air, water and fire are filled with beings that are higher, but also more limited, than humans. I will not explain to you the essence of gnomes, sylphs, undines and salamanders.

These spirits constantly crave connection with a person, and knowing that people are always afraid of such acquaintance, they use all sorts of tricks to achieve their goal and destroy the person they love. The cunning spirit sits either in a flower, or in a glass of water, or in the flame of a candle, or in some shiny thing and patiently waits for the opportunity to achieve its goal.... An alliance with a spirit is always a great danger because the spirit, having contacted a person, takes away all his reason, and, moreover, cruelly takes revenge on him for every slightest insult" (Hoffmann, Works in translation by Gerbel. St. Petersburg, vol. IV, p. 301. Odoevsky, Works. 1844, vol. 2, p. 104- -141; 141--287.). “Letters to Countess Rostopchina about ghosts, superstitious fears, deceptions, magic, cabalism, alchemy and other mysterious sciences” owe their form, perhaps and intent, to “The Secrets or the remarkable correspondence of the author with various persons "Hoffmann (Odoevsky, Sochin. 1844, vol. 3, p. 307--359. Hoffmann's Schriften. Erster Band. Stuttg. 1839, p. 218.). The musical education of Sebastian Bach under the guidance of his elder brother, Christopher, as presented by Odoevsky, resembles the musical education of Hoffmann's Theodor (Odoevsky, Works. 1844, vol. 2, pp. 219-234. Hoffmann, Works. in the translation of Gerbel. 1873, volume 1, p. 76).

Of the foreign writers, besides Hoffmann, Odoevsky was influenced by Goethe and Jean-Paul Richter. Talent J. -P. Richter was akin to Odoevsky’s talent. Poetic didacticism is a distinctive feature of the works of both writers.

There is a remarkable similarity in form between some of the works of Odoevsky and Senkovsky. “Princess Mimi” (1834) by Odoevsky is reminiscent of “The Whole Woman’s Life in a Few Hours” (1833) by Senkovsky (Odoevsky, Works. 1844, vol. 2, pp. 287-355. Senkovsky, Collected Works. 1858, vol. 3, pp. 344--346.). In both stories, an evil slanderer is presented, from whose intrigues a young lady dies in Odoevsky’s story, and in Senkovsky’s story - a girl, a college student. “The Adventures of One Revise Soul” (1834) by Senkovsky has in other places similarities with “The Tale of the Dead Body” (1833) by Odoevsky (Senkovsky, Works. 1858, vol. 3, p. 65. Odoevsky, Motley Tales. 1833. 29- -53.) “The Living Dead” (1839) by Odoevsky is very reminiscent of “Notes of a Brownie” (1835) by Senkovsky. In both stories, their vicious lives are revealed in their wanderings through the land of the dead (Odoevsky, Sochin. 1844, vol. 3, pp. 99-140. Senkovsky, Sochin. 1858, vol. 3.). I don’t think that Odoevsky and Senkovsky imitated each other in anything. Despite the fact that both of them were the most educated and learned people of their time, their mental and moral makeup represented irreconcilable opposites, and, it is clear that they could not tolerate each other. Odoevsky, who was friendly towards all writers, always kept aloof from Senkovsky. The petty and evil egoist Senkovsky hated Odoevsky. Odoevsky accused Senkovsky of self-interest, petty skepticism, and misunderstanding of the Russian language and Russian writers. Senkovsky angrily mocked Odoevsky’s works. The similarity of several works by Odoevsky and Senkovsky is explained by the common hackneyed form of romantic works. To interest the reader, writers clothed their thoughts and observations in fantastic images and, in this form, presented them to the public. Senkovsky himself, despite the fact that he called romanticism nonsense, funny, tasteless, ugly and false (Senkovsky, Sochin. 1858, vol. 1, pp. 412 and 421.), did not talk about modern writers and scientists without dressing them up first in the costume of the dead, demons or devils.

“In all eras,” says Odoevsky in the preface to “Russian Nights,” the human soul, with a desire of irresistible force, involuntarily, like a magnet to the north, turns to problems, the solution of which is hidden in the depths of the mysterious elements that form and connect spiritual life and material life. Nothing. This striving is not stopped by neither everyday sorrows and joys, nor rebellious activity, nor humble contemplation. This striving is so constant that sometimes it seems to occur independently of the will of a person, like physical functions. Centuries pass; everything is absorbed by time: concepts, morals , habits, direction, mode of action; the whole past life is drowning in an unattainable depth, and a wonderful task emerges above the drowned world" (Odoevsky, Works. I. Preface 3.). This, by the way, is the task of human life. "Why do we live?" Odoevsky asks the reader. He makes the solution to this question easier by giving it the correct formulation. Truth is not transmitted, he says. The definition of life must be spoken in your own soul. It cannot be transferred to another; can only be suggested, and then in such a case when this other person, through independent work of internal self-determination, reached approximately similar results. Odoevsky encourages a person seeking a solution to the riddle of life with the assurance that “it is not in vain that a person seeks that point of support where all his desires could be reconciled, where all the questions that trouble him could find an answer, all the abilities to receive a harmonious direction. For his happiness it is necessary one thing: a bright, broad axiom that would embrace everything and save him from the torment of doubt; he needs an unstoppable and unquenchable light, a living center for all objects - in a word, he needs truth, but complete, unconditional truth... If attraction exists , then there must also be an object that attracts, an object of the same affinity with man, to which the human soul is drawn, just as objects on the earth’s surface are attracted to the center of the earth; the need for complete bliss testifies to the existence of this bliss; the need for bright truth testifies to the existence of this truth, and equally the fact that darkness, delusion, doubt are contrary to human nature; the desire of man to comprehend the cause of causes, to penetrate into the center of all beings - the need for reverence testify that there is an object into which the soul can trustfully immerse itself; in a word, the desire for a full life testifies to the possibility of such a life, testifies that only in it can a person’s soul find peace.

The rough tree, the last blade of grass, every object of rough material nature proves the existence of a law which leads them directly to that degree of perfection to which they are capable; Since the beginning of centuries, natural bodies have developed harmoniously and uniformly and have always reached their full development.

Has a higher power really given only to man one unrequited desire, an unsatisfied need, a pointless aspiration? (Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 17 and 18.)

“The task of man” is to rise from the earth without leaving it (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 156.). In the sublime soaring of his soul, he should not miss reality.

Odoevsky’s symbol of the unsatisfied aspirations of extreme idealism is the Neapolitan architect Giambatista Piranesi. In the unbridled impulses of his creative imagination, Piranesi lost all sense of proportion, which is necessary for true artistic talent. Michel Angelo admired Piranesi’s brilliant projects; but no one took up the task of implementing them. The projects were too colossal. The genius of Piranesi was suffocating from the impracticality, inapplicability, and impossibility of realizing his plans. Piranesi is a madman. He wanted to connect Etna with Vesuvius with a vault for the triumphal gate, with which the park of the castle he designed began.

But woe to humanity when it is limited to the narrow interests of the earth. Neglect of the highest spiritual aspirations leads to destruction. Odoevsky does not allow the possibility of complete materialism. According to him, a person is so far from any kind of perfection that he cannot even be completely squinted. (Odoevsky, Sochin. 1844, vol. 1, p. 12.) Odoevsky will execute by death a society that has abandoned its highest spiritual interests. He brutally attacked Bentham, to whose teaching he attributed an overly materialistic character. “The City Without a Name” is a tendentious and therefore one-sided development of Bentham’s theory that benefit is the basic principle of all human relations, both political and moral. “God forbid us,” says Odoevsky, to concentrate all mental, moral and physical forces on one material direction, no matter how useful it may be: whether it be railways, paper spinning mills, fulling mills or calico factories. One-sidedness is the poison of modern societies, and the secret the cause of all complaints, unrest and bewilderment; when one branch lives at the expense of the whole tree, the tree dries up" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 59.).

Odoevsky attached extremely important importance to art in private and public life. He was an artist at heart. He was sensitive to beauty, wherever it appeared, in nature, a painting, a literary work, a building, a statue or a symphony. In determining the significance of aesthetic education for the original activity of the spirit, Odoevsky followed Schelling. Schelling saw in aesthetic feeling an incomprehensible principle that involuntarily connects objects with knowledge. Schelling's aesthetic views dominated Russian literature in the 30s and 40s. Nadezhdin, for example, says the following about aesthetic education: “Aesthetic education is the completion and crown of our life: without it, our human nature cannot mature. It must end with the poetry of life, which is nothing more than the complete, harmonious development of all the strings of the human of our existence. Without this development, these strings will never emit full and bright sounds. Our whole life will then turn into a drawn-out monotony, cold and gloomy. In our actions the heavy clatter of mechanical work will be heard: our knowledge will respond with the dull emptiness of stunted pedantry. Without aesthetic education we cannot fully enjoy the bliss of our human existence!...." (Otech. Zap. 1870, vol. 193. Nov. p. 46.)

Odoevsky recognized four universal human elements: the need for truth, love, reverence and strength, or power. (Odoevsky, Sochin. 1844, vol. 1, p. 380.) Man is given the privilege of creating a special world, where he can combine the basic elements in whatever proportion he wants, even in their present natural balance; this world is called art. In this world a person can find symbols of what is happening or should be happening inside and around him; but the architects of this world often introduce into it that disproportion between the elements, from which they themselves suffer without noticing it; other lucky people unconsciously build this world in such a way that it unexpectedly reflects the harmony that resounds in the souls of the architects themselves" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 382.) "The world of art is endless" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 252.) In the field of art, Odoevsky gives the first place to poetry and music.

“The poetry of all ages and all peoples,” he says, is one and the same harmonious work; every artist adds to it his own feature, his own sound, his own word: often a thought begun by a great poet is completed by the most mediocre; often a dark thought originated in to the common people, genius brings forth an unflickering light; often poets, separated by time and space, respond to each other like echoes between the rocks." (Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 212 and 213.) A person cannot get rid of poetry. “It, as one of the necessary elements, enters into every human action, without which life(Italics in the original.) This action would have been impossible; We see a symbol of this psychological law in every organism; it is formed from carbon dioxide, hydrogen and nitrogen: the proportions of these elements vary in almost every animal body: but without one of these elements the existence of such a body would be impossible; in the psychological world, poetry is one of those elements without which roar of life(Italics in the original.) should have disappeared: that is why even in every industrial enterprise there is a person quantum(Italics in the original.) poetry, on the contrary, in every purely poetic work there is quantum(Italics in the original.) material benefit" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 58.). "Poetry, according to Odoevsky, explains life" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 5.). "Not all is explained in the dead letter of a chronicler; not every thought, not every life reaches full development, just as not every plant reaches the level of color and fruit; but the possibility of this development is not destroyed; dying in history, it is resurrected in poetry" (Ibid., vol. 1, Preface, p. V.). The poet "reads the letter of the century in the bright book of eternal life, foresees the natural path of humanity and executes its seduction" (Ibid., t. 1, p. 31). That is why Odoevsky calls the poet “the first judge of humanity" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 31). Neither history nor theory of poetry creates poetry" (Ibid., vol. 1 , page 30.). It arises from direct feeling, natural talent. The poet needs knowledge. It is useful for him sometimes to descend to external nature in order to be convinced of the superiority of his internal nature and to more easily grasp its eternal laws. The poet also needs to have convictions, because it is not at all indifferent to the reader how the poet relates to certain phenomena of the physical and moral world" (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 172.).

Odoevsky's view of music is as broad and complete as his view of poetry. He says that there is a higher degree of the human soul, which he does not share with nature, which eludes the sculptor’s chisel; which the fiery lines of the poet will not complete - that degree where the soul, proud of its victory over nature in all the splendor of glory, humbles itself before the Highest Power, with bitter suffering longs to transfer itself to the foot of Her throne, and, like a wanderer among the luxurious pleasures of an alien land, sighs by homeland; people called the feeling aroused at this level inexpressible; the only language of this feeling is music; its boundless, boundless sounds alone embrace the boundless soul of man (Ibid., vol. 1 , pp. 249 and 250). Odoevsky’s words are remarkable that “all the difference between people is only the difference of suffering” (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 109.) and that “music is primarily an expression of human suffering” (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 82 .). Each thought expressed in a piece of music, according to Odoevsky, is just one link in an endless chain of thoughts and suffering, and the minute when the artist descends to the level of man is an excerpt from the long painful life of an immeasurable feeling, every expression of which, every feature, was born from the bitter tears of Seraphim, riveted in human clothing, and often giving half his life just to breathe the fresh air of inspiration for just a minute (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 166.). Beethoven's music expresses especially much grief (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 170). To prove the importance of the humanizing influence of music, Odoevsky points to the fact that, according to studies of philanthropists, “only those criminals are inclined to reform in whom there is a disposition towards music” (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 363.). Odoevsky accuses his contemporaries of not understanding the true merits of music. “The material spirit of the time gave the hymns, expressing the inner man, the character of contradance, humiliated it with the expression of unprecedented passions, the expression of spiritual lies, covered the poor art with glitter, roulades, trills, all sorts of tinsel, so that people would not recognize it, would not discover its deep meaning! A strange thing happened; everything that the musicians wrote to please the spirit of the time, for the present moment, for effect, decays, becomes boring and is forgotten.... The Rossini splendor has already faded! And meanwhile, old Bach lives! The marvelous Mozart lives."

In “Russian Nights,” Odoevsky repeatedly expressed the idea that between feeling and thought on the one hand and their expression on the other, there is a whole abyss that even music cannot fill, with all its ability to convey the subtle sensations of the human soul. In my opinion, he says, every conversation, every speech is a deception into which we ourselves fall and lead others; we think that we are talking about one object, when, instead, we are talking about completely different objects.... We add to this word some other concept, inexpressible in words, a concept communicated to us not by an external object, but originally and unconditionally emanating from our spirit.... We speak not with words, but with something that is outside of words, and for which words serve only as riddles, which sometimes, but by no means constantly, lead us to thought, make us guess, awaken thought in us , but they do not express it at all.... One condition is to understand each other: to speak sincerely and from the fullness of your soul. When two or three people speak from the heart, they do not stop at the greater or less completeness of their words: an internal harmony is formed between them; the inner strength of one excites the inner strength of the other; their connection, like the connection of organisms in a magnetic process, elevates their strength; Together, with incalculable speed, they both move through entire worlds of different concepts and, in agreement, achieve the desired goal; If this transition is expressed in words, then due to their imperfection, they barely mean only the final boundaries: the point of departure and the point of rest; the internal thread connecting them is inaccessible to words. That is why, in a lively, frank, sincere conversation, there seems to be no logical connection, and yet, only in this harmonious collision of a person’s inner forces are the unexpectedly most profound observations born, as Goethe noted in passing... People usually do not pay attention to this process, but meanwhile, it is so important that without a preliminary study of this process, any philosophical concept expressed in words is nothing more than a simple sound that can have thousands of arbitrary meanings; in a word, without a preliminary study of the process of expressing thoughts, no philosophy is possible (Odoevsky, Sochin. 1844, vol. 1, pp. 279-282. Further Odoevsky points to the ability of language to change the meaning of a word, keeping its form intact: “The word is grace or what did it mean for the people of the last century, what does it mean for the people of the present? the virtue of a pagan would be a crime in our time; Remember the abuse of words: equality, freedom, morality. This is not enough: a few fathoms of land and the meaning of the words changes: baranta, vendetta, all kinds of bloody revenge - in some countries they mean duty, courage, honor." At the same time, Odoevsky notes: "The letters of nature are more constant than human letters: in nature, a tree is always clear and complete pronounces his word; a tree, no matter what names it exists in human language... A tree has been a tree for everyone since the beginning of time." Odoevsky's reasoning in this case is not entirely correct. Unchangeable in its essence, external nature is constantly changing in the consciousness of man. Tree, flower ", the rainbow is pronounced in the human soul through prolonged internal work of the spirit. Man is first of all a man, whether he pronounces the word of the moral world or the physical world. In both cases, this word is changeable. Nature will only express itself fully when the kingdom of God comes on earth, in other words, when humanity reaches full and all-round spiritual development. “A tree has been a tree for everyone since the beginning of centuries.” It is very difficult to say what a tree was for a person at the beginning of centuries. What is certain is that in ancient times a tree did not seem to man as a combination of several substances developing according to immutable laws and chemically decomposable, but a terrible spiritual being, which costs nothing to appear before the amazed eyes of man in the form of a many-armed giant, or a weak, quiet creature that is capable of speaking and crying. The tree was first expressed in the human soul as an independent spiritual being, capable of thinking and feeling; then it began to be pronounced somewhat differently; the person took away his right to independence. Oak and pine lost their significance as spiritual individuals and obeyed one generic spiritual being, oak, pine, which, through natural simplification, passed into the goblin, the only ruler of the forests. N.S.} .

“Beethoven's Last Quartet” was written by Odoevsky with the aim of representing the torment that talent must experience from the inability to express itself. “I have never been able to express my soul,” says Beethoven; I have never been able to convey to paper what was in my imagination: will I write? what I wrote" (Odoevsky, Op. I. 163.).

Each person, says Odoevsky, turning to the definition of science, must form his own science from the essence of his individual spirit. Consequently, study should not consist in the logical construction of this or that knowledge (this is a luxury, an aid to memory - nothing more, if only an aid); it must consist in the constant integration of the spirit, in its elevation, in other words, in the increase in its original activity (V. Odoevsky, Op. 1844, vol. 1, p. 287.). After such a definition of science, Odoevsky’s numerous attacks on the one-sidedness of the scientific movement in the 19th century become clear. He recognized disunity and fragmentation as the main shortcomings of Western science. According to him, “soon the study of the invisible insect will take over the name of science” (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 309). The fragmentation of science results in the powerlessness of man over nature. To prove this idea, Odoevsky offers readers a number of questions to resolve that are remarkable for characterizing Odoevsky as a multifaceted scientist. For example: Tell me, please, the chemical composition of certain substances used in food, what effect can it have on the human body and, consequently, on one of the sources of social wealth? - Sorry, this is not my part: I only deal with financial science. Tell me, is it possible to explain some historical events by the influence of the chemical composition of substances that were used as food by humans at different times? - Sorry, I can’t have fun studying history - I’m a chemist. Tell me, do the fine arts, and especially music, really have such a strong influence on softening morals, and what kind of music exactly? - For pity's sake, music is such a fun, toy - when I do it - I'm a lawyer. - But can you explain to me the meaning of the rituals that were observed in ancient times by the priests of Cybele or the earth? - Sorry, philology does not concern me - I am an agronomist (V. Odoevsky, Op. 1844, vol. 1, pp. 347-352.).

In addition to one-sidedness and fragmentation, Odoevsky points to one more, in his opinion, significant drawback of the modern scientific movement, namely, the predominance in scientific research of experience “not warmed by faith in providence and in the perfection of man” (Ibid., vol. 1, p. . 100.). In “The Last Suicide” he presented to what absurdity a philosophical theory constructed in a purely logical way can reach in practical application (B. Odoevsky, Works 1844, vol. 1, pp. 100-112.). This work is nothing more than a peculiar development of one chapter of Malthus, precisely the one in which Malthus raised the question of the correspondence of means with needs. It is known that Malthus resolved this issue in a sense unfavorable for civilization. Odoevsky was indignant at Malthus’s theory and called it “the last absurdity in humanity” (Ibid., vol. 1, p. 28).

The basis of all Odoevsky’s reasoning in “Russian Night.” about science lie the same ideas that he expressed in 1824 in “Aphorisms”. Both there and here Odoevsky demands that the presence of a higher, generalizing, philosophical idea be observed in scientific pursuits. Both there and here he equally recognizes the close connection between the sciences. In both cases, he was guided by the ideas of German philosophy, mainly the philosophy of Schelling.

Odoevsky all his life stood for enlightenment, wherever it was found, among Russians or among foreigners. “Ignorance is no salvation,” he used to say. Uneducated people have the same passions as educated people, “the same ambition, the same vanity, the same envy, the same greed, the same malice, the same flattery, the same baseness, only with this difference that all these passions here it is stronger, more frank, meaner, and yet the objects are smaller. I will say more: an educated person is entertained by his very education, and his soul, at least not every minute of his existence, is in complete humiliation: music, painting, the invention of luxury - all this takes away from his time is on baseness... I understand... why immorality is so closely connected with ignorance" (V. Odoevsky, Op. 1844, vol. II, p. 110.). To characterize the noble personality of the book. Odoevsky, who has gone through many life trials and seen an abyss of vicious people in his life, is very important in his conviction that immorality comes from ignorance and that misfortune itself largely depends on it. Ipsarsky, in his memoirs about the Society for Visiting the Poor, says that members of the Society happened to encounter such filth and depravity that they had to involuntarily doubt the goodness of human nature and ask whether ignorance comes more from immorality than immorality from ignorance. (Russian Arch. 1869, p. 1021.) Odoevsky’s bright mind retained under all circumstances the best concept of people.

In the vast field of sciences, Odoevsky gave the first place to philosophy. “In the temple of philosophy,” he says, as in the highest court, those tasks are determined that in a given era are being developed in the lower strata of human activity.” Over time, Odoevsky’s worldview became more and more clear. Having acted as an enemy of Bacon's experimental philosophy and a supporter of the doctrine of the self-knowing spirit and innate ideas, Odoevsky at the end of his life, in the 60s, came to the conclusion that “the law of nature expresses only the final conclusion of experiments carried out before a certain time. Axiom 2× 2 = 4 is nothing more than an abbreviated formula for experimental observation of how the number four is formed. We have no original ideas. What we call an idea is a conclusion from concepts, which in turn are a conclusion from various sensations. For example, ", vice is not something original, like illness, but the repetition of crimes or misdeeds, resulting from an abnormal state of the spiritual or physical organism. Odoevsky's final turn towards the full recognition of experience, as the decisive element in the sphere of knowledge, was expressed in his following words: " Absolute truth can only be found in experimental observation, or, if you like, in the formula by which this observation is expressed" (Rus. Arch. 1874. II. 322--327.). Spiritualism did not find a supporter in the old man Odoevsky. Odoevsky thought that there was not a single spiritual phenomenon that could not be explained by the known natural laws set out in any textbook of physics or physiology (Russian Arch. 1874, k. 2, p. 293.).

Odoevsky did not have a flattering opinion of history. According to him, this science does not know where it is going and what it can be. She places stone on stone, not knowing what kind of building will come out, a vault or a pyramid, or just a ruin, and even whether anything will come out (V. Odoevsky, Op. 1844, vol. 1, p. 357.). “There is no absurdity that cannot be supported by indications of the unhypocritical tablets of history, and the more unhypocritical they are, the more conveniently they bend to any conclusions. Why is this strange, ugly phenomenon? - all for one reason: because historians, like meteorologists, thought it was possible to dwell on secondary reasons - they thought that a number of facts could lead them to some kind of general formula! in great use; I don’t understand how no one has yet thought of applying to history the same method of research that, for example, chemists use when decomposing organic bodies; first they reach the nearest principles of the body, such as, for example, acids, salts and others, finally, to its most remote elements, such as, for example, the four main gases: the first are different in each organic body; the second belong equally to all organic bodies. For this kind of historical research, it would be possible to form an excellent science with some kind of some sonorous name, for example, “Analytical Ethnography”. This science would be in relation to history what chemical decomposition and chemical combination are in relation to simple mechanical fragmentation and mechanical mixing of bodies, and you know what the difference is between them: - you crushed a stone; every particle of stone remains a stone and does not reveal anything new to you; on the contrary, you can collect all these particles together and there will be only a collection of stone particles - nothing more; on the contrary, you decomposed the body chemically and find that it consists of elements that could not be assumed at all from the external appearance of the body; you combine these elements chemically and get a decomposed body again, which in appearance is different from its elements... Why know! perhaps historians, through analytical ethnography, will reach some of the same results that chemists have reached in the physical world; they will discover the mutual affinity of some elements, the mutual opposition of others, a way to destroy or reconcile this opposition; They will inadvertently discover that wonderful chemical law according to which the elements of bodies are combined in certain proportions and in the progression of prime numbers, like one and one, one and two, etc. etc., perhaps, they will stumble upon what chemists in despair called the catalytic force, i.e., the transformation of one body into another through the presence of a third, without an obvious chemical compound... they will even get closer, perhaps, to the basic elements. Of course, the ideal goal of analytical ethnography would be to restore history, that is, having discovered the basic elements of a people through analysis, and systematically construct its history from these elements; then, perhaps, history would receive some authenticity, some meaning, would have the right to be called a science, whereas until now it is only a very boring novel, full of pitiful and unexpected catastrophes, remaining without any resolution, and where the author constantly forgets about his a hero known by the name of man." (B. Odoevsky, Op. 1844, vol. 1, pp. 370--372.)

Despite his hostile attitude towards materialism and experimentalism, Odoevsky was diligently engaged in the natural sciences in the 40s. He predicted Darwin's theory of the development of organic life. In “The Last Suicide” we read: “soon people appeared among the crowds - they seemed to have been counting the sufferings of man for a long time - and as a result they were summing up his entire existence. With a vast, hellish gaze they embraced the past and pursued life from its very beginning. They they remembered how, like a thief, she first crept into a dark block of earth and there, in the midst of granite and gneiss, little by little, destroying one substance after another, she developed new products, more perfect, then, on the death of one plant, she founded thousands of others; and by the destruction of plants she multiplied animals; and with what cunning she chained to the suffering of one kind of creatures the pleasures, the very existence of another kind. They recalled how, finally, ambitious, spreading her dominion every hour, she more and more multiplied the irritability of feeling, and incessantly in each new being, adding to the new perfection a new method of suffering, it finally reached man, unfolded in his soul with all its insane activity and set the happiness of all people against the happiness of every person" (V. Odoevsky, Sochi. 1844. t. 1. p. 105.). Odoevsky’s views on the world order are not alien to poetic mysticism. “In all organisms,” he says, there is some kind of mysterious alarm clock that reminds them of the need to nourish their elements; that’s why the plant reaches like a flower towards the sun, its roots greedily seeking earthly moisture.” An animal, through hunger, learns about the need to assimilate a certain amount of nitrogen... (Ibid. vol. 1. p. 378.).

At the end of “Russian Nights”, in the “Epilogue”, Slavophile opinions are expressed about the decay of the West, about the special historical mission of the Russian people, opinions that caused severe criticism from Belinsky (Belinsky, Op. IX. 55-61.).

At the beginning of the Epilogue, Odoevsky says that skepticism in Western Europe has killed faith, science and art. Later, in the 50s, Odoevsky changed his opinion about the meaning of negation in the history of civilization. He recognized that the denial of unfounded authority or the authority of insufficiently clarified facts is a great thing, which only geniuses are capable of, and is the first condition for the success of science (Russian Arch. 1874. II. 334.) . " The distinctive character of our time, says Odoevsky in the “Epilogue,” is not skepticism itself, but the desire to get out of skepticism, to believe something, to hope for something, a desire that is unsatisfied by nothing and therefore painful to the point of inexpressibility. Wherever the friend of humanity turns his gaze, everywhere he sees destruction; everything has been refuted, everything has been mocked, everything has been ridiculed; there is no life in science, no sacredness in art; There is no opinion whose contrary has not been confirmed by all the evidence possible to man. Such an unfortunate era of contradiction ends with what is called syncretism, that is, the combination into an ugly system, contrary to reason, of all the most contradictory opinions" (Odoevsky, Works I. 308.).

In addition to syncretism, Odoevsky considers the most terrible all-corroding lie to be the distinctive character of Western society. Lies embrace Western man from the first day of his birth and accompanies him throughout his entire life. People kill each other and at the same time assure of their sincere respect and devotion, talk about the desire of the people, but mean the desire of several speculators, get married and deliberately omit during the ceremony that without which marriage, on occasion, may be considered unprecedented, they preach with the departments of truth, not knowing what they consist of, proclaim love for humanity and sell wives and children, etc. (Odoevsky, Works. 1844. vol. I. pp. 319--323.) Sciences, instead of in order to strive for that unity, which alone can return to them their powerful strength, the sciences have fragmented into flying fluff, their common connection has been lost, there is no organic life in them: the old West, like a baby, sees only parts, only signs - the common is incomprehensible to it and impossible... Art is no longer transferred to that wonderful world in which a person used to take a break from the sadness of this world... Religious feeling in the West? - it would have been forgotten long ago if its external language had not yet remained for decoration, like political architecture, or hieroglyphs on furniture, or for selfish types of people (Ibid. vol. I, pp. 309-310.). The literature of the West testifies only to an irresistible melancholy, the absence of any belief, denial without any affirmation. The industry of the West is based on poverty and crime (Ibid. vol. I, p. 325.).

Odoevsky finds it necessary to bring Western European enlightenment into a real assessment, so that it is convenient to determine what should be borrowed from it. “We are placed on the border of two worlds, the past and the future, we are new and fresh; we are not involved in the crimes of old Europe... We must revive everything - inscribe our spirit in the history of the human mind, as our name is inscribed on the tablets of victory.” Odoevsky convinces Western peoples to look at the Russian people without fear. The West will find in Russia partly its own forces, preserved and multiplied, and partly the strength of the Russian, Slavic, unknown to the West.

These forces, according to Odoevsky’s definition, consist of the following: 1) a sense of strength, expressed in the Russification of foreigners; 2) the comprehensive versatility of the spirit, which found excellent expression in Lomonosov and is constantly expressed in the amazing receptivity of the Russian people; 3) a feeling of love and unity; 4) a feeling of reverence and faith, 5) the existence of faith in the happiness of not just the majority, but of everyone; 6) in the presence of a sense of social unity among the common people; 7) the fact that the people began their literary life with satire (?), that is, with strict judgment of themselves; 8) in the natural understanding of musical harmony in addition to tonic study.

Odoevsky in the 40s was not a consistent Slavophile, and Slavophilism itself was in its infancy at that time. The Slavophil “Moscow Collection” was published in 1845, and even here Slavophilism was not fully expressed. The Koran of Slavophilism, the famous letter of I.V. Kireyevsky to Count Komarovsky about the nature of the enlightenment of Europe and its relationship to enlightenment in Russia, was written in 1852. Until that time, only Khomyakov spoke out quite definitely, but spoke out in small articles.

In Odoevsky’s writings of the 40s there are two significant contradictions to the later developed Slavophilism. Firstly, Odoevsky highly regarded the transformative activities of Peter the Great and fully approved of it. Secondly, he was silent about Orthodoxy as a national feature of the Russian people, and did not see religion as a necessary condition for exceptional development.

In the 50s and 60s, Odoevsky completely abandoned his Slavophile opinions. He bowed to the rich European science, became an admirer of the West, and completely moved into the camp of Westerners. In “Sketches and Fragments”, written in the 50s and 60s in the quiet of the office, the following opinion was expressed, among other things: “Nationalism is a rather stupid word in its vagueness and is much more accurately and modestly replaced by the word” folk custom, i.e. The combination of various physiological, climatic and other circumstances, which, with insufficient mental development, had an influence on the spread of various popular beliefs, some always reasonable, some reasonable yesterday, some senseless from the very beginning. That all these circumstances, under the same circumstances, acting on generation after generation, acquire a certain settledness - there is no doubt about that; but whether there is a way in this is another question... “Through enlightenment,” says Odoevsky in another place in “Sketch,” human dignity in general is developed; half-enlightenment is only nationality, that is, the denial of universal human rights” (Russian Arch. 1874. II. 279--281; ​​VII. 42.). In "Sketches" Odoevsky speaks mockingly about the Slavophiles. “And what the Slavophiles talk about some kind of antediluvian Slavic-Tatar enlightenment, then let it remain with them until they show us Russian science, Russian painting, Russian architecture in pre-Petrine times; and how, in their opinion, all this antediluvian dryness was preserved only among the peasants , then we can easily see the essence of this antediluvian enlightenment in that ugly crookedness with which our peasant scratches the ground, in his barely harrowed field, in his crops with bushes, in the inability to keep cattle, which, if you please, is neither here nor there. This plague is found, so from the ceiling, and not from bad care, in his smoking hut, in his fight with his wife and children, in the special affection of fathers-in-law for young daughters-in-law, in careless handling of fire and, finally, in illiteracy. : “And our smart people, who even consider literacy to be a useless matter, who want to keep our smart, but completely ignorant villagers on the Book of Hours! What kind of infidel would reject both the religious and moral benefits of the Book of Hours and the Psalter." But what kind of ignorant would consider them sufficient for geological, mineralogical, botanical, in general for physical information, for understanding the industrial benefits, in general, the objects from which. .. the well-being, even the security of the country, depends" (Russian Archives. 1874. II. 286, 296.) .

In the second and third parts of Odoevsky’s collected works there are his own literary articles, numbering 25. “Unfortunately, the stories are not in my line,” wrote Odoevsky Count Rostopchina. Most of Odoevsky’s stories are written in the spirit of extreme romanticism, vague, fantastic and boring. Odoevsky's everyday stories are interesting: 1) "The Story of the Rooster, the Cat and the Frog" (III. 141--161), which presents a vivid picture of old city life, a picture in a purely Gogolian spirit; 2) "Princess Mimi" (II. 287-- 355) a rather interesting image of an embittered old maid; 3) “The Black Glove” (II. 17-50), which depicts the shortcomings of educating young people: 4) “The Unbroken House” - a curious adaptation of a folk legend about a man who falls asleep for many years and then waking up (in Pushkin’s charming poem “And the tired traveler grumbled at God”).

Works of the book. Odoevsky influenced his contemporaries. Belinsky said that selected youth read with delight some of Odoevsky’s stories and spoke about them with that important air with which neophytes usually talk about the mysteries of their teaching (Belinsky, Op. IX. 46.). G. Skabichevsky sees the influence of Odoevsky in Herzen’s first works (Otechestv. Zap. 1870, vol. 193. 16.). It is impossible not to pay attention to the significant similarity between “Notes of Doctor Krupov” and what is said in Odoevsky’s “Russian Nights” on pages 35-37 (here the opinion is expressed that it is impossible to draw a true, definite line between sane and insane thought). Odoevsky’s influence on the Slavophiles is also beyond doubt. He expressed for the first time many things that were subsequently developed in detail and in detail by I. Kireevsky, Khomyakov and K. Aksakov.

About how Odoevsky’s contemporaries reacted to the “Collection” of his works, how they understood and appreciated them, the answer should be given by a critic. Reviews of Odoevsky’s works appeared in all major magazines and newspapers, namely: in Otech. Zap. 1844, "Contemporary" 1844, vol. 36 pp. 233--235; Literary. Newspaper 1844, No. 36; Finnish Bulletin 1845, I. 35--51; Lighthouse 1844. XVII. 7--29, and Bible. for Reading 1844, vol. 66, pp. 1--9. The most efficient and thorough review was made by Belinsky in Otech. Zap. “Some of the works of Prince Odoevsky,” says Belinsky, can be considered less successful than others: but in none of them can one not recognize a remarkable talent, an original view of things, an original style. As for his best works, they find in him not not only a writer with great talent, but also a man with a deep, passionate desire for truth, with an ardent and sincere conviction, a man who is concerned with questions of time and whose whole life belongs to thought.” In Sovremennik it was noted that Odoevsky’s works deserve general attention, even study, that the author’s soul is dissolved in love for the common good, for enlightenment and morality. "Literat. Newspaper" found that Odoevsky's works are imbued with lively and intelligent thought, warmed by feeling, sparkling with intelligence, talent and education. The "Finnish Bulletin" recognized Odoevsky's works as a major acquisition for art, due to the beauty of the language and fidelity in the depiction of passions. He praised the prince. Odoevsky and "Mayak", this pathetic magazine obscurantist of the old days. One Senkovsky scolded Odoevsky in the Bible, calling him a man obsessed with a dozen vulgarities, an empty talker.

Having published the Collected Works of Odoevsky, he almost completely stopped his literary activity. In the second half of the 40s and in the fifties, he wrote almost nothing. At this time (1846-1861) he was assistant to the director of the Public Library of Baron M. A. Korf and, in addition, was in charge of the Rumyantsov Museum. But it was not his work activities that distracted Odoevsky from his literary activities. He devoted himself entirely to philanthropic activities. Odoevsky had the first idea about the founding of children's shelters. He also owned the editorship of the charter of these institutions (Moskovsk. Vedomosti 1869. No. 50.). In 1844, through his efforts, the Elisabeth Hospital for young children was founded in St. Petersburg (People's School 1869. No. 5.). The most brilliant development of the philanthropic activities of Prince. Odoevsky falls between 1846-1855, when he was chairman of the Society for Visiting the Poor. At this time the name of the prince. Odoevsky became popular among the poor population of the capital.

The Society for Visiting the Poor arose in 1846. Its goal was to ascertain the real situation of the residents of St. Petersburg, who were applying for benefits to various charitable persons, and to organize proper assistance to those who were truly in need.

Assistance, according to the charter of the Society, was provided in the following form:

1) the elderly, crippled patients, orphans and children of poor parents were placed in charitable institutions established by the Society or efforts were made to place them in external charitable institutions and at the expense of private individuals, and 2) assistance was provided to other poor people in the form of money, clothing, firewood, etc. Free medical care was provided in their homes through the Society’s doctors with the dispensing of medicines without money.

Members of the Society were divided into a) members of benefactors, b) members of visitors and c) members of managers.

Benefactor members contributed a certain fee annually to the Society or contributed to it free of charge and constantly with their labors.

Visiting members were obliged to visit the poor of the capital at least once a month, as designated by the Administrative Assembly. The managing members constituted the Administrative Assembly, and one of them was appointed chairman. At the very establishment of the Society, Prince. Odoevsky was unanimously elected chairman.

The honorary trustee of the Society was first the Duke of Leuchtenberg, and after his death in 1852, Prince V. Konstantin Nikolaevich. The meetings of the Society, especially in the early days of its existence, were numerous and brilliant. Everything that was wonderful and smart in St. Petersburg belonged to the Society. Almost the entire aristocratic world was on his list; there was not a single writer or journalist who was not a member of the Society; he was supported by financial celebrities; the best doctors offered him their services. The huge list of members of the Society was decorated with the names of the Imperial family, and the first among them was the Heir Tsarevich, Alexander Nikolaevich. The Administrative Assembly resorted to a wide variety of measures to bring the Society’s funds into an excellent position. Balls, concerts, performances, art exhibitions, and win-win lotteries were organized. Mugs were displayed in busy places. It is not surprising that the Society's business was excellent. 15 thousand poor families of the capital were under his care. Three handicraft shops were established, a children's shelter and a school attached to it, the Kuznetsov women's school, a common apartment for single elderly women, a family apartment, a hospital for visitors and a store (Russian Archives. 1869. 2nd edition. Page 1006 et seq.) , where the basic necessities of life were sold to the poor at cheap prices.

The brilliant activity of the Society for Visiting the Poor did not last long. She aroused displeasure in government spheres. At first, it was forbidden for military personnel to participate in the Society, which is why the Society lost many useful figures. In 1848, the Society for Visiting the Poor was annexed to the Imperial Humane Society, whose trustee was the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, and the famous Abr. Serg. Norov. In 1855, the Society for Visiting the Poor closed completely.

The Society for Visiting the Poor owes the best aspects of its activities to Prince. Odoevsky. The very charter of the society was drawn up by him (Russian Arch. 1874. 2. 267.). “Prince Odoevsky,” says Insarsky, often brought thick notebooks, which he rarely managed to read from beginning to end.. Objections began, and everything collapsed on him. He was absolutely not able to restrain such pressure. not impressive at all. The heated debate ended with the fact that by three o'clock in the morning the prince put his half-read notebook in his briefcase and, without being at all angry, brought another notebook to the next meeting, which for the most part suffered the same fate. His meekness and kindness tempered everything, and we loved and respected him endlessly, although each of us was rude to him and attacked his works in the most unceremonious manner. I cannot speak about this angelic personality without admiration. Having been in the closest relations with him for a long time, I developed a deep reverence for him, like to the unparalleled ideal of goodness and honor.... For Prince Odoevsky, the Society constituted a family, to which he devoted himself with all his soul, with all his material and moral strength. One pure love for good and people guided his relationship to Society, just as it was the basis of all the actions of this exemplary Christian and man" (Russian Arch. 1869. 2nd edition, pp. 1006 et seq.). According According to Putyata, who took an active part in the affairs of the Society, Prince Odoevsky devoted himself to the Society from the heart and in the full sense of the word was its soul. He devoted to it all the time remaining from his official activities and all the means that he could have at his disposal with his very limited income. internal connection of the Society; he agreed on opinions and softened clashes (Russian Arch. 1874. 2. 265.) By the late prince’s own admission, he sacrificed everything he could bring to the Society for Visiting the Poor for 9 years: work and love. “These nine years,” he says, “absorbed my entire literary activity without a trace” (Russian Arch. 1874. 2. 313.).

Book Odoevsky came up with the idea of ​​​​founding a hospital for visitors. In 1848, he published “The Past in the Present” for the benefit of the Society - a small extract from “Russian Nights”, namely “The City without a Name” and part of the “Epilogue” (pp. 308-314).

When the persecution of the Society was open, a difficult time came for Odoevsky to defend his kind institution. The prince’s good nature had to endure a lot of suffering in the overwhelming struggle against the enemies of the Society. Every enterprise of Odoevsky in favor of the Society was met with stupid opposition. He sometimes had to work not for permission to organize a concert or performance for a charitable purpose, but for permission to ask the Governor-General for permission. “We must,” Odoevsky wrote to Insarsky, use a steam engine to raise the straw” (Russian Arch. 1869. Edition 2. Page 1029.).

With the accession of the Company in the village. troubles to the Humane General. Odoevsky began a strong, although fruitless, struggle with the latter’s office. On paper Man. Total, received by the Society of the village. bad., Odoevsky looked at it as a personal insult and did not respond to them until the last opportunity. No matter how strong the opponents were, Odoevsky did not lose heart and did not leave his place as chairman. Upon the closure of the Society in 1855, Baron M. A. Korf, regarding the Great. book Konstantin Nikolaevich, made the following statement about the activities of the prince. Odoevsky in the late Society. “Knowing closely not only the official, but also the home life of the prince and fully appreciating his merits in assisting me in the establishment of the Imperial Public Library and the Rumyantsov Museum, I, together with this, for many years witnessed that conscientious and selfless zeal, I will even say, complete selflessness , with whom he, sparing no effort, worked for the benefit of the poor and disadvantaged in the Society he created and in it alone found the main elements of his life" (Russian Arch. 1870. Ed. 2. pp. 927--931.). The Grand Duke, according to the review of Baron Korf, nominated Odoevsky to be awarded some special sign of royal favor. Having learned about this, Odoevsky wrote a very remarkable letter to the Grand Duke, in which he refused a reward for his activities in the Society for the Benefit of the Poor. “To me, a Russian person, every royal favor is dear, and due to my actual service I was not abandoned by it; but I have always rejected from myself any reward for charitable institutions; for in my eyes, activities of this kind, in comparison with service, are nothing more than every other everyday activity; there is sacred duty; here is simply good will and satisfaction of inner desire. What I did, anyone else would have done under the circumstances in which I was placed" (Russian Arch. 1870. Ed. 2. 927 .).

Odoevsky's funds were very limited. In the Vyborg province he had a small manor, Rongas, “a piece of stone in the middle of the water” (Russian Arch. 1869, p. 1030). The manor did not generate income (Modern Izvestia 1870. No. 54.). Odoevsky lived on the salary he received for his service. Of the little that he received, he gave quite a large part to the poor (Moscow Ved. 1869. No. 50.). “Being very meager in funds,” says Insarsky, he was positively ready to give his shirt to his neighbor” (Russian Arch. 1869. 1015.). This evidence is confirmed by V.A. Sollogub (Voice 1869. No. 72.) and A.I. Koshelev (In memory of Prince V.F. .). Odoevsky petitioned for the cases of Koltsov (Russian Arch. 1864, 833-838.) and Fet (Voice 1869. No. 171.), sought permission to publish Gogol’s “Dead Souls” (Russian Arch. 1864. 840, 841.) , took an active part in the production of “Life for the Tsar” by M. I. Glinka (Russian Arch. 1864. 840, 841.), patronized the famous engraver Seryakov (Russian Antiquity 1875. XIV. 344.), supported Mr. Pyatkovsky at the beginning of his official and literary activities (Historical Vestn. 1880. IV.).

In 1850, Odoevsky undertook a trip abroad. He visited France, Germany and Switzerland; abroad he studied music. In Paris, Odoevsky met Cheve and thoroughly mastered his digital method of musical teaching (Day. 1864. No. 40.). In 1857, he published a brochure in French abroad to refute the false opinions of foreigners about Russia. In 1858, he traveled to Weimar as a deputy from the Public Library for Schiller's anniversary.

Traveling abroad helped Odoevsky renounce his former Slavophilism, revealed to him the richness of European culture, a high degree of Western citizenship, and should have somewhat calmed him down after the worries and troubles that his activities in the Society for Visiting the Poor caused him.

A year before Odoevsky moved to Moscow, in 1861, the great event of the liberation of peasants from serfdom took place. In the prince’s papers there is a small poem written by him about this event:

You have accomplished what you have desired for centuries;
Rus' rejoiced, content and proud,
And the people celebrate... with prayer and tears
The great first day of free labor.

Rus. Arch. 1871. 186.

In 1864 Turgenev's "Enough" was published. “It’s time to rush about, it’s time to stretch, it’s time to shrink,” wrote Turgenev. It’s time to take your head in both hands and tell your heart to be silent. It’s time to bask in the sweet bliss of vague, but captivating sensations; it’s time to run after every new image of beauty; it’s time to catch every flutter of its subtle and strong wings. Everything has been experienced, everything has been experienced many times.... I’m tired. What does it matter to me that at this very moment the dawn spreads wider and brighter across the sky, as if heated by some kind of victorious passion? two steps away from me, in the midst of the silence and bliss and splendor of the evening, in the dewy depths of a motionless bush, a nightingale suddenly made such magical sounds, as if there had never been a nightingale before him in the world, and he was the first to sing the first song about first love? - All this it was, it was, it was repeated, it is repeated a thousand times and how do you remember that all this will continue like this for an eternity - as if by decree, by law - it will even become annoying!.... Fate leads each of us strictly and indifferently, and only at first We are busy with all sorts of accidents, nonsense, with ourselves - we do not feel her callous hand. As long as you can be deceived and not be ashamed to lie, you can live and not be ashamed to hope. Truth, incomplete truth - there can be no mention of that; but even the little that is available to us immediately closes our mouths, ties our hands, and reduces us to nothing. Then one thing remains for a person, so as not to wallow in the mire of self-forgetfulness..., self-contempt: to calmly turn away from everything, to say: enough, and crossing unnecessary arms on an empty chest, to preserve the last, the only dignity available to him, the dignity of the consciousness of his own insignificance (Turgenev, Works . VIII. 50--52.).

Odoevsky, a sixty-year old man, read this sad reflection, and in 1865 he wrote an objection to “Enough,” wrote “Dissatisfied,” full of youthful faith in truth and beauty (Conversations of the General. Loves. Ros. Slov. 1865. I. 65-- 84.). Odoevsky objects to the points of Turgenev’s “Enough.”

“In a moment of sudden fatigue, the artist uttered the word “Enough!” - a broad and insidious word. How! - he took from us the native Russian word, in his works he taught us to read ourselves, - and suddenly, out of the blue, the artist says: “It will be with you! enough!" no; he won’t get rid of us so easily! With his clever thought, with his elegant speech, he has enslaved himself to us; - every thought, every feeling, every word belongs to us; they are our property and we do not intend to give it up for nothing.. .

Something else comes to mind. Has the essence of this word been expressed? Isn’t this just one letter shell, under which another, new word was born? This is not the first time that letters have deceived people in general, and especially artists.... A man digs the earth, just think - a grave; nothing happened! he's just planting a tree. The tree has faded, the fruit has fallen, yellowed leaves are falling - goodbye tree!... nothing happened; the fruit seeded the ground, the leaves covered it - let the embryo sprout!

“Enough” because everything has been experienced, because “everything was, was, repeated, repeated a thousand times: the nightingale, and the dawn and the sun.” - What if some miraculous power amused the artist and, to please him, nothing in the world would be repeated? the nightingale would have sung for the last time, the sun would not have risen in the morning, the brush would have dried up on the palette forever, the last string would have broken. If the human voice were silent, would science speak its last word? - what then? darkness, cold, endless silence of both mind and feelings.... oh! then a person would really have the right to say: “enough!” that is, give me again warmth, light, speech, the singing of a nightingale, the rustling of leaves in the twilight of the forest, give me suffering, give space to my spirit, unleash its activity, even if it was poison for me in a word, restore the immutability of the laws of nature!

Let unresolved questions and doubts arise before me again, let the sun reflect evenly both in the boundless sea and in a drop of morning dew hanging on a blade of grass.

Do we really ever grow old? This question is still subject to great doubt. What I thought, felt, loved, suffered yesterday, for 20, for 40 years, has not grown old, has not passed without a trace, has not died, but has only been transformed: an old thought, an old feeling responds in new feelings: to my new word, As if through a prism, the multi-colored shade of the former lies.... Finally: is the artist really locked in the artistic sphere? Shouldn’t that powerful creative force that was given to him at birth also penetrate beyond this sphere? “I’ve been too busy today,” says Pitt. - "give me another briefcase." Every highly gifted person can, even must, quote such words - be he an artist, a scientist, a campaigner, or an industrialist. A gifted organization is elastic: it does not have the right to dig its talent into the ground; she must buy it wherever she can find it - and there is a lot of work on earth, and the work is urgent, multifaceted; She calls everyone - both young and old; there is enough for everyone, and she needs everything, and often this is exactly what the Lord bestows on the artist: without the aesthetic element, nothing is in dispute; You can't build an effective mousetrap with mechanics alone.

True, after the day there comes night, after the struggle there comes fatigue. How soft, how pleasant is that metaphysical bed that we make for ourselves when preparing to retire! how to freely stretch out in it, lulling yourself with dreams of the futility of human life, that everything is fleeting, that everything must come to an end someday: the strength of the mind, and the activity of love, and the sense of truth. - everything, everything - the beating of the heart and the enjoyment of art and nature; that the end of everything is the grave. Does it matter a little later or a little earlier? - These minutes are guarded by the worst of human enemies, the most cunning of flatterers: spiritual laziness, and the evil spirit sings us many such songs. But fortunately, our guardian angel rises up against the evil spirit: love! love is all-encompassing, all-feeling, all-forgiving, seeking action, seeking all-knowledge as preparation for one’s work.

Away with despondency! away with metaphysical swaddling clothes! I am not alone in the world, and I am not irresponsible to my brothers - whoever they are: friend, comrade, beloved woman, fellow tribesman, person from the other hemisphere. - What I do, whether willingly or unwillingly, is accepted by them; What I have created does not die, but lives in others with endless life. The thought that I sowed today will come up tomorrow, in a year, in a thousand years; I set one string in vibration, it will not disappear, but will respond in the other strings with a harmonic vocal response. My life is connected with the life of my great-great-grandfathers; my offspring are connected with my life. Can anything human really be alien to me? We are all mutually responsible.

VII, VIII, IX, X, XI.

As in the world of science, so in the world of feelings, moments of love, inspiration, the word of science, even just a good deed, do not leave us even in the midst of the most bitter spiritual anxiety, but lie as a bright stripe between our dark dreams. Let's bless these moments. They not only existed, they are inherent in us; They live in our very denial.

Who has the right to say: “for the last time” and, like an animal, sink into the depths and fall asleep? And in our dreams we will see “the sun, and the grass, and the blue, gentle waters” - and in reality we will involuntarily look for them. There is a need in the human spirit to both think and feel, just like a worker bee has a need to build a cell. Why, for whom does the bee build it? Why does she fill it with honey, collected at the risk of her life? Maybe she won’t use this cell, this honey, but other creatures unknown to her will use it, the queen and her new tribe will use it. But as Cuvier seems to have noticed, the bee carries within itself the image of a cell, a geometric ghost; - to realize this image, this ghost, is the irresistible calling of the bee; A special kind of pleasure must be invested in the fulfillment of this calling, and without it the bee’s life would remain unsatisfied.

Fate! - what kind of lady is this? where did she come from? where does she live? It would be interesting to find out about that. Only her name wanders around the world, like that gigantic sea serpent, which was written about in the newspapers every year, but which has not yet sunk one ship and has recently turned into a humble mollusk. No one has ever been subjected to such a lie as invisible fate. We are all sick with the same disease: failure to use our hands, but we are somehow ashamed of this disease and find it more convenient to blame the products of our laziness on fate, since it is unrequited. - You won’t get far with “self-forgetfulness and self-contempt”: in all cases of life a certain amount of self-confidence is needed: whether in a battle with life, or in a battle with one’s own thought. You must be able to look straight into the eyes of friend and foe, success and failure. But they will say: what a joy it is to live on guard for a whole century! Perhaps you will be like that eccentric described by Hoffmann, who even in clear weather walked with an umbrella, and a thunder deflector was attached to the umbrella - because, the eccentric reasoned, there were cases of thunder strikes even in a cloudless sky. - The boundary line between the reasonable and the ridiculous is very thin and indefinite, but it does not follow from this that it does not exist, and that a person is unable to stand on this or that side of this line. Everything depends on the ability to handle life, on the meaning that we attach to its phenomena.

Words! words! but under the words there is a thought, and every thought is a force, whether it acts on another thought, or whether it sets material forces in motion. Is it really in vain that science and art are passing through the world?

Let us imagine that in one unfortunate moment the highest and lowest figures of our time would gather and, having become convinced of the futility of human life, that is, the futility of science and art, decided by common agreement: to stop all scientific and artistic activity. How would this attempt end? firstly, this world would become a little more boring, and secondly, such an attempt would never succeed. Both science and art would appear again, but in some distorted form, for it is impossible to kill the element of the human organism, as important as all other elements, without destroying the organism itself...; a Stone Age man would be forgiven for grieving over the futility of human life; But we, who have traced the work of man from the Stone Age to ours, we, who are aware of the sacred connection between science, art and life, ... have the right to indulge in despondency and cry out for inaction.

Beauty - is it a conditional matter? It seems to me that this question cannot exist. The question is not the beauty of this or that work, but the feeling of beauty, and this feeling, this need is an element common to all people. What does it matter that a Chinese admires a picture without perspective, or a study of sounds incomprehensible to us - the point is that he admires, that he finds satisfaction in his need of grace...

Once again, nothing perishes, neither in the matter of science, nor in the matter of art; Their material manifestations pass and are crushed by time, but their spirit lives and multiplies. True, he gets this life not without struggle, but this very struggle, recorded by history, is for us edification and encouragement for further movement (progress).... Science... walks along the earth with a calm, even, but unceasing step, scattering your favors right and left. The creator of cities and villages, she rises to the palaces, does not bypass either a fragile hut, or the cell of a learned worker, or a judge’s chamber. Everywhere she protects, lives, strengthens. And such is the nature of her benefits that they do not pass quickly, like many things in the sublunary world; every step of science is a new active center, a new sun, from which there is light, and warmth, and a rainbow...... The calculation of the ever-increasing successes of science is usually interrupted by the question..., so to speak, at home: have we become Does that make you happier? I dare to answer this age-old question with a decisive “yes!” with the condition: do not give the word happiness a fantastic meaning, but see in it what it really is, that is, the absence, or at least a decrease in suffering. Hasn’t the average life in Europe increased, that is, aren’t we able to live more years ourselves and see those dear to our hearts alive? Isn’t it a blessing to consider the opportunity to exchange words in a few minutes with friends, with relatives who are vastly distant from us? How many family anxieties, how many mental torments were calmed by an instant word of electricity? the luxury of fast movement, protected from storms and bad weather, the convenience of verbal rapprochement between people, the opportunity to be present at great research, conclusions, and triumphs of science without great expense, to enjoy works of art or nature that are far from us - has it not now become more accessible to a larger number of people? But where, in a few lines, can one enumerate all the goodness that has been spilled by science in almost all areas of the globe! The fact is that with each discovery of science, one of the human sufferings is reduced - this seems beyond doubt. - I hear an objection: the war, they tell me, and the methods of exterminating people, obtained from science, haven’t they increased the mass of suffering of another kind, but still suffering?.... the objection is strong - but, however, can science be blamed? Is it possible to blame fire for the fact that, although it warms and illuminates, it also produces fires? Can you blame both the sun and optics if a crazy person points a burning glass at a haystack and the haystack catches fire? Who is to blame if the data developed by science so far only to a very small extent enter into state, social and family affairs?.... our social sciences are not only far behind the natural sciences, but, to tell the truth, are still in their infancy .... Is science the cause of war? Is science preparing it? no! science says something else: it mercilessly shakes the pedestal of military exploits; she proves with numbers that all the complex reasons for migrations, wars, raids, robberies, generally violent movements of peoples, as well as internal upheavals, come down to one basic and very prosaic reason: the depletion of the soil, the need to feed oneself.... There will be time when the forces of mind and body are not spent on mutual destruction, but on mutual preservation: the data developed by science will penetrate into all layers of society - and the question of food will truly become similar to the question of the use of water and air...

But let’s leave the cosmopolitan sphere and apply our thoughts to what is closer to us, to Russia, dear to us all. Shall we say to her the word: “Enough!” On February 19, 1861, all Russian forces moved. Science is developing slowly, but wider and wider. The villager begins to understand his ignorance and the need to get out of it. The zemstvo, no matter how difficult its first steps may be, begins to show its originality and apply the common sense of the Russian person to the diverse conditions of social life, complicated by centuries-old misunderstandings. Finally, a public independent court will form a support not only for internal and external trust, but also a school of morality, accessible to everyone.... The whole great cause (February 19, 1861) will perish if it does not find worthy workers, and more than one of them is needed not two. Is it possible to indulge in inaction and say: “Enough!”

It doesn’t matter that we are getting old, and in our last minutes we will not say to Russia, like gladiators to the Roman Caesar: “as we die, we bow to you”: but let us remember.... Go ahead, never mind, help yourself! - which in Russian translates: stop chilling, there’s a lot of unfinished business!” (“Dissatisfied” is stated in abbreviation.)

In 1865, the Moscow noble assembly revealed the desire of the local nobility to make up for the lost landowner right by acquiring some kind of political protectorate over other classes. This desire, immediately picked up and inflated in its own way by the newspaper "Vest", aroused fierce opposition from the prince. Odoevsky. Book Odoevsky immediately after reading the article published in Vesti, wrote a strong objection against it, which, with many signatures, should have appeared in the newspapers, but did not appear on the occasion of the termination of Vesti. Odoevsky considered it indecent to insist on the publication of his article, following the proverb “you don’t beat someone who is lying down,” and for his delicacy he was punished by the fact that the serf owners of the white-stone capital spread a lot of gossip about him, passing him off almost as an informer who wanted to curry favor with the government and slow down public development (Pyatkovsky, Biogr. book. Odoevsky, in Ist. Vest. 1880. IV. 698.).

Here is the verbatim content of the prince’s protest. Odoevsky: “In No. 4 (January 14) of the Vesti magazine there is an article containing supposedly the assumption of the majority of the Moscow noble assembly about various subjects related not to the benefits and needs of this Moscow nobility, but to the entire nobility and even to our entire state device. Having the honor of belonging to the Russian nobility, we, the undersigned, fear that silence on our part will not be considered a sign of consent to such an assumption, which, by its content, and even more by the speeches made to interpret its meaning, we find untimely , and incompatible both with the real needs of Russia, as well as with its history, with its political and national life and with its local and natural conditions. Therefore, we consider it our duty to declare that, in our deep conviction, the task of the nobility at the present moment consists of the following: 1 ) to apply all the strength of mind and will to eliminating the remaining consequences of the serfdom, now destroyed with God's help, but which was a constant source of disaster for Russia and a shame for all its nobility. 2) Take a conscientious and zealous participation in the activities of new zemstvo institutions and new legal proceedings, and in this activity exhaust that experience and knowledge of zemstvo and judicial affairs, without which any institution, no matter what, would remain fruitless due to the lack of capable executors. 3) Do not set yourself the goal of selfishly protecting your own class interests exclusively, do not seek discord with other classes before the court and the law, but work amicably and jointly with all loyal subjects for the glory of the sovereign and the benefit of the entire fatherland. 4) Taking advantage of higher education and great wealth, use available means to disseminate useful knowledge to all layers of the people, in order to assimilate them to the successes of science and art, as far as possible for the nobility. Finally, in general, to promote sincerely and honestly, with trust and love, those grace-filled transformations that are now already destined by our wise sovereign, without disrupting their natural course and gradual development by untimely and lawless intervention" (Ibid., p. 698.) .

In 1866, Odoevsky, who did not lose sight of any serious state issue, reacted very keenly to the prison reform that was then emerging in Moscow. The former workers' house was transformed under the leadership of Count Sallogub into a correctional prison, in which the beginning of the correction of prisoners through properly organized labor was applied. “It’s sad to think,” Prince Odoevsky wrote to Sallogub about this, that we still have to prove the necessity of labor, the destruction of bunks, the separation of sexes, etc. abuses, the bad choice of people, this is a special article, possible everywhere, but that I It's infuriating, our passionate laziness, which prevents us from thinking about things that are asking themselves to be thought about. If Fourier had lived with us, he would not have written his system of harmonization of passions, because in the passion of laziness, in the passion of doing nothing, he would have found such an element that destroys all others".... (Pyatkovsky, "Historical Vest." 1880. IV. 700.)

Since 1862, Odoevsky divided his time between studies in the Senate, where he was the first chairman, and desk studies in ancient Russian music. In Moscow, he became friends with lovers and experts of ancient Russian art, Buslaev, Filimonov, Potulov, priest. Razumovsky, Bezsonov. Odoevsky, using ancient music manuscripts, if we are not mistaken, with the assistance of Potulov and Razumovsky, managed to discover the key to understanding the ancient hook notes and thus restore the ancient church tunes. Odoevsky wrote several small brochures about ancient Russian music and collected a significant number of ancient music manuscripts, which after his death were received partly by the Moscow Music Conservatory, partly by the Rumyantsov Museum (Bulletin of the General Ancient Russian Arts 1874. IV--V. 36-- 39; Bezsonov, Kaliki passersby. V, p. 8.).

In 1867, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Baron Korf, Odoevsky wrote a small book in honor of the hero of the day, where he pointed out Korf’s merit in introducing shorthand in Russia. The book bears the title: “Memoirs of Assistant Director V.F. Odoevsky.” There are only 9 countries in the book. The memoir was published in two copies, of which one was given to the hero of the day, and the other was placed in Public. Bible for storage. From the "Memoirs" it is clear that Odoevsky knew shorthand.

Shortly before his death, Odoevsky attended public lectures by Prof. Lyubimov in physics. In 1868, he wrote a short article about these lectures and published it in the form of a separate brochure. Lyubimov's lectures are called here a good and smart deed ("Public lectures of Prof. Lyubimov", K.V.F.O. Moscow. 1868, p. 22.). He expresses regret that it was impossible to make the lectures free of charge and proposes to organize a pool to open free public lectures, and he says that 100 people. with a membership fee of 10 rubles. or 200 people. with a contribution of 5 rubles. a person could fully support the lectures financially. According to Odoevsky, Russia has everything, untold natural wealth, a variety of climates, and the people turn out to be understanding and receptive to knowledge. There is a lack of knowledge, science, book learning. With the development of knowledge, learned people will appear in all corners of the Russian land, public libraries, physics classrooms, and chemical laboratories will arise. In factories, railways, and ships, the drivers will be predominantly Russian people. A simple man will drive the locomobile and adapt it to the local business. All zemstvo forces will expand. The farmer will make an extra ruble. State revenues will increase, and new funds will be created to help science.

This was Odoevsky’s last word for enlightenment, his last appeal about active love for one’s neighbor.

Prince V.F. Odoevsky died on February 27, 1869 after a short illness, “Prince Odoevsky, let us say in conclusion in the words of Count Sallogub, left behind an excellent memory as a person, as a public figure, as a writer, as a scientist, as a musician. Above “In all he stood as a human being, and other merits were only a consequence of his exceptionally noble, loving, meek and tirelessly active nature.”

Now Trostyanets district, Sumy region of Ukraine. Ukrainian.

After graduating from the Kharkov Chemical College in 1933, he arrived at the construction of the Bobrikovsky (Stalinogorsk) energy and chemical plant. From October 1936 to December 1938, he served in the NKVD troops as a squad commander of the 185th regiment of the NKVD troops (dismissed to the reserve). He graduated from a two-year course for reserve command personnel in 1938. Member of the CPSU(b) since 1939.

In January-April 1940, he again served as a platoon commander of the 89th separate battalion of the NKVD troops. In Stalinogorsk he worked his way up from a foreman to a shift supervisor at a chemical plant.

The beginning of the Great Patriotic War, participation in the defense of Stalinogorsk

With the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, in June 1941, he was sent to the 180th NKVD regiment and appointed platoon commander of the 1st company of the 2nd battalion. As part of the regiment, junior lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov served as a security guard for chemical production at an industrial site in Stalinogorsk-2.

On October 27-28, 1941, with German troops approaching Tula, junior lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov, as commander of a reconnaissance group, successfully conducted reconnaissance in the Uzlovaya area. The enemy was not detected.

On November 18, 1941, with the start of the second stage of the German Operation Typhoon, as part of the 2nd battalion, Senior Lieutenant Redin was supposed to provide support to the tankers of the 108th Tank Division, which, northwest of Uzlovaya, launched a counterattack on the broken tank units of the 2nd Tank army of G. Guderian. However, his platoon did not take part in the battles, returning on November 20 to the regiment’s location in Stalinogorsk-2. According to his recollections, such an order was given to him by battalion commander 2 Redin.

According to his recollections, on November 21, 1941, his platoon, together with a subordinate rifle squad and a heavy machine gun crew (60 people in total), guarded the Shatov Dam north of Stalinogorsk-2. During the second half of the day, soldiers of the 180th NKVD Regiment and the 108th Tank Division, defeated that day at the Maklets station by units of the German 4th Tank Division, proceeded across the bridge on the Shatov Dam. In the evening, German tanks trying to cross the bridge were fired upon by an anti-aircraft battery of the 336th anti-aircraft artillery division, forcing them to turn back, which saved Sumtsov’s platoon from destruction (the fighters did not have their own anti-tank weapons).

On the night of November 21-22, 1941, he witnessed the explosion of all industrial facilities in Stalinogorsk-2 and a warehouse of anti-aircraft shells, the destruction of which was carried out by NKVD and Red Army units before their departure. His platoon was the last to leave the Shatov Dam, subjected to small fire from the advanced German units. Without losses, he reached the regiment's location in the city of Ozyory (85 km north of Stalinogorsk-2) along the route Yudino, Mochily, Serebryanye Prudy, Ozyory, where, as part of the 180th NKVD regiment, he began to carry out a new combat mission - to protect the rear of the 50th th army.

On January 8, 1942, he was awarded the rank of lieutenant. He served with the regiment until February 1942.

On the Transcaucasian and 1st Belorussian fronts

Subsequently, from February 1942 to December 1943, he served in the 284th rifle regiment of the Sukhumi division of the internal troops of the NKVD on the Transcaucasian Front, and participated in combat operations to eliminate banditry in Dagestan, Karachay and Checheno-Igushetia. “For exemplary conduct of security and military operations, conscientious attitude to official duties,” he received a number of thanks from the command. Then, from December 1943 to May 1945, as part of the regiment, he restored order in the rear of the 1st Belorussian Front.

Late 1940s.

The commander of the 1st company of the 284th rifle regiment of the NKVD, Lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov, particularly distinguished himself in April 1944 during the liquidation of members of the UPA (Ukrainian Insurgent Army) in the Rokitnovsky district of the Rivne region of Ukraine. As commandant of the city of Rokitno (now the village of Rokitnoye), Lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov’s responsibilities also included the tasks of identifying and eliminating the remnants of German henchmen in the liberated territory. As the commander of the 284th Infantry Regiment of the NKVD, Colonel Babintsev, noted, in the period from March 29 to April 13, 1944, “thanks to his thoughtful and well-executed work, in the shortest possible time he organized exemplary order in the city and the surrounding villages.” Lieutenant Sumtsov’s unit detained 416 people, of which 4 bandits (2 wounded, 2 captured), 3 German spies, 42 deserters, and weapons were also captured.

On April 4, while combing the village of Masevichi, N.P. Sumtsov personally discovered a German paratrooper, abandoned at night to restore contact with the “Bulbovites” (UPA-PS militants), who was quickly disarmed and gave valuable testimony. “For energetic actions, courage and determination in the detention of a German paratrooper-radio operator, the thoughtful organization of an operation to eliminate bandit groups,” Lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov was awarded the Order of the Patriotic War, II degree (May 19, 1944).

The commander of the 284th Infantry Regiment of the NKVD, Colonel Babintsev, emphasized the exceptional attitude of Lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov to his official duties and set him as an example for the entire officer corps of the regiment.

Also awarded medals “For the Defense of Moscow” (1944), “For the Defense of the Caucasus”, “For the Victory over Germany in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.” .

Post-war years: director of a chemical plant

After the war, on July 11, 1945, he was awarded the rank of senior lieutenant; in December 1945, he was appointed commander of the rifle battalion of the 284th NKVD rifle regiment. And on January 18, 1946, N.P. Sumtsov was transferred to the reserve for the third time.

Nikolai Pavlovich Sumtsov, director of the chemical plant in 1965-1976.

He returned to Stalinogorsk, worked as a process engineer in shop No. 11 of the Stalinogorsk Chemical Plant, and worked his way up from shift supervisor to director of the enterprise in 1965. During his leadership, in 1970, the chemical plant was named after Lenin, which was akin to the highest state recognition.

The chemical plant was rapidly developing new capacities. In 1975, it became the country's largest enterprise for the production of ammonia and mineral fertilizers. This happened due to the fact that, with the participation of N.P. Sumtsov and under his leadership, large-scale ammonia and urea production facilities with a capacity of 450 thousand tons per year (the so-called “large units”) were put into operation. In addition, Nikolai Pavlovich Sumtsov paid a lot of attention to the development of the medical and sanitary part of Azot.

Knight of the Order of Lenin and the Red Banner of Labor.

Memory

In August 2013, a memorial plaque was installed on the house where he lived in Novomoskovsk. The inscription on the board: “In this house lived a holder of the Order of Lenin, the Order of the Red Banner of Labor, director of the Novomoskovsk Chemical Plant (1965-1976) Sumtsov Nikolai Pavlovich 05/22/1914 - 12/21/1991.”

Family, personal life

Was married twice. The first wife is Maria Nikiforovna Sumtsova (born 1916). Two sons were born into their family: Pavel (born 1935) and Nikolai (born 1947). After the war, they lived in the city of Stalinogorsk in block No. 37, building 9, then in the 1960s - on the street. Komsomolskaya, 39/19. With his second wife, Maria Mikhailovna, they raised a son, Igor (1953-1977), and a daughter, Irina.

He left a 3-volume book of memoirs, “Notes of a Soldier,” in which he described in detail his military journey. In the 1990s, separate fragments about how he, as a junior lieutenant, defended the city of Stalinogorsk in November 1941, were published in the newspapers Novomoskovskaya Pravda and Novomoskovsky Khimik. However, the book was never published in its entirety.

In the title photo: junior lieutenant N.P. Sumtsov, November 1941.

Journal of combat operations of the 180th regiment of the NKVD of the USSR for the protection of especially important industrial enterprises for September 25 - November 17, 1941 (RGVA, f. 38366, op. 1, d. 1, pp. 1-2.)

M.: Eastern literature, 1996. 298 p.

Mind. 09/12/1922.

Nikolai SUMTSOV: “Life in Ukraine should take a different path”

Olesya MANDEBURA, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Kyiv

2003, http://www.day.kiev.ua/18371

Among those scientists who represented Ukrainian folk studies in Europe at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries at a high professional level, the main place is occupied by the Kharkov researcher Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov (1854 - 1922). Professor, corresponding member and academician of three high scientific institutions (from 1899 - the Czecho-Slovak Society in Prague, from 1905 - the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, from 1919, at the suggestion and with the assistance of Agatangel Krymsky, Nikolai Sumtsov was among the first to become an academician of the newly formed Academy of Sciences of Ukraine), with his work, in the far from favorable political conditions of that period, he asserted the right of the Ukrainian people and their culture to independent existence, the need for their study and generalization. Among the connoisseurs of his work at one time were N. Drahomanov, M. Grushevsky, Hv. Vovk, D. Doroshenko, V. Petrov, V. Kaminsky, A. Pipin, A. Potebnya and many other outstanding Ukrainian and Russian researchers.

A clear and consistent civic (not even political!) position, love for everything Ukrainian - language, culture, literature, people in general, led to the fact that already in Soviet times an unspoken taboo was placed on the name of Professor Sumtsov, his works (according to history of literature, ethnography, history of Ukraine, local history, history of art, pedagogy...) were in special funds, were not republished, and even referring to them other than with criticism was prohibited. In the official conclusion to the book “Ukrainian Culture”, ed. K. Guslisty, S. Maslov, M. Rylsky dated August 18, 1947. Nikolai Sumtsov, together with Boris Grinchenko, Khvedir Vovk, Dmitry Yavornitsky, Dmitry Bagaliy and other scientists, is called “a bourgeois figure of Ukrainian culture with nationalist, anti-scientific views” (See. : Shapoval Yu. “Ukraine of the 20th century: exposure and hypotheses in the context of important history”). And this despite the fact that Nikolai Sumtsov was almost not involved in politics itself, trying to remain in positions of non-party culturalism, although he did not always succeed.

In all his scientific works, especially on the history of Ukraine and Ukrainian culture, he, Russian by origin, like many other Russian scientists, acted as a consistent Ukrainian patriot. This was the time when Kharkov was considered the spiritual capital of the Ukrainian national liberation movement - many Ukrainian and Russian scientists worked in the capital of Slobozhanshchyna, generating the idea of ​​Ukrainian national and cultural revival. It was in Kharkov and Poltava at the Shevchenko holiday in 1900 that the famous speech of M. Mikhnovsky was delivered, published in Lvov under the title “Independent Ukraine,” where the idea of ​​an independent Ukrainian state was defended.

The actual return of the name of Nikolai Sumtsov to the wider cultural and scientific community occurred only in the early 90s of the twentieth century. Over the course of seven years (1991 - 1997), three candidate's dissertations devoted to the study of the literary, historical and ethnological heritage of the scientist were defended; Since 1995, Sumtsov readings have been held in his homeland on the basis of the Kharkov Historical Museum.

It was the Kharkov researcher V. Fradkin, during the Soviet period of the development of Ukrainian folk studies (and these were the 70s!), who dared to raise the question of the need for a comprehensive study of Sumtsov’s folk studies heritage and, accordingly, became one of the first Soviet researchers who emphasized the enormous scientific significance of this heritage, instead in order to look for flaws in it.

The future professor was born in St. Petersburg on April 18 (according to the old style, April 6. - O.M.) 1854 in the family of a Russified Cossack foreman. His parents were small landowners and had a farm in Boromla. The scientist’s great-grandfather, having built a hut, left an inscription on the mat: “Semyon Sumets.” Immediately after the birth of their son, the family moved to live in the Kharkov region. The future scientist received his secondary education at the 2nd Kharkov Gymnasium, where he acquired thorough knowledge in many areas - history, literature, Latin, geography, and the like. It is to the gymnasium that the researcher owes a thorough knowledge of French and German. But he studied Ukrainian literature and language on his own - he read the works of G. Kvitka, I. Kotlyarevsky and others, which were not part of the gymnasium curriculum, and was interested in Ukrainian folk songwriting. This, as he later wrote, lies the source of his future scientific preferences and interests.

He continued his further studies at the Faculty of History and Philology of Kharkov University. A number of his student works receive approving reviews from the teaching staff, and he receives a faculty gold medal for developing the topic “Historical Essay on Christian Demonology.” The scientific fate of this work was clearly reflected in the censorship pressure existing at that time. After graduating from the university, it was prepared for publication - a number of significant additions and changes were made, and a new section on Ukrainian demonology was added. However, imperial censorship did not give permission for its publication. The manuscript was also not returned to the scientist, and the student version of the work, as it turned out later, disappeared without a trace in the university archives. Using the remaining manuscripts, the scientist managed to rewrite and publish in 1878 one of the sections of the work entitled “Essay on the history of witchcraft in Western Europe.” This was N. Sumtsov’s first printed work.

After graduating from the university in 1875, Sumtsov, with the assistance of his teacher A. Potebnya, continued his studies abroad - at Heidelberg University, then returned to Kharkov University. In 1877 he received the title of privat-docent, in 1880 he defended his dissertation for the title of master “On wedding rites, mainly Russian.” In 1884, the scientist submitted his doctoral dissertation “Lazar Baranovich” to Kharkov University for consideration. She received a positive review and was allowed to defend herself. However, a denunciation flew from Kharkov to St. Petersburg, the author of which, Kharkov professor P. Bezsonov, accused the scientist of “Ukrainophile” sympathies. The public defense of the dissertation did not take place, as the scientist later wrote in his autobiography - “it did not pass for reasons that did not depend on either the author or the faculty.” According to another version, the dissertation was not allowed to be defended by the tsarist government, since in it N. Sumtsov gave a negative assessment of the activities of Moscow governors in Ukraine, which could not at all coincide with the theory of official circles. As we can see, in both the first and second versions, the immediate reason for the refusal was the researcher’s Ukrainian sympathies. A year later, he submitted his second dissertation, “Bread in Rituals and Songs,” for consideration by the faculty council, for which he received a Doctor of Science degree.

In 1888, the scientist was confirmed as an extraordinary professor, and in 1889 - as an ordinary professor. For his scientific achievements, he was elected to many scientific societies and organizations: the Imperial Moscow Society of Lovers of Natural History, Anthropology and Ethnography, the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, the Moscow Archaeological Society, the Poltava, Chernigov and Voronezh Archival Commissions, the Ekaterinoslav Scientific Research Archival Commission... N. Sumtsov was elected a full member of such influential scientific institutions as the Scientific Society named after. T. Shevchenko in Lvov, Ukrainian Scientific Society in Kyiv; he maintained friendly relations with many famous scientists from Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and the international organization “Free Thought”.

The following fact testifies to the civic position of Professor Sumtsov. In October 1906, the scientist made a public statement at the university faculty about the transition to teaching lectures in Ukrainian and became the first in Ukraine who dared to do this. This lecture was a real treat. On behalf of the Ukrainian students, a speech was made, where it was called the opening of a “new era” in the life of the Kharkov scientific center. The rector of the university, Dmitry Bagaliy, who was present at it, subsequently wrote that the lecture made a pleasant, strong impression both in its content and in the form of presentation of the material. It is clear that this initiative could not last long under the conditions of that time - the lecture caused great displeasure of the Minister of Public Education. An order was issued demanding to stop this sedition, which the university rector could not fail to comply with. But after the February events of 1917, the scientist finally switched to teaching lectures and writing scientific papers in Ukrainian.

In general, N. Sumtsov is one of the most active figures in the movement for Ukrainian national revival, in particular, Sloboda Ukraine; he is a persistent and consistent promoter of the Ukrainian language and literature, Ukrainian folk art. He saw one of his main tasks as a scientist in promoting national revival.

In July 1917, on behalf of the Council of Kharkov University, a special commission, which included N. Sumtsov, compiled a note on the Ukrainian issue. On October 12, it was accepted and sent to the Provisional Government. In it, the Council of Kharkov University spoke out “for granting the right to freely use the Ukrainian language in all local institutions, as well as for the free development of purely national Ukrainian culture.”

It was precisely the deep knowledge of Ukrainian traditional culture that led Nikolai Sumtsov to the conclusion that “life in Ukraine must take a different path. First of all, we need to turn to the revival and spread of Ukrainian national feeling and consciousness.” Almost a century has passed, but these words of the researcher, unfortunately, still remain relevant.

From Brockhaus:

Folklorist, from the nobles of the Kharkov province; born in 1854, educated at the 2nd Kharkov Gymnasium and at the Faculty of History and Philology of Kharkov University; in 1878 he defended his dissertation pro venia legendi based on the book by V.F. Odoevsky and began to read, as a private assistant professor, lectures on the history of Russian literature; in 1880 he defended his master's thesis "On wedding rites, mainly Russian", and in 1885 he defended his doctoral dissertation "Bread in rituals and songs". He is an ordinary professor at Kharkov University and a member of the board of trustees of the Kharkov educational district. In various publications, mainly in “Kyiv Antiquity”, “Ethnographic Review”, “Collection of the Kharkov Historical and Philological Society”, Sumarokov published about 300 studies, articles and notes, scientific and journalistic. Of his works on the history of Russian literature, the main ones are: “Ioanniky Galatovsky” (Kiev Antiquity, 1884), “Prince V.F. Odoevsky” (Kharkov, 1884), “Lazar Baranovich” (Kharkov, 1885), “Speech of Ivan Meleshko as a literary monument" ("Kyiv Starina", 1894), "A.S. Pushkin" (Kharkov, 1900). He owns a number of monographs about legends, stories, epic motifs, thoughts: “Essay on the history of witchcraft in Europe” (Kharkov, 1878), “On wedding rituals” (Kharkov, 1881), articles about Easter eggs, about cultural experiences, about curses (according to advantageously in "Kievskaya Starina"). On the history of art, Sumtsov’s monograph “Leonardo da Vinci” (“Collection of the Kharkov Historical and Philological Society”, 1900) stands out. Sumtsov also wrote a number of articles on pedagogy; under his editorship, a “Manual for organizing scientific and literary readings” was compiled (Kharkov, 1895 and 1896). The Academy of Sciences several times entrusted him with reviewing scientific works submitted for the Makaryev and Uvarov Prizes. He is the chairman of the historical and philological society at Kharkov University (of the 12 volumes of the “Collection” published by the society, 11 were edited by Sumtsov); stood at the head of the commission for organizing public readings for women; in 1892, on his initiative, a pedagogical department arose at the Historical and Philological Society and the publication of the “Proceedings” of this department began; actively participates in the work of the publishing committee of the Kharkov Literacy Society (compiled several brochures for public reading); For several four years he has been the head of the Kharkov City Duma. In this dictionary, Sumtsov contains articles on Little Russian and Yugoslav ethnography and literature.

Alma mater:

Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov(Russian doref.: Nikolai Θedorovich Sumtsov, 1854, St. Petersburg, Russian Empire - 1922, Kharkov, USSR) - Ukrainian ethnographer, literary critic, art historian, museum activist. Ideologist of Ukrainophilism. Corresponding member of the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (1905), in the year of the reign of Pavel Skoropadsky, he was elected one of the first academicians of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences.

Biography

Immediately after the death of his father, the family moved from the Northern capital to the Kharkov region. Nikolai Sumtsov received his education at the 2nd Kharkov Gymnasium (where he showed particular success in German and French). During his high school years, Sumtsov made his first recordings of folk songs of Slobozhanshchina (Ukrainian-language, mostly). Among his favorite writers were Ivan Kotlyarevsky and Kvitka-Osnovyanenko. Then Sumtsov studied at the Faculty of History and Philology of Kharkov University, from which he graduated in 1875. He studied in Germany for 2 or 3 years, and in 1878 he defended a dissertation pro venia legendi on Prince V.F. Odoevsky and began to lecture as a private lecturer on the history of Russian literature. Since 1880 - permanent secretary of the university. In 1880 he defended his master’s thesis “On wedding rites, mainly Russian”, and in 1885 he defended his doctorate “Bread in rituals and songs”.

Since 1887, Sumtsov was the chairman of the Historical and Philological Society at Kharkov University, and headed the commission for organizing public readings for women. Since 1888, he has been an ordinary professor at Kharkov University and a member of the board of trustees of the Kharkov educational district. The Academy of Sciences several times entrusted him with reviewing scientific works submitted for the Makaryev and Uvarov Prizes. In various publications, mainly in “Kyiv Antiquity”, “Ethnographic Review”, “Collection of Kharkov Historical and Philological. general”, “Russian Philological Bulletin”. Sumtsov published about 300 studies, articles and notes, scientific and journalistic. In 1892, on his initiative, the Pedagogical Department at the Historical and Philological Society arose and the publication of the “Proceedings” of this department began.

In 1896, Sumtsov discovered a unique Old Believer handwritten collection “The Spiritual Sword” - “Interpretations on the Apocalypse.” The latter essay includes criticism of the religious doctrine of the Freemasons.

In 1897-1919, Sumtsov headed the Historical and Philological Society at Kharkov University. Since 1905, Sumtsov was in charge of the University Ethnographic Museum. He actively participated in the work of the publishing committee of the Kharkov Literacy Society (compiled several brochures for public reading). He was a member of the Kharkov City Duma for several four years. Sumtsov is the author of articles on Little Russian and South Slavic ethnography and literature in the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary, numerous collections of Ukrainian folk poetry, and ethnographic research. He paid a lot of attention to the history of the Sloboda Cossack Army (SLKV), destroyed by Catherine the Second on July 26, 1765. He wrote a series of articles about kobzarism and outstanding kobzars: “Study of kobzarism” (1905), “Bandurist Kucherenko” (1907), etc. He attributed Bulgarian origin to the kobzar tradition.

Proceedings

Works on the history of Russian literature

Monographs about legends, stories, epic motives, thoughts

• Essay on the history of witchcraft in Europe - Kharkov, 1878.
• About wedding rituals - Kharkov, 1881.
• articles about Easter eggs, about cultural experiences, about curses - mostly. in “Kyiv antiquity.
• Thought about Alexei Popovich - 1894.
• Slobidsko-Ukrainian historical songs - Kharkov, 1918.

Ethnographic studies and collections

Monographs on art history and pedagogy

• “Leonardo da Vinci” (“Collected Kharkiv historical-philological society,” 1900).
• “A manual for organizing scientific and literary readings” (Khark., 1895 and 1896).
• "Cultural Experiences" (1889-1890).

Write a review of the article "Sumtsov, Nikolai Fedorovich"

Literature about Sumtsov

• // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.
• // Small Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 4 volumes - St. Petersburg. , 1907-1909.
• “Proceedings of ped. department Khark. historical-philol. about-va", vol. VII, Kharkov, 1902;
• Redin E. Professor Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov. - X., 1906
• “Collection Kharkov. historical-philol. about-va", vol. XVIII, 1909
• Sumtsov Mikola Fedorovich // Shudrya E. Descendants of folk mythology: Biobibliographical drawings / Ed. M. Selivachova. - Kiev: Ant, 2008. - pp. 13-16.
• Petrov V. Sumtsov as a historian of ethnography // ZIPhV UAN, book. 7-8. - K., 1926.
• Doroshenko V. Academician Mikola Sumtsov // Pratsi Ist.-Philol. Partnerships in Prazia, vol. I. - Prague, 1926.
• Mikola Fedorovich Sumtsov. Description of documentary materials of the special fund, part 794, 1876–1921. - K., 1965.

Links

	in Wikisource

• on the official website of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Notes

Excerpt characterizing Sumtsov, Nikolai Fedorovich

Natasha, in the morning, when they told her about the wound and the presence of Prince Andrei, decided that she should see him. She did not know what it was for, but she knew that the meeting would be painful, and she was even more convinced that it was necessary.
All day she lived only in the hope that at night she would see him. But now, when this moment came, the horror of what she would see came over her. How was he mutilated? What was left of him? Was he like that incessant groan of the adjutant? Yes, he was like that. He was in her imagination the personification of this terrible groan. When she saw an obscure mass in the corner and mistook his raised knees under the blanket for his shoulders, she imagined some kind of terrible body and stopped in horror. But an irresistible force pulled her forward. She carefully took one step, then another, and found herself in the middle of a small, cluttered hut. In the hut, under the icons, another person was lying on the benches (it was Timokhin), and two more people were lying on the floor (these were the doctor and the valet).
The valet stood up and whispered something. Timokhin, suffering from pain in his wounded leg, did not sleep and looked with all his eyes at the strange appearance of a girl in a poor shirt, jacket and eternal cap. The sleepy and frightened words of the valet; “What do you need, why?” - they only forced Natasha to quickly approach what was lying in the corner. No matter how scary or unlike a human this body was, she had to see it. She passed the valet: the burnt mushroom of the candle fell off, and she clearly saw Prince Andrei lying with his arms outstretched on the blanket, just as she had always seen him.
He was the same as always; but the inflamed color of his face, his sparkling eyes, fixed enthusiastically on her, and especially the tender child’s neck protruding from the folded collar of his shirt, gave him a special, innocent, childish appearance, which, however, she had never seen in Prince Andrei. She walked up to him and with a quick, flexible, youthful movement knelt down.
He smiled and extended his hand to her.

For Prince Andrei, seven days have passed since he woke up at the dressing station of the Borodino field. All this time he was in almost constant unconsciousness. The fever and inflammation of the intestines, which were damaged, in the opinion of the doctor traveling with the wounded man, should have carried him away. But on the seventh day he happily ate a slice of bread with tea, and the doctor noticed that the general fever had decreased. Prince Andrei regained consciousness in the morning. The first night after leaving Moscow it was quite warm, and Prince Andrei was left to spend the night in a carriage; but in Mytishchi the wounded man himself demanded to be carried out and to be given tea. The pain caused to him by being carried into the hut made Prince Andrei moan loudly and lose consciousness again. When they laid him on a camp bed, he lay for a long time with his eyes closed without moving. Then he opened them and quietly whispered: “What should I have for tea?” This memory for the small details of life amazed the doctor. He felt the pulse and, to his surprise and displeasure, noticed that the pulse was better. To his displeasure, the doctor noticed this because, from his experience, he was convinced that Prince Andrei could not live and that if he did not die now, he would only die with great suffering some time later. With Prince Andrei they were carrying the major of his regiment, Timokhin, who had joined them in Moscow with a red nose and was wounded in the leg in the same Battle of Borodino. With them rode a doctor, the prince's valet, his coachman and two orderlies.
Prince Andrey was given tea. He drank greedily, looking ahead at the door with feverish eyes, as if trying to understand and remember something.
- I don’t want anymore. Is Timokhin here? - he asked. Timokhin crawled towards him along the bench.
- I'm here, your Excellency.
- How's the wound?
- Mine then? Nothing. Is that you? “Prince Andrei began to think again, as if remembering something.
-Can I get a book? - he said.
- Which book?
- Gospel! I have no.
The doctor promised to get it and began asking the prince about how he felt. Prince Andrei reluctantly, but wisely answered all the doctor’s questions and then said that he needed to put a cushion on him, otherwise it would be awkward and very painful. The doctor and the valet lifted the greatcoat with which he was covered and, wincing at the heavy smell of rotten meat spreading from the wound, began to examine this terrible place. The doctor was very dissatisfied with something, changed something differently, turned the wounded man over so that he groaned again and, from the pain while turning, again lost consciousness and began to rave. He kept talking about getting this book for him as soon as possible and putting it there.
- And what does it cost you! - he said. “I don’t have it, please take it out and put it in for a minute,” he said in a pitiful voice.
The doctor went out into the hallway to wash his hands.
“Ah, shameless, really,” the doctor said to the valet, who was pouring water onto his hands. “I just didn’t watch it for a minute.” After all, you put it directly on the wound. It’s such a pain that I’m surprised how he endures it.
“It seems like we planted it, Lord Jesus Christ,” said the valet.
For the first time, Prince Andrei understood where he was and what had happened to him, and remembered that he had been wounded and how at that moment when the carriage stopped in Mytishchi, he asked to go to the hut. Confused again from pain, he came to his senses another time in the hut, when he was drinking tea, and then again, repeating in his memory everything that had happened to him, he most vividly imagined that moment at the dressing station when, at the sight of the suffering of a person he did not love, , these new thoughts came to him, promising him happiness. And these thoughts, although unclear and indefinite, now again took possession of his soul. He remembered that he now had new happiness and that this happiness had something in common with the Gospel. That's why he asked for the Gospel. But the bad situation that his wound had given him, the new upheaval, again confused his thoughts, and for the third time he woke up to life in the complete silence of the night. Everyone was sleeping around him. A cricket screamed through the entryway, someone was shouting and singing on the street, cockroaches rustled on the table and icons, in the autumn a thick fly beat on his headboard and near the tallow candle, which had burned like a large mushroom and stood next to him.
His soul was not in a normal state. A healthy person usually thinks, feels and remembers simultaneously about a countless number of objects, but he has the power and strength, having chosen one series of thoughts or phenomena, to focus all his attention on this series of phenomena. A healthy person, in a moment of deepest thought, breaks away to say a polite word to the person who has entered, and again returns to his thoughts. The soul of Prince Andrei was not in a normal state in this regard. All the forces of his soul were more active, clearer than ever, but they acted outside of his will. The most diverse thoughts and ideas simultaneously possessed him. Sometimes his thought suddenly began to work, and with such strength, clarity and depth with which it had never been able to act in a healthy state; but suddenly, in the middle of her work, she broke off, was replaced by some unexpected idea, and there was no strength to return to it.
“Yes, I have discovered a new happiness, inalienable from a person,” he thought, lying in a dark, quiet hut and looking ahead with feverishly open, fixed eyes. Happiness that is outside of material forces, outside of material external influences on a person, the happiness of one soul, the happiness of love! Every person can understand it, but only God can recognize and prescribe it. But how did God prescribe this law? Why son?.. And suddenly the train of these thoughts was interrupted, and Prince Andrei heard (not knowing whether he was in delirium or in reality he was hearing this), he heard some quiet, whispering voice, incessantly repeating in rhythm: “And drink piti drink” then “and ti tii” again “and piti piti piti” again “and ti ti.” At the same time, to the sound of this whispering music, Prince Andrei felt that some strange airy building made of thin needles or splinters was erected above his face, above the very middle. He felt (although it was difficult for him) that he had to diligently maintain his balance so that the building that was being erected would not collapse; but it still fell down and slowly rose again at the sounds of steadily whispering music. “It’s stretching!” stretches! stretches and everything stretches,” Prince Andrei said to himself. Along with listening to the whisper and feeling this stretching and rising building of needles, Prince Andrei saw in fits and starts the red light of a candle surrounded in a circle and heard the rustling of cockroaches and the rustling of a fly beating on the pillow and on his face. And every time the fly touched his face, it produced a burning sensation; but at the same time he was surprised by the fact that, hitting the very area of ​​​​the building erected on his face, the fly did not destroy it. But besides this, there was one more important thing. It was white by the door, it was a sphinx statue that was also crushing him.
“But maybe this is my shirt on the table,” thought Prince Andrei, “and these are my legs, and this is the door; but why is everything stretching and moving forward and piti piti piti and tit ti - and piti piti piti... - Enough, stop, please, leave it, - Prince Andrei begged someone heavily. And suddenly the thought and feeling emerged again with extraordinary clarity and strength.
“Yes, love,” he thought again with perfect clarity), but not the love that loves for something, for something or for some reason, but the love that I experienced for the first time, when, dying, I saw my enemy and still fell in love with him. I experienced that feeling of love, which is the very essence of the soul and for which no object is needed. I still experience this blissful feeling. Love your neighbors, love your enemies. To love everything - to love God in all manifestations. You can love a dear person with human love; but only an enemy can be loved with divine love. And from this I experienced such joy when I felt that I loved that person. What about him? Is he alive... Loving with human love, you can move from love to hatred; but divine love cannot change. Nothing, not death, nothing can destroy it. She is the essence of the soul. And how many people have I hated in my life. And of all the people, I have never loved or hated anyone more than her.” And he vividly imagined Natasha, not the way he had imagined her before, with only her charm, joyful for himself; but for the first time I imagined her soul. And he understood her feeling, her suffering, shame, repentance. Now for the first time he understood the cruelty of his refusal, saw the cruelty of his break with her. “If only it were possible for me to see her just one more time. Once, looking into these eyes, say..."

Sumtsov, Nikolai Fedorovich

Folklorist; from the nobles of the Kharkov province, born. in 1854; received his education at the 2nd Kharkov Gymnasium and at the Faculty of History and Philology of Kharkov University; in 1878 he defended his dissertation pro venia legendi on the book. V.F. Odoevsky and began to read lectures on the history of Russian literature as a private assistant professor; in 1880 he defended his master's thesis. “On wedding rituals, mainly Russian”, and in 1885 a doctoral dissertation “Bread in rituals and songs”. Consists of ord. prof. Kharkiv Univ. and a member of the board of trustees of the Kharkov educational institution. districts. In various publications, mainly in “Kyiv Antiquity”, “Ethnographic Review”, “Collection of the Kharkov Historical and Philological Society.”, S. published about 300 studies, articles and notes, scientific and journalistic. Of his works on the history of Russian literature, the main ones are: “Ioanniky Galatovsky” (“Kiev. Antiquity”, 1884), “Prince V. F. Odoevsky” (Khark., 1884), “Lazar Baranovich” (Khark., 1885), “The Speech of Ivan Meleshko as a Literary Monument” (Kiev. Antiquity, 1894), “A.S. Pushkin” (Kharkov, 1900). He owns a number of monographs on legends, stories, epic motifs, thoughts: “Essay on the history of witchcraft in Europe” (Khark., 1878), “On wedding rituals” (Khark., 1881), articles on Easter eggs, on cultural experiences, on curses (preferably in “Kyiv Antiquity”). On the history of art, a monograph by S. “Leonardo da Vinci” has been published (Collected Kharkiv History-Phil. Society, 1900). S. also wrote a number of articles on pedagogy; under his editorship, a “Manual for the organization of scientific and literary readings” was compiled (Khark., 1895 and 1896). The Academy of Sciences several times entrusted him with reviewing scientific works submitted for the Makaryev and Uvarov Prizes. He is the chairman of the Historical and Philological. total near Kharkovsk. Univ. (out of 12 volumes of the “Collection” published by the society, 11 were edited by S.); stood at the head of the commission for organizing public readings for women; in 1892, on his initiative, a pedagogical department was created under the Historical and Philological Department. total and the publication of the “Proceedings” of this department began; actively participates in the work of the publishing committee of the Kharkov Society. literacy (compiled several brochures for public reading); He has been a member of the Kharkov City Duma for several four years. In this dictionary, S. contains articles on Little Russian and Yugoslav ethnography and literature.

(Brockhaus)

Sumtsov, Nikolai Fedorovich

Literary historian and ethnographer. Genus. in St. Petersburg, in a noble family. In 1875 he graduated from the Faculty of Philology of Kharkov University, where from 1878 he was an associate professor and then a professor. Subsequently he was a corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences.

S. wrote a huge number (about 800) of works, published by Ch. arr. in various periodicals ("Kiev Antiquity", "Ukrainian Life", "Ethnographic Review", "Bulletin of the Kharkov Philological Society", etc.) and devoted to the study of oral poetry and folk life (rites, beliefs, etc.). S. also owns a number of articles about Russian writers - Pushkin, Griboyedov, A. Maikov, Zhukovsky, V. Odoevsky. S.'s works, which remained within the historical-cultural and comparative-historical schools, did not have major scientific significance and are now outdated. His summaries on certain issues of oral poetry ("The Raven in Folk Literature", "The Mouse in Folk Literature", etc.) and his works on the description of rituals retain a certain interest.

Bibliography: I. About wedding rituals, Kharkov, 1881; Book V. F. Odoevsky, Kharkov, 1884; Episodes about A.S. Pushkin, vol. 1-5, Warsaw, 1893-1897; A. S. Pushkin. Research, Kharkov, 1900; Essay on the history of witchcraft in Europe, Kharkov, 1878; Essays on folk life, Kharkov, 1902; V. A. Zhukovsky and N. V. Gogol, Kharkov, 1902; From Ukrainian antiquity, Kharkov, 1905.

II. Prof. N. F. Sumtsov, in the book: "Proceedings of the pedagogical department of the Kharkiv Historical and Philological Society", vol. VII, Kharkov, 1902; "Collection of Kharkov. Historical and Philological Society", vol. XVIII, 1909 (in both editions, see the bibliography of Sumtsov’s works).

(Lit. enc.)

Large biographical encyclopedia. 2009 .

See what “Sumtsov, Nikolai Fedorovich” is in other dictionaries:

Sumtsov (Nikolai Fedorovich) folklorist, from the nobles of the Kharkov province; born in 1854, educated at the 2nd Kharkov Gymnasium and at the Faculty of History and Philology of Kharkov University; in 1878 defended pro venia legendi... ... Biographical Dictionary

Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov Date of birth: April 6 (18), 1854 (1854 04 18 ... Wikipedia

Sumtsov, Nikolai Fedorovich Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov Date of birth: April 6 (18), 1854 (1854 04 18) Place of birth ... Wikipedia

Nikolai Fedorovich (1854 1922) literary historian and ethnographer. R. in St. Petersburg in a noble family. In 1875 he graduated from the Faculty of Philology of Kharkov University, where from 1878 he was an associate professor and then a professor. Subsequently he became a corresponding member... Literary encyclopedia

Nikolai Fedorovich folklorist, from the nobles of the Kharkov province; genus. in 1854, he received his education at the 2nd Kharkov gymnasium and in historical and philological studies. Faculty of Kharkov University; in 1878 he defended his dissertation pro venia legendi on the book. V.F.... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron

Nikolay Fedorovich Chernyavsky Ukrainian Mikola Fedorovich Chernyavsky Date of birth: December 22, 1867 (January 3, 1868) (1868 01 03) Place of birth ... Wikipedia

Spafari Milescu (Nikolai Gavrilovich) Moldavian boyar of Greek origin, born in 1635, received an excellent, but quite scholastic education in Constantinople and Italy, mastered the languages ​​Hellenic, Modern Greek, ... ... Biographical Dictionary

List of active members of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine since 1918. The list includes 597 scientists. The specialization of academicians is indicated according to scientific activity and it may differ from the activity in which the scientist... ... Wikipedia

Attraction 1st city (Ioanno Useknovenskoe) cemetery Kharkov Country Ukraine Kharkov st. Pushkinskaya, 81 ... Wikipedia

Full list of corresponding members of the Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, Imperial Academy of Sciences, Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, USSR Academy of Sciences, Russian Academy of Sciences). # A B C D E E F G H H I J K L M N O P R ... Wikipedia

Books

• Raven in Folk Literature, Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov. According to L.Z. Kolmachevsky, the only criterion for correct assessment of the originality and relative antiquity of animal tales can only be the principle of naturalness...