http://www.lib.ru

annotation

The History of Karamzin is one of the greatest monuments of Russian national culture.

The first volume of the "History of the Russian State" includes 10 chapters: I - On the peoples who have lived in Russia since ancient times, II - On the Slavs and other peoples, III - On the physical and moral character ancient Slavs, IV - Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, V - Oleg the ruler, VI - Prince Igor, VII - Prince Svyatoslav, VIII - Grand Duke Yaropolk, IX - Grand Duke Vladimir, X - On the state of Ancient Russia. The first volume of this set contains commentaries, an index of names, an index of geographical and ethnic names, an index of literary and documentary sources, church holidays and events and a list of abbreviations adopted in pointers.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin

"History of Russian Goverment"

Volume I

Foreword

History is in a sense holy book peoples: main, necessary; a mirror of their being and activity; the tablet of revelations and rules; the covenant of ancestors to posterity; addition, explanation of the present and an example of the future.

Rulers, Legislators act according to the instructions of History and look at its sheets, like navigators look at the blueprints of the seas. Human wisdom needs experiments, but life is short-lived. One must know how from time immemorial rebellious passions agitated civil society and in what ways the beneficent power of the mind curbed their stormy striving in order to establish order, agree on the benefits of people and bestow on them the happiness possible on earth.

But even a simple citizen should read History. She reconciles him with the imperfection of the visible order of things, as with an ordinary phenomenon in all ages; consoles in state disasters, testifying that there have been similar ones before, there have been even more terrible ones, and the State has not been destroyed; it nourishes a moral sense and with its righteous judgment disposes the soul to justice, which affirms our good and the consent of society.

Here is the benefit: what pleasures for the heart and mind! Curiosity is akin to man, both enlightened and wild. At the glorious Olympic Games, the noise was silent, and the crowds were silent around Herodotus, who was reading the traditions of the ages. Even without knowing the use of letters, the peoples already love History: the elder points the young man to a high grave and tells about the deeds of the Hero lying in it. The first experiments of our ancestors in the art of writing were devoted to the Faith and the Scriptures; darkened by the thick shadow of ignorance, the people eagerly listened to the tales of the Chroniclers. And I like fiction; but for complete pleasure one must deceive oneself and think that they are the truth. History, opening the tombs, raising the dead, putting life into their hearts and words into their mouths, rebuilding the Kingdoms from decay, and presenting to the imagination a series of centuries with their distinct passions, morals, deeds, expands the limits of our own being; By its creative power we live with people of all times, we see and hear them, we love and hate them; not yet thinking about the benefit, we already enjoy the contemplation of diverse cases and characters that occupy the mind or nourish the sensitivity.

If any History, even unskillfully written, is pleasant, as Pliny says: all the more domestic. The true Cosmopolitan is a metaphysical being, or so extraordinary phenomenon that there is no need to talk about him, neither praise nor condemn him. We are all citizens, in Europe and in India, in Mexico and in Abyssinia; the personality of each is closely connected with the fatherland: we love it, because we love ourselves. Let the Greeks and Romans captivate the imagination: they belong to the family of the human race and are not strangers to us in their virtues and weaknesses, glory and disasters; but the name Russian has a special charm for us: my heart beats even stronger for Pozharsky than for Themistocles or Scipio. The World History with great memories adorns the world for the mind, and the Russian adorns the fatherland, where we live and feel. How attractive are the banks of the Volkhov, Dnieper, Don, when we know that in ancient times happened to them! Not only Novgorod, Kyiv, Vladimir, but also the huts of Yelets, Kozelsk, Galich become curious monuments and mute objects - eloquent. The shadows of past centuries paint pictures everywhere before us.

In addition to a special dignity for us, the sons of Russia, her chronicles have something in common. Let's take a look at the space of this only Power: the thought becomes numb; Never in its grandeur could Rome equal it, dominating from the Tiber to the Caucasus, the Elbe and the sands of Africa. Isn't it amazing how lands separated by eternal barriers of nature, immeasurable deserts and impenetrable forests, cold and hot climates, like Astrakhan and Lapland, Siberia and Bessarabia, could form one State with Moscow? Is the mixture of its inhabitants, of different tribes, varieties, and so remote from each other in degrees of education, less wonderful? Like America, Russia has its Wilds; like other European countries, is the fruit of a long-term civil life. You don’t have to be Russian: you just need to think in order to read with curiosity the traditions of a people who, with courage and courage, gained dominance over a ninth part of the world, discovered countries hitherto unknown to anyone, bringing them into common system Geography, History, and enlightened by the Divine Faith, without violence, without villainy, used by other zealots of Christianity in Europe and America, but the only example of the best.

We agree that the deeds described by Herodotus, Thucydides, Livy are more entertaining for any non-Russian in general, representing more spiritual strength and a livelier play of passions: for Greece and Rome were popular Powers and more enlightened than Russia; however, we can safely say that some cases, pictures, characters of our history are no less curious than ancient ones. Such are the essence of the exploits of Svyatoslav, the thunderstorm of Batyev, the uprising of the Russians at the Donskoy, the fall of Novgorod, the capture of Kazan, the triumph of popular virtues during the Interregnum. Giants of dusk, Oleg and son Igorev; the simple-hearted knight, the blind man Vasilko; friend of the fatherland, philanthropic Monomakh; Mstislav Brave, terrible in battle and an example of gentleness in the world; Mikhail of Tver, so famous for his generous death, the ill-fated, truly courageous, Alexander Nevsky; The hero is a young man, the winner of Mamaev, in the lightest outline, they strongly affect the imagination and heart. One reign of John III is a rare wealth for history: according to at least I do not know a Monarch worthy to live and shine in her sanctuary. The rays of his glory fall on the cradle of Peter - and between these two Autocrats is the amazing John IV, Godunov, worthy of his happiness and misfortune, the strange False Dmitry, and behind the host of valiant Patriots, Boyars and citizens, the mentor of the throne, the High Hierarch Filaret with the Sovereign son, the light-bearer in the darkness our state disasters, and Tsar Alexy, the wise father of the Emperor, whom Europe called the Great. Or all New story must remain silent, or the Russian has the right to attention.

I know that the battles of our specific civil strife, thundering incessantly in the space of five centuries, are of little importance for the mind; that this subject is neither rich in thought for the Pragmatist, nor in beauty for the painter; but History is not a novel, and the world is not a garden where everything should be pleasant: it depicts the real world. We see on the ground majestic mountains and waterfalls flowering meadows and valleys; but how many barren sands and dull steppes! However, traveling in general is kind to a person with a lively feeling and imagination; in the very deserts there are charming views.

Let us not be superstitious in our high concept about the writings of antiquity. If we exclude fictitious speeches from the immortal creation of Thucydides, what remains? A naked story about the internecine strife of the Greek cities: the crowds are villainous, slaughtered for the honor of Athens or Sparta, as we have for the honor of Monomakhov or Oleg's house. Not much difference, if we forget that these half-tigers spoke the language of Homer, had Sophocles' Tragedies and statues of Phidias. Does the thoughtful painter Tacitus always present us with the great, the striking? With tenderness we look at Agrippina, carrying the ashes of Germanicus; with pity for the bones and armor of the Varov Legion scattered in the forest; with horror at the bloody feast of the frantic Romans, illuminated by the flames of the Capitol; with disgust at the monster of tyranny, devouring the remnants of the Republican virtues in the capital of the world: but the boring litigation of cities for the right to have a priest in this or that temple and the dry Obituary of Roman officials occupy many pages in Tacitus. He envied Titus Livius for the richness of the subject; and Livy, smooth, eloquent, sometimes fills entire books with news of clashes and robberies, which are hardly more important than the Polovtsian raids. - In a word, reading all the Stories requires some patience, more or less rewarded with pleasure.

The historian of Russia could, of course, having said a few words about the origin of its main people, about the composition of the State, present the important, most memorable features of antiquity in a skillful picture and start detailed a narrative from the time of John, or from the fifteenth century, when one of the greatest state works in the world took place: he would easily have written 200 or 300 eloquent, pleasant pages, instead of many books, difficult for the Author, tedious for the Reader. But these reviews, these paintings do not replace chronicles, and whoever read only Robertson's Introduction to the History of Charles V does not yet have a solid, true concept about Europe in the Middle Ages. It is not enough that an intelligent person, looking over the monuments of centuries, will tell us his notes: we ourselves must see the actions and those who act - then we know History. Will the boastfulness of the Author's eloquence and the bliss of the Readers condemn the deeds and fate of our ancestors to eternal oblivion? They suffered, and with their misfortunes they made our greatness, and we do not want to hear about it, nor know whom they loved, whom they blamed for their misfortunes? Foreigners may miss what is boring to them in our ancient History; but aren't good Russians obliged to have more patience, following the rule of state morality, which puts respect for ancestors in the dignity of an educated citizen? .. So I thought, and wrote about Igor, about Vsevolodakh, as contemporary looking at them in the dim mirror of the ancient Chronicle with tireless attention, with sincere reverence; and if, instead of alive , whole images represented only shadows , in excerpts, then it is not my fault: I could not supplement the Chronicles!

There is three kind of history: first modern, for example, Thukidides, where an obvious witness speaks of incidents; second, like Tacitov, is based on fresh verbal traditions at a time close to the described actions; third extracted only from monuments, like ours until the 18th century. (Only with Peter the Great do verbal traditions begin for us: we heard from our fathers and grandfathers about him, about Catherine I, Peter II, Anna, Elizabeth a lot that is not in the books. (Hereinafter, notes by N. M. Karamzin are marked. )) AT first and second the mind shines, the imagination of the Writer, who chooses the most curious, blooms, decorates, sometimes creates without fear of reproof; will say: i saw it that way , so heard- and silent Criticism does not prevent the Reader from enjoying excellent descriptions. The third the genus is the most limited for talent: not a single trait can be added to the known; one cannot question the dead; we say that our contemporaries have betrayed us; we are silent if they kept silent - or fair Criticism will stop the mouth of the frivolous Historian, who is obliged to present only what has been preserved from centuries in the Chronicles, in the Archives. The ancients had the right to invent speeches in accordance with the character of people, with circumstances: a right that is invaluable for true talents, and Livy, using it, enriched his books with the power of the mind, eloquence, and wise instructions. But we, contrary to the opinion of Abbot Mabley, cannot now ordain in History. New advances in reason have given us the clearest conception of its property and purpose; common sense established unaltered rules and forever excommunicated the Epistle from the Poem, from the flower gardens of eloquence, leaving the former to be a true mirror of the past, a true recall of the words really spoken by the Heroes of the ages. The most beautiful fictitious speech will disgrace the History, dedicated not to the glory of the Writer, not to the pleasure of the Readers, and not even to moralizing wisdom, but only to the truth, which already becomes a source of pleasure and benefit by itself. Both Natural and Civil History do not tolerate fiction, depicting what is or was, and not what to be. could. But History, they say, is filled with lies: let us say better that in it, as in human affairs, there is an admixture of lies, but the character of truth is always more or less preserved; and this is enough for us to compose for ourselves general concept about people and activities. The more exacting and stricter is Criticism; it is all the more impermissible for the Historian, for the benefit of his talent, to deceive conscientious Readers, to think and speak for the Heroes, who have long been silent in the graves. What is left for him, chained, so to speak, to the dry charters of antiquity? order, clarity, strength, painting. He creates from the given substance: he will not produce gold from copper, but he must also purify copper; must know the whole price and property; to reveal the great where it is hidden, and not to give the small the rights of the great. There is no object so poor that Art can no longer mark itself in it in a way pleasing to the mind.

Until now, the Ancients serve as models for us. No one has surpassed Livy in the beauty of the story, Tacitus in strength: that's the main thing! Knowledge of all the rights in the world, German learning, Voltaire's wit, not even Machiavele's deepest thought in the Historian can replace the talent to portray actions. The English are famous for Hume, the Germans for John Muller, and rightly so his Introduction, which can be called a Geological Poem): both are worthy co-workers of the Ancients, not imitators: for every age, every nation gives special colors to the skilful Writer of Genesis. “Do not imitate Tacitus, but write as he would write in your place!” There is a rule of Genius. Did Muller, often inserting moral apothegmas like Tacitus? Don't know; but this desire to shine with the mind, or seem profound, is almost contrary to true taste. The historian argues only in the explanation of cases, where his thoughts, as it were, complement the description. Note that these apothegms are for solid minds either half-truths, or very ordinary truths that have no great price in History, where we look for actions and characters. There is skillful storytelling duty everyday writer, but a good separate thought - gift: the reader demands the first and thanks for the second, when his demand has already been fulfilled. Didn't the prudent Hume also think so, sometimes very prolific in explaining the reasons, but to the point of avarice in thinking? The historian, whom we would call the most perfect of the New, were it not for shunned England, did not boast too much of impartiality and thus did not cool his elegant creation! In Thucydides we always see an Athenian Greek, in Libya we always see a Roman, and we are captivated by them, and we believe them. Feeling: we, our enlivens the narrative - and just as a gross predilection, a consequence of a weak mind or a weak soul, is unbearable in the Historian, so love for the fatherland will give his brush heat, strength, charm. Where there is no love, there is no soul.

I turn to my work. Allowing myself no invention, I sought expressions in my mind, and thoughts only in monuments: I sought spirit and life in smoldering charters; I wanted to unite what has been given to us for centuries into a system, clear by the harmonious convergence of parts; depicted not only the disasters and glory of war, but everything that is part of the civil existence of people: the successes of reason, art, customs, laws, industry; was not afraid to speak with dignity about what was respected by the ancestors; wanted, without betraying his age, without pride and ridicule, to describe the ages of spiritual infancy, gullibility, fables; I wanted to present both the character of the time and the character of the Chroniclers: for one seemed to me necessary for the other. The less news I found, the more I valued and used what I found; the less he chose: for it is not the poor, but the rich who elect. It was necessary either to say nothing, or to say everything about such and such a Prince, so that he would live in our memory not with one dry name, but with a certain moral physiognomy. Diligently exhausting materials of ancient Russian history, I encouraged myself with the thought that in the narrative of distant times there is some inexplicable charm for our imagination: there are the sources of Poetry! Our gaze, in contemplation of the great space, does not usually strive - past everything close, clear - to the end of the horizon, where shadows thicken, fade and impenetrability begins?

The reader will notice that I am describing the acts not apart, by years and days, but copulating them for the most comfortable impression in memory. The historian is not a chronicler: the latter looks only at time, and the former at the quality and connection of deeds: he can make a mistake in the distribution of places, but he must indicate his place to everything.

The multitude of notes and extracts I have made terrifies me myself. Happy the Ancients: they did not know this petty labor, in which half the time is lost, the mind is bored, the imagination withers: a painful sacrifice made credibility but necessary! If all the materials in our country were collected, published, purified by Criticism, then I would only have to refer; but when most of them are in manuscript, in the dark; when hardly anything has been processed, explained, agreed - one must arm oneself with patience. It is up to the Reader to look into this motley mixture, which sometimes serves as evidence, sometimes as an explanation or addition. For hunters, everything is curious: an old name, a word; the slightest feature of antiquity gives rise to considerations. Since the 15th century, I have been writing less: the sources are multiplying and becoming clearer.

A learned and glorious man, Schlozer, said that our history has five main periods; that Russia from 862 to Svyatopolk should be called nascent(Nascens), from Yaroslav to the Mughals divided(Divisa), from Batu to John oppressed(Oppressa), from John to Peter the Great victorious(Victrix), from Peter to Catherine II prosperous. This idea seems to me more witty than solid. 1) The age of St. Vladimir was already the age of power and glory, and not of birth. 2) State shared before 1015. 3) If according to the internal state and external actions of Russia it is necessary to designate periods, then is it possible to mix at one time the Grand Duke Dimitri Alexandrovich and the Donskoy, silent slavery with victory and glory? 4) The Age of Pretenders is marked more by misfortune than by victory. Much better, truer, more modest, our history is divided into ancient from Rurik to John III, on middle from John to Peter, and new from Peter to Alexander. The Destiny system was a character first era, unanimity - second, changing civil customs - third. However, there is no need to set limits where the places serve as a living tract.

With willingness and zeal, having devoted twelve years, and the best time my life, for the composition of these eight or nine volumes, I can weakly desire praise and fear condemnation; but I dare say that this is not the main thing for me. Love of glory alone could not give me the constant, long-term firmness necessary in such a matter, if I did not find true pleasure in the work itself and had no hope of being useful, that is, of making Russian History known to many, even to my strict judges. .

Thanks to everyone, both the living and the dead, whose intelligence, knowledge, talents, art served as a guide to me, I entrust myself to the indulgence of good fellow citizens. We love one thing, we desire one thing: we love the fatherland; we wish him prosperity even more than glory; we wish that the firm foundation of our greatness never change; Yes, the rules of the wise Autocracy and the Holy Faith more and more strengthen the union of the parts; May Russia bloom... at least for a long time, for a long time, if there is nothing immortal on earth except the human soul!

December 7, 1815. On the sources of Russian history until the 17th century

These sources are:

I. Chronicles. Nestor, monk of the Monastery of Kiev Pechersk, nicknamed father Russian History, lived in the XI century: gifted with a curious mind, he listened with attention to the oral traditions of antiquity, folk historical tales; I saw the monuments, the graves of the Princes; talked with the nobles, the elders of Kiev, travelers, residents of other regions of Russia; read the Byzantine Chronicles, church notes and became first chronicler of our fatherland. Second, named Vasily, also lived at the end of the 11th century: used by Vladimir Prince David in negotiations with the unfortunate Vasilko, he described to us the generosity of the latter and other modern deeds of southwestern Russia. All other chroniclers remained for us nameless; one can only guess where and when they lived: for example, one in Novgorod, Priest, consecrated by Bishop Nifont in 1144; another in Vladimir on the Klyazma under Vsevolod the Great; the third in Kyiv, a contemporary of Rurik II; the fourth in Volhynia around 1290; the fifth at the same time in Pskov. Unfortunately, they did not say everything that is curious for posterity; but, fortunately, they did not invent, and the most reliable of the Chroniclers of foreign countries agree with them. This almost uninterrupted chain of Chronicles goes up to the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich. Some of them have not yet been published or have been printed very incorrectly. I was looking for ancient lists: the best of Nestor and his successors are charatees, Pushkin and Trinity, XIV and XV centuries. Notes are also worthy. Ipatiev, Khlebnikov, Koenigsberg, Rostov, Voskresensky, Lvov, Arkhivsky. In each of them there is something special and truly historical, introduced, as one might think, by contemporaries or from their notes. Nikonovsky most distorted by insertions of meaningless scribes, but in the XIV century he reports probable additional news about the Tver Principality, then it already resembles others, yielding to them, however, in good condition, - for example, Arkhivsky .

II. power book, composed in the reign of Ivan the Terrible according to the thought and instruction of Metropolitan Macarius. It is a selection from the annals with some additions, more or less reliable, and is called by this name for what is indicated in it. degree, or generations of sovereigns.

III. So called Chronographs, or General history according to the Byzantine Chronicles, with the introduction of our own, very brief. They have been curious since the 17th century: there are already many detailed contemporary news that is not in the annals.

IV. Lives of the Saints, in patericon, in prologues, in menaias, in special manuscripts. Many of these Biographies have been written in modern times; some, however, for example, St. Vladimir, Boris and Gleb, Theodosius, are in the charate Prologues; and the Patericon was composed in the thirteenth century.

v. Special writings: for example, the legend of Dovmont of Pskov, Alexander Nevsky; contemporary notes by Kurbsky and Palitsyn; news about the Pskov siege in 1581, about Metropolitan Philip, and so on.

VI. Discharges, or the distribution of governors and regiments: start from the time of John III. These handwritten books are not rare.

VII. Pedigree book: there is printed; the most correct and complete, written in 1660, is stored in the Synodal Library.

VIII. Written Catalogs of metropolitans and bishops. - These two sources are not very reliable; they need to be compared with the annals.

IX. Epistles of the Saints to princes, clergy and laity; the most important of these is the Epistle to Shemyaka; but in others there is much to remember.

X. The Ancients coins, medals, inscriptions, fairy tales, songs, proverbs: the source is scarce, but not completely useless.

XI. Certificates. The oldest authentic writing was written around 1125. Archival New Year's letters and soul records princes begin from the XIII century; this source is already rich, but there is still much richer.

XII. collection of so-called Article lists, or Embassy Affairs, and letters in the Archives of the Foreign Collegium from the 15th century, when both incidents and methods for describing them give the Reader the right to demand even greater satisfaction from the Historian. - They are added to this property of ours.

XIII. Foreign contemporary chronicles: Byzantine, Scandinavian, German, Hungarian, Polish, along with the news of travelers.

XIV. Government papers foreign archives : most of all I used extracts from Koenigsberg.

Here are the materials of History and the subject of Historical Criticism!

T ores of all life. Over a work of 12 volumes, the poet, writer, creator of the first Russian literary magazine and the last historiographer of Russia worked for more than twenty years. He managed to give the historical work a "light style" and create a real historical bestseller of his time. Natalya Letnikova studied the history of the creation of the famous multi-volume book.

From travel notes to the study of history. The author of Letters from a Russian Traveler, Poor Liza, Martha Posadnitsa, a successful publisher of the Moscow Journal and Vestnik Evropy, became seriously interested in history at the beginning of the 19th century. Studying chronicles and rare manuscripts, I decided to combine invaluable knowledge in one work. He set the task - to create a complete printed public presentation of Russian history.

Historiographer Russian Empire . Emperor Alexander I appointed Karamzin to the honorary position of the country's chief historian. The writer received an annual pension of two thousand rubles and admission to all libraries. Karamzin did not hesitate to leave the Vestnik, which brought in three times as much, and devoted his life to The History of the Russian State. As Prince Vyazemsky noted, “he took his hair as a historian.” Karamzin preferred the archives to secular salons, and the study of documents to invitations to balls.

historical knowledge and literary style . Not just a statement of facts mixed with dates, but a highly artistic history book for a wide range readers. Karamzin worked not only with primary sources, but also with the style. The author himself called his work " historical poem". The scientist hid extracts, quotations, retellings of documents in notes - in fact, Karamzin created a book within a book for those who are especially interested in history.

First historical bestseller. Eight volumes the author gave to print only thirteen years after the start of work. Three printing houses were involved: military, senatorial, medical. The lion's share of the time was taken by proofreading. Three thousand copies came out a year later - at the beginning of 1818. sold out historical volumes no worse than the infamous romance novels: the first edition sold out to readers in just a month.

Scientific discoveries between this and then. At work, Nikolai Mikhailovich discovered truly unique sources. It was Karamzin who found the Ipatiev Chronicle. The notes of Volume VI included excerpts from Afanasy Nikitin's Journey Beyond the Three Seas. “Until now, geographers did not know that the honor of one of the oldest described European travels to India belongs to Russia of the Ioannian century ... It (the journey) proves that Russia in the 15th century had its Taverniers and Chardenis, less enlightened, but equally bold and enterprising”- wrote the historian.

Pushkin about the work of Karamzin. “Everyone, even secular women, rushed to read the history of their fatherland, hitherto unknown to them. She was a new discovery for them. Ancient Russia, seemed to be found by Karamzin, like America - by Columbus. For some time they didn’t talk about anything else ... "- wrote Pushkin. Alexander Sergeevich dedicated the tragedy "Boris Godunov" to the memory of the historiographer, he drew material for his work, including from Karamzin's "History".

Grade at the highest state level . Alexander I not only gave Karamzin the broadest authority to read "all ancient manuscripts relating to Russian antiquities" and a monetary allowance. The emperor personally financed the first edition of the History of the Russian State. At the highest command, the book was sent to ministries and embassies. The cover letter said that the sovereign's husbands and diplomats are obliged to know their history.

Whatever the event. Waiting for the release of a new book. The second edition of the eight-volume book was published a year later. Each subsequent volume became an event. Historical facts discussed in society. So Volume IX, dedicated to the era of Grozny, became a real shock. "Well, Grozny! Well, Karamzin! I don’t know what to be more surprised at, the tyranny of John or the gift of our Tacitus.”, - wrote the poet Kondraty Ryleev, noting both the horrors of the oprichnina themselves and the beautiful style of the historian.

The last historiographer of Russia. The title appeared under Peter the Great. The honorary title was awarded to Gerhard Miller, a native of Germany, an archivist and author of the History of Siberia, who is also famous for Miller's portfolios. The author of the History of Russia from Ancient Times, Prince Mikhail Shcherbatov, held a high post. Claimed by him who gave his historical work 30 years Sergey Solovyov and major historian the beginning of the twentieth century, Vladimir Ikonnikov, but, despite petitions, the title was never received. So Nikolai Karamzin remained the last historiographer of Russia.

"History of Karamzin" - one of greatest monuments Russian national culture.

The first volume of the "History of the Russian State" includes 10 chapters: I - On the peoples who have lived in Russia since ancient times, II - On the Slavs and other peoples, III - On the physical and moral character of the ancient Slavs, IV - Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, V - Oleg the ruler, VI - Prince Igor, VII - Prince Svyatoslav, VIII - Grand Duke Yaropolk, IX - Grand Duke Vladimir, X - On the state of Ancient Russia. The first volume of this set contains comments, an index of names, an index of geographical and ethnic names, an index of literary and documentary sources, church holidays and events, and a list of abbreviations used in indexes.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin
"History of Russian Goverment"
Volume I

Foreword

History is, in a certain sense, the sacred book of nations: the main, necessary; a mirror of their being and activity; the tablet of revelations and rules; the covenant of ancestors to posterity; addition, explanation of the present and an example of the future.

Rulers, Legislators act according to the instructions of History and look at its sheets, like navigators look at the blueprints of the seas. Human wisdom needs experiments, but life is short-lived. One must know how from time immemorial rebellious passions agitated civil society and in what ways the beneficent power of the mind curbed their stormy striving in order to establish order, agree on the benefits of people and bestow on them the happiness possible on earth.

But even a simple citizen should read History. She reconciles him with the imperfection of the visible order of things, as with an ordinary phenomenon in all ages; consoles in state disasters, testifying that there have been similar ones before, there have been even more terrible ones, and the State has not been destroyed; she feeds moral sense and with its righteous judgment disposes the soul to justice, which affirms our good and the consent of society.

Here is the benefit: what pleasures for the heart and mind! Curiosity is akin to man, both enlightened and wild. At the glorious Olympic Games, the noise was silent, and the crowds were silent around Herodotus, who was reading the traditions of the ages. Even without knowing the use of letters, the peoples already love History: the elder points the young man to a high grave and tells about the deeds of the Hero lying in it. The first experiments of our ancestors in the art of writing were devoted to the Faith and the Scriptures; darkened by the thick shadow of ignorance, the people eagerly listened to the tales of the Chroniclers. And I like fiction; but for complete pleasure one must deceive oneself and think that they are the truth. History, opening the tombs, raising the dead, putting life into their hearts and words into their mouths, rebuilding the Kingdoms from decay, and presenting to the imagination a series of centuries with their distinct passions, morals, deeds, expands the limits of our own being; her creative power we live with people of all times, we see and hear them, we love and hate them; not yet thinking about the benefit, we already enjoy the contemplation of diverse cases and characters that occupy the mind or nourish the sensitivity.

If any History, even unskillfully written, is pleasant, as Pliny says: all the more domestic. The true Cosmopolitan is a metaphysical being or a phenomenon so extraordinary that there is no need to speak about him, neither praise nor condemn him. We are all citizens, in Europe and in India, in Mexico and in Abyssinia; the personality of each is closely connected with the fatherland: we love it, because we love ourselves. Let the Greeks and Romans captivate the imagination: they belong to the family of the human race and are not strangers to us in their virtues and weaknesses, glory and disasters; but the name Russian has a special charm for us: my heart beats even stronger for Pozharsky than for Themistocles or Scipio. World History adorns the world with great memories for the mind, and Russian adorns the fatherland, where we live and feel. How attractive are the banks of the Volkhov, Dnieper, Don, when we know what happened on them in ancient times! Not only Novgorod, Kyiv, Vladimir, but also the huts of Yelets, Kozelsk, Galich become curious monuments and mute objects - eloquent. The shadows of past centuries paint pictures everywhere before us.

In addition to a special dignity for us, the sons of Russia, her chronicles have something in common. Let's take a look at the space of this only Power: the thought becomes numb; Never in its grandeur could Rome equal it, dominating from the Tiber to the Caucasus, the Elbe and the sands of Africa. Isn't it amazing how lands separated by eternal barriers of nature, immeasurable deserts and impenetrable forests, cold and hot climates, like Astrakhan and Lapland, Siberia and Bessarabia, could form one State with Moscow? Is the mixture of its inhabitants, of different tribes, varieties, and so remote from each other in degrees of education, less wonderful? Like America, Russia has its Wilds; like other European countries, it is the fruits of a long-term civil life. You don’t have to be Russian: you just need to think in order to read with curiosity the traditions of a people who, with courage and courage, gained dominance over a ninth part of the world, discovered countries hitherto unknown to anyone, introducing them into the general system of Geography, History, and enlightened them with Divine Faith, without violence , without the atrocities used by other zealots of Christianity in Europe and America, but the only example of the best.

We agree that the deeds described by Herodotus, Thucydides, Livy, for any non-Russian in general, are more entertaining, representing more spiritual strength and a livelier play of passions: for Greece and Rome were popular Powers and more enlightened than Russia; however, we can safely say that some cases, pictures, characters of our history are no less curious than ancient ones. Such are the essence of the exploits of Svyatoslav, the thunderstorm of Batyev, the uprising of the Russians at the Donskoy, the fall of Novgorod, the capture of Kazan, the triumph of popular virtues during the Interregnum. Giants of dusk, Oleg and son Igorev; the simple-hearted knight, the blind man Vasilko; friend of the fatherland, philanthropic Monomakh; Mstislav Brave, terrible in battle and an example of gentleness in the world; Mikhail of Tver, so famous for his generous death, the ill-fated, truly courageous, Alexander Nevsky; The hero is a young man, the winner of Mamaev, in the lightest outline, they strongly affect the imagination and heart. One reign of John III is a rare wealth for history: at least I do not know a Monarch worthy to live and shine in her sanctuary. The rays of his glory fall on the cradle of Peter - and between these two Autocrats is the amazing John IV, Godunov, worthy of his happiness and misfortune, the strange False Dmitry, and behind the host of valiant Patriots, Boyars and citizens, the mentor of the throne, the High Hierarch Filaret with the Sovereign son, the light-bearer in the darkness our state disasters, and Tsar Alexy, the wise father of the Emperor, whom Europe called the Great. Either the entire New History should remain silent, or the Russian should have the right to attention.

I know that the battles of our specific civil strife, thundering incessantly in the space of five centuries, are of little importance for the mind; that this subject is neither rich in thought for the Pragmatist, nor in beauty for the painter; but History is not a novel, and the world is not a garden where everything should be pleasant: it depicts the real world. We see majestic mountains and waterfalls on earth, flowering meadows and valleys; but how many barren sands and dull steppes! However, traveling in general is kind to a person with a lively feeling and imagination; in the very deserts there are charming views.

Let us not be superstitious in our lofty conception of the Ancient Scriptures. If we exclude fictitious speeches from the immortal creation of Thucydides, what remains? A naked story about the internecine strife of the Greek cities: the crowds are villainous, slaughtered for the honor of Athens or Sparta, as we have for the honor of Monomakhov or Oleg's house. There is not much difference, if we forget that these half-tigers spoke the language of Homer, had Sophocles' Tragedies and statues of Phidias. Does the thoughtful painter Tacitus always present us with the great, the striking? With tenderness we look at Agrippina, carrying the ashes of Germanicus; with pity for the bones and armor of the Varov Legion scattered in the forest; with horror at the bloody feast of the frantic Romans, illuminated by the flames of the Capitol; with disgust at the monster of tyranny, devouring the remnants of the Republican virtues in the capital of the world: but the boring litigation of cities for the right to have a priest in this or that temple and the dry Obituary of Roman officials occupy many pages in Tacitus. He envied Titus Livius for the richness of the subject; and Livy, smooth, eloquent, sometimes fills entire books with news of clashes and robberies, which are hardly more important than the Polovtsian raids. - In a word, reading all the Stories requires some patience, more or less rewarded with pleasure.

Karamzin from its very appearance was an immediate and universal success. She broke records in sales. The vast majority of readers took it as a canonical picture of the Russian past. Even the liberal minority, who did not like her main thesis about the effectiveness of the autocracy, was carried away by the literary charm of the presentation and the novelty of the facts. Since then, critical views have changed, and today no one will survive the enthusiasm of the public who read this in 1818. Karamzin's historical view is narrow and distorted by the character of his worldview, specific to the 18th century. He studied exclusively (or almost exclusively) political activity Russian sovereigns. The Russian people are practically left without attention, which is emphasized by the very name - History of Russian Goverment. The judgments that he makes about kings (since those of lower rank do not attract his attention too much) are often composed in a moralistic, sentimental spirit. His fundamental idea of ​​the redeeming virtues of autocracy distorts the reading of some facts.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. Portrait by Tropinin

But these disadvantages also good side. By forcing the reader to perceive Russian history as a whole, Karamzin helped him understand its unity. By reasoning about the behavior of sovereigns from the point of view of a moralist, he got the opportunity to condemn them for selfish or despotic policies. Focusing on the actions of the princes, he gave his work a dramatic effect: most of all, the reader's imagination was struck by the stories of individual monarchs, no doubt based on solid facts, but presented and combined with the art of a real playwright. The most famous of them is the story of Boris Godunov, which became the great tragic myth of Russian poetry and the source of Pushkin's tragedy and Mussorgsky's folk drama.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. Video lecture

Style Stories rhetorical and eloquent. This is a compromise with literary conservatives, who are in favor of what he wrote history, forgave Karamzin all his previous sins. But in the main, it nevertheless represents the development of the French, in the spirit of the 18th century, style of the young Karamzin. It is abstract and sentimental. It avoids, or rather misses, all local and historical overtones. The choice of words is designed for universalization and humanization, not for individualization. ancient Russia, and monotonously rounded rhythmic cadences create a sense of continuity, but not complexity, of the story. Contemporaries loved this style. Some of the few critics did not like his pomp and sentimentality, but on the whole the whole era was fascinated by him and recognized him. greatest achievement Russian prose.

Genre: ,

Language:
Publisher:
Publication city: Moscow
The year of publishing:
ISBN: 978-5-373-04665-7 The size: 45 MB





Description

In the proposed edition, the reader can get acquainted with the most interesting episodes of the "History of the Russian State", written by the writer and historiographer N.M. historical material. Karamzin devoted over two decades to his multi-volume book. In 1816–1829 it was first published and Russian society with great interest got acquainted with the history of his own country.

But five years before the start of the publication of the "History", in 1811, at the request of the sister of Emperor Alexander, Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna, Karamzin creates a treatise (Note) “On the ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations". Emphasizing that “the present is a consequence of the past,” Karamzin analyzes the events of Russian life and evaluates the results of the ten-year activity of Alexander I. This assessment was quite critical, and, obviously, therefore, Karamzin’s treatise was not published in the 19th century .. More than a hundred years have passed, before he saw the light. We present this interesting document Karamzin for the information of readers.

The book is richly illustrated, which creates a more voluminous idea of ​​the events and heroes of the era described.

For those who are interested in the history of our Motherland, for the general reader.