Sewerage and drainpipes portal / Cesspool / Impossibility to return after the war of 1812. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin

Impossibility to return after the war of 1812. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin

20.12.2021

So the breath of earthly storms

And we were accidentally touched ...

A.S. Pushkin

In a rare era, the personal fate of a person is so closely connected with historical events - the fate of states and peoples, as in the years of A.S. Pushkin. In 1831, in a poem dedicated to the lyceum anniversary, Pushkin wrote:

How long have friends ...

but twenty years

Tom has passed; and what do I see

That king is no longer alive;

We burned Moscow;

was captured by Paris;

Napoleon died in prison;

The glory of the ancient Greeks has risen;

Another Bourbon fell from the throne.

Neither Pushkin nor his lyceum comrades took a personal part in any of these events, and nevertheless the historical life of those years was so much a part of their personal biography that Pushkin had every reason to say: "We burned Moscow." "We" is popular, "we" of lyceum students ("We have matured ..." in the same poem) and Pushkin's "I" merge here into one face of a participant and contemporary of Historical Life.

Six months after the birth of Pushkin, on November 9, 1799 (18 Brumaire of the VIII year of the Republic), returning unexpectedly from Egypt, General Bonaparte staged a coup d'état. First Consul, Consul for Life and finally Emperor Napoleon, he remained at the head of France until military defeat and abdication in 1814.

Almost in the same years, on the other end of Europe, in St. Petersburg, on the night of March 11-12, 1801, a coup d'etat also took place: a group of palace conspirators and guards officers burst into the bedroom of Paul I at night and brutally strangled him. The eldest son of Paul, twenty-four-year-old Alexander I, was on the throne.

As a result of these turbulent historical events, the youth of the early 19th century got used to life on bivouacs, to campaigns and battles. Death became habitual and was associated not with old age and illness, but with youth and courage. The wounds were not regretful, but envy.

Hardly having time to visit between military campaigns at home - in St. Petersburg, Moscow, parental estates, young people in the break between campaigns were in no hurry to get married and immerse themselves in secular pleasures or family concerns: they locked themselves in their offices, read political treatises, pondered the future of Europe and Russia ... Hot arguments in a friendly circle attracted them more than balls and ladies' company.

Burst, according to Pushkin, "the thunderstorm of 1812." For several months of the Patriotic War, Russian society matured for decades! Yu.M. Lotman quotes a letter dated August 15, 1812 (Moscow has not yet been surrendered!) Of one educated society lady M.A. Volkova to his friend V.I. Lanskoy: “Judge how painful it is to see that villains like Balashov(Minister of Police, confidant of Alexander I. - Yu.S.) and Arakcheeva are selling such a wonderful people! But I assure you that if the latter are hated in St. Petersburg as well as in Moscow, then it will be unpleasant for them later. "

The war ended with the victory of Russia. Young cornets, warrant officers, lieutenants returned home wounded military officers who recognized themselves as active participants in History and did not want to agree that the future of Europe should be placed in the hands of the monarchs gathered in Vienna, and in Russia - in the tough corporal hands of Arakcheev.

The impossibility of returning to the old order after the Patriotic War of 1812 was widely felt in a society that had experienced a national upsurge. A keen observer, the Livonian nobleman T. von Bock wrote in a memorandum given to Alexander I: "The people, illuminated by the glow of Moscow, are no longer the people whom the Courland groom Biron dragged by the hair for ten years." Characteristic is the concept of the tragedy "Year 1812", which was later pondered by A.S. Griboyedov: the main hero of the play was to become a serf, a hero of a partisan war, who, after victory, must "return under the master's stick." Unable to withstand the return of the "former abominations" (according to Griboyedov), the hero committed suicide.

The desire to prevent the return of the "former abominations" of the "past century" (Chatsky's expression) was the psychological spring that forced young officers who returned from the war, risking their future, refusing the joys of youth and a brilliantly started career, to embark on the path of political struggle. The connection between 1812 and liberation activities was emphasized by many Decembrists. M. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, speaking at a conspiratorial meeting, said: “The age of military glory ended with Napoleon. Now the time has come for the liberation of peoples from the slavery that oppresses them, and really the Russians, who have marked themselves with such brilliant feats in a truly Patriotic war, - the Russians, who plucked Europe from the yoke of Napoleon, will not overthrow their own yoke?

In 1815, the first secret revolutionary societies arose in Russia. On February 9, 1816, several Guards officers - participants in the Patriotic War at the age of twenty to twenty-five years, established the Salvation Union, thereby opening a new page in the history of Russia. Freedom seemed close to the victors of Napoleon, and the struggle and death for it - an enviable triumph.

In the book "The Decembrist Uprising", which I, on the advice of S.S. Geychenko leafed through, quoted the words of the stern Pestel, who was in the casemate, addressed not to like-minded people, but to judges and executioners; these words are filled with ecstasy of freedom: “I have become a republican at heart and in nothing have I seen greater prosperity and supreme Bliss for Russia, as in republican rule. When I talked about this subject with other members who share my way of thinking, then, imagining a living picture of all the happiness that Russia, according to our concepts, would then use, we entered into such admiration and, one might say, delight that I and others were ready not only to agree, but also to offer everything that could contribute to the complete introduction and perfect strengthening and confirmation of this order of things. "

The number of members of the secret society grew rapidly, and in 1818 it was reorganized into the Union of Welfare - a conspiratorial organization that relied on influencing public opinion, pressure on the government, infiltrating government posts, educating the young generation in the spirit of patriotism, love of freedom, personal independence and hatred of despotism to prepare Russia for a radical social transformation, which was supposed to take place in ten to fifteen years.

The influence of the Union of Welfare was broad and fruitful: in silent Russia, members of the Union of Welfare introduced publicity. At balls and in public meetings, they openly discussed government actions, brought out of the darkness cases of abuse of power, depriving despotism and bureaucracy of their main weapon - secrecy. The Decembrists created the concept of public opinion, which did not exist before in Russian society. It was precisely this that determined the new situation in Russia, about which Griboyedov said through the lips of Chatsky: "... nowadays laughter is frightening, and keeps shame in check."

However, the wide scope of activities and the orientation towards glasnost also had weaknesses: the Union of Prosperity swelled from random fellow travelers, and the conspiracy was reduced to almost nothing. By 1821, the government was already in possession of a number of denunciations that provided extensive information about the secret society. This information alarmed the emperor all the more because the reactionary order of the Holy Alliance of European Monarchs, which had taken root after the fall of Napoleon, was crumbling and crumbling. Revolutions in Spain and Naples, riots in German universities, Greek uprisings, riots in the Semyonovsky regiment in St. Petersburg, riots in military settlements in Chuguev near Kharkov - all this set the Russian government in a panic mood. Repression began. Kazan and St. Petersburg universities were destroyed (after the inquisitorial investigation the best professors were dismissed, teaching a number of sciences was generally prohibited), censorship persecution intensified, Pushkin and, a little later, the poet and Decembrist Katenin were expelled from St. Petersburg.

The illegal congress of the Union of Welfare, which met under these conditions in 1821 in Moscow, having learned that the government had complete lists of conspirators, declared the secret society liquidated. But that was only a tactical step: in fact, the first decision was followed by the second, which restored the Union, but on a narrower and more conspiratorial basis. The restoration, however, did not go smoothly: the secret society split geographically - into the South and North, politically - into moderates who left its ranks and decisive ones, mainly young people who replaced the leaders of the first stage of Decembrism. In such a situation of organizational collapse, it seemed that the government had won a victory. But no! The public discontent driven deep into the depths only took root more firmly, and by 1824 both the Southern and Northern Decembrists' societies entered a period of new political activity and began preparations for a military revolution in Russia.

On November 19, 1825, Alexander I unexpectedly died in Taganrog. The Decembrists had long ago decided to coincide the beginning of the uprising with the death of the tsar. On December 14, 1825, the first attempt at revolution in Russia was made on Senate Square in St. Petersburg. Point-blank shots, which dispersed the rebellious punishment, heralded the failure of the uprising and the beginning of a new reign and a new era of Russian life.

Yu.M. Lotman writes: “Nicholas I began his reign as a clever investigator and ruthless executioner: five leaders of the Decembrist movement were hanged, one hundred and twenty were exiled to Siberia for hard labor. The new reign began under the sign of political terror: Russia was handed over to the political secret police: the established machine of search and suppression - the third department of the emperor's chancellery and the gendarme corps - represented like a peephole in the cell through which the tsar watched the imprisoned Russia. The place of the rude and illiterate Arakcheev was taken by the more civilized, more educated, more secular Benckendorff and his assistant Dubelt. Arakcheev leaned on a stick, ruled with a shout and a rattle - Benckendorff created an army of spies, introduced denunciation into everyday life. If the Decembrists sought to raise public morality, then Benckendorff and Nicholas I deliberately corrupted society, killed shame in it, persecuted personal independence and independence of opinion as a political crime. "

INTRODUCTION

In a rare era, the personal fate of a person was so closely connected with historical events - the fate of states and peoples - as during the years of Pushkin's life. In 1831 in a poem. dedicated to the lyceum anniversary, Pushkin wrote *:

Neither Pushkin nor his high school classmates took a personal part in any of these events. and nevertheless, the historical life of those years was to such an extent a part of their personal biography that Pushkin had every reason to say: "We burned Moscow.""We are" folk, "we" are lyceum students ( "We have matured ..." in the same poem ") and Pushkin's" I "merge here into one person of a participant and a contemporary of Historical Life.

* The works of Pushkin are cited from the complete collection) essays in 16 volumes (Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1937-1949; Large academic edition). The Roman numeral denotes the volume, the Arabic numeral - half and page; citation of works named in the text is not specified. In square brackets is crossed out by Pushkin, in curly brackets - what is read on the basis of reconstruction (conjunction). In some cases, the punctuation and spelling of the original are preserved, which are at variance with those adopted today.

Six months after the birth of Pushkin, on November 9, 1799 (18 Brumaire of the VIII year of the Republic), General Bonaparte, unexpectedly returning from Egypt, staged a coup d'etat. First Consul, Consul for Life and finally Emperor Napoleon, he remained at the head of France until military defeat and abdication in 1814. Then, after a few months, he restored his power for 100 days and in 1815, after the defeat at Waterloo, was exiled to the island of St. Helena. These years were for Europe a time of continuous battles, in which Russia was drawn from 1805 on.

On the night of March 11-12, 1801, at the other end of Europe, in St. Petersburg, a coup d'etat also took place: a group of palace conspirators and guards officers burst into the bedroom of Paul I at night and brutally strangled him. The eldest son of Paul, twenty-four-year-old Alexander I, was on the throne.

Young people at the beginning of the 19th century got used to life on bivouacs, to campaigns and battles. Death became habitual and was associated not with old age and illness, but with youth and courage. The wounds were not regretful, but envy. Later, informing friends about the beginning of the Greek uprising, Pushkin wrote about its leader, A. Ypsilanti: "From now on, the dead or the winner belongs to history - 28 years, a severed hand, a magnanimous goal! - an enviable fate"(XIII, 24). Not only "a benevolent goal"- the struggle for freedom - but a severed hand (Ypsilanti, a general in the Russian service, lost an arm - it was torn off by a nucleus - in the battle with Napoleon near Leipzig in 1813) can become the subject of envy if it introduces a person into History. Barely having time to visit between military campaigns at home - in St. Petersburg, Moscow, parental estates - young people in the break between campaigns were in no hurry to get married and immerse themselves in secular pleasures or family concerns: they locked themselves in their offices, read political treatises, pondered the future of Europe and Russia. Hot arguments in a friendly circle attracted them more than balls and ladies' company. Burst out, according to Pushkin, "thunderstorm of 1812". For several months of the Patriotic War, Russian society matured for decades. On August 15, 1812 (Moscow had not yet been surrendered!), An intelligent, educated, but, generally speaking, nothing outstanding socialite M.A. Volkova wrote to her friend V.I. Lanskoy: "Judge how painful it is to see that villains like Balashov(Minister of Police, confidant of Alexander I. - Yu.L. ) and Arakcheeva are selling such a wonderful people! But I assure you that if the latter are hated in St. Petersburg as well as in Moscow, then they will not be served later. " *.

* V.V. Kallash The twelfth year in the memoirs and correspondence of contemporaries. M., 1912, p. 253-254.

The war ended with the victory of Russia. Young cornets, warrant officers, lieutenants,

returned home as wounded military officers who recognized themselves as active participants in History and did not want to agree that the future of Europe should be placed in the hands of the monarchs gathered in Vienna, and Russia - in the tough corporal hands of Arakcheev.

* Predtechensky A.V. T.E.Bok's note. - In the book: The Decembrists and their time. M. - L. 1951, p. 193; original in French, translated by the publisher. Bock paid for his note with long years of fortress, and later committed suicide in Viljandi.

Characteristic is the concept of the tragedy "Year 1812", which Griboyedov later pondered: the main character of the play was to become a serf M.(Griboyedov did not determine his name), a hero of a partisan war, who, after victory, must "back under the lord's stick." Griboyedov will complete the outline of the tragedy with an expressive remark: "Former abominations". M. committed suicide. The desire to admit a return to "the former abominations" of the "past century"(Chatsky's expression) was a psychological spring that forced young officers who returned from the war, risking their entire future, refusing the joys that were promised by their full of youth and a brilliantly started career, to embark on the path of political struggle. The connection between 1812 and liberation activities was emphasized by many Decembrists. M. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, speaking at a secret meeting, said: "The age of military glory ended with Napoleon. Now the time has come for the liberation of peoples from their oppressive slavery, and will the Russians, who have marked themselves with such brilliant feats in a truly Patriotic war - the Russians, who plucked Europe from the yoke of Napoleon, will not overthrow their own yoke?" *

* Uprising of the Decembrists, vol. IX. M., 1950, p. 117.

“I became a republican in my soul and in nothing did I see greater prosperity and supreme Bliss for Russia, as in a republican government. which Russia, according to our concepts, would then use, we entered into such admiration and, one might say, delight that I and others were ready not only to agree, but also to offer everything that could contribute to the full introduction and perfect strengthening and the approval of this order of things "*.
* The uprising of the Decembrists, vol. IV. M. - L., 1927, p. 91.

The number of members of the secret society grew rapidly, and in 1818 it was reorganized into the Union of Welfare - a conspiratorial organization that counted on by influencing public opinion, pressure on the government, infiltrating government posts, educating the young generation in the spirit of patriotism, love of freedom, personal independence and hatred. to prepare Russia for despotism for a radical social transformation, which was supposed to be carried out in ten to fifteen years. The influence of the Union of Welfare was broad and fruitful: in silent Russia, where any business was considered to be within the competence of the government, and everything within the competence of the government was considered secret, members of the Union of Welfare introduced publicity without a doubt. At balls and in public meetings, they openly discussed government actions, brought out of the darkness cases of abuse of power, depriving despotism and bureaucracy of their main weapon - secrecy. The Decembrists created in Russian society a concept that did not exist until then - public opinion. It was precisely this that conditioned the new in Russia position, about which Griboyedov said through the lips of Chatsky:

... nowadays laughter is frightening, and it keeps shame in check.

However, the wide scope of activities and the orientation towards glasnost also had weaknesses: the Union of Prosperity swelled at the expense of random fellow travelers, the conspiracy was almost reduced to naught. By 1821, the government was already in the hands of a number of denunciations that provided extensive information about the secret society. This information alarmed the emperor all the more since the reactionary order of the Holy Alliance of European Monarchs, which had taken root after the fall of Napoleon, was crumbling and crumbling: riots in German universities, a revolution in Spain, a revolution in Naples, a Greek uprising, riots in the Semenovsky regiment in St. Petersburg, a riot in military settlements in Chuguev near Kharkov - all this set the Russian government in a panic mood. Repressions began: Kazan and St. Petersburg universities were destroyed (after the inquisitorial investigation the best professors were dismissed, teaching a number of sciences is generally prohibited; universities began to resemble a mixture of barracks and a monastery), censorship persecution intensified, Pushkin and, somewhat later, a poet and a Decembrist were expelled from St. Petersburg. Colonel Katenin.

The illegal congress of the Union of Prosperity, which met under these conditions in 1821 in Moscow, having learned that the government had complete lists of conspirators, declared the secret society liquidated. But that was only a tactical step: in fact, the first decision was followed by the second, which restored the Union, but on a narrower and more conspiratorial basis. However, the restoration was not going smoothly: the secret society split geographically - into the South and North, politically - into moderates who left its ranks and decisive ones, mainly young people who replaced the leaders of the first stage of Decembrism. In an atmosphere of organizational collapse, it was necessary to fight against the mood of pessimism and develop new tactics. The government seemed to be triumphant. However, as always, the victories of the reaction turned out to be imaginary: driven deep into the depths, public discontent only took root more firmly, and by 1824 both the Southern and Northern societies of the Decembrists entered a period of new political activity and directly approached the preparation of the military revolution in Russia.

On November 19, 1825, Alexander I unexpectedly died in Taganrog. The Decembrists have long decided to coincide the beginning of the "action" with the death of the tsar. On December 14, 1825, in St. Petersburg, on Senate Square, the first attempt at revolution in Russia was made. Point-blank shots, which dispersed the rebellious punishment, heralded the failure of the uprising and the beginning of a new reign and a new era of Russian life.

Nicholas I began his reign as a clever investigator and ruthless executioner: five leaders of the Decembrist movement were hanged, one hundred and twenty were exiled to Siberia for hard labor. The new reign began under the sign of political terror: Russia was handed over to the political secret police: the established machine of search and suppression - the third department of the emperor's chancellery and the gendarme corps - represented like a peephole in the cell through which the tsar watched the imprisoned Russia. The place of the rude and illiterate Arakcheev was taken by the more civilized, more educated, more secular Benckendorff and his assistant Dubelt. Arakcheev leaned on a stick, ruled with a shout and a rattle - Benckendorff created an army of spies, introduced denunciation into everyday life. If the Decembrists sought to raise public morality, then Benckendorff and Nicholas I deliberately corrupted society, killed shame in it, persecuted personal independence and independence of opinion as a political crime.

However, it is impossible to stop the flow of life. Nicholas I saw his - as he believed, divine - mission to "freeze" Russia and stop the development of the spirit of freedom throughout Europe. He sought to replace life with circulars, and state people with faceless careerists who would help him, deceiving himself, create the scenery for a powerful and prosperous Russia. Historical sobering is known to have been bitter.

But healthy forces were ripening in society. All the power of national life was concentrated at this time in literature.

Such was the era of Pushkin.

* The works of Pushkin are cited from the complete collection) essays in 16 volumes (Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1937-1949; Large academic edition). The Roman numeral denotes the volume, the Arabic numeral - half and page; citation of works named in the text is not specified. In square brackets is crossed out by Pushkin, in curly brackets - what is read on the basis of reconstruction (conjunction). In some cases, the punctuation and spelling of the original are preserved, which are at variance with those adopted today.

* Callash V.V. The twelfth year in the memoirs and correspondence of contemporaries. M., 1912, p. 253-254.

The war ended with the victory of Russia. Young cornets, warrant officers, lieutenants, returned home wounded military officers who recognized themselves as active participants in History and did not want to agree that the future of Europe should be placed in the hands of the monarchs gathered in Vienna, and Russia - in the tough corporal hands of Arakcheev.

* Predtechensky A.V. T.E.Bok's note. - In the book: The Decembrists and their time. M. - L. 1951, p. 193; original in French, translated by the publisher. Bock paid for his note with long years of fortress, and later committed suicide in Viljandi.

* Uprising of the Decembrists, vol. IX. M., 1950, p. 117.

In 1815, the first secret revolutionary societies arose in Russia. On February 9, 1816, several guards officers aged twenty to twenty-five - all participants in the Patriotic War - established the Salvation Union, thereby opening a new page in the history of Russia. Freedom seemed close to the victors of Napoleon, and the struggle and death for it seemed Western and festive. Even the stern Pestel, moreover, being in the casemate of the fortress and turning not to like-minded people, but to judges and executioners, again experienced the rapture of freedom. remembering these minutes: “I became a republican in my soul and in nothing did I see greater prosperity and supreme Bliss for Russia, as in a republican government. which Russia, according to our concepts, would then use, we entered into such admiration and, one might say, delight that I and others were ready not only to agree, but also to offer everything that could contribute to the full introduction and perfect strengthening and the approval of this order of things "*.

* The uprising of the Decembrists, vol. IV. M. - L., 1927, p. 91.

... nowadays laughter is frightening, and it keeps shame in check.

But healthy forces were ripening in society. All the power of national life was concentrated at this time in literature.

Such was the era of Pushkin.

Chapter 1
Years of adolescence

Pushkin was born on May 26, 1799 * in Moscow in the Skvortsov house on Molchanovka (now Bauman St., no. 10, the house has not survived) in the family of a retired major, an official of the Moscow Commissariat Sergei Lvovich Pushkin and his wife Nadezhda Osipovna (née Hannibal).

* All dates are given in the old style.

In addition to him, the family had an older sister Olga and three younger brothers. The Pushkins were born. In his autobiographical notes, Pushkin wrote: "We trace our clan from a Prussian native Radsha or Racha (my husband is honest, as the chronicler says, that is, a noble, noble), who left for Russia during the reign of St. Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky. From him came the Musins, Bobrischevs, Myatlevs, Povodovs. , Kamensky, Buturlins, Kologrivovs, Sherefedinovs and Tovarkovs "(XII, 311). Kinship with many surnames of the indigenous Russian nobility made the Pushkins closely connected with the world and life of that "pre-fire" (ie, before the fire of 1812) Moscow, in which they said: "Love to count the kinship and give it honor"- and: "He who does not respect his kinship humiliates himself, and who is ashamed of his relatives, he himself is ashamed through this."

"Mother's pedigree is even more curious,- continued Pushkin. - Her grandfather was a Negro, the son of a sovereign prince. The Russian envoy in Constantinople somehow got him out of the seraglio, where he was kept as an amanat(hostage. - Yu.L. ), and sent it to Peter the Great "(XII, 311-312) *. By the end of the 18th century, the Hacknibals were already closely intertwined with blood ties with Russian noble families - they intermarried with the Rzhevsky, Buturlins, Cherkassky, Pushkins. The poet's father and mother were relatives (second cousins).

* Pushkin's ancestor was not a Negro. and arap, i.e. Ethiopian, Abyssinian. His appearance at the court of Peter I is possibly connected with deeper reasons than the fashion for arapchat pages that spread in Europe at the beginning of the 18th century: in plans to crush the Turkish Empire. which Peter I nurtured, ties with Abyssinia, a Christian country located in a strategically important area, in the rear of Turkey's troubled Egyptian flank. - occupied a certain place. However, the protracted Northern War did not allow these plans to develop.

The Pushkins were very poor. Ownless and homeless, they were on the brink of ruin all their lives, in the future they invariably cut financial assistance to their son, and in the last years of his life they burdened the poet with their debts. Sergei Lvovich Pushkin combined lordly carelessness with morbid avarice. A friend of A.S. Pushkin P.A. Vyazemsky kept a sketch in his notes:

“In general, he was very stingy with himself and with all the household. His son Leo broke a glass at his dinner. Father flared up and grumbled the whole dinner.

"Is it possible, - said Lev, - for so long to complain about a glass that costs 20 kopecks?"

- "Excuse me, sir," the father objected with feeling, "not twenty, but thirty-five kopecks!" *.

* Vyazemsky P. An old notebook. L-d .. 1929. p. 114.

The family belonged to the educated part of Moscow society. Pushkin's uncle Vasily Lvovich Pushkin was a famous poet; Moscow writers used to visit the house. As a child, Pushkin saw Karamzin, then the head of young Russian literature, listened to conversations on literary topics.

The upbringing of children, which the parents did not attach great importance to, was disorderly. From home schooling, Pushkin endured only an excellent knowledge of the French language, and in his father's library he became addicted to reading (also in French).

The most striking feature of Pushkin's childhood is how little and rarely he recalled these years later. In the life of a noble child, the House is a whole world full of intimate charm, legends, intimate memories, the threads from which stretched for the rest of his life. In the memoirs of S.T. Aksakov tells how the separation from his parents and home - he was brought from his parents' estate to the Kazan gymnasium - turned into a childish tragedy for the child: life outside the home seemed absolutely impossible for him. The childhood of L.N. Tolstoy was not idyllic (discord between his parents, his father's debts and frivolity, his strange death), and yet he dedicated deeply felt lines in the story "Childhood" to the world of his first memories, his home, his mother. Lermontov's childhood was disfigured by a serious family tragedy, he grew up not knowing the real family, in an atmosphere of enmity between the closest relatives. And yet he carried through his whole life the poetry of childhood and his home:

The image of the Father - poeticized and tragic, contrary to real biographical facts - entered the romantic world of Lermontov.

Pushkin easily left the walls of his home and never once mentioned either his mother or his father in his poems. The references to Uncle Vasily Lvovich soon became frankly ironic. And at the same time, he was not devoid of kindred feelings: he dearly loved his brother and sister all his life, helped them with salvation, being himself in constrained material circumstances, invariably paid, without any murmurings, the considerable debts of his brother Levushka, which he did in a fatherly manner, carelessly and shamelessly overcame on Pushkin. And he showed more attention to his parents than they did to him. It is all the more striking that when in the future Pushkin wanted to look back at the beginning of his life, he invariably remembered only the Lyceum - he deleted his childhood from his life *. He was a man with no childhood.

* This is especially noticeable in those rare cases when the literary tradition forced him to introduce the theme of childhood into poetry. So, in the Lyceum "Message to Yudin" Pushkin introduces features of the real landscape of the village of Zakharov, with which his childhood memories were associated. However, the image of the author, who dreams of Horace and La Fontaine, cultivates his garden with a shovel in his hands, takes neighbors in his own house for a peaceful rural meal with a glass in his hands, of course, is conditional through and through and does not carry anything personal: Pushkin visited Zakharyin from 1806 to 1810, i.e. between seven and eleven years old, and his behavior, of course, had nothing to do with this literary posture. A rare case of real echoes of childhood impressions is the poem "Dream" (1816). But it is characteristic that not the mother is mentioned here, but the nanny. ("Ah! I will keep silent about my mother ...").

And when the inner development brought Pushkin to the idea of the House, the poetry of his corner, it turned out to be absolutely not the house (or not the houses) in which he spent his childhood days. The house in Mikhailovskoye, the house of ancestors, with which the poet was personally connected by youthful memories of 1817 and years of exile, and not by the memory of childhood, became a house with a capital letter. And not the poet's mother was sitting under the window of this house, but his serf "mother" Arina Rodionovna.

Childhood, however, is too important a stage in a person's self-awareness to be deleted without replacing it with anything. Replacing the world of childhood, the world to which a person, as a rule, turns his whole life as a source of dear memories, a world in which he learns that kindness, sympathy and understanding are the norm, and evil and loneliness are an ugly evasion of it, for Pushkin became the Lyceum. The idea of the Lyceum as a native home, of the Lyceum teachers as elders, and of the Lyceum students as comrades, brothers finally took shape in the poet's mind in the mid-1820s, when real Lyceum memories had already merged into a picture of a relatively distant past, and persecution, exile, the slander that persecuted the poet, forced him to seek support in idyllic memories. In 1825 he wrote:

But the idealized image of the Lyceum that took shape in Pushkin's mind during these years differed in many respects from documentary reality.

The Lyceum was an educational institution that repeated in miniature the fate and nature of many reforms and undertakings "the days of the alexandrovs of a wonderful beginning": brilliant promises, broad plans with complete ill-considered general tasks, goals and plan. Much attention was paid to the location and external order of the new educational institution, the issues of the form of lyceum students were discussed by the emperor himself. However, the teaching plan was not thought out, the composition of the professors was random, most of them did not meet the requirements of a good gymnasium in terms of their training and pedagogical experience. And the Lyceum gave graduates the rights of those who graduated from a higher educational institution.

The future of lyceum students was not clearly defined either. According to the original plan, the younger brothers of Alexander I, Nikolai and Mikhail, were to be brought up in the Lyceum. This idea probably belonged to Speransky, who, like many progressive people of those years, was alarmed by how the characters of the great princes, on whom the fate of millions of people could depend in the future, was alarming. The growing Nicholas and Mikhail Pavlovichs got used to the belief in the infinity and divine origin of their power and to the deep conviction that the art of management consists in "Feldwebel science". In 1816, a man far from liberal ideas, but an honest warrior and patriot, General P.P. Konovnitsyn, who was entrusted by Alexander I in 1815 with observing his brothers during their stay in the army, apparently, it was not by chance that he considered it necessary to give the grand dukes a written instruction: "If the time comes to command your troops, ... try to improve the position of everyone, do not demand the impossible from people. Give them the necessary and necessary peace before, and then demand the exact and strict performance of true service. Shouting and threats are just annoying, but benefits They won't bring you ".

In the Lyceum, the grand dukes were to be brought up in the circle of their peers, in isolation from the court. Here they would have been instilled with ideas more appropriate to their future position than "screams, threats" and the requirement "from people of the impossible", inclinations to which they began to show very early. If this plan had come true, Pushkin and Nicholas I would have turned out to be schoolmates (Nikolai Pavlovich was only three years older than Pushkin). In accordance with the same plan, the rest of the lyceum students were destined for a high state career.

These intentions, apparently, provoked opposition to them. Maria Feodorovna. The general offensive of reaction before the war of 1812, expressed, in particular, in the fall of Speransky, led to the fact that the original plans were abandoned, as a result of which Nicholas I came to the throne in 1825 monstrously unprepared. According to the testimony of an informed memoirist V.A. Mukhanova, "As for the political sciences, they were not even mentioned during the education of the emperor ... When it was decided that he would reign, the emperor himself was afraid of his ignorance."

* Russian archive. 1897, no. 5. With. 89-90.

For the Lyceum, there was an advantageous side to the change in its status: although the weakening of the court's interest in this educational institution entailed a decrease in its prestige, and the future of the Lyceum students ceased to appear in its original tempting form, but the interference of the court circles in the life of the Lyceum became less noticeable.

The Lyceum was located in Tsarskoe Selo, the summer imperial residence, in the wing of the Catherine Palace. The location itself made it like a court educational institution. However, apparently, not without the influence of Speransky, who hated the court circles and sought to limit their political role in the state and influence on the emperor as much as possible, the first director of the Lyceum V.F. Malinovsky tried to protect his educational institution from the influence of the court by means of strict isolation: the Lyceum was isolated from the surrounding life, pupils were released outside its walls extremely reluctantly and only in special cases, visits to relatives were limited, Lyceum isolation evoked in Pushkin's poetry of those years the images of a monastery, monastic life , the temptations to which a monk is subjected by a demon. The desire to escape from captivity is also connected with this. Poetic admiration for the Lyceum years, as mentioned above, came later - during his stay at the Lyceum, Pushkin's dominant mood was the expectation of its completion. If in verse the Lyceum is transformed into a monastery, where the young novice says to himself:

then its ending is drawn as a release from captivity:

Of course, the lectures of the lyceum teachers, among whom were progressive and well-trained professors (for example, A.P. Kunitsyn, A.I. Galich), did not pass without leaving a trace for Pushkin, although he was not among the exemplary students.

The program of classes at the Lyceum was extensive The first three years were devoted to the study of languages - "Russian, Latin, French, German",- mathematics (in the amount of gymnasium), literature and rhetoric, history, geography, dance, fencing, horse riding and swimming.

In the senior years, classes were conducted without a strict program - the approved charter determined only the sciences to be studied: classes were provided for the sections of moral, physical, mathematical, historical sciences, literature and languages.

Of course, an extensive plan with the uncertainty of programs and requirements, inexperience of teachers led to superficial knowledge of students. Pushkin had reason to complain in a letter to his brother in November 1824 about "the shortcomings of his accursed upbringing." However, there was an indisputable positive side to the lyceum studies: it was that "lyceum spirit" that the lyceum students of the first - "Pushkin" - graduation remembered for their whole lives and which very soon became the subject of numerous denunciations. It was this "spirit" that Nicholas I later assiduously knocked out of the Lyceum.

The small number of students, the youth of a number of professors, the humane nature of their pedagogical ideas, focused - at least in the best part of them - on attention and respect for the personality of students, the fact that in the Lyceum, unlike other educational institutions, there was no corporal punishment among lyceum students the spirit of honor and camaraderie was encouraged, and finally, the fact that this was the first graduation - an object of love and attention - all this created a special atmosphere. A number of professors were not alien to liberal ideas and later became a victim of persecution (Kunitsyn, Galich). Their lectures had a beneficial effect on the audience. So, although Pushkin had very low marks in Kunitsyn's subjects, the fact that one of the chapters - about the novel "Fatama, or Human Reason" that has not come down to us, was called "Natural Law" speaks for itself: Kunitsyn read to lyceum students "Natural law "- a discipline devoted to the study of the" natural "rights of an individual human person. The very teaching of such a subject was a tribute to liberal trends, and later he was expelled from the programs of Russian universities. Teachers like Kunitsyn and the director Malinovsky acted, however, mainly not by lectures (Kunitsyn did not have the gift of captivating speech), but by their own human example, showing examples of proud independence and "Slartan severity" of personal behavior. The spirit of independence, respect for one's own dignity was cultivated among the lyceum students. In addition to advanced ideas, they learned a certain type of behavior: aversion to servility and servile worship, independence of judgments and actions. The journalist of dubious reputation Faddey Bulgarin in a denunciation note "Something about the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum and its spirit", filed in 1826 to Nicholas I. wrote: "In the light, it is called the lyceum spirit, when a young man does not respect his elders, treats his bosses in a familiar manner, arrogantly with equals, contemptuously with those who are inferior. Except for those cases when, for fanfare, one must seem like a lover of equality."

* Modzalevsky B.L. Pushkin is under secret supervision. Ed. 3rd. L-d. 1925. p. 36.

If we digress from the maliciously denunciatory tone, on the one hand, and, on the other, take into account that Bulgarin could not know the "lyceum spirit" of the 1810s from personal experience, but reconstructed it on the basis of his impression of Delvig's behavior. Pushkin and other lyceum students in the post-Lyceum period, supplementing the picture with features from the style of behavior of the "Arzamas" and "liberalists" of the Turgenev brothers, then we will have a vivid characteristic of how the young "progressist" of the late 1810s - early 1820s behaved in society ... As for the statement about the contemptuous attitude of the lower, then we are talking about the contempt of the freedom-lover for the servile official. Chatsky to Molchalin. This, based on high self-respect, a look down on silence and a field (the hero of Gogol's story "Diary of a Madman") was not forgiven by the Chatsky and Pechorins. how Bulgarin could not forgive his lyceum students Pushkin and Delvig. Bulgarin, by the informer's intuition, guessed the connection between the "noble treatment" to which the teachers taught the lyceum students, and the offensive for "voluntary serfs"(Pushkin) freedom of behavior of a young liberal. The main thing that was noted by the Lyceum in Pushkin's life was that here he felt like a Poet. In 1830 Pushkin wrote: "I started writing at the age of 13 and typing almost at the same time."(XI, 157).

The cult of friendship flourished in the Lyceum. However, in reality, lyceum students - and this is quite natural - broke up into groups, relations between which were sometimes very conflicting. Pushkin adjoined several, but was not unconditionally accepted into any. Thus, in the Lyceum, there was a strong craving for literary pursuits, which was encouraged by the entire teaching style. Handwritten journals were published: "Lyceum sage", "Inexperienced pen", "For pleasure and benefit" and others. The poetical leader of the Lyceum, at least in the first years, was Illichevsky. It can be assumed that Pushkin jealously fought for the recognition of his poetic primacy in the lyceum circle. However B.V. Tomashevsky showed that certain aspects of his young poetry that were very important for Pushkin (for example, an orientation toward epic tradition and large genres) were not accepted by the court of classmates, and there was no complete unanimity between the young Pushkin and the "literary opinion" of the Lyceum *.

* B.V. Tomashevsky. Pushkin, book. 1 (1813-18241. M. - L., 1956. P. 40-41.

The closest friendships were between Pushkin and Delvig, Pushchin, Malinovsky and Kuchelbecker. It was a lifelong friendship that left a deep mark on Pushkin's soul. But here, too, not everything was simple. The political interests of the lyceum students matured, they developed conscious freedom-loving convictions. Threads stretched from the Lyceum to the emerging movement of the Decembrists: Pushchin, Delvig, Kuchelbecker and Walchowski entered the "Sacred Artel" by Alexander Muravyov and Ivan Burtsev. Pushkin did not receive an invitation to participate. Moreover, his friends hid their involvement from him.

Later, when Pushkin looked at the Lyceum years from the height of the past years, everything smoothed out. The need for friendship "corrected" the memory. It was after parting, when the Lyceum was behind, that the memories turned out to be cement, which over the years tied the "Lyceum circle" more and more tightly. The brotherhood did not weaken, but strengthened. This can be seen in one example. On June 9, 1817, at the graduation ceremony of the Lyceum, Delvig's farewell hymn was sung:

The lyceum students of the first edition, of course, memorized the entire poem by heart, and each line from it sounded like a password to them. Pushkin later several times used this poem by Delvig precisely as a password, allowing in a few words to restore the atmosphere of their youth in the minds of his lyceum friends. In the poem "October 19" (1825), dedicated to the lyceum anniversary, Pushkin, addressing the lyceum seaman F.F. Matyushkin, who was on a trip around the world, wrote:

slightly paraphrased by Pushkin, but lyceum students, of course, recognized them. Another example is even more significant: the famous lines from the message "To Siberia":

were an understandable reference to the same Delvig hymn:

In misfortune - proud patience.

That which in Delvig represented a tribute to the commonplaces of the elegiac style was filled with real content in Pushkin. Moving from Tsarskoe Selo to St. Petersburg, where the majority of lyceum students had to enter the service - civil or military, - elegiac "eternal separation"; travel around the world - real "long separation"; "in misfortune - proud patience"- a poetic commonplace. "Proud patience" "in the depths of Siberian ores" sounded completely different. These poetic quotes also had a hidden meaning. Readers who received a volume of the anthology "Northern Flowers" for 1827, where the poem "October 19" was printed, could not know whose words Pushkin put into the mouth of his friend the sailor - this was understandable only to the lyceum students. The message "To Siberia", which was not published during his lifetime, bypassed the entire Decembrist penal servitude and was known far beyond its borders, but the "taste" of the line about "proud patience" was fully understood only by lyceum students - in particular to Pushchin and Küchelbecker, who recognized the poem much later.

So the Lyceum became in Pushkin's mind the ideal kingdom of friendship, and the Lyceum friends became the ideal audience for his poetry.

Pushkin's relations with his comrades, as already mentioned, were not easy to develop. Even the most benevolent of them could not fail to further mention his deep vulnerability, which easily turned into impudent and defiant behavior. I.I. Pushchin recalled:

"Pushkin, from the very beginning, was more irritable than many and therefore did not arouse general sympathy: this is the lot of an eccentric being among people. Not that he was playing any role between us or amazed with any special oddities; as it was in others; but sometimes with inappropriate jokes, awkward barbs he put himself in a difficult situation, not being able to get out of it later. This led him to new mistakes that never slip away in school relations. I, as a neighbor (on the other side of his number there was a blank wall) , often, when everyone was already falling asleep, I would talk with him in an undertone across the partition about some absurd incident of that day; here I saw clearly that he, by his delicacy, ascribed some kind of importance to all nonsense, and that worried him. smoothed out some rough edges, although it was not always possible. He had a mixture of excessive courage with shyness, and both were out of place, which thereby harmed him. Sometimes, together we miss. there is no way he can handle it. The main thing is that he lacked what is called tact".

"All of this together was the reason.- Pushchin concludes, - that in general they did not suddenly respond to him about his affection for the lyceum circle. " Pushchin was an astute observer. Six years of continuous communication with Pushkin-lyceum student allowed him to make an extremely accurate observation of the character of his friend: "To love him in a real way, you had to look at him with that complete benevolence, which knows and sees all the irregularities of character and other shortcomings, puts up with them and ends up loving even them in a friend-comrade." *

* A.S. Pushkin in the memoirs of his contemporaries. In 2 volumes. T. 1.M., 1974, p. 82-83.

An unloved child in his own family, early and unevenly developing, Pushkin the youth, apparently, was deeply insecure. This caused bravado, youth, the desire to excel. At home he was considered a bumpkin - he began to put physical agility, strength, and the ability to stand up for himself above all else. The same Pushchin, with bewilderment that had not weakened for almost half a century, separating the first meeting with Pushkin from the time of writing the notes, recalled that Pushkin, who was significantly ahead of his classmates in reading and knowledge, was least of all inclined to be proud of this and even appreciate: "He considered everything scientific as nothing and seemed to want only to prove that he was a master of running, jumping over chairs, throwing a ball, etc. This even involved his pride - there were collisions, very awkward."*. Pushkin himself testified that the "appearance of the Muse" in his "student cell" was preceded by a time

* Ibid, p. 74.

* We are talking about a special youth. The tsar complained to the director of the Lyceum Engelgard: "Your pupils ... are shooting my liquid apples over the fence, they beat the watchmen" (ibid., P. 91). The fact that the apples were royal gave them a special taste, and the campaign - danger.

All memoirists are unanimous in describing and assessing the enormous impression that the events of 1812 made on the Lyceum and lyceum students. Let's refer again to Pushchin: "Our Lyceum life merges with the political era of Russian folk life: the storm of 1812 was being prepared. These events had a strong impact on our childhood. It began with the fact that we saw off all the Guards regiments, because they passed by the Lyceum itself." *.

* A.S. Pushkin in the memoirs of his contemporaries, vol. 1. p. 81.

The impressions of these years, of course, determined the civic pathos and early love of freedom of many lyceum students, including Pushkin. However, the events affected young minds in another respect: History from the pages of textbooks itself appeared on the lyceum threshold. In order to immortalize your name and pass it on to descendants, you no longer needed to be born in fabulous times or belong to a family of crowned heads. Not only the "husband of destinies", the son of a petty Corsican nobleman Napoleon Bonaparte, who became the emperor of France and redrawn the map of Europe, but also any of the young guard officers who passed the Lyceum gate to fall near Borodino, Leipzig or on the heights of Montmartre, was a "man of history" ... In one of his last poems (October 19, 1836) Pushkin wrote:

The restrained stylistics of the mature Pushkin is alien to poetic decorations. "Envious of the one who died, Walked past us,"- not a rhetorical figure, but an accurate description of the psychological experiences of lyceum students. Heroic death, turning into historical immortality, did not seem terrible - it was beautiful. The more the resentment inflicted by age was felt. L.N. Tolstoy deeply conveyed these experiences in the words of Petya Rostov in War and Peace: "... All the same, I can't learn anything now that ... - Petya stopped, blushed to the point of sweat and said: - when the fatherland is in danger."

Poetry was the answer to everything. She became an excuse in her own eyes and a promise of immortality. It was immortality that was the only yardstick that measured the merit of poetry in the Pushkin circle. Pushkin was sixteen years old when Derzhavin ordained him a poet, and Delvig in the September issue of the Russian Museum for 1815 greeted him - the author of only a few published poems - with verses:

Pushkin did not have deep affection for his parents. However, the need for such affection was apparently extremely strong. This left an imprint on Pushkin's relations with people older than him. On the one hand, he was ready to rebel against authority at any moment, the condescension or patronage of his elders was unbearable to him. On the other hand, he was drawn to them, thirsty for their attention, recognition on their part was necessary for him. He wanted friendship with them. The Cult of Friendship was inseparable from the literature of pre-romanticism: Schiller and Karamzin, Russo and Batyushkov created a real "mythology" of friendship. However, the literary tradition gave only the word, suggested the forms in them. cast a deeply personal need to compensate for the lack of spiritual connections that the young man felt, who did not like to remember his childhood and family.

Friendly ties with lyceum students, as we said, were difficult to establish. All the more noticeable is Pushkin's craving for the people of the "adult" world: for friendship with Chaadaev and Kaverin, Arzamas and Karamzin, Turgenev and F. Glinka: Looking at Pushkin's friendship from an age point of view, we clearly see three periods. From the Lyceum to Odessa, inclusive, Pushkin's friends are older than him in age, life experience, and official position. Pushkin deliberately ignores this difference. He said to Karamzin: "So, you prefer slavery to freedom" ("Karamzin flared up and called me his slanderer," XII, 306). M. Orlov, the hero of the war of 1812, who accepted the keys of Paris, the favorite of the emperor and the idol of the soldiers, the head of the Chisinau Decembrist society, "he let go","flaming up": "You talk, general, like an old woman" ("Pushkin, you tell me insolence, beware,"- answered Orlov *. Yet the friendships of this period are far from equal. Friends of Pushkin are almost always his teachers. Some teach him civic firmness and stoicism, like Chaadaev or F. Glinka, others instruct him in political economy, like N. Turgenev, others introduce him to the secrets of hussar revelry, like Kaverin or Molostvov, the fourth, like N.P. Krivtsov, "corrupted" by the preaching of materialism. The question of Pushkin's influence on this entire circle of people is not even raised.

* A.S. Pushkin in the memoirs of his contemporaries, vol. 1, p. 351.

In 1824, Pushkin dedicated a quatrain to friendship, colored with bitterness:

A new period begins in Mikhailovsky - Pushkin is clearly attracted to his peers. It was at this time that the lyceum ties acquired a new and special value for him, the epistolary friendship with Vyazemsky was strengthened, who, although somewhat older in age, was in no way suitable for a mentor and did not pretend to this role. In the role of a friend-publisher (wandering through the links, Pushkin really needs services in this area, since he himself is deprived of the opportunity to conduct business negotiations), the venerable mentor Gnedich is replaced by his friend Pletnev. Among the political conspirators, Pushkin is now attracted to the "young": Ryleev and Bestuzhev, among the poets - peers: Delvig, Baratynsky. Languages.

In the thirties, the names of young, novice writers appeared in the circle of Pushkin's friends: Ivan Kireevsky, Pogodin, Gogol, who became Pushkin's closest collaborator, Koltsov and even Belinsky, with all the differences in literary views, everyday and cultural habits, fall into the circle of persons of interest to Pushkin. The younger brother's friends (Nashchokin, Sobolevsky) also become his friends. Renewal of the circle of friends will become for Pushkin one of the features of his courageous recognition of the eternal movement of life.

Among the friendships of Pushkin, Zhukovsky occupied a special place. A deep and subtle lyricist who discovered the secrets of poetic sound, Zhukovsky was distinguished by another talent: he was undoubtedly the kindest person in Russian literature. Kindness, gentleness, responsiveness also require talent, and Zhukovsky possessed this talent to the highest degree. During the years of Pushkin's studies at the Lyceum, Zhukovsky was already a recognized poet, and Pushkin began his poetic message to him (1816) with the address: "Bless, poet ...". In these words there was a consciousness of the distance that separated the author of the patriotic poem "A Singer in the Camp of Russian Warriors", glorified in 1812, and the romantic ballads that aroused heated controversy, from the novice who was embarking on a poetic path.

However, in the attitude of Zhukovsky to the aspiring poet, there was neither patronage, so intolerant by Pushkin, nor morality that annoyed him. Zhukovsky found the right tone - the tone of a loving older brother, in which seniority does not interfere with equality. This made the friendship between Pushkin and Zhukovsky especially durable. True, not everything went smoothly here either: Zhukovsky sometimes got lost in moralizing, and in the last months of the poet's life he lost understanding of his spiritual life. Pushkin, in turn, did not hide creative differences with his older friend, sometimes emphasizing them with epigrammatic acuteness. And yet, among the most lasting friendships of Pushkin, the name of Zhukovsky should be named alongside the names of Delvig and Pushchin.

The friendly ties of the lyceum period - with the Tsarskoye Selo hussars, with the Arzamas writers - young writers united around the banners of the "new style" of Karamzin and the romanticism of Zhukovsky, - with the Karamzin family - gave extremely much for the formation of Pushkin's mind and views, his social and literary position. But they also influenced the character. In the hussar circle, Pushkin could feel like an adult, in Karamzin's, he could breathe in the air of family, home comfort - that which he himself never knew at home. In the unexpected and touching feeling of love that Pushkin felt for Ekaterina Andreevna Karamzina, a woman nineteen years his senior (more than twice!), The need for maternal love probably occupied a significant place. There is no reason to see in this feeling a deep and hidden passion. Yu.N. Tynyanov, the author of a detailed work dedicated to Pushkin's "nameless love" for Karamzina, attaches particular importance to the fact that before his death, Pushkin wanted to see her *. However, in order to correctly comprehend this fact, one should name the names of all those who were recalled to him at these moments.

* Tynyanov Yu.N. Nameless love. - In the book: Tynyanov Yu.N. "Pushkin and his contemporaries. M., 1968, p. 217.

Anyone who has had to observe people dying from wounds in their consciousness knows with what unexpected force the memories of a distant and seemingly forgotten childhood flash up in them. Pushkin did not remember his recently deceased mother, did not call his father, brother or sister. He remembered the Lyceum:

"What a pity that now neither Pushchin nor Malinovsky is here, it would be easier for me to die."

"Karamzin? Is Karamzin here?"- asked Pushkin *.

* A.S. Pushkin in the memoirs of his contemporaries, vol. 2, p. 332, 349.

He returned to the world of lyceum life.

Lyceum replaced Pushkin's childhood. The lyceum was finished - childhood was over. Life began.

Parting with childhood and entering "adulthood" was perceived by Pushkin, rushing from the Lyceum, solemnly. It was depicted as an ordination to the knightly order of Russian Literature, the oath of a palladin, who will henceforth look for an opportunity to fight for the honor of his Lady. For a young man who perceived the culture of chivalry through the prism of the ironic poems of Voltaire, Ariosto and Tasso, such "ordination" inevitably appeared in a double light: solemn and even pathetic, on the one hand, and parody-buffoon, on the other, and the mockery and pathos were not canceled. but set off each other. Pushkin at the Lyceum was twice ordained a poet. The first dedication took place on January 8, 1815, at the transfer exam. The meeting between Pushkin and Derzhavin did not have in reality that conditionally symbolic (and, of course, even more so, theatrical) character that we involuntarily attribute to it, looking back and knowing that the greatest Russian poet of the 18th century met in the Lyceum hall on that day, who has only a year and a half left, and the greatest of Russian poets in general. Derzhavin had already “passed on” his lyre to young poets several times before:

Pushkin himself later described this meeting, combining humor with lyricism: "Derzhavin arrived. He entered the entrance hall, and Delvig heard him ask the doorman:" Where, brother, is the outhouse here? "This prosaic question disappointed Delvig."

"Derzhavin was very old ... He sat with his head on his hand. His face was meaningless; his eyes were dull; his lips were drooping."(XII, 158).

These lines were written almost at the same time as the portrait of the old countess in The Queen of Spades: "The Countess was sitting all yellow, moving her droopy lips ... In her dull eyes, a complete lack of thought was depicted."(VIII, 1 ,240).

This coincidence is not accidental: in both cases, Pushkin depicts the already departed and obsolete 18th century, as if condensed in the face of one person.

The episode of the meeting of the outgoing and beginning poets at one of the translation exams at the Lyceum hardly made a stunning impression on contemporaries, absorbed in the routine of daily official, political, court concerns. Only a close circle of friends, who were already beginning to appreciate the talent of the young poet, could feel its significance. But for Pushkin himself, this was one of the most important events in his life. He felt like a page knighted: "Finally they called me. I read my" Memoirs in Ts. <арском> WITH.<еле>», standing a stone's throw from Derzhavin. I am unable to describe the state of my soul: when I reached the verse where I mention the name of Derzhavin, my adolescent voice rang out, and my heart beat with delightful delight ...

I don’t remember how I finished my reading, I don’t remember where I ran away. Derzhavin was delighted; he demanded me, wanted to hug me ... They looked for me, but did not find ... "(XII, 158).

The second initiation was the acceptance of Pushkin into "Arzamas" - an unofficial literary society that united young and perky writers who ridiculed literary Old Believers at their humorous meetings. The members of "Arzamas" were Karamzin's admirers, and they were ironic about Derzhavin, in whose house archaist writers solemnly gathered. Pushkin was admitted to "Arzamas" in the fall of 1817, at a time when this society was in a state of internal discord. For Pushkin, this acceptance had a deep meaning: his belonging to literature received public recognition. The enrollment of young writers - romantics, mockers, persecutors of the "past century" into the fighting squad - drew a line under the period of childhood and years of study. He felt admitted to the circle of generally recognized poets.

Chapter 2
Petersburg. 1817-1820

The Lyceum has become a home. Years will come when the House will become for Pushkin a symbol of the most cherished feelings and the highest values of Culture. Then the meaning of the life path will be drawn in the image of returning home. On the day of the fourth anniversary of the events on Senate Square, December 14, 1829, Pushkin was irresistibly drawn home - he would go to Tsarskoe Selo. In the poem begun then and remaining unfinished, the image of the return dominates. It is no coincidence that the poem, even with its title ("Memories in Tsarskoe Selo" *), returns to the lyceum exam, significant for the poet:

* The word "memories" is used here and in the lyceum poem in slightly different meanings in 1814, the poet spoke about historical memories that are evoked by the monuments of Tsarskoye Selo, in 1829 - about personal and historical ones.

In his youth, for Pushkin's House (Lyceum, St. Petersburg) ~ cell and bondage. Staying in it is violent, but flight is desirable. Space and freedom are seen behind the walls of the House. While Pushkin is at the Lyceum, St. Petersburg seems like an open space when he is in St. Petersburg. - village. These ideas will even leave an imprint on the southern exile, which in the poet's mind, unexpectedly for us, will sometimes be portrayed not as a forced exile, but as a voluntary flight from captivity to freedom. And before the reader and before himself, Pushkin appears in the form of a Fugitive, a voluntary Exile. Sometimes this image, drawn from the arsenal of images of European romanticism, will have a real biographical content, and behind the verses:

there were real plans "quietly take a cane and a hat and go to see Constantinople"(XIII, 86). However, more often we face poetic comprehension that transforms reality. In life's prose - a violent reference to the south, in verse:

In poetry, the Lyceum is an abandoned monastery, St. Petersburg is a brilliant and tempting goal of escape. In real life, everything is different: the poet's parents moved to St. Petersburg, and Pushkin returns home from the Lyceum; it is interesting that the house in Kolomna "near the Intercession", on the Fontanka in the house of Klokachev, as well as the general impressions of this suburb, where, in the words of Gogol, "everything is silence and resignation", which were later recalled in "The House in Kolomna" and "The Bronze Horseman" , for the creativity of Pushkin 1817-1820 do not exist; from the Lyceum, Pushkin wrote letters to his sister - in the poetry of the Petersburg period neither sister nor any other "domestic" themes are mentioned.

In St. Petersburg, Pushkin lived from the beginning of June 1817 (on June 9 the graduation act of the Lyceum took place, and the same month he was already in St. Petersburg) to May 6, 1820, when he left the Tsarskoye Selo road, heading for southern exile. The plans for military service, which Pushkin cherished in his imagination, had to be abandoned: his father, fearing expenses (service in the guard required large expenditures), insisted on civil service. Pushkin was enrolled in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs and was sworn in on June 13 (on the same day as Kuchelbecker and Griboyedov).

Petersburg spun Pushkin. In a wide black tailcoat with uncut folds (such a tailcoat was called a l "americaine; his deliberate rudeness was the height of dapper sophistication) and in a wide hat a la bolivar(the brim of such a hat has been hers *) he is in a hurry to reward himself for the forced six-year seclusion.

* Pylyaev M.I. Essays and stories. SPb, 1892, p. 104.

There were periods in Pushkin's life when the book was his favorite society, and solitude and concentration of thought was the best thing to do. The years 1817-1820 are sharply different from these periods. The point here is not only that the unspent forces of the young poet were vigorously looking for an outcome for themselves. Young Russia boiled and seethed in unison with them. These years in Russian history have a special, incomparable physiognomy. The happy ending of the wars with Napoleon awakened a sense of its own strength in society. The right to social activity seemed to be achieved irrevocably. Young people were full of thirst for activity and faith in its possibility in Russia. The conflict on this path with the government and the "old people" had already loomed quite clearly, but no one yet believed in its tragic nature. A characteristic feature of the time was the desire to unite efforts. Even reading a book - an occupation traditionally associated with solitude in cultural history - is done together. At the beginning of the 18th century, Cantemir wrote about reading:

In the late 1810s - early 1820s, reading in Russia was a form of friendly communication; read together as they think, argue, drink, discuss government measures or theatrical news. Pushkin, referring to the hussar Y. Saburov, put in one row

P.P. Kaverin is a Gottingen, hussar, boozer and duelist, a member of the Union of Welfare. He "walked" (that is, he drank, not only with Pushkin, but also "put a plug in the ceiling" with Onegin in the trendy restaurant Talon on Nevsky. P.Kh. Molostvov is a life-hussar, original and liberal. Reading is also - requires a companion, like fun or conversation. The nature of such reading is perfectly illustrated by the story of the Decembrist ID Yakushkin. He will meet Colonel P. Kh. Grabbe in 1818. During their conversation, the batman brought Grabbe a hussar uniform: a dolman and a mentik - that I was going to go and introduce myself to Arakcheev.

"The conversation fell on the ancient historians. At this time we passionately loved the ancients: Plutarch, Titus Livia, Cicero, Tacitus and others were almost table books for each of us. Grabbe also loved the ancients. On my table lay a book from which I read Grabbe several letters from Brutus to Cicero, in which the first, who decided to act against Octavius, reproaches the latter for cowardice.(i.e. "noticeably". - Yu.L. ) I got fired up and told my man that he would not leave the yard, and we dined with the seals; then he never visited Arakcheev "*.

* Yakushkin I.D. Notes, articles, letters. M., 1951, p. twenty.

Striving for commonwealth, community, fraternal unity is a characteristic feature of Pushkin's behavior in these years. The energy with which he associates himself with various literary and friendly circles is capable of causing surprise. One interesting feature should be noted: each of the circles that attracted Pushkin's attention during these years has a certain literary and political face, it includes people who have been shot at in literary disputes or covered with battle scars, their tastes and views have already been determined, their judgments and goals are categorical. Membership in one circle, as a rule, excludes participation in another. Pushkin stands out in their circle as a seeker among those who have found. The point is not only in age, but in Pushkin's profoundly characteristic throughout his life - still spontaneous - deviation from any one-sidedness: entering this or that circle, he, with the same ease with which he mastered the styles of Russian poetry in lyceum poetry, assimilates the dominant style of the circle, the nature of the behavior and speech of its participants. But the more brilliantly in one or another of the lyceum poems the mastery of the already established stylistic, genre norms, the more Pushkin's own is manifested in it. Something similar happened in 1817-1820 in the sphere of the poet's building of his personality. With unusual ease, assimilating the "conditions of the game" adopted in a particular circle, joining in the style of friendly communication offered by one or another of the interlocutor-mentors, Pushkin does not dissolve in other people's characters and norms. He's looking for myself.

Pushkin's ability to change, moving from one circle to another, and to seek communication with completely different people did not always meet with approval in the circle of the Decembrists. Even a close friend of I.I. Pushchin wrote: "Pushkin, liberal in his views, had some miserable habit of betraying his noble character and very often made me and all of us angry that he loved, for example, to spin around Orlov, Chernyshev, Kiselev and others at the orchestra<...>You say, it used to be: "What a desire for you, dear friend, to bother with this public opinion: you will not find sympathy in any of them, etc." He will listen patiently, start tickling, hugging, which he usually did when he got a little lost. Then, you look, - Pushkin again with the lions of that time! "*.

* A.C. Pushkin in the memoirs of his contemporaries. vol. 1, p. 98.

A.F. Orlov is the brother of the Decembrist, who at that time was barely over thirty, the son of Catherine's grandee, who began his military career at Austerlitz (golden saber "for bravery"), received seven wounds on the Borodino field, at thirty, Major General, commander of the Horse Guards regiment , the favorite of the emperor, had a lot to tell. A.I. Chernyshev, a year younger than Orlov, also had a rich life experience behind him: repeated, many hours of conversations with Napoleon, excellent personal knowledge of the entire entourage of the French emperor made this adjutant general also an interesting interlocutor. P.D. Kiselev is an intelligent and clever ambitious, quickly making a career, just thirty-one years old, promoted to major general, a man who knew how to simultaneously be the most confidant of Emperor Alexander and Pestel's closest friend. All of them, in the spirit of the leaders of Alexander's time, did not shy away from "lawfully free" ideas, all three later became successful bureaucrats.

However, it is precisely this testimony of Pushchin that allows us to assert that Pushkin was not an admired boy in this circle, but an inquisitive observer. Even the shrewd Pestel, who believed in the sincerity of his friendship and free-thinking and paid for it with his life, could not figure out Kiselev, and twenty-year-old Pushkin wrote about him in a message to A.F. Orlov:

At the Lyceum, Pushkin, who was elected in absentia to "Arzamas" and received there the code name "Cricket", was eager for real participation in the activities of this society. However, when this desire came true, the purely literary direction of "Arzamas" in the era of the Union of Prosperity became an anachronism. In February - April 1817 N. Turgenev and M. Orlov joined "Arzamas", and in the fall - N. Muravyov. All of them were active members of conspiratorial political groups; they all considered literature not as an independent value, but only as a means of political propaganda. By this time, the political interests of the "old" Arzamas residents became more active: P.A. Vyazemsky, D.V. Davydov. The entry in the diary of N.I. Turgenev of September 29, 1817: "The third day we had Arzamas. Accidentally we deviated from literature and began to talk about internal politics. Everyone agrees on the need to abolish slavery." Apparently, Pushkin was also present at this meeting.

* Archive br. Turgenevs, no. 5. Ptg., 1921, p. 93.

Arzamas was not ready for political activity and fell apart. However, apparently, it was here that Pushkin became close to Nikolai Turgenev and Mikhail Orlov, connections with whom during this period decisively pushed aside the old literary attachments and friendships. Karamzin, Zhukovsky, Batyushkov - fighters for the elegance of language and for a "new style", heroes of literary battles with "Beseda" - faded before the preachers of freedom and civic virtues.

Nikolai Turgenev played a special role in Pushkin's life during these years. He was ten years older than Pushkin. Having inherited severe ethical principles and deep religiosity from his Freemason father, N.I. Turgenev combined a firm, doctrinaire and dry mind with the most exalted, albeit somewhat bookish, love for Russia and the Russian people. Fight against slavery ( "rudeness" as he expressed in his specific political vocabulary) was an idea that he carried throughout his life. If his older brother, Alexander, was distinguished by a gentle character and his liberalism was expressed mainly in tolerance, readiness to accept someone else's point of view, then Nikolai Turgenev was intolerant, demanded uncompromising from people. in decisions he was harsh, in conversations mocking and categorical. Here, in Turgenev's apartment, Pushkin was a regular guest. The political views of N. Turgenev during these years basically coincided with the moods of the moderate wing of the Union of Welfare, into which he joined in the second half of 1818. He hoped to achieve the liberation of the peasants with the help of the government.

They no longer believed in the good intentions of the tsar. But members of the Union of Prosperity pinned their hopes on pressure from the advanced public, to which Alexander I, whether he wanted it or not, would be forced to yield. For this purpose, the Union of Welfare considered it necessary to create public opinion in Russia, which would be led by political conspirators through literature and journalism. Thus, the writer was assigned a subordinate role. Purely artistic problems were of little concern to N. Turgenev. In 1819 he wrote: "Where can a Russian get the rules of civicism necessary for this? Our literature is limited to this day by almost nothing but poetry. Writings in prose do not touch upon subjects of politics."

"Poetry and fine literature in general cannot fill our souls" *.

* "Russian bibliophile", 1914, No. 5, p. 17.

Göttingen, diplomat and statesman, author of a book on political economy, N. Turgenev looked at poetry somewhat downright; admitting an exception only for the agitationally useful; political lyrics. He tried to instill these views in Pushkin as well. His younger brother, the novice diplomat Sergei, was in complete agreement with him, reflecting in his diary: “Zhukovsky wrote to me that, judging by the portrait, he sees that liberal ideas are shining in my eyes. He is a poet, but I will tell him in truth that his talent will be lost if he doesn’t devote him to everything liberal. to earn immortality ... They again write to me about Pushkin, as about an unfolding talent. Oh, let them hasten to breathe liberality into him and, instead of lamenting himself, let his first song be: Freedom" *.

* Decembrist N.I. Turgenev. Letters to brother s. I. Turgenev. M.-L., 1936, p. 59.

"Mourning for Oneself"- elegiac poetry, to which the Turgenevs, like most of the Decembrists, were harsh.

The influence of N.I. Turgenev is clearly reflected in Pushkin's poem "Village". Characteristic from this point of view, and the beginning of the ode "Liberty" - a demonstrative rejection of love poetry and an appeal to the freedom-loving Muse. One should not, of course, understand this influence too bluntly - the idea of condemning love poetry and opposing it to political poetry was almost universal in the Decembrist and those close to them. Vyazemsky, walking a different, completely original road, in his poem "Indignation" expressed the same idea in very similar images:

In Pushkin:

The ode "Liberty" has in common with the ideas of N. Turgenev not only the opposition of love and political poetry, but the whole range of ideas, the attitude to the French Revolution and the Russian autocracy. The ode "Liberty" expressed the political concepts of the Union of Welfare, and the views of N.I. Turgenev were directly reflected in it *.

* There is a completely plausible biographical legend, according to which the ode ((Liberty "was started at the suggestion of N.I. Turgenev, in his apartment, from the windows of which the Mikhailovsky Palace is visible - the place of death of Paul I . 1. M.-L., 1956, pp. 147-148).

N.I. Turgenev was a stern moralist - not everything in Pushkin's behavior and Pushkin's poetry satisfied him. Pushkin's harsh antics against the government, epigrams and a frivolous attitude towards the service (N. Turgenev himself held positions of responsibility in the State Council and the Ministry of Finance and took the service very seriously) forced him to "scold and advise" Pushkin. According to A.I. Turgenev, he "made me feel more than once" Pushkin, "that you can not take anything for anything and scold the one who gives it", and the poet's condemnation "for his epigrams of that time, etc. against the government" once, during a conversation at the Turgenevs' apartment, it took on such acute forms that Pushkin summoned N.I. Turgenev for a duel,. however, he immediately changed his mind and took the call back with an apology *.

* In memory of the Decembrists, vol. II. L., 1926, p. 122.

Nikolai Turgenev was not the only link between Pushkin and the Union of Prosperity. Apparently, in the fall of 1817, Pushkin met Fyodor Nikolaevich Glinka. Glinka came from a poor, but old family of Smolensk nobles. Small in stature, sickly from childhood, he was distinguished by exceptional courage in the war (his entire chest was covered with Russian and foreign orders) and extreme philanthropy. Even Speransky, who himself looked like a model of sensitivity against the background of figures like Arakcheev, blamed Glinka for being impressionable inappropriate in the conditions of Russian reality, saying: "You can't pay everyone at the churchyard!" Glinka was a well-known writer and a very active figure in secret Decembrist organizations at an early stage of their existence. Combining the role of one of the leaders of the Union of Welfare and an adjutant assigned for special assignments to the Petersburg military governor-general Miloradovich, Glinka rendered important services to secret societies, and also greatly contributed to mitigating the fate of Pushkin in 1820.

In 1819, Glinka was elected chairman of the Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature in St. Petersburg, which was to play an exceptional role in rallying the writers of the Decembrist orientation. Pushkin was strongly influenced by Glinka's personality - a man of high spiritual purity and firmness. To a certain extent, Glinka drew Pushkin into legal activities, gradually led by conspiratorial societies. Other points of contact between Pushkin and the Union of Prosperity are outlined. While still at the Lyceum, Pushkin met Nikita Muravyov. When in 1817 this acquaintance was renewed in connection with the entry of Muravyov into "Arzamas", he was already one of the organizers of the first secret society of the Decembrists - the Union of Salvation. Apparently, through Nikita Muravyov, Pushkin was attracted to participate in those meetings of the Union of Welfare, which were not strictly conspiratorial and were supposed to contribute to the spread of the influence of society. Many years later, while working on the tenth chapter of Eugene Onegin, Pushkin drew such a meeting

For a long time these poems seemed to be the fruit of poetic fiction: Pushkin's participation in meetings of this kind seemed impossible. However, in 1952 M.V. Nechkina published the testimony of the Decembrist N.N. Gorstkin, who said (it is necessary, of course, to take into account the tactically quite understandable desire of Gorstkin to belittle the significance of the described meetings): "They began to gather at first willingly, then ten people would hardly gather, I was two or three times at the<нязя> Ilya Dolgoruky, who was, it seems, one of the main at the time. With him, Pushkin read his poems, everyone admired the sharpness, told all sorts of nonsense, read, others whispered, and that's it; general conversation never happened anywhere<...>I visited Nikita Muravyov's evenings, here I often met people who did not belong to society "*

* "Lit. inheritance", 1952, v. 58, p. 158-159.

If we add that the prominent figures of the Decembrist movement named in the stanza Lunin and Yakushkin were also Pushkin's acquaintances during these years (he met Lunin on November 19, 1818 during the farewell ceremony for Batyushkov, who was leaving for Italy, and got so close that in 1820, before leaving Lunin cut off a strand of hair from him for memory; Chaadaev introduced Pushkin to Yakushkin), the picture of Pushkin's Decembrist connections becomes quite clear. However, it will not be completely finished if we turn to one more side of the question.

We have already said that the moral ideal of the Union of Welfare was tinted in the tone of heroic asceticism. A true citizen was thought of as a stern hero who, for the sake of the common good, abandoned happiness, fun, and friendly feasts. Imbued with a feeling of love for his homeland, he does not waste his spiritual strength on love interests. Not only elegant erotic poetry, but also Zhukovsky's "unearthly" love elegies evoke condemnation in him: they relax the soul of a citizen and are useless for the cause of Freedom. Ryleev wrote:

V.F. Raevsky later, in Chisinau, already sitting in the Tiraspol fortress, called on Pushkin:

Is it love to sing where blood sprinkles.

The ethics of heroic self-denial, opposing the citizen to the poet, the hero to the lover and Freedom to Happiness, was characteristic of a wide circle of freedom-lovers - from Robespierre to Schiller. However, there were other ethical notions: the Enlightenment of the 18th century in the fight against Christian asceticism created a different concept of Freedom. Freedom was not opposed to Happiness, but coincided with it. A truly free man is a man of seething passions, liberated inner forces, having the audacity to desire and achieve what he wants, a poet and a lover. Freedom is a life that does not fit into any framework, overflowing, and self-restraint is a kind of spiritual slavery. A free society cannot be built on the basis of asceticism, the self-denial of an individual. On the contrary, it is precisely this that will ensure the personality of an unheard-of completeness and flourishing.

Pushkin was extremely deeply and organically connected with the culture of the Enlightenment of the 18th century. In this respect, of the Russian writers of his century, only Herzen can be compared with him. In Pushkin's organic love of life, it is impossible to separate the traits of personal temperament from the theoretical position. It is significant that almost simultaneously with the ode "Liberty", which clearly expressed the concept of heroic asceticism, Pushkin wrote the madrigal Golitsina "An inexperienced lover of the lands of others ...", in which two lofty human ideals are given as equivalent:

The Seal of Freedom respects both.

Such a view left an imprint on the poet's personal, everyday behavior. To live in constant tension of passions was for Pushkin not a concession to temperament, but a conscious and programmatic attitude towards life. And if Love was, as it were, a sign of this continuous burning of life, then Prank and Laziness became conventional designations of insubordination to the deathly discipline of state bureaucracy. They opposed the decorous order of business Petersburg as a protest against the conventional norms of decency and as a refusal to take seriously the whole world of state values. However, at the same time they opposed the seriousness of the civil pathos of the Decembrist ethics.

The border between the Decembrists and the liberal youth circles close to them divided in two the sphere of ethics, and the area of direct life habits, the style of everyday existence. Philanthropist and unmercenary Fyodor Glinka covered himself with an overcoat instead of a blanket and, if it was necessary to redeem some serf artist, would deny himself tea and switch to boiling water. Its slogan was severe poverty and labor. Delvig and Baratynsky were also poor:

However, their slogan was merry poverty and laziness. For Delvig, Baratynsky and the poets of their circle, fun was only a literary pose: Baratynsky, a melancholic in life, wrote the poem "Feasts", glorifying carefree fun. A self-denying dreamer in poetry, Zhukovsky in everyday life was more balanced and more cheerful than the hedonist in poetry and the sick loser in life Batiushkov. Pushkin, on the other hand, made "poetic" behavior the norm for the real. Poetic prank and everyday "rebelliousness" became a common feature of his life behavior.

The guardians and mentors surrounding Pushkin - from Karamzin to N. Turgenev - could not understand that he was paving a new path: from their point of view, he was simply going astray. The brilliance of Pushkin's talent dazzled, and poets, public and cultural figures of the older generation considered it their duty to preserve this talent for Russia. They considered it necessary to direct him along the usual and backward path. The unusual seemed to be dissolute. There were many well-wishers around Pushkin and very few people who would understand him. Pushkin got tired of moralizing, from the fact that he was still considered a boy, and sometimes to spite everyone in spite of the boyishness of his behavior.

Zhukovsky said in Arzamas: "The cricket, buried in a crack of leprosy, from there shouts, as in verse:" I'm lazy! "(the conviction that "in verses" is allowed is the behavior that is forbidden in life) *.

* Report imp. Public library for 1884, St. Petersburg., 1887, p. 158, adj.

A.I. Turgenev, in his own words, daily scolded Pushkin for "laziness and carelessness about their own education. To this was added a taste for the marketplace, red tape, and free-thinking, - also marketplace, of the 18th century"*. Batyushkov wrote to A.I. Turgenev: "It would not be bad to lock him up in Göttingen and feed him milk soup and logic for three years." **.

* Commentary by B.L. Modzalevsky in the book: Pushkin. Letters, t. 1.M., 1926, p. 191.
** "Russian Archive", 1867, No. 11, stb. 1534.

The Green Lamp shows what the "pranks" of the youth of the Pushkin circle are. This friendly literary and theater society was founded in the spring of 1819. The "Green Lamp" was going to the house of Nikita Vsevolozhsky. There was vague gossip in society about the meetings in the Vsevolozhsky House, and to the minds of Pushkin's first biographers, it was drawn in the outlines of some kind of gathering of depraved youth organizing orgies. The publication of the minutes and other materials of the meetings forced "to resolutely reject this version. The participation in the leadership of the Green Lamp of such people as F. Glinka, S. Trubetskoy and Y. Tolstoy, active figures of the Decembrist movement, is a sufficient argument to speak of a serious The publication of the works read at the meeting and the analysis of the historical and literary interests of the "Green Lamp" * finally consolidated the idea of the connection of this organization with the Decembrist movement.

* See. Tomashevsky B. Pushkin, book 1 (1813-1824). M.-L., 1956, p. 193-234.

The impression from these data was so great that in the research literature there was an idea of the "Green Lamp" as simply a legal branch of the Union of Welfare (the creation of such branches was encouraged by the charter of the Union). But this view simplifies the picture. Undoubtedly, the "Green Lamp" was in the field of vision of the Union, which, apparently, sought to extend its influence to it. However, its direction was not completely uniform with a serious, imbued with an atmosphere of moral rigor and civil service by the Union of Prosperity. The Green Lamp combined love of freedom and serious interests with an atmosphere of play, exuberant fun, a demonstrative challenge to the "serious" world. Rebelliousness and freethinking permeate the poems and letters of Pushkin associated with The Green Lamp. However, they all have the most mischievous character, decidedly alien to the seriousness of the Welfare Union.

To a friend in "Lamp" P.B. Mansurov, who went to work in Arakcheevsky Novgorod (there were military settlements near Novgorod), Pushkin wrote on October 27, 1819: "The green Lamp is on fire - it seems to go out - but it's a pity - there is oil (ie our friend's champagne). Do you write, my brother - will you write to me, my bachelorette. Talk to me about yourself - about military settlements. That's all I need -because I love you - and I hate despotism. Farewell, honey. " and the signature: "Sver<чок>A. Pushkin "(XIII, 11) This combination "I hate despotism" With "bachelorette", "honey"(and other expressions, even much more free) is characteristic of The Green Lamp, but resolutely alien to the spirit of the Decembrist underground.

A lack of understanding of the peculiarities of Pushkin's position gave rise to the idea in conspiratorial circles that he was still "immature" and not trustworthy. And if people who personally knew Pushkin and loved him softened this sentence with consoling arguments that, being outside the secret society, Pushkin contributes with his poems to the cause of freedom (Pushchin), or with reference to the need to protect his talent from the dangers associated with direct revolutionary struggle (Ryleev didn’t take care of himself!), Then the people of the Decembrist periphery, who did not know Pushkin personally and who feed on rumors from third hands, received such rumors: "He, by his character and cowardice, by his depraved life, will immediately inform the government about the existence of the Secret Society."*. These words of blatant injustice were said by P.P. Gorbachevsky is a Decembrist of rare perseverance, an honest and courageous person. At the same time, he referred to such saints for the Decembrists as the opinion of the hanged S. Muravyov-Apostol and M. Bestuzhev-Ryumin. Mikhail Bestuzhev, whose notes cover the manuscript, fully agreed with this.

* Gorbachevsky I.I. Notes of the Decembrist. M., 1916, p. 300.

The Union of Welfare was not a sufficiently conspiratorial organization in the sense attributed to this word in the subsequent revolutionary tradition: its existence was widely known. It is characteristic that when M. Orlov asked General N.N. Raevsky's hand to his daughter, the future father-in-law made Orlov's exit from the secret society a condition of marriage. Consequently, Raevsky knew not only about the existence of society, but also about who its members were, and discussed this issue in the same way as before marriage they discussed issues of dowry.

Constantly in contact with the members of the secret society, Pushkin, of course, knew about its existence and clearly strove to enter its circle. The fact that he did not receive an invitation and even ran into a polite but firm rebuff from people so close to him as Pushchin, of course, hurt him immensely. If we do not take into account the extent to which he was hurt and traumatized, on the one hand, by the annoying teachings of his mentors, on the other hand, by the mistrust of friends, the feverish nervousness and tension characteristic of Pushkin's state of mind during these years will remain a mystery to us. They are expressed, for example, in the fact that he expects grievances at any moment and is constantly ready to answer them with a challenge to a duel. In the summer of 1817, on an insignificant reason, he challenged the old man to a duel, S.I. Hannibal, challenged N. Turgenev, Lyceum classmate M. Korf, Major Denisevich and, apparently, many others. E.A. Karamzina wrote to her brother, Vyazemsky: "Mr. Pushkin has a duel every day; thank God, not deadly"*. Not all duels could be settled without bringing matters to the "field of honor": in the fall of 1819, Pushkin fired on Kuchelbecker (at the latter's summons), both fired into the air (the matter ended in a friendly reconciliation). Later he confessed to F.N. Lugin, that in St. Petersburg he had a serious duel (there is an assumption that his opponent was Ryleev).

* Antiquity and novelty, book. 1, 1897, p. 98.

During this period of emotional turmoil, the rapprochement with P.Ya. Chaadaev.

Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev, with whom Pushkin met while still a lyceum student of Karamzin, was one of the most remarkable people of his time. He received an excellent education at home, grew up in the atmosphere of a cultural aristocratic nest in the house of the historian M.M. Shcherbatov, who was his grandfather, Chaadaev at the age of sixteen joined the Semyonovsky Guards regiment, with which he made the way from Borodino to Paris. In the years we are interested in now, he was listed in the Life Guards Hussar Regiment, was an adjutant of the Minister of War Vasilchikov and lodged in the Demutov tavern * in St. Petersburg. "Chaadaev was handsome, distinguished not by hussars, but by some kind of English, almost even Byronic manners, and had a brilliant success in the then Petersburg society" **.

* Hotel on the Moika, near Nevsky Prospect.
** Sverbeev D.N. Notes, vol. 2, M., 1899, p. 386.

Chaadaev was a member of the Union of Welfare, but did not show activity in it: the tactics of slow propaganda, the spread of freedom-loving ideas and the cause of philanthropy, apparently, attracted him little. Chaadaev is seized with a thirst for glory - glory of enormous, unheard-of, glory that will forever bring his name to the tablets of the history of Russia and Europe. The example of Napoleon made him dizzy, and the thought of his chosenness, of the exceptional lot awaiting him, did not leave his whole life. He was attracted by the path of the Russian Brutus or the Russian marquis of Pose *: the difference is not so significant whether to stab the tyrant with a dagger in the name of freedom or to carry him away with a fiery sermon; what is important is that there must be a struggle for freedom, heroic death and immortal glory ahead.

* Brutus - a politician in Ancient Rome, one of the organizers of the assassination of Caesar; in the literature of the XVIII - early. XIX century. - the image of the hero-republican. The Marquis Pose is the hero of Schiller's tragedy "Don Carlos", a republican trying to influence the tyrant.

In Chaadaev's office:

As Pushkin wrote in 1821 - the poet was covered by an atmosphere of greatness.

Chaadaev taught Pushkin to prepare for a great future and respect a person in himself, whose name belongs to posterity. Chaadaev also gave Pushkin lessons and demanded from him "in education to become on a par with the century." However, his teachings put Pushkin in the position of not a schoolboy, but a hero. They did not humiliate, but elevated Pushkin in their own eyes.

The great future, for which Chaadaev urged Pushkin to prepare, was only partly connected with poetry: in the office of the Demutov tavern, apparently, it was also a question of repeating the feat of Brutus and Cassius in Russia - to free the homeland from the tyrant with a blow of the sword. Decembrist Yakushkin said in his memoirs that when in 1821 the Decembrists in Kamenka, in order to avert the suspicions of A.N. Raevsky (the general's son), played the scene of organizing a secret society and immediately turned everything into a joke, Pushkin exclaimed bitterly: "I have already seen my life ennobled and a lofty goal in front of me" *. "Life ennobled by a lofty goal", "a magnanimous goal"(XIII, 241) - behind these words of Pushkin lies the dream of a great destiny. Even death is an object of envy if it is associated with the field in which a person "belongs to history."

* Yakushkin I.D. Notes, articles, letters. M., 1951, p. 43.49.

Conversations with Chaadaev taught Pushkin to see his own life "ennobled high purpose". Only the atmosphere of talk about tyranicide can explain the proud words:

Why should the names of Chaadaev be written on the wreckage of the Russian autocracy, "a young man in his twenties who did not write anything; in any field he did not distinguish himself in any way", how venomously did one of the memoirists write about him, and - Pushkin, who has not yet declared himself in political life and was not even admitted to the circle of Russian conspirators? The strangeness of these verses is concealed for us by the fact that in them we see an appeal to all freedom-loving youth, and we perceive Pushkin in the rays of his subsequent glory. But in the years 1818-1820 (the poem is dated approximately), it can only be understood in the light of heroic and ambitious plans.

It was in these plans that Pushkin found a fulcrum in one of the most bitter moments of his life. Numerous testimonies of contemporaries confirm Pushkin's charm, his talent for friendship and talent for love. But he knew how to incite hatred, and he always had enemies. In St. Petersburg in 1819-1820, there were enough people who voluntarily reported to the government about Pushkin's poems, words and antics. V.N. was especially zealous. Karazin is a restless and envious person, obsessed with ambition. Someone else's fame caused him sincere suffering. His denunciations, brought to the attention of Alexander I, were all the more poisonous because Pushkin appeared in them as a personal offender to the tsar, and the suspicious and vindictive Alexander could forgive the most daring thoughts, but he never forgave and did not forget personal grievances.

On April 19, 1820, Karamzin wrote to Dmitriev: "Above the local poet Pushkin, if not a cloud, then at least a cloud, and a thunderous one (this is between us): serving under the banner of the Liberalists, he wrote and dismissed poems to liberty, epigrams to rulers, etc., and so on. The Police found out. etc. They are afraid of the consequences " *.

* Karamzin N.M. Letters to I.I. Dmitriev. SPb., 1866, p. 286-287.

At a time when the fate of Pushkin was being decided and friends were busy with the emperor for the poet, vile gossip spread across St. Petersburg that the poet was secretly, by order of the government, carved out. It was dismissed by the famous adventurer, brether, gambler F.I. Tolstoy ("The American"). Pushkin did not know the source of the slander and was completely shocked, considering himself irrevocably disgraced and his life destroyed. Not knowing what to decide on - whether to commit suicide or kill the emperor as the indirect culprit of the gossip - he rushed to Chaadaev. Here he found solace: Chaadaev proved to him that a person who has a great career ahead should despise slander and be superior to his persecutors.

The troubles of Karamzin, Chaadaev, F. Glinka somewhat eased Pushkin's fate: neither Siberia nor Solovki became the place of his exile. On May 6, 1820, he left Petersburg to the south with an appointment to the office of Lieutenant General I.N. Inzov.

On September 9, Vladimir Abarinov on the website of the radio station "Liberty", and on September 10, Boris Sokolov on the site grani.ru announced a figure that allegedly 40 thousand Russian soldiers refused to return to Russia after the overseas campaigns of the Russian army in 1813-1814. Like, "they chose freedom." Everything is clear about the attitude of the respective sites towards Russia and its history as a whole, so it is not surprising that this figure was announced there.

First, it should be said right away that at the moment historical science does not know such sources, which would say about 40 thousand "non-revivalists" of 1813-1814. Abarinov and Sokolov do not indicate the sources of this figure either. Therefore, there is every reason to believe that the figure is taken from the ceiling.
Well, to make it clearer what 40 thousand soldiers were at that time - the number of Russian troops who participated in the storming of Paris on March 30, 1814 was 63 thousand people. In total, 175 thousand people took part in the foreign campaigns of the Russian army. By the beginning of the 1814 campaign - 157 thousand.
Thus, the figure of 40 thousand defectors - no more than 25% of this number - does not stand up to criticism. Of course, a certain number of Russian soldiers could have stayed in Europe, but not 40 thousand.

It is interesting to approach the question from the other side - how many French prisoners did not return to France? The number of 150 thousand soldiers of Napoleon's army who remained in Russia is walking on the Internet. This is also an inflection. On this score, I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the research of V.A. Bessonov "The number of prisoners of war in 1812 in Russia". To quote the result of the study: "Taking into account the number of prisoners of war, which was not reflected in the documents sent from 45 regions, we find that the total number of representatives of the Great Army taken prisoner during the Patriotic War of 1812 can be estimated at 110 thousand people, of which more than 60 died by the beginning of 1813. thousand prisoners "... The high mortality rate was caused by the fact that prisoners of war in large columns of 2-3 thousand people were sent in the same frost-resistant clothing and shabby shoes in the cold to different provinces, and on the way many of them died.
Thus, by the beginning of 1813, about 50 thousand prisoners remained in Russia (it should be noted that other researchers estimate the total number of prisoners not at 110 thousand, but at 200 thousand). The exact number of those who refused to return to their home is unknown. Some statistics are given in the article by T.A. Moshina and N.A. Gutina "A Slow Return Home":

It is not known how the fate of most of the prisoners developed, among whom there were only about fifty generals. According to various sources, out of 200 thousand prisoners in April 1815, only about 30 thousand returned to their homeland. Many stayed and settled in Russia. According to the data of 1837, most of them were in Moscow and the Moscow province - 3229 people. (merchants, shop assistants, tutors, artisans, artisans). Some of the former prisoners returned to France after the events of December 14, 1825 and the resulting "security checks" and harassment.

The Patriotic War of 1812 began on June 12 - on this day, Napoleon's troops crossed the Neman River, unleashing wars between the two crowns of French and Russian. This war lasted until December 14, 1812, culminating in a complete and unconditional victory for the Russian and allied forces. This is a glorious page in Russian history, which we will consider, referring to the official history textbooks of Russia and France, as well as to the books of bibliographers Napoleon, Alexander 1 and Kutuzov, who describe in great detail the events taking place at that moment.

➤ ➤ ➤ ➤ ➤ ➤ ➤

The beginning of the war

Causes of the war of 1812

The causes of the Patriotic War of 1812, like all other wars in the history of mankind, must be considered in two aspects - the reasons on the part of France and the reasons on the part of Russia.

Causes from France

In just a few years, Napoleon radically changed his own view of Russia. If, having come to power, he wrote that Russia was his only ally, then by 1812 Russia had become a threat to France (consider it to the emperor). This was largely provoked by Alexander 1 himself. So, this is why France attacked Russia in June 1812:

Violation of the Tilsit Agreements: Easing the Continental Blockade. As you know, the main enemy of France at that time was England, against which the blockade was organized. Russia also participated in this, but in 1810 the government passed a law allowing trade with England through intermediaries. In fact, this made the entire blockade ineffective, which completely undermined the plans of France.
Dynastic marriage rejections. Napoleon aspired to marry the imperial court of Russia in order to become "God's anointed". However, in 1808 he was denied marriage to Princess Catherine. In 1810 he was denied marriage to Princess Anna. As a result, in 1811 the French emperor married an Austrian princess.
The transfer of Russian troops to the border with Poland in 1811. In the first half of 1811, Alexander I ordered to transfer 3 divisions to the Polish borders, fearing a Polish uprising, which could be transferred to Russian lands. This step was regarded by Napoleon as aggression and preparation for war over Polish territories, which by that time were already subordinate to France.

Soldiers! A new, second in a row, Polish war begins! The first ended in Tilsit. There Russia promised to be an eternal ally for France in the war with England, but she broke her promise. The Russian emperor does not want to give explanations for his actions until the French eagles cross the Rhine. Do they think that we have become different? Are we not the winners of Austerlitz? Russia presented France with a choice - disgrace or war. The choice is obvious! Let's go forward, let's cross the Neman! The second Polish howl will be glorious for the French arms. It will bring a messenger to Russia's destructive influence on European affairs.

This is how the war of conquest began for France.

Reasons from Russia

On the part of Russia, there were also good reasons for participating in the war, which turned out to be a liberation for the state. The main reasons are the following:

Large losses of all segments of the population from the rupture of trade with England. The opinions of historians on this point differ, since it is believed that the blockade did not affect the state as a whole, but exclusively its elite, which, as a result of the lack of the possibility of trade with England, was losing money.
France's intention to recreate the Commonwealth. In 1807, Napoleon created the Duchy of Warsaw and sought to recreate the ancient state in its true dimensions. Perhaps this was only in the case of the seizure of its western lands from Russia.
Violation of the Peace of Tilsit by Napoleon. One of the main criteria for signing this agreement is that Prussia should be cleared of French troops, but this was never done, although Alexander 1 constantly reminded of this.

For a long time France has been trying to encroach on the independence of Russia. We always tried to be meek, believing so to reject her attempts to capture. With all our desire to keep the peace, we are forced to gather troops to defend the Motherland. There are no opportunities for a peaceful solution to the conflict with France, which means that there is only one thing left - to defend the truth, to defend Russia from the invaders. I do not need to remind generals and soldiers of courage, it is in our hearts. The blood of victors, the blood of the Slavs flows in our veins. Soldiers! You defend the country, defend religion, defend the fatherland. I'm with you. God is with us.

The balance of forces and means at the beginning of the war

The crossing of Napoleon across the Niemen took place on June 12, with 450 thousand people at his disposal. By the end of the month, another 200 thousand people joined him. Considering that by that time there were no large losses on the part of both sides, then the total number of the French army at the time of the outbreak of hostilities in 1812 was 650 thousand soldiers. It is impossible to say that the French made up 100% of the army, since the combined army of almost all European countries (France, Austria, Poland, Switzerland, Italy, Prussia, Spain, Holland) fought on the side of France. However, it was the French who formed the basis of the army. They were proven soldiers who won many victories with their emperor.

Russia after mobilization had 590 thousand soldiers. Initially, the army was 227 thousand people, and they were divided along three fronts:

Northern - First Army. Commander - Mikhail Bogdanovich Barclay de Tolly. Population - 120 thousand people. They were located in the north of Lithuania and covered St. Petersburg.
Central - Second Army. Commander - Peter Ivanovich Bagration. Population - 49 thousand people. They were located in the south of Lithuania, covering Moscow.
Southern - Third Army. Commander - Alexander Petrovich Tormasov. Population - 58 thousand people. They were located in Volhynia, covering the attack on Kiev.

Also in Russia, partisan detachments were actively operating, the number of which reached 400 thousand people.

The first stage of the war - the offensive of Napoleon's troops (June-September)

At 6 o'clock in the morning on June 12, 1812, a patriotic war with Napoleonic France began for Russia. Napoleon's troops crossed the Niemen and headed inland. The main direction of the strike was supposed to be in Moscow. The commander himself said that "if I capture Kiev, I will raise the Russians by the legs, if I capture St. Petersburg, I will take it by the throat; if I take Moscow, I will strike the heart of Russia."

The French army, commanded by brilliant commanders, was looking for a general battle, and the fact that Alexander 1 divided the army into 3 fronts played into the hands of the aggressors. However, at the initial stage, Barclay de Tolly played a decisive role, who gave the order not to engage in battle with the enemy and to retreat inland. This was necessary in order to combine forces and also to bring up reserves. Retreating, the Russians destroyed everything - they killed livestock, poisoned the water, burned the fields. In the literal sense of the word, the French moved forward through the ashes. Later, Napoleon complained that the Russian people were waging a dastardly war and were not behaving according to the rules.

North direction

Napoleon sent 32 thousand people led by General MacDonald to St. Petersburg. The first city on this route was Riga. According to France's plan, MacDonald was to capture the city. Connect with General Oudinot (he had 28 thousand people at his disposal) and go further.

The defense of Riga was commanded by General Essen with 18 thousand soldiers. He burned everything around the city, and the city itself was very well fortified. MacDonald by this time captured Dinaburg (the Russians left the city with the beginning of the war) and did not conduct further active actions. He understood the absurdity of storming Riga and waited for the arrival of artillery.

General Oudinot occupied Polotsk and from there tried to separate Wittgenstein's corps from Barclay de Tolly's army. However, on July 18, Wittgenstein struck an unexpected blow at Oudinot, who was saved from defeat only by the corps of Saint-Cyr that had arrived in time. As a result, equilibrium was achieved and no more active offensive operations were carried out in the northern direction.

South direction

General Runier with an army of 22 thousand people was supposed to act in the southern direction, blocking the army of General Tormasov, preventing it from joining with the rest of the Russian army.

On July 27, Tormasov surrounded the city of Kobrin, where the main forces of Ranye gathered. The French suffered a terrible defeat - 5 thousand people were killed in the battle in 1 day, which forced the French to retreat. Napoleon realized that the southern direction in the Patriotic War of 1812 was in danger of failure. Therefore, he transferred the troops of General Schwarzenberg there, numbering 30 thousand people. As a result, on August 12, Tormasov was forced to retreat to Lutsk and take up defenses there. In the future, the French did not undertake active offensive actions in the southern direction. The main events took place in the Moscow direction.

The course of events of the offensive company

On June 26, the army of General Bagration moved out of Vitebsk, in whose task Alexander 1 set to engage in battle with the main forces of the enemy in order to wear them out. Everyone realized the absurdity of this idea, but only by July 17 the emperor was finally dissuaded from this venture. The troops began to retreat to Smolensk.

On July 6, the large number of Napoleon's troops became clear. To prevent the Patriotic War from dragging on for a long time, Alexander 1 signs a decree on the creation of a militia. Literally all the inhabitants of the country are enrolled in it - in total there are about 400 thousand volunteers.

On July 22, the armies of Bagration and Barclay de Tolly united near Smolensk. The command of the combined army was taken over by Barclay de Tolly, who had 130 thousand soldiers at his disposal, while the forward detachment of the French army consisted of 150 thousand soldiers.

On July 25, a council of war was held in Smolensk, at which the issue of accepting a battle was discussed in order to launch a counteroffensive and defeat Napoleon with one blow. But Barclay spoke out against this idea, realizing that an open battle with the enemy, a brilliant strategist and tactician, could lead to a grandiose failure. As a result, the offensive idea was not implemented. It was decided to retreat further - to Moscow.

On July 26, the retreat of troops began, which General Neverovsky was supposed to cover, occupying the village of Krasnoe, thereby closing the bypass of Smolensk for Napoleon.

On August 2, Murat with a cavalry corps tried to break through the defense of Neverovsky, but to no avail. In total, more than 40 attacks were undertaken with the help of cavalry, but they did not succeed in achieving the desired.

August 5 is one of the important dates in the Patriotic War of 1812. Napoleon began an assault on Smolensk, capturing the suburbs in the evening. However, at night he was driven out of the city, and the Russian army continued its massive retreat from the city. This caused a storm of discontent among the soldiers. They believed that if they managed to knock the French out of Smolensk, then it was necessary to destroy it there. They accused Barclay of cowardice, but the general implemented only one plan - to wear down the enemy and take a decisive battle when the balance of forces was on the side of Russia. By this time, the French had all the advantage.

On August 17, Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov arrived in the army and took over the command. This candidacy did not raise questions, since Kutuzov (a student of Suvorov) was highly respected and was considered the best Russian commander after the death of Suvorov. Arriving in the army, the new commander-in-chief wrote that he had not yet decided what to do next: "The question has not yet been resolved - either to lose the army, or to give up Moscow."

On August 26, the Battle of Borodino took place. Its outcome still raises many questions and controversy, but there were no losers then. Each commander solved his problems: Napoleon opened his way to Moscow (the heart of Russia, as the emperor of France himself wrote), and Kutuzov was able to inflict heavy damage on the enemy, thereby making the initial turning point in the battle of 1812.

September 1 is a significant day, which is described in all history textbooks. A council of war was held in Fili, near Moscow. Kutuzov gathered his generals to decide what to do next. There were only two options: to retreat and surrender Moscow, or after Borodino to organize a second general battle. Most of the generals, on the wave of success, demanded a battle in order to defeat Napoleon in the shortest possible time. Opponents of this development of events were Kutuzov himself and Barclay de Tolly. The military council in Fili ended with Kutuzov's phrase “As long as there is an army, there is hope. We will lose the army near Moscow - we will lose not only the ancient capital, but the whole of Russia. "

September 2 - following the results of the military council of the generals, which took place in Fili, it was decided that it was necessary to leave the ancient capital. The Russian army retreated, and Moscow itself, before the arrival of Napoleon, according to many sources, was subjected to terrible looting. However, this is not even the main thing. Retreating, the Russian army set fire to the city. Wooden Moscow burned down to almost three quarters. Most importantly, literally all food stores were destroyed. The reasons for the Moscow fire lie in the fact that the French did not get anything that the enemies could use for food, movement, or in other respects. As a result, the troops of the aggressors found themselves in a very precarious position.

Second stage of the war - Napoleon's retreat (October - December)

Having occupied Moscow, Napoleon considered the mission accomplished. The commander's bibliographers later wrote that he was faithful - the loss of the historical center of Russia would break the victorious spirit, and the leaders of the country had to come to him with a request for peace. But this did not happen. Kutuzov settled down with an army 80 kilometers from Moscow at Tarutin and waited until the enemy army, deprived of normal supplies, weakened and itself would bring a radical change to the Patriotic War. Without waiting for a peace proposal from Russia, the French emperor himself took the initiative.

Napoleon's desire for peace

According to Napoleon's original plan, the capture of Moscow was to play a decisive role. Here it was possible to deploy a convenient foothold, including for a hike to St. Petersburg, the capital of Russia. However, the delay in moving around Russia and the heroism of the people, who fought literally for every piece of land, practically thwarted this plan. After all, a march to the north of Russia in winter for the French army with irregular food supplies was actually equal to death. This became clear by the end of September, when it started to get colder. Subsequently, Napoleon wrote in his autobiography that his biggest mistake was the campaign to Moscow and the month he spent there.

Realizing the gravity of his position, the French emperor and commander decided to end the Patriotic War of Russia by signing a peace treaty with her. There were three such attempts:

September 18th. Through General Tutolmin, a message was transmitted to Alexander 1, which said that Napoleon honored the Russian emperor and offered him peace. Russia is only required to give up the territory of Lithuania and again return to the continental blockade.
September 20th. Alexander 1 received a second letter from Napoleon with a proposal for peace. The terms offered are the same as before. The Russian emperor did not respond to these messages.
The 4th of October. The hopelessness of the situation led to the fact that Napoleon literally begged for peace. Here is what he writes to Alexander 1 (according to the famous French historian F. Segur): “I need peace, I need it, by all means, only save honor.” This proposal was delivered to Kutuzov, but the emperor of France did not wait for an answer.

The retreat of the French army in the autumn and winter of 1812

It became obvious to Napoleon that he would not be able to sign a peace treaty with Russia, and that it was folly to remain in Moscow for the winter, which the Russians retreating and burned. Moreover, it was impossible to stay here, since the constant raids of the militias inflicted heavy losses on the army. So, for a month, while the French army was in Moscow, its number decreased by 30 thousand people. As a result, it was decided to retreat.

On October 7, preparations began for the retreat of the French army. One of the orders in this regard was to blow up the Kremlin. Fortunately, he did not succeed in this undertaking. Russian historians attribute this to the fact that, due to high humidity, the wicks got wet and out of order.

On October 19, Napoleon's army began to retreat from Moscow. The purpose of this retreat was to reach Smolensk, as it was the only major nearby city with significant food supplies. The road went through Kaluga, but this direction was blocked by Kutuzov. Now the advantage was on the side of the Russian army, so Napoleon decided to bypass. However, Kutuzov foresaw this maneuver and met the enemy army at Maloyaroslavets.

On October 24, the battle of Maloyaroslavets took place. During the day, this small town crossed 8 times from one side to the other. At the final stage of the battle, Kutuzov managed to take fortified positions, and Napoleon did not dare to storm them, since the numerical superiority was already on the side of the Russian army. As a result, the plans of the French were thwarted, and they had to retreat to Smolensk along the same road along which they went to Moscow. It was already scorched earth - no food and no water.

The retreat of Napoleon was accompanied by heavy losses. Indeed, in addition to clashes with the army of Kutuzov, we also had to deal with partisan detachments, which daily attacked the enemy, especially its rear units. The losses of Napoleon were terrible. On November 9, he managed to capture Smolensk, but this did not make a radical change in the course of the war. There was practically no food in the city, and it was not possible to organize a reliable defense. As a result, the army was subjected to almost continuous attacks by militias and local patriots. Therefore, Napoleon stayed in Smolensk for 4 days and decided to retreat further.

Crossing the Berezina river

The French were heading for the Berezina River (in modern Belarus) to force the river and go to the Neman. But on November 16, General Chichagov captured the city of Borisov, which is located on the Berezina. The position of Napoleon became catastrophic - for the first time an opportunity to be captured was actively looming for him, since he was surrounded.

On November 25, by order of Napoleon, the French army began to imitate the crossing south of Borisov. Chichagov bought into this maneuver and began the transfer of troops. At that moment, the French built two bridges across the Berezina and began the crossing on November 26-27. Only on November 28, Chichagov realized his mistake and tried to give battle to the French army, but it was too late - the crossing was completed, albeit with the loss of a huge number of human lives. While crossing the Berezina, 21 thousand Frenchmen died! The "Great Army" now numbered only 9 thousand soldiers, most of whom were already incapable of combat.

It was during this crossing that unusually severe frosts came, to which the French emperor referred to, justifying the huge losses. In the 29th bulletin, which was published in one of the newspapers in France, it was said that the weather was normal until November 10, but after that very severe cold came, for which no one was ready.

Crossing the Neman (from Russia to France)

The crossing of the Berezina showed that Napoleon's Russian campaign was over - he lost the Patriotic War in Russia in 1812. Then the emperor decided that his further stay with the army did not make sense and on December 5 he left his troops and went to Paris.

On December 16, in Kovno, the French army crossed the Niemen and left the territory of Russia. Its population was only 1600 people. The invincible army that inspired fear throughout Europe was almost completely destroyed by Kutuzov's army in less than 6 months.

Below is a graphical representation of Napoleon's retreat on a map.

Results of the Patriotic War of 1812

The Patriotic War of Russia with Napoleon was of great importance for all countries involved in the conflict. Largely thanks to these events, the undivided domination of England in Europe became possible. Such a development was foreseen by Kutuzov, who, after the flight of the French army in December, sent a report to Alexander 1, where he explained to the ruler that the war must be ended immediately, and the pursuit of the enemy and the liberation of Europe would play into the hands of strengthening the power of England. But Alexander did not heed the advice of his commander and soon began an overseas campaign.

Reasons for Napoleon's defeat in the war

Determining the main reasons for the defeat of the Napoleonic army, it is necessary to dwell on the most important, which are most often used by historians:

A strategic mistake of the Emperor of France, who sat in Moscow for 30 days and was waiting for the representatives of Alexander I with pleas for the conclusion of peace. As a result, it began to get colder and run out of provisions, and the constant raids of partisan movements brought a turning point in the war.
Unity of the Russian people. As usual, the Slavs rally in the face of great danger. So it was this time. For example, the historian Lieven writes that the main reason for the defeat of France lies in the massive nature of the war. Everyone fought for the Russians - both women and children. And all of this was ideologically based, which made the morale of the army very strong. The emperor of France did not break him.
The reluctance of Russian generals to accept a decisive battle. Most historians forget about this, but what would have happened to Bagration's army if he had taken a general battle at the beginning of the war, as Alexander 1 really wanted? 60 thousand of the army of Bagration against 400 thousand of the army of aggressors. It would be an unconditional victory, and after it they would hardly have time to recover. Therefore, the Russian people should express their gratitude to Barclay de Tolly, who by his decision gave the order to retreat and unite the armies.
The genius of Kutuzov. The Russian general, who was well trained by Suvorov, did not allow a single tactical miscalculation. It is noteworthy that Kutuzov never managed to defeat his enemy, but managed to tactically and strategically win the Patriotic War.
General Frost is being used as an excuse. In fairness, it must be said that the frost did not have any significant effect on the final result, since at the time of the onset of anomalous frosts (mid-November) the outcome of the confrontation was decided - the great army was destroyed.