N.M. Karamzin is a famous Russian historian and writer. He started new era Russian historical literature. Karamzin was the first to replace the dead language of the book with a living language of communication.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born on December 1, 1766. After a failed military career, he took up literary activity. His thought was born in a tense and difficult communication experience of the turbulent events of European and Russian life. This was a kind of university that determined his entire future path. Impressions shaped his personality and awakened Karamzin’s thoughts, determined his desire to understand what was happening not only in his fatherland, but also in the world.

Among Karamzin’s literary and historical heritage, “History of the Russian State” occupies a huge place. In it, as his contemporaries noted, “Rus' read the history of its fatherland and for the first time received an understanding of it.” Work on “History” lasted more than two decades (1804 – 1826). “The History of the Russian State” is built on a wealth of factual material collected by the writer over many years. Among primary sources, chronicles are of great importance. The text of his “History” uses not only valuable information and facts from chronicles, but also includes extensive quotes or retellings of stories, traditions, and legends. For Karamzin, the chronicle is valuable primarily because it revealed the attitude towards the facts, events and legends of their contemporary – the chronicler.”

“The History of the Russian State” made it possible to reveal the process of formation of national character, the fate of the Russian land, and the struggle for unity. When considering these issues, Karamzin paid great attention to the role of the national factor, patriotism and citizenship, as well as the social factor and its influence on national identity. Karamzin writes: “Courage is a great quality of the soul; a people marked by it should be proud of themselves.”

Karamzin traced the influence of the political regimes of the past on national life, how they developed into the forms of princely and tsarist government; he, as a historian, believes in the experience of history, asserts that the experience of history is the true guide of humanity. Analyzing the events of history, Karamzin writes: “We are too humble in our thoughts about our people’s dignity - and humility in politics is harmful, whoever does not respect himself will no doubt be respected by others.” The stronger the love for the Fatherland, the clearer the citizen’s path to his own happiness. Therefore, Karamzin writes: “Russian talent is getting closer and closer to glorifying the Russian.”

The events of the French Revolution and the subsequent reaction to it served as a link between the period when the formation of historicism began in the Enlightenment, and its subsequent development. Engels pointed out that it was in the first decade of the 19th century that a rapid process of developing a new philosophy of history took place. The history of mankind has ceased to seem like a wild chaos of senseless violence; on the contrary, it has appeared as a process of development of humanity itself, and the task of thinking has now been reduced to tracing the successive stages of this process, among all its wanderings, and to prove the internal regularity among all seeming accidents. “The History of the Russian State” is a particular example of the process of philosophical understanding of the historical past based on the history of Russia.

Karamzin’s contemporaries treated “The History of the Russian State” differently. Thus, Klyuchevsky wrote: “Karamzin’s view of history was based not on historical patterns, but on moral and psychological aesthetics. He was not interested in society with its structure and make-up, but in man, with his personal qualities and the accidents of his personal life.”

I.I. Pavlenko in his work “Historical Science in the Past and Present” wrote: “The structure of the “History of the Russian State” reflects the undivided dominance of descriptive history with weak attempts to comprehend the essence of phenomena and to grasp their close interrelation. The author records phenomena and himself tries to explain them from a moral and psychological perspective, which influenced not so much the reader’s thoughts as his feelings.”

But despite all the shortcomings, the significance of the work is very great. Without Karamzin, the Russians would not have known the history of their fatherland, because they did not have the opportunity to look at it critically. Karamzin wanted to make the history of Russia not a word of praise to the Russian people, like Lomonosov, but a heroic epic of Russian valor and glory; he helped the Russian people better understand their past, but he made them love it even more. This is the main merit of his works to Russian society and main drawback him in front historical science– noted historians and writers.

Karamzin was not only a historian; in the last 5 years of the 18th century, Karamzin acted as a prose writer and poet, as a critic and translator, as an organizer of new literary publications uniting young poets, and paid great attention not only to Russian literature, but also to Russian society.

While maintaining his ideological positions, the historian did not remain deaf to the social events that preceded the Decembrist uprising, and changed the emphasis in the last volumes of History - the focus was on the autocrats who took the path of despotism.

Karamzin, as a patriot and scientist, loved Russia very much and tried to do as much as possible for its prosperity. Karamzin wrote historically conditioned advice, based on premises of reason, and based on the experience of history.

In conclusion, we can quote Belinsky’s words: “ Main merit Karamzin, as a historian of Russia, is not at all that he wrote the true history of Russia, but that he created an opportunity in the future true history Russia."

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

From travel notes to study history. The author of “Letters of a Russian Traveler”, “Poor Lisa”, “Marfa Posadnitsa”, a successful publisher of “Moscow Journal” and “Bulletin of Europe” became seriously interested in history at the beginning of the 19th century. Studying chronicles and rare manuscripts, I decided to combine invaluable knowledge into one work. I set the task - to create a complete printed, publicly accessible presentation of Russian history.

Historiographer Russian Empire . Karamzin was appointed to the honorary position of the country's chief historian by Emperor Alexander I. The writer received an annual pension of two thousand rubles and access to all libraries. Karamzin without hesitation left Vestnik, which brought in three times as much income, and devoted his life to “The History of the Russian State.” As Prince Vyazemsky noted, “he took monastic vows as a historian.” Karamzin preferred archives to social salons, and studying documents to invitations to balls.

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

First historical bestseller. The author sent eight volumes to print only thirteen years after the start of work. Three printing houses were involved: military, senate, medical. Proofreading took up the lion's share of time. Three thousand copies were published a year later - at the beginning of 1818. Historical volumes sold out are no worse than the sensational ones romance novels: The first edition was distributed to readers in just a month.

Scientific discoveries in between. While working, Nikolai Mikhailovich discovered truly unique sources. It was Karamzin who found the Ipatiev Chronicle. The notes of volume VI include excerpts from “Walking across Three Seas” by Afanasy Nikitin. “Until now, geographers did not know that the honor of one of the oldest described European journeys to India belongs to Russia of the Ioannian century... It (the journey) proves that Russia in the 15th century had its own Taverniers and Chardenis, less enlightened, but equally courageous and enterprising.”, wrote the historian.

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

Assessment at the highest state level. Alexander I not only gave Karamzin the broadest powers to read “all ancient manuscripts relating to Russian antiquities” and financial support. The Emperor personally financed the first edition of the History of the Russian State. By order of the highest order, the book was distributed to ministries and embassies. The accompanying letter stated that sovereigns and diplomats are obliged to know their history.

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

The last historiographer of Russia. The title appeared under Peter the Great. The honorary title was awarded to a native of Germany, archivist and author of “History of Siberia” Gerhard Miller, also famous for “Miller’s portfolios”. The author of “The History of Russia from Ancient Times”, Prince Mikhail Shcherbatov, held a high position. Sergei Solovyov, who dedicated 30 years to his historical work, and Vladimir Ikonnikov, a major historian of the early twentieth century, applied for it, but, despite petitions, they never received the title. So Nikolai Karamzin remained the last historiographer of Russia.

History of the Russian State. Volume I-XII. Karamzin N.M.

“Karamzin is our first historian and last Chronicler...” - this is the definition given by A. S. Pushkin to the great educator, writer and historian N. M. Karamzin (1766-1826). The famous "History of the Russian State", all twelve volumes of which are included in this book, became a major event public life country, an era in the study of our past.

Karamzin N.M.

Born in the village of Mikhailovka, Simbirsk province, in the family of a landowner. At the fourteenth year of his life, Karamzin was brought to Moscow and sent to the boarding school of the Moscow professor Schaden. In 1783, he tried to enlist in military service, where he was enrolled while still a minor, but retired that same year. From May 1789 to September 1790, he traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France and England, stopping mainly in big cities- Berlin, Leipzig, Geneva, Paris, London. Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began publishing the Moscow Journal, where Letters of a Russian Traveler appeared. Karamzin spent most of 1793 - 1795 in the village and prepared two collections here called "Aglaya", published in the fall of 1793 and 1794. In 1803, through Comrade Minister of Public Education M.N. Muravyov, Karamzin received the title of historiographer and an annual pension of 2,000 rubles in order to write a complete history of Russia. IN 1816 he published the first 8 volumes of the "History of the Russian State", in 1821 g. - volume 9, in 1824 g. - 10th and 11th. IN 1826 Mr. Karamzin died without having time to finish writing the 12th volume, which was published by D.N. Bludov from the papers left behind by the deceased.

Format: doc

Size: 9.1 MB

Download: 16 .11.2017, links removed at the request of the publishing house "AST" (see note)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface
VOLUME I
Chapter I. About the peoples who have inhabited Russia since ancient times. About the Slavs in general.
Chapter II. About the Slavs and other peoples who made up the Russian State.
Chapter III. On the physical and moral character of the ancient Slavs.
Chapter IV. Rurik, Sineus and Trubor. 862-879
Chapter V. Oleg - Ruler. 879-912
Chapter VI. Prince Igor. 912-945
Chapter VII. Prince Svyatoslav. 945-972
Chapter VIII. Grand Duke Yaropolk. 972-980
Chapter IX. Grand Duke Vladimir, named Vasily in baptism. 980-1014
Chapter X. About the state Ancient Russia.
VOLUME II
Chapter I. Grand Duke Svyatopolk. 1015-1019
Chapter II. Grand Duke Yaroslav, or George. 1019-1054
Chapter III. Russian truth, or Yaroslavna's laws.
Chapter IV. Grand Duke Izyaslav, named Dmitry in baptism. 1054-1077
Chapter V. Grand Duke Vsevolod. 1078-1093
Chapter VI. Grand Duke Svyatopolk - Michael. 1093-1112
Chapter VII. Vladimir Monomakh, named Vasily in baptism. 1113-1125
Chapter VIII. Grand Duke Mstislav. 1125-1132
Chapter IX. Grand Duke Yaropolk. 1132-1139
Chapter X. Grand Duke Vsevolod Olgovich. 1139-1146
Chapter XI. Grand Duke Igor Olgovich.
Chapter XII. Grand Duke Izyaslav Mstislavovich. 1146-1154
Chapter XIII. Grand Duke Rostislav-Mikhail Mstislavovich. 1154-1155
Chapter XIV. Grand Duke George, or Yuri Vladimirovich, nicknamed Dolgoruky. 1155-1157
Chapter XV. Grand Duke Izyaslav Davidovich of Kyiv. Prince Andrei of Suzdal, nicknamed Bogolyubsky. 1157-1159
Chapter XVI. Grand Duke Svyatopolk - Michael.
Chapter XVII. Vladimir Monomakh, named Vasily in baptism.
VOLUME III
Chapter I. Grand Duke Andrei. 1169-1174
Chapter II. Grand Duke Mikhail II [Georgievich]. 1174-1176
Chapter III. Grand Duke Vsevolod III Georgievich. 1176-1212
Chapter IV. George, Prince of Vladimir. Konstantin Rostovsky. 1212-1216
Chapter V. Constantine, Grand Duke of Vladimir and Suzdal. 1216-1219
Chapter VI. Grand Duke George II Vsevolodovich. 1219-1224
Chapter VII. The state of Russia from the 11th to the 13th centuries.
Chapter VIII. Grand Duke Georgy Vsevolodovich. 1224-1238
VOLUME IV
Chapter I. Grand Duke Yaroslav II Vsevolodovich. 1238-1247
Chapter II. Grand Dukes Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, Andrei Yaroslavich and Alexander Nevsky (one after the other). 1247-1263
Chapter III. Grand Duke Yaroslav Yaroslavich. 1263-1272
Chapter IV. Grand Duke Vasily Yaroslavich. 1272-1276
Chapter V. Grand Duke Dimitri Alexandrovich. 1276-1294
Chapter VI. Grand Duke Andrei Alexandrovich. 1294 -1304
Chapter VII. Grand Duke Mikhail Yaroslavich. 1304-1319
Chapter VIII. Grand Dukes Georgy Daniilovich, Dimitri and Alexander Mikhailovich. (one after the other). 1319-1328
Chapter IX. Grand Duke John Daniilovich, nicknamed Kalita. 1328-1340
Chapter X. Grand Duke Simeon Ioannovich, nicknamed the Proud. 1340-1353
Chapter XI. Grand Duke John II Ioannovich. 1353-1359
Chapter XII. Grand Duke Dimitri Konstantinovich. 1359-1362
VOLUME V
Chapter I. Grand Duke Dimitri Ioannovich, nicknamed Donskoy. 1363-1389
Chapter II. Grand Duke Vasily Dimitrievich. 1389-1425
Chapter III. Grand Duke Vasily Vasilyevich the Dark. 1425-1462
Chapter IV. The state of Russia from the Tatar invasion to John III.
VOLUME VI
Chapter I. Sovereign, Sovereign Grand Duke John III Vasilievich. 1462-1472
Chapter II. Continuation of Ioannov's reign. 1472-1477
Chapter III. Continuation of Ioannov's reign. 1475-1481
Chapter IV. Continuation of Ioannov's reign. 1480-1490
Chapter V. Continuation of Ioannov's reign. 1491-1496
Chapter VI. Continuation of Ioannov's reign. 1495-1503
Chapter VII. Continuation of the reign of John. 1503-1505
VOLUME VII
Chapter I. Sovereign Grand Duke Vasily Ioannovich. 1505-1509
Chapter II. Continuation of Vasiliev's government. 1510-1521
Chapter III. Continuation of Vasiliev's government. 1521-1534
Chapter IV. State of Russia. 1462-1533
VOLUME VIII
Chapter I. Grand Duke and Tsar John IV Vasilyevich II. 1533-1538
Chapter II. Continuation of the reign of John IV. 1538-1547
Chapter III. Continuation of the reign of John IV. 1546-1552
Chapter IV. Continuation of the reign of John IV. 1552
Chapter V. Continuation of the reign of John IV. 1552-1560
VOLUME IX
Chapter I. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1560-1564
Chapter II. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1563-1569
Chapter III. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1569-1572
Chapter IV. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1572-1577
Chapter V. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1577-1582
Chapter VI. The first conquest of Siberia. 1581-1584
Chapter VII. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1582-1584
VOLUME X
Chapter I. The reign of Theodore Ioannovich. 1584-1587
Chapter II. Continuation of the reign of Theodore Ioannovich. 1587-1592
Chapter III. Continuation of the reign of Theodore Ioannovich. 1591-1598
Chapter IV. The state of Russia at the end of the 16th century.
VOLUME XI
Chapter I. The reign of Boris Godunov. 1598-1604
Chapter II. Continuation of Borisov's reign. 1600 -1605
Chapter III. Reign of Theodore Borisov. 1605
Chapter IV. Reign of False Dmitry. 1605-1606
VOLUME XII
Chapter I. The reign of Vasily Ioannovich Shuisky. 1606-1608
Chapter II. Continuation of Vasiliev's reign. 1607-1609
Chapter III. Continuation of Vasiliev's reign. 1608-1610
Chapter IV. The overthrow of Vasily and the interregnum. 1610-1611
Chapter V. Interregnum. 1611-1612

At the very beginning of his reign, Emperor Alexander I appointed Nikolai Karamzin as his official historiographer. Throughout his life, Karamzin will work on the “History of the Russian State.” Pushkin himself appreciated this work, but the Karamzin story is far from flawless.

Ukraine is the birthplace of the horse

“This great part of Europe and Asia, now called Russia, in its temperate climates was originally inhabited, but by wild peoples, plunged into the depths of ignorance, who did not mark their existence with any historical monuments of their own,” Karamzin’s narrative begins with these words and already contains there is a mistake in yourself.
The contribution made by the tribes that inhabited the south of modern Karamzin Russia in ancient times to general development humanity is difficult to overestimate. Huge number modern data indicates that in the territories of present-day Ukraine in the period from 3500 to 4000 BC. e. For the first time in world history, the horse was domesticated.
This is probably Karamzin’s most forgivable mistake, because there was still more than a century left before the invention of genetics. When Nikolai Mikhailovich began his work, he could not have known that all the horses in the world: from Australia and both Americas, to Europe and Africa are distant descendants of the horses with which our not-so-wild and ignorant ancestors “made friends” in the Black Sea steppes.

Norman theory

As you know, "The Tale of Bygone Years", one of the main historical sources on which Karamzin relies in his work, begins with a lengthy introductory part from biblical times, which fits the history of the Slavic tribes into a general historical context. And only then Nestor sets out the concept of the origin of Russian statehood, which will later be called “ Norman theory».

According to this concept, Russian tribes originate from Scandinavia during the Viking times. Karamzin omits the biblical part of the Tale, but repeats the main provisions of the Norman Theory. The controversy surrounding this theory began before Karamzin and continued after. Many influential historians either completely denied the “Varangian origin” of the Russian state, or assessed its extent and role completely differently, especially in terms of the “voluntary” calling of the Varangians.
IN present moment Among scientists, the opinion has become stronger that, at a minimum, everything is not so simple. Karamzin’s apologetic and uncritical repetition of the “Norman Theory” looks, if not an obvious mistake, then an obvious historical simplification.

Ancient, Middle and New

In his multi-volume work and scientific polemics, Karamzin proposed his own concept of dividing the history of Russia into periods: “Our history is divided into the Ancient, from Rurik to John III, the Middle, from John to Peter, and the New, from Peter to Alexander. The system of appanages was the character of the first era, autocracy was the character of the second, and changes in civil customs were the character of the third.”
Despite some positive responses and support from such prominent historians as, for example, S.M. Soloviev, Karamzin’s periodization was not established in Russian historiography, and the initial premises of the division were recognized as erroneous and unworkable.

Khazar Khaganate

In connection with the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, the history of Judaism is of keen interest to scientists in different parts of the world, because any new knowledge on this topic is literally a matter of “war and peace.” Historians are increasingly paying attention to the Khazar Kaganate, a powerful Jewish state that existed in Eastern Europe, which had a significant influence on Kievan Rus.
In the background modern research and our knowledge on this topic, the description of the Khazar Khaganate in Karamzin’s work looks like a dark spot. In fact, Karamzin simply bypasses the problem of the Khazars, thereby denying the degree of influence and significance of their cultural relations with Slavic tribes and states.

"Ardent Romantic Passion"

The son of his century, Karamzin looked at history as a poem written in prose. In his descriptions of ancient Russian princes characteristic feature looks like what one critic would call “ardent romantic passion.”

Karamzin describes the terrible atrocities, accompanied by no less terrible atrocities, committed completely in the spirit of his time, as Christmas carols, they say, well, yes, the pagans sinned, but they repented. In the first volumes of the “History of the Russian State” the actions are rather not really historical, but rather literary characters, as Karamzin saw them, firmly standing on monarchical, conservative-protective positions.

Tatar-Mongol yoke

Karamzin did not use the phrase “Tatar-Mongols”; in his books there were either “Tatars” or “Mongols”, but the term “yoke” was Karamzin’s invention. This term first appeared 150 years after the official end of the invasion in Polish sources. Karamzin transplanted it onto Russian soil, thereby planting a time bomb. Almost another 200 years have passed, and the debate among historians still does not subside: was there a yoke or not? Can what happened be considered a yoke? What are we even talking about?

There is no doubt about the first, aggressive campaign against the Russian lands, the destruction of many cities and the establishment of vassal dependence of the appanage principalities on the Mongols. But for feudal Europe of those years, the fact that the lord could be of a different nationality was, in general, a common practice.
The very concept of “yoke” implies the existence of a certain single Russian national and almost state space, which was conquered and enslaved by the interventionists, with whom a persistent war of liberation is being waged. In this case, this seems to be at least somewhat of an exaggeration.
And Karamzin’s assessment of the consequences sounds completely wrong Mongol invasion: “The Russians emerged from under the yoke with a more European than Asian character. Europe did not recognize us: but because it has changed in these 250 years, and we remained as we were.”
Karamzin gives a categorically negative answer to the question he himself posed: “The domination of the Mongols, besides the harmful consequences for morality, left any other traces in folk customs, in civil legislation, in home life, in the language of Russians?” “No,” he writes.
In fact, of course - yes.

King Herod

In the previous paragraphs we talked mainly about Karamzin’s conceptual errors. But there is one big factual inaccuracy in his work, which had great consequences and influence on Russian and world culture.
"No no! You cannot pray for King Herod - the Mother of God does not command,” sings the holy fool in Mussorgsky’s opera “Boris Godunov” based on the text of the drama of the same name by A.S. Pushkin. Tsar Boris recoils in horror from the holy fool, indirectly admitting to committing a crime - the murder of the legitimate heir to the throne, the son of the seventh wife of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, the youth prince Dmitry.
Dmitry died in Uglich under unclear circumstances. Official investigation conducted by boyar Vasily Shuisky. The verdict is an accident. Dmitry's death was beneficial to Godunov, as it cleared the way for him to the throne. Popular rumor did not believe in official version, and then several impostors, False Dmitrievs, appeared in Russian history, claiming that there was no death: “Dmitry survived, I am.”
In “The History of the Russian State,” Karamzin directly accuses Godunov of organizing the murder of Dmitry. Pushkin will pick up the version of the murder, then Mussorgsky will write a brilliant opera, which will be staged at all the largest theater venues in the world. WITH light hand galaxy of Russian geniuses, Boris Godunov will become the second most famous King Herod in world history.
The first timid publications in defense of Godunov will appear during the lifetime of Karamzin and Pushkin. At the moment, his innocence has been proven by historians: Dmitry really died as a result of an accident. However, this will not change anything in the popular consciousness.
The episode with the unfair accusation and subsequent rehabilitation of Godunov is, in a sense, a brilliant metaphor for the entire work of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin: a brilliant artistic concept and fiction sometimes turns out to be higher than the convoluted truth of facts, documents and authentic testimonies of contemporaries.

Famous writer, historian, poet, publicist. Creator of "History of the Russian State".

Family. Childhood

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born in the Simbirsk province into a family of poor, educated nobles. Got a good one home education. At the age of 14 he began studying at the Moscow private boarding school of Professor Schaden. Upon completion of it in 1783, he went to St. Petersburg to serve in. In the capital, Karamzin met the poet and future employee of his “Moscow Journal” Dmitriev. At the same time, he published the first translation of S. Gesner’s idyll “The Wooden Leg.” Having served in the army less than a year, Karamzin, with the low rank of lieutenant, resigned in 1784 and returned to Simbirsk. Here he led outwardly social life, but at the same time he was engaged in self-education: he studied history, literature and philosophy. Family friend Ivan Petrovich Turgenev, a freemason and writer, who was in great friendship with, played a certain role in the life of the future writer. On his advice, Nikolai Mikhailovich moved to Moscow and met Novikov’s circle. So it began new period in his life, covering the time from 1785 to 1789.

Moscow period (1785-1789). Travel to Europe (1789-1790)

Karamzin translates in Moscow fiction, since 1787 regularly publishes his translations of Thomson’s “Seasons,” Genlis’s “Country Evenings,” the tragedy “Julius Caesar,” and Lessing’s tragedy “Emilia Galotti.” He also begins to write for the magazine " Children's reading for the heart and mind,” the publisher of which was Novikov. In 1789, Karamzin’s first original story, “Eugene and Yulia,” appeared in it.

Soon Nikolai Mikhailovich decides to go on a trip to Europe, for which he mortgages his ancestral estate. This was a bold step: it meant giving up living on the income from an inherited estate and supporting oneself through the labor of serfs. Now Nikolai Mikhailovich had to earn a living by his own work as a professional writer. He will spend about a year and a half abroad. During this time, he visits Germany, Switzerland, France, where he observes the activities of the revolutionary government. In June 1789, Karamzin moved from France to England. Throughout the journey, the writer gets acquainted with interesting and outstanding people. Nikolai Mikhailovich is interested in people’s homes, historical monuments, factories, universities, street celebrations, taverns, village weddings. He evaluates and compares the characters and morals of a particular nationality, studies the characteristics of speech, recording various conversations and his own thoughts.

At the origins of sentimentalism

In the autumn of 1790, Karamzin returned to Moscow, where he began publishing the monthly “Moscow Journal”, in which his stories were published (such as “Liodor”, “Natalia”, boyar's daughter", "Flor Silin"), critical articles and poems. The famous “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and the story “ Poor Lisa" Karamzin attracted Dmitriev and Petrov, Kheraskov and others to collaborate in the magazine.

In his works of this period, Karamzin asserts a new literary direction- sentimentalism. Dominant " human nature“This direction declared feeling, not reason, which distinguished it from classicism. Sentimentalism is an ideal human activity did not believe in a “reasonable” reorganization of the world, but in the release and improvement of “natural” feelings. His hero is more individualized, his inner world enriched by the ability to empathize and sensitively respond to what is happening around.

In the 1790s, the writer published almanacs. Among them are “Aglaya” (parts 1-2, 1794-1795), “Aonids,” written in verse (parts 1-3, 1796-1799), as well as the collection “My Trinkets,” which includes various stories and poems. Fame comes to Karamzin. He is known and loved throughout Russia.

One of Karamzin’s first works written in prose is published in 1803 historical story"Martha Posadnitsa" It was written long before the craze for Walter Scott’s novels began in Russia. This story revealed Karamzin’s attraction to antiquity and classics as an unattainable ideal of morality. In an epic, ancient form, Karamzin presented the struggle of the Novgorodians with Moscow. “Posadnitsa” touched upon important ideological issues: about the monarchy and the republic, about the people and leaders, about “divine” historical predestination and the disobedience of an individual to it. The author's sympathies were clearly on the side of the Novgorodians and Marfa, and not of monarchical Moscow. This story also revealed the writer’s ideological contradictions. Historical truth was undoubtedly on the side of the Novgorodians. However, Novgorod is doomed, bad omens are harbingers of the city's imminent death, and later they are justified.

But greatest success had the story “Poor Liza,” published in 1792 and which became a landmark work of sentimentalism. Frequently found in Western literature In the eighteenth century, the plot of how a nobleman seduced a peasant or bourgeois woman was first developed in Russian literature in this story by Karamzin. The biography of a morally pure, beautiful girl, as well as the idea that such tragic fates can also be found in the reality around us, contributed to the enormous success of this work. It was also important that N.M. Karamzin taught his readers to notice beauty native nature and love her. The humanistic orientation of the work was invaluable for the literature of that time.

In the same year, 1792, the story “Natalya, the Boyar’s Daughter” was born. It is not as famous as “Poor Liza”, but it touches on very important moral issues, which worried N.M.’s contemporaries. Karamzin. One of the most important issues in the work is the problem of honor. Alexey, Natalya's lover, was an honest man who served the Russian Tsar. Therefore, he confessed to his “crime”, that he had kidnapped the daughter of Matvey Andreev, the beloved boyar of the sovereign. But the king blesses their marriage, seeing that Alexey is worthy person. The girl’s father does the same. Concluding the story, the author writes that the newlyweds lived happily ever after and were buried together. They were distinguished by sincere love and devotion to the sovereign. In the story, the question of honor is inseparable from serving the king. Happy is the one whom the sovereign loves.

The year 1793 became a landmark year for Karamzin and his work. At this time, the Jacobin dictatorship was established in France, which shocked the writer with its cruelty. She aroused in him doubts about the possibility of humanity achieving prosperity. He condemned the revolution. The philosophy of despair and fatalism permeates his new works: the stories “Bornholm Island” (1793), “Sierra Morena” (1795), the poems “Melancholy”, “Message to A. A. Pleshcheev”, etc.

By the mid-1790s, Nikolai Karamzin became the recognized head of Russian sentimentalism, which opened new page in Russian literature. He was an indisputable authority for the young Batyushkov.

"Bulletin of Europe". "A note about the old and new Russia»

In 1802 - 1803, Karamzin published the journal “Bulletin of Europe”, in which literature and politics predominated. In his critical articles this time a new one was emerging aesthetic program, which contributed to the formation of Russian literature as nationally distinctive. Karamzin saw the key to the uniqueness of Russian culture in history. The most striking illustration of his views was the story “Martha the Posadnitsa” mentioned above. In his political articles, Karamzin made recommendations to the government, pointing out the role of education.

Trying to influence Tsar Alexander I in this direction, Karamzin gave him his “Note on Ancient and New Russia in its Political and Civil Relations” (1811), which reflected the views of conservative sections of society who did not approve of the sovereign’s liberal reforms. The note irritated the latter. In 1819, the writer submitted a new note - “Opinion of a Russian Citizen,” which caused even greater displeasure to the tsar. However, Karamzin did not abandon his belief in the salvation of an enlightened autocracy and later condemned the Decembrist uprising. Despite this, Karamzin the artist was still highly valued by young writers, even those who did not share his political beliefs.

"History of the Russian State"

In 1803, through his friend and former teacher The young emperor Nikolai Mikhailovich receives the official title of court historiographer. This was of great importance for him, since now, thanks to the pension assigned by the sovereign and access to archives, the writer could carry out the work he had planned on the history of the fatherland. In 1804, he left the literary field and plunged headlong into work: in the archives and book collections of the Synod, the Hermitage, the Academy of Sciences, Public library, Moscow University, Alexander Nevsky and Trinity-Sergius Lavra, read manuscripts and history books, sorted out ancient tomes (, Trinity Chronicle, Code of Law of Ivan the Terrible, “Prayer” and many others), copied and compared. It is difficult to imagine what great work the historian Karamzin did. After all, the creation of twelve volumes of his “History of the Russian State” took more than twenty years of hard work, from 1804 to 1826. Presentation historical events here it was distinguished, as far as possible, by impartiality and authenticity, as well as excellent artistic style. The narrative was brought to . In 1818, the first eight volumes of “History” were published, in 1821 the 9th volume, dedicated to the reign, was published, in 1824 - the 10th and 11th, about Fyodor Ioannovich and. Death interrupted work on the 12th volume and did not allow the large-scale plan to be carried out to completion.

The 12 volumes of “History of the Russian State” that came out one after another caused numerous reader responses. Perhaps for the first time in history, a printed book has provoked such a surge national identity residents of Russia. Karamzin revealed his history to the people and explained his past. They said that, having closed the eighth volume, he exclaimed: “It turns out that I have a Fatherland!” Everyone was engrossed in “History”—students, officials, nobles, even society ladies. They read it in Moscow and St. Petersburg, they read it in the provinces: for example, 400 copies were purchased in Irkutsk.

But the content of the work was perceived ambiguously. Thus, freedom-loving youth were inclined to challenge the support for the monarchical system that Karamzin showed on the pages of “History of the Russian State.” And young Pushkin even wrote daring epigrams about the then venerable historian. In his opinion, this work proved “the need for autocracy and the charms of the whip.” Karamzin, whose books left no one indifferent, was always restrained in response to criticism, calmly accepting both ridicule and praise.

Recent years

Having moved to St. Petersburg, Karamzin, starting in 1816, spends every summer with his family. The Karamzins were hospitable hosts who received such famous poets, like Zhukovsky and Batyushkov (they were members of the Arzamas society created in 1815 and defending the Karamzin direction in literature), as well as educated youth. Young A.S. also often visited here. Pushkin, listening to his elders read poetry, caring for his wife N.M. Karamzina Ekaterina Andreevna (she was the writer’s second wife, the couple had 9 children), no longer young, but a charming and intelligent woman, to whom he even decided to send a declaration of love. The wise and experienced Karamzin forgave the young man’s antics, as well as his daring epigrams on “History.” Ten years later, Pushkin, already a mature man, would look at things differently. great work Nikolai Mikhailovich. In 1826, while in exile in Mikhailovskoye, he wrote in the “Note on Public Education” that the history of Russia should be taught according to Karamzin, and called this work not just the work of a great historian, but also the feat of an honest man.

Generally, recent years The lives of historians and writers can be called happy. He was connected by friendship with Tsar Alexander. The two of them often walked, talking, in Tsarskoye Selo Park. The event that darkened these years was. On December 14, 1825, Karamzin was present on Senate Square. The historian, of course, was against the uprising, although he saw the familiar faces of the Muravyovs among the rebels. A few days after the speech, Nikolai Mikhailovich said: “The delusions and crimes of these young people are the delusions and crimes of our century.”

Karamzin himself became a victim of the events of December 14: standing on Senate Square, he caught a terrible cold and died on May 22, 1826.

Memory

In 1848, the Karamzin Public Library was opened in Simbirsk. In Novgorod, on the monument “1000th anniversary of Russia” (1862), among 129 figures the most outstanding personalities V Russian history there is also the figure of N.M. Karamzin. In Moscow in honor of N.M. Karamzin is named a passage, in Kaliningrad - a street. A monument to the historian was erected in Ulyanovsk, and a memorial sign was erected in the Ostafyevo estate.

Essays

Selected works in 2 vols. M.-L., 1964.

History of the Russian State. St. Petersburg, 1818-1826.

Complete works in 18 volumes. M., 1998-2008.

Complete collection of poems / Intro. Art., prepared. text and notes Yu. M. Lotman. L., 1967.