Student years are an important stage in the formation of a scientist: the dawn of research is engaged. Gradually, the favorite branch of the chosen specialty is determined. The first theme is born. Hundreds of ideas, often contradictory, exciting, and sometimes leading to other areas, run around it in intersecting orbits. Crises, doubts, and searches are inevitable. Everything together is covered by the process of forming a worldview-scientific and political inextricably. The idea of a scientist's student years simply as "studying", a stressful but monotonous process of obtaining large doses of various information, from which a specialty is then formed, does not correspond to reality. A scientist is created in a gifted student very difficult and sometimes not without drama. It begins not with "graduate school", in modern parlance, but with student life. We will notice these features in the Klyuchevsky formation. During his student years, not only did he fulfill the first scientific topic, write the first book, but also a deep ideological crisis associated with the choice of a path and the formation of a worldview. We didn't know about this crisis at all before. Academic legend 1 did not cover this issue. Only the discovery and publication of Klyuchevsky's diary entries, compared with his correspondence, allow us to reveal the internal conflicts and difficulties of his scientific growth. My previous article describes the childhood and seminary years of V. O. Klyuchevsky 2 . We left it at the time of breaking up with the seminary and preparing for the university entrance exams - now let's move on.
In the spring of 1861, Klyuchevsky was ill with a "fever" (apparently malaria) and did not make it to the university exams in May. It was necessary to count on the August tests, which were allowed to be late for good reasons. He was already 20 years old. Students were more likely to enter the university at a younger age - 17-18 years. It was impossible to postpone admission. He left Penza for the first time. Alexander Marshev and Comrade Pokrovsky, who had been expelled from the seminary, were already waiting for him in Moscow, where they had left earlier. It was decided to rent a room together. To exist on what? For lessons. They will have to look for them immediately after passing the exams, if everything goes well. By-
* From the forthcoming monograph "Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky".
1 An academic legend about the development of Klyuchevsky as a scientist was formed shortly after his death. She interpreted his student years as a peaceful period of accumulation of knowledge, a quiet, clear stage, the content of which did not even need to be revealed internally. My article " The history of studying V. O. Klyuchevsky "("Historical Notes", vol. 84, 1969) describes the process of the emergence of an academic legend.
2 See M. V. Nechkin. Young years of V. O. Klyuchevsky. Voprosy Istorii, 1969, No. 9.
page 61
the power was promised at first by the uncle-priest of the Europeans. As he said good-bye, he placed a large bank note in the prayer book he had given his nephew. But you will have to save on every penny. Mother and aunt with tears and fears accompanied the young man to an unknown path. In mid-July 1861, Klyuchevsky and two fellow seminary teachers who were friends of his set out on horseback from Penza. To Vladimir-500 versts-dragged a whole week. In Vladimir, they moved to the" miracle-yudo " of modern technology-a railway train ("a whole village of cars," writes Klyuchevsky) and at an unprecedented speed-up to 30 versts per hour! - moved to Moscow 3 .
The road left an indelible impression and is described in detail in Klyuchevsky's letters to his family and seminary comrades. The young man is terribly worried about travel expenses and the high cost of the path. The letters contain a lot of meticulous calculations, how much is spent on what, how expensive everything is, what is the greed of the owners of road taverns: "Is it really cheap and humane to take 1 1/2 kopecks in silver for an egg?" But there are folklore and historical associations nearby: "We rode, rode all 60 versts through the Murom forest, but we did not see a real forest where the Nightingale Robber could fit in the open space with his ukharsky whistle...". "Bowed to the relics of Boris and Gleb, victims of Svyatopolk the Accursed." The city of Vladimir on a high mountain, "steeper than on our Penza walk from Popovka, the excitement is scary to look at; I think the Mongols worked hard when they took it" 4 . The historian is already felt in the young man.
On the evening of July 22, at half past eight, the travelers arrived in Moscow, received their luggage in the bustle of the railway station, found a cab, and moved to the second - hand courtyard hotel. But they hadn't yet seen Moscow through the darkness and dust of the July evening: "something huge and nothing more." In the morning Klyuchevsky found Marshev and Pokrovsky; the room had already been hired, though it was too expensive, but they had moved in anyway, and then we'll see. Klyuchevsky's first Moscow address: "on Tverskaya Street, Kozitsky Lane, in Lopyrevsky's house, in Nezhdanova's apartment..." 5 .
His Excellency the chairman of the examination committee, Shchurovsky, did not greet the belated person very kindly - it turns out that the application for postponing the exams for August due to illness should have been submitted during the spring session; but "then he turned over the documents, read the certificate" and gave permission. The next day, July 26, 1861, Klyuchevsky submitted his application to the chancellery, paid the required 25 rubles., a huge sum for him-a fee for the right to study at the university for the first half of the year, sat down to prepare for exams. My uncle's bank note came in handy! The exams started on August 8 "and went to write every day until August 16" 6 .
3 Hereafter, we use the material of V. O. Klyuchevsky's letters to the Evropeytsevs, P. Gvozdev, and V. Kholmovsky with detailed stories about their journey to Moscow, arrival, arrangement in Moscow, passing exams, and admission to university. See the set of materials from the archive of V. O. Klyuchevsky, published under my editorship in the publication "Letters, diaries, aphorisms and Thoughts about History", Moscow 1968 (hereinafter - PDA), pp. 13, 15, 19, etc.
4 PDAs, 13, 15, 16, 18 - 20; A. I. Yakovlev and V. O. Klyuchevsky (1841-1911). "Notes" of the Research Institute under the Council of Ministers of the Mordovian ASSR. Vol. 6. Saransk, 1946, p. 98 et al. ; S. A. Golubtsov, V. O. Klyuchevsky in the student years. Introductory article to the publication " Letters of V. O. Klyuchevsky to P. P. Gvozdev (1861-1870)", Moscow, 1924, p.129 (Golubtsov vainly suggests an error in the memoirs of Klyuchevsky's sister E. O. Virginskaya. In fact, Klyuchevsky rode horses for the first part of the journey (to Vladimir), and in Vladimir he took the train).
5 PDA, p. 13, 17.
6 Ibid., p. 26. Klyuchevsky has a typo in his letters: it dates the beginning of exams on August 7 or 8 (cf. PDA, p. 20 and p. 26). I rely on an earlier letter to the Evropeytsevs, especially since in the second letter (to P. Gvozdev) there is another misspelling in the date-Shchurovsky's visa is clearly mistakenly dated August 25 instead of July 25 (correction made by P. Gvozdev's hand).
page 62
Klyuchevsky colorfully described the events. Here is how his sister remembered his story: "When I entered such a large hall, I was immediately overcome with shyness: I see that some individuals are very well dressed, in pince-nez with shiny frames, with watches and fangs (as he called the collars of starched shirts). I look at it and think: are they professors? "And then, when the exam started, I see that these gentlemen came here for the same thing as me. Then I felt a little better. And when they started calling them and asking questions, some of them were silent; then they turned to me, saying: "Klyuchevsky! Answer you" And so it went on. Then I took a calmer breath, thinking: "You are such gentlemen with pince-nez, but you are silent." 7 A timid poor raznochinets suddenly felt the possibility of his superiority over the noble and official sons.
The first exam was written Russian, an essay on the topic "My upbringing". Examinees were warned that "one spelling mistake takes away the right to enter the university." The professor asked me to write "straight to the point, without philosophical speculations and prefaces." Unfortunately, the text of this work of Klyuchevsky has not reached us, and it would have been a significant autobiographical document. Here the young man gave free rein to his critical mind: "Everything went wrong, and especially the seminary," Klyuchevsky writes in a letter to his seminary friend P. Gvozdev. He "solemnly" concluded the essay with the words: "Eternal memory to you, patriarchal, unforgettable school! You taught more than you taught." He did not say "thank you" to the seminary, but sang "eternal memory" to it, as they sang over the dead. Then he even caught himself "and got a little scared for his vehemence, but everything ended well" - for the essay he received an A. At the exam in Russian literature, his answer was also rated as excellent - they asked about Lomonosov and about samples of the Russian epic. According to the "law of God", the answer about the ninth member of the creed and especially about the ecumenical councils (when and on what occasion was the last one) even surprised the examiner with erudition: the examiner priest, looking at the professor of theology Sergievsky who was leading the exam, uttered only one explanatory word: "Seminarian!". However, the rating "satisfactory" is not entirely clear with such a brilliant answer - perhaps the essay "My Upbringing" with its critical attitude to the seminary was pulled down here?
The next day there were exams in history and geography. Last podkuzmila: the ticket "on the political state of Australia" entailed such an approximate answer that I had to take the second one. This second ticket, "about the tribes of the Russian Empire", according to Klyuchevsky himself, was only half explained to them, but a satisfactory assessment followed. Another thing is history, here he was "at home, at ease." In world history, he answered about the Hundred Years ' War between England and France, in Russian - "about Olga". "We chatted with him for a long time," Klyuchevsky says of the examiner. But the joy of the successful results of the exam was overshadowed by the fact that tomorrow there were tests in mathematics and physics. The psychological state of the examinee is interesting. Feeling unsure, Klyuchevsky goes to take the exam to the "professor of mathematical wisdom" himself, and not to his assistants: "I gave him the reduction of Fractions to the same denominator, multiplication of fractions, told him how to enter a Square and a hexagon in a circle" and added for some reason that:-
7 "Readings at the Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities". Book 248. Materials for the biography of V. O. Klyuchevsky. 1914 (hereinafter-CHOIDR), p. 417; we do not reproduce in the quotation the peculiar spelling of Klyuchevsky's sister, which is preserved in the Readings.
page 63
he could not enter a square (although he was not asked about it) and that "he had no idea about progression formulas from algebra". The letter goes on to say something unexpected:" I lied, I had an idea - only once, but now I forgot... "But he solved the equation given to him"and even added that the solution was negative, subtly hinting that the problem was not quite correct." This was the end of the "mathematical comedy", In physics they asked only about the pinhole camera and the barometer. It should be noted that applicants who did not enter the Faculty of Mathematics were asked in mathematics and physics easily.
"But then how did they catch us - philologists - in classical antiquity, in other words, in Latin and Greek!" The written exam in Latin consisted of translating from Russian into Latin. At the oral exam, Klyuchevsky translated Cicero a livre ouvert "quite neatly", endured "grammatical torture" - he named all the forms of verbs and so on. He wrote a dictation in Greek, which he was not used to, and he understood it thoroughly in the oral exam from the grammatical side, making only one mistake in the accent. "Leontiev himself" and an angry old teacher were also taking the exam. The last exams were in German and French - they wrote dictation in German and asked for the translation of the text, and in French they limited themselves to one oral translation, "without skimping" suggested unfamiliar words. "Oh, the French are a delicate people!" So the exams are passed. "Now you can see if this is the case." It is clear that Klyuchevsky believed that this was "not the case" at all, and in general believed that "exams are a stupid thing." "The most fruitful work is free, unaccountable (in the sense: not subject to a report. - M. N.), not for the exam table..." 8 .
So, judging by his letters, he passed at least 14 exams when he entered Moscow University in 1861, if you count written and oral separately: for seven of them-written in Russian (essay), Russian literature, history, Latin written, Latin oral, Greek written, Greek oral - it received ratings of "very satisfactory". Apparently, the oral exam in the Russian language was combined with the exam in the Slavic language, but a brilliant answer in Russian literature and the presence of seminary training gave the professor a reason to remove the exam in the Slavic language. When Klyuchevsky himself mentioned the Slavic language, the professor remarked:: "You're a seminarian, aren't you? You've had enough." "I went and rejoiced in my heart," Klyuchevsky writes. For seven other exams - "the law of god", geography, mathematics (arithmetic, geometry, algebra), physics, German (written and spoken), French (spoken) Klyuchevsky received a grade of "satisfactory". At that time, the university accepted all those who passed the exam. The letter to his comrades about how he passed the exams is intended to draw other members of the raznochin family away from the seminary, attract them to the university, and convince them that they are quite capable of passing the exams. Klyuchevsky describes all the exams in detail, concluding that it is quite possible to prepare for a year. When in one of the following letters Gvozdev - " carissime Porphyri "("dearest Porphyri") calls his university exams "brilliant", he will get from Klyuchevsky: "What did you conclude?.. "Brilliance"? What a nasty word... " 9 .
Now it was possible to look at Moscow. Previously, there was no time - exams absorbed all the attention and time. The ability to concentrate, to go deep into work, which he had brought up in himself at a young age - without this, where would he have overcome poverty, difficult conditions of study, hunger, crowding, and even the need to give lessons for existence
8 Letter of Klyuchevsky to P. Gvozdev dated September 3, 1861: PDA, pp. 22-30.
9 Ibid., pp. 20, 26-29, 40.
page 64
families? "it helped him this time, too. If at first he "hasn't looked into Moscow yet," as he writes to his relatives in Penza, then in the days following the exams he "is just beginning to study this huge city with its strange houses and streets." Moscow made a strong impression. He must have walked along it a lot and got lost in the streets and alleys: "You walk around Moscow and you can't make out Moscow, all the streets, streets, streets and all the streets - you get lost, or you go south and go south, and you come home from the north - and how did it happen? you wouldn't understand... And it's worth it to walk around and see: Russia is all here, and with legs and hands and with golitsami even... "Here on the streets he had to satisfy his hunger:" there is nothing to say about rolls and saikas-zaydenie. Both of them are worth 5 kopecks in silver apiece, but they are such that one roll or saika is enough to be calm about the stomach for at least three hours afterward, " he writes to Pashenka Evropeytsev .10 Letters to Penza also included descriptions of Moscow's boulevards. "Do you know what Moskovsky Boulevard is? A thing worth studying for statistical and psychological interest, " he wrote to Porfiry Gvozdev. "This, my dear brother, is a long alley lined with trees, like our public garden, only long, not round, along a wide street, in the middle, between two rows of houses-you know, I draw vividly, don't you? Such boulevards run around the entire center of Moscow. The most famous of them in relation to hunting for hats is Tverskaya, that is, the one from which I am located not far away. Only I rarely go there, so take comfort and don't be afraid for me." 11
Material concerns of the most urgent order were born in his poor life. The old frock coat is already completely worn out, lectures are coming soon, lessons are being sought, you need to get at least some decent clothes, you can't go to a lesson "to a decent person" in this form. He had the audacious idea of making a coat and trousers out of satin, if only the four yards that his uncle had given him would be enough. At home, too, it is necessary to look decent in some way, because people come - he bought a robe from a junk dealer, giving him his old one and two and a half to boot; the new robe is "uemisty", and now he sleeps in it (probably there was no blanket). As long as he doesn't have a frock coat, he wears a coat left behind by a friend who has left for a while. Saves, as before, paper, writes the smallest, smaller beads, handwriting, leaving no empty spaces on the sheet. The apartment must be changed to a cheaper one - 13 rubles a month is not affordable, it's good that the Marshevs paid 12 rubles in advance for everyone .
But here is the beginning of classes at the university, long-awaited, desired, attractive, so long being an unattainable dream. The first lectures of famous professors - F. V. Buslaev, S. V. Eshevsky. S. M. Solovyov, who was dreamed of in Penza, does not read in the first year. But you can get past pedel * to the second year, listen to the famous scientist. Letters to seminar friends take on a new character. They are filled not with external incidents, but with a careful presentation of the lectures they have listened to. After all, here, at the university, is the true science that seminarians so longed for. It is the moral duty of a comrade who has achieved a cherished goal to quickly convey to them what is learned from this true science. But less than a month after the start of university classes, a powerful wave of social events swept over Moscow University, broke through its classrooms, pushed science aside, and captured minds. The main voice of the era drowned out all other voices. The student movement of 1861 is an organic element of the revolutionary si-
10 Ibid., pp. 17, 19, 22.
11 Ibid., p. 93.
12 Ibid., pp. 16, 17, 21, 23.
* A junior employee at higher educational institutions in pre-revolutionary Russia who monitored the behavior of students.
page 65
tuations-rises in university towns. Having flared up in St. Petersburg, it is transferred to Moscow University, while Kharkiv and Kiev are worried at the same time... Kazan University and the Kazan Theological Academy started even earlier, in the spring, with the uprising in the Abyss, and remain important participants in the movement. A powerful democratic upsurge, which for the first time in Russia has received such force, loudly declares itself in this form of social struggle.
Klyuchevsky was only marginally prepared for this social upheaval. The youth movement also affected the Penza Seminary in 1859-1860-this was mentioned in my previous article 13 . The ideological ferment among seminarians was connected with the essential issues of the Sixties ' ideology - a protest against religious scholasticism, a demand for the study of genuine science, and indignation against the restriction of individual freedom and natural rights. The Penza seminarians also noticed the role of the peasantry: the year 1861 was the time of the greatest upsurge in the mass peasant movement, which broke out after February 19 in the Penza regions as well. In the homeland of the young Klyuchevsky, the culminating event of the peasant struggle took place - the Kandeyevka uprising. But nevertheless, the capital's events find Klyuchevsky at a crossroads, raising doubts and concerns.
The composition of participants in the student unrest of 1861 at Moscow University was complex. These disturbances undoubtedly went beyond the "academic" scope of purely student needs and university interests. 14 Just the fact that they were a response to the St. Petersburg events and that the future most active members of Zemlya I Volya - Ivan Kelsiev, N. Utin, Ya. Sulin and a number of others-took part in them speaks for itself. Reading of revolutionary proclamations during student gatherings; "Kolokol", "Velikoruse", proclamation literature seized during the arrests of the "instigators" testified to the presence of a radical democratic trend in the complex student ferment. The liberal current, which did not go as far in words as the revolutionary democrats, and later quickly receded back to the positions of "repentant" and loyal to the higher authorities, was also present in the movement. There were also active reactionaries, supporters of the "powers that be", who actively resisted the growing protest.
Klyuchevsky was not one of them, nor the other, nor the third. He was one of the "abstainers" from any form of participation. Klyuchevsky's correspondence during his student years makes it possible to analyze the reasons for his position, and we have a valuable document for this.
It should be noted that Klyuchevsky's "non-participation" in the movement is in no way an indifference to it. He feels a keen interest in events, is excited by them, and seeks to understand them. Even before the beginning of the open movement, which unfolded at the end of September, he catches the tremors that precede it and writes more than a month before the events in a letter to the Europeans in Penza about the "bleak Russian life": "I would like to tell you something about this; we are talking about it, curious in the highest degree, alluding to the fact that in Russia not everything is covered and covered, and that in it, in some places, dvi-
13 M. V. Nechkina. Young years of V. O. Klyuchevsky, pp. 78-90.
14 S. Ashevsky ("The Russian Student Movement in the Epoch of the 60s", Sovremennyi Mir, 1907, No. 9, 10) and after him B. P. Kozmin ("From the History of the student movement in Moscow in 1861" in the collection "The Revolutionary Movement of the 1860s", Moscow, 1932) they adhere to this incorrect point of view, considering the student unrest of 1861 to be purely "academic". Criticism of these views was given by M. P. Svintsova in her PhD thesis "Students in the Russian revolutionary-democratic movement of the period of the revolutionary situation" (Moscow, 1952, pp. 184, 212, etc.).
page 66
they huddle and struggle, and do not remain silent submissively; but it is still somehow terrible to convey this on paper... " As we can see, all this interests him, and even "to the highest degree"; he must be recognized at this moment as rather sympathetic to those who "move and struggle"; he is against submissive silence, he is for movement and struggle. He is afraid to write about everything, obviously in the context of censorship conditions 15 .
The news about the closure of St. Petersburg University appeared in Moskovskiye Vedomosti on September 26, and the response was a movement of Moscow students. The unrest began with the reading of revolutionary proclamations at the Faculty of Law: "We have read a proclamation, zealous, irritable, in the tone of" Aux armes, citoyens!"*. It was sent from St. Petersburg. The reader was answered with loud applause, " Klyuchevsky writes. It can be assumed that the proclamation "To the Young Generation" was read, printed in London and brought to Moscow by St. Petersburg student delegates .16
Klyuchevsky was not yet aware of the student requirements and could not fully understand the situation. The introduction of matricules and the new university rules did not bother him very much - what did he have to compare them with? They were nothing compared to the cast-iron rules of the seminary; he prayed for the university in advance and was ready to comply with any of its rules. The demand to reduce the fee for the right to study, of course, met with sympathy of the poor, but only with this benefit you can not live anyway - the calculation remained on the scholarship and lessons. We still see him at the first student meeting listening attentively to the revolutionary proclamation and defining its content with a line from the hymn "La Marseillaise"to the French Revolution. Of course, there was nothing to stop him from just not going to the meeting, but he did. The inspector burst in during the reading of the proclamation, grabbed the speaker by the arm and dragged him from the pulpit, "but the speaker continued to read without deigning to pay the inspector any attention." He did not come down until he had finished reading " at the sound of applause." The students "responded to the inspector's admonitions with deafening whistles." They drew up an address in the university garden to the tsar about student demands, and began to sign them. And here Klyuchevsky did not dare to give his signature, refused: the tone of the address frightened him, seemed to him unceremonious: all "we wish", "we wish"... Apparently, he wanted a more submissive and pleading tone, but he did not object to the substance of the wishes. He was impressed by the isolation of a group of reactionary students who declared that everything that had happened ("this noise and whistling") was "an alien matter"for them. He hastens to conclude that disorder is the work of a few. He "turned his back" on this kind of case. There were "demagogues" (he was against them!) who shouted in the garden that the names of the participants in the struggle ("their names"!) would be "written in gold letters for posterity." He is outraged by such bragging rights.
On the third day, by the decision of the University Council, the First and second courses of the Faculty of Law were closed for a year. Some students were shouting: "Let them close our university! "" How easy it is to say that! And did anyone think that all these screams were not worth one word of a lecture by Buslaev or someone else?" The reaction seems to be that of a typical "academic", but it has its own special shades: rather, it is the opinion of a young man who has just escaped from the captivity of the seminary, eager for knowledge, who did not have time to understand the situation and yet in some weak measure sympathized with the requirements. The "case" was generally fair; but here "azhi-
15 PDA, p. 22 (letter to the Evropyantsevs of August 19, 1861, written before the beginning of classes at the university, but after the exams).
* "To arms, citizens!" - a line from the French revolutionary anthem.
16 M. P. Svintsova suggests that it could have been a proclamation "To the young generation" that fits Klyuchevsky's definition. There is no exact information about the proclamation in the archives.
page 67
the tators "messed up the case" and started writing the address: "that's why I turned my back on him." He narrates in detail the speech of Professor Buslaev, an opponent of the unrest, but also criticizes Buslaev: his speech "was dark in itself." But something prevents him from writing about this in his letter: he suddenly breaks off the story of the unrest and resolutely proceeds to transfer Professor Sergievsky's theological lecture, as if wanting to get away from events. He is clearly rushing around, looking for ways, afraid to take a decisive position 17 . He writes this letter on October 11 before nightfall ("God! 12 without 1/4!"). He does not yet know that it is at this time that searches and arrests of members of the student movement are already beginning - on the night of October 12, 1861.
The next day, the arrests outrage and puzzle Klyuchevsky. A letter dated October 18 to I. V. Evropeytsev once again sets out his wavering point of view on student unrest. The immediate program of the movement is the abolition of the "universal duty to pay for listening to lectures" and about "permission" (he does not dare to say "right") to explain yourself to your superiors through deputies - "it was all fine." But the noise and impertinence made the good deed illegal. It seems impossible for him to get off the ground of the law: "anyone who tries to change something must also submit to the existing regulations in order to succeed." He still accompanies this good formula with the question "isn't it?". That's why he didn't sign the address; after thinking about it rationally, he also decided that the address was bound to fail, it wouldn't do any good: it didn't say "we ask for this", but "we want, we demand-and that's the end of it". It is clear that people who have just closed St. Petersburg University will not meet the requirements of Moscow students. But he is outraged that the police on the night of October 12 are grabbing some students "without any explanation for what and why." Nowhere does Klyuchevsky say that the instigators have been caught up in the case, nowhere does he stand in solidarity with the police - he is outraged by the police brutality. He describes the violent movement, the explanation with the trustee, the expulsion of the chief police officer by students "with a noisy whistle". The next day, a huge crowd moves to the Governor-General's house to demand an explanation from the Governor-General. Everything "ended in tragedy", "a strange thing began": foot and horse gendarmes "scattered" through the streets and grabbed anyone who had at least some signs of a student (uniform, glasses, etc.), students were beaten. "Shopkeepers and mobs, provoked by the police, shouted that the students "want to take away the will of the peasants together with the landlords", that "it's all the Poles who are rebelling". "What a ridiculous incongruity!" Klyuchevsky exclaims. The students have gone a little off the ground of the law, and the government has rudely trampled on justice! The result is a tragedy. The gendarmes did not allow anyone to enter or leave the university. "It saved many people, including me, who stayed at the university, from the gendarme's broadsword or the hoof of his horse. The matter was too serious not to be taken to heart. " 18 So, he still "took it to heart"?
The whole tone of the narrative is cautiously anti-government and at the same time"anti-left". Klyuchevsky is glad that he escaped "from many troubles", but it was not he who hid himself - circumstances saved him: the gendarmes locked up the university, he could not go out, like many others, which, however, led to his personal well-being. There are many contradictory features in this whole story: the qualification of events as "tragedies", and next to them - clearly comedic notes (ladies bringing students to the arrested).-
17 PDA, p. 22. 41-43, 47; cf. M. P. Svintsova. Decree, op., pp. 206, 207; P. S. Tkachenko. Moscow studentstvo v sotsial'no-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii vtoroi poloviny XIX veka [Moscow students in the socio-political life of Russia in the second half of the 19th century].
18 PDA, p. 47-48.
page 68
there "confect whole knots" and declare that "they will no longer dance with gendarme officers..."). Defining what happened as "a police massacre" and at the same time trying to characterize it as "a domestic university affair, not a political demonstration." But he himself had just delivered the contents of the revolutionary proclamation read at the meeting... He himself asks :" What should I call this time?., interregnum of the police?" He doesn't seem to be making ends meet. "Turmoil on all sides" - he is not a supporter of turmoil. But he doesn't say much - "you know why you can't write about it." 19
The researchers ' straightforward conclusion that Klyuchevsky then belonged to the "moderate-liberal" trend 20 does not convey either his confusion, or the search for truth, or the contradictions he encountered, or the process of forming a person. Here is a young man entering life and looking for ways, a seminarian who has just broken free, and by the beginning of events has not even studied at the university for a month. Perhaps the liberals were even somewhat to the left of him at that time. He will not choose the road to revolutionary democracy in the future, but the 60s, with all their events that passed through his consciousness, raised before the young historian the question of active participation in the social struggle, of his personal responsibility for the "reigning evil". They gave rise to confusion and hesitation in his academic soul. This remained in him for the rest of his life, reinforced by all the new impressions and painful reflections of the following years. Without this impulse of the 60s, it is impossible to understand Klyuchevsky.
Klyuchevsky tries to protect himself from doubts and hesitation with irony - this is typical of him. In a letter to Gvozdev dated October 27, he seeks to simplify events, emphasize their weak and funny sides. Yes, there was a decent "drama with a tragic connotation" at the university, but " I'm afraid that, like everything tragic in the world, it will end in a comedy." He foresees even elements of "the most vulgar vaudeville". The arrest of students on the night of October 12 is still perceived as such an act of arbitrariness and lawlessness, the protest against which rightly united all students and silenced "contradictory interpretations". The fight with gendarmes at the Governor-General's house on Tverskaya Street, the mob provoked by the police "in the face of shopkeepers", betraying students to the police, still outrage him. But even the students here allowed a "melodramatic" exaggeration, there were also blindfolds under the eye in the presence of an insignificant scratch made "by themselves (maybe even as a result of a conversation with a bottle)"! He has no direct facts, but it is felt that a simple philistine skepticism helps him to push out the disturbing contradictory perception of everything that happened, set out in previous letters, and move towards his own calm. It follows again an abridged story about sweets and ladies. Do not believe the information of the Moscow Police Gazette (he must have read it!) that students allegedly attacked gendarmes and 3 daggers and 58 sticks were raised on the square. The police themselves bought these daggers in the store, and all the students already have sticks, he himself, Klyuchevsky, is no exception. Energetic "Enough!"he completes the information, then moves on to other questions. He tries to push doubts out of his mind 21 .
Of course, the neutral position of "non-participation" in the unrest alienated Klyuchevsky from the active progressive youth, from the revolutionary democracy of the radical students and from the strata, to this democracy
19 Ibid., p. 49.
20 See M. V. Nechkin. History of studying V. O. Klyuchevsky, p. 216 et seq.
21 Ibid., pp. 50-53.
page 69
the gravitating ones. But he also had nothing in common with the reactionary "white-liners". This peculiar situation of the first few months of his long-awaited stay at the university immediately made him lonely. Only a very small circle of new acquaintances from former seminarians is formed around him. He himself writes that this group is " seminary, therefore, our native brotherhood." He mentions only two surnames - Fiveysky, who spent a year at the Moscow Theological Academy (was he not expelled?) and then transferred to Moscow University, and F. A. Gilyarov from the Moscow Seminary, the son of a Moscow priest, the nephew of the famous professor of the Theological Academy N. P. Gilyarov-Platonov. Fiveysky - "an ideal, kind, frank head", a violinist to the same. Gilyarov has a sister who is "quite strong in the business of charming". "Others of the same kind and good with them." They all met quite often: "The people are all sensible: let's put a bottle (however, rarely) and philosophize in the open" 22 . There is no question of disputes - this is a closed, small circle of former seminarians, rather not even a circle, but a "triangle".
So raznochinets had a kind of "self-isolation" from events, of course, very fragile. There remained the teaching and the teaching. In it, it seemed, one could be saved. Klyuchevsky devoted himself to science with passion. According to the documents of his archive, we can follow the course of his scientific growth and notice the ideological influences that he perceived at that time.
The university day of 1861 - one of the Fridays - Klyuchevsky described in detail in a letter to his" bosom friend " Vasenka Kholmovsky 23 . Why is Friday chosen? Because on this day, "all the great personalities come on stage." Classes start at 9 am. First-year student Klyuchevsky shows the caretaker his entrance ticket (without this, they are not allowed to enter the university), "takes off his coat" and runs to the audience. There is already a noisy crowd of "students and non-students", about two hundred people, "uniformed and non-uniformed": the mandatory uniform has just been abolished, although it is allowed to wear it for a year. But here is a general movement, there is Professor Fyodor Ivanovich Buslaev, one of the university's celebrities. Everyone rushes to take their seats. A man in his forties rises to the pulpit - a short-haired, healthy man... He starts snuffing as if from under his hand, quietly, looking so funny at the audience. All of a sudden, he'll start yelling, so naively, as if he'd fallen off a cart.".. So original is the beginning of the Buslaev lecture. Subject - history of Ancient Russian literature: "Well, at least about how the Slavs lived in a long-gone time, when there were no Ruriks and Varangians between them, what traditions, what beliefs they had, what songs they sang and what tales about gods, heroes and monsters the Slavs told their children, rocking them in the cradle..." Klyuchevsky quickly, enthusiastically writes down a lecture. New, attractive, and striking is the professor's guiding idea, unknown to the old seminary teaching: "The people and only the people with their apt, prophetic word, with their concepts-this is what most interests the professor." Buslaev - " a lover of native Russian antiquity, the Russian people." Klyuchevsky has already read Buslaev's work and recommends it to a friend: "Take any of his works, every line of it speaks of his fervent love for the interests of our people..."
22 Ibid., pp. 54-55.
23 Ibid., pp. 59-63. The word" friend "was omitted from the epithet" bosom friend " by seminarians.
page 70
During the break, Klyuchevsky still has time to reread the lecture notes. But here's the call again - "the second action opens". There is a second celebrity, especially interesting for seminarians, Professor of theology Sergievsky. He is still young, about 35 years old, " dark and at the same time pale... His features are surprisingly regular. The eyes with long lashes are somehow particularly soft." From under the long and wide sleeves of the cassock, armbands of striking whiteness are knocked out. "He's actually a dandy." In his lectures, theological truth is enlivened by "contemporary interest." He connects theology with philosophy, even puts theology "eye to eye with philosophical opinions", without fear that it will be untenable before the "opinions of philosophical heads". Sergievsky, explains Klyuchevsky, "boldly went out against Feuerbach, an inveterate modern materialist who rejects God, the soul, and everything spiritual." The professor argues with Feuerbach "not in the Eupsychian way" - he scolds, and the matter is over. After all, how did Eupsychius criticize such philosophers? "Madmen! - he would say, without even bothering to find out what these follies consist of." If they are against religion - " well, and in the face of them for this." That's all the criticism. At Moscow University, however, the situation is different. But the bell rings, and Sergievsky's lecture is over. With a small group of students, Klyuchevsky hurries down to a small room for a lecture on Latin stylistics. The old German professor," an ugly snuff-snuffer, " gives a lecture in Latin, and Klyuchevsky fully understands everything. The lecture is interrupted by Latin questions from the professor, a stylistic analysis of the text is underway , and Klyuchevsky answers the professor in Latin.
Another phone call, another large audience - a lecture on world history. Enter the third celebrity-Stepan Vasilyevich Eshevsky. In appearance, the professor is plain, looks like a morel, weak, thin, pale, in his early 30s. But Yeshevsky reads "fine". Although immediately Klyuchevsky rushes to clarify: "that is, the content of his readings is excellent, but his accent is not very good. He speaks in a low, weak voice, and some words are difficult to pronounce. But you will listen to this person." The first-year student is struck by Yeshevsky's thought about the significance of the history of the ancient world for people of the XIX century; it turns out that "the most practical people of our century, like Napoleon III or trading North Americans," are now turning to antiquity to understand modernity. 24 Yeshevsky has already delivered eight lectures and is still "not out of the introduction". Klyuchevsky also writes down Eshevsky's lectures, and "especially diligently": he will prepare a lithographic edition of his course in the future. Call, it's already 2 pm. There is still a fifth lecture to be held - Professor Hertz teaches the subject "completely new" - the history of Byzantine art. At the same time, the author examines the question of the Byzantine influence on the architecture of Russian churches. Hertz looks like a "good boy", hefty, red (obviously ruddy. - M. N.), about 36 - 38 years old in appearance. Klyuchevsky managed to "get acquainted" with him, but did not manage to "find out" - he distinguishes this. Klyuchevsky is proud of his professors. We can see by correspondence how attentive the student is to the content of lectures, how the manner of reading, oratorical skills of the professor do not escape him, even the appearance and approximate age of the lecturer is characterized. All these observations will be necessary for him later - in the work on his own lecturing talent.
The university day has passed, and the working evening begins. It is not described in the letter to Kholmovsky, but from other letters of Klyuchevsky it is easy to reconstruct the picture of the afternoon. The most intensive classes take place at home. Sometimes the student Klyuchevsky sits for five hours in a row reading a scientific book, sometimes a foreign one.
24 Ibid., p. 34.
page 71
gets acquainted with the "Edda", spends long hours for Herodotus. His knowledge of ancient languages came in handy - he has to read primary sources both in Greek and Latin (he is a mountain for studying ancient languages in disputes with young people!). He is attracted to sources and difficult monographs ("History of the German Language" by J. Grimm in German). In the first years, philological interests are strong, philology is deeply occupied, and foreign languages are of interest. He also reads French, for example, the works of Renan. But only two modern foreign languages - German and French - are not enough. You also need to know English and Slavic languages-Czech, Bulgarian. But even without Sanskrit, one cannot delve into the issues of linguistics: "It is difficult to summarize my studies," he writes to P. Gvozdev. "God knows what I don't do. And I read political economy, and I learn Sanskrit, and I learn a few things in English, and I turn Czech and Bulgarian, and the devil knows what else." The correspondence shows that Klyuchevsky is aware of the current periodicals, reads magazines of various directions-Sovremennik, Otechestvennye Zapiski, Aksakov's Den. New books and new issues of magazines are easy to get in Moscow - he is up to date with scientific news. Late at night, he "puts out the candle" (in Moscow, he is by candlelight!).
But if the evenings were devoted only to studying science, what a blessing it would be. However, this is impossible: to exist, you must give lessons. Klyuchevsky has a lot of them, and they are very different. There are lessons in cultured, well-to-do families, probably relatively well-paid. We know about later tutoring in the families of N. Milyutin, S. Volkonsky, the rich Morozovs, and a number of others. But the first - year student does not have to choose-you will not give up difficult and cheap lessons. A. I. Yakovlev, according to Klyuchevsky, tells about a lesson in the family of a forest ranger in Sokolniki: for 15 rubles a month plus a glass of tea with a piece of bread, Klyuchevsky in leaky boots, without galoshes, walks seven versts from his Kozikha to Sokolniki (horse-drawn horses there no), to rehearse a high school student-the son of a forest ranger, and in addition to this, for some time read aloud to the forest ranger, the mistress of the house, tabloid novels. You have to go back in the dark. On the outskirts of the city, in Sokolniki, you can meet robbers and hooligans. Knowing this, the forester "reassures" the student: "If you are attacked, just say that you are coming from me. Then you will not only be left untouched, but even escorted." It was not profitable for robbers to quarrel with the forest ranger - he was guarding the "order" 25 in the area .
I really need to get a scholarship. But there were very few scholarships then. They were given only to the" trustworthy "poor as a result of strict "competitive tests". From letters to P. Gvozdev and I. Evropeytsev, we learn that Klyuchevsky successfully passed the scholarship exam (six tests) and received five fives and one four (in Greek), which provided him with a scholarship from the second year (first-year students were not given a scholarship , but were enrolled only as a result of successful transition from the first year on II). At the end of 1862, the establishment of new scholarships of an increased type was announced. Klyuchevsky submitted an application to the rector with a request to allow him to enter the competitive test "in order to transfer me from the scholarship I had previously received to one of the newly established ones." He also received a new scholarship from the Ministry of National Education - in the "Consolidated list of points of students of the Faculty of History and Philology for all four courses" we see his name among the "state-funded" students, that is, scholarship holders, of whom there were only six in the course. According to the average score obtained by him on all university tests (4 23/31), Klyuchev-
25 A. I. Yakovlev. Decree op., pp. 94-131.
page 72
Alexander Kirpichnikov is the second most successful Russian scholar (the first was Alexander Kirpichnikov) .26
Receiving a ministerial scholarship, which was hard to come by and extremely necessary, increased his isolation. He was careful. Sometimes he thought one thing and said another. There were plenty of listening ears at the university during those tumultuous years; it was hard to get a scholarship, but easy to lose one.
The general philosophical battle in the era of the revolutionary situation of the late 1850s and early 1860s began just before Klyuchevsky entered Moscow University and continued during his years of study. At the center of the battle was N. G. Chernyshevsky's work "The Anthropological Principle in Philosophy", which appeared in the April 1860 book Sovremennik. It laid out the foundations of a materialist philosophical worldview and challenged idealistic schools. Russian materialism spoke here with a full voice. Chernyshevsky went into battle on the old philosophical foundations, declared himself a supporter of mature materialist thought.
The reactionary camp was in motion. At first, the opponents ' attacks on the advanced thinker were limited to magazine bickering, which did not yet reflect all the ideological danger that threatened the "foundations". An attempt at an organized defense, however, was not slow to appear at the end of the same year and aroused the increased attention and hopes of defenders of the religious and philosophical bastions of idealism. On December 1, 1860 - rather quickly for that time-a work hostile to Chernyshevsky was published by his opponent and philosophical antagonist, Professor P. D. Yurkevich of the Kiev Theological Academy, under the title "From the Science of the Human Spirit". Published in the proceedings of the Kiev Theological Academy (1860, No. 4), this work, born in the reactionary-ecclesiastical sphere, would probably have remained the property of theological academies and seminaries if the conditions of a sharp ideological clash had not immediately made it a banner in the hands of the reactionary camp that was confused: M. N. Katkov hastened to proclaim Yurkevich's creation an outstanding philosophical work of the epoch and reprint it almost entirely in the March and May books of Russky Vestnik for 1861. Sovremennik accepted the challenge and promptly responded to Yurkevich, Katkov and others in the June book of the same year. N. G. Chernyshevsky's brilliant and spirited articles "Disrespect for Authority" and " Polemical Beauties (Collection One)", unsurpassed in their wit, courage, and merciless exposure of the enemy's ideological inadequacy, appeared immediately in one book. Chernyshevsky subjected the idealist's worldview to deadly criticism. N. A. Dobrolyubov, M. A. Antonovich, later D. I. Pisarev and a number of other revolutionary democrats took part in the philosophical battle.
Kliuchevsky, who read Sovremennik and had easy access to the publications of theological academies and Russkiy Vestnik, was well aware of the heated and heated controversy. In Penza, the fourth volume of Sovremennik for 1860 with Chernyshevsky's main philosophical work appeared in May-June, when Klyuchevsky was already living with the Marshevs and preparing for the university exam. In a letter to Gvozdev dated January 27, 1862, he recalls Yurkevich's work and the" curious "polemic with it in Sovremennik. "Did you read Chernyshevsky's review of it in Sovremennik?" asks Klyuchevsky of his correspondent. We are talking, of course, about "Disrespect for authorities" and "Polemical beauties".
26 CHOIDR, book 248, p. 381.
page 73
Even in the seminary, the opposition of idealistic truth to materialism was brought to the consciousness of not only the average, but even the most backward seminarian. The struggle between idealism and materialism was a learned proposition. But the developed mind delved into the counter-argument, looking for arguments. First, of course, in favor of religious idealism. Klyuchevsky was never convinced by evidence on the level of a cat-like philosopher's mind. Sergievsky's first lectures at the University captivated him precisely because the professor seemed to be arguing with Feuerbach at the level of modern science. But materialism, drawn from the original source, now appeared to the young man's consciousness quite different. Sovremennik gave us a lot. The fighting organ, the worldview teacher, opened up a whole world of philosophical materialism to the young reader, logically elaborated and supported by modern scientific argumentation. Not only that, but materialism was revealed as a well-founded system, went into battle, was militant, and this was understood by Klyuchevsky.
The theme of the opposition of materialism to idealism occupies a large place in Klyuchevsky's student correspondence with his seminary comrades. It is clear that he has not yet broken with the old worldview, but has already made new demands on it in the hope that the idealistic system will be able to overcome the enemy and assert itself. This is no longer the old dogma, but a new position. It requires reflection and is therefore fruitful. It gives rise to increased requests for the philosophical argumentation of a theologian professor. It is still too early to sum up the results of the formation of a worldview, but it was no longer religious. Klyuchevsky's student letters are full of skeptical thoughts about the old beliefs that are wavering in his soul.
Even in the first month of studying at the university, Klyuchevsky undoubtedly considers himself one of those who "look askance at theology." 27 But he still "often" after Sergievsky's lectures becomes suddenly, by his own admission, " childishly religious, despite 20 years." In theology, however, he is not at home; he is "at home" only in historical science .28 Later Klyuchevsky would say that religion "is not a need of the spirit, but a memory or habit of youth." 29 First, in a letter to a friend, Klyuchevsky gives a detailed account of Sergievsky's lecture on the essence of religion, stating that he does not include his own opinions in the presentation. But at the end of the semester-November of the same year, 1861 - something significantly begins to change. Now it is not Sergievsky who is being described in detail, but Feuerbach. Klyuchevsky now reads Feuerbach's "On the Essence of Religion" in the original, not content with a second-hand retelling. He delves into the materialist's idea that " man is not created in the image and likeness of God, but by man God is created in the image and likeness of man." Klyuchevsky knows very well who he is dealing with, and ends with an exclamation mark: "Feuerbach is a materialist and puts nature in the foreground, admitting that he is not ashamed to depend on nature and submit to it as if it really exists, and not a product of the imagination!" 30 However, the former seminarian immediately concludes: "This is where the danger for Christianity lies", this is what "all the theologians of seminaries and academies, their reverends and reverends", who "only swear and do not want to know what is being done around them", should do. But it seems that he is not an assistant to their reverends in this important matter. In the same November letter to Porfiry Gvozdev, Klyuchevsky considers it necessary to check the entire historical course of Christians impartially-
27 PDA, page 35.
28 Ibid., p. 36.
29 Ibid., p. 337.
30 Ibid., pp. 43-46, 64.
page 74
"it doesn't matter what this test leads to, even if it leads to the denial of Christianity."31 . The reverends wouldn't do that, of course.
Feuerbach was not read in vain: "You know that thanks to the zealots of pseudo-Orthodoxy (he still believes that there is a true orthodoxy. - M. Ya.), who liked to fish in muddy waters, we were mystified as fools..." Further, calling for the help of none other than Heine, Klyuchevsky together with him sings " the worst heretic"a human mind that would have been burned at the stake long ago, but it doesn't burn. Anticipating the reporter's surprise, he notices: "You may wonder how I, who was such a conservative before, such a worshipper, came to be so liberal in the matter of religion..." He admits that he does not want to "break down at breakneck speed", he previously valued "his beliefs, learned from childhood", but now "saw in them so much false that the true one became doubtful". He asks you to consider yourself a person "seeking the truth", no more. This remarkable November letter, a milestone in the development of his worldview, ends with the words: "Bow down to the whole seminary and tell it that I wish it the best that can be wished for - freedom of thought." 32 And this letter begins with sad news: "Recently, Dobrolyubov, an employee of Sovremennik in the criticism department, died in Moscow. This loss is worth regretting in your heart. Read as a memento of him his "Dark Kingdom" in Sovremennik about two years ago: you will see what a man he was! He was a seminarian and died of consumption. " 33
Meanwhile, the philosophical battles at the university were further developed. Defeated idealism prepared a rearguard action. As soon as P. D. Yurkevich was "promoted" by Katkov, the university leadership, which had just been shaken by unprecedented student performances, hastened to seize on the newly appeared philosopher as a lifeline. It was clear that it was not enough to put students under yodeling, to expel the "instigators" of the student movement from Moscow, but it was also necessary to take measures of ideological education. A new professor of philosophy was extracted from the obscurity of the Kiev Theological Academy and, exalted to the skies by the reactionary press, was triumphantly transferred to the Department of Philosophy in Moscow. Thus the line of struggle between Chernyshevsky's militant materialism and Russian reactionary idealism passed directly through Moscow University, and this struggle unfolded before Klyuchevsky's eyes.
Klyuchevsky's letters to Gvozdev are a curious document of this event. Yurkevich Klyuchevsky, however, was not allowed to attend the first two lectures, because he had not been paid for the right to study in the second semester of 1861/62. But he managed to scrape together the necessary rubles and got to the third lecture. An unprecedented sight presented itself to His eyes. All the higher-ups and reactionary professors sat in the audience and listened to the newly-appeared celebrity, even the theologian Professor Sergievsky canceled his own lectures on Tuesday (coinciding with Yurkevich's reading hours) and sat in the first row of listeners, directly opposite the lecturer's chair, next to none other than B. N. Chicherin. Yurkevich was accompanied by a whole retinue - the university trustee, rector A. A. Alfonsky and other superiors: special chairs were placed for "distinguished visitors". According to Klyuchevsky's description, a small, dark man in his mid-thirties, with a wide, prominent mouth, thick blue glasses, and a brown glove on his left hand would appear at the lectern. He bowed slowly and began to speak "impromptu, with a strong Khokhlak accent." 34 Klyuchevsky in detail
31 Ibid., pp. 65, 66, 67.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid., p. 63.
34 Ibid., p. 72.
page 75
he presents a lecture by Yurkevich, praising idealism over materialism (or "realism", as the lecturer prefers to call it). However, Klyuchevsky is not content with this. It is interesting that in the next letter he describes not only the lecturer and his lecture, but also how the audience listens to him. He divides the audience into three categories: the first one includes those who "stare at the lecturer" as if they want to "swallow the professor together with the lecture", build "eyes in a frunt". Another category is skeptical about the lecture-the listener of this type seems to say: "Um! We know this, you can't fool us, we know it, but then, what's not to listen to it?" Still others are narrow-minded, not understanding anything, whose heads "have never been overshadowed by the presence of their own thoughts"; this category "turns up the forehead, but nothing happens", these listeners are described as "stupid lovers of classics" 35 . From this it is clear that the efforts of the authorities, who tried to influence the student people who had just been agitated by Yurkevich's lectures, were not crowned with success, the students listened too differently to the new philosophical luminary, designed to re-educate them idealistically and convince them of the falsity of"realism".
The question arises: to which group of Yurkevich's listeners does Klyuchevsky refer himself? He asks this question himself, but answers with cunning. "God only knows," as a peasant would say. It is clear, however, that he does not refer to himself as "building eyes in a frunt". He hopes that the correspondent will not refer him to the third category-to stupid fans of classics. It seems that only one category remains - the second, skeptical one. There is a conclusion: "Nice foreheads can be found, promising, not just classic ones with hard-to-lift eyes" 36 .
At this point, what is Klyuchevsky's philosophical position in the dispute between idealism and materialism? In the circle of what philosophical phenomena is he aware of this dispute? He considered this problem within the framework of contrasting the religious-theological system, on the one hand, and the materialistic worldview of Chernyshevsky and Feuerbach, on the other. The two ideologues mentioned are an extremely left - wing front for Klyuchevsky, and his awareness apparently does not extend beyond that. Herbert, Buchner, and Moleschott complete but do not expand his understanding of materialism. We see that Klyuchevsky came to Yurkevich's lectures quite armed, after meeting Chernyshevsky and Feuerbach. He is already evaluating the old authorities in a new way: opposite Yurkevich, "Chicherin and Sergievsky, these two great sophists of our science, seem to have just sat down on purpose." 37 In this expressive remark, new, skeptical notes sound.
Although Klyuchevsky hesitates and thinks slowly, in the dispute between idealism and" realism " he clearly tends to the latter. Especially interesting in this regard is the criticism of Hegel's historical concept contained in the letters of a first-year student. Yurkevich especially recommended Hegel to his listeners: his idealistic system supposedly "best interprets and comprehends the history of mankind." 38 Passing on this assessment in a letter to P. Gvozdev, Klyuchevsky could not remain calm and, interrupting the retelling of the lecture, notes that he cannot agree with such a scheme in which some higher intelligence eternally inherent in history leads humanity "to an equally intelligent goal." What then remains for a person to do? Lay down your hands almost "in the Mohammedan way" and leave everything to some "reasonable beginning that drives history"? Progress is thus assured in itself. "Isn't it so easy and so brilliant? But under this exterior... lies a deadening doct-
35 Ibid., pp. 79-80.
36 Ibid., pp. 78-80.
37 Ibid., p. 72.
38 Ibid., p. 75.
page 76
rina " 39 . Klyuchevsky resolutely rebelled against the Hegelian scheme. Hegel, in his opinion, "crumpled up history" and arbitrarily, "in his own way, drew a program for the past...". He catches factual errors in the Hegelian scheme and strongly criticizes the entire Hegelian historical school that has emerged in science, smelling of "Mohammedan fatalism". The position that everything that exists is reasonable provokes his strong protest, accompanied by a sharp remark to Solovyov, who "justifies and even defends Moscow centralization with its shameless despotism and tyranny." 40 The hint that follows this conclusion is significant: "I'll leave you to figure out the rest." Klyuchevsky believes that the" deadening fatalism "of Hegelianism was one of the main reasons that" forced the Hegelian system to be dragged to the cemetery so soon. " 41
At the very beginning of the second semester of the first year, there are also signs of a religious break in the correspondence. "Sergievsky... he also rages about the essence of Christianity. Nothing for him to do! And I used to protect him. I repent, but you never know what I repent of now!" - Klyuchevsky writes on February 14, 1862 42 .
In the spring of 1862, Klyuchevsky - not for the first time? "he doesn't go to church for Easter matins, which is a remarkable trait for a former seminarian. And on March 17, 1862, the correspondence again sharply negative assessment of Sergievsky: "He deceives us in the department, fools us like a peddler's village women, puts out his rotten goods, but tinted with the latest paint, and says that the first grade, the newest..."I'm tired of this cloying, womanish, indecent talk in the pulpit..." And at the end of the same letter - a characteristic postscript: "What do you think of Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons" in the second issue of Russky Vestnik? Read it, please." After all, there - we, our generation, the newest, means " 43 . Reflecting on these lines, it is impossible not to come to the conclusion that, having moved far away from Aduyev, Klyuchevsky, of course, did not reach Bazarov, but still moved on the way to it, and not back. At the same time, he looked for his own detours.
In the same vein, there are some unexpected biographical details from a letter dated June 14, 1862, to I. V. Evropeytsev, to whom Klyuchevsky only recently undertook to compose church sermons: "I have never been to Uspenskoye (why?), I have not seen Filaret and I do not want to see him; in the Kremlin twice in passing, in the church two times in general three times - in November and at Easter somehow, towards the end of... " 44 . Under the "Assumption" of course, of course, the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin, under Filaret-Metropolitan Filaret - the head of the clergy, the author of the "Catechism", a curious figure for a seminarian, the highest authority in church affairs... All these philosophical reflections of Klyuchevsky, full of internal conflict and hesitation, are far from being limited to theoretical reflections. They are fused with deep emotional emotions, self-demands, the search for a life goal, active action. They are an organic part of a person's life position.
It was at this time that one somewhat mysterious diary entry by Klyuchevsky of great sharpness and power, made only for himself, belongs. The degree of its reliability is the highest - Klyuchevsky is not constrained here by the peculiarities of the addressee, nor by the requirements of censorship, nor by the ear of an informant listening to a student conversation in a university corridor. March 9, 1862 freshman Klyuchevsky beats
39 Ibid.
40 Ibid., p. 76.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid., p. 79.
43 Ibid., pp. 86-88, 90.
44 Ibid., pp. 17, 22, 98-99.
page 77
on the question of choosing a life path. Belong to science or social struggle? Conscience tells us to go selflessly to the struggle, together with the advanced fighters, to do the work that is urgent in the country, risking ourselves, and not to go into science. He feels it acutely, as a demand of conscience. You can't hesitate: "It's creepy to stand between two fires. It is better to go against two muzzles than to stand there, not knowing where to throw yourself, when one muzzle is pointed at you from both sides." Sometimes he wants to " give himself up unconsciously and completely to science, become its registered priest, closing his ears and eyes from the rest of the surrounding world, but only for a while." These last three words are remarkable. Why "only temporarily"? So the main issue of choice has already been resolved - and not in favor of science? "Only for a while", because you need to properly prepare for the activity, "pick up the necessary supplies", without which the activity will not be complete. He wants to "lock himself in" at least for a while. "But it is only necessary to look into one of our few living magazines in order to turn these ascetic thoughts over in yourself": in fact, life's questions are born of reality, they are universal, they reach the most remote corners, " these questions are constantly being drawn to themselves with all their strength, which are muffled, but strongly resounded from-under disguised, and sometimes unmasked speech..." Here conscience speaks loudly: "it's a shame to remain deaf in this native dispute, it's a shame not to know it...": "Something definite would be better soon. An already small amount of energy is lost in these painful tosses from side to side. " 45
How does Klyuchevsky imagine in his "tossing and turning" the real alignment of forces in Russia in the time of the revolutionary situation, during which he himself lives, reflects, and suffers? He clearly and painfully feels the presence of opposing social camps in Russia. You have to join a certain camp, otherwise you can't. But he knows many people -" people of thought and knowledge, not unknown in literature", these people "sometimes use a strong phrase", even " thinking about the current situation, but they somehow stand in isolation, speak, but do not want to build their words into a living principle, into a firm belief that constantly attracts to the point. It's like they're out of the camp, but how do you act now without belonging to any camp?"
Does Klyuchevsky know about the existence of a revolutionary organization in Russia in 1861-1862, about the " Land and Freedom "operating not only in the capital, but also far from one, but in many "distant corners of Russia"? Apparently not: "Why don't all those who are qualified, even by trade, unite in a friendly protest and declare resolutely that they all stand for the cause of truth?" But he knows something about people who devote themselves to the social struggle: "There are people in our country, but not many of them, who have taken up their word as a matter of life, as a holy faith, as confessors of the first centuries of Christianity." He believes that for these people "everything is still limited to the word, but this word is life, it throws into energetic animation and gives strength and means to work." 46 He brands himself at the end of the recording a "runt" who can't be released yet, "because he hasn't learned his lesson." It remains for him "only in snatches" to listen "to the subterranean work of the underlying forces of life." Having shortened and cut off the surname of Apollon Grigoriev (Grig...), whose words he quotes here, Klyuchevsky again returns to the leitmotif of the conscience of a thinking person: "And energy and conscientiousness go away, and you yourself feel that you are making a dishonest deal with yourself..." This is where the diary entry of March 9, 1862, ends... 47.
45 Ibid., pp. 223-224 (diary entry).
46 Ibid., p. 224.
47 Ibid.
page 78
During the years of the revolutionary situation, these tosses were a difficult personal Drama for Klyuchevsky. He apparently destroyed quite a few documents of this time - there are no letters from Gvozdev to him, no messages from other seminary comrades over the years-but the diary entries quoted have been preserved. They were probably very dear to him, very important to him.
We thus see that Klyuchevsky, at the time of his university studies, moved to the left - from the old religious-idealistic positions, already shaken but not yet outlived in the seminary, to the new, Feuerbachian ones. From idealism he was moving towards materialism, to which, although he did not reach it, he was still on the way to it. As a historian, he discovered the topic of the people and their role in history at Buslaev's lectures, from reading advanced literature of the 60s with Sovremennik at the head. But the School of History and Law, with its idealistic conception of the historical process, stood before him as a citadel that had not yet been taken. With a sharpened and painful feeling, he sought a solution to Russian socio-political issues and his place in the social struggle of the era. He did not find the strength to go over to the side of revolutionary democracy. The process of internal struggle and search did not lead him "to the camp of those who perish for the great cause of love," in the words of N. A. Nekrasov. But Klyuchevsky was also not seen in the camp "cheering, idly chatting, and getting their hands wet with blood." He remained "between two lights", at a fork in the road, "against two muzzles". He was slowly maturing, still weighing the pros and cons of the struggling camps whose existence he was becoming increasingly aware of. The old pillars of an idealistic worldview were tottering and crumbling... The search for the way continued.
He began his final year at the Faculty of History, and with it appeared his first scientific work - "Tales of Foreigners about the Moscow State", a student's "candidate's" essay, which crowned his studies at the university and opened the way for him to science.
page 79
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2024-2025, ELIB.CO.IL is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Preserving Israel's heritage |