From what history textbooks did Pushkin draw his knowledge?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Nobody questions the talent of A. S. Pushkin, nor his prophetic gift embodied in poetry and prose. After all, we see how, for example, in "The Tale of the Golden Cockerel" the poet is trying to give us an idea of the ancient history of Russia. And what is the metaphor of a learned cat walking "on a chain in a circle" …

Nevertheless, the history course that Pushkin studied at the lyceum is the official version of history, created, as we will see below, under the extremely strict control of the Romanovs. Which the writer was somehow forced to follow. Although, obviously, Pushkin's knowledge in history was hardly limited only to the school course.

By the way, one of the symbols of the official historical science of that time, in addition to the notorious Germans, was undoubtedly Karamzin. It will also be mentioned below.

What textbooks did A. S. Pushkin?

As many know, the history teacher at the lyceum where Pushkin studied from 1811 to 1817 was Ivan Kuzmich Kaidanov.

So who is this history teacher?

Kaidanov came from the clergy and studied, of course, at the Kiev Theological Academy [Greetings A. V. Pyzhikov! - Approx. ss69100.], as well as at the Pedagogical Institute. Since 1808, he continued his studies at foreign universities, in particular at the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Göttingen, after which he was promoted to master's degree.

The University of Göttingen at that time was the largest in Europe, and, I think, was rather a university of Freemasonry. It was there that Kaidanov in 1810 became a member of the Petersburg lodge "Peter to Truth". After returning in 1811, he was appointed adjunct professor at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum and taught history to A. S. Pushkin. What is interesting: the Lyceum was opened in the same year.

Kaidanov was the author of history textbooks, according to which they studied in Russian educational institutions. And some of them were even translated into other languages: German, French, Polish.

So why did society learn about Ancient Russia from Karamzin, what kind of history did Kaidanov teach the lyceum students of the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum?

And a sequel from another author.

Such a question quite naturally arises when you read that “Pushkin called Karamzin Columbus, who opened Ancient Russia for his readers just as the famous traveler opened America to Europeans.” (Quoted by Yu. M. Lotman, “Karamzin” - St. Petersburg, Art 1997, p. 56.).

Or such assessments: “Until the 19th century, Russian society had almost no idea“where the Russian land came from.”Nikolai Karamzin, the official historiographer of the imperial court, was the first to answer this question. He opened Russian history to the general public, and the chronicles and turned legends into fashionable secular reading. " ("AN Sakharov" Nikolay Karamzin. Columbus of Russian history ")

What's the matter? Why did no one know anything about Ancient Rus before the publication of the first volumes of "History of the Russian State" by N. Karamzin? After all, this is not about the fact that he covered some issues in more detail, but for the FIRST TIME he acquainted readers with the history of Ancient Russia.

This is exactly how it should be, according to the version of the victory of St. Petersburg over Muscovy as a result of the war of 1812. They did not yet know what Muscovy had in the annals and documents.

But after 1812, a massive clean-up of the conquered territory of Muscovy began, including the seizure of historical documents. Comrades from the so-called circle of Count Rumyantsev are scouring all over Muscovy in search of manuscripts: "Stroev's detours, together with K. F. Kalaydovich, monasteries near Moscow to find ancient manuscripts (1817-1820) enriched science with valuable documents." As if "Searches in the monastic archives convinced Stroyev of the abundance of historical documents hidden from the world and could easily perish from the ignorance of the keepers."

Well, yes, if you believe the dating, the documents were perfectly kept for 300-700 years, and then suddenly the benefactor showed up, decided to save … In 1823 he promotes the idea of the need to equip an archaeographic expedition and draws up a detailed program for the systematic collection, description and publication of manuscript antiquities …The archaeographic expedition becomes a permanent body. Let us remember that Pavel Mikhailovich Stroyev is one of the key figures in the creation of the new history of the Romanov-Oldenburgskys.

And yet, why neither Pushkin nor others knew anything about Ancient Russia, because according to the official version (see "History of history textbooks"), the Synopsis was republished several times since 1674, and since 1760 a simplified retelling was allegedly published in parallel "Synopsis" M. V. Lomonosov under the title "A Brief Russian Chronicler"? It turns out that Pushkin and the rest of the secular society are dull poor students? No. It's just that the legend about the ancient edition of these textbooks is a lie and is a lie to the respected public.

Any mention of the Romanovs in the history of Ancient Russia and Muscovy before 1812 is an indisputable sign of a document forgery, and here the story is brought right up to the third king of the Romanov dynasty: “Synopsis or a short description from various chroniclers about the beginning of the Slavic people, about the first Kiev princes, and about life Holy Noble and Grand Duke Vladimir of All Russia, the first autocrat and about his heirs, even up to the pious Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Alekseevich the Autocrat of All Russia for the benefit of history lovers."

Therefore, any versions of the "Synopsis", allegedly published from 1674 to 1836, as well as its alleged retelling by M. V. Lomonosov "A short Russian chronicler" are sent to the basket of falsifications:

1760 Lomonosov A short Russian chronicler. (take a closer look and read "The Short Russian Chronicler" by M. Lomonosov on the RSL website)

It is recommended to compare the print quality with samples from the chronological scale, banknotes of 25 rubles in 1769 and 1778 and 10 rubles in 1812:

1769 banknote 5 rubles 1778 banknote 25 rubles 1812 banknote 10 rubles

However, the issue of print quality is not so important. The main thing is that before the war of 1812 the Romanovs did not have the full opportunity to find out the content of the chronicles of Muscovy, which was done only as a result of Stroyev's expeditions in 1817-1820, then the confiscated manuscripts were processed and created their own history, in which the Romanovs are already present and glued to history Rurikovich.

Therefore, neither Pushkin, nor other representatives of the secular society, who, according to the official version from the "Synopsis" or "The Brief Russian Chronicler", should have learned long ago "where the Russian land came from," were completely ignorant up to the revelations of Karamzin.

After all, all these synopsis and chroniclers were published according to a single manual of the Romanov regional committee much later than 1812. And it is no coincidence that the competition for the creation of a basic textbook on the history of the Russian Empire was announced only in 1831, when the manuscripts of Muscovy had basically already been sorted out, the manual had been worked out. But the ever-memorable "Synopsis" was published until 1836. And in 1839, the history textbook of Ustryalov was finally approved, which Emperor Nicholas-1 ruled personally. This was how a story was created, which has been reproduced in all its main features to the present day.

The reader may have a completely natural question: who printed all these fakes, which require the use of a lot of different fonts?

Here is the most likely candidate: a branch of the British Bible Society, created in 1813 in St. Petersburg and in 1814 renamed the Russian Bible Society (it has nothing to do with the modern one, the similarity is only in name). The official task is to translate the Bible into the languages of different nations (that's what a lot of fonts are for); the total circulation of published books is not less than half a million copies, but biblical traces of their activities in the first half of the 19th century have not yet been found.

The most interesting thing is that the Bible was eventually translated into ordinary Russian only at the end of the 19th century. So what were they really doing there?

The last, 12th volume of "History of the Russian State" by N. M. Karamzin was published in 1829, after his death, and brought to Boris Godunov and the Time of Troubles. The Romanovs do not appear there yet.

Therefore, it would not be an exaggeration to conclude that the regional committee's manual of the concept of the history of the Romanovs as the successors of the Rurikovichs was formulated in the period 1816 - 1831.