You did not know such A.S. Pushkin

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

The more talents a person who has long gone into another world and left behind a rich heritage in the form of the fruits of his mind, the more difficult it is for art critics, historians, and even more ordinary citizens to assess his life and his creative heritage. A good example of this is Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin (1799-1837). In Russia, he is known as a great poet, probably by all adults without exception, because the literary works of A. S. Pushkin are compulsorily studied in secondary school. And I knew him only as a genius poet. When a specialist in a rare profession - a cipher clerk - became interested in the life and work of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, our Russian genius opened up to him from a completely unexpected side.

This repost repost Anatoly Klepova I decided to do it only because I have in my hands two historical "puzzles", when added to the story of this man of a rare profession, the history of Russia appears even more interesting and even more understandable.

So, I invite the reader to the most interesting reading! By the way, if you want to buy three of my books, which are now being published in Moscow, take a look at this link … And if you want to help me as much as possible, take a look here.

The life and death of Alexander Pushkin. Myths and reality

This month we celebrated another birthday of the great Russian writer and statesman Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. If almost everything is known about the literary work of the poet and writer, then practically nothing is known about his secret state activity. Various little-known documents telling about that era, about Pushkin's closest friends, and, above all, Pavel Schilling, helped me to reveal previously unknown pages of the biography of the great compatriot.

On June 9, 1817, an 18-year-old student of the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum A. S. Pushkin, released as an official of the X class with the rank of collegiate secretary, was appointed to the State Collegium of Foreign Affairs as a translator, with a salary of seven hundred rubles a year.

A few days later, on June 15, 1817, he took the oath of allegiance to Alexander I and got acquainted with the contents of the Collegium's document of March 5, 1744 on nondisclosure of official secrets and a decree from the time of Peter I, with a long heading: “On those present in the College of Foreign Affairs, on the procedure reasoning on matters of particular importance and on current papers and on the appointment of the number of officials with the distribution of posts between them."

After reading the Peter's decree, Pushkin signed a document on familiarization, which was a necessary procedure before starting work and to gain access to secret documents.

From that moment, Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin entered into a real adult life, a part of which was hidden for all subsequent years even from the people closest to him.

When Pushkin became an employee of the foreign collegium, it was the only state institution in Russia that was subordinate not to the Senate, but directly to Emperor Alexander I.

What was the reason for such a high status of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs and the level of secrecy adopted in it?

We can find the answer in the book "Essays on the history of Russian foreign intelligence" edited by Academician Yevgeny Maksimovich Primakov, which tells in detail about the activities of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Empire, the predecessor of the foreign department of the Cheka-OGPU, the First Main Directorate of the KGB of the USSR and the current Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation.

Few people pay attention to this fact in the biography of Pushkin, but in vain. After all, it testifies to Pushkin's involvement in the most serious state affairs, often very closely related to the top officials of the state. And it was no coincidence that he was admitted to the personal archive of the tsar, as the apple of his eye guarded from prying eyes. For centuries, many secrets of court conspiracies, coups, murders of confidants, heirs to the throne and even kings were hidden there.

For example, the secret of the death of Paul I, who was killed with the tacit consent of his son Alexander I, was not disclosed for almost a hundred years, the people did not know anything about the path to power of Catherine II, the grandmother of Alexander I.

Can you imagine what level a person's state status and trust in him should be, so that, for example, today he could freely access the personal archives of the leaders of the Soviet and Russian states and their families?

And this despite the fact that at that time all the activities of the king and his personal life were shrouded in great mystery. And these archives contained all the details of the behind-the-scenes events in the life of the rulers of the Russian Empire, including about their health and the real causes of death.

Only circumstances of the highest state importance could allow Pushkin to use the personal archive of the sovereign.

What were these circumstances?

At the beginning of the 19th century, in the time of troubles experienced by the Russian Empire both inside the country and on its borders, the Western monarchs, and above all England, wanted to appoint their protégé at the helm

England essentially elevated Alexander I to the throne by organizing the assassination of Paul I. Naturally, from this she wanted to extract not only political, but also economic benefits. Later, due to political games on the part of his foreign patrons, with his secret testament of succession to the throne, Alexander I actually brought Russia into a powerful crisis of power that led to the Decembrist uprising.

All documents confirming the legal right of Nicholas I to inherit the throne were kept in the archives in deep secrecy. And nothing was known about the abdication of another possible heir, Grand Duke Constantine.

On November 27, 1825, in St. Petersburg, we received from Taganrog the news of the sudden death of Emperor Alexander I. St. Petersburg Governor-General Count M. A. Miloradovich insisted on taking the oath to Grand Duke Constantine as the legal heir.

The senate, troops and population were also immediately sworn in to Emperor Constantine I.

But the Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich himself, the governor in Poland, knowing about the documents stored in the Moscow archives, reaffirmed his refusal to inherit and swore allegiance to his brother Nicholas in Warsaw.

While there was a correspondence between Nicholas and Constantine, there was an actual interregnum, which lasted 22 days. The officers of the guards took advantage of this for agitation against the accession of Nicholas, who argued that Constantine had not renounced and that one must be faithful to the oath of allegiance to him.

Only on December 12 (24), 1825, Nicholas decided to declare himself emperor.

But the very first day of the reign of Nicholas I was marked by tragic events on Senate Square in St. Petersburg, where the uprising of officers, members of a secret society, later known as the "Decembrist uprising" … The fate of Nicholas I hung in the balance, but he managed to suppress the uprising, showing determination and ruthlessness.

According to the St. Petersburg historian and writer Nikolai Starikov, forces from abroad also stood behind this revolt. Who, you ask. Great Britain again!

After the suppression of the rebellion, Nicholas I established a political police (the Third Department of His Imperial Majesty's own Chancellery), established strict censorship.

And here I, Anton Blagin, want to intrude into the course of Anatoly Klepov's narration in order to acquaint the reader with a very important historical "puzzle". This is its essence: to leave Russia without an army, weaken it as much as possible and make it an easy prey for the predatory West, not just some individual "Decembrists", like today's fighters against the power of A. Navalny or K. Sobchak, wanted this, a whole community of intruders who they had one common feature uniting them - they were united by the Jewish "Torah" and the political program that was spelled out in it.

Nicholas I knew this very well. Therefore, declaring himself emperor on December 12 (24), 1825, he not only immediately established in connection with the uprising of officers, members of the secret society, strict censorship in the country, he ordered the already translated "Bible Society" and published in the same 1825 edition of the Jewish The "Old Testament", which was not yet in the Russian version of the "Bible" at that time, must be burned entirely at the brick factories of the Nevsky Lavra!

Few people know about this fact today. However, the Orthodox "Bible" became judeo-christian, as it is today, only at the end of the 19th century!

We read further the story of Anatoly Klepov:

Sympathy for the new monarch was also expressed by A. S. Pushkin. Close relations were established between the sovereign and Pushkin. The emperor, having saved the poet from general censorship, nevertheless assumed the rights of his personal censor.

Why, as historians say, Nicholas I, who was completely indifferent to poetry before meeting Pushkin, suddenly took upon himself the personal responsibility to carefully evaluate all the works of Alexander Sergeevich?

After the tragic death of Pushkin, the emperor, according to this literary version, also took over the material care of his family - he appointed a pension to the widow and children, paid the poet's promissory notes. What circumstances could serve as the basis for such an unprecedented interest?

Why did the emperor thank the disgraced Pushkin's family so generously, was it only for his literary talents ?!

Everyone in the world has enemies …

Why does Pushkin in his work refer to the time of troubles of Boris Godunov? Apparently, in those days, the mystery was haunted, who brought to the post of the first tsar not from Rurik, who contributed to the death of Ivan the Terrible?

Is it really England ?!

As you can see, England has long sought to gain leverage in Russia with the help of its protégés.

In a huge country with almost absolute power, the coronation of a “pocket” ruler at the very top of the political hierarchy turned out to be the most effective option for lobbying his interests and achieving very beneficial results for himself, including in economics and politics.

And here's another interesting historical fact. Under Ivan the Terrible, the quality of Russian guns was better than the English ones! However, in troubled times, after Boris Godunov ascended the throne, the advanced technologies in military affairs were lost by the Russian armies.

Can you imagine how much the Russian industry was thrown back ?! And already Peter the Great had to extract the secrets of making cannons from England, and pay for this not only with economic, but political concessions. Otherwise, not having modern guns, he would have suffered another defeat, as the Russian army suffered at Narva. And at Poltava, without reliable weapons, we would not have defeated the Swedes, having lost our independence.

And again, I, Anton Blagin, want to invade the course of Anatoly Klepov's narrative, because Peter I in Russia is a separate story, full of secrets and intrigues.

Regarding the above-mentioned war of Peter I with the Swedes, which lasted for 21 years, from 1700 to 1721, it was war by agreement between Peter I, tsar of Russia, who returned from a trip abroad, and Leopold I, ruler of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation.

An agreement was reached between them in 1699: Peter I must by force take away from Sweden the "primordial Russian lands", the so-called Ingermalandia (the territory of the present Leningrad region), with all the ancient Russian artifacts available on the banks of the Neva River in the form of a dilapidated ancient city, and for that (!) and for something else the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire promised to elevate him, the 27-year-old Russian Tsar Peter I, to the rank of emperor, with the renaming of the Russian State into the Russian Empire. And the imperial coat of arms of the Russian Empire will be exactly the same as that of the Holy Roman Empire.

Leopold I, coat of arms of the Holy Roman Empire and Peter I.

That's why Peter I fought with the Swedish king Charles XII for 21 years. And as soon as the condition of the agreement was fulfilled by Peter I, he conquered Ingermalandia, he immediately received in 1721 the title of the All-Russian Emperor promised to him earlier, together with the coat of arms of Western Rome - a double-headed eagle, which differs from the Byzantine coat of arms by raised wings! And after 4 years, Peter I died. And when did he build St. Petersburg, one wonders ?!

Engraving by the court artist Fyodor Zubov:

Continuation of this dark history of Peter I in a separate article: "Who built the city on the Neva, now called St. Petersburg".

We read further the story of Anatoly Klepov:

It can be assumed that it was precisely this mechanism of foreign influence on Russia that was of interest to Pushkin, who was allowed to study in closed archives the history of numerous riots and court intrigues.

True, it was not easy to get access to them, the documents were surrounded by the strictest secrecy, and access to them could only be given with the personal permission of the emperor. But even with such permission, Pushkin was not immediately able to obtain complete materials on the Pugachev uprising. And he had to turn to the emperor again. But even after the second call, he could not get all the materials!

This case showed a clear sabotage of officials, who in those days were also interested in not revealing any secrets. Now we can already guess what a terrible secret the keepers of the imperial archives tried not to reveal to Pushkin … in order, apparently, not to compromise the continuing close ties of the Russian elite with abroad.

Let us recall one more fact that clearly demonstrates the long-standing interest of the West in establishing a ruler dependent on them in Russia.

Not many people guess why Napoleon the First went on a campaign against Moscow, and not against the then new capital - St. Petersburg? At first glance, this is a completely illogical step.

Firstly, it is illogical because the French army had the same distance to go to Moscow or to St. Petersburg, but it was more logical for them to go straight to the capital of Russia.

Secondly, in those days, all wars ended with the traditional capture of the capital of an enemy state. It was there that the maximum concentration of all power structures was. The enemy seized the capital, destroyed the system of government of the state, and the country surrendered at the mercy of the winner.

So why did Napoleon go to Moscow, if the capital of Russia at that time was St. Petersburg?

But because in 1800 the court archives from St. Petersburg were transported to Moscow. And, most importantly, the archives of members of the royal families were also kept in Moscow, which could show the illegality of the coming to power of Catherine II. This information gave Napoleon a reason to change the dynasty reigning in Russia. Napoleon did not hatch plans for the complete capture of Russia. He wanted to have an ally in the person of its rulers for the fight against the same England!

And of course, Pushkin, who got access to unique documents with the personal permission of the Emperor, was important to figure out what mechanisms lead the country to civil war, threaten the government with sabotage, betrayal, and bribery of Russia's top officials?

This fact, like many others, eloquently demonstrates the poet's involvement in important state activities, shows his highest status in the state hierarchy, and allows a completely different interpretation of many circumstances of Pushkin's life, including the tragic death in a duel.

The reaction of the Emperor of Russia Nicholas I, who tried to hush up the scandal with the poet's duel as soon as possible, becomes clear. After all, it could have turned out that the foreigners initiated the murder, and then also compromised one of the leaders of the most secret Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who was in the rank of Privy Councilor - Lieutenant General (Privy Councilor - a civilian rank of III class in the Table of Ranks, corresponded to military ranks General - lieutenant and vice admiral. Persons who had him held senior government positions, for example, minister, head of a large department, occasionally in the III class there were also some governors who ruled their province for a long time and were promoted to privy councilors in recognition of special merits and before transfer with a promotion to the capital).

"Ah, it's not difficult to deceive me, I myself am glad to be deceived!"

To understand the real position of Pushkin, we must understand the structure of the state table of ranks in Russia at that time. As now, there were ranks of state advisers. But there were several categories of them at once: courtiers, civilians and military. In addition, government officials were further divided into classes.

The highest ranks were considered courtiers. But at that time there was a special procedure for assigning such court ranks as chamberlain, chamber-junker and class-state ranks. There should be no duplication between them. A person who possessed a court rank and received a state appointment and the corresponding high-class rank, as a chamberlain, was deprived of the rank of court. This was done because the number of court ranks was limited, and the emperor tried in every possible way to maintain the status of his entourage, not distributing positions to everyone in a row. There were few persons with court ranks. In 1809-1835. the total number of chamberlains and chamber-junkers increased from 146 to 263, despite the establishment in 1826 of a set of 48 of them and the termination of their salary payments from 1824. In 1836, it was determined that these ranks could only be given to civilian officials who had reached the III - V and VI - IX classes.

Knowledge of these rules immediately makes us understand why in the archival documents Pushkin is called either a junker or a chamberlain. Major officials could not be wrong calling him different titles. In fact, no one was wrong!

This discrepancy was due to the fact that when a person was appointed chamberlain, he signed with a court office. But if he received a further appointment and was promoted in the civil service, receiving a higher civil or military rank, then, as we already know, he was deprived of his court position.

There were already many applicants for it! When an official was promoted to third grade, he was relieved of the “tasty” court title, yielding to the next one standing behind him in line. More than a hundred years later, party appointments in the USSR were very reminiscent of the "court" hierarchy of the times of the Russian Empire. Soviet leaders could also simultaneously hold the position of a member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, head of a ministry or some regional structure. At the same time, the "court" title of a member of the Politburo was considered the highest, emphasizing a special closeness to the party power. Deprivation of this title actually meant the political death of the functionary, even if he retained his government position.

It was different in tsarist Russia. The emperor assigned the lower court title of chamber junker to a court official who received a promotion in the civil service, and only so that he could continue to attend all ceremonies at court, while money was paid according to the category of a third-class civil servant.

As for Pushkin, only top officials knew about his last appointment as a third-class official, and Nicholas I was apparently forbidden to talk about this.

When, after the death of Pushkin, documents were brought to Nicholas I for signature, he did not want to indicate in them such a high state position of the poet, giving instructions to enter his last court position - chamber junker.

If the country learned that a third-class official was killed in a duel prohibited by law, then this fact would surely become a real explosion in society.

Therefore, all the confusion in historical documents with the designation of the state position of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin can be logically explained only by the procedure for assigning class and court ranks that existed at that time in the Russian Empire.

Until then, in all official documents on the investigation of the circumstances of the duel, it was mentioned everywhere that A. S. Pushkin was a chamberlain. And only after the documents on the investigation of the duel, including the verdict of the military court, came to Nicholas I, the court position of A. S. Pushkin, in subsequent official documents, changed to a chamber junker.

Here is a document:

Another interesting fact. The expulsion of a person, first sentenced to capital punishment, and then pardoned and released, is very similar to the legal procedure for expelling intelligence officers at the request of a country with which they do not want to spoil diplomatic relations. It can hardly be explained in another way.

I am not proud of that, my singer, That I knew how to attract with poetry …

We have already figured out that the discrepancy in information about the court positions of A. S. Pushkin can be explained by the appropriation of the civil rank of the third class - the rank of privy councilor. In those days, he corresponded to no less than the military rank of lieutenant general!

And now let's try to understand what position an official with a third class rank in the Russian Foreign Ministry at that time could have held.

In favor of my version that Pushkin had one of the highest state ranks in the Russian hierarchy, it is also evidenced by the fact that the salary received by A. S. Pushkin in the civil service had to correspond to the level of officials in similar departments …

So, let us compare the salary received by A. S. Pushkin in the civil service with the salaries in similar departments.

… On November 14, 1831, a supreme decree was issued: "The Emperor deigned to command: retired collegiate secretary Alexander Pushkin to take on the service of the same rank and appoint him to the State Collegium of Foreign Affairs."

And on December 6, 1831, another imperial decree was issued: “Sovereign Emperor, most merciful, deigned to the State. Collegiums of Foreign Cases call sec. Pushkin into titular advisers."

On July 4, 1832, after six months of A. Pushkin's service in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, Russian Foreign Minister K. V. Nesselrode submits a report to Nicholas I: “G.-a. Benckendorff announced to me the highest order of appointment from states. Treasury salary tit. owls. Pushkin. In the opinion of Mr. Benckendorff, 5,000 rubles could be put into Pushkin's salary. in year. I dare to ask for this highest command c. and. V-va ". The report reads: “It is imperative to demand from the state. Treasury from November 14, 1831 to 5,000 rubles. a year for the use known to his imperial majesty, in thirds of a year, and to give out this money tit. owls. Pushkin ".

We are once again witnessing the tsar's amazing and inexplicable at first glance generosity to the recently disgraced A. Pushkin. After all, the amount of his salary was seven times (!) Higher than the rates of officials of this rank. Let's try to solve these strange riddles.

A. S. Pushkin entered the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on November 14, 1831 and received a salary that corresponded to his position as a titular adviser. Eight months later, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs K. V. Nesselrode unexpectedly received instructions from A. Kh. Benckendorff, the head of another government department, whose most important function was to ensure the security of the state, about a multiple increase in the salary of A. S. Pushkin.

This became possible if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Section III carried out joint secret work, as a result of which A. S. Pushkin showed his brilliant abilities and contributed to the success of Russia in defeating the most dangerous enemy.

And what was the most dangerous thing for tsarism?

Undoubtedly, uprisings and riots organized by people from the closest circle of the Emperor, who had a chance to claim the throne.

And in order to reveal the reasons for the historical events that often led Russia to a change of power, and the influence of foreign states on them, a personality of the scale of Pushkin was needed.

But I will tell you a little later about this amazing and previously unknown evidence of the secret state activity of the great poet.

Continuation of the story of an information security specialist Anatoly Klepovacan be read here:

How the subsequent government of the Russian Empire reworked the works of A. S. Pushkin can be seen in two examples:

You can also see in the famous poem by Pushkin "The Prisoner" that the eagle was reared free, not in captivity!

Download works of A. S. Pushkin in the original can be here:

The author of part number 2 - Kozak Yaitskoy, and the source is an article on the VEDI website: "Pushkin in the original uncensored by the Russian Orthodox Church, when the world became baptized".

The tales of A. S. Pushkin are read to the accompaniment of an old Russian instrument - the gusli, by the way, was forbidden in Russia at one time.

Read more about this unique project. here.

February 14, 2018 Murmansk. Anton Blagin