Civil war in the works of writers of the 20th century. The theme of the civil war in Russian literature of the 20th century based on one or more works - abstract

In Petrashevsky's circle, Stepan Dmitrievich Yanovsky: His love, on the one hand, for society and for mental activity, and on the other, lack of acquaintance in other areas other than the one in which he ended up after leaving the Engineering School, were the reason that he easily got along with

Dostoevsky The following happened in Leningrad interesting case. There was a question about creating a modest monument-sign to Dostoevsky in our city. And so the person in charge says: “Dostoevsky has no positive hero" And it’s true! Who can we name from

MUSICAL CIRCLE In the history of Russia, 1861 is a turning point. In the history of Russian music, this is the eve big events. A few months will pass, and Anton Rubinstein will open a conservatory in St. Petersburg, and Mily Balakirev will open a free conservatory music school. Already created, active,

Petrashevtsy and Russian literature. The circle, led by M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky (1821-1866), was one of the centers of the social and literary movement of the 40s of the 19th century. V.G. Belinsky and A.I. Herzen, who stood at the head of the democratic and anti-serfdom movement, had an ideological influence on all directions of Russian thought, including the Petrashevite circle. The members of the circle were united by hatred of serfdom and human oppression, an understanding of socialism as a comprehensive doctrine designed to “harmonize” the social structure with the needs human nature(at the same time, the Petrashevites shared the idea of ​​​​the closeness of socialism to Christianity with its preaching of love and brotherhood), deep faith in the power of knowledge (“Knowledge is the basis of human power,” wrote the Petrashevites in the “Pocket Dictionary foreign words", 1845), confidence that the foundation cognitive activity man is nature. In search of ways to change the social structure, Petrashevsky and his like-minded people turned to the social-utopian theories of Charles Fourier and A. Saint-Simon, as well as to the materialist philosophy of L. Feuerbach. The Fourierist preaching of “universal happiness,” which perfectly corresponded to the aspirations of the Petrashevites for the abolition of slavery and for the communal structure of the village, acquired a revolutionary character in Russian conditions. Social-utopian theories, as well as the influence of Belinsky, especially his “Letter to Gogol”, read by F.M. Dostoevsky on one of Petrashevsky’s “Fridays” (April 15, 1849), affected the formation of the literary and aesthetic views of the circle participants. They proceeded from recognition of the social role of art and the high mission of the writer, teacher of society, called for the democratization of literature, and sought to bring it closer to people's life. They wanted to subordinate literature to the tasks of promoting science, education, and socialist theories. Petrashevets V.N. Maikov argued that the purpose of fiction is to popularize ideas important to society. For this purpose, the critic allowed both didactics in art and direct appeal to science in search of those truths that literature should instill in the reader, as long as these truths were fair. At the same time, Petrashevites often mixed scientific and artistic form knowledge, which Belinsky objected to, writing in the article “A Look at Russian Literature of 1847” that “... art should first of all be art, and then it can be an expression of the spirit and trends of society in a certain era” and that “... in the sphere art... no direction is worth a penny without talent..." (Poln. sobr. soch., vol. 10, 1956, pp. 303, 312).

There was no complete unity in the literary and aesthetic views of the Petrashevites; they did not have time to form into a coherent system, because they reflected the transitional nature of this movement. Discrepancies were evident both at the meetings of the circle and in the later speeches of its participants. Some of them felt the one-sidedness of Petrashevsky’s views; Dostoevsky, for example, objected to them. S.F. Durov, somewhat exaggerating, noted that Petrashevsky “... stuck to philosophy and politics; He fine arts doesn’t understand…” (“The Case of the Petrashevites,” vol. 3, 1951, p. 273). The ideas of the Petrashevites found fairly complete expression in their literary creativity. The first poet of the circle was A.N. Pleshcheev, the author of the collection “Poems” (1846), a poetic manifesto of the Petrashevites. At the same time, V. Maikov explained in “ Domestic notes» the significance of Pleshcheev’s lyrics, associated with the Lermontov tradition in the development of the theme of the poet-prophet, the theme of the wanderer, the prisoner; it also revealed Fourierist motives (preaching universal happiness, condemnation of inequality, contradictions of wealth and poverty, “ unequal marriage" etc.). Pleshcheev's poem “Forward! without fear or doubt, to a valiant feat, friends!” contained slogans and formulas (“the teaching of love”, the union “under the banner of science”, etc.), filled with specific meaning for the socialists of that time; they were later appreciated by figures of the 60s (N.A. Dobrolyubov, M.L. Mikhailov). Lermontov’s influence is also characteristic of the poems of Petrashev’s A.A. Palm, who combined social-utopian motifs with an appeal to folklore themes. Fourierist views were reflected in the poetic sketches of D.D. Akhsharumov. In numerous translations by S.F. Durov (from O. Barbier, V. Hugo, etc.), imbued with civic pathos, his democratic ideals are embodied. The ideological influence of the Petrashevites circle was also reflected in the work of some poets, who were generally far from the progressive movement of the 40s: A.N. Maykov, the author of the poems “Two Fates” and “Mashenka”, A.A. Grigoriev, who wrote during a short period of communication with a circle, a cycle of revolutionary-pathetic poems (“Farewell to St. Petersburg”, “When the bells ring solemnly”, etc.).

Participation in the circle is associated with the social motives of Dostoevsky’s early prose (“Poor People”, etc.), the first stories of M.E. Saltykov (“Contradictions,” “Confused Affair”), who believed that participation in the circle and Belinsky’s “school of ideas” were the most important in his creative development. Socialist ideas The 40s played a significant role in shaping the views of N.G. Chernyshevsky, who in student years was a member of one of the circles associated with the Petrashevites. An active member of the circle, A.V. Khanykov, first introduced him to the teachings of Fourier and the views of Feuerbach. The ideas of the Petrashevtsev (mainly V. Maikov) about the nature and purpose of art were reflected in Chernyshevsky’s work “Aesthetic relations of art to reality.” The trend of propaganda of the Petrashevites with their desire for the “common good for all mankind” also affected the young L.N. Tolstoy (see entries in the diary of 1847), who had to meet with some members of the circle; the world of social utopias that captivated the progressive youth of the 40s turned out to be in many ways close to the interests and moral searches of Tolstoy in those same years. Researchers (T.I. Usakina) also note that ideological plan novel by I.A. Goncharov " An ordinary story"(1847) was formed not without the influence of V. Maykov’s criticism of romanticism and “positive” philosophy, criticism closely related to the aesthetics and philosophy of the Petrashevites.

Brief literary encyclopedia in 9 volumes. State scientific publishing house "Soviet Encyclopedia", vol. 5, M., 1968.

Editions:

Philosophical and socio-political works of the Petrashevites, M., 1953;

Poets-Petrashevtsy, L., 1957.

Literature:

Sakulin P.N., Russian literature and socialism, part 1, M., 1922;

Semevsky V.I., M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky and the Petrashevites, part 1, M., 1922;

Semevsky V.I., M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin - Petrashevets, “Russian Notes”, 1917, No. 1;

Semevsky V.I., Petrashevtsy S.F. Durov, A.I. Palm, F.M. Dostoevsky and A.N. Pleshcheev, “The Voice of the Past,” 1915, No. 11, 12;

Smirensky B.V., Petrashevets poet S.F. Durov in Siberia, “Siberian Lights”, 1958, No. 1;

Smirensky B.V., Poems of the Petrashev poets, “Questions of Literature”, 1959, No. 7;

Belchikov N.F., Dostoevsky in the process of the Petrashevites, M.-L., 1936;

Zeldovich M.G., To characterize the literary and aesthetic views of M.V. Petrashevsky, “Scientific Notes of Kharkov University,” 1956, v. 70, no. 3;

Derkach S.S., On the literary and aesthetic views of the Petrashevites, “Bulletin of Leningrad State University”, 1957, No. 14, century. 3;

Zhdanov V.V., Poetry in circle of Petrashevites, in the collection: Poets-Petrashevtsy, L., 1957;

Eikhenbaum B.M., Tolstoy and the Petrashevites, “Russian Literature”, 1965, No. 4;

In March 1848, the experienced official of special assignments Liprandi received an assignment from the Minister of Internal Affairs Perovsky to develop the case of the nobleman Petrashevsky. The first months of searching did not yield any results. There was no conspiracy, but Liprandi felt one might arise. In the past, he was an experienced military intelligence officer in the Russian Southern Army. He was practically familiar with intelligence work since the war of 1812, when he was appointed to manage Russian military agents in Paris, captured by the Russian army.

The fact that 27-year-old Petrashevsky collided with an experienced 58-year-old detective cost him his freedom, and subsequently his life. To infiltrate the circle, Liprandi soon met Antonelli, who agreed to the role of provocateur.

Soon Antonelli met Petrashevsky. The agent was able to play his role, and Petrashevsky fell into the net laid out for him.

In his report, Liprindi wrote that members of the society intended to influence the masses through propaganda. For this purpose, discussions were held at the meetings regarding how to arouse indignation against the government among all classes of the people, how to arm the peasants against the landowners, and set up officials against their superiors. Also, Liprandi’s report contains information that at the meetings, directions for using the fanaticism of schismatics were considered. The conspirators considered directions for the destruction of all religious feelings; they considered directions of work in Little Russia, Poland, Finland, the Baltic provinces, Siberia and the Caucasus. According to Liprandi's report, based on the information received, he formed the opinion that there was not so much a separate and petty conspiracy as a plan for a general movement, destruction and revolution, which was comprehensive. The first Russian socialists. Memoirs of participants in Petrashevsky circles in St. Petersburg. / Compiled by Egorov B.F. - M.: "Prospekt", 2012.

However, it is worth recognizing that the activity of the circle, in fact, did not consist of conspiracies at all, but exclusively of conversations.

One can note the amazing cruelty of the sentence in the case of the Petrashevites. 21 people were sentenced by the court to death, among whom was also the aspiring writer F.M. Dostoevsky. On December 22, 1849, the condemned were taken to the square, after which they were put on death shirts.

But, due to various mitigating circumstances, including the repentance of all the defendants, the court considered it possible to reduce their sentences. Thus, as a result of mitigation of punishments, Petrashevsky received hard labor without a term, Dostoevsky was sentenced to hard labor for 4 years, followed by transfer to the rank and file. The remaining members of the circle received shorter sentences.

Three days after the verdict, Petrashevsky was sent to Eastern Siberia.

After the massacre of the Petrashevites was carried out, public life in Russia froze. The period 1848-1855 is remembered by contemporaries as the “dark seven years.”

Sending to Siberia became a very severe test for the Petrashevites. The sentence and the Siberian penal servitude led Dostoevsky to a mental turning point, a rejection of revolutionary socialist ideas, and also led to an increase in his religious sentiments. Other Petrashevsky associates also condemned the lessons from their past. The first Russian socialists. Memoirs of participants in Petrashevsky circles in St. Petersburg. / Compiled by Egorov B.F. - M.: "Prospekt", 2012.

In 1856, Petrashevsky settled and continued to live in Irkutsk, collaborated with local newspapers and gave lessons. He unsuccessfully tried to have his sentence reviewed and his rights restored.

Petrashevsky remained an irreconcilable enemy of the autocratic-serf system, wrote letters to St. Petersburg about the illegal actions of local authorities, tried to deal with local officials in court until his death from a cerebral hemorrhage.

Petrashevtsy history of creation, their views, leaders

Emergence

In the middle of the 19th century in Russia, progressive thought began to be under the control of commoners. These were representatives of merchants, townspeople, clergy, retired soldiers, minor officials and rich peasants.

These people didn't pass civil service, so it was difficult for them to enter the social system of the Russian Empire.

They earned their living mainly by mental labor. The raznochintsy became a new socio-cultural group with progressive ideologies - liberal, socialist, revolutionary, anarchist.

The backbone of the revolutionary movement was the intelligentsia. And if the representatives of the Decembrists were mainly nobles, then their successors were already commoners. One of the earliest circles of common ranks were considered to be the Petrashevites, named after M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky. The Petrashevites were split based on their methods of struggle. Among them there were reformers, who made up the majority, and revolutionaries.

Every Friday, reports on the organization’s activities were read out in Petrashevsky’s house. Their ideology and methods of struggle were influenced by the worldviews of Herzen and Belinsky. The circle did not have time to take shape organizationally and ideologically: in 1849, when it was close to this, it was covered up by the tsarist government.

Occupation and ideology

The ideas and goals of the Petrashevites were the same as those of any Russian progressives mid-19th century. The main goal of the circle was, of course, the abolition of serfdom. Other goals of the Petrashevites included judicial reform, freedom of the press, and a number of Petrashevites were inclined to revolt. Many Petrashevites had a negative attitude towards religion, denied the existence of God and considered themselves outspoken materialists.

Religion, in the opinion of many members of the circle, coarsened and suppressed a person. Religion, according to Petrashevites, is expressed in God, who indulges the strong and the winners. Like any progressives, the Petrashevites were champions of science and education. They contrasted them with superstition, mysticism and religion. The Petrashevites were critical of the idealists from Germany, considering their views to be divorced from reality.

Petrashevites supported utopian socialism as an alternative to the evils of the feudal and capitalist systems. Their ideas were influenced by the views of Charles Fourier. They opposed the patriarchal family and supported the egalitarian family due to the fact that the egalitarian model does not oppress women. Personal egoism, according to Petrashevites, should be absorbed by group egoism. Thus, this circle advocated the transformation of society through natural nature person.

The socialism of the Petrashevites was far from socialist in nature. But in Russia all the revolutionary movements of that time were called socialist. If many liberals advocated only for the rights of the Russian serf peasantry and were reformists in general, then almost all socialists advocated a scientific worldview, against religion and superstition, for freedom of the individual and society, and fought against feudalism and capitalism.

Famous leaders

Of course, the most famous figure Butashevich-Petrashevsky, a St. Petersburg nobleman, creator of the “Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words” was considered an organization. After his arrest, he spent the rest of his life in Siberia, where he died in 1866 (in the Yenisei province).

A well-known member of the Petrashevsky circle was also one of the 20 arrested in 1849. Unlike many members of the circle, he had a positive attitude towards religion and adhered to the positions of Christian socialism, which was already influential in a number of European countries. Fyodor Mikhailovich put atheistic socialism on a par with bourgeoisism, and many Petrashevists contrasted these concepts. Dostoevsky also managed to visit the more radical communities of Durov and Speshnev.

Sergei Fedorovich Durov was more apolitical; the circles he organized were literary character. And Nikolai Ivanovich Speshnev in Dostoevsky's novel "" became the prototype of Stavrogin. He is one of the first to call himself a communist. In exile, with the support of the East Siberian governor N.N. Muravyov-Amursky returns to public service.

To Gogol. One of these circles gathered at Irinarch of Vvedensky (see); Among its participants were young writers and students G. E. Blagosvetlov, A. P. Milyukov and N. G. Chernyshevsky. The famous Vigel, who knew about these meetings and their close connection with the meetings of Petrashevsky, made a denunciation in this sense, and only the lack of accurate information from Liprandi, and most of all the intercession of Rostovtsev, who loved Vvedensky very much, saved the latter and his friends. In addition, many of those who were at meetings with Petrashevsky himself escaped persecution, such as Engelson, who later active participant Herzen’s “Polar Star”, the famous theorist of modern Slavophilism - Nikolai Danilevsky, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and for a long time Apollo Maikov, who diligently attended Petrashevsky's Fridays. Finally, two first-class writers can be counted among P., who were not included in the list of defendants only because they died before the start of the investigation: Valerian Maykov and Belinsky. Valerian Maikov was very friendly with Petrashevsky and took a large part in compiling Kirillov’s “Dictionary of Foreign Words”, which was one of the largest corpus delicti process. Belinsky, for his letter to Gogol, would probably have been ranked in the most criminal category of “society,” since many of P. were only guilty of distributing this letter. The final verdict of the Auditor General regarding Pleshcheev is motivated as follows: “Pleshcheev, for distributing Belinsky’s letter, should be deprived of all rights to the estate and exiled to hard labor in factories for 4 years." One of the motives on the basis of which Golovinsky, Dostoevsky, Palm were awarded death penalty, exposed misreporting about the dissemination of Belinsky's letter.

The Petrashevsky case was a state secret for a long time. The name Belinsky itself was withdrawn from circulation and even in the first years of the reign of Alexander II was not pronounced directly in print, but was replaced by the expression: “critic of the Gogol period.” This mystery in connection with the severe punishment suffered by the participants of the “propaganda society” created the idea of ​​​​the Petrashevsky case as a serious political conspiracy, which was often put along with the Decembrist conspiracy. This idea collapsed after the publication of documents related to P.’s case. “Members of society,” Liprandi said in his report, “intended to follow the path of propaganda acting on the masses. For this purpose, discussions took place in meetings about how to arouse indignation against the government among all classes of the people, how to arm peasants against landowners, officials against bosses, how to take advantage of the fanaticism of schismatics, and in other classes to undermine and destroy all religious feelings, how to act in the Caucasus , in Siberia, in the Baltic provinces, in Finland, in Poland, in Little Russia, where minds were supposed to be already in ferment from the seeds thrown by Shevchenko’s writings (!). From all this I gained the conviction that there was not so much a small and separate conspiracy, but comprehensive plan for the general movement, revolution and destruction».

In reality, however, the court turned out to be completely different. “Butashevich-Petrashevsky,” said the report of the Auditor General, “has been trying to instill the harmful principles of liberalism in the younger generation since then.” Starting from Mr. Petrashevsky, he “collected in his famous days teachers, writers, students and generally persons of different classes familiar to him and constantly aroused judgments tending towards condemnation of what existed in Russia government controlled" Not content with this, Petrashevsky at the end of the year conferred with Speshnev, Chernosvitov, Mombelli, Debu, Lvov “about the establishment secret society under the name, as they themselves put it, of a partnership or brotherhood of mutual assistance made up of progressives and people of progressive opinions, who could move civil life forward on new principles, through the elevation of each other; however, this is society, according to differences of opinion among members, didn't happen" So, people never went beyond abstract reasoning; even in theory they could not agree on any organization. However, the court agreed with Liprandi overall assessment"society" and sentenced all its participants to death. The harsh sentence was motivated solely by “criminal conversations”, “harmful ideas”, "vile liberalism", as Mombelli put it in his confessional statement. The “harmful thoughts” expressed at Petrashevsky’s meetings boiled down to the following: Yastrzhembsky gave a speech on March 18 that “was strewn with salt on the local chinomania.” He praised Proudhon, but “he looked at Lamartine from the worst side.” Golovinsky at the meeting on April 1 “was distinguished by his eloquence, impudence of expression and the most malicious spirit, examining three main issues: liberation of the peasants, freedom of printing and transformation of legal proceedings." Kuzmin “took part in the debate on the same issues.” Timkovsky, “speaking of his intention to bring a complaint to the governing Senate about his improper dismissal from service, added that by this he only wants to set an example for others, like him, dismissed from service, who lose their food along with the service.” Akhsharumov “said that the issues of legal proceedings and the liberation of peasants should be resolved on the same day.” Grigoriev “took part in the debate on the liberation of the peasants.” Durov, at the “meeting” on March 25, read his preface to Khmelnitsky’s works, which was missed by censorship and therefore freely circulated in the book trade. “The whole community applauded. Durov complained that the censorship did not let a lot through, but Petrashevsky added: everyone should try to write in a similar spirit, because although the censorship will erase ten or twenty thoughts and ideas, at least five will still remain.”

[Full list of all participants in the Petrashevsky case:

1) title. owls Mikhail Butashevich-Petrashevsky (27 years old), 2) landowner Kursk province Nikolai Speshnev (28 years old), 3) lieutenant of the Lieutenant-Guards. Moscow regiment Nikolai Mombelli (27 years old), 4) lieutenant of the Life Guards. Horse Grenadier Regiment Nik. Grigoriev, 5) staff captain of the Lieutenant-Guards. Chasseur Regiment Fedor Lvov (25 years old), 6) student of St. Petersburg. University Pavel Filippov (24 years old), 7) candidate St. Petersburg. University Dmitry Akhsharumov (26 years old), 8) student of St. Petersburg. Alex University Khanykov (24 years old), 9) employee in the Asian Department of Const. Debu 1st (38 years old), 10) employee of the same Ippol. Debu 2nd (25 years old), 11) Nick, an employee there. Koshkin (20 years old), 12) retired. college Assess. , writer Serg. Durov (33 years old), 13) retired lieutenant engineer, writer Fed. Dostoevsky (27 years old), 14) non-office nobleman, writer Alexey Pleshcheev (23 years old), 15) title. owls You. Golovinsky (20 years old), 16) head teacher. engineer learned. Felix Tol (26 years old), 17) assistant inspector in technology. inst. Iv. Yastrzhembsky (34 years old), 18) lieutenant of the Life Guards. Chasseur Regiment Alexander Palm (27 years old), 19) title. owls Const. Timkovsky (35 years old), 20) retired. college secret Alex. Europeus (2? years old), 21) tradesman Pyotr Shaposhnikov (28 years old), 22) son of rev. citizen You. Katepev (19 years old), 23) retired. subp. (former police officer) Raf. Chernosvitov (39 years old).]

The Petrashevites were very keen on the ideas of French social reformers, but there was nothing politically dangerous in this hobby, and, moreover, it was characteristic of very many educated people of that time (see memoirs of Panaev, Annenkov, Milyukov, Dostoevsky, Saltykov, letters of Belinsky and many others). Conversations about Owen's New Lanark, Cabet's "Icarium", Fourier's "phalansteries", Proudhon, Louis-Blanc constituted the predominant theme of intimate conversations, which were certainly platonic in nature. From social systems the interlocutors drew only from a common humane background, the desire to put the common good, truth and justice at the basis public life. They did not think about establishing phalansteries in Russia. Only three occupied a special position among P. - Speshnev, Mombelli and Petrashevsky, and from a special military point of view - Grigoriev. In Speshnev’s papers, a draft of a mandatory subscription was found for members of the supposed “Russian society”, according to which, in case of need, they undertake to “without sparing themselves, take full open participation in the uprising and fight.” The court found that this project was Speshnev’s isolated case, about which even the head of the “conspiracy”, Petrashevsky, knew nothing. In Mombelli's papers were found "extremely insolent expressions against His Majesty's sacred person." The importance of this circumstance was greatly increased by the fact that Mombelli was an officer. From the point of view of violation of military discipline, the author of the “Soldier’s Conversation” Grigoriev was also guilty, although the “conversation” only stated the difficult conditions of soldier’s service at that time, the improvement of which is always considered one of the greatest merits of Emperor Alexander II. The testimony they gave during the investigation and trial does not indicate the seriousness of P.’s plans - testimony expressing for the most part, remorse and regret. Only Petrashevsky himself, as the investigative commission noted, “ one of all the prisoners“was “impudent and insolent” and announced “that, striving to achieve a complete, perfect reform of social life in Russia, he wanted to become the head of a reasonable movement among the Russian people”; but Petrashevsky was, as they say, a “restless man,” did not want to accept pardon under the city’s amnesty, insisted on reconsidering the case, and even in the midst of new trends managed to alienate such a person as Count Muravyov-Amursky, who was extremely soft on political exiles. And yet Petrashevsky himself, when the idea arose in the Durov circle to acquire a secret lithograph to disseminate Fourierist views, resolutely protested against such an intention, which was abandoned. As soon as the public atmosphere changed, Petrashevsky became a sincere friend of the government.

One of the main points of accusation against Petrashevsky was the “Dictionary of Foreign Words” he published (see above), which was unhindered by censorship and even dedicated to Grand Duke Mikhail Pavlovich. Written passionately and engagingly, the Dictionary was intended to be something like Voltaire's Dictionnaire philosophique" Its style, somewhat similar to a sermon, was generally in use in the forties under the influence of “ Parols d'un croyant» Lamennay. The main desire of the dictionary is to show that there is a renewal of dilapidated forms of life necessary condition of every truly human existence. The dictionary dreams of the harmony of social relations, of universal brotherhood and solidarity. The dictionary's compilers are not fascinated by the Constitution; in their words, "this vaunted government is nothing less than an aristocracy of wealth." The dictionary's attitude towards capitalism is equally hostile. In general, the dictionary is a living reflection of the ideas that came to us from France in the forties. As with everything that came from P., there was nothing in it that threatened public peace. To sum up, one cannot help but come to the conclusion that the “propaganda society” was in fact Society of Liberal Journalists. Dostoevsky quite rightly says in “The Diary of a Writer”: “P.’s name is incorrect, because an excessively large number in comparison with those who stood on the scaffold, but exactly the same as us, P. remained completely untouched and undisturbed. True, they never knew Petrashevsky, but Petrashevsky was not at all the point in all this long ago past history" P. were, in essence, only pioneers of ideas that a few years later became an integral part of the government program. The military court ordered over them found, however, that “the destructive teachings, which gave rise to unrest and rebellion throughout Western Europe and threatened to overthrow all order and well-being of peoples, unfortunately echoed to some extent in our fatherland. A handful of completely insignificant people, mostly young and immoral, dreamed of the opportunity to trample on the most sacred rights of religion, law and property.”

All defendants were sentenced to death - execution; but, taking into account various mitigating circumstances, including the repentance of all the defendants, the court considered it possible to petition for a reduction in their punishment, and Palma even asked for complete forgiveness. The punishments were indeed commuted: Petrashevsky was given hard labor without a term, Dostoevsky - hard labor for 4 years with then transfer to the privates, Durov - the same, Tolya - 2 years of hard labor, Pleshcheev - transfer to the privates in the Orenburg line battalions, etc. Palm was transferred with the same rank to the army.

Despite this mitigation, the Petrashevites had to endure, as Dostoevsky recalls with a shudder, “ten terrible, immensely terrible minutes of waiting for death.” On December 22, they were brought from the Peter and Paul Fortress (where they spent 8 months in solitary confinement) to the Semenovsky parade ground. The confirmation of the death sentence was read to them; a priest in a black robe approached with a cross in his hand and broke the sword over the heads of the nobles; Everyone, except Palma, was dressed in death shirts. Petrashevsky, Mombelli and Grigoriev were blindfolded and tied to a pole. The officer ordered the soldiers to take aim... Only Kashkin, to whom Chief Police Chief Galakhov, who was standing next to him, managed to whisper that everyone would be pardoned, knew that all this was just a ceremony; the rest said goodbye to life and prepared to move to another world. Grigoriev, who was already somewhat damaged in his mind from solitary confinement, at these moments lost it completely. But then they hit the lights out; tied to the post, their eyes were untied and the verdict was read out in the form in which it finally took place. Then everyone was sent back to the fortress, with the exception of Petrashevsky, who was immediately put on a sleigh on the parade ground and sent straight to Siberia with a courier.

• “Notes” by I.P. Liprandi in “Russian Antiquity” (1872, No. 7);
• "Propaganda Society in the City" (Lits., 1875);
• “New Time”, No. 1790;
• Pleshcheev, in “Rumor” (1881, No. 50);
• Vuich, in "Order" (1881, No. 48);
• Miliukov, in “Russian Antiquity” (1881, No. 3);
• “Russian Invalid”, 1849, No. 276 (verdict);
• Op. Miller, "Biography of Dostoevsky";
• Dostoevsky, “A Writer’s Diary”;
• V.I. Semevsky, “The Peasant Question” (vol. II) and in the “Collection of Jurisprudence” (vol. I).

In fiction. form, the Petrashevsky case is presented in Palm’s novel “Alexei Slobodin” and in “Results of Life” by L. M. Kovalevsky (“Bulletin of Europe”, Nos. 1-3).

Petrashevtsy, Petrashevtsy society, Petrashevtsy circle, a group of youth that met in the 2nd half of the 40s. 19th century in St. Petersburg with M. V. Petrashevsky; utopian socialists and democrats who sought to restructure autocratic and feudal Russia. P. stood at the very beginning of the process of forming a revolutionary democratic camp, the ideologists of which at that time were V. G. Belinsky and A. I. Herzen; with P. begins, according to V.I. Lenin, the history of the socialist intelligentsia in Russia (see Complete collection of works, 5th ed., vol. 7, p. 438, note).

Meetings at Petrashevsky's began in the fall of 1845 - they became weekly (“Fridays”). They were visited by officials, teachers, writers, artists, students, officers (D. D. Akhsharumov, A. P. Balasoglo, V. A. Golovinsky, I. P. Grigoriev, I. M. and K. M. Debu, M M. and F. M. Dostoevsky, S. F. Durov, A. I. Evropeus, N. S. Kashkin, F. N. Lvov, V. N. Maikov, A. P. Milyukov, V. A. Milyutin, N. A. Mombelli, A. I. Palm, A. N. Pleshcheev, M. E. Saltykov, N. A. Speshnev, F. G. Tol, P. N. Filippov, A. V. Khanykov, I. L. Yastrzhembsky and others). The social composition and ideology of Petrograd reflected the features of the transition period of the Russian liberation movement, when, in the conditions of the aggravation of the crisis of serfdom, noble revolutionism gave way to raznochinskaya. P. did not have a formalized organization or developed program. Initially, the goals of the circle were limited to self-education, familiarization with the theories of materialism and utopian socialism. The extensive library of prohibited literature collected by Petrashevsky attracted P. The works of C. Fourier and L. Feuerbach enjoyed particular success. The first attempt to propagate the ideas of democracy and utopian socialism in wide circles was the publication of the Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words (v. 1-2, 1845-46), undertaken by Petrashevsky with the participation of V. N. Maikov, R. R. Shtrandman and others. In 1848- 49 under the influence of the Revolution in France and the aggravation of the internal situation in Russia, revolutionary sentiments began to mature among P. Along with theoretical problems(atheistic reports by Speshnev and Tol, lectures by Yastrzhembsky on political economy, etc.) political issues began to be discussed on “Fridays.” At meetings in a narrower composition (in Petrashevsky’s office, in the apartments of the brothers Debu, Kashkin, Durov), the P. determined their attitude towards the expected peasant revolution. In the fall of 1848, Petrashevsky and Speshnev tried to develop a plan for leading a peasant uprising, which was supposed to begin in Siberia, and from there spread to areas with long traditions popular movements(Ural, Volga, Don) and end with the overthrow of the Tsar. In December 1848 - January 1849, at the “meetings of five” (Petrashevsky, Speshnev, Mombelli, Lvov, K. Debout) the issue of creating a secret society, its program and tactics was discussed. Disagreements emerged regarding the immediate goals of society between supporters of preparatory propaganda work and Speshnev, who stood for an immediate uprising. The idea of ​​the need for an illegal organization was shared by many P. The question of creating propaganda works for the people, criticizing the socio-political system of Russia, was raised. For this purpose, Miliukov wrote an adaptation of F. Lamennais’s “Words of a Believer”, denouncing the clergy, Grigoriev - “A Soldier’s Conversation” about the powerless situation of soldiers, Filippov - “Ten Commandments” about the situation of the serf peasantry. Speshnev and Filippov were preparing equipment for the underground printing house. “Belinsky’s Letter to Gogol” was also destined for publication, first read publicly in P.’s circle at a gala dinner in honor of Fourier, held on April 7, 1849. P. proclaimed themselves fighters for a socialist society, emphasizing the need for Russia to combine socialist propaganda with the fight against autocracy .

Based on the denunciation of a provocateur, the Petrashevtsy were arrested on April 23. Of the 123 people involved in the investigation, 22 were tried by a military court, 21 of them were sentenced to death. After the ritual of preparation for the death penalty on December 22, 1849 at the Semyonovsky parade ground in St. Petersburg, upon the confirmation of Nicholas I, P. were exiled for various periods of hard labor, to prison companies and as privates in the line troops. The Petrashevites were amnestied and by the beginning of the 60s. all (except Petrashevsky) were restored to civil rights. Some P. returned to social struggle: became publicists for Siberian newspapers (Petrashevsky, Speshnev, Lvov), defended the interests of peasants during the Peasant Reform of 1861 (Europeus, Kashkin, Speshnev, Golovinsky), worked in the field of pedagogy (Tol).

The general prerequisites for the worldview of the Petrashevites (utopian socialism, democracy, enlightenment) did not exclude the complexity, diversity and inconsistency of their philosophical, socio-political and literary quest. In the field of philosophy, many Petrashevites were influenced by Belinsky and Herzen, some of them became materialists and atheists. P.'s economic demands did not go beyond the tasks of bourgeois development in Russia. While advocating industrial development and the abolition of serfdom, P. differed in determining the conditions and methods for the emancipation of the peasants. The main revolutionary core of Pestilence, which linked the future of the country with the development of the peasant economy (Petrashevsky, Speshnev, Khanykov, Mombelli, and others), was opposed by liberal fellow travelers (N. Ya. Danilevsky, A. P. Beklemishev, and others), who were oriented toward the development of the landowners. farms. The most radical were the views of Speshnev, who considered himself a communist and demanded the nationalization of the land and the most important industries. While criticizing Western European capitalism, P. recognized its relative progressiveness and saw in it the “threshold” of socialism. Following Fourier, P. believed that the socialist system corresponds to human nature, but unlike Western European utopian socialists, they hoped to achieve it through revolutionary means. Most P. did not share the theory of non-capitalist development put forward by Herzen, and only a few (Khanykov, Golovinsky, etc.) attached special importance to the peasant community. P.'s socialism merged with democracy and was the ideological shell of their anti-serfdom struggle. P. understood that a radical restructuring of social relations in Russia was impossible without political reforms. They dreamed of a republic or, at a minimum, a constitutional monarchy. Unlike the Decembrists, P. considered the people main force revolution.

P.'s ideas were reflected in poetic creativity Pleshcheeva, Palma, Akhsharumova, Durova, in the early prose of Dostoevsky (“Poor People”, etc.), the first stories of Saltykov (“Contradictions”, etc.), journal articles by V.N. Maykov and V.A. Milyutin. The influence of P.’s ideas affected the young L. N. Tolstoy, A. A. Grigoriev, A. N. Maykov.

• Petrashevtsy. Sat. materials, vol. 1-3, M.-L., 1926-28;
• The case of the Petrashevites, vol. 1-3, M.-L., 1937-51;
• Philosophical and socio-political works of the Petrashevites, M., 1953;
• Petrashevsky poets, 2nd ed., Leningrad, 1957.

Literature

• Semevsky V.I., M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky and Petrashevsky, M., 1922;
• Nifontov A.S., Russia in 1848, M., 1949;
• Fedosov I. A., Revolutionary movement in Russia in the second quarter of the 19th century, M., 1958;
• History of Russian economic thought, vol. 1, part 2, M., 1958;
• Leikina-Svirskaya V.F., Petrashevtsy, M., 1965;
• Usakina T.I., Petrashevtsy and the literary and social movement of the forties of the 19th century, [Saratov], 1965;
• History of philosophy in the USSR, vol. 2, M., 1968.

V. F. Leikina-Svirskaya, E. M. Filatova.