home-Suits-G.B. Kurlyandskaya

G.B. Kurlyandskaya

Kurlyandskaya Galina Vladimirovna

Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences,
Research Professor at UrFU and the University of Bilbao (Spain)

Life has developed in such a way that in 33 years since graduating from the Department of Magnetism of the Ural State University. A.M. Gorky I had the opportunity to work at various universities and research laboratories in Russia, Spain, France, Germany, Argentina, Brazil, and the USA. Although knowledge in the specialty “physics of magnetic phenomena” was in demand everywhere, a special role in my destiny was, of course, played by the Institute of Metal Physics of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, where the first 15 years of scientific development took place. This happy time coincided with the birth of children and the defense of my Ph.D. dissertation. I returned to the Ural University in 2003: doctoral studies, defense of my doctoral dissertation, defense of the first Russian graduate student S.O. Volchkova – these were years of visible changes for the better. I can say with certainty that today the experimental base in our department fully complies with a good European standard, there are well-established connections with magnetologists at other universities in Russia (Moscow, Irkutsk, Krasnoyarsk, Kaliningrad), Spain, Brazil, the USA, I am very pleased with the active desire to work of young generations of our magnets.

During my school years, in addition to physics, I really liked biology. By the 3rd year I realized that I would like to study magnetism; a special role in my life was played by a meeting with Oleg Andrianovich Ivanov, whose brilliant lectures I will always remember, as well as critical comments on my doctoral dissertation. In 2002, a very important event occurred in my scientific life; I received a 5-year grant, the main direction of which can be formulated as assessing the possibility of creating a magnetic impedance biosensor. Since then, issues of bioapplications of magnetic materials have been present in one way or another in the work of our group “magnetodynamics of media with high magnetic permeability.” This is a very interesting area at the intersection of the physics of magnetic phenomena, electronics, chemistry, and magnetic materials technology, which is why students from other specialties adapt well to the group. In general, there are no “non-magnetic” materials in nature - they are all magnetic to one degree or another, which is why a magnetologist will always find a place for himself in life. This, for example, happened to my graduate student from the University of Oviedo, who, after defending her thesis on materials science of magnetic materials, works very successfully in a private pharmaceutical company. Another graduate student who worked in the group, graduated from the Department of Magnetism, entered graduate school at the academic institute, in a word, different paths are open to graduates of our department.

Writers of the Oryol region
XX century
Reader
Eagle 2001

Ed. prof. E. M. Volkova

Galina Borisovna Kurlyandskaya

Galina Borisovna Kurlyandskaya, a famous Soviet literary critic, professor at Oryol State University, was born on October 24 (November 6), 1912 in Saratov.
In 1934, after graduating from the Saratov Pedagogical Institute, she worked as a literature teacher at the Saratov Pedagogical College. In 1939 she defended her PhD thesis at Saratov University. Kurlyandskaya studied at the scientific school under the guidance of the prominent scientist A.P. Skaftymov, whose research on N.G. Chernyshevsky, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, L.P. Chekhov was included in the classics of Soviet literary criticism.
In 1939-1948, Kurlyandskaya worked at the Sverdlovsk Pedagogical Institute and at the Ural University. In 1948 she transferred from Kazan University.
Her first article, “The Problem of Debt in I. S. Turgenev’s novel “The Noble Nest,” was published in “Scientific Notes of the Kazan University” (1951, vol. 3, book 3). Since then, Turgenev’s work has become the main subject of Kurlyandskaya’s research.
In 1956, the monograph “Novels of I. S. Turgenev of the 50s - early 60s” was published - one of the first attempts to consider Turgenev’s novels in the dialectical unity of form and content.
Since 1957, Kurlyandskaya has been working at the Oryol Pedagogical Institute. In January 1965, she defended her doctoral dissertation at Leningrad University, “The Method and Style of Turgenev the Novelist,” which was published as a separate book in 1967.
The following monograph, “The Artistic Method of Turgenev the Novelist” (1972), traces the evolution of the writer’s psychological skill.
G. B. Kurlyandskaya is well known in Orel as a propagandist and scientific popularizer of the classical heritage and Soviet literature. She does a lot of public work, being a member of the scientific commission on literature under the Ministry of Education, and is a member of the Art Council of the Oryol Drama Theater. I. S. Turgenev and the Council at the I. S. Turgenev Museum; for a number of years she led a methodological seminar for teachers in the city and region.
Since 1958, interuniversity “Turgenev Readings” have been held in Orel under her leadership. Scientists from Moscow, Leningrad, Kyiv, Minsk, Kharkov, Odessa, Voronezh, Smolensk, Saratov and other cities take part in them.
Since 1971, on the initiative of Kurlyandskaya, the republican "Interuniversity Turgenev Collection" has been published.
In 1985 he was awarded the title "Honored Scientist of the RSFSR".
Latest publications:
The aesthetic world of Turgenev. - Orel, 1994.
Literary Central Russia. - Orel, 1996.

* * *
L. N. Andreev and the traditions of F. M. Dostoevsky

The topic “Leonid Andreev and Dostoevsky” has repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. The main thing in the works of the Soviet period is the recognition of the great power of Andreev’s humanism, which manifested itself in the exposure of the anti-human philosophy of individualism and anarchism1.
Turning to a fairly well-studied topic, I choose a new aspect of considering an old question, namely: the main forms of psychological analysis in the works “Thought” and “My Notes” are studied by me in the light of Andreev’s concept of personality, the interaction in it of different levels of consciousness.

1
Scientists have long noticed that Andreev is brought closer to Dostoevsky by his protest against the anthropological educational understanding of man as “natural”, “natural”, “good” with an unambiguous “reasonable” consciousness. They portrayed man as spontaneously unexpected, self-willed, “broad,” and tragic. Andreev drew closer to Dostoevsky in his main idea that the cause of evil lies not so much in the environment, in socially vicious conditions, but in the person himself. With the entire content of his work, Andreev confirms that he fully shares Dostoevsky’s well-known judgment about man, expressed by him in the “Diary of a Writer” for 1877 regarding “Anna Karenina” by L. Tolstoy. "...No anthill, no triumph of the "fourth estate", no abolition of poverty, no organization of labor will save humanity from abnormality, and consequently from guilt and crime (...). It is clear and understandable to the point of obviousness that evil lurks in humanity deeper than socialist doctors assume, that in no social structure you can escape evil, that the human soul will remain the same, that abnormality and sin come from it itself and that, finally, the laws of the human spirit are still so unknown, so unknown to science, so indefinite and so mysterious that there are and cannot yet be any doctors, or even final judges, but there is One who says: “Vengeance is mine and I will repay.” He alone knows the whole secret of this world...”2.
In “Winter Notes on Summer Impressions” (1863) and especially sharply in “Notes from Underground,” Dostoevsky leads an open debate with the ideas of utopian socialism and the entire enlightenment concept of man. But by entrusting his protest against the rationalistic philosophy of the Enlightenment to the “underground”, Dostoevsky diverges from the “anti-hero” in his attitude to the fact of universal conditionality as the law of social and natural life. The understanding of freedom as anarchic self-will, as unbridled whim, is alien to him, because freedom and necessity for him are interconnected and inseparable. Freedom is exercised only in accordance with the requirements of universal morality. Freedom is to “take control of yourself and your aspirations”3. This “free self-sacrifice of oneself for the benefit of all” is understood by the writer in the sense of a moral imperative in its universality, and this free-willed determination of one’s behavior is far from being personal self-will; on the contrary, it is subject to the laws of a person’s spiritual life. In this conscious and free appeal to selfless service to “everyone,” that moral law is realized, which has a universal, necessary character. But the nature of this necessity is internal, spiritual, transcendental: it is that free intelligible causality that is outside the natural series.
In the anarchic rebellion of the underground hero, the writer sees an expression of independence and a deep recognition of the self-worth of the individual. He is also close to the protest against the fatalistically understood necessity, which unconditionally determines every manifestation of life and thereby bleeds it. He is ready to agree that “free and free will” is more valuable to a person than calculation and profit. But freedom is not self-will. It manifests itself in those actions that express the requirements of the moral law. Self-will remains at the level of “the wildest whim,” individualistic rebellion, blind passions, and the revelry of primitive instincts.
The Russian man, Dostoevsky's hero, is seen in two extremes - "the fatal cycle of convulsive and instant self-denial and self-destruction for us" and in the thirst for restoration, "self-preservation and repentance." In the “Diary of a Writer” for 1873, the Russian people noted “first of all, the oblivion of any measure in everything,” “the need to go over the edge, the need for a fading sensation to reach the abyss, hang halfway into it, look into the very abyss and - in particular cases , but very often - to throw yourself into it like a crazy person upside down." Having reached the last line, the Russian person, as well as the entire people, “with the same strength, with the same swiftness, with the same thirst for self-preservation and repentance” turns to the ideal of Christ. In the personality of a rebel-individualist, like any person, Dostoevsky discovers that moral feeling, which is a necessary condition for his restoration, revival. Through great tests of conscience, he leads his nihilists to the experience of active love in the spirit of a Christian worldview. For example, Raskolnikov’s mental turmoil is given in the perspective of a possible “resurrection.” A person is also depicted as deeply affected by evil, no longer capable of “restoration”, inevitably surrendering to complete spiritual decay (Svidrigailov, Stavrogin, Pavel Fedorovich Karamazov).
Recognizing “abnormality and sin” as emanating from the human soul, Dostoevsky at the same time believes that Christ gave the covenants of salvation: “And in order not to perish in despair from a lack of understanding of one’s paths and destinies, from the conviction of the mysterious and fatal inevitability of evil, the outcome is indicated to man.” . The path of salvation is in recognizing the value of love and brotherly unity, in activating “the feeling of contact with mysterious other worlds” (Zosima). The task is to “psychologically turn people who are divided and hostile to each other onto a different road” and help them gain “dignity and freedom in it.” This recognition of love as the basic law of life for him is a consequence of the religious meaning of life.
In the work of his predecessor, Andreev is mainly consonant with the rebellious sentiments of individualists protesting against the laws of the universe. In their inner world, he sees only a passion for destruction and does not notice, unlike Dostoevsky, the desire for restoration. However, Andreev clearly condemns the position of unbridled self-will from a sober humanistic position, which sometimes comes close to recognizing the moral values ​​of Christianity.
Far from religious consciousness, Andreev, however, continuing the traditions of his great teachers - Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, persistently searched for the inner, enduring meaning of life. In two of his works - "Thought" (1902) and "My Notes" (1908) Andreev took a significant step towards Dostoevsky in the sense of recognizing the complexity of the human personality. He noticed in her with extraordinary strength resistance to the criminal shedding of human blood, discovered in her principles that were opposite to the attraction to destruction and violence. Biblical law - "Thou shalt not kill!" - became a reality for him.

2
Andreev's story "Thought" was considered by scientists as a response to Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment." Indeed, the same task unites writers belonging to different stages of the Russian social movement and different stages in the development of Russian literature.
However, a detailed study of the story “Thought” is not exhaustive. Researchers have overlooked the problem of interaction between different levels of consciousness, which determines Kerzhentsev’s mental drama.
In Dostoevsky's novel and Andreev's story, the crime is committed from certain moral and psychological positions. Raskolnikov is literally burned with anxiety about the humiliated and insulted; the fate of the disadvantaged turned him to an individualistic butch, to a Napoleonic solution to a social problem. Kerzhentsev is a classic example of a Nietzschean superman without the slightest glimmer of compassion. Ruthless contempt for the weak is the only reason for bloody violence against a defenseless person.
Kerzhentsev continues those traditions of Raskolnikov that were absolutized by the German philosopher Nietzsche. According to Raskolnikov’s theory, “people, according to the law of nature, are generally divided into two categories: into the lowest (ordinary), that is, so to speak, into material that serves solely for the generation of their own kind, and into people proper, that is, those who have the gift or talent to speak in a new word in our environment." Ordinary people “preserve the world and increase it numerically,” extraordinary destroyers “of the present in the name of the best,” they “move the world and lead it to the goal.”
Contempt for the “ordinary” makes Raskolnikov the predecessor of Kerzhentsev. This Nietzschean hatred of the “weak” prepares him for the murder of Savelov as a mediocre and useless person, in whose works “everything is petty and insignificant.” He admits frankly, expressing his anti-human essence: “I would not have killed Alexei even if the criticism was right and he really was such a major literary talent.” Feeling “free and master over others”4, he controls their lives.
One hypostasis of Raskolnikov - namely the starting individualistic position, which does not exhaust the complex content of his personality, finds its further development first in the philosophy of Nietzsche, and then in the reasoning and actions of Andreev's hero. Kerzhentsev is connected with Raskolnikov indirectly through Nietzsche, who speaks of the “last man” as the most despicable, petty creature, subject to destruction in the name of the affirmation of the strong (“Thus Spoke Zarathustra”). Kerzhentsev’s closeness to the teachings of the German philosopher is revealed in the article by M. Ya. Ermakova “Leonid Andreev and F. M. Dostoevsky (Kerzhentsev and Raskolnikov)”5.
Kerzhentsev is proud that, due to his exclusivity, he is alone and deprived of internal connections with people. He likes that not a single curious glance penetrates into the depths of his soul with “dark gaps and abysses, at the edge of which one feels dizzy” (150). He admits that he loves only himself, “the strength of his muscles, the power of his thoughts, clear and precise.” He respected himself as a strong man who never cried, was not afraid, and loved life for its “cruelty, for its ferocious vindictiveness and satanically cheerful play with people and events” (150). He is amused by rebellion against insignificant, weak people. At the moment of feigning madness, he “really wanted to punch several faces, taking advantage of the privilege of his position.” “Struggle is the joy of life,” he says enthusiastically, referring to the anarchic forms of this struggle. In his deepest conviction, he, as a necessary, strong person, has every right to destroy the weak, frail: “The very fact of taking a person’s life did not stop me” (148).
Kerzhentsev and Raskolnikov, although their individualistic claims are somewhat similar, are still very different from each other. Raskolnikov is occupied by the thought of shedding human blood according to conscience, that is, in accordance with universally binding morality. In an ideological conversation with Sonya, he still wrestles with the question of the existence of God. Kerzhentsev consciously denies moral norms rooted in the recognition of an absolute origin. Addressing the experts, he says: “You will say that you cannot steal, kill and deceive, because this is immoral and a crime, but I will prove to you that you can kill and rob and that this is very moral. And you will think and speak, and I will think and speak, and we will all be right, and none of us will be right. Where is the judge who can judge us and find the truth?" There is no criterion of truth, everything is relative and therefore everything is allowed.
Confidence in the relativity of people’s moral ideas connects Andreev’s hero with Nietzsche. Nietzsche wrote about “moral prejudices” in his “Collected Aphorisms” entitled “Human, all too human. A book for free minds”, in the treatises “Beyond Good and Evil”, “Genealogy of Morals”. On this path of the planned murder, Kerzhentsev had no internal moral resistance, unlike Raskolnikov. “I wasn’t afraid of myself either, and that was the most important thing. For a murderer, for a criminal, the worst thing is not the police, not the court, but himself, his nerves, the powerful protest of the whole body, brought up in well-known traditions. Remember Raskolnikov, it’s such a pity and such an absurdly lost man and the darkness of his like" (148). He had every reason to oppose Raskolnikov, having sincere contempt for the demands of morality. Let me remind you of at least one scene from Dostoevsky’s novel: the “rehearsal” of the planned murder ends with an exacerbation of internal division. Raskolnikov left the old woman “in decisive embarrassment,” which “increased more and more.” Bloody violence appeared to him in its ugliness and offended his moral feeling: “Oh, God! How disgusting it all is... And could such horror really come into my head? What kind of dirt is my heart capable of, however! The main thing: dirty, dirty , disgusting, disgusting... and I for a whole month..." The author explains on his own behalf: "The feeling of endless disgust, which began to oppress and torment his heart even at the time when he was just going to the old woman, has now reached such a size and so It clearly became clear that he did not know where to go from his melancholy! This author's explanation sheds light on Raskolnikov's internal drama. Human nature does not accept violence and reacts to it with a feeling of endless disgust.

3
The problem of the dialectical relationship between consciousness, subconscious and superconsciousness - the position from which Andreev portrayed the internal drama of the individualist hero, was not considered by researchers.
Like Raskolnikov, Kerzhentsev is obsessed with the thought of his exclusivity, of permissiveness. As a result of Savelov's murder, the idea of ​​the relativity of good and evil perishes. Madness is the penalty for violating the universal moral law. It is this conclusion that follows from the objective meaning of the story. Mental illness is associated with a loss of faith in the power and accuracy of thought as the only saving reality. It turned out that Andreev’s hero found in himself areas unknown and incomprehensible to him. It turned out that in addition to rational thinking, a person also has unconscious forces that interact with thought, determining its character and course. Back in the 30s of our century, the outstanding psychologist L. S. Vygotsky, having criticized Freudian psychoanalysis, at the same time emphasized the importance of the subconscious: “After all, the unconscious is not separated from consciousness by some impenetrable wall. Processes that begin in it often have "demolition continues in consciousness and, conversely, much of the conscious is displaced by us into the subconscious sphere. There is a constant, never-ending dynamic connection between both spheres of our consciousness"6. During the preparation of the crime, Kerzhentsev’s thought was fueled by a passion for destruction and evil irrationality. After the murder, the thought of the individualistic hero was influenced by those elements of the subconscious that resist evil. Andreev made a significant step towards Dostoevsky in understanding the subconscious not only as instincts of destruction, but also as positive forces opposite to them.
“Did I pretend to be crazy in order to kill, or did I kill because I was crazy?” It is clear to the reader that there was a hereditary possibility of mental illness. This potency is actively realized after the murder has been committed. Violation of the biblical covenant leads to retribution that comes from within - to loss of self-control, power over oneself.
In preparation for the crime, Kerzhentsev decided to achieve impunity by feigning insanity, and then believed he would “recover.” However, he was worried about “hereditary influences,” the idea of ​​the formidable danger of experience. Nevertheless, he placed hope in his strong mind, clear and clear thought, which was “obedient, efficient and quick,” and he loved it as his “slave,” “formidable strength,” “only treasure.”
The ability to control oneself and the associated clarity of thought did not change Andreev’s hero even at the moment of the crime: “Never has the clarity of my consciousness reached such heights and strength; never has the feeling of a multifaceted, harmoniously working “I” been so complete.” Just like God: without seeing - I saw without listening - I heard without thinking - I was aware." However, the simulation of madness, complicated by predisposition, cost the loss of common sense. He dramatically experiences the collapse of what he so sacredly believed in - in the power of human thought, in the “sharpness and poisonous teeth” of which he once saw “salvation and his protection.” Now, after the crime, he realized that he was “not a master, but a slave, pitiful and powerless.” He lost the ability to control himself with the help of thought: “The vile thought betrayed me, the one who believed in it and loved it so much. It has not become worse: the same light, sharp, elastic, like a rapier, but its handle is no longer in my hand And she killed me, her creator, her master, with the same stupid indifference as I killed others with her" (180). That is, thought began to be determined by forces directed against the passion of destruction that controlled him. Thought was at the mercy of those forces that did not enter his consciousness and were unknown to him, although they constituted the hidden depths of his spiritual “I”.
Once clear and clear, now, after the crime, the thought became “eternally lying, changeable, illusory,” because it ceased to serve his individualistic spirit. He felt within himself some mysterious spheres unknown to him, which turned out to be beyond the control of his individualistic consciousness. “And they cheated on me. Vilely, insidiously, as women, slaves and thoughts cheat. My castle became my prison. Enemies attacked me in my castle. Where is salvation?” But there is no salvation, because “I am I and am the only enemy of my Self” (180). The position of the superman, for whom freedom becomes self-will, is the main reason for the anarchic rebellion against “human and divine laws” - this position led the nihilist to a split personality. In his own castle he was attacked by enemies. He understood one thing: the cause of the crash was himself. Now loneliness has become “formidable” and “ominous” for him: “.... of myself I am only an insignificant particle,” because “in myself I am surrounded and strangled by gloomily silent, mysterious enemies.” However, he remained in his previous positions of godlessness, although he realized that the cause of suffering was in himself. Therefore, there is no prospect of revival: “Who strong will give me a helping hand? - Nobody. Nobody. Where will I find that eternal thing to which I could cling with my pitiful, terribly powerless, lonely “I”? Nowhere.” He did not find a “soul,” that is, an absolute beginning for him to the external universal world, neither in himself, and therefore “great and terrible” loneliness became his lot: “...lonely in the emptiness of the universe, I have no friend."
In a roll call with Dostoevsky, Andreev leads Kerzhentsev through a test of faith. Masha, a nurse in a hospital, quiet and selfless, a simplified version of Sonya Marmeladova, interested Kerzhentsev with her ecstatic faith. True, he considered her a “limited, stupid creature,” at the same time possessing a secret inaccessible to him: “She knows something. Yes, she knows, but she cannot or does not want to say.” But unlike Raskolnikov, he is not able to believe and survive the process of revival: “No, Masha, you will not answer me. And you know nothing. In one of the dark rooms of your simple house lives someone who is very useful to you, but For me, this room is empty. He died long ago, the one who lived there, and on his grave I erected a magnificent monument. He died, Masha, died - and will not rise again" (175-176). He buried God like Nietzsche.
Kerzhentsev is far from repentance, from remorse. Nevertheless, the punishment followed. Kerzhentsev, like Raskolnikov, reacted to the shedding of human blood with illness. One was delirious, the other lost self-control and power over thought. Within himself, Kerzhentsev felt a struggle between opposing forces. The confusion of internal disunity is expressed by him in these words: “A single thought was broken into a thousand thoughts, and each of them was strong, and they were all hostile. They whirled in a wild dance” (171). In himself, he felt the struggle of hostile principles and lost the unity of his personality.
He admits: “While my “I” was in my brightly illuminated head, where everything moves and lives in a natural order, I understood and knew myself, reflected on my character and plans, and was, as I thought, a master.” But a person cannot be reduced only to a rational principle, because thought itself is inextricably linked with the sphere of the subconscious - this is where the multidimensionality of the human personality is manifested. After the crime, Kerzhentsev became convinced that he did not know himself and had never been a criminal. True, he had always felt the abysses within himself, but now such irrational depths were revealed in him that he had not suspected and which seemed mysterious to him.
The inconsistency of Raskolnikov's theory is proven by its incompatibility with human “nature”, the protest of moral feeling. Andreev's story depicts the process of spiritual disintegration of a criminal who is dramatically experiencing a decline in his intellectual potential.
Andreev came close to Dostoevsky, united with him by the moral pathos of his work: he showed that violation of an objectively existing moral law is accompanied by punishment, a protest from the inner spiritual “I” of a person.
Complete internal isolation as a result of a crime that severed the last ties with humanity makes Kerzhentsev mentally ill. But he himself is far from morally judging himself and is still full of individualistic claims. “For me there is no judge, there is no law, there is nothing prohibited. Everything is possible,” he says and strives to prove this when he invents an explosive substance “stronger than dynamite, stronger than nitroglycerin, stronger than the very thought of it.” He needs this explosive to blow up “the accursed earth, which has so many gods and no one eternal god” (182). And yet the punishment triumphs over the sinister hopes of the criminal. Human nature itself protests against such nihilistic abuse of itself. Everything ends in complete moral devastation. In his defense at the trial, Kerzhentsev did not say a word: “With dull, as if sightless eyes, he looked around the ship and looked at the audience. And those on whom this heavy, unseeing gaze fell experienced a strange and painful feeling: as if from the empty orbits of the skull they were indifferent and silent death itself looked" (182). Dostoevsky leads his individualist hero to moral rebirth through rapprochement with representatives of the people, through internal conflict, through love for Sonya.

4
The hero and author of "My Notes" is a doctor of mathematical sciences, a murderer of three people - his father, older brother and sister, who completely clears his involvement in the crime. The motives for the crime remain unclear. Most likely, this is a spontaneous and unexpected manifestation of self-will, and not a cold, rational decision. However, along with the expression of evil irrationality, the act of bloody reprisal also reflected a conscious protest against the “wall” of moral ideas of humanity. The following eloquent detail serves as confirmation: “...after committing the crime, the killer drank wine and ate biscuits - the remains of both were found on the table with traces of bloody fingers”7. With a feeling of some strange friendliness, he placed the lit cigar into the clenched teeth of his late father. Contempt for universal human moral standards unites the individualist from “My Notes” with his predecessor Kerzhentsev, who, returning from his father’s mistress on the day of his death, stopped in front of the corpse, folded his arms on his chest, like Napoleon, and looked at him with comic pride” (162 Both of them deliberately violated "all laws, divine and human."
“My Notes” is not a confessional self-disclosure. The prisoner carefully hides the “holy secrets” of his soul, values ​​loneliness as a human “advantage over other creatures.” Only by taking into account the pattern of some of his involuntary movements, external detections and actions, as well as the content of some confessions, do we begin to understand the inner drama of the criminal. The following facts can serve as proof that we have a murderer. Reflecting on the suicide of the prison artist K., he says: “The split personality can be so great that a suicide, stabbing himself, can experience that voluptuous mysterious delight that a real murderer experiences when separating living tissue with a knife (...). life is almost always pleasure for a person, even if this life is one’s own” (231-232). In the act of suicide, he sees “the presence of murder...” This judgment of the hero-prisoner clearly confirms the truth that he is trying in vain to hide. It turns out that he knows that the criminal experiences a “voluptuous, mysterious delight” when he uses a knife to separate living tissue. I remember in connection with this honor an incident from his student life. While working on the corpse, he “unexpectedly felt the deepest delight at the extraordinary spectacle of the reverse procession of matter from life to death, from the most complex structure of a living organism to the simplest elements of matter.” He admired the corpse for a long time in ecstasy, surrendering to “admired contemplation.” Another fact confirming the prisoner’s guilt was a meeting with his former bride, when he, shocked by love, was ready to admit that he was a criminal: “Truly, an abyss opened up under my feet, and, as if blinded by lightning, as if stunned by a blow, I screamed in wild and incomprehensible delight : “Be silent!” I...” He should have said: “I am a murderer.” But the woman interrupted him and did not allow him to finish what he started; she interrupted the truth that was ready to burst out. It is clear that “this terrible face, full of wild contradictions,” depicted by the artist K. is the face of a criminal who has spent decades of titanic efforts to live in prison conditions.
Murder became an expression of the evil energy of sadism, a source of voluptuous pleasure. In a “blind and wild rage,” he savagely violated the corpses, delivering the last blows to the dead, blows that were “pointless and cruel,” indicating the “sadic inclinations of the disgusting villain...” The prisoner comes to the conclusion: “This man, intoxicated by the sight of blood so many innocent victims, temporarily ceased to be a man and became a beast, the son of primordial chaos, the child of dark, terrible lusts" (233). A. Gornfeld astutely noted: “Temporarily - this is a significant italics of the original. The author himself believes that only in a sadistic hobby after the murder did he temporarily become a beast: in the murder itself he does not see “dark and terrible lusts”: it was reasonable and conscious.” 8. Apparently, the murder was conceived and carried out in connection with a nihilistic denial of the laws of God and man, but this denial was undoubtedly fueled by unconsciously acting primitive instincts of destruction and violence.
Andreev, like Dostoevsky, believed that the source of evil is rooted in man himself - this is an ineradicable attraction to egoistic self-affirmation. But unlike Dostoevsky, who showed the desire of fallen man for restoration and repentance, Andreev emphasizes in the inner man the wild self-will, the madness of selfishness. For Andreev's hero, freedom turns into a destructive element, an insane play of evil irrational forces in him. This passion for self-affirmation in the absence of moral precepts is what leads the nameless hero of “Notes” to merciless bloody villainy.
A prisoner behaves and thinks differently during different periods of his imprisonment. At first he cursed the judges and threatened them with merciless revenge, went mad, banged his head against the walls and lay unconscious for hours on the stone floor. Then he recognized the futility of rebellion and the inevitability of submission to an immutable law. At first he came to a complete denial of life and its great meaning. Then he created the philosophy of the “iron grid,” according to which “the greatest expediency, harmony and beauty” are realized in the world (190). He felt “tender gratitude, almost love” for the bars at that moment when the sky seemed unusually beautiful to him through the prison bars. And he thought about the question: “Isn’t this a manifestation of a higher law, in which the limitless is comprehended by the human mind only under the indispensable condition of introducing it into boundaries?” And the bars of the prison “suddenly revealed an example of the deepest purposefulness, nobility and strength. Having captured the infinite in its iron squares, it froze in cold and proud peace, frightening dark people, giving food for thought to sensible people and delighting the sage” (200).
Guided by the idea that the limitless (harmony, beauty) is comprehended only by introducing it into boundaries, the prisoner came to the conclusion “that our entire prison was built according to an extremely expedient plan, causing delight in its completeness.” The image of a prison grows into a symbol of a strictly determined world order, a harmonious, durable, harmonious and purposeful cosmos.
The formula of the “iron lattice” is thus given as the embodiment of the world necessity of an “omnipotent law” that subordinates “both the movement of the heavenly bodies and the restless cohesion” of people (196). V. Bezzubov believes that the hero of “My Notes”, who illuminates the walls of the prison, is in some ways very similar to the imaginary opponents of the underground man, when they shout, based on the laws of nature, the conclusions of natural sciences and mathematics: “Have mercy (...) You can’t rebel: it’s twice two four (...) You are obliged to accept it (nature) as it is, and therefore all its results. A wall, then, is a wall"9.
Guided by the love of life and a healthy instinct of adaptability, the prisoner realized, following the opponents of the underground, that the protest was devoid of any basis and was simply insane: “For I must live.” This thesis postulates all his actions and reasoning. The optimistic philosophy of expediency was the result of the titanic efforts of many years of prison life. “The world fell on my head and did not crush me, and from its terrible rubble I created a new world - according to my drawing and plan; all the evil forces of life: loneliness, prison, betrayal and lies, everything turned against me and I subdued them all his own will" (213).
He wants to assure himself and others that from despair and aimlessness he has come to complete spiritual clarity and awareness of the high meaning of life. However, this statement is contradicted by the moral and psychological states guessed by the prison artist, reflected in his eyes full of “torment and even horror.” Their stopped, frozen gaze, the madness flickering somewhere in the depths, the painful eloquence of the bottomless and infinitely lonely soul" (216). In a word, "this terrible face, full of wild contradictions" is not a confirmation of the newfound harmony. The rationalistic theory of world expediency did not become for him as the source of living life, and therefore the assurances of the newfound harmony were hypocritical and false. L. Andreev said this with all certainty in a famous interview with A. Izmailov: “He does not stop lying all his life... conditions in which there is no place for hope , nor life, force him with a terrible effort of will to create his own world, in which expediency, harmony and beauty reign... he could be called a genius of adaptability"10.

5
However, the hero of “My Notes” is presented in all the complexity of his inner spiritual world, which is determined by the interaction of equal spheres of consciousness. He himself realized that in the inner man, attractions and states belonging to different levels of consciousness are intricately intertwined. From his own experience, he knew that “the mind, when a person is awake, forgets all other voices, muffledly coming from the hidden depths of the human body. And only in sleep, when the tired mind, having lost the thread of logical thinking, powerlessly gallops through absurd gaps, do they begin sound loud and commanding" (219).
It is very noteworthy that the hero and writer recognized the “hidden depths of the human “I”. Reason with its “thread of logical thinking” does not exhaust the whole person. He felt the power of the subconscious in the tragedy of his complex experiences. As a result of hard-won experience, he came closer to the truth and rather felt, than he knew that the content of the inner world cannot be limited to sudden instinctive impulses of destruction alone, that opposite elements also lurk in it, a higher reality resisting eternal chaos. It is not without reason that in one murderer he discovered “an inexhaustible spring of pure truth and an endless desire for good” (223 ).
The hero and the author come closer in understanding the structure of personality. The complex movement and interaction of different layers of consciousness is the position from which Andreev sees the world. The anti-positivist orientation of the story was clearly reflected in the exposure of the abstractly rationalistic, straightforwardly logical thought of the hero-character, who retained the natural-scientific orientation of the positivist to the end: “My thought, brought up in the laws of strictly scientific thinking, cannot recognize either miracles or divinity “He who is rightly called the Savior of the world” (225), he said to the lady who gave him the ivory crucifix. The prisoner constantly emphasized that the sacred formula of the iron grid was based on the conclusions of reason and science, that it was only “a simple, sober, purely mathematical formula”11.
However, the story reveals the scholasticism of the hero’s theoretical constructs, which come into clear contradiction with the entire spiritual and moral composition of his personality.
The inner drama of chic explodes that positivist philosophy, which boils down to a mechanistic understanding of determination as excluding human freedom, freedom of choice, to the absolutization of necessity, which supposedly means the highest expediency realized in the world process.
The hero-prisoner comes into clear contradiction with the positivist misunderstanding of the world when, freed from the prison yoke, he voluntarily prefers imprisonment, as if fulfilling the duty of renunciation, driven by some kind of subconscious incentives. In this case, the philosophy of the iron lattice, that is, the expediency and beauty of the world, seems to go beyond the limits of positivism and the conclusions of the exact mathematical sciences. In this case, this philosophy is not determined by the instinct of self-preservation, the desire to adapt to difficult prison conditions and survive. In this case, it is connected with some internal processes, shifts in moral consciousness.
Andreev showed that the positivist theory contradicts the mental structure of a person, the complexity of his inner world. Therefore, the writer cannot have an unequivocally negative attitude towards his hero, who is experiencing the drama of duality. There is no complete denunciation, debunking, as many Andreev scholars believe. On the contrary, even in the judgments of his nameless hero, the author captures echoes of the hidden depths of his human “I”. However, when faced with manifestations of absolute spirituality in man, Andreev, unlike Dostoevsky, is far from a religious and moral interpretation of the positive forces in man that oppose the rampant blind passions.
Interest in the deep layers of the human psyche unites and at the same time separates Andreev from Dostoevsky. Recognizing the limitations of rational-unilinear logic, writers had different understandings of the means of knowing the truth. The experience of mystical contact with other worlds did not exist for Andreev. But at the same time, he was not satisfied with sober humanistic positions, which were very far from recognizing the moral and ontological values ​​of Christianity.

6
In “My Notes” Andreev is extremely close to Dostoevsky in his understanding of the spiritual potential of the human personality and the positive meaning of world law, which introduces the eternal Chaos into the boundaries of order.
Let us recall that Dostoevsky considered the deep essence of man to be spiritually free and distinguished him as a subject, as a spiritual, intelligible “I” from his socio-psychological states. He knew that man is not limited to psychological reality. Behind it lie “the depths of spiritual existence that are not included in the actual consciousness of the present moment,” wrote Vl. Soloviev in "Readings about God-manhood". Dostoevsky’s position becomes clear in the light of the following reasoning of the Russian philosopher: “...The spirit, as manifested in its internal integrity, must always be the first of its given manifestations...” Our spirit “has an original substantial existence, regardless of its particular detection or manifestation in a number of separate acts and states,” our spirit “exists deeper than all that inner reality that makes up our current, present life. In this initial depth lie the roots of what we call ourselves or our I...”12. This original subject is deeper and more important than our conscious life. Our individual character resides in direct substantial unity with it. Dostoevsky, together with Solovyov, recognizes that the depths of the human personality are free spirituality.
Andreev’s closeness to Dostoevsky in “My Notes” was reflected in the recognition of the duality of the human being, the confrontation between good and evil in him. Having gone through bloody villainy, the hero felt in himself that subject who resists the irrational element of evil. Having realized for himself the complexity of the human personality, he became convinced that its deepest principles have nothing to do with the bestial intoxication with blood. He views the devilish attraction to violence as something different from himself. Hence the statement - “It was not I who killed,” that is, it was not the deep subject who killed who constitutes the only reality and opposes the rampant passions. The deepest spirit in him has nothing to do with murder - and hence: “I did not kill.” He was killed by the suddenly awakened beast in him, initially associated with ancient chaos, the pacification of which requires prison bars. He discovered the need to curb the evil irrationality in himself, to throw a rein of coercion over it. By this, he sought to gain spiritual clarity and introduce himself into world harmony, “where everything is strictly subject to the law...” (222).
St. Andrew's hero came to the feeling of his deep spiritual “I”. He seems to be returning to himself and is close to understanding himself as an independent subject, not reducible to his socio-bio-psychological manifestations. He discovered that he was deeper than his emotions and his actions. This discovery of one’s originality was sufficient to acquire a critical attitude towards one’s primitive instincts and strive to curb them. But this return to oneself does not become that internal, actual consciousness that would allow one to overcome the devilish element within oneself by the power of the spirit. And therefore, a “grid” becomes necessary for him. If in the universal world everything is strictly subject to law, that is, to beauty and harmony, then the “eternal chaos” in one’s own soul should be brought into the mainstream of reason and order. He accepted his solitary confinement as “a thorny path of achievement and self-denial” (224).
He explains the ambiguity of the human personality, its “mystery” as the struggle in it of “primordial and terrible chaos with a greedy desire for harmony and order” (223). This struggle of opposite principles ends with the fact that “the eternal chaos is defeated and the triumphant song of bright harmony rises to the sky” (223). It is this confidence in the expediency of the development of all cosmic life that allows him to consider himself a teacher of life. He addresses the audience with the words: “I know the truth! I have comprehended the world! I have discovered the great principle of expediency! I have unraveled the sacred formula of the iron lattice!” He explains that the iron lattice is a mathematical formula, “this is the scheme in which the laws governing the world are located, abolishing chaos and restoring in its place (...) strict, iron, inviolable order” (221-222).
The assumption, as a result of some intuitive insight into the true reality in himself, revealed to him the destructiveness of voluptuous bloody fury. However, this premonition of higher principles could not turn him to religious and moral decisions. He only understood the need for bridles, “order”, submission to the omnipotent law - especially since he remained under the power of the devilish elements, which is confirmed by the entire history of his relationship with the artist K. After all, it was he who mercilessly tempted the unfortunate man, speaking of Christ as the greatest criminal, expressed the assumption "that when the devil tempted him in the desert, He did not renounce him, as he later said, but agreed, sold himself - did not renounce..." (214).
The complex worldview of the hero-prisoner is dominated by the understanding of universal life as a prison for man. At first, he envied the artist, who, having ended his life, said: “I am leaving your prison.” But the narrator quickly realized the pointlessness of suicide, because the omnipotent Law equally reigns over being and non-being: “Who told you that our prison ends here, that you did not get from one prison to another...”. Suicides “end up with only one form of themselves, only to immediately assume another” (232). Escape from “our prison” is pointless, because prison for the hero and author is synonymous with the “bonds of eternity”: “I believe and confess that our prison is immortal.” A human being, doomed to immortality, is lonely and defenseless in the universal world, for him deaf and unknowable, and therefore in vain “people believe in ghosts and build on this absurd theories about some kind of relations between the world of living people and the mysterious country where the dead live " (235).
The prisoner came to the idea of ​​​​world harmony, of a universal order that restrains the impulses of eternal chaos, defeating the “horror of pricelessness.” But this victory turned out to be imaginary, illusory due to the lack of moral revival. And therefore, for him, a person is doomed to tragic loneliness, not only among people, but also in the face of the metaphysical Whole. All earthly and universal life for him is an eternal prison.
The hero of “My Notes” and Dostoevsky’s “underground man” are siblings, inextricable allies, at least in their understanding of the essence of the human personality as an absolutized volitional element, as a riot of irrational forces. True, there is a significant difference between them. The underground is to the end an opponent of the “stone wall,” i.e., the laws of nature, the conclusions of natural sciences, mathematics, universal conditioning, and upholds the “freedom of will” to the end. What is most important to him is “his own, free and free will, his own, even the wildest whim, his own fantasy, sometimes irritated even to the point of madness...” (5, 113). Andreevsky's hero, having the same individualistic disposition, came to the opposite conclusion about the need for a bridle and an iron grid, apparently not only under the influence of love of life and the instinct of adaptability, but also under the influence of some internal influences. In any case, in the works “Thought” and “My Notes,” in which the traditions of Dostoevsky are clearly felt, the energy of self-affirming will, directed against world laws and expediency, is given as the energy of evil.
Man has eternal freedom, but it becomes a burden for him and turns into self-will. Deprived of a moral guideline, Andreev's hero involuntarily surrenders to the play of irrational forces within himself. But, having surrendered to the eternal chaos and committed an unheard-of atrocity, he realized the need for reins. He convinces his opponent: “... the human soul, imagining itself to be free and constantly tormented by this false freedom, inevitably requires bonds for itself, which are for some an oath, for others an oath, for others simply an honest word” (222).
The idea that freedom is unbearable for a person unites the narrator from “My Notes” with Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor. The Cardinal of the Roman Church says to Christ: “Man has no more painful concern than to find someone to whom he can quickly transfer the gift of freedom with which this unfortunate creature is born” (232). The Inquisitor understands freedom as the greatest moral gift, which exceeds the capabilities of “weak rebels” and is contrary to their nature. Reminding Christ how fifteen centuries ago he told people: “I want to make you free,” and adds: “Now you have seen these free people.” “This matter,” he continues, “cost us dearly, but we ended it - in Your name. For fifteen centuries we suffered with this freedom, but now it is over and over firmly.” He, together with his associates, organized the lives of people without Him, but in His name.
Andreev and Dostoevsky, despite existing points of contact, nevertheless solve the problem of freedom and necessity from different positions. Dostoevsky understands the freedom of the human person as an expression of its spiritual essence, and therefore it meets the requirements of the moral law. For Andreev, freedom and necessity are oppositely directed forces that exclude each other. Inner freedom is understood by Andreev not as transcendental spirituality, but as irrationality, rooted in eternal chaos, which, through the cosmic process of development, enters the shores of order.

* * *
In such works as “Thought” and “My Notes,” Andreev, inspired by insight, came close to a direct sensation of the “mysteries of being.” The rational appeal of the hero-prisoner to the philosophy of the iron grid was at first dictated by the instinct of adaptation, and therefore this philosophy comes into clear contradiction with the entire content of sensual manifestations of life, then, fueled by the hidden movements of moral feeling, it acquired the meaning of a “bridle” that fetters the explosions of the devilish element in him . The prisoner found some positive principles in his soul, prompting him to submit to the world Law, to renounce, to the feat of duty (meaning the voluntary election of a new prison).
Together with his character, the writer is ready to admit that there are some positive elements in man that resist the eternal chaos of destruction and dictate a saving appeal to the idea of ​​duty, “bridle”13.

Notes
1. Ermakova M. Ya. Leonid Andreev and F. M. Dostoevsky. / Kerzhentsev and Raskolnikov // Uch. zap. Series of Philological Sciences. Vol. 87, Gorky. 1966; Babicheva N.V. Three “Thoughts” by Leonid Andreev // Philological Sciences, 1969, No. 5; Jesuitova L. A. “Crime and Punishment” in the works of Leonid Andreev // Method and skill. Russian literature. Vol. 1, Vologda, 1970; Smirnova L. A. F. M. Dostoevsky and L. N. Andreev // Collection of works of the Moscow region. Pedagogical Institute. The problem of realism at the beginning of the 20th century. M., 1974: Kurlyandskaya G.B. Andreev’s story “Darkness” and “Notes from Dostoevsky’s Underground” // Creativity of Leonid Andreev. Research and materials, Kursk, 1983; Bezzubov V. Andreev and Dostoevsky // Leonid Andreev and the traditions of Russian realism, Tallinn, 1984; Silard Lena. "My Notes" by L. Andreev. On the question of the history of assessments and the polemical orientation of the story // Studia Slavica - Hung - XVIII. - 1972. - P. 303-342; Silard Lena. "My Notes" by Andreev. // Metamorphoses of Russian positivism in the mirror of literary parody // The same; Silard Lena. “The Grand Inquisitor” by L. Andreev, or the soul-warmer of the latest despondency // Studia Slavica - Hung - XX. - 1974; Generalova N.P. “My Notes” by Leonid Andreev (On the issue of the ideological orientation of the story) // Russian literature. 1986, no. 4.
2. Dostoevsky F. M. Complete. collection Op. in 30 volumes. T. 25. P. 201.
3. See about this: Kurlyandskaya G. L. N. Tolstoy and F. M. Dostoevsky. Tula, 1987.S. 71-103.
4. Andreev L. Favorites. M., Sovremennik. 1982. P. 152. In the following, pages are indicated in the text of the article (“Thought”).
5. Scientific notes. Series of Philological Sciences. Vol. 87. - Gorky, 1966.
6. Vygotsky L. S. Psychology of art. M., 1965. S. 93-94.
7. Andreev Leonid. Full collection Op. St. Petersburg, 1913. T. 111. P. 234. Further in the text of the article the pages of the third volume of this publication are indicated.
8. Gornfeld A. “My notes” by Leonid Andreev // Russian wealth, 1909, No. 1. P. 116.
9. Bezzubov V. Leonid Andreev and the traditions of Russian realism. P. 91.
10. "Exchange Gazette", 1908, No. 10797, evening. issue
11. Lena Szilard believes that “the hero of “Notes” is not just a positivist, but a positivist of the Machist-Avenarius type, applying the general principles of Lunacharsky’s positive aesthetics to his experience” (Silard Lena. “My Notes” by L. Andreev. II. Metamorphoses of the Russian positivism in the mirror of literary parody. Studia Slavica - Hung - XX, 1974. - P. 57). N.P. Generalova believes that for the writer the very concept of positivism was apparently of an undifferentiated nature, merging into a certain generalized image." Therefore, she considers the "erroneous interpretation of the story "My Notes" by the Hungarian researcher L. Szilard as "brilliant in the form of a parody and insightful in the content of the philosophical dispute" with "Machist positivism and the Russian god-building that grew out of it" in the person of A. Lunacharsky and M. Gorky" (N.P. Generalova. "My Notes" by Leonid Andreev // Russian Literature, 1986, No. 4. - P. 180).
12. Solovyov V. S. Readings about God-manhood // Solovyov V. S. Collection. Op. edited by and with notes by S. M. Solovyov and E. L. Radlov. St. Petersburg, 1912, vol. III. P. 91.
13. Keldysh V. A. On the problem of literary interactions at the beginning of the 20th century. // Russian literature, 1979. No. 2. P. 8.
“The substance of world life is both unknowable and hostile to man,” wrote V. A. Keldysh. “Hence the position of disagreement, struggle, rebellion. Since the individual is rejected by the metaphysical whole, the path to it is barred for her - all that remains is to challenge fate.” “If it is impossible to overcome the disunity of man with man, then Andreev is inclined to consider the loneliness of man in the world in the face of the transcendental mysteries of existence as inevitable.”

The article follows. ed.:
Kurlyandskaya G. B. Literature of Central Russia. - Orel, 1996.

  • HISTORICAL VIEW OF COURLAND PROVINCE 14
  • The state of the country before the arrival of the Germans. Conquest of Courland by the Livonian Order. The structure of the order. Lithuanian invasions. Spread of the Reformation. Relations with the Russian principalities. Weakening and disintegration of the order. Establishment of the Duchy of Courland. The state of Courland under the dukes. Reign of Duke James. Warriors of Poland and Sweden Northern War. Accession to the throne of Courland Erist-Ioann Biron. Annexation of Courland to Russia 14
  • DESCRIPTION OF KURLAND PROVINCE 26
  • GEOGRAPHICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION 28
    • General view of the province 28
    • Geographical position 28
    • Borders 29
    • Space 29
  • PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SURFACE 32
    • GEOLOGICAL STYLE 32
      • Distribution and description of rocks and fossils by geological periods and formations 32
    • OROGRAPHIC REVIEW 41
      • General character of the surface. Upper Courland. The hills of the Kurland Peninsula on both sides of the river. Vindavas. East End. West Side. Mitavskaya plain. Lowlands in the northern part of the Courland Peninsula 41
      • Soil 49
    • HYDROGRAPHIC REVIEW 50
      • General character. Benefits delivered by waters - the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Riga. Direction and properties of shores. Capes. Shoals and water depth. Vindanskaya and Libavskaya harbors. Coastal region. -Rivers. General direction. Division by basin. - Western Dvina basin. Extent, depth, width and fall of the Western Dvina. Islands, rapids. Meli. Underwater rocks. Opening and freezing. Shores. Crossings. Tributaries - Courland Aa basin. P.p. Memel and Mus with tributaries. Description of the river Aa regarding length, width, depth, banks, fall, etc. Tributaries Aa on the right and left sides. - Swimming pool, northern Courland. - Basin of the river. Windavi. Description of the river Vindava and its tributaries on the right and left sides. - The basin of western Courland. - Opera. - Swamps. Main types of swamps. Their influence on the health of residents and communication routes. Swamp drainage and peat extraction 50
  • COMMUNICATIONS 81
    • a) land 81
      • General condition of roads. Ways to keep them in good condition. Bridges and transportation. Road separation. Railways. Highway. Postal roads. Communication and trade roads. Parish roads. Country roads. Winter roads. Stagecoaches and carriages with passengers. Telegraph lines 81
    • b) water 95
      • Description of navigable and rafting rivers in relation to the convenience of navigation and rafting. Piers. Description and movement of ships. Western Dvina. Kurlyandskaya Aa. Mus. Memel. Wessit. Sussey. Misse. Ekau. Vindava. Abau. Bartau. Libavskoye Lake. Irbe 95
  • Climate 100
    • General view. Average temperatures in Mitau, Libau and Goldingen. Days with the highest and lowest temperatures in Mitau and Goldingen. Hot and cold days. The duration of the period during which the midday temperature is not lower than +13°. The duration of the period during which there are no night frosts. Barometric altitude. Vapor pressure in air. Relative dampness of the air. Winds. Their general direction and properties. Fogs. Their timing and impact on the health of residents. Rains. The amount of rainwater and snow that falls in a year. Number of rainy and cloudy days. Thunderstorms. Spills from the abundance of rain. Lack of rain or drought. Hail. Hailstorm. Snow. The amount of snow falling and the number of snow days. Freezing and opening of rivers and seas. Seasons. The influence of climate on the health of residents and animals. Predominant diseases 100
  • NATURAL WORKS 131
    • a) BY THE PLANT KINGDOM 131
      • Description of plants cultivated in the region. Rye. Wheat. Barley. Oats. Capsicum plants. Fibrous plants. Oily plants. Dying plants. Root plants. Garden and garden plants. Forage grasses. Wild plants. Forest species. Shrubs. Poisonous plants. Pharmaceutical plants. Weeds 131
    • b) According to the animal kingdom 146
      • Pets. Horses. Cattle. Sheep. Goats. Pigs. Backyard birds. Non-domestic animals. Mammals. Birds. Fish. Insects, mainly harmful to plants and animals 146
    • C) ACCORDING TO THE FOSSIL KINGDOM 160
      • Minerals. Their properties and distribution. Extraction of peat and other rocks. Amber. Mineral waters: Kemmern, Baldon, Barbern. Doroteensky and Dondangensky springs 160
  • Population 170
    • Historical information about the gradual settlement of the region. The number of residents and their distribution by locality, according to information from the provincial statistical committee and according to the latest audit. Numerical ratios by gender. Number of families. Distribution of population by age. Distribution of the population by class. Nobility. Clergy. Merchants. Workshops. Bourgeois. Working class in cities. Citizens of Courland cities. Rural people. Peasant tenants and peasant workers. Kings of Courland (Kurische Konige). Military classes. Distribution of residents by religion. Distribution of residents by tribe. Population movement. Population growth. Number of births and deaths. Number of marriages. Accommodation of residents 170
  • INDUSTRY 226
    • A) agriculture 226
      • a) Plowing 226
        • A general view of the province in economic terms. Circumstances that had an impact on the development of agriculture in general. Kurland Credit Society. The transition from corvée contracts to monetary labor contracts. Propagation of the multifield system. The value of land property. Distribution of land by economic use and ownership. Number of estates. Productive rural population. Sowing and harvest. Distribution of collected products. Prices of different types of bread. Carrying out field work. Drainage. Crop rotations. Agricultural tools. Fertilizing the land. Sowing and harvesting rye, wheat, barley, oats, peas, potatoes, turnips, clover. Drying and threshing. Economic structure of the names. Kazed estates 226
      • b) Meadow farming 270
        • Condition of natural meadows. Improving them with temporary floods and artificial irrigation. Amount of hay collected. Calculation of the required amount of hay based on the number of available livestock. Straw collection 270
      • c) Vegetable gardening 275
      • d) Gardening 275
      • e) Cultivation of flax and hemp 276
        • Amount of flax and hemp collected. Development of this industry in various areas. Sowing and harvesting time 276
      • f) Forestry 278
        • Previous and current conditions of this industry. Number of forests. State forest dachas. Composition of tall and short-trunked forests by tree species. Measures taken to preserve and collect forests. Forest supervision. New plantings. Use of forests. Forestry foreign trade. Shipbuilding. Race of tar and tar. Forest consumption for fuel 278
      • g) Cattle breeding 286
        • The current development of this industry. Cattle. Its species, quantity and distribution by area. Maintenance and food supply of livestock, both dairy and intended for slaughter. Stables. Income from dairy cattle. Diseases. Horse breeding. Number of horses and distribution by area. Breeds. Sheep farming, Distribution of fine-wool sheep. Breeds and content. The amount of wool and income received from fine and simple sheep. Goats. Pigs. Backyard birds 286
      • h) Beekeeping 296
      • i) Hunting for animals and birds 296
      • i) Fishing 296
      • j) Extraction of earth and rocks 298
    • b) manufacturing industry; factory and factory 300
      • Development of this industry in general. The number of plants and factories and the value of their production. The number of masters, apprentices and workers employed at factories and factories. Factories and factories that produce products from the kingdom of life. Tanneries. Candle and soap factories. Saddlery Factories. - Processing works from the plant kingdom. Tobacco and cigar, tape, oil and writing paper factories. Rope factories, starch factories, cooper factories, distilleries, breweries and vodka factories. - Processing works from the fossil kingdom. Button and iron foundry factories. Factory of clay products. Glass factory. Chemical plant. Copper smelting, brick, lime and tar factories. Flour mills. Shipbuilding. Craft industry. Number of artisans. Peasant crafts 300
    • c) barter or trade industry 325
      • A general view of the state of trade in the past and present 325
      • a) Internal trade 328
        • List of goods sold by the Courland province to other provinces and abroad. Listing of goods received from other provinces and from abroad. Main trading points. Movement of goods by shipping and rafting along p.p. Dvina and Kurland Aa. The number of merchants and their capital. Markets and fairs. Number of shops and other commercial establishments. Local counting units of measures, weights and numbers used in trade. Trade prices for essential life supplies in various places 328
      • b) Foreign trade 340
        • Foreign trade points. The value of goods sold and brought in. The value of goods sold to different states, and the value of goods brought from different states. The number of ships arriving and departing at the Libau and Vindava ports. The main items of release and import Separately at Libau, Vindava and Polangen customs. Coastal shipping. Number of trading houses. Number of duties. Smuggling trade and measures taken against it. The value of seized contraband goods. Transit trade 340
  • EDUCATION 370
    • RELIGIOUS EDUCATION 370
      • A general view of the religious beliefs of Latvians, the relationship of the Orthodox clergy to schismatics and other religions. Schism in Lutheranism. Spiritual administrations and churches: according to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Lutheran faiths, Jewish faith 370
    • MENTAL EDUCATION 381
      • Number of colleges and public schools, teachers and students. The ratio of the number of the latter to the number of souls of different classes and religions. Methods of maintaining schools. Educational means of the Courland Directorate. Public schools. Educational aids. Courland Provincial Museum, libraries, bookstores, printing houses and lithographs, newspapers and periodicals, learned societies 381
    • Moral education 389
      • A general view of the state of folk morality. Number of criminal offenses and criminals. The distribution of the latter by class, by gender, by age, by religion and by family union. Punishments according to sentences of courts and secular communities. The number of deserters, vagrants and prisoners. Manners and customs, folk holidays, local beliefs and prejudices 389
  • Office 418
    • Edge management order. Places and institutions operating under the general laws of the Empire, and places and institutions based on special local regulations. Administrative division of the province. Staffing expenses for the maintenance of public offices and various departments. Number of officials, persons in different ministries. Description of provincial and district institutions: for the Ministry of Internal Affairs, for the Ministry of Justice, for the Ministry of State Property, for the Main Directorate of Communications and Public Buildings, for the Ministry of Finance, for the Ministry of Public Education, for the Main Postal Administration, for the Telegraph Directorate, for the Military Department , according to the gendarme corps. Private review of government and public institutions. Charitable institutions. Correctional facilities. Institutions for providing food to the people. Medical institutions. State taxes. Arrears. Government revenues 418
  • DESCRIPTION OF CITIES AND OTHER WONDERFUL PLACES 456
    • General information about cities. The time of establishment of city administrations in the Courland cities. Amount of land owned by cities. Number of houses and number of inhabitants. City revenues, expenses and reserve capital. Fire department and housing duties. Description of the cities: Mitau, Bauska, Friedrichstadt, Jacobstadt, Tukum, Goldingen, Vindava, Pilten, Hasenpot, Grobin and Libau. Description of towns and other wonderful places in the province 456
  • ADD 501
    • About geodetic and astronomical work carried out in the province 501
    • Information about topographic works 503
    • Information about hydrographic work on the Courland shores of the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Riga 504

I [Map of K. province. see Map of Kovno and Courland provinces] one of the three Baltic (Baltic) provinces of Russia, between 55°41 and 57°451/2 N. w. It borders N with the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Riga, NE and E with the Gulf of Riga, Livonia and Vitebsk... ...

According to the 1897 census, there were 674,034 residents (male 326,252, female 347,782), including 155,761 in cities. For the distribution of residents in individual counties (according to preliminary calculations), see Art. Russia. There are 506 thousand Latvians, 51 thousand Germans, 38 thousand Russians (of which 12 thousand... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron

Courland adjective from the name "Courland", a historical region of Latvia. The Courland colonization of America created a colony on the Guinea coast of James Island in the West Indies. On May 20, 1654, Captain Willem Mollens announced... ... Wikipedia

The street runs from Drovyanaya Street to Stepan Razin Street between Rizhsky Avenue and Obvodny Canal. Initially, it reached the Black River (now the Ekateringofka River) and since 1798 it was called Zagorodny Avenue. Then it was the outskirts... ... St. Petersburg (encyclopedia)

See also: Colonization of America Courland colonial empire (1654 1659 and 1660 1661) ... Wikipedia

The general name for the highest local administrative unit. According to the definition of A.D. Gradovsky, a city is a space of land within which authorities directly subordinate to the central government operate. In Western Europe the highest local... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron

The highest unit of administrative division and local structure in Russia, which took shape in the 18th century. under Peter 1 in the process of organizing an absolutist state. By decree of 1708 the country was divided into 8 cities: St. Petersburg (until 1710... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Province of the Russian Empire ... Wikipedia

Uusimaa Province (Finnish: Uudenmaan lääni, Swedish: Nylands län) is a province (Läani) of Finland that existed from 1831 to 1997. Until 1917 it was called the Nyland province of the Grand Duchy of Finland ... Wikipedia

Books

  • Materials for the geography and statistics of Russia, collected by officers of the General Staff. Courland province. , . The book is a reprint of 1862. Despite the fact that serious work has been done to restore the original quality of the publication, some pages may...
  • Proceedings of local committees. Volume 18. Courland province, . Reproduced in the original author's spelling of the 1903 edition (St. Petersburg publishing house)…


Related publications: