Student Griboedov analysis. Student forever and ever

Pypin (Alexander Nikolaevich)

Well-known researcher of Russian literature and the public. Born in 1833 in Saratov, in noble family. He studied at the Saratov gymnasium, at Kazan (first year) and St. Petersburg universities, where he graduated in 1853 as a candidate in the Faculty of History and Philology. While still a student, he published his first work - “Dictionary to the Novgorod Chronicle”, in the “Collection of the Academy of Sciences” (1852, No. 3). This was participation in the work on the dictionary of the ancient Russian language undertaken by I.I. Sreznevsky, and where the other participants were P.A. Lavrovsky and others. Pypin's first journal article was a study about the 18th century playwright Lukin ("Notes of the Fatherland", 1853; repeated during the collection of works by Lukin and Elchaninov, St. Petersburg, 1868); this was an excerpt from him PhD thesis. Since then, he has taken a fairly active part in Otechestvennye Zapiski with reviews and articles on the history of literature. Concentrating his studies on ancient Russian stories, Pypin in 1857 defended his master's thesis "Essay on the literary history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales." Here for the first time the history of the Russian story is given, starting with borrowings from Byzantine and South Slavic sources and ending with stories that developed under Western influence, and the first attempts at an original everyday story of the 17th century. The author used handwritten collections Public library and the Rumyantsev Museum, which were still little known at that time. Some ancient stories were first studied by Pypin, and some ("Devgenie's Act", "The Tale of Misfortune") were even discovered for the first time by him while studying collections. Pypin's "essay" constituted an era in the development of the history of Russian stories. Further work in this area greatly expanded the study of the subject, but Pypin's work was the starting point for new researchers. In 1858, Pypin was sent abroad for two years to prepare for the department of history. European literatures. During this trip, he visited, among other things, Slavic lands (2 travel essays- “From Venice” and “From Florence” appeared in Sovremennik in 1859). On his return he was appointed acting professor extraordinary and in 1860/61 academic year lectured on the history of Provençal and medieval French literature. In November 1861, he resigned (simultaneously with Spasovich, Stasyulevich and Boris Utin), due to violation normal life university after student unrest caused by the introduction of new rules (matricules) and a mandatory fee for listening to lectures for all students. Since 1863, Pypin took part in Sovremennik. He was a member of the magazine's editorial board, and somewhat later (from 1865 until its suspension in 1866) - its executive editor (together with Nekrasov). Pypin's work on the apocrypha dates back to the early 60s, to which he was one of the first Russian scientists to pay attention. The fruit of their study was the publication of “False and renounced books of Russian antiquity” (1861), in the third volume of “Monuments of Ancient Russian Literature.” An explanation for the publication was published in the “Russian Word” of 1862, and a study about the ancient article about the books of true and false was published in the “Chronicle of the Studies of the Archaeographical Commission” (1862, issue 1). This is the end scientific works Pypin in the field of old Russian writing, to which he only returned in passing in the 80s, publishing the books: “Consolidated Old Believer Synodik” (St. Petersburg, 1883), “From the history of a folk story” (St. Petersburg, 1887), “ For lovers of book antiquities" (Moscow, 1888) and "Forgeries of manuscripts and folk songs"(St. Petersburg, 1898). From the mid-60s, and especially after the closure of Sovremennik, Pypin for some time diligently engaged in translation activities. Partly under his editorship, partly in his translation, historical, literary and historical works Scherr, Gettner, Draper, Lecky, Taine, Rochau, Bentham. Together with him he translated "History of the Inductive Sciences" by Wevel. In the 90s, edited by Pypin, “History German literature"Scherer and Guyot's "Art from the Point of View of Sociology". In 1865, originally an addition to Scherr's "General History of Literature", a joint work by Pypin and V.D. Spasovich (the latter owns an essay on the history of Polish literature), "Review of the History of Slavic Literatures" was published ". In 1874-1881, this book appeared in the 2nd edition in a significantly revised and expanded form, under the title "History of Slavic Literatures". This major work (translated into German, Czech and French), representing the only detailed account of destinies thousand years of history literature of the Western and Southern Slavs, is extremely remarkable not only as a summary of what has been done in the field of studying the spiritual life of the Slavs, but also truly scientific method to your own. While a significant part of our Slavists, willingly calling themselves Slavophiles in theory, in reality fall into Russophilism and the extremely one-sided imposition of one faith and one “common Slavic” (and in fact Byzantine) worldview on all the Slavs, Pypin treats with the greatest respect and with complete tolerance for the spiritual makeup of each of the individual Slavic nationalities. He is a resolute opponent of the absorption of one nationality by another and proceeds from the ideal of the joint development of universal human culture and national individuals. With the founding of Vestnik Evropy, Pypin (since 1867) became one of its most important and prominent figures, both as a member of the magazine’s editorial board and as the magazine’s most prolific employee. In a rare book, throughout the more than 30-year existence of Vestnik Evropy, there is no one or more articles by Pypin. A significant part of these articles, in revised form, became part of Pypin’s separately published works: “The Social Movement in Russia under Alexander I” (St. Petersburg, 1871; 2nd ed., 1885), “Characteristics of Literary Opinions from 1820 to 50 's" (St. Petersburg, 2nd ed., 1890), "Belinsky, his life and correspondence" (St. Petersburg, 1876), "History of Russian ethnography" (4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1890- 91), “History of Russian Literature” (St. Petersburg, 1898; so far 3 volumes have been published, there will be 4). A special edition was published, in manuscript form and in a small number of copies, “Chronological Index of Russian Lodges, from the first introduction of Freemasonry to its prohibition” (St. Petersburg, 1873). From Pypin's articles in Vestnik Evropy, not included in individual works, more remarkable: “Russian Freemasonry in the 18th century” (1867, vol. II - IV), “Russian Freemasonry before Novikov” (1868, No. 6 and 7), “Krylov and Radishchev” (1868, No. 5), “Feofan Prokopovich and his opponents" (1869, No. 6), "Pan-Slavism in the past and present" (1878, No. 9-12), "Literary Pan-Slavism" (1879, No. 6, 8, 9), "The Polish question in Russian literature" (1880, No. 2, 4, 5, 10, 11), “History of the text of Pushkin’s works” (1887, No. 2), “New explanations of Pushkin” (1887, No. 8, 9), “Review of Russian studies of the Slavs” (1889 , No. 4-6), “The idealism of M.E. Saltykov” (1889, No. 6), “Russian Slavic studies in the 19th century.” (1889, No. 7-9), "Journal activity of M.E. Saltykov" (1889, No. 10-12), " Literary Memoirs" and "Correspondence" (1890, No. 10-12), "Herder" (1890, No. 3 and 4), "New data on Slavic affairs" (1893, No. 6-8). A number of articles and notes on current phenomena literary life published by Pypin in literary reviews"Bulletin of Europe". All of Pypin's listed works are a valuable contribution to our literature. "The Social Movement under Alexander I" is rich in new materials and for the first time provided the whole picture era, previously known from fragmentary data and official impersonal documents. Here the change from the bright hopes of the beginning of Alexander's time to the reactionary-pietistic aspirations of the era of Baroness Krudener, Prince Golitsyn and Arakcheev is clearly depicted. In the early 1870s, the Academy of Sciences elected Pypin as a co-member in the department of Russian history. But due to the energetic opposition of the then Minister of Public Education, Count D.A. Tolstoy - opposition brought to higher spheres, - approval slowed down, and Pypin, in order to end the awkward situation of the institution, refused to be elected. "Characteristics of Literary Opinions from the Twenties to the Fifties" represents the history of Russian literary and social trends. Therefore, here we consider mainly representatives of our theoretical thought: unconditional apologists of the Russian state structure, then Slavophiles, . Of the artists, the author analyzes only the activities of Zhukovsky, Pushkin and Gogol, but not from an aesthetic point of view, but from their socio-political views. The merit of the “Characteristics” is the systematization of Slavophil teaching and the illumination of the theory of “official nationality”. This term was created by Pypin and became established in our historical literature to determine the theory of complete isolation of Russia, which originates from the Minister of Public Education Uvarov, constituting, as it were, a special part of the world, to which demands and aspirations are completely inapplicable European life and which is strong by the immobility of its foundations political system. The main objection that the author opposes to the one-sidedness of Slavophilism and the theory of “official nationality” is that “nationality, as a historical element, is capable of modification and improvement, and this is precisely the possibility and hope of national success.” Given the immobility of its foundations, Russia would not have borrowed Christianity from Byzantium, and the Moscow autocracy would not have replaced the appanage life of the veche. The biography, published in parts in the "Bulletin of Europe" in 1874-1875, at one time attracted extraordinary attention. It gives detailed and completely new information not only about himself, but also about his friends - and many others, extracted from their correspondence, made public here for the first time. The search and systematization of correspondence constitutes a major service to the history of Russian literature. The letters found by Pypin introduced us into a world of unprecedented spiritual beauty and produced strong impression. Everyone knew until now - criticism, but now such a radiant image of a man-fighter for his ideas emerged that it was impossible not to love even more -writer. The opinion was created that the letters Pypin found, who freely reflected here in all the purity and ideality of his high spirit, are almost more valuable than in his articles, where he was constrained by the press conditions of that time. - “The History of Russian Ethnography” gives much more than its special title. The author includes in his work, which amazes with erudition, not only ethnographers in in the narrow sense this word, but also all researchers of Russian folk art- Sakharov, Buslaev, Afanasyev, Veselovsky and others, and even all the theorists of the question of nationality, right down to the “populist” publicists of the 80s and 90s, like the late Kablitz-Yuzov. In connection with the fact that detailed biographies and characteristics of a long series of Russian scientists and publicists are given here, Pypin’s work is one of our most thorough historical and literary aids. In the "History of Russian Literature" there is nothing ordinary in the essays this kind narrative element. Brief biographical information is provided only in the notes to individual chapters. The task of the essay is to note the main literary movements. Its merit is that this is the first set huge amount special studies of the last 20 - 30 years, often not leading to any general conclusions. Pypin is only interested in general contours, the big picture the course of Russian literature, presented here for the first time in such relief. Much that eluded the attention of special studies that delved into details is brought to the fore here. This is, for example, in volume III the picture of mental excitement in Moscow on the eve of Peter’s reform, showing that this reform was not at all a sharp change, that it represented only the spectacular completion of a whole series of preparatory attempts. Each of Pypin's 7 major works, which together amount to 15 volumes (Pypin's journal articles collected together will amount to at least as many volumes), would be absolutely enough to provide him with a very prominent place in the history of Russian scholarship. The ownership of all these works, so highly authoritative, by one person is an almost unprecedented phenomenon in our scientific world. That is why public opinion, regardless of direction, greeted with particular sympathy at the end of 1897 the news that the Academy of Sciences, after 26 years, had again elected Pypin as a fellow member. This time, Pypin's election as an ordinary academician (department of Russian language and literature) was approved. Died in 1904.

PYPIN Alexander Nikolaevich

(25.III.1833 - 26.XI.1904) - Russian historian. society thoughts, Russian researcher And foreign literature and folklore. Academician (since 1896). From the nobles Cousin. In 1853 he graduated from St. Petersburg. univ. From the beginning 60s began to collaborate in Otechestvennye zapiski and Sovremennik, from 1866 - in Vestnik Evropy, on the editorial board of which he was approx. 40 years. Works by P. 60s. are dedicated to ch. arr. research of other Russian stories. In the 70s wrote a number of works on the history of societies. thoughts. P. considered literature as part of societies. history as an illustration of societies. movements. Socio-political P.'s views as a whole did not go beyond the framework of liberal enlightenment and moderate democracy. P.'s interest in the people and people. everyday life is reflected in ethnographic. P.'s works are of interest as a consolidated work, which sets out the views of all prominent writers, critics, scientists, and publicists on the problem of people and nationality. By the subject of ethnography, P. understood folk-poetic. views and ritual life of the people.

Works: Essay lit. history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales, St. Petersburg, 1857; Historical essays. Society movement in Russia under Alexander I, 2nd ed., St. Petersburg, 1885; Characteristics of lit. opinions from the twenties to the fifties, St. Petersburg, 1906; Belinsky, his life and correspondence, vol. 1-2, St. Petersburg, 1876; History of Russian literature, vol. 1-4, 2nd ed., St. Petersburg, 1902-03; History of Russian ethnography, vol. 1-4, St. Petersburg, 1890-92; M. E. Saltykov, St. Petersburg, 1899; Rus. Freemasonry XVIII and first quarter. XIX century, P., 1916; Relig. movements under Alexander I, P., 1916; Nekrasov, St. Petersburg, 1905.

Lit.: ., A. N. Pypin. His scientific merits and societies. views, "Bulletin of Education", 1905, No. 4; Glagolev N., On the criticism of the historical and cultural school (Pypin, Gettner, Ten), "Russian language in the Soviet school", 1931, No. 4, 5; Steklov Yu. M., Pypin’s note on the Chernyshevsky case, “KA”, 1927, vol. 3(22); List of works of academician Pypin, 1853-1903, comp. Ya. L. Barskov, St. Petersburg, 1903.

Soviet historical encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ed. E. M. Zhukova. 1973-1982.

Pypin Alexander Nikolaevich

Russian scientist, literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (1898). From the nobles. Graduated from St. Petersburg University (1853). From 1863 he actively collaborated with Sovremennik; from 1867 - in the "Bulletin of Europe". In his youth he experienced the ideological influence of (See Chernyshevsky) (his cousin), and later became a supporter of moderately liberal, educational views. As a representative of the cultural historical school(See cultural-historical school) fiction interested P. exclusively in connection with the history of social thought. Author of fundamental works: “History of Russian Literature” (4th ed., vol. 1-4, 1911-1913), “History of Russian Ethnography” (vol. 1-4, 1890-92), “History of Slavic Literatures” (2nd ed. ., vol. 1-2, 1879-81, together with V.D. Spasovich), which incorporated enormous, in many cases completely original, factual material. With his scientific research, P. made a significant contribution to the study of the Old Russian story, Freemasonry, and the literary and social movement in Russia in the first half of the 19th century.

Works: Essay on the literary history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales, St. Petersburg, 1857; M. E. Saltykov. Saltykov's idealism. Journal activities. 1863-1864, St. Petersburg, 1899; N. A. Nekrasov, St. Petersburg, 1905; Social movement in Russia under Alexander I, 4th ed., St. Petersburg, 1908; Belinsky. His life and correspondence, 2nd ed., vol. 1-2, St. Petersburg, 1908; Characteristics of literary opinions from the 20s to the 50s, 4th ed., St. Petersburg, 1909.

Lit.: List of works of academician A. N. Pypin. Comp. Ya. L. Barskov, St. Petersburg, 1903; Fiftieth anniversary of scientific literary activity A. N. Pypina, “Literary Bulletin”, 1903, No. 3; Veselovsky A. N., A. N. Pypin, St. Petersburg, 1905; , A. N. Pypin, M., 1905; Tkachenko P. S., New materials about A. N. Pypin, “Russian Literature”, 1967, No. 4.

V. I. Maslovsky.

Great Soviet Encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1969-1978.

Pypin, Alexander Nikolaevich

Well-known researcher of Russian literature and the public. Genus. in 1833 in Saratov, in a noble family. He studied at the Saratov gymnasium, in Kazan (first year) and St. Petersburg. universities, where he graduated from the course in 1853 as a candidate in the Faculty of History and Philology. While still a student, he published his first work - a Dictionary to the Novgorod Chronicle, in the "Collection of the Academy of Sciences" (1852, No. 3). This was participation in the work on the dictionary of the ancient Russian language undertaken by I. I. Sreznevsky, and where other participants were N. G. Chernyshevsky, P. A. Lavrovsky and others. P.’s first journal article was a study about the playwright of the 18th century. Lukin ("Notes of the Fatherland", 1853; repeated in the collected works of Lunin and Elchaninov, St. Petersburg, 1868); it was an excerpt from his Ph.D. thesis. Since then, he has taken a fairly active part in Otechestvennye Zapiski, writing reviews and articles on the history of literature. Concentrating his studies on ancient Russian stories, P. in 1867 defended his master's thesis: “Essay on the literary history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales.” Here, for the first time, the history of the Russian story is given, starting with borrowings from Byzantine and South Slavic sources and ending with stories that developed under Western influence, and the first attempts at an original everyday story of the 17th century. The author used handwritten collections from the Public Library and the Rumyantsev Museum, which were still little known at that time. Some ancient stories were studied for the first time by P., and some ("Devgenie's Act", "The Tale of Misfortune") were even discovered for the first time by him while studying collections. P.'s "essay" constituted an era in the development of the history of Russian stories. Further work in this area greatly expanded the study of the subject, but P.’s work was the starting point for new researchers. In 1858, P. was sent abroad for two years to prepare for the department of history of European literature. During this trip, he visited, among other things, the Slavic lands (two travel essays - “From Venice” and “From Florence” appeared in Sovremennik in 1859). On his return he was appointed acting professor extraordinary and in the academic year 1860-61 lectured on the history of Provençal and medieval French literature. In November 1861, he resigned (at the same time as Kavelin, Spasovich, Stasyulevich and Boris Utin), due to the disruption of the normal life of the university after student unrest caused by the introduction of new rules (matricules) and a mandatory fee for listening to lectures for all students.

Since 1863, P. took part in Sovremennik. He was a member of the magazine's editorial board, and somewhat later (from 1865 until its suspension in 1866) - its executive editor (together with Nekrasov). By the beginning of the 60s. include P.’s work on the apocrypha, to which he was one of the first Russian scientists to pay attention. The fruit of their study was the publication of “False and renounced books of Russian antiquity” (1861), in the third volume of “Monuments of Ancient Russian Literature.” Explanations for the publication were published in the “Russian Word” of 1862, and a study about the ancient article, about true and false books was published in the “Chronicle of the Studies of the Archaeographical Commission” (1862, issue I). This ended P.’s scientific work in the field of old Russian writing, to which he only returned in passing in the 80s, publishing the books: “Consolidated Old Believer Synodik” (St. Petersburg, 1883), “From the history of a folk story” (St. Petersburg, 1887 ), “For lovers of book antiquities” (M., 1888) and “Forgeries of manuscripts and folk songs” (St. Petersburg, 1898).

Since the mid-60s. and especially after the closure of Sovremennik, P. diligently engaged in translation work for some time. Partly under his editorship, partly in his translation, the historical, literary and historical works of Scherr, Hettner, Draper, Lecky, Taine, Rochau, and Bentham appeared. Together with M. A. Antonovich, he translated “History of Inductive Sciences” by Uevel. In the 90s edited by P. published “The History of German Literature” by Scherer and “Art from the Point of View of Sociology” by Guyot. In 1865, a joint work by P. and V.D. Spasovich (the latter wrote an essay on the history of Polish literature): “Review of the History of Slavic Literatures” was published, originally an addition to Scherr’s “General History of Literature.” In 1874-81. This book appeared in the 2nd edition in a significantly revised and expanded form, under the title: “History of Slavic Literatures.” This major work (translated into German, Czech and French), which is the only detailed presentation of the fate of the thousand-year history of the literature of the Western and Southern Slavs, is extremely remarkable not only as a summary of what has been done in the field of studying the spiritual life of the Slavs, but also according to his true scientific method. While a significant part of our Slavists, willingly calling themselves in theory Slavic philami, actually falls into ruso philism and the extremely one-sided imposition of one faith and one “common Slavic” (and in fact Byzantine) worldview on the entire Slavic people, P. treats with the greatest respect and complete tolerance the spiritual make-up of each of the individual Slavic nationalities. He is a resolute opponent of the absorption of one nationality by another and proceeds from the ideal of the joint development of universal human culture and national individuals.

With the founding of the "Bulletin of Europe" P. (since 1867) became one of its most important and prominent figures, both as a member of the editorial board of the magazine and as the most prolific employee of the magazine. In a rare book, throughout the more than 30-year existence of the "Bulletin of Europe", there is no one or more articles by P. A significant part of these articles, in revised form, was included in the separately published works of P.: "The social movement in Russia under Alexander I" (St. Petersburg, 1871; 2nd ed., 1885), "Characteristics of literary opinions from 1820 to the 50s" (St. Petersburg, 2nd ed., 1890), "Belinsky, his life and correspondence "(St. Petersburg, 1876), "History of Russian Ethnography" (4 volumes, St. Petersburg, 1890-91), "History of Russian Literature" (St. Petersburg, 1898; so far 3 volumes have been published, there will be 4 of them). A special edition was published, in manuscript form and in a small number of copies, “Chronological Index of Russian Lodges, from the first introduction of Freemasonry to its prohibition” (St. Petersburg, 1873). Of P.'s articles in the "Bulletin of Europe", which were not included in separate works, the most remarkable are: "Russian Freemasonry in the 18th century." (1867, vol. II-IV), “Russian Freemasonry before Novikov” (1868, nos. 6 and 7), “Krylov and Radishchev” (1868, no. 5), “Feofan Prokopovich and his opponents” (1869, no. 6 ), “Pan-Slavism in the past and present” (1878, Nos. 9-12), “Literary Pan-Slavism” (1879, Nos. 6, 8, 9), “The Polish question in Russian literature” (1880, Nos. 2, 4 , 5, 10, 11), “History of the text of Pushkin’s works” (1887, No. 2), “New explanations of Pushkin” (1887, No. 8, 9), “Review of Russian studies of the Slavs” (1889, No. 4-6 ), "The Idealism of M. E. Saltykov" (1889, No. 6), "Russian Slavic Studies in the 19th Century" (1889, Nos. 7-9), "Journal Activities of M. E. Saltykov" (1889; No. 10- 12), “Literary Memoirs” and “Correspondence” (1890, nos. 10-12), “Herder” (1890, nos. 3 and 4), “New Data on Slavic Affairs” (1893, nos. 6-8) . A number of articles and notes on current phenomena in literary life were published by P. in the literary reviews of Vestnik Evropy. All of P.'s listed works are a valuable contribution to our literature. “The Social Movement under Alexander I” is rich in new materials and for the first time gave a complete picture of the era, previously known from fragmentary data and official impersonal documents. Here the replacement of the bright hopes of the beginning of Alexander's time with the reactionary-pietistic aspirations of the era of Baroness Krudener, Prince Golitsyn and Arakcheev is clearly depicted.

In the early 1870s. The Academy of Sciences elected P. as its co-member in the department of Russian history. But as a result of the energetic opposition of the then Minister of Public Education, Count D. A. Tolstoy - opposition brought to the highest spheres - approval slowed down, and P., in order to stop the awkward situation of the institution, refused to be elected.

"Characteristics of Literary Opinions from the Twenties to the Fifties" represents the history of Russian literary and social trends. Therefore, here we consider mainly representatives of our theoretical thought: unconditional apologists of the Russian state structure, then Chaadaev, Slavophiles, Belinsky. Of the artists, the author analyzes only the activities of Zhukovsky, Pushkin and Gogol, but not from an aesthetic point of view, but from their socio-political views. The merit of the “Characteristics” is the systematization of Slavophil teaching and the illumination of the theory of “official nationality”. This term was created by P. and established itself in our historical literature to define the theory of complete isolation of Russia, which originated from the Minister of Public Education Uvarov, constituting, as it were, a special part of the world, to which the demands and aspirations of European life are completely inapplicable and which is strong in the immobility of the foundations of its state system . The main objection that the author opposes to the one-sidedness of Slavophilism and the theory of “official nationality” is that “nationality, as an element historical, is capable of modification and improvement, and this is precisely the possibility and hope of national success." Given the immobility of the foundations, Russia would not have borrowed Christianity from Byzantium, and the Moscow autocracy would not have replaced the appanage veche life. Belinsky's biography, published in parts in the "Vestnik" Europe" 1874 and 75, at one time attracted extraordinary attention. It provides detailed and completely new information not only about Belinsky himself, but also his friends - Stankevich, Vas. Botkin, Herzen, Bakunin and many others, extracted from their correspondence, published here for the first time. The search and systematization of Belinsky's correspondence constitutes a major service to the history of Russian literature. Belinsky's letters, found by P., introduced into the world of unprecedented spiritual beauty and made a strong impression. Everyone knew Belinsky the critic until now, but now such a radiant image of a man who fought for his ideas emerged that one could not help but love even more than Belinsky the writer. The opinion was created that Belinsky’s letters found by Pypin, freely reflected here in all the purity and ideality of his high spirit, were almost more valuable than in his articles, where he was constrained by the press conditions of that time.

"The History of Russian Ethnography" gives much more than its special title. The author includes in his work, striking in erudition, not only ethnographers in the narrow sense of the word, but also all researchers of Russian folk art - Sakharov, Buslaev, Afanasyev, Veselovsky, etc., and even all theorists of the question of nationality, right down to the "populists" publicists 80s and 90s, like the late Kablitz-Yuzov. In connection with the fact that detailed biographies and characteristics of a long series of Russian scientists and publicists are given here, P.’s work is one of our most important historical and literary aids. The History of Russian Literature does not contain the usual narrative element in works of this kind. Brief biographical information appears only in the notes to individual chapters. The purpose of the essay is to highlight the main literary currents. Its merit is that it is the first summary of a huge number of special studies of the last 20-30 years, which often do not come to any general conclusions. P. is interested only in the general contours, the general picture of the course of Russian literature, presented here for the first time in such relief. Much that eluded the attention of special studies that delved into details is brought to the fore here. This is, for example, in volume III the picture of mental excitement in Moscow on the eve of Peter’s reform, showing that this reform was not at all a sharp change, that it represented only the spectacular completion of a whole series of preparatory attempts.

Each of P.'s 7 major works, which together make up 15 volumes [Collected together, P.'s journal articles will amount to no less than a number of volumes.], would be absolutely enough to provide him with a very prominent place in the history of Russian scholarship. The ownership of all these works, so highly authoritative, by one person is an almost unprecedented phenomenon in our scientific world. That is why public opinion, regardless of direction, greeted with particular sympathy at the end of 1897 the news that the Academy of Sciences, after 26 years, had again elected P. as a member. This time, P.'s election as an ordinary academician (department of Russian language and literature) was approved.

S. Vengerov.

(Brockhaus)

Pypin, Alexander Nikolaevich (addition to the article)

Researcher of Russian history, literature and public opinion; died 1904

(Brockhaus)

Pypin, Alexander Nikolaevich

The largest representative of the cultural-historical school in literary criticism ( cm."Methods of pre-Marxist literary criticism"). Genus. in a noble family. He studied at the Saratov gymnasium, Kazan and St. Petersburg high school. The first printed work is excerpts from a candidate's dissertation about Vl. Lukin. Since 1857 - Master of Russian Literature. 1858-1860 spent on a business trip abroad; 1860-1861 - professor at St. Petersburg University in the department of general literature. In 1861 he resigned as a result of reactionary government pressure on the university. After leaving the university, he went into magazine work. He worked at Sovremennik until its closure, was a member of the editorial board, and for some time was the executive editor. In 1866 he began publishing in the newly opened Vestnik Evropy, maintaining a close connection with it until the end of his life. In 1871 he was elected academician, but on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Education, Count. D. Tolstoy's election was not approved by the tsar. He became an academician for the second time and finally in 1898.

P.'s scientific interests were extremely diverse: history of the Russian language, paleography, folklore, ancient Russian literature, Russian literature of the 18th - 19th centuries, historiography. Besides scientific activity P. is also significant as an editor, translator, and popularizer. Possessing exceptional erudition and ability to work, P. left a large number of scientific works.

P. is one of the most prominent representatives of the liberal-bourgeois enlightenment, who propagated the ideas of the comprehensive Europeanization of Russia, the expansion of education, the gradual elimination of the remnants of serfdom, etc. In his philosophical views, P. was closest to positivism. Following Taine, P. brought to the fore the concepts of “race” and “environment”, and in a completely Taine-like spirit he interpreted the question of " national character". IN historical works acted as an idealist. Social relations P. was everywhere considered as a simple consequence of the spread famous opinions. P. attached decisive importance to “the influence on the masses of the educated classes,” believing that without this the masses would be left without “moral support” and almost without the opportunity to consciously participate in the “higher interests national development"("Characteristics of literary opinions", p. 243). In the system of his views on the course historical development Pypin took a big step back compared to Chernyshevsky.

Considering literature as a social activity, P. opposed the so-called theorists. "pure art" (P.'s first such performance - critical article about Miliukov's book "Essay on the history of Russian poetry"). II. considered literature as an expression of national self-consciousness, recognized the journalistic element as a completely legitimate element of “literary history”, noted special role literature in the education of society, etc. However, in his interpretation of the views of Belinsky and Chernyshevsky on the tasks of literature and art, P. dulled their revolutionary edge, emasculated their revolutionary democratic content, speaking from the position of liberal-bourgeois enlightenment. While for Chernyshevsky the expression of “national self-awareness in literature” was a radical negation of existing social orders, which served powerful weapon in the fight against the regime of the Russian autocracy in preparing masses To overthrow it, Pypin did not go further than moderate-liberal demands. It should also be borne in mind that P.'s liberalism, most clearly manifested during the period of his collaboration in Sovremennik, subsequently faded thoroughly. In a liberal spirit, P. interpreted the program of “old Russian peasant socialism” (“My Notes”), as a liberal he assessed both the historical meaning and significance of the peasant revolution, speaking in his article about Saltykov with apologetics Russian nobility, the singer of the progressive aspirations of his “enlightened and generous part,” etc. Pypin had a sharply negative attitude towards the revolutionary methods of struggle of populism in the 70s, which was especially clearly reflected in his articles about Saltykov.

In my understanding of the specifics fiction P. also took a big step back compared to Belinsky, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov. In “Characteristics,” speaking about the significance of Belinsky’s historical and literary activity, Pypin stated that the history of literature is now becoming the history not so much of literature itself, but of the history of education public life, "morals". The boundaries separating literature from other areas of ideology were like this. arr. completely lost, and the content of literary criticism as a science became blurred in the boundless sea of ​​questions included integral part into cultural history. It is not surprising that P. charged Belinsky that “because of artistic interest literature did not see its greatest historical and cultural interest" (Introduction to the History of Russian Literature, p. 12). P. revealed here both a misunderstanding of the revolutionary-democratic partisanship of Belinsky’s criticism, and a misunderstanding of the specifics artistic creativity. There is no reason to consider P., as some researchers do (Sakulin, Shchegolev, etc.), as a successor and interpreter of Chernyshevsky’s views. P. had a family relationship with Chernyshevsky, which he did not stop even after the autocracy’s reprisal against Chernyshevsky, continuing to maintain active correspondence with him and showing great concern about his family. Chernyshevsky’s influence on the formation of P.’s views is undeniable. However, it is equally indisputable that Pypin did not share the revolutionary-democratic program for overthrowing the autocratic-serf system and in his works acted as a typical representative of moderate liberalism.

P.’s works had big influence on Russian literary criticism. Up to October revolution The cultural-historical school, of which P. was the largest representative, retained its dominance in the science of literature. Shakhov, Istrin, Vengerov, Sakulin, Piksanov and many others can be considered P.’s students. etc. Currently, P.’s liberal-bourgeois works have known value in its factual part.

Bibliography: I. Essay on the literary history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales, St. Petersburg, 1857; Review of the history of Slavic literatures, St. Petersburg, 1865 (ed. 2, in a significantly expanded and revised form, 2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1874-1881, with the participation of V. D. Spasovich according to Polish literature); Social movement in Russia under Alexander I, St. Petersburg, 1871 (ed. 5, P., 1918); Characteristics of literary opinions from the 20s to the 50s, St. Petersburg, 1875 (ed. 4, 1907); Belinsky, his life and correspondence, 2 vols., 1876 (ed. 2; 1908); History of Russian literature, 4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1898-1899 (ed. 4, СІІБ, 1911-1913); History of Russian ethnography, 4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1890-1892; M. E. Saltykov. Saltykov's idealism. Journal activity, St. Petersburg, 1899; N. A. Nekrasov, St. Petersburg, 1905; My notes, M., 1910; Panslavism in the past and present, St. Petersburg, 1913; Russian Freemasonry of the 18th and first quarter of the 19th centuries, P., 1916; Religious movements under Alexander I, P., 1916; Essays on literature and the public under Alexander I, P., 1917; Journal articles published in "Bulletin of Europe" in various years: Krylov and Radishchev, 1868, No. 5; Russian Freemasonry before Novikov, 1868, No. 6, 7; History of the text of Pushkin’s works, 1887, No. 2; New explanations of Pushkin, 1887, Nos. 10 and 11; Idealism of M. E. Saltykov, 1889, No. 6; Russian Slavic studies in the 19th century, 1889, No. 7-9; Journal activity of M. E. Saltykov, 1889, No. 10-12.

Well-known researcher of Russian literature and the public. Genus. in 1833 in Saratov, in a noble family. He studied at the Saratov gymnasium, in Kazan (first year) and St. Petersburg. universities, where he graduated from the course in 1853 as a candidate in the Faculty of History and Philology. While still a student, he published his first work - a Dictionary to the Novgorod Chronicle, in the "Collection of the Academy of Sciences" (1852, No. 3). This was participation in the work on the dictionary of the ancient Russian language undertaken by I. I. Sreznevsky, and where other participants were N. G. Chernyshevsky, P. A. Lavrovsky and others. P.’s first journal article was a study about the playwright of the 18th century. Lukin ("Notes of the Fatherland", 1853; repeated in the collected works of Lunin and Elchaninov, St. Petersburg, 1868); it was an excerpt from his Ph.D. thesis. Since then, he has taken a fairly active part in Otechestvennye Zapiski, writing reviews and articles on the history of literature. Concentrating his studies on ancient Russian stories, P. in 1867 defended his master's thesis: “Essay on the literary history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales.” Here, for the first time, the history of the Russian story is given, starting with borrowings from Byzantine and South Slavic sources and ending with stories that developed under Western influence, and the first attempts at an original everyday story of the 17th century. The author used handwritten collections from the Public Library and the Rumyantsev Museum, which were still little known at that time. Some ancient stories were studied for the first time by P., and some ("Devgenie's Act", "The Tale of Misfortune") were even discovered for the first time by him while studying collections. P.'s "essay" constituted an era in the development of the history of Russian stories. Further work in this area greatly expanded the study of the subject, but P.’s work was the starting point for new researchers. In 1858, P. was sent abroad for two years to prepare for the department of history of European literature. During this trip, he visited, among other things, the Slavic lands (two travel essays - “From Venice” and “From Florence” appeared in Sovremennik in 1859). On his return he was appointed acting professor extraordinary and in the academic year 1860-61 lectured on the history of Provençal and medieval French literature. In November 1861, he resigned (at the same time as Kavelin, Spasovich, Stasyulevich and Boris Utin), due to the disruption of the normal life of the university after student unrest caused by the introduction of new rules (matricules) and a mandatory fee for listening to lectures for all students.

Since 1863, P. took part in Sovremennik. He was a member of the magazine's editorial board, and somewhat later (from 1865 until its suspension in 1866) - its executive editor (together with Nekrasov). By the beginning of the 60s. include P.’s work on the apocrypha, to which he was one of the first Russian scientists to pay attention. The fruit of their study was the publication of “False and renounced books of Russian antiquity” (1861), in the third volume of “Monuments of Ancient Russian Literature.” Explanations for the publication were published in the “Russian Word” of 1862, and a study about the ancient article, about true and false books was published in the “Chronicle of the Studies of the Archaeographical Commission” (1862, issue I). This ended P.’s scientific work in the field of old Russian writing, to which he only returned in passing in the 80s, publishing the books: “Consolidated Old Believer Synodik” (St. Petersburg, 1883), “From the history of a folk story” (St. Petersburg, 1887 ), “For lovers of book antiquities” (M., 1888) and “Forgeries of manuscripts and folk songs” (St. Petersburg, 1898).

Since the mid-60s. and especially after the closure of Sovremennik, P. diligently engaged in translation work for some time. Partly under his editorship, partly in his translation, the historical, literary and historical works of Scherr, Hettner, Draper, Lecky, Taine, Rochau, and Bentham appeared. Together with M. A. Antonovich, he translated “History of Inductive Sciences” by Uevel. In the 90s edited by P. published “The History of German Literature” by Scherer and “Art from the Point of View of Sociology” by Guyot. In 1865, a joint work by P. and V.D. Spasovich (the latter wrote an essay on the history of Polish literature): “Review of the History of Slavic Literatures” was published, originally an addition to Scherr’s “General History of Literature.” In 1874-81. This book appeared in the 2nd edition in a significantly revised and expanded form, under the title: “History of Slavic Literatures.” This major work (translated into German, Czech and French), which is the only detailed presentation of the fate of the thousand-year history of the literature of the Western and Southern Slavs, is extremely remarkable not only as a summary of what has been done in the field of studying the spiritual life of the Slavs, but also according to his true scientific method. While a significant part of our Slavists, willingly calling themselves in theory Slavic philami, actually falls into ruso philism and the extremely one-sided imposition of one faith and one “common Slavic” (and in fact Byzantine) worldview on the entire Slavic people, P. treats with the greatest respect and complete tolerance the spiritual make-up of each of the individual Slavic nationalities. He is a resolute opponent of the absorption of one nationality by another and proceeds from the ideal of the joint development of universal human culture and national individuals.

With the founding of the "Bulletin of Europe" P. (since 1867) became one of its most important and prominent figures, both as a member of the editorial board of the magazine and as the most prolific employee of the magazine. In a rare book, throughout the more than 30-year existence of the "Bulletin of Europe", there is no one or more articles by P. A significant part of these articles, in revised form, was included in the separately published works of P.: "The social movement in Russia under Alexander I" (St. Petersburg, 1871; 2nd ed., 1885), "Characteristics of literary opinions from 1820 to the 50s" (St. Petersburg, 2nd ed., 1890), "Belinsky, his life and correspondence "(St. Petersburg, 1876), "History of Russian Ethnography" (4 volumes, St. Petersburg, 1890-91), "History of Russian Literature" (St. Petersburg, 1898; so far 3 volumes have been published, there will be 4 of them). A special edition was published, in manuscript form and in a small number of copies, “Chronological Index of Russian Lodges, from the first introduction of Freemasonry to its prohibition” (St. Petersburg, 1873). Of P.'s articles in the "Bulletin of Europe", which were not included in separate works, the most remarkable are: "Russian Freemasonry in the 18th century." (1867, vol. II-IV), “Russian Freemasonry before Novikov” (1868, nos. 6 and 7), “Krylov and Radishchev” (1868, no. 5), “Feofan Prokopovich and his opponents” (1869, no. 6 ), “Pan-Slavism in the past and present” (1878, Nos. 9-12), “Literary Pan-Slavism” (1879, Nos. 6, 8, 9), “The Polish question in Russian literature” (1880, Nos. 2, 4 , 5, 10, 11), “History of the text of Pushkin’s works” (1887, No. 2), “New explanations of Pushkin” (1887, No. 8, 9), “Review of Russian studies of the Slavs” (1889, No. 4-6 ), "The Idealism of M. E. Saltykov" (1889, No. 6), "Russian Slavic Studies in the 19th Century" (1889, Nos. 7-9), "Journal Activities of M. E. Saltykov" (1889; No. 10- 12), “Literary Memoirs” and “Correspondence” (1890, nos. 10-12), “Herder” (1890, nos. 3 and 4), “New Data on Slavic Affairs” (1893, nos. 6-8) . A number of articles and notes on current phenomena in literary life were published by P. in the literary reviews of Vestnik Evropy. All of P.'s listed works are a valuable contribution to our literature. “The Social Movement under Alexander I” is rich in new materials and for the first time gave a complete picture of the era, previously known from fragmentary data and official impersonal documents. Here the replacement of the bright hopes of the beginning of Alexander's time with the reactionary-pietistic aspirations of the era of Baroness Krudener, Prince Golitsyn and Arakcheev is clearly depicted.

In the early 1870s. The Academy of Sciences elected P. as its co-member in the department of Russian history. But as a result of the energetic opposition of the then Minister of Public Education, Count D. A. Tolstoy - opposition brought to the highest spheres - approval slowed down, and P., in order to stop the awkward situation of the institution, refused to be elected.

"Characteristics of Literary Opinions from the Twenties to the Fifties" represents the history of Russian literary and social trends. Therefore, here we consider mainly representatives of our theoretical thought: unconditional apologists of the Russian state structure, then Chaadaev, Slavophiles, Belinsky. Of the artists, the author analyzes only the activities of Zhukovsky, Pushkin and Gogol, but not from an aesthetic point of view, but from their socio-political views. The merit of the “Characteristics” is the systematization of Slavophil teaching and the illumination of the theory of “official nationality”. This term was created by P. and established itself in our historical literature to define the theory of complete isolation of Russia, which originated from the Minister of Public Education Uvarov, constituting, as it were, a special part of the world, to which the demands and aspirations of European life are completely inapplicable and which is strong in the immobility of the foundations of its state system . The main objection that the author opposes to the one-sidedness of Slavophilism and the theory of “official nationality” is that “nationality, as an element historical, is capable of modification and improvement, and this is precisely the possibility and hope of national success." Given the immobility of the foundations, Russia would not have borrowed Christianity from Byzantium, and the Moscow autocracy would not have replaced the appanage veche life. Belinsky's biography, published in parts in the "Vestnik" Europe" 1874 and 75, at one time attracted extraordinary attention. It provides detailed and completely new information not only about Belinsky himself, but also his friends - Stankevich, Vas. Botkin, Herzen, Bakunin and many others, extracted from their correspondence, published here for the first time. The search and systematization of Belinsky's correspondence constitutes a major service to the history of Russian literature. Belinsky's letters, found by P., introduced into the world of unprecedented spiritual beauty and made a strong impression. Everyone knew Belinsky the critic until now, but now such a radiant image of a man who fought for his ideas emerged that one could not help but love even more than Belinsky the writer. The opinion was created that Belinsky’s letters found by Pypin, freely reflected here in all the purity and ideality of his high spirit, were almost more valuable than in his articles, where he was constrained by the press conditions of that time.

"The History of Russian Ethnography" gives much more than its special title. The author includes in his work, striking in erudition, not only ethnographers in the narrow sense of the word, but also all researchers of Russian folk art - Sakharov, Buslaev, Afanasyev, Veselovsky, etc., and even all theorists of the question of nationality, right down to the "populists" publicists 80s and 90s, like the late Kablitz-Yuzov. In connection with the fact that detailed biographies and characteristics of a long series of Russian scientists and publicists are given here, P.’s work is one of our most important historical and literary aids. The History of Russian Literature does not contain the usual narrative element in works of this kind. Brief biographical information appears only in the notes to individual chapters. The purpose of the essay is to highlight the main literary currents. Its merit is that it is the first summary of a huge number of special studies of the last 20-30 years, which often do not come to any general conclusions. P. is interested only in the general contours, the general picture of the course of Russian literature, presented here for the first time in such relief. Much that eluded the attention of special studies that delved into details is brought to the fore here. This is, for example, in volume III the picture of mental excitement in Moscow on the eve of Peter’s reform, showing that this reform was not at all a sharp change, that it represented only the spectacular completion of a whole series of preparatory attempts.

Each of P.'s 7 major works, which together make up 15 volumes [Collected together, P.'s journal articles will amount to no less than a number of volumes.], would be absolutely enough to provide him with a very prominent place in the history of Russian scholarship. The ownership of all these works, so highly authoritative, by one person is an almost unprecedented phenomenon in our scientific world. That is why public opinion, regardless of direction, greeted with particular sympathy at the end of 1897 the news that the Academy of Sciences, after 26 years, had again elected P. as a member. This time, P.'s election as an ordinary academician (department of Russian language and literature) was approved.

S. Vengerov.

(Brockhaus)

Pypin, Alexander Nikolaevich (addition to the article)

Researcher of Russian history, literature and public opinion; died 1904

(Brockhaus)

Pypin, Alexander Nikolaevich

The largest representative of the cultural-historical school in literary criticism ( cm."Methods of pre-Marxist literary criticism"). Genus. in a noble family. He studied at the Saratov gymnasium, Kazan and St. Petersburg high school. The first printed work is excerpts from a candidate's dissertation about Vl. Lukin. Since 1857 - Master of Russian Literature. 1858-1860 spent on a business trip abroad; 1860-1861 - professor at St. Petersburg University in the department of general literature. In 1861 he resigned as a result of reactionary government pressure on the university. After leaving the university, he went into magazine work. He worked at Sovremennik until its closure, was a member of the editorial board, and for some time was the executive editor. In 1866 he began publishing in the newly opened Vestnik Evropy, maintaining a close connection with it until the end of his life. In 1871 he was elected academician, but on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Education, Count. D. Tolstoy's election was not approved by the tsar. He became an academician for the second time and finally in 1898.

P.'s scientific interests were extremely diverse: history of the Russian language, paleography, folklore, ancient Russian literature, Russian literature of the 18th - 19th centuries, historiography. In addition to his scientific activities, P. is also significant as an editor, translator, and popularizer. Possessing exceptional erudition and ability to work, P. left a large number of scientific works.

P. is one of the most prominent representatives of the liberal-bourgeois enlightenment, who propagated the ideas of the comprehensive Europeanization of Russia, the expansion of education, the gradual elimination of the remnants of serfdom, etc. In his philosophical views, P. was closest to positivism. Following Taine, P. brought to the fore the concepts of “race” and “environment” and interpreted the question of “national character” in a completely Taine-esque spirit. In historical works he acted as an idealist. Social relations were everywhere considered by P. as a simple consequence of the spread of known opinions. P. attached decisive importance to “the effect on the masses of the educated classes,” believing that without this the masses would be left without “moral support” and almost without the opportunity to consciously participate in the “highest interests of national development” (“Characteristics of Literary Opinions,” p. 243). In his system of views on the course of historical development, Pypin took a big step back in comparison with Chernyshevsky.

Considering literature as a social activity, P. opposed the so-called theorists. “pure art” (P.’s first such speech was a critical article about Miliukov’s book “Essay on the History of Russian Poetry”). II. considered literature as an expression of national self-consciousness, recognized the journalistic element as a completely legitimate element of “literary history,” noted the special role of literature in the education of society, etc. However, in his interpretation of the views of Belinsky and Chernyshevsky on the tasks of literature and art, P. dulled their revolutionary edge , emasculated their revolutionary-democratic content, speaking from the position of liberal-bourgeois enlightenment. While for Chernyshevsky the expression of “popular self-consciousness in literature” was a radical negation of the existing social order, which served as a powerful weapon in the fight against the regime of the Russian autocracy in preparing the masses for its overthrow, Pypin did not go further than moderate liberal demands. It should also be borne in mind that P.'s liberalism, most clearly manifested during the period of his collaboration in Sovremennik, subsequently faded thoroughly. In a liberal spirit, P. interpreted the program of “old Russian peasant socialism” (“My Notes”), as a liberal he assessed both the historical meaning and significance of the peasant revolution, speaking in his article about Saltykov with an apologetics for the Russian nobility, a singer of the progressive aspirations of his “enlightened and magnanimous part,” etc. Pypin had a sharply negative attitude towards the revolutionary methods of struggle of populism in the 70s, which was especially clearly reflected in his articles about Saltykov.

In his understanding of the specifics of fiction, P. also took a big step back compared to Belinsky, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov. In “Characteristics,” speaking about the significance of Belinsky’s historical and literary activity, Pypin stated that the history of literature is now becoming the history not so much of literature itself, but rather the history of the formation of social life, “mores.” The boundaries separating literature from other areas of ideology were like this. arr. were completely lost, and the content of literary criticism as a science was blurred into a boundless sea of ​​issues that are an integral part of the history of culture. It is not surprising that P. charged Belinsky with the fact that “because of the artistic interest of literature, he did not see its greatest historical and cultural interest” (Introduction to the History of Russian Literature, p. 12). P. revealed here both a misunderstanding of the revolutionary-democratic partisanship of Belinsky’s criticism, and a misunderstanding of the specifics of artistic creativity. There is no reason to consider P., as some researchers do (Sakulin, Shchegolev, etc.), as a successor and interpreter of Chernyshevsky’s views. P. had a family relationship with Chernyshevsky, which he did not stop even after the autocracy’s reprisal against Chernyshevsky, continuing to maintain active correspondence with him and showing great concern for his family. Chernyshevsky’s influence on the formation of P.’s views is undeniable. However, it is equally indisputable that Pypin did not share the revolutionary-democratic program for overthrowing the autocratic-serf system and in his works acted as a typical representative of moderate liberalism.

P.'s works had a great influence on Russian literary criticism. Until the October Revolution, the cultural-historical school, of which P. was the largest representative, retained its dominance in the science of literature. Shakhov, Istrin, Vengerov, Sakulin, Piksanov and many others can be considered P.’s students. etc. At present, P.'s liberal-bourgeois works have a certain significance in their factual part.

Bibliography: I. Essay on the literary history of ancient Russian stories and fairy tales, St. Petersburg, 1857; Review of the history of Slavic literatures, St. Petersburg, 1865 (ed. 2, in a significantly expanded and revised form, 2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1874-1881, with the participation of V. D. Spasovich on Polish literature); Social movement in Russia under Alexander I, St. Petersburg, 1871 (ed. 5, P., 1918); Characteristics of literary opinions from the 20s to the 50s, St. Petersburg, 1875 (ed. 4, 1907); Belinsky, his life and correspondence, 2 vols., 1876 (ed. 2; 1908); History of Russian literature, 4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1898-1899 (ed. 4, СІІБ, 1911-1913); History of Russian ethnography, 4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1890-1892; M. E. Saltykov. Saltykov's idealism. Journal activity, St. Petersburg, 1899; N. A. Nekrasov, St. Petersburg, 1905; My notes, M., 1910; Panslavism in the past and present, St. Petersburg, 1913; Russian Freemasonry of the 18th and first quarter of the 19th centuries, P., 1916; Religious movements under Alexander I, P., 1916; Essays on literature and the public under Alexander I, P., 1917; Journal articles published in "Bulletin of Europe" in various years: Krylov and Radishchev, 1868, No. 5; Russian Freemasonry before Novikov, 1868, No. 6, 7; History of the text of Pushkin’s works, 1887, No. 2; New explanations of Pushkin, 1887, Nos. 10 and 11; Idealism of M. E. Saltykov, 1889, No. 6; Russian Slavic studies in the 19th century, 1889, No. 7-9; Journal activity of M. E. Saltykov, 1889, No. 10-12.

II. 50th anniversary scientific and literary activities acad. A. N. Pypina, St. Petersburg, 1903 (from the Literary Bulletin,

1903, No. 3); Arkhangelsky A., Pypin's works in the field of the history of Russian literature, "ZhMNP, 1904, No. 2; Sakulin P. N., A. N. Pypin. His scientific merits and public views, "Bulletin of Education", 1905, No. 4; Steklov Yu. M., A. N. Pypin’s note on the Chernyshevsky case, “Red Archive”, 1927, vol. III (22); Glagolev N., On the criticism of the historical and cultural school, “Russian language in the Soviet school”, 1931, Nos. 4 and 5; Piksanov N. K., Academician A. N. Pypin. To the centenary of his birth, "Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR", 1933, No. 4.

III. Barskov Ya. L., List of works of academician. A. N. Pypina, 1853-1903, St. Petersburg, 1903 (with annotations; Later publications are listed in “Materials for the biographical dictionary of current members of the Imperial Academy of Sciences,” part 2, P., 1917; Vladislavlev I. V. , Russian Writers, ed. 4, M. - L., 1924.

N. Glagolev.

• - , Emperor, son of Nicholas I. In 1856 he gave amnesty to the Decembrists, Petrashevites and others. Under the influence of the defeat of Russia in Crimean War 1853-56 the government of A. II prepared and carried out...

  St. Petersburg (encyclopedia)

• - Alexander Nikolaevich, literary critic, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences...

  Russian Encyclopedia

• - Alexander Nikolaevich PYPIN is the largest representative of the cultural-historical school in literary criticism. R. in a noble family...

  Literary encyclopedia

• - Vice Admiral, † June 14, 1881...
• - Head coach of the Shinnik football team since January 1998; born October 1, 1948 in Vladivostok; graduated from the NGPI, the Higher School of Coaches at the State Center for Physical Culture and Physical Culture in Moscow in 1983; played in the teams "Chernomorets", "...

  Big biographical encyclopedia

• - fighter pilot, sergeant. During the Great Patriotic War he fought in the 183rd IAP. July 11, 1943 on the Kursk Bulge in air combat shot down 3 enemy planes, and rammed the fourth...

  Large biographical encyclopedia

• - Emperor of All Russia, son of Emperor Nicholas I and his wife, Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, b. within the walls of the Moscow Kremlin April 17. 1818 Zhukovsky welcomed his birth prophetic verses: Yes...

  Large biographical encyclopedia

• - a famous researcher of Russian literature and the public. Genus. in 1833 in Saratov, in a noble family...

  Large biographical encyclopedia

• - Doctor of Medicine; son of a cornet, b. in 1801, died in 1855; in 1820 he entered Moscow University, in 1826 he graduated with honors, was awarded a silver medal and remained at the university...

  Large biographical encyclopedia

• - Lieutenant General...

  Large biographical encyclopedia

• - Aksakov, Alexander Nikolaevich, writer about spiritualism, 1832 - 1903...

  Biographical Dictionary

• - a follower of spiritualist teachings - mind. in 1903...

  encyclopedic Dictionary Brockhaus and Euphron

• - Alexander Nikolaevich, Russian scientist, literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. From the nobles. Graduated from St. Petersburg University. From 1863 he actively collaborated with Sovremennik; from 1867 - in the “Bulletin of Europe”...
• - Russian scientist, literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. From the nobles. Graduated from St. Petersburg University. From 1863 he actively collaborated with Sovremennik; from 1867 ≈ in the “Bulletin of Europe”...

  Great Soviet Encyclopedia

• - founder of the school of biochemists, academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Hero of Socialist Labor. People's Volunteer; in 1885-1917 in exile. He studied the chemistry of photosynthesis and oxidative processes in cells...
• - Russian literary critic, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences...

  Large encyclopedic dictionary

"Pypin, Alexander Nikolaevich" in books

Alexander Nikolaevich Vertinsky