Аннотация: The Story on the final days of Alexander Pushkin's life as about the European diplomatic event
The Story on the final days of Alexander Pushkin's life as about the European diplomatic event
Paul E. Shchegolev, having begun the reflections about a so-called a (dress) button of d'Anthes, involuntarily passed by his thoughts to other themes.
What was happening to Pushkin before obtaining "The Diploma of the cuckold"?
Paul Eliseevich took a pen and wrote: "Eventually, anonymous letters to which quite often attribute Pushkin's death were only the casual activator. And without those letters, sooner or later a moment would to come up, when Pushkin would interrupt the role of the contemplator of the love intrigue of his wife and d'Anthes. In fact, knowing the passionate and impatient nature of Pushkin, you have to wonder, why he had so long withstood the role of spectator.
The lack of reaction can be attributed to that condition of catalepsy into which Pushkin was plunged " thanks to " his affairs in 1836. " Thanks to " all of his affairs: both material, and literary, and others. About the Pushkin's situation, the Pushkin's state in recent months of his life should be told especially and in detail.
Anonymous letters were the impetus that pushed Pushkin out of the rut of contemplation. His honor had suffered because of the insult. It was necessary for him to punish the abusers. Those, who have become a cause (to the thought) of insult, and those, who produced the pasquil" [lampoon, libel].
Paul Eliseevich was captured by doubts: "If someone calls me the outstanding researcher of life of Pushkin, the Russian history, I will object, but without special ardency. But even the outstanding researcher can't encroach on some a established, stable public opinions ".
"Natalya Nikolaevna ... She was visiting a balls (an evening parties) constantly ... We will lay aside those issues which dominate in connection with the slanderous "The Diploma" and with the duel: "Nikolay Pavlovich" and "Georges d'Anthes" themes ...
All recognized Natalya Nikolaevna's beauty ... And what, on the "actions" there were no courtings, courtesies in her address? It seems, d'Anthes' courtings lasted about two years, and by the time of obtaining "The Diploma" began to fade ...
d'Anthes - the one of many visitors of "actions" (balls). He that, the only man who was paying the attention to a beautiful women?
Moreover, about plans of a wedding of d'Anthes and Ekaterina Nikolaevna, the sister of Natalya Nikolaevna, it was known even before emergence of "The Diploma".
Reading letters Ekaterina Nikolaevna and d'Anthes, written in connection with appearance of new family, makes a very peculiar an impression.
Suddenly after obtaining "The Diploma", in which not a word was told about d'Anthes, the theme of d'Anthes appeared in the foreground ..."
Paul Eliseevich sighed, and decided not to think on this subject yet, and if to thinking, not to hurry to trust the thoughts to a paper. In the end, thinking on different topics and making some conclusions, it isn't obligatory to make personal reflections the subject of public attention.
If in the subject "d'Anthes" there is a lot of not clear, but and in the subject "Nikolay Pavlovich" there is a lot of interesting.
Nikolay Pavlovich (Nicholas I) at will of a circumstances became the head of the huge Empire. His personal merits in accumulation of this Empire of force, power and authority, were not a so huge. It is possible to argue on this subject, but the Crimean (Eastern) war (1853-1856) has shown his (Nicholas I) "merits".
But was still necessary to live up till the Crimean war.
And he began own reign as the heir of Peter the Great and Alexander I (strong positions on Baltic region and in the West), as the heir of Catherine the great (strong positions in the West and South), as the heir of Ivan IV Vasilyevich ('Thunderstormable'), of the Cossacks, of the free, trade and industrial people (strong positions in the East).
With such the inheritance it was possible to show activity in Holy Alliance and to be highly intrested in discussing the ideas of a legitimism.
But here in France there was the July revolution of 1830. On August 2, 1830 Charles X has abdicated, on August 7, 1830 Louis Philipp has been proclaimed by "the king of the French".
And how to perceive, to understand this event - from the point of view of the principles of legitimism?
To remember famous 1813 - 1814... To try to organize military intervention against France? It hasn't happened ... Different circumstances, contradictions, have prevented! All European states, though not at once, recognized the mode of the July monarchy. But is Louis Philippe fully legitimate?!
It is possible to be thinking of this topic. This subject can be discussed ...
But here the disappointment! There is some personality - a certain Pushkin - which has written "Boris Godunov"!
This "Boris Godunov" directs at some unpleasant reflections about legitimacy of a dynasty of Romanov! And how many forces have been spent for preparation "History of the Russian State", published by Karamzin! This "History" did, for example, existence of Grand Duchy of Lithuania almost imperceptible, kind of transparent, invisible.
This "History" has carried out a restart of the Russian history - though these words and sound like a pun. And here this Pushkin with his "Boris Godunov"! It appears, many events took place until coming to power of a dynasty of Romanov. And it isn't absolutely clear: and the Ryurik dynasty has lost the power legitimately? The Ryurik dynasty not needed for confirmation of "the rights for the power" neither documents, nor historical casuistry ...
Pushkin has a great number of relatives? All his duels come to the end with a nothing? But there are also foreign representatives ...
Paul Eliseevich has thought that Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin feeling "condensation of the adverse atmosphere" around itself, gradually fell into "catalepsy". Shchegolev has looked at the words written - about a state of "catalepsy into which he [Pushkin] in 1836 was plunged owing all his affairs: both material, and literary, and others".
But a moment comes, and the "Diploma" appears!
If to consider "The Diploma" independently - that what idea can suggest this "Diploma"? This "Diploma" hints at the person of highest position, that is, Nikolay Pavlovich, as at the person showing interest in Natalya Nikolaevna!
But this interest of this person wasn't a news for Pushkin. "Tsar's attitudes towards Pushkin's wife. Pushkin said to Nashchokin, that the tsar as an ofitserishka (the type of officer who is ironically perceived), was looking after Pushkin's wife: purposely in the mornings several times was passing by her windows, an in the evening at balls was asking why her curtains were always lowered. - Pushkin himself reported Naschokin his confidence in the pure behavior of Natalya Nikolaevna".
Shchegolev has attributed in brackets: "Bartenev, writing down the story by Nashchokin for itself in the notebook, was afraid to write the word "tsar", and he has put instead of this word the conventional sign (three asterisks)".
Shchegolev slightly pushed away the sheet of paper.
Undoubtedly, diplomats and many residents of European countries would be interested to read the "continuation" of "Boris Godunov",- for example, or the poem "Wladyslaw IV Vasa", or the drama "The Treaty of Polyanovka".
Some a whacky (a Saint madness man) is asking publicly Russian Tsar in the presence of the people: "Where the documents relating to the election of Wladyslaw at the position of the Russian Tsar in 1610 (record about sacred oaths of boyars, etc.)?". The Tsar and the people are keeping silence...
Shchegolev has sighed. How could Pushkin in the conditions of the Nicholas I's regime feel himself? If Nicholas I could reflect on "connection" to "process" of foreign representatives, then and Pushkin needed them as persons relatively independent. His, Pushkin, a numerous friends, relatives, - they were the Russian subjects. They provided support, but they were vulnerable, powerless and vulnerable in the relations with their superiors. The Nicholas I's regime wasn't " blown off " in this period, yet, it still was on rise. Before the Crimean war the Hungarian events (in 1849) will take place, - the intervention for the Nicholas I's regime a successful militarily.
Shchegolev thought that the events of the final period of Pushkin's life resemble a some diplomatic event.
Paul Eliseevich reflected, that a reader of his book learns about diplomatic representatives of France, England, Austria, Holland, and many other European countries. They will pass in different qualities before a reader. Of course, their roles are different. d'Archiac, for example, was acting as the second of d'Anthes, - and someone else only wrote in a diplomatic dispatch of information about the Pushkin's duel.
But and the European states could feel interest in an implicit situation with the participation of Pushkin and Nicholas I!
If Nikolay Pavlovich liked to argue on legitimacy themes, and cared for the invariance of serf orders, then in France during an era after Napoléon I there was an industrial revolution. France was quickly developing economically. England became the "workshop of the world".
But even if to lay aside a theme of an economic development, then the principle of "legitimism", which was "giving the right" interventions in internal affairs of the sovereign states - is it not an interesting subject, especially in case this subject can be rotated and directed against Nikolay Pavlovich Romanov?
On the one hand, the d'Archiac's activity as the second of d'Anthes, can create a questions. D'Archiac was an employee (attache) of embassy of that power (of France), which government has resulted from the July revolution of 1830. But d'Anthes therefore has arrived to Russia that he hasn't "fitted" into realities of France of that time (after the June revolution).
On the other hand, d Archiac had, perhaps, some relative of d'Anthes. Besides, the close touch to events around Pushkin allowed to d'Archiac to be informed on very interesting circumstances.
In general, the d'Archiac's participation in events around Pushkin looks very worthy. There is an impression that d'Archiac, acting within rules, promoted peaceful resolution of the conflict situation.
And why the European powers needed the Pushkin's participation in a duel? What value could represent for European powers a dueling pistol in the hands of Pushkin? His feather was of a much greater value.
Undoubtedly, diplomats and many residents of European countries would be interested to read the "continuation" of Boris Godunov "- for example, or the poem" Sigismund III Vladislav", or the drama "The Treaty of Polyanovka".
At some combination of circumstances Pushkin could live some period of time and abroad Russia, in any European country. He knew French. at him was much Familiar diplomats. As shows experience of many Russian subjects, adaptation to foreign life was not especially difficult for them. Nikolay Gogol with pleasure lived in Italy, in Rome, and with pleasure wrote the brilliant work there.
Shchegolev has remembered Maxim Gorky. Gorky has lived and has much written in Italy.
"But I have distracted!"
Paul Eliseevich a sheet of paper has moved toward himself , took a pen. "27th January (... day of the duel)". "d Archiac went abroad [of Russia] February 2".
Soon d' Archiac was in France. "How to explain a high interest with which have treated to Heeckeren's case here? Why in all newspapers wrote about him? However, within a week have told a heap of various nonsenses which immediately and have forgotten. My name hasn't been mentioned anywhere".
Shchegolev has sighed: "This d'Archiac was unusually nice personality and himself then has died violent death on hunting soon".
What means "soon"? Years of life of d'Archiac:1811 - 1851. Neither in Russian-language, nor in French-language Wikipedia of articles about d'Archiac, it seems, aren't.
Paul Eliseevich has postponed his pen. "I will make a walk, I will breathe fresh air".
September 4, 2018 12:02
Translation from Russian into English: September 6, 2018, September 9, 2018
Владимир Владимирович Залесский 'Рассказ о завершающих днях жизни Александра Пушкина как о европейском дипломатическом событии'.