The history of the Russian state who is the author. "History of the Russian State": where the historian Karamzin misled us

http://www.lib.ru

annotation

The History of Karamzin is one of the greatest monuments of Russian national culture.

The first volume of the "History of the Russian State" includes 10 chapters: I - On the peoples who have lived in Russia since ancient times, II - On the Slavs and other peoples, III - On the physical and moral character of the ancient Slavs, IV - Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, V - Oleg the ruler, VI - Prince Igor, VII - Prince Svyatoslav, VIII - Grand Duke Yaropolk, IX - Grand Duke Vladimir, X - On the state of Ancient Russia. The first volume of this set contains comments, an index of names, an index of geographical and ethnic names, an index of literary and documentary sources, church holidays and events, and a list of abbreviations used in indexes.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin

"History of Russian Goverment"

Volume I

Foreword

History is, in a certain sense, the sacred book of nations: the main, necessary; a mirror of their being and activity; the tablet of revelations and rules; the covenant of ancestors to posterity; addition, explanation of the present and an example of the future.

Rulers, Legislators act according to the instructions of History and look at its sheets, like navigators look at the blueprints of the seas. Human wisdom needs experiments, but life is short-lived. One must know how from time immemorial rebellious passions agitated civil society and in what ways the beneficent power of the mind curbed their violent striving in order to establish order, to agree on the benefits of people and to bestow on them the happiness possible on earth.

But even a simple citizen should read History. She reconciles him with the imperfection of the visible order of things, as with an ordinary phenomenon in all ages; consoles in state disasters, testifying that there have been similar ones before, there have been even more terrible ones, and the State has not been destroyed; it nourishes a moral sense and with its righteous judgment disposes the soul to justice, which affirms our good and the consent of society.

Here is the benefit: what pleasures for the heart and mind! Curiosity is akin to man, both enlightened and wild. At the glorious Olympic Games, the noise was silent, and the crowds were silent around Herodotus, who was reading the traditions of the ages. Even without knowing the use of letters, people already love History: the elder points the young man to a high grave and tells about the deeds of the Hero lying in it. The first experiments of our ancestors in the art of writing were devoted to the Faith and the Scriptures; darkened by the thick shadow of ignorance, the people eagerly listened to the tales of the Chroniclers. And I like fiction; but for complete pleasure one must deceive oneself and think that they are the truth. History, opening the tombs, raising the dead, putting life into their hearts and words into their mouths, rebuilding the Kingdoms from decay, and presenting to the imagination a series of centuries with their distinct passions, morals, deeds, expands the limits of our own being; By its creative power we live with people of all times, we see and hear them, we love and hate them; not yet thinking about the benefit, we already enjoy the contemplation of diverse cases and characters that occupy the mind or nourish the sensitivity.

If any History, even unskillfully written, is pleasant, as Pliny says: all the more domestic. The true Cosmopolitan is a metaphysical being or a phenomenon so extraordinary that there is no need to talk about him, neither praise nor condemn him. We are all citizens, in Europe and in India, in Mexico and in Abyssinia; the personality of each is closely connected with the fatherland: we love it, because we love ourselves. Let the Greeks and Romans captivate the imagination: they belong to the family of the human race and are not strangers to us in their virtues and weaknesses, glory and disasters; but the name Russian has a special charm for us: my heart beats even stronger for Pozharsky than for Themistocles or Scipio. World History adorns the world with great memories for the mind, and Russian adorns the fatherland, where we live and feel. How attractive are the banks of the Volkhov, Dnieper, Don, when we know what happened on them in ancient times! Not only Novgorod, Kyiv, Vladimir, but also the huts of Yelets, Kozelsk, Galich become curious monuments and mute objects - eloquent. The shadows of past centuries paint pictures everywhere before us.

In addition to a special dignity for us, the sons of Russia, her chronicles have something in common. Let's take a look at the space of this only Power: the thought becomes numb; Never in its grandeur could Rome equal it, dominating from the Tiber to the Caucasus, the Elbe and the sands of Africa. Isn't it amazing how lands separated by eternal barriers of nature, immeasurable deserts and impenetrable forests, cold and hot climates, like Astrakhan and Lapland, Siberia and Bessarabia, could form one State with Moscow? Is the mixture of its inhabitants, of different tribes, varieties, and so remote from each other in degrees of education, less wonderful? Like America, Russia has its Wilds; like other European countries, it is the fruits of a long-term civil life. You don’t have to be Russian: you just need to think in order to read with curiosity the traditions of a people who, with courage and courage, gained dominance over a ninth part of the world, discovered countries hitherto unknown to anyone, introducing them into the general system of Geography, History, and enlightened them with the Divine Faith, without violence , without the atrocities used by other zealots of Christianity in Europe and America, but the only example of the best.

We agree that the deeds described by Herodotus, Thucydides, Livy, are generally more entertaining for any non-Russian, representing more spiritual strength and a livelier play of passions: for Greece and Rome were popular Powers and more enlightened than Russia; however, we can safely say that some cases, pictures, characters of our history are no less curious than ancient ones. Such are the essence of the exploits of Svyatoslav, the thunderstorm of Batyev, the uprising of the Russians at the Donskoy, the fall of Novgorod, the capture of Kazan, the triumph of popular virtues during the Interregnum. Giants of dusk, Oleg and son Igorev; the simple-hearted knight, the blind man Vasilko; friend of the fatherland, philanthropic Monomakh; Mstislav Brave, terrible in battle and an example of gentleness in the world; Mikhail of Tver, so famous for his generous death, the ill-fated, truly courageous, Alexander Nevsky; The hero is a young man, the winner of Mamaev, in the lightest outline, they strongly affect the imagination and heart. One reign of John III is a rare wealth for history: at least I do not know a Monarch worthy to live and shine in her sanctuary. The rays of his glory fall on the cradle of Peter - and between these two Autocrats is the amazing John IV, Godunov, worthy of his happiness and misfortune, the strange False Dmitry, and behind the host of valiant Patriots, Boyars and citizens, the mentor of the throne, the High Hierarch Philaret with the Sovereign son, the light-bearer in the darkness our state disasters, and Tsar Alexy, the wise father of the Emperor, whom Europe called the Great. Either the entire New History should remain silent, or the Russian should have the right to attention.

I know that the battles of our specific civil strife, thundering incessantly in the space of five centuries, are of little importance for the mind; that this subject is neither rich in thought for the Pragmatist, nor in beauty for the painter; but History is not a novel, and the world is not a garden where everything should be pleasant: it depicts the real world. We see majestic mountains and waterfalls on earth, flowering meadows and valleys; but how many barren sands and dull steppes! However, traveling in general is kind to a person with a lively feeling and imagination; in the very deserts there are charming views.

Let us not be superstitious in our lofty conception of the Ancient Scriptures. If we exclude fictitious speeches from the immortal creation of Thucydides, what remains? A naked story about the internecine strife of the Greek cities: the crowds are villainous, slaughtered for the honor of Athens or Sparta, as we have for the honor of Monomakhov or Oleg's house. Not much difference, if we forget that these half-tigers spoke the language of Homer, had Sophocles' Tragedies and statues of Phidias. Does the thoughtful painter Tacitus always present us with the great, the striking? With tenderness we look at Agrippina, carrying the ashes of Germanicus; with pity for the bones and armor of the Varov Legion scattered in the forest; with horror at the bloody feast of the frantic Romans, illuminated by the flames of the Capitol; with disgust at the monster of tyranny, devouring the remnants of the Republican virtues in the capital of the world: but the boring litigation of cities for the right to have a priest in this or that temple and the dry Obituary of Roman officials occupy many pages in Tacitus. He envied Titus Livius for the richness of the subject; and Livy, smooth, eloquent, sometimes fills entire books with news of clashes and robberies, which are hardly more important than the Polovtsian raids. - In a word, reading all the Stories requires some patience, more or less rewarded with pleasure.

The historian of Russia could, of course, having said a few words about the origin of its main people, about the composition of the State, present the important, most memorable features of antiquity in a skillful picture and start detailed a narrative from the time of John, or from the fifteenth century, when one of the greatest state works in the world took place: he would easily write 200 or 300 eloquent, pleasant pages, instead of many books, difficult for the Author, tedious for the Reader. But these reviews, these paintings do not replace the annals, and whoever read only Robertson's Introduction to the History of Charles V does not yet have a solid, true understanding of Europe in the Middle Ages. It is not enough that an intelligent person, looking over the monuments of centuries, will tell us his notes: we ourselves must see the actions and those who act - then we know History. Will the boastfulness of the Author's eloquence and the bliss of the Readers condemn the deeds and fate of our ancestors to eternal oblivion? They suffered, and with their misfortunes they made our greatness, and we do not want to hear about it, nor know whom they loved, whom they blamed for their misfortunes? Foreigners may miss what is boring to them in our ancient History; but are not good Russians obliged to have more patience, following the rule of state morality, which puts respect for ancestors in the dignity of an educated citizen? .. So I thought, and wrote about Igor, O Vsevolodakh, How contemporary looking at them in the dim mirror of the ancient Chronicle with tireless attention, with sincere reverence; and if, instead of alive , whole images represented only shadows , in excerpts, then it is not my fault: I could not supplement the Chronicles!

Eat three kind of history: first modern, for example, Thukidides, where an obvious witness speaks of incidents; second, like Tacitov, is based on fresh verbal traditions at a time close to the described actions; third extracted only from monuments, like ours until the 18th century. (Only with Peter the Great do verbal traditions begin for us: we heard from our fathers and grandfathers about him, about Catherine I, Peter II, Anna, Elizabeth a lot that is not in the books. (Hereinafter, notes by N. M. Karamzin are marked. )) IN first And second the mind shines, the imagination of the Writer, who chooses the most curious, blooms, decorates, sometimes creates without fear of reproof; will say: i saw it that way , so heard- and silent Criticism does not prevent the Reader from enjoying excellent descriptions. Third the genus is the most limited for talent: not a single trait can be added to the known; one cannot question the dead; we say that our contemporaries have betrayed us; we are silent if they kept silent - or fair Criticism will stop the mouth of the frivolous Historian, who is obliged to present only what has been preserved from centuries in the Chronicles, in the Archives. The ancients had the right to invent speeches in accordance with the nature of people, with circumstances: a right that is invaluable for true talents, and Livy, using it, enriched his books with the power of the mind, eloquence, and wise instructions. But we, contrary to the opinion of Abbot Mabley, cannot now ordain in History. New advances in reason have given us the clearest conception of its property and purpose; common sense established unaltered rules and forever excommunicated the Epistle from the Poem, from the flower gardens of eloquence, leaving the former to be a true mirror of the past, a true recall of the words really spoken by the Heroes of the ages. The most beautiful invented speech will disgrace the History, dedicated not to the glory of the Writer, not to the pleasure of the Readers, and not even to the wisdom of moralizing, but only to the truth, which already becomes a source of pleasure and benefit by itself. Both Natural and Civil History do not tolerate fiction, depicting what is or was, and not what to be. could. But History, they say, is filled with lies: let us say better that in it, as in human affairs, there is an admixture of lies, but the character of truth is always more or less preserved; and this is sufficient for us to form a general idea of ​​people and deeds. The more exacting and stricter is Criticism; it is all the more impermissible for the Historian, for the benefit of his talent, to deceive conscientious Readers, to think and speak for the Heroes, who have long been silent in the graves. What is left for him, chained, so to speak, to the dry charters of antiquity? order, clarity, strength, painting. He creates from the given substance: he will not produce gold from copper, but he must also purify copper; must know the whole price and property; to reveal the great where it is hidden, and not to give the small the rights of the great. There is no object so poor that Art can no longer mark itself in it in a way pleasing to the mind.

Until now, the Ancients serve as models for us. No one has surpassed Livy in the beauty of the story, Tacitus in strength: that's the main thing! Knowledge of all the rights in the world, German learning, Voltaire's wit, not even Machiavele's deepest thought in the Historian can replace the talent to portray actions. The English are famous for Hume, the Germans for John Müller, and rightly so his Introduction, which can be called a Geological Poem): both are worthy co-workers of the Ancients, not imitators: for every age, every nation gives special colors to the skilful Writer of Genesis. “Do not imitate Tacitus, but write as he would write in your place!” There is a rule of Genius. Did Muller, often inserting moral apothegmas like Tacitus? Don't know; but this desire to shine with the mind, or seem profound, is almost contrary to true taste. The historian argues only in the explanation of cases, where his thoughts, as it were, complement the description. Let us note that these apothegms are for solid minds either half-truths, or very ordinary truths, which have little value in History, where we are looking for actions and characters. There is skillful storytelling duty everyday writer, but a good separate thought - gift: the reader demands the first and thanks for the second, when his demand has already been fulfilled. Didn't the prudent Hume also think so, sometimes very prolific in explaining the reasons, but to the point of avarice in thinking? The historian, whom we would call the most perfect of the New, were it not for shunned England, did not boast too much of impartiality and thus did not cool his elegant creation! In Thucydides we always see an Athenian Greek, in Libya we always see a Roman, and we are captivated by them, and we believe them. Feeling: we, our enlivens the narrative - and just as a gross predilection, a consequence of a weak mind or a weak soul, is unbearable in the Historian, so love for the fatherland will give his brush heat, strength, charm. Where there is no love, there is no soul.

I turn to my work. Allowing myself no invention, I sought expressions in my mind, and thoughts only in monuments: I sought spirit and life in smoldering charters; I wanted to unite what has been given to us for centuries into a system, clear by the harmonious convergence of parts; depicted not only the disasters and glory of war, but everything that is part of the civil existence of people: the successes of reason, art, customs, laws, industry; was not afraid to speak with dignity about what was respected by the ancestors; wanted, without betraying his age, without pride and ridicule, to describe the ages of spiritual infancy, gullibility, fables; I wanted to present both the character of the time and the character of the Chroniclers: for one seemed to me necessary for the other. The less news I found, the more I valued and used what I found; the less he chose: for it is not the poor, but the rich who elect. It was necessary either to say nothing, or to say everything about such and such a Prince, so that he would live in our memory not with one dry name, but with a certain moral physiognomy. Diligently exhausting materials of ancient Russian history, I encouraged myself with the thought that in the narrative of distant times there is some inexplicable charm for our imagination: there are the sources of Poetry! Our gaze, in contemplation of the great space, does not usually strive - past everything close, clear - to the end of the horizon, where shadows thicken, fade and impenetrability begins?

The reader will notice that I am describing the acts not apart, by years and days, but copulating them for the most comfortable impression in memory. The historian is not a chronicler: the latter looks only at time, and the former at the quality and connection of deeds: he can make a mistake in the distribution of places, but he must indicate his place to everything.

The multitude of notes and extracts I have made terrifies me myself. Happy the Ancients: they did not know this petty labor, in which half the time is lost, the mind is bored, the imagination withers: a painful sacrifice made credibility but necessary! If all the materials in our country were collected, published, purified by Criticism, then I would only have to refer; but when most of them are in manuscript, in the dark; when hardly anything has been processed, explained, agreed - one must arm oneself with patience. It is up to the Reader to look into this motley mixture, which sometimes serves as evidence, sometimes as an explanation or addition. For hunters, everything is curious: an old name, a word; the slightest feature of antiquity gives rise to considerations. Since the 15th century, I have been writing less: the sources are multiplying and becoming clearer.

A learned and glorious man, Schlozer, said that our history has five main periods; that Russia from 862 to Svyatopolk should be called nascent(Nascens), from Yaroslav to the Mughals divided(Divisa), from Batu to John oppressed(Oppressa), from John to Peter the Great victorious(Victrix), from Peter to Catherine II prosperous. This idea seems to me more witty than solid. 1) The age of St. Vladimir was already the age of power and glory, and not of birth. 2) State shared before 1015. 3) If, according to the internal state and external actions of Russia, it is necessary to designate periods, then is it possible to mix at one time the Grand Duke Dimitri Alexandrovich and the Donskoy, silent slavery with victory and glory? 4) The Age of Pretenders is marked more by misfortune than by victory. Much better, truer, more modest, our history is divided into ancient from Rurik to John III, on middle from John to Peter, and new from Peter to Alexander. The Destiny system was a character first era, unanimity - second, changing civil customs - third. However, there is no need to set limits where the places serve as a living tract.

Having willingly and zealously devoted twelve years, and the best time of my life, to the composition of these eight or nine volumes, I can weakly desire praise and fear condemnation; but I dare say that this is not the main thing for me. Love of glory alone could not give me the constant, long-term firmness necessary in such a matter, if I did not find true pleasure in the work itself and had no hope of being useful, that is, of making Russian History known to many, even to my strict judges. .

Thanks to everyone, both the living and the dead, whose intelligence, knowledge, talents, art served as a guide to me, I entrust myself to the indulgence of good fellow citizens. We love one thing, we desire one thing: we love the fatherland; we wish him prosperity even more than glory; we wish that the firm foundation of our greatness never change; Yes, the rules of the wise Autocracy and the Holy Faith more and more strengthen the union of the parts; May Russia bloom... at least for a long time, for a long time, if there is nothing immortal on earth except the human soul!

December 7, 1815. On the sources of Russian history until the 17th century

These sources are:

I. Chronicles. Nestor, monk of the Monastery of Kiev Pechersk, nicknamed father Russian History, lived in the XI century: gifted with a curious mind, he listened with attention to the oral traditions of antiquity, folk historical tales; I saw the monuments, the graves of the Princes; talked with the nobles, the elders of Kyiv, travelers, residents of other regions of Russia; read the Byzantine Chronicles, church notes and became first chronicler of our fatherland. Second, named Vasily, also lived at the end of the 11th century: used by Vladimir Prince David in negotiations with the unfortunate Vasilko, he described to us the generosity of the latter and other modern deeds of southwestern Russia. All other chroniclers remained for us nameless; one can only guess where and when they lived: for example, one in Novgorod, Priest, consecrated by Bishop Nifont in 1144; another in Vladimir on the Klyazma under Vsevolod the Great; the third in Kyiv, a contemporary of Rurik II; the fourth in Volhynia around 1290; the fifth at the same time in Pskov. Unfortunately, they did not say everything that is curious for posterity; but, fortunately, they did not invent, and the most reliable of the Chroniclers of foreign countries agree with them. This almost uninterrupted chain of Chronicles goes up to the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich. Some of them have not yet been published or have been printed very faulty. I was looking for the oldest lists: the best of Nestor and his successors are charate, Pushkin and Troitsky, XIV and XV centuries. Notes are also worthy. Ipatiev, Khlebnikov, Koenigsberg, Rostov, Voskresensky, Lvov, Arkhivsky. In each of them there is something special and truly historical, introduced, as one might think, by contemporaries or from their notes. Nikonovsky most distorted by insertions of meaningless scribes, but in the XIV century he reports probable additional news about the Tver Principality, then it already resembles others, yielding to them, however, in good condition, - for example, Arkhivsky .

II. power book, composed in the reign of Ivan the Terrible according to the thought and instruction of Metropolitan Macarius. It is a selection from the annals with some additions, more or less reliable, and is called by this name for what is indicated in it. degrees, or generations of sovereigns.

III. So called Chronographs, or General History according to the Byzantine Chronicles, with the introduction of our own, very brief. They have been curious since the 17th century: there are already many detailed contemporary news that is not in the annals.

IV. Lives of the Saints, in patericon, in prologues, in menaias, in special manuscripts. Many of these Biographies have been written in modern times; some, however, for example, St. Vladimir, Boris and Gleb, Theodosius, are in the charate Prologues; and the Patericon was composed in the thirteenth century.

v. Special writings: for example, the legend of Dovmont of Pskov, Alexander Nevsky; contemporary notes by Kurbsky and Palitsyn; news about the Pskov siege in 1581, about Metropolitan Philip, and so on.

VI. Discharges, or the distribution of governors and regiments: start from the time of John III. These handwritten books are not rare.

VII. Pedigree book: there is printed; the most correct and complete, written in 1660, is stored in the Synodal Library.

VIII. Written Catalogs of metropolitans and bishops. - These two sources are not very reliable; they need to be compared with the annals.

IX. Epistles of the Saints to princes, clergy and laity; the most important of these is the Epistle to Shemyaka; but in others there is much to remember.

X. The Ancients coins, medals, inscriptions, fairy tales, songs, proverbs: the source is scarce, but not completely useless.

XI. Certificates. The oldest authentic writing was written around 1125. Archival New Year's letters and soul records princes begin from the XIII century; this source is already rich, but there is still much richer.

XII. collection of so-called Article lists, or Embassy Affairs, and letters in the Archives of the Foreign Collegium from the 15th century, when both incidents and methods for describing them give the Reader the right to demand even greater satisfaction from the Historian. - They are added to this property of ours.

XIII. Foreign contemporary chronicles: Byzantine, Scandinavian, German, Hungarian, Polish, along with the news of travelers.

XIV. Government Papers of Foreign Archives: most of all I used extracts from Koenigsberg.

Here are the materials of History and the subject of Historical Criticism!

Karamzin, Nikolai Mikhailovich - famous Russian writer, journalist and historian. Born December 1, 1766 in the Simbirsk province; grew up in the village of his father, a Simbirsk landowner. The first spiritual food of an 8-9-year-old boy was old novels, which developed natural sensitivity in him. Already then, like the hero of one of his stories, "he loved to be sad, not knowing what," and "could play with his imagination for two hours and build castles in the air." In the 14th year, Karamzin was brought to Moscow and sent to the boarding school of the Moscow professor Shaden; he also attended the university, where one could then learn "if not the sciences, then Russian literacy." He owed Schaden a practical acquaintance with the German and French languages. After finishing his studies with Shaden, Karamzin hesitated for some time in his choice of activity. In 1783, he tries to enter the military service, where he was enrolled as a minor, but at the same time he retires and in 1784 is fond of secular successes in the society of the city of Simbirsk. At the end of the same year, Karamzin returned to Moscow and, through his countryman, I.P. Turgenev, draws closer to Novikov's circle. Here began, according to Dmitriev, "Karamzin's education, not only the author's, but also moral." The influence of the circle lasted 4 years (1785 - 88). Serious work on oneself, which Freemasonry demanded, and which Karamzin's closest friend, Petrov, was so absorbed in, is not noticeable in Karamzin, however. From May 1789 to September 1790 he traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France and England, stopping mainly in big cities like Berlin, Leipzig, Geneva, Paris, London. Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began to publish the Moscow Journal (see below), where Letters from a Russian Traveler appeared. The Moscow Journal ceased in 1792, perhaps not without connection with the imprisonment of Novikov in the fortress and the persecution of Masons. Although Karamzin, starting the Moscow Journal, formally excluded articles "theological and mystical" from his program, but after Novikov's arrest (and before the final verdict) he published a rather bold ode: "To Mercy" ("As long as a citizen is calm, without fear he can fall asleep, and freely dispose of life according to your thoughts to all your subjects; ... as long as you give freedom to everyone and do not darken the minds of light; as long as the power of attorney to the people is visible in all your affairs: until then you will be sacredly revered ... nothing can disturb the tranquility of your state ") and hardly did not come under investigation on suspicion that the Masons sent him abroad. Karamzin spent most of 1793-1795 in the countryside and prepared two collections here called Aglaya, published in the autumn of 1793 and 1794. In 1795, Karamzin limited himself to compiling a "mixture" in the Moscow Vedomosti. "Having lost the will to walk under black clouds," he set out into the world and led a rather dispersed life. In 1796, he published a collection of poems by Russian poets, entitled "Aonides". A year later, the second book "Aonid" appeared; then Karamzin decided to publish something like an anthology on foreign literature ("Pantheon of Foreign Literature"). By the end of 1798, Karamzin had barely gotten his "Pantheon" through the censorship, which forbade the publication of Demosthenes, Cicero, Sallust, etc., because they were republicans. Even a simple reprint of Karamzin's old works met with difficulties from the side of censorship. Thirty-year-old Karamzin apologizes to readers for the ardor of feelings of the “young, inexperienced Russian traveler” and writes to one of his friends: “There is a time for everything, and the scenes change. dreams ... Thus, soon my poor muse will either retire completely, or ... will shift into verse Kant's metaphysics with the Platonic Republic. Metaphysics, however, was just as alien to Karamzin's mental makeup as was mysticism. From the letters to Aglaya and Chloe, he moved not to philosophy, but to historical studies. In the "Moscow Journal" Karamzin won the sympathy of the public as a writer; now in the "Bulletin of Europe" (1802 - 03) he is in the role of a publicist. A predominantly journalistic character is also composed by Karamzin in the first months of the reign of Emperor Alexander I "Historical eulogy to Empress Catherine II." During the publication of the journal, Karamzin more and more enters into the taste of historical articles. He receives, with the help of Comrade Minister of Public Education M.N. Muravyov, the title of historiographer and 2000 rubles of annual pension in order to write a complete history of Russia (October 31, 1803). Since 1804, having stopped publishing Vestnik Evropy, Karamzin plunged exclusively into compiling history. In 1816, he published the first 8 volumes of "The History of the Russian State" (in 1818-19, their second edition was published), in 1821 - 9 volumes, in 1824 - the 10th and 11th. In 1826, Karamzin died before he could complete the 12th volume, which was published by D.N. Bludov on the papers left after the deceased. During all these 22 years, the compilation of history was the main occupation of Karamzin; to defend and continue the work begun by him in literature, he left to his literary friends. Prior to the publication of the first 8 volumes, Karamzin lived in Moscow, from where he traveled only to Tver to the Grand Duchess Ekaterina Pavlovna (through her he handed over to the sovereign in 1810 his note "On Ancient and New Russia") and to Nizhny, during the occupation of Moscow by the French. He usually spent his summers at Ostafyev, the estate of Prince Andrei Ivanovich Vyazemsky, whose daughter, Ekaterina Andreevna, Karamzin married in 1804 (Karamzin's first wife, Elizaveta Ivanovna Protasova, died in 1802). Karamzin spent the last 10 years of his life in St. Petersburg and became close to the royal family, although Emperor Alexander I, who did not like criticism of his actions, treated Karamzin with restraint from the time the Note was submitted, in which the historiographer turned out to be plus royaliste que le roi. In Tsarskoe Selo, where Karamzin spent the summer at the request of the empresses (Maria Feodorovna and Elizabeth Alekseevna), he more than once had frank political conversations with Emperor Alexander, passionately rebelled against the sovereign’s intentions regarding Poland, “did not keep silent about taxes in peacetime, about the absurd about the provincial system of finance, about formidable military settlements, about the strange choice of some of the most important dignitaries, about the Ministry of Education or Eclipse, about the need to reduce the army that fights only Russia, about the imaginary improvement of roads, so painful for the people, finally, about the need to have firm laws, civil and government." On the last question, the sovereign answered how he could answer Speransky that he "will give the fundamental laws of Russia", but in fact this opinion of Karamzin, like other advice of the opponent of the "liberals" and "serviles", Speransky and Arakcheev, "remained fruitless for dear fatherland." The death of Emperor Alexander shocked Karamzin's health; half-ill, he daily visited the palace for a conversation with Empress Maria Feodorovna, from memories of the late sovereign, moving on to discussions about the tasks of the future reign. In the first months of 1826, Karamzin experienced pneumonia and, on the advice of doctors, decided to go to southern France and Italy in the spring, for which Emperor Nicholas gave him money and put a frigate at his disposal. But Karamzin was already too weak to travel and died on May 22, 1826.

A. Venetsianov "Portrait of N.M. Karamzin"

"I was looking for the path to the truth,
I wanted to know the reason for everything ... "(N.M. Karamzin)

"History of the Russian State" was the last and unfinished work of the outstanding Russian historian N.M. Karamzin: a total of 12 volumes of research were written, Russian history was presented until 1612.

Interest in history appeared in Karamzin in his youth, but there was a long way to his calling as a historian.

From the biography of N.M. Karamzin

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin was born in 1766 in the family estate of Znamenskoye, Simbirsk district, Kazan province, in the family of a retired captain, a middle-class Simbirsk nobleman. Received home education. Studied at Moscow University. For a short time he served in the Preobrazhensky Guards Regiment of St. Petersburg, it was to this time that his first literary experiments date.

After retiring, he lived for some time in Simbirsk, and then moved to Moscow.

In 1789, Karamzin left for Europe, where in Koenigsberg he visited I. Kant, and in Paris he became a witness to the Great French Revolution. Returning to Russia, he publishes Letters from a Russian Traveler, which make him a famous writer.

Writer

"The influence of Karamzin on literature can be compared with the influence of Catherine on society: he made literature humane"(A.I. Herzen)

Creativity N.M. Karamzin developed in line with sentimentalism.

V. Tropinin "Portrait of N.M. Karamzin"

Literary direction sentimentalism(from fr.sentiment- feeling) was popular in Europe from the 20s to the 80s of the 18th century, and in Russia from the end of the 18th to the beginning of the 19th century. The ideologist of sentimentalism is J.-J. Ruso.

European sentimentalism entered Russia in the 1780s and early 1790s. thanks to translations of Goethe's Werther, novels by S. Richardson and J.-J. Rousseau, who were very popular in Russia:

She liked novels early on;

They replaced everything for her.

She fell in love with deceptions

And Richardson and Rousseau.

Pushkin is talking here about his heroine Tatyana, but all the girls of that time read sentimental novels.

The main feature of sentimentalism is that attention in them is primarily paid to the spiritual world of a person, in the first place are feelings, and not reason and great ideas. The heroes of the works of sentimentalism have an innate moral purity, integrity, they live in the bosom of nature, love it and are merged with it.

Such a heroine is Liza from Karamzin's story "Poor Lisa" (1792). This story was a huge success with readers, followed by numerous imitations, but the main significance of sentimentalism and in particular the story of Karamzin was that such works revealed the inner world of a simple person who evoked the ability to empathize in others.

In poetry, Karamzin was also an innovator: the former poetry, represented by the odes of Lomonosov and Derzhavin, spoke the language of reason, and Karamzin's poems spoke the language of the heart.

N.M. Karamzin is a reformer of the Russian language

He enriched the Russian language with many words: “impression”, “love”, “influence”, “entertaining”, “touching”. Introduced the words "epoch", "concentrate", "scene", "moral", "aesthetic", "harmony", "future", "catastrophe", "charity", "free-thinking", "attraction", "responsibility" ”, “suspicion”, “industry”, “refinement”, “first-class”, “human”.

His language reforms caused a heated controversy: members of the Conversation of Russian Word Lovers society, headed by G. R. Derzhavin and A. S. Shishkov, adhered to conservative views and opposed the reform of the Russian language. In response to their activities, in 1815 the literary society "Arzamas" was formed (it included Batyushkov, Vyazemsky, Zhukovsky, Pushkin), which sneered at the authors of "Conversations" and parodied their works. The literary victory of "Arzamas" over "Conversation" was won, which also strengthened the victory of Karamzin's language changes.

Karamzin also introduced the letter Y into the alphabet. Prior to this, the words “tree”, “hedgehog” were written like this: “іolka”, “іozh”.

Karamzin also introduced a dash, one of the punctuation marks, into Russian writing.

Historian

In 1802 N.M. Karamzin wrote the historical story “Martha the Posadnitsa, or the Conquest of Novgorod”, and in 1803 Alexander I appointed him to the post of historiographer, thus, Karamzin devoted the rest of his life to writing “The History of the Russian State”, in fact, finishing with fiction.

Exploring manuscripts of the 16th century, Karamzin discovered and published in 1821 Afanasy Nikitin's Journey Beyond the Three Seas. In this regard, he wrote: “... while Vasco da Gamma was only thinking about the possibility of finding a way from Africa to Hindustan, our Tverite was already a merchant on the coast of Malabar”(historical region in South India). In addition, Karamzin was the initiator of the installation of a monument to K. M. Minin and D. M. Pozharsky on Red Square and took the initiative to erect monuments to prominent figures in Russian history.

"History of Russian Goverment"

Historical work of N.M. Karamzin

This is a multi-volume work by N. M. Karamzin, describing Russian history from ancient times to the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible and the Time of Troubles. Karamzin's work was not the first in the description of the history of Russia, before him there were already historical works by V. N. Tatishchev and M. M. Shcherbatov.

But Karamzin's "History" had, in addition to historical, high literary merits, including due to the ease of writing, it attracted not only specialists, but also simply educated people to Russian history, which greatly contributed to the formation of national self-consciousness, interest in the past. A.S. Pushkin wrote that “everyone, even secular women, rushed to read the history of their fatherland, hitherto unknown to them. She was a new discovery for them. Ancient Russia seemed to have been found by Karamzin, just as America was found by Columbus.

It is believed that in this work Karamzin nevertheless showed himself more not as a historian, but as a writer: "History" is written in a beautiful literary language (by the way, Karamzin did not use the letter Y in it), but the historical value of his work is unconditional, because . the author used manuscripts that were first published by him and many of which have not survived to this day.

Working on "History" until the end of his life, Karamzin did not have time to finish it. The text of the manuscript breaks off at the chapter "Interregnum 1611-1612".

The work of N.M. Karamzin over the "History of the Russian State"

In 1804, Karamzin retired to the Ostafyevo estate, where he devoted himself entirely to writing the History.

Manor Ostafyevo

Ostafyevo- the estate near Moscow of Prince P. A. Vyazemsky. It was built in 1800-07. the poet's father, Prince A. I. Vyazemsky. The estate remained in the possession of the Vyazemskys until 1898, after which it passed into the possession of the Sheremetevs.

In 1804, A.I. Vyazemsky invited his son-in-law, N.M. Karamzin, who worked here on the History of the Russian State. In April 1807, after the death of his father, Pyotr Andreevich Vyazemsky became the owner of the estate, under which Ostafyevo became one of the symbols of the cultural life of Russia: Pushkin, Zhukovsky, Batyushkov, Denis Davydov, Griboedov, Gogol, Adam Mickiewicz visited here many times.

The content of Karamzin's "History of the Russian State"

N. M. Karamzin "History of the Russian State"

In the course of his work, Karamzin found the Ipatiev Chronicle, it was from here that the historian drew many details and details, but did not clutter up the text of the narrative with them, but put them in a separate volume of notes that are of particular historical significance.

In his work, Karamzin describes the peoples who inhabited the territory of modern Russia, the origins of the Slavs, their conflict with the Varangians, talks about the origin of the first princes of Rus', their reign, describes in detail all the important events of Russian history until 1612.

The value of N.M. Karamzin

Already the first publications of the "History" shocked contemporaries. They read it excitedly, discovering the past of their country. Writers used many plots in the future for works of art. For example, Pushkin took material from History for his tragedy Boris Godunov, which he dedicated to Karamzin.

But, as always, there were critics. Basically, liberals contemporary to Karamzin objected to the etatist picture of the world expressed in the work of the historian, and his belief in the effectiveness of the autocracy.

Statism- this is a worldview and ideology that absolutizes the role of the state in society and promotes the maximum subordination of the interests of individuals and groups to the interests of the state; a policy of active state intervention in all spheres of public and private life.

Statism considers the state as the highest institution, standing above all other institutions, although its goal is to create real opportunities for the comprehensive development of the individual and the state.

The liberals reproached Karamzin for following in his work only the development of the supreme power, which gradually took on the forms of autocracy contemporary to him, but neglected the history of the Russian people themselves.

There is even an epigram attributed to Pushkin:

In his "History" elegance, simplicity
They prove to us without prejudice
The need for autocracy
And the charms of the whip.

Indeed, by the end of his life, Karamzin was a staunch supporter of absolute monarchy. He did not share the point of view of the majority of thinking people on serfdom, was not an ardent supporter of its abolition.

He died in 1826 in St. Petersburg and was buried at the Tikhvin cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

Monument to N.M. Karamzin in Ostafyevo

At the very beginning of his reign, Emperor Alexander I appointed Nikolai Karamzin as his official historiographer. All his life Karamzin will work on the "History of the Russian State". This work was appreciated by Pushkin himself, but Karamzin's story is far from flawless.

Ukraine - the birthplace of the horse

“This great part of Europe and Asia, now called Russia, in its temperate climates was originally inhabited, but wild, plunged into the depths of ignorance by peoples who did not mark their existence with any of their own historical monuments,” Karamzin’s narrative begins with these words and already contains mistake in itself.
It is difficult to overestimate the contribution that the tribes that inhabited the south of contemporary Karamzin Russia in ancient times to the overall development of mankind can hardly overestimate. A huge amount of modern data indicates that in the territories of present-day Ukraine in the period from 3500 to 4000 BC. e. For the first time in world history, the domestication of the horse took place.
This is probably the most forgivable mistake of Karamzin, because more than a century remained before the invention of genetics. When Nikolai Mikhailovich began his work, he could not have known that all the horses in the world, from Australia and both Americas to Europe and Africa, are distant descendants of horses with whom our not-so-wild and ignorant ancestors “made friends” in the Black Sea steppes.

Norman theory

As you know, The Tale of Bygone Years, one of the main historical sources on which Karamzin relies in his work, begins with a lengthy introductory part from biblical times, which enters the history of the Slavic tribes into a general historical context. And only then Nestor sets out the concept of the origin of the Russian statehood, which will later be called the "Norman theory".

According to this concept, Russian tribes originate from Viking times Scandinavia. Karamzin omits the biblical part of the "Tale", but repeats the main provisions of the "Norman theory". Disputes around this theory began before Karamzin and continued after. Many influential historians either completely denied the “Varangian origin” of the Russian state, or assessed its degree and role in a completely different way, especially in terms of the “voluntary” calling of the Varangians.
At the moment, among scientists, the opinion has strengthened that, at least, everything is not so simple. Karamzin's apologetic and uncritical repetition of the "Norman Theory" looks, if not an obvious mistake, then an obvious historical simplification.

Ancient, Middle and New

In his multi-volume work and scientific controversy, Karamzin proposed his own concept of dividing the history of Russia into periods: “Our history is divided into the Ancient, from Rurik to John III, the Middle, from John to Peter, and the New, from Peter to Alexander. The system of destinies was the character of the first era, autocracy - the second, change in civil customs - the third.
Despite some positive feedback and support from such prominent historians as, for example, S.M. Solovyov, Karamzin's periodization was not established in Russian historiography, and the initial prerequisites for division were recognized as erroneous and non-working.

Khazar Khaganate

In connection with the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, the history of Judaism is of great interest to scholars in different parts of the world, because any new knowledge on this topic is literally a matter of "war and peace." More and more attention of historians is paid to the Khazar Khaganate - a powerful Jewish state that existed in Eastern Europe, which had a significant impact on Kievan Rus.
Against the background of modern research and our knowledge on this topic, the description of the Khazar Khaganate in the work of Karamzin looks like a dark spot. In fact, Karamzin simply bypasses the problem of the Khazars, thereby denying the degree of influence and significance of their cultural ties with the Slavic tribes and states.

"Fiery Romantic Passion"

The son of his age, Karamzin looked at history as a poem written in prose. In his descriptions of the ancient Russian princes, what one of the critics would call "ardent romantic passion" seems to be a characteristic feature.

Terrible atrocities, accompanied by no less terrible atrocities, committed quite in the spirit of his time, Karamzin describes as Christmas carols, they say, well, yes - the pagans have sinned, but they have repented. In the first volumes of the "History of the Russian State" there are rather not really historical, but rather literary characters, as Karamzin saw them, firmly standing on a monarchist, conservative-protective position.

Tatar-Mongol yoke

Karamzin did not use the phrase "Tatar-Mongols", in his books either "Tatars" or "Mongols", but the term "yoke" is an invention of Karamzin. For the first time this term appeared 150 years after the official end of the invasion in Polish sources. Karamzin transplanted him to Russian soil, thereby planting a time bomb. Almost 200 years have passed, and the disputes of historians still do not subside: was there a yoke or not? and what was, can be considered a yoke? what is it all about?

There is no doubt about the first, aggressive campaign against Russian lands, the ruin of many cities and the establishment of vassal dependence of specific principalities on the Mongols. But for the feudal Europe of those years, the fact that the signor could be of a different nationality, by and large, is a common practice.
The very concept of "yoke" implies the existence of a certain single Russian national and almost state space, which was conquered and enslaved by the interventionists, with whom a stubborn liberation war is being waged. In this case, it looks like at least some exaggeration.
And Karamzin's assessment of the consequences of the Mongol invasion sounds completely erroneous: “The Russians got out from under the yoke, more with a European than an Asian character. Europe did not recognize us: but for the fact that it has changed in these 250 years, and we have remained as we were.
Karamzin gives a categorically negative answer to the question he himself posed: “Domination of the Mongols, besides harmful consequences for morality, left any other traces in folk customs, in civil legislation, in domestic life, in the language of Russians?” “No,” he writes.
Actually, of course, yes.

King Herod

In the previous paragraphs, we talked mainly about the conceptual errors of Karamzin. But there is one big factual inaccuracy in his work, which had great consequences and influence on Russian and world culture.
"No no! You can’t pray for Tsar Herod - the Mother of God does not order, ”the holy fool sings in Mussorgsky’s opera“ Boris Godunov ”to the text of the drama of the same name by A.S. Pushkin. Tsar Boris recoils in horror from the holy fool, indirectly admitting to committing a crime - the murder of the legitimate heir to the throne, the son of the seventh wife of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, the teenage prince Dmitry.
Dmitry died in Uglich, under unclear circumstances. The official investigation was conducted by the boyar Vasily Shuisky. The verdict is an accident. The death of Dmitry was beneficial to Godunov, as it cleared the way for him to the throne. Popular rumor did not believe in the official version, and then several impostors, False Dmitriev, appeared in Russian history, claiming that there was no death either: “Dmitry survived, I am that.”
In The History of the Russian State, Karamzin directly accuses Godunov of organizing Dmitry's murder. Pushkin will pick up the version of the murder, then Mussorgsky will write a brilliant opera, which will be staged at all the largest theater venues in the world. With the light hand of a galaxy of Russian geniuses, Boris Godunov will become the second most famous King Herod in world history.
The first timid publications in defense of Godunov would appear during the lifetime of Karamzin and Pushkin. At the moment, his innocence has been proven by historians: Dmitry really died in an accident. However, this will not change anything in the public mind.
The episode with the unfair accusation and subsequent rehabilitation of Godunov is, in a sense, a brilliant metaphor for the entire work of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin: a brilliant artistic concept and fiction sometimes turns out to be higher than the chicane truth of facts, documents and authentic testimonies of contemporaries.

The History of Karamzin is one of the greatest monuments of Russian national culture.

The first volume of the "History of the Russian State" includes 10 chapters: I - On the peoples who have lived in Russia since ancient times, II - On the Slavs and other peoples, III - On the physical and moral character of the ancient Slavs, IV - Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, V - Oleg the ruler, VI - Prince Igor, VII - Prince Svyatoslav, VIII - Grand Duke Yaropolk, IX - Grand Duke Vladimir, X - On the state of Ancient Russia. The first volume of this set contains comments, an index of names, an index of geographical and ethnic names, an index of literary and documentary sources, church holidays and events, and a list of abbreviations used in indexes.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin
"History of Russian Goverment"
Volume I

Foreword

History is, in a certain sense, the sacred book of nations: the main, necessary; a mirror of their being and activity; the tablet of revelations and rules; the covenant of ancestors to posterity; addition, explanation of the present and an example of the future.

Rulers, Legislators act according to the instructions of History and look at its sheets, like navigators look at the blueprints of the seas. Human wisdom needs experiments, but life is short-lived. One must know how from time immemorial rebellious passions agitated civil society and in what ways the beneficent power of the mind curbed their violent striving in order to establish order, to agree on the benefits of people and to bestow on them the happiness possible on earth.

But even a simple citizen should read History. She reconciles him with the imperfection of the visible order of things, as with an ordinary phenomenon in all ages; consoles in state disasters, testifying that there have been similar ones before, there have been even more terrible ones, and the State has not been destroyed; it nourishes a moral sense and with its righteous judgment disposes the soul to justice, which affirms our good and the consent of society.

Here is the benefit: what pleasures for the heart and mind! Curiosity is akin to man, both enlightened and wild. At the glorious Olympic Games, the noise was silent, and the crowds were silent around Herodotus, who was reading the traditions of the ages. Even without knowing the use of letters, people already love History: the elder points the young man to a high grave and tells about the deeds of the Hero lying in it. The first experiments of our ancestors in the art of writing were devoted to the Faith and the Scriptures; darkened by the thick shadow of ignorance, the people eagerly listened to the tales of the Chroniclers. And I like fiction; but for complete pleasure one must deceive oneself and think that they are the truth. History, opening the tombs, raising the dead, putting life into their hearts and words into their mouths, rebuilding the Kingdoms from decay, and presenting to the imagination a series of centuries with their distinct passions, morals, deeds, expands the limits of our own being; By its creative power we live with people of all times, we see and hear them, we love and hate them; not yet thinking about the benefit, we already enjoy the contemplation of diverse cases and characters that occupy the mind or nourish the sensitivity.

If any History, even unskillfully written, is pleasant, as Pliny says: all the more domestic. The true Cosmopolitan is a metaphysical being or a phenomenon so extraordinary that there is no need to talk about him, neither praise nor condemn him. We are all citizens, in Europe and in India, in Mexico and in Abyssinia; the personality of each is closely connected with the fatherland: we love it, because we love ourselves. Let the Greeks and Romans captivate the imagination: they belong to the family of the human race and are not strangers to us in their virtues and weaknesses, glory and disasters; but the name Russian has a special charm for us: my heart beats even stronger for Pozharsky than for Themistocles or Scipio. World History adorns the world with great memories for the mind, and Russian adorns the fatherland, where we live and feel. How attractive are the banks of the Volkhov, Dnieper, Don, when we know what happened on them in ancient times! Not only Novgorod, Kyiv, Vladimir, but also the huts of Yelets, Kozelsk, Galich become curious monuments and mute objects - eloquent. The shadows of past centuries paint pictures everywhere before us.

In addition to a special dignity for us, the sons of Russia, her chronicles have something in common. Let's take a look at the space of this only Power: the thought becomes numb; Never in its grandeur could Rome equal it, dominating from the Tiber to the Caucasus, the Elbe and the sands of Africa. Isn't it amazing how lands separated by eternal barriers of nature, immeasurable deserts and impenetrable forests, cold and hot climates, like Astrakhan and Lapland, Siberia and Bessarabia, could form one State with Moscow? Is the mixture of its inhabitants, of different tribes, varieties, and so remote from each other in degrees of education, less wonderful? Like America, Russia has its Wilds; like other European countries, it is the fruits of a long-term civil life. You don’t have to be Russian: you just need to think in order to read with curiosity the traditions of a people who, with courage and courage, gained dominance over a ninth part of the world, discovered countries hitherto unknown to anyone, introducing them into the general system of Geography, History, and enlightened them with the Divine Faith, without violence , without the atrocities used by other zealots of Christianity in Europe and America, but the only example of the best.

We agree that the deeds described by Herodotus, Thucydides, Livy, are generally more entertaining for any non-Russian, representing more spiritual strength and a livelier play of passions: for Greece and Rome were popular Powers and more enlightened than Russia; however, we can safely say that some cases, pictures, characters of our history are no less curious than ancient ones. Such are the essence of the exploits of Svyatoslav, the thunderstorm of Batyev, the uprising of the Russians at the Donskoy, the fall of Novgorod, the capture of Kazan, the triumph of popular virtues during the Interregnum. Giants of dusk, Oleg and son Igorev; the simple-hearted knight, the blind man Vasilko; friend of the fatherland, philanthropic Monomakh; Mstislav Brave, terrible in battle and an example of gentleness in the world; Mikhail of Tver, so famous for his generous death, the ill-fated, truly courageous, Alexander Nevsky; The hero is a young man, the winner of Mamaev, in the lightest outline, they strongly affect the imagination and heart. One reign of John III is a rare wealth for history: at least I do not know a Monarch worthy to live and shine in her sanctuary. The rays of his glory fall on the cradle of Peter - and between these two Autocrats is the amazing John IV, Godunov, worthy of his happiness and misfortune, the strange False Dmitry, and behind the host of valiant Patriots, Boyars and citizens, the mentor of the throne, the High Hierarch Philaret with the Sovereign son, the light-bearer in the darkness our state disasters, and Tsar Alexy, the wise father of the Emperor, whom Europe called the Great. Either the entire New History should remain silent, or the Russian should have the right to attention.

I know that the battles of our specific civil strife, thundering incessantly in the space of five centuries, are of little importance for the mind; that this subject is neither rich in thought for the Pragmatist, nor in beauty for the painter; but History is not a novel, and the world is not a garden where everything should be pleasant: it depicts the real world. We see majestic mountains and waterfalls on earth, flowering meadows and valleys; but how many barren sands and dull steppes! However, traveling in general is kind to a person with a lively feeling and imagination; in the very deserts there are charming views.

Let us not be superstitious in our lofty conception of the Ancient Scriptures. If we exclude fictitious speeches from the immortal creation of Thucydides, what remains? A naked story about the internecine strife of the Greek cities: the crowds are villainous, slaughtered for the honor of Athens or Sparta, as we have for the honor of Monomakhov or Oleg's house. There is not much difference, if we forget that these half-tigers spoke the language of Homer, had Sophocles' Tragedies and statues of Phidias. Does the thoughtful painter Tacitus always present us with the great, the striking? With tenderness we look at Agrippina, carrying the ashes of Germanicus; with pity for the bones and armor of the Varov Legion scattered in the forest; with horror at the bloody feast of the frantic Romans, illuminated by the flames of the Capitol; with disgust at the monster of tyranny, devouring the remnants of the Republican virtues in the capital of the world: but the boring litigation of cities for the right to have a priest in this or that temple and the dry Obituary of Roman officials occupy many pages in Tacitus. He envied Titus Livius for the richness of the subject; and Livy, smooth, eloquent, sometimes fills entire books with news of clashes and robberies, which are hardly more important than the Polovtsian raids. - In a word, reading all the Stories requires some patience, more or less rewarded with pleasure.