“It is a pity that such cruel and ambitious men influence the fate of that good but
simple people, who lived for so many centuries in happy union with the large can-
tons, and who now, following the promptings of one malicious egoist, demand
partition”[126].
The strife that followed in Switzerland caused him to reiterate his view that with-
out national virtue a Republic was doomed:
“That is why a monarchy is far more happy and reliable; it does not put excessive
demands on its citizens and can raise itself from a degree of morality at which
republics would fall”[127].
Karamzin’s hostility towards Reding continued from issue to issue[128], but in
March 1803 he translated a German article, in which Reding was praised as a self-
less and dedicated patriot[129]. This is essentially an illustration of Karamzin’s
desire to present an objective picture of European events, although his own point
of view was clearly stated in his “News and Comments” (Izvestiya I zamechaniya)
column. Karamzin also made use of German material for “external” criticism of
both France and Germany. Certain German journalists were strongly pro-English
and delighted in revealing the “hypocrisies” of French policy[130]; Karamzin him-
self found satisfaction in playing off the French press against its English counter-
part, pointing out their readiness to abuse and libel their opponents[131].
Karamzin’s interest in English affairs is the counterbalance to his absorption with
Napoleon; he himself made the revealing opposition that “in the one we are curi-
ous to know about national affairs and in the other, the actions of Consul
Bonaparte”[132]. His interest was primarily in English patriotism, in social insti-
tutions rather than political forms[133]. He tended to point out that the much
vaunted English political system, especially Parliament and democratic elections,
were not so ideal or worthy of imitation. In an amusing account of an English elec-
tion Karamzin quoted Rousseau’s remark that this was the only time Englishmen
enjoyed true freedom, but warned that “these elections may be called merely a cer-
emony: the ministers control them unseen, in agreement with the best people in
each district”[134].
Karamzin’s political commentary in the Messenger coincided with a brief period
of peace in Europe. The first number announced the imminent meeting at
Amiens, but the last issues were filled with apprehension lest hostilities resumed.
As Napoleon prepared to invade England, Karamzin was led to wonder whether
victory for France or England would be the better outcome for Europe; admira-
tion for Napoleon conflicted with his love of England:
“England abuses its dominance at sea, but who would wish the French to conquer
this most fortunate country in the world, where wise laws reign and the citizens
prosper”[135].
Yet it is important to note that the prospects of a new European conflict did not
plunge Karamzin into despair and anguish – as the events of the Terror and the
Revolutionary Wars had done. The reason behind his comparative equanimity was
herald of europe • September 2004
19
his patriotic faith in Russia and his new independence of Europe. His confidence
was founded not only on Russia’s internal strength and identity, given to it by the
accession of Alexander, but also on its European mission and influence:
It can despise the usual tricks of diplomacy and, elected by Fate, can, it seems, be
a true intermediary between nations[136].
He proudly recorded that Russia’s intervention, into German affairs made it “an
object of universal respect, universal trust”, that the Corfu islanders had welcomed
Russian help and that even England acknowledged Russia’s might[137].
VIII.
The Messenger of Europe offered the Russian public a rich variety of reading mat-
ter, but it was a journal dominated by the personality and interests of one man,
given unity both by his style and by the persistence of certain themes and ideas.
Compared with the Moscow Journal, the Messenger is pre-eminently a political
rather than a literary journal; Karamzin’s desire for cultural enlightenment is
linked with his propaganda for a particular social and political system, within
which his ideals could be realized. The journal was the messenger of European
affairs to the degree that European experience could demonstrate, negatively or
positively, a course for Russian development; it is essentially the testament of a
man who had learnt and taken much from Western culture but who now felt the
tide to be turning and wished to encourage Russians to an awareness of their
greatness and potential.
Karamzin had himself lived happily under the influence of Western literature and
thought since his schooldays and had freely acknowledged in his story Liodor
(1792) that Russians were still apprentices of the West in all things, even in litera-
ture[138]. Now he felt assured of his standing as a writer in Russia and abroad; he
was the one contemporary Russian author widely known in the West and in the
period 1797–1803 translations of the Letters, stories and articles appeared in
Danish, English, French, German, Greek and Polish[139]. Karamzin drew atten-
tion to English, French and German versions of his work in the pages of the
Messenger[140], and it was from the Messenger that Johannes-Gottfried Richter,
already the translator of the Letters translated articles and stories for publication
in his Russische Miszellen (1803–4)[141].
The Messenger of Europe occupies a distinguished place in the history of Russian
journalism as the first of the tolstyye zhurnaly and its importance was immediate-
ly recognized by Karamzin’s contemporaries. It was initially published in 600
copies, but was so successful that the first number was republished and the month-
ly printing doubled to 1200 copies. Of the tributes to Karamzin’s achievement per-
haps the most impressive, because it was unexpected, came from an opponent, the
Shishkovite and Decembrist Wilhelm Kyukhel’beker, who read in exile the works
herald of europe • September 2004
20
Karamzin had written in the 19th Century. Although he was fundamentally
opposed to Karamzin’s views[142], he felt obliged to acknowledge the merits of the
Messenger:
“It must be admitted that for its time this journal is extremely good; and even
today it would not occupy the last place among our publications for the attractive-
ness of its articles, and almost the first place for its language”[143].
A month later, in June 1832, he admitted:
“They have brought me two volumes of Karamzin’s Messenger and two of his suc-
cessors’. What a difference! One must be just to Karamzin that as a journalist he
was a master of his craft”[144].
* FORUM FOR MODERN LANGUAGE STUDIES, Vol. V.№ 1. January 1969
1. F.F. Vigel’, Zapiski, 2 vols., Moscow, 1928, I, p. 131.
2. Arzamas i arzamasskiye protokoly, Leningrad, 1933, p. 240.
3. Op. cit., p. 125.
4. N.I. Grech, Zapiski o moyey zhizni, Moscow-Leningrad, 1930, p. 190.
5. In the second volume of his literary almanac Aglaya (1795) Karamzin published an exchange of
letters between Melodor and Philalet, illustrating the philosophical crisis he underwent as a result of
the Reign of Terror in France. Melodor represented Karamzin the disillusioned idealist and Philalet
the worldly-wise guarded optimist. The debate was continued in the Dialogue on Happiness
(Razgovor o shchastii, 1797).
6. Sochineniya Karamzina, 3 vols., St Petersburg, 1848, I, p.210. (Note: Whenever possible, subsequent
references are made to this edition, which includes Karamzin’s major articles from the Messenger of
Europe: Karamzin, followed by volume and page.)
7. Vestnik Evropy, I, 1802, January, № 1, p. 8.
8. Ibid., VIII, 1803, April, № 7, pp. 173–92.
9. Ibid., VI, 1802, December, № 23, p. 227.
10. Ibid., № 24, pp. 319-25.
11. An analysis of Karamzin’s prose fiction in the journal lies outside the scope of the present article.
Its importance, however, has been recognized in a number of recent studies, e.g. V.I. Fyodorov,
“Istoricheskaya povest N.M. Karamzina “Marfa Posadnitsa’» (Uchonyye zapiski Moskovskogo
gorodskogo ped. instituta, LXII, № 6, Moscow, 1957, pp. 109-20); Yu.M. Lotman, «Puti razvitiya
russkoy prozy 1800–1810-kh godov» (Uchonyye zapiski Tartuskogo gos. universiteta, vypusk 104,
Tartu, 1961, pp. 3–57); Istoriya russkogo romana, I, Moscow-Leningrad, 1962, pp. 71–83; F.Z.
Kanunova,“K evolyutsii sentimentalizma N.M. Karamzina (“Marfa Posadnitsa”)” (Uchonyye zapiski
Tomskogo gos. universiteta, № 50, 1965, pp. 3–13); F.Z. Kanunova, “Evolyutsiya sentimentalizma
Karamzina (“Moya ispoved”)” (Rol’ i znacheniye literatury XVIII veka v istorii russkoy kul’tury.
XVIII vek, sbornik 7, Moscow-Leningrad, 1966, pp. 286–290).
12. Vestnik Evropy, I, 1802, January, № 1, p. 7.
13. Ibid., VI, December, № 23, pp. 228–9. (Karamzin’s new views on criticism were embraced by
herald of europe • September 2004
21
Zhukovsky, who began editing the Messenger in 1808: “Criticism and luxury are the daughters of
wealth; but we are not yet Croesuses in literature!”: ibid., 1808, January, № 1, p. 9.)
14. Moskovskiy zhurnal, V, 1792, February, pp. 277-90.
15. Ya.L. Barskov, Perepiska moskovskikh masonov XVIII-go veka, 1780–1792, Petrograd, 1915, p. 90;
Zritel’, II St Petersburg, 1792, June, pp. 158-9.
16. Vestnik Evropy, VI, p. 228.
17. G.P. Makogonenko, “Literaturnaya positsiya Karamzina v XIX veke” (Russkaya literatura,
Leningrad, 1962, № 1, p. 90).
18. Vestnik Evropy, VI, p. 229.
19. Ibid., III, 1802, May, № 10, pp. 103-19; VII, 1803, January, № 2, pp. 136–40; III, 1802, June, № 11,
pp. 242–4.
20. Ibid., p. 244.
21. Ibid., X, 1803, July, № 13, pp. 57-8. (Cf. A. G. Cross, “N.M. Karamzin and Barthelemy’s Voyage du
jeune Anacharsis” in Modern Language Review, LXI, 1966, July, № 3, pp. 467–72.)
22. Ibid., V, 1802, September, № 17, p. 56.
23. Ibid., III, 1802, May, № 10, p. 146.
24. Ibid., II, 1802, April, № 7, pp. 232–236. (Cf. Karamzin’s remarks to Dmitriyev on Klushin’s
Laughter and Grief (Smekh i gore) in 1793: Pis’ma N.M. Karamzina k I. I. Dmitriyevu, St.Petersburg,
1866, pp. 36-7.)
25. The response was so great that Dmitriyev wrote ‘An Epitaph on Epitaphs’ (Epitafiya Epitafiyam,
sochinyonnaya odnim iz avtorov epitafiy): Vestnik Evropy, IX, 1803, May, № 9, p. 46. The standard
may be judged from the fact that Karamzin was obliged to make two grammatical corrections in an
epitaph of two lines! : ibid., VIII, 1803, March, № 6, p. 140.
26. N. Vtorov, “Gavrila Petrovich Kamenev” (Vchera i segodnya, I, St Petersburg, 1845, p. 50).
27. Karamzin, I, p. 610.
28. Ibid., pp. 615, 643-4, 647. (Cf. Karamzin’s conversation with Wieland in the Letters when all three
topics were discussed: ibid., II, p. 149.)
29. Vestnik Evropy, V, 1802, October, № 20, p. 285. (In his notes on Kantemir in the “Pantheon”
Karamzin had divided the 18th Century into four periods.)
30. Ibid., I, 1802, January, № 1, pp. 3–4.
31. Ibid., p. 5.
32. Karamzin, III, pp. 551–2.
33. Ibid., p. 473.
34. Ibid., pp. 474–5.
35. Ibid., p. 527.
36. Ibid., p. 528.
37. Ibid., p. 529. The idea of “writing as one speaks” was taken up by adherents of Karamzin, such as
Batyushkov, but had been expressed as early as 1778 by Fyodor Karin, a follower of Sumarokov: V.I.
Saitov, “Fyodor Grigor’yevich Karin. Odin iz maloizvestnykh pisateley vtoroy poloviny XVIII
veka”(Fyodor Grigor’yevich Karin. One of less known writers of the second half of 18th Century)
(Bibliograf, St. Petersburg, 1893, № 1, p. 16).
38. Vestnik Evropy, II, 1802, March, № 5, p. 56. (Cf. Karamzin, II, p. 749.)
herald of europe • September 2004
22
39. Ibid., VI, 1802, November, № 22, p. 124.
40. Ibid., p. 126.
41. Ibid., IX, 1803, June, № 11, p. 172.
42. Ibid., pp. 167–8. (Cf. Karamzin, III, p. 609.)
43. Ibid., I, 1802, January, № 1, p. 44.
44. Karamzin, III, p. 552.
45. Ibid., I, p. 384.
46. Vestnik Evropy, IX, 1803, June, № 11, p. 201.
47. Karamzin, I, p. 641.
48. Vestnik Evropy, VI, 1802, November, № 22, p. 133 (A detailed analysis of Karamzin’s changing atti-
tude to folk literature is given by N.N. Trubitsyn, O narodnoy poezii v obshchestvennom i liter-
aturnom obikhode pervoy treti XIX veka, St.Petersburg, 1912, pp. 328–32.)
49. Ibid., X, 1803, July, № 13, pp. 60-1.
50. Karamzin, I, pp. 424-5.
51. Ibid., p. 470. “I wanted to know if they love each other?” – “Of course we do love! Husband and
wife are more than brother and sister”. “Are you afraid of Death?” – “Why be afraid? We, thank God,
have lived. Death is no Misfortune”. “Will you not pity the old woman?” – “Why pity?! Someone has
to die first”. – “What if she outlives you?” – “And so what? There are kind people in the world; they
will give her a place”.
52. Vestnik Evropy, III, 1802, May, № 10, p. 140.
53. Ibid., I, 1802, January, № 1, pp. 17-9.
54. Ibid., p. 48.
55. Ibid., II, 1802, March, № 5, p. 52.
56. Ibid., p. 55.
57. Ibid., VIII, 1803, March, № 5, pp. 39-42; April, № 7, pp.227-9; № 8, pp. 298-301; IX, May, № 10, pp.
124–6; June, № 11, p. 235; № 12, pp. 291–4; XII, November, Nos. 23–4, pp.268–75.
58. ‘On the Moscow Earthquake of 1802’ (O moskovskom zemletryasenii 1802 goda): Karamzin, III,
pp. 581–4.
59.“A Journey around Moscow” (Puteshestviye vokrug Moskvy): Karamzin, I, pp. 448–57; “Historical
Reminiscences and Observations on the Way to the Holy Trinity Monastery” (Istoricheskiye
vospominaniya i zamechaniya na puti k Troitse): ibid., pp. 458–501.
60. “On the Secret Chancellery” (O taynoy kantselarii): ibid., pp. 419–26.
61. “On the Moscow Revolt in the Reign of Aleksey Mikhaylovich” (O moskovskom myatezhe v
tsarstvovaniye Alekseya Mikhaylovicha): ibid.m pp. 398–418.
62. Ibid., pp. 420–1, 487.
63. Ibid., pp. 422–3, 485.
64. Ibid., p. 419.
65. Ibid. (Karamzin was referring to A.L. Schlozer [1735–1809].)
66. Ibid., p. 479.
67. Karamzin had himself in mind at the end of his essay on Martha: “a gallery of famous women
herald of europe • September 2004
23
could be a highly attractive work if an author of talent and taste would present these characters with
the lively colours of love for the fair sex and the homeland. Is it necessary to say who should be
entrusted with such a work in our time?”: ibid., p. 387.
68. Vestnik Evropy, II, 1802, March, № 6, p. 134.
69. Karamzin, I, p. 424.
70. A.S. Pushkin, Polnoye sobraniye sochineniy, XI, Moscow-Leningrad, 1949, p. 120.
71. Karamzin, III, p. 607. (Cf. Karamzin’s letter to Alexander Turgenev on the same subject in
September 1816: ibid., p. 740.)
72. ibid., pp. 505–7.
73. Ibid., I, p. 361.
74. “On the New Schools for the Nobility, Established in Russia” (O novykh blagorodnykh
uchilishchakh, zavodimykh v Rossii): Vestnik Evropy, II, 1802, April, № 8, pp. 358–66; “On the New
Organization of National Enlightenment in Russia” (O novom obrazovanii narodnogo
prosveshcheniya v Rossii): Karamzin, III, pp. 348–359; “On a Reliable Method of Acquiring Sufficient
Teachers in Russia” (O vernom sposobe imet’ v Rossii dovol’no uchiteley): Karamzin, III, pp.
340–347; “On the Public Teaching of the Sciences at Moscow University” (O publichnom prepoda-
vanii nauk v Moskovskom universitete): ibid., III, pp. 611–7.
75. Vestnik Evropy, II, 1802, April, № 8, p. 363.
76. Karamzin, III, p. 349.
77. Ibid., p. 597.
78. Ibid., pp. 343–4.
79. Vestnik Evropy, IX, 1803, June, № 11, pp. 197–9. (Karamzin later printed part of Glinka’s first
work, “The Temple of Svetovid” (Khram Svetovida), a laboured investigation into the gods of Slavic
mythology: ibid., X, August, № 15, pp.173–86.)
80. Karamzin, III, p. 616.
81. Ibid., I, p. 339.
82. Ibid., III, p. 591. (Cf. ibid., p. 580.)
83. Ibid., p. 351.
84. Ibid., pp. 573–4, 350.
85. Ibid., p. 573..
86. Ibid., p. 570; I, p. 406.
87. In his Historical Panegyric to Catherine II Karamzin revealed clearly the distinction he made
between philosophical theorizing and political expediency: “… even good in a philosophical sense
may be harmful in politics, as soon as it is out of step with the civil state of a nation. A sad truth, but
demonstrated by experience!”: ibid., I, p. 370.
88. Ibid., III, p. 575.
89. Cf. Pushkin’s account of a conversation he had with Karamzin on this subject and Karamzin’s vio-
lent rejection of the accusation: A.S. Pushkin, Polnoye sobraniye sochineniy, XII, 1949, p. 306.
90. In a later essay Karamzin said «a full methodical collection of civil laws, clearly and wisely writ-
ten» was Russia’s most pressing need: Karamzin, III, p. 592.
91. Ibid., I, p. 209.
92. A.M. Skabichevsky, Ocherki istorii russkoy tsenzury (1700–1863), St Petersburg, 1892, p. 86.
herald of europe • September 2004
24
93. “Odin s ulybkoyu umil’noy / Zhelal dela tvoi vospet’ / I slov pustya potok obil’nyy / Mnil slavu
Tomasa imet’. / K romanam, k pastoral’nu slogu / Imeya strast’ – skroil eklogu / I slovo milaya vkleil
/ Tvoi i lavry i trofei / I khramy vse, I mavzoley / Slezoyu nezhnoy okropil.”: Russkaya starina, XCII,
St.Petersburg, 1897, November, p. 306.
94. Karamzin, I, p. 280.
95. Karamzin, I, p. 289. (Karamzin’s antipathy towards Poland also informs his Opinion of a Russian
Citizen.)
96. G.V. Vernadsky, Russkoye masonstvo v tsarstvovaniye Yekateriny II, Petrograd, 1917, pp. 236–8.
97. He stressed the need for censorship because reason might stray from truth; he had been quick to
forget the excesses of censors under Catherine and Paul.
98. Karamzin, II, p. 723.
99. Ibid., I, pp. 303–4.
100. Ibid., p. 312.
101. Nevertheless, true to the theories of Montesquieu and Rousseau on the suit-ability of a republic
for a small country, Karamzin defended Switzerland’s system: ibid., I, pp. 313, 320.
102. Ibid., I, pp. 312–3.
103. Ibid., III, pp. 345, 349, 357.
104 Ibid., I, p. 202.
105. Ibid., pp. 402–3. (Cf. Karamzin’s translation of an article giving a similar view of Louis XVI)
106. Ibid., p. 203. (Cf. his epigraph to the Memoir on Ancient and Modern Russia: “There is no flat-
tery on my tongue”.)
107. This epigram on Karamzin’s History is not included in the Academy edition of Pushkin’s work,
but Pushkin’s authorship of it is well argued by B. V. Tomashevsky, Pushkin. Issledovaniya I materi-
ally, I, Moscow-Leningrad, 1956, pp. 208–15.
108. Karamzin, III, pp. 585–6. (Cf. ibid., II, pp. 462–3.)
109. Ibid., pp. 586, 587.
110. Vestnik Evropy, IX, 1803, June, № 11, pp. 175–6.
111. Ibid., I, 1802, January, № 1, pp. 20–37.
112. Ibid., pp. 9–16.
113. Karamzin, III, p. 522.
114. Vestnik Evropy, VII, 1803, January, № 2, pp. 85–91; XI, 1803, May, № 9, pp. 24–30.
115. Ibid., I, 1802, January, № 1, p. 33.
116. Karamzin, III, p. 387.
117. Yu. M. Lotman, “Evolyutsiya mirovozzreniya Karamzina (1789–1803)”, Uchonyye zapiski
Tartuskogo gos. universiteta, vypusk 51, Tartu, 1957, pp. 150–5.
118. Karamzin, I, p. 527.
119. Ibid., p. 530. (Karamzin also translated a speech by Baron Nekker favouring monarchy over a
republic: Vestnik Evropy, V, 1802, October, № 20, pp. 301–19.)
120. Ibid., I, pp. 276–7. (Cf. “Not the French people but Providence placed this astonishing man at
such a degree of greatness”: Vestnik Evropy, III, 1802, June, № 11, p. 270.)
herald of europe • September 2004
25
121. Quoted by Karamzin in his Man of Feeling and the Cold-Blooded Man: ibid., III, p. 620.
122. Karamzin was here referring to Napoleon’s plans to invade England: Vestnik Evropy, X, 1803,
August, № 15, p. 230.
123. Karamzin, I, p. 552.
124. Vestnik Evropy, III, 1802, May, № 9, pp. 77–94; II, April, № 7, pp. 276–7.
125. Karamzin, I, p. 536.
126. Vestnik Evropy, V, 1802, September, № 18, p. 157.
127. Ibid., October, № 20, pp. 319–20.
128. Ibid., VI, 1802, November, № 21, p. 74; № 22, p. 156; December, № 24, pp. 330–1.
129. Ibid., VIII, 1803, March, № 6, pp. 146–54.
130. Particularly Archenholz, whom Karamzin called in the Letters “this well-known anglomaniac”:
Karamzin, II, p. 691.
131. Vestnik Evropy, II, 1802, April, № 8, p. 386; IV, August, № 15, p. 247; VI, November, № 22, p. 165.
132. Ibid., IV, 1802, August, № 16, p. 329.
133. See A. G. Cross, “Karamzin and England” (Slavonic and East European Review, XLIII, 1964, №
100, December, pp. 101–6).
134. Vestnik Evropy, IV, 1802, July, № 13, p. 73.
135. Ibid., XI, 1803, September, № 18, p. 160.136 Karamzin, III, p. 590.
137. Vestnik Evropy, V, 1802, October, № 19, p. 232; X, 1803, August, № 15, pp. 213–5, 232.
138. Moskovskiy zhurnal, V, 1792, Mach, p. 315.
139. S. Ponomaryov, Materialy dlya bibliografii literatury o N.M. Karamzine, St Petersburg, 1883, pp.
46–51.
140. Vestnik Evropy, VII, 1803, February, № 3, p. 229; X, August, № 15, pp. 195–8; XI, October, № 20,
p. 291; XII, November, Nos. 21–2, p. 50.
141. V.I. Kuleshov, “Iz istorii russko-nemetskikh literatur-nykh svyazey” (Vestnik Evropy N.M.
Karamzina i Russische Miszellen I.G. Rikh-tera)” (Slavyanskaya filologiya, V, Moscow, 1963, pp.
436–51).
142. “It is impossible to agree with all Karamzin’s historical, literary and philosophical opinions”: V.
K. Kyukhel’beker, Dnevnik, Leningrad, 1929, p. 88.
143. Ibid., pp. 60–1.
144. Ibid., pp. 64–5. (Karamzin’s immediate successors on the Messenger were Pankratii Sumarokov,
Michael Kachenovsky and Vassily Zhukovsky).
herald of europe • September 2004
26
Dostları ilə paylaş: |