1
herald of europe • September 2004
N.M.Karamzin’s Messenger of
Europe
Anthony G. Cross
(Vestnik Evropy), 1802–3
Karamzin’s versatility and talent were revealed from the first number of the
Moscow Journal. As a journalist he showed his ability to produce a journal
comparable in presentation and content with the European models he so
admired. He introduced as a basic feature informed criticism of Russian and
foreign books and plays and published carefully chosen and written transla-
tions from Western originals on a wide range of subjects.
In the summer of 1790 the 23 year-old Nikolay Karamzin returned to Russia after
an extensive trip through Germany, Switzerland, France and England. Eager to
make his name as a writer and to pass on the fruits of his European education,
Karamzin resolved to publish the Moscow Journal (Moskovskiy zhurnal, 1791-2)
which became the broad-sheet of Russian sentimentalism and initiated what was
to be known as the “Karamzin period of Russian literature”. In his memoirs Filipp
Vigel saw the journal as the rallying-point for “all noble-minded youths and all
truly sensitive women»”[1], and Piotr Vyazemsky considered that “Karamzin in
the Moscow Journal destroyed the Gothic towers of a decaying literature and on
its ruins laid the foundations of a new European publication, which awaited for its
ultimate completion skilled, industrious hands”[2].
Karamzin’s versatility and talent were revealed from the first number of the
Moscow Journal. As a journalist he showed his ability to produce a journal com-
parable in presentation and content with the European models he so admired. He
introduced as a basic feature informed criticism of Russian and foreign books and
plays and published carefully chosen and written translations from Western orig-
inals on a wide range of subjects. H e mustered contributions from the leading
poets of the day and provided in his own Letters of a Russian Traveller (Pis’ma
russkogo puteshestvennika) and in sentimental stories such as Poor Liza (Bednaya
Liza) and Nathalie, the Boyar’s Daughter (Natal’ya, boyarskaya doch’) examples of
accomplished Russian prose writing, which caught the imagination of the reading
public and ensured the success of sentimentalism as a literary vogue in Russia. Not
least, the Moscow Journal heralded a stylistic revolution: without the carefully
wrought embroidery of what became known as the “new style” (novyy slog) the
emotional finesse and nuance on which sentimentalism relied could not have been
realized. The implications of sentimentalism as something more than a literary
style are equally evident in the journal: the spirit of Karamzin’s work is independ-
ent, enlightened and humane.
Although Karamzin’s activity as a writer extends over a period of more than forty
years (from the publication of his first translation in 1783 until his death in 1826,
2
herald of europe • September 2004
when he was working on the twelfth volume of his monumental history of Russia)
his major literary output is concentrated in a period of thirteen years. It is a peri-
od bounded by two important journals, the Moscow Journal and the Messenger of
Europe. In the 1790’s Karamzin’s desire to encourage the development of Russian
literature and to bring Russia into line culturally with the West, inspired his stream
of publications. He strove to provide examples of entertaining and accomplished
writing and to fashion a literary language able to compete with French or English
in its range and richness.
Nevertheless, in this period his work and philosophy of life were affected by polit-
ical, non-literary events in Europe and Russia. Repressive measures under
Catherine and Paul threatened not only his friends but his own very existence as
a writer. After the unrelieved gloom of Paul’s reign it is not surprising that
Karamzin shared in the wave of optimism which swept through Russia on
Alexander’s accession. Vigel described how “everyone felt a kind of moral expan-
sion, looks became kinder, the walk bolder, the breathing freer»”[3]; Nikolay
Grech sought to characterize the change by specific reference to Karamzin’s own
sentiments:
“It is impossible to describe the astonishment, joy and, enthusiasm, aroused by
what was in fact an unfortunate and loathsome event (Paul’s murder). Russia
breathed freely. Nobody thought of pretending any more. Karamzin remarked
justly in his memoir on the state of Russia: “Who was more unfortunate than Paul!
Tears at his death were shed only within his family”. Not only in words but in writ-
ing, in print, particularly in poems, people expressed their joyful feelings of release
from his tyranny. Karamzin, in his ode on Alexander’s accession, said: “Hearts are
ready to breathe in You: / Our spirit is revived by hope. / Thus does the appearance
of sweet spring / Bring with it oblivion / Of all the dark horrors of winter”[4].
Yet this did not, and could not, signal a complete return by Karamzin to the beliefs
and enthusiasms of his youth. He continued to speak as a Philalet, advocating a
philosophy of moderation and caution[5]. Karamzin’s experiences and new inter-
ests in the decade between the Moscow Journal and the Messenger of Europe
modified his approach to journalism: in the earlier journal he had been pre-emi-
nently a man of letters; to this role he now added those of an historian and a polit-
ical publicist. His erstwhile propaganda for Russian enlightenment took on a new
nationalistic colouring. The Messenger of Europe is the focal point of Karamzin’s
thought and work at the beginning of Alexander’s reign; it is the culmination of
his years of work for Russian literature and his swan song before his entry into “the
temple of History”[6]. Although his reputation and influence were considerable
throughout Alexander’s reign, it was not until the publication of the first eight vol-
umes of his History of the Russian State (Istoriya gosudarstva rossiyskogo) in 1818
that Karamzin again occupied the literary limelight.
Karamzin was both the editor and chief contributor of the Messenger of Europe;
he left his stamp on every aspect of its contents and presentation as indelibly as he
had done on his earlier journal. Karamzin himself was perhaps not fully aware to
what degree he assumed his new role as public tribune; in the foreword to the first
issue (as well as in an article at the end of 1802) he emphasized his concern for lit-