This work is the basis of Church Slavonic grammatical science. The value of the works of M.V.

Meletiy Smotrytsky(in the world - Maxim Gerasimovich Smotritsky, there is also a mixed form of the name Maxentius, alias Theophilus Orthologist; genus. predp. - or, the town of Smotrych or Kamenets-Podolsky - December 17 (27) (according to others, the village of Derman) - Archbishop of Polotsk; writer, educator.

He actively advocated the accession of the Orthodox Church, located on Ukrainian lands, to the union; the proposals were rebuffed by the circles uniting around the Bishop of Przemysl Isaiah (Kopinsky).

Biography

early years

Meletius received his primary education at the Ostroh school from his father and Greek Cyril Lukaris (in the future also the rector of the Ostroh school, and later the Patriarch of Constantinople), where he got the opportunity to master the Church Slavonic and Greek languages ​​perfectly. After the death of Smotrytsky's father, Prince Konstantin Ostrozhsky sent a capable young man for further education to the Jesuit Vilna Academy (this happened, according to various sources, in or in 1601; the first option is considered more reliable); then Smotrytsky traveled widely abroad, listening to lectures at various universities, especially at the Protestant Leipzig, Wittenberg and Nuremberg universities. He probably received his doctorate in medicine abroad. Returning, he settled with Prince B. Solomeretsky near Minsk. Smotrytsky often traveled to Minsk, fought against the union, as a result of which many Uniates returned to Orthodoxy and an Orthodox brotherhood was founded in Minsk. Around 1608 he moved to Vilna, was a member of the Vilna Brotherhood, anonymously published a treatise "Αντίγραφη" ("Answer"); probably taught at a fraternal school. Actively participated in the national-religious struggle. Under a pseudonym Theophilus Orthologist in 1610 he published his most famous work "Θρηνος" ("Lament"), like most of Smotrytsky's other polemical works - in Polish. In this work, the author scourges the bishops who have converted to the union, calls them to change their minds, but also criticizes the negligence and abuses of the Orthodox clergy; in polemics with Catholics, Smotrytsky acts as an encyclopedically educated person of his time, cites or mentions more than 140 authors - not only the fathers of the church, but also many ancient and revival scholars and writers. With this work, Smotrytsky gained immense popularity among the Orthodox; as he himself wrote, some contemporaries considered this book equal to the works of John Chrysostom and were ready to shed their blood and give their souls for it.

Criticism of both the Catholic and Orthodox hierarchies, the display of religious and national persecution of the people of Little Russia and Belarus, and most importantly, the call for the active protection of their rights, greatly disturbed the Polish royal authorities. Sigismund III in 1610 forbade the sale and purchase of books by the Vilna Brotherhood under the threat of a fine of 5,000 gold pieces; The king ordered the local authorities to confiscate the fraternal printing house, take away and burn the books, and arrest the compositors and proofreaders, which was done. The editor and proofreader Leonty Karpovich ended up in prison; Smotritsky managed to avoid arrest.

Very little information has been preserved about the life and work of Smotrytsky after the royal repressions. He probably returned to Little Russia; maybe he lived in Ostrog for some time and taught at the school there. Smotrytsky is considered one of the first rectors of the Kyiv fraternal school, organized in - years, where he taught Church Slavonic and Latin. He then returned to Vilna where he lived in the Holy Spirit Monastery. Under pressure or even at the categorical demand of the Vilna brotherhood, which could not remain indifferent to Smotrytsky's contacts with the Uniates, he became a monk under the name of Meletius. In 1616, his translation into the Little Russian language of the “Gospel of the instructive ... our father Callistus” was published.

"Grammar"

"Grammar" Smotrytsky. 1721 edition. Moscow

Journey to the East (1624-1626)

Artworks

• Θρηνος to iest Lament iedyney S. powszechney apostolskiey Wschodniey Cerkwie… - Wilno, 1610.
• Grammars of Slavonic correct Cvntagma… Evye, 1619. Reprint: Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 1979. Internet version (scanned).
• Apologia. - Lvov, 1628.
• Αντιγραφη (Antigrafi) // Monuments of polemical literature. - SPb., 1903. - Prince. 3 (Russian Historical Library, Vol. 19).
• Verificatia niewinności // AUZR. - Part 1. - T. 7.
• Lament of the world of the poor on the pitiful repose of the holy-loving and in both virtue of the wealthy husband in God's lord father Leonty Karpovich, archimandrite of the common monastery at the church of the Descent of the Holy Spirit of the brotherhood of the church Vilensky Orthodox Greek // Memories of fraternal schools on Ukraine. - K., 1988.
• Collected works of Meletij Smortyc'kyj / Harvard Library of Early Ukrainian Literature: Texts: Volume I. Cambridge (Massachusetts): Harvard University, 1987. ISBN 0-916458-20-2.
• The Jevanhelije ucytelnoje of Meletij Smotryc'kyj / Harvard Library of Early Ukrainian Literature: Texts: Volume II. Cambridge (Massachusetts): Harvard University, 1987. ISBN 0-916458-21-0.

Literature

• Vasilyeva Z. I. (ed.) History of Education and Pedagogical Thought Abroad and in Russia: Textbook for University Students. - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 2002.
• Zasadkevich N. Meletiy Smotrytsky as a philologist. - Odessa, 1883.
• From the history of philosophical and socio-political thought of Belarus. - Minsk, 1962.
• Short V.S. The creative path of Meletiy Smotrytsky. - Minsk, 1987.
• Kuznetsov P. S. At the origins of Russian grammatical thought. - M., 1958.
• Mitsko I. Z. Ostrozka Slov'yano-Greek-Latin Academy. - K., 1990.
• Nimchuk V. V. Kiev-Mohyla Academy and development of Ukrainian. linguistics XVII-XIX centuries. // The role of the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in the cultural heritage of the Slavic peoples. - K., 1988.
• Nichik V. M., Litvinov V. D., Stratiy Ya. M. Humanist and Reformation Ideas in Ukraine. - K., 1991.
• Osinsky A.S. Melety Smotrytsky, Archbishop of Polotsk. - K., 1912.
• Piskunov A. I. (ed.) History of Pedagogy and Education. - M., 2003.
• Prokoshina E. Meletiy Smotrytsky. - Minsk, 1966.
• Tsirulnikov A. M. The history of education in portraits and documents: A textbook for students of pedagogical institutions. - M., 2001.
• Yaremenko P.K. Meletiy Smotrytsky. Life and creativity. - K., 1986.

Notes

Links

Categories:

• Personalities in alphabetical order
• Born in 1577
• Born in Dunaevets region
• Deceased December 27
• Deceased in 1633
• The dead in the Zdolbunovsky district
• Buried in Zdolbunovsky district
• Scientists of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
• Religious figures of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
• Philologists of Ukraine
• Publicists alphabetically
• Publicists of Ukraine
• Religious figures of Ukraine
• Bishops of the Orthodox Church of Constantinople
• Teachers of the Kiev-Mohyla Academy
• Bishops of Polotsk

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

The author talks about the complex and controversial life and work, analyzes the socio-political views of the thinker against the backdrop of a complex historical situation. Two periods of Smotrytsky's life and work are considered - the first, when he was an active supporter and participant in protests against Catholic dominance in Belarus, and the second - the last years of his life, when Smotrytsky moved away from this struggle. His scientific activity as a philologist, as the author of the famous "Grammar" of the Slavic language, which has retained its scientific significance for 150 years, is covered in detail.

FOREWORD

There are individuals in the history who are born of their era, but their significance and fame go far beyond its limits. There are also those who cannot be imagined outside of their time, outside the conditions in which they were brought up and lived. Smotrytsky combines the features of one and the other. Indeed, when we pronounce his name, we remember him first of all as the author of the well-known "Grammar" of the Church Slavonic language, which Lomonosov, together with Magnitsky's "Arithmetic", called "the gates of his learning." Less. Smotrytsky's social and literary activity as a polemical writer is known. It is closely connected with the era, incomprehensible and inexplicable without it. Without Smotritsky, it is difficult to imagine the development of literature and social thought in one of the most difficult periods in the history of Belarus - in the first quarter of the 17th century. As a son of his time, he reflected all its complexity and inconsistency.

Melety Smotrytsky attracted the attention of many researchers. Polish, German, Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian and other scientists wrote about him. Separate archival documents about the life of Smotrytsky were published, his works were published in translation and in the original, monographic studies and short articles were written about the life and various aspects of Smotrytsky's activity. The group of works devoted to the analysis of Smotrytsky's philological views is especially significant. And this attention is natural, because his "Grammar" retained its scientific significance for 150 years after publication.

The main advantage of all pre-revolutionary literature about Smotrytsky is the large amount of factual material that has been identified and collected. In their conclusions and interpretations, some authors were more objective and impartial (K. Kharlampovich, K. Elenevsky, A. Osinsky), others were tendentious (M. Koyalovich, S. Golubev, A. Demyanovich, Jesuit and Uniate historians).

However, all of them are characterized by one drawback, which stems essentially from the limitations of the worldview. For them, it was important to find out the significance of Smotrytsky's church activities, the essence of the religious struggle of that period, and, depending on this, assess his place in the history of religious life. Pre-revolutionary historians saw only passionate and furious "theological squabbles" in the social struggle of that period. In their opinion, "if only people of that time could come to an agreement among themselves regarding heavenly things, then they would have no reason to quarrel over earthly matters." They either insufficiently, or did not at all touch upon the analysis of Smotrytsky's class position in the religious and political struggle that unfolded after the Brest Church Union. Therefore, they ignored the role of social and class ideas in the formation of the individual and in the nature of Smotrytsky's work, and placed all emphasis on one side - the religious one, which they illuminated as central and the only one both in Smotrytsky's activities and in the public life of that time.

In the post-October period, Soviet researchers paid insufficient attention to the study of social thought in Belarus and Ukraine of this period, the activities and views of Smotrytsky in particular. And only in recent years, mainly in the works of Belarusian and Ukrainian scientists devoted to the history of social thought and literature, Smotrytsky is not passed over in silence. Among these works, first of all, it should be noted A. Korshunov’s “Christamat na old Belarusian language literature” (Minsk, 1959), the collection “From the history of philosophical and socio-political thought of Belarus” (Minsk, 1962), the book - the beginning of the XVII century. in the fight against Vatzhanu i Unp "P. Zagaiko (KiTv, 1957), "In the glorious place of Vilna" A. Anushkin (M., 1962), "From the history of the socio-political life of the cities of Belarus in the 16th - half of the 17th centuries." 3. Kopyssky (“Proceedings of the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the BSSR”, issue 3. Minsk, 1958) and others.

It is also impossible not to mention the latest works of P. Yaremenko "Restoroga" - an Ukrainian anti-Ushat pamphlet on the cob of the 17th century. (Kyiv, 1963) and “Ukrainian polemicist Christopher Fshalet and Yogo “Apokrisis” (Lv1v, 1964), which gives a detailed description of the period we are studying, an analysis of major polemical treatises of that time and an assessment of the religious and literary controversy, an active participant in which was Melenty Smotrytsky.

It seems to us that the gap in the study of the personality and activities of Smotritsky by Soviet scientists was not accidental: with his contradictory inconsistent position in the national liberation movement, he did not arouse the interest of researchers. Nevertheless, without Smotritsky it is impossible to fully imagine the social and cultural life in Belarus at the beginning of the 17th century. All this requires a thorough and objective study of his activities, which guided the author of this study.

EVERY EPOCH IS DIFFERENT

The years of life of M. Smotritsky fall on one of the critical periods in the history of Belarus. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania of that time, which included Belarus and Ukraine, was the economic oppression and arbitrariness of secular and spiritual feudal lords, it was the class struggle of the masses for their rights and human dignity, it was national and religious humiliation and oppression. The picture of life in general terms is quite vivid: the vast possessions of the princes with numerous settlements of peasants, either completely or partially dependent, enslaved by countless requisitions, chinches, etc .; lively cities with a variety of crafts, with merchants who trade, with various religious temples; numerous fortified monasteries with their own pharmacies and "spitals", printing houses, libraries and schools - after all, it was a time when "priests got the monopoly on intellectual education, and education itself thus assumed a predominantly theological character"

Two unions - political Lublin and church Brest - influenced the mindset and social movement of that time. In 1569, an agreement was approved at the Seimas in Lublin, according to which the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland formed a single state - the Commonwealth. It was an alliance that actually asserted the political, socio-economic and national dominance of Poland and determined its aggressive, colonial policy towards the principality of Lithuania. Of all the consequences of this political act, we will briefly consider only a few.

By virtue of the agreement, the Polish feudal lords could have land holdings in the Principality of Lithuania, which they were not slow to take advantage of. Now the peasants were exploited not only by their magnates - the Radziwills, the Slutskys, the Czarto-ryskys, the Volovichs, the Khreptoviches, the Khodkeviches, the Tyshkeviches, the Kishki, the Solomeretskys, and others, but also the Polish ones, who created their farmsteads based on corvee labor on still free lands. The Polish kings generously distributed the Belarusian lands into lifetime possession. The magnate Lukomsky was granted the whole Krichev starostvo with tens of thousands of peasants. The possessions of the feudal lord Voitkevich consisted of several districts, the king himself owned large land estates - Mogilev, Bobruisk, Gorodets, some elders with cities and villages. Domestic and foreign feudal lords, feeling the strength and support of royal power, intensified economic exploitation in their possessions. The desire of the Belarusian princes and gentry to be like the Polish magnates and gentry in everything demanded more and more expenses, which naturally resulted in the desire to squeeze as much income out of their possessions as possible.

As a result of the union, a large multinational state was formed. But the ruling class of Poland, supported by the top of the Catholic Church, launched an attack on the national culture of the Belarusian, Lithuanian and Ukrainian peoples, exalting the Polish nation and culture in every possible way and humiliating the national dignity of other peoples, their language, cultural traditions, national customs and customs. It was a course towards the spiritual enslavement of non-Polish peoples, towards the destruction of their language, culture, towards Polonization. National languages ​​began to be gradually replaced, and Polish became generally accepted in communication and in office work; national features were subjected to ridicule and humiliation, national customs were desecrated. The vast majority of local feudal lords quickly began to abandon everything of their own, national. Lithuanian humanist of the 16th century. Dauksha “speaks with bitterness and reproach about the Lithuanian gentry, who, thirty years after the Union of Lublin, began to be ashamed of their native language.”

Lithuanian, Belarusian and Ukrainian feudal lords and the gentry did not want to appear worse and lower than their Polish brothers in class in anything. This was expressed both in external imitation and in borrowing a way of thinking, certain norms of morality. Young people of princely and gentry families strove to receive education in Polish higher educational institutions. National features began to disappear in the construction and arrangement of dwellings, in clothing, their own, "grandfather's" customs in everyday life were forgotten. They began to build their houses according to the Western model: estates-castles, estates-fortresses; get luxurious carriages and rich furnishings, keep many servants, flaunt weapons and luxury. Language, clothing, cuisine, religion,. the whole way of life - everything has changed, nothing has remained of what would resemble one's own, national, original. There was only one estate title “pans and gentry to the law of the Roman and Greek”, and later this difference in faith will disappear completely in the entire gentry class of the Commonwealth.

Naturally, under these conditions, the lower classes, especially the peasantry, experienced national oppression not only from the side of the Polish authorities and magnates, but also from their local feudal lords, who showed contempt and intolerance for their slightest demands for independence and former rights. to manifestations of the national spirit and character.

Religious persecution was added to the class-economic and national oppression. The unlimited secular and spiritual power of the feudal lords gave them the opportunity to uncontrollably dispose of the conscience of their subjects. If this or that prince was of the Catholic faith, a follower of Luther or a supporter of Arianism and other religious sects, then he forcibly converted his subjects to the new faith. But this religious violence had, if one can say, a local significance, it once again confirmed the already disenfranchised and oppressed position of the subjects of the feudal lords, and especially the plebeian and peasant masses. From the end of the 16th century religious oppression and violence turned into the state policy of the feudal Catholic elite in relation to the Belarusian and Ukrainian peoples.

Over time, the Catholic Church, having taken a dominant position in Poland, began to implement its long-standing plans - plans for the union of the Orthodox Church with the Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope. The Union of Lublin helped in many ways to implement their plans. Thanks to the church union, the Roman curia tried to compensate for the damage that had been inflicted on it by the reformation, when many countries - Germany, England, the Netherlands and some others - came out of the power of Catholicism. Through the union, the papacy tried to raise its prestige and expand the sphere of domination. The union of churches was also supposed to facilitate the possibility of subordination to the pope in the future of the rich Russian state. All this fueled the cosmopolitan ambitions of the popes during this period.

I period. Maxim Grek arrives in Muscovite Rus', having a general idea of ​​the Athonite, South Slavic edition of the Church Slavonic language. Its main task is to correct liturgical texts based on Greek originals (Colored Triodion, 1525) and create new translations from Greek (Explanatory Psalter, 1522). During this period, Maxim Grek perceives the Church Slavonic language as an imperfect model of the Greek language, which should be improved, focusing on Greek samples. He does not realize the specifics of the Russian version of the Church Slavonic language, considering the bookish language common to all Orthodox Slavs. Error correction is achieved by grammatical systematization of the elements from which the text is built. In his epistle, "The Word of Responsibility about Book Correction," he evaluates himself as the only expert on grammar who has the right to correlate the Greek and Church Slavonic languages.

II period. Teaches Greek and creates educational texts, lexical and grammatical compositions; for educational purposes, he also translated the Psalter of 1552.

Comes to an understanding of the specifics of the Russian version of the Church Slavonic language. He is aware that errors in the Church Slavonic language arise not only because of ignorance of Greek, but also because of the inability to compare and correlate elements of the bookish and non-bookish language.

The linguistic attitude of Maxim the Greek can be defined as consistent "Russification" of the Church Slavonic language. In an effort to eliminate variability in one grammatical position, from the variant forms of the Church Slavonic language, Maxim chooses the variant that coincides with Russian. So, he gets rid of archaic, actually book constructions and as a result brings the book language closer to the spoken language. (text by Remneva, let him just blather something!!!)

Lavrentiy Zizaniy (Lavrenty Tustanovsky;? - after 1633) - archpriest, famous Belarusian scientist. Initially, he was a teacher at the Lvov Brotherhood School, from where he moved to Brest in 1592, then to Vilna (now Vilnius), where in 1596 he published the alphabet and Church Slavonic grammar. Grammar Zizania - one of the first monuments of East Slavic philology. Written with a conscious focus on Greek and Latin patterns. Its purpose was to prove the equal importance of the Church Slavonic language with Greek; Zizaniy did not pursue descriptive or normative goals(his prescriptions sometimes deviate quite strongly from the real language practice of that time).

Melety Smotrytsky in the world - Maxim Gerasimovich Smotritsky, there is also a mixed form of the name Maxenty; Latin pseudonym Theophilus Orthologue; presumably 1577-1579 or 1572 the town of Smotrych - December 17 (27), 1633, Orthodox archbishop of Polotsk; writer, educator.

In 1618-1619. - the main philological work "Grammatika Slavensky correct Cvntaґma" - the basis of Church Slavonic grammatical science for the next two centuries. Consists of the following parts: spelling, etymology, syntax, prosody. Written on the model of Greek grammars, Smotrytsky's work reflects the specific phenomena of the Church Slavonic language. He owns establishing a case system, characteristic of the Slavic languages ​​​​(in this Smotrytsky was ahead of Western grammarians, who adjusted the cases of living languages ​​\u200b\u200bto the norms of the Latin language), establishment of two conjugations of verbs, definition (not yet quite accurate) of the type of verbs, etc .; marked extra letters of Slavic writing that she doesn't need. Smotrytsky's "Grammar" also has a section on versification, where instead of syllabic verse, it is proposed to use metric verse, as supposedly more characteristic of Slavic speech (in fact, it reproduces an authoritative ancient model; Meletius' experiment with artificial meterization of the Church Slavonic language had no consequences). His "Grammar" is full of many examples that facilitate the assimilation of grammatical rules. It was repeatedly reprinted with an approximation to the living Russian language and had a great influence on the development of Russian philology and the teaching of grammar in schools. In the alphabet books of the 17th century. extensive extracts have been made from it. Smotrytsky's "grammar" was taken into account by the authors of a number of subsequent Slavic grammars published abroad - Heinrich Wilhelm Ludolf (Oxford, 1696), Ilya Kopievich (Amsterdam, 1706), Pavel Nenadovich (Rymnik, 1755), Stefan Vuyanovsky (Vienna, 1793) and Abraham Mrazovich (Vienna, 1794). His participation in the writing of the Primer of the Slavonic Language, published in 1618, is confirmed.

I. On the history of the question of the literary norms of the Russian language

1.1 Background

The Russian language from the Indo-European family, after the collapse of the common European Proto-Slavic language (VI-VII centuries) into the eastern, western and southern groups, developed in the East Slavic group, from which it stood out in the 15th century. (5)

“The culture of Ancient Rus' was characterized by bilingualism: Church Slavonic and Old Russian languages. Church Slavonic was the literary, scholarly language. The Old Russian language was used in everyday communication, business correspondence, etc. At the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. the Great Russian language was formed, which ousted Church Slavonic from cultural communication. (14)

“All liturgical literature,” write Mikhailova and Golovanova, “being written off from Old Slavonic Byzantine and Bulgarian sources, reflected the norms of the Old Slavonic language. However, words and elements of the Old Russian language penetrated into this literature. In parallel to this style of language, secular and business literature also existed. (5)

In the process of the formation of the Old Russian literary and written language, the primary was the folk colloquial speech (dialects) of the East Slavic tribes, which in the 9th-10th centuries. possessed rich oral folk art, epic and lyrical poetry, tales and legends, proverbs and sayings (15).

"Book-Slavonic literary language, based on Old Church Slavonic and used mainly in church literature" and "folk-literary language, based on the living Old Russian language and used in secular literature", gradually converged to one degree or another, and, although they did not overcome its separation and difference, but “based on them in the XVIII century. the literary Russian language was formed” (5).

Victor Vinogradov (1894/95-1969) (16), Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (1946), literary critic and linguist-Russianist, philologist, in his work “The Language of Pushkin” (1935) (17) notes on the issue of the formation of a normalized Russian literary language, that from the end of the 18th century this “normalization was carried out by means of a ban and strict restriction in the literary use of the words professional, “common people” and generally dialectical (here: coming from dialects, and not from dialectics - P.P.) socially alien (from the point of view of the salon , secular-noble language) coloring "(17).

The modern literary Russian language, according to Mikhailova and Golovanova, originates only in the 19th century:

End of the 19th century up to the present time - the second period of development of the modern literary Russian language. This period is characterized by well-established linguistic norms, but these norms are being improved over time” (5).

At the same time, upon completion of the process of formation of the written Russian literary language, and especially after the rules and norms were officially established in it, oral folk art and dialects are no longer considered as an integral part of the modern literary language, but in their own special dialect language field. (1).

Lev Shcherba (1880-1944), Russian and Soviet linguist, academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (18), in the article "Modern Russian literary language" notes:

“The greater the number of dialects united by a given literary language, the more traditional and fixed its norms should be. It cannot follow changes in the spoken language of this or that dialect, since then it will cease to be intelligible to everyone, i.e., it will cease to fulfill the main function that the literary language should perform and which, in essence, only makes it literary, i.e. e. generally accepted, and therefore generally understood. (19)

“Language means that are not capable of serving the entire society are discarded, recognized as non-literary,” Mikhailova and Golovanova state (5).

The features of the norms of the literary language are the following (5):

1) relative stability;
2) prevalence;
3) general usage;
4) general obligatoriness;
5) compliance with the use, custom, capabilities of the language system.

1.2. Pushkin - the founder of the modern Russian literary language

Alexander Pushkin (1799 -1837) - the greatest Russian poet with African, German and other non-Russian roots on his mother. According to Pushkin's genealogy, Pushkin's maternal great-grandfather was the African Abram Gannibal, and his maternal great-grandmothers were the Russian German Christina Sheberg and Sarah Rzhevskaya (20).
Pushkin is officially recognized as "the founder of the modern Russian literary language" (21). Pushkin's contribution to the Russian literary language is scientifically determined primarily thanks to the study of Vinogradov (16) "The Language of Pushkin" (1933) (17), as well as subsequent literary critics and linguists:

Boris Tomashevsky (1890-1957) (22), verse theorist and textual critic, author of Pushkin. Contemporary Problems of Historical and Literary Studies” (1925) (23);

Grigory Vinokur (1896-1947), a member of the Union of Writers of the USSR, head of the Manuscript Department and the Sector of Pushkin Studies of the Pushkin House, whose scientific interests were centered on the style of the Russian language and especially poetic style, and who dealt, in particular, with Pushkin's work. Vinokur was a member of the Pushkin Commission since 1933, initiated work on the creation of Pushkin's Language Dictionary, participated in the compilation of the Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language, edited by Dmitry Ushakov (24, 25).

In the article "Literary language and the ways of its development" (1940), Shcherba wrote:

“From the fact that the basis of any literary language is the richness of all the literature still read, it does not at all follow that the literary language does not change. Pushkin is still, of course, quite alive for us: almost nothing in his language shocks us. And yet it would be ridiculous to think that it is now possible to write in the sense of language quite in Pushkin's way" (19).

We will show by examples that Pushkin was by no means always an impeccable example of the “correct” or literary language, not only of his time, but, even more so, modern. Tomashevsky pointed to this in his research. Referring to numerous spelling deviations from the literary norm "in the direction of archaisms and lively pronunciation", it was he who concluded that "Pushkin's language was not the" correct "literary language of his time" and even "Far from all Pushkin's forms were literary acceptable in print" (23).

“Do we understand Pushkin? - Valery Bryusov (1873-1924), one of the most famous Russian poets, founders of symbolism, literary scholar and literary critic, posed the question in 1918 (26), and noted that “for the “average” reader in Pushkin’s writings, there are three elements of “incomprehensibility” :

Firstly, in order to fully understand Pushkin, you need to know his era, historical facts, details of the poet’s biography, etc. ...

Secondly, it is necessary to know Pushkin's language, his usage of words...

Thirdly, it is necessary to know the whole worldview of Pushkin .... " (27).

Vinokur in his article "Pushkin and the Russian language" (1937) pointed out (28):

“... In Pushkin's time, the influence of normative grammar on the literary language was much weaker than later. Therefore, such phenomena penetrated into the literary language more freely and were more easily retained in it, which represent the deviation of the living spoken language from the schemes of book grammar and which in our time, not only in writing, but also in oral speech, leave the impression of “non-literary”. This also applies to some extent to the vocabulary of the language.

At the beginning of the XIX century. some words found their place in the literary language, which now seem to us insufficiently literary, regional, etc. But not everything non-literary from our point of view was non-literary from the point of view of the language practice of Pushkin's time.

In the century separating us from Pushkin (Vinokur's article was written in 1937), the Russian literary language has undergone a number of changes, the general meaning of which can be defined approximately as follows: first, a stricter distinction between literary correct and non-literary forms of the language; secondly, the gradual elimination of sharp contradictions between the “high” and “simple” syllables within the actual literary language.

Various kinds of archaisms and specific elements of the old bookish speech are expelled from the literary language, but at the same time the literary language becomes much more strict in relation to such facts of the language, mainly phonetic and morphological, but to some extent also lexical, which begin to relate to categories " regional”, “common people”, etc.

In other words, the process of simplifying the literary language, the process of bringing the bookish language closer to living colloquial speech was accompanied by a vocabulary and grammatical cleansing of the language, the introduction of grammatical uniformity and normative correctness into literary speech” (28).

Pushkin's work, of course, played a crucial role in shaping the norms of the modern literary language. Before Pushkin, many such norms simply did not exist, were not formed or were not established for many words and expressions, although there were, of course, the rules of Russian grammar.

1.3. Pushkin's predecessors and their contribution to the founding of the Russian literary language

While recognizing Pushkin's contribution to the foundation of the modern Russian literary language, and considering that the work of this greatest poet fell on the first period of the development of such a language, one must, nevertheless, recall his predecessors.
1.3.1 Maxim Smotrytsky - Theophilus Orthologue and his "Grammar"

Turning to an earlier time, to the XVI-XVII centuries. , we must first of all mention Maxim Smotrytsky, known in the church as Meletius, and who also had the pseudonym Theophilus Ortholog (born either in 1572, or c. 1577-1579), a Ukrainian and Belarusian publicist, scholarly philologist, church and public figure - Western Rus', Archbishop of Polotsk (29).

In 1618-1619, Smotrytsky’s Grammar was published, his main philological work, “the basis of Church Slavonic grammatical science for the next two centuries, which withstood many reprints, revisions and translations ... is an outstanding monument of Slavic grammatical thought.”

Smotrytsky's "grammar" consisted of the following parts: spelling, etymology, syntax, prosody or the doctrine of stress (primarily musical, dealing with syllables in terms of their stress and length (29). ).

Smotrytsky belongs to the establishment of the system of cases characteristic of the Slavic languages; two conjugations of verbs; definition (not yet quite accurate) of the type of verbs, etc .; extra letters of Slavic writing, which she does not need, are marked.

Smotrytsky's "Grammar" also had a section on versification, where instead of syllabic verse it was proposed to use metric verse, as supposedly more characteristic of Slavic speech.

Smotritsky's "Grammar" was repeatedly reprinted closer to the living Russian language and had a great influence on the development of Russian philology and the teaching of grammar in schools. In the alphabet books of the 17th century. extensive extracts have been made from it.

Smotrytsky emphasized the need for conscious assimilation of educational material - "understand the words with your mind." He put forward 5 levels of training: "look, heed, understand, consider, remember." Smotrytsky participated in the writing of the Primer of the Slavonic language (1618).
1.3.2 Mikhail Lomonosov's contribution to the foundation of the Russian literary language
Next, we need to mention the great scientist and great poet Mikhail Lomonosov (1711-1765), whose contribution to the foundation of the Russian literary language is indisputable, but who still cannot be credited with the fact that he "approved the foundations of the MODERN Russian literary language" (32). This merit remains with Pushkin.

Lomonosov was one of the first who compiled (1755) "Russian Grammar" and thus laid the foundation for the norms of the Russian literary language.

Lomonosov wrote the first Russian works on rhetoric: A Brief Guide to Rhetoric (1743) and the fundamental work Rhetoric (1748), which became the first reader in Russia of world and domestic literature, or, as they said then, literature.

Rhetoric was considered by Lomonosov as a science of oral and written eloquence, which must be “depicted with decent words ... On the basis of Rhetoric, textbooks on Russian eloquence were subsequently written.” In his work, he singled out poetry, giving "instruction for the composition of poetic works" (32).

In the book Discourse on the Usefulness of Church Books in the Russian Language, Lomonosov "developed the stylistic system of the Russian language" (33).

In the "Letter on the rules of Russian poetry" (1739), Lomonosov, being a famous poet of his time, expressed his idea of ​​the literary correctness of Russian poetic speech.

Lomonosov, in his letter, called for, firstly, to try not to use foreign or alien words in Russian poetry without the need; secondly, to use all the vocabulary of the Russian language, not shying away from colloquial folk expressions and words; and, finally, thirdly, try to avoid objectionable words and expressions and not forget all the good ones, taking from poetic examples only that which is worthy of being followed or used in the modern Russian language.
1.3.3 Pioneer of Russian phonetics Vasily Trediakovsky
Vasily Trediakovsky (1703-1769), a Russian poet, translator and philologist, who for the first time in the Russian language and literature theoretically separated poetry and prose, (34) wrote about the "liberties of the poetic language":

“Liberty is a certain change in words, the use of approved ...
As a rule, poets act more freely and boldly in choosing syllables and sometimes use in verse, for the sake of measure, such words, which in prose cannot be tolerated at all. They have this right confirmed by many centuries: however, they must also be moderate in this.

Liberty in general should be such that the word used by liberties can be quite recognizable that it is our direct one, and also so that it is somewhat used, and not some kind of absurd, strange and wild ”(35).

Trediakovsky's treatise A Conversation on Spelling (1748) dealt with Russian sounds, letters and fonts. In his doctrine of spelling, Trediakovsky expressed his desire to bring Russian spelling closer to its phonetic basis: “My spelling is mostly according to the statement for the ear, and not according to the work for the sake of the eye ...” (35).

Literary critic, academician and doctor of philological sciences Leonid Timofeev (1904-1984) (36) in an introductory article about Trediakovsky, published in the book of selected works of the poet (1963) (37), gives a noteworthy description of his orthographic treatise given by Vinokur in the study "Spelling theory Trediakovsky" (1948) (38):
“Most of his (Trediakovsky - P.P.) provisions relating to phonetics turn out to be true, and we must certainly keep in mind that in establishing these provisions, Trediakovsky had no predecessors and was a true pioneer of science ... His scientific priority in history of Russian phonetics on a number of points ... Trediakovsky appears before us as a pioneer of Russian phonetics, standing far above all his contemporaries.
1.3.4 Alexander Sumarokov - a fighter for the purity and correctness of the Russian literary language

Alexander Sumarokov (1717-1777) was a remarkable, very popular poet and writer of his time, who made a significant contribution to the history of the struggle for the purity and correctness of the Russian literary language and Russian poetry; he was also the founder of the Russian theater, rightfully considered his father (39,40,41).

In the poem "Epistole on Poetry" (1747), Sumarokov wrote:

It is impossible for him to glorify himself with his letter,
Who does not know the grammatical properties, nor the rules
And, correctly writing letters without understanding,
He suddenly wants to be a creator and a poet.
He just picks up words to rhyme,
But the woven nonsense calls poetry.

There is no direct stress in the words,
Not the slightest conjugation in speeches,
No decent rhymes, no decent measure stop
There is no stingy thought in a song that is unworthy.
..............................................
The syllable of songs should be pleasant, simple and clear,
Vitiystvo is not necessary; he himself is beautiful.

Pushkin wrote:
“Sumarokov knew the Russian language better than Lomonosov, and his critics (grammatically) are thorough. Lomonosov did not answer or laughed it off. Sumarokov demanded respect for poetry” (42).
1.3.5 Gavriil Derzhavin and his contribution to the development of the modern Russian literary language

Gabriel (Gavrila) Derzhavin (1743-1816), descended from the well-known Tatar family of Bagrim-Murza from the Great Horde (43.44). - "the most radiant luminary of our poetry" (45) of the Enlightenment, "the largest poet of the 18th century." (46)
Derzhavin was also a statesman of the Russian Empire:
“In 1791-1793, he was the cabinet-secretary of Catherine II.
In 1793 he was appointed senator with the production of privy councillors.
From 1795 to 1796 - President of the College of Commerce.
In 1802-1803 he was the Minister of Justice of the Russian Empire" (43).
From the founding of the Imperial Russian Academy (1783), Derzhavin was its full member. As part of the publishing group, he took part in the compilation and publication of the first academic explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, or by its full name, "The Dictionary of the Russian Academy, arranged in a derivative order" (43, 47.48), published in 1784 - 1789. It is known that Derzhavin personally collected words for the specified dictionary with the letter "T" (48), but this is not the most important thing that he did for the poetic Russian language.
The main contribution of the poet Derzhavin to the development of the modern Russian literary language is that he introduced original and lively combinations of different styles into classical poetry, thereby deliberately moving away from the views on Lomonosov's poetry and his theory of three styles. He was the first to include in the fabric, along with archaisms and high-style poetisms, also bright vernacular, and thereby enriched the literary language of Russian poetry, making it more vivid, impressionable, bold, truthful and popular.

1.3.6. Formation of the Russian Academy as a center for the study of the Russian language and literature

In 1783, by decree of Catherine II, the Imperial Russian Academy was founded in St. Petersburg on the model of the French Academy, known and referred to in various sources simply as the Russian Academy or as the Russian Academy.
By analogy with the French Academy, whose goals in France are the study of the French language, literature, regulation of the linguistic and literary norms of the French language (49) The Russian Academy should have as its object the purification and enrichment of the Russian language, the general establishment of the use of the words of this, the ornateness characteristic of this, and the poem. (48)
For further understanding of the essence of the work of the said Russian Academy in its various transformations, as well as its academicians or full and honorary members, they must be distinguished from the Imperial Academy of Sciences that simultaneously existed in St. Petersburg and was founded by decree of Peter I in 1724 as the highest scientific institution of the Russian empire (50) which had the official names "Academy of Sciences and Arts in St. Petersburg" (1724-1746), "Imperial Academy of Sciences and Arts in St. Petersburg" (1747-1802), "Imperial Academy of Sciences" (1803-1835) , "Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences" (1836-1917) and "Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) (1917-1925). Then, in the history of the Academy of Sciences, in connection with the change of the official name of the state, it is also necessary to indicate the following names: "Academy of Sciences of the USSR" (1925-1991) and again "Russian Academy of Sciences" (since 1991). Accordingly, scientific academicians differed from the full and honorary members of the above-mentioned Russian Academy, who were mostly well-known writers and poets.
In the 19th century The following outstanding poets became members of the Russian Academy:
Ivan Krylov (1769-1844), the largest Russian fabulist (he turned to this genre in 1805), and at the same time he was known as a publicist and publisher of satirical and educational magazines. He became a full member of the Imperial Russian Academy from 1811 (41.51);
Nikolai Karamzin (1766-1826) is a remarkable sentimentalist poet, an outstanding historian and the largest Russian writer of that time, (52), whose pedigree, according to researchers, came from the Tatar family of a certain Kara-Murza (53). In 1818 Karamzin was elected a member of the Russian Academy and the Imperial Academy of Sciences.

Vasily Zhukovsky (1783-1852) - "the central figure of early romanticism" who opened the way for this trend in Russian poetry and was the founder of the Russian ballad (41.54). Zhukovsky became full members of the Russian Academy also in 1818.
By origin, Zhukovsky is the illegitimate son of the landowner Afanasy Bunin and his Turkish concubine Salkha (by baptism named Turchaninova Elizaveta Dementyevna). Vasily received his surname and patronymic from his godfather, the impoverished Kyiv landowner Andrei Grigorievich Zhukovsky, who became a homestay of the Bunins. So, under the care of two fathers (native and godfather), the future poet, translator, literary critic and teacher Vasily Zhukovsky (41.54) grew up, who became Pushkin's literary mentor, and then - "collector, keeper and publisher of Pushkin's literary heritage" (41) .
In 1817-1841, Zhukovsky was a teacher of the Russian language to the Grand Duchess, and then Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, wife of the Russian Emperor Nicholas I, mentor to Tsarevich Alexander Nikolaevich. In 1841 he received the title of Privy Councilor (54).
He became famous as the author of the words of the national anthem of the Russian Empire "God Save the Tsar!" (1833).
Alexander Vostokov (birth name Alexander-Voldemar Ostenek, German Osteneck) (1781-1864), Russian poet of "Balto-German origin", born in Estonia (at that time the Livonian province of the Russian Empire), whose father was a certain Russian nobleman from H. I. Osten-Saken (“Osten” in German means “east”, from where the literary pseudonym of the poet, which became his official surname, also originates), philologist, member of the Russian Academy since 1820, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences since 1841 (41.55). Vostokov, in addition, was awarded the title of Doctor of Philosophy from the University of Tübingen (1825) and Doctor of the University of Prague (1848). In 1831, the Russian Academy published the "Russian Grammar", compiled by Vostokov in two versions: an abbreviated one "for use in lower educational institutions" and "more fully presented" (55). Vostokov owned "pioneer observations in the field of syntax." (55) In his youth, Vostokov, was a prominent figure in the literary and artistic association "Free Society of Lovers of Literature, Sciences and Arts" (1801-1812, 1816-1825), formed at the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg, originally under the name "Friendly Society of Lovers of Fine Arts" ( 41, 56) and officially recognized in 1803.

In addition to many scientific works, Vostokov is also the author of the Brief History of the Society of Lovers of Sciences, Literature and Arts (1804), in which he described in detail the first three years of his work. At the same time, we note that in the title of this work and the works of the Society described in it, he, perhaps by accident, put science in the first place, and literature in the second place (57);
In 1832, Alexander Pushkin (58) was elected a full member of the Russian Academy, becoming at that time the 159th full member of the Russian Academy.
In total, over the 58-year history (from 1783 to 1841) of the Russian Academy, 187 full members were elected to its membership, among which writers predominated (58). In the following presentation, we will also point out some of them who have become famous as poets and have made a significant contribution to the formation of the modern Russian literary language.

1.3.7 Ekaterina Dashkova - the first woman president of the Russian Academy and her contribution to the development of the modern Russian literary language
The role of Princess Ekaterina Dashkova (1743-1810), nee Countess Vorontsova (Dashkova is her husband's surname) (59) is invaluable in the development of the modern Russian literary language. By the way, at that time the surname Dashkov, pronounced with an accent on "a", testified to belonging to a princely family, and Dashkov, with an emphasis on "o", to a noble family (60).
Princess Dashkova - politician who participated in the coup against Peter III;
scientist - the first woman in the world to manage the Academy of Sciences: in 1783 she was appointed the first chairman of the Russian Academy and director of the Academy of Sciences, was elected a member of the American Philosophical Society;
writer - essayist, playwright, journalist and memoirist, "her articles were published in "The Friend of Enlightenment" (1804-1806) and in "New Monthly Works"", wrote the comedy "Toisekov, or a spineless man" (1786) for the Hermitage theater "Fabian's wedding, or punished greed for wealth" - the continuation of Kotzebue's drama: "Poverty and nobility of the soul";
poetess and translator: wrote poetry in Russian and French, translated Voltaire's "Experience on Epic Poetry" from French, translated from English in "Experiences of the Works of a Free Russian Collection";
Dashkova's memoirs were published in English and French (59).

In 1771-1783, Dashkova actively participated in the work of the Free Russian Assembly (59), which existed at Moscow University from 1771 to 1787, which stopped its work in connection with the opening of the Russian Academy (61).

The Free Russian Assembly consisted of 51 members, mostly university professors (61). Its founder and chairman was the director and curator of Moscow University, Ivan Melissino (1718 - 1795), who came from an ancient Greek family, who was related to the Byzantine emperors (62). It is also necessary to mention in connection with the activities of the Assembly the last representative of classicism of the 18th century, in whose work there was a turn towards sentimentalism, a Russian poet with Romanian roots, ancient on his father, Mikhail Kheraskov (1733-1807), who was also the director of Moscow University (1763-1770) , and his curator (1778-1802). (63)
Dashkova actively participated in the compilation of the first academic explanatory dictionary - the main work of the Russian Academy, which she led from the moment of its foundation until 1794. She collected words for this dictionary with the letters Ts, Sh, Sh, made additions to many other letters and also "many worked on an explanation of words (mainly denoting moral qualities) ”in the specified Dictionary (59).
In November 1783, at a meeting of the Russian Academy, Dashkova proposed using the printed letter “ё”, asking the academicians present a question: is it legal to write “iolka” and is it not more reasonable to replace the digraph “io” with one letter “ё” (60) .

1.3.8 The first academic editions of the explanatory dictionary of the Russian language
The first academic explanatory dictionary of the Russian language corresponded or established, in essence, the lexical norms of the literary language of the second half of the 18th century.
When compiling the first “Dictionary of the Russian Academy, arranged in a derivative order”, materials were used from the Russian Assembly of the Academy of Sciences in 1735-1743 and the Free Russian Assembly, a literary and scientific public organization that existed at Moscow University from 1771 to 1787, the goals of which were formulated in essence the same as for the subsequently founded Russian Academy: ““correction and enrichment” of the Russian language, compilation of a dictionary of the Russian language, introduction of Russian scientific terms, publication of historical sources.” (47)

Although the first explanatory dictionary was defined as "Slavonic Russian", nevertheless, approximately one fiftieth of all the words in the dictionary were occupied by foreign borrowings. “They were left in some cases, for example:

1) if the word has grown together with the Russian language, like many words of Tatar origin;
2) Greek and Hebrew church words used in Orthodox worship;
3) job titles adopted in the legislation, mainly from the German language;
4) the names of “natural and artistic works brought from foreign lands””. (47)

Issue of a six-volume explanatory sovar of the Russian language in 1784-1789. became the main business of the life of Princess Dashkova, who remained as president of the Russian Academy until 1796.
The first explanatory dictionary of the Russian language included 43,357 words, which were located along a common root, forming branched semantic nests and thus, using the dictionary, it was possible to determine the origin of words, i.e. this dictionary was not only explanatory, but, in essence, also the first etymological dictionary of the Russian language, or, more precisely, "contained elements of an etymological dictionary" (47).
In the second edition of the "Dictionary of the Russian Academy, arranged in alphabetical order" (1806-1822) included 51,388 words. Its compilers retreated from the principle of grouping lexical units according to the common root of words proposed and implemented by Dashkova in the first edition (48).

1.3.8 The great Russian language reformer Nikolai Karamzin

Karamzin had a huge impact on the development of the Russian literary language and went down in history as its great reformer. He deliberately refused to use Church Slavonic vocabulary and grammar, preferring in his works the everyday language of his era, decisively brought the literary language closer to the spoken one, although he also used old words when he considered them especially expressive (52).

The great Russian critic Vissarion Belinsky (1811-1848), who was born in the former Sveaborg (in Swedish Sveaborg - Swedish fortress) or in Finnish - in Suomenlinna, since in Finnish Suomenlinna - "Finnish fortress", a fortress that is part of Helsinki (Finland) whose paternal surname was Belynsky (64), which comes from the name of the village of Belyn, Penza province, where his paternal grandfather served as a priest (when entering the university, the future critic decided to “soften” his surname by writing as Belinsky) wrote about the reformist contribution Karamzin in Russian literature the following:

"In the person of Karamzin, Russian literature for the first time descended to earth from the stilts on which Lomonosov placed it." (65)

Karamzin's statement is interesting: "A grammarian should be good-natured and compassionate, especially towards poets." (66)

Karamzin was one of the first to support the letter “ё” proposed by Dashkova (52) and thanks to him she became widely known (67).

“Sensitive to linguistic nuances, Karamzin was the first to decide to use a young letter in his poem, replacing it with a clumsy combination in the word “sliozy,” Elena Novoselova wrote in Rossiyskaya Gazeta in 2003 in connection with the 220th anniversary of this young letter of the Russian alphabet (68).

In the first book of the poetic almanac "Aonides" (1796), Karamzin printed with the letter "e" not only the word tears, but also the words "dawn", "eagle", "moth", "as well as the verb" drip "(60, 67).

For a long time it was believed that it was Karamzin who introduced the letter “e” into written speech. (60,69,70)
However, the printed letter "e" appeared as early as 1795, in the first edition of the collection of poems "And my trinkets" by the famous Russian poet, representative of sentimentalism, fabulist, member of the Russian Academy (1797) Ivan Dmitriev (1760 -1837), who was printed at the Moscow University Printing House. The name of the collection was given by analogy with Karamzin's "My knick-knacks". Dmitriev is a distant relative of Karamzin (71), whom he met only in 1783 and became his friend. He is also known as a statesman and minister of justice (1810-1814) (71).

The specified collection was under the title, by analogy with Karamzin's "My trinkets" (60).
Philologist Elena Ogneva points out that Dmitriev “then ran to Nikolai Mikhailovich (Karamzin-P.P.) and showed that he put everything in the word at the end Y. And Karamzin replaced two letters in the word sliozy with Y” ”(67)

Also, the Russian writer, prose writer and researcher Viktor Chumakov (1932-2012), who was the chairman of the so-called “Union of Yofikators of Russia” (72), confirms that the first word written by Dmitriev with the letter “ё” was “everything”. Actually, it is Chumakov who owns this discovery, made, as he writes, in August 1999 (60).
It is also known that it was Dmitriev who contributed to Pushkin's admission to the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, and his first meeting with little Alexander Pushkin took place in 1809 (71).

1.4. Russian literary and philological societies of the 19th century
The literary society "Conversation of Russian Word Lovers" (73), also called, as indicated in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron (74) "Conversation of Russian Literature Lovers" (75), was founded in 1811 by Derzhavin and Shishkov on the initiative of the latter "with aim to develop and maintain a taste for the elegant word through the public reading of exemplary works in verse and prose” (75).
Interestingly, the name chosen for this literary society "Conversation of lovers of the Russian word" was not accidental. It is associated with the well-known magazine "Interlocutor of the Lovers of the Russian Word", founded by Dashkova and published in 1783 and 1784, in which "the best literary forces of that time participated:
Derzhavin, Kheraskov, Kapnist, Fonvizin, Bogdanovich, Knyazhnin" (59).
The literary role of Derzhavin and Kheraskov has already been discussed above. Now let's turn to brief characteristics of other literary personalities indicated in the above list.
Vasily Kapnist (b. 1757 or 1758; d. 1823), Russian poet of Greek and Turkish roots (41,76,77,78), known for his anti-serfdom views, served in a department of the Ministry of Public Education. A friend of Derzhavin and was married to his sister. Kapnist participated in the creation of the Dictionary of the Russian Academy" (1814). He was entrusted with the choice of words from Russkaya Pravda and The Tale of Igor's Campaign.

Denis Fonvizin (1745-1792) - Russian writer, although his surname Fon-Vizen came from the German (Von Wiesen) or, with a Russified ending - Fon-Vizin, as it was written in the 18th century in two words or with a hyphen; the same spelling persisted until the middle of the 19th century. The progenitor of the Fonvizins was captured by the Russians and became a Russian during the Livonian War (1558-1583). In the literary world, Fonvizin is known as the creator of the famous Russian household comedy "Undergrowth" (1782). He was also a member of the Free Russian Assembly (61). Fonvizin had the title of State Councilor, was in the service of Russian diplomacy, was the secretary of its head N.I. Panin. (79)
Ippolit Bogdanovich (1743-1803) - a famous Russian poet and translator, was born in the Poltava province (according to other sources - in the Kyiv province). Also, like Fonvizin, Bogdanovich was in the diplomatic service, from 1788 to 1795 he was the chairman of the state archive, a member of the Russian Academy since 1783. His poem "Darling" (1775) was a huge success and highly appreciated by Pushkin (80). It was a loose adaptation of La Fontaine's The Love of Psyche and Cupid (1669). (74.80) “The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron states, however, that “after “Darling” Bogdanovich did not compose anything outstanding even according to the concepts of that time.” Contemporaries agree with this assessment: “Of everything written by Ippolit Fedorovich, only “Darling” has historical and literary significance.” (80) At the same time, "in fulfillment of the will of the Empress, Bogdanovich collected and published Russian proverbs." (74)
Russian poet and one of the largest playwrights of Russian classicism Yakov Knyazhnin (1740-1791) (81), by the way, married to the first Russian poetess, Sumarokov's eldest daughter, Ekaterina Sumarokova (1746-1797), who was the first among women to publish her poems in 1759 (82).
Let us continue, however, the description of that essential, in our opinion, with regard to the literary society "Conversation of lovers of the Russian word".
Meetings of this society were held in the house of Derzhavin, “who made available to the new society a vast hall in his house, assumed all the expenses that the society might need, and donated a significant collection of books to its library” (75).
The "Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron" describes in detail the structure and order of work of "Conversations" (B.):

“Meetings were to take place in autumn and winter, once a month; in addition, it was decided to establish a time-based publication in which the works of B. members and outsiders would be published. B. was supposed to consist of 24 full members and collaborators. To maintain order in the Readings, it was divided into four categories of 6 members each; discharges were to be collected in turn. At each solemn meeting, the chairman of the next category was charged with the duty to read the main article written by him, after which others could read, but only with the preliminary approval of the whole society and, moreover, so that each time the readings lasted no more than 2-2; hours" (75).
“The composition of B. at its foundation was as follows: I category - chairman Shishkov, members: Olenin, Kikin, Prince. D. P. Gorchakov, Prince. S. A. Shikhmatov, Krylov. II category - chairman Derzhavin, members: I. M. Muravyov-Apostol, gr. Khvostov, Labzin, Baranov, Lvov. III category - chairman A. S. Khvostov, members: book. B. Vl. Golitsyn, Prince. Shakhovskoy, Filatov, Marin and permanent secretary of the Russian Academy Sokolov. Category IV: chairman Zakharov, members: Politkovsky, Druzhinin, Karabanov, Pisarev and Lvov” (75).
Let us characterize first of all the chairmen of the Society, whom we have not yet characterised.
Writer and statesman, Admiral Alexander Shishkov (1754-1841), served as State Secretary, President of the Russian Academy (1813-1841), Minister of Public Education (1824-1828) (41.83).

Shishkov's treatise "Discourses on the old and new style of the Russian language" (1803) caused controversy among his followers, who considered it necessary to form the Russian literary language on a traditional national, rather than French basis, mostly old apologists for classicism and archaists with young "innovators" Westerners , "romantics" and, above all, with the sentimentalist Karamzin, who, nevertheless, was elected an honorary member of the "Society" of Shishkov and Derzhavin, and then most of all with Zhukovsky (75).
Since 1811, a gradual rapprochement between Shishkov and Karamzin began, and in 1818, after Karamzin published the History of the Russian State, Shishkov became an ardent admirer of Karamzin.
In addition, it was Shishkov, being the president of the Russian Academy, who contributed to the election of Karamzin to full members of the Academy in the same year, as well as Pushkin, who became close to Karamzin also in 1818 and remained until the end of the 1810s, as Vinogradov noted (17 ) under his influence.

Alexander Khvostov (1753-1820) (84), appointed chairman of the third category of the literary Society "Conversation of lovers of the Russian word", was in fact a not very famous Russian writer and poet, speaking in literature more as a translator. He was a military man, a diplomat and had the title of Privy Councilor. However, his comic ode “To immortality” (“I want to take refuge in immortality”), published in “Interlocutor of lovers of the Russian word” (vol. X, p. 165), and “Message to the creator of the message”, that is, to Fonvizin cited by the famous poet, Prince Peter Vyazemsky (1792-1878) (85) in the biography of Fonvizin attracted attention. We will talk about Vyazemsky in the future.
As for Alexander Khvostov, it must be said that, despite his chairmanship in the literary society "Conversation of the Lovers of the Russian Word", it was not he who gained great fame in Russian poetry, but his cousin, Count Dmitry Khvostov (1757-1835) (86), one of the late representatives of poetic classicism, also a military and statesman, senator, chief prosecutor of the senate and the Holy Synod, privy councillor, playwright, honorary member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences (1817), who collected materials for a significant part of his life to compile a dictionary of Russian writers, participated in the publication magazine "Friend of Education" (1804-1806).
“The innovation introduced into Russian poetry by Dmitry Khvostov was the glorification of birch trees as symbols of the Motherland, as well as the glorification of the image of Ivan Susanin.” (41, 86) Dmitry Khvostov was included in the second category of members of the "Society" participating in the Readings chaired by Derzhavin (75).
Ivan Zakharov (1754 - 1816) - chairman of the IV category of the "Conversations", in Russian literature is known mainly as a translator. Among his numerous and popular translations, the Wanderings of Telemachus, son of Ulysses, by F. Fenelon (1786), especially stood out. In this translation, he followed in the footsteps of Trediakovsky, who was the first to translate this work into verse. Zakharov is trying to get closer to the prose original and improve the style and style, advocating “a pure Russian language of translation, without barbarisms (in this case, gallicisms). At the same time, he accepted the interpretation of Fenelon's novel developed by Trediakovsky as an epic poem in prose, requiring special syntax and a "high style" saturated with Slavicisms to convey. (87)

In the translation work, Zakharov's main principles for translation took shape, which he outlined in his Discourse on the Translation of Books (1787). He opposed both the literal (“word for word and difficult to read”), and against the Russified (approximate) translation (“incorrect and dissimilar to the original, but whose addition is smooth and understandable”).
A “perfect translation,” according to Zakharov, “should depict the original with all fidelity, that is, take into itself the exact meaning, and even more so the image of the author’s writing,” and combine all this with “smoothness of style.” He considered “smoothness” as the implementation of the theory of “three calms” by M. V. Lomonosov, whose merit he saw in the fact that he showed “the abundance, strength, beauty, of the Slavic Russian word”, gave instructions “on the choice and arrangement of words” and “taught me to draw words from their very source, that is, in church books.” (87)
On the recommendation of E. R. Dashkova, Zakharov was elected a member of the Russian Academy in 1786, because, as she wrote, “his knowledge and practice in the Russian word in the presentation of his Adventures of Telemachus has been proven.” In 1788, Zakharov carried out at his own expense the 2nd, corrected, edition of Telemak. He also actively participated in the work on the academic explanatory dictionary, presenting in 1788 a list of words for the letter "Z" with explanations, for which he was awarded the gold medal of the Academy in 1789 (87).
In his old age, Zakharov decided to prove himself as an original poet, writing poems on the theme of the Patriotic War of 1812, “The March of the General Militia of Russia” (1812) and “Song to the Victor Alexander I of Napoleon” (1812). Vyazemsky noted in the Notebook: "Zakharov did not write poetry until old age, and now he suddenly wrote an ode, from which at least six can be made." (88)

Honorary members of the society "Conversation of lovers of the Russian word" were major state dignitaries (41):

Count Mikhail Speransky (1772-1839) at that time (1810-1812) was the State Secretary of the Russian Empire, and Shishkov became his successor (89).

Count Fyodor Rastopchin (1763-1826) - statesman, Moscow mayor, member of the State Council (since 1814), president of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, patriotic writer and publicist who ridiculed gallomania (90), i.e. “passionate reverence (on the part of predominantly non-French people) for everything French (be it art, literature, history, etc.), which is expressed in the desire to imitate the life of the French in every possible way and exalt it above the life of other peoples” (91).
Honorary member since 1811. "Conversations of lovers of the Russian word" were also the already mentioned Karamzin (75) and Kapnist (76). Unlike most of Shishkov's supporters, Kapnist was not an apologist for classicism and an opponent of Karamzin, but at the end of the 18th century he joined the sentimentalists he led and published in his "Collection of Various New Poems" - "Aonides" (however, Derzhavin was also published in this edition). Kapnist also published his poems in Readings, Conversations of Lovers of the Russian Word.
Another Russian poet and playwright, member of the Russian Academy since 1792, Nikolai Nikolev (1758-1815), a relative of Princess E. R. Dashkova on the paternal side, who originated from the one who moved to Russia, was also an honorary member of the Conversations of Russian Word Lovers society. in the 17th century French Colonel D. Nicole-Demanor (92). Nikolev was also an honorary member of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature (since 1811) at Moscow University. Nikolev defended the principles of classicism, but "gradually, other directions, in particular, the then developing sentimentalism, occupied more and more space in his work." (92)
Above the chairmen of the Society, at the head of each category, there were also "trustees" - ministers:
Pyotr Zavadovsky (1739-1812) - the first head of the Ministry of Public Education (1802-1810), under which public schools, district schools, provincial gymnasiums appeared, Kazan, Kharkov and Derpt universities were founded, the St. Petersburg Pedagogical Institute was opened; educational districts were established, university statutes were issued (93);
Admiral Nikolai Mordvinov (1754-1845) - the first naval minister in the history of Russia (1802). “Mordvinov had a reputation as the most liberal person in the tsarist government and enjoyed great prestige among the Decembrists” (94);
Alexei Razumovsky (1748-1822) - Minister of Public Education (1810-1816), trustee (1807) and honorary member of Moscow University (1812).

Under him, 72 parish schools, 24 district schools, several gymnasiums and other educational institutions were opened; several learned societies were opened; The first department of Slavic literature was established at Moscow University. With the personal assistance of Razumovsky, the charter of the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, where Pushkin studied, was developed, and on October 19, 1811, its opening took place (95);
Ivan Dmitriev - Minister of Justice (1810-1814) and Russian poet (71), whom we have already mentioned as the first author who was the first to replicate the letter "ё" in his printed poems.
Most of the members of the Conversation of Lovers of the Russian Word society are considered archaists (96), and chief among them was Shishkov, according to the definition and term "archaists" proposed by the literary critic, prose writer, poet, playwright, translator, and critic, Yuri Tynyanov (1894-1943) (97) in the article "Archaists and Pushkin" (1921-1924), included in the book "Archaists and Innovators" (1929) (98). Tynyanov was not only of Russian, but also of Belarusian origin. He was born in the former Vitebsk province, now part of Latvia, into a Jewish family: his father is Nason Aronovich (Nikolai Arkadyevich) Tynyanov), his mother is Sora-Khasya Berovna (Sofya Borisovna) Epshtein (97).
Based on the notes of a Russian, from a family of Russian German nobles, poet, prose writer and public figure, Decembrist, friend of Pushkin, Wilhelm Küchelbecker (1797-1846) (99,100), Tynyanov divided archaists into older and younger groups.

The older group of archaists was represented by the staff and supporters of the "Conversations of the Lovers of the Russian Word" (96.98). In addition to Shishkov and Derzhavin, who headed that group, the following members of the "Conversations" indicated by Tynyanov (98) belonged to it, first of all:
Krylov, whom we have already mentioned among the members of the Russian Academy of the 19th century, was also a member of the Conversations of Russian Word Lovers Society, but, nevertheless, did not belong to any of the opposing trends noted above, “but this did not prevent Belinsky from recognizing "in fairness" Krylov's indisputable right "to be considered one of the most brilliant figures of the Karamzin period, at the same time remaining the original creator of a new element of Russian poetry - nationality." Nationality, "which only flashed and flashed from time to time in the writings of Derzhavin, but in Krylov's poetry was the main and predominant element." (65,101) Krylov was in the first category of members of the Society for Readings under the chairmanship of Shishkov;

Prince Alexander Shakhovskoy (1777-1846), poet, writer and theater figure, creator of Russian vaudeville. (41, 102), who was included in the third category of members of the Society "Conversation of Russian Word Lovers" under the chairmanship of Alexander Khvostov for readings at the meetings of the Society in this category (75).
At this time, Shakhovskoy wrote the verse comedy A Lesson for Coquettes, or Lipetsk Waters, which, in terms of artistic merit, “towered above everything that was created in Russia in the field of verse comedy after Kapnist’s Yabeda and before Woe from Wit. None of Shakhovsky's plays aroused such fierce controversy as this one. The sharpness of the attacks on Shakhovsky was due to the personal nature of his satire. He directly aimed at certain people. The greatest indignation was caused by the caricature figure of the sentimental ballad poet Fialkin, in whom the audience guessed V. A. Zhukovsky” (102);
In addition, the following well-known writers of that time belonged to the senior archaists:
Sergei Shirinsky-Shikhmatov (1783 or 1785-1837), hieromonk of the Orthodox Russian Church Anikita, prince, poet, spiritual and secular writer, member of the Russian Academy (1809), academician of the Imperial (Petersburg) Academy of Sciences, took an active part in the "Conversations of lovers of Russian words” from the day of foundation of this society (103) and was also included in the first category of members participating in the Readings of the Society under the chairmanship of Shishkov (75);

Nikolai Gnedich (1784-1833), member of the Russian Academy (since 1811), head of the department of Greek books in the public library, famous for the complete translation of Homer's Iliad (41, 104) in hexameter, and not in Alexandrian verse, as in the first unfinished translations , although he was not a member of the Conversation, he was close to this society (98).
Gnedich's translation abounded in archaisms, but its merits were the accurate rendering of the original, the strength and vivid imagery of the language (104). Gnedich was a member of the Free Society of Lovers of Literature, Sciences and Arts (56).

Vladislav Ozerov (1769-1816), Russian playwright and poet, the most popular of the tragedians of the early 19th century. (105) was also not a member of the Conversations, but was a follower of this society.
In his poetic tragedies, Ozerov followed the rules of classical dramaturgy, but at the same time they were imbued with a sentimentalist mood (41,46,105).

As a writer, Ozerov joined the circle of Alexei Olenin (1763-1843), a Russian statesman (director of the Imperial Public Library in St. Petersburg from 1811, Secretary of State in 1814-1827, later a member of the State Council, Acting Privy Councilor), historian , archaeologist, artist (since 1804 member and since 1817 president of the Academy of Arts), member of the Russian Academy (since 1786), honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (since 1809).

Alexander Vostokov (98), whom we mentioned above, also belonged to the convinced archaists of the older generation.

The archaists of the younger generation (96.98), “whose peak of activity falls on the first half of the 1820s (98) included poets of the Decembrist direction:

Alexander Griboyedov (1795-1829), Russian diplomat, state councilor, playwright with Polish ancestral roots, bearing a surname representing the translation of the surname Grzhibovsky (106,107). His main work is the comedy-play in verse "Woe from Wit" (1822-1824), which combines elements not only of classicism, but also elements new for the beginning of the 21st century. the directions of romanticism and realism, which entered Russian literature as one of the peaks of Russian dramaturgy and poetry, written in an aphoristic style, which contributed to the fact that it "dispersed into quotes" of catchphrases (108);
Pavel Katenin (1792-1853) - poet, playwright, literary critic, translator and theater figure, member of the Russian Academy (1833), one of the last representatives of classicism who argued with the romantics, although "he learned a lot from the circulation of romantic poetry" (41) . It is believed that it was Katenin who headed one of the currents of the Decembrist romanticism. Katenin's poetry was distinguished by the wide use of colloquial forms of the Russian language, which brought him closer to Shishkov (109);

Kuchelbecker was not only a member of the Free Society of Lovers of Literature, Sciences and Arts (56), but an employee and full member of another, similar in name, literary association that existed in St. Petersburg in 1816-1826. (110) - "Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature". In 1820 - 1821. Küchelbecker, under the influence of Griboyedov, "adjoins Shishkov's squad". (98)

Since 1818, A. S. Pushkin also evolved towards younger archaists, especially in the poem Ruslan and Lyudmila (1817-1820). (96)
The "Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature" was founded with the permission of the government in January 1816 under the name "Society of Lovers of Literature". Alexander I himself favored the creation of the society. Derzhavin and Shishkov objected: “Why open a new society when there is an old one that does not function due to a lack of members. Let them come to us and work.” Shishkov believed that the new society would compete with the Russian Academy headed by him and therefore pose a danger to it ...
Shishkov was forced to yield; the addition of the word “free” to the name emphasized the private nature of the society, in contrast to the Russian Academy, which had an official status” (110).
The founders of the "Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature" were members of the Masonic Lodge of the Chosen Michael (110):
Russian poet, publicist, prose writer Fyodor Glinka (1786-1880), a poet of the spiritual genre, who was a member of the organization of the Decembrists (41, 110,111). Popular songs were Glinka's poems "Troika" ("Here is a daring troika rushing...") (1824) and "Prisoner" (1831) ("I can't hear the noise of the city...");
Alexander Borovkov (1788-1856) (99) - poet, translator, memoirist, editor of the journal of the St. Petersburg Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature "Competitor of Education and Charity", a Russian official who served in the courts (112). It is noteworthy that immediately (on the third day) after the Decembrist uprising on December 14, 1825, i.e. On December 17, 1825, Borovkov was appointed by Nicholas I to the post of "ruler of affairs (secretary) of the Investigative Committee for research on malicious societies" (112).
By order of the emperor in 1825-1826. Borovkov became the compiler of a biographical dictionary of the Decembrists and persons who were under investigation of the uprising, the so-called "Borovkov's Alphabet" (113).
Kondraty Ryleev (1795-1826) (107) - Russian poet with non-Russian roots of the ancestry of his mother, who bore the maiden name Essen (114). Ryleev entered the Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature in 1821 (110,114). He was the leader of the Decembrists and was executed by hanging, and twice, because at first the rope could not stand it and broke.

According to a legend told by a certain Sofya Nikolaevna Savina and published in the journal Historical Bulletin in 1894, when three-year-old Ryleev was ill as a child, his mother, praying to the Lord for the health of her son and saving his life, appeared, as if in the coming time prayers in a dream, the voice of an angel, and in this dream the mother had visions, including the gallows, as a prediction of the future death of her son (115). The poet's mother, however, did not live to see this unjust execution.
In addition to the Decembrist poets, most of whom were members of the Free Society of Russian Literature Lovers (110), one should also mention Yevgeny Baratynsky (Boratynsky) (1800-1844) (116) - one of the "most striking and at the same time mysterious and underestimated "Russian romantic poets, who came from the Galician gentry family of the Boratynskys (116), and, as Bryusov noted, also had Italian blood ties (117).
In contrast to the "Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature" (110), it is necessary to tell about another literary and philological association, similar in name, but distinguished by the absence of the word "Free" in it. This is the "Society of Lovers of Russian Literature", founded in 1811 at Moscow University (118). It existed until 1837 and, having resumed its activities in 1857, continued to exist until 1930. The largest publication of this society is Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language (1863-1866) (41,118, 119).
Vladimir Dal (1801-1872) (120) - Russian poet (Dal's first poems were published in 1827) and writer (Dal's first fame in the literary circles of the Russian capital was brought by "Russian fairy tales from folk oral tradition to civil literacy transcribed, to everyday life adapted to everyday life and embellished with walking sayings by Cossack Vladimir Lugansky. The first heel "(1832).
Dahl had Danish roots on his paternal side, and French on his maternal side, also known by the pseudonym "Cossack Lugansk", was an ethnographer and lexicographer, collector of Russian folklore, military doctor, member and then honorary member (1868) of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature (118) .
Russian poet, philosopher, playwright, publicist and translator Alexei Khomyakov (1804-1860), corresponding member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (since 1856) (41,121) was also known as the founder of Slavophilism, “the literary and religious-philosophical trend of Russian social and philosophical thought, which took shape in the 40s of the XIX century, focused on identifying the identity of Russia, its typical differences from the West, whose representatives acted with the justification of a special, different from the Western European, Russian path" (122).

He was one of the chairmen who headed the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature.
It is known that the word "Slavophile" was first applied to Shishkov and other archaists (96).
The Society "Conversation of the Lovers of the Russian Word" ceased its activities after the death of Derzhavin.

In contrast to the society "Conversation of lovers of the Russian word," the followers of Karamzin, led by Zhukovsky, united in the literary circle "Arzamas" (1815-1818) in St. Petersburg (41,123).

In addition to the young Pushkin and his close friend Prince Vyazemsky, the Arzamas circle also included Pushkin's friend and mentor - Konstantin Batyushkov (1787-1855) (41.124), who was elected in absentia a member of the Arzamas literary society in 1815, but only in 1817 he first came to its meeting.
The meetings of this circle were held "in an atmosphere of buffoonery and fun" (41), with parodies and epigrams of Shishkovites and ended with a feast.

Vyazemsky, critical of Shishkov, noted:

“I remember that during it we laughed at the absurdities of his manifestos; but meanwhile, the majority - the people, Russia - read them with delight and tenderness, and now many admire their eloquence, therefore, they were useful ”(88).

Shishkov fought for the purity of the Russian language, against the French influence prevailing at that time, both on the Russian language and on Russian society in its upper classes, but his orientation towards the Church Slavonic language, as the fundamental principle of the national Russian language, nevertheless, did not quite correspond the cultural needs of the development of Russian society, striving for the development of the Russian language from various sources, not only national, but also the entire world culture.

Galicisms, against which Shishkov and his followers resented the clogging of the Russian language, were actively introduced for at least 100 years, including through the poetic works of many famous Russian poets. Including, according to the testimony of the Russian poet and publisher Sergei Makovsky (1877-1962) (125), Pushkin "brilliantly introduced hundreds of them into Russian speech" (126).

In Russian poetry of the beginning of the 19th century. the influence of classicism is still strong... But on the whole, classicism is already leaving the literary scene” (46). He was replaced by new directions: sentimentalism and romanticism.
The struggle between the archaists and the Karamzinists ended in a compromise. Karamzin took into account the position of the Shishkovites in his main prose work, The History of the Russian State.
Tynyanov noted Pushkin's changing position in the literary disputes of that time:
“Until 1818, Pushkin could be called an orthodox Arzamas-Karamzinist. 1818 - the year of a decisive turning point and the closest rapprochement with the younger archaists. (98).

Note: This section is a continuation of the publication “On literary norms in Russian poetry. Preface". The continuation (next sections) of the work "On literary norms in Russian poetry" follows in new publications.