Roman in pickul is evil spirits. Devilry

Book " Devilry' is considered one of the most famous works Valentina Pikul. The writer himself said that this was his main literary success. She tells about the life of a man who provided big influence on the situation in the country. At the same time, his personality causes a lot of controversy so far, the same applies to the book.

Grigory Rasputin became the central character of the novel. He was brought from Siberia to the capital, because he was noticeably different from others in his views. Gregory was well versed in people, he understood how to please. In a short time, he was able to gain a foothold in secular society, and then with the help of the maid of honor and at the court of the emperor. Gradually, he increasingly influenced the adoption of important decisions, skillfully used his position. Those around him, seeing his successes, began to gather around him in order to also derive some benefit.

The novel covers the period from the moment of the formation of Nicholas II in the last years of the reign of Alexander III and until the autumn of 1917. The writer, talking about the life of the protagonist, reflects historical events: the Russian-Japanese war, the suppression of the revolution of 1905, the First World War, the February Revolution. It makes one think about why the whole system of royal power was destroyed.

There are no fictional characters in the book, Pikul relied on real facts. He used over a hundred sources to write the novel. The author studied open documents, official versions of events, recollections of eyewitnesses, data from interrogations and testimonies of officials and ministers. He frequently cites these sources. For this reason, the facts presented can be considered quite reliable. The writer talks about the negative aspects human personality, reveals the vices of society and power, forgetting to mention the good. Some may not like it. But in the novel, the author wanted to show exactly this - the impurity of power forces.

The work belongs to the Prose genre. It was published in 1979 by the publishing house Veche. The book is part of the "Pikul's Books/cellophane" series. On our site you can download the book "Unclean Power" in fb2, rtf, epub, pdf, txt format or read online. The rating of the book is 4.21 out of 5. Here, before reading, you can also refer to the reviews of readers who are already familiar with the book and find out their opinion. In the online store of our partner you can buy and read the book in paper form.

"Devilry". The book, which Valentin Pikul himself called "the main success in his literary biography."

The story of the life and death of one of the most controversial figures in Russian history - Grigory Rasputin - develops under the pen of Pikul into a large-scale and fascinating story about the most paradoxical, perhaps for our country, period - a short break between the February and October revolutions ...

Valentin Pikul
Devilry

I dedicate it to the memory of my grandmother, the Pskov peasant woman Vasilisa Minaevna Karenina, who lived her whole long life not for herself, but for people.

Prologue,
which could be an epilogue

The old Russian history was ending and a new one was beginning. Creeping in the lanes with their wings, the booming hooting owls of reaction shied away through their caves ... The first to disappear somewhere was the excessively quick-witted Matilda Kshesinskaya, the most unique prima weighing 2 pounds and 36 pounds (a fluff of the Russian stage!); a brutal crowd of deserters was already smashing her palace, smashing to smithereens the fabulous gardens of Babylon, where overseas birds sang in captivating bushes. The ubiquitous newspapermen stole the ballerina's notebook, and the Russian layman could now find out how the daily budget of this amazing woman was formed:

For a hat - 115 rubles.

A person for tea - 7 kopecks.

For a suit - 600 rubles.

Boric acid - 15 kopecks.

Vovochka as a gift - 3 kopecks.

The imperial couple was temporarily kept under arrest in Tsarskoye Selo; At workers' rallies there were already calls for the execution of "Nikolaska the Bloody", and from England they promised to send a cruiser for the Romanovs, and Kerensky expressed a desire to personally escort the royal family to Murmansk. Under the windows of the palace, the students sang:

Alice needs to go back

Address for letters - Hesse - Darmstadt,

Frau Alice rides "nach Rhine",

Frau Alice - aufwiderzein!

Who would have believed that until recently they were arguing:

- We will call the monastery over the grave of the unforgettable martyr: Rasputin! the empress said.

“Dear Alix,” answered her husband respectfully, “but such a name will be misunderstood among the people, for the surname sounds obscene. The monastery is better called Grigorievskaya.

- No, Rasputinskaya! the queen insisted. - There are hundreds of thousands of Grigorievs in Rus', and Rasputin is only one ...

They reconciled on the fact that the monastery would be called Tsarskoye Selo-Rasputin; before the architect Zverev, the empress revealed the "ideological" plan of the future temple: "Gregory was killed in accursed St. Petersburg, and therefore you will turn the Rasputinsky monastery towards the capital with a blank wall without a single window. The facade of the monastery, bright and joyful, turn to my palace ..." March 21, 1917 year, precisely on the birthday of Rasputin, they were going to lay the foundation of the monastery. But in February, ahead of the tsar's schedules, the revolution broke out, and it seemed that Grishka's long-standing threat to the tsars came true:

"That's already it! I will not be - and you will not be." It is true that after the assassination of Rasputin, the tsar lasted only 74 days on the throne. When an army is defeated, it buries its banners so that they do not fall into the hands of the victor. Rasputin lay in the ground, like the banner of a fallen monarchy, and no one knew where his grave was. The Romanovs hid the place of his burial ...

Staff Captain Klimov, who served on the anti-aircraft batteries of Tsarskoye Selo, once walked along the outskirts of the parks; by chance he wandered to the piles of boards and bricks, an unfinished chapel froze in the snow. The officer illuminated its vaults with a flashlight, noticed a blackening under the altar. Having squeezed into its recess, I found myself in the dungeon of the chapel. Here stood a coffin, large and black, almost square; there was a hole in the lid, like a ship's porthole. The staff captain directed the beam of the lantern directly into this hole, and then Rasputin himself looked at him from the depths of non-existence, eerie and ghostly ...

Klimov appeared at the Council of Soldiers' Deputies.

“There are a lot of fools in Rus',” he said. - Isn't it enough to experiment with Russian psychology? How can we guarantee that the obscurantists will not find out where Grishka is lying, as I found out? It is necessary from the beginning to stop all the pilgrimages of the Rasputinites ...

Bolshevik G.V. Yelin (soon the first head of the armored forces of the young Soviet Republic). All in black leather, creaking angrily, he decided to put Rasputin to execution - execution after death!

Today, Lieutenant Kiselev was on duty for the protection of the royal family; in the kitchen he was handed a lunch menu for "citizens of the Romanovs".

“Soup-pottage,” read Kiselyov, marching along long corridors, “smelt risotto pies and cutlets, vegetable chops, porridge-slurry and pancakes with currants ... Well, not bad!”

The doors leading to the royal chambers opened.

“Citizen Emperor,” the lieutenant said, handing over the menu, “let me draw your highest attention ...

Nicholas II put aside the tabloid "Blue Journal" (in which some of his ministers were presented against the backdrop of prison bars, while the heads of others were wrapped around ropes) and answered the lieutenant dully:

– Doesn’t the awkward combination of the words “citizen” and “emperor” bother you? Why don't you just call me...

He wanted to advise that they address him by his first name and patronymic, but Lieutenant Kiselyov took the hint differently.

– your majesty- he whispered, looking at the door, - the soldiers of the garrison became aware of the grave of Rasputin, now they are holding a meeting, deciding what to do with his ashes ...

The Empress, all in heightened attention, quickly spoke with her husband in English, then suddenly, without even feeling pain, she tore off her finger a precious ring, a gift from the British Queen Victoria, almost forcibly pulled it on the lieutenant's little finger.

“I beg you,” she muttered, “you will get anything else you want, just save it!” God will punish us for this villainy...

The state of the empress "was truly terrible, and even more terrible - nervous twitches of her face and her whole body during a conversation with Kiselev, which ended in a strong hysterical fit." The lieutenant ran to the chapel when the soldiers were already working with spades, angrily opening the stone floor in order to get to the coffin. Kiselev began to protest:

“Are there really no believers in God among you?”

There were also such among the soldiers of the revolution.

Kiselev rushed to the office telephone, calling the Taurida Palace, where the Provisional Government met. On the other end of the wire was Commissar Voitinsky:

- Thank you! I will report to Minister of Justice Kerensky...

And the soldiers were already carrying the coffin with Rasputin through the streets. Among the local inhabitants, who came running from everywhere, wandered "material evidence" taken from the grave. It was a gospel in expensive morocco and a modest icon tied with a silk bow, like a box of sweets for a name day. From the bottom of the image, the empress drew her name with the names of her daughters with an indelible pencil, Vyrubova signed below; around the list of names are the words: YOUR - SAVE - US - AND HAVE PARTY. The rally started again. Speakers climbed onto the lid of the coffin, as if on a podium, and talked about what a terrible animal power lies here, trampled by them, but now they, citizens of free Russia, are boldly trampling on this evil spirits that will never rise up ...

And the ministers conferred in the Tauride Palace.

- It's unthinkable! snorted Rodzianko. - If the workers of the capital find out that the soldiers dragged Rasputin, undesirable excesses may occur. Alexander Fedorych, what is your opinion?

“It is necessary,” answered Kerensky, “to delay the demonstration with the corpse on Zabalkansky Prospekt. I propose: take the coffin by force and secretly bury it in the cemetery of the Novodevichy Convent...

In the evening, near the Tsarskoye Selo railway station, G. V. Yelin stopped a truck hurrying to Petrograd, the soldiers put Rasputin on the back of the car - and they rushed, just keep your hats!

“That’s what I just didn’t drive,” the driver admitted. - And Chinese furniture, and Brazilian cocoa, and even Christmas decorations, but to carry the dead ... and even Rasputin! - this has never happened to me before. By the way, where are you guys going?

- Yes, we do not know. Where are you going, honey?

- To the garage. My "benz" of the court department.

- Take us there. The morning is wiser than the evening…

Current page: 58 (total book has 58 pages) [accessible reading excerpt: 38 pages]

Fires blazed up in the middle of the square.

Thundered, rampaged "La Marseillaise".

As always - inviting and jubilant!

Author's conclusion

I began writing this novel on September 3, 1972, and finished new year's eve on January 1, 1975; over the roofs of ancient Riga, rockets burned with a clapping, the chime of glasses was heard from the neighbors, when I, a diligent chronicler, dragged the bundle with the corpse of Rasputin into the hole, drove the homeless minister around the capital.

So, the point is set!

They say that an English novelist from his youth saved up materials about a certain historical person, and by his old age he turned out to have a whole chest of papers. Making sure that everything was collected, the writer mercilessly burned all the materials at the stake. When asked why he did this, the novelist replied: “The unnecessary burned out, but the necessary remained in the memory ...”

I didn't burn the chest with Rasputin materials, but selecting the right one was the most painful process. The volume of the book made me give up many interesting facts and events. The novel included only an insignificant fraction of what was learned about Rasputinism. I confess that I had to be extremely economical, and sometimes I tried to consolidate on one page what could be safely expanded into an independent chapter.

We usually write - "the bloody reign of the tsar", "the cruel regime of tsarism", "the corrupt clique of Nicholas II", but from frequent use the words have already been erased: it is difficult for them to withstand the semantic load. There was a kind of amortization of words! I wanted to show those people and those conditions of life that were overthrown by the revolution, so that these stamped definitions would regain visual visibility and actual weight.

According to the definition of V. I. Lenin, “the counter-revolutionary era (1907–1914) revealed the whole essence of the tsarist monarchy, brought it to the“ last line ”, revealed all its rottenness, vileness, all the cynicism and depravity of the royal gang with the monstrous Rasputin at its head ... »

Here about this I wrote!

Probably, they can reproach me for the fact that, describing the work of the tsarist Ministry of Internal Affairs and the police department, I did not reflect in the novel their fierce struggle against the revolutionary movement. As a matter of fact, these two powerful levers of the autocracy are occupied with me by intradepartmental squabbles and participation in Rasputin's intrigues.

This is true. I don't mind!

But I wrote about the negative side of the revolutionary era, back on title page warning the reader that the novel is dedicated to the decay of the autocracy. Please understand me correctly: based on the ideas of the author's ethics, I deliberately did not want to fit two incompatible things under one cover - the process of the growth of the revolution and the process of strengthening Rasputinism. Moreover, the work of the tsarist Ministry of Internal Affairs in suppressing revolutionary movement I have already reflected in my two-volume novel “In the Backyards great empire”, and did not want to repeat myself. In part, I was guided by the testament of the democratic critic N. G. Chernyshevsky, who said that it was impossible to demand from the author that wild garlic in his work should also be fragrant with forget-me-nots! A Russian proverb confirms this rule: if you chase two hares, you won't catch a single one... Now I must make a frank confession. It seems that who else, if not me, the author of the book on Rasputinism, is given to know about the reasons that made Rasputin an influential person in the empire. So I am the author! I find it difficult to give a precise answer to this tricky question.

Memory brings me back to the first pages.

Rasputin drinks vodka, quarrels and roams in front of people, he is obscene and steals, but ... You must admit that there were a lot of reasons for Rasputin's imprisonment, but I see no reason for bringing this person to the fore.

Only a limited person can think that Rasputin came to the fore thanks to his sexual potency. Trust me that all world history does not know a case for a person to advance thanks to these qualities. If we take a closer look at well-known figures of favoritism, such bright and original personalities as the Duke Biron, the Shuvalov family, the Orlov brothers, Prince Potemkin-Tavrichesky, Godoy in Spain or Struensee in Denmark, we will see a picture completely opposite to Rasputinism. Having shown at some point purely masculine qualities, the favorites then acted as prominent statesmen with a sharp grip on administrative talents - it was for this that they were valued by the crowned admirers.

I may be objected to by the example of Potemkin ... Yes, this man was not a clean person. But while he had great vices, he also had great virtues. Potemkin built cities, populated the gigantic expanses of the uninhabited steppes of the Black Sea, he made the Crimea a grape paradise, this sybarite knew how to heroically withstand a barrage of Turkish cannonballs, when his adjutants' heads were torn off their shoulders; the smartest people of Europe traveled to distant lands only to enjoy a conversation with the Russian Alcibiades, whose speech shone with wit and aphorism.

What comparison can there be with Rasputin! It is known from the history of favoritism that, having received a lot from the queens, the Russian courtesans knew how to spend money for the benefit not only for themselves. They collected collections of paintings and minerals, valuable books and engravings, entered into correspondence with Voltaire and Diderot, ordered foreign architects and painters, orchestras and opera companies, they invested in the creation of lyceums and cadet corps, after which they remained art galleries and palaces with parks that have survived to this day as valuable monuments of the Russian past.

And what has come down to us from Rasputin?

Dirty jokes, drunken burps and vomit...

So I ask again - where are the reasons that could specifically justify his rise?

I do not see them. But I… guess about them!

My author's opinion is this: at no other time could a "favorite" like Rasputin appear at the Russian court; even Anna Ioannovna, who adored all sorts of deformities of nature, would not let such a person on her doorstep. The appearance of Rasputin at the beginning of the 20th century, on the eve of the revolutions, in my opinion, is quite natural and historically justified, because any vile trash flourishes best of all on the rot of decay.

“God's anointed ones” had already degraded to such an extent that they regarded the abnormal presence of Rasputin with their “highly named” persons as a normal phenomenon of autocratic life. Sometimes it even seems to me that Rasputin was to some extent a kind of drug for the Romanovs. It became necessary for Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna, just as a drunkard needs a glass of vodka, as a drug addict needs regular injections of drugs under the skin ... Then they come to life, then their eyes shine again!

And it is necessary to reach the highest degree of decomposition, moral and physiological, in order to consider communication with Rasputin "God's grace" ...

I probably do not quite understand the reasons for the rise of Rasputin, also because I try to reason sensibly. To understand these reasons, obviously, one must be abnormal. It is possible that we even need to go crazy to the state in which the last Romanovs were - then Rasputin will become one of the things necessary for life ...

With this I will allow myself to end the novel.

A novel is a house with open doors and windows.

Everyone can settle down in it as it is more convenient for him.

The genre of the novel is good because it leaves the author the right to leave something unsaid in order to leave room for the reader's conjecture.

Without this conjecture, no novel can be considered complete.

Comments

We consider it necessary to acquaint readers with the author's preface to the first complete version of the novel. (Ed.)

From the author

The novel "Unclean Power" I consider the main success in my literary biography, but this novel has a very strange and too difficult fate ...

I remember that I had not yet started writing this book, when even then I began to receive dirty anonymous letters warning me that they would deal with me for Rasputin. The threats wrote that you, they say, write about anything, but just don’t touch Grigory Rasputin and his best friends.

Be that as it may, the novel "Unclean Power" was written, and soon I had an agreement with Lenizdat. In anticipation of the release of the novel as a separate book, I submitted it for publication to the magazine Our Contemporary. The editors of the magazine informed that the novel, which is too voluminous, will be printed in a strong reduction.

However, when it came out, I - in the magazine - found not my own, but someone else's name "At the last line", the very first pages of the publication were written not by me, but by someone else's hand. In fact, under the title "At the last line," the reader received not an abridged version of the novel, but only fragments from it, by which it was impossible to judge the entire book.

But even these passages turned out to be quite enough to excite L. I. Brezhnev’s inner circle, who saw themselves and all the sins of their camarilla in scenes of corruption at the court of Nicholas II, in pictures of plunder and venality. Not without reason, in the middle of the publication of my novel, the wives themselves wished to “edit” it - the same L. I. Brezhnev and M. A. Suslov.

The first blow was inflicted on me by M. V. Zimyanin, who demanded me “on the carpet” to inflict reprisals on me. Then a devastating article by Irina Pushkareva appeared (I still don’t know who she is), which served as a signal for a general persecution of me. After that, “heavy artillery” came into action - in the person of M. A. Suslov, and his speech, directed against me personally and my novel, was obsequiously picked up by the pages of Literaturnaya Gazeta.

Lenizdat, of course, immediately broke the contract with me, but at the same time terminated the contract for the publication of the popular book by M.K. Kasvinov "Twenty-three steps down", because our materials were largely identical.

Many years passed, a vacuum of ominous silence developed around my novel and my name - they simply hushed me up and did not print. Meanwhile, historians sometimes told me: we don’t understand why you were beaten? After all, you did not discover anything new, everything that you described in the novel was published in the Soviet press back in the twenties ...

Unfortunately, the editors of Lenizdat, rejecting my novel, were guided by the opinion again of Irina Pushkareva, who wrote for the same editors: “After reading the manuscript of the novel by V. Pikul, it remains unclear why the author needed to raise stories long forgotten and buried in a landfill events and facts of secondary importance. And for me, the author, it remained unclear why the events on the eve of the revolution, which involuntarily brought its beginning closer, turned out to be “in the dustbin” and why they seem “secondary” to critics?

But let's not forget that this was written in that barren and filthy time, which is now commonly called the "era of stagnation", and therefore our supreme bosses did not at all want the reader to look for deplorable analogies - between the events of my novel and those blatant outrages that were happening in the circle of the Brezhnev elite. Really, doesn't little darling Churbanov look like Grishka Rasputin? Looks like! How similar, only he didn’t have a beard ...

These, I think, are the main reasons why the novel provoked such a furious reaction in the highest echelons of power. But now times have changed, and I will be happy if the reader - finally! - will see my novel under its real name and in full.

* * *

In the creative fate of Pikul, work on the novel "Unclean Power" became an important stage that brought deep satisfaction. But in his personal life, it was a catastrophically difficult time, leaving deep traces that did not heal until the end of his life ...

On the basis of an agreement signed on May 28, 1973 with Lenizdat, Valentin Savvich sent the manuscript to his usual address. (It so happened that for many years the books of Pikul, who had never been a member of the party, were published by the party publishing house, which is under the auspices of the Leningrad regional committee of the CPSU.) "Unclean Force" fell into the obkom structure, where the first readers of the manuscript were censors, editors and reviewers who specialized mainly in the products of the party apparatus.

According to the stories of Valentin Savvich, he went to this novel for more than ten years. How much material was "shoveled"! Not counting small newspaper and magazine notes, of which he looked through many hundreds, "the list of literature lying on the author's desk," attached to the manuscript, included 128 titles.

I am holding it in my hands now. This is not just a bibliography - it contains the author's opinion about what he read. I can't resist quoting at least selectively:

4. ALMAZOV B. Rasputin and Russia. Grünhut Publishing House, Prague, 1922. The book is saturated with errors, and therefore almost never used it in his work.

20. BUCHANAN, George. My mission in Russia. Per. from English. D. Ya. Bloch. "Obelisk", Berlin, 1924. Finally, the lousy Soviet translation of memoirs with the appendix of A. Kerensky's article THE END OF THE ROYAL FAMILY in the GIZ edition (M., 1925).

25. VYRUBOVA A. A. Her Majesty's maid of honor. Intimate diary and memories. 1903–1928, Riga, no year. This unthinkable lie was not used in the work.

73. V. P. OBNINSKY No date. The last autocrat. Berlin, ca. 1912. As you know, circulation approx. 500 copies was almost completely destroyed by the tsarist secret police, 1 copy. There are books in Moscow, I have another one.

101. Simanovich A. S. Rasputin and the Jews. Notes personal secretary Rasputin. Riga, b / g.

Remember, reader, these books and Pikul's comments. Two reviews were given to "Unclean Force", different in form and content, but similar in their categorical rejection of the book. Perhaps their lengthy consideration does not deserve attention, but it is instructive from the point of view of showing the inconsistency of concepts based on a momentary fad, on the mood and opinion of those standing above ...

So, senior researcher of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, candidate of historical sciences Pushkareva I. M. wrote after reading the manuscript:

– “poor knowledge of history (?! – A.P.) brings the author to the camp of our ideological opponents abroad”;

– “in Pikul’s novel, in contradiction with the established views in Soviet historical science, the revolutionary era of the beginning of the 20th century, illuminated by the genius of V. I. Lenin, is called nothing less than the “era” of Rasputinism”;

Neglecting Marxism-Leninism, contradicting established views, expressing his understanding, etc. - at that time this was not at all praise. Now this assessment of the author's behavior at that time can be perceived as an order for personal courage, for his contribution to democracy and openness.

- “the literature that“ lay on the table ”of the author of the novel (judging by the list that he attached to the manuscript) is small ...”;

- "a novel ... nothing more than a simple retelling ... of the writings of white emigrants - the anti-Soviet B. Almazov, the monarchist Purishkevich, the adventurer A. Simanovich, etc."

As for Almazov, I hope you remember Pikul's opinion? But the "adventurer" really used. And what self-respecting writer will ignore the notes of “Rasputin’s adviser and secretary appointed by the tsar”, almost completely unknown to a wide circle of readers, just because he is not of “Soviet blood”. Moreover, according to eyewitnesses, smart, with a good memory, strong, lived to be a hundred years old (he died in 1978), the secretary "vouched for the full correspondence of the facts he presented to reality." By the way, much later, after the publication of "Unclean Forces", Simanovich's notes were published in the journal "Slovo" under the heading "From the First Word".

The editorial conclusion, signed by the head of the editorial office of fiction E. N. Gabis and senior editor L. A. Plotnikova, contradicted the review only in part of the statement that “the author, of course, has the most extensive (! - A.P.) historical material,” but there was unanimity on the merits of the final conclusions: “V. Pikul’s manuscript cannot be published. It cannot be considered a Soviet historical novel, the origins of which originate in the 20th century in the work of A. M. Gorky ”(Pushkarev).

“The manuscript of the novel by V. Pikul “Unclean Force” cannot be accepted for publication, because ... it is a detailed argument for the notorious thesis: the people have such rulers as they deserve. And this is insulting for a great people, for a great country, which October 1917 clearly showed” (editorial conclusion).

So the funeral of "Unclean Forces" took place.

Lenizdat terminated the contract, but Valentin Savvich did not despair - he handed over his work to the editors of the Our Contemporary magazine.

Since the manuscript of the novel was quite voluminous, about 44 author's sheets, the editors suggested that the author shorten the novel. Valentin Savvich agreed to shorten the novel, but he himself did not take any part in this, because at that time his wife, Veronika Feliksovna, was seriously ill.

An abridged version of the novel was published in Nash Sovremennik magazine from No. 4 to No. 7 in 1979 under the title "At the last line". It should be noted that neither the title nor the published version of the novel, to put it mildly, brought satisfaction to Valentin Savvich.

Readers had no time to get acquainted with the ending of the novel, as in the newspaper " Literary Russia”On July 27, an article by Pushkareva “When the sense of proportion is lost” appeared. These were rehashings of the negativisms of the review, squared by the realization of the futility of the first attempts to completely close an undesirable topic.

The banner of the campaign against Pikul was also picked up by the critic Oskotsky:

– “the novel clearly showed the unhistorical nature of the author’s view, which replaced the social-class approach to the events of the pre-revolutionary period with the idea of ​​the self-decomposition of tsarism”;

- "in the novel "At the last line" -" Vyrubova's memoirs ", the forgery of which is accepted as authentic" (?! - A.P.).

But it was a trifle, so to speak, - flowers. "Berries" followed after the performances of M. Zimyanin and M. Suslov.

A meeting of the secretariat of the Board of the Writers' Union of the RSFSR was held, where the publication of the novel in the journal Our Contemporary was recognized as erroneous. In essence, the secretariat of that time carried out an act of discrediting not only "Unclean Forces", but also the entire work of V. Pikul.

In one of the letters, Valentin Savvich expressed his condition as follows: “I live in stress. They stopped printing me. How to live - I do not know. The writing didn't get worse. I just don’t like the Soviet government…”

From many libraries, the remnants of the magazines "Our Contemporary" with the publication of the novel began to be withdrawn. I am writing “leftovers” because the bulk of the magazines were immediately “withdrawn” by readers, the book went from hand to hand, began its life.

What kind of will and faith one had to have in order to survive in an atmosphere of misunderstanding and persecution. During this difficult period, Valentin Pikul lost his wife.

The ice broke only in 1988.

Unexpectedly, the Krasnoyarsk book publishing house offered to publish the novel “At the last line”, to which Pikul offered to publish “the novel“ Unclean Forces ”, which was still unknown at that time. A photocopy was urgently made, and the manuscript went to distant Krasnoyarsk.

We should pay tribute to Doctor of Historical Sciences V. N. Ganichev, who personally knew V. Pikul, who wrote a short preface, which significantly calmed the nerves of some doubting publishers.

While the Siberians were working on the manuscript, a request came from the Voronezh magazine Podyem to publish the book, which was done starting with the first issue in 1989.

Their countrymen from the Central Black Earth Book Publishing House, represented by director A.N. Sviridov, also became interested in the long-suffering novel and, having received a “go-ahead” from the author, released a two-volume edition of “Unclean Forces” with a circulation of 120,000 copies.

In the same year, 1989, the book, tastefully designed by the artist V. Bakhtin, was published in a 100,000th edition by the Krasnoyarsk book publishing house.

“A boring, wordy, loose narrative” (according to Oskotsky) was snapped up at one moment. The phrase, which gradually became withered, came to life: "A book is the best gift."

On next year under the influence of reader demand, the circulation of the book increased dramatically: 250 thousand copies of the book were published by the Leningrad Rosvideofilm, 200 thousand by the Moscow Military Publishing House.

Speaking about the Dnepropetrovsk publishing house "Promin", which published "Unclean Force", I recall here with special warmth its director, Sirota Viktor Andreevich, who greatly appreciated Valentin Savvich.

And then there was "Roman-newspaper" ( Chief Editor V. N. Ganichev) with its more than three million circulation. The first three issues in 1991 were given to the novel "Unclean Power".

The pompous phrases of the reviews have faded, but the interest in the book and the demand for it do not weaken ...

May the reader forgive me for the lengthy comment. But it is the "Unclean Force" that, in my opinion, is cornerstone in understanding and, if you like, in knowing the character, creativity, and indeed the whole life of Valentin Pikul.

Stolypin Arkady

About the book by V Pikul "At the last line"

Article by Arkady Stolypin

(son of P.A. Stolypin)

about the book by V. Pikul "At the last line"

From the editor. It is hardly a big exaggeration to consider that V. Pikul's novels are among the most popular in Russia. Ten - fifteen years ago, for many it was the standard of historical prose, almost a textbook, according to which one should study Russian and world history. Indeed, the ease of style, exciting intrigues, the complex interweaving of the plot - all this forced the reader, exhausted by the tedious clichés of the Soviet official-bureaucratic language, to literally read everything that came out of V. Pikul's pen in one breath. Popularity was also promoted by the seemingly great scientific objectivity and impartiality of the author. In addition, one should not forget that V. Pikul wrote not at all about the leaders of the party and government, not about "people's heroes", whose biographies are "stuck in everyone's teeth", but about Tsars, Emperors, nobles, Russian officers, scientists , politicians, that is, about people to whom university and school history textbooks were assigned, in best case, no more than 10-15 lines. Somehow it was forgotten that historical truth was far from the same as V. Pikul wrote about it. Writing objective historical analysis his writing at that time was very difficult. But even now, when, obviously, there is every opportunity to get acquainted with "history as it is", since hundreds of memoirs and historical studies have come to light, Pikul's novels are still "ultimate truth" for many. Presented to the readers of "Posev" review of one of the most popular novels V. Pikul "At the last line", written by Arkady Stolypin - the son of the great Russian reformer P.A. Stolypin. It convincingly shows that most of the "historical" research of the novelist, to put it mildly, does not correspond to reality. The review was first published in the magazine "Posev" No. 8, 1980.

Arkady STOLYPIN

CRUMBER OF TRUTH IN A BARREL OF LIES

About the novel by Valentin Pikul, At the last line, one can, without fear of making a mistake, say that he enjoys exceptional success with readers in the Soviet Union. However, this interest of hundreds of thousands, and maybe millions of readers, is hardly due only to the "flow of plot gossip" , as the author of a literary review in Pravda (October 8, 1979) states. If you read the novel carefully, you get the impression that it was written not by one, but, as it were, by two authors. passages written in a different handwriting, passages where one can find some grain of truth about our historical past.Does the novel enjoy such popularity because of these crumbs of truth, does the reader perceive the vast vicious portion of the novel as an annoying but familiar "compulsory assortment"? that this is exactly so. Did the author consciously exaggerate, hoping that our reader had long been accustomed to the work that Krylov's rooster was doing on a dunghill? It's hard to say, we don't know too much about Pikul. But even if he was mainly concerned with getting the manuscript through the censors, he overdid it. There are many places in the book that are not only incorrect, but also base and slanderous, for which, in a state of law, the author would answer not to critics, but to the court. We will not touch these pages. We will simply try to portray the slandered people truthfully. I would like to emphasize that it was only the news that the novel "At the Last Line" is read by many people in Russia that prompted me to take up this article. I will be happy if at least a small part of them read these lines. Although the book is dedicated to pre-revolutionary Russia, before our eyes appear the figures of the Khrushchev (and even Brezhnev) era, dressed in frock coats and uniforms of the tsarist era. So, for example, Empress Maria Feodorovna of Pikulev on official reception whispers to Alexander III: “Sashka, I beg you, don’t get drunk!” (!) What Pikul didn’t say about this queen! She allegedly scandalized at the time of the death of her royal husband and the accession to the throne of her son, she allegedly remarried. Pikul clearly neglects the memoirs of that time. And there were many people who left their memories of the queen. For example, Foreign Minister Izvolsky testifies: “She was a charming and infinitely kind woman. She softened with her friendliness and lit up the reign of Emperor Alexander III with her charm ... Without hesitation, she advised her son reasonable transformations, and the situation in October 1905 was saved with her assistance." Younger brother Emperor Nicholas II - Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich - Pikul clearly likes it. But he is depicted in a crooked mirror. Thus, the author forces him to publicly beat Rasputin near the fence of the imperial park in Tsarskoye Selo, as if he were not a Grand Duke, but a combatant on Mayakovsky Square. His own father I didn't even know. Pikul writes: "... a black-moustached, wiry man with a predatory gypsy look - Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin sat down in a well-warmed (ministerial - A.S.) chair." "A wiry man", reporting to the tsar about state affairs, behaves like a hooligan. The queen exclaims, turning to the sovereign: "Lounged in front of you in an armchair, grabs your cigarettes from the table." In the novel, my father smokes both his own and other people's cigarettes without tired. Yes, and much to drink:, ... bitterly closing his eyes, he sucked in a lukewarm Armenian with some indignation (?! - A.S.). In fact, my father never smoked a single cigarette in his entire life. When there were no guests, we had only mineral water on the dining table. Mother often used to say: "Our house is like that of the Old Believers: no cigarettes, no wine, no cards." When Pikul writes about the dachas of that time, he imagines a closed zone near Moscow: "After crumpling up the working day, Stolypin drove off to the Neidgart dacha in Vyritsa," he says. First, the "Neidhart dacha" (apparently belonging to my mother, née Neidhart) did not exist at all. As for the "crumpled working day", I myself, according to childhood memories, could object a lot. I prefer, however, to quote the words of Izvolsky: "Stolypin's ability to work was amazing, as was his physical and moral endurance, thanks to which he overcame unreasonably hard work." Member of the State Duma V. Shulgin testified that P. Stolypin went to bed at 4 o'clock in the morning, and at 9 he already began his working day. According to Pikul, right hand my father, when he was the governor of Grodno (1902-1903), was shot by a terrorist-SR. Wrong. Stolypin's right hand had been acting badly since early youth(rheumatism). Subsequently, this was further intensified when he was governor of Saratov: in June 1905, one Black Hundreds pogromist fell into his father's right hand with a cobblestone when he defended a group of zemstvo doctors from reprisals. The novel describes a scene that allegedly took place in the First Duma, that is, no later than June 1906, when Stolypin was still Minister of the Interior. “When the Duma raged, began to shout that he was a satrap, Stolypin raised his fist above himself and said with surprising calmness: “But you won’t be intimidated.” In fact, something similar happened almost a year later, when my father was already prime minister. was not, and the mentioned words were not a separate remark - they ended his response speech on March 6, 1907 at the opening of the Second Duma: "All of them (attacks of the left deputies - A. S.) boil down to two words addressed to the authorities: up!". With these two words, gentlemen, the government complete calm, with the consciousness of his rightness, can answer with only two words: "Do not intimidate!" Pikul cites a conversation of historical significance that allegedly took place between Stolypin and the leader of the Octobrists, A.I. Guchkov, in the Winter Palace in August 1911. Firstly, we no longer lived in the Winter Palace for a good 2 years (we lived on Fontanka, 16) . The second half of July and the whole of August, my father was not in St. Petersburg: due to heart fatigue, he took a 6-week vacation for the first time. I interrupted it twice to preside over meetings of the Council of Ministers - at the end of July (in connection with the preparation of the Kyiv celebrations) and on August 17 (due to events in Outer Mongolia). The meetings took place not in the Winter Palace, but on the Islands in the Elagin Palace. On September 1 (14), 1911, in the Kiev theater (before Bogrov's shot rang out), the royal box allegedly "was occupied by Nicholas II and his wife." In fact, Alexandra Feodorovna remained in the palace. In the box, along with the king, were his daughters Olga and Tatiana, as well as the crown prince of Bulgaria (later the king) Boris. He arrived in Kyiv at the head of the Bulgarian delegation to participate in the opening of the monument to the Tsar-Liberator Alexander II. Pikul does not know about this or does not want to know. But the Bulgarians remember. A few years ago, I received a letter from the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon, who lives in exile, in which he recalls this event. Pikul writes that even before the war, Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna, due to some whim, moved to Kyiv for permanent residence, taking with her her second husband, Prince Georgy Shervashidze. In fact, the move took place at the end of 1915 or at the beginning of 1916, and not because of a whim: the tsar moved to Headquarters and it was easier for the tsarina to communicate with her son from Kiev. Moreover, the time has come for Rasputin's political influence in St. Petersburg. Prince George Shervashidze held a position at the Queen's court in St. Petersburg, but was not in her close circle. He did not follow her to Kyiv (and then to the Crimea). I share the feelings of the Soviet historian Irina Pushkareva when she writes: “The interpretation of the epoch is distorted in the novel, accents are mixed in the assessment of the historical process, a number of historical persons". (, Literary Russia", August 2, 1979). I would like to say a few more words about the explosion on Aptekarsky Island on August 12, 1906. Let's forgive the author for the sham depiction of this tragic incident. Let's stop at something else. Pikul writes: "More than thirty people died and forty people who had nothing to do with Stolypin were mutilated. Factory workers died, with great difficulty (emphasis mine. - L.S.) who achieved an appointment with the chairman of the Council of Ministers for their personal needs. " "Those who achieved with great difficulty ..." You might think that we are talking about receiving Kosygin, Andropov or another representative of the "people's" power. I remember from childhood (this was also noted by a number of witnesses of that time): my father insisted that his Saturday reception days be available to everyone. Those who came to the reception were not required to present a written invitation, or even any kind of identification. And so the terrorists, dressed in gendarme uniforms, entered the entrance. Then there is such a scene, allegedly in the Winter Palace: “At night, Stolypin sat on the royal bed, listening to his daughter Natasha screaming in the next room of the palace, whose leg was amputated by doctors (emphasis mine. - A. S.). Near his wife, the wounded son suffered from pain ". First, after the explosion, my father called an emergency meeting of the Council of Ministers, which ended only at two in the morning. And the rest of the night was busy with the fate of the wounded. To be convinced of this, it would be enough for Pikul to look at any newspaper of that time. Secondly, my sister and I were not transported from the site of the explosion to the Winter Palace. They also wrote about it at the time. For example, Novoye Vremya (13.8.1906): “Yesterday, at 5 o’clock in the afternoon, the daughter of P. A. Stolypin Natalya, 14 years old, and the son Arkady, 3 years old, were brought to the private hospital of Dr. Kalmeyer in ambulances from the ministerial dacha. The author needed an invention to add that at the head of my sister Rasputin, who then did not even exist, "mumbled" prayers. There was no amputation: the life surgeon E. V. Pavlov opposed this. back on her feet. Let's move on to Pikul's characterization of the last imperial couple. It is difficult to tell in detail about our last Empress Alexandra Feodorovna in a magazine article. Inspired by the best intentions, she, nevertheless, contributed to the collapse of our statehood. Having moved to Headquarters and gave herself entirely In the conduct of the war, the tsar handed over the reins of government to her, to her and Rasputin, who stood behind her.The then British ambassador George Buchanan notes: "The Empress began to rule Russia, especially from February 1916, when Stürmer was appointed head of government." For once, the Soviet press gives these events coverage close to the truth: in her review of Pikul’s book, Irina Pushkareva writes in Literary Russia: “Bourgeois falsifiers of history exaggerate the role of Rasputin’s personality. among the court camarilla in the very last years of the tsarist regime, during the war years. And this was one of the many signs of the crisis of the ruling elite. "As if everything is clear: the empress fell for all time part of the terrible responsibility for the catastrophe that befell our country. But this is not enough for Pikul. He considered it necessary to portray the mournful and morally pure queen as an immoral woman. On this score, as I have already said, I will not polemize. But Pikul throws other accusations to Alexandra Fedorovna. She was, they say, a Germanophile, almost a spy, almost an accomplice of Wilhelm. She, they say, did not love Russia, did not loved her children, loved only herself. next place : "Gregory," the tsarina said in the autumn of 1915, "I need a reliable person, obviously devoted, who, in secret from the whole world, would transport large sums of money to ... Germany." So. The finance ministers, who later went into exile, Kokovtsev and Bark, did not find any sums belonging to the murdered royal family in the West. Not only in Germany, but also in allied England. But there were fairly accurate traces of the large sums that the German paid agent Vladimir Ulyanov-Lenin received from the German treasury. Those who accuse the Empress of Germanophilism (Pikul is not alone in this) are silent about the fact that she was brought up mostly at the English court and was half English, the beloved granddaughter of Queen Victoria. Pierre Gilliard, who taught the royal children, writes in his book "Thirteen Years at the Russian Court": "Queen Victoria did not like the Germans and had a special disgust for Emperor Wilhelm II. And she conveyed this disgust to her granddaughter, who felt more attached to England, her homeland his mother than to Germany." True, there were Germanophiles at the royal court and in the capital. Ambassador Buchanan watched them carefully. About the commandant of the imperial palace, General Voeikov, he writes: "But neither he, nor anyone else, would ever dare to express his pro-German feelings, which could irritate Their Imperial Majesties." About Prime Minister Stürmer: "This very cunning man did not even think of speaking openly in favor of a separate peace with Germany ... neither the Emperor nor the Empress would have tolerated such advice, because of which he would almost certainly have lost his post." The ambassador adds to this: "Kerensky himself once assured me that (after the February Revolution. - A.S.) not a single document was found, on the basis of which one could suspect that the empress was thinking about a separate peace with Germany." So it was when the royal couple was on the throne. Well, then? According to Pikul, in the summer of 1917, while imprisoned in Tsarskoye Selo, the tsarina allegedly whispers to the tsar: “We must leave everything here, even children, and run ... run ... we must run to Germany. Now we have our last hope for a cousin Kaiser and his mighty army." In fact, after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, being imprisoned in Tobolsk, Alexandra Feodorovna says: "I would rather die in Russia than be saved by the Germans." These words were conveyed to us by the tsarist entourage who survived the massacre. Lieutenant General M. Diterikhs, who, by order of Admiral Kolchak, conducted an investigation into the murder of the royal family in Yekaterinburg, mentions in his book that officer Markov was secretly sent by the Germans at the beginning of 1918. , in Tobolsk. He brought the written proposal of Emperor Wilhelm to the queen, which could save her. With a letter from the queen to her brother, the Prince of Hesse, he headed back to Kyiv, then occupied by the Germans. “Emperor Vilyelm, under the influence of the Prince of Hesse, offered Empress Alexandra Feodorovna to come to Germany with her daughters,” writes Dieterichs. “But she rejected this offer ...” In December 1917, the tsarina secretly wrote Vyrubova from Tobolsk in her penultimate letter:, I'm old! Oh, how old I am! But I am still the mother of our Russia. I am experiencing her torment, just like the torment of my own children. And I love her, despite all her sins and all the horrors she does. No one can tear a child away from the mother's heart, no one can tear love for his native country from the human heart. However, the black ingratitude shown by Russia towards the Emperor tears my soul apart. But it's still not the whole country. God have mercy on Russia! God, save our Russia!" In his description of the personality of the last tsar, Pikul went so far that even official Soviet criticism is forced to correct him. I will not quote Pikul. I will limit myself to a brief description of the personality of the last emperor. this account to talk (Kokovtsev, Sazonov, Krgzhanovsky), gave a high assessment to the mind, ability to work, disinterestedness of the sovereign. Everyone regretted that the king was weak-willed and, as a result, sometimes indecisive. All persons who knew him closely endure the same Izvolsky writes: “Was Nicholas II a naturally gifted and intelligent person? I do not hesitate to answer this question in the affirmative. I was always struck by the ease with which he grasped the slightest shade in the arguments presented to him, as well as the clarity with which he expressed his own thoughts. of his royal duty, unshakable in times of trial, he did not possess the quality necessary in an autocratic system, namely, a strong will. "Ambassador Buchanan is not far from this assessment:" The Emperor possessed numerous qualities, thanks to which he could successfully play the role of a monarch under a parliamentary system. He had a receptive mind, method and perseverance in his work, an amazing natural charm, which fell under all those who communicated with him. But the emperor did not inherit the impressiveness, strength of character and ability to make clear decisions necessary for a monarch who was in his position. Pikul writes that the tsar was bored during the reports of the ministers, yawned, giggled, understood little. It's a lie. In the summer of 1906, in the Peterhof Palace, when the agrarian reform was being prepared, the tsar worked with my father all night long. He delved into all the details, gave his opinions, was tireless. Obviously, these Peterhof nights were remembered by the tsar when in March 1911 (at the time of the government crisis) he wrote to Stolypin: "I believe you, as in 1906" (letter dated 03/09/1911). Nicholas II did not lose these qualities, and most importantly self-control, in the most difficult moments life. Izvolsky describes a reception at the Tsar in the summer of 1906 in the Peterhof Palace, at the time of the uprising in Kronstadt. The windows of the royal office trembled from cannon shots: “The Emperor listened to me attentively and, as usual, put me a series of questions, showing that he was interested in the slightest details of my report. the slightest sign of excitement. However, he knew very well that just a few versts from us his crown was at stake. " When an uprising broke out in Petrograd and the hour of renunciation arrived, the tsar addressed his last order to the troops. (As is known, the publication of this document was forbidden by the democratic Provisional Government.) All personal considerations in this order were discarded. The tsar focused all his thoughts on the fate of the country, on loyalty to the allies, on the need to fight to the bitter end. He did not think about himself even in Siberian captivity. But if he agreed to recognize the shameful Treaty of Brest-Litovsk the Germans would have saved him. Money matters will have to be discussed separately. Pikul has such a scene. "Beautiful Mrs. M.", dressed in expensive furs and hung with jewelry, comes to the Minister of Finance Kokovtsev with a note from the tsar: "Immediately issue one hundred and twenty thousand rubles." The minister fulfills the king's will, but takes this money not from the state treasury, but from the king's personal funds. Upon learning this, the royal couple is allegedly indignant. Pikul writes: "Billionaires, living for nothing on everything ready, in fabulous palaces filled with treasures, they ate the treasury like rats that have climbed into the head of cheese, but ... just dare to touch their little egg!" "Beautiful Mrs. M." actually existed. It was at the very beginning of the reign of Nicholas II. Having resorted to the patronage of the dowager empress, this lady asked the tsar for a large loan from the state treasury ... In February 1899, the tsar replied in writing to his mother with a refusal The text of the letter has been preserved. This is about a separate case. Now about the royal finances as such. In his book, Nicholas and Alexandra, the historian of the last royal couple, American Robert Massey, gives financial estimates of that time. As he writes, the personal income of Nicholas II was actually impressive. But Massey gives a full list of expenses. They are impressive too. Here are some of these expenses: the maintenance of seven palaces, the maintenance of the Imperial Academy of Arts, the maintenance of the Imperial Ballet, the maintenance of the staff of the imperial palaces (15,000 people), subsidies to a number of hospitals, orphanages, almshouses, etc. In addition, the Imperial Chancellery received a constant stream of requests for financial assistance. The king secretly, from personal funds, satisfied all requests that deserved attention. As a result, according to Massey, based on documentary evidence, at the end, and sometimes in the middle of the year, the king did not know how to make ends meet. I have a personal memory. At the beginning of April 1916, at Headquarters, in Mogilev, Nicholas II told our distant relative Admiral Mikhail Veselkin: "I learned that Natasha Stolypina, who suffered in the explosion of 1906, will soon get married. I decided to give her a small pension. Please inform her family about this, but do not make it public." The royal family lived economically. Expensive receptions and court balls were canceled (with the exception of magnificent celebrations in the winter of 1913 on the occasion of the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty). Ambassador Buchanan writes: "In the seclusion of Tsarskoye Selo, the imperial couple adhered a simple image life ... receptions were rare. "This irritated the St. Petersburg high society, which was far from the royal family. The common people, greedy for magnificent ceremonies, were also not happy: "The German keeps the tsar away from the people." Few people knew about the modest lifestyle of the royal family. I remember how one day my father came with a report to the Palace earlier than the appointed hour. He was asked to wait a little: the royal family was still at the table. And so, in the waiting room, Colonel Dexbach, who was with my father, approached him with excitement and said: “Your Excellency, I just saw fruit being brought to the royal table. I would never allow such a miserable dessert to be served to my home table." The royal family saved not only on food, but also on clothing. Lieutenant-General Diterichs, examining the royal things during the judicial investigation in Yekaterinburg, describes the rather worn overcoat of Nicholas II. Inside one of the sleeves, the king wrote: bought in such and such a year, given for repair in such and such a year. I remember my mother's story. In December 1913, Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna hosted a ball at the Anichkov Palace in honor of her two eldest granddaughters, Olga and Tatyana. The royal couple was supposed to be present at the ball. And the queen hesitated for a long time: whether to order her a ball gown from the first capital dressmaker, Madame Brisac. As a result, the ball gown was not ready for the day of the ball, and Alexandra Fedorovna appeared at the Anichkov Palace in an old, no longer fashionable attire. This incident aroused ridicule in the highest Petersburg society. But already in 1921 in Berlin, my mother and the tsar's maid of honor, Baroness Buxgeveden, who survived in Yekaterinburg, recalled this with sadness. This whole - the largest - part of Pikulev's novel was written with the obvious goal of presenting in the wrong light, discrediting the entire Duma period of our national history. The main bosses in public life and in politics, Pikul, along with Rasputin, are defrocked, religious fanatics and morally degraded hierarchs of the Orthodox Church. Or unscrupulous financial dealers, who have wrapped their web around representatives of the administration, the army, and even the imperial couple. There were fanatics, there were rasstrigi. They are now in almost all countries of the free part of the world. But they, as was the case in Russia in tsarist times, by no means influence the course of history. There were also not quite clean businessmen. There was a banker Manus in Petersburg who was close to Rasputin and had a bad reputation. But no role in the state financial policy Manus didn't play. Of course, he had no access to the royal couple. But, in the description of Pikul, Manus is omnipotent, he is omnipresent. Could it be that Pikul wrote this on orders to inflame anti-Semitic sentiments? (Manus was Jewish). Perhaps, by order of those at the top of the party power, Pikul engaged in discrediting the last decades of the tsarist system, often simply falsifying events? Maybe he was instructed to show that at that time Russia was bogged down in a stinking swamp, and such a demonstration of the beginning of the century is needed by the Kremlin dogmatists in order to fight the religious revival, the monarchist moods that are now suddenly manifesting themselves in the new Russian generation? Have the customers achieved the desired result? Probably not. Pikul, on the one hand, clumsily lied, and on the other hand, he stepped over the line of what was prescribed and what was permitted. It is time to move now to those phrases, and sometimes entire pages in the novel, which are written in a different handwriting. First, Pikul betrayed Marxism. As Pravda notes, he "replaced the social-class approach to the events of the pre-revolutionary period with the idea of ​​the self-decomposition of tsarism." But although it is not social-class, "the idea of ​​the self-decomposition of tsarism" is closer to the truth. Self-decomposition was observed (since when? since the end of the last century?) in all strata of Russian society. And among the bureaucracy, detached from the liberal intelligentsia. And among the intelligentsia, living in utopias and detached from the people. And among the merchants (the richer Savva Morozov, and not only him, financed Lenin and the work of his terrorist groups). But, along with diseased cells, there were also healthy cells. Self-decomposition could stop. In the state body after the revolution of 1905 healthy blood circulation began again. In the novel we find lines that seem to have been written by a cultured and sensible teacher in the margins of an essay by a presumptuous student. So, it says that in the reign of Nicholas II, "... Maxim Gorky and Mechnikov, Repin and Tsiolkovsky created, ... Chaliapin sang and the incomparable Anna Pavlova danced, ... Zabolotny defeated the plague bacillus, and Makarovsky's "Ermak" crushed the ice of the Arctic... Boris Rosing pondered the problem of the future of television, and the young Igor Sikorsky raised the first helicopter in Russia vertically above the ground... This should be remembered in order not to fall into a false extreme. And although the author goes to a false extreme, here and there, he inserts significant phrases into his text: "The moral authority of Russia was very great, and Europe humbly waited for what they would say on the banks of the Neva. .. The industrial power of the Empire increased, and Russia could throw almost everything on the world market - from armadillos to baby nipples ... The industrial boom began in 1909, and Russian power largely determined the tone of European politics. Russia stood on a par with France and Japan, but lagged behind England and Germany. On the other hand, in terms of the degree of concentration of production, the Russian Empire came out on top in the world. " Of course, much could be added to Pikul's words. But what is written is indicative. Pikul even dares to timidly recall the freedom of the press that reigned then. Chairman of the Duma Rodzianko says to the tsar: “It is customary in our newspapers to scold ministers. The Synod, the Duma... and they douse me. We all tolerate it - we're used to it!" If Pikul had added that before the First World War the Bolshevik Pravda was legally published in St. Petersburg, the picture would be even more complete. Pikul decides to say a few words about the role of the Duma: , who wanted to ignore the Duma, the prime minister actively became friends with her. I understood that the parliament, even the most shabby (! - A.S.), is still the voice of public opinion. Stolypin led big game with members of the Central Committee of the October Party ... Russia, after the defeat in the war with the Japanese, quickly gained military power. That is why the appropriations for defense are the sharpest, the most hurtful." And not everything has been agreed upon here. But from the above quotation it is clear that the Duma was by no means a simple registration office, stamping out decisions taken in advance in another instance. The allocation of loans for all branches of government work depended on popular representation. Therefore, the Duma debate on the restoration of the fleet was "sharp, hurting." Ministers, members of the public, the military, Pikul slandered many, slandered. But not only slandered and slandered. If their portraits are put together, then something real arises before your eyes and even almost truthful. Here is Finance Minister Kokovtsev: "The Right reproached Kokovtsev for a lack of monarchism, the Left criticized him for an excess of monarchism. And Vladimir Nikolayevich was simply a liberal.” “Kokovtsev was an intelligent and well-mannered man, but too talkative (? - A.S.). He was an honest man and entered the extensive chronicle of the robbery of the Russian treasury (? - A. S.) like a dog in the manger. "Here is the Minister of War Rediger. "The author of many military scientific works, which for a long time were considered almost classic, highly educated person"Here is the Governor-General of Turkestan A. Samsonov. "He developed new areas for cotton crops, drilled artesian wells in the deserts, built an irrigation canal in the Hungry Steppe." (? - A. S.), but behind this appearance there was a subtle, penetrating mind, great willpower, steadfast adherence to principles in those issues that he defended from his own, monarchist positions. "Pikul even dares to hint that the time of the" Stolypin reaction " It was by no means a time of domination by reactionary elements: “The extreme right for the government was just as inconvenient and odious for the government as the extreme left. Tsarism never risked drawing high-ranking cadres from among the extreme right. "I would like to dwell separately on my uncle, the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sazonov. Not because Pikul particularly liked him, but because with the lines dedicated to this statesman, connected big national problems. He is described as I remember him: "Sazonov, who was very weak in health, did not smoke, did not drink, did not have bad habits ... he was a polyglot and musician, an expert on history and politics." The novel describes important conversation Sazonov with the German ambassador Count Pourtales just before the start of the First World War: “Sazonov froze in the middle of his office ... I can tell you one thing,” he remarked calmly, “as long as there is at least an insignificant chance of maintaining peace, Russia will never attack anyone ... The aggressor will be the one who attacks us, and then we will defend ourselves." The quoted words of Sazonov negate the misinformation that exists in communist and communist circles that the tsarist regime allegedly deliberately provoked the First World War in order to stop the revolutionary moods that were growing in the country. In this matter, Pikul confirms the words of Buchanan, who writes: “Russia did not want war. When problems arose that could cause war, the tsar invariably showed all his influence in favor of peace. In his peace-loving policy, he went so far that at the end of 1913 the impression was that Russia would not fight under any circumstances. The trouble is that this false impression prompted Germany to take advantage of the situation." Further, Buchanan elaborates: “In Germany, it was well known that, following the strengthening of the German army in 1913, Russia was forced to work out a new military program that could not be fully completed before 1918. Thus, a particularly favorable opportunity arose for a military attack, and Germany took advantage of them." Among the fictions and obscenities in the book, there are places where the figure of the minister-reformer is still visible. Pikul writes: “Stolypin stood out from the crowd, was extremely colorful. It was he who now formed the backdrop of power ... he was reactionary, but sometimes he thought radically, trying to destroy in the order of things that had remained indestructible for centuries before him. other bureaucrats. There are four passages in the book where the author almost put into my father's mouth the words he actually uttered. Let it be said in a different setting and in a less rude form - but the main ideas of his state creativity are expressed correctly. First: the day after the explosion on Aptekarsky Island, at a meeting of the Council of Ministers, "Stolypin said that yesterday's assassination attempt, which almost took the life of himself and his children, would not change anything in domestic politics Russian state. “My train didn’t derail,” Stolypin said, “The terrorists need great upheavals, but I need Great Russia ... My program remains unchanged: the suppression of disorder, the resolution of the agrarian question as the most urgent matter of the Empire and the elections to the Second Duma. "Second passage ( also refers to the first year of Stolypin's government activity, when the revolutionary ferment had not subsided yet): "He shook the bell, calling the secretary, a telegram to the provinces, write down, dictate: -" The struggle is not against society, but against the enemies of society. Therefore, indiscriminate repressions are not Actions that are illegal and careless, bringing bitterness instead of reassurance, are intolerable. Old system The third place is especially revealing. Let this be Stolypin's conversation with the tsar, which has never been and is given in rough terms. But this conversation briefly outlines the main ideas of the agrarian reform: your! So that he could feel the taste of it, so that he would say - "My land, and whoever touches it, I will go to that one with an ax!" That's when the instincts of the landowner will wake up in the peasant, and all revolutionary doctrines will be shattered against the mighty stratum of the peasantry, like a storm against a breakwater. "My land, and whoever touches it, I'll go with an ax" - how did the censorship miss this? In these words, attributed to my father, today there is also a condemnation of the entire collective-farm and state-farm system. The fourth passage, as it were, complements everything that was said earlier: “The Prime Minister urgently left for the Crimea ... A journalist from the influential Volga newspaper climbed into the car (! - A. S.), and at night Stolypin, walking along the carpet, was firmly knocking together phrases of the interview. “Give it to me,” he dictated for only twenty years of inner and outer peace, and our children will no longer recognize dark, backward Russia. Quite peacefully, with Russian bread alone, we are able to crush the whole of Europe. Stolypin was not going to put pressure on Europe. But the rest of the quote corresponds to what he really said. Was a revolution inevitable? So Pikul, of course, does not pose the question. But the answer comes through in the above words of Stolpin. It also shines through in the description of the days preceding the First World War: "Bravura music poured through the wide open windows. The Russian guards marched, brought up on the traditions of dying, but not giving up ... The Russian iron guard marched measuredly and clearly." So it asks for paper what is shown here, but not agreed. If the "Russian Iron Guard" had not perished in the fields of East Prussia and Galicia, if some guard units had (as in 1905) been left in the capital? What would happen then? Would the propagandized soldiers of the Petrograd garrison (from the reserve) manage to carry out the "great and bloodless"?" August 14th, the author interprets differently from Solzhenitsyn. Briefly mentioning the offensive of our troops in East Prussia, he writes: army, and entered the annals of Russian military glory new page called Gumbinen ... The breakthrough of Samsonov's army predetermined the defeat of Germany, and those Germans who knew how to think sensibly, already then realized that Germany could not win ... The Germans did not lose the war at the table of Versailles in 1918, but in the swamps of Masuria swamps back in August 1914. "In these words one can hear regret that Russia was not among the winners. In this matter, the author is close to the thoughts of Sir Buchanan, who hoped that the First World War would end differently. The British ambassador recalls in his book an audience with the tsar on March 13, 1915, which was attended by the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sazonov. On the agenda was an agreement on Constantinople and spheres of influence in Persia: speed, the exact location on the map of every city and every region that was discussed ... Then, turning to the emperor, I say: after the end of the war, Russia and Great Britain will be the two most powerful powers, and world peace will be ensured. Well-founded, but unfulfilled hopes. Thus, in the novel "At the last line" we are confronted, as it were, with two texts, sometimes sharply contradicting one another. One more extensive text speaks of a state sliding into an abyss. In the other, about a state gaining new strength and being able, without resorting to violence, to take first place in Europe. Pikul does not finish all this, but it sounds between the lines. It turns out, therefore, that the novel "At the last line" reflects two trends that are now emerging in the circles of Russian society. One trend is dogmatic, totalitarian. Its representatives seek to trample into the dirt, to show our historical past in an ugly way. Especially the Duma period of the beginning of the century - with so many opportunities, carrying so many hopes! It is obviously no longer possible to hide the truth about this time: the process of restoring historical memory has begun in new generations. Therefore, the authorities need to present this time in a distorted form and thus try to prevent a sane vision of the future. People who see that totalitarianism is heading for the abyss and dragging Russia and other countries along with it belong to another trend. People of this tendency (some of them for selfish reasons, for the sake of their own salvation) strive to rely on the still living foundations of the past. The novel "At the last line" was almost banned by the authorities. It seems that this is not due to the shortcomings noted by Soviet critics (infidelity in the interpretation of historical events, an abundance of alcove and fake episodes). And due to the fact that the author, to some extent, timidly noted the presence and positive aspects our, still capable of being revived, national statehood.

Stolypin Arkady

Stolypin Arkady

About the book by V Pikul "At the last line"

Article by Arkady Stolypin

(son of P.A. Stolypin)

about the book by V. Pikul "At the last line"

From the editor. It is hardly a big exaggeration to consider that V. Pikul's novels are among the most popular in Russia. Ten - fifteen years ago, for many, it was the standard of historical prose, almost a textbook, according to which one should study Russian and world history. Indeed, the ease of style, exciting intrigues, the complex interweaving of the plot - all this forced the reader, exhausted by the tedious clichés of the Soviet official-bureaucratic language, to literally read everything that came out of V. Pikul's pen in one breath. Popularity was also promoted by the seemingly great scientific objectivity and impartiality of the author. In addition, one should not forget that V. Pikul wrote not at all about the leaders of the party and government, not about "people's heroes", whose biographies are "stuck in everyone's teeth", but about Tsars, Emperors, nobles, Russian officers, scientists , politicians, that is, about people to whom university and school history textbooks were assigned, at best, no more than 10-15 lines. At the same time, it was somehow forgotten that the historical truth was far from the same as V. Pikul wrote about it. It was very difficult to give an objective historical analysis of his writings at that time. But even now, when, obviously, there is every opportunity to get acquainted with "history as it is", since hundreds of memoirs and historical studies have come to light, Pikul's novels are still "ultimate truth" for many. The review presented to the readers of "Posev" about one of the most popular novels by V. Pikul "At the last line" is written by Arkady Stolypin, the son of the great Russian reformer P.A. Stolypin. It convincingly shows that most of the "historical" research of the novelist, to put it mildly, does not correspond to reality. The review was first published in the magazine "Posev" No. 8, 1980.

Arkady STOLYPIN

CRUMBER OF TRUTH IN A BARREL OF LIES

About the novel by Valentin Pikul, At the last line, one can, without fear of making a mistake, say that he enjoys exceptional success with readers in the Soviet Union. However, this interest of hundreds of thousands, and maybe millions of readers, is hardly due only to the "flow of plot gossip" , as the author of a literary review in Pravda (October 8, 1979) states. If you read the novel carefully, you get the impression that it was written not by one, but, as it were, by two authors. passages written in a different handwriting, passages where one can find some grain of truth about our historical past.Does the novel enjoy such popularity because of these crumbs of truth, does the reader perceive the vast vicious portion of the novel as an annoying but familiar "compulsory assortment"? that this is exactly so. Did the author consciously exaggerate, hoping that our reader had long been accustomed to the work that Krylov's rooster was doing on a dunghill? It's hard to say, we don't know too much about Pikul. But even if he was mainly concerned with getting the manuscript through the censors, he overdid it. There are many places in the book that are not only incorrect, but also base and slanderous, for which, in a state of law, the author would answer not to critics, but to the court. We will not touch these pages. We will simply try to portray the slandered people truthfully. I would like to emphasize that it was only the news that the novel "At the Last Line" is read by many people in Russia that prompted me to take up this article. I will be happy if at least a small part of them read these lines. Although the book is dedicated to pre-revolutionary Russia, before our eyes appear the figures of the Khrushchev (and even Brezhnev) era, dressed in frock coats and uniforms of the tsarist era. So, for example, Empress Maria Fedorovna of Pikulev whispers to Alexander III at an official reception: “Sashka, I beg you, don’t get drunk!” (!) What Pikul didn’t say about this queen! She allegedly scandalized at the time of the death of her royal husband and the accession to the throne of her son, she allegedly remarried. Pikul clearly neglects the memoirs of that time. And there were many people who left their memories of the queen. For example, Foreign Minister Izvolsky testifies: “She was a charming and infinitely kind woman. She softened with her friendliness and lit up the reign of Emperor Alexander III with her charm ... Without hesitation, she advised her son reasonable transformations, and the situation in October 1905 was saved with her assistance." The younger brother of Emperor Nicholas II - Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich - clearly likes Pikul. But he is depicted in a crooked mirror. Thus, the author forces him to publicly beat Rasputin near the fence of the imperial park in Tsarskoye Selo, as if he were not a Grand Duke, but a combatant on Mayakovsky Square. I didn't even recognize my own father. Pikul writes: "... a black-moustached, wiry man with a predatory gypsy look - Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin sat down in a well-warmed (ministerial - A.S.) chair." "A wiry man", reporting to the tsar about state affairs, behaves like a hooligan. The queen exclaims, turning to the sovereign: "Lounged in front of you in an armchair, grabs your cigarettes from the table." In the novel, my father smokes both his own and other people's cigarettes without tired. Yes, and much to drink:, ... bitterly closing his eyes, he sucked in a lukewarm Armenian with some indignation (?! - A.S.). In fact, my father never smoked a single cigarette in his entire life. When there were no guests, we had only mineral water on the dining table. Mother often used to say: "Our house is like that of the Old Believers: no cigarettes, no wine, no cards." When Pikul writes about the dachas of that time, he imagines a closed zone near Moscow: "After crumpling up the working day, Stolypin drove off to the Neidgart dacha in Vyritsa," he says. First, the "Neidhart dacha" (apparently belonging to my mother, née Neidhart) did not exist at all. As for the "crumpled working day", I myself, according to childhood memories, could object a lot. I prefer, however, to quote the words of Izvolsky: "Stolypin's ability to work was amazing, as was his physical and moral endurance, thanks to which he overcame unreasonably hard work." Member of the State Duma V. Shulgin testified that P. Stolypin went to bed at 4 o'clock in the morning, and at 9 he already began his working day. According to Pikul, my father's right hand, when he was governor of Grodno (1902-1903), was shot by a Socialist-Revolutionary terrorist. Wrong. Stolypin's right hand did not work well from early youth (rheumatism). Subsequently, this was further intensified when he was governor of Saratov: in June 1905, one Black Hundreds pogromist fell into his father's right hand with a cobblestone when he defended a group of zemstvo doctors from reprisals. The novel describes a scene that allegedly took place in the First Duma, that is, no later than June 1906, when Stolypin was still Minister of the Interior. “When the Duma raged, began to shout that he was a satrap, Stolypin raised his fist above himself and said with surprising calmness: “But you won’t intimidate me.” In fact, something similar happened almost a year later, when my father was already prime minister. There was no raised fist, and the mentioned words were not a separate remark - they ended his response speech on March 6, 1907 at the opening of the Second Duma: “All of them (attacks of the left deputies - A.S.) boil down to two words addressed to the authorities: “Hands up!” To these two words, gentlemen, the government, with complete calm, with the consciousness of its rightness, can only answer with two words: “You will not intimidate!” Pikul cites a conversation of historical significance that supposedly took place between Stolypin and the Octobrist leader A. And Guchkov in the Winter Palace in August 1911. Firstly, we no longer lived in the Winter Palace for a good 2 years (we lived on the Fontanka, 16). he took a 6-week vacation for the first time due to heart fatigue, interrupting it twice to preside over meetings of the Council of Ministers - at the end of July (in connection with the preparation of the Kiev celebrations) and on August 17 (due to events in Outer Mongolia). in the Winter Palace, and on the Islands in the Elagin Palace. On September 1 (14), 1911, in the Kiev theater (before Bogrov's shot rang out), the royal box allegedly "was occupied by Nicholas II and his wife." In fact, Alexandra Feodorovna remained in the palace. In the box, along with the king, were his daughters Olga and Tatiana, as well as the crown prince of Bulgaria (later the king) Boris. He arrived in Kyiv at the head of the Bulgarian delegation to participate in the opening of the monument to the Tsar-Liberator Alexander II. Pikul does not know about this or does not want to know. But the Bulgarians remember. A few years ago, I received a letter from the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon, who lives in exile, in which he recalls this event. Pikul writes that even before the war, Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna, due to some whim, moved to Kyiv for permanent residence, taking with her her second husband, Prince Georgy Shervashidze. In fact, the move took place at the end of 1915 or at the beginning of 1916, and not because of a whim: the tsar moved to Headquarters and it was easier for the tsarina to communicate with her son from Kiev. Moreover, the time has come for Rasputin's political influence in St. Petersburg. Prince George Shervashidze held a position at the Queen's court in St. Petersburg, but was not in her close circle. He did not follow her to Kyiv (and then to the Crimea). I share the feelings of the Soviet historian Irina Pushkareva when she writes: "The interpretation of the era is distorted in the novel, accents are mixed in assessing the historical process, a number of historical figures are incorrectly characterized." (, Literary Russia, August 2, 1979). I would like to say a few more words about the explosion on Aptekarsky Island on August 12, 1906. We will forgive the author for the fake image of this tragedy ...