Literary and historical notes of a young technician. Vasily Klyuchevsky - biography, information, personal life

January 28, 1841 (Voskresenovka village, Penza province, Russian Empire) - May 25, 1911 (Moscow, Russian Empire)



Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky - a prominent Russian historian of the liberal trend, a "legend" of Russian historical science, an ordinary professor at Moscow University, an ordinary academician of the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (over the state) on Russian history and antiquities (1900), chairman of the Imperial Society of at Moscow University, Privy Councilor.

IN. Klyuchevsky

So much has been written about V.O. Klyuchevsky that it seems absolutely impossible to insert words into the grandiose memorial erected to the legendary historian in the memoirs of his contemporaries, scientific monographs of fellow historians, popular articles in encyclopedias and reference books. For almost every anniversary of Klyuchevsky, whole collections of biographical, analytical, historical and journalistic materials were published, devoted to the analysis of one side or another of his work, scientific concepts, pedagogical and administrative activities within the walls of Moscow University. Indeed, largely thanks to his efforts, Russian historical science already in the second half of the 19th century reached a completely new qualitative level, which subsequently provided the appearance of works that laid the foundations of modern philosophy and methodology of historical knowledge.

Meanwhile, in the popular science literature about V.O. Klyuchevsky, and especially in modern publications on Internet resources, only general information about the biography of the famous historian is given. The characteristics of the personality of V.O. Klyuchevsky, who, of course, was one of the most outstanding, extraordinary and remarkable people of his era, the idol of more than one generation of students and teachers of Moscow University, are also presented very differently.

In part, this inattention can be explained by the fact that the main biographical works about Klyuchevsky (M.V. Nechkina, R.A. Kireeva, L.V. was understood primarily as the process of preparing his scientific works and creative achievements. In addition, in the conditions of the dominance of Marxist-Leninist ideology and the propaganda of the advantages of the Soviet way of life, it was impossible to openly say that even under the "accursed tsarism" a person from the lower classes had the opportunity to become a great scientist, a secret adviser, enjoy the personal disposition and deep respect of the emperor and members of the tsarist families. This to some extent neutralized the gains of the October Revolution, among which, as you know, the people's conquest of those very "equal" opportunities was declared. In addition, VO Klyuchevsky in all Soviet textbooks and reference literature was unambiguously ranked among the representatives of the "liberal-bourgeois" historiography - that is, to class alien elements. To study private life, to reconstruct the little-known facets of the biography of such a "hero", no Marxist historian would have thought of it.

In the post-Soviet period, it was believed that the factual side of Klyuchevsky's biography was sufficiently studied, and therefore it makes no sense to return to it. Still: in the life of a historian there are no scandalous love affairs, intrigues in the service, acute conflicts with colleagues, i.e. no "strawberries" that could interest the average reader of the magazine "Caravan of stories". This is partly true, but as a result, today the general public knows only historical anecdotes about the "secrecy" and "excessive modesty" of Professor Klyuchevsky, his maliciously ironic aphorisms, and contradictory statements, "bruised" by the authors of various pseudo-scientific publications from personal letters and memoirs of contemporaries.

However, the modern view of the personality, private life and communications of the historian, the process of his scientific and extrascientific creativity implies the intrinsic value of these objects of research as part of the “historiographic life” and the world of Russian culture as a whole. Ultimately, the life of every person is made up of family relationships, friendships and love relationships, home, habits, household trifles. And the fact that some of us, as a result, ends up or does not go down in history as a historian, writer or politician is an accident against the background of all the same "everyday trifles" ...

In this article, we would like to outline the main milestones not only in the creative, but also in the personal biography of V.O. Klyuchevsky, to tell about him as a man who made a very difficult and thorny path from the son of a provincial priest, a beggar orphan to the heights of glory of the first historian of Russia.

V.O.Klyuchevsky: the triumph and tragedy of the "commoner"

Childhood and adolescence

IN. Klyuchevsky

IN. Klyuchevsky was born on January 16 (28), 1841 in the village of Voskresenskoye (Voskresenovka) near Penza, into a poor family of a parish priest. The life of the future historian began with great misfortune - in August 1850, when Vasily was not yet ten years old, his father died tragically. He went to the market for shopping, and on the way back got into a severe thunderstorm. The horses were frightened and carried away. Father Osip, having lost control, obviously fell from the wagon, lost consciousness from hitting the ground and choked with streams of water. Without waiting for his return, the family organized a search. Nine-year-old Vasily was the first to see his dead father, lying in the mud on the road. From a strong shock, the boy began to stutter.

After the death of the breadwinner, the Klyuchevsky family moved to Penza, where they entered the maintenance of the Penza diocese. Out of compassion for a poor widow who was left with three children, one of her husband's friends gave her to live small house... “Was anyone poorer than you and me at the time when we were left orphans in the arms of our mother,” Klyuchevsky wrote to his sister later, recalling the hungry years of his childhood and adolescence.

In the theological school, where he was sent to study, Klyuchevsky stuttered so much that he weighed down the teachers, did not have time in many basic subjects. As an orphan, he was kept in an educational institution only out of pity. From day to day, the question of expelling a student due to professional incompetence could arise: the school trained clergy, and the stutterer was not suitable either for priests or for sexton. Under the circumstances, Klyuchevsky might not have received any education at all - his mother did not have the funds to study at the gymnasium or invite tutors. Then the widow of the priest tearfully begged one of the students of the senior department to take care of the boy. History has not preserved the name of this gifted young man, who managed to turn a timid stutterer into a brilliant orator, who later gathered thousands of student audiences for his lectures. According to the assumptions of the most famous biographer V.O. Klyuchevsky M.V. Nechkina, it could have been the seminarian Vasily Pokrovsky - the elder brother of Klyuchevsky's classmate Stepan Pokrovsky. Not being a professional speech therapist, he intuitively found ways to combat stuttering, so it almost disappeared. Among the techniques for overcoming the deficiency was this: slowly and clearly pronounce the ends of words, even if the stress on them did not fall. Klyuchevsky did not overcome his stuttering to the end, but he did a miracle - he managed to give the small pauses involuntarily arising in speech in the form of semantic artistic pauses, which gave his words a peculiar and charming flavor. Subsequently, the lack turned into a characteristic individual trait, which gave a special appeal to the historian's speech. Modern psychologists and image-makers deliberately use such techniques to attract the attention of listeners, to give “charisma” to the image of a particular speaker, politician, or public figure.

IN. Klyuchevsky

The long and stubborn struggle with natural deficiency also contributed to the excellent diction of the lecturer Klyuchevsky. He “rapped” every sentence and “especially the endings of the words he uttered so that not a single sound, not a single intonation of a quietly but unusually clear-sounding voice could be lost for an attentive listener,” wrote his student professor A. I. Yakovlev about the historian ...

After graduating from the district theological school in 1856, V.O. Klyuchevsky entered the seminary. He had to become a priest - this was the condition of the diocese, which took on the maintenance of his family. But in 1860, having dropped out of his last year at the seminary, the young man was preparing to enter Moscow University. The desperately courageous decision of the nineteen-year-old boy determined his entire fate in the future. In our opinion, it testifies not so much to the insistence of Klyuchevsky or the integrity of his nature, but to the intuition inherent in him already at a young age, which many of his contemporaries later spoke of. Even then, Klyuchevsky intuitively understands (or guesses) about his personal purpose, goes against fate in order to take exactly that place in life that will allow him to fully realize his aspirations and abilities.

One must think that the fateful decision to leave the Penza Seminary was not easy for the future historian. From the moment the application was submitted, the seminarist was deprived of the scholarship. For Klyuchevsky, who was extremely strapped for money, the loss of even this small amount of money was quite tangible, but circumstances forced him to be guided by the principle "either all or nothing." Immediately after graduating from the seminary, he could not enter the university, because he would have to accept the clergy and stay in it for at least four years. Therefore, it was necessary to leave the seminary as soon as possible.

Klyuchevsky's daring act blew up the measured seminary life. The spiritual authorities objected to the expulsion of a successful student, who had actually already received his education at the expense of the diocese. Klyuchevsky motivated his letter of dismissal by constrained domestic circumstances and poor health, but it was obvious to everyone in the seminary, from the director to the stoker, that this was just a formal excuse. The seminar board wrote a report to the Bishop of Penza, His Eminence Varlaam, but he unexpectedly imposed a positive resolution: "Klyuchevsky has not yet completed his course of study and, therefore, if he does not want to be in the clergy, then he can be fired without hindrance." The loyalty of the official document did not quite correspond to the true opinion of the bishop. Klyuchevsky later recalled that at the December exam at the seminary, Barlaam called him a fool.

Uncle IV Evropeytsev (the husband of his mother's sister) gave money for the trip to Moscow, who encouraged his nephew's desire to study at the university. Knowing that the young man is deeply grateful, but at the same time mentally uncomfortable from his uncle's charity, the Europeans decided to cheat a little. He presented his nephew "as a keepsake" with a prayer book with parting words to refer to this book in difficult moments of life. Between the pages was a large banknote, which Klyuchevsky found already in Moscow. In one of his first letters home, he wrote: "I left for Moscow, firmly hoping for God, and then for you and for myself, not counting too much on someone else's pocket, no matter what happened to me."

According to some biographers, the complex of personal guilt before the mother and younger sisters left in Penza haunted the famous historian for many years. As evidenced by the materials of Klyuchevsky's personal correspondence, Vasily Osipovich maintained the warmest relations with the sisters: he always tried to help them, take care of them, and participate in their fate. So, thanks to the help of her brother, the older sister Elizaveta Osipovna (married - Virganskaya) was able to raise and educate her seven children, and after the death of her younger sister, Klyuchevsky accepted her two children (E.P. and P.P. Kornevs) into her family and raised them.

The beginning of the way

In 1861 V.O. Klyuchevsky entered the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. He had a difficult time: in the capitals, almost revolutionary passions were simmering, caused by the manifesto of February 19, 1861, on the emancipation of the peasants. Liberalization of literally all sides public life, fashion ideas Chernyshevsky about the "people's revolution", which literally fluttered in the air, confused young minds.

During his studies, Klyuchevsky tried to stay away from political disputes in the student environment. Most likely, he simply had neither the time nor the desire to engage in politics: he came to Moscow to study and, in addition, he had to earn money with lessons in order to support himself and help his family.

According to Soviet biographers, Klyuchevsky at one time attended the historical and philosophical circle of N.A. Ishutin, but this version is not confirmed by the materials of the historian's personal archive now studied. They contain an indication of the fact that Klyuchevsky was the tutor of a certain gymnasium student Ishutin. However, this "tutoring" could have taken place even before Klyuchevsky entered Moscow University. ON. Ishutin and DV Karakozov were natives of Serdobsk (Penza province); in the 1850s, they studied at the 1st Penza men's gymnasium, and the seminarian Klyuchevsky during the same period actively earned money by private lessons. Perhaps Klyuchevsky renewed his acquaintance with his fellow countrymen in Moscow, but researchers have not found any reliable information about his participation in the Ishutinsky circle.

Moscow life, obviously, aroused interest, but at the same time gave rise to wariness and distrust in the soul of the young provincial. Before leaving Penza, he had never been anywhere else, he moved mainly in a spiritual environment, which undoubtedly made it difficult to "adapt" Klyuchevsky to the metropolitan reality. "Provinciality" and a subconscious rejection of everyday excesses, which are considered the norm in a big city, remained with V.O.Klyuchevsky for the rest of his life.

The former seminarian, no doubt, had to endure a serious internal struggle as he moved from the religious traditions learned in the seminary and family to scientific-positivist ones. Klyuchevsky followed this path, studying the works of the founders of positivism (Comte, Mil, Spencer), the materialist Ludwig Feuerbach, in whose concept he was most attracted by the philosopher's prevailing interest in ethics and the religious problem.

As the diaries and some personal notes of Klyuchevsky testify, the result of the inner "degeneration" of the future historian was his constant desire to distance himself from the world around him, keeping his personal space in it, inaccessible to prying eyes. Hence - the ostentatious sarcasm noted by contemporaries more than once, the stinging skepticism of Klyuchevsky, his desire to act in public, convincing others of his own "complexity" and "closeness."

In 1864-1865, Klyuchevsky completed his course at the university with the defense of his Ph.D. essay "The Tales of Foreigners about the Moscow State." The problem was posed under the influence of Professor F.I. Buslaev. The candidate's essay was highly appreciated, and Klyuchevsky was retained at the department as a fellow to prepare for a professorship.

Work on the master's thesis "Lives of the Saints as a Historical Source" dragged on for six years. Since Vasily Osipovich could not remain a scholar, at the request of his teacher and mentor S.M. Solovyov, he got a place as a tutor at the Alexander military school. Here he worked since 1867 for sixteen years. Since 1871, he replaced S.M. Solovyov in teaching the course of new general history at this school.

Family and personal life

In 1869 V.O. Klyuchevsky married Anisya Mikhailovna Borodina. This decision came as a real surprise, both for the relatives and for the bride herself. Klyuchevsky initially courted the younger sisters of the Borodins - Anna and Nadezhda, but made an offer to Anisya, who was three years older than him (at the time of the wedding she was already thirty-two). At this age, the girl was considered "century old" and practically could not count on marriage.

Boris and Anisya Mikhailovna Klyuchevskiy, probably with their dogs, named by V.O. Klyuchevsky Grosh and Kopeyka. Not earlier than 1909

It's no secret that among the creative intelligentsia, long-term marriage unions are usually based on relationships of like-minded people. The wife of a scientist, writer, renowned publicist usually acts as a permanent secretary, critic, or even an invisible generator of ideas for her creative "half". Little is known about the relationship between the Klyuchevsky spouses, but, most likely, they were very far from a creative union.

In the correspondence of 1864, Klyuchevsky affectionately called his bride "Nixochka", "the confidant of my soul." But, what is remarkable, in the future, no correspondence between the spouses was recorded. Even during the departure of Vasily Osipovich from home, he, as a rule, asked his other addressees to transmit information about himself to Anisya Mikhailovna. At the same time, for many years Klyuchevsky had a lively friendly correspondence with his wife's sister, Nadezhda Mikhailovna Borodina. And drafts of old letters to his other sister-in-law, Anna Mikhailovna, according to the testimony of his son, Vasily Osipovich carefully kept and hid among the "Penza papers".

Most likely, the relationship between the Klyuchevsky spouses was built exclusively in a personal, family and household plane, remaining so throughout their lives.

The home secretary of V.O. Klyuchevsky, his interlocutor and assistant in the work was his only son Boris. For Anisya Mikhailovna, although she often attended her husband's public lectures, the sphere of scientific interests of the famous historian remained alien and largely incomprehensible. As P.N. Milyukov recalled, during his visits to the Klyuchevskys' house, Anisya Mikhailovna only acted as a hospitable hostess: she poured tea, treated guests, without participating in the general conversation. Vasily Osipovich himself, who often attended various unofficial receptions and journals, never took his spouse with him. Perhaps Anisia Mikhailovna did not have a penchant for secular pastime, but, most likely, Vasily Osipovich and his wife did not want to cause themselves unnecessary worries and put each other in an uncomfortable situation. Mrs. Klyuchevskaya could not be imagined at an official banquet or in the company of her husband's scholarly colleagues arguing in a smoky home office.

There are cases when unknown visitors mistook Anisya Mikhailovna for a servant in a professorial house: even outwardly she resembled an ordinary bourgeois housewife or a wicked woman. The wife of the historian was known as a homebody, led the house and household, solving all the practical issues of family life. Klyuchevsky himself, like any person carried away by his ideas, was more helpless than a child in everyday trifles.

All her life A.M. Klyuchevskaya remained a deeply religious person. In conversations with friends, Vasily Osipovich often sarcastically about his wife's addiction to "sports" trips to the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, which was far from their home, although there was another small church nearby. In one of these "trips" Anisia Mikhailovna became ill, and when she was brought home, she died.

Nevertheless, on the whole, one gets the impression that for many years of their life together, the Klyuchevskys' spouses retained deep personal affection and almost dependence on each other. Vasily Osipovich took the death of his "half" very hard. Student of Klyuchevsky S.B. Veselovsky these days in a letter to a comrade wrote that after the death of his wife, old Vasily Osipovich (he was already 69 years old) and his son Boris "remained orphaned, helpless, like little children."

And when in December 1909 the long-awaited fourth volume of the "Course of Russian History" appeared, before the text on a separate page there was an inscription: "In memory of Anisia Mikhailovna Klyuchevskaya († March 21, 1909)".

In addition to his son Boris (1879-1944), Vasily Osipovich's niece Elizaveta Korneva (? –09.01.1906) lived in the Klyuchevski family as a pupil. When Liza had a fiancé, V.O. Klyuchevsky did not like him, and the guardian began to interfere with their relationship. Despite the disapproval of the whole family, Lisa left home, hastily married and soon after the wedding she died "of consumption." Vasily Osipovich, who loved her like his own daughter, was especially hard at the death of his niece.

Professor Klyuchevsky

In 1872 V.O. Klyuchevsky successfully defended his master's thesis. In the same year, he took the department of history at the Moscow Theological Academy and held it for 36 years (until 1906). In those same years, Klyuchevsky began to teach at the Higher Courses for Women. Since 1879 - lectured at Moscow University. At the same time, he completed his doctoral dissertation "Boyar Duma of Ancient Rus" and in 1882 defended it at the university department. Since that time, Klyuchevsky has become a professor at four educational institutions.

His lectures were very popular among student youth. Not only students of historians and philologists, for whom, in fact, the course of Russian history was taught, were its listeners. Mathematicians, physicists, chemists, doctors - all tried to break through to the lectures of Klyuchevsky. According to contemporaries, they literally devastated audiences in other faculties; many students came to the university early in the morning to take a seat and wait for the “desired hour”. The audience was attracted not so much by the content of the lectures as by the aphorism and liveliness of Klyuchevsky's presentation of even the already known material. The democratic character of the professor himself, so atypical for the university environment, also could not fail to arouse the sympathy of the student youth: everyone wanted to listen to “their” historian.

Soviet biographers tried to explain the extraordinary success of VO Klyuchevsky's lecture course in the 1880s by his desire to “please” a revolutionary-minded student audience. According to M.V. Nechkina, in his very first lecture, delivered on December 5, 1879, Klyuchevsky put forward the slogan of freedom:

“The text of this particular lecture, unfortunately, did not reach us, but the memories of the listeners have survived. Klyuchevsky, writes one of them, “believed that Peter's reforms did not give the desired results; for Russia to become rich and powerful, freedom was needed. Russia of the 18th century did not see it. Hence, so Vasily Osipovich concluded, and her state weakness. "

M.V. Nechkina “Lecture skills of V.O. Klyuchevsky "

In other lectures, Klyuchevsky spoke ironically about Empresses Elizabeth Petrovna, Catherine II, colorfully characterized the era of palace coups:

“For reasons known to us ... - a university listener of Klyuchevsky recorded the lecture in 1882, - after Peter the Russian throne became a toy for adventurers, for random people who often unexpectedly entered it ... Many miracles have been on the Russian throne since the death of Peter the Great - there were ... both childless widows and unmarried mothers of families, but there was not yet a buffoon; the play of chance was probably intended to fill this gap in our history. The buffoon appeared. "

It was about Peter III. So from the university department, no one has yet spoken about the house of the Romanovs.

From all this, Soviet historians drew a conclusion about the historian's anti-monarchist and anti-noble position, which almost made him intimate with the regicide revolutionaries S. Perovskaya, Zhelyabov and other radicals who wanted to change the existing order at all costs. However, the historian V.O. Klyuchevsky did not even think about anything like that. His "liberalism" clearly fit into the framework of what was permitted in the era state reforms 1860-70s. "Historical portraits" of kings, emperors and other prominent rulers of antiquity, created by V.O. Klyuchevsky, are just a tribute to historical reliability, an attempt to objectively present monarchs as ordinary people who are not alien to any human weakness.

The venerable scientist V.O. Klyuchevsky was elected dean of the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University, vice-rector, chairman of the Society for Russian History and Antiquities. He was appointed teacher of the son of Alexander III, Grand Duke George, was more than once invited on walks with the royal family, and conducted conversations with the Tsar and Empress Maria Fedorovna. However, in 1893-1894, Klyuchevsky, despite the personal disposition of the emperor, categorically refused to write a book about Alexander III. Most likely, this was neither a whim of the historian, nor a manifestation of his opposition to the authorities. Klyuchevsky did not see the talent of a flattering publicist behind him, and for a historian to write about the still living or just deceased "next" emperor is simply not interesting.

In 1894, as chairman of the Society for Russian History and Antiquities, he had to deliver a speech "In memory of the deceased Emperor Alexander III". The liberal-minded historian in this speech sincerely sincerely regretted the death of the sovereign, with whom he often communicated during his lifetime. For this speech, Klyuchevsky was booed by the students, who saw in the behavior of the beloved professor not grief for the deceased, but unforgivable conformism.

In the mid-1890s, Klyuchevsky continued research work, publishes "A short guide to modern history", the third edition of the "Boyar Duma of Ancient Rus". Six of his students are defending dissertations.

In 1900, Klyuchevsky was elected to the Imperial Academy of Sciences. Since 1901, according to the rules, he resigns, but remains to teach at the university and the Theological Academy.

In the years 1900-1910, he began to give a course of lectures at the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, where he was attended by many outstanding artists. F.I. Chaliapin wrote in his memoirs that Klyuchevsky helped him to understand the image of Boris Godunov before the benefit performance in The Bolshoi Theater in 1903. In the memoirs of the famous singer about the famous historian, it is also repeatedly said about the artistry of Klyuchevsky, his extraordinary talent to attract the attention of the viewer and listener, the ability to "get used to the role" and fully reveal the character of the chosen character.

Since 1902, Vasily Osipovich has been preparing for publication the main brainchild of his life - The Course in Russian History. This work was interrupted only in 1905 by trips to St. Petersburg to participate in the commissions on the law on the press and the status of the State Duma. Klyuchevsky's liberal position complicated his relationship with the leadership of the Theological Academy. In 1906, Klyuchevsky resigned and was dismissed, despite student protests.

According to the cadet historians P.N. Milyukov and A. Kizevetter, at the end of his life V.O. Klyuchevsky held the same liberal constitutional positions as the Party of People's Freedom. In 1905, at a meeting in Peterhof, he did not support the idea of ​​a "noble" constitution for the future "Octobrists", and agreed to run for the State Duma as a deputy from Sergiev Posad. In fact, despite all the curtsies from the barely born leaders political parties, politics V.O. Klyuchevsky was not interested at all.

Quite fierce disputes arose among Soviet historians about the "party affiliation" of Klyuchevsky. M.V. Nechkina unequivocally (following Milyukov) considered Klyuchevsky an ideological and de facto member of the Party of People's Freedom (cd). However, academician Yu.V. Gauthier, who personally knew the historian in those years, argued that his son Boris almost forcibly forced his son Boris to run for the Duma from this party of the "old man", and "it is impossible to make a cadet figure out of Klyuchevsky."

In the same polemic with Nechkina, the following phrase of Yu.V. Gaultier: “Klyuchevsky was a real“ wet chicken ”in terms of character and social activity. I told him so. He had will only in his works, but in life he had no will ... Klyuchevsky was always under someone's shoe. "

The question of the actual participation or non-participation of the historian in the affairs of the Cadet Party has lost its relevance today. His deputy in the State Duma did not take place, but, unlike P.N. Milyukov and Co., this did not matter for Klyuchevsky: the scientist always had something to do and where to realize his oratorical talent.

"Course of Russian history" and the historical concept of V.O.Klyuchevsky

Along with the special course "History of estates in Russia" (1887), research on social topics ("The origin of serfdom in Russia", "The poll and the abolition of servitude in Russia", "The composition of the representation at the zemstvo cathedrals of ancient Russia"), history cultures of the 18th and 19th centuries. and others, Klyuchevsky created the main work of his life - "The Course of Russian History" (1987-1989. T.I - 5). It is in it that the concept is presented historical development Russia according to V.O. Klyuchevsky.

Most contemporary historians believed that V.O. Klyuchevsky, as a student of S.M. Solovyov, was only continuing to develop the concept of a state (legal) school in Russian historiography under new conditions. In addition to the influence of the state school, the influence on the views of Klyuchevsky of his other university teachers - F.I. Buslaeva, S.V. Eshevsky and figures of the 1860s. - A.P. Shchapova, N.A. Ishutin, etc.

At one time, Soviet historiography made a completely unjustified attempt to "dissolve" the views of SM Solovyov as an "apologist for autocracy" and VO Klyuchevsky, who held liberal-democratic positions (MV Nechkina). A number of historians (V.I.Pichet, P.P.Smirnov) saw the main value of Klyuchevsky's works in an attempt to give the history of society and people in its dependence on economic and political conditions.

In modern research, the prevailing view is that V.O. Klyuchevsky is not only a successor of the historical and methodological traditions of the state (legal) school (K.D. Kavelin, B.N. Chicherin, T.N. Granovsky, S.M. Soloviev) , but also the creator of a new, most promising direction for her, based on the "sociological" method.

Unlike the first generation of "statists", Klyuchevsky considered it necessary to introduce social and economic factors as independent forces of historical development. The historical process in his view is the result of the continuous interaction of all factors (geographic, demographic, economic, political, social). The task of the historian in this process is not reduced to the construction of global historical schemes, but to the constant identification of the specific relationship of all the above factors at each specific moment of development.

In practice, the "sociological method" meant for V.O. Klyuchevsky, a thorough study of the degree and nature of the country's economic development, closely related to the natural-geographical environment, as well as a detailed analysis of the social stratification of society at each stage of development and the relationships that arise in this case within the individual social groups(he often referred to them as classes). As a result, the historical process was adopted by V.O. Klyuchevsky has more voluminous and dynamic forms than those of his predecessors or contemporaries such as V.I. Sergeevich.

His understanding of the general course of Russian history V.O. Klyuchevsky presented the most succinctly in periodization, in which he distinguished four qualitatively different stages:

VIII-XIII centuries - Rus Dnieper, city, trade;

XIII - mid XV century - Russia Upper Volga, specific princely, free agricultural;

mid-15th - second decade of the 17th century - Great Russia, Moscow, tsarist-boyar, military landownership;

early 17th - mid 19th centuries - the All-Russian period, the imperial-noble, the period of the serf, agricultural and factory economy.

Already in his doctoral dissertation "Boyar Duma of Ancient Rus", which was, in fact, a developed social portrait of the boyar class, the novelty that V.O. Klyuchevsky introduced into the traditions of the public school.

In the context of the divergence of interests of the autocratic state and society, sharply marked at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, Klyuchevsky revised the views of his teacher Solovyov on the entire two-century segment of the country's new history, thereby crossing out the results of the last seventeen volumes of his History of Russia and the political program of the national pre-reform liberalism. On these grounds, a number of researchers (in particular, A. Shakhanov) conclude that it is impossible to classify Klyuchevsky as a state school in Russian historiography.

But this is not the case. Klyuchevsky only declares “ new story”, Actualizes the sociological orientation of historical research. In fact, he did what most of all appealed to the needs of the younger generation of historians of the 1880s: he declares the rejection of schemes or goals proposed from outside, both Westernizing and Slavophil. The students wanted to study Russian history as a scientific problem, and Klyuchevsky's "sociological method" gave them such an opportunity. Pupils and followers of Klyuchevsky (P. Milyukov, Y. Gauthier, A. Kizevetter, M. Bogoslovsky, N. A. Rozhkov, S. Bakhrushin, A. I. Yakovlev, Ya. L. Barskov) are often called "neo-state actors" .To. in their constructions, they used the same multifactorial approach of the state school, expanding and supplementing it with cultural, sociological, psychological and other factors.

In The Course of Russian History, Klyuchevsky has already given a holistic exposition of Russian history on the basis of his sociological method. Like none of the historical works of the state school, "Course" by V.O. Klyuchevsky went far beyond the scope of a purely educational publication, turning into a fact of not only scientific, but also social life of the country. An expanded understanding of the multifactorial nature of the historical process in combination with the traditional postulates of the state school made it possible to bring to a logical limit the concept of the Russian historical process, which was laid down by S.M. Solovyov. In this sense, the work of V.O. Klyuchevsky became a milestone for the development of all historical science in Russia: he completed the tradition of the 19th century and at the same time anticipated the innovative searches that the 20th century brought with it.

Assessment of the personality of V.O. Klyuchevsky in the memoirs of contemporaries

The figure of V.O. Klyuchevsky was already surrounded by a halo of "myths" during his lifetime, different kinds anecdotes and a priori judgments. And today the problem of the cliched perception of the personality of the historian remains, which, as a rule, is based on subjective negative characteristics PN Milyukov and the stinging aphorisms of Klyuchevsky himself, which are widely available to the reader.

P.N. Milyukov, as you know, fell out with V.O. Klyuchevsky even in the process of preparing his master's thesis on the reforms of Peter I. The dissertation was enthusiastically received by the scientific community, but V.O. the university does not award her doctorate. He advised Miliukov to write another dissertation, noting that "science will only benefit from this." The future leader of the cadets was mortally offended and subsequently, without going into details and the true reasons for such an attitude of the teacher to his work, he reduced everything to the complexity of character, egoism and “mysteriousness” of V.O.Klyuchevsky, or, more simply, to envy. Everything in life was not easy for Klyuchevsky himself, and he could not tolerate someone else's quick success.

In a letter dated July 29, 1890, Miliukov writes that Klyuchevsky “It's hard and boring to live in the world. Greater fame than he has achieved, he will not be able to receive. Living with love for science - he can hardly be with his skepticism ... Now he is recognized, secured; every word he is caught with greed; but he was tired, and most importantly, he does not believe in science: there is no fire, no life, no passion for scientific work - and for this reason, there is no school and students ".

In the conflict with Milyukov, two remarkable pride obviously clashed in the scientific field. Only Klyuchevsky still loved science more than himself in science. His school and his students developed ideas and multiplied the scientist's merits - this is an indisputable fact. As is known, the older generation of fellow historians supported Klyuchevsky in this confrontation. And not only because at that time he already had a name and fame. Without Klyuchevsky there would not have been Milyukov as a historian, and what is especially sad to realize is that without a conflict with the almighty Klyuchevsky, Milyukov as a politician might not have happened. Of course, there would be other people willing to rock the building of Russian statehood, but if Milyukov had not joined them, not only historical science would benefit from this, but the history of Russia as a whole.

Often, memories of Klyuchevsky as a scientist or lecturer smoothly flow into psychological analysis or the characteristics of his personality. Apparently, his persona was such a striking event in the life of his contemporaries that this topic could not be ignored. Excessive causticity, isolation of character, and distance of the scientist were noticed by many contemporaries. But it is necessary to understand that different people could be admitted by Klyuchevsky to him at different distances. Everyone who wrote about Klyuchevsky, one way or another, directly or in context, indicated his degree of closeness to the scientist's personal space. This was the reason for the various, often directly opposite, interpretations of his behavior and character traits.

Klyuchevsky's contemporaries (including S. B. Veselovsky, V. A. Maklakov, A. E. Presnyakov) in their memoirs resolutely refute the myth of his "complexity and mystery", "egoism", "buffoonery", the constant desire to "play to the public ”, they try to protect the historian from quick and superficial characteristics.

Vasily Osipovich was a person of a subtle psychological make-up, who endowed all the phenomena of life, attitude towards people and even his lectures with a personal emotional color. PN Milyukov compares his psyche with a very sensitive measuring apparatus in constant vibration. According to Milyukov, it was rather difficult for such a person as his teacher to establish even ordinary everyday relationships.

If we turn to the diaries of the historian of different years, then, first of all, the researcher is struck by deep self-reflection, the desire to raise his inner experiences above the bustle of everyday life. Often there are records testifying to a lack of understanding by his contemporaries, as it seemed to Klyuchevsky himself, of his inner world. He closes in, seeks revelations in himself, in nature, away from the hustle and bustle of modern society, the values ​​and way of life of which he, by and large, does not fully understand and does not accept.

It must be admitted that generations of rural clergy, having absorbed the habits of a simple and unpretentious, low-income life, left a special stamp on the appearance of Klyuchevsky and his life. According to M.V. Nechkina:

“… For a long time already he could proudly carry his glory, feel famous, loved, irreplaceable, but there is not even a shadow of high self-esteem in his behavior, on the contrary - an emphasized disregard for fame. From the applause, he "waved away gloomily and annoyedly."

In the Moscow house of the Klyuchevskys, the atmosphere was traditional for the old capital: the visitor was struck by the old-fashioned "homespun rugs" and similar "bourgeois elements." Vasily Osipovich was extremely reluctant to agree to numerous requests from his wife and son to improve their life, for example, such as buying new furniture.

Klyuchevsky, as a rule, received visitors who came to him in the dining room. Only when he was in a complacent mood, he invited me to the table. Sometimes his colleagues, professors, came to visit Vasily Osipovich. In such cases, "he ordered a small decanter of pure vodka, herring, cucumbers, then a beluga appeared," although in general Klyuchevsky was very thrifty. (Bogoslovsky, M. M. "From the memoirs of V. O. Klyuchevsky").

Klyuchevsky went to lectures at the university only in cheap cabs ("vans"), in principle avoiding the schoogo sledges of the Moscow "reckless drivers". On the way, the professor often led lively conversations with the "vans" - yesterday's village guys and peasants. On his own business, Klyuchevsky moved on the "wretched Moscow horse-drawn carriage", and "climbed onto the imperial". Konka, as one of his students A.I. Yakovlev recalls, was then distinguished by endless downtime at almost every crossing. Klyuchevsky traveled twice a week to the Trinity-Sergius Lavra to teach at the Theological Academy. railroad, but always in third grade, in a crowd of worshipers.

IA Artobolevsky said: “The well-known rich woman Morozova, with whose son Klyuchevsky once worked, offered him a carriage and“ two drawbar horses ”as a present. “And yet I refused ... Pardon me, does it suit me? .. Wouldn't I be ridiculous in such a carriage ?! In borrowed plumes..."

Another famous anecdote about a professor's fur coat, cited in the monograph by M.V. Nechkina:

“The famous professor, no longer constrained by the lack of money, wore an old, shabby fur coat. “Why can't you get yourself a new fur coat, Vasily Osipovich? Everything is rubbed over there, ”the friends remarked. - "In the face and a fur coat" - laconically answered Klyuchevsky. "

The professor's notorious "frugality" undoubtedly testified not at all to his natural stinginess, low self-esteem, or a desire to shock others. On the contrary, she speaks only of his inner, spiritual freedom. Klyuchevsky was accustomed to doing as it was convenient for him, and did not intend to change his habits to please external conventions.

Having crossed the line of his fiftieth birthday, Klyuchevsky fully retained his incredible ability to work. She amazed his younger students. One of them recalls how, after working for long hours with young people in the late evening and at night, Klyuchevsky appeared in the department in the morning fresh and full of energy, while the students could hardly stand on their feet.

Of course, he sometimes got sick, complained either of a sore throat or a cold, drafts that blew through the lecture hall at Gerrier's courses began to irritate him, and sometimes his teeth ached. But he called his health iron and was right. Not really observing the rules of hygiene (he worked at night, not sparing his eyes), he created an original aphorism about her: "Hygiene teaches how to be a chain dog of your own health." There was another saying about work: "He who is not able to work 16 hours a day has no right to be born and must be removed from life as a usurper of being." (Both aphorisms date back to the 1890s.)

The memory of Klyuchevsky, like that of any failed clergyman, was amazing. One day, going up to the pulpit for a lecture at some public scientific celebration, he tripped over a step and dropped the sheets of his notes. They scattered like a fan across the floor, their order was fundamentally disrupted. The sheets were once again mixed up by the listeners who rushed to the aid of the professor. Everyone was worried about the fate of the report. Only Klyuchevsky's wife Anisya Mikhailovna, who was sitting in the front rows, remained completely calm: “He will read it, read it, he remembers everything by heart,” she calmly reassured the neighbors. And so it happened.

A very distinct "beaded" handwriting, perhaps even smaller than beads, writing with a sharply sharpened pencil testified to the historian's good eyesight for a long time. It is not his handwriting that interferes with reading his archival manuscripts - it is impeccable, but a pencil that has worn out from time to time. Only in the last years of his life did Klyuchevsky's handwriting become larger, with the predominant use of pen and ink. “To be able to write legibly is the first rule of politeness,” says one of the historian's aphorisms. On his writing desk he did not have any massive inkwell on a marble board, but a five-kopeck bottle of ink where he dipped his pen, as he once did in his seminary years.

In the memoirs dedicated to the historian, the question of whether he was happy in marriage is not at all discussed. This spicy side of private life was either deliberately kept silent by his acquaintances, or was hidden from prying eyes. As a result, Klyuchevsky's relationship with his wife, reflected only in correspondence with relatives or in the extremely rare memories of family friends, remain not entirely certain.

It is not for nothing that a memoir theme stands out against this background, which characterizes the attitude of Klyuchevsky to the fair sex. The esteemed professor, while maintaining the image of a trustworthy family man, has managed to acquire the fame of a gallant gentleman and ladies' man.

Maria Golubtsova, the daughter of a friend of Klyuchevsky, a teacher of the Theological Academy, A.P. Golubtsov, recalls such a "funny scene." Vasily Osipovich, having come to Easter, was not averse to "making Christ" with her. But the little girl unceremoniously refused him. "The first woman who refused to kiss me!"- said Vasily Osipovich, laughing, to her father. Even on a walk in the mountains with Prince George and all his "brilliant company", Klyuchevsky did not fail to attract female attention to his person. Grieved that he was given an old-aged maid of honor as a companion, he decided to take revenge: Klyuchevsky shocked the company by picking the edelweiss that grew over the cliff and presented it to his lady. “On the way back, everyone surrounded me, and the youngest young ladies walked with me,” the professor, pleased with his trick, said.

Klyuchevsky taught at the Higher Courses for Women, and here the elderly professor was pursued by a mass of enthusiastic admirers who literally idolized him. At the university, even when girls were banned from attending university lectures, its female audience grew steadily. The hostesses of the most famous Moscow salons often competed with each other, wanting to see Klyuchevsky at all their evenings.

The historian's attitude towards women was something chivalrous and at the same time detached - he was ready to serve them and admire them, but, most likely, disinterestedly: only as a gallant gentleman.

One of the few women with whom Klyuchevsky maintained trusting, even friendly relations for many years was the wife's sister, Nadezhda Mikhailovna, which we have already mentioned. Vasily Osipovich willingly invited his sister-in-law to visit, corresponded with her, became the godfather of her pupil. The different characters of these people, most likely, were united by an addiction to witty humor and intellectual irony. V.O. Klyuchevsky made an invaluable gift to Nadezhda Mikhailovna - he gave his "black book" with a collection of aphorisms. Almost all the aphorisms now attributed to the historian are known and remembered only thanks to this book. It contains many dedications to a woman and, perhaps, that is why, after the death of Klyuchevsky, the memoirists involuntarily focused their attention precisely on the topic of his “non-family” relationship with the fair sex.

Speaking about the appearance of Klyuchevsky, many contemporaries noted that he "in his appearance was unenviable ... undignified." From the famous photograph of 1890, a typical "commoner" looks at us: an elderly, tired, slightly ironic man with the appearance of a parish priest or a deacon, who does not care too much about his appearance. Modest requests and habits, the ascetic appearance of Klyuchevsky, on the one hand, set him apart from the university professorship, on the other, were typical of different Moscow inhabitants or visiting provincials. But as soon as Vasily Osipovich struck up a conversation with someone, magnetic force, forcing, somehow involuntarily, to love him. " He did not imitate anyone and did not resemble anyone, "It was created in all the original"... (Memories of priest A. Rozhdestvensky. Memories of V. O. Klyuchevsky // Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky. Biographical sketch ... p. 423.)

The person of Klyuchevsky was also interesting thanks to his extraordinary sense of humor: "He sparkled like fireworks with sparkles of wit"... As you know, vivid images of Klyuchevsky's lectures were prepared by him in advance and even repeated from year to year, which was noted by his students and colleagues. But, at the same time, they were always refreshed by the "quick and accurate as a shot" improvisation. At the same time, "the charm of his witticisms lay in the fact that in each of them, along with a completely unexpected juxtaposition of concepts, there was always a very subtle thought." (Bogoslovsky, M. M. "From the memoirs of V. O. Klyuchevsky.")

Klyuchevsky's sharp tongue did not spare anyone, hence his reputation as an "incorrigible skeptic who does not recognize any sacred things." At first glance, he could easily appear selfish and angry. But this impression, of course, was wrong - PN Milyukov and AN Savin justified it: "The Mask of Mephistopheles" was designed not to let strangers into the holy of holies of his sensitive soul. Having found himself in a new and heterogeneous social environment, Klyuchevsky had to develop the habit of wearing this mask as a "protective shell", perhaps, thereby misleading many of his colleagues and contemporaries. Perhaps, with the help of this "shell" the historian tried to win back his right to internal freedom.

Klyuchevsky communicated with almost all the scientific, creative and political elite of his time. He attended both official receptions and informal journalism meetings, and simply loved to visit colleagues and acquaintances. He always left the impression of an interesting companion, a pleasant guest, a gallant gentleman. But the most sincere friends, according to the recollections of relatives, remained for Klyuchevsky simple people, mainly of the clergy. For example, one could often find with him the assistant librarian of the Theological Academy - Hieromonk Raphael. The hieromonk was a great original and a very kind person (nephews or seminarians constantly lived in his cell). Father Raphael knew scientific works only by the names and color of the spines of books, moreover, he was extremely ugly, but he loved to boast of his scholarship and former beauty. Klyuchevsky always joked about him and especially liked to ask why he had not married. To which he was answered: “Yes, you know, brother, as he graduated from the seminary, so we have brides, brides, passion. And I used to run away into the garden, lie down between the ridges, and I lie, and they are looking for me. I was handsome then. " “Traces of the former beauty are still noticeable,” Klyuchevsky agreed with good irony.

Coming to Sergiev Posad for the holidays, the professor loved, along with the townspeople guys and girls, to take part in festivities riding the carousel.

Obviously, in such communication, the eminent historian was looking for simplicity, so familiar to him from childhood, which the prim academic environment and the capital's society so lacked. Here Klyuchevsky could feel free, not wear "masks", not play "a learned professor", be himself.

The meaning of the personality of V.O. Klyuchevsky

The importance of the personality of V.O. Klyuchevsky for his contemporaries was enormous. He was highly regarded as a professional historian, appreciated as an outstanding, talented person. Many students and followers saw in him a source of morality, instructiveness, kindness, and sparkling humor.

But those who communicated with V.O.Klyuchevsky in an informal setting were often repelled in him by his excessive (sometimes unjustified) frugality, scrupulousness in details, unpretentious, "philistine" home environment, sharp language and at the same time - indiscretion in emotions, restraint, isolation of character.

The extraordinary talent of a researcher and analyst, courage in judgments and conclusions inherent in V.O. Klyuchevsky would hardly have allowed him to make a successful career as a clergyman. Applying all these qualities in the scientific field, the provincial priest actually caught the "bird of luck" by the tail, for which he came from Penza to Moscow. He became the most famous historian of Russia, a venerable scientist, academician, "general" from science, a personality of all-Russian and even world scale. Nevertheless, V.O. Klyuchevsky did not feel like a triumphant. Having lived almost his entire adult life in isolation from the environment that raised him, he still tried to remain faithful to his present, at least in the family way of life, life, habits. For some contemporaries, this caused bewilderment and mockery of the "eccentricities" of Professor Klyuchevsky, others made them talk about his "inconsistency", "complexity", "egoism."

In this global contradiction of mind and heart, in our opinion, was the triumph and tragedy of many famous people of Russia, who emerged from among the "commoners" and entered a society where, by and large, the traditions of noble culture still prevailed. Klyuchevsky turned out to be a significant figure in this regard.

IN. Klyuchevsky

A nondescript-looking man, similar to a sexton of a provincial church, in an old fur coat and with spots on his official uniform, at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries was the "face" of Moscow University, an ordinary academician of the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, a teacher of imperial children.

This fact to a large extent testifies to a change in external priorities and the democratization of not only Russian society, but also domestic science as a whole.

As a scientist V.O. Klyuchevsky did not make a global revolution in the theory or methodology of historical science. By and large, he only developed and brought to a new qualitative level the idea of ​​the "state" historical school of Moscow University. But the very image of Professor Klyuchevsky broke all the hitherto existing stereotypes of the appearance of a famous scientist, a successful lecturer and in general “ educated person"As a bearer of noble culture. Intuitively unwilling to adapt, to adapt to external conventions, at least in everyday life and behavior, the historian Klyuchevsky contributed to the introduction of a fashion for democracy, freedom of personal expression and, most importantly, spiritual freedom in the capital's academic environment, without which the formation of a social "stratum" called the intelligentsia is impossible.

Students loved Professor Klyuchevsky not at all for his shabby fur coat or his ability to artistically tell historical anecdotes. They saw in front of them a person who, before their very eyes, turned the time, by his example, who destroyed the gap between the history of the Fatherland as a tool for educating loyal patriotism and history as a subject of knowledge accessible to every researcher.

For forty years of inflamed public passions, the historian was able to "find the key" to any - spiritual, university, military - audience, captivating and captivating everywhere, never in any way arousing the suspicion of the authorities and various authorities.

That is why, in our opinion, V.O. Klyuchevsky - scientist, artist, artist, master - was erected not only by his contemporaries, but also by his descendants on the high pedestal of the leading figure of Russian historical science. Like N.M. Karamzin at the beginning of the 19th century, at the beginning of the 20th century, he gave his compatriots the history that they wanted to know at that very moment, thereby drawing a line under all previous historiography and looking into the distant future.

V.O. Klyuchevsky died on May 12 (25), 1911 in Moscow, and was buried in the cemetery of the Donskoy Monastery.

Memory and descendants

Memorialization of the cultural space in Moscow associated with the name of Klyuchevsky was actively developing in the first years after his death. A few days after the death of V. O. Klyuchevsky, in May 1911, the Moscow City Duma received a statement from the vowel N. A. Shamin "the need to perpetuate the memory of the famous Russian historian V. O. Klyuchevsky." As a result of the meetings of the Duma, it was decided in 1912 to establish a scholarship "in memory of V.O. Klyuchevsky" at the Imperial University of Moscow. The Klyuchevsky scholarship was also established by the Moscow Higher Courses for Women, where he taught as a historian.

At the same time, Moscow University announced a competition to provide memories of V.O. Klyuchevsky.

Boris Klyuchevsky as a child

In the house on Zhitnaya Street, where Vasily Osipovich lived in recent years, his son, Boris Klyuchevsky, planned to open a museum. Here was the library, the personal archive of V.O. Klyuchevsky, his personal belongings, a portrait by the artist V.O. Sherwood. The son oversaw the holding of the annual memorial services in memory of his father, gathering his disciples and everyone who cherished his memory. Thus, the house of V.O. Klyuchevsky, even after his death, continued to play the role of a center uniting Moscow historians.

In 1918, the Moscow house of the historian was searched, the main part of the archive was evacuated to Petrograd, to one of Klyuchevsky's students, the literary historian Ya.L. Barsky. Subsequently, Boris Klyuchevsky managed to obtain a "security certificate" for his father's library and, with great difficulty, returned the bulk of the manuscripts from Barsky, but in the 1920s the historian's library and archive were seized and placed in state archives.

At the same time, among the students of Klyuchevsky who remained in Moscow, the problem of erecting a monument to the great historian acquired special urgency. By that time, there was not even a monument at his grave in the Donskoy Monastery. The reason for various conversations was partly the negative attitude of the students towards the only living descendant of Klyuchevsky.

Boris Vasilievich Klyuchevsky, according to him, graduated from two faculties of Moscow University, but his scientific activity did not attract him. For many years he played the role of home secretary of his famous father, was fond of sports and bicycle improvement.

From the stories of B. Klyuchevsky M.V. Nechkina knows the following episode: in his youth, Boris invented some kind of special "nut" for a bicycle and was very proud of it. Rolling it in the palm of your hand, V.O. Klyuchevsky, with his usual sarcasm, told the guests: “What a time has come! To invent such a nut, you have to graduate from two faculties - history and law ... ”(Nechkina MV Decree, p. 318).

Obviously, Vasily Osipovich devoted much more time to communicating with students than with his own son. The son's hobbies did not evoke either understanding or approval from the historian. According to the recollections of eyewitnesses (in particular, Yu. V. Gauthier indicates this), in the last years of his life, Klyuchevsky's relationship with Boris left much to be desired. Vasily Osipovich did not like his son's hobby for politics, as well as his open cohabitation either with a housekeeper, or with a maid who lived in their house. Friends and acquaintances V.O. Klyuchevsky - V.A. Maklakov and A.N. Savin - it was also believed that the young man exerts strong pressure on the elderly, weakened from the diseases of Vasily Osipovich.

Nevertheless, during the life of V.O. Klyuchevsky, Boris helped him a lot in his work, and after the death of the scientist he collected and preserved his archive, actively participated in the publication of his father's scientific heritage, was engaged in the publication and reprint of his books.

In the 1920s, colleagues and students of Klyuchevsky accused the "heir" of the fact that the grave of his parents is in desolation: there is neither a monument nor a fence. Most likely, Boris Vasilyevich simply did not have the funds to erect a worthy monument, and the events of the revolution and the Civil War did little to help living people care about their deceased ancestors.

Through the efforts of the university community, the "Committee on the question of perpetuating the memory of V.O. Klyuchevsky" was created, which set itself the goal of erecting a monument to the historian on one of the central streets of Moscow. However, the Committee limited itself only to the creation in 1928 of a common memorial-tombstone on the grave of the Klyuchevsky spouses (the cemetery of the Donskoy Monastery). After the "academic affair" (1929-30), persecution and deportation of historians of the "old school" began. VO Klyuchevsky was included in the "liberal-bourgeois" direction of historiography, and it was considered inappropriate to erect a separate monument to him in the center of Moscow.

Width = "300">

The historian's son Boris Klyuchevsky broke all ties with the scientific community in the first half of the 1920s. According to M.V. Nechkina, he served as an assistant legal adviser "in some automotive department" and, finally, was doing his favorite thing - car repairs. Then the son of Klyuchevsky was a car technician, translator, minor co-auditor of VATO. In 1933 he was repressed and sentenced to exile in Alma-Ata. Exact date his death is unknown (circa 1944). However, B.V. Klyuchevsky managed to preserve the main and very important part of his father's archive. These materials were acquired in 1945 by the Commission on the History of Historical Sciences at the department of the Institute of History and Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR from the "widow of the historian's son." The V.O.Klyuchevsky Museum in Moscow was never created by him, the memories of his father were also not written ...

Only in 1991, on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the birth of Klyuchevsky, a museum was opened in Penza, named after the great historian. And today the monuments to V.O. Klyuchevsky exist only in his homeland, in the village of Voskresenovka (Penza region) and in Penza, where the Klyuchevsky family moved after the death of their father. It is noteworthy that the initiatives to perpetuate the memory of the historian, as a rule, did not come from the state or the scientific community, but from local authorities and enthusiasts of local history.

Elena Shirokova

For the preparation of this work, materials from the sites were used:

http://www.history.perm.ru/

World outlook portraits. Klyuchevsky V.O. Bibliofond

Literature:

Bogomazova O. V. Private life of a famous historian (based on the materials of memoirs about V.O. Klyuchevsky) // Bulletin of Chelyabinsk state university... 2009. No. 23 (161). History. Issue 33. S. 151-159.

History and historians in the space of national and world culture of the 18th – 21st centuries: collection of articles / ed. N.N. Alevras, N.V. Grishina, Yu.V. Krasnova. - Chelyabinsk: Encyclopedia, 2011;

The world of the historian: a historiographic collection / edited by V.P. Korzun, S.P. Bychkov. - Issue. 7. - Omsk: Publishing house Om. state university, 2011;

M.V. Nechkina Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky (1841-1911). History of life and creativity, Moscow: "Science", 1974;

Shakhanov A.N. Struggle against "objectivism" and "cosmopolitanism" in Soviet historical science. "Russian historiography" by N.L. Rubinstein // History and historians, 2004. - №1 - С.186-207.

Biography

KLYUCHEVSKY, VASILY OSIPOVICH (1841−1911), Russian historian. Born January 16 (28), 1841 in the village of Voskresenskoye (near Penza) in the family of a poor parish priest. His first teacher was his father, who died tragically in August 1850. The family was forced to move to Penza. Out of compassion for a poor widow, one of her husband's friends gave her a small house to live in. “Was anyone poorer than you and me at the time when we were left orphans in the arms of our mother,” Klyuchevsky wrote to his sister later, recalling the hungry years of childhood and adolescence. In Penza, Klyuchevsky studied at a parish religious school, then at a district religious school and at a theological seminary. Already at school, Klyuchevsky knew well the works of many historians. In order to be able to devote himself to science (the authorities promised him a career as a clergyman and admission to the theological academy), in his last year he deliberately dropped out of seminary and spent a year independently preparing for the university entrance exams.

With his admission to Moscow University in 1861, a new period began in the life of Klyuchevsky. His teachers are F. I. Buslaev, N. S. Tikhonravov, P. M. Leontiev, and in particular S. M. Soloviev: “Soloviev gave the listener a surprisingly integral, harmonious thread, drawn through a chain of generalized facts, a view of the course of Russian history, and it is known what a pleasure it is for a young mind, beginning a scientific study, to feel in possession of a whole view of a scientific subject. "

The time of training for Klyuchevsky coincided with the largest event in the life of the country - the bourgeois reforms of the early 1860s. He was opposed to extreme measures of the government, but did not approve of the political actions of the student body. Legends of foreigners about the Moscow State (1866) Klyuchevsky chose the study of about 40 legends and notes of foreigners about Russia in the 15-17 centuries as the subject of his graduation essay at the university. For the essay, the graduate was awarded a gold medal and left at the department "to prepare for a professorship."

Another type of medieval Russian sources is devoted to the master's (candidate's) dissertation Kliuchevskoy's Old Russian Lives of Saints as a historical source (1871). The topic was indicated by Solovyov, who probably expected to use the secular and spiritual knowledge of the novice scientist to study the issue of the participation of monasteries in the colonization of Russian lands. Klyuchevsky has done a titanic job of studying at least five thousand hagiographies. During the preparation of his thesis, he wrote six independent studies, including such a major work as Economic activity Solovetsky monastery in the White Sea region (1866-1867). But the efforts expended and the result obtained did not justify the expected - the literary monotony of the lives, when the authors described the life of the heroes according to the stencil, did not allow establishing the details of "the setting, place and time, without which there is no historical fact for the historian."

After defending his master's thesis, Klyuchevsky received the right to teach in higher educational institutions. He gave a course on general history at the Alexander Military School, a course on Russian history at the Moscow Theological Academy, at the Higher Courses for Women, at the School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. From 1879 he taught at Moscow University, where he replaced the deceased Solovyov at the department of Russian history.

Teaching has brought Klyuchevsky a well-deserved fame. Gifted with the ability of imaginative penetration into the past, a master of artistic words, a well-known wit and author of numerous epigrams and aphorisms, in his speeches the scientist skillfully built whole galleries of portraits of historical figures that would be remembered for a long time by the audience.

Doctoral dissertation Boyar Duma of Ancient Rus (first published on the pages of the journal "Russian Thought" in 1880-1881) constituted a well-known stage in the work of Klyuchevsky. The theme of the subsequent scientific works of Klyuchevsky clearly indicated this new direction - the Russian ruble of the 16th-18th centuries. in his relation to the present (1884), The origin of serfdom in Russia (1885), Podnaya filing and the abolition of servitude in Russia (1886), Eugene Onegin and his ancestors (1887), Composition of the representation at the Zemsky Councils of Ancient Rus (1890), etc. ...

The most famous scientific work of Klyuchevsky, which has received worldwide recognition, is the Course of Russian History in 5 parts. The scientist worked on it for more than three decades, but decided to publish it only in the early 1900s. The main factor of Russian history around which events unfold, Klyuchevsky called colonization: “The history of Russia is the history of the country that is being colonized. The area of ​​colonization in it expanded along with its state territory. Either falling, now rising, this age-old movement continues to this day. " Based on this, Klyuchevsky divided Russian history into four periods. The first period lasts from about the 8th to the 13th century, when the Russian population was concentrated on the middle and upper Dnieper with tributaries. Russia was then politically divided into separate cities, foreign trade prevailed in the economy. During the second period (13th - mid 15th century), the bulk of the population moved to the interfluve of the upper Volga and Oka. The country was still fragmented, but no longer into cities with the regions attached to them, but into princely estates. The basis of the economy is free peasant agricultural labor. The third period lasts from the middle of the 15th century. until the second decade of the 17th century, when the Russian population colonized the southeastern Don and Middle Volga chernozems; in politics, the state unification of Great Russia took place; the process of enslavement of the peasantry began in the economy. The last, fourth period until the middle of the 19th century. (later the course did not cover) - this is the time when "the Russian people spread over the entire plain from the Baltic and White seas to the Black, to the Caucasian ridge, the Caspian Sea and the Urals." The Russian Empire was formed, headed by the autocracy, based on the military-service class - the nobility. In the economy, the manufacturing industry joins the agricultural serf labor. Klyuchevsky's scientific concept, for all its schematism, reflected the influence of social and scientific thought in the second half of the 19th century. Allocation of the natural factor, the significance of geographical conditions for the historical development of the people met the requirements of positivist philosophy. The recognition of the importance of questions of economic and social history was to some extent akin to Marxist approaches to the study of the past. But nevertheless, the closest to Klyuchevsky are the historians of the so-called "state school" - KD Kavelin, SM Soloviev and BN Chicherin. "In the life of a scientist and writer, the main biographical facts are books, the most important events are thoughts," wrote Klyuchevsky. The biography of Klyuchevsky himself rarely goes beyond these events and facts. His political speeches are few in number and characterize him as a moderate conservative who avoided the extremes of the Black Hundred reaction, a supporter of enlightened autocracy and the imperial greatness of Russia (it is no coincidence that Klyuchevsky was chosen as a teacher of general history for Grand Duke Georgy Alexandrovich, brother of Nicholas II). The scientist's political line was also answered by the "Praise of Honor" to Alexander III, pronounced in 1894 and provoking the outrage of the revolutionary students, and a wary attitude towards the First Russian Revolution, and the unsuccessful ballating in the spring of 1906 to the ranks of electors to the First State Duma on the Cadet list. Kliuchevsky died in Moscow on May 12, 1911. He was buried in the cemetery of the Donskoy Monastery.

Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich (1841−1911). The great historian saw the light on January 16 (28), 1841 in the village of Voskresenskoye (near Penza). The family of the future writer was poor, they did not have anything to pay even for the education of their children, so his clergy father was their mentor. However, his life came to an abrupt end in 1850. Taking pity on the poor widow with children, a friend of her husband gave a house in Penza. There Klyuchevsky studied first at the parish religious school, later entered the district religious school and then at the theological seminary. Ever since school, Klyuchevsky loves and knows history, completely immerses himself in the study of historical facts and events. Deciding to devote himself to science, he drops out of seminary in his last year and prepares to enter the university.

Having become a student at Moscow University in 1861, Vasily practically starts a new life.

The student years coincided with the bourgeois reforms of 1860. The graduation work was the study of notes of foreigners about Russia, which brought Klyuchevsky a gold medal and an invitation to stay to work at the department.

1871 - defense of a master's thesis, after which Klyuchevsky was given the right to teach in higher educational institutions. He reads a history course at the Alexander Military School, at the Higher Courses for Women, at the Moscow Theological Academy, at the School of Painting. Since 1879 he has been teaching at Moscow University.

It was teaching that brought Klyuchevsky his well-deserved popularity. The listeners easily memorized the lectures of the talented teacher, many epigrams and aphorisms belong to him.

Klyuchevsky is famous for his Course in Russian History, published in five parts, the work on which took more than thirty years of the historian's life. It was published in the early 1900s. This scientific work was recognized all over the world and is still appreciated and especially popular.

Klyuchevsky's scientific views reflected the influence of scientific and social thought in the second half of the 19th century. He recognized the importance of issues of social and economic history. Biography of Klyuchevsky includes very few political speeches. He avoided extremes and preferred the position of a moderate conservative for himself. It was because of his political views that Klyuchevsky was invited to teach history to the brother of Nicholas II, Prince Georgy Alexandrovich.

Vasily Klyuchevsky (1841-1911) - the largest and one of the most prominent Russian historians of the second half of the 19th century. He is rightfully considered the founder of bourgeois economism in Russian historiography, since he was the first to convert the most close attention on the study of folk life and the economic foundations of social life.

Some information about the youth of the historian

Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich, short biography whom is presented in this section, was born in 1841 in He was the son of a rural priest. His both grandfathers and great-grandfathers were also clergymen. Therefore, church teaching had a great influence on him. Interest in Orthodox history the researcher kept it for life: his first dissertation was devoted to the lives of the saints, and in his famous courses on Russian history he invariably turned to the spiritual development of the people and the role of Orthodoxy in the past of the country.

Vasily Klyuchevsky studied at the Penza parish school and the Penza seminary, but decided to devote himself to the secular science of history. He was attracted by the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University, which was the center of social and political life at the time in question. However, church education had a great influence on him. The historian himself admitted that the study of scholasticism developed in him the ability to think logically.

Years of study and first studies

Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich, whose brief biography is continued in this section, studied for four years at Moscow University. This time became decisive in the choice of his profession and research topics. He was greatly influenced by the lectures of the historian F. Buslaev. At the same time, the future scientist became very interested in folk culture, folklore, sayings, and proverbs.

Vasily Klyuchevsky decided to devote himself to the study of the foundations of folk life, as he expressed it. His first dissertation was devoted to a thorough study of the hagiographic literature. Before him, none of the domestic historians dealt with this topic in such detail. Another major study is devoted to the study of the composition of Vasily Klyuchevsky very carefully analyzed those social strata that were part of this advisory body under the Russian princes and tsars. His work opened up new approaches in historiography when studying the social structure of society. His methodology included a detailed analysis of all manifestations of the life and everyday life of the common people, which was especially important for Russia in the second half of the 19th century after the abolition of serfdom.

Works on history

Vasily Klyuchevsky, whose biography was briefly presented in the previous sections, is known as the author of the famous course of lectures that he gave over several decades. As an excellent speaker, he was excellent at literary language, which made his performances especially bright and expressive. Thanks to the apt and witty remarks and conclusions with which he accompanied his scientific reasoning, his lectures became especially popular. Vasily Klyuchevsky, whose history of Russia has become a real standard not only for his students, but also for many other domestic scientists, also became famous as a thoughtful observer of the life of the Russian people. Before him, researchers, as a rule, paid attention to political events and facts, therefore, without exaggeration, his work can be called a real breakthrough in historiography.

Scientist language

A feature of Klyuchevsky's vocabulary is the expressiveness, accuracy and brightness of statements. The researcher was able to very clearly express his thoughts on the most diverse problems of the present and the past. For example, he owns the following statement about the reforms of the first Russian emperor: "A lot of rubbish always remains from a large construction site, and a lot of good was lost in Peter's hasty work." The historian often resorted to such comparisons and metaphors, which, while distinguished by their wit, nevertheless conveyed his thoughts very well.

Interesting is his statement about Catherine II, whom he called "the last accident on the Russian throne." The scientist quite often resorted to such comparisons, which made it possible to better assimilate the material covered. Many expressions of Klyuchevsky have become a kind of sayings in Russian historiography. Often, his phrases are referred to in order to give expressiveness to reasoning. Many of his words have become aphorisms. For example, the saying "In Russia, the center is on the periphery" almost immediately went to the people: it can often be found in the press, at symposia, conferences.

Scientist about history and life

Klyuchevsky's thoughts are distinguished by their originality and originality. So, in his own way, he remade the famous Latin proverb that history teaches life: "History teaches nothing, but only punishes for ignorance of the lessons." Accuracy, clarity and brightness of the language brought the scientist not only all-Russian, but also world fame: many foreign researchers, studying the history of Russia, refer precisely to his works. Of interest are those aphorisms of the historian in which he expressed his attitude not only to history, but also to general philosophical problems in general: “Life is not about living, but about feeling that you are living”.

Some facts from the biography

In conclusion, several interesting moments from the life of this outstanding researcher should be outlined. The future researcher learned to read at the age of four and from early childhood showed an amazing ability to learn. At the same time, he struggled with stuttering and, as a result of great efforts, managed to overcome this vice and become a brilliant orator. He took part in the famous Peterhof conferences on the drafting of the Duma, and also ran as a deputy, but did not pass. So, Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich, whose biography and work became the subject of this study, is one of the leading Russian specialists in the study of Russian history.

Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky - Russian historian, professor at Moscow University, academician of the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, chairman of the Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities, Privy Councilor.

January 28 (January 16, O.S.) 1841 Vasily Klyuchevsky was born in the Penza province, p. Voznesenskoe, in the family of a priest. When their family after the death of his father moved to Penza, Vasily entered the parish school, and in 1856 - the city theological seminary, which he left after 4 years, not considering his spiritual career attractive. In 1861, despite financial difficulties, he moved to Moscow and became a student at Moscow University (Faculty of History and Philology), which he graduated in 1865. 1866 saw the light of his Ph.D. thesis "The Tale of Foreigners about the Moscow State."

In 1861, Klyuchevsky began teaching himself. In 1861-1881. he read general history at the Alexander military school. In 1871, at the Moscow Theological Academy, he was elected to the department of Russian history, which he was to occupy until 1906. From 1872 to 1888, he was listened to at the Moscow Higher Courses for Women. In 1872 he defended his master's thesis "Old Russian Lives of Saints as a Historical Source".

In 1879, Vasily Klyuchevsky was invited to teach a course in Russian history at Moscow University; in September of the same year, he became an assistant professor at this educational institution. 1882 became a special year in his biography: he became an extraordinary professor at Moscow University, and his doctoral dissertation "Boyar Duma of Ancient Rus" was published as a separate book, which later became very widely known and became the central work of the historian. In 1885 Vasily Osipovich became an ordinary professor, during 1887-1889. he is the dean of the Faculty of History and Philology and vice-rector.

In 1889, Klyuchevsky was included in the ranks of Corresponding Members of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in the category of historical and political sciences. In the same year, his “Short manual on Russian history” was published (the full course was published later, in 1904, and included 4 volumes). During the years 1893-1895. a student of the Russian history course performed by V.O. Klyuchevsky was the Grand Duke Georgy Alexandrovich - such an assignment to the teacher was given by Emperor Alexander III. In 1900 Vasily Osipovich was an ordinary academician of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in Russian history and antiquities (out of state). In 1905, the historian was officially instructed to take part in the work of the commission revising the laws on the press, as well as to participate in meetings devoted to the establishment of the State Duma and the definition of its powers. In April 1906 he was elected a member of the State Council from the Academy of Sciences of the University, but Klyuchevsky refused the proposed title, believing that participation in this body would not provide the due freedom in discussing state problems. In 1908 he was elected an honorary academician of the Academy of Sciences in the category of fine literature.

IN. Klyuchevsky very quickly gained fame as an outstanding, original lecturer, one of the most popular among his contemporaries. His lectures on the history of Russia were distinguished by the breadth of coverage of the most different factors and aspects of the historical process, relying on a large number of primary sources, for scientific analysis. All this was combined with a talent to attract and hold the audience's attention with a masterful, vivid, memorable presentation of information. Great style, distinguished by lectures, publicistic articles and scientific works of Klyuchevsky (they were published mainly by the journal "Russian Thought") allowed their author to take a worthy place in the history of literature.

Died V.O. Klyuchevsky on May 25 (May 12 O.S.) 1911 in Moscow. They buried him at the Donskoy cemetery.

IN. Klyuchevsky

"In the life of a scientist and writer, the main biographical facts are books, the most important events are thoughts." (V.O. Klyuchevsky)

Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky was born in the village of Voskresenskoye near Penza into the family of a poor parish priest who was the boy's first teacher, but who died tragically when Vasily was only 9 years old. The family moved to Penza, where they settled in a small house donated by one of the priest's friends.

First he graduated from the Penza Theological School, and then the Theological Seminary.

In 1861 he entered the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. His teachers were N.M. Leontiev, F.M. Buslaev, K.N. Pobedonostsev, B.N. Chicherin, S.M. Soloviev, whose lectures had a great influence on the young historian. "Soloviev gave the listener a surprisingly integral, harmonious thread, drawn through a chain of generalized facts, a glance at the course of Russian history, and it is known what a pleasure it is for a young mind, beginning a scientific study, to feel in possessing an integral glance at a scientific subject," Klyuchevsky wrote later.

Klyuchevsky Museum in Penza

Career

After graduating from the university, Klyuchevsky stays here to teach and begins work on ancient Russian saints, which became his master's thesis. Along the way, he writes several works on the history of the church and Russian religious thought: "The economic activities of the Solovetsky monastery", "Pskov disputes", "Promoting the church to the success of Russian civil order and law", "The significance of St. Sergius of Radonezh for the Russian people and state", "Western influence and schism in Russia XVII century ", etc.

Klyuchevsky devoted much effort to teaching: in 1871 he was elected to the department of Russian history at the Moscow Theological Academy, where he worked until 1906; then he began teaching at the Alexander Military School, as well as at the higher courses for women. His scientific and teaching career is growing rapidly: in September 1879 he was elected assistant professor of Moscow University, in 1882 - extraordinary, in 1885 - ordinary professor.

IN. Klyuchevsky

In 1893 - 1895 he taught a course in Russian history to Grand Duke Georgy Alexandrovich (son of Alexander III); taught at the School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture; in 1893 - 1905 he was chairman of the Society for History and Antiquities at Moscow University.

He was an academician and honorary academician of a number of scientific societies.

For Klyuchevsky, the fame of a brilliant lecturer was established, who knew how to grab the attention of the audience with the power of analysis, the gift of images, and deep erudition. He shone with wit, aphorisms, epigrams, which are still in demand today. His work has always caused controversy, in which he tried not to interfere. The themes of his works are extremely diverse: the situation of the peasantry, the Zemsky Sobors of Ancient Rus, the reforms of Ivan the Terrible ...

He was worried about the history of the spiritual life of Russian society and its outstanding representatives. This topic includes a number of articles and speeches of Klyuchevsky about S.M. Soloviev, Pushkin, Lermontov, N.I. Novikov, Fonvizin, Catherine II, Peter the Great. He published "A Brief Guide to Russian History", and in 1904 began publishing a complete course. In total, 4 volumes were published, brought to the time of Catherine II.

V. Klyuchevsky expounds a strictly subjective understanding of Russian history, eliminating review and criticism and not entering into polemics with anyone. He bases his course on facts not according to their actual significance in history, but according to their methodological significance.

"Course of Russian history"

The most famous scientific work of Klyuchevsky is "The Course of Russian History" in 5 parts. He worked on it for over 30 years, but only decided to publish it in the early 1900s. Klyuchevsky considers the colonization of Russia to be the main factor in Russian history; the main events unfold around the colonization: “The history of Russia is the history of the country that is being colonized. The area of ​​colonization in it expanded along with its state territory. Either falling, now rising, this age-old movement continues to this day. "

Klyuchevsky divided Russian history into four periods:

Period I - from about the 8th to the 13th century, when the Russian population was concentrated mainly on the middle and upper Dnieper with tributaries. Russia was then politically divided into separate cities, and foreign trade prevailed in the economy.

II period - XIII - mid-15th century, when the bulk of the people moved to the interfluve of the upper Volga and Oka. It is still a fragmented country, but into princely fiefdoms. The economy was based on free peasant agricultural labor.

Monument to Klyuchevsky in Penza

III period - from the middle of the 15th century. until the second decade of the 17th century, when the Russian population colonized the Don and Middle Volga chernozems; there was a state unification of Great Russia; the process of enslavement of the peasantry began in the economy.

IV period - until the middle of the 19th century. (later the course did not cover) - the time when “the Russian people spread throughout the plain from the seas

Baltic and White to Black, to the Caucasian ridge, the Caspian and the Urals ”. The Russian Empire was formed, the autocracy was based on the military-service class - the nobility. The processing factory industry joins the agricultural serf labor.

"In the life of a scientist and writer, the main biographical facts are books, the most important events are thoughts," Klyuchevsky wrote. The life of Klyuchevsky himself rarely goes beyond these events and facts. By conviction, he was moderate conservative, his political speeches are extremely few. But even if they were, they were always distinguished by the originality of thinking and were never to please someone. He only had his own position. For example, in 1894 he uttered the "Praise of Honor" to Alexander III, which aroused the outrage of the revolutionary students, and was wary of the 1905 revolution.

"Historical portraits" by V. Klyuchevsky

His "Historical portraits" include a number of biographies of famous people:

The first Kiev princes, Andrey Bogolyubsky, Ivan III, Ivan Nikitich Bersen-Beklemishev and Maxim the Greek, Ivan the Terrible, Tsar Fedor, Boris Godunov, False Dmitry I, Vasily Shuisky, False Dmitry II, Tsar Mikhail Romanov, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Peter the Great, Catherine I, Peter II , Anna Ioannovna, Elizabeth I, Peter III, Catherine II, Paul I, Alexander I, Nicholas I, Alexander II.
Creators of the Russian land
Kind people of Ancient Russia, Nestor and Sylvester, Sergiy Radonezhsky, Ivan Nikitich Bersen-Beklemishev and Maxim Grek, Nil Sorsky and Joseph Volotsky, K. Minin and D.M. Pozharsky, Patriarch Nikon, Simeon of Polotsk, A.L. Ordin-Nashchokin, Prince V.V. Golitsyn, Prince D.M. Golitsyn, N.I. Novikov,
MM. Speransky, A.S. Pushkin, the Decembrists, H.M. Karamzin, K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, S.M. Soloviev,
T.N. Granovsky.

Grave of Klyuchevsky in the Donskoy Monastery

Aphorisms of V. Klyuchevsky

• To be happy means not wanting what you can't get.
• A great idea in a bad environment is perverted into a series of absurdities.
• In science, lessons must be repeated in order to remember them well; in morality, mistakes must be well remembered so as not to repeat them.
• It is much easier to become a father than to remain one.
• The evil fool is angry with others for his own stupidity.
• Life teaches only those who study it.
• He who loves himself very much is not loved by others, because out of delicacy they do not want to be his rivals.
• He who laughs is not angry, because to laugh is to forgive.
• People live by idolatry before ideals, and when ideals are lacking, they idealize idols.
• People are looking for themselves everywhere, but not in themselves.
• There are people who can speak, but cannot say anything. These are windmills that flap their wings forever, but never fly.
• Thought without morality is thoughtlessness, morality without thought is fanaticism.
• One should not complain that there are few smart people, but thank God for the fact that they are.
• A man usually loves women whom he respects: a woman usually respects only the men whom she loves. Therefore, a man often loves women who are not worth loving, and a woman often respects men who are not worth respecting.
• Science is often confused with knowledge. This is a gross misunderstanding. Science is not only knowledge, but also consciousness, that is, the ability to use knowledge as it should.
• Young people are like butterflies: they fly into the light and fall on the fire.
• The past must be known not because it has passed, but because, when leaving, one did not skillfully remove its consequences.
• A thinking person should be afraid only of himself, because he should be the only and merciless judge of himself.
• The smartest thing in life is still death, for only it corrects all the mistakes and stupidity of life.
• A proud person is one who values ​​the opinion of others about himself more than his own. So, being proud means loving yourself more than others and respecting others more than yourself.
• The most faithful and almost the only way to become happy is to imagine yourself that way.
• Freedom of conscience usually means freedom from conscience.
• Strong passions often hide only a weak will.
• Proud people love power, ambitious people love influence, arrogant people seek both, thinking people despise both.
• A kind person is not one who knows how to do good, but one who does not know how to do evil.
• Friendship can do without love; love without friendship - no.
• The mind dies from contradictions, and the heart feeds on them.
• Character is power over oneself, talent is power over others.
• Christs rarely appear as comets, but Judas is not translated as mosquitoes.
• Man is the greatest brute in the world.
• In Russia there are no average talents, simple craftsmen, but there are lonely geniuses and millions of worthless people. Geniuses cannot do anything because they have no apprentices, and nothing can be done with millions because they have no masters. The former are useless because there are too few of them; the latter are helpless because there are too many of them.