Shcherbatov Mikhail Mikhailovich Russian history. Biography. What you need to know

The transformations of the innovator tsar proceeded on an unprecedented scale: industry (especially metallurgy), military and naval affairs developed rapidly; science, diplomacy. Russia strengthened its position "on all frontiers and fronts", moving from the old testamentary stagnation to the position of a powerful power, which from now on everyone in the world will have to take seriously.

All this required a huge influx of young, energetic and educated people. But these people - people of a new formation - still had to be trained. The old systems of education and upbringing were completely unsuitable for such large-scale tasks, and therefore it was necessary to come up with new schemes.

This is amazing, but in a very short time Peter the Great managed to find and “mobilize” a whole galaxy of brilliant teachers and mentors with the same open-minded views as his own. These innovators, in fact, became the founders of modern pedagogy.

Seven Pedagogical Facts That Shocked Russia

Fact 1. For the first time, a periodical press appeared in the country, in particular, the first newspaper Vedomosti was published, and a fairly massive publication of secular original and translated literature for those years was established. In order to make the printed word available to everyone, a civil alphabet was introduced.

And, perhaps most importantly and unheard of, control over education is shifting from church to state. This applies even to the later bishops' schools, where the ministers of the church were trained.

Fact 2. In 1698, the state opens the first "Russian" or garrison school in the Preobrazhensky Regiment. From now on, the children of the simplest soldiers and sailors get the opportunity to learn to read and write, count, and artillery. Since 1721, such schools have been established in each regiment. That is, in fact, every child of the “lower class” received good starting opportunities. Schools were called "Russian" because teaching there was conducted in Russian.

Fact 3. In 1701, an artillery and engineering school was opened in Moscow to train "Pushkar and other outside ranks of children." It was led by mathematician and astronomer Jacob Bruce. The school was divided into two levels: at the bottom they studied writing, reading and counting, and at the top they studied arithmetic, geometry, trigonometry, drawing, fortification and artillery.

In fact, it was the first real school in Europe, and - state and free, in which up to 500 people studied annually. Many more such schools were then created in Russia. For comparison: a similar institution opened in 1708 in Halle (Germany) was private and had only 12 listeners.

Fact 4. In 1707, a surgical school was opened in Moscow at a military hospital. There, for the first time in the history of Russia, they began to produce certified doctors. The course of disciplines included: anatomy, surgery, pharmacology, Latin and drawing. Education was conducted mainly in Latin, and theoretical training was combined with practice in the hospital.

It is difficult to overestimate this event for a country where before that the population was completely deprived of qualified medical care. By the way, at first future doctors were trained by foreigners, but very soon they were replaced by "domestic personnel".

Fact 5. At the beginning of the 18th century, the first state comprehensive schools. In 1714, a decree was sent throughout the empire on the opening of "digital schools", the task of which is to train qualified personnel for the state and military service. Children of all classes (with the exception of serfs) studied literacy, writing and arithmetic there, as well as the beginnings of the exact sciences.

In 1718, there were already 42 such schools. Not bad progress for a country in which until recently no one had heard of secular schools ... True, enrollment in "tsifirki" often went on a voluntary-compulsory basis: the required number of people who wanted to comprehend book wisdom was not always recruited .

Fact 6. In the 20s of the 18th century, a prototype of modern vocational schools was created. In 1721, the first mining school opened in the Urals under the guidance of the scientist and statesman V. N. Tatishchev. Children of impoverished nobles and simpler people were also accepted here.

Young men already working at a factory or in a mine could, if desired, acquire a good working specialty and become craftsmen, and they also received decent general education. Later, similar schools were opened at all Ural state factories.

Fact 7. For the viability of the education system, Peter I did a lot more necessary and relevant for his time: a reform of spiritual education was carried out, schools were opened for the training of clerical employees, cadet corps for children of the nobility, foreign boarding houses, etc., became widespread.

It is important. Of course, life in Russia has never been easy and cloudless for everyone, but thanks to the efforts of the reformer tsar and his like-minded people, children of all classes, except for serfs, got a real opportunity to secure a better future for themselves than their parents. It only required the ability and desire to learn. At the same time, in matters of education, Peter I was just as tough-tempered and intolerant as in many others.

A vivid example of this is the School of Mathematical and Navigational Sciences in Moscow. Future sailors, engineers and gunners were not only taught for free, but they were also paid “feed” money, that is, a scholarship, but a considerable fine threatened for absenteeism, and even for escaping the death penalty.

"Chicks of Petrov's nest" in education

Those people who created the new pedagogy of Russia had views very similar to the ideas of the French Enlightenment: they thought about educating and educating a free and happy citizen of their Fatherland, who serves the country and people, thanks to his conscious choice. Each of these teachers brought their own know-how to the education system.

Thus, Ivan Tikhonovich Pososhkov (1652-1726), the author of the pedagogical works "A Testament to a Father's Son" and "Books on Poverty and Wealth", sought to combine the ideas of a modern public school and the spiritual values of ancient Russian education.

He also created a very bold project for his time to open public schools for the peasantry. The talented self-taught thinker was convinced that it was impossible to enlighten the Russian people without universal literacy, and he insisted on creating a system of general education and vocational schools accessible to everyone.

Another associate of Peter - Leonid Filippovich Magnitsky (1669-1739) - made a real revolution in exact sciences. In 1703, he wrote the most popular textbook in Russia, Arithmetic, and was constantly developing his own original teaching methods. It was thanks to Magnitsky that mathematics in Russian schools was studied sequentially - from simple to complex, and theory was closely linked with practice, and mathematical calculations - with professional training.

In addition, it was Magnitsky who proposed to widely use in the learning process visual aids(layouts, tables, diagrams, etc.). The famous mathematician and theorist was also a practicing teacher - for a long time he taught at the School of Mathematical and Navigational Sciences in Moscow.

The head of the "scientific squad" of Peter I, Feofan Prokopovich (1681-1736), was a well-known church figure, which did not prevent him from becoming an active conductor of Peter's reforms in general and secular education in particular.

Feofan Prokopovich

He wrote a "Primer" for schools, and other urgently needed study guides, insisted on the scientific nature of education and the expansion of the number of subjects, did a lot to ensure that libraries in educational institutions became mandatory, and contributed to the widespread school theater. Feofan Prokopovich was also a prominent benefactor: at his own expense he opened private schools for orphans and poor children.

Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev (1686-1750) - scientist, teacher and statesman, was a bold reformer. He divided the sciences into necessary ones (housekeeping, morality, religion), useful ones (writing, languages, horseback riding) and harmful ones (divination, witchcraft, etc.).

In addition, it was Tatishchev who contributed to the formation of history as a science in Russia, becoming the author of the multi-volume "History of the Russian" and other works. Like other reformers of the "Peter's call", he was a very versatile person: it was on the initiative of Tatishchev that the first professional mining school was opened in 1721, and then a whole network of professional educational institutions arose.

The "scientific squad" of Peter the Great included many more gifted and bright people, thanks to whose initiative the realization of the most daring dream of the reformer tsar in the field of education became possible: in 1724, the Academy of Sciences was opened in St. new level.

The building of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences

The activities of the Academy are closely connected with the name of Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov (1711-1765), "Peter I from science", who honorably supported high standards, given by the Russian converter. Next time we will talk about what Lomonosov and his associates did for the further development of pedagogy, about their interaction with the authorities, about the reforms of Catherine II and about the opening of Moscow University.

July 22 this year 272 years have passed since the birth of one of the founders of Russian conservatism, a well-known statesman, historian, publicist and philosopher Mikhail Mikhailovich SHERBATOV

Shcherbatov Mikhail Mikhailovich (July 22, 1733, Moscow - December 12, 1790, Moscow) - a prominent statesman, historian, publicist and philosopher, was one of the most prominent representatives of the emerging Russian conservatism of the second half of the 18th century.

His most famous works were: the multi-volume "History of Russia from ancient times", "On the damage to morals in Russia", "Journey to the land of Ophir", "On Turkish war", "short story about impostors who were in Russia" and others. M.M. Shcherbatov received a good home education, knew history, philosophy, literature, medicine; collected by the end of his life a library of 15,000 volumes. Like all educated people of that time, he knew French, but in addition, he also mastered German, Italian and other languages. From 1767 until the end of his life, Shcherbatov was on public service. He was a deputy of the Legislative Commission from the Yaroslavl nobility (1767), a member of the Private Commission on the middle gender of people, a chamber junker; member of the Commission on Commerce (1770), chamberlain (1773); President of the Chamber College, Senator (1779).

In 1768 he received the position of historiographer and was appointed king of arms of the Senate. The political ideal for Shcherbatov was the English limited monarchy with the idea of separation of powers. He found a certain analogue of this ideal in pre-Petrine Russia, when, in his opinion, autocracy was limited in favor of such an aristocratic body as Boyar Duma. The assessment of the personality of Peter I in the works of Shcherbatov was ambiguous. In the essay "Review of the Vices and Autocracy of Peter the Great" (1782), he did not agree with the "detractors of the great monarch", who believed that what Peter had done could be done with fewer losses and more humane means, although for a longer period. According to Shcherbatov, without "foreign borrowings and the autocracy of Peter" Russia would have needed much more time to enlighten, and foreign policy opponents, meanwhile, could have conquered the country. In addition, the personal vices, rudeness and cruelty of the autocrat were due to the cruelty of the time. Peter "need forced to be a despot." In his work "On the Corruption of Morals in Russia," Shcherbatov criticized the massive abuses committed by the authorities: bribery, embezzlement, servility. The methods of Peter I, who promoted "ignorant people", were also criticized, which led to a state crisis. Shcherbatov tried to show both positive and negative sides of Peter's modernization. He wrote about the changes that were made in Russia by the reforms of Peter I, while paying attention not only to changes in the political or military fields, but also in the field of culture, noting that, thanks to Europeanization, "we are truly in humanity and in some other things , one might say, they had amazing successes and marched with gigantic steps to improve our appearance.

After the accession of Catherine II, Shcherbatov took part in the work of the Legislative Commission of 1767-1771. He spoke out for the abolition of the provision of the Table of Ranks and for the expansion of the rights of the Russian nobility. However, he was by no means a purely "noble" ideologue who cared, as some Soviet scholars tend to think, only about his "narrow estate interests." With regard to the ascribed peasants belonging to merchants and working in their factories, he considered it necessary, after rewriting, to leave in their places, but not to allow buying anymore. As for those peasants who were listed at the factories, he suggested "little by little try to make them free, giving freedom as a reward for good morals and for the best knowledge of art." Shcherbatov advocated the preservation of serfdom, arguing that the peasants, being uneducated, would not be able to dispose of the freedom granted to them. Shcherbatov believed that the problems associated with serfdom could be solved, but not by destroying it, but by changing the attitude towards the peasants on the part of the landowners.

Shortly before his death, Shcherbatov creates works that reflect his views on the state structure: "Different Discourses on Government" and "Reflections on Legislation in General". He distinguishes four forms of government: monarchical, despotic (or autocratic), aristocratic and democratic. Considering the monarchical method of government as the most acceptable, Shcherbatov notes that the ideal monarch is one who “considering himself the father of the people, does not try, rejecting laws, to introduce autocracy, does not share his interests with the interests of the state, knows the great art of choosing such people as advisers, who combine zeal for their sovereign with love for the fatherland and laws. However, most rulers, being subject to various "passions", cannot meet this characteristic. Aristocratic rule is not acceptable for Russia. The inability or unwillingness of people to suppress excessive ambition and selfishness in themselves, as well as the thirst for power, "gives rise to intrigues, parties, hatreds and other evils, which are not separated from these passions." Democratic government "devours its bowels, dividing into different parties, which are set on fire by various vague ones, like a ship on a rough sea - although it often avoids sinking by the skill of a helmsman, but more often it also dies sometimes at the very pier." Rejecting the autocratic method of government, Shcherbatov wrote that this "is torment, in which there are no other laws and other rules, except for the insane waywardness of a despot (self-ruler)". The views on Russian legislation presented in the second work were the result of practical work Shcherbatov in various public institutions. Since the creation of new laws requires a thorough study of the subject, then, Shcherbatov believes, the best way is, "that the laws were composed by a few honest people, reasonable, full of information, industrious and experienced in business." Comparing the laws for various forms government, Shcherbatov emphasizes the advantage of the monarchy, which, "having its own fundamental laws and preserving all established ones, ... preserves the life, honor, estate and tranquility of its citizens."

Ideas about state structure were developed in the utopia created by Shcherbatov "Journey to the land of Ophir by Mr. S ... a Swedish nobleman." The Ophir state is monarchical. It is based on "immutable laws" based on moral foundations. A citizen of this state "honours, firstly, virtue, and then - the law, and after - the king and nobles." All people of the state are divided into "natural" and "civilian". In addition to natural freedoms, a person has certain obligations in relation to society. The people in Ophir must honor and obey the laws; relations within society are built on the principles of respect for each other and, above all, for the monarch. At the same time, you need to remember about your own dignity: "Honor and love your sovereign, but so that your respect and love for him does not consist in vain servility and not in the hope of receiving a reward from him, but in the good that you expect from him to the whole society" . Society is divided into several hierarchical estates, and the life of each citizen is regulated. At the top of this pyramid is the king, who among the rest of the nobles is only "first among equals." Next - the middle landlords and merchants. The lowest class were the peasants. Although they are not free, the legislation of the utopian state prescribes to treat them humanly: "Do not be cruel to your servants; do not leave those who serve you without sufficient food and clothing; do not burden those living on your lands with excessive taxes and work, and do not offend them harsh punishments...

Shcherbatov's legacy today is increasingly attracting the attention of domestic and foreign researchers of Russian conservative thought, who devote books and articles to him, and his state activity has recently become the subject of the first special dissertation research.

Compositions:

On the damage to morals in Russia of Prince M. Shcherbatov and Journey of A. Radishchev. Facsimile edition. M., 1984.

Shcherbatov M.M., about him

1. Brikner A.G. Prince M.M. Shcherbatov as a member of the Big Commission // Historical Bulletin. 1881. No. 9;

2. Pypin A.N. Half-forgotten writer of the XVIII century // Bulletin of Europe. 1896. No. 11;

3. Fedosov I.A. From the history of Russian social thought of the XVIII century. MM. Shcherbatov. M., 1967;

4. Artemyeva T.V. Mikhail Shcherbatov. SPb., 1994;

5. Shansky D.N. What should the historian: M.M. Shcherbatov and I.N. Boltin // Historians of Russia. XVIII - early XX century. M., 1996;

6. Musikhin G.I. Traditionalism and reforms: comparative analysis views of M. Shcherbatov and Yu. MЈzer / / Research on conservatism. Reforms: political, socio-economic and law. Materials of the international scientific conference. Perm, 1997. Issue. 4;

7. Gavrilova L.M. Russian historical thought and medal art in the era of Catherine II. St. Petersburg, 2000;

8. Artemyeva T.V. New Atlantis by Mikhail Shcherbatov // Questions of Philosophy. 2000. No. 10;

9. Dmitrieva I.A., Shcherbatov Mikhail Mikhailovich // Historians of Russia. Biographies. M., ROSSPEN, 2001;

10. Kalinina S.G. Problems of reconstruction of the biography of Prince M.M. Shcherbatova // Archive of Russian history. 2002. Issue. 7;

11. Polskoy S.V. Philopatris and Fenelon (on the question of the origins political views Prince M.M. Shcherbatova) // Evolution of Conservatism: European Tradition and Russian Experience: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference. Samara, April 26-29, 2002. Samara, 2002;

12. Kalinina S.G. Development of M.M. Shcherbatov of the project of a school for the merchants // Cities of European Russia at the end of the 15th - the first half of XIX century. Materials of the international scientific-practical conference April 25-28, 2002. Tver-Kashin-Kalyazin. Tver, 2002;

13. Kalinina S.G. Unpublished documents about the work of M.M. Shcherbatov in the King of Arms Control // Genealogy in the Russian North: History and Modernity. Collection of articles of the international scientific conference dedicated to the 5th anniversary of the Arkhangelsk regional public organization "Northern Historical and Genealogical Society". Arkhangelsk. September 15-18, 2003. Arkhangelsk. 2003.

14. Kalinina S.G. State activity of M.M. Shcherbatova: ideas and practice. 1767 - 1790 // Dissertation for competition degree candidate of historical sciences. M., 2004.

http://www.pravaya.ru/ludi/450/4148

Service

Shcherbatov as a historian

Shcherbatov was a historian and publicist, economist and politician, philosopher and moralist, a man of truly encyclopedic knowledge. In "Russian History from Ancient Times" (brought to) he emphasized the role of the feudal aristocracy, reducing historical progress to the level of knowledge, science and the mind of individuals. At the same time, Shcherbatov's work is saturated with a large number of act, annalistic and other sources. Shcherbatov found and published some valuable monuments, including The Royal Book, The Chronicle of Many Revolts, The Journal of Peter the Great, etc. According to S. M. Solovyov, the shortcomings of Shcherbatov’s works were the result of began to study Russian history when he began to write it, ”and he was in a hurry to write it. Until his death, Shcherbatov continued to be interested in political, philosophical and economic issues, expounding his views in a number of articles.

He began to study Russian history under the influence of Miller, about which he himself speaks in the preface to Vol. I. "Russian History". Based on 12 lists taken from different monasteries, and 7 of his own, without any preliminary preparation, he set about compiling history. At the same time, Shcherbatov's intensified publishing activity began. He prints: in the city, according to the list of the patriarchal library, "The Royal Book"; in the city, at the behest of Catherine II - "The History of the Svean War", personally corrected by Peter the Great; in the city - "Chronicle of many rebellions"; in the city - "Royal Chronicler". His own history somewhat slowed down due to the need to add archival sources to chronicle sources, which had not been touched by anyone except Miller before him. In the city, he received permission to use the documents of the Moscow archive of a foreign collegium, where the spiritual and contractual letters of the princes were kept from the middle of the 13th century. and monuments of diplomatic relations from the last quarter of the 15th century.

Shcherbatov, during his lifetime, had to defend his work from general attacks, especially against Boltin. In the city, he published a “Letter to a friend, in justification for some hidden and obvious blasphemy committed by his story from Mr. Major General Boltin,” which provoked a response from Boltin and a rebuke, in turn, from Shcherbatov, which was published after his death, in Boltin pointed out a number of Shcherbatov’s mistakes: 1) in reading the chronicle, such as turning the “banner” into a “stack”, “walking along it” into “going to help”, etc. and 2) complete unfamiliarity Shcherbatov with historical ethnography and geography. Indeed, his history suffers greatly in this regard. Shcherbatov did not manage to navigate in ancient ethnography, but limited himself to retelling the news from French sources, and even then “only vaguely and randomly, according to his own statement, that it is impossible to compose any consequence of history from this.” But the fact is that this question was the most obscure, and only Schlozer managed to bring some light into it.

In processing the annals, Shcherbatov, despite the whole mass of blunders for which he was reproached, took a step forward compared to Tatishchev in two respects. Firstly, he introduced new and very important lists into scholarly use, such as the synodal list of the Novgorod Chronicle (XIII and XIV centuries), the Resurrection Code, etc. text and distinguishing his text from the text of sources to which he made exact references, although, as Bestuzhev-Ryumin notes, his way of quoting by number takes away the possibility of verification. Like the rest of our historians of the 18th century, Shcherbatov still does not fully distinguish between the source and its scientific processing and therefore prefers, for example, Synopsis to chronicles. The choice of data is beyond Shcherbatov's strength; obediently following the sources, he clutters up his work with trifles. Shcherbatov brought a lot of good things to Russian history by processing and publishing acts. Thanks to his history and Novikov's Vivliofika, science has mastered sources of paramount importance, such as spiritual, contractual letters of princes, monuments of diplomatic relations and article lists of embassies; there was, so to speak, the emancipation of history from the annals, and the possibility of studying a later period of history, where the testimony of the annals becomes scarce or completely stops, was indicated. Finally, Miller and Shcherbatov published, and partly prepared for publication, a lot of archival material, especially from the time of Peter the Great. Shch's material obtained from the annals and acts connects pragmatically, but his pragmatism is of a special kind - rationalistic or rationalistic-individualistic: the creator of history is the individual. The course of events is explained by the influence of the hero on the will of the mass or individual, and the hero is guided by the selfish motives of his nature, the same for all people in different eras, and the mass obeys him out of stupidity or superstition, etc. So, for example, Shcherbatov does not try to discard the chronicle story about the courtship of the Byzantine emperor (already married) - to 70-year-old Olga, but gives him his explanation: the emperor wanted to marry Olga in order to conclude an alliance with Russia. He explains the conquest of Russia by the Mongols by the excessive piety of the Russians, which killed the former warlike spirit. In accordance with his rationalism, Sch. does not recognize the possibility of the miraculous in history and treats religion coldly. From a look at the nature of the beginning of Russian history and its general course. Shcherbatov stands closest to Schlozer. He sees the goal of compiling his history in a better acquaintance with contemporary Russia, that is, he looks at history from a practical point of view, although in another place, based on Hume, he reaches the modern view of history as a science striving to discover the laws that govern the life of mankind. Among his contemporaries, the story of Shcherbatov was not successful: it was considered uninteresting and incorrect, and Shcherbatov himself was considered devoid of historical talent (Emperor Catherine II).

Shcherbatov as a publicist

In the 70s. Shcherbatov wrote a number of journalistic articles and notes, and in the late 80s. essay "On the damage to morals in Russia", where he sharply criticized the policy of the government and the morals of the court environment. V wrote the utopian novel Journey to the Land of Ophir, in which he outlined his ideal of a state, essentially a policeman based on the nobility, prospering at the expense of the labor of forced slaves.

Shcherbatov is interesting mainly as a staunch defender of the nobility. His political and social views are not far removed from that era. Of his numerous articles - “A Conversation about the Immortality of the Soul”, “Consideration of Human Life”, “On the Benefits of a Shortcoming”, etc. - his utopia is of particular interest - “Journey to the Land of Ophir, Mr. S., a Swedish nobleman” (not completed ). The ideal Ophir state is ruled by a sovereign whose power is limited to the highest nobility. The rest of the classes, even the ordinary nobility, have no access to higher power. Shcherbatov does not know the need for every citizen to take part in the government, to ensure personal freedom. The first estate is the nobility, entry into which is prohibited. It alone has the right to own inhabited lands; it is even recommended (in an article on the famine in 1787) to give all the land to the nobles.

He recommends organizing military service according to the type of military settlements, which was later done in Russia and suffered a complete fiasco. The rationality of the century left a strong imprint on him. His views on the religion of officers are especially characteristic: religion, like education, should be strictly utilitarian, serve to protect order, peace and tranquility, which is why police officers are priests. In other words, Shcherbatov does not recognize the Christian religion of love, although this does not prevent him in his article “On the Corruption of Morals in Russia” from attacking rationalist philosophy and Catherine II as her representative in Russia. The extent to which Shcherbatov himself was imbued with rationalism, however, is evident from his opinion that it is possible to re-create the state in a very short time and establish an unshakable order for millennia, in which only some amendments will be needed.

Notes

Literature

Ikonnikov V.S., "The experience of Russian historiography"
Ikonnikov V.S., “The answer of Major General Boltin to the letter of Prince. Shcherbatov. - St. Petersburg, 1789.
Solovyov S. M., "Criticism of notes on the History of Shcherbatov." - St. Petersburg, 1793-1794.
Solovyov S. M., "Archive" (vol. II, floor 2)
Solovyov S. M., " Current state Russian history as a science” // Moscow Review. - 1859. - No. 1.
Bestuzhev-Ryumin, "Russian History", vol. I. - St. Petersburg, 1872.
Myakotin V. A. Noble publicist of the Catherine era // "Russian wealth". - 1898.
Chechulin N. D. Russian social novel of the 18th century.
Fedosov I. A. From the history of Russian social thought of the XVIII century: M. M. Shcherbatov. - M., 1967.
Artemyeva T.V. Mikhail Shcherbatov. - St. Petersburg. : St. Petersburg State University, 1994. - 92 p. - (Thinkers of Russia). - ISBN 5-288-01163-X
Milyukov P. N. The main currents of Russian historical thought / P. Milyukov; State. publ. ist. library of Russia. - M .: GPIB, 2006. - 400 p. - 500 copies. - ISBN 5-85209-166-9(in translation) (1st ed. - M., 1898)