Tyutchev is a poet and diplomat, a fighter against Russophobia. Was the famous Russian poet F.I. Tyutchev as a diplomat? How many years did Tyutchev spend in diplomatic work

The diplomatic career of F.I. Tyutcheva had a long and thorny path. In February 1822, Fyodor Ivanovich was admitted to the State Collegium of Foreign Affairs as a provincial secretary. Alexander Ivanovich Osterman-Tolstoy recommended F.I. Tyutchev as a supernumerary official at the Russian embassy in Bavaria. Count Vorontsov-Dashkov wrote that a new attache had come to him and, despite the small amount of work, the count would try to make the young Mr. Tyutchev usefully spend his time.

It is worth noting that at the beginning of the 1920s, Bavaria was not of great importance in international political life, so the Munich mission did not have much work to do. Its main function was informational. At first, Fyodor Ivanovich wrote various diplomatic papers from dictation, then he himself composed dispatches of a more serious content. Three years later F.I. Tyutchev was promoted to chamber junker. This position implied a certain status in the highest society, but it did not play any role for career growth. Increasing F.I. Tyutchev's service took place already under the new after - I. A. Potemkin. The time of serving under the count was for F.I. Tyutchev the most fruitful and successful.

Young Fyodor Ivanovich and Count Potemkin liked to discuss issues of Russian and European politics, as well as possible tasks facing the Russian representation in Bavaria. Friendly relations developed between the leader and the subordinate. F.I. Tyutchev always knew how to find contact with people, his sharp and lively mind attracted and could not leave indifferent. This is what helped Fyodor Ivanovich move up the career ladder of a diplomat. Later I.A. Potemkin recommended F.I. Tyutchev for the post of second secretary in the mission.

Fedor Ivanovich himself, in letters to his family, admitted that the service was not easy for him. The poet approached official duties from a slightly different angle than required. Perhaps that is why F.I. Tyutchev did not achieve any high position in diplomacy. The post of second secretary was not highly valued, the salary was small. Further increase F.I. Tyutchev was somewhat delayed, and only in the summer of 1833 Fyodor Ivanovich received the rank of collegiate assessor. Such a slow career growth can be explained by the fact that places in embassies were rarely vacated and were strictly limited. After the change of leadership, Fedor Ivanovich's affairs went worse. In place of I.A. Potemkin is appointed by G.I. Gagarin, a strict and reserved person. Despite a serious business trip to Greece, F.I. Tyutchev was practically suspended from service for two years. The new ambassador was alien to the character and manner of work of Fyodor Ivanovich. His arrogance and simplicity strained G.I. Gagarin. Grigory Ivanovich, unlike I.A. Potemkin was less talkative and friendly. He was never very sociable and always took his work seriously. All sorts of jokes and banter made him angry.

Despite tense relations with the ambassador, it was during this period that F.I. Tyutchev was assigned an important assignment - negotiations with the government of the new Greek kingdom. To date, we know little about the negotiation procedure, but the dispatch compiled by Tyutchev shows the attitude of the poet himself to diplomacy and its mechanisms. The document was written in an ironic form, very sharply reflecting the situation between the countries. Instead of official terms F.I. Tyutchev uses various epithets and metaphors. It is in this document that one can trace the special form of presentation of F.I. Tyutchev. The dispatch did not include a dry set of scientific terms, at the same time it objectively reflected the situation. For example, Fyodor Ivanovich called Greece "the chosen baby", and King Otto "an evil fairy", which had a detrimental effect on the young monarchy. In a very peculiar form of presentation, F.I. Tyutchev quite clearly expressed his idea that the Greek Ministry should be moved from Nauplia to Munich, as this would reduce the British influence on Greece. Unfortunately, the dispatch was not destined to go to St. Petersburg, because G.I. For Gagarin, this form of presentation seemed frivolous and did not carry any deep meaning.

Fedor Ivanovich understood that his activities practically did not bear fruit. His career growth was extremely slow and stopped almost at the very beginning. From supernumerary attache F.I. Tyutchev was recommended as second secretary. In this position, he remained until the end of his service in Munich. Before his eyes, colleagues, on the contrary, constantly received promotions, new appointments and promotions. Despite the fact that things were getting worse, F.I. Tyutchev could not yet afford to move to Russia. He believed that in St. Petersburg he would not be able to find a worthy occupation that would be appreciated. And without the ability to feed themselves and provide livelihood F.I. Tyutchev did not dare to return to his homeland.

The situation was aggravated by an event in the personal life of F.I. Tyutchev. Fedor Ivanovich began an affair with Ernestina Dernberg. Soon the whole secular society learned about his intrigue. This is what worsened the position of F.I. Tyutchev in diplomacy. Due to the fact that this scandal was a dark stain on the Ministry, Gagarin wrote a letter to St. Petersburg asking for the transfer of Mr. Tyutchev from Munich. Already in the spring of 1836, Fedor Ivanovich left with his family for Russia. The poet was only 33 years old and there was still much ahead of him, but the diplomatic service in Bavaria ended for him forever. F. I. Tyutchev never managed to build a brilliant career in Germany.

At the end of September 1844, F.I. Tyutchev returned to Petersburg with his wife and two children from his second marriage. Half a year later, the poet was returned the title of chamberlain. Fedor Ivanovich spent a total of 22 years abroad. During this time, he only visited his homeland a few times for a fairly short period of time. The diplomatic career of F.I. Tyutchev did not develop quite successfully and not as quickly as the poet would like. For his diplomatic activity, F.I. Tyutchev acquired the necessary contacts, which further helped him in his journalistic activities. Fedor Ivanovich always conscientiously carried out the instructions of his superiors. His poetic mind and love for freedom of action prevented him from becoming a great diplomat. F. I. Tyutchev has always been sincerely interested in diplomacy and Russia's relations with other countries, and this is what he devoted his journalistic articles to. In painful moments, F.I. Tyutchev was worried about the fate of his homeland and tried to help her in every possible way.

"I love the storm in early May,
when the first spring thunder,
As if frolicking and playing,
Rumbles in the blue sky."

But the contemporaries of Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev knew him mainly as talented diplomat, publicist and witty man, whose witty aphorisms were passed from mouth to mouth.

For example: "Any attempts at political speeches in Russia are tantamount to efforts to carve fire from a bar of soap."

In February 1822, eighteen-year-old Fyodor Tyutchev was enrolled in the State Collegium of Foreign Affairs with the rank of provincial secretary. After taking a closer look at him, Alexander Ivanovich Osterman-Tolstoy recommended him for the position of a supernumerary official of the Russian embassy in Bavaria and, since he was going abroad, he decided to take Fyodor to Munich in his carriage.

Fyodor Tyutchev arrived in Germany at the end of June 1822 and lived here for a total of about two decades. In Bavaria, he met many figures of German culture of that time, primarily Friedrich Schiller and Heinrich Heine.

In 1838, as part of the Russian diplomatic mission, Fedor Ivanovich leaves for Turin.

Later, in a letter to Vyazemsky, Tyutchev notes: “A very great inconvenience of our position lies in the fact that we are forced to call Europe something that should never have any other name than its own: Civilization. This is where lies for us the source of endless delusions and inevitable This is what distorts our concepts ... However, I am more and more convinced that everything that could do and could give us a peaceful imitation of Europe - we have already received all this. True, this is very little.

By 1829, Tyutchev had matured as a diplomat and tried to carry out his own diplomatic project. In that year, Greece received autonomy, which led to an intensification of the struggle between Russia and England for influence over it. Tyutchev later wrote:

For a long time on European soil,
Where lies so luxuriantly grew
Long ago the science of the Pharisees
A double truth has been created.

Since in the newly emerging Greek state there were constant clashes of various forces, it was decided to invite the king from a "neutral" country. Otton, the very young son of the Bavarian king, was chosen for this role.

One of the ideologists of this way of restoring Greek statehood was the rector of the University of Munich, Friedrich Thiersch. Tyutchev and Thiersch jointly developed a plan according to which the new kingdom was to be under the auspices of Russia, which did much more than anyone else to liberate Greece.

However, the policy pursued by Foreign Minister Nesselrode led to the fact that Otto became, in fact, an English puppet. In May 1850 Tyutchev wrote:

No, my dwarf! coward unparalleled!
You, no matter how tight, no matter how cowardly,
With your unbelieving soul
Don't tempt Holy Russia...

And ten years later, Fyodor Ivanovich bitterly remarks: “Look with what reckless haste we are trying to reconcile the powers that can come to an agreement only in order to turn against us. And why such an oversight? Because we still have not learned to distinguish our "I" from our "not me".

No matter how you bend before her, gentlemen,
You will not win recognition from Europe:
In her eyes you will always be
Not servants of enlightenment, but serfs.

For a long time, Tyutchev's diplomatic career was not entirely successful. On June 30, 1841, under the pretext of a long "non-arrival from vacation", he was dismissed from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and deprived of the rank of chamberlain. The pretext was purely formal, but the real reason was Tyutchev's divergence in views on European politics with the leadership of the ministry, says Victoria Khevrolina, Doctor of Historical Sciences.

Fedor Ivanovich will write about this later: “Great crises, great punishments usually do not occur when lawlessness is brought to the limit, when it reigns and governs fully armed with strength and shamelessness. No, the explosion breaks out for the most part at the first timid attempt to return to good, at the first sincere, perhaps, but hesitant and timid encroachment towards the necessary correction.

After his dismissal from the post of senior secretary of the Russian mission in Turin, Tyutchev continued to remain in Munich for several more years.

At the end of September 1844, having lived abroad for about 22 years, Tyutchev with his wife and two children from his second marriage moved from Munich to St. Petersburg, and six months later he was again enrolled in the department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; at the same time, the title of chamberlain was returned to the poet, recalls Victoria Khevrolina.

He managed to become the closest associate and chief adviser to Russian Foreign Minister Gorchakov. From the very beginning of Gorchakov's entry into this position in 1856, he invited Tyutchev to his place. Many historians believe that the main diplomatic decisions that Gorchakov made were prompted to one degree or another by Tyutchev.

Including the famous diplomatic victory after the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War in 1856. Then, according to the Paris Peace Treaty, Russia was severely curtailed in the rights in the Crimea, and Gorchakov managed to restore the status quo, and with this he went down in history, says Doctor of Historical Sciences Victoria Khevrolina.

Tyutchev, who had lived in Western Europe for many years, of course, could not help thinking about the fate of Russia and its relations with the West. Wrote several articles about this, worked on the treatise "Russia and the West". He highly appreciated the successes of Western civilization, but did not believe that Russia could follow this path. Putting forward the idea of moral sense history, morality of power, criticized Western individualism. The Soviet poet Yakov Helemsky writes about Tyutchev:

And in life there were Munich and Paris,
Venerable Schelling, unforgettable Heine.
But everything attracted to Umyslichi and Vshchizh,
Desna always imagined on the Rhine.

A colleague in the diplomatic service, Prince Ivan Gagarin, wrote: "Wealth, honors and glory had little attraction for him. The biggest, deepest pleasure for him was to be present at the spectacle that is unfolding in the world, with unflagging curiosity to follow all its changes."

Tyutchev himself, in a letter to Vyazemsky, noted: “There are, I know, among us people who say that there is nothing in us that would be worth knowing, but in this case the only thing that should be done is to cease to exist, and meanwhile I don't think anyone is of that opinion..."

From the book of V.V. Pokhlebkin Foreign policy of Russia, Russia and the USSR for 1000 years in names, dates, facts. Issue 1”.

Released in the series "Russian Way" another volume dedicated to the outstanding Russian poet, philosopher, diplomat, and patriot of Russia F.I. Tyutchev. The main value of this publication is that here, for the first time, an attempt was made to systematize all critical literature about the poet

Tyutchev: poet, diplomat, philosopher, citizen

F.I. Tyutchev: pro et contra Comp., intro. article and comment. K.G. Isupov. - St. Petersburg: RKhGI, 2005. - 1038s. - Russian way.

Released in the series "Russian Way" another volume dedicated to the outstanding Russian poet, political philosopher, diplomat, citizen and patriot of Russia F.I. Tyutchev (1803-1873), in many ways completes the numerous publications dedicated to the 200th anniversary of his birth. Among the publications of this period, we can single out the complete academic collection of works in 6 volumes, as well as the publication of Poems (Progress-Pleyada, 2004), which was recently released on the eve of the 200th anniversary of F. I. Tyutchev. to understand the significance of the Russian poet, which he really had for both Russian and world culture.

The main value of this publication lies in the fact that here, for the first time, an attempt was made to systematize all critical literature about the poet, to present Tyutchev's ideas in the most complete way: as a romantic poet, philosopher, publicist, diplomat, public figure. This topic was devoted to a large number of works presented in the publication. Some texts, such as the article by I.S. Aksakov "F.I. Tyutchev and his article" The Roman Question and the Papacy "and some others, previously inaccessible to researchers, are presented in this edition. The works of I.S. Aksakov" F.I. Tyutchev and his article "The Roman Question and the Papacy", L.I. Lvova, G.V. Florovsky, D.I. Chizhevsky, L.P. Grossman, V.V. Weidle, B.K. Zaitseva, B.A. Filippova, M. Roslavleva, B.N. Tarasov showing Tyutchev, not only as a poet, but also as an original philosopher, diplomat, publicist and public figure.

At the end of the publication, the most complete bibliography, research literature is presented, which allows the researcher F.I. Tyutchev to fully explore his heritage and more fully present it in the cultural and social life of Russia in the 19th century.

In the introductory article, much attention is paid to the topic "Tyutchev, romanticism, politics, the aesthetics of history." The author of the introductory article K.G. Isupov rightly notes: “Romanticism creates a philosophy and aesthetics of history that is tragic in its main parameters. It is based on three postulates: 1) history is part of nature (...); 2) history is a completely empirical, but providential performance, a Divine mystery ("history is the mystery of the Divine Kingdom that has become apparent"); 3) history is art ("the historical is ... a certain kind of symbolic" "(the thoughts of the German romantic philosopher F.W. Schelling, a follower, especially in his youth, was F .I. Tyutchev).

The personality in Tyutchev's world is called upon to fully embody the idea of ​​the metaphysical unity of space and history. History, for the Russian poet, is the self-knowledge of nature, bringing eventfulness and teleology into the life of the cosmos. In the world of history and in space, Tyutchev found common features: both are subject to catastrophes, both are spectacular, here and there evil reigns in all the splendor of necrotic aggression.

Tyutchev's mythology "history as a theater of symbols" is deeper than Schelling's. In history itself, the Russian poet rightly believes, there has not yet been a situation when the idea of ​​a world performance would have found an adequate performer. Applicants for this role - the emperors of Rome, Charlemagne, Napoleon, Nicholas I - cannot withstand Tyutchev's criticism. The reason for this discrepancy between direction and execution is of an ontological order: Lies reign in the world. "Lies, evil lies corrupted all minds, And the whole world became an incarnate lie." In Fyodor Ivanovich, the antitheses of truth and falsehood, wisdom and cunning are connected with Russia on the left side, and with the West on the right side. From his point of view, the Western world chooses adventurism as a type of behavior and develops false (“cunning”) forms of statehood: “You don’t know what is more flattering for the cunning of the people: / Or the Babylonian pillar of German unity, Or the French outrage The republican cunning system.”

On the whole, Tyutchev's political ideas are in many respects unique even for Russian thought of the 19th century. It is far from the soil catastrophism of P.Ya. Chaadaev, and from the open Russophilia of the brothers Aksakov and Kireevsky and M.P. Pogodin. In Tyutchev's philosophy of history, as the author of the introductory article rightly believes, two ideas that are difficult to combine with each other are combined: 1) the past of the West is burdened with historical mistakes, and the past of Russia is burdened with historical guilt; 2) the upheavals that Tyutchev's modernity is experiencing create a situation of historical catharsis in which Russia and the West, at new heights of self-knowledge, are able to enter into a consistent unity.

Here it is necessary to clarify that many of Tyutchev's works are saturated with contrasting contexts of such concepts as Russia, Europe, West, East, North, South, etc. The geopolitical content of these words, as well as the semantics of the names of world cities, have at least two sides for Tyutchev: Petersburg can be thought of by him as "East" in relation to Western Europe, but as "Europe" in relation to Constantinople; Rome in direct and figuratively will be the "East" for Paris (exactly like N.V. Gogol in the essay "Rome" (1842)), but the "West" for Moscow; the semantic orbit of "Moscow" will also include the names of the Slavic capitals; Russia and Poland turned out to be closer to "Kiev and Constantinople" than to Moscow and St. Petersburg.

From this point of view, Tyutchev, not without irony, treated the fierce dispute between the supporters of St. Petersburg and Muscovites and did not contrast the two Russian capitals as sharply as did the Slavophiles, N.M. languages.

On the one hand, he was a tireless propagandist of Slavic unity, the author of popular "at the court of two emperors" monarchist projects for solving the Eastern question, on the other hand, a man of Western culture, having two wives of German aristocratic surnames. On the one hand, the defender from censorship persecution of his father-in-law and Slavophile I.S. Aksakov, and on the other: "Where is your, Holy Russia, worldly progress doubtful to me." On the one hand, he is a deeply Orthodox publicist, and on the other, he writes the following lines: "I love worship as Lutherans." On the one hand, a Western European in spirit and time, on the other hand, an accuser of the papacy.

In addition, equally loving Moscow, Munich, St. Petersburg, Venice, he also loved Kyiv, considering this city a "spring of history", where he believes there is an "arena" of a "great future" predetermined by Russia (which is fully confirmed by the US policy to create hostile outpost (Ukraine) directed against Russia). In essence, a rather strange aberration is taking place: Tyutchev is trying to see Russia in the West and vice versa.

Thus, the plan of history, for all its providential opacity, is based in Fyodor Ivanovich on the Good. But, being transubstantiated in the actions of people, it fatally turns into evil for them. In one place he writes the following: "In the history of human societies there is a fatal law ... Great crises, great punishments usually do not come when lawlessness is brought to the limit, when it reigns, rules in the full armor of evil and shamelessness. No, the explosion breaks out on for the most part at the first attempt to return to goodness, at the first sincere ... encroachment towards the necessary correction. Then Louis the sixteenth are paying for the Louis fifteenth and Louis the fourteenth "(if we turn to Russian history, then Nicholas II answered for the" Europeanization "of Peter I ).

Tyutchev understands the whole world history in the romantic categories of Fate, revenge, damnation, sin, guilt, redemption and salvation, i.e. characteristic of the Christian worldview. Particularly interesting in this regard is Tyutchev's attitude to the papacy and specifically to the pope. Tyutchev brought down all the energy of the publicist on the dogma of the infallibility of the pope, proclaimed by the Vatican Council on July 18, 1870. In Tyutchev's poetry and prose, the Roman theme is painted in the tone of reproof. From Rome, sleeping in historical self-forgetfulness, the capital of Italy turns into a source of all-European sinfulness, into a "foolish Rome", triumphing over its wrongful independence in "sinful infallibility". The "new God-man" acquires from Tyutchev, who loves unexpected comparisons, a barbaric Asian nickname: "the Vatican Dalai Lama." Thus, in the light of Italian history as "the eternal struggle of the Italian against the barbarian," Pope Pius IX turns out to be "east" of the "East" itself.

Tyutchev is constantly waiting for a "political performance." So, bored in Turin in 1837, he will say that his existence "is devoid of any entertainment and seems to me a bad performance." "Providence," he says elsewhere, "acting like a great artist, tells us here one of the most amazing theatrical effects."

Strictly speaking, the attitude to the world as a game is not a new thing and is characteristic not only of Tyutchev (it has a long philosophical tradition starting with Heraclitus and Plato). Tyutchev, on the basis of the philosophy of German romantics, transforms it into an image of total hypocrisy. Here, for him, the very philosophy of history becomes the philosophy of a sacrificial choice between a lesser evil and a greater evil. In this context, Tyutchev comprehended the fate of Russia and the prospect of the Slavs.

According to Tyutchev, Europe makes its way from Christ to Antichrist. His results: Pope, Bismarck, the Paris Commune. But when Tyutchev calls the pope "innocent", Bismarck - the embodiment of the spirit of the nation, and in February 1854 writes the following: "Red will save us", he seems to cross out all the catastrophic contexts of his philosophy of history and turns it into the author's "dialectics of history". Such poems as "December 14, 1825" are built on the dialectical opposition of the historical process. (1826) and "Two Voices" (1850). They seem to assert the right to historical initiative in spite of the fatal irreversibility of the course of history.

Tyutchev believes that Russian history and forms of national statehood are in tragic contradiction with the forms of national-historical self-knowledge. “The first condition for any progress,” he said to P.A. Vyazemsky, “is self-knowledge.” Hence the consequences of the gap between the post-Petrine past and the present. This is how, for example, the Sevastopol catastrophe is explained: the emperor's mistake "was only a fatal consequence of the completely false direction given long before him to the fate of Russia." False ideology is generated by false power and mystifies life as such. In a letter to A.D. Bludova, he wrote the following: "... Power in Russia - such as it was formed by its own past with its complete break with the country and its historical past - (...) this power does not recognize and does not allow any other right than its own (. ..) The authorities in Russia are in fact godless (...)".

Further, in thinking about Russia as a "civilization" (its carrier is the pro-European "public", i.e. not a genuine people, but a fake for it), it is not "culture" that is opposed, but real (i.e. folk history): "The kind of civilization that was instilled in this unfortunate country fatally led to two consequences: the perversion of instincts and the dulling or destruction of reason. This applies only to the scum of Russian society, which fancies itself a civilization, to the public, - for the life of the people, the life historical has not yet woken up among the masses of the population. What an educated society considers culture in Russia is in fact its entropic werewolf - civilization, moreover, secondary-imitative (as in K. Leontiev). They were directly told about this in a letter to P.A. Vyazemsky: "... We are forced to call Europe something that should never have any other name than its own: Civilization is what distorts our concepts. I am more and more convinced that everything that could do and could give the world imitation of Europe - we have already received all this. However, it is very little. It did not break the ice, but only covered it with a layer of moss, which imitates vegetation quite well. "

You better not say. We are still in the position that Tyutchev so brilliantly described (even worse, because every year we degenerate and collapse).

This edition is important point in the process of collecting all the material about Tyutchev. Unfortunately, only the first collection was published, I would like the compilers to wish to publish another volume, with other texts about Tyutchev and his role in Russian culture. We hope that this publication will give the necessary impetus to further work, in a previously forgotten work, on the reconstruction of a more complete scientific apparatus about such a wonderful person and citizen of Russia as F.I. Tyutchev.

http://www.pravaya.ru/idea/20/9900

Isn't it too early to start teaching children the poetry of Fyodor Tyutchev? And is it possible to teach it? And what remains in our memory after this inoculation in primary school, except:
"I love the storm in early May,
When the first spring thunder…”,
and not every one of us returns after it to his poetry.
But I do not want to talk about poetry today, but about diplomacy, history, philosophy - phenomena so interconnected that it seems impossible to determine the exact boundaries separating one from the other.
Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev was a Russian diplomat. Since 1822, he began his service in Munich "over the staff", six years later he became the junior secretary of the diplomatic mission, and served under the command of Count I.A. Potemkin, who appreciated his outstanding abilities. They discussed issues of Russian and European politics, and this was of primary interest to the young Tyutchev in his diplomatic activities. A friendly affection arose between the boss and the subordinate, and when the ambassador was transferred from Bavaria, Tyutchev said, apparently with a bitter joke: “It is a sin for the Vice-Chancellor to separate two hearts, as if they were made for each other.”
In the spring of 1836, Tyutchev and his family returned to Russia. The title of chamber junker and belonging to the diplomatic corps, aristocratic connections, and most importantly - the mind attracted high society to him.
Tyutchev treats his poetic work carelessly - he often loses what he has written, probably underestimating it. Politics interests him more. Enriched with world historical experience, he makes his assessment of events in Russia against the backdrop of world history.
Since 1844 Tyutchev serves in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and lives in St. Petersburg, since 1858. he is chairman of the Foreign Censorship Committee. In society, his favorite topic of conversation (or it is connected with interest in his opinion) is foreign policy. Tyutchev clearly influences the minds of high Russian society. He brings his opinions to Alexander II, writes the political and philosophical treatise "Russia and the West", which, unfortunately, remains unfinished.
Speaking for the Christian humility of his people, at the same time he wrote about his readiness for offensive activity. His political ideas testify to his anxiety about the fate of his homeland. However, he was spiritually connected with European culture and contemporary philosophy. The subject of European thought was also his subject. He saw Europe as freer than Russia.
Shortly before his death, he wrote about the "deification" of the individual:
“All this is the human will, elevated into something absolute and dominant, into a higher and unconditional law. This is how it manifests itself in political parties, for which their personal interest and the successful fulfillment of their plans are above all other considerations. Thus, it begins to manifest itself in the policy of the government, in this policy of extremes, which, in pursuing its goals, does not stop at any obstacles, does not spare anyone and does not neglect any means to achieve its goals ... Only when they are fully convinced of the presence of this element, it will be possible to more precisely determine the consequences ... These consequences can be incalculable for the whole world ... It can lead Europe to a state of barbarism unprecedented in world history, allowing all other enslavement.

Reviews

A strange thing - life! .. Turgenev, Fet, Dostoevsky considered Tyutchev one of the greatest peaks of Russian poetry, Leo Tolstoy put him even higher than Pushkin, and in my whole life I met only one person who appreciated him; and he, or rather, she, taught me to appreciate the poet! .. And they “know” Tyutchev something like this: somehow the fans of our famous “bards”, who part-time strummed on guitars, somehow defeated me, I blurted out to get rid of: "Actually, my favorite poet is Tyutchev! .." Eyes popped out at me, looked at each other and asked: "And in which group does he sing !?" That's how he is known in Great Russia ...
I was glad to meet the SECOND person who appreciates Fedor Ivanovich, I wish him all the best and success in life!
Best regards - Nicola

Andrew Ranchin. Fedor Tyutchev: public service of a poet, publicist and historiosophist // STATE SERVICE,

2014, №4 (90)

Andrey Ranchin, Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Moscow state university them. M.V. Lomonosov and the International Institute of Public Administration and Management of the Russian Academy National economy and public service under the President of the Russian Federation (119991, Moscow, Leninskiye Gory, 1; 119571, Moscow, Vernadsky Avenue, 82, building 1). Email: [email protected]
Annotation: The article deals with the diplomatic and censorship service of the famous Russian poet Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev (1803–1873), as well as his journalistic and historiosophical works, the publication of which was supported by the Russian government. Tyutchev's diplomatic career undoubtedly testifies that he was not born for public service - non-performance and neglect of his duties shown by him were absolutely unacceptable in this field. But the diplomatic service in Western Europe, especially in Germany, attracted him for another reason - Tyutchev, by temperament and habits, was eminently European and was rooted in German culture. But the successful promotion of Tyutchev in the service, starting from the mid-1840s, was associated with his talent as a political publicist that was revealed at that time. At the same time, in the same service, he showed both education and a rare mind (and these qualities were probably shown not so much when Tyutchev compiled dispatches - he himself wrote few documents - but in oral conversations.) His historiosophical ideas found expression as in political articles and poetry. Tyutchev's historiosophy was nourished by the ideas of German idealist philosophy, primarily Schellingism. But Schellingism was also the nourishing source of Tyutchev's natural philosophy - lyrics dedicated to nature and man as its breakaway particle. Tyutchev's imperial historiosophy was of a very deep and by no means semi-official nature.
Keywords: diplomatic activity, political journalism, historiosophy and poetry.

After graduating from the Imperial Moscow University, Fyodor Tyutchev entered the diplomatic service: such a choice was traditional for a well-born nobleman if he preferred a civilian rather than a military field. On May 13, 1822, Tyutchev received a very flattering appointment to the diplomatic mission in Munich, the capital of Bavaria, which was one of the most significant states of the German Union. The appointment took place thanks to the petition of a relative - Count A.I. Osterman-Tolstoy, who enjoyed influence in government circles [Dinesman, 2004. p. 6]. The very place that Tyutchev took - an official "over the staff" (or "freelance attache") - was "more than modest." Indeed, the "non-staff attache" was not part of the staff of the mission, and therefore had neither specific duties nor salary. Nevertheless, for an eighteen-year-old boy who had barely left his student's bench, such an appointment was considered a great success. It was assumed that talent, diligence, the goodwill of the authorities and a lucky break would help the young man move up the career ladder and make a diplomatic career. In addition, the upcoming life in the Bavarian capital, located near France and Italy, promised the possibility of direct contact with Western European culture, and perhaps with its outstanding representatives, - rightly notes T.G. Dinesman. Tyutchevsky acquaintance at the university M.P. Pogodin spoke about this appointment with the words: “A wonderful place!” [Dinesman, 2004. p. 6].

Tyutchev's stay in Bavaria, albeit indirectly, but very strongly influenced his poetic work: his deep reception of the German philosophical and poetic traditions, in particular, the poetry of Heinrich Heine [Tynyanov, 1977], was due not only to the philosophical and literary fashion in Russia at that time, but also personal impressions of life in Germany. In itself, the service in Munich was not burdensome and was not of great importance from the point of view of Russia's foreign policy interests: “In the early 1820s, Bavaria did not play a particularly significant role in European political life; at the same time, Bavarian diplomacy was entirely focused on Russia. As a result, the Munich Mission at that time had almost no diplomatic tasks in the full sense of the word. In the extensive correspondence of the mission with the Collegium of Foreign Affairs for 1822–1827, there are virtually no diplomatic problems proper.” The mission in Munich was mainly engaged in the compilation of dispatches of a purely informational nature. There were only three full-time employees in the mission (Ambassador Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary Count I.I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, First Secretary of the Mission M.P. Tormasov and Second Secretary Baron A.S. Krudener), freelancers - two (Tyutchev and Count G .A. Rzhevusskiy). Tyutchev's duties included copying the dispatches clean and making copies for the mission archive. From January 1823 to the beginning of February 1824, he copied 110 documents. Later, until October 1828, he was practically relieved of the duties of a copyist (they were assigned to another employee): during this period, the future author of "Cicero" and " Last love”copied only 15 papers [Dinesman, 2004. p. 8]. There were almost no real cases, besides, the freelance attache of the Munich mission did not work in the affairs of the service, as evidenced by the lateness to the duty station in 1826: Tyutchev received a four-month leave that year to travel home, but more than doubled its duration [Dinesman , 2004. S. 12]. The neglect of the service is apparently explained not only by such a circumstance as the almost complete absence of real cases, but also by the self-consciousness of the poet, who considered copying documents to be somewhat humiliating and felt his uselessness, “superfluity”: the talent of an intellectual and publicist, which brilliantly manifested itself later, did not found embodiment.

The situation changed only in 1828 after the appointment of a new ambassador, I.A. Potemkin, when the poet received the post of second secretary of the mission, until then vacant for two years. He began to receive a salary, however, insignificant (800 rubles a year). It was a regular promotion. Tyutchev received the rank of collegiate secretary (rank X class according to the Table of Ranks), which was automatically assigned after three years of service, and the right to the next rank, which was appointed after the second three years. A more significant success was receiving the court rank of chamber junker.

Under the command of the new ambassador, Tyutchev carried out more serious assignments. In November 1828, the Bavarian newspaper "Augsburger Allgemeine" published an article "Letter from Constantinople", which contained sharp criticism of the Russian foreign policy and the actions of the Russian troops waging war with Turkey. The Bavarian king, who always adhered to the pro-Russian line, signed a rescript with strict sanctions against the newspaper. Potemkin hastened to inform the head of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, Count K.V., about this event. Nesselrode, to whom a translation of the royal rescript into French was sent; Tyutchev was the translator.

Under Potemkin, Tyutchev felt at ease and did not feel embarrassed. This was not the case with the new envoy, Prince G.I. Gagarin, who arrived in Munich at the end of May 1833. Tyutchev's wife Eleanor wrote to her husband's brother about the new boss: “There is something dry and cold in his manner, which hurts doubly in the position in which we are in relation to him.<… >. You know your brother's temper; I'm afraid such a manner will spoil their relationship; mutual constraint and coldness, having arisen once, will make further rapprochement impossible. This prospect drives me to despair<…>You yourself know that if Theodore is offended or prejudiced by something, he is no longer himself; his tense and resentful air, his biting phrases or gloomy silence - everything distorts his usual manner, and I understand that he makes an unpleasant impression. Therefore, it is a mutually vicious circle<… >» [Contemporaries about Tyutchev, 1984. S. 188–189].

Fears turned out to be partly exaggerated: the wife was even able to get Tyutchev to increase his annual salary by 200 rubles. In September 1833, Tyutchev was entrusted with a responsible diplomatic mission - he was supposed to go to the son of the Bavarian king Ludwig Otton, who occupied the Greek throne, and help upset his planned marriage to one of the French princesses. Tyutchev was to deliver to King Otto a letter from his father condemning these matrimonial plans. The trip was prepared in great secrecy. The Russian government was very worried about the alliance, as it could be followed by a political union. Nicholas I of the French King Louis Philippe, who came to power as a result of the revolution of 1830, despised. It was serious that France in recent years pursued a line hostile to the government of Nicholas I: most recently, it threatened to support the Poles, who raised an uprising for independence from Russia in 1830-1831.

True, it soon became clear that King Otto was by no means striving for a marriage alliance with the French overlord. However, the trip was not cancelled. In September-October 1833, Tyutchev visited Greece, but did not find King Otto in the then Greek capital city of Nauplia, where he was supposed to be. Then he tried to find him in another city - Patras. Ludwig of Bavaria's letter remained undelivered. Tyutchev hurriedly left Greece, without even waiting for the Bavarian envoy to the Greek king to give him reports for his king Ludwig: he sailed to Trieste with the first passing ship - ships from Greece to Trieste were rare, and the Russian diplomat did not want to wait long. The trip was not safe: on the way from Trieste to Greece, the ship got into a storm, on the way back Tyutchev almost fell ill with cholera in Trieste. Tyutchev's mission was a failure, but the reasons for the failure to fulfill the order remain unexplained.

Failed, but in a completely different way, it turned out to be another assignment - to draw up a note on the political situation in Greece. Tyutchev's note on the content was quite a serious text, but this content turned out to be clothed in an unacceptable poetic form: “Fairy tales sometimes depict a wonderful cradle around which the patron geniuses of the newborn gather. After they endow the chosen infant with their most beneficent charms, a fairy inevitably appears, bringing on the cradle of the child some kind of pernicious witchcraft, which has the property of destroying or spoiling those brilliant gifts with which friendly forces have just showered him. Such, approximately, is the history of the Greek monarchy. It must be admitted that the three great powers that cherished her under their wing provided her with quite a decent dowry. By what strange, fatal accident did it fall to the lot of the Bavarian king to play the role of the Evil Fairy in this? [Dinesman, 2004. p. 71].

Tyutchev perfectly knew how to compose political dispatches, and there is reason to agree with the assumption that this text was “a deliberate outrage against Gagarin” [Dinesman, 2004. p. 72].

Tyutchev was oppressed by lack of money, and Gagarin, despite mutual antipathy, who respected him, tried to help by turning to Nesselrode with a request for an increase in salary and giving his employee a very approving description: “College assessor Tyutchev, who is at the embassy in the position of 2nd secretary, - a man of rare virtues, a rare breadth of mind and education, and, moreover, of an eminently noble disposition. He is married and burdened with a large family, and therefore, with the modest means at his disposal, the best reward for him would be a cash allowance.<…>» [Dinesman, 2004, p. 73]. The direct appeal of the poet himself to Nesselrode in October 1835 also remained without consequences: Tyutchev asked for the appointment of the first secretary of the embassy in Munich, but he was refused. True, Emperor Nicholas I granted Tyutchev the honorary court title of chamberlain, about which Nesselrode informed the poet [Chronicle, 1999. p. 151]. However, the high court rank did not save him from financial difficulties.

And soon the situation became more complicated because of the scandal - Tyutchev's affair with Baroness Ernestina Dernberg, which led to a suicide attempt by the poet-diplomat's wife: “in a fit of desperation, she struck herself several times with a masquerade dagger and ran out into the street, where, having lost consciousness, she fell, shedding blood” [Dinesman, 2004, p. 78].

On May 3, 1836, Gagarin turned to Nesselrode with a request to remove Tyutchev from Munich: “With very remarkable abilities, with an outstanding and highly enlightened mind, Mr. which he delivered by his fatal marriage. In the name of Christian Mercy, I beg Your Excellency to remove him from here, and this can only be done on condition that he be given a financial allowance of 1000 rubles. to pay debts: it would be happiness for him and for me” [Dinesman, 2004. p. 80].

In a letter to his parents dated December 31, 1836, Tyutchev complained that in the last months before being transferred to a new place, he almost single-handedly managed all the affairs of the mission: “all the work, more than ever, lies with me alone” [Tyutchev, 2002– 2004. S. 61]. However, documents testify that he was almost not busy with official business at that time [Dinesman, 2004. pp. 81–82].

On August 3, 1837, Tyutchev was appointed senior secretary of the Russian Mission in Turin, the capital of the Italian kingdom of Sardinia, with an annual salary of 8,000 rubles. Tyutchev did not burden himself with official duties here either: he and Ernestine Dernberg travel around Italy for several weeks. On the way, however, the Russian diplomat sent two dispatches to his superiors in St. Petersburg about Italian political and economic affairs. Tyutchev's wife had died by this time, and he asked Nesselrode for permission to marry Ernestina and for a vacation. The first request was accepted, the second was denied. Formally, Nesselrode was right: the staff of the mission was small (only three full-time employees, one of whom was already on vacation). But Ernestina was pregnant, and “Tyutchev faced a dilemma: observance of duty or Ernestina's health and her peace of mind. Tyutchev chose the latter. On July 7, the two of them leave for Switzerland in the hope of entering into a marriage there according to two rites - Orthodox and Catholic” [Dinesman, 2004. p. 125].

There is a version that in a hurry the secretary of the Russian embassy lost the secret diplomatic code [Kazanovich, 1928. p. 132], but the documents prove that this is apparently not the case [Dinesman, 2004. p. 132]. On July 29, the wedding of Tyutchev and Ernestina Dernberg took place in the Orthodox Church at the Russian mission in Bern. August 10 - a wedding took place according to the Catholic rite in Constanta.

After that, Tyutchev and his wife settled in Munich, where they spent four years, and he did not even ask his superiors to extend the vacation he finally received. On June 30, 1841, he was expelled from the staff of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for not returning from a four-month vacation received on November 10, 1839 [Chronicle, 1999, p. 241]. (He was released from the post of senior secretary of the mission in Turin on October 1, 1839 - retroactively, at his own request, filed on October 6, 1839, and left at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs "until a new appointment" [Dinesman, 2004. P. 128-129 The dismissal in 1841 also entailed the deprivation of the court rank of chamberlain [Pigarev, 1962. p. 108].

In March 1845, he asked to be returned to the Foreign Office and was enrolled, but without a fixed position; this was the position of an official without a salary, while Tyutchev was in dire need of funds [Chronicle, 2003. p. 20]. A February 15 next year was appointed officer for special assignments under Nesselrod. He never returned to the diplomatic service. He was in the rank of VI class (collegiate adviser) with an annual salary of 1,500 rubles, unable to cover all family expenses [Chronicle, 2003. p. 38]. On February 1, 1848, at the request of K.V. Nesselrode to Emperor Tyutchev was appointed an official for special assignments and a senior censor at the Special Office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the 5th class (State Councilor) with a salary of 2430 rubles 32 kopecks per year [Chronicle, 2003. P. 71]. Nine years later, he was promoted to the rank of real state councilor, corresponding to the rank of major general according to the Table of Ranks [Chronicle, 2003. p. 262], and on April 17, 1858, by decree of Emperor Alexander II, he was appointed chairman of the Foreign Censorship Committee, leaving department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At the same time, at the request of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prince M.D. Gorchakov "in respect for his useful work and long-term service in this Ministry" Tyutchev received (in addition to the salary in the censorship department - 3430 rubles) a second salary, 1143 rubles 68 kopecks - also as an official of the ministry [Chronicle, 2003. P. 294, 306 ]. On August 30, 1865, he became a privy councilor, that is, he received the rank of III class, equal to the military rank of lieutenant general.

Tyutchev's diplomatic career undoubtedly testifies that he was not born for public service - non-performance and neglect of his duties shown by him were absolutely unacceptable in this field. In his Munich letter to Nesselrode, he directly explained his stay in the public service as a material necessity: “Despite the fact that in the future I will receive an independent state, for many years I have been brought to the sad need to live in service. The insignificance of funds, far from meeting the expenses to which my position in society forces me, imposed obligations against my will, the fulfillment of which only time can help. This is the first reason that keeps me in Munich" [Tyutchev, 2002-2004. S. 37]. But the diplomatic service in Western Europe, especially in Germany, attracted him for another reason - Tyutchev, by temperament and habits, was highly European and was rooted in German culture. In essence, he speaks of this in the letter quoted above: “However, if there is a country where I would flatter myself with the hope of bringing some benefit to the service, it is definitely the one in which I am now. A long stay here, thanks to a consistent and serious study of the country, which continues to this day both from an inner attraction and a sense of duty, allowed me to acquire a very special knowledge of people and objects, its language, history, literature, social and political situation, - especially that its parts, where I serve” [Tyutchev, 2002–2004. S. 37-38].

At the same time, in the same service, he showed both education and a rare mind. Moreover, these qualities were shown, probably, not so much when Tyutchev compiled dispatches - he himself wrote few documents - but in oral conversations. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain the generally benevolent and even caring attitude towards Tyutchev on the part of Gagarin, who forgave his subordinate for all excesses and antics, and Nesselrode's willingness to again take the former diplomat into the service. Tyutchev's smooth, ordinary service was apparently hindered by the rejection of routine, an all-consuming passion (“Oh, how murderously we love<…>!”) and a tendency, under adverse circumstances, if not to depression, then to apathy.

But the successful promotion of Tyutchev in the service, starting from the mid-1840s, was undoubtedly associated with his talent as a political publicist that was discovered at that time. On August 16, 1843, he introduced the head of the III department of His Imperial Majesty's own office, Count A.Kh. Benckendorff with his political project. The idea of ​​the project was to involve Western European publicists in promoting Russian interests in the German press. Nicholas I appreciated Tyutchev's project favorably. As the author of the project wrote to his parents on September 3, 1843 about Benckendorff, “what I was especially pleased with was his attention to my thoughts regarding the project known to you, and the hasty readiness with which he supported them with the Sovereign, because the next day<после>of our conversation, he took advantage of his last meeting with the Sovereign, before his departure, in order to bring them to his attention. He assured me that my thoughts were accepted quite favorably and there is reason to hope that they will be given a move" [Tyutchev, 2002-2004. S. 271].

In March of the same year, Tyutchev publishes in an appendix to German newspaper"Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung" a letter to the editor, in which he argues with the essay "The Russian Army in the Caucasus" published in it. Tyutchev's letter was an apology for the actions of the Russian army in the Caucasian war. In April of the following year, Tyutchev printed in Germany a separate pamphlet "Letter to Mr. Dr. Gustav Kolb, editor of Vseobshchaya Gazeta". Tyutchev wrote about the debt of the Germans to Russia, which in 1813 freed them from Napoleonic oppression, and called on Germany to fight against the revolutionary movement in alliance with Russia. Subsequently, this article, originally published in German but written in French, was reprinted under the title "La Russie et l'Allemagne" ("Russia and Germany").

The ideas expressed in these publications could not but impress Nicholas I. Apparently, the emperor’s reaction to the note addressed to him was more complex (its later title is “Russia and the Revolution”, compiled in French). The note, completed in April 1848 and being a reaction to the revolutionary events of February 1848 in France (see details about its dating: [Ospovat, 1992]; [Chronicle, 2003. p. 75]), according to the author's wife, was accepted approvingly by the king, and the emperor recommended that it be published abroad: “The sovereign read and highly approved her; he even expressed the wish that it be published abroad<…>» [Contemporaries about Tyutchev, 1984. S. 225, trans. from French, highlighted in the original]. However, Prince P.A. conveyed the reaction of Nicholas I to this note in a completely different way. Vyazemsky: “The sovereign was, they say, very dissatisfied with her. Too bad it can't be printed. And why not, really, I don’t know<…>» [Vyazemsky, 1896, p. 90].

There is reason to believe that both testimonies are true, while the truth lies in the middle. Tyutchev wrote about Russia and the revolution: “To understand the essence of the enormous upheaval that has now engulfed Europe, this is what one should say to oneself. For a long time there have been only two real forces in Europe: the Revolution and Russia. These two forces today stand against each other, and tomorrow, perhaps, they will clash with each other. There are no agreements or treaties between them. The life of one of them means the death of the other. On the outcome of the struggle between them, the greatest struggle the world has ever seen, the entire political and religious future of mankind depends for centuries. Nicholas I fully shared Tyutchev's idea of ​​Russia as the main force opposing the spirit of the revolution, which threatened to take over Europe. He also had to agree with another statement of the poet and political publicist: “First of all, Russia is a Christian state, and the Russian people are Christian not only because of the Orthodoxy of their beliefs, but also because of something even more sincere. He is such thanks to that ability for self-denial and self-sacrifice, which constitutes, as it were, the basis of his moral nature. The revolution, first of all, is the enemy of Christianity” [Tyutchev, 2002-2004. S. 144]. However, Tyutchev dreamed of uniting all Slavic peoples, at least professing Orthodoxy, under the auspices of Russia and saw visible traces of such a desire in the southern Slavs - subjects of Austria: “<…>along this entire military border, composed of three-quarters of Orthodox Serbs, there is not a single hut of settlers (according to even the Austrians themselves), where next to the portrait of the Emperor of Austria would not hang a portrait of another Emperor, stubbornly recognized by these faithful tribes as the only legitimate one. However (why hide it from ourselves), it is also unlikely that all these earthquake shocks destroying the West will stop at the threshold of the Eastern countries. And how could it happen that in such ruthless war, in the impending crusade of the impious Revolution, which has already engulfed three-quarters of Western Europe, against Russia, the Christian East, the Slavic-Orthodox East, whose existence is inseparably linked with our own, would not join us in the unfolding struggle. And, perhaps, the war will begin with him, since it is natural to assume that all the propaganda that torments him (Catholic, revolutionary, etc., etc.), although opposed to each other, but united in a common feeling of hatred for Russia, will be accepted to work with even greater zeal than before. You can be sure that in order to achieve their goals, they will not back down from anything ... Good God! What would be the fate of all these Christian peoples, like us, if, having become, as is already happening, the target of all disgusting influences, they were abandoned in a difficult moment by the only authority to which they appeal in their prayers? “In a word, what terrible confusion would have seized the countries of the East in their struggle with the Revolution, if the rightful Sovereign, the Orthodox Emperor of the East, had delayed even further with his appearance!” [Tyutchev 2002–2004. S. 156].

Tyutchev's thought tended towards pan-Slavism, towards the idea of ​​accepting all Slavs, primarily Orthodox, into the citizenship of the Russian Tsar. But this idea encroached on the unstable political balance in Europe, and its implementation could lead to a violation of the principles of legitimism, which were sacredly professed by Nicholas I, who in 1833 protected the Turkish sultan from the rebellious Egyptian pasha (despite the fact that historically and geopolitically Turkey was an old enemy of Russia), and in 1849 he suppressed the uprising of the Hungarians against Austrian rule. Pan-Slavic ideas were extremely painfully perceived by Austria, under whose rule there were many Slavic peoples - Orthodox (some of the Serbs), Uniates (they were a significant part of Western Ukrainians) and Catholics (Croats, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks). Pan-Slavism was also uneasily perceived in Prussia, which owned part of the Polish lands. Nicholas I came to the idea of ​​relying on the support of fellow believers - the southern Slavs - only in catastrophic conditions - during the Crimean War, when Austria took a position of unfriendly neutrality. In addition, the anti-Catholic pathos of Tyutchev's article was also alien to the Russian emperor.

The article was published in French in Paris as a pamphlet in May 1849. Subsequently, Tyutchev worked on a large treatise "Russia and the West", which he also wrote in French; this essay was not completed. January 1, 1850 (according to the new style) in the Parisian magazine "Revue des Deux Mondes" published an article "The Papacy and the Roman Question", written, like other Tyutchev articles, in French. The article caused a heated controversy in the foreign press, and its author gained a reputation in the West as an adviser to Nicholas I. In fact, both Nicholas I and later his son Alexander II were very skeptical of Tyutchev and his ideas, and Alexander II even spoke of him as about the "holy fool".

At the same time, the proposal of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prince A.M., testifies to a certain weight of Tyutchev in the eyes of the authorities. Gorchakov (October 1857) to lead the publication of a new political newspaper, which was supposed to resist the "Bell" A.I. Herzen, who acquired a strong influence on Russian society. Tyutchev, in response to this proposal, wrote a note, which, as he assumed, the emperor was supposed to read. Recalling that for the past ten years, censorship has “heaved over Russia like a true social disaster,” Tyutchev argues that this “hard experience” has shown: “you can’t constrain and oppress minds for too long and unconditionally without significant damage to the entire social organism.” Without denying censorship as such, Tyutchev believes that it must be limited, and cites the policy of a number of German states as an example. A union of power and society is needed, and for this it is necessary that free polemics be conducted on the pages of the planned publication. Otherwise, “the expectation to gain influence on the minds with the help of the press controlled in this way” will turn out to be “only a delusion” [Tyutchev, 2002-2004. S. 202, 209–210].

According to the biographer Tyutchev and his son-in-law, Slavophile I.S. Aksakov, “... it could not have been better, more complete, more frank, firmer and more courageous, and at the same time with more politeness, with more decency and dignity, to express an opinion on such a burning issue as the question of the press, almost in the face of power and especially under conditions given time. We repeat: this is a kind of civic feat. There is no doubt that this letter did much to alleviate the oppression that weighed on the Russian press, and to establish a little more scope for thought and speech.<…>» [Aksakov, 1997, p. 273].

Tyutchev's journalism was not so much strictly political as mystical-historiosophical in nature, deeply alien to the views of both Nicholas I and his son and heir. Its key idea was the concept of the special mission of Russia - the successor of Byzantium. Tyutchev fully shared the idea of ​​translatio imperii formed in the Middle Ages. The complex of Tyutchev's ideas was formulated in a note written in September 1849: “1) the final formation of the great Orthodox empire, the legitimate empire of the East, in a word, Russia of the future, carried out by the absorption of Austria and the return of Constantinople; 2) the union of two churches - eastern and western. These two facts, to tell the truth, constitute one, which, in brief, boils down to the following: the Orthodox emperor in Constantinople, ruler and patron of Italy and Rome; Orthodox pope in Rome, subject of the emperor” [Pigarev, 1935. p. 196]. Tyutchev's historiosophy partly coincided with Slavophilism, but diverged from it in two key points: 1) Tyutchev, unlike the Slavophiles, did not consider Peter's reforms a cultural and historical catastrophe; 2) he was a convinced statesman, while the Slavophiles saw the basis of Russian life not in the state, but in a public institution: in a peasant landed community - a secular analogue of church catholicity. In addition, Tyutchev was a European to the marrow of his bones and even thought in French - this is the language of both his private letters and his articles. In French, he felt and thought - but he wrote poetry in Russian (French poems by Tyutchev are very few). However, in his poems, he showed an indifference, surprising in comparison with other poets, to both Russian history and Russian folklore. Russia was for Tyutchev rather the subject of metaphysical faith than living and immediate love.

The same sentiments as Tyutchev's articles are imbued with his lyrics. This is the poem "Prophecy" (1850):

Not a rumble of rumor passed among the people,
The message was born not in our kind -
Now an ancient voice, now a voice from above:
"The fourth century is already coming to an end, -
It will come true - and the hour will strike!

And the vaults of ancient Sophia,
In the renewed Byzantium,
Again overshadow the altar of Christ.
Fall before him, O Tsar of Russia, -
And stand up - like an all-Slavic king!

[Tyutchev, 2002–2004. S. 14]

In an earlier poem, "Russian Geography" (1848 or 1849), the idea of ​​Russia, the successor of Byzantium and the ancient kingdoms of the East, called upon to restore the Eastern Roman Empire and become an eschatological kingdom, is unfolded even more solemnly and grandiosely:

Moscow and the city of Petrov, and the city of Konstantinov -
Here are the treasured Capitals of the Russian kingdom...
But where is the limit for him? And where are its boundaries?
To the north, to the east, to the south and to the sunset?..
For the coming times, fate will expose them ...

Seven inland seas and seven great rivers...
From the Nile to the Neva, from the Elbe to China,
From the Volga to the Euphrates, from the Ganges to the Danube ...
Here is the Russian kingdom ... and will not pass away forever,
As the Spirit foresaw, and Daniel foretold...

[Tyutchev, 2002–2004. S. 200]

"Russian geography" fits into the scheme of translatio imperii, going back to the mysterious images from the biblical Book of the Prophet Daniel (ch. 2 and 7) - the vision of four animals in the dream of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar; in the later tradition of interpretation, these animals are the Babylonian, Persian Hellenic, Roman monarchies. The same idea, which goes back to the Book of the Prophet Daniel and its interpretations, is also contained in the treatise “Russia and the West” [Sinitsyna, 1998. pp. 16–21]. In the latest commentary by V.N. Kasatkina to this poem [Tyutchev, 2002–2004. P. 487] this idea is groundlessly called Slavophile: the concept of translatio imperii and etatism were not characteristic of the Slavophils.

On the political and historiosophical lyrics of Tyutchev, such a poet as I.A. spoke very sharply. Brodsky: “Tyutchev is undoubtedly a significant figure, but with all this talk about his metaphysics, etc., it is somehow missed that domestic literature did not give birth to a greater loyal subject.<…>On the one hand, it would seem that the chariot of the universe is rolling into the sanctuary of heaven, and on the other hand, these are his, using the expression of Vyazemsky, “overcoat odes”” [Volkov, 1998. P. 51]. This assessment is unfair. The point is not even that Tyutchev, for example, spoke extremely sharply about Russia's foreign policy, pursued by K.V. Nesselrode (poem "No, my dwarf! Unparalleled coward! ..", 1850), and no less sharply - about the policy of Nicholas I, which led to a catastrophe in the Crimean War ("You did not serve God and not Russia ...", 1855). Tyutchev's historiosophy was nourished by the ideas of German idealist philosophy, primarily Schellingism. But Schellingism was also the nourishing source of Tyutchev's natural philosophy - lyrics dedicated to nature and man as its breakaway particle. Tyutchev's imperial historiosophy was of a very deep and by no means semi-official nature. Tyutchev also had to gravitate towards the imperial theme for stylistic reasons: his poetry is oriented towards the traditions of the ode [Tynyanov, 1977a], and the ode in its main variety, the solemn ode, was dedicated precisely to the theme of the empire, its greatness, its victories.

Literature

Aksakov I.S. Biography of Fedor Ivanovich Tyutchev: Reprint reproduction of the 1886 edition. M .: JSC "Book and Business", 1997;

Volkov S. Dialogues with Joseph Brodsky. Moscow: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 1998;

Vyazemsky P.A. Letter to D.P. Severin. Petersburg. May 28, 1848 // Russian antiquity. 1896. No. 1;

Dinesman T.G. F.I. Tyutchev. Biography pages: On the history of a diplomatic career. Moscow: IMLI RAN, 2004;

Kazanovich E.P. From the Munich meetings of F.I. Tyutchev (1840s) // Urania. Tyutchev's Almanac (1803–1928). Leningrad: Surf, 1928;

Chronicle of the life and work of F.I. Tyutcheva / Nauch. hands T.G. Dinesman; Comp.: T.G. Dinesman, S.A. Dolgopolova, N.A. Koroleva, B.N. Shchedrinsky; Rep. ed. T.G. Dinesman; Ed. N.I. Lukyanchuk. Book. 1. 1803–1844. [Muranovo]: Museum-estate "Muranovo" named after. F.I. Tyutchev. 1999; book. 2. 1844–1860. [M.]: OOO "Lithograph"; [Muranovo]: Museum-estate "Muranovo" named after. F.I. Tyutcheva, 2003;

Ospovat A.L. Tyutchev's Newly Found Political Memorandum: On the History of Creation // New Literary Review. 1992. No. 1;

Pigarev K.V. Tyutchev and problems of the foreign policy of tsarist Russia // Literary heritage. T. 19–21. M.: Journal and newspaper association, 1935;

Pigarev K.V. Life and work of Tyutchev. M.: Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1962.

Sinitsyna N.V. The Third Rome: The Origins and Evolution of the Medieval Concept (XV-XVI Centuries). Moscow: Indrik, 1998;

Contemporaries about F.I. Tyutchev: Memoirs, reviews and letters. Tula: Priokskoe book publishing house, 1984;

Tyutchev F.I. Complete Works and Letters: In 6 vols. M.: Publishing Center "Classics", 2002-2004;

Tynyanov Yu.N. The question of Tyutchev // Tynyanov Yu.N. Poetics. History of literature. Cinema. Moscow: Nauka, 1977;

Tynyanov Yu.N. Tyutchev and Heine // Tynyanov Yu.N. Poetics. History of literature. Cinema. Moscow: Nauka, 1977.