Ivan Savvich Nikitin (1824-1861) was born and raised in a very wealthy merchant family. The young boy mastered reading and writing quite early - his love of reading and walks in picturesque surroundings would later manifest itself in brilliant poems in the style of landscape lyricism.
At eight years old in 1833, Ivan entered theological school, which he successfully completed, but he would not be able to finish the seminary - due to severe family circumstances(death of his mother, drunkenness and ruin of his father), the boy is early forced to be the sole breadwinner of his family. After working a little in a candle shop, Ivan sells the family candle factory and becomes the owner of an inn, the wandering people and common surroundings of which will later lead to populist motifs in his work.
First serious attempts poetic creativity were noticed while still studying at the theological seminary, although the first publication of the poems took place only in 1853, in the newspaper “Voronezh Provincial News”. The first published poem “Rus” immediately brought fame and popularity to the young poet Ivan Nikitin; he was deservedly compared with the famous poet A.V. Koltsov. Also, everyone at the seminary noted the poet’s special musicality; subsequently, more than 60 poems would be set to music (“Hello, guest-winter,” “The nightingale fell silent in a dark grove,” “It made noise, it went wild,” etc.).
Religious and philosophical motives are very clearly visible in the writer’s work, their echo is present both in landscape lyrics(“Meeting Winter”, “Morning”), and in works describing the hard life of ordinary people (“Ploughman”, “Beggar”, “Mother and Daughter”). Being a deeply religious Christian, the author more than once turned in his work to the evangelical and spiritual theme (“Prayer”, “The Sweetness of Prayer”, “New Testament”).
The poet’s creativity did not pass by and love lyrics(“The candle has burned out”). A year before his death, the poet falls in love with a beautiful, educated girl, Natalia Antonovna Matveeva, a true connoisseur of his bright and at the same time deep talent.
The poet's creative path was far from cloudless - the first collection of poems was subjected to a devastating review by N. Chernyshevsky, which caused serious mental trauma to the poet. The flowering of creativity was very short-lived - the release of the last collection of poems dates back to 1859. Next, the poet is working on finishing the poem “Taras” and the story “The Diary of a Seminarian.” In 1861, A. Nekrasov was offered cooperation on any terms in literary magazine"Contemporary". This event was a great creative victory for the young but already experienced writer, but due to a serious illness, he was never able to fully realize himself.
On November 16, 1861, the 37-year-old poet dies from a severe form of consumption. He will be buried next to the grave of the poet A. Koltsov at the Novo-Mitrofanyevskoye cemetery.
An ardent patriot, a sad soul of the Russian people, a sincerely believing Christian - Ivan Savvich Nikitin was not only a role model for his contemporaries, but also an inspirer of a host of followers of his brilliant work - Pleshcheev, Surikov, Minaev, Yesenin, Tvardovsky.
- a princely and noble family, the coat of arms of Byalyn, descended from Pan Grigory Mirsky, judge of the Zemsky Braslav (died in 1620). Another Gregory of Mirsky (died in 1661) was a great Lithuanian guard. Bratslav Marshal Thomas (1764) and Stanislav (died 1805) were generals of the Lithuanian troops.
Stanisław-Wojciech Mirski (died 1805) was the great Lithuanian clerk from 1791. About Prince Dmitry and Nikolai Ivanovich Svyatopolk-Mirsky, see below. The Svyatopolk-Mirsky family is included in the VI and V parts of the genealogical books of the Vilna, Minsk and Kharkov provinces (Herbovnik, XII, 3). V.R.
Svyatopolk-Mirsky, Pyotr Dmitrievich (1857-1914)- Russian statesman, adjutant general. Father of D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky.
He studied in the page corps; began service in His Majesty's Life Guards Hussar Regiment. He took part in the war of 1877-78, then completed a course at the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff. Commanded a division; was governor in Penza and Ekaterinoslav. In 1900 he was appointed comrade of the Minister of Internal Affairs and commander of a separate corps of gendarmes, in 1902 - governor-general of Vilna, Kovno and Grodno, and on August 26, 1904 - minister of internal affairs. This appointment was seen as the end of the brutal reaction of the era of V.K. Plehve. “Personally,” “Liberation” greeted him with such a description, “according to the general opinion, Svyatopolk-Mirsky kind person, almost no one and almost nothing with political side unknown. He did not approve of the speech of January 17, 1895, about meaningless dreams.”
In the organs of the extreme left parties (Iskra and Revolutionary Russia), the ministry of Svyatopolk-Mirsky was called the “ministry of pleasant smiles.” On September 16, when the officials of the ministry were presented to him, Svyatopolk-Mirsky made a speech in which he promised to base his activities on “a sincerely benevolent and sincerely trusting attitude towards public and class institutions and towards the population in general.” “Only under these conditions,” he said, “can you get mutual trust, without which it is impossible to expect lasting success in building a state.” This speech gave rise to calling the era of management internal. affairs of Svyatopolk-Mirsky, the era of trust, as well as the “spring of Russian life.”
The brutal repressions stopped; many administratively expelled were returned, and the ban on public activities was lifted from many. The amnesty granted on August 12 (on the occasion of the birth of the heir) was interpreted quite widely. Political arrests were made less frequently. The “trends” coming from St. Petersburg were, however, characterized by extreme inconsistency.
Zemstvo leaders were allowed to organize a congress, but then this permission was taken back; When the banned congress did meet, and it met completely openly, nothing was done against it. On November 28, a demonstration was organized on the streets of St. Petersburg; it was suppressed with ferocity no less than under Plehve, and Svyatopolk-Mirsky did not take any measures against it. Svyatopolk-Mirsky himself outlined his program in countless interviews in an extremely vague manner.
He is a friend of progress and freedom, since they do not contradict the foundations of what exists in Russia political system; he is a supporter of religious tolerance within the same boundaries; he is a friend of the Jews, but he is afraid that they will take over great strength, if they are given full equality, etc. However, the management of Svyatopolk-Mirsky facilitated the development liberation movement. Hence the hatred of reactionary elements towards Svyatopolk-Mirsky. From the beginning of January 1905, he actually no longer had any power, although he was still listed as a minister.
When on the eve of January 9, 1905, terrible bloodshed was expected in St. Petersburg, a deputation from St. Petersburg writers came to Svyatopolk-Mirsky to ask him to achieve the abolition of certain military measures, Svyatopolk-Mirsky refused to accept this deputation. 9 out of 10 deputies were arrested, in all likelihood, in addition to the wishes of Svyatopolk-Mirsky, who, however, bears political responsibility for this arrest.
Events of January 9, 1905 et seq. days also took place against the will of Svyatopolk-Mirsky on January 18, 1905, he was dismissed from the post of Minister of Internal Affairs. affairs, with retention in the rank of adjutant general.
Svyatopolk-Mirsky (Prince Dmitry Ivanovich, 1825 - 1899)
Adjutant General, Infantry General. He began military service in 1841, in the Caucasus, taking part in cases against the Chechens and Dagestanis. During eastern war as an adjutant to the commander-in-chief of a separate Caucasian corps, he participated in the battle of Kyuryuk-Darya, and then, commanding the Chernigov regiment, was at the head of the regiment in the battle on the Black River, in Crimea, where he was seriously wounded.
From 1857 to 1859 he commanded the Kabardian regiment; took part in the capture of Gunib. After the conquest Eastern Caucasus was the head of the Terek region, then the Kutaisi governor-general; at this time he had to suppress the indignation of the mountaineers in Abkhazia and introduce a new administrative and judicial system in the newly conquered country.
In 1876 he was appointed assistant to the governor of the Caucasus, His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich. During the last Russian-Turkish war, Prince Svyatopolk-Mirsky was with the commander-in-chief of the Caucasian army at the theater of war and took an active part in the storming of Kars. Appointed a member in 1880 State Council. In 1882, he served as commander of the Kharkov Military District and temporary Kharkov Governor-General.
Svyatopolk-Mirsky, Dmitry Petrovich (1890-1939)- Russian literary critic, literary critic, publicist. Son of P. D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky.
IN school years became interested in the poetry of Russian symbolism, began writing poetry, and in 1911 published a collection of poems. In 1914 he graduated from the Faculty of History and Philology of St. Petersburg University. Participated in the First World War and the Civil War on the side white movement. Since 1920 in exile, first in Poland, then in Athens. From 1921 to 1932 he lived in England, taught a course in Russian literature at King's College, University of London. He published several anthologies of Russian poetry.
Since 1922 - participant of the Eurasian movement. In 1926-1928 - founder and co-editor of the magazine “Versty”.
In 1931 he joined the Communist Party of Great Britain and in 1932, with the assistance of Maxim Gorky, he returned to Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union he published many articles on the theory and history of Russian and Western literature, worked on a biography of Pushkin. Since 1934 - member of the Union Soviet writers. In 1937 he was arrested, in 1939 he died in a camp near Magadan. Posthumously rehabilitated.
Vladimir Nabokov called “The History of Russian Literature” by Svyatopolk-Mirsky “ best story Russian literature in any language, including Russian."
Major works
Modern Russian Literature, 1925.
A History of Russian Literature: From Its Beginnings to 1900 in two volumes, 1926, 1927.
Svyatopolk-Chetvertinskie
A princely family, originating, in all likelihood, from the princes of Turov and Pinsk, from the Rurik tribe. It was first mentioned in documents in 1388. Prince Fyodor Mikhailovich Chetvertinsky was ambassador to Wallachia (1492).
Prince Yuri Ivanovich Chetvertinsky (died in 1502) was the governor of Vladimir (in Volyn), and his son Prince Fedor (died around 1508) was the governor of Bratslav and Zvenigorod. Prince Nikolai Stepanovich (died in 1661) was a Minsk castellan. Prince Gregory, monk Gideon (died 1713), was Metropolitan of Kyiv. Prince Janusz-Foma and Prince Felician were successively (1785 - 1792) castellans of Chernigov.
Prince Anton-Stanislav Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky, castellan of Przemysl, adviser to the Targowitz confederation, was killed by the mob in Warsaw on June 8, 1794. His family was taken to Russia. The Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky family is included in the V part of the genealogical books of the Volyn, Grodno and Moscow provinces (Armorial, XII, 1 and 2). V.R.
Pyotr Dmitrievich Svyatopolk-Mirsky - Russian statesman, adjutant general. Born in 1857. Studied in the Corps of Pages; began service in the Life Guards of His Majesty's Hussar Regiment. Participated in the war of 1877-1878. He completed a course at the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff. He commanded a division and was governor in Penza and Ekaterinoslav. In 1900, he was appointed comrade of the Minister of Internal Affairs and commander of a separate corps of gendarmes, in 1902 - governor-general of three Lithuanian provinces: Vilna, Kovno and Grodno. And on August 26, 1904 - Minister of Internal Affairs. This appointment was seen as the end of the brutal reaction of the era of V.K. Plehve. “Personally (with this description “Liberation” greeted him), by general opinion Svyatopolk-Mirsky is a kind person, not known to almost anyone or anything from the political side.
He did not approve of the speech of January 17, 1895, about meaningless dreams." In the organs of the extreme left parties, Iskra and Revolutionary Russia“The ministry of Svyatopolk-Mirsky was called the ministry of pleasant smiles. On September 16, when the officials of the ministry were presented to him, Svyatopolk-Mirsky made a speech in which he promised to base his activities on “a sincerely benevolent and sincerely trusting attitude towards public and class institutions and towards the population in general.” “Only under these conditions,” he said, “can we gain mutual trust, without which it is impossible to expect lasting success in building the state.” This speech gave reason to call the era of Svyatopolk-Mirsky’s management of the Ministry of Internal Affairs “the era of trust,” as well as the “spring of Russian life.” The brutal repressions stopped; many administratively expelled people were returned, and the ban on public activities was lifted. The amnesty granted on August 12 (on the occasion of the birth of the heir) was interpreted quite widely. Political arrests were made less frequently. The trends coming from St. Petersburg were extremely inconsistent. Zemstvo leaders were allowed to organize a congress, but then this permission was taken back, and when the forbidden congress did meet, and quite openly, nothing was done against it. On November 28, a demonstration was organized on the streets of St. Petersburg, but it was suppressed with no less ferocity than under Plehve, and Svyatopolk-Mirsky did not take any measures against it. In countless interviews, he outlined his program in an extremely vague manner.
He is a “friend of progress and freedom,” since they do not contradict the foundations of the existing state system in Russia; he is a supporter of religious tolerance within the same boundaries; he is a friend of the Jews, but is afraid that they will seize too much power if they are given full equality, etc. Nevertheless, the management of Svyatopolk-Mirsky facilitated the development of the liberation movement. Hence the hatred of the reactionary elements towards him. From the beginning of January 1905, he actually no longer had any power, although he was still listed as a minister. On the eve of January 9, 1905, terrible bloodshed was expected in St. Petersburg.
A deputation from St. Petersburg writers came to Svyatopolk-Mirsky to ask him to achieve the abolition of certain military measures, but he refused to accept them. Nine out of ten deputies were arrested, in all likelihood, against the wishes of Svyatopolk-Mirsky, who, however, bears political responsibility for this arrest. Events of January 9 and next days also took place against his will. On January 18, 1905, Svyatopolk-Mirsky was dismissed from the post of Minister of Internal Affairs, retaining the rank of Adjutant General.
General, was governor in Penza and Ekaterinoslav. In 1900, he was appointed comrade of the Minister of Internal Affairs (Sipyagin) and commander of a separate corps of gendarmes. In 1902, Svyatopolk-Mirsky, in connection with the appointment of Plehve, whom he did not like, left as governor general for Vilna. After the assassination, Plehve was appointed (August 26, 1904) Minister of the Interior. The appointment of Svyatopolk-Mirsky was greeted by liberal society as a symptom of the government's decisive transition to new policy. Iskra at one time characterized the ministry of Svyatopolk-Mirsky as a “ministry of pleasant smiles.” On September 16, 1904, he made a speech when the officials of the ministry were presented to him, in which he promised to treat class institutions and the population in general with confidence. This speech gave rise to calling the era of management Svyatopolk-Mirsky era"spring" and "trust". Svyatopolk-Mirsky formulated his program vaguely: he is a friend of progress and freedom, but since they do not contradict the foundations of the existing political system. During his administration, the policy of repression softened somewhat, political arrests became less common. However, when on the eve of January 9 a deputation of professors and writers came to him demanding to avoid bloodshed, Svyatopolk-Mirsky refused to accept it. On January 18, 1905, Svyatopolk-Mirsky received his resignation.
View value Svyatopolk-Mirsky P.D. in other dictionaries
Svyatopolk- genus. p. -a (m.) – proper name, other Russian. Svyatopolk (Movary years), Tslav.-Greek. Σφεντόπλικος (Life of St. Clement), Czech. Svatopluk, Polish. Swiętopeɫk. Derived from saint and regiment, t.........
Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language by Max Vasmer
Svyatopolk-Mirsky Dmitry Petrovich— (1890–1939) - publicist, poet, literary critic, left-wing Eurasian, supporter of National Bolshevism. Returned to Soviet Russia from emigration. Died in Kolyma.
Political dictionary
Svyatopolk I the Accursed- (c. 980-1019) - Prince of Turov from 988, Kiev in 1015 - 19. Son of Yaropolk, adopted by Vladimir I. Killed three of his brothers and took possession of their inheritance. Expelled by Yaroslav the Wise; at 1018 s.......
Svyatopolk Ii (1050-1113)- Prince of Polotsk in 1069-71, Novgorod in 1078-88, Turov in 1088-93, Grand Duke Kyiv since 1093.
Big encyclopedic dictionary
Svyatopolk-mirsky- Pyotr Dmitrievich (1857-1914) - prince, Russian statesman, cavalry general (1913). In August 1904 - January 1905, Minister of Internal Affairs. On the eve of the Revolution of 1905-07 he tried to attract........
Large encyclopedic dictionary
Gideon Svyatopolk Chetvertinsky- (Prince Gregory) - Metropolitan of Kiev and Galicia.
Born into the family of a princely elder.
In 1659 he was consecrated Bishop of Lutsk and Ostrog.
This was the period.......
Gideon Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky— - Bishop of Lutsk, then Metropolitan of Kiev († in 1690); known for his letters and messages to various clergy. Wed. Sumtsov "L. Baranovich" and Shlyapkina "St. Demetrius........
Big biographical encyclopedia
Gideon, Prince Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky- (in the world Grigory) - Metropolitan of Kiev, son of the headman of Ratsiborsky, subordinate of Lutsk Prince Zakhary Grigorievich from his marriage with Regina Khrenitskaya, was ordained metropolitan in 1659........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk- (d. 894) - Great Moravian. prince (870-894), nephew of the prince. Rostislav and his rival in the struggle for power. Recognized himself as a vassal of Louis the German and Charles III. In 890 he got it from the king.........
Svyatopolk Izyaslavich- (1050-1113) - prince of Polotsk (1069-71), Novgorod (1078-88), Turov (1088-1093), great. book Kyiv (1093-1113), son led. book Izyaslav Yaroslavich. In 1077, together with Vladimir Monomakh, he went to........
Soviet historical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk the Accursed- (c. 980-1019) - Prince of Turov (988-1015) and leader. book Kyiv (1015-19), son of Vladimir Svyatoslavich. Was married to a daughter Polish king Boleslav the Brave. With his help, S.O. prepared.......
Soviet historical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk-mirsky- Pyotr Danilovich (1857 - 16.V.1914), prince, - state. figure Tsarist Russia, Adjutant General. Graduated from the Corps of Pages and the General Staff Academy. From 1890 - leader of the nobility of the Kharkov province........
Soviet historical encyclopedia
Kamensky (Mirovich-Mirsky), Nik. Dm.- modern dram
Large biographical encyclopedia
Konichek, Svyatopolk Osip.- author brochure "Sokolstvo", ed. alman. "Slavic traveler." (1900
Large biographical encyclopedia
Mirsky, V.- critic, collaborator "Magazine for everyone" 1900s, pseudo. Evg. A.
Large biographical encyclopedia
Mirsky, I.- comp. arithmetic task (M.,
Large biographical encyclopedia
Mirsky, Eduard Mikhailovich- (b. 04/20/1935) - special. in the region methodology of interdisciplinary research. and system research science; Doctor of Philosophy Sci. Graduated from Philol. Faculty of Leningrad State University (1958), philosophy. asp. Rostov State university (1969)..........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Mirsky, Ya. Ts.- critical author brochure about rum. Tolstoy "Resurrection" (St. Petersburg,
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk (Mikhail) Ii Izyaslavich- - son of Izyaslav Yaroslavich, b. in 1050. In 1069, Izyaslav expelled Vseslav from Polotsk and planted his son Mstislav there, and after his death - Svyatopolk; in 1071 S. was expelled........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk (Mikhail) Izyaslavich— - Grand Duke of Kyiv; reigned from 1093 to 1113, was the second son of Grand Duke Izyaslav Yaroslavich. The year of his birth is unknown, and the chronicler does not give any........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk I Vladimirovich- called the Accursed in the chronicle - the son of St. Vladimir from the widow of his brother, Yaropolk, was born around 980. His father planted him in Turov and approx. 1013 married the daughter of the Polish king........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk Vladimirovich- - Grand Duke of Kiev, was the son of St. Vladimir. Having defeated his brother Yaropolk in 980 and killed him, Vladimir took as his concubine his Greek wife, who was......
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk Georgievich- - Prince Turovsky, was the son of Prince Yuri Yaroslavich and the great-grandson of Grand Duke Svyatopolk (Mikhail) Izyaslavich. His year of birth is unknown, and there is no possibility even........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk Mstislavich— - 3rd son of Grand Duke Mstislav Vladimirovich and his second wife, daughter of the noble Novgorodian Dimitri Zavidich, grandson of Vladimir Monomakh. The year of his birth is unknown;........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk-worldly, Princely and Noble Family- - princely and noble family, coat of arms of Byalyn, descended from Pan Grigory Mirsky, judge of the Zemsky Braslav (died in 1620). Another Grigory Mirsky (died in 1661) was a guard........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk-mirsky, Prince Dmitry Ivanovich- (1825-1899) - adjutant general, infantry general. He began military service in 1841, in the Caucasus, taking part in cases against the Chechens and Dagestanis. During the eastern.........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk-mirsky, Prince Nikolai Ivanovich— (1883-1898) - adjutant general, cavalry general; student of the Corps of Pages; He began his service under Vorontsov in the Caucasus, where he participated in affairs with the highlanders and the Turks. In........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk-Mirsky, Peter Dmitrievich— - statesman, adjutant general. Genus. in 1857 he studied in the page corps; began service in the Life Guards. gusarsk E.V. regiment. He took part in the war of 1877-78, then graduated........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky, Princely Family — - princely family, originating, in all likelihood, from the princes of Turov and Pinsk, from the Rurik tribe. It was first mentioned in documents in 1388. Prince. Fyodor Mikhailovich Chetvertinsky........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Sylvester Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky- (in the world Prince Sergius Vyacheslavich Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky) - Bishop of Mogilev; elected to the see of the Belarusian bishopric in 1704 from the abbots of the Chetvertinsky monastery.........
Large biographical encyclopedia
Dmitry Petrovich Svyatopolk-Mirsky (1880–1939) began his career in Tsarist Russia, gained fame in emigration, left his mark on the literary and political life England, and ended his journey in Stalinist Russia.
Prince Dmitry Mirsky owes the uniqueness of his human and creative destiny to the era, the uniqueness of his talent, and his character traits. What allowed him to enter the culture and, in particular, the university environment of England was the “Anglophile” upbringing he received in his family, similar to the one that V. Nabokov received. “Svyatopolk the Mirsky Father was a rare phenomenon: he was a liberal Minister of the Interior in the tsarist government. Thanks to his common sense, openness and courage, he gained significant authority in that period, which gave Russia its representative State Duma“- wrote Bernard Perse, one of the Englishmen who stayed at the estate of Prince Dmitry’s father.
On his mother's side, Prince Svyatopolk-Mirsky was related to Prince A. Bobrinsky, the illegitimate son of Catherine II and Count Grigory Orlov. English education was a family tradition among the Bobrinskys. Mother's brother V. Bobrinsky was educated in English private school and then at the University of Edinburgh. He visited England often and spoke impeccable English. Dmitry Mirsky visited England with his mother as a child; he communicated in English both with her and with his English governess. Perhaps from his mother he inherited not only his love for England, but also his literary talent. In 1906-1908, D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky studied at the First Lyceum of St. Petersburg, and then entered St. Petersburg University, where for the first three years he studied at the department of Chinese and Japanese languages. His teachers were the famous orientalists V. Bartold, V. Alekseev, I. Baudouin de Courtenay. Mirsky, like other wealthy students, expanded his education during trips to Europe. In 1911 he published the first and only collection of poetry8. The book presents the genres of ancient elegy and ode, Japanese pentaverses (section “Tanks”), and imitation of Buddhist prayer. The interests of the future ideologist of Eurasianism were reflected here. A prediction of this line of thought is the poem “Asia”, in which D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky reflects on East and West, on the origins of human culture, on “old age” European culture and the possible awakening of the East in the coming century: And remember, Asia, about the blessed goal, Rocking new century in an iron cradle.
In 1911, D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky was called up for military service and received officer rank. When did the first one begin? world war, Mirsky took part in military operations on eastern front. For his anti-war statements in August 1916, he was exiled to the Caucasus. October Revolution he did not accept and joined the formation of the White Army in Sevastopol. During civil war he fought in Denikin's army and emigrated with it to Europe from the south of Russia through Constantinople. Then he went to Athens, where his mother emigrated along with part of the royal court. In Athens, D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky wrote and sent to England his first essays on Russian literature, which were published in the magazine " The London Mercury" in the form of a series of articles entitled "Russian Letters". In 1922 he moved to London, where, with the help of Baring and Purse, he obtained a professorship at the Institute of Slavic Studies at King's College, University of London. Mirsky's years of emigration were spent mainly in England (1922-1932). Peers recalled the beginning of D. Mirsky’s activities in England: “After the revolution, I arranged for Dmitry, who became an emigrant, to lecture on Russian literature and criticism at the University of London. I remembered the impression that his ardor and brilliant argumentation made on me in defending his convictions in a dispute over literary issues. At the department he did much moreover what his duties required of him. He taught the course with us once a week open lectures and on their basis he wrote a first-class history of Russian literature from ancient times to the present, as well as a study on Pushkin.
Literary criticism has always flourished in Russia, and Mirsky showed us a level in this field that specialists in England had never achieved. He had an amazing stock of varied and living knowledge, which was quickly and easily brought to light on occasion; he had an amazing memory, and his style, when he spoke English, sometimes made me freeze in surprise in the middle of the street. IN English he undertook the most daring experiments - and always came out of them with success.” In England, D. Mirsky wrote surprisingly a lot. In 1923, he published an article about Pushkin for the university magazine Slavonic Review. Soon this article grew into master's thesis, which he defended in 1924. Two years later, based on his dissertation, he published the book “Pushkin”. In the preface to one of the reprints of this book, it is assessed as best introduction into Pushkin's works in English. In 1925, he published a popular book on modern Russian literature, Modern Russian Literature. The next year, 1926, a book about modern Russian literature, and a year later, a history of Russian literature from ancient times to 1881. These publications secured D. Mirsky's position as a leading historian of Russian literature in England and in the Russian diaspora. Subsequently, his books went through many reprints, and in the 1960s and 1970s they were translated into major European languages.
As G. Struve, D. Mirsky’s successor at the Russian department of the University of London, wrote, “The History of Russian Literature” became reference book for all foreigners studying Russian literature. Many reviewers noted the excellent literary style D. Mirsky combined with passion of argumentation. Sir Isaiah Berlin wrote: “His English was lively and original, and his judgments were always based on first-hand knowledge of the subject and independent understanding of it.” The famous English literary critic and expert on Russian literature D. Davey wrote about the uniqueness of the history of Russian literature by D. Mirsky, who believed that it represents an ideal example for writing history national literature. The books and articles of D. Mirsky shaped the ideas of not only students and readers, but also Western writers about Russian literature; Virginia and Lenard Wolfe, D.G. became acquainted with Russian literature through them. Lawrence, E. Hemingway. As A. Bakhrakh noted, when D. Mirsky wrote for foreigners, he abandoned “malicious polemics” and did not seek to shock with the paradoxical nature of his judgments. Western Slavists were aware of this, one of whom noted that for foreigners D. Mirsky wrote “in breadth, but for Russians in depth.”
In addition to academic works, D. Mirsky wrote articles and reviews for the English, French, German and Russian foreign press. In his articles, unlike other Russian critics abroad, he paid a lot of attention to the literature of Soviet Russia. This direction of his interests was formed under the influence of the requirements of the English university course: after the establishment diplomatic relations with Soviet Russia in 1921, the British interest in emigrants, already quite weak, finally died out, and Soviet culture, on the contrary, became the focus of attention. In his articles, D. Mirsky emphasized that in Russia the search for something new in artistic field are much more successful than in emigration. In the article “On the current state of Russian poetry,” Mirsky analyzes the poetry of Russia and emigration and comes to the conclusion that emigration has nothing to oppose to the young and developing literature of Russia. He states: “The selection of poets for emigration was done on the principle of unnecessaryness.” D. Mirsky was accepted in the literary and artistic circles of England and France, visited the elite circle of Bloomsbury, the bohemian aristocratic salon of Lady Ottoline Morell, was acquainted with the most prominent English economist Maynard Keynes and his wife, the Russian ballerina L. Lopukhova (Lopokova), visited prominent socialists Sidney and Beatrice Webb, and the Fabian Society invited him to lecture on the situation in Russia. He subsequently gave lectures on this topic to the workers of Manchester.
D. Mirsky occupied a prominent place in the cultural and political activity of the Russian emigration, and he could be found in the main centers of the Russian diaspora. D. Mirsky has written more than once about the need to recognize the Russian revolution as accomplished historical fact. Recognition of the revolution entailed recognition new culture. This position brought the critic closer to the Eurasianists, whose movement played important role in his fate, however, he himself played a fatal role in the fate of Eurasianism. D. Mirsky published his first notes about the movement and its manifesto in 1922 in England in the magazine “Russian Life”, published in English by the Committee for the Liberation of Russia. In the spring of 1925, he organized a group of Eurasianists in England, despite the fact that the Russian emigrant environment in this country was not the most favorable for the spread of Eurasian ideas. Several publications appeared in the English press, clearly not without the participation of D. Mirsky English authors about Eurasianism, one of them was Jane Helen Garrison, an expert on ancient Russian literature and friend of Dmitry Petrovich. N. Spalding, a wealthy philanthropist, philosopher and poet, became seriously interested in Eurasian problems, passionate about the idea of bringing Western and Eastern civilizations closer together. Spalding acted as a patron of the Eurasians. In 1928, under the pseudonym “English Eurasian,” he published the book “Resurrecting Russia: A Summary of Views and Goals.” new party in Russia”, which was highly appreciated by the founders of the Eurasian movement. Spalding financed some Eurasian publications and, possibly, the magazine “Versty”, in which D. Mirsky occupied a leading position.
Eurasianism was defined in these publications as “revolutionary” or “post-revolutionary” Russian nationalism. In this capacity, Eurasianism seemed to D. Mirsky as a kind of Russian correspondence to those movements for national self-affirmation that arose and spread among the peoples of Europe. He recognized Eurasianism as an expression of national-historiosophical thought as the main achievement of emigration: “But in the sphere of political thought, since the Revolution, only emigrants have shown true creativity - in the person of the Eurasians.” D. Mirsky sees the originality and value of Russian thought, developed by Eurasians, in thinking in “wholes” - as opposed to European rationalistic analysis. Eurasians, the critic writes, are looking for their ideals in Orthodoxy, in the idea of conciliarity and in the harmony of man with nature and with the cosmos. D. Mirsky's interest in Eurasian ideology soon began to take on more and more left-wing contours. In its brilliant English book on the history of modern Russian literature, he wrote: “Unlike fiction, Russian political thought in emigration is not sterile; its most interesting manifestations were found among young scientists, whose names were unknown to anyone before the revolution - they called themselves Eurasians. Eurasians are extreme nationalists who believe that Russia is a separate cultural world, unlike either Europe or Asia (hence their name).” The most detailed outline of Eurasianism is contained in an article by D. Mirsky, published in the academic publication “Slavonic Review” in 1927. He began to pin his political hopes on new government in Russia.
In Eurasianism he sees the opportunity to “reconsider and reassess all pre-revolutionary ideas and values”, creatively rethink history under the influence of new ones historical events. In an effort to bring Eurasianism closer to communism, Svyatopolk-Mirsky gives some concepts a new and unexpected meaning. Thus, when he writes about the combination of mystical consciousness with practical economic activity, he cites as an example Lenin’s plan for the electrification of Russia, and in the “conciliar personality” of the Eurasians he sees an analogy to Bolshevik collectivism. Svyatopolk-Mirsky brings together the principle of “ideocracy” postulated by Eurasians, that is, power based on an idea, with the organization of a communist society, in which one party rules, implementing its idea. Interpretation of Eurasian ideas, placement of new accents in this system of philosophical and political views led to a deep conflict between D. Mirsky and the founders of the movement and to a split of Eurasianism into two wings. 1928 turned out to be a turning point for him: according to him, he was at the very beginning of the road that led him “to the complete and unconditional acceptance of communism.” During these years of crisis for him, D. Mirsky actively became close to communist parties France and England, on the instructions of the latter, writes a book about Lenin, and is preparing a book on the history of Russia, in which, from a Marxist point of view, he revises his previous version of history, written from a Eurasian position. The critic speaks in English workers' newspaper The Daily Worker, outlining his views in an article entitled "Why I Became a Marxist." That same year, a few months later, The History of a Liberation was published in Paris.
Disillusioned with Eurasianism, D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky notes too close connection Eurasianism with the ideology of religious and philosophical renaissance. Now he denies the merits of Russian idealism in the history of thought, the achievements of symbolism in poetry and aesthetics, the gains of classical Eurasianism in the philosophical and political quest for emigration. How sincerely D. Mirsky changed his milestones can be judged by the episode described by Flora Solomon and dating back to 1929. “We met in Paris when we worked together on a wonderful publication.” Brief history Milton's Muscovy, published in last time in the 17th century. Dmitry betrayed the traditions of the family, becoming, ironically, a communist. True, at dinner, under the influence of too much wine, he completely forgot about his communism and returned to square one. One day in a restaurant, he rose from his chair and, standing unsteadily on his feet, called on everyone present to join him in a toast to the Romanov dynasty. He was very upset by the West's ignorance of Russian culture, and he felt obliged to introduce the British to Pushkin. Our publishing house prepared selected letters from Pushkin with his drawings, as well as a luxurious edition of “ Queen of Spades"bound in leather, cost ten guineas."
In 1931 D. Mirsky met with Soviet ambassador in London by Sokolnikov and his wife, writer Galina Serebryakova,28 and in March 1932 he was declared a communist agitator in the press and soon lost his position at the university. PRINCESS D.P. SVYATOPOLK-MIRSKY: TALENT AND DESTINY 215 having lost his job, Svyatopolk-Mirsky could not find a guarantor to extend his visa in England, which made his departure inevitable. However, the issue of obtaining a Soviet passport was not resolved immediately, although M. Gorky did his best to facilitate his departure. Virginia Woolf, who intuitively understood the problems of even such a distant country as Russia, foresaw tragic fate D. Mirsky. In her diary for June 28, 1932, she left a note about their meeting shortly before his departure: “Mirsky came for 12 years, he lives in England in furnished apartments, and now he is returning to Russia - forever. Watching his eyes light up and then go out, I suddenly thought: there will soon be a bullet in this head. This is what war does: it’s as if this cornered, trapped man speaks.” By mid-1932 soviet passport was ready and D. Mirsky no longer had a choice. In early October, Svyatopolk-Mirsky was met in Moscow by his English acquaintance Malcolm Muggeridge. In his diary, Muggeridge left a note about this meeting: “I ran into Mirsky in the New Moscow Hotel. I tried to understand what he thought about his present life, but he was very secretive. “I found what I expected,” he answered evasively. However, he looked depressed. I don’t think he’s happy in Russia; but I also don’t think that he would be happy anywhere.” In his book Chronicle of a Lost Time (1973), Muggeridge also recalled: “It was obvious that he had difficulty living in Moscow and collaborating with Soviet writers. Or maybe it was in London, where he had a strong position former prince, both in the aristocratic environment and in the circles of the intelligentsia, not to mention workers' meetings, where he was also popular. There, the communists were especially flattered by the presence of the prince in their ranks during the demonstrations in Trafalgar Square.
In Moscow he ended up in complete dependence from those in power. I don’t know if he thought about escaping, but one day, when we were looking at a map together, his finger seemed to accidentally move in the direction of Batum and stopped at the Turkish border.” D. Mirsky, one might say, was lucky in that M. Gorky also moved to Russia at that time. In an effort to help D. Mirsky enter literary world Russia, the writer invited him to participate in Soviet publications. M. Gorky ordered D. Mirsky an article about the English intelligentsia, which the critic readily took on. The article was published in " Literary newspaper”, and later on its basis the book “Intelligence” was written, which was published in 1934 in Russia, and in next year published in London, translated into English. M. Gorky involved D. Mirsky in work on the history of factories and factories. Working on a large writer's "collective farm", he participated in the preparation of a book about the construction of the White Sea-Baltic Canal (M., 1934), in which he wrote historical part chapter “GPU, engineers, project”. The following year, edited by M. Gorky and D. Mirsky, the book “There Were High Mountains” (M., 1935) about the Vysokogorsk iron mine was published. D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky interested Gorky from a human point of view. He had long been interested in the type of “traitor to his class.”
In 1922, he wrote: “...In Russia, white crows, traitors to the interests of their class, are as common a phenomenon as in other countries. We have a descendant of the Rurikovichs - an anarchist, the count - out of principle - plows the land and also preaches passive anarchism...” Ten years later, M. Gorky continues this observation in a letter to Romain Rolland using new examples, including D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky: "There are several interesting facts psychological restructuring: Prince Svyatopolk-Mirsky, the son of the former Minister of Internal Affairs, also declared himself a communist. However, these individual cases moral revival does not yet allow, of course, to draw serious conclusions.” With all his interest and attention to D. Mirsky, M. Gorky, of course, could not protect him from the difficulties of his unusual existence in Soviet Russia. In his first letters to Dorothy Golton, Peers's secretary, D. Mirsky writes about how much he has to work and travel, how many new acquaintances he has made. But the enthusiasm in his letters gradually gives way to irritation, and then despair. Many everyday problems arise, and in each letter he has to ask Dorothy to buy him books and things with the money left over from the English royalties. He begins to look forward to letters, parcels and the arrival of acquaintances from Europe. Little things give way to larger troubles: he has to change his apartment several times, each time for a worse one, he is visited several times by strange robbers who take out of the apartment the books he most needs for work, imported from England.
Telling Dorothy about his troubles, D. Mirsky leaves them in the shadow main source- their conflicts with official literary authorities. The works of D. Mirsky - both purely scientific and literary-critical - caused resistance among Soviet specialists. But the main reason for indignation was D. Mirsky’s intrusion into the affairs of modern Soviet literature. The death of M. Gorky in 1936 extremely complicated the situation of D. Mirsky, for whom the writer was reliable protection. In 1937, critical speeches against D. Mirsky turned into open persecution. At the general meeting of the Moscow Writers' Union, of which D. Mirsky was a member, he was publicly accused of hostile attitude to the Soviet system, in espionage and betrayal. Despite the fact that D. Mirsky admitted his mistakes and expressed his readiness to reconsider his beliefs, in the same year he was arrested and died in a camp near Magadan in 1939. Transition of Prince D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky, an officer of the Russian army, a successful professor at the University of London, to a communist camp, his departure to Russia and his tragic death, vague rumors about which were heard abroad, shocked the emigration. For people who knew D. Mirsky closely, his change of milestones was not unexpected; they saw it as a consequence of a nonconformist driven to the extreme. Gleb Struve believed that D. Mirsky “became a victim of his own spiritual mischief”3. A. Bakhrakh expressed the opinion of many when he noted that in his Russian works D. Mirsky was extremely subjective and changeable, like a two-faced Janus, “he burned what he worshiped, without hiding the fact that he knew the price of what he burned.”
Peers once wrote: “The worldly man was seized by one passion after another. There was a time when he defended the White cause with arms in hand; then he declared himself a Eurasian and shared quite strange point view of Russia as a special continent; there was a moment when he called Marina Tsvetaeva a hopelessly dissolute Muscovite, but he soon recognized her the greatest poet peace. For us, he always remained a terrible child." Modern researchers in assessing the motives for changing milestones, D. Mirsky makes similar judgments. N. Lavrukhina cites the observation of Vera Trail: a close friend of D. Mirsky saw the gap between what he loved and what he considered necessary to love. Gerald Smith is also convinced that D. Mirsky was neither an opportunist nor an opportunist and that his change of belief, while not creatively fruitful, was nevertheless sincere. D. Mirsky himself most accurately defined the nature of his reorientation when he wrote about V. Bryusov: “The main thing that pushed Bryusov to the Bolsheviks was his loneliness, his perceived backwardness from the front and the desire at all costs to be ahead again, again be the last word."
Russian Presence in Britain project
