Military Review

The deceased at the post. The mystery of the death of Pushkin

The deceased at the post. The mystery of the death of Pushkin

I understand that this title will seem to many too pretentious. Especially since we are talking about one of the topics utterly hackneyed - about the death of Pushkin. Scary has been written about her a lot - and yet ... In short, the author of these lines had until recently a feeling of some kind of inconsistency. Moreover, most of the research on this subject can be reduced to two categories: 1) "because of women" and 2) "liquidmasons." I must say that the representatives of both approaches have a lot of good and intelligent. But…

The first approach has to be thrown away almost immediately. And the point is not only that Natalya Nikolayevna Aleksandr Sergeevich’s spouse behaved quite respectably (which, we note, Pushkin had no doubt). They may say: yes, but the romantic time and all that ... But the romance was romance, and the ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the Netherlands (Holland) in Russia, Baron Geckern, and the vice-chancellor of Russia Nesselrode were involved in this matter. It should be added that the Netherlands was a state, Russia was very, very friendly (married to a Dutch ruler - shtgalgalom or, more precisely, a stathauder, usually called the Dutch king, Willem III was the sister of Nicholas I, Anna Pavlovna). On the other hand, Nesselrode was for quite a long time a vice-chancellor, despite the fact that there was no chancellor - that is, he was and. about. the prime minister. This means that Nicholas I had some grounds for not rushing to his appointment - and Nesselrode directed the policy of the Russian Empire, being himself, so to speak, on bird rights. Recall that in the libel, which was thrown both to Pushkin himself, and to many of his friends and acquaintances, there were very indecent for that time hints on the behavior of the late Alexander I. According to most researchers today, the libel came out of Nesselrode’s house (and said , and very affirmatively, for the first time none other than Alexander II soon after his accession to the throne - in 1857). Will a person who was raised to the highest post of the Empire from, one might say, non-being, be from the cipherkeepers of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and built conditionally, in some way suspected, for the sake of some love affair to interfere in such a thing? Find out about his involvement, not Alexander II, but Nicholas I (who, incidentally, was enraged by the letter when he read this creation after the death of Pushkin) - what would be left of Nesselrode?
No, this does not mean, of course, that Alexander II, and most of the researchers today are wrong. Risk politicians so can. But not because of the intrigue, which, moreover, was not there - but for more important reasons. And do not talk about the enmity of the vice-chancellor with the poet. They were in different calibers - and besides, Alexander Sergeevich was under special suspicion of the emperor. And because of such a low (according to the table of ranks) standing, and even often conflicting with the sovereign of the chamber junker, this man, cunning, cautious, who is fabulously high, but in limbo, will he suddenly risk it? Dismiss ...

All the more so, at Göckkern, the consequences of this risk were fully affected. As it was said above, Nikolay, having become acquainted with the libel, became enraged. Gekkern was simply thrown out of Russia with a scandal. Willem III, having familiarized himself with the case thanks to the message of Nicholas, completely approved the tsar's behavior - and he threw Gekkern out of diplomatic circles - seriously and for a long time. Is it possible to assume that Gekkern, an experienced diplomat, did not foresee such an opportunity? Well, yes, of course, cupid, trujur, bonjour and everything else ... But did Dantes, being obliged to all to Heecker, so went about his alleged love (besides unresponsive) to Pushkin's wife? And an experienced, cautious diplomat suddenly became a pimp?

One of the historians (by the name of Abramovich, I think) explained this episode in a rather exotic way. As you know, under Nicholas I, a lot of homosexuals went uphill (it’s enough to recall Vigel - and the notorious Sukhozaneta who was in charge of the cadet corps - and was “clearing up” there). The historian believed that Gekkern also belonged to these unformals - and therefore adopted the handsome Dantes. And then, when Dantes was “normally” carried away by beautiful Natalia Nikolaevna, Gekkern decided to upset this hobby, thinking for some reason that the matter would end not in a duel - but in a scandalous explanation of her husband and her wife and her retreat. And allegedly because Gekkern played the inept role of the pimp - in order to outrage Pushkin and encourage him to lock up “Natalie” at home. Alas, it is unlikely. Could the ambassador not know that the tsar himself wanted Natalia Nikolayevna to shine at the balls at the court? And if he didn’t know, couldn’t he tell Nesselrode who was very friendly to him? And was the Pushkin’s furious nature really so unknown - and his constant readiness for tough actions? Especially since already one challenge barely managed to upset ...
Nonsense, it would seem. But in every such nonsense there is something. The ineptitude of the behavior of an experienced Geckern; the cheeky behavior of the unstable Dantes ... Did everyone go crazy? Or ... or some kind of intentionality? But then it turns out that - the machinations, the conspiracy?

May be. But immediately the question arises: what about? There are a lot of assumptions - but, alas, everyone I know does not shine with consistency. Up to the point that, allegedly, Pushkin, who was a freemason at one time, revealed some Masonic secrets - and was destroyed for it. A. Bushkov logically asked: so what are the secrets and to whom did Pushkin reveal? Add: Alexander Sergeyevich, as a person of poetic, enthusiastic, not very trusted. Well, if his friends did not trust the secret of the Decembrist conspiracy to him - what could they have given him seriously-Masonic? So, some general reasoning used to attract simpletons - maximum ... Another thing is that, yes, it all looks like a conspiracy - the participation of very influential people, and the suspicious awkwardness of the behavior of a number of people who are deft by definition. But what a conspiracy?

Let's try to reason. Firstly, for people involved in politics and having achieved considerable heights, the priorities for which they will take risks may be primarily, if not only, political tasks. Here they can take the risk of a very, very, including not only a career, sometimes life. This time. Two: usually such people for their own purposes, among which may be the “removal” of some undesirable figure, someone is hired or pushed. “Why climb, for example, Himself!” - especially if this “himself” is an ambassador or, even more, and. about. Chancellor. And if they “climbed for themselves”, it means that something urgent and urgent is happening, when there is no time for a long intrigue, pushing or hiring someone. And, yes, such a desperate situation can be the threat of disclosing some mystery (in this the conspiracy therapists are right). And from this point of view, it is necessary to reconsider all the more than familiar events in the life of Pushkin before the duel pores.

Has Pushkin ever touched international politics? Yes. And it was precisely at this time that he began to touch her all the more insistently, having received an opportunity to do so — taking up the publication of Sovremennik.

What aspect of politics did he cover?

Russophobia. It was in 1830 in Europe that its new wave rose. At that time, in particular, a fake “Testament of Peter the Great”, allegedly extracted from Russian archives, was published for the first time - and so on and so forth. Pushkin saw it. Back in 1831, he wanted to repel this wave, to publish, so to speak, countermaterials. But he did not succeed, in particular, also because he did not have his own organ of the press. And in 1836, he already had a “Contemporary”. And the materials that Pushkin published or planned to publish were sometimes quite peculiar: the poet denounced many sides of Europe, and sometimes went in his techniques “beyond the limits of a foul” - such as in the material on Voltaire and the descendant of Joan of Arc. In a word, he reflected how he could (and as censorship allowed) “unscrupulous attacks of Europeans on Russia”.

And what was terrible about this? - may ask me. The materials published in the not too readable Russian magazine - and even about the wave that has spread widely in the West? What is this specifically political? Especially since there is another example. Already after the death of Pushkin, another remarkable poet — and, besides, a remarkable diplomat, Tyutchev — also spoke out against the wave of Russophobia. He published anonymously his interesting articles not in Russia, but abroad - and they were written not in Russian, but in French. They, yes, made quite a splash, they were answered by the best publicists of the West, such as the famous Michelet. Subsequently, some of these publicists admitted that Tyutchev saw much deeper than they. But ... but Russophobia as it was-and remained, not at all weakening. The question is, what could Pushkin do here?

Yes, against this wave, he could not do anything. Well, if Tyutchev ... But, one wonders, why, then, was Tyutchev's case so accepted with hostility? Why did it cost him to start his activity to repel Russophobia, his boss Nesselrode (again he!) Literally kicked him out of work? In addition, some rumors (let us remember it!) Rushed after Tyutchev about the loss of the cipher ... The documents raised did not contain anything like that. But there was a rumor. And the dismissal was. And then ... further events developed even more intriguing.

When Tyutchev, who had flown in from everywhere, arrived in Russia, he suddenly found that Count Benkendorf was very, very interested in him. Yes, yes, that one. Gendarme chief. And not interested in the subject of surveillance or the collection of compromising. No, the count offered Tyutchev ... COOPERATION. Far from the line of "knocking" and in general the internal affairs. No, Tyutchev had to find promising and hard-nosed Western Russophobes (first of all, Falmerayer, a rather strong Byzantologist of that time) and give them the opportunity to speak out in print to Russia and its traditions without common polity, as they really thought. What would come of this is clear already from the fact that a significant part of anti-Russian and anti-Orthodox statements still in circulation came from Falmerayer. Well, for example: "the soulless emptiness of the Orthodox faith." And from Tyutchev's letters it becomes clear that all this was meant for Nicholas I.

Here we come to the topic: what secrets were kept from the king. More E. V. Tarle found out: Nicholas managed to completely ignore the wave of Russophobia in the West until the Crimean War. And smearing this Russophobia, disorienting the Tsar was precisely ... NESCELRODE! This is not me - this is academician Tarle says ...

At times, something still reached the sovereign. The famous book of the Marquis de Custine surprised him a lot. And it was Benkendorf who tried to explain to the king that this is the opinion that is prevalent in Europe about Russia - and not only among the left. And it was after this that Benkendorf and with Tyutchev tried to provoke prominent Russophobes to speak out in such a way that even Nicholas could understand: yes, that’s how Europe looks at Russia! But then it began ...

Soon after the start of Tyutchev’s negotiations with Fallmerayer and the latter’s agreement to act on Benkendorf’s subsidy, the count himself ... suddenly dies on the steamer. Heart, you see. Wow, if not in time. Or, on the contrary, in time - if from the point of view of Nesselrode? And again there is a rumor behind the event - ostensibly before his death Benkendorf converted to Catholicism. And Nikolai could not bear those. And, of course, the king quickly forgot, threw away everything that Benkendorf tried to introduce into his consciousness. Classic intrigue. Like today, an airplane or a helicopter launches heat balls to disorient a rocket homing at heat — so did someone “shoot out” the rumors. First, to hide Tyutchev, and then to hide, why this healthy, strong man suddenly took and died — not in his bed, but on the ship, as if in a microcosm, distant from his surroundings ... If you take into account that Benkendorf and Nesselrode openly feuded, given that Nesselrode assured the king in a completely different way than it was in reality and he tried to open his eyes to King Benkendorf ... then who could be at the head of this grand intrigue?

And now back to Pushkin. It is clear how he could be dangerous to the clique Nesselrode - and perhaps to himself. Of course, Pushkin’s materials on Russophobia would hardly have been perceived by a wide circle of readers. But the poet had one most attentive reader who did not trust him. King. And even if not a single material of Pushkin would go to print, the king would still know everything about them. And, therefore, he would have known what he did not know, and what led him and Russia to the catastrophe of the Crimean War — about the wave of Russophobia in the West, which swept then both left and right circles. It is in the light of this that all the fuss about the poet is understood. "Contemporary" started to go out! Materials on Russophobia have already gone - if not all to print - then to the selection and, consequently, after a while on Nicholas's table! So, those who protected the king from the truth, had to hurry. They were in a hurry - there was no time for a more cunning intrigue, I had to act on my own, to take risks. And at the same time, again, "shot the balls." One scandal, another ... A duel will be ... No, the duel is settled - Dantes will marry Natalie's sister ... No, it will still be ... A letter to me ... And in the letter there are hints of a royal house ... Is Natal and himself - hee-ruler? If only to occupy the minds of chewing all sorts of dirty tricks ... Quite a subtle psychological game. Unreasonable risk in any other case - but here - that is what intrigues need.

And the last question: why was it necessary to protect the king from the truth? He did not treat Europe very well anyway. What happened to this and Nesselrode and Gekkernu?

At the time it was popular this wording: Russia under Nicholas I was the "gendarme of Europe." This, of course, is to a considerable degree a biting liberal phrase. But not only a phrase. Russia, yes, was - only more likely not a gendarme, but simply a policeman, the "city" of Europe. Already for a long time, the notorious European development of a free and courageous personality has put Europe more than once, if not to the brink of death, then at least to the brink of historical failure. So it was at the end of the brilliant era of the Renaissance, when the development of the free personality of one or another ruler ended with a mountain of corpses (see the comments of A. F. Losev about Shakespeare's Hamlet). So it was in the XVII century, when the German people almost disappeared in the unprecedented bloody Thirty Years War, when France and Spain devastated each other, and at the same time also a number of other countries in the wild wars for the Spanish inheritance, and Cromwell in revolutionary England cut out at least a third of Ireland (according to some information - more than half). It was in this century that the Turkish danger was again manifested with great force - Turkey sensed the European focus on suicide and rushed to Europe - to help the Europeans in this “noble” business ... With the entry of Russia into Europe this danger began to withdraw. Russia pacified these strong European personalities, ready to cut almost half the world. So it was during the days of Pushkin's boyhood, when Russia managed to undermine the power of Napoleon. So it was in the XX century - in the Great Patriotic War. The responses are heard today, and in our time, when, it would seem, there is little left of traditional Russia, our leaders have to do peacemaking in Syria again - otherwise the whole East will catch fire from the freedom-loving Europeans ...

In the light of this, it becomes clear: a significant part of the brilliant and unprecedented development of Europe, progress is ensured by Russia, the Russian extinction of European fires. The hatred of Russia is also understandable: whoever loves the “cop of the nasty,” even more so of this, without which nothing can be done? But at the same time a thought arises: do we need it? The development of Europe! Yes, it is brilliant. But if you remember that its foundation is sealed, on the one hand, with unmeasured Russian blood, and on the other - with spitting that Russia constantly receives from the “enlightened world” for its mission of policeman’s dash, then involuntarily comes the thought: gentlemen, if you are developed and cultural, unlike us, the dark ones - maybe take care of yourself a little? Is it worth Russia to fulfill its mission like this in order to receive such “gratitude”?

Did Pushkin think about this? Yes. In his verses 1830 of the year and later there are exactly the formulas that the Russians “With their own blood redeemed Europe with freedom, honor and peace”, and in his letters and appeals both to relatives and the king often contain indignation about Russophobia and generally ingratitude of Europe.

Did Nesselrode think about this? Yes. Then the lazy one did not say that Nesselrode is an agent of influence of Austria - and only the king did not see it. Even an elegant anecdote was invented. As I said, the king, as if sensing something was wrong, did not make Nesselrode a full chancellor for a long time. And the courtiers supposedly said this: “Why is he still only the vice-chancellor? “How is it possible otherwise, because the Chancellor is alive.” It was so, respectfully, as if with a capital letter, it was customary to call the Austrian Chancellor Metternich. But for Austria, oh, how Russian help was needed - in 1848, it would simply crumble without Nikolai’s troops. At the same time, it should be noted that the king again seemed to sense that something was wrong - and did not want to give “good” to the invasion of Austria, blazing with fire by revolution. The Austrian envoy on his knees begged for this decision. It was an embarrassment to come true later - when, during the Crimean War, Austria occupied hostile neutrality towards Russia. This was such a betrayal that one of the Austrian leaders, Prince Schwarzenberg, according to some sources said: "We obviously want to surprise the world with our ingratitude." The world was not surprised. So it needs her, this barbaric Russia ...

Did Thackern think about this? If he was a little bit a diplomat, and not a donut hole, he could not help but think. The fact is that by the decision of the Congress of Vienna, Belgium was annexed to Holland. But in 1830, due to the French Revolution and many others, Belgium separated from Holland. Nicholas wanted to restore order here, but at the same time an uprising in Poland flared up, troops were needed there — and Nicholas could not help her sister and her husband, Willem, and Belgium withdrew from revolutionary France, which the renowned grabber, hypocrite and traitor Talleyrand. The Dutch diplomat did not have to say what the non-interference of the Russian tsar threatened. The disaster. So both Nesselrode and Geckern should have been convinced that, by eliminating Pushkin, they were protecting the interests of Europe. Maybe even the interests of progress, which by no means can not be pumped with Russian blood - often the best Russian blood ...

Pushkin also tried to stop this bloody orgy - and died. He died honestly, on the line of duty, trying to obscure Russia. And the harder it was for him to die, that he didn’t even understand it - so the intrigue was twisted ...

Is it not time today to unwind all these intrigues - and stop paying even the most wonderful European successes with Russian blood? Moreover, the precedents of such decisions in our stories there were - and one of them was associated with our other great poet, Tyutchev.

But this is a special story ...
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Belogor
    Belogor 14 February 2014 07: 26
    “It's hard to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if it's not there,” said Chinese philosopher Kung Fu-Tzu. The author is apparently a lover of conspiracy theories. Intrigues and political games, of course, always existed at court, but the author should not have mixed everything together.
    Pushkin only defended the honor of his wife, like any real man. To do this, just read his letters. And his counterparts, of course, were seasoned schemers, and, as rumors circulated, they also had a sexual orientation, not entirely unambiguously.
    1. Lapotnik
      Lapotnik 14 February 2014 09: 54
      In principle, you confirmed the author of the article with your post. As a real man, Pushkin was bred from scratch on a fabricated affair by seasoned schemers (those are still n-ss)))).

      You should not believe in romance, especially when inveterate schemers involved in state politics are involved. At these levels, romance is just a tool in achieving goals.

      PS See how in the modern world they deal with politicians of any level - from secretaries with dresses that have been kept all their lives, to maids in hotels. Politics, nothing personal.

      And yes, again - at the present time we are right now shouting about the information war, curse the press, Russophobic publicists, etc. etc., but as about the past, so immediately - because of the woman ... Hmm.
      1. Lapotnik
        Lapotnik 14 February 2014 11: 50
        An interesting coincidence ... I just read what exactly ruined Pushkin, for which he was killed.

        He wanted to publish the Historiography of Peter 1, information for which, among other things, he was going to gather from the diary of Patrick Gordon, discovered by Turgenev in Scotland. This is a direct blow to the Romanovs - the seizure of power and the falsification of history. This is well described by Alexander Kas, "The Collapse of the Empire of the Russian Tsars 1675-1700." (now reading). The most logical version is hard to even imagine.

        It turns out that Nikolai was personally interested in the death of Pushkin. Otherwise, the truth about the civil wars in Russia is revealed, and there immediately claims to the appearance of the Romanovs on the throne, the dominance of foreigners, etc., etc.

        It should also be noted that the well-known "historian of Russia" Miller had a hand in this diary ... In short, they shouldn't have run over a woman.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Dilshat
        Dilshat 15 February 2014 00: 50
        A poet in Russia is more than a poet. It has always been and will be. And these are not empty words, which confirms the death of our contemporaries, Talc, Choi.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. washi
      washi 14 February 2014 17: 01
      Quote: Belogor
      Pushkin only defended the honor of his wife, like any real man

      Even if you accept the official version, it is already Russian.
      And to read his tales, even more so.
      If you read the article, then more or less, but Russian.
      Given the Anglophile royal court, how Russian he must die
      DAEDALUS 14 February 2014 17: 08
      Quote: Belogor
      according to rumors, with a sexual orientation they also had it, not quite unequivocally.

      Rumors were, of course, but they remained rumors.
  2. grotto
    grotto 14 February 2014 08: 25
    The goal of the confrontation between the West and Russia is one - by any means to achieve dominance in relations. Lies, meanness, intrigues - all means are good, the winner is not judged. So try to have good relations with them, not just good ones. But how many wolves do not feed ..
    1. washi
      washi 14 February 2014 17: 16
      Quote: grotto
      The goal of the confrontation between the West and Russia is one - by any means to achieve dominance in relations. Lies, meanness, intrigues - all means are good, the winner is not judged. So try to have good relations with them, not just good ones. But how many wolves do not feed ..

      A standard set for any article on VO for earning a "rating".
      Have you read Pushkin?
      And verses d, Antes, who was also a poet.
      And the verses of Denis Davydov?
      Why is he worse than Byron?
      Nevertheless, Byron’s pedril was taught, and the womanizer Davydov was forgotten.
      Politics, as spoken and govoryads uglys and hangover
      If there will be problems regarding the end, then contact Russian writers: Gogol, Chekhov.
      If there are associations, then "slaves will always remain slaves, a free slave cannot be"
  3. psychologist
    psychologist 14 February 2014 08: 29
    I think it was much easier !! there’s no question of any fighting post! just the usual showdown (as they would say now - everyday life). just before were probably more uncompromising! the result is a duel! Sorry for the poet! but you can’t argue with fate !!
  4. Luga
    Luga 14 February 2014 08: 41
    A funny "conspiracy theory". I put a plus, although I don't believe in its seriousness. Pushkin, who opens Nikolai's eyes to Russophobes in Europe and was killed for this by pi. Daras from Holland, is too Hollywood in my opinion.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 14 February 2014 10: 13
      Quote: Luga
      A funny "conspiracy theory". I put a plus, although I don't believe in its seriousness.

      Pushkinist about the murder of A.S. Pushkin:

      Full video: "Zaznobin V.M. (2013.08.15) - New researches of A.S. Pushkin's creativity (Alushta)"
      1. Vadim2013
        Vadim2013 14 February 2014 13: 41
        Thanks for the link. It was very interesting to listen in full.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  5. vanderhaas
    vanderhaas 14 February 2014 08: 42
    A fairy tale is a lie, but a hint in it, a lesson for good fellows. Aleksandr Sergeyevich has been dead for one hundred and seventy-six years, the good service of the Fatherland already serves at least that which forces to rethink a lot in history. Respect to the author.
  6. khmer
    khmer 14 February 2014 08: 49
    The version is extremely shaky - what could Pushkin tell the sovereign so sensational? what would he not know without him? Could Pushkin, if he stayed alive, “save” Russia? - oh, hardly
    1. washi
      washi 14 February 2014 17: 19
      Quote: khmer
      The version is extremely shaky - what could Pushkin tell the sovereign so sensational? what would he not know without him? Could Pushkin, if he stayed alive, “save” Russia? - oh, hardly

      I agree.
      The king plays the retinue. Moreover, the king is a regicide
  7. Volkhov
    Volkhov 14 February 2014 09: 07
    An interesting metamorphosis is undergoing an explanation - in the Soviet school, the version about the lady and button of Dantes, in the 90s about blue masons and the ordered carapace (body armor), is now a more logical version.
  8. makarov
    makarov 14 February 2014 09: 11
    had the opportunity to "fight for the idea" and the historical truth, to debunk the historical untruth. If any of the readers are interested (?), They can get acquainted, in order of priority: http: // Option = com_content & view = artic
    le & id = 759: lr & Itemid = 396,
    1. washi
      washi 14 February 2014 17: 26
      Quote: makarov
      had the opportunity to "fight for the idea"

      What an idea you might have.
      There is a Russian world
      There are volochi and tati
      There are fairy tales and the real world.
      There is Russian land from Laba to Kamchatka
      And eat from rome to smoked
  9. My address
    My address 14 February 2014 10: 12
    I heard another version on the radio.
    Allegedly, the case was in the theft of intra-imperial documents by Heeckeren, Pushkin found out about it, and Dantes withdrew attention by scandal.
    God knows. But what is interesting is that Dantes, who was expelled from Russia, in France behaved quite respectably. This was said in the same radio program. Changed after the murder of Pushkin? No, he did not worry about it.
    It turns out that many versions of Pushkin’s death revolve around diplomacy. Your will, but why did Heeckeren, the diplomat, scandalously quarrel with Pushkin? Why would Dantes foolishly protect his adoptive father from his new kin?
  10. 14 February 2014 10: 21
    Any hypothesis has a right to exist. This is not an exception, especially since it is logical. However, in my opinion, English ears stick out behind Neselrode, not Austrian. It is doubtful that Nikolai did not know about egregious Russophobia in Europe; tea did not live in the Stone Age. The sources of information were numerous and verified. The fact that Pushkin was removed I also have no doubt. Perhaps this was not done by Dantes. For example, it is still not clear who shot Lenin or Kennedy. And in the nineteenth century it was much easier to cover the tracks. Perhaps Nikolai, realizing what influence Pushkin has in society, had plans to appoint him to some important post, which did not correspond to the plans of the British intelligence. As, for example, Stalin suggested Chkalov to lead the GPU. I have no doubt in one thing: these English creatures stick their nose everywhere and do not disdain anything. It is a pity that our special services do not act also in relation to them. Or maybe they’re coming ...
    1. Black
      Black 14 February 2014 13: 10
      Perhaps this was not done by Dantes.

      Well, you are on a completely "revolutionary" path.
      A century of honor, a century of dignity. In a duel, K.K.Danzas was a second with (FRIEND !!!) Pushkin.
      Do you blame him for lying?
  11. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 14 February 2014 10: 36
    Maybe it was like that, or maybe not, in any case we will never know the truth, but in any case, any article of interest to the personality of a person of such a scale as A. Pushkin will be useful, of course, excluding any nonsense like liquid reptiloids and freemasons.
  12. Dimych
    Dimych 14 February 2014 10: 41
    I will look forward to continuing, about Tyutchev.
  13. bikoleg
    bikoleg 14 February 2014 11: 00
    Or maybe Alexander Sergeevich dug up something in the archives, working on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion"? There is a theory that this is not a rebellion, a war for the inheritance of the Great Empire. After all, Catherine II got funds from somewhere to buy works of art, build palaces and so on? Maybe this knowledge ruined Pushkin?
  14. parus2nik
    parus2nik 14 February 2014 11: 11
    M.Yu. Lermontov was the best on this subject in his poem "To the Death of a Poet"
  15. vomag
    vomag 14 February 2014 11: 16
    MMMddddaaaa gentlemen, I’ve been watching the program on TV-3 the other day (I think you know who I am), so there Alexander Sergeevich didn’t die at all, but was the most alive left for France and became Alexander Dumas! dassss ......
  16. Black
    Black 14 February 2014 13: 15
    After almost two centuries, the life and fate of Alexander Sergeyevich excites us so much as if this person lived quite recently. Note, Pushkin is not a king, not a politician, not a commander ....
    Huge Man!
  17. Captain45
    Captain45 14 February 2014 13: 28
    Here the day before yesterday on REN-TV in the film "His Majesty's Spies" SUCH version of the death of A.S. Pushkin was put forward, where is the author of this article ... Pushkin was no less and no more than an agent of the foreign intelligence of the Russian Empire and his death is a success legendary introduction into the highest circles of France under the guise of the writer Alexandre Dumas. Yes, sir, gentlemen! Actually, in the film they showed the case of a duel between Pushkin and Dantes, and in the materials of the case the rank of Pushkin is indicated - KAMERGER, and not a chamber-junker. death in a duel looks absurd, there are many blank spots. In one thing the authors of the film are right - they present the story in the way that it is advantageous to see it in the present.
    1. Cynic
      Cynic 14 February 2014 17: 06
      Quote: Captain45
      Here the day before yesterday on REN-TV

      Could not see.
      Another version.
    2. Knizhnik
      Knizhnik 19 February 2014 15: 33
      On Ren TV, they sometimes overdo it. But, I remember, in Soviet times they wrote that Pushkin had his own reasons to dislike Dantes, and the story around his wife was only the last straw, or even a reason for a duel. One thing is not in doubt - the poet was a real nobleman and patriot
  18. Stinger
    Stinger 14 February 2014 14: 53
    Pushkin tried to stop this bloody bacchanalia - and died. He died honestly, at a military post, trying to obscure Russia. And the harder it was for him to die, because he didn’t even understand this - so the intrigue was twisted

    Well, at least the author unraveled. Where to Pushkin before him. In fact, he died as an agent of Ethiopian intelligence, created even by the arap of Peter the Great under the nose of this great one. Therefore, he wrote: About how many miraculous discoveries are prepared by self-made scientists.
  19. washi
    washi 14 February 2014 17: 32
    And why did Stalin support Bulgagov, and the Jews forbade him?
    To Stalin from Pushkin:
    Enthusiastic praise will pass a momentary noise;
    Hear the fool's judgment and the laughter of the cold crowd:
    But you stay firm, calm and gloomy.
    You are the king: live alone. Free road
    Go where the free mind takes you
    Improving the fruits of your favorite thoughts,
    Not requiring rewards for a noble deed.
    They are in you. You yourself are your highest court;
    You know how to evaluate your work more strictly.
    Are you satisfied with him, a demanding artist?
    Satisfied? So let the crowd scold him
    And spits on the altar where your fire burns
    And in children's playfulness your tripod shakes.
  20. tundra
    tundra 14 February 2014 18: 10
    Quote: Lapotnik
    Pushkin was divorced from scratch according to a fabricated affair, seasoned schemers (those still n-ss)))).
    And try to convince me that pi ... s are less dangerous than the Nazis. With the Nazis, everything was clear, in some ways they were more honest than pi ... s, they went to kill. For what they got it from our grandfathers. But pi .... they’re more dangerous, these quiet glanders act. PEOPLE BE VIGILANT !!!!!
  21. tundra
    tundra 14 February 2014 18: 13
    Do not let moral freaks affect our brains.
  22. OPTR
    OPTR 14 February 2014 20: 58
    The author touched on a very interesting and relatively poorly developed topic about the information policy (or war) of Russia and the West in the period up to the 20th century. From this point of view, little is considered and little is taught in general educational institutions about the appearance of print media, censorship, etc. It turns out that there were supporters of certain views (for example, Westerners and Slavophiles), but how these views were propagated, what was done for this, who was standing for this, and why, etc., they still pay little attention to this.
    The article draws attention to the circle of phenomena. And this is its value regardless of the conclusions.
  23. Enot-poloskun
    Enot-poloskun 14 February 2014 21: 16
    Or maybe Pushkin’s contemporaries have an answer?

    I will cite a poem by Lermontov:

    Poet is dead! - slave of honor -
    Pal, slandered by rumor,
    With lead in the chest and a thirst for vengeance,
    Bowed proud head! ..
    Did not bear the soul of the Poet
    The shame of petty grievances,
    He rebelled against the opinions of the world
    Alone, as before ... and killed!
    Killed! .. why sob now
    Empty praise unnecessary chorus
    And a pitiful babble of justification?
    Fate has come to a verdict!
    Do not you were so angrily driven
    His free, bold gift
    And for fun to inflate
    A little hiding fire?
    Well? have fun ... he is tormented
    The latter could not bear:
    Faded away like a torch, a wondrous genius,
    The solemn wreath withered.

    His murderer is cold-blooded
    Has brought a blow ... there is no salvation:
    An empty heart beats smoothly,
    The pistol did not flinch in his hand.
    And what a marvel? ... from afar,
    Like hundreds of fugitives,
    On catching happiness and ranks
    Abandoned to us at the behest of fate;
    Laughing, he despised defiantly
    Earth is a foreign language and customs;
    He could not spare our glory;
    I could not understand at this moment a bloody,
    Why did he raise his hand! ..


    But there is also God's judgment, confidants of debauchery!
    There is a terrible trial: he is waiting;
    It is not accessible to the ringing of gold,
    He knows thoughts and deeds in advance.
    Then in vain you will resort to evil thoughts:
    It will not help you again,
    And you will not wash away all your black blood
    Poet's righteous blood!
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 15 February 2014 05: 12
      the poet-slave of honor died, for once again SUCH an end, as if it were unknown, talent in Russia is not a tenant ...
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 15 February 2014 05: 59
        but I didn’t say it .. this is E. Yevtushenko.
        1. The comment was deleted.
  24. psychologist
    psychologist 15 February 2014 09: 50
    Quote: psychologist
    I think it was much easier !! there’s no question of any fighting post! just the usual showdown (as they would say now - everyday life). just before were probably more uncompromising! the result is a duel! Sorry for the poet! but you can’t argue with fate !!

    Maybe you should first read the article, than just minus it !! !! ??? article is complete nonsense !! it seems that the author was either smoked or was not friends with the head !!! or just loves soooooooooooooo hot !! The article must be read, not minus for the sake of the bulldozer!