Alexey Viktorovich Vostrikov book about the Russian duel. The standard of noble honor The code of honor of the Russian noble assembly

Agreement on the use of site materials

Please use the works published on the site for personal purposes only. Publication of materials on other sites is prohibited.
This work (and all others) is available for download free of charge. Mentally, you can thank its author and the staff of the site.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Similar Documents

Prerequisites for the formation of a noble revolutionary ideology and the creation of secret societies: the Union of Salvation, the Union of Welfare, the Southern Society and the Northern Society. Study of the significance and historical consequences of the uprising of December 14, 1825 for Russia.

control work, added 10/25/2011


Formation of spiritual and moral priorities of the Russian nobility. Transformations in the noble environment in the nineteenth century. Reflection of political and social changes in the life of the nobility. Changes in the cultural life of Russian nobles, their spiritual and moral appearance.

thesis, added 12/10/2017


Causes of the Decembrist movement. Features of the Russian noble ideology. The refusal of the government of Alexander I from the policy of reforms. Programs for the reorganization of Russia. Uprising December 14, 1825 in St. Petersburg. Reasons for the defeat of the Decembrist uprising.

control work, added 06/20/2010


Analysis of the era of palace coups. Study of the period of development of the noble empire from the formations of Peter the Great to a new major modernization of the country under Catherine II. Descriptions of the struggle for the imperial throne. Description of the causes of palace coups.

test, added 10/23/2013


Conducting a knighthood. The main defenders of right and good against evil. The era of admiration for the Beautiful Lady, continuous festivities, tournaments, poems, holy observance of all commandments of honor. Code of chivalry. Favorite pastimes of chivalry.

abstract, added 11/17/2011


Characteristics of women's home schooling and education in educational institutions. The main provisions of the conclusion of marriage by peasants and nobles, especially the termination of marriage and divorce. Description of the phenomenon of motherhood in noble and peasant environments.

thesis, added 06/27/2017


The nobility as the highest ruling class in Russia. Mironovs and Andreevs - the most famous representatives of noble families, their origin. Features of the types of noble estates. Hunting as one of the favorite pastimes of the nobles, a characteristic of social life.

The aristocrat of the 19th century is a very special type of personality. The whole style of his life, manner of behavior, even appearance bore the imprints of a certain cultural tradition. That is why it is so difficult for a modern person (actor in cinema, on stage) to portray him. Imitation of external features of behavior looks false. The so-called good tone in life consisted in the organic unity of ethical and aesthetic norms.

In the second half of the 18th century, the noble elite cultivated the leadership of their class in the political and cultural life of Russia, rightly seeing the main obstacle to achieving this goal in the depressingly low cultural level of the vast majority of Russian landowners (the comedy "Undergrowth" by D.F. Fonvizin).

Despite considerable difficulties, spiritual leaders (noble writers, clergymen) took up the education of the children of the Prostakovs and Skotinins, trying to make them enlightened and virtuous citizens, noble knights and courteous gentlemen.

The so-called "normative education" was applied to noble children, according to which the personality, while maintaining and developing its individual qualities, was polished according to a certain image. In the XIX century in Russia there were people who amaze us today with incomparable honesty, nobility and subtlety of feelings. They grew up like this not only thanks to outstanding personal qualities, but also thanks to a special upbringing. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that "noble education" is not a pedagogical system, not a special methodology, and not even a set of rules, it is, first of all, a way of life, a style of behavior, assimilated by the younger from the older part consciously, part unconsciously through habit and imitations. The concept of "noble type of behavior", of course, is extremely arbitrary. Each estate had its own vices and weaknesses, and so did the Russian nobility. It doesn't need to be idealized. What was good in the Russian nobility?

Pushkin A.S. reasoned: "What does the nobility learn - independence, courage, nobility, honor." Lifestyle can develop, strengthen or stifle them. Do they need a simple people? Need! believed that the generation of people of the "Alexander era" will always serve as a vivid example of what kind of people can be formed in Russia under favorable circumstances. It can be said that those qualities of a Russian person developed in the nobility, which, ideally, should have penetrated into the social environment. Noble culture in its entirety (from works of art to good manners) could become the property of all classes in Russia in the 20th century. Unfortunately, Russian history took a completely different path, a tragic and bloody one.

The natural cultural evolution has been interrupted, and now one can only guess what its results would have been. Life, style of relationships, unwritten rules of behavior turned out to be the most fragile material, it could not be hidden in museums and libraries - this turned out to be impossible in modern real life. An attempt to regain what has been lost by teaching "good manners" outside of Orthodoxy and without an appropriate cultural environment cannot bring the desired result.

Let us try, if not to restore, then at least to recall some of the features of the disappeared society. However, it should be recognized that there were not so many impeccably educated people even among the noble society. In a secular society, it was customary that talents that come out of the people, even from serfs, if they give hope to become later writers, scientists, artists, are welcomed cordially and friendly, introduced into circles and families on an equal footing with everyone. This was not a farce, but the real truth - the result of a deep respect for education, talents, scientists and literary merit, which turned into habits and mores. Count V.A. Sollogub, aristocrat and courtier, friend of A.S. Pushkin, declared: "There is nothing more absurd and more deceitful than the belief in generic swagger." Boasting was condemned, restraint and modesty were valued and regarded as a sign of aristocracy. Prince V.F. Odoevsky, a representative of the most ancient noble family in Russia, spoke of his aristocratic origin in no other way than in a "joking tone."

In Russia in the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century, the nobility was a privileged and serving class at the same time, which gave rise in the soul of a nobleman to a peculiar combination of feelings of being chosen and responsible. Military or public service was for a nobleman an obligatory form of service to society, Russia, the Sovereign. If the nobleman was not in the public service, then he was forced to deal with the affairs of his estate and his peasants. Of course, not every landowner successfully managed the household, however, the refusal to properly perform his class off-duty functions was perceived as unworthy behavior, deserving public censure, which was instilled in noble children from childhood.

The rule "to serve faithfully" was included in the code of noble honor. This was recognized for many decades by people belonging to different circles of noble society. One of the principles of the noble ideology was the conviction that the high position of a nobleman in society obliges him to be a model of high moral qualities. To whom much is given, much will be required. In this spirit, children were brought up in many noble families. Let us recall an episode from the story "Childhood of the Theme". Theme threw a stone at the butcher, who saved him from an angry bull, and then kicked his ears so that he wouldn’t climb where he shouldn’t. Theme's mother was very angry: "Why did you throw a stone, you bad boy? The butcher is rude, but a kind person, and you are rude and evil. Go, I don't want such a son. You will always be to blame, because nothing has been given to him, but you have and ask you."

According to the highest moral and ethical class principles, a nobleman should be brave, honest, educated, not so much in order to achieve fame, wealth, high rank, but because he was given a lot, because he should be like that. The noble honor was considered the main virtue. According to noble ethics, honor does not give a person any privileges, but on the contrary makes him more vulnerable than others. Honor was the basic law of a nobleman's behavior, prevailing over any other considerations, whether it was profit, success, safety, or just prudence.

What is a duel? The duel was forbidden by law and, from the standpoint of common sense, was pure madness. What pushed the nobleman to duel? Fear of condemnation, an eye on public opinion, which Pushkin called the "spring of honor." All this developed the habit of answering for one's words, insulting and not fighting was considered the limit of baseness. This also dictated a certain style of behavior: it was necessary to be restrained and correct, while avoiding both excessive suspiciousness and insufficient exactingness. You need to control yourself enough to be friendly and courteous, even with someone who definitely does not love you and is trying to harm you. If by your behavior you make it clear to others that you are offended and offended, you will be obliged to properly repay for the offense. But to demand satisfaction for every sideways glance is to put oneself in a stupid position. A public insult inevitably led to a duel, but a public apology ended the conflict. The ever-present threat of death, the duel greatly increased the price of words and, in particular, the Word given to someone. To break one's word is to ruin one's reputation forever; a surety on parole was absolutely reliable. There are cases when a person, recognizing his irreparable misfortune, gave his word to shoot himself and kept his promise. In this atmosphere of honesty, decency, a sense of duty, noble children were brought up.

The duel, as a way of protecting honor, also carried a special function, asserted a kind of noble equality, independent of the bureaucratic and court hierarchy. Recall that the duel was officially prohibited and punishable, the officer could be tried, expelled from the regiment because of the duel, the duelists' seconds were also under jurisdiction. Why were there duels anyway? Because the nobles were brought up in such a way that the stimulus of life for them is honor. Education built on such principles seems reckless, but it not only equips a person with the qualities necessary for success, it declares the unworthy to be shameful and thereby contributes to the formation of a morally organized viable society.

How to understand the life success of a nobleman? This concept includes not only external well-being, but also the internal state of a person - a clear conscience, high self-esteem, and so on. Nobility education is the least "practical". Honor is above all. In the novel by L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace" describes the scene: the degraded officer Dolokhov in the ranks of soldiers.

How are you standing? Where is the leg? - the regimental commander shouted and saw that Dolokhov was dressed in a blue officer's overcoat.

Why the blue overcoat? Down with. The sergeant-major, - change his clothes ... - but he did not have time to finish.

General, I am obliged to carry out orders, but I am not obliged to endure insults, ”Dolokhov said hastily. The eyes of the general and the soldier met, the general fell silent.

If you please, change your clothes, please,” he said, walking away.

The relationship between father and son is typical. As V.V. wrote Nabokov: "I am sure that if my father caught me in physical cowardice, he would curse me." These words are very revealing for the nobility. Prince Potemkin said to his great-nephew: "First, try to test whether you are a coward, if not, then strengthen your innate courage by frequent treatment of the enemy." Noteworthy is the importance attached to courage, and the confidence that it can be brought up and developed through strong-willed efforts and training.

A boy of 10-12 years old had to ride on a par with adults. As a child, Alexander II fell off a horse at the age of 10 and lay in bed for several days, having recovered, the heir to the throne continued training. The riskiness of such educational procedures was explained by a sincere belief in their beneficence. Courage and endurance were impossible without the corresponding strength and dexterity. In the lyceum where Pushkin studied, time was allotted every day for gymnastic exercises, lyceum students learned horseback riding, fencing, rowing, and swimming. Rise at 7 o'clock, walk in any weather, simple food. The requirements for the cadets in regard to physical conditioning were incomparably harsh. The description of the order in the cadet corps, and even in boarding houses for noble maidens, is striking in its severity and rigidity (the girls lie on the floor to form a straight back and correct posture, strict observance of the daily routine, etc.).

The question arises: how does the training and hardening of noble children actually differ from modern physical education classes? Physical exercises in the noble environment were designed not only to improve health, but also had to contribute to the formation of personality, strengthening discipline. Physical trials, as it were, were equated with moral ones, any difficulties and blows of fate must be endured courageously, without losing heart and without losing one's own dignity. Educated people, as A.S. Pushkin, differ from others in the imperturbable calm that their actions are imbued with - move calmly, live calmly, endure the loss (betrayal) of their wives, relatives and even children with restraint, while people of the lower circle cannot calmly endure adversity without raising a cry. In secular life, a person often has to meet unpleasant things with a relaxed (and sometimes cheerful face), if he does some kind of awkwardness, he smooths it out with his composure, knows how to hide minor annoyances and disappointments from prying eyes. Showing everyone your grief, weakness or confusion is not worthy and not decent.

Noble children, first of all, were accustomed to the elementary rules of hygiene, the need to keep the body and clothes clean. In relation to clothing, the rules of good manners required that the most expensive and sophisticated outfit look simple. Wearing too much jewelry was considered bad manners, and preference was given to a few rare and expensive jewelry. At the same time, a deliberate demonstration of wealth was considered obscene. In society, one must behave in such a way as not to cause irritation, and do only pleasant things to others. Nowhere is true good breeding more evident than in relations with people who are higher and lower in their position - the sophistication of manners consisted in keeping the same with both of them.

A real gentleman observes the rules of decency in dealing with his footman and even a beggar on the street. These people evoke sympathy in him, and by no means a desire to offend. Among the nobles, poverty also did not cause ridicule; it was customary not to attach visible importance to it. Recall how Pushkin describes Tatyana Larina's living room:

No one with a cold mockery

I did not think to meet the old man,

Noticing the collar is not fashionable

Under the bow of the neckerchief.

And a provincial novice

The hostess did not bother with arrogance,

She was equal to everyone,

Effortless and sweet.

Swagger and arrogance were considered hopelessly bad manners. It was impossible to try to seem smarter or more learned than the people in whose company you are. Carry your learning as you wear a watch in your inside pocket. If asked, answer; speak often, but do not speak for a long time. Never take anyone by the button or by the hand in order to be heard. Never prove your opinion with heat and loudly, speak calmly. Be tolerant and respectful of other people's opinions. When disagreeing with someone, resort to softening expressions: "maybe I'm wrong" or "I'm not sure, but I think ..."

The Russian nobility never had those problems in communicating with the common people that faced the raznochintsy intelligentsia. Unlike raznochintsy, they lived among the people and knew them well. The landowners, willy-nilly, had to somehow understand agriculture and peasant life. Leo Tolstoy, in particular, instilled in his children respect for the peasants, whom he called breadwinners.

Moral norms and rules of good manners were based on the Orthodox faith and were assimilated, as a rule, in the family circle. The noble family united a much wider range of people than the modern family. It was not customary to limit the number of children: as a rule, there were many of them. Accordingly there were many uncles, aunts, and an infinite number of cousins; tutors were usually included in the family circle. Numerous relatives could act as tutors and interfere in the upbringing of children; the notion that education is exclusively a matter of the father or mother did not exist. Obedience to elders, especially parents, was considered one of the fundamental elements of education. According to the Russian autocratic ideology, the tsar was the father of his subjects, which established an analogy between relations in the family and the state as a whole. Disobedience to the will of the parents in a noble society was perceived as a scandal.

The attitude towards children in the noble family was strict and even tough. But this severity should not be mistaken for a lack of love. The high level of exactingness to the child was determined by the fact that his upbringing was strictly focused on the norm, fixed in the concepts of the code of noble honor and the rules of good manners. And although many children studied at home, their day was strictly scheduled, with the same early rise, lessons, and various activities. Going to church, following the commandments, offering prayers before household activities (lessons, meals, etc.) were mandatory. Breakfasts, lunches and dinners were held in the family circle always at a certain time. Teenage children were never late, they sat peacefully at the table, did not dare to speak loudly and refuse any dish, strictly observed etiquette. For any serious misconduct, children were punished. Even rods were used for younger children, in addition, a whole ladder of ordinary punishments was in use: no sweets, no walks, kneeling, etc. At the same time, approvals and punishments should have been rare, for approval is the greatest reward, and disapproval is the heaviest punishment.

In order to be always benevolent, amiable, to say pleasant things, it was necessary to learn to overcome false shame. False shame often torments young people. Dances were taught to all noble children without exception, it was one of the necessary elements of education, a young man or girl who could not dance would have nothing to do at the ball, and a ball in the life of a nobleman is not an evening of dancing, but a peculiar form of social organization of the nobility. Dancing was an element of an important ritual, defining the style of communication and the manner of secular conversation. Complex dances of that time required good choreographic training, and therefore dance training began at the age of 5-6. Dancing evenings for children were arranged in rich houses. At small balls, children aged 10-12 were allowed to dance with adults. The first ball of a noble girl was at the age of 17. Particular attention was paid to the fact that the young nobleman could overcome shyness - an agonizing feeling of adolescents, regardless of their social status.

Thus, a unique type of person was formed, which already in the second half of the 19th century seemed to Leo Tolstoy receding into the past. After the 30s and 40s of the XIX century. rivalry begins between the old nobility and the raznochintsy intelligentsia. In the 60-70s. it results in a tense political struggle, which continues into the 20th century and leaves its mark on almost all spheres of society.

As we have already noted, "good society" willingly accepted people from lower society, if they were gifted and decent people, and the latter eagerly absorbed the refined culture cultivated by the noble elite. Aristocrats also benefited from this - new friends helped them quickly adapt to the inevitable changes of the times. Thus, such cultural cooperation went unnoticed in the drawing rooms of the nobility and could become fruitful for Russian society with the evolutionary development of Russia.

After that, the gloomy and self-confident “fiery revolutionaries” got the opportunity to impose their views by force (the reasons for this are not the subject of this consideration, however, we note that in many respects the death of old Russia was ensured by the non-Orthodox liberal mentality of the raznochintsy intelligentsia). The revolutionaries succeeded, and the cultural elite in Russia was almost completely destroyed. A grandiose "educational" experiment, gave its obvious and depressing results. Society has lost honor and dignity, moral principles, rules of conduct and social relations.

The future belongs to the young - this is not a slogan, but a fact. It is obvious that the way the young generation of Russians will be formed will be the fate of Russia. The time has come to take a closer look at the pre-revolutionary past of Russia and take the best from it in order to introduce it into the upbringing of new generations, thereby creating real prerequisites for the normal development and prosperity of our Fatherland.

Russian aristocracy, or the nobleman's code of honor Noble education is not a pedagogical system, not a special technique and not a set of any rules. This is a way of life, a style of behavior, clothes. This was assimilated consciously, and partly unconsciously, through habits and imitation. These are traditions that are not discussed, but observed. The nobles were taught independence, courage, nobility, honor. The nobles had faith that in the future the inequality of the strata of Russian society would gradually smooth out and the noble culture in its entirety - from works of literature and art to good manners - would become the property of all classes, would be the common legitimate heritage of free and enlightened citizens. The attitude of a nobleman was largely determined by his position and role in the state. The nobility was a privileged and service class at the same time. This gave birth in the soul of a nobleman a combination of a sense of being chosen and a sense of responsibility. The nobleman's attitude to military and public service was associated with serving society, Russia. Motto: "Serve faithfully to whom you swear." Even a nobleman who was not in public service was forced to deal with the affairs of his estate and his peasants. Instruction: "obey your superiors, do not chase after their affection, do not ask for service, do not refuse service, take care of your dress again, and honor from a young age." The difference between the service of the nobility and the service of the lackey is that the former implies a personal interest in matters of national importance. The nobleman serves the tsar as a vassal, but does common business with him, bearing his share of responsibility for everything that happens in the state. The upbringing of children consisted in the fact that they were oriented not to success, but to the ideal. To be brave, honest, educated - not in order to achieve fame, wealth, high rank, but because he is a nobleman, much has been given to him, and he should be just like that. The noble honor was considered the main class virtue. This honor does not give a person any privileges, but, on the contrary, makes him more vulnerable. Honor was the basic law of behavior of a nobleman, unconditionally and unconditionally prevailing over any other considerations - over profit, success, security or prudence. A person had to answer for his words and for an insult he had to fight a duel. Not to fight was considered the limit of baseness. If a person intentionally insults or rudely humiliates you - hit him, but if he only hurts you, then the best way to take revenge on him is to be exquisitely polite with him outwardly and, at the same time, return the barbs to him even with interest. With your enemy, you must be emphatically polite, or knock him down. Children were brought up in an atmosphere of high demands and emphasized trust. Noble upbringing gave success in life. It included not only external well-being, but also the internal state of a person - a clear conscience, high self-esteem, no tantrums, no anger, aristocratic pride did not allow such feelings to be shown. Great importance was attached to courage and confidence that it can be brought up through strong-willed efforts and attitudes. These qualities have always been highly valued and diligently instilled in children. They were impossible without physical strength, agility and endurance. Lyceum students were trained in horse riding, fencing, swimming, rowing, etc. The schedule was strict: getting up at 7 in the morning, walking in any weather, simple food - this was dictated by life itself. Girls were forced to lie on the floor so that their backs were even, regardless of the weather they were forced to walk, ride, dress lightly - Russian noblewomen were psychologically and physically better prepared for the difficulties of life than today's women. The children of the nobility learned to overcome pain, despair, fear, and tried to the best of their ability not to show how difficult it was. This required not only courage, but also an impeccable ability to control oneself, which was achieved through a long and careful education. In a secular society, a person often has to face very unpleasant things with a relaxed and cheerful face. He must seem pleased when in fact he is feeling bad, must approach with a smile those whom he would more willingly approach with a gun. These requirements were brought up from early childhood, persistently and sometimes cruelly. You must hide your temper and be able not to be, but to seem. He who controls himself controls the situation. It was believed that a well-mannered person does not burden those around him with his personal troubles and experiences, he knows how to protect his inner world from uninvited witnesses. In life, not connected with the service, the nobles were engaged in special activities, no less interesting and very important. Balls, social events, salon conversations, private correspondence - all this bore the tinge of rituals, participation in which required training. They had the ability to "appeal to people." It was a special art. The big world is a theater where everyone is both an artist and a spectator at the same time. A person who perfectly knows the rules of good manners was not burdened by them, but gained true freedom in relations with people. Children were taught, first of all, to the rules of hygiene: brush their teeth, wash their ears, keep their hands and nails in exemplary order. Do not pick your nose, ears, blow your nose only into a handkerchief and do not look into it anymore. Do not show off your dress, but think about how you are dressed. Caring for one's appearance was combined among aristocrats with physical endurance and courage. The rules of etiquette demanded that the most expensive and sophisticated outfit look simple. Particular attention was paid to jewelry: wearing too much jewelry was considered bad form. That is, a demonstration of wealth - open and deliberate - was considered obscene. Good manners were needed not only for holidays, for example, such as: not to sit when others are standing. Any question addressed to you cannot be left unanswered. You can’t take the best place in the room, pounce on the dish you like without offering it to others to taste. You need to speak slowly and clearly. The grossest insult is a clear inattention to the person who says something to you. When talking, you need to look the interlocutor in the face, do not look around or look out the window, corner, etc. If you are told a story already known, listen to it carefully to the end, give pleasure to the narrator. In a conversation with the elderly, hint that you expect to learn something from them. In a conversation with a woman, all jokes and witticisms, directly or indirectly, should be aimed at praising the interlocutor and should not be interpreted offensively or unpleasantly for her. The first rule of good manners is to behave in such a way as to make your company as pleasant as possible for others. A special sophistication of manners is to behave equally with both. Of course, a very high-ranking person needs to show their respect - for example, wait to be spoken to, and not start talking to the first. Maintain the conversation that has already been started, and not choose the topic of conversation yourself. Accidentally praise someone for good qualities. The rules of decency in treatment must be observed with everyone - with a lackey, and with a beggar on the street, and with a passerby. Swaggering and arrogance has always been considered bad manners. Modesty is the surest way to satisfy vanity. Self-esteem makes people behave modestly. Here are some rules - a code of honor for every nobleman: 1. Never try to appear smarter or more learned than the people in whose company you are. 2. Stay out of the way unless asked. 3. Speak often, but not for long. 4. Never indulge in mystery and mystery - this is unpleasant and suspicious. 5. Do not prove your opinion loudly and with fervor - even though you are right, express it modestly and calmly. 6. Express your views confidently, but treat others with respect. There is no falsehood, betrayal, all this concerns only politeness of manners. Lies and rudeness are unacceptable. 7. It's not a shame to clean up the dirt, it's a shame to live in the dirt.

Nobility n In the era of feudalism, there was an urgent need to create a clear and binding system of laws governing relations between a vassal (feudal lord) and his suzerain (large feudal lord). This is how a class of nobility arose, whose main duty was the unconditional protection of their overlord and his interests, as a rule, with weapons in their hands. Since then, a nobleman is always a warrior, often a military leader.

The vassal received land and other material goods, as well as a certain number of souls, for life from the overlord. n Then there was a transition to the right of hereditary possession, and the nobility significantly strengthened its role in society. The eldest son of a noble father inherited his father's possessions, and his youngest son was obliged to become a military man. Therefore, while the nobility existed, it was a military class. n



n Family nobility - inherited from the ancestors along with the family estate. Among the family nobles, pillar nobles stood out especially - those who could prove their nobility for more than 100 years (for example, the Eropkins, Scriabins, Sergeevs and some others).

n Complimentary nobility - nobility assigned by decree for outstanding services or as a result of long-term impeccable service. The granted nobility can be hereditary or lifelong. The hereditary is transferred to the children of the nobleman, and the life is given personally and does not pass to the children.



n In Russia, the nobility most often complained to the retired military as an encouragement. n Titled nobility - nobles with a TITLE: prince, count, baron ... n Untitled nobility - nobles who do not have such generic titles. There were more untitled nobles than titled ones.

The nobility in Russia arose in the 12th century as the lowest part of the military service class, which constituted the court of a prince or a major boyar. n The word "noble" literally means "a person from the prince's court" or "court". The nobles were taken into the service of the prince to carry out various administrative, judicial and other assignments. n

n Aristocracy (Greek ἀριστεύς "the noblest, noblest origin" and κράτος, "power, state, power") - a form of government in which power belongs to the nobility.

n At the heart of the aristocracy lies the idea that only the elite, the best minds, should govern the state. But in reality the question of this chosenness finds a different solution; in some aristocracies, the determining principle is the nobility of origin, in others military prowess, higher mental development, religious or moral superiority, and finally, also the size and type of property. However, in most aristocracies, several of these factors, or all of them together, are combined to determine the right to state power.



The nobles considered themselves the best people of the state. Whether they had such grounds or not, they talked about it. A. S. Pushkin believed that the meaning of the nobility is precisely this: to be the most perfect, most educated and most decent people in Russia. n For this, they are given privileges that separate them from common people, estates that give them the opportunity to live without worrying about a piece of bread. n

Noble Code of Honor n Nobleman could not do much that was forgiven to a commoner, but not forgiven him. Because noble. Because that's what ranks, estates and privileges are given.





n Important for understanding the moral principles of the nobility are ideas of honor, valor, patriotism, dignity, loyalty. n In 1783, the book of the Austrian teacher I. Felbiger "On the Positions of a Man and a Citizen" was published for the first time, translated from German and edited with the participation of the Empress.

n Consisting of numerous rules of conduct and advice on housekeeping, it became a kind of encyclopedia of morals and attitudes, and was used as a textbook for public schools. She urged young nobles to be afraid of meanness, that is, unseemly acts and obscene deeds that lead to loss of honor.



The implementation of the new goal of noble education in Russia in the 30s of the 18th century was taken under strict state control. n New state educational institutions, primarily cadet corps and institutes for noble maidens, were closed. Parents signed a special "announcement" in which they declared that they were sending their child for upbringing and education for a 15-year period and would not demand their return or short-term leave (remember the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum). n

n At the age of 12-15, cadets were instructed to "do diligent experiments on the inclinations of their pets" in order to find out who is more capable of what rank, military or civilian. At the age of 15-18, teachers were supposed to “set examples of honor and those thoughts that lead to virtue ...” and divide the cadets into those who go to military and civil ranks, giving them the opportunity to change their mind at any time; and at the age of 18-21 - to help maturely choose a place of service for the Fatherland.



n Also in 1779, the Noble Boarding School was opened at Moscow University - a closed men's educational institution that combined gymnasium and university classes. Here the class values ​​of service and loyalty to the State, the new ideal of the aristocrat were in the foreground.

n What was new for Russia during this period was a change in attitudes towards women's education. Institutes and boarding schools for noble maidens were popular. n Noble modesty in behavior, prudence, kindness, industriousness and thriftiness, knowledge of foreign languages, love of books and other secular "virtues" made up the image of an ideal noblewoman.



n The entire content of education in women's boarding schools and institutes was focused on the development of these qualities. The beginnings of the sciences, including foreign languages, the beginnings of mathematics and natural science, architecture, familiarization with heraldry, needlework, the law of God and the "rules of secular treatment and courtesy" were called upon to provide girls with the necessary intellectual level necessary for communication in their social circle.

n Closed women's educational institutions had a strict internal routine and regime. The pupils were under the constant supervision of the guards and educators, who were entrusted with the duty to be an "hourly example" for them. n The purpose of female noble education was not preparation for any service, but the education of an ideal wife of a nobleman.



n Changes in everyday life and culture emphasized the allocation of the nobility to the privileged class. Achievements of culture became one of the privileges of the nobility, which determined the nobility as the main object of the bearer of cultural traditions.

n The behavior of the nobles had changed by the 18th century. New moral positions appeared, among them self-respect based on inner dignity and honor, courtesy, gratitude, decency, respect for a woman. n “Have a heart, have a soul, and you will be a man at all times. ... The main goal of all human knowledge is good manners, ”wrote V. O. Klyuchevsky, quoting D. I. Fonvizin.



At the same time, the moral origins of behavior worked out by previous centuries, such as reverence for God, respect, modesty, respect for age, generosity, and social status, have largely been preserved. n The etiquette that was formed in Russia played an important role in the development of the Russian state. Etiquette rules reflected the needs of society in the thoughtful and courteous behavior of its members, which was based on the moral assessment and aesthetic beauty of the actions and actions performed. n



n Behavior began to be considered in close connection with moral positions, as an external manifestation of the internal content of the individual. The task of self-knowledge was set before the nobleman, that is, the study of his strengths and weaknesses, self-improvement in accordance with the requirements of conscience, the creation of his personality.

n As far as a person is deep, so he is a person. Always and in everything, there must be more inside than outside. “Never lose respect for yourself. And alone, don't argue with yourself. Let your conscience be the measure of your rightness and the severity of your own sentence is more important than other people's opinions. »



Giving practical advice on self-improvement, moralizing literature recommended “to rule oneself”, “restrain emotions, talk about yourself as little as possible with others, since praising yourself is “vanity, and blaspheming baseness and vice”. n Becoming a person, a person could build relationships with others “with a sense of dignity, but without any arrogance, characteristic only of low souls,” wrote N. Karamzin. n

n A number of principles of behavior were obligatory for everyone and for everyone: "Be pious, kind-hearted, temperate, good-natured and courteous." n Courtesy was understood as the main feature of culture. This is a behavior that reflects the desire to please others, decency.



n The literature of that time simply and intelligibly inspired the basic principles of courtesy: the absence of rude manners, unnaturalness in clothes, words and deeds, as well as the desire to please everyone and be pleasant in communication. It was necessary to treat everyone according to his dignity, but to everyone courteously: without pretense, demonstrate his respect and obedience to his superiors, and his favorable disposition towards his inferiors.

n Such moral and aesthetic principles of communication as courtesy and helpfulness, beneficence and gratitude, frankness and sincerity, beauty of manners, movements and actions were formed.



I get robbed in the same way as others, but this is a good sign and shows that there is something to steal.

Catherine II, private letter, 1775

The nobles considered themselves the best people of the state. Whether they had such grounds or not, they talked about it. A. S. Pushkin believed that the meaning of the nobility is precisely this: to be the most perfect, most educated and most decent people in Russia.

For this they are given privileges that separate them from the common people, estates that give them the opportunity to live without worrying about a piece of bread.

Of course, outstanding personalities were rarely born among the nobles, most of these people were the most ordinary men and women who did nothing exceptional.

But here is the code of honor. He acted. A nobleman could not do much that was forgiven to a commoner, but not forgiven to him. Because noble. Because that's what ranks, estates and privileges are given.

Cavalier guard of the Russian army of the time of Peter. The standard of noble honor. We remember, alas, only that “the age of the cavalry guard is short-lived, and therefore so la-la-la ... la-la, throwing back the canopy, and all la-la-la-la-la ...”

In our “democratic” time, due to the inertia of Soviet times, it is supposed to believe that the nobles “in fact” were not the best people in Russia and that their privileges and wealth were given completely in vain, for nothing. Class, you know, the principle! For this, I can only advise one thing ... And you guys go to Azov. The walls of the Turkish fortress, 25-30 meters high, are perfectly preserved there. Bombards stand there ... with a diameter of up to 80 centimeters.

Further - it is clear. We take a ladder ... 30 meters long, it will weigh 150 kilos ... This is the one we take together. A sword in the teeth and - forward. On the walls! Bombs are falling from there, pouring tar and boiling water, shooting, stairs are repelled with special spears - and sideways, and your camping comrade is already writhing below with a broken spine. And you climb! And don't just climb - pistols on your belt. Sword in the teeth! Climb, encouraging the male soldiers, organizing subordinates, pulling out the wounded along the way. Dolez? Pistols pulled out, smoke, fumes, blood, lead - point blank, sword drawn - forward! There are still plenty of Turks on the walls, and they are not going to give up. Penicillin and painkillers, by the way, have not yet been invented, so every second wound is gangrene and amputation, and every third, even small by modern standards, is death in wild torment, like that of a prince, an oligarch and a nobleman in ... the fourth knee of Andrei Bolkonsky. Fearfully? Do not want? Nothing to freak out. Did you do it? Congratulations, you are nobles.

But we digress. Let us return to the very honor of the nobility, which should be protected from a young age. The code of honor, among other things, excluded any dishonest way of enrichment. The nobleman built his “quarry” in such a way that not only himself, but also his ancestors and his descendants could not be reproached for anything. Ancestors - that gave birth to a bad offspring. Descendants - that come from a scoundrel.

This very strict, very rigid code of honor could, in a number of cases, directly demand that death be preferred to the continuation of life. Honor is more important than physical existence.

The reader is generally aware of how rigidly the code of honor acted: this is very historically described in Pushkin's The Captain's Daughter. Alexander Sergeevich relied on facts: during the Pugachevshchina, more than 300 nobles of both sexes were hanged for refusing to swear allegiance to Pugachev - "miraculously saved Peter III." Exactly like the captain and captain (!) Mironovs. The Pugachevites lined up noble families under the gallows, first they hanged their husbands in front of their wives and children. Then mothers in front of their children. Sometimes they started with children - maybe this will impress the parents? So: not a single described case has been preserved in the history of fathers and mothers (mothers too, I emphasize this) saved a child at the cost of a false oath.

At the same time, ordinary soldiers, yesterday's men, of course, usually betrayed, "recognizing" in Pugachev "the true king." But what is surprising, then, after the suppression of the rebellion, they usually ... returned back "to the sovereign's service", and they were taken! Well, what did they give slack, changed the oath? Guys. What to take from them. There is no real honor in them, what can you do.

And from the native nobility, only 1 (one) person chickened out under the gallows and went to serve Pugachev. After the defeat of the impostor, he rushed to save himself: after all, he was not Catherine's "ideological" enemy at all. Well, at first he was afraid, betrayed, and then there was no way out. The surname of this historical character is Shvanvich. In Pushkin, he is Shvabrin, and all contemporaries immediately recognized who he was talking about. By the way, in The Captain's Daughter, Pushkin did not invent the story of Shvabrin's duel: in fact, there was the same case of violation of the rules of the duel, only not by Shvanvich himself, but by his father. The incident was notorious at the time. Shvanvi-cha's father cut the face of Alexei Orlov, the very favorite of Catherine the Great, when he looked back at a cry.

Until the end of his days, the face of Alexei Orlov was “decorated” with a terrible scar from the ear to the corner of the mouth. On unusual people, his smile acted terribly. Shvanvich Sr. was forgiven: he managed to convince the public that he had taken advantage of the enemy’s mistake “accidentally”, he slashed at the same time as he screamed.

This is how suspicion involuntarily arises: maybe meanness is still a hereditary quality? Maybe our ancestors were right when they judged a person not only by his own qualities, but also by the way of life of his parents and grandparents? Are many qualities transmitted even purely genetically, and even more so - through education?

In any case, when Shvanvich Jr. was tried, he was also reminded of the meanness committed by his father. And they haven't forgiven. The fact that a commoner was forgiven, who was often not even punished, but simply put back into service, could not be forgiven a nobleman. Under no circumstances.

It is difficult to describe the full measure of contempt for Shvanvich of the whole society. Shvanvich is politically dead. When he was led in shackles to the court, the women tried not to touch him even with the edge of their dress. No one addressed him and did not answer his words, except for the members of the court.

According to the verdict, he was not executed, but exiled to the Turukhansk region forever. Catherine died, Paul reigned, Alexander ascended the throne, the war with Napoleon died down ... Shvanvich lived. None of the Sovereigns, despite tradition, pardoned him upon accession to the throne. The living dead rotted on the banks of the Yenisei, in the forest-tundra, for a good forty years.

Russian nobles, including the highest-ranking ones, could not be “primordially” thievish just because they protected family honor. Yes, they were not disinterested, they worked for the result, including obtaining ranks, estates, awards, awards. They wanted to "make a quarry", and, of course, not all of them used only noble methods for this.

The nobles served their superiors, bowed to their superiors, married rich brides, and resorted to all sorts of petty scams to inflate their worth. But to steal ... to appropriate someone else's and even government money ...

From the point of view of the famous French diplomat Talleyrand, Russian courtiers were "strange". Including because they "did not take." The same "strangeness" was observed by the Russians by the Prussian king Frederick the Great, and the envoy Lestok, who played a significant role in the conspiracy that brought Elizabeth to the throne.

However, our kings are also strange. Let's say the state budget of France in 1720 was 5 million livres.

The fortune of the relative of the king, the Duke of Orleans, was estimated at 114 million livres, and his debts - at 74 million livres. The legendary diamond pendants donated by the king to his wife cost about 800,000 livres.

Here is what is interesting: the highest French nobility behaved exactly like in Russia - temporary workers. A classic domestic example of a thief at the throne is, of course, Aleksashka Menshikov. 14 million totaled his fortune at the time of the "confiscation" in 1727. And there is no certainty that everything was completely found.

But who is Menshikov - the "semi-powerful ruler"? Pieman? Is it the son of a groom, or a soldier? A typical temporary worker for our history.

Alas, sometimes all sorts of Menshikovs, Shafirovs, Khodorkovskys, Berezovskys, Gusinskys fell down on our long-suffering state. The price of these personalities is clear: fartsa without family and tribe, instantly elevated from "junior scientists" and pastry makers to the owners of the country. Steal the loot. At any moment they will be overthrown, imprisoned, exiled.

But there is a difference between a temporary worker and a hereditary aristocrat "having all rights". Therefore, it is somehow incorrect to compare Menshikov with the French princes of the blood. What is still “forgivable” to a temporary worker-grabber somehow looks wildly among those who have been on the throne for generations, among the hereditary rulers of the Kingdom of France themselves. The aristocracy, whose ancestors participated in the Crusades.

In general, one way or another, the kings themselves and their relatives in France have always been much richer than the state they headed.

The budget of the Russian Empire in 1899 reached an astronomical figure: 1.5 billion rubles.

And the value of the property of the royal family - according to the maximum calculation - 125 million rubles. Also not childish - 8% ... But you can’t compare with the French.

Moral: Russian tsars were much poorer than the state they headed. It is well known that during the first census in 1897, Nicholas II wrote in the column "occupation": "The owner of the Russian land."

Hmm yes. Doubtful, Your Majesty! What kind of master are you when your entire large family of the total fortune accounts for only a maximum of 8%, and according to other sources - 2-3% of the annual state budget.

I'll make it clear right now. The Sovereign Emperor, of course, DISTRIBUTED in Russia according to the law and subject to certain restrictions established by laws, practically all the property of the State. But precisely - disposed of. Didn't own. The members of the imperial house were the richest people, and their content cost the Russian budget a pretty penny, but the state treasury is one thing, and their personal pocket is quite another. The right to dispose of state property by the emperor is partly the same right that, for example, the President of Russia has today, only with greater restrictions under the law. The only difference is that the President has this right limited in time, for the term of office, and is not inherited, but delegated directly by the people through direct elections.

But it would not occur to anyone today to say about the President of Russia - "the owner of the Russian land", even though he is partly the same manager of state property, who was, say, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov.

So, they were strange, our kings.

And their dignitaries were also strange.

Did the highest Russian dignitaries take bribes? As a rule, no. Did they steal the treasury? Rather, some of them used the treasury, and then mostly moderately and cautiously. In each era and for each layer and rank, there were their own standards of what is possible and what is not. These "concepts" had nothing to do with the written law, but its dignitaries never violated it. They knew - otherwise they will cease to be respected. With them it will be like with Shvanvich - civil death will come. Even without exile or confiscation, without exclusion from the nobility and without deprivation of ranks ... They will simply cease to exist for their class. For them, everything that was their world all their lives will disappear.