The main sources on students of the 19th century. Guidelines. When starting to study the topic, students should remember that in the second half of the 19th century, important changes were taking place in Russian culture. Wirtshafter E.K. Social Structures: Raznochintsy in R
The development of bourgeois relations in Russia in the second half of the 19th century made special demands on higher education - in connection with the reforms of this period, it was necessary to increase the educational qualification of a large army of officials. The question arose of training specialists with technical education, expanding the research work of universities, and creating new higher educational institutions. Already in the 60s, a number of technical educational institutions were transformed into higher ones: the St. Petersburg Institute of Technology (1862), the Mining Institute (1866), the Moscow Higher Technical School (1868), etc. Along with this, new higher technical educational institutions were opened, so that their number increased from 7 to almost 60.
Without touching on the formation and activities of the country's technical universities as a field of special education, we will later turn to the history of Russian universities in the second half of the 19th century.
By the middle of the last century, there were six universities in Russia: Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan, Kharkov, Derpt and Kyiv. Universities were the largest scientific and educational centers of the country. They trained teachers for secondary and higher schools, doctors, and scientists. Universities were the focus of scientific thought, they became widely known thanks to outstanding scientist-professors: at Moscow University they were historians T. N. Granovsky and S. M. Solovyov; in St. Petersburg, the mathematicians P. L. Chebyshev and V. Ya. Bunyakovsky, the physicist E. Kh. Lenz, and the zoologist S. M. Kutorga; in Kazan - mathematician N. I. Lobachevsky, chemist N. N. Zinin. In addition to scientific and educational work, university scientists consulted on national economic issues, being members of various committees and commissions, conducted educational work, gave public lectures, etc.
Universities, in addition to purely scientific profiling, also provided applied knowledge. Medicine, mechanics, etc. were studied at the corresponding faculties. Clinics, laboratories, and scientific libraries were created at the universities. The most famous in the first half of the 19th century was the old Russian university - Moscow. The youngest was the University of St. Vladimir in Kyiv, founded in 1833 after the defeat of the uprising in Poland and the closure of the Vilna and Warsaw universities.
The activities of universities were determined by statutes. The charter of 1835 effectively eliminated the autonomy that had previously existed, and the entire life of the universities began to be completely controlled by the trustees of the educational districts, who were appointed almost exclusively by the military.
The routine of student life was also paramilitary in nature - military activities, discipline close to that of the army; strict regulation of behavior, including a ban on wearing long hair, beard and mustache; obligatory uniform, the violation of which was punishable by expulsion from the university. This was also emphasized by some external accessories of university buildings. So, at St. Petersburg University, until the end of the 50s, in the middle of the main corridor, “a rather large copper cannon continued to flaunt, indicating that the university did not escape the invasion of the military regime of the last years of the reign of Nicholas, and while in the gymnasiums they taught gun techniques , students practiced cannon shooting.
The research work of teachers was also subjected to strict control. Professors were required to submit their lecture programs for approval to the rector, and if their “reliability” was in doubt, they were submitted to the trustee of the educational district for consideration. The program for courses in state law, political economy and all historical disciplines was subject to approval by the Ministry of Education.
The state law of "European powers, shocked by internal sedition and riots" was generally excluded from university teaching. Thus, a law professor could not only refer to English institutions, but even refer to the Russian Code of Laws. Philosophy was also excluded from the curriculum of universities, which was recognized as useless "with the modern reprehensible development of this science by German scientists."
Naturally, such changes lowered the level of teaching. In order to avoid scientific trips abroad to prepare for the title of professor, according to the charter of 1842, the institute of associate professors was introduced, designed to replace this internship.
At the same time, administrative ministerial control over the internal life of universities was strengthened. According to the regulation of 1849, the rector of the university was not elected by the council with the subsequent approval of the minister, but simply appointed by him. In addition, the Minister of Education received the right to remove and dismiss deans of faculties.
Political reliability was recognized as the ideological basis of university education. Kyiv Governor-General Bibikov during a visit to the University of St. Vladimir said in a public speech, addressing the students: "Remember: I will condescendingly look at your revelry and the like, but a soldier's cap threatens anyone who is seen in freethinking." Police censorship not only hindered the development of research thought in the works of scientists, but negatively influenced the worldview and psychology of students, generating social and mental apathy, directing young energy not at all towards scientific affairs. A student of those years recalled: “... It was necessary to put somewhere an excess of young forces in the complete absence of public interests and the languishing boredom and apathy that reigned in society ... there was an uncontrollable desire to somehow especially original and boldly feign and surprise the universe. And so, they broke restaurants or other entertainment establishments, then, walking in a drunken gang along the Nikolaevsky bridge, knocked down and threw hats from passers-by into the Neva, then outweighed shop signs ... Such scandals did not always work out safely and often ended in fierce, and sometimes bloody clashes with the police."
At the same time, such cases for the most part did not entail any punitive measures on the part of the university authorities, since his vigilant observation turned mainly to the political reliability of the students. The same goal was pursued by the regulation of the composition of students. Introduced in 1839, the tuition fee at the university for 10 years has been constantly increasing, limiting the entry of young men from poor and unprivileged families, only persons of noble origin were enrolled in the “state kosht”.
The new political trends of the late 1950s and early 1960s had a noticeable effect on the life of universities. Already at the end of the 50s, civilians began to be appointed trustees of educational districts instead of generals - Nazimov, Kokoshkin, Vasilchikov: Senator E. P. Kovalevsky became the trustee of the Moscow educational district, Prince G. A. Shcherbatov of St. Petersburg, and a well-known medical scientist of Kiev N. I. Pirogov.
Great changes have also taken place in the teaching staff of universities. “50% of the teachers who worked at the universities in 1854 dropped out by the end of 1862. By the fall of 1861, 47.5% of the faculty were new. The changes affected all universities. They were especially great in St. Petersburg and Kazan, where 58.3 and 61%, respectively, left and 59 and 58.8% of the entire staff re-entered. The old conservative professors were replaced by young, progressive scientists. Professor of Russian history N. G. Ustryalov, one of the leading historiographers of the Nikolaev era, was voted out at St. Petersburg University, and N. I. Kostomarov was elected in his place, shortly before returning from exile, to which he was convicted in the trial of the Cyril and Methodius Society. The educator D. I. Moyer and K. D. Kavelin, a lawyer, historian and sociologist, and a prominent public figure of the liberal trend, were admitted to the Faculty of Law. At the natural department of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of St. Petersburg University, the future great scientist, then a young assistant professor D.I. Mendeleev, a highly gifted chemist N.I. became rector of the university.
Gradually, the nature and content of university lectures began to change. Professors informed students about modern achievements of European science, new scientific theories. In 1864, a translation into Russian of Charles Darwin's book "The Origin of Species" appeared, which made a revolution in science. A greater place in the lecture courses began to be given to the coverage of Western European literature, history, and law. Scientific publications also became more active - in the early 60s, new volumes of Solovyov's History of Russia from Ancient Times, Kostomarov's Historical Monographs and Researches, and Beketov's botany course came out of print. There was an opportunity for foreign internships for students and scientific trips for university professors. Scientific discussions have become a new phenomenon in university life.
In 1860, a public dispute between Kostomarov and Pogodin took place at St. Petersburg University. The reason was the speech of the first against the Norman theory. A supporter of Pogodin's theory gave the scientific dispute an open character and initiated a discussion that aroused great public interest. The assembly hall of the university during the debate was overcrowded with young people.
A contemporary recalled: “They sat two by two on the same chair ... they sat on each other’s knees, on the windows, on the floor.” The sympathy of the listeners was mostly on the side of Kostomarov. The desire of university scientists to disseminate scientific knowledge was also manifested in the reading of public lectures, which were previously subjected to administrative persecution. Under the Free Economic Society, from the end of the 1950s, public lectures on a broad program were resumed, Professor of St. Petersburg University S. S. Kutorga gave a whole course “On Man and Nature” there. In Kazan, university professors Eshevsky, Babst, Bulich and Pakhman gave lectures on the humanities. In St. Petersburg, the association "Public Benefit" even opened a hall for public lectures in the Passage. The best university professors read there:
Lenz, Zagorsky, Khodnev, Tsonkovsky. Tickets were snapped up. Lectures were held in a crowded green. Each was attended by at least 300, often up to 500 or more people.
There were also changes in student life. The spirit of barracks discipline and police control gradually disappeared. According to a contemporary, “a series of liberation actions began,” as a result of which the students felt freer: “they began to smoke within the walls of the university ... The authorities no longer stuttered about wearing cocked hats and swords; they were archived even by dandies-white-summers… At the same time, students with shaggy manes and mustaches began to appear at the university… All these were trifles, but they unspeakably lifted the spirit and strengthened…”.
The poverty of the majority of students, the lack of privileges of the social position: people from the small landed nobility, the clergy, the philistinism, they, cut off from their estate, were essentially raznochintsy - all this brought up in them the independence of actions and judgments, the habit of relying only on their own strength, intolerance to injustice .
The curiosity of such young men was manifested not only in science, but also in an active interest in public life. Along with this, aspirations arose to discuss university problems, their position. Thus, students of St. N. Ya.), orders of elders ... satires on professors and students. However, soon the editors and employees of the leaflets were summoned to the trustee, Prince Shcherbatov, who ordered them to present the texts of the leaflets to him. Naturally, their further distribution stopped. This and similar administrative measures aroused the indignation of the students, which was intensified by everything that was happening in the country. “A number of liberal measures were taken from above,” a contemporary wrote. - Society expressed great sympathy for them, at the same time grumbled, worried, protested about the abuses and lawlessness that were encountered at every step. The satirical leaflets, with Iskra at the head, denounced them; protests with dozens of signatures were printed in the newspapers…”. Mass gatherings of students began, which the authorities tried to prevent. At Moscow University, “when a very crowded gathering wanted to gather in the large assembly hall of the old university, the authorities ordered that the doors of this hall be locked; but this only led to the fact that the crowd broke down the doors and, entering the hall, arranged a meeting for them ... ". Gradually, student meetings began to take on a political character. “... Undoubtedly,” a participant in the meeting testifies, “that among the speakers who spoke at the meetings and in general the leaders of the movement there were also directly political speakers who were in connection with the secret society“ Land and Freedom ”, which at that time spread its activities throughout Russia ” .
Student gatherings and speeches began to cause alarm in government circles. “The Sovereign,” wrote A. V. Nikitenko, a professor at St. N. Ya.) and announced to him that such disturbances as now agitate the universities could not be tolerated, and that he intended to proceed with a drastic measure - to close the universities. Honest and intelligent, according to the same Nikitenko, Kovalevsky objected to these extreme measures, but, unable to calm the student unrest, was replaced in the post of Minister of Education by Mr. Putyatin, who tried to influence the movement by force. When a grandiose student demonstration took place at Moscow University on the day of memory of Professor T. N. Granovsky, the next day 24 of its participants were arrested.
In May-June 1861, the government adopted decrees banning student gatherings and meetings, as well as exempting no more than two students from each province from tuition fees, which closed the doors of universities to the poor. But these measures only added fuel to the fire. “To excite university unrest,” wrote a student of Kiev University, “there was a new reason in the rules that had just been issued for students, the application of which in almost all universities was met with grumbling and even resistance.” In response to these government decrees, major student unrest broke out at many universities. In Kiev University, in connection with the arrest of the student Penkovsky, mass gatherings began. Particularly significant were the performances of students in Moscow and St. Petersburg, where a street demonstration was dispersed by the police. “The prevailing mood among the students was the most extreme: hatred of power ... protest against the existing order of things, reaching the complete denial of any compromise with them,” recalled a participant in these events.
In response to student unrest, the authorities closed St. Petersburg University until the "special order", which followed only in 1863.
The student unrest evoked widespread public sympathy. The university issue acquired political significance, since the attitude of the government to education also determined the general direction of domestic policy. The rise of the student movement had a direct impact on the development of a new university charter, the preparation of which lasted from 1858 to 1863. In the course of its discussion, the most extreme proposals were made, up to the transformation of universities into exclusively noble educational institutions. Minister Putyatin showed complete incompetence in this matter. "Obviously," wrote Nikitenko, "he himself is unable to grasp either the tasks of universities, or their needs, or the means of transforming and improving them."
Nevertheless, the public sentiments and speeches of the students predetermined the generally progressive nature of the charter of 1863. According to him, universities were recognized as self-governing institutions. Government control was weakened. University councils received the right to resolve all methodological issues, determine the curriculum, distribute funds for teaching aids, assign scholarships to students, recommend scientific papers for publication, and award awards and medals. The charter of 1863 established the election of the rector and deans with their subsequent approval by the trustee of the educational district or the Minister of Education.
The charter of 1863 also secured the stable structure of the universities. They included four faculties: physics and mathematics, with departments of physics, mathematics and natural sciences; medical; historical and philological, with departments of historical, Slavic-Russian philology and classical philology; legal. Petersburg University did not have a medical faculty, since the Medical and Surgical Academy operated in the city, but there was a faculty of oriental languages. Tomsk University was opened in 1888 as part of one medical faculty, in 1898 a law faculty was added to it. At Dorpat University there was also a theological, Lutheran faculty.
The lecture method was combined with practical exercises in teaching. The curriculum was expanded to include special subjects, while fencing, music, and drawing were excluded from it. The term of study was extended to 5 years.
Upon graduation from the university, students received the title of candidate. The most able could continue their studies in graduate school. After two years of study, graduate students took the exam for a master's degree and prepared a master's thesis.
The implementation of the provisions of the charter of 1863 contributed to the progressive development of university education and scientific activities.
Numerous scientific societies began to be created at universities and with the participation of university teachers, their activities covered vast regions of Russia and were very fruitful. For example, in 1868, the Society of Doctors was created in Kazan, chaired by Professor Vinogradov of Kazan University. The "Society" carried out "a medical study of the Kazan region in order to improve the level of public health in it." Among other cases, measures were developed to eliminate the "harmful influence of various industries on the lives of workers." Employees of Kharkiv University studied local mineral springs, took preventive measures against epidemics (in particular, cholera), took part in the activities of the local literacy society. In 1868 in St. Petersburg, and then in Kazan, Kyiv and other cities, "Societies of Naturalists" arose, their activities proceeded in close connection with university scientists. Famintsyn, a professor at St. Petersburg University, took an active part in the work of the Society; in Kazan, the university council provided an auditorium and a museum at the disposal of the Society. Societies of archeology, history and ethnography were created at many universities, studying local monuments of antiquity and collecting ethnographic material.
Despite the development of university education and science in the second half of the 19th century, there was still a shortage of both scientific personnel and people with higher education. In the mid-60s, A. V. Nikitenko wrote in his “diary”: “... out of 80,000 officials of the empire, 3,000 vacancies open annually. Over the course of 2 or 3 years ... from all universities, lyceums and schools of law 400 people graduated annually, except for doctors. The conclusion from this is: how small the number of educated people we have to occupy positions in the public service.
This situation continued in subsequent years as well. The lack of scientific personnel prompted the involvement of university professors for discussion various projects, participation in state administrative and financial commissions. For example, Professor A. I. Voeikov was the chairman of the meteorological commission of the Russian Geographical Society, V. V. Dokuchaev was a member of the commission for higher agricultural education and the commission of the Ministry of State Property. At the same time, the economic situation of universities in the 1960s and 1980s continued to be difficult. The regular amounts did not cover the actual costs of the salaries of teachers and employees of universities. In the early 80s of the XIX century, they amounted to St. Petersburg University - 311,050 rubles ... Moscow - 409,570 rubles ... Kazan - 342,820 rubles ... Kharkov - 327,190 rubles, Kiev - 332,070 rubles. 2,907,722 rubles were allocated for educational and auxiliary institutions of six universities. Due to lack of funds, the laboratories lacked the necessary preparations and instruments, the libraries and university museums were poor. Universities experienced great difficulties because of the unsuitability and tightness of the premises. So, at the opening of Kharkov University, he was placed in the former governor-general's house, naturally, not adapted for the needs of the educational institution. V. A. Zhukovsky, who visited it in the late 1930s, characterized the position of the university in two words: “poverty and overcrowding”. This condition worsened in the second half of the 19th century. In the 70s, with the growth of departments, the need for premises increased even more - they were needed for a clinic at the Faculty of Medicine (with 75 beds), astronomical and meteorological observatories, rooms for mechanics, physical geography and forensic medicine. Thanks to a large donation from the wealthy Sumy sugar producer Kharitonenko (100 thousand rubles for construction and 50 thousand rubles for scholarships in his name), a building for the medical faculty was built, but the problem as a whole was not solved.
Other universities experienced similar difficulties. Thus, the rector of Kazan University, Professor N. N. Bulich, complained about the overcrowding of classrooms, the cramped conditions at the medical faculty, and the terrible situation of the library: halls ... at the present time ... is so cluttered with scales and covered with a thick layer of dust, books lying on the floor, that there is hardly an opportunity to pass in it, and not to study quietly.
The position of professors was also unenviable, especially in provincial universities. In 1875, 387 professors and associate professors worked at six universities in Russia. A contemporary described the living conditions of professors at Kazan University in the early 1970s as follows: “Strongly constrained in funds, since life became more and more expensive every year, being unable not only to acquire books that constitute an urgent need for every scientist, but even to satisfy their current daily necessities of life. And, continuing to describe the plight of the provincial professors, the author added: “From this circle of mental activity during the whole academic year, the conscientious professor, in essence, did not even have to use rest, since, on the one hand, he had a year-long course that required preparation, on the other - Attachment to science and the technique of scientific research required continuous studies. But, nevertheless, despite this non-stop work, which has always made and makes the professorial position perhaps the most difficult of all the pedagogical positions of the state, the majority of professors - true workers - never regretted their time and labors and gave them with full readiness. cause of the common good."
Despite all the difficulties, the creative activity of university scientists during this period was embodied in a number of outstanding scientific works: mathematician P. L. Chebyshev, physicist A. G. Stoletov, mechanics N. E. Zhukovsky. Historical science was enriched by the final volumes of “The History of Russia from Ancient Times” by S. M. Solovyov (1878–1879), at the same time, “Communal Land Ownership ...” by M. M. Kovalevsky, “Boyar Duma in Ancient Russia” by V. O. Klyuchevsky and others.
The general democratic upsurge of the late 1970s and early 1980s had a huge impact on universities. Under the influence of growing public excitement, the intensification of the revolutionary activities of the populists, students began to take an increasingly active part in various kinds of public events: anniversaries of progressive writers, petitions, funerals of leading public figures, then gatherings and demonstrations. Since the spring of 1878, progressive students have been taking an active part in public protests against the arbitrariness of the authorities. Numerous gatherings at the country's universities were held in connection with the political "trial of the 193s." “The press and higher education have always been among us the most sensitive and gentle barometers for determining the political weather,” wrote the remarkable Russian historian A. A. Kizevetter in his memoirs.
In the autumn and winter of 1878, students of St. Petersburg, Kharkov and Moscow universities petitioned the heir to the throne, Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich (future Emperor Alexander III). The petition contained requests for corporate rights, permission for mutual funds, gatherings, and other "human rights." Similar petitions were filed by students of the St. Petersburg Medical and Surgical Academy. Kharkov Veterinary Institute and other higher educational institutions of the country. In a number of cases, student demonstrations were dispersed by the police and Cossacks.
The academic conflict began to acquire a political character.
In response to student unrest, the government, in the “Temporary Instructions for the University Inspectorate” and “Rules for Students” published in 1879, decided: student gatherings, meetings, performances, as well as the filing of addresses and petitions to prohibit, strengthen police supervision of students. The duties of the inspector now included monitoring students during extracurricular time - visiting their apartments, parties, studying the character, interests, friendships of each student.
However, the further escalation of the revolutionary situation in the period 1879-1881 slowed down subsequent repressive measures against universities and the publication of the upcoming new university charter.
Only in August 1884 was the new university charter promulgated, which was the "brainchild" of D. Tolstoy, and later I. D. Delyanov was appointed Minister of Education, who "was a resolute enemy of all liberal trends and was the constant squire of Pobedonostsev and Tolstoy."
The new charter of 1884 was adopted without prior approval by the Council of State, many of whose members raised strong objections. The charter approved by the emperor, in the words of B. N. Chicherin, decapitated the universities and “turned them upside down”. It is significant that the reactionary press gave a highly positive assessment of the charter of 1884. Moskovskie Vedomosti wrote that in the new charter “no compromises distorting the matter were allowed, no concessions were made to tyranny ... now its completion ... The guiding and controlling supervision of the state power extends over everything. Indeed, the new charter practically abolished the autonomy of universities - the strictest control of the ministry over the teaching activities, curriculum and curricula of universities was introduced; the ministry promoted and dismissed professors on the recommendation of the trustee, "elected" the rector and deans of the faculties. The historian A. A. Kizevetter subsequently assessed the significance of the charter in the following way: “The university charter of 1884 established some useful innovations ... completely overthrew university autonomy, nullified the independence of the council of professors, destroyed the elective principle in the management of the university, canceled the election of the rector and deans and turned the rector and deans as officials appointed: the rector - by the Minister of Public Education, deans - by the trustee of the educational district.
The “Considerations on the Enforcement of the Decrees of the New Charter” emphasized the political significance of universities: “as a state institution, the university cannot but have a political goal”, therefore “...university education ... must be in the service of state interests and government power.” Hence the requirement that "professors politically recognize themselves as organs of the government and are obliged to follow its forms." The election of professors cannot be left to "accidents and biases", but must be the result of "attentive and detailed discussion with the decisive voice of the central authority." During such "elections" of professors and associate professors, the main attention was paid to their "reliability" and way of thinking. At the same time, along with the unfortunate cases of dismissal of capable scientists and teachers, there were also funny things. So, one associate professor at Kharkov University (later a prominent scientist) was “left behind the staff”, that is, not hired, because, “according to private information”, one of his reports at the archaeological congress in Odessa was recognized as not corresponding to the official concept. However, later it turned out that the mentioned report was made by a completely different person.
The inspector had a decisive influence on the life of the university. Not being a lecturer, he, nevertheless, could now, together with the dean, discuss the distribution of hours, the content of lectures, and even scientific issues.
Since one of the main goals of the statute was to make student unrest impossible, the inspector's supervision of students was "so intensified that, in essence, it approached police surveillance.
“Investigation and espionage reigned in the universities,” wrote a later researcher. - In Kazan, they appeared, it seems, in especially rude forms ... There, to introduce the charter of 1884, a new trustee was appointed from the zealous directors of gymnasiums, a certain Maslennikov - a gentleman, as they said, who made a career under the patronage of some influential nun ... Among the seditious, Maslennikov found himself a good assistant in the person of ... Inspector Potapov, who considered almost every student a personal enemy.
The chairman of the scientific committee of the Ministry of Public Education, A. Georgievsky, who made an inspection trip, also positively assessed the activities of the Kazan inspector, his "careful monitoring of the students", emphasizing that "the inspection in Kazan was put in the right relationship with the general police and the gendarme department."
The charter of 1884 made changes to the curricula of universities, while historical and philological education suffered great damage. The division of the historical and philological faculties into historical, Slavic-Russian and classical departments was destroyed. The main subjects for students of this faculty were ancient languages, ancient history and mythology.
A former student of this faculty, later academician S. A. Zhebelev, wrote: “Of all the university faculties, the faculties of history and philology were most sensitively affected by the charter of 1884. Strictly speaking, these faculties, as such, were abolished... Only classical philology was preserved in them, understood, again, not scientifically, but from a certain point of view...“. “The Minister of Education,” the memoirist continued ironically, “convinced that classical philology is the alpha and omega of all humanitarian disciplines, that it is the guarantee of the good and salvation of Russia ... he decided ... to nurture the largest possible number of classical philologists, as the most reliable stronghold of the fatherland ... “.
As a result of such a curriculum, a student of the Faculty of Philology could graduate from it without attending such lecture courses as the history of Russia, Russian language and literature, Slavic linguistics, and others recognized as “optional”. Fortunately, most of the classical professors who taught courses in classical philology understood it as a scientific discipline, and not as a special kind of pedagogical device, which meant not so much to teach, but to “curb” and “humble”.
In any case, they did not take advantage of the "privileged position" in which the statutes of 1884 were supposed to place the classical professors. Moreover, they, apparently, were embarrassed by this privileged position, and soon the first ones took up arms against him with fervor.
The system of so-called fees did not justify itself. With the existence of "optional" and "mandatory" courses in the curriculum, professors who taught the first courses received half as much as their colleagues who taught "mandatory" courses, regardless of the erudition and abilities of the lecturer. In addition, such a financial system was extremely difficult for students.
The Charter of 1884 provoked numerous protests both from the public and from the "universitarians" themselves, especially since its reactionary significance was strengthened by subsequent government circulars. The "Regulations" of 1884 prohibited students from expressing approval or disapproval of professors and from marrying while studying at the university. In 1885, by order of the Committee of Ministers, uniforms were introduced at universities. Students were required to salute members of the imperial family and the university authorities. Student meetings and gatherings were prohibited. Punishment systems were established for violations of discipline.
The prominent historian of Russian culture P. N. Milyukov, recognizing the main trend of the statute of 1884 as “the subordination of professorial teaching and service to the university authorities and the ministry”, as well as “strengthening inspectorial supervision of students”, wrote about its consequences in the 90s: “In In the field of higher education, the struggle goes against the academic conditions created by the charter of 1884. The government responds to student unrest, first of all, by intensifying repression. The highest point it reaches in this direction is the rule of July 29, 1899, on the surrender to the soldiers of the rioters. 183 students of Kiev University were actually given to the soldiers by virtue of these rules. The answer was the assassination of the Minister of Public Education Bogolepov by a student (Socialist-Revolutionary) Karpovich. Only after this was the Ministry of Education invited the councils of the universities to express their opinion on the desired changes in the charter of 1884. The Soviets demanded the restoration of autonomy and the return of rights to student organizations.
The charter of 1884 and subsequent government measures had a negative impact on the financial situation of the students.
Since the bulk of the students of the second half of the 19th century were raznochintsy, it is natural that the property status of this group was insufficient. Moreover, for a number of years, tuition fees have steadily increased. If in the 60-70s students of metropolitan universities contributed 50 rubles a year, and provincial universities - 20 rubles, then according to the charter of 1884, the fee was increased to 60 rubles, and after 1887 (that is, after the assassination attempt on Alexander III 1 March 1887, a student of St. Petersburg University Alexander Ulyanov - N. Ya.) the fee increased to 100 rubles. in year. In addition to tuition fees, students were supposed to pay 20 rubles. to the commission for passing the final exams and obtaining a graduation certificate. State scholarships were used by no more than 15% of the students of each faculty. Getting it was due to a number of requirements: the submission of a certificate of poverty, a positive review of the inspector about the student's behavior and, finally, the successful passing of the so-called "adversarial tests". In addition to state scholarships, there were scholarships from funds of public and private donations. Students preferred to turn to them for help.
But neither government stipends nor charity could do much to meet the needs of the poor student body, whose existence was constantly poisoned by an excruciating lack of funds and a constant search for work. Subsequently, the prominent scientist Professor I. I. Yanzhul recalled that, as a student at Moscow University, “I used the last pennies for publications in the Police Vedomosti, looking for any kind of income and giving bribes to newspaper peddlers and typesetters so that they would notify me before anyone else about polls to work ... Nothing good came of all these measures ... I was left without earnings and ruffled my old and already holey boots for nothing ... I sold out absolutely everything that could be sold, and pawned everything that was more necessary. The memoirist carefully reproduced the budget of a student who has 25 rubles a month. In addition to the room fee (11 rubles), the largest expenses are for food. Most students enjoy half-hearted and unhealthy lunches in the kitchen. The minimum charge for lunch in these canteens is 7 rubles. 50 kop. The same price is in the paid canteen of the "Society for Assistance to Needy Students." In addition, morning and evening tea with sugar cost 1 ruble per month. 30 kop. Bread in the morning and in the evening for 5 kopecks, a total of 3 rubles per month. Lighting with a small lamp (kerosene) - 50 kopecks, laundress 1 ruble, minor expenses (soap, bath, tooth powder, paper) - 50 kopecks. As a result - 24 rubles. 80 k. “And 20 kopecks. stays for tobacco or the theatre.”
Housing conditions for the majority of poor students were difficult. They settled mainly in the poorest quarters, where the rooms were cheaper. A description of one of these places is given in his memoirs by a former student of Moscow University: “Narrow, very narrow streets (Bronny, Kozikhinsky).
Nondescript wooden houses with faded paint, dirty, disgusting ... Small colonial (that is, petty, selling various goods, including tea— N. Ya.) benches with unwashed windows. Repulsive gate. Ugly yards are unsanitary to the last degree. And everywhere the stench, the stinking stench of cellars, latrines and garbage pits. Poisonous fumes are in the air... The population consists entirely of people with no specific occupations, petty office workers, widows and women of various types... Drunken fun lives hand in hand with eternal need, interrupting from bread to kvass. In such old wooden houses in Moscow or 4-5-storey tenement houses in St. Petersburg with well-yards, students rented rooms. If the room was rented to one student, then it cost 11 rubles. a month with servants, that is, cleaning and a samovar in the morning: "... This will be a room where you can sleep and occasionally study, if the neighbors allow and the cold - these constant companions of student apartments." But often the budget of students was less than 25 rubles. - 18 or 15 rubles. monthly living wage. Then the room was rented by three or four people. Here is how the well-known publicist V. Gilyarovsky draws the life of such poor fellows: “In each room of student apartments ... usually four people lived. Four miserable beds - they are chairs; a table and a shelf of books, behind the bindings of which bugs moved from apartment to apartment. They dined in canteens (kukhmisterskie) or ate tea with bread. During austerity, instead of tea, chicory was brewed, "a round stick of which 1/4 pound cost 3 kopecks, and it was enough for four days for 10."
Particular material difficulties arose among poor students with clothes, especially uniforms. “And so many buy coats and jackets somewhere on occasion: from comrades, junk dealers. There is no need to argue whether it is customary or not customary to wear a dress from an unknown person’s shoulder - perhaps sick or dead from a contagious disease, ”recalled the former student.
In general, the compulsory form caused students not only new expenses, but also ridicule. V. Gilyarovsky in his memoirs cites poems that went from hand to hand with students: “Alexander III had two weaknesses: a passion for dressing everyone in uniform and a passion for playing the trombone ... Our young tsar is a musician. He trumpets on the trombone. Only the regal talent does not like Notu "re". As soon as the minister brings a new reform, "Re" he instantly crosses out. And leave the form.
Of course, not all students were in such great need, there was a category of middle-income and well-to-do students who did not feel the need for additional earnings and did not know the full severity of poverty. Parental "assistance" gave them the opportunity not only to study quietly, but also to have a good time. However, most of the university students belonged to the first category.
Despite all the difficulties that university education experienced in the second half of the 19th century, its development proceeded progressively. The number of universities increased: in 1863 Novorossiysk University was opened in Odessa, in 1888 - in Tomsk, which became the largest scientific and cultural center in Siberia. Accordingly, the number of students increased: in 1864 there were 4,328 of them in all universities of Russia, in 1875 - 5,679, in 1885 - 12,939, in 1894 - 13,944.
By the end of the 19th century, Russia occupied one of the first places in the world in theoretical developments in many branches of science, and above all in chemistry, physics, natural science, and mathematics. A significant contribution to these achievements was made by university scientists - D. I. Mendeleev, A. G. Stoletov, I. I. Sechenov, A. A. Markov and others.
Russian universities have become true cultural centers of the country, contributing to the creation of many scientific societies, the popularization of scientific knowledge, giving hundreds and thousands of students not only high vocational training, but instilling respect for science, breadth of views and the desire for progress. D. I. Pisarev wrote: “The best hopes of the Fatherland are concentrated in the universities.”
Commentary by Academic Supervisor Marina Fadeeva, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Dean of the HSE Faculty of History Alexander Kamensky
In the mass consciousness, a Russian student of the late 19th and early 20th centuries usually appears as an eternally hungry consumptive youth with a feverish gleam in his eyes and with a soul filled with the most benevolent revolutionary impulses. However, one has only to seriously think about how, even without resorting to specialized literature, it becomes clear that, like many other stilted images that make up mass ideas about the past, this one also does not stand up to criticism. After all, if all Russian students of that era were dying of consumption and were preoccupied not with their studies, but only with plans to fight the autocracy, in Russia at the beginning of the last century there would not have been brilliant scientists, engineers, lawyers, doctors and people of all other professions who were trained Russian universities. Yes, and during the period of revolutionary upheavals and civil war For some reason, the Russian students turned out to be by no means on the side of the Bolsheviks.
The organization of higher education in tsarist Russia, the university as a scientific corporation, and many other topics related to this issue, of course, have recently become one of the most prominent areas of historical research for a reason. What today is often called a crisis in national education and science has deep and by no means only economic roots. Researchers are concerned about the organization of the scientific community, its structure, the system of internal relations, and the norms of scientific ethics. In this context, Marina Fadeeva's appeal to the history of Russian students seems quite logical and natural. However, as her supervisor, I dare say that she came to her completely independently. Having become a history student at the Higher School of Economics herself, she, apparently, and perhaps even without realizing it herself, experienced curiosity about the phenomenon of students, which, ultimately, led her to this topic. Curiosity, as is well known, is the main driving force of science. Having once begun to study Russian students a hundred years ago, Marina, of course, discovered many far-from-resolved issues in this topic and became seriously carried away by it.
The history of Russian pre-revolutionary students is provided, though not too voluminous, but quite representative historiography. In particular, in recent decades, a significant contribution to it has been made by several monographs by A.E. Ivanov, who is rightly considered the best expert on this topic. The work of Marina Fadeeva, however, once again proves that in science there are no “closed” topics once and for all, and each new generation of historians asks the past new questions and receives new answers to them.
Marina Fadeeva, as a researcher who is just starting her career in science and belongs to the youngest generation of Russian historians, is distinguished at the same time by respect for her predecessors, whose works she actively uses, and a healthy distrust of everything she finds in them, the desire to double-check every "historical fact, to document it. Presented here course work bears little resemblance to an ordinary student term paper, significantly surpassing it not only in volume (more than 120 pages!), but also in the variety of subjects covered in it and the methods used. Not to mention the fact that in the coursework written in the second year you will not often find references to archival sources! Another distinguishing feature of the presented work is its consistency.
The author began with an attempt to understand what students are as a social group, what place they occupied in Russian society, what distinctive characteristics were provided by his contemporaries and subsequent historiography, then moving on to its formal characteristics (number, social origin), and from them - to recreate the reality of everyday life, which she rightly and in full accordance with the ideas of modern science considers as the basis for the formation of a worldview. To the reader, who is not too versed in the peculiarities of modern historical knowledge and expects to find, first of all, information about the number of students inspired by the works of Lavrov, Bakunin, Mikhailovsky and Marx, this approach may seem strange, and the abundance of tables and other digital material and completely avert from careful reading. But as soon as you read it, you discover with pleasure how the next historical stereotypes begin to crumble. In addition, let us remember: we are only an intermediate stage on the way to big science, although not without certain stylistic and compositional shortcomings, but representing a very serious and thorough application.
Formation of the worldview of the Moscow students of the end XIX - start XX century
1. The concepts of "raznochintsy", "intelligentsia»
The concept of "students", like any definition, cannot be unambiguous. The related concepts are just as diverse. The raznochintsy component of students in the understanding of contemporaries and the minds of researchers often overshadows other parts of the student body, many students are defined as young intelligentsia, and therefore, in our opinion, on the eve of discussions about students, we should define what “raznochintsy” and “intelligentsia” are.
Pre-revolutionary historiography already understood the raznochinets in different ways: if B. Frommet defines the raznochintsy as “people without a family, without a tribe, sometimes associated with the lower ranks of the people, always cut off from all classes of society, with high hopes and without a penny in their pocket, with dreams of a marshal rod and without any social status ", then S. Svatikov, on the contrary, calls the main qualities of a raznochinets" a high understanding of the individual and a sharply expressed sense of self-worth ".
The definition of B. Frommett is similar to the ideas about raznochintsy that prevail in culture. As E. Wirtshafter writes, non-nobles and educated commoners were called raznochintsy - initially to belittle or condemn demeanor. For example, raznochintsy at A.N. Ostrovsky - these are half-educated students, non-nobles.
In Soviet historiography, the concept of "raznochintsy" is closely intertwined with the criterion of education. According to V.R. Leykina-Svirskaya, by the 19th century, “those who received a rank or title by the right of education began to be called raznochintsy”.
Modern researchers emphasize the fact that categories of the population that often fall under the criteria of raznochintsy did not use this term for self-determination. E. Wirtshafter also writes about the 19th century as a turning point in the definition of raznochintsy: initially being a transitional category of ignorant strangers, they become part of the educated elite.
If by the period of interest to us, raznochintsy are often defined through the presence of higher education, then it will be interesting to look at how they correlate with the intelligentsia in the research literature.
Modern historiography pays attention to this issue. Researchers such as S.G. Stafeev, V.V. Bocharov, E.I. Shcherbakova and L.G. Sukhotin either distinguish "raznochintsy" as part of the intelligentsia, or identify these concepts. For example, L.G. Sukhotina writes about the intelligentsia as "raznochinny in terms of social composition."
There are many definitions of the intelligentsia in historiography, each of the authors strives to give his own, the most complete and accurate, but no one has succeeded in this endeavor. K.B. Sokolov, considering the established definitions of the intelligentsia, identifies three main criteria by which one or another part of society is singled out into a single group called "intelligentsia": an intellectual as a person with an appropriate level of education, or as a "good person", a valiant knight, "conscience people", educator, defender, or as a dissident.
Most of the definitions of the intelligentsia in the historiography we have examined can be divided into these three groups: V.V. Bocharov, B.I. Kolonitsky and V. Zhivov. The image of a “good person” was mostly liked by Soviet researchers (in their works, N.G. Chernyshevsky and N.A. Dobrolyubov formed intellectuals as people of the highest spiritual qualities), V.R. Leikina-Svirskaya, M.N. Tikhomirov and A.N. Maslinny. Both pre-revolutionary and modern authors believe in the "dissidence" of the intelligentsia. This is P.B. Struve, I.A. Ilyin , P.I Novgorodtsev , E.I. Shcherbakova , E. Wirtschafter , S.M. Usmanov and L.G. Sukhotin.
K.B. himself Sokolov criticizes all three common approaches. In his opinion, “there is no doubt that the intelligentsia is not just a category or not only a professional one. These are not just people of “intellectual labor”, but also, for example, representatives of the village intelligentsia, and therefore the first criterion is not suitable. The author proposes to represent the concepts of "intelligentsia" and "educated class" in the form of two concentric circles, then the intelligentsia is an internal initiative, creative circle.
Also, the intelligentsia is only in a fit of narcissism, according to K.B. Sokolova, could position herself as the "conscience of the people." In addition, the defined group itself never identified itself with the revolutionaries, and the revolution did not position its intelligence.
Thus, the selected criteria, according to K.B. Sokolov, are not true. However, he himself despairs of the possibility of ever once and for all ending the dispute about the intelligentsia and, it seems, comes to a certain agreement with the philologist V.S. Elistratov, who claims that anything can be found in the meaning of this word, but any definition will imply the best part of Russia.
What are the distinguishing features of the intelligentsia? Researchers of different generations and views single out in it detachment (V.M. Zhivov, P.B. Struve, E.I. Shcherbakova, P.I. Novgorodtsev), isolation, alienation (P.B. Struve, I.A. Ilyin , E. Wirtshafter, L.G. Sukhotina), radicalism (E.I. Shcherbakova, S.M. Usmanov), skepticism, criticality, nihilism (I.A. Ilyin, L.G. Sukhotina, E.I. Shcherbakova ).
“Beggars, unarmed people throw kings off the throne out of love for their neighbor. Out of love for the motherland, the soldiers trample on death with their feet, and she runs without looking back. Wise men ascend to heaven and dive into hell itself - out of love for the truth. The earth is being rebuilt out of love for beauty." The intelligentsia seemed to be just as versatile, and, perhaps, it was just as diverse in reality, not representing a homogeneous mass. We agree with K.B. Sokolov and, recognizing that “in general, it is already obvious that none of the known definitions of the intelligentsia is able to cover and explain the entire phenomenon as a whole” and we are talking about a concept that “does not have a clear detonation and includes an element of interpretation already when it is used ”, let us turn to the definition of students and highlighting the characteristic features of its Russian part.
2. Definition of students, its characteristics in Russian realities
Student - a student of a higher educational institution, university or academy.
V. Dahl. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language
Students are considered as a special society that was formed around this educational institution and makes an independent contribution to public life.
Feofanov A.M. Students of Moscow University in the second half
XVIII
- first quarter
XIX
in.
As epigraphs for this part, we took two definitions of students: given in the Explanatory Dictionary of a contemporary of the period we are considering - V.I. Dahl and formulated in the work of a contemporary researcher. According to these statements, it is clear that over two centuries, ideas about the subject of interest to us have not undergone significant changes.
The research literature tends to oppose the student body and its characteristic features depending on the geography of study: they do not see much similarity in Russian and foreign students, except for the fact of receiving higher education. An exception is the position of B. Frommet, who at the beginning of the 20th century disputed the widespread contemporary statements to him, “as if only in Russia alone, studying youth dares to claim active participation in the political life of the country, [which] without any doubt, is not true, or at least , greatly exaggerated."
Most researchers who have addressed this issue tend to oppose Russian students to foreign students. This tradition begins with pre-revolutionary authors. For example, G.B. Sliozberg sees the answer to the question of whether revolutionism is a specific feature of Russian students in the “difference in the composition of students”: in Europe, higher education was the lot of the elite, and therefore the material issue that played such a big role in the life of students in Russia did not stand there at all.
Our contemporaries V.V. Ponomarev and L.B. Khoroshilov, the explanation for such a significant difference is found in the very culture of universities. The Russian path “was a path opposite to the Western European one, where the experience, traditions, culture accumulated in society completely determined the lifestyle of educational institutions, but in our country it is in many respects the opposite - educational institutions created according to someone else's model themselves, sometimes by touch, created traditions, and culture, shaped the experience that decades later will form the basis of the traditions of the next generations of educational institutions.
Let us turn to questions closer to our topic and, on the basis of the censuses of Moscow (1882 and 1902), we will look at the share of students in the total mass of the Moscow population and at the quantitative changes taking place with this group. First, we present data that allow us to judge the percentage of the male population of the age we need (from 18 to 30 years old - the most common student age) to the entire mass of the population of Moscow, and then we correlate these men with the number of students.
Let's make a reservation in advance that we are interested in the age from 18 to 30 years and only students from the variety of all students, so in the tables we will provide only data on these ages and categories.
Table 1. Age distribution of the male population (1882) .
| Age | Husband. | Total |
| 15–20 | 7,00% | 12,00% |
| 20–25 | 8,00% | 12,00% |
| 25–30 | 7,00% | 11,00% |
| Total | 57,00% | 100,00% |
The table shows that out of the entire population of Moscow in 1882, we will be interested in 22% of men. We correlate them with the number of students.
Table 2. Distribution according to the degree of education of the male population (1882)
| windows. | Not OK. | Total | |
| Universities | 2785 | 703 | 3488 |
So, in total, in 1882, 432,447 males lived in Moscow, of which 22% were men aged 18 to 30 years, i.e. 95,138 people. Of these, 3488 people were listed as students at the university. This means that 0.8% of men in Moscow were students in 1882.
Let us now look at the changes that had taken place by 1902.
Table 3. Age distribution of the male population (1902)
| Age (years of age) | born | ||
| In Moscow | Outside Moscow | Total | |
| 18 | 3148 | 15 374 | 18 522 |
| 19 | 2722 | 14 637 | 17 359 |
| 20 | 2524 | 16 025 | 18 549 |
| 21 | 2288 | 15 829 | 18 117 |
| 22 | 2180 | 17 723 | 19 903 |
| 23 | 2045 | 16 506 | 18 551 |
| 24 | 1937 | 15 037 | 16 974 |
| 25 | 2038 | 16 730 | 18 768 |
| 26 | 1992 | 14 754 | 16 746 |
| 27 | 2022 | 16 275 | 18 297 |
| 28 | 2079 | 16 332 | 18 411 |
| 29 | 1765 | 12 346 | 14 111 |
| 30 | 2080 | 16 725 | 18 805 |
According to these data, out of the entire population of Moscow in 1882, we will be interested in 38% of men. We correlate them with the number of students.
Table 4. Distribution according to the degree of education of the male population (1902)
| Age (years of age) | Total number [students in higher education] | Universities |
| 18 | 1742 | 173 |
| 19 | 1488 | 474 |
| 20 | 1430 | 800 |
| 21 | 1389 | 962 |
| 22 | 1146 | 902 |
| 23 | 969 | 776 |
| 24 | 719 | 602 |
| 25 | 536 | 418 |
| 26 | 324 | 250 |
| 27 | 197 | 145 |
| 28 | 101 | 59 |
| 29 | 58 | 35 |
| 30 or more | 158 | 76 |
| Total | 43981 | 5690 |
In 1882, 613,303 males lived in Moscow, of which 38% were men aged 18 to 30, i.e. 233,113 people. Of these, 5690 people are listed as students at the university, which means that in 1902, 0.92% of men in Moscow were students.
Thus, over the 20 years from 1882 to 1902, the number of university students increased: from 3488 to 5690 people and grew from only 0.8% to 0.92%.
“What is the appearance of a Russian student? There is no doubt that the Russian students were a group of young people, imbued in the vast majority with the desire to develop principles for future activities - a group that had its own common features and was imbued with a special mood, ”wrote G.B. Sliozberg.
Based on the studied historiography, memoirs of students and professors, as well as information from official reports, we will try to determine these common features and highlight the distinctive features of Russian students.
There are no less disputes regarding the definition of students than in the case of the intelligentsia. So, according to S. Kassov, the students were distinguished by a "clear sense of corporate identity", as well as a "sense of a student family". According to A.M. Annenkov, “as a distinctive feature in the student environment of the first third of the 19th century. freedom of opinion and speech can be singled out, and G.B. Sliozberg - "the presence among students of heterogeneous, alien in upbringing and habits to elements" . V.R. Leikina-Svirskaya insists that "Russian students had a democratic character." “The expectations of beneficial changes in Russian society, typical for the students of that time [the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century,” notes A.E. Ivanov. V.E. Baghdasaryan is sure that "the departure of students to the revolution was a manifestation of the crisis of youthful socialization." “Professors, as well as a significant part of the so-called educated society [in fact, the intelligentsia], are educating the younger generation, in short, a revolutionary spirit,” Professor N.P. states with indignation. Bogolepov. “The growth of the student movement gave rise to a powerful impulse for self-knowledge among the students of universities,” writes Yu.D. Margolis, “as far as society is concerned, in this era the student’s blue band was a patent for trust,” emphasizes S. Svatikov.
From this variety of striking characteristics, it becomes clear only that the main features of the student body were its diversity and heterogeneity. What are the inalienable qualities of a Russian student of the late 19th - early 20th century?
We have formulated the following ten distinctive features: community and solidarity; the desire to develop ideals and norms of behavior; transition and heterogeneity; democracy; search for yourself; corporatism; own ideas about the future; state of political views; commitment to certain ideas and, finally, interaction with society.
The selected features of the students are understood differently by historiography and the authors of the sources: some are noted only by the authors of a certain era, others are accepted by the majority, many turn out to be controversial. Let's consider them sequentially.
Let us first turn to the features of the student body, understood in a similar way. All authors note, firstly, the desire of students for community and solidarity (data from the “Report of the Moscow University Commission of 1901 on the causes of student unrest”, works by S. Melgunov, S. Svatikov, S. Kassov, P.V. Grishunin, A .M. Feofanov and E. Vishlenkova, R. Galiullina, K. Ilyina). Secondly, their desire to develop ideals and norms of behavior that proclaimed freedom, morality, and ideological life as ideals is noted (information provided by S. Melgunov, “Report of the Judicial Commission for 1893/1894”, S. Svatikov, A.E. Ivanov, G.I. Shchetinina, S. Kassov and A.M. Annenkov). Thirdly, the transition and heterogeneity of the students, who came out of different social strata and at the university transformed into something, on the one hand, completely new, and on the other hand, retaining traces of the original estate and class affiliation (data from G.B. Sliozberg, V R. Leikina-Svirskaya, A. E. Ivanov, N. G. Georgieva, S. Kassova, V. N. Simonov and A. M. Feofanov). Fourthly, it is the democracy of students in various spheres of life (representations by S. Svatikov, V.R. Leikina-Svirskaya, A.E. Ivanov and N.G. Georgieva). And, fifthly, students' search for themselves (beliefs of S. Melgunov, B. Frommet, S. Kassov, Yu.D. Margolis and N.G. Zavadsky).
Other five features are controversial in the interpretation of researchers. This is, firstly, the corporatism of students, which most people call one of the main features of the student body (R. Vydrin, A.E. Ivanov, S. Kassov, O.A. Vakhterova, P.V. Grishunin, I.V. Zimin and E. Vishlenkova, R. Galiullina, K. Ilyin), while others, on the contrary, write about the destruction of corporatism by the charter of 1884 (information from the “Report of the Moscow University Commission of 1901 on the causes of student unrest” and S.I. Mitskevich). Secondly, their ideas about the future: uncertain (in the interpretation of G.B. Sliozberg and S. Kassov) and confidence in change (A.E. Ivanov). Thirdly, the state of political views is assessed by researchers in different ways. They were almost equally divided in their opinions: some speak of the uncertainty and heterogeneity of student ideas (R. Vydrin, A. Saltykov, V.B. Elyashevich, M.V. Sabashnikov, S. Kassov, V.N. Simonov and A.M. Annenkov), others write about political differentiation and activity (G.B. Sliozberg, V. Lind, G.A. Veselaya, A.E. Ivanov, S.I. Radtsig, N.G. Zavadsky, V.E. Baghdasaryan). Fourthly, the commitment of Russian students to certain ideas: we learn either about the inclination of students to liberal ideas (A. Saltykov and Yu.K. Rachkovskaya), or about their revolutionary worldview (N.I. Khudyakov, G.I. Shchetinina, S D. Speshkov and N. G. Zavadsky). And, finally, fifthly, the interaction of students and society is also regarded ambiguously: if the majority tends to their mutual trust (Commission of the Moscow University of 1901 on the causes of student unrest, S.D. Speshkov, B. Frommet, V. Kurbsky, S. Svatikov, G.B. Sliozberg and A.S. Izgoev), then the rest write about students outside of society (S. Melgunov) or about society's distrust of students (in the submissions of the Judicial Commission [student]).
This is how the image of Russian students of the late 19th - early 20th century appears in the sources and works of researchers.
3. Correlation of the concepts of students, intelligentsia and raznochintsy
Above, we talked about the intelligentsia, its definitions and characteristics, as well as the definition of the Russian student body and its inherent features. Now consider how these concepts are combined from the point of view of researchers from different eras.
Regardless of the time of creation of their works, various authors are unanimous in their assessments. S. Svatikov, G.B. Sliozberg , A. Saltykov , N.G. Georgiev, G.I. Shchetinina, N.G. Zavadsky and B.I. Kolonitsky.
Some researchers separately emphasize that the students were "the quintessence of the Russian intelligentsia." We find such statements, in particular, in the works of R. Vydrin, A.E. Ivanov and K.B. Sokolova.
Thus, we have shown how historiography assesses raznochintsy, the intelligentsia, and students, what characteristic features stand out in each case, and how these concepts are combined with each other. To understand the relationship between these three concepts and to understand the essence of the student body, we expressed this relationship with a diagram.
Scheme 1 
Let us briefly explain the structure of the circuit. Let us first explain the inclusion of the intelligentsia in the educated population only as a part. This is explained by our agreement with the ideas of S.G. Stafeev, who defines the intelligentsia in such a way in Russian realities. He is convinced that “unlike Western intellectuals, for whom the main criterion for attributing them to this stratum was professional mental work, in Russia people began to be called intelligentsia, differing primarily in two characteristic features: the desire to selflessly serve the people, to express and protect its interests and irreconcilable opposition to political power» . Thus, in Russian realities, along with the level of education, one of the main criteria for the intelligentsia is its opposition. Further, according to E.K. Wirtshafter, raznochintsy are fully included in the intelligentsia, tk. were its most radical part. As for the students, it seemed important to us to emphasize their heterogeneity not only in social terms, but also in terms of beliefs. After all, even the pre-revolutionary researcher S. Svatikov emphasized that "the hegemony of the intelligent commoner was so strong in the students that his appearance overshadowed other types of youth." Therefore, on the diagram, students are represented, on the one hand, as part of the intelligentsia and, accordingly, part of the raznochintsy, and on the other hand, as part of the educated population, i.e. holders of higher education loyal to the government.
4. The origins of the student body (XVIII- StartXIXcentury)
The chosen chronological framework of this work is the middle of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century (1860-1904), therefore, the time preceding this period can be spoken of as the origins of students. On the basis of historiography, we will show how students were understood in the era of its inception, and look at the evolution within this process, so that later, when analyzing students of the period we have chosen, it would be possible to trace the causes and evolution of certain ideas of students and its perception by society, the authorities and the students themselves of the Moscow university.
Let us first follow the quantitative changes in the number of students.
Table 5. Changes in the number of students in Russia (1808–1894)
| Year | Number of students, pers. |
| 1808 | 150 |
| 1830 | 1996 |
| 1850 | 3368 |
| 1860 | 5453 |
| 1865 | 5453 |
| 1872 | 7251 |
| 1894 | 8193 |
Table 6. Changes in the number of students at Moscow and St. Petersburg Universities (1850–1894)
| Year/University | 1850 | 1880 | 1885 | 1890 | 1894 |
| Moscow | 821 | 1881 | 3179 | 3492 | 3761 |
| Petersburg | 387 | 1675 | 2340 | 1815 | 2676 |
What are the changes in the number of students in Russia? From 1808 to 1894, the number of students increased from 150 to 8193 people, i.e. 55 times. The number of students also increased at Moscow University: from 1850 to 1894, the number of students increased 4.5 times (from 821 to 3761 people).
Let us divide the time of the origins into two periods - the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century - and consider them sequentially.
The 18th century is presented in historiography as follows. One of the pre-revolutionary researchers of the student movement emphasizes at this time the fact that “university education, accessible only to one nobility, did not open up especially tempting prospects for students, because. the conditions of the serf regime hindered any cultural undertaking.
Modern authors narrate in detail about the time of the birth of Russian universities. In the book “Higher Education in Russia. Outline of history until 1917" it is reported that "all types and types of higher educational institutions were created at the initiative of the state and at the expense of the state" , and therefore "the state hampered any manifestation of public goals if they did not pursue pragmatic tasks" . V.A. Zmeev notes that “universities began to really influence changes in the social class composition of the population of St. clothes."
In relation to the beginning of the 19th century, the collection "Higher Education in Russia ..." characterizes changes in government policy in the field of education as follows. “Autonomy and authoritarianism were changing; the recognition of intrinsic value for higher education was given with difficulties both in the sphere of government and in a slowly evolving society.
A.M. Annenkov dwells in detail on the characteristics of the students of this period. He writes that “at the beginning of the 19th century. young people who entered the university saw it as the main means for realizing their abilities and desires ", noting that" most of the students studied willingly and seriously "," however, with all the "thirst for knowledge", the general educational level of students remained low due to the rather low qualifications of the teaching staff and imperfect forms of education” . Speaking about the life of pupils of Moscow University, he reports that students read willingly and a lot, and "books and magazines banned by official censorship were especially popular", the theater was also a form of leisure. “As a distinctive feature in the student environment of the first third of the 19th century. freedom of opinion and speech can be singled out,” the researcher concludes. The theme of student life is continued by N.V. Makarov, emphasizing that "students of Moscow University were distinguished by frequent visits to taverns, of which Moscow had enough" . In addition to the theater, in her opinion, " feature student life in the first half of the 19th century were student "gatherings". Young people gathered informally, discussed university life, professors, and various issues of Russian life. At these "gatherings" there were occasional drinking bouts. In general, “students of the first universities were not distinguished by good manners,” the researcher concludes. E. Vishlenkov, R. Galiullina and K. Ilyin complete the characterization of the students of the early 19th century. They emphasize the fact that "in the 1830s, the Russian student acquired clear identification marks", became more educated and older.
Notes
1. Frommet B. Essay on the history of students in Russia. SPb., 1912. S. 27.
2. Svatikov S. Students before and now // Way of students. Sat. articles. Private collection of proceeds to the fund of the Moscow student house. M., 1916. S. 1–19 (hereinafter: Svatikov S. Students before and now...).
3. Wirtshafter E.K. Social structures: raznochintsy in the Russian Empire. Per. from English. T.P. Party. Ed. A.B. Kamensky. M.: Logos, 2002 (hereinafter: Wirtshafter E.K. ).
4. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. Intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century. Moscow. 1971. S. 25 (further: Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. Intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century ...).
5. Stafeev S.G. Russian intelligentsia and its role in the social movement (second half of the 19th century) // Man, culture, society: interuniversity. Sat. scientific tr. / Editorial staff: N.V. Dulin (responsible editor) and others / VolgGTU. Volgograd, 2005. Issue. 2. P. 67–76. (Further: Stafeev S.G. The Russian intelligentsia and its role in the social movement (second half of the 19th century) ...).
6. Bocharov V.V. Intelligentsia and violence: socio-anthropological aspect // Anthropology of violence. RAN. Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology. Miklouho-Maclay. Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography. Peter the Great (Kunstkamera). St. Petersburg State University. Rep. Ed. V.V. Bocharov, V.A. Tishkov. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2001, pp. 39–85 (hereinafter: Bocharov V.V. Intelligentsia and Violence: A Socio-Anthropological Aspect…).
7. Shcherbakova E.I. Raznochinnaya intelligentsia of the 60s of the XIX century as a potential opponent of political detectives // Historical readings on the Lubyanka. Russian special services at the turn of the era: the end of the 19th century - 1922. Moscow, Veliky Novgorod, 1999, pp. 48–55 (hereinafter: Shcherbakova E.I. Raznochinskaya intelligentsia of the 60s of the 19th century as a potential opponent of political investigation bodies ...).
8. Sukhotina L.G. Russian intelligentsia and social thought. Publishing House of Tomsk University, 2008 (hereinafter: Sukhotina L.G. ).
9. Ibid. S. 14.
10. Sokolov K.B. Russian intelligentsia of the 18th - early 20th centuries: a picture of the world and everyday life. SPb., 2007 (hereinafter: Sokolov K.B. ).
11. Bocharov V.V. Intelligentsia and Violence: A Socio-Anthropological Aspect…
12. Kolonitsky B.I. Intelligentsia in the late 19th - early 20th century: contemporaries' self-awareness and research approaches // From the history of the Russian intelligentsia. Collection of materials and articles dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of V.R. Leikina-Svirskaya. SPb., 2003. S. 181–201 (hereinafter: Kolonitsky B.I. Intelligentsia in the late 19th - early 20th century: contemporaries' self-awareness and research approaches...).
13. Zhivov V. Marginal culture in Russia and the birth of the intelligentsia. // New literary review. 1999. No. 37 (hereinafter: Zhivov V. Marginal Culture in Russia and the Birth of the Intelligentsia…).
14. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. The intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century ...
15. History of Moscow University. Volume I. Rep. ed. M.N. Tikhomirov. M., 1955.
16. Maslin A.N. Materialism and revolutionary-democratic ideology in Russia in the 60s of the XIX century. M., 1960.
17. Struve P.B. Intelligentsia and revolution (1909) // Russian sources of modern social philosophy. Intelligentsia. Power. People. M., 1993. S. 190–204 (hereinafter: Struve P.B. Intelligentsia and revolution ...).
18. Ilyin I.A. On the Russian intelligentsia (1927) // Russian sources of modern social philosophy. Intelligentsia. Power. People. M., 1993. S. 275–281 (hereinafter: Ilyin I.A. About the Russian intelligentsia ...).
19. Novgorodtsev P.I. On the Ways and Tasks of the Russian Intelligentsia (1918) // Russian Sources of Modern Social Philosophy. Intelligentsia. Power. People. M., 1993. S. 225–241 (hereinafter: Novgorodtsev P.I. About the ways and tasks of the Russian intelligentsia ...).
20. Shcherbakova E.I. Ethics of revolutionary action (60s of the 19th century). Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. M., 1996 (hereinafter: Shcherbakova E.I. Ethics of revolutionary action (60s of the XIX century) ...).
21. Wirtshafter E.K. Social Structures: Raznochintsy in the Russian Empire…
22. Usmanov S.M. Hopeless dreams. Russian intelligentsia between East and West in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Ivanovo, 1998 (further: Usmanov S.M. Hopeless dreams. Russian intelligentsia between East and West in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries ...).
23. Sukhotina L.G. Russian intelligentsia and social thought ...
24. Sokolov K.B. Russian intelligentsia of the 18th - early 20th centuries: a picture of the world and everyday life ...
25. Zhivov V. Marginal culture in Russia and the birth of the intelligentsia ... S. 39.
26. Struve P.B.
27. Shcherbakova E.I.
28. Novgorodtsev P.I. About the ways and tasks of the Russian intelligentsia ... S. 237.
29. Struve P.B. Intelligentsia and revolution ... S. 192.
30. Ilyin I.A. About the Russian intelligentsia ... S. 277.
31. Wirtshafter E.K. Social Structures: Raznochintsy in the Russian Empire…
32. Sukhotina L.G. Russian intelligentsia and social thought ... S. 14.
33. Shcherbakova E.I. Ethics of revolutionary action (60s of the XIX century) ... S. 53.
34. Usmanov S.M. Hopeless dreams. Russian intelligentsia between East and West in the second half of the 19th - early 20th century ... S. 5.
35. Ilyin I.A. About the Russian intelligentsia...
36. Sukhotina L.G. Russian intelligentsia and social thought ...
37. Shcherbakova E.I. Ethics of revolutionary action (60s of the XIX century) ... S. 53.
38. Schwartz E.L. Ordinary miracle: plays, fairy tales. Moscow: Eksmo. 2011, pp. 559–560.
39. Sokolov K.B. Russian intelligentsia of the 18th - early 20th centuries: a picture of the world and everyday life ... S. 38.
40. Ibid. S. 39.
41. Dahl V. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. M., 1956. T. IV. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language by Vladimir Dahl. Second edition, corrected and greatly enlarged from the author's manuscript. Volume four. SPb., M., 1882. S. 347.
42. Feofanov A.M. Students of Moscow University in the second half of the 18th - first quarter of the 19th century. Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. M., 2006 (hereinafter: Feofanov A.M. Students of Moscow University in the second half of the 18th - first quarter of the 19th centuries ...).
43. Frommet B. Essay on the history of students in Russia ... S. 1.
44. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students // In memory of Russian students. Paris, 1934, pp. 82–95 (further: Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ...).
45. Ponomareva V.V., Khoroshilova L.B. University Noble boarding house. 1779–1830 Moscow: New Chronograph, 2006, p. 63.
46. Census of Moscow in 1882. Issue. II. Population and Occupations. M .: City Printing House, 1885 (hereinafter: Census of Moscow in 1882. Issue II. Population and Occupations ...).
47. Ibid. S. 77.
48. Ibid. S. 77.
49. Census of Moscow in 1902. Part I. Population. Issue. 1. Population by sex, age, place of origin, length of stay in Moscow, marital status, estates, literacy and degree of education. Publication of the Statistical Department of the Moscow City Council. M., 1904 (hereinafter: Census of Moscow in 1902. Part I. Population. Issue 1. Population by sex, age, field, length of stay in Moscow, marital status, estates, literacy and degree of education ...).
50. Ibid. S. 38.
51. Ibid. S. 106.
52. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ... S. 82.
53. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia. L.: University of California Press, 1989. P. 54 (hereinafter: Kassow S.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia…).
54. Ibid. pp. 48–49.
55. Annenkov A.M. Russian students in the first third of the 19th century in the memoirs of contemporaries // Culture of historical memory. Proceedings of the scientific conference (September 19–22, 2011). Petrozavodsk, 2002, pp. 106–113. S. 112 (further: Annenkov A.M. Russian students in the first third of the 19th century in the memoirs of contemporaries...).
56. Sliozberg G.B.
57. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R.
58. Ivanov A.E. Student corporation of Russia in the late 19th - early 20th century: experience of cultural and political self-organization. M., 2004. S. 288 (hereinafter: Ivanov A.E. Student corporation of Russia in the late XIX - early XX century: the experience of cultural and political self-organization ...).
59. Bagdasaryan V.E. Motives for deviant behavior of students in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. // Russian students: conditions of life and life (XVIII-XXI centuries). All-Russian scientific conference. Collections of scientific articles. M., 2004. S. 83 (hereinafter: Bagdasaryan V.E. Motives for deviant behavior of students in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. // Russian students: conditions of life and life (XVIII-XXI centuries) ...).
60. From the notes of Professor N.P. Bogolepov. A page from the life of Moscow University. M., 1911. P. 55 (further: From the notes of Professor N.P. Bogolepov. A page from the life of Moscow University ...).
61. Margolis Yu.D. Student censuses in Russia 1872–1912 // Medieval and new Russia. Collection of scientific articles. To the 60th anniversary of prof. AND I. Froyanova. SPb., 1996. S. 658 (hereinafter: Margolis Yu.D. Student censuses in Russia 1872–1912…).
62. Svatikov S.
63. Materials on the university issue. Issue. 2. Report of the commission of the Moscow University in 1901 on the causes of student unrest. Stuttgart, 1904. P. 59 (hereinafter: Materials on the university issue. Issue 2. Report of the commission of Moscow University in 1901 on the causes of student unrest ...).
64. Melgunov C. Student organizations in the 80s–90s at Moscow University (according to archival data). M., 1908. S. 3 (hereinafter: Melgunov C. Student organizations in the 80s–90s at Moscow University (according to archival data) ...).
65. Svatikov S.
66. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia… P. 22.
67. Grishunin P.V. Students of metropolitan universities: structures of everyday life. 1820s–1880s Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. SPb., 2005. S. 18 (hereinafter: Grishunin P.V. Students of metropolitan universities: structures of everyday life. 1820–1880s...).
68. Feofanov A.M. Students of Moscow University in the second half of the 18th - first quarter of the 19th centuries ... P. 25–26.
69. Russian professors. University corporatism or professional solidarity. M.: NLO, 2012. S. 59 (hereinafter: Vishlenkova E., Galiullina R., Ilyina K. Russian professors. University corporatism or professional solidarity…).
70. Melgunov C. From the history of student societies in Russian universities. M., 1904. S. 1 (hereinafter: Melgunov C. From the history of student societies in Russian universities...).
71. Report of the judicial commission for 1893/1894 // From the notes of Professor N.P. Bogolepov. A page from the life of Moscow University. M., 1911. S. 109.
72. Svatikov S. Students before and now ... S. 10.
73. Ivanov A.E. Russian university students on the eve of the first Russian revolution. Socio-political appearance // Revolutionary movement of the democratic intelligentsia of Russia in the period of imperialism. Collection of scientific papers. M., 1984. S. 123 (further: Ivanov A.E. Russian university students on the eve of the first Russian revolution. Socio-political appearance ...).
74. Shchetinina G.I. Students and the revolutionary movement in Russia. Last quarter of the 19th century Abstract for the degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences. M., 1988. S. 42 (hereinafter: Shchetinina G.I. Students and the revolutionary movement in Russia. Last quarter of the 19th century...).
75. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia… P. 52.
76. Annenkov A.M.
77. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ... S. 94.
78. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. The intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century ... S. 27.
79. Ivanov A.E. University policy of autocracy on the eve of the first Russian revolution of 1899–1904. Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. M., 1975. S. 14 (hereinafter: Ivanov A.E. University policy of autocracy on the eve of the first Russian revolution of 1899–1904…).
80. Georgieva N.G. IN AND. Lenin on the place of students in the bourgeois-democratic revolution // Intelligentsia and revolution. XX century. Rep. ed. d.h.s. K.V. Gusev. M., 1985. S. 90 (hereinafter: Georgieva N.G. IN AND. Lenin on the place of students in the bourgeois-democratic revolution ...).
81. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia. P. 401.
82. Simonov V.N. Pupils of Moscow University are active participants in the political movement in the late 19th - present. 20th century Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. M., 1995. S. 13 (hereinafter: Simonov V.N. Pupils of Moscow University are active participants in the political movement in the late 19th - present. XX century ...).
83. Feofanov A.M. Students of Moscow University in the second half of the 18th - first quarter of the 19th centuries ... P. 25.
84. Svatikov S. Students before and now ... S. 15.
85. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. The intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century ... S. 27.
86. Ivanov A.E. University policy of autocracy on the eve of the first Russian revolution of 1899–1904… P. 13; Ivanov A.E. Russian university students on the eve of the first Russian revolution. Socio-political appearance ... S. 113.
87. Georgieva N.G. IN AND. Lenin on the place of students in the bourgeois-democratic revolution ... S. 91.
88. Melgunov C. Student organizations in the 80s–90s at Moscow University (according to archival data) ... S. 103.
89. Frommet B. Essay on the history of students in Russia ... S. 58.
90. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia… P. 399.
91. Margolis Yu.D. Student censuses in Russia 1872-1912 ... S. 658.
92. Zavadsky N.G. Student body and political parties in 1901–1914 SPb., 1998. S. 31 (hereinafter: Zavadsky N.G. Students and political parties in 1901-1914...).
93. Vydrin R. Highlights of the student movement in Russia. M., 1908. S. 28 (further: Vydrin R. The main points of the student movement in Russia ...).
94. Ivanov A.E. Russian university students on the eve of the first Russian revolution. Socio-political appearance ... S. 123; Ivanov A.E. Student Corporation of Russia in the late XIX - early XX century: the experience of cultural and political self-organization ... S. 389.
95. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia… P. 54.
96. Vakhterova O.A. Students and authorities in Russia in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries // Power and Society. Interuniversity collection of scientific papers. SPb., 2000. S. 60.
97. Grishunin P.V. Students of metropolitan universities: structures of everyday life. 1820–1880s… S. 17.
98. Zimin I.V. Student uniform and badges in Russia in the 19th - early 20th centuries // Facts and Versions. Historical and cultural almanac. Book. IV. Methodology. Symbolism. Semantics. SPb., 2005. P. 112 (hereinafter: Zimin I.V. Student uniform and badges in Russia in the 19th - early 20th century...).
99. Materials on the university issue. Issue. 2. Report of the commission of the Moscow University in 1901 on the causes of student unrest ... S. 13.
100. Mitskevich S.I. Notes of a public doctor. 1888–1918 M.-L., 1941. S. 7.
101. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ... S. 83.
102. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia… P. 403.
103. Ivanov A.E. Student Corporation of Russia in the late XIX - early XX century: the experience of cultural and political self-organization ... S. 288.
104. Vydrin R. The main points of the student movement in Russia ... S. 14.
105. Saltykov A. Moscow University in 1890–1895 // In memory of Russian students. Paris, 1934, p. 96 (further: Saltykov A. Moscow University in 1890-1895...).
106. Elyashevich V.B. From the memoirs of an old Moscow student (1892–1896) // In memory of Russian students. Paris, 1934, p. 107 (further: Elyashevich V.B. From the memoirs of an old Moscow student (1892-1896) ...).
107. Sabashnikov M.V. Memoirs // Moscow University in the memoirs of contemporaries (1755-1917). M., 1989. S. 580 (hereinafter: Sabashnikov M.V. Memories…).
108. KassowS.D. Students, Professors and State in the Tsarist Russia… P. 196.
109. Simonov V.N. Pupils of Moscow University are active participants in the political movement in the late 19th - present. XX century ... S. 22.
110. Annenkov A.M. Russian students in the first third of the 19th century in the memoirs of contemporaries ... S. 112.
111. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ... S. 84.
112. Lind W. Memories of my life. Moscow University ... S. 250.
113. Veselaya G.A. Mass public performances of Moscow students in the late XIX - early XX century. (1896–1904). Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. M., 1974. S. 11.
114. Ivanov A.E. Russian university students on the eve of the first Russian revolution. Socio-political appearance ... S. 121.
115. Radtsig S.I. Pages from memories ... S. 597.
116. Zavadsky N.G. Students and political parties in 1901–1914… S. 37.
117. Bagdasaryan V.E. Motives for deviant behavior of students in the late XIX - early XX century ... S. 83.
118. Saltykov A.
119. Rachkovskaya Yu.K. Students of St. Petersburg and Moscow in the light of the authors of the liberal direction (the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century). Abstract for the degree of candidate of historical sciences. SPb., 1999. S. 17.
120. Khudyakov N.I. Notes of Karakozov. Moscow University (1859–1860) ... S. 438.
121. Shchetinina G.I. Students and the revolutionary movement in Russia. The last quarter of the 19th century ... S. 35.
122. Speshkov S.D. A note compiled on behalf of the Minister of Public Education by a member of the Council, Privy Councilor Speshkov, about various organizations among students and students in various educational institutions ... S. 19.
123. Zavadsky N.G. Students and political parties in 1901-1914 ... S. 37
124. Materials on the university question. Issue. 2. Report of the commission of the Moscow University in 1901 on the causes of student unrest ... S. 23
125. Speshkov S.D. A note drawn up on behalf of the Minister of Public Education by a member of the Council, Privy Councilor Speshkov, about various organizations among students and students in various educational institutions ... P. 17.
126. Frommet B. Essay on the history of students in Russia ... S. 29.
127. Kurbsky V. Essays on student life (from the diary of a former student) ... S. 53.
128. Svatikov S. Students before and now ... S. 15.
129. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ... S. 94.
130. S. 205 [According to: Izgoev A.S. About intelligent youth (Notes about her way of life and moods) // Milestones. From the depth. M., 1991, S. 112].
131. Melgunov C. Student organizations in the 80s–90s at Moscow University (according to archival data) ... S. 88.
132. Report of the judicial commission for 1893/1894 ... S. 131.
133. Zavadsky N.G. Students and political parties in 1901-1914 ... S. 161.
134. Svatikov S. Students before and now ... S. 15.
135. Sliozberg G.B. Pre-revolutionary Russian students ... S. 94.
136. Saltykov A. Moscow University in 1890–1895… S. 96.
137. Georgieva N.G. IN AND. Lenin on the place of students in the bourgeois-democratic revolution ... S. 90.
138. Shchetinina G.I. Students and the revolutionary movement in Russia. The last quarter of the 19th century ... S. 41.
139. Zavadsky N.G. Students and political parties in 1901–1914… P. 9.
140. Kolonitsky B.I. Intelligentsia in the late 19th - early 20th century: contemporaries' self-awareness and research approaches ... S. 188.
141. Sokolov K.B. The Russian intelligentsia of the 18th - early 20th centuries: a picture of the world and everyday life ... [According to: Izgoev A.S. About intelligent youth (Notes about her way of life and moods) // Milestones. From the depth. M., 1991.].
142. Vydrin R. Highlights of the student movement in Russia ... S. 42.
143. Ivanov A.E. Student Corporation of Russia in the late XIX - early XX century: the experience of cultural and political self-organization ... S. 286.
144. Sokolov K.B. Russian intelligentsia of the 18th - early 20th centuries: a picture of the world and everyday life ...
145. Stafeev S.G. The Russian intelligentsia and its role in the social movement (the second half of the 19th century) ... S. 67 [For: History of Russia in questions and answers. Rostov-on-Don, 1999, p. 303].
146. Svatikov S. Students before and now ... S. 15.
147. Chinenny A., Stoyan T. Students of Russian universities (XIX century) // Higher education in Russia. Scientific and pedagogical journal of the Ministry of General and Vocational Education of the Russian Federation. 1999. No. 5. P. 141 [According to: Brockhaus F.A., Efron I.A. Encyclopedic Dictionary T. XXXIV. SPb., 1899. S. 754] (hereinafter: Chinenny A., Stoyan T. Students of Russian Universities (XIX century)…).
148. Ibid. P. 142 [S. 142 - By: Higher education in Russia. Essay on history until 1917. NII VO. M., 1995. S. 117].
149. Vydrin R. The main points of the student movement in Russia ... S. 11.
150. Higher education in Russia. Outline of history until 1917. Ed. prof. V.G. Kinelev. M., 1995. S. 260 (hereinafter: Higher education in Russia. Outline of history until 1917. Edited by Prof. V.G. Kinelev ...).
151. Ibid. S. 260.
152. Zmeev V.A. Russian students of the XVIII century // Russian students at the turn of the century. Materials of the All-Russian Student Forum. Ed. Yu.V. Kovrizhinykh, G.V. Kupriyanova. Scientific editor T.E. Petrov. M., 2001. S. 5.
153. Ibid. S. 16.
154. Higher education in Russia. Outline of history until 1917. Ed. prof. V.G. Kinelev ... S. 261.
155. Annenkov A.M. Russian students in the first third of the 19th century in the memoirs of contemporaries ... S. 107.
156. Ibid. S. 108.
157. Ibid. S. 109.
158. Ibid. S. 111.
159. Ibid. S. 112.
160. Makarova N.V. Students in the 19th century: life and customs // Russian students: conditions of life and life (XVIII-XXI centuries). All-Russian scientific conference. Collections of scientific articles. M., 2004. S. 61 (hereinafter: Makarova N.V. Students in the 19th century: life and customs ...).
When starting to study the topic, students should remember that in the second half of the 19th century, important changes were taking place in Russian culture. This was largely due to the major historical events that took place in Russia. The most important factor that had a huge impact on the development of all aspects of society was the abolition of serfdom and the bourgeois reforms that followed it. Thanks to these transformations, capitalism developed rapidly in Russia, which changed the entire old economic system of the country, led to a change in the social and spiritual image of the population, its way of life, mores, and to an increase in cultural needs.
The development of education should be considered on the example of the transformative policy of the Minister of Public Education A.V. Golovnin. The rise of science and technology was also associated with educational reforms. It is necessary to consider the scientific activities of the Russian Academy of Sciences, university professors, numerous scientific and scientific and technical societies that arose in Russia in the second half of the 19th century.
The education reforms also resulted in a noticeable growth of libraries and museums, periodicals and book publishing.
The development of Russian literature in the second half of the XIX century. was caused by the crisis of relations between the authorities and society after the Crimean War, therefore, the ideas of public service, citizenship, and exposure of the existing reality were put forward in a central place in it. Considering in in general terms creativity of N. A. Nekrasov, I. S. Turgenev, F. M. Dostoevsky, L. N. Tolstoy and others, students should try to formulate the main line of development of Russian literature in the period under consideration and the degree of its influence on the spiritual development of society.
The issue of the development of Russian art must be considered, paying attention to the new social processes that took place in the country. In particular, the appearance of a diverse intelligentsia, thanks to which the attitude of cultural figures to their place and role in society has changed.
In the second half of the 19th century, a national art school was finally formed in Russia, the achievements of which covered not only certain types art, but precisely artistic culture as a whole, embracing various types of art, and the entire system of their interaction, and the relationship of art with society.
Considering the question of the development of architecture, it should be noted that as a result of the rapid development of capitalist relations after the abolition of serfdom, the number of cities, especially large centers, grew.
New methods of building were born, new building materials were used.
The main artistic trend in the architecture of this time was eclecticism. Among the Russian architects of the post-reform era there were many outstanding masters. Students should get acquainted with the work of A.E. RezanovA, A.M. Gornostaev, V.O. Sherwood and others.
The question of the development of Russian painting requires knowledge that the leading center for the training of professional architects, sculptors, and artists was still the Russian Academy of Arts. It should not be denied that the Academy trained specialists of the European level. However, the restriction of freedom of creativity by academic dogmas caused discontent among the part of her students who shared democratic convictions. Dissatisfaction with the academic teaching system among some students of the Academy of Arts in the 60s. 19th century led to the first organized action against the academic order. In the history of Russian culture, this event is known as the "Riot of the Fourteen". Students need to understand the reasons for the protest of young artists, study materials about the activities they created in 1863. "The First St. Petersburg Artel of Free Artists".
It is especially important to analyze the reasons for the creation, the composition of the participants, the ideological guidelines of the Association of Traveling Art Exhibitions.
Considering the work of masters of fine arts, it is necessary to single out the main directions in the development of painting: everyday genre, historical painting, portrait and landscape painting
Students should study the biographies of such famous painters of the second half of the 19th century as V.G. Perov, I.E. Repin, V.I. Surikov, A.K. Savrasov, I.I. Shishkin and others.
The development of sculpture in the period under study was associated with the work of sculptors of the academic direction - M.O. Mikeshin and A.M. guardian. The realistic direction in sculpture was expressed in the work of M.M. Antokolsky.
The democratization of the country's artistic life, which took place in the early 1860s, led to qualitative, radical shifts in the entire way of musical life. This is confirmed by the development of musical criticism and theoretical thought about music; organization in 1860 of the Russian Musical Society (RMO). Its goal was to "develop musical education and a taste for music in Russia and encourage domestic talent." In 1862, in St. Petersburg, and in 1866, in Moscow, on the initiative of the famous pianists and conductors brothers A. G. and N. G. Rubinshten, conservatories were opened. For the first time, the profession of musician acquired a legal status; the title of "free artist", assigned at the end of the course, meant a certain civil status.
The successor of the creative tradition of M. I. Glinka was P. I. Tchaikovsky, whose name is associated with the development of Russian musical culture of the era under study. The realistic traditions of M. I. Glinka were further developed in the work of the members of the circle of composers of the realistic direction - “The Mighty Handful”, which included M. A. Balakirev, M. P. Mussorgsky, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, A. P. Borodin and Ts. A. Cui. Students should study their biographies, know the main musical works. Theatrical life in the 1860s-1890s was represented by opera houses - the Bolshoi and Mariinsky, as well as drama theaters. The leading role was played by the Maly and Alexandrinsky theatres. Students must study dramaturgy, directing features, theatrical education system; get acquainted with the history of the creation of the capital's theaters, as well as the work of the leading artists who worked in them (M. S. Shchepkin, P. M. Sadovsky, P. A. Strepetova, G. N. Fedotov, M. N. Yermolov - at the Maly Theater; V. V. Samoilov, P. V. Vasiliev, K. A. Varlamov, M. G. Savina - at the Alexandrinsky Theater.
It is important to note that after the abolition of the monopoly of the Imperial Theaters in 1882, the creation of theaters in the Russian provinces began. Students must prepare performances about the theaters of the Don.
Abstract topics:
1. New trends in Russian culture in the post-reform period.
2. "Wanderers" and their social significance.
3. Provincial theater in the second half of the 19th century (on the example of the development of theaters in Rostov-on-Don, Taganrog, Novocherkassk).
Sources and literature:
1. Botkina A.P.M. Tretyakov in life and art. M., 1960.
2. Minchenkov Ya.D. Memories of the Wanderers. L., 1961.
3. Tenisheva M. K. Impressions of my life. L., 1991.
1. Allenov M.M. and others. Russian art X - early XX: Architecture. Sculpture. Painting. Graphics. M., 1989.
2. Aronov A.A. World art culture: Russia: the end of the 19th - 20th centuries. Study guide. M., 1999.
3. Gordeeva E. M. Composers of the "Mighty Handful". M., 1986.
4. Zezina M.R. Koshman L.V., Shulgin V.S. Culture of Russia in the IX-XX centuries. - M., 1996.
5. Kondakov I.V. Culture of Russia. M., 1999.
6. Kuleshov V.I. History of Russian literature of the 19th century. M., 1997.
7. Culture and art of Russia in the 19th century. M., 1985.
8. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. Intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century. M., 1971.
9. Lisovsky V. G. Academy of Arts. L., 1988.
10. Likhachev D.S. Russian art from antiquity to the avant-garde. M., 1993.
11. Nikitin V.S. Tchaikovsky: old and new. - M., 1990.
12. Organization of science in post-reform Russia. L., 1987.
13. Essays on Russian culture in the second half of the 19th century. \ edited by N.M. Volynkin. M., 1982.
14. Petrovskaya I.F. Theater and audience of Russian capitals. 1875-1917. - L. 1990.
15. Petrovskaya I.F. Theater and audience in provincial Russia. Second half of the 19th century. - M., 1979.
16. Plotnikov V.I. Folklore and Russian fine arts of the second half of the 19th century. L., 1987.
17.
18. Poznansky V.V. Essays on the history of Russian culture in the second half of the 19th century. M., 1976.
19. Russian artistic culture of the second half of the 19th century. M., 1991.
20. Ryabtsev Yu. S. History of Russian culture: Artistic life and life of the XVIII-XIX centuries. M., 1997.
21. Sarabyanov D.V. History of Russian art of the second half of the 19th century: a course of lectures. M., 1989.
22. Soboleva E.V. The struggle for the reorganization of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences in the middle of the XIX century. L., 1971.
23. Soboleva E.V. Organization of science in post-reform Russia. L., 1983.
24. Sternin G.Yu. Russian artistic culture of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. M., 1995. Shchetinina G.I. The ideological life of the Russian intelligentsia. Late XIX- beginning of XX century. M., 1995.
25. Shchetinina, G.I. The ideological life of the Russian intelligentsia. Late 19th-early 20th century M., 1995.
26. Eymontova, R. G. Russian universities on the verge of two eras: From serf Russia to capitalist Russia. M., 1985.
27. Yakovkina N. I. History of Russian culture: XIX century. SPb., 2000.
Tests
to the topic: "Russian culture in the second half of the nineteenth century".
The first conflict arose because of police brutality against students of St. Petersburg University. The students demanded inviolability of the person, the publication of all measures concerning them, the repeal of the old law on conscription of expelled students into the army. The rector of the university answered them that "birds of paradise, which are given everything they ask, do not live in our climate" Solomonov V.A. On the participation of Moscow students in the first All-Russian student strike in 1899 //Bulletin of Moscow State University. Series 8: History. 1994. No. 2. Students staged a demonstration near the Kazan Cathedral. They were supported by their strike of 25,000 workers. The university was closed, all students were expelled. After the opening of the university, 2181 students out of 2425 were accepted back.
Nicholas II denounced the students, saying that they should study, not demonstrate. The fermentation did not subside and on January 14, 1901, former student Karpovich P.V. assassinated the Minister of Education Prof. Bogolepova N.P. This senseless crime, enthusiastically received by the students, opened a series of terrorist acts by the revolutionary forces and the government's response. After these events, a significant part of the students became in opposition to the tsarist regime. In 1902, an underground student congress took place with fierce discussions of the Social Revolutionaries and liberals Engel G., Gorokhov V. From the history of the student movement. 1899-1906. M., 1908. A small part of extremist students went into terror, into the militant organization of the Socialist-Revolutionaries. After 5 years, in the university cities of the Jewish Pale of Settlement - Kyiv, Odessa, Nizhyn, Jewish students became the main explosive force. In the revolutionary turmoil of these cities, especially after the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, they took an active part, being, as the rightists claimed, its "backbone". Great ideas, including socialist ones, spread in a transnational way, like religious, pacifist, feminist and other movements.
At the beginning of the 20th century, students became the main class, which was dissatisfied with the situation in the country. Of course, the marginal strata of society experienced the greatest oppression, but it was the students who were the accumulator of social unrest, it was among its most intellectual part that Marxist sentiments, thoughts about the coming revolution, a total change in society, went. I think that anyone will agree that the workers were hardly familiar with the philosophical and political views of both domestic and Western thinkers. And only among students and intellectuals they had huge popularity.
Material and living conditions of student life in Russia at the end of the 19th century.
Student life of that time deserves special attention.
Student and work is not a new topic for Russia. She occupied a prominent place in the fiction of the past: half-poor, half-starved, always looking for a place as a tutor or tutor, living from water to bread - this is how a typical student of the second half of the 19th century, Ivanov P., appears before us. Students in Moscow. Gen. Morals. Types (Essays). M., 1903 .. A student of St. Petersburg University, Raskolnikov, a non-resident, "from the nobility", who came from a small town in the R-th province, "was so poorly dressed that a different, even familiar person, would be ashamed to go out in such tatters on street" Raskolnikov's student life was provided by money transfers from his mother (his mother allocated him 15 rubles from her pension of 120 rubles, and even then irregularly) and lessons. Such is his friend, student Razumikhin, who earns money for teaching by lessons or translations from foreign languages. As long as there were lessons, Raskolnikov "somehow, but made his way", avoiding turning to moneylenders, although pawnshops and usury offices, where you could pawn and re-pawn some personal items, up to your own clothes, served as a help to students in difficult minutes. However, by the time the crime was committed, Raskolnikov had already left the university for several months, "for lack of something to support himself, and his lessons and other means ceased," despite the fact that he studied diligently and surpassed many of his classmates in knowledge (for a while, Razumikhin also left teaching the same reason). The murder of the usurer Alena Ivanovna Raskolnikov is largely driven by the lack of means of subsistence. It could be assumed that such a deplorable financial situation of a student, described by Dostoevsky, is a marginal and extreme phenomenon. However, turning to the tetralogy of N.G. Garin-Mikhailovsky, which Gorky called "the whole epic of Russian life", we find in the third and fourth parts ("Students" and "Engineers") almost the same picture. For most students, in addition to parental money, the main sources of livelihood were tutoring, tutoring, private lessons, translations, work as a copyist. Most of these activities had nothing to do with the professions that students studied at the institutes.
This means that this work helped young people in mastering their future profession, it is not necessary to speak. Rather, students used for survival the cultural resources they inherited from their families or acquired while studying at the gymnasiums. The limited nature of the student labor market was partly determined by the negative attitude towards physical labor. Students of that era - most often come from a noble environment, which, despite the often encountered financial insolvency, retained class prejudices: these young people could hardly imagine themselves doing hard physical work like loading and unloading.
In the fundamental work of A.E. Ivanov, the "art of survival" of pre-revolutionary Russian students is considered in detail and comprehensively. After analyzing a huge number of statistical and historical documents, the author comes to the conclusion that in addition to parental assistance and state loans and subsidies, aid societies and cooperative student organizations, students' own earnings constituted a significant part of their budget revenues.
"A significant proportion of students worked (permanently, temporarily, occasionally), and not only during the educational process, but also during the summer vacation." At the same time, already at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. "an ominous companion of student everyday life" was unemployment Frommet B. R. Key moments in the history of Russian students // Student Bulletin. 1917. No. 7. February 17..
Most often, poor students could not get a profitable place. An almost insoluble task for them was to find such an income that would not take away a large number time and provided a living wage. "Our comrades are strenuously knocking on the thresholds of the editorial offices of newspapers, all kinds of bureaus and offices in pursuit of earnings, but usually they do not find work here," a student of the University of St. Vladimir in Kyiv wrote in 1903 to the editorial office of the Kiev News newspaper. It was difficult for needy students to get around their "more affluent colleagues with good acquaintances," and therefore appropriate recommendations, who lived in the best urban areas of the city, decently dressed. In Moscow, according to P. Ivanov, employers avoided dealing with those who lived in the "student camp" (Bronny or "Zhivoderka", Georgians). The inhabitants of the dormitory for poor students - the notorious "Lyapinka" and the cereal "Girsha", as well as tenement houses on Bronnaya, which were the realm of hostesses-renters who lived at the expense of tenants - mostly students, were especially hostile. As a rule, the latter hid the place of residence that compromised them. The topic of secondary employment of students practically disappears in the post-revolutionary, Soviet period. Numerous works are devoted to the problems of youth health and communist education, the value orientations of Soviet students and the problems of their socialization are studied. The complete lack of research into the material existence of students leads to the idea that the policy of the Soviet government in the field of higher education solved all these problems. This theme is not reflected in the literature of that period. In this regard, the story of Yuri Trifonov is symptomatic, which describes the life and studies of students of the Literary Institute in the very first post-war years. Most of the characters in the novel are former veterans. They are passionate about studies, social, Komsomol activities, work in a student scientific society, establish ties with the working class, expose hostile, ideologically alien elements among students and teachers, experience love affairs. money. Material differentiation among students and, accordingly, the problems associated with it are indicated only by hints. At the same time, as a rule, "negative" heroes are clearly better off than "positive" ones. So, the negative hero Sergei - a talented egoist - walks, "putting his hands into the deep pockets of his spacious furry coat", and Lagutenko, a front-line soldier, wears a "shabby overcoat" ... It is clear that enjoying the first years of peacetime, post-war asceticism took the problems of material prosperity far beyond framework of truly important and interesting aspects of peaceful life. However, the memories of former students of different Soviet generations reveal a more diverse reality to us. To earn a living in addition to the scholarship had to almost everyone who did not belong to the wealthy strata, who came to the university centers from the provinces. Material deprivation, self-restraint, often the same as those of their predecessors from pre-revolutionary times, life from hand to mouth was their everyday life. The problems of housing and clothing were no less acute than before. Of course, the market for applying student labor has gradually expanded. This happened not only in connection with the growth of production and the development of scientific and technological progress. It should also be taken into account that the new social strata, drawn into the sphere of higher education, no longer shunned unskilled, physical labor. Thus, the loading and unloading of wagons becomes one of the most common types of earnings among young students of the post-war years. Usually they worked at night, unloading wagons with coal and building materials, and in the summer also with vegetables and fruits. Former students recall how, with the money they earned, they "took girls to cocktail bars to make up for lost time due to the war." Girls - this historically relatively new category for higher education - worked much less frequently. Their budget consisted of scholarships and parental money.
With the beginning of the campaign for the development of virgin lands, new forms of earnings appeared in the famous student construction teams. During the summer holidays, students also participated in the harvest in the south, in geological or archaeological expeditions. More exotic are the types of episodic earnings mentioned in the stories of former students, such as donating blood, playing preference for money with wealthy clients (this was especially common in universities of a mathematical profile), participating as test subjects in various medical and psychological experiments. Those who owned musical instruments played in jazz ensembles; many worked as night watchmen, orderlies, stokers Elfimova N. V. Social assistance to students in pre-revolutionary Russia // Russian Journal of Social Work. 1995. No. 2. P. 36-38.. In an era of total shortage, students, especially language universities, did not shun speculation ... Qualified work that coincides with the specialty being studied was more accessible to students of prestigious, metropolitan, in particular, humanitarian, language universities faculties of Moscow State University. They made money by translating, journalism, near-literary forms of activity (reporting for the press or radio, covering student life, etc.).
The prevalence of employment among students depended on the profile and status of the university. So, in MVTU them. Bauman students rarely worked.
Student holidays are a special tradition. The traditions of Russian student revelry had already developed at the beginning of the 19th century. Unlike other "feasts", they were distinguished by love of freedom, some kind of special patriotism and all-consuming brotherhood. There is no specific celebration ritual. Every year something new. Generations are changing, and with them comes a new understanding of student holidays.
Perhaps the most famous and oldest holiday is Tatyana's Day (celebrated on January 25, the day when the winter session is finally "closed"). In the descriptions of the celebration of Tatyana's Day, it is usually most of all about how much was drunk, and how someone played tricks. All this is accompanied by mass festivities. Not a single frost will force a student to stay at home on this significant day.
A.P. Chekhov, in one of his early feuilletons of 1885, wrote about the Moscow student holiday: “Everything was drunk this year, except for the Moskva River, and this was due to the fact that it froze ... It was so fun that one studious from an excess of feelings was bathed in a reservoir where the sterlets swim…"
In 1918, the university church was closed, and a reading room was set up in it. Holidays "in honor of the academic goddess" Tatiana have been stopped. In 1923, "Archaic and meaningless Tatyana" was noticed in the directive order by the Day of the proletarian students. However, it was not possible to completely eradicate the memory of the old student holiday. In the post-war years, Moscow students resumed, of course, in home companies, the celebration of Tatiana's Day. In the 1990s, along with the return of some customs canceled by the revolution, Tatyana's day returned. At Moscow University, they began to celebrate it officially, and the rector congratulated the students with a glass of champagne in his hand. In 1993, the premises where the university church was located were handed over to the Patriarchate, and everything fell into place again. More recently, a new tradition has emerged: protests - as many newspapers note, in our time this event can be equated with a student holiday.
Although the first universities appeared in Russia in the 18th century, students as a special social group took shape only in the second half of the 19th century. As we know, raznochintsy students were almost entirely democratic. Dobrolyubov and Chernyshevsky became their idols, their ideology was populism. Then it was fashionable to read "What to do?" and be a materialist. Perhaps the first protest was organized by students of St. Petersburg, Moscow and Kyiv in March 1861, a memorial service for the Poles demonstrators killed by the tsarist troops in Warsaw. "In the winter of 1899, the first all-Russian student strike took place, which then began to be held regularly."
Meanwhile, one of the factors influencing the formation of the spiritual and psychological image of Russian students was the theater. Theater in Russia, especially in Russia at the end of the 19th century, especially the capital's theater played a huge cultural, educational and socio-political role. The connection of Moscow University with the theatrical life of Moscow had a long and solid foundation. Suffice it to recall that the very emergence of the Moscow public theater was due precisely to the university, or rather, the university student theater, one of the founders of which was the famous Russian writer, an outstanding university figure M.M. Kheraskov. Over the years, this connection, consecrated by traditions, only became more multifaceted and stronger. Moscow University, on the one hand, and Moscow theaters, on the other, are firmly woven into the cultural fabric of the capital, turning over time into public, cultural and educational centers, by the very nature of their activities and traditionally closely related to each other.
The influence of the theatrical life of Moscow on the formation of the spiritual and psychological image of students of Moscow University. The problem itself breaks down into a number of sub-problems. Because in the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. theaters played both a cultural and educational and a socio-political role in the life of Russian society; accordingly, their influence on the public was both cultural and educational and socio-political in nature. If we talk about Moscow students, then, along with all of the above, a huge role was played by the charitable activities of theaters, as well as personal contacts between theatrical figures and students of Moscow University. The influence of the theater on the students of Moscow University, of course, was not one-sided. Students constituted one of the most numerous, and, most importantly, the most active part of the theater audience. Accordingly, the repertoire of theaters, and the manner of performance, and the very nature of relations with society were largely determined precisely by the needs of students. The question of the personal ties of a number of theatrical figures with Moscow University deserves special consideration. It is known that many outstanding actors, singers, composers, directors either received a university education or took an active part in the public life of Moscow University (in charity events, in scientific, educational and cultural societies at the university, etc.).
Thus, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Theatrical life in Moscow had a huge impact on the formation of the spiritual and psychological image of the students of Moscow University. At the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. this influence can be fully and above all called a revolutionary factor in the spiritual history of Russian students. Both the repertoire of Moscow theatres, and their socio-political, and even cultural and educational activities (attempts to appeal to the masses, met with a decisive rebuff from the autocracy) contributed to the growth of opposition sentiments among the students.
2. Students, being, firstly, the largest and most active part of the theatrical public, and, secondly, a force very influential in wide circles of the Russian intelligentsia, in turn most directly influenced the repertoire policy of Moscow theaters and the nature of public behavior of theatrical figures.
3. Relations of Moscow University with the capital's theaters were not limited
formal and informal relationships in the field of cultural, educational and socio-political activities. For many theatrical figures, Moscow University was in the full sense of the alma mater, and, at the same time, for many students of Moscow University, the theater became a place for further application of their talent, vitality and energy.
As for the relationship of students with professors, this can be learned from the example of the Kazan Telegraph, 1900 Ivanov P. Students in Moscow. Gen. Morals. Types (Essays). M., 1903..
“The number of students at Kazan University by January 1, 1900 was 823 students and 75 regular students. According to the faculties, they were distributed as follows: in the historical and philological - 37 people, in the physical and mathematical sciences - 179 (in the category of mathematical sciences - 60 and in the category of natural sciences - 19), in the legal - 164, and in the medical - 443 people.
During 1899, 169 students enjoyed the right to listen to lectures free of charge, which is 15.5% of the total number of students.
Holiday dinner
On November 5, 1900, on the day of the founding of the Imperial Kazan University, its former students gathered in St. Petersburg for a friendly dinner at Donon's restaurant. About 20 persons participated in the dinner. Among those present at the dinner were: Senator N.P. Smirnov, the oldest student (class of 1846) V.V. Pashutin, N.A. Kremlev - former rector of Kazan University, prof. V.A. Lebedev, S.K. Bulich, S.F. Glinka, A.F. Elachich and others. A telegram was sent to the rector of Kazan University: "Former students of Kazan University, having gathered at a friendly dinner at the turn of two centuries, drink for the further prosperity of their native university and express confidence that in the twentieth century, his pupils will continue to add their names to the ranks of the luminaries of science and honest figures in all fields of public life of the dear Fatherland.
Professors, closer to students!
In order to establish a possible rapprochement between the professorship and the students and a more correct formulation of university teaching, attention is paid to strengthening practical classes in all faculties and the formation of student, scientific and literary circles is allowed; but the most expedient measure for establishing the desired communication between professors and students is the arrangement of properly arranged student dormitories, for which, by the Highest command, 3,262,000 rubles were allocated from the amount of the State Treasury.
Fashion (democratic and aristocratic) played its essential role in the public presentation of the students.
A special place in the everyday culture of the students belonged to the so-called "sexual question". With all its mysteries and dangers, it was vigorously discussed in Russian society, especially after the first Russian revolution. The sphere of the subculture of the young intelligentsia also included its attitude to marriage (church and civil), family life and childbearing.
Introduction
Chapter I
University education and students in Russia in 1850 - early 1860s
Chapter II
Legal status of Russian students
Chapter III
The material and everyday aspect of the situation of students in the second half of the XIX century
Conclusion
Introduction (excerpt)
Russian universities have always been islands of secular culture, education and creativity, which is impossible without some “freedom from”…. Freedom to some extent from power, ideology, freedom from isolation and class. Students have always been a special group of people, which had their own customs, traditions, their own culture and identity. It is the relationship between students and universities, which acted as conductors of state order and politics, that is and was the subject of research by domestic scientists both before the 1917 revolution and after.
The relevance of studying these relations has not disappeared to this day, because the authorities have always sought to put universities under control in order to be able to educate a loyal generation of young people. However, the paradox of such an attitude of power is that it almost never succeeded. Students at all times, even the most severe reaction, were aware of their unity, their interests and defended them in every possible way.
The purpose of this work is to try to solve a difficult dilemma: was the tsarist government the factor that determined not only the development of Russian students, but also predetermined its historical fate? Did the political weakness of the government, expressed in its dictatorship and authoritarianism, create conditions for development that predetermined the role of the Russian intelligentsia in the future? That is, the purpose of this work is an attempt to answer the question about the role of autocracy in the formation of a special type of intelligentsia, active in student years and passive during the crisis of power, unable to do anything and somehow turn the situation around.
Conclusion (excerpt)
The role of post-reform universities in social and political life was determined by deep objective prerequisites. Not only university problems proper lay at the basis of the university crisis, which became especially aggravated by the beginning of the 20th century. The unresolved contradictions of a society in which the development of capitalism was held back by feudal remnants, the absence of political freedoms at that time created a tense political climate in Russia in the last quarter of the 19th century. Even during the reforms of the 1960s, the government cut off any legal path to freedom, because it responded with repressions even to simple petitions, because it never even allowed to speak freely about freedom.
Literature
SOURCES
1. Kovalevsky M.M. Moscow University in the late 70s and early 80s of the last century. Personal memories / Moscow University in the memoirs of contemporaries. 1755-1917. M., 1989
2. Lebedev V.A. Educational memories. / Russian antiquity 1908. No. 7 - 10
3. General Charter of the Imperial Russian Universities in 1863/ w*w.lib.r* - Library of Maxim Mashkov.
4. Pisarev D.I. Works in 4 volumes. M., 1955 - 1956. T2
5. Full Code of Laws of the Russian Empire /under. ed. A.A. Dobrovolsky. SPb 1911., book 2
6. Sechenov I.M. At Moscow University (1850 - 1856) / Moscow University in the memoirs of contemporaries. 1755-1917. M., 1989
7. Sorokin V. Memoirs of an old student / Russian antiquity 1888 No. 12
LITERATURE
1. Andreev A.Yu. Lectures on the history of Moscow University. 1755-1855. M., 2001
2. Borodzin I.N. Universities in the era of the 60s - In the book History of Russia in the XIX century. SPb. 1908 - 1909. T4
3. Great reforms in Russia 1856 - 1874 / ed. L.G. Zakharova et al. M., 1992
4. Georgievsky A.I. Brief outline of government measures and plans against student unrest. SPb. 1890
5. Janilyaev G.A. University autonomy / From the era of great reforms. 1893. 10th ed. SPb., 1907
6. Elenev F.P. Student riots. SPb.1888.
7. Ikonnikov V.S. Russian universities in connection with the course of public education / Bulletin of Europe, 1876. No. 9 - 10
8. Klyuchevsky V.O. Course of Russian history / Electronic book. IDDK.2005
9. Leikina-Svirskaya V. R. Intelligentsia in Russia in 1901-1917. M., 1981
10. Leikina-Svirskaya V.R. Intelligentsia in Russia in the second half of the 19th century. M., 1971
11. Litvak B.G. Coup of 1861 in Russia: why the reformist alternative was not implemented. M., 1991
12. Moscow University in the memoirs of contemporaries. 1755-1917. M., 1989
13. Pokrovsky M.N. Russian history since ancient times. M., 1934
14. The revolutionary situation in Russia in the middle. XIX century / Ed. M.V. Nechkina M., 1978
15. Rozhdestvensky SV Historical review of the activities of the Ministry of Education. 1802-1902. SPb. 1902
16. Firsov N.A. Student stories at Kazan University 1855 - 1863 / Russian antiquity 1889. No. 3,4, 6 - 8
17. Shchetinina GI Students and the revolutionary movement in Russia. M., 1987
18. Shchetinina G. I. Universities in Russia and the charter of 1884, M., 1976
19. Eymontova R.G. Russian universities on the path of reform: the sixties of the XIX century. M., 1993
20. Eymontova R.G. Russian universities on the verge of two eras. From serf Russia to capitalist Russia. M., 1985
Hairpin interpretation of the dream book Why dream of buying a hairpin
Win competitions Why dream of acrobatic competitions
Dream interpretation sparrow looks out the window
Divination by Tarot Etteila - Horoscope of Life Collection of free divinations
The meaning of tarot cards in divination
What does it mean to see yourself from the side in a dream?
Social movements and their types