Morozov, Nikolai Alexandrovich(1854-1946) - Russian public figure, revolutionary populist, thinker, scientist, honorary member of the USSR Academy of Sciences, writer, poet.
Party and literary pseudonyms - "Sparrow", "Zodiac".
Born on June 25, 1854 in the village of Borok, Nekouzsky district of the Yaroslavl province. the illegitimate son of a wealthy landowner and a serf peasant woman set free, he received a good education at home, completing it at the 2nd Moscow classical gymnasium. There, carried away by the natural sciences, he founded the "Secret Society of Naturalists-Gymnasium Students". Starting from the 5th grade of the gymnasium, he attended, dressed in a student uniform, lectures at Moscow University, thoroughly studied university museum collections.
Carried away in 1874 by populist ideas, he entered the Moscow circle of N.V. Tchaikovsky (“Tchaikovsky”), together with his comrades “went to the people” - conducted propaganda among the peasants of Moscow, Kursk and Voronezh provinces. Police persecution forced him to return to Moscow, from where he left for St. Petersburg, and by the end of 1874 - to Geneva. There he collaborated in P.L. Lavrov’s magazine “Forward”, joined the International Association of Workers (I International).
In January 1875 he tried to return to Russia, but was arrested at the border and allowed into the country under the guarantee of his father. Leaning towards the bourgeois-liberal idea of progress through the dissemination of scientific and accurate knowledge among the people, Morozov gave himself up to the revolutionary struggle, and not so much for the sake of "peasant socialism" as in the name of the program of civil liberties. Having gone underground, he again engaged in propaganda among the peasants - this time in the Saratov province.
In 1878, having returned to St. Petersburg, he joined the organization "Land and Freedom", became one of the editors of its underground publication of the same name.
In 1879, with the split of "Land and Liberty" into "Cherny Repartition" and "Narodnaya Volya", he entered the organization of Narodnaya Volya, edited their printed organ. In 1880 he emigrated to Geneva, where he wrote the pamphlet The Terrorist Struggle, theoretically substantiating the tactics of the Narodnaya Volya. In the opinion of his comrades, he became "one of the first ardent heralds of the people's will" (V.N. Figner). At the same time he published his first collection of poems - Poems. 1875–1880(It is no coincidence that Russian Marxists called Morozov a liberal with a bomb).
Having moved from Geneva to London, he met Karl Marx.
When trying to return to Russia on January 28, 1881, he was again arrested at the border near Verzhbolov. After the assassination on March 1, 1881, Alexander II was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress and in 1882 he was tried by the "Trial of 20", sentenced to life imprisonment. His verbal portrait was preserved in the court report: “more than average height, very thin, dark blond, oblong face, small features, large silky beard and mustache, wearing glasses, very handsome, speaks quietly, slowly.” During the investigation, he frankly stated: “By conviction, I am a terrorist.”
After the trial, he was imprisoned in the Alekseevsky ravelin of the Peter and Paul Fortress.
Long-term imprisonment in a ravelin without the right to use printed matter, with constant "torture by lack of food and lack of air" did not break his will. Having received some time later permission to use theological literature, he mastered the Hebrew language (in total, Morozov knew 11 foreign languages). In prison, he began an in-depth study of biblical history, as well as the chronology of heavenly phenomena during the years of Christ's life. Meticulous work led him to a new understanding of the chronology of world history. Being transferred to the casemate of the Shlisselburg Fortress and having the opportunity to use scientific books, throughout the entire period of 25 years of imprisonment, he was persistently engaged in “thought work” (creative scientific activity), creating works on chemistry, physics, astronomy, mathematics, history. The books written by him in prison were published after his release in November 1905 (among them - Periodic system of the structure of matter: the theory of the formation of chemical elements. M., 1907; Revelations in thunder and storm: the story of the emergence of the Apocalypse. M. - St. Petersburg, 1907; Fundamentals of Qualitative Physical and Mathematical Analysis and New Physical Factors Discovered by It in Various Natural Phenomena. M., 1908; D.I. Mendeleev and the importance of his periodic system for the chemistry of the future. M., 1908, etc.).
The enthusiastic revolutionary youth perceived him as the personification of the coming democratic revolution. Soon after his release, Morozov's scientific merits were noticed in society, he was awarded the title of professor of physical chemistry at the Higher Free School of P.F. Lesgaft. Soon he was appointed director, first of the biological laboratory, and then of the entire Natural Science Institute. P.F. Lesgaft. It was at this institute, on the initiative of Morozov, that the development of a number of problems related to space exploration began.
Often speaking with public scientific lectures, he traveled to many cities in Russia, spoke in Siberia and the Far East. Interesting are Morozov's attempts to publish "scientific poetry" on astronomical topics, theoretically comprehended by him in the article Poetry in science and science in poetry(“Russian Vedomosti”, 1912, No. 1).
For the publication of a collection of poems star songs(M., 1910) was put on trial and spent the whole of 1911 in the Dvina fortress. He used his conclusion to write a multi-volume Lead my life; the memoirs in it are brought to the foundation of the "Narodnaya Volya". L.N. Tolstoy highly appreciated his writing gift: “I read it with the greatest interest and pleasure. I am very sorry that there is no continuation of them ... Talentedly written!
In Morozov's poems there were calls for social feat (comparable to the poetry of N.A. Nekrasov and V.S. Kurochkin), for the glorification of the revolutionary struggle, and the glorification of sacrificial heroism.
In the 1910s, having become interested in aeronautics, as a researcher, he flew the first airplanes, including over the Shlisselburg fortress 10 years after his release from it (he was already about 60 years old). Being elected after returning from a long prison term to honorary members of many scientific societies, he taught at the Higher Women's Courses of P.F. Lesgaft, read the course "World Chemistry" at the Psychoneurological Institute.
Lev Pushkarev, Natalya Pushkareva
Morozov, Nikolai Aleksandrovich (revolutionary) Prepared by a student of 8 "B" class NNOU secondary school "Career" Maxim Budylko for a history lesson.
Content. 1 Biography 1. 1 Addresses in St. Petersburg - Petrograd - Leningrad 2 Performance evaluation 3 Proceedings 4 Criticism 5 Memory 6 Bibliography
family of N. A. and K. A. Morozov, circa 1910. (supraga) At the beginning of 1907, in the church of the village of Kopan, near Bork, Nikolai Alexandrovich married Ksenia Alekseevna Borislavskaya (1880-1948), a famous pianist, writer and translator. They lived a long life together, but they had no children. Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov was born in 1854 in the family estate of Borok, Yaroslavl Region. Father - Mongolian landowner, nobleman Pyotr Alekseevich Shchepochkin (1832-1886). Mother - a Novgorod peasant woman, a former serf P. A. Shchepochkina Anna Vasilievna Morozova (1834-1919).
Education Nikolay received mainly home education, but in 1869 he entered the 2nd Moscow gymnasium, in which, according to his own recollections, he studied poorly and was expelled. In 1871-1872 he was a volunteer at Moscow University.
revolutionary work. In 1874 he joined the populist circle "Chaikovites", participated in "going to the people", conducted propaganda among the peasants of Moscow, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Voronezh and Kursk provinces. In the same year he went abroad, was a representative of the "Chaikovites" in Switzerland, collaborated in the newspaper "Worker" and the magazine "Forward", became a member of the International. Upon returning to Russia in 1875, he was arrested. In 1878 he was convicted in the process of 193 and, taking into account the preliminary conclusion, was released at the end of the trial. He continued his revolutionary activities, conducted propaganda in the Saratov province, and went underground to avoid arrest.
He became one of the leaders of the organization "Land and Freedom", was the secretary of the editorial office of the newspaper "Land and Freedom". In 1879 he took part in the creation of the "Narodnaya Volya" and joined its Executive Committee. He participated in the assassination attempt on Alexander 1. As a result, intermittently, he spent about 30 years in prison.
Addresses in SP Addresses in St. Petersburg - Petrograd - Leningrad. September 1880 - 25. 11. 1880 - profitable house - Nevsky Prospekt, 122, apt. 20; 1906-1941 - house of A. A. Raevskaya - Torgovaya street, 25.
Activity evaluation. (about chemistry with physics) According to Academician Igor Kurchatov, "modern physics has fully confirmed the statement about the complex structure of atoms and the interconvertibility of all chemical elements, analyzed at the time by N. A. Morozov in the monograph" Periodic systems of the structure of matter "".
Problems of space exploration. A. Morozov from 1918 until the end of his life was the director of the Natural Science Institute. P. F. Lesgaft. Members of the Russian Society of World Science Lovers led by him, located in the building of the institute, began to develop a number of problems related to space exploration. Morozov personally took part in this work, proposing, regardless of the Americans, a high-altitude hermetic aviation suit - a prototype of a modern space suit. He also invented the equatorial rescue belt, which allows you to automatically turn the top of the balloon into a parachute and ensure a smooth descent of the gondola or cabin to the ground.
N. A. Morozov wrote many books and articles on astronomy, cosmogony, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, geophysics, meteorology, aeronautics, aviation, history, philosophy, political economy, linguistics, history of science, mostly of a popular and educational nature . In prison, he recovered from tuberculosis, created a smallpox vaccine, but it was not used due to shortcomings.
Kriteka Author of a number of books in which he tried to revise some of the problems of world history, in particular the history of Christianity - "The Revelation of Thunder and Storm" (1907), "Prophets" (1914), "Christ" (in 7 volumes, 1924-1932) . These works were sharply criticized by professional historians and representatives of other sciences even in pre-revolutionary times. In Soviet and post-Soviet times, both Morozov's historical concept and his research methodology were recognized by specialists as erroneous. However, at the end of the 20th century, Morozov's ideas found their continuation in the so-called "new chronology" - a pseudoscientific theory of a radical revision of history, created by a group of authors led by mathematician A. T. Fomenko, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
memory 1) A minor planet (1210) Morozovia and a crater on the Moon are named after Morozov. 2) In the Leningrad region there is a village named after Morozov. 3) Streets in Vladivostok and Ramenskoye are named after Nikolai Morozov. 4) Shlisselburg gunpowder factories were renamed in 1922 into the “Plant im. Morozov". 5) In Bork (Yaroslavl region) there is a memorial house-museum of N. A. Morozov. 6) The monument on the grave of Nikolai Alexandrovich - the work of the sculptor G. I. Motovilov. 7) I. E. Repin. Portrait of N. A. Morozov, 1910 8) The collection of the Yaroslavl Art Museum contains a picturesque portrait of N. A. Morozov, painted by the artist T. N. Glebova in the 1930s.
Bibliography Morozov N. A. Star Songs. M., "Scorpion", 1910. Morozov N. A. Tales of my life: Memoirs / Ed. and note. S. Ya. Shtreikh. Afterword B. I. Kozmina. T. 2. - M.: b. And. , 1961. - 702 p. : p. (ed. 1965, Ch 1, Ch 2, Ch 3) Morozov N. A. “Letters from the Shlisselburg fortress” Morozov N. A. “Terrorist struggle” Morozov N. A. Traveling in outer space Morozov N. A On the border of the unknown. In world space. Scientific semi-fantasies. Moscow, 1910. Morozov NA A new tool for objective research of ancient documents Morozov NA Khristos. The history of mankind in natural science coverage vols. 1-7 - M. -L. : Gosizdat, 1924-1932; 2nd ed. - M. : Kraft +, 1998
- Morozov N.V., Ganiev I.M., Galliamova I.N. Resource-saving biotechnology of wastewater treatment from waste lubricating oils of industrial enterprises to the norms of circulating water supply / N.V. Morozov, I.M. Ganiev, I.N. Galliamova // Intern. scientific conf. theor. and example. developments "Scientific developments: the Eurasian region", - M .: Izd. Infiniti, 2019. - S. 191-197.
- Morozov N.V., Ganiev I.M., Lebedev N.A., Almazova G.A., Ibragimov T.R. Neutralization of waste lubricating oils in industrial wastewater using a consortium of microorganisms in a spray-settlement bioreactor / N.V. Morozov, I.M. Ganiev, N.A. Lebedev, G.A. Almazova, T.R. Ibragimov // Bulletin of the Technological University. Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, Kazan. nat. research technol. un-t. - Kazan: Publishing House of KNRTU, 2018. - T. 21. - No. 12. - P. 78 - 83.
- Morozov N.V., Morozov V.N.; Ganiev I.M. Biotechnology of deep biodegradation of lubricating oils in wastewater from enterprises and agricultural facilities / N.V. Morozov, V.N. Morozov, I.M. Ganiev // Mat. III International Scientific Internet Conference “Biotechnology. A look into the future", in 2 volumes, Kazan, IP Sinyaev, 2014. - from 18-20.
- Morozov N.V., Ivanov A.V., Akhmetov A.A., Grigoryeva E.N. Optimization of environmental conditions of hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms used for controlled biodegradation of oil pollution. //Materials of the VII-th Moscow International Congress "Biotechnology: state and development prospects" M.: 2013.-S. 250-251.
- Akhmetov A.A., Morozov N.V., Grigorieva E.N. Intensification of oil biodegradation in agricultural wastewater by sorbents of plant origin.// Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference "Biotechnology: Reality and Prospects in Agriculture". Saratov, 2013.-p. 241-243
- Morozov N.V., Zhukova O.V. The use of strains of hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms for the purification of wastewater from agricultural enterprises from oil products of small sewerage.//Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference "Biotechnology: Reality and Prospects in Agriculture". Saratov, 2013.-p. 265-267
- Morozov N.V., Ivanov A.V., Akhmetov A.A. Biotechnology for the elimination of oil pollution by associations of oil and hydrocarbon oxidizing microorganisms immobilized on sorbents of different nature.// Materials of the International. scientific tech. conference "Pharmaceutical and medical biotechnologies". M.: 2012.-S. 463-464.
- Morozov N.V., Ivanov A.A., Zhukova O.V., Chernov A.N., Stepanov V.I. Biological preparations of an industrial design and their use for controlled treatment of surface water from oil pollution (in case of emergency or local entry).// Proceedings of the VI-th Moscow International Congress "Biotechnology: state and development prospects" M.: 2011.
- Morozov N.V., Zhukova O.V., Ivanov A.V. Biotechnology for the elimination of oil pollution by native strains of hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms immobilized on sorbents of different nature.// Proceedings of the VI-th Moscow International Congress "Biotechnology: state and development prospects" M.: 2011.
- Zhukova O.V. Applicability of biopolitical categories to forms of behavior of microorganisms / O.V. Zhukova, L.Z. Khusnetdinova, N.V. Morozov // Environmental biotechnologies in the XXI century. Collection of scientific articles. Edited by Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor N.V. Morozov. - Kazan: TGGPU, 2010. - S. 106-124.
The life of Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov was full of bright, contradictory, fateful and incredible events. According to his encyclopedic knowledge, creative potential and enormous capacity for work, N.A. Morozov is an exceptional phenomenon. Whoever he was: a terrorist, a freemason, an inventor, a pilot, an encyclopedic scientist, a writer and a poet, a sniper ... He did not waste time in Dvinsk either: being imprisoned in the fortress, N.A. Morozov wrote memoirs and learned Hebrew.
Dreamed of becoming a scientist, but became a terrorist
According to one version, 15-year-old Nikolai Morozov was expelled from the 2nd Moscow gymnasium in 1869 due to poor study, and a little later - in 1971 and 1872 - he was a volunteer at the medical faculty of Moscow University. According to another, he was expelled from the gymnasium without the right to enter higher educational institutions in Russia for democratic views - home education affected. Thus, by denying the right to education, the tsarist government itself pushed him onto the revolutionary path.
The next decade of his life was stormy: in 1874 he became a "populist" and participated in "going to the people", conducted propaganda among the peasants. He became one of the leaders of the Land and Freedom organization, and in 1879 he joined the executive committee of the People's Will, where the revolver, dagger and dynamite were considered the main means of political struggle. Morozov was an ardent radical and proposed to constantly use terror as a regulator of political life. In 1880, in London, he met with Karl Marx, was closely acquainted with Nikolai Kibalchich, Sofia Perovskaya, Andrey Zhelyabov, who were executed for the murder of Emperor Alexander II.
He was arrested in 1881 (even before the assassination of the emperor) and in 1882 he was sentenced to life imprisonment - his participation in one of the seven assassination attempts on Alexander II was proved, when the Narodnaya Volya dig under the railway. He spent three years in solitary confinement at the Alekseevsky ravelin of the Peter and Paul Fortress. It was not until 1887 that he was given paper for the first time, and the following year, ink. In 1984, he was transferred to the Shlisselburg Fortress, where he stayed for 21 years.
"I did not sit in a fortress, I sat in the Universe"
In the cold solitary confinement of the Shlisselburg convict prison, Morozov did not just serve his sentence. He studied the sciences daily and made several world-class discoveries. He recalled: “Some calculations had to be done in a row for several days and written in numbers and conversions of twenty pages of paper, and then reduced everything to one page. And at the end of such tedious operations, my head was ready to burst, and it was impossible to leave in the middle and rest, so as not to lose the connection between the beginning of calculations and their end.
During his confinement, he learned eleven foreign languages by self-tutor and, after being released under an amnesty in 1905, he managed to take out of prison 26 volumes of manuscripts on various sciences - chemistry, physics, mathematics, astronomy, aviation, political economy, history, mathematics, biology, etc. At large he was actively involved in scientific and pedagogical activity. On the proposal of D.I. Mendeleev in 1906, Morozov was awarded the degree of Doctor of Chemistry for his work “Periodic Systems of the Structure of Matter” without defending a dissertation. Later, Academician Igor Kurchatov will note: "Modern physics has fully confirmed the statement about the complex structure of atoms, developed at the time by N.A. Morozov."
He teaches at the St. Petersburg Higher Free School of P.F. Lesgaft - a teacher, anatomist and doctor, the creator of the scientific system of physical education. He is elected a member of the Russian, French and British Astronomical Societies and the Russian Physico-Chemical Society, he is elected chairman of the Russian Society of Lovers of the World. Academician Sergei Ivanovich Vavilov spoke of Morozov in the following way: "This scientific enthusiasm, completely disinterested, passionate love for scientific research should remain an example and model for every scientist, young or old."
Last arrest
The last time Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov was arrested in the Crimea in 1912 (he was 58 years old) and, by decision of the Moscow Court of Justice, was imprisoned in the Dvina fortress. The reason for the arrest was the publication of the collection of poems "Star Songs", where revolutionary sentiments and anti-religious views prevailed. Later, Nikolai Alexandrovich recalled: “I took advantage of this opportunity to learn the Hebrew language for the purposeful development of the Old Testament Bible, and wrote there four volumes of the Tales of My Life, which I brought to the foundation of Narodnaya Volya, since my term of imprisonment ended at this place. ".
The release followed in 1913 under an amnesty in honor of the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty. Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy was very interested in the memoirs written by Morozov in Dvinsk: “... I read it with great interest and pleasure. I am very sorry that there is no continuation ... Talentedly written. It was interesting to look into the soul of the revolutionaries. This Morozov is very instructive for me.”
“There is no limit to the aspiration of the spirit,
Wide, unbroken sky.
On the powerful wings of a white bird
Let's make our childhood dream come true!"
Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov stood at the origins of aeronautics and astronautics. Having received the rank of pilot, he was chairman of the commission of scientific flights, lectured at the aviation school. More than a hundred times he himself took to the air on the first balloons, and each flight was associated with risk. He suffered accidents more than once, miraculously remaining alive, and witnessed the death of many Russian aviators. He has done a lot for flight safety. For example, he created the world's first high-altitude hermetic aviation suit - a prototype of a modern space suit, and also invented a saving equatorial belt that allows you to automatically turn the top of the balloon into a parachute, thereby ensuring a smooth descent of the gondola to the ground.
twelfth foreign
In the Dvina fortress, Nikolai Morozov mastered the twelfth foreign language - Hebrew. Thanks to his knowledge of languages, including ancient ones, he got acquainted with the sources on the history of mankind (the Bible, for example) in the original and comprehended the information contained in them in his own way. Having systematized the ancient texts, which probably describe the same events, I noticed that they date from different eras. This allowed Morozov to take a fresh look at the historical process and create his own concept of human development. Thus, he laid the foundations for the revision of traditional history.
Not everyone liked this idea, and in large scientific centers (Moscow State University, in particular), there are still fights between "correctors" of chronology and scientists who adhere to traditional views. They don’t really favor Nikolai Alexandrovich, accusing him of falsification, lack of evidence, free interpretation and fiction: “In the field of“ humanities ”he can be called ...“ an outstanding pseudoscientist ””.
Biography facts
While in prison, N.A. Morozov cured himself of tuberculosis (the method included physical exercises) - six months later, the doctors, to their amazement, discovered that the prisoner was not only alive, but completely healthy.
N.A. Morozov is almost the only one who was not affected by the Stalinist repressions. In 1945, there were three honorary academicians of the USSR Academy of Sciences - microbiologist N.F. Gamaley, N.A. Morozov and I.V. Stalin. He was awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Labor (1939) and two Orders of Lenin (1944, 1945). Until the end of his days, he remained a convinced revolutionary and wrote in all questionnaires: a member of the People's Will party.
In 1939, at the age of 85, he graduated from the OSOAVIAKhIM sniper courses and three years later he went to the Volkhov Front, where he participated in hostilities.
From a letter from the Shlisselburg Fortress dated August 8, 1899: “Sometimes a storm rips off the nests of swallows, and then their chicks come to us for education, are fed with flies and spiders and are placed in small cloth nests until they grow wings. And now a little orphan swallow named Chika is being brought up ... She loves to sleep on her chest in her bosom, in her sleeve, or even just in her fist. She loves to be stroked and talked to and knows her name. There has never been such a sweet and affectionate bird ... "
“The one whose echo is in others has not died”
There is still no consensus why N.A. Morozov was not affected by the Stalinist repressions. Leader's whim? A whim of a dictator? Or maybe the generalissimo was close to some impulses of the soul of a convinced revolutionary, because in all the questionnaires Morozov wrote: Member of the People's Will party?
ON THE. Morozov was friendly with the poet V.Ya. Bryusov, was in correspondence with V.I. Lenin, F.E. Dzerzhinsky, A.V. Lunacharsky, V.D. .Rykov, N.I. Ezhov, L.P. Beria, I.V. Stalin. In 1945, there were three honorary academicians of the USSR Academy of Sciences - microbiologist N.F. Gamalei, N.A. Morozov and I.V. Stalin. At the end of his life, awards came: the Order of the Red Banner of Labor (1939) and two Orders of Lenin (1944, 1945). Died in 1946.
V. A. Tvardovskaya "Nikolai Morozov at the end of the road: science against violence" Date: July 19, 2009 Edition: "Peacekeeping in Russia: Church, politicians, thinkers", M., Nauka, 2003. OCR: Adamenko Vitaly ( [email protected])
IN. A. Tvardovskaya
NIKOLAI MOROZOV AT THE END OF THE ROAD:
SCIENCE AGAINST VIOLENCE
Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov has firmly entered our literature as a "revolutionary and scientist" or "scientist-revolutionary". A former Narodnaya Volya member, a Shlisselburg prisoner, who spent a total of 28 years in prison, he was always characterized as an unbending fighter, whose revolutionary will even prison could not break. The attention of those who wrote about Morozov, as a rule, was focused on his participation in the revolutionary movement and on his prison ordeals. The life of the former Narodnaya Volya on his release from prison remained little known: they were more interested in his scientific activities of that time. But even in special works devoted to Morozov's scientific hobbies and discoveries, he was invariably defined as a revolutionary; a good example is the book "Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov - a scientist encyclopedist" (M., 1982). Meanwhile, Morozov in 1870 - early 1880s. and Morozov in the 20th century. - completely different personalities in terms of worldview and social position. Nikolai Alexandrovich called himself an "evolutionary" in the last period of his life. It seems that the self-change that took place in the former Narodnaya Volya, a preacher of terror, is of considerable interest, since it happened naturally and organically, without external coercion, being the result of a deep and serious work of the scientist’s thought. But in order to understand the results of this work, it is worth referring to the beginning of his life path, which in many respects is typical for the Raznochinsk youth of post-reform Russia. Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov was born on July 7 (June 25), 1854 in the family estate of his father Borok, Yaroslavl province. He was the son of a wealthy landowner, Pyotr Alekseevich Shchepochkin, and his serf, Anna Vasilievna Morozova. Their marriage was not legal. Anna Vasilievna, having received her freedom, was assigned to the estate of the townspeople. In official documents - up to the October Revolution - Nikolai 404 Alexandrovich was listed as "the illegitimate son of a nobleman", a tradesman of the city of Mologa. He received his mother's surname and her class affiliation. Nikolai ended up in the ranks of the revolutionaries without finishing the 5th grade of the gymnasium. And, although he entered the gymnasium (in the 2nd grade) quite late (he received home education until the age of 14), it is hardly possible to recognize his choice of path as mature. The young man, who was barely 20 years old, did not have any serious life experience. The vague dissatisfaction with the surrounding world was more connected with the order in the gymnasium, where classicism almost brought to naught the teaching of natural science, which Morozov was fond of in the spirit of the time. He recalled how, in protest against the dominance of dead languages, after exams he burned textbooks in Latin and Greek with his classmates. The gymnasium student Morozov read Russian literature with its sympathy for all the humiliated and insulted - he himself felt that way in terms of social status. Love for the Russian classics - Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol - he inherited from his mother, who stood out among the provincial nobility with her erudition and education. In his youth, Nekrasov became Morozov's favorite poet. "Go to battle for the honor of the fatherland, // For beliefs, for love. // ...Go and die impeccably. // You won't die in vain: // The case is solid, // When blood flows under it." Young Morozov read these Nekrasov lines as an appeal addressed personally to him. He was also fond of the works of Schiller with their tyrannical motives. During this period of the formation of the personality, its impulses for goodness and justice, he met people who entered into a struggle with the existing order for the common good. Delighted by his new comrades, in love with the owner of the safe house, Olimpiada Alekseeva, Nikolai Morozov decided to follow the same path with them. This decision was not made without a certain violence against oneself. If one part of his soul was already irresistibly rushing towards a new life, with its storms and hardships, then it turned out to be painfully difficult for the other to break away from his favorite sciences. Gymnasium Morozov was enthusiastically fond of natural science, geology, mineralogy, and botany. By the 5th grade, he not only got acquainted with the works of Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, Pisarev, but also studied C. Darwin, M. Faraday, K. Foght, E. Haeckel. In 1871/72. became a listener 405 telecom of Moscow University. His finds in the quarries of the Moscow region entered the Museum of Mineralogy and Zoology of Moscow University, whose professors had no doubts about the scientific future of the gifted high school student. But precisely because the pursuit of science seemed to him the happiest variant of human destiny, Morozov doubted his right to engage in it when his comrades give their strength to the struggle for the liberation of the people. The entry into the revolutionary movement of a high school student who had not completed his course was not something extraordinary for that time, being a special sign of Russian post-reform life. It was portrayed by F. M. Dostoevsky, who in his last novel depicted the high school socialist Kolya Krasotkin, who is indignant at the injustice of the world around him, and dreams of remaking humanity "according to a new state." Kolya Morozov, indulging in dreams of universal equality and happiness, just as vaguely imagined how society should be organized for this purpose. But, sharing the convictions of his new comrades, he no longer doubted that the path to it lay only through the revolution. A mighty wave of the movement of the Raznochinsk youth picked up Morozov and carried him to the village. Participation in "going to the people" further revolutionized him. Like his comrades in the "Chaikovites" circle, he witnessed that the authorities responded to any attempts to get closer to the people with repressions. Not only propagandists were arrested, but also those who went to the village to get to know the peasantry better, to help him, working side by side as a village clerk, doctor, teacher, and agronomist. Later, in verse, he displayed, "how in confusion they raised the alarm // Servants of darkness, fetters and chains // And with a cover of thorny branches // Covered the road to the people." Morozov's further development as a revolutionary was facilitated by his stay in Switzerland: in 1874 he was sent by the Chaikovites to the editorial office of the Rabotnik newspaper, which was published in the spirit of Bakunin. Here, among revolutionary emigrants, Nikolai Alexandrovich met with adherents of various trends in populism. So different in their understanding of the paths of the upcoming transformations, their means and forces, Bakuninists, Lavrists, Jacobins (Tkachev’s supporters) equally did not conceive of the transition to a new social system otherwise than 406 with the help of revolutionary violence committed by the people or a minority of intellectuals - by means of a conspiracy. Pyotr Nikitich Tkachev made a strong impression on the young Morozov: the originality of his views, their novelty and sharp dissimilarity with many popular ideas. Tkachev at that time continued to develop his ideas about the relativity of morality, expressed in his journalism of the 60s. Considering himself a follower of K. Marx, Tkachev argued to the eagerly listening Morozov that "not moral doctrines, not critical thought make history." Its soul, the "nerve of social life", is made up of "economic interests" 1 . In Geneva, Nikolai Alexandrovich joins the local section of the International - Bakuninist orientation. With enthusiasm, she sings "Carmagnola" with everyone at her meetings: "We want the freedom of all people! // Enough of poverty, violence and enmity! // We want equality of people! // Into the ditch of all priests, into the stable of all gods!" And, like other internationalist revolutionaries, he does not notice the inconsistency and inconsistency of the revolutionary anthem. His thought does not stop at the fact that the protest against violence is accompanied by a call for violence. His sense of justice is not hurt by the fact that the slogan of equality and freedom of "all people" does not apply to all at all: in the new society, a place is prepared for some in the ditch. Upon his return to Russia in March 1875, while still at the border, Morozov was arrested. Three years spent in prison, as well as the process of 193 participants in "going to the people", in which he was tried, continued his revolutionary development. And although in prison Nikolai Alexandrovich is enthusiastically engaged in self-education, improving in foreign languages, composing poetry, reading serious scientific literature, the main result of these three prison years is the comprehension of the "science of hatred." "The long duel between the government and the revolutionary party," as G. V. Plekhanov defined the trial of the 193rds, ended not in favor of the government. The authorities, as always, were able to oppose only violence to revolutionary and socialist ideas. Lost lives, broken fates of comrades, their fears Tkachev P. N. Selected works on socio-political topics in 5 volumes. M, 1933. V. 3. S. 217. The article was first published in the journal Delo. 1875. N 9, 12. 407 Danes in captivity filled Morozov with hatred for the autocracy. Already in prison, he felt new - fighting - moods among his like-minded people, who were eager to avenge their comrades, to seize power not for life, but for death for "human rights." Morozov himself fully shared these aspirations, and upon his release in February 1878, he was among the supporters of the new course of struggle - those who were increasingly aware of the need to win civil rights. General discontent boiled in the country. The sharp deterioration in the life of the working classes, connected with the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, caused strikes in St. Petersburg. Rumors were widely spread among the peasantry about the redistribution of land, about the addition to the allotment. Morozov and his associates, who again went to the people - to the Saratov province, heard the echo of the first terrorist acts - attempts on local authorities and spies in Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa, where the southern Executive Committee began to operate. The seal that affixed the proclamations issued by him depicted a crossed pistol, dagger and axe. The acquittal by a jury of V. I. Zasulich, who shot at the St. Petersburg mayor Trepov, made a huge impression on the revolutionary environment and society: in its own way, it convinced of the effectiveness of the terror that had begun. Morozov, with all his heart rushing into the thick of city events, did not sit long in the village. In August 1878, he appeared in St. Petersburg and was immediately admitted to the Land and Freedom organization, which aimed at preparing a people's revolution. Terror was recognized as one of the ways to disorganize the existing system. Morozov (together with S. M. Kravchinsky and D. A. Klements) is a member of the editorial board of the newspaper "Land and Freedom". Convinced that it is worth speaking with the authorities only from positions of strength, and that the existing social order can be transformed only by force, Nikolai Alexandrovich tries to propagate terror in Land and Freedom as the main form of revolutionary action, but meets with the resistance of many influential landowners. It intensifies with the arrival of G. V. Plekhanov to the editorial office. Plekhanov contrasted Morozov's "terrorist enthusiasm" and his growing supporters with the Bakuninist ideas of the peasant revolution, which rejected political tasks as independent. The dispute within the revolutionary organization, for all its sharpness and adherence to principles, did not go on. 408 only about the strategy of struggle, but also about the most expedient forms of violence in relation to the existing power. In the context of the growing revolutionary crisis, the apolitical, semi-anarchist program could no longer be successful. Since the disagreements between Plekhanov and Morozov hampered the publication of the newspaper, a chronicle addition was created to it - "The Sheet of Land and Freedom", the editor of which was Morozov. Here he was more independent, although in a certain sense he was rather limited by the purpose of "Leaf" as a chronicle of the current events of the movement. If Zemlya i Volya wrote about terrorist attempts with approval and satisfaction, without drawing general conclusions about the role and place of terror in the unfolding struggle, then Listok became a true apologia for terror. Morozov propagated a view of terror not only as a weapon of revenge and self-defence: Listka asserted the ability of terror to disorganize power and the possibility of agitational influence of this form of struggle on the people. The pathos of Listok is in the moral justification of terror. According to Morozov, by performing the functions of revenge and self-defence, terror already allows revolutionaries to rise to that "moral height that is necessary for a leader of freedom in order to captivate the masses" 2 . Summing up the possibilities of this form of revolutionary violence, Morozov puts forward his programmatic thesis, asserting terror as "one of the main means of combating despotism": "Political assassination is the realization of the revolution in the present" 3 . The Land and Freedom Leaflet glorifies the first terrorists as true heroes of their time, genuine fighters against autocratic arbitrariness. Bearing in mind the by no means unequivocal attitude towards terrorists in society, Morozov remarked: "When passions subside, when things appear in their true light, these people will be bowed down, they will be considered saints" 4 . Listka fully reflected that feature of the younger generation of post-reform Russia, which was noticed by F. M. Dostoevsky: "the thirst for a speedy feat." The impatient work in the "native field", which the writer called for, and the readiness for self-sacrifice in the name of the oppressed people, attracted the attention of the repressed journalists of the 1970s. Rostov-on-Don, b. pp. 282-283. 3 Ibid. P. 283. 4 Ibid. pp. 283-284. 409 old youth. "It's hard to live and fight for the will, // But it's easy to die for it," wrote Morozov in prison. “Speech with weapons in hand, attacks here and there, everywhere, the forcible release of comrades who fell into the hands of the government, corresponded to him as well as possible (Morozova. - V.T.) ardent nature and long-standing dreams of "heroic deeds," V. N. Figner recalled about her comrade in the struggle. The preacher of the guerrilla war against the government himself, who had undermined his health in prison, made a strange impression even in a revolutionary environment, familiar to everything: thin and pale, but hung all over with weapons, he resembled "a young tree that has grown far from fresh air" 5. "Sparrow", "Sparrow" - underground nicknames of Morozov. Amorous, affectionate, faithful in friendship, he was valued by his comrades for his kindness and responsiveness. Would he be able to raise his hand against a person, carrying out his program installations? V. I. Zasulich admitted in court that it was not easy for her to do this. It was also difficult for Morozov's closest friend S. M. Kravchinsky: several times, under the most favorable conditions for the assassination of the chief of gendarmes, N. V. Mezentsev, he was unable to proceed with the "political assassination" planned by the landowners. Finally, on August 2, 1878, he forced himself to carry out this action entrusted to him by the organization, overcoming strong internal resistance. In the mentioned prison poems by Morozov, where he admits that it is easier for him to die for his will than to fight for it, the inner world of this revolutionary appears differently than in his journalism. Morozov's poetry shows that he was no stranger to the questions that confronted many of those who did not accept the existing order. In Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov, published at the turn of the 1870s and 1880s, Alyosha puts them in front of Ivan, a "business socialist", according to the author's definition: "Does every person have the right to decide, looking at other people, which of them worthy to live, and who is more worthy?" 6 In the Leaflet of Land and Freedom, the revolutionary Morozov calls for terror "without fear or doubt," not only Figner W. N."Land and Freedom" // Russian State Archive of Literature and Art. F. 1185 (V. N. Figner). Op. 1. D. 147; Lubatovich O. WITH. Distant and recent // Past. 1906. N 5. S. 219-220. 6 Dostoevsky F. M. Full collected op.: V 30 volumes. T. 14. L., 1976. S. 131. 410 flight and necessity, but also morally justifying "political murders". The poet Morozov does not hide how disturbing him this, using the expression of Dostoevsky, "blood according to conscience." And it turns out that it’s hard for him to raise his hand against a person: “It’s hard to live, so that sometimes you don’t tremble, // Rising up against the enemy, a hand, // So that melancholy does not eat strength ... So that in someone who rebelled for love, // Right up to to the door of the cold coffin / The mighty malice did not cease, / And the blood would boil with vengeance. Feelings of hatred and malice, enmity and revenge, interpreted in the underground press of the Narodniks as holy and right, organically inherent in the fighter for the good of the people, in their poetry, with their revelations and insights, are sometimes recognized as just unnatural, destructive for the human person. Morozov's comrade in struggle and imprisonment, Sergei Silych Sinegub, accuses the oppressors of the people who threw him in prison of "killing the feeling of forgiveness in the heart // And poisoning love with malice!"... "You killed everything that I was so rich... // Give me my heart back! // It's hard for me to exist for malice!", confesses the poet Sinegub. Assimilated from childhood, the norms of universal morality prevented with a calm soul from committing violence, theoretically justified as necessary and inevitable - all human nature opposed this. "Only you remained, the childhood of influence, // Sunk to the bottom in the soul," Morozov realized in prison what hindered him in his revolutionary activities. “Once you told me,” he wrote to his mother from prison, “that whenever I want to do something that concerns another person, I would first imagine that this same thing was done to me, and if I consider such an act bad in relation to oneself, then it is not good on my part" 7. The simple moral lessons of Anna Vasilievna, a Russian serf woman, as we see, were not forgotten: they were not used in the thick of the struggle against enemies, but remained in the subconscious, "at the bottom of the soul." Doubts, generated by the contradiction between revolutionary duty and innate morality, were reflected in their own way only by Morozov's poetry: they were not imprinted either in journalism or in program documents. In the verses of this consistent adherent of terror, one sometimes hears a strange disbelief. Morozov N. A. Letters from the Shlisselburg Fortress. SPb., 1910. S. 71. 411 confidence in the legitimacy of the chosen path. Here sounds the voice of a person breaking himself in the name of ideas that he recognizes as the only true ones, suppressing his nature, trying to get rid of the initial rejection of violence. "I'll sharpen an ax, // I'll teach myself how to handle heavy weapons, // I'll kill pity in my heart, so that I can make my hand scary // To make fearless judges" 8, - the adherent of terror, as it were, conjures himself, preparing for the bloodshed, which he considers inevitable . And he resolutely suppresses all hesitation in himself, drives away doubts, joining the ranks of those who expressed their readiness to fight the authorities in the most cruel way, with the most modern weapons. Morozov advocated political terror not only in Listka, which he edited, but everywhere among his comrades. However, the question of terror, but of political struggle, turned out to be at the center of the disputes among the landlords. The Land and Freedom program, as already mentioned, provided for terror as a means of disorganizing power. But she did not set the task of winning political freedoms as an independent one. Those who set such a task began to consider terror as a means of political struggle. Morozov, of course, was in the ranks of its pioneers. He was among its first few supporters at their Lipetsk congress in June 1879. Actively, but unsuccessfully, campaigned with his like-minded people at the Voronezh congress of landowners for the introduction of political goals into the program. Here their main opponent was GV Plekhanov. These disagreements split the Land and Freedom. In August 1879, after the division of the organization, Nikolai Aleksandrovich became one of the founders of Narodnaya Volya and a member of its central, governing body, the Executive Committee.* * *
Together with L. A. Tikhomirov, Morozov was appointed editor of the newspaper Narodnaya Volya, a propaganda and theoretical organ at the same time. 8 These poems, reprinted in all collections of revolutionary populist poetry, were attributed to an "unknown author", but belong to N. A. Morozov ( Tvardovskaya V. A. Unknown about the poem "After the execution on November 4" // Russian literature. 1984. N 2. S. 166-169). 412 tions "in all segments of the population ideas democratic political revolution 9 . The achievement of socialist goals was placed in direct dependence on the conquest of civil liberties. The path of a coup d'état was seen as the most reliable, although the possibility of a people's revolution was not denied. Self-liquidation of the autocracy was also allowed under the influence of the struggle, one of the means of which was terror. A peaceful, non-violent path of transformation, it would seem, was also not excluded. "Narodnaya Volya" put forward an ultimatum: to convene a Constituent Assembly in the country on the basis of universal suffrage, and then it would stop the struggle, engaging only in propaganda and agitation. The people of Narodnaya Volya did not believe in the impact of this ultimatum on the government, in its ability to make concessions. And, it must be said, the authorities did everything to convince them of the possibility of only a violent method of transformation. The slogan of the Constituent Assembly, to one degree or another, found sympathy among representatives of various political movements, in a peculiar way echoing the demands of the legislative bodies under the autocrat of varying degrees of competence, up to the purely ritual Zemsky Sobor. The task of involving society in governance was ripe, but the authorities did not want to recognize it, being hostile to any projects of public representation, as a threat to the existence of autocracy. Not only with the socialist revolutionaries, but also with political trends that did not set out to eliminate the autocratic monarchy, its supreme power did not want to enter into a dialogue, to make any compromise. Convinced that only force could wrest from the autocracy the civil rights that already existed in the European states, the Narodnaya Volya launched a struggle. It was outlined in their program as multifaceted, being conducted in different directions. This provided for propaganda among all segments of the population, the organization of local groups and circles - among workers, students, the military, the establishment of a free press in the country, and not abroad. Terror was not assigned a decisive role in the program of the IK "Narodnaya Volya". Morozov, however, continued to see terror as the main weapon of the revolutionaries, believing it to be quite sufficient for the struggle for political freedom. Into a coup by seizing power by the revolutionaries 9 Literature of the People's Will party. M., 1930. S. 50-51. 413 he didn't believe. Yes, and his goal - the convocation of the Constituent Assembly, where the people would express their will regarding the future structure of the country, considered erroneous. The people, in his opinion, due to their darkness and downtroddenness, would not be able to express their own decision on the fate of the country. Morozov saw only one opportunity to prepare the people for a social revolution - through enlightenment and free propaganda, the right to which revolutionary terror must win. Nikolai Alexandrovich argued that terror should have in mind only a given, strictly limited goal 10 . Violence in the form of terror was, according to Morozov, to ensure the implementation "actual freedom of thought, speech and the actual security of the individual from violence - these are necessary conditions for the widespread propaganda of socialist ideas. "We are talking, therefore, about actual freedoms, established not by legislative, but by secret order. Morozov appears in Morozov as a kind of regulator of the political regime in the country : intensifies with a toughening of the government course and weakens with the admission of certain concessions. Violence "according to the method of William Tell" - the hero of the drama of the same name by F. Schiller, so beloved by him, appears in Morozov as the most perfect way of political transformations. "Tellism", in his words, promises victory without undue bloodshed is the most economical and expedient and "the most just of all forms of revolution. The elusiveness of the terrorists, the inevitability of their attempts on those in power create the supposedly special power of this type of violence, designed to shake the foundations, to intimidate, to bring the authorities to capitulation "11. "Tellism" was a serious deviation from the program of the People's Will IK. not only were they not allowed to develop their views in the party press, but they were also not allowed to propagate them among young people. Morozov was sent on an indefinite leave abroad. tellism" Morozov had no heresy, i.e. no ideas, 10 Letter from N. A. Morozov to P. N. Tkachev on May 8, 1880. Draft // GARF. F. 1762 (P. L. Lavrov). Op. 4. D. 604. L. 64; letter to his own unknown person May 9, 1880 Draft // Ibid. L. 57; his letter to P. L. Lavrov May 28, 1880 // Ibid. D. 317. L .3.11 Morozov N. A. Terrorist fight. London [Geneva], 1880. S. 9-10. 12 Kan S. G. Ideological "heretics" of "Narodnaya Volya" // Individual political terror in Russia XIX -- early 20th century M, 1996. S. 24 et seq. 414 conflicting with the prevailing doctrine of the Narodnaya Volya. "Tellism" did not contradict the program of the IK "Narodnaya Volya" - it only carried one of its main points to an extreme. Morozov exaggerated the significance of the means of struggle recognized by the Party, elevated it to a "superlative degree", but he did not put it forward. Terrorism was fully combined with conspiracy, which Morozov, an opponent of the seizure of power, did not accept. And it is no coincidence that the people of Narodnaya Volya, having removed Morozov from the IK, openly and publicly - in their newspaper did not oppose his extreme terrorism. True, at the trial of the First March A. I. Zhelyabov stated that Narodnaya Volya had a negative attitude towards Morozov’s position (expressed in his brochure The Terrorist Struggle), 13 but Narodnaya Volya did not make any other official statements about Morozov’s “Tellism”. Meanwhile, they quite consistently opposed dissent in their midst. In the newspaper "Narodnaya Volya", for example, very aggressively substantiated the destructiveness for the revolutionaries of adherence to apoliticalism. And the enthusiasm for extreme forms of revolutionary violence was treated quite condescendingly here. Business relations were maintained with Morozov, who had been removed to Switzerland, and soon, after numerous arrests that followed the explosion in the Winter Palace on February 5, 1880, when the forces in the organization were not enough, he was called back. The explosion happened immediately after Morozov's departure. Newspapers reported on his victims: the king survived, and more than 50 soldiers of the Finnish Regiment, the palace guard, were killed and wounded. In the pamphlet The Terrorist Struggle, published abroad, but written back in Russia, Morozov also proved such an advantage of terror as the possibility of using this form of struggle to get by with a minimum of bloodshed. Terror, according to him, affected precisely those whom it was aimed at - representatives of the authorities. The brochure was printed after the assassination attempt on the tsar in the Winter Palace, but Nikolai Alexandrovich did not correct anything in the text. Preparing an assassination attempt in the royal palace itself, the revolutionaries could not help but know in advance that the first victims of this action would be precisely the soldiers and security officers. The guardhouse was located above the basement, from where Stepan Khalturin, who entered the palace as a cabinetmaker, was preparing an explosion. Tsars-13 Revolutionary populism of the 70s of the XIX century. M., 1965. T. II. S. 254. 415 which dining room, located on the floor above, was less vulnerable to an explosion. The IC program promised immunity to all who remained neutral in the party's struggle against the government. The soldiers of the Finland Regiment, apparently, belonged to "consciously and actively helping the government", that is, to the enemies of the "Narodnaya Volya": they swore allegiance to the tsar and the fatherland. Morozov's pamphlet "The Terrorist Struggle" sums up all the arguments in favor of terror in "one fist". If the author has not yet had time to fully comprehend the Narodnaya Volya terrorist experience, then the experience of the Zemlya Volya could already refute a lot in his apology for terror. Terror really frightened the government, undermined its prestige, made it hesitate. But in his own way, he also frightened society, as any violence frightens - cruel and merciless. Even those natives of the Raznochinsk intelligentsia, who, based on the experience of Europe, recognized revolutions as inevitable companions of the development of society, were afraid of this bloodshed without revolution. It was by no means small, as Morozov had promised. Each attempt was fraught with a risk to the lives of many people, including "neutrals" who did not participate in the revolutionary struggle, those to whom the Narodnaya Volya promised immunity. And some actions of terrorists, like February 5, 1880 or March 1, 1881, were accompanied by victims of people not involved in the struggle. Every terrorist attack resulted in mass arrests, and here, too, there were many accidental victims. A chain reaction of violence was born and grew. VN Figner, a member of the Narodnaya Volya Executive Committee, in reflecting on the struggle in which she participated after the Shlisselburg conclusion, spoke quite definitely about its impact on society. “Like any struggle based not on the basis of ideas, but on the basis of strength, it was accompanied by violence. And violence, whether it is committed on thought, on action or on human life, never helps to soften morals. It causes bitterness, develops bestial instincts, excites evil impulses and encourages treachery. Humanity and generosity are incompatible with it. And in this sense, the government and the party competed in corrupting the environment" 14 . 14 Figner W. N. Imprinted work. // Figner W. N. Full coll. op. in 7 volumes. M, 1932. T. 1. S. 251-252. 416 According to V. N. Figner, "society, not seeing a way out of the existing situation, partly sympathized with the violence of the party, partly looked at them as a necessary evil, but even in this case applauded the courage or skill of the fighter." This, perhaps, is true only for the initial stage of the terrorist struggle. In a certain sense, terror undermined the credibility of the party, which wrote on its banner the slogans of equality, fraternity, individual freedom and the common good and tried to establish them in life by bloodshed. In this sense, the experience of the Narodnaya Volya terror once again proves that the goal is not indifferent to the means by which it is sought to be achieved. Unlike S. G. Nechaev, the revolutionaries of the 1870-1880s. the principle "the end justifies the means" was accepted with a reservation, which, it would seem, nullified it. It was possible to be guided by this principle, "excluding those cases when the means used can undermine the authority of the organization" 15 . But, by using terror, the Narodnaya Volya did not want to notice that they were thereby causing irreparable moral damage to their party, hindering its desire to unite all those dissatisfied with the regime in a general attack on the autocracy. The terror of the Narodnaya Volya in its own way forced L. N. Tolstoy to think about the role of violence: he quits work on a widely conceived novel about the Decembrists. A. A. Fet, who knew about the intention of this novel, after the assassination attempt on Tsar A. K. Solovyov on April 2, 1879, was especially alarmed by the fate of this work: “I am horrified at the thought that the current regicides might think that you approve and bless them. .. an attempt to penetrate the people by force and violence ... ". Answering that he had left his "Decembrists", Tolstoy explained that even if he had written this novel, its spirit "would be unbearable for those who shoot at people for the good of mankind" 16 . "Tellism" did not justify itself in the struggle for political freedoms and the socialist ideal. But terrorist illusions turned out to be very viable, not giving in to the test of experience, existing, as it were, autonomously from it. In any case, Morozov left for Switzerland full of faith in terror and the hope of convincing his comrades-in-arms of the advantages of this form of revolutionary violence. 15 Archive "Land and Freedom" and "Narodnaya Volya". M., 1932. S. 65. 16 Tolstoy L. N. Correspondence with Russian writers. M., 1962. S. 399. 417 However, his plans to publish a "terrorist organ" promoting "tellism" and also a collection of speeches in defense of terror did not meet with support in exile. Morozov faced here with more decisive criticism of such tactics of struggle than in the environment of the Narodnaya Volya in his homeland. P. L. Lavrov put forward serious arguments against political assassinations. According to him, “terrorism must constantly strike the imagination of the public, going to more and more spectacular manifestations, but here very soon you will reach the wall, that is, to the impossibility of going any longer for lack of means, or to such outrageous acts that general disgust will take away all force from the terrorists." Lavrov drew attention to the danger of terror for the revolutionary movement itself: he "promotes to the forefront people with energy, but very often people who very poorly understand the ideas that cause terrorism, and these people, in the moment of victory, put by natural leaders, will terribly harmful to the movement." All this forced Lavrov to recognize "the terrorist program as extremely harmful to the socialists and success along this path as completely accidental, in no way protecting against the danger of great failures and greater harm in the near and more distant future" 17 . He did not approve of Morozov's views on the current tasks of the revolutionaries and P. A. Kropotkin, with whom Morozov was in close contact in Klaran. GV Plekhanov took a firm anti-terrorist position. However, all these revolutionaries - with their rich experience and authority in the movement - were in their own way inconsistent. Rejecting terror, they supported the "Narodnaya Volya", which used it. They supported it as the only serious revolutionary force that entered into single combat with the autocracy. They supported, not wanting to notice that much in their just criticism of terror as a form of struggle can be attributed to revolutionary activity in general. Meanwhile, exhausted by the February-March 1880 arrests, Narodnaya Volya called on Morozov to return to its thinned ranks. Apparently, the differences with him no longer seemed so serious. Terror, contrary to its programmatic justification, was increasingly coming to the fore. With a successful assassination attempt 17 Letter from P. L. Lavrov to N. A. Morozov May 29-30, 1880 // GARF. F. 1762. Op. 3. D. 79. L. 5-6. 418 hopes were pinned on the tsar, tacitly suggesting the uselessness of other forms of activity. The dictatorship of Count M. T. Loris-Melikov, which was established after the explosion in the Winter Palace, instilled in society certain hopes for the possibility of reforms "from above". As Lavrov predicted in his dispute with Morozov, with the “loosening” of power in the eyes of society, terror loses all justification and can no longer enjoy any sympathy. The revolutionaries immediately sensed these new social moods, which were also reflected in the fact that the assistance to their organization from all the "dissatisfied" was sharply reduced. The cash desk of Narodnaya Volya, which for the time being was replenished quite successfully at the expense of public donations from the most diverse segments of the population, became impoverished. But even Loris-Melikov's first, even very vague promises to take into account public interests, his call to society to support the authorities in their desire to stabilize the life of the country, met with universal sympathy. In the most diverse circles of the population, a peaceful outcome of events was preferred - without dynamite explosions, shots and gallows. Having decided to return to Russia in order to continue the struggle, Morozov, like other Narodnaya Volya members, did not believe in transformations "from above", preferring revolutionary actions to their expectation. But he was arrested while crossing the border - just like when he returned from his first emigration. However, this time, his pamphlet "The Terrorist Struggle" became a serious material evidence of his anti-government activities during the investigation and trial. Witness testimony about his participation in the preparation of the assassination attempt on Alexander II on the Moscow-Kursk railway was also taken into account. Judged in the process of "20" Narodnaya Volya (in February 1882), 28-year-old Morozov was sentenced to indefinite hard labor. By the will of the emperor, they were replaced by life imprisonment. In March 1882, Morozov and his associates were transferred from the Trubetskoy bastion of the Peter and Paul Fortress to its Alekseevsky ravelin. With the opening of a new, newly built "sovereign prison" in Shlisselburg, Nikolai Alexandrovich was moved there to stay there for life. He was 30 years old. "The clock of life has stopped," as V. N. Figner, who was serving her sentence in the same Shlisselburg fortress, said. It's time to look back at the events involved 419 whom he has become, to comprehend them, which in the rage of struggle was not always possible. For the Shlisselburg prisoner, this turned out to be possible.* * *
Reflection has become an important part of life in prison, along with studies and reading. Serious internal work led to a change not only in political views, but also in the very worldview and attitude. In his memoirs, Nikolai Alexandrovich does not particularly dwell on these changes. However, the shifts that took place in his mind can be caught in letters to his relatives: correspondence was allowed in 1897. There is nothing about revolutionary activity in them; one could write about her only in a spirit of repentance, since the letters were subject to prison censorship. Nikolai Alexandrovich recalls in his letters from the casemate about his childhood in the Borok estate, talks about his scientific works. Apparently, he did not lose touch with science, even after becoming a revolutionary. The dilemma "science or revolution" was resolved, it would seem, in favor of the revolution, but Morozov could not completely abandon science, just as many participants in the populist movement could not, whose vocation was precisely it, and not revolution, - P. A. Kropotkin , N. I. Kibalchich, A. I. Ulyanov and others. Passion for science lived in Morozov, as if confirming that his destiny was not in revolutionary activity. Passion for science did not leave even in the midst of the struggle, to which he intended to devote himself entirely. During the period of "going to the people" he collected plants, insects, minerals. In the course of digging under the bed of the Moscow-Kursk railway in order to assassinate the king, he managed to notice interesting fossils. In exile, busy organizing terror propaganda, he found time to listen to lectures at the University of Geneva, to meet with scientists - the geographer E. Reclus, the astronomer K. Flammarion. By the time of his arrest, Morozov was aware of the main discoveries in the field of natural science and the exact sciences and was fairly familiar with their issues. In the first years in prison, he received books only of theological content, but for him, who was familiar with astronomy, geography, natural science, religious literature gave a huge 420 material for reflection and rational development. It was in prison that he began the work, completed already in the wild, - "The History of Human Culture in the Natural Scientific Illumination." It was published after the October Revolution under the title "Christos" (i.e., "initiate into the secrets of the sciences" - Greek), caused great controversy and received different assessments. Religious literature did not change the materialistic, atheistic views of Nikolai Aleksandrovich, but made us think about the principles of universal morality, which coincide with the commandments of Christ, as social guidelines that help humanity move forward. Gradually, he began to receive books on physics, mathematics, natural science, and some of the simplest apparatus for experiments. Not all modern scientific publications, including periodicals, were available to the prisoner: Morozov, in letters to his relatives, talks about the numerous difficulties that arose in his studies, when he was sometimes forced to rely only on "the stock of material accumulated in his head over previous years ". And yet, in these extraordinary conditions for scientific work, he managed to do amazingly much. One of the first Morozov developed a theory about the complex structure of the atom, explained the phenomena of isotopy and radioactivity, substantiated the theory of synthesis and interconvertibility of atoms. Anticipating a number of discoveries of the 20th century, the Shlisselburg prisoner was one of the founders of modern atomistics 18 . The range of Morozov's scientific studies in prison is wide: he works in the field of natural science, mathematics, chemistry, physics, mineralogy, geology, astronomy, political economy, history and a number of other sciences. Released from prison by the revolution of 1905, Morozov brought 26 volumes of manuscripts to freedom. Not everything in them was of equal value, the scientist's prison isolation had an effect, but much turned out to be a genuine contribution to science 19 . In many years of immersion in science, Morozov became more and more convinced of its possibilities, more and more clearly saw in it the main pillar of mankind on the path to progress. Increasingly inclined - 18 Kurchatov I. IN. About the monograph by N. A. Morozov "Periodic systems of the structure of matter" // Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences (hereinafter: Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences). F. 543 (N. A. Morozova). Op. 3. D. 355; Wolfkovich S. AND. A brief outline of the scientific, revolutionary and social activities of N. A. Morozov // Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov. 1854-1946. M., 1981. P.16. 19 Wolfkovich S. AND. Decree. op. S. 16. 421 to the thought: everything that the socialist revolutionaries wanted to achieve through violence and revolution, or rather, more firmly, more painlessly, can be achieved with the help of science, the dissemination of knowledge, and the improvement of education. Already from Morozov's letters from the conclusion it is clear that he was becoming more and more assertive in recognizing science as a decisive condition for civilization and progress. Belief in the limitless possibilities of science, the technical and industrial progress associated with it for the development of mankind, becomes limitless, displacing thoughts of any acceleration of this development by force - with the help of upheavals and revolutions. Characteristic is Morozov's poem "Prisoner of Shlisselburg", written in prison. Her hero reflects on what, finally, is capable of freeing peoples who spend their lives "in suffering and darkness." Before the Prisoner pass scenes of past history, when "the God of Darkness, Enmity and Persecution rushed over the slave land," and "an obedient crowd, // People bowed everywhere // Over the earth wet with the blood of the dead // Before the power of roaring guns." These pictures of bloody violence accompany the Prisoner, as if flipping through the pages of world history. And yet, both in the ages of slavery and in the era of the "oppression of the golden calf", human thought did not fade away, contributing to the fact that "above the world of suffering and torment" a new star shone - "The Great Lamp of Science". A lever appeared in the hands of man, capable of transforming the world. With the triumph of science, a new era begins for the peoples: "And people heard the old call, // And the old torments ended. // The free impulse was powerful in art // By the bright light of science." The concept of progress expressed in the poem, carried out through science, with the help of science and the technical revolution caused by it, is very symptomatic for the former terrorist. He began to believe in science as the most powerful force that could transform the face of the earth. Immersed in scientific discoveries, Morozov draws pictures of the near future: "The ships took off into the azure heights, // Swimming in the air, // The deserts of the earth turned into gardens, // And the turbulent sea into a friend." At the same time, he sees in the future everywhere the freedom affirmed by the power of science, the freedom that his generation dreamed of, striving to wrest it by revolutionary violence. 422 Features of the new attitude are also manifested in the behavior of Morozov the prisoner. Prison taught tolerance, accustomed to compromise as a necessary condition for survival. Nikolai Alexandrovich did not conflict with his jailers: he managed to establish loyal relations with them, without fawning, without humiliating himself. Not without success, he proved himself to be a peacemaker in conflicts among prisoners, as well as between prisoners and prison authorities. An episode from the life of a prisoner is also characteristic, in which his new position in life is also revealed. We are talking about a visit to the Shlisselburg fortress by Princess Maria Mikhailovna Dondukova-Korsakova. Being deeply religious, she dedicated her life to all those who suffer, trying to somehow alleviate their plight. The princess had everything - nobility, wealth, beauty in her youth, but she chose this particular share - to be needed by those who especially needed human warmth, compassion and help. Ferrying in any weather in a boat across the Neva to the fortress, 77-year-old Maria Mikhailovna visited the prisoners for several months in 1904. I asked about their needs, tried to somehow ease their prison life, to encourage them spiritually. With great difficulty she obtained permission for these visits, but after the assassination of the Minister of the Interior V. K. Plehve by the Socialist Revolutionary E. S. Sazonov, they were banned. The Narodnaya Volya met Dondukova-Korsakova in different ways. As V. N. Figner explained, when she appeared in Shlisselburg, "two irreconcilable worldviews clashed." The princess, according to the Narodnaya Volka, is "a herald of peace, an enemy of violence, retreating in horror before bloodshed, whether it will be on a street barricade or in a one-man fight between a terrorist and an enemy, will it finally be on the scaffold. And we - rebels - revolutionaries who do not stop before raising the sword - we, who found a moral justification for ourselves in throwing our heads to the executioner ... 20 . Vera Nikolaevna had no doubt that M. M. Dondukova-Korsakova appeared in the fortress with the aim of "catching souls." Paying tribute to her kindness, V. N. Figner perceived the princess as "a religious enthusiast, thirsting for the feat of proselytism", Figner W. N. Imprinted work // Figner W. N. Full coll. op. M., 1932. T. 2. S. 266-267. 423 push the Narodnaya Volya into the bosom of Orthodoxy. Vera Nikolaevna admitted that during her visits she felt awkward and was wary. G. A. Lopatin generally refused to visit the princess. Morozov's attitude towards this personality was quite different. When he met her, he felt gratitude and trust, mutual sympathy. At that time, he had no information about the extensive and laborious social activities of Dondukova-Korsakova. Already released, he learns about her selfless work in the hospital for syphilitic, founded by her in the Pskov province, and much more. Nikolai Alexandrovich noticed the deep religiosity of the princess, who struck him with her religious tolerance. Maria Mikhailovna told him that "she does not consider herself entitled to convert non-believers or non-believers to Christianity, since if they exist, then, obviously, God needs them just as much as Christians." The Shlisselburg prisoner wrote to his relatives about the old princess as "the heroine of selflessness and the embodiment of disinterested love for one's neighbor" 21 . In ancient times, he said, she would have been a saint. It can be seen that the concepts of the former Narodnaya Volya about heroism, feat, service to society, the ideal of man have become in many ways different than at the time of his revolutionary activity. Apparently, by the time of his release in 1905, the inner world of the revolutionary Morozov had changed no less strongly than his ideas about the world around him. It is not possible to trace how these changes occurred in the outlook of the Narodnaya Volya, to restore the picture of his conversion to the "new faith" in any consistent way. Whether the turn to new ideas was a sudden insight, like the discoveries that occurred during his scientific studies, or gradually accumulating shifts in views of the past and future contributed to the transition from quantity to another quality is unclear. Nikolai Alexandrovich himself, as already mentioned, does not stop at the changes that took place with him, either in articles or in memoirs. About them you can only 21 Morozov N. A. Letters from the Shlisselburg Fortress. pp. 239-240, 253. Dondukova-Korsakova left such a deep imprint on Morozov’s memory that after her death in 1909, he writes an essay about her, where even more vividly than in letters from prison, she characterizes her as an example of a noble and selfless service to society // Morozov N. A. Princess Maria Mikhailovna Dondukova-Korsakova // Aryan N. P. The first women's calendar for 1910. SPb., 1910. 424 guess by what was directly or indirectly reflected in his correspondence and his poems during the period of imprisonment. But Morozov, who was released from prison in October 1905, was a different person than the one who entered, as he put it, into the "stone coffin." Not all contemporaries, and then the researchers understood this. In Soviet literature, he appears after Shlisselburg as a staunch revolutionary who remained true to his convictions. When I wrote about him a long time ago, the Shlisselburg period of his life interested me primarily from the point of view of the ability of the human person not only to survive in the most difficult conditions, but also to show the ability for intense mental activity that enriched science. Least of all did I try to find out the changes in his views then, and the topic of the book devoted to Morozov’s participation in the populist movement of the 1870-1880s did not encourage this: Morozov in the 20th century. stayed out of my line of sight. Now I have discovered a new Morozov, previously unknown to me and our literature, a thinker convinced of the advantages of the evolutionary path to progress, proving not only the “non-citizenship”, but also the “economic disadvantage” of any violence. About all this - in order. Once at liberty after a 28-year imprisonment, Morozov relatively quickly restored his health, which had been undermined in prison, and, as if trying to make up for the lost years, completely surrendered to the whirlwind of life that arose and grew around him. The released prisoner, the hero of Narodnaya Volya, was in great demand: he was invited to give public lectures, to speak with his memoirs at literary evenings, and was invited to their meetings by populists and liberals. Nikolai Alexandrovich never returned to revolutionary activity, did not provide assistance to any of the existing revolutionary groups and organizations. Meanwhile, the revolutionary struggle in the country was in full swing, and terror did not stop. Morozov's pamphlet "The Terrorist Struggle" was republished [Geneva, 1900] - clearly there were not enough new arguments in favor of "Tellism". Created in 1902, the party of socialist revolutionaries (Socialist-Revolutionaries), which considered itself the successor 425 the name of the "Narodnaya Volya", made political assassinations one of the main means of struggle. The Social Revolutionaries received the support of a number of former People's Will members: A. V. Yakimova, P. S. Ivanovskaya-Voloshenko and other former associates of Morozov joined their combat organization. He himself avoided contacts with terrorists. He approaches the "Party of People's Freedom" (cadets), and then joins it, thereby denoting his political position as a liberal-constitutionalist. However, as we shall see, he also differed from the Cadets in many ways. With all this, Morozov was far from giving up his revolutionary past, condemning it, considering it a delusion. He simply believed that another time was coming, requiring other forms of development of society, but everything that happened, in his opinion, was quite natural and understandable. Moreover, he believed that in Russia the revolutionary struggle had not yet exhausted itself as a means of social transformation. Later, during the days of the February Revolution, he would say that it was inevitable: "The Romanovs did everything to make it happen." The idea of the incompleteness of the revolutionary struggle in the country comes through in many of Morozov's memoirs about his people's past. He willingly talks about it in public speeches and in the periodical press. Nikolai Alexandrovich recalls his comrades, writing essays about V. Figner, A. Frangoli, A. Aronchik, D. Clemenets. He is proud of them, admires their fearlessness, readiness for self-sacrifice, asceticism in everyday life. His memoirs about his activities in populist circles and in the "Narodnaya Volya", about his stay in exile and in Shlisselburg were later included in the book "Tales of my life" 23 . He was destined to write it again in prison. For publishing a book of his prison poems, he was convicted and spent a year in the Dvina fortress. The new test that fell to Morozov's lot aroused public sympathy for him even more and, accordingly, further undermined the authority of the authorities. Among the readers of his memoirs who came into contact with him were L. N. Tolstoy and V. G. Korolenko, M. Gorky and I. E. Repin, V. Ya. Bryusov and E. V. Tarle, A. N. Bach and G. N. Potanin. 22 Morozov N. A. Revolution and evolution. Pg., 1917. P. 3. 23 Published for the first time in 1928 (GIZ, M; L.) "Tales of my life" were repeatedly reprinted. The last edition appeared in 1965. 426 Repin paints four portraits of Morozov, perceiving the former Narodnaya Volya as an "angel of kindness" 24 . Morozov's main theme, whether it be lectures or press appearances, is science, its mysteries, its power and its growing role in the new century. As soon as he got out of prison, he began preparing for printing the manuscripts taken out of prison. For the work "Periodic systems of the structure of matter: The theory of the formation of chemical elements" (M., 1907), Morozov, on the proposal of D. I. Mendeleev, was awarded honoris causa (without defending a dissertation) the degree of Doctor of Science. Working - at the invitation of P. F. Lesgaft at the Higher Free School, Nikolai Alexandrovich was soon approved by the Ministry of Education as a professor of analytical chemistry. In Russian science, this is an unprecedented case of such a statement for someone who does not have a secondary education and, therefore, the right to teach in a gymnasium. Eagerly comprehending what was new in those areas that he himself mastered as a natural scientist, chemist, physicist, mathematician, one of the first Morozov caught the trend towards convergence of sciences, guessed the unpredictable prospects for studying the atom. Morozov writes a lot about the structure of matter, about "the depths of the heavens and the depths of the earth", about the successes of astronomy and the physical and mathematical sciences. His special hobby is aeronautics. In numerous articles on this topic, he writes about the grandiose prospects that open up in connection with the conquest of the sky. The new century, which the scientist entered back in Shlisselburg, seems to him a century of unlimited possibilities in the field of science and production. After a long-term isolation, separation from the discoveries of modern times, he was shocked in his own way by the achievements of scientific thought at the turn of the century. From now on, the entire course of world civilization was conceived by the scientist-encyclopedist under the banner of science, under its leadership. Such a view of science as capable of renewing social and cultural life and transforming human relations was very characteristic of many liberals at the turn of the century and at the beginning of the 20th century. He was professed, in particular, by Prof. D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky, editor of Vestnik Evropy, with whom Nikolai Aleksandrovich had a certain rapprochement 25 . 24 Repin I. E. Letters. M., 1952. S. 207, 366-367. 25 Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky D. N. Memories. Pg., 1923. S. 116. 427 Morozov, apparently, believed that science itself was capable of influencing society, renewing it, regardless of the socio-political conditions in which it develops, in whose hands it is. In the traditions of Russian democratic thought, there was a recognition of the priority of the moral principle in public life. So Mikhailovsky called on those who believed in the omnipotence of science to “be imbued with the consciousness that science is only one of the factors of life, undoubtedly, to a high degree will bring everything to the best end" 26 . The underestimation of the role of morality as an independent factor in social development is felt in Morozov's perception of certain events in modern history. So, in the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), the sympathies of the Shlisselburg prisoner turned out to be on the side of the British Empire, which ousted the Transvaal Republic and the Orange Free State from South Africa, founded by the Dutch. Nikolai Aleksandrovich considered that in the interests of civilization South Africa should be dominated by a new "progressive and enterprising" English race, and not by "the patriarchal and rather ignorant race of the old Dutch settlers" 27 . Here Morozov parted ways with most of Russian society, which showed sympathy for the Boers. In Russia, many then, expressing solidarity with them, sang: "Transvaal, Transvaal, my country, // You are all on fire ...". A characteristic feature of Morozov's scientific and popular science publications upon his release from prison was the frequent use of the term "evolution". Morozov writes about "the evolution of matter in nature", "the evolution of elements on celestial bodies", "the evolution of aeronautics", "the evolution of luminaries from a geophysical point of view". The same term also appears in his speeches on the socio-political problems of our time to designate the basic laws of modern civilization. We are talking about Morozov's articles in the liberal newspaper "Russian Vedomosti" during the First World War: in 1915 Morozov became a correspondent for this newspaper. As a delegate of the All-Russian-26 Mikhailovsky N. TO. Op. SPb., 1897. T. VIII. pp. 239-242. 27 Morozov N. A. Letters from the Shlisselburg Fortress. pp. 90-91. 428 of the State Zemstvo Union for Assistance to the Sick and Wounded, Nikolai Aleksandrovich flies in an airplane to the front lines, talks about what he has seen and shares his thoughts on the place and role of wars in the development of mankind 28 . Morozov makes the reservation more than once that he writes not so much about modern warfare as "about general sociological questions connected with it," which he tries to solve "scientifically and impartially." It is felt that these problems have occupied him for a long time, and the war only gave impetus to generalizations, helped to draw more definite conclusions from many years of observations. Nikolai Alexandrovich does not hide his disgust for the war - a bloody slaughter, which, according to his definition, is "mass psychosis." He shows how war accustoms to sometimes unjustified cruelty, developing bestial instincts. War in Morozov's perception is an abnormal, unnatural state for a person. A typical example of such unnaturalness is his meeting with a woman aviator dropping bombs. He sincerely admits the fear that he experienced when he came under artillery fire, as well as the fear of being captured. Paying attention to how weapons of extermination are being improved in the new century, Morozov has no illusions that this in itself will make war impossible. Morozov's articles in the liberal Russkiye Vedomosti are similar in tone and terminology to M. Gorky's Untimely Thoughts about the war in the social democratic newspaper Novaya Zhizn. Gorky writes about the "bloody nightmare" of the war, the brutality and madness of the belligerents, the detrimental effect of the war on the spiritual life of society. "Art excites a thirst for blood, murder, destruction; science, raped by militarism, dutifully serves the mass destruction of people." "This war is the suicide of Europe!" exclaims Gorky, calling for an end to the world slaughter. In Morozov's book "On the War", essentially anti-militarist, the conclusion is different - to continue the war with Germany to a victorious end. Here he, diverging from Gorky, is closer to GV Plekhanov. 28 Articles by N. A. Morozov in Russkiye Vedomosti compiled the book At War. Stories and Reflections. Pg., 1916 (hereinafter - Morozov N. A. At war). 29 Gorky M. Untimely thoughts. Notes on revolution and culture. M., 1990. S. 84-85. 429 The war split the Social Democracy into "defeatists" and "defencists". V. I. Lenin, denouncing the unjust, predatory nature of the war for both belligerents, called for turning the imperialist war into a civil one. In contrast to Lenin, who asserted that the proletariat has no fatherland, Plekhanov, referring to K. Marx, proved the right of every people to be protected from attack. A German victory, in Plekhanov's conviction, would put off the revolution in Europe and in Russia. Having parted ways with the majority of the Social Democrats (not only the Bolsheviks, but also a part of the Mensheviks turned out to be against him), Georgy Valentinovich turned out to be in many ways close to some of his long-standing ideological opponents in his attitude towards the war. The anarchist P. A. Kropotkin and the “newly minted” Cadet Morozov, with whom Plekhanov, at the time of the crisis in Land and Freedom, and then in exile, showed complete incompatibility with his position. Views on this war, which broke into the fate of each of the former comrades-in-arms, bizarrely converge and diverge, reflecting the complex and contradictory perception of it by contemporaries. Kropotkin and Morozov, who were rather anti-militarist, considered Russia's participation in the 1914 war necessary and inevitable. Both opposed defeatist sentiments - for the victory over Germany, which was assigned the main, leading role in arming Europe and in unleashing war. For Kropotkin, as for Plekhanov, the victory of Germany is a threat to the European revolution. Like Plekhanov and VI Lenin, he connects the causes of the war with the striving of the bourgeoisie for new markets, for new territorial conquests, with the very existence of capitalism. For Morozov, the growing and strengthening German militarism is the main threat to European civilization and European democratic freedoms. He speaks of the possibility of German aggression to interrupt "the great evolutionary role of European capital" and the development of European countries towards socialism. 30 See more details: Tyutyukin S. IN. G. V. PLEKHANOV The fate of the Russian Marxist. M., 1997. S. 301-323. 31 P. A. Kropotkin on the war. M., 1916. S. 3, 12, 27; Kropotkin P. A. War and capitalism. B.m. . S. 3; He is. The end of the war is the beginning of eternal peace and general disarmament. Pg., . pp. 21-24, 19. 32 Morozov N. A. At war. S. 33, 111-112; He is. militarism and socialism. // Morozov N. A. How to stop the rise in price of life. M., 1916. S. 116-117. 430 Morozov, unlike V. I. Lenin and G. V. Plekhanov, refuses to see the main cause of the war in the striving of the bourgeoisie of the warring countries for new markets, for the redivision of the world. He proves that the capitalists cannot be interested in the war, since they themselves suffer from it: causing the fall of finances, the narrowing of sales markets, the war primarily ruins them. Morozov sees the causes of wars in the psychophysical nature of mankind, which is based on social egoism. Prevailing in human nature, it causes a continuous struggle for existence, competition and rivalry, which lead to wars. But, recognizing the universal nature of competition and struggle in all social spheres, Morozov, in fact, comes to the same socio-economic and political causes of wars that he denies. How else can the competition and struggle for the existence of the capitalists express themselves, having reached their climax, if not in wars? Morozov stubbornly emphasizes that the mental factor is "at the basis of all forms of social life," that it is not the economic system that determines the psyche, but, on the contrary, the psyche of the masses underlies the state and socio-economic structure. Based on Darwin, Morozov proves that egoism in human nature, through natural selection, weakens over time, being replaced by altruistic motives. He assigns an important role in this process to wars, in which the carriers of egoism are gradually destroyed. Wars, in his view, are a natural factor in evolution, contributing to the improvement of the people who remain after them 34 . Darwin, in his theory of natural selection, justified the improvement of the species in the course of the struggle for existence by the survival of the strongest and most viable individuals. Nikolai Alexandrovich bypasses the question of why after the war, which exterminates part of humanity, its representatives should remain the most suitable for improvement. Isn't it more logical to think that the war does not distinguish between the bearers of egoism and altruism who participate in it? 33 Morozov N. A. At war. pp. 121-123. 34 Morozov N. A. War as one of the factors of the psychological and social evolution of mankind (Experience in the natural scientific explanation of wars) // Russkiye Vedomosti. 1915, 6 and 10 February. 431 Morozov considers the evolutionary function of wars complete - it has already "destroyed and weakened the primary animal egoism." In the XX century. wars "inflict only useless wounds on humanity, arousing destructive passions." Representatives of altruism, according to his observation, already far outnumber the carriers of egoistic energy. Purely ideological educational methods can be applied to the latter at this stage of development. Enlarged unions of states -- a kind of United States of Europe 35 -- can become a barrier to wars . Nikolai Alexandrovich was not the first to try to give a natural-scientific explanation of socio-political aspirations, including wars. Before him, this was done even more fully and reasonably by P. A. Kropotkin, who in turn relied on the work of a number of Russian thinkers of the 1960s and 1970s, who had already posed such a problem (N. D. Nozhin, A. N. Beketov, N. K. Mikhailovsky and others). They read Ch. Darwin differently, not traditionally, seeing in his teaching not only the idea of the struggle for existence, but also an indication of the beginnings of mutual assistance in living organisms, and took this into account. It can hardly be assumed that Morozov, who was so seriously involved in sociology and biology, who strove to keep abreast of the latest research, did not get acquainted with the work of P. A. Kropotkin "Mutual Aid as a Factor of Evolution" (St. Petersburg, 1907). The very name of the author, a former "Chaikovite", an ally of "Narodnaya Volya", with whom he was personally acquainted, meant a lot to Morozov. Nikolai Aleksandrovich was one of the first to turn to Kropotkin after his release: he asked for the opportunity to give lectures on scientific topics in London. Peter Alekseevich responded quickly and enthusiastically. “I got so used to you in my thoughts while you were in prison, you became such a dear and sweet brother to me that I can’t write to you in a cold way,” he answered Morozov, noticing that he wanted to tell him a lot, but reluctantly writes to Russia so as not to harm his addressees 36 . Although Morozov nowhere in his works, for obvious reasons, refers to Kropotkin, a revolutionary emigrant, in the very formulation of the problem "war as a factor of social Morozov N. A. At war. pp. 123-124, 147-149, 142. 36 Letter from P. A. Kropotkin to N. A. Morozov (1908) // Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 543. Op. 4. D. 941. 432 of evolution" there is a controversy with him, who considered mutual assistance to be the determining factor in social development. Based on Ch. Darwin and the naturalist's own research, as well as referring to the history of mankind, which he considered part of nature, Kropotkin argued that human nature characteristic of the same instincts that dominate the animal world.These are the instincts of mutual assistance and solidarity, which helped mankind to survive and develop.It was them, unlike Morozov, he considered dominant.Crushed by social and state oppression, the instincts of mutual assistance, underlying morality, all more clearly, according to Kropotkin's observation, are revealed and in the future will determine the development of mankind - without wars and revolutions.As you can see, each of the scientists in his natural-scientific explanation of the psychophysical nature of man allowed a certain one-sidedness, taking into account mainly one attribute of this nature, as the main In addition, focusing on the natural-organic, psychophysical factors of human development, which were almost not taken into account by modern socio-political science, both Morozov and Kropotkin, in turn, did not sufficiently take into account the socio-economic factors of progress. However, it is symptomatic that, each reasoning "on the contrary", going in different ways, they come to similar conclusions about the development of mankind in the future. In contrast to Kropotkin, Morozov, who proceeded from the egoistic nature of man, in fact, already considers it to be completely transformed for the further predominance of altruistic motives in it. His main conclusion about war is that it becomes only an evil, devoid of meaning, and therefore doomed to disappear. The war "released the germs of new generous feelings in the human soul, which can carry out the further evolution of mankind even without streams of human blood and a whole ocean of suffering" 37 . This conclusion is very close to Kropotkin's confidence in the widespread dissemination of the principles of solidarity and mutual assistance, in which he saw "the best prerequisite for a sublime further evolution" 38 . 37 Morozov N. A. At war. S. 149; He is. When the wars stop. (Natural scientific explanation of the war) // Bulletin of Literature and Life. 1915. No. 13-14. pp. 747-748. 38 Kropotkin P. A. Mutual assistance as a factor of evolution. M., 1918. S. 15-17. 433 A supporter of "evolutionary socialism", Morozov nevertheless believed that an anti-autocratic revolution in Russia was inevitable and necessary, and warmly welcomed the fall of tsarism in February 1917. He emphasized that, by bringing the country to famine with its policy during the war, the royal dynasty brought the revolutionary upheaval closer . But the "revolution has died down" and Russia should find peace and confidence by becoming a democratic republic and basing its development "on a privately owned and capitalist foundation" 39 . Such an understanding of the prospects for the post-revolutionary future was close to liberal democracy in the broadest sense - from P. N. Milyukov to V. G. Korolenko. But unlike the Cadets and their leader, Morozov rejected the monarchical principle of the post-revolutionary system. Republicanism, as well as adherence to socialism - the ideal of social organization, brought him closer to the left, radical - populist part of the democratic intelligentsia. However, the social ideal in Morozov's understanding was not at all a practical program for building a new society. It was perceived as a kind of ultimate goal, towards which one would have to go a long way through the all-round development of science and technology, all the productive forces of the country, which is possible only on the basis of capitalism. Morozov becomes a member of the Free Association for the Development and Propagation of Positive Sciences, founded in March 1917. The organization, in addition to him, included I. P. Pavlov, A. N. Krylov, A. E. Fersman, V. G. Korolenko , M. Gorky, other prominent scientists, writers and public figures. The association aimed to promote knowledge and culture among the people. "The sciences ... could play a great role in ennobling the instincts," said M. Gorky, one of the initiators of the creation of this organization. The people, in his opinion, needed books that would tell "how great is the positive role of industry in the development of culture" 40 . The members of the Association saw the creation of scientific and artistic literature specially intended for the people as one of the "first tasks of the moment." Nikolai Aleksandrovich was close to the idea of MorozovON THE. Revolution and evolution. pp. 3-5, 5-6. 40 BitterM. Untimely thoughts. pp. 119, 122-123, 293. 434 the creative influence of science on the mitigation of morals, so relevant in the revolutionary era. But the members of the Association did not manage to develop any broadly planned work: the unstable situation in the country, special difficulties for educational activities among the masses excited by revolutionary events, prevented. After the October Revolution, the Association was liquidated. The country was still reveling in the almost bloodless victory of the February Revolution, and was just getting ready to take advantage of its fruits, when V.I. Lenin, who returned from emigration, issued a call to the masses for an early transition from the bourgeois-democratic revolution to the socialist one. According to the correct remark of the historian, in Lenin's "April Theses" "there was something that fundamentally changed Marxist ideas about the revolution and filled the hearts of some with hope and joy, and others with a premonition of an imminent and, alas, inevitable catastrophe" 41 . Among those who understood that socialist slogans in a tense revolutionary situation would lead to civil war and disaster, was Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov. At this historical moment, he, a former Narodnaya Volya, seemed to change places with the leader of Bolshevism, who denounced the Narodnaya Volya that they want to "jump out of capitalism", "jump over" it. Now Morozov, at one time a member of a party that aimed to merge a political revolution with a social one, proved to the Bolsheviks who considered themselves Marxists the unnaturalness and danger of a transition to socialism in a country that had not survived capitalism. Not only the Mensheviks, but also part of the Bolsheviks, at first did not support Lenin's idea of "growing" the democratic revolution into a socialist one. G. V. Plekhanov actively spoke out against such a "deepening" of the revolution, defining it as "a mad and extremely harmful attempt to sow anarchist confusion on earth" 42 . Longtime ideological opponents - Plekhanov and Morozov - again revealed the similarity of their positions on the fundamental problem of Russian reality, and yet remained ideological opponents. Plekhanov refuted Lenin, relying on Marx, referring to his teaching. Morozov tried to prove the inconsistency of the idea of a socialist revolution in 41 Tyutyukin S. IN. Decree. op. P. 329. 42 Ibid. S. 330 et seq. 435 peasant Russia in a dispute with the main provisions of Marxism. Acquaintance with Morozov's Marxism, most likely, happened in exile. Not without the influence of P. L. Lavrov and G. V. Plekhanov, he tried to involve K. Marx in the publication of the Social Revolutionary Library. In December 1880, Nikolai Alexandrovich visited K. Marx in London, wondering what works he would recommend for the "Library". Among the works handed over to him by Marx was the Manifesto of the Communist Party, which Morozov began to translate. It is hardly worth taking seriously the statement of the former Narodnaya Volya that at that time he was an adherent of Marxism. This assertion, repeated in his memoirs of his meeting with Marx, does not stand up to scrutiny when compared with the views and actions of the revolutionary émigré, who saw Marx primarily as an ally of Narodnaya Volya. In prison, Nikolai Alexandrovich got acquainted with the views of the Russian students of Marx. In the winter of 1895/96, one of the gendarmes handed over the journal of legal Marxists, Novoye Slovo, in which V. I. Lenin also collaborated, to the binding workshop of the Shlisselburg fortress, where prisoners worked. Legal Marxists are a trend in Russian liberal thought that accepted the idea of the natural historical development of society, rejecting the concept of class struggle as an eternal pattern. For a long time, the autocracy was tolerant of legal Marxism, meaning its criticism of Narodnaya Volya. “The impression of the magazine was, one might say, profoundly amazing,” says V. N. Figner, “the content struck at the dearest ideas and convictions. Different camps immediately emerged among us: some triumphed, others felt wounded” 44 . It is unlikely that Nikolai Alexandrovich was at that time shocked by the criticism of populism: he changed his mind a lot in prison, a lot of things. Morozov N. A. Karl Marx and "Narodnaya Volya" in the early 80s // Penal servitude and exile, 1933. N 3. Morozov's memoirs about Marx were repeatedly republished in Politizdat collections (see, for example: Russian contemporaries about K. Marx and F. Engels. M., 1969). Based on these memoirs, some authors expressed their views on Morozov as a supporter of Marxism. (Vnuchkov B. WITH. Prisoner of Shlisselburg. Yaroslavl, 1969. S. 49, 189; Zhdanov S. M. M. O. Morozov - one of the first successors and promoters of Marxism in Pocii 70-80 years of the XIX century. // Problems of Philosophy, 1969. Issue 13. 44 Figner W. N. Imprinted work. pp. 185-186. 436 revised. In his letters from Shlisselburg, there are clear signs of a departure from that leveling socialism that was part of the populist worldview. However, he was never an adherent of the principle of the community. But Morozov no longer shares the view of an equal division of duties in the future society, of the combination of physical and mental labor necessary for each of its members. P. A. Kropotkin, who in the program of the “Tchaikovites” substantiated the necessity of such a division, primarily from a moral point of view, as a manifestation of true equality, and in the 20th century. continued to espouse this idea. As V. N. Figner recalls, Morozov was among those who did not feel hurt by reading the Marxist overthrowers of populism. According to M. V. Novorussky, his friend on walks in Shlisselburg, Nikolai Alexandrovich, together with such prisoners of the fortress as M. P. Shebalin, I. D. Lukashevich and Mikhail Vasilyevich himself, already welcomed capitalist production not only "as a force organizing workers and constituting revolutionary cadres", but also as "creating industrial wealth countries" 46 . Having been released, N. A. Morozov had the opportunity to become more fully acquainted with the works of Russian Marxists, to learn about the criticism of Marxism in Western Social Democracy. One of the first attempts to revise Marxism by Russian revolutionary thought belonged to the former Narodnaya Volya N. S. Rusanov. In the early 80s. joining forces with the "Narodnaya Volya", he considered himself a Marxist, but soon moved away from Marxism. Already a member of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, which declared itself the successor of the "Narodnaya Volya", he called into question a number of basic provisions of Marxism 47 . N. A. Morozov not only repeated his Russian and Western predecessors in his criticism of Marxism, but also expressed a number of his own observations and conclusions about the weak and vulnerable aspects of Marx's teaching. His attitude to Marxism is clearly manifested in 1917, when, as already mentioned, V. I. Lenin threw the slogan of the socialist revolution to the masses. Morozov just as organically accepts the idea of the natural-historical development of society in the teachings of 45 Morozov N. A. Letters from the Shlisselburg Fortress. S. 213. 46 Novorusskiy M. IN. In the Shlisselburg fortress // Byloye 1906. N 12. P. 220-221. 47 See more: Tvardovskaya V. A., Itenberg B. S. Russians and Karl Marx: choice or fate? M., 1999. S. 171-181. 437 K. Marx, how ardently he rejects the conclusion about the revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism. The main idea of his speeches between April and October 1917 was that capitalism itself is capable of solving the social problems that confront its classes. With the advent of capitalism, according to Morozov, the need for revolution, as the midwife of history, disappears, society can and should develop only in an evolutionary way. "All of us revolutionaries will inevitably turn into evolutionists" 48 . Morozov proves this by refuting Marx's conclusion about the inevitability of the proletarian revolution. According to Marx, the urgent contradiction between the new, socialist productive forces that are growing up under capitalism, and the old, capitalist production relations can only be resolved by the revolutionary violence of the working class. Nikolai Alexandrovich refuses to see the proletariat as the grave-digger of capitalism: this is a class interested in its own way in the development of the bourgeois system, since the growth of its own well-being is connected with the development of capitalist production. The proletariat is not threatened by absolute impoverishment, the Russian scientist argued following K. Kautsky and E. Bernstein. But if the criticism of this thesis of Marxism by Western social democrats was based primarily on the experience of the development of Europe in the 90s and 900s, which did not confirm it, then Morozov also turns to political economy for arguments. The impoverishment of the masses is disastrous for capitalism itself, he argues, since the sale of products can only be ensured by growing demand, and demand is determined by a rising standard of living. Just as confidently, Morozov refutes the original proposition of Marxism about surplus value. In contrast to K. Marx, he argues that the surplus value - the unpaid part of the worker's labor - is by no means all expropriated from the workers by the capitalist for his own benefit, but a significant part goes "to build all-necessary structures that facilitate and improve the life of not only the propertied classes" . Marshes turned into flowering meadows, telegraphs, railroads—steamships, etc., are "crystallized surplus value," Morozov argues. 48 Morozov N. A. Revolution and evolution. S. 7. 49 Morozov N. A. Evolutionary sociology, land and labor. Pg., 1917. S. 21-22. 50 Ibid. S. 21. 438 Recognizing the merit of Marxism in establishing the transformative role of capitalism in relation to the feudal stage of development, Morozov believed that this theory bypassed the question of the creative potentialities of this system. Morozov's speeches in the press after the February Revolution focused on opening up opportunities, on substantiating "the great evolutionary role of capital." Arguing that the impoverished peasant country devastated by the war is not ready for socialism, the scientist explains that only the all-round development of capitalist production can prepare Russia for a new stage of social life. Capitalism encourages science, creates conditions for continuous and accelerated industrial progress, and thereby for that all-round transformation of "human life, which in two centuries made the entire earth's surface unrecognizable" 51 . This transformation also applies to the spiritual life of society. Only with the development of civilization and the growth of culture will the "genes of solidarity" strengthen in society and the "genes of egocentrism" weaken. And only in the course of such an evolution will mankind come to true collectivism. It is impossible to get rid of the class system, to establish universal brotherhood with the help of decrees, Morozov convinced, developing in his own way the idea of F. M. Dostoevsky: "if there are brothers, there will be brotherhood." By arguing that universal equality can be achieved "only by an evolutionary, and not revolutionary, way," Morozov, in fact, gives a rebuke to the leveling socialism that was an integral part of populism. Criticized by Marxism as utopian, populist ideas unexpectedly came to life in their own way in the Bolshevik plan for the "growing" of the democratic revolution into a socialist one. Morozov quite in a Marxist way argues that there are no conditions for building socialism in a country devastated by the war: there is no powerful developed industry, viable agriculture. To expropriate available resources and distribute them "equitably" means creating insurmountable difficulties for future generations. For normal socio-economic development, savings and surpluses are needed, and not property equality, imposed by force. 51 Ibid. pp. 18-19; He is. Science and freedom. Pg., 1917. S. 7. 439 Nikolai Alexandrovich, using a typical example, shows the thoughtlessness and irresponsibility of socialist agitators. With knowledge of the matter, the scientist analyzes the pamphlet of the agronomist A. Grigoriev "All the land to the working people" (1917) with its call to "take away and divide everything equally." According to the calculations of the socialist agronomist, if all the arable land available in the country is taken away by evicting landlords and monks to Siberia, then 200 acres will fall to the head of a peasant. Morozov, dwelling on the criticism of the arithmetic calculations of the agronomist, focuses on the immorality of the proposed violent measure, recalling, in particular, that the monks themselves cultivate their lands, because they are the same peasants. But violence, he says, is not only "non-civilian" - it "turns into an economic disadvantage." After all, for the cultivation of expropriated land, the peasant will already need machines, and, given the general state of technology in the country, he will not be able to use it fully and properly. It would seem that it was V. I. Lenin, who always spoke out against the social utopias of the populists, who should have raised his voice in defense of real socio-economic and political transformations, as opposed to such projects of "general equalization." However, while orienting the masses towards a "deepening" of the revolution, on the eve of October the Bolsheviks did not oppose even the most fantastic projects of the utopian socialists. Meanwhile, according to Morozov's observations, the pamphlets of the socialists, which became widespread after the February Revolution, "in fact excite in the people not at all social, but anti-social feelings of enmity," as well as popular cartoons of the bourgeois, published "without the slightest idea of the historical role social classes." Morozov insistently repeated that a "bright future" could be reached only by "peaceful transformation of economic interclass relations on the basis of justice not only to one class, but also to every living human soul in one's own country" 53 . In the heated post-revolutionary atmosphere, saturated with class hatred, such calls met with much less understanding and sympathy than the Bolshevik 52 Morozov N. A. Evolutionary sociology, land and labor. S. 27 et seq. 53 Morozov N. A. Revolution and evolution. S. 9. 440 slogans of the transformation of the revolution into a socialist one. These latter could be opposed not by arguments about how revolution is worse than evolution, but by specific measures of the Provisional Government, primarily the solution of questions about land and peace, but they did not follow. Therefore, the convocation of the State Conference, presented in the press as an all-Russian forum with the participation of the country's leading state and political figures, did not bring peace. The State Conference, which opened on August 12, 1917 in Moscow at the Bolshoi Theater, was attended by representatives of major political parties and trends - from the monarchists and the Cadets to the Socialist-Revolutionaries, Mensheviks and Bolsheviks. In addition to the ministers of the Provisional Government, there were generals L. G. Kornilov (supreme commander) and M. V. Alekseev, ataman A. M. Kaledin. The head of the Provisional Government, A.F. Kerensky, invited to participate in the State Conference "historical", in his words, leaders of the liberation movement: Prince P.A. Kropotkin, E.K. Breshkovskaya, G.A. Lopatin, G.V. Plekhanov and N. A. Morozov. G. V. Plekhanov and P. A. Kropotkin, who spoke at the State Conference, so different in their political views, were unanimous in their desire to stop the growing civil strife in the country. The ideologist of anarchism and the leader of the Social Democracy proved the need, above all, to strengthen the gains of the February Revolution. Both Kropotkin and Plekhanov called for prudence and tolerance to those who, in their own journalism, were implacable enemies. It was argued to the capitalists that it was necessary to meet the needs of the workers - the costs of raising their living standards would have to be paid off by increasing labor productivity. Workers were persuaded not to make unrealistic demands on employers, not to resort to violence. The government was called for broad social reforms 54 . All this was close to the position of N. A. Morozov, who had already expressed much of what Plekhanov and Kropotkin spoke about in the press. Nikolai Aleksandrovich, just like Plekhanov, convinced that the proletariat could not live without the bourgeoisie at the present time. Morozov argued that it was not industrialists and merchants who were to blame for speculation: it was a sign of general malaise. 54 Speech 1917, August 15-17. 441 economy. He explained that the idea of the profitability of the transfer of tools of labor into the hands of the workers is incorrect, since it is not economically prepared. Elected directors will not be as interested in the success of the business as the owner of the enterprise himself is a capitalist. Now it is important to raise production, which has been undermined by the war, and this can be done only by increasing labor productivity, by multiplying the hours of working time. What is needed is a gradual, well-prepared nationalization of production, and not forced expropriation. Coinciding with Plekhanov and Kropotkin in understanding the tasks of the current moment, Morozov understood the prospects for the development of the country in a completely different way than these revolutionaries. His former comrades-in-arms, who became ideological opponents, had in mind not a class peace, but a temporary truce. For Plekhanov and Kropotkin, the contradictions between labor and capital could only be resolved by a revolution, which was only postponed due to its unpreparedness and the state of war in the country. They called for a temporary agreement with the bourgeoisie, possible because of its disinterest in restoring the autocracy. But in the eyes of both Plekhanov and Kropotkin, the bourgeoisie remained a class hostile to the proletariat and historically doomed. Morozov, as already mentioned, understands the relations of labor and capital in a completely different way - as mutually conditioned and mutually beneficial. It is he who calls on the opposing classes to realize their great evolutionary role. The economic foundation can be transformed only "carefully, humanely, replacing stone by stone in it." With the help of a revolution, i.e., a "rapid violent overturn", this cannot be achieved. Morozov believes that with the establishment of a democratic republic, "the long period of our revolutionary attempts" should naturally come to an end. The logical reasoning of the scientist, apparently, did not quite coincide with his direct perception of the current. And therefore, along with proofs of the onset of a non-revolutionary era, involuntary forebodings are expressed that the first strike of the earthquake (i.e., the February Revolution) "will be followed by more strikes" 57 55 Morozov N. A. How to stop the rise in price of life. pp. 56-61; He is. Evolutionary sociology, land and labor. pp. 24-25. 56 Morozov N. A. Revolution and evolution. P. 7. 57 Ibid. C. 3. 442 These forebodings were fed by the impressions of reality: Nikolai Alexandrovich was a participant in many of its important events. In September, Morozov became a member of the Council of the Republic, conceived as a kind of "pre-parliament" of the Democratic Conference. At this meeting of representatives of political parties, cooperative unions, various societies, in the midst of party passions, only E. D. Kuskova called for "suppressing strife, uniting to save the motherland," but her call was drowned in the thick of "party polemics sharpened to the point of rudeness" 58 . There was an unaccustomed to democracy, an inability to compromise - a consequence of a civil society that did not take shape in the country. The Bolsheviks, led by L. D. Trotsky, openly refused any agreements and left the meetings after reading out their declaration. However, even the remaining liberal-democratic parties and groupings could not agree on anything, did not offer a specific program for overcoming the crisis, which threatened new upheavals 59 . Morozov's position turned out to be just as vague and vague. While advocating the strengthening of the gains of the February Revolution, he did not propose specific means of such strengthening. It was impossible to preserve democratic freedoms without backing them up with the socio-economic emancipation of the people. At one time, their ally N.K. Mikhailovsky warned the Narodnaya Volya about this. Both in Otechestvennye Zapiski and in the newspaper Narodnaya Volya, at the time of N. A. Morozov’s work in its editorial office, he, referring to historical experience, argued that “political freedom, sometimes bought at the cost of a whole ocean of blood, fell from an insignificant impetus from Bonaparte or another person eager for power", if it "at its inception was not complicated by significant assistance to the people, who therefore, in cold blood, and sometimes sympathetically, watched the goddess of freedom stagger and fall from her pedestal" 60 . Morozov and his liberal associates did not hear this warning. Argued and logically proved with the help of science the uselessness of revolutionary violence, 58 Gessen I. IN. In two centuries. Life Report // Archive of the Russian Revolution. Berlin. 1937. (M., 1993). T. XXII. S. 376. 59 Rudneva S. E. Democratic Conference September 1917. History of the forum. M., 2000. S. 247-248. 60 N.M. [Mikhailovsky N. TO.] Literary notes // Otechestvennye zapiski. 1880. N 9. S. 133; cf .: Literature of the party "People's Will". S. 29. 443 Morozov, like his party comrades-in-arms, did not propose specific measures to prevent it, did not pay due attention to solving the agrarian question, so formidable in a peasant country. Morozov spoke out not only against the expropriation of landlord property, but also against the distribution of state lands to allotments, which was envisaged by many liberal and populist programs. He spoke only of strengthening state control over land holdings, programming the "gradual municipalization of the land" 61 . But the principle of gradualness, so convincingly applied in discussions about the building of socialism in post-revolutionary Russia, in the land question, which required urgent resolution, was clearly not suitable. Lack of understanding of this is a serious flaw in Morozov's "evolutionary sociology", who missed the most topical and burning problem of "land and labor" in his scientific analysis. Other participants in the Democratic Conference also missed it. None of the leaders of the liberal-democratic parties put forward a program corresponding to the aspirations of the peasantry - the Bolsheviks did it. That is why the mass of the people, who at first trusted the Provisional Government, expected fundamental changes from it, by the autumn of 1917 had already "fluctuated away from the capitalists to the side revolutionary workers" 62. Neither Morozov nor such public figures who tried to stop the outbreak of fratricidal war in the country as M. Gorky, G. V. Plekhanov, P. A. Kropotkin, V. G. Korolenko could prevent such a development of events , and many, many others who raised their voices against the impending revolutionary violence, which became inevitable due to the passivity of the Provisional Government, which did not dare to reform, the weakness and disunity of the democratic forces, the intractability of the bourgeoisie, the intransigence of the vanguard of the working class, excited by the Bolshevik agitation. promising land and peace, the peasantry went in. I. V. Gessen, editor of the Cadet newspaper Rech, recalling his impression of complete hopelessness and hopelessness from participating in the Democratic Conference, tells about a meeting in the Mariinsky Palace, where it was held, with N. A Morozov: 61 Morozov N. A. Evolutionary sociology, land and labor. S. 27, 31-33. 62 Lenin V. AND. Full coll. op. T. 31. S. 325. 444 "Well, Nikolai Alexandrovich, was it worth spending twenty years in Shlisselburg to wait for such a day?" According to Gessen, the interlocutor was even frightened by such a question: "Oh, what are you, what are you. Do not sin. In a year or two, we will be happy to remember this time with you." The answer of the former Shlisselburger infuriated Gessen: “I want to hit him with anger or cuddle up close to him, if I’m infected with this childish faith, and in vain I torment my imagination to imagine what this terrorist was like twenty years ago, when the heavy gates closed behind him Shlisselburg casemate" 63 . It is not clear why Morozov's optimism so struck and annoyed Gessen. After all, until recently, Hessen himself, just as inexplicably hoped for better times: he had just returned from the Crimea, where back in August he had bought a piece of land by the sea and was going to build a house. But he regularly received newspapers and telegrams from the St. Petersburg agency and still believed in good changes. Morozov also believed in them, although, as already mentioned, not without doubts. His natural optimism was multiplied by the optimism of a man who overcame the exorbitant trials of fate. Even the October Revolution did not at first deprive him of hope and faith, he finally lost them with the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. The Bolsheviks supported the slogan of convening a Constituent Assembly, put forward by Narodnaya Volya, until they seized power. Narodovolets Morozov was his opponent, Morozov, a member of the Cadets Party, participated in the elections to the Constituent Assembly. He could still understand, if he did not accept the overthrow of the Provisional Government - an inactive and ineffective power, the violent dispersal of the representatives of the people elected by him, convinced that the peaceful development of the revolution was no longer foreseen - a dictatorship was established in the country. In his Autobiography, written in 1926, briefly mentioning his participation in the Moscow State Conference, the Council of the Republic and the Constituent Assembly (these facts generally fell out of the essays on Morozov by his Soviet biographers), Nikolai Aleksandrovich admits that all this time "he was anxious ". “I already foresaw the inevitability of a civil war, the disasters of famine and devastation as its results, and therefore deliberately took a reconciliatory position among the warring parties, but soon became convinced that this was completely useless. Hessen I. IN. Decree. op. S. 378. 445 useful and that it will be just as difficult for our political parties to stop the spontaneous onslaught of the popular masses from excesses as it is to stop a hurricane with a simple wave of hands.* * *
After the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, Nikolai Alexandrovich resolutely and irrevocably left politics, completely surrendering to science. His words in his Autobiography about the forced removal from science in 1917, caused by the demands of politics, are not entirely accurate: scientific work slowed down, was interrupted, but did not stop - it was a vital need for him. He came to all political meetings with a pack of books. Also at one time, with a bag of books and manuscripts, he went for a walk in Shlisselburg: fellow prisoners nicknamed him "The Marsupial". In Soviet Russia, science became a safe haven from disappointing politics. Morozov continued to believe in science and its transforming power. It was science that was supposed not only to promote the rise of the economy destroyed by the war and revolutions, but also to ennoble morals, embittered by fratricidal slaughter. Darkness and ignorance in the understanding of the scientist are incompatible with democratic freedoms. The enlightenment of the people, the dissemination of scientific knowledge, in his opinion, contributes to the civil maturity of society, the establishment of the principles of freedom and individual rights in it. While proving the inextricable link between freedom and science in the revolutionary year, Morozov continued to think the same way during the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Seeing that events did not take the development he had hoped for, realizing that the country was in danger of protracted devastation, threatening to aggravate the class and political struggle, Nikolai Alexandrovich did not leave Russia. Rich and varied opportunities to engage in science abroad, where his name enjoyed sufficient fame, were rejected: he devotes all his strength to the organization of science in his native country. In these difficult years, P. A. Kropotkin did not leave Russia either; Morozov N. A. Autobiography // Figures of the USSR and the revolutionary movement in Russia. Encyclopedic Dictionary Pomegranate. M., 1989. S. 317. 65 Morozov N. A. Science and freedom; ditto // Nature. 1917. No. 5-6. pp. 670-675. 446 he regretted the work begun abroad on the "Ethics", in which his teaching about the instincts of solidarity and mutual assistance as the basis of morality was to find a comprehensive justification. Considering this work to be topical, the scientist was still constantly distracted by solving political problems. Kropotkin, unlike Morozov, actively tried to influence the policy of the Soviet government. He raised his voice against the Red Terror, urging the Bolsheviks not to distort the communist ideal with enmity and revenge, not to encourage destructive instincts. Kropotkin wrote to VI Lenin about the need to develop the "constructive" energy of the masses and to promote the cooperative movement. Morozov turned to V.I. Lenin only on the problems of science, without touching on politics. Nikolai Alexandrovich declared his readiness to serve the cause of public education. He offered to donate his experience and knowledge of Russian aviation: "With the greatest zeal, I would undertake," he wrote to the leader, "the re-creation of scientific aeronautics and the organization of scientific flights." He repeatedly sent Lenin the works of the Institute. P.F. Lesgaft, whose director he became, reporting on the plans of the institute and its needs. It is clear from these letters of his that Lenin readily responded to the proposals of the scientist 67 . At the initiative of the leader, by a decree of the Council of People's Commissars, the Borok estate was transferred to Morozov for life use - for services to the revolution and science. No longer trying to interfere in political life, Nikolai Alexandrovich in the first post-revolutionary years still made attempts to petition for some of his arrested acquaintances, using personal connections, in particular, acquaintance with F. E. Dzerzhinsky. The archive of the scientist preserved a letter from the chairman of the Cheka, who answered his petition about the arrested member of the Cadet Party N. A. de Roberti, an economist and publicist. Informing Morozov, in response to his petition, that the case of N. A. de Roberti was considered by him personally, Dzerzhinsky wrote that the arrested "cannot be released at present." He assured Nikolai Alexandrovich that the conditions of de Roberti's imprisonment were not 66 Pirumova N. Letters and meetings // Motherland. 1989. N 1. S. 27-30. 67 Letter from N. A. Morozov to V. I. Lenin [July 1919]. Draft // Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 543; Same. Aug 11 and 1 Feb. 1921 // Literary heritage. M., 1971. T. 80. S. 280, 269; ditto, 29 Jan. 1921 // Letters of workers to V. I. Lenin. M., 1969. S. 280-281. 447 heavy. “Our opponents have not given up on all sorts of conspiracies, on the contrary, they now want to take advantage of the difficult situation of the republic and increase their activity. And therefore we must be on the alert and must isolate many,” the country’s chief Chekist explained to Morozov the meaning of his decision. At the same time, Dzerzhinsky expressed his readiness to contribute to the publication of Morozov's work "Christ" and expressed a desire to be useful to him in any way he could. "I am firmly convinced that Soviet Russia will be able to overcome all difficulties and wait for the collapse of world capitalism," he wrote to Morozov. One can imagine with what feeling the scientist, convinced of the "great evolutionary role of capitalism," read these lines. But Nikolai Alexandrovich did not enter into a dispute with the authorities. It would be more accurate to define his position not even as neutrality, but rather as complete aloofness, alienation from politics. While not protesting against mass repressions in the 1930s, he never came out in support of them either. The signatures of N. A. Morozov, an honorary member of the USSR Academy of Sciences since 1934, are not under the collective letters of scientists and cultural figures who demanded the execution of "enemies of the people" and tougher punitive measures. During the years of Soviet power, Nikolai Aleksandrovich lived only for science. The principle of integrated research, which the scientist adhered to, contributed to his advancement in its various fields from astronomy to geology and geophysics and nuclear physics. It is at the Institute, them. P. F. Lesgaft, headed by Morozov, began the development of problems related to space exploration. In 1931 Morozov handed over most of Bork to the Academy of Sciences. The Upper Volga base of the Academy of Sciences was created here - the basis of the future Institute of Biology of Inland Waters of the Academy of Sciences. Academician S. I. Volfkovich, who corresponded with Nikolai Aleksandrovich and was aware of his scientific plans and discoveries, testified that even at the age of 91, Nikolai Aleksandrovich "was more passionate and bold than many of us at 40-50 years younger than him." The passion and courage of the young Morozov, a revolutionary and a mature public figure, at the end of his life path, were reflected only in science, becoming // Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 543. Op. 4. D. 546. 69 Wolfkovich S. AND. Decree. op. S. 20. 448 our raison d'être, a refuge from revolutionary And political storms, the main hope for the future. The Soviet authorities, awarding the honorary academician N. A. Morozov with the Orders of Lenin and the Red Banner of Labor in connection with anniversaries, emphasized that they paid tribute not only to his scientific, but also to revolutionary merits. The image of a revolutionary scientist was supposed to become a symbol of the connection between science and revolution, the continuity of the revolutionary tradition. This image already had little in common with a real person, but was supported in every possible way - the era needed its symbols, myths, legends. N. A. Morozov died at the age of 92 in 1946 in Bork, in the house where he was born. His long life contained events - public and personal, enough for several human lives. He was a contemporary of three Russian emperors and three Russian revolutions. In fact, Morozov, as it were, lived several lives, completely different in content and aspirations. There is a deep meaning in the fact that man came to the renunciation of revolutionary violence fully armed with revolutionary experience and extensive scientific knowledge. In substantiating the possibility of the evolutionary development of mankind - without social upheavals and wars, Morozov went his own way, trying to rely not only on socio-political, but also on the natural sciences. At the same time, he was not always convincing enough in his reasoning, but his conclusions and observations are of interest because of their coincidence with the emerging and ever-increasing peacemaking tendencies in social thought. For Nikolai Alexandrovich, who turned from a revolutionary into an "evolutionary", the uselessness of violent means for social transformation became so obvious that he believed in the possibility of convincing a society that was in a state of revolutionary ferment. The lessons of Morozov's fate show that it is not enough to become an opponent of violence in a world where it is still full-fledged: it is important to find real ways to avoid it. It is not enough to be convinced of the advantages of peaceful, evolutionary development; one must look for concrete means of resisting violence and preventing it. The searches in this direction by Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, for all their incompleteness and seeming inconsistency, should not be forgotten.
