this is a historical podcast, we continue the conversation about pyotr yakovlevich chaadaev. even alexander sergeevich pushkin, who was complacent towards him and very affectionate towards pyotr yakovlevich, spoke out against chaadaev’s position. he wrote about him: he is higher by the will of heaven, born in the shackles of royal service, he would have been a brute in rome, a crossroads in athens, but here he is an officer. it was written early, you already quoted the message to chaadaev, he has more than one message to chaadaev, this is such a part of a humorous epigram, but pushkin in april of the year thirty-six after the publication of the letter, he writes a critical response to chiodaev, where he analyzes it in sufficient detail, he writes himself that it turned out to be a huge letter, analyzes his point of view, i will not quote this letter in full, although it is very worth reading, because from my point of view, alexander sergeevich is here , from the point of view of historical accuracy, not only from my point of view. view was more right,

of course, than pyotr yakovlevich. he writes, as for thoughts, you know that i do not agree with you on everything. there is no doubt that the schism, the division of churches, separated us from the rest of europe, so that we did not take part in any of the great events that shook it. but we had our own special purpose. it was russia, this vast space, that was swallowed up by the mongol invasion. the tatars did not dare cross our western borders and leave us in the rear. they retreated to their deserts, the tatars, that is, and christian civilization was saved. to achieve this goal we had to lead a completely special existence, which, while leaving us christians, made us, however, completely alien to the christian world, so that by our martyrdom, the energetic development of catholic europe was freed from all hindrances, that is, pushkin here looks at the role of russia in the pan-european context. you say that the source from which we drew christianity was unclean, and they are talking here about byzantium. pushkin objects: “oh, my friend, wasn’t jesus christ himself born a jew, and wasn’t jerusalem among the nations?” his?

which is a sad and great spectacle, the awakening of russia, the development of its power, its movement towards unity, to russian unity, of course, both ivans, the majestic drama that began in uglich, is all this really not history, but just a pale half-forgotten dream, and peter the great, one whole story, and catherine ii, who placed russia on the threshold of europe, and alexander, who brought you, i am far from delighted with what i see around me, how writers irritate me, as a person with prejudices, i... this is speaking about

modern times, but i swear on my honor, i would not want to change my fatherland for anything in the world have a different history than our history ancestors, as god gave it to us, and the lines are truly brilliant, and here it is ultimately difficult to disagree with pushkin, there is such a point of view that what he wrote, these philosophical letters, they call it a kind of intellectual provocation , well...

you can’t look at just today, but this very premise of chadayev, that in the past and today’s future, it doesn’t work, in fact it doesn’t work, this publication, it had the effect of such an explosion, that’s what it’s like for him -it was necessary to react, well, nikolai, as you already said, he reacted in his usual manner, he summed up the scandal. taking into account the painful condition of the unfortunate man, the government, in its solicitude, orders him not to leave the house and to provide him with pre-health medical benefits; in general, he was under this house arrest -