, for the fact that tiberius was exclusively a fiend of evil, and pushkin strives for maximum objectivityes the state merits of tiberius, but he is not satisfied, but they exist, and they exist, of course, that is, for him he is simply executioner everything. in the 1830s, pushkin again turned to the canals, only now he did not destroy the desire for freedom for the sake of historicism. tats is close to him again, as it once was in decembrist times, as in 1822, because he constantly returned to this figure, enough. in general, pushkin has such a rethinking of specific texts - this is a rather typical story, so, but he is close to him not in his historical views now, but as a person who is trying to speak out against the tide of history. which preserves the ideal free personality, this is a slightly different view, already a third view, pushkin does not just justify autocracy, on the contrary, he promotes the independence of the individual, this is the idea according to which the individual must resist the pressure of power, not dissolve in front of power, the same idea is in the article a