"To the barrier!" Features and traditions of the Russian duel. The most famous duels in the world

Presumably the first duel in Russia can be considered a duel that took place in 1666 in Moscow between two hired foreign officers - the Scotsman Patrick Gordon (later Peter's general) and the Englishman Major Montgomery. But at that time this custom had not yet penetrated the Russians. Nevertheless, isolated precedents forced Princess Sophia in a decree of October 25, 1682, which allowed all servicemen of the Moscow state to carry personal weapons, to stipulate a ban on fights. Peter the Great, energetically instilling European customs in Russia, hastened to prevent the spread of duels by cruel laws against them.

Chapter 49 of the Petrine Military Regulations of 1715, called "Patent on duels and starting quarrels", proclaimed: "No insult of the offended in any way can diminish", the victim and witnesses of the incident are obliged to immediately report the fact of the insult to the military court; failure to report was also punished. For the very challenge to a duel relied deprivation of ranks and partial confiscation of property, for going to a duel and bare arms - the death penalty with complete confiscation of property, not excluding the seconds.

Even more definitely stated on this score, published as an appendix to the Peter's statute "Military article" of 1715, in which two articles were devoted to duels. The first of them ("article 139") said: "All challenges, fights and fights through the cue are strictly prohibited. Thus, so that no one, no matter whoever he was, of a high or low rank, a born local or a foreigner, although another, who by words, deed, signs or otherwise was prompted and provoked to this, would by no means dare to summon his rival, lower in a duel with him on pistols or on swords to fight. Whoever perpetrates against this, he certainly, as the caller, and whoever comes out, has to be executed, namely, hanged, although one of them will be wounded or killed ... then they will be hanged by the feet after death. "

The next article ("article 140") stipulated the same about the seconds: "If someone quarrels with whom and begs the second," then the second "should be punished in the same way." Like Vidic T, the punishments for the duel were sustained in the typically Peter's, mercilessly brutal style. Despite this, Peter's legalizations against duels, which were formally in force until 1787, have never been applied for all these seventy years. What's the matter?

And the fact that the very concept of honor in its European meaning had not yet entered the consciousness of the Russian nobility, and there were practically no duels until the second half of Catherine's reign. It should not be forgotten that Peter's innovations in relation to Western customs and mores were too superficial, for the most part the Russian nobility in terms of upbringing and internal culture for a long time still did not differ much from the common people, and the desire to wash off defilement with blood in a fair fight was alien to him. In addition, there was still an exceptionally great fear of reprisals from the state, until 1762 an ominous "word and deed" operated.

Therefore, when duels began to spread among the noble youth in Catherine's era, representatives of the older generation reacted to this with unconditional condemnation. D.I.Fonvizin in his "Sincere confession in deeds and my thoughts" recalled that his father considered the duel "a matter against conscience" and taught him: "We live under the laws, and it is a shame, having such sacred defenders, what are the laws, to understand on fists or on swords, for swords and fists are one thing, and a challenge to a duel is nothing but the action of violent youth. " Let us remember how he lectured Pyotr Grinev, the hero of Pushkin's “ Captain's daughter", For the duel with Shvabrin, his father Andrei Petrovich Grinev in his letter:" ... I'm going to get to you, but for your pranks, teach you a lesson like a boy, despite your officer rank: for you have proved that you are not yet worthy of wearing a sword, which granted to you for the defense of the fatherland, and not for duels with the same rascals as you are. "

And nevertheless, duels gradually more and more penetrated the milieu of the noble youth. And the reason for this was not so much the "spirit of violent youth", for which the law-abiding fathers disapproved of the children, but the emerging sense of honor and personal dignity, which developed gradually, with the development of education and class upbringing, and intensified with each new generation. The noble youth, still loyal to the oath and to the throne, did not allow the state to interfere in matters of honor. Later this formula was succinctly and succinctly expressed by General Kornilov in his life credo: "The soul is for God, the heart is for a woman, duty is for the Fatherland, honor is for nobody."

By the time of the spread of duels in Russia, the formidable articles of Peter's article, punishing death for a duel, had been thoroughly forgotten, since sixty years had passed since their publication. And before the "powers that be" there is a problem: how to fight duels? In 1787, Catherine the Great published the Manifesto of Duels. In it, duels were called a foreign planting; the participants in the duel, which ended bloodlessly, were punished with a monetary fine (not excluding the seconds), and the offender, "like a violator of peace and tranquility," was exiled to Siberia for life. For wounds and murder in a duel, punishment was imposed as for the corresponding deliberate crimes. The duel reached its climax in the first half of the 19th century. The prohibition of duels was reaffirmed in the 1832 Code of Criminal Laws and the Military Criminal Charter of 1839, published under Nicholas I, and the Military Criminal Charter of 1839, which obliged military commanders to “try to reconcile the quarreling and give the offended satisfaction by collecting from the offender.”

But nothing helped! Moreover, duels in Russia were distinguished by the exceptional rigidity of the conditions of the unwritten codes: the distance varied from 3 to 25 steps (most often 15 steps), there were even duels without seconds and doctors, one on one, often fought to death, sometimes they shot themselves, standing alternately back at the edge of the abyss, so that in the event of a hit, the enemy does not survive (remember the duel between Pechorin and Grushnitsky in "Princess Mary"). Under such conditions, both opponents often perished (as was the case in 1825 in the duel between Novosiltsev and Chernov). Moreover, the regimental commanders, formally following the letter of the law, actually themselves encouraged such a sense of honor among the officers and, under various pretexts, freed themselves from those officers who refused to fight in a duel.

At the same time, Nicholas I personally treated duels with disgust, his words are known: “I hate a duel. This is barbarism. In my opinion, there is nothing chivalrous in it. The Duke of Wellington destroyed her in the English army and did well. " But it was on the 20-40th years XIX century there are loud duels between Pushkin and Dantes, Ryleev with Prince Shakhovsky, Griboyedov with Yakubovich, Lermontov with de Barant and Martynov.

With the advent of relative freedom of the press in Russia in the second half of the 19th century, the controversy surrounding the duel spread to its pages. Opinions were divided between supporters of the duel and its opponents. Among the first were the jurists Lokhvitsky, Spasovich, military writers Kalinin, Shveikovsky, Mikulin; in the camp of the opponents there were no less respectable names: military leader, teacher and writer General M.I.Dragomirov, military lawyer Shavrov. The point of view of the supporters of the duel was most clearly expressed by Spasovich: “The custom of the duel is among civilization as a symbol of the fact that a person can and should, in certain cases, sacrifice his most precious good - life - for things that, from a materialistic point of view, have no meaning and meaning: for faith, homeland and honor. That is why this custom cannot be compromised. It has the same foundation as war. "

Even during the reign of Emperor Nicholas I, according to the "Code on criminal punishments" in 1845, responsibility for duels was significantly reduced: seconds and doctors were generally exempted from punishment (unless they acted as instigators), and the punishment for duelists did not exceed - even in case of death one of the opponents - imprisonment in the fortress from 6 to 10 years with the preservation of noble rights upon leaving. This provision once again reflected the entire inconsistency of the legislation on dueling. In practice, these measures were never applied - the most common punishment for duelists was transfer to the active army in the Caucasus (as was the case with Lermontov for the duel with de Barant), and in the event of a fatal outcome, demotion from officers to privates (as was with Dantes after a duel with Pushkin), after which they, as a rule, quickly recovered in the officer rank.

A new milestone at this stage was to be the courts of the society of officers. Courts of the society of officers by that time existed in many European armies, playing the role of something like comrade courts. In the Russian army, they have existed semi-officially since the times of Peter the Great (since 1721). The Society of Regiment Officers could issue certifications to officers and was a significant instrument of public opinion in the military environment. They especially flourished under Alexander I, after 1822, when the emperor himself, when analyzing the conflict between the court of the society of officers and the commander of the regiment, took the side of the first. But in 1829, Nicholas I saw in the very fact of the existence of independent officer corporations, endowed with considerable rights, a means of undermining military discipline and banned their activities everywhere. Nevertheless, this measure, at first glance reasonable, turned out to be erroneous in practice, since the courts of the society of officers were a powerful means of moral, educational influence. Therefore, during the period of the "great reforms" of the 60s, they were (in 1863) restored and acquired an official status. A regulation was issued on their structure (in the fleet - since 1864 - the courts of captains, in each naval division). In developing this provision, many suggested that the issues of resolving the duel on a case-by-case basis should be left to the discretion of these courts, but this proposal was rejected. Nevertheless, the punishments for the duels were getting softer.

So, in the determination of the Senate in the case of the duel between Beklemishev and Neklyudov in 1860, it was said: good origin the offender was an aggravating circumstance. - V. X.), because this crime is so connected with a concept peculiar exclusively to educated people that the indicated circumstances appear in this case more likely to be a reason explaining, and therefore reducing crime. " There were also tragicomic cases. One of them is described in his "Notes of a Revolutionary" by Prince P. A. Kropotkin. A certain officer was insulted by Alexander III when he was the heir to the throne. Being in an unequal position and unable to challenge the Tsarevich himself to a duel, the officer sent him a note demanding a written apology, otherwise he threatened suicide. If the heir had been more sensitive, he would have apologized, or he himself would have given satisfaction to a person who had no opportunity to summon him. But he didn't. After 24 hours, the officer exactly fulfilled his promise and shot himself. The enraged Alexander II sharply reprimanded his son and ordered him to accompany the officer's coffin at the funeral.

Finally, in 1894, at the very end of the reign of Alexander III, fights were officially allowed. Order for the military department No. 118 of May 20, 1894, and entitled: "Rules for the investigation of quarrels that occur among officers," consisted of 6 points. The first point established that all cases of officer quarrels were sent by the commander of the military unit to the court of the officers' society. The second paragraph determined that the court could either recognize the possible reconciliation of the officers, or (in view of the severity of the insults) decide on the need for a duel. At the same time, the court's decision on the possibility of reconciliation was of a recommendatory nature, the decision on the duel was binding. Paragraph three stated that the specific conditions of the duel are determined by the seconds chosen by the opponents themselves, but at the end of the duel, the court of the society of officers, according to the protocol presented by the senior second-manager, considers the behavior of the duelists and seconds and the conditions of the duel. Clause four obliged the officer who refused the duel to submit a letter of resignation within two weeks; otherwise, he was subject to dismissal without a petition. Finally, the fifth point stipulated that in those military units where there are no courts of the society of officers, their functions are performed by the commander of the military unit himself.

If in the second half of the 19th century the number of duels in the Russian army clearly began to decline, then after the official permission in 1894 their number again sharply increases. For comparison: from 1876 to 1890, only 14 cases of officer duels reached the court (in 2 of them the opponents were acquitted); From 1894 to 1910, 322 duels took place, of which 256 - by decision of the courts of honor, 47 - with the permission of military commanders and 19 unauthorized (none of them reached the criminal court). Annually there were from 4 to 33 fights in the army (on average - 20). According to General Mikulin, from 1894 to 1910, 4 generals, 14 staff officers, 187 captains and staff captains, 367 junior officers, 72 civilians participated in officer duels as opponents. Of the 99 offensive duels, 9 ended in a difficult outcome, 17 with minor wounds and 73 without blood. Of the 183 duels for grave insult, 21 ended in a grave outcome, 31 with minor injuries and 131 without blood. Thus, the death of one of the opponents or a serious injury ended in an insignificant number of fights - 10-11% of the total. Of all 322 duels, 315 took place with pistols and only 7 with swords or sabers. Of these, in 241 fights (that is, in 3/4 of the cases) one bullet was fired, in 49 - two, in 12 - three, in one - four and in one - six bullets; the distance ranged from 12 to 50 steps. The intervals between the insult and the duel ranged from one day to ... three years (!), But most often - from two days to two and a half months (depending on the duration of the examination of the case by the court of honor).

So, at the beginning of this century, duels were quite common in Russia. The well-known political figure and leader of the "Union of October 17" AI Guchkov fought a duel "more than once, gaining even the glory of a brute (although he himself was by no means of noble origin). Ilya Ehrenburg in his memoirs" People, Years, Life "describes the duel between two famous poets - Nikolai Gumilyov and Maximilian Voloshin - in the pre-revolutionary years, the reason for which was one of the rallies for which Voloshin was a great master; during the duel Voloshin fired into the air, and Gumilyov, who considered himself insulted, missed. into the air was allowed only if the one who called for a duel fired, and not the one who called - otherwise the duel was not recognized as valid, but only a farce, since none of the opponents endangered themselves.

Then other times came. The best representatives Russian intelligentsia and officers with their scrupulous notions of personal honor were thrown overboard by the revolution, found themselves in a foreign land. In the proletarian state, such concepts as honor and duty were at first generally declared to be relics of the exploitative past. Duels were replaced by denunciations, the concept of state benefits overshadowed everything else, fanaticism of some and prudence of others replaced nobility.

The most famous duels in the world:

1. Alexander Pushkin - Georges de Gekkern (Dantes), 1837, Petersburg.

Feelings became the reason for the duel. The conflict between Pushkin and the cavalry officer, the adopted son of the Ambassador of the Netherlands, matured for a long time. The first planned duel - after the poet received an anonymous "cuckold diploma", in which there was a hint of Dantes' relationship with Natalia Pushkina - did not take place due to de Heeckern's matchmaking to his wife's sister. The second challenge came from his newly-minted relative.After Dantes' marriage to Ekaterina Goncharova, unpleasant rumors about the poet's family continued to circulate in society. Pushkin, who was not distinguished by his lightness of character and believing that their distributor was de Gekkern, reacted very sharply, excommunicating him and his relatives from home in a rather rude manner. Immediately, predictably, a challenge followed. The fatal shot was fired on February 8, 1837 near the Black River near St. Petersburg. The conditions of the duel (on which Pushkin himself insisted) were harsh and left little room for survival. The distance between the opponents was only twenty steps. The barrier was set in ten steps, and opponents could shoot at any moment on the way to it. Dantes was the first to shoot, wounding Pushkin in the stomach. After changing the snow-clogged weapon, the bleeding poet also fired a shot, lightly wounding de Heeckern in the arm. Two days later, Alexander Pushkin died from his injury. And Dantes, sentenced to death for a duel, had to hastily leave Russia. He lived to be old and made a good political career.

2. Mikhail Lermontov - Nikolay Martynov, 1841, Pyatigorsk.

The official reason for the duel, in which Lieutenant Lermontov died at the hands of Major Martynov, was the taunts and witticisms that the poet regularly allowed himself to make in relation to the officer. They say that the last straw came when, two days before the duel, a famous wit called his opponent "a mountaineer with a large dagger." However, there is an opinion that the real reason for the deadly fight could have been rivalry over the heart of the lady. Martynov and Lermontov met on the slope of Mount Mashuk on the evening of July 15, 1841. The exact conditions of the duel are not known - the major and his seconds talked about different "barriers". However, the fact remains - Mikhail Lermontov was fatally wounded in the chest and died on the spot, without having had time to fire a shot. To confirm that his weapon was loaded, he was later fired into the air. After the duel Martynov was sentenced by a court-martial to three months of arrest, and served the spiritual penance imposed on him in Kiev.

3. Vladimir Novosiltsev - Konstantin Chernov, 1825, Petersburg

The reason for the sensational duel was the refusal of one of the richest suitors of that time, the aide-de-camp of Vladimir Novosiltsev, to marry the sister of the lieutenant of the Semyonovsky regiment Konstantin Chernov. Mother insisted on canceling the engagement young man... As a result, he succumbed to her persuasion, but Chernov considered that the honor of his family was offended, sent a challenge. Despite all the efforts of the influential Ekaterina Novosiltseva, the duel took place on September 14, 1825 on the outskirts of St. Petersburg, on the outskirts of the Forest Park. Novosiltsev and Chernov fired at a distance of eight steps, which left them practically no chance. They pull the trigger at the same time. Lieutenant Chernov died on the spot, and the adjutant wing Novosiltsev lived another day. Not far from the place of the duel, the inconsolable mother erected a church and an almshouse.

4. "Duel of Minions", 1578, Paris.

This plot was later included in the novel by Alexandre-Dumas-father "The Countess de Monsoreau". Three "minions" (that is, supporters) of King Henry II, and on the other, supporters of his political opponent, the Duke de Guise, took part in the bloody battle. The reason for the conflict between the two instigators of the duel, as usual, was the lady. Count de Quelus found Baron de Antraga with his mistress, and the next day he allowed himself to joke that this lady was "more beautiful than virtuous." The call followed immediately. The opponents met on April 27, 1578 in the Tournelle Park. First, one pair of fighters entered the battle, later four seconds joined it. Actually, only a couple of the instigators of the duel survived - Kelyus, who received a total of 19 wounds, and Antrag, wounded in the arm. Their seconds did not survive the fight. But the count did not live long after the duel either. A month later, he got on a horse, his wounds opened and he died a few days later.

5. Andrew Jackson - Charles Dickinson, 1806, Kentucky.

Twenty years before becoming President of the United States, Jackson took part in the famous duel, striking to death the famous shooter, lawyer Dickinson. The reason for the call was an unflattering statement about the past of the wife of the then Senator Jackson. The challenge was not long in coming. The duelists met on the border of the states of Kentucky and Tennessee, at the Harrison factories on the Red River. However, formally it was the territory of Kentucky, since duels were already outlawed in Tennessee. The first, as the party to accept the challenge, was Dickinson, who wounded the future President of the United States. The bullet went very close to the heart. However, the politician did not flinch and killed Dickinson with a retaliatory shot.

6. Alexander Hamilton - Aaron Burr, 1804, New Jersey.

This duel is considered the most famous in American history. The reason for her was a long political conflict between the former US Treasury Secretary and the chief federalist Hamilton and the vice-president of the country (then the president was Thomas Jefferson) Aaron Burr. The latter ran for the governor of New York, but his old adversary hindered him in every possible way. Burr wanted to resolve the issue with a duel. Political opponents met near the village of Weehawken (New Jersey). Hamilton did not hit the enemy (and according to some testimonies he just shot in the air), after which he received a bullet from Burr in the stomach. He died the next day. The duel was one of the reasons for the prosecution of the politician, who was also accused of treason and a number of other crimes. He had to flee to Europe and only a few years later he was able to return to the United States.

7. Miyamoto Musashi and Kojiro Sasaki, 1612, Gonrui Island.

In Japanese culture, duels occupied great value, but went differently than in Europe. There, the opponents froze in front of each other for a long time, circled, and the matter was most often solved with one blow. Moments of fights Japanese samurai directors are very fond of, often including them in their films. One of the most famous duels in the land of the rising sun took place in 1612 between two famous swordsmen Miyamota Musashi and Kojiro Sasaki. The reason for the duel, according to legend, was their different views on the art of fencing. They say Musashi appeared a few hours later to break the will of the enemy. Kojiro attacked the samurai with his signature swallow lunge, but before his blade came down, Musashi was able to deliver the killing blow. Later, the winner of this duel, who had to escape from the students of the defeated enemy, became a famous Japanese artist.

On February 8 (January 27, old style), 1837, a duel between the great Russian poet and writer Alexander Pushkin and the French citizen Georges Dantes took place on the outskirts of St. Petersburg - on the Black River. From a wound received in a duel, the poet died on February 10 (January 29, old style).

The reason for the duel was an anonymous libel, insulting to the honor of Pushkin's wife Natalia (nee Goncharova) and himself.

On November 16 (November 4, old style), 1836, Pushkin received three copies of an anonymous message, which entered him into the "order of the cuckolds" and alluded to the persistent courting of his wife, the lieutenant of the cavalry guard Baron Georges Dantes, a foreigner who was accepted into the Russian service and adopted by the Dutch envoy Baron Heckern.

Pushkin challenged Dantes to a duel, he at first accepted the challenge, but through Baron Gekkern asked for a 15-day delay. During this time, Pushkin learned that Dantes had made an offer to his sister-in-law Ekaterina Goncharova, and took his challenge back. The wedding took place on January 22 (January 10, old style) 1837.

Pushkin very sharply expressed his contempt for Dantes, who continued to meet with his wife Natalya and show her signs of attention, and Gekkern, who intensely intrigued against him - the gossip did not stop. Withdrawn completely from patience, Pushkin sent Gekkern an extremely insulting letter, to which he answered with a challenge on behalf of Dantes.

On February 8 (January 27, old style), at five o'clock in the evening, a duel took place on the outskirts of St. Petersburg on the Black River. The seconds were the secretary of the French embassy, ​​Viscount Laurent d "Arsiak, from Dantes’s side, and the Lyceum comrade of Pushkin, Lieutenant Colonel Konstantin Danzas.

At the poet's insistence, they were deadly and did not give any of the opponents a chance to survive: the barrier separated the enemies by ten steps, it was allowed to shoot from any distance on the way to the barrier.

Dantes fired first and mortally wounded Pushkin in the right side of the abdomen. The poet fell, but then raised himself on his hand, called Dantes to the barrier.

Taking aim, fired and, seeing that his opponent fell, shouted: "Bravo!" Dantes's wound was not dangerous; a bullet aimed at the chest hit the flesh of the hand with which Dantes covered his chest.

The wounded Pushkin was taken to his apartment. The poet made every effort not to disturb his wife, hid his suffering. Later, the invited doctors determined the inevitability of a tragic outcome - they did not hide this from Pushkin.

A priest was invited to the poet, who confessed him and gave the Holy Communion.

Alexander Pushkin, stoically enduring torment for two days, died on February 10 (January 29, old style) surrounded by friends in his apartment in St. Petersburg on the Moika River embankment.

For two days, the coffin with the poet's body was in the apartment, which at that time was visited by crowds of people of various classes. On the night of February 11-12 (January 30-31, old style), the coffin was moved to the Church of the Court and Stables Department. On the morning of February 13 (February 1, according to the old style), the poet's funeral service took place, in the evening his ashes were taken to the Svyatogorsk monastery in the Pskov province, where the Hannibals-Pushkin family cemetery was located.

On February 18 (February 6, old style), 1837, after the funeral service in the southern aisle of the Assumption Cathedral of the Svyatogorsk Monastery near the altar wall of the cathedral, the body of Alexander Pushkin was buried. Later, a marble monument was erected on the grave, commissioned by the poet's widow.

The death of Pushkin was perceived by many as a national tragedy, this was expressed in the poetic responses of Mikhail Lermontov, Fyodor Tyutchev, Alexei Koltsov.

In 1937, on the site of the duel between Pushkin and Dantes on the Black River, an obelisk was erected by the sculptor Matvey Manizer.

For participation in a duel with Alexander Pushkin, which had a fatal outcome, Dantes-Gekkern was formally sentenced to death, replaced by expulsion from Russia. Having settled in France, Georges Charles Dantes-Gekkern (1812-1895) made a prominent career - he was one of the major figures of the coup on December 2, 1851, an intermediary in secret negotiations between Napoleon III and Nicholas I. Subsequently, he became a senator, mayor of Sulz, a commercial figure, was awarded the degree of Commander of the Order of the Legion of Honor.

Dantes' wife Catherine, nee Goncharova, died in 1843 in France from postpartum fever.

For participating in the poet's duel, Konstantin Danzas (1800-1870) was put on trial and sentenced to two months' arrest in the guardhouse. Pushkin, dying, worried about him and handed over a turquoise ring as a keepsake. Later Danzas served in the Caucasus in the Tekinsky infantry regiment, participated in expeditions against the mountaineers. In 1856 he retired with the rank of Major General. According to Danzas, Alexander Ammosov compiled a brochure " Last days life and death of A.S. Pushkin ", published in 1863.

Pushkin's wife Natalya, nee Goncharova (1812-1863), did not know about the duel, which became fatal for her first husband. After the poet's death, seven years later, in 1846, she remarried to General Pyotr Lansky. She was dedicated to the poems of Alexander Pushkin "On the hills of Georgia", "The purest charm, the purest sample", "Madonna" (1830); "Beauty" (1831); "Excerpt", "No, I do not value" (1832); "It's time my friend, it's time ..." (1836).

The material was prepared on the basis of information from RIA Novosti and open sources

Duels: Pushkin and Lermontov
Pushkin and Lermontov: coincidence of destinies
Pushkin and Lermontov are contemporaries, but they never met. Is it so? Both were born in Moscow, and both later became Petersburgers. Pushkin's father, Sergei Lvovich, is a retired major. Lermontov's father, Yuri Petrovich, is a captain. Pushkin and Lermontov came from old noble families. Pushkin's ancestor was Gavrilo Oleksich, a colleague of Alexander Nevsky, Pushkin's mother, Nadezhda Osipovna, was the granddaughter of "Peter the Great's arap" A.P. Hannibal, a native of Ethiopia (Cameroon?). And Lermontov has foreign roots: according to legend, his family descended from George Lermont, a native of Scotland, captured by Russian troops in the fall of 1613, who remained in Russia and became a Russian nobleman in 1621. Pushkin and Lermontov had mutual acquaintances. Cornet Lermontov is a fellow soldier of Lieutenant Goncharov, Pushkin's brother-in-law. But Pushkin, apparently, did not even hear the name of Lermontov. Why? It's not just the age difference.
Both Pushkin and Lermontov published their first poems at the age of 15. But Lermontov, who anonymously published his first poem "Spring" in the magazine "Athenaeum" in September 1830, was coldly greeted by readers, was mortally offended by them and did not submit his poems to print for almost 6 years. He wrote them down in secret notebooks and in the albums of secular beauties. How could Pushkin find out about Lermontov's beautiful poems? And yet Pushkin and Lermontov met! When? In the summer of 1820, Pushkin, a poet already well-known in Russia, and 5-year-old Lermontov with his grandmother were at the same time in the Caucasian Mineral Waters. In Pyatigorsk, one street led to springs and baths and ended at them. The great Pushkin, of course, met on the street or at the springs, where there were only a few dozen people, with the young Lermontov, his future great heir in Russian poetry. So Misha Lermontov saw and heard Pushkin. Both Pushkin and Lermontov communicated with the Decembrists and experienced the tsarist exile themselves.
Pushkin and Lermontov wrote both poetry and prose, praising freedom, evoking the hatred of Russia's high society. In the winter of 1834-35. Lermontov often visited the brothers Alexander and Sergei Trubetskoy, and here he could meet the future assassin of Pushkin - Dantes, who was visited by the Trubetskoy during this period. Pushkin had a difficult relationship with both his father and mother, because he "compromised" them with his epigrams against nobles, freedom-loving "seditious" verses, a conflict with the authorities, and reference to Mikhailovskoye. In 1807, the poet's younger brother, Nikolenka, died, and Pushkin had no close trusting relationship with his other younger brother, Lev. Pushkin loved only his nanny Arina Rodionovna (she died in 1828) and his sister Olga, who always tried to reconcile him with his parents. And Lermontov had neither brothers nor sisters, only one beloved grandmother E.A. Arsenyev. Lermontov was left without parents at the age of 17, moreover, his father abandoned him in childhood, and Pushkin, with living parents, was alienated from them. So Pushkin and Lermontov, in fact, did not know either maternal or paternal love. Both Pushkin and Lermontov died in duels, and not at the hands of random people. Dantes had already become Pushkin's brother-in-law, and Martynov was an old schoolmate and friend of Lermontov's.
And the last surprising coincidence: Nicholas I's physician N. Arendt, who was at the bedside of the mortally wounded Pushkin, first early in the morning on the day of Pushkin's death on January 29, 1837, even before the death of the great poet, told his other great patient, the poet Lermontov, about the last hours of his life his idol.
Classic duel
It's not about gladiator fights in Ancient Rome, not about medieval knightly tournaments, not about fist fights in Russia, but about a duel. Russian military writer P.A. Shveikovsky gave the definition of a classic duel: "A duel is an agreed battle between two persons with a deadly weapon to satisfy an outraged honor, in compliance with the well-known conditions established by custom regarding the place, time, weapons and, in general, the situation for performing the battle." The word "duel" itself implies two of its participants: the offended one wants satisfaction (satisfaction of the offended honor) from his offender. Can we consider a classic duel, an honest duel according to the rules, for the observance of which not only the duelists, but also their seconds, are strictly responsible with their honor and dignity, a duel in which opponents, who are in equal conditions, rely only on the skill of using weapons, composure, courage and luck, can we consider such a duel legalized murder, and the winner of the duel who killed his opponent - a murderer ?! It is not that simple. We do not call a fight a duel between two trained boxers in the ring, conducted according to the rules, for the observance of which the referee (judge) is responsible. And we do not call boxers hooligans, and the winner by knockout is a sadist. Of course, there were also duels-murders, when a professional duelist-killer came out to the barrier in a provoked duel against a poorly wielding opponent. And violations of the duel code led precisely to murder.
Therefore, back in the 16th century in France, where hundreds of proud nobles died in duels, duels were prohibited. In Russia, Peter I issued cruel laws against dueling, punishing up to death penalty... However, in practice, these laws were not applied, since almost until the end of the 18th century in Russia duels were a rare phenomenon, and in France, although Cardinal Richelieu forbade duels on pain of death, they continued (remember "The Three Musketeers" by A. Dumas). In the era of Catherine II in Russia, dueling among the noble youth began to spread. However, DI Fonvizin recalled that his father taught him: “We live under the laws, and it is a shame, having such sacred defenders, what are the laws, to figure it out ourselves with fists or swords, for swords and fists are one thing, and there is a challenge to a duel nothing more than the action of exuberant youth. "
But the noble youth did not allow the state to interfere in matters of honor, believing that the offense should be washed off with blood, and the refusal to fight is an indelible shame. Later, General L. Kornilov formulated his credo as follows: "The soul is for God, the heart is for a woman, duty is for the Fatherland, honor is for nobody." In 1787, Catherine II published the "Manifesto on Duels", in which the offender was threatened with lifelong exile to Siberia for a bloodless duel, and wounds and murder in a duel were equated with criminal offenses. Nicholas I generally regarded duels with disgust. But no laws helped! Moreover, duels in Russia were distinguished by the extremely harsh conditions: the distance between the barriers was usually 10-15 steps (about 7-10 meters), there were even duels without seconds and doctors, one-on-one. So often the fights ended tragically.
It was during the reign of Nicholas I that the loudest, famous duels took place with the participation of Ryleev, Griboyedov, Pushkin, Lermontov. Despite the harsh laws on responsibility for a duel, even under Nicholas I, duelists were usually transferred to the active army in the Caucasus, and in case of death, they were demoted from officers to privates.
And in 1894, Alexander III officially allowed officers to fight for personal grievances not related to service. The first dueling code was published in France by the Comte de Chateauvilliard in 1836. Usually, the delay to the place of the duel should not exceed 15 minutes, the duel began 10 minutes after the arrival of all participants. The steward, chosen from two seconds, suggested that the duelists make up one last time. In the event of their refusal, he explained to them the conditions of the duel, the seconds designated the barriers and loaded their pistols in the presence of opponents. The seconds stood parallel to the battle line, the doctors behind them. The opponents performed all actions at the command of the manager. At the end of the battle, the opponents shook hands at each other.
By the way, a shot in the air was allowed only if the one who was called to a duel fired, and not the one who sent him the cartel (challenge), otherwise the duel was considered invalid, a farce, since none of the opponents endangered themselves. There were several options for a duel with pistols. Opponents could, while remaining motionless at a distance, alternately shoot on command, or, for example, they usually walked to the barriers on command, while on command, the first on the move fired and waited for a return shot, standing still (if the barriers were 15-20 steps apart from each other , then it was possible to shoot on the move, moving towards the enemy, without a command). A fallen wounded opponent could shoot while prone. It was forbidden to cross the barriers. The most dangerous variant of the duel was when the opponents, standing motionless at a distance of 25-35 steps, fired at each other simultaneously on command on the count “one-two-three”. In this case, both opponents could die. As for the duel with melee weapons, here it was most difficult for the seconds to regulate the course of the duel due to its mobility and the agitation of opponents; in addition, in fights with melee weapons (epee, saber, espadron), the inequality of the fighters in such a complex art as fencing was always more pronounced. Therefore, duels with pistols were widespread, as more equalizing opportunities and chances of duelists. But the musketeers in France, as we know, preferred a duel with swords!
By the way, young L. Tolstoy challenged I. Turgenev to a duel, but, fortunately, it did not take place. And the revolutionary anarchist M. Bakunin challenged K. Marx himself to a duel, when he spoke disparagingly about the Russian army. It is interesting that, although Bakunin, as an anarchist, was an enemy of any regular army, he stood up for the honor of the Russian uniform, which he wore in his youth as an artillery ensign. However, Marx, who in his youth more than once fought on swords with students of the University of Bonn and was proud of the scars on his face, did not accept Bakunin's challenge, since his life now belonged to the proletariat! And the last example: before the revolution, the poet N. Gumilyov challenged the poet M. Voloshin to a duel, insulting at his prank. Voloshin fired into the air, and Gumilyov missed. In general, at the beginning of the 20th century (until 1917), hundreds of officer duels took place in Russia, and almost all of them with pistols, but only 10-11 percent of the duels ended in death or severe injury of the duelists.
I paid special attention to the classic duel in Russia with its code, so that the reader could decide for himself what the duel of the times of Pushkin and Lermontov was: a criminal murder or an honest duel according to the rules of equal rivals?
Pushkin the duelist

Pushkin A.S.

Pushkin's mother died in April 1836 (Pushkin was buried next to her in the Svyatogorsk monastery almost a year later), the father outlived his son much. Pushkin becomes an independent person already during his stay at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum. His character was not easy. Striving for independence, heightened self-esteem, youthful ardor, thirst for military exploits and thrill early lead Pushkin to duels. Pushkin went to the duel many times, several outlined duels did not take place for various reasons, often due to the intervention of the poet's friends. He fenced well and was an excellent marksman, constantly improving his skill with weapons.
There are enough articles and studies written about these duels, so I will only cite little-known facts. Pushkin's bravery under the bullets of the enemy is known to us from his behavior in the army, with which he went to Arzrum in the summer of 1829. And his hot temper, impulsiveness disappeared when he appeared for a duel, becoming imperturbable and cold-blooded. The Decembrist Basargin wrote about the young Pushkin: “I didn’t know him, but I met him three times in society. I didn’t like him as a person. , to prick others. At the same time, many of those who knew him said that sooner or later, he would die in a duel. In Chisinau, he had several fights, but he happily got away with them. " I will cite one case from the first dueling stories of Pushkin. Pushkin had a great-uncle, Semyon Isaakovich Hannibal. At a party in the summer of 1817, Pushkin was jealous of the girl Loshakova for her uncle and demanded an explanation. True, they soon reconciled and parted amicably. Uncle was not only a participant in the foreign campaigns of 1814, but also a great ladies' man. Moreover, he was so annoying in courting secular beauties that they fled from him. And Pushkin's sister Olga, outraged by the sighs and harassment of her uncle, even ordered the servants not to let him into her house.
Pushkin's duels in 1821 with officer Zubov and in 1822 with Colonel Starov were very dangerous. At this time, Pushkin not only used any suitable pretext to create a duel situation, but also provoked fights himself. A duel with Tolstoy, the American, who spread rumors that Pushkin was allegedly flogged in the Secret Chancellery, could become especially dangerous for him. Tolstoy was a famous duelist, a killer-breaker, on whose conscience there were several people who died at his hand in fights. Fortunately, Pushkin's duel with this wonderful shooter was postponed by the poet's exile to Mikhailovskoye, and when, 5 years later, in 1826, Pushkin was brought to Moscow and he sent a cartel (challenge) to Tolstoy on the same day, then at the request of Tolstoy they made up. To Pushkin's credit, it must be said that if he was convinced of the offender's unwillingness to offend his honor and dignity, then he himself went to reconciliation.
Over the years, he became, of course, wiser and even more sedate. Pushkin in August 1836 submitted to the censorship the article "Alexander Radishchev", in which he wrote: "Humble by experience and years, he (Radishchev. - Yu.P.) even changed his mindset, which marked his stormy and arrogant youth. his heart had no anger towards the past and was sincerely reconciled with the glorious memory of the great queen. " But Pushkin wrote, in fact, about himself.
And then there is an important thought: "He (Radishchev. - Yu.P.) seems to be trying to irritate the supreme power with his bitter slander; wouldn't it have been better to point out the good that it is able to create?" In this article, under the guise of condemning Radishchev for his past views and approving him as a person who allegedly "reformed" at the end of his life, Pushkin tries to convince the government to believe the purity and positiveness of its intentions.
Now we know that, having returned from exile, Radishchev continued to work on the "seditious" book "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow". And Pushkin, although somewhat settled down, failed to deceive the government, to convince it of his reliability. Nicholas I and Benckendorff considered Pushkin a great poet, but also a great liberal, a hater of all power. The article about Radishchev was rejected.
Let's return to Pushkin's duels: what is the main reason for his striving for duels in his youth? It's all about the duality of his position in society: he is the first poet in Russia and at the same time a petty official and a poor nobleman. When Pushkin was treated with disdain as a collegiate secretary, he perceived it as an attempt on his honor and dignity, not only as a nobleman, but also as a freedom-loving poet. Of course, in his mature years he was not such a reckless bully, but the position of the chamber-junker infuriated him. By the way, remember the behavior of a beggar, but a proud Gascon bully nobleman d "Artagnan" at the beginning of "The Three Musketeers" by A. Dumas.
Let me emphasize that Pushkin was a duelist high class and usually did not aim to shoot first. The fact is that the opponent who kept the shot had the right to call the shooter to the barrier and shoot him at a minimum distance like a stationary target. In order to restrain himself and not shoot first, an iron composure was required. In the last years of Pushkin's life, dueling situations were outlined with several, as it seemed to him in his position, ill-wishers. And he had only one way out to save not only his honor, but also the honor of his creativity - a duel.
Lermontov-duelist

Lermontov M.Yu.

Lermontov's mother died at the age of 21, in 1817, when he was almost 3 years old. Father left, leaving Michel in hot care loving boy grandmother E.A. Arsenyeva. He died in 1831 at the age of 44. Thus, at the age of 17, Lermontov remained a complete orphan, which, of course, left a serious imprint on his complex character. A relative of Lermontov, A.M. Vereshchagin, wrote to him in 1832: "... unfortunately, I know you too well to be calm, I know that you are capable of cutting with the first comer because of the first stupidity - fi! It's a shame ; you will never be happy with such a disgusting character. " Lermontov could be sociable and cheerful, but more often he was withdrawn, bilious, caustic and gloomy-brooding. Turgenev wrote that in Lermontov's appearance there was "something ominous and tragic. Some unkind and gloomy strength, brooding contempt and passion emanated from his swarthy face, from his large and motionless dark eyes." AE Baratynsky in 1840, already before the death of Lermontov, having met him, wrote to his wife: "... a man, no doubt, with great talent, but I did not like morally. Something unfriendly, Moscow."
So, Lermontov had a complex, uneven character and heightened self-esteem, often pushing him to arrogant ridicule and insolence. Having entered the Moscow University in the moral and political department in 1830, Lermontov studied at the same time as V. Belinsky, N. Stankevich, but in May 1832 he did not appear for public one-year tests. The fact is that Lermontov faced reactionary professors and the leadership invited him to leave the university. Although Lermontov's departure was formalized as voluntary, at his request, he was nevertheless forced.
Having moved to St. Petersburg, Lermontov wanted to go to university, but according to the new curriculum, he would not have credited the subjects he had attended at Moscow University, and he did not want to start his studies anew. After much deliberation, Lermontov nevertheless decided to enter the school of guards ensigns and cavalry cadets and spent two years in the harsh conditions of a military school. After graduation in 1834, he was promoted to cornet and sent to military service in the Life Guards Hussar Regiment. Of course, during his time at school, Lermontov mastered pistol shooting well. But by all accounts, he did not have duels. In 1834, the revision tale confirmed that the nobleman M.Yu. Lermontov, by inheritance in 1832 in the Tula province, owned courtyard people and peasants: 148 souls for men, 155 souls for women. Serfdom has not yet been abolished. Lermontov was repeatedly in love, especially with Varvara Lopukhina, but for various reasons he never married until his death. And on January 28 (!), 1837 (even before Pushkin's death) Lermontov, having learned about his mortally wounded in a duel, wrote the first 56 verses of the poem "The Death of a Poet". These poems (without the name of the author) instantly, in thousands of handwritten copies, spread throughout St. Petersburg and other cities. It was Lermontov's finest hour. The name of Lermontov is becoming widely known in the leading circles of Russian society. Never again, neither in Russia nor in the USSR, poems produced such an "explosive" effect.
Here I must emphasize one important point: Russia at that time was a huge, illiterate, in its mass, a multimillion population, a backward, feudal country. Given the very limited circulation of newspapers and magazines, could ALL of Russia know Pushkin, and even more so the young Lermontov ?! Of course not! Therefore, it is necessary to talk only about advanced people and, above all, about the inhabitants of large cities, but not about the majority of the country's population - the peasantry. By mid-February 1837, Lermontov wrote the final 16 poems of the poem "The Death of a Poet", and soon he was arrested together with S.А. Raevsky, who disseminated this poem. Lermontov was sent to the active army in the Caucasus as an ensign, and Raevsky was sent into exile.
Only a year later, Lermontov was allowed to return first to Novgorod, and then to Petersburg, where he was already known as a poet, and Lermontov again ended up in the Life Guards Hussar regiment. He was repeatedly encouraged by the highest orders, and on December 6, 1839 he was promoted to lieutenant. And all this - to the poet, who angrily denounced the entire ruling elite of Russia! December 31, 1839 Lermontov at New Year's masquerade ball in the hall of the Nobility Assembly, he allowed himself a daring trick against the empress and her entourage, who were wearing masks. Previously, it was believed that these were the two daughters of Nicholas I, who said caustic words to Lermontov, to which he sharply responded. But these were the empress and the lady. Incidentally, the wife of Nicholas I liked the work of Lermontov, for example, the poem "The Demon", and she stood up for the poet, wanting to mitigate his punishment, but to no avail. On January 2, 1840, Lermontov was invited to a ball at the French embassy to the Barant, and on February 16, at the ball at the Countess of Laval, Lermontov had a quarrel with the son of the French envoy, Ernest de Barant. The reason for the quarrel between Lermontov and de Barant was their dialogue, in which de Barant accused Lermontov of telling her unfavorable things about him in a conversation with a famous person, to which Lermontov said that he had not told anyone anything reprehensible about de Barant. Then de Baranth accused Lermontov of spreading gossip about him, to which Lermontov said that de Barant's behavior was very funny and insolent. De Barant said that in France he would know how to end the matter. Lermontov replied that in Russia they strictly follow the rules of honor and we are less likely than others to allow ourselves to be insulted with impunity. De Barant Lermontov was summoned to a duel. It should be emphasized that the French embassy was wary of Lermontov because of his poems on the death of Pushkin, believing that in them Lermontov insulted not Dantes personally, but the French as a nation. The duel took place on February 18, 1840 at 12 noon beyond the Black River (!) On the Pargolovskaya road. Lermontov's second was A.A. Stolypin (Mongo) - his friend and cousin uncle, de Barant's second - Count Raoul d "Angles. Since de Barant considered himself offended, Lermontov gave him a choice of weapons. A true Frenchman, de Barant chose swords, although his rivals also had pistols. It was decided to fight to the first blood, and then switch to pistols. By the way, Lermontov fenced poorly. Only the duelists crossed their weapons, as Lermontov's sword broke the end of the blade, and the excellent duelist de Barant managed to attack, aiming at Lermontov's chest with a point and could kill him , but slipped and only slightly scratched his chest. Then they switched to pistols. The duelists were supposed to shoot together, but Lermontov was a little late, apparently not wanting to shoot de Barant or simply trying his luck. De Barant missed, and then Lermontov shot at side (into the air.) Then de Barant gave his hand, and they parted.
Lermontov was arrested for failure to report the duel and put on trial. On March 14, V. Sollogub's parody story "Big World" was published to please the empress, and in the heroes of the story Lermontov and Stolypin were recognizable in caricature.
Lermontov, who was under arrest at the Arsenal Guardhouse through A. Branitsky - the 2nd, invited E. de Barant for personal explanations about his written testimony that he had fired a shot to the side (into the air) in a duel, which offended de Barant, since the duel looked harmless to him. An unauthorized, secret meeting from the guards took place on March 22 at 8 pm. Lermontov said that he did shoot to the side and this testimony would mitigate his punishment, and if his explanation does not suit de Barant, then he is ready to subsequently meet him again in a duel. De Barant refused a new duel and departed for France. Lermontov was sent back to exile in the Caucasus with the same rank of lieutenant, but to the Tengin regiment operating in the area of ​​dangerous battles. Here Lermontov repeatedly showed courage in battles, and he was presented to the golden saber and twice to the order, but Nicholas I rejected all submissions. Unlike Pushkin, Lermontov was far from the royal court and himself did not strive for duels.
On the reasons for the duel between Pushkin and Dantes

Georges-Charles Dantes (1812-1895)

Hundreds of articles and dozens of books have been written about this, so I will limit myself to only a few clarifications and additions. Baron Georges-Charles Dantes (more correctly d "Antes) was born in 1812. He is the same age as Pushkin's wife Natalia. Dantes belonged to a poor noble family. He is more German than French. His mother is Countess M. Gatsfeld and his paternal grandmother, Baroness R von Weil were German, Dantes himself was a tall athlete, blond with blue eyes, but he was considered French.
Dantes went to Russia in 1833 with weighty recommendations to seek his fortune. On the way to Russia, he met quite by accident with the Dutch envoy, Baron Heckern, and he liked him so much that he arrived in St. Petersburg as a protege of this diplomat. Moreover, at the beginning of 1836, the envoy, with the consent of Father Dantes (?!), Adopted Georges, and he became Baron Heckern. In 1937, it was established that such an adoption was impossible, and Dantes only received the Dutch nobility. In Russia, Dantes was promoted to cornet and enlisted in the Cavalry Regiment. Beauty, sociability, cheerful disposition and wit made him a favorite of the ladies of the court and comrades in the regiment, although he turned out to be unimportant as a campaigner. He managed to hide his prudence, self-confidence, immorality and even arrogance. Pushkin long treated him as one of the usual numerous admirers of his wife, that is, not hostile. Natalya Nikolaevna and Baron Georges met at the end of 1834. Natalie was not exactly a windy beauty. She played chess well and could spend hours solving complex compositions. Of course, she did not have an ardent love for Pushkin, her husband, because of the great age difference and his ugly appearance. Of course, as a provincial woman, she liked the attention to her personality of the capital's high society and of Nicholas I.
There is no doubt that she and Dantes had a mutual attraction. Recently published letters from Dantes to Heckern, who traveled through Europe, testify to his deep feelings for Natalie. In a letter dated March 6, 1836, Dantes writes: "... She did not love anyone more than me, and in Lately there were enough cases when she could give everything to me - and what then, my dear friend? Never, nothing. Never in my life. "Dantes writes about the great respect that Natalie instilled in him. At the same time, he would hardly have provoked Pushkin into a duel by demonstrative courtship of his wife, if she had not frivolously responded to him with mutual feelings. Pushkin himself let his wife out in secular society, and she, without thinking about the consequences, enthusiastically told him about the advances of Dantes. Of course, we do not know much about the secret springs of the conspiracy against Pushkin and, perhaps, will never learn.
He had enough enemies. There were many reasons for the duel, by the way, not necessarily with Dantes. The further life of Pushkin became unbearable. He was humiliated at court by his position as a chamber junker, and he began to have problems not only with the publication of his works, but also with their sale. And his lifestyle and large family demanded considerable expenses. Pushkin had few old friends left. He could not find a way out of his position, and, finally, jealousy and humiliation of his wife's honor and his own dignity in the world found their way out in a duel with Dantes, who for him personified all the court nobility - his enemies. An anonymous libel diploma, received by Pushkin and some of his friends by mail on November 4, 1836, on the election of Pushkin as coadjutor (deputy) of the Grand Master of the Order of Cuckolds (Deceived Husbands) overflowed his patience.
It was a direct allusion to Natalie's connection, if not with the king, then with Dantes. I do not think that this diploma was the work of the Gekkerns, but Pushkin did not look for its author, but immediately sent Dantes a challenge to a duel. Gekkern, with tears in his eyes, begged Pushkin to postpone the duel. I consider this fact as evidence that Dantes did not strive for a duel, especially with deadly conditions, although he was an excellent shooter and was not a coward. Difficult negotiations between mediators, including V. Zhukovsky, prevented the duel, especially since Dantes unexpectedly announced his marriage to his sister Natalie Ekaterina Nikolaevna. By the way, Dantes's second, Viscount d'Arsiac, sincerely tried to prevent this duel. Dantes's wedding with Catherine took place on January 10, 1837, and Pushkin and Dantes became brother-in-law. January a letter with rude and harsh insults The duel became inevitable, and on January 26, the attaché of the French embassy, ​​Viscount Auguste d "Arsiac, conveyed to the poet Dantes' challenge.

On the reasons for the duel between Lermontov and Martynov

Martynov N.S. (1815-1875)
The reasons for this duel are largely known, but are still not completely clear. Before, everything was simple: Soviet time in the textbooks it was reported that the gendarmes, associated with their boss Benckendorff himself, organized a quarrel and a duel for Lermontov in order to destroy the freedom-loving poet, almost by order of Tsar Nicholas I.

Today we know the truth about the reasons for the duel between Lermontov and Martynov, but some circumstances are unknown and remain undisclosed. Not everything is so simple in life. By the time of his death, Lermontov was already a well-known poet and author of the novel "A Hero of Our Time", but none of the talented poets of that time responded to his death with inspired and bitter verses. Why? It is not only about the character of Lermontov, his sharp tongue and relations with the people around him. The point is, first of all, that most of those who knew him saw in him a young man and a low-ranking officer: as if a great poet had to be an elderly general. The story with Pushkin was repeated: the great poet and chamber junker. Only such progressive people of that time as Belinsky could see in Lermontov the great poet, the heir to Pushkin. And the poet's caustic and contemptuous character repelled many of his acquaintances. Many circumstances left their mark on the personality and character of Lermontov: the early death of his mother, separation from his father, the military drill in the cadet school, the reactionary situation in Russia after the suppression of the Decembrist uprising, supervision and censorship, the intrigues of the royal court and the entourage of the poet himself, the death of his idol Pushkin , instant fame after writing poetry on his death, arrest and exile to the Caucasus in 1837, harsh military service and, of course, most importantly, the creation of poetic masterpieces, unrequited love, constant illness, the ill-fated duel with de Barant and the second exile in 1840, fierce battles in the Caucasus, the inability to retire for literary activity, hatred and envy of enemies. And all this fit into a short, 26-year-old life! Yes, Lermontov's character was complex, even contradictory. The poet was having fun, then he was sad, then he was silent for hours, then he was bitter and sarcastic. The stepdaughter of General Verzilin E. Shan-Girey, who lived in Pyatigorsk, recalled Lermontov: "... he was uneven, capricious in character, sometimes helpful and kind, sometimes absent-minded and inattentive." Lermontov loved to joke, even make fun of someone, he loved to order at picnics, to dance. But with his poor health (how did he pull the military strap?), He often had to be treated in the Caucasus with hot sulfur baths.
When Lermontov was sent into exile to the Caucasus for the second time, then on May 20, 1840 A.S. Khomyakov wrote prophetically to N.M. Yazykov: “And here's a pity: Lermontov was sent to the Caucasus for a duel. and he is with true talent both as a poet and as a disseminator. " Of course, Khomyakov meant death in battle, not in a duel, but still ...
In the Caucasus, Lermontov strives to excel in hostilities and risks his life, hoping now to earn his resignation and devote himself entirely to literary activity. He dreamed of creating his own magazine. Finally, in January 1841, Lermontov secured a vacation to St. Petersburg for 2 months. He spends three of the happiest and brightest months of his life in the capital, surrounded by friends and admirers of his work. The entire circulation of Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time" has been sold out. But instead of a possible resignation, the poet was ordered to leave Petersburg in 48 hours and go back to the Caucasus to the Tengin regiment.
On the way to Temir-Khan-Shura, Lermontov, together with his relative and friend A. Stolypin, stopped in Georgievsk. Pyatigorsk is 40 versts from here, and the poet wanted to visit his beloved city, to see old friends. Stolypin did not support him. Who knows how the fate of Lermontov would have developed if he had not gone to Pyatigorsk then to meet his death ?! But fate (or chance) plays a man. Lermontov suggested to Stolypin to throw a fifty-kopeck piece, and if the coin falls heads up - go to the detachment, and if the lattice up - go to Pyatigorsk. The grate fell out, and Lermontov shouted joyfully: "To Pyatigorsk, to Pyatigorsk!" They arrived in Pyatigorsk on May 13, 1841, settled in Chilyaev's house and lived there for two months until the fatal duel between Lermontov and Martynov. Lermontov received permission to remain in Pyatigorsk until he was completely cured of his fever.
At this time, a retired Major Martynov lived in Pyatigorsk, with whom Lermontov constantly met. Nikolai Solomonovich Martynov was an old friend and classmate of Lermontov since the time joint learning at the military school. They had known each other for over eight years. Martynov, as a rather limited person, did not differ in special abilities. His nickname "Monkey" suited him. But he was very proud.
Martynov's father is a state councilor who since 1798 owned the village of Znamenskoye near Moscow. Martynov not only understood Lermontov's superiority over him, but also recognized his poetic and artistic talent, forgiving Lermontov both at the military school, and at subsequent meetings in Moscow for his stinging mockery and barbs. Martynov was a handsome, tall blond. While studying at a military school, he dreamed of ranks and orders, he wanted to become a general, that is, he was a vain person. A contemporary recalled that in 1839 Martynov looked like a graceful young officer and sang songs well.
But in February 1841, he unexpectedly submitted his resignation letter and was dismissed from military service with the rank of major. The story is dark. There were rumors about his unfair gambling. Remembering Martynov's dream of rising to the rank of general, it can be assumed that he resigned by no means according to on their own... It was the collapse of his military career, his prospects for the future. Martynov remained in the Caucasus and settled in Pyatigorsk, not wanting to return in disgrace to his mother and sisters in Moscow. And in Petersburg he had nothing to do among his acquaintances.
Martynov changed dramatically: he became gloomy, silent and began to wear a Caucasian outfit, imitating the highlanders: a Circassian coat with gazyry, a hat on a shaved head. A dagger hung from his belt. Indeed, Martynov looked exotic among the Russian population of Pyatigorsk. On July 2, 1841, Nicholas I refused Martynov a reward, to which he presented himself for participating in the autumn expedition (military operations) in 1840. This fact is confirmed by Martynov's forced resignation from military service. Now attention: the refusal to grant Martynov took place 10 days before his quarrel with Lermontov and, therefore, Martynov's nerves were inflated by this refusal on the eve of the quarrel (however, it is not known whether the news of the refusal of the award to Martynov came from Petersburg to Pyatigorsk before his quarrel with Lermontov) ... I want to emphasize that before the duel with Lermontov, Martynov did not participate in fights, was not a hero of scandals and was not a bully at all. And one important point: Martynov, almost the same age as Lermontov and his classmate at the military school, was still a retired major, and Lermontov (perhaps because of "seditious" poetry and a duel with de Barant) was only a lieutenant. Therefore, Martynov could count on Lermontov's respectful attitude towards him, and he mocked him as before.
Back in 1837, on his way to exile in the Caucasus, Lermontov drove to Moscow. In his memoirs, Martynov later wrote that his family permanently lived in Moscow and in late March - early April 1837 he met with Lermontov almost every day and they often had breakfast together at Yar's. Quite friendly relations!
In October 1837 Martynov met with Lermontov in the Caucasus. He writes to his father from Yekaterinodar: “I received the three hundred rubles that you sent me through Lermontov, but no letters, because he was robbed on the way, and this money invested in the letter was also lost; but, of course, he gave I have mine ... "On November 6, E.A. Martynova wrote from Moscow to her son N. Martynov that it is a pity for the missing letters sent with Lermontov, and (attention!) accuses Lermontov that he allegedly printed and read these letters. And on May 25, 1840 Martynova writes to her son Nikolai from Moscow that Lermontov is still in the city and almost every day visits her daughters, who find great pleasure in his company, despite the fact that Martynova's visits are always (!) Unpleasant. Thus, N. Martynov's mother treated Lermontov with hostility, trying to inspire her son with hostility to the poet.
In 1841, in Pyatigorsk, Lermontov's enemies, playing on Martynov's feelings, incited him to a duel with the poet. Apparently, Prince Vasilchikov, whose father was a close associate of Nicholas I, offended by Lermontov's barbs and epigrams against him, secretly incited Martynov against the poet. In our time, on a page of one book of those years, an anonymous, handwritten in printed (!) Letters, mocking and insulting epigram on Lermontov, relating to the pre-duel period, was found. On it by Lermontov's hand, two words are written in pencil: "Scoundrel Monkey", that is, Martynov. This means that Lermontov connected the appearance of the epigram with the name of Martynov, and this fact greatly touched the poet. Most likely, Martynov was "knocked out" by Lermontov's enemies for this epigram, and, although Martynov's authorship has not been proven, the epigram achieved its goal, irritating the poet. Even his entourage made fun of Martynov, and Lermontov called him "a highlander with a large dagger." Martynov himself, after the duel with Lermontov, testified at the trial that "this fight was completely accidental" and that he "never harbored anger towards Lermontov, therefore, I had no reason to quarrel with him."
Years later, Martynov explained that he challenged Lermontov to a duel because the poet insulted his family and sister in 1837 by opening and reading the letter sent with him by his sister Natalya to find out her opinion of him. Why was Martynov silent for almost 4 years before Lermontov was summoned to a duel on July 13, 1841 ?! Of course, Martynov came up with an excuse for the murder of the great poet, because E. Maidel testified that, indeed, in October 1837, Lermontov arrived in Stavropol completely without the things that were stolen from him on the way, and therefore he did not appear to the authorities immediately upon arrival in the city, and when the uniform and other things were prepared, for which he received a reprimand, since it was found at the headquarters that he had to appear immediately in what he arrived.
It is interesting that in 1870 Martynov wrote a poem "The Decembrists", in which he admired their feat, not understanding its essence. I repeat that there are many reasons for the duel between Lermontov and Martynov, but the specific, obvious reason for the fight has not yet been clarified. By the way, Lermontov was already going to leave for his regiment from Pyatigorsk and even on July 12, 1841 (the day before the challenge to a duel!) Presented his road to the Pyatigorsk commandant's office to leave for Temir-Khan-Shura. It's not meant to be!
Let me emphasize that Lermontov introduced Martynov to his acquaintances in Pyatigorsk not only as an old friend, but also as his friend! So, on the evening of July 13, 1841, there were several people in the hall of General Verzilin's house. Lermontov, the daughter of the hostess Emilia Alexandrovna and Lev Sergeevich Pushkin (!), The younger brother of the great poet, were sitting on the sofa and talking animatedly. The piano, played by Prince S. Trubetskoy, stood in the northeastern corner of the large hall. Near the piano - before the quarrel - stood and talked Nadezhda Petrovna Verzilina and Martynov in their Caucasian dress. Lermontov, turning to his interlocutor and referring to Martynov, told her jokingly that she should be careful with this dangerous "highlander with a large dagger" who could kill. Unfortunately, at that moment Trubetskoy stopped playing the piano and Lermontov's words sounded clearly in the large hall.
Everything that had been accumulating in Martynov's soul for years, against Lermontov's treatment of him, everything that Martynov carefully concealed within himself, came out. Yes, and his mother constantly inspired her son with dislike for Lermontov. Martynov's pride was hurt by the poet's mockery of him in the presence of the ladies. Martynov "exploded" and sharply stated that he had endured insults from Mr. Lermontov for a long time and did not intend to endure them anymore. There may be some inaccuracies in the circumstances of the quarrel, but the essence of the cause of the quarrel is correct. Let me assume, based on circumstantial evidence, that Martynov was not indifferent to one of the ladies present, whom he courted, and Lermontov's mockery of him in her presence pissed Martynov out of himself. By the way, according to E.A. Shan-Girei, a witness of the quarrel, to her remark to the poet after this quarrel, but even before the challenge to a duel: "My tongue is my enemy," Lermontov replied calmly: "That's nothing, tomorrow we will be good friends." Lermontov did not take this quarrel seriously, not thinking about its possible consequences.
But after that evening, on the stairs of Verzilin's house between Lermontov and Martynov, a conversation took place in a raised voice. Of course, Lermontov, without attaching serious importance to the quarrel, did not seek to apologize to Martynov and calm him down, and the excited conversation ended with Lermontov's challenge to a duel.
It turns out that Lermontov himself provoked this duel and its main reason was the poet's caustic, cocky character and, in particular, his sharp tongue. Martynov knew about Lermontov's duel with de Barant, and he knew that Lermontov was a good shooter and a brave man. How could not the hero Martynov, who later declared that he almost did not know how to shoot a pistol, decided to challenge Lermontov to a duel ?! What pushed him to the challenge: the collapse of his military career, the mockery of Lermontov and those around him, the incitement of the poet's enemies, an insult in front of a lady to whom he was not indifferent, and, finally, despair? Or was he just sure that Lermontov would not shoot at him? Be that as it may, the duel became inevitable.
Duel of Pushkin with Dantes

Duel of Pushkin with Dantes-Heeckeren on January 27, 1837 fig. Kaverzneva,
engraving by Gerasimov.
The circumstances of the duel are widely known, and I will only briefly mention them, complementing them with little-known details. The duel took place on January 27, 1837 on the Black River at about 5 pm. On January 26, at a ball with Countess Razumovskaya, Pushkin proposed to the adviser of the British Embassy Magenis, whom he knew as a decent man, to become his second, but he refused. On January 27 in the afternoon, Pushkin accidentally met K. Danzas, his high school friend, on the street, and he agreed to become his second.
Constructed conditions for a duel with barriers of 10 paces (7 m) were almost fatal. Pushkin himself was eager to kill Dantes, and he understood that he needed to kill Pushkin, otherwise the duel could be resumed. Both were excellent marksmen. Bullets from Lepage's dueling pistols, 12 mm in diameter, inflicted life-threatening wounds. Everything was according to the rules. Dantes' second was the Viscount d "Arsiac. The paths for the duel were trampled in deep snow, the barriers were marked with the overcoats of the seconds. Lieutenant Colonel Danzas waved his hat, and Pushkin, quickly approaching the barrier, took aim to shoot for sure. But Dantes shot earlier, not reaching the barrier. Pushkin fell on Danzas' overcoat, mortally wounded in the right half of the abdomen. He found the strength to lie down to aim and shoot. Dantes stood with his right side, bent right hand in the elbow, covering the chest and the head with a discharged pistol. This saved him. The bullet pierced his right forearm and flattened (ricocheted?) Against the button of his uniform. Dantes fell, Pushkin shouted: "Bravo!" - but Dantes quickly got up: the wound was not dangerous.
Pushkin developed severe bleeding, but there was no doctor, and there was nothing to bandage the wound with. According to M. Underman, Pushkin lost 2 liters of blood. He was taken on a sleigh to the Commandant's dacha, where Dantes offered Danzas a carriage sent to him by Gekkern for transporting the wounded. Nice gesture! If Pushkin knew whose carriage it was, he, of course, would have refused, but Danzas said that it was he who hired the carriage. Pushkin was taken home. All the time until his death, he was conscious. The bullet pierced the poet's intestines in several places and, crushing part of the sacrum bone, got stuck nearby. Pushkin behaved courageously, but there was a moment when he, unable to bear the excruciating pain, wanted to shoot himself. Danzas managed to take the pistol from him, already hidden under the covers, saying: "No need, Cricket" (Pushkin's lyceum nickname).
The tsar acted decently, sending a note with the poet's forgiveness, and most importantly, with a promise to take care of his wife and children. Suffering, Pushkin hastened death. The best doctors treated him correctly, but the poet's position was hopeless. He developed peritonitis, and 46 hours after the injury, Pushkin died at 2:45 pm on January 29, 1837. Danzas was arrested, not giving him the opportunity to take his friend's body to the Svyatogorsk monastery for burial next to his mother.
Was it possible to save Pushkin in our time? This possibility was analyzed. Subject to all medical conditions, performing the operation and applying latest techniques, medical devices, antibiotics, Pushkin COULD be saved today. Even so, the chances of a successful outcome would not exceed 50-60 percent. By the way, the writer Andrei Sobol, grievingly experiencing the death of his friend Sergei Yesenin, on June 7, 1926, with a revolver shot at the Pushkin monument in Moscow, deliberately inflicted a wound similar to Pushkin's, shooting himself in the stomach on the right. Twenty minutes later, he was operated on, and although the wound was inflicted by a conical bullet, and not a round one, which produces more severe injuries, Sobol died just three hours after the operation. And Pushkin in 1837 had no chance of surviving at the level of medicine at that time. I will add that the wounded Pushkin said: "When we are well, we will start over." But there could be only one duel for the same insult.
Duel Lermontov with Martynov

The circumstances of this duel are so contradictory and confusing, according to the testimony of Martynov and the seconds M. Glebov and A. Vasilchikov, that they are still interpreted in different ways. The seconds in collusion with Martynov gave distorted testimony to the court in order to alleviate their fate. Lermontov not only did not want to kill Martynov, but he did not want this duel itself. He understood perfectly well that after all it was he who insulted, albeit in jest, Martynov, not expecting such a consequence as a challenge to a duel. Moreover, Lermontov clearly realized that if the duel took place, then even with a bloodless outcome, his future would become tragic and all dreams of retirement and literary activity would collapse: Nicholas I, who hated him, would put an end to him.
Therefore, Lermontov, trying to prevent a duel, declared after Martynov's summons that he refused his shot. But Martynov, pushed by his entourage, was already blinded by the accumulated anger towards Lermontov and categorically refused reconciliation. He was afraid that by taking the challenge back, he would become a laughing stock for the whole of Pyatigorsk. Lermontov himself, back in 1832, entering a military school, wrote prophetically: "To die with a lead bullet in the heart is worth the slow agony of an old man." Lermontov's drawing of the same time has also survived, depicting two duelists standing almost side by side, one of whom fired at the other, and he swung with a pistol in his hand at his belt, for some reason directed the muzzle to the side.
On the morning of the day of the duel, July 15, 1841, his friends came to Lermontov in Zheleznovodsk, including Lev Pushkin, the poet's brother. Lermontov was cheerful, joked, and no one even suspected of the upcoming duel, but, left alone with his cousin Katya Bykhovets, he was terribly sad. Lermontov was well aware that by not shooting Martynov, he was putting his own life on the line.
As for the seconds, there is an amazing story with them. Many years later, Vasilchikov said that Stolypin (a relative of the poet), Glebov, Trubetskoy (a friend of the poet) and he, Vasilchikov, were the seconds in the duel. During the investigation, it was said that Glebov was Martynov's second, and Vasilchikov (!) - Lermontov. The presence of Trubetskoy was hidden because he came to Pyatigorsk without a vacation, and Stolypin's presence was hidden because he had already once been involved in Lermontov's duel with de Barant and both of them would face serious punishment.
The duel took place on July 15, 1841 between 6 and 7 pm. Previously, it was believed that it took place at the foot of Mount Mashuk near Pyatigorsk, and an obelisk created by the sculptor Mikeshin was erected on the site of the duel in 1915, but in Soviet times it was established that in fact the duel took place in another place - at the Perkal rock. The conditions of the duel were brutal: shoot up to 3 times (!) With barriers of 15 steps (10.5 meters). But such conditions could exist only with the gravest insult! Sometimes they write that the distance between the barriers was 6 (!) Steps (4.2 meters)! This is not serious, although exceptional duels happened even with barriers of 3 (!) Steps! Since Lermontov had previously abandoned his shot, then, in fact, it was not a duel, but a murder.
Now - attention! According to the well-known Lermonologist E. Gernstein, when a storm began before the duel, then, apparently, Stolypin, Trubetskoy and, perhaps, Dorokhov for some minutes did not have time to drive up to the place of the duel before it began. Stolypin and Trubetskoy, friends and seconds of the poet, did not think that the duel would begin with a thunderstorm and heavy rain, especially before their arrival. But Martynov hurried Lermontov, and he accepted the duel with two seconds. It so happened that Glebov and Vasilchikov became seconds of both Lermontov and Martynov at the same time. Let me emphasize that Lermontov trusted Glebov. Lermontov probably did not fully believe that Martynov would shoot at him, would strive to kill him. Refusing to fire his shot under severe conditions to shoot up to 3 times, Lermontov, in fact, acted like a suicide, leaving his life to the will of fate or chance.
Now - important fact... The fact is that Martynov, who challenged Lermontov to a duel, had no right to shoot in the air, since then the duel would be considered invalid, a farce, because both were not endangered. And if Martynov had clearly not fired aimingly, past Lermontov, he would have become a laughing stock. So Martynov had nowhere to retreat.
He really wanted to kill Lermontov and with this murder wanted to silence all those who mocked him. Martynov was in a frenzy, blinded by hatred of Lermontov for the years of humiliation from him, was angry with the whole world for the collapse of his military career. In this state, he, of course, could not aim at Lermontov's legs, just to injure him. He had one goal: to kill Lermontov. I wonder what Martynov was doing 2 days before the duel? No, Martynov was not cold-blooded and judicious during the duel, although he perfectly understood everything that was happening, without thinking about the consequences. What a nobility, dignity of an officer, a nobleman: Martynov is far from even Dantes. There is information that before the duel Lermontov wanted to explain to Martynov that he did not want to offend his dignity, but he did not even listen to him, in a hurry to start a duel-murder.
So, at the signal of the seconds, the duel began during a thunderstorm and downpour. Lermontov at the sight of Martynov hurriedly walking towards the barrier and aiming at him with a pistol, not wanting to shoot and not moving, stretched his hand over his head with a pistol muzzle upward, looking contemptuously at Martynov. Sometimes they write that Martynov, beside himself, enraged by Lermontov's calmness, shouted at him to shoot him. But Lermontov shot in the air, and Martynov, reaching the barrier, mercilessly shot the motionless, unarmed Lermontov. The bullet pierced the poet's chest right through, causing his instant death.
Martynov testified during the investigation that Lermontov had no pistol misfire. This means that Lermontov, who refused to shoot his opponent, unloaded his pistol into the air. Martynov testified against himself. But Vasilchikov, apparently, did not come to an agreement with him and said that Martynov fired, and Lermontov did not manage to shoot (meaning Martynov) and he, Vasilchikov, later fired a shot from Lermontov's pistol into the air. True, no one has confirmed this fact. Khiter Vasilchikov! Indeed, in this case, it turns out that Martynov managed to shoot at the armed Lermontov earlier than the latter at him. Everything is according to the rules of a duel. But Martynov was not smart enough for this lie, which was beneficial to him. Without a doubt, even in this case, Martynov had missed, and Lermontov would have fired into the air. But duel up to 3 times! According to Martynov, Lermontov fired (where?), And according to Vasilchikov, Lermontov's pistol remained loaded after the duel. Such a mysterious story.
One can, of course, assume that, having directed the muzzle of the pistol up, Lermontov did not have time to shoot into the air, but it was in his interest to do it as quickly as possible, demonstrating his unwillingness to fight. But all the same, Martynov saw the upward barrel of Lermontov's pistol, and he shot at a person who did not want to shoot at him, that is, in fact, unarmed. And this is murder, because Martynov knew that Lermontov would not shoot at him. Apparently, Martynov no longer controlled himself. And Glebov wrote after the arrest to Martynov: "I and Vasilchikov protect you everywhere and to everyone, because we see nothing wrong on your part in the Lermontov case." An amazing confession, especially since Lermontov trusted Glebov. The meaning of what is written is this: justify us, because we justify you.
Let me emphasize once again that the exact circumstances of the duel are still unknown. I think that if Stolypin and Trubetskoy were present at the duel, then at least years later they told about it, but this did not happen. Let's go back to the duel. Let me remind you that there was neither a doctor nor a cart. The downpour has stopped. Glebov was the only one with Lermontov's body, and Martynov and Vasilchikov rode off to Pyatigorsk for the doctor and people. Late in the evening Vasilchikov arrived with people, but without a doctor, and the poet's body was transported to Chilyaev's house, where he lived with Stolypin. The next day, with a huge crowd of people, Lermontov was buried at the Pyatigorsk cemetery, and later, at the request of his grandmother E.A. Arsenyeva, Nicholas I allowed his body to be transported in a lead and tarred coffin to Tarkhany, where he was buried on April 23, 1842 in the Arsenyev family crypt , next to his mother's grave. Let me emphasize that Martynov, in a duel with Lermontov, undoubtedly acted as a murderer.

Versions of Pushkin's duel with Dantes
In 1959, in the USSR and in 1963 in France (!), Articles that made a lot of noise appeared, claiming that the duel between Pushkin and Dantes was actually a premeditated murder of the great poet. The articles say that Dantes was capable of meanness and outright crime, which is why he behaved insolently and unceremoniously during the weeks leading up to the fight on January 27, 1837. The articles directly mention that Dantes had a protective device during a duel with Pushkin: either chain mail, worn under a cavalier's coat, or a shell (a bulletproof vest), and also that Dantes allegedly had a rifled barrel pistol, which increased the lethal force of a bullet. The authors of the articles doubt that Dantes's life was saved by a button, from which a bullet bounced, piercing his forearm before that, forgetting that Pushkin fired lying down, at an acute angle, and the bullet should have rebounded from the metal button, having lost some of its lethal force. when she (the bullet) pierced Dantes' forearm.
These supposedly "sensational" facts are easily refuted. Even if Dantes had put on the "museum" chain mail, he would have risked, along with Pushkin's bullet, wounds from fragments of broken rings. As for the carapace, there was no trace of a fairly light and at the same time durable material from which today's bulletproof vests are made. And dueling pistols were smooth-bore and loaded with ball-shaped bullets, unsuitable for shooting from rifled weapons. Pushkin's friend Danzas and d "Arsiak checked the pistols and strictly adhered to the conditions of the duel, ensuring their fulfillment with their honor. You can cite a lot of refutations to the" sensational "facts. Pushkinists do not take into account the version of the duel-murder at all. signed by the seconds, and Dantes was not a coward, Truth is above all, and the memory of Pushkin does not need a lie.
The version of the duel between Lermontov and Martynov
In the 60s of the XX century, a sensational article appeared in which expert authors put forward their version of the duel between Lermontov and Martynov. They studied the fatal wound of Lermontov and came to the conclusion that the bullet pierced the poet's side at a significant angle and exited through the other side right through. Death came instantly.
Since Lermontov and Martynov were on a level ground during the duel, the authors argued that a bullet fired from Martynov's pistol could not have hit Lermontov at such an angle of direction. The authors offered a version of Lermontov's murder by an outsider during a duel. Say, the hired killer hid with a gun in the bushes on the side of Lermontov to the left or to the right, that is, an unknown person shot Lermontov in the side from above or below. The article even cited a legend that many years later, one Cossack, before his death, said that he was promised forgiveness for the crime he had committed if he secretly shot one person.
This version does not hold water. First of all, as a result of the duel, Martynov, knowing that Lermontov refused to shoot, hoped to kill him or seriously injure him. And if Lermontov had started shooting, he would have been convicted of this fight, so there was no point in sending the killer. In addition, he had to shoot at the moment Martynov fired, which is almost impossible. Otherwise, two shots would have sounded. The smoke after the shot from the bushes would have been noticed by the seconds. In the case of the assassin, it was impossible to do without collusion with Martynov.
How could the killer know where Lermontov would stand? And the shooter must be experienced. Wounds from pistol and rifle bullets are different. Besides, where is the second wound from Martynov's bullet then? Or was his shot a blank? But the seconds checked the weapon. So it would not have been possible to hide the assassination. There are many such inconsistencies in the article, and there is no reason to take the authors' arguments seriously.
Copyright digression
Not wishing to come to terms with the death of two great poets in ordinary duels, we forget that a duel according to the rules of two equal nobles, regardless of which of them is the greatest, is an honest duel, for the observance of the conditions of which both duelists are responsible with their honor, and, of course the seconds. After all, duelists defend their dignity. We have already found out that Dantes cannot be called a murderer in the direct (criminal) sense of the word, but Martynov can be directly called a murderer. In addition, we must not forget that Pushkin took part in duels more than once and was an excellent shooter, and Lermontov was a brave man and a good shooter, being a soldier.
Unlike Lermontov, Pushkin, driven to extreme nervous tension, defending the honor of his wife and his dignity, passionately wanted to kill Dantes, and he was well aware of the danger of this fight, also wanting to kill Pushkin. Dantes, as a foreigner, could not understand the greatness of Pushkin, as the first national poet, he saw in him, first of all, an equal nobleman who sent an extremely insulting letter to him. And Martynov, for all his limitations, understood that Lermontov was a huge talent, but offended pride overshadowed his common sense, and Martynov, remembering all the insults, saw in Lermontov not a famous poet and his classmate, but a caustic mocker who disgraced him in the presence of ladies.
And Lermontov, not wanting a duel, due to his uneven nature, allowed himself insulting barbs, without thinking about the consequences. And Lermontov's poor health left an imprint on his actions. Courting insolently and defiantly for Pushkin's wife, did Dantes "run up" to a duel, did he want her? Pushkin insulted Dantes, wanting a duel, Lermontov insulted Martynov, not wanting a duel. You can't do without the subjunctive mood. We call Dantes and Martynov murderers, and if Pushkin killed Dantes or Lermontov killed Martynov, could you, dear reader, call Pushkin or Lermontov murderers? Never! This is our mentality. It turns out that in a duel great person"has the right" to kill a small person, but he has no such "right." But this is pure murder! Before the law (code), duels are all equal. And if Pushkin wanted to kill Dantes, then why did Dantes, not wanting to be killed, have to (according to our concept) not shoot Pushkin, but directly substitute his chest under his bullet? Not everything is so simple from the point of view of that time.
Today we see how a high official or a big businessman finds himself more equal before the law common man... The proverb is also true: "Don't fight the strong, don't sue the rich!" And although the law is the same for everyone, our same mentality works. It should always be remembered that a person's personality and the position he occupies in society by the nature of his activities are completely different things, and although professionalism is valued first of all, but also the concept " good man"is also important! Celebrities should set an example in this. It is time for all of us to get rid of the ideological stereotypes of Soviet all-encompassing class propaganda. The main thing is universal values.
Finally, let's compare the personalities of Dantes and Martynov in connection with these duels from a position today... Who is the biggest scoundrel: Dantes or Martynov? The duel between Pushkin and Dantes is an honest duel, the duel between Lermontov and Martynov is a dishonorable duel on the part of Martynov, because Lermontov refused to shoot in advance, and Martynov shot him as a motionless and safe target. So, Dantes is not a murderer, but Martynov is a murderer and, therefore, a greater scoundrel. Don't rush to a conclusion. Dantes, in terms of his mental development and certain penetrating qualities, was head and shoulders above Martynov, who remained a retired major and a limited soldier. But Dantes, impudently courting married woman, even though he felt sincere love for her, he himself, in fact, fell in love with a young, loving enthusiastic adoration of her beauty, who is carried away, without thinking about the consequences, Natalie, disgracing Pushkin at court, not accepting him as a great poet, and promoting him nervous jealousy, driven to the extreme.
But Martynov did nothing bad to Lermontov and even, recognizing his abilities and poetic talent, more than once endured his ridicule and taunts in his address, until Lermontov, not thinking about the consequences and not taking Martynov seriously, laughed at him in front of the ladies. It turns out that Dantes is much meaner than Martynov. I will end this digression by the proverb: "Two boots - a pair." So did Dantes and Martynov, who killed two great poets of Russia, go unpunished ?! Didn't just retribution overtake them ?!

The fate of d'Anthes

Dantes was demoted to the rank and file and expelled from Russia as a foreigner. This was the most successful outcome of the dueling history for him. After Dantes, Pushkin's younger brother, Lev, wanted to rush to take revenge on him. The son of the historian Karamzin, Alexander, also wanted to take revenge on Dantes. But Dantes remained to live. His adoptive father, Baron Gekkern, Nicholas I made it clear that his presence in St. Petersburg is more undesirable. Dantes himself later made excuses, saying that he did not know what a great poet Pushkin was. Dantes claimed that he was aiming at Pushkin's legs, but accidentally hit in the stomach. A naive explanation at 10 steps apart during a duel! However, Dantes was not at all an insignificant person. By the way, on the mother's side, he was the grandson of Countess Elizabeth Feodorovna Varceleben, who was married to Count Alexander Semyonovich Musin-Pushkin (1730-1817), and Musin-Pushkin was the sixth cousin (!) Brother of Nadezhda Platonovna Musina-Pushkina, who was the grandmother of N. Pushkina, wife of A.S. Pushkin. Like this!
Expelled from the borders of Russia, Dantes went to France. The Russians living in France did not allow Pushkin's killer to their doorstep. But Dantes made a punchy, dexterous and unprincipled career. After the death in 1843 of his wife Ekaterina Goncharova, the elder sister of Natalya Nikolaevna Pushkina (by the way, Ekaterina was almost 3 years older than Dantes), Dantes took up political activity.
By 1850 he had become a famous man in Alsace, elected to the Constituent Assembly. And in 1852, he was already known to the head of state, Louis Napoleon, nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, who sent Dantes to unofficial diplomatic negotiations, in particular with Nicholas I (!). The killer of Pushkin, demoted and expelled from Russia by the tsar, is negotiating with him! Truly, the impudence of Dantes has no boundaries. Nicholas I received the former cavalry guard in Potsdam and had a long conversation with him, half-jokingly calling him "Mr. Ambassador". Although it was officially emphasized that the emperor accepts Dantes not as a representative of a foreign power, but as a former officer of his guard, convicted and pardoned.

Dantes successfully completed the assignment and was appointed senator. This is a big take-off in 40 years. However, he did not grow further, although he always had great connections. He became an excellent speaker, but he lacked education. In the Senate, he opposed Victor Hugo, Garibaldi, called for the overthrow of the Paris Commune in 1871. In short, a well-known reactionary. Then he became mayor of the town of Sulz in Alsace and a big successful businessman, remaining a petty person. Dantes lived 83 years, died in 1895 and is buried in Sulce, next to his wife and adoptive father Baron Heckern, deceased

Postcard, late 19th century

The most compelling argument in a controversy sometimes turned the controversy into a farce. Sometimes comedy. More often - into tragedy. My Planet focuses on the most famous controversies of the recent past.

Since ancient times, duels have been used as the best way to prove oneself in the right - by the right of the strong. The very concept of "duel" arose around the XIV century and comes from the Latin duo - "two". By the 16th century, "duels of honor" had become a real headache for European monarchs. Thousands of people died, among whom were quite famous and significant personalities... Below are the ten most famous duels in history.

Quadruple duel: Zavadovsky and Griboyedov vs. Sheremetev and Yakubovich

In 1817, because of the charming ballerina Avdotya Istomina, the queen of secular Petersburg, four men entered the battle at once.

By that time, Avdotya had been in communication with the cavalier-guard staff-captain V.V. Sheremetev. The relationship was unstable, and after another quarrel, Istomina left her boyfriend. A couple of days later, one of her friends - an aspiring writer A.S. Griboyedov - called the upset ballerina to his place for tea. However, a new boyfriend was also waiting for her - the secular lion Count Zavadovsky, who rented an apartment with Griboyedov. Sheremetev flew into a rage upon learning of Zavadovsky's connection with Istomina, and on the advice of his friend Alexander Yakubovich challenged the count to a duel. And Griboyedov, who unwittingly turned out to be the initiator of Istomina's acquaintance with the count, was summoned by Yakubovich himself.

On November 12, Sheremetev died in a duel. Yakubovich, however, fought with Griboyedov only a year later, during which Yakubovich remained unharmed, and the writer was shot through the little finger on his hand. Much later, this mutilation helped to identify his corpse among those killed by religious fanatics in Tehran.

Failed duel: Ivan Turgenev against Leo Tolstoy

Fortunately, the duel never took place.

In the 19th century, Leo Tolstoy, who had a far from sugar-like character, distinguished himself on the basis of duels. The young writer often clashed with his entourage, teaching everyone how to live. Turgenev was the complete opposite: a typical intellectual, creativity is in its prime, "Notes of a Hunter", "A Noble Nest" have already been written.

On May 27, 1861, when both masters were visiting Afanasy Fet, Tolstoy insulted Turgenev's daughter, Polina, in the heat: they say, her charity towards the poor is insincere and even theatrical. Angry Turgenev left Fet's house. A written showdown began between the writers, in which they challenged each other to a duel. But since the letters arrived with delays, Tolstoy and Turgenev, in turn, had time to cool down by the time they received the messages.

Fortunately, the duel never took place, otherwise, perhaps, “Anna Karenina”, “War and Peace” and other literary masterpieces would never have reached us. However, the writers renewed their friendship only after 17 years of boycott.

Most ridiculous duel: Otto von Bismarck vs. Rudolf Virchow

An almost unique case: the rational man of science Rudolf Virchow outwitted the influential minister Otto von Bismarck

The Minister-President of Prussia, Otto von Bismarck, like most politicians, had both supporters and opponents, the main of whom was Rudolf Virchow, who was elected leader of the radical party. Virchow was a supporter of the revolution, which Bismarck wanted, on the contrary, to suppress.

The controversy culminated in a debate on May 30, 1865. Bismarck felt offended after Virchow's statements that the military budget of Prussia was excessively inflated through the fault of the minister, and the country plunged into poverty. Without waiting for an apology, Bismarck challenged his opponent to a duel.

However, Virkhov was also a scientist. When Bismarck's seconds came to him, he defended his right to choose a weapon for a duel and offered to fight on sausages. One of them was supposed to be contaminated with toxins and be fatal to the one who eats it. Bismarck refused such an undertaking, replacing wittily that "heroes do not overeat to death."

Duel between man and animal: Richard de Maker against the dog

Chronicler Olivier de la Marsh did not fail to note: when Maker's body stopped twitching in the noose, the dog of the late de Mondidier immediately calmed down

At the end of the XIV century, two knights served in France at the court of Charles V - Aubrey de Mondidier and Richard de Maquer. Aubrey was more successful and often envied Maker. Once the friends went hunting, but only Richard returned from it. The knight's corpse was found in the forest, hidden under the leaves, by Aubrey's dog. After the funeral, the dog, who found shelter with a friend of the murdered owner, met Maker on the street, suddenly attacked him with wild barking, which aroused suspicion among those present. This happened every time the dog saw the knight. The phenomenon reached the king himself, who decided to personally investigate. By his order, about 200 knights, including Maker, lined up in front of the palace. Then a dog was brought into the yard, which immediately rushed towards the suspect.

During the King's interrogation, Maker denied all charges. Then Karl decided to resort to the practice of God's judgment, assigning the role of the accuser to the dog. So on October 8, 1371, for the first time in history, a man-animal duel took place. The maker was armed with a stick and a shield, but they did not help him. As soon as the dog was released from the leash, it attacked the enemy. The startled Maker confessed that he had killed Aubrey, and began to beg for mercy. However, by the decision of His Majesty, the knight was sent to the gallows, and a monument was erected in the vicinity of Fontainebleau for the dog who avenged the owner.

Most famous duel: "duel of minions"

The duel was perceived by most courtiers as a senseless carnage.

In this battle, six fought at once: three minions of King Henry III and three from the side of his opponent, the Duke de Guise. However, the reason was not politics at all. Once one of the minions, the Comte de Quelus, accidentally found Baron d'Antrag (supporter of the Duke de Guise) with his beloved. A day later, the count deliberately joked about her in public, saying that this lady was "more beautiful than virtuous." The call from the baron came instantly.

The duel took place at the Tournelle Park in Paris on April 27, 1578. At first, de Quelus and d'Antrag entered the battle, but later their seconds could not stand it either (although according to the dueling code they were not supposed to interfere in the duel). As a result, the seconds killed the friend of the arc, but the instigators of the duel survived. The baron escaped with a scratch on his arm, and de Quelus received about 19 wounds. The king allocated a considerable amount for the treatment of his pet, and the restless count even went on the mend, but decided to ride a horse. The wounds opened and the minion died.

If everything described seems familiar to you, no wonder - the story of this duel was included in the plot of the novel by Alexandre Dumas-father "The Countess de Monsoreau".

Most unusual duel: Monsieur de Grandpré vs Monsieur Le Pic in a hot air balloon

Both the duelist and the pilot who controlled the balloon died in the fall.

In 1808, an air duel took place in France. Two honorable gentlemen - de Grandpré and Le Pic - fell in love with the same dancer of the Paris Opera, Mademoiselle Tirevy. The rivals concluded that there is no better way to find out which of them is worthy of the prima donna's heart, other than to shoot. Since at that time among the Parisian nobility there was a fashion for balloons, the duelists decided to sort things out right in the sky.

Rising each on his own balloon about 900 m, monsieur stopped at this height and fired at each other. De Grandpre's bullet hit Balloon Le Pic, after which he caught fire and fell to the ground along with the duelist and the pilot.

The winner claimed his rights to Mademoiselle Tirevy's heart. However, the prima donna did not appreciate the courage shown in the heavens, preferring a completely different man.

The most famous ladies' duel

Russian women knew a lot about duels. Moreover, in Russia, this type of clarification of relations was actively cultivated.

Do you think duels were purely male fun? Not at all. In Europe in the 17th century, the fashion for fighting literally swept over lovely ladies. Women's battles were even tougher than men's and more often ended in death. You can read more about the most famous ladies' duels and their stories in, but for now we will tell you where it all started.

June 1744. German princess Sophia Frederica Augusta of Anhalt-Zerbst receives a duel challenge from her second cousin, Princess Anne Ludwiga of Anhalt. The duelists are 15 years old! The princesses who did not share some trifle locked themselves in the bedroom and fought with swords. Fortunately, both stopped in time, otherwise world history would not have recognized Catherine the Great.

After accession to the throne, the Empress literally introduced the fashion for female duels in Russia. So, in 1765, 20 fights took place, in eight of which she even acted as a second. However, being an opponent of lethal outcomes, Catherine introduced the slogan: "Until the first blood!" Thanks to this, during her reign, there were only three cases of women killed in duels.

The funniest duel: Sasaki Kojiro vs. Miyamoto Musashi

Two quick strikes at the samurai were enough for the master to to kill

In Japanese culture, duels held a special place and took place differently than in Europe and Russia. No pistols, no swords. In the East, there were other weapons - swords. The tactics were different: the opponents first froze in front of each other, then circled, looking for the moment to strike, which later decided everything. Scenes like this are often seen in Japanese films.

One of the most famous duels among samurai is the battle in 1612 between two famous swordsmen - Miyamoto Musashi and Kojiro Sasaki. It is believed that the reason for the fight was their different views on, in fact, the art of fencing. While Sasaki, who was a true master of the sword and the author of the signature "swallow lunge" technique, was formidable and self-confident, Musashi was a comic sight, having appeared with an oar, hastily shaved under the sword. Sasaki relaxed in advance and considered the duel won, but Musashi managed to deviate from the blow and kill the enemy with just one clear blow to the head with an oar. It only remains to add: weapons are nothing, technology is everything!

Most tragic duel: Alexander Pushkin vs. Georges de Heeckern (Dantes)

Dantes shot first and wounded Pushkin in the stomach. Falling into the snow, the poet soon got up and fired, easily wounding the offender in the arm.

Pushkin's creativity is recognized as a national treasure. The poet's cult was formed during his lifetime, but popularity always has a downside.

In 1835, a young attractive officer Dantes-Gekkern met Natalya Pushkina, the poet's wife, and fell in love. In the secular circles of St. Petersburg, rumors immediately spread, including about the reciprocity of Natalia's feelings. Pushkin, despite a slight excitement, retained trust and tenderness for his wife, until in November 1836 he received an anonymous letter in which he was christened a cuckold and hinted at his wife's relationship with Dantes.

And there would have been a duel even then, but Dantes married. And not on anyone, but on Natalia's sister - Ekaterina Goncharova. However, even after the wedding, Georges continued to look after Natalia, which gave society a reason for new witticisms. Losing patience, in 1837 the poet sends a letter to Dantes' adoptive father Louis Gekkern, where he refuses both of the house. The duel is inevitable.

On February 8, 1837, Pushkin was mortally wounded in the stomach, and Dantes escaped with a minor injury to his hand. Two days later, the country lost its genius. People came in droves to say goodbye. Vasily Zhukovsky, amazed at the pacified expression on the face of his deceased friend, summoned the sculptor, and he took off his death mask. After that it was sold in copies among the closest friends, but now it is in almost every Pushkin museum. From whom else the death masks were removed, read in.

Bloodless duels

Now bloodless duels are sometimes called the prototype of paintball.

At the beginning of the 20th century, they finally thought about the value human life and came up with a relatively safe alternative - bloodless duels. The rivals fired from 20 m from pistols with wax bullets. Such an original weapon was invented by the French physician de Villers in 1905. After that, he conducted training sessions at the elite Parisian School of Combat, and even the ex-President of France, Casimir Perrier, was among their visitors.

The wax bullets were unable to inflict fatal injury, in addition, long canvas cloaks and steel masks were used for protection. Thus, bloodless duels were more like sports, looked spectacular and quickly gained popularity. The New York Times wrote about one of the fights in 1906: two wealthy Americans in leather coats and protective masks fired on command in a certain men's club. The duel ended in a draw, but both the participants and the audience received their portion of adrenaline. Now bloodless duels are sometimes called the prototype of paintball.