№ 1, 2024 year

According to contemporaries, the play “Boris Godunov” was written by Dostoevsky before he began work on the novel “Poor People.” The manuscript of the play is lost. Some assumptions about its composition have been made in the scientific literature, but this article for the first time undertakes a systematic analysis, if possible, of all the alleged sources of the idea, as well as some of its reflections in the writer’s later works. The article examines the situation in Russian historiography and fiction related the coverage of the reign of Boris Godunov and the personality of the tsar himself prior to Dostoevsky’s undertaking of this topic. The key sources for him were the 9 volumes of Karamzin’s “History of the Russian State” and Pushkin’s “Boris Godunov,” which formed the consciousness of the future writer since the times of family readings in his parents’ house. Subsequently, Dostoevsky faced an acute dispute in literature around Karamzin and Pushkin, who declared Godunov guilty of the murder of Tsarevich Dmitry. Their position was supported in the 1830s by the authors of historical dramas V. T. Narezhny, A. S. Khomyakov, and M. E. Lobanov. The historians M. P. Pogodin, N. S. Artsybashev, and A. A. Kraevsky defended Godunov; their point of view was reflected in the dramas of the same Pogodin and G. F. Rosen. F. V. Bulgarin took an ambivalent position in both journalism and prose. Dostoevsky was undoubtedly familiar with Schiller’s printed sketches for the tragedy “Demetrius,” where the figure of Boris Godunov as psychologically complex and ambiguous. The critics of Pushkin’s Boris Godunov N. I. Nadezhdin, N. A. Polevoy, and V. G. Belinsky played a certain role in shaping Dostoevsky’s idea. In “interacting” with them, Dostoevsky obviously developed a new twist in the dramatic plot, which resolved the historians’ dead-end disputes. In his play, which absorbed the dramatic experience of Shakespeare, Racine, Schiller, as well as the historical legends around Alexander I and Napoleon, a version was proposed about Godunov’s indirect guilt in Dmitry’s death and about the hero’s unwavering moral responsibility even for indirect complicity in a crime. This motif was developed in Dostoevsky’s subsequent works, such as “Netochka Nezvanova” (Efimov), “Demons” (Stavrogin), “Brothers Karamazov” (Ivan). It can be stated with a high degree of confidence that the origin of the concept of expanding guilt and responsibility for it occurred in the very first works of the writer — the tragedies “Mary Stuart” and “Boris Godunov.” The author of the article suggests the formation of Dostoevsky’s aesthetics in the context of the development of Russian historical drama.F. M. Dostoevsky, Boris Godunov, lost text, sources, N. M. Karamzin, A. S. Pushkin, guilt, retribution, historical drama, evolution of the genre

Omsk is the city where F. M. Dostoevsky served a penal sentence in 1850–1854 and where the “rebirth of his beliefs” occurred. In the first part of the article, Dostoevsky’s memorable sites in Omsk are revealed based on the impressions of the writer himself, as reflected in “Notes from the Dead House” and “Siberian Notebook,” memoir, epistolary, local history and archival sources (Article lists of prisoners of the Omsk prison (ostrog) and maps and plans of the Omsk fortress, stored in the Russian State Military Historical Archive, metric books of Omsk, stored in the Historical archive of the Omsk region). Through the Tara fortress gate, prisoners arrived at the Omsk prison (ostrog); and through the Tobolsk fortress gate, they went to menial jobs. The house of the engineer general have been preserved, who was in charge of prison work (it also housed the engineering office, where Dostoevsky worked as a scribe), as were the complex of the military hospital, where prisoners were treated and had the opportunity to read and write, and where the “Siberian Notebook” was created, the fortress of the Resurrection Military Cathedral, where they were taken for church services and whose rectors nursed the prisoners, and the house of Platz-Major V. G. Krivtsov and the house of the commandant of the Omsk fortress A. F. de Grave. The second part of the article, arranged as a tour of Dostoevsky’s sites in Omsk, describes the history and current state of all identified objects in the same order from the point of view of the restorer and architect. Some loci have disappeared irrevocably; some have been restored for the anniversary of the writer; some of them do not have the status of a monument of history and culture. The task of professional restoration, conservation and museumification of all the memorable sites in Omsk has been set to create a single memorial route “Dostoevsky’s Omsk.”F. M. Dostoevsky, Omsk, penal servitude, Omsk prison, memorable places, Notes from the Dead House, Siberian notebook, Crime and Punishment, Dmitry Ponomarev, Stefan Znamensky, A. F. de Grave, V. G. Krivtsov

The article introduces into scientific circulation the archival documents stored in the Central State Archive of Moscow and dedicated to the relatives of F. M. Dostoevsky — his greatuncle (grandmother’s older brother) Vasily Mikhailovich Kotelnitsky and his wife Nadezhda Andreevna, nee Rumyantseva. This is a metric certificate of the wedding on February 4, 1806 in the Transfiguration Church of Moscow, as well as a marriage search compiled by the clergy of the specified church. In the latter document, the list of the guarantors for the groom, along with Dostoevsky’s own grandfather Fyodor Timofeevich Nechaev and his brother-in-law (married to sisters) Andrey Gavrilovich Tikhomirov, includes the “drawing teacher” Fyodor Ivanovich Popov. Using other archival documents (metric records, confession sheets), the author of the article substantiates that this person is the artist Popov (whose name had remained unknown up to this day), who in 1823 painted the famous pastel portraits of Maria and Mikhail Dostoevsky — the parents of the writer — and who, according to Andrei Dostoevsky, was in some kind of relationship with their mother, Maria Fedorovna. The article also provides other data (approximate age, places of service) about the artist Fyodor Ivanovich Popov and his wife Evlampia Nikolaevna (nee Chestnova or Chesnova).Fyodor Dostoevsky, genealogy, Kotelnitsky, Fyodor Popov, portrait of Mikhail Dostoevsky, portrait of Maria Dostoevskaya, the metric book, the marriage search, the confession sheet

The article examines the creative history of short stories from the Russian history of Apollon Maikov on the basis of epistolary sources and archival materials. The idea of the work emerged in the author’s mind in a discussion with Fyodor Dostoevsky: in letters of 1867–1869 they reflected on Russia’s past and future, the work on the translation of the “Tale about Igor’s Campaign,” the need to create a textbook living history, the central event of which would be the spread of Christianity in Russia. In correspondence with Maikov, Dostoevsky outlined the concept of epics as a literary genre capable of expressing the essence of Russian history and “serving to revive the self-consciousness of the Russian people” and delineated the turning points of history that determined the future of the country. Maikov conceived another version of the description of Russia’s past — a cycle of ten to twelve historical short stories “for children and the people.” He recorded the plan of the work point by point in papers dating from 1868, and outlined it to Dostoevsky in an April letter for 1869. In separate short stories, he intended to reveal the deeds of Alexander Nevsky, Metropolitans Peter and Alexy, Dmitry Donskoy, Ioann III, Ivan the Terrible, Ermak, St. Sergius of Radonezh, Peter I, Catherine II, Suvorov, the events of 1812, the Crimean War and the liberation of the peasants. The author planned to tell the reader about the main events of Russian history and the patriots of Russia, to reveal the supreme destiny of its historical path, the prerequisites for the formation of the Russian national character, to highlight the idea of unity and integrity of all Russian territories. To realize the idea, Maikov processed chronicle legends, epics, folklore sources (for example, anecdotes about Peter I), the works of historians (I. D. Belyaev, K. P. Pobedonostsev, etc.). He thought out the plots in detail, worked through them repeatedly (which is confirmed by the preserved cycle plans for 1868 and 1881), but released from print only two short stories in 1869 (the second story includes four separate plots). Neither Dostoevsky nor Maikov succeeded in carrying out their plans for historical works. But their plans testify to a common understanding of the historical path of Russia — the path of preserving the Orthodox Christian truth in the struggle for identity and independence. Conscious of their moral duty to the fatherland, they considered it their duty to convey to readers the need to feel Russian and the right to be proud of the history of this great country.Apollon Maikov, Dostoevsky, stories, creative history, plan, idea, history of Russia, Orthodoxy, patriotism

The Dostoevsky couple’s book trade is a separate, vast topic that has recently attracted increasingly greater attention of researchers. Starting in 1872 — the period of preparation of the novel “Demons” (1873) for publication — the Dostoevskys dealt with various publishers, printers, manufacturers and booksellers. The article is based on the 1872–1881 notebooks of F. M. Dostoevsky and the 1876–1918 notebooks of A. G. Dostoevskaya, as well as on scientific literature on publishing and book trade of 19th-century Russia, expanded comments and biographical references to such representatives of the book business as the Vargunin brothers and separately father and son Alexander Ivanovich and Konstantin Alexandrovich Vargunin; the Glazunov brothers and separately Alexander Ilyich and Ivan Ilyich Glazunov. The last representatives of the Glazunov publishing clan, Konstantin Ilyich and Ilya Ivanovich Glazunov, with whom, judging by the notebooks, A. G. Dostoevskaya interacted after the writer’s death, are being discussed for the first time. The article expanded the comment on the surname “Mamontov.” In the research literature on Dostoevsky, the emphasis is placed either exclusively on the writer’s relationship with Nikolai Ivanovich Mamontov, or with Anatoly Ivanovich Mamontov. Based on the notebooks of A. G. Dostoevskaya of 1876–1881, the article demonstrates that the Dostoevskys communicated with both representatives of the Mamontov family at that time. It is also suggested that in the late receipts issued by A. G. Dostoevskaya to a subscriber of the bookstore of a certain N. G. Mamontov, most likely refer to the bookseller N. G. Martynov. A. G. Dostoevskaya’s notebooks of the period after Dostoevsky’s death shows that the widow continued to cooperate with many publishers, booksellers and manufacturers after her husband’s death.F. M. Dostoevsky, A. G. Dostoevskaya, notebook, subscription book, typographer, publisher, bookseller, book trade, paper business, Vargunins, Glazunovs, Mamontovs, N. G. Martynov

The article examines the path of Armenian Dostoevsky studies — starting from the 80s of the 19th century. It was then that interest in Dostoevsky’s work arose in Armenian literary circles — in particular, in the periodicals of Tiflis, K. Polis, Petersburg, Paris. At the origins of Armenian studies of the Russian writer are the editors of Armenian newspapers and magazines Arpiar Arpiaryan, Levon Bashalyan, and Arshak Chopanyan. For the first time to Dostoevsky’s work contacted the editor of Tiflis newspaper “Mshak” Grigor Artsruni in 1880; he tried to consider the work of the novelist in the context of mysticism and religious views. And the first work of the Russian writer in the Armenian language was the story “Notes from the Dead House,” which was printed in 1885 in the weekly “Araks” published in Petersburg. The first work of the Russian writer translated into Armenian was the story “The Boy at Christ’s Christmas Tree,” published in 1886 in the Constantinople newspaper “Masis.” The translation was not signed. In 1892, in the St. Petersburg bulletin “Araks” were published “Notes from the House of the Dead.” The unknown translator left the work unfinished. The new translation of the story was done by Yervand Otyan. In subsequent years, the works of Dostoevsky were translated by K. Mirianyan, Shirvanzade, S. Shalchyan, G. Lerentz, K. Surenyan, A. Mazmanyan, A. Mekhakyan, A. Hovhannisyan and others. The writer’s death became an occasion for new reflections on his life and work. At the next stage of Armenian history, at the beginning of the 20th century, discussions about the novelist’s work became more often, lectures and discussions were organized at the literary evenings of the Caucasian Society of Armenian Writers. Many Armenian writers and critics recognized the influence of Dostoevsky not only on their creativity, but also on world perception (A. Oshakan, K. Surenyan, Nar-Dos, Shirvanzade). Some of them became translators of Dostoevsky (Surenyan, Shirvanzade), and some initiated new translations (Arpiaryan, Chopanyan). In the second half of the 20th century, Karpis Surenyan, Levon Mkrtchyan and Karen Stepanyan became the most important actors of the Armenian Dostoevsky studies. Remarkable typological and comparative parallels were drawn between Dostoevsky and Mickiewicz, Narekatsi, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Schiller, Cervantes and other authors.Hovhannes Tumanyan, Fedor Dostoevsky, Karpis Surenyan, Levon Mkrtchyan, Stanislav Rassadin, Narekatsi, Arpiar Arpiaryan, Arshak Chopanyan, Levon Bashalyan, Karen Stepanyan, literary connections, Russian literature, Armenian literature

On February 9, at the age of 86, Horst-Jürgen Gerigk, one of the largest Slavists in Germany, a researcher of F. M. Dostoevsky's work, honorary professor at the University of Heidelberg, member of the editorial board of the journal "The Unknown Dostoevsky", passed away. The publication is dedicated to his bright memory.Horst-Jurgen Gerick, Dostoevsky, obituary, memory, researcher, Germany

On March 3, Viktor Fedorovich Molchanov, a well-known Russian historian, researcher of book culture, Doctor of historical sciences, member of the editorial board of our journal "The Unknown Dostoevsky", died at the age of 75. For more than 35 years, he headed the Department of Manuscripts of the Russian State Library. The publication is dedicated to the memory of V. F. Molchanov, the keeper of books and manuscripts.V. F. Molchanov, Department of Manuscripts of the Russian State Library, autograph, manuscript, history, Russia, culture