P. N

Are you here: Holiday scenarios

Introduction

1. Political activity of P.N. Milyukov

2. "Memories"

Conclusion

List of sources used

Introduction

The history of Russia is full of contradictory events and historical situations. Particularly interesting in this regard is the period of history from 1905 to 1917. A huge number of memoirs of contemporaries, historical monographs of Russian and foreign historians are consecrated to this period. It is very difficult to judge this time after almost a hundred years, since views on history have been redrawn several times during this time. The historians of the Soviet Union offered their own view, the emigrants offered their own, but it remains difficult to find out the authenticity and reality of the events taking place at that time today. Until now, the history of Russian revolutions has not been written, although there are now quite enough materials for this.

The book "Memoirs" by Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov is one of those historical documents that allows us to form our own understanding of the events of 1905-1917.

The purpose of this work is to consider the memoirs of one of the outstanding political figures and scientists of Russia in the early twentieth century

Before getting acquainted with the work of Milyukov, it is necessary to dwell on his biography, since the memoirs themselves are biographical, it will be interesting to compare the views of historians on the life of the author with his own views given in his memoirs.

milyukov revolutionary historian political russia

1. Political activity of P.N. Milyukov

He received his education at the 1st Moscow Gymnasium, located on Sivtsev Vrazhek. Even then, the sphere of his interests lay in the humanitarian field: he was attracted by ancient authors, classical music, he began to write poetry.

At the end of the gymnasium, in the summer of 1877, together with P.D. Dolgorukov P.N. Milyukov participated as a volunteer in the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1978. as treasurer of the military economy, and then authorized by the Moscow sanitary detachment in Transcaucasia.

In 1877 he entered the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. In 1879, after the death of his father, the Milyukov family was on the verge of ruin. To ensure a decent existence for his mother (the younger brother Alexei did not live with his family at that time), he was forced to give private lessons.

The first interest of P.N. Milyukov to political activity. He began to take part in student gatherings. In 1881, for participating in one of them, he ended up in a cell in the Butyrka prison for several hours and was expelled from the university, to which he could return only a year later.

Although when entering the university, P.N. Milyukov chose the Faculty of History and Philology; interest in history came only thanks to the influence of outstanding professors P.G. Vinogradov and V.O. Klyuchevsky, who appeared in his life as "real luminaries of learning and talent." Lectures and seminars by V.O. Klyuchevsky instilled in him Milyukov a love for the history of his native country, which he decided to study after graduating from university in 1882. For this purpose, he remained at the department to work on his master's thesis. In 1892, the dissertation was presented for defense, and in 1896 it was published under the title "The State Economy of Russia in the First Quarter of the 18th Century and the Reforms of Peter the Great."

At the end of the 80s. there have been changes in the personal life of P.N. Milyukov: he married Anna Sergeevna Smirnova, daughter of the rector of the Trinity-Sergius Academy S.K. Smirnov, whom he met in the house of V.O. Klyuchevsky. Like her husband, who had been fond of playing the violin all his life, Anna Sergeevna loved music: according to the reviews of others, she was a talented pianist. They had three children: in 1889 - son Nikolai, in 1895 - son Sergei, the youngest child in the family was the only daughter Natalya. P.N. Milyukov taught at Moscow University for two years, but in 1895 he was fired. Taking part in reading educational lectures in the provinces, in one of them he pointed out the need to develop Russian citizenship, which is why he was exiled to Ryazan.

The link was given by P.N. Milyukov the opportunity to study archeology in depth, as well as to start writing his main historical work - Essays on the History of Russian Culture. In it, he showed the great role of the state in the formation of Russian society, arguing that Russia, despite its peculiarities, followed the European path of development, and also presented his arguments regarding the adaptability of the Russian "national type" to borrowed public institutions.

In the spring of 1897, having received an invitation from Sofia, P.N. Miliukov left for Bulgaria. Two years spent in Bulgaria and Macedonia, he was engaged in teaching activities. During this time, he managed to study the history and culture of the southern Slavs to such an extent that subsequently he was rightly considered the largest specialist in Russia on the Balkan issue.

Returning to Russia in 1900, P.N. Milyukov, at one of the public meetings, expressed opinions in opposition to the government, which is why he spent about six months in prison. Having been released in the summer of 1901, having earned a reputation as an oppositionist, he received an offer to edit the liberal publication Osvobozhdenie, which he refused. But when the magazine began to appear, he began to contribute to it. For "Liberation" he wrote the first program article - "From the Russian Constitutionalists" (1902). Cooperation in the journal continued until 1905.

In 1903 P.N. Milyukov traveled to the United States of America to lecture, and returned to his homeland in 1905 after hearing about the revolution in Russia. From April 1905 he was in Moscow. Gradually accustomed to the new political environment, he realized the need for social change. Implementation of changes P.N. Milyukov considered it possible only under the condition of a "peace agreement between liberals and revolutionaries", which he sought to implement in the "Union of Unions", where he served as chairman in May - August 1905. His political views attracted public attention and united a significant number of supporters around him: after all by 1905 he had gained a reputation as an "inveterate revolutionary." Like-minded people created the Party of People's Freedom (Constitutional-Democratic), in the drafting of the program of which he took an active part.

All the years of the functioning of the State Duma P.N. Milyukov remained the ideological inspirer and head of the Cadet faction, despite the fact that he did not enter the I and II Dumas because of the property qualification.

In 1906, the official printed organ of the Constitutional Democratic Party, the newspaper Rech, began to be published, one of the editors of which was P.N. Milyukov. On its pages, he published his numerous publicistic notes, and also wrote the editorials of almost all issues, in which he covered various issues of Russia's domestic and foreign policy.

On June 1907, the government dissolved the Second Duma, and a new electoral law was issued. As a result of the elections to the III Duma, P.N. Milyukov finally joined it. Despite the new working conditions, the tactics of the Cadet faction was to become more actively involved in state activities through participation in the work of the Duma.

In the III Duma, P.N. Milyukov became the chief expert on foreign policy issues, which he also dealt with in the Fourth Duma, and also spoke on various issues on behalf of the faction. It is interesting that in one of his speeches he used in relation to A.I. Guchkov, in his own words, "a rather strong expression", "although quite parliamentary", for which he was challenged by the leader of the Octobrists to a duel (which, however, did not take place).

In the first period of the work of the Fourth Duma, which lasted from the day it was opened on November 15, 1912 until the outbreak of the First World War, the Cadets faction headed by P.N. Milyukov drew attention to issues of general political significance, as well as to "criticism of the behavior of the government in the internal life of Russia, carried out in the form of requests."

At the end of 1915, P.N. Milyukov experienced a deep personal tragedy: during the retreat from Brest, his second son Sergei, who had gone to war as a volunteer in 1914, was killed.

After the February Revolution, P.N. Milyukov took part in the formation of the Provisional Government, which he joined as Minister of Foreign Affairs. After the abdication of Nicholas II, he tried to achieve the preservation of the monarchy in Russia until the convocation of the Constituent Assembly.

At the ministerial post, the decline of the political career of P.N. Milyukov: the war was unpopular among the people, and on April 18, 1917, he sent a note to the allies in which he outlined his foreign policy doctrine: war to a victorious end. This was the main drawback of P.N. Milyukov was a politician who cost him his career: being convinced of the correctness of his views and firmly convinced of the need to implement the program guidelines of his party, he imperturbably walked towards his goals, not paying attention to external influences, to the real situation in the country, to the mindset of the population. The manifestation of discontent and demonstrations in the capital after the note by P.N. Milyukov called for the resignation of the minister on May 2, 1917.

In the spring - autumn of 1917, P.N. Milyukov participated in the political life of Russia as chairman of the Central Committee of the Constitutional Democratic Party, a member of the permanent bureau of the State Conference and the Pre-Parliament. In August 1917, at the State Meeting in Moscow, according to V.A. Obolensky, P.N. Milyukov "unambiguously made it clear that in the phase into which the revolution had entered, the Provisional Government was doomed and that only a military dictatorship could save Russia from anarchy." Thus, he supported the proposals of General L.G. Kornilov. At the same time, he actively appealed to the Russian public about the need to fight Bolshevism.

Bolshevik coup P.N. Miliukov did not accept and began to use all his influence to fight the Soviet regime. He advocated armed struggle, for which he sought to create a united front. After October 1917, he left for Moscow to organize resistance to the Bolsheviks. In November 1917, he participated in a meeting of representatives of the Entente on the fight against Bolshevism. Having gone to Novocherkassk, he joined the volunteer military organization of General M.V. Alekseev. In January 1918, he was a member of the "Don Civil Council", created under the Volunteer Army of General L.G. Kornilov, for whom he wrote a declaration. He was elected to the Constituent Assembly from the city of Petrograd.

In May 1918, in Kyiv, on behalf of the conference of the Cadet Party P.N. Milyukov began negotiations with the German command about the need to finance the anti-Bolshevik movement. The convinced supporter of the Entente decided to take this step only because he saw in Germany the only real force at that time capable of resisting the Bolsheviks. Since the negotiations were not supported by the majority of the Cadets, he resigned from his duties as chairman of the Central Committee of the party (he later recognized the negotiations as erroneous).

In the winter - spring of 1918, he participated in the organization of an underground operation in Moscow " National Center", was a friend of its chairman. At the same time, P.N. Milyukov resumed his activity as a historian: in 1919, The History of the Second Russian Revolution was published in Kyiv, republished in 1921 in Sofia. In this work, the author offered a deep analysis of the causes and significance of the 1917 revolution.

In November 1918, P.N. Milyukov traveled to Western Europe in order to obtain support from the allies for the anti-Bolshevik forces. For some time he lived in England, where he edited the weekly "The New Russia", published in English by the Russian emigrant Liberation Committee. He spoke in print and journalism on behalf of the White movement. In 1920 he published in London the book Bolshevism: An International Danger. However, the defeat of the White armies at the front and the conservative policy of the White leaders, which failed to provide the White movement with broad popular support, changed his views on how to rid Russia of Bolshevism. After the evacuation of the troops of General P.N. Wrangel from the Crimea in November 1920, he admitted that "Russia cannot be liberated against the will of the people."

In the same years, P.N. Milyukov received from Soviet Russia the tragic news of the death of his daughter Natalya from dysentery.

In 1920 P.N. Milyukov moved to Paris, where he headed the Union of Russian Writers and Journalists in Paris and the council of professors at the Franco-Russian Institute. In exile P.N. Milyukov wrote and published a lot: his works “Russia at a Turning Point”, “Emigration at a Crossroads” were published, “Memoirs” were started, and remained unfinished.

In the period from April 27, 1921 to June 11, 1940, P.N. Milyukov edited the Latest News newspaper published in Paris. It devoted much space to news from Soviet Russia. Since 1921, P.N. Milyukov found signs of revival and democratization in Russia, which, in his opinion, went against the policy of the Soviet government. In 1935, A.S. died. Milyukov. In the same year, P.N. Milyukov married N.V. Lavrova.

In the conditions of World War II, P.N. Milyukov was unconditionally on the side of the USSR, considering Germany as an aggressor. He sincerely rejoiced at the Stalingrad victory, evaluating it as a turning point in favor of the USSR. March 31, 1943, at the age of 84, P.N. Milyukov died in Aix-les-Bains, not having lived to see the victory, but until the last minutes of his life, remaining a true patriot of his native country. He was buried in a temporary plot in the cemetery in Aix-les-Bains. Soon after the end of the war, the only surviving child of P.N. Milyukova, his eldest son Nikolai, moved his father's coffin to Paris, to the family crypt at the Batillon cemetery, where A.S. Milyukov.

2. "Memories"

Pavel Nikolayevich Milyukov began writing his “Memoirs” at the beginning of World War II. In his book, the author talks about a long life. But since he happened to be a participant in the most important events for the history of Russia, such as a surge in the liberation movement at the turn of the century, the revolutions of 1905-1917, the formation of Russian parliamentarism, the fall of the autocracy and the creation of a provisional government, Milyukov’s memoirs acquire the significance of a document of the era, reflected in the mind of one of her heroes.

It is known that memoirs always represent a historical source of a specific kind: they inevitably bear the imprint of subjectivity in the author's perception of certain facts or phenomena and in their selection for his story. With Milyukov's Memoirs, the situation is even more complicated, since when writing them, he was deprived of the opportunity to use documents, literature, any materials that clarify and supplement the evidence of his exceptional memory.

For the first time, “Memoirs” were published in 1955 by the Chekhov Publishing House in New York under the editorship of Professors M.M. Karpovich and B.I. Elkin, belonging to the close circle of Pavel Nikolayevich. In the preface from the editors, it was indicated that, as is clear from the detailed table of contents compiled by the author, he set himself the goal of bringing the memories to the Bolshevik coup, but death prevented this plan from being carried out. In its finished form, the presentation is brought only to the chapter on the July uprising of 1917 and its consequences.

The editors also reported that when preparing the book for publication, they filled in the gaps left by the author in the manuscript due to the lack of reference materials, corrected errors in dates and names, and omitted some harsh judgments of a “purely personal nature”.

Milyukov also wrote about his political activities in his other memoirs, published during his lifetime. But there the reader will not find many essential details introduced into the memoirs, elements of political confession that are not present in them. and the rise of an outstanding Russian scientist and politician.

The attitude of his contemporaries towards Milyukov throughout his life remained complex and contradictory, assessments of his personality were often polar opposites. He always had many enemies, and at the same time not a few friends. Sometimes friends became enemies, but sometimes it was true and vice versa. In the memoir literature it is difficult to find impartial, not colored by personal attitude judgments about this extraordinary person.

The ability to maneuver flexibly between political extremes, the desire to find mutually acceptable solutions coexisted in Milyukov with extraordinary personal courage, which he repeatedly showed at decisive moments in his life. As Prince V.A., who knew Pavel Nikolayevich closely, testified. Obolensky, he completely lacked a fear reflex.

There were legends about Milyukov's efficiency. During the day he managed to do a huge number of things, all his life, every day he wrote serious analytical articles, worked on books. Compiled in 1930, the bibliographic list of his scientific works amounted to 38 typewritten sheets.

In "Memoirs" the author's life is described in detail until the summer of 1917, how the situation developed further, we can learn from other memoirs: Milyukov P.N. History of the second Russian revolution., issue 2. - Sofia 1921.

“The memoirs are divided by the author into 9 parts, and, as is typical for a historian, they have a clear periodization. In the first part, “From Childhood to Youth” (1859 - 1873), the author talks about the first years of his life, from the narrative we can learn not only about his life, but also about the life and life of the people of that time. The second part of the book tells about the last gymnasium years of Pavel Nikolayevich 1873 - 1877, about his first musical, literary and other hobbies, as in other parts of the book, the impressions conveyed by the author in detail about what he saw, felt and meaningful, amaze and surprise. In the third part, the author shares his impressions of his life during his university years. Here, for example, we can see detailed psychological portraits of such prominent historians of that time as Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky. “From Student to Teacher and Scientist” covers 1882-1894, as in other parts, the author writes not only about his work, but also about his personal life, his incredible energy was enough not only for work, but he also had strength to visit the theater , concerts, collecting a personal library, which throughout his life he started from scratch three or four times.

Since 1895, P.N. Miliukov traveled a lot. First, he talks about exile in Ryazan, then about a trip to Bulgaria and Macedonia, about the first period of life in St. Petersburg, about trips to America and England. All these wanderings are devoted to the fifth part of the book, covering the years 1895-1905 of the author's life.

The last parts of the book - from the sixth to the ninth, tell about the political life of Milyukov during the years of the Russian revolutions, from here we can learn about the course of the first and second revolutions in Russia, about the creation of the Cadets Party and its activities. This part of the Memoirs is of great interest to scholarly historians and lovers of Russian history of this period. As mentioned above, the author did not have time to bring his memories to the planned moment of his life, that is, October - November 1917, but what Milyukov told was very helpful to historians in studying this period of Russian history.

Conclusion

Like all memoir literature, this book is full of subjective opinions and views of the author, but at the same time, it fully conveys the views of educated people of that time, both Milyukov himself and his associates.

In his memoirs, the author talks about a large period of his life, for 58 years many events take place in his life, for example, it is interesting that the author's views on the same phenomena change over the course of his life and they are described in detail in this book. This indicator helps to quite fully represent the interests, views, character of the author.

The fact that the author was deprived of access to various types of documentary sources somewhat reduces the value of this book from the point of view of historians, since, as we know, undocumented facts constantly cause disputes among historians. However, this does not diminish the value of the book for intellectual readers.

The book of Milyukov's Memoirs was published several times over the course of fifty years, it earned popularity outside of Russia, and after the collapse of the USSR, they were able to get acquainted with it in Russia. In Russia over the past 15 years, it has also been published several times.

Like any memoir literature, it is very difficult to read “in one fell swoop”, since a huge number of events and opinions of one person, which very often contradict each other, are difficult to perceive. But this book of memoirs is very clearly divided into periods, which indicates not only that the author was a strict and very organized person, but also allows you to read it selectively, for example, to get acquainted only with the political aspects of the life of P.N. Milyukov.

List of sources used

1. Works by P.N. Milyukov

Milyukov P.N. History of the second Russian revolution. Issue 1 - 3. Paris, 1921 - 1924.

Milyukov P.N. History of the second Russian revolution., issue 2. - Sofia 1921.

Milyukov P. Emigration at the Crossroads. Paris, 1926.

Milyukov P.N. Russia at the turning point: the Bolshevik period of the Russian revolution. Vol. 1 - 2. Paris, 1927.

Milyukov P.N. Essays on the history of Russian culture. Paris, 1937.

Milyukov P.N. "Memories. - New York.: Chekhov Publishing House., 1955.

Milyukov P.N. Memoirs (1859 - 1917). In 2 vol. M., 1990.

Milyukov Pavel Nikolaevich. "Memories" - M .: Vagrius., 2001.,

Milyukov P.N. Living Pushkin. M., 1997.

Bibliography of publications about P.N. Milyukov.

12. Alexandrov, Sergei Alexandrovich (1960-). The leader of the Russian cadets P.N. Milyukov in exile / Afterword. M.G. Vandalkovskaya; [Assoc. researchers grew up. islands of the 20th century]. - M. : AIRO-XX, 1996. - 151 p. : silt

13. Vakar N.P. N. Milyukov in exile // New Journal 1943 No. 6, p. 375.

14. Vandalkovskaya, Margarita Georgievna. P.N. Milyukov A.A. Kizevetter: history and politics / Ros. acad. Sciences. In-t grew up. stories. - M.: Nauka, 1992. - 285, p.

15. Vernadsky G.V. P.N. Milyukov and the place of development of the Russian people // New Journal., 1964. No. 74., p. 255.

Gessen I.V. Years of Exile: A Life Report. Paris, 1979.

Dumova N.G. The Kadet counter-revolution and its defeat - M., 1982.

18. Dumova, Natalya Georgievna. Churchill and Milyukov against Soviet Russia / USSR Academy of Sciences. - M.: Nauka, 1989. - 202,

19. Karpovich M.M. P.N. Milyukov as a historian // New magazine. 1943. No. 6. Sir. 366.

Kizevetter A.A. At the turn of two centuries - Prague., 1929.

21. Makushin, Alexander Vasilievich. P.N. Milyukov: the path in historical science and the transition to political activity (late 1870s - early 1900s): Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist step. Ph.D. : Spec. 07.00.02 / [Voronezh. state. university]. - Voronezh, 1998. - 24 p.

P.N. Milyukov: historian, politician, diplomat: Proceedings of the International. scientific conf., Moscow, May 26-27, 1999 / [Ed.: V.V. Shelokhaev (responsible editor) and others]. - M. : Rosspen, 2000. - 558, p.

23. Obolensky V.A. My life. My contemporaries. Paris, 1988.

24. Platonov, Sergei Fedorovich (1860-1933). Letters of Russian historians: (S.F. Platonov, P.N. Milyukov) / [Compiled by: Doctor of Historical Sciences. V.P. Korzun and others]; Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation, Om. state. un-t. - Omsk: Polygraphist, 2003. - 304, p.

Rutkevich, Natalia Alekseevna. Philosophy of the history of Russian liberalism: P.B. Struve and P.N. Milyukov: (Comparative analysis): Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist step. Ph.D. : Spec. 09.00.11 / Rutkevich N.A.; Ros. acad. Sciences, Institute of Philosophy. - M., 2002. - 26 p.

26. Savich N.V. Memories. SPb., 1993.

Sedykh A. Far, close - New York., 1970.

28. Tribunsky, Pavel Alexandrovich. P.N. Milyukov as a historian of Russian historical thought: Abstract of the thesis. dis. To the competition scientist step. Ph.D. : Spec. 07.00.09 / [Ros. state. humanit. university]. - M., 2001. - 22, p.

29. Tyrkova-Williams A.V. On the way to freedom. London, 1990.

Shulgin V.V. 1917 - 1919//Persons: Biographical almanac. M.; SPb., 1994. Part 5. P.121 - 328.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

MILYUKOV PAVEL NIKOLAEVICH (1859 - 1943)

P.N. Milyukov

Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov was born on January 15 (27), 1859 in Moscow, in the family of a poor architect, a native of the nobility, Nikolai Pavlovich Milyukov, and his wife Maria Arkadyevna, who came from a noble Sultanov family. He was the eldest of two children born in the marriage. His mother was involved in his early education. P.N. Milyukov recalled: “Father, busy with his own affairs, did not pay attention to the children at all and did not take care of our upbringing. Mother guided us ... "

Although when entering the university, P.N. Milyukov chose the Faculty of History and Philology, interest in history came only thanks to the influence of outstanding professors P.G. Vinogradov and V.O. Klyuchevsky, who appeared in his life as "real luminaries of learning and talent." Lectures and seminars by V. O. Klyuchevsky instilled in him a love for the history of his native country, which he decided to study after graduating from university in 1882. For this purpose, he remained at the department to work on his master's thesis.

In 1892, the dissertation was presented for defense, and in 1896 it was published under the title "The State Economy of Russia in the First Quarter of the 18th Century and the Reforms of Peter the Great." Fame P.N. Milyukov brought an original view of the course of transformations: he was the first to express the idea that the reforms of Peter I were a spontaneous process, prepared by the course of time, and not originally planned.

The university professors appreciated the work done by the young researcher, almost making a decision to award P.N. Milyukov immediately doctoral degree. The person who spoke out against and won over the Academic Council was V.O. Klyuchevsky. The teacher could not come to terms with the quick success of a talented student, which forever ruined their relationship.

P.N. Milyukov taught at Moscow University for two years, but in 1895 he was fired. Taking part in reading educational lectures in the provinces, in one of them he pointed out the need to develop Russian citizenship, which is why he was exiled to Ryazan.

In the spring of 1897, having received an invitation from Sofia, P.N. Miliukov left for Bulgaria. Two years spent in Bulgaria and Macedonia, he worked

teaching activities. During this time, he managed to study the history and culture of the southern Slavs to such an extent that subsequently he was rightly considered the largest specialist in Russia on the Balkan issue.

P.N. Milyukov went down in history as the permanent leader of the party, becoming in March 1907 the chairman of its Central Committee. He developed the Cadets' tactical line at all stages of the Party's existence, and was one of the best Party publicists and orators. In his views within the party, he always occupied centrist positions. I.V. Gessen, in his memoirs, claims that the policy of the party was "mainly" determined by one person - P.N. Milyukov, and his influence was so strong that it was only thanks to him that the party did not reflect the "interests of a certain social group."

On the reasons for the unconditional leadership of P.N. Milyukov in the Constitutional Democratic Party was written by a member of the Central Committee of the Party of People's Freedom A.V. Tyrkova-Williams: “There were many outstanding people in the party. Miliukov rose above them, became a leader primarily because he strongly wanted to be a leader. He had a concentrated ambition, rare for a Russian public figure. It's a good thing for a politician."

His attitude towards the activities of the Constitutional Democratic Party is almost fanatical: he was so absorbed in it that he showed interest in people only to the extent that they took part in the common cause. From communication, he tried to take out what best reflected public opinion or the “atmosphere”

within his party. Coldness and indifference to people became the main reason that P.N. Milyukov was and always has been an excellent theoretician of liberalism and a mediocre practical politician, incapable of understanding the aspirations of various sections of the country's population.

In the summer of 1906, P.N. Milyukov took part in compiling the Vyborg Appeal. On the morning of July 9, having barely learned that a manifesto was being prepared to dissolve the Duma, P.N. Milyukov, not wasting a minute, "got on his bicycle and at about 7 o'clock in the morning toured the apartments of the members of the Central Committee (of the Constitutional Democratic Party), inviting them to assemble immediately." The Central Committee of the party in full force went to Vyborg, where, together with the deputies of the Duma, who did not agree with the decision of the government, they participated in drawing up an appeal to the population about passive resistance to dissolution.

On June 3, 1907, the government dissolved the Second Duma, and a new electoral law was issued. As a result of the elections to the III Duma, P.N. Milyukov finally joined it. Despite the new working conditions, the tactics of the Cadet faction was to become more actively involved in state activities through participation in the work of the Duma.

Traveling around the country during the election campaign of P.N. Milyukov met at the station with Nina (Antonina) Vasilievna Lavrova, who later became his second wife. It is characteristic that, like the first wife of the leader of the Cadets, N.V. Lavrova had an excellent ear for music and played the piano.

also on "criticism of the behavior of the government in the internal life of Russia, carried out in the form of requests."

At the Congress of the Constitutional Democratic Party of P.N. Milyukov proposed the tactic of "isolating the government", which won the support of the majority of the delegates. This meant legitimizing the open confrontation between the Cadets and the authorities, which was reflected in the harsh speeches of the party representatives in the Duma and in the periodical press.

The First World War at first made adjustments to the tactics of the Cadets. P.N. Milyukov became a supporter of the idea of ending the internal political struggle before victory, for the sake of which the opposition forces should support the government. He considered the war as an opportunity to strengthen the foreign policy influence of the state, associated with the strengthening of positions in the Balkans and the inclusion of the Bosporus and Dardanelles in the Russian Empire, for which he received the nickname "Milyukov-Dardanelles".

But the "sacred unity" with the government did not last long: the economic crisis in the country, the defeat of the army and domestic political instability led to the fact that a strong opposition to the government began to form in the Duma, which in August 1915 united in the Progressive Bloc. P.N. Milyukov was the organizer and one of the leaders of the bloc, who believed that Russia could win the war only if the existing government was replaced by a ministry that enjoyed the confidence of the country.

At the end of 1915, P. N. Milyukov experienced a deep personal tragedy: during the retreat from Brest, his second son Sergei, who had gone to war as a volunteer in 1914, was killed.

1916 - the peak of the Progressive Bloc. This year, B.V. turned out to be the head of the Russian government. Stürmer, who concentrated in his hands three key positions of the Cabinet of Ministers, a protege of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna and G.E. Rasputin, and therefore extremely unpopular in the ranks of the opposition. It is natural that the resignation of B.V. Stürmer became one of the main tasks of the unit. An important step towards its implementation was the famous Duma speech by P.N. Milyukov of November 1, 1916, which received in historiography the conditional name "Stupidity or treason?" on the basis of the refrain repeated in it. Having built his speech on information unknown in Russia, collected by him during a trip abroad in the summer - autumn of 1916, P.N. Milyukov used them as evidence of B.V.'s incapacity and malicious intent. Stürmer, mentioning in this connection even the name of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Thanks to the use of information unknown in Russia, the speech became very popular in the country, which is why among emigrants, already in the 20s, it was often perceived as a “storm signal” for revolution.

After the February Revolution, P.N. Milyukov took part in the formation

Provisional Government, which included as Minister of Foreign Affairs. After the abdication of Nicholas II, he tried to achieve the preservation of the monarchy in Russia until the convocation of the Constituent Assembly.

1917 at the State Meeting in Moscow, according to V.A. Obolensky, P.N. Milyukov "unambiguously made it clear that in the phase into which the revolution had entered, the Provisional Government was doomed and that only a military dictatorship could save Russia from anarchy." Thus, he supported the proposals of General L.G. Kornilov. At the same time, he actively appealed to the Russian public about the need to fight Bolshevism.

In the winter - spring of 1918, he participated in the organization of an underground

Moscow "National Center", was a friend of its chairman.

At the same time, P.N. Milyukov resumed his activity as a historian: in 1919, The History of the Second Russian Revolution was published in Kyiv, republished in 1921 in Sofia. In this work, the author offered a deep analysis of the causes and significance of the 1917 revolution.

In the same years, P. N. Milyukov received from Soviet Russia the tragic news of the death of his daughter Natalya from dysentery.

In 1920 P.N. Milyukov moved to Paris, where he headed the Union of Russian Writers and Journalists in Paris and the council of professors at the Franco-Russian Institute.

Summing up the results of the anti-Bolshevik struggle in 1917-1920, he developed a "new tactic", with the theses of which he spoke in May 1920 at a meeting of the Paris Committee of Cadets. The "new tactics" in relation to Soviet Russia, aimed at internally overcoming Bolshevism, rejected both the continuation of the armed struggle within Russia and foreign intervention. Instead, it was envisaged the recognition of the republican and federal order in Russia, the destruction of landownership, the development of local self-government. P.N. Milyukov considered it necessary, together with the socialists, to develop a broad plan in land and national questions, in the sphere of state building. It was expected that this platform would gain the support of the democratic forces within Russia and inspire them to fight against the Bolshevik regime.

P.N. Miliukov also planned the creation of a National Committee as a body uniting emigration circles close to the Cadets. He considered the agreement with the Social Revolutionaries to be the basis of the coalition. Together with them, he participated in the meeting of the former members of the Constituent Assembly, and also became a member of the Executive Committee of the meeting.

A change in outlook put P.N. Milyukov in opposition to the greater

part of the Russian emigration and made enemies of many of the Cadets, who were his like-minded people in Russia. In June 1921, he left the party and, together with M.M. Vinaverom formed the Paris Democratic Group of the People's Freedom Party (in 1924 it was transformed into the "Republican-Democratic Association").

Monarchists who accused P.N. Milyukov in unleashing the revolution in Russia and in all its consequences, several attempts were made to assassinate him. Even in Paris, a city with a relatively liberal emigrant colony, he had to live in a "semi-secret" apartment and "semi-hidden", fearing their attacks. March 28, 1922 in the building of the Berlin Philharmonic in P.N. Milyukov was shot, but

V.D. Nabokov, a well-known cadet, covered up the former leader of the party, in his opinion, "one of the most remarkable Russian people", "a man of vast, almost inexhaustible knowledge", as a result of which he himself was killed.

In exile, P. N. Milyukov wrote and published a lot: his works “Russia at a Turning Point”, “Emigration at a Crossroads” were published, “Memoirs” were started, and remained unfinished.

Gradually, Russian nationalism and fear of fascism forced P.N. Milyukov to reconsider his views on some areas of I.V. Stalin. So, in the 30s. he began to appreciate the foreign policy of the Bolsheviks for its imperial character. For example, he approved of the war with Finland, arguing: "I feel sorry for the Finns, but I am for the Vyborg province."

In 1935, A.S. died. Milyukov. In the same year, P.N. Milyukov married N.V. Lavrova.

March 31, 1943, at the age of 84, P.N. Milyukov died in Aix-les-Bains, not having lived to see the victory, but until the last minutes of his life, remaining a true patriot of his native country. He was buried in a temporary plot in the cemetery in Aix-les-Bains. Soon after the end of the war, the only surviving child of P.N. Milyukova, his eldest son Nikolai, moved his father's coffin to Paris, to the family crypt at the Batillon cemetery, where A.S. Milyukov.

Compositions:

Milyukov P.N. History of the second Russian revolution. Issue 1 - 3. Paris, 1921 - 1924. Milyukov P.N. Emigration at a crossroads. Paris, 1926.

Milyukov P.N. Russia at the turning point: the Bolshevik period of the Russian revolution. Vol. 1 - 2. Paris, 1927.

Milyukov P.N. Essays on the history of Russian culture. Paris, 1937.

Milyukov P.N. Memoirs (1859 - 1917). In 2 vol. M., 1990.

Milyukov P.N. Living Pushkin. M., 1997.

Memories:

Gessen I.V. Years of Exile: A Life Report. Paris, 1979.

Obolensky V.A. My life. My contemporaries. Paris, 1988.

Savich N.V. Memories. SPb., 1993.

Tyrkova-Williams A.V. On the way to freedom. London, 1990.

Shulgin V.V. 1917 - 1919//Persons: Biographical almanac. M.; SPb., 1994. Part 5.

Literature:

Aleksandrov S.A. The leader of the Russian cadets P.N. Milyukov in exile. M., 1996.

Buldakov V.P. Red Troubles: The Nature and Consequences of Revolutionary Violence. M., 1997.

Vandalkovskaya M.G. P.N. Milyukov // P.N. Milyukov. Memories. M., 1990. T.1. pp.3-37.

Vandalkovskaya M.G. P.N. Milyukov, A.A. Kiesevetter: history and politics. M., 1992.

Dumova N.G. Liberal in Russia: the tragedy of incompatibility. M., 1993.

P.N. Milyukov: Collection of materials for the celebration of his seventieth birthday, 1859-1929. Paris, 1930.

Raev M. Russia Abroad: History of Russian Emigration Culture, 1919 - 1939. M., 1994.

The documents:

State archive of the Russian Federation. F. R-5856 - Milyukov Pavel Nikolaevich.

Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov(1859-1943) - theorist of liberal democracy and leader of the Party of Constitutional Democrats, famous historian, political scientist, politician. Born in Moscow. His father, a commoner who received an architectural education, combined work in his specialty with pedagogical activity. Mother - a noblewoman from the Sultanov family, was a domineering woman and played a major role in the family.

Navel Miliukov matured early for a conscious independent life. This was facilitated by a steady interest in literature, music, painting, and history. In his gymnasium years, he wrote poetry, played the violin brilliantly, read ancient authors with rapture. He organized a circle for political discussions in the gymnasium. In 1877, his father died, and Pavel, as the eldest man in the family, began to help his mother and younger brother, earning money by private lessons.

At the age of 18, Milyukov entered the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. His most prominent teachers were V. O. Klyuchevsky and P. G. Vinogradov. Here, too, the leadership qualities of the future politician were manifested: for participation in the movement of constitutionalist students, Milyukov was expelled from the university with the right to continue his studies in a year. At the end of the course, he was left at the department of Russian history. In 1892, having defended his dissertation "The State Economy of Russia in the First Quarter of the 18th Century and the Reform of Peter the Great", he received a master's degree.

The ideas formulated in this work formed the basis of his scientific views. This is the determination by economic relations of the state structure of the country. But unlike Western countries, Russia's economic development occurs mainly under the influence of the state, that is, not from the bottom up, but from the top down. The development of civilization in Russia, according to Milyukov, went along the European path, but was delayed by environmental conditions. Peter's reforms were not subjective "acts of the tsar"; they organically fit into the historical process, were prepared by the internal evolution of Russian society.

In addition to teaching Russian history, P. N. Milyukov is engaged in educational activities. On behalf of the Moscow commission for self-education, he lectured in Nizhny Novgorod on social movements in Russia. For condemning the autocracy, he was dismissed from the university and exiled for three years to Ryazan. It was there that he did the main work on writing Essays on the History of Russian Culture.

In 1897, Milyukov accepted an invitation from Bulgaria and became head of the Department of World History at the Sofia Higher School. He combined his professional activities with the study of Slavic culture and the political situation in the Balkans (published in Russkiye Vedomosti in 1897-1899, Letters from the Road).

Upon his return to Russia, to St. Petersburg (1899), he presides over a meeting dedicated to the memory of P. N. Lavrov. This time he is sentenced to six months in prison, followed by a ban on living in St. Petersburg. After serving his sentence (1890), Milyukov settled outside the city at the Udelnaya station.

In the next period of his activity, he prepares a draft policy statement for the liberal journal "Liberation" (1902), publishes the monograph "From the History of the Russian Intelligentsia" (1903), undertakes a trip abroad (1903-1905), during which he lectures "On Russia and the Slavs ”at Chicago and Harvard Universities, publishes in English and French the book “Russia and Its Crisis” (Chicago, 1905), visits (except the USA) Canada, Austria-Hungary, England, France, where he meets with famous political scientists, politicians, public figures (A. Lowell, R. MacDonald), including Russian emigrants (P. A. Kropotkin, A. V. Tchaikovsky, E. K. Breshko-Breshkovskaya, V. I. Lenin, etc.).

Upon his return to Russia (1905), Milyukov was elected chairman of the congress of the Union of Unions, an authoritative public and professional organization that adopted an appeal demanding the convocation of a Constituent Assembly. In August 1905, Milyukov was again arrested for publishing The Political Significance of the Law of August 6 and spent a month in Kresty. After that, he settled in Moscow, where he joined a circle of lawyers (M. M. Kovalevsky, S. A. Muromtsev, F. F. Kokoshkin, P. I. Novgorodtsev), who discussed the text of the future Russian constitution.

In the conditions of expanding political freedoms, he is connected to the process of party building. He aims to create not a revolutionary, but a constitutional party. At the founding congress of the Constitutional Democratic Party (KDP) (October 1905), Milyukov made an introductory address and a report on tactics. At the II Congress of the KDP-PNS (People's Freedom Party), he read a report (January 1906), which became the basis for decisions on issues of ideology, tactics and organization.

Milyukov was the recognized leader of the KDP-PNS, co-editor (with N. V. Gessen) of the party newspaper Rech and the author of almost all of its editorials (published in the book Year of Struggle, St. Petersburg, 1907). At the III Congress (September 1906), the KDP-PNS dissociated itself from the revolutionary actions of the left forces - Social Democrats, Socialist-Revolutionaries and Anarchists ("not an assault, but a regular siege"). Octobrist leader A. I. Guchkov, who did not recognize the need to put pressure on the tsar in order to establish constitutionalism and parliamentarism as soon as possible. He calls the KDP-PNS a "non-class" parliamentary party, a "third possibility" party (neither left nor right).

Unable to be elected to the First and Second State Dumas, Milyukov actually led the most numerous faction of the Cadets. After the dissolution of the First State Duma by the Tsar, it was he who drafted the Vyborg Appeal of Deputies, which called on the population to civil disobedience.

In 1910, P. N. Milyukov took part in the collection The Intelligentsia in Russia, which was the response of the liberal-democratic intelligentsia to the religious-conservative authors of the collection Milestones (1909). In the article "The Intelligentsia and Historical Tradition", Milyukov, while recognizing the historical separation of the intelligentsia from the people, the "departure" of the intelligentsia, nevertheless showed its enormous importance in society, which only intensifies with the beginning of a new political life (after the Manifesto

October 17, 1905). Moreover, new political realities (elections, party struggle, the work of the State Duma, controversy in the press, etc.) will serve, in his opinion, to joint activities and mutual understanding of the intelligentsia and the lower ranks. Other accusations by the Russian intelligentsia of being non-religious, stateless, and non-national only manifest, as Milyukov believed, the philosophical and ideological (neo-Slavophilism, Orthodox Russian nationalism) and political (right-wing spectrum of forces) position of the authors of Vekhi. P. N. Milyukov not only affirmed the historicity and organic nature of the European and Russian intelligentsia, not only opened up the prospect of overcoming its “apostasy”, but also indicated the path for the democratic development of the whole society - the path of joint social and political activity, the rejection of estate privileges, the inclusion of the lower classes culture, politics, education.

In the III and IV Dumas, P. N. Milyukov was already a full-fledged deputy, the head of a faction, specializing in questions of constitutionalism and foreign policy. In relation to the war, the Cadets took the position of liberating the motherland, Europe and the Slavs from German hegemony, freeing the world from the unbearable burden of ever-increasing armaments.

In 1915, Milyukov became the initiator and de facto leader of the Progressive Bloc, which included left- and center-right parties and which put forward a program to create a government of confidence, change the government of the country, amnesty for political and religious crimes, abolition of restrictions on Jews and persecution of Ukrainians, granting autonomy Poland, the restoration of trade unions, the equalization of peasants in rights with other classes, the reform of city and zemstvo institutions. On November 1, 1916, the leader of the Kadets made a famous speech in the Duma on the policy of the tsarist government, in which the refrain sounded: “What is this, stupidity or treason?” The public outcry of the speech was so great that the chairman of the Council of Ministers, B. V. Stürmer, was immediately dismissed. At the end of 1916, the leading figures of the Progressive Bloc (G.E. Lvov, A.I. Guchkov, P.N. Milyukov) discussed the idea of a palace coup with the aim of transferring power to the heir Alexei under the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, complaisant nature and liberal convictions which could become a guarantee of the Russian constitutional order.

During the February Revolution of 1917, Milyukov played a decisive role in determining the composition of the Provisional Government and especially in choosing its chairman, the chairman of the Zemstvo organization, Prince G. E. Lvov. Milyukov himself was approved as Minister of Foreign Affairs. He determined his line in this post in an active struggle on three fronts: 1) against Zimmerwaldism (internationalism), for maintaining a common foreign policy with the allies, 2) against Kerensky's aspirations to strengthen his own power, and 3) for maintaining the full power of the government, created by the revolution. As Minister of Foreign Affairs, Milyukov also spoke out for the liberation of the Slavic peoples inhabiting Austria-Hungary, and the creation of the Czech-Slovak and Serbo-Croatian states, the merger of the Ukrainian lands of Austria-Hungary with Russia, for the possession of Constantinople and the Black Sea straits. For the last requirement, he was nicknamed "Dardanelle". Based on these goals of the government, which coincided with Russian national interests, Milyukov drew up a note of the Provisional Government (dated March 27, 1917).

The left-wing parties, supported by A.F. Kerensky, compromised Miliukov's statement in every possible way and advocated an immediate peace "without annexations and indemnities." Clashes broke out in Petrograd between supporters of the left-wing parties, who put forward the slogan "Down with Milyukov, down with the capitalist ministers!" and supporters of centrist forces under the slogan “Trust in Milyukov! Long live the Provisional Government! Down with Lenin! There were casualties. The way out of the political crisis, according to many, was the creation of a coalition government with the participation of left and center parties. In the new government, Milyukov was offered the post of Minister of Public Education, but he resolutely refused. It was the nickname of his political career.

In the future, he continued to be chairman of the Central Committee of the KDP-PDS, but the ban on the Cadets party by the Bolsheviks who came to power (October 1917) put an end to his legal activities in Petrograd. Milyukov left for Novocherkassk. But, having familiarized himself with the draft "Political Program of General Kornilov", he expressed disagreement with the fact that the documents and the government in the South of Russia were created without consultations with political parties. Having moved to Kyiv, he came into contact with the German command, for which he was condemned by the Central Committee of the KDP-PDS. Miliukov resigned from his duties as chairman of the Central Committee. After the expulsion of Wrangel's army from the Crimea, he abandoned his attempts to overthrow the Bolsheviks by force.

From 1920, Milyukov lived in Paris, worked as the editor-in-chief of the newspaper of the Russian diaspora, Latest News. He put forward the concept of "the gradual evolution of the Soviet political system into a democratic one." In 1922, during a speech in Berlin, he was shot at by Russian monarchists. The bullet was taken over by V. D. Nabokov, a member of the Central Committee of the KDP-PDS, who covered it with his body. With the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, Milyukov declared solidarity with the USSR. In recent years, he lived in small towns in the south of France.

Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov became the first victim of the psychosis of the overthrow of political idols of the new, "Free Russia" model of 1917. Only a month and a half had passed after the “great” and “glorious” February Revolution, and the angry crowds of soldiers, sailors, workers and just city hooligans, incited by the Bolsheviks, who filled the central streets of Petrograd, demanded: “Milyukov resign!”, “Down with the war!”, "Down with the Provisional Government!" During the days of the so-called “April Crisis”, the leader of the Kadet Party and Foreign Minister Miliukov turned out to be the main embodiment of the “image of the enemy”, the most odious, hated figure among democratic rulers, his name turned into a rude curse, into a political label ...

Another turn of the mass consciousness is very significant for Russia, agitated by the revolutionary elements. For more than two decades, Milyukov has been rightfully perceived by the public as an outstanding figure, a symbol of the liberal intelligentsia. A "Russian European", an intellectual, a popular humanities scholar, an erudite, a man of impeccable reputation - all this provided Milyukov with a special position in society. A talented historian, Milyukov already in his mature years changed his life and, abandoning an academic career, devoted himself to social activities (this happened to many historians, lawyers, economists in the recent past, during the years of perestroika). Pavel Nikolayevich becomes one of the leaders of the liberal movement, creates and permanently heads the Cadets Party, is elected a deputy of the III and IV State Dumas, is the ideologist and de facto leader of the parliamentary opposition, and holds the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs in the first composition of the Provisional Government. Milyukov was one of the few politicians who could really influence the scenarios of the relationship between the public and “historical power” at the beginning of the 20th century and tried to prove in practice (alas, unsuccessfully) that the liberal path of development for Russia was by no means a “bookish utopia”.

Moscow Privatdozent

Pavel Milyukov was born in Moscow on January 15, 1859. It was believed that his grandfather - Pavel Alekseevich Milyukov - came from the Tver nobles. In the era of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, one of his ancestors was granted a charter, however, there was no documentary evidence of his noble origin. Having gone to Siberia in search of gold, the grandfather failed and was completely ruined. The father of the future politician - Nikolai Pavlovich Milyukov - is a graduate of the Academy of Arts, an architect by profession. He taught a lot, served as an inspector of two art schools in Moscow, worked as an appraiser in a bank, and for some time served as a city architect. The atmosphere in the family was far from well-being due to the difficult relationship of the parents. Mother was proud of belonging to the noble family of the Sultanovs, invariably emphasizing that her marriage to N.P. Milyukov (this was her second marriage) was a misalliance. Quarrels constantly broke out in the family, no one seriously took care of the children.

Milyukov, even as a child, felt himself in the role of an "oppositionist" - "his inner life had to be created in some kind of constant opposition to parental cares." Psychologically, he felt independent, including because he was “owing everything to himself”, being engaged in “self-education”1. Gymnasium student Milyukov initially showed interest in the humanities - he was attracted by classical philology, history, music (violin lessons were given by a musician from the Bolshoi Theater), he began to write poetry, was fond of foreign languages. "Encyclopedism" was promoted by a passion for buying books at the flea market of the Sukharevsky market - literature was purchased for a penny and completely unsystematically. Nevertheless, by the end of the gymnasium, Pavel had developed a stable positivist thinking, with a critical attitude towards religion, which left him indifferent from childhood.

In the autumn of 1877, Milyukov entered the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. At first, he was attracted by such a new direction of science as linguistics and comparative linguistics. Then the general history came to the fore. Interest in Russian history was awakened thanks to the lectures of Professor V. O. Klyuchevsky, whom Milyukov, despite the complexity of their further relationship, considered his favorite teacher: “He suppressed us with his talent and scientific insight<…>Klyuchevsky read the meaning of Russian history, so to speak, with his inner eye, himself experiencing the psychology of the past<...>said that the material must be asked so that it gives answers<…>This feature was joined by another: the charm that the artistic side of Klyuchevsky's lectures produced, his sparkling wit, the sharpness of form, unexpected juxtapositions and antitheses, and finally, ready-made schemes that fit the meaning of entire periods of history into one polished phrase ”(77).

For participation in a student meeting in 1881, Milyukov was expelled from the fourth year. The rector of the university, who personally knew the talented student, invited him to justify himself - they say, he had no idea about the political nature of the meeting, but Milyukov refused. However, the very next year he was allowed to apply for reinstatement at the university. After completing his studies, Milyukov was left at the department of Russian history by V. O. Klyuchevsky.

Having passed the master's exam and received the position of Privatdozent in 1886, Milyukov is actively involved in research and teaching. The very fact of a change in social status delivered psychological comfort, which he recalled with undisguised pleasure: “This secured my social position in Moscow society, where, in contrast to the military and bureaucratic Petersburg, the university circle traditionally stood in the foreground” (99) . Pavel Nikolaevich becomes a member of the Society for the History and Antiquities of Russia, the Moscow Archaeological Society, the Society for Natural Science, Geography and Archeology. He was attracted by pedagogy - "a living thing", and in addition to the university, he teaches history at the 4th women's gymnasium, at the Agricultural College, at a private women's school. Milyukov took on a huge burden not from a good life. After the death of his father in 1879, Pavel Nikolaevich had to support his family - he still lived with his mother, he had to help his younger brother ...

In 1885, Milyukov married, which led to a complete break with his mother, who in recent years was increasingly striving to maintain “power” over her son. With his future wife - the daughter of the rector of the Trinity-Sergius Academy Anna Sergeevna Smirnova - he met in the house of Klyuchevsky. Anna, having left her family against the will of her parents, lived in a private boarding school (the main source of her livelihood was piano lessons) and attended the women's courses in the general history of Professor V. I. Guerrier, where Klyuchevsky taught. Anna became a faithful companion of Milyukov, was an activist in the movement for the emancipation of women, and took an active part in the life of the Cadet Party. Together they remained exactly half a century - until her death in 1935 in Paris.

The dissertation, on which Milyukov worked for six years, he submitted for defense in 1892 - it was a published work of almost 700 pages. Pavel Nikolayevich, who did not hide his scientific ambitions and dreams of “contribution to science”, chose a large-scale topic: “The state economy of Russia in the first quarter of the 18th century and the reforms of Peter the Great.” Along with the analysis of the huge factual material, Milyukov sought to present an independent concept that reflects his view of the trends in the historical development of Russia. In particular, challenging both the Slavophiles and the Westernizers, he urged not to exaggerate the role of Peter I and argued that “the Europeanization of Russia is not a product of borrowing, but an inevitable result of internal evolution, the same in principle in Russia with Europe, but only delayed by environmental conditions” . Subsequently, this thesis will become one of the most important elements of Milyukov's integral historical concept, which was also the scientific basis of his political doctrine.

To Milyukov's disappointment, Klyuchevsky recommended, in order to avoid unnecessary problems, to take a simpler topic for a dissertation (for example, to study some northern monastery). But Pavel Nikolayevich did not listen to the advice. During the defense of his dissertation, some professors argued that Miliukov's work was worthy of a doctoral degree. But Klyuchevsky demanded that he limit himself to a master's degree: let him write one more book, science will only benefit from this. And Milyukov was awarded only a master's degree. He took what happened as an insult. Considering that the work deserved a higher appreciation, he firmly decided that he would never specifically write a doctoral dissertation.

Disgraced historian

The measured way of life of the young Privatdozent was disrupted in February 1895: Milyukov was fired from the university, any teaching activity was prohibited, he was sent to Ryazan for two years. The reason for the repressions were lectures on the history of the social movement of the XVIII-XIX centuries, read in November 1894 in Nizhny Novgorod. The noisy success of the speeches of the already very popular lecturer was predetermined by the actual political associations that arose among the listeners. Milyukov spoke about the freedom-loving ideas of N. I. Novikov, A. N. Radishchev, A. I. Herzen, about the Decembrists and Narodniks. All this was in tune with public moods and expectations of a “thaw” that seemed to be coming after the recent death of Alexander III. In police parlance, the historian's fault was "delivering lectures of criminal content to an audience unable to take them critically."

Paradoxically, the dismissal from the university brought Milyukov even psychological relief. The “unbearable feeling” of resentment associated with the defense of a dissertation “was receding into the past”. Moreover, he felt that he "stepped over the boundaries of the university, because they became too small for me." Milyukov clearly gravitated towards social activities. Numerous articles and reviews published in such liberal publications as the Russian Thought magazine and the Russkiye Vedomosti newspaper brought Miliukov ever greater public fame and prestige. The next decade - right up to the events of 1905 and inclusion in legal political life - Milyukov will call "years of wandering". However, these were very fruitful years from the point of view of both professional studies in history and acquaintance with representatives of various circles of society both in Russia and abroad. abroad.

Finding himself involuntarily in Ryazan, Milyukov was finally able to begin work on his main research. "Essays on the History of Russian Culture" not only had a huge success in scientific circles, but became an event in social and political life. As the chapters were written, they were published in the journal “The World of God” and came out in separate issues. Miliukov's three-volume work went through six editions in Russia - the last appeared in 1918. Miliukov undertook the first attempt in Russian historiography to study the social history of Russia, the whole variety of factors in its development. The scale of the plan, completed in 1902-1903, can be evidenced by the titles of the chapters: “Earth”, “Population”, “Economy”, “Estate”, “State”, “Church”, “Literature”, “Faith”, “Creativity ”, “Education”, etc. Each problem was considered in dynamics, providing a solution to the research super-task - to create a multifaceted picture of the development of Russian society.

In addition to "Essays ..." Milyukov was engaged in archaeological and local history research, wrote articles for the encyclopedic dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron, for the English magazine "Atenium". In his free time, he enjoyed performing as a violinist in an amateur quartet and participated in concerts of the local military orchestra. A new hobby of Pavel Nikolaevich was cycling. Later, already in St. Petersburg, a prominent politician, in case of emergency, will use a bicycle to hastily go around the members of the Central Committee of the party or arrive at a rally.

Miliukov's stay in the Balkans in 1897-1899 was of great importance for him: at the invitation of the Bulgarian Minister of Public Education, he headed the department of history at the Sofia Higher School. Legally, this was an expulsion abroad - as an alternative, the authorities offered a link to Ufa. On his way to Sofia, Milyukov gave a signed undertaking that he would not "deal with any Russian political affairs", working "exclusively within the limits of his post"2. But five months later, under pressure from the Russian authorities, the contract with Milyukov, who could "have a harmful effect on the education of the Bulgarian youth," was terminated. Having received a salary for all five years for which the contract was concluded, Milyukov remained in the Balkans. He took up the study of complex interethnic relations and soon gained a reputation as one of the leading experts on the Balkan issue.

Returning to Russia, Pavel Nikolayevich became close to the publicists and writers who united around the populist journal Russkoe bogatstvo. In early 1901, for participating in a political meeting of memory

P. L. Lavrov at the Mining Institute Milyukov was arrested and spent almost half a year in prison. After his release, he was forbidden to live in the capital. For some time he lived with his family in Finland, in a small border resort town, then settled in Udelnaya, which was formally located outside of St. Petersburg. Milyukov, with his reputation as an “inveterate oppositionist,” is among the leading ideologists of Russian liberalism, who in 1903 form the “Liberation Union” (I. I. Petrunkevich, P. B. Struve, D. I. Shakhovskoy, and others). Milyukov refused the offer to edit the journal Osvobozhdenie, which had been published in Stuttgart since 1902 - he did not want to go abroad with the likelihood of repeating the “fate of Herzen”. Nevertheless, he wrote a program article for the first issue - "From the Russian Constitutionalists" - and began to actively publish on the pages of the magazine.

Appeal to politics

The events of the Russian Revolution of 1905 found Milyukov in America, where he lectured at the University of Chicago. Before leaving for Russia, he hastily completed work on the book Russia and Its Crises, published in 1905 in America and France, in which Russian liberalism was introduced to the Western public, the embodiment of which would soon become the party of constitutional democrats3.

The intention to play one of the defining roles in Russian politics was Milyukov's dominant attitude, which seemed to him quite logical and natural. “Having lost the reputation of a novice historian, with which I left Russia, I returned“ home ”with the reputation of a novice political figure,” Pavel Nikolayevich recalled. - The change came gradually, but it was inevitable in my position. Abroad, I found myself in the role of an observer of the political life and foreign policy of democratic states. And at home, events took place that required the use of these observations, and they demanded it from me, since there were very few Russian observers ... I did not at all strive to turn from a historian into a politician; but it happened, because it became an indispensable requirement of the time” (176).

As mentioned above, Milyukov the historian from the very first works consistently developed the key thesis of his concept. Russia is moving in line with the universal laws of the development of society, although it passes some phases with a delay. For all its originality, the Russian “national type” naturally adapts to the social institutions borrowed from the West - this is an organic process that is not limited to “violence” (for example, Peter I). At the same time, the idea that in Russia, in comparison with European countries, the state plays a much greater role in the formation of civil society was of great importance for Milyukov the politician. The trend of Western European development is “from the bottom up”, that is, from the economy to the state; the history of Russia testifies to the reverse process. In Russia, the possibility of evolution is determined primarily by the state, it is from it that impulses come, aimed at economic, social, cultural development. Thus, the Russian specificity lies in the combination of a strong state and an amorphous civil society. On the one hand, there is a conflict potential in this, but on the other hand, there is also a mechanism for overcoming the crisis. From this follows the main practical orientation of liberal politicians: since the state power is conservative and not ready to carry out reforms, the liberal party must influence the power, achieve its transformation and transformation into an instrument for democratic reforms. Rejecting the path of violent seizure of power, liberals should promote the transition from absolutism to a constitutional monarchy, which ensures maximum political freedoms and, consequently, conditions for further struggle for liberal reforms4.

Milyukov's other practical attitude is also noteworthy - he was sure that he was carrying out a "conciliatory mission" for the entire opposition camp. Pavel Nikolayevich considered it necessary to bring liberals and socialists closer together, to unite efforts to achieve a common goal - the establishment of political freedoms.

It is symbolic that the founding congress of the Constitutional Democratic Party, which opened on October 12, 1905, was supposed to end on October 17, according to advance plans: as it turned out, it was on this day that the Manifesto of Nicholas II on changing the state system was published. Political life was being legalized, and the Cadets Party began to energetically prepare for the elections to the First State Duma. At the beginning of 1906, according to Milyukov's estimates, the party numbered about 100,000 registered members: “It included, undoubtedly, the most politically conscious elements of the Russian intelligentsia. No wonder it was sometimes called the “professorial party”. Its most active elements in the country were progressive zemstvo and city leaders ... They were also connected with the lower ranks of the people, especially through the so-called “third element”: professional employees in zemstvo institutions - doctors, agronomists, teachers, etc. ” (235).

Initially, Milyukov was only one of the members of the Central Committee - he would become the permanent chairman of the Central Committee of the party, as well as its main ideologist, tactician and strategist in 1907. Having passed the "entrance examination for leadership" at the founding congress of the party, Milyukov demonstrated that he was capable of being a consolidating figure, "pulling both extreme flanks of the party to the center so that the party could get its own face." The position of the centrist majority was expressed in the programmatic thesis that "Russia should be a constitutional and parliamentary monarchy" - thereby removing the overly radical slogan of a "democratic republic". Instead of the idea of a “Constituent Assembly”, it was proposed to stake on the “Duma with founding functions” (the indisputable prerogative of the parliament was considered to be the adoption of constitutional acts - the Basic Laws, a new electoral law, after which the Duma could demand its dissolution). The most acute land issue for Russia should be resolved by increasing the peasant allotments - due to the partial alienation of landlord estates with compensation "according to a fair assessment."

“There were many outstanding people in the party. Miliukov rose above them, became a leader primarily because he strongly wanted to be a leader. He had a concentrated ambition, rare for a Russian public figure. For a politician, this is a good thing. There is nothing reprehensible in the desire to leave a mark on Russian history, especially when one does not have to prevaricate for this. Milyukov built all his activities on the principles in which he believed. He was convinced of the justice of liberal ideas and with a clear conscience defended every detail of the Cadet program.<…>Among us, he was only the first between equals. Although he loved honor and power, he loved to be in sight. This is what I've been looking for all my life. But there was no inborn authority in him”5.

Miliukov could not be elected either to the First State Duma or to the Second. There was opposition from the authorities, although the formal pretext for exclusion from participation in the elections was the non-compliance with the requirements of the housing qualification. Nevertheless, Pavel Nikolayevich acted as the de facto leader of the Duma Cadets faction. It was said that Milyukov, who visited the Taurida Palace every day, was "conducting the Duma from the buffet"!

The tactics of the Cadets, which Miliukov ultimately formulated, placed the party in fierce opposition to the authorities. Although it was sometimes corrected - depending on the political situation.

Subsequently, in exile, some leaders of the Cadets will accuse Miliukov of the fact that, after the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, which meant the transition to a constitutional monarchy, he did not dare to make a clear break with the revolutionary forces and refused to cooperate with the “historical power”, which then put forward progressive reformers. So right cadet

V. A. Maklakov noted: “It was not the unpreparedness of the people for the constitutional system that became an obstacle to its implementation, but the tactics of the intelligentsia leaders, who self-confidently claimed to represent the entire “people”. As long as there was a war with the Autocracy, liberalism could go along with the revolutionary parties; but when the constitution was decreed (from the French octroi - complained. - I. A.), the Duma was elected and the Cadet Party led the Duma, its task should have been to reconcile with the authorities and protect Russia from the revolution ... The population could immediately feel the benefits of the new order ; liberalism would free itself from pleasing its former allies; constitutional monarchy would become the final form of government, and not a bridge to revolution; an era of urgent reforms would have begun... But liberalism, insofar as it was represented by the Cadets, set itself a different task. He did not want to collude with the authorities. He sought an immediate and complete victory over it, demanded capitulation to himself and ensured that the authorities accepted his challenge, went on the offensive, and Cadet liberalism won. According to Maklakov, the responsibility for this lies largely with Milyukov, who was rather “not a party leader, but a standard-bearer” and, believing in his role as a guarantor of inner-party compromises, prevented the disengagement and, as a result, the emergence of a clear tactical line: “Among the Cadets, between the flanks were a fundamental disagreement. If the pariah had a real leader, he would not be afraid of a split. A split would only be useful... The activity of the nominal “leader” was reduced to the invention of ambiguous formulas behind which party differences were hidden”6.

There is some truth in such harsh assessments, although one cannot fail to note Miliukov's attempts to find compromises (albeit very conditional ones). For example, shortly after October 17, the leader of the Cadets was invited to the Winter Palace for a meeting with Chairman of the Council of Ministers S. Yu. Witte. And the head of the cabinet was surprised that Milyukov, usually accused of radicalism, agreed to waive the demand for a "public ministry" - on the condition that Witte create a "business cabinet" of unsullied administrative officials. In Miliukov's opinion, society could be satisfied by the introduction "from above" of a moderate constitution on the model of the Bulgarian or Belgian. In such a case, public opinion would agree to abandon the idea of convening a Constituent Assembly. But an agreement with the Cadets on similar terms turned out to be unacceptable to the authorities.

The conflict with the opposition majority in the First Duma, where more than a third of the deputies represented the Kadet Party, was natural. The sovereign's approval of the Fundamental Laws a few days before the convocation of the Duma had negative consequences, which deprived the parliament of its "founding" functions. Many Cadet leaders, inspired by the victory in the elections, were more radical than Milyukov and called for open conflict with the authorities. Later, Pavel Nikolayevich admitted that he was striving for “the moderation of the political temperament of the Duma and the strengthening of the political perspicacity of the authorities,” but “neither of the two, nor in particular the combination of both, turned out to be possible either for me or for anyone else.” Trying to take advantage of the differences in the tsar's entourage, Milyukov secretly met in the restaurant "Kyuba" with the palace commandant D. F. Trepov, a supporter of concessions to the opposition and the creation of a "ministry of trust". Trepov brought to the attention of Nicholas II the cabinet list he had drawn up, in which Milyukov appeared as a candidate for minister of the interior or foreign affairs. Prospects for the formation of a Cadet ministry were also discussed with P. A. Stolypin; At the same time, Milyukov, wishing to instill an idea of the “moderation” of the Cadets, said that “about the behavior of Cadets. in the government should not be judged by their role in the opposition” (244, 250-251, 255). Nevertheless, the dissolution of the Duma on July 9, 1906 became the denouement of the conflict between the government and parliament.

Taking into account the first experience of the parliamentary struggle, the Cadets revised their tactics. The revolution was on the wane, the autocracy proved the strength of its positions, and at the same time it became obvious how strong the resistance of the bureaucracy and court circles was to liberal reforms. Therefore, the slogan was put forward: "Not an assault, but a correct siege." It was supposed to "preserve" the Second Duma, avoiding direct conflicts, expressing no confidence in the government, fraught with the dissolution of parliament. Milyukov believed that it was now expedient to distance himself from the leftist, revolutionary forces. Despite this, the Cadets rejected Stolypin's demand that revolutionary violence be condemned in some public form (for this, official "legalization" of the party was promised). Pavel Nikolayevich was ready in principle to publish such an article in Rech without a signature, but other leaders objected. Soon the Duma was dissolved - under the pretext of a demonstrative refusal to agree to bring the Social Democratic deputies to criminal responsibility.

liberal style

Milyukov's cherished dream of parliamentary activity came true in the autumn of 1907 - he was elected to the Third Duma. The leader of the Cadets Party, having headed its parliamentary faction, became an even more influential and prominent figure. They joked that Milyukov was an ideal parliamentarian, he was created as if by order especially for the British Parliament and the British Encyclopedia!

Miliukov's position was twofold. Professional readiness for constructive legislative activity in accordance with European parliamentary canons, the presence of an appropriate intellectual potential conflicted with reality - with the rigid opposition of party members who considered it impossible to abandon such a political role.

In the Third Duma, elected under the new law of June 3, 1907 (its edition was called by the oppositionists a "coup d'état"), the Cadets were in the minority. But, according to Milyukov, they played "the role of a real opposition, ideologically stable and well organized." Initially, the government relied on the majority, which was formed by the Octobrists and right-wing nationalist groups. Miliukov had no illusions about the influence of the Duma as a legislative organ of power - this is "a cripple, which was made from the very beginning by the basic laws, which curtailed the rights of popular representation on all sides." Nevertheless, the tactics of the Cadets were reoriented to “dirty, everyday work”: “We decided to invest with all our strength and knowledge in the current state activities of the people's representation. We still had a lot to learn, which can be learned, understood and appreciated only by standing at the spinning wheel of a complex and cumbersome state machine. At the same time, it was impossible to neglect the contact with the bureaucracy of ministerial employees, who had their own technical knowledge, experience and routine” (292-293).

Milyukov, from the point of view of "speech" activity, was listed among the undisputed leaders. In the III Duma, he had 73 speeches from the parliamentary rostrum, in the IV Duma - 37. Milyukov's "trademark" topics were foreign policy and international relations. On behalf of the faction, he also spoke on many domestic political issues relating to public education, agrarian reform, and local self-government. Sometimes Pavel Nikolaevich appeared on the podium, because for some issues "there were no trained workers." It happened that there were simply no people in the faction who wanted to act in accordance with Miliukov's "tactical directives".

(including somewhat anachronistic-sounding expressions such as "eighteenth century").

Milyukov was rightly called one of the most erudite politicians. His ability as a polyglot was legendary. It was said that Pavel Nikolaevich spoke almost two dozen foreign languages and daily reads a lot of foreign newspapers and magazines. Milyukov's passion was books collected with his usual fundamentality. In addition to the excellent library, which consisted mainly of historical literature, Miliukov already in the Duma period, in St. Petersburg, collected a new library - books on politics, economics, and law. The third library - more than 10 thousand volumes - appeared with him in Paris.

Contemporaries were struck by the efficiency of Milyukov. His day began at his desk at six or seven in the morning and often ended after midnight in the editorial office of the party newspaper Rech (from 1906 until the autumn of 1917 he was its co-editor and wrote editorials for it almost daily). The editor of the newspaper I. V. Gessen recalled that Milyukov always appeared at night, “opening the door somehow noisily and wide. Animation, cheerfulness, confidence burst into the room with him ... Sitting down in his usual place at one of the tables, he began to read the typeset pages brought from typesetting, at the same time answering questions addressed from all sides and drinking tea. Often right there, amid the incessant noise, he wrote articles, without interrupting his participation in fragmentary remarks in general conversations. Despite being busy, the cadet leader managed to attend social events, liked to go to theaters, to vernissages, and participated in charity balls. Playing music was a favorite home entertainment -

a small orchestra gathered in Milyukov's apartment, Pavel Nikolaevich played the violin or viola, and Anna Sergeevna played the parts on the piano.

Having settled in St. Petersburg, Milyukov for the first time took up the arrangement of a settled life - financial opportunities also allowed this. In addition to deputy salaries and wages in the newspaper, a tangible income was brought by the sale of the constantly reprinted Essays on the History of Russian Culture. Anna Sergeevna opened her own publishing house and dealt with all matters related to the publication and sale of her husband's books. The Milyukovs, who at first lived in a small apartment at 8 Ertelev Lane, bought a spacious apartment in a new house on Sands. In the Crimea, not far from Sudak, a small dacha was built on a property acquired. They acquired a “near” dacha in Finland, on the shore of the bay. Having bought a picturesque plot, they radically rebuilt the village hut located on it - they got a spectacular house with balconies, a terrace and a tower, even a pool with a fountain was arranged.

Patriotism with political overtones

Of course, it would be an oversimplification to believe that Milyukov fully shared the "patriotic enthusiasm" that swept over wide sections of society after Russia's entry into the war. Contrary to the labels used by the Bolsheviks in 1917 to portray Miliukov as a fanatical “chauvinist” and spokesman for the “imperialist interests of the big bourgeoisie,” before the outbreak of the war he was considered in government circles, on the contrary, to be a “defeatist.” Pavel Nikolaevich did not share the pan-Slavist attitudes that were widespread (including among some liberals), believing: Russia must sacrifice “solidarity” with the Balkan Slavs in order to avoid participation in a pan-European war. The leader of the Cadets considered the war imposed on Russia, nevertheless he was convinced of the need for a “realistic” approach to the ongoing world cataclysms. One of the most important tasks of Russia, which meets its national interests and the needs of economic development, is to ensure control over the straits. Milyukov said that he could "justifiably be proud" of the nickname "Milyukov-Dardanelles" (384-385, 390-392).

The “patriotic enthusiasm” of the liberals, as interpreted by Milyukov, gave the war a special ideological meaning. A parallel was drawn that thanks to the victory “the country will become closer to its cherished goal” - it meant the triumph of the ideals of constitutionalism, the implementation of liberal reforms, and the expansion of freedoms. It was also important for Russia's political future that its coalition partners were the "exemplary" democratic states of Europe. The Cadet leader formulated the super-task as follows: “Long live free Russia in humanity liberated by her efforts!”9 Against the background of other Cadet leaders, Milyukov stood out for his sincere, partly fanatical faith in Russia's victory. Having built an ideological structure, according to which the successful completion of the war played a colossal political role, Pavel Nikolayevich will not be able to revise this view even during his work in the Provisional Government. Milyukov has always categorically rejected the possibility of concluding an armistice, or at least abandoning Russia's "imperial" goals in world politics. He adhered to his position even in the situation of the endless defeats of the Russian army, the growing economic ruin, and the strengthening of anti-war sentiments. Milyukov’s party comrades reacted with disappointment to his overly optimistic, not devoid of “dogmatism” attitude: “Disputes immediately ended when Milyukov appeared, no one dared to enter into a debate with him, considering it pointless. The Dardanelles really turned into an obsession for him, which prevented him from following, evaluating and adapting to a changing environment. Miliukov's attitude to the war also had a personal, tragic tinge. In 1915, at the front, during the retreat of Russian troops in Eastern Galicia, the youngest son Sergei, who went to the front as a volunteer, died. The eldest son Nikolai also served in the army - an artilleryman, and then a pilot (398-399).

In August 1915, the Progressive Bloc was formed in the Duma - for the first time a stable opposition majority arose (only the extreme right and left were outside it). Milyukov became the "author of the bloc" and its leader, later noting that "it was the climax of my political career" (404). On the eve of the creation of the bloc, speaking at the opening of the Duma session on July 19, 1915, Milyukov indicated the return of the liberals to a more active line of behavior: “The patriotic anxiety of the people's representatives turned out, unfortunately, to be quite well founded. The secret became clear, and all reassurance turned out to be just words. The country cannot be governed by words. The people now want to get down to business themselves and correct the omissions. In us, he sees the first legitimate executors of his will. And now he is sending us with another definite order: to tell the authorities the whole truth about the country, to find out for the country the whole truth about the authorities and to do what was left unfinished by it.

Politicians implied that the bloc should also become a tool to prevent revolution. As Milyukov put it, the unification was directed not only against the “tops,” but also against the “danger from below.” The formula of oppositional tactics - "words are deeds" - was considered as a universal remedy. Duma politicians who do not want spontaneous revolutionary actions should criticize the authorities within the walls of parliament, uncompromisingly expressing claims on behalf of the people. Rejecting the possibility of interference in the political life of the “street,” Miliukov, two weeks before the February Revolution, on February 15, 1917, declared in the Duma: “Our word is already our deed. The word and the vote are so far our only weapons.”12

The bloc's main program requirement is the creation of a government capable of ensuring "unity with the entire country and enjoying its confidence." Milyukov admitted that this wording was “deliberately vague”, but on the other hand it allowed to unite a maximum of political currents, including those who put forward the harsh slogan of a “responsible ministry” (in his opinion, obviously unacceptable to the authorities and, therefore, “revolutionary”) ( 408). At the same time, it is noteworthy that many liberals, including Miliukov, looked without enthusiasm even at the hypothetical prospect of the Duma leaders entering the government. To take responsibility for running a country in such an unfavorable situation is to risk losing popularity!

Revealing populist speeches from the Duma rostrum are quite another matter. In the autumn of 1916, on the eve of the opening of the Duma session scheduled for November 1, Milyukov was worried that “there is a clear decline in interest in the Duma in society”13. Meanwhile, as Pavel Nikolayevich frankly stated at a meeting of the parliamentary commission on military and naval affairs, public inaction and indecision will harm politicians who want to be re-elected to the Duma in the fall of 1917: “This Duma has only one year left in its life, and this Duma has at its disposal only one session to show what it is. How she will show herself in this session and with what she will appear in front of her voters. The answer will be the 5th Duma.”14 Therefore, in order not to lose the initiative, the Duma opposition must more actively follow the political situation. The key theme prompted by the demands of the mass consciousness is the search for the “internal enemy”. There is no need to refuse to exploit the rumors and legends popular among the townsfolk that discredit the royal power. As Milyukov insisted when developing the bloc's strategy, the main emphasis should be placed on patriotic rhetoric, on exposing the "dark forces": odious Minister of War Sukhomlinov. “The red thread is our patriotism: they cannot bring [the war] to an end,” Milyukov formulated15.

Pavel Nikolayevich's speech on November 1 predetermined the style of most opposition speeches in the following months, until February 1917. Starting from rumors circulating in society about the influence of “dark forces” and the intentions of the “camarilla” to conclude a “separate peace” with Germany in order to prevent a revolution, Milyukov repeatedly repeated the rhetorical question: “What is this, stupidity or treason?” In addition to Sturmer, who turned out to be the main target of criticism, in connection with the theme of “German dominance” and the vicious palace camarilla, Empress Alexandra Feodorovna was mentioned (under the guise of a newspaper quote in German). Milyukov's speech evoked a colossal response. “These words (“stupidity or treason?” - I. A.) hit like a hammer on the head, because they formulated just that terrible thing that tormented everyone, recalled cadet V. A. Obolensky. - I returned from this meeting of the Duma with a feeling of victory. Merciless words, spoken frankly, in front of all of Russia, were perceived as a deadly weapon plunged into the very heart of the enemy”16. Immediately after the speech, at a meeting of the Cadet faction, Milyukov was given a standing ovation, expressing "ardent gratitude for his brilliant speech": "Thank you and we are proud!"

Later, Milyukov, like other opposition leaders, admitted that there was no reliable evidence for the "revelations." He noted that he himself did not have an unequivocal answer to the question of “stupidity or treason”, but “the audience strongly supported the second interpretation with their approval - even where I myself was not completely sure of it” (445). In testimony to the Extraordinary Commission of Inquiry of the Provisional Government, Milyukov said that practically the only basis for his speech was the mood in the political and diplomatic circles of the allied countries, where Sturmer's foreign policy activities made a "depressing" impression. The leader of the Kadets ran into this summer of 1916, during a visit to Europe as part of a parliamentary delegation.

Under the influence of the Duma “storm and onslaught”, Nicholas II dismissed Stürmer, but there were no fundamental changes in the political course, the conflict between the government and social forces remained just as sharp. Many politicians, including the Cadets, will then reproach Milyukov for being carried away by a dangerous game, not calculating how the discrediting of power (including the Supreme) will affect the "excitation" of the population, its readiness for revolutionary action. To the question: “Do you realize that this is the beginning of a revolution?” - Pavel Nikolaevich answered: “Only in your pessimistic imagination. This is still a long way off.”18 The well-known historian and participant in the events of February 1917, S. P. Melgunov, later reconstructing the psychological motives of Milyukov’s behavior, believed that the leader of the Cadets “was actually very far from thinking about the possibility of an imminent revolution. The threat of "revolution" for him was only a means of influencing the authorities and partly on his like-minded people, who, in the words of Dep.<артамента>The police experienced an unreasonable fear of the revolution”19.

Pushed by the revolution

In the early morning of February 27, 1917, Pavel Nikolayevich was awakened by a porter - in the barracks of the Volynsky regiment, opposite the house where the Milyukovs then lived (60 Basseynaya St., corner with Paradny Lane), something strange was happening. Looking out from the balcony, Miliukov saw the Volhynians running out of the barracks. Saying goodbye to the agitated Anna Sergeevna, Milyukov immediately set off on foot to the Taurida Palace - shooting was already beginning in the streets ...

The decree on the dissolution of the Duma was announced, but the deputies did not disperse, having gathered for a “private meeting”. Milyukov proposed to wait for the situation to be clarified, but in the meantime to create a Provisional Committee of the members of the Duma "for the restoration of order and for relations with individuals and institutions," headed by M. V. Rodzianko. Only at night did the chairman of the Duma agree to announce the takeover of power by the Provisional Committee.

In the first days of the revolution, Milyukov, like other Duma leaders, had to speak in public a lot, in front of crowds of soldiers, workers, and simply active inhabitants. Usually rational and “academic” in his speeches, Milyukov, facing an exalted audience, resorted to far from professorial oratorical methods of “persuading”. In an effort to win over the listeners, he posed questions that implied positive answers-spells. Speaking on February 28 in the Catherine Hall before the Life Grenadiers, Milyukov called: “Remember, the only condition for our strength is our organization. Only together with the officers will you be strong. An unorganized crowd does not represent strength ... Remember that the enemy is not asleep and is preparing to wipe us off the face of the earth (Screams: “This will not happen”). "So it won't?" - "Will not!" - there is a unanimous answer from the military”20.

But much more significant was the behind-the-scenes side of Milyukov's activities, concerning the organization of the new government. On behalf of the Duma Committee, he negotiated with the contact commission of the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet on the creation of the Provisional Government and its program. In the process of exhausting political bargaining, he sought to ensure that for the transitional period, before the convocation of the Constituent Assembly, all conditions were created for the Provisional Government to pursue a moderate, liberal-democratic policy that would correspond to the “nationwide”, “above-class” meaning of the revolution.

Milyukov was the driving force behind the intrigue against M. V. Rodzianko. Pavel Nikolaevich, like most of the leaders of the bloc, opposed the formal connection of the government with the Duma of the "third of June", which already "was a shadow of its past" and could not be considered a "factor in the current situation." The figure of the Octobrist Rodzianko, who seemed excessively “right-wing”, clearly did not fit into the compromise with the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet on the formation of the Provisional Government. The tension of personal relations between Rodzianko and Milyukov, the unspoken struggle for leadership over the parliamentary opposition also had an effect here. Milyukov and a number of influential figures in the Duma Committee relied on the head of the Zemstvo-City Union, Prince G. E. Lvov (later there would be serious doubts about the correctness of such a decision).

With the exception of the Trudovik A.F. Kerensky, the Provisional Government consisted of liberal politicians, dominated by the Cadets. As expected, Pavel Nikolayevich became Minister of Foreign Affairs. On the afternoon of March 2, in the Catherine Hall of the Tauride Palace, Milyukov announced the formation of a government. The fact that the act of abdication of Nicholas II had not yet been received did not bother the leaders of the democratic government, who assumed “full power” (both executive and legislative). Justifying the legitimacy of the new leaders of the country, Milyukov found a spectacular, in the spirit of the current moment, answer to the question “Who chose you?”: “I could read an entire dissertation in response. I replied: “The Russian revolution chose us!” This simple reference to the historical process that brought us to power shut the mouths of the most radical opponents. It was later referred to as the canonical source of our power” (465).

But, seeing the rampant revolutionary elements in Petrograd, Milyukov insisted on preserving the monarchy (of course, constitutional) - they say, the population needs a traditional form of "historical power." On March 3, at a meeting of members of the Duma Committee and members of the Provisional Government, held at the apartment of Prince M. S. Putyatin, only Milyukov and the leader of the Octobrists

AI Guchkov objected to the refusal of the Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich from the throne. The leader of the Cadets literally begged his brother Nicholas II to take the throne, convinced his colleagues that the government, without relying on the usual symbol of power, “will turn out to be a fragile boat that will sink in the ocean of popular unrest” and will not live to see the Constituent Assembly. Pavel Nikolayevich called for action, to urgently go to Moscow, where anarchy had not yet engulfed the army, to find a reliable armed force and, having announced the accession to the throne of Michael, to try to restore order. Milyukov, as a staunch supporter of a constitutional monarchy, which even under the conditions of February seemed to him the most reliable guarantee of political stability, freedom and liberal reforms, it was difficult to abandon the "only true" scheme. In addition, according to the apt expression of M. A. Aldanov, at that moment in the “military-political equation, all quantities were unknown”21. And even years later, it is impossible to give an unambiguous answer: would the formal preservation of the monarchy help stop the political radicalization of the masses and create a firm government, or, on the contrary, would awaken an even more destructive element.

Diplomacy versus politics

Be that as it may, Milyukov, who threatened to refuse to join the Provisional Government, resigned himself to the position of the overwhelming majority of the Cadet leaders: “They all convinced me that at such a moment I simply have no right to leave and deprive the government of that share of authority that related to my position. The general public just won't get it. I myself already felt that refusal was impossible” (469). Milyukov headed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which in any case was a triumph for him, towards which he had been going all his life.

Having received the portfolio of the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Milyukov felt confident, reasonably believing that he had long been professionally ready for this job. Milyukov remarked, not without pleasure, that “he was the only minister who did not have to study on the fly and who sat down in his chair in the ministerial office on Palace Square as a complete master of his business.” He “appreciated a running car in terms of technology and tradition,” and personnel changes in the Foreign Ministry were minimal (480). The former opposition leader did not plan fundamental changes in the foreign policy course: “I proceeded from the idea that we do not have tsarist diplomacy and the diplomacy of the Provisional Government; we have allied diplomacy.” The new Minister of Foreign Affairs had every reason to believe that in moderate Russian public circles and in the government spheres of the Allied countries, he was credible, and he was perceived as “a sign that Russia will not change the obligations that she has entered into and the goals that she set for myself”22.

In terms of the style of behavior and moods demonstrated in public, Milyukov fully corresponded to the atmosphere of the “honeymoon of the revolution”, the universal “Freedom Day”. “It was rare to observe such a jubilant mood as Pavel Nikolayevich experienced these days,” recalled V. B. Lopukhin, vice director of the First Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. - His long-time dream came true. He is clothed with the trust of the people, the most authoritative in the eyes of the people, as Milyukov, the head of Russia's foreign policy, imagined himself at that time ... Eyes sparkling with delight. A joyful smile that never leaves your lips. Sipota muffles speech. Only a few jerky exclamations are caught: └Bloodless coup. A stormy stream of spontaneous popular upsurge. Enters a calm channel. Just do not get him across the flow. Hold on to the coast. Guide. Don't let it spill out of the stream. The prospects are the most joyful!”23.

As foreign minister, Milyukov immediately encountered an insoluble contradiction between the official interpretation by the democratic authorities of the new meaning and tasks of Russia's participation in the war and the real mood of the masses. The February coup was ideologically justified by the elite as an "act of national self-defense", as a "people's Russian" revolution, a spontaneous protest against the "traitorous" tsarism, leading the country to the defeat and enslavement of "Kaiser Germany". By exaggerating the degree of “patriotism” of the population, inspiring both themselves and society with the illusion that the “citizens of Free Russia” were ready to fight the external enemy to the bitter end, the leaders of the Provisional Government hoped to arouse a surge of enthusiasm among the masses and raise the morale of the army. Milyukov is one of the most zealous preachers of this ideology. As a violation of allied obligations, he angrily dismissed any thought that Russia should try to hasten the conclusion of peace, since it is simply not capable of continuing the war. For Pavel Nikolaevich, the refusal (even if only in words!) Of the previous agreements on the post-war geopolitical interests of Russia was unacceptable. Milyukov was determined to ensure the implementation of the "secret treaties" at any cost (primarily this concerned the acquisition of Constantinople by Russia and control over the Bosporus and Dardanelles).

Considered a supporter of political compromises, Milyukov was uncompromising in matters of international relations and Russian foreign policy. And it is no coincidence that later many politicians will cite this as evidence of the “dogmatism”, “doctrinalism”, “stubbornness” of the leader of the Cadets, the inability to be a “real politician” who soberly assesses the situation. Even Minister of War and Naval Affairs Guchkov (much more right-wing in his views) pointed to Miliukov's lack of understanding of the current situation: the Russian army could no longer wage war. “Milyukov is thicker-skinned, and his impressions were different than mine,” noted Guchkov; besides, Pavel Nikolayevich dealt with “diplomats full of bright hopes”, and not “with rebellious soldiers”24.

The leader of the Cadets found himself in a position where he had to maneuver, reconciling his own ideas about foreign policy with the solution of diplomatic problems and, most importantly, with the need to take into account the difficult domestic political situation. The allies, represented by heads of diplomatic missions, insisted that the Provisional Government unequivocally declare Russia's intention to fulfill all allied obligations. In turn, the leaders of the Petrosoviet demanded that the government, in a special declaration for “internal use”, clearly state that it was renouncing “imperialist aspirations” and was ready to take immediate steps to achieve world peace. They argued that such a statement would raise the morale of the "revolutionary army" and somehow keep it from decay. It is interesting that Milyukov and his colleagues in the government tried to correct the foreign policy course from similar positions. The most active critic of Milyukov was the “hostage of democracy”

A. F. Kerensky, who was invariably supported by M. I. Tereshchenko,

N. V. Nekrasov, A. I. Konovalov (associated with him by Masonic bonds). Moreover, the allies soon joined in the intrigues against Milyukov - especially the British ambassador George Buchanan. He staked on Kerensky and Tereshchenko - the first was considered as a future minister of war, the second - as the head of the Foreign Ministry. Unlike Milyukov, who was unpopular among the masses, they seemed to have more opportunities to keep Russia from leaving the war, to captivate the army with the ideas of “revolutionary defencism,” and restore discipline. At the same time, it was tacitly implied that if Russia, under the pressure of internal political circumstances, renounces “imperialist” demands, then the allies, of course, will not oppose this.

On March 28, the Statement on the Aims of the War, compiled by Milyukov and approved by the government and the contact commission of the Executive Committee of the Petrosoviet, was published. The declaration was intended for the citizens of Russia - attempts to give it the character of a diplomatic act Milyukov resolutely suppressed. The formula “without annexations and indemnities” required by “revolutionary democracy” was replaced in the text by euphemisms that could be interpreted in different ways. The government proclaimed: “Leaving the will of the people (that is, the Constituent Assembly. - I. A.) in close unity with the allies to finally resolve all issues related to the world war and its end, the Provisional Government considers it its right and duty to declare now that the goal of a free Russia is not domination over other peoples, not depriving them of their national property, not the forcible seizure of foreign territories, but the establishment of a lasting peace on the basis of self-determination of peoples. The Russian people do not seek to strengthen their external power at the expense of other peoples, just as they do not set as their goal the enslavement and humiliation of anyone. To Milyukov’s delight, the text managed to include the words that “the Russian people will not allow their homeland to emerge from the great struggle humiliated, undermined in its vitality.” It was also said about the intention of the government "to protect the rights of our homeland, in full compliance with the obligations assumed in relation to our allies." Behind the last wording one could also understand the observance of the conditions of the notorious “secret agreements”.

The impetus for Milyukov's resignation was the publication of a note from the Provisional Government to the Allies, essentially repeating the "Statement ..." of March 28. The street riots provoked by the Bolsheviks on April 20-21 became a convenient argument both for the leaders of the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet and for most ministers: the figure of Milyukov is unpopular among the masses because of his uncompromising attitude on the issue of “war to a victorious end”, and he must go resign. The proposal to take the post of Minister of Education Milyukov rejected with indignation. He also spoke out against the idea of creating a coalition government, convincing Prime Minister G.E. Lvov of the need to break with the Soviet and take harsh measures to restore order and, in particular, to fight

with the Bolsheviks.

In principle, Miliukov from the very beginning “did not consider his position to be secure” and was psychologically ready for resignation. It is probably no coincidence that Pavel Nikolayevich refused to move to the luxurious apartment of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the building of the Ministry, as was customary with his predecessors. When he had to stay late at the ministry, he spent the night in a small room for employees, where he ordered to put a bed. Under Milyukov, there were almost no receptions in the ministry. Except that soon after the February Revolution, on Good Friday, colleagues from the Cadet Party came to greet Milyukov, and at the same time celebrate Easter (by the way, Pavel Nikolaevich was always a non-religious person and did not have the habit of going to church). A. V. Tyrkova-Williams remembered the unexpected request with which Anna Sergeevna turned to all the invitees. “Just you know,” she added apologetically, “it’s so hard to get provisions now that we have to ask guests to bring whatever they can.” A festive feast made a peculiar impression: “The table was set wonderfully: porcelain, glass, silver - everything was ministerial. And several picturesque statue-like footmen in bright liveries stood along the walls, living reminders of the pomp of the bygone regime. Not a trace of surprise or mockery flickered on their impassive faces when we began, rustling with greasy papers, to unfold our bags and randomly arrange them on plates. Anna Sergeevna was bustling about, running around the table, holding out plates. It looked like a student party, not a ministerial break.”25 A similar picture was presented by the only "diplomatic" dinner on May 1, on the eve of Milyukov's resignation - the occasion was the departure from Russia of the French ambassador Maurice Palaiologos. According to Pavel Nikolayevich, “the general mood was of a funeral mood” (501).

long reflection

After leaving the Provisional Government, Miliukov did not in the least moderate his political activity. The main question - about the continuation of Russia's participation in the war - Milyukov more and more rigidly put in interconnection with the problem of suppressing anarchy and suppressing the activities of the Bolsheviks. Milyukov tirelessly exposed the intrigues of external and internal enemies. He argued that the “formula beneficial for Germany” - “peace without annexations and indemnities” - was brought from Berlin through Switzerland. The enemies of Russia "prepared spiritual poison and poisoners against us in advance and delivered both." For Milyukov, the Bolsheviks are "people who are obviously in the service of Germany." He calls by all means to stop the “devilishly skillful propaganda of our enemies”, which falls on such extremely favorable ground as the “mortal fatigue” of the soldier masses26. In his revelations of the “German intrigue,” Milyukov claimed that “German money” contributed to the removal of himself and A. I. Guchkov from the first composition of the Provisional Government27. Let us note that characteristic associations were sometimes made in mass propaganda literature as well. Milyukov in the Duma “denounced the betrayal of Stürmer and the criminality of Protopopov”, and “for this the Tsarist Government wanted to try Milyukov”, and in April 1917 Milyukov had to resign due to the intrigues of the “Bolshevik-Leninists and internationalists”, that is, “German agents 28.

In the summer of 1917, observing the strengthening of Bolshevism, the unbridled growth of disintegration in the army and the home front, the impotence of the coalition Provisional Government, and considering the failures at the front to be the result of all this, Milyukov joined in the search for ways to establish "firm power." Like many liberal politicians, moderate public figures, and representatives of the business community, he pins his hopes on the figure of General L. G. Kornilov. Milyukov supported the program proposed by Kornilov to restore order, which he openly stated

August 14 at the State Meeting in Moscow. Both then and later, analyzing the events of the Russian revolution, Milyukov was convinced that there was only one alternative - Kornilov or Lenin. At the same time, meeting with Kornilov, the leader of the Cadets tried to convince him of the inadmissibility of a break with Kerensky. Counter-revolution as a negation of the liberal-democratic gains of February 1917, the leader of the Kadets unequivocally rejected.

On August 27, when Kerensky unexpectedly announced Kornilov's rebellion and called him a traitor, Milyukov tried to act as an intermediary, offered Alexander Fyodorovich assistance in resolving the "misunderstanding", and expressed his readiness to go to Headquarters for this.

But in the end, Milyukov himself was actually expelled from Petrograd - to the Crimea!

On August 30, Kerensky was brought the text of Miliukov's editorial, which had been removed from the typesetting issue of Rech by the typographical workers, in which Pavel Nikolayevich spoke unambiguously in support of Kornilov. Kerensky was furious and, having summoned the most influential Cadets in the party, V. D. Nabokov and M. M. Vinaver, offered them a “delicate mission” - to convince Milyukov to temporarily go abroad or to the Crimea. Kerensky explained that he was going to form a new government with the participation of the Cadets, but he feared that the figure of Milyukov, who continued to be actively involved in politics, would cause a negative attitude among the masses towards the whole “combination”. “I was aware that all the actions of the leader of the Cadets, Milyukov, every article he wrote, every speech he delivered, would cause a new wave of indignation, as it had already happened in March and April,” Kerensky recalled29.

Miliukov took the coming to power of the Bolsheviks as an almost accidental episode and believed that they would not last long. During the days of the October Revolution, Pavel Nikolayevich left Petrograd for Moscow, where he joined the organization of anti-Bolshevik forces. Without waiting for the opening of the Constituent Assembly, of which he was elected a member, Milyukov went to the Don, to Novocherkassk, and participated in the formation of the Volunteer Army under the command of M. V. Alekseev. The goals and principles of the white movement were formulated in the Declaration of the Volunteer Army, written by Milyukov. But soon he disagrees with the leaders of the Volunteer Army. Milyukov's rejection was caused, in particular, by Kornilov's attempts to single-handedly form a government, without binding himself with the support of politicians who arrived on the Don. Pavel Nikolayevich was convinced that without the participation of political parties, the military authorities would not find sympathy among the population. At the beginning of 1918, having left Novocherkassk, he gets to Kyiv and quite unexpectedly comes into contact with the command of the German troops. Miliukov is convinced that their army, occupying the Ukraine, is the only real force, and with its help it is possible to occupy Petrograd and Moscow, overthrow the Soviets and create an "all-Russian national power." Colleagues in the Central Committee of the Kadet Party were shocked by such a radical reorientation of their leader. Miliukov, in response, refuses his duties as chairman of the Central Committee. However, already in the autumn of 1918, after the surrender of Germany, the differences lost their practical meaning.

Milyukov's next tactical turn took place at the end of 1919 - the beginning of 1920. Pavel Nikolaevich is disappointed in the white movement and sees no prospects for armed struggle. These sentiments are also reflected in the monthly New Russia magazine edited by him, published in London in English. But even in the case of the proclamation in 1920 of the “new tactics”, in which most of the emigration saw “reconciliation with Bolshevism”, Milyukov the politician was greatly influenced by Milyukov the historian with his ability for deep, sober analysis. Having prepared a fundamental three-volume work “The History of the Second Russian Revolution” during the years of the Civil War, Pavel Nikolayevich rethought many of the processes that determined the nature of the revolution of 1917 and made the victory of the Bolsheviks logical. He calls the most important factor the behavior of the masses, in relation to which the Russian political elite (with the exception of the Bolsheviks, who turned out to be cynical, cruel, but, moreover, real politicians) showed complete failure. Not afraid to enter into dissonance with the ideological attitudes that are generally characteristic of emigration, Milyukov argues that the revolution had deep social roots associated with the historical past of Russia and now predetermining its future.

The report "What to do after the Crimean catastrophe?", which Milyukov delivered in December 1920, marked the ideological formation of the "new tactics". In fact, Milyukov went for a split in the party, since almost all the Cadet leaders considered his position to be erroneous (and soon he created the supra-party Republican Democratic Union (association)). Defending the principles of the "new tactics", Milyukov argues that the changes brought about by the revolution in the social and political system are irreversible. An armed struggle against the Bolsheviks is impossible, primarily because of its unpopularity among the population, tired of the bloody civil war - therefore, emigre organizations advocating for its continuation have no chance of support in Russia. The main stake must be placed on the disintegration of the Bolshevik regime from within. Without overestimating the strength of the opposition that had survived in Soviet Russia, Milyukov pinned his main hopes on the broad sections of the population - on the peasant proprietors and the urban "petty bourgeoisie". The introduction of the NEP was presented as evidence of the evolution of the regime, which could lead it to the path of Thermidor. In the emergence of millions of sections of the population interested in "free economic activity", in the inevitable "little things of life", he saw a growing threat to the Bolshevik rulers, who are trying to maintain the dictatorship. A return to the monarchy is no longer possible. The anti-communist forces, counting on victory, must guarantee the preservation of the gains of the revolution. The land received by the peasants should remain at their disposal, the “working issue” should continue to be resolved, pursuing a state policy for the protection of wage labor, special attention should be paid to public education30. As subsequent events showed, all these hopes for "internal overcoming of Bolshevism" turned out to be a utopia - the democratic emigration again underestimated the communist regime and its "ability to rule."

In the early 1920s, Milyukov was subjected not only to attacks in the right-wing press, but also to threats of physical violence from the monarchists. Party comrades noted that Milyukov was always alien to the "reflex of fear." For example, he refused to be guarded after the first Russian revolution, when the Black Hundreds hunted him, kept his cool in front of aggressive crowds and anarchist “beauty and pride” in 1917. Nevertheless, in the first years of emigration, Pavel Nikolayevich had to live in safe houses. The reality of the threats can be judged at least by the attempt on his life in the hall of the Berlin Philharmonic on March 28, 1922, during a lecture. Milyukov miraculously survived, but V. D. Nabokov died from the bullets of terrorists.

From March 1, 1921 to June 14, 1940, that is, until the day the German troops entered Paris, Milyukov was the editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper Latest News. The newspaper was acquired by the Milyukov group (a year earlier it had begun to appear as a non-partisan, informational publication, but failed to gain popularity). With the appearance of Milyukov, the publication took on a “political face”, and soon “Latest News” turned into a “big”, respectable newspaper of the European level. According to documents from the accounting department of Latest News, at first Milyukov invested considerable personal funds in the development of the newspaper. The liberal Latest News was considered the most widely read organ of the emigration. I. A. Bunin, A. M. Remizov, B. K. Zaitsev,

M. A. Aldanov, M. I. Tsvetaeva, V. V. Nabokov, Z. N. Gippius, A. N. Benois… political struggle.

In exile, Milyukov continued to write a lot. A notable phenomenon was the two-volume work "Russia at the Turn", dedicated to the civil war and the initial period of the Bolshevik regime. Returning to scientific activity after a long break, Milyukov thoroughly revised Essays on the History of Russian Culture (the first volume was almost doubled in size). The "jubilee" edition of "Essays ..." was published in Paris in 1936 - 40 years after the publication of the first volume. Many articles were written by Milyukov for the Encyclopædia Britannica. Forced to constantly think about making money for a living, Pavel Nikolayevich often gave paid lectures on Russian history in many European countries, at US universities.

Anna Sergeevna died in 1935. For the first time, friends saw Milyukov literally heartbroken. But it was not in vain that even earlier Pavel Nikolaevich had a reputation as a man with iron restraint and self-control (he was even called a “stone cat”!). A few months later, Milyukov married Nina Vasilievna Lavrova. He met the “young pretty lady” back in 1912 at the station, waiting for the train. A fleeting meeting grew into a close relationship that lasted more than two decades. They were also united by a common passion for music - Lavrova turned out to be "an excellent musician who possessed not only brilliant technique, but also a delicate musical taste developed by a serious conservatory school." From his small, modestly furnished apartment, Milyukov moved into a spacious, well-maintained apartment on the Boulevard Montparnasse. Despite the outward “bourgeoisness” of the new home, he retained his usual office environment - the walls were completely lined with bookshelves, the chairs were littered with piles of newspapers, countless papers, manuscripts, and letters were on the desktop. And here, on the edge of the table, Milyukov preferred to dine hastily. The everyday side of life, which did not worry Pavel Nikolaevich too much in Russia, played an even smaller role for him in exile - it was limited to the preservation of the usual cabinet microcosm.

Left in 1940 in a part of France free from German occupation, Milyukov first lived in Vichy, then in Montpellier, and in the spring of 1941 he moved to Aix-les-Bains, a small town on the border with Switzerland. Pavel Nikolaevich did not want to leave for the USA, where he was invited - he believed in a close victory over Nazi Germany, dreamed that he would soon be able to revive Latest News. Milyukov began to write memoirs, which he never had time to complete. He closely followed the military operations on the Eastern Front and wished success to the Soviet troops. The victory at Stalingrad brought great joy. Then Milyukov wrote his last article - "The Truth about Bolshevism", in which he directly declared solidarity with the Soviet regime. Milyukov was convinced that for the generations already formed in Russia in the conditions of post-revolutionary reality, the communist regime was fully organic, close and understandable.

Don Aminado, columnist for Latest News, recalled meeting Milyukov in 1942, in a cheap room at the International Hotel in Aix-les-Bains:

“Milyukov both fell ill and died, like Turgenev's Bazarov, his beloved hero.

He never complained, did not ask for anything, did not make it difficult for anyone, did not disturb.

Do not refuse a trifle, agree to be my executor ...

It was impossible to refuse. The notary demanded an executor on the spot, the rest were in Paris and London.

I had to agree. Pavel Nikolayevich was sincerely pleased, thanked him, and emphasized his touching gratitude with a strong Bazar handshake.

We met with him often, almost for more than a year, and his sunset was high, clear, Olympic ...

P.N. sat in an armchair, wrapping his legs in a blanket, and looked for a long time at the map of Europe, which hung opposite, on the wall.

The map was studded with multi-colored paper flags that accurately determined the line of the Russian front.

Look, ours are advancing from two sides and moving forward almost non-stop ...

His eyes shone with some special unusual brilliance.

He immediately perked up and repeated with obvious, accentuated satisfaction:

Our front... our army... our troops...

In the mouth of this old implacable hater of the Bolsheviks, the word - ours - acquired a different, sublime meaning.

In the most difficult and, it seemed, hopeless moments, he never for one moment stopped believing in the victory of the Allies, in the victory of Russian weapons.

He never lived to see his final triumph.”31

in Aix-les-Bains. At the end of the war, his son Nikolai transported his ashes to Paris, where he again ended up with Anna Sergeevna - in the family crypt at the Batignolles cemetery.

1 Milyukov P. N. Memoirs. M., 1991, p. 37-38. Further quotations from this work are given with page numbers in the text.

2 Peregudova Z. I. Police Department and P. N. Milyukov. // P. N. Milyukov: historian, politician, diplomat. M., 2000, p. 416.

3 Dumova N. G. P. N. Milyukov. // Political history of Russia in parties and individuals. M., 1993, p. 269-270.

4 For more details, see: Emmons T. “Belated” or “Original”? The problem of the Russian historical process in P. N. Milyukov. // P. N. Milyukov: historian, politician, diplomat,

With. 33-61; Medushevsky A. N. Neo-liberal concept of constitutional crises

in Russia. // Ibid., p. 100-103.

5 Tyrkova-Williams A. On the way to freedom. London, 2000, p. 408, 412.

6 Maklakov V. A. The First State Duma. Memoirs of a Contemporary. April 27 - July 8, 1906 M., 2006, p. 9:15-17.

7 Tyrkova-Williams A. Decree. op., p. 409-410.

8 Gessen I. V. P. N. Milyukov as a journalist. // P. N. Milyukov: Collection of materials to celebrate his seventieth birthday. 1859-1929. Paris, s. 195.

9 State Duma. Fourth Convocation. Verbatim reports. Session III. Pg., 1915, stb. 51-52.

10 Hessen I.V. In two centuries. Life report. // Archive of the Russian Revolution. T. 22. Berlin, 1937, p. 328-329.

11 State Duma. Fourth convocation. Verbatim reports. Session IV. Pg., 1915, stb. 92.

12 State Duma. Fourth convocation. Verbatim reports. Session V. Pg., 1917, stb. 1344.

13 Milyukov P. N. History of the Second Russian Revolution. M., 2001, p. 35.

14 RGIA. F. 1278. Op. 5. D. 446. L. 269.

15 The Progressive Bloc in 1915-1917 // Red archive. 1933. Vol. 1 (56), p. 83, 90, 106, etc.

16 Obolensky V. A. My life, my contemporaries. Paris, 1988, p. 502.

17 The fall of the tsarist regime. T. VI. M.-L., 1926, p. 343-345.

18 Gessen I. V. In two centuries ... p. 347.

19 Melgunov S.P. On the way to a palace coup. (Conspiracies before the revolution of 1917) Paris, 1979, p. 80.

20 Great days of the Russian Revolution. February 27 and 28, March 1, 2, 3 and 4, 1917. Pg., 1917, p. fifteen.

21 Aldanov M.A. Third of March. // P. N. Milyukov: Collection of materials ... p. 33.

22 Bourgeoisie and landlords in 1917. M.-L., 1932, p. 9.

23 OR RNB. F. 1000. Op. 2. D. 765. L. 379.

24 Alexander Ivanovich Guchkov tells… M., 1993, p. 63, 107.

25 Tyrkova-Williams A. V. From the memoirs of 1917. // Edges. 1983. No. 130, p. 128-129.

26 Milyukov P. N. Why and why are we fighting? Pg., 1917, p. 48-49, 57-58.

27 Milyukov P. N. Russia in captivity at Zimmerwald. M., 1917, p. 29.

28 See, for example: Interpreter of political words and politicians. Pg., 1917,

29 Kerensky A.F. Russia at a historical turn. // Questions of history. 1991. No. 7-8, p. 142-143.

30 Milyukov P. N. Three platforms of the Republican-Democratic Associations. (1922-24). Paris, 1925, p. 7-50; For more details, see: Alexandrov S.A. Leader of Russian Cadets

P. N. Milyukov in exile. M., 1996.

31 Don Aminado. Train on the third track. M., 1991, p. 293-295.

Graduated from the 1st Moscow Gymnasium. In the summer, during the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, he was in the Transcaucasus as a treasurer of the military economy, and then an authorized Moscow sanitary detachment.

He graduated from the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University (; was expelled for participating in a student gathering in, reinstated the following year). At the university he was a student of V. O. Klyuchevsky and P. G. Vinogradov. In his student years after the death of his father, he gave private lessons to provide for his family. He was left at the university to prepare for a professorship.

Pavel Milyukov (from a letter to Joseph Vasilyevich Revenko):“You know that we took a firm decision to use the war to carry out a coup shortly after the outbreak of this war. Note also that we could not wait any longer, for we knew that at the end of April or the beginning of May our army was to go on the offensive, the results of which would immediately completely stop all hints of discontent and would cause an explosion of patriotism and jubilation in the country.

Foreign Secretary

Deputy Ministers(currently in office)
Denisov Karasin Borodavkin Grushko Ryabkov Saltanov Titov Yakovenko

Key ambassadors(currently in office)

Editor's Choice

What kind of fish can be salted at home: choices and cooking tips Salt white fish

Fish is a source of nutrients necessary for the life of the human body. It can be salted, smoked,...

What is yantra, types of yantra meaning

Elements of Eastern symbolism, Mantras, mudras, what do mandalas do? How to work with a mandala? Skillful application of the sound codes of mantras can...

wood burning technology

Modern tool Where to start Burning methods Instruction for beginners Decorative wood burning is an art, ...

How to calculate the specific gravity in different areas?

The formula and algorithm for calculating the specific gravity in percent There is a set (whole), which includes several components (composite ...

Geography of beef cattle breeding (cattle, pigs, sheep), poultry farming

Animal husbandry is a branch of agriculture that specializes in breeding domestic animals. The main purpose of the industry is...

Analysis of the company's market share is an effective tool for a successful business What share in sales is considered the norm

Market share of a company How to calculate a company's market share in practice? This question is often asked by beginner marketers. However,...

The seventh technological mode is cognitive

First mode (wave) The first wave (1785-1835) formed a technological mode based on new technologies in textile...

Types of one-part sentences

§one. General data Recall: sentences are divided into two-part, the grammatical basis of which consists of two main members - ...

The concept of dialect. What is a dialect? Grammar Dictionary: Grammar and linguistic terms

The Great Soviet Encyclopedia gives the following definition of the concept of a dialect (from the Greek diblektos - conversation, dialect, dialect) - this is ...

New

Popular