№ 1, 2020 year

The article examines the newly discovered autograph of the letter by F. M. Dostoevsky dated November 16, 1878 and addressed to Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich (the future Emperor Alexander III). The letter was located in the Archive of the Office of the Successor Tsesarevich of the Ministry of the Imperial Court. Dostoevsky appealed to Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich upon the recommendation of K. P. Pobedonostsev. In his letter, the writer requests permission to send to the august addressee issues of A Writer’s Diary, his personal periodical, and gives a general appraisal of the historical juncture in Russia at that time. The text of the letter was previously known through its rough draft, as well as through a document written by Anna Dostoevskaya and qualified as a “copy of the final version of the letter” by the publishers of the writer’s Complete Collected Works. However, a comparison between the presumed “copy” and the final autograph revealed certain textual discrepancies in the latter. It is more likely to be the text that the writer initially dictated to his wife, and which he subsequently amended and improved while writing the final version. The fact that the added details and corrections can be traced back to the rough draft allowed us to propose this hypothesis. In addition, the stamp of the Office of the Court of the Successor Tsesarevich on the letter addressed to Dostoevsky is published.Dostoevsky, epistolary heritage, autograph, A Writer’s Diary, Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich, Russian State Historical Archive

The article examines the routes Dostoevsky had followed from St. Petersburg to Siberia and back, and his travels through Siberia in 1850—1859. This task required a historically accurate reconstruction of Dostoevsky’s Siberian routes: Semipalatinsk—Zmiev, Semipalatinsk—Barnaul, Semipalatinsk—Zmiev—Barnaul—Kuznetsk, Semipalatinsk—Loktev plant. The article also describes the condition of the roads, indicates their length and intermediate stations, which allows to identify the writer’s Siberian routes, clarify the details of his travels, their duration and dates. The length of the routes is revealed by the Postal Road Atlas of the Russian Empire dated 1829, 1852 and 1875, topographic maps of Tomsk province, reference works, memoirs of contemporaries and the author’s collection of letters. The study revealed that the length of the road from Semipalatinsk to Zmeinogorsk is 182.5 versts (Postal Road Atlas, 1829) or 201 versts (1875); Zmeinogorsk—Barnaul — 280 (1825) or 268.75 (1875) versts. Thus, the total length of the Semipalatinsk—Zmiev—Barnaul route is equal to 462.5 versts (1825) or 469.75 versts (1875). There were two roads between Barnaul and Kuznetsk: the first one, the north road, passed through Kisluha—Beloyarsk—Golubtsovo—Kopylovo, Sorokino, Yanovskoe, Monoskino, Khmelevsky, Salairsky Pereval, Gavrilovsky Silver Smelter Plant, Gurievsk, Bachata, Karagayly, Bangur; and the second one, the south road, shorter and more direct, passed through Togul and the Tomsk plant. Only the second road is mentioned in the Postal Road Atlas. The article provides the calculation of the span of each road, and substantiates the hypothesis that Dostoevsky’s Barnaul-Kuznetsk route passed through Gobina, Zilina, Kosikha, Losishikha (Losisha), Togul’skoye village, Togul’skoye Zimov’ye, Tomsk iron plant, Berezovka and spanned 282—282.5 versts. Indirect evidence of the fact that the writer took this road are the memoirs of A. E. Vrangel and Dostoevsky’s letters. For instance, in the letters to V. M. Karepina and the writer’s elder brother (both dated 22 December 1856), Dostoevsky mentions 700—750 versts between Semipalatinsk and Kuznetsk. A comparison between topographic maps of the ХIХ century and the author’s letters allows us to revise the viewpoint of E. R. Vesterman, who insisted on the distance of 1,000 verst-route between Semipalatinsk and Kuznetsk through Salair, Guryevsk, Bachata, Karagayly, Kiselevsk, Kalachevo and Bungur. The Siberian period of Dostoevsky’s biography requires further research with support from archival sources.biography, F. M. Dostoevsky, M. D. Isaeva, A. E. Vrangel, roads of the XIX century, Semipalatinsk, Barnaul, Kuznetsk, route

The article analyzes the results of the search conducted by a group of young researchers at the Russian State Military Historical Archive. As part of a scientific project led by the author of the article, M. Kalinin, E. Ogorodnikova, A. Podryabinkina discovered previously unknown archival documents associated with the period of Dostoevsky’s penal servitude in Omsk, to the actual historical context of the Notes from a Dead House. The article contains a number of observations and assumptions related to the prototypes of certain characters, the details of their biographies and the possible influence of this “biographical factor” on Dostoevsky’s fate. The author also offers a critical assessment (issue of authorship, degree of reliability, etc.) of fragments from the memoirs of Jozef Boguslavsky, which are published in Russian for the first time.Dostoevsky, Notes from a Dead House, Russian State Military Historical Archive, prototypes, Boguslavsky, Tokarzhevsky, Omsk prison, penal servitude, Polish trail

The article examines the chapter Sergei Durov and Fyodor Dostoevsky from the Siberian Diary of the Polish revolutionary Jozef Boguslavsky, who was confined in the Omsk prison at the same time as F. M. Dostoevsky. The Siberian Diary was included in Polacy z Wilna i ze Żmudzi na zesłaniu. Pamiętniki Józefa Bogusławskiego i księdza Mateusza Wejta (Poles from Vilnius and Zemaitija in exile. The Memoirs of Jozef Boguslavsky and priest Mateusz Veit). Some fragments of this book and other Polish sources were translated into Russian for the first time by the author of the article, including the recollections about Sergey Durov and Fyodor Dostoevsky. The interrelation between the Siberian Diary by Y. Boguslavsky, Notes from a Dead House by F. M. Dostoevsky, and S. Tokazhevsky’s Seven Years of Hard Labor and The Convicts is also analyzed in the paper.F. M. Dostoevsky, Notes from a Dead House, Tokazhevsky, Tokarzhevsky, Boguslavsky, Omsk prison, penal servitude, Jagiellonian library, Russian State Military Historical Archive

The article introduces new archival materials into scientific discourse, i. e., the service records of the identified prototypes of official authority figures in The House of the Dead by F. M. Dostoevsky. The archival documents provided an opportunity to fill in the gaps in the biographies of those who held military and medical posts during the writer’s Siberian exile: major Krivtsov, field engineer Gladyshev, head physician Troitsky and resident physician Lovchinsky. It also allowed us to see which of the officials’ traits were depicted in the novel’s characters. A number of events and details were revealed thanks to the memories of the exiled Pole Joseph Boguslavsky. Thus, the prototypical nature of the characters in The House of the Dead was clarified as new facts were revealed and the already known details were revised.Dostoevsky, Notes from the Dead House, image of official, image of doctor, national type, Krivtsov, Gladyshev, Troitsky, Lovchinsky, Boguslavsky, Tokarzhevsky

The article under discussion presents a detailed analysis of some archival documents of the Russian State Military History Archive in Moscow: the drawings of the Omsk Ostrog [[ɐ'strog] ‘fortress’], which served as a katorga [[ˈkatərgə] ‘penal servitude’] prison, as well as the maps of its surroundings. The work examines the area and the size of the structures both on the territory of the prison and outside and attempts to restore the picture of the formerly exisisting prison barracks. The results thus obtained are consistently compared with the available studies of the Omsk Katorga structures as penned by the Russian author F. M. Dostoevsky. As a result, the exact sizes of all the structures and premises inside the penal facility were identified; the size of the area for one prisoner, the design drawing of the military hospital are described; the appearance of the elements of the every-day life in the penal servitude facility and the rules and order the prisoners had to follow in their correspondence with relatives are clarified. The actual sizes of the structures let us create a more accurate idea of the life F. M. Dostoevsky had during his Omsk penal servitude.Dostoevsky, Omsk penal servitude, Omsk prison, link, space, maps, drawings, archive

The article examines the problem of attribution of an essay from F. M. Dostoevsky's workbook of 1864—1867 (Russian State Archive of Literature and Art. Fund 212.1.5. p. 10), titled “The Usurer”. The novelty of the study is in that Nero (the artist), a character who emerged from the writer’s knowledge and concept of Emperor Nero, for the first time becomes the subject of detailed analysis. Based on the evidence from the classical and early Christian writers, as well as on scientific and literary works written during Dostoevsky’s lifetime, the author makes an argument for Nero’s figure to be considered a junction of at least three elements. He is not merely Nero-the-artist, but also Nero-the-persecutor of Christians and Nero-the Antichrist. This image reveals a ramified network of extensive ties with the preparatory materials for an early draft of “The Idiot”. Thus, it augments the aggregate of B. N. Tikhomirov’s arguments regarding other records, characters, motifs and prototypes in this essay. It also support his theory regarding “The Usurer”, which states that it is not the author’s independent and unexecuted idea, but, rather, should be examined in the framework of the creative history of “The Idiot”, specifically, its initial stage.Dostoevsky, textual criticism, attribution, prototypes, historical context, antiquity, calligraphy, “The Idiot”

The paper suggests that one of the sources of the article in “defense” of “Pavlishchev’s son” against Myshkin in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel The Idiot could have been the “Minister Lanskoy” lampoon by P. V. Dolgorukov. It was published in the émigré periodical Budushnost’ (Future) and contained an extensive addendum about V. F. Odoevsky. The fact that Dostoevsky had demonstrated an interest and was sympathetic to Odoevsky’s personality and views, specifically, during his work on The Idiot, substantiate this hypothesis. It is further confirmed by similar motifs and techniques in the texts of the two articles, for instance, the author’s position, hyperbole, distortion of facts, satirical attribution of common features to the lampooned persons (i.e., stupidity, worthlessness, wastefulness, depravity, impunity, proclivity for the opposite sex, passion for the European world). Similarities between the articles also include a personal, rather than an ideological, reason for lampooning and quoting I. A. Krylov, A. S. Griboyedov and others. Meanwhile, Myshkin’s and Odoevsky’s reactions to the lampoon are opposite. This allows us to discuss the substantial differences between the character and his possible prototype. P. V. Dolgorukov’s article “Minister Lanskoy” is published as an appendix to this work.prototype, parody, lampoon, F. M. Dostoevsky, V. F. Odoevsky, P. V. Dolgorukov, The Idiot, Budushnost (Future), emigrant press

The article reconstructs the life path of Alexander Timofeevich Neofitov, the first legal representative of A. F. Kumanina. The recreation is based on the memorial, epistolary, biographic and historic resources introduced into scientific discourse. They include the testimonies from the unpublished memoirs of A. M. Dostoevsky, an unreleased letter by A. G. Dostoevskaya to N. N. Strakhov dated October 18, 1881, which characterizes the Kumanin case as “wretched and bewitched” (Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts. Fund 1159. List 6. File 6. Page 1), materials of the well-known Moscow trial of false-coiners, and other criminal cases (“The Jack of Hearts Club. Criminal trial.” 1877). It also comprises the details from the history of Moscow Academy of Commercial Studies, which Aleksei Alekseevich Kunanin had founded and where he served as a trustee. As a professor of World History at the Academy, A. T. Neofitov became one of the key members of the Jack of Hearts Club criminal network. His involvement in various illegal schemes with the Kumanin inheritance was described in Dostoevsky’s novels Crime and Punishment and The Raw Youth. As a result of the inquiry, we can deduce that due to the fraud conducted by Neofitov, who was the ‘enfant terrible’ among the writer’s relatives, the Kumanin inheritance case turned out to be not only “wretched” and “bewitched,” but highly criminalized.F. M. Dostoevsky, A. T. Neofitov, Kumanin heritage, “Jack of Hearts”, Crime and Punishment, The Raw Youth

This publication introduces into scientific circulation one of the previously untranscribed shorthand documents of the wife of F. M. Dostoevsky. According to our transcript, the contents of this draft of her letter is related to the inheritance that the writer's family received after the death of a rich Moscow relative, A. F. Kumanina. Dostoevsky did not have the time to use the inherited estate in the village of Spas-Klepiki of the Ryazan province, and the writer’s widow and children became the owners of the Ryazan estate. On these three pages, A. G. Dostoevskaya encrypted a message to an unknown person about the upcoming sale of her family's share of the estate in Spas-Klepiki and a request for advice on drawing up a forestry plan. In addition to the fact that this document is written in shorthand, the work with it was complicated by several circumstances: it was randomly enclosed in a folder with letters from N. A. Disterlo to A. G. Dostoevskaya; there is no evocation of the addressee or date. After studying the letters of F. F. Dostoevsky to his mother, the authors of the article concluded that the draft letter was dated 1895. An attempt is made to attribute it: it is demonstrated that the likely addressee is A. D. Povalishin, the manager of the Ryazan branches of the Noble and Peasant Banks. The transcript helped determine that count A. A. Golenishchev-Kutuzov provided assistance in the sale of the estate. It was established that a certain Monsherov, mentioned in the verbatim draft, is not a joint heir of Dostoevsky, as he is listed in the nominal index of the Complete Academic Works of the writer, but the Ryazan surveyor I. P. Monsherov. The study analyzes unpublished letters from 1896 by this acquaintance of Dostoevsky's widow, as well as epistolary documents from the archive of Andrei and Anna Dostoevsky, which are related to the Ryazan estate. Examination reveals that one parcel of the land inherited by the writer's family was sold, and the first income from the Ryazan estate was received in 1895-1896. The fair copy of the letter written by Dostoevsky's widow has not been recovered; the task of locating it (likely in the Ryazan archives) remains relevant. The transcribed, attributed and dated draft of this letter and the surviving letters of I. P. Monsherov to A. G. Dostoevsky are the documents that establish new facts about the fate of Kumanina’s inheritance after the writer’s death.shorthand, Anna Dostoevskaya, attribution, dating, Dostoevsky archive, Ryazan estate, I. P. Monsherov, A. D. Povalishin, A. A. Golenishchev-Kutuzov

The article provides an overview of the editorial principles in publishing F.M. Dostoevsky’s epistolary heritage. An analysis of these principles allows to discuss the evolution of goals and objectives of the researchers involved in the preparation of Dostoevsky’s and his correspondents’ letters for publication. At the same time, this review reveals the problems that the researchers have encountered and continue to face for over 130 years of studies of the writer’s epistolary heritage. The literary value of Dostoevsky’s letters was recognized immediately after his death. They aroused interest both as a biographical source and as part of the writer’s literary heritage. A significant number of letters to A. E. Vrangel, A. N. Maykov, N. N. Strakhov, I. S. Aksakov and others were published as early as in the 1880s. Particular attention was heeded to Dostoevsky’s correspondence with readers, writers, editors, and journalists. The first publications of Dostoevsky’s letters did not pursue any scientific goals and presented them as part of the writer’s creative heritage. Many problems associated with the systematization of correspondence, search for manuscript autographs, lost or undiscovered letters, principles of publication of epistolary sources have already emerged at that time. In the 1920—1930s, the researchers, still focusing on Dostoevsky’s letters, turned to his addressees’ letters, which began to be recognized as an integral part of the correspondence. The corps of letters of certain correspondents were set apart, specific epistolary cycles were formed, mutual correspondence began to be published, and a gradual mastering of its historical, cultural and commentary potential commenced. The emerging trends were subsequently developed. Principles that included the completeness of presentation of correspondence, precision of reproduction of handwritten text, and a scientific and critical approach to the study and publication of the letters came to the fore. Despite the significant successes achieved by the researchers, many problems of publishing Dostoevsky’s correspondence are still relevant, for example, structuring the letters in an integral manner. At present, the publication of the writer’s epistolary heritage and the letters of his correspondents sets the task of publishing a complete annotated code of correspondence both in print and in an electronic form. The electronic publication format has certain advantages, as it expands the number of manuscript material presentation modes and, in turn, the chance for researchers to further study Dostoevsky’s epistolary heritage and the writer’s life and work as a whole.F. M. Dostoevsky, epistolary heritage, correspondence, correspondent, addressee, sender, attribution, dialogue, epistolary cycles