Kurbsky, Prince Andrei Mikhailovich (1528 - 1583)

- well-known politician activist and writer, b. OK. 1528. In the 21st year, he participated in the 1st campaign near Kazan; then he was governor in Pronsk. In 1552, he defeated the Tatars near Tula, and was wounded, but after 8 days he was already on horseback again. During the siege of Kazan, K. commanded right hand the whole army and, together with his younger brother, showed outstanding courage. After 2 years, he defeated the rebellious Tatars and Cheremis, for which he was appointed boyar. At this time, K. was one of the people closest to the king; he became even closer to the party of Sylvester and Adashev. When failures began in Livonia, the tsar put K. at the head of the Livonian army, who soon won a number of victories over the knights and Poles, after which he was governor in Yuryev Livonsky (Derpt). But at that time, the persecution and execution of supporters of Sylvester and Adashev had already begun, and the escapes of those disgraced or threatened by royal disgrace to Lithuania had already begun. Although there was no fault for K., except for sympathy for the fallen rulers, he had full foundation to think that cruel disgrace will not pass him by. Meanwhile, King Sigismund-August and the Polish nobles wrote to K., persuading him to go over to their side and promising a warm welcome. The battle of Nevl (1562), which was unsuccessful for the Russians, could not give the tsar a pretext for disgrace, judging by the fact that even after it K. was in charge of Yuryev; and the king, reproaching him for his failure (Skaz. 186), does not think of attributing it to treason. K. could not be afraid of responsibility for an unsuccessful attempt to capture the city of Helmet: if this matter were of great importance, the king would blame him in his letter to K.. Nevertheless, K. was sure of the nearness of misfortune and, after vain prayers and fruitless intercession of the hierarchal ranks (Skaz. 132-3), decided to flee "from the land of God." In 1563 (according to other news - in 1564: g.) K., with the help of his faithful servant Vaska Shibanov, fled from Yuryev to Lithuania [In rukop. "Tales" K., storage. in moscow main archive, it is told how Shibanov took the first message to the king K. and was tormented by him for that. According to another report, Vaska Shibanov was captured during his flight and said in K. "many treacherous deeds"; but the praises that the tsar showers on Shibanov for his loyalty to K. clearly contradict this news]. K. came to the service of Sigismund not alone, but with a whole crowd of adherents and servants, and was granted several estates (by the way, by the city of Kovel). K. controlled them through his officers from Muscovites. Already in September 1564, K. was fighting against Russia. After K. escaped, a hard fate befell people close to him. K. subsequently writes that the tsar “mortified my mother and wife and child of my only son, who were imprisoned, with a rope; my brethren, the single-knee princes of Yaroslavl, with various deaths, I killed my estates and plundered them. To justify his rage, Grozny could only cite the fact of betrayal and violation of the kiss of the cross; two of his other accusations, that K. “wanted the sovereignty in Yaroslavl” and that he took away his wife Anastasia from him, were apparently invented by him only to justify his anger in the eyes of the Polish-Lithuanian nobles: K. could not have personal hatred for the queen, and only a madman could think of separating Yaroslavl into a separate principality. K. usually lived about 20 versts from Kovel, in the town of Milyanovichi. Judging by the numerous processes, the acts of which have come down to us, the Moscow boyar and the tsar’s servant quickly assimilated with the Polish-Lithuanian magnates and turned out to be at least not the most humble among the violent ones: he fought with the lords, seized the estate by force, scolded the royal envoys with “obscene Moscow words” ; his officers, hoping for his protection, extorted money from the Jews, and so on. In 1571, K. married a rich widow Kozinskaya, nee Princess Golshanskaya, but soon divorced her, married, in 1579, for the third time a poor girl Semashko and was apparently happy with her; had a daughter and son Demetrius by her. In 1583, Mr.. K. died. Since soon his authoritative executor, Konstantin Ostrozhsky, also died, the government, under various pretexts, began to take possession of the widow and son K. and, finally, took Kovel himself. Demetrius K. subsequently received part of what was taken away and converted to Catholicism. - Opinions about K., like politician and man are not only different, but also diametrically opposed. Some see him as a narrow conservative, an extremely limited but self-important person, a supporter of boyar sedition and an opponent of autocracy. His betrayal is explained by the calculation of worldly benefits, and his behavior in Lithuania is considered a manifestation of unbridled autocracy and gross egoism; even the sincerity and expediency of his labors for the maintenance of Orthodoxy are suspected. According to others, K. is an intelligent, honest and sincere person who has always stood on the side of good and truth. Since the controversy between K. and Grozny, along with other products literary activity K., are still extremely insufficiently examined, then a final judgment about K., more or less capable of reconciling the contradictions, is still impossible. From the works of K. currently known the following: 1) "History of Prince. the great Moscow about the deeds, even heard from reliable husbands and even seen by our eyes. 2) “Four letters to Grozny”, 3) “Letters” to different persons; 16 of them were included in the 3rd edition. "Tales of the book. TO." N. Ustryalova (St. Petersburg, 1868), one letter was published by Sakharov in The Moskvityanin (1843, No. 9) and three letters in The Orthodox Interlocutor (1863, book V - VIII). 4) "Preface to the New Margaret"; ed. for the first time by N. Ivanishev in the collection of acts: “Life of Prince. K. in Lithuania and Volhynia ”(Kyiv 1849), reprinted by Ustryalov in Skaz. 5) “Preface to the book of Damascus “Heaven”, ed. book. Obolensky in "Bibliographic. Notes "1858 No. 12). 6) “Notes (on the margins) to the translations from Chrysostom and Damascus” (printed by Prof. A. Arkhangelsky in “Appendices” to “Essays on the History of Western Russian Literature”, in “Readings of the General and Historical and Ancient .” 1888 No. 1). 7) "History of the Florence Cathedral", compilation; printed in "Story" pp. 261-8; about it, see 2 articles - “Journal. Min. Nar. Prosv. ”, 1841 book. I, and "Moskvityanin" 1841, vol. III. In addition to selected works by Chrysostom (“Margaret the New”; see about him “Slavic-Russian rukop.” Undolsky, M., 1870), K. translated the dialogue of Patr. Gennady, Theology, Dialectics, and other writings of Damaskinos (see the article by A. Arkhangelsky in 1888, No. 8), some of the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite, Gregory the Theologian, Basil the Great, excerpts from Eusebius, and so on. Large excerpts from Cicero are inserted into one of his letters to Grozny (“Skaz.” 205-9). Sam K. calls his "beloved teacher" Maxim Grek; but the latter was both old and dejected by persecution at the time when K. entered into life, and K. could not be his direct student. Back in 1525, you were very close to Maxim. Mich. Tuchkov (K.'s mother - nee Tuchkova), who probably had a strong influence on K. Like Maxim, K. has a deep hatred for self-satisfied ignorance, at that time very widespread even in the upper class of the Moscow state. Dislike for books, from which supposedly “people go crazy, that is to say go crazy,” K. considers a malicious heresy. Above all, he places St. Scripture and the Church Fathers as its interpreters; but he also respects the external or gentry sciences - grammar, rhetoric, dialectics, natural philosophy (physics, etc.), moral philosophy (ethics) and the circle of heavenly circulation (astronomy). He himself studies in fits and starts, but he studies all his life. As governor in Yuryev, he has a whole library with him; after the flight, “already in gray hairs” (“Skaz.”, 224), he strives “to learn the Latin language for the sake of it, and he could put into his own language what has not yet been put down” (“Skaz.” 274). According to K., state disasters also come from neglect of teaching, and states where verbal education is firmly established not only do not perish, but expand and convert those of other faiths to Christianity (as the Spaniards - New World ). K. shares with Maxim the Greek his dislike for the "Osiflyans", for the monks, who "began to love the acquisitions"; they are in his eyes "in truth, all sorts of kats (executioners) are bitter." He pursues the apocrypha, denounces the "Bulgarian fables" of the priest Yeremey, "or rather the nonsense of women", and especially rises against the Gospel of Nicodemus, the authenticity of which people who were well-read in St. Scripture. Exposing the ignorance of contemporary Russia and willingly recognizing that in his new fatherland science is more widespread and more respected, K. is proud of the purity of the faith of his natural fellow citizens, reproaches the Catholics for their impious innovations and vacillations, and deliberately does not want to separate the Protestants from them, although aware of the biography of Luther, the civil strife that arose as a result of his preaching and the iconoclasm of Protestant sects. He is also pleased with the purity of the Slavonic language and opposes it to "Polish barbaria". He clearly sees the danger threatening the Orthodox of the Polish crown from the Jesuits, and warns Konstantin Ostrozhsky himself against their machinations; it is precisely for the struggle against them that he would like to prepare his co-religionists by science. K. looks gloomily at his time; this is the 8th thousand years, the “age of the beast”; “if the Antichrist has not yet been born, the doors of wide and bold are already in Prague. In general, the mind of K. can rather be called strong and solid, rather than strong and original (so he sincerely believes that during the siege of Kazan, the Tatar old men and women used their charms to bring “spitting”, that is, rain, on the Russian army; Skaz. 24) , and in this respect his regal adversary is vastly superior to him. Terrible is not inferior to Kurbsky in knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, the history of the church of the first centuries and the history of Byzantium, but he is less well-read in the church fathers and incomparably less experienced in the ability to clearly and literaryly express his thoughts, and “many rage and ferocity” interfere with his correctness his speeches. In terms of content, Grozny's correspondence with K. is a precious literary monument: there is no other case where the worldview of the advanced Russian people of the 16th century would have been revealed with greater frankness and freedom, and where two outstanding minds would have acted with great tension. In the "History of the Great Prince of Moscow" (an account of events from the childhood of Grozny to 1578), which is rightly considered the first monument of Russian historiography with a strictly sustained trend, K. is a writer to an even greater extent: all parts of his monograph are strictly considered, presentation harmonious and clear (with the exception of those places where the text is faulty); he very skillfully uses the figures of exclamation and questioning, and in some places (for example, in the depiction of the torment of Metropolitan Philip) reaches true pathos. But even in the "History" K. cannot rise to a definite and original world outlook; and here he is only an imitator of good Byzantine examples. Either he rises against the nobles, but to the battle of the lazy, and proves that the king should seek good advice “not only from advisers, but also from people of all people” (Sk. 89), then he reproaches the king that he elects “clerks” for himself “ not from a gentry family”, “but more from priests or from a simple nation” (Skaz. 43). He constantly enriches his story with unnecessary beautiful words, intercalary, not always going to the point and not well-aimed maxims, composed speeches and prayers and monotonous reproaches against the primordial enemy of the human race. K.'s tongue is in places beautiful and even strong, in places pompous and viscous, and everywhere dotted foreign words, obviously - not out of need, but for the sake of greater literary. In a huge number there are words taken from the Greek language unfamiliar to him, even more - Latin words, somewhat smaller - German words that have become known to the author either in Livonia or through the Polish language. Literature about K. is extremely extensive: anyone who wrote about Grozny could not avoid K.; in addition, his history and his letters, on the one hand, translations and polemics for Orthodoxy, on the other, are such significant facts in the history of Russian mental life that not a single researcher of pre-Petrine writing had the opportunity not to express judgment about them; almost every description of the Slavic manuscripts of Russian book depositories contains material for the history of K.'s literary activity. We will name only the most important works not named above. "Tales of the book. TO." published by N. Ustryalov in 1833, 1842 and 1868, but also the 3rd ed. far from being called critical and does not contain everything that was known even in 1868. Concerning the work of S. Gorsky: (Kaz., 1858) see the article by N. A. Popov, “About the biographer. and the criminal element in history” (“Athenaeus” 1858, Part VIII, No. 46). A number of articles by Z. Oppokov (“Kn. A. M. K.”) were published in Kiev. Univ. Izv." for 1872, nos. 6-8. Article by prof. M. Petrovsky (M. P -sky): “Kn. A.. M. K. Historical and bibliographic notes on his Tales” printed. in "Uch. Zap. Kazan Univ. for 1873. See also “Investigations about the life of Prince. K. in Volyn ”, reported. L. Matseevich (“Ancient and New Russia” 1880, I); "Kn. K. in Volyn ”Yul. Bartoshevich ("Ist. Bulletin" VI). In 1889, a detailed work by A. N. Yasinsky was published in Kyiv: “Works of Prince. K. as historical material.

A. Kirpichnikov

Kurbsky Andrei Mikhailovich (1528 - 1583)

Russian political and military figure, writer and publicist. From the family of Yaroslavl princes. Received a good education(studied grammar, rhetoric, astronomy and philosophy); Maxim Grek had a great influence on the formation of K.'s worldview. In the 40-50s. was one of the closest people of Ivan IV Vasilyevich. He occupied the highest administrative and military positions, was a member of the Chosen Rada, participated in the Kazan campaigns of 1545-52. In connection with military failures in Livonia, in 1561 the tsar placed K. at the head of the Russian troops in the Baltic states, who soon won a number of victories over the knights and Poles, after which he was governor in Yuryev (Derpt). Fearing disgrace after the fall of the government of A.F. Adashev (see Oprichnina), with whom he was close, on April 30, 1564, K. fled from Yuryev to Lithuania; the Polish king granted K. several estates in Lithuania (including the city of Kovel) and Volyn, K. was included in the number of members of the queens. glad. In 1564 he led one of the Polish armies in the war against Russia. In 1564-79, K. sent three messages to Ivan IV (which marked the beginning of the well-known correspondence between K. and the tsar), in which he accused him of cruelty and unjustified executions. In 1573, K. wrote The History of the Grand Duke of Moscow, a political pamphlet that reflected the ideology of the large aristocracy, which opposed the strengthening of autocratic power. "History" is simultaneously evidence of a contemporary about the uprising of 1547 in Moscow, the capture of Kazan, the activities of the government of A.F. Adashev, which K. called the "Chosen Rada", the Livonian War and other events. Works K. - valuable historical source are of high literary merit.

Works: Works, vol. 1 - Original works, St. Petersburg, 1914.

Lit .: Yasinsky A. N., Works. Prince Kurbsky as historical material, , 1889; Zimina A., When did Kurbsky write the "History of the Grand Duke of Moscow"?, Tr. Department of Old Russian Literature, vol. 18, M. - L., 1962; Skrynnikov R. G., Kurbsky and his letters to the Pskov-Caves Monastery, ibid.

V. I. Koretsky.

Great Soviet Encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1969-1978.

KURBSKY Andrey Mikhailovich

(c. 1528 - 1583, metro station Milyanovichi near Kovel, Lithuania) - Russian political and military leader, publicist. Belonged to one of the most noble boyar families. He received a good education for his time (he studied rhetoric, grammar, astronomy, philosophy), knew Latin. Participated in many military campaigns, including the Livonian War. In 1556-57 he was a member of the Chosen Rada - the government of Muscovite Russia. Not wanting to fall victim to the persecutions initiated by Ivan IV against the boyars, he fled to Lithuania to King Sigismund II Augustus. He considered Maxim the Greek to be his spiritual teacher. Like him, he fought for the preservation of the purity of the Orthodox faith, was an ardent critic of Catholicism and Protestantism. In numerous messages, he dealt with various dogmatic and philosophical issues, combining adherence to orthodox teaching with respect for knowledge and enlightenment. In Lithuania, he did a lot of propaganda and educational work, organized the correspondence and translation of the works of many Eastern Christian thinkers and preachers: John Chrysostom, John of Damascus, Basil the Great, Simeon Metaphrastus, Gregory the Theologian, and others. Kurbsky owns a number of translations and work on logic. In his political views, he was a supporter of a limited monarchy. He devoted several letters to Ivan the Terrible and the pamphlet "The Story of the Grand Duke of Moscow" to defend and justify his position.

Cit.: Works of Prince Kurbsky. - . SPb., 1914, v. 21; Correspondence between Ivan the Terrible and Andrei Kurbsky. M 1993.

Lit .: Gavryushin N.K. Scientific legacy A. M. Kurbsky. - "Monuments of science and technology. 1984". M., 1986.

E. Η. Butuzksha.

New Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001.

Rod Kurbsky

The Kurbsky family separated from the branch of the Yaroslavl princes in the 15th century. According to the family legend, the family received a surname from the village of Kurba. The Kurbsky clan manifested itself mainly in the voivodeship service: members of the clan conquered the Khanty and Mansi tribes in the Northern Urals, the Kurbskys died both near Kazan and in the war with the Crimean Khanate. The Kurbsky family was also present in administrative positions, but in this field the family did not achieve great success, although the Kurbskys were governors in Veliky Ustyug, and in Pskov, and in Starodub, and in Toropets. Most likely, Mikhail Mikhailovich Kurbsky, the father of Andrei Kurbsky, had the boyars. Perhaps Semyon Fedorovich Kurbsky also had the boyar rank.

Such a career position, of course, did not correspond to the very name of the Yaroslavl prince. There could be several reasons for this situation. Firstly, the princes Kurbsky often supported the opposition to the ruling regime. The grandson of Semyon Ivanovich Kurbsky was married to the daughter of the disgraced Prince Andrei Uglichsky. The Kurbskys supported in the struggle for the throne not Vasily III, but Dmitry the grandson, which earned even greater dislike of the Moscow rulers.

Participation in Kazan campaigns ==

In the 21st year, he participated in the 1st campaign near Kazan; then he was governor in Pronsk. In the city, he defeated the Tatars near Tula at the crossing over the Shivoron River near Dedoslavl, and was wounded, but after eight days he was already on horseback again. During the siege of Kazan, Kurbsky commanded the right hand of the entire army and, together with his younger brother, showed outstanding courage. Two years later, he defeated the rebellious Tatars and Cheremis, for which he was appointed boyar.

At this time, Kurbsky was one of the people closest to Tsar Ivan the Terrible, he became even closer to the party of Sylvester and Adashev.

Participation in the Livonian War

According to the historian B.N. Morozov, immediately after Kurbsky's arrival in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, his surname was confused with the existing Lithuanian gentry surname "Krupsky".

Judging by the numerous trials, the acts of which have survived to this day, he quickly assimilated with the Polish-Lithuanian magnates and “among the violent ones, he turned out to be at least not the most humble”: he fought with the pans, seized the estate by force, scolded the royal envoys with “obscene Moscow words” and other.

Evaluation of a historical figure

On a mossy stone at night,
An exile from a dear homeland,
Prince Kurbsky sat, the young leader,
In hostile Lithuania, a sad wanderer,
Shame and glory of the Russian countries,
Wise in advice, terrible in battle,
The hope of mournful Russians,
The storm of the Livonians, the scourge of Kazan...

Opinions about Kurbsky, as a politician and a person, are not only different, but also diametrically opposed. Some see him as a narrow conservative, an extremely limited but self-important person, a supporter of boyar sedition and an opponent of autocracy. His betrayal is explained by the calculation of worldly benefits, and his behavior in Lithuania is considered a manifestation of unbridled autocracy and gross egoism; even the sincerity and expediency of his labors for the maintenance of Orthodoxy are suspected.

According to others, Kurbsky is a smart and educated person, an honest and sincere person who has always stood on the side of good and truth. He is called the first Russian dissident.

The well-known Polish historian and heraldist of the 17th century, Simon Okolsky, wrote that Kurbsky “was a truly great man: firstly, great in his origin, for he was in common with Prince John of Moscow; secondly, great in position, as he was the highest military leader in Muscovy; thirdly, great in valor, because he won so many victories; fourthly, great in his happy fate: after all, he, an exile and a fugitive, was received with such honors by King Augustus. He also possessed a great mind, for in a short time, already in his advanced years, he learned the Latin language in the kingdom, with which he was previously unfamiliar.

Political ideas of Andrei Kurbsky

• The weakening of the Christian faith and the spread of heresy is dangerous primarily because it gives rise to ruthlessness and indifference in people towards their people and fatherland.
• Like Ivan the Terrible, Andrei Kurbsky interpreted the supreme state power as a gift from God, in addition, he called Russia the "Holy Russian Empire."
• The holders of power do not actually fulfill what God intended for them. Instead of administering a righteous judgment, they create arbitrariness. In particular, Ivan IV does not administer a righteous court and does not protect his subjects.
• The Church should be an obstacle to rampant lawlessness and bloody arbitrariness of rulers. The spirit of Christian martyrs who died in the struggle against criminal and unrighteous rulers raises the Church to this lofty destiny.
• Royal power should be exercised with the assistance of advisers. Moreover, it should be a permanent advisory body under the tsar. The prince saw an example of such an organ in the Elected Rada - a board of advisers that operated under Ivan IV in the 50s of the 16th century.

Literary creativity

From the works of K. currently known the following:

1. "History of the book. the great Moscow about the deeds, even heard from reliable husbands and even seen by our eyes.
2. "Four Letters to Grozny",
3. "Letters" to various persons; 16 of them were included in the 3rd edition. "Tales of the book. TO." N. Ustryalova (St. Petersburg, 1868), one letter was published by Sakharov in The Moskvityanin (1843, No. 9) and three letters in The Orthodox Interlocutor (1863, book V-VIII).
4. "Preface to the New Margaret"; ed. for the first time by N. Ivanishev in the collection of acts: “Life of Prince. K. in Lithuania and Volhynia ”(Kyiv 1849), reprinted by Ustryalov in Skaz.
5. "Foreword to the book of Damascus" Heaven "published by Prince Obolensky in" Bibliographic Notes "1858 No. 12).
6. “Notes (on the margins) to translations from Chrysostom and Damascus” (published by Prof. A. Arkhangelsky in “Appendices” to “Essays on the History of West Russian Literature”, in “Readings of the General and Ist. and Ancient.” 1888 No. 1).
7. "History of the Cathedral of Florence", compilation; printed in "Story" pp. 261-8; about her, see 2 articles by S.P. Shevyrev - "", 1841 book. I, and "Moskvityanin" 1841, vol. III.

In addition to selected works of Chrysostom ("Margaret the New"; see about him "Slavic-Russian rukop." Undolsky, M., 1870), Kurbsky translated the dialogue of Patr. Gennady, Theology, Dialectics and other writings of Damascus (see the article by A. Arkhangelsky in the Journal of the Ministry of National Education, 1888, No. 8), some of the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite, Gregory the Theologian, Basil the Great, excerpts from Eusebius, and so on.

see also

• Kurbsky, Andrei Mikhailovich at Rodovod. Tree of ancestors and descendants

Notes

Literature

• Correspondence between Ivan the Terrible and Andrei Kurbsky. - M., 1993.
• Filyushkin A. Andrei Kurbsky. - M .: Young Guard, 2008. - 308 p. - (Life of Remarkable People; Issue 1337 (1137)). - ISBN 978-5-235-03138-8
• Solodkin Ya. G. The first message of Ivan the Terrible to A. M. Kurbsky in Russian literature and diplomatic usage at the end of the 16th - early XVII in // Ancient Russia. Questions of medieval studies. - 2003. - No. 2 (12). - S. 81-82.
• With. 395, 321 (scheme IV - 11), "Ukrainian gentry from the end of the XIV to the middle of the XVII century (Volin and Central Ukraine)", professor Yakovenko N.M. "Science thought", Kiev, 1993 ISBN 5-12-003024-6 (ukr.)

Music

• Dedicated to Andrei Kurbsky photo and audio enhanced CD album - Petrov-Tverskoy "In the Mississippi Delta" (C) 2010

Links

• book. A. M. Kurbsky. Tales of Prince Kurbsky on the Runivers website

The information in this article is current as of late XIX century.

Categories:

• Personalities in alphabetical order
• Born in 1528
• Deceased in 1583
• Writers alphabetically
• Writers of Russia alphabetically
• Writers Russia XVI century
• Writers of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
• Russian writers alphabetically
• Russian writers of the 16th century
• Moscow State
• Members of the Livonian War
• Persons:Yaroslavsky district of the Yaroslavl region
• Kurbsky

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what "Kurbsky, Andrey Mikhailovich" is in other dictionaries:

- (1528 ≈ 1583), Russian political and military leader, publicist writer. From the family of Yaroslavl princes. He received a good education (studied grammar, rhetoric, astronomy and philosophy); K. had a great influence on the formation of the worldview ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

- (1528 83) Russian prince, statesman, writer, translator. Member of the Kazan campaigns, member of the Chosen Council, governor in the Livonian War. Fearing the unrighteous disgrace of Ivan IV, he fled to Lithuania (1564); member of the Rzeczpospolita Rada; participant… … Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Kurbsky, Andrei Mikhailovich- KURBSKY Andrei Mikhailovich (1528 83), prince, boyar, writer. Member of the Kazan campaigns of the late 40's early 50's. 16th century, member of the Chosen Rada, governor in the Livonian War of 1558 83. Fearing disgrace for being close to the feudal lords executed by Ivan IV, in 1564 ... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

KURBSKY Andrei Mikhailovich was born - a prince, writer and translator.

Andrei Mikhailovich is a descendant of the eminent princes of Yaroslavl, who have long been in opposition to the power of the great Moscow prince. He grew up in a family distinguished by literary interests and, apparently, not alien to the influence of the West.

In his youth, he was close to Ivan the Terrible, was a member of the Chosen Rada, and was a major military leader.

In 1552, 24-year-old Kurbsky participated in the Kazan campaign and was wounded. His subsequent life until 1564 was filled with numerous campaigns. In the spring of 1563, Andrei Mikhailovich was sent as governor to Yuryev, which was an honorable exile for his "agreement with the traitors" - the boyars, many of whom had been executed by Ivan IV shortly before.

April 30, 1564 Kurbsky with extreme haste, leaving his wife and son, leaving all his property and even military armor, fled from royal disgrace to Lithuania. The flight was preceded by secret negotiations with King Sigismund-August and the leaders of the Lithuanian Rada, who guaranteed him a "decent maintenance". Having changed his homeland, he tried to please the new masters, from whom he received rich estates: he took part in the war with the Muscovite state and contributed to the alliance of Lithuania with the Crimea against Russia.

In a foreign land, Andrei Mikhailovich "consoled himself in book affairs", comprehended "the wisdom of the highest ancient men", in particular Aristotle, studied Latin, from which he translated a number of theological works into Russian.

The journalistic works of Kurbsky reflected the point of view of the boyar reaction. The earliest works known to us are three letters to the Pskov-Caves Monastery to the elder Vassian and the first letter to Ivan the Terrible. The second epistle to Vassian (written between February and April 1564, before fleeing abroad) is an incriminating document directed against the tsar who is accused of arbitrariness and lawlessness, oppression not only of the boyars, but also of the "merchant" rank and farmers. Kurbsky calls major hierarchs minions of secular power - they are bribed with wealth and turned into obedient executors of the will of the king. With this letter, he hoped to call the elders to an open condemnation of the "lawful" repressions.

AT "Epistolia first to the Tsar and the Grand Duke of Moscow", sent to Ivan the Terrible in 1564 already from abroad, Andrei Mikhailovich accuses the tsar of the villainous murders of the governors, who got him "high-profile kingdoms." He complains about injustice to himself and warns that he orders to put his “piranitsa”, “wetted with tears”, in a coffin in order to appear before the highest judge who will judge them in the next world. The letter is distinguished by the logic of presentation, the harmony of the composition, the clarity and emotionality of the language.

The most significant work of Kurbsky is "The Story of the Grand Duke of Moscow"(1573), which is a pamphlet directed against Grozny. The author tries to answer the question of how the "previously kind and deliberate" king turned into a "new beast". He traces his whole life, starting from childhood, when a self-willed teenager met no resistance in anyone. He talks in detail about the Kazan campaign, especially emphasizing his own military merit. The descriptions of tortures and executions to which Ivan the Terrible subjected persons objectionable to him are distinguished by great drama. The main idea of ​​\u200b\u200bHistory was that the autocrat should rule the state not alone, but with the help of good advisers, equal in generosity to himself: it is no accident that Grozny is here polemically called not a king, but "the Grand Duke of Moscow."

In Lithuania and Volyn, Andrey Mikhailovich wrote a number of business letters to various people and letters to Grozny (1579), which were a response to the second message of the tsar (1577), in which he reported on the capture of Wolmar, where the disgraced boyar had fled at one time.

As a publicist, Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky in many respects continues the traditions of his teacher Maxim Grek, striving to write “in short words, much reason is closing” (the second message to Grozny), that is, calling for a concise and at the same time meaningful presentation. Prince Kurbsky's own messages fully meet this requirement: they are small in size, built according to a clear plan, their main idea is expressed very clearly. Following the "high" style dictates the use of such oratory techniques as rhetorical questions and exclamations, antithesis, anaphora and other means of poetic syntax. Kurbsky's phrase is distinguished by "decoration", which is largely achieved by using a variety of epithets. The writer's language is almost alien to vulgarisms, vernacular, but, thanks to the pathos, especially strong in denunciations, emotionality, lyrical excitement, the journalistic works of the enemy of the Terrible are perceived as phenomena of living speech.

The features of the writer's literary manner are clearly revealed on the material of the first message to Ivan IV. The work is distinguished by harmony and logic of composition. Already in the introduction, which is a solemn appeal to the tsar, the main idea of ​​the monument is formulated: the author “out of much grief of the heart” wants to talk about the “persecutions” to which the tsar subjected his neighbors. From here - a natural transition to the main part, where first a description of the governors ruined by Grozny is given, and then the fate of one of the persecuted is reported - the personal misfortunes of the author himself. These two themes are presented in different tones. The panegyric of “the mighty in Israel” is intertwined with the angry denunciation of the king, which becomes especially expressive thanks to the multitude rhetorical questions- the author, as it were, severely interrogates Grozny, by what right does the latter commit his atrocities. The memory of one's own troubles sounds like a lyrical lamenting monologue; exclamatory sentences predominate here, giving the presentation an emotional character. The message ends with a prediction of retribution that awaits the wicked. Next to the king, “petters” appear here, pushing him to bad deeds. The accusatory intonation intensifies again, the writer's words become especially caustic. Thus, the task set in the introduction - to denounce Ivan IV - turns out to be completely solved, moreover, by economical means. At the same time, Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky himself remained in the memory of his descendants as a traitor and defector to the camp of the enemies of the motherland.

Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky - a prince and a controversial political figure, a writer who lived in 1528-1583. It is difficult to form an unambiguous opinion about Kurbsky A.M. as a person, because in various historical publications he is called both a selfish egoist who went into exile only for his own material gain, and a smart, honest and adamant person who stands guard over truth and goodness. Meanwhile, among the famous figures of the Russian Middle Ages, the figure of Kurbsky occupies an important position. He not only successfully participated in many significant military campaigns, but also took an active part in internal reforms that were carried out in the 50s. XVI century.

Participation in military battles

Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky devoted most of his life to military battles and campaigns. His first battle was in 1552. The commander Kurbsky, who at that time was only 24 years old, participated in the Kazan campaign. During the Livonian War, Kurbsky won a number of victories in major battles with the Poles.

In addition to being close to Ivan the Terrible, Kurbsky held secret negotiations with King Sigismund-August and the leaders of the Lithuanian Rada, who promised him great wealth for treason. At that time, the persecution of the allies of Sylvester and Adashev had just begun, and although Kurbsky did not feel any guilt for himself, he nevertheless suspected that the fate of other disgraced personalities would also affect him.

In April 1564, Kurbsky decides to urgently flee from his native lands in order to avoid the persecution of Ivan IV. In his new homeland, in Lithuania, Kurbsky tried to do everything possible to please the new owners. He also takes an active part in hostilities, only now he is fighting against his compatriots, on the side of the enemy. After all, as promised by King Sigismund-August, Andrei Mikhailovich received enormous wealth and land estates at his disposal. There is no unequivocal opinion whether the material side influenced Krupsky's decision to participate in hostilities against his compatriots.

Life in exile

Having abandoned his wife and infant son during a hasty escape from Great Russia, Kurbsky found solace in studying various sciences among which was the study Latin. By the way, he was quite successful in this training, since later he translated a large number of theological works into Russian. Kurbsky also paid great attention to "book affairs". Having a sharp mind and clarity of thought, Andrei Mikhailovich took up journalism, entering into a furious correspondence with Ivan the Terrible.

Literary creativity

Considering the journalistic work of Kurbsky, first of all, it is necessary to mention the "History of the Grand Duke of Moscow", in which he tried to expose Tsar Ivan the Terrible and accused him of unjustified murders of the governors. The main motive of the work was the idea that the tsar should rule not alone, but in consultation with boyars close to him by kinship. Considering the question of why Tsar Ivan the Terrible turned from a skillful and fair ruler into a despot, Kurbsky analyzes the entire history of the tsar's life, starting from childhood, in which Ivan the Terrible was not denied anything.

This work reflects the literary talent of the publicist. The introduction sets the emotional tone of the entire work. The main part of the epistle describes the characteristics and fate of the persecuted governors who did everything for the good of Russia, and the final part describes the misadventures of the author himself, who was forced to flee in search of salvation from persecution.

It is also necessary to note the work "Epistolie first to the Tsar and the Grand Duke of Moscow." It is the first message of Kurbsky to the Terrible. In this message, Andrei Mikhailovich accuses the tsar of injustice to himself and the governors who fought for the tsar. Contemporaries note a good literary style, literacy of presentation and clarity of thought of Kurbsky. According to researchers, the task that the writer set himself, namely to convict Ivan IV of atrocities, has been successfully completed.

Ivan the Terrible (also possessing an outstanding journalistic gift) entered into a fierce correspondence with Kurbsky. In it, he vigorously defended his right to autocratic power and accused Kurbsky of unjustified treason and the pursuit of material wealth. The letters of Ivan the Terrible carried an emotional color, the brightness of verbal forms and reflected the remarkable mind of the ruler. Thanks to the correspondence of these two extraordinary personalities, we have valuable monuments of literature and social thought of Ancient Russia.

It should be noted that in his journalistic works, Kurbsky, in addition to criticizing the tsar, actively tried to justify his flight from Russia. Leaving a bright mark in history, Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky died in 1583.

Prince, Russian and Lithuanian military and statesman, publicist writer; boyar.

From the family of the princes of the Kurb-skys, the vet-vi of the Yaroslavl Ryu-ri-ko-vi-chey. For the first time mentioned in the sources in the autumn of 1547 among the teaching-st-n-kov of the sva-deb-noy tse-re-mo-nii of the younger brother tsar Iva-na IV Va-sil-e-vi-cha, dmit-rov-sko-go book. Yuri Vas-sil-e-vi-cha. He was close to the pra-vi-tel-st-vu A.F. bra-noy ra-doy). In 1549-50, in the chi-not so-and-so and in the rank of esau-la, teaching-st-in-val in the way to Kazan, being in the co-hundred-ve retinue of Tsar Ivan IV. 16/8/1550 sent war-in-doy to Pronsk, in Oct. 1550 for-numbers in the composition of the 1st article “from-branded you-sya-chi” of the children of the bo-yar-skys, after receiving the power under Mo- howl. In 1552, a participant in the campaign against Kazan, after it began, was sent to lift the siege of Tu-la, pre-follow-to-the shaft from the fallen Crimean Tatars to the river. Shi-vo-ron, where teaching-st-in-shaft in a be-to-nose battle with them and was wounded. In July, according to the tsarist order, you stepped to Svi-yazh-sk, in August, in a co-hundred-ve Rus. howl-ska under the general ko-man-do-va-ni-em Ivan-on IV on-right-vil-sya near Kazan, during the storm-me, someone-swarm 10/2/1552 broke- Xia to the city through El-bu-gi-ny in-ro-ta, then pre-follow-to-shaft beyond the city from-st-fallen-shih Kazan-sky ta -tar, was seriously wounded. During the time of the pain of Tsar Iva-on IV Va-sil-e-vi-cha (March 1553) swore-nul mla-den-tsu-on-trace-no-ku - tsa- re-vi-chu Dmitry Iva-no-vi-chu. In 1553, co-pro-in-zh-gave Ivan IV on a bo-go-mo-lie in Kiril-lo-Be-lo-zer-sky mon. be-se-de with Mak-si-mom the Greek in Troy-tse-Ser-gie-vom mon., during the time of someone-swarm Mak-sim the Greek pre-do-ste-re-galca -rya from continuing the ride and made a pro-ro-honest about the possible gi-be-whether during her tsa-re-vi-cha Dmitry Iwa-no-vi-cha (which happened in June 1553). In 1553/54, at the head of a hundred-ro-of-the-same-half-ka, teaching-st-in-shaft in the after-le-nii of the resurrection of che-re-mi-owls in Wed. In the Volga (on-gra-zh-day for the service of the golden Ugric), in 1555 ru-ko-vo-dil in-dav-le-ni-em a new flash ki recovery. In June 1556, already in the rank of battle-ri-na and being in the retinue of the tsar, teaching-st-in-the-shaft in the course of Ivan IV for oh-ra-na-gra -nich ru-be-zhey under Ser-pu-hov; in September-Tyab-re - ok-Tyab-re led the regiment of the left hand, which stood in Ka-lu-ge. In 1557, he was on the be-re-go-howl service of the 2nd military-in-doy half of the right-hand-howl, hundred-yav-she-th in Ka-shi- re, from 12/21/1557 - the 1st military in Tu-le. From the beginning of the Livonian war of 1558-83 th floor. Ucha-st-in-shaft in the osa de Nei-shlos-sa (Sy-ren-ska), Nei-gau-ze-na (Nov-go-rod-ka), Der-pta (Yur-e-va ; we-not Tar-tu, Es-to-niya), etc. cities. 11.3.1559 sent by the 2nd military commander half of the right hand to oh-ra-well south-west. gra-ni-tsy from the on-going Crimean Tatars, on-ho-dil-sya in Ka-lu-ge, Mtsensk, in July-le - in De-di-lo-ve. You-st-fell killed-w-den-ny side-ron-no-one-in-en. action-st-viy against the Crimean-go-khan-st-va. Feb. - March 1560 ko-man-to-val in the very red Li-von-sky in the way of a large regiment. Co-performed successful foot trips under Wei-sen-stein (White Ka-men; now not the city of Pay-de, Es-to-nia), Fel-lin (Ville -yan; we are not the city of Vil-yan-di, Es-to-niya), Wol-mar (we are not the city of Val-mier-ra, Latvia). In May 1560, he was in Yury-e-ve at the head of a re-re-to-first half, in August he carried a defeat of lit-comrade. from-a-row in the head with the book. A. I. Po-lu-ben-sky near Ven-de-nom (Ke-sue; now not the city of Tse-sis, Latvia). A participant in the battle at Er-mes (2.8.1560), in a lo-living-she-k-nets su-sche-st-in-va-niyu Li-von-go-or- de-na. In con. 1560 teaching-st-in-shaft in not-successful for Russian. troops of the battle-ve near Wei-sen-shtein-nom. When you enter-p-le-nii into the howl-well, pol-scoli-comrade. and Swede. troops, together with others. From 3/25/1562 on-ho-dil-sya in Ve-li-ki Lu-kah, on May 28 he burned the garden and seized ar-til-le-riyu in ost-ro-ge Vi-teb- ska, in au-gu-sta lost a fight with li-comrade. from-rya-da-mi under Ne-ve-lem, was wounded. Vpo-lots-com in-ho-de 1562-63 on the night from 5.2 to 6.2.1563 “according to the go-court-re-vu decree” ru-ko-vo-dil us-ta-nov-koy siege round (towers) transferred to the pilot -kim ost-ro-gom. After the capture of Po-lots-ka (15.2.1563) co-pro-in-g-gave Ivan IV to Great Luke. On March 8, 1563, he received an appointment at the me-st-no-one in Yuryev for 1 year. From Jan. 1563 led a secret pe-re-go-in-ry with a bicycle. het-ma-nom li-tov-skim N. Yu. book. li-tov-sko-mu and polsk. ko-ro-lu Si-giz-mun-du II Av-gu-stu. In the autumn of 1563, K. led the sank-tsio-ni-ro-van-nye Russian. hundred-ro-noy tay-nye, but without-re-zul-tat-nye-re-go-in-ry with gr. I. von Ar-tsem, on-me-st-no-comm of the Duke of Fin-lyan-dia Yukha-na, about the surrender of the Russian. tsar-ryu deputy Gel-met in Li-vo-nii.

On the night of April 30, 1564, in co-pro-in-g-de-nii, 12 servants fled to Vel. Prince of Li-tov-skoe (ON). One of the reasons for his hasty run-st-va, according to the pre-la-same-tion of a number of is-to-ri-kov, would it be in-lu-chen -nye K. from the news of his coming soon opa-le and the fear of the possible ra-zo-bla-che-of his secret connections zey with Rad-zi-vil-lom and Polsk. ko-ro-lyom. By itself, K.’s run abroad cannot still be considered a pre-da-tel-st-vom, however, he was not a simple departure from the house of service -lo-go-lo-ve-ka from one-but-go-su-da-rya to another. K. ran, os-ta-viv on the pro-of-the-ox of fate, practically all his own-st-ve-ness in Rus. state-ve with a race-what-to-be-chit in ON com-pen-sa-tion for a re-move to a hundred-ro-well Si-giz-mun-da II Av-gu-hundred. Soon after this, K., proceeding from the conditions of his flax-no-go in the ON and in Vo -ly-no, began to teach-st-in-vat in the military. in-ho-dah and active-but in-mo-gat Polish. ko-ro-lyu in a war with Rus. state-tion, which can already be considered from me. Mother, wife and son K., who remained in Yur-e-ve, fell into disgrace and died in prison; here are the orderly lands of K. and others.

Si-giz-mund II August 4.7.1564 in-zh-lo-val K. in-lyn-ski-mi mes-tech-ka-mi, Ko-ve-lem, Vizh-voi and Mi-la- but-vi-cha-mi with deputy-ka-mi and with 28 sho-la-mi, bo-ga-you-mi in-me-st-i-mi in Lithuania (up to 10 villages). Soon, K. also received upit-sky estates (in 1567, concluding a contract with Prince M. A. Char-to-ryi-sky, K. joined-so-di-nil to his own vo-lyn-sky vla-de-ni-yam Sme-dinskaya vol.). In the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, he for-no-small the duty of the ko-vel-sky old-growth (appointed in 1564, accepted the post in 1565 and for-no-small it until to death), Krev-sko-go-star-ros-you (1566-71).

In Sept. - Oct. 1564 K. together with the book. B.F. arm-mii in in-ho-de in Rus. state-in, teaching-st-in-shaft in a bez-us-foot three-not-del-noy osa-de Po-lots-ka. In March 1565, at the head of the con-no-go detachment of 200 warriors in the co-hundred-ve of 15-thousand-thousand li-comrade. arm-mii omitted something-shal ve-li-ko-luts-kie lands. In con. 1560s K. personally entered into secret pe-re-go-vo-ry with the pre-sta-vi-te-lem imp. Mak-si-mi-lia-on II Gabs-burg-ga ab- ba-tom I. Tsi-rum on the creation of an-ti-tu-retz-coy league in co-hundred-ve Rus. state-va and Holy Rome. im-pe-rii. Before the beginning 1571 K. os-ta-val-sya at Si-giz-mun-de II Av-gu-ste and ras-smat-ri-val-sya them in ka-che-st-ve is possible can-di-da-ta for re-re-go-vo-ditch from Russian. knowledge, in order to convince her before-hundred-vi-te-lei to accept the ko-ro-left sub-given. In March 1573, he was elected de-pu-ta-tom vy-bor-no-go this-ma from Vo-ly-ni, in May 1573 he was teaching-st-in-shaft in the bra-tion of the Polish. ko-ro-lem Gen-ri-ha Wa-lua. With the advent of the house to power in Re-chi Po-spo-li-toy in 1576 new Polish. ko-ro-la Ste-fa-na Ba-to-ria K. returned to the military. service boo. In Aug. - sept. 1579 in ho-de pol-scoli-comrade. troops in Russian. state teaching-st-vo-va-la ro-ta headed by K., including 86 ka-za-kov and 14 gu-sa-ditch. In the re-zul-ta-te, this-ho-yes howl-ska Ste-fa-na Ba-to-riya from-vo-va-li from Rus. state-va Po-lotsk (31.8.1579) and some other fortresses. In 1581, at the order of co-ro-la Ste-fa-na Ba-to-ria K., he left to go on a journey already to Pskov, but on the way to him, in the region of Russian gra-ni-tsy, seriously, but for-bo-lel and returned to Mi-la-no-vi-chi.

Lit. in-te-re-sy and spiritual views of K. for-mi-ro-wa-were under the influence of uncle-di from the side of ma-te-ri - pi-sa-te-la V.M. -tsa K., elder of the Yaroslavl Spa-so-Pre-ob-ra-women-mon. Feo-do-ri-ta Kol-sko-go. K. was very fashionable for his time, not alien to the trends of western-european-rop. Counter-re-for-ma-tion. I studied gram-ma-ti-ku, ri-to-ri-ku, dia-lek-ti-ku, fi-lo-so-fiyu and other secular “sciences”. In the 1570s you-learned lat. lang. His best-known co-chi-non-nias are three messages of Ivan-nu IV, as well as “Is-to-riya about the prince-ve-li-ko- go mo-s-kov-sko-go de-leh. In the in-sla-ni-yah K. tsa-ryu in po-le-mich. for-me you-say-zy-wa-moose didn’t-with-the-glas-this with-li-ti-koy Ivan-on IV, pro-divin-she-sya in the 1560-70s, you-ra-zha-lis sim-pa-tii to the boyar-sky ari-hundred-kra-tii. K. osu-zh-gave gestural and demon-judgmental executions of the subjects, seeing in them the pre-ro-ha-ti-you Strash -no-so-yes. He you-dare-shaft in-en. no-good-chi rus. troops, someone-ry-mi ko-man-do-wa-whether not artificial "stra-ti-la-you", but unknown "vo-vo-dish-ki", from de-val-sya over the rough style of “shi-ro-ko-ve-shcha-tel-no-go and much-shu-me-sche-go” of the tsarist-go- blessing, not-dos-that-no-go, in his opinion, yes, even rya-to-go “bad-go-go-go-on”, pro-ti-vo-post-tav -lyal tsar-ryu his zap.-ev-rop. eru-ness, ob-ra-zo-vanity and brilliant abilities in the field of epi-hundred-lyar-no-go genre and style. In an effort to re-define his running in the ON, K. in the 3rd letter referred to “Pa-ra-dok-sy” Qi-tse-ro- on (sent to the tsar two extracts of them in their own re-re-vo-de from lat.). Fore-said-wal-Ivan-nu IV died together with the whole royal house, if the tsar did not return to the good deeds.

The question of yes-ti-ditch-ke “Is-to-rii about the prince of ve-li-ko-go mo-s-kov-sko-go-de-lekh” is-ta-et-sya dispute- nym and windows-cha-tel-but not resolved, but no-doubt-nen-but the fact that she is on-pi-sa-na in the period between 1573 and 1583. “Is-to-riya ...”, in some K. but-vator-ski co-uni-nil with-e-we decomp. lit. gen-ditch - le-to-pi-this, life-ty, in-in-sky in weight, me-moire-ditch, na-pi-sa-na in the form of once-ver-well- then from-ve-ta to the questions of “bright husbands” Re-chi Po-li-that about the features of the rights of Ivan IV. In it, from the lo-same-on the life of Ivan IV from ro-zh-de-nia to the beginning. 1570s, the name of the cause of his temper-st-ven-no-go re-ro-zh-de-nia (influence of io-sif-lyan, “shur- yov "For-har-i-nykh-Yur-e-vyh and others. "pa-lip-no-kov father-che-st-va"), describe-sa-ny tragic. fate would be co-time-men-ni-kov K., who died from the tsarist pro-of-la. In “Is-to-rii ...” K. you-stepped before-sta-vi-te-lem of the luminous ari-hundred-kra-tii, hundred-yav-shey in the winter qi-yah com-pro-miss-sa with others ka-te-go-riya-mi of the nobility-ryan-st-va. State. the ideal-scrap of K. was-la Chosen ra-yes, church-kov-nym - not-stya-zha-tel-st-vo (see in Art. Not-stya-zha-te-li) .

During the pre-by-va-niya in Yur-e-ve, K. wrote two messages to the elder of the Psko-vo-Pe-cher-sky mon. Vas-sia-nu (Mu-rom-tse-wu) and, ve-ro-yat-no, “Answer about the right ve-re Io-an-well, much-learned-no-mu” (perhaps, from the West-no-mu in Yur-e-ve pro-tes-tant-sko-mu pro-veda-no-ku I. Vet-ter-ma-nu). 1st message to the elder Vas-sia-nu and “Answer ...” in the sacred ch. arr. church-kov-no-dog-ma-tich. in-pro-himself and have an-ti-ka-to-lich. and an-ti-here-tich. rightness. 2nd blessing to the old Vas-sia-well so-der-lives the osu-zh-de-nie without-for-the-king of the king, please-no-th-st-va-rya- yes church-ing ie-rar-hov; in it, about-whether-chal-sya not-right-wise court, you-ra-m-elk with-feel-st-vie troubles-st-ven-no-mu in the same way- residential people, merchants, kre-st-yan. К. -you are from pro-from-in-la-tsa-rya. 3rd sending of Vas-sia-nu, on-pi-san-noe, apparently, already in Wol-ma-re after running-st-va from Yur-e-va, so-der-zha-lo zh-lo-would and up-ryo-ki mo-na-ham, not an eye-head-shim K. support-ki and ras-pro-stra-nya-shim about him on -ve-you.

In the 1570s K. on-pi-sal is also a series of pi-s to different persons, including kn. K.K. church-to-view and especially-ben-but against decomp. re-for-ma-ci-on-nyh and here-tich. re-league move. In conversations with the elder, Ar-te-mi-em came to the idea of ​​creating a circle of books. K. and his one-but-mouse-len-ni-ki (book M.A. etc.) pe-re-vo-di-li and pe-re-pi-sy-va-li decomp. co-chi-non-niya christ-sti-an-sky pi-sa-te-lei, co-hundred-vi-li in the beginning. 1570s collection of church co-chi-non-nii “New Mar-ga-rit” (included the works of Io-an-na Evil-to-us-ta, ano-nim-noe grammatical op. "On book signs" and "Skaz", compiled by K. himself), re-re-ve-li from lat. lang. collection of words and living vizant. hagio-gra-fa Si-me-o-na Me-taf-ra-sta. In the 2nd floor. 1570s K. re-re-led from lat. lang. trak-tat Io-an-na Da-ma-ski-na "Source of knowledge", including "God-word-vie", "Dia-lek-ti-ku" (hour-tic-but), perhaps, "Book of heresies." K. ra-bo-tal also over the re-vo-da-mi “Hro-ni-ki” Ni-ki-fo-ra Kal-li-sta Xan-fo-pu-la, so-chi -non-fathers of the Church-vi Va-si-lia Ve-li-ko-go, Gri-go-ria of the God-word-va, Dio-ni-sia Are-o-pa-gi-ta , Ie-ro-ni-ma Bla-zhen-no-go, etc. Ori-gi-nal-nye and re-water co-chi-non-nia K. have come down to us in spin- Skakh 16-19 centuries.

In the history of other Russian. lit-ry K. os-ta-vil a deep trace as you-give-schi-sya pi-sa-tel-pub-li-cyst, for the first time ku sin-te-for diff. lit. genres with the aim of creating a new genre - bio-graphics otd. great-vi-te-la on the background of the is-to-rii of his kingdom-in-va-niya. Lit. creative honor K. - known-me-on-tel-ny fe-no-men of the fatherland. culture-tu-ry, on-walking-scha-Xia on the re-se-che-nii decomp. lit. and languages ​​​​of tra-di-tsy - slav-vya-no-vi-zan-tiy-sky and latin-sky, moscow-sky and western-Russian.

Compositions:

So-chi-no-nia. SPb., 1914. T. 1: So-chi-non-niya original-gi-nal-nye; Pe-re-pis-ka Ivan Groz-no-go with A. Kurb-sky. 3rd ed. M., 1993;

The same // Bib-lio-te-ka li-te-ra-tu-ry of Ancient Russia. SPb., 2001. T. 11: XVI century;

So-chi-non-nia A. Kurb-sko-go // Ibid.

Additional literature:

Gorsky S. [D.]. Life and historical meaning of Prince A. M. Kurb-go. Kazan, 1858;

Yasinsky A.N. So-chi-non-niya prince Kurb-sko-go as is-to-ri-che-sky ma-te-ri-al. K., 1889;

Lu-rye Ya.S. Before-not-se-niya agent im-pe-ra-to-ra Mak-si-mi-lia-na II ab-ba-ta Tsi-ra about re-re-go-vo-ra with A. M. Kurb-skim in 1569 (According to ma-te-ria-lam of the Vienna ar-khi-va) // Ar-heo-gra-fi-che-year-old for 1957 Moscow, 1958;

Skryn-ni-kov R.G. Kurbsky and his letters to the Psko-Vo-Pe-Cher-sky mo-na-styr // Works From de la ancient Russian Li-te-ra-tu-ry. M.; L., 1962. T. 18;

he is. Pe-re-pis-ka Groz-no-go with Kurb-sky. Pa-ra-doc-sy E. Ki-na-na. L., 1973;

Schmidt S.O. To the study of the “Is-to-rii of Prince Kurb-go” // Slava-vya-ne and Rus. M., 1968;

he is. To the history of the re-pis-ki of Kurb-sko-go and Ivan-on-the-Groz-no-go // Cultural heritage of Ancient Russia. M., 1976;

Keenan E.L. The Kurbskii-Groznyi Apocrypha. Camb. (Mass.), 1971;

Rykov Yu.D. Editions of "Is-to-rii" by Prince Kurb-go // Ar-heo-gra-fi-che-year-old for 1970. M., 1971;

he is. “Is-to-riya about the great prince Mo-s-kov-sky” by A. M. Kurb-sko-go and Op-rich-ni-on Ivan-on Groz-no-go // Is-the-ri-che-sky for-pis-ki. 1974. T. 93;

he is. Prince A. M. Kurbsky and his concept of state-su-dar-st-ven-noy power // Russia on the paths of cent-tra-li-za-tion. M., 1982;

Florya B.N. New about Groz-ny and Kurb-sky // History of the USSR. 1974. No. 3;

Zi-min A.A. The first message of Kurb-sky-Ivan-well Groz-no-mu: (Tek-hundred-lo-gi-che-pro-ble-we) // Works From-de-la ancient-non-Russian-li-te-ra-tu-ry. L., 1976. T. 31;

he is. On the run of Prince A. Kurb-go to Lithuania // Russian ro-do-slo-vets. 2002. No. 1;

Rossing N., Rønne B. Apocryphal - not Apocryphal? A critical analysis of the discussion concerning the corre-spondence between Tsar Ivan IV Groznyj and Prince A. Kurbskij. Ph., 1980;

Tse-ha-no-vich A.A. To the re-re-vo-dche-sky activity of Prince A. M. Kurb-go // Ancient-Russian Li-te-ra-tu-ra. Is-toch-no-ve-de-nie. L., 1985;

Auerbach I. A. M. Kurbskij: Leben in osteurop ̈aischen Adels-gesell-schaf-ten des 16. Jahrhunderts. Munch., 1985;

idem.Identity in Exile: A. M. Kurbskii and national consciousness in the sixteenth cen-tury // Mo-s-kov-skaya Rus (1359-1584): culture-tu-ra and is-to-ri-che-s-mo-creation-on-nie. Moscow, 1997;

Mo-ro-zov B.N. The first message of Kurb-sky Ivan-well Groz-no-mu in the collection of the end of the 16th - at the beginning of the 17th century. // Ar-heo-gra-fi-che yearly-year-nick for 1986. M., 1987;

Ka-lu-gin V.V. When was Prince A. Kurbsky born? // Archive of Russian history. 1995. Issue. 6;

he is. A. Kurb-sky and Ivan the Terrible: Theo-re-ti-che-sky views and whether-te-ra-tour-naya tech-no-no-old-Russian-sky-go-pi-sa -te-la. M., 1998