The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

About influence of negative psychological features of character of the founder of school of sciences on its development



UDK 930.2

About INFLUENCE of NEGATIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL FEATURES of CHARACTER of the FOUNDER of SCHOOL OF SCIENCES ON ITS DEVELOPMENT

E.S. Kirsanova

Seversk state technological academy E-mail: kirsanov@ssti.ru

On the basis of the analysis of the biography of the outstanding Russian historian V.I. Guerrier difficult collisions of ideological and personal relationship between the founder of school of sciences and his pupils in a situation when the person with "heavy" character appears the teacher are considered.

Knowing about a big contribution of the scientist-historian to development of science, about its role in creation of school of sciences, it is natural to assume that behind this contribution and a role, there are not only his scientific and pedagogical talents, but also the traits of character attractive from the human point of view: tolerance, openness in communication with colleagues and pupils, lack of irritability concerning opponents, etc. Biographies of many historians confirm justice of such stereotypical expectation. But cases when the mentioned traits of character were obviously not inherent in the scientists who became history of historical science as founders of schools of sciences are not rare. Why their "heavy" character did not become the reason of rejection of pupils from them? How did it nevertheless affect relationship of pupils with the teacher over time? Perhaps, we will manage to receive answers to these questions, being guided by the analysis of the biography of professor of the Moscow university V.I. Guerrier (1837-1919)

>- the scientist who trained many Russian researchers of general and Russian history (N.I. Kareev, P.G Vinogradov, M.S. Korelin, S.F. Fortunatov, P.N. Ardashev, R.Yu. Vipper, etc.).

At first sight, it is difficult to understand, than V.I. Guerrier won hearts of students - the historians electing him the mentor. He was not a brilliant lecturer. "His appearance, - P.N. Milyukov remembered, - had no in his advantage. Dry and long, with the extended structure of the lower part of the person making an impression of a horse jaw, with pergament, wrinkled skin, always clasped on all buttons, with motionless, some glass expression of eyes, with the thin lips sometimes stretching in a scornful and derisive smile he as though was afraid to drop the advantage and separated himself from listeners an unapproachable wall" [1]. About boring fault-finding of V.I. Guerrier at examinations the students composed jokes. One of them is brought in A.A. Kizevetter's memoirs: "Three examiners sit at a table: archpriest Sergiyevsky, philosopher Troitsky and Guerrier. Sergiyevsky speaks to students: "Trust, not that will be unit", Troitsky says: "Do not trust, not that will be unit", and Guerrier says: "Trust - do not believe, and unit all the same will be" [2]. Before V.I. Guerrier's severity not only students, but also venerable teachers quailed. "Somehow,

>- Kizevetter tells, - two philosophers Lopatin and Sergey Trubetskoy, having become indignant with some any orders of Guerrier on female courses, decided to go immediately to Guerrier and to lay out to him "all truth". Educh to Guerrier on the carrier, they were ready very aggressively. But only they entered Guerrier's office, language at them stuck to a throat. They stayed at Guerrier the whole evening, lovely stirring about that and about this and and left, having hesitated to concern the purpose of the visit" [2].

Memoirists are unanimous in negative assessment of those traits of character of V.I. Guerrier which were constantly shown in his communication even with people close to it according to one of his pupils Yu.V. Gaultier, "... sharpness, coldness, shape in the form of a knife... averted from it people, forced it to be afraid; besides, it had a lack of a step which quite often caused it unnecessary troubles and collisions" [3]. "Guerrier's character, - echoes it A.A. Kizevetter, - was obstinate, whimsical, venomous. Heavy he was a person" [2].

Than such person of the young people registering in his lectures and seminars, and subsequently appealing to him could bribe to direct writing of their master and doctoral dissertations? The fact that differed from many colleagues of V.I. Guerrier not only excessive dryness, capriciousness and causticity, but also devout devotion to the science shown in sincere desire to train in skill of the historian of those in whom he found the aspiration supported with talent to rise on a path of scientific creativity.

One of main goals of seminars which V.I. Guerrier the first in Russia began to use when training historians according to him, just and was in revealing students, most "capable to scientific work". Over the last careful guardianship which continued up to protection master, and sometimes and the doctoral dissertation was established. N.I. Kareev, N.G. Vinogradov, M.S. Korelin, V.Yu. Vipper, P.N. Ardashev, S.N. Kotlyarevsky, E.N. Shchepkin and many other pupils of Guerrier were obliged to him not only as to the scientist and the teacher who woke in them interest in general history, but also as to the person who believed in them and supported at the first stage of their scientific field.

Forms of support of pupils were various. Being among V.I. Guerrier's pupils, future historians had an opportunity to take part in discussion of scientific questions in an informal situation. In 70 — such discussions of V.I. Guerrier organized the 90th of the 19th century regularly at himself at home, inviting to them both young students, and the pupils of last releases. In many respects thanks to such the unique scientific association including the historians belonging to different generations and adhering at times to different political and historical views - V.I. Guerrier's school arose informal contact also.

As the scientific mentor, V.I. Guerrier it is extremely interested treated also the choice of a subject of a research of the pupils and results of their work at any its stage. Subjects of their master and doctoral dissertations were elected by them or directly according to V.I. Guerrier's recommendation or from his consent. About volume, how intense character at times accepted search of a thesis, it is possible to judge by V.I. Guerrier's correspondence, being in 1882-1883 on vacation in Switzerland, with M.S. to Cora-linym [4] who after the termination of the university long could not decide on a subject of the future research. From the letter to the letter there is a dialogue in which M.S. Korelin's preferences kindly, but, nevertheless, are openly called in question by his teacher; and M.S. Korelin so kindly refuses the subjects offered by the teacher (in this correspondence of V.I. Guerrier one for another five subjects of future thesis recommend M.S. Korelina). Compromise reached as a result of this dispute (subject "History and Historiography of Early Humanity"), eventually, suited both V.I. Guerrier, and M.S. Korelin.

In 1885 almost same process of definition of a thesis was reflected in V.I. Guerrier's correspondence with other his pupil R.Yu. Vipper [5]. Here beginning of this process: "The first and main, - R.Yu. Vipper writes, - what I would ask to help me with. It would be desirable to choose a subject which would give a scope to independent work, but which would not ruin at the same time the sizes... Allow to learn your opinion on some subjects which occupy me; can be, from them you will find suitable, maybe, will specify to me others in any given area. First, I thought of an era and Yulian's identity... Then I stop on brochures of an era of the French revolution; I remember that you on Kareev's debate pointed to not readiness of this question. Then to me the thought came to address the contemporary history and to choose a subject from the history of reunification of Italy. At last, I thought of a question on a historiography - and here as starting point served for me the subject which you offered me for the candidate composition and which as very much I regret now, did not take - Beyl's scepticism; this subject could be expanded, taken the skeptical direction in the 18th century". Let's pay attention that among the listed RUES. Vipper that do not have a subject of his future thesis so far "Church and the state in Geneva 16th century during a Calvinism era". This subject was offered to him by V.I. Guerrier what R.Yu. Vipper expresses it gratitude in one of letters of 1894 written soon after defense of a thesis for. I don't know, - R.Yu. Vipper wrote, - as well as to thank you for all your cares... It is a pleasure to remember to me all history of the work now, and I much, am much obliged to you that it left so, but not differently".

We will bring the similar recognition of gratitude stated by other pupil V.I. Guerrier P.N. Ardashev after an exit into printings of his work "Provincial Administration in France during the Last Time of an Old Regime (1774-1789)": "You were his vnushitel, you were the head of his author, you, at last, were responsible for emergence it in the press. You possess its beginning. You possess also its end. It is obliged to you by the idea and it is obliged to you by the real material cover" [6].

In view of frequent departures abroad as V.I. Guerrier's pupils, and him, they from time to time lost a possibility of direct communication with each other, but thanks to intensive correspondence, exchange of scientific ideas and estimates between them never stopped. V.I. Guerrier's archive stores many letters from his pupils in whom they confidentially shared the reasons about read, seen and conceived. Dozens of letters of V.I. Guerrier in which he in details answered the questions posed are stored in each of archives of pupils of V.I. Guerrier, did scrupulous analyses of the ideas submitted to his judgement, offers, estimates and opinions. Correspondence continued even then when views and living positions of his pupils (N.I. Kareeva, P.G. Vinogradova, P.N. Milyukova) began to confront obviously with his own. In V.I. Guerrier's estimates in the last cases never appeared, perhaps, excessive bile and irony, but — indifference.

To these also, perhaps, that fact speaks why V.I. Guerrier's school, despite age and ideological heterogeneity of her representatives, several decades remained uniform community of historians. It is necessary to notice that sincere interest of V.I. Guerrier creativity of any of the pupils very contrasted with the formal style of relationship with colleagues and students which is quite extended among professors of the Moscow university. R.Yu. Vipper, for example, being both de jure and de facto a pupil V.I. Guerrier, at the same time always with a huge piety treated V.O. Klyuchevsky whose lectures had serious impact on formation of its historical views and whom he considered the second teacher. However all attempts of R.Yu. Vipper to come to V.O. Klyuchevsky into informal scientific contact

faced indifference of the last to creativity of "pupil". Books which R.Yu. Vipper regularly sent V.O. Klyuchevskoma not only did not receive his response, but even often remained uncut [7].

Purely human participation of V.I. Guerrier in the fate of the pupils was expressed also in his continuous care of financial position of pupils and also of their office growth. So it turned out that almost all pupils of V.I. Guerrier, as well as he, were natives of families which financial position did not allow them to study without assistance at the university and furthermore to prepare for a scientific rank after its termination. And this help constantly came to V.I. Guerrier's pets in the form of petitions to Council of the university for purpose of grants it, about award to them of awards for student's scientific works, lump sums to trips abroad. It is necessary to add the organization of orders for the transfers and providing with paid lessons in all Moscow educational institutions with which at V.I. Guerrier for many years of professorial activity contacts were come to it.

Besides the help when choosing a subject and the actual leadership in writing of theses, V.I. Guerrier's contribution to the scientific growth of his pupils consisted in writing of preliminary conclusions for their works before official protection. The authority of opinion V.I. Guerrier for members of council of istorikofilologichesky faculty of the Moscow university in 80 — the 90th of the 19th century was so high that only seldom or never the decision of Council for the thesis dispersed from its recommendations. For example, in 1892 according to the persistent recommendation of V.I. Guerrier the historical and philological faculty found it possible to appropriate to M.S. Korelin defending the master dissertation, at once degree of the doctor of general history that was the first case in the history of the Moscow university. In two years this case repeated concerning the master thesis R.Yu. Vippera. And again V.I. Guerrier's opinion was decisive. "Guerrier solved, and the faculty awarded doctor Vippera", - notes an impression about protection Vippera in the diary his friend M.S. Korelin [8].

Thus, V.I. Guerrier's identity as the scientist and the teacher, undoubtedly, a number of advantages which in the opinion of his pupils, did pardonable whims of its character was inherent. Whether a conclusion follows from here that the last have no negative consequences for development of relationship of the mentor with pupils at the school of sciences created by his efforts at all? It is thought that does not follow.

We will pay attention to ideological and personal loneliness of V.I. Guerrier in the last years of life. It says that the tolerance of most of pupils of V.I. Guerrier to properties of his difficult character maintained by appreciation for its unconditional support at a stage of their formation as scientists, nevertheless could not prevent the estrangement which arose over time, and sometimes even mutual hostility

In the 1900th the scientific authority V.I. Guerrier stops being indisputable for the young professors of its department of R.Yu. Vipper, D.M. Petrushevsky who are in blossoming of a creative maturity,

A.R Savina. In diaries of the last in the 1900th Guerrier is characterized as the representative of "dead souls", as "cemetery" [7].

V.I. Guerrier's relations with one professor belonging to a cohort of his first pupils, P.G. Vinogradov cracked in the 90th of the 19th century. Strain of relations between V.I. Guerrier and P.G. Vinogradov happened during establishment in 1894. Historical society at the Moscow university when P.G. Vinogradov insisted on inclusion in members of society of all members of the circle in what Guerrier saw P.G. Vinogradov's aspiration to displace it from the chairman's position.

In the mid-nineties of the 19th century V.I. Guerrier quarreled also with other former student P.N. Milyukov. However, in memoirs [1] P.N. Milyukov claimed that V.I. Guerrier took a jaundiced view to him and spitefully in days of his students as it, unlike other pupils

V.I. Guerrier, did not show to professor of due servility. But it is contradicted by the fact about which P.N. Milyukov reports itself: during its first conflict with V.O. Klyuchevskim when the last had doubts concerning P.N. Milyukov's leaving at the Moscow university at department of the Russian history, V.I. Guerrier persistently convinced him "to remain at the university on department of general history". Thus, in this case P.N. Milyukov, most likely, overturns in the past the memory of the collisions with V.I. Guerrier which became permanent, as well as the conflicts with P.G. Vinogradov, after the events connected with establishment of Historical society. At an organizational meeting P.N. Milyukov, having got into an argument with V.I. Guerrier concerning the procedure of elections, V.I. Guerrier was torn sharply off ("You forget where you and with whom you speak!"). P.N. Milyukov immediately declared an exit from Historical society and impossibility of participation in it until V.I. Guerrier remains its chairman [8].

At the beginning of the 1900th the attitude towards V.I. Guerrier sharply worsened from students. Being a consecutive supporter of university independence, V.I. Guerrier in 70 — the 90th XlX of century was against tough repressive sanctions of the power against participants of student's performances. He saw the reasons of the last in the government policy which is petty regulating university life and pushing with that students in embraces of radicals. V.I. Guerrier repeatedly submitted to the Ministry of Internal Affairs petitions for the students noticed in disorders. In 1894 participation in affairs of disgraced students V.I. Guerrier nearly cost departments. However, in process of radicalization

of the student's movement, V.I. Guerrier who before was tolerantly treating student's rebelliousness understood less a situation when the young people who came to the university for study turned it into political club for pronouncing revolutionary speeches. At meetings of Council of the university it from the lawyer of the student's movement turned into his angry critic. Students, in turn, began to treat it as to one of the most reactionary monsters in the environment of the Moscow professorate. As a result "... Guerrier got... reputation of the reactionary, - V.A. Maklakov remembered,-... students considered him the backward pedant who got stuck on old positions" [9]. The old professor who was once protecting the students participating in obstructions of reactionary teachers himself became an object of similar acts. One of them at the end of 1904 had especially offensive character. According to M.N. Pokrovsky, "... students read to him (V.I. Guerrier - E.K.) in audience something like the address on the contrary where it was said that the Moscow university will be always ashamed that considered it among the professors" [10]. After this event of V.I. Guerrier submitted the resignation from a position of professor and in December, 1904 left the university which was given 40 years of life.

The new painful blow of V.I. Guerrier received from colleagues and pupils at the beginning of 1905. His candidate for a rektorstvo of the High female courses was blackballed by teachers therefore he was forced to leave also this pet project. "Professors invited by me personally, - V.I. Guerrier in memoirs complained, - deprived of me any communication with the courses based by me" [11].

A huge shock for V.I. Guerrier was the death in 1915 of the wife Avdotya Ivanovna who, patiently transferring all whims of its difficult character, for many years was his loyal friend and the assistant. After her death V.I. Guerrier lived in isolation. His loneliness was brightened up by daughters. With their help the historian wrote and rewrote the last work "Reminiscence".

It is impossible to claim, of course, that only the nasty character of V.I. Guerrier was force, fatally RAZSPISOK LITERATURY

1. P.N. Milyukov. Memoirs (1859-1917). - M.: Contemporary, 1990. - 446 pages
2. A.A. Kizevetter. At a turn of two centuries. - M.: Art, 1997. - 386 pages
3. Yu.V. Gaultier. My notes//Questions of history. - 1992. - No. 4-5. - Page 108-136.
4. M.S. Korelin's letters of V.I. Guerrier. - Central historical archive of Moscow, T. 2202. Op. 3. Unit hr. 11. - L. 4-51.
5. R.Yu. Vipper's letters of V.I. Guerrier. - Department of manuscripts of the Russian state library, T. 70. To. 38. - L. 117-189.
6. P.N. Ardashev's letters of V.I. Guerrier. - Department of manuscripts of the Russian state library, T. 70. To. 36. - L. 3-18.

rushayushchy kind relations of colleagues and pupils with it. Certainly there were also other factors promoting it. It is thought, in a case with P.G. Vinogradov, R.Yu. Vipper, P.N. Milyukov and A.A. Kizevetter who were actively participating in ideological and political fight of the 1900th, hostility to V.I. Guerrier besides creative disagreements with it and his personal features, ate the gone deep divergence of political views. Against the background of radicalization of public consciousness of the intellectuals on the eve of the first Russian revolution the political convictions of V.I. Guerrier with his respectful relation to the public institutes created by the Russian history in the opinion of quickly shifting to the Left Russian professorate looked retrograde.

At the same time, deserves judgments and such fact. V.I. Guerrier throughout all creativity, was a jealous adherent of a philosophical and methodological position of idealistic historicism in interpretation of historical process and problems of historical science and the conservative liberal close to B.N. Chicherin, on political convictions. However among numerous pupils there is V.I. Guerrier, perhaps, only M.S. Korelin and P.N. Ardashev to a certain extent divided his methodological and political views. Most of the historians fostered by V.I. Guerrier, to great chagrin of the teacher, became his opponents and in questions of the historical theory, and in policy issues. Of course, the teacher and pupils time to which new trends the pupils are always more susceptible, than teachers parted. But it is possible that personal features of V.I. Guerrier here too played a certain role. Unattractive lines in character of the historian, as a rule, do not disturb objective assessment of his high professionalism shown in concrete historical creativity, and we are ready to study at it to methodical working methods with a historical empiriya, to ability to unmistakably choose topical issues for future researches, etc. However the philosophical and political ideas are too subjective in essence what we could estimate them, abstracting from the identity of the person who preaches them.

7. B.G. Safronov. Historical outlook of R.Yu. Vipper and his time. - M.: MSU publishing house, 1976. - 223 pages
8. M.S. Korelin's diaries. - Central historical archive of Moscow, T. 2202. Op. 3. Unit hr. 1. - L. 34-138.
9. V.A. Maklakov. Fragments from memoirs//the Moscow university, 1755-1930 - Paris, 1930. - Page 267-298.
10. M.N. Pokrovsky's letters. - Department of manuscripts of the Russian state library, F.70. To. 32. Unit hr. 1. - L. 29-106.
11. V.I. Guerrier. Memoirs. - Department of manuscripts of the Russian state library, F.70. To. 32. Unit hr. 1. - L. 29-106.

Arrived 16.11.2006

Kajetan Harald
Other scientific works: