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

Graduates of Professorial institute, their Teachers and Pupils: continuity mechanisms



n. V. Karnaukh

GRADUATES of PROFESSORIAL INSTITUTE, THEIR TEACHERS AND PUPILS:

CONTINUITY MECHANISMS

Article is devoted to graduates of Professorial institute which was created at the Derptsky university in the first half of the 19th century. The author analyzes process of training of future teachers of the universities of Russia. The main attention is paid to identification of mechanisms of continuity in development by pupils of Professorial institute of pedagogical skill. In article archive materials and references of the 19th century are used.

N. Kagpaiya

PROFESSOR INSTITUTE GRADUATES, THEIR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS:

MECHANISMS OF CONTINUITY

The graduates of Professor&s Institute founded in the beginning of 19th century in Derpt University and the process of training of pre-service university teachers are described. The main attention is paid to the idea of continuity in mastering the pedagogical skills by the graduates of the Institute and afterwards by their students. The paper is based on the 19th century&s archival materials and literature sources.

In philosophical sense the continuity is considered as a real phenomenon of human life and mankind. All this what forms link of times provides progressiveness of development of humanity and formation of each person separately: preservation and transfer to the future of the experience of life, culture, values accumulated by mankind. Broadcast of values from generation to generation and from one individual to another is carried out by means of specific mechanisms of social memory.

As the concept transferred to the sphere of culture and education continuity reflects more specific contexts and values, without losing the general sense. In professional and pedagogical activity the continuity is shown in transfer of values of teaching activity. Historically it developed oprede-

the lenny sequence of forms of broadcast of these values from the Master to the Pupil: through an example — by means of an image of activity of the teacher-mentor; by means of a word — during the conversation, exchange of views; formations of value systems.

Formation of a profession "the teacher of the higher school" in Russia has the specific features, connected with the fact that in Russia much later of other European countries the universities appeared, and professors invited from abroad were the first teachers in them. Among them was the people knowing much, but as professor of the St. Petersburg university V.V. Grigoriev wrote, "at professors of foreigners the Russian students seldom to what were taught, and teaching them never formed worthy to them receivers" [7, page 20] (my italics. — N.K.).

One of students of that time wrote in the memoirs later: "At some departments there were people belonging to number of the most famous experts in Europe of that time and from these exactly departments we took out for ourselves least of all... The reason for that was that in erudite professors German there was no personal sympathy for us, and ourselves had sorrow to hear from them that for the Russian student they considered a duty to carry out only the official duties, i.e. to stay at department full time.... Lectures came to an end, we left professor and left really. He was for us some high, but abstract being: between us nothing was the general, except a thought of future examination" [5, page 17-18].

The, domestic professors with high qualification, with education at the level of Western Europe were necessary for the Russian higher school that would allow to overcome isolation of the Russian university science, to expand foreign scientific contacts without which fast development of national science and education in the 19th century would be impossible.

At the beginning of the 19th century many European universities were guided by the German model of a higher educational institution. As ideal model of the German university of a new sample — free from medieval scholasticism and based on new methodology and a technique of educational process — the Berlin university founded in 1816 by V. Humboldt was considered. For this reason in the Russian universities scientists most often from Germany were invited. In Russia is the closest to the German model there was Derptsky (the official name of Tartu in 1224-1893) the university. It was "truly cultural and scientific center which was not conceding in many respects to the Western European universities" [16, page 28]. N.I. Pirogov, one of the first you -

pusknik of Professorial institute, remembered that the Derptsky university used big glory in Russia, a considerable part of departments was engaged in it by the people famous for "unusual erudition and learning" [17, page 322]. Congenial to the German universities, it had to serve as a peculiar bridge between Russia and Western Europe. For this reason the Derptsky university was elected the place of training of domestic professors who could make the serious competition to foreign teachers, and all system of expeditious training of professors in it it was decided to call Professorial institute.

It was necessary to develop the special system of training allowing to determine the level of achievement of the object set by the emperor.

The main attention at Professorial institute was paid to individual approach to trainees, development of independence in them. According to it for each pupil in the first days of stay in Derpta the plan of work for the entire period of training taking into account individual abilities and knowledge was made. Except visit of lectures and participation in other collective classes also quite extensive independent, generally practical, work was provided. According to the chosen specialty professors-heads were assigned to pupils. Each professor-head had to have the closest contact with the pupil (pupils), create the atmosphere of mutual trust and by means of it to aim the pupil at independent work. The rector recommended various forms of independent work: making an abstract and reviewing of books, writing articles or papers on the chosen subject. Professor has to analyze the work written by the student together with the author, influencing, it obra-

zy, on scientific development of the student. From professors - mentors it was required that at the leadership in independent work they paid the main attention to a subject essence, leaving the solution of collateral questions to pupils. Such nature of classes with students remained in all the time of existence of Professorial institute.

For achievement of the object set by the emperor it was necessary to keep track constantly of results of process of formation of future professors. Every half-year the director of Professorial institute V.M. Perevoshchikov made the report to the trustee about progress of pupils. In the report difficulties which pupils, achievements of each of them met were analyzed.

Summing up the results of the first half of the year (on February 27, 1829), the director told the trustee that almost all students of Professorial Institute understand and feel important appointment, and "acquit him with jealousy of sciences and a laudable way of life. On this beginning we can with great hope tell that, by means of God's, salutary intentions of its Imperial Majesty and a hope of the fatherland by these young men will be executed" [4, l. 1]. Further reports on progress of each pupil in development of all objects, in development of professional abilities were submitted. It was noted that in the first half of the year all pupils attended diligently lectures, participated in debates, "wrote reasonings" in Latin in the objects which are of particular interest. The main problem in training — weak knowledge "in German" at some pupils, and it was shown during the examinations. It was especially difficult for students from the Kharkiv university as they arrived in Derpt only at the end of a semester. V.M. Perevoshchikov told in the report to the trustee that: "they devoted all free time to study the German -

whom language also achieved success" [4, l. 9]. Was especially marked out the student Inozemtsev who ". shows excellent abilities".

In the report of the director on results of the first year of training of future professors in Derpta it is also noted: "Almost all pupils the diligence to sciences and the behavior continued to correspond to their important appointment" [4, l. 9].

K.A. Graf of Livny, the trustee Derptsko-go of the university, reported in the report to the Emperor Nicholas I that pupils all were already defined in the choice of area of pedagogical activity: Inozemtsev, Filomafitsky, Shramkov, Sokolsky, Pirogov, Skandovsky devote themselves to medical sciences; Lapshin — the mathematician; Kotelnikov — astronomies; M. Kutorga and Lunin — Ancient and Russian history; S. Kutorga — zoology; Shi-hovsky and Kornukh-Trotsky — botany; Chivilyov and Ivanovsky — political economy; Hooks and Valitsky — literature Latin and Greek; Mukhlinsky — to east languages. As for achievement of a main goal of stay of pupils in Derpta, K.A. Liven notes: "It is possible to hope that from 18 students of Professorial institute eight people: Pirogov, Inozemtsev, Kalmykov, Shklyarev-sky, M. Kutorga, Shramkov, Ivanovsky and Kryukov will be excellent professors (my italics. — N.K.); four: The station Kutor-ga, Kotelnikov, Lapshin, Valitsky — good; four: Filomafitsky, Shikhov-sky, Kornukh-Trotsky, Chivilyov — mediocre. Skandovsky, maybe, will become a person with data, but not professor, about Sokolsky nothing certain can be told. However, only one future time can solve everything" [4, l. 25].

In the next report to the trustee the director noted: "The resolute hope to become capable university teachers is given by Shikhovsky, Box-nukh-Trotsky, Pirogov, Lapshin, Kotelni-

k, Inozemtsev, Ivanovsky, Valitsky, Chivilyov, Kryukov, Lunin, both Kutorgi.

Skandovsky showed more knowledge than how many expected from it at tests, and belongs to this list.

Opposite to that, it is impossible to make the resolute conclusion about abilities to Sokolsky and Filomafitsko-go's teaching" [4, l. 92].

Professor Perevoshchikov in August, 1830 sent to the trustee two petitions concerning pupils of Professorial institute since whose beginning of training in Derpta took place two years and there was only one. The first petition concerned extension of term of stay of pupils in Derpta for three-four months in order that pupils had time for preparation and passing of last "test". The second — permissions to award to pupils by results of examinations those academic degrees which they will be worthy. (Traditionally degrees

were appropriated to

in a certain sequence: the candidate — the master — the doctor). Difficulties were connected with assignment of degrees on sciences of philosophical and legal faculties as on medical faculty the university already had the right to award to the graduates degree of the doctor of medicine.

Both petitions of V.M. Perevoshchikov were satisfied. After nearly 4, 5 years' stay in Derpta pupils were awarded those academic degrees which they deserved by results of "strict tests".

Formation of future domestic professors happened under the leadership of competent, attentive and strict mentors. Analyzing the forms of individual work with students used by professors, the established style of relationship, it is possible to come to a conclusion: the skill is studied at the Master.

Johann Christiaan (Ivan Filippovich) Moyer. To its gift of teaching, which it

attracted to itself extensive (not only student's) audience, the university, it is to a certain extent obliged by quite considerable number of good surgeons. Broad education of Moyer, "the straight character, an inherent step and remarkable musical talents opened for him ways of influence by the personality and out of the university" [8, page 261]. His lectures differed in simplicity, clarity and presentation of statement. In reports of the director of institute it was noted to the trustee, professor I.H. Moyer to the wards was how attentive: "provided to the pupil Pirogov housing in the house. supplied it with a table and firewood". Achieved allocation to Pirogov and Inozemtsev of "convenient and quiet" the room in the clinical building of the university. These pupils constantly took advices of professor, with great desire studied medicine. Moyer showed them operations "over corpses" and gave an opportunity to prove in practical surgery.

Johann Martin Christiaan of Bartels is professor of department of abstract and applied mathematics. Began teaching activity at the Kazan university. Here to it fell to lot to be a teacher of one more great mathematician — N.I. Lobachevsky. He was engaged under the leadership of Bartels not only during passing of a course, but also upon termination of it. At Professorial institute Bartels till some hours a week "explained to pupils the annex of geometry and mechanics to physical astronomy". Helped Lapshin and Kotelnikov with their independent work as books and manuals.

Friedrich Georg Wilhelm Struwe — at the Derptsky university he for the first time in a university course began teaching not only astronomies, but also the higher mathematics. His ability was distinctive feature of teaching Struwe not only to interest the listeners, but also to prepare them in rather short time to

to independent scientific work. From pupils of Professorial institute the activity was devoted by astronomies

And. Savich and E. Sabler. With success V. Lapshin and P. Kotelnikov were engaged in this subject. Professor to F.G. Struva on vacation was engaged with the pupil Kotelnikov in "practical exercises on observatories".

Karl Christiaan Friedrich Ledebur is ordinary professor of natural history in general and botanists in particular. He allowed pupils Shikhovsky and Kornukh-Trotsky to use the library. "They will daily see off at it every morning, are engaged on its manuals and under its supervision" — it is noted in reports.

Professor Cruz brought together at himself in the house every week the pupils of Professorial institute studying history and classic languages forced them "to compose reasonings" and to discuss "different objects in Latin. These exercises were very useful to them". Trained Kryukov, Valitsky, Chivilyov and Ivanovsky "privately in General history". Every evening was engaged with M. Kutorgoy [4, l. 10-11, 19].

Under the leadership of experienced mentors the pupils departed from formal assimilation of a subject. Except important scientific provisions, indisputable facts, significant events they had an opportunity to get acquainted with their critical evaluation stated by the teacher emotionally, excitedly, could express the opinion. The love of professor for the subject helps listeners to understand, experience better it. Future teachers of the universities except the maintenance of a subject acquired effective forms and methods of its presentation, and subsequently what memoirs of their pupils testify to, could realize, improve them successfully.

Community of scientific interests, ability in time to come to the rescue needing

to students, even to give them material support, connected teachers and pupils by close bonds of friendship, respect and love.

The professorial institute, undoubtedly, is of great importance in the history of the higher education in Russia: thanks to it the Russian universities received about two dozen good professors. But success of the young people studying in it in achievement of the purposes planned by them as E.V. Petukhov, the author of the books devoted to the history of the Derptsky university notices "it would be unfair to attribute to advantages of derptsky school of sciences alone and disciplines; much also the choice of candidates meant here" [8, page 497]. Valuable seeds of knowledge were put to the fertile field: in Professorial institute selected the best students from the universities of Russia.

V. P. Buzeskul in the essay devoted to M.M. Lunin notes that in Professorial institute "at that time there was the whole group of gifted young people, the figures who subsequently are given for a field of science and professorate" [2, page 323].

All the Professorial institute carried out two sets. The first — in 1828, the second — in 1833, all trained 22 teachers for the universities of Russia. At receipt in institute future professors subscribed that undertake after its termination "serve 12 years on a teaching department since the occupation them professorial department" [15, page 132]. This term was exactly a half of a 25-year professorial experience. In literature of that time different estimates of such document as a subscription meet. So, A.V. Nikitenko who was given at the time too an opportunity to study at Professorial institute wrote down in the diary: "I love science and thirst of knowledge, but. I cannot reconcile with anything that withdraws enslaving of any. Temptation uso-

to vershenstvovatsya in Germany, of course, it is big, but I prefer to have freely future in Russia" [13, page 178].

D.I. Mendeleyev adhered to other point of view. Remembering that he at receipt in the Main Pedagogical Institute had to give the receipt that it undertakes to serve for the every year spent at institute two years there where it will be appointed the administration, Dmitry Ivanovich noted value of this receipt for young specialists: "The obligation or the receipt not only will force everyone to belong more attentively to business to which it is accepted, but also will make one of the first vital lessons for suggestion of that communication which has to exist between any rights and duties" [11, page 203-204]. Graduates of Professorial institute fulfilled the obligations, many of them worked at the higher school even much more than the specified time frame.

Finally all universities of Russia operating at that time received the qualified replenishment from Professorial institute. Against the background of the standard practice in the first half of the 19th century it was a big innovation.

F.I. Buslayev wrote in the memories of student's years that "the new period in the history of the Moscow university... begins together with appearance of young professors in it". It were graduates of Professorial institute: Pecherin, Kryukov and Chivilyov — at philological faculty; on legal — Redkin; on medical — Inozemtsev, Filoma-fitsky.

Young teachers made the serious competition to foreign teachers. The domestic science was one of value reference points in their teaching activity.

The former students professors of F.I. Inozemtsev, the graduate of Professorial institute, remembered: "From it we uslykha-

whether for the first time word, new then for us: Russian science, Russian medicine. Its sense already was not with what it happened to us to hear it from other, German our teachers. Not in a narrow frame of the compressed, limited patriotism despising everything that not ours, the Russian science was before us in his lectures and conversations. No, it was full respect both for experience and for merits of others, but together and the aspiration to bring and the contribution in the general treasury of science. We constantly heard from our mentor that honesty in science is as much obligatory and important, as well as honesty in life" [5, page 22-23].

N. I. Pirogov in the works constantly emphasized that at the university two activities — scientific and educational have to be closely interconnected: "It is impossible to separate educational from scientific at the university. But scientific, and without educational, after all shines and heats. And educational without scientific, kind of there was no his appearance for nationality of a primanchiv — only shines" [18, page 15]. It can carry out this work to the teachers who are carried away by the subject which is engaged in research activity.

Activity of outstanding teachers was a valuable example, a model of conducting educational process at the higher school. M.S. Kutorga, the graduate of Professorial institute teaching within 30 years at the St. Petersburg university (department of world history) taught the students to methods of scientific research. "Not cargo of names and numbers was taken out by listeners from its audience, and got acquainted. with method of scientific occupations, with requirements of scientific research. Such teaching, at a statement gift, naturally, attracted listeners and, exciting in them amateur performance, disposed to independent occupation a subject" [9, page 215-216]. To support and strengthen the interest of students in the studied subject, M.S. Kutorga, except lectures at the university, there was Provo -

to dit in addition, since the end of the 40th years, "special evening conversations at itself at home", for the students wishing to devote themselves to studying history. In these hours just as it became at Professorial institute and in "seminaries" at the German professors, it was engaged in special analysis of single historical questions, gave to students of a subject for development, sorted compositions which they submitted, and thus in practice acquainted young people with requirements and methods of historical criticism.

These efforts of professor did not remain useless: "not only some from working in its seminary occupied university departments of history subsequently: strictly scientific direction obliged to his lectures even works of many of his listeners who chose to themselves other specialties" [9, page 215-216].

M.S. Kutorga constantly emphasized in the lectures that in life of the people and development of science the large role is played by the law of continuity (it is allocated by me. — N.K.), being that "works of the previous generations do not remain fruitless for generations of the subsequent. the ideas do not die, and promote further success" [14, page 12]. The ideas of the Teacher, the Master find the development in activity of Pupils.

M.M. Stasyulevich was one of pupils M.S. Kutorgi. The history of Ancient Greece which classes begun under the leadership of one of the best professors of that time, M.S. Ku auctions developed in him "a habit to strictly scientific thinking" became its specialty. On the master thesis of M.M. Stasyulevich it was printed: "Mikhail Semyonovich Kutorg with feeling of deep respect and the most live appreciation is devoted by the grateful pupil" [1, page 1].

by

B the decree of the Emperor resumed 1857 practice of the direction of the most capable students in foreign uni -

versiteta for the purpose of training of domestic professors. Addition to the order of departure of young scientists existing earlier abroad was the requirement: "that for this purpose people with excellent talents, but, as teachers, already proved abilities to a professorial rank were elected not only in general" [6, page 11]. In S. - the St. Petersburg university the graduated in a military academy on department of the general history Mikhail Stasyulevich was one of the candidates conforming to this requirement.

On the basis of the general interest in history between M.S. Kutorgoy and M.M. Stasyulevi-chem there was a friendship which can connect the Teacher and his Pupil. Analyzing the remained M.M. Stasyulevich's letters directed to M.S. Kutorge it is possible to draw a conclusion that for Mikhail Matveevich there was very important an opinion of the teacher on his activity. So, in the letter of July 10, 1850 M.M. Stasyulevich states contents of articles prepared by it for the publication in the Moskvityanin magazine. At the same time he notes: "the opinion on Socrates. I am much obliged to your lectures" [19, page 238]. Phrases often occur in letters: "I will make what you will advise me", "I will wait for your council".

Working with literature in library of the Parisian university, Mikhail Matveevich does not forget about the interests of the Teacher: "Only yesterday I. read a lecture of professor of the Athenian university Papa-rigopulo which so reminded me of you that it forced to postpone the Pompey baths (the name of article on which M.M. Stasyulevich worked. — N.K.) aside and to write you this letter". Further Stasyulevich writes: this lecture — "a subject for you especially interesting; perhaps, you even read about that at the university at this time" [19, page 258].

M.M. Stasyulevich was the worthy pupil of the teacher: hobby for history, aspiration to a research deya-

telnost, desire and ability to share this knowledge with the pupils — characteristic features of professor of Stasyulevi-cha. Famous teacher V.P. Ostrogorsky wrote in the memories of student's years: "Professor of history M.M. Stasyulevich giving the general course of history of European civilization and attracting to myself at a lecture especially was one of the first, the strongest impression when I studied in S. - the St. Petersburg university at philological faculty who made on me, it is a lot of students and public. It was the lecturer popular writer, brilliant, unusually able to interest, carry away that is called to take all audience so that breathless attention of listeners did not weaken from the beginning of a lecture up to the end.... I think that such lecturer as M.M. Stasyulevich beating not so much on the facts how many on generalizations, coverage of events, disclosure of internal communication between them and their sense, it was especially useful to us, students. He pointed the first to us to value of historical sources and historical criticism" [20, page 2] (my italics. — N.K.). Professors in Derpta noted that at M. Kutorgi critical thinking, his "reasonings" prepared on the basis of the analysis of historical sources and works of the different authors devoted to a certain historical period was very well developed always deserved an appreciation of teachers. As it was already noted above, Mikhail Semyonovich trained the students in methods of historical criticism. And, as it became clear, not unsuccessfully.

The skill of teaching graduates of Professorial institute contributed to the development in their listeners of great interest in a subject. Memoirs of the former students demonstrate to it. N.I. Kostomarov, the famous historian, wrote about M.M. Lunin: "Lectures of this professor had enormous impact on me and made in my spiritual life reshitel-

ny turn: I fell in love with history most of all and since then with great feeling indulged in reading and studying historical books" [10, page 22].

D.L. Kryukov, as his former students note, owned the ability very important for the teacher: to surprise, summon interest and desire to follow itself. Its pedagogical activity continued only ten years (Dmitry Lvovich died at young age), but during this time he managed to prepare two followers who then were engaged in teaching activity at the Moscow university. These are professors Leontyev and Pekhovsky. F.I. Buslayev remembered lectures of young professor D.L. Kryukov: "I remember that he forced me to fall in love with Tacitus, and especially Horace. On the fourth year he read us the Roman antiquities in Latin. This subject so interested me that in addition to it I attended Krylov's lectures on history of the Roman right" [3, page 129].

Famous microbiologist professor L.S. Tsenkovsky wrote that formation of its interest in natural sciences was influenced by S.S. Kutorgi's lectures. Having come to S. - the St. Petersburg university with the purpose to be engaged in studying abstract mathematics, it it is accidental, following crowd of listeners, got on a lecture on zoology. Famous professor S.S. Kutorga read it. The lecture was devoted to the history of development of animals. "After this a lecture, significant for me, I imagined that it is possible to comprehend all mysteries of the nature, and immediately ran in management of the university and asked to transfer me to natural office. Since then I served faithfully to natural sciences nearly a half of century" [12, page 42].

The system effectiveness is determined by its results. The domestic teachers trained at Professorial institute really were competitive at the all-European level. They owned thorough special and common cultural knowledge.

Such qualities as enthusiasm for the profession, high working capacity, aspiration to research activity and extensiveness of scientific knowledge, aspiration to improvement of pedagogical skill, ambition of the scientist, tolerance were characteristic of them. About -

fessionalno significant personal qualities were shown in abilities to influence the students, to carry away them the profession (teacher of the higher school), to create own system, school of teaching, to own brilliantly lecturing skill.

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Arsenyev K.K. Mikhail Matveevich Stasyulevich//M.M. Stasyulevich and his contemporaries in their correspondence / Under the editorship of Lemke. SPb., 1911. T. I. 560 pages
2. V.P. Buzeskul. Professor M.M. Lunin, "Kharkiv Granovsky". By century of the Kharkiv university//Magazine of the Ministry of national education. 1905. N ° 2. Page 321-374.
3. F.I. Buslayev. My memoirs. M.: Type. G. Lissnera and A. Geshelya, 1897. 387 pages
4. Sheets about classes of pupils of Professorial institute for 1828-1832: RGIA. T. 733. Op. 56. Unit hr. 656. 117 l.
5. Reminiscence of Fedor Ivanovich Inozemtsev of S.A. Smirnov. M.: Type. Gracheva and Co, 1872. 34 pages
6. The year solemn act in Imperial SPb. un-those, SPb which was on February 8, 1857.: Type.

AA. Weimar, 1857. 203 pages

7. Grigoriev V.V.T.N. Granovsky before his professorship in Moscow. Orenburg, 1856. (Izv. from the Russkaya Beseda magazine). 57 pages
8. Imperial Yuryevsky, the former Derptsky, un-t in 100 years of his existence (1802-1902). T. 1: The first and second periods (1802-1865). Historical essay of E.V. Petukhov, award. prof. Imper. Yuryevsky un-that. Yuryev: Type. K. Mattisena, 1902. 620 pages
9. Imperial S. - the St. Petersburg university within the first fifty years of its existence. The historical note made at the request of Council of the University an award. prof. on department of history of the East V.V. Grigoriev. SPb., 1870. 432 pages
10. Literary heritage by N.I. Kostomarov: Autobiography. Poems — scenes — historical fragments — the low-Russian national poetry — the latest work. SPb.: Type. M.M. Stasyulevi-cha, 1890. 523 pages
11. Mendeleyev D.I. Soch. T. XXIII. Prod. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. L.; M, 1952. 379 pages
12. A.I. Metelkin. L.S. Tsenkovsky. Founder of domestic school of microbiologists. M.: Publishing house of meditsa. l-ry, 1950. 263 pages
13. A.V. Nikitenko. Notes and diary: In 3 t. SPb.: Type. A.S. Suvorina, 1893. T. 2. 498 pages
14. About science and its value in the state. M. Kutorgi's reasoning. CT.1. M.: Univ. type. (Skating rinks and Co), 1873. 61 pages
15. About orders on establishment of Professorial institute//Sb. resolutions on the Ministry of national education. T. 2: Reign of the emperor Nicholas I. (1825-1855). Otd. the first 1825-1839. Prod. II. SPb.: Type. V.S. Balasheva, 1875. 1575 pages
16. F.A. Petrov. Formation of a system of university education in Russia. T. 3: University professorate and preparation of the Charter of 1835. M.: MSU publishing house, 2003. 480 pages
17. N.I. Pirogov. From the diary of the old doctor//N.I. Pirogov. Sevastopol letters and memoirs. M, 1950. 649 pages
18. N.I. Pirogov. University question. Additions to remarks on the draft of the general charter of the imperial Russian universities. SPb.: Type. I. Ogrizko, 1863. 85 pages
19. Letters to M.S. Kutorge//M.M. Stasyulevich and his contemporaries in their correspondence / Under the editorship of Lemke. SPb, 1911. T. I. 571 pages
20. D.D. Semyonov. An essay of public and educational activity of Mikhail Matveevich Stasya-levicha (Concerning the fiftieth anniversary of its public, literary and scientific work)//the Messenger of education. M.: Type V. Richter, 1897. 8 pages

REFERENCES

1. Arsen&eva K. K. Mihail Matveevich Stasjulevich//M. M. Stasjulevich i ego sovremenniki v ih perepiske/Pod red. Lemke. SPb., 1911. T. I. 560 s.
2. Buzeskul V. P. Professor M. M. Lunin, "Har&kovskij Granovskij". K stoletiju Har&kovskogo universiteta//Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosveshchenija. 1905. No. 2. S. 321-374.
3. BuslaevF. I. Moi vospominanija. M.: Tip. G. Lissnera i A. Geshelja, 1897. 387 s.
4. Vedomosti o zanjatijah vospitannikov Professorskogo instituta za 1828-1832 gg.: RGIA. F. 733. Op. 56. Ed. hr. 656. 117 l.
5. Vospominanie o Fedore Ivanoviche Inozemceve S.A. Smirnova. M.: Tip. Gracheva i K °, 1872. 34 s.
6. Godichnyj torzhestvennyj akt v Imperatorskom SPb. un-te, byvshij 8 fevralja 1857 g. SPb.: Tip. E. Ve-jmara, 1857. 203 s.
7. Grigor&ev V. V. T. N. Granovskij do ego professorstva v Moskve. Orenburg, 1856. (Izv. Iz Zhurnala "Russkaja beseda"). 57 s.
8. Imperatorskij Jur&evskij, byvshij Derptskij, un-t za 100 let ego sushchestvovanija (1802-1902), T. 1: Per-vyj i vtoroj periody (1802-1865). Istoricheskij ocherk E. V. Petuhova, ordin. prof. Imper. Jur&evskogo un-ta. Jur&ev: tip. K. Mattisena, 1902. 620 s.
9. Imperatorskij S. - Peterburgskij universitet v techenie pervyh pjatidesjati let ego sushchestvovanija. Is-toricheskaja zapiska, sostavlennaja po porucheniju Soveta universiteta ordin. prof. po kafedre istorii Vostoka V. V. Grigor&evym. SPb., 1870. 432 s.
10. Literaturnoe nasledie N. I. Kostomarova: Avtobiografija. Stihotvorenija — sceny — istoricheskie otry-vki — malorusskaja narodnaja pojezija — poslednjaja rabota. SPb.: Tip. M. M. Stasjulevicha, 1890. 523 s.
11. MendeleevD. I. Soch. Y. XXIII. Izd. AN SSSR. L.; M., 1952. 379 s.
12. Metelkin A. I. L. S. Cenkovskij. Osnovopolozhnik otechestvennoj shkoly mikrobiologov. M.: Izd-vo medic. l-ry, 1950. 263 s.
13. Nikitenko A. V. Zapiski i dnevnik: V 3 t. SPb.: Tip. A. S. Suvorina, 1893. T. 2. 498 s.
14. O nauke i ee znachenii v gosudarstve. Rassuzhdenie M. Kutorgi. St. 1. M.: Univ. tip. (Katkov i K °),
1873. 61 s.
15. O rasporjazhenijah po uchrezhdeniju Professorskogo instituta//Sb. postanovlenij po Ministerstvu narodnogo prosvtshchenija. T. 2: Carstvovanie imperatora Nikolaja I (1825-1855). Otd. pervoe 1825-1839. Izd.

II SPb.: Tip. V. S. Balasheva, 1875. 1575 s.

16. Petrov F. A. Formirovanie sistemy universitetskogo obrazovanija v Rossii. T. 3: Universitetskaja profes-sura i podgotovka Ustava 1835 goda. M.: Izd-vo MGU, 2003. 480 s.
17. Pirogov N. I. Iz dnevnika starogo vracha//Pirogov N. I. Sevastopol&skie pis&ma i vospominanija. M., 1950. 649 s.
18. Pirogov N. I. Universitetskij vopros. Dopolnenija k zamechanijam na proekt obshchego ustava impera-

torskih rossijskih universitetov. SPb.: Tip. I. Ogrizko, 1863. 85 s.

19. Pis&ma k M. S. Kutorge//M. M. Stasjulevich i ego sovremenniki v ih perepiske/Pod red. Lemke. SPb., 1911. T. I. 571 s.
20. Semenov D. D. Ocherk obwestvenno-prosvetitel&noj dejatel&nosti Mihaila Matveevicha Stasjulevicha (Po povodu pjatidesjatiletija ego obshchestvennoj, literaturnoj i nauchnoj dejatel&nosti)//Vestnik vospitanija. M.: Tip V. Rihter, 1897. 8 s.
Hedvig Bodil Rebecca
Other scientific works: