Kovalevsky Pavel Ivanovich (1850-1930), psychologist, religious figure, emigrant. Born in 1850 in Kharkov in the family of a priest. He graduated from the Yekaterinoslav Theological Seminary and the Medical Faculty of Kharkov University. Professor of Psychiatry (1879-1894). Rector of Warsaw University (1894). Distinguished Professor. He was a foreman of the Russian National Club and a member of the Council of the Russian National Union. On the eve of the revolution, he taught a course in forensic psychology at the Faculty of Law of Petrograd University for 2 years. After the revolution, he was mobilized into the Red Army as chief physician of a military detachment, then until 1924 he worked as chief physician of the psychiatric and nervous department of the Nikolaev hospital in Petrograd. In December 1924 he received permission to travel abroad. In exile in Belgium (c.1925). Lived in Spa (Belgium). In 1925, he addressed the Metropolitan Eulogy (Georgievsky) with a proposal to read a psychology course at the St. Sergius Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris, however, P. I. Kovalevsky, apparently, did not have to teach at the St. Sergius Institute. He died in 1930 in Belgium.

This biographical note is compiled from sources:

Russian writers of emigration: Biographical information and bibliography of their books on theology, religious philosophy, church history and Orthodox culture: 1921-1972 / Compiled by N. M. Zernov. - Boston: G. K. Hall & Co., 1973.
Letter from P.I. Kovalevsky to Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky) dated April 5/19, 1925 - GARF. F. R-5919. Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky) Foundation. Op. 1. D. 66.

Reprinted from the site: http://zarubezhje.narod.ru/kl/k_014.htm

Kovalevsky Pavel Ivanovich (1849-1923), psychiatrist, publicist, ideologist of Russian nationalism. Founder of the first Russian psychiatric journal. Professor. Member of the Russian Assembly. Member of the All-Russian National Union.

Prof. Kovalevsky gave one of the most exhaustive formulations of nationalism: “In a broad sense, nationalism,” he wrote, “is a spiritual trend, a trend directed in a given people, with the goal and task of raising and improving the good of this nation. It will be mass, party nationalism... But there is nationalism and personal, individual, inherent in the nature of each person. Personal individual nationalism is a manifestation of respect, love and devotion to self-sacrifice in the present, reverence and admiration for the past and the desire for prosperity, glory and success in the future of the nation, the people to which the person belongs ... Nationalism can manifest itself in two ways: in the form of a national feeling and in the form of national consciousness. National feeling is an innate property of the human spirit, inherent in every person from birth and consisting in instinctive inexplicable animal love for a given people, for a given area ... National consciousness is an expression of a definitely expressed view of love for the motherland, its glory, its honor, greatness and strength " .

Exploring the national psychology of the Russian people, Kovalevsky very accurately defined the nation, nationalism, national feeling and national self-consciousness - concepts so essential to the general worldview.

“A nation is a large group of people united among themselves by the unity of origin, the unity of historical destinies and the struggle for existence, the unity of physical and mental qualities, the unity of culture, the unity of faith, the unity of language and territory…

Nationalism is a manifestation of respect, love and devotion, up to self-sacrifice, in the present, - respect and admiration for the past and the desire for prosperity, glory, power and success in the future - that nation, the people to which this person belongs ...

National feeling is an innate property of the physical and mental organization. It is instinctive. It is mandatory. The national feeling is innate in us just like all other feelings: love for parents, love for children, hunger, thirst, etc.

National self-consciousness is an act of thinking, by virtue of which a given person recognizes himself as part of the whole, goes under the protection and carries himself to the defense of his native whole, his nation.

The dominance of the Russian nation in the Russian Empire Kovalevsky derived from the right of sacrifices, the right of shed blood for the fatherland. “Our rights to the possession of this state,” Kovalevsky wrote, “are the rights of blood arising from the blood shed by our ancestors, property rights arising from the costs of our ancestors, the interest on which we still have to pay to this day, the rights of the historical destinies of the motherland, obliging us to keep whole and unharmed the conquered ancestors.

Regarding the pan-Slavic ideas that were widely spread and discussed in Russian society in the 1910s, Kovalevsky wrote the following: “A union of Slavs is conceivable if Russia becomes its head, if the Russian language becomes a common Slavic language, if the Russian cause becomes a common Slavic affair, if not only Russia will be for the Slavs, but also the Slavs for Russia.”

Smolin M.

Used materials from the site Great Encyclopedia of the Russian people - http://www.rusinst.ru

In the fate of Professor Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky, science, social activities and political journalism are closely intertwined.

Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky was born in 1849 (according to other sources - in 1850) in the city of Petropavlovsk, Pavlograd district, Yekaterinoslav province, in the family of a priest. He graduated from the theological school, and then the Yekaterinoslav Theological Seminary. Passion for the natural sciences prompted him to choose a different path. In 1874 he graduated from the medical faculty of Kharkov University. In 1877, after defending his dissertation, he became an assistant professor, and in 1884 - a professor at the department of psychiatry at this university. In 1889 Kovalevsky - Dean of the Faculty of Medicine. In 1982 he was appointed to the post of rector of the University of Warsaw. After a serious illness in 1897, Kovalevsky was forced to leave this post.

In the future, Professor Kovalevsky is engaged in publishing and scientific activities, and also participates in the work of a number of public organizations. He published scientific journals, translated the works of foreign psychiatrists. Through the efforts of Kovalevsky, the first Russian congress of psychiatrists and neuropathologists took place. He participates in the work of the Institute of Brothers of Mercy, the Committee of the Red Cross, and also becomes a foreman of the Russian National Club and a member of the board of the Russian National Union. In addition, Kovalevsky's dacha estate near Novorossiysk became known as an exemplary winery.

Among the books of Kovalevsky, his professional works are known: "A Guide to the Proper Care of the Mentally Ill", "Forensic Psychiatry", "Forensic Psychiatric Analyzes", "Mental Illness for Doctors and Lawyers", "Psychology of Sex", "Hygiene and Treatment of Mental and nervous diseases", "Fundamentals of the mechanism of mental activity", "Textbook of psychiatry for students", "Syphilis of the brain and its treatment", "Puerperal psychoses", "Migraine and its treatment". No less famous are the historical works of Kovalevsky: "The Peoples of the Caucasus", "The Conquest of the Caucasus by Russia", "History of Little Russia", "History of Russia from a National Point of View", "Psychiatric Sketches from History". The role of Kovalevsky as the ideologist of Russian nationalism is only today becoming known in the Russian social movement. This is facilitated by the publication of his works "Fundamentals of Russian Nationalism", "Psychology of the Russian Nation", "Nationalism and National Education in Russia", which remained in oblivion for almost a century.

After the revolution, an elderly professor was mobilized into the Red Army as the chief physician of a military detachment. Then until 1924 (according to other sources - until 1923) he worked as a doctor in the psychiatric and nervous department of the Nikolaev hospital in Petrograd. Kovalevsky was the first to identify progressive paralysis in Lenin. This moment became a turning point in his life. It is still not clear whether Kovalevsky became a victim made by the Bolsheviks to hide the diagnosis, or whether he was still able to go abroad in 1925 and ended his years in Belgium in 1930.

P.I. Kovalevsky's book "Nationalism and National Education in Russia" belongs to the category of those that have not lost their relevance for many decades. In the same way as we open today the philosophical works of other Russian thinkers of the early and first half of the twentieth century - those who founded the Russian tradition of social philosophy and kept it from non-existence.

Professor Kovalevsky compiled in 1912 a work on the nation, which is not only in the context of the most acute contemporary problems, but is also a "classic", exemplary for modern political science, which is only just approaching the concept of "nation" and timidly applying it to Russia. The authorities in the person of their first persons have already learned to pronounce the word "nation", but are still in the dark about what this word means. Court political science proves that there is no nation, that this is just a different sound of the word "state". She appeals to the authorities: "Forget the nation!". But Russian political science has already mastered the legacy of its predecessors, among which P.I. Kovalevsky occupies one of the most worthy places.

It cannot be said that in P.I. Kovalevsky the concept of "nation" acquires its fullness and clarity in the form in which it is necessary today. But he does the main thing: he speaks of the nation not as a late historical phenomenon, but as a primordial phenomenon. This interpretation is profoundly different from the liberal one, which considers a social phenomenon to exist only when it is named. No, the nation in Russian history existed from the moment of birth. The only question is how the early form differs from the mature one.

Kovalevsky considers the nation as a phenomenon of common language, faith and destiny. And such a community among the Russians develops by the end of the 9th century. And even though the yoke called into question the sovereignty of the Russian nation, and the Time of Troubles threatened to completely eliminate the Russian state from history, the Russian nation was reborn at the beginning of the 17th century and occupied a leading position among the most prominent nations of the world.

It is necessary to distinguish, writes Kovalevsky, the existence of a nation and its formation. One should also see the historical conditionality of the features of the nation. The problem of the Russian nation at the beginning of the 20th century, which the thinker vividly describes, consisted in such a reorganization of life that required the personal dignity of a citizen and the penetration of patriotism into all pores of society, not only during the years of invasions, but also in everyday life.

Russians, following the family forms of solidarity and love for truth instilled in them by Orthodoxy, had to reach nationwide, national solidarity and social truth - to an understanding of the life of society in its modern forms. This meant a deepening of the concept of the nation and an understanding of national identity - going beyond the boundaries of the rural and parish communities and establishing a supra-class solidarity in urban life, in universities, in the press, in the mass army of the people.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Russians had to master the space of spiritual struggle. This was clearly understood by Professor Kovalevsky and other Russian nationalist thinkers. Alas, historical circumstances and the intrigues of the enemies of the Russian people did not give the Russian nation a chance to enter into mature forms and threw it on the wrong path of communist construction. In a hard struggle against Marxist cosmopolitanism, the Russians were able to gather into a nation on the eve of the Great Patriotic War and win it. But the undermined forces faced a new manipulation. The Russians were not allowed to be reborn as a nation, and up to our time, national building has been going on in spite of the authorities, which have remained purely anti-national.

So far, citizenship and nationality operate separately. Moreover, citizenship becomes more nationless with higher levels of education. Education, as it has been for the last half century in Russia, creates more reasons for a citizen to slander Russia than to be proud of it. Similar phenomena were seen at the beginning of the 20th century by Professor Kovalevsky, who pointed out that "the school killed God, killed the nationality, killed the statehood, killed the society, killed the family, killed the person." Just as in our time, liberal education created cosmopolitans out of children, just as in our time, the role of teachers, professionally and morally decomposed even on the student bench, is extremely great in the destruction of the nation and the state.

Russian nationalism is a saving means of reuniting nationality and citizenship, a means of becoming a modern political nation, in which patriotism must give way to Russian nationalism, and the parochial "nationalism" of the non-Russian indigenous peoples of Russia must develop into Russian patriotism. For the existence of Russia, a general civil understanding is important that Russia was created by Russian people, and Russian nationalism is the nationalism of a great nation, which, of course, must be educated and ascend to higher forms, outliving the dark element of the people. Other nationalisms in Russia may be worthy of respect if combined with loyalty and fidelity to the Russian state. From this arises the formula and hierarchy of the empire, which is an alliance of friendly nationalisms under the primacy, leadership and patronage of Russian nationalists. Not only the Russian, but also the Slavic community can exist only under Russian leadership. For for the world and world history Slavdom is perceived only through Russians and Russian history.

Liberal racism demands to break this Russian unity, seeking to degrade the clear Russian worldview and reduce it to wild phobias. Russian nationalism opposes the vile undertakings of the liberals with Russian solidarity, which draws into its orbit all the patriots of Russia - even if they are non-Russian by blood.

"Russia for Russians" - this formula Alexander III in the works of Professor Kovalevsky is revealed and substantiated. To the chagrin of slanderers who are looking for a reason to accuse the Russian national movement of all sins, "Russia for Russians" acts as the most promising formula of statehood not only for the Russians themselves (we share the confidence of P.I. Kovalevsky that the Russians are a trinity of Great Russians, Little Russians and Belarusians ), but also for the non-Russian peoples of Russia, connected with the Russians by a common destiny. Kovalevsky perfectly saw the diversity of "Russianness", which today we sometimes cease to notice, reducing Russian exclusively to generic characteristics. In "Russianness" there is unity in the Orthodox faith, there is unity in the memory of the greatness of Russia, there is unity in the Russian language and Russian culture, in love for the Fatherland, there is a connection between Russians in the space of the Russian world - not only holders of citizenship of the Russian Federation, but also compatriots .

For Professor Kovalevsky there was no other formula for the Russian idea, except Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality. Taking a lesson in intellectual honesty and scientific depth from an outstanding thinker and the greatest Russian scientist, we must assimilate this formula and be imbued with it to the very depths of our souls. To save Russia from non-existence, which has come so close that the imminent death of the Fatherland and the dissolution of the Russian people in the waves of migration no longer surprise or frighten many. We should be afraid only of this - the death of our Motherland, the extinction of the Russian family. In the Russian idea of ​​Russian thinkers of the early twentieth century, we have a detailed ideological doctrine with which we will save Russia and continue our race until the end of time.

Preface to the reprint of the book by P.I. Kovalevsky

Reprinted from the site: http://www.savelev.ru

Cover of the book by P.I.Kovalevsky.

Compositions:

P.I.Kovalevsky. Syphilis of the brain. 1890.

P.I.Kovalevsky. Migraine. 1893.

P.I.Kovalevsky. Forensic psychiatry. 1896.

P.I.Kovalevsky. Nationalism and national education in Russia: In 2 parts. - St. Petersburg, 1912. 394 p. (The book went through several editions, including New York, 1922).

P.I.Kovalevsky. Fundamentals of the mechanism of mental activity.

P.I.Kovalevsky. Fundamentals of human psychology.

P.I.Kovalevsky. Psychology of a woman.

P.I.Kovalevsky. The Psychology of the Criminal (French edition also available).

P.I.Kovalevsky. Science, Christ and His Teachings. - Brussels, 1928. 146 p.

P.I.Kovalevsky. John the Terrible. // St. Petersburg: printing house M.I. Akinfieva, 1901.

P.I.Kovalevsky. "Fundamentals of Russian nationalism";

P.I.Kovalevsky. "Psychology of the Russian nation".

Literature:

Spektorsky E., Davats V. Materials for the bibliography of Russian scientific works abroad. - Belgrade: T. I. 1931 (2nd edition - 1972).

Read here:

Jewish pogroms, whose organization is attributed to the Black Hundreds.

Abbreviations(including a brief explanation of abbreviations).

Professor Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky (1849–1931) - a well-known domestic scientist, psychiatrist, psychologist, publicist, ideologist of Russian nationalism, public figure, who worked for a long time at Saburova Dacha - a former Saburyan who belonged to a galaxy of intellectual doctors that formed in the last third of the XIX century and did a lot for the development of domestic psychiatry, including for the Kharkov psychiatric school. P. I. Kovalevsky - Doctor of Medicine, Professor, founder of the first Russian psychiatric journal "Archive of Psychiatry, Neurology and Forensic Psychopathology", author of the original concept on the role of blood circulation and metabolism in the central nervous system, the first national manual on psychiatry, organizer at Kiev University the first independent department of psychiatry in Ukraine and one of the first experimental psychological laboratories, a member of the Russian Assembly, the All-Russian National Club and the All-Russian National Union. Pavel Ivanovich was one of the leading domestic psychiatrists of the early 20th century, his rightly called the best metropolitan psychiatrist and even the "father of Russian psychiatry" .

The name of Pavel Ivanovich is still little known today. As a rule, only historians of medicine know about him, because P. I. Kovalevsky was one of the leading Russian psychiatrists of the early 20th century, and a few experts on the ideology of Russian nationalism, since P. I. Kovalevsky was rightfully considered the ideologist of this direction of Russian thought, actively who took part in such organizations as the All-Russian National Club and the All-Russian National Union 1 . Before the revolution, in right-wing circles, his name was no less famous than the recently returned name of the major nationalist publicist M. O. Menshikov. However, in the following seventy years of Soviet power, these names were deliberately consigned to oblivion. Little by little, the works of patriotic thinkers are beginning to be republished, and special studies are dedicated to their authors. But unlike M. O. Menshikov, about whom a whole monograph has already been written, Pavel Ivanovich was less fortunate - the political biography of this prominent ideologist of Russian national thought, superficially reflected in several small articles devoted to him, remains essentially unknown.

P. I. Kovalevsky was born in 1849 (according to other sources - in 1850) in the town of Petropavlovka, Pavlograd district, Yekaterinoslav province (now an urban-type settlement in the Dnepropetrovsk region of Ukraine) in the family of a priest. In the sixth week of his life, having lost his father, Pavel grew up with his brother, two sisters and a widowed mother in extremely cramped material conditions - the main source of livelihood for the Kovalevsky family was a ten-ruble annual pension. At the age of nine, following the family tradition, the boy was sent as a half-boarder to a religious school, in the senior classes of which, through tutoring, "not only earned for himself, but also gave some of this for household use."

Having successfully completed his studies at the school, P. I. Kovalevsky entered the Yekaterinoslav Theological Seminary, from which he graduated in 1869 as the first student. However, being passionate about natural science, the young man did not follow the spiritual path, but decided to continue his education at the medical faculty of Kharkov University.

In 1869, P. I. Kovalevsky entered the medical faculty of Kharkov University. Already from the second year he has been engaged in scientific research in the laboratory of the Department of General Pathology, led by I. N. Obolensky. The future doctor pays the greatest attention to nervous and mental diseases. After graduating with honors in 1874 from the university and receiving a degree in medicine and the title of a county doctor, P. I. Kovalevsky, in view of his abilities, was left at the faculty to prepare a doctoral dissertation in psychiatry, which he soon successfully defended on the topic “On changes in the sensitivity of the skin in melancholic in 1877.

Pavel Ivanovich, striving to thoroughly study modern methods of treating mental illness, repeatedly traveled abroad, worked in Kazan with Professor A. U. Frese, who received training from the same teachers as S. S. Korsakov (after A. W. Frese, the chair of psychiatry in Kazan was taken by V. M. Bekhterev).

At the same time, the theoretical work of P.I. Kovalevsky was closely intertwined with practical work. The young scientist combined his scientific research with the work of a supernumerary intern in the mentally ill department of the Kharkov provincial zemstvo hospital (Saburova dacha). Here it is appropriate to note that before the intervention of Pavel Ivanovich, shocked to the depths of his soul by what he saw in a lunatic asylum, their position in the established system of attitude towards the mentally ill was very painful. Here is how a contemporary describes him: “A guard armed with a whip was placed over the unfortunate. With every disobedience, the deserving one received a reminder of the observance of decency with a full blow of the lash. If the whip did not have the desired effect, the madman was chained, and if this did not calm the brawler, he was simply shackled! .

P. I. Kovalevsky boldly spoke out in defense of the mentally ill, proposing a number of measures to reorganize the institution (an innovation was the idea he embodied of creating workshops for the mentally ill and introducing them to physical labor). Thanks to his work and the work of his students, the painful situation of the patients of the institution came to an end - the chains and shackles disappeared, and the insane got the right to be considered sick.

After defending his doctoral dissertation, Pavel Ivanovich was successively a privatdozent (1877), associate professor (1878), extraordinary (1884) and ordinary (1888) professor of the Department of Psychiatry at Kharkov University, was the initiator of the First Congress of Psychiatrists and Neuropathologists of Russia (1887) .

In 1877, the first independent department of psychiatry and neurology in Ukraine was organized at Kharkov University, headed by Privatdozent P. I. Kovalevsky, a student of A. U. Frese, who began his scientific career at Saburova Dacha. Clinical demonstrations were carried out at the beginning in the Kharkiv provincial zemstvo hospital (Saburova dacha), and later in the clinic of I. Ya. Platonov, where a laboratory was organized and everything necessary for the most successful teaching was created, within the limits of was outside Kharkov and there was no paved road.

In 1889, P. I. Kovalevsky was appointed dean of the medical faculty of Kharkov University, and then rector of Warsaw University (1892–1897). Unfortunately, a serious illness suffered in the summer of 1896 forced him to leave the university. From 1903 to 1906, he was the head of the department of psychiatry at Kazan University, after which he taught a course in forensic psychopathology at the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg University and worked as a senior physician in the psychiatric department of the Nikolaev Military Hospital in St. Petersburg, an advanced medical institution of that time. At this time, Pavel Ivanovich continued to publish journals, translated the works of foreign psychiatrists F. Pinel, T. Meinert, K. Wernicke and others, taking an active part in the work of a number of public organizations (Institute of Brothers of Mercy, Committee of the Red Cross, etc.).

The implementation of the innovations that have matured in psychiatry, and the attraction of wide public attention to them, gave rise to the need to create a special press organ in Russia. In 1893, P. I. Kovalevsky became the founder and editor of the first psychiatric journal in Russian, called the Archive of Psychiatry, Neurology and Forensic Psychopathology (the journal ceased to exist in 1896). The name of the publication reflected the versatile aspirations of the editor, who announced that the journal "will pursue the study of abnormalities in the nervous life of a person, diseases, crimes, the conditions for their development and the means to eradicate them." He published a number of foreign monographs and manuals on the most important issues of psychoneurology. Domestic psychiatrists owe him an acquaintance with the clinical lectures of T. Meinert, whose ideas were especially close to P. I. Kovalevsky, the lectures of J. M. Charcot, the books of W. R. Gowers, O. L. Bienswanger, Ch. Richet and others. In addition, he published the Journal of Medicine and Hygiene, Russian Medical Bulletin, Bulletin of Idiocy and Epilepsy, Bulletin of Mental Diseases, and for 15 years he was co-editor of the European Psychiatric Journal published in Germany. Pavel Ivanovich rightly called the best metropolitan psychiatrist and even the "father of Russian psychiatry"- he is the author of a large number of scientific papers on various issues of psychiatry, including forensic psychiatry, psychology, neurology, and a large number of translations of the works of foreign psychiatrists.

In his scientific research, Pavel Ivanovich, relying on the anatomical and physiological knowledge of that time, in particular, on the reflex theory of I. M. Sechenov, developed materialistic ideas about the essence of mental phenomena in normal and pathological conditions. He created an original concept of the role of blood circulation and metabolism in the central nervous system, believing that the basis of any mental illness is a violation of the nutrition of nerve elements and that the degree of their anatomical destruction depends on the duration of this violation. In the etiology of psychosis, P.I. is of great importance. Kovalevsky attributed the combination of hereditary factors with disease-causing external agents of both somatogenic and psychogenic character. A number of his works are devoted to the study of syphilitic lesions of the nervous system, issues of forensic psychiatry, childhood neuropathology, etc. Pavel Ivanovich created a classification of mental illnesses, where he took the predominance of disorders in one or another area of ​​mental activity as the basis for division.

During his half-century of medical activity, P. I. Kovalevsky wrote over 300 books, brochures, journal articles on various issues of psychiatry, neuropathology and psychology. Among them are the books "Psychiatry", "General Psychopathology", "A Guide to Proper Care of the Mentally Ill", "Forensic Psychiatry", "Forensic Psychiatric Analysis" (3 editions), "Primary Insanity", "Mental Illness for Physicians and lawyers”, “Psychology of sex”, “Psychology of woman”, “Degeneration and rebirth. The criminal and the fight against crime: Social and psychological sketches, The psychology of the criminal (there is also a French edition), Hygiene and the treatment of mental and nervous diseases, Fundamentals of the mechanism of mental activity, Fundamentals of human psychology, Drunkenness, its causes and treatment", "Textbook of psychiatry for students" (4 editions), "Syphilis of the brain and its treatment", "Puerperal psychoses", "Migraine and its treatment". Professor I. A. Polishchuk (1976) appropriately emphasized that Pavel Ivanovich published what he wrote the first domestic guide to psychiatry.

In addition to scientific and teaching activities, P. I. Kovalevsky was an active participant in the national-monarchist movement. For some time he was a member of the oldest St. Petersburg elite monarchist organization "Russian Assembly", participated in the activities of the Russian outlying society that arose on the basis of the Assembly, which aimed to study the national outskirts of the Russian Empire and fight against outlying separatism. With the formation of the All-Russian National Union (VNS) in 1908, Pavel Ivanovich became one of its leading ideologists. He also took an active part in the activities of the All-Russian National Club (VNK) - a cultural, educational and political organization created to promote the ideas of Russian nationalism. Within the framework of the VNK, P. I. Kovalevsky repeatedly made presentations, was a member of the editorial board of the Izvestia of the All-Russian National Club, and for some time was the chairman of the VNK publishing commission.

According to P. I. Kovalevsky, the VNS was called upon to “warm up national feeling among the masses of the dark people” and “destroy the depraved indifference and denationalism” of the educated classes. At the same time, Pavel Ivanovich saw the composition of the National Assembly as quite broad, although not unlimited: “The National Party will only be national when it is popular. It will include ... the intelligentsia and the people - the basis of the nation - as well as other nationalities ... this party will be followed not only by the Orthodox, but also by Catholics, Mohammedans - and Russians, and Poles, and Armenians, and Tatars ... ". He also emphasized that the Russian people have the right to “be proud of our nation within their own state”, “because we can boldly say to the eyes of all our subjects that we defeated them, but did not destroy them. We have preserved their religion, their language, their manners and customs.” The view of P. I. Kovalevsky on the revolution of 1905 was also very characteristic: the Russian revolution, he emphasized, “is not Russian, but foreign, because this revolution is nothing but a revolt of foreigners ... against Russia and the Russian people”.

Soon, P. I. Kovalevsky established himself as a recognized theorist of Russian nationalism, who gave the most exhaustive formulations of the basic concepts of this ideology. In his opinion, a nation (from the love of which healthy nationalism actually follows) is a phenomenon of a common language, faith and destiny. And such a community, the scientist believed, was formed among the Russians by the end of the 9th century. And although the Tatar yoke called into question the sovereignty of the Russian nation, and the Time of Troubles threatened the complete elimination of the Russian state, the Russian nation was revived at the beginning of the 17th century and took a leading position among the most prominent nations of the world. At the same time, Pavel Ivanovich emphasized that it is necessary to distinguish between the existence of a nation and its formation, to see the historical conditioning of the features of a nation.

Thus, the scientist wrote, a nation is "a certain group of people, united by a single territory, a single faith, a single language, common physical and mental properties, one culture and one destinies." However, P. I. Kovalevsky believed, among the listed conditions that make up a nation, some are mandatory, while others are conditional. It is quite characteristic that, like many nationalists of the early 20th century, Pavel Ivanovich believed that optional the conditions for the formation of a nation are territory, religion and language, while he believed the physical and mental properties of the people, their culture and historical destinies to be the conditions obligatory.

As for such a concept as “nationality”, it was interpreted by P. I. Kovalevsky as “a collection of properties and qualities inherent in a particular nation”, and distinguishing it from other nations. But to determine the relationship between the concepts of "nation" and "people" P. I. Kovalevsky, unfortunately, did not really succeed. As the modern researcher D. A. Kotsyubinsky rightly notes, the interpretation proposed by Pavel Ivanovich was internally contradictory and logically indigestible. According to his interpretation, “it is the people, their mass, that gives the essence and basis of the nation, for the intelligentsia and the enlightened part of the Russian people are more than half made up of foreigners of the non-Russian nation”, therefore, the characteristic features of the nation are given by the common people, and if the nation is a “military institution”, “founded by the sword and living by the sword” of peasants and soldiers, then the people are the state.

As a modern researcher of the work of P. I. Kovalevsky, a well-known patriot politician A. N. Savelyev, Russian nationalism according to P. I. Kovalevsky is “a saving means of reuniting nationality and citizenship, a means of becoming a modern political nation, in which patriotism must give way Russian nationalism, and the parochial "nationalism" of the non-Russian indigenous peoples of Russia - develop into Russian patriotism. For the existence of Russia, a general civil understanding is important that Russia was created by Russian people, and Russian nationalism is the nationalism of a great nation, which, of course, must be educated and ascend to higher forms, outliving the dark element of the people. Other nationalisms in Russia may be worthy of respect if combined with loyalty and fidelity to the Russian state. From here arises the formula and hierarchy of the empire, which is an alliance of friendly nationalisms under the primacy, leadership and patronage of Russian nationalists. Not only the Russian, but also the Slavic community can exist only under Russian leadership. For for the world and world history, Slavdom is perceived only through Russians and Russian history ... Russian nationalism opposes Russian solidarity to the vile undertakings of the liberals, which draws into its orbit all the patriots of Russia - even if they are non-Russian by blood.

“Nationalism,” wrote P. I. Kovalevsky in one of his works, “is a manifestation of respect, love and devotion to self-sacrifice, in the present - respect and reverence for the past and the desire for prosperity, glory, power and success in the future - that nation, the people to which the person belongs. And in the book “The Significance of Nationalism in the Modern Movement of the Balkan Slavs” (1913), he developed the concept of nationalism as follows: “Nationalism is the essence of the life of a nation - it is a manifestation of that inner essence of a nation, by virtue of which its individual members gravitate towards each other, help each other friend, carry their lives for the benefit of their community and live in its glory and greatness.

P. I. Kovalevsky, speaking of nationalism, noted that the latter consists of national consciousness and national feeling. Under national feeling the scientist understood the "unconscious attraction and heartfelt attraction of people of one nation to each other," that is, an unconscious, instinctive, and therefore organic phenomenon. National identity However, Pavel Ivanovich emphasized, “there is an act of thinking, by virtue of which a given person recognizes himself as a part of his native whole, goes under his protection and carries himself to the defense of his native, whole, his nation.” And if the national feeling is a “lower, animal manifestation,” then national self-consciousness is a “higher, spiritual, intelligent” manifestation.

At the same time, being aware that nationalism as an ideology was borrowed from the West (which many nationalists did not hide, noting that the growing popularity of nationalism is a phenomenon of the latest European development), P. I. Kovalevsky was in a hurry, in order to avoid reproaches in " Westernism” and imitation, to make a reservation that Russian nationalism has its own specifics. Pavel Ivanovich saw the main difference between Russian nationalism and its European "brother" in the more active role of the government, led by P. A. Stolypin, in the development and implementation of the national idea: i.e. as in Europe - allocated by A. Ivanov), but from top to bottom"; thanks to which, wrote P. I. Kovalevsky, Russian nationalism should be qualified not as a mechanically imitative "Westernism", but as a "living, natural phenomenon" . Proving the “genuine progressiveness” of nationalism, Pavel Ivanovich nevertheless emphasized that nationalism is still a kind of conservatism, but “healthy” conservatism, that is, providing creative activity.

Analyzing in detail in his works such concepts as “nationalism”, “nation”, “national feeling”, “national self-consciousness”, P. I. Kovalevsky could not but dwell on the phrase “Russian nationalists”, already vilified by the “progressive public” .

"Russian nationalists" are cannibals... that's what foreigners who hate Russia and wish her harm say. So say some Russians or those who sold their souls to the enemies of the fatherland, or people who are uneducated, stupid, ”Pavel Ivanovich wrote in one of his most famous works,“ Russian Nationalism and National Education ”. “Russian nationalists” are people who truly love their homeland and their nation with all their hearts, respect its past and wish it glory, power and greatness in the future.” At the same time, P. I. Kovalevsky noted further, “these were purely Russians and Russians from foreigners, like Tsitsianov, Chavchavadze and many others. They devoted their entire lives to the service of the motherland and belonged undividedly to it. But only such Russians have the right to be called Russians, sons of Great Russia, and enjoy all the rights of Russian citizens. Those Russians who dare to slander their mother Russia, who wish her harm, who decide, while living in her, to act to her detriment - these are no longer Russians. These are the enemies of Russia ... Russia is for Russians - in the broadest sense of the word.

Defending further the priority rights of Russians (in the broad sense of the word) in the Russian state, P. I. Kovalevsky noted that they stem from the “right of blood” shed by our ancestors; property rights, "arising from the costs of our ancestors" and "the rights of the historical fate of the motherland ...".

It should be noted that in the broad circles of the Russian intelligentsia, the authority of Kovalevsky the historian was quite high. His historical and journalistic works, such as "Peoples of the Caucasus", "Conquest of the Caucasus by Russia", "History of Little Russia", "History of Russia from a national point of view", "Russian nationalism and national education in Russia", "Fundamentals of Russian nationalism", " Science, Christ and His Teaching”, “John the Terrible and His State of Mind”, “Psychology of the Russian Nation. Youth education. Alexander III - Tsar-Nationalist" enjoyed great reader interest and withstood more than one edition in pre-revolutionary Russia. At the same time, Pavel Ivanovich was one of the first to use historical analysis for the development of practical psychiatry. His famous "Psychiatric sketches from history", combining the rigor and reliability of analysis, ease of style, originality and imagery of presentation, on specific examples from the life of John the Terrible, Peter III, Mohammed, Joan of Arc, Paul I, Napoleon, Cambyses, Ludwig II , Emanuel Swedenborg and others reveal the dynamics of various mental states, show the role of the environment and heredity in the genesis and clinical course of diseases. It should be emphasized that the essays written by P. I. Kovalevsky at the beginning of the 20th century are still relevant today. Very often the fate of a people, a state depends on the will and character of the leader who is at the head of this people or state.

But of particular interest in the context of this article is the work of P. I. Kovalevsky "History of Russia from a national point of view." Although this work of a psychiatrist does not pretend to be a serious scientific work, it is notable for the fact that P.I. Kovalevsky, in contrast to the indifference to his native past that was gaining strength, tried to consider its history with love for his people. “I do not at all dare,” he wrote in the preface to the book, “to write a new history of Russia. My desire is to try to consider the events of our history from a national point of view. The final conclusion of P. I. Kovalevsky’s “History ...” is also noteworthy: “The main essence of the Russian people is that the Russians are Slavs, a completely original and original people. His being is completely different from that of the Western peoples. It is united by a mutual national connection, ancestral and natural, saving each other and all together, connected in times of adversity and hard times. His faith is the Orthodox faith, for it is in his spirit, in his being, in his Slavic nature. This people must inevitably have at its head a tsar, a tsar of one faith with the people, a tsar-father who rules in this great Slavic family like a good father in any family, a master tsar, guardian of the integrity of the entire Russian state, the entire Russian family. Orthodoxy, autocracy and monocracy there are the main features, the foundations of the life of the Russian people. It should be clarified that by “monocracy” the scientist understood the confession of the idea “that the Russian land under no circumstances can be divided, nor reduced in volume, nor dissected into its component parts from which it originated” .

For P.I. Kovalevsky, the ideal of the Russian tsar was Emperor Alexander III, whose main merit was that “he was the father of his people. This tsar knew his people, understood their spirit, lived according to their needs and loved them… He was truly a Russian people’s tsar, a nationalist tsar.” "He was flesh from the flesh of the Slavic people and blood from the blood of the Slavic nation".

As can be seen from the above quotes, P. I. Kovalevsky represented a kind of integral Slavic nation, with the development of which he linked his hopes for a happy future for all of Europe, if not all of humanity. So, in one of his works, a nationalist professor wrote: “Now the European peoples hate us. They surpass us with their knowledge, their technical and other improvements. But true perfection consists in the development of the greatest morality, the crown of which is: love, mercy, compassion and self-sacrifice - but, - P. I. Kovalevsky noted further, - I believe that the moment will come when all European peoples will achieve this degree of moral perfection. Then they will understand us. Then they will see that the Slavs, who carried in their lives a great and heavy cross, a symbol of suffering and redemption, a symbol of the teachings of the God-man, shed their blood not because of material benefits, but in the name of their national morality. And then the second prophecy will be fulfilled. The Slavs will conquer the world. And then all human national streams will merge into the Slavic sea. And the Slavs will win not with fire and sword, but with love, mercy, compassion and self-sacrifice. Then freedom, equality and brotherhood will reign under the Slavic symbol of the Cross, the symbol of the Divine Teacher Christ.

However, although P. I. Kovalevsky was a consistent defender of the famous triad of Count S. S. Uvarov "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality", the idea of ​​a nationality-nation, as for most Russian nationalists (not to be confused with the Black Hundreds monarchists, who looked at the nationalists as "heretics", covering up Western nationalist ideas with monarchical and Orthodox ideology) stood in his main place. “... Outside the nationality, there is no art, no truth, no life, there is nothing!”, - considered P. I. Kovalevsky. From the above quotes, it is clear that Orthodoxy and monarchy were understood by Pavel Ivanovich not as values ​​in themselves, but as forms of faith and power that were most suitable for the Russian people. That is, P. I. Kovalevsky considered them through the prism of nationalism, believing that they stem from the national properties of the Russian people, and not vice versa. At the same time, the very value of the institution of an autocratic monarchy seemed to Pavel Ivanovich rather arbitrary: “A unified autocratic power in Russia follows directly from the nature of the national properties of the Russian people. From the organic inability of the Slavs to unite in themselves and self-government. “Autocracy in Russia is an organic national need, without which Russia cannot exist. for the time being", - he noted in one of his works.

With regard to the teachings of the Orthodox Church, P. I. Kovalevsky allowed himself arbitrary judgments and interpretations bordering on heresy. In particular, for the views on the Old Testament he set out in the brochure “The Bible and Morality” (1906), the scientist almost turned out to be an exiled settler - the censorship committee recognized the book as criminal, and put its author on trial for “blasphemy and insulting the shrine”. The court, however, acquitted P. I. Kovalevsky, not finding sacrilege in the essay, and the pamphlet subsequently withstood as many as 14 editions. However, as regards the decision of the court to release the pamphlet from arrest, and not to sanction the author, it does not at all speak of the “impartiality, intelligence and honesty of our judges”, as Pavel Ivanovich himself believed, but rather indicates that “those who tried him brochure, lawyers, armed with knowledge of the laws ... [were] completely ignorant of the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, accidentally turned out to be indifferent people and as ignorant in these matters as the professor himself. In this work, P. I. Kovalevsky sharply criticized the Old Testament, considering it sacred only for Jews, and allowed himself attacks against the God of Israel and the Old Testament prophets that are unacceptable for a Christian. The conclusion of the pamphlet was that Jehovah and Christ are two different Gods, and the Sacred History of the Old Testament is not Sacred History for Christians. Based on this, a political conclusion was made: “ A people whose religion sanctifies and encourages theft and fraud has no right to expect equal rights with peoples whose religion considers these acts to be crimes.» . We believe that there is no need to dwell on this opus of Pavel Ivanovich, because almost every quote from it will border on blasphemy, although the professor himself, who considered himself a Christian, apparently did not understand this. He separated the New Testament from the Old Testament for himself and, in exaltation of Christ's teaching, began to criticize all the deeds of God the Father, whom he considered too far from the ideal of the Christian God, and the Old Testament Jewish people, including Moses, King David and other righteous people. “I always thought,” P.I. Kovalevsky wrote, “that there is nothing sacred in it (the Holy History of the Old Testament) - its examples are not worthy of imitation, - you can read it only in order not to do as it is written there, - and reading the Bible is immoral and corrupting.

We should recall the words of the authoritative church and monarchist figure, Archbishop Nikon (Rozhdestvensky), who revealed in his article “The Word of Truth to Our Anti-Semitic Patriots” this misconception so common in the patriotic environment: “For a long time, conscience demanded to say a word of truth to our venerable patriots in defense of the holy Bible ... Yes, you have to not just say, but shout to some of them: “Do not touch the Bible, do not touch our Holy Scriptures, in which we believers see and know only the word of God! ... Our patriots do not spare even Abraham, whom the Apostle calls" friend of God,” nor David, whom the Church calls the “Godfather,” that is, the forefather of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, nor other great patriarchs and holy men of the Old Testament, whom our zealous anti-Semites do not hesitate to put on a par with modern “Kids” and attribute to them the same qualities that are observed in modern, God-rejected Jews. To tell the truth: it becomes scary for these respectable people who embark on a sea of ​​interpretation of the Scriptures without a helmsman and allow themselves to boldly treat the Holy Scriptures as with the most ordinary book ... Unfortunately ... our patriots do not write random articles in newspapers, they only show it in speeches such a frivolous attitude to the Bible, but they write entire books ... All this happens because they do not want to put a sharp line, set by God himself, between the Old Testament Jew and the modern Jew, a descendant of the crucifiers and the sworn enemy of our Lord Jesus Christ.

It should be noted that it was the Black Hundreds who gave a rebuke to the pamphlet of P.I. Kovalevsky. The Moscow monarchist newspaper Kolokol, published by the prominent church missionary V. M. Skvortsov, published a special pamphlet by a certain Elizabeth Geptner, containing criticism of the religious views of P. I. Kovalevsky. As the pamphlet rightly noted, “the sympathy of many even well-meaning people enjoys the fashionable delusion and extremely seductive tendency that a Christian does not need to believe the sacred books of the Jewish people,” and that it is a mistake to believe that the books of the Old Testament were “created by a national Jewish genius and can be considered as national Jewish books. Based further on the interpretation of the Old Testament by the authoritative Church Fathers, the author easily smashed all the arguments of P. I. Kovalevsky and, not without reason, accused the scientist (by the way, who graduated from the seminary with honors in his time) of “self-conceit and proud self-delusion”. Therefore, when modern authors, carried away, write that “for Professor P. I. Kovalevsky there was no other formula for the Russian idea, except Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality", it must be remembered that P.I. Kovalevsky's view of the first for a member of the Uvarov triad was peculiar and differed from the views of orthodox Russian monarchists.

"Russia for the Russians" - this formula of Alexander III in the works of Professor P.I. Kovalevsky is revealed and substantiated. To the chagrin of slanderers who are looking for a reason to accuse the Russian national movement of all sins, “Russia for Russians” acts as the most promising formula for statehood not only for Russians themselves (we share P.I. Kovalevsky’s confidence that Russians are a trinity of Great Russians, Little Russians and Belarusians ), but also for the non-Russian peoples of Russia, connected with the Russians by a common destiny. Pavel Ivanovich perfectly saw the diversity of “Russianness”, which today we sometimes stop noticing, reducing Russian exclusively to generic characteristics. In "Russianness" there is unity in the Orthodox faith, there is unity in the memory of the greatness of Russia, there is unity in the Russian language and Russian culture, in love for the Fatherland, there is a connection of Russians in the space of the Russian world - not only holders of citizenship of the Russian Federation, but also compatriots .

For Professor P. I. Kovalevsky there was no other formula for the Russian idea, except Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality. Taking a lesson in intellectual honesty and scientific depth from an outstanding thinker and the greatest Russian scientist, we must assimilate this formula and be imbued with it to the very depths of our souls. To save Russia from non-existence, which has come so close that the imminent death of the Fatherland and the dissolution of the Russian people in the waves of migration no longer surprise or frighten many. We should be afraid only of this - the death of our Motherland, the extinction of the Russian family. In the Russian idea of ​​Russian thinkers of the early 20th century, we have a detailed ideological doctrine with which we will save Russia and continue our race until the end of time.

The best national qualities of the people can be strengthened through the awareness of the unity of language, faith, traditions, beliefs, the unity of physical and mental qualities and culture, as well as a common historical destiny. Reading the works of P. I. Kovalevsky and projecting them to the present day, you understand that the main conditions for the revival of the deformed Russian soul are the restoration of its dignity, catholicity and unity, the elimination of feelings of inferiority, enlightened nationalism and patriotism. Standing up for enlightened healthy nationalism, P. I. Kovalevsky, as noted above, argues: “Nationalism is a manifestation of respect, love and devotion to self-sacrifice in the present, respect and reverence for the past and the desire for prosperity, glory, power in the future of that nation the people to which the person belongs. Speaking about the dignity of Russia and Russians, Pavel Ivanovich raises the question of national equality and the national infringement and subsequent humiliation of Russians that was planned in the 20th century: “... Russia is a great and powerful state, and the Russians are its worthy sons with honor... Russia - its subjects. They can be equal to us only insofar as they deserve it with their devotion and readiness to serve Russia, as her real, true children.

It is rightly noted that the classic of Russian ethno-political science P. I. Kovalevsky distinguishes between the concepts of “nationalism” and “patriotism”: “It is clear: nationalism and patriotism are not the same thing. Rather, patriotism is a more general concept, while nationalism is a more particular concept. In each state there can be only one patriotism and several nationalisms. One of the cornerstone internal foundations on which strength is based, the vitality of the state is also growing stronger, one of the powerful strongholds that preserve its integrity and well-being is the people's love for their Fatherland, people's patriotism. At the same time, Pavel Ivanovich distinguishes between different types of nationalism (folk, bureaucratic, Christian, which has an industrial-labor, production character, etc.).

A great place in the works of P. I. Kovalevsky is occupied by reflections on the education of patriotism, which should begin with instilling love for one's village, one's land on the basis of studying their traditions and culture. Patriotic feelings and convictions are reinforced by the knowledge of native history, its victories, outstanding figures and heroes. Moreover, the history of Russian and Russian heroes, which will protect Russia from foreignness and admiration for the West.

The students of P. I. Kovalevsky were: E. I. Andruzsky, Z. V. Gutnikov, M. N. Popov (professor in Tomsk), N. I. Mukhin (professor in Warsaw, Kharkov), D. B. Frank ( professor in Dnepropetrovsk), I. Ya. Platonov, Ya. Ya. Trutovsky, N. V. Krainsky (professor in Warsaw, Belgrade), A. I. Yushchenko (professor in Warsaw, Vinnitsa, St. on-Don, Kharkov, later Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR), A. A. Govseev and many others.

A student of Pavel Ivanovich, Professor N. V. Krainsky rightly writes in the introduction to his work “Corruption, hysterics and possessed” warm words addressed to Pavel Ivanovich: “I dedicate this clinical essay to my dear and highly respected teacher, Professor Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky, on day 25 -year anniversary of his scientific and practical activities. At the same time, I consider it my duty to declare that I, like most of the numerous students of Pavel Ivanovich, scattered throughout Russia and serving in Russian psychiatry in the departments of universities, in government and zemstvo hospitals, are deeply convinced that in everything that I will be able to do on for the benefit of science and for the benefit of the many mentally ill people passing through my hands, I am wholly indebted to those strictly scientific and humane principles which we have always heard from our teacher. With deep respect and gratitude, I recall that strict scientific discipline that has always been a hallmark of the school of Pavel Ivanovich, and his unconditional, devoid of any indulgence demand from his students to fulfill their duty, while not allowing any compromises with their convictions and conscience, greatly facilitates his students the difficult task of fighting in the practical work and life of Russian psychiatrists.

As a student of Pavel Ivanovich; I - ten years after he left the position where the best years of his activity passed, where the personality of Pavel Ivanovich developed and formed as a figure and scientist - I had the honor to enter this psychiatric institution as a doctor, and later to hold the position of my teacher. Here I could see how colossally fruitful was the work and energy that Pavel Ivanovich put into the business. Despite all sorts of perversions to which everything done by Pavel Ivanovich was subjected, despite the most unsightly distortions of his activities by some individuals, even the ten-year anarchy of the Saburova dacha (italics by the author - P. P.) did not smooth his ideas and principles. The same Saburova dacha convinced me that sooner or later a true assessment of the activity will not be long in coming, and I publicly affirm that, 12 years after Pavel Ivanovich left the Saburova dacha, I heard words of justice and honor addressed to his activities from his personal enemies and enemies, and it is difficult to achieve the highest praise. I do not grieve that Russian life, society - everything except the impartial field of science - lost Pavel Ivanovich too early, as an energetic figure in the struggle of life. This is the common lot of major figures in public life.. Pure science and practical psychiatry, in the person of Pavel Ivanovich's numerous students, will show Russian society that its principles and teachings will not be stifled by the thorns with which Russian, especially Zemstvo, psychiatric activity is so full. I think that if we weigh the successes that Russian psychiatry is obliged to P. I. Kovalevsky, who was one of the first to remove the chains from the insane in Russia, - from the impossible clinical Saburova dacha, he arranged, although temporarily, an exemplary institution, founded the first Russian psychiatric journal, created in a short time a numerous school of students, and until recently, with his brilliant lectures, attracts recruits to the ranks of Russian psychiatrists - moreover, he did all this completely alone, without help, rather with interference from many, then you will have to recognize the situation, "that there is one warrior in the field."

I am glad that at present, Pavel Ivanovich, far from the struggle of life, will continue to lead Russian psychiatry for a long time to come, devoting all his time to pure science and, like an ideal clinician, will supplement us with his brilliant compositions that his students used to hear through the living words in the clinic. If the official Fatherland does not always appreciate its leaders, then you just need to remember whether there can be the highest award for a scientist and clinician, when he is no longer in his former toga of the rector and state dignitary, but in the form of a modest private person - he sees every week at his lectures in the solemn hall of the university - a large crowd, honest, alien to extraneous considerations, and, nevertheless, the most severe judges. In this, and not in the toga of a state dignitary, I see that highest award and crown with which the anniversary of the 25-year scientific activity of my dear teacher is crowned.

It should be emphasized that zemstvo medicine played a significant role in the development of medical deontology in our country. From the very beginning of its development, zemstvo psychiatry had a clinical basis and a social orientation. This orientation allows us to say that the emergence of social psychiatry and the rehabilitation of the mentally ill began in our country at the end of the 19th century. At the same time, attention is drawn to the combination of a truly humane attitude to the fate of the patient, the invariable respect for the dignity of his personality and the desire to use the remaining mental abilities for the highest possible social readaptation. An example is the statements of P. I. Kovalevsky, who is rightfully considered an outstanding humanist doctor. In the repeatedly reprinted Guide to the Proper Care of the Mentally Ill, he wrote: “The treatment of patients in the hospital should always be humane, gentle, meek and patient. First of all, it is necessary to gain the confidence of your patients; but they acquire it only with warm participation, patience, affectionate treatment, fulfillment of reasonable desires, readiness to do good and strict justice in relation to all patients. Lies, deceit and cunning have no place in dealing with these patients. They are too sensitive even to artificiality and really dislike a person who pretends to be only kind..

Pavel Ivanovich's instructions, made by him long before the very concept of "medical deontology" appeared, can serve as excellent illustrations of the proper medical attitude towards patients in psychiatry. In the same Handbook, he wrote: “Just as a good surgeon probes a wound only as a last resort, so a good psychiatrist should touch the patient’s mental wound only in the name of research”. P. I. Kovalevsky emphasized that “the main task in this case is to give this person the means of subsistence, restore his independence, inspire him with the trust of the society in whose environment he enters as a member.” The cited "Guide" provides for almost everything that doctors need to do, realizing the concern for the patient to more easily and fully return to life outside the hospital: from how to feed and clothe him, and to how to simplify the resolution of administrative and legal issues arising after discharge from the hospital, and provide the necessary social and medical assistance to the patient.

It is noteworthy that the organizing committee for the preparations for the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the Kharkiv City Clinical Psychiatric Hospital No. 15 (Saburova Dacha), with the full approval of the scientific and practical psychiatric community of the region, decided to make a bas-relief depicting a portrait of Professor P. I. Kovalevsky on one side of the commemorative commemorative medal dedicated to the aforementioned significant event in the history of Ukrainian medicine, which was done.

On the eve of the revolution, P. I. Kovalevsky taught a course in forensic psychopathology at the Faculty of Law of Petrograd University. We do not know how the ideologue of Russian nationalism perceived the February and then the October Revolution. It is only known that after the revolution, the elderly professor P. I. Kovalevsky, as a highly qualified physician, was mobilized into the Red Army as the chief doctor of a military detachment (already in exile, in a private letter to a former fellow party member, Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky), P. I. Kovalevsky wrote that the Reds forced him to this cooperation). After the end of the Civil War until 1924, the scientist worked, as mentioned above, as a senior doctor in the psychiatric and nervous department of the Nikolaev hospital in Petrograd and even consulted the seriously ill V. I. Lenin, who was the first to determine his progressive paralysis.

This moment became a turning point in his life. In 1924, Pavel Ivanovich almost died as a result of persecution from the Soviet authorities, but in December 1924, having somehow received permission to travel abroad, P.I. Kovalevsky left the USSR. The rest of his life he lived in the small Belgian resort town of Spa, in the province of Liege in Wallonia, continuing to engage in scientific and journalistic activities. In 1925, the professor wrote to Metropolitan Evlogy with a proposal to read a course in psychology at the St. Sergius Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris, but, apparently, Pavel Ivanovich did not have to return to teaching. The emigrant period of P. I. Kovalevsky’s life is very little known, and this letter allows researchers to expand the knowledge of researchers about the author’s stay in Belgium. This outstanding scientist, an outstanding psychiatrist, publicist, public figure, a staunch Russian nationalist and, without any doubt, a patriot who wished his Fatherland and people only good, died on October 17, 1931 in Liege (Belgium).

Thus, P. I. Kovalevsky made a significant contribution to the development of domestic scientific and practical psychiatry, including the Kharkov psychiatric school, and other disciplines. Without a doubt, the biography and scientific heritage of Pavel Ivanovich need further careful study, especially his Ukrainian period of life and scientific work.

Literature

1. Ivanov A. Nationalist professor (to the 75th anniversary of the death of P. I. Kovalevsky) [Electronic resource]. - Access mode: http://www.rusk.ru/st.php?idar=104584 .
2. Platonov K. K. My meetings on the great road of life (memoirs of an old psychologist) / Ed. A. D. Glotochkina, A. L. Zhuravlev, V. A. Koltseva, V. N. Loskutova. - M.: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2005. - 312 p. - (Series "Outstanding scientists of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences").
3. Kovalevsky Pavel Ivanovich [Electronic resource]. - Access mode: http://lib.e-science.ru/book/78/page/100.html .
4. Afanasiev N.I. Contemporaries. Album of biographies. - St. Petersburg, 1909. - T. 1.- S. 133.
5. Petryuk P. T. Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky - a famous domestic psychiatrist // History of Saburova dacha. Progress in psychiatry, neurology, neurosurgery and narcology: Collection of scientific papers of the Ukrainian Research Institute of Clinical and Experimental Neurology and Psychiatry and Kharkov City Clinical Psychiatric Hospital No. 15 (Saburova dacha) / Ed. ed. I. I. Kutko, P. T. Petryuk. - Kharkov, 1996. - T. 3. - S. 57–61.
6. Tatar Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ch. ed. M. Kh. Khasanov. - Kazan: Institute of the Tatar Encyclopedia of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan, 1999. - P. 280.
7. Kannabikh Yu. History of psychiatry. - M.: TsTR MGP VOS, 1994. - S. 383–410.
8. Kotsiubinsky D. A. Russian nationalism at the beginning of the 20th century. The birth and death of the ideology of the All-Russian National Union. - M., 2001.
9. Kovalevsky P.I. The value of nationalism in the modern movement of the Balkan Slavs. - Rostov-on-Don, 1913. - S. 2–6.
10. Saveliev A. N. Nation: the Russian formula of Professor Kovalevsky [Electronic resource] // Golden Lev. - 2005. - No. 69–70. - Access mode: http://www.zlev.ru/69_50.htm.
11. Kovalevsky P.I. Russian nationalism and national education in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 1912. - S. 7–8.
12. Kovalevsky P.I. History of Russia from a national point of view. - St. Petersburg, 1912.
13. Geptner E. The Bible and Morality. In Defense of the Word of God (Answer to Prof. P.I. Kovalevsky regarding his pamphlet The Bible and Morality). - St. Petersburg, 1913. - S. 6.
14. Kovalevsky P.I. Alexander III. Nationalist king. - St. Petersburg, 1912.
15. Nikon (Rozhdestvensky), archbishop. Orthodoxy and the future fate of Russia / Comp. I. Shipov. - M., 1994. - S. 397, 400.
16. Belashkina L. F. A book about the Russian soul [Electronic resource] // Slavic peoples in the North Caucasus: modern demographic processes. Supplement to the "South Russian Review". - 2006. - No. 5. - Access mode: http://www.kavkazonline.ru/csrip/elibrary/appendix/app_05/app_05_p_01.htm. - Rec. on the book: Kovalevsky P.I. Psychology of the Russian nation. Youth education. Alexander III - nationalist tsar / Comp. E. S. Troitsky. - M.: AKIRN: Border, 2005. - 237 p.
17. Saveliev A. Preface to the reissue of the book by P. I. Kovalevsky "Nationalism and national education in Russia" [Electronic resource]. - Access mode: http://www.savelev.ru.
18. Krainsky N.V. Corruption, hysterics and demoniacs [Electronic resource]. - Access mode: http://pathographia.narod.ru/new/KLIKUSHY.htm .
19. Morozov G.V. Deontology in psychiatry // Deontology in medicine: In 2 volumes - V. 2: Private deontology / E. M. Vikhlyaeva, V. P. Gamov, S. Z. Gorshkov and others; Ed. B. V. Petrovsky. - M.: Medicine, 1988. - S. 145–162.
20. Letter from P.I. Kovalevsky to Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky) dated April 5/19, 1925 - GARF. F. R-5919 // Foundation of Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky). Op. 1. D. 66.

Note

1. The author, being a psychiatrist by profession, did not aim in this work to assess the political views of the hero of the day, but only cites his works on this issue and cites critical statements on some of them by other researchers.

Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky(- October 17, Liege) - a well-known psychiatrist, publicist and public figure. Rector of Warsaw University (1894-1897).

Biography

This book, combining scientific and popularizing style, using specific examples from the life of John the Terrible, Peter III, the Prophet Muhammad, Joan of Arc, Paul I, the Persian king Cambyses, Ludwig II of Bavaria, Emanuel Swedenborg and others, reveals the dynamics of various mental phenomena, shows the role of the environment and heredity in the formation of personality.

P. I. Kovalevsky was a foreman of the Russian National Club, a member of the Council of the All-Russian National Union and a member of the Russian Assembly.

Compositions

• Kovalevsky P.I. Peter the Great and his genius. - St. Petersburg. , edition of the Russian Medical Bulletin: printing house of M. Akinfiev and I. Leontiev, 1900.
• Kovalevsky P.I. The conquest of the Caucasus by Russia. Historical essays. - St. Petersburg. , 1911.
• Kovalevsky P.I. History of Russia from a national point of view. - St. Petersburg. , 1912.
• Kovalevsky P.I. Foundations of Russian nationalism. - St. Petersburg. , 1912.
• Kovalevsky P.I.. - St. Petersburg. , 1912.
• Kovalevsky P.I. History of Little Russia. - St. Petersburg. , 1914.
• Kovalevsky P.I. Psychology of the Russian nation. - St. Petersburg. , 1915.
• Kovalevsky P.I. Psychiatric sketches from history. In two volumes. - M .: Terra, 1995. - ISBN 5-300-00095-7, 5-300-00094-9.
• Kovalevsky P.I. John the Terrible and his state of mind. Psychiatric sketches from history. - M .: Librokom, 2012.
• Kovalevsky P.I.. Forensic psychiatry. St. Petersburg, 1902

Write a review on the article "Kovalevsky, Pavel Ivanovich"

Notes

Literature

• Petryuk P. T. // Mental health. - 2009. - No. 3. - S. 77-87.
• Ivanov A.
• Afanasiev N. I. Contemporaries. Album of biographies. - St. Petersburg, 1909. - T. 1.- S. 133.
• Kotsiubinsky D. A. Russian nationalism at the beginning of the 20th century. The birth and death of the ideology of the All-Russian National Union. - M., 2001.
• Sadivnichy V. Pavlo Kovalevsky - editor and editor of medical periodicals / Volodymyr Sadivnichy // Journalism. - Vip. 11 (36). - 2012. - S. 114-123.
• Saveliev A. N. // Golden Lion. - 2005. - No. 69-70.

Links

• Sidorchuk I.V., Rostovtsev E.A.

An excerpt characterizing Kovalevsky, Pavel Ivanovich

The last day of Moscow has come. It was clear, cheerful autumn weather. It was Sunday. As on ordinary Sundays, the gospel was announced for mass in all churches. No one, it seemed, could yet understand what awaited Moscow.
Only two indicators of the state of society expressed the situation in which Moscow was: the mob, that is, the class of poor people, and the prices of objects. Factory workers, servants and peasants in a huge crowd, in which officials, seminarians, noblemen got involved, on this day, early in the morning, went to the Three Mountains. After standing there and not waiting for Rostopchin and making sure that Moscow would be surrendered, this crowd scattered around Moscow, to drinking houses and taverns. Prices that day also indicated the state of affairs. The prices of weapons, gold, carts and horses kept going up, while the prices of paper money and city things kept going down, so that in the middle of the day there were cases when cabbies took out expensive goods, like cloth, from the floor, and for a peasant horse paid five hundred rubles; furniture, mirrors, bronzes were given away for free.
In the sedate and old house of the Rostovs, the disintegration of the former living conditions expressed itself very weakly. With regard to people, it was only that three people from a huge household disappeared during the night; but nothing was stolen; and with regard to the prices of things, it turned out that the thirty carts that came from the villages were enormous wealth, which many envied and for which Rostov was offered huge money. Not only did they offer a lot of money for these carts, from the evening and early morning of September 1, orderlies and servants from wounded officers came to the Rostovs’ courtyard and dragged the wounded themselves, placed at the Rostovs and in neighboring houses, and begged the Rostovs’ people to take care of that they were given carts to leave Moscow. The butler, who was approached with such requests, although he felt sorry for the wounded, resolutely refused, saying that he would not even dare to report this to the count. No matter how pitiful the remaining wounded were, it was obvious that if you gave up one cart, there was no reason not to give up another, that's all - to give up your crews. Thirty carts could not save all the wounded, and in the general disaster it was impossible not to think about yourself and your family. So thought the butler for his master.
Waking up on the morning of the 1st, Count Ilya Andreich quietly left the bedroom, so as not to wake the countess who had just fallen asleep by morning, and in his purple silk dressing gown went out onto the porch. The carts, tied up, stood in the yard. The carriages were at the porch. The butler stood at the entrance, talking to an old batman and a young, pale officer with a bandaged arm. The butler, seeing the count, made a significant and stern sign to the officer and orderly to leave.
- Well, is everything ready, Vasilich? - said the count, rubbing his bald head and looking good-naturedly at the officer and orderly and nodding his head to them. (The count liked new faces.)
- At least harness now, Your Excellency.
- Well, that's nice, the countess will wake up, and with God! What are you, gentlemen? he turned to the officer. - In my house? The officer moved closer. His pale face suddenly flushed bright red.
- Count, do me a favor, let me ... for God's sake ... shelter somewhere on your carts. I don’t have anything with me here ... I don’t care in the cart ... - the officer had not yet managed to finish, as the batman turned to the count with the same request for his master.
- A! yes, yes, yes,” said the count hastily. - I'm very, very happy. Vasilyich, you order, well, clear one or two carts there, well, there ... what ... what is needed ... - with some kind of vague expressions, ordering something, the count said. But at the same moment, the officer's warm expression of gratitude already confirmed what he ordered. The count looked around him: in the yard, at the gate, in the window of the wing, one could see the wounded and orderlies. They all looked at the count and moved towards the porch.
- Please, Your Excellency, to the gallery: what do you want about the paintings there? the butler said. And the count entered the house with him, repeating his order not to refuse the wounded who ask to go.
“Well, then, you can put something together,” he added in a low, mysterious voice, as if afraid that someone would hear him.
At nine o'clock the countess woke up, and Matrena Timofeevna, her former maid, who had acted as chief of the gendarmes in relation to the countess, came to report to her former young lady that Marya Karlovna was very offended and that the young lady's summer dresses should not stay here. When asked by the countess why mme Schoss was offended, it was revealed that her chest was removed from the cart and all the carts were being untied - they were taking off the good and taking the wounded with them, whom the count, in his simplicity, ordered to take with him. The countess ordered to ask her husband.
- What is it, my friend, I hear things are being filmed again?
- You know, ma chere, I wanted to tell you this ... ma chere countess ... an officer came to me, asking me to give a few carts for the wounded. After all, this is all a matter of gain; But what is it like for them to stay, think! .. Really, in our yard, we ourselves invited them, there are officers here. You know, I think it’s right, ma chere, here, ma chere… let them take them… where is the hurry?.. – The count said this timidly, as he always said when it came to money. The Countess, however, was accustomed to this tone, which always preceded the deed that ruined the children, like some kind of construction of a gallery, a greenhouse, the installation of a home theater or music - and she was used to, and considered it her duty to always oppose what was expressed in this timid tone.
She assumed her meekly deplorable air and said to her husband:
“Listen, Count, you have brought it to the point that they don’t give anything for the house, and now you want to ruin all of our - children’s fortune. After all, you yourself say that there is a hundred thousand good in the house. I, my friend, disagree and disagree. Your will! There is government on the wounded. They know. Look: over there, at the Lopukhins, everything was taken out clean on the third day. That's how people do it. We alone are fools. Have pity at least not on me, but on the children.
The count waved his hands and, without saying anything, left the room.
- Dad! what are you talking about? Natasha told him, following him into her mother's room.
- About nothing! What do you care! said the Count angrily.
“No, I heard,” Natasha said. Why doesn't mommy want to?
– What is your business? shouted the count. Natasha went to the window and thought.
“Papa, Berg has come to visit us,” she said, looking out the window.

Berg, the son-in-law of the Rostovs, was already a colonel with Vladimir and Anna around his neck and occupied the same quiet and pleasant position of assistant chief of staff, assistant to the first department of the chief of staff of the second corps.
On September 1, he came from the army to Moscow.
He had nothing to do in Moscow; but he noticed that everyone from the army asked to go to Moscow and did something there. He also considered it necessary to take time off for household and family affairs.