AUTOCRAT VERSUS POET

Nicholas I was brought up in the traditions of autocracy and believed

in them with all his heart. He hated liberal thought and detested the

idea of educating the masses.

Tens of thousands of copies of the New Testament and the Psalter were

burned by his orders. He said such books were for the priests, not for

the common people. Incidentally it may be remarked that the priests had

to teach what he wanted or lose their jobs.

To speak against his government, or even to criticize czars who reigned

hundreds of years before him was a crime.

The little band of dreamers who formed the Society of Cyril and

Methodius actually hoped to convert this autocrat, and secure his

assistance in freeing the people. They had visions of a free

Confederation of Slavonic states, after the pattern of the United

States of America, but with the czar as head. But they sadly misjudged

their man.

Shevchenko had actually spoken impertinently of the Autocrat in his

poems. He refused to retract.

The government really wished to he lenient, if he would only be good

and confess that he had done wrong. But Shevchenko was not of those who

are willing to admit that black is white.

The gloomy autocracy now pronounces his doom—a sort of living death in

Siberian barracks. The czar added to the sentence, with his own hand,

the proviso that he should not be allowed either to write or to paint.

The Kobzar of the Ukraine Being select poems of Taras Shevchenko done into English verse with biographical fragments by Alexander Jardine Hunter · 第 52 / 70 题