1 This book was completed in January 1884, Tolstoy continued
to live and work till November 1910. -AM.
¡¡
Once accept the thesis that Jesus, by saying ¡®resist not
him ¡®that is evil¡¯, intended to forbid any use of physical force to prevent
anyone from doing whatever evil he likes, and that he was divinely and
absolutely right in laying down that principle, and there is no logical escape
from the ultimate conclusion that any Government using force, all compulsory
law, all police, and all protection of life or property is immoral.
In the Life of Tolstoy in this series, an argument is adduced -and one
that has nowhere been refuted-to show that Christ¡¯s injunction admits of a
different understanding from that which Tolstoy attributes to it. But be that as
it may, Christ¡¯s injunction has till now been so little regarded, and reliance
on it has been so generally the signal for scornful repudiation, that what
Tolstoy has to say in its support should not be over¡©looked or carelessly
thrust aside. The governments of the world systematically reject both Christ¡¯s
injunction and Tolstoy¡¯s Non-Resistant theory, but while they have been doing
so wars have become more and more terrible, till at last we are faced by the
prospect, perhaps in the near future, of defenseless men, women, and children,
being massacred in millions while our whole world crashes to destruction.-A.M.
Tolstoy always gave away small change to beggars he met, in accord with the
usual practice of religious folk in a country which had no State poor-relief
organization, and also in accord with the injunction ¡®Give to him that asketh
of thee!¡¯ He , sometimes admitted that his gift might do harm and that the ¡®
man might go and drink it; but he argued that the goodwill on the giver¡¯s part
indicated by the gift was more important than the possible ill-effects to the
recipient.-A.M.
Matthew 25:35
Matthew 7:1, ¡°Judge not, that ye be not judged.¡± JudgeÀÇ ¶æÀº, 1)ÀçÆÇÇÏ´Ù,
2)ÆÇ´ÜÇÏ´Ù. µû¶ó¼ ¡°ÀçÆÇ¹ÞÁö ¾ÊÀ¸·Á°Åµç ÀçÆÇÇÏÁö ¸»¶ó.¡±
It certainly deserves serious consideration whether it may not benefit a man
to be forcibly restrained from pursuing an evil course. Confusion arises from a
simultaneous discussion of the actual words attributed to Jesus and of the
general question of what really is true and sensible about man¡¯s relation to
his fellow men. Tolstoy argued, in another place, that Christ¡¯s words should
only be accepted as authoritative because they are true and reasonable, it
therefore will not do to assume that they are true and reasonable because they
are attributed to Christ.-A.M.
Matthew 5:40, ¡°And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy
coat, let him have thy cloke also.¡± ¸¶Åº¹À½ 5Àå 40Àý ¡°¶Ç ³Ê¸¦
¼Û»çÇÏ¿© ¼Ó¿ÊÀ» °¡Áö°íÀÚ ÇÏ´Â ÀÚ¿¡°Ô °Ñ¿Ê±îÁöµµ °¡Áö°Ô
Çϸ硱
¶óƾ¾î ¼º¼¡¦
judge, ¹× ±âŸ ´Ü¾îµéÀÇ ¼º¼»óÀÇ ¹ø¿ª Âü°í ¹Ù¶÷ judge =
ºñÆÇÇÏ´Ù·Î ¹ø¿ªµÇ¾úÀ¸³ª »çÀü»óÀº ½ÉÆÇÇÏ´Ù, ÀçÆÇÇÏ´Ù,
ÆÇ´ÜÇÏ´Ù ÀÓ
See Confession, p. 12.
A method of punishment frequently practiced in the army under Nicholas I. The
sentence was so many thousand strokes, and the prisoner had to run the gauntlet
between ranks of soldiers, the result often being death form collapse.-A.M.
Tolstoy was an Arbiter of the Peace for about a year in 1862 after the
emancipation of the serfs, his duties being to adjust differences between the
landed proprietors and the newly emancipated serfs.-A.M.
Tolstoy intended no sophistry, but there is unconscious sophistry in the
suggestion that the purpose of the Criminal Courts is to injure certain people.
He leaves unnoticed the benefit those Courts confer by making it plain
what we are not permitted to do. One of the greatest benefits conferred by law
is that it supplies a degree of definiteness to human relations which renders
co-operation possible even among people whose opinions differ. It diminishes the
amount of strife and friction that would otherwise exist.-A.M.
½´Æ®¶ó¿ì½º, David Friedrich Strauss, 1808. 1. 27
ºß¸£ÅÛº£¸£Å© ·çÆ®ºñÈ÷½ººÎ¸£Å©~1874. 2. 8 ·çÆ®ºñÈ÷½ººÎ¸£Å©.
µ¶ÀÏÀÇ ÇÁ·ÎÅ×½ºÅºÆ® öÇÐÀÚ, ½ÅÇÐÀÚ, Àü±âÀÛ°¡. ´ë¸³
¼¼·ÂµéÀÇ ÅõÀïÀ» ÅëÇØ »çȸÀÇ Áøº¸¸¦ °Á¶ÇÏ´Â º¯Áõ¹ýÀû
öÇÐÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ¡´½Å¾à¼º¼¡µÀÇ ±×¸®½ºµµ¿¡ °üÇÑ À̾߱⸦
½ÅÈ·ÐÀûÀ¸·Î ¼³¸íÇÔÀ¸·Î½á ¼º¼ ÇØ¼®ÀÇ »õ·Î¿î Åä´ë¸¦
¿¾ú´Ù.
¸£³¶, (Joseph-)Ernest Renan, 1823. 2. 28 ÇÁ¶û½º
Æ®·¹±â¿¡~1892. 10. 2 ÆÄ¸®.
ÇÁ¶û½ºÀÇ Ã¶ÇÐÀÚ¡¤¿ª»ç°¡¡¤Á¾±³ÇÐÀÚ, ÇÁ¶û½º ºñÆÇöÇÐÆÄÀÇ
´ëÇ¥Àû Àι°ÀÌ´Ù.
1863³â ¡´ ¿¹¼öÀÇ »ý¾Ö Vie de Jesus¡µ°¡ ÃâÆÇµÇ¾úÀ» ¶§ ±³È¸´Â
ÀûÀÇ¿¡ Âù ºñ³À» ÆÛºÎ¾ú´Ù. ÀÌ Ã¥Àº ¿ª»ç¿¡ °üÇÑ ¸£³¶ÀÇ
ÀúÀÛ Áß ÃÖ°í´Â ¾Æ´ÏÁö¸¸ ¿À´Ã³¯¿¡µµ ¿©ÀüÈ÷ µ¶ÀÚµéÀÇ
°ü½ÉÀ» ²ø ¸¸ÇÏ´Ù. ¿Ö³ÄÇÏ¸é ±×¸®½ºµµ±³ÀÇ ¼º¸³À» ´ëÁßÀû
»ó»ó·ÂÀ» ÅëÇØ ¡®½ÅÈÀû¡¯À¸·Î ¼³¸íÇϰí Àִµ¥´Ù°¡ ±×ÀÇ
´Ù¸¥ ¿ª»çÀú¼úó·³ ¸Þ½Ã¾ÆÁÖÀÇ ¹®Çп¡ ¼ÓÇϱ⠶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù.
1864~65³â ¾Æ³»¿Í ÇÔ²² ¼Ò(á³)¾Æ½Ã¾Æ¸¦ ¿©ÇàÇÑ ÈÄ ¿¬¼Ó¹°ÀÎ
¡´±×¸®½ºµµ±³ ±â¿ø»ç Histoire des origines du christianisme¡µÀÇ
ÀϺηΠ¡´¿¹¼öÀÇ »ý¾Ö¡µ¸¦ µÚÀÌÀº ¡´»çµµµé Les Apotres¡µ(1866)°ú
¡´»çµµ ¹Ù¿ï·Î Saint Paul¡µ(1869)¸¦ Æì³Â´Ù. ÀÌ 2±ÇÀÇ Ã¥Àº
¼Ò¾Æ½Ã¾Æ µµ½ÃµéÀÇ ºÒ¾ÈÁ¤ÇÑ ÇÁ·Ñ·¹Å¸¸®¾Æ »çÀÌ¿¡ ¾î¶»°Ô
±×¸®½ºµµ±³°¡ ÆÛÁú ¼ö ÀÖ¾ú´ÂÁö¸¦ Ź¿ùÇÏ°Ô ¹¦»çÇÑ
°ÍÀ¸·Î¼ ±×°¡ ¡®19¼¼±â Áö½ÄÀÎÀº ´ëÁßÀ» »õ·Ó°Ô °è¸ù½Ãų
¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀΰ¡¡¯ÇÏ´Â ¹®Á¦¿¡ °ñ¸ôÇßÀ½À» º¸¿©ÁØ´Ù.
The translator finds himself in a difficulty when he has to devise an
equivalent for the most improper type of Moscow restaurant.
This passage is an excellent example of Tolst6y¡¯s power of sarcasm. The
scorn he pours both on those who wish Chris¡©tianity to be a mere epicurean
consolation, and on those who, while criticizing Christianity, see it through
the eyes of the others, is effective; but one should note how, urged by his
moral and intellectual indignation against these people, he slips in a
juxtaposition of brothels and parliaments, which is the first word of an
argument he pushed later to far-reaching and questionable conclusions.-A.M.
This passage, which occurs here incidentally, forms the keynote of some of
Tolstoy¡¯s later economic treatises. He says, and means, that no one has a
right to keep anything anyone else wishes to take. A man who wishes to get
needful work . efficiently done and requires accustomed tools for the purpose
may hardly find himself able to agree with the thesis. One consideration clashes
with another, and in the experience of life we have to deal with comparative
values more often than with absolute and abstract principles.-A.M.
Pugachev was the Cossack leader of a very serious peasant ) revolt in the
time of Catherine II.-A.M.
Where Tolstoy¡¯s translation diverges in meaning from ¡® our Revised and
Authorized Versions, his words are enclosed in square brackets.-A.M.
More than that, as though to prevent any possible doubt as to which law he is
speaking of, he immediately, in this connexion, gives an example-a very striking
example-of a contradiction of the law of Moses with the eternal law of which no
atom can fail; giving the sharpest contradiction to the Mosaic law that occurs
in the Gospels, he says (Luke xvi. i8): ¡®Everyone that putteth away his wife
and marrieth another, |ommitteth adultery.¡¯ That is to say that, whereas in
the written law divorce is allowed, in the eternal law it is a sin.- L.T.
ÀúÀÚ ÁÖ :ÀÌ ¸»ÀÇ ¶æÀº ÀÌ ¸»¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÇØ¼®À» µÑ·¯½Î°í
³íÀïÇϰí ÀÖ´Â ¶æ°ú´Â °Å¸®°¡ ¸Ö´Ù. ¿¹¼ö´Â ¿©±â¼ ÀڱⰡ
¾î¶² À²¹ýÀ» ¸»Çϰí ÀÖ´Â °¡¿¡ ´ëÇØ¼ ÀǽÉÀ» ³²°ÜµÎÁö
¾ÊÀ¸·Á´Â °Íó·³ ¹Ù·Î ´ÙÀ½¿¡ Á÷Á¢ ¿¬°áÇÏ¿© ÀÏ Á¡ ÀÏ
ȹÀÌ¶óµµ ¾ø¾îÁöÁö ¾Ê´Â ¡®¿µ¿øÇÑ À²¹ýÀ» ¸»ÇÏ¸ç ¾Õ¿¡ ³ª¿Â
¸ð¼¼ÀÇ À²¹ýÀ» °ÅºÎÇÏ´Â ÁÁÀº º»º¸±â¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù. ¿¹¼ö°¡
¸ð¼¼ÀÇ À²¹ýÀ» °¡Àå ¸Í·ÄÇÏ°Ô ¹Ý¹ÚÇÑ °ÍÀº º¹À½¼º¼ÀÇ(´©°¡
16Àå 18Àý)ÀÇ ´ÙÀ½ ±¸Àý¿¡¼µµ ¹ß°ßµÈ´Ù. ¡¸¹«¸©¾Æ³»¸¦
¹ö¸®°í ´Ù¸¥µ¥ Àå°¡µå´Â ÀÚµµ °£À½ ÇÔÀÌ¿ä, ¹«¸© ¹ö¸®¿î
ÀÚ¿¡°Ô Àå°¡µå´Â ÀÚµµ °£À½ÇÔÀ̴϶ó.¡¹- Áï ¼º¹®ÀÇ
À²¹ý¿¡¼´Â ÀÌÈ¥À» Çã¿ëÇÏÁö¸¸ ¿µ¿ùÇÑ À²¹ýÀº ÀÌÈ¥À» ÁË·Î
ÀÎÁ¤ÇÑ´Ù´Â ¶æÀÌ´Ù.
(¸¶ÅÂ, ¸¶°¡, ´©°¡ º¹À½)
·ç±×µÎ´®(¸®¿Ë)ÀÇ ÁÖ±³À̸ç 2¼¼±âÀÇ ´ëÇ¥ÀûÀÎ ±×¸®½ºµµ±³
½ÅÇÐÀÚ. 180³â°æ ¡´À̴ܵéÀ» ¹Ý¹ÚÇÔ Adversus haereses¡µÀ» ½á¼
¿µÁöÁÖÀÇ(çÏò±ñ«ëù)¸¦ ¹Ý¹ÚÇß´Ù. ÀúÀÛ È°µ¿À» ÅëÇØ ¼º¼ÀÇ
Á¤°æ(ïáÌè)¡¤½ÅÁ¶¡¤ÁÖ±³Á÷ÀÇ ±ÇÀ§¸¦ ÇÑ ´Ü°è ´õ ³ô°Ô
²ø¾î¿Ã·È´Ù.
Here Tolstoy introduces an argument which occurs repeatedly in his works. He
diverts the argument as to whether a man of good will who desires to preserve
the peace is morally justified in forcibly restraining a murderer, by a
reference to the difficulty of judging the facts of each case rightly. The moral
issue is perplexed by the introduction of a simultaneous consideration of the
fact that man is intellectually fallible.-A.M.
2 Timothy 3:16, ¡°All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness:¡± µð¸ðµ¥Èļ 3Àå 16Àý: ¸ðµç ¼º°æÀº Çϳª´ÔÀÇ
°¨µ¿À¸·Î µÈ °ÍÀ¸·Î ±³Èưú Ã¥¸Á°ú ¹Ù¸£°Ô ÇÔ°ú ÀÇ·Î
±³À°Çϱ⿡ À¯ÀÍÇÏ´Ï
By the Councils of the Church. The expression first occur in Acts xv.
38.-A.M.
Beatitudes, (Latin beatitudo,¡±blessedness¡±), in the Bible, expressions of
praise for those who are considered exemplars of piety and who may consequently
expect a reward from God. Like the hymn or the parable, the beatitude is a
literary form found throughout the Judeo-Christian scriptures.
In the Hebrew scriptures, beatitudes occur primarily in the Wisdom writings
(see Proverbs, Job, Ecclesiastes, Sirach, Wisdom of Solomon, Psalms). They are
not restricted to a single pattern, although they regularly begin with the word
blessed (Psalm 1:1; Proverbs 8:34; Isaiah 56:2; Daniel 12:12). A beatitude is
pronounced on the righteous person who may confidently anticipate earthly
rewards such as peace, material prosperity, and the enjoyment of family (Psalm
41:1-3; 65:4; 112:1-4; 128:1-3; Proverbs 8:32). According to the Old Testament,
the benefits of divine favor are to be enjoyed in the material world.
In the New Testament, beatitudes are most frequent in the Gospels of Matthew
and Luke. They are also found several times in Revelation; three times in Saint
Paul¡¯s Epistle to the Romans (4:7-8, 14:22); and once in the Gospel of John
(20:29). In their formal structure, the New Testament beatitudes recall the
Hebrew examples, but they differ in one important respect: In place of earthly
rewards, the beatitudes of the New Testament emphasize rewards that will be
realized only in the eschatological future (see Eschatology). This aspect is
evident even in the beatitudes that are most closely related to those in the
Hebrew Bible (Romans 4:7-8 and Psalm 32:1-2; James 1:25 and Psalm 1:1). It is
particularly apparent in the Sermon on the Mount and in Revelation.
As a result of their eschatological orientation, the New Testament beatitudes
contain an element of paradox: It is precisely those who appear least
fortunate-the martyrs, the poor, and the destitute-who are declared blessed. The
most familiar examples occur in the Sermon on the Mount by Jesus Christ. Eight
promises are recorded in Matthew 5:3-11 (nine promises, if verse 11 is separated
from verse 10). A shorter version, containing four promises, appears in Luke
6:20-22. The eight beatitudes in Matthew are:
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be
satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness¡¯ sake, for theirs is
the kingdom of heaven.
1¿¹¼ö²²¼ ¹«¸®¸¦ º¸½Ã°í »ê¿¡ ¿Ã¶ó°¡ ¾ÉÀ¸½Ã´Ï Á¦ÀÚµéÀÌ
³ª¾Æ¿ÂÁö¶ó2ÀÔÀ» ¿¾î °¡¸£ÃÄ °¡¶ó»ç´ë3½É·ÉÀÌ °¡³ÇÑ ÀÚ´Â
º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï õ±¹ÀÌ ÀúÈñ °ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä4¾ÖÅëÇÏ´Â ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ
ÀÖ³ª´Ï ÀúÈñ°¡ À§·Î¸¦ ¹ÞÀ» °ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä5¿ÂÀ¯ÇÑ ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ
ÀÖ³ª´Ï ÀúÈñ°¡ ¶¥À» ±â¾÷À¸·Î ¹ÞÀ» °ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä6ÀÇ¿¡ ÁÖ¸®°í
¸ñ¸¶¸¥ ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï ÀúÈñ°¡ ¹èºÎ¸¦ °ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä7±àÈáÈ÷
¿©±â´Â ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï ÀúÈñ°¡ ±àÈáÈ÷ ¿©±èÀ» ¹ÞÀ»
°ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä8¸¶À½ÀÌ Ã»°áÇÑ ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï ÀúÈñ°¡ Çϳª´ÔÀ»
º¼ °ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä9ÈÆòÄÉ ÇÏ´Â ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï ÀúÈñ°¡ Çϳª´ÔÀÇ
¾ÆµéÀ̶ó ÀÏÄÃÀ½À» ¹ÞÀ» °ÍÀÓÀÌ¿ä10ÀǸ¦ À§ÇÏ¿© Ç̹ÚÀ» ¹ÞÀº
ÀÚ´Â º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï õ±¹ÀÌ ÀúÈñ °ÍÀÓÀ̶ó11³ª¸¦ ÀÎÇÏ¿©
³ÊÈñ¸¦ ¿åÇϰí Ç̹ÚÇÏ°í °ÅÁþÀ¸·Î ³ÊÈñ¸¦ °Å½º·Á ¸ðµç ¾ÇÇÑ
¸»À» ÇÒ ¶§¿¡´Â ³ÊÈñ¿¡°Ô º¹ÀÌ ÀÖ³ª´Ï
¡¡
¡¡
¡¡
ÀÌ ±¸ÀýÀº Á¦ÀÓ½º¿Õ ¿ª¿¡´Â ³ª¿Í ÀÖÁö¸¸ ÇÑ±Û °³¿ª
¼º°æ¿¡´Â Á¦°ÅµÇ¾î ÀÖ´Ù. -hs
Griesbach, Johann Jakob
b. Jan. 4, 1745, Butzbach, Hesse [Germany]
d. March 24, 1812, Jena, Thuringia
rationalist Protestant German theologian, the earliest biblical critic to
subject the Gospels to systematic literary analysis.
Griesbach studied at Halle (then belonging to Prussia) under J.S. Semler, and
from 1775 until his death he was professor of New Testament studies at the
University of Jena. He originated the term synoptic to designate the first three
Gospels and, rejecting the traditional view, held that Mark was derived from
Matthew and Luke (the ¡°usage hypothesis¡±). Griesbach also published a
corrected Greek edition of the New Testament.
Tolstoy sometimes carries his adherence to the letter of Christ¡¯s saying to
an extreme, but in the case of this text it will be noticed that he does not
agree with those Russian sectarians who rely on the surgical operation of
castration as a desirable corrective of sexual desire.-A.M.
Matthew 5:32, ¡°But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving
for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit
adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.¡±
(King James)
It will be noticed that Tolstoy¡¯s translation of this
passage, in the words inserted in square brackets, differs from our Authorized
or Revised Versions and helps to make sense of the passage.-A.M.
Note that this view was alluded to in Anna Karenina (vol. i, chap.
xxiv), where the incident was borrowed from the actual life of Tolstoy¡¯s
brother, Dmitry, who took a woman he had found in a brothel to live with him,
and regarded her as a wife to whom he was bound for life.-A.M.
Tolstoy delighted in absolute laws and was eager to attribute perfection and
finality to those he formulated. But this law, of which he fully approved when
he wrote this book in 1884, no longer satisfied him when in 1889 he wrote the Kreutzer
Sonata and in the Afterword thereto expressed the opinion that man
can best serve God and man by remaining celibate. The explanation of his change
of view lay in the fact that his wife disagreed with his wish to renounce his
property, and he found that his union with her, and even their affection for one
another made it hard for him to adhere to his principles. Marriage was therefore
an obstacle to right life, and as such, it seemed to him, should be shunned by a
Christian. - A.M.
Reuss, Edouard Guillaume Eugene, 1804-1891. Alsatian-French Protestant
theologian; best known for his translation of the Bible(1874-81), with an
introduction and commentaries.-
At a time when Parliament has to deal with the marriage laws, it is in place
to remember that Tolstoy wrote solely of what he considered to be Christian
duty, entirely apart from legal enactment or Church ceremony of any kind. He dis¡©approved
of legal interference with the right of man or woman to form or rescind unions
with one another.-A.M.
Tolstoy¡¯s indictment of the received translation of various passages in the
Gospels has had considerable circulation, and by many readers is accepted as
authoritative. As yet, so far as the present translator knows, no prominent
Churchman has either admitted any of the alleged errors or produced any reasoned
rejoinder to Tolstoy¡¯s assertions. A pronouncement on these matters from some
recognized and impartial authority of admitted competence would therefore be
valuable as a help towards clearing up questions which are as important as they
are doubtful.
The only contribution the present translator can make to the matter is to
record the fact that, some fifteen years after What I Believe was
written, he asked Tolstoy whether he still held to the interpretations he had
advanced when dealing with the Gospels. Tolstoy replied that he had ceased to
attach special importance to precise words attributed to Jesus, and admitted
that in his anxiety to counteract the bias he detected in the ¡®Orthodox¡¯
translation, he had sometimes overstrained the sense too much in a contrary
direction, as one engaged on demagnetizing a watch may sometimes expose it to
too strong an opposite influence; but he thought his Greek reliable.-A.M.
¾Æ³»¸¦ ¹ö¸®´Â ÀÚ´Â ÀÚ½ÅÀÌ °£À½ÇÔ ¿Ü¿¡µµ ¾Æ³»¸¶Àú
°£À½ÇÏ°Ô ¸¸µç´Ù-hs
A reason Tolstoy ignores for forbidding oaths is, that as the belief (common
in primitive times) that men can stake their lives or possessions on the
veracity of their assertions and that the deity will enforce the penalties
should the oath be a false one, fades away, the use of such oaths becomes
incompatible with intellectual integrity, and therefore fails to accomplish its
object and even conflicts with it.-A.M.
In Russian literally ¡®the oath¡¯. The equivalent English expressions,
¡®volunteers¡¯ or ¡®conscripts¡¯, do not carry the same significance, though
in England they also take an oath of allegiance.-A.M.
¿¡ÇÈÅ×Å佺, (55°æ ÇÁ¸®Áö¾Æ È÷¿¡¶óÆú¸®½º~135°æ ¿¡ÇǷνº
´ÏÄÚÆú¸®½º.), ½ºÅ侯 ÇÐÆÄ Ã¶ÇÐÀÚ. Á¾±³Àû °æÇâÀÇ
°¡¸£Ä§À¸·Î À¯¸íÇϸç, ÀÌ ¶§¹®¿¡ Ãʱ⠱׸®½ºµµ±³
»ç»ó°¡µé·ÎºÎÅÍ Á¸°æ¹Þ¾Ò´Ù. º»¸íÀº ÀüÇÏÁö ¾Ê´Â´Ù.
¼Ò³â½ÃÀý ³ë¿¹¿´Áö¸¸ ½ºÅ侯 ÇÐÆÄ ¹«¼Ò´Ï¿ì½º ·çÇÁ½ºÀÇ
°¿¬À» µéÀ» ¼ö ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. ÈÄ¿¡ ÀÚÀ¯¹ÎÀÌ µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç Àý¸§¹ßÀÌ¿¡
´Ã °Ç°ÀÌ ³ª»¦´Ù. AD 90³â ȲÁ¦ µµ¹ÌƼ¾Æ´©½º´Â ±×¸¦
·Î¸¶¿¡¼ Ãß¹æÇߴµ¥ ȲÁ¦´Â ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ ÆøÁ¤¿¡ ¹Ý´ëÇÏ´Â
»ç¶÷µéÀ» ÁÁ°Ô Æò°¡ÇÏ´Â ½ºÅ侯 ÇÐÆÄ¸¦ ŽŹÁö ¾Ê°Ô
»ý°¢Çß´Ù. ¿¡ÇÈÅ×Å佺´Â ¿©»ýÀ» ´ÏÄÚÆú¸®½º¿¡¼ º¸³Â´Ù.
¼¼³×Ä« (Lucius Annaeus Seneca), BC 4°æ ½ºÆäÀÎ ÄÚ¸£µµ¹Ù~AD 65
·Î¸¶. ·Î¸¶ÀÇ Ã¶ÇÐÀÚ¡¤Á¤Ä¡°¡¡¤¿¬¼³°¡¡¤ºñ±ØÀÛ°¡. 1¼¼±â Áß¿±
·Î¸¶ÀÇ ÁöµµÀû Áö¼ºÀÎÀ̾ú°í, ³×·Î ȲÁ¦ ÀçÀ§ ÃʱâÀÎ 54~ 62³â¿¡
µ¿·áµé°ú ÇÔ²² ·Î¸¶ÀÇ ½ÇÁúÀû ÅëÄ¡ÀÚ¿´´Ù. ±ºÁÖÁ¤°ú ±×
ÀÓ¹«¿¡ °üÇÑ ¼¼³×Ä«ÀÇ °ßÇØ´Â ¾ÈÅä´Ï³×½º ½Ã´ë(¾ÈÅä´Ï¿ì½º
Çǿ콺, ¸¶¸£Äí½º ¾Æ¿ì·¼¸®¿ì½º, ÄÚ¸ðµÎ½º, 138~192)ÀÇ
Àΰ£ÀûÀ̰í ÀÚÀ¯·Î¿î ºÐÀ§±â¸¦ ¸¸µå´Â µ¥ À̹ÙÁöÇß´Ù.
±×µ¿¾È ½ºÅ侯ÁÖÀǰ¡ ³Î¸® ÆÛÁö´Â ¹Ù¶÷¿¡ ±×ÀÇ Ã¶ÇÐÀº °è¼Ó
»ì¾Æ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. ±×ÀÇ Ã¶ÇÐÀÌ ±×¸®½ºµµ±³¿Í À¯»ç¼ºÀÌ ÀÖ´Ù°í
¹àÇôÁöÀÚ »õ·Î¿î ÁöÆòÀÌ ¿·È´Ù. ±×°¡ ¼º ¹Ù¿ï·Î¸¦ ¾Ë°í
ÀÖ¾ú´Ù´Â ¹ÏÀ½°ú ÀÌ ¹ÏÀ½À» ½ÇÁõÇϱâ À§ÇÑ °¡Â¥ ÆíÁö ¸ðÀ½µµ
ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.
In Russian Courts the oath was administered on the open Gospels.-A.M.
If Christ wished to lay down that it is wrong ever to use physical force to
prevent any man from doing what he wishes to do (and that is the rule Tolstoy
deduces) it is curious that he gives here an illustration of going two miles
with a man who demands that you accompany him one; for, with regard to the
second mile, there is clearly no reference to the use of physical force, any
more than in the following example of lending to him who asks.-A.M.
= ¿ø¼ö, Àû(±º)
Or, if that Russian expression sounds strange to English ears, we might call
it ¡®the Christian army¡¯.-A.M.
¿À¸®°Ô³×½ºOregenes. Á¤½Ä À̸§Àº Oregenes Adamantius.
¿À¸®°ÕÀ̶ó°íµµ ÇÔ.185°æ ¾Ë·º»êµå¸®¾Æ~254°æ Æä´ÏŰ¾Æ Ƽ·¹.Ãʱâ
±×¸®½º ±³È¸ÀÇ °¡Àå Áß¿äÇÑ ½ÅÇÐÀÚ¡¤¼º¼ÇÐÀÚ. ´ëÇ¥ÀÛÀº
¡´±¸¾à¼º¼¡µÀÇ 6°¡Áö ÆÇº»À» º´±âÇØ³õÀº ¡´Çí»çÇöó Hexapla¡µÀÌ´Ù.
Tolstoy had the Russo-Greek Church primarily in mind, and was writing when
that Church was particularly sub¡©servient to the Civil power. Also opinions
were then still current both in the English and in the Eastern Churches to which
assent is now rarely demanded. But he certainly ad¡©dressed both his rejection
of the Church dogmas and his insistence on the teaching of Jesus to all Churches
alike.-A.M.
Tolstoy counts from the First General Council of Christians at Nicaea, under
Constantine, in a.d. 325.-A.M.
In all the Church¡¯s translations an intentionally false rendering is given:
instead of the words ¡®in you¡¯, wherever those words occur the rendering is
given ¡®with you¡¯.-L.T.
The English Authorized Version gives ¡®with you¡¯, but our Revised Version,
published in 1881, gives ¡®among you¡¯, and in a footnote adds the translation
¡®in you¡¯; so that the meaning Tolstoy considers correct is not entirely
inaccessible to English readers of the Gospel.-A.M.
(ÁÖ) ¸ðµç ±³È¸ÀÇ ¹ø¿ª¿¡´Â ÀÌ ±¸ÀýÀÌ °íÀÇÀûÀ¸·Î
À߸øµÇ¾î ÀÖ´Ù. Áï ¡®³ÊÈñ Áß¿¡¡¯ (en umin¶ó´Â ¸»ÀÌ µé¾î ÀÖ´Â
°÷Àº ¾îµð¿¡¼³ª ÀÌ ¸» ´ë½Å¿¡ ¡®³ÊÈñ¿Í ÇÔ²²¡¯¶ó´Â ¸»ÀÌ
µé¾î ÀÖ´Ù.
Marcus Aurelius says: ¡®Honor that which is more power¡©ful
than anything on earth, which rules and guides all men. Honor also that which is
most powerful within thyself. The latter is like the former, because it uses
what is within thee to guide thy life.¡¯
Epictetus says: ¡®God sowed His seed not only in my father
and grandfather, but in all that live on the earth, especially in those that
reason, for they alone enter into relation with God, through the reason by which
they are united with Him.¡¯
In the book of Confucius it is said: ¡®The law of great
science consists in developing and establishing the principle of the light of
reason, which we have received from heaven.¡¯ That proposition is repeated
several times, and serves as the basis of Confucius¡¯s teaching.-L.T.
ÁÖ: ¸¶¸£Äí½º ¾Æ¿ì·¼¸®¿ì½º´Â ÀÌ·¸°Ô ¸»Çß´Ù. [ÀÌ
Áö±¸»ó¿¡¼ º¸´Ù À§·ÂÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ» Á¸°æÇ϶ó. À§·ÂÀº ¸ðµç
»ç¶÷À» Áö¹èÇϰí ÀεµÇÑ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ³× ¸¶À½ ¼Ó¿¡¼ °¡Àå
À§·ÂÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ» Á¸°æÇ϶ó. ¸¶À½ ¼Ó¿¡¼ À§·ÂÀÖ´Â °ÍÀÌ
¼¼»ó¿¡¼ À§·ÂÀÖ´Â °Í°ú µ¿ÀÏÇÏ´Ù. ¿Ö³ÄÇÏ¸é ¸¶À½¼ÓÀÇ
À§·ÂÀÌ ³ÊÈñ ¸¶À½ ¼Ó¿¡ ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ³ÊÈñ »ýȰÀ»
Áö¹èÇϱ⠶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù.
¿¡ÇÈÅ×Åõ½º´Â ¸»ÇÑ´Ù: [Çϳª´ÔÀº ±×ÀÇ Á¾ÀÚ¸¦ ³ªÀÇ
¾Æ¹öÁö¿Í Á¶»ó»Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó, Áö»ó¿¡ ÀÖ´Â ¸ðµç °Í, ƯÈ÷ À̼ºÀ»
°¡Áø Àڵ鿡°Ô º¸³»¾ú´Ù. ¿Ö³ÄÇϸé À̼ºÀ» °¡Áø ÀÚ¸¸ÀÌ
À̼ºÀ» Áß°³·Î ÇÏ¿© Çϳª´Ô°ú °ü°è¸¦ ¸Î°í À̼º¿¡ ÀÇÇØ¼
Çϳª´Ô°ú Çϳª°¡ µÇ±â ¶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù.
°øÀÚÀÇ Ã¥¿¡´Â ÀÌ·± ¸»ÀÌ ±â·ÏµÇ¾î ÀÖ´Ù. [À§´ëÇÑ Çй®ÀÇ
¹ýÄ¢Àº ¿ì¸®µéÀÌ Çϴ÷κÎÅÍ ¹ÞÀº À̼ºÀÇ ºûÀ» °³¹ßÇϰí
È®ÁõÇϴµ¥¿¡ ÀÖ´Ù] ÀÌ ¸íÁ¦´Â ¸î¹ø¾¿ µÇÇ®ÀÌ µÇ¾î ÀÖÀ¸¸ç,
°øÀÚÀÇ °¡¸£Ä§ÀÇ ±âÃʸ¦ Çü¼ºÇÑ´Ù.
The reference is to two disasters that occurred in Russia at the time Tolstoy
was writing this book.-A.M.
ÁÖ: ¼Ä¿½º °Ç¹°Àº 1883³â ·¯½Ã¾Æ ºÎȰÀý ±â°£¿¡ ¼¼¿î ¸ñÁ¶
°Ç¹°·Î ºÒÀ̳ª¼ ¸ðµÎ Ÿ¹ö·È´Âµ¥, ºÒÀÌ ³µÀ» ¶§ ¹®À»
¿¼ö°¡ ¾ø¾î¼ ±× °Ç¹° ¾È¿¡ ÀÖ´Â ¸ðµç »ç¶÷µéÀº ÀüºÎ ºÒ¿¡
Ÿ Á×¾ú´Ù°í ÇÔ.
The word hlikia-age, time of life, is incorrectly
trans¡©lated ¡®stature¡¯. So the whole expression means; can add an hour to
his life.-L.T.
ÁÖ:ÀÌ ¸»Àº Á¤±³ ¼º°æ ±¸Àý¿¡¼ À߸ø ¹ø¿ªµÇ¾î
ÀÖ´Ù. hlikia¶õ ¸»Àº ¿¬·É-»ýÀÇ ½Ã°£À» ¸»ÇÑ´Ù. ±×·¯¹Ç·Î
ÀÌ ¹®ÀåÀÇ ÀüüÀǹ̴ [³ÊÈñ´Â ³ÊÈñ »îÀÇ ½Ã°£À» Çѽ𣵵
µ¡ºÙÀÏ ¼ö ¾ø´Ù]´Â ¶æÀÌ´Ù.
¡¡
We are so accustomed to the religious assertion of a physical
resurrection and to the supposition that the only alternative to that is the
denial (commonly made by material¡©ists) of any life beyond the grave, that many
people find it difficult to grasp what Tolstoy is here saying. His argument is
that even now, in the present existence, our only real life lies in what
results from the workings of our reasonable con¡©sciousness, that voice within
which makes us ¡®sons of God¡¯, and not in our rapidly changing and perishing
physical body, and he looks forward not to a cessation of existence after the
final disintegration of our body, as materialists suppose will be the case, but
to a continuance of that sonship to God which is even now our only real life.
This perception is more fully and clearly brought out in On Life,
which will appear in the nest volume of this edition. -A.M.
±×¸®½º¾îÀÇ
The English Revised Version accords with Tolstoy¡¯s translation, and has
been followed here.-A.M.
doxa, as in many other passages, is here quite wrongly translated by
the word ¡®glory¡¯; doxa, from dokew), means opinion, judgment,
doctrine.-L.T.
ÁÖ: doxa´Â ¿©±â¿¡¼µµ ¿©·¯ ±¸Àý¿¡¼Ã³·³ ¡®¿µ±¤¡¯À̶ó´Â
¸»·Î ÇØ¼®µÇ¾ú´Âµ¥, À̰ÍÀº À߸øµÈ ¹ø¿ªÀÌ´Ù. doxa´Â dokevw¿¡¼
ÆÄ»ýµÈ ¸»·Î °ßÇØ. ÆÇ´Ü. ¡®±³¸®¡¯¶ó´Â ¸»ÀÌ´Ù.
The judgment (krsi") does not mean the
judgment, but the division.-L.T.
The actual words used by Tertullian were, Cerium quia impossible. One
might amend the above passage to make it read: ¡®Others have repeated this,
assuming that the assertion of impossibilities is the best method of inculcating
truth.¡¯-A.M.
Like St. Simeon Stylites and the other Stylites, who are more highly honored
in the Eastern than in the Western world.--A.M.
Christ was led into the wilderness in order there to be
tempted (Matt. iv. 3-7). The deception told Christ that he Was not a Son of God
if he could not turn stones into bread. Christ replied: ¡®I can live without
bread; I live by that which was breathed into me by God.¡¯ Then the deception
said: ¡®If you live by that which was breathed into you by God, throw yourself
down from this high place; you will kill your flesh, but the spirit breathed
into you by God will not perish.¡¯ Christ replied: ¡®It is the will of God
that I should live in the flesh; to kill my flesh means to act contrary to the
will of God-to tempt God¡¯ (Matt. iv. 8-n). Then the deception said: ¡®If that
is so, then serve your flesh as all men do, and your flesh will reward you.¡¯
Christ replied: ¡®I am not the owner of my flesh. My life is in the spirit; but
I cannot destroy my flesh, because my spirit is in my flesh by the will of God,
and therefore only by living in the flesh can I serve my Father, God.¡¯ And
Christ departed from the wilderness into the world.-L.T.
ÁÖ: ´©°¡º¹À½ 4Àå 1Àý, 2Àý: ±×¸®½ºµµ´Â
¸¶±Í¿¡°Ô ½ÃÇèÀ» ¹ÞÀ¸·¯ ±¤¾ß·Î °¡¼ ½ÃÇèÀ» ¹ÞÀ¸½Ã´õ¶ó.
¸¶Åº¹À½ 4Àå 3Àý, 4Àý: ¸¶±Í°¡ ±×¸®½ºµµ²² ¸»Çϱ⸦ [´ç½ÅÀÌ
¸¸ÀÏ ÀÌ µéÀ» ¶±À¸·Î ¸¸µéÁö ¸øÇÏ¸é ´ç½ÅÀº Çϳª´ÔÀÇ ¾ÆµéÀÌ
¾Æ´Ï´Ù.] ±×¸®½ºµµ²²¼ ´ëÇÕÇÏ¿© °¡¶ó»ç´ë »ç¶÷ÀÌ ¶±À¸·Î¸¸
»ì °ÍÀÌ ¾Æ´Ï¿ä, Çϳª´ÔÀÇ ÀÔÀ¸·Î ³ª¿À´Â ¸ðµç ¸»¾¸À¸·Î »ì
°ÍÀ̶ó ÇÏ¿´´À¸®¶ó]ÇÏ½Ã´Ï ÀÌ¿¡ ¸¶±Í°¡ ¸»Çϱ⸦ [¸¸ÀÏ
´ç½ÅÀÌ Çϳª´ÔÀÌ ºÒ¾î ³Ö¾îÁØ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ê´Ù¸é ³ôÀº µ¥¼ ¶Ù¾î
³»¸®¶ó ´ç½ÅÀº À°Ã¼¸¦ Á×À̰ÚÁö¸¸ ±×·¯³ª Çϳª´ÔÀÌ ºÒ¾î
³Ö¾î ÁØ Á¤½ÅÀ» °áÄÚ Á×Áö ¾Ê´Â´Ù.] ÀÌ¿¡ ±×¸®½ºµµ´Â
´ë´äÇÏ¿© °¡¶ó»ç´ë, [À°Ã¼·Î µÈ ³ªÀÇ »îÀº Çϳª´ÔÀÇ
ÀÇÁöÀÌ´Ù. À°Ã¼¸¦ Á×ÀÌ´Â °ÍÀº Çϳª´ÔÀÇ ¶æ¿¡ ¾î±ß³ª´Â ÇàÀ§
Áï Çϳª´ÔÀ» ½ÃÇèÇØº¸´Â ÇàÀ§ÀÌ´Ù.] ¸¶Åº¹À½ 4Àå 8-11Àý: ±×
¶§¿¡ ¸¶±Í´Â ¸»ÇÏ¿´´Ù. [¸¸ÀÏ ±×·¸´Ù¸é ´Ù¸¥ »ç¶÷µéÀÌ ÇÏ´Â
°Íó·³ ´ç½Åµµ À°Ã¼¸¦ ¼¶°Ü¶ó À°Ã¼°¡ º¸»óÇÒ °ÍÀÌ´Ù]
±×¸®½ºµµ´Â ´ë´äÇÏ¿´´Ù. [³ª´Â À°Ã¼¿¡ ´ëÇØ¼ ¹«·ÂÇÏ´Ù.
»îÀº Á¤½Å ¾È¿¡ ÀÖ´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ³ª´Â À°Ã¼µµ ÆÄ±«ÇÒ ¼ö ¾ø´Ù.
¿Ö³ÄÇϸé Á¤½ÅÀº Çϳª´ÔÀÇ ¶æ¿¡ ÀÇÇØ À°Ã¼¾È¿¡ ÀÖ±â
¶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù. ±×·¡¼ À°Ã¼¾È¿¡ »ì¸é¼µµ ³ªÀÇ Çϳª´Ô ¾Æ¹öÁö²²
ºÀ»çÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù.] ÀÌ·¸°Ô ÇÏ¿© ±×¸®½ºµµ´Â ±¤¾ß¿¡¼
¼¼»óÀ¸·Î µ¹¾Æ¿Ô´Ù.
¡¡
¡¡
It was common for Moscow workmen to live in a corner of a room or passage,
generally not even screened off from the rest of the room in which other people,
besides the owner and his family, had other corners.-A.M.
This is a reference to the common Russian practice of having a foreign nurse,
governess, or tutor for young children, that they may learn a foreign language
in the nursery.-A.M.
The Russian schools are State institutions.-A.M.
The defense of such a life that one often hears from parents is amazing. ¡®I
want nothing¡¯, say the parents; ¡®this kind of life is hard for me, but as I
love my children I bear it for their sakes.¡¯ That is to say, I know by
undoubted experience that our life is unhappy, and therefore ... I educate my
children so that they shall be as unhappy as I am. And therefore, out of my love
for them, I place them in the full physical and moral contagion of a town; I
hand them over to strangers who have only a mercenary aim in educating them; and
so physically, morally, and mentally I take pains to injure my children. And
this contention has to serve as justification for the irrational life the
parents themselves lead!-L.T.
This book was written in 1884; and the figures relate to the nineteenth
century.-A.M.
The wearing of over-shoes or goloshes to keep one¡¯s feet dry and warm and
to be able on entering a house to kick them off and have clean shoes, is here
instanced as a sign of distinction from the peasant, who usually wore nothing
over his high boots.-A.M.
We have here a very sweeping conclusion, a serious ob¡©jection to which is
that it is desirable to be able to co-operate with one¡¯s fellows, and
co-operation is practically impossible if those engaged on an undertaking do not
know what they may expect of their fellow workers.-A.M.
The reference is to the practice of hanging a heavy block, or log, over a
deposit of honey. When a bear tries to take the honey he knocks himself against
the log, which swings back and hits him. The bear then strikes more fiercely at
the log, which rebounding, strikes him still more heavily, and so on, until, it
is said, the bear is sometimes killed by the blows he receives.-A.M.
Poverty, in Russian, is bednost, from the same root as beda, a
misfortune.-A.M.
Tolstoy has in mind a Russian country peasant, whom he contrasts with a rich
townsman, and the description relates to things as they were under the Tsars in
the pro-Revolutionary days.-A.M.
Such as the autos-da-fe of the Inquisition, or the decapi¡©tations and
burnings of the Raskoluiki.
This sentence is remarkable as showing that Tolst6y had then already reached
the conclusion that all force-using Government should be condemned. Things have
altered much in Russia both in Church and State since this book was written. The
use of violence has certainly not diminished, but the present Dictatorship
realizes that, while relying on the G.P.U. for support, it cannot tolerate the
teaching of Jesus.-A.M.
Before the generation had passed away to whom Tolstoy first issued this book,
the Church in Russia had been disen¡©dowed and disestablished and the words
¡®Religion is the people¡¯s opium¡¯ were painted in large letters on the
walls of the churches by order of the authorities.-A.M.
A favourite phrase of the Slavophils, ardent patriots, who regarded Russia
and her institutions as far superior to any¡©thing existing in the democratic
West.-A.M.
As a matter of fact, banishment to Australia had ceased some twenty years
before Tolstoy wrote this, but the memory of legal barbarities committed in
distant countries lingers long in men¡¯s minds, as is illustrated by frequent
references in England to the knout, the use of which was abolished genera¡©tions
ago.-A.M.
The amazing submission shown by the Russian people to the misrule they
suffered under the Tsars for centuries, and, stranger still, to the greater
oppression they have endured since the Bolsheviks seized power and organized a
Dictator¡©ship supported by the Cheka and the G.P.U., may be partly explained by
the habit of submission deeply engrained in them, to which Tolstoy alludes.-A.M.
At the time Tolstoy was preparing this work, V. I. Alexeyev was his son¡¯s
tutor. Alexeyev had been an active Socialist agitator at the time when the
movement was still new in Russia. He says: ¡®Sometimes we¡¯ (Tolstoy and he)
¡®started a conversation on economics and social themes. I had a copy of the
Gospels, left from the days of my Socialist propaganda among the people.
Passages relating to social questions were underlined in it and I often pointed
these out to Tolstoy.¡¯ It is to the Socialist propaganda on behalf of the poor
that Tolstoy refers in this passage. (See the Life of Tolstoy,
vol. ii, pp. 14, 15 in this edition.)-A.M.
When any great evil, such as slavery or war, begins to fall into disrepute
and the time for its abolition is approaching, there is sure to a be a long
transition period during which those who are on the side of its abolition may
do, or may seem to do, more harm than good by the action they take, as in the
case of conscientious objectors to a just war. But Tolst6y felt no doubt on the
matter.-A.M.
This book appeared when de Vogue was writing his work Le reman russe,
and not having before him Tolstoy¡¯s subsequent pronouncements on Art, nor of
course the stories, novels, and plays he wrote later, he relied too much on
these few one-sided words, and by his comments misled a whole string of French,
English, and American critics, who, since then-overlooking what Tolstoy said
later in a series of essays deliberately dealing with the problem-have again and
again repeated the silly parrot-cry that from the time he began to concern
himself with religion Tolstoy ¡®abandoned art¡¯.-A.M.
This is a logical and quite inevitable conclusion from the non-resistant
position-that the use of physical force to pre¡©vent men doing what they please
is immoral. It is therefore very necessary that that position should be examined
and carefully tested, as I have tried to do in my Life of Tolstoy. -A.M.
Some of Tolstoy¡¯s most vivid recollections, as readers of Tales of Army
Life will know, related to the Crimean War fought against the French and the
English and of which he wrote a remarkable account in Sevastopol.-A.M.
N. N. Miklukha-MakUy was a distinguished Russian explorer (1846-88) who
investigated the manners and cus¡©toms of the inhabitants of New Guinea and
Micronesia.-A.M.