The Kreutzer Sonata (Крейцерова соната) + the Afterword (Послесловие)
Mined from the PSS vol. 27 editorial commentary (Срезневский / V. I. Sreznevsky), «История писания и печатания»:
- v27_563_624_Krejtserova_sonata.txt — the novella’s writing/printing history
- v27_625_646_Posleslovie_k_Krejtserovoj_sonate.txt — the Afterword’s history
Convention: VERBATIM Russian copied exactly from the extracts; “(working English)” is my rendering, not the editors’. Documentary fact vs. editors’ inference is flagged. Page/manuscript numbers (стр. NN, рукопись № N) are the editors’ apparatus, kept as-is.
0. Scope and span of the work
«Работа над «Крейцеровой сонатой» заняла у Толстого с перерывами не менее двух лет.» (working English) “Work on The Kreutzer Sonata occupied Tolstoy, with interruptions, no less than two years.”
Editors note the earliest embryo predates everything below:
«Еще в конце 1870-х годов Толстой начал, но не окончил рассказ «Убийца жены»,²⁶¹ в котором можно видеть ранний эмбрион «Крейцеровой сонаты».» (working English) “Already in the late 1870s Tolstoy began, but did not finish, the story ‘The Wife-Murderer’ (Убийца жены), in which one can see an early embryo of The Kreutzer Sonata.” — Editors’ interpretation (“can see… embryo”).
The first rough draft proper is dated by the editors to 1887, from Tolstoy’s own letter to G. A. Rusanov, 14 March 1889:
«Слух о повести имеет основание. Я уже года два тому назад написал начерно повесть действительно на тему половой любви, но так небрежно и неудовлетворительно, что и не поправляю…» (working English) “The rumour of a tale has a basis. About two years ago I wrote in rough a tale really on the theme of sexual love, but so carelessly and unsatisfactorily that I am not even correcting it…”
«Таким образом, первый набросок повести относится, видимо, к 1887 г.» (working English) “Thus the first sketch of the tale evidently belongs to 1887.” — Editors’ dating inference from the “about two years ago.”
1. THE SEEDS (1887–1888)
1a. V. N. Andreyev-Burlak and the railway-confession frame
Source = S. A. Tolstaya’s diary, 28 December 1890, reported by the editors as her testimony (documentary, but second-hand to Tolstoy’s intention):
«С. А. Толстая в записи своего дневника от 28 декабря 1890 г. сообщает, что мысль создать «Крейцерову сонату» внушил Толстому актер В. Н. Андреев-Бурлак. «Он же — записывает Софья Андреевна — рассказал ему, что раз на железной дороге один господин сообщил ему свое несчастье от измены жены, и этим то сюжетом и воспользовался Левочка».²⁶⁵» (working English) “S. A. Tolstaya records in her diary of 28 Dec 1890 that the idea of creating The Kreutzer Sonata was suggested to Tolstoy by the actor V. N. Andreyev-Burlak. ‘He also’ — writes Sofya Andreyevna — ‘told him that once on the railway a certain gentleman confided to him his misfortune from his wife’s infidelity, and it was this very subject that Lyovochka used.’”
The acquaintance date is pinned (documentary, from S.A.T.’s diary 21 June 1887):
«Андреев-Бурлак приехал в Ясную поляну, чтобы познакомиться с Толстым, 20 июня 1887 г.²⁶⁶ Следовательно, если полагаться на слова Софьи Андреевны, первая редакция повести не могла быть написана ранее этого срока.» (working English) “Andreyev-Burlak came to Yasnaya Polyana to make Tolstoy’s acquaintance on 20 June 1887. Consequently, if one relies on Sofya Andreyevna’s words, the first redaction could not have been written earlier than this date.” — Editors’ inference about the earliest date.
Caveat the editors themselves register: the railway-confession framing in the FINAL text (the train, Pozdnyshev telling his story to fellow passengers) is present from the start, but in the earliest redaction the confession is told to three passengers, later narrowed to one listener (see §2). The “train-confession frame” is documentary; the “Pozdnyshev model = the railway gentleman” is S.A.T.’s attribution, not Tolstoy’s own statement.
1b. The Beethoven sonata at the Tolstoys’ + the triptych idea
The triptych comes from biographer P. I. Biryukov (Birukoff), reported by the editors — so attributed biography, not archival document:
«Как сообщает биограф Толстого П. И. Бирюков, поводом для написания «Крейцеровой сонаты»²⁶⁸ послужило исполнение как то весной в Москве, в хамовническом доме Толстых, сонаты Бетховена, посвященной Крейцеру, скрипачем Лясоттой и С. Л. Толстым (последним на рояле). Среди многих слушателей был художник Репин и актер Андреев-Бурлак.» (working English) “As Tolstoy’s biographer P. I. Biryukov reports, the occasion for writing The Kreutzer Sonata was a performance one spring in Moscow, in the Tolstoys’ Khamovniki house, of Beethoven’s sonata dedicated to Kreutzer, by the violinist Lyasotta and S. L. Tolstoy (the latter at the piano). Among the many listeners were the painter Repin and the actor Andreyev-Burlak.”
The triptych proposal (story + painting + public reading):
«он, обратившись к Репину и Андрееву-Бурлаку, предложил изобразить эту сонату доступными всем трем средствами искусства. Сам он взялся написать рассказ, который должен был прочесть перед публикой Андреев-Бурлак — прекрасный чтец, а Репину предложено было написать на эту тему картину, которая должна стоять на сцене во время чтения Андреевым-Бурлаком рассказа. Предложение это было принято, но выполнено одним лишь Толстым.» (working English) “turning to Repin and Andreyev-Burlak, he proposed to depict this sonata by means accessible to all three arts. He himself undertook to write a story, which Andreyev-Burlak — an excellent reader — was to read before the public; and Repin was asked to paint a picture on this theme, which was to stand on the stage during Andreyev-Burlak’s reading of the story. This proposal was accepted, but carried out by Tolstoy alone.”
Biryukov adds he witnessed a reading:
«Бирюков сообщает, что ему пришлось присутствовать на чтении Толстым начала повести Андрееву-Бурлаку, тут же попробовавшему читать ее».²⁷⁰» (working English) “Biryukov reports that he happened to be present at Tolstoy’s reading of the beginning of the tale to Andreyev-Burlak, who there and then tried reading it himself.”
Dating anchor (documentary — Andreyev-Burlak’s death):
«Так как Андреев-Бурлак умер 10 мая 1888 г., то, следовательно, незаконченная третья редакция, которая впервые связалась с «Крейцеровой сонатой», была написана до этого времени.» (working English) “Since Andreyev-Burlak died on 10 May 1888, the unfinished third redaction — which first became attached to the Kreutzer Sonata — was written before that date.” — Editors’ inference; this is why the editors date the 3rd redaction to spring 1888 and the Moscow performance to “shortly before, also that spring.”
Name-confirm note: The Beethoven sonata performance is editor-via-Biryukov, dated spring 1888 in Moscow (Khamovniki). The earlier June 1887 event (S.A.T. diary) is Andreyev-Burlak’s first visit to Yasnaya Polyana. These are two distinct events the dive must not conflate.
2. THE REDACTION HISTORY — nine redactions confirmed
The dive’s “~9” is CONFIRMED. The editors number them explicitly. The 8th is the lithographed/underground one; the 9th is the final printed text. Summary table (dates and substance all from the commentary):
| # | Date | Manuscript(s) | What shifted |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ~1887 (first sketch) | автограф № 1 | Lover is a painter (художник), not a musician; “о музыке… совсем нет речи” (no music at all). Murder on a dacha. Pozdnyshev is a chemist/professor of chemistry (химик, профессор химии), not a nobleman. Confession told to three passengers; narrator stays out. Old merchant figure is pious, contrast-figure. |
| 2 | before March 1888 | копия № 2 | Confession narrowed to one listener; 10 years between marriage and the affair; Pozdnyshev becomes a landowner-nobleman (помещик-дворянин). “до марта 1888 г., когда между Чертковым и Толстым завязалась переписка на тему о половой любви” (editors’ dating). |
| 3 | spring 1888 | автограф № 3 (unfinished) | Murderer renamed Леонид Степанов; the painter is replaced by the musician Трухачевский (Trukhachevsky) — “Место художника занимает музыкант, Трухачевский.” The Kreutzer Sonata itself enters here for the first time (“Здесь впервые… идет речь о Крейцеровой сонате”). Breaks off mid-sentence. This is the redaction tied to the Andreyev-Burlak triptych, hence written before 10 May 1888. |
| 4 | after 29 March 1889 (Spasskoye) | рукопись № 4 | Combination of 2nd + 3rd; murderer again Pozdnyshev; written at Урусов’s Спасское, 23 March–8 April 1889; music/musician temporarily removed again here (4th reverts to painter via combination). First pages on Pozdnyshev’s pre-marriage life, first fall, excesses. |
| 5 | ~1.5 months, spring 1889 | №§ 5, 2, 6, 7 | Painter again replaces musician (“музыкант был вновь заменен художником, и мотив музыки из повести удален”). Shaker (шекеры) influence enters — total chastity as the ideal; Popov (Е. И. Попов) begins copying (“Попов сидит и переписывает”). Finished ~2 July 1889. |
| 6 | July 1889 | parts of № 6, §§ 7, 8, part 9 | Plot of murder reworked: jealousy → return home → the dagger killing. Childbearing/contraception made central (“Запрещение рожать надо сделать центральным местом”). |
| 7 | begun 26 July, finished 29 Aug 1889 | mainly № 9, titled «Как муж убил жену» (“How a Husband Killed his Wife”), dated 28 Aug 1889 | Trukhachevsky’s mid-day visit episode added; murder/return rewritten; epigraph Matthew V:28–30 chosen (записная книжка 22–23 Aug). Read aloud 31 Aug; Tolstoy decides to print in Nedelya. |
| 8 | 17 Sept – ~21 Oct 1889 | §§ 10–12, parts 13–14; collated against № 15 | THE LITHOGRAPHED REDACTION — see §2b below. Dagger restored; dying wife shows hatred (not forgiveness, as окончательная); doctors attacked; Pozdnyshev/wife quarrel + suicide attempt added (ch. XX). “Эта редакция распространилась в многочисленных списках и литографированных и гектографированных изданиях.” |
| 9 | early December 1889, finished 8 Dec 1889 | §§ 13, 14 (final = рукопись № 14) | THE FINAL TEXT. Pozdnyshev’s name no longer spoken aloud by the lawyer; ch. XV jealousy material cut; ch. XVI on child-rearing cut/condensed; ch. XVII praise-of-women speech removed; generally shorter. “Этим числом нужно, видимо, датировать окончание работы Толстого над девятой и последней редакцией.” |
Key verbatim anchors:
-
3rd redaction, musician + sonata enter:
«Место художника занимает музыкант, Трухачевский… Здесь впервые, хотя не так подробно, как в окончательной редакции, идет речь о Крейцеровой сонате, которую играют жена Степанова и Трухачевский.» (working English) “The painter’s place is taken by a musician, Trukhachevsky… Here for the first time, though not as fully as in the final redaction, there is talk of the Kreutzer Sonata, which Stepanov’s wife and Trukhachevsky play.”
-
7th redaction finished, decision to print:
«Вечером читал всем «Крейцерову сонату». Поднял всех. Это очень нужно. Решил печатать в «Неделе».» (diary, 31 Aug 1889) (working English) “In the evening read The Kreutzer Sonata to everyone. It stirred everyone. This is very necessary. Decided to print in Nedelya.”
-
8th redaction span and nature:
«Это была работа над восьмой редакцией повести, длившаяся месяц с лишним. Эта редакция распространилась в многочисленных списках и литографированных и гектографированных изданиях и стала достоянием широких читательских кругов. В дальнейшем называем ее общо — «литографированной редакцией».» (working English) “This was work on the eighth redaction of the tale, lasting a month and more. This redaction spread in numerous copies and in lithographed and hectographed editions and became the property of wide reading circles. Henceforth we call it generally ‘the lithographed redaction.’”
-
9th (final) end-date:
«Поправлял «Крейцерову сонату»… Надоела «Крейцерова соната». Этим числом нужно, видимо, датировать окончание работы Толстого над девятой и последней редакцией «Крейцеровой сонаты».» (diary, 8 Dec 1889) (working English) “Corrected The Kreutzer Sonata… The Kreutzer Sonata has worn me out. By this date one should evidently place the completion of Tolstoy’s work on the ninth and final redaction.”
2b. The lithographed (8th) redaction vs. the printed final (9th)
The crucial fact: the text that swept Russia underground was the 8th, NOT the final 9th. The final redaction’s distinguishing features (Pozdnyshev’s name unspoken; cut praise-of-women; condensed jealousy/child-rearing chapters) were NOT in the circulated text. Editors:
«Огромное большинство списков повести, рукописных, литографированных и гектографированных, восходит к тексту списка, переписанного рукой М. Л. Толстой (первый слой рукописи № 15).» (working English) “The vast majority of the copies of the tale — manuscript, lithographed and hectographed — go back to the text of the copy made in M. L. Tolstaya’s hand (the first layer of manuscript № 15).”
Tolstoy’s own discomfort that the unfinished version was loose:
«Личное же мое желание об этой повести то, чтобы ее не давать читать, пока она не исправлена.» (to T. A. Kuzminskaya, Nov 1889) (working English) “My personal wish about this tale is that it not be given to read until it is corrected.”
His harsher self-assessment to N. N. Strakhov, 17 Nov 1889:
«В художественном отношении я знаю, что это писание ниже всякой критики: оно произошло двумя приемами, и оба приема несогласные между собой, и от этого то безобразие, которое вы слышали.» (working English) “Artistically I know this writing is beneath all criticism: it came about in two goes, and the two goes don’t agree with each other, and hence the ugliness you heard.”
3. THE AFTERWORD (Послесловие) — its own genesis, late 1889 – late 1890
3a. When/why begun
Editors place the start right after the 8th redaction, prompted by Chertkov:
«За писание «Послесловия» к «Крейцеровой сонате» Толстой принялся, видимо, вскоре же после окончания работы над предпоследней, восьмой редакцией повести, вероятно, в конце октября 1889 г.» (working English) “Tolstoy set about writing the Afterword to The Kreutzer Sonata evidently soon after finishing the penultimate, eighth redaction of the tale, probably at the end of October 1889.”
Tolstoy to Chertkov, 1 November 1889 (answering Chertkov’s letters of 27 & 28 Oct), confirming the prompt:
«Я даже начал писать послесловие, ответ на вопрос: что думает сам автор о предмете рассказа. Я бы желал написать это. Как Бог даст» (working English) “I have even begun to write an afterword, an answer to the question: what does the author himself think about the subject of the story. I should like to write it. As God grants.”
First-redaction autograph (рукопись № 1) is internally dated «6 декабря» (6 December 1889).
The WHY is Chertkov’s editorial pressure for a moral compromise. Chertkov’s letter of 27 October 1889 (the editors quote it):
«Следовало бы в заключение прибавить… более всестороннее освещение вопроса, а именно сказать, что полное воздержание лучше всего, но только для тех, кто могут вместить… Слишком безусловное требование полного воздержания может оттолкнуть, вместо того чтобы привлечь.» (working English) “One ought to add in conclusion… a more all-round illumination of the question, namely to say that full abstinence is best, but only for those who can contain it… Too unconditional a demand for full abstinence may repel rather than attract.”
Tolstoy noted reader letters arriving in his diary 7 November 1889: «Получаю письма, что «Крейцерова соната» действует» (working English: “I am receiving letters that The Kreutzer Sonata is having an effect”).
3b. The Afterword’s redactions — likewise nine-ish, finished 6 April 1890 (lithographed) / late 1890 (final)
The editors trace the Afterword through its own chain. Load-bearing points and dates:
- 1st (rough autograph, № 1): begun late Oct, dated 6 Dec 1889; took Chertkov’s advice — chastity stated only as an ideal. Then ~2 months’ gap.
- Chertkov again urges it, 25 Dec 1889; Tolstoy near-refuses 15 Jan 1890: «Послесловие, хотя и начал писать, едва ли напишу…»
- 2nd redaction (автограф № 3): begun not before 17 Jan 1890; “более энергичном и приподнятом тоне” (more energetic/elevated tone); included a denunciation of social order, later struck; left unfinished.
- 3rd redaction (рукопись № 7): the “letter to Prokhorov” form — a personal reply to V. P. Prokhorov, who wrote Tolstoy on 6 March 1890 asking him to explain the tale’s basic idea. Tolstoy’s diary, 11 March 1890: «Думал о послесловии в форме ответа на письмо Прок.» Abandoned as too personal; M. L. Tolstaya answered Prokhorov on her father’s behalf (both copies marked «отвечено»).
- 4th redaction (рукопись № 8, ~21–25 March 1890): “Докончил послесловие. Кажется, слабо” (25 March). Then worked up in §§ 9–16, 17. Five positions/conclusions from the tale fixed; № 9 dated by Tolstoy 31 March 1890.
The pivotal date — the Hansen (Ганзен) copy of 6 April 1890, which became the lithographed Afterword:
«Ганзен пробыл в Ясной поляне с 1 по 6 апреля и за это время пять раз сам переписывал исправленные каждый раз Толстым копии «Послесловия».³⁷³» (working English) “Hansen stayed at Yasnaya Polyana from 1 to 6 April and in that time himself copied the Afterword five times, each time corrected anew by Tolstoy.”
«6-м апреля рукой П. Г. Ганзена датирована рукопись № 16… После первой авторской правки с нее снята была Ганзеном копия, которая стала распространяться в списках в литографированных и гектографированных изданиях.» (working English) “Manuscript № 16 is dated 6 April by P. G. Hansen’s hand… After the first authorial correction a copy was made from it by Hansen, which began to circulate in lists, in lithographed and hectographed editions.”
So: the Afterword’s penultimate (4th, “lithographed”) redaction = dated 6 April 1890 — the underground Afterword, paralleling the novella’s 8th. Editors call it that explicitly:
«оно стало распространяться в рукописных, литографированных и гектографированных списках в предпоследней, четвертой редакции, датированной 6 апреля 1890 г.» (working English) “it began to spread in manuscript, lithographed and hectographed copies in the penultimate, fourth redaction, dated 6 April 1890.”
- 5th redaction + large addition: 7–24 April 1890 (§§ 17, 19–23); the addition written as a rebuttal of Chertkov’s renewed plea (Chertkov’s letter 12 April 1890) to legitimise “нравственный брак” for the millions who cannot reach total chastity. Tolstoy refused to budge:
«то, что я не мог в «Послесловии» сделать то, что вы хотите и на чем настаиваете, как бы реабилитацию честного брака. Нет такого брака.» (to Chertkov, 25 April 1890) (working English) “…that I could not do in the Afterword what you want and insist on, a kind of rehabilitation of honest marriage. There is no such marriage.”
The conclusion the 4th-redaction work reached:
«Конечный вывод тот, что «христианского брака никогда не было и не может быть».» (working English) “The final conclusion is that ‘a Christian marriage never was and cannot be.’”
- Final authorized text: рукопись № 23 dated 24 April 1890; two further corrections requested 4 May 1890 (cut “как говорит Матью Арнольд” / Matthew Arnold; choose the opening). S. A. Tolstaya’s setting-copy (рукопись № 25) is dated on its wrapper «Ноябрь 23. 1890 г.» — last corrections no later than 23 Nov 1890.
4. PEOPLE AROUND THE WORK — candidate person-entities
Each below is surfaced as (name — role — why it matters). Documentary unless flagged.
Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy — author. (Already a vault anchor presumably.)
Sofya Andreyevna Tolstaya (С. А. Толстая) — wife; wounded reader who nonetheless drove publication. She copied the tale and the Afterword (setting-copies №§ 25 and 16 of the novella); she corrected proofs without Tolstoy (“Корректура «Послесловия» правилась С. А. Толстой без участия Толстого”); she introduced the censorship-driven cuts and conscious alterations to the 1891 text; and she secured publication by audience with the Tsar (§5). Her diaries (28 Dec 1890, 21 June 1887, autobiography «Моя жизнь») are the editors’ source for the Andreyev-Burlak genesis. High-priority entity.
V. G. Chertkov (Чертков) — disciple/editor; the EDITORIAL PRESSURE behind the Afterword. Repeatedly urged Tolstoy to write it (27 Oct, 25 Dec 1889, 4 March, 12 April 1890); pushed (unsuccessfully) for a “moral marriage” compromise; organized the Posrednik printing plan; received the final manuscripts; made stylistic emendations in рукопись № 15. The editors note: «Чертков никогда не делал в рукописях Толстого сколько-нибудь существенных исправлений, даже словарных, не санкционированных Толстым.» High-priority entity.
V. N. Andreyev-Burlak (В. Н. Андреев-Бурлак) — actor; reported originator of the railway-confession subject + intended public reader in the triptych. Died 10 May 1888. High-priority entity (the seed).
P. I. Biryukov (Бирюков / Birukoff) — biographer; SOURCE for the triptych/Beethoven-performance account. Note for the vault: existing page transliteration likely Pavel Birukoff. His later edited Sytin Полное собрание (1913) reprinted the censored text. Entity — but as cited secondary biographer.
I. Ye. Repin (Репин) — painter; the third corner of the triptych (the canvas that was never painted). Entity.
S. L. Tolstoy (С. Л. Толстой) — Tolstoy’s son; played piano at the Beethoven performance. Minor entity.
Lyasotta (Лясотта) — violinist at the Beethoven performance (Khamovniki). Minor entity; name as given, no initials in commentary.
P. G. Hansen / Ganzen (П. Г. Ганзен) — Danish translator; copied the Afterword five times (1–6 April 1890); his 6 April copy seeded the lithographed Afterword; carried the manuscript to Petersburg. Entity (the lithograph vector).
I. I. Gorbunov(-Posadov) (И. И. Горбунов, “Ваня”) — close collaborator; copyist of late Afterword manuscripts (№§ 18, 20, 22, 23); carried the final Afterword to Chertkov for the translators. Entity. His brother N. I. Gorbunov (Н. И. Горбунов) — read the final redaction aloud at Chertkov’s Petersburg gathering. Minor entity.
M. L. Tolstaya (М. Л. Толстая) — daughter; the single most important COPYIST — the master copy from which “the vast majority” of underground lists descend is in her hand (рукопись № 15, first layer); answered Prokhorov; dated several Afterword manuscripts. Entity.
T. L. Tolstaya (Т. Л. Толстая) — daughter; copyist (§§ 11, 14, 21). Minor entity.
E. I. Popov (Е. И. Попов) — copyist of the 5th-redaction pages (May 1889): «Попов сидит и переписывает так называемую «Крейцерову сонату».» Minor entity.
A. M. Novikov (А. М. Новиков), A. N. Dunaev (А. Н. Дунаев), V. V. Rakhmanov (В. В. Рахманов), M. A. Stakhovich (М. А. Стахович), V. A. Kuzminskaya, L. F. Annenkova (Л. Ф. Анненкова) — further named copyists of the Afterword / novella manuscripts. Minor entities (copyist cluster).
M. A. Kuzminskaya (М. А. Кузминская) — carried M.L.’s copy to Petersburg, partly corrected it; her copy (rk. № 15) is the underground fountainhead. Entity (transmission).
T. A. Kuzminskaya (Т. А. Кузминская) — S.A.T.’s sister; the 28 Oct 1889 reading happened at the Kuzminskys’ Petersburg flat; corresponded with S.A.T. on reception and censorship; reported (15 Feb 1890) the Tsar/Tsaritsa reading. Entity. A. M. Kuzminsky — Tolstoy’s brother-in-law, one of those who lobbied to get the tale passed. Minor entity.
Prototypes / named models: V. P. Prokhorov (Прохоров) — reader whose 6 March 1890 letter became the (abandoned) “letter” form of the Afterword. The “main idea” of the tale, Tolstoy said (diary 9 May 1890), came partly from a Slav woman correspondent’s letter about women oppressed by sexual demands, and the Matthew-V reading “относится… и к своей” jealousy was given him by an Englishman who wrote it. The Zauze (Заузе) family Odessa double-murder (read in Nedelya № 38, 17 Sept 1889) reinforced the “murder from a quarrel” version. — These are documentary genesis-inputs, not characters.
First readers / reception names (Petersburg, 28 Oct 1889 reading at the Kuzminskys’): N. N. Strakhov, the novelist G. P. Danilevsky, the poet A. N. Apukhtin, A. A. Tolstaya; read aloud by A. F. Koni. At Chertkov’s later reading of the FINAL redaction (>50 people): Leskov, Ertel, Leontiev (Shcheglov), L. E. Obolensky, Gaideburov, Rubakin, Khiryakov, Savikhin, Menshikov. N. S. Leskov wrote a polemical “По поводу «Крейцеровой сонаты»” with an epigraph from the penultimate redaction. Mention-cluster, not all entity-worthy.
N. Ya. Grot (Н. Я. Грот) — editor of Вопросы философии и психологии; the Afterword was first meant for his journal (S.A.T. autobiography, Oct 1890); censorship-passage was being arranged by Prince Tsertelev (князь Цертелев) and M. A. Stakhovich. Did not happen. Minor entities.
5. PUBLICATION, CENSORSHIP & THE FIGHT
5a. Original publication plans, then the ban
Plans cycled: Posrednik (Chertkov, from May 1889) → Gaideburov’s uncensored weekly Nedelya (Неделя) → the Yuryev memorial collection (Юрьевский сборник) (decided 5 Dec 1889). The censorship machine moved first.
Diary, 10 Dec 1889:
«Вчера получил письмо от Эртеля и Гайдебурова, что «Крейцерову сонату» не пропустят. Только приятно.» (working English) “Yesterday received a letter from Ertel and Gaideburov that The Kreutzer Sonata will not be passed. Only pleasant.”
Gaideburov, 20 Dec 1889 (the formal ban, naming Feoktistov of the Main Directorate for Press Affairs):
«мне категорически объявлено, что она ни в каком случае не будет допущена к выпуску в свет и что книжка с этой повестью будет уничтожена… когда известно мнение Победоносцева и других влиятельных лиц, цензура уже не могла бы… дозволить «Сонату».» (working English) “I have been categorically informed that under no circumstances will it be permitted to appear and that the issue containing this tale will be destroyed… once Pobedonostsev’s and other influential persons’ opinion is known, the censorship could no longer… permit the Sonata.”
The named censorship antagonists (documentary): E. M. Feoktistov (Феоктистов) — head of the Main Directorate for Press Affairs; K. P. Pobedonostsev (Победоносцев) — Ober-Procurator (who admitted to Strakhov he had not read it: «Не читал и не буду читать»); I. N. Durnovo (Дурново) — Minister of Internal Affairs. Because of premature Petersburg readings, the tale was condemned whole.
So the tale moved into pure underground circulation. The transmission record (documentary, via Posrednik memoirist Yu. O. Yakubovsky):
«Таким образом… уже на третий день рукопись «Крейцеровой сонаты», в первой версии, получила распространение в Петербурге. К воскресенью уже было готово 300 литографированных списков, которые моментально облетели весь читающий Петербург… во многих домах списки гектографировались на домашних гектографах… такие списки ценились по 10—15 рублей.» (working English) “Thus… already on the third day the manuscript of The Kreutzer Sonata, in its first version, gained circulation in Petersburg. By Sunday some 300 lithographed copies were ready, which instantly flew round all reading Petersburg… in many houses copies were hectographed on home hectographs… such copies were valued at 10–15 roubles.”
A. A. Tolstaya’s memoir (editors quote it as memoir, i.e. attributed reminiscence):
«Еще недопущенные к печати, эти произведения переписывались уже сотнями и тысячами экземпляров, переходили из рук в руки, переводились на все языки и читались везде с неимоверною страстностью…» (working English) “Still not allowed into print, these works were already being copied in hundreds and thousands of copies, passing from hand to hand, translated into all languages and read everywhere with incredible passion…”
5b. S. A. Tolstaya’s audience with Alexander III
The chain of who-read-it at court (documentary — T. A. Kuzminskaya to S.A.T., 15 Feb 1890):
«”Крейцерову сонату” читали министр внутренних дел И. Н. Дурново, начальник главного управления по делам печати E. М. Феоктистов, Победоносцев, государь и государыня. Александр III, по словам Кузминской, был доволен повестью, государыня шокирована; главной же помехой во всем были Победоносцев и Феоктистов.» (working English) “The Kreutzer Sonata was read by the Minister of Internal Affairs I. N. Durnovo, the head of the Main Press Directorate E. M. Feoktistov, Pobedonostsev, the Sovereign and the Sovereign’s wife. Alexander III, in Kuzminskaya’s words, was pleased with the tale; the Empress shocked; the chief obstacle in everything was Pobedonostsev and Feoktistov.”
The audience itself (documentary, from S.A.T.’s record) — secured via E. G. Sheremeteva (Шереметева), Alexander III’s cousin; the meeting took place 13 April 1891 in Petersburg:
«При помощи Е. Г. Шереметевой, двоюродной сестры Александра III, С. А. Толстая добилась с государем свидания, которое произошло 13 апреля в Петербурге. Предлогом для свидания была просьба Софьи Андреевны, чтобы Александр ІII был сам цензором произведений Толстого… Разрешение на печатание последней, но лишь в полном собрании сочинений, было дано Александром III.» (working English) “With the help of E. G. Sheremeteva, Alexander III’s cousin, S. A. Tolstaya obtained an audience with the Sovereign, which took place on 13 April [1891] in Petersburg. The pretext for the audience was Sofya Andreyevna’s request that Alexander III himself be the censor of Tolstoy’s works… Permission to print it, but only in the Collected Works, was given by Alexander III.”
Tolstoy’s own cold reaction (to Chertkov, 15 April 1891):
«Жена вчера приехала из Петербурга, где она видела государя и говорила с ним про меня и мои писанья — совершенно напрасно. Он обещал ей разрешить «Крейцерову сонату», чему я вовсе не рад.» (working English) “My wife arrived yesterday from Petersburg, where she saw the Sovereign and spoke with him about me and my writings — quite in vain. He promised her to permit The Kreutzer Sonata, at which I am not at all glad.”
5c. First legal printing — vol. 13 of the Сочинения, 1891
The permission was strictly limited to the collected edition, NOT separate issue. Censorship circulars kept hammering the separate-edition ban (8 May 1891 № 2217; 26 Sept 1891 № 4453; 4 Nov 1893 № 5198) — only lifted 17 Feb 1900 «по высочайшему повелению» (circular № 1192).
The volume’s appearance (documentary):
«В июне 1891 г. вышла, наконец, в свет тринадцатая часть сочинений Толстого с «Крейцеровой сонатой» и «Послесловием» к ней, отпечатанная в Москве, в типографии А. И. Мамонтова и помеченная на титульном листе 1890-м годом, а на обложке… — 1891-м годом.» (working English) “In June 1891 the thirteenth part of Tolstoy’s works finally appeared with The Kreutzer Sonata and its Afterword, printed in Moscow at A. I. Mamontov’s press and marked 1890 on the title page and 1891 on the wrapper.”
The fight wasn’t even over after the audience — the volume was arrested 25 Feb 1891 before permission came:
«В феврале большая часть тринадцатой части была отпечатана, но 25 февраля на нее был наложен арест.» (working English) “In February most of the thirteenth part had been printed, but on 25 February it was placed under arrest.”
Final clearance from Durnovo to release vol. 13 with the tale came ~6–10 May 1891. First print run was small and sold out fast, forcing a reprint:
«Так как этот том вышел в ограниченном количестве экземпляров (3000) и очень скоро разошелся, то С. А. Толстая вскоре же задумала новое издание его… заказывать 20000 XIII части…» (working English) “Since this volume appeared in a limited number of copies (3000) and very soon sold out, S. A. Tolstaya soon planned a new edition… to order 20,000 of part XIII…”
Textual caveat the editors stress (documentary): the 1891 vol. 13 text was set from S. A. Tolstaya’s copy (рукопись № 16/№ 25), and contains «огромное количество искажений (около 200)» (about 200 distortions) vs. the authentic text — some conscious censorship-prophylactic softenings by S.A.T. (e.g. «за сифилитиков» → «за больных известной болезнью»; «публичные дома» → «известные дома»; «мерзавцы не велели» → «доктора не велели»), most accidental copying errors. The present PSS prints from рукопись № 14 instead.
5d. Foreign / émigré editions named in the commentary
- Geneva, M. K. Elpidin (Элпидин), 1890 — «Крейцерова соната. Графа Л. Н. Толстого. По исправленной рукописи», 123 pp. — printed the FINAL redaction + Afterword before the 1891 Russian vol. 13; its text is a chance mix of S.A.T.’s copy and the last authorized manuscript.
- Berlin, “Bibliographical Bureau” (Библиографическое бюро) / B. Behr (Walter Zimmermann), 1890 — 1st ed. (tale only) + 2nd ed. (tale + Afterword), from the M. L. Tolstaya line → 8th (lithographed) redaction; many corruptions.
- Berlin, Stuhr’sche Buch- und Kunsthandlung (n.d., ~1890) — “new, revised and corrected” ed. by one “A. N.”, a Russian-language teacher at the Royal Military Academy in Berlin; 8th redaction + Afterword.
- Berlin, Walter Zimmermann, 1890 — «Послесловие к «Крейцеровой сонате». Издание по исправленной рукописи последней редакции» — the Afterword’s final redaction, uncensored, as a separate booklet.
- French: рукопись № 16 was first meant to be sent to Vogüé (Вогюэ), who translated the tale into French (its title-page bears «Une sonate de Beethoven dédiée à Kreutzer»). The translators Dillon (Диллон, англо-американский) and Hansen (Ганзен, датский) were the channels Chertkov fed.
- Later uncensored Russian-language: V. Chertkov’s compilation «О половом вопросе» (Christchurch, England, Свободное слово, 1901) reprinted the Afterword uncensored; reprinted in Всемирный вестник, Feb 1906 — the only uncensored Afterword printed in Russia before this PSS.
6. Manuscript-holding institutions (for provenance citations)
- АТ = Архив Толстого, Публичная библиотека СССР имени В. И. Ленина (Lenin/Rumyantsev Public Library, Moscow), папка 51 (Afterword), plus the novella manuscripts.
- ГТМ = Государственный Толстовский музей, Москва — Архив В. Г. Черткова, папка 15 (Afterword).
- АЧ = Архив Черткова (Chertkov’s archive, source of the Tolstoy↔Chertkov letters).
7. Editors’ interpretation vs. documentary fact — flags for the dive
- “Early embryo in Убийца жены (late 1870s)” = editors’ interpretation (“можно видеть… эмбрион”).
- Andreyev-Burlak as originator + railway gentleman = Pozdnyshev model = S. A. Tolstaya’s diary attribution (28 Dec 1890), reported by editors, not Tolstoy’s own statement.
- The triptych (story+painting+reading) + Beethoven performance = Biryukov’s biographical account, reported by editors.
- Dating of redactions 1–9 = a mix: hard anchors are Tolstoy’s diary/letters and dated manuscripts (documentary); the assignment of undated drafts to specific months (e.g. 2nd “before March 1888”, 3rd “spring 1888”) is editors’ inference, explicitly reasoned.
- “Idea came from a Slav woman’s letter / the Matthew-V reading from an Englishman” = Tolstoy’s own diary (9 May 1890), documentary but Tolstoy’s self-report.
- The roughly nine redactions is the editors’ own numbering and is internally consistent; the dive’s “~9” is confirmed for BOTH the novella (9) and effectively the Afterword (the editors count five named redactions but trace 25 manuscripts; the “penultimate = lithographed, dated 6 April 1890” / “final = late 1890” pairing mirrors the novella).