(03/06/1492, Valencia, - 05/06/1540, Bruges), Spanish humanist, philosopher and teacher. One of the most prominent representatives of the Northern Renaissance. After 1509 he lived in France, England and the Netherlands. Professor at the Universities of Louvain and Oxford. He maintained close ties with Erasmus of Rotterdam and T. More.
For his wide interest in pedagogical problems, he was called by his contemporaries the “second Quintilian.” Many of his works are devoted to education and training: “On the method of teaching children” (“De ratione studii puerilis”, 1523), “On the education of a Christian woman” (“De institutione feminae christianae”, 1523), “Guide to wisdom" ("Introductio ad sapientiam", 1524; Russian translation 1768), "On the sciences" ("De disciplinis", 1531), "On the soul and life" ("De anima et vita", 1538), "Exercise in Latin"("Linguae latinae exercitatio", 1538). Vives's pedagogical ideas are based on the idea of nature as a model for education. Hence the desire to identify and take into account the natural inclinations of children and exclude coercion from educational process. Speaking against scholasticism and seeing the basis of knowledge in direct observation and experiment, Vives in many ways anticipated the experimental method of F. Bacon. Knowledge about phenomena, according to Vives, is acquired through sensations; the essence of phenomena is comprehended through reason. Moral education Vives placed dependence on the enlightenment of the mind. Following the principles of humanist pedagogy, Vives emphasized the importance of developing citizenship and patriotism, and pointed out the need for physical and labor education. He especially insisted on control over children's reading, demanding the exclusion of too crude and frivolous works.
Vives saw the goal of the teacher in imparting knowledge to students, instilling in them the skills and abilities that will be required in practical activities. Vives developed syllabus and the program of the humanistic school, from which he excluded theology, and transferred the center of gravity from dialectics and philosophy to the natural sciences, mathematics and history. The first period of training (from 7 to 15 years) included the study of classical languages (which were not an end in themselves, but the key to knowledge), logic, dialectics and natural sciences (geography, botany, zoology, mineralogy, etc.). The second period (from 15 to 25 years old) included the study of mathematics, astronomy, music, history and ethics. After this, the student improved in his chosen specialty.
Vives made important didactic generalizations. Recommending the presentation of material from the particular to the general, from simple to complex, Vives first raised the question of the relationship between science and the academic subject. He called for systematic and visual presentation of the material and demanded its conscious assimilation. Criticizing medieval methods and means of teaching (especially debates), Vives proposed new ones: direct observation, explanatory reading, questioning, etc. He attached great importance to the creation of favorable external conditions for classes (silence, appropriate nutrition).
Vives owns a humanistic program for women's education, a project for the creation by municipal authorities of craft schools for the poor (the treatise "On Helping the Poor", 1526), and a plan for the education of the blind (teaching music, reading aloud to them). Vives substantiated the need for secular upbringing and education, and state support for school affairs.
The pedagogical ideas of Vives were popular in the 16th and 17th centuries and influenced J. A. Komensky and others.
Literature: Lorentzson V. N. Outstanding Spanish humanist teacher X. L. Vives, Soviet Pedagogy, 1959, No. 8; Watson F., Vives. On education, Camb.,.1913; Urmeneta F. de, La doctrina psicologica y pedagogica de Luis Vives, Barcelona, 1949; Norena C. G., Juan Luis Vives, The Hague. 1970; Homenaje a Luis Vives, Madrid, 1977; R e n s o n R. Le jeu chez J. L. Vivies, in the book: Les jeux a la Renaissance, P., 1982.
V. A. Vedyushkin
The champion of humanistic education was the famous humanist Juan Luis Vives (1492-1540). He came from a family of Christian converts, and many of his close relatives were persecuted by the Inquisition. Apparently, in connection with this, Vives left his homeland early. Hence his emphasized orthodoxy in his late treatise, Defense of the Christian Faith. He studied in Paris, lived and taught in England, in Flanders, and belongs to the European humanist movement rather than to Spain. He was in charge of the Latin department at the University of Louvain and was familiar with Erasmus; in England, on the recommendation of Thomas More, he received a chair at Oxford, was a reader for Catherine of Aragon, and wrote pedagogical treatises for Mary Tudor. After the disgrace of Catherine of Aragon, he returned to Bruges.
Vives's works, written in Latin, concern philosophy, pedagogy, and psychology. The basis of his philosophical system was Aristotelianism. His work “On the Soul and Life” laid the foundations for a scientific understanding of emotions, memory, and language. Among the many pedagogical ideas Vives special attention Treatises on children's and women's education, reflections on the school of mutual education of people of different ages and genders are worthy. His dialogues for teaching boys Latin are distinguished by brilliance and grace.
In addition to schools at churches, departments, monasteries, according to the law on teachers of Enrique II (XIV century), repeatedly, until the 17th century, repeated and confirmed by the kings of Castile, then Spain, there were private educational establishments, which could be opened in cities by teachers who had passed the exam and were distinguished by piety and good morals. Teachers were given significant benefits in court cases, taxes and personal status. The city authorities had to help them in every possible way. Noteworthy is the early desire of kings to patronize and control education. The situation was similar in Portugal. Engraving on title page Barros's "Grammars" vividly conveys the situation in a 16th-century Pyrenean school: the teacher, next to whom stands a pedel, listens to the students lined up reading; to the side a group of children sitting on the floor reading books; through the arch the next hall is visible, in which rows of frozen listeners are apparently listening to the lecturer; right there, a little away from the teacher, two boys are fighting while a dog barks, dropping their textbooks and notebooks on the floor.
The need for education was recognized in the 16th century. not only by humanists, but also by society as a whole. Access to education was debated at the Spanish Cortes of 1548, where the question of creating a school for the poor was raised. The problem remained relevant half a century later, when the Cortes of 1594 proposed lowering prices for textbooks. A constant shortage of funds was felt in both city and cathedral schools. Nevertheless, by the end of the 16th century. There were about 4,000 schools in Spain. Every settlement with more than 500 inhabitants was required to maintain a school; in smaller settlements, children were educated in parishes. The quality of teaching was most often low.
The needs for educated people required an increase in the number of universities, and at the turn of the 16th-17th centuries. there were already over thirty of them. The most famous remained the University of Salamanca, next to it was the University of Valladolid, and in Portugal - the University of Coimbra. The university in Alcalá de Henares played a special role. At the beginning of the 16th century. Pyrenean universities were for the most part wary of humanism. Cisneros “let” him into Alcalá, which was modeled after Italian universities. In the first half of the century, E. A. de Nebrija and Aires Barbosa worked here, Juan de Avila and Philip II's secretary Antonio Perez came from it. In Portugal, Joan III, following the model of the University of Paris, reformed the University of Coimbra, creating a college of arts where ancient languages and philosophy were studied. Its first rector was Antonio de Gouveia, a humanist, Aristotelian, who influenced the development of not only his own university culture, but also the French one.
The humanistic philosophy of the Spanish and Portuguese university scholars reveals the absence of a sharp break with the medieval tradition. There was no significant school of Platonists among them; Moreover, they tried to interpret Platonic ideas in the spirit of Aristotelianism. In a sense, they were more characteristic of the school of medical philosophers - an eclectic and independent movement based on scientific experience. Medical philosophers recognized the existence of a philosophy based on reason outside of religion, and developed many philosophical problems in biology and medicine (for example, the problem of the origin of sensations).
However, from the middle of the 16th century. Universities are subject to inquisitorial persecution. First of all, the professors and students of Alcala were subjected to them; in the 50s, charges of Lutheranism were brought against the professors of Valladolid and Seville. Immediately after this, in 1559, a royal pragmatism was issued, prohibiting “traveling, teaching, studying and staying” in any foreign university except Rome, Naples and Bologna. In the 60s, the University of Salamanca suffered. A new charter was issued, according to which all professors had to check the work of their colleagues five times a year and draw up reports on it; the result was the squeezing out of unorthodox teachers from the university. Restrictions on converts increased sharply. All this led to a severance of ties with European universities, a paucity of information and, ultimately, to the decline of universities.
From the middle of the 16th century. Jesuit colleges were woven into the school and university education system of the Iberian Peninsula. The first of them arose in 1546, and by 1585 there were already 45 of them. Taking the ideal of virtus liberata as the basis for teaching, but interpreting it as an addition to religious and moral formation, the Jesuits thus reduced humanistic universality to pedagogical activity. The enormous success of the Jesuit colleges was due to the fact that the Jesuits showed concern for each student and conducted training, taking into account psychological characteristics students. Their religious trustworthiness played an important role. Pedagogical skill, combined with a religious orientation, created a very harsh type of education that suppressed the free expression of the individual.
The result of the order's activities was the emergence of a virtual monopoly of the Jesuits on humanitarian education. The rich sought to send their children to Jesuit colleges, the poor went to free city schools. Jesuit colleges were also formed at the largest universities, and some of them came under strong or complete influence (Valladolid, Evora). Secular education thus suffered significant damage. At the end of the 16th century. A real war broke out between universities and colleges, with petitions to the king and appeals to the Inquisition, with oral and printed polemics. Nevertheless, the Jesuits maintained their position in education at the beginning of the 17th century.
Voskoboynik Konstantin Pavlovich born in 1895 in the town of Smela, Cherkassy district, Kyiv province (now Cherkasy region of Ukraine) in the family of a railway worker. He graduated from high school in Cherkassy.
In 1915 he entered the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, and in 1916 he volunteered for the front. He fought as part of the 449th Kharkov Infantry Regiment in Galicia, and completed machine gunner courses. In the fall of 1916, as part of the regiment, he participated in the Lutsk (Brusilov) breakthrough. In the winter of 1916-1917 he graduated from the school of warrant officers and became a junior officer in the Russian Imperial Army.
In the summer of 1918 he ended up in the Middle Volga, where he joined the People's Army of the Committee Constituent Assembly(KomUch).
In 1919 he participated in the civil war on the side of the Reds, proved himself to be a good soldier, in 1920 he was wounded (the wound was complicated by typhus) and demobilized from the ranks of the Red Army. Soon after demobilization he married Anna Kolokoltseva.
Sent to work as secretary of the Khvalynsky Military Commissariat of the Saratov Province.
In the 1920s, realizing the anti-national essence of the communist dictatorship, he participated in peasant uprisings against collectivization and the exorbitant extortions of peasants for the maintenance of the Red Army. In 1921 he joined the combat formation of the Socialist Revolutionaries of Vakulin-Popov (one of the detachments of the peasant rebel army of Alexander Antonov), where he was chosen as the first number to the machine gun. He was wounded in the arm. According to fellow soldiers, he is an experienced and brave fighter. The uprising was suppressed by Red troops under the command of M. N. Tukhachevsky.
1921 - after the defeat of the uprising, he disappeared under the name of Ivan Yakovlevich Loshakov. Moved to Astrakhan. Here he registered his marriage with his wife for the second time, giving her the surname Loshakova. They had a daughter, who received her parents' new surname.
From Astrakhan, the Loshakov couple moved to Syzran, then to Nizhny Novgorod, until in 1924 they moved to Moscow. Here Voskoboynik graduates from the Electromechanical Faculty of the Institute of National Economy named after. G. V. Plekhanov, specialty "electrical engineer".
1930-1931 - head of electrical measuring (electrical technical (?)) workshops at the All-Union Chamber of Weights and Measures, Moscow.
1931 - confessed to the OGPU (since the statute of limitations for the fight against Soviet power had expired). A special meeting at the OGPU under Art. 58-2 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR (armed uprising) was sentenced to three years in labor camp.
1931-1934 - in exile (in a camp (?)) in the Novosibirsk region.
After the end of his exile, he moved with his family to Krivoy Rog, then to Orsk, and in 1938 settled in the urban village of Lokot, where he worked as a physics teacher at the Brasov Forestry Technical School. Here Konstantin Pavlovich met and became friends with B.V. Kaminsky. There is every reason to assert that in Lokt there was a powerful and numerous anti-Soviet organization of Russian nationalists, in whose activities Konstantin Pavlovich took an active part. With the beginning of the Soviet-German war, after the flight of Soviet functionaries from the Oryol region, the organization had the opportunity to legalize.
Even before the advanced units of the German army arrived in Lokot, Voskoboynik created local government and a small self-defense detachment. The assembled rural and village elders, together with the elected deputies, decided by a majority vote to appoint Voskoboynik as “governor of Loktya and the surrounding land”, and Bronislav Kaminsky as his deputy. It was they who led the Russian liberation movement on the Oryol-Bryansk land.
When the Germans (Guderian's 2nd Tank Army) entered Lokot on October 4, 1941, according to eyewitnesses, they were greeted by the Russian white-blue-red flag, which at that time had a clear national liberation meaning.
After the occupation of Lokt by German troops, Voskoboynik voluntarily offered cooperation to the Germans.
Voskoboinik obtained a reception from the commander of the 2nd Panzer Army, Colonel General Heinz Guderian, with the idea of creating the Lokot Republic - a self-governing, independent, Russian state entity, the official ideology of which should be, following the example of Germany, National Socialism. The conductor of these ideas will be the Russian National Socialist Party, organized following the example of Hitler's NSDAP. It was assumed that as the Wehrmacht advanced, the ideas of the Russian NSP would cover all of Russia, which would be organized according to the principle of the Lokot Republic. Since “every revolution must be able to defend itself” (as Voskoboynik tirelessly repeated), it is necessary to form a paramilitary militia (militia), which was called the Russian Liberation People's Army (RONA).
Taking into account his organizational abilities and merits, a month later, on October 16, 1941, Voskoboinik’s powers were significantly expanded by the German authorities - the police detachment was increased to 200 people, the settlements adjacent to the village of Lokot were subordinated to Voskoboinik, the Lokot volost was formed, and rural self-defense units were created everywhere.
At the same time, in the Lokot self-government, Voskoboinik wrote a manifesto and created his own party, the NSPR (“National Socialist Party of Russia”). Also, under his signature, an APPEAL and Order No. 1 were published, justifying the position of the struggle against the Soviet regime in alliance with the German army. Voskoboynik signed official documents of the Lokot self-government - “Earth Engineer (KPV)”
On November 25, 1941, Voskoboynik announced the creation of the People's Socialist Party of Russia "Viking" (Vityaz). The manifesto on the creation of the NSPR, written by Voskoboynik, proclaimed its main goal: “to revive the Russian state from the Bolshevik ruins,” “the complete destruction of the communist and collective farm system in Russia,” “the free transfer to the peasantry ... of all arable land,” “the free development of private initiative.” etc. The release of the NSPR Manifesto marked the beginning of a broad propaganda campaign. The manifesto was distributed within the Oryol, Kursk, Smolensk and Chernigov regions with the direct participation of Kaminsky and Mosin. Accompanying his comrades on a trip to the named regions, Voskoboynik admonished them: “Don’t forget that we are no longer working for just the Brasov region, but on the scale of all of Russia. History will not forget us.” After the creation of the NSPR, Voskoboynik moves from the status of an ordinary headman to the category of ideological mortal enemies of the Soviet regime.
November-December 1941 - at the head of police detachments (Russian People's Army State Education) Voskoboynik repeatedly participated in battles with partisans in the area of the villages of Kholmichi, Tarasovka, Shemyakino. In the Brasovsky district, 5 party organizations of the NSPR were created.
Speaking about the first activities of the Russian National Socialists, it is necessary to note their effective policy in economic sphere. First of all, in the newly born Lokotskaya Republic, the long-standing, more than ten-year-old dream of a simple Russian rural person came true: the volost government liquidated the hated communist collective farms. At the same time, property and equipment were distributed equally to the peasants depending on the number of eaters in the family. In the same way, collective farm land was divided among peasant families. By the end of 1941, the overwhelming majority of collective farms were dissolved, and their lands were distributed among the villagers. In 1942, the size of the per capita plot was approximately 10 hectares. Most families in the Lokot Republic had one or more cows, pigs, sheep, horses...
December 1941 - Lokot volost was transformed into a district, Voskoboinik headed it as burgomaster. Later (June 19, 1942) the district received the status of "Lokotsky district of self-government" (8 districts, six of them belonged to the Oryol region: Brasovsky, Komarichsky, Sevsky, Navlinsky, Suzemsky, Mikhailovsky, and two to Kursk: Dmitrovsk-Orlovsky and Dmitriev-Lgovsky, up to 600,000 thousand people, its own symbols - a white-blue-red tricolor with St. George the Victorious. Unofficial names - “Lokotskaya Republic”, “Lokotskaya Rus”. All executive power was entrusted to the Russians, and all German troops and governing bodies were withdrawn from there (with the exception of the communications headquarters of several German and Hungarian garrisons who helped in the fight against the partisans). The Russians had complete freedom of action. The Germans did not interfere in the internal affairs of the Russian Geographical Society; there was even a special order from Guderian’s headquarters that categorically prohibited such interference. For example, the Germans were unable to prevent the execution of two of their servicemen convicted in Lokot for looting and murder. In the lands of the “Lokotshchina” there were no Germans in the authorities, German courts, police, prisons, and German laws did not apply. Local law enforcement forces kept order here. The Lokot Republic had its own Criminal Procedure and Criminal Codes, developed by former law student Timinsky.
January 7, 1942 - in Lokot, in the building of the Drama Theater, the first day of the Constituent Congress of the People's Socialist Party of Russia "Vityaz" ("Viking") took place, the party was created. The 2nd day of the congress was planned for January 8: it remained to choose the governing bodies of the party, and resolve other organizational issues.
On the night of January 8, 1942, the “partisans” - special detachments of NKVD saboteurs under the command of A. N. Saburov (according to other sources - D. V. Emlyutin), having made a winter rush on 120 sleighs, carried out an attack on the village. Elbow. Despite the surprise, the People's Army, having lost about 50 people, repelled the attack. Voskoboynik was mortally wounded in the battle. Most likely, the KGB attack on Lokot was specially organized to eliminate the creator and first head of the Russian State Education in the Oryol region.
The description of the battle in which Konstantin Pavlovich died is known: “the main group of attackers of several dozen people who broke into the theater was blocked, they desperately shot back, and from time to time they threw grenades through the broken doors and windows, they had nowhere to go - they were blocked, and - doomed. They could easily be thrown with grenades . But at the same time, the entire theater building would have burned to the ground. Therefore, Voskoboinik forbade his soldiers to use grenades. He invited those surrounded in the theater to stop the needless bloodshed and surrender. Promising, on his personal word of honor - the word of the commander - to leave everyone alive. In response, Voskoboinik was asked go out to the illuminated place to make sure that it is really him. And when Voskoboynik came out, he was immediately struck by a long line of “tar.”
German doctors, who urgently arrived from Orel, were unable to save Voskoboinik, and he died on the same day. Bronislaw Kaminsky took over the duties of mayor.
By order of B.V. Kaminsky, who replaced Voskoboynik in his post, Lokot was renamed the city of Voskoboinik from October 1942.
| Russian collaborationism Second World War |
| Basic Concepts |
| Collaborationism in World War II Russian liberation movement |
| Ideology |
| Intransigence Defeatism |
| Story |
| Civil War in Russia White emigration Collectivization Political repression in the USSR World War II Operation Barbarossa Smolensk Declaration Prague Manifesto Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia "April Wind" Prague Uprising Repatriation (Release of Cossacks Operation Keelhole) |
| Personalities |
| A. Vlasov V. Malyshkin K. Voskoboynik B. Kaminsky P. Krasnov A. Shkuro K. Kromiadi S. Bunyachenko G. Zverev M. Shapovalov V. I. Maltsev B. Shteifon A. Turkul T. Domanov F. Trukhin M. Meandrov V. Shtrik-Shtrikfeldt S. Klych N. Kozin |
| Armed formations |
| ROA RONA Cossack Stan Separate Cossack Corps Air Force KONR 15th Cossack SS Cavalry Corps 30th SS Grenadier Division (2nd Russian) 30th SS Grenadier Division (1st Belarusian) Division "Russland" Russian Corps Khivi Fighting Union of Russians nationalists 1st Russian national brigade of the SS "Druzhina" Russian national people's army Volunteer regiment of the SS "Varyag" Russian detachment of the 9th Army of the Wehrmacht Detachment of Nikolai Kozin |
| National entities |
| Lokot self-government Republic of Zueva |
| Organizations |
| Russian National Labor Party |
| Portal:World War II |
Konstantin Pavlovich Voskoboynik(1895, Smela, Cherkasy district, Kyiv province, Russian empire- January 8, 1942, Lokot, Lokot district) - collaborationist, first burgomaster of Lokot self-government during the Great Patriotic War.
Biography
Born in 1895 in the city of Smela, Cherkasy district, Kyiv province (now Cherkasy region) in the family of a railway worker. In 1915 he entered the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, and in 1916 he volunteered for the front. In 1919 he participated in Civil War in Russia on the side of the Reds, proved himself to be a good soldier, in 1920 he was wounded and demobilized from the ranks of the Red Army as unfit for duty. military service. Sent to work as secretary of the Khvalynsk Military Commissariat.
In the 1920s he participated in peasant uprisings against Soviet power. In 1921 he joined the detachments of the Socialist Revolutionaries Vakulin-Popov, where he was chosen as the first number to the machine gun. The uprising was suppressed by Red troops under the command of M. N. Tukhachevsky.
Using forged documents in the name of Ivan Yakovlevich Loshakov, he fled to Astrakhan, where he remarried his own wife, giving her a “new” surname. From Astrakhan, the Loshakov couple moved to Syzran, then to Nizhny Novgorod, until they moved to Moscow in 1924. Here Voskoboinik graduated from the Electromechanical Faculty of the Institute of National Economy named after. G. V. Plekhanov.
In 1931, believing that 10 years had already passed the statute of limitations since his participation in the peasant uprising, he appeared at the OGPU and gave a confession. He was not convicted, but was administratively exiled to the Novosibirsk region for 3 years. After the end of his exile, he moved with his family to Krivoy Rog, then to Orsk, and in 1938 he ended up in the city of Lokot, where he met and became friends with B.V. Kaminsky.
Even before the advanced units of the German army arrived in Lokot, he created local self-government and a small self-defense detachment. After the arrival of the Germans in September-October 1941, he offered them cooperation and was appointed headman and commander of a self-defense detachment in the village of Lokot, where he recruited a detachment of 20 people from among those formerly convicted and offended by the Soviet regime, as well as from the “surrounded people.” Taking into account the organizational abilities and merits[what?], a month later, on October 16, 1941, the powers of Voskoboinik were significantly expanded by the German authorities - the police detachment was increased to 200 people, the settlements adjacent to Lokot were subordinated to Voskoboinik, the Lokotskaya volost was formed in which rural detachments were created self-defense.
Voskoboynik wrote a manifesto and created his own People's Socialist Party of Russia (NSPR).
After the creation of the NSPR, Voskoboynik actually moved from the status of an ordinary headman to the category of ideological enemies of the Soviet government and became the object of attention of the NKVD.
On the night of January 8, 1942, Soviet partisans under the command of A. N. Saburov, having made a winter rush on 120 sleds, attacked the local police barracks and the house of the burgomaster. Despite the surprise, the police organized a repulse to the partisans. After reporting what was happening, Voskoboinik, going out onto the porch of his house, was wounded by partisans. Immediately after this, realizing that Voskoboinik was killed and the task was completed, Saburov gave the order to the partisans to retreat. The total losses of the collaborators were about 50 people.
German doctors, who urgently arrived from Orel, were unable to save Voskoboinik, and he died on the same day. Bronislaw Kaminsky took over the duties of mayor.
Family
His wife, Anna Veniaminovna Kolokoltseva, lived in the city of Gorky, and after the death of her husband, she held a responsible post in Kaminsky’s office.
Daughter - Ganna Kolokoltseva, b. OK. 1921, in 1941-1942, according to the NKVD, she was a student at the Industrial Pedagogical Institute. K. Liebknecht.
Memory
On June 6, 2005, Voskoboynik and Kaminsky were canonized by the Russian Catacomb Church of True Orthodox Christians.
