-
Главная
-
- Книги
-
- Авторы
-
- Лев Толстой
-
- Война и мир
-
- Стр. 1249/1273
Для того чтобы воспользоваться озвучкой предложений, необходимо
Войти или зарегистрироваться
Озвучка предложений доступна при наличии PRO-доступа
Купить PRO-доступ
Modern
history
replying
to
these
questions
says
:
you
want
to
know
what
this
movement
means
,
what
caused
it
,
and
what
force
produced
these
events
?
Then
listen
:
"
Louis
XIV
was
a
very
proud
and
self-confident
man
;
he
had
such
and
such
mistresses
and
such
and
such
ministers
and
he
ruled
France
badly
.
His
descendants
were
weak
men
and
they
too
ruled
France
badly
.
And
they
had
such
and
such
favorites
and
such
and
such
mistresses
.
Moreover
,
certain
men
wrote
some
books
at
that
time
.
At
the
end
of
the
eighteenth
century
there
were
a
couple
of
dozen
men
in
Paris
who
began
to
talk
about
all
men
being
free
and
equal
.
This
caused
people
all
over
France
to
begin
to
slash
at
and
drown
one
another
.
They
killed
the
king
and
many
other
people
.
At
that
time
there
was
in
France
a
man
of
genius
--
Napoleon
.
He
conquered
everybody
everywhere
--
that
is
,
he
killed
many
people
because
he
was
a
great
genius
.
And
for
some
reason
he
went
to
kill
Africans
,
and
killed
them
so
well
and
was
so
cunning
and
wise
that
when
he
returned
to
France
he
ordered
everybody
to
obey
him
,
and
they
all
obeyed
him
.
Having
become
an
Emperor
he
again
went
out
to
kill
people
in
Italy
,
Austria
,
and
Prussia
.
And
there
too
he
killed
a
great
many
.
In
Russia
there
was
an
Emperor
,
Alexander
,
who
decided
to
restore
order
in
Europe
and
therefore
fought
against
Napoleon
.
In
1807
he
suddenly
made
friends
with
him
,
but
in
1811
they
again
quarreled
and
again
began
killing
many
people
.
Napoleon
led
six
hundred
thousand
men
into
Russia
and
captured
Moscow
;
then
he
suddenly
ran
away
from
Moscow
,
and
the
Emperor
Alexander
,
helped
by
the
advice
of
Stein
and
others
,
united
Europe
to
arm
against
the
disturber
of
its
peace
.
All
Napoleon
's
allies
suddenly
became
his
enemies
and
their
forces
advanced
against
the
fresh
forces
he
raised
.
The
Allies
defeated
Napoleon
,
entered
Paris
,
forced
Napoleon
to
abdicate
,
and
sent
him
to
the
island
of
Elba
,
not
depriving
him
of
the
title
of
Emperor
and
showing
him
every
respect
,
though
five
years
before
and
one
year
later
they
all
regarded
him
as
an
outlaw
and
a
brigand
.
Then
Louis
XVIII
,
who
till
then
had
been
the
laughingstock
both
of
the
French
and
the
Allies
,
began
to
reign
.
And
Napoleon
,
shedding
tears
before
his
Old
Guards
,
renounced
the
throne
and
went
into
exile
.
Then
the
skillful
statesmen
and
diplomatists
(
especially
Talleyrand
,
who
managed
to
sit
down
in
a
particular
chair
before
anyone
else
and
thereby
extended
the
frontiers
of
France
)
talked
in
Vienna
and
by
these
conversations
made
the
nations
happy
or
unhappy
.
Suddenly
the
diplomatists
and
monarchs
nearly
quarreled
and
were
on
the
point
of
again
ordering
their
armies
to
kill
one
another
,
but
just
then
Napoleon
arrived
in
France
with
a
battalion
,
and
the
French
,
who
had
been
hating
him
,
immediately
all
submitted
to
him
.
But
the
Allied
monarchs
were
angry
at
this
and
went
to
fight
the
French
once
more
.
And
they
defeated
the
genius
Napoleon
and
,
suddenly
recognizing
him
as
a
brigand
,
sent
him
to
the
island
of
St.
Helena
.
And
the
exile
,
separated
from
the
beloved
France
so
dear
to
his
heart
,
died
a
lingering
death
on
that
rock
and
bequeathed
his
great
deeds
to
posterity
.
But
in
Europe
a
reaction
occurred
and
the
sovereigns
once
again
all
began
to
oppress
their
subjects
.
"
It
would
be
a
mistake
to
think
that
this
is
ironic
--
a
caricature
of
the
historical
accounts
.
On
the
contrary
it
is
a
very
mild
expression
of
the
contradictory
replies
,
not
meeting
the
questions
,
which
all
the
historians
give
,
from
the
compilers
of
memoirs
and
the
histories
of
separate
states
to
the
writers
of
general
histories
and
the
new
histories
of
the
culture
of
that
period
.
The
strangeness
and
absurdity
of
these
replies
arise
from
the
fact
that
modern
history
,
like
a
deaf
man
,
answers
questions
no
one
has
asked
.
If
the
purpose
of
history
be
to
give
a
description
of
the
movement
of
humanity
and
of
the
peoples
,
the
first
question
--
in
the
absence
of
a
reply
to
which
all
the
rest
will
be
incomprehensible
--
is
:
what
is
the
power
that
moves
peoples
?
To
this
,
modern
history
laboriously
replies
either
that
Napoleon
was
a
great
genius
,
or
that
Louis
XIV
was
very
proud
,
or
that
certain
writers
wrote
certain
books
All
that
may
be
so
and
mankind
is
ready
to
agree
with
it
,
but
it
is
not
what
was
asked
.
All
that
would
be
interesting
if
we
recognized
a
divine
power
based
on
itself
and
always
consistently
directing
its
nations
through
Napoleons
,
Louis-es
,
and
writers
;
but
we
do
not
acknowledge
such
a
power
,
and
therefore
before
speaking
about
Napoleons
,
Louis-es
,
and
authors
,
we
ought
to
be
shown
the
connection
existing
between
these
men
and
the
movement
of
the
nations
.
If
instead
of
a
divine
power
some
other
force
has
appeared
,
it
should
be
explained
in
what
this
new
force
consists
,
for
the
whole
interest
of
history
lies
precisely
in
that
force
.
History
seems
to
assume
that
this
force
is
self-evident
and
known
to
everyone
.
But
in
spite
of
every
desire
to
regard
it
as
known
,
anyone
reading
many
historical
works
can
not
help
doubting
whether
this
new
force
,
so
variously
understood
by
the
historians
themselves
,
is
really
quite
well
known
to
everybody
.
