THE DEBATE ON PERSONS’ IDENTIFICATION IN SHEVCHENKO'S PORTRAITS CREATED IN 1857 DURING HIS VOYAGE ON THE STEAMER

Abstract

The paper aims at impartially examining Leonid Bolshakov’s arguments against the established in academic Shevchenko studies probable identification of the persons depicted in three male portraits that Shevchenko created during his voyage on the steamer “Prince Pozharsky” from Astrakhan to Nizhniy Novgorod in August-September 1857. The object of the study is the mentioned portraits, and the subject is depicted persons’ biographical connections with Shevchenko. The methodology of the study is based on traditional methods of biographical criticism, in particular, comparing information from different sources, critical verification of the reliability of known facts, etc.

The article proves the necessity of accepting Bolshakov’s reasoned proposal to consider the drawing, still known as the image of Tikhon Yepifanov, as a probable portrait of pilot Mikhailov (with a question mark). However, the researcher’s objections to the supposed identification of the persons depicted in the other two portraits as Mikhail Komarovsky and Yelisey Panchenko should be recognized as unconvincing and subjective due to the lack of evidence. Taking into account the working conditions on the steamer, diary entries with references to the drawings made, leisure activities on a given day, and the circle of men who were aboard at the time, it turns out that the current identification of Mykola Matsapura is the most probable, although not without reservations, as indicated in academic publications by the question marks next to the names of the portrayed.

The pilot Mikhailov, who had no place to keep the drawing, the medical man Panchenko, and the second-rank captain Komarovsky were officially and financially dependent on their employer, the millionaire Alexandr Sapozhnikov, a patron and an art collector. Probably, the fishing industrialist took for safekeeping or purchased Shevchenko’s drawings, which were primarily of artistic value to him, from the portrayed ones. That is why all the four drawings immediately ended up in the hands of a collector. 

_____________

REFERENCES

1. Bolshakov L. N. Yikhav poet iz zaslannia... Poshuky. Rozdumy. Doslidzhennia / Leonid Bolshakov. Kyiv : Dnipro, 1977. 327 s. (in Ukrainian).
2. Dnevnik T. Gr. Shevchenka // Osnova. 1862. Liutyi (fevral). S. 3–29. (in Russian).
3. Matsapura M. Neopublikovani maliunky T. H. Shevchenka / Mykola Matsapura // Radianske mystetstvo. 1949. 17 bereznia. № 11. S. 4. (in Ukrainian).
4. Obschiy morskoy spisok. Sankt-Peterburg : Tip. V. Demakova, 1898. Ch. X. 755 s. (in Russian).
5. Chetyire risunka T. G. Shevchenko // Literaturnaya gazeta. 1950. 26 oktyabrya. № 100. S. 3. (in Russian).
6. Shevchenko T. H. Povne zibrannia tvoriv : v 10 t. / Taras Shevchenko. – Kyiv : Vyd-vo AN URSR, 1951. – T. 10: Zhyvopys, hrafika, 1857–1861. – X s., 104 ark. reprod. 174 s. (in Ukrainian).
7. Shevchenko T. H. Povne zibrannia tvoriv : u 12 t. / Taras Shevchenko. Kyiv : Naukova dumka, 2003. T. 5. 495 s. (in Ukrainian).
8. Shevchenko T. H. Povne zibrannia tvoriv : u 12 t. / Taras Shevchenko. – Kyiv : Naukova dumka, 2014. – T. 11: Mystetska spadshchyna. Zhyvopys i hrafika: 1857–1861. – 401 s. (in Ukrainian).