Russian Eurasianism_ Historiosophy and I - Mazurek, Slawomir

Russian Eurasianism: Historiosophy and Ideology Author(s): Sławomir Mazurek and Guy R.Torr Source: Studies in East European Thought, Vol. 54, No. 1/2, Polish Studies on Russian Thought (Mar., 2002), pp. 105-123 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20099785 . Accessed: 23/10/2011 07:37 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in East European Thought. http://www.jstor.org SLAWOMIR MAZUREK AND RUSSIAN EURASIANISM- HISTORIOSOPHY IDEOLOGY I attempt to answer the question about the place of Eurasianism ABSTRACT. in the Russian intellectual tradition. I reconstruct its historiosophical assumptions as well the political ideology following from them. I share the opinion of certain historians that Eurasianism is interesting for a variety of reasons, but I disagree with those who see in it nothing more than a synthesis of standard ideas often in the history of Russian thought. Eurasianism's originality includes to the history of of the positive contribution of theMongols acknowledgment Russian state, the radicalism of its critique of theWest, the innovativeness of theory of revolution, as well as the absence, unusual for Russian thinkers of period, of an eschatological sensitivity. found its the its the KEY WORDS: anti-Westernism, historiosophy, political ideology, polycentrism, Russian Eurasianism, Russian intellectual tradition, Tartar roots of the Russian State THE LAST LINK There is no absence inRussia today of circles and publications with various degrees of influence defining themselves quite simply as Eurasian. In the ideological void that resulted from the collapse of communism, has proved considered whenever the perspective for many tempting that they were the was of Eurasian concepts reanimating the Eurasians themselves because of ideology should take an which over - creators to arise the possibility from Bolshevik communism. They did not want to smash the totalitarian and monolithic colossus that had been created by the Bolsheviks, but simply to breathe a new Eurasian soul into it. Their concep tion constituting the last link in the history of Russian nation alist ideologies sanctioned by historiosophies (or equally in the history ally ?M wV of Russian all impresses historiosophies those nowadays sanctioning who desire nationalism) to maintain natur Russia's Studies inEast European Thought 54: 105-123,2002. ? 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in theNetherlands. up' to western so distanced by I'll the SLAWOMIR MAZUREK threatened as if as a result of 'the opening It is worth noting here that for various reasons phenomenon proposed as (here in time. less ideologists desire quoting it. one of the leading representatives of this current in the 1920s and 1930s. active this is not. renaissance catastrophism from among virtually choose Merezhkovskii's founding fathers at random) Berdyaev's Some of those millenarianism. characteristic: Gumil?v a past which to has still not become the past. who in emigration for were the heirs Grigorii Vernadskii (1887-1993). I feel. our day yet its roots are located in the nine towards temporally was Lev Gumil?v. Although they were active as thinkers and ideologists only several correctly in the inter-war period. and politicians small. while Petr Suvch inskii in 1985. If the last Eurasian teenth century. influences. belongs a historical in remaining does not allow itself to be phenomenon. then the title of the first in accordance with the consensus of researchers is Russian by Konstantin Leont'ev. of so removed classicists the Russian this is not a as such or the our 'historically'. an unimportant detail. The historian of ideas who is not guided by motives of this type may be inter ested in Eurasianism for other reasons.106 an 'otherness' 'otherness'. that developed within can therefore have position is not without influence on the existing political views prevalent in Russia. In adhering to the past Eurasian merited . We have already said that this was the last of Russian historiosophies that sanctioned nation alism. Of more decades considered significance there were to be is the fact that after the war two eminent of Eurasianism historians. of Eurasianism were to live to see contemporary period: Petr Savitskii died in 1968. totally placed within It becomes as a result the boundaries doubly attractive of a historical for those 'yesterday'. and in the Soviet Union Lev Gumil?v who spoke of himself as the last Eurasian. the risk that they will an anachronism is relatively be suspected of a than to reactivate in the case of quoting other historiosophies post-revolutionary ?migr? A closer of the Eurasians' inspection a practical its popularity significance circles. We shall add that it is also a historiosophy whose position within Its continuances head appears most history singular. Note this as it appears to be extremely last phrase. Eurasianism. will . however. historians. itwas at one moment subjected. We historiosophical on historiosophy. of thought. There were. the fate of their country. Given relationship historiosophical the background against with it. is unavoidable.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM ism did not isolate itself. a universally anti-Westernism. nationalism.2 one of "The ideas that were the tion that against the background of ?migr? thought Eurasianism was the authorities on elaborated by such as subject likewise the prophetism. renaissance felt himself closely tied to their circles. however. of earlier concepts and those contemporary creation or. This concerned Lev Karsavin who at one time claimed the role of philosophical for Eurasianism. something highly original? And what modifications do commonly held views and the convic ideas undergo upon their acceptance by Eurasians? Within the literature on the subject one can encounter the most Eurasians traditional writes current. This Eurasians. the only view. speculating certain time when at least one eminent representative of the Russian from the Russian however. ence was concentrate as a presentation to determine coupled on the Russian in our an attempt tradition. Orthodoxy. intelligents typical linguists a over There was. inspirations. with 107 philosophical thought of various the creators of Eurasianism.1 legislator and varied."3 a completely Certain researchers express that Eurasianism was ". considerations which say that the ideology. fore numerous current's Russian The sources of Eurasianism were there styles involving a variety of personages. scholars amongst special Russian ities naturalists.. to which be ignored."4 We will soon article with discover is meant which to the truth. of an apocalyptic tone. religious which it was contemporary. opposite claiming new examination fundamentally of these is closer viewpoints of the views of the what their depend will naturally is not to of Russian history and culture that appeared within Russian ?migr? circles. to be a typical this situation the question of this to the concepts and ideas characteristic of the Does tradition it appear. are closely presence This of Russian is not. thought. related to the traditions held view.. contrariwise. history of Russian Eurasianism begins with Nikolai Trubetskoi's Evropa i chelovechestvo5 a book devoted in its entirety to criti cism of the West. .108 SLAWOMIR MAZUREK THE TRAP OF EUROPEANIZATION The foundation of Eurasian historiosophy was the conviction that Russia was historically different. written though simple ingenious on contemporaries. It was only thereafter that the famous almanacs appeared: Iskhod k Vostokw. the view that working or even out an original concept for Russia-Eurasia would not have been impossible had these thinkers limited themselves to the second of the points just mentioned. 'Eurasianism unknown. However. that it lay between Europe and Asia and belonged to neither of these worlds. by twenty-year-old.was a Parisian born in the course of an argument with conci say a some truth.someone was to from Russia. This theory was to Leont'ev's it was connected ideas new. the adoption by non-European of Romano-Germanic intellectual achievements . the technological and culture. by. to In wanting and to Spengler who was well known to conceive have their say on the matter they had as a consequence this historical difference source via two and essence. On routes. i. that they to look elsewhere for its I would the one to achieve this they aimed Western criticized civiliza tion (in their terminology the other hand. on a fundamental. There of the West was of culture not the consequence of certainly most would the Eurasian continent. ?migr?s . nothing to the Eurasians. The author's the regularity of and paradoxes in an extremely made argumentation. Criticism is much malice here though also erge'. reinterpretation advocate Many the Romano-Germanic civilization).e. iconoclastic. of Eurasia anti-Westernism.6 Na putyakh'.1 Rossiya Trubetskoi's book. chief the process of peoples i latinstvo? on lucid way. in a novel way. was to a great the psychological basis for Eurasianism a deep as experienced resentment for Western civilization degree at that time the creators of the movement. say hand. on the contrary. This the affirming have already original advocated product I want that the affirmation of radical to abide as the by appears initially is not an interpretation that not to notice that the however. they undertook of national history. It is difficult. based a strong impression was to describe intention of Europeanization. out creating in this way pushing of them unconscious them toward for European the sake of have to be based on the adoption of alien values and subsequently their Western creative culture transformation. Romano-Germanic had Europe to implant in the world the idea of the pre-eminence of managed no reasons why own culture. the very term 'primitive' appears for him highly unsuitable. which from the people. that is their a transformation According in source. Equally significant is its low self-esteem. as the highest authority. The West's exceptional perfidy lies in its imposition of its system of values ization. to be false this is impossible without people with Romano-Germans. there were its however. obviously. the ethnic Even 'mixing'of theory there were the indigenous were if this had no doubts that it would). culture. upon partners the domination of Romano-Germanic and strengthening expanding at Europeanization nations.in the spirit of Leon tievian polycentrism .defend the rights of all historical cultures that lie beyond Europe. the internal creative potential of the Europeanizing collectivity is all the more diminished. and also the to be of Western turn out ideological fictions manipulated by the latter with great skill. What According is interesting is that not only does Trubetskoi . Hence the pre-eminence and openness cosmopolitanism and universalism. Attempts lead to backwardness: nations are condemned to remain this process which backward undergo to the strength of the dialectics and paradoxes since they are subject of the process of Europeanization itself. Let us start from the fact that successful would Europeanization others. Besides which. equally quickly. as the deformation of prototypes. its In essence. Finally. but he argues with the view concerning the cultural inferiority of primitive people. universal and higher values should be considered than others. other circum (Trubetskoi stances hindering the very adoption creativity. the spirit of to Trubetskoi. . independent Already an effort of foreign values constitutes that absorbs huge provisions not all social strata Europeanize of social energy. leads to the separation of the intelligentsia conflicts intensify and. The fact that we do not perceive the richness and complexity of primitive cultures is no proof thatwe are superior to them. which is a consequence of the fact that its works are perceived by Europe.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM 109 to Trubetskoi. without seemingly explanation. already instead i chel fragments suggested. a selective reception of the works of Western culture is also possible. that it is not a benefactor.110 a nation for in the course the economic MAZUREK SLAWOMIR of Europeanization and military expansion remains easy plunder the Romano-Germans. but equally proposals in the form of Panslavism and "merely obscure the essence opposition of the world. All that is left is to adopt adopting the achievements its endemic of Romano-Germanic Europeanizing culture nations without will not 'egocentrism'. fall then into psychological dependence on theWest and will avoid the complexes paralysing their abilities. but uniform. The initial condition is. Evropa well-founded Trubetskoi i chelovechestvo misgivings not use does that the could cannot term call be forth left 'Eurasia'.that the history of Eurasianism begins with Nikolai Trubetskoi's certain. Trubetskoi clearly speaks out for cultural polycentrism. non-European a multiplicity of world various is not here wholes. of In the desire to make up for backwardness in various fields there takes place periodically a mobilizing of forces for a subsequent Europeanizing effort. This is possible are spelt out."10 between Romano between to be very Europe distant of Panmongolianism for "there exists Germans and and humanity. dualist. which when In order is the to first and cunning hegemony. in the long run this simply results in increased backwardness. to overestimate rhetoric In other their reinforcing I believe. How does one escape from the trap of Europeanization? An uprising on the part of all peoples exploited by theWest is (unfor tunately Trubetskoi seems to say) impossible. something The of Evropa author ovechestvo is here fully conscious of the cultural independence . what is more he writes in one place that not only forms of nationalism. The as these from the Eurasian position.including the author of this article . significance. though."11 mistaken anti-Western historiosophy. of the work. that it would they belong not rather though as we have be to anti-Western. appear one true only the rest of the nations Assertions such the problem. the mental transformation of the a factor of 'bad' Europeanization. however. one must The view held by certain historians of ideas9 . always civilization faults of Romano-Germanic neutralize Europe's and foremost make absolute it known intelligentsia. it was Trubetskoi's almanac views Iskhod chelovechestvo. for original the Eurasians. We that only does on the basis of of such an interpretation the authors of the his participation among a year after Evropa i which k vostoku. The defense of the theory that in the historical and cultural plane of things Russia is a distinct Eurasian continent demanded the overcoming of a new of numerous difficulties.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM of Russia. an however. At a given moment the prerogatives of the individual are transferred to the people. creation. among other passages. Iwill withhold from summarizing it as it does not differ from the typical Russian arguments against 'Romists'. 111 frag expresses ments shall devoted add also to Peter the Great and his designs for Russia. not appear criticism of the West is concerned. extremely was the their most concept of Eurasia.13 THE RUSSIAN NATIONAL MYTH AND THE INTERPRETATIONOF REVOLUTION Radical important anti-Westernism impulse. which he in.or even a synthesis the from at of inadvertently European and Asian of in the guise elements. The dissemination of nationalist ideologies leading to a tribal war of all against all was in his opinion the result of the struggle for the rights of the individual so important in the history of Europe. was. It followed as a distinct not arrived quality. . A reinterpre tation of national history would have been incomplete without creation the treatment concept of Eurasianism of the Russian nation. a hybrid The innovative aspect of the Eurasian history was closely connected with interpretation of Russian reassessment of a complete .12 Another element missing in Trubetskoi is the criticism of theWestern idea of human rights devised by Karsavin and which is undoubtedly more interesting than routine anti-Catholicism. There appears amongst Eurasians a criticism of Catholicism which is lacking in Trubetskoi. As far as Trubetskoi's taken on board by Eurasians and incorporated in their historiosophy. appeared to be incomprehensible. The only modifications are to be found in the addition of certain themes which in no way diminish its radicalism. this bringing about a quasi-person mercilessly fighting for position and influence. It was. It was as to and a theory Russia pre-Petrine all of Eurasia of historical continuity the empire of Genghis Khan. not. into a Russian exploited for the by anti-Russian views propaganda This would original probably not have been possible concerning the genesis had it not been of the Russian people with which According specificities. joined together. claims earlier. Western obviously.15 political new a completely theory. inhabiting Eurasia from time immemorial. It is not surprising then that within richer the limits than the Great of the people Russian so evolved.112 opinion country's MAZUREK SLAWOMIR concerning history. they .14 In taking into consideration these recognized circumstances was a conscious This historians new was had the Eurasians continuation maintained of the Mongol that the Muscovite state idea. and mutually influ enced role one another. iconoclastic about to see what many as Russia's European blemish. similar broached however. stretching from the Ukraine and Belarus was for Rus a period of to Siberia. The political occupation characteristic education. advancing between Russia. historians They writers wanted and political a topos willingly transformed national myth. As the role which opposed the Tatars had played the Great's reforms in the the to Peter period of the so-called 'Tatar yoke' had not been the subject of fundamental arguments during the ideological and historiosophical that had disputes the Eurasians only the existence taken who place raised in pre-Revolutionary the matter. They they explained the latter's ethnic and cultural are neither to the Eurasians. Empire Tatar was the first state within It was whose their belief borders that the Mongol was contained.16 Although it is difficult to miss them. And here the Eurasians' theory for Russian was revealed roots for in arguing for Mongolian anti-Westernism boasted its Tatar past they ostentatiously in mythologizing Russia. incorporating the culture of other groups and conveying their own to them. mixed. this nationality [narodnost'] played became a significant the 'centre' of cultural and ethnic synthesis. broader exist and infinite regional differences. while the Tatar khans played such an significant part state that they deserve to be in the construction of the Muscovite as its joint creators. nor Turanians. Slavs Russians over a long process as a people had formed in the course of which various ethnic groupings. ethnic as something there substratum. The Greater Russian element in this process. a soil. 18 A tragic turn in the history of Russia was therefore either the succession of an arbitrary individual . determination. into an alienated upper society threat that for from the creators the moment living by its own ideas and the people who preserve their Eurasian constituted the greatest identity ism. to remove the historical processes of the Russian of interest Ignoring by great is the case was spread over the itself - The Eurasianism according and lasting characterized although in character. the catastrophe. Peter The irreducible. know and of the nineteenth which for century. because to say . between to it. however. of what he himself note simply the stratum the Russian accompanying Europeanization. The Russia no was of Eurasian the said no of condemned was as Florovskii and to revolution."movement the authorities figure of Peter would be able to put society"17 a certain contro aroused.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM as do not be overemphasized. after constructed paradoxes model general accompanied such a process Let's by Trubetskoi had considered that amongst disintegration (undoubtedly to be the phenomena of traditional on the basis experience). Nemesis.was 'Russian' in essence to the authors to us here this something actions force with utopia rooted Utopian utopias they had to lead to in the reforms of Peter the Great (regardless of his intentions). it is impossible centuries. in the Bolshevik the Great's Revolution. We already know it as we. Some of them considered division political borders an end existed reform. from above meant revolution the historical the renunciation reformer was to of the by Russia a process started tsar Idea'. The latter programme should to the disintegration of the Russian the adherents of national 113 self is threatening because it leads as but it is also Utopian nation.were and Russia . While others Russia's maintained some saw literally nothing positive that Peter distinctive had been character: a leader his in what he did. The 'Mongolian Imperial of Europeanizing the country which last for the whole the phenomena the all. people fact. and as catastrophe. . versy. to maintain was only to culturally desiring intention transfer from Europe everything thatmight turn out useful in order to then 'turn one's back on it' (this intention failed because the tsar died leaving no heirs worthy of him). Even a superficial knowledge over the historical sense of the revolu of the controversy for several decades within intellectual tion. Ivanov. than global any all and tendencies an of wrote Georgii "It did not bring revelations. embracing in relation the West. The political (dictatorship). matter and objective significance.114 without or concern for . to their Russia's isolation was in every more respect welcome. The Russian revolution to its own origin. ?migr? an isolated one to state that this was allows position. in it is Russian truth. event the catastrophic of the contemporary 'local' rather Florovskii is a Russian they character period. truth about Russia. Also espe the cially as the new authorities clearly intended to establish order close structural ideal (about which in a moment). event. and many. forced to the Eurasians. the sense of of events. for the country programme perceived in this way. the national ing. Frank. not sense. From the point of view of Eurasians. foreign policy of the Soviet state appeared to be bringing sympto matic in central Asia involved and the Far East they were changes: on a scale unmatched in the history of pre-Revolutionary Russia. was Far less controversial another of the characteristic feature to examine the clear tendency the revolution Eurasians' position as an event would devoid of a universal of historical sense. to some of extent. and ideological (Marxist communism) innovations of the Soviet authorities led to the severing of all links with Europe. revolution as presented revolution was by the Eurasians interpretation and folk caused a real scandal in ?migr? circles. coincidence." not understanding The Bolsheviks themselves. a fatal The SLAWOMIR MAZUREK the organic of character of the historical process.. economic (monolith). spokesmen industrialization Europeanization."19 The although it therefore. running circles. considered that and was they the also were. an epoch-making opened up a new epoch in the history of Russia. Berdyaev. what ismanifested revolution was.. many others Vyatcheslav . The nature of the Bolsheviks theory regarding especially were not irritat a group but power. Whatever the crisis say about of the epoch or the general as revolution they treated significance. Merezhkovskii. According to seize of professional revolutionaries who managed of the will of the masses rather unconscious "who preserve agents an Eurasian as of 'Petersburg' and understanding Russia identity an alien creation. IDEOLOGYAND IDEOCRACY The distinction I have adopted between historiosophy and ideology . an ideological the Eurasians the structure of the future: they prophesized ideocracy (undoubtedly affiliated the arrival of a anti century to the subsequent . to put itmildly. national in order character. not have taken place had Russia itself not survived According saved to the Eurasians. Such a project reconstruction. it doesn't us so far. to survive. reflecting and culture. shun. that the revolution was an event of 115 a influencing the fate of humanity. only the final formulation and elaboration of this vision constitutes the ideologicalization of their position. Eurasians. its a new in its traditions. only appeared a result of the ongoing politicization means pleasing have ideology. In wishing to present the ideology of the Eurasians. rooted myths needed - only a temporary solution. represented. them. It is not. of i. with to all of in mind the vision of the entire movement (by no its adherents).the first having been dealt with above. we must examine the project for political structure which they advanced for Russia.e. ideological even if. the second to be dealt with below historiosophy some of raise significant doubts. as a state. a project in the shape presented for political however. 'a return It however. however because falsehood and precisely the artificiality of Bolshevik Russia. it was the Bolsheviks themselves who its unity and in the short term its survival. More was than likely the most important element was state. proletariat mythologizing of Marxism's This was. in talking about created by them in our view. The guaranteed Russia' had unleashed the peoples of 'Petersburg amongst collapse and ethnic groupings inhabiting it strong tendencies for independ ence which were defeated chiefly thanks to the new ideology and its of the internationalist and class solidarity. The Bolshevik Russia. as a rule the historiosophy of the new Russia. by as at a later moment. could victory.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM considered universal it a certainty significance. For the concep this tion of an ideocracy. within the perspective of the history of not only to the East'. It is easy to see that the may of the Eurasians contains many moments. together Therefore. in spite of the appeals for academic neutrality20 made by assessment. ideology mentality. and for by polemicists. or to suddenly propose is the theory nature of the answers An evident and diagnoses. which was associated with theWest).116 Western motif. even ideocracy democracy. on concerning were for At times Orthodoxy's sure one of one has place the weaker in the future in the points that its creators of ques this problem area only the impression to increase the number tions which doubtful defended they were not able to deal with. to religious attempt coercion. for the reasons cited Russia. was for SLAWOMIR MAZUREK was the anti-theory to parliamentary above. religious the subordination of all areas to one power write they incessantly an to create the need of life to reli . rebirth. the whole of social life to the requirements of religion. the theory seems of other religions designed of to sustain .21 over about Orthodox gion. was concerned Russia it was presented Soviet and economic retaining political As far in their institu tions though possessing a new ideology.22 Considerations Russian Eurasian touched ideocracy doctrine. room when driven hard an aversion they declare for discussion the handing concerning to Orthodox hierarchies. They intended it to remain with a monolithic economy and retain the institution of a single party. is concentrating that they would be able to create in this way They power quite in the hands that the route to seriously of a 'classless ruling elite'. the selection for which would take place exclusively as to whether a theocracy. to an ephemeral and condemned existence. from his fellow countrymen ranging demanding as they have apparently that they subordinate. done for centuries Trubetskoi to limit ourselves in India. to avoid Nor of state this is there criteria'. example of them concerning the Eurasian many by Orthodox Eurasia faith and the natural gravitation towards Orthodoxy. 'ideological It is not easy to answer the question would be at the same time ideocracy Eurasians. On the other hand. Eurasian ideologists believed a classless this society. On on the basis of post-Bolshevik the one hand. term. the necessity culture. though conveying ideas about the possibilities for the new order (the Eurasians did not hide their surprise regarding its achievements that grew as a result as 'post-Bolshevik' plans as a country of the promulgation of the five-year plans). The first modern ideocracy deprived Soviet of a future a state. though it would be already claimed a Eurasian single party.uses the wide example term fideocentrism. the first half of the twentieth century constituted one of the most important symptoms to move of these the crisis of historiosophy sophical discipline. Trubetskoi) and the pro-Bolshevik grouping that formed around the paper 'Evrasia' (Karsavin. V. Let us begin by placing Eurasianism of two currents in the philosophy within against the background whose separation as a philo in of history. The task at hand will be all the easier if we first of all examine several interpretative generalizations. they are fond they display a sensitive bent for treating and spatial conditions. The latter group tried. strike up a dialogue with the Soviet authorities. culture as a creation its naturalistic and scientific preferences. and increasingly they used up their energy in typically damning ?migr? squabbles. understandably unsuccessfully. Efron. IT in.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM dreams 117 for the ideological-religious and to appease unity of Russia or less sympathetic of denominational coercion. More opponents seen perfectly of the Eurasians critics have the inadequacies in not only their religious have drawn attention They conceptions. attempts The first sics are for in both cases we are dealing with clear into a new. (bytovoi). of history: naturalistic. N. of relatively and Toynbee. Spengler to this latter current. and politicization The circle broke of Eurasianism led finally in an into two camps engaged unrelenting struggle with each other: the anti-Bolshevik (Savitskii. of geopolitical research. With time the Eurasians became less intellectually productive.N. Sviatopolk to Mirskii). it close for although in the philosophy specialists 'catastrophizing' and Rozanov. of Orthodoxy. by the creators is difficult to minimize Eurasians keenly refer linguistics.24 Having presented the Eurasians' position in this way it is time to answer the questions raised at the very start. customs ceremonial and not the spiritual aspects external.23 The ideologization to its decomposition. climatology. of climatic . non-philosophical is religious-eschatological type of discourse. and its clas the Russian Berdyaev. and is represented historicist. and ethnology. it is not an historicism. in nature. the great Eurasianism stands synthesis. The second may be called Frank. Naturalism. in their considerations to the findings of geography. to its vague to instrumentalize but to the tendency reli character. on the most as to concentrate as well to treat it superficially gion. this question does not oppress them for in point of fact they know the answer (although they probably have never couched it expr?s sis verbis). however by original and far outmoded eschatologism which one searches for vainly in his twentieth century pupils.25 role. West. thought a secondary or and linguistic theological. for for this. The cunning of historical reason.118 of though Konstantin a different Leont'ev. They concentrate on the fate of Russia which. was In Leont'ev characteristic this was for balanced their precursor. of Russians turns out themselves. equally to the problem of eschatology.on the whole may look toward the future with hope. As perspective Eurasians insensitive are not their for Russian is known the the thinkers as that of faith introduction of enabled preservation within a sensibility to history through the simultaneous rejection of reject millenarianism. completely istic here a pervading question sense of history. SLAWOMIR MAZUREK type. The banality and meagreness of eschatologism within the Eurasians' historiosophy remains closely linked with their ignor ance of such the regarding the eschatological millenarianism. The workings of the pushing them towards the domains of the mechanism are closely of tied to the already mentioned permanence for concrete characteristic ethno-cultural predispositions subjects. regenerates in the direction of a destiny which they had not even In this conception envisaged. statements in which they avoid yet remain Character the matter. Eschatological are not oppressed by they the question of the sense of history. it plays afoul falling This eschato logical reserve is striking and easily noticed despite the abundant catastrophic distress rhetoric. It is not difficult to find an explanation is missing in the Eurasians. thanks to the Bolshevik revolution. It is this that explains why the Eurasian nature of the Russians could not be forced relentlessly. most significant conception and for Eurasians undoubtedly this is after has meaning. all the One history . but those in which of of that time intellectual. - something unheard of in Russian tertiary routines. they accept . of which the victims. to be finally the cunning the Bolsheviks of the Eurasian become nature .that there exists in implicite though this is not essential history an impersonal regulating mechanism. He writes about the need to work out a third historiosophical ical voluntarism even in the most standpoint free of vestiges of historiosoph he does not sketch he when shifts not it out. Eurasians. who sympathized with the revolution. Florovskii reproached the adherents of the thesis of historical necessity for dealing in the cult of strength as well as in the naive belief that events head via the shortest route to a happy finale. He formulates his position smenovekhovstvo. Georgii to the question neces attention of historical sity. however.26 We have mentioned that Eurasianism had much in common with the naturalist current in contemporary philosophy of history. in a polemic with the leader of the as with the poets. Superficially. then the situation an eminent of the Karsavin. though general historical he expresses events. personal from of all-unity with the smallest hierarchical to the personalism: all created a potential possess largest. start of histori osophy such was is totally devoid of a metaphysical the case at the as soon as Lev background. The lichnost'] usefulness who stand higher gical hierarchy!). respectively the Church. we have naive also said that None its creators of often succumbed however. in the ontological e. of concrete close adopt terms. though this does not mean that his criticism does not apply to the views of many eminent representatives of the Eurasian current. declared himself philosophy of existence of Eurasianism. hierarchy nation. sanction equally for polycentrism treating nations and cultures as distinct.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM Such Not all. considerable 119 devotes for the theoreticians of Eurasianism. Blok and as well Belyi. Even if the twenties. to an analysis in a tone he does quite not and fatalism. as for the Eurasian . Ustryalov. is the standard however. sobornaya state. besides individuals [individual'naya lichnost'] there exist symphonic indi viduals [simfonicheskaya. changed representative to be an adherent Russian of all-unity. unique and equally valuable objects.g. Karsavin's combines the philosophy metaphysics existences. (but not in the axiolo of this philosophy as the ontological background for Eurasian historio it became a perfect sophy was limited however. position it with Florovskii accept approbation. actualizes itself (in the temporal character: this potential plane always only partially) through participation in Logos'. this means. to more that their or less scientism. Who himself to that of other is to say whether their assumptions. longer in its fundamentally nature of reactionary by the people revolution. anti-Westernism.120 SLAWOMIR MAZUREK conception of the Russian people. in the face of the Russian a short answer. Regardless movens of the entire Eurasian spiritus tion. What distinguishes their diagnosis from those no of others of the same time is not only but the thesis concerning 'local'. historiosophical the answer must the present as concisely new quality One can tradition. ideas that appear in the Russian well intellectual tradition yet as significant omissions. for as opposed to the Russian nation which within the historiosophy of the Eurasians is really harmonious unity inmultiplicity. as we . Equally the concept of the Russian nation as a symphonic unity of collective individuals (peoples and ethnic groupings) is a novel thought. and radicalized we have to mention. be there elaborated and the relatively innovation. If. and as kinds of elements: new ideas and concepts. configuration it as something made of three up entirely are radicalized by Eurasians. Amongst the ideas that belong to the Russian intellectual tradi by the Eurasians. character (the and the also the return to Eurasian identity). however. It is equally difficult not to note the independence and originality of the historiosophy of revolution worked out by the Eurasians. could not be described as a symphony of cultures. innovatory that does not the Tatar statehood is an original in char acter in relation to the indigenous historiosophical idea of ideocracy tradition. as a result of the dramatic conflict between Europe and the rest of the world. developed and elaborated since the days of Khomyakov. The appear in earlier Russian political thought.27 to the question of With regard of Eurasianism secondary standing. one of Russians. The thesis concerning roots of their the Eurasianism is undoubtedly idea. conviction the support of the Bolsheviks 'universal'. I were to answer is rather a that Eurasianism text constitutes as possible. I would a new say therefore of well-known ideas. first place. to provide is no way the whole and in a sense of upon. we see in the here the whether historiosophy (and. than merely grasp an answer. although it could not have come about were it not for the ontology of sobornosf. humanity. in the thought of which itwas a cultural and ethnic unit within a multitude. In reality the only well justified sanction was the last. originality not only of by the Eurasians' the presence of conception themes and is forejudged. often said that the future Byzantine Russia should pay off its debts to Europe. it occurred to them. in the history of Russian and their and successors Leont'ev - letters. This formulated century ignores in a more we the criticism than in the theory. as more to be viewed polycentrism. there exists saying something a chasm to bridge and Russia in a way impossible there is no way one can talk of a community back on their it. the defense of such a position that consider would 121 not be a hopeless severe undertaking) or simply as one of its themes. on the whole.' anti of similar to thatwhich exists between Europe and the rest of humanity. appears according if one for a moment radical already form know itself as a scheming to be out of keeping with however was teenth the theory of the equal standing of cultures. As a consequence one can historical destiny. and which Eurasians which ignore Europe. however. then this is only turn one's to harmonize of the radicalization with radical cultural of Slavophile post-Slavophile also needs anti-Westernism. itwould be difficult not to agree with The the views Eurasians to be the most critics of theWest Slavophiles Dostoevskii. formulations not . and the healing of by the Eurasians. an uncompromising Konstantin between critic the rebirth of Russia highly of Western considered liberalism.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM have recalled. The bold polycentrism of the Eurasians underwent deformation under pressure from their radical anti-Westernism. which always to its very nature. It is difficult to imagine any of the Eurasians between Europe In their view similar. constantly displayed a fascination with its culture. It is true that. and the creator Leont'ev. If it is not condemned because The Westernism. by saving it from sinking into the depths of social egalitarianism. they considered its splendour to be irretrievably past. The radical criti striking as it is in the case of criticism of the cism of European aggressor reveals culture. The however. were never was a product 'one can able to conflict. than the polycentrism of Danilevskii or Leont'ev (the difference here is not however as West).28 among whom in criticising I include Europe Danilevskii. of catastrophic historiosophy. - of Europe letters of nine an attempt thinkers: that there was to deny the difference between primitive and historical cultures. pointing out the richness of the former. to hold a different position as regards the dependency Europe. Russian always thinkers. these Maybe tormenting all weaknesses though intense despair as at the time are in the Eurasian though position. pass. to its meaning. vague nature of characteristic to be the Eurasian NOTES 1 Cf. of the that had appeared however. these reasons. remain on the level of the most Eurasianism of general to us as another only descriptions: importantly. 79.S. could discuss this its elements so long as we then.122 met typical in other themes. p. . instantly position. This raises the question. to perceive or It is enough. As it turns out we scale of this dependence. appears Russian historiosophy Similarities combining manifest anti-Westernism themselves however. rather of the entire characteristics. and about anti-millenarianism the precursor bringing to the thinkers the Eurasians closer of the Russian renaissance in historiosophy). An original feature is equally the absence of the question and concerning the meaning other of history. they from the position of an historian of ideas. I have what acquires significance. Khoruzhyi. Russian For reserve SLAWOMIR MAZUREK but also historiosophies. in the absence called above of their posi eschatological indeed a unique tion against the background of Russian thought in general and surely unmet amongst the ?migr? philosophers of history discussing the phenomenon of revolution. that besides this it has nothing in common with the proposals of then contemporary different Russian authors. generalization level of generality. evrazistvo i VKP. at a certain to step down only. traits 'original' What is more. S." Voprosy filosofii 1992. they are rather striking It would be absurd of course to claim that Eurasianism is a creation totally independent of theRussian intellectual tradition. "Karsavin. with cultural level from of this able polycentrism. going at full steam with the momentary. In the course of these arguments we have pointed out repeatedly that it does represent something as of Leont'ev (we have spoken at least of the significance to the current. reason for which would be weaknesses of their position alone. the characterization allows one above its engaged of the of Eurasianism to realize dependence upon tradition: it has to be dependent given that several of as the product of a radicalization of ideas appear earlier. 2. p. 16 E. cit. R Bitsilli. Opyt sistematicheskogo izlozheniya. 13 Cf. 269. za rubezhom. T. Iskhod k vostoku. Khoruzhyi. Evropa evrazitsev. 1. 25 Cf.V. 414. N. p. Trubetskoi. Eevrazistvo. Florovskii. "Rossiya. op. cit." Slavia 1994. op. cit. p. cit. op. Kn. Zen'kovskii. 9 iEvropa. op. G." Na putyakh. Khoruzhyi. 24 Cf. Berdjaev. 82-83.. m. ineniya. Trubetskoi. 167. no. samosozn 14 Cf. S.N. 42. Cf.. Paris. op." Seriya Literatury i Yazyka. cit. op cit. V. 12 Cf. S. 52. N. P. Lichnost' "Tserkov'.. Paris. Sofia 1920. cit. i svershenija. 3." L. op. S. Trubetskoi. 190. 22 Cf. cit. 1993. p. Kniga vtoraya. Utverzhdeniye evrazitsev. Paris. 161. i Vostok v kontseptsii Suchanek. "O patriotizme pravednom i grekhovnom. 20 Cf. p. Trubetskoi. 35. N. vol. Savitskii." Iskhod k vostoku. op. "Istoki russkoi revolucji. 1993.. op. 19 G.. 278. 1931. pp. Soch 26 Cf. Lo Gatto. Russkie mysliteli 6 10 N. cit. Rossiya i latinstvo. 1994. Florovskii. Moskva. cit. L.V. Karsavin.. Zen'kovskij. T. 450-446. 1993. istoricheskogo pp. Sofija. This Filozofii is an amended version of an article published i 1996. Orientalis. P. 191. p. N. Trubetskoi.S. 3 L. pp. p. i gosudarstvo. 1921.RUSSIAN EURASIANISM 123 2 C. Savitskii. "Evrazistvo i puti russkogo aniya. Berlin. Ochirova. Cf.. op. R Suvchynskii. G. Mysli Spolecznef. op. Na putyakh. Trubetskoi.. Evropa i chelovechestvo. "Evrazitsev. no. Egejska Poland . 4. "Religii Indii i khristianstvo. Roma.. Florovskii. 45. Pagine di storia e di letteratura russa. Ochirova. Vbor'be za evrazistvo. Karsavin. cit. Khachaturian. pp. S. 1928. Istoriya kultury russkoj emigratsii. p. G. V. 21 Cf. 82. op.. 1926.." Puf. cit. 15 Cf. Savitskii. Berlin. 78. Utverzhdenie evrazitscev. G. 17 G. Raeff. 23 Cf. 18 N. 158. Torr 02-764 Warszawa 6. p. p. Savitskii. in 'Archiwum Historii Translated from Polish by Guy R. N. Florovskii. p. p. E. op. 41. Rossiya no. 1925.S." Slavia Orientalis. 52 ul. 8 1923.. M. pp. Lo Gatto. cit. Florovskii. 1922. Trubetskoi. 4 M. Florovskij. 37-38. p. 81-82. 5 11 Ibid. 37-38. N. 27 28 Cf. Predchuvstvia 7 R Suvchynskii.