The image of Russian Pan-Slavism in the last third of the XIX century: historiography of the issue and the assessment issue

Koloskov Evgenii Andreevich ORCID: 0000-0002-8123-2924 PhD in History Associate Professor of Department of Theory and History of IR, St. Petersburg State University School of International Relations 191060, Russia, Saint Petersburg region, Saint Petersburg, Smolny St., entrance No. 8, of. entrance No. 8 eakoloskov@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Pan–Slavism, considered an ideology, including sometimes attributed to the official St. Petersburg ^[52], in the last third of the XIX century, literally immediately after the first political use of the term in 1848, became the subject of close study by contemporaries, both in Russia and abroad. In modern conditions, when the idea of unification on a national or linguistic principle looks rather suspicious, both in the eyes of scientists and the public, it becomes urgent to understand the causes and methods of constructing the image of Russian pan-Slavism in Western Europe of the nineteenth century.

Within the framework of this study, we will try to trace the dynamics of changes in the assessment of the relationship of Russian pan–Slavism in the last third of the XIX century with the idea of Slavic reciprocity through the prism of perception of the foreign policy of Russia / the USSR on the basis of domestic and foreign historiography of the XX-XXI centuries. It should be emphasized that, within the framework of this study, we will not try to define this term or try to compare it with the idea of Slavic (or Orthodox reciprocity).

Perhaps nothing has had such a serious impact on the assessment of pan-Slavism in Russia and abroad in the XX century, as two articles by F. Engels published in the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung" in January and February 1849 ^{[40, 42]} One of the most influential ideologists for the XX century spoke very unequivocally about the idea of uniting the Slavs, seeing in it "the main instrument of counter-revolution", the expansionism of Russia and a direct threat to the Germans and Magyars ^{[40, p. 181-184]}. It should be noted that in the future Engels continued to criticize pan-Slavism, seeing in it the justification of Russian expansionism, and Russia's foreign policy, which poses a threat to the German people and the labor movement as a whole, both in his articles ^[41] and in private correspondence ^[43].

It is quite expected that the answer was obvious, and we see that the further development of the ideas of pan-Slavism took place in line with the chauvinistic concept, as part of the search for an anti-Slavic conspiracy, including the German one. Given that the first version of pan–Slavism was clearly inspired by the concept of a "cultured German nation" and the pan-German movement gaining strength in the 1830s, mutual hostility between the two movements was inevitable. 

On the other hand, the critical assessment of Engels could not but influence Soviet historiography, which was branded in M.I. Pokrovsky's article "Pan-Slavism in the service of imperialism" in 1927 ^{[33, p. 1]}. Further works, in particular the dissertation and A.A. Mikhailov 1939 "Essays on the history of Slavophilism of the 40-50s (pan-Slavist tendencies in early Slavophilism)", in general, formed a tradition of direct comparison of Slavophilism (in domestic politics) and pan-Slavism (in foreign policy), together with their identification with tsarism, conservatism and nationalism ^[23]. Perhaps the only thing that caused disagreement: This is Engels' assessment of the foreign policy of tsarist Russia and its role in international relations, which was most clearly demonstrated in the framework of the discussion provoked by I. Stalin on the possibility of publishing the aforementioned article by Engels "The Foreign Policy of Russian Tsarism" in the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) in 1934 – as is known, on July 22, 1934, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) It recognized the publication of Engels' article "The Foreign Policy of Russian Tsarism" in the Bolshevik as inappropriate. This decision was preceded by Stalin's letter to the members of the Politburo dated July 19, in which Engels' article was given a critical assessment ^[38] and Stalin's negative reaction to the publication in the same year of Engels' letter to the Romanian publicist and translator I. Nadezhda in the 13-14 issue of the Bolshevik magazine with comments ^[37] by G.E. Zinoviev (according to Stalin's assumption ^[43]), dedicated to the 20th anniversary of the PMV.

The transformation of attitudes towards the idea of Slavic reciprocity, in our opinion, was caused by the outbreak of the Second World War and plans for post-war reconstruction. As already noted, Stalin personally opposed critics of Russia's foreign policy in the person of Engels in a letter to members of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) on July 19, 1934 ^[38]. And on May 31, 1941, on the pages of the Bolshevik magazine, this criticism became the property of all party members ^[39]. The creation of the All–Slavic Committee on October 5, 1941 in Moscow, in many ways also became a signal to change the attitude of the idea of Slavic reciprocity, and numerous appeals to the Slavic peoples – "oppressed brothers Slavs" - are proof of this. We can also talk about a change of emphasis in the assessment of the foreign policy of the tsarist government. You can remember and so warped M. Dzhilasa is the word of the Kremlin guide about "our tsars" ^{[10, p. 118]}. Such a position of the authorities, coupled with the need for a historical justification of Soviet expansionism in the late 1930s and the creation of the Eastern Bloc in the second half of the 1940s, dramatically expanded the list of works devoted to the issues of interest to us, both from politicians and from the academic community. A certain paradox of the attitude towards pan-Slavism during and immediately after the Great Patriotic War, namely, the accusation of reactionalism and imperialism (for example, A.N. Tolstoy: "We resolutely and firmly reject the very idea of pan–Slavism, as a thoroughly reactionary trend, deeply hostile to the equality of peoples and the lofty tasks of national development of states and peoples") ^{[6, p. 9]}, together with the praises after the war of the idea of a pan-Slavic brotherhood opposed to the Germanic-Roman world, for example, the article by E. Benes "The Unity of Slavic peoples – the foundation of peace in Europe" in the magazine "Slavs" ^[20] and brought victory over fascism (the theme of Slavic unity as the basis of victory over German fascism and the guarantor of peace are discussed in detail in the articles by I. Borozdin ^[4] and A. Gundorov ^[9]) was preserved throughout the Soviet period. Separately, it is worth noting the obvious desire to disown the term "pan-Slavism" both in Soviet historiography and in the countries of the Eastern Bloc, in order to overcome the above dichotomy, i.e. the unwillingness to recognize, noted by Western critics, the similarity of the foreign policy of Soviet and tsarist Russia in the specified time period. Institutionally, it is important to remember that it was during this time period – at the end of 1946 – that the Institute of Slavic Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which previously existed for a short period of 1931-1934 in Leningrad, was recreated in Moscow ^[27]. Of course, the ideas of Slavic reciprocity were not expected to find support in socialist Romania, Hungary and Albania.

Outside of Russia, interest in the study of pan-Slavism also did not fade during the interwar period, in particular, in 1932, H. Cohn, one of the pioneers of the academic study of nationalism, the topic of pan-Slavism was touched upon in the book "Nationalism in the Soviet Union" ^[54]. The peak of interest is expected to fall on the initial stage of the Cold War of the 1950s. It was during this period that Cohn's works "Pan–Slavism: History and Ideology" (1953) ^[56] and X were published. Arendt "The Origins of Totalitarianism" ^[50], in which pan-Slavism is considered as a forerunner of Bolshevism and as a justification for Soviet expansionism. The active use of the Slavic idea also remains without attention during the WWII ^[55]. It should be noted that in Russia, interest in this topic has already appeared in our time ^{[16, 46]}. The influence of the emigrant tradition, in turn, justified a closer study of the cultural elements of pan-Slavism to the detriment of the political component of the concept, which is noticeable in the works of N.V. Ryasanovsky ("Russia and the West in the teachings of Slavophiles", 1952) ^{[57, p. 202-210]}. and M.B. Petrovich ("The Emergence of Russian pan-Slavism in 1856-1870", 1956) ^[58]. It is obvious in the works of the authors of the 50s and 60s, a special interest in the Czech version of pan–Slavism, for example, in the article by D.F.N. Bradley, a specialist in diplomatic history, and the desire to divide pan-Slavism into "good" and "bad" at his expense: into "Russian" (expansionist and conservative) and "Slavic" (protective and democratic) ^{[50, 51]} or, within the framework of Russian pan–Slavism, into "state" and "radical-democratic", as F. suggests. Fadner ("Seventy years of Pan-Slavism in Russia. From Karamzin to Danilevsky", 1962) ^{[52, p. 404]}.

Perhaps the most detailed answer to the accusations of "Soviet pan–Slavism" is given in the article by V.K. Volkov "On the question of the origin of the terms "pan-Germanism" and "pan-Slavism" in the collection Slavic-Germanic cultural ties and Relations of 1969, where the author notes the similarity of the origin of the terms, but emphasizes the difference between "class roots" and "the role they played in the destinies of the peoples of Europe and all of humanity" ^[5], not realizing how close he is to the perception of the movements of H. Arendt ^{[49, p. 222-228]} and attempts to demonstrate the democratic principles of pan-Germanism in H. Seton–Watson ^{[61, p. 446-447]}.

The collapse of the Eastern Bloc and the USSR reduces interest in the history of Slavic reciprocity in Western countries, but, at the same time, raises interest in pan-Slavism in Russia and in Eastern Europe. It is noted that "the discussions of Soviet historians at the IX Congress of Slavists (1983) showed that Soviet historiography is ready to revise previous ideological attitudes regarding pan-Slavism" ^{[36, p. 100]}. In 1989, the All–Slavic Cathedral was established in the USSR as a regional organization with a center in Vologda, which marked the beginning of the creation of a whole galaxy of different pan-Slavic socio-political organizations in modern Russia ^{[11, 14]}. At the end of the Soviet era in the academic environment, the works of N.I. Tsimbaev ^[47] and V.A. Dyakov ^[13] became an example of revision of approaches to Slavophilism and pan-Slavism, which, along with the authority of V.K. Volkov, who headed the Institute of Slavic Studies and Balkanistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1987, opened the way to rethinking the assessments of Slavic reciprocity and the role of Russia in this process, which was also greatly facilitated by the tragedy of the growth of nationalism and the collapse of the USSR and the SFRY. Interest in pan–Slavism as an element of Russia's foreign policy or even a variant of Russia's path ^{[12, pp. 571-573, 600]} is also noticeable in the works of domestic political publicists of the turn of the XX - early XXI centuries ^{[44, 35, 26, pp. 104, 147-164, 197, 202-206]}.

A new surge of interest in pan–Slavism in the West and in Russia arises during the period of activation of Russian cultural diplomacy in Europe and the new actualization of the issue of Slavic (and Orthodox) reciprocity in the second half of the 2000s – early 2010s. An attempt to consider the phenomenon in the format of an international discussion was made by an international team of researchers who published their works in the collection "Post–Pan-Slavism: Slavs, Slavic idea and anti-Slavism in the XX and XXI centuries." published in fateful 2014, the authors focused on the formation of identity based on the Slavic idea, taking into account national and international discourses, anti–Slavism - criticism of the ideas of the idea of Slavic reciprocity on the example of Greece and Italy ^[61].

Against the background of the mass creation of various cultural funds and the publication of classical authors, including K.S. Aksakov "The State and the People" (2009) ^[1], V.I. Lamansky "Geopolitics of Pan-Slavism" (2010) ^[22], A.S. Khomyakov "The World Task of Russia" (2011) ^[45], M.P. Pogodin "Eternal beginning. The Russian Spirit" (2011) ^[32], works on the topic of pan-Slavism began to appear en masse. Let us note only the main research trends: the authors study the origins of pan-Slavism and the origin of the term (G.V. Rokina ^[36], A.A. Grigorieva ^{[7, 8]}, A.V. Myrikova ^{[24, 25]}, I.V. Churkina ^[48]), compare Slavophilism and pan-Slavism (V.A. Boldin ^[3], M.K. Kovtunenko ^{[7, 8]}, B.A. Prokudin ^[34]), are engaged in the analysis of domestic and foreign historiography of pan-Slavism (O.V. Pavlenko) ^{[28, 29, 30, 31]}.

In the works of modern authors, great importance is given to the role of pan-Slavism in modern Russia: a number of researchers are trying to analyze the significance of the influence of the concept of Slavic reciprocity on the modern foreign policy of the Russian Federation ^[11]. Also recently, interest in certain well-known personalities and their role in shaping Russian foreign policy has increased again. Among them, we note the works dedicated to V.I. Lamansky ^[21], I.I. Dusinsky ^{[19, 20]}, I.P. Liprandi ^[15], etc. The Western attempt to comprehend pan-Slavism (not only Russian) was perhaps most vividly embodied in the collective monograph "Pan-Slavism and Slavophilism in Modern Central and Eastern Europe: Origins, Manifestations and Functions", which was published in February 2023" ^[59]. Pan-Slavism is considered in this study by a team of authors in the widest possible meaning, including both Yugoslavism and Russian appeals to Slavic and Orthodox solidarity, competing, according to the authors, with European identity.

The modern attempt to revive the idea of Slavic reciprocity, often by simply giving it a new name, in the eyes of Western researchers obviously has similarities with the Soviet and imperial tradition and, in general, is perceived with a significant degree of suspicion. Against this background, the abundance of studies devoted to the development of Central European pan–Slavism, in fact, resurrects the concept of dividing pan-Slavism into "Russian" and "Slavic".

Thus, we come to the conclusion that in the domestic tradition there is a desire to separate pan-Slavism, Slavophilism, the idea of Slavic and Orthodox reciprocity, I strongly protest against mixing these concepts and endlessly arguing about their definition and correlation with the foreign policy of Russia and other Slavic countries, while in the foreign tradition the authors tend to trace the continuous genesis with in the middle of the XIX century and up to the present moment, political and social views are often very different in their structure within the framework of a single term "pan-Slavism".