Libmonster ID: RS-622
Author(s) of the publication: V. A. Dyakov

The phrases "Slavic idea", "Slavic question"," Slavic solidarity"," Slavic reciprocity"," Slavic community"," Slavic unity " have existed for at least two hundred years. Somewhat later, the terms "pan-Slavism", "Austroslavism", "Yugoslavism" and some others of a similar type and content appeared. Although these concepts are not always clear definitions suitable for modern scientific terminology, they are still quite widely used. This is due, on the one hand, to the strength of tradition, and, on the other, to the complexity of the corresponding phenomena .1
The history of the "Slavic idea" and the "Slavic question" in pre-revolutionary Russia was given a lot of attention by both domestic and foreign historiography. A number of reports were devoted to it at the IX International Congress of Slavists, held in Kiev in September 1983. The purpose of this article is to use the concrete material of the pre-Reform period to consider some general questions concerning the genesis, essence, and social significance of the idea of Slavic solidarity.

Slavic tribes began to realize their ethnic and linguistic kinship in the early Middle Ages. The feudal era as a whole was marked by a further growth of the ethnic consciousness of the Slavs, the formation of a number of Slavic ethnic communities at the level of the feudal nationality 2 . It is methodologically incorrect to identify the ethno-social relations of the feudal-folk stage with the national ties characteristic of the so-called modern, i.e. bourgeois nations that appeared at a later time.

Although the idea of Slavic solidarity is deeply rooted in the past, a significant part of public life in the form of " sla-

1 For all this, see, in particular: Koleika I. Slavic programs and the idea of Slavic solidarity in the 19th and 20th centuries Prague, 1964; Volkov V. K. On the question of the origin of the terms " Pan-Germanism "and"pan-Slavism". In: Slavyano-germanskie kul'turnye svyazi i otnosheniya [Slavic-German Cultural Relations and Relations], Moscow, 1969; Leshchilovskaya I. I. Kontseptsii slavyanskoi obshchnosti v kontse XVIII-pervoi polovine XIX veka. - Voprosy istorii, 1976, N 12; Dyakov V. A. Politicheskie interpretatsii idei slavyanskoi solidarnosti i razvitie slavyanovedeniya (s kontsa XVIII v. do 1939 g.) [Political interpretations of the idea of Slavic solidarity and the development of Slavic studies (from the end of the XVIII century to 1939)]. In: Metodologicheskie problemy istorii slavistiki, Moscow 1978; Freidzon V. I. Predstavleniya i idei slavyanskoi obshchnosti v pervoi polovine XIX veka. - Voprosy istorii, 1979, N 9; Nenasheva Z. S. The idea of Slavic community in modern Soviet and Czechoslovak historiography (Some terminological and theoretical aspects). In: Issledovaniya po istorii slavyanovedeniya i balkanistiki [Studies on the History of Slavic Studies and Balkan Studies], Moscow, 1981. The origins of Pan-Slavism (An Attempt towards the Evaluation of the Slav Movements in the First Half of the 19th Century). In: Annales Universitatis Scientiarum Budapestinensis de Rolando Eotvos nominatae. Sectio historica, t. XXI. Budapest. 1981.

2 the Development of ethnic identity of the Slavic peoples in the early middle ages. M., 1982.

page 16

It was only at the end of the XVIII - beginning of the XIX century that it became part of the Vyan issue. The most important objective factor that caused this transformation was the process of nation formation among the largest of the Slavic peoples-the Russian people. The beginning of this process dates back to the middle or second third of the XVII century. Experts consider the end of the 18th century to be an important turning point in both the material and spiritual spheres. On the one hand, the capitalist system developed in Russia around the 1780s, and on the other hand, in the last third of the eighteenth century, the new culture reached a significant degree of maturity, which for more than a century gradually replaced the old, medieval one .3 The completion of the process of forming the Russian bourgeois nation dates back to the first half of the 19th century.

It was significant that similar ethno-social and ethno-cultural processes unfolded in approximately the same era in Ukraine and Belarus, among the Western and southern Slavs. The specifics of the development of each of the Slavic peoples left their mark on the external manifestations and time frame of this process. It is, therefore, not a question of coincidences, but of the typological similarity of phenomena .4 It was this similarity that largely determined the growing desire of the Slavic public for mutual understanding.

These are the conditions under which the idea of Slavic reciprocity has become an essential component of the social life of Slavic peoples. This idea was a further development of the sense of linguistic, cultural and historical community, the proximity of historical destinies, the similarity of economic and everyday life, which was part of the ethnic consciousness of the Slavs of the feudal era. In the course of the emergence and development of capitalist relations associated with the strengthening of intra-ethnic integration, the development of economic relations between neighboring peoples, this ethnic consciousness was gradually integrated into the national consciousness that was replacing it. The idea of Slavic reciprocity increasingly became the primary basis of various theoretical concepts, which proceeded from the fact that the Slavic peoples are united in their origin and customs, that their relations with each other should be based on fraternal solidarity and mutual support.

Bourgeois publicists and historians claim that concepts of this kind are something exceptional, inherent only in the Slavs. However, even a cursory acquaintance with the history of the Gendinavian peoples, the unification of Germany, and the Italian Risorgimento leaves no doubt that such phenomena took place not only among the Slavs and not only in Europe, but also in other parts of the world. K. I. Rovda reasonably writes: "The community of spiritual culture of the Slavs is not an isolated and not exceptional phenomenon a phenomenon in the history of world civilization. Such a commonality, based on the similarity of historical conditions, geographical proximity, ethnic and linguistic kinship, exists among many European, American and Asian peoples and is one of the objective aspects of the development of human culture." 5
3 For the main factual material and the most important generalizing judgments, see: Dmitriev S. S. Obrazovanie russkoy natsii [Education of the Russian Nation]. - Voprosy istorii, 1955, No. 7; his own journal. On the question of education and the main stages of development of the Russian nation. - Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series of Social Sciences, 1955 N 11; Voprosy formirovaniya russkoy narodnosti i natsii [Questions of Formation of the Russian people and Nation], Moscow, L. 1958; Poznansky V. V. Ocherki formirovaniya russkoy natsional'noi kul'tury, Moscow, 1975; Krasnobaev B. I. Russkaya kul'tura vtoroy poloviny XVII - nachala XIX V. Moscow, 1983.

4 Formation of national cultures in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe, Moscow, 1977; Formation of nations in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Historical and Historical-cultural aspects, Moscow, 1981.

5 Rovda K. I. Slavyanskaya obshchnost ' i problemy kul'tury [Slavic community and cultural problems]. In: History, Culture, Ethnography and Folklore of the Slavic peoples. VII International Congress of Slavists. Reports of the Soviet delegation, Moscow, 1973, p. 269.

page 17

In most cases, bourgeois authors approach the study of the" Slavic idea "unhistorically, trying to prove that throughout history, in all its manifestations, it appeared only in the form of the" aggressive "and even" imperialist " ideology of nationalism and pan-Slavism6 . In fact, for some time after its emergence, the idea of Slavic reciprocity had mainly an ethno-national content. Over time, it gradually began to turn into an instrument of struggle between various social and political groups. Each of them interpreted the "Slavic idea" in its own way. Progressive forces used the idea of Slavic reciprocity in attempts at social transformation and the struggle for national independence, while reactionaries used it to justify concepts of a directly opposite nature. Co-existing with the main philosophical and sociological doctrines that occupied people's minds, the idea of Slavic reciprocity in some cases was directly derived from them, in others it appeared, although independently, but in a complex intertwining with other doctrines of the same kind, and in others it was the basis of reasoning, with the help of which attempts were made to contrast the historical destinies of Eastern Europe.

The methodological conclusion that follows from this is that in this area, hasty assessments are particularly illegitimate and fraught with errors. It is impossible to say that the idea of Slavic reciprocity is progressive in general, just as it is impossible to say that it has always served and can serve only the forces of reaction. In the period between 1789 and 1871, i.e., in the era of bourgeois - progressive, national-liberation, and democratic-liberation movements, this idea was quite often used by progressive forces. In the following decades, it more often, though not always, found itself in the service of the reaction. In each individual case, everything was determined by a very specific situation; therefore, only on historical realities, and not on speculative schemes, should the researcher base his conclusions and assessments .7
This can be confirmed by many examples related to any of the Slavic peoples. Especially rich material is provided by the history of Eastern Slavs. This material is extremely broad and diverse, and it opens up certain opportunities for generalizing judgments and conclusions.

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Russian society's keen interest in Russian history and culture, in the historical past, languages and culture of other Slavic peoples, was captured in fiction and scientific literature, documentary sources written by writers and publicists, scientists, travelers and business people, officers, diplomatic and other officials. 8 The subject matter, content, and most important conclusions of the Slavistic ra-

6 См. Fisera V. С. Politiques et modeles d'integration regionale dans le pays Slaves: du Monde Slave au camp socialiste. Comunication presentee au IX e Congres internationale des slavistes. P. 1983.

7 Right was V. T. Pashuto, who called for studying the history of Russian Slavophilism, pan-Slavism, neo-Slavism, carefully considering their social conditionality, because "without understanding their historical nature, it is easy to lose the criteria and fall either into their apology, or into national nihilism, or pretend that these important topics do not exist in science" (Pashuto V. T. Nauchnyy istorizm i sodruzhestvo muz [Scientific Historicism and the Community of Muses]. - Kommunist, 1984, N 5, p. 84).

8 Dostyan I. S. Russkaya obshchestvennaya mysl i balkanskie narody ot Radishchev do dekabristov [Russian Public Thought and the Balkan Peoples from Radishchev to the Decembrists], Moscow, 1980; Nikulina M. V. Slavyanskaya problematika v obshchestvenno-literaturnoy borbe pervoy treti XIX V. (based on the material of Russian periodicals). In: Studies on the Historiography of Slavic studies and Balkanistics, Moscow, 1981.

page 18

bot was largely determined by the socio-political situation in the country and the foreign policy course of the government.

The question of the place of the Slavs in the history of Europe occupied the well-known Russian enlightener-democrat V. V. Putin. F. Malinovsky, who published the magazine "Autumn Evenings"in 1803g. Discussing in its pages the glory and power of Russia, its ability to repel any attack, he declared that "from the Baltic Gulf to the Kamchatka and Mediterranean Seas, between Asia and America" there is "one tribe of Slavenorussians: in Bulgaria and Slavonia, Hungary, Dalmatia - all these are our dear fellow citizens! And yet all of Greece is bound to us by its Orthodox faith - or are the sons of Russia not able to protect them?" Recalling Russia's victories in the eighteenth-century wars with Turkey, and the success of Suvorov's Italian campaign, Malinovsky suggested building on them to rebuild the political system of Europe by creating federal states that would unite peoples close in language, such as Slavs. Malinovsky's characteristic desire to justify the necessity and usefulness of cultural and political rapprochement between Russia and the Slavic peoples, the vagueness of ideas about the linguistic differences between the "Slavic tribes", and the unjustified attribution of the Hungarians and the Moldo-Wallachian population to the Slavs are characteristic in one form or another of many foreign policy projects put forward at the beginning of the XIX century. Karazin, S. M. and V. B. Bronevsky. The projects for the political reconstruction of Europe, set out in a number of notes of retired Major A. Polev, which were submitted to Alexander I in 1306-1811, provided for the creation of a united German state, the Hellenic republic, the Kingdom of Hungary, as well as a large Slavic federation headed by Russia .9
In 1804, A. S. Kaisarov and A. I. Turgenev, having made a trip to the Slavic countries, prepared a number of scientific works, which, however, were not published. By their own admission, these progressive young people became interested in the history, culture, and languages of the Slavic peoples when they were students at the University of Göttingen and listened to A. L. Schletzer's lectures on Russian history. About what motivated travelers to scientific studies in this area, Kaisarov wrote: "The more we delved into our research, the more convinced we were of the truth that a Russian historian should certainly learn more about all the branches of the fertile Slavic tree, the more we were kindled by the desire to see those peoples who are connected with us by close ties kinship, to see the lands that witnessed their great exploits. Together we were in Poland, Lusatia, Bohemia, Hungary, Srem, Slavonia, Croatia, Istria, Carinthia, and Carniolia, and if we could take advantage of the circumstances of our intended research in a short time, we did not miss anything. " 10 In the 1940s. Kaisarov was called "one of the first Slavophiles" 11 . It seems, however, that the similarity here is mainly external; in fact, his views differ significantly from those of the Slavophiles, both in content and in their class orientation.

During the first decade of the 19th century, various political interpretations of the idea of a Slavic community emerged. If Malinovsky followed the principle of national equality, showed a more or less democratic approach to social contradictions, if

9 Dostyan I. S. UK. soch., pp. 53, 63, 84-85.

10 Lotman Yu. A. The manuscript of A. S. Kaisarov "Comparative dictionary of Slavic adverbs". - Scientific Notes of the University of Tartu, 1958, issue 65, p. 198.

11 A. I. Turgenev to K. S. Serbinovich, 25. III. 1844. - Russkaya starina, 1882, N 5, p. 449.

page 19

Polev, although he was not so radical, but still wrote about the need to mitigate serfdom oppression, Karazin, who evolved from moderate liberalism to reactionism, approached the matter more from a dynastic position and designed the "Kingdom of Slovenia" in the Balkans, intended for one of "the august brothers of Alexander I" 12 .

The democratic interpretation of the idea of the Slavic community, which was barely outlined at the previous stage, received quite significant development in the Decembrist ideology. The genetic connection of the Decembrist views on the Slavic question with the progressive thought of the previous period is indubitable, although researchers differ in the specific interpretation of this connection. Yu. A. Lotman believes that " Kaisarov's ideal was free Russia-the center of the liberated Slavic world, that od was one of the forerunners of the ideas of political unification of Slavs led by free Russia, put forward later by the Decembrist organization - Society of the United Slavs " 13. I. S. Dostyan refers Kaisarov's reasoning exclusively to the cultural sphere and states: "Speaking as an ardent advocate of the reciprocity of Slavic peoples in the sphere of education and science, Kaisarov seems to anticipate the ideas of cultural rapprochement between these peoples, which were developed in Russian public thought several decades later." 14 It seems that this confirms the continuity of the Decembrist views on the Slavic question with the views of A. S. Kaisarov, A. I. Turgenev, V. F. Malinovsky both in political (Yu.A. Lotman) and cultural (I. S. Dostyan) aspects.

The future Decembrist V. K. Kuchelbecker gave a public lecture on Russian literature and the Russian language in Paris in 1821, in which he argued that the rich history and high virtues of the Russian language are organically connected with the democratic traditions of the people who created it, that these traditions are the key to the liberation of the masses from serfdom and despotism. At the same time, Kuchelbecker emphasized that the Russian language "originated from the Slavic language, whose various branches now extend from the shores of the Adriatic Sea to the Arctic Ocean, from the Danube and Elbe to the Pacific Islands." 15 During the arrest of A. S. Griboyedov, who was involved in the investigation of the Decembrists, editions of Ukrainian and Serbian folk songs, a Serbian-Russian dictionary, one of the scientific works of I. Dobrovsky and other books related to Slavism were found in his suitcase .16 In 1825, the Northern Archive published an article about the Slavic peoples in the European part of the Turkish Empire. Its author, A. M. Spiridov, brother of the Decembrist M. M. Spiridov, partly shared the views of the Decembrists. The article is imbued with sympathy for the "peoples of the Slavic tribe", the desire to emphasize their important historical role; it is characterized by the idealization of features inherited, in the author's opinion, by the Slavs from the past, such as moral purity, patriarchal-democratic foundations of the social order, natural courage and patriotism. 17
12 Dostyan I. S. UK. soch., p. 70.

13 Lotman Yu. A. Andrey Sergeevich Kaisarov and the literary and social struggle of his time. - Scientific Notes of the University of Tartu, 1958, issue 63, p. 139.

14 Dostyan I. S. UK. soch., p. 104.

15 Kuchelbecker's lecture on Russian Literature and Language, delivered in Paris in 1821. Publication and foreword by P. S. Beisov. - Literary Heritage, 1954, vol. 59, p. 375.

16 Georgievsky A. P. Slavyansky vopros [The Slavic question]. Historical and literary essay. - Scientific Notes of the Faculty of History and Philosophy of the Far Eastern University, 1921, vol. II, polutom 2, p. 107.

17 Dostyan I. S. UK. soch., p. 185.

page 20

Some enthusiasm for the" Slavic idea "is also noticeable in the program of the early Decadent organization "Order of Russian Knights", founded in 1814 by M. F. Orlov and M. A. Dmitriev-Mamonov .18 Recalling the contacts of the Decembrists with the Polish gentry in 1818, S. G. Volkonsky wrote:: "At that time, a united Slavic element prevailed in our mutual beliefs, and I support this not only with my own views, but with the fact that at that time a Masonic lodge was established in Kiev under the name of Les Slaves reunis (United Slavs)" 19 . Members of the Decembrist organizations and those close to them who studied the Balkan region and the history of the Russo-Turkish wars of the XVIII-early XIX centuries noted the important role of the ideas of the Slavic community in the liberation struggle of the Balkan Slavs against the Ottoman yoke, and even assumed that sooner or later it would be possible to create a "Slavic power"friendly to Russia 20 .

The idea of a Slavic community was peculiar to the views of members of the Society of United Slavs. This Decembrist organization "raised the banner of Slavic unity for the first time in the history of Europe and gave its intentions in this area the significance of a political program" 21, which is confirmed by the documents of the Society - the "Oath" and "Rules" or "Catechism", testimonies and memoirs of its active participants. Among the commandments of the Catechism was the following:: "You are a Slav, and you will build four fleets on your land by the shores of the surrounding seas: the Black, the White, the Dalmatian, and the Arctic." 22 The surviving draft of the Society's seal has 8 facets with inscriptions on them: Russians, Poles, Hungarians (variant: Illyrians), Bohemians, Croats, Dalmatians, Serbs, Moravians. "Society, "says I. I. Gorbachevsky's Notes," had as its main goal the emancipation of all Slavic tribes from autocracy, the elimination of the existing national hatred among some of them, and the unification of all the lands inhabited by them by a federal union. It was intended to define with precision the boundaries of each state; to introduce among all peoples a form of democratic representative government; to form a congress to manage the affairs of the Union and to amend, if necessary, the general indigenous laws, leaving each State to take care of its internal structure and to be independent in drawing up its particular laws." 23
When it came to the merger of the Society of United Slavs with the Southern Society of Decembrists, the head of the first of these organizations, PI Borisov, said that even after the merger of the societies, its members would have to follow the oath they had taken - to devote their lives to the struggle for freedom, equality and brotherhood of the Slavic peoples. The representative of the Southerners, M. P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, expressed the conviction that this in no way contradicts the tasks of Southern society and "that the transformation of Russia will necessarily open the way to freedom and prosperity for all Slavic tribes; that united Societies can more easily carry out this transformation; that Russia, freed from tyranny, will openly promote the goals of the Slavic union: liberate Poland, Bohemia, Moravia and other Slavic lands,

18 Nechkina M. V. Dvizhenie dekabristov [The Decembrist Movement], vol. II, Moscow, 1955, p. 159.

19 Notes of Sergei Grigoryevich Volkonsky, St. Petersburg, 1902, p. 402.

20 Dostyan I. S. Participation of the Decembrists in the study of the Balkans and Russian-Turkish warriors of the XVIII-early XIX century. - Soviet Slavic Studies, 1975, N 6, p. 32-33.

21 Вazulow L. Idea federacji sJowianskiej w programie Stowarzyszenia Zjedno-czonych Slowian. In: Z polskich studiow slawistycznych. Ser. 3. Historia. Warszawa. 1968, s. 147.

22 The Decembrist Uprising. Materials. T. V. M.-L. 1926, pp. 13-14.

23 Gorbachevsky I. I. Zapiski [Notes]. Letters, Moscow, 1965, p. 13.

page 21

establish free governments in them and unite them all in a federal union." According to Gorbachevsky, after the negotiations, the commitment to the idea of a Slavic community was confirmed by many other members of the Southern Society, including M. M. Muravyov-Apostol24 .

Program documents of the Southern and Northern societies, as well as other sources indicate that the supporters of putting the "Slavic idea" in the foreground did not constitute the majority in these societies. At the same time, the literature recognizes the presence of a considerable number of followers of this idea in the Decembrist milieu, especially in Southern society .25 To the evidence already cited above, we will add the investigative testimony of A. S. Gangeblov, who in the spring of 1825 was admitted to the St. Petersburg Southern Council, but did not participate in its activities or in the events of December 14. Having twice repeated during the interrogation that the task of the secret society was to establish constitutional rule and "unite the Slavic peoples into one political whole," he referred to P. P. Svistunov ,who accepted him as a member of the society. 26
The Decembrists ' fascination with the idea of a Slavic community and their national-patriotic feelings did not lead them to chauvinism. Turning to the past of the entire Slavs, to the traditions of the Russian people, they sought in them evidence of the originality, viability, and prospects of the national culture. The characteristic features of the Decembrist approach to the" Slavic idea " are connected with the features of the noble revolutionary spirit, with the forms of democracy inherent in it. The Decembrist views on Slavism later, of course, had an impact on Narodnik and Slavophil doctrines. However, to claim that Decembrism contains " germs... Slavophilism in its purest form " 27, there is hardly any reason, if we talk not about phraseology, but about the essence of the matter.

Heightened national feelings and a keen interest in the idea of a Slavic community can be traced in the ideology of the participants of the Russian liberation movement during the first 10-15 years after December 14, 1825. Participants in the circle of the Cretan brothers at Moscow University, for example, demanded that the Russian language and customs be fully supported, because "this distinguishes the character of the people and preserves national pride, which is closely connected with the glory and power of the state", and insisted on transformations that "revitalize the national industry, art and arts" 28 . Particularly characteristic are the "projects" of the retired staff captain S. I. Sitnikov, which he sent by mail to different cities of Russia in 1830. They proposed a number of social reforms and the creation of a" Veche "state modeled on the"Novgorod Republic or the United States of America." The "Veche" state was to be called the " Slavic Society "and include" three vechs "headed by" Slavic-Russian posadniks "in Novgorod, Warsaw, and Kiev, and the" voivode of all forces " in Moscow .29
The 40s of the last century were marked by a significant rise in interest in the Slavic question, which was reflected in the program documents and activities of the Kiev Cyril and Methodius Society.-

24 Ibid., pp. 11-12.

25" The idea of a democratic Slavic federation did not die out even after the unification of societies, "wrote, for example, R. I. Vydrin in the article" The National Question in the Russian Social Movement " (Golos Pastuvshiy, 1915, No. 1, p.112).

26 Dostyan I. S. Russkoe obshchestvennoe dvizhenie [Russian Social Movement], pp. 313, 325.

27 Dovnar-Zapolsky M. V. Idealy dekabristov [The Ideals of the Decembrists]. Moscow, 1907, p. 278.

28 Dyakov V. A. Osvobozhitelnoe dvizhenie v Rossii v 1825 - 1861 gg. [Liberation movement in Russia in 1825-1861]. Moscow, 1979, p. 94.

29 For more information, see: Elias. The Sitnikov case (project of the Veche government). Based on archived data. - Voice of the Past, 1917, N 7-8.

page 22

A. A. (1846-1847) and the St. Petersburg organization of M. V. Butashevich - Petrashevsky (1844-1848).

The emergence of the Cyril and Methodius society was determined by the same factors that determined the social orientation of the entire liberation movement in Russia. But there were also local factors associated with the process of forming the Ukrainian nation, especially in the field of culture. 30 The very name of the Cyril and Methodius brotherhood strongly linked it with the idea of a Slavic community (the Ukrainian version of the name sounds from this point of view, perhaps more expressive: "Slov'janske tovarishstvo sv.Cyril I Mefodiya"). The Bratchikov program focused primarily on the national issue. In a note by V. M. Belozersky outlining this program (December 1845), the failure of the Polish liberation movement was explained by the fact that it was fighting alone. In Ukraine, independent actions were recognized as impossible, and the task was to unite all Slavs to fight for freedom, for the return of people's rights. The note called for spreading education "in the spirit of the Slavic idea"by all means.

The charter of the society, written by N. I. Gulak in 1845 or at the beginning of 1846, declared the creation of a political association of Slavic peoples in the future to be an important task of the liberation struggle. The following mandatory conditions were stipulated: "Each Slavic tribe should have its own independence... the government of the people and to observe the perfect equality of fellow citizens according to their birth, Christian faiths and condition." In view of the existence of various kinds of prejudices between the Slavic peoples, it was established that "the society will try to eliminate all tribal and religious hostility between them and spread the idea of the possibility of reconciliation in the Christian churches." 31 According to the charter, members of the Society could come from all Slavic tribes, regardless of their social status.

The main program document of the Cyril and Methodius Society - "The Book of Genesis of the Ukrainian People", or" The Law of God " - depicted the relations of Ukraine with Poland and Russia in the following way. Ukraine, having no conditions for creating an independent statehood, wanted to live "inseparably and incessantly" first with Poland, then with Russia. However, the former "in no way wanted to renounce her panstvo", and the latter deceived expectations and brought the tsar's captivity. Ukraine "loved both the Poles and the Great Russians as brothers and did not want to part with them," but was not understood by either of them; as a result, the Ukrainian lands were torn "in two halves along the Dnieper River." The authors of the document argued that everything should change, and Ukraine will play a decisive role. "For the voice of Ukraine is not silenced; Ukraine will rise up from her grave and again call out to her Slavic brothers, and they will hear her call, and Slavism will rise up, and there will be no king, no prince, no prince-

30 Recall that it was on the territory of Ukraine that the Society of United Slavs arose and operated. In 1834, during a search in the Kharkiv apartment of V. V. Passek, who together with A. I. Herzen studied at Moscow University, the gendarmes seized the manuscript " Little Russia. An excerpt from my travel notes." In it, Passek highly appreciated the merits of B. Khmelnitsky and his associates in the struggle for the reunification of Ukraine with Russia, and spoke out for the free development of all the peoples of the Russian Empire. Speaking about the unity of the origin of the Slavs, he pointed out the common historical past of the Slavic peoples and thereby led the reader to the idea of the need for future cooperation between them. (Сергiенко Г. Я. Суспiльно-полiтичний рух на Украiнi пiсля повстання декабристiв. KiIv. 1971, p. 56-57).

31 Cit. by: Bortnikov A. I. Cyril and Methodius Society and the Polish National Liberation Movement. In: Development of Capitalism and national movements of Slavic peoples, Moscow, 1970, p. 192.

page 23

No prince, no count, no duke, no lordship, no excellency, no pan, no boyar, no peasant, no serf, not in Great Russia, not in Poland, not in the Ukraine, not in the Czech Republic, not among the Horutans, not among the Serbs, not among the Bulgarians. And Ukraine will become an independent Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the Slavic Union. " 32
The Petrashevites were opposed to any national narrow-mindedness, and were in favor of friendly communication and cooperation between peoples. They were keenly interested in the situation in Poland and sympathized with the Polish people's struggle for freedom. In the concrete plans of revolutionary action developed by the Petrashevites, Poland occupied one of the leading places. Recording in his diary rumors about the arrest of members of the Cyril and Methodius Society and analyzing the plan of the uprising in Ukraine attributed to T. G. Shevchenko, N. A. Mombelli wrote:: "With the uprising of Little Russia, the Don, who has long been dissatisfied with the measures of the government, would also move. The Poles would also have taken the opportunity. Consequently, the entire south and west of Russia would take up arms. " 33
In parallel with the progressive-democratic interpretation of the idea of Slavic solidarity, conservative and reactionary-protective interpretations of it emerged and developed. Their roots go back to the social life of the late XVIII century, the subsequent stage is largely associated with the name of N. M. Karamzin. As you know, Karamzin experienced a long and deep fascination with enlightenment ideas, but lost faith in them, observing the course and results of the French bourgeois Revolution of 1789-1793. Evolving to the right and becoming a court historiographer, he objectively found himself in conservative-protective positions, although subjectively he sought to "update the old feudal foundations with European principles of national dignity and the identity of the people" 34 . In his" Notes on Ancient and New Russia " (1811), Karamzin expressed his conviction that the basis of the state existence of Russia can only be the undivided unity of the monarchy, the Orthodox faith and national identity.

In the "History of the Russian State" (1816-1826), he gave a general description of the history and culture of all Slavs, both "Russian", i.e. eastern, and "Danube", i.e. southern and western (Bohemian, Serbian, Croat, Dalmatian, Lusatian, Polish, Bulgarian, Carinthian). In the "History" the questions of the common origin and ancestral homeland of the Slavs, their languages and writing are quite widely touched upon, and an attempt is made to determine the general and specific features of the spiritual and material culture of the Slavic peoples. Karamzin linked the peculiarities of individual peoples with the geographical conditions of their settlement, as well as with the forms of statehood that emerged among them. Among the factors that caused the difference between the" Russian " Slavs and all others, he attributed, in particular, the voluntary vocation of the Varangian princes.

Karamzin's work had a huge impact on the historical consciousness of Russian society, on the development of its national identity and caused heated discussions of both socio - political and scientific nature. Although it was criticized mainly from the left (in particular, the Decembrists), and praised mainly from the right, the actual material collected in the "History" was used by both those and others. Public opinion was strongly influenced by Russian and Slavs-

32 Zayonchkovsky P. A. Cyril and Methodius Society (1846-1847). Moscow, 1959, pp. 158-160; Sergienko G. Ya. T. G. Shevchenko i Cyril and Methodius Society. KiIv. 1983, p. 98.

33 Delo petrashevtsev, T. I. M.-L. 1937, p. 312.

34 Minaeva N. V. Governmental constitutionalism and advanced public opinion of Russia at the beginning of the XIX century. Saratov, 1983, p. 88.

page 24

the Russian patriotism that permeates the main sections of this talented work.

In 1832, the bma was reported to Nicholas I, and in 1834, in the circular of the Minister of National Education to the trustees of educational districts, the well-known formula of S. S. Uvarov "Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality"was published. This "triad", which later became known as the" theory of official nationality " and for a long time determined the Slavic doctrine of Russian reaction, began to take shape somewhat earlier. It has a certain genetic connection with Karamzin's "Note on Ancient and New Russia". The theoretical basis of the Uvarov formula is easily found in M. P. Pogodin's "Historical Aphorisms", written in 1823-1826 and published by Moskovsky Vestnik in 1827. Listing the factors that determine the appearance of peoples and their history, Pogodin invariably begins with religion, then names the way of government and national qualities. At the same time, Christianity is placed above all else, the monarchical mode of government, the dignity of the Russian and other Slavic peoples is exalted in every possible way, while religion, statehood and moral qualities of the peoples of Western Europe are belittled.

Pogodin's views on the Slavic question are formulated in "Historical Aphorisms"as follows:" Europe can be divided historically into two main halves: the western and eastern. The first was dominated by German tribes, while the second remained Slavic. The first is won; the second is occupied. In the first, strangers and natives; in the second, only natives. In the first - feudalism, in the second-appanages. The first received the Christian faith from Rome, the second-from Constantinople. On the division of the church... the first was left to the pope, the second to the patriarch. The Western states were founded on the ruins of the western Roman Empire, while the eastern states were made up of the eastern regions and the countries adjacent to it. In the Western states, history begins with the advantage of spiritual power over secular; in the Slavic states, spiritual power has always been subordinate to the sovereigns, just as in Constantinople." From the totality of Pogodin's "aphorisms", from the content of his first professorial lecture delivered at Moscow University in 1834, it follows that, professing Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality, Russians are prosperous and will continue to be prosperous. The southern and Western Slavs, on the other hand, were classified as "ogrechennye, nemechennye, oturechennye" peoples - insofar as each of them lacks one or another element of the "triad" 35 .

As early as 1821, when he was a student at Moscow University, Pogodin made an entry in his diary that spoke of "the unification of all Slavs into one whole, into one state." 36 This idea undoubtedly reflected the sentiments of some part of Russian society at that time. However, while acknowledging the existence and even some prevalence of such an interpretation of the "Slavic idea," one can hardly agree with A. V. Fadeev's statement that even during the Russo-Turkish war of 1828-1829, "the tsarist government sympathized with the program of reactionary pan-Slavism." 37 Throughout the reign of Nicholas I, the core of the tsarist government's foreign policy remained the dynastic principle, and the principle of nationality in its Slavophil sense began to be introduced only with the coming to power of Alexander II, i.e. after 1855.

35 Pogodin M. P. Istoricheskie aphorizmy [Historical aphorisms]. Moscow, 1836, p. 20 - 30, 13, 27, 35, 37, 92, 99, 102, 118 - 119.

36 Barsukov N. P. Zhizn i trudy M. P. Pogodin [Life and Works of M. P. Pogodin]. Book I. St. Petersburg, 1888, p. 56.

37 Fadeev A. V. Russia and the Eastern Crisis of the 20s of the 19th century, Moscow, 1958, p. 199.

page 25

Contrary to a fairly common opinion, the foreign policy aspect of the "theory of official nationality", and later - Slavophilism, was perceived negatively in government circles. This is explained by the fact that in this issue, both of these doctrines, although only outwardly, were close to the views of members of opposition organizations, in particular Cyril and Methodius. That is why in 1847, i.e. shortly after the defeat of the Cyril and Methodius Society, Uvarov sent out a circular approved by the tsar to the trustees of educational districts, which stated that "dreams" of cultural and political unification of the Slavs were harmful, that university teaching should be guided by the "idea of Russian nationality", educating young people with patriotism not in the spirit of created by the play of the imagination of "vseslavianism" and feeding it from the "Russian primary source". The materials of the Kiev School District, with the trustee of which the circular was previously approved by ministry officials, prove that the above wording is directed, on the one hand, against fans of "Slavic reciprocity" in the Czech Republic and other Slavic lands, and on the other hand, against the "Slavic" aspect in the political programs of Russian revolutionaries .38
There has been much debate about the assessment of pre-reform Slavophilism. Currently, most experts consider the earlier Slavophilism as a complex and controversial social trend. His doctrines were certainly conservative. However, on a number of issues, including their attitude to serfdom, the Slavophils were in moderate opposition to the government. This is the main difference between the ideological and political concepts of early Slavophilism and the more reactionary ideology embodied in the"theory of official nationality".

A. S. Khomyakov, I. V. Kireevsky, as well as K. S. Aksakov, Yu. F. Samarin, and D. A. Valuev played the greatest role in developing the system of views of pre-reform Slavophilism. Their worldview was formed under the influence of the idealistic philosophical systems of Hegel and Schelling, the moral and ethical doctrines of conservative German Romantics, the theological writings of the Orthodox Church fathers, and partly - the French socio-political literature of the first half of the XIX century. The inconsistency of ideological and theoretical influences was superimposed on the real contradictions of pre-reform social life. Slavophiles opposed the rapprochement with Western Europe and the assimilation of its economic, political, and cultural experience by Russia. They idealized pre-Petrine Russia, which they saw as the embodiment of harmony in relations between the state and society, "zemstvo" and "power". Peter I, the Slavophiles claimed, had broken this harmony, which led to the opposition of the tsar to the "zemstvo", to the separation of the nobility and intelligentsia from the people, to the superficial assimilation of Western culture, to the neglect of the native language and the national way of life. At the same time, the Slavophiles advocated for the country's economic progress, the development of glasnost, the elimination of censorship restrictions, and sought to increase the role of public opinion in public administration. The essence of their views in this area was reflected in the formula: "To the people the power of opinion is to the tsar the power of power."

The Slavophils approached the solution of the main question of Russian reality at that time - the question of serfdom - from a liberal position. Since the end of the 30s, they have consistently advocated for OT-

38 Rozhdestvensky S. V. Historical review of the Ministry of Public Education. 1802-1902. St. Petersburg, 1902, p. 224; TsGIA of the Ukrainian SSR, f. 707, 1847, d. 12, ll. 1-14.

page 26

exchange of serfdom by the government with the provision of land to peasant communities for redemption in favor of landlords. From this it follows that Slavophilism together with Westernism were two components of Russian pre-reform liberalism. Both of them reflected the tendencies of bourgeois development and represented the views of the social groups interested in it, i.e., a section of the nobility that had entered the capitalist path and the Russian bourgeoisie, although not numerous, which was gradually growing stronger .39 The Slavophiles considered the common people to be the "foundation of a social edifice", but the very concept of "people" was interpreted in accordance with the canons of German conservative Romanticism; the Slavophiles did not understand the true interests of the masses of the people and did not care about their satisfaction. At the same time, their calls for rapprochement with the people, for the study of their life and everyday life to a certain extent contributed to the awakening of national consciousness, stimulated the collection of monuments of Slavic culture and the scientific development of everything related to the history, languages and writing of the Slavs.

The social program of pre-reform Slavophilism was basically not very different from the program of the liberal wing of Westernism. But they were divided by contradictions in the Slavic question, in the assessment of the historical path of Russia and the West. Numerous proofs of this can be found in the writings of any of the theorists of early Slavophilism.

An example is the article published in 1852 by I. V. Kireevsky "On the nature of the Enlightenment of Europe and its relation to the enlightenment of Russia". Considering this question as one of the most important and relevant, Kireevsky compares Russian and Slavic cultures with the cultures of the peoples of Western Europe. "The beginnings of the Russian enlightenment," he writes, " are quite different from the elements that formed the enlightenment of the European peoples. In addition to the tribal differences, three other historical features gave an excellent character to the entire development of the enlightenment in the West... The Roman Church, ancient Roman education, and statehood that emerged from the violence of conquest were completely alien to ancient Russia." The contrast between these three lines is developed in the article in relation to the spiritual and material spheres. "In a word, - the author concludes, -... bifurcation and wholeness, reasonableness and reasonableness will be the last expression of Western European and Old Russian education." Starting from the 16th century, the positive principles of ancient Russia, according to Kireevsky, began to be greatly distorted. "But the root of Russia's education still lives in its people, and most importantly, it lives in its holy Orthodox Church. Therefore, on this basis alone, and on no other, a solid edifice of the enlightenment of Russia should be erected, which needs to be rebuilt from pure materials of its own." As for the culture of Western European countries, Kireevsky urges not to be deceived by the "artificial beauty of their rotten beauty" 40 .

And other prominent Slavophiles in their theoretical constructions on the Slavic question, like Kireevsky, put Orthodoxy in the foreground. In this respect, their position coincided with that of the followers of the "theory of official nationality", although the Slavophiles understood the significance of the religious factor somewhat differently, linking it.-

39 The socio-economic program of the Slavophiles is described in detail in a number of works by E. A. Dudzinskaya, including in the book: Dudzinskaya E. A. Slavophiles in public struggle, Moscow, 1983.

40 Kireevsky I. V. Kritika i estetika [Criticism and Aesthetics], Moscow, 1979, p. 4. 249, 254, 256, 266, 288 - 290, 292.

page 27

in a similar way with society, and not with the state. Following Orthodoxy, the Slavophils did not put an autocracy, but a national identity or nationality. They considered autocracy to be the last link of the "triad", which resulted from their desire to limit the prerogatives of the monarch in accordance with the formula "the power of opinion to the people - the power of power to the tsar".

Noble-bourgeois liberalism - both Slavophiles and Westerners-was opposed by the revolutionary-democratic current of Russian social thought, whose representatives formulated their own idea of the place and role of the Slavic peoples in the world - historical process. For the first time it was presented by V. G. Belinsky, who strongly stated the fundamental identity of the main stages of the historical development of Russia, the Slavs and the peoples of Western Europe, and at the same time recognized the significant impact of national factors on historical development. Belinsky polemicized with the" Normanists "from among the Slavophiles and followers of the" theory of official nationality", proving that the Normans did not leave any significant traces in the language, customs, and social structure of ancient Russia. Interested mainly in the history and culture of Russia, he also dealt with issues related to foreign Slavic peoples in his works.

M. A. Bakunin and A. I. Herzen made a significant contribution to the progressive-democratic interpretation of the idea of Slavic solidarity. Both of them were propagandists of the theory of communal socialism and argued that the most reliable way to transform society in the interests of the people was through the Russian and generally Slavic community; both of them were supporters of the democratic federation of Slavic republics, which, in their opinion, was to take the place of the monarchical states that oppressed the Slavs. This aspect of the ideology and social activities of M. A. Bakunin and A. I. Herzen is of great interest in the West and is covered in bourgeois literature very biased. Soviet historiography is still based in this respect on the works of historians of the 1920s, who raised a number of significant questions, but only partially solved them .41
The Slavic question occupied a prominent place in Bakunin's worldview and political program, and he repeatedly expressed his point of view on this issue in theoretical works, letters, speeches, and appeals. As early as 1846, he decided, in his own words, to make the Russian revolution and the republican federation of all Slavic lands the goal of his activity. In 1848, Bakunin published The Foundations of a New Slavic Policy and an Appeal to the Slavs .42 In them, he called for the destruction of the Russian, Prussian, Turkish and especially Austrian monarchies, on the ruins of which, in his opinion, a great free Slavic federation was to be formed, based on the principles of general equality, freedom and brotherly love, on the destruction of serfdom and class inequality, on granting everyone a land plot within any territory. from the Slavic lands. Bakunin believed in a special historical path for the Slavic peoples and Slavs in general, but he did not oppose their interests to those of Western Europe; the world, he reasoned, was divided into two camps - revolutionary and counter-revolutionary, and the Slavs, in their own interests, should, in alliance with the Germans and Hungarians, seek a universal federation of European republics. Referring to the sla-

41 See in particular: Steklov Yu. M. Mikhail Aleksandrovich Bakunin. His life and Activity. Part 1. Moscow, 1920; Derzhavin N. S. Herzen and the Slavophiles. - Marxist Historian, 1929, No. 1.

42 Bakunin M. A. Izbr. soch. T. 3. Pg. - M. 1921, pp. 61-69.

page 28

At the same time, Bakunin declared that they should be friends and allies of all peoples and parties fighting for the revolution. At the same time, he warned the foreign Slavs against unfounded hopes for help from the tsarist government, fueled by Slavophiles, saying that they could only get real support from revolutionary Russia.

Herzen, while not agreeing with B. N. Chicherin and other representatives of the" state" school of Russian historiography, who gave the state a leading role in history, considered the people to be its main driving force, and attributed the role of outstanding personalities primarily to the extent to which they understand the needs of the people. From the point of view of studying foreign Slavs, Herzen's statements about the disputes between Westerners and Slavophiles and his political interpretation of the idea of Slavic reciprocity are of particular interest. In the 1940s, recognizing the peculiarities of the development of individual peoples, in particular the Slavs, Herzen highlighted not this aspect of the historical process, but "the great unity of the development of the human race." Accordingly, in his early works, Slavophil doctrines were subjected to a highly critical examination. After the revolution of 1848-1849, in search of an ideal of social progress, Herzen turned his attention to the Russian and Slavic communities and saw in them the germ of socialist development not only for Russia, but for the whole of Europe. That is why the Slavophiles, who wrote a lot about the community and first attracted public interest in it, appeared to him as their positive side. Clearly deluded, Herzen assumed that he would be able to get closer to the Slavophils on the basis of faith in communal ideals and even wrote: "socialism... "isn't it recognized by the Slavophiles as well as by us?" It is a bridge on which we can give each other our hand. " 43 He considered the Slavophils to be his allies even during the preparation of the peasant reform, being convinced that their faith in the rural community would help free the peasants with land plots.

Herzen constantly connected the historical paths of Russia with the fate of all Slavic peoples. Believing that the free development of the Russian and Slavic communities coincided with the aspirations of "Western socialism", Herzen saw the future of the Slavic world in a free federation, the core of which would be Russia, freed from serfdom and autocracy. "Only by grouping together in a union of free and original peoples," he wrote, "will the Slavic world finally enter into a truly historical existence." 44 The progressive orientation of these plans of Herzen, based on the recognition of the inevitability of the collapse of the Austrian and Ottoman Empires, the need for radical social transformations in Russia, and the unity of the revolutionary tasks of the West and the East, is quite obvious. However, the echoes of pan-Slavist ideas in his arguments and the ambiguous characterization of the possibilities of tsarism in solving the Slavic question aroused the distrust of many figures of the international revolutionary movement and sharp criticism of Herzen's publicistic speeches by K - Marx and F. Kropotkin. Engels 45 .

N. G. Chernyshevsky persistently pursued the idea that class relations, rather than national relations, play a decisive role in social development. This is very clearly expressed in his articles prepared for Sovremennik and published in 1861. In the article

43 Herzen A. I. Sobr. soch. T. 7. Moscow, 1956, p. 248.

44 Ibid., p. 315.

45 Volgin V. P. Sotsializm Gertsena [Socialism of Herzen]. In: Problems of studying Herzen, Moscow, 1963, pp. 63-65.

page 29

"Preface to present-day Austrian affairs", speaking about the events of 1848, Chernyshevsky pointed out that resistance to national oppression "was only an external sign of the cause", while the essence was the struggle for the abolition of feudal duties. 46 Not only these, but also many other statements of Chernyshevsky indicate that in his views there could not be and there was no place for any isolation of the Slavic peoples, for the theoretical opposition of their past and present to the Western European historical process. Observing the disputes between Westerners and Slavophiles, Chernyshevsky was critical of both. First, he asked: why remain in the fantastic belief that Western Europe is an earthly paradise, when in fact the situation of its peoples is not such at all? I wrote about the second ones: "Slavophiles are not harmed because they are Slavophiles; there are other reasons for prejudice against them. Attaching too much importance to the abstract notions of the all-embracing character of the Russian nationality, of the so-called one-sidedness and inadequacy of Western science and life, they are too ready to indiscriminately admire any judgment, so long as it is in favor of the nationality against Europeanism. " 47
Condemning the retrogradism, religiosity and chauvinism of the Slavophiles, Chernyshevsky declared that Slavophilism also has "another side that puts the Slavophiles above many of the most serious Westerners." This meant that the Slavophiles understood the role of the Russian and, more broadly, the Slavic community. "We see," wrote Chernyshevsky, " what sad consequences the loss of communal land ownership has produced in the West, and how difficult it is for the Western peoples to recover their loss. The example of the West should not be lost on us. " 48 The partial agreement of views on this issue should not be misleading: Chernyshevsky interpreted the community as the germ of future socialist transformations, while the Slavophiles saw it as one of the tools that made it easier for them to influence the national consciousness.

While admitting that community relations could play a positive role in the socialist transformation of Russia, Chernyshevsky objected to the view that the community is equally necessary for the peoples of Western Europe. In 1861, in his article "On the Causes of the Fall of Rome", he criticized not only the Slavophils, but also Herzen for idealizing community relations (it was about his article "The Russian people and Socialism"). "Apart from communal land ownership," wrote Chernyshevsky, " it was impossible for the most zealous dreamers to discover in our public and private life not a single institution, or even the germ of an institution, for the renewal of the old Europe that they predicted with our fresh help. We don't have to worry about it, she doesn't need any animators. She knows how to reason with her own mind and how to do what she wants with her own strength, and her own strength is sufficient for everything that she needs to do. " 49 Chernyshevsky did not direct his criticism of Slavophilism against sympathy for the oppressed Slavic peoples. If it were only a matter of sympathy for the Slavs, he said, then all " educated people "(i.e., supporters of progress, revolutionaries - V. D.) could be called Slavophiles. The real Slavophiles of the early 60s of the XIX century, while promoting their understanding of the idea of Slavic reciprocity, often turned out to be voluntary or involuntary helpers of reactionary forces.

46 Chernyshevsky N. G. Poln. sobr. soch. T. 8. Moscow, 1950, pp. 449-450.

47 Ibid., vol. 4, Moscow, 1949, pp. 724, 693.

48 Ibid., pp. 738-743.

49 Ibid., vol. 7, pp. 663-664.

page 30

within the country, as well as in those states that were subject to the Slavic lands 50 .

These facts, of course, do not exhaust the variety of existing interpretations of the idea of Slavic unity that existed in the pre-reform period. However, the presented material allows us to express several generalizing considerations, in particular about the nature of this idea and the reasons for the fact that since the end of the XVIII century. it has become increasingly important in the public life of Russia. Having originated in the depths of the ethnic consciousness of the feudal period, this idea sounded much stronger and acquired more definite national-patriotic features in the era when the Slavic peoples were completing the formation of national cultures. If at the previous stage the idea of Slavic solidarity had mainly ethnic content, then in the era of transition from feudalism to capitalism and the formation of bourgeois nations, it was filled with a new ethno-social content and became an integral part of the national consciousness of the Russian and other Slavic peoples.

Various class and estate groups almost immediately began to use the idea of Slavic solidarity for their own purposes, although in its original essence it would seem that it could be perceived equally by all social strata. For pre-reform Russia, we can offer the following typology of political interpretations of this idea: a) the progressive-democratic trend, represented primarily by the Decembrists, Cyril and Methodius, Petrashevites, and revolutionaries of the era of the fall of serfdom, including M. A. Bakunin, A. I. Herzen, and N. G. Chernyshevsky; b) the noble-bourgeois liberal trend, the concepts of which are most fully embodied in the works of Slavophiles; c) reactionary- a protective trend that consolidated its view of the Slavic question in the "theory of official nationality".

When describing these areas, it is necessary to take into account the imperfection of the terminology that we usually use when considering this range of issues, and not to allow "indiscriminate" formulations that put almost everyone who somehow expressed themselves in the spirit of Slavic solidarity in one bracket. I think that here the greatest care is needed in evaluating. Analyzing Bakunin's views on the Slavic question, which were described above, and criticizing them very sharply, Engels called such concepts "democratic pan-Slavism." 51 In a methodological sense, this definition is very important, since it points to the necessity of a class-based, concrete historical approach to various "pan-Slavisms", to the need to clearly separate the illusions and self-deceptions of "democratic pan-Slavists" from the conservative utopias of Slavophiles and from the reactionary-protective pan-Slavism of supporters of the"theory of official nationality".

50 For more information, see Dyakov V. A. "The Slavic Question" and N. G. Chernyshevsky's political program. In the book. Problems in the history of social thought and historiography. M. 1976.

51 K. Marx and F. Engels Soch. Vol. 6, p. 290.

page 31


© library.rs

Permanent link to this publication:

https://library.rs/m/articles/view/THE-IDEA-OF-SLAVIC-UNITY-IN-THE-SOCIAL-THOUGHT-OF-PRE-REFORM-RUSSIA

Similar publications: LSerbia LWorld Y G


Publisher:

Andrija PutnikContacts and other materials (articles, photo, files etc)

Author's official page at Libmonster: https://library.rs/Putnik

Find other author's materials at: Libmonster (all the World)GoogleYandex

Permanent link for scientific papers (for citations):

V. A. Dyakov, THE IDEA OF SLAVIC UNITY IN THE SOCIAL THOUGHT OF PRE-REFORM RUSSIA // Belgrade: Library of Serbia (LIBRARY.RS). Updated: 29.01.2025. URL: https://library.rs/m/articles/view/THE-IDEA-OF-SLAVIC-UNITY-IN-THE-SOCIAL-THOUGHT-OF-PRE-REFORM-RUSSIA (date of access: 19.02.2025).

Found source (search robot):


Publication author(s) - V. A. Dyakov:

V. A. Dyakov → other publications, search: Libmonster SerbiaLibmonster WorldGoogleYandex

Comments:



Reviews of professional authors
Order by: 
Per page: 
 
  • There are no comments yet
Related topics
Publisher
Andrija Putnik
Белград, Serbia
105 views rating
29.01.2025 (21 days ago)
0 subscribers
Rating
0 votes
Related Articles
Заснув в сафьянах книг Мы пробудились поздно Нам нами не зажгут сиреневые звёзды В лесах росу не раскачает лень полуденных дерев Дрозды уснут в полях всех перепев... И шепот деревень загасит пламя дня Наступит ночь, как видно без меня Осталось мало Нас, сотрудников Земли Уходим, уводя Надежды корабли...
Catalog: Филология 
«Вздор!.. Гений не совершает ошибок. Его блуждания намеренны, они врата – открытия» (Джойс Д. Улисс. стр. 202). Писано в брутальные времена...
Jean Eiffel and Innovations Derivatives
Catalog: Экономика 
The Question of Changing the Global Matrix in Russia and in the World
Catalog: Экономика 
"A WORD ABOUT IGOR'S REGIMENT" IN THE "EXPERIENCE OF NARRATION ABOUT RUSSIA" BY I. P. ELAGIN
17 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
DRUZHINA AND THE GENESIS OF FEUDALISM IN RUSSIA
Catalog: История 
18 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
Many of you and your associates are operating in the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions y.e. This is about your transactions... Direct or Indirect or Potential. Not so long ago, many of you became players in "Cybereconomics". In a fundamentally new transformation of the digital world, about which many of us are still little known.. Purchase and exchange of fiat money, work on the transformation of fiat money into cryptocurrency. Buying a car, apartments, loans from financial institutions... Et cetera. There are lucky people who work in their own business or act as investors.
Catalog: Экономика 
LITTLE-KNOWN HERO OF BORODIN
Catalog: История 
20 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
A. M. STANISLAVSKAYA. POLITICHESKAYA DEYATEL'NOST ' F. F. USHAKOV V GREKE [POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF F. F. USHAKOV IN GREECE]. 1798-1800
21 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
DEVELOPMENT OF ETHNIC IDENTITY OF SLAVIC PEOPLES IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES
21 days ago · From Andrija Putnik

New publications:

Popular with readers:

News from other countries:

LIBRARY.RS - Serbian Digital Library

Create your author's collection of articles, books, author's works, biographies, photographic documents, files. Save forever your author's legacy in digital form. Click here to register as an author.
Library Partners

THE IDEA OF SLAVIC UNITY IN THE SOCIAL THOUGHT OF PRE-REFORM RUSSIA
 

Editorial Contacts
Chat for Authors: RS LIVE: We are in social networks:

About · News · For Advertisers

Serbian Digital Library ® All rights reserved.
2014-2025, LIBRARY.RS is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map)
Keeping the heritage of Serbia


LIBMONSTER NETWORK ONE WORLD - ONE LIBRARY

US-Great Britain Sweden Serbia
Russia Belarus Ukraine Kazakhstan Moldova Tajikistan Estonia Russia-2 Belarus-2

Create and store your author's collection at Libmonster: articles, books, studies. Libmonster will spread your heritage all over the world (through a network of affiliates, partner libraries, search engines, social networks). You will be able to share a link to your profile with colleagues, students, readers and other interested parties, in order to acquaint them with your copyright heritage. Once you register, you have more than 100 tools at your disposal to build your own author collection. It's free: it was, it is, and it always will be.

Download app for Android