Формирование историософского дискурса в России в первой трети XIX в.

Abstract

This article argues that by 1830s historiosophical discourse in Russia had be­come both a specific genre and a type of ideology. The article outlines the spec­trum of philosophical approaches to history within this genre and ideology. It ar­gues that the defeat of the Decembrist revolt led to the formation of a particular negative interpretation of Russian history amongst Russian philosophers of that time. The author offers an analysis of works by Dmitry Venevitinov, Ivan Kireyevsky, and Pyotr Chaadayev written in the late 1820s and in the early 1830s. These texts allow us to explore the genealogy and distinctive style of Russian philosophy of history. Nikolay Karamzin’s interpretation of history as governed by providence proved to be the most influential interpretation of the 19th century. Pyotr Chaadaev’s historical pessimism and Ivan Kireyevsky’s opti­mistic messianism were both influenced by Karamzin’s humanist anthropology. All these thinkers were looking to determine the meaning of Russian history, and this very task inevitably entails rhetorical and ideological constructions. Russian messianism and the popular Russian idea of the decay of Europe were inspired by the conservative reception of the French revolution by religious thinkers in Europe. This messianic philosophy of history was expressed in a very non-schol­arly discourse and was interwoven with ideas of teleology and providence to­gether with some superficial comparative observations. There is a striking simi­larity between philosophy of history in the 1830s and the philosophy that was developed by the authors of the Vekhi collection in the early 20th century.