European, National, and (Anti-)Imperial: The Formation of Academic Oriental Studies in Late Tsarist and Early Soviet Russia

Abstract

This article focuses on circulation of knowledge within discipline of Oriental Studies in Russia and in Europe from 1880s to late 1920s. In this period, two processes, closely intertwined but vectored in opposite directions, shaped nature of science and These processes were nationalization (the emergence of nation as structuring unit and principal arena of scientific activity) and internationalization (increased international cooperation as well as competition among scholars from different countries). (1) Even though Russian Oriental Studies as an established academic discipline dates back to 1804, it was only in 1880s that a community of Orientalist (2) scholars sharing a common identity and partaking in a clearly defined program of study emerged in (3) The period from 1880s to 1920s was time when discipline in Russia boasted greatest names, particularly Baron Viktor Rozen (1849-1908) and a group of his disciples, including Vasilii Bartol'd (1869-1930), Nikolai Marr (1864-1934), and Sergei Ol'denburg (1863-1934). (4) Within Russian academic community, Oriental Studies was perceived in that period as strongest discipline, which, on a par with Russian Studies, was most widely recognized internationally. (5) Furthermore, above-mentioned Orientalists believed that their discipline was central to key questions facing Russia at time. According to Bartol'd, [t]he fulfillment by Russians of their historic missions in West and in East is closely linked to situation of Russian scholarship. (6) In his view, [m]aybe modest works by Russian Orientalists more than other achievements of Russian culture will contribute to peaceful unification of peoples of East with Russia. (7) These scholars agreed that the prestige and immediate interests of Russia required Russian scholars to be in lead internationally in study of various nationalities populating Russian empire. (8) Thus, in eyes of these scholars, their work was explicitly linked to management of nationality question in Russia, to search for Russian national identity, and to Russia's imperial ambitions. These positions of Russian scholars and, in many ways, development of Russian Oriental Studies in period under review reflect general contemporary trends in European Since 19th century, this scholarship had been shaped by several forces. First, roots of a rapid development of various branches of humanities are to be found in a larger positivist enterprise [of Enlightenment] that sought empirically verifiable information about all societies everywhere. (10) In terms of methods used to extract and process this information pride of place belonged to those developed by classical philologists. Second, ideology of nationalism assigned special importance to study of scholars' own societies within their contemporary boundaries. Belief in division of world above all into nations placed nationality at center of historical, archaeological, philological, and ethnographic research. (11) Simultaneously, (nation-)states became increasingly involved in funding and setting agendas for scientists and scholars. (12) Finally, imperialism, another important political force with its own ideologies, also had an impact on various humanities disciplines, especially Oriental Studies. (13) This article discusses how interaction among these pan-European processes played out in case of Russian Oriental Studies. It starts by showing how modern Russian Oriental Studies took shape as an academic discipline under impact of debate in Russia about national identity. It then discusses impact of pan-European processes of nationalization and internationalization on Russian Oriental Studies by focusing on role of Rozen and his disciples. It further demonstrates how imperialist discourse promoted at international congresses of Orientalists was subverted by scholars' attempts to incorporate Orient into Russian identity and how belief in pan-European methods of scholarship co-existed with criticism of some of approaches of European scholars, leading to claims about moral superiority of Russian …