Reviewed by: "Беспокойный Клеменц": Опыт интеллектуальной биогра-фии by О. А. Милевский, А. Б. Пан-ченко Ian W. Campbell (bio) О. А. Милевский, А. Б. Пан-ченко. "Беспокойный Клеменц": Опыт интеллектуальной биогра-фии. Москва: РОССПЭН, 2017. 695 с. Алфавитный указатель. Географический указатель. ISBN: 978-5-8243-2124-1. Dmitrii Aleksandrovich Klements (1849–1914), as the title of this biography indicates, was a restless man. His unquiet nature led him to two careers, either of which would have been full enough for a lifetime: as a Populist revolutionary in the 1870s and, during and after the ensuing period of Siberian exile, as a scholar devoted in various ways to the study of the Russian Empire's ethnic and cultural diversity. It was an active life, voluminously documented, yet heretofore understudied, taking a secondary place in histories of Populism and of exploration (Pp. 15–16). O. A. Milevskii and A. B. Panchenko have filled this gap in the literature abundantly, their thick tome retelling both sides of Klements's life in extraordinary detail. Using the method of "personal history" (P. 7), bringing together microhistorical approaches to the development of the individual personality and macrohistorical contextualization, they offer what they bill as the first complete and methodologically up-to-date intellectual biography [End Page 348] of Klements as a scholar, publicist, and revolutionary. The search for coherence in this complicated life, and indeed the assumption that the different facets of Klements's activity should fit together coherently, compose the book's major argument and historiographical intervention. To produce a comprehensive study, the authors have to salvage usable parts of Klements's life story from a problematic historiography. As they describe it, the earliest writings on his life come from two distinct contexts: one memoir-like, produced by his fellow revolutionaries, and accenting his personality and political development; one "analytical," produced by scholarly colleagues, with an accent on the value of his scholarship, passing over his revolutionary background in silence (Pp. 9–11). Such bifurcation of the source material, the authors argue, partially accounts for the weaknesses of previous biographies. They chide one Soviet biographer for treating the two phases of Klements's activity in isolation from one another, while another comes in for criticism for placing too strong an accent on his revolutionary views even late in life, when his scholarly activity required high-level political contacts and cooperation.1 A brief summary of the post-Soviet historiography mentions (not in any great detail) articles devoted to various episodes and aspects of Klements's scholarly career (Pp. 20–23). Hence, they argue, the need for a complete biography: to trace the evolution of Klements's views, to correct misconceptions stemming from forcing a complicated figure into a single ideological framework, and to properly situate him in shifting social, political, and academic contexts. The task is daunting, and the authors bring a formidable amount of documentation to bear as they carry it out. The greatest strength of the monograph is precisely in the detail the authors contribute to individual episodes: one feels the warmth and wit of Klements's personality, the stultifying boredom of a Siberian winter, the excitement of study and exploration at the empire's edge. They unfurl their luxuriously detailed account in a traditional, chronologically organized, narrative form (only one key moment, the Sibiriakov expedition to Yakutia in 1894–1896, gets separate treatment out of strict chronological order). The story begins along the Volga, in Klements's childhood home in Samara province and at the gymnasium in Kazan. It was in this latter environment, surrounded by "exaggerated [End Page 349] revolutionary expectations" (P. 41) that the young Klements's horror at the cruelties of serfdom and arbitrary government repression began to coalesce into an activist political worldview. A move to continue his studies in St. Petersburg, motivated in part by financial considerations, brought him to the epicenter of the empire's revolutionary movement. His thirst for risk and action, alongside a native distrust of hierarchy, led him to a significant role in the Populist Chaikovskii circle and, ultimately, to the crushing disappointment of the "going to the people" movement in 1874. With the noose tightening around revolutionary circles, he briefly decamped to Geneva; his return to a Russia marked by increasing state violence against revolutionaries and inexorably narrowing political alternatives led him, however hesitantly, to the newly formed Land and Liberty (P. 169). It...