“The Little Brothers of Empire”: Russian conservatives

and the peoples of Asia and Africa in the end of

nineteenth and early twentieth century.

Alexander Polunov

Appeared in French: «Les petits frères de l’Empire»: le particonservateur russe et les peuples de l’Asie et de l’Afrique à lafin du XIXe siècle et au début du XXe. // Slavica Occitania. –Toulouse, 2012. - Vol. 35. – P. 49-66.

The essay deals with the educational, cultural, and religiousactivities of the Russian conservatives related to the remote“exotic” regions of the world. In my work I seek to demonstratethat the growing interest of Russian statesmen, ecclesiastics,and public figures to these areas was stimulated to a largeextent by a new notion of the African and Asian peoples as the"little brothers" of Russian Empire which were in need of itstutelage and protection. This notion was based on the idea ofthe alleged spiritual affinity of these ethno-confessionalgroups to Russia which made them a potential object of theconversion to Orthodoxy. The activities of the prominent Russianconservatives are being analyzed in connection with such eventsas the Russian expeditions to Abyssinia, establishment of theImperial Orthodox Palestine Society and of the mission to theNestorians of North Persia. 

В статье рассматриваются религиозные, культурные ипросветительские начинания русских консерваторов, связанные сдеятельностью в отделенных «экзотических» регионах мира.Согласно моей концепции, возросший интерес русскихгосударственных, церковных и общественных деятелей к даннымрегионам основывался во многом на новой системе представлений онародах Азии и Африки как о «младших братьях Российской

1

империи», нуждавшихся в покровительстве и защите. Подобноевосприятие, в свою очередь, базировалось на идее опредполагаемой духовной близости данных народов к России ивозможном обращении их в православие. В статье анализируетсядеятельность известных русских консерваторов в контексте важныхисторических событий конца XIX – начала XX в. (установлениесвязей России и Эфиопии, основание Императорского ПравославногоПалестинского общества и миссии для несториан Северной Персии).

The late nineteenth and early twentieth century was marked inRussia by the growing interest of conservative circles(statesmen, churchmen, and public leaders) to the remote“exotic” areas of the word. The most diverse countries andpeoples were touched upon by this tendency. The OrthodoxPalestine Society founded in 1882 unfolded energetic activitiesamong the native Christians of the Holy Land seeking to upliftits educational and cultural level. A number of the private andsemi-official expeditions were sent to Ethiopia (Abyssinia)which led to the establishment of the diplomatic relations withthis country in 1897. Next year, the Russian ecclesiasticalmission to the Assyrians of North Persia (Iran) was founded, andsignificant part of this ancient community joined Orthodoxy inthe course of the next decade.

At the other side of the word, the American diocese of theRussian Church increased its activities in order to absorb theSlavic immigrants to the United States and Canada intoOrthodoxy. Much more visible became at that time theproselytizing undertakings of Russian missions to Japan andChina. A special mission to Korea was established in 1897.1 What,then, were the reasons for all these processes? Why did Russianconservatives become interested in regions and peoples which hadnot attracted previously any serious attention of them?

1 I.K. Smolich, Istoriia russkoi tserkvi. 1700-1917. Kniga 2. [History of the RussianChurch. 1700-1917. Vol. II], M., Izdatel’stvo Sviato-PreobrazhenskogoValaamskogo monastyria, 1997, p. 259-283. A.V. Popov, Rossiiskoe pravoslavnoezarubezh’e [Russian Orthodoxy abroad], M., IPVA, 2005, p. 138-174.

2

To some extent, this phenomenon may be explained by thegeneral tendencies of the world development in the epoch whichis being often defined currently as the period of the “firstglobalization”. The communication revolution made at this timethe different parts of the world closer to each otherfacilitating travelling and writing about other countries,stimulating the development of the world market and worldeconomy. An international mass-circulation press started todeliver promptly information from the remotest corners of theworld making the knowledge about these regions more availablefor European public. A new system of international relations wasemerging, and this process, though interrupted by the FirstWorld War, left deep traces in the history of nineteenth andearly twentieth century.2

In the realm of religious life which is especially importantfor the topic of this essay, the above-mentioned tendencies ledto the unprecedented expansion of European Christianityoverseas, to the growth of the world missionary movement whichcould not but affect the Russian Church. The landmarks of theepoch were the numerous religious conferences and congresseswhich discussed the possibilities of the closer cooperationbetween like-minded denominations and even of the unification ofChristian Churches.3

An important trend of the epoch was also the active colonialexpansion of the Western countries which reached its peak in theearly twentieth century. The Russian Empire as a great powercould not stay entirely apart of this tendency. The influentialpoliticians and journalists, especially those of conservative2 M. Geyer and J. Paulmann, eds., The Mechanics of Internationalism: Culture, Society, andPolitics from 1840s to the First World War, London – New York, Oxford University Press,2001, p. 1-25.3 The widest world repercussions had so-called Parliament of religions whichwas held in Chicago in connection with the World’s Columbian Exposition of1893. See Richard Hughes Seager, The World’s parliament of Religions: The East/Westencounter, Chicago, 1893,Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 2009. On theinternational missionary and ecumenical movements of the late nineteenth andearly twentieth century, see Francis S.L. Lyons, Internationalism in Europe, 1815-1914, Leyden, A.W. Sythoff, 1963, p. 245-365. Thomas A. Askew, “The 1888 LondonCentenary Missions Conference: Ecumenical Disappointment or American MissionsComing of Age?”, International Bulletin of Missionary Research, 18, 1994, p. 113-116.

3

and nationalist leaning, were discussing at that time apossibility for Russia to take part in the race of colonies andto obtain the strategic outposts in Africa and South Asia.4 Anurge towards domination on important trade roots, the search ofthe sources of raw materials and underdeveloped markets – allthese elements of the turn-of-century imperialism were easilydiscernible in the writings of many Russian public figures. But,besides of these ‘imperialistic” motivations, there werespecifically Russian reasons for the interest to the “exotic”peoples and countries.

Touching upon this point, it should be noted that since late1870s, Russia lost to a large extent a possibility to pursue anactive policy in the area of its traditional predominance, onthe Balkan Peninsula. The revision of the results of Russo-Turkish war at the Berlin congress (1878) was perceived in theBalkan countries – Serbia, Bulgaria, and others – as adiplomatic defeat of Russia which led immediately to the declineof Russian influence. In 1881, the Austrophile Prince Milandismissed the head of the Serbian Church, Metropolitan Mihailowho had strong pro-Russian leanings and was considered “theheart of Panslavism in the Balkans”. Two years later, thesimilar story occurred in Bulgaria with another Russophilecleric, Metropolitan Meletii of Sofia.5 In 1887, Ferdinand ofSaxe-Coburg, a Roman Catholic, was elected prince of Bulgaria,despite all attempts of Russia to prevent his ascension to thethrone. As historian Melvin Wren noted, “by the series ofevents in 1887 the tsar’s government was served notice thatfurther efforts to build up the Russian influence in the Balkanswould be fruitless”.6 “All feel that events in the East not onlyare turning against us, but are aimed against Russia”, wrote4 On this tendencies in the Russian press see: S.A. Agureev, “K istoriiustanovleniia russko-efiopskikh obshchestvennyh sviazei I kul’turnyhcontaktov s kontsa XVII po konets XIX veka” [On the history of theestablishment of the Russo-Ethiopian social and cultural contacts from theend of seventeenth to the end of nineteenth centuries], Vestnik RossiskogoGumanitarnogo Universiteta (M.), 2, 2011, p. 239-245. 5 Charles Jelavich, Tsarist Russia and Balkan Nationalism: Russian Influence in the InternationalAffairs of Bulgaria and Serbia, 1879-1886,Berkeley, University of California Press,1958, p. 111-202.

4

with this regard the prominent Russian statesman, the ChiefProcurator of the Holy Synod K.P. Pobedonostsev to his formerdisciple, Emperor Alexander III.7

“It is clear that they are now undertaking from the West asystematic campaign by which the Catholic Church is leading itsforces… against Russian interests”, stressed Pobedonostsev inhis letters to tsar explaining the international situation of1880s. The “detachments” of the Roman Catholic “army”

“are undermining our strength and nationality and church – inunion also with Austria – in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Bulgaria,in Hungary, and finally in Serbia… Austria and Rome understandthat it is possible to injure Russia and its influence in the Eastonly by harming the Orthodox Church8”.

An explanation of the setbacks of tsarist diplomacy by theAustrian and German intrigues, looking for the “concealedulterior motives and mysterious aims” in the Western policytowards Russia – all of these were highly characteristic for theRussian conservative approaches to the international problems of1880s. There was, however, another important motive inconservative thinking which significantly influenced the Russianforeign policy of that time.

Seeking to portray West and South Slavs as the innocentvictims of Western conspiracy which had to be protected by themighty “Empire of the Tsars”, the tsarist statesmen andconservative public figures could not but feel that the ideas ofPanslavism began to lose its popularity among the Slavicpeoples. After getting the political independence (mostly withthe help of Russia), these peoples started to gravitate towardsthe West, to emulate the western principles of social andpolitical organization, and to loosen their ties with autocraticRussia. This situation engendered a deep feeling ofdisappointment and grievance among Russian conservatives andurged them to look for the new objects of protection and care in

6 Melvin C. Wren, “Pobedonostsev and Russian Influence in the Balkans, 1881-1888”, The Journal of Modern History (Chicago), 19, 1947, p. 141.7 Pis’ma Pobedonostseva k Aleksandru III. Tom II [Pobedonostsev’s Letters to AlexanderIII. Vol. II.] M, Novaia Moskva, 1926, p. 88-89 (November 3, 1885).8 Pis’ma… op. cit, Tom I, p. 154-156 (November 11, 1881).

5

the remote areas of the world. The peoples which inhabited theseareas should have allegedly been “innocent and simplistic”, notfamiliar with Western culture and therefore unreceptive to thetemptations of political democracy, nationalism, secularism, andmarket economy.

Of course, an interest to the remote regions and peoples asthe objects of possible care appeared long before the post-Berlin era. The first symptoms of such an approach may bediscerned in the writing and activities of archimandrite (laterbishop) Porfirii (Uspenskii), the prominent Russian churchman,writer and scholar, specialist in ancient Church history and theNear East Christianity.9 Being sent in 1843 to Palestine in orderto prepare the ground for the establishment of Russianecclesiastical mission in Jerusalem, Porfirii faced a verycomplicated situation within the Orthodox population of the HolyLand.

The majority of the native Christians, Arabs, were suppressedby the Greek overlords who occupied almost all hierarchicalposts in the ancient patriarchates of Jerusalem and Antioch andconsidered themselves the privileged nation. The spiritual,educational, and cultural needs of Arabs were, accordingly toPorfirii, badly neglected by Greeks, and their religious lifelanguished. Travelling across Palestine and Syria, the Russiancleric could not held in check his anger against Greeks. Later,as a head of the Russian mission in Jerusalem, Porfirii wouldseek energetically to help the native Christians founding theprimary schools for them, supporting construction of thechurches, and promoting the publication of the literature inArab.

The “patient” and “simple-minded” Arabs, as opposed toarrogant Greeks, engendered a vivid sympathy of thearchimandrite. “I protected”, would later recall the cleric,

“the Arab people praising its courtesy, diligence, honesty andfirm adherence at the Orthodox faith… How striking is their

9 On Porfirii, see: A.A. Dmitrievskii, Russkaia dukhovnaia missiia v Ierusalime[Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem], M. – SPb, ImperatorskoePravoslavnoe Palestinskoe Obshchestvo – Izdatel’stvo Olega Abyshko, 2009, p.21-171.

6

childish simplicity when they are praying in their temples whichhave almost nothing in common with the real houses of God!10”

The local Christians, by their side, accepted enthusiasticallysupport of the mighty northern country and strove to stress byall means their close ties with the Russian Orthodoxy. “I am notafraid to assert, wrote Porfirii’s successor on the post of thehead of the Jerusalem mission, bishop Kirill (Naumov), that allthese people live only by their belief in Russia. They areconvinced that the throne of Orthodoxy is now in Russia11”.

Travelling across the Near East, Porfirii got familiar notonly with the Orthodox Arabs of the Holy Land, but with otherancient religious communities which also could be treated as“oppressed” and were potentially looking for the Russian aid -the Copts of Egypt and the Abyssinians (Ethiopians) of BlackAfrica12. The archimandrite proposed a plan of the union of Coptsand Abyssinians with the Russian Church which would have helpedto establish the Russian ecclesiastical dominance throughout theChristian East and to form in the future a considerable point ofinfluence in Africa for Russia.

By bringing forward this proposal, the charismatic churchmanreformulated de-facto the old conception “Moscow the third Rome”adjusting it to the new international, political, and culturalsituation of the nineteenth century. Russia, the heir of fallenConstantinople, had to become now not only the center of theOrthodox universe and the protector of their Slavic bloodrelatives, but also a point of attraction for all ethno-confessional communities which were pushed on the periphery ofthe world civilization by the unfavorable historicalcircumstances.

Needless to say that the ambitious plans of Porfirii couldnot get any serious support of authorities in the legitimistreign of Nicholas I (1825-1855) who sought to maintain statusquo in all areas of international relations. Though the ministryof foreign affairs approved in 1847 the establishment of Russian10 A.A. Dmitrievskii, Russkaia dukhovnaia missia… op.cit., p. 53-53.11 Quoted in: Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence in Syria and Palestine, 1843-1914. Oxford,Clarendon Press, 1969, p. 67.12 Both peoples adhered to the Monophysite variant of the Christian faith.

7

ecclesiastical mission in Jerusalem, Porfirii as a head of themission was burdened with the cumbersome instructions whichseriously hampered any independent activity of him. Thus, thecleric could not protest against the undue deeds of the Greekhierarchy and to interfere in the in internal affairs of theEastern patriarchates. “The Catholics had [in Palestine] theirpatriarch and the Anglicans their bishop”, wrote with thisregard British historian Derek Hopwood. “The Orthodox Church ofRussia was to be represented by an archimandrite forbidden toreveal his mission and burdened with prohibitions. The smallfinancial allowance was a clear demonstration of officialapathy, and virtually condemned the mission to failure13”.

The situation did not change for the better under the son andsuccessor of Nicholas I, Alexander II, whose liberal policy hadstrong secularist leanings and was aimed mostly at the purelypragmatic, economic and commercial goals. Under Alexander II,the ecclesiastical mission in Jerusalem was de-facto submittedto the secular bureaucratic body, the Palestine commission, andin 1878 a proposal was put forward to close down the mission andto delegate its functions to the consulate church. The otherareas of the Russian Church policy in the Near East were markedby the same passive approach. Even the initiatives of the “lostChristian communities” of the region did not evoke any clearresponse from the Russian authorities. Thus, when in 1874 theNegus John IV of Abyssinia tried to establish contacts withRussia, this step remained without practical results.14

Time for the realization of the bold ideas of Russiandominance over the Eastern religious communities came only in1880s, after the assassination of Alexander II and ascension tothe throne of his son, conservative and nationalistic AlexanderIII, the former disciple of Pobedonostsev who had strong tieswith the Moscow Slavophil circles. The changes in the publicmood began to be felt as early as the first years of the new

13 Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence… op.cit, p. 42.14 Sergius Yakobson, “Russia and Africa”, The Slavonic Review, 19, 1940, p. 163. Aprecious gold cross was sent by the Negus to the tsar as a token of thefriendship with this regard.

8

reign, and so-called Ashinov incident revealed clearly thistendency.15

In 1883, a certain Nikolai Ashinov appeared in SaintPetersburg claiming that he was a head of the “Free Cossacks”, aforgotten community of Russian people which inhabited the uplandregions of North Persia, Kurdistan, and Turkish Armenia.Accordingly to Ashinov, these Cossacks, while living for thecenturies abroad, retained the true Russian habits and theOrthodox faith, and were striving to move to Russia. Though thetales about the forgotten Russian community sounded highlyunrealistically, “the head of the Free Cossacks” managed to getsupport of influential statesmen and public leaders, such asPobedonostsev, General O.B. Richter (the commander of theImperial General headquarters), the nationalist journalists I.S.Aksakov and M.N. Katkov, and the former ambassador toConstantinople, N.P. Ignatiev.

Claiming he would be able to organize the resettlement of the“Free Cossacks” to the Black Sea coast of Caucasus, Ashinovtried to get money from the state budget for this purpose andwas soon unmasked as a swindler. Having had to flee Russia, theunsuccessful adventurer used his stay abroad as an opportunityfor the new machination. Ashinov set off to Ethiopia and, thoughhe failed to reach the capital of the country, returned to SaintPetersburg in 1886 as a triumpher. The period after his firstAbyssinian expedition was for the “Free Cossack” a time of hisgreatest fame and popularity, especially in conservative andnationalistic circles.

Ashinov got to win the favor of the prominent figures ofRussian political and intellectual world because the image ofAbyssinia he created corresponded to the widespread notions andexpectations of the conservatives frustrated by the Russianfailures in Balkan region and by the “betrayal” of the “Slavicbrothers”. Ethiopians were portrayed with this regard by Ashinov15 On Ashinov and his African expedition see: A.V. Lunochkin, “Ataman volnykhkazakov” N.I. Ashinov i ego deiatel’nost’ [“The Ataman of Free Cossacks” N.I. Ashinov andhis activities]. Volgograd, Izdatel’stvo Volgogradskogo universiteta, 1999.Patrick J. Rollins. “Imperial Russia’s African Colony”, Russian Review,27, 1968,p. 432-451.

9

as the “simple-minded” and “childish” people who were close tothe Orthodoxy and yearned sincerely for the community with theRussian Church. Being friendly disposed towards the remotemysterious “Empire of the Tsars”, the Ethiopians, accordingly toAshinov, were at the same time hostile to Westerners who hadbeen considered by the nationalists as primordial foes ofRussia. It was a time, exclaimed the “Free Cossack”, to protectthe “Black Christians” against the incursions of the Europeancountries, especially those of Roman Catholic Italy who claimedin the end of nineteenth century the colonial dominance overAbyssinia.

Facing the resistance of the ministry of foreign affairswhich did not want Russia to get involved in to the dangerousinternational venture with unpredictable outcome, Ashinov chidedthe official diplomats as being spiritually “non-Russian” and“non-Orthodox” and claimed they were unable to understand thereal needs of Russia. With the help of his influential friends,the “Free Cossack” managed to overcome the opposition of theministry, got from the tsar a semi-official approval for hisactivities and organized in 1888-1889 a new expedition toAbyssinia, this time much more numerous and supplied withweapons. As the diplomats warned, the undertaking ended in adisaster. When Ashinov and his followers landed the Red Seacoast and tried to found here a settlement as a base for thefurther move to Abyssinia, the French which possessed thisterritory protested and removed the Russian colonists using thearmed force. It should be noted, however, that the Ashinovincident did not put an end to the relations between Russia andAbyssinia.

After 1889, a number of new Russian expeditions to the “Landof the Black Christians” were organized, this time headed bymore reliable and decent persons.16 The Russian press continuedto pay a close attention to Ethiopia publishing accounts ontravels to Africa, translations of the Western works on this

16 A.V. Khrenkov, “Mashkov v Efiopii (mezhdu podvigom i avantiuroi)” [Mashkovin Ethiopia: between the Heroic Deed and Adventure], Voprosy istorii (M), 2, 1999,p. 123-137.

10

matter, and the theological treatises on the features of theEthiopian Christianity. All these processes prepared the groundfor the official visit of the Abyssinian delegation to SaintPetersburg in 1895 and to the establishment, two years later, ofthe diplomatic relationship between Abyssinia and Russia.

Dealing with the Abyssinian subjects the Russian periodicals(especially those of conservative and nationalist leaning) weredeveloping the ideas which had firstly been formulated in 1880s,in the course of preparation of the Ashinov adventures.17 TheRussian treatment of the black-skinned Christians was contrastedin these periodicals to the attitudes of Europeans with theirarrogance and pretensions to be a higher race. Though not veryadvanced in economy and science, Russian authors emphasized,Abyssinians retained the deep religious faith and the purity oftheir souls. The centuries of isolation helped to the AfricanChristians to protect themselves against the corruptinginfluence of the Western civilization which, accordingly to theRussian conservatives, was undergoing by the end of nineteenthcentury a process of deep decline.

In many of their publications on Abyssinia, the Russianauthors sought to stress the sincere piety of the blackChristians, their adherence to the ancient religious traditions(“Apostolic”, or “Biblical” Christianity), they emphasized thecentral role which the ecclesiastical institutes (first of all,monasteries) played in the political and social life of thecountry. Of an obvious importance for Russian authors were theparallels between Ethiopia and the medieval Russia where thesocial order was also based to a large extent on the religiousprinciples. As it was in medieval Russia, the rulers ofAbyssinia were fighting by the end of nineteenth century for the17 On the attitudes of the Russian press to Abyssinia, see S.V. Grigor’eva,“Mifologizirovannye stereotypy v mezhkulturnykh kommunikatsiiakh: Efiopskaiaimperiia glazami russkikh” [Mthologized Stereotipes in Cross-CulturalCommunications: the Ethiopian Empire as Seen by Russians], Vesntik Nizhegorodskogouniversiteta imeni N.I. Lobachevskogo (Nizhnii Novgorod), 4, 2010, p. 202-208. S.A.Agureev. “Vospriiatie Efiopii v rossiiskom obshchestvennom soznanii narubezhe XIX-XX vekov” [Perception of Ethiopia by the Russian publicconsciousness at the turn of nineteenth century], Rossiiskaia istoriia, (M), 2,2009, p. 36-42.

11

political unity of the country trying to overcome the tendenciesof its feudal fragmentation. Abyssinia retained its independencebeing surrounded in the course of the centuries by the hostile(first of all, Muslim) powers; it was protecting now itssovereignty against the aggression of Western countries – allthese similarities between Abyssinia and Russia could not butengender a vivid sympathy of Russian conservatives. 18

Taking measures aimed to expand the Russian influence intoAfrica, conservative circles paid at the same time closeattention to the traditional areas of the Russian Churchactivities abroad, such as policy towards the Holy Land. Thiskind of activities got a new impetus after founding in 1882 ofthe Orthodox Palestine Society (since 1889 – the ImperialOrthodox Palestine Society, IOPS). The IOPS was headed by thetsar’s brother, Grand Duke Sergei Aleksandrovich, and waseagerly supported by Pobedonostsev and many other influentialstatesmen, churchmen, and public leaders19. Aimed at thepropagation of the news about Palestine in Russia and atrendering assistance to the Russian pilgrims to Holy Places, theIOPS sought at that time to support native Christians throughthe founding of schools, hospitals, churches and direct materialaid to native churches. The members of the Society weremotivated by the quasi-religious zeal which permitted them toexpand broadly the activities of the IOPS and to strengthensignificantly its financial base. “Increase of membership,collection of funds, encouragement of pilgrims, scholarship,publications, all occurred with such religious that one might

18 Writing about Negus Menelik II who ruled Abyssinia in 1889-1913 and whosepolicy helped to strengthen the unity and independence of the country, theRussian writer A.I. Kokhanovskii stressed the parallels between this monarchand the famous rulers of Russia. “In terms of his persistent earning tocivilization, of his deep respect to labor, of his amazing modesty, Menelikwas Peter the Great of the Black Continent; his ruthless struggle againstfeudal reminded Ivan the Terrible, but more consistent and less cruel”(Quoted in: S.V. Grigor’eva, Mifologizirovannye stereotypy… art. cit., p. 205).19 On the Palestine society, see N.N. Lisovoi. Russkoe dukhovnoe i politicheskoeprisutstvie v Sviatoi zemle i na Blizhnem Vostoke v XIX – nachale XX v. [Russian Political andSpiritual Presence at the Holy Land and the Near East in Nineteenth and EarlyTwentieth Century], M., Indrik, 2006.

12

well consider the society nothing but a religious organization”,noted with this regard the American scholar T.G. Stavrou20.

Though the Society, while starting its activities, stressedits willingness to act in accordance with the Greek hierarchyand to respect its prerogatives, the clashes between thetraditional ecclesiastical rulers of the Holy Land and theRussian newcomers were doomed to appear. ‘We could either haverenounced the local Orthodox Arabs or have workedindependently”, had to conclude the general meeting of theSociety in 1892. “We decided on the second course. We soughtreconciliation, but in vain21”. The Greeks, in their turn,suspected Russians of an intention to undermine the traditionalecclesiastical order of the Near East, to wrest the authorityfrom the Ecumenical (Constantinople) Patriarch and to replace inwith the domination of the Russian Church. Facing the resistanceof Greeks in Palestine, the Society transferred since 1895 itsactivities in Syria where it made vigorous efforts to uplift theeducational, cultural, and material level of the local Arabclergy and to support them against the Greek hierarchy.

Seeking to assist the native Christians of the Holy Land, theleaders of the IOPS strove at that time to retain their Arabidentity and not to disrupt it disposing the “simplistic”priests and peasants of Syria to the harmful influence of thealien culture. “If our society were called the Russian PalestineSociety”, noted V.N. Khitrovo, one of the founders of the IOPS,

“then we would simply convert Orthodox Arabs into Russians as theProtestants convert them into Englishmen and the Catholics intoFrenchmen, but we are called Orthodox and so we have to make themgood Orthodox Arabs22”.

The schools of the IOPS, unlike those of Western missionarystructures, pay a big attention to teaching of the Arabiclanguage. Some Arab clerics of Syria opposed consciously tointroducing of the Western languages in the school curriculum

20 T.G. Stavrou. Russian Interests in Palestine, 1882-1914. Thessaloniki, Institute forBalkan Studies, 1963, p. 89.21 Quoted in: Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence… op.cit, p. 107.22 Quoted in: Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence… op.cit, p. 115.

13

fearing it might have had a corrupting influence onimpressionable and naïve native Christians.

In the late 1890s, when the activities of the IOPS reachedits apogee, the Russian Church and religiously inspired laymenfound a new object for their activities. This time it was asmall community of the Assyrians which inhabited the NorthPersia (Iran) and belonged to the Nestorian branch ofChristianity23. In 1898, the Assyrian Bishop Mar-Ionan joinedOrthodoxy in Saint-Petersburg together with a group of his co-religionists, and the same year a special mission of the RussianChurch was sent to the Nestorians of North Persia. Over the nextdecade, a number of Orthodox educational and religiousinstitutes in North Persia were founded, and on the eve of theFirst World War, the whole Nestorian community expressed,accordingly to the Russian ecclesiastical authorities, itsdesire to join Orthodoxy.

The characteristics which were given to the Assyrians inRussian periodicals strongly reminded those of Ethiopians whichappeared in the period of the Ashinov’s expedition. Assyrians,stressed the Russian journalists, belonged to the ancientChristian community which fate was closely connected with thehistory of the great empires of the past, such as Rome andByzantium; they had to undergo the innumerable sufferings, butretained their Christian faith. The patriarchal mores of theAssyrians looked more attractive when compared with thecorrupted life of the contemporary Europeans; living in aterrible poverty, the Christians of North Persia demonstrated atthe same time a deep religiosity “which may shame the WesternChristians”. The discriminated and oppressed minority ofAssyrians had been surrounded by the militant Muslim tribes, andthe holy mission of Russia was to protect its potential co-religionists24. Being motivated by these stimuli, the Russianconservatives, as it was mentioned above, expanded energetic23 On the Assyrians and their attitudes to the Russian Church, see V.V.Bolotov, Iz istorii tserkvi Siro-Khaldeiskoi [From the History of the Syro-ChaldeanChurch], SPb, 1901. A.P. Lopukhin Novoe poprishche dlia missii. Siro-khaldei, ikhproiskhozhdenie, istoriia [New Field for the Mission. Syro-Chaldeans, Their Originand History], SPb, 1898.

14

activities in different parts of the world believing that thepeoples of these regions would become sooner or later the memberof one spiritual family under the Russian leadership. What were,then, the results of these activities?

In many respects, these results were impressive. Russiamanaged to create a wide network of educational, religious, andcultural institutes in North Persia and especially in the HolyLand, it increased significantly its influence in Abyssinia. In1899, with the help of Russian diplomacy, the Arab bishopMeletios Dumani was elected as Patriarch of Antioch, the firstArab to hold this position in 200 years. This, in turn, helpedRussia to increase its predominance in Syria. Many young menfrom Syria and Palestine came to Russia for their studies andoccupied, upon returning home, important positions in Churchhierarchy and the educational system of the Easternpatriarchates. As T.G. Stavrou put it, “at the outbreak of theFirst World War… Syria and Palestine gave the impression thatthe two Turkish provinces were becoming Russian colonies… In allparts of Syria and Palestine one encountered evidence of thework of the Palestine Society”.25

In Abyssinia, the Russian presence was also highly visibleand tended to get expanded over all the Near East comprisingdifferent religious communities. The head of the Ethiopian

24 For the typical statement of these notions, see A.P. Lopukhin. “KatolikosVostoka i ego narod. Ocherki iz zhizni siro-khaldeev nestorian v Persii iTurtsii” [Catholicos of the East and His People. Skethes of the Life of theSyro-Chaldeans – Nestorians in Persia and Turkey], Khristianskoe Chtenie, 8-11,1898.25 T.G. Stavrou. Russian Interests… op. cit., p. 193. In parallel with supporting of thenative Arab Christians, the Society did its best to encourage the influx ofthe Russian pilgrims in the Holy Land. The “simplicity” of these pilgrims,mostly the ordinary peasants, was in consonance with the same qualities ofthe Orthodox Arabs which demonstrated in the eyes of the Russianconservatives the deep spiritual affinity of the Russian and Near EasternChristians. Some of Western observers confirmed this point of view expressingtheir fascination with the religiosity of Russian pilgrims. “Nothing in theHoly Land”, wrote Theodor Dowling, “touched me so much as the simple faith,the deep reference, the heart-felt love and sorrow of the Russian pilgrims.Totally free from self-consciousness, like children, they show all thefeelings of their hearts”. (Quoted in: T.G. Stavrou. Russian Interests… op. cit., p.100).

15

Church, Abuna Petros, asserted at the turn of the century thatRussia should establish its ecclesiastical protectorate over theGreeks, the Armenians, the Copts, and the Abyssinians, similarto that exercised by France over the Roman Catholics in theLevant26. Russians went to Abyssinia to built highways andorganize the hospitals; they also gave the Negus valuable helpas military advisors. “It was presumed”, wrote in thisconnection the British scholar Czeslaw Jesman,

“that Russians were the people most likely to obtain favor fromthe Ethiopians… The Russians, because of their great efforts,became extremely influential in the Ethiopian capital by theclosing years of nineteenth century27”.The peoples of the remote regions, in their turn, accepted

enthusiastically the protection of the mighty northern empireand expressed on many occasions their deep feelings to it. “Weall love Russia and have always desired to enter in friendlyrelations with her28” – these words of Negus Menelik may betreated as typical for the attitude of many Asian and Africanpeoples to Russia. The contemporaries from Syria and Palestinedescribed in colorful details the “intoxication of affection”which overtook them when, being encouraged by the IOPS, theyrealized that they were backed by “a Great Power feared by theother powers29”. The great culture and, especially, literatureof Russia “could not fail to find a response in the hearts ofEastern youth, burning, thirsting to love… [The Russianliterature] stirred their spirit, aroused their feelings, andimpelled them to take up the pen with youthful ardor”, wrote theArab author Yahya Haqqi30. But, despite of these achievements,there were of course many serious problems which burdened therelationship of Russia with the remote “exotic” peoples andwhich did not permit to the Russian conservatives to achieve infull their goals.26 Sergius Yakobson, Russia and Africa… art. cit., p. 166.27 Czeslav Jesman, The Russians in Ethiopia. An Essay in Futility, London, Chatto andWindus, 1958, p. 94.28 Czeslav Jesman, The Russians… op.cit., p.81.29 Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence… op.cit, p. 152.30 Peter Tilley, “The Imperial Russian Orthodox Society and the Arab LiteraryRenaissance, 1882-1914”, Australian Slavonic and East European Studies, 2, 1988, p. 51.

16

First of all, it should be noted that the religious andconservative ardor which was the main driving force behind theinterest to the “exotic little brothers” embraced at the turnof the century only the minor (though influential and highlyvisible) part of the educated classes. The election of Meletioswhich could be properly treated as “the greatest politicalvictory of Russia”, “passed unnoticed by the whole of Russiansociety31”, complained V.N. Khitrovo in 1900. It demonstrated“that the whole [Arab] affair is important merely in myimagination or that society does not understand this question orhas no sympathy for it”. The spread of secularism in the firstyears of the twentieth century further weakened the positions ofthe religiously inspired conservatives. In early 1900s,especially after the Russo-Japanese war and revolution of 1905-1907, the membership of the IOPS started to decrease, and itsincomes seriously diminished. It may be concluded thereforethat even if the monarchy did not collapse in 1917, theinternational activities of the conservatives and the Churchinstitutes were doomed to lose a significant part of theiroffensive mood in twentieth century.

Turning to the attitudes of the “exotic” peoples to Russia,it should be noted that expression of their sympathies to thenorthern empire concealed very often a purely practical and evencynical intention to use its might in their own interests. Thiswas especially true with regard to Abyssinians for whom “anyassumption of social equality with the Westerners wasridiculous”. “The Russian bogey, noted Czeslaw Jesman, was [forAbyssinians] an excellent lever to obtain concessions of everykind from the British and Italians. The Russians did not realizethat Menelik’s friendly feelings towards them depended directlyon their usefulness to him32”. The alleged ecclesiasticalcloseness of the Monophysite Abyssinia and the Orthodox Russiawas nothing but an illusion, and all attempts to establish thereligious union of two countries came to nothing. The positivefeatures of the Ethiopian national character were greatly31 Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence… op.cit, p. 171.32 Czeslav Jesman, The Russians… op.cit., p.45-46.

17

exaggerated by the romantic approach of the conservatives whoturned consciously a blind eye to the many unattractive traitsof the life of this backward and poor country. All of thiscontributed to the gradual disappointment of the Russianconservatives with the newfound “little brothers”. Butespecially discouraging became for them the processes initiatedin the life of the remote communities by the Russianorganizations and the unpredictable results of these processes.

It was extremely naïve for the Russian conservatives toexpect that the religious and ethnic groups which were perceivedas “simplistic” and “innocent” would preserve these qualitiesforever. Making the “exotic” peoples familiar with the foreignculture, helping them to uplift their educational level andbroaden their worldview, the Russians contributed unwittingly todisruption of their traditional way of life and urged them tomake the further steps on the way of secularization andwesternization. This was felt in all regions where the Russianorganizations were working. Thus, in Syria, the local notablesstarted by the beginning of the twentieth century to demand thatthe modern professional subjects, such as trade and economy, aswell as the Western languages should have been introduced in thecurriculum of the IOPS schools33. The modern currents of thought,such as ethnic nationalism and constitutionalism, began to getspread among the Arab population, and the Russian protection wasperceived in this situation as an undesirable and annoyingburden.

Demonstrating an ardent interest in Russian literature, the“little brothers” borrowed very often from it the ideas thatclearly corresponded to their status as oppressed people butcould hardly be welcomed by the pious and politically loyalactivists of the IOPS. Thus, extremely popular among Arabsbecame such writers as Leo Tolstoy and Maxim Gorky, and therevolutionary tendencies of the latter evoked an especiallyenthusiastic response of the local population. “Gorky, wrote oneof the Syrian writers, strove for the elevation of the lowerclasses amongst his compatriots, as he was convinced that there33 Derek Hopwood, The Russian Presence… op.cit, p. 152-155.

18

are in this classes more people of intelligence and deep culturethan in the upper classes”. Tolstoy was esteemed by the Arabsociety as a “teacher” and “the great Muscovite sage”, and aspecial attention was paid to his moralistic critics of themodern world and to his protest against the unequal distributionof land. It is not surprising therefore that many Arabs,especially the young ones, hailed wholeheartedly the revolutionof 1905 in Russia34.

Summing up, it should be concluded that the endeavor of theRussian conservatives at the turn of the century led to thehighly paradoxical results. It stimulated unexpected andunpredictable processes in the “exotic” societies underminingthose principles which the adherents of the Orthodoxy andautocracy strove to strengthen. The downfall of the monarchy in1917 put an end to the conservative experiment in the area offoreign policy diminishing dramatically the possibilities of theRussian Church to pursue the international activities. It wouldbe misleading, however, to say that the undertaking of themembers of the Palestine Society, of travelers to Abyssinia andother enthusiasts of religious conservatism left no traces inRussian and world history. Being unable to reach their directgoals, to create and international spiritual community under theleadership of the tsarist empire, the conservatives helped topromote the Russian educational and religious institutes abroad,to make the remote peoples familiar with the Russian culture,and to improve to some extend the image of Russia abroad. Theconservative efforts failed in the political area, but succeededin the less tangible, but nevertheless very important sphere ofintellectual, spiritual, and cultural life.

Bibliography

1. Agureev S.A. “K istorii ustanovleniia russko-efiopskikhobshchestvennyh sviazei I kul’turnyh contaktov s kontsaXVII po konets XIX veka” [On the history of theestablishment of the Russo-Ethiopian social and cultural

34 Peter Tilley, The Imperial Russian Orthodox Society… art. cit., p. 62-65, 68, 74-77. 19

contacts from the end of seventeenth to the end ofnineteenth centuries], Vestnik Rossiskogo Gumanitarnogo Universiteta(M.), 2, 2011.

2. Agureev S.A.. “Vospriiatie Efiopii v rossiiskomobshchestvennom soznanii na rubezhe XIX-XX vekov”[Perception of Ethiopia by the Russian public consciousnessat the turn of nineteenth century], Rossiiskaia istoriia, (M), 2,2009.

3. Askew Thomas A., “The 1888 London Centenary MissionsConference: Ecumenical Disappointment or American MissionsComing of Age?”, International Bulletin of Missionary Research, 18,1994.

4. Bolotov V.V., Iz istorii tserkvi Siro-Khaldeiskoi [From the History ofthe Syro-Chaldean Church], SPb, 1901.

5. Dmitrievskii A.A., Russkaia dukhovnaia missiia v Ierusalime [RussianEcclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem], M. – SPb,Imperatorskoe Pravoslavnoe Palestinskoe Obshchestvo –Izdatel’stvo Olega Abyshko, 2009.

6. Geyer M. and Paulmann J., eds., The Mechanics of Internationalism:Culture, Society, and Politics from 1840s to the First World War, London –New York, Oxford University Press, 2001.

7. Grigor’eva S.V., “Mifologizirovannye stereotypy vmezhkulturnykh kommunikatsiiakh: Efiopskaia imperiiaglazami russkikh” [Mthologized Stereotipes in Cross-Cultural Communications: the Ethiopian Empire as Seen byRussians], Vesntik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta imeni N.I. Lobachevskogo(Nizhnii Novgorod), 4, 2010.

8. Hopwood Derek, The Russian Presence in Syria and Palestine, 1843-1914.Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1969.

9. Jelavich Charles, Tsarist Russia and Balkan Nationalism: RussianInfluence in the International Affairs of Bulgaria and Serbia, 1879-1886,Berkeley, University of California Press, 1958.

20

10. Jesman Czeslav, The Russians in Ethiopia. An Essay in Futility, London, Chatto and Windus, 1958.

11. Khrenkov A.V., “Mashkov v Efiopii (mezhdu podvigom i avantiuroi)” [Mashkov in Ethiopia: between the Heroic Deed and Adventure], Voprosy istorii (M), 2, 1999.

12. Lisovoi N.N.. Russkoe dukhovnoe i politicheskoe prisutstvie v Sviatoizemle i na Blizhnem Vostoke v XIX – nachale XX v. [Russian Political andSpiritual Presence at the Holy Land and the Near East inNineteenth and Early Twentieth Century], M., Indrik, 2006.

13. Lopukhin A.P. “Katolikos Vostoka i ego narod. Ocherkiiz zhizni siro-khaldeev nestorian v Persii i Turtsii”[Catholicos of the East and His People. Skethes of the Lifeof the Syro-Chaldeans – Nestorians in Persia and Turkey],Khristianskoe Chtenie, 8-11, 1898.

14. Lopukhin A.P. Novoe poprishche dlia missii. Siro-khaldei, ikhproiskhozhdenie, istoriia [New Field for the Mission. Syro-Chaldeans, Their Origin and History], SPb, 1898.

15. Lunochkin A.V., “Ataman volnykh kazakov” N.I. Ashinov i egodeiatel’nost’ [“The Ataman of Free Cossacks” N.I. Ashinov andhis activities]. Volgograd, Izdatel’stvo Volgogradskogouniversiteta, 1999.

16. Pis’ma Pobedonostseva k Aleksandru III. Tom II [Pobedonostsev’sLetters to Alexander III. Vol. II.] M, Novaia Moskva, 1926.

17. Popov A.V., Rossiiskoe pravoslavnoe zarubezh’e [RussianOrthodoxy abroad], M., IPVA, 2005.

18. Rollins Patrick J.. “Imperial Russia’s African Colony”,Russian Review,27, 1968.

19. Seager, Richard Hughes The World’s parliament of Religions: The East/West encounter, Chicago, 1893,Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 2009.

21

20. Smolich I.K., Istoriia russkoi tserkvi. 1700-1917. Kniga 2. [Historyof the Russian Church. 1700-1917. Vol. II], M.,Izdatel’stvo Sviato-Preobrazhenskogo Valaamskogomonastyria, 1997.

21. Stavrou T.G.. Russian Interests in Palestine, 1882-1914. Thessaloniki, Institute for Balkan Studies, 1963

22. Tilley Peter, “The Imperial Russian Orthodox Societyand the Arab Literary Renaissance, 1882-1914”, AustralianSlavonic and East European Studies, 2, 1988.

23. Wren Melvin C., “Pobedonostsev and Russian Influence inthe Balkans, 1881-1888”, The Journal of Modern History (Chicago),19, 1947.

24. Yakobson Sergius, “Russia and Africa”, The Slavonic Review, 19, 1940.

22