A.N. Wilson, The Victorians, London: Arrow Books, 2002, p. 395.
253
Gallagher, "Folly & Failure in the Balkans", History Today, September, 1999, p. 48. As Hosking points out, "the official Foreign Office view was that Russia should cooperate with Germany and Austria to reaffirm the legitimist monarchical principle in Eastern Europe, to counteract revolutionary movements there, whether nationalist or not, and to promote a stable balance of power. Panslavism could never be consistently espoused by the Russian government, for it was a policy which would inevitably lead to war against the Ottomans and Habsburgs, if not against the European powers in general. Besides, it was in essence a revolutionary strategy, directed against legitimate sovereign states. For the Russian empire to promote the principle of insurrectionary nationalism was, to say the least, double-edged." (op. cit., pp. 370-371)
254
Andrzej Walicki, A History of Russian Thought, Oxford: Clarendon, 1988, pp. 291-293, 295-297.
255
Hosking, op. cit., p. 369.
256
As Fr. Georges Florovsky writes, speaking of the later Slavophiles, "Significance is ascribed to this or that cultural achievement or discovery of the Slavic nationality not because we see in it the manifestation of the highest values, values which surpass those that inspired 'European' culture, but simply because they are the organic offshoots of the Slavic national genius. And so not because they are good, but because they are ours. "The ideals and concrete tasks for action are inspired not by autonomous seeking and 'the reevaluation of all values', but solely by 'the milieu' and 'circumstances' of one's 'chance' belonging to the given 'cultural-historical type', to the given 'ethnic group of peoples'. This nationalism should be given the epithet 'anthropological', as opposed to the ethnic nationalism of the 'older Slavophiles', [since] the basis for 'idiosyncracy' is sociological or anthropological particularity, not originality of cultural content. There individual variations are allowed on universal and eternal motifs: here they are taken to be various unshakeable and unmixed relative melodies..."
“It was on this plane, “continues Florovsky, “that the annihilating criticism to which Vladimir Soloviev subjected the imitative nationalism of the later Slavophiles lay. His words had the greater weight in that, even though he was not conscious of it, he stood squarely on the ground of the old, classical Slavophile principles. True, his criticism suffered from wordiness and ‘personalities’. Too often a harsh phrase took the place of subtle argumentation. But the basic fault of ‘false’ nationalism was sensed by him and illumined completely correctly. Only on the soil of universal principles that are absolutely significant to all is genuine culture possible, and the national task of Slavdom can lie only in actively converting itself to the service of values that will be chosen for their supreme good in the free exercise of thought and faith… But the denial of the ‘universal-historical’ path is a step towards nihilism, to the complete dissolution of values,… in the final analysis, the abolition of the category of values altogether…”(“Vechnoe i prekhodiaschee v uchenii russkikh slavianofilov” (The eternal and the passing in the teaching of the Russian Slavophiles), in Vera i Kul’tura (Faith and Culture), St. Petersburg, 2002, pp. 101, 102-103)
257
Almond, Europe's Backyard War, London: Mandarin, 1994, p. 105.
258
Walicki, op. cit., pp. 304-305.
259
Thus "one of the sources of Leontiev's ideas", writes S.V. Khatuntsev, “on the inevitability of serious conflicts between a Russia that was renewing and transforming itself and the civilization of the West was, without a doubt, the ideas of the Slavophiles. Proceeding from a recognition of the complete opposition of the two worlds – the ‘western’, ‘Romano-Germanic’, ‘Catholic-Protestant’, and the ‘eastern’, ‘Slavic-Orthodox’, the Slavophiles concluded that conflicts and wars between them were inevitable. So for Yu.F. Samarin, ‘the essential, root difference’ between the two worlds was already ‘a condition of struggle’ between them in all spheres, including the political. The political opposition between Western Europe and Slavdom was the initial basis of the views of I.S. Aksakov. Already in 1861 he was speaking about ‘the hatred, which is often instinctive’ of Europe for the Slavic, Orthodox world, the case of which was ‘the antagonism between the two opposing educational principles and the envy of the decrepit world for the new one, to which the future belongs’. Several years later Aksakov wrote: ‘The whole task of Europe consisted and consists in putting an end to the material and moral strengthening of Russia, so as not to allow the new, Orthodox-Slavic world to arise…’ However, he did not think that the opposition between the West and Russia unfailingly signified enmity or war between them. No less important for the genesis of the ideas of Leontiev that are being reviewed was his conception of the war of 1853-56 and the anti-Russian campaigns in Europe during the Polish rebellion of 1863-1864. Both the Eastern war and the anti-Russian campaigns convinced him that the West was irreconcilably hostile to Russia.” ("Problema 'Rossia -Zapad' vo vzgliadakh K.N. Leontieva (60-e gg. XIX veka)" (The Problem of Russia and the West in the views of K.N. Leontiev (in the 60s of the 19th century), Voprosy Istorii (Questions of History), 2006 (3), p. 119)
260
As Leontiev put it: "The Greeks have 'the Byzantine empire', 'the Great Hellenic Idea'; while the Bulgars have 'Great Bulgaria'. Is it not all the same?" ("Pis'ma o vostochnykh delakh - IV" (Letters on Eastern Matters - IV), op. cit., p. 363.
261
"So much for the national development, which makes them all similar to contemporary Europeans, which spreads petty rationalism, egalitarianism, religious indifference, European bourgeois uniformity in tastes and manners: machines, pantaloons, frock-coats, top hats and demagogy!" ("Plody natsional'nykh dvizhenij" (The Fruits of the National Movements), op. cit., p. 560).
262
Walicki, op. cit., p. 303.
263
Leontiev, Letter of a Hermit.
264
Leontiev, "On Political and Cultural Nationalism", letter 3, op. cit., p. 363.
265
Leontiev, "Tribal Politics as a Weapon of Global Revolution", letter 2, in Constantine Leontiev, Izbrannie Sochinenia (Selected Works), edited and with an introductory article by I.N. Smirnov, Moscow, 1993, p. 314.
266
Wil Van Den Bercken, Holy Russia and Christian Europe, London: SCM Press, 1999, p. 212.
267
Walicki, op. cit., p. 308.
268
This was a point stressed by Leontiev's spiritual father, Elder Ambrose of Optina: "In your note about the living union of Russia with Greece, in our opinion you should first of all have pointed out how the Lord in the beginning founded the Ecumenical Orthodox Church, consisting of five Patriarchates, or individual Churches; and, when the Roman Church fell away from the Ecumenical Church, then the Lord as it were filled up this deprivation by founding the Church of Russia in the north, enlightening Russia with Christianity through the Greek Church, as the main representative of the Ecumenical Church. The attentive and discerning among the Orthodox see here two works of the Providence of God. First, the Lord by his later conversion of Russia to Christianity preserved her from the harm of the papists. And secondly, He showed that Russia, having been enlightened with Christianity through the Greek Church, must be in union with this people, as the main representative of the Ecumenical Orthodox Church, and not with others harmed by heresy. That is how our forefathers acted, seeing, perhaps, a pitiful example, beside the Romans, in the Armenian Church, which through its separation from the Ecumenical Church fell into many errors. The Armenians erred for two reasons: first, they accepted slanders against the Ecumenical Church; and secondly, they wanted self-government and instead of this subjected themselves to the subtle influence of the westerners, from which they were protected by their very geographical position. The cunning hellish enemy also wove his nets and is still weaving them over the Russians, only in a somewhat different form. The Armenians were confused first by accepting a slander against the Ecumenical Church, but afterwards by their desire for self-government. But the Russian could be closer to the same actions by accepting slanders against the first-hierarchs of the Ecumenical Church. And thus, through the enemy's cunning and our blunders, it will turn out that we, wilfully departing from a useful and saving union with the Ecumenical Church, involuntarily and imperceptibly fall under the harmful influence of western opinions, from which Providence Itself has preserved and protected us, as was said earlier... You should have pointed out that absolute obedience is one thing, and relations with the Greek Church another. In the latter case there is nothing obligatory with regard to absolute obedience..." (Letter 226, Pravoslavnaia Zhizn' (Orthodox Life),478, November, 1989, pp. 208-209)
269
Moreover, the 28th canon of the Fourth Ecumenical Council specifically mentions Thrace and Macedonia as coming within the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The Greeks were to use this canon in defence of their position.
270
The Phanar's refusal led to two distinct movements for Bulgarian ecclesiastical independence: the Bulgarian Uniate Church, which was in communion with Rome, and the Bulgarian exarchate, later the Bulgarian patriarchate, which remained Orthodox. What is written here relates exclusively to the Bulgarian Orthodox Church.
271
Walter, "Raphael Popov, Bulgarian Uniate bishop: problems of uniatism and autocephaly", Sobornost', 6:1, 1984, p. 53.
272
Leontiev, “Plody natsional’nykh dvizhenij” (The Fruits of the National Movements), op. cit., p. 559.
273
Metropolitan Philaret, in Leontiev, “Pis’ma o vostochnykh delakh” (Letters on Eastern Matters), op. cit, p. 360.
274
Leontiev, “Plody natsional’nykh dvizhenij”, op. cit., p. 558.
275
Leontiev, “Plody natsional’nykh dvizhenij”, op. cit., p. 559.
276
Leontiev, “Plody natsional’nykh dvizhenij”, op. cit., p. 560. As he wrote in another place: “They wanted to have not, an administrative, or topographical exarchate within definite boundaries, but a tribal [ethnic] exarchate, a ‘phyletic’ exarchate as the Greek clergy put it at the council of 1872. The Ecumenical Patriarch could have given them an administrative exarchate or even a patriarchy, and he would have been forced to do that later by force of circumstances… but the Bulgarians wanted a ‘tribal’ exarchate, that is, they wanted all Bulgarians, wherever they lived, to depend directly and in all respects on their national clergy. Of course, the Patriarch did not even have the right to bow to their wishes in this form. The Bulgarians then separated in a self-willed manner; while the council declared them to be… ‘schismatics’…” (“Dopolnenie k dvum stat’iam o panslavizme” (Supplement to Two Articles on Pan-Slavism), op. cit., p. 81.) And again: “In the ecclesiastical question the Bulgarians and the Greeks were equally cunning and wrong according to conscience. The difference lay in the fact that canonically, formally, in the sense precisely of abstract principles of tradition, the Greeks were more right” (“Khram i Tserkov’” (Temple and Church), op. cit., p. 165). (V.M.)
277
Pavlenko, “The Heresy of Phyletism: History and the Present”, Vertograd-Inform, (English edition), September, 1999. The full report of the special commission can be found in Hildo Boas and Jim Forest, For the Peace from Above: an Orthodox Resource Book, Syndesmos, 1999; in “The Heresy of Racism”, In Communion, Fall, 2000, pp. 16-18.
278
See K. Dinkov, Istoria na B'lgarskata Ts'rkva (A History of the Bulgarian Church), Vratsa, 1953, pp. 80-96; D. Kosev, "Bor'ba za samostoyatel'na natsionalna tserkva" (The Struggle for an Independent National Church), in Istoria na B'lgaria (A History of Bulgaria), Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1987, vol. 6, pp. 124-188 (in Bulgarian); Fr. German Ivanov-Trinadtsaty, "Novij podkhod k greko-bolgarskomu raskolu 1872 goda" (A New Approach to the Greco-Bulgarian Schism), Russkoe Vozrozhdenie (Russian Regeneration), 1987 (I), pp. 193-200.
279
Khomiakov, Pravoslavie, Samoderzhavie, Narodnost’ (Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality), Minsk: Belaruskaya Gramata, 1997, p. 19.
280
Glubokovsky, "Pravoslavie po ego sushchestvu" (Orthodoxy in its essence), in Tserkov' i Vremia (The Church and Time), 1991, pp. 5-6.
281
Leontiev, “Panslavism i Greki” (Pan-Slavism and the Greeks), op. cit., p. 46.
282
Wheatcroft, Infidels, London: Penguin Books, 2004, p. 260. As Noel Malcolm writes, "the basic cause of popular discontent was agrarian; but this discontent was harnessed in some parts of Bosnia by members of the Orthodox population who had been in contact with Serbia, and who now publicly declared their loyalty to the Serbian state. Volunteers from Serbia, Slavonia, Croatia, Slovenia and even Russia (plus some Italian Garibaldists, and a Dutch adventuress called Johanna Paulus) were flooding into the country, convinced that the great awakening of the South Slavs was at hand. The Bosnian governor assembled an army in Hercegovina, which acted with ineffective brutality during the autumn and harsh winter of 1875-6. The fiercer begs raised their own 'bashi-bazooks' (irregular troops) and, fearing a general overthrow in Bosnia, began terrorizing the peasant population. During 1876, hundreds of villages were burnt down and at least 5000 peasants killed; by the end of the year, the number of refugees from Bosnia was probably 100,000 at least, and possibly 250,000." (Bosnia: A Short History, London: Papermac, 1996, p. 132)
283
"Proslavlenie khristian iz Bataka, muchenicheski postradavshikh za sv. Pravoslavnuiu veru v 1876 godu" (Glorification of the Christians from Batak who suffered martyrically for the holy Orthodox faith in 1876), http://catacomb.org.ua/modules.php?name=Pages&go=print_page&pid=910 ; Rassophore Monk Euthymius, "The New Martyrs of Batak", Orthodox Life, no. 2, March-April, 2007, p. 8.
284
Tim Judah, The Serbs, London and New York: Yale University Press, third edition, 2009, pp. 66, 67
285
Hosking, Russia: People & Empire, London: HarperCollins, 1997, p. 371.
286
According to Judah, Cherniaev's troops were "often drunk and had little or no military experience" (op. cit., p. 66).
287
Misha Glenny, The Balkans, 1804-1999, London: Granta Books, 2000, p. 132.
288
Almond, op. cit., pp. 108-109.
289
Hosking, op. cit., p. 371.
290
Hosking, op. cit.
291
Golicz, op. cit., p. 40.
292
Selischev, "Chto neset Pravoslaviu proekt 'Velikoj Albanii'?" (What will the project of a 'Greater Albania' bring for Orthodoxy), Pravoslavnaia Rus' (Orthodox Russia), NQ 2 (1787), January 15/28, 2005, p. 10.
293
Lieven, Empire, London: John Murray, 2000, p. 213.
294
Dostoyevsky, in Orlando Figes, Crimea, London: Allen Lane, 2010, p. 462.
295
Golicz, op. cit., p. 44.
296
Lebedev, Velikorossia (Great Russia), St. Petersburg, 1997, p. 349.
297
V. Zombardt, in O.A. Platonov, Ternovij Venets Rossii (Russia's Crown of Thorns), Moscow, 1998, p. 275.
298
Vital, op. cit., pp. 485-486.
299
"The Union which we want to create is not French, English, Swiss or German; it is Jewish, it is universal. The Jew will not become a friend of the Christian or the Muslim before the light of the Jewish faith, the only religion of reason, shines out everywhere among the other peoples and countries that are hostile to our manners and interests. We first of all want to be and remain Jews; our nationality is the religion of our fathers, and we do not recognize any authority. We lived in foreign lands and cannot about the changing desires of countries that are completely alien to us while our own material and moral tasks are in danger."The Jewish teaching must fill the whole world... The Christian churches are obstacles to the Jewish cause, and it is necessary in the interests of Jewry not only to fight the Christian churches, but also to annihilate them... Our cause is great and holy, and its success guaranteed. Catholicism, our age-old enemy, lies face down, wounded in the head. The net cast by Israel over the whole earthly globe will spread with each day, and the majestic prophecies of our sacred books will finally be fulfilled. The time is approaching when Jerusalem will become a house of prayer for all peoples, and the banner of Jewish monotheism will be unfurled on distant shores. We will take advantage of circumstances. Our power is huge. We shall learn how to apply it for our cause. What have we to be frightened of? Not far distant is the day when all the riches of the earth will pass into the possession of the children of Israel." (italics mine - V.M.).
300
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., pp. 178-180.
301
Aksakov, Rus', October 10, 1881; in Cohen and Major, op. cit., p. 627.
302
Jelavich, History of the Balkans, vol. 2: Twentieth Century, Cambridge University Press, 1983, p. 26.
303
Jelavich, op. cit., p. 26.
304
Vital, op. cit., pp. 495-496.
305
Glenny, op. cit., p. 150.
306
Jelavich, op. cit., p. 26.
307
Vital, op. cit., pp. 504, 505.
308
Glenny, op. cit., pp. 133-134.
309
Hosking, op. cit., pp. 372-373.
310
Dostoyevsky, in K. Mochulsky, Dostoyevsky: His Life and Work, Princeton, 1967.
311
V. Weidle writes: “’Europe is a mother to us, as is Russia, she is our second mother; we have taken much from her and shall do so again, and we do not wish to be ungrateful to her.’ No Westernizer said this; it is beyond Westernizers, as it is beyond Slavophiles. Dostoyevsky wrote it at the height of his wisdom, on the threshold of death… His last hope was Messianism, but a Messianism which was essentially European, which developed out of his perception of Russia as a sort of better Europe, which was called upon to save and renew Europe” (The Task of Russia, New York, 1956, pp. 47-60; in Alexander Schmemann, The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy, Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1963, p. 338).
312
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, Penguin Magarshack translation, p. 307.
313
Lebedev, op. cit., p. 331.
314
Among his few sayings on the subject is the following: "Our constitution is mutual love. Of the Monarch for the people and of the people for the Monarch." (cited in Lossky, N.O., Bog i mirovoe zlo (God and World Evil), 1994, Moscow: "Respublika", pp. 234-35).
315
Mussorgsky, quoted in Richard Taruskin, “The Power of Black Earth: Notes on Khovanschina”, Classic FM Magazine. May, 2006. In Boris Godunov Mussorgsky tried to "view the people as one giant being, inspired by one idea" (Julian Haylock, "Mussorgsky", Classic FM Magazine, May, 2006, p. 31).
Dostoyevsky, in Igor Volgin, Poslednij God Dostoevskogo (Dostoyevsky's Last Year), Moscow, 1986, p. 267.
323
Metropolitan Anastasy (Gribanovsky), Besedy so svoim sobstvennym serdtsem (Conversations with my own Heart), Jordanville, 1948, pp. 9-10.
324
The only person who retained his enthusiasm for the Speech for years to come was Ivan Aksakov. As Dostoyevsky wrote: “Aksakov (Ivan) ran onto the stage and declared to the public that my speech was not simply a speech but an historical event! The clouds had been covering the horizon, but here was Dostoyevsky’s word, which, like the appearing sun, dispersed all the clouds and lit up everything. From now on there would be brotherhood, and there would be no misunderstandings” (in Volgin, op. cit., p. 267).
325
Volgin, op. cit., p. 266.
326
Volgin, op. cit., p. 271.
327
K.V. Glazkov, "Zashchita ot liberalizma" ("A Defence from Liberalism"), Pravoslavnaia Rus' (Orthodox Russia), N 15 (1636), August 1/14, 1999, pp. 9, 10, 11.
328
Katkov, Moskovskie Vedomosti (Moscow Gazette), 1867, № 88; in L.A. Tikhomirov, Monarkhicheskaia Gosudarstvennost’ (Monarchical Statehood), St. Petersburg, 1992, p. 31.
329
Katkov, Moskovskie Vedomosti (Moscow Gazette), 1881, № 115; in Tikhomirov, op. cit., p. 314.
330
Katkov, Moskovskie Vedomosti (Moscow Gazette), 1886, № 341; in Tikhomirov, op. cit., p. 314.
331
For example: “The whole labour and struggle of Russian History consisted in taking away the power of each over all, in the annihilation of many centres of power. This struggle, which in various forms and under various conditions took place in the history of all the great peoples, was with us difficult, but successful, thanks to the special character of the Orthodox Church, which renounced earthly power and never entered into competition with the State. The difficult process was completed, everything was subjected to one supreme principle and there had to be no place left in the Russian people for any power not dependent on the monarch. In his one-man-rule the Russian people sees the testament of the whole of its life, on him they place all their hope” (Moskovskie Vedomosti (Moscow Gazette), № 12, 1884; in Tikhomirov, op. cit., p. 312). Again, “[the Tsar] is not only the sovereign of his country and the leader of his people: he is the God-appointed supervisor and protector of the Orthodox Church, which does not recognize any earthly deputy of Christ above it and has renounced any non-spiritual action, presenting all its cares about its earthly prosperity and order to the leader of the great Orthodox people that it has sanctified” (in Tikhomirov, op. cit., p. 313).
332
Volgin, op. cit., pp. 269-270.
333
Leontiev, “G. Katkov i ego vragi na prazdnike Pushkina” (G. Katkov and his enemies at the Pushkin festivities), in Vostok, Rossia i Slavianstvo (The East, Russia and Slavdom), op. cit., p. 279 ®.
334
Leontiev, op. cit., p. 282.
335
Dostoyevsky, The Dream of a Ridiculous Man.
336
Leontiev, “O vsemirnoj liubvi”, op. cit., p. 315.
337
Dostoyevsky, Polnoe Sobranie Sochinenij (Complete Works), Leningrad, 1984, vol. 26, p. 323; in Leontiev, op. cit., p. 717.
338
Leontiev, op. cit., pp. 315, 322.
339
Dostoyevsky, The Diary of a Writer, Haslemere: Ianmead, 1984, p. 1003.
340
Leontiev, op. cit., p. 324.
341
Leontiev, op. cit., pp. 326, 327.
342
Dostoyevsky, The Diary of a Writer; in Figes, op. cit., p. 331.
343
Dostoyevsky, “The Pushkin Speech”, in The Diary of a Writer, January, 1881, p. 1029.
344
Soloviev, in David Magarshack’s introduction to his Penguin translation of The Brothers Karamazov, pp. xi-xii.
345
Florovsky, Puti Russkogo Bogoslovia (Paths of Russian Theology), Paris, 1937, pp. 300-301 ®.
346
Lourié, “Dogmatika ‘religii liubvi’. Dogmaticheskie predstavlenia pozdnego Dostoevskogo” (The Dogmatics of ‘the religion of love’. The Dogmatic ideas of the late Dostoyevsky), in V.A. Kotel’nikov (ed.), Khristianstvo i Russkaia Literatura (Christianity and Russian Literature), St. Petersburg, 1996, p. 305.
347
Magarshack, op. cit., p. xviii.
348
Magarshack, op. cit., p. xvi.
349
Florovsky, op. cit., pp. 301-302.
350
Fr. Sergius Chetverikov, Elder Ambrose of Optina, Platina, Ca.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1997, p. 437
351
S. P. Ivanov, Russkaia Intelligentsia i Masonstvo ot Petra I do nashikh dnej (The Russian Intelligentsia and Masonry from Peter I to our days), Harbin, 1934, Moscow, 1997, p. 340.
352
Lieven, Nicholas II, op. cit., pp. 142, 143.
353
Ivanov, op. cit., p. 345.
354
“The participation of the Masons in this deed,” writes Selyaninov, “cannot be doubted. This was discovered when the Russian government turned to the French government with the demand that it hand over Hartman, who was hiding in Paris under the name Meyer. Scarcely had Hartman been arrested at the request of the Russian ambassador when the French radicals raised an unimaginable noise. The Masonic deputy Engelhardt took his defence upon himself, trying to prove that Meyer and Hartman were different people. The Russian ambassador Prince Orlov began to receive threatening letters. Finally, the leftist deputies were preparing to raise a question and bring about the fall of the ministry. The latter took fright, and, without waiting for the documents promised by Orlov that could have established the identity of Hartman-Meyer, hastily agreed with the conclusions of Brother Engelhardt and helped Hartman to flee to England… In London Hartman was triumphantly received into the Masonic lodge ‘The Philadelphia’.” (in Ivanov, op. cit., p. 346). “In this connection an interesting correspondence took place between two high-ranking Masons, Felix Pia and Giuseppe Garibaldi. Pia wrote: ‘The most recent attempt on the life of the All-Russian despot confirms your legendary phrase: “The Intenationale is the sun of the future!”’, and speaks about the necessity of defending ‘our brave friend Hartman’. In reply, Garibaldi praised Hartman, and declared: ‘Political murder is the secret of the successful realization of the revolution.’ And added: ‘Siberia is the not the place for the comrades of Hartman, but for the Christian clergy.’ In 1881 Hartman arrived in America, where he was received with a storm of ovations. At one of the workers’ meetings he declared that he had arrived in the USA (!) with the aim of… helping the Russian people (!) to win freedom.” (in Lebedev, op. cit., p. 356).
355
Abaza argued in favour of a constitution as follows: “The throne cannot rest exclusively on a million bayonets and an army of officials” (quoted in Figes, A People’s Tragedy, p. 41).
356
Ivanov, op. cit., pp. 344-345. In broad daylight, a bomb was thrown at the Tsar's carriage. It injured some of the guards but left him unhurt. Disregarding his personal safety, he left his carriage and was attending to the injured when a second bomb was thrown, fatally wounding him and many others. He was rushed to the Winter Palace where he died in the presence of his grief-stricken family. Both his son and heir, the future Tsar Alexander III, and his grandson, the future Tsar Nicholas II, were present.
357
Izmestieva, "Dmitrij Andreevich Tolstoj", Voprosy Istorii (Questions of History), 2006 (3), p. 84.
358
St. Ambrose, in Sergius Fomin & Tatiana Fomina, Rossia pered Vtorym Prishestviem (Russia before the Second Coming), Moscow: "Rodnik", 1994, vol. II, p. 350.
359
Nazarov, “Krovavaia mest’ slavianskim varvaram” (Bloody revenge on the Slavic barbarians), address to the international scientific conference, ‘The Jewish-Bolshevik coup of 1917 as the precondition of the red terror and forced starvations’, http://www.livejournal.com/users/rocornews/174447.html.
360
Leontiev, in Fomin & Fomina, op. cit., vol. II, p. 350.
361
Archbishop John, cited in Orthodoxy America, June, 1987, pp. 10-11.
362
Khrapovitsky, “Dorogie vospominania” (Treasured Reminiscences), Tsarskij Vestnik (Royal Herald), in Archbishop Nicon (Rklitskly), Zhizneopisanie Blazhennejshago Antonia, Mitropolita Kievskago i Galitskago (Biography of his Beatitude Anthony, Metropolitan of Kiev and Galich),New York, 1971, volume 1, p. 26.
363
Solzhenitsyn, Dvesti let vmeste (Two Hundred Years Together), Moscow, 2001, part 1, p. 185.
364
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., p. 189.
365
Vital, A People Apart: The Jews in Europe 1789-1939, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 288, 289.
366
Lieven, Empire, London: John Murray, 2000, p. 277.
367
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., p. 192.
368
Hosking, op. cit., p. 390.
369
Krivosheev Yu. & Krivosheev, V., Istoria Rossijskoj Imperii, 1861-1894 (A History of the Russian Empire, 1861-1894), St. Petersburg, 2000, pp. 99, 106.
370
Archbishop Nicanor, in Fomin and Fomina, op. cit., vol. I, p. 351. Of course, the kahal, that “state within a state”, was supposed to have been abolished in the reign of Nicholas I. Evidently, the Jews had managed to get round that law…
371
Hosking, op. cit., pp. 392-393.
372
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., p. 192.
373
Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews, London: Phoenix, 1995, p. 370.
374
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., pp. 293-294.
375
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., p. 299.
376
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., p. 311.
377
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., pp. 313-314.
378
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., p. 314.
379
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., pp. 317-318.
380
I.L. Solonevich, Narodnaia Monarkhia (The People’s Monarchy),Minsk, 1998, pp. 403-404. The slaves included some who have been numbered among the saints, such as St. John the Russian (imprisoned in Turkey itself) and St. Paul of Cairo.
381
Armour, “The Roots of Sarajevo: Austria-Hungary and Serbia, 1867-81”, History Today, February 27, 2014.
382
Judah, The Serbs, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009, third edition, pp. 93-94.
383
Zhukov, Russkaia Pravoslavnaia Tserkov’ na Rodine i za Rubezhom (The Russian Orthodox Church in the Homeland and Abroad), Paris, 2005, pp. 18-19.
384
Glenny, The Balkans, 1804-1999, London: Granta Books, 2000, p. 175.
385
Jelavich, History of the Balkans, Cambridge University Press, 1983, vol. 2, p. 31.
386
Archbishop Nicon (Rklitsky), Zhizneopisanie Blazhenneishago Antonia, Mitropolita Kievskago i Galitskago (Biography of his Beatitude Anthony, Metropolitan of Kiev and Galich),New York, 1971, volume 1, pp. 103-104.
387
For Soloviev Sophia was the feminine principle of God, His ‘other’. For some of his heretical followers, such as Protopriest Sergius Bulgakov, it was the Mother of God.
388
Soloviev, V. “Golos Moskvy” (The Voice of Moscow), 14 March, 1885; quoted in S. Fomin, Rossia pered Vtorym Prishestviem (Russia before the Second Coming), Sergiev Posad, 1993.
389
Soloviev, "Tri Sily" (“Three Forces”), reprinted in Novy Mir (New World), № 1, 1989, pp. 198-199.
390
Lossky, History of Russian Philosophy, London: George Allen & Unwin, 1952, pp. 114-115.
391
Soloviev, in N.G. Fyodorovsky, V poiskakh svoego puti: Rossia mezhdu Evropoj i Aziej (In Search of her own Path: Russia between Europe and Asia),Moscow, 1997, pp. 334-335.
392
Published in French as La Russie et l’Eglise universelle.
393
Lossky, op. cit., pp. 115-117.
394
Khrapovitsky, “The Infallibility of the Pope according to Vladimir Soloviev”, Orthodox Life, vol. 37, № 4, July-August, 1987, pp. 37, 43.
Pobedonostev, in Protopriest Michael Ardov, "Arkhi-Kontrrevoliutsioner", Nasha Strana, no. 2929, December 3, 2011, p. 3.
397
A.I. Peshkov, “’Kto razoriaet – mal vo Tsarstvii Khristovym’” (He who destroys is least in the Kingdom of Christ), in K.P. Pobedonostev, Sochinenia (Works), St. Petersburg, p. 3.
398
Firsov, op. cit., pp. 42-43.
399
Peshkov provides a certain, not very convincing correction to this point of view: “It is necessary to take into account that even in the Synod he did not have that direct administrative power which any minister in Russia’s Tsarist government possessed in the department subject to him, since the Most Holy Synod was a collegial organ, whose decision-making required the unanimity of its members. As Pobedonostev himself emphasised, ‘juridically I have no power to issue orders in the Church and the department. You have to refer to the Synod.’ In particular, when Metropolitan Isidore of St. Petersburg expressed himself against the publication in Russia of the New Testament in the translation of V.A. Zhukovsky, K.P. Pobedonostev had to publish it abroad, in Berlin…” (Peshkov, op. cit., p. 7)
400
Firsov, op. cit., p. 77.
401
Pobedonostev, Moskovskij Sbornik: Tserkov’ i Gosudarstvo (Moscow Anthology: Church and State),op. cit., p. 264.
402
Pobedonostsev, op. cit., p. 266.
403
Pobedonostsev, op. cit., pp. 268-269.
404
Pobedonostsev, op. cit., pp. 271-275, 276-277.
405
Krivosheev & Krivosheev, op. cit., pp. 91, 90, 88.
406
Alexander III, in Fomin, S. & Fomin, T. op. cit., 1998, vol. 1, p. 354. Prince Sergius Trubetskoy illustrated the link between family feeling and feeling for the monarchy during his childhood under the same Tsar Alexander: “Father and mother, grandfathers and grandmothers were for us in childhood not only sources and centres of love and unquestioned authority; they were enveloped in our eyes by a kind of aura which the modern generation does not know… Our fathers and grandfathers were in our children’s eyes both patriarchs and family monarchs, while our mothers and grandmothers were family tsaritsas.”
407
Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 1899-1919, London: Collins Harvill, 1990, pp. 143-145.
408
Figes, A People’s Tragedy, London: Pimlico, 1997, pp. 46-47.
409
But Lenin was not moved with compassion for the starving. Then, as later in the Volga famine of 1921-22, he saw the suffering of the peasants as an opportunity for revolution. (V.M.)
410
Figes, op. cit., pp. 160-162.
411
Pipes, op. cit., pp. 135-137.
412
Frank, “Etika nigilizma” (The Ethics of Nihilism), in Vekhi (Landmarks), Moscow, 1909, pp. 183-185.
413
Tikhomirov, “Bor’ba veka” (The Struggle of the Century), in Kritika Demokratii (A Critique of Democracy),Moscow, 1997, pp. 189-190, 191, 192, 195-196.
414
Tikhomirov, “Pochemu ia perestal byt’ revoliutsionerom” (Why I ceased to be a Revolutionary), in “Korni zla” (The Roots of Evil), Pravoslavnaia Rus’ (Orthodox Russia), № 7 (1412), April 1/14, 1990.
415
Frank, "Religioznoe-Istoricheskoe Znachenie Russkoj Revoliutsii" (The religio-historical significance of the Russian revolution), Po Tu Storonu i Po Pravu (On That Side and on the Right), Paris: YMCA Press, 1972.
416
Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago.
417
Florovsky, "Metafizicheskie predposylki utopizma" (The Metaphysical Presuppositions of Utopianism), Put' (The Way), June-July, 1926, p. 30.
418
Berdyaev, The Russian Revolution, Ann Arbor, 1966, p. 58; quoted in Michael Burleigh, Sacred Causes, London: Harper Perennial, 2007, p. 41.
419
Roberts, The Penguin History of the Twentieth Century, London: Penguin Books, 2000, p. 89.
420
Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire, London: Allen Lane, 2004, pp. 171-172.
421
Roberts, op. cit., pp. 96-97.
422
Eric Hobsbawm has expounded the commercial argument for imperialism in detail in The Age of Empire 1875-1914, London: Abacus, 1994, p. 62-69.
423
Comby, How to Read Church History, London: SCM Press, 1989, vol. 2, p. 174.
424
Wheatcroft, Infidels, London: Penguin Books, 2004, pp. 213-216
425
Cf. the cargo myth in New Guinea, which "has developed from the end of the nineteenth century to our day. The text which follows reflects the way in which it was expressed in the 1930s. "In the beginning Anut (God) created the heaven and the earth. On the earth he gave birth to all the flora and fauna and then to Adam and Eve. He gave these power over all things on earth and established a paradise for them to live in. He completed his beneficial work by creating and giving them cargo: canned meat, steel utensils, sacks of rice, tins of tobacco, matches, but not cotton clothing. For a time they were content with that, but finally they offended God by having sexual relations. In anger God chased them out of paradise and condemned them to wander in the bush. He took the cargo away from them and decreed that they were to spend the rest of their existence being content with the minimum needed to live.
"God showed Noah how to build the ark - which was a steamship like those one sees at the port of Madang. He gave him a peaked cap, a white shirt, shorts, socks and shoes... When the flood ended, God gave Noah and his family cargo as a proof of his renewed goodness towards the human race... Shem and Japheth continued to respect God and Noah and as a result continued also to benefit from the resources of cargo. They became the ancestors of the white races who have profited from their good sense. But Ham was stupid. He uncovered his father's nakedness... God took the cargo away from him and sent him to New Guinea, where he became the ancestor of the natives.
"God had said to the missionaries: "Your brothers in New Guinea are plunged into utter darkness. They have no cargo because of the folly of Ham. But now I have pity on them and want to help them. That is why you missionaries must go to New Guinea and remedy the error of Ham. You must put his descendants on the right way. When they again follow me, I will send them cargo, just as today I send it to you white people... (Comby, op. cit., p. 177)
426
An anti-Christian tract of a Chinese secret society in around 1875 read: "Accursed be these Europeans, these missionary dogs or these governors of dogs who come to preach a barbarous religion and destroy the holy wisdom, who profane and defame the holy Confucius, although they have not studied the first page of a book. Heaven can no longer tolerate them and the earth refused to bear them; let us strike them, and send them to meditate eternally in the depths of hell. May their tongues be cut out because they seduce the masses by their lies and their hypocrisy has a thousand means of tearing out the heart... Let us throw their bodies in the desert to be food for dogs." (Comby, op. cit., p. 178)
427
Max Hastings, review of William Dalrymple, The Last Mughal, London: Bloomsbury, 2006, in The Sunday Times Books, October 1, 2006, p. 46.
428
Darwin, After Tamerlane: The Rise & Fall of Global Empires, 1400-2000, London: Penguin Books, 2008, p. 298.
429
Adams, op. cit., p. 37.
430
Hobsbawm, The Age of Empire 1875-1914, London: Abacus, 1994, pp. 69, 70.
431
Dominic Lieven, Empire, London: John Murray, 2000, p. 49.
432
Preston, The Boxer Rebellion, London: Robinson, 2002, pp. xxi-xxii.
433
Chamberlain, in Davies, op. cit., p. 817.
434
Ferguson, Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, London: Penguin, 2003, pp. 262-265.
435
Ferguson, “The War of the World”, BBC History Magazine, vol. 7, № 6, June, 2006, p. 18.
436
Ferguson, Colossus, p. 41.
437
Landes, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, London: Abacus, 1999, p. 307.
438
Ferguson, Colossus, pp. 42-43.
439
Preston, op. cit., p. xxiii.
440
Roberts, op. cit., pp. 102-103.
441
Ferguson, Colossus, p. 48.
442
Reynolds, op. cit., p. 295.
443
Smith, "Heroes of the Cuban revolution: Marti, Maceo and Gomez", Historian, N 44, Winter, 1994, pp. 7-8.
444
Judis, "Imperial Amnesia", Foreign Policy, July-August, 2004, p. 50.
445
Ferguson, Colossus, p. 50.
446
Ferguson, Colossus, p. 48.
447
Judis, op. cit., pp. 53-54.
448
Roberts, op. cit., p. 105.
449
See Anthony Delano, "America's Devious Dream", BBC History Magazine, vol. 7, no. 11, November, 2006, pp. 21-25.
450
Reynolds, op. cit., p. 301.
451
Armstrong, The Battle for God, New York: Ballantyne, 2000, pp. 136-139.
452
Armstrong, op. cit., pp. 139-140.
453
Armstrong, op. cit., pp. 143-144.
454
Wilson, op. cit., pp. 89-90.
455
Barenboim,"Wagner, Israel and the Palestinians",http://www.danielbarenboim.com/index.php?id=72.
456
Johnson, A History of the Jews, London: Phoenix, 1995, pp. 379-380.
457
As he admitted to the Royal Commission on Alien Immigration in London in 1902: "Seven years ago, when I was living in Paris, I was so impressed with the state of Jewry throughout Europe that I turned my attention to the Jewish question and published a pamphlet which I called 'A Jewish State'. I may say that it was not my original intention to publish the pamphlet or to take part in a political movement. But, after placing before a number of influential Jews my views upon the Jewish question, and finding that they were utterly oblivious of the danger which I then foresaw - that they could not see the large black cloud gathering in the East - I published the pamphlet which resulted in the establishment of the Zionist movement." (Vital, op. cit., p. 439).
458
When Herzl ascended the podium at the first Zionist conference, "he looked like 'a man of the House of David, risen all of a sudden from his grave in all his legendary glory,' recalled Mordechai Ben-Ami, the delegate from Odessa. ‘It seemed as if the dream cherished by our people for two thousand years had come true at last and Messiah the Son of David was standing before us.'" (Karen Armstrong, A History of Jerusalem, London: HarperCollins, 1997, p. 365). (V.M.).
459
Johnson, op. cit., pp. 395, 396-397, 397-398, 398-399.
460
Simms, Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy, London: Allen Lane, 2013, pp. 264-265.
461
Solzhenitsyn, op. cit., pp. 257-258, 260-261, 262, 263.
462
According to Vital (op. cit., p. 468), Plehve's memorandum to Herzl was approved beforehand by the Tsar. However, little came of his promise because in July, 1904 Herzl died and Plehve himself was assassinated by the Social Revolutionaries.
463
In 1879 William Marr had written: "The Jewish idea of colonizing Palestine could be wholesome for both sides [Jews and Germans]" (in Pipes, op. cit., p. 28).
464
Mead, "God's Country?", Foreign Affairs, September/October, 2006, p. 39.
465
Armstrong, op. cit., p. 360.
466
Hanks, Great Events in the History of the Church, Tain, 2004, pp. 294, 295.
467
Johnson, op. cit., pp. 400-402. At the Sixth Congress Herzl had been forced to stand before the delegates, raise his right hand and quote the words of the psalmist: 'If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand wither!' (Armstrong, op. cit., p. 366).
468
Johnson, op. cit., pp. 403-404.
469
Armstrong, op. cit., pp. 367-369.
470
Pobedonostsev, "Novaia Demokratia" (The New Democracy), in Sochinenia (Works), St. Petersburg: "Nauka", 1996, p. 277.
471
Pobedonostev, op. cit., pp. 278-279.
472
Pobedonostsev, op. cit., pp. 279-280.
473
As in Gilbert and Sullivan's operetta, H.M.S. Pinafore: I always voted at my Party's call / And I never thought of thinking for myself at all. (V.M.)
474
Pobedonostsev, op. cit., pp. 281-283.
475
Bobbitt, The Shield of Achilles, London: Penguin, 2002, p. 204.
476
Leontiev, "Fourth Letter from Athos", Vostok, Rossia i Slavianstvo (The East, Russia and Slavdom), Moscow, 1996, p. 37.
477
Leontiev, "Natsional'naia politika kak orudie vsemirnoj politiki", op. cit., p. 527.
478
Thompson, Europe since Napoleon, London: Penguin Books, 1966, p. 353.
479
Thompson, op. cit., pp. 353-354, 355.
480
Thompson, op. cit., p. 361.
481
Thompson, op. cit., pp. 405-407, 408.
482
Chamberlain, in Derek Fraser, The Welfare State, Stroud: Sutton Publishing, 2000, pp. 33-34.
483
Toynbee, A Study of History. Abridgement of Volumes I-VI by D.C. Somervell, Oxford University Press, 1946, p. 95. E.P. Thompson writes: "Just as Germany provided the most spectacular example, in those years, of massive and speedy industrial expansion, so she also set the pace in systematic social legislation. The emphasis in The German system lay neither on factory legislation, which Bismarck distrusted as external interference in employers' affairs, nor on unemployment insurance, which he treated as of minor importance. It aimed at a comprehensive national provision for security against the three commonest vicissitudes of urban life - sickness, accident, and incapacity in old age. Acts tackling successively these three problems were passed in 1883, 1884, and 1889. In 1911 the whole law of social insurance was codified and extended to various classes of non-industrial workers, such as agricultural labourers and domestic servants. Before these laws were passed, a multitude of local provisions had been made voluntarily by benefit societies, guilds, burial clubs, and parishes. The Reich system utilized these older forms but gradually absorbed and replaced them by new local and factory associations which administered the insurance schemes. By 1913 some fourteen and a half million persons were insured in this way. To the sickness and pension funds, both workers and employers contributed and both were represented on their management. In the course of time such benefits as free medical attendance and hospital care were extended, and by 1914 codes of factory legislation and of child labour were at last added. Although the prewar Reich did not set up unemployment insurance, it set up labour exchanges, and some municipalities had local schemes of insurance and relief for unemployed workers. Germans were pioneers in the thoroughness and extent of their welfare system. When war began, German workers were more protected against the hazards of an industrial society than those of any other country. This was a not unimportant element in her national solidarity and strength" (op. cit., p.358).
484
Thompson, op. cit., p. 359.
485
Bismarck, in M.J. Cohen and John Major, History in Quotations, London: Cassell, 2004, p. 674.
486
Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 1899-1919, London: Collins Harvill, 1990, pp. 135-137.
487
Troitsky, "Christianity and Socialism", Orthodox Life, vol. 48, N 3, May-June, 1998, pp. 37, 38-41, 43.
488
O.F. Soloviev, Masonstvo v Mirovoj Politike XX Veka (Masonry in World Politics in the 20th Century), Moscow: Rosspen, 1998, p. 7.
489
Soloviev, op. cit., p. 29.
490
Ridley, The Freemasons, London: Constable, 1999, pp. 70-71.
491
Ridley, op. cit., p. 220.
492
Ridley, op. cit., p. 220.
493
Chevallier, P. Histoire de la franc-maçonnerie française, in Soloviev, op. cit., p. 30.
494
Soloviev, op. cit., pp. 30, 31.
495
Soloviev, op. cit., p. 39.
496
Soloviev, op. cit., pp. 40-41.
497
McGrath, The Dawkins Delusion?, London: SPCK, 2007, pp. 20, 21.
498
Wilson, The Victorians, London: Arrow, 2003, p. 417.
499
A.N. Wilson, After the Victorians, London: Hutchinson, 2005, p. 80.
500
Burleigh, Sacred Causes, London: Harper Perennial, 2007, p. 13.
501
Fr. Sergius Chetverikov, Elder Ambrose of Optina, Platina, Ca.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1997, p. 181.
502
Tikhomirov, op. cit., pp. 480-481.
503
Wilson, After the Victorians, p. 92.
504
Horne, Seven Ages of Paris, London: Pan, 2002, pp. 324-325.
505
Comby, op. cit., pp. 160-162. Comby quotes two opposing views. First, that of the socialist deputy Maurice Allard (10 April 1905): "It has to be said very loudly that the Church, Catholicism or even Christianity is incompatible with any republican regime. Christianity is an outrage to reason, an outrage to nature. I also declare very clearly that I wish to pursue the idea of the Convention and to complete the work of de-Christianizing France which was taking place in utter calm and as happily as could be imagined until the day when Napoleon concluded his Concordat. And why do we Republicans and above all we socialists want to de-Christianize this country? Why are we fighting against religion? We are fighting against religion because we believe - and I say this again - that it is a permanent obstacle to progress and civilization."On the other hand, the Pope in his encyclical Vehementer (11 February 1906) wrote: "This theory of separation is the clearest negation of the supernatural order. In fact it limits the action of the state to the pursuit of public prosperity in this life, though that is only a secondary matter for religious societies; and as though such a thing were alien to it, it is in no way concerned with the ultimate reason for their existence, which is eternal bliss." (Comby, op. cit., p. 161) (V.M.)
506
Cornwell, Hitler’s Pope, London: Penguin, 2000, p. 46.
507
Frély, in Archpriest Lev Lebedev, Velikorossia (Great Russia), St. Petersburg, 1997, p. 357.
508
De Poncins, Freemasonry and the Vatican, Chulmleigh : Britons Publishing Company, p. 73.
509
V.F. Ivanov, Russkaya Intelligentsia i Masonstvo: ot Petra I do nashikh dnej (The Russian Intelligentsia and Masonry: from Peter I to our Days), Harbin, 1934, Moscow: "Moskva", 1997, p. 67.
510
Ridley, op. cit., p. 227.
511
Roberts, History of the World, Oxford: Helicon, 1992, p. 371.
512
Spellman, op. cit., pp. 57, 58.
513
Spellman, op. cit., p. 59.
514
Prince Ito, the effective creator of modern Imperial Japan, wrote in his Commentary on the Constitution: "The Sacred Throne was established at the time when the heavens and the earth became separated" (in Harold Nicolson, Monarchy, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1962, p. 38). However, he goes on to say that "the Emperor is heaven descended, divine and sacred", which implies that while the empire is a product of the fall, its purpose is also to overcome the fall, at least in part. It is possible that Prince Ito was here betraying the influencing of Christian ideas which he picked up during his education in Europe. (V.M.)
515
Spellman, op. cit., pp. 60-64.
516
Ienaga, in Rikki Kersten, "Coming to Terms with the Past: Japan", History Today, vol. 54 (3), March, 2004, p. 21.
517
Lieven, Nicholas II: Emperor of all the Russias, London: Pimlico, 1994, pp. 126-127.
518
Lieven, Nicholas II, pp. 140-141.
519
J.M. Roberts, The Penguin History of the Twentieth Century, London: Penguin, 1999, p. 63.
520
Golo Mann, The History of Germany since 1789, London: Pimlico, p. 233.
521
Mary Greene writes: “By the time his father died of cancer in 1888 at their palace in Potsdam, Wilhelm was set in his anglophobia and loathing for his mother and her liberal ideas. An English doctor had crippled his arm, he declared, and an English doctor had killed his father after misdiagnosing his cancer as benign: ‘One cannot have enough hatred for England’.” (Did Kaiser Bill’s mother spark the Great War?, Weekend, November 16, 2013, p. 9).
522
As Felix Ponsonby said, "He was the creation of the Germans themselves. They wanted a sabre-rattling autocrat with theatrical ways, attempting to dominate Europe, sending telegrams and making bombastic speeches, and he did his best to supply them with the superman they required." (in Miranda Carter, The Three Emperors, London: Penguin, 2010, p. 365). Again, as Stuart Miller writes, "the real problem was that he was too typical of the new state which he was now called upon to rule. A very complex personality with a rather stunted body and a withered arm, he was very insecure and unsure of himself and over-compensated for these inadequacies with bumptious aggressiveness and flamboyant posing. 'Psychological' versions of history can be very dangerous, but it is not difficult to see the problems and responses of the Kaiser and the state as being identical" (Mastering Modern European History, London: Palgrave, 1997, p. 226).
523
Spellman, Monarchies, London: Reaktion Press, 2001, p. 218.
524
Bernard Simms, Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy, London: Allen Lane, 2013, p. 263.
525
Delano, “Crisis in Caracas”, BBC History Magazine, vol. 7, № 1, January, 2006, p. 31.
526
Evans, op. cit., p. 46.
527
Carter, The Three Emperors, London: Penguin, 2010, p. 373.
528
Carter, op. cit., pp. 331-332.
529
Hew Strachan, The First World War, London: Pocket Books, 2006, p. 14.
530
Strachan, op. cit., p. 11.
531
Carter, op. cit., p. 392.
532
Carter, op. cit., p. 393.
533
Carter, op. cit., p. 401.
534
Carter, op. cit., p. 402.
535
Carter, op. cit., pp. 372.
536
Simms, op. cit., p. 294.
537
Roberts, The Penguin History of the Twentieth Century, London: Penguin, 2000, pp. 205-206.
538
Mann, op. cit., pp. 306-307.
539
Govorun, “Zavtra byla Vojna”, Religia v Ukraine, March 10, 2014, in Portal-Credo.ru, March 12, 2014.
540
Wilson, After the Victorians, pp. 3-4.
541
Wilson, After the Victorians, pp. 3-4.
542
Freud, S., “Charcot”, Standard Edition, London: Hogarth, vol. III, pp. 11-23.
543
Freud, S., Leonardo, London: Penguin Books, 1957.
544
Rieff, Freud: The Mind of the Moralist, University of Chicago Press, 1979, p. 385, footnote.
545
Holland, N., “Freud and the Poet’s Eye”, in Mannheim, L. & Mannheim, E., Hidden Patterns: Studies in Psychoanalytic Literary Criticism, New York: Macmillan, 1966, p. 153.
546
Freud, S., “The Unconscious”, 1915, Standard Edition, vol. XIV, pp. 201-202. My italics (V.M.).
547
Trilling, L., “Freud and Literature”, in The Liberal Imagination, New York: Doubleday, 1947.
548
Kramer, in Jerry Adler, “Freud in our Midst”, Newsweek, March 27, 2006, p. 37.
549
Jessie Chambers recounts how D.H. Lawrence once told her: “You know, Jessie, I’ve always loved mother.” “I know you have,” I replied. “I don’t mean that,” he answered, “I’ve loved her – like a lover – that’s why I could never love you.” (in Wilson, op. cit., p. 73).
550
Lewis, Mere Christianity, London: Fount Paperbacks, 1977, pp. 91-92.
551
Lewis, op. cit., p. 81.
552
Grabbe, “Pravoslavnoe vospitanoe detej v nashi dni”, http://www.portal-credo.ru/site.print.php?act=lib&id=846.
553
The idea was first put forward in his Project for a Scientific Psychology (1895) (Claudia Kalb, “The Therapist as Scientist”, Newsweek, March 27, 2006, p. 42).
554
Grabbe, op. cit.
555
Freud, Group Psychology, pp. 103, 94.
556
Anthony Storr, The Dynamics of Creation, London: Secker & Warburg, 1972, p. 236.
557
Lebedev, Velikorossia (Great Russia), St. Petersburg, 1997, pp. 377-379.
558
Voeikov, So Tsarem i Bez Tsaria (With and Without the Tsar), Moscow, 1995, p. 271. For more statistics, see Arsène de Goulevitch, Czarism and Revolution, Hawthorne, Ca., 1962.
559
Polsky, The New Martyrs of Russia, Wildwood, Alberta: Monastery Press, 2000, p. 117.
560
Mikhail V. Shkarovskii, “The Russian Orthodox Church”, in Edward Action, Vladimir Cherniaev, William Rosenberg (eds.), A Critical Companion to the Russian Revolution, 1914-1921, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997, p. 416. On December 1, 1901 the Tsar decreed that every military unit having its own clergy should have its own church in the form of a separate building (A.S. Fedotov, “Khramy vo imia svyatogo blagovernago velikago kniazia Aleksandra Nevskago v XIX-XX vv.”, Pravoslavnaia Rus’, N 5 (1818), March 1/14, 2007, p. 13).
561
O.F. Soloviev, Masonstvo v Mirovoj Politike XX Veka (Masonry in the World Politics of the 20th Century), Moscow: Rosspen, 1998, pp. 33-34. In 1921, the American President, Warren Harding, officially acknowledged the Tsar's noble efforts towards the limitation of armaments by way of binding agreements among the Powers.
562
Thus Miranda Carter writes: “When, a couple of months before the Hague peace conference took place in May 1899, the British ambassador in St. Petersburg raised the issue of the four new battleships Russia had commissioned, Nicholas replied that it wasn’t the right moment for ‘exchanging views about a mutual curtailment of naval programmes’. By then, the tsar’s enthusiasm had wanted when, according to the British Russia expert Donald Mackenzie Wallace, it had been pointed out to him that the proposed alternative to war – an arbitration court – would undermine the intrinsic superiority of the Great Powers, since small countries would have just as much muscle as big ones; and that there were thirty outstanding disputes with other Asian powers which Russia would almost certainly lose in arbitration. Nor did he like being hailed as a hero by European socialists” (The Three Emperors, London: Penguin, 2010, p. 252).
563
Ibid.
564
Soloviev, op. cit., pp. 41-42.
565
Tsar Nicholas, in Lieven, Nicholas II, p. 94.
566
Figes, Natasha’s Dance, pp. 415-416.
567
A man of talent and energy, Witte was distrusted by the conservatives. Thus on October 13, 1901, N.V. Muraviev, the Minister of Justice said that Witte, “thanks to his wife Matilda, a pure-blooded Jewess, has concluded a close union with the Jews and is confusing Russia… In his hands are special organs of his secret police… He is preparing, if there were to be a change of reign, to take power into his own hands. He has… influence everywhere” (Vladimir Gubanov (ed.), Nikolai II-ij i Novie Mucheniki (Nicholas II and the New Martyrs), St. Petersburg, 2000, p. 705).
568
Kireev, in Niall Ferguson, The War of the Worlds, London: Penguin, 2007, p. 70.
569
Pipes, op. cit., pp. 12-13.
570
Lieven, op. cit., p. 94.
571
Ferguson, op. cit., pp. 49-50.
572
Carter, op. cit., p. 209.
573
Ferguson, op. cit., pp. 50-51.
574
Lieven, op. cit., p. 97.
575
Archbishop Nicon (Rklitsky), Zhizneopisanie Blazhennejshago Antonia, Mitropolita Kievskago i Galitskago, volume 2, New York, 1957, pp. 140-141.
576
“The First Chinese Orthodox Martyrs”, Orthodox Life, vol. 29, № 1, January-February, 1979, pp. 14-18; The True Vine, № 8, Winter, 1991, pp. 42-51.
577
Pipes, The Russian Revolution 1899-1919, London: Collins Harvill, 1990, p. 4.
578
Voeikov, So Tsarem i Bez Tsaria (With and Without the Tsar), Moscow, 1995, p. 127.
579
Pipes, op. cit., pp. 6-8.
580
Pipes, op. cit., pp. 11-12 and note.
581
Bullock, Stalin and Hitler, London: HarperCollins, 1991, pp. 12, 13, 14.
582
Bullock, op. cit., p. 16. For some anecdotes of Stalin’s behaviour at the seminary, see I.V. Alexandrov, “Fotoletopisets”, Pravoslavnaia Rus’, N 10 (1869), May 15/28, 2009, pp. 12-15.
583
Chondropoulos. Saint Nektarios: The Saint of Our Century, Athens, 1997. p. 48.
584
Keselopoulos, Greece's Dostoyevsky, Protecting Veil, www.ProtectingVeil.com, 2011, p. 86.
585
Keselopoulos, op. cit., p. 88.
586
Keselopoulos, op. cit., p. 91.
587
Fortescue, The Orthodox Eastern Church, London: Catholic Truth Society, 1920, pp. 342-345.
588
Ekklesiastiki Alitheia (Ecclesiastical Truth), 1920; in Monk Pavlos, Neoimerologitismos Oikoumenismos (Newcalendarism Ecumenism), Athens, 1982, pp. 17-19
589
Fortescue, op. cit., pp. 345-347. See also Eleutherios Goutzides, Ekklesiologika Themata (Ecclesiological Themes), Athens, 1980, vol. I, pp. 64-67.
590
See Muriel Heppell, George Bell and Nikolai Velimirovich”, Birmingham: Lazarica Press, 2001.
591
S.V. Bulgakov, Nastol’naia Kniga sviaschenno-tserkovno-sluzhitelej (Handbook for Church Servers), Kharkov, 1900, p. 928. In a footnote Bulgakov writes: “Accepting confirmed Anglicans [and Catholics] by the ‘Third Rite’ could be permitted only under the condition of recognition that the Anglican Church has a completely legitimate hierarchy, truly having preserved the grace of the priesthood in unbroken succession from the Apostles.” In line with this acceptance of Anglican order, Bishop Tikhon of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands, the future Martyr-Patriarch, attended the consecration of Reginald Weller as Episcopalian Bishop Coadjutor of the Diocese of Fond du Lac, Wisconsin in 1900” (The Living Church, November 17, 1900). In his diary under December 16/29, 1900, Archbishop Nicholas (Kasatkin) of Japan mentions this fact with some annoyance: “Why did Tikhon worm himself in there in a hierarchical mantia?” With regard to the Syro-Chaldean Nestorians, the position of the Church of Russia was expressed in a Synodal ukaz dated March 17-21, 1898, № 1017, which stated that in accordance with the 95th Canon of the Sixth Ecumenical Council they were to be received according to the Third Rite, and that their clergy had be received in full ecclesiastical rank, with no re-ordination.
592
A translation of the whole Epistle is to be found in Athelstan Riley, Birkbeck and the Russian Church, London: Macmillan, 1917, pp. 247-257.
593
Veretennikov, “K Voprosu Periodizatsii Istorii Russkoj Tserkvi” (Towards the Question of the Periodicisation of the History of the Russian Church), http://ao.orthodoxy.ru/arch/017/017-smol.htm, pp. 6, 11 (footnote 17).
594
Agios Agathangelos Esphigmenites (St. Agathangelos of Esphigmenou), NQ 124, March-April, 1990, pp. 17-19.
595
Fortescue, op. cit., pp. 347-348.
596
Monk Pavlos, op. cit., pp. 19-20.
597
Firsov, Russkaia Tserkov’ nakanune peremen (konets 1890-kh – 1918 g.) (The Russian Church on the Eve of the Changes (the end of the 1890s to 1918), Moscow, 2002, p. 47.
598
Madame Blavatsky wrote that “that which the clergy of every dogmatic religion – pre-eminently the Christian – points out as Satan, the enemy of God, is in reality, the highest divine Spirit – (occult Wisdom on Earth) – in its naturally antagonistic character to every worldly, evanescent illusion, dogmatic or ecclesiastical religions included.” (The Secret Doctrine, London, 1888, vol. 2, p. 377; quoted in Maria Carlson,”No Religion Higher than Truth”, Princeton University Press, 1993, p. 124). Theosophy influenced many Russian intelligentsy, as was recognised by such philosophers as Vladimir Soloviev and Nicholas Berdiaev. (L. Perepelkina, Ecumenism: A Path to Perdition
