Military Review

"Russia has been bequeathed to all of us"

18

Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov (1.10.1912/15.06.1992/XNUMX - XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX) - Russian scientist, historian-ethnologist (doctor historical and Geographical Sciences), poet, translator from Farsi. The founder of the passionate theory of ethnogenesis.


Biography

The son of poets Nikolai Gumilev and Anna Akhmatova. From 1917 to 1929 lived in Bezhetsk. From 1930 in Leningrad. In 1930-1934 he worked on expeditions in the Sayan Mountains, in the Pamirs and in the Crimea. With 1934 studying at the Faculty of History of the Leningrad University. In 1935, he was expelled from the university and arrested, but released after some time. In 1937, reinstated at LSU. At the beginning of 1938, he was arrested while a student at Leningrad State University and sentenced to five years. He was serving a term in Norillag, working as a geologist in a copper-nickel mine, and was left in Norilsk with no right to leave.

In the autumn of 1944, he voluntarily joined the Soviet army and fought as an ordinary anti-aircraft artillery regiment in the 1386, which was part of the 31 anti-aircraft artillery division on the First Belarusian Front, ending the war in Berlin. In 1945, he was demobilized, reinstated at the Leningrad State University, and graduated from the beginning of 1946, and entered the postgraduate school of the Leningrad branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, from which he was expelled with the motivation “due to the inconsistency of the philological training of the chosen specialty”. December 28 1948 defended the dissertation of the candidate of historical sciences at Leningrad State University and was accepted as a research assistant at the Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR.

On November 7 of November 1949, he was arrested and convicted by the Special Meeting for 10 years, which he served first in a special camp in Churbay-Nura near Karaganda, then in a camp near Mezhdurechensk in the Kemerovo Region, in the Sayan Mountains. In 1956, he was rehabilitated due to the lack of corpus delicti. Since 1956, he worked as a librarian in the Hermitage. In 1961, he defended his doctoral dissertation in history ("Ancient Turks"), and in 1974, he defended his doctoral dissertation in geography ("Ethnogenesis and Earth's Biosphere"). Prior to retiring in 1986, he worked at the Research Institute of Geography at Leningrad State University.

Died 15 June 1992 of the year in St. Petersburg. He was buried at Nikolsky cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Monastery. In August 2005 of the year in Kazan "in connection with the days of St. Petersburg and the celebration of the millennium of the city of Kazan" a monument was erected to Lev Gumilyov. On the personal initiative of the President of Kazakhstan N.Nazarbayev in 1996 in the capital of Kazakhstan, Astana, one of the country's leading universities, the Eurasian National University named after L.N.Gumilev, was named after Gumilev.

Gumilev and historical science.

Lev Gumilyov proposed a set of original methods for studying ethnogenesis, consisting in a parallel study of historical information about the climate, geology and geography of the surrounding landscape and archaeological and cultural sources. The basis of his research baggage was the original passionate theory of ethnogenesis, with which he tried to explain the laws of the historical process. In the actual research L.N.Gumilev adhered to ideas close to Eurasianism. For example, he considered the scale of the Mongol-Tatar yoke to be greatly exaggerated. In his opinion, symbiosis was more characteristic of Russian-Mongolian relations, and serious clashes were associated mainly with Horde Muslims, more radical than the rest of the Mongols. China appears to him not as a peaceful bastion of civilization fighting against invaders, but as a predatory aggressor. He says the same thing about Europe: criticism of Eurocentrism occupies a large place in his writings. He considers ancient and modern Russians different ethnic groups.


"Russia has been bequeathed to all of us"


Russia bequeathed to all of us


Published in the newspaper "Red Star", 1989, 21 September.


Certainly, the domestic history is many-sided and complex, - began our conversation Lev Nikolayevich. - There are no straight lines and unambiguous answers. But, alas, historical science gradually turned from a source of people's self-knowledge into a very complicated matter. History, meanwhile, is an exact science. The historian, no matter how much he advocates patriotism, must be impartial, follow the fact in its logical, historical and critical understanding.

Our society today is in turmoil of contradictions, and this, of course: a breakthrough into the future is always difficult, but our difficulties, I am convinced of this, can be overcome. And in order to understand this, it is necessary to clarify for oneself the peculiarity and uniqueness of Russia's historical path, its role in world history, to know exactly where we are from and whose genetic memory we keep in ourselves.

- Many are trying to answer this question now, and they are especially intently searching in the recent past.

- It is fruitless and leads us further away from the truth. After all, our history and culture was not born in the seventeenth year. The peculiarity of our statehood manifested itself already in ancient times, on the earth lying between the warlike West and the Great Steppe.

- But how much time has passed ...

- However, every nation keeps the past in itself, and in order to get along with foreigners, one must respect their ethnic uniqueness and foresee their reaction to each rash word or deed. After all, how many conflicts today occur due to mutual misunderstanding or false confidence that all people are the same.



- Do you think that our ancestors had such experience and were more tolerant and sensitive to each other?

- And they not only had, but also kept it carefully ...

- Lev Nikolayevich, today, when opinions in the literary and scientific world are so conflicted and contradictory, you, if I may say so, take the “middle” position. The so-called “leftists” accuse you almost of chauvinism, and the “rightists” do not agree with your thoughts about the Mongol-Tatar yoke.

- Unfortunately, this is true. Although the time for strife is inappropriate. Today, more than ever, consolidation of all patriotic forces is needed. As for the yoke, I am fundamentally against its current interpretation. This thought came and was born in the West. Moreover, its author, the French historian de Tou, relying on the clearly tendentious "Notes on the Moscow War" by the Secretary of State of the Polish King Stefan Batori R. Herberstein. he hastened to rank all together: the Turks, the Mongols, and the Russians among the monstrous carriers of evil and destruction.

Centuries have passed, but this unfortunate theory, exposing our past in a negative light, is a direct outrage upon the glorious deeds of our ancestors. Think about it - three hundred years of submissive slavery! Is this consistent with logic and a Russian freedom-loving character? This theory and now yields its fruits: its logical consequence is the chimera of Russia as a prison of nations, and today we pay the price for it. And could, in principle, unite the lands and peoples around Moscow be the result of mere capture and violence? Apparently not. Without goodwill and mutual consent, this is impossible.

- So - without a good and real knowledge of our past, to make predictions for the future is an adventure?

- Knowledge of the past to today's man gives, firstly, a true understanding that not the West, not the East, but Russia, as a common, collective, international, if you like, concept, is the mother and the true home of the peoples inhabiting it. Secondly, not knowing the history of their homeland, it is difficult to be a patriot. And, thirdly, the roots of many of today's national contradictions lie precisely in the past. Tracing their historical development, you can find painless ways to solve them.

- We are talking about long past wars, but history is moving. I would like to know your attitude to the armed defense of the Fatherland, to today's army.

- What can I say about the armed defense of the Fatherland, when I myself defended him during the Great Patriotic War on the front lines, and my father had two Georgy, and grandfathers, and great-grandfathers were military men. If you believe family traditions, my distant ancestor commanded one of the regiments on the Kulikovo field and died there. So I’m more likely not from intellectuals, but from a military family, than I am very proud and constantly emphasize it. For me, military service is an integral part of civic duty. Unfortunately, I hardly know the modern army, but for centuries the army has been the bearer and guardian of true patriotism, pride in belonging to the great and united Russia. Having lost these feelings, we will inevitably lose our historical face.



“I don’t know if you are following the press and television, but today a whole barrage of accusations of all existing and non-existent sins falls upon the army.

- I am not against criticism, especially if it is constructive. But the discredit of the strong has always been the lot of the weak and self-serving. Of course, it is easier to raise a coward, hoping that he will not have to fight, to experience any difficulties and hardships, than to educate a warrior and a citizen. I think that blind pacifism causes irreparable damage to our society.

- Lev Nikolayevich, let's return to your books, and in particular to the theory of drive, that is, the energy potential of ethnic groups. Applying it to our country, at what level are we?


- Paradoxically, with all our troubles, on the rise. After all, we are a relatively young ethnic group, about six hundred years younger than Europe. Ancient Russia refers to Russia in approximately the same way as ancient Rome to Italy.

- So, if we believe you, everything is ahead?

- Of course, if we ourselves do not do the next nonsense. In a large multi-lingual Russia, its path, which it has chosen, has defended and is obliged to defend in a difficult struggle.

The conversation was led by Major V. Kazakov
Author:
Originator:
newspaper "Red Star", 21.09.1989
18 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dromac
    Dromac 5 June 2013 15: 19 New
    +2
    He was a strong man. Life patted is not weak.
  2. afire
    afire 5 June 2013 15: 28 New
    +1
    yeah, fate fate shook him, he went through a lot and is shocked by the fact that he always retained a thirst for knowledge.
  3. waisson
    waisson 5 June 2013 15: 29 New
    +1
    man of mind and honor of the 20th century
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. Avenger711
    Avenger711 5 June 2013 15: 56 New
    +1
    Why weren’t you friends with the authorities like that?
    1. evfrat
      5 June 2013 16: 07 New
      +1
      His ideas and scientific works did not fit into the Soviet framework, and his parents ... Although he himself recalled that the best ideas had come to him in the camps, and the books that he would hardly have got out free, they regularly sent him to the zone . It’s terrible not even that he was in the camps, but that his whole life humiliated him by power. His little room in the communal apartment was constantly searched, he even put a note on the table asking him to leave everything in place during the search. They knew how to break, those who thought differently, but they did not break it.
    2. neri73-r
      neri73-r 5 June 2013 16: 13 New
      +1
      Most likely he had an opinion (different from others .........)!
  6. Apollo
    Apollo 5 June 2013 16: 02 New
    +1
    I take off my hat before creativity, the great Russian scientist. Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov. I remember a teenager being read out by his works.

  7. vladim.gorbunow
    vladim.gorbunow 5 June 2013 16: 17 New
    0
    Gumilyov passed a terrible sentence. Usually hushed up, his disciples commemorate him with a tongue twister. We have an Antisystem. That is, the area inhabited neither by the ethnic group or ethnic groups, but their fragments with a nihilistic worldview. Ethnogenesis is interrupted. The goals of the fathers are despicable and ridiculous. The land of ancestors is hated, it can be turned into a lifeless desert, having exhausted resources. Why create, if you can take it away. Life is short, it should be turned into a hedonistic orgy. But the world is terrible, so you should not give birth to children, so as not to expose them to the horrors of the world. How did this happen? On the one hand, love is hatred of the West, with its regular military campaigns against Moscow, beginning in the 17th century, with our epigonism in culture, technology, and science. And a giant surge of human energy in 20-40 years. On the other hand, the inclusion in the Russian superethnos of elements of the Mediterranean and Central Asian superethnoses. An ethnic disaster has occurred.
    1. evfrat
      5 June 2013 16: 27 New
      0
      Gumilyov himself was not so pessimistic about our situation. Even chopping or burning out the upper part of the hazel, the root continues to live and give new shoots. It is possible that a chimera has developed in our state (in the term. L.N.G.), similar to the Khazaria. It is surmountable.
      1. tixon444
        tixon444 5 June 2013 19: 41 New
        +1
        Quote: evfrat
        It is possible that a chimera has developed in our state (in the term. L.N.G.), similar to the Khazaria. It is surmountable.


        Yes, and now we would have to wait for Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich II!
  8. Vtel
    Vtel 5 June 2013 16: 26 New
    +1
    - What can I say about the armed defense of the Fatherland, when I myself defended it during the Great Patriotic War on the front line, and my father had two Georges, and grandfathers and great-grandfathers were military. If you believe the family legends, then my distant ancestor commanded one of the regiments on the Kulikovo field and died there. So I’m more likely not from intellectuals, but from a military family, than I’m very proud and constantly emphasize this. For me, military service is an integral part of civic duty.

    "Yes, there were people these days,
    Not that the present tribe:
    Bogatyri - not you!
    Bad share they got: "M. Yu. Lermontov.
  9. knn54
    knn54 5 June 2013 16: 35 New
    +2
    Eternal memory and gratitude for the fact that he did not betray his homeland, which was not particularly affectionate for him.
    The Russian road bequeathed to us all from God!
  10. vostok1982
    vostok1982 5 June 2013 18: 11 New
    0
    "Ancient Russia refers to Russia in much the same way as ancient Rome to Italy"
    I'm afraid to incur general contempt, but this is his phrase - complete nonsense. Ancient Russia refers to Russia like any early feudal kingdom - France, Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, etc. to modern France, Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, etc.
    1. tixon444
      tixon444 5 June 2013 19: 44 New
      +1
      Quote: vostok1982
      "Ancient Russia refers to Russia in much the same way as ancient Rome to Italy"
      I'm afraid to incur general contempt, but this is his phrase - complete nonsense. Ancient Russia refers to Russia like any early feudal kingdom - France, Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, etc. to modern France, Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, etc.


      Isn't that the same thing?
      1. vostok1982
        vostok1982 5 June 2013 21: 27 New
        0
        What does Italy have to do with ancient Rome? Nothing. It’s just located in the same territory - the people are different, the language is a bit similar. And modern Russia is the direct heir and successor of Kievan Rus.
        1. evfrat
          6 June 2013 02: 01 New
          +1
          What's the difference?
          1. vostok1982
            vostok1982 6 June 2013 09: 57 New
            -3
            One is ipet and the other is teasing.
            1. evfrat
              6 June 2013 11: 15 New
              +2
              a wonderful, intellectual answer from a connoisseur of ancient history and generally a good person.
            2. yurta2013
              yurta2013 6 June 2013 19: 34 New
              +1
              Just the Euphrates had in mind that Russia is not a direct heir to Ancient Russia, just as Italy is not a direct heir to Ancient Rome. From the point of view of civilizational theory, these are indeed two different civilizations, albeit related ones.
  11. Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 5 June 2013 19: 15 New
    +2
    After all, we are a relatively young ethnic group, six hundred years younger than Europe. Ancient Russia refers to Russia in much the same way as ancient Rome to Italy

    Genetic studies refute this claim, the Russian ethnos is thousands of years older than all European ethnoses. Gumilyov did not know paleogeography, the sequence of the retreat of glaciers and the resettlement of people across the continents.
    In the 10th century, on the territory of Eastern Europe from the Volga to the Bug and the Danube, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, the Russian people already lived, having a single language, praying to one gods and writing in single letters. In Western Europe there was not one of the present peoples, there were tribes of Celts, Latins, Germans, Normans, etc. not having a common language, religion and culture.
    1. evfrat
      6 June 2013 01: 50 New
      +1
      Maybe he didn’t know, but he often refers to it in his works. Here, in particular, in the work on the Khazars:

      ... "However, the problem of the Khazar ethnogenesis and the area of ​​their distribution encountered difficulties before which historical science was powerless. Only the involvement of paleogeography made it possible to solve the Khazaria problem. In turn, archaeological finds made it possible to clarify the absolute chronology of fluctuations in the level of the Caspian Sea and the formation of delta channels Volga. Thus, it was possible to achieve an organic combination of historical geography with paleogeography and archeology "...


      Khazaria and the Caspian
      L. N. Gumilyov
      Published in the Bulletin of Leningrad University. - 1964. - N 6. issue I. - S. 83-95.
  12. DeerIvanovich
    DeerIvanovich 5 June 2013 20: 17 New
    +1
    After all, we are a relatively young ethnic group, six hundred years younger than Europe. Ancient Russia refers to Russia in much the same way as ancient Rome to Italy ...
    - Of course, if we ourselves do not do the next nonsense. In a large multi-lingual Russia, its path, which it has chosen, has defended and is obliged to defend in a difficult struggle.
    only for this article is a minus.
    and people are talking about patriotism ... I don’t understand how you can perceive a person who calls to love Russia, not Russia, and even multilingual, when the state-forming language is one - Russian, and at the same time he says that our stories are only 600 years old, and before that, they say, dear ones, they were not Slavs, but for example snowy people and, they say, we can throw it in a landfill. angry
    Such disgrace and antagonism is unacceptable. If these are really the words of Gumilyov, and not the words extracted by the interviewer from the context, then all his works are worthless.
    1. evfrat
      6 June 2013 01: 47 New
      -1
      You would read them, immediately such questions would disappear. From your words it turns out that in order to love Russia it is necessary that it is older than Babylon. Yes, and "six hundred" and "six hundred" are different things, re-read the paragraph: ... "young ethnic group, years six hundred younger than Europe "... Especially the ancient" states "of the Eastern Slavs, Russia, Russia, these are different concepts, for Gumilyov and other scientists, but apparently not for you. As for Russian, read from how many languages ​​and dialects it has developed in its current form At different periods, the heterogeneous Russian language absorbed borrowings from other languages ​​of the peoples merging into the Russian superethnos (Turkic, Mongolian, Slavic, etc.) or influencing it (Greek, Latin, Arabic, etc.) Apparently for the Komi, Permians and Chuvashs, Tatars, Ukrainians - in your Russia and Hashem Russian space No Yes, about the ugliness agree - refer to the progressive obchestvennosti the inadmissibility of various outrages in science and beyond.
      1. DeerIvanovich
        DeerIvanovich 6 June 2013 09: 06 New
        0
        Quote: evfrat
        Yes, and "six hundred" and "six hundred" are different things, re-read the paragraph: ...

        As if only you can read carefully.
        On this occasion, the words were added:
        Quote: DeerIvanovich
        If these are really the words of Gumilyov, and not the words extracted by the interviewer from the context, then all his works are worthless.

        six hundred years younger than Europe
        which Europe? Why is it distinguished in this context as a whole ethnic group? And if the peoples of Europe declared a single ethnic group, then to what time does this apply? In general, the garden is fenced.
        1. evfrat
          6 June 2013 11: 11 New
          0
          Do you want a full, detailed answer in a newspaper article? Maybe make us all happy and share knowledge on this topic? Put detailed material on the site, we read, enlighten? We’ll understand how everything is there.
          1. DeerIvanovich
            DeerIvanovich 6 June 2013 13: 28 New
            0
            I wonder why you provoke me?
            What do not like when they catch in a rigging of the conceptual historical apparatus? Are you Major Kazakov? laughing
            if I consider posting something on the site, I’ll post it; I won’t ask you for permission.