The image of the empire in the Russian historiosophical consciousness: from Slavophiles to Eurasians

Introduction. The article examines the peculiarities of the transformation of the historical image of the empire in the national intellectual tradition. The views of such thinkers as M.N. Katkov, F.I. Tyutchev, I.V. Kireevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, Yu.F. Samarin, K.N. Leontiev, P.B. Struve, M.O. Menshikov, P.N. Savitsky, N.S. Trubetskoy and others are analyzed. The typologization and analysis of the key images of the empire in the Russian historiosophical consciousness, namely: European, Byzantine and Eurasian, is presented.

Materials and Methods. The main material of this article is the research of the following authors: L.E. Shaposhnikov, O.V. Parilov, S.N. Pushkin, V.M. Lurie, A.K. Tolstenko, R.R. Vakhitov. The following methods were used in the presented study: system analysis, philosophical analysis, interpretation, comparison and synthesis.

Results. The article examines the evolution of the image of the empire in the Russian historiosophical consciousness, starting from the triad of Count S.S. Uvarov, the ideas of M.N. Katkov and Slavophiles, ending with the Eurasian concepts of P.N. Savitsky and N.S. Trubetskoy. During the development of the idea of empire, three main images of it were formed. The first is the European one, in which the Russian Empire is perceived as one of the European powers claiming their piece of the world pie. This image quite logically changes from the absolutist-autocratic to the liberal-national. The second image is Slavophile. Being absolutely monarchical, he regards Russia, headed by an Orthodox emperor, as the heiress of Byzantium, endowed with a special messianic status. The third image is Eurasian (P.N. Savitsky, N.S. Trubetskoy). It represents the image of a "reassembled" empire that underwent profound changes as a result of the revolution. The Eurasians are moving away from the image of the universal empire to the image of a self-sufficient "mainland state" preserving its original civilization based on Orthodoxy. At the same time, they actively use the Slavophile category of conciliarity, transferring it from the sphere of theology to national and cultural policy. The Eurasians proclaim the fundamental equality of national cultures and their unity in cathedral Russia.

Discussion and Conclusions. The authors of the study managed to conduct a systematic and full-fledged historical and philosophical analysis of the evolution of the image of the empire in the Russian historiosophical consciousness, from Slavophiles to Eurasians. The authors managed to carry out a comprehensive and systematic historical and philosophical analysis of the three main images of the empire of the European, Byzantine and Eurasian.

1. Bohanov A. N. Russian Empire. Image and meaning. Moscow, FIV Publ., 2020. 592 p. (In Russ.)

2. Vahitov R. R. P. N. Savitsky: from the national liberal to the Eurasian theory of empire. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 12. Politicheskie nauki, 2011, no. 4, pp. 79-95. (In Russ.)

3. Dostoevskij F. M. Complete works: in 30 volumes. Vol. 25. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1983. 472 p. (In Russ.)

4. Lur'e V. M. “Conciliarity”: the emergence of the term and concept in the works of Pseudo-Khomyakov. Studia Religiosa Rossica: nauchnyj zhurnal o religii, 2020, no. 1, pp. 72-88. (In Russ.)

5. Political science: Encyclopedic dictionary / general. ed. and comp. Yu. I. Averyanov. Moscow, Moskovskij kommercheskij universitet Publ., 1993. P. 119. (In Russ.)

6. Savickij P. Continent of Eurasia. Moscow, Agraf Publ., 1997. 464 p. (In Russ.)

7. Semikopov D. V., Zahryapin A. A. Europe as the “other” of Russian historiosophical consciousness: from the Middle Ages to modernity. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, 2021, vol. 9, no. 1 (34). (In Russ.)

8. Svetlov R. V. Civilization models for describing the Russian Empire in Russian and Western philosophy of history. Vestnik Russkoj hristianskoj gumanitarnoj akademii, 2021, no. 4, pp. 272-283. (In Russ.)

9. Smit E. Nationalism and Modernism: A Critical Review of Modern Theories of Nations and Nationalism. Moscow, Praksis Publ., 2004. 464 p. (In Russ.)

10. Solov'ev A. V. “Holy Rus'” (essay on the development of religious and social ideas). Sbornik russkogo arheologicheskogo obshchestva v Korolevstve SKHS. Belgrad, 1927. Pp. 77-113. (In Russ.)

11. Solovej T. D., Solovej V. D. The failed revolution: Historical meanings of Russian nationalism. Moscow, AST Publ., 2011. 542 p. (In Russ.)

12. Tolstenko A. K. “National Empire” by Pyotr Struve and Mikhail Menshikov. Voprosy nacionalizma, 2012, no. 1 (9), pp. 130-139. (In Russ.)

13. Trubeckoj N. S. History. Culture. Language. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1995. 800 p. (In Russ.)

14. Holmogorov E. S. Nationalism of centripetal movement. Political metaphysics of Mikhail Katkov. Tetradi po konservatizmu: al'manah. No. 3. Moscow, 2018. 434 p. (In Russ.)

15. SHaposhnikov L. E., Parilov O. V., Pushkin S. N. The problem of the relationship between universal and national in the history of Russian thought. Nizhny Novgorod, Mininskij universitet Publ., Moscow, FLINTA Publ., 2020. 324 p. (In Russ.)

16. Berlin I. Russian Thought and the Slavophile Controversy. The Slavonic East European Review, 1981, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 572-586.

17. Greenfeld L. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity. Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press, 1992. 604 p.

18. Hingley R. The Russian Mind. The Bodley Head, London, 1977. 248 p.