Rus istisnacılığının inşası: Rus akademisinde ilk Oryantologlar

Year 2020, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 216 - 231, 31.12.2020

Melih Demirtaş

https://doi.org/10.38154/cjas.42

Abstract

Rus devletinin ve toplumunun “Doğu” ile “Batı” arasındaki yeri çağlar boyunca tartışmalı bir konu olduğundan, “Rus Oryantalizmi” de Rusya ve Avrasya’yla ilgili bölge çalışmalarının anahtar kavramlarından biri haline gelmiştir. Bu makalede, bahsekonu "Oryantalizm"in bir kaynağı sözde "Rus istisnacılığı" veya "benzersizliği" olarak araştırılmaktadır. Bu çerçevede, Oryantologların Rus emperyal ajandasına uygun şekilde fikirlerini ortaya koyarak etkilerini arttırdığı 19. Yüzyıl süresince Rus Akademisinde bu konuya destek teşkil eden ilk ve önemli argümanlar bulunmaya çalışılacaktır. Bu itibarla, Rusya için bir "arada kalmışlık durumu"yla ortaya çıkan ve Akademi'nin çalışmalarından giderek daha fazla destek alan "mekânsallık" etkisinin, gerek Batılı gerek Doğulu komşularla meşru bir benzerlik ve/veya zıtlık durumundan beslenmek suretiyle daha hegemon ve güçlü bir Rus zihniyetine zemin hazırladığı ele alınacaktır. Öte yandan, bu süreçte günümüze de etki eden şu güçlü argüman geçerli kalmaya devam edecektir: "Medeni" Rus merkezi seçkinleri, Devletleri için "Şarkı" her zaman fethedilen Kafkasya, İdil/Ural veya Orta Asya (Türkistan) gibi "doğu" topraklarında aramaya devam etmişlerdir.

Keywords

Rus oryantalizmi, Rus akademisi, inşacılık; dikotomiler, oryantolog, Kazan, St.Petersburg

Construction of Russian exceptionalism: first Orientologists in Russian academia

Abstract

Since the exact positioning of the Russian state and society between “the East” and “the West” has long been a contested topic, the term “Russian Orientalism” has emerged as a frequent keyword in Russia and Eurasia-related area studies. This paper investigates one source of this "Orientalism" in the so-called “Russian exceptionalism” or “uniqueness”. To this end, first supporting arguments are sought in Russian academia from the 19th century, through which the growing impact of Orientologists led to the promotion of ideas that followed the official tenets of Russian imperialism. It will be therefore argued that with the increasing support of academic works, the effect of “spatiality” that emerged as “in-between status” provided a more hegemonic and stronger Russian mentality that was nurtured by both the similarities and/or contrasts with the nation’s Western and Eastern neighbors. One strong argument will remain, however, as an ongoing area of evaluation – suggesting that the “civilized” Russian central elites continue to search for their State’s “Orient” within the conquered “eastern” territories, such as in the Caucasus, Idel/Volga or in Central Asia (Turkestan).

Keywords

Russian Orientalism, Russian academia, constructivism, dichotomies; Orientologists, Kazan, St. Petersburg

References

• Abrahamsen, Rita. 2003. “African Studies and the Postcolonial Challenge.” African Affairs, Vol. 102, No. 407.
• Akiner, Shirin. 1986. Islamic peoples of the Soviet Union: with an appendix on the non-Muslim Turkic peoples of the Soviet Union: an historical and statistical handbook. London; New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Barthold, Vladimir. 1965. Collected Works, IX, 533. Cf., Collected Works, Vol. III, Moscow.
• Baumann, Robert F. 1987. “Subject Nationalities in the Military Service of Imperial Russia: The Case of the Bashkirs.” Slavic Review, Vol. 46, No. 3/4.
• Bregel, Yuri. “Barthold and Modern Oriental Studies.” International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Nov., 1980).
• Bustanov, Alfrid K. 2015. Soviet orientalism and the creation of Central Asian nations. New York: Routledge.
• Cronin, Stephanie. 2015. “Introduction: Edward Said, Russian Orientalism and Soviet Iranology.” Iranian Studies, 48:5.
• David-Fox, Michael , Peter Holquist, and Alexander Martin (eds.). 2006. Orientalism and Empire In Russia: Kritika Historical Studies 3. Bloomington, Slavica.
• Demirtas, Melih. 2020. “Understanding impacts of Russian Orientalism on post-Soviet elite-management in the Republic of Bashkortostan.” Cappadocia Journal of Area Studies (CJAS) vol. 2, no.1.
• Dostoevsky, Fyodor. 1895. “Shto takoe aziya dlya nas? [What is Asia for us?].” In Dnevnik pisatelii. Saint Petersburg: A. F. Marska.
• Evans, Charles. 1999. “Vasilii Barthold: Orientalism in Russia?” Russian History, 26, No:1.
• Feldman, Leah. 2012. “Orientalism on the Threshold: Reorienting Heroism in Late Imperial Russia.” boundary, 2 39-2.
• Foucault, Michel 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-77. Brighton: Harvester Press.
• Glebov Sergei,”Postcolonial Empire? Russian Orientologists and the Politics of Knowledge in Late Imperial Russia”, Ab Imperio, 3/2011.
• Gorenburg, Dmitry. 1999. “Regional Separatism in Russia: Ethnic Mobilisation or Power Grab?” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 51, No. 2.
• Graney, Katherine E. 1999. “Education Reform in Tatarstan and Bashkortostan: Sovereignty Projects in Post-Soviet Russia.” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 51, No. 4.
• Halliday, Fred. 1993. “Orientalism and Its Critics.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2.
• Khalid, Adeeb. 2000. “Russian History and the Debate over Orientalism.” Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, Volume 1, Number 4.
• Knight, Nathaniel. 2000/Fall. “On Russian Orientalism: A Response to Adeeb Khalid.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. Volume 1, Number 4.
• Knight, Nathaniel. 2000/Spring. “Grigor'ev in Orenburg, 1851-1862: Russian Orientalism in the Service of Empire?” Slavic Review, Vol. 59, No. 1.
• Knight, Nathaniel. 2002. “Was Russia Its Own Orient?: Reflections on the Contributions of Etkind and Schimmelpenninck to the Debate on Orientalism.” Ab Imperio, 1.
• Lankina, Tomila. 2002. “Local Administration and Ethno-Social Consensus in Russia.” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 54, No. 7.
• Marcuse, Peter. 2014. “Said’s Orientalism: A Vital Contribution Today.” Antipode, Volume 46-3.
• Morrison, Alexander. 2009. “‘Applied Orientalism’ in British India and Tsarist Turkestan.” Comparative Studies in Society & History, Vol.51 No.3.
• Naumkin, Vitaly. 2004. Russian Oriental Studies: Current Research on Past & Present Asian and African Societies. Boston: Brill and London.
• Onuf, Nicholas. 2016. “Many Worlds, Many Theories, Many Rules: Formulating an Ethical System for the World to Come.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (Rev. Bras. Polít. Int.), 59/2.
• Polunov, Aleksandr Iu. 2012. “Space, Place, and Power in Modern Russia: Essays in the New Spatial History, and Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration (review).” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. Volume 13, Number 3.
• Ramakrishnan, A. K. 1999. “The Gaze of Orientalism: Reflections on Linking Postcolonialism and International Relations.” International Studies, Volume: 36/2.
• Rorlich, Azade Ayşe. 2000. Volga Tatarları: Yüzyılları Aşan Milli Kimlik. İstanbul: İletişim.
• Sahni, Kalpana. 1997. Crucifying the Orient. Russian Orientalism and the Colonization of Caucasus and Central Asia, Bangkok and Oslo: White Orchid Press.
• Said, Edward W. 2003. Orientalism. London, Penguin Books.
• Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, David. 2010. Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.
• Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, David. 2011. “The Imperial Roots of Soviet Orientology.” In The Heritage of Soviet Oriental Studies. Michael Kemper and Stephan Conermann (eds.), London and New York: Routledge.
• Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, David. 2008. “Mirza Kazem- Bek and the Kazan School of Russian Orientology.” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 28, no.3.
• Sunderland, Willard. 2011 “What Is Asia to Us?: Scholarship on the Tsarist “East” since the 1990s.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, Volume 12, Number 4.
• Tolz, Vera. 2011..Russia's own Orient: the politics of identity and Oriental studies in the late Imperial and early Soviet periods. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press.
• Tolz, Vera. 2008. “European, National, and (Anti-)Imperial The Formation of Academic Oriental Studies in Late Tsarist and Early Soviet Russia.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, Volume 9, Number 1, Winter.
• Werth, Paul W. “From Resistance to Subversion: Imperial Power, Indigenous Opposition, and Their Entanglement.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, Volume 1, Number 1, Winter 2000 (New Series).