|
Viktor Shnirelman and Sergei Panarin
Inner Asia 3(2001): 1-18
This paper takes a critical look at the work of the extraordinarily popular historian Lev Gumilev. Writing in late Soviet times, Gumilev has become virtually a cult figure in Russia after his death. He took up the ideas of the Eurasianists of the early twentieth century, according to whom Russia's destiny is to be a Eurasian power, and he reconfigured them as a 'scientific' theory of ethnos. The ethnos is supposed to be a 'biological' entity determined by its place in the natural environment, but at the same time, inspired by a few innovative leaders, each 'ethnos' has its special time of intense flowering (which Gumilev called 'passionary'). The article examines the contradictions in Gumilev's theories and its methodological flaws. It ends with a discussion of the political implications of Gumilev's popularity in post-Socialist Russia. He is not only admired by semi-educated people but is also legitimised by sections of the academy (a university is named after him in Kazakhstan). It is argued that his work lends a spurious credence to nationalism and anti-semitism.
[back]
|
