 | You can helpexpand this article with text translated fromthe corresponding article in Russian. (May 2023)Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Lev Gumilev | |
|---|---|
| Лев Гумилёв | |
 Gumilev in 1931 | |
| Born | 1 October [O.S. 18 September] 1912 Saint Petersburg, Russian Empire |
| Died | 15 June 1992(1992-06-15) (aged 79) Saint Petersburg, Russia |
| Awards |
|
| Education | |
| Doctoral advisor | Nikolai Kuehner |
| Philosophical work | |
| Era | 20th-century philosophy |
| Region | Russian philosophy |
| School | Eurasianism |
| Institutions | Saint Petersburg State University |
| Doctoral students | Gelian Prokhorov |
| Main interests | Philosophy of history,history,ethnology,turkology,cultural studies,geopolitics,religious studies |
| Notable ideas | Eurasianism, passionarity |
| Part ofa series on |
| Eurasianism |
|---|
.svg) |
Politicians |
Literature |
Lev Nikolayevich Gumilev (alsoGumilyov;Russian:Лев Никола́евич Гумилёв; 1 October [O.S. 18 September] 1912 – 15 June 1992) was a Soviet and Russianhistorian,ethnologist,anthropologist andtranslator. He had a reputation for his highly unorthodox theories ofethnogenesis andhistoriosophy. He was an exponent ofEurasianism.
Gumilev's parents, the prominent poetsNikolai Gumilev andAnna Akhmatova, divorced when he was 7 years old and his father was executed by theCheka when he was just 9. Gumilev spent much of his adulthood, from 1938 until 1956, inSoviet labor camps. He was arrested by theNKVD in 1935 and released, but rearrested and sentenced to five years in 1938.Osip Mandelstam's "Stalin Epigram" is said to have played a role in his arrest.[1] After release, he joined theRed Army and took part in theBattle of Berlin of 1945. However, he was arrested again in 1949 and sentenced to ten years in prison camps. Aiming to secure his freedom, Akhmatova published adithyramb toJoseph Stalin, which did not help to release Gumilev, although it possibly prevented her own imprisonment. TheSoviet secret police had already prepared an order for her arrest, but Stalin decided not to sign it. Relations between Gumilev and his mother became strained, as he blamed her for not helping him enough. She described her feelings about her son's arrest and the period of political repressions inRequiem (published in 1963).
After Stalin's death in 1953, Gumilev joined theHermitage Museum, whose director,Mikhail Artamonov, he would accept as his mentor. Under Artamonov's guidance, he became interested inKhazar studies and in steppe peoples in general. In the 1950s and 1960s, he participated in several expeditions to theVolga Delta and to theNorth Caucasus. He proposed an archeological site forSamandar as well as the theory of the Caspian transgression[clarification needed] in collaboration with geologist Alexander Aleksin as one of the reasons for Khazar decline.[2] In 1960, he started delivering lectures atLeningrad University. Two years later, he defended his doctoral thesis on ancientTurks. From the 1960s, he worked in the Geography Institute, where he would defend another doctoral thesis, this time in geography.
Although the official Soviet authorities rejected his ideas and banned most of his monographs from being published, Gumilev came to attract much publicity, especially in thePerestroika years of 1985–1991. As an indication of his popularity, theKazakh presidentNursultan Nazarbayev ordered theL. N. Gumilev Eurasian National University (Евразийский Национальный университет имени Л. Н. Гумилёва, founded in 1996) to be erected just opposite his own palace on the central square of the new Kazakh capital,Astana.
 | This sectionneeds more completecitations forverification. Please helpadd missing citation information so that sources are clearly identifiable.(August 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Senior researcher in the Department of Ethnology at theUniversity of Tartu, Aimar Ventsel, states the following:
Gumilev’s central concept is that of theethnos. He connected it to the biosphere concept promoted by Academician Vernadsky and came to the conclusion that the ethnos is like a human being: it has its own character, childhood, adulthood and waning period. As people are part of nature, peoples must also follow the laws of nature. Of these, the most important ispassionarity, or the vital energy of the ethnos. Passionarity is connected to geography—in other words, ethnic groups that developed in certain climatic and geographical conditions "adapt" to their environment, find their "ecological niche" and become part of the energy of their living environment. Each ethnos has its own "behavioural stereotype", which is passed down from parent to child, and could be considered a national mentality. These stereotypes are like animal reflexes that ensure the preservation of an ethnos. In time, an ethnos develops its own civilisation, which includes religion, manners and norms. Gumilev was never able to explain whether or not a civilisation is a biological phenomenon, but he claimed that people of different races could be part of the same civilisation.[3]
Gumilev theorized that a group of people living in a single place and with a specific way of life and historical experience could over generations form akonviksiya [ru] (Russian:конвиксия) or akonsortsiya [ru] (Russian:консорция).[4] Such a group then (if it survives) may become a sub-ethnos, with the opportunity of forming successively an ethnos, a super-ethnos, and even a meta-ethnos.[5]
Drawing inspiration from the works ofKonstantin Leontyev (1831–1891) andNikolay Danilevsky (1822–1885), Gumilev regardedRussians as a "super-ethnos" kindred toTurkic-Mongol peoples of theEurasian steppe. The periods in which Russia has been said to conflict with the steppe peoples were reinterpreted by Gumilev as the periods of consolidation of Russian power with that of the steppe to oppose destructive influences fromCatholic Europe, which posed a potential threat to the integrity of Russia.[citation needed] He also saw a distinctEurasian civilization with there being a unification of the Eurasian peoples around Russia.[6]
In accordance with hispan-Asiatic theories, he supported the national movements ofTatars,Kazakhs and other Turkic peoples, in addition to those of the Mongols and otherEast Asians. Unsurprisingly, Gumilev's teachings have enjoyed immense popularity inCentral Asian countries.[7] InKazan a monument to him was erected in August 2005.
The historian Mark Bassin stated that Gumilev's theories are scientifically unproven and problematic but that they have a significant impact in a range of Soviet and post-Soviet contexts.[7] Several researchers, such asVadim Rossman,[8]John Klier,[9]Victor Yasmann,[10][11]Victor Schnirelmann[12] andMikhail Tripolsky describe Gumilev's views asanti-Semitic.[13] According to those authors, Gumilev did not extend this ethnological ecumenism to the medievalJews, whom he regarded as a parasitic, international urban class that had dominated theKhazars and subjected the earlyEast Slavs to the "Khazar Yoke". The last phrase was adapted by him from the traditional term "Tatar Yoke" for the Mongol domination of medieval Russia, a term that Gumilev rejected since he did not necessarily regard the Mongol conquest as a negative event. Instead, he saw the "Tatar yoke" as a military union of the Russians andTatars.[14]
In particular, he asserted that theRadhanites had been instrumental in the exploitation of East Slavic people and had exerted undue influence on the sociopolitical and economic landscape of the earlyMiddle Ages. Gumilev maintained that theJewish culture was by nature mercantile and existed outside and in opposition to its environment. According to that view, Jews share a specific way of thinking associated with the moral norms ofJudaism. According to Gumilev, the medieval Jews also did not bear arms themselves but waged wars throughproxies ormercenaries.[15][16][17]
InKazan, the capital ofTatarstan (Russia), an inscription for a statue in honor of Gumilev quotes the following: "I, a Russian, have been defending the Tatars all my life".[18] About Tatars he said (for example) that "Tatars are in our blood, our history, our language, our worldview. Whatever the real differences with the Russians, the Tatars are not a people outside us, but within us". He calledTatar a "proud name". Tatar historian Gali Yenikeev (among others) has continued with Gumilev's ideas since.[19]
Russian PresidentVladimir Putin stated during a speech in November 2023: "Alexander Nevsky was given theyarlyk [permission] byGolden Horde khans to rule as prince, primarily so that he could effectively resist the invasion of the West".[20] Gumilev himself expressed similar ideas.[21][original research?]
The "Eurasian vision" of presidentVladimir Putin has allegedly been influenced by Gumilev's ideas.[22]
Gumilev identified himself as an Orthodox Christian.[23]
Gumilev married in 1967, the year after his mother died.[24]
In Gumilev's theoretical framework, each ethnos is a bio-social organism that presents a hierarchical structure that divides it into several sub- and supra-entities. The smallest ethnic entity is that of the sub-ethnos, then comes the ethnos, followed by the greater superethnos, and finally the biggest entity is that of the meta-ethnos.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
