Journal Title: Russia’s empires /
期刊名称： Russia's empires /
Volume:  卷：
Issue:  问题：
Month/Year: 2017  月/年： 2017
Pages: 140-182  页数： 140-182
Article Author:  文章作者：
Article Title: Imperial Russia in the Moment of the Nation
文章标题：国家时刻的俄罗斯帝国

Note: RAPID request held locally (Main Library)
注意：本地保存的 RAPID 请求（主库）

Call #: DK43 .K53 2017
呼叫 #： DK43 .K53 2017 年
Location: UNIV LIB–Stacks (Floor 1) Available
位置： UNIV LIB–堆栈（1 楼）可用

Hold for Pickup
faculty  能力
Address:  地址：
Alan Barenberg (abarenbe)
艾伦·巴伦贝格 （abarenbe）
1665 Lincoln Avenue  林肯大道 1665 号
Saint Paul, MN  圣保罗 （Saint Paul， MN）

Paul I (1796-1801) was in most ways a throwback to his father, the unfortunate Peter III (1762). His erratic behavior, particularly in foreign policy, quickly alienated influential nobles and the elite guards units that had already carried out several coups d’état in the eighteenth century. The reign of his mother, Catherine II, had been marked by the empress’s solicitous relations with the nobility and their loyalty to her. Immediately after Catherine’s death, Paul upset those who had doted on the late empress when he bizarrely arranged her funeral by disinterring the corpse of Peter III and burying it next to her. He was off to a rocky start. She had ruled by engendering affection, he by fear. Paul managed to keep the contagion of European revolution away from Russia by strict censorship and an ever more elaborate system of police spies. He levied a tax on noble estates in 1797, which historically had been tax-exempt. The same year he undermined the rights conferred by the Charter of the Nobility when he decreed that nobles convicted of a crime could be flogged. Two years later he discontinued the provincial assemblies of nobles that his mother had established, and he refused to hear loyal addresses from the aristocrats. Establishing a new “tradition,” one observed inconsistently and without explicit formulation in the past, Paul decreed that in future the principle of primogeniture-the eldest son would succeed the father as emperor-was the law of the land. Paul’s decree did not exclude succession in the female line, but permitted it only in the complete absence of male heirs. Here too was a slap at the mother he despised, who had seized the throne without reference to her son, the likely heir, and who planned to elevate her grandson, Alexander, as her successor rather than Paul.
保罗一世 （1796-1801） 在大多数方面都是对他父亲不幸的彼得三世 （1762） 的回归。他反复无常的行为，尤其是在外交政策方面，很快就疏远了有影响力的贵族和精英卫队，这些部队在 18 世纪已经发动了几次政变。他的母亲叶卡捷琳娜二世 （Catherine II） 在位期间，皇后与贵族们的友好关系以及他们对她的忠诚为标志。凯瑟琳去世后，保罗立即惹恼了那些溺爱这位已故皇后的人，因为他离奇地安排了她的葬礼，将彼得三世的尸体挖出来埋在她旁边。他的开局并不顺利。她通过产生感情来统治，他通过恐惧来统治。保罗通过严格的审查制度和越来越复杂的警察间谍系统，设法使欧洲革命的传染远离俄国。他于 1797 年对贵族庄园征税，这在历史上是免税的。同年，他破坏了《贵族宪章》赋予的权利，下令可以鞭打被判有罪的贵族。两年后，他停止了他母亲建立的省级贵族会议，他拒绝听取贵族们的忠诚演讲。保罗建立了一个新的“传统”，这个传统在过去是不一致的，也没有明确的表述，他宣布在未来，长子继承制的原则——长子继承父亲成为皇帝——是当地的法律。保罗的法令并不排除女性继承权，而是只允许在男性继承人完全缺席的情况下继承。 这也是对他所鄙视的母亲的一记耳光，她在没有提及她的儿子（可能的继承人）的情况下夺取了王位，并计划将她的孙子亚历山大提升为她的继承人，而不是保罗。

In foreign policy the emperor was as capricious as in domestic affairs. Like his father, Paul loved all things Prussian, wounding the pride of patriotic Russians at court and in the military. On ascending to the throne, he astounded Europe by denouncing his mother’s militant anti-French policy and proclaiming his intention to mediate a general pacification of Europe. The next year, upset that Napoleon had captured the island of Malta after Paul himself had been elected Grand Master by the Knights of Malta, he rejoined the anti-French powers-Austria, Britain, Naples,
在外交政策方面，皇帝和在国内事务上一样反复无常。和他的父亲一样，保罗热爱普鲁士的一切事物，在宫廷和军队中伤害了爱国俄罗斯人的自豪感。登基后，他谴责了他母亲激进的反法政策，并宣布他打算调解欧洲的全面和平，从而震惊了欧洲。次年，保罗本人被马耳他骑士团选为最高大师后，拿破仑占领了马耳他岛，他感到不满，他重新加入了反法列强——奥地利、英国、那不勒斯、

Portugal, and the Ottoman Empire (the Second Coalition)-and declared war on Napoleon. Then the following year he abandoned his allies, withdrew from European affairs, and began planning an extravagant campaign to use the Don Cossacks in a march through Central Asia to attack India. In his last year Paul gravitated once again toward France. For Britain and Austria he had become “Bonaparte’s fool.” Enough nobles were alienated by what they considered the tyranny of the arbitrary emperor that on March 11, 1801, they slipped into Paul’s fortress-like palace in St. Petersburg and strangled him. Paul had violated the tacit rules of aristocratic politics that had characterized the previous century, and he paid for his oversight with his life. His twenty-three-year-old son, Alexander, was proclaimed tsar. Among most nobles and the educated public a sense of relief spread, hope that a new day was about to dawn.
葡萄牙和奥斯曼帝国（第二次联盟）——并向拿破仑宣战。然后，第二年他抛弃了他的盟友，退出了欧洲事务，并开始计划一场奢侈的战役，利用顿河哥萨克人穿越中亚进攻印度。在他的最后一年，保罗再次被法国所吸引。对于英国和奥地利来说，他已经成为“波拿巴的傻瓜”。1801 年 3 月 11 日，他们认为专横的皇帝的暴政疏远了足够多的贵族，以至于他们溜进了保罗在圣彼得堡的堡垒般的宫殿，勒死了他。保罗违反了上个世纪贵族政治的默许规则，他用生命为他的监督付出了代价。他 23 岁的儿子亚历山大被宣布为沙皇。在大多数贵族和受过教育的公众中，一种解脱感蔓延开来，希望新的一天即将到来。

Alexander’s government, like his empire, was cosmopolitan. Among his foreign ministers, for example, were a patriotic Pole (Prince Adam Czartoryski), a Baltic German (Count Karl Nesselrode), and a Greek (Count Ioann Capodistrias). In choosing his officers and officials, competence, breeding, and affection were far more important to the emperor than ethnicity. Loyalty to the dynasty and to the state was an absolute requirement for a high position. The tsar’s close friend Czartoryski had earlier fought for Poland against Russia and would later emerge as the epitome of Polish patriotism. Yet in the early nineteenth century he was able to serve the tsar and develop a scheme in 1803 to unite a broad “Slavic race” that would include both Poles and Russians. Even as he conceived of a peaceful world in which each nation, with its own language and customs, feelings and point of view, would have a bounded territory of its own, Czartoryski saw Russians and Poles as two nations “descended from the same stem.” What in later nationalisms would develop as two separate and often antagonistic nations, for a time, in the imagination of the prince, could coexist as a single ethno-political community that could thrive under a single monarch. ${}^2$${}^2$^(2){ }^{2}
亚历山大的政府和他的帝国一样，是世界性的。例如，他的外交部长中包括一位爱国的波兰人（亚当·恰尔托雷斯基王子）、一位波罗的海德国人（卡尔·内塞尔罗德伯爵）和一位希腊人（约安·卡波迪斯特里亚斯伯爵）。在选择他的官员和官员时，能力、教养和感情对皇帝来说远比种族重要。忠于王朝和国家是担任高位的绝对要求。沙皇的密友恰尔托雷斯基早些时候曾为波兰对抗俄罗斯而战，后来成为波兰爱国主义的缩影。然而，在 19 世纪初，他能够为沙皇服务，并在 1803 年制定了一项计划，以团结一个包括波兰人和俄罗斯人在内的广泛的“斯拉夫种族”。即使他设想了一个和平的世界，在这个世界里，每个国家都有自己的语言和习俗、感情和观点，都会有自己的边界领土，但恰尔托雷斯基将俄罗斯人和波兰人视为两个“来自同一根茎”的国家。在后来的民族主义中，在王子的想象中，一度发展为两个独立且经常对立的国家，可以作为单一的民族政治共同体共存，从而在单一君主的统治下繁荣发展。 ${}^2$${}^2$^(2){ }^{2}

The new ruler himself and his circle of close friends, the so-called Unofficial Committee, raised hopes and expectations for better days to come not only by avoiding the pitfalls of Paul’s brief reign but also through lofty verbiage about reform and constitution. However, despite their seeming idealism, their degree of commitment to meaningful reform of Russia’s autocratic system remains controversial, continuing to fuel debate in the historical literature after two centuries of discussion. The disagreements derive from the ambiguity of the words that were
新统治者本人和他的密友圈子，即所谓的非官方委员会，不仅通过避免保罗短暂统治的陷阱，而且通过对改革和宪法的崇高言辞，提高了对未来更好日子的希望和期望。然而，尽管他们看似理想主义，但他们对俄罗斯专制制度进行有意义改革的承诺程度仍然存在争议，在两个世纪的讨论之后，继续在历史文献中引发辩论。分歧源于词语的歧义

circulating (what did “constitution” actually mean to the people who tossed it around?), from the distance between the visionary language of reform and the far less impressive practical results, and, probably, from Alexander’s own ambivalence and mutable thinking. One school of thought, strongly advanced by Marc Raeff, maintains that neither Alexander nor his inner circle, nor even his ambitious and abrasive minister, Mikhail Speranskii, desired to limit the monarch in any substantive way. Raeff argues that the Alexandrine reformers had their own ideas of what a “constitution” might mean in Russia, one that Alexander accepted: preservation of the autocracy but with more orderly and rational administration and avoidance of arbitrariness or anything that smacked of tyranny or despotism. Whatever reforms might be brought to Russia would come from an enlightened ruler working through an efficient bureaucracy. State power, not that of the landed gentry, would be paramount. In this interpretation, Russian “constitutionalism” was hardly limited government; rather it was unlimited rule but based on a rule of law and bureaucratic consistency. This hybrid formula would prove extremely difficult to achieve, since its two premises were fundamentally at odds. Autocratic arbitrariness infected bureaucratic consistency, and regulation eventually would threaten to cramp the monarch’s will. Over time, the power of the bureaucracy, the tsar’s ministers, and appointed provincial governments increased at the expense of the landed nobility’s assemblies and the aristocratic Senate. ${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3} No estate or social class would be allowed to check the monarch’s supreme authority.
流传（“宪法”对那些抛来抛去它的人来说究竟意味着什么？），从改革的远见卓识的语言和远不那么令人印象深刻的实际结果之间的距离，可能来自亚历山大自己的矛盾心理和多变的思维。马克·拉夫 （Marc Raeff） 大力推动的一个思想流派认为，亚历山大和他的核心圈子，甚至他雄心勃勃、粗暴的大臣米哈伊尔·斯佩兰斯基 （Mikhail Speranskii） 都不想以任何实质性的方式限制君主。拉夫认为，亚历山大改革者对俄国的“宪法”可能意味着什么有自己的想法，亚历山大接受了这个想法：维护专制，但要有更有序和理性的管理，避免专断或任何带有暴政或专制色彩的东西。无论可能给俄罗斯带来什么改革，都将来自一个开明的统治者，他通过一个高效的官僚机构来工作。国家权力，而不是地主绅士的权力，将是至高无上的。在这种解释中，俄罗斯的“宪政主义”几乎不是有限的政府;相反，它是无限的统治，但基于法治和官僚主义的一致性。事实证明，这种混合模式极难实现，因为它的两个前提从根本上是不一致的。专制的专断性感染了官僚主义的一致性，监管最终会威胁到君主的意志。随着时间的推移，官僚机构、沙皇的大臣和任命的省级政府的权力增加，以牺牲地主贵族议会和贵族元老院为代价。 ${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3} 任何阶层或社会阶层都不允许制衡君主的最高权威。

Yet Alexander and his friends were fascinated with the democratizing impulses of the era, and other scholars take their preoccupation with reform seriously. The idea of constitution, whatever its precise meaning, floated about, unmoored, raising hopes and expectations. ${}^4$${}^4$^(4){ }^{4} Throughout his reign Alexander encouraged his friends in the Unofficial Committee and kept turning to his capable minister Speranskii to develop plans for constitution and reform. He commissioned reform plans to be drawn up, including a plan for a thorough overhaul of the system of governance and a codification of the law. These grand plans produced paltry results, but they set in motion and put some kind of hesitant official imprimatur on the pursuit of reformist goals. Under Alexander’s watch, six universities were established, as well as a relatively extensive system of lycées, gymnasia, and local schools, all of which contributed to training the literate bureaucrats and administrators that Russia needed. These educational institutions also augmented the cultured world of “polite society” and produced the cadres of writers responsible for Russia’s nineteenth-century literary boom.
然而，亚历山大和他的朋友们对那个时代的民主化冲动着迷，其他学者也认真对待他们对改革的关注。宪法的概念，无论其确切含义如何，都漂浮着，无所适从，引发了希望和期望。 ${}^4$${}^4$^(4){ }^{4} 在他的整个统治期间，亚历山大鼓励他在非官方委员会中的朋友，并不断求助于他能干的大臣斯佩兰斯基制定宪法和改革计划。他委托制定改革计划，包括彻底改革治理体系和编纂法律的计划。这些宏伟的计划产生了微不足道的结果，但它们开始行动，并为追求改革主义目标提供了某种犹豫不决的官方认可。在亚历山大的监督下，建立了六所大学，以及一个相对广泛的中学、中学和地方学校系统，所有这些都有助于培养俄罗斯需要的有文化的官僚和管理人员。这些教育机构还扩大了“礼貌社会”的文化世界，并培养了负责 19 世纪俄罗斯文学繁荣的作家骨干。

Alexander’s regime took the first small steps toward emancipating the serfs, mandating the liberation of the Baltic peasants, but on deeply disadvantageous terms and without any land. The destitution that resulted from this landless
亚历山大政权迈出了解放农奴的第一步，要求解放波罗的海农民，但条件非常不利，而且没有任何土地。这种无地造成的贫困
${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3} Marc Raeff, Michael Speransky, Statesman of Imperial Russia, 1772-1839 (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1957), p. 44.
${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3} 马克·雷夫，迈克尔·斯佩兰斯基，《俄罗斯帝国政治家，1772-1839 年》（海牙：M. Nijhoff，1957 年），第 44 页。
${}^4$${}^4$^(4){ }^{4} David Christian, “The Political Ideals of Michael Speransky,” Slavonic and East European Review 54, no. 2 (April 1976): 199.
${}^4$${}^4$^(4){ }^{4} 大卫·克里斯蒂安，“迈克尔·斯佩兰斯基的政治理想”，《斯拉夫语和东欧评论》第 54 期，第 2 期（1976 年 4 月）：199。
liberation drove home the lesson that any subsequent move toward emancipation should guarantee the freed peasants an adequate allotment of land. This realization raised the bar for emancipation, intensifying landlords’ resistance, but also taught would-be reformers where to place their energies. Emancipation efforts moved forward but with steps that were small to the point of negligibility: the Free Agriculturalist Law of 1803 gave serfs the right to purchase their freedom, along with a bit of land, according to agreements worked out privately with the landlords. The likelihood of such polarized parties reaching mutually satisfying terms was small, and fewer than 50,000 male serfs were able to take advantage of the law, but in this sensitive area, as in many others, David Saunders argues, Alexander "had created an atmosphere in which principles could be canvassed and he had allowed discussions to take place whose effects could not be easily calculated."5 By summoning into being a previously nonexistent category of “freed peasant,” this reform set wheels in motion.
解放使人们深刻认识到，任何后续的解放行动都应该保证被解放的农民得到足够的土地分配。这一认识提高了解放的门槛，加剧了地主的抵抗，但也教会了潜在的改革者将精力放在何处。解放奴隶的努力向前推进，但步伐很小，几乎可以忽略不计：1803 年的《自由农业法》赋予农奴根据与地主私下达成的协议购买自由和少量土地的权利。这种两极分化的政党达成双方都满意的条件的可能性很小，只有不到 50,000 名男性农奴能够利用法律，但大卫·桑德斯 （David Saunders） 认为，在这个敏感领域，就像在许多其他领域一样，亚历山大“创造了一种可以讨论原则的氛围，他允许进行影响无法轻易计算的讨论。5 通过召唤出一个以前不存在的“自由农民”类别，这项改革启动了车轮。

On the other hand, Alexander, with the help of the ruthless General Count Aleksei Arakcheev, created another new category of peasant-soldier, the highly regulated recruits of the “military colonies,” or “military settlements,” first established in 1816. Designed with the goal of building a reliable, trained reserve, the colonies combined agricultural with military labor and were run with military discipline that extended to every aspect of life. Families settled in the colonies were subject to the same harsh discipline, and sons of colonists inherited their fathers’ obligatory service. The colonies provoked deep hostility and erupted in rebellion frequently. The military colonies and their hybrid serf-soldiers, like the “free agriculturalists,” were part of a proliferation of new categories of people and forms of rule, produced by fiat, in the course of Alexander’s reign.
另一方面，亚历山大在冷酷无情的阿列克谢·阿拉克切耶夫将军的帮助下，创造了另一种新的农民士兵类别，即 1816 年首次建立的“军事殖民地”或“军事定居点”的高度管制的新兵。这些殖民地的设计目标是建立一个可靠的、训练有素的保护区，将农业与军事劳动相结合，并以延伸到生活各个方面的军事纪律进行管理。定居在殖民地的家庭也受到同样严厉的纪律，殖民者的儿子继承了他们父亲的义务。殖民地激起了深深的敌意，并经常爆发叛乱。军事殖民地及其混合农奴士兵，就像“自由农业主义者”一样，是亚历山大统治过程中由法定货币产生的新类别和统治形式扩散的一部分。

Liberalizing expectations heightened after the ruler confirmed the constitutional structures and rights of Finland, incorporated into the empire in the course of the Napoleonic wars, and of Poland, reincorporated after being liberated from Russian rule and briefly reestablished as the Duchy of Warsaw by Napoleon. As an ally of Napoleon in 1808, before they parted ways, Alexander sent his troops into Finland, which had for six hundred years been a part of the kingdom of Sweden. As he put it in his “Gracious Manifesto,” “In accordance with the will of the Almighty, who has blessed Our arms, we have united the province of Finland to the Russian Empire for all time.” ${}^6$${}^6$^(6){ }^{6} Fearing that the Swedish-speaking nobles of Finland harbored loyalties to Sweden, the emperor allowed the people of his new Grand Duchy to retain all the rights and privileges, including an advisory legislature, the Diet, that they had enjoyed under Swedish rule. The Orthodox Emperor of Russia not only took on the title of Grand Duke of Finland but also became the head of its Lutheran church.
在统治者确认芬兰的宪法结构和权利后，自由化的期望更高，芬兰在拿破仑战争过程中并入帝国，波兰在从俄罗斯统治下解放后重新合并，并被拿破仑短暂地重新建立为华沙公国。作为拿破仑的盟友，1808 年，在他们分道扬镳之前，亚历山大派遣他的军队进入芬兰，芬兰在六百年里一直是瑞典王国的一部分。正如他在《仁慈宣言》中所说，“根据祝福我们武器的全能者的旨意，我们将芬兰省永远统一为俄罗斯帝国。 ${}^6$${}^6$^(6){ }^{6} 由于担心芬兰讲瑞典语的贵族对瑞典忠诚，皇帝允许他的新大公国的人民保留他们在瑞典统治下享有的所有权利和特权，包括咨询立法机构，即议会。俄罗斯东正教皇帝不仅获得了芬兰大公的头衔，还成为了路德教会的领袖。

In a secret instruction to his governor-general in Finland, Alexander wrote, “In determining conditions in Finland, my intention has been to give the people of that country a political existence, so that they would not consider themselves conquered by Russia, but joined to it by their own self-evident interests.” ${}^7$${}^7$^(7){ }^{7} At a Diet that he convened in 1809, he confirmed the Finnish “fundamental laws” and “constitution.” As Saunders writes, “What he meant by these promises has been intensively debated. The fact that the Finnish Diet did not meet again until 1863 seems to show that Alexander did not intend to give more ground than he had to. Nevertheless, Finland occupied a place in the constitutional structure of the Russian Empire which was unique at the time of the union and was subsequently paralleled only by the position of Poland after 1815. The Finnish Grand Duchy had its own laws and own customs dues. Finns were not enserfed, not recruited into the Russian army, and had dual citizenship (of the Duchy and the Empire).” ${}^8$${}^8$^(8){ }^{8} The peculiar status of Finland within the Russian Empire-a Grand Duchy with reserved rights for the local gentry-was at one and the same time anomalous and a manifestation of the diversity routinely tolerated, even produced, by empire.
在给芬兰总督的秘密指示中，亚历山大写道：“在确定芬兰的情况时，我的意图是让那个国家的人民在政治上存在，这样他们就不会认为自己被俄罗斯征服了，而是被他们自己不言而喻的利益所加入。 ${}^7$${}^7$^(7){ }^{7} 在 1809 年召开的一次国会上，他确认了芬兰的“基本法”和“宪法”。正如桑德斯所写的那样，“他所说的这些承诺的含义已经被激烈地争论了。芬兰议会直到 1863 年才再次开会，这一事实似乎表明亚历山大并不打算让步。尽管如此，芬兰在俄罗斯帝国的宪法结构中占有一席之地，这在联邦成立时是独一无二的，随后在 1815 年后仅与波兰的地位相提并论。芬兰大公国有自己的法律和关税。芬兰人没有被征召，没有被招募到俄罗斯军队中，并且拥有（公国和帝国）双重国籍。 ${}^8$${}^8$^(8){ }^{8} 芬兰在俄罗斯帝国内的特殊地位——一个为当地绅士保留权利的大公国——既是反常的，也是帝国经常容忍甚至产生的多样性的表现。

Alexander followed the template he had adopted in Finland when he established a Kingdom of Poland in 1815 out of the lands regained from Napoleon. Twenty years after his grandmother had erased Poland from the map, and against the judgment of his policy advisers who urged him to absorb Poland fully into Russia as part of an administratively uniform polity, Alexander conferred on Poland a remarkable constitution, guaranteeing parliamentary representation based on a relatively broad electoral base, rights of freedom of religion, press, and habeas corpus. Under the direction of his friend Czartoryski, education at all levels, including at the university of Wilno, was conducted entirely in Polish, and a cohort of great national writers found their voices.
亚历山大遵循了他在芬兰采用的模板，于 1815 年从拿破仑手中收复的土地上建立了波兰王国。在他的祖母将波兰从地图上抹去 20 年后，亚历山大不顾政策顾问的判断，敦促他将波兰完全吸收到俄罗斯，作为行政统一政体的一部分，亚历山大授予波兰一部非凡的宪法，保证基于相对广泛的选举基础的议会代表权、宗教自由权。 Press 和人身保护令。在他的朋友恰尔托雷斯基的指导下，包括维尔诺大学在内的各级教育完全用波兰语进行，一批伟大的民族作家找到了自己的声音。

True, he took for himself the crown of this new kingdom, but he cast this as a “personal union,” a fortuitous coincidence of Polish king and Russian tsar in a single person, rather than the political incorporation of Poland into Russia. Perhaps swept up in the spirit of his own magnanimity, he gave an uplifting speech on freedom and constitutions in Warsaw. The speech reverberated throughout the realm. One of the major figures of the Decembrist Rebellion that would follow Alexander’s unexpected death in 1825 would report that he was inspired by “the first speech of the late Emperor at the Diet of Warsaw, from which it was inferred that His Majesty intended to lead Russia, in due course, to a similar state.” ${}^9$${}^9$^(9){ }^{9}
诚然，他把这个新王国的王冠据为己有，但他把这说成是“个人联盟”，是波兰国王和俄国沙皇合二为一的巧合，而不是波兰在政治上并入俄国。也许是被自己的宽宏大量精神所吸引，他在华沙发表了关于自由和宪法的振奋人心的演讲。这番话在整个领域回荡。亚历山大于 1825 年意外去世后，十二月党人叛乱的主要人物之一报告说，他受到“已故皇帝在华沙议会上的第一次演讲的启发，从中可以推断出，国王陛下打算在适当的时候带领俄罗斯进入类似的国家”。 ${}^9$${}^9$^(9){ }^{9}

In sum, Alexander’s was a complex reign, with an ambivalent agenda and ambiguous record. What is clear, however, is that he and his policymakers continued the deeply ingrained imperial tendency of ruling through difference, creating new entities and categories (Grand Duchy of Finland, Kingdom of Poland, free
总而言之，亚历山大的统治是一个复杂的时期，有着矛盾的议程和模棱两可的记录。然而，很明显的是，他和他的政策制定者延续了根深蒂固的帝国主义倾向，即通过差异进行统治，创建新的实体和类别（芬兰大公国、波兰王国、自由

agriculturalists, emancipated Baltic peasants, military colonists), enshrining differences in regional dispensations and in the law of the land. The same men who most forcefully advocated the idea of rationalizing imperial rule saw no contradiction in resting their reform efforts on structures of differential rights.
农业学家、解放的波罗的海农民、军事殖民者），体现了地区分配和土地法律的差异。那些最有力地倡导将帝国统治合理化思想的人认为，将他们的改革努力建立在不同的权利结构上并不矛盾。

Mikhail Speranskii expressed this point explicitly when he built inequitable standing into his vision for systemic legal overhaul. “The law defining personal freedom cannot be the same for everyone.” “No one ought to be deprived of it, but not everyone can have it in equal degree.” ${}^{10}$${}^{10}$^(10){ }^{10} In this extraordinary statement, Speranskii reveals the world of difference that divides twenty-first-century ideas of freedom from those of nineteenth-century Russia. Freedom was of profound concern, but the obvious fact of its unequal distribution among different social estates was beyond question.
米哈伊尔·斯佩兰斯基 （Mikhail Speranskii） 在将不公平地位纳入他的系统性法律改革愿景时明确表达了这一点。“定义个人自由的法律不可能对每个人都相同。”“任何人都不应该被剥夺它，但不是每个人都能平等地拥有它。” ${}^{10}$${}^{10}$^(10){ }^{10} 在这段非同寻常的声明中，斯佩兰斯基揭示了 21 世纪自由思想与 19 世纪俄罗斯自由思想之间的差异世界。自由是一个深切的问题，但它在不同社会阶层之间分配不均的明显事实是毋庸置疑的。

Active as Alexander was in internal reform, particularly in the early years, the central, defining focus of his reign was his engagement in the Napoleonic Wars. After the fall of the Bourbon monarchy in 1789, the French Revolution descended into a “Reign of Terror” followed by an oligarchy of representatives of the propertied classes, and then a dictatorship by the extraordinary General Bonaparte. In 1804 Bonaparte proclaimed himself Napoleon I, emperor of the French. The revolutionary republic had become an empire, whose ruler set out to dominate Europe, taking on the other great states of the continent-Prussia, Austria, and eventually Russia-as well as its formidable foe on the seas, Great Britain. To the reigning monarchs of Europe, Napoleon’s imperial ambitions posed an intolerable threat. His early campaigns to take Malta and Egypt failed but sharpened antagonisms between France and Britain. To punish Britain and enhance French economic dominance, in 1806 Napoleon established the Continental Blockade, preventing his allies and his defeated rivals from trading with the British.
尽管亚历山大积极参与内部改革，尤其是在早期，但他统治的核心决定性焦点是他参与拿破仑战争。1789 年波旁王朝垮台后，法国大革命陷入“恐怖统治”，随后是有产阶级代表的寡头政治，然后是非凡的波拿巴将军的独裁统治。1804 年，波拿巴宣布自己为法国皇帝拿破仑一世。革命共和国已经成为一个帝国，其统治者开始主宰欧洲，与欧洲大陆的其他大国——普鲁士、奥地利和最终的俄罗斯——以及它在海上的强大敌人英国展开较量。对于欧洲的在位君主来说，拿破仑的帝国野心构成了无法容忍的威胁。他早期夺取马耳他和埃及的战役失败了，但加剧了法国和英国之间的对立。为了惩罚英国并加强法国的经济主导地位，拿破仑于 1806 年建立了大陆封锁线，阻止他的盟友和他击败的对手与英国人进行贸易。

In 1805 Russia joined Britain, Sweden, and Austria in the Third Coalition against France. But in a series of colossal battles-Austerlitz, Jena, and Auerstädt-Napoleon overwhelmed his enemies and forced Russia to accept the humiliating Peace of Tilsit in 1807, the price of which was a de facto alliance with France and opposition to Britain. Alexander’s mother admonished him for accepting the treaty with France. The emperor replied that he was playing for time, “to breathe freely and to increase in the course of this most precious time the resources of strength of Russia.” ${}^{11}$${}^{11}$^(11){ }^{11}
1805 年，俄罗斯与英国、瑞典和奥地利一起组成了对抗法国的第三次联盟。但在一系列巨大的战役中——奥斯特里茨、耶拿和奥尔施泰特——拿破仑压倒了他的敌人，迫使俄罗斯接受了 1807 年屈辱的蒂尔西特和约，其代价是事实上与法国结盟并反对英国。亚历山大的母亲告诫他接受与法国的条约。皇帝回答说，他在争取时间，“自由呼吸，在这最宝贵的时间里增加俄罗斯的力量资源。 ${}^{11}$${}^{11}$^(11){ }^{11}

And he used the time well. Although he was technically supposed to be an ally of Napoleon, and he benefited from that connection in the brief war with Sweden that resulted in the annexation of Finland, Alexander proved to be
他很好地利用了这段时间。尽管从技术上讲，他应该是拿破仑的盟友，而且他在与瑞典的短暂战争中受益于这种联系，导致芬兰被吞并，但事实证明，亚历山大是

Map 6.1. Napoleonic Europe.
地图 6.1.拿破仑时期的欧洲。
quite independent of his French partner. He held back his troops when Napoleon fought the Austrians, and he thwarted the French plan to keep all English goods out of Europe and thus compel the British to come to terms with France. Alexander broke the Continental Blockade in 1810 and permitted English products into Russia on neutral ships. Napoleon was furious, and both emperors steadily built up their forces for the coming clash. On June 24, 1812, Napoleon’s army of nearly half a million men crossed the Neman River, then the border of the Russian Empire.
完全独立于他的法国伙伴。当拿破仑与奥地利人作战时，他阻止了他的军队，并挫败了法国将所有英国商品排除在欧洲之外的计划，从而迫使英国与法国达成协议。亚历山大于 1810 年打破大陆封锁，允许英国产品通过中立船只进入俄罗斯。拿破仑大怒，两位皇帝都稳步集结了他们的力量，为即将到来的冲突做准备。1812 年 6 月 24 日，拿破仑的近五十万军队越过了当时的俄罗斯帝国边境的涅曼河。

The tsar was determined not to give in to Napoleon this time. He held supreme authority over his armed forces, but his leading generals hated one another and pulled the emperor in different directions. Minister of War Mikhail Barclay de Tolly (of Scottish heritage) proposed retreat before Napoleon’s larger and more battle-hardened army to draw it deeper into Russia, while his rival, Prince Petr Bagration, scion of the Georgian royal family, saw such a strategy as cowardly. While de Tolly was derided as a “German,” Bagration was lauded for his forceful “Russian” patriotism. The emperor was unimpressed by the one man whom his nobles favored as commander, the one-eyed veteran Mikhail Kutuzov, an ethnic Russian, but gave in to their pressure and appointed him. Alexander deplored the strategy of retreat, which was known as skifskaia strategiia (Scythian Strategy), a derisive term that cast retreat as an Asian tactic inappropriate for a European power. Russians finally stood up to the invaders at Borodino, and though they lost the battle they battered the French, who were then far weaker when they marched into a deserted Moscow on September 3, 1812. Mysteriously, fires broke out all over the city, destroying almost half its buildings. To this day it is not certain if the Russians or the French set the fires, but it is most likely that Russians torched buildings in order to force the French to abandon the old capital. For thirty-three days Napoleon sat in the Kremlin waiting for the Russian surrender that never came. He ordered his army to pull back, and as the once Grande Armée moved back westward, the Russian army and partisan bands repeatedly attacked its flanks and picked off stragglers. When the French reached the Russian border, only one out of ten of those who had invaded Russia had survived.
沙皇这次决心不向拿破仑屈服。他对他的军队拥有至高无上的权威，但他的主要将领们彼此仇恨，并将皇帝拉向不同的方向。战争部长米哈伊尔·巴克莱·德·托利（苏格兰血统）提议在拿破仑规模更大、久经沙场的军队之前撤退，以将其深入俄罗斯，而他的竞争对手、格鲁吉亚王室后裔彼得·巴格拉季昂亲王则认为这样的策略是懦弱的。虽然德·托利被嘲笑为“德国人”，但巴格拉季昂因其强烈的“俄罗斯”爱国主义而受到称赞。皇帝对贵族们喜欢的独眼老兵、俄罗斯族人米哈伊尔·库图佐夫 （Mikhail Kutuzov） 不以为然，但屈服于他们的压力并任命了他。亚历山大谴责了撤退战略，该战略被称为 skifskaia strategiia（斯基泰战略），这是一个嘲讽的术语，将撤退视为不适合欧洲大国的亚洲战略。俄罗斯人最终在博罗季诺 （Borodino） 抵抗侵略者，虽然他们输掉了战斗，但他们重创了法国人，当他们于 1812 年 9 月 3 日进军荒凉的莫斯科时，法国人要弱得多。神秘的是，整个城市都爆发了大火，几乎摧毁了一半的建筑物。直到今天，仍不确定是俄罗斯人还是法国人放火，但很可能是俄罗斯人烧毁了建筑物，以迫使法国人放弃旧都。拿破仑在克里姆林宫坐了 33 天，等待俄国投降，但从未到来。他命令他的军队撤退，当曾经的大军向西撤退时，俄罗斯军队和游击队反复攻击其侧翼并消灭掉队的人。 当法国人到达俄罗斯边境时，入侵俄罗斯的人中只有十分之一幸存下来。

Russia won this catastrophic war with France thanks to its strategy of retreat, the generalship of Kutuzov, the determination of the emperor not to give in, and the logistical difficulties faced by the French in their attempt to defeat a resistant Russia. Napoleon was unable to equip and feed his gargantuan army, while the Russians managed not only to supply their army but to cripple the French by killing almost all their horses. “The horse was a crucial-perhaps the single most decisive-factor in Russia’s defeat of Napoleon,” writes Dominic Lieven. "The enormous superiority of the Russian light cavalry played a key role in denying food or rest to Napoleon’s army in the retreat from Moscow and thereby destroying it. ${}^{,12}$${}^{,12}$^(,12){ }^{, 12} Winter weather, it appears, had little to do with the victory of the
俄罗斯赢得了这场与法国的灾难性战争，这要归功于其撤退战略、库图佐夫的统帅地位、皇帝不屈服的决心，以及法国人在试图击败抵抗的俄罗斯时面临的后勤困难。拿破仑无法装备和养活他庞大的军队，而俄国人不仅设法补给他们的军队，而且通过杀死法国人几乎所有的马匹来削弱法国人。“这匹马是俄国击败拿破仑的关键因素，也许是最具决定性的因素，”多米尼克·利文 （Dominic Lieven） 写道。“俄罗斯轻骑兵的巨大优势在拿破仑的军队从莫斯科撤退时拒绝提供食物或休息并因此摧毁它方面发挥了关键作用。 ${}^{,12}$${}^{,12}$^(,12){ }^{, 12} 冬季的天气似乎与

Charles Joseph Minard’s 1869 map of Napoleon’s invasion and disastrous retreat from Russia in 1812: Carte figurative des pertes successives en hommes de l’Armée Française dans la campagne de Russie 1812-1813 [Figurative Map of the successive losses in men of the French Army in the Russian campaign 1812-1813]. The map is considered a masterpiece of efficient visual representation of information. Despite its deceptively simple layout, it conveys information on distances, temperature, latitude and longitude, direction of movement, and dates, as well as the number of men in Napoleon’s army, with precipitous drops marked at specific points. The English translation of the explanatory text says “The numbers of men present are represented by the widths of the colored zones in a rate of one millimeter for ten thousand men; these are also written beside the zones. Red designates men moving into Russia, black those on retreat.”
查尔斯·约瑟夫·米纳尔 （Charles Joseph Minard） 1869 年绘制的拿破仑入侵和 1812 年从俄罗斯灾难性撤退的地图：Carte figurative des pertes successives en hommes de l'Armée Française dans la campagne de Russie 1812-1813 [1812-1813 年俄国战役中法国军队连续损失的具象地图]。该地图被认为是高效视觉表示信息的杰作。尽管它的布局看似简单，但它传达了有关距离、温度、经纬度、移动方向和日期的信息，以及拿破仑军队中的人数，并在特定点标记了陡峭的下降。解释性文本的英文翻译说：“在场的男性人数由彩色区域的宽度表示，一万名男性为 1 毫米;这些也写在区域旁边。红色表示进入俄罗斯的男性，黑色表示撤退的男性。

Russians. There was enough support and fighting spirit in the Russian ranks to hold out against the French and inflict sufficient damage on them.
俄罗斯。俄罗斯军队中有足够的支持和战斗精神来抵抗法国人并对他们造成足够的伤害。

In hindsight, Russian patriotic writers and historians described the country’s resistance to the European army led by Napoleon as a great triumph of the people, a fervent defense of the fatherland inspired by an aroused nationalism. The war came to be known in Russian as the Otechestvennaia voina, the Fatherland War. The motivations of people at the time, however, were less clear-cut. In the context of our considerations of the rise of nationalism, the struggle against the French offers an interesting opportunity to assess the extent to which the Russian people were mobilized by a sense of national solidarity.
事后看来，俄罗斯爱国作家和历史学家将该国对拿破仑领导的欧洲军队的抵抗描述为人民的伟大胜利，是被激起的民族主义所激发的对祖国的狂热保卫。这场战争在俄语中被称为 Otechestvennaia voina，即祖国战争。然而，当时人们的动机并不那么明确。在我们考虑民族主义兴起的背景下，反对法国的斗争提供了一个有趣的机会来评估俄罗斯人民在多大程度上被民族团结感所动员。

The view from the top, from the imperial palace, was largely uninflected by popular nationalism. Although the tsar and his friends had been happy to speculate about the peaceful coexistence of various Slavic nations under an imperial mantle, this did not translate into any acknowledgment of popular sovereignty. The state, in Alexander’s view, was embodied in his person. At the moment of the French invasion, Alexander I issued a rescript that concluded, “I will not lay down arms while the last enemy soldier remains in my empire.” ${}^{13}$${}^{13}$^(13){ }^{13} No mention was made of the Russian people, and the empire was presented as a possession of the emperor. Even as the French moved toward Moscow, Alexander’s advisers had to convince the reluctant emperor to go to Moscow and take on the role of national leader. His manifestos, written by the conservative poet Admiral Alexander Shishkov, “appealed to the people’s patriotic and religious feelings.” ${}^{14}$${}^{14}$^(14){ }^{14} The tsar was depicted by writers of the time as the “Angel of God,” “Our Father,”’ loved by his subject people to whom he feels great love. ${}^{15}$${}^{15}$^(15){ }^{15} At the same time that Shishkov was marketing this image of tsar as beloved and loving, Russian authorities resisted portraying the great victory as a popular triumph and instead projected it as a divinely ordained triumph of autocracy supported by a devoted people. “The people’s involvement in the imperial scenario,” writes Richard Wortman, "threatened the tsar’s image as a superordinate force, whose title came from outside or from above, from divine mandate, or the emanations of reason."16
从顶部看，从皇宫看出去，基本上没有受到流行民族主义的影响。尽管沙皇和他的朋友们乐于猜测各个斯拉夫国家在帝国的外衣下和平共处，但这并没有转化为对人民主权的任何承认。在亚历山大看来，国家体现在他身上。在法国入侵的那一刻，亚历山大一世发布了一份诏书，结论是：“当最后一名敌军留在我的帝国时，我不会放下武器。 ${}^{13}$${}^{13}$^(13){ }^{13} 没有提到俄罗斯人民，帝国被描述为皇帝的财产。即使法国人向莫斯科进军，亚历山大的顾问也不得不说服这位不情愿的皇帝前往莫斯科并担任国家领导人的角色。他的宣言由保守派诗人亚历山大·希什科夫海军上将 （Admiral Alexander Shishkov） 撰写，“诉诸人民的爱国主义和宗教情感”。 ${}^{14}$${}^{14}$^(14){ }^{14} 沙皇被当时的作家描绘成“上帝的天使”、“我们的父亲”，深受他的臣民的爱戴，他对他们深爱不释手。 ${}^{15}$${}^{15}$^(15){ }^{15} 在希什科夫将沙皇的形象宣传为受人爱戴和充满爱戴的形象的同时，俄罗斯当局拒绝将这一伟大胜利描绘成人民的胜利，而是将其投射为由忠诚的人民支持的专制制度的神圣命定的胜利。理查德·沃特曼（Richard Wortman）写道：“人民卷入帝国的情景，威胁到沙皇作为上级力量的形象，其头衔来自外部或上层，来自神圣的使命，或理性的化身。16

For the rulers of Russia as well as their most faithful followers, there was no distinction made between nation and state, between the loyal people and dedication to the empire. What had already emerged in Europe, particularly in eighteenth-century France, the idea that the nation was distinct from the monarch and his state and possessed its own claims to sovereign power, was not only something not embraced by Russian authorities or thinkers in the reign of Alexander I but was seen as a sinister threat to autocracy.
对于俄罗斯的统治者以及他们最忠实的追随者来说，民族和国家之间、忠诚的人民和对帝国的奉献之间没有区别。在欧洲，尤其是 18 世纪的法国已经出现，即国家与君主和他的国家不同，并拥有自己的主权主张，不仅在亚历山大一世统治时期没有被俄罗斯当局或思想家所接受，而且被视为对专制的险恶威胁。

Even so, at the height of the war, Russian officialdom gave its blessing to a particular form of folksy patriotism and shared credit for the victory over
即便如此，在战争最激烈的时候，俄罗斯官方还是赞同一种特殊形式的民间爱国主义，并分享了对胜利的功劳

I. I. Terebenev, The Russian Hercules Drives Off the French, c. 1813. The text notes that the Russian Hercules “crushed the French in the woods and beat them like a real man [kak muzhik].” The puny French soldiers hide and flee while the giant Russian peasant casually strides through them, waving them about in his enormous hands.
I. I. 捷列别涅夫，《俄国大力神赶走法国人》，约 1813 年。文中指出，俄国的大力士“在树林里粉碎了法国人，像真正的人一样殴打他们 [kak muzhik]”。矮小的法国士兵躲藏着逃跑，而巨大的俄罗斯农民则漫不经心地从他们身边走过，用他巨大的手挥舞着他们。

Napoleon with a manufactured figure of the “simple Russian muzhik (peasant man).” Popular broadsides, called lubki (singular, lubok), by Russian artists Ivan Terebenev, Ivan Alekseevich Ivanov, Aleksei Gavrilovich Venetsianov, and others, depicted friendly, honest Russian muzhiki dispatching their effete French foes with ease, and with no rancor. Other, more somber Terebenev prints showed the courage and unstoppable commitment of the Russians. In “A Russian Scaevola,” the artist recasts in Russian terms the legend of Gaius Mucius Scaevola, a brave Roman soldier who awed the Etruscans when he thrust his own arm into a fire to demonstrate Roman courage and commitment. In the Russian version, another humble muzhik unflinchingly chops off his own arm. Stephen M. Norris explains that Terebenev and other lubok artists drew inspiration "from a legend circulating throughout the years 1812-1813 about a Russian peasant who had been captured and branded with the letter N (for Napoleon) on his arm. Rather than accept this outrage, the peasant took an axe and chopped off his arm. ${}^{17}$${}^{17}$^(17){ }^{17} The scrawny French soldiers reel back in horror. The accompanying text explains that the peasant would prefer to cut off his arm “in order not to serve Napoleon, the enemy of the Fatherland,” and continues with praise of the "glory of the Russian
拿破仑与“简单的俄罗斯农民”的人造形象。俄罗斯艺术家伊万·捷列贝涅夫、伊万·阿列克谢耶维奇·伊万诺夫、阿列克谢·加夫里洛维奇·维内齐亚诺夫等人创作的流行版画，称为 lubki（单数，lubok），描绘了友好、诚实的俄罗斯 muzhiki 轻松、毫无怨恨地消灭他们虚弱的法国敌人。其他更阴郁的捷列别涅夫版画展示了俄罗斯人的勇气和不可阻挡的承诺。在“A Russian Scaevola”中，艺术家用俄罗斯术语重铸了 Gaius Mucius Scaevola 的传奇故事，他是一位勇敢的罗马士兵，当他将自己的手臂插入火中以展示罗马的勇气和承诺时，伊特鲁里亚人感到敬畏。在俄罗斯版本中，另一个卑微的 muzhik 毫不畏惧地砍下了自己的手臂。斯蒂芬·诺里斯 （Stephen M. Norris） 解释说，捷列别涅夫和其他卢布克艺术家“从 1812 年至 1813 年流传的一个传说中汲取灵感，该传说讲述了一个俄罗斯农民被俘虏并在手臂上打上字母 N（代表拿破仑）的烙印。农民没有接受这种暴行，而是拿起斧头砍掉了他的手臂。 ${}^{17}$${}^{17}$^(17){ }^{17} 瘦骨嶙峋的法国士兵惊恐地向后退去。随附的文字解释说，农民宁愿砍掉自己的手臂，“以免为祖国的敌人拿破仑服务”，并继续赞美“俄国人的荣耀
${}^{17}$${}^{17}$^(17){ }^{17} Stephen M. Norris, A War of Images: Russian Popular Prints, Wartime Culture, and NationalIdentity, 1812-1945 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2006), p. 22.
${}^{17}$${}^{17}$^(17){ }^{17} 斯蒂芬·诺里斯（Stephen M. Norris），《图像之战：俄罗斯大众版画、战时文化和国家认同，1812-1945年》（迪卡尔布：北伊利诺伊大学出版社，2006年），第22页。

Ivan Terebenev, A Russian Scaevola, 1813. In his 1813 print, the Terebenev recasts in Russian terms the legend of Gaius Mucius Scaevola, who cut off his arm to prove his Roman courage to the Etruscans.
伊万·捷列贝涅夫，《俄罗斯斯卡沃拉》，1813 年。在他 1813 年的版画中，捷列别涅夫用俄语重新塑造了盖乌斯·穆修斯·斯卡沃拉 （Gaius Mucius Scaevola） 的传说，他砍下了自己的手臂，以向伊特鲁里亚人证明他的罗马勇气。
[Rossian] in 1812 during the French invasion of Russia." ${}^{18}$${}^{18}$^(18){ }^{18} Norris notes that the choice of the lubok genre-the simple broadsheet, mass produced for popular markets, worked in simple folk style rather than in the stiff, academic style in which Terebenev and his fellow printmakers were trained-demonstrates an active decision to celebrate the art forms of “the people.” At the same time, it reflects a deliberate bid to influence the hearts and minds of a broad “national” public.
[Rossian] 在 1812 年法国入侵俄罗斯期间。 ${}^{18}$${}^{18}$^(18){ }^{18} 诺里斯指出，选择卢布克体裁——为大众市场批量生产的简单宽幅印刷品，以简单的民间风格工作，而不是捷列别涅夫和他的版画家同事们所接受的僵硬、学院派的风格——表明了庆祝“人民”艺术形式的积极决定。同时，它反映了一种蓄意影响广大“全国”公众的心灵和思想的努力。

In these popular art forms, endorsed though not directly commissioned by the regime and supported by a consumer market, the common man personifies all that is the best in Russia. As the explanatory texts make clear, these good, strong, simple, men and women embody Russia and Russianness and the “fatherland.” The ruler and his supporters could accept this small admission of the people’s contribution, because it could be reconciled with a state-patriotic vision in which the devoted people fought loyally for the emperor and his cause. "The nation and the tsar are conflated, not yet set apart. Russian patriotism depicted in the war lubok . . . had a ‘divine’ emperor whom viewers could contrast with the ‘insidious’ Napoleon. More importantly, the patriotism espoused in the images of 1812 stressed not only the deeds of individual Russians, but also the
在这些流行的艺术形式中，虽然不是直接受政权委托，但得到消费市场的支持，普通人是俄罗斯所有最好的人的化身。正如解释性文本所阐明的那样，这些善良、强壮、简单的男人和女人体现了俄罗斯、俄罗斯性和“祖国”。统治者和他的支持者可以接受这种对人民贡献的微小承认，因为它可以与国家爱国愿景相协调，在这种愿景中，忠诚的人民为皇帝和他的事业忠诚地战斗。“国家和沙皇是混为一谈的，还没有分开。战争卢布克中描绘的俄罗斯爱国主义 . . .有一个“神圣”的皇帝，观众可以与“阴险”的拿破仑形成对比。更重要的是，1812 年图像中所倡导的爱国主义不仅强调了俄罗斯个人的行为，还强调了

overarching influence and guidance of their tsar. ${}^{,19}$${}^{,19}$^(,19){ }^{, 19} Alexander himself would eventually acknowledge this conceptual fusion of the nation with his person when he expressed appreciation for the “powerful valor of the people entrusted to Us by God,” which so critically contributed to the victory. ${}^{20}$${}^{20}$^(20){ }^{20}
他们的沙皇的总体影响和指导。 ${}^{,19}$${}^{,19}$^(,19){ }^{, 19} 亚历山大本人最终承认了国家与他个人的这种概念融合，当时他对“上帝托付给我们的人民的强大勇气”表示赞赏，这对胜利做出了如此关键的贡献。 ${}^{20}$${}^{20}$^(20){ }^{20}

The anxieties that surrounded permissible representation of Russia’s victory underscore the importance to the key players of the time of working out a solution to the relation of tsar and nation. A similar amalgam of state patriotism with elements of ethnic and national sentiments would be reproduced 130 years later in what the Soviets called the Second Great Patriotic War, that is, World War II.
围绕俄罗斯胜利的允许代表的焦虑凸显了当时关键参与者制定沙皇与国家关系解决方案的重要性。130 年后，苏联人所说的第二次伟大卫国战争，即第二次世界大战，将类似的国家爱国主义与民族和民族情感元素的混合体再现。

The embryonic national identity and state patriotism were largely limited to the upper classes: the imperial court and the nobility; some townspeople; and intellectuals. Such sentiments most likely did not extend widely or deeply into the common people. The patriotic muzhik of the lubki may have stirred the imaginations of urban buyers, but there appears to have been no general enthusiasm among the peasants for the war with the French. Peasants were prepared to defend their villages whether against foreign invaders or against marauding Russian soldiers. On the very eve of the French invasion, the minister of war, Barclay de Tolly, had written the emperor of the need to arouse national feelings among the masses:
萌芽的民族认同和国家爱国主义在很大程度上局限于上层阶级：朝廷和贵族;一些镇民;和知识分子。这种情绪很可能没有广泛或深入地延伸到普通民众中。lubki 的爱国主义 muzhik 可能激起了城市买家的想象力，但农民似乎对与法国的战争没有普遍的热情。农民准备保卫他们的村庄，无论是抵御外国侵略者还是抵御劫掠的俄罗斯士兵。在法国入侵前夕，战争部长巴克莱·德·托利 （Barclay de Tolly） 写信给皇帝，要求在群众中唤起民族感情：

We must try to raise the morale and spirit of Russia’s own population and arouse its commitment to a war on whose outcome Russia’s very salvation and existence will depend. I make bold to add here that for the last twenty years we have been doing all we can to suppress everything that is truly national but a great nation which changes its customs and values overnight will quickly go into decline unless the government stops this process and takes measures for the nation’s resurrection. And can anything aid this process better than love for one’s sovereign and one’s country, a feeling of pride at the thought that one is Russian in heart and soul? These feelings can only be brought forth if the government takes the lead in this matter. ${}^{21}$${}^{21}$^(21){ }^{21}
我们必须努力提高俄罗斯本国人民的士气和精神，并唤起他们对战争的承诺，这场战争的结果将取决于俄罗斯的救赎和生存。我在这里大胆地补充一点，在过去的二十年里，我们一直在尽一切可能压制一切真正属于国家的东西，但一个伟大的国家，如果一夜之间改变了它的习俗和价值观，除非政府停止这一过程并采取措施使国家复活，否则它将很快走向衰落。还有什么比对自己的主权和国家的爱更能帮助这个过程的呢，因为想到一个人的心和灵魂都是俄罗斯人而感到自豪呢？只有在政府在这件事上带头，才能激发出这些感受。 ${}^{21}$${}^{21}$^(21){ }^{21}
Barclay de Tolly spoke of the people defending the “Holy Faith and the frontiers of the Fatherland.” ${}^{"22}$${}^{"22}$^("22){ }^{" 22} The emperor himself told a Finnish officer that in order to unite Russians against the French it was essential to have Napoleon be seen as the aggressor and to fight the war on Russian soil. ${}^{23}$${}^{23}$^(23){ }^{23} Whatever worked to mobilize and inspire ordinary people to fight was deployed. At Borodino, Kutuzov and clergy paraded before the troops with the Icon of the Smolensk Mother of God.
巴克莱·德·托利 （Barclay de Tolly） 谈到了捍卫“神圣信仰和祖国边境”的人们。 ${}^{"22}$${}^{"22}$^("22){ }^{" 22} 皇帝本人告诉一位芬兰军官，为了团结俄罗斯人对抗法国人，必须将拿破仑视为侵略者，并在俄罗斯的土地上发动战争。 ${}^{23}$${}^{23}$^(23){ }^{23} 任何能动员和激励普通人战斗的东西都被部署了。在博罗季诺，库图佐夫和神职人员举着斯摩棱斯克圣母圣像在军队前游行。

Still, in Petersburg society there was fear that Russian peasants might rise up in support of Napoleon, who after all had abolished serfdom in the Duchy of
尽管如此，在彼得堡社会中，人们担心俄国农民可能会起来支持拿破仑，拿破仑毕竟已经废除了公国的农奴制

Warsaw. The Russian army was made up of conscripted peasants who generally were forced to leave their homes and families and serve for twenty-five years. There were no peasant volunteers. Peasant soldiers were often treated brutally and with sneering condescension from their noble officers. The same social distinctions and divisions that separated the upper and lower classes in Russian society were reproduced in the ranks of the army. And yet the soldiers fought and died by the tens of thousands, their motivations varying from loyalty to their fellow soldiers with whom they had long served, to compliance bred by their training and socialization, to an elemental sense of self-preservation. There may have been no surge of peasant patriotism in 1812 but neither was there a rising of the serfs against their masters. ${}^{24}$${}^{24}$^(24){ }^{24}
华沙。俄罗斯军队由应征入伍的农民组成，他们通常被迫离开家园和家人，服役 25 年。没有农民志愿者。农民士兵经常受到残酷的对待，并受到他们高贵军官的冷嘲热讽。在俄罗斯社会中，将上层和下层阶级分开的相同社会差异和分化在军队中得到了复制。然而，这些士兵有数以万计的人战斗和死亡，他们的动机各不相同，从对长期服役的战友的忠诚，到他们的训练和社会化所孕育的服从，再到基本的自我保护意识。1812 年可能没有农民爱国主义的高涨，但也没有农奴起义反对他们的主人。 ${}^{24}$${}^{24}$^(24){ }^{24}

Russia emerged from the Napoleonic wars even more imperial than it had been in the eighteenth century. Rather than a mobilized nation, it was ancien régime Russia that won the war, a multinational empire led by an autocrat and a landed gentry with the bulk of its people serfs or state peasants (that is, peasants bound to serve the state rather than private landlords). The tsar stood apart and above his people; they remained diverse not only ethnically, religiously, and in social status, but also in terms of the institutions through which they were ruled. In the newly designated Grand Duchy of Finland, the Orthodox Russian emperor, autocrat in his Russian lands, served as a constitutional monarch and observed the public law of the Grand Duchy. In the Kingdom of Poland (1815-1832), he ruled as Tsar Polskii, the constitutional king of Poland. At the same time, according to the Fundamental Laws codified in 1832, “the Emperor of Russia is an autocratic [samoderzhavnyi] and unlimited [neogranichennyi] monarch,” while he proclaimed his realm a Rechtsstaat, responsibly governed by laws, and distinct from the despotisms of the East. ${}^{25}$${}^{25}$^(25){ }^{25}
俄国从拿破仑战争中崛起，甚至比 18 世纪更加帝王化。赢得战争的不是旧政权的俄国，而不是一个动员起来的国家，一个由独裁者和地主绅士领导的多民族帝国，其大部分人民是农奴或国家农民（即必须为国家服务的农民，而不是私人地主）。沙皇站在他人民之上;他们不仅在种族、宗教和社会地位上保持多样化，而且在他们被统治的机构方面也保持着多样性。在新指定的芬兰大公国，东正教俄罗斯皇帝在他的俄罗斯土地上是独裁者，担任立宪君主并遵守大公国的公法。在波兰王国（1815-1832 年），他以沙皇波兰的名义统治，即波兰的立宪国王。同时，根据 1832 年编纂的《基本法》，“俄罗斯皇帝是专制的 [samoderzhavnyi] 和无限的 [neogranichennyi] 君主”，同时他宣布他的王国是 Rechtsstaat，由法律负责管理，与东方的专制不同。 ${}^{25}$${}^{25}$^(25){ }^{25}

Victorious Russia, the conservative bulwark against the principles of the French Revolution, was self-consciously the antithesis of nationalism. Alexander I expressed this personally in his post-war scheme for a Holy Alliance in which various European states would consider themselves members “of a single Chris~ tian nation” ruled over by the “Autocrat of the Christian People,” Jesus Christ. ${}^{26}$${}^{26}$^(26){ }^{26} Russia’s foreign policy during the years of the French threat had been not only defensive but “imperial,” taking opportunities to expand into Moldavia and Wallachia and annexing Finland. Alexander never gave up his grandmother’s dream
胜利的俄国是反对法国大革命原则的保守堡垒，自觉地是民族主义的对立面。亚历山大一世在战后建立神圣联盟的计划中亲自表达了这一点，在这个计划中，各个欧洲国家将认为自己是“一个由”基督教人民的独裁者“耶稣基督统治的”单一克里斯~天国家“的成员。 ${}^{26}$${}^{26}$^(26){ }^{26} 在法国威胁的那些年里，俄罗斯的外交政策不仅是防御性的，而且是“帝国性的”，趁机向摩尔达维亚和瓦拉几亚扩张，并吞并了芬兰。亚历山大从未放弃过他祖母的梦想

of taking Constantinople and establishing "either the empire of the Slavs or that of the Greeks. ${}^{227}$${}^{227}$^(227){ }^{227} And though thwarted from having all of Poland by the other European Great Powers meeting at the Congress of Vienna in 1815, Alexander emerged from the Napoleonic wars as the ruler of the most powerful country on the continent.
占领君士坦丁堡并建立“斯拉夫人或希腊人的帝国。 ${}^{227}$${}^{227}$^(227){ }^{227} 尽管在 1815 年的维也纳会议上，其他欧洲大国未能让整个波兰受挫，但亚历山大还是从拿破仑战争中脱颖而出，成为欧洲大陆最强大国家的统治者。

After 1812, Russia held a different place in the world. As William C. Fuller Jr. put it, “Russia came to be regarded as the premier land power on the Continent, and the Russian autocracy and its army of 800,000 troops, as the arbiter of European order, the bulwark of legitimacy, conservatism, and stability.” ${}^{28}$${}^{28}$^(28){ }^{28} As the victor over the upstart imperialism of the illegitimate Napoleon, who himself represented in some ways the universal principles of the French Revolution (e.g., in the Code Napoléon), Alexander by 1813 had moved away from his early liberalism toward defense of legitimate monarchies and religious conservatism. Hardly a coherent movement or even body of thought, conservatism in the first quarter of the century was more an inclination to reject the materialism and rationalism of the French Revolution, a preference for order, fidelity to traditional and tried practices, and gradual organic growth rather than precipitate reform. As the patriotic historian Nikolai Karamzin put it, the French Revolution “clarified our ideas. . . Not freedom which is often calamitous, but order, justice, and safety … are the pillars of a happy society.” He became the most dedicated defender of autocracy, which he saw as the institution that had repeatedly saved Russia from disintegration. In his secret memorandum to Alexander I, Memoir on Ancient and Modern Russia (1811), Karamzin argued that autocracy and a powerful state were responsible for Russia’s greatness. ${}^{29}$${}^{29}$^(29){ }^{29} “In Russia,” he wrote, "the sovereign is the living law . . . , our government is fatherly, patriarchal, the father of a family judges and punishes without a protocol. The monarch too must in conditions of a different nature follow only his own conscience and nothing else."30 The tsar’s absolute power was not to be disputed, but, Karamzin hoped, the emperor would always consider Russia’s traditions and ancient customs and maintain close contact with its nobility whose privileges and prerogatives he would respect.
1812 年后，俄罗斯在世界上占据了不同的地位。正如小威廉·富勒（William C. Fuller Jr.）所说，“俄罗斯逐渐被视为欧洲大陆上首屈一指的陆上强国，而俄罗斯的独裁政权及其80万军队则被视为欧洲秩序的仲裁者，合法性、保守主义和稳定的堡垒。 ${}^{28}$${}^{28}$^(28){ }^{28} 作为非法拿破仑的暴发户帝国主义的胜利者，拿破仑本人在某种程度上代表了法国大革命的普遍原则（例如，在《拿破仑法典》中），到 1813 年，亚历山大已经从他早期的自由主义转向捍卫合法的君主制和宗教保守主义。在本世纪的前 25 年，保守主义几乎不是一个连贯的运动，甚至不是思想体系，它更倾向于拒绝法国大革命的唯物主义和理性主义，喜欢秩序，忠于传统和久经考验的做法，以及逐渐的有机增长，而不是仓促的改革。正如爱国历史学家尼古拉·卡拉姆津（Nikolai Karamzin）所说，法国大革命“澄清了我们的思想......不是经常是灾难性的自由，而是秩序、正义和安全......是幸福社会的支柱。他成为最坚定的专制捍卫者，他认为专制是一再将俄罗斯从解体中拯救出来的机构。在他给亚历山大一世的秘密备忘录《古代和现代俄罗斯回忆录》（1811 年）中，卡拉姆津认为，专制和强大的国家是俄罗斯伟大的原因。 ${}^{29}$${}^{29}$^(29){ }^{29} “在俄罗斯，”他写道，“主权是活生生的法律......，我们的政府是父爱的，是父权制的，一个家庭的父亲在没有礼节的情况下审判和惩罚。 君主也必须在不同性质的条件下只遵循自己的良心，而不是其他任何事情。30 沙皇的绝对权力是无可争议的，但是，卡拉姆津希望皇帝始终考虑俄罗斯的传统和古老习俗，并与他所尊重的特权和特权的贵族保持密切联系。

The emperor continued to talk about constitutionalism well into his later years, although after granting constitutions to both Poland and Finland he rejected such schemes for Russia proper. Instead, fearing sedition and revolt at home, he relied increasingly on the police to monitor what his officials were doing. The last
皇帝直到晚年都继续谈论宪政，尽管在授予波兰和芬兰宪法后，他拒绝了俄罗斯本土的此类计划。相反，由于害怕国内的煽动叛乱和叛乱，他越来越依赖警察来监视他的官员的所作所为。最后

decade of Alexander’s reign was known as the Arakcheevshchina, after his brutal but loyal lieutenant, General Arakcheev, who was said to have proudly announced, "I am the friend of the tsar and complaints about me can be made only to God. ${}^{,31}$${}^{,31}$^(,31){ }^{, 31} Frustrated by Alexander’s growing conservatism and mysticism, disappointed by unfulfilled promises of constitutional reform, and inspired by their experiences in Europe during the Napoleonic Wars, groups of young officers and nobles organized secret political societies to discuss reform and even a coup d’ettat. Their youthful dreams reflected the imperial world that shaped their experience as well as the radical innovations they hoped to introduce.
亚历山大在位的十年被称为阿拉克切夫希纳，以他残忍但忠诚的副官阿拉克切夫将军的名字命名，据说阿拉克切耶夫将军自豪地宣布：“我是沙皇的朋友，对我的抱怨只能向上帝提出。 ${}^{,31}$${}^{,31}$^(,31){ }^{, 31} 由于对亚历山大日益增长的保守主义和神秘主义感到沮丧，对未兑现的宪法改革承诺感到失望，并受到拿破仑战争期间他们在欧洲经历的启发，一群年轻的军官和贵族组织了秘密的政治社团来讨论改革，甚至发动政变。他们年轻时的梦想反映了塑造他们经历的帝国世界，以及他们希望引入的激进创新。

Pavel Pestel, leader of the most radical of the factions, began his treatise with the assertion that “Russia (Rossiia) is a state, one and indivisible,” but then promptly enumerated all the different peoples, social estates, and functional units that comprised it. He contrasts the right to nationhood, which is enjoyed by great nations, like the Russians, with the right of convenience, which great states, like Russia, must invoke for their own security.
最激进派系的领袖帕维尔·佩斯特尔 （Pavel Pestel） 在他的论文中一开始就断言“俄罗斯（俄罗斯）是一个国家，一个单一的、不可分割的”，但随后迅速列举了构成它的所有不同民族、社会阶层和功能单位。他将俄罗斯等大国享有的建国权与俄国等大国为了自身安全而必须援引的便利权进行了对比。

Poland, on the other hand, which had been independent, should be granted separate statehood “through the magnanimity of the glorious Russian people,” but under conditions that guarantee Russia’s safety and security. ${}^{33}$${}^{33}$^(33){ }^{33} Pestel’s intellectual nationalism and his commitment to popular government was contained within a non-autocratic but nonetheless imperial vision of a great multinational state ruled by the Russian nation.
另一方面，波兰已经独立，应该“通过光荣的俄罗斯人民的宽宏大量”获得独立的国家地位，但条件是保证俄罗斯的安全。 ${}^{33}$${}^{33}$^(33){ }^{33} 佩斯特尔的知识分子民族主义和他对人民政府的承诺包含在一个非专制但仍然是帝国主义的愿景中，即一个由俄罗斯民族统治的伟大多民族国家。

These young men expressed impassioned commitment to serving and improving their country and their society. They were animated by what they had seen abroad after war, by what they had read or studied in university, or simply by awareness of the lack of freedom in Russia. “The desire to be useful to humanity always filled me,” Petr Borisov, a co-founder of one of the underground societies, the Society of United Slavs, testified. He explained, “Nobody imparted in me free thoughts and liberal ideas. The reading, since childhood, of Greek and Roman history . . . implanted in me a love for freedom and popular sovereignty.” Such aspirations had no outlet in the oppressive circumstances of the time, where any unauthorized discussion of reform was viewed as dangerous and even members of the elite had no licit opportunity to voice their concerns. Censorship silenced efforts to work constructively within the autocratic system, so even members of
这些年轻人表达了对服务和改善他们的国家和社会的热情承诺。他们被战后在国外的所见所闻所激励，被他们在大学里读过或学过的东西所激励，或者仅仅是因为意识到俄罗斯缺乏自由。“对人类有用的愿望一直让我充满，”地下社团之一联合斯拉夫人协会（Society of United Slavs）的联合创始人彼得·鲍里索夫（Petr Borisov）作证说。他解释说：“没有人向我传授自由思想和自由思想。从小就阅读希腊和罗马历史......在我心中植入了对自由和人民主权的热爱。在当时的压迫环境中，这种愿望是没有出口的，在那个时代，任何未经授权的改革讨论都被视为危险的，即使是精英成员也没有合法的机会来表达他们的担忧。审查制度压制了在专制系统内建设性工作的努力，因此即使是

the privileged elite like these young officers were driven into conspiracy, against their own immediate interests. Borisov noted that he was so moved by "the cruelty displayed by commanding officers toward their subordinates … that I left ranks and swore to myself to abolish this kind of punishment, should it cost me my life. ${}^{334}$${}^{334}$^(334){ }^{334} Although the more radical among them spoke of justifiable regicide and of emancipating the serfs, the conspirators of the Northern and Southern Societies aspired to change the form of government, not to arouse the masses in revolution.
像这些年轻军官这样的特权精英被驱使陷入阴谋，违背了他们自己的直接利益。鲍里索夫指出，他对“指挥官对下属的残忍......我离开了队伍，对自己发誓，如果这种惩罚要付出我的生命的代价，就要废除这种惩罚。 ${}^{334}$${}^{334}$^(334){ }^{334} 虽然他们当中较激进的人谈论正当的弑君和解放农奴，但北方和南方社会的阴谋者渴望改变政府的形式，而不是在革命中煽动群众。

Their chance came with the sudden, unexpected death of Alexander I. When on December 14, 1825, the imperial troops gathered on Senate Square in St. Petersburg to swear allegiance to the new emperor, Nicholas I, the rebel officers called instead for his brother Konstantin to rule and for a constitution: “Konstantin $i$$i$ii Konstitutsiia!” Pale with fear, Nicholas sat stiffly on his horse, as his loyal troops faced the rebels. He then ordered his soldiers to fire; several men were killed; and hundreds were arrested. The prisoners were interrogated harshly, a few “whose guilt exceeded that of all the others” were executed and others were sent in perpetual exile to Siberia. The memoirs of some of the survivors express a sense of genuine surprise that the tsar’s officials, men whom these privileged young nobles had known since childhood, were prepared to mete out such merciless punishment. A. M. Muravev conveyed this sense of hurt in his memoir about the ordeal. After months of confinement in “a dirty, humid, dark, and narrow cell,” he was taken for questioning to General Sukhin,
他们的机会随着亚历山大一世的突然意外去世而来。1825 年 12 月 14 日，当帝国军队聚集在圣彼得堡的参议院广场上宣誓效忠新皇帝尼古拉一世时，叛军军官们反而呼吁他的兄弟康斯坦丁统治并制定宪法：“康斯坦丁 $i$$i$ii ·康斯坦丁！尼古拉斯因恐惧而脸色苍白，僵硬地坐在马上，他的忠诚部队面对着叛军。然后他命令他的士兵开火;几人被杀;数百人被捕。囚犯受到严厉的审讯，一些“罪过超过其他人”被处决，其他人被永久流放到西伯利亚。一些幸存者的回忆录表达了一种由衷的惊讶感，沙皇的官员们，这些享有特权的年轻贵族从小就认识的人，竟然准备施以如此无情的惩罚。A. M. 穆拉维夫 （A. M. Muravev） 在他关于这场磨难的回忆录中传达了这种受伤的感觉。在“肮脏、潮湿、黑暗和狭窄的牢房”中被关押了几个月后，他被带到苏欣将军那里接受审问。
an old veteran whom I had known as a child. He received me seated at his desk, pretending not to recognize me, and asked for my name. I answered that I was called Murav’ev and that I was an officer of the Cavalier Guards. To this he thought it polite to say: “I am quite sorry for the memory of your esteemed father who has a criminal in you.” I shook on hearing this, but a sentiment of pity seized me at the view of this poor old man who was so dulled by servility that he could remain completely indifferent to the sight of someone’s sufferings, of someone who did not share his views. ${}^{35}$${}^{35}$^(35){ }^{35}
一位我小时候就认识的老兵。他接待了坐在他办公桌前的我，假装不认识我，并询问我的名字。我回答说，我叫穆拉夫耶夫，是骑士卫队的一名军官。“对此，他认为说：”我对你尊敬的父亲的记忆感到非常抱歉，因为你心里有罪。听到这话，我浑身发抖，但看到这个可怜的老人，他被奴性弄得如此迟钝，以至于他对看到别人的痛苦，对一个不同意他的观点的人完全无动于衷，我就感到一种怜悯之情。 ${}^{35}$${}^{35}$^(35){ }^{35}
The Decembrists learned at great cost that the space for “someone who did not share his views” was closing rapidly. Opportunities for expressions of ideas and criticisms were being driven underground, into the dark corners of revolutionary conspiracy and the subterfuge of “Aesopian” (masked, coded, allegorical) language.
十二月党人付出了巨大的代价才知道，“一个不同意他的观点的人”的空间正在迅速关闭。表达思想和批评的机会被驱赶到地下，进入革命阴谋和“伊索普”（蒙面、编码、寓言）语言的诡计的阴暗角落。

Muravev and his comrades had come of age in a changing world. Born at the tail end of an era of palace coups orchestrated by the glittering inner circle of courtiers and guards regiments, they preserved a sense that the monarch was obligated, by pragmatic survival instincts as well as by graciousness and personal relationships, to listen to the elites and at least pretend to take them seriously. But
穆拉维夫和他的同志们在一个不断变化的世界中长大。他们诞生于由闪闪发光的朝臣和卫队核心圈子精心策划的宫廷政变时代的尾声，他们保留了一种感觉，即君主有义务出于务实的生存本能以及亲切和个人关系，倾听精英的意见，至少假装认真对待他们。但

at the same time, they grew up surrounded by “free thoughts and liberal ideas” about “the drawing together of all classes and . . . the civil reorganization of Russia.” They read in newspapers and “various books on politics, such as Machiavelli, Montesquieu, and the Contrat Social of J. J. Rousseau.” They learned about “the increase of happiness in the United States of America” due to "the superiority of the republican form of government."36 Their conceptions of political life had strayed into a muddled intermediate zone somewhere between the intimacy and entitlement of a privileged ruling class and the national entitlements of a sovereign people.
与此同时，他们在“自由思想和自由思想”的包围下长大，这些思想是关于“所有阶级和......俄罗斯的民事重组。他们在报纸上阅读和“各种政治书籍，如马基雅维利、孟德斯鸠和 J. J. 卢梭的 Contrat Social”。他们了解到“由于”共和政体的优越性“，”美利坚合众国的幸福感增加”。36 他们的政治生活观念已经误入了一个模糊的中间地带，介于特权统治阶级的亲密和权利与主权人民的国家权利之间。

The Decembrist revolt was easily crushed, but it left a complicated legacy. Nightmares of revolution haunted the new emperor and encouraged him to rein in the dreams of reform unleashed by his brother’s rash talk of constitutions and by contact with Western ideas of freedom and popular sovereignty. On the other hand, although the rebellion itself was handily put down, the movement created its own martyrs and a durable mythology of selfless sacrifice in defense of the people against an oppressive and tyrannical state. In a curious twist, the Siberian exiles were allowed to correspond with their friends and families back in Petersburg, thereby cultivating the legend of their own noble martyrdom. The cult received a public relations boost from the equally noble and self-sacrificing choice of a number of beautiful “Decembrist wives” to follow their husbands into the wilderness. Modeling themselves on the tragic, inspiring figures of the Decembrists and their wives, the next generation of educated men and women explored avenues for serving the “the general good” within a closed society that offered few legal opportunities to serve the people. Siberia, as a space of noble suffering and exile, far distant from state oppression and from court frivolity, became a focus for dreams of true Russianness.
十二月党人的起义很容易被镇压，但它留下了复杂的遗产。革命的噩梦一直困扰着新天皇，并鼓励他控制住哥哥轻率谈论宪法以及与西方自由和人民主权思想接触所引发的改革梦想。另一方面，尽管叛乱本身被轻易地镇压，但该运动创造了自己的烈士和一个持久的神话，即为保卫人民免受压迫和暴政的统治而无私牺牲。奇怪的是，西伯利亚流亡者被允许与他们在彼得堡的朋友和家人通信，从而培养了他们自己崇高殉道的传奇。该邪教通过同样高尚和自我牺牲的选择，许多美丽的“十二月党人妻子”跟随她们的丈夫进入荒野，从而得到了公关的推动。下一代受过教育的男性和女性以十二月党人及其妻子的悲惨、鼓舞人心的人物为蓝本，在一个几乎没有合法机会为人民服务的封闭社会中探索为“公众利益”服务的途径。西伯利亚，作为一个高尚的苦难和流放之地，远离国家压迫和宫廷的轻浮，成为真正俄罗斯性梦想的焦点。

The reign of Nicholas I (1825-1855) was a deeply contradictory one. It began with the failed coup of guards’ officers, hoping to topple the autocracy and establish a constitutional regime, and ended with Russia fighting a modern, nineteenth-century war in Crimea with the antique social and political system crying out for drastic reform. The reign witnessed the emergence of the Russian intelligentsia, a serious discussion of reforms of the peasant bondage system, and an energetic push for state-directed economic and industrial development. The first railroad in Russia was laid, and a sturdy structure of police surveillance was established. Political repression coexisted with economic growth and intellectual ferment, but autocratic power was in no way compromised.
尼古拉一世（1825-1855 年）的统治是一个非常矛盾的时期。它始于卫兵军官的失败政变，希望推翻专制制度并建立宪政制度，以俄罗斯在克里米亚进行一场 19 世纪的现代战争结束，古老的社会和政治制度呼吁进行大刀阔斧的改革。在位期间，俄国知识分子的出现，对农民奴役制度改革的严肃讨论，以及对国家主导的经济和工业发展的积极推动。俄罗斯的第一条铁路铺设完毕，并建立了坚固的警察监视结构。政治镇压与经济增长和知识分子的发酵并存，但专制权力丝毫没有受到损害。

Central to the political contradictions was the character of the emperor himself. Nicholas was an imposing man, over six feet in height, described by one
政治矛盾的核心是皇帝本人的品格。尼古拉斯是一个威风凛凛的男人，身高超过 6 英尺，有人这样描述

Vasilii Golike, portrait of Emperor Nicholas I, 1843.
瓦西里·戈利克，尼古拉一世皇帝的肖像，1843 年。
historian as “the most handsome man in Europe” and by a contemporary foreign observer as "the most perfect specimen of a human being, physically speaking, in all of Europe. ${}^{\text{.37}}$${}^{\text{.37 }}$^(".37 "){ }^{\text {.37 }} Once he sat firmly on the throne, he was stern, unyielding, and majestic when he commanded, but his courage, it was said, concealed a nervousness and excitement bordering on panic. Deeply religious, he was absolutely convinced that God was on Russia’s side. He believed that the state was meant to serve God and not God the state. His greatest love was the army, and he lavished attention and rewards on it, taking special care to tend to even the minutest details concerning the military. He was a martinet at heart, and the dress uniform became the fashion of the day. What he sought was order, obedience, and a sense of duty, as one finds in a wellrun army.
历史学家称其为“欧洲最英俊的男人”，并被当代外国观察家评为“整个欧洲最完美的人类标本”。 ${}^{\text{.37}}$${}^{\text{.37 }}$^(".37 "){ }^{\text {.37 }} 一旦他稳稳地坐在王位上，他发号施令时就显得严厉、不屈不挠、威严，但据说，他的勇气中隐藏着一种近乎恐慌的紧张和兴奋。他虔诚地虔诚，绝对相信上帝站在俄罗斯一边。他相信国家是为了侍奉上帝，而不是上帝为国家服务。他最大的爱是军队，他对军队给予了极大的关注和奖励，特别注意照顾与军队有关的最微小细节。他本质上是一个马丁内特人，制服成为当时的时尚。他寻求的是秩序、服从和责任感，就像一个人在一支管理良好的军队中发现的那样。

As the educated public grew, and writers found an audience of readers, the regime produced its own synthetic ideological formulation to counter oppositional tendencies that it saw taking shape in the widening public sphere. Elaborated by the conservative minister of education, Sergei Uvarov, the state’s program known as “Official Nationality” emphasized the close ties between the tsar and the people, a bond said to originate deep in the distant past. Russians, it was claimed, had chosen their foreign rulers, the Varangians, and worshiped their successors. Russia was distinct in the love of the people for the autocrat and their devotion to the church. “Official Nationality,” was summed up in the official slogan “Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality [narodnost’].” The historic link of autocracy, Orthodoxy, and the people was present at Russia’s creation, claimed the journalist Fedor Bulgarin:
随着受过教育的公众的增长，作家找到了读者，该政权产生了自己的综合意识形态表述，以对抗它在不断扩大的公共领域中看到的反对趋势。由保守派教育部长谢尔盖·乌瓦罗夫 （Sergei Uvarov） 阐述的该州被称为“官方国籍”的计划强调了沙皇与人民之间的密切联系，据说这种纽带起源于遥远的过去。据称，俄罗斯人选择了他们的外国统治者瓦兰吉人，并崇拜他们的继任者。俄罗斯在人民对独裁者的热爱和对教会的奉献方面是与众不同的。“官方国籍”被总结为官方口号“正统、专制、国籍 [narodnost']。专制、东正教和人民的历史联系在俄罗斯的建立时就存在，记者费多尔·布尔加林 （Fedor Bulgarin） 声称：

Faith and autocracy created the Russian state and the one common fatherland for the Russian Slavs. . . . This immense colossus, Russia, almost a separate continent, which contains within itself all the climates and all the tribes of mankind, can be held in balance only by faith and autocracy. That is why in Russia
信仰和专制创造了俄罗斯国家和俄罗斯斯拉夫人的共同祖国......俄罗斯这个巨大的庞然大物，几乎是一个独立的大陆，它包含了人类的所有气候和所有部落，只有通过信仰和专制才能保持平衡。这就是为什么在俄罗斯

there could never and cannot exist any other nationality, except the nationality founded on Orthodoxy and on autocracy. ${}^{38}$${}^{38}$^(38){ }^{38}
除了建立在东正教和专制基础上的民族之外，永远不可能也不存在任何其他民族。 ${}^{38}$${}^{38}$^(38){ }^{38}

At the heart of Official Nationality stood the image of Russia as "a single family in which the ruler is the father and the subjects the children. The father retains complete authority over the children while he allows them to have full freedom. Between the father and the children there can be no suspicion, no treason; their fate, their happiness and their peace they share in common. ${}^{39}$${}^{39}$^(39){ }^{39} Nicholas played up the familial aspect in what Wortman calls “scenarios of power,” formalized tableaux in which he cast himself as the “first father” and his family as first family of the land. This sentimentalized and naturalized representation of power enjoyed some success in touching his intended audience: when he presented his young son and heir to the people, witnesses reported not a dry eye in the crowd, so moved were they by the loving father and son.
官方国籍的核心是俄罗斯的形象，即“一个单一的家庭，统治者是父亲，臣民是孩子。父亲保留对孩子的完全权威，同时允许他们拥有充分的自由。父亲和孩子之间不能有猜疑，不能有叛国;他们的命运、他们的幸福和他们的和平是他们共有的。 ${}^{39}$${}^{39}$^(39){ }^{39} 尼古拉斯在沃尔特曼所说的“权力场景”中渲染了家庭方面，他将自己塑造成“第一父亲”，将家人塑造成这片土地的第一家庭。这种感伤和自然化的权力表现在触动他的目标受众方面取得了一些成功：当他向人们介绍他年幼的儿子和继承人时，目击者报告说，人群中没有一个干涩的眼睛，他们被这对充满爱意的父子所感动。

The staged “loving family” of the monarchy affected Russian society in even deeper ways than the official planners might have hoped. Not only did it win the affectionate loyalty of susceptible subjects, but it also provided a model for patriarchal landholders, who internalized the role of benevolent fathers to their wives, daughters, sisters, and, of course, serfs. The familial model saturated understandings of power and gave Westernized Russian landholders a way to imagine their prerogatives as moral, intimate, and distinctly Russian. Patriarchy inflected with familial affection may have softened some interactions between serfs and the peasants they viewed as their children, but, as John Randolph observes, it also licensed the “romantic” liaisons of masters and serfs, painting an attractive veneer on profoundly unequal relations. ${}^{40}$${}^{40}$^(40){ }^{40} Memories of the Pugachev rebellion half a century earlier and real-life interactions on provincial estates perturbed the iconic figure of the simple, pure, arcadian peasant, but the powerful strains of early-nineteenth-century nationalism bolstered the image in the face of experience.
君主制上演的“爱家”对俄罗斯社会的影响比官方规划者所希望的还要深。它不仅赢得了易感臣民的深情忠诚，而且还为父权制地主提供了一个榜样，他们将仁慈的父亲的角色内化到他们的妻子、女儿、姐妹，当然还有农奴。家庭模式使对权力的理解饱和，并为西化的俄罗斯地主提供了一种将他们的特权想象为道德、亲密和独特的俄罗斯特权的方法。带有家庭情感影响的父权制可能软化了农奴和他们视为孩子的农民之间的一些互动，但正如约翰·伦道夫 （John Randolph） 所观察到的，它也允许主人和农奴之间的“浪漫”联系，为极度不平等的关系涂上了迷人的外衣。 ${}^{40}$${}^{40}$^(40){ }^{40} 半个世纪前对普加乔夫起义的记忆和在省级庄园的真实互动使这个简单、纯洁、田园诗般的农民的标志性形象感到不安，但 19 世纪初民族主义的强大压力在面对经验时强化了这一形象。
“Nationality,” the most obscure and contested of the official trinity, was intimately linked with ideas of obedience, submission, and loyalty. This was not something akin to modern nation but a wishful idea about what the Russian people were like. As an authentically Christian people, Russians were said to be marked by renunciation and sacrifice, a deep affection for their sovereign, and dedicated resistance to revolution. At the same time Nicholas attempted to quash discussions of popular sovereignty, he russified the monarchy more intensively. At the ball that followed his coronation, nobles danced in national costumes surrounded by Muscovite decor. Russian was to be used at court; Russian language and history became required subjects at university; churches were built in a
“国籍”是官方三位一体中最晦涩、最有争议的，它与服从、服从和忠诚的观念密切相关。这不是类似于现代国家的东西，而是对俄罗斯人民是什么样子的一厢情愿的想法。作为一个真正的基督教民族，据说俄罗斯人以放弃和牺牲、对君主的深厚感情和对革命的坚定抵抗为标志。在尼古拉斯试图压制关于人民主权的讨论的同时，他更密集地俄罗斯化了君主制。在他加冕后的舞会上，贵族们穿着民族服装在莫斯科装饰的包围下跳舞。俄语将在宫廷中使用;俄语和历史成为大学的必修课;教堂建于

Russo-Byzantine style. A national anthem, “God Save the Tsar,” was composed, under the emperor’s supervision, and Russian authors and musicians sought what they believed were authentic Russian themes.
俄罗斯-拜占庭风格。在皇帝的监督下，俄罗斯创作了一首国歌《天佑沙皇》（God Save the Tsar），俄罗斯作家和音乐家们寻找他们认为是真正的俄罗斯主题。

Although not the first “Russian” opera, Mikhail Glinka’s A Life for the Tsar (1836) was widely lauded as genuinely Russian. “When I heard [A Life] for the first time, in its entirety and on the stage,” wrote a critic of the time, "I was so astonished by the depth and breadth of its conception-which sought to elevate Russian folk tunes into a jewel of Nature-that all music which had been written prior to this on Russian texts seemed like childish babble. ${}^{311}$${}^{311}$^(311){ }^{311} Set during the Time of Troubles, the opera told the tale of a patriotic peasant, Ivan Susanin, who leads a band of Poles astray rather than reveal the hiding place of the future tsar. In the official scenario, reflected in the opera, the people adored the tsar but did not sanction or legitimize his right to rule. Nicholas dispensed with the pretense of attending to the voices of “the people” with the comfortable (though erroneous) assumption that he knew and understood his people and that they were delighted to entrust him with the burden of rule. The right to rule was conferred by God, conquest, and hereditary right. Any notion that sovereignty resided in the collective “folk” was peremptorily rejected.
米哈伊尔·格林卡 （Mikhail Glinka） 的《沙皇的一生》（A Life for the Tsar，1836 年）虽然不是第一部“俄罗斯”歌剧，但被广泛赞誉为真正的俄罗斯歌剧。“当我第一次在舞台上听到 [A Life] 的完整声音时，”当时的一位评论家写道，“我对它的构思的深度和广度感到非常惊讶——它试图将俄罗斯民间曲调提升为大自然的瑰宝——以至于在此之前写在俄罗斯文本上的所有音乐似乎都像是幼稚的胡言乱语。 ${}^{311}$${}^{311}$^(311){ }^{311} 这部歌剧以动乱时期为背景，讲述了一位爱国农民伊万·苏萨宁 （Ivan Susanin） 的故事，他带领一群波兰人误入歧途，而不是揭示未来沙皇的藏身之处。在歌剧中反映的官方场景中，人们崇拜沙皇，但没有批准或合法化他的统治权。尼古拉斯摒弃了听从“人民”声音的伪装，以一种舒适（尽管是错误的）假设，即他了解并理解他的人民，并且他们乐于将统治的重担托付给他。统治权是由上帝、征服和世袭权赋予的。任何主权属于集体“民间”的观念都被强硬地拒绝了。
“Official Nationality” was an attempt to make an ideological end run around the Western discourse of the nation and to re-suture nation to state, to the monarch and the state religion at the moment when in Western Europe the political community known as nation was becoming separable from the state, at least conceptually, and was fast gaining an independent potency as the source of legitima$cy.{}^{42}$$cy.{}^{42}$cy.^(42)c y .{ }^{42} Generalizing from the Russian case, Benedict Anderson, a leading theorist of nations and national identity, defines “official nationalisms” as a category of nationalisms that appear after the first stirrings of popular linguistic and cultural nationalisms, “responses by power-groups-primarily, but not exclusively, dynastic and aristocratic-threatened with exclusion from, or marginalization in, popular imagined communities.” Official nationalism “concealed a discrepancy between nation and dynastic realm” and was connected to the efforts of aristocracies and monarchies to maintain their empires. ${}^{43}$${}^{43}$^(43){ }^{43} The ideology of Official Nationality was part of the empire’s adjustment to the claims of the discourse of the nation and the perceived subversive power of the European nation-form. With considerable trepidation and in its own particular way, the empire faced the challenges of a modernity defined by its Western competitors.
“官方国籍”是一种尝试，旨在使意识形态达到围绕国家话语的西方话语，并在西欧被称为民族的政治共同体至少在概念上与国家分离，并迅速获得作为合法 $cy.{}^{42}$$cy.{}^{42}$cy.^(42)c y .{ }^{42} 性来源的独立效力 从俄罗斯的案例中概括，领先的国家和国家认同理论家本尼迪克特·安德森 （Benedict Anderson） 将“官方民族主义”定义为在流行的语言和文化民族主义第一次激荡之后出现的一类民族主义，“权力集团的反应——主要但不限于王朝和贵族——受到被排斥在大众想象社区之外或被边缘化的威胁。官方的民族主义“掩盖了国家和王朝领域之间的差异”，并与贵族和君主制维持其帝国的努力有关。 ${}^{43}$${}^{43}$^(43){ }^{43} 官方国籍的意识形态是帝国调整国家话语主张和欧洲民族形式的颠覆力量的一部分。怀着相当大的恐惧，这个帝国以自己独特的方式面临着由西方竞争对手定义的现代性的挑战。

By the second quarter of the nineteenth century, the notion of “nation” was up for grabs. Monarchs, nobilities, and various other social groups, like the emerging middle class (the “bourgeoisie”), competed with emboldened intellectuals to
到 19 世纪下半叶，“国家”的概念已经可供争夺。君主、贵族和其他各种社会群体，如新兴的中产阶级（“资产阶级”），与大胆的知识分子竞争

claim that they were the nation. Certainly the official tsarist view of what was national was deeply conservative in the sense of preserving a given state form that was being questioned by rival conceptions in the West. Looking back to an idealized past of harmony between people and ruler, Nicholas’s notion of Holy Rus was contrasted to godless, revolutionary Europe. At the same time the monarchy resisted those domestic nationalists, like the Slavophile Konstantin Aksakov, who identified with the simple people (narod) by wearing a beard and Russian national dress. “In Nicholas’ Western frame of mind, beards signified not Russians but Jews and radicals. The official view identified the nation with the ruling Western elite,” and not with the mass of the people. ${}^{44}$${}^{44}$^(44){ }^{44}
声称他们是国家。当然，沙皇对国家的官方观点是非常保守的，因为保留了一种特定的国家形式，而这种形式受到了西方对立观念的质疑。回顾人民与统治者之间和谐的理想化过去，尼古拉斯的神圣罗斯概念与无神的革命欧洲形成鲜明对比。与此同时，君主制抵制那些国内民族主义者，比如亲斯拉夫的康斯坦丁·阿克萨科夫，他们通过留胡子和俄罗斯民族服装来认同淳朴的人民 （narod）。“在尼古拉斯的西方思想中，胡子不代表俄罗斯人，而是犹太人和激进分子。官方观点将这个国家与西方统治精英相提并论，“而不是与人民群众相提并论。 ${}^{44}$${}^{44}$^(44){ }^{44}

Nicholas spent much time traveling about his empire, showing himself to the public, reassuring them (and himself) of the special powers that he held. During the cholera epidemic of 1830, he appeared in Moscow as if taking charge of the efforts to fight the disease. His faithful adjutant Aleksandr Benkendorff remarked, “it seemed to all that the disease itself would capitulate to his omnipotence.” Reprising his frozen defiance of the Decembrist rebels, Nicholas faced down a riotous mob driven to frenzy by the cholera. “He threw off his coat, ordered the rioters to fall to their knees and cross themselves. He then scolded them. . . . 'Remember what you did, remember that you aren’t French, you aren’t Poles, but Russians.” ${}^{\prime 45}$${}^{\prime 45}$^('45){ }^{\prime 45}
尼古拉斯花了很多时间在他的帝国中旅行，向公众展示自己，向他们（和他自己）保证他拥有的特殊能力。在 1830 年霍乱流行期间，他出现在莫斯科，仿佛负责抗击疾病的努力。他忠实的副官亚历山大·本肯多夫 （Aleksandr Benkendorff） 评论说：“在所有人看来，疾病本身都会屈服于他的无所不能。尼古拉斯再次对十二月党人叛军的冰冷蔑视，面对被霍乱逼得发狂的暴徒。“他脱掉外套，命令暴徒跪下并交叉。然后他责骂他们......“记住你所做的事，记住你不是法国人，你不是波兰人，而是俄罗斯人。” ${}^{\prime 45}$${}^{\prime 45}$^('45){ }^{\prime 45}

In many ways the emergence of the group of critical, socially engaged thinkers known as the “intelligentsia” in the 1830s implied a social dialogue about what constituted “the nation.” Made up of members from various classes, the intelligentsia lived apart from polite society (obshchestvo) on the one hand and from the people (narod) on the other. It was isolated from and alien to official Russia, questioning fundamentals about the political order and religion, yet deeply desirous of becoming close to the people and serving it. As. Alan Pollard suggests, "Herein lay the intelligentsia’s dilemma. The elements which created consciousness tended to be products of the West, so that the very qualities which endowed the intelligentsia with understanding, and thus with its very essence, also alienated it from national life, to represent which was its vital function. Therefore, the intelligentsia’s central problem was to establish a liaison with the people."46
在许多方面，1830 年代被称为“知识分子”的批判性、社会参与的思想家群体的出现意味着关于什么是“国家”的社会对话。知识分子由来自不同阶层的成员组成，一方面与礼貌社会 （obshchestvo） 分开生活，另一方面与人民 （narod） 分开生活。它与俄罗斯官方隔绝且格格不入，质疑政治秩序和宗教的基本原则，但又深切渴望亲近人民并为人民服务。正如艾伦·波拉德 （Alan Pollard） 所说，“这就是知识分子的困境。创造意识的元素往往是西方的产物，因此，赋予知识分子理解力的品质，以及它的本质，也使它与国家生活疏远，而国家生活是代表其重要功能。因此，知识分子的核心问题是与人民建立联系。46

Where the Decembrists had been content to scheme and act on behalf of the common soldiers and peasants, their successors increasingly strove not only to serve these victimized masses but also to connect with them in some way. Young Russian intellectuals moved between the 1830s and the 1860s from contemplating
十二月党人满足于代表普通士兵和农民进行策划和行动，而他们的继任者则越来越努力，不仅为这些受害群众服务，而且以某种方式与他们建立联系。年轻的俄罗斯知识分子在 1830 年代和 1860 年代之间开始思考

the world to attempting to transform it through action. The opening event in the intelligentsia dialogue was the 1836 Philosophical Letter by Petr Chaadaev that Aleksandr Herzen reported had an effect like “a pistol shot in the dark night.” Radically anti-nationalist, the Letter proclaimed that Russia was unique in that it had no history or traditions; it was a tabula rasa on which new ideas and forms could be written. This extreme position was diametrically opposed to Official Nationality that celebrated Russia’s healthy wholeness in contrast to the rottenness of the West. After he was condemned as insane and placed under house arrest, Chaadaev published an Apology of a Madman, in which he argued that Russia’s backwardness presented a unique opportunity for his country "to resolve the greater part of the social problems, to perfect the greater part of the ideas which have arisen in older societies. ${}^{247}$${}^{247}$^(247){ }^{247}
世界试图通过行动来改变它。知识分子对话的开场白是彼得·恰达耶夫 （Petr Chaadaev） 1836 年的《哲学信》（Philosophical Letter），亚历山大·赫尔岑 （Aleksandr Herzen） 报告说，这封信的效果就像“黑夜中的手枪射击”。这封信激进地反民族主义，宣称俄罗斯是独一无二的，因为它没有历史或传统;这是一张可以写下新思想和形式的白板。这种极端立场与官方国籍截然相反，官方国籍庆祝俄罗斯的健康完整性，与西方的腐朽形成鲜明对比。在被判为精神错乱并被软禁后，恰达耶夫发表了一篇《一个疯子的道歉》，其中他认为俄罗斯的落后为他的国家提供了一个独特的机会，“可以解决大部分社会问题，完善旧社会中出现的大部分思想。 ${}^{247}$${}^{247}$^(247){ }^{247}

The ensuing discussion divided the intelligentsia into Westernizers, those who subscribed to a rationalist, Enlightenment agenda for Russia-reform in a generally modernist European direction-and Slavophiles, who advocated a more conservative, nostalgic reconstruction of what was thought to have made up the Russian tradition. While some Westernizing liberals appeared to be indifferent or even hostile to issues of national identity, those identified as Slavophiles were preoccupied with finding the Russian nation, characterizing it, and building on its many virtues. They followed the European Romantics and looked to the narod [the people], which was largely identified with the peasantry, for narodnost’, the essential character of the Russian or Slav. For Aleksei Khomiakov national character was contained in religion or a certain form of religiosity. ${}^{48}$${}^{48}$^(48){ }^{48} Slavs were the most highly spiritual, the most artistic and talented of the peoples of the earth. Peace-loving and fraternal, spontaneous, loving, and valuing freedom, they realized their fullness in an organic unity of all in love and freedom which he called sobornost’ (roughly, spiritual collectivity or community within Orthodoxy). Russians were the greatest of the Slavs and possessed an abundance of vital, organic energy, humility, and brotherly love. In the pre-Petrine past they had lived freely and harmoniously, but Peter the Great introduced alien Western notions of rationalism, legalism, and formalism to Russia and destroyed the organic harmony of the nation. Rigid rules and impersonal procedures, in this romantic view, crushed the human element and the quality of mercy that had made Muscovy a community of love and faith.
随后的讨论将知识分子分为西化者，一派赞同理性主义、启蒙运动的俄罗斯议程——朝着普遍的现代主义欧洲方向进行改革——和亲斯拉夫派，他们主张对被认为构成俄罗斯传统的事物进行更保守、更怀旧的重建。虽然一些西化的自由主义者似乎对民族认同问题漠不关心甚至敌对，但那些被认定为亲斯拉夫主义者的人则全神贯注于寻找俄罗斯民族，描述它，并利用它的许多美德。他们追随欧洲浪漫主义者，将主要与农民相提并论的 narod [人民] 视为 narodnost'，即俄罗斯或斯拉夫人的基本特征。对阿列克谢·霍米亚科夫来说，民族性格包含在宗教或某种形式的宗教信仰中。 ${}^{48}$${}^{48}$^(48){ }^{48} 斯拉夫人是地球上最有灵性、最有艺术气息和才华的民族。他们热爱和平、博爱、自发、充满爱心和珍视自由，他们在爱和自由中实现所有人的有机统一体中的圆满，他称之为 sobornost'（大致为东正教内的精神集体或社区）。俄罗斯人是斯拉夫人中最伟大的，拥有丰富的生命力、有机能量、谦逊和兄弟之爱。在彼得大帝之前，他们过着自由和谐的生活，但彼得大帝将外来的西方理性主义、律法主义和形式主义概念引入俄罗斯，破坏了这个国家的有机和谐。在这种浪漫的观点中，僵化的规则和没有人情味的程序粉碎了使莫斯科公国成为爱和信仰社区的人性因素和怜悯的品质。

For Konstantin Aksakov and other Slavophiles, not only was Orthodox Christianity the essential heart of Slavic nature, but the peasant commune (communal village organization) was envisioned as “a union of the people who have renounced their egoism, their individuality, and who express their common accord.” Critical of the newly triumphant capitalism of the West, they feared the
对于康斯坦丁·阿克萨科夫 （Konstantin Aksakov） 和其他斯拉夫亲民者来说，不仅东正教是斯拉夫自然的基本核心，而且农民公社（公社村庄组织）也被设想为“放弃自我主义、个性并表达共同共识的人们的联盟”。他们批评新近胜利的西方资本主义，害怕
${}^{47}$${}^{47}$^(47){ }^{47} P. Chaadaev, Philosophical Letters and Apology of a Madman, trans. and introduced by MaryBarbara Zeldin (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1969), p. 174.
${}^{47}$${}^{47}$^(47){ }^{47} P. Chaadaev，《一个疯子的哲学书信和道歉》，玛丽·芭芭拉·泽尔丁译并介绍（诺克斯维尔：田纳西大学出版社，1969 年），第 174 页。
${}^{48}$${}^{48}$^(48){ }^{48} See Austin Jersild’s unpublished paper, “Khomiakov and Empire: Faith and Custom in the Borderlands,” presented at the AAASS annual convention, Boca Raton, Florida, September 26, 1998.
${}^{48}$${}^{48}$^(48){ }^{48} 参见 Austin Jersild 未发表的论文，“霍米亚科夫与帝国：边疆的信仰和习俗”，于 1998 年 9 月 26 日在佛罗里达州博卡拉顿举行的 AAASS 年会上发表。
depersonalization of human relations, the dominance of things over men, that came with private property. In Andrzjei Walicki’s telling analysis, Slavophilism was a “conservative utopianism” that defended community against the fragmenting effects of society. ${}^{49}$${}^{49}$^(49){ }^{49}
人际关系的非人格化，事物对人的支配，伴随着私有财产而来。在 Andrzjei Walicki 的生动分析中，斯拉夫主义是一种“保守的乌托邦主义”，它捍卫社区免受社会的分裂影响。 ${}^{49}$${}^{49}$^(49){ }^{49}

Though Slavophilism was in its origins “a cultivation of the native and primarily Slavic elements in the social life and culture of ancient Russia,” this conservative nationalism later blended into a larger concern with the whole of Slavdom (Pan-Slavism), rather than a focused development of Russian national character. Slavophile Russians advocated freedom for Slavic peoples ruled by the Ottoman Empire. In its Pan-Slavic incarnation, calls for Slavic fraternity adopted an ugly, aggressive stance vis-à-vis Russia’s Slavic neighbors, particularly the Catholic Poles, who were cast as rightfully subject to the manifestly superior Russians. ${}^{50}$${}^{50}$^(50){ }^{50}
尽管亲斯拉夫主义的起源是“在古代俄罗斯的社会生活和文化中培养本土和主要是斯拉夫元素”，但这种保守的民族主义后来融入了对整个斯拉夫统治（泛斯拉夫主义）的更大关注，而不是俄罗斯民族性格的集中发展。亲斯拉夫的俄罗斯人主张奥斯曼帝国统治下的斯拉夫人民获得自由。在其泛斯拉夫语的化身中，对斯拉夫兄弟会的呼吁对俄罗斯的斯拉夫邻国，特别是天主教波兰人采取了丑陋、咄咄逼人的立场，他们被描绘成理所当然地服从明显优越的俄罗斯人。 ${}^{50}$${}^{50}$^(50){ }^{50}

Both the state authorities and the Westernizer intellectuals rejected the Slavophile vision. For the autocracy, the repudiation of the Petrine reforms was an unacceptable challenge and the valorization of the people threatened to undermine the premises of autocracy, while for the Westernizers the Slavophile reading of the Russian past was a narcissistic fiction. Paul Bushkovitch observes that none of these lines of thought, not even the Slavophile philosophy, endorsed a fully ethnic vision of a sovereign Russian people apart from a state. ${}^{51}$${}^{51}$^(51){ }^{51} Their contribution to Russian political and social thought was of a different kind and built toward different solutions. The Westernizers themselves were divided between liberals who favored capitalist development and parliamentary democracy and the radicals who proposed a particularly Russian form of socialism that would avoid capitalism and build a unique future on the collectivist sentiments of the peasantry. From Alexander Herzen’s “Russian socialism” and the celebration of the peasant commune to the revolutionary populism of the 1870s, ideas of Russian exceptionalism, of overcoming the burdens of Western capitalism and moving straight on to a new communitarianism, dominated the left wing of the Russian intelligentsia.
国家当局和西化知识分子都拒绝了亲斯拉夫主义的愿景。对于专制政权来说，否定彼得林改革是一个不可接受的挑战，人民的价值化有可能破坏专制政权的前提，而对于西化者来说，亲斯拉夫主义对俄罗斯过去的解读是一种自恋的虚构。保罗·布什科维奇 （Paul Bushkovitch） 观察到，这些思路，甚至亲斯拉夫哲学，都没有赞同一个完全民族化的愿景，即一个独立于国家之外的俄罗斯主权人民。 ${}^{51}$${}^{51}$^(51){ }^{51} 他们对俄罗斯政治和社会思想的贡献是不同的，并且建立在不同的解决方案之上。西化者本身分为两派，一派是赞成资本主义发展和议会民主制的自由派，另一派是激进派，他们提出了一种特别俄罗斯形式的社会主义，这种社会主义将避免资本主义，并在农民的集体主义情感上建立一个独特的未来。从亚历山大·赫尔岑（Alexander Herzen）的“俄国社会主义”和对农民公社的庆祝到1870年代的革命民粹主义，俄国例外论的思想，即克服西方资本主义的负担并直接走向新的共产主义，主导了俄国知识分子的左翼。

Historians of the time entered the debate over the nature of the Russian nation and the effects of Peter the Great’s intervention, usually in opposition to the Slavophile interpretation. In a series of lectures in 1843-1844, Timofei Granovskii attacked the Slavophile idealization of the people. But more long-lasting was the work of the so-called statist school of Russian historians-Konstantin Kavelin, Boris Chicherin, and Sergei Solovev-who by proposing that the Russian state was the principal agent of progress in Russia’s history assured that state-centered narratives would dominate the subsequent historical discussion. The “nation,” while always present as a palimpsest, was overlaid by other more pressing social and political themes.
当时的历史学家参与了关于俄罗斯民族性质和彼得大帝干预影响的辩论，通常与亲斯拉夫派的解释相反。在 1843 年至 1844 年的一系列讲座中，蒂莫菲·格拉诺夫斯基 （Timofei Granovskii） 抨击了亲斯拉夫主义对人民的理想化。但更持久的是俄罗斯历史学家所谓的国家主义学派——康斯坦丁·卡维林、鲍里斯·奇切林和谢尔盖·索洛维夫——的工作，他们提出俄罗斯国家是俄罗斯历史进步的主要推动者，确保了以国家为中心的叙述将主导随后的历史讨论。“国家”虽然总是作为复写本出现，但被其他更紧迫的社会和政治主题所覆盖。

Even the conservative nationalist Mikhail Katkov (1818-1887), an influential journalist and political commentator, conceived of Russian identity as basically state-centered. Russian society was not ethnically homogeneous, and that condition had to be changed. Russification would provide the state with an appropriately unified ethnic nation below. Though his newspaper, Moskovskie Vedomosti [Moscow News], was very popular, his nationalist views had only limited appeal. The idea of a Pan-Slavic unity, perhaps headed by “the tsar of all the Slavs” and not just of Russia (an idea expressed by the poet Fedor Tiuchev among others), was continually undermined by the resistance of other Slavic peoples, most importantly the Poles, who not only did not share Orthodoxy with the Russians but whose whole self-identity was bound up in resistance to Russian domination. Closer to home, both Pan-Slavism and the more modest concept of the Russian people including both “Little Russians” (Ukrainians) and “White Russians” (Belorussians) as well as “Great Russians” was dealt a severe blow by an emerging separate national identity among Ukrainians. After the government suppressed in 1847 the shortlived Ukrainian Brotherhood of Cyril and Methodius, a radical Pan-Slavic group that advocated emancipation of the serfs and a federation of the Slavic peoples, it officially condemned Pan-Slavism as a dangerous and subversive doctrine. ${}^{52}$${}^{52}$^(52){ }^{52}
即使是保守的民族主义者米哈伊尔·卡特科夫（Mikhail Katkov，1818-1887 年），一位有影响力的记者和政治评论员，也认为俄罗斯的身份基本上是以国家为中心的。俄罗斯社会在种族上并不同质，这种状况必须改变。俄罗斯化将为该州提供一个适当统一的民族国家。尽管他的报纸 Moskovskie Vedomosti [莫斯科新闻] 非常受欢迎，但他的民族主义观点的吸引力有限。泛斯拉夫统一的想法，也许由“所有斯拉夫人的沙皇”领导，而不仅仅是俄罗斯（诗人费奥多尔·蒂切夫等人表达了这一想法），不断被其他斯拉夫民族的抵抗所破坏，最重要的是波兰人，他们不仅与俄罗斯人没有东正教信仰，而且他们的整个自我认同都与抵抗俄罗斯的统治联系在一起。在国内，泛斯拉夫主义和俄罗斯人民的更温和的概念，包括“小俄罗斯人”（乌克兰人）和“白俄罗斯人”（白俄罗斯人）以及“大俄罗斯人”，都受到了乌克兰人中新兴的独立民族身份的严重打击。1847 年，政府镇压了短命的乌克兰兄弟会西里尔和美多迪乌斯兄弟会（一个主张解放农奴和建立斯拉夫人民联盟的激进泛斯拉夫团体）后，它正式谴责泛斯拉夫主义是一种危险和颠覆性的教义。 ${}^{52}$${}^{52}$^(52){ }^{52}

All this interest in “the people” led some leading figures among the educated classes to take the next obvious step: to go out and study “the people.” While sentimentalized images of peasant purity had circulated in the previous century, those arcadian idylls were recognizably more imaginary than based on reality. In the 1830s, the Imperial Russian Geographic Society was founded and a flotilla of ethnographers set out to catalogue the costumes and customs of the many people of the empire. These gentleman-scholars took with them a host of preconceived notions about the folk cultures they would encounter, but nonetheless, they were able to gather a good deal of information. Initially intent on spanning the empire, their efforts quickly came to focus on the Russian peasantry over any other inhabitants of the realm. Their experience as they traveled across the roads of Russia were given a particular gloss and an exaggerated sense of coherence by the very fact that they had to stick to the routes built and maintained by the state and staffed by official coachmen. The ethnographers relied on their coachmen to explain what they saw and to pass the hours by singing laments. These coachmen, and the roads they traveled, shaped the impression of Russia brought back by learned investigators. ${}^{53}$${}^{53}$^(53){ }^{53}
所有这些对“人民”的兴趣导致受过教育的阶层中的一些领军人物采取了下一个明显的步骤：走出去研究“人民”。虽然农民纯洁的感伤形象在上个世纪流传开来，但那些田园诗般的田园诗显然更像是虚构的，而不是基于现实的。1830 年代，俄罗斯帝国地理学会成立，一群民族志学家开始对帝国许多人的服装和习俗进行分类。这些绅士学者带着许多关于他们将遇到的民间文化的先入为主的观念，但尽管如此，他们还是能够收集到大量信息。他们最初打算跨越整个帝国，但很快就将注意力集中在俄罗斯农民身上，而不是该王国的任何其他居民。他们穿越俄罗斯道路的经历被赋予了特殊的光彩和夸张的连贯感，因为他们必须坚持走由国家建造和维护并由官方马车夫配备的路线。民族志学家依靠他们的马车夫来解释他们所看到的，并通过唱歌哀歌来打发时间。这些马车夫和他们走过的道路塑造了博学的调查员带回的俄罗斯印象。 ${}^{53}$${}^{53}$^(53){ }^{53}
${}^{52}$${}^{52}$^(52){ }^{52} P. A. Zionchkovskii, Kirilo-Mefodievskoe obshchestvo (1846-1847) (Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1959); Faith Hillis, Children of Rus’: Right-Bank Ukraine and the Invention of a Russian Nation (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013).
${}^{52}$${}^{52}$^(52){ }^{52} P. A. Zionchkovskii， Kirilo-Mefodievskoe obshchestvo （1846-1847） （莫斯科：Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo universiteta， 1959）;费斯·希利斯，《罗斯之子：右岸乌克兰和俄罗斯国家的发明》（伊萨卡，纽约：康奈尔大学出版社，2013 年）。
${}^{53}$${}^{53}$^(53){ }^{53} John W. Randolph, “The Singing Coachman or, The Road and Russia’s Ethnographic Invention in Early Modern Times,” Journal of Early Modern History 11, nos. 1-2 (2007): 33-62; Nathaniel Knight, “Science, Empire, and Nationality: Ethnography in the Russian Geographical Society, 1845-1855,” in Imperial Russia: New Histories for the Empire, ed. Jane Burbank and David L. Ransel, pp. 108-42; Cathy A. Frierson, Peasant Icons: Representations of Rural People in Late Nineteenth-Century Russia (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).
${}^{53}$${}^{53}$^(53){ }^{53} John W. Randolph，“会唱歌的马车夫或，道路和俄罗斯在近代早期的民族志发明”，《近代早期历史杂志》第 11 期，第 1-2 期（2007 年）：33-62;纳撒尼尔·奈特，“科学、帝国和国籍：1845-1855 年俄罗斯地理学会的民族志”，载于《俄罗斯帝国：帝国的新历史》，简·伯班克和大卫·兰塞尔编辑，第 108-42 页;Cathy A. Frierson，《农民偶像：十九世纪末俄罗斯农村人民的表现》（纽约：牛津大学出版社，1993 年）。

Growing preoccupation with the Russian peasantry and with all the rich local varieties of their ethnographic customs might have encouraged a sense of regional loyalty-a commitment to the particular peasant customs in Province A or B-or an enthusiasm for “the provinces” as opposed to a broader national vision. Anne Lounsbery finds quite the contrary at work within Russian literary texts. Within Russia proper “the provinces” did not win intellectuals’ loyalties. The term did not actually refer to the country life of the peasantry, but rather to the stultifying world of provincial towns. Lounsbery finds in literary works the provinces shade into a homogeneous and indistinguishable nowhere, characterized by being “not the capitals,” “a mass of grimly uniform places in opposition to which the capitals took their meaning.” “So Saratov or Pskov? Take your pick: it usually matters little. What matters is the province-vs.-capital opposition and the fact that in Russian literature, the provinces as the embodiment of cultural lack are so often not merely drab or backward or philistine; . . . [r]ather, the provinces can be a version of hell itself, a place where banality threatens to intensify to the point of evil.” To explain why this should be so, Lounsbery returns to the question of Russia’s sense of backwardness relative to the West: in Europe, authors might mock provincials’ striving to emulate the cultural heights of Paris, but the status of Paris as true metropolis would never be subject to doubt. “In Russia provincialism is deeply worrisome because the provinciality of the provinces can be seen to reflect the provinciality and perhaps even the “inauthenticity” of the nation as a whole.” ${}^{54}$${}^{54}$^(54){ }^{54} The Russian capitals themselves, it was feared, were just as provincial as the actual provinces when held up to the daunting measuring stick of European metropolitan centers.
对俄国农民和他们所有丰富的地方民族志习俗的日益关注可能激发了一种区域忠诚度——对 A 省或 B 省特定农民习俗的承诺——或对“省份”的热情，而不是更广泛的国家愿景。安妮·隆斯贝里 （Anne Lounsbery） 在俄罗斯文学文本中发现了恰恰相反的情况。在俄国内部，真正的“省份”并没有赢得知识分子的忠诚。这个词实际上并不是指农民的乡村生活，而是指省城的愚蠢世界。Lounsbery 在文学作品中发现，各省被遮蔽成一个同质的、无法区分的无处可去，其特征是“不是首都”，是“一大堆严峻统一的地方，与首都的意义相对立”。“所以萨拉托夫还是普斯科夫？随便选一选：这通常无关紧要。重要的是省份与首都的对立，以及在俄罗斯文学中，作为文化缺失的体现的省份往往不仅仅是单调、落后或庸俗的;. . .相反，这些省份本身就是地狱的一个版本，一个平庸有可能加剧到邪恶地步的地方。为了解释为什么会这样，Lounsbery 回到了俄罗斯相对于西方的落后感问题：在欧洲，作者可能会嘲笑地方政府努力效仿巴黎的文化高度，但巴黎作为真正大都市的地位永远不会受到质疑。 “在俄罗斯，地方主义令人深感担忧，因为各省的省份性可以被视为反映了整个国家的省份性，甚至可能反映了整个国家的'不真实性'。” ${}^{54}$${}^{54}$^(54){ }^{54} 人们担心，当欧洲大都市中心的令人生畏的衡量标准面前，俄罗斯首都本身与实际的省份一样省级。

To this point we have discussed the ideas advanced by political authorities and by literate elites of various stripes. It proves far more difficult to discern popular ideas about “nationality” or identity. Since figures from the lower orders rarely recorded their perspectives, historians have to find creative ways to tap into their beliefs. Jeffrey Brooks attempts to do so by considering what ordinary Russians were likely to read and takes their reading choices as indicators of their views. He acknowledges that “We know little about the popular conception of what it meant to be Russian,” and finds that "the concept of a nation of peoples with shared loyalties was not well developed. ${}^{"55}\mathrm{He}$${}^{"55}\mathrm{He}$^("55)He{ }^{" 55} \mathrm{He} finds some clues in the recurrent themes of lubki, the popular broadsheets we have seen above, which consistently featured “the Orthodox Church, and, to a lesser extent, the tsar” as “the foremost emblems of Russianness throughout the nineteenth century.” 56 It is difficult, however, to disaggregate the “popular” content of the lubki from the messages we have already seen being purveyed from on high. In any case, this Orthodox conception of Russianness would have appealed to only a limited subset of the empire’s
在这一点上，我们已经讨论了政治当局和各派有文化的精英所提出的思想。事实证明，辨别关于“国籍”或身份的流行观念要困难得多。由于来自较低阶层的人物很少记录他们的观点，历史学家必须找到创造性的方法来挖掘他们的信仰。杰弗里·布鲁克斯 （Jeffrey Brooks） 试图通过考虑普通俄罗斯人可能阅读的内容并将他们的阅读选择作为他们观点的指标来做到这一点。他承认，“我们对俄罗斯人意味着什么的流行概念知之甚少”，并发现“一个由具有共同忠诚的人民组成的国家的概念并没有得到很好的发展。 ${}^{"55}\mathrm{He}$${}^{"55}\mathrm{He}$^("55)He{ }^{" 55} \mathrm{He} 我们在 lubki 反复出现的主题中找到了一些线索，我们在上面看到的那些流行的大报，它始终将“东正教，在较小程度上，沙皇”作为“整个 19 世纪俄罗斯性最重要的象征”。56 然而，很难将 lubki 的“流行”内容与我们已经看到的从高处传播的信息中分离出来。无论如何，这种东正教的俄罗斯性概念只会吸引帝国的一小部分人

population. Figuring out the extent to which a broader sense of imperial (Rossiiskii) awareness or identity had developed at this time poses an even more difficult question, and leads us again to the complex position of Russia’s non-Russian subjects within the empire.
人口。弄清楚此时更广泛的帝国 （Rossiiskii） 意识或身份感已经发展到什么程度提出了一个更加困难的问题，并再次将我们引向俄罗斯非俄罗斯臣民在帝国中的复杂地位。

Russia’s intensive engagement with Napoleon was perhaps the most dramatic of its foreign entanglements in the first half of the nineteenth century, but the empire grew apace in other directions as well and continually confronted the downstream consequences of its expansion. Siberia has sometimes been referred to as Russia’s first colony, and eventually it would become a region of intense Slavic settlement. Nicholas I sent the prominent statesman Mikhail Speranskii to survey his lands in Siberia and propose reforms to bring some order and good governance to the vast territory. The reform laws of 1822 set up a more transparent administration, curtailed the arbitrary rule of governors (to an extent), and granted the Siberian peoples, now classified as state peasants, self-governing institutions organized around clans and chosen elders. The statutes allowed indigenous Siberians to practice their religions, use their own languages in official business, and settle disputes according to their customs. Although the laws worked better on paper than in reality, and ultimate authority remained with Russian governors and bureaucrats, Speranskii’s reform established rules and practices that safeguarded to a degree the native peoples’ way of life until the end of the empire. ${}^{57}$${}^{57}$^(57){ }^{57}
俄罗斯与拿破仑的密切接触可能是 19 世纪上半叶最引人注目的外交纠葛，但帝国也在其他方向迅速发展，并不断面对其扩张的下游后果。西伯利亚有时被称为俄罗斯的第一个殖民地，最终它将成为斯拉夫人密集定居的地区。尼古拉一世派遣著名政治家米哈伊尔·斯佩兰斯基 （Mikhail Speranskii） 调查他在西伯利亚的土地，并提出改革建议，为这片广阔的领土带来一些秩序和良好的治理。1822 年的改革法建立了一个更加透明的政府，（在一定程度上）限制了总督的专制统治，并授予现在被归类为国家农民的西伯利亚人民以氏族和选定的长者为核心的自治机构。这些法规允许西伯利亚土著人信奉他们的宗教，在公务中使用他们自己的语言，并根据他们的习俗解决争端。尽管法律在纸面上比在现实中运作得更好，并且最终权力仍然掌握在俄罗斯总督和官僚手中，但斯佩兰斯基的改革建立了在一定程度上保护土著人民的生活方式的规则和做法，直到帝国灭亡。 ${}^{57}$${}^{57}$^(57){ }^{57}

At the same time, the native peoples found themselves enmeshed in the ethnographic trap of language and labeling. The slippery term inorodtsy meant literally, people of other blood or clan, and from the point of view of the Russians, it denoted particularly alien, and primitive peoples. The term took on strict legal definition in a related 1822 Ustav (statute) “on the administration of the inorodtsy.” "The Ustav placed in the category of inorodtsy various ‘Eastern’ peoples, mostly nomadic or semi-nomadic Siberian natives, whose way of life was based on herding, hunting or fishing. Subsequent nineteenth-century expansion to the south and east brought new ethnic groups into the empire, and a decision had to be made in each case whether or not a given ethnic group should be assigned to the category of inorodtsy. ${}^{58}$${}^{58}$^(58){ }^{58} The term took on disproportionate significance as its ethnographic meanings shifted and hardened into legal consequences, and its mobility inevitably raised questions about the mutability or immutability of such categories. As John Slocum writes:
与此同时，原住民发现自己陷入了语言和标签的民族志陷阱中。inorodtsy 这个滑稽的词语字面意思是其他血统或氏族的人，从俄罗斯人的角度来看，它特别表示外来的和原始的民族。该术语在 1822 年的相关 Usav（法规）中具有严格的法律定义，“关于 inorodtsy 的管理”。“乌斯塔夫人将各种'东方'民族归入伊诺罗茨的范畴，主要是游牧或半游牧的西伯利亚土著，他们的生活方式以放牧、狩猎或捕鱼为基础。随后的 19 世纪向南部和东部的扩张为帝国带来了新的民族，在每种情况下都必须决定是否应将特定民族归入 inorodtsy 类别。 ${}^{58}$${}^{58}$^(58){ }^{58} 随着其民族学含义的转变和硬化为法律后果，这个词具有不成比例的重要性，它的流动性不可避免地引发了对此类类别的可变性或不变性的质疑。正如约翰·斯洛库姆 （John Slocum） 所写的那样：

In 1835, Russia’s Jews were designated inorodtsy, despite the fact that Jews were a sedentary people and inhabited a European, rather than Asian milieu. The classification of Jews as inorodtsy points to a fundamental ambiguity in the underlying logic of this category: was it more an indicator of a given people’s purported level of civilized development, or a legal marker of racial difference? If the former was the case, a group categorized as inorodtsy could in principle eventually qualify for “promotion” out of this status, given Enlightenment-era notions of social evolution. ${}^{59}$${}^{59}$^(59){ }^{59}
1835 年，俄罗斯的犹太人被指定为 inorodtsy，尽管犹太人是一个久坐不动的民族，并且居住在欧洲而不是亚洲的环境中。将犹太人归类为 inorodtsy 表明了这一类别的基本逻辑存在根本的歧义：它更像是特定民族所声称的文明发展水平的指标，还是种族差异的法律标志？如果是前者的话，那么考虑到启蒙运动时期的社会进化观念，一个被归类为 inorodtsy 的群体原则上最终可能有资格从这种地位中“晋升”。 ${}^{59}$${}^{59}$^(59){ }^{59}

If the latter were the case, and differences were biological, physiological, then presumably characteristics of inorodtsy would be understood as immutable. Russians are generally said to have been indifferent to the category of race, but Slocum challenges that easy assumption, reminding us that these were questions very much open to debate in the early nineteenth century, and even more as time progressed.
如果是后者，并且差异是生物学的、生理的，那么 inorodtsy 的特征可能会被理解为不变的。通常说俄罗斯人对种族类别漠不关心，但斯洛库姆挑战了这个简单的假设，提醒我们，这些问题在 19 世纪初是非常有争议的辩论，随着时间的推移甚至更多。

It is difficult to gain access to the experience of Siberia’s native peoples in this era or to assess their impressions of the empire, although some good work makes inroads in this direction. ${}^{60}$${}^{60}$^(60){ }^{60} More accessible are members of the Russian administrative and intellectual elite who served the empire in its distant reaches. One of the peculiarities of the Siberian case, later to be replicated in Central Asia as well, was that many of the key figures who staffed its ministries, served as governors, or oversaw its reforms were sent to the region as exiles. Mark Soderstrom examines the copious writings of some of these figures, some exiled, others simply blocked in their career aspirations and subject to the derogatory attitudes toward these ultimate provincials held by their more cosmopolitan counterparts in the capitals. He finds well-educated men, typical of the “enlightened bureaucrats” of the age, who were deeply committed to improving the realm, while also unambiguously attached to the monarchy, the principle of absolutism, and the person of Nicholas I, the tsar who has one of the darkest reputations for autocratic, repressive rule of all Russian rulers. In their writings they demonstrated almost religious commitment to this unlikely figure as the path to enlightenment and benefactor of all his subjects.
要了解西伯利亚原住民在这个时代的经历或评估他们对帝国的印象是很困难的，尽管一些优秀的工作朝着这个方向取得了进展。 ${}^{60}$${}^{60}$^(60){ }^{60} 更容易接近的是俄罗斯行政和知识精英，他们在遥远的帝国范围内为帝国服务。西伯利亚案例的一个特点是，许多为中亚各部工作、担任州长或监督其改革的关键人物都被流放到该地区。马克·索德斯特罗姆 （Mark Soderstrom） 研究了其中一些人物的大量著作，其中一些被流放，另一些只是阻碍了他们的职业抱负，并受到首都更国际化的同行对这些终极地方人物的贬损态度。他发现受过良好教育的人是那个时代“开明官僚”的典型代表，他们坚定地致力于改善领域，同时也明确地依附于君主制、专制主义原则，以及尼古拉一世的人，这位沙皇因所有俄罗斯统治者中最黑暗的专制、压迫统治而声名狼藉。在他们的著作中，他们展示了对这个不太可能的人物的近乎宗教的承诺，将其视为通往启蒙的道路和他所有臣民的恩人。

Where scholarship has long understood the regime’s attention to crafting its own image, Soderstrom’s research sheds light on the difficult problem of reception. Like Anna Labzina half a century earlier, these Siberian officials show in their writings that they had fully internalized the idea of autocracy as the best and only path for Russia. Particularly Peter Slovtsov, exiled, like so many of his contemporaries, and barred from service in the capitals, is a fascinating case. He expressed an ongoing commitment to the imperial regime and also was convinced that his knowledge of Siberia would allow him and his protégé, Ivan Kalashnikov, to make important contributions to furthering the imperial mission.
学术界早就明白该政权对塑造自身形象的关注，而索德斯特罗姆的研究则揭示了接受的难题。就像半个世纪前的安娜·拉布齐娜一样，这些西伯利亚官员在他们的著作中表明，他们已经完全内化了专制的理念，认为这是俄罗斯最好和唯一的道路。特别是彼得·斯洛夫佐夫，他和他的许多同时代人一样被流放，并被禁止在首都服役，这是一个引人入胜的案例。他表达了对帝国政权的持续承诺，并且还相信他对西伯利亚的了解将使他和他的门徒伊万·卡拉什尼科夫 （Ivan Kalashnikov） 能够为推进帝国使命做出重要贡献。

They combined a fierce commitment to empire with a strong sense of attachment to Siberia itself. ${}^{61}$${}^{61}$^(61){ }^{61} Their political loyalism found a counterpart in a literary Siberia that also found voice in this period. ${}^{62}$${}^{62}$^(62){ }^{62}
他们结合了对帝国的强烈承诺和对西伯利亚本身的强烈依恋感。 ${}^{61}$${}^{61}$^(61){ }^{61} 他们的政治忠诚主义在文学西伯利亚找到了对应物，西伯利亚文学也在这个时期找到了声音。 ${}^{62}$${}^{62}$^(62){ }^{62}

Their regionalism highlights yet another mode of affiliation that complicates the empire-nation binary. Lounsbery observes that this kind of regionalism surfaces almost exclusively in literary works situated in “borderland spaces-nonand semi-Russian places like Siberia, Ukraine, the Caucasus, Crimea, the Asian steppe, and even the Baltics,” where the particularities of the region add to the impact of the work. Pushkin’s “Prisoner of the Caucasus,” discussed below, or Gogol’s Ukrainian tales exemplify this pattern. “In the Russian cultural imaginary the empire’s various borderlands and frontiers are most often opposed to ‘Russia,’ so that the presence of all these less-than-Russian spaces within the territorially unified empire perhaps even intensified the tendency to collapse the heterogeneous regions of European Russia into the idea of ‘the provinces’.” ${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3}
他们的地区主义凸显了另一种使帝国-国家二元对立复杂化的归属模式。Lounsbery 观察到，这种地方主义几乎只出现在位于“边陲空间——非俄罗斯和半俄罗斯地方，如西伯利亚、乌克兰、高加索、克里米亚、亚洲草原甚至波罗的海”的文学作品中，该地区的特殊性增加了作品的影响力。普希金的《高加索囚徒》（下文讨论）或果戈理的乌克兰故事就是这种模式的例证。“在俄罗斯文化想象中，帝国的各种边疆和边界往往与'俄罗斯'相对立，因此，在领土统一的帝国中，所有这些不如俄罗斯的空间的存在，甚至可能加剧了将欧洲俄罗斯的异质地区瓦解为'省份'概念的趋势。” ${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3}

The nineteenth century opened with successful advances in the South Caucasus, with the incorporation of Georgia and Persian Armenia. In later decades, securely positioned in the lowland valleys of Georgia, Armenia, and what would become Azerbaijan, Russia turned its acquisitive gaze to the highlands, to the far more challenging North Caucasus, where it became mired in fierce war against the “mountain people,” a struggle with echoes even today in Chechnya and Dagestan. On the western front, the promising overtures of Alexander to his Polish subjects in 1816 soured in subsequent decades, leading to the Polish November Insurrection of 1830, and this “betrayal” in turn colored imperial policies toward the heterogeneous populations of the Ukrainian, Ruthenian, and Baltic lands.
19 世纪以南高加索的成功进步开始，格鲁吉亚和波斯亚美尼亚合并。在后来的几十年里，俄罗斯安全地坐落在格鲁吉亚、亚美尼亚和后来的阿塞拜疆的低地山谷中，将其收购的目光转向了高地，转向了更具挑战性的北高加索地区，在那里它陷入了与“山区人民”的激烈战争的泥潭，这场斗争甚至在今天在车臣和达吉斯坦都有回声。在西线，亚历山大在 1816 年向他的波兰臣民提出的充满希望的示好在随后的几十年里变质，导致了 1830 年的波兰十一月起义，而这种“背叛”反过来又为帝国对乌克兰、鲁塞尼亚和波罗的海土地上的异质人口的政策增添了色彩。

Russia had long-standing contacts with the Georgian and Armenian populations of the South Caucasus, and was generally viewed as a protective force shielding the region’s Christians from Persian and Ottoman oppression. When Russia incorporated Georgia in 1801 and the former khanate of Erevan in 1828, its dominion seems to have been welcomed by its new subjects, at least by the Christians. Some Muslims chose to exit and migrated to the Ottoman and Persian Empires; others chose loyalty and stayed under the sway of the Orthodox emperor. Official documents made much of the fact that Russia had been invited into these regions. Since Russian officials always kept an eye on their Western counterparts and compared themselves to those other empires, their reception in the Caucasus allowed them to tout themselves as liberators and to pat themselves
俄罗斯与南高加索地区的格鲁吉亚和亚美尼亚人口有着长期的联系，通常被视为保护该地区的基督徒免受波斯和奥斯曼帝国压迫的保护力量。当俄罗斯于 1801 年合并格鲁吉亚并于 1828 年合并前埃里温汗国时，其统治似乎受到了新臣民的欢迎，至少受到基督教徒的欢迎。一些穆斯林选择退出并迁移到奥斯曼帝国和波斯帝国;其他人选择忠诚，留在东正教皇帝的支配下。官方文件大肆渲染了俄罗斯被邀请进入这些地区的事实。由于俄罗斯官员总是密切关注他们的西方同行，并将自己与其他帝国进行比较，因此他们在高加索地区的接待使他们能够吹捧自己是解放者并拍拍自己

on the back as a kinder, gentler empire. Favorable policies allowed Armenians to maintain a large degree of autonomous self-rule within local communities and empowered the Catholicos, the head of the Armenian church, to supervise religious and spiritual matters and to impose censorship on Armenian works published anywhere in the empire, to establish and run religious schools, and to call on state forces to enforce his decisions.
背面是一个更善良、更温和的帝国。有利的政策使亚美尼亚人能够在当地社区内保持很大程度的自治，并授权亚美尼亚教会的领袖天主教徒监督宗教和精神事务，对在帝国任何地方出版的亚美尼亚作品进行审查，建立和经营宗教学校，并呼吁国家力量执行他的决定。

At the same time, Russian rhetoric circulated deprecating and even vicious stereotypes of their new subjects. Armenians in many ways benefited from their inclusion in the empire and even from the cultural stereotypes about them that Russians believed to be true. In particular, the entrenched image of Armenians as able merchants and traders worked in their favor, leading first Catherine II and then her grandson to privilege them with tax exemptions and permission to travel freely both within the empire and abroad. In the anomalous treatment of Armenia and Armenians, we see once again the persistence of patterns of differential rights. As Ann Stoler observes about empires as a general phenomenon: "imperial formations are macropolities whose technologies of rule thrive on the production of exceptions and their uneven and changing proliferation."64
与此同时，俄罗斯的言论流传着对他们新主题的嘲讽甚至恶毒的刻板印象。亚美尼亚人在许多方面都受益于他们被纳入帝国，甚至受益于俄罗斯人认为是真实的对他们的文化刻板印象。特别是，亚美尼亚人作为有能力的商人和商人的根深蒂固的形象对他们有利，导致叶卡捷琳娜二世和她的孙子赋予他们免税特权，并允许他们在帝国内外自由旅行。在对亚美尼亚和亚美尼亚人的异常待遇中，我们再次看到了不同权利模式的持续存在。正如安·斯托勒 （Ann Stoler） 将帝国作为一种普遍现象所观察到的那样：“帝国形态是宏观的政体，其统治技术在例外的产生及其不均衡和不断变化的增殖中蓬勃发展。64

Armenians had long been scattered about the world, forming settlements from India to Italy. After centuries of dispersion, they lacked a coherent sense of themselves as a people or nation distinct from an ethnoreligious community. The newly established Armianskaia oblast’ (Armenian Region) attracted nearly 100,000 Armenians from Persia and Turkey, which increased interaction and exchange among members of this reassembled diaspora. Occurring as it did in the early nineteenth century, this condensation coincided with the explosion in thinking and writing about national identity. Ideas about nationality funneled into Russian Armenia through the work of Armenians educated in Venice, one of the leading centers of Armenian intellectual life. Armenian national thinkers, however, were not in a position to militate for national sovereignty or independence, nor, given their appreciation for their new “liberation” from Muslim rulers and their favorable position within the Russian empire, did they particularly want to do so. Instead, as we have seen in other cases, they paired their commitment to Armenian identity with solid loyalty to the empire. In his study of Armenian history, Ronald Suny labels them the “Armenian patriotic intelligentsia.” ${}^{65}$${}^{65}$^(65){ }^{65} Their patriotism in this case was for the state that protected them, and the culture that offered, from their perspective, attractive benefits of membership, that is, Western-style education, opportunities for advancement, and roads to enrichment.
亚美尼亚人长期以来一直分散在世界各地，形成了从印度到意大利的定居点。经过几个世纪的分散，他们缺乏一种连贯的意识，即自己是一个不同于民族宗教社区的民族或国家。新成立的亚美尼亚州（Armianskaia oblast'）（亚美尼亚地区）吸引了来自波斯和土耳其的近 100,000 名亚美尼亚人，这增加了这些重新聚集的侨民之间的互动和交流。就像 19 世纪初一样，这种凝结与关于国家身份的思考和写作的爆炸式增长相吻合。关于国籍的观念通过在威尼斯接受教育的亚美尼亚人的工作流入俄罗斯亚美尼亚，威尼斯是亚美尼亚知识生活的主要中心之一。然而，亚美尼亚民族思想家们并没有能力为国家主权或独立而战，而且，考虑到他们对从穆斯林统治者手中“解放”的赞赏以及他们在俄罗斯帝国内的有利地位，他们并不是特别想这样做。相反，正如我们在其他案例中看到的那样，他们将对亚美尼亚身份的承诺与对帝国的坚定忠诚相结合。在他对亚美尼亚历史的研究中，罗纳德·苏尼 （Ronald Suny） 将他们称为“亚美尼亚爱国知识分子”。 ${}^{65}$${}^{65}$^(65){ }^{65} 在这种情况下，他们的爱国主义是为了保护他们的国家，以及从他们的角度来看，这种文化提供了有吸引力的会员资格的好处，即西式教育、晋升机会和致富之路。

The Armenians and Georgians had religious reasons to welcome Russian dominion. More surprising perhaps were those Muslim populations that also made common cause with the Russians as they continued to penetrate into the steppe,
亚美尼亚人和格鲁吉亚人有宗教理由欢迎俄罗斯的统治。也许更令人惊讶的是，那些穆斯林人口在继续渗透到草原时也与俄罗斯人建立了共同的事业。

Crimea, the Caucasus, and Central Asia in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
18 世纪末和 19 世纪初的克里米亚、高加索和中亚。

Following patterns set by Catherine the Great, the Russian state relied on the structures and institutions of the imamate that the regime itself had established and supported as an instrument of imperial rule. In the early nineteenth century, however, and particularly in the wake of the Polish uprising of 1830 , the Russian authorities grew wary of non-Orthodox clergies, and inserted themselves in disputes between ordinary Muslims and the clergy. Parallel to the particular forms of attachment to empire that we have seen among Armenians, some Russian Muslims articulated an imperial form of loyalty that allowed them to maintain a clear sense of their communal religious identity while at the same time claiming proud membership in the broader community of imperial subjects. ${}^{66}$${}^{66}$^(66){ }^{66}
遵循叶卡捷琳娜大帝设定的模式，俄罗斯国家依赖于政权本身作为帝国统治工具建立并支持的伊玛目结构和机构。然而，在 19 世纪初，特别是在 1830 年波兰起义之后，俄罗斯当局对非东正教神职人员变得警惕，并介入了普通穆斯林和神职人员之间的争论。与我们在亚美尼亚人中看到的特殊形式的帝国依恋平行，一些俄罗斯穆斯林表达了一种帝国形式的忠诚，使他们能够保持对自己公共宗教身份的明确认识，同时声称自己在更广泛的帝国臣民社区中享有自豪的成员身份。 ${}^{66}$${}^{66}$^(66){ }^{66}

For the most part, imperial power worked through, not against, the religious institutions of its varied population. Conversion still remained largely off the table. Robert Crews writes: “For millions of tsarist subjects, the state did more than tolerate other confessions; it presented itself as a defender of certain forms of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Protestantism, and other faiths.” ${}^{\text{"}}$${}^{\text{" }}$^("" "){ }^{\text {" }} Only later did the series of Russian-Ottoman wars, particularly the Crimean War (1853-1856) and the War of 1877-1878, and the growth of nationalism among Poles and other subject peoples, give rise to Russian anxieties about the loyalty of the empire’s Muslims. Conservative Russian nationalists, like Mikhail Katkov and the novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky, questioned the policy of tolerance. As Russian Pan-Slav writers fantasized about the unity of all Slavic peoples, observers feared that parallel ideologies, Pan-Turkism or Pan-Islamism, might seduce Muslims within Russia to support the Ottomans. While the policy of tolerance continued until the end of the empire, powerful voices proclaimed that the diversity of faiths weakened the empire and that Russia should follow the lead of European nationstates and work toward greater homogenization of its population. Yet even in the revolution of 1905 and the period of constitutional monarchy from 1905 to 1917, Muslims continued to work within the system to the extent that they were able, electing representatives to the state dumas and petitioning for civil rights and equal treatment.
在大多数情况下，皇权通过而不是对抗其不同人口的宗教机构发挥作用。转换在很大程度上仍然没有被考虑。罗伯特·克鲁斯写道：“对于数百万沙皇臣民来说，国家所做的不仅仅是容忍其他的供词;它把自己描绘成某些形式的伊斯兰教、犹太教、佛教、新教和其他信仰的捍卫者。 ${}^{\text{"}}$${}^{\text{" }}$^("" "){ }^{\text {" }} 直到后来，俄罗斯-奥斯曼帝国的一系列战争，特别是克里米亚战争（1853-1856 年）和 1877-1878 年战争，以及波兰人和其他附属民族中民族主义的增长，才引起了俄罗斯对帝国穆斯林忠诚度的焦虑。保守的俄罗斯民族主义者，如米哈伊尔·卡特科夫（Mikhail Katkov）和小说家费奥多尔·陀思妥耶夫斯基（Fyodor Dostoevsky），对宽容政策提出了质疑。当俄罗斯泛斯拉夫作家幻想所有斯拉夫民族的团结时，观察家们担心平行的意识形态，泛突厥主义或泛伊斯兰主义，可能会诱使俄罗斯国内的穆斯林支持奥斯曼帝国。虽然宽容政策一直持续到帝国灭亡，但强大的声音宣称信仰的多样性削弱了帝国，俄罗斯应该效仿欧洲民族国家的做法，努力实现其人口的更大同质化。然而，即使在 1905 年的革命和 1905 年至 1917 年的君主立宪制时期，穆斯林仍然在他们力所能及的范围内继续在体制内工作，选举代表进入国家大仲马，并为公民权利和平等待遇请愿。

Significantly, Russia cast itself as defender of only certain forms of religion. One that fell decidedly outside of the zone of protection was the form of Sufism that played a critical role in mobilizing the armed resistance of the peoples of the North Caucasus-Chechens, Circassians, Avars, Kumyks, Kabardinians, and Adyghes-to Russian incursions. The great range of the Caucasian Mountains, the highest mountains in Europe, is known as the “Mountain of Tongues”
值得注意的是，俄罗斯将自己塑造成只捍卫某些形式的宗教。苏菲主义形式明显落在保护区之外，它在动员北高加索人民（车臣人、切尔克斯人、阿瓦尔人、库梅克人、卡巴尔丁人和阿迪赫斯人）武装抵抗俄罗斯入侵方面发挥了关键作用。高加索山脉是欧洲最高的山脉，被称为“舌头山”
${}^{66}\mathrm{On}$${}^{66}\mathrm{On}$^(66)On{ }^{66} \mathrm{On} the oldest Muslim community in the Russian Empire, the Volga Tatars, see Michael Kemper,
${}^{66}\mathrm{On}$${}^{66}\mathrm{On}$^(66)On{ }^{66} \mathrm{On} 俄罗斯帝国最古老的穆斯林社区，伏尔加鞑靼人，见迈克尔·肯佩尔，
“Imperial Russia as Dar al-Islam? Nineteenth-Century Debates on Ijtihad and Taqlid Among the Volga Tatars,” Islamic Law and Society: A Global Perspective, guest ed. Sabrina Joseph, special issue of Encounters: An International Journal for the Study of Culture and Society 6 (Fall 2015): 95-124.
“俄罗斯帝国作为 Dar al-Islam？十九世纪伏尔加鞑靼人关于伊提哈德和塔克利德的辩论“，伊斯兰法律与社会：全球视角，客座编辑萨布丽娜·约瑟夫，《相遇：文化与社会研究国际期刊》特刊 6（2015 年秋季）：95-124。
${}^{67}$${}^{67}$^(67){ }^{67} Crews, For Prophet and Tsar, p. 2.
${}^{67}$${}^{67}$^(67){ }^{67} 克鲁斯，《先知与沙皇》，第 2 页。

Map 6.2. Russian expansion in the Caucasus.
地图 6.2.俄罗斯在高加索地区的扩张。
because of its huge diversity of languages and peoples. Most North Caucasians are Muslims but many are Christian or practice local religious rites. Ruled by khans and chieftains, imams and sheiks, the Caucasians were nominally under the rule of the Ottomans from the early sixteenth century. At about the same time, Ivan the Terrible expanded his realm southward to Astrakhan on the Caspian Sea and settled Cossacks on the Terek River just north of the Caucasian Mountains. From the 1780s, when Russians began creeping into the region, a series of Sufi leaders declared holy war against the invaders. In the late eighteenth century, Russians built the “Georgian Military Highway” through the mountains to link Russia with the Georgian kingdoms to which they pledged support. In the 1820 s, taking advantage of a period of weakness of the two powers that had traditionally held sway in the region, Persia and Turkey, Russia began edging into
因为它的语言和民族的巨大多样性。大多数北高加索人是穆斯林，但许多人是基督教徒或参加当地的宗教仪式。高加索人由可汗和酋长、伊玛目和酋长统治，从 16 世纪初开始，高加索人名义上处于奥斯曼人的统治之下。大约在同一时间，伊凡雷帝将他的领土向南扩展到里海的阿斯特拉罕，并在高加索山脉以北的捷列克河上定居了哥萨克人。从 1780 年代开始，当俄罗斯人开始悄悄进入该地区时，一系列苏菲派领袖向侵略者宣战。18 世纪末，俄罗斯人修建了穿越群山的“格鲁吉亚军事公路”，将俄罗斯与他们承诺支持的格鲁吉亚王国连接起来。在 1820 年代，利用传统上在该地区占据主导地位的两个大国波斯和土耳其的虚弱时期，俄罗斯开始逐渐介入
the region more forcibly, sparking what would prove to be a long (endless), murderous war.
该地区更加强硬，引发了一场漫长（无休止的）杀戮战争。

Initially the Russians attempted to implement their usual technique of coopting local elites, but the region proved frustratingly fractious and fractured. Identifying a set of elites with any real authority was difficult, and the absence of a single, unified political entity made the usual approach impracticable. In campaigns against the elusive tribesmen of the mountains, the Russian Empire set aside its general preference for ruling through difference and instead adopted a horrific path toward eradication. The “special deal” prescribed for the North Caucasians was an immeasurably grim one. In 1829, following an important victory over Persian forces that opened the path for Russian advance, Nicholas I bluntly urged General Paskiewicz to “set his sights on a glorious and most vital enterprise of direct utility [to Russia]-the permanent pacification of the mountain peoples or the annihilation of those who do not submit.” ${}^{58}$${}^{58}$^(58){ }^{58} Since submission was not forthcoming, annihilation became Russian policy. Passing through the mountainous region in 1829, the great poet Alexander Pushkin reported in short, abrupt sentences the results of this bloodthirsty policy: “The Circassians hate us. We have driven them from their pastures; whole auls [villages, settlements, encampments] belonging to them have been sacked; entire clans destroyed.” ${}^{"69}$${}^{"69}$^("69){ }^{" 69}
最初，俄罗斯人试图实施他们惯用的拉拢当地精英的技巧，但事实证明，该地区令人沮丧地动荡不安和四分五裂。确定一组拥有任何真正权威的精英是困难的，而且缺乏一个单一的、统一的政治实体使得通常的方法变得不切实际。在对抗山区难以捉摸的部落居民的战役中，俄罗斯帝国抛弃了通过差异进行统治的普遍偏好，而是走上了一条可怕的消灭之路。为北高加索人规定的“特殊交易”是不可估量的严峻交易。1829 年，在战胜波斯军队为俄国的进军开辟了道路后，尼古拉一世直言不讳地敦促帕斯基维奇将军“将目光投向一项对 [俄国] 直接有用的光荣和最重要的事业——永久安抚山区人民或消灭那些不屈服的人。 ${}^{58}$${}^{58}$^(58){ }^{58} 由于没有投降，歼灭成为俄罗斯的政策。1829 年，伟大的诗人亚历山大·普希金 （Alexander Pushkin） 经过山区，用简短而突兀的句子描述了这种嗜血政策的后果：“切尔克斯人憎恨我们。我已将他们从他们的牧场上赶走;属于他们的整个 auls[村庄、定居点、营地] 都被洗劫一空;整个部落都被摧毁了。 ${}^{"69}$${}^{"69}$^("69){ }^{" 69}

Russia’s bitter and bloody war with the native peoples was marked by the “policies of terror” employed by General Aleksei Ermolov, the tsar’s all-powerful viceroy in the Caucasus (1816-1827). The largest and most tragic ethnic cleansing of non-Russians in the tsarist empire followed the defeat of the North Caucasian peoples in the prolonged wars in the mountains that stretched from the middle of the reign of Alexander I through the entire rule of Nicholas I into the early years of Alexander II (roughly 1817 to 1864). One might even note that violent conflicts between Chechens and other mountain peoples and the Russian state have continued until the present. ${}^{70}$${}^{70}$^(70){ }^{70}
俄罗斯与土著人民的苦涩血腥战争以沙皇在高加索地区全能的总督阿列克谢·埃尔莫洛夫将军（1816-1827 年）所采用的“恐怖政策”为标志。从亚历山大一世统治中期到尼古拉一世的整个统治，再到亚历山大二世的早期（大约 1817 年至 1864 年），北高加索人民在山区的长期战争中战败，之后沙皇帝国对非俄罗斯人进行了规模最大、最悲惨的种族清洗。人们甚至可能会注意到，车臣人和其他山区人民与俄罗斯国家之间的暴力冲突一直持续到现在。 ${}^{70}$${}^{70}$^(70){ }^{70}

The mountaineers rose repeatedly to resist the Russian conquest, eventually rallying around powerful charismatic Islamic leaders. Preaching and enforcing strict sharia law, banning vices such as drinking, smoking, dancing, and unregulated relations between men and women, the imams successfully organized the local tribes to fight the invaders for decades. The most effective leader was Shamil, who during the Crimean War even threatened the Russians’ Caucasian capital, Tiflis. The rebels of the Caucasus were effectively allies of the Ottoman enemies of the tsarist state. The Europeans planned to invade the Caucasus and join up with the anti-Russian resistance, but the end of the Crimean War
登山者们反复崛起抵抗俄罗斯的征服，最终团结在强大而有魅力的伊斯兰领袖周围。伊玛目们宣扬和执行严格的伊斯兰教法，禁止饮酒、吸烟、跳舞等恶习，以及不受管制的男女关系，几十年来，伊玛目成功地组织了当地部落与侵略者作战。最有效的领导人是沙米尔，他在克里米亚战争期间甚至威胁到俄罗斯的高加索首都蒂弗利斯。高加索地区的叛乱者实际上是沙皇国家的奥斯曼敌人的盟友。欧洲人计划入侵高加索地区并与反俄抵抗运动联合起来，但克里米亚战争结束了
${}^{68}$${}^{68}$^(68){ }^{68} Quoted in Gary Hamburg, “War of Worlds: Commentary on the Two Texts in Their Historical Context,” in Russian-Muslim Confrontation in the Caucasus: Alternative Visions of the Conflict between Imam Shamil and the Russians, 1830-1859, ed. Gary Hamburg and Thomas Sanders, Soas/ Routledge Studies on the Middle East (Abingdon, Oxon, and New York: Routledge, 2004), p. 157.
${}^{68}$${}^{68}$^(68){ }^{68} 引自加里·汉堡（Gary Hamburg）的《世界大战：历史背景下对两篇文本的评论》（War of Worlds： Commentary on the Two Texts in Their Historical Context），载于《高加索地区的俄穆斯林对抗：伊玛目沙米尔与俄国人之间冲突的另类视角，1830-1859年》（Russian-Muslim Confrontation in the Caucas： Alternative Visions of the Conflict between Imam Shamil and the Russians， 1830-1859），加里·汉堡（Gary Hamburg）和托马斯·桑德斯（Thomas Sanders）编，《亚非/劳特利奇中东研究》（Abingdon， Oxon， and New York： Routledge， 2004），第157页。
${}^{69}$${}^{69}$^(69){ }^{69} Quoted in ibid.
${}^{69}$${}^{69}$^(69){ }^{69} 引自同上。
${}^{70}$${}^{70}$^(70){ }^{70} Vladimir O. Bobrovnikov, Musul’mane Severnogo Kavkaza: obychai, pravo, nasilie. Ocherki po istorii i etnografii prava Nagornogo Dagestana (Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura RAN, 2002).
${}^{70}$${}^{70}$^(70){ }^{70} Vladimir O. Bobrovnikov， Musul'mane Severnogo Kavkaza： obychai， pravo， nasilie.Ocherki po istorii i etnografii prava Nagornogo Dagestana （Moscow： Vostochnaia literatura RAN， 2002）.
allowed the Russians to subdue the Caucasians.
让俄罗斯人征服了高加索人。

In the early 1860 s the Russian authorities decided to reduce the vulnerability of their Caucasian frontier by ridding the region of certain peoples. They first removed Adyghe and Cherkess (Circassian) tribes and settled Cossacks on their lands. These policies encouraged the mass emigration of hundreds of thousands of North Caucasians southward to the Ottoman Empire. Alexander Knysh writes,
在 1860 年代初期，俄罗斯当局决定通过清除该地区的某些民族来减少高加索边境的脆弱性。他们首先驱逐了 Adyghe 和 Cherkess（切尔克斯）部落，并在他们的土地上定居了哥萨克人。这些政策鼓励了数十万北高加索人向南移民到奥斯曼帝国。Alexander Knysh 写道：

The refugees were motivated by a variety of factors, such as the dislocation and resentment produced by the Russian resettlement schemes and oppressive rule, hopes for a happy life under friendly Muslim rule in
难民的动机有多种因素，例如俄罗斯重新安置计划和压迫统治产生的流离失所和怨恨，以及在友好的穆斯林统治下过上幸福生活的希望

Shamil, c. 1860. Anatolia (inspired in part by Ottoman propaganda), and the religious rulings issued by Muslim religious authorities, which proclaimed living under infidel rule to be a grave sin for any Muslim who had other options. Once the emigrants found themselves on board ships headed for Ottoman Turkey, they were readily preyed upon by Ottoman slave-traders and greedy crews who charged their passengers by the head and therefore packed as many of them as possible into each ship. ${}^{71}$${}^{71}$^(71){ }^{71}
沙米尔，约 1860 年。安纳托利亚（部分受到奥斯曼帝国宣传的启发）和穆斯林宗教权威发布的宗教裁决，这些裁决宣称生活在异教徒统治下对任何有其他选择的穆斯林来说都是严重的罪过。一旦移民发现自己登上了开往奥斯曼土耳其的船只，他们很容易被奥斯曼奴隶贩子和贪婪的船员捕食，他们抓住乘客的头颅，因此将尽可能多的乘客装进每艘船。 ${}^{71}$${}^{71}$^(71){ }^{71}

Upwards of half a million Caucasians fled, half of whom would perish on the journey. Other hundreds of thousands were moved by the Russian government to places where they could be supervised more closely by Cossacks. Sporadic revolts continued, most notably during the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878, but essentially the Caucasus became part of the Russian Empire though never fully pacified or effectively integrated into the imperial administration.
超过五十万白种人逃离，其中一半人将在旅途中丧生。其他数十万人被俄罗斯政府转移到可以受到哥萨克人更密切监督的地方。零星的起义仍在继续，尤其是在 1877 年至 1878 年的俄土战争期间，但从本质上讲，高加索地区成为俄罗斯帝国的一部分，尽管从未完全平定或有效地融入帝国政府。

The battle lines during this conflict were less clear-cut than a “holy war” or “clash of civilizations” explanation would suggest. A century of varied interactions between Russians and the people of the mountains had produced an assortment of people of mixed allegiances, affiliations, and loyalties that profoundly complicated any easy claims about imperial powers and colonized subjects. Hadji Murat, an Avar warrior who became the protagonist of Tolstoy’s 1904 novella, moved back and forth
这场冲突中的战线并不像“圣战”或“文明冲突”的解释所暗示的那样清晰。一个世纪以来，俄罗斯人和山区人民之间的各种互动产生了各种各样的人，他们有着不同的效忠、隶属关系和忠诚，这使得任何关于帝国主义强权和殖民地臣民的简单主张都变得非常复杂。哈吉·穆拉特 （Hadji Murat） 是一位阿瓦尔战士，后来成为托尔斯泰 1904 年中篇小说的主人公，他来回移动

between the forces of the resistance and the Russians, driven by personal experiences and jarred by assaults on his dignity and his family rather than by any rigid cultural attachments. In another short novel, “The Cossacks,” Tolstoy depicts a world of Cossacks deployed to the North Caucasian offensive line, where their lives have far more in common with their tribal adversaries than with their cultured Russian officers, and where lines between Cossack and Adyghe, between Christian and Muslim, between the languages and practices of invaders and resisters have become blurred.
在抵抗力量和俄罗斯人之间，受到个人经历的驱使，受到对他的尊严和家庭的攻击的冲击，而不是任何僵化的文化依恋。在另一部短篇小说《哥萨克人》（The Cossacks）中，托尔斯泰描绘了一个被部署到北高加索进攻线的哥萨克人的世界，在那里，他们的生活与部落对手的共同点远多于与有教养的俄罗斯军官的共同点，哥萨克人和阿迪格人之间，基督教和穆斯林之间，侵略者和抵抗者的语言和习俗之间的界限已经变得模糊。

Groups of Christian sectarians, considered “apostates” by the Orthodox authorities in St. Petersburg, similarly shook up comfortable categories when relocated in the mountainous frontier. Dukhobors, Molokans, and Subbotniks, sectarian groups that were condemned as heretics, settled in large numbers both in the North and South Caucasus beginning in the 1830s. Driven from their Russian homes by persecution, they came as exiles or fled seeking freedom to practice their religion, but their new homes in the mountainous frontier transformed them in a variety of ways. From the point of view of St. Petersburg, the former heretics became model colonists and exemplars of Russianness. For the settlers, living in new ecological surroundings and confronting the harsh realities of scratching out a living in unfamiliar terrain, relations with their indigenous neighbors became matters of life and death. Historian Nicholas Breyfogle charts the ways in which these sectarians interacted with their neighbors, learned from them, competed and fought with them, and adapted to entirely new environmental demands. The categorical divisions that had defined them and led to their exile proved ephemeral in the plains and high mountain air. ${}^{72}$${}^{72}$^(72){ }^{72}
被圣彼得堡东正教当局视为“叛教者”的基督教宗派团体，在搬迁到山区边境时，也同样动摇了舒适的类别。Dukhobors、Molokans 和 Subbotniks 是被谴责为异端的教派团体，从 1830 年代开始在北高加索和南高加索大量定居。他们因迫害而被迫离开俄罗斯家园，以流亡者的身份来到这里，或逃离以寻求信仰宗教的自由，但他们在山区边境的新家以各种方式改变了他们。从圣彼得堡的角度来看，以前的异端分子成为模范殖民者和俄罗斯性的典范。对于定居者来说，生活在新的生态环境中，面对在陌生地形中谋生的严酷现实，与土著邻居的关系成为生死攸关的问题。历史学家尼古拉斯·布雷福格尔 （Nicholas Breyfogle） 描绘了这些教派成员与邻居互动、向他们学习、与他们竞争和战斗以及适应全新环境要求的方式。事实证明，定义他们并导致他们流亡的分类划分在平原和高山空气中转瞬即逝。 ${}^{72}$${}^{72}$^(72){ }^{72}

In a work of historical reconstruction, Michael Khodarkovsky traces the life of a historical figure who lived on precisely this hazy divide and had to make “bitter choices”: a certain Semyon Atarshchikov. Raised as a Russian Cossack but born to Chechen parents, Atarshchikov followed a back-and-forth trajectory remarkably similar to Hadji Murat’s, playing a dangerous, ultimately lethal, game of shifting allegiances between his Russian fellows and his Muslim roots. ${}^{73}$${}^{73}$^(73){ }^{73} Another boundary crosser, Shamil, the great leader of the anti-Russian resistance, was captured and spent the end of his life as an important personage in St. Petersburg, receiving visits from the curious elite. The public feted the defeated Shamil, treating him nostalgically as a noble warrior. He married an Armenian captive, who converted to Islam and stayed with him in a loving relationship for life. It is remarkable to discover that even on the most sharply contested frontiers of empire, crisscrossing loyalties and antagonisms compromised divisions between invaders and local populations. Empire was both about differentiating peoples one from another and a cosmopoli$\tan$$\tan$tan\tan mixing that produced hybrid combinations of colonizer and colonized.
在一部历史重建作品中，迈克尔·霍达科夫斯基 （Michael Khodarkovsky） 追溯了一位历史人物的一生，他正是生活在这个朦胧的鸿沟上，不得不做出“痛苦的选择”：某个谢苗·阿塔尔什奇科夫。阿塔尔什奇科夫是作为俄罗斯哥萨克人长大的，但父母是车臣人，他遵循着与哈吉·穆拉特非常相似的来回轨迹，玩着一场危险的、最终致命的游戏，在他的俄罗斯同胞和他的穆斯林根源之间改变效忠。 ${}^{73}$${}^{73}$^(73){ }^{73} 另一位越境者，反俄抵抗运动的伟大领袖沙米尔被捕，并在圣彼得堡作为重要人物度过了他生命的尽头，受到了好奇的精英们的访问。公众欢迎战败的沙米尔，将他视为高贵的战士。他娶了一位亚美尼亚俘虏，后者皈依了伊斯兰教，并与他保持了终生的恩爱关系。值得注意的是，即使在帝国争夺最激烈的边境上，纵横交错的忠诚和对立也损害了侵略者和当地居民之间的分歧。帝国既是关于区分人民彼此的，也是产生殖民者和被殖民者的混合世界性的 $\tan$$\tan$tan\tan 混合。

Not only the people caught in the turbulent winds of imperial conquest expressed ambivalence about the process of mixing. Ambivalence and indecision
不仅被困在帝国征服的汹涌之风中的人们对混合的过程表达了矛盾的态度。矛盾和优柔寡断

continued to mark official state positions toward incorporation of its multitude of subject peoples as well. Many historians have remarked on the drive on the part of the Nicolaevan regime to institute uniform policies and to integrate all their holdings and people into a single, clear, Russian whole. Yet, as we have argued, recourse to differentiation continued apace, alongside and perhaps beneath half-hearted homogenizing campaigns.
继续标志着国家的官方立场，以纳入其众多的附属民族。许多历史学家评论了尼古拉耶万政权制定统一政策并将其所有财产和人民整合成一个单一、清晰的俄罗斯整体的努力。然而，正如我们所指出的，对差异化的求助继续迅速，与三心二意的同质化运动相伴而生，也许是在三心二意的运动之下。

The Jews of the Pale of Settlement offer a case in point. Eugene Avrutin argues that beginning in the 1830s, the Russian regime confronted the difficulties presented by the large Jewish population that they had absorbed from Poland-Lithuania in the late eighteenth century. Jews presented particular problems of “legibility.” Instead of the formally regulated baptismal practices that made Christian births easy to record and Christian names easy to track, Jews kept no official records of births (deaths were a different matter). Moreover, during their lives they went by all sorts of different names and nicknames, making it hard for the authorities to keep straight who was who. The state therefore launched a two-pronged effort to register the Jews of the Pale and to “civilize” them, to bring them into line with Russian ideas of propriety and cleanliness. They should register births, adopt and record stable first and last names, and abandon their traditional dress in favor of up-to-date urban couture.
The Jews of the Pale of Settlement 就是一个很好的例子。尤金·阿夫鲁廷 （Eugene Avrutin） 认为，从 1830 年代开始，俄罗斯政权面临着他们在 18 世纪后期从波兰-立陶宛吸收的大量犹太人口所带来的困难。犹太人提出了特殊的“易读性”问题。犹太人没有采用正式规定的洗礼习俗，使基督徒的出生很容易记录，基督徒的名字也很容易追踪，犹太人没有保留正式的出生记录（死亡是另一回事）。此外，在他们的一生中，他们有各种不同的名字和昵称，这使得当局很难弄清楚谁是谁。因此，国家发起了一项双管齐下的努力，对 Pale 的犹太人进行登记，并使他们“文明化”，使他们符合俄罗斯的礼仪和清洁理念。他们应该登记出生，采用和记录稳定的名字和姓氏，并放弃他们的传统服饰，转而采用最新的城市时装。

But here the Russian plan ran into a stumbling block: what to do if Jewish subjects took them up on their offer and chose to adopt Russian names? If Moishe the Fishmonger became Ivan Ivanovich Ivanov, if he set aside his dark overcoat and cut his sidelocks, how would one know he was a Jew? This possibility unnerved the authorities, who had mixed feelings about truly “russifying” the Jews, and they continually tinkered with policies in order to guarantee some distinctions. Jews had to take last names, but they had to be identifiably Jewish last names. New forms of sartorial distinction came into play, and modern sumptuary laws regulated precisely who could wear what. The Jews themselves had mixed responses to the web of requirements that enmeshed them. Some tried to evade the strictures of registration and documentation, while others saw the benefits of playing along and even actively sought ways to register themselves in the system. ${}^{74}$${}^{74}$^(74){ }^{74}
但在这里，俄罗斯的计划遇到了一个绊脚石：如果犹太臣民接受了他们的提议并选择采用俄罗斯名字，该怎么办？如果鱼贩莫伊舍变成了伊万·伊万诺维奇·伊万诺夫，如果他脱掉了他的深色大衣，剪掉了他的鬓发，人们怎么知道他是个犹太人呢？这种可能性让当局感到不安，他们对真正“俄罗斯化”犹太人有着复杂的感觉，他们不断修改政策以确保一些区别。犹太人必须取姓氏，但他们必须是可识别的犹太姓氏。新形式的服装区别开始发挥作用，现代奢华法律精确地规定了谁可以穿什么。犹太人自己对缠绕他们的要求网络有不同的反应。一些人试图逃避注册和文件的限制，而另一些人则看到了顺其自然的好处，甚至积极寻找在系统中注册自己的方法。 ${}^{74}$${}^{74}$^(74){ }^{74}

Russia confronted its “Jewish Problem” as a consequence of one of its most significant imperial relationships, the fraught interactions with Poland, whose large Jewish population suddenly fell under Russian jurisdiction following the partitions. As we have seen, ambitious empires campaigned across Poland during the Napoleonic wars and batted the region back and forth between them. After the defeat of Napoleon and the reassertion of Russian rule, Alexander I’s granting of constitutional rule and (nominal) separate monarchical status allowed for a heady, though brief, honeymoon, which soon turned sour as Russian rule manifested its far less attractive reality. In 1830 a group of young Polish military cadets, inspired by nationalist rhetoric and constitutionalist aspirations, sparked
俄罗斯面临“犹太人问题”是其最重要的帝国关系之一的结果，即与波兰的令人担忧的互动，波兰的大量犹太人口在分治后突然落入俄罗斯的管辖之下。正如我们所看到的，在拿破仑战争期间，雄心勃勃的帝国在波兰各地作战，并在它们之间来回打击该地区。拿破仑战败并重新确立俄罗斯统治后，亚历山大一世授予宪法统治和（名义上的）独立君主制地位，这让一段令人陶醉但短暂的蜜月之旅变得令人陶醉，但随着俄罗斯统治表现出其远不那么有吸引力的现实，蜜月很快就变质了。1830 年，一群年轻的波兰军校在民族主义言论和立宪主义抱负的启发下，点燃了

a rebellion against increasingly oppressive Russian rule. Their constitutional protections ignored, their authors stifled by Russian censors, their great university closed, the Poles mobilized a broad-based rebellion, but were handily crushed by the Russian army. Nicholas rescinded all vestiges of Polish independence and declared Poland fully incorporated in Russia.
一场反抗日益压迫性的俄罗斯统治的反抗。他们的宪法保护被忽视，他们的作者被俄罗斯审查机构扼杀，他们伟大的大学关闭，波兰人动员了一场基础广泛的叛乱，但被俄罗斯军队轻易镇压。尼古拉斯取消了波兰独立的所有残余，并宣布波兰完全并入俄罗斯。

The meaning of this rebellion would seem self-evident: a nationalist uprising in an era of fervent nationalism and commitment to popular sovereignty. Yet loyalties could be as complex and multivalent among Polish nationalists as among the warriors of the Caucasus. The rebels cast their movement not as a fundamental clash between Poles and Russians, but as a struggle to reinstate constitutional prerogatives. They drew inspiration from the Decembrists, whose commitment to freedom they shared. Their slogan, “For your freedom and ours,” reflected a misplaced confidence that the Russian people would rise up alongside them. Prince Adam Czartoryski, a leader of the insurrection, wrote in the midst of the uprising, “No nation has the right to impose its opinion upon another, especially [upon] the powerful Russian nation, but [the Russian nation] should know that we, the Poles, wish them happiness, value their brotherhood, and want a union of the Slavs to come into being.”
这场叛乱的意义似乎不言而喻：在一个狂热的民族主义和对人民主权的承诺的时代，一场民族主义起义。然而，波兰民族主义者的忠诚度可能与高加索地区的战士一样复杂和多元。叛乱者将他们的运动描述为恢复宪法特权的斗争，而不是波兰人和俄罗斯人之间的根本冲突。他们从十二月党人那里汲取灵感，他们共同致力于自由。他们的口号是“为了你们和我们的自由”，反映了一种错误的信念，即俄罗斯人民会与他们一起起来。起义领袖亚当·恰尔托雷斯基王子在起义中写道：“任何国家都无权将自己的意见强加给另一个国家，尤其是强大的俄罗斯民族，但 [俄罗斯民族] 应该知道，我们波兰人祝他们幸福，珍视他们的兄弟情谊，并希望斯拉夫人的联盟成立。

Czartoryski, whom we encountered earlier in this chapter, embodied the impossibility of fitting the people of empire into neat boxes as oppressors or oppressed, colonizers or colonists, or even Poles or Russians. Born into a Polish noble family, Prince Adam took part as a very young man in the anti-Russian insurrection of 1795. Soon thereafter, following the defeat of the insurrection and on the heels of the Third Partition of Poland, he moved to St. Petersburg and, through the prerogative of rank and culture, found a warm welcome in circles of equally aristocratic and educated young men at court. He became in short order a close friend of none other than the young Alexander I and then a member of the Unofficial Committee. Sent back to Poland to reform the educational system, the prince found the reformist aspirations for an autonomous Kingdom of Poland increasingly submerged under Nicholas’s repressive rule.
我们在本章前面遇到的恰尔托雷斯基体现了将帝国人民整齐地放入盒子里是不可能的，他们是压迫者或被压迫者，殖民者或殖民者，甚至波兰人或俄罗斯人。亚当王子出生于一个波兰贵族家庭，在很小的时候就参加了 1795 年的反俄起义。此后不久，在起义失败后，在波兰第三次瓜分之后，他搬到了圣彼得堡，并通过等级和文化的特权，在宫廷中同样贵族和受过教育的年轻人的圈子中受到了热烈欢迎。他很快就成为了年轻的亚历山大一世的密友，然后成为非官方委员会的成员。被送回波兰改革教育体系后，王子发现波兰自治王国的改革主义愿望越来越被尼古拉斯的压迫统治所淹没。

In 1830, somewhat inadvertently he emerged as leader of the opposition, but only slowly relinquished his hope that Poles and Russians, a great, unified Slavic “nation,” together could challenge the erosions of freedom. Czartoryski, like others of his contemporaries whom one would expect to adopt a firmly anti-Russian position, instead clung as long as he possibly could to a dual identity as ardent Polish patriot and loyal subject of empire. ${}^{75}$${}^{75}$^(75){ }^{75} Exiles who served the empire loyally from distant postings in Siberia, translators wrenched from their natal villages in the Caucasus, Baltic Germans and Greek diplomats in the service of the state, all were able to combine identities and perform loyal service to the empire. Yet these same people, frustrated by imperial intolerance, unable to find congenial modes to realize their “national” aspirations, might then turn to rebellion. Categories that seem transparent and self-evident today and divisions that
1830 年，他不经意间成为了反对派的领袖，但只是慢慢地放弃了他希望波兰人和俄罗斯人——一个伟大、统一的斯拉夫“民族”——能够共同挑战自由的侵蚀的希望。恰尔托雷斯基和他的同时代人一样，人们会期望他们采取坚决的反俄立场，相反，他尽可能长时间地坚持作为狂热的波兰爱国者和忠诚的帝国臣民的双重身份。 ${}^{75}$${}^{75}$^(75){ }^{75} 从西伯利亚的遥远岗位忠诚地为帝国服务的流亡者、从高加索的原生村庄被解救出来的翻译、为国家服务的波罗的海德国人和希腊外交官，都能够结合身份并为帝国忠诚服务。然而，这些人对帝国主义的不宽容感到沮丧，无法找到合意的方式来实现他们的“民族”抱负，然后可能会转向叛乱。今天看起来透明且不言而喻的类别以及

we try to impose retrospectively on historical actors are confounded by shifting loyalties of people in complex changing circumstances.
我们试图追溯性地强加于历史参与者，他们在复杂变化的环境中被人们不断变化的忠诚度所混淆。

Russian writers and thinkers were intrigued by the new languages of politics that flowed from Europe, and already in the eighteenth century and early in the nineteenth they shared the European search for the medieval origins of nations. People were fascinated by the discovery of the ancient poems of Ossian, ostensibly the work of a third-century Celtic bard. Their popularity spread through Europe, even though from the beginning there were suspicions that they were clever forgeries by their discoverer, the Scottish writer James Macpherson (as they indeed were). Ossian was translated into Russian in 1788 and again in 1792. Even more important was the publication in 1800 of the Slovo o polku Igoreve (The Tale of Igor’s Campaign), a grand medieval saga of heroic battles and tragic losses in defense of the Rus land. The Tale was vivid enough to compete with any of the many folk epics in vogue at the time and seemed to capture something of an authentic and vibrant Russian past. The manuscript was found in a provincial monastery as part of a concerted campaign to unearth and place in circulation literary monuments of the Russian past. It was published by Count Aleksei Musin-Pushkin, who then claimed that the sole manuscript copy had lamentably burned along with his entire library and indeed most of the city of Moscow in 1812, leaving only a flawed copy for posterity. Doubt and speculation have attached to this too-good-to-be-true national treasure over the centuries, and like Ossian, the authenticity of this purported twelfth-century epic is suspect. Nonetheless it satisfied a hunger for antiquity and authenticity in a search for a true and distinctive Russian past. ${}^{76}$${}^{76}$^(76){ }^{76}
俄罗斯作家和思想家对来自欧洲的新政治语言很感兴趣，早在 18 世纪和 19 世纪初，他们就与欧洲人一样寻找中世纪国家的起源。人们对奥西安古诗的发现着迷，这些诗歌表面上是 3 世纪一位凯尔特吟游诗人的作品。它们的流行传遍了整个欧洲，尽管从一开始就有人怀疑它们是它们的发现者苏格兰作家詹姆斯·麦克弗森（确实如此）的巧妙伪造。Ossian 于 1788 年和 1792 年被翻译成俄语。更重要的是 1800 年出版的 Slovo o polku Igoreve（《伊戈尔战役的故事》），这是一部关于保卫罗斯土地的英勇战斗和悲惨损失的中世纪宏伟传奇。这个故事足够生动，可以与当时流行的许多民间史诗中的任何一部相媲美，并且似乎捕捉到了真实而充满活力的俄罗斯过去。这份手稿是在一座省级修道院发现的，这是一场旨在发掘俄罗斯历史文学遗迹并将其放入流通地的联合运动的一部分。它由阿列克谢·穆辛-普希金伯爵出版，他随后声称，1812 年，唯一的手稿副本与他的整个图书馆以及莫斯科市的大部分地区一起被遗忘，只留下了一份有缺陷的副本供后人参考。几个世纪以来，人们对这件好得令人难以置信的国宝一直持怀疑和猜测，就像奥西安一样，这部据称是 12 世纪史诗的真实性也值得怀疑。尽管如此，它满足了对古老和真实性的渴望，以寻找真实而独特的俄罗斯历史。 ${}^{76}$${}^{76}$^(76){ }^{76}

As with other peoples and states of Europe in the post-revolutionary period, intellectuals, particularly historians, were in a sense thinking nations into existence or at least elaborating and propagating the contours, characteristics, symbols and signs that would make the nation familiar to a broader public. From Karamzin’s multivolume Istoriia gosudarstva rossiiskogo (History of the Russian State) (1816-1826) through the great synthetic works of Sergei Solovev and Vasilii Kliuchevskii, historians treated Russia as a persistent, recognizable polity, something like a nation-state, from the very earliest days of Rus. In many ways their idea of Russia conformed to Western European models though they acknowledged and even emphasized its uniquely multiethnic composition. Karamzin’s contribution was particularly significant, for his work was extremely popular among educated readers, and it provided a colorful, patriotic narrative of Russia’s past up to the Time of Troubles. The poet Alexander Pushkin proclaimed,
与后革命时期的欧洲其他民族和国家一样，知识分子，尤其是历史学家，在某种意义上认为国家的存在，或者至少阐述和传播使国家为更广泛的公众所熟悉的轮廓、特征、符号和标志。从卡拉姆津的多卷本 Istoriia gosudarstva rossiiskogo（《俄罗斯国家史》）（1816-1826 年）到谢尔盖·索洛夫夫 （Sergei Solovev） 和瓦西里·克柳切夫斯基 （Vasilii Kliuchevskii） 的伟大综合著作，历史学家从罗斯的早期开始就将俄罗斯视为一个持久的、可识别的政体，有点像一个民族国家。在许多方面，他们对俄罗斯的看法符合西欧模式，尽管他们承认甚至强调其独特的多民族构成。卡拉姆津的贡献尤为重要，因为他的作品在受过教育的读者中非常受欢迎，它对俄罗斯的过去进行了丰富多彩的爱国主义叙述，直到动荡时期。诗人亚历山大·普希金 （Alexander Pushkin） 宣称：

“Karamzin, it seemed, discovered ancient Rus’, as Columbus discovered America.” ${}^{277}$${}^{277}$^(277){ }^{277} This search for the past of Russia as a nation coincided with the development of an ideology of imperialism and the emergence of Russian schools of ethnography and geography, and was refracted through poetry, novels and short stories, music, and the visual arts. ${}^{78}$${}^{78}$^(78){ }^{78}
“看来，卡拉姆津发现了古罗斯，就像哥伦布发现了美洲一样。” ${}^{277}$${}^{277}$^(277){ }^{277} 这种对俄罗斯作为一个国家的过去的探索恰逢帝国主义意识形态的发展以及俄罗斯民族志和地理学派的出现，并通过诗歌、小说和短篇小说、音乐和视觉艺术得到折射。 ${}^{78}$${}^{78}$^(78){ }^{78}

Convinced of their cultural, not to mention material, superiority over the southern and eastern peoples of their empire, Russian intellectuals and statesmen evolved a modernist program of developing, civilizing, categorizing, and rationalizing through regulations, laws, statistical surveys and censuses the non-Russian peoples of the borderlands. Whatever sense of inferiority Russians might have felt toward Europeans, particularly the Germans and the English, they more than made up for in their condescension toward their own colonized peoples. Occasionally, however, the immensity of the civilizing mission overwhelmed even the most enthusiastic advocates of expansion. Mikhail Orlov, for example, wearily (and prophetically) remarked, "It is just as hard to subjugate the Chechens and other peoples of this region as to level the Caucasian range. This is something to achieve not with bayonets but with time and enlightenment, in such short supply in our country."79
俄罗斯知识分子和政治家确信他们的文化优势，更不用说物质上优于他们帝国的南部和东部人民，他们制定了一个现代主义计划，通过法规、法律、统计调查和人口普查对边境地区的非俄罗斯人民进行发展、文明化、分类和合理化。无论俄罗斯人对欧洲人，尤其是德国人和英国人有什么自卑感，他们对自己被殖民地人民的居高临下都足以弥补这一点。然而，有时，文明使命的浩大甚至会压倒最热情的扩张倡导者。例如，米哈伊尔·奥尔洛夫 （Mikhail Orlov） 疲惫地（并且以预言性的方式）评论道：“征服车臣人和该地区的其他民族与平整高加索山脉一样困难。这不是用刺刀来实现的，而是需要时间和启蒙来实现的，在我们国家如此短缺的情况下。79

The conceptual work of imagining Russia as both national and imperial intensified in the second third of the nineteenth century, as Russian soldiers moved over the mountains into the Georgian principalities, the Muslim khanates, and Armenia. The Russian colonial encounter with the Caucasus coincided with an intense phase of the intelligentsia’s discussion of Russia’s place between Europe and Asia. In the first decades of the nineteenth century, scholars laid the foundations of Russian orientalism, and through their perception of the Asian “other,” Russians conceptualized ideas of themselves. Russian “civilization,” usually taken to be inferior to the West, was at least superior to the “savagery” of the Caucasian mountaineers or Central Asian nomads. A compensatory pride marked the complex and contradictory attitudes toward and images of the Caucasian Orient, where Russian authors imagine emotional intensity and primitive poetry mixing with macho violence.
在 19 世纪下半叶，随着俄罗斯士兵翻山越岭进入格鲁吉亚公国、穆斯林汗国和亚美尼亚，将俄罗斯想象为国家和帝国的概念工作得到了加强。俄罗斯与高加索地区的殖民遭遇恰逢知识分子讨论俄罗斯在欧洲和亚洲之间地位的激烈阶段。在 19 世纪的最初几十年里，学者们奠定了俄罗斯东方主义的基础，通过他们对亚洲“他者”的感知，俄罗斯人将自己的观念概念化。俄罗斯的“文明”通常被认为不如西方，但至少优于高加索登山者或中亚游牧民族的“野蛮”。一种补偿性的自豪感标志着对高加索东方复杂而矛盾的态度和形象，俄罗斯作家想象着情感的强烈和原始的诗歌与男子气概的暴力混合在一起。

Russian writers created their own “literary Caucasus” that contributed to Russian discourses of empire and national identity that in turn shaped perceptions and self-understandings of the Russian nineteenth-century elite. Admiration for the natural spontaneity of “Noble Savages” paired with a sense that their freedom was excessive, integrally tied to violence and lawlessness. A case in point, Pushkin’s evocative poem, “The Prisoner of the Caucasus” (1822), was at one and the same
俄罗斯作家创造了他们自己的“文学高加索”，为俄罗斯的帝国和民族认同话语做出了贡献，这反过来又塑造了俄罗斯 19 世纪精英的观念和自我理解。对“高贵的野蛮人”天生的自发性的钦佩，以及一种感觉，即他们的自由是过度的，与暴力和无法无天密不可分。一个很好的例子是，普希金令人回味的诗歌《高加索的囚徒》（The Prisoner of the Caucasus，1822）就是一首诗
${}^{77}$${}^{77}$^(77){ }^{77} Cited in Olga Maiorova, From the Shadow of Empire: Defining the Russian Nation Through Cultural Mythology, 1855-1870 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2010), p. 4.
${}^{77}$${}^{77}$^(77){ }^{77} 引自奥尔加·马约罗娃，《来自帝国的阴影：通过文化神话定义俄罗斯民族，1855-1870 年》（麦迪逊：威斯康星大学出版社，2010 年），第 4 页。
${}^{78}$${}^{78}$^(78){ }^{78} See, for example, Susan Layton, Russian Literature and Empire: Conquest of the Caucasus from Pushkin to Tolstoy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994); and Austin Jersild, Orientalism and Empire: North Caucasus Mountain Peoples and the Georgian Frontier, 1845-1917 (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002).
${}^{78}$${}^{78}$^(78){ }^{78} 例如，参见苏珊·雷顿（Susan Layton）的《俄罗斯文学与帝国：从普希金到托尔斯泰对高加索的征服》（剑桥：剑桥大学出版社，1994年）;以及奥斯汀·杰西尔德（Austin Jersild），《东方主义与帝国：北高加索山区人民和格鲁吉亚边境，1845-1917年》（蒙特利尔：麦吉尔-皇后大学出版社，2002年）。
${}^{79}$${}^{79}$^(79){ }^{79} Quoted in Layton, Russian Literature and Empire, p. 108.
${}^{79}$${}^{79}$^(79){ }^{79} 引自雷顿，《俄罗斯文学与帝国》，第 108 页。
time romance, travelogue, ethnography, geography, and even war correspondence. It tells of a Russian soldier taken prisoner by Circassian tribesmen. Both captive and captivated by the life-affirming culture of the mountain folk, the Russian regains his vital fire, nearly extinguished by his jaded, disenchanted cosmopolitan existence. He falls in love with a dark-eyed Circassian girl, who reciprocates his passionate feelings. After she helps him escape, she proves her ardent love by casting herself in the river rather than live life without him.
时间浪漫、游记、民族志、地理，甚至战争通信。它讲述了一名俄罗斯士兵被切尔克斯部落成员俘虏的故事。俄罗斯人既被山民肯定生命的文化所俘虏，又被他们所吸引，他重新获得了他生命之火，他几乎被他疲惫不堪、幻想破灭的世界性生活所熄灭。他爱上了一个黑眼睛的切尔克斯女孩，她回报了他的热情。在她帮助他逃脱后，她宁愿投河也不愿过没有他的生活，从而证明了她炽热的爱。

The poem provided the template and the tropes for many subsequent treatments of the Caucasus. It glories in the sublime landscape: “What scenes of splendor! Mountain peaks, thrones of eternal snows, seemed to the eye like a motionless blank of clouds, and in their midst Mount Elbrus, huge and majestic, twin-headed colossus glistening with crown of ice, gleamed white in the azure sky.” It dwells on the “outlandish people of those parts that the European found most fascinating. . . . He liked the simplicity of their lives, their hospitality, their love of fighting, the speed and deftness of their movements, their lightness of foot, their strength of hand.” And it situates the “European” Russian in a curious position as the “good prisoner,” noble victim, a captive conqueror, beguiled by his fierce captors, but also, ultimately outmanning them, winning both the girl and the battle.
这首诗为后来对高加索地区的许多处理提供了模板和比喻。它在崇高的风景中颂扬：“多么壮丽的景象！山峰，永恒白雪的宝座，在眼前就像一片一动不动的空白云层，在它们中间，厄尔布鲁士山，巨大而雄伟，双头巨像，在蔚蓝的天空中闪耀着白色的光芒。它详细描述了“欧洲人认为最迷人的那些地方的古怪人......他喜欢他们简单的生活，他们的热情好客，他们热爱战斗，他们动作的速度和灵巧，他们轻盈的脚步，他们的力量。它将“欧洲”俄罗斯置于一个奇怪的位置，作为“好囚犯”、高贵的受害者、被俘虏的征服者，被凶猛的俘虏所迷惑，但最终在人数上超过了他们，赢得了女孩和战斗。

Anthropologist Bruce Grant provides an illuminating reading of Pushkin’s epic, which, he says, inaugurated an important trope of self-justification in Russian literature of imperial conquest. The “good captive” brings to the barbaric mountain people the “gift” of civilization, and the best among the tribes-people, sensitive souls like the Circassian heroine, appreciate that gift. The conquered people should be thankful for the Russian’s generous civilizing mission, and their resistance shows ingratitude. ${}^{80}$${}^{80}$^(80){ }^{80} Pushkin’s epilogue supports Grant’s interpretation. The closing lines of the poem’ celebrated the military conquest of the Caucasus and introduced a dissonant note into his meditation on the purity, generosity, and liberty of the mountaineers.
人类学家布鲁斯·格兰特 （Bruce Grant） 对普希金的史诗进行了富有启发性的解读，他说，这开创了俄罗斯帝国征服文学中自我辩护的重要比喻。“好俘虏”给野蛮的山区人民带来了文明的“礼物”，而部落中最优秀的人——像切尔克斯女英雄一样敏感的灵魂，欣赏这份礼物。被征服的人民应该感谢俄罗斯慷慨的文明使命，而他们的抵抗表现出了忘恩负义。 ${}^{80}$${}^{80}$^(80){ }^{80} 普希金的结语支持格兰特的解释。这首诗的结尾几行歌颂了对高加索地区的军事征服，并在他对登山者的纯洁、慷慨和自由的沉思中引入了一个不和谐的音符。

Pushkin’s close friend, the romantic poet Petr Viazemskii, was appalled at Pushkin’s praise for the Russian generals, Kotliarevskii and Ermolov, who had
普希金的密友、浪漫主义诗人彼得·维亚泽姆斯基 （Petr Viazemskii） 对普希金对俄国将军科特利亚列夫斯基 （Kotliarevskii） 和叶尔莫洛夫 （Ermolov） 的赞美感到震惊，他们

brutally subdued the Caucasians. “If we had educated the tribes, then there would have been something to sing. Poetry is not the ally of executioners; they may be necessary in politics, and then it is for the judgment of history to decide whether it was justified or not; but the hymns of a poet should never be eulogies of butchery.” ${}^{\text{"}}$${}^{\text{" }}$^("" "){ }^{\text {" }} 2
残酷地制服了高加索人。“如果我们教育了部落，那么就会有东西可歌颂。诗歌不是刽子手的盟友;它们在政治中可能是必要的，然后由历史的判断来决定它是否合理;但诗人的赞美诗绝不应该是屠杀的颂歌。 ${}^{\text{"}}$${}^{\text{" }}$^("" "){ }^{\text {" }} 阿拉伯数字

The young Mikhail Lermontov expressed some of this ambivalence and censure in his poem “Izmail-Bey” (1832): “And the tribes living in those gorges are savage/Their god is freedom, their law is war.” ${}^{83}$${}^{83}$^(83){ }^{83} For some the “civilizing mission” of Russia in the south and east was paramount; for others, like military volunteers, adventure and a “license to kill” was what they sought. In “Izmail-Bey” and Elizaveta Gan’s oriental tales the mountaineers also become the sexual aggressor, “real men” both terrifying and seductive, a threat to the wounded masculine pride of the more restrained Russian. The East invited Russian fantasies about alternate gender orders. For the radical literary critic Vissarion Belinskii, “a woman is created by nature for love,” but the Caucasians go too far, making them exclusively objects of passion. Russian writers treated Georgia as a dangerous woman, capable of murder, who had to be dominated for her own good. This deeply entrenched trope about “vengeful Georgian girls” who lay with Russian men appears even in the epilogue of Pushkin’s “Prisoner of the Caucasus,” intruded as a kind of free association about the eroticism and danger that companioned imperialism. Literature expressed currents of terror, violence, and desire that accompanied imperial advance. It articulated Russian fear of the physical prowess of the Caucasians that extended from the battlefield to the bedroom.
年轻的米哈伊尔·莱蒙托夫 （Mikhail Lermontov） 在他的诗歌《Izmail-Bey》（1832 年）中表达了这种矛盾和谴责：“生活在那些峡谷中的部落是野蛮的/他们的神是自由，他们的法律是战争。 ${}^{83}$${}^{83}$^(83){ }^{83} 对一些人来说，俄罗斯在南部和东部的“文明使命”是最重要的;对于其他人来说，比如军事志愿者，冒险和“杀戮执照”是他们所寻求的。在《Izmail-Bey》和伊丽莎白·甘（Elizaveta Gan）的东方故事中，登山者也成为性侵略者，“真正的男人”既可怕又诱人，对更内敛的俄罗斯人受伤的男性自豪感构成威胁。东方邀请了俄罗斯人对替代性别秩序的幻想。对于激进的文学评论家维萨里翁·别林斯基（Vissarion Belinskii）来说，“女人是大自然为爱而创造的”，但白种人走得太远了，使他们完全成为激情的对象。俄罗斯作家将格鲁吉亚视为一个危险的女人，有能力谋杀，为了自己的利益，她必须被支配。这个关于与俄罗斯男人上床的“复仇心切的格鲁吉亚女孩”的根深蒂固的比喻甚至出现在普希金的《高加索囚徒》的尾声中，作为一种关于伴随帝国主义的色情和危险的自由联想而闯入。文学表达了伴随着帝国主义进步的恐怖、暴力和欲望的潮流。它表达了俄罗斯人对白种人体能的恐惧，这种恐惧从战场一直延伸到卧室。

As we have already emphasized, the cohesion of the empire was maintained by more than simple coercion. Although the scorched auls in the North Caucasus and the brutal suppression of rebellion in Poland and Lithuania testify to the empire’s willingness to use unrestrained violence, in most imperial encounters, people on the margins could benefit in some ways from the connection to the imperial center. In both the empire of the tsars and the empire of the soviets, one occasionally glimpses what Alexander Etkind has called a “reversed imperial gradient,” that is, those in the peripheries might live better than those in the metropole…${}^{84}$${}^{84}$^(84)^{84} Culture too provided a connective tissue throughout the Russian realm. Political order may have come with the uniformed Russian officers, but so too did Russian literature, painting, and later photography. “In the long run, Russian literature proved to be an extremely successful instrument of cultural hegemony,” Etkind tells us. “With its classics, heretics, and critics, it conquered more Russians, non-Russians, and Russian enemies than any other imperial
正如我们已经强调的那样，帝国的凝聚力不仅仅是通过简单的胁迫来维持的。尽管北高加索的焦土以及波兰和立陶宛对叛乱的残酷镇压证明了帝国愿意使用无节制的暴力，但在大多数帝国交锋中，边缘人可以在某种程度上从与帝国中心的联系中受益。在沙皇帝国和苏维埃帝国中，人们偶尔会瞥见亚历山大·埃特金德 （Alexander Etkind） 所说的“颠倒的帝国梯度”，也就是说，边缘地区的人可能比大都市的人生活得更好...... ${}^{84}$${}^{84}$^(84)^{84} 文化也为整个俄罗斯王国提供了结缔组织。政治秩序可能来自身穿制服的俄罗斯军官，但俄罗斯文学、绘画和后来的摄影也是如此。“从长远来看，俄罗斯文学被证明是极其成功的文化霸权工具，”埃特金德告诉我们。“凭借其经典、异端和批评家，它征服的俄罗斯人、非俄罗斯人和俄罗斯敌人比任何其他帝国都多
${}^{82}$${}^{82}$^(82){ }^{82} T. J. Binyon, Pushkin, A Biography (London: HarperCollins, 2002), p. 148. See also Layton, Russian Literature and Empire, p. 53.
${}^{82}$${}^{82}$^(82){ }^{82} T. J. Binyon，《普希金传》（伦敦：HarperCollins，2002 年），第 148 页。另见 Layton，《俄罗斯文学与帝国》，第 53 页。
${}^{83}$${}^{83}$^(83){ }^{83} Quoted and discussed in Harsha Ram, “Prisoners of the Caucasus: Literary Myths and Media Representations of the Chechen Conflict,” Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Working Papers (Berkeley, CA, 1999), p. 4.
${}^{83}$${}^{83}$^(83){ }^{83} 引自Harsha Ram，“高加索的囚徒：车臣冲突的文学神话和媒体表现”，苏联和后苏联工作论文中的伯克利项目（加州伯克利，1999年），第4页。
${}^{84}$${}^{84}$^(84){ }^{84} Alexander Etkind, Internal Colonization: Russia’s Imperial Experience (Cambridge, UK, and Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2011), pp. 143-44.
${}^{84}$${}^{84}$^(84){ }^{84} 亚历山大·埃特金德，《内部殖民化：俄罗斯的帝国经验》（英国剑桥和马萨诸塞州莫尔登：政治出版社，2011 年），第 143-44 页。
endeavor.” ${}^{35}$${}^{35}$^(35){ }^{35} And yet there was "an uneasy dialectics. The more productive a literary text was in the machinery of hegemony, the more destructive it became to the hierarchy of domination. ${}^{386}$${}^{386}$^(386){ }^{386} The circulation of ideas, texts, and historical myth and memory proved to be a dangerous by-product of imperial domination. Just as Russia’s rebellious Decembrists provided unintended inspiration to Poland’s rebels, Russian literary classics with their humanist values and moral conflicts planted seeds of opposition to the repressive empire in which they had been created.
努力。 ${}^{35}$${}^{35}$^(35){ }^{35} 然而，“有一种令人不安的辩证法。文学文本在霸权机器中的生产力越高，它对统治等级制度的破坏性就越大。 ${}^{386}$${}^{386}$^(386){ }^{386} 事实证明，思想、文本、历史神话和记忆的传播是帝国统治的危险副产品。正如俄罗斯叛逆的十二月党人无意中为波兰的叛乱者提供了灵感一样，具有人文主义价值观和道德冲突的俄罗斯文学经典也埋下了反对他们所诞生的压迫帝国的种子。

While expanding in territory and upholding the traditional principles of autocracy and orthodoxy, the Russian monarchy imagined Russia as a modern Western state. But the “West” had changed since Peter’s time. No longer embracing the ideal of absolutism, progressive Europe (the one that attracted Russia’s intellectuals) increasingly celebrated the principles of nationality and popular sovereignty, industrialism and free labor, constitutionalism and representative government. The task for the ideologists of empire in mid-century was to reconceive Russia as “modern” and rethink its relationship to its own imagined “West.” Setting out the terms of what would become an interminable debate, the conservative Moscow university professor, Stepan Shevyrev, wrote in 1841, “The West and Russia, Russia and the West-here is the result that follows from the entire past; here is the last word of history; here are the two facts for the future.” ${}^{37}$${}^{37}$^(37){ }^{37}
在扩大领土并维护专制和正统的传统原则的同时，俄罗斯君主制将俄罗斯想象成一个现代的西方国家。但自彼得的时代以来，“西方”已经发生了变化。进步的欧洲（吸引俄罗斯知识分子的欧洲）不再拥护专制主义的理想，而是日益赞颂民族和人民主权、工业主义和自由劳动、宪政和代议制政府的原则。本世纪中叶帝国意识形态家的任务是将俄罗斯重新构想为“现代”，并重新思考它与自己想象中的“西方”的关系。保守的莫斯科大学教授斯捷潘·舍维列夫 （Stepan Shevyrev） 在 1841 年写道，“西方和俄罗斯，俄罗斯和西方——这就是整个过去的结果;这是历史的最后一句话;以下是未来的两个事实。 ${}^{37}$${}^{37}$^(37){ }^{37}

While observers looking back from the future might believe that the great empires of the nineteenth century were doomed to be replaced by nation-states, which in many cases would eventually happen, the imperialists themselves were confident that their empires were viable, indeed admirable, forms of governance that would long reign over and civilize their subjects. They were prepared neither to give in to nationalism nor to accept that empires were archaic. But in the global competition with nations, imperial elites in all the great landed empires-Russia, the Ottoman, and Austro-Hungary-came to realize that they could no longer do business as usual. They needed to face the challenge from their European rivals and America and modernize-whatever that meant and however precarious the road ahead appeared.
虽然从未来回顾过去的观察者可能会认为 19 世纪的伟大帝国注定要被民族国家所取代，这在许多情况下最终会发生，但帝国主义者自己也相信他们的帝国是可行的，确实令人钦佩的治理形式，可以长期统治和文明他们的臣民。他们既不准备屈服于民族主义，也不准备接受帝国是过时的。但在与国家的全球竞争中，所有伟大的土地帝国——俄罗斯、奥斯曼帝国和奥匈帝国——的帝国精英都开始意识到，他们不能再像往常一样做生意了。他们需要面对来自欧洲竞争对手和美国的挑战并实现现代化——无论这意味着什么，也无论前方的道路看起来多么不稳定。

Bassin, Mark. Imperial Visions: Nationalist Imagination and Geographical Expansion in the Russian Far East, 1840-1865. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
巴辛，马克。帝国愿景：1840-1865 年俄罗斯远东的民族主义想象和地理扩张。剑桥和纽约：剑桥大学出版社，1999 年。
Grant, Bruce. The Captive and the Gift: Cultural Histories of Sovereignty in Russia and the Caucasus. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009.
格兰特，布鲁斯。俘虏与礼物：俄罗斯和高加索主权的文化史。纽约州伊萨卡：康奈尔大学出版社，2009 年。

Hillis, Faith. Children of Rus’: Right-Bank Ukraine and the Invention of a Russian Nation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013.
希利斯，信仰。罗斯之子：右岸乌克兰和俄罗斯国家的发明。纽约州伊萨卡：康奈尔大学出版社，2013 年。
Lieven, D. C. B. Russia Against Napoleon: The True Story of the Campaigns of War and Peace. New York: Penguin, 2009.
Lieven， DC B. 俄罗斯对抗拿破仑：战争与和平运动的真实故事。纽约：企鹅出版社，2009 年。
Maiorova, O. E. From the Shadow of Empire: Defining the Russian Nation Through Cultural Mythology, 1855-1870. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2010.
马约罗娃，O. E.来自帝国的阴影：通过文化神话定义俄罗斯民族，1855-1870 年。麦迪逊：威斯康星大学出版社，2010 年。
Norris, Stephen M. A War of Images: Russian Popular Prints, Wartime Culture, and National Identity, 1812-1945. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2006.
诺里斯，斯蒂芬 M.图像之战：俄罗斯流行版画、战时文化和国家认同，1812-1945 年。迪卡尔布：北伊利诺伊大学出版社，2006 年。
Raeff, Marc. The Decembrist Movement. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1966.
雷夫，马克。十二月党人运动。第 2 版恩格尔伍德悬崖，新泽西州：Prentice-Hall，1966 年。

Randolph, John. The House in the Garden: The Bakunin Family and the Romance of Russian Idealism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2007.
伦道夫，约翰。花园里的房子：巴枯宁家族和俄罗斯理想主义的浪漫史。纽约州伊萨卡：康奈尔大学出版社，2007 年。
Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. Nicholas I and Official Nationality in Russia, 1825-1855. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959.
里亚萨诺夫斯基，尼古拉斯 V. 尼古拉斯一世和俄罗斯的官方国籍，1825-1855 年。伯克利：加利福尼亚大学出版社，1959 年。
Slocum, John W. “Who, and When Were the Inorodtsy? The Evolution of the Category of ‘Aliens’ in Imperial Russia.” Russian Review 57, no. 2 (1998): 173-90.
Slocum， John W. “伊诺罗茨人是谁，什么时候？俄罗斯帝国中'外星人'类别的演变》。俄罗斯评论 57，第 2 期（1998）：173-90。
Suny, Ronald Grigor. Looking Toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993.
Suny， Ronald Grigor.展望亚拉腊：现代史中的亚美尼亚。布卢明顿：印第安纳大学出版社，1993 年。