Alfred Erich Senn THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS:

FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA UDK 070(470 Se-88

Recenzentai: Prof. Egidijus Aleksandravičius, VDU, Lietuvių išeivijos institutas Doc. Kristina Juraitė, VDU, PMDF, Viešosios komunikacijos katedra

Leidinys rekomenduotas publikuoti PMDI tarybos nutarimu Nr.16, 2008 05 20.

© Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, 2008 ISBN 978-9955-12-470-2 © Alfred Erich Senn, 2008 Table of Contents

Introduction · 5 1. The Russian Free Press · 8 2. Years of Triumph · 13 3. The Young Emigration · 18 4. Elpidin’s Challenge · 23 5. Bakunin and Narodnoe delo · 28 6. The Young Fanatic From Russia · 34 7. Answering the Call · 41 8. A House on Sand · 47 9. Lavrov in London · 54 10. The Three Musketeers · 61 11. Propaganda of the Deed · 68 12. Counterattack · 74 13. The Revolutionary Movement as History · 79 14. The Group “Liberation of Labor” · 84 15. The Agony of Lev Tikhomirov · 90 16. A New Generation · 96 17. Kravchinsky’s Friends · 102 18. The Chimera of Unification · 108 19. Epilogue: The Leninist Inheritance · 114 Additional Readings · 117

Introduction

The year was 1853, the place London. The two men In the early 1850s, however, Russia lay seemingly stood looking at a galley proof lying on the desk. quiet under the heavy hand of Nicholas I. Herzen The older one picked it up, and exclaimed, “My had no proof that there were readers for his publi- God! My God! That I should have lived so long! A cations. There was no underground publishing to free Russian print shop in London! This sheet, all speak of. Nevertheless, convinced of his mission, smeared with printer’s ink, wipes so many recent, he set out on uncharted waters. He was launching evil memories from my soul!” Alexander Herzen, a a great adventure. Russian émigré, and his older Polish friend, Count His gamble succeeded. In later years, he would call Stanislaw Worcell, were examining a manifesto the founding of the print shop “the best act” of his denouncing the institution of serfdom in Russia. life. “Let the whole world know,” he declaimed, At that moment Herzen knew only too well that his venture, printing texts in Russian, could result in that in the middle of the 19th century a madman, disastrous failure. The authorities in tsarist Russia believing in Russia and loving Russia, organized a would probably never let him return; at the same print shop for Russians. time he could not be sure that his publications would ever find readers in Russia. Nevertheless, It took several years and cost great effort before he wanted to send uncensored words back to his he saw any reward, but Herzen’s print shop won a homeland. special place in Russian history, and it paved the Herzen was neither the first Russian to open a way for printing and publishing in Western Europe Cyrillic print shop in the West nor the first Russian to become an important part of the revolutionary émigré to write and publish literature critical of the movement in Russia and even in the development administration of the Russian Empire. The very ori- of Russian culture as a whole. gins of secular Russian book printing lay in Peter the When he founded the Russian Free Press, Herzen Great’s decision, at the beginning of the 18th cen- did not have in mind the publication of a periodical tury, to have Russian books printed in Amsterdam. or a newspaper, but the need for a vehicle carrying In 1849 Ivan Golovin’s had authored the first anti- up to date news and commentary soon became tsarist book in Russian, Katikhizis russkogo naroda obvious. Eventually his newspaper, Kolokol (The (Catechism of the Russian People). Bell), became the standard by which later gene- The novelty of Herzen’s venture lay in his intention rations of publications were to be judged. Herzen to provide uncensored literature for the reading essentially inspired the network of Russian émigré, public within the Russian Empire. Since the time revolutionary periodicals that at the beginning of of Peter the government had maintained a tight the twentieth century culminated in the particular control of the reading material of its citizenry. The character of Vladimir Ulianov-Lenin’s Iskra (The current Tsar, Nicholas I, had declared himself the Spark). personal censor of the noted writer Alexander Pus- The editors and publishers of émigré periodicals hkin. When Peter Chaadaev wrote an unflattering had to master, or at least do battle with, the entire comparison of Russia with Western Europe, the complex of problems in creating publications: fin- authorities declared him insane and ordered him ding financial resources, collecting and culling to submit to medical supervision. When a group of manuscripts, setting type and printing texts, and of intellectuals known as the “petrashevtsy” resorted course then distributing them in the hope of finding to printing a pocket dictionary of foreign words in readers and receiving enough money to do more. order to discuss such concepts as “republic” and Herzen could rely on his own financial resources, “democracy,” the government banned the work. but his successors had to struggle and even to Herzen believed that he could create an alternative intrigue for money. Print shops in turn became 5 to the muzzled press in his homeland. intellectual and social centers, often visited even THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

by tsarist police agents. The distribution networks same name. If a periodical appeared to be well always ran the danger of exposure and arrest. Over funded, émigrés automatically suspected that tsa- all hung the continuing question of defining the rist sources lay behind it. After that there remained goals of each enterprise and finding readers. the problem of marketing or, as it concerned the readership in the Russian empire, smuggling. This For the émigrés printing and publishing became an process required money and sacrifice. The émigrés important occupation. Many of the leading figures usually had little money, and they offered self- of the revolutionary movement – Herzen, Mikhail sacrifice in its stead. Bakunin, Petr Lavrov, Sergei Kravchinsky, Georgii Plekhanov, Lev Tikhomirov, Vladimir Lenin – spent There was a reciprocal relationship between opposi- time in the emigration working for one publication tional and revolutionary activity within the Russian or another. When the first major Russian Marxist empire and émigré publishing activities abroad. organization, Osvobozhdenia truda (Liberation of When overt activity in the empire picked up in the Labor), was established in Western Switzerland, its late 1870s, publishing waned and some émigrés formal birth announcement consisted in the pur- even returned home; when the government struck chase of a print shop. back, publishing abroad intensified as new waves of émigrés came to join in the work. That the Russian Marxists made their home in Swit- zerland was no accident. While émigrés might seek At the same time, in the background of émigré haven almost anywhere in Western Europe, they publishing lay a continuing debate – sometimes quickly discovered that if they wanted to publish, open, sometimes muted – as to the role to which they basically had to choose between two coun- émigrés could aspire in the Russian revolutionary tries, England or Switzerland. France and Belgium movement. There was no consensus concerning the would not tolerate such activity, and although Rus- purposes of publishing. Some wanted to view their sian liberals found that they could place their works resources as being at the service of those silenced in Germany, until the end of the century revolu- at home; others insisted that they had a message, tionaries felt unsafe there. In the choice between a truth, to deliver. Herzen had appealed to right England and Switzerland most émigrés tended to reason; others criticized him for not offering a pro- choose Switzerland because, at least in those days, gram of revolution. Bakunin called for immediate it was less expensive to live and work in the Helvetic revolt, but the revolutionaries who went to the Republic than elsewhere in Europe. people had trouble delivering their messages. Some turned to violence, but at the same time the émigrés Emigration itself posed a variety of psychological took to studying Russian society more carefully, problems. To many émigrés, going abroad meant examining the history of the country and of the to admit defeat, to acknowledge that one could no revolutionary movement and looking for practical longer remain in Russia. This might even involve theories of revolution. feelings of guilt in having deserted comrades still in the field of battle. For those who wanted to justify By the end of the century, the émigrés were con- their actions and to influence the course of events vinced that their publications had to educate the in the homeland, publishing became an important people, and Marxism was beginning to enjoy consi- activity. Their publications focused on the home- derable popularity as an explanation of social deve- land, not on news of life abroad. They were meant lopment. Many émigré writers, including in parti- to stimulate opposition to the regime in Russia. The cular V. I. Lenin, came to doubt the revolutionary uncensored word could in fact be a more powerful readiness of the masses in Russia, and they couched weapon than a bomb. their messages as directives, claiming the right to lead revolution at home. For Lenin, the periodical, The print shops usually operated on shoestring originating in the emigration, was to become the budgets; Herzen sank a good part of his personal skeleton of the party organization that was to bring fortune into his print shop, but no one else had about revolution. such resources. Once the type had been set – per- haps only a signature, 16 pages, at a time – the In the 1880s the émigrés found new markets as wes- shop manager would probably have to send it out tern audiences wanted more and more information to a local printer, maybe not even a socialist, and about the sensational news coming out of Russia. that type would then remain unavailable until the This market, however, demanded different talents, job was done. Then the publisher had to find a bin- not to speak of language facility; the market was dery. In its early years, even Herzen’s shop could not accessible to the average émigré. The western print only one issue of the thick journal Poliarnaia reader, moreover, came from a different political zvezda in a year. When Peter Lavrov later began culture, and the most successful Russian émigré 6 publishing a biweekly newspaper, Vpered, he had writer, Sergei Stepniak-Kravchinsky, found that in to suspend publication of his thick journal of the appealing to a western audience he ran the risk of Introduction criticism from his compatriots for having distorted abroad. They tried to remain independent of their Russian realities. new surroundings, so as to be able to keep alive their connections with Russia, and frequently they openly The publishing enterprises tended to be the work of scorned the manners and customs of their hosts. individuals or at best small groups; their directors Within their own ranks, on the other hand, chal- often appeared to be generals without armies. The lenges continually arose as to whether they in fact Russian revolutionary movement had not yet deve- still understood Russia with all its changes especially loped parties, and the activists, by trial and error, as younger émigrés challenged the ways and views tried to find and build constituencies. As a result the of the older generations. Against this background,­ policies and practices in the print shops tended to publishing, together with the concurrent hope of be highly personalized, and individual friendships making contact with the reading public in Russia, and antagonisms frequently seemed to dominate provided the émigrés with feelings of participation policy decisions. Friedrich Engels snorted at what and self-worth, mixed with feelings of frustration. he considered the petty rivalries of among the Rus- sian émigrés, but at the same time he insisted that it This account aims at depicting 19th century tamizdat, was important to know about all this since it cons- the émigré publishing world in the second half of tituted the “diplomacy of the proletariat,” the deve- the century. The American writer Norman Mailer lopment of relationships between revolutionary insisted that no ordinary writer could capture the groups. Only in the last two decades of the century essence of such a story: did funding from Russia itself begin to direct the efforts of the émigré print shops in any sort of syste- It was always necessary to remind oneself that a matic, although still sporadic, way. series of such interviews with Lenin, Martov, Plek- hanov, and Trotsky in the days of Iskra would Herzen frequently complained about the dis­ have been likely to produce a set of stories about agreements among the people who sought social change in Russia, and he attributed them to lack short stocky men in rumpled clothes and unhe- of experience in the exercise of free speech. The althy beards who seemed to talk with a great deal debates of the émigré publishers, in this sense, of certainty in words which were hard to follow. could be considered a political kindergarten or per- Obviously no journalist could have done the job – it haps a seed bed for political parties in the empire. was work which called for a novelist...” (Prisoner of Some leaders, like Georgii Plekhanov, advocated Sex, Boston, 1971) censorship of their publications program in the interest of making their message clear; others, like Despite Mailer’s warning, this account offers the Sergei Kravchinsky, insisted that limitations on the genealogy of the various Russian print shops and freedom of speech of any comrade threatened the the major publications in Western Europe – how freedom of all. they defined their missions, how they tried to esta- blish their identities, how they tried to win support, For all their arguments, the émigrés usually con- and, of course, how their inventory and ideas passed ceived of themselves as a distinct society of Russians from generation to generation of émigrés.

7 Chapter I:

THE RUSSIAN FREE PRESS

On February 21, 1853, Herzen issued, in litho- Herzen thought of himself as a progressive, sharing graphed form, his first announcement of Free in the intellectual heritage of the so-called “Decem- Russian Book Printing in London. Addressed to brists.” Following Russia’s victory over Napole- “Brothers in Rus,” the broadside declared that since onic France in 1815, the intellectual legacy of the there was no place for free Russian speech at home, French Revolution had proved more powerful than the time had come to publish in Russian outside of Napoleon’s armies. New ideas flowed into Russia, Russia. Calling silence “a sign of consent,” Herzen and in 1825, at the announcement of the death of urged his compatriots to follow the example of the Tsar Alexander I, the trusted Imperial Guard, repre- Poles in carrying their struggle against tsarist rule sentatives of the nobility, tried to exploit confusion into the emigration, and he invited the submission over the order of succession to the throne to raise of anything written in the spirit of freedom. “Our calls for “constitution” and “republic,” alien concepts door is open,” he declared, “Whether you want to use that they had learned from foreign publications. it or not, that will be on your conscience... If secu- The authorities quickly quelled the disorder; the rity is worth more than free speech, remain silent.” Tsar, Nicholas I, executed five leaders of the trouble. This date of February 21, he concluded, “marks the Nevertheless, the rebels, named for the month of beginning of the Russian uncensored press.” December 1825, left behind them a legacy of oppo- sition to the traditions of autocratic government. On June 22, 1853, the “Russian Free Press” print shop began production. The “first free Russian Imbued with idealistic images of popular revolt and word” to be sent back to the homeland took the form popular government, Herzen, from his very first of a leaflet entitled Iur’ev den’ Iur’ev den’, addressed days in Paris, found the West disappointing. The to the Russian nobility. St. George’s Day, Iur’ev den’, West, he pronounced, “has a great idea, a grand had historically marked the time of year when pea- ideal – but little strength, little energy.” Russia, he sants could presumably leave a given landlord’s became convinced, had nothing to learn from the estate, and the leaflet used this date as the jumping West. Watching the failure of revolution in 1848 off point for an attack on the institution of serfdom. only led him to despair of western liberal beliefs – “We are slaves because we are masters,” Herzen the people were unworthy of the faith that the libe- declared in the name of all landowners. “We are rals invested in them. “Universal suffrage, the last servants because we are landlords.” Herzen mailed banality of the formal political world,” he wrote, copies of the leaflet to leading government officials “gave a voice to the orangutans, and you cannot in Russia, and he placed copies for sale in radical make a concert from them.” Russia, he concluded, bookstores in Germany and Switzerland. had to find its own path to social justice, one in har- mony with its own traditions. He realized that this was a turning point in his life. Born in Moscow in 1812, the illegitimate son of a In the fall of 1852 Herzen had left the continent for Russian landowner and therefore furnished with England as a bitter and disappointed man. Added the foreign sounding surname of Herzen (Gertsen), to his political discontent was devastating personal he had twice tasted the bitter experience of exile to travail. His wife had left him for a man he had the provinces in Russia, and in 1847, having become considered his good friend. Subsequently she had independently wealthy after his father’s death, he returned, but then she had become ill, and in the had chosen to test the air of Western Europe, arri- spring of 1852 she had died. Besides his personal ving just in time to share in the exultation and agony over the situation, he felt exposed and ridi- disappointments of revolution when France, Aus- culed before the world of European intellectuals. tria, Italy, and Germany experienced the “Spring He had intended to stay in England only a month 8 of Peoples,” as the revolutionary events of 1848 or two; then he would go on to America. London, became known. Chapter I: THE RUSSIAN FREE PRESS however, seemed to offer him the haven and quiet the Russian Academy of Sciences but had not been that he felt he needed. “One can establish a remar- claimed. As his first typesetter Herzen hired a Pole, kable life here,” he wrote. “I repeat with full convic- Ludwik Czerniecki, who soon took over direction tion that in all Europe there is one city, and this city of the shop’s work. Stanislaw Tchorzewski, another is London.” London, he declared, had “all the short- Pole, handled problems of publishing and distri- comings of a free state in the political sense, and buting the printed materials, and Herzen located in turn it has freedom and a religion of respect for his type in a shop just established in London by the individual.” Deciding that to go on to America Worcell’s Polish group, known as the Centralizacja. would constitute flight from the struggle in Russia, The first responses from his friends in Russia disap- he chose to remain in England. pointed him. He had been sure that he would find Herzen now concluded that he had a mission to support and get materials to publish. Instead he write not just about but rather for Russia. For several received cautionary warnings, and his friends in years he had been telling western Europeans about Russia seemed unable – or perhaps unwilling – to conditions in Russia, assuring them that the land set up smuggling routes into Russia for his works. consisted of more than just a mindless despotism. (He had to rely on the Poles for this service.) The He also worked intermittently on his memoirs, Past historian T. N. Granovsky warned him to be careful, and Thoughts, which took the form of essays and saying “You have forgotten much about Russia.” vignettes, a project he would continue to the end of Late in the summer of 1853 another friend, M. his life. There remained yet the challenge of sending S. Shchepkin, appeared in London to warn that his words back to Russia; while not abandoning his Herzen’s publications could compromise his sym- task of educating the West, he wanted to speak to pathizers in Russia. “I would get on my own knees his own people back at home. For this purpose, he in front of you,” pleaded Shchepkin, “and would decided to found a printing press. ask you to stop while there is time.” Go to America, he advised Herzen: “Write nothing, let yourself be In his quest for social justice he focused on the forgotten, and then after about two or three years plight of the Russian peasant: The peasant must we will begin to work so that they will permit your be freed from the abominable system of serfdom. entry into Russia.” No one, Shchepkin declared, Influenced by the writings of a German traveler to would send any texts. Russia, August von Haxthausen, who had reported the existence of apparently ancient communal Herzen rejected all advice for caution. His writings, institutions among the Russian peasants, Herzen he asserted, would not bring martyrdom to anyone claimed to discern a distinctive form of socialism in Russia, and he lamented the serf mentality that among these people, and he looked to them as the gripped the minds of his Russian friends, whom key to the future. Their energy had to be released he called an “unhappy, long-suffering, weary, noble and then directed into new, constructive channels. generation.” He regretted his friends’ fainthearte- “The whole Russian Question,” he wrote in a British dness, but he would persist: periodical, “for the present at least may be said to be included in that of serfdom.” As he wrote to a friend My friends can say what they want; I will not close in February 1853, “The main thing now is propa- the press... I will print, unceasingly print... If our ganda for the emancipation of the muzhiki [i.e., the friends do not like my work, that will hurt, but this peasants].” will not stop me. Others value it, a young genera- Founding a publishing operation in London had tion, the future generation. been no simple task. Herzen had previously con- For all his optimism, the work of the press cost him sidered starting a press while living in France in money. “Remember,” he wrote to a friend, “that I 1849, but that thought had come to nothing. Since, have a third daughter, the print shop, and that she with the aid of the banking House of Rothschild, he has a nanny, Czerniecki, who has a nasty habit – he had managed to spirit his wealth out of Russia, he needs food and a place to live.” Nevertheless he per- had enough money for the venture, but he needed sisted in his optimism, awaiting resonance for his advice and contacts in the printing world. Now he lonely voice. received aid and encouragement from a source no Russian could have conceived of before this time – For the moment he found his main support among from Polish émigrés in London. the Poles. In greeting the opening of Herzen’s shop, Demokrata Polski, the Centralizacija’s organ, He found support for his enterprise among the left patronizingly welcomed this example of “freethin- of the Polish emigration in London. Count Sta- king men of the Russian people,” who was ready nislaw Worcell, twelve years older than Herzen, to become “an active participant in the great cause helped him to calculate financing and to purchase of European liberation.” Herzen, the newspaper 9 Russian type in Paris, where it had been ordered by THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

concluded, “has understood the obligation of the upon the soldiers not to lay down their lives for the Russian people.” Herzen responded in kind, wel- Tsar against the Polish people. His reaction to the coming the support of the Poles. “The Poles for- western powers differentiated between the English give us,” he proclaimed, adding that it would be and the French. He was opposed to Napoleon III of “shameful” not to take the hand that they were France, but he allowed himself to dream about the proffering. “I united this print shop with the print possibility of British successes in the Black Sea: shop of the Polish Centralizacja,” he wrote to the French historian Jules Michelet, “as a sign of the Then I will move with my press into the English city union and full unity between us and revolutio- of Odessa... This will be great! nary Poland.” In November 1853 he declared to a meeting celebrating the anniversary of the Polish Then in the fall of 1854, Herzen came into conflict rising of 1830, “Long live independent Poland and with the Poles. He could not accept all the nationa- free Russia!” To a friend Herzen described this listic ideals of Poles; he objected to what he called moment as “the first time since the creation of the their medieval Catholic thoughts; and he also had world that the Russian word had sounded in the more immediate, practical complaints about affairs revolutionary cause.” As he saw it, his link with the in the print shop. The Poles were too casual in pre- Poles enhanced his own revolutionary credentials senting him with printing bills, and he felt that their in the eyes of western intellectuals but his support smuggling operations were failing him. When the of the Polish cause brought angry protests from time came in November again to mark the anniver- other Russians in England. sary of the 1830 rising, the Poles asked him not to speak. Herzen decided to do them one better, and Events beyond Herzen’s control soon complicated he stayed away from the meeting altogether. “As his position in London. Anti-Russian feelings, long they requested,” he wrote a friend, “I was eloquently fermenting in England, exploded in reaction to silent.” In December 1854 he finally decided to developments in the Middle East. In the summer of move out of the space that he had been sharing with 1853, without a declaration of war, Russian troops Centralizacja, giving as his reason the economic had crossed into the Danubian Principalities of the problems that the manager of the Polish shop was Ottoman Empire. A flurry of diplomatic activity experiencing. ensued, and in October the Turkish government declared war. At the end of November the Russians From his new location on Brunswick Square in destroyed a part of the Turkish fleet in the Black Sea, London, where he had also brought Czerniecki to and the London press angrily denounced this “mas- run his printing operations, he renewed his call for sacre.” In January 1854 a joint English and French manuscripts from Russia, claiming that the press squadron sailed into the Black Sea, and conflict in had not stopped working since June 1, 1853. At the the Crimea ensued. same time he decided that he needed a connection with a solid respectable English publisher. He had In his own mind, Herzen could easily distinguish already worked with several, both in England and the Russian people from the Tsar and his govern- in Germany, but now he made the momentous ment. The Russian people, the Russian soldier, had decision to distribute the publications of the Rus- a liberating mission in the Balkans; the Tsar, on the sian Free Press through M. Trübner & Co. 12 Pater- other hand, represented only intolerable despo- noster Row. tism. In a statement to the English public, entitled “Russia and the Old World,” Herzen argued that the Nikolaus Trübner, born in Heidelberg in 1817, had Russian question and the social question, the two come to London in 1843 after a decade of training burning problems of the day in the West, were now in the German book business. In 1851 he founded one. Herzen praised Russia’s youth and unspoiled his own firm in alliance with Thomas Delf, London character, and he predicted that Nicholas I, serving representative of several American firms. From the as an “instrument of fate,” would conquer Istanbul, beginning Trübner directed his efforts toward the Constantinople, and thereby contribute to the col- international book trade, and he was a member lapse of the tsarist system and to the flowering of of the important Börsenverein des deutschen the Slavic peoples. His English audience did not Buchhandels. With Trübner’s name protecting his necessarily accept his sanguine view of the prospect publications, Herzen could hope for less trouble of Russia’s frontiers expanding. in arranging for shipments to Russia through Ger- many. Under the terms of the agreement, Herzen Herzen followed up this declaration by printing covered all costs of printing, and Trübner distri- four proclamations aimed at arousing the Rus- buted the publications on a commission basis. sian peasantry, and he printed an appeal to Rus- sian soldiers in Poland, ostensibly in the name of Despite his new hopes, Herzen still found that 10 the “Russian Free Commune in London,” calling his publications were selling slowly. Speaking to Chapter I: THE RUSSIAN FREE PRESS a gathering of refugees on February 27, 1855, he asked for support in Russia. The journal, he stated, sounded despondent. As a Russian, he resented would be “dedicated exclusively to the question of pressures to make him speak publicly against Russia Russian liberation and to the dissemination of a free in the current European conflict. Even among the form of thought in Russia.” This periodical would refugees, however, he had his troubles, having been serve as a channel for the discussion of social issues: denounced as a German Jew, a Panslavist, and a “Official Russia has a tongue and finds defenders tsarist propagandist. But, warming to his audience, even in London. But young Russia, Russia of the he still spoke out in favor of Polish independence, future and of hope, has no organ. We offer this to and, invoking the memory of the Decembrists, he her.” For the third time Herzen publicly appealed insisted that Russia would yet lead Europe on a for manuscripts; the frequency of this publication, revolutionary path. “History,” he told his audience, he declared, would depend on the flow of materials. “is really unfair; to those who come late it doesn’t “Manuscripts eventually die,” he warned; “they must just give remains, it gives the seniority of experi- be preserved in print.” ence.” Russia, he argued, had a special mission for For the first issue, however, there were only a few the world. items on hand. Herzen collected statements of sup- Then suddenly, in the middle of his despondence, port and sympathy from West European friends, Herzen’s world changed. “We are drunk, we are but almost half the volume’s 246 pages were filled by crazy, we have become young,” he wrote. To an Ita- excerpts from his memoirs, Past and Thoughts. He lian friend he exclaimed, “Long live death and long was still receiving nothing from Russia. In June 1855 live the dead! Finally the nightmare of all Europe, he complained to a friend, “... I am simply amazed the vampire of Europe, is, as Hamlet said, fee- that there is not a line from anybody... The cowar- ding worms.” News had come of the death of Tsar dice of our people in Moscow drives me to despair.” Nicholas I, whom Herzen hated personally more He was also disappointed that the printing of the than he hated the institution of monarchy. first issue took longer than he had expected. He had hoped to publish it on July 25, the anniversary of Nicholas’s successor, his son Alexander II, was by the execution of the five Decembrists in 1826; the no means sure to be a better ruler, “but he would at job dragged on into August. least be different.” Now Russia could expect a quick end to the Crimean War, of course at the price of Then, just as the Russian Free Press was completing “a shameful peace,” but “that is what will help our its printing of the journal, a visitor arrived from cause in Russia.” In an open letter to the new Tsar, Moscow, Pavel Lukich Pikulin, who brought stories Herzen declared that Alexander could make him- of a new kind: “It was hard to see well from a dis- self a genuine leader among the Russian people by tance – there had to be an eyewitness,” exclaimed ending censorship and freeing the peasants. “The Herzen, at least once admitting his difficulties of death of Nicholas,” Herzen later declared, “was one keeping in touch with events in Russia. Pikulin of those fortunate historical occasions, one of those brought Herzen new hope, as he delivered mes- decisive interferences of Providence that must be sages from friends and even brought manuscripts. exploited.” Herzen quickly added a note at the very end of this first volume of Poliarnaia zvezda: Within two or three days of the news of Nicholas’s death, Herzen began working on a periodical, to be Our booklet was already printed when we received called Poliarnaia zvezda (Polar Star). In their time a copybook of poems by Pushkin, Lermontov, and the Decembrists had published an almanac with the Polezhaev. We will place some of them in the next same title, and after the crushing of their revolt, it issues. We know no limit to our gratitude for this had become a highly sought bibliographical rarity, fetching a price of 100 rubles for a compete set of its delivery. Finally! Finally! three volumes. Making explicit his own symbolism, Despite this outburst of enthusiasm, the Russian Herzen declaimed, “The Polar Star has been hidden Free Press lay quiet for the last several months of behind the clouds of the reign of Nicholas. Nicholas 1855. Czerniecki went to Paris on business, and has departed, and the Polar Star again appears.” Herzen kept busy with other work. Poliarnaia To further his commitment to the memory of the zvezda received favorable comment; but in an open Decembrists, Herzen commissioned an English letter to his friends in Moscow, written at the end friend, William Linton, to prepare portraits of the of 1855, Herzen again complained about their fai- five executed Decembrists as the cover design. It lure to send him materials: “For the last time I ask made no difference that Linton had no idea what you: Will they send me the books that I requested the men looked like; Herzen cared more for sym- through Paris or not? Will they send me some bols than likenesses. manuscripts or not?” Herzen was frustrated by the 11 In his announcement of the journal, Herzen again continued lack of contributions from Russia. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

On New Year’s Eve, 1855-1856, a sentimental occa- western powers to raise the Polish question at the sion under any circumstances, an anonymous letter talks, but they resented the treaty’s neutralization from St. Petersburg moved Herzen to tears. Young of the Black Sea. The generally poor showing of people whom he did not know were thanking him Russian forces in the war, despite individual heroic for maintaining the Russian Free Press and for performances, raised the prospect of far-reaching publishing Poliarnaia zvezda. The letter, to be sure, reforms in the empire. criticized the press’s leaflets relating to the Crimean For Herzen, however, this was still a period of War, but Herzen wrote this off as a product of ine- unrewarded waiting, still working in something xperience with “free speech.” In any case, Herzen of a void. The anti-Russian feelings rampant in wrote, the letter “concluded the year for me in grand England upset him, and he was fast losing his ori- fashion, and I will stand, doubly bolder, at my prin- ginal enthusiasm for living in London. The cost of ting press.” living was high, and he called his position “boring, The year 1856 therefore dawned promisingly as like the situation of worms in cheese.” He was thin- the end of the Crimean War hung in the air and king of moving to Switzerland, but for the moment rumors flew about the new Tsar’s intentions to the press, with Czerniecki back at work, was busy liberate the serfs in Russia. In February the war- setting up the second issue of Poliarnaia zvezda. ring powers finally opened negotiations in Paris. This could not be completed before May, but he On March 30, 1856, the Treaty of Paris formalized was planning to leave England as soon after that a rather humiliating defeat for the tsarist empire. as possible. “London,” he declared, “is weighing on The Russian could take heart in the failure of the me like a storm cloud.”

12 Chapter 2:

YEARS OF TRIUMPH

The month of April 1856 brought a surprising and parallel – Herzen became involved with Ogarev’s happy turning point in Herzen’s fortunes. The Cri- wife, Natalia Tuchkova-Ogareva, and Tuchkova mean War had ended, there were promises of new eventually bore him three children. Ogarev accepted developments in Russia, yet his personal life was all this stoically if not without some tension. He unhappy. The printing of Poliarnaia zvezda itself turned to the bottle for solace, and he found conso- epitomized his problems and limitations at this time. lation with a London prostitute, Mary Sotherland, In contrast to his hopeful thoughts at the beginning whom he persuaded to change her ways and to tie of the year, the flow of manuscripts he had expected her life to his. still refused to materialize; for the second issue of Through all this personal turmoil, the Russian Free his almanac he had written about 190 of the 288 Press kept the ménage together. In a troubled letter pages himself. The print shop, moreover, only had written in 1859, Ogarev accused Herzen of having the capacity to print one issue per year. Once this been cruel, and then he exclaimed, “... if instead of second issue would be ready, he planned to make helping, you continue to display your rational-ego- changes in his life, probably moving back to the tistical malice (just as she displays her irrational- continent. egotistical malice), then I ask only one thing. Keep On April 9, the arrival of an old friend, Nikolai me as a faithful employee of the printing press, but Platonovich Ogarev, brought an abrupt change to let me live by myself.” The concern that the two men all his plans and thoughts. Herzen immediately shared for the printed Russian word, set against the recalled how, as youths in Moscow, he and Ogarev background of their youthful dreams, prevailed over had solemnly pledged themselves to follow the the confusion and tension of their personal lives. lead of the Decembrists: “The sun was setting, the As the first consequence of Ogarev’s arrival in cupolas glittered, beneath the hill the city extended London, Herzen put off his thoughts of moving farther than the eye could reach; a fresh breeze blew to Switzerland. The manuscripts that Ogarev had on our faces; we stood leaning against each other brought gave him plenty of work, and he also felt and, suddenly embracing, vowed in the sight of all encouraged by other signs of new activity in Russia. Moscow to sacrifice our lives to the struggle we had Censorship seemed to be easing there; some peri- chosen.” Ogarev, moreover, now brought with him a odicals even dared to reprint earlier writings of his. mass of literature – poetry, manuscripts, and books. The new Tsar, Alexander II, had reportedly advised (Among the current writers with whom Herzen Moscow nobles that serfdom should be abolished could now become acquainted was “a very talented from above rather than “to wait for the time when new author” by the name of Count Lev Tolstoy.) it will begin to abolish itself spontaneously from Now, finally, Herzen had both a sympathetic colla- below.” Herzen now felt his mission even more borator and fresh, current materials with which to strongly: “I will remain at my machine. Whatever work. they said before, I now, more than ever, am con- But Ogarev also brought new problems. His debi- vinced of the importance of having a completely litating weakness for strong drink had complicated free organ for Russian thought.” his bouts with epilepsy. “About Ogarev I will say one During the summer of 1856 the flow of Russians sad thing,” Herzen wrote to a friend, “and this is his traveling to Western Europe increased dramati- completely deranged health. I don’t know whether cally, and visiting Herzen in London became a fas- it will improve here. This is sad.” Herzen’s doctor hionable as well as a stimulating thing to do. This put Ogarev on an alcohol-free regimen – “not one current of visitors delighted Herzen, who held open drop of wine.” Ogarev, however, would never free house on Sundays, and with the visitors came a gro- himself of his alcoholism. Another new problem: In wing flow of manuscripts – old historic documents, an unconscious reversal of his own earlier unhappy belles lettres that had circulated only privately, and 13 marital experience – he himself never drew the THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

commentaries on contemporary events. As the flow strictly political character for the active opposition. of manuscripts grew, moreover, so did demand for We will limit ourselves only to Russia and Poland.” the publications of the Russian Free Press. Herzen Kolokol quickly shed its original identity as a “sup- was finally finding an audience. plement,” although it would continue to carry that In June 1856 Herzen estimated that since April designation for several years. It appeared for the Trübner had sold 2000 francs worth of the Russian next ten years, far outliving the most influential Free Press’s publications, and six months later he period of Herzen’s activity. In its first five years, estimated the volume of sales since April at 10,000 Kolokol became a focal point of Russian intellectual francs. By then Trübner had sold out the stockpiles life. It became a model for a popular oppositional of publications in his storehouse. “You cannot ima- Russian voice; subsequent generations would vainly gine,” Herzen wrote in the spring of 1857, try to emulate its success. In short, the newspaper consolidated Herzen’s position in Russian cultural what dimensions our London propaganda is taking. and intellectual history of the late 1850s as a catalyst We can barely keep up, since there are just three for critical thought about the tsarist order. of us: I, Ogarev, and the typesetter. My books are Underlying the creation of the newspaper was a selling magnificently, expenses are being completely plan that Ogarev had prepared for what he called a covered. The third volume of Poliarnaia zvezda, for “secret society,” aimed at changing the social order example, comes out on April 15 – already there is an in Russia. The society, Ogarev argued, had to have order for 300 copies, and I can count on another 200 its own printed organ that would establish guide- even before May 1. I would never have believed in lines for theory and practice on the part of social such things in the time of the renowned Nicholas. activists. The organization itself would spread out in a series of concentric circles, each area of speciali- In response to these developments, Herzen zation having its own printed organ, and ultimately expanded and diversified his publishing program. followers out on the periphery of the organization’s But first he had to respond to correspondents in web would be unaware of the source of their instruc- Russia who objected to his vision of peasant soci- tions. “Naturally,” Ogarev conceded, “the society alism and of Russia’s mission to renew Europe and cannot limit itself to the one activity, book publis- who urged him to moderate his tone. As his old hing,” but its first task was to popularize and spread friend K. D. Kavelin challenged, what had the Rus- knowledge especially in the fields of the natural sci- sian peasant done that one should expect of him ences, economic, and jurisprudence – and for this it “the future rebirth of mankind”? must engage in publishing. Although he disagreed with the cautious libera- Ogarev’s grand plan, which anticipated V. I. Lenin’s lism of Kavelin and others, Herzen wanted to give plan for the newspaper Iskra forty years later, was them a chance to express their views publicly, and stillborn. He and Herzen organized no secret society, to this end he began a new series of publications, and Herzen, moreover, repeatedly demonstrated a called Golosa iz Rossii (Voices from Russia). Calling preference for printing informational rather than Kavelin’s criticisms the result of “our lack of expe- programmatic material. Nevertheless he shared rience in speaking without a censor’s supervision,” Ogarev’s conviction that literacy and knowledge he declared his readiness to serve as “just a type- would lead the way to revolution; the uncensored setter, a typesetter ready to print everything useful printed word was a revolutionary weapon. for our common goal.” As before, he believed that with time even these cautious persons of good will Through the late 1850s,Kolokol enabled the Russian would recognize that he was right. Free Press to flourish. It provided a forum for dis- cussions of the peasant question; in 1858 the editors Herzen’s energy, however, could not be satisfied entered the debate still more vigorously, passing with the passive role of being “just a typesetter,” and from simply printing items sent to them by corres- in April 1857 he announced plans for a new publi- pondents on to offering their own views on desi- cation, Kolokol (The Bell), which would be a supple- rable terms and conditions for emancipation. The ment to Poliarnaia zvezda but would appear more newspaper remained a monthly until February 1, frequently. This publication had a specific program: 1858; then, beginning with February 15, it appeared liberation of the word from censorship, liberation twice a month. Although it kept the subtitle of “sup- of the peasants from the control of the landlords, plement” to Poliarnaia zvezda, which continued to and liberation of the common people from corporal appear as an annual, it quickly surpassed the popu- punishment. Herzen invited all “who share our love larity of its mother ship. The demand for Russian for Russia” not just to listen to the bell’s ringing, but Free Press publications grew so enthusiastically that 14 also to help its resonance by furnishing reports of Czerniecki eventually found it profitable to reprint official malfeasance. The publication would have “a a number of the early issues of Kolokol. Trübner Chapter 2: YEARS OF TRIUMPH undertook publishing some works at his own cost – Inevitably the criticism arose that in rejecting any although he was, as one observer put it, “too careful offered texts he was engaging in censorship. He to risk his own wares” in smuggling. The press’s responded that he had to exercise his own editorial publications, Herzen exclaimed, were moving “as if judgment; he could not be “just a typesetter.” As they were on wheels.” he explained, “It is unpleasant to be a censor, but on the editor lies the moral responsibility that he Herzen stood ready to publish anything he thought accepts.” The liberals in Russia attacked his radical interesting to the Russian reading public. He repu- stances – “The first free Russian journals serve as blished Alexander Radishchev’s Journey from St. the strongest evidence for the usefulness of cen- Petersburg to Moscow, for which the Empress Cathe- sorship,” wrote the historian B. N. Chicherin – and rine had exiled the author, and he published Cathe- the radicals in Russia criticized Herzen’s appeals to rine II’s diary, which somehow came into his hands. the Tsar for reform. He started a new series Istoricheskii sbornik Vol’noi Russkoi Tipografii v Londone (Historical Anthology Herzen consistently included the Tsar in the of the Free Russian Press in London), and he con- audience that he wanted to reach. From the time tinued to publish Golosa iz Rossii, which appeared of Alexander’s accession to the throne, he had in a total of nine volumes before its demise in 1860, expressed the hope that this Tsar would lead Russia the victim of the growing radicalization of the Rus- to a new life, and he welcomed every sign of pro- sian intelligentsia. gress. In Kolokol of February 15, 1858, the first on the new biweekly schedule, Herzen enthusiasti- The Russian Free Press’s publications penetrated the cally responded to Alexander’s initiative urging the highest circles of the Russian government, and they emancipation of the peasants, exclaiming “Thou were even selling at premium prices. At a meeting hast conquered, Galilean!” In the third volume of of the State Council in St. Petersburg during the Poliarnaia zvezda, Ogarev wrote, “Your Majesty, free spring of 1857, Count S. G. Stroganov passed a note yourself and free Russia,” and he had then added his to the chief of police Prince V. A. Dolgorukov: “If own thought that Alexander merited a place at the you wish, prince, I will give you Poliarnaia zvezda head of “the great Russian cause – the liberation of for five silver rubles, the price I paid myself.” Dolgo- the peasants.” rukov scribbled back, “It would be better if you told me where you got this book so cheaply!” A new generation of young radicals in Russia was not so inclined to find anything of value in the Old Success bred still greater success. In August 1857 Order. It objected to Herzen’s signs of respect for the a mysterious visitor came to Herzen and offered a Tsar, and it furthermore complained about Herzen’s contribution to the cause: “I have decided to leave practice of exposés of malfeasance and abuses in some money with you. Should it be necessary for office, as if the tsarist order could be redeemed your printing press or for Russian propaganda through the appearance of a few honest men. N. A. generally, then it would be at your disposal.” Herzen Dobroliubov, editor of the St. Petersburg literary protested that he did not need the money, but the monthly Sovremennik, criticized Kolokol’s exposés man insisted, “No sir, this is decided. I have 50,000 as accomplishing nothing of value. Stirred by per- francs... I shall give you 20,000 for propaganda.” If sonal animus toward Sovremennik’s director, V. A. Herzen did not need and did not use the money, he Nekrasov, Herzen accused the young radicals of could return it when the man was again in England abetting the reactionaries and even suggested that – “but if I don’t return within some ten years, or if I one might discern here the insidious hand of the die, use it for your propaganda.” Within a day or two authorities. Dobroliubov immediately considered he left London, never to be seen again. This nest egg, challenging Herzen to a duel, but another member which Herzen invested and which became known of the St. Petersburg group, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, henceforth as the “Bakhmetev fund,” remained insisted that the proper course would be to send an intact, although it quickly became an apple of dis- envoy to London to meet with Herzen. Chernys- cord within the emigration. hevsky undertook the mission himself. As the demand for his publications increased, Now 30 years old, Chernyshevsky came from a Herzen found that the demands for his time and clerical family, but, with the consent of his father, attention grew even faster. The Russian reading he had broken the pattern by attending the Uni- public rapidly diversified, and its sectors would versity of St. Petersburg. At first deeply religious, not be satisfied with Herzen’s self-proclaimed role he had soon, under the influence of the events of of being “just a typesetter.” He resisted pressures to 1848, turned to socialism and skepticism. Long an take sides among groups in Russia, but he neverthe- admirer of Herzen, he had undertaken a literary less had to make controversial decisions of his own career in St. Petersburg, and he had become an out- in choosing which of the growing flood of manu- standing practitioner of the art of circumventing the 15 scripts to print. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

censor in commenting on contemporary problems. The authorities in St. Petersburg had been wat- At the same time, he had become the intellectual ching him for years, attempting, with occasional leader of the new generation of Russian radicals. success, to interfere with shipments of his publi- When he took up the question of the emancipation cations through Germany. They had also engaged of the peasants, he split with Herzen, insisting that in some discussion of establishing another publi- the terms that the government was preparing were cation, printed in the West, seemingly free of the too costly for the peasants. restrictions of censorship but at the same time sympathetic to the government. They could not, Chernyshevsky’s meeting with Herzen at the end of however, figure out how to do this; as one official June 1859 has been elevated by some to a confron- argued, to encourage a free press would be tanta- tation between revolutionary generations. In fact, mount to killing “oneself out of fear of being killed.” their talks passed quietly, although the gap bet- Therefore, as one official complained, “one can find ween the generations was not to be bridged. Cher- [émigré publications] in practically every home, not nyshevsky later described Herzen as a “Kavelin to speak of every pocket” in the empire. squared,” an unreconstructable liberal, but Herzen recognized the integrity of the Sovremennik group In its frustration, the Russian government sponsored and immediately published a retraction of his the publication of pamphlets attacking Herzen. After innuendo: “It would be extremely painful if the reading one such attack, written by N. V. Elagin, an irony with which we expressed ourselves were to official of the tsarist censor’s office, Herzen claimed be considered an insulting allusion.” privately that he and Ogarev had laughed heartily at it; in Kolokol, however, he solemnly declared that he Despite the complaints of the Sovremennik group, would not honor the work with a response. The tsa- Herzen continued to publish exposés, soon laun- rist officials nevertheless persisted; when Herzen, in ching yet another periodical, Pod Sud! (On Trial), 1862, rejected a manuscript submitted by one D. K. carrying accounts of miscarriages of justice in Schedo-Ferotti, the writer, a Russian agent, publicly Russia. A year later, in October 1860, he felt cons- charged Herzen with having exercised arbitrary trained to defend his own generation, the “superf- censorship. Herzen then published an open letter luous” men of the 1840s, against the “jaundiced” to the Russian ambassador in London, reporting young radicals who “gloomily reproach men threats against his life, but Schedo-Ferroti replied because they dine without gnashing their teeth and with a publication, reprinted four times, ridiculing because they enjoy pictures or music and forget the Herzen. misfortunes of this world.” In the face of all attacks, from whatever quarter, Herzen also had to deal with other, less program- whether liberal, radical, or government, Herzen matic criticisms of his work, ranging from com- insisted that he would continue his work. “The plaints that Poliarnaia zvezda was wasting paper matter of Russian propaganda,” he declared, “is not a in printing poetry with broad margins to personal caprice”; rather it was “the work of our life, our reli- attacks against his wealth. After the New York Eve- gion, a piece of our heart, our service to the Russian ning Post had printed a letter saying that figures like people.” His task now was “to be an organ of move- Herzen and the novelist Ivan Turgenev were living ment, to show the way and the goal, to say what the on money derived from the sale of their serfs, Herzen censorship wants kept silent.” He stood ready as ever angrily responded that he had never sold a serf, that “vigorously to help any good enterprise, so long as it the government had sequestered the family estate, does not contradict our religion.” and that therefore he was receiving no money from it. Herzen recognized that some people objected to By the end of the 1850s, the goal to which Herzen his personal wealth, but he argued that money cons- had dedicated his efforts was on the horizon, and tituted an important and essential weapon: “No one finally, on March 4, 1861, the tsarist government throws away a weapon in time of war, although it announced the emancipation of the peasants in may have come from the enemy and even be rusty.” the Russian Empire. The result of protracted, con- servative, bureaucratic intrigues, the act actually Behind some of these criticisms undoubtedly lay imposed a heavy new form of servitude on the pea- the heavy hand of tsarist authorities, trying to dis- santry. At the very least, the peasants were obliged credit Herzen and thereby undermine his remar- to live by new restrictions for nine years, that is kably strong influence. In 1857 Herzen discovered until March 4, 1870, at which time they would that an employee in Trübner’s publishing house be subjected to yet another set of conditions. The was passing on information. The man was fired, but complexity of the terms quickly undermined the Herzen knew only too well that among his weekly spontaneous enthusiasm that had greeted the visitors were quite probably tsarist agents, looking emancipation, and new voices of discontent arose. 16 for compromising information. In London Herzen greeted the first news with joy. Chapter 2: YEARS OF TRIUMPH

He had long been waiting for this moment. “You of July 1, in answer to the question “What do the probably know,” he wrote to his son on February people need?” Ogarev offered the ringing slogan 24, “that on March 4 they will proclaim the emanci- that became the rallying cry of the next two decades pation with land (the portion of land is unknown). in Russia: “Very simply, the people need land and This is surely, together with the unification of Italy, freedom.” On November 1, taking note of student one of the major events of the last twenty-five demonstrations that had brought the closing of uni- years.” To celebrate the occasion, Herzen organized versities in Russia, Herzen offered his own call: a dinner for the associates of the Russian Free Press, to be followed by an open house for “every Russian From all sides of our enormous motherland – from of whatever party who sympathizes with the great the Don and the Ural, from the Volga and the Dnepr c au s e .” – grows a moan, rises a murmur; this is the first roar of the ocean wave which seethes with storms The cries of joy, however, were quickly strangled. Herzen had long recognized the cold hand of the after the terribly fatiguing calm. To the people! conservatives steering the course of emancipation, To the people! There is your place, you exiles of and he had bemoaned Alexander’s failure to provide science... more forceful leadership. “If only,” he lamented, “it were possible to say again, ‘Thou hast conquered, In spite of this inspired oratory, Herzen had trouble Galilean.’” Nevertheless he was still ready to toast redefining Kolokol’s program. Emancipation of the the Tsar, but then news came that Russian troops peasants had been one of the newspaper’s original were firing on Polish demonstrators. “Warsaw’s demands, and that, at least in form, had now been blood,” he wrote later, cast a pall over the entire realized. Herzen proclaimed new priorities: Inde- evening. The celebrants drank toasts to “the eman- pendence for Poland, Land for the peasants, and cipated Russian people” and to “The full, uncondi- Freedom for Russia. He identified the social forces tional independence of Poland, for her liberation that he thought would realize these goals: the Poles, from Russia and Germany, and for the fraternal the peasants, the students. But these new goals could union of Russians and Poles.” not focus the emotions of the Russian public as cle- arly as he had been able to do in the past. Just as the Over the succeeding months Herzen repeatedly realities of the emancipation had disappointed him, expressed his disappointment in the government. Herzen soon found new disappointments within In Kolokol of May 1, he grieved that Tsar Alexander the new generation of Russian radicals. II had not died “on the day when the emancipation decree was proclaimed to the Russian people.” In the Nevertheless, with his Russian Free Press awash in issue of June 15, Ogarev proclaimed, “The people a sea of manuscripts, Herzen could at this point have been deceived by the Tsar,” and Herzen vigo- take considerable pride in his accomplishments, rously denounced the “tongue-tied illiteracy and and of these Kolokol would stand as his greatest. duplicity of the government.” The newspaper car- Subsequent generations might dispute his views ried reports of peasant rebellions and other expres- and might challenge his methods, but they would sions of opposition, as in the case of troubles in struggle to distill and reproduce the essence of Bezdna, where the peasants believed that a second his popularity, and they would admire and envy emancipation decree had been suppressed. Kolokol, the promontory from which he had for a time directed and watched over the discussions Herzen and Ogarev now formulated new thoughts about Russia’s future. for the radical youth in Russia. Writing in Kolokol

17 Chapter 3:

THE YOUNG EMIGRATION

The emancipation of the peasants in Russia left Long in trouble with the authorities for his literary Herzen face to face with his critics. The Russian activity, Dolgorukov came to Western Europe in behemoth had shifted a bit, and no one could be May 1859 and published a book, La Verité sur la certain what further changes would ensue. There Russie, which quickly went through several prin- were those fearing too much movement, and those tings and was translated into Russian. The tsarist demanding more. Herzen’s peculiar combination authorities summoned him home, but the prince of views, with his faith in the masses of peasantry, refused to obey the call, sending the police a photo- his irritation with intellectuals who disagreed with graph, “a good likeness,” in case they simply wanted him, and his propensity for publicly addressing to remember how he looked. The authorities res- words of wisdom to the Tsar, left him vulnerable ponded by seizing his property in Russia. to attack from all sides. The attacks from the young Dolgorukov’s political views were constitutional radicals especially hurt him over the next few years; rather than radical-social. The government, he the radicals of the day, he asserted, “could drive an argued, should make use of all persons of talent, angel to fighting and a saint to curses.” Instead he including of course himself. Herzen said of his claimed to espy a young generation, coming from work, “The author thinks that we as socialists will the “healthy Ukraine” or the “healthy northeast,” not agree with his constitutionalist striving. We that would appreciate the work of his generation. think, to the contrary, that there are circumstances That group, however, refused to show itself, and under which one cannot avoid these transitional Herzen had to find consolation in his own words. forms.” In particular he welcomed Dolgorukov’s By the early 1860s, moreover, Herzen no longer stood announced intention of exposing incompetence alone on the publishing front as he had a decade in government: “Prince Dolgorukov does well to earlier. Russian publishing houses, to be sure, had publish in French; our bureaucrats fear publicity, existed in Western Europe for generations, but they especially in French – ladies will read it, and so will had not indulged in printing dissident literature. French privy councilors.” While Dolgorukov failed Herzen’s success in London evoked imitators; “Our to win any significant following for his program, machine,” he chortled, “has become a grandfather.” such as it was, the tsarist authorities spent consi- Even the tsarist court saw fit to exploit this deve- derable effort to silence him; as Herzen suggested, lopment: Mikhail Lermontov’s poem Demon had they feared his gossip perhaps more than they did been banned in Russia, but in 1856 the court had it his political ideas. printed in Karlsruhe in Germany. (Needless to say, When Dolgorukov began his own Russian news- other shops immediately pirated it and reprinted paper, Budushchnost’ (The Future), his French it.) Publishing in Germany was in fact cheaper than publisher suddenly informed him that he would not in England, but Herzen, while welcoming this new handle a newspaper offensive to the Russian govern- activity, insisted that in London he had greater fre- ment. Then another Russian took the prince into a edom to express himself than he would on the con- French court on the charge of having attempted to tinent. blackmail him. When, to Dolgorukov’s dismay, the If he needed evidence to demonstrate the power of plaintiff won, the prince moved on to Leipzig, in the tsarist authorities in pursuing émigré publishing Germany, where he started a new periodical enti- operations on the continent, Herzen needed but tled Pravdivyi (Truthful). Once again the long arm point to the experiences of a new émigré of regal of the Tsar seemed to intrude, and his new publisher lineage, Prince Petr Vladimirovich Dolgorukov, insisted on reviewing all articles before printing who considered himself of nobler blood than the them. Dolgorukov declared he would accept no 18 Romanov who sat on the Russian imperial throne. censorship, and he moved to Brussels where he Chapter 3: THE YOUNG EMIGRATION opened up his own print shop, putting out a news- and it called Kolokol “a review of liberal tendencies paper in French, Veridique, and yet another Russian and nothing more.” While this could be considered periodical, Listok (Leaflet). an extreme case in view of the fact that Herzen was still cooperating with Chernyshevsky and Even in Belgium, however, Dolgorukov was not other radical leaders, Herzen found no consolation safe. He won the cooperation of another writer, among the young émigrés who were now seeking Leonid Bliummer, who had been publishing his own haven in the West. Russian periodical, Svobodnoe slovo (Free Word), in Berlin. Bliummer moved in with the prince in When young radicals showed up in London, Herzen Brussels, but the two men soon argued and accused discovered that the new activists in Russia were each other of bad faith. When Dolgorukov distri- rejecting his values. At first he found their stories buted a brochure attacking the French court’s deci- exciting, but then he soon became bored. Most of sion against him, Belgian authorities seized it, and these young men had interrupted their university in February 1863, with the threat of imprisonment studies, and they displayed little interest in resu- for contumacy toward the French judiciary hanging ming them. Although Herzen had himself called over his head, he fled to London where he settled upon the “exiles of science” to go to the people, he into Herzen’s crowded shadow. Now a pamphlet was dismayed by their disdain for learning and their published in Russia named him as the author of lack of taste for the fine arts. “What need had they the lampoon against Alexander Pushkin, written in of music? What need of poetry?” he asked. “These 1836, that had led to the duel that took the noted came not from the training school of the coming writer’s life. Dolgorukov angrily denied the charge, revolution but from the devastated stage on which but his star was on the wane. they had already been actors.” He acknowledged their bravery and their energy, but he objected to For Herzen the lessons to be drawn from their scorn for “intellectual luxuries, among which Dolgorukov’s odyssey were clear. Although printing art stands in the foreground.” By his standards, they in London was expensive – 150 francs for a sheet of read little and had no intellectual curiosity; instead, Russian type as opposed to 75 francs on the conti- they displayed “a morbid and very unceremonious nent – it was nevertheless a more secure operation vanity.” than it could be in France, in Germany or in Bel- gium. If any of his readers who were complaining The young émigrés’ demands for financial assistance about the price of his publications wanted to try further distressed Herzen. In order to help them, he their hands at publishing in Germany, they should organized a “Common Fund” for “our common Rus- feel free to do so. If, on the other hand, his readers sian cause,” proposing a graduated “income tax” for wanted to lower the costs of his publications, they sympathizers. Requests, rather naturally, far outs- could do so by improving the distribution network. tripped receipts, and the young émigrés demanded that he contribute more. They criticized his refusal Ensconced in London, Herzen was physically safe, to deny himself pleasures such as good cigars, and but as the chaotic events in Russia of the early 1860s they demanded that he surrender the Bakhmetev unfolded, he was increasingly isolated, attacked money, which they called a fund to support the by both right and left. Although disagreeing with revolution rather than just Herzen’s publishing ven- the young radicals in Russia, he remained ready to tures. As veterans of the recent revolutionary events help them with his printing press. For this he drew in Russia, they argued, they should administer and attacks in the legal Russian press, and when a series spend this money. Herzen resisted and as a result of mysterious fires broke out in St. Petersburg in the reaped a harvest of ill feeling. spring of 1862, even old friends like the writer Ivan Turgenev shied away from him. Herzen accused In July 1862 the Russian government scored an the tsarist government of having “female nerves” enormous success when it intercepted a courier and insisted that the young radicals were not to from Herzen to his contacts in Russia. The letters blame for the fires: “Turning loose the red cock,” he seized on this occasion revealed Herzen’s network declared, had long been a form of social protest on of correspondents in Russia, and a campaign of the part of the peasantry, but this was not the cause arrests ensued, culminating in the “Trial of the 32,” of the urban fires. persons “charged with relations with the London propagandists.” The arrests decimated the ranks of Despite Herzen’s efforts to help and to defend them, the radical leadership in St. Petersburg and decapi- many young radicals dismissed him as a political tated the nascent revolutionary organization Zemlia fossil and attacked him in public. Molodaia Rossiia i volia (Land and Freedom), which had taken its (Young Russia), a revolutionary proclamation that name from Ogarev’s slogan. Caught up in the dra- appeared in the spring of 1862 calling for mass blo- gnet were Chernyshevsky and another well-known odletting in the name of revolution, declared that radical, Nikolai Serno-Solovevich. Amid charges 19 Herzen had actually been a reactionary since 1849, THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

that his carelessness had contributed to this catas- Schlusselberg fortress.” For Herzen these exchanges trophe, Herzen could only watch as his network might have been amusing, but they foretold trouble crumbled and anger intensified. within his own camp. The consequences of this catastrophe were not, Herzen faced a personal political crisis in the late however, immediately evident, and the Russian winter and early spring of 1863 when the Poles rose Free Press seemingly continued to thrive through against Russian rule in Warsaw. Many Russians, like the year of 1862, Ogarev and Herzen experimented Dolgorukov, who objected to “Polish pretensions,” with reaching new, less sophisticated readers, as they put what they saw as Russia’s national interest first, rewrote selected theoretical articles in simplified, and they supported the government’s suppression of popularized form. They also directed some publica- the revolt. Bakunin, on the other hand, rallied enthu- tions toward the Old Believers, religious dissidents siastically to the Polish side. Even without Bakunin’s in Russia, whom they thought a fertile ground for influence, Herzen had a strong sympathy for the anti-establishment seeds. Beginning in the middle Poles, and at Bakunin’s urging, he supported them, of July, Kolokol printed yet another irregular supple- seeing the cause of Polish independence as being clo- ment, this one entitled Obshchee veche (Common sely tied with the cause of Russian freedom. Assembly), aimed at a wider audience. Supporting the Polish cause cost Herzen dearly. In At the end of 1862, Herzen even seemed about many Russian circles expressions of sympathy for to forge new ties with the young émigrés when the Poles constituted treason. Herzen was further he entered into negotiations with a new Russian embarrassed by Bakunin, who immediately raced print shop in Bern, Switzerland, organized by B. I. off to Sweden to be near the action and there issued Bakst and other young Russians who had come to flaming, irrational statements. Despite earlier nego- the Swiss capital after their studies at the Univer- tiations, the Russian radicals failed to come to the sity of Heidelberg had been interrupted. Herzen, help of the Poles, and in the course of the summer however, was no more willing to put his property the Russian army crushed the rebels. Kolokol’s and resources at the mercy of the young émigrés in prestige suffered badly, and its circulation dropped Switzerland than he was in London. He sent money from over 2000 to barely 500. It would never again to help Bakst, and he commissioned the press to rise much above 1000 copies, and whereas in 1862 print some of his works, putting on them false the newspaper printed a total of 288 pages, in 1863, imprints such as Naples, Moscow, and Kronstadt, it totaled only 176. but he would not accept any responsibility for the In the aftermath of the Polish revolt and the operation in Bern. Bakst’s press soon shut down for government’s campaign against radicals within the lack of funds. empire, a new wave of émigrés flowed into Wes- Momentarily bridging Herzen’s growing rupture tern Europe, and their meetings with Herzen led to with the radical left was the appearance in London in new disputes. In describing the visit of one, Herzen 1862 of Mikhail Bakunin, an old friend of Herzen’s wrote angrily, “The plenipotentiary was full of the who had just recently escaped exile in Siberia. Two importance of his mission and invited us to become years younger than Herzen, Bakunin was also a the agents of Zemlia i volia.” Although Bakunin and noble by birth, and in 1848 he had feverishly pur- Ogarev stood ready as ever to rally to the revolu- sued the flame of revolution around Europe. Even- tionary tocsin, Herzen would not commit himself, tually taken prisoner by German authorities, he had but by summer, when Kolokol’s loss of readership been extradited to Russia and then sent into exile. was becoming obvious, he welcomed the arrival of Now, having escaped, he had come to see his old another émigré, Nikolai Utin, who, he hoped, could friend in London. give the newspaper new vigor. Even as the two men fell in each other’s arms, Utin, now in his early 20s, took it upon himself to Herzen realized that Bakunin’s arrival meant new instruct Herzen and Ogarev on conspiratorial prac- turmoil. Toothless, disheveled, and overweight, but tices, and he clashed directly with Herzen’s editorial still feverishly energetic, Bakunin looked for revolu- policies. When he finally left London, shortly after tionary action. When Bakunin met Dolgorukov, he New Year’s Day of 1864, he was talking of founding allegedly told the prince, “I love you very much, but, his own periodical in Switzerland, and he vainly alas, when we take power in our hands, we will cut attempted to persuade Tchorzewski to come with off your head and those of your political sympat- him. Herzen, who now feared a British-Russian hizers,” to which Dolgorukov responded, “Mikhail conflict over the Polish question, was himself thin- Aleksandrovich, when my sympathizers take power, king again of moving to Switzerland, and therefore we will cut off no one’s head, and I even hope that Utin’s intentions disturbed him greatly. He had to 20 we do away with capital punishment, but you, alt- pay greater attention to the growing Russian popu- hough I love you very much, we, alas, will return to lation in the Helvetic Republic. Chapter 3: THE YOUNG EMIGRATION

The Russians in Switzerland had mostly settled lived printing enterprise, was ready to sell the type along the shores of Lake Geneva, and they consti- to Herzen. Stuart, moreover, had unlimited credit tuted in fact several colonies. There were aristocrats with a foundry in Frankfurt, Utin added, and there- seeking a healthful climate and inexpensive com- fore Czerniecki could leave his old type in London. fort; landowners went there to educate their chil- Herzen need only bring money to Geneva. dren at the many good Swiss schools; and the new Finally, in December 1864, Herzen again visited political émigrés, who cultivated a corporate iden- Geneva, where he faced a new list of demands. Utin tity as the “Young Emigration,” were fugitives from declared that Kolokol should be reorganized and the social disturbances of 1859-1862 and after. As broadened, that it should be a general émigré organ, one observer wrote, in Geneva one could, and that it should adopt a skeptical attitude toward so to speak, study the geological stratifications of the educated classes. The young émigrés, moreover, all Russian revolutionary strata of the 19th cen- stood ready to relieve Herzen of the obligation of tury. administering the Bakhmetev fund. If Herzen should refuse these demands, however, the émigrés For Herzen these settlements represented an enti- would start their own journal. Please, Utin cajoled, rely new world, full of both promise and pitfalls. “Don’t bring harm to the cause dear to all.” In December 1863 Herzen visited Geneva, and Herzen coolly responded that Kolokol would remain despite his trepidation about dealing with the “an organ for the social development of Russia” and young émigrés his meeting with them went fairly that he would welcome any contributions from the well. The émigrés asked that Czerniecki come émigrés. Émigrés, he argued, could not aspire to to Switzerland to revive Bakst’s printing esta- lead the revolutionary movement; their role was blishment, and when Herzen responded that he the help the people within Russia. The talks resulted might move his entire operation to Central Europe, in an agreement that was in fact not an agreement. they were delighted. Herzen rather rashly then pro- The émigrés withdrew their demands for control of mised to settle in Lugano, in the Italian speaking Kolokol and of the Bakhmetev fund, while Herzen part of Switzerland, by May of 1864, but once he agreed to bring Kolokol and the Russian Free Press had returned to England, his enthusiasm quickly to Geneva and to work with the youths. cooled. He foresaw only trouble in trying to publish Almost immediately, Herzen had misgivings about in Switzerland: The young émigrés had no funds to even this modest arrangement, but he saw no alter- help with, and he did not consider them capable native but to move to Geneva. He converted his of significant literary work. Therefore he chose to press into a joint stock company, selling shares to remain in England for the time being, leaving the friends in order to raise money for the move, and émigrés in Switzerland muttering about his pusilla- with Trübner’s help he shipped his stock of publi- nimous behavior. cations by way of a book dealer in Cologne. Kolokol Through the winter of 1863-1864 Herzen had other continued to appear in London until April 1, 1865, troubles too. His press did not have enough work and the next issue, no. 197, appeared in Geneva any more, and he had to cover its costs out of his with the date of May 25. “Our move,” the newspaper own pocket. (By his calculations, this came to per- assured its readers, “signifies no internal change in haps one-seventh of his income.) His investments our publication.” in US confederate bonds, moreover, were failing. With his sense of history and drama, Herzen saw Kolokol’s readership was declining, and in Switzer- this as the start of a new period of his activity, the land Utin was loudly complaining about Herzen’s third and perhaps the most important in his career failure either to offer leadership to the young revo- as an émigré in Western Europe. He had visions of lutionaries or to recognize their qualifications. He Kolokol’s now winning new life and renown as an considered moving to Brussels, but Dolgorukov’s influential forum for progressive Russian thought, unhappy experience there gave warning. In the and upon his arrival in Geneva on April 4, just two summer of 1864, Herzen considered temporarily days before his 53rd birthday, he thought of him- suspending publication of Kolokol, but this publica- self as remaining active yet “for another five years, tion now constituted a mission, an obligation, and maximum seven.” he struggled on. His enthusiasm, such as it was, quickly cooled when Under these circumstances, Utin’s continued urgings he received the bills for the move. “Since the begin- that he come to Switzerland began to have their ning of 1863,” he lamented to Tchorzewski, “Czer- effect. Utin even claimed to have mobilized help for niecki has cost me (in addition to Kolokol) more the move. Baron Alexander F. Stuart, he reported, than 12,000 francs, and not only have I received who owned the equipment left from Baksts’s short- no thanks, but he himself and you yourself abuse 21 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

me.” It would have been better, he reflected, “to give at the service of a revolutionary circle in Moscow, him 5000 francs and leave him in London.” Even but when Khudiakov returned to Russia with sto- in this pessimistic mood, Herzen had no idea how ries about a “European Revolutionary Committee” prophetic this thought would prove to be, but he to which Herzen supposedly belonged, and when a had trouble enough on his hands when new conflict member of Khudiakov’s group, Dmitri Karakozov, immediately arose with the “puppies,” as he called tried to assassinate the Tsar, the Russian authorities the young émigrés. noted Herzen’s name and intensified their surveil- lance of the émigrés. Herzen contributed heavily to his own problems by publishing as his first item in Switzerland another All in all, Herzen’s move to Switzerland failed of its open letter to the Tsar, this one, on the occasion of purpose. At the end of the year 1865 he had little the death of the autocrat’s son, urging the Russian to be optimistic about. Kolokol, he wrote to his son, rule to seize the moment to renew himself, to rid had actually published more pages in 1865 than in himself of the fear of the uncensored word, and to 1864, but it was not doing well. Ogarev had now complete the work of the emancipation of the whole apparently destroyed his health; he had contributed Russian people begun by the emancipation of the only one significant piece to Kolokol in the last six peasantry. When this letter appeared in Kolokol, a months. Czerniecki was complaining of a lack of furor arose. Ogarev tried to praise his comrade’s work, and his wife was homesick for London. A boldness and daring in addressing the Tsar, but for visitor to Herzen’s home in September 1865 later the Young Emigration the letter smacked of libera- recalled, “He himself recognized that he was losing lism, a belief in reform rather than revolution, and his footing” and that his prolonged absence from it offered further proof that Herzen was little more Russia had “unfavorably influenced the vitality of than a relic of the past. his publication.” Whatever his thoughts about the future of Russia, Herzen could no longer be opti- Living in Geneva, Herzen met a wider variety of mistic about his own role in those developments, Russians than he had known in England, and at and even in Geneva, the new generation of émigrés, the same time he ran new risks of having his name however representative they were of Russia, was compromised. He rejected, for example, the efforts deserting him. of the young radical Ivan Khudiakov to put the press

22 Chapter 4:

ELPIDIN’S CHALLENGE

At odds with the Young Emigration, Herzen was me that he hates me – just as he once loved me.” The vulnerable to challenge by ambitious émigrés who young émigrés, however, could not be dismissed so dreamed of assuming his historic role of the late glibly, and as Herzen told Ogarev, “Serno-Solove- 1850s, not to speak of his income, as a center of vich is our chief opponent.” Russian intellectual activity. His Russian Free Press In this moment of turmoil Mikhail Konstantinovich had already spawned a number of imitators in Ger- Elpidin emerged as a new focus for the efforts of the many, but these had been for the most part com- Young Emigration to wrest control of the printed mercial ventures, aimed at making profits. While word away from Herzen. Born in the Volga region some of the major German publishing houses could in 1835, the son of a priest, Elpidin had enrolled maintain such an activity as a sideline, those enter- at Kazan University in the fall of 1860. The follo- prises that tried to make their fortune just from the wing April authorities arrested him in the village of printing of Russian materials found the going very Bezdna on the charge of having distributed inflam- difficult. One entrepreneur even applied to the Rus- matory literature during peasant turmoil there, and sian police for money to stave off his creditors. a few months later university officials expelled him Having angered the younger émigrés with his for his participation in a student demonstration. In appeal to the Tsar in 1865, Herzen intensified April 1863 the police again arrested him, and this the clash the following year when, in response to time Elpidin received a sentence of five years’ hard Karakozov’s attack on the life of Tsar Alexander II, labor. In July 1865 he escaped and fled abroad, arri- he denounced the principle of individual terror as ving soon thereafter in Geneva. “murder” and he called Karakozov’s act the work of Having long dreamed of being a writer, Elpidin pro- a “fanatic.” He feared that the tsarist regime would duced an essay on recent events in Kazan, which now increase its pressure on the émigrés, and he Herzen published in two installments, in the October complained about the “spy mania” that considered 1 and October 15 issues of Kolokol. The essay became the émigrés responsible for Karakozov’s action. a minor classic, enjoying a number of reprintings in “The horrors that are occurring in Russia,” he wrote revolutionary anthologies, and some of the younger to a friend, “transcend fairy tales and romances.” émigrés assured Elpidin that he was actually a better On another occasion he sighed, “I am more than writer than Herzen. If someone should protest that tired – I am aging.” Herzen’s style was more elegant and polished, the The young émigrés responded very differently to answer would come back that Herzen owed all his the news coming from Russia. They did not wel- achievements to the blood and sweat of the serfs on come the Tsar’s escape from meeting his morta- his family’s estate – Elpidin was a man of the people, lity; for them Karakozov was a hero. “The younger rough hewn as a natural man should be. Elpidin’s generation,” Aleksandr Serno-Solovevich declared challenge to Herzen’s press quickly became a central to Herzen, “will never forgive you your statements issue in the clash of generations. about Karakozov.” Serno, now some 27 years old In deciding to try his hand at printing, Elpidin was the younger brother of Nikolai Serno-Solove- drew inspiration from Khudiakov and money from vich, who had been arrested with Chernyshevsky Prince Dolgorukov. Khudiakov failed to persuade on the charge of having corresponded with Herzen. Herzen to put the Russian Free Press at the disposal Like other young émigrés, Serno revered Chernys- of his group in Russia, but he had spoken at length hevsky, and he tended to hold Herzen at least in to the young émigrés of the desirability of establis- part responsible for his hero’s, not to speak of his hing another printing press. Elpidin, who had done brother’s, misfortunes. Angered also by news that some printing work in Kazan and more recently his brother had died in exile, Serno visited Herzen had worked briefly in a shop in Geneva, asked to voice his thoughts, but Herzen brushed off the Dolgorukov for a loan, apparently without telling 23 visit casually: “Serno-Solovevich came here to tell him the purpose. Uneasy about dealing with this THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

uncultured commoner, the prince, who had come lamented in November 1866. In contrast to the image to Switzerland with Herzen and who owned shares that Czerniecki had once enjoyed as an efficient and in Herzen’s print shop, simply gave him the cash. creative printer, he had now become a burden who morbidly kept reminding Herzen of his dependence: In the summer of 1866 Elpidin published his own “If I thought otherwise,” the Pole moaned, “I would thoughts on the subject of assassination in a new surely have 500 pounds sterling in the bank, as my journal called Podpol’noe slovo (The Underground co-nationals suspected in London, and in Geneva Word), which he anticipated would appear as a I would not have to labor for 200 francs a month, “series of brochures and popular books.” The first which does not suffice for the most humble life, issue, 38 pages in length, consisted of just one essay, devoid of any luxury, working from early morning to “Karakozov and Muraviev.” Written by Elpidin and night...” Herzen tried to motivate his old comrade by Nikolai Nikoladze, the essay denied the existence of turning the press over to him, but Czerniecki coun- a conspiracy behind Karakozov and asserted that tered this generosity with another plea for sympathy: only the rulers of Russia, like Catherine II, had use He was ready to give the press back to Herzen, but for conspiracies in overthrowing and killing their then of course, “What future has a worker of forty predecessors. Despite its topicality, Elpidin’s journal years without special talents or scientific training?” proved short-lived, and it published only one more Herzen had to keep paying the bills of the press out issue, this one a reprint of Elpidin’s article on the of his own pocket. recent revolutionary history of Kazan, but the very appearance of his journal announced his challenge In the fall and winter of 1866-1867 the differences to Herzen. and divisions between Herzen and the Young Emi- gration burst out into public view. After Ogarev had Prince Dolgorukov, shocked that this “Cheremis” startled Kolokol’s readers by hailing tsarist expro- had used his money to start a printing business, priation of Polish landowners as a positive step denounced Elpidin to the Geneva authorities. This away from the “religion of property,” the newspaper uneducated man, he declared, had set up “a secret carried a series of articles by Herzen entitled “Order printing press in the land of the free press,” and he Prevails.” In the third installment Herzen recalled was issuing repulsive works that endorsed murder. his own role in the development of Russian free The authorities, however, did nothing, and the story speech after the death of Nicholas I, and then noting of the denunciation drove yet another wedge into his differences with Chernyshevsky, he declared, the rift between the generations. “This bifurcation ... does not at all represent an Outraged by Dolgorukov’s action, Serno-Solovevich antagonism. We served as a mutual supplement to again made his way to Herzen’s door, this time chal- each other.” Herzen’s self-evaluation infuriated the lenging Dolgorukov’s right even to call himself a young émigrés. political refugee and questioning Herzen’s own cre- Serno-Solovevich led the attack, producing a pamp- dentials as a revolutionary. Herzen rejected Serno’s hlet entitled Our Domestic Affairs. Since the Russian argument that the emigration constituted a sort of Free Press had already refused to print a pamphlet corporate unit and that therefore Dolgorukov had he had prepared in French attacking Kolokol’s posi- had no right to appeal to outside authorities. Upset tion in the Polish question, he turned to Elpidin by this cool response and finding even Herzen’s for help in getting his manuscript into print. Dated taste for champagne offensive, Serno stormed off to March 9, 1867, Serno’s pamphlet amounted to a seek satisfaction elsewhere. catalog of complaints raised by the Young Emigra- There was just no way, Herzen told himself, to work tion against the older émigrés. He called the work with the young émigrés. In 1865 when the émigrés a response to “Order Prevails,” but the pamphlet founded their own mutual assistance fund, he had actually collected together several essays that Serno tried to show good faith by helping them, but the had written about Kolokol fund soon failed. Herzen then liquidated his own “There was a time one impatiently awaited the appe- Common Fund. He could not, he explained, tolerate arance of Kolokol,” Serno began, and he went on to the young émigrés’ impudence. Since the émigrés in say that Herzen had outlived his time. He called any case resented his wealth, he could not satisfy Herzen a “tsarist socialist” who had failed to grasp them, and he decided simply to withdraw from their the imperatives of the revolutionary movement and company. Even so, however, at Ogarev’s urging, he who indulged himself with dirty stories about the agreed to give the young émigrés 1000 francs to revolutionaries. Herzen’s insistence on genuflecting help them try to establish their own journal. in front of Alexander II, he asserted, only impeded In the meantime, business had declined still further the revolutionary movement. Serno put his strongest for the Russian Free Press, and Herzen was facing words into his thoughts about Herzen’s relationship 24 new financial troubles. “The press is dying,” Herzen with Chernyshevsky. Noting that Chernyshevsky’s Chapter 4: ELPIDIN’S CHALLENGE work had now been totally banned in Russia and expressed concern about unpleasantness for him in that Herzen’s old novel Who is to Blame had recently possibly meeting Serno there: “She, respecting me, been legally published, Serno exclaimed, “You com- knows that I am very guilty towards Serno-Solove- plemented Chernyshevsky! You walked hand in vich, and that he, Serno-Solovevich, is one of the hand with Chernyshevsky! I did not expect such a most remarkable figures of our time.” When Serno trick from you, and I have studied you well!” Cher- committed suicide in August 1869, Herzen stated, nyshevsky and Herzen, he insisted, had nothing in “I would be lying if I should say that I am especially common; they were in fact “representatives of two moved by the death of Serno-Solovevich – he was a hostile natures that do not complement each other poisonous pimple.” When Bakunin and others then but rather destroy each other.” Finally dismissing sang Serno’s praise as a martyr for the common Herzen as a phrasemonger concerned only with cause, Herzen angrily commented, “Why is his sui- glorifying and even deifying himself, Serno pro- cide concealed – too diplomatic! When did he live nounced, “You, M. Herzen, are a dead man.” ‘by his labor ... by his pen’?” Serno’s pamphlet subsequently enjoyed its own Behind Serno Herzen saw the hand of Elpidin. Since interesting history. A German socialist, Sigismund the beginning of his open split with the younger Ludwig Borkheim, who bore Herzen little love, emigration, Herzen had been receiving anonymous came across it while visiting Geneva in the fall of letters and broadsheets demanding that he recant. 1867 and requested permission to publish a German Otherwise, warned one communication from the edition. Because Serno was slow to answer his let- “Cosmopoetic Society for the Preservation of Know- ters, Borkheim immediately concluded that Herzen ledge,” he would be “declared a traitor to the Creator was somehow interfering to block any translation, and to humanity, as the most rabid defender of the but in fact Serno claimed that he had been contem- policies of monarchism.” In his private correspon- plating whether it was worthwhile to have it appear dence, Herzen denounced the “Elpidins,” meaning in German. In the end, Serno not only approved all the younger émigrés, and he eventually referred the translation, but also added his own annotations to the Young Emigration as the “Elpidevka.” to the text. Borkheim then published it with the So far as Elpidin was concerned, Serno’s brochure announced intention of informing the West Euro- constituted his succes de scandale, but he could claim pean reading public that there were indeed Russian a far more lasting and significant achievement, ear- radicals other than Herzen worthy of their attention ning him a significant place in the history of Rus- and sympathy. sian revolutionary publishing, with his printing of For Herzen Serno’s pamphlet constituted the last the works of Chernyshevsky. Even here, it would straw. Herzen had heard long before that Serno was seem, Herzen and the Russian Free Press had been preparing some sort of literary attack, or series of compelled to make an involuntary contribution. In attacks, and by January 1867 he had already begun February 1868 Herzen turned on Ogarev with yet to demand that other émigrés make clear whether another complaint about the latter’s friendship with they would support him against these calumnies. Utin: “Do you think you could ask that little Jew (In his diary, Herzen claimed that Serno, through Utin why he is tormenting Tchorzewski, who has Utin, had offered to withdraw his brochure for a no money? He cut all Chernyshevsky’s articles out price.) To sympathize with Serno, even to try to of his Sovremennik, i.e., he has ruined years’ worth understand him, Herzen made clear, would mean of Sovremennik.” With Utin’s help, Elpidin’s expen- the forfeit of his, Herzen’s, friendship. diture in obtaining the text of Chernyshevsky’s wri- tings that had appeared in Sovremennik would seem When Serno’s pamphlet finally appeared in public to have been minimal. at the beginning of May 1867, Herzen decided that there was nothing more for him to do in Switzerland. As his first selection from the master’s corpus, “S-S’s brochure is so foul,” he cried out, “that we do Elpidin chose What is to be Done?, a novel of revo- not even want to send it. Note that everyone here lutionary manners that had appeared in Sovre- cries out against it (except Elpidin and Nikoladze), mennik in 1862-1863, after Chernyshevsky’s arrest. and no one dares to protest.” Switzerland was now The choice recommended itself in many ways: The intolerable. “I detest Geneva with all my heart,” he young radicals idolized Chernyshevsky and thought exclaimed. “You cannot imagine,” he wrote to Tuch- even of modeling themselves after the figures in the kova-Ogareva, “what kind of abomination is being novel; since the author was now in Siberian exile, created here; S-S’s life is dedicated to one intrigue moreover, the work had not yet appeared in book against me.” form. With the help of Utin, Serno, and others, Elpidin now set about printing the first edition of Herzen maintained his hostility toward Serno-Solo- What is to be Done? in book form. vevich for the remaining years of both their lives. 25 In April 1869 he bridled when a neighbor in Nice When Elpidin’s intentions became known, sources THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

in St. Petersburg objected to it as an infringement measures of the government,” Bakunin reproved of the rights of the Chernyshevsky family to the his friend for showing signs of getting old. “These author’s literary property. Elpidin nevertheless went unwashed, clumsy, and often completely uncom- ahead, promising that the profit from the publica- fortable pioneers of a new truth and a new life,” he tion would be put into a foreign bank in the name of declared, “stand a million times higher than all your Chernyshevsky’s family. Once the work had actually proper corpses.” Herzen, he advised, should show appeared, A. S. Suvorin, a St. Petersburg publisher, respect for their efforts and for their sacrifices. raised three specific objections: This constituted Bakunin then circulated among the émigrés a copy literary theft, it could compromise the legal publi- of Herzen’s complaint together with his own repro- cation of Chernyshevsky’s works in Russia, and ving response. it put the author and his family into an awkward While Herzen watched, Bakunin seemed to win situation vis-à-vis the Russian authorities. Such the hearts and minds of all. Ogarev had expressed objections, however, had no effect on Elpidin, who considerable fear about dealing with Bakunin, but immediately began preparing a complete collection at Herzen’s urging he had agreed to see the man. of Chernyshevsky’s works, which he proudly called The meeting went unexpectedly well. “He is fine,” the “first edition” of the master’s writings. Ogarev reported to Herzen, “and much better than To his dismay, Elpidin soon found that the publis- before.” Ogarev even scolded Herzen for criticizing hing business was infinitely more complicated and Bakunin, insisting that “he has great respect for you problematic than he had expected. He obviously had and even friendship. Aren’t you being too negative not understood the significance of Trübner’s help toward him?” Under Bakunin’s influence Ogarev to Herzen, and he had underestimated the signifi- took the side of the young émigrés: “Look,” he urged cance of Herzen’s personal fortune in underwriting Herzen, “and you’ll see that in truth they are not evil, the work of the Russian Free Press. Elpidin signed i.e. not bad but good-intentioned, goodhearted.” a contract with a book dealer in Vevey, and he then Herzen was probably not surprised by Ogarev’s con- ran afoul of late deliveries, demanding creditors, version; he had always considered his friend rather and slow payments. At one point, in January 1869, unstable and susceptible to sudden enthusiasms. As the book dealer even had Elpidin’s shop seques- for Ogarev’s urgings, Herzen was not to be softened. tered. Elpidin somehow came up with the neces- In the fall of 1867 he had chosen to have nothing to sary money, but the experience left its scars. “It is do with the international Peace Conference that had a bad deal for a foreigner to have debts where the brought Bakunin to Geneva. He foresaw only disor- bourgeoisie is well organized,” he later complained. derly discussion, and the meeting, the pisovka as he Yet, in contrast to Czerniecki’s helplessness, Elpidin and Ogarev called it, was not worth the emotional demonstrated amazing powers of survival in the cost of a return to Geneva so soon after his recent publishing business. experiences. The success that Bakunin enjoyed at the While Elpidin struggled to establish his business, conference only added to his bitterness. During a brief Herzen chose finally to withdraw from the turmoil visit to Geneva in February 1868 Herzen declared, “I of the émigré publishing world. On July 1, 1867, the detest [Geneva] for itself and for its gang of Russian last issue of Kolokol appeared, officially completing scoundrels.” He wanted to keep his distance. ten years of its existence. “The last five,” Herzen While he could physically withdraw, however, he wrote on the first page, “have been difficult.” Alt- could not withdraw financially. There remained hough he spoke of possibly reviving the newspaper for one the problem of the Russian Free Press. He in the future, he had decided to retire. He moved hoped that Czerniecki could make a commercial out of Geneva altogether, and he urged that “new success of the press, and he experimented with a younger and fresher champions” try their hand at French edition of Kolokol with a Russian language printing and publishing. supplement. (From 1863 to 1865 he had published When his old friend Bakunin appeared in Geneva a French edition of Kolokol, entitled La Cloche, in in the fall of 1867, Herzen had already left the city. Brussels.) This was in itself recognition of defeat: In his heart, he actually looked forward to Bakunin’s Kolokol, which had been designed to communicate confrontation with the “Elpidevka,” but much to his with Russians, could no longer fulfill that function. dismay, Bakunin’s charm and enthusiasm captivated As Herzen explained, the émigrés, including Elpidin and even Ogarev. Herzen became even more bitter about his experi- It was now easier to talk about Russia than to ence with these young activists. speak with it.

Bakunin in fact used Herzen as a foil: When In its fourteen issues, Kolokol (La Cloche): Revue du 26 Herzen, in a letter, called the young émigrés “swin- développement social, politique, et litteraire en Russie dlers who with their son-of-a-bitchism justified the struck no resonance among the émigrés, who had Chapter 4: ELPIDIN’S CHALLENGE hoped that Herzen, under the influence of Ogarev Herzen was “an awakener, his was the voice of one and Bakunin, would change his stance. When Serno crying in the wilderness,” but in the end, Masaryk explained his delay in providing Borkheim with a suggested, he “was never able to transcend a para- translation of Our Domestic Affairs, he declared that lyzing skepticism.” He could not become a poli- he had thought that the new journal would perhaps tical leader. obviate his complaints, and if that should prove For Elpidin Herzen’s withdrawal represented a so, he would not want a German translation of his great opportunity. In 1868 the newcomer tried his work to appear. When the émigrés had the news- hand at another periodical, Letuchie listki (Flying paper in hand, they decided that in fact nothing had Leaflets), this one attacking the institution of mar- changed, and they went ahead with their own plans, riage as a perversion of “the laws of nature, the fre- proposals, and projects. edom of the individual,” but the effort failed after Herzen realized that his time had now passed: “They just one issue. (Herzen said of it that “the thoughts don’t read us in Russia,” he declared, “and they don’t are good but the form is foul.”) Another venture, want us; in general, they don’t believe the foreign a periodical called Sovremennost’ for which he press.” In a particularly despondent moment, he served as simply the printer, ran for seven issues exclaimed, “Work, work. And now trouble. I have before arousing general hostility by suggesting done my work. I don’t want to work platonically that the émigrés as a whole were immature and with science, actually I can’t. Our word has been that therefore they should perhaps just become said and even heard. We have no other. Like Dic- “peaceful citizens of Switzerland.” In the ensuing kens, we are repeating the same thing.” He lacked scandal, the publication had to close up. motivation to continue. Elpidin now had to admit at least to himself that he Kolokol had borne the motto “Vivos voco!” (I call could not replace Herzen. He was shrewd enough the living!) on its masthead, but Herzen could no in struggling for his own economic survival, but he longer summon anyone. In the words of the Czech lacked the necessary literary talent and economic philosopher and political leader T. G. Masaryk, resources to be a literary lion. His crude personal manners, moreover, antagonized many. Instead Herzen’s career recalls the fate of Goethe’s Eupho- he had to settle for the role of a local eccentric in rion. Radiating light he rises, on high he shines, but the émigré community, to be sure an important he is dashed to pieces on the earth. In the fifties and figure because of his print shop and because of the in the early sixties Herzen was the spokesman of reading room and book shop that he eventually progressive Russia; after the liberation sof the pea- attached to it. It remained for others, first of all santry and after the Polish rising he became more Bakunin, to attempt to fill the void left by Herzen’s and more isolated, increasingly lonely. retreat.

27 Chapter 5:

BAKUNIN AND NARODNOE DELO

Of Elpidin’s various periodical ventures in the latter In the years since the Polish rising Bakunin had kept 1860s, Narodnoe delo (The People’s Cause), which in touch with Herzen, but in the fall of 1867 Herzen first appeared in September 1868, had the greatest and his friends were as ever rather unsure about historic significance. The founding spirit of the the man. Dolgorukov considered leaving Geneva in publication, however, was not Elpidin himself but order to avoid him. With some trepidation Ogarev rather Mikhail Bakunin. Elpidin’s own connection remained, while Herzen, ever generous, offered with the publication, moreover, soon ended; the Bakunin the use of his apartment. When Bakunin, journal changed its character and even spawned yet however, complained about food, Herzen acidly another Russian print shop in Geneva. Neverthe- told Ogarev that he had promised only “walls, less it was born in Elpidin’s shop, and it marked the chairs, and Tchorzewski’s conversation.” Ogarev, on start of a new era in the emigration, as the Russians the other hand, surrendered his mind and his soul. made tentative, uncertain efforts to relate their own Bakunin’s arrival in Geneva revived thoughts of experiences and programs to developments within publishing a new émigré journal or periodical. In a Western European socialism. letter to Ogarev, Nikolai Zhukovsky, a well-known Narodnoe delo’s pre-history dated from a year ear- émigré, argued that the reconstruction of social lier, the fall of 1867, when Bakunin moved from and economic relations in Russia could come about Italy to Switzerland, settling in Vevey in the same only through a peasant revolution led by the urban house where Nikolai Utin and other Russians were intelligentsia, and the youth, the urban intellec- living. In the three or four years since his fiasco in tual proletariat as he called them, needed reading the Polish revolution, Bakunin had busied himself material in order to properly understand their his- with Western European revolutionary movements, torical role and to draw up a program of action. The founding the “International Brotherhood,” a group proposed journal, as a publication of the émigrés, opposed to the authority of church and state alike should recount the historical development of socia­ and endorsing federalism, communal autonomy, list ideas, explain how socialism could arise from and socialism. The organization did not extend far the Russian peasant commune, and offer samples of beyond the confines of Bakunin’s brain, but his ardor Western Europe’s practical experience as a model and passion in putting forth its program impressed for the Russians. all who met him. Zhukovsky would play an important role in In September 1867 Bakunin came to Geneva to Bakunin’s activities over the next several years. Now attend an international Peace Conference, held in his mid 30s, he had worked for a while in the under the auspices of a group of liberals who wanted archive of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to discuss problems of avoiding a conflict between after his graduation from the University of Moscow, Bismarck’s Prussia and the France of Napoleon III. but in 1862, threatened with arrest for his part in He seized this opportunity to reintroduce himself the operation of an illegal print shop, he had fled to to the European left, and when the Italian revolu- London. He had served briefly as Herzen’s agent in tionary Giuseppe Garibaldi publicly embraced him Germany for smuggling publications to Russia, and in welcome, the assemblage arose spontaneously to the two had again met in Geneva. Although some celebrate his appearance. Although the group was émigrés considered Zhukovsky a braggart and an more pacifist than revolutionary, Bakunin accepted insubstantial person, he was a prominent figure in his election to the Central Committee of the League the emigration, frequently called upon to chair con- of Peace and Freedom that the conference set up troversial meetings. In the fall of 1867, as he ent- as its permanent executive body. This gave him an husiastically rallied to Bakunin’s banner, he persu- 28 international platform on which he could perform. aded his sister-in-law, Olga Levasheva, to promise Chapter 5: BAKUNIN AND NARODNOE DELO a subsidy of one thousand francs to underwrite a Kolokol.) In practice, however, Bakunin dominated new periodical. the collective’s discussions. According to Elpidin’s later recollections, Bakunin sat as the “patriarch of For the moment, however, the émigrés only dis- the editorial board”; after he had read and consi- cussed the matter. Defining a program for such a dered a manuscript, he would hand it to Elpidin to periodical and forming an editorial board took time. be set into type. Since the first issue contained only As Utin had told Ogarev in the spring, the young four articles, this procedure could not have been émigrés needed a journal or an anthology with a followed very frequently, but Elpidin’s selective and program that was “definite, appropriate, radical”; not altogether reliable memory probably captured meeting that standard was difficult. Elpidin stood at least the atmosphere of the meetings. ready to print anything, but the leaders of the young émigrés, particularly Utin, wanted to proceed with Bakunin’s collaboration with Elpidin further caution. Nor, for that matter, could Bakunin be bri- enra­ged Herzen, who was aghast when he first dled and harnessed for systematic action on short heard of the plans for Narodnoe delo. This must be notice. a lie, he argued: Bakunin could not be involved in such a new project; at most perhaps he had con- Local Swiss political issues and the work of the tributed an article to Sovremennost’. Herzen asked Geneva section of the International Workingmen’s Ogarev to look into the matter, but when Ogarev Association, better known to history as the First reported that Bakunin had denied the rumors about International, also diverted the attention of the émi- a new journal, Herzen, knowing Bakunin’s conspi- grés. When local construction workers in Geneva ratorial nature and his evasive manners, persisted: went out on strike in the winter of 1867-1868, “Ask him more simply.” When the rumors conti- the Russians, most notably Serno-Solovevich and nued, Herzen exclaimed, “What kind of absurdity is Bakunin, came to their aid, and this in turn brought it that Bakunin is organizing a press? Where would them into contact with the International and with the money come from... Why is he undermining Karl Marx, the moving spirit of the International. Czerniecki?” Finally, in June 1868, after another When the construction workers won a settlement brief visit to Geneva, he understood: “Bakunin is that cut their working day and raised their pay, directing a journal, and everything is with Elpidin Marx triumphantly exclaimed, “We have achieved and company.” Then he seemed to see more sinister a complete victory in Geneva.” In recognition of meaning: “Bakunin is conspiring with Eldyrin [sic] Serno’s contribution to the situation, Marx sent him behind our backs.” Finally he concluded, “Bakunin a copy of Das Kapital. completely belongs to Elpidin’s party.” Herzen con- Bakunin threw himself into this activity with his cluded that the young émigrés were exerting an evil characteristic enthusiasm. He helped to publish influence on his old friend. a French language newspaper, Egalité, and, spon- The first issue of Narodnoe delo carried two articles sored by Elpidin, he joined one of the sections of by Bakunin and two by Zhukovsky. Describing the the International in Geneva. At the same time, he journal’s program as materialist and atheist, Zhu- dreamed of leading this revolutionary ferment, and, kovsky called for the economic reorganization of supported by Zhukovsky and two Poles, he tried society: “The land belongs only to those who work to convert the Central Committee of the League it with their own hands – to the agricultural com- of Peace and Freedom to his anarchist program. munes. Capital and all the tools of labor [belong to] “I have found here,” he wrote, “a live Russian and the workers – to the workers’ association.” Decla- international environment, and therefore I can act ring, “We are opponents of the state,” he foresaw a according to my tastes and my thoughts.” For a brief post-revolutionary society made up of “a free fede- time in 1868 the various currents within the Russian ration of free agricultural and factory-artel workers.” emigration – excluding of course, Herzen – seemed Reviving the slogan “Land and Liberty,” Bakunin united, and Bakunin eagerly adopted as his own the declared that the “priests of science,” the intellec- thought of publishing a new journal. tuals in Russian society, were as much the servants Work on the new journal, to be called Narodnoe of the state as the priests of the church. Therefore, delo (The People’s Cause), the same name as a he proclaimed, the young people of Russia should pamphlet that Herzen published in London in 1862, leave school and plunge into revolutionary activity began in April 1868; the first issue appeared in Sep- among the masses. tember. In telling friends about this new project, According to the publisher’s notice in the journal, Bakunin enthusiastically described how it was to be Narodnoe delo would appear twice monthly. There an “anonymous” enterprise, produced by a collec- would be no honorarium for contributors, and tive or “artel,” as the younger émigrés were wont to all articles would be published anonymously. The call such cooperation. (This was meant to contrast publishers went on to promise secrecy and protec- 29 with Herzen’s highly personal style in publishing THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

tion for the authors: Once an article was set in type, cially his constant declarations that he was in fact the manuscript would be burned. Herzen in fact the director of Narodnoe delo. The editorial board praised the first issue that with “all the impetuosity of the journal was supposed to be an anonymous of adolescence” was ready to confront the most dif- collective, not a replica of Herzen’s personal style in ficult questions. publishing Kolokol. The younger émigrés also con- cluded, as Utin put it, that “Bakunin was incapable The appearance of Narodnoe delo marked the high of any sustained work.” Levasheva, Zhukovsky’s point of Bakunin’s general standing among the sister-in-law who was funding the publication, now émigrés. He was at this moment their acclaimed insisted that Utin should be installed as the co- leader, and he was also carving himself an impor- editor of the newspaper. tant niche in the International. But having reached this moment of triumph, Bakunin’s position almost Bakunin naturally objected, and he interpreted immediately began to disintegrate. In August 1868, the developments as the result of personal intrigue at a meeting of the Central Committee of the League rather than of dissatisfaction with his own style and of Peace and Freedom, he had persuaded the group behavior. He identified Utin as the leader of the to align itself with the International. He would seem conspiracy against him, and he warned that this to have been aspiring to a position the equal of Karl man was a centralist who favored “a dictatorship of Marx’s. The league, Bakunin explained, could direct the university, more or less doctrinaire, youth.” The the intellectual development of the international elitism represented by these former university stu- workers’ movement, while the International would dents, he declared, contradicted all principles of a concern itself with practical political and economic mass popular rising. Turning on Utin personally, he questions. Marx, however, would have nothing of intimated that Levasheva’s interests in the man were such maneuvering, and at a congress of the Inter- more physical than intellectual. national, held in Brussels at the beginning of Sep- In the end, Levasheva, with her control of the purse tember, delegates decreed that they had no reason strings, prevailed, and Bakunin demonstratively to recognize the League of Peace and Freedom. If resigned from the editorial board. Zhukovsky fol- its members wished to join the International, they lowed him, and the second issue of Narodnoe delo, should apply individually to any of its sections. which appeared at the end of October and carried After this rebuff, Bakunin came under fire at the the number 2/3, printed a solemn statement calling league’s own congress, meeting in Bern in the latter itself “an organ of revolutionary propaganda” and part of September. He explained how his views dif- declaring that its policies did not represent the arbi- fered from Marx’s, calling himself “a collectivist, trary will of any one individual, that the editorial but not a communist,” and he explained, “I want work on the journal was the product of “collective” the abolition of the state, the final eradication of effort. On the back page of the issue appeared a the principle of authority and patronage proper to letter from Bakunin to Elpidin, saying simply, “I am the state, which under the pretext of moralizing and taking no part in this journal.” At the same time, civilizing men, has hitherto only enslaved, perse- however, the new board did not immediately disso- cuted, exploited, and corrupted them.” At the last ciate itself from the program enunciated in the first session of the congress, Bakunin led his followers issue. in resigning from the organization; he wanted, he The antagonism between Bakunin and Utin would explained, to devote himself to finding a place in the dominate both their lives for the next several years, International. and it would have repercussions on émigré publis- Bakunin’s predilection for intrigue and conspiracy, hing, on the general behavior of the émigrés, and however, brought him new trouble. Unwilling to also in the Council of the First International. Ironi- yield to the demand of the Council of the Inter- cally, other Russians frequently accused both men national that his followers join the International of having turned their backs on Russian questions as individuals, he set up a new organization, the in their concerns with Western European politics, International Social Democratic Alliance, which he with the International, and with their mutual anta- envisioned as a society of intellectuals that would gonism. The two had first met in London in October provide leadership for the workers’ movement. He 1863, when Bakunin had returned in the aftermath wanted this to be a secret organization, but when of his Polish adventure. They then met again at his French and Italian followers objected, it was the first congress of the League of Peace and Fre- constituted as an open group. edom, where, according to Bakunin, Utin had fol- lowed him around feeding off his popularity. After In the midst of this fervid activity, Bakunin lost their disagreement over Narodnoe delo, Bakunin his position within the Russian emigration. His denounced Utin as a “little man with great preten- colleagues on the editorial board of Narodnoe delo 30 sions,” repeatedly pictured his foe as an immoral objected to various aspects of his behavior, but espe- Chapter 5: BAKUNIN AND NARODNOE DELO philanderer, and made pointed, uncomplimentary bearing the number 4/5/6. With its announced pur- references to Utin’s Jewish heritage. Utin, on the pose now to support the “Party of Popular Libera- other hand, turned to Karl Marx and became an tion” in Russia, the editorial board carefully guarded important source of information on Russian affairs its anonymity; only Trusov’s name appeared in the for Marx, providing him with details of Bakunin’s newspaper in his capacity as secretary of the board. intrigues within the Russian emigration. In the only signed contribution in this issue, Trusov announced that the newspaper had now taken its In the immediate aftermath of Bakunin’s resigna- final form; the first issues printed in Elpidin’s shop tion from Narodnoe delo, Utin had to concern him- had been just “trials.” This publication, he declared, self with the problem of how to keep the journal would replace Kolokol as the voice of the emigra- going. At the time of the furor in the editorial board, tion. Elpidin had been in Scandinavia, preparing smug- gling routes for the publication. Upon returning to One area where Narodnoe delo declared it would Geneva, he immediately declared his solidarity with improve on Kolokol’s practices concerned the pro- Bakunin and ordered the new editors of Narodnoe blem of dissenting opinions. Utin had frequently delo out of his establishment. This separation too complained about Herzen’s personal control over was heated: Elpidin charged that Utin had diverted the content of his publication, and in February 1867 money raised for the publication of Chernyshevsky’s he had criticized the Russian Free Press’s refusal to works to support the publication of Narodnoe delo, print Serno’s attack on Herzen. Kolokol, he declared, while Utin and his associates complained that should have printed the pamphlet: “You should do Elpidin had exploited their resources for his own everything possible so that the shop does not refuse “extravagant fantasies.” Narodnoe delo then had to to print anything; you would not lose from this, you search for new quarters, and this resulted in the for- would gain.” Trusov announced that Narodnoe delo mation of a third Russian print shop in Geneva. would carry a section for which the editorial board “accepts no responsibility”; this would carry letters, To head this new print shop, called the “Narodnoe announcements, notes, and even criticism of the delo Press,” Utin summoned Anton Danilovich editorial board’s position just so long as the items Trusov from Paris. A native of the Minsk region, “clearly evidenced the author’s sincere relationship Trusov had participated in the Polish rising of 1863 to the cause of freedom.” In practice, however, the and had then emigrated to Paris, where he was newspaper printed only one such item by an out- known in radical circles as “Antoine.” Recruited into sider, a signed account of a false arrest in Geneva Bakunin’s International Brotherhood, Trusov had in 1870, and, for reasons never made explicit, it come to Switzerland in the late summer of 1868 for ignored an article submitted by Herzen. the congress of the League of Peace and Freedom, and there he first met Utin. Upon the conclusion of Driven from Narodnoe delo, Bakunin had little left the congress, he returned to Paris, where he worked of his Russian constituency, and he moved back into as a typesetter. Now Utin promised him a position the international arena, in particular developing in the Narodnoe delo shop so long as it was under his following among the French-Swiss in the Jura his, Utin’s, management; Trusov agreed and moved mountains. Acceding to the demands of the General to Geneva. Council of the International, he dissolved the Social Democratic Alliance, but he continued his cons- Trusov had yet another role to play in the saga of piratorial intrigues. Behind him now, relentlessly Bakunin’s intrigues. When Bakunin sought to take pursuing him, came Narodnoe delo. When Bakunin his Social Democratic Alliance into the Interna- next clashed with Marx, Narodnoe delo aligned itself tional as a separate entity, the General Council of with Marx. the International, under Marx’s direction, rejected the group’s application. In January 1869 a small The differences between Marx and Bakunin were group of members of Bakunin’s International Brot- both doctrinal and personal. Bakunin was of course herhood, including Trusov, lodged their own com- challenging Marx’s personal role in the Interna- plaints about Bakunin’s dictatorial and secretive tional, but the two men differed significantly in their intrigues. Bakunin, who for financial reasons could respective conceptions of the very idea of revolu- not be present at the meeting, screamed in futile tion. Marx advocated a class struggle aimed at the rage at “all these gentlemen” but to no avail. Two nationalization of the means of production and the months later the International Brotherhood ceased establishment of a revolutionary dictatorship of to exist, and Bakunin charged that the “Jew Utin” the proletariat, a centralized political structure that had directed Trusov to break up the organization. would remake society. Bakunin offered a mystique of insurrection, a mass popular rising that would In May 1869, after a long silence during which create a stateless and classless society without pri- rumors abounded that Narodnoe delo would never vate property. (Bakunin saw no contradiction bet- 31 again appear, another issue was published, this one THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

ween his opposition to the principle of inherited go to Russia to avenge the death of my brother and property and his own complaints that he was not his friends,” Serno allegedly had declared, “but my receiving his share of the moneys from the family single vengeance would be insufficient and impo- estate in Russia.) Marx favored political activity, tent.” It was better, the article concluded, to work for educational work among the workers; Bakunin revolution through the International. called for action, not politicking, and for immediate Narodnoe delo’s movement toward the Interna- revolution. The views of the two men were irrecon- tional completed its path in March 1870, when the cilable even without any consideration of their per- newspaper’s directors proclaimed the formation of sonal antagonisms. a Russian section of the International. In a letter Recognizing Bakunin’s strength among the radi- dated the 12th, Utin and Trusov asked Karl Marx cals of southern Europe, Marx looked for support to be their representative in the International’s in Bakunin’s backyard, in the Russian emigration. General Council. Pledging themselves to spread He knew that his own work was popular among the message of the International among Russian Russian intellectuals – a Russian publisher was workers, the men pointed out their opposition to already planning to translate Das Kapital, and this the idea of Pan-Slavism, the unification of all Slavic would be the first translation of the work into any peoples in one state, and they spoke of themselves language. On the other hand, Marx generally bore as students of Chernyshevsky. They explicitly stated the Russians no particular love: He did not consider their opposition to “Bakunin and his few confede- Herzen a serious social scientist, and he considered rates,” and declaring that there were no Russians in most other Russians blind and narrow on the Polish London to whom they could turn, they asked Marx question. to represent them. Marx immediately agreed, prai- sing Chernyshevsky, and the admission of the Rus- Marx saw considerable irony in the interest that the sian section in Geneva as a member of the Interna- Russians were showing in his work, but he found no tional was quickly consummated. humor in the situation whereby, because of student demonstrations in Russia, the project to translate Now the organ of the Russian section of the First Das Kapital had to be moved into the emigration. International, Narodnoe delo had undergone a con- This only brought new problems, because Bakunin siderable transformation since 1868. Whether the had received the commission to do the job, accep- members of the editorial board in 1870 could really ting an advance of 300 rubles. Marx could not be be called Marxist has been the subject of some his- happy about Bakunin’s influencing the message of torical controversy, but regardless of that, the his- socialism to the Russians. tory of Narodnoe delo had revolved closely around the controversial figure of Bakunin. Founded by For its part, the Narodnoe delo group looked sym- him, the newspaper turned away from him, and pathetically toward Marx’s teachings and of course when its editors joined the International they found supported him against Bakunin. The newspaper’s it desirable, if not necessary, to declare their opposi- issue for May 1869 took note of Marx’s calls for pur- tion to him as part of their new profession of faith. suing the class struggle, and its next issue, nos. 7-10, Together, Bakunin and Narodnoe delo were leading appearing in November, expressed support for the the Russian revolutionary movement into closer program of the International. The newspaper even ties with Western socialists. turned its account of Serno-Solovevich’s suicide to the benefit of the International, calling Serno a For Marx too the formation of the Russian section victim of Russian life while at the same time taking was closely related to his struggle with Bakunin. a few shots at Herzen: “We, whom the older gene- In summarizing the adherence of this group to the ration accuses of lacking any historical gratitude – International, Marx wrote: we speak of love and of thankfulness, which both the former generation, the contemporaries of the Together with that, they declared – as if apologi- [Serno-Solovevich] brothers, and the present young zing to Marx – that in the near future they would generation will always carry for the memory of both.” tear away Bakunin’s mask, because this man Granting that Aleksandr had suffered from psycho- leads a double policy: one in Russia and completely logical problems, the obituary charged that the hos- another in Europe. And so, an end will soon be put tility of the older generation had contributed to his to this highly dangerous intrigant, at least within breakdown. Perhaps Serno had not used the proper the framework of the International. tone in criticizing Kolokol, the article conceded, but “Chernyshevsky’s student” had been correct in the Indeed, if one may judge from Marx’s comments on substance of his comments. In more recent years, it the usefulness of the Russian section, he looked for- continued, Serno had thrown himself into the work 32 ward more to the contribution it could make to his of the International: “It torments me that I do not struggle against Bakunin than he did to any work it Chapter 5: BAKUNIN AND NARODNOE DELO might carry out among the still minuscule Russian in mind, namely one Sergei Nechaev, a revolutio- proletariat. nary student who had come onto the émigré scene in April 1869 and who had immediately stirred up For the Russian section, the struggle with Bakunin new fury and turmoil. The Narodnoe delo group had taken a new twist since the spring of 1869 considered Nechaev dangerous; in the end, he was that Marx himself did not yet fully appreciate. The to contribute heavily to Bakunin’s final defeat within reference that Utin and Trusov made to “Bakunin the ranks of the International. and his confederates” had a specific, sinister figure

33 Chapter 6:

THE YOUNG FANATIC FROM RUSSIA

The problems of contacts and links with Russia, or St. Petersburg students in 1868 and 1869. Revolution, the lack thereof, always stood in the forefront of he argued, could be expected in the spring of 1870, émigré publishing considerations. By themselves the ninth anniversary of the emancipation of the the émigrés could not long sustain revolutionary peasantry, when the peasants would have to choose publishing. Besides lacking the financial resources, whether to accept land with a heavy mortgage or to they looked to the opposition groups within Russia take a reduced plot free of payments. The revolutio- for their material, and in turn, only through living naries, he concluded, must prepare for action. and vital contacts with the developing situation at Nechaev found both Ogarev and Bakunin vulne- home could émigré publications find not just an rable and easy to manipulate. To Ogarev he spoke audience and even their rationale for existence. of his respect for the memory of the Decembrists; In the late 1860s, Herzen and Ogarev frequently to Bakunin he declared his solidarity with the ideas discussed the difficulties in maintaining links with of mass revolution espoused in the first issue of Russia. During Kolokol’s days of glory Herzen had Narodnoe delo. Both of the older men welcomed the enjoyed such contact, but living in Nice in the newcomer as a man of the people, a revolutionary winter of 1868-1869, he was convinced that émigré from the masses. In this nervous young man, who publishing was now a losing proposition. “Everyt- chewed his fingernails to the point of drawing blood, hing we are publishing abroad,” he lamented, “is they saw selflessness and dedication; they admired philanthropy and self-deception.” The Russian Free his energy and enthusiasm; and they took him to Press was only draining his resources: “I admit that, their bosoms as a representative of the new Young beyond good will, I would passionately like to be Russia who still appreciated the revolutionary acti- relieved of this burden,” he exclaimed. “The Czer- vities of the older generation. Bakunin glowingly niecki affair, like a canker bores deeper and deeper described Nechaev as “an example of those young – it must be ended.” Nevertheless, Herzen had to fanatics who doubt nothing and fear nothing.” continue paying Czerniecki’s bills. Full of enthusiasm, Ogarev drafted a proclama- Less cynical and ever optimistic, Ogarev kept tion entitled “From the Three Old Men to Young hoping to find a solution, and at the end of March Friends,” assuring Russian students “We will not 1869, he thought he could see the way out of these teach you. You seek nothing for yourselves, and you doldrums and uncertainties. “Yesterday,” he wrote want nothing but national needs and the national to Herzen on April 1, movement. We know this and we see; therefore we believe in your movement.” All three grand old men a letter came in your name with a request to print a of the emigration – Bakunin, Herzen, and himself message to the students from one student who had – should sign the declaration, Ogarev declared, and just escaped the Petropavlovsk fortress. The mes- he urged Herzen to telegraph his agreement. He sage is perhaps somewhat overblown, but it must gave the manuscript of his proclamation to Czer- be printed. It is my deep conviction that in any case niecki for typesetting even before he had received it will bring about the resurrection of the émigré Herzen’s response. press.” Herzen, however, objected. He did not share his comrades’ enthusiasm for Nechaev’s vigor, and at A few days later, the author of the letter, Sergei Gen- first he suggested that Nechaev’s own proclamation nadievich Nechaev, appeared in person at Ogarev’s “To the Students” be printed without any endorse- home in Geneva. ment. Then, when he had had a chance to study the 34 Born in 1847, Nechaev had just recently emerged as a document, he called it “simply bad,” declaring, “I leader in the new wave of activity sweeping through do not approve.” When he read Ogarev’s text “From Chapter 6: THE YOUNG FANATIC FROM RUSSIA the Three Old Men,” he responded, “If you have and he later referred to the young man as a “snake.” decided and done it, then let it be – if not, put it On a second trip to Geneva at the end of May, out without signatures.” The piece, he complained, Herzen met with more trouble as the new troika amounted to a “journalistic diatribe,” written in demanded that he surrender the Bakhmetev fund “the jargon of 1863 and of Bakunin.” Upon reading to support their program of revolutionary procla- another proclamation written by Bakunin, “entitled mations. For almost a month, Ogarev, undoubtedly “A Few Words to Our Young Brothers in Russia,” he influenced by Bakunin, importuned him daily, commented that it was better written than Ogarev’s arguing that Bakhmetev had actually delivered the effort, but that he still saw no purpose to it – it had money into both their keeping and that therefore no relevance to the situation in Russia. he, Ogarev, had rights equal to Herzen’s in deter- Herzen and Ogarev now came to verbal blows. mining the use of the money. Herzen objected, but Ogarev called it “contemptible” and “shameful” not Ogarev persisted. When Herzen left Geneva at the to give unconditional support to the youth. Herzen end of June, the question remained open, but more in turn objected to Ogarev’s misguided enthusiasm: than anything else Herzen feared that others would “How did you, a poet and musician, lose the fee- find out about these “unpleasant arguments” and ling of form and measure?” he asked. “No, caro publicize them. mio, these are not the sounds with which the young Herzen’s fears were well founded; within the Rus- Kolokol electrified the youth.” Herzen’s “arrogance,” sian émigré community along the shores of Lac as Ogarev called it, brought the poet to tears – “It Leman there were few secrets. When Utin heard would be best to die.” of Ogarev’s plans, he protested that Bakunin had Bemused by the intensity of this exchange, Herzen no right to claim to represent Russian youth and tried to make peace with Ogarev during a brief that he had no significant ties with Russia. Instead, visit to Geneva in May 1869. They reached agre- Utin argued, the Bakhmetev fund should belong ement quickly enough on Ogarev’s second appeal to the “revolutionary cause” in general, and he to the Russian students, which was called “Our put in a claim on behalf of Narodnoe delo, which Story” and was printed over the signature “The edi- he described as having extensive contacts with tors of Kolokol.” Ogarev’s passion for working with Russia. Herzen coldly replied that the capital of the Nechaev and Bakunin, however, disturbed Herzen. Bakhmetev fund still remained intact as of July 1, “Ogarev is still playing games,” Herzen wrote to his 1869, and now he defended Bakunin: “He has small son. “He has taken the bit and just makes noise, shortcomings and enormous qualities. He has a scolds, and has even written a manifesto. What’s past, and he is a force in the present. Don’t count with him? God knows it’s Bakunin.” He now began on each succeeding generation’s being intensively referring to Ogarev as “bloodthirsty” and as “my better than the preceding one.” Robespierre,” and he declared, “I protest and dec- Herzen resisted Utin easily, but against Ogarev he line all solidarity.” had no defense. He had to agree in principle that Herzen found Bakunin no easier to understand. Ogarev had equal claim to the Bakhmetev money, Calling the anarchist “a mastodon” and comparing and he could not in good conscience challenge him to Attila, Herzen wrote, “He preaches general Ogarev’s competence. In July he gave in, hoping that destruction everywhere... In the abstract he is right, the Bakhmetev money could restore the economic but in practice he is beyond the realm of possibi- health of the Russian Free Press. Agreeing to divide lity. Yet Russian youth takes his program literally. the fund in half, he wrote to Ogarev, “You know that The students are preparing to form robber bands. I protest. You must make bold to take upon your- Bakunin is advising them to burn all documents self the full, sole responsibility for all such expen- – to destroy things and not to spare people.” In a ditures.” more moderate moment, Herzen characterized his The money barely stopped in Ogarev’s hands on old friend as a “locomotive, overheated and off the its way to Nechaev, who applied it to his “literary rails,” and he expressed regret about the influence campaign” of revolutionary leaflets and proclama- that Bakunin seemed to be wielding over Ogarev. tions, printed by Czerniecki in the summer of 1869. For Nechaev, Herzen felt only revulsion. Ogarev These publications, written mostly by Bakunin, had had tried to ease the meeting of the two by warning confusing aims, but there was no mistaking their that Herzen’s first impression of “the little peasant” bloodthirstiness and their call for violence. Young might not be favorable: “His manners are still very people should stop their philosophizing and turn much peasantlike.” Herzen’s reaction was in fact to “declaration through deeds.” Ironically, the most negative: “Rarely,” wrote Tuchkova-Ogareva, “has significant and lasting product of this campaign was anyone been so antipathetic to Herzen.” Herzen the first Russian translation of Marx’s Communist 35 simply could not understand Nechaev’s magnetism, Manifesto, printed in the fall of 1869. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Even as he directed this publishing campaign, declared that Postnikov should negotiate directly Nechaev repeatedly expressed scorn for the printed with Herzen in Paris. word and for the people who specialized in pro- Postnikov did not altogether welcome this invita- ducing it. Type, he would argue, should be melted tion to visit the famed émigré, for while he pre- down for bullets: “Books do not educate, they put sented himself as a publisher, he was in fact an to sleep.” In the first issue of a new periodical,Naro - agent of the tsarist police, Karl-Arvid Romann, dnaia rasprava (The People’s Vengeance), he wrote, dispatched to Western Europe with the dual assi- He who initiates himself in the revolutionary cause gnment of tracking down Nechaev and of obtai- through books will never be anything but a revolu- ning Dolgorukov’s papers. (The tsarist authorities tionary sluggard... For us the word is of significance still feared Dolgorukov’s scandals as much as they feared any revolutionary propaganda.) Postnikov- only when the deed is sensed behind it and follows Romann found Ogarev, Bakunin, and Tchorzewski immediately upon it. easy enough to fool, but Herzen had a reputation for having a keener eye. “I held off from meeting Nechaev vigorously endorsed Bakunin’s calls to Herzen until I was forced into it,” Postnikov- action: “Bakunin rightly tries to persuade us to Romann reported back to his superiors. Finally, abandon our academies, universities, and schools, anxious to have assurances that the papers in and go to the people.” Even such a call, however, he Tchorzewski’s collection were complete, he agreed considered vague, and he specified, “We have only to make the trip to Paris. a single, negative, immutable goal – merciless des- truction.” In contrast to the advocates of what he When the two men met at the beginning of called “paper revolution,” he demanded a campaign October, Herzen quickly approved the sale. He of assassinations, saving the Tsar for a final bloo- liked Postnikov’s plan to publish the papers as a dletting of popular vengeance. As for those who series of brochures. “If you are so well acquainted disagreed with him, such as the editors of Naro- with the publishing business,” Herzen told his dnoe delo, Nechaev warned, “We can interfere with visitor, “then the papers will not be lost in your the distribution of things, however sincere, that hands.” He recommended that Postnikov print the directly counter our banner, with various practical works with Czerniecki in Geneva, but he admitted methods at our command.” that it could be cheaper to have the job done in Brussels. The deal consummated, Postnikov col- When Ogarev, totally enchanted by Nechaev, ten- lected the papers, declaring that he was taking the tatively raised the thought of reviving Kolokol as documents to Brussels, and then he mailed them part of this new campaign of publications, Herzen off to St. Petersburg. objected, “I cannot understand how you can think of putting Kolokol together... Where would the reports Once this flurry of excitement had passed, Geneva come from?” Herzen insisted that he could place again became quiet, and Ogarev, as supervisor of the a regular column on Russian affairs in any one of Russian Free Press, again became concerned about several newspapers; a revived Kolokol, on the other the lack of work for Czerniecki’s press. Bakunin, hand, would have no readership. He also reminded now in Locarno, was bombarding him with com- Ogarev that the print shop could not sustain the plaints about Karl Marx and especially about work of printing a periodical. Nechaev left Geneva Utin, whom he called “a rooster among [women], late in the summer to return to Russia, and this a rooster revolutionizing in words and playing at question faded away for the time being. dictatorship,” indulging himself with “women and money.” When Ogarev sadly questioned whether Nechaev’s impact on the emigration, however, his generation would live to see the revolution in involved more than just his rapid conquest of Russia, Bakunin responded, “None of us can guess Ogarev and Czerniecki’s printing facilities, for this. But even if we see it, Ogarev, there will not be other suspicious characters came in his wake. much consolation for you and me; other people, Tchorzewski unexpectedly received one such mys- new, strong, young – naturally not the Utins – will terious visitor, a Nikolai Postnikov, who expressed bump us from the face of the earth, making us use- interest in purchasing and publishing the papers of less.” Yet, Bakunin concluded, the older generation Prince Dolgorukov. The prince had died two years had made its contributions with its writings: “We earlier, leaving his paper in Tchorzewski’s care, and will then leave books in their hands.” although Kolokol (La Cloche) of February 15, 1869, had reported that Tchorzewski would soon publish Bakunin was himself tormented by his lack of “extremely interesting revelations,” Tchorzewski funds. He had been able to move to Locarno himself felt there was little there worth his effort. because of the 300 francs he had received as an 36 When Postnikov inquired about the papers, Tchor- advance for translating Marx’s Das Kapital into zewski was very ready to sell them, but he cautiously Russian, but once settled, he found that even with Chapter 6: THE YOUNG FANATIC FROM RUSSIA

Locarno’s low cost of living, that money did not the morning of the 21st he died. His death allowed go very far. On the other hand, the translation Nechaev a free hand in exploiting and thereby des- proved to be more demanding that he had bli- troying the last financial and intellectual capital of thely anticipated. In December he asked Ogarev Herzen’s generation of émigrés. for a loan of 800 francs from the Bakhmetev fund. Nechaev now launched a new campaign of pro- When Ogarev sent the request along to Herzen, clamations, and he indulged himself in fervent now again in Paris, Herzen exclaimed, “This is self-glorification as a hero and a martyr pursued mindless. You spent 3000 on something harmful by the tsarist authorities. “He collided with the and not useful – and suddenly make the fund a police frequently but always skipped away safely,” pawnshop!” It would be better, Herzen suggested, he wrote about himself in the second issue of Naro- to use the money to buy out Czerniecki. Nevert- dnaia rasprava. “I was spared with the few survi- heless Herzen sent 300 francs to Bakunin as a gift; vors,” he wrote on another occasion, “The enraged he knew he could not consider it a loan. Ogarev governmental tigers failed to capture me. They have then had to listen to Bakunin’s lamentations about become rabid to the point of mindlessness, to the Herzen’s lack of confidence in him. point of absurdity; they have rushed to hunt me in Bakunin’s moaning did nothing to help Ogarev ful- Europe.” The police were pursuing him because of fill his responsibilities. Bakunin was urging him to a murder of a comrade of his in Russia. Nechaev, move the Russian Free Press to sunny Locarno, but freely admitting the deed, insisted that he and his even if Ogarev had had the physical strength for such followers had simply liquidated a police informer a venture – he rarely traveled further from his apar- from within their ranks, and he incorporated the tment than to a local tavern – Czerniecki had little murder into the romantic aura that he was conju- enough work in Geneva. When Ogarev raised the ring around himself. question of using the remainder of the Bakhmetev Bakunin again threw his support behind Nechaev. fund to bail Czerniecki out, Herzen declared that Although in one peculiar essay he suggested that this money could only be used if Czerniecki had to Nechaev was only a figment of the government’s sell the press for less than it was worth. Instead, he imagination – Nechaev published a piece in that promised to continue paying Czerniecki 100 francs very same publication under his own name – per month out of his own pocket. Significantly, in Bakunin published a more noteworthy defense traveling between Paris and Italy, Herzen chose not under the title The Bears of Bern and the Bears of St. to pass through Switzerland. “I hate Geneva,” he Petersburg. Comparing Nechaev, “a Russian patriot,” explained. to William Tell, “this hero of political murder,” he In January 1870 Nechaev suddenly reappeared in protested against the Swiss government’s coopera- Geneva, and Ogarev, who had heard that the young ting with any foreign government in extraditing a revolutionary had been arrested, was enormously political refugee. relieved and excited. For Bakunin too, Nechaev’s Nechaev’s relationship with Bakunin now under- return promised new action; upon hearing the went a certain change. Instead of his earlier sup- news, he declared, he “so jumped for joy that I nearly port of Narodnoe delo’s anarchism, Nechaev now smashed the ceiling with my old head. Fortunately espoused more conspiratorial, Jacobin ideas, advo- the ceiling is very high.” Herzen’s reaction was con- cating the political seizure of power instead of siderably more restrained. At Ogarev’s urging he spontaneous mass revolution. Despite misgivings, agreed to receive Nechaev, “but I regard his acti- Bakunin followed his lead. vity and that of the two old men positively harmful and untimely.” As far as Ogarev was concerned, Nechaev persuaded Bakunin and Ogarev to help Nechaev’s arrival promised new activity and new him to obtain the remainder of the Bakhmetev initiatives, and he asked Herzen for another 5000 money in order to renew the publication of Kolokol. francs from the Bakhmetev fund. For this they needed the approval of Herzen’s chil- dren, Natalie and Alexander, and at Nechaev’s Suddenly Herzen was no more. In recent months behest, the two older men pressured Natalie, who he had been complaining about various physical was just recovering from a nervous breakdown, to problems; he was having trouble with diabetes. cooperate with their young hero. Ogarev introduced On January 14, 1870, he felt pain in his chest. A her to Nechaev, explaining that her father had dis- fever developed, and he was confined to bed. He liked the man because “he could not judge the pre- had an inflammation in his lungs. On the 18th he sent position of the young people in Russia or what seemed better; the fever was down. On the 19th he they are doing.” Bakunin assured her that working sent Tchorzewski a telegram: “Great danger past. with Nechaev and becoming involved in the revo- Dissatisfied as ever with doctors. Will try to write lutionary movement would be good for her health: tomorrow.” That night he became delirious, and on 37 “It would be treachery against your conscience and THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

your honor not to help Nechaev.” He urged Ogarev Nechaev also overplayed his hand with Natalie. to press her on the subject: He made advances toward her, but Natalie was not ready to accept his clumsy moves. “Until such time For the time being write nothing to them about as you give me your word of honor that you will Kolokol, but just demand relentlessly that the not kiss me,” she angrily declared, “I shall not go to whole fund be turned over. This is not only your visit Ogarev.” Nechaev urged her to “give free rein right but your sacred duty, and all delicacies of to your mind, do not constrain it with comfortable social relationships must yield before this duty. prejudices.” Natalie objected: “You will not leave me in peace; you do not know how to treat people Turning to Natalie’s brother Alexander, Ogarev in a civilized fashion.” first assured him that Natalie was well, living in Natalie soon withdrew from her brief foray into Switzerland, and warned him that the idle life of émigré political activities. A year later she wrote to a the Herzen family constituted the real threat to her friend, “Be very cautious with all the Russians who health. Then, in a moment of triumph, Ogarev won have recently arrived. Remember, a new man a la the younger Herzen’s approval for using the rema- Nechaev is forming among them, a kind of revolu- inder of the Bakhmetev fund. Ogarev immediately tionary Jesuit who is ready to commit any vileness delivered the money to Nechaev, who went ahead in order to achieve his goal.” with his plans to revive the name of Kolokol for his own purposes. With these problems arising within the emigration, Nechaev hardly noticed the continued pursuit of Even as he seemed to be logging victories, however, the tsarist police. At the end of March Postnikov- Nechaev made several egregious blunders. On Romann arrived back in Geneva, but he now found February 25, in an effort to free Bakunin from the the atmosphere somewhat uncomfortable. Tchor- nagging obligation to deliver something in return zewski was upset by rumors that he, Tchorzewski, for the advance he had received for the translation had sold Dolgorukov’s papers to the tsarist police. of Das Kapital, Nechaev sent a letter to N. N. Liu- Postnikov gently reassured him about his intentions bavin, the man who had thought he was helping to publish Dolgorukov’s papers, but in turn Pos- Bakunin by giving him work. In the name of “The tnikov had to request money from his home office, Bureau of Foreign Agents of the Russian Revolu- suggesting that he could burn the finished product tionary Society `Narodnaia Rasprava’,” the letter if St Petersburg so desired. St. Petersburg, however, warned Liubavin that the bureau intended to pro- was unwilling to go ahead with the planned publi- tect “dear personalities” who were being exploited cation. by “dilettante kulaks” and who were thereby being “deprived of the possibility of working for the libe- Postnikov seemed beaten, but the naiveté of Bakunin ration of mankind.” If Liubavin did not free Bakunin and Ogarev rescued him. When he met Bakunin of “the moral obligation to continue the transla- in Ogarev’s apartment, he found that at least these tion,” the society would “take extreme and therefore men trusted him. Indeed, Bakunin welcomed him, rather rough measures.” Bakunin soon received his and in turn Postnikov now offered his superiors release from this obligation to earn his money, but new information as evidence of his own efficiency. Liubavin turned the letter over to Karl Marx, who “Bakunin’s opinion is the opinion of all extreme added it to his own arsenal in his campaign to expel conspirators,” he told his chiefs. Impressed, the Bakunin from the International. authorities renewed Postnikov’s commission and approved the publication of some of Dolgorukov’s Nechaev also threatened the Herzen family. Ale- papers. Although he became a close associate of xander fils was reportedly planning the publication Bakunin’s, however, Postnikov somehow still could of a number of his father’s last writings, including not find Nechaev, even though he probably met him his “Letters to an Old Comrade,” critical of Bakunin. at Ogarev’s apartment. Ogarev attempted to persuade Sasha to postpone publication of the letters, but then the Herzens Despite all the controversy whirling about his received a letter from the “Foreign Bureau of Naro- head, Nechaev began publishing his new version dnaia Rasprava,” this one declaring that the works of Kolokol, beginning in April 1870. He had won contradicted Herzen’s earlier writings and that their Natalie Herzen’s approval for the use of the name, publication would serve no useful purpose. The letter although she refused personally to have anyt- expressed confidence that the society would not be hing to do with it. As the publication’s subtitle, he forced “into the sad necessity of acting in a less deli- added, “Organ of Russian Liberation, Founded by cate manner.” Sasha angrily informed Ogarev, “You A. I. Herzen.” The publication identified its edito- yourself understand that now I must publish these rial board only as “Agents of the Russian Cause.” 38 articles.” The work appeared in the course of the (Postnikov, whom Ogarev invited to contribute summer of 1870, printed by Czerniecki. to Kolokol, reported home that Czerniecki was Chapter 6: THE YOUNG FANATIC FROM RUSSIA the editor.) In a strange contrast to his earlier tested vigorously, but the police, armed with a pho- pronouncements, Nechaev attempted to unite all tograph, held him for some eleven days. Serebren- factions in the emigration as well as in Russia, nikov subsequently tried to sue the Swiss authori- praising peasants and students, complaining of ties, demanding 1000 francs as compensation for his censorship and corruption, and even indicating suffering. EvenNarodnoe delo rallied to his support, that a constitution might be desirable for Russia. seeing this case as a threat to the safety of all émi- In the first issue Ogarev published an open letter grés, but the Swiss courts rejected Serebrennikov’s to the editorial board announcing the passing of complaint. The Russian émigrés stood on notice the flame from the oldKolokol , and he promised to that the authorities were very serious about their remain a collaborator “to the end of my life.” pursuit of Nechaev, and Nechaev himself had to go underground. With Kolokol’s strange new program, Nechaev managed to attract some notable collaborators. Var- Still more dangerous for Nechaev than the pursuit folomei Zaitsev, just a few years earlier one of the lite- of the Russian and the Swiss authorities was the rary lions of St. Petersburg, had recently emigrated, appearance of a new figure in the Russian emigra- and he was ready to contribute to the new Kolokol. tion, German Lopatin, a young man in his mid 20s. Another collaborator was Nikolai Zhukovsky, who In 1869, the Russian government’s dragnet to root of late had served as something of a liaison between out Nechaev’s followers among students had picked Ogarev and Utin. Zhukovsky seemed to get along up Lopatin, even though he strongly opposed well with all the émigré camps, perhaps because no Nechaev’s conspiratorial intrigues, himself favoring one took him too seriously. Bakunin himself did not mass revolution. Now, in order to defend his friend approve of the newspaper’s program. Liubavin, he undertook to expose Nechaev’s mys- tifications, declaring that the murder of Nechaev’s Nechaev’s venture came to a sudden end in May. follower had arisen first of all from Nechaev’s own The seventh issue of Kolokol had actually been wounded vanity and secondly from Nechaev’s insis- prepared, but it was never to be printed. A dispute tence that the so-called “Committee” could dispose arose between Nechaev and Czerniecki. Nechaev of the goods and lives of its members without any protested Czerniecki’s having sent copies of Kolokol restriction. Lopatin’s revelations almost completely to Elpidin and Trusov; Czerniecki countered that undermined Nechaev’s standing in the emigration, he had done this as a courtesy from one printer to but only with difficulty could Lopatin convince another; Nechaev argued that somehow this could Bakunin of the young fanatic’s perfidy. “compromise the cause,” and he complained of the cost. Czerniecki exploded, “It is impossible to con- Bakunin could not let his dream die easily. In a ceive of anything stupider than this!” Czerniecki long letter dated June 2, 1870, full of self-pity, he then refused to have anything more to do with the reprimanded Nechaev for his activities in Geneva. publication. Referring to the Bakhmetev money, he wrote, “You could have done a lot of useful things in Geneva More serious than the dispute with Czerniecki was with this modest sum in your hands and with the growing controversy concerning Nechaev’s the help of a few people... You could have set up personal character. With stories about the murder a serious organ with an avowed social-revolutio- of Nechaev’s follower in Russia swirling through nary program and, attached to it, a foreign bureau the emigration, a gathering of Russian émigrés in for the management of Russian activities outside Geneva on May 7 took up the entire complex of of Russia.” Bakunin even reproved Nechaev for questions surrounding Nechaev. (According to having instilled in Natalie Herzen “a deep suspi- police reports, those present included Tuchkova- cion toward all of us and a conviction that you and Ogareva, Natalie Herzen, Elpidin, Zhukovsky and I intended to exploit [her] financial resources and Ogarev; the Narodnoe delo group refused to attend to exploit them, of course, for ourselves and not because of its opposition to both Bakunin and for the cause.” Despite all this, however, Bakunin Nechaev.) While accounts of what transpired in the was still ready to work with Nechaev under certain heated, chaotic discussions are at best confused, conditions, including Nechaev’s promise to have two definite results emerged. The émigrés agreed nothing more to do with Utin. to a petition protesting the thought of extraditing anyone to Russia, and at the same time there was Bakunin’s hopes notwithstanding, Nechaev’s influ- a growing wave of hostility toward Nechaev per- ence among the émigrés quickly evaporated, but sonally. his brief meteoric career had wrought significant changes on the face of the émigré publishing world. Nechaev had to go into hiding, and his Kolokol died He had scorned the printed word as worthless in a immediately. Just two days later Geneva authorities world that demanded revolutionary action, but he arrested an émigré on the street, believing him to be had spent a great deal of time publishing works with 39 Nechaev. The émigré, Semen Serebrennikov, pro- THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Ogarev and Czerniecki. He had gained control of the turmoil that would sweep France in 1870-1871, the Bakhmetev fund and had turned it to his own his ideas would yet influence future generations purposes, to be sure for paper and ink rather than of revolutionaries, but he personally became little for bullets, but he had quickly dissipated this poten- more than a relic of days past. Karl Marx, with Utin’s tially important resource. He had seriously damaged help, would use Nechaev’s image as another weapon the reputations of both Ogarev and Bakunin. Ogarev with which to discredit Bakunin within the ranks retired again to drink, never again to be a significant of the Workers’ International. Nechaev had ravaged factor in printing and publishing. Bakunin would the intellectual heritage of the generation of Herzen yet have his moment on the revolutionary stage in and Bakunin.

40 Chapter 7:

ANSWERING THE CALL

The collapse of Nechaev’s elaborate mystifications encouraged Utin to write a brochure exposing the left chaos within the Russian emigration, and the activities of the anarchist. As he explained to Frie- print shops lapsed into relative silence. The kalei- drich Engels, doscope of émigré relationships now underwent a radical rotation. Nechaev’s drama, after reaching its In Geneva... a colony has formed of Russian émigrés climax in Geneva, eventually found its conclusion who are opponents of Bakunin because they know in Zurich, even as a new generation of émigrés there the ambitious striving of this completely average constructed institutions to replace those destroyed man (although also an accomplished intriguer) by Bakunin’s intrigues and Nechaev’s manipula- and because they are acquainted with the doctrines tion. propagated by Bakunin in his ‘Russian’ writings, Nechaev’s activities over the next two years, from directly antagonistic to the principles of the Inter- the summer of 1870 to the spring of 1872, have national. remained hidden from the prying eyes of genera- tions of historians: He published one issue of a new In turn, Engels warned Marx to be cautious: periodical, Obshchina (The Commune), which bore What kind of stupid nonsense is this, half a dozen the imprint of London – a second issue was printed Russians squabbling among themselves as though but destroyed before distribution; in the spring of 1871 he was in France; after a brief stay in Zurich world supremacy depended the outcome?... It is he returned to France in the fall of 1871; in June good to know all the gossip for it belongs to the 1872 he reappeared in Zurich for the last phase of diplomacy of the proletariat. his public career. While he could still manipulate a few young émigrés, he was in fact no longer a major In contrast to his rather cautious use of Utin, Marx actor in the émigré community. genuinely respected German Lopatin, whom he met in London at the beginning of July 1870. This young Utin, however, could not forget him. After Nechaev man, he declared, had “a clear critical head, a che- had left Geneva, Utin discovered that the man erful disposition, patient and hardy like a Russian had even penetrated the offices of Narodnoe delo. peasant, who is satisfied with what he has.” Upon During the winter of 1869-1870, according to Utin, hearing from him the full story of Nechaev’s mys- a newly arrived Russian, Vladimir Serebrennikov, tification, Marx marveled at Bakunin’s naiveté, but had asked for help in resisting Nechaev’s threats. the revelations did not make him any more sym- After a while, Serebrennikov became secretary of pathetic toward the anarchist. At the same time, the Russian Section of the International, and he Lopatin’s balanced account may well have made had then attempted to take over the Narodnoe delo Marx a bit suspicious of Utin’s unrestrained denun- print shop for Nechaev. Utin managed to block this ciations and exaggerations. infiltration, and he hastened to add this story to the catalog of complaints about Nechaev and Bakunin Marx sponsored Lopatin’s membership in the that he was supplying to Karl Marx. General Council of the International, but the Rus- sian remained a man of action. He was himself not Marx himself had long been scornful of the activi- ready to lead the emigration, and in fact he soon ties of the Russians, but in the winter of 1869-1870 disappeared. He disapproved of the controversies he forged his way through a new study of the wor- between Utin and Bakunin and between Marx and king class in Russian, written by Vasily Bervi-Flo- Bakunin; he sat long enough to translate about rovsky, and he acquired new respect for the revo- one-third of Das Kapital – he took no pay lest he lutionary potential existing in the Tsar’s realm. He anger the Bakunists; and then in November 1870 he still considered Utin’s Russian Section in Geneva suddenly departed London, heading for Russia in useful mainly as a weapon against Bakunin, and he the hope of rescuing Chernyshevsky from Siberian 41 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

exile. If Chernyshevsky could join the emigration, Paris, but he was not ready to enter into the maels- Lopatin calculated, he would give it the leadership trom of émigré politics. it so desperately lacked. The Russian authorities, Lavrov’s advice to Russian youth offered a strong however, arrested Lopatin when he arrived in contrast to Bakunin’s injunctions to leave the univer- Irkutsk and then removed Chernyshevsky to a still sities. The study of social problems, Lavrov argued, more remote exile. Émigré suspicions immediately would contribute to the understanding of society focused on the garrulous Elpidin as having betrayed and nature. Although he insisted on the necessity of him, perhaps inadvertently, perhaps treacherously. organization to effect major social change, he paid Lopatin later gave Elpidin the benefit of the doubt, tribute to the power of individual zeal: calling him “not an accomplished scoundrel but a simple ass.” At any rate, Lopatin was lost to the emi- Not only words but deeds are necessary. Ener- gration for several years. getic, fanatical people are necessary, risking all and Although the émigré presses were quiet, there was ready to sacrifice all. Martyrs are necessary, whose no shortage of grand ideas being put forth; the idea legend will grow far beyond their true worth, their of publishing a new periodical was continually a true service. subject of discussion. Narodnoe delo could not fill the obvious gap in the émigrés’ intellectual needs of Calling knowledge the key weapon for revolution, the moment. In its first issue for 1870, while Nechaev he argued that the revolutionary intelligentsia had was still active, its editors spoke of the problems to lead the way for the masses. involved in producing essays of the proper theoretic Told by Dmitri Pisarev to study the natural sciences quality and described their plans to give the publi- and by Bakunin to give up their formal university cation a new format: One part would have the cha- studies altogether, Russian youth welcomed Lavrov’s racter of a newspaper, covering current events, and injunction to study history and to strive for social the other would offer more general considerations justice in payment of their “debt to the people.” about contemporary social movements. In practice, Lavrov posed no specific program; he spoke of the the journal spearheaded Utin’s campaign against necessity of working to realize a just society. His Bakunin and Nechaev, denouncing the “charlatanry young readers pondered his message and drew their of revolutionizing phrasemongers,” the “two or three own conclusions. old émigrés and the several Muscovite youths who play at a game called ‘revolution’.” In its third issue, Settled in Paris, Lavrov was not ready to take any the newspaper spoke scornfully of “naive old men, post of leadership; he did not yet consider himself a dreaming of the annihilation of Tsarism by some revolutionary. He hoped that the authorities would proclaimed conspiracy,” and its fifth issue called for yet realize that they had made a mistake in his case “the development of popular understanding” rather and would allow him to return to Russia; he thought than the evocation of passion as a necessary con- of himself as a scholar, not as a political émigré. As dition for the success of the revolution. Narodnoe he plunged into studying émigré publications, he delo ceased publication with no. 6/7, dated August/ was dismayed by the discord that he found, and he September 1870. Some of its supporters spoke of could not understand the rivalry between Marx and the difficulty of fighting the influence of Nechaev Bakunin. (Engels later ridiculed Lavrov’s concern and Bakunin among the Russian young people, but for “unity” within the International.) “Accusations the disappearance of Nechaev seemed in fact to take and gossip are pouring down like hail,” Lavrov away its reason for existence. exclaimed. “Why do these gentlemen bear such malice toward each other?” He also criticized Naro- By general agreement, the obvious person to head dnoe delo’s work, and he declared that Nechaev had a new journal and to provide new intellectual lea- “lost the right to all political refuge.” As Lavrov saw dership for the emigration would be the writer Petr it, “The major error of our celebrities in the emi- Lavrov, whose Historical Letters, first published gration is that they are hurrying as if the question serially in the St. Petersburg magazine Nedelia, had were a political revolution,” and he called the argu- found a sympathetic audience among the youth. ments among the émigrés “a natural pathological Something of an elder statesman – he was born in phenomenon in every emigration torn away from 1823 – Lavrov, an artillery officer who published its homeland.” essays and poetry, had long distinguished himself as a liberal within the tsarist establishment. In the Lavrov rejected invitations from both Bakunin wake of the Karakozov affair, he found himself in and Elpidin to join forces with them. Bakunin exile in the interior of the Russian Empire, and in announced that he and Ogarev were planning February 1870 German Lopatin had come to him a monthly review, revolutionary in content but 42 unannounced to ask, “Are you ready? When can moderate in tone, with no “hard words or noisy you leave?” On March 13, 1870, Lavrov arrived in phrases”; your name, Bakunin told Lavrov, “so Chapter 7: ANSWERING THE CALL beloved in Russia, would give an enormous weight seizing this mission as an opportunity to flee Paris, to our journal.” Lavrov hesitated, saying that he but whatever his personal concerns, Lavrov was hoped yet to return to Russia, but privately he enthralled by the events in the French capital. He expressed doubts about Bakunin’s project as a now experienced a radical conversion in his own whole. When Elpidin then invited him to edit “an thought; he was ready to give up hope of returning organ (or a newspaper) that would give some sort to Russia and to dedicate himself to the cause of of digestible food to the Russian public,” Lavrov social revolution. exclaimed, “Is each alone thinking of publishing In the fall of 1871 Lavrov settled back into Paris with something?” Nevertheless he told Elpidin that he a new outlook. The Commune had been crushed, considered three points central to the program of and he now spoke of France and the French as such a journal: 1. “the struggle for a realistic scien- “the abomination of abominations.” The French tific world view”; 2. the struggle against the bour- government’s reprisals against the Communards geoisie, and 3. the struggle to broaden women’s distressed him. The Parisians, he complained, were rights. Elpidin responded enthusiastically, but the “cold, busy, and egoistic.” But when he had to con- project died without any result. sider the alternatives, he chose to remain in Paris. Suddenly Lavrov and many of the other Russian He would not consider Germany because he feared émigrés had no time to think about participating in the possibility of arrest and extradition by the Rus- any new publications; they found themselves thrust sian authorities. London seemed pleasant enough, into the exhilaration and hardship of war and revo- but he believed that for now he had to remain in a lution. Conflict had broken out between Prussia French-speaking area. He liked the people in Brus- and France, and in September 1870 the Germans sels – they “sing choral songs in the street” – but laid siege to Paris. While Bakunin rushed from his the city lacked the intellectual resources that Paris haven in Switzerland to Lyon, dragging along the offered. Geneva had no appeal for him; the Russian reluctant revolutionary Postnikov-Romann, Lavrov colony in Paris was in any case significantly larger. experienced revolution in Paris. He shared the Therefore he stayed for the time being in Paris. deprivations forced on the Parisians; like them he In March 1872 he received the call that stirred him was happy even to find horse or dog meat. But the into action. Several young Russians came to visit political life was exciting. He was thrilled to be pre- him, and, on behalf of some undefined group in St. sent when the people of Paris proclaimed “Vive la Petersburg, they invited him to edit a journal. They république!” and destroyed the eagle of Napoleon spoke of providing materials and funds. Lavrov res- III’s Second Empire. ponded with interest; in contrast to his earlier reser- Like Herzen in 1848 and 1849, Lavrov came to vations about the character of Russian youth, he had express scorn for the behavior of French politicians. declared just a few months earlier that young people “All the great names of France,” he declared, were “were altogether not as impossible as it seemed just not worth a “copper penny”; they could only look recently.” This new invitation, unlike the soundings into the past. But in contrast to Herzen, he found from Bakunin and Elpidin in 1870, found Lavrov hope in the behavior of the masses. He welcomed ready to respond; the invitation came, moreover, the establishment of the Paris Commune, a revo- from Russia itself, rather than simply from other lutionary order under which, as Lavrov put it, the corners of the emigration. workers of Paris, “the real people” who constituted Whatever the mandate of the mysterious visitors, “the only healthy and reliable class of this rotten their promises proved to be empty, and upon inves- society,” took power into their own hands. When tigating the question of publishing a journal, Lavrov the Commune fell, he attributed its collapse to the realized that he would have to organize the ende- failure of its leaders to rise above tradition and to avor himself. The task proved more difficult than he meet the tasks of the day. “The party that first puts had expected; a year later he declared that had he forth a man combining wisdom and energy,” he known in 1872 what he knew in the spring of 1873, declared, “will rule in France.” he would not have undertaken the publication of Lavrov did not take a direct part in the revolutio- any sort of journal. But once he had begun work, “I nary events. The writer Ivan Turgenev characterized felt a moral obligation to struggle with all my forces him at this time as a dove struggling to be a hawk; together with the people who have gathered around much as he longed for a popular rising, Lavrov was me and who had to accept my sole leadership.” As not himself a man of action. At one point he consi- Philip Pomper, an American historian, has des- dered working for the ambulance service, but in the cribed Lavrov’s sense of duty, spring of 1871 he eagerly accepted the mission to travel abroad as a representative of the revolution. Lavrov continually resolved the problem of his One of Bakunin’s followers later accused him to isolation in the same way – by moving forward 43 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

to meet the new generation of radicals within the young: “The young can want a great deal. But not intelligentsia. every desire can or should be fulfilled. The young themselves change; many are just seeking careers But even moved as he was by a sense of mission, for themselves.” Turning to the principle of the ante Lavrov had trouble finding his constituency for this in a card game, Eliseev then advised that Lavrov new project. demand firm signs of cash support, that he not rely on promises. The government, Eliseev warned, He first drew up a model program for his journal, could only too easily disrupt the journal’s support to be called Vpered! (Forward!). Believing that his network within Russia. call had come from a group of liberals in St. Peters- burg, he aimed his statement at what he thought Lavrov sifted and weighed this contradictory advice, they wanted. Just being able to publish without but he was determined to go ahead: “What is to be censorship did not justify “needless sacrifices” and done? I will sing as my voice permits.” He painsta- “unrealizable goals,” and therefore he emphasized kingly assured his friends that he was not yielding the responsibilities that faced an editor. He criti- to the “illusions” of age, but he had received a call, a cized Nechaev’s behavior of the past several years call that “came to me unsolicited, it arose in front of and asserted that his journal would concern itself me as a moral obligation.” Fate, moreover, seemed with “exact facts.” His target, he declared, would to have freed him of personal ties: His close friend not be personalities but irresponsibility; he would Anna Czaplicka had recently died, and his friend not indulge in personal gossip; and he specifically Lopatin was sitting in Siberian exile for his bold rejected the use of lies as “a means for spreading effort to liberate Chernyshevsky. Lavrov began to truth.” His journal would first appear irregu- say that he would not be taking risks because he had larly, and he suggested that readers subscribe in nothing more to lose. advance for four books, which would comprise He had yet to decide where to center his publica- one volume. tion and to determine the conditions of publication. When Lavrov sent out his first soundings, he found In June and July of 1872 he visited London, and as great enthusiasm, but he received little in the way of late as October he was still considering settling in concrete support. He also encountered some oppo- the English capital. The British Museum offered sition. When he commissioned friends to inquire fantastic intellectual treasures, and he felt secure within Russia, they found some sympathy among in England. On the other hand, the Swiss city of the Chaikovtsy, a new group aimed at self-edu- Zurich, where a new, exciting colony of Russian stu- cation and concerned about the limited supply of dents was growing, beckoned and appealed strongly good literature, who were themselves considering to his sense of mission and duty. He decided finally the possibility of supporting a journal in Western to investigate the situation there for himself; if it Europe. Through the summer of 1872, however, proved unsuitable, he would settle in London. Lavrov received only vague reports of sympathy, no The colony in Zurich represented a completely new firm material support. element in the overall picture of Russians in Wes- Some friends, on the other hand, tried to discourage tern Europe. The émigrés of the early and mid 60s him; their thoughts echoed the cautionary advice had by and large abandoned their studies to settle that Herzen had received. G. E. Eliseev, one of the in the West; they entertained, on the whole, little people to whom Lavrov had directed his program, hope that they would be able to return to Russia. suggested that “reaction is not in government but in The new arrivals in Zurich, on the contrary, were society,” the people themselves were not receptive to for the most part not even émigrés. They came to liberal ideas. Eliseev advised Lavrov to concern him- study; they intended yet to return home and to self with finding a way to return to Russia, where he pursue careers in Russia. The University in Zurich, could be more useful than he was in the emigration. founded in 1839, was welcoming foreign students, “The government, it seems, is satisfied with you,” and its attraction was enhanced by the presence in Eliseev reported. “It must have expected that once Zurich of the ETH, the Swiss National Polytech- abroad you would act like Herzen. You, however, sit nicum, which had a strong international reputation. absolutely quietly.” In a year or two the authorities At first only a trickle of Russian students had come might be willing to allow Lavrov to return, and in to Zurich, but after the university admitted a Rus- any case, Eliseev argued, it would be impossible in sian woman in 1867, the flow intensified. the emigration to maintain a periodical concerned Switzerland quickly became an important center with current events in Russia. for the education of Russian women. The question Lavrov disagreed, declaring that he had to respond of women’s liberation concerned Russian intellec- 44 to the pleas of Russian youth. Eliseev urged that tuals of the 1860s as much as the emancipation of Lavrov should not feel bound by the passions of the the peasantry, the rights of students, or questions Chapter 7: ANSWERING THE CALL of censorship. The cause of women’s liberation had in Zurich. Such was its stamp or seal on its books.” expressed itself in various superficial ways – smo- The library, he insisted, was a private, not a commu- king in public, women’s haircuts, clothing, personal nity institution. behavior – but one of its fundamental issues was the Beneath the intellectual arguments in Zurich, more- right to education. Women commonly could attend over, lay the threat of violence. In June 1872 Utin university lectures, but they could not matriculate came from Geneva on a visit; late once evening, by to prepare for examinations and to receive degrees. his account, he was beset by eight persons. But for Zurich was the first university in Europe to offer the appearance of four German students, he later women the opportunity to study for medical degrees, insisted, his assailants would surely have killed him. and Russian women immediately responded to the As a result of the fracas, his right eye was perma- opportunity. By 1872 more than 75 Russian women nently damaged. He blamed the Bakunists for the were studying at the university, most of them stu- attack, and he included this incident in his reports dying medicine. As Vera Figner put it, to Marx on the nefarious work of the Bakunists The wish to be useful to society... that is the best among the Russian émigrés. formula for defining the mood of the Russian youth In August 1872 the colony experienced another in Zurich in 1872. convulsion when Swiss authorities in the city arrested Nechaev, who had been living there since Since male students followed the flow of female spring. After Utin’s beating, various émigrés warned students into Zurich, the colony’s appeal for Lavrov Nechaev that the authorities were intensifying their was obvious. These were not political émigrés, and pursuit, but he had remained, trying to win support he could find in their midst both an immediate for a new journal. Now he was betrayed by a Pole, reading public and also new channels for commu- one Adolf Stempkowski, a longtime deep-cover nicating with Russia. Friends nevertheless advised Russian police agent. By prearrangement Stemp- him not to go there: Eliseev warned that publis- kowski delivered Nechaev to a cafe, and Swiss police hing an anti-governmental periodical in Zurich seized him. It remained, however, for Swiss judicial could have an unfortunate impact on the colony authorities to authorize Nechaev’s extradition to and could even possibly compromise the idea of Russia. That would yet take several months, and education for women; a Ukrainian friend, S. D. in the meantime the Russian colony erupted in a Podolinsky, also worried about Lavrov’s activity storm of protest. hampering the development of women’s educa- Most of the émigrés bore Nechaev no special love tion. Lavrov nevertheless decided to go ahead; the – quite the contrary – but neither did they fear students, he explained, needed “experienced and him. They saw in his arrest an intrusion of tsarist mature advisors.” authorities into their haven in Switzerland, and The colony in Zurich, however, was not a tabula this intrusion threatened the principle of political rasa, a blank slate on which Lavrov could write asylum in the Confederation. Polish radicals issued his message without contradiction. Although a statement An das schweizerische Volk, calling the women students had for a time resisted being Nechaev a “Russian agitator, organizer of the revo- drawn into émigré politics, the Bakunists had lutionary party in Russia,” and asserting that he was already established a strong foothold in the city on guilty only of having killed a police spy. As Valerian the Limmat. Mikhail P. Sazhin, a former follower of Smirnov, another émigré, declared, Nechaev who had now switched to Bakunin, settled in Zurich in the fall of 1870 and became, in his True, it would have been better to kill him our- own words, “the first organizer, if not the founder selves than to deliver him to the government. In of the Russian colony.” He established a library as a this moment as Sergei Gennadevich sits in chains, central gathering place and a font for the spread of I am unbearably sorry for him. You forgive him Bakunin’s teachings. everything, you would like to think that despite all Sazhin’s library became an intellectual center for perhaps he would have straightened himself out the students. As the colony grew, however, Sazhin and become a useful person. The miserable Swiss became concerned about keeping the political government! outlook of his group intact, and he drew a distinc- tion between users and members, reserving voting In September the Swiss Bundesrat, the federal exe- rights for the more select “membership.” Insurgents cutive council, accepted the Russian government’s tried to claim the library as the property of the version of the murder of Nechaev’s follower, decla- community, but Sazhin declared, “The library was ring it to have been a criminal, rather than a poli- always called ‘The Russian Library in Zurich’ and it tical act, and it approved Nechaev’s extradition. Final 45 was never named the library of the Russian students judgment, however, lay with the cantonal authorities THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

in Zurich, and the case dragged on for over another deserved his fate or not, his case stood out in sharp month. Finally, by split decision, the judicial autho- relief against the general picture of the political rities of the canton of Zurich agreed to Nechaev’s asylum Russian émigrés found in Switzerland. extradition. Although a few Russians, including Despite their criticisms of the Swiss action in this Utin, thought that Nechaev had received just what he case, the émigrés did not flee the country, the colo- deserved, most of the Russians in Switzerland called nies in the various parts of Switzerland remained Nechaev the victim of momentary passions, and they intact, and in fact they continued to publish their argued that the Swiss should have just expelled him, anti-tsarist materials in this country. Their resen- not extradited him. There was some talk of trying to tment simply permitted the émigrés to free them- free him by force, but the Swiss secretly and quickly selves of any obligation to be grateful for their sent him to Russia by way of Austria. asylum in Switzerland. The decision of the Swiss to extradite Nechaev has When Lavrov arrived in Zurich at the end of stimulated considerable discussion over the years. November, the furor over Nechaev’s extradition was Under pressure from the Great Powers to take steps just beginning to abate, and the Russian colony was against units of the International, against the Com- still in ferment. He understood that there would be munards (the veterans of the Paris Commune), problems if he should choose to settle here, but with and against alleged counterfeiters, the Swiss chose his sense of mission, he seemed convinced of the to yield in this particular case. Whether Nechaev necessity and justice of his cause.

46 Chapter 8:

A HOUSE ON SAND

When Lavrov arrived in Zurich, he had two imme- hough still skeptical, they were willing to hear what diate goals: to acquaint himself with the nature of the well-dressed gentleman had to say. the student colony in the city and to negotiate with Revising his program to appeal to the Bakunists, the Bakunists, who were again talking of produ- Lavrov added a discourse on his opposition to “cen- cing their own periodical. His own first impres- tralized political programs.” He did not hide his sions of Zurich were very good. His public lec- preference for legal change, but he added a criticism tures were received with enthusiasm, he found his of “pseudo-liberal legality.” If there were more Rus- discussions with the students stimulating, and his sian publications in the West, he argued, it would preliminary talks with the Bakunists seemed to be be possible to be more definite in his program, and promising. He felt physically better and even spoke he admitted that his views were “problematic.” The of the atmosphere in Zurich as being good for his journal, he suggested, would be a forum for dis- health. He felt rested, he reported to friends, as cussions leading to the formation of a new party. opposed to the various nagging complaints he had The first phase of the negotiations went seemingly had in Paris. well, and Sazhin agreed to take Lavrov’s proposal to Negotiating with the Bakunists quickly became Bakunin in Locarno. Bad snow conditions hindered the focus of his attention. Since he did not want his travel, however, and he was absent for several to compete with them for a reading public and for days. the limited available resources, he looked for agree- While Sazhin was gone, Lavrov continued to charm ment. When he had first announced his intentions the members of the Russian community. As one to publish a journal, Sazhin had in fact approached observer exclaimed, “I had not expected such a him with the possibility of cooperation: “What popularizing talent of Petr Lavrovich!” His new do you think about joint work with Bakunin in a gospel of social responsibility won the hearts of journal?” he asked. “Before the war of 1870-1871 the students: “... little by little,” reported this same you were agreeable to this. Perhaps you have not observer, “our young revolutionaries will put aside changed your mind?” Lavrov responded carefully; revolutionary rhetoric, their play at political ona- besides wanting to avoid unnecessary conflict, nism, and understand that it is possible to be a revo- Lavrov believed that the Bakunists had money for lutionary without using bad words and donning a a publication. Phrygian cap.” Admitting “perhaps I am prejudiced The Bakunists, however, looked rather skeptically and unjust,” the man declared that he now had at Lavrov. They considered his original program too conservative and dull, and when he arrived the deep conviction that Lavrov’s personality is in Zurich they were scornful of his elegant dress. more imposing than Bakunin’s, that Lavrov is far Bakunin complained of Lavrov’s “learned self-satis- more dangerous to the Russian Empire than our faction.” But the Bakunists also needed some sort good Mikhail Aleksandrovich. of public recognition. Bakunin had just suffered a crushing defeat in the International; the General By the end of January 1873, Lavrov’s followers were Council, meeting in The Hague in September, had said to outnumber the Bakunists by a ratio of more backed Marx, who, with Utin’s exhaustive report on than five to one. Bakunin’s intrigues in hand, had excluded Bakunin The observer just quoted here, Valerian N. Smirnov, and his followers from the ranks of the International. was himself Lavrov’s most important recruit within With his international position collapsing, Bakunin the community. Smirnov had first come to Zurich in had withdrawn again to Locarno, and his followers 1871 and had soon become the secretary of Sazhin’s in Zurich, led by Sazhin, calculated that association library. He had not been completely at peace with with Lavrov, if acceptable, could bring contacts with Bakunin, having written of him, “He is not a serious 47 Russia that they at present lacked. Therefore, alt- THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

revolutionary but an old man – he knows little, he rable to give it a somewhat humorous character works little, but he still stands a head taller than the and to look at it as a comedy played out in front other activists for the homeland.” An enthusiast of us as we watch, like something unreal, amusing for a workers’ movement rather than for a party of in its unrealness and only occasionally tragic in the intellectuals, which he considered simply a party of results of its unreal efforts.” The point was to expose alienated representatives of the privileged classes, the moral decay of “bourgeois-legal society,” but Smirnov was impatient and intolerant toward those Lavrov was also concerned about observing high who disagreed with him, but Lavrov found him a literary standards. virtually indispensable assistant, industrious and Finances required special effort. The early pro- ascetic to a fault, even undermining his own health mises of support proved evanescent, and Lavrov in his zeal. Smirnov, in turn, foresaw a “shining had to raise the necessary funding himself. At the future” for the journal Vpered under Lavrov’s lea- end of 1872, he sent Rosalia Idelson, Smirnov’s dership as a modern day replacement for Kolokol. wife, to Russia, and he considered the results of her When Sazhin finally returned to Zurich in the trip a “brilliant success,” even though she brought middle of December 1872, he brought the news that back more psychological than material aid. Lavrov Bakunin opposed cooperation with Lavrov, and the donated the income from various of his own wri- Bakunists demanded a high price for their parti- tings to the cause, and others of his followers added cipation in any journal. Sazhin presented Lavrov what they could. The publication’s total annual with the conditions: a Bakunist – obviously him- income has been estimated at perhaps 3500 francs self – should be coeditor of the publication and the at its best, and its creators were often barely able to Bakunists must control the business matters of cir- maintain themselves at a subsistence level. culation and correspondence. (Smirnov at this time The last major question that had to be settled was characterized Sazhin as being in a “psychopatholo- where to print the journal. One of Lavrov’s friends gical condition” because others were attacking his had suggested Leipzig. The Brockhaus establishment control of the Bakunists’ library.) On December 16 had excellent equipment for producing Russian Sazhin and Lavrov, each accompanied by two sup- publications, and some liberal writers found that porters, met in a climactic confrontation. they could even have their manuscripts converted The negotiations collapsed when Lavrov refused to print in just three days. But Russian political to share the editorship. He considered himself to émigrés in Germany lived in constant fear of tsarist have been called to this responsibility, and therefore spies, and Lavrov dismissed Germany early on in he had the duty of assuming it by himself. Sazhin his considerations. forever after claimed that Lavrov had more or less When Lavrov considered Geneva, he found that promised him joint editorship, but Lavrov was so the Russian print shops there had all fallen upon convinced of his own calling that he could hardly difficult times. Czerniecki had died in the summer have made such an offer. When the men parted, of 1872, and his press was no longer functioning. Lavrov expressed the hope that they would still be Reportedly things had gone so badly that the remai- able to cooperate, but Sazhin replied that they were ning stock of Kolokol had been sold off at fifteen locked in a struggle to the death. centimes a pound, and it was now serving as wrap- From his haven in Locarno, Bakunin welcomed the ping paper in a grocery store. Elpidin, of course, was failure of the negotiations. Upon reading Lavrov’s still in business, but he had a Bakunist background. second program, he had taken issue with Lavrov’s TheNarodnoe delo print shop also had fallen on bad emphasis on “the necessity of scientific preparation” times. Utin, once Lavrov had clearly broken with for the revolution. “What then?” he asked, “Are we Bakunin, seemed willing to negotiate, but he posed preparing to establish a university abroad?” He elaborate conditions. preferred his followers to keep their distance from There was also a new print shop in Geneva, spon- Lavrov’s ideas and to oppose wasting time in aca- sored by the chaikovtsy, but it had just moved from demic studies when they should be preparing revo- the Zurich region, and Lavrov was leery of having lution. much to do with it. The chaikovtsy, the Chaikovsky Lavrov now devoted himself to planning his publi- circle in Russia, had decided to exploit the possi- cation. Taking Kolokol as his model, he wanted bilities of publishing in the emigration some time Vpered to rise above its émigré environment and to earlier, and they sent Vasily Aleksandrov, one of the become a genuine part of the Russian literary world. pioneers in their activity of providing reading mate- In asking Aleksandr S. Buturlin to write a quarterly rial to the public, to Geneva, to purchase copies of survey of bourgeois European politics, he specified Elpidin’s edition of Chernyshevsky’s works. While 48 that he wanted this done “from the point of view of this move gave Elpidin some welcome cash, the socialism and the International. It would be desi- choice of Aleksandrov for the task had unfortunate Chapter 8: A HOUSE ON SAND consequences. The chaikovtsy observed stern ascetic Yet, he declared, “in general they are good people.” and moral principles as a group, and they were sub- He still had grand images of the support that the sequently shocked to learn of Aleksandrov’s efforts students would give him. When he returned, to win female members of the group over to his own however, he found himself immediately drawn into peculiar doctrine of free love. new controversy. Aleksandrov nevertheless organized a print shop. His first conflict, as he might well have expected, He established a good working relationship in came with the Bakunists, or the “Rossists” as they Geneva with Elpidin – perhaps in part due to their were often called with reference to Sazhin’s revolu- common fondness for the opposite sex – and with tionary pseudonym “Armand Ross.” Lavrov’s follo- Elpidin’s help he obtained type. He first wanted to wers, headed by Smirnov, had begun withdrawing set up shop in Zurich, but when the local authori- books in great numbers from Sazhin’s library and ties would not allow him to operate within the city, not returning them; Sazhin closed his library. The he located in nearby Wintertur. He printed several Lavrists proceeded to organize their own center. important works, including one by Karl Marx, Smirnov, declaring that the great majority of the another volume (in cooperation with Elpidin) of Russians in Zurich had shifted into Lavrov’s camp, Chernyshevsky’s works, and a collection of folk left his post as secretary of Sazhin’s library took tales assembled by Aleksandr Afanasiev, a publica- along with him some 300 francs in subscription tion that later connoisseurs would consider a classic money. of Russian erotica. Bakunin urged Sazhin and his followers to con- Aleksandrov’s publishing career proved stormy tinue the fight: “Your position is now so clear and and short, yet his print shop represented a major pure that nothing remains to be desired. What may new thrust for émigré publishing. For the first to others seem defeat I consider a victory. You are time a printer in the West was operating on the twenty people, united by common ideals and a cle- basis of funds and, to some extent, orders from arly defined target... You will unite still more clo- Russia. Aleksandrov himself proved to be too con- sely; cursed be the man who would start conflicts troversial, even for the émigré publishing world. among you.” Bakunin, however, remained isolated His lectures, on topics such as “Down with Uni- in Locarno, and Sazhin directed the struggle in versities and Learning,” were popular enough, but Zurich. his personal relations with female students proved As his first step to counter Lavrov’s influence, his undoing. In the fall of 1872, in the midst of Sazhin organized his own printing press. He knew the furor surrounding Nechaev’s arrest and extra- that the group still lacked the financial and intel- dition, Aleksandrov moved the press to Geneva. lectual resources to publish a journal, but he cal- The chaikovstsy, who also felt that he was not culated that they could handle brochures and boo- adequately accounting for his expenditures, sent klets. When he looked for help in Geneva, however, a new man, Lazar Goldenberg, to work with him, Elpidin exploded in rage: “Why don’t you want to and eventually Aleksandrov had to give up his enter into an arrangement with someone and save publishing activity. Besides misgivings he might the revolutionary treasury?” The chaikovtsy should have had about Aleksandrov’s character, Lavrov be able to handle any job the Bakunists might have, probably considered this shop too sympathetic and as for Sazhin’s intention to organize a “secret” toward Bakunin to be relied on. shop, Elpidin exclaimed, “1. Either you are making Lavrov finally decided, despite contrary advice, to jokes from boredom, or 2. One of you is on friendly found his own print shop. With some help from terms with a provocateur.” Nevertheless Sazhin Elpidin, the Lavrists purchased type in March 1873. went ahead. The Zurich authorities, still upset by the contro- Gathering funds from his followers, he ordered versy of the Nechaev affair, allowed them to esta- type from Germany, and he himself built a model blish themselves in the city on the condition that case from which a carpenter could make more. they print just their journal and no proclamations The group even purchased a printing machine, or broadsheets. The shop only set type, it had no although, according to Sazhin, they never learned machine. Once the type was ready, it had to be sent to operate it well. Despite having no experience in off the premises to be printed, and of course the printing, Sazhin began work on two publications finished product had to be bound elsewhere. – essays on the history of the International and an At the end of February 1873 Lavrov returned to essay by Bakunin. Paris to put his affairs there in order. At this point Seeing Sazhin’s activity, Lavrov rushed to publish a he already had some misgivings about settling in new program for his journal in lithographed form, Zurich. The community there, he acknowledged, since his own print shop was not yet ready. This 49 was energetic, but it lacked the “right perspective.” THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

now constituted his third program in one year, and mised 500 francs annually to support the group. he received considerable criticism for what seemed Onto the scene, however, quickly came violence. to be the inconsistency of his ideas. Sympathizers Smirnov had assured Lavrov that the struggle over argued that he had been addressing different audi- the Rossists’ library would not affect his work in ences and that indeed his views had developed and Zurich, but on April 7 several of Sazhin’s followers changed as a result of his prolonged discussions visited Smirnov and demanded his copies of the with different groups. Critics, on the other hand, book The Refractories, by Varfolomei Zaitsev and accused him of lacking ideological commitment. At Nikolai Sokolov. (Smirnov had taken part of the any rate, Lavrov now had a program with which he run in exchange for having underwritten the work’s was ready to work. publication by Aleksandrov at the Chaikovtsy Lavrov admitted that he could not match the ele- press.) An argument developed, and Sokolov, a gant writing style of Herzen, but he nevertheless robust man, struck Smirnov, by all descriptions a wanted to follow in the footsteps of that pioneer of frail, ascetic person. A major uproar then tore the the uncensored word. He eschewed revolutionary Russian colony apart. phraseology in his new publication and spoke of the The Lavrists henceforth guarded their leader care- impossibility of “artificially” bringing revolution to fully, fearing for his very life. Many of the émigrés Russia. His goal, he explained, was to struggle for a began to carry guns for their self-protection. Alt- realistic, materialistic world outlook and for equa- hough neither side desired the intervention of the lity between people – in short, “the most just struc- Swiss authorities, the police in Zurich – at the requ- ture of society.” Emphasizing the “social struggle” ests of the Lavrists, the Rossists claimed – ordered against the Russian government, as opposed to the Sokolov out of the canton and put another man, “political struggle” for reform of the empire, Lavrov Zemfire Ralli, under surveillance. noted that there were no other émigré publica- tions representing the various lines of thought now Sazhin indignantly rejected demands by the Lav- emerging among Russians, and therefore he hoped rists that he leave the city, but he too had to protect to include “all shades of Russian radical-socialistic himself from attack. One of Lavrov’s female suppor- thought” in his journal. He wanted this to be a ters accosted him on the street and hit him with her popular informational publication. Contributions, umbrella; Sazhin apparently pulled a gun from his however, would have to be acceptable to the majo- pocket and struck her in return, drawing blood. In rity of the publication’s associates. his memoirs, Sazhin pictured a gang of Lavrists stal- king him through all of Zurich. Bakunin eventually The Lavrists established their headquarters in a came to Zurich himself to help restore peace, but building located atop the Zurichberg, where they both sides continued to nurture resentment toward set up their print shop and where Lavrov himself the other. lived. (There was some debate as to whether the Lavrists, in principle socialists, could own land; Lavrov found this atmosphere very difficult to live in the end they organized a cooperative for which and work in, certainly not what he had expected they sold shares at 50 francs apiece.) Smirnov when he had decided to move to Zurich, but he served as Lavrov’s administrative assistant; Alek- adopted a fatalistic attitude. “There are a million sandr Linev, whom Lavrov had met in exile, orga- unpleasantries,” he declared, nized the print shop, handled business affairs, and directed the typesetting work. Together the group such that I never thought I would experience, such constituted a commune, receiving no salaries but that practically put my life in danger, but I tell you provided with the basic necessities of life by the completely sincerely that all these unpleasantries collective. don’t bother me as they would have in another time. I don’t have a penny’s worth of faith in people; I Much of the labor in the print shop came from women students in Zurich, the so-called “Fritschi,” know that individual passions, individual egoisms, who took their name from that of their landlady. petty calculations, and personal vanities play a (Their work may in fact have violated Swiss law for very important role around me, alongside sincere employment in printing establishments.) Numbe- and semi-sincere convictions. ring some 14 members, mostly from upper-class backgrounds, the group looked to Sofiia Bardina His only worry, he insisted, was his concern that he as their leader, and in subsequent years the women should have the strength and energy to see his plans maintained their collective identity when later through to completion. becoming active in Russia. In the spring of 1873, Torn by internal strife, the Russian colony in Zurich they rallied to Lavrov, and their contribution to the 50 also faced attacks mounted by the Russian govern- collective so intrigued Ivan Turgenev that he pro- ment. A token of official interest had appeared in Chapter 8: A HOUSE ON SAND an obviously inspired series of articles published in In view of all this the government duly warns all Moskovskie vedemosti in January 1873. (The author, Russian women attending the university and the a former émigré named Gzhebitsky, would seem to polytechnicum in Zurich that those who continue to have bought permission to return home by writing attend lectures in these institutions after January this set of articles.) Offering a sort of history of the 1 of the coming year 1874 will not be admitted to emigration, the articles painted a picture of petty any occupations for which permission depends on intrigue and scandal, and they depicted the Russians the government or to any examinations for Russian among the émigrés as being exploited and cheated institutions of higher learning. by various Jews, Poles, and Caucasians. The author accused “B” (Bakst) of having lived on Herzen’s lar- If the women wanted to return to careers in Russia, gesse and “Zh” (Zhukovsky) of having taken money they would have to leave Zurich; the decree did not from Herzen and then losing it at roulette. The “hero discuss the male students in Zurich. of the Russian emigration” was Elpidin, mentioned by his full name: “poor, begging, or plundering, The decree hit its mark, just as a similar decree in always ragged, uncombed, with the expression of a 1866 had shattered a colony of Russian students at drunken lackey, and, moreover, endlessly stupid, he the University of Heidelberg in Germany. Although carries on so well that he has won the general scorn the Russians in Zurich protested, by and large they of his own people as well as of others.” Czerniecki bowed to the decree, which, after all, was by no was a “sponger” of “a type only to be found among means as severe as some had feared. (There had been Poles”; his patron, Herzen, had had only his money rumors that the government would order everyone to recommend himself. These denunciations, to home immediately.) By the fall semester of 1873 the be sure, were out of date in 1873, but the Russian number of Russian students in Zurich had declined government was firing only its first salvo. precipitously, as the women turned especially to the medical schools in Bern and Geneva. (The Swiss in In the early days of June 1873 there arose rumors Bern came to call the university’s medical school that the government in St. Petersburg was preparing “eine slawische Mädchenschule.”) The male students a decree concerning the emigration. On June 8 the followed the lead of the females in leaving Zurich. Swiss press carried the actual text, but the Russian colony in Zurich already knew the main lines of The decree also doomed the two Russian print the document the day before. Dated June 3 (May shops in Zurich because their constituencies were 22 according to the Russian calendar), the decree suddenly washing away around them. Lavrov had struck a mortal blow at the Russian colony, under- disregarded the warnings that his moving to Zurich mining its fundamental reason for existence, which might compromise the colony of women studying was to study in Zurich in preparation for careers at there, and while he was not dependent on the stu- home in Russia. dents for financial support, the dissolution of the colony meant the loss of contact with Russians who Claiming to be distressed by “unpleasant infor- planned yet to return home. It also meant the loss mation” about a “revolutionary center” in Zurich, of volunteer labor in the print shop. Zurich was the Russian government bemoaned the way in losing everything that had appealed to him. For the which “the young and inexperienced minds” of the moment, however, Lavrov and Sazhin both conti- women studying medicine there were being twisted nued the work of their print shops. in a “false direction.” Becoming “obedient weapons” of émigré leaders, the women were succumbing to In the course of June 1873 the Vpered shop com- “communist theories of free love” and were disre- pleted its first publication, an essay by Lavrov “To garding “feminine chastity.” Some had “so fallen the Russian Women Students in Zurich,” his res- that they are especially studying that branch of obs- ponse to the Russian government’s decree. (While tetrics that in all countries is punished by criminal critical of the government and of Russian educa- law and is despised by honest people.” Decrying this tion, he told the students that each had to decide “moral decay of the young generation,” the decree her own course.) The first issue of Vpered, totaling expressed fears for the future when the women some 475 pages of small type, appeared toward the would return home to become “wives, mothers, and end of the summer. “Far from the homeland we raise teachers,” and it asked, “What sort of generation our banner,” the editors wrote, “the banner of social can such women raise?” revolution for Russia, for the whole world.” Recon- firming the principle of anonymity for contributors, Affirming its own concern for the proper education the introductory essay spoke of the publication’s of women, the government promised an improved representing “not the work of one person, of a program at home in the future, and then it stated circle, but the’ work of all Russians aware that the the purpose of the decree: present political order is leading Russia to ruin, that 51 the present social structure cannot heal its wounds.” THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

In a contribution entitled “Knowledge and Revolu- siderable reworking, and as a result although the tion,” Lavrov reiterated his belief in the necessity of typesetting was begun in November 1873, the job preparing for revolution through education. was not completed until some time in 1874. The work almost immediately became a revolutionary Lavrov’s readers had trouble understanding his best-seller, but successive reprinting and revisions message: His summons to education might well so changed it that the original author, Vasily E. separate the intellectual still further from the Varzar, eventually had trouble recognizing his own masses, telling the young to go to school rather creation. than to work among the people. The students still in Zurich were beginning to complain that he was Lavrov’s print shop scored another important suc- too cerebral, too abstract, and that he seemed too cess when he obtained a work by Chernyshevsky, hesitant in lending them books. Lavrov in turn Letters without an Address, originally written in bemoaned the students’ cultural level. The Russian 1862. The manuscript had an odd history. Marx had government’s decree served only to intensify, not received it from a Russian correspondent in August to cause, tension between Lavrov and his young 1872. The Russian, N. F. Danielson, had thought it compatriots. should be printed as a part of Chernyshevsky’s col- lected works, but because the collected works were Over in the Bakunist camp, Sazhin welcomed a project of Elpidin’s and Aleksandrov’s, Marx was Lavrov’s problems, but he had little time to savor unwilling to pass the manuscript on. Therefore he them as he had troubles within his own small for- asked Utin about it, and Utin responded enthusias- tress. In his memoirs he would have his readers tically: “If this is an important piece, then we will believe that everying in his print shop had proce- always find the means to print it.” Utin, however, eded smoothly until his three comrades – Aleksandr had no capital with which to start, and as Marx Golshtein, Zemfire Ralli, and Aleksandr Elsnits explained to Danielson, “I still have the manuscript – suddenly turned on him. The problems actually you sent since Utin is not in a position to print it, dated back more than a year, as the three men had and Elpidin belongs to that gang of scoundrels.” repeatedly objected to Sazhin’s authoritarian prac- Utin nevertheless told Lavrov that the Narodnoe tices and had tried to appeal directly to Bakunin. delo shop was reserving its available paper for “a Bakunin had firmly supported Sazhin; in July 1873 very important manuscript, namely a manuscript he formally confirmed Sazhin as the director of the by N. G. Chern-sky (this is just between us),” but print shop. While the three rebels still protested the matter stood stalemated until German Lopatin their devotion and feeling for Bakunin, they chose returned to the scene. to leave Zurich and to organize their own commune in Geneva. Lopatin had arrived back in the West in August 1873. After two unsuccessful attempts to escape his prison Sazhin found himself with two unfinished manu- in Irkutsk, he had finally succeeded on June 10. He scripts in his print shop. He received some help from first visited Lavrov in Zurich, and then he traveled newcomers, but he had to set type himself. Upon to Geneva, where, among other things, he looked finishing the last two signatures of his publication on into the disposition of Chernyshevsky’s manuscript. the history of the International, he decided to close “It would seem that Trusov has acted the rogue with the shop. What remained to be done of Bakunin’s you just as you have with him,” Lopatin reported to essay State and Anarchy he sent to Geneva, where Lavrov, “i.e., he assured you that he had the manu- Elpidin arranged to have it completed in Trusov’s script and was already setting type, when it had only print shop. Once he had the sheets, Sazhin had been promised him.” Although Utin insisted that he them bound in Zurich, and he then liquidated his was indeed about to begin printing, Lopatin won holdings. He sold the printing press; he turned the the manuscript for Lavrov, insisting that the Vpered remains of his library over to Elpidin in Geneva; group in Zurich had both the will and the funds to and he sent his type off to London. act immediately Lavrov also began to cast his eyes at London, alt- At Lopatin’s urging, Lavrov then interrupted his hough for the moment he continued his work in work on the second issue of Vpered to print the Zurich. In the fall of 1873 his press printed a manu- manuscript as a separate pamphlet, which appeared script entitled Khitraia mekhanika (The Cunning in the middle of January 1874. The editors explained Trick), which became one of the classics of a new that they had received this text by chance and had form of émigré publication called “books for the decided to publish it as a service to their readers. people,” narodnye knigi. Presented as a conversation The next issue of Vpered then followed in March between two peasants, The Cunning Trick aimed at 1874; totaling over 440 pages, the volume had the explaining the role of direct and indirect taxation same format as the first, including three different in the exploitation of the population. When Lavrov 52 sets of pagination. received the manuscript, he decided it needed con- Chapter 8: A HOUSE ON SAND

Even before the appearance of Vpered’s second The task of moving the shop proved more diffficult volume, however, Lavrov had left Zurich. After than expected. Aleksandr Linev. Lavrov’s business the departure of the students, there had been little manager, packed the type in his luggage, but on the reason to stay there, and he had decided to move. French coast he ran afoul of security precautions In all, his experience in Zurich had been disappoin- aimed at protecting a visiting Russian Grand Duke. ting. Lavrov later blamed the Swiss and the Russian The French authorities identified him and his tra- governments for his troubles, but he realized that veling companion as Russians and stopped them he too had erred. “I know that I seriously damaged for questioning. His answers were confused, and my reputation in Zurich,” he admitted, and in a the authorities then insisted on examining their letter to Lopatin he complained about the problems luggage, in which they found forged passports, of “publishing a serious journal for circles who women’s clothing, and the Russian type. When the should be studying the alphabet.” Leaving Smirnov two Russians were taken into custody, Lavrov sent in Zurich to take care of the details of completing an anguished appeal to a friend in Paris, who, after volume II and of shipping the shop’s equipment to much travail, managed to arrange their release. London, Lavrov departed for London at the begin- Finally, in March, everyone was settled in new lod- ning of February 1874, again thinking of himself as gings in London, ready to renew their activity on following in Herzen’s footsteps. behalf of social revolution in Russia.

53 Chapter 9:

LAVROV IN LONDON

Lavrov had few misgivings about leaving the émigré Tkachev also objected to Vpered’s practice of anony- environment in Switzerland – he considered his stay mity for its contributors. The cycle begun by Herzen there to have been an unfortunate experience – but was now complete. As a reaction to Herzen’s perso- much to his surprise he encountered his first major nalized style, Narodnoe delo had insisted on anony- problem in London from within his own camp. mity in order to stress the concept of the collective, Petr Tkachev had joined him in the fall of 1873 as the group; now Tkachev demanded the freedom to a representative of the Chaikovtsy in Russia. Now distinguish his own views from those of the Lavrist just over 30 years of age, Tkachev had been arrested collective. Lavrov, as part of his own mystique of several times in the 1860s and then sentenced to publishing, insisted that articles must be published internal exile. Released at the end of 1872, he was anonymously. exiled to his family estate in Velikie Luki, and then Despite his various complaints and misgivings, Tka- the Chaikovtsy had urged him to go abroad to work chev followed Lavrov to London and rejoined the with Lavrov. He agreed, although he had already commune, but he also began to plan his break. First expressed his own opposition to Lavrov’s philosop- of all he sought out Sazhin, who had now also moved hical outlook. to London. Sazhin felt no particular friendship for Labeling himself a “nihilist,” Tkachev had published Tkachev. As he reported in his memoirs, “Calling extensively in Russia, and in 1869 he had briefly himself a friend of Lavrov and living together with operated an underground printing press in St. his fellow workers, Tkachev at the same time was Petersburg. Having accepted the principle of eco- writing his well known brochure.” Sazhin neverthe- nomic materialism, he demanded the overthrow of less agreed to let Tkachev use his shop to produce a the capitalist order; in 1871 the tsarist authorities tract attacking Lavrov. had exiled him on the charge “of having repudiated Once the brochure, entitled Tasks of Revolutionary the principle of property with the aim of destroying Propaganda in Russia, was completed, Tkachev still it or weakening its foundation.” Since the masses deceived Lavrov about his intentions. He announced were not yet ready to understand this theory, Tka- that he had to go to France, and Lavrov, together chev argued, it would be necessary for an intellec- with Smirnov and Lopatin, even went to the train tual elite to lead them into revolution. With those station to see him off. When Sazhin also showed Jacobin ideas, Tkachev was destined to clash with up at the station, Tkachev pretended that he did Lavrov and also with other members of the Vpered not know him. Lavrov was still ignorant about the collective. brochure’s existence, and when he finally received In Zurich, despite his established reputation and a copy of the brochure, his anger and indignation experience, Tkachev had to take his place in the knew no bounds. second rank. Supported by Smirnov, Lavrov even Tkachev held nothing back in dismissing Lavrov rejected an article by Tkachev; he particularly as a representative of an older generation and out criticized Tkachev’s picture of a post-revolutio- of date with the times: “You very clearly do not nary society of ease and plenty as being false and believe in revolution,” Tkachev wrote, “and do not misleading. On the other hand, Tkachev objected wish its success.” The proper task for a revolutionary to Smirnov’s essay “Revolutionaries from the Pri- journal, the younger man insisted, was not to theo- vileged Milieu,” printed in the second volume of rize and to educate but to stimulate and to stir into Vpered, which argued that the people, and not the action. “The question what is to be done should no intelligentsia, constituted the revolutionary force longer be put to us!” he exclaimed. “It is long since in society. Smirnov called on the educated youth determined: A revolution should be made.” A cons- to divest themselves of their hubris and to devote piratorial organization should be working for the 54 themselves to serving the people. seizure of political power. Chapter 9: LAVROV IN LONDON

Lavrov tolerated no middle ground in this challenge in Russia. Lavrov did not respond to Engels’s com- from Tkachev – either one supported the editorial ments, but Tkachev engaged Engels in a polemic in policies of Vpered or one opposed them. When the German press. some of the Fritschi, now in Paris, took issue with As the controversy faded in the summer and fall his position, Lavrov angrily called them “empty- of 1874, the Russian emigration briefly turned its headed and worthless natures.” As he put it, “I for- attention to a demand of the tsarist authorities that give and will forgive none of those who know me nineteen leading émigrés return home. Of the men and who are not upset by this libel.” He ultimately named in the decree of May 5, 1874, fifteen were attributed the controversy to a generational pro- abroad without legal papers and four had violated blem: the terms of their passports by having remained I find our contemporary youth very poor in the abroad for more than five years. If these men did great majority of its examples. In the beginning of not return home within six months, the govern- the ‘60s, there was incomparably more flame, more ment would regard them as “exiles from the father- land and take their property into custody.” selflessness, less petty and worthless motives. While the decree did not speak of émigré publi- To be sure, his image of the early 60s was skewed – cations, its list gave ample testimony to the signi- Tkachev had been one of the flaming youths of that ficance that the tsarist authorities gave to émigré period. printing and publishing. Lazar Goldenberg, Trusov, Sazhin, Lavrov, and Smirnov were cur- Lavrov framed his public response as separate bro- rently directing presses; Aleksandrov, Elpidin, chure. “I have to write these pages,”” he asserted, Golshtein, Ralli, Elsnitz, and Tkachev were either not to defend himself or Vpered, but rather to past or future directors of presses; Zhukovsky, counteract the harmful ideas advanced by Tkachev. Sokolov, Semen Serebrennikov, and Vladimir Arguing that propaganda and agitation were com- Ozerov were known as writers. Bakunin, Ogarev, plementary and indistinguishable, he insisted that and Utin were now inactive, but the government the political seizure of power did not of itself assure understood little of such distinctions. The ninete- social revolution if the proper groundwork had enth name, the man who caused the government not been prepared by propaganda and education. perhaps the most trouble by his travels in and out When his pamphlet was ready in June, Lavrov gave of Russia, was German Lopatin. it the broadest possible dissemination, even sen- ding a copy to Karl Marx: “The author of Kapital,” The émigrés responded defiantly; unlike the stu- he wrote, “should have in his library the works of all dents, they had no intention of openly returning to parties.” By July 1874 Lavrov believed that he had Russia under the current regime. Angered by the won the struggle: Tkachev’s brochure was hard to fact that the local authorities in Geneva contacted find while Trübner was distributing his response. persons mentioned in the decree, a number of them, He refused to print Tkachev’s response in Vpered, led by Elsnitz and Elpidin, called for a united, public saying that the journal was not meant for polemics. protest. Lavrov, however, chilled this move by refu- “Only a small minority is hostile to us,” Lavrov glo- sing to join, arguing that the decree was too formal ated to Lopatin. “Tkachev’s brochure made a repul- and too insignificant to merit attention and publi- sive impression. Practically no one supported him. city. Utin, now withdrawn to London, supported My brochure was well received.” Lavrov, and as a result the emigration remained publicly silent. The government, on the other hand, Eventually Friedrich Engels took the occasion of found the decree ineffective and confused; efforts this dispute to level a few more shots at an old foe. to seize property in Russia became tied up in long In an essay on émigré literature, after a jab at the drawn out court cases. Russians’ “comical” passion for anonymity, Engels marveled at Tkachev’s bravado in demanding an Having now dismissed both Tkachev and the equal voice in the publication of Vpered. “In Ger- government from his mind, Lavrov concentrated many they would have ridiculed him, but the Rus- on developing Vpered’s image. “You are mistaken,” sians are not so crude.” Engels went on to challenge he told Lopatin, Tkachev’s assertion that the people were ready for revolution: “Why the devil don’t you get to work?” if you think that we are not responsible to the public he asked sarcastically. Turning back to Lavrov’s res- for the content of what we publish. True, with Gol- ponse, Engels laughed at the Russian’s alleged dis- denberg, from Trusov, from Elpidin, even from Alek- comfort in having to resort to printed polemics. It sandrov, no one will question if they print on order, was just such silly editorial practices on the part of but from Vpered, from me, they will question if we the Russians, Engels concluded, that had allowed print nonsense, and I would never in all eternity 55 Bakunin to deceive the West about developments THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

recover from rubbish, sent with the best of will, but On December 25, 1874, the Vpered commune laid nevertheless rubbish, if it appeared with us. plans for a new publication, which would also use the name Vpered but bear the subtitle “A Biweekly The press, he insisted, had to be careful about the Survey.” The survey would be a supplement to the form, content, and even provenance of its mate- thick journal, which would continue to appear irre- rials. gularly. The newspaper would have three sections: an editorial section with commentary; “What is Much as he wanted to picture himself as picking going on at home,” including news and small arti- up Herzen’s pen, however, Lavrov could not act as cles on current questions; and “Chronicle of the independently as Herzen had. First of all, he did Workers’ Movement,” including both articles and not have the personal wealth to fall back on. He small news items. There remained, as ever, the ques- was anxiously dependent on contributions from tion of funds, and Lavrov recognized that he could Russia, and he was aghast when informed that a run into trouble: “If this is not set up,” he declared, Russian bookstore was demanding payment for “then this new enterprise can put us in a real squ- bills incurred before his flight from exile. He feared eeze as regards money.” Nevertheless he was eager that the long arm of the Tsar might yet drag him to forge ahead. before a British court and impound his possessions, including the print shop. Lavrov immediately discovered that the problems of printing a newspaper were very different from Equally disturbing was his inability to control spe- those he had faced up to this point. The existence of culation in the sale of copies of Vpered (but then deadlines made him compromise with his natural this was a problem that had also troubled Herzen). bent to investigate a topic thoroughly, and he found Each volume of Vpered was supposed to sell for that even passing problems could be terribly dis- two and one-half rubles, yet Lavrov heard of a ruptive when they ran into a deadline. As the first copy’s going for as much as 25 rubles in Russia. He issue went to press, for example, he was ill, and his received nothing of this profit, and dependent as helpers completely forgot about his plan to print he was on donations, he feared that readers might 100 copies on extra-thin paper so that they could be not feel the need to contribute to a publication that more easily smuggled into Russia. cost so much. At the other extreme, he was also dis- tressed by rumors that he had wealthy backers and Despite such problems, the first issue, consisting of therefore did not need small contributions. He later, sixteen double-columned pages and dated January to be sure, spoke glowingly of the contributions he 15, 1875, appeared on schedule. In his editorial had received from the writer Ivan Turgenev. introduction, Lavrov called this an experiment: “If this succeeds, then we will keep the new form of our Despite his financial problems he felt the need to publication in its two forms of irregular books and expand, not contract, because of the flood of news biweekly supplements. If it does not succeed, we will coming from Russia. During the summers of 1873 return to the earlier form of publication.” The news- and 1874 a remarkable movement of Russian stu- paper schematically outlined Lavrov’s program: dents into the countryside, known as the move- ment “to the people,” had stirred up governmental Prepare social, popular revolution. Prepare it in the repression, and the third volume of Vpered, which people, who alone can carry it out. Prepare yourself appeared in the fall of 1874, had blown up to over for this intellectually and morally, in understan- 740 pages. This type of thick, irregular publication ding and in customs of life, by thought, word, and – like Herzen’s Poliarnaia zvezda – could not keep up with the fast breaking news. Lavrov called for a deed. monthly or bi-weekly newspaper as a supplement With the second issue, dated February 1, the Vpered – much in the style that Herzen’s Kolokol had been commune settled into a routine that produced the conceived. most punctual and regular periodical published Reports of new activity in Geneva also spurred him by the nineteenth century Russian emigration. In on. Tkachev was said to be negotiating with Elpidin one room sat Smirnov, working day and night. In for the publication of a periodical. The chaikovtsy the next room male and female typesetters labored press was planning a newspaper to be called Rabo- intensely at four cases. (According to Lavrov, one tnik (The Worker). To be sure, the chaikovtsy’s typesetter set his answer to Tkachev, which came publication would probably follow the simplified to 60 pages, in one night.) When their work was style of the “books for the people,” and so there done, the typesetters could sleep, and Linev would would be no serious competition from that quarter. take over, formatting the pages, at times scurrying But Lavrov particularly feared the possible compe- into the editor’s office to force the dropping of a 56 tition of Tkachev. line or two, the adding of a line or two. Once set, the type had to be carried to the press of the Daily Chapter 9: LAVROV IN LONDON

News to be run off. And so the commune toiled The negotiations resulted in the formation of the for two years, publishing the newspaper every two “Union of Russian Revolutionary Groups,” and weeks. in December 1875 Natanson came to the West to explain the new organization. Lavrov knew in As Lavrov devoted himself to the printed word, he advance that this would be a difficult meeting, but displayed little understanding of more adventure- he always believed that his work had to be subor- some spirits. He despaired of Lopatin’s boldness, dinated to events in Russia. He did not want to edit and he was particularly upset when a new young an “émigré” journal – on this score Kravchinsky’s acquaintance, Sergei Kravchinsky, chose to go to comments had particularly hurt – and he wanted the Balkans in the summer of 1875 to take part in to be a part of the Russian scene. Therefore he the Serbian struggle against Turkish rule. Upon always stood ready to sacrifice his own position hearing that “this crazy man is going to Herzego- for the good of the cause. Yet at the same time, he vina,” Lavrov decried the influence that Sazhin and craved recognition for his own efforts. Adding to Bakunin still had on the youth – “But what can you his uneasiness was the news from Russia: during do with young blood?” September 1875 mass arrests in Moscow had Adding insult to injury, Kravchinsky sent Lavrov picked up many revolutionaries, including mem- a long letter, paying tribute to Lavrov’s honesty bers of the Fritschi. and integrity but telling him that he had no busi- Natanson therefore found Lavrov submissive but ness publishing “a revolutionary organ,” because he reserved. Lavrov was not inclined to argue with lacked the proper “revolutionary instinct.” Krav- his visitor, he accepted Natanson as the spokesman chinsky called him a “man of thought, not of pas- of the revolutionary movement in Russia, but he sion. And this is not enough.” An émigré publica- could tolerate direction only up to a certain point. tion, Kravchinsky continued, could only “follow On December 27, 1875, after three days of talks, he the party,” not lead it. Demanding fewer words and declared that he would quit and turn the editorship more deeds, Kravchinsky insisted that all revolu- over to Smirnov. Frightened, Smirnov declared tions begin with action; propaganda alone could that if Lavrov resigned, he too would resign. Dis- accomplish nothing. trustful of Smirnov’s urging that he compromise, Kravchinsky’s declaration deeply upset Lavrov, Lavrov finally yielded to his own sense of duty, and who suggested a formal exchange of views in the he grudgingly withdrew his resignation. Natanson pages of Vpered and then went on to assail Sazhin went on to dictate a new program to the Vpered as an evil influence on the young. Kravchinsky group. rejected the invitation to a literary duel, and he The print shop in London now became the property defended Sazhin as a close associate of Bakunin, of the Union of Russian Revolutionary Groups. The adding “Surely you yourself don’t think... that union would provide an annual subsidy of up to your word can have greater weight than Bakunin’s 6000 rubles. Vpered’s publications would consist of word?” Kravchinsky then went off to battle, lea- three types – books for the people, books for the ving Lavrov outraged. intelligentsia, and the newspaper. Of these only Kravchinsky’s defection distressed Lavrov all the more the newspaper would have a degree of autonomy, because his supporters in Russia at this time, the fall and even so it would have to accept direction from of 1875, were conducting delicate negotiations with Russia. The book publishing activities would be Kravchinsky’s erstwhile colleagues, the chaikovtsy, fully subordinated to the center in Russia. with the aim of establishing a single revolutionary In the matter of books for the people, Vpered was organization. Although the revolutionaries liked to to print all manuscripts sent by the union without use the term “revolutionary party,” or even “social- making any editorial changes. The union would dic- revolutionary party,” the revolutionary movement tate the number of copies to be printed, and orders had no organization; the term “party” referred only to in this category would take precedence in the print the vague sum of the various, sometimes competing, shop over any other work with the exception of the circles that opposed the government and somehow newspaper. If the shop received manuscripts in this wanted to reorganize society. In an effort to unify and category from other sources, it should send them to thereby to strengthen the movement, Lavrov’s chief Russia for review before committing itself to publi- supporter in St. Petersburg, Lev Ginsburg, entered cation. If the print shop produced a work on its own into talks with Mark Natanson, one of the founders initiative, it would run the risk of the union’s ban- of the Chaikovtsy circle. In London Lavrov watched ning its distribution in Russia. anxiously as the negotiations dragged on; uncertain what the future would bring, he feared that the rift Concerning books for the intelligentsia, the union with Kravchinsky bode ill. was apparently willing to consider the London group 57 somewhat more competent. The shop could, on its THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

own judgment, print books dealing with questions “All correspondence concerning subscriptions to of socialism, the history of popular movements the journal, to the newspaper and other publica- both in Russia and in the West, and commentaries tions, on the shipping of these publications, and on current events. Even so the shop had to keep the such, should be addressed: To the Publishing Office center in Russia informed about its activities, and of “Forward,” 4, Lower Charles St., Clerkenwell, the union could dictate the size of the edition to be London, E.C.” Money should be addressed: To the printed. Publisher of “Forward,” Hornsey Rd., Post Office, London, N. The newspaper, under this program, would cons- titute a third area of activity. Accepting the news- As he saw it, he could offer no clearer evidence of paper as “useful for the intelligentsia,” the union the new bureaucratic spirit in the print shop. He was still unwilling to declare this to be its literary had already taken a demonstrative step in Vpered of organ. Vpered could continue in editions of 2000- January 15, 1875, by writing in the first person “I” 2500 copies, 1200 of which were to be given to the rather than the editorial “we,” thereby emphasizing union for distribution in Russia. While the union his understanding of his reduced, personal role in would not be responsible for the content of articles the editing of the newspaper. in the newspaper, it would not distribute any issue However much travail Lavrov had endured before, carrying something of which it disapproved. If the he now enjoyed his labor less. Work in the office was union submitted an article for publication, Vpered now different; he particularly objected to the pro- would have to print it in the next issue without any motion of Goldenberg, who seemed to represent the changes. infiltration of Bakunist ideas. In alliance with Linev, For Lavrov this arrangement amounted to a demo- Goldenberg introduced more radical, insurrectionist tion, even a slap in the face, but he recognized the tendencies into the group’s thoughts, and in collabo- greater principle involved here of the relationship of ration with Aaron Liberman, a recent arrival from any émigré publication to the needs of the situation Vilnius, Goldenberg pressed for greater considera- in Russia. He adhered to the letter of Natanson’s tion of Jewish questions. Lavrov considered moving demands, insisting that he henceforth had nothing to Paris and fulfilling his obligations by mail. to do with anything but the newspaper. Smirnov In the long run, the relationship with the Union insisted that the program constituted an effort at of Russian Revolutionary Groups failed to bring renewal: “Either our Vpered will perish or it will Vpered the promised security. The union could not enter into a new stage.” Lavrov saw himself as being deliver on its promises of financial support, and in forced into retirement. the spring of 1876 it disintegrated – the Lavrists In January 1876, after Natanson’s departure for denounced the chaikovtsy as “maniacs of insurrec- Geneva, Lavrov had to taste still more bitter dregs. tion and gangs.” In the breakup Lavrov’s suppor- Natanson sent back a document with new surprises, ters recovered rights to the Vpered press, and they defining procedures and establishing new offices, immediately asked Lavrov to reconsider his inten- including a Shipping Agency, which would handle tion to retire. To help him make up his mind, they the transportation of publications. A more serious sent along 1000 rubles. Lavrov reluctantly agreed to problem lay in Natanson’s restructuring of the print stay on. shop, henceforth to be directed by a triumvirate As his price for continuing, Lavrov became more – Smirnov, Linev, and Lazar Goldenberg, whom assertive. In August 1876 he directed the forma- the chaikovtsy now transferred from Geneva to tion of the Vpered Publications Society, which in London. This triumvirate would handle all aspects turn elected him editor; he went on to draw up a of the book business, providing quarterly financial plan for the organization of the Russian Popular- reports, directing correspondence, and reporting Socialist Revolutionary Party. His draft conceived to the center in Russia. The print shop essentially of the party as a federation of local “independent” became the foreign center of the union. societies, the executive organ of which would be Lavrov at first threatened to resign, but his collea- an annual congress. Under these terms the Vpered gues persuaded him to hold off while they sought Publications Society would constitute a legal entity an explanation. He then chose to react to this bure- within the party. Lavrov was showing that he too aucratic transformation of his commune with irony could manipulate bureaucratic structures. and sarcasm. In Vpered no. 26 of February 1, 1876, These ambitious plans, as Lavrov himself probably he published an elaborate notice for his readers: realized, were nevertheless doomed to failure. His “Manuscripts meant for publication in the journal, relations with his supporters in St. Petersburg were in the newspaper, or separately, should be addressed: deteriorating, and he even had differences with To the Editor of “Forward,” 4, Lower Charles St., 58 Smirnov over the new program. Lavrov was him- Clerkenwell, London, E.C.” Chapter 9: LAVROV IN LONDON self weary from the continued controversy – when Herzen was a writer, Lavrov a philosopher. Both suf- he printed an obituary for Bakunin, who had died fered seriously in their confrontations with Bakunin. at the beginning of July 1876, the Bakunists called And both had troubles dealing with younger émigrés it a “slander,” and when he printed a sympathetic following them out of Russia. Yet both succeeded in account of Bakunin’s funeral, Karl Marx objected editing newspapers, in highly personal and distinc- to the glorification of the anarchist. In the fall, as tive ways, that were idealized by later generations of rumors circulated that Vpered was on its deathbed, revolutionaries and historians. Lavrov looked forward to a congress of his follo- Another unhappy coincidence that Herzen and wers, scheduled for Paris at the end of the year, as Lavrov shared was the activity of a particular Rus- the decisive confrontation. sian spy, Aleksandr Balaszewicz, also known as The congress in fact brought the publication of Count Albert Potocki. After a rather successful tour Vpered to an end, and it also put an end to Lavrov’s of duty in Paris, Balaszewicz-Potocki had settled position in the emigration as a leading publisher. in England in December 1863, watching Herzen. The Lavrists had chosen Paris for their meeting as When the Third Section ordered him to follow a concession to Lavrov, but they were unwilling to Herzen to Geneva in 1865, he refused and instead concede anything else. When Lavrov pressed for opened an antique store in London. For this he had recognition of the Vpered Publishing Society as a to take a cut in pay, but his post again assumed signi- full voting member of the gathering, the delegates, ficance when Lavrov visited London in the summer mostly from Russia, declared they would seat him of 1871 to seek support for the Paris Commune. personally without deciding on the “organizational” Balaszewicz made a point of meeting Lavrov, and question. After listening to a variety of complaints he then demanded a pay raise from his superiors about Vpered’s publications, Lavrov finally rose to in the Third Section. In 1874, when Lavrov moved say that the reports of the delegates from Russia had Vpered to London, Balaszewicz-Potocki was eagerly convinced him that he should resign. awaiting him. The delegates accepted his resignation and went on Lavrov considered Balaszewicz a useful person to draw up a program that recognized the useful- to know, a man “with broad contacts and able ness of a publications program but stressed “life” to perform a service in a needy moment.” In first as the major factor in molding revolutionary con- describing him to Lopatin, Lavrov called the man victions. They voted to close down the newspaper “somehow both a Jew and a count at the same time,” Vpered and approved a plan for scientific books and “a radical, almost a socialist.” When Lopatin sent brochures, brochures on social questions, and semi- a picture identifying Balaszewicz as a spy, Lavrov annual surveys of events in Russia and abroad. The reponded, “The picture of Potocki is the person I last issue of the newspaper Vpered, bearing the know, but I will insist that in recent years he could date of December 31, 1876, appeared a few weeks not be a spy of the Russian government... He is later. Although everyone attempted to picture the simply a limited conniver, greedy and vain at the imminent changes as simply a matter of form and same time; perhaps he is not Potocki and probably not substance, the Vpered group proved unable to not a count, but this is still far from being a spy.” Alt- survive without Lavrov’s guiding hand. hough he used Potocki’s shop as a “safe address” for correspondence from Russia, Lavrov insisted that In its last issues Vpered reported new developments there was no danger because all the important let- in Russia that in fact presaged things to come. A ters were written either with chemicals or in code. massive demonstration before the Kazan cathedral in St. Petersburg marked the first major urban show Balaszewicz reported to the Third Section that he of opposition to the government. Arrests might had easily penetrated Lavrov’s operation and that decimate individual underground organizations, Lavrov “is in our hands.” While the agent did not but the numbers of such groups were increasing. affect the contents of Lavrov’s publications and The revolutionary movement was displaying signi- he received little information that he could have ficant signs of growth, but Vpered admittedly could obtained otherwise, he could hinder the distribu- not keep in step with it. tion of Vpered within London. Lavrov’s experience in London had also differed from Herzen’s in his With the ending of Vpered, the second English failure to win the support of a British publisher period of Russian émigré publishing closed. Lavrov’s like Trübner; this gave the tsarist authorities, using experience had been very different from Herzen’s, agents like Balaszewicz, a great opportunity to limit but they had shared many of the same problems. his income and undermine his message. Lavrov, lacking Herzen’s financial resources, needed aid from supporters in Russia; but like Herzen he had The quick collapse of the Vpered group after Lavrov’s resisted the thought of a party’s being formed around departure testified eloquently to his personal role in 59 his publications. Neither man was truly a politician: its work. His publication had called an embryonic THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

party into existence, but without him, neither the In contrast to Herzen’s unhappy latter years or to publication nor the group could survive. When Bakunin’s confusion, however, Lavrov did not with- asked at what part of the Russian public he had draw from émigré life in the aftermath of his mete- been aiming, Lavrov replied, “At those who must be oric publishing career. He viewed his departure awakened.” He had not specifically aimed at leading from Vpered as liberation, and he soon set off for a political group – such a thing still seemed proble- Paris. In future years he became a respected elder, matic for someone sitting in the emigration – and whose opinion and sanctions the émigré commu- his publications eventually failed to sink roots in nity frequently sought for their various activities Russia. and projects.

60 Chapter 10:

THE THREE MUSKETEERS

With the closing of Vpered, the center of Russian The community in Geneva had shown itself to be émigré printing and publishing shifted back to considerably more resilient than the short-lived Geneva. When Lavrov settled in Zurich at the end of blossom in Zurich. Tsarist officials considered the 1873, the colony was still lost in the confusion that authorities in Zurich more open to socialist ideas followed its experience with Nechaev. Elpidin had than Geneva officials were, and accordingly less res- decided to be a publisher rather than a printer; he ponsive to official Russian complaints. The Russian had given up his shop, apparently turning his type colony in Zurich, however, had consisted mainly of over to Trusov, and was concentrating his efforts students who still planned to return home; there- on his bookstore, his library, and the pension that fore they had yielded to St. Petersburg’s threats and he had founded in conjunction with Utin. Trusov had moved away. The émigrés in western Switzer- was operating the former Narodnoe delo shop in his land, on the other hand, generally entertained little own name, running it on purely commercial princi- hope of returning to Russia short of revolution in ples and accepting work from almost anyone. Lazar their homeland, and therefore the Russian authori- Goldenberg, who had left Zurich in the aftermath of ties had no lever with which to pry them loose. Nechaev’s arrest, subsequently took over the Chai- The émigrés in Geneva were now giving increa- kovtsy press and led the revival of émigré printing sing attention to identifying the audience for their in Geneva. publications. The practice of printing “books for In order to disguise the origins of the works it the people,” whatever problems the intellectuals printed, the chaikovtsy press usually furnished its had in defining what the ‘people” needed or wanted, products with false imprints. Taking his type out marked a beginning of such concern, and with its of its case (in Russian: kassa), Goldenberg, before publications now directed toward specific readers, he left to join Vpered in London, liked to say that the émigré printing world in Geneva achieved the works were set at the Kassov print shop. Lev rather more stability and continuity. Trusov and Tikhomirov’s work Where is it Better? was called a Elpidin, to be sure, were essentially running their second edition, corrected and expanded, printed in respective enterprises on commercial principles, Moscow and passed by the censorship on April 19, accepting customers of any belief, but more specia- 1868. Tikhomirov’s Emelka Pugachev or a Cossack’s lized printing and publishing enterprises now tried Love was labeled a second edition, “printed from to reach specific sectors within the Russian reading the edition of 1869 without changes” and permitted public. by the censorship in Moscow on May 2, 1871. Other Leading the way were Zemfire Ralli, Aleksandr works might bear no imprint at all. Golshtein, and Aleksandr Elsnits, Bakunin’s ers- Costs of printing were less in Geneva than the costs twhile followers who had rebelled against Sazhin’s of printing in England, and the émigrés enjoyed a leadership in Zurich. Some émigrés scorned their freedom that they could not find elsewhere on the flight from Zurich; Smirnov called them “cowards” continent. In Paris, to be sure, there were more Rus- and “old women” for having allowed Sazhin to keep sians; the émigrés liked to refer to the city of light as control of the Bakunist library and print shop. In a provincial Russian city. But in the smaller Russian Geneva they organized themselves as the Revolu- “town” of Geneva, they enjoyed a freedom of the tionary Commune of Russian Anarchists, and using press that the French authorities would not permit. the chaikovtsy print shop, printed their own mate- They realized that the tsarist authorities could also rial. In their first proclamation “To Russian Revolu- exploit that atmosphere, but they knew that they tionaries,” they complained that Russian youth was had some recourse to Swiss laws and customs for losing its strength, character and energy under the their own protection. weight of Russian liberalism, and they summoned 61 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

the youth to turn to “the peasant world, the Russian “people,” both he and his wife insisted on dressing people.” They saw themselves as offering a synthesis in native costume. of previous thought: Marx’s state-oriented revo- When Zhebunev arrived in Geneva, he was ecs- lutionary theory constituted the thesis, Bakunin’s tatic about the editorial arrangements he found anarchy the antithesis, and as their synthesis they in Rabotnik’s office. “They are preparing a people’s called for a federation of nationalities. newspaper,” he wrote Lavrov, “as we discussed with When their effort to popularize the Revolutionary you in London and which you recognized as neces- Commune of Russian anarchists failed, the “three sary. When I got to Geneva, I found the matter half- musketeers,” as they called themselves, began prepared; they have been working three months.” work on a new periodical, to be called Rabotnik After recounting how the group had formed a (The Worker). They presented their philosophy commune, meeting every Thursday and deciding in a book entitled, The Satisfied and the Hungry, all matters by a majority vote, Zhebunev broke expounding on the origins of inequality. Dividing into German as he rhapsodized, “Mein Herz, was society into the two classes of the satisfied and wünschst du mehr! (My heart, what more could you the hungry, the authors emphasized the need for desire!)” He immediately offered the group a poem organization in the struggle against this system and an article of his own. The article, entitled “Is of inequality. “One cannot go alone against the it True That an Affectionate Calf Sucks from Two satiated,” they declared; “They will always crush Mothers?” argued “the necessity of ending obe- one lone person.” Despite its considerable size, dience to the existing order in Russia.” Bemused the work enjoyed a certain popularity, but it was by Zhebunev’s energy, the editorial board agreed meant to constitute only the foundation of Rabo- to publish both these contributions in the news- tnik, the first newspaper “for the people.” (Some paper. historians later pointed to the publication’s title To Zhebunev’s dismay, however, another figure now and identified it as the first newspaper aimed at came onto the scene, Nikolai Morozov, a young the working class.) man of barely 20. Morozov had been a member of Following the pattern of the “books for the people,” the Moscow group of the Chaikovtsy and had par- Rabotnik spoke in a simplified language. In their ticipated in the movement to the people. The group preliminary announcement the editors invited cor- had now sent him to Geneva to work with Rabotnik, respondence and letters directed toward Russian and on his arrival he became an instant celebrity as a workers, and the group won promises of support witness and veteran of the exciting events in Russia from Russia, in particular from a Moscow orga- in the summer of 1874. Inevitably he also came into nization called “The All-Russian Social Revolu- conflict with Zhebunev, who was undoubtedly jea- tionary Group,” better known as the “moskvichi” lous of Morozov’s enthusiastic reception. (the Muscovites). While Rabotnik has frequently The first meeting between the two bode ill for the been considered the organ of the moskvichi, Ralli future. According to Morozov’s memoirs, which later claimed that it was in fact independent of the dripped with ridicule, he arrived as Tkachev’s apar- Moscow group, and that the moskvichi paid only tment in Geneva without any idea of what the man for some specific publications. Nevertheless, the looked like. Confronted by the Zhebunevs, he pre- editors of Rabotnik received aid from Russia, and of sumed that these were Tkachev and his wife, and course their cooperation with Goldenberg and the in his mind he anxiously pondered how he could chaikovtsy press testified to a certain degree of sup- tell them that the poetry they were reading him was port from the Chaikovtsy organization. really terrible. Before Tkachev himself showed up The editorial board, however, almost disintegrated to rescue Morozov from his confusion, the Zhebu- before the first issue. At the center of the storm was nevs had also extracted five hundred francs from Nikolai Zhebunev, an odd figure whom many con- the newcomer, ostensibly as a loan, although they sidered even clownish. Born in 1847, the son of a never repaid it. landowner, Zhebunev had been part of the student When beginning work in the editorial office, colony in Zurich. With his two brothers he had Morozov was shocked to find that the poetry that directed a small circle, known because of its Saint- the Zhebunevs had been declaiming to him had Simonist proclivities as the Saint-Zhebunevists. already been set into type. Goldenberg explained When the colony in Zurich broke up, he returned that the editorial board was made up of “prose wri- to Russia with his wife Zinaida and participated ters,” who disclaimed any special understanding of in the movement to the people, running a blacks- poetry. In any case, Goldenberg noted, the poem mith shop in Odessa. Upon learning that he had had been well received “among the people.” When been denounced to the authorities, he fled again Morozov called the piece unacceptable, Golden- 62 into the emigration. Proud of their contact with the berg protested that rejection now would constitute Chapter 10: THE THREE MUSKETEERS an insult to the Zhebunevs. Nevertheless Morozov he had made up the quotation, but he asked, “How forced the editorial board to throw out the poem, else could he have spoken?” Despite misgivings the although he compromised by accepting Zhebunev’s editorial board approved the article, but two weeks essay on the affectionate calf. later came a protest from the group’s correspondent in Berlin, Dmitri Klements: “Were you all drunk in Zhebunev could not understand why his com- the editorial office or were all of you simultaneously rades had turned against him, and in a long letter struck by an attack of insanity when you printed in to Lavrov he denounced the editorial board. He Rabotnik a whole speech in Malinovsky’s name?” claimed to have been told, “We are not a party but The worker had actually only said “Yes” in answer a commune,” but, he complained to Lavrov, “Wha- to the question whether he was a revolutionary. The tever you call the devil, he remains the devil.” Moa- editorial board tried to defend its action, but it reco- ning that others were taking advantage of his good gnized that it had embarrassed itself. nature, he asserted that Zhukovsky had already persuaded Goldenberg to retire from the board of Morozov stayed in Geneva for only about four editors. While paying homage to the talents of both months. He found the intrigues and jealousies among Goldenberg and Zhukovsky, Zhebunev criticized the émigrés intolerable; his comrades even accused Elsnits and Ralli as “persons who know the people him of having betrayed them when he published only from books.” Morozov, he insisted, had even an article in Lavrov’s Vpered. Most of the émigrés, changed the orientation of the paper, aiming it now he told himself, were “mentally ill, torn away from at the “popular intelligentsia.” their native land, not joining another, deprived of any work other than arguments, the point of which Lavrov repeated Zhebunev’s complaints to others. is not even the search for truth but only the wish to “You have of course seen no. 1 of Rabotnik,” he assert one’s own, to have the last word in the argu- wrote to Lopatin in the latter part of January 1875. ment.” But when Morozov returned to Russia, the “Not bad, very tolerable. But you could hardly know tsarist authorities arrested him at the frontier; his about the internal revolutions of its editorial board, revolutionary activity was abruptly stilled. about which I received a detailed letter. Founded, of course, on pure equality, on anarchic principles, The first issue of Rabotnik, bearing the imprint of etc., then, one fine day, three persons (Zhebunev the “Slavic Print Shop” and the date of January 1875, husband and wife and Goldenberg) are thrown out, repeated the philosophy espoused in The Satiated the latter, they say but I hardly believe, because of and the Hungry. “The satiated person,” the edi- his Jewish origins.” Goldenberg, Lavrov declared, tors wrote, “does not understand the hungry one.” had been “the only acceptable person on the board.” Reviving Bakunist ideas, the journal argued that When Goldenberg came to London, he apparently revolution would come through the spontaneous confirmed Zhebunev’s account, whereupon Lavrov explosion of the aroused masses, and it couched its commented, “We could think that about the others, message in simple, primitive style, making heavy but as regards Zhukovsky this is rather surprising.” use of simulated discussions and stories – the story of Zhebunev’s thirsty calf ran across the lower part While he had triumphed over Zhebunev, Morozov of six pages. could not always carry Rabotnik’s editorial board with him. One of his first problems in policy came The “worker” of Rabotnik’s title meant all toilers, with the decision of the board that, in accordance whether in the field or factory; the editors viewed with established revolutionary tradition, all arti- the worker in the factory as basically just a displaced cles would appear anonymously. This, Morozov peasant. Nevertheless many émigrés viewed the fac- complained, forced him into an unnatural style of tory worker as more receptive to political agitation writing; in the revolutionary movement, he argued, than the peasant. Nabat had already argued that “not the masses but individuals were acting, each at propaganda among the peasants had little use. In his own risk.” Anonymity, he added, could also lead the third issue, March 1875, Rabotnik declared, to confusion as unnamed authors contradicted each other. Nevertheless the others insisted on maintai- It is necessary once and for all to stop relying on ning the policy of anonymity. the Tsar. It is necessary to reach agreement and to raise rebellion through all of Rus’, but to raise it The enthusiasms of the editors could occasionally only when the peasants’ force will be calculated, lead them down false paths. When news came that a worker had talked back to a tsarist court, Zhukovsky when the Russian workers will know where they exclaimed, “The working masses are speaking!” are going and what they want. and Ralli produced an article quoting his hero as saying, “It is not true; I had no intention of killing The emancipation, the editors wrote in issue no. 6, constituted a “tsarist joke, the freedom to hunger, the Tsar. The Tsar is not responsible for the people’s 63 suffering.” When challenged, Ralli admitted that the freedom to die off from intolerable labor, the THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

freedom to fall under the bullets of tsarist soldiers.” minority that would then go on to carry out a social revolution, and he later claimed that his group of True to their anarchist background, the editors Jacobins had recruited Tkachev. Whatever the cir- foresaw a post-revolutionary society with no state: cumstances that brought them together in 1875, “Any government will always be an enemy of the Turski had money to support a publication, and people. The people will be free only when there is Tkachev had the ideas and literary talent to pro- no more government, when the people completely duce it. When they decided to produce a journal, annihilate government.” A democratic constitution Elpidin helped them to obtain type, and they set up could be no guarantee of freedom; even in Swit- the Nabat print shop. zerland there were “satiated and hungry.” The new society would be a “free union of free communes”; Their journal, Nabat (The Tocsin), first appeared there would be only workers, “free and equal among in November/December 1875. As its slogan, the themselves.” Although the founders had planned to masthead proclaimed, “Now or, if not very soon, publish the newspaper twice a month, Rabotnik perhaps never.” According to Tkachev, “Only remained a monthly throughout its existence, put- abject cowards, only weak egotists remain deaf to ting out 15 issues before its demise. the sound of the tocsin.” Called the “Organ of Rus- sian Revolutionaries,” Nabat appeared monthly for Rabotnik’s decline and fall came about through both a year and then irregularly over the following five internal and external developments. The departure years. In its pages Tkachev advocated the seizure of of Goldenberg at the end of 1875 was undoubtedly political power. Capitalism, he argued, had not yet a blow, but he had already become unhappy with come to Russia, and therefore the seizure of power his position within the group. When the chaikovtsy would be easier now than it would be later when directed him to move to London, he apparently went capitalism and the bourgeoisie would have become gladly. On the other hand, Rabotnik could no longer stronger. The seizure of political power by a cons- count on any help from the chaikovtsy in Russia, piratorial revolutionary group constituted the first and its Moscow supporters had been completely stage of the social revolution, which would then be disrupted by a wave of arrests in September 1875. directed from above. The periodical’s last issue appeared in February/ March 1876, but the “three musketeers” maintained Most other émigrés generally rejected Tkachev’s the name Rabotnik for their print shop. arguments, calling his theories elitist, and they shied away from the “political struggle” he advo- With Rabotnik’s demise, Petr Tkachev came into cated, which still had liberal overtones to their ears. new prominence as a publisher in Geneva. When They argued that Tkachev’s views could find no Tkachev first came to Geneva at the end of 1874, audience, but as they themselves discussed and dis- Lavrov had feared that he would take over the puted his views, Tkachev claimed success. He dis- entire émigré printing establishment, but from the counted arguments that his publication had only a beginning his relations with the other émigrés were small circulation; he needed no mass distribution in strained. Upon arriving, Tkachev made a point of Russia, he asserted, because he was not advocating visiting Ralli, an old comrade from the days of the mass revolution. At the end of the decade, when Nechaevshchina, and he offered to cooperate with Russian revolutionaries launched their campaign Rabotnik. Ralli, however, distrusted him, and the of assassinations against tsarist officials, he insisted two immediately became mutually suspicious rivals. that they were in fact following his program. Inf- Although there were rumors that he was planning a luenced by their personal dislike of Tkachev, many new journal in collaboration with Elpidin, Tkachev’s émigrés nevertheless denied him credit for having first publishing venture was a plan for a history of influenced anyone. the revolutionary movement, to be carried out in cooperation with the ever-available Zhukovsky. For the Rabotnik group, the “three musketeers,” This project, however, died on the drawing board, Tkachev’s aggressiveness posed special problems. and Zhukovsky announced that he had nothing to Angered by their rejection of his offer of coopera- do with it. tion, he denounced the practices of their print shop. Having heard of Rabotnik’s agreement to print a Tkachev finally found a kindred spirit in the person religious periodical entitled Vestnik pravdy (Mes- of Gaspar-Michael Turski, a man of noble Polish senger of Truth), Tkachev scornfully asked, “Are birth from the Ukraine. Born in 1847, Turski had there really émigrés who so little value their worth, been arrested while a student at Kharkov University who so allow word and deed to diverge, that they are and had been exiled to Archangel. After escaping ready to print in their shops any nonsense so long into the emigration, he had fought with Garibaldi as they receive money?” When the group finally and had participated in the Paris Commune. Turski prepared its rebuttal to Tkachev’s attacks, Elsnits himself had well-developed Jacobin-Blanquist ideas, 64 objected to entering into polemics with this “scoun- favoring the seizure of power by a conspiratorial Chapter 10: THE THREE MUSKETEERS drel” and “louse,” saying, “This is the first piece of When he visited Zurich in 1873 to meet Lavrov, shit to come from our Rabotnik press, which up to Dragomanov had not believed that émigré publis- now has been clean.” hing could accomplish much in the way of reform of the Russian Empire, but when he came to Geneva The musketeers in fact had trouble maintaining a in 1876 after having been forced to leave his uni- clear direction to their work. In the fall of 1876, versity post in Russia, he brought along money and despite their Bakunist principles, they welcomed ideas for a new publishing program. Of the existing a newcomer to their ranks, Mikhail Dragomanov, print shops, he found the Rabotnik group the most who led them in the direction of supporting the to his liking, and he moved in with them, calling his “political struggle,” the question of limiting or sei- own operation the Gromada print shop. The Rabo- zing government, as opposed to advocating the tnik group in turn welcomed him, calculating that social struggle for the overthrow of the government. it needed only to add a few letters of type in order to Dragomanov, a Ukrainian, gave new drive to their print in Ukrainian. Dragomanov, however, brought thoughts of reorganizing society into a federation of his own type and even his own typesetter, thereby nationalities and directed them toward the struggle costing the musketeers nothing and bringing them for “political freedom.” business. Dragomanov’s entry into the émigré community Dragomanov’s typesetter, Anton Mikhailovich Liak- forced the Russians there to turn their attention hotsky, better known simply as “Kuzma,” himself to the nationalities question within the Russian became a legendary figure in Russian émigré publis- Empire. Although the empire was Russian in cha- hing, remaining active well into the twentieth cen- racter, the Russians themselves comprised less than tury. His start with the Gromada group was modest half of the state’s inhabitants. Something over a enough. Dragomanov considered him a quiet loyal hundred nationalities made up the rest of the popu- aide who could do everything involved in the prin- lation, and several of these, notably the Poles, had ting process. Liakhotsky demanded little for himself, already displayed well developed separatist move- at one time living in the doorway of Dragomanov’s ments aiming at political independence. Both libe- home and often bedding down in the print shop. rals and socialists among the Russians had been Beginning in these humble conditions, Liakhotsky unsympathetic to these currents: liberals viewed eventually obtained some land with which he could the nationalist movements as a threat to the inte- support himself, and he became the director of the grity of the Russian state and socialists considered shop. When Dragomanov left Switzerland, he ran nationalism a false doctrine that diverted the atten- the shop for himself, and by the time of the First tion of the workers from the international workers’ World War he enjoyed a virtual monopoly in Rus- movement. sian émigré printing in Switzerland. Until now the nationalities question had not posed Dragomanov had at first planned just to publish in any serious problem for the Russian socialists. Those Ukrainian, but soon he formulated a program for persons joining their ranks from the minority natio- producing both Ukrainian and Russian works. The nalities – Jews, Ukrainians, some Poles – had indi- Ukrainian part would include everything having a vidually accepted the principle of internationalism, direct relationship to the Ukraine and to spreading and as proof of their beliefs, they had assimilated socialist ideas in the Ukraine. His Russian program themselves into the Russian movement. The Poles, foresaw works of a political, liberal, and federal to be sure, had posed special problems, especially character that could appeal to the Russian public. since they enjoyed significant sympathy among Above all he wanted to print materials that would Western European socialists, but the Russians pre- help the development of a Ukrainian national cons- ferred to believe that the Polish toiling masses, as ciousness and would contribute to spreading liberal opposed to the nobility, had yet to be heard from. and socialist ideas in the Ukrainian lands of the Dragomanov gave a new twist to the discussions Russian and the Austrian empires. of the nationalities question, as he claimed to be Within the first months of his stay in Geneva Dra- both a Ukrainian and a socialist. He favored strong gomanov gave evidence of his opposition to tradi- and intense efforts on behalf of the development of tional émigré practices when he clashed with Lavrov, Ukrainian culture, but he did not advocate inde- a man with whom he had enjoyed good relations pendence for the Ukrainians, offering instead a up to this point. Lavrov had even suggested Drago- vision of a decentralized Russia restructured as a manov as his possible successor in editing Vpered, federated society giving considerable autonomy to but now they came to verbal blows over Lavrov’s the various nationalities. To this end he advocated plans to publish another manuscript by Chernys- a political struggle to free the nationalities and to hevsky, this one entitled Prologue of “Prologue”. open the way for social change. 65 Lavrov had received the manuscript from Lopatin THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

with the understanding that Vpered should publish hough he considered a constitution only a stage on it. Dragomanov, however, came forth as a spokesman the road to socialism. After some hesitation, Tkachev for A. Pypin, a noted Russian historian, who claimed rejected Elpidin’s invitation to join the group. Trusov to control the literary rights to Chernyshevsky’s accepted the job of printing the journal, but the group works. Pypin insisted that Lavrov had no right to soon established its own shop. publish the work, but Lavrov countered that any of The newspaper first appeared on May 9, 1877, and Chernyshevsky’s works having social significance the publication proved to be the longest lived of the could and should be printed by the “revolutionary nineteenth century émigré publications, putting party” if it just got its hands on them. Dragomanov out 112 issues before its demise in November 1890. called Lavrov’s position unethical: “I think that the Khristoforov aimed the publication at the Russian narrow interests of your circle will sooner suffer traveler in the West, presumably a fairly well-to-do, than prosper from your printing a novel while there probably liberal person. Travelers, he explained, is still basis to think that it came to you through ask, “Why is there no publication abroad that would theft.” Lavrov, angered by this challenge to his inte- serve as the organ of the hopes and feelings of the grity, went ahead and published it. majority of society and that would present us with a Despite such controversy Dragomanov, born in rounded picture of what is now going on in Russia?” 1841, quickly established himself as, at least for a He wanted Obshchee delo to fill this gap. time, the intellectual leader of the community in Early in the newspaper’s existence, Khristoforov and Geneva. He had been a member of the faculty of the Elpidin won very important financial support when University of Kiev until the authorities had forced Nikolai Belogolovy came to volunteer his help. A him to leave, and now he enjoyed considerable sym- Russian doctor who occasionally vacationed in Swit- pathy as a professor who had suffered for his radi- zerland, Belogolovy had met Elpidin in 1870 and calism and for his antireligious teachings. He had a at that time had offered him support for a journal, solid reputation for honesty and sincerity, and most but he had then lost contact with the community in people considered him charming. Unlike most Geneva. In 1878, he – as Khristoforov had hoped other émigrés, he did not frequent the cafes, but – discovered Obshchee delo in a Berlin bookshop. rather he settled sedately in a quiet part of Geneva, He did not agree with all the views expressed; he where he welcomed visitors on Sundays. They came considered Khistoforov too theoretical and Zaitsev both to speak with him and to use his extensive a “cold-blooded nihilist of the ‘60s” with “too cheap library. In a way, his position was analogous to what and disorganized a wit.” Nevertheless he sent money Herzen had once enjoyed in London and to what and even some literary contributions of his own. Lavrov enjoyed in Paris once he had moved back Several years later, in 1883, having retired from his there from London. practice in Russia, he settled in Geneva and agreed Dragomanov’s call for the political struggle found to underwrite the publication. support in a new publication entitled Obshchee delo According to Khristoforov, Obshchee delo’ s s t a ff (Common Cause), which now began to appear in constituted something of a parliament – on the left Geneva. Aimed at uniting all the factions in the was Zaitsev, who wrote quickly, in a “volley like a emigration, the newspaper had its roots in Mik- rocket”; on the right Belogolovy, an ideal liberal, “a hail Elpidin’s efforts to persuade Lavrov to edit a knight without fear or reproach”; and in the center new periodical in 1870. That having failed, Elpidin himself. Since the contributors rarely if ever met as waited for the right person to appear, and in 1875 a group, Elpidin acted as the organizer, receiving Aleksandr Khristoforov, an old friend and comrade their individual contributions and assembling the from Kazan, arrived in Geneva. Elpidin revived his various issues. Elpidin later called this publication idea, and Khristoforov agreed enthusiastically. Obs- his favorite among those with which he had worked, hchee delo called for limiting the power of the Rus- but others did not have such fond memories. Wor- sian autocracy; it advocated a constitution for the king with Elpidin could, as the saying went, put a Russian Empire. saint to swearing. “I found in him,” Belogolovy later Although most émigrés still objected to the thought complained, “not only a complete absence of clear of pursuing a political struggle for a constitution political views, but the most confused and ignorant rather than a revolutionary social struggle, Elpidin view of the press.” When Belogolovy at one point and Khristoforov quickly won a number of collabo- bemoaned the lack of material for the newspaper, rators. Elpidin became the business manager, seeking Elpidin reportedly urged, “Can’t we reprint the old material support and recruiting contributors. Khris- articles put out three or four years ago? Our readers toforov became the editor; Nikolai Iurenev agreed to change, and they won’t know that this is old.” give financial support, but his name had to remain Obshchee delo never enjoyed large circulation, but 66 secret; Varfolomai Zaitsev agreed to cooperate alt- it earned for itself a respectable place in the history Chapter 10: THE THREE MUSKETEERS of the émigré press. At the time of its birth, the brochures for smuggling into Russia.) In all, Obsh- revolutionaries in Geneva disparagingly spoke of chee delo was a newspaper that many found worth it as a commercial venture, thereby grossly overes- reading, whatever its policies. timating its financial success, and they identified Neither Obshchee delo nor Nabat, which was now Elpidin as its editor. That was enough for them appearing irregularly under Turski’s guidance, to laugh the publication away. But as one com- offered leadership for the revolutionary spirits in mentator put it, “No one got angry at it, no one Geneva, and the three musketeers, cooperating with thought it shameful to place an announcement Dragomanov, began gearing up their print shop for in it – occasionally this was necessary and there the publication of a new journal, to be called Obch- was no organ of one’s own – but in general it had china (Commune), scheduled to begin in January neither supporters nor opponents in the revolutio- 1878. Developments within the empires, however, nary emigration.” It printed important revolutio- soon brought dramatic changes to life both at home nary documents, and Belogolovy supplied it with in Russia and abroad. Increased revolutionary acti- reliable information about the workings of the vity, more rapid communications with the home- inner circles of government and also with works land, and eventually a new wave of emigration radi- by the noted satirist Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin. cally altered the character of Russian printing and (Elpidin, always alert to a likely looking business publishing in Western Europe. venture, reprinted Shchedrin’s works as separate

67 Chapter 11:

PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED

Émigré publishing waxed and waned in reciprocal defense attorney depicted her as an innocent victim relationship to events in Russia. Publishing, and of an unjust system, driven by the purest of motives. even emigration itself, constituted in fact an alter- The jury accepted this account of her biography and native to activity within Russia; Herzen had opened acquitted the defendant. his print shop as a means of keeping some sort of Even before Zasulich’s trial, a wave of violence arose. contact with the homeland to which he could not The revolutionaries had been preparing themselves return. Accordingly, when revolutionary violence for this for some time, insisting that they were exploded within the empire at the end of the 1870s, acting in their own self-defense, and after Zasulich’s the émigrés essentially stopped what they were acquittal, violence quickly escalated. On January doing and watched in awe; they then willingly put 30, authorities in Odessa met with armed resi- themselves at the service of the activists. stance when they raided an illegal printing press; in Some observers had long been predicting an out- February a group in Kiev, inspired by the actions of break of violence in Russia. In the fall of 1875 Sergei Zasulich and the resisters in Odessa, attempted to Kravchinsky had predicted to Petr Lavrov that the kill the prosecutor in a peculiar case known as the tsarist authorities’ plan to hold a mass trial of pro- Chigirin affair. The prosecutor survived the attack, pagandists arrested in the course of the “movement but the “war activities” predicted by Kravchinsky to the people” would have far-reaching repercus- had begun. sions for the revolutionary movement. This, he The violence had no clear political or social pro- declared, would be a “trial of propaganda,” and it gram. Driven by feelings of frustration and anger, would demonstrate on the one hand the weaknesses or even by fundamentally asocial instincts, the of the propaganda campaign and on the other hand revolutionaries first attacked individuals accused the necessity of organizing the oppositionist forces. of being government spies. Then they lashed out The result, he predicted, would be violence: “War at governmental officials, justifying their actions will start soon after the trial.” as punishment for abuses of power. Then they The Trial of the 193, of which Kravchinsky spoke, began to speak of the desirability of destabilizing began in September 1877 and concluded on January the government. As German Lopatin described the 23, 1878. Tension ran high in the courtroom as the process in a letter to Engels, many “energetic ele- defendants openly defied the court; one defendant ments” had instinctively entered the path of “purely declared that government officials had lower morals political struggle” without understanding what they than prostitutes. Adding to the uneasy atmosp- were doing. here was a controversy over a recent incident in The news of Zasulich’s deed and of other terrorist which the governor of St. Petersburg, General Fedr actions electrified the émigrés in Switzerland. They Trepov, had ordered a political prisoner beaten for collected what news they could, and some took it alleged insubordination. In a seeming effort to show upon themselves to provide theoretical justification understanding and patience, the court acquitted for the violence, which was called “propaganda of most of the defendants in the Trial of the 193, sen- the deed.” The revolutionaries, they explained, were tencing only five of them to ten years’ hard labor, too busy acting to bother with ideological questions ten to nine years, and three to five years’ hard labor; and explanations. Writing in Obshchee delo, Khris- forty were exiled. toforov called Zasulich “a heroic nature from the On January 24, the day after the trial had ended, a stock of Charlotte Corday, but more exalted than young woman named Vera Zasulich shot Trepov, her because she acted not under the influence of 68 claiming vengeance for the beating that had taken religious fanaticism promising eternal salvation, place some six months earlier. At her trial the but in the name of insulted human dignity.” Khris- Chapter 11: PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED toforov considered her deed a step forward in the convinced him that he had to think about his own political struggle, an effort to call the government to escape. On August 4, Kravchinsky approached the account for the excesses of its officials. general in public and stabbed him to death – a knife is obviously the most intimate of assassination wea- Obshchina (Commune), the new publication of the pons, requiring the assassin to be next to the target. “three musketeers,” welcomed the news from Russia Kravchinsky succeeded in getting away, and his with enthusiasm. In planning their first two issues, comrades immediately sent him out of the country. for January and February 1878, the editors had con- Accompanied by Zasulich, Kravchinsky returned to centrated on the Trial of the 193, but when news of Geneva at the end of the year with the tsarist police Zasulich’s act came, they had to juggle their format. in hot pursuit. An essay by Dragomanov on Zasulich’s acquittal was added so late that it was not even listed in the As the unpunished killing of a high government table of contents. In no. 3/4, Sergei Kravchinsky’s official, Mezentsev’s assassination constituted a dithyramb to her complained that he knew only her formidable challenge to the government, which in name: “Tell me, what is her face like? what sort of turn had been unprepared for such violent opposi- voice? eyes? Tell me, how does she dress? How does tion. To be sure, Kravchinsky muddied the waters she speak? How does she love?” This, he asserted, with his pamphlet Death for Death, in which he must be “one of those truly great souls who in called the killing a measure of self-defense and not their humbleness and simplicity themselves do not a political act, but the murder evoked a heightened suspect what is lying within them.” Pausing to apos- governmental campaign of political repression, sus- trophize her, he exclaimed, “Heroine, these lines I pending trials for political offenders and directing write for you!” and he added, “Such idolization is that the accused be brought before military courts. difficult for your childishly pure heart. You went (Since Russia was at war with Turkey, political forth not to your apotheosis but to a sacrifice.” Then offenders in the south, as in Odessa, had already turning back to his other readers, he declared that been brought before military courts.) Kravchinsky’s her acquittal had struck a deathblow at the tsarist prediction of “war” proved more prescient than regime: “The Russian autocracy has been killed; even he had thought, but then he had made his own March 31 was the last day of its existence.” contribution to the developments. Obshchina now became one of the liveliest and most The escalation of revolutionary violence had a divi- significant of the émigré publications, but it did not sive impact among the various groups challenging survive the year. Under Dragomanov’s influence, it the tsarist order. Many who had hailed Zasulich spoke more of federalism than of anarchism, calling without reservation had second thoughts about for a “free union of local and national social groups,” Kravchinsky’s deed. Among the staff of Obshchee and it aimed its message at the Russian intelligentsia delo, for example, Zaitsev considered Death for rather than at the worker. Ultimately it was both Death, which was published anonymously, a poli- helped and killed by the events in Russia. The news tical ad absurdum, and he even questioned whether of revolutionary violence gave it exciting material, it was not the work of a police agent. On the other and the veterans of the Trial of the 193 publicly hand, Belogolovy opposed terrorism in any form as acclaimed the newspaper as their organ. On the a weapon of the political struggle. Within the ranks other hand, the escalation of activity aroused divi- of Obshchina, Dragomanov visibly cooled toward sive passions and even drew off participants. the principle of political assassination, although he still voiced some support for the use of violence in Activist natures like Kravchinsky’s could not sit political struggle. still at a press in Geneva. In the summer of 1878 he returned to Russia, carrying with him equipment The first wave of new émigrés escaping government for the establishment of an underground printing retaliation arrived in Switzerland at the end of 1878 press. An underground “Free Russian Press,” orga- and intensified the debates over the morality and nized by Aaron Zundelevich, had existed since the usefulness of violence. Petr Tkachev insisted that fall of 1877, and there also existed a Northern Revo- the emergence of a terrorist party in Russia proved lutionary Populist Group, founded by the ubiqui- that his arguments had found fertile soil at home. tous Mark Natanson, which would soon revive the The new émigrés objected strongly to Tkachev’s name Zemlia i volia and be known in history as the claim, and in the last issue of Obshchina, no. 8/9 of “second” Zemlia i volia. Throwing himself into the 1878, Zasulich and Kravchinsky joined with others action, Kravchinsky drew the assignment of killing in declaring that all the groups in Russia were orga- the chief of the hated Third Department, the poli- nized in a federative fashion, not in the centralized tical police, General Nikolai Mezentsev. fashion that Tkachev and Nabat had called for. In his enthusiasm, Kravchinsky at first wanted to The new arrivals also found that they had to defend 69 challenge Mezentsev to a duel, but his comrades themselves against what they considered “preju- THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

dices” in the emigration. Lev Deich, for example, a ment decided that it had no reason to object to the close associate of Zasulich’s, had to justify his own behavior of the Russians. revolutionary past. In 1876 he and a comrade, Iakov The Swiss investigation, however superficial its Stefanovich, had beaten a suspected police informer conclusions, testified to the electricity in Geneva’s and had disfigured his face with acid. (Tkachev had atmosphere. Tsarist police agents, looking for hailed the act: “Make more such masks for trai- Kravchinsky and Zasulich, traced Kravchinsky to tors.”) On another occasion, Deich had playfully Dragomanov’s apartment. Dragomanov, however, shot a loaded gun at a comrade, and in 1877 he turned the tables on them by complaining to the and Stefanovich had directed the “Chigirin affair,” Swiss. Trusov, on the other hand, was publishing where they had tried to arouse the peasants to vio- brochures favoring terrorism, but for this he was lence through the use of forged documents. Now using type that he had taken over from the Nabat in the quieter atmosphere of the emigration, Deich print shop, and he was putting the false imprint of objected to being characterized as unprincipled and London on such works. bloodthirsty. As passions for “the propaganda of the deed” Deich immediately came into direct conflict with intensified, for the first time since Herzen opened Dragomanov, who challenged the morality of revo- his shop in London the demand for radical litera- lutionary violence. Deich, who was himself from ture seemed best met by secret presses within the the Ukraine, responded by attacking Dragomanov’s empire. When the Petersburg Free Press printed the Ukrainophilism, his khokhlomania, and he labeled first issue of Zemlia i volia in November 1878, the the respect that Dragomanov enjoyed among the émigré press seemed to have lost its significance. émigrés, including the “three musketeers,” “scanda- (In his time, Mezentsev had reportedly denied that lous” and “criminal.” In the final issue ofObshchina , an underground press could exist in Russia; all the Stefanovich published a negative, critical essay on revolutionary works, he argued, must be smuggled Dragomanov’s Ukrainian periodical Gromada. in from abroad.) The revolutionaries in Russia now The attacks on Dragomanov contributed to the had their own voice, and the émigrés became rela- collapse of Obshchina, but the newspaper also tively quiet. suffered from a lack of material and problems of In the spring of 1879 Zemlia i volia split, and advo- bad management. There had been enough money, cates of terrorism organized a faction called Fre- Zhukovsky informed Ralli, but it had been spent edom or Death. The group subsequently adopted on other things: “It is necessary to give it up and to the name Narodnaia volia (The People’s Will) and wait until a better wind blows.” The Rabotnik shop decreed that the Tsar must die. Opponents of ter- essentially closed down. “Our typesetters have rorism objected, and they organized themselves as been orphaned,” Zhukovsky wrote. “There are just Chernyi peredel (Black Repartition, a name signi- no Russian works for propaganda.” Elsnitz argued, fying a call for massive land reform). After pro- “Besides money we also need new people,” and, longed negotiations, the two groups agreed on a echoing Zhukovsky’s words, he lamented, “Our complete split, dividing up the assets and property print shop is decaying, and if not for the Ukrai- of the Zemlia i volia organization. nian work it would long ago have been overgrown with weeds and thistles.” The émigrés recognized Since the narodovoltsy, as the Narodnaia volia that they had little to do but watch the unfolding group was called, won control of the main prin- drama within Russia. ting equipment of Zemlia i volia, they were able to publicize their existence and their program imme- In the spring of 1879, even as they complained of diately, putting out a newspaper bearing the group’s inactivity, the Russian print shops in Geneva drew name. Directing their clandestine publishing ope- the attention of the Swiss. The federal authorities, rations were Lev Tikhomirov and Nikolai Morozov, disturbed by rumors of “nihilistic” activities in the who had previously been members of the editorial land and by Russian complaints, asked the autho- board of Zemlia i volia. Morozov strongly endorsed rities in Geneva “carefully and discretely” to inves- the terrorist campaign, declaring simply, “Political tigate the activities of the émigrés from the tsarist assassination is the very essence of the revolutio- empire. The investigating officer in Geneva res- nary movement.” ponded that there were “two print shops serving the aspirations of the Russian liberal movement.” The On August 26, 1879, the Executive Committee, as employees of both shops, including Russians and the conspiratorial core of the narodovoltsy called Poles, were “all liberal, but in no way recognizing themselves, confirmed its verdict that Tsar Ale- nihilism.” The works they were printing all favored xander II must die, and its members launched an the emancipation of the Russian people, but they unprecedented campaign of assassination. For 70 did not endorse assassinations. The Swiss govern- the next eighteen months they pursued the tsar Chapter 11: PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED throughout the country, mining railroad tracks and raised money; they supported Hartman’s cause; but even planting a bomb in the Winter Palace. For the they had no unifying organizations or ideas. moment, however, he survived. Some émigrés tentatively offered theories to justify Early in the morning of January 18, 1880, tsarist the principle of political assassination, arguing that authorities struck back; police raided the apartment the narodovoltsy were too busy acting to take time in St. Petersburg where the Narodnaia volia printing to put the obvious down on paper. After he was press was housed. The residents responded with gun expelled from Paris, Hartman, lionized in London as fire, and the battle continued for something over half a martyr of both the French and the Russian govern- an hour before the police prevailed. According to an ments, considered publishing a weekly newspaper, official report, the raid netted 370 kilograms of type, to be called Nihilist, but nothing came of this. In a an excellent printing press and various typographic pamphlet entitled The Terrorist Struggle, Morozov, equipment, in addition to revolvers, poison, dyna- now again in Switzerland, argued that terrorism, mite, and an abundance of revolutionary printed “this rich, consistent system,” should be established material. Ten days later, meeting with no resistance, in all societies as an effective means of preventing the police seized the Chernyi peredel printing esta- “the recurrence of despotism in the future.” Even the blishment, taking some 65 kilos of type. On March Executive Committee rejected Morozov’s thesis, but 13-14, the authorities closed down a third illegal within the emigration only Dragomanov dared to printing establishment in St. Petersburg, this one condemn terrorism altogether, calling it “unclean.” organized by a group of workers, and in yet another Another terrorist émigré, G. Romanenko, res- victory over the revolutionaries, the police confis- ponded that “all revolution as a means of liberating cated type being smuggled into the country in an the people is moral” and that “terrorist revolution” effort to set up a printing press for Nabat. was more reasonable, humanitarian, and ethical in its methods than mass revolution. The government’s success in eliminating revolutio- nary print shops stimulated the revival of émigré In this turmoil and confusion, the chernoperedeltsy, printing and publishing. Neither Narodnaia volia the members of Chernyi peredel, led by Georgii V. nor Chernyi peredel could afford such losses of Plekhanov, emerged as the force of the future. Once capital equipment. Narodnaia volia, with its greater a member of the editorial board of Zemlia i volia, resources, succeeded in reviving some printing acti- Plekhanov opposed Narodnaia volia’s dedication to vities within Russia, but Chernyi peredel chose to terrorism, and he chose to go into the emigration. turn to the emigration, and it contracted with the Shortly after arriving in Geneva in January 1879, he Rabotnik press in Geneva to handle its printing traveled with Zhukovsky to Paris to participate in the needs. struggle against Hartman’s extradition. After mee- ting Lavrov, whom he had long admired, he chose A major new wave of émigrés now fled to the West to remain in the French capital for a year to work and behind them came tsarist agents. On February with him. Lavrov helped him to place articles for 4, 1880, Russian officials in Paris succeeded in publication, and although he was constantly beset arranging the arrest of Lev Hartman, a fugitive from by financial hardship, Plekhanov soon emerged as the investigation of an effort to mine the Tsar’s train one of the intellectual leaders of the emigration. in Moscow. When the Russians sought Hartman’s extradition, however, a storm arose in French poli- Born to a military family in 1856, Plekhanov had tics. The émigrés, each frightened for his or her own publicly joined the revolutionary movement with personal safety, rose as one to protest the thought of a passionate speech at the Kazan demonstration of extradition and demanded help from French poli- December 1876. After a brief stay in Berlin, he had ticians and public figures. In the end, the French returned to Russia and had joined Zemlia i volia. government decided against Hartman’s extradition, Choosing to work among urban workers rather calling his action political rather than criminal, and than among the peasantry, he earned a reputation it expelled him from the country, sending him off as a slashing orator and debater, at this time still to London. advocating Bakunist-style revolutionary action. When Zemlia i volia split, Plekhanov threatened Watching these fast changing developments, the to retire from the revolutionary movement, but he émigrés had no sense of purpose or identity within remained in it when he found kindred spirits such their own ranks; they could only approve or disap- as Zasulich, Deich, and Stefanovich. prove of what was happening in Russia. To most, the assassination campaign appeared to be a heroic While in Paris, Plekhanov accepted Lavrov’s invi- life or death struggle, perhaps the apocalypse itself, tation to join a new publication venture, a series to and they felt that they had to support Narodnaia be called the Russian Social-Revolutionary Library. volia’s Executive Committee, even if they were less Although he was not on the editorial board of the 71 than enthusiastic about terrorism as a weapon. They library, Plekhanov wrote the announcement which THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

spoke of a desperate need for socialist literature: be quick to complain about Polish imperialism. “The only means for the exchange of ideas on all Dragomanov’s Russian opponents, led by Deich these questions, which brook no delay, are indivi- and the other chernoperedeltsy, now found new dual meetings of these or those persons.” Intellec- allies in a new Polish socialist group that was for- tuals, Plekhanov argued, needed help in bridging ming in Geneva. “We decided then to form a secret “the abyss that was separating the censored world coalition against Dragomanov,” Lev Deich later view of the Russian citizen from the world view of recounted, “to strip him of his laurels, to knock him the socialist.” Few could accomplish this passage down from his pedestal on which, in our opinion, by themselves, and therefore the Russian socialists, he unjustifiably stood.” “who must regularly seek refuge abroad,” should The turning point in Dragomanov’s public image take this moment to contribute to the development came in a public meeting of the émigrés in Geneva, of Russian socialist literature. held in June 1880, at which Deich, in the name of As a participant in the Russian Social-Revolutionary various revolutionaries from the Ukraine, objected Library, Plekhanov opposed tolerating too broad to the Ukrainian’s “excessive” nationalism; the a range of opinions. “Censorship,” he declared to Ukrainians present, supporting Dragomanov, felt Lavrov, threatened as a group and withdrew, refusing to attend any more such gatherings. Deich attributed is not bad when the initiators of a specific literary their reaction to irrational, paranoid behavior on enterprise refuse to accept under their banner arti- Dragomanov’s part. Dragomanov then attracted cles contradicting their convictions; it is only bad more hostility when he spoke out against Polish when it interferes with such an initiative in other imperialism at a public meeting marking the fiftieth enterprises. anniversary of the Polish rising of 1830. Dragomanov completed his isolation by openly cri- He was particularly suspicious of the views of Har- ticizing the terrorists. According to Deich, as late as tman and Morozov, both still apologists for assas- the spring of 1880 Dragomanov still paid grudging sinations, and he succeeded in blocking the inclu- tribute to the successes of the terrorists, declaring, sion of Morozov’s essay on terrorism in the library’s “If I had a large amount of money, I would give series. He also blocked endorsement of Rebellions three-quarters of it to terror and the rest to various and Propaganda, by the anarchist Peter Kropotkin, literary endeavors.” Dragomanov limited his endor- and he advised Lavrov against the idea of holding an sement, however, to violence as a weapon of self- open election for the Editorial Commission because defense, and he was one of the first to express dis- the wrong people might win. trust of Narodnaia volia’s centralized structure. As Of particular concern to Plekhanov in the organiza- he spoke up, Dragomanov looked more and more tion of the library was the possibility of Dragomanov’s the political liberal reformer, not a radical socialist, becoming a member of the library’s Editorial Com- and the Russian émigrés began to draw away from mission. Unwilling to give up his own independent him. stance, Dragomanov had limited his participation In retreat, Dragomanov tried new initiatives. In a in the enterprise to literary questions and would proclamation dated June 15, 1880, he and the Gro- have nothing to do with the library’s administra- mada press announced the establishment of a “Free tion, but Plekhanov opposed the Ukrainian’s influ- Jewish Print Shop.” Saying that the great majority of ence in any matter. He scolded Lavrov for having Jews in Russia could only read Yiddish, he declared even asked whether the “Ukrainophile view was that this press would carry the socialist message compatible with the basic tenets” of the library. “In to Jewish workers, and he requested support from my opinion no,” Plekhanov responded, and he went other progressive groups. (When he was accused on to declare that he would have nothing to do with of being anti-Jewish, Dragomanov explained that the Ukrainians: “Where there is no socialism, there the Jews must recognize that their national group is no science.” had its own class divisions.) The idea was still-born. Dragomanov also drew the fire of Polish socialists. Many Russians rejected his basic notion that each His Ukrainian nationalism was not directed solely nationality should have its own socialist literature, against the Russians; as a former subject people and they resented how busy Liakhotsky-Kuzma of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Ukrai- was in the Gromada shop at a time when the Rus- nians also had old social, political, and cultural sian print shops were languishing. Dragomanov grievances against the Poles, whose nobility had so received an unexpected endorsement when Andrei long controlled their territory. When Polish natio- Zheliabov, who was now directing Narodnaia volia’s nalists spoke of restoring Poland to its frontiers of terrorist operations, asked him to be the guardian 72 1772, Dragomanov and other Ukrainians would of the group’s archive, but since Dragomanov was Chapter 11: PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED already speaking out against the group’s program, fresh from the battles at home. The printing esta- nothing came of this initiative. blishment in Geneva, to be sure, was still in a state of disarray. The Rabotnik group had by and large The Russian émigrés now drove Dragomanov out of broken up; the shop’s days were numbered. Trusov their ranks, although he maintained some personal was getting old, and he was making sounds of quit- contacts. He and Kravchinsky remained friends, his ting. Elpidin was going his own way, an eccentric Gromada press had no trouble working on the pre- with whom people felt they had to do business, but mises of the Rabotnik shop, but he ceased to attend whom most did not trust. Dragomanov’s Gromada meetings and his hospitality toward visitors cooled. was flourishing; later generations of Ukrainians By the end of 1880 it was no longer a common prac- would hail it as the “Kolokol of Ukrainian socia- tice as it had once been to take every newcomer to lism”; but it had nothing to do with the Russians. meet him. As one commentator put it, he was not The terrorist campaign in Russia had to run its just in a minority, he was isolated. course before the émigré community could regain The field belonged to the new generation of émigrés, its sense of mission in the revolutionary cause.

73 Chapter 12:

COUNTERATTACK

On March 1/13, 1881, Narodnaia volia finally sions had rather haphazardly watched Russians accomplished its goal, the assassination of the living in Western Europe. In 1881 Russian consuls Tsar. As Tsar Alexander II was passing through St. abroad were co-opted as “correspondents and aides Petersburg, one conspirator threw a bomb at him of the Department of Police.” In 1883, the police, the that failed of its purpose. Having stepped out of his Okhrana, established their Foreign Agency, Zagra- carriage to see what had happened, the Tsar then nichnaia agentura, in the basement of the Russian fell victim to another bomb that mangled him. He embassy in Paris, and the following year Petr Iva- died a few hours later. The terrorists had succeeded, novich Rachkovsky took charge and established its but whether they had won or not was another ques- network of operations. tion. The government and its supporters responded Paralleling the systematization of the police in this forcefully to the assassination. conservative counterrevolution were new initiatives Narodnaia volia paid heavily for its campaign and on the part of private groups who argued that the then again for its success. By the late winter of security forces had failed in their duty of protecting 1881-1882, most of its original leaders had fled the the Tsar. Some of them considered organizing a country or else had fallen into the hands of the aut- campaign of assassinations aimed at revolutionary horities. The assassination failed to wrest any con- leaders, but more significant was the effort of mem- cessions, much less a constitution, from the govern- bers of the so-called Holy Brotherhood to manipu- ment; indeed, the next decade would turn out to late public opinion by influencing the press both be a period of renewed political reaction under the within Russia and also in the emigration. iron hand of the new Tsar, Alexander III. But the The conservatives chose Dragomanov as their revolutionaries had won attention for themselves target for entry into the émigré community. In the both at home and abroad. summer of 1881 Dragomanov’s fortunes seemed Revolutionary terror, of course, did not immedi- at low ebb; at odds with most of the Russians in ately cease with the Tsar’s death. The Executive Geneva, he seemed particularly vulnerable and Committee issued communiqués explaining its accessible because of his open opposition to revo- demands, and the attacks on government officials lutionary terrorism. When a mysterious figure continued. The statistics of the terrorist campaign suddenly appeared, claiming to represent a liberal were impressive: Between 1878 and 1882, besides organization called the Zemskii soiuz (Zemstvo four direct attacks on the Tsar’s life, one could count Union) and offering to underwrite the publication six attacks on high government officials and four of a journal that would advocate a struggle for poli- more on police chiefs. Bystanders, such as the dead tical freedoms and at the same time oppose the use in the explosion in the Winter Palace, did not figure of terror, Dragomanov accepted the proposal with into the revolutionaries’ calculations, and they put alacrity and even gave the man a letter of recom- the body count of spies and traitors at nine killed mendation to Petr Lavrov. and two wounded. The police recorded twenty-two The visitor, Arkady Malshinsky, once known as a cases of armed resistance to arrest in this period. In radical journalist, persuaded others of his good faith return the revolutionaries paid heavily: Thirty-one too. When he visited Lavrov in Paris, he pictured comrades were executed. With time the authorities himself as a socialist and a supporter of Chernyi succeeded in breaking up the terrorist organization, peredel. Lavrov reacted cautiously, but he offered and they tracked the fugitives into the emigration. some suggestions as to other collaborators. He then Under the newly formed Department of State Police urged Pavel Akselrod to investigate this possibility of the Ministry of the Interior, official surveillance of paid work. “If he is not a soiled man,” Lavrov of émigrés became far better organized. In the past, speculated, “then this organ could be taken in hand 74 tsarist diplomats and police agents on special mis- and made into something decent.” Chapter 12: COUNTERATTACK

Akselrod, who was associated with the chernopere- of the people in Russia and in neighboring, related deltsy, was to play an important role in the emi- l an d s .” gration through the next decade as a member of Rejecting this explanation, critics focused on Mals- the Marxist group “Liberation of Labor.” Born in a hinsky, whom they now identified as the author of poor Jewish family in the Ukraine, he was one of a study of the revolutionary movement prepared a the first of that nationality to come into the revo- few years earlier under the aegis of the police. Later, lutionary movement with a Russian education. He various revolutionaries would claim to have been had worked briefly as a typesetter in Geneva in 1876 the first to tell Dragomanov of his colleague’s suspi- and had contributed to Obshchina in 1878, but he cious background, but the Ukrainian always replied did not settle in Switzerland until he joined Deich that Malshinsky had simply been an employee of there in 1880. Much to Deich’s distress, Akselrod the archive of the Third Section, not an officer of also maintained good relations with Dragomanov. that organization. This answer frustrated his chal- (Deich never could understand how Dragomanov lengers – “... he did not want to believe that this was kept the respect of men like Akselrod and Krav- an organ of the Minister of Internal Affairs Igna- chinsky.) At Lavrov’s urging, moreover, Akselrod tiev,” wrote Elpidin – but Dragomanov persisted. now joined this new publication, and his presence on its staff gave it a degree of respectability. Dragomanov even had to answer to Alphons Thun, a Swiss professor who was preparing a history of The first issue of Vol’noe slovo (The Free Word), as the Russian revolutionary movement. While Thun the publication was called, appeared with the date of was ready to accept Vol’noe slovo’s program as the August 8, 1881. Printed in Dragomanov’s Gromada “only relatively correct” one for Russia, he was cri- shop, it eventually claimed to have its own print tical of the so-called Zemskii soiuz, and he rejected shop, although the work continued to be performed Dragomanov’s request that he drop a reference in on the same premises. Coming out against centra- his book to Malshinsky’s having worked for the lism both in government and in revolutionary orga- Third Section. As for Dragomanov’s insistence that nizations and against revolutionary violence, the Malshinsky had only been an employee of the sec- newspaper demanded linguistic and religious rights tion, Thun declared, “I gainsay to note that the dif- for all the nationalities of the Russian Empire. ference is not a great one.” Malshinsky, he asserted, From the first the newspaper evoked controversy had written an essay for the use of the emperor and and opposition. Other émigrés considered it suspi- had received “an appropriate honorarium.” ciously well-funded, and they complained that it The furor over Malshinsky’s background and role seemed more concerned about attacking revolu- especially upset Akselrod. He worried about his tionary practices than about considering problems own reputation, but he also valued the 125 francs he of Russian society. Dragomanov, who increasingly received each month as a contributor to the news- spoke for the newspaper while Malshinsky tried to paper. Therefore he urged Dragomanov, who was remain in the background, responded that he was drawing no income from the publication, to speak against terror in any form; as he saw it, revolutionary out more effectively in its defense; as a paid con- terror and governmental terror fed off each other. tributor, he, Akselrod, could do nothing. To soothe The ideological and tactical disputes, however, soon the nerves of his collaborators, Malshinsky gave a fell by the wayside as challenges arose to Vol’noe banquet for them at the end of January 1882 and slovo’s basic character – was it sponsored by the apparently succeeded in calming them down for at government? least the time being. In September 1881 Varfolomei Zaitsev, writing For his own part, Dragomanov tried to balance in Obshchee delo, called Vol’noe slovo a tool of the the attacks from the left by pointing to attacks on Ministry of the Interior. Vol’noe slovo denied having him coming from the right. He cited articles in the any special relationship “with persons standing at British press labeling him an advocate of tsaricide. the helm of government in Russia,” and it scoffed In answer to all, he declared that his views and his at Obshchee delo’s revelations about a mysterious activities were open and well known. He signed his organization called the Holy Brotherhood. Within a own material; he published nothing anonymously. month, however, it reported that it too had learned The printing shops of Geneva, he declared, were something about such an organization. When Obs- hchee delo pursued the topic, the “editorial board” based not on conspiratorial but on ordinary trade of Vol’noe slovo responded, “Vol’noe slovo has no foundations, and they print on their publications relations with any official or semi-official person or their own names and addresses and present a institutions, it is a publication completely indepen- determined number of copies, in accordance with dent, and it has no other goals than, by means of Geneva laws, to the local city hall. the uncensored word, to serve the free development 75 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

He complained of a conspiracy aimed against all board of the newspaper altered one of his contribu- “who raise an independent voice on behalf of the tions, he finally broke away. free development of all peoples of Russia and of In the face of these attacks, Malshinsky had consi- neighboring states.” derable trouble keeping Dragomanov’s spirits up. In addition to the controversy surrounding Vol’noe “I am very happy at the news that the narodovoltsy slovo, Dragomanov’s moralizing angered the émi- have opened a campaign against Vol’noe slovo,” grés. In the fall of 1881 he criticized the way the he wrote. “I did not start it; but if they want to émigrés had branded one man a spy; Zaitsev res- fight, let’s do it!” Dragomanov, however, felt bele- ponded that if one suspected another person of aguered. When V. A. Cherkezov announced that being a spy, one had a duty to speak out even at the he would publish a critical brochure in the form risk of smearing an innocent person. Dragomanov of “a defense written by an enemy,” Dragomanov objected, but he was swimming against the tide. exclaimed, “I don’t know in what dictionary to find Similarly, he drew considerable fire for his critici- the appropriate phrase to apply to you.” Cherzekov zing the formation of the Red Cross of Narodnaia responded, “How can you suspect that I would say volia, a group established to raise money for the anything about you or anyone else that I would revolutionary organization; a secret terrorist group, not say directly?” and he criticized Dragomanov he argued, had no right to exploit the image of a for having tried to discredit “the Russian move- public international philanthropic organization. ment and Russian revolutionaries.” Speaking of Dragomanov’s essay “The Fascination of Energy,” After Dragomanov and Rabotnik had parted com- Cherkezov declared that the Ukrainian had now pany in the spring of 1882, he came out even more fully earned the title of “scoundrel” (podlets). Dra- sharply against the uses of political conspiracy and gomanov chose not to respond. of terror. In an article entitled “The Fascination of Energy,” published in Vol’noe slovo of April 8, 1882, In addition to his troubles with the radical political he called Narodnaia volia’s program vague, and he émigrés, Dragomanov had to deal with attacks from declared that the party now resembled a religious a peculiar new publication, entitled Pravda (Truth), cult, immune to rational criticism. By equating the which first appeared in August 1882. No one knew political struggle with war, “completely free of any exactly where the editor, I. Klimov, had come from, conventions,” the terrorists were displaying Jesui- but some claimed that he had once been a police tical morals, and one should not be surprised by agent. Printed by Trusov, with the false imprint stories of how these people, when captured, capitu- of “Free Russian Press, London,” this newspaper late and cooperate with the authorities. put out twenty issues, appearing regularly until February 13, 1883. The punctuality and consistency Dragomanov’s essay aroused a new storm, as critics in itself bespoke sound financial backing and natu- rushed forward to defend the names of the men and rally aroused the émigrés’ suspicions. women who were carrying on the struggle in Russia. The chernoperedeltsy published an open letter chal- As its program the newspaper breathed and snorted lenging him to prove his allegations about the ter- a destructive radicalism. According to Khristoforov, rorists’ moral standards. Elsnitz exclaimed, “Gradu- “Klimov called for attacking the landlords not only ally the conviction has formed for me that this man with axes and fire, but also by crippling their lives- is above all a nationalist, with spite and hatred for tock, breaking their horses’ legs, cutting out cows’ all things Muscovite in general, and in particular for udders, etc.” The newspaper denounced “knuto- all those elements of Muscovy, however revolutio- monarchic [‘whip-monarchic’] absolutism” and nary, who dare not to apply to the Ukrainian ques- called for the rule of law in Russia. It claimed that tion that same significance that he gives to it.” police spies had infiltrated the emigration, and it enthusiastically endorsed terror as a revolutionary For Akselrod, this all presented a special dilemma. weapon. In its ninth issue it announced its support Under attack for continuing to contribute to Vol’noe of the “socialist communist group” (gruppa sotsia- slovo, he finally sent Malshinsky his resignation, listov-obshchinnikov), calling for the organization adding, “I will always have good memories about my of agricultural associations. Declaring that socialist personal relations with you.” Kravchinsky, however, propaganda and tactics should be attuned to the urged him to reconsider. Despite his own past acti- particular place and time, the newspaper went on vities, Kravchinsky was critical of the elitist and to argue that governmental leaders were so stupid centralist philosophy underlying Narodnaia volia’s that the revolutionaries should support them: Such actions. Insisting, “We must demand and defend tsarist officials as “the idiot plunderers” Konstantin the freedom of any thought and any criticism,” he Pobedonostsev and Dmitri Tolstoy, it insisted, were denounced the Executive Committee’s efforts to in fact helping the revolutionary cause: “We can clothe itself in “papal infallibility.” Akselrod the- 76 boldly hope that this reactionary barbarian road on reupon withdrew his letter, but when the editorial Chapter 12: COUNTERATTACK which the Russian government has embarked will the tsarist police. V. Iakovlev, a noted historian of yet long continue.” the revolutionary movement, saw Pravda as the creation of the Ministry of the Interior, as distin- Very soon Pravda joined in the attacks on Vol’noe guished from the Holy Brotherhood’s sponsorship slovo, calling it a police organ. With sarcastic com- of Vol’noe slovo. Other historians have argued that ment about “the level of culture of a great number both were the work of the Brotherhood. After the of our co-nationals,” Dragomanov labeled Pravda fall of the tsarist regime, researchers came up with a “constitutional-republican-socialist newspaper, a police commentary on Pravda: “This estimable written in an illiterate style, and slow in printing newspaper was published not by revolutionaries news.” He was willing to overlook the attacks on his but by the Brotherhood, which thought it could own newspaper, he declared, but he objected that establish relations with socialist groups in this sha- Pravda had stolen away one of his contributors, meful way and expose them.” This commentary led Vasily Sidoratsky. to speculation that Pravda was the work of the con- Sidoratsky, an eccentric living in Paris, was a self- servative “Voluntary Okhrana,” while Vol’noe slovo acclaimed nihilist, whom almost no one, including came from the more liberal wing of the Holy Brot- tsarist agents, took very seriously. Deich later said herhood. of him that he “was already psychologically ill when None of these historical analyses, however, consi- he emigrated; a ‘graphomane’ [‘writing maniac’], dered the satirical content of Pravda. Klimov, the an anti-Semite, he received funds from who knows editor, could be witty, and he obviously put con- where for publishing a colossal quantity of the most siderable thought into carrying the arguments mindless works.” In the somewhat freer atmosphere of the terrorists to absurd extremes. The émigrés of Paris after Hartman’s success in avoiding extradi- denounced his calls as “provocative,” but at time he tion, Sidoratsky set up a printing press of his own, would seem to have been laughing while writing. publishing a periodical entitled Nigilist (Nihilist); his His negative comments about the tsarist police and product, including poetry of dubious literary merit, about Vol’noe slovo would also indicate that he had was most noteworthy for his anti-Jewish sentiments other purposes: Perhaps elements within the Holy and for his attempts at orthographic reform of the Brotherhood were attempting to satisfy personal Russian language. When one of his essays appeared grudges against others both in the brotherhood and in Pravda – he was apparently at home with the wild in the government. At any rate, Pravda was simply pronouncements of that publication – Dragomanov a brief, passing phenomenon on the émigré stage, questioned what he was doing. Sidoratsky then around only long enough to add to Dragomanov’s angrily withdrew a manuscript from Vol’noe slovo troubles. and charged that Dragomanov was attempting to censor his work. In the fall of 1882 the Holy Brotherhood made yet another excursion into the emigration when it sent Pravda’s days, however, were numbered. To the Nikolai Nikoladze, once a radical émigré and now a very end Klimov continued to attack Vol’noe slovo, prominent liberal journalist, to Western Europe to declaring that “correspondence for Pravda comes negotiate with the émigré leadership of Narodnaia from Russia as the opportunity presents itself, volia. Nikoladze proposed that Narodnaia volia while Vol’noe slovo receives its directly from its suspend its campaign of terror and allow the coro- chief, practically through the imperial embassy.” In nation of Tsar Alexander III to take place in peace; December 1882 a group of twenty-six leading émi- the government would then launch a campaign of grés in Geneva issued a public declaration asserting moderate reform. The talks failed, and the Holy that Pravda represented none of them and that the Brotherhood decided to withdraw from its experi- newspaper had to be viewed with suspicion. The ments in the émigré publishing world. Russian government, they feared, could be trying to compromise them in the hope of having them The Holy Brotherhood’s withdrawal left Vol’noe expelled from Switzerland. Under the glare of public slovo orphaned and impoverished. Gradually taking scrutiny, the newspaper could not survive; it ceased more and more responsibility for the publication, publication in February 1883. Dragomanov had made it into an informative work; having obtained the papers of Herzen and Tchor- For decades afterward, the émigrés debatedPravda ’s zewski, he recounted the story of how Nechaev had character and background, as well as the meaning obtained control of the Bakhmetev fund. In January and significance of its dispute with Vol’noe slovo. 1883, he officially became the newspaper’s editor, Elpidin, not noted for any subtlety in understan- but his effort to find support among liberals failed. ding political nuances, simplistically referred to the dispute between the two publications as “a war bet- In the spring of 1883 the narodovoltsy in Geneva ween a chief spy and a plenipotentiary agent from delivered a death blow to Vol’noe slovo in their 77 the same kitchen,” seeing both as the products of publication Calendar of Narodnaia volia for 1883. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Listing émigré periodicals, they characterized in the development of his heart condition. He had Vol’noe slovo as “an ardent opponent of the social- to have known of the role of the Holy Brotherhood revolutionary movement,” not only in principle but in sponsoring the publication; he at least once met also in action. In April 1883 Malshinsky notified secretly with Pavel Shuvalov, the head of the Brot- Dragomanov that the newspaper would have to herhood. But he probably had convinced himself be temporarily suspended, and the last issue, nos. of the usefulness of cooperating with the group in 61/62, appeared with the date May 22. Although seeking a constitution for Russia. Because of the in November 1882the head of the Holy Brother- scandal, he now lost much of his funding from hood had personally promised Dragomanov that Ukrainian sources, and yet he continued his strug- he would be happy to provide material help for any gles. In July 1883 he publicized a letter from Russia other literary ventures, Dragomanov now withdrew criticizing the centralist and despotic nature of the from any such activity. Executive Committee and charging that the com- mittee viewed Russian youth as so much “cannon Among themselves the émigrés at times debated fodder.” In a public meeting in January 1884 he why Obshchee delo had taken the initiative of expo- attacked Plekhanov; when Zhukovsky, the chairman sing and attacking Vol’noe slovo’s suspicious origins. of the session, asked him to refrain from being “pro- Some thought that Zaitsev had raised the issue vocative,” the meeting broke up in disorder. simply out of his own personal convictions. Vera Zasulich later claimed that Belogolovy had obtained In all, the Holy Brotherhood’s excursion into information from the Tsar’s former minister, Mik- the world of émigré printing and publishing was hail Loris-Melikov, who had been Belogolovy’s pri- unsuccessful. Vol’noe slovo’s criticisms of the ter- vate patient. Belogolovy, however, asserted that he rorist movement may have hampered Narodnaia saw Loris in the emigration for the first time only volia’s efforts at fundraising, but the suspicious several years later. Khristoforov, Obshchee delo’s background of the publication undermined its editor, on the other hand, later confirmed that Belo- fundamental message. Dragomanov neverthe- golovy had been the source of the newspaper’s infor- less somehow managed to avoid being personally mation, but he asserted that Belogolovy’s source has branded a police agent. Vera Zasulich declared that been the writer Saltykov-Shchedrin. Rather than she was willing to reestablish personal relations with having any political motive, Obshchee delo was pro- him: “He is an interesting conversationalist; there bably following the journalistic instinct of pursuing are few such, at least in Geneva, and therefore it is a good story. boring.” Pavel Akselrod later called him “an hono- rable and logical liberal-democrat with sympathies Vol’noe slovo cost Dragomanov heavily. The personal for socialism.” The intrigues of the Russian conser- aggravation could not be measured; according to vatives had nevertheless compromised one of the one biographer, the experience played no small role most moderate voices in the emigration.

78 Chapter 13:

THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT AS HISTORY

Ever since Vera Zasulich’s unsuccessful shot at he had then fallen out with the Young Emigration. General Trepov, the western public had been A few years later Tkachev and Zhukovsky had demanding news about the strange developments announced their intention of writing a history of in Russia. As the terrorist campaign against the Tsar the “political movement in Russia.” Declaring that unfolded, the western press even sent its own cor- Russian society knew only the “official, state -ver respondents to report the news. In May 1879 when sion” of Russian history, they wanted to recount the would-be regicide Aleksandr Soloviev met his “the history of protests against the authorities, the executioner, two French journalists witnessed the history of the fifty-year struggle against them, the event. Taking note of this interest, Narodnaia volia history of the martyrs for Russian freedom, a his- declared in its program: tory unknown in the West and unknown to Russian society.” That project failed on the drawing board; Our party should acquaint Europe with the threat Tkachev complained that Zhukovsky had not been that Russian absolutism poses to European civili- able to comply with the work’s “strictly historical zation. character.” In 1880 the most popular book on the revolutionary When Alexander II died, a German periodical movement available in the West would seem to have declared that the assassination constituted the con- been one by an Italian, J. B. Arnaudo, just recently clusion of “only one act of the great drama the deve- translated into French as Le nihilisme et les nihilistes. lopment of which Europe is following with breat- The French edition appended letters by Turgenev hless anticipation.” and Alexander Herzen fils, both dated August 1879, Émigrés with the talent or simply the ambition to testifying to its usefulness. Turgenev called the write saw opportunity and perhaps even a duty to work “the best thought out and the best written” of respond to this thirst for knowledge. They resented all the recent works on “nihilism.” Herzen had some the picture of the revolutionary movement pre- objections about the image of his father presented sented in the popular novels of Ivan Turgenev and in in the work, but he praised it as “one of the best stu- F. M. Dostoevsky’s The Possessed. But satisfying the dies published on the subject,” although he felt that curiosity of western readers could be difficult. Even it did not pay enough attention to “governmental those Russians who had studied at Swiss universi- nihilism.” Most political émigrés, on the other hand, ties might still have trouble expressing themselves objected to Arnaudo’s characterization of “bloody in German or in French. Speaking out could also nihilism” and to the sympathy shown by the author have unhappy consequences; when the anarchist for assassination victims. Petr Kropotkin extolled revolutionary violence, the When Nikolai Morozov returned to Switzerland in Swiss deported him. When Pavel Akselrod, on the the winter of 1880, he announced plans to write a other hand, painstakingly tried to educate German history of the revolutionary movement, concentra- Social Democrats about the differences between ting especially on the years 1873-1875, the period Narodnaia volia and the anarchists, he received of the flowering of the Chaikovtsy. He asked Lavrov abuse in the pages of Narodnaia volia. for documents concerning Vpered, but Lavrov res- Besides wanting to educate foreigners, the émigrés ponded that he had “no written materials.” Morozov felt a need to study their history themselves. Herzen nevertheless continued his project, promising it had challenged the official version of Russian his- to the Library of Social Revolutionary Literature. tory sponsored by the court and its supporters, but He soon tired of such quiet activity, however, and 79 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

returned to Russia, once again to be arrested on the and Lavrov in the emigration. Based mainly on frontier. This time, he “sat” in tsarist prisons for the police reports, it tended to emphasize scandals, and rest of the century; the text he was able to prepare it abounded in factual errors and contradictions. saw publication only in Soviet times. Some 60% of the volume consisted in an alphabe- tical listing of biographies of leading émigrés. The tsarist authorities also needed accounts of the revolutionary movement. Down to the end of the In the early 1880s, the authorities obtained impor- 1860s, the authorities had compiled annual summa- tant additional information in the confessions of ries of the revolutionary troubles, but in the decade revolutionaries such as Iakov Stefanovich. In the fall of the 1870s developments came too fast. They the- of 1881, Stefanovich, one of the founders of Chernyi refore decided that they needed a complete history, a peredel, had been arrested in Russia. Under inter- reference work, and they assigned this job to one of rogation, he yielded and produced a history of the their own workers, Arkady Malshinsky, a man who “Russian revolutionary emigration.” Structuring his had studied in Heidelberg and who had personally account around émigré publications, he explained known Herzen and Ogarev, and also the man who that Vpered had folded after the breakup of the subsequently worked with Mikhail Dragomanov. chaikovtsy circle; Nabat was supported only by a few women; and Obshchee delo was a “commer- When it was completed, Malshinsky’s product cial” enterprise from which Elpidin was making amounted to an intellectual history of the revolutio- a profit. Because Narodnaia volia demanded that nary movement. Relying more on literary sources its adherents be ready to return to Russia, most of than on police reports, Malshinsky paid special the émigrés leaned toward Chernyi peredel, which attention to émigré publishing activities, which he only demanded support for socialist publications, saw as embodying the efforts of the people abroad but since the assassination of Tsar Alexander II, he to influence the revolutionary movement at home. noted, sympathy for Narodnaia volia had been gro- Although almost all “poorly educated,” the émi- wing. In 1880 and 1881 the police decided to sum- grés supported “the system of agitation by means marize and distribute all such information in a new of book propaganda on the soil of the fatherland.” series of reports that soon became an annual publi- In conclusion, Malshinsky argued that the revolu- cation, recounting events and police documents in tionary movement sprang from Russia’s internal a narrative fashion. problems, that it was not a product of foreign inf- luences, and he warned that repressive measures by The historical research of the police was for the themselves constituted an ineffective response – the most part kept secret, and the most popular histo- government had to deal with the roots of Russia’s rical work on the revolution in this time emerged social problems. from with the emigration –Underground Russia. A Gallery of Revolutionary Portraits, written by Sergei First printed in a limited edition of just 150 copies, Kravchinsky, using the penname of Stepniak. Krav- Malshinsky’s work, entitled Obzor sotsial’no-revo- chinsky had undertaken this project as a means of liutsionnogo dvizheniia v Rossii, somehow became supporting himself while awaiting an opportunity public, and in 1880 it was reprinted commercially. to return to Russia. He had spoken to Lavrov of The revolutionaries naturally scorned this effort by a wanting to bring “the real truth about the ‘nihi- representative of the government to study the revo- lists’” to the European public, and when he moved lutionary movement, but Narodnaia volia, for one, from Switzerland to Milan, Italy, hoping thereby to essentially approved of Malshinsky’s conclusions. escape the tsarist agents who still sought him for The tsarist authorities, on the other hand, consi- Mezentsev’s murder, he contracted with the news- dered Malshinsky’s work too literary and generally paper Il Pungolo for a series of ten to sixteen articles too interpretive on the part of the author. It did on the revolutionary movement. not constitute the reference book that they wanted. Therefore, dissatisfied, they commissioned another As Kravchinsky conceived of his project, it would historical survey. characterize “the movement in persons and images.” Upon reading the first installment, an essay on After some confusion, Prince N. N. Golitsyn “Dmitro,” (Stefanovich), Il Pungolo’s editor was full undertook the job. When he finally completed his of compliments. Naturally the newspaper could not manuscript, the tenth chapter, which considered share all of Kravchinsky’s views, but, he concluded, the period 1870 to 1874, was chosen for a sample the newspaper would be happy to have the “letters” printing. Produced in a limited edition of 50 copies, decorate its columns. (Kravchinsky used the form Golitsyn’s Istoriia sotsial’no-revoliutsionnogo dviz- of letters, ostensibly written in Switzerland, in the heniia v Rossii 1861-1881 gg. Glava desiataia stuck hopes that this would still confuse the police as to his closely to the desiderata presented by its sponsors. actual whereabouts.) Kravchinsky was delighted: “I Beginning with the death of Herzen in 1870, his 80 will write a semi-revolutionary thing,” he explained account followed the activities of Nechaev, Bakunin, Chapter 13: THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT AS HISTORY in a letter to his wife, “and this is very pleasant after sense of mission, and when Lev Deich informed all that censored nonsense.” him that everything was now ready for him to return to Russia, Kravchinsky refused, saying his Kravchinsky planned a total of thirteen essays – book was now a more important activity. (Consi- two historical studies, eight biographies (four men dering Stefanovich’s cooperation with the autho- and four women), and then three anecdotes, these rities, Kravchinsky may have been fortunate.) An concerning Prince Peter Kropotkin’s escape from Italian publisher printed the book in an edition of prison, the Hartman case, and the work of under- 1200 copies, and in order to impress the public with ground printers. The essay on printers, he told his the credentials of the mysterious “Stepniak,” Krav- wife, would be the last “and the most somber and chinsky persuaded Lavrov to write a short intro- perhaps the best.” In his dreams he thought about duction, explaining that the author was indeed “a how these essays would live on: “All these together person who had directly taken part in the move- will constitute very good material for a future histo- ment he is describing.” rian or a novelist.” By the spring of 1882, with La Russia sotterranea The job of writing, however, was not easy. Krav- on the market, Kravchinsky was already negotiating chinsky composed his essays in Italian – he had for translations in Paris, Vienna, and London. As reportedly learned the language while sitting in an the succeeding editions came out in different langu- Italian prison a few years earlier. He did not, however, ages over the next dozen years, he tinkered with the have a good memory for dates and details; he repe- text to keep it up to date. The profile of Stefanovich, atedly had to ask his wife, who was still in Geneva, for example, was successively toned down. In the to inquire among friends, to consult Dragomanov’s original Italian edition, he spoke of Stefanovich as books, and to send him publications. Then, in order “amico carissimo,” but the English edition of 1883 to get some reaction from his friends, he translated modified this to “dear friend.” The French edition the first two essays into Russian and sent them to of 1885 spoke of “mon ami.” When the opportunity his wife to pass around for comments. Everything finally came in the 1890s to publish a Russian edi- had to be done quietly, without arousing attention, tion, Kravchinsky dropped all reference to personal lest the police learn where he was hiding. friendship with Stefanovich, and instead he added There being no tradition among the revolutionaries a page criticizing the man’s methods, especially his for writing about living comrades, Kravchinsky had “lack of principle” in the Chigirin affair when he to expect criticism, and it came quickly. Respon- joined in deceiving the peasants. ding to complaints that he had been too cool in his The success of his book led Kravchinsky to shed comments about Stefanovich, who now sat in a tsa- his anonymity, and it may well have influenced rist prison, he declared, “They want to picture him his conversion from his earlier Bakunist sympat- in gold. His face should shine like Moses’s on Mt. hies. No longer did he have to fear the long arm Sinai – as Byzantine painters portrayed the saints.” of the Tsar, although at times he was concerned Vera Zasulich complained that memoirs about that genteel western friends might be shocked to people should only be written after their deaths, learn that he had assassinated a government offi- and she objected to a statement that she wandered cial. Russian diplomats and police agents abroad “about the mountains alone at night.” Kravchinsky could only gnash their teeth in frustration as this explained that he had to write at a given moment “bloodthirsty” person was acclaimed an interesting whether the person was living or not. The public new literary talent. His romantic, idealistic image of wanted to read about notable, living persons. As the Russian revolutionaries was in turn very influ- for his account of her meanderings, he explained, “I ential in winning western public support and sym- would not say ‘with Dmitri [Stefanovich] or Zhenya pathy for the revolutionary cause. To be sure, there [Deich]’ or just with an amico, just as I would not were criticisms – Dragomanov complained about say that I rushed in on Annie when she was in bed the “encomium, the fervid dithyramb” to the terro- and that I sat on her bed, etc., because foreigners rists – but Kravchinsky now had a new career, wri- would not understand this in the Russian way.” On ting about the revolutionary movement. When the the other hand, he abandoned his essay about Olga English translation of Underground Russia created Liubatovich when he heard of her arrest in Russia. a demand for more of his work, he began studying The first installment of the work, with the author the language, and he soon moved to London, better designated simply as “Stepniak,” appeared in Il Pun- there to exploit his opportunities and fame. golo on November 8, 1881, and it won considerable However popular and authentic, Kravchinsky’s attention. The newspaper trimmed the essays to works only offered vignettes of revolutionary life fit the space in its columns, but Kravchinsky was and heroism; in the summer of 1882 the emigration already looking ahead to the separate publication of finally found its contemporary historian, when Alp- 81 his full manuscript as a book. He now had a new THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

hons Thun arrived in Geneva with the announced make sizable incomes for themselves. In the 1860s intention of studying the revolutionary movement. only a few leaders like Chernyshevsky had had a A native of Aachen, Thun had become Ordinarius socialist consciousness, but as Thun saw it, socia- for History at the University of Basel in 1881, and lism had replaced nihilism as the dominant world upon coming across some Russian publications in a view in the period from 1869 to 1872, due mainly local book store, he had decided to study the events to the influence of Narodnoe delo and of the Paris in Russia. When he announced that he would lec- Commune. ture on the Russian revolutionary movement, he Once in print, Thun’s book enjoyed a unique history. drew enough students to fill the largest auditorium Appearing in an edition of 1000 copies, it had little in the university. Now he wanted to write a book. success in Western Europe; it was not translated It being summertime, Thun found only Drago- into any other Western European language. Thun manov and Elpidin in residence in Geneva, but had hoped to put out further editions; he asked when he returned to Basel, he received some une- Dragomanov to read it “with pencil in hand,” ready xpected help from Lev Deich. Having learned to mark errors. But he unexpectedly died, leaving of Thun’s reliance on Elpidin and Dragomanov, no other studies of the revolutionary movement Deich, who was living then in Basel under an except for some articles in the German periodical assumed name, visited the historian and struck up a press. The Russians, however, read the book avidly: friendship, eventually agreeing to comment on the They criticized it, at times condemned it, but kept professor’s manuscript. Since Deich was an illegal on reading it. The book went through a remarkable alien in Switzerland, he did not reveal his true iden- series of reprinting in Eastern Europe all the way to tity, thereby creating an awkward situation when the time of the revolution in Russia in 1917. Thun criticized the principals in the Chigirin affair A Polish edition appeared in 1893, appending for having deceived the peasants and commented Plekhanov’s memories of the development of social that the leader of that escapade, who happened to democratic thought among the Russians and also be Deich, had “unfortunately” escaped. Thun, as a adding a list of corrections compiled by Lavrov, moderate liberal, could in no way endorse violence including an explanation for his three variants of a or deception. Deich found such discussion very program for Vpered. At the beginning of the twen- uncomfortable and thought it best not to visit Thun tieth century, both major revolutionary groups in so often. Russia, the Socialist Revolutionaries and the Social Thun finished his manuscript in January 1883, and Democrats, came out with Russian translations, when his book appeared in the summer, the émi- enhanced with extensive commentaries. (Transla- grés were not entirely happy with the result. Com- tions of sections had already appeared in hecto- paring the Chigirin affair to Nechaevist mystifica- graphed form.) In both cases, the editors com- tion, Thun criticized the leaders of Chernyi peredel plained about details and even the tone of Thun’s for not having disavowed this use of deceit, espe- study, but they had to confess that no Russian had cially for having called upon the peasantry to swear yet written anything better, or even comparable. a false oath. Displaying some response to Deich’s The Socialist Revolutionaries called Thun’s study arguments, he attributed terrorism to frustration “the only narrative of the Russian revolutionary on the part of the activists: movement.” His effort to collect facts, they declared, Centralized political terror was rather a direct pro- made up for his ignorance of the conditions of Rus- duct of the uncompromising struggle between the sian life. Noting that there were “errors and omis- despotic government and the revolutionary youth sions” in the work, the editor of the translation, Leonid Shishko, added his own commentary at the driven to desperation, in which neither side would end of each chapter. In the case of the first chapter, shy away from any means. this meant an appendix of 27 pages added on to Thun’s original 14 pages. Overall, Shishko’s com- The émigrés welcomed his understanding of the mentaries equalled Thun’s work in volume, splitting general development of the revolutionary move- the 342 pages of the tome. On occasion Shishko also ment and especially his noting the distinction bet- censored Thun’s text: He eliminated, for example, ween nihilism and socialism. Nihilism had negative the account of Herzen’s negative views toward connotations in the West while socialism was beco- the young emigration of the 1860s; he altered the ming an increasingly acceptable theory. The nihi- account of the founding of Vpered; but he approved lists, Thun declared, had the personal, individua- of Thun’s criticisms of Nechaev. listic values of an “honorable bourgeois”; they were materialists, arguing that bureaucrats should not When the Social Democrats published a translation 82 take bribes, doctors should serve their patients well, by Vera Zasulich in 1903, Deich prefaced it with an etc. These values allowed them, in some cases, to account of his own role in the preparation of the Chapter 13: THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT AS HISTORY study. Plekhanov added a critical introduction, sta- movement. In 1917 both Shishko’s and Zasulich’s ting that the work had no outstanding qualities, that translations were again published. One reviewer there were no original thoughts or insights here, and marveled at how the work had survived the years, that a more talented and a more sympathetic writer despite its obvious shortcomings: “Who of us in the than Thun would have done a much better job in days of youth did not read Thun, printed with some capturing and delineating “our revolutionary his- blue hectograph ink?” It was now time, the reviewer tory.” The majesty of the topic itself was responsible declared, to replace the work with a scientific, for whatever was worthwhile in the study, having collective study: “But even so they will not forget forced Thun, however unwillingly, to recognize the Thun. They will remember him as a person, in truth “heroism, self-denial, and sometimes perhaps the alien to us in spirit and outlook, but as the sincere conspiratorial talent of the Russian revolutionaries.” academic who first related to us the history of the Since, however, no better writer had yet dealt with revolutionary movement in Russia, perhaps even the topic, Plekhanov concluded apologetically, “we involuntarily teaching us to live in struggle and by have decided to publish Thun’s book, which despite struggle to justify our own place in history.” all its obvious shortcomings at least has the no less When Thun was writing and publishing his study, obvious virtue of honesty.” he could hardly have expected it to survive in this In his rambling but detailed essay that ran to over way. He did not even live long enough to experi- 60 pages, Plekhanov offered his own version of ence the first reactions of the Russians. But together revolutionary history, criticizing Thun’s account of with Stepniak’s Underground Russia, his work cons- Lavrovism, praising the description of the populist tructed the foundation for generations to come in movement of the ‘70s, and even taking himself to their efforts to study and understand the Russian task for some of his earlier, pre-Marxist, writings. revolutionary movement. In the latter 1880s a He also had to respond to the specter of the Chi- German author, Karl Oldenberg, who had no special girin affair, explaining that at the time the majority connection with the Russian revolutionaries, paid of the activists in the movement had approved of special tribute to both authors: “Stepniak not only the revolutionaries’ tactic, although he himself had wields a very skilled pen, but through his artistic viewed it negatively. The translation closed with an form and literary refinement, he knows how to essay by Stefanovich explaining the Chigirin affair draw a colorful and interesting picture that undoub- and also an account of the revolutionary movement tedly has its agitational purpose but still, despite all in the 1880s, written by D. Koltsov. embellishment, contains a mass of concrete features that the impartial historian values.” Thun’s work this In the midst of the revolutionary turmoil of 1905- writer called “the first and only, what can be called 1906 in Russia, both Russian versions of Thun’s in a certain sense exhaustive, historical description work appeared legally in St. Petersburg. The books of nihilism.” now had a nostalgic as well as an educational value. As one reviewer sighed, “Many people paid for this The two works, Stepniak’s and Thun’s, sprang from book with prison and exile.” The reviewer com- a common root. The Russian revolutionary move- plained that Thun had paid too much attention to ment had come of age; it had reached the western émigré publications and had not fully understood press and it had even penetrated the halls of aca- what was going on within Russia; he called the book deme. It demanded its own history, and it needed outdated, having no contemporary significance, as to record its own memory. Its leaders had become being superficial and generally unsatisfactory; but celebrities about whom the western public wanted he concluded, “Nevertheless up to now it is the only to read, and its new adherents wanted to know what complete outline of the history of the revolutionary had gone on before. Stepniak, the Russian, offered movements of the 1860s, 1870s, and 1880s.” western readers an idealized image of the revolu- tionaries. Thun, the German, provided the Russians As Russia then passed on through its travail leading with the basic history that they wanted and needed up to the revolutions of 1917, Thun’s book conti- but which they did not yet have the perspective to nued to serve as the basic text for studying the his- write themselves. tory of at least the early phases of the revolutionary

83 Chapter 14:

THE GROUP “LIBERATION OF LABOR”

When Iakov Stefanovich told the tsarist police about Beneath the enthusiasm for Narodnaia volia’s propa- the growing sympathy that the émigrés in Geneva ganda, a new current was nevertheless developing, were displaying toward Narodnaia volia after the led by Georgii Plekhanov. Still formulating his own assassination of the Tsar, he may well have had his world outlook, Plekhanov worked closely with his friend Lev Deich in mind. While Deich later claimed comrades in Chernyi peredel – Deich, Vera Zasu- to have recognized the limits of Narodnaia volia’s lich, and Pavel Akselrod. For the moment, however, terrorist campaign, in 1881 and 1882 he joined this group had not taken a distinctive form, and, enthusiastically in the paeans to the heroism and like Deich, Zasulich publicly supported Narodnaia daring of the assassins. In January 1882 he accepted volia. appointment as the director of the Narodnaia volia Complementing Deich’s cooperation with the naro- print shop in Geneva, to be called the Free Russian dovoltsy, Zasulich, in the late winter of 1881-1882, Press, Vol’naia Russkaia Tipografiia. agreed to be a foreign representative for the Red Narodnaia volia had reached agreement with the Cross of Narodnaia volia. Together with Lavrov “three musketeers” to take over the Rabotnik shop in Paris and Chaikovsky in London, she became for a three-year, renewable, term, and it assumed the a fund raiser; the money, she insisted, would be shop’s debts. There were, of course, complications in used for “charitable,” not terrorist, purposes. Try arranging the separation of Rabotnik’s possessions as she might, however, she could raise little cash. from those of Dragomanov’s Gromada group, but Over half her contributions came from the émigrés these were relatively easily resolved. Calculating themselves, and much of that went directly into that Rabotnik owed him almost 1000 francs, Dra- publishing programs. Lavrov had an even more gomanov wrote off 300 of this as his contribution to difficult time in Paris; as soon as his appointment the printing of Obshchina in 1878; he took type as was announced, the French government ordered the equivalent of another 400 francs; the remaining him out of the country. He had to seek refuge in 280 francs he received in cash. As Elsnits summa- England until his friends in Paris could arrange for rized the arrangement, “In general, I have to credit his return to the French capital. In London, much to Dragomanov’s justice; in the division he acted com- Chaikovsky’s dismay, on the very day of the group’s pletely the gentleman.” public appeal for contributions, a potential assassin barely failed in his attempt on the life of Queen Vic- Under Deich’s direction the new press flourished. By toria; “This shot killed the Red Cross of Narodnaia the fall of 1882 it had published six brochures and volia on the spot in England,” Chaikovsky sadly had launched a new journal, Na rodine (In the Mot- reported. herland). Consisting mainly of material reprinted from Narodnaia volia, the journal first carried the Official Russian circles displayed a certain Scha- false imprint “London: Vol’naia tipografiia ‘Naro- denfreude in commenting on the attempt on the dnoi voli’ (Free Press of “Narodnaia volia”). The Queen’s life. “In common with all we rejoice at her second issue said, “London: Zagranichnaia tipogra- deliverance from the peril that threatened her,” fiia ‘Narodnoi voli’” (Foreign Press of “Narodnaia wrote Moskovskie vedemosti. “At the same time, volia”), and the third finally declared, “Geneva: however, we wish that this attempt may be followed Vol’naia Russkaia Tipografiia.” Elsnits, for one, was by consequences not previously contemplated. May overjoyed with this activity, declaring: this event be a warning to the pharisees of civiliza- tion, who under the high sounding phrase of ‘holy Up to this time this is the only print shop that has asylum’ harbor the political thieves of all countries. not been converted into private property and that England, who sows and supports disorder in foreign 84 continues actively to serve the collective cause. countries, must now look to her own safety.” For- Chapter 14: THE GROUP “LIBERATION OF LABOR” tunately for the Russian émigrés, England did not Maria Nikolaevna Oshanina, now designated the retaliate against them for the attack on the queen. Foreign Representative of the Executive Committee, brought to Switzerland a new proposal for coope- Deich’s and Zasulich’s involvement in the activi- ration. The Executive Committee, she announced, ties of Narodnaia volia upset Plekhanov. When he had decided to sponsor publication of a journal, returned to Switzerland from Paris in the fall of to be entitled Vestnik Narodnoi voli (Messenger 1881, he criticized Deich’s enthusiasm, but Deich of Narodnaia volia), and as editors the committee replied that Plekhanov had lost touch with the latest had chosen Lavrov, Kravchinsky, and Plekhanov. In developments in Russia. Taking advantage of the turn she welcomed the chernoperedeltsy’s proposal fact that Plekhanov then settled in Baugy, some to publish a new series of works on scientific soci- three hours’ distance from Geneva, Deich delibe- alism, tentative entitled Socialist Library of Naro- rately kept his colleague misinformed about the dnaia Volia, Sotsialisticheskaia Biblioteka Narodnoi degree of his cooperation with Narodnaia volia. voli. Plekhanov’s objections to Narodnaia volia stemmed Neither Plekhanov nor Lavrov were unreservedly from both personal and political considerations. enthusiastic about Oshanina’s proposals. Plekh- He was angered by the criticism that the journal anov distrusted Kravchinsky, but he was willing Narodnaia volia had leveled at Pavel Akselrod’s to go along with the plan, he explained to Lavrov, effort to explain the group to the German Social as a means of bringing the narodovolltsy onto the Democrats, and he strongly objected to a terrorist proper ideological path. “I am ready,” he declared, manifesto, written in Ukrainian, expressing sym- “to make from Das Kapital a Procrustean bed for all pathy for the anti-Jewish pogroms in Russia that the collaborators of Vestnik Narodnoi voli.” Lavrov, had followed the tsar’s assassination. His criticisms while not a member of Narodnaia volia, was willing became stronger in February 1882 when he read the to cooperate out of a sense of duty to the revolutio- Executive Committee’s call for the revolutionary nary cause. For the moment, however, all plans lay seizure of power – Narodnaia volia now seemed to in abeyance for lack of money. have taken a Jacobin position a la Tkachev. Confer- ring with Deich and Zasulich, Plekhanov agreed to Plekhanov’s view of the proposed cooperation respond cautiously to the Executive Committee’s changed in the summer of 1882 with the arrival in declaration, but he could not bring himself to write Switzerland of Lev Tikhomirov, another leader of the text. After Zasulich then tried and failed, it fell Narodnaia volia who had considerable experience to Deich to find the formula for a sympathetic but in writing. Plekhanov considered the newcomer highly reserved statement concerning Narodnaia indifferent to revolutionary theory, but he took volia’s program. heart in his expressed interest in scientific socia- lism. In any case, Tikhomirov replaced Kravchinsky In the winter of 1881-1882, Plekhanov was in the on the proposed editorial board of the Vestnik, and process of a major change in his understanding of Plekhanov could only welcome this. the world and of revolution. He had undertaken the translation of the Communist Manifesto for Unlike most other émigrés, however, Tikhomirov at the Russian Social-Revolutionary Library. To be first held back from revolutionary politics and acti- sure, he might have preferred better-paying work. vities. In his own words, “I went abroad not to influ- He even offered to surrender the task, but then he ence Russia, not for any other reason but that I was became caught up in it: “I would not like to give the defeated.” When Oshanina drew him into the talks translation over into other hands,” he wrote. When with Nikoladze concerning the truce offered by the done, this publication marked Plekhanov’s final Holy Brotherhood, Tikhomirov welcomed the idea conversion to Marxism, it deepened his hostility of ending the struggle in Russia. However utopian to the program of Narodnaia volia and his convic- Nikoladze’s proposals might seem, he argued, they tion that the Russian revolutionary movement must represented the only way out of a bleak and des- embark on a new path. perate situation. When the talks collapsed, Tikho- mirov turned to his favorite activity, writing. Relations between the chernoperedeltsy and the narodovoltsy took a new turn in the spring of 1882 Arguing that Narodnaia volia should now show the when leaders of Narodnaia volia came straggling intellectual strength and vitality that lay behind its out to the West. Once abroad, the narodovoltsy, terrorist activities, Tikhomirov welcomed the idea who had earlier declared that they would never of working on the board of Vestnik Narodnoi voli. desert the battlefield, were shorn of their immunity While the organizers awaited funding, he wrote to criticism. No longer heroes above reproach, they biographies of his revolutionary comrades: “I would had to deal with the chernoperedeltsy as equals. The write essays about the events and people of 1870- enthusiastic unity formed in the campaign of assas- 1880. I loved these comrades very much. To save 85 sinations proved to be too fragile to survive. their memory from oblivion seemed to me somet- THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

hing of a holy task.” In order to raise “the conscious- “resignation,” Deich objected vigorously to such ness of Russian socialists and revolutionaries,” he “Blanquist-Nechaevist intrigue,” arguing that he also prepared a general work on the revolutionary had organized the shop and had given it life. Naro- movement. Published as Calendar of Narodnaia dnaia volia, however, had the title to the shop, and Volia for 1883, the work offered a morsel of revo- Oshanina named a new manager, Vladimir Ilich lutionary history for each day of the year and then Iokhelson-Goldovsky. added a literary section, a reference section, and a Complicating the intrigues was the arrival in the number of appendices. Lavrov contributed a size- summer of 1883 of Sergei Degaev, a minor but well- able essay on the history of Russian socialism. known figure on the revolutionary scene. In private Once the calendar was finished in the spring of conversations with Tikhomirov, Degaev confessed 1883, Tikhomirov could turn to Vestnik Narodnoi that he was working with the chief of the Russian voli, for which money had finally come from Russia. police, Sudeikin. Tikhomirov then took it upon him- Under Lavrov’s influence, he thought of using the self to send Degaev back to Russia to kill Sudeikin. journal to unite all revolutionary forces under Apart from informing Oshanina of the case, Tik- Narodnaia volia’s leadership, but from the first he homirov told no one else. After Degaev had killed had trouble with Plekhanov, who even complained Sudeikin, the story became known to the revolu- about the publication’s name, saying that it lacked tionaries, and Tikhomirov came under fire for his the proper revolutionary ring. Plekhanov argued “dictatorial” practices. Plekhanov and Deich argued that “Vestnik” sounded too official: A revolutionary that Degaev had somehow influenced Tikhomirov’s publication, he insisted, should have programmatic demand that the chernoperedeltsy had to join Naro- words like “egalité” or “Volksstaat” in its title. dnaia volia as individuals rather than as a group. Plekhanov also wanted to give the work a Marxist Plekhanov now aroused new controversy with his orientation. In a prepared statement, he demanded contribution to the first issue of the Vestnik, a long that the journal endorse socialism and populism essay on “Socialism and the Political Struggle.” The (narodnichestvo, meaning here popular govern- ideas of Narodnaia volia, he declared, were outdated; ment), and he declared that achieving these goals Russian socialists now had to arm themselves with had to be “the task of the working class, organi- Marxism, with scientific socialism. “Without revo- zing itself in a special workers’ party.” Tikhomirov lutionary theory there is no revolutionary move- replied that the Russian public was not ready for ment in the true sense of the word,” he wrote. Marxism. While Plekhanov was inclined to accept this thought for the moment, Lev Deich, who was An idea that is inherently revolutionary is a kind of still running Narodnaia volia’s print shop, took an dynamite that no other explosive in the world can active dislike to Tikhomirov and began looking for replace. points of conflict. Narodnaia volia, he explained, had correctly under- Trouble flared when the question arose of the taken the political struggle; now one must recognize chernoperedeltsy’s joining Narodnaia volia. Accor- the limitations of the terrorist program and proceed ding to Deich, he and Zasulich for some time had to a broader political struggle to be led by the wor- been contemplating the establishment of a new king class with Narodnaia volia at its head. organization; in response to Tikhomirov’s demand that the group join Narodnaia volia in order to par- Tikhomirov, backed by Oshanina, raised several ticipate in the publication, the chernoperedeltsy objections to this essay. Plekhanov had written, “The insisted on being accepted as a unit. Tikhomirov party Narodnaia volia is the most unprincipled of all responded that they must join as individuals. Plek- past parties.” Tikhomirov asked that this be dropped hanov protested, “We never conceived that union or else that Plekhanov agree to an editorial note con- could be anything but a merger of the two groups, cerning it. (Editorial notes, it should be noted, had brought together by time and the course of events.” been an acceptable practice in the Library of Social Both Tikhomirov and Plekhanov then petitioned Revolutionary Literature.) Plekhanov refused, insis- Lavrov for his support. ting that if there was to be an editorial note, he must have space for his own counter note. Tikhomirov As the standoff developed, Deich insisted that the pointed out that Lavrov had already submitted an question of conditions of membership be resolved article on the same topic but with different conclu- before his group could participate in any publica- sions. Plekhanov thereupon withdrew from the edi- tion. Tikhomirov seized the moment to recall that torial board of the publication. Deich had agreed to head Narodnaia volia’s print shop only “temporarily,” and he demanded Deich’s Plekhanov had already been seeking a way to resign 86 ouster as manager. When Oshanina subsequently from the publication. Deich, whose memory is not announced her reluctant acceptance of Deich’s always to be trusted, later insisted that Tikhomirov Chapter 14: THE GROUP “LIBERATION OF LABOR” had originally returned Plekhanov’s manuscript the problem of organizing the working class, and without comment and that he, Deich, had then the “destructive work of our revolutionaries has not pointed out problematic spots. Plekhanov, more- been supplemented by the creation of elements for over, was willing enough to make the changes in the future workers’ socialist party in Russia.” In order his essay when he subsequently published the work to rectify this situation, the osvobozhdentsy were independently. In any case, Plekhanov suggested beginning the Library of Contemporary Socialism. to Lavrov that it was better that he, Plekhanov, pull In an appendix to the statement, they added, out of the enterprise before the first issue appeared rather than afterward to resign. Despite his resi- In view of the constantly repeated rumors of a union gnation, he still published a book review in the first of the former Chernyi peredel with Narodnaia volia, issue of the Vestnik. we consider it necessary to say a few words in that regard here. In the last two years, negotiations By the time Vestnik Narodnoi voli had appeared in November 1883, the split between the narodovoltsy regarding union were in fact conducted between the and the chernoperedeltsy was complete and irrevo- two groups. But although two or three of our group cable. A new dispute arose over a letter written to even fully adhered to Narodnaia volia, it was unfor- Deich by Stefanovich, who was now languishing in tunately not possible to effect a complete merger. a tsarist prison. The chernoperedeltsy charged that Tikhomirov had diverted the letter, and Plekhanov Applying Marx’s teaching to Russian conditions and Deich rushed off to Paris to complain to Osha- was not easy. In 1881 Vera Zasulich asked Marx for nina. Such personal antagonisms, however, only his opinion whether the Russian peasant commune facilitated the split, they did not cause it: Plekhanov could serve as a basis for revolutionary reconstruc- felt that he had a mission and that he had to break tion of society; Marx replied that the commune with the narodovoltsy in order to fulfill it. could become the base for the “rebirth of Russia” if it could be allowed to function freely. In a spe- In September 1883 the cherenoperedeltsy took the cial introduction for Plekhanov’s translation of the step that opened their page in the history of the Rus- Communist Manifesto, Marx spoke of Russia’s beco- sian revolutionary movement. As Tikhomirov noted ming “the leading detachment of the revolutionary in his diary, “Deich & co. are buying Trusov’s print movement in Europe,” but he seemed to be thinking shop for 2000 fr. and want to print as a brochure of Narodnaia volia. In regard to the peasant com- Plekhanov’s article that we did not accept (where mune, he specified, there is a polemic with the narodovoltsy).” Tikho- mirov had had his own designs on Trusov’s shop, If the Russian revolution serves as a signal for a but he was mistaken in emphasizing the group’s proletarian revolution in the West, so that they desire to print just Plekhanov’s essay. The group had complement one another, then contemporary Rus- been planning their own publications program for sian obshchina [commune] property relations on some time, and now they were ready to proceed. the land can become the departure point for com- As their first move, the chernoperedeltsy assumed munist development. a new name, the group Osvobozhdenie truda, or Liberation of Labor, which was itself the result of These pronouncements, widely circulated in the prolonged discussion. Plekhanov had first proposed course of 1882 and 1883, foresaw little prospect of the name Russian Social Democratic group,” but the Marxist revolution in Russia. others feared that this might imply that they were Nevertheless the osvobozhdentsy persevered in copying the German Social Democrats and it might introducing Marx to the Russian reading public. therefore alienate Russian young people. Plekhanov Friedrich Engels, who took over the literary rights thereupon suggested other names, from which the to Marx’s work after the master’s death in 1883, put group finally chose Osvobozhdenie truda, even off a request for permission to translate the second though this was somewhat vague. Henceforth volume of Kapital until the question of possible known for short as the osvobozhdentsy, the group legal publication in Russia could be resolved, but he eventually became enshrined as the progenitors of expressed delight that Zasulich, whom he addressed Marxism in Russia, eclipsing the efforts of Utin and as “dear and heroic citizen,” was translating his Deve- Trusov in the days of the First International. lopment of Socialism from Utopia to Science. When In a statement dated September 25, 1883, the osvobo- Zasulich called Marx’s The Poverty of Philosophy an zhdentsy, who called themselves a literary group and important tool for combating the influence of Proud- not a party, announced “the formation of a workers’ honism among the young, Engels responded, “For literature – the simple, concise and intelligent pre- me and for Marx’s daughters it will be a holiday when sentation of scientific socialism.” The revolutionary The Poverty of Philosophy appears in Russian transla- 87 intelligentsia, they declared, had wrongly ignored tion.” In reading one of Zasulich’s translations, Engels THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

exclaimed, “How beautiful the Russian language is! the dealers to whom he had given them on commis- All the advantages of German without its terrible sion, but, please, just as soon as he received somet- roughness and crudeness!” Even Engels, however, hing from them, he would immediately settle with did not seem to believe in the possibility of a wor- the publishers.” Nevertheless, Deich prided himself kers’ revolution in Russia in the near future. He saw on dealing with Elpidin efficiently. When Elpidin as most likely a coup d’état led by a “constitutionally offered to take publications on commission, Deich inclined and bold grand duke.” offered them to him at a discount of 25%. Elpidin agreed, but then countered with a proposal to pay Plekhanov and his collaborators received no more in installments. Deich insisted on signing a formal encouragement from other Russians. “The ‘libera- contract, written in French and signed in front of tors of labor’,” Deich quoted one émigré as saying, witnesses. This firm stance, Deich later gloated, won “have conceived of gladdening Russia with translated even Elpidin’s respect. pamphlets and compilations of German works.” Nikolai Zhukovsky reportedly snorted, “You are not In order to reach their proposed readers directly, revolutionaries! You are students of sociology!” The the osvobozhdentsy sent an agent, Saul Grinfest- first and greatest of the group’s problems, however, Finster, their typesetter, to Russia with a message was not the opposition of other émigré leaders, but composed by Deich: “Comrades! You now know rather its own lack of material resources. our views and aspirations; you know what made us form a new group. On you now depends our suc- The task of organizing the group’s finances and of cess or our failure. We are ready to do what we can course directing the formation of the print shop fell and we will do it. If you do not support our literary to Deich, who obviously had the best head for busi- enterprises, the necessity of which I need not con- ness in the group. The negotiations with Trusov for vince you, we will have to end our existence as a the purchase of his equipment had not been simple. group. Therefore if you share our views and aims, Trusov had asked for 2500 francs. The group itself try to enter into closer relations with us, organize had no such amount, and therefore Deich saw the collections for our literary publications, send all necessity of raising “a colossal amount of money sorts of material, etc.” Although Grinfest’s reports without being able to give any firm promise of retur- from Russia rang with enthusiasm and optimism, ning it in the near future.” In desperation he turned the results of his mission were in fact disappointing. to a wealthy émigré, Vasily Ignatov, and rather to A decade was to lapse before the osvobozhdentsy his own surprise he received 1500 francs. With this enjoyed significant resonance in Russia. capital, the group negotiated the price of 1800 francs for Trusov’s shop, to be paid in installments. Grinfest’s enthusiasm, on the other hand, led to disaster for Deich. When Grinfest asked that he Meeting the operating costs of the print shop was be sent more literature, Deich took it upon himself the next task; Deich calculated he would need 160 to take a shipment of materials through Germany. to 200 francs per month to pay for typesetting, to Within three hours of crossing the Swiss frontier, he purchase paper, and to obtain some new equipment. was sitting in a jail in Freiburg im Breisgau, awai- In response to the peculiar needs of his organization, ting extradition to Russia. The tsarist authorities Deich refused to continue the old practice of paying a soon had him in Siberia, where he spent the rest of premium for typesetters to set materials into Cyrillic the century. For the Marxists his arrest constituted letters, and he decreed that henceforth authors would a terrible blow. Grinfest attempted to replace him as receive an honorarium for their works. In the first business manager of the group, but he was not up to six months of the shop’s operation, the typesetters’ the task. He was never accepted into the inner circle remuneration ran to a total of 639 francs, while the of the group, and the fortunes of the press suffered. group’s authors – Plekhanov, Akselrod, and Zasulich – received a total of 1269 francs as honoraria. The group now faced even the danger of extinc- tion. Ignatov died in 1884, and in the aftermath of There remained the problem of marketing the Deich’s arrest, Zasulich was so distraught that she group’s publications, and here Deich had to deal with withdrew from any literary activity for six months. Elpidin. The growing interest in literature about the Akselrod remained in Zurich, where as a result of Russian revolutionary movement since the assas- an illness he had begun to produce kefir for his own sination of the Tsar had helped Elpidin’s business, needs and had then discovered that this could be a but his practices won him little love among the émi- modestly successful commercial venture. This work, grés. “From the books he received on commission,” however, demanded an enormous amount of time, complained Deich, “he extracted (as he did from and he had little opportunity to write. Therefore everything that came under his hand) all profit only the brunt of the literary work for the infant Marxist for himself. Publishers of underground works suc- movement fell on Plekhanov’s shoulders. 88 ceeded in getting nothing from him, since he always informed them that the books have not been sold by Plekhanov threw his whole being into the cause. He Chapter 14: THE GROUP “LIBERATION OF LABOR” did not, as a matter of fact, completely trust the lite- Even as he threw down the gauntlet, Plekhanov rary efforts of his own comrades. When Akselrod still could not count on the unreserved support first sent a manuscript entitled “What is Socialism?” of Engels. In 1886 Vera Zasulich sent the socialist the group, under Plekhanov’s guidance, rejected it. patriarch a copy of Our Differences and requested Akselrod rewrote it, and the group again rejected it, his comments. Engels responded cautiously, prai- even as its typesetter sat idle without work. Plekh- sing the work’s spirit and intentions, but insisting anov was not about to allow his vision of a Marxist that he did not know enough about the situation interpretation of Russia’s development to be diluted in Russia to pass judgment on a revolutionary pro- by imprecise analyses and presentations. gram. No doubt influenced by his own friendship with Hartman and Lavrov, Engels was leery about The first original work the group published was committing himself to this unknown voice coming Plekhanov’s essay Socialism and the Political Struggle. from Switzerland. Now somewhat rewritten from the form that he had submitted to Vestnik Narodnoi voli, the essay paid Undaunted, Plekhanov pushed ahead. In September tribute to the narodovoltsy for their having opened 1884, in cooperation with Akselrod, he announced the political struggle but went on painstakingly to the creation of a Workers’ Library, aimed at the argue that all previous groups, including the Lav- “developed strata” of the workers, “in other words, rovist Vpered group and the narodovoltsy, had not the workers’ intelligentsia.” The two men apolo- properly understood the imperatives of the revo- gized for ignoring the masses in this undertaking lutionary struggle. Plekhanov urged the narodo- and expressed the hope that someone else would yet voltsy to reexamine their “ideological baggage” and take up that mission; they had to deliver their mes- to study “contemporary scientific socialism” as the sage to the educated people. “The duty of literature proper revolutionary theory. As for the debates on – books and newspapers – is to clarify in people’s terrorism, Plekhanov concluded, his group agreed heads the goals and means that best lead to their with the views expressed at the conclusion of the well-being,” Plekhanov wrote, and he asserted that recently published biography of the regicide Andrei the peasantry and the working class both had to Zheliabov. According to that work, written by Tik- recognize their own interests. The Workers’ Library homirov, Zheliabov, by his adherence to the cons- proposed to acquaint Russian workers with develo- piratorial organization principles of the terrorist pments in the “educated lands” and to explain the party, had cut himself off from the people. social character of the Russian workers themselves. As the first work in this series, the group published When the narodovoltsy responded by attacking the an essay by Akselrod, The Workers’ Movement and Marxists in the second issue of the Vestnik, Plek- Social Democracy. hanov produced a more militant essay, Our Diffe- rences, defending scientific socialism and explaining The first years of activity of the osvobozhdentsy his break with the Vestnik. In Socialism and the Poli- passed into history as unrewarded effort. The res- tical Struggle he had protested his respect for other ponses that the group received from Russia, while Russian revolutionaries and had eschewed personal at first encouraging, failed to develop in any posi- polemics. In Our Differences he opened with a pre- tive way. Financial problems loomed at every turn. face couched as a long letter to Lavrov, declaring, Plekhanov worked furiously to raise money to sup- “If the Russian socialists recognize in principle the port both the press and himself, and he did this at right of free speech and include it in their programs, severe cost to his own health. Other émigré leaders they cannot restrict its enjoyment to the group or remained critical and even hostile. Lavrov’s opposi- ‘party’ that claims hegemony in a particular period tion seemed particularly damaging, but Plekhanov, of the revolutionary movement.” The body of the together with Akselrod and Zasulich, persevered. work concentrated on Tikhomirov, whose sole Plekhanov insisted that Russia had entered the contribution to revolutionary developments, Plek- capitalist era and that the Russian proletariat would hanov averred, consisted of “a few historical, legal, grow to fulfill its historic mission. In the meantime and statistical mistakes.” Plekhanov twitted Lavrov he insisted on maintaining Osvobozhdenie truda as for having become co-editor of the journal of the a “literary group” rather than a party; he restricted “Russian Jacobins” despite his earlier disagreements its membership severely so as to maintain his vision. with Tkachev, and he dismissed Tikhomirov’s the- Soviet historians considered that with the forma- ories as reactionary, vacillating between Bakunin’s tion of this group, “the prehistoric epoch ended and anarchy and Tkachev’s Jacobinism: “Hating reac- a new social democratic one was beginning,” but tion generally, I hate it all the more when it attracts even if a new epoch was beginning, the Marxists people over to it in the name of revolution.” had much suffering and travail yet to overcome.

89 Chapter 15:

THE AGONY OF LEV TIKHOMIROV

For Lev Tikhomirov, émigré life smelled of defeat. its revolutionary representatives,” one could then Like other narodovoltsy, he had once scorned the proceed to the social revolution. These thoughts thought of seeking refuge abroad, and now the earned him a reputation as a Jacobin. change from the heady days of 1880-1881 bore hea- Pursued by the authorities after the Tsar’s assassi- vily on him. The intellectual disputes of the emigra- nation, Tikhomirov had fled into the emigration, tion seemed petty and irrelevant to him; for him but, distressed by Narodnaia volia’s collapse, he emigration brought a severe emotional and intellec- could find no consolation in the West. He disliked tual crisis. He sought solace in writing, especially in Geneva, and in the fall of 1883 he moved to Paris. singing the praises of his revolutionary comrades- Life there, however, was no easier. Upon taking an in-arms, but he could not be enthusiastic about the apartment in the French capital, he noted in his future of the revolutionary movement. diary, “We have no money. We spent everything, Tikhomirov came from a long line of Orthodox and we don’t even have a lamp in the apartment, priests. His father had attended a seminary but not even candles.” A few days later he wrote, “We had then transferred to medical studies, going on are absolutely penniless. Bills on all sides. Nothing to serve as a military doctor. Lev began studying to pay with. Just wait – they will evict us from the medicine at Moscow University in 1870, but he was apartment.” In moments of dark humor he reas- soon drawn into the work of the Chaikovsky circle sured himself that his landlady would not evict him and into the revolutionary movement. He tried his and his wife because she did not want to lose the hand at writing popular literature and produced a money she was surely receiving from Russian spies classic of the genre. As one of the defendants in the to watch his activities. renowned Trial of the 193, he was found guilty, but Tormented by these personal concerns, Tikhomirov in view of the more than four years he had already buried himself in his work for the Vestnik Narodnoi “sat,” he was then released. In July 1879 he was one voli. The first issue, which appeared in November of the founding members of Narodnaia volia, beco- 1883, called itself “the organ for unifying all Rus- ming with Morozov co-editor of the group’s organ. sian socialist revolutionaries,” and the journal He never actually took part in an assassination promised to carry no personal polemics between attempt, but he was considered one of the conspi- revolutionaries. In form it offered three parts: the rators in the assassination of the Tsar. His specialty first contained theoretical articles, memoirs, docu- was always writing, and he was the main author of mentary materials, and poetry; the second, called the Executive Committee’s proclamation to Tsar “Contemporary Review,” considered developments Alexander III after the assassination of Alexander outside of Russia and carried book reviews; the II. third, “Internal Survey,” discussed revolutionary Although a prolific writer, Tikhomirov was never activities and developments, conditions of the wor- considered much of a theorist. Writing in Narodnaia king people, governmental actions, and news about volia, no. 7, he declared that there was no difference arrests and trials. The journal’s general message was between “political radicalism” and “socialism.” He that the Russian government must be overthrown, called Narodnaia volia a party of action that was, as by a conspiracy if necessary – “Carthago delenda a matter of necessity, pursuing “the most economic est.” Although Tikhomirov had hoped to publish an and expedient use of strength for the purpose of issue every two months, the second issue appeared revolution.” To this end, it had concentrated its only in April 1884, and the prospects for the third resources on terrorist methods, not on mass pro- issue were at that point dim. On May 1 Tikhomirov paganda. Once revolution had delivered “political told his diary, “The print shop is almost without 90 authority into the hands of the people or at least of work; there is no paper.” Later he added, Chapter 15: THE AGONY OF LEV TIKHOMIROV

Soon there will be nothing. We are not paying the Tikhomirov had had misgivings about Lopatin’s typesetters. There is not enough even to mail books. latest venture. In January 1884 a Narodnaia volia This amounts to death by starvation. congress in Paris had called for reform and renewal of the party in Russia and had dispatched Lopatin, The journal also suffered from Tikhomirov’s disa- now a member of the group, to Russia to supervise greements with his fellow editor Lavrov. Lavrov and matters. When Tikhomirov heard that a “suspicious Tikhomirov agreed in principle on the necessity figure” had shown up as Lopatin’s traveling compa- of jointly approving contributions to the Vestnik, nion out of Paris, he moaned, “Now they have surely but in practice they disagreed strongly in assessing perished! Everything will perish!” A week later he the issues of the day. Lavrov criticized the osvobo- declared, “Nothing from Russia! Apparently bad zhdentsy for breaking ranks within the revolutio- news!” Lopatin’s time, however, had not yet come, nary movement, but he objected to Tikhomirov’s and he managed to send money in the summer. passion for attacking the Marxists personally. In For a while things looked better, but then came the noting the death of Ivan Turgenev in September news of his arrest. “It strongly appears that this is 1883, Tikhomirov dismissed the writer as having the end,” Tikhomirov told his diary, “the end for a scarcely understood the revolutionary movement; long time, in the course of which our journal could in contrast, Lavrov contributed a long essay to the of course die ten times of starvation. That means an Vestnik, noting Turgenev’s support of Vpered and end to this dream too.” When Lavrov questioned asserting that the writer had maintained his per- “whether it pays to continue the publication in the sonal friendship with Lavrov even at some personal face of these uninterrupted misfortunes,” Tikho- cost to himself. mirov nevertheless insisted on continuing for the time being. In the summer of 1884 conditions seemed to improve somewhat. TheVestnik received 700 francs Lopatin’s misfortune had far-reaching consequ- from supporters in Russia, and Tikhomirov’s own ences for the revolutionary movement. As a Bri- financial situation looked better. The narodovoltsy’s tish diplomat reported home from St. Petersburg, print shop in Geneva scored a small victory in obtai- “The police have been fortunate enough to capture ning the type that had once belonged to the Nabat a well known Nihilist and dangerous man whom group and had subsequently been held by Trusov. they had been watching for a long time... The police The group now announced the closing of the series found upon him some dynamite and the names and Library of Social Revolutionary Literature and the addresses of several of his friends and co-conspira- formation of a new series, to be entitled Library tors. This enabled them to make about thirty more of the Social Sciences. Tikhomirov reportedly put arrests.” This roundup, he concluded, “will for the great hopes in this new project: “If it would just moment check the nefarious designs of the Nihi- begin to come out well, it would cut the osvobozh- lists.” The tsarist authorities were delighted with dentsy to the core.” the documents that they found in Lopatin’s pos- session: his expense records, lists of addresses, and The publications of the narodovoltsy, however, correspondence, not to speak of a variety of wea- lacked fire; the pen proved harder to wield than the pons. A letter from Tikhomirov, who spoke about sword. When the third issue of the Vestnik appe- his own “decline in revolutionary energy,” seemed ared in September 1884, even Tikhomirov called to be urging moderation on Lopatin, while Lavrov it “pale and empty.” In its time, the assassinations reportedly favored reestablishment of the Executive campaign had emphasized action over theory, and Committee. With this array of evidence, the police now, without action, Tikhomirov could not keep struck heavily against the remnants of Narodnaia the flame of enthusiasm burning on words alone. volia in Russia. In October 1884 all of Tikhomirov’s dark forebo- Tikhomirov’s dark forebodings found expression dings about the fate of the revolutionary movement in the fourth issue of Vestnik Narodnoi voli, which seemed to be confirmed; on the 24th he wrote in carried the date of January 15, 1885. While boldly his diary, “There has not been such a damned week reconfirming the party’s program, the issue again in a long time!” There were misunderstandings and revealed the disputes within the ranks of its contri- problems in communication between the “young butors. Lavrov emphasized the need to rally behind narodovoltsy” in Russia and the émigrés, now Narodnaia volia, but Tikhomirov, not satisfied with coming to be known as the “old narodovoltsy.” The such general statements, continued his attacks on Russian authorities broke up a smuggling route and the “catastrophic” policy of the Osvobozhdenie captured a major shipment of publications. And truda group. At the same time, Lavrov, fulfilling a then came the shocking news that the police in St. promise that he had made to Engels, printed a sym- Petersburg had captured Lopatin and were starting pathetic review of Engels’s new work, The Emer- a new campaign of arrests. 91 gence of the Family, Private Property and the State. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Tikhomirov was finding Marxism a hydra that he authorities might yet find some way to spirit him would not accept and could not control, and in an off to Germany, where he would share Lev Deich’s essay that seemed directed more at himself than fate, extradition to Russia. at the public, he claimed that revolutionaries were Tikhomirov particularly resented having to put acting in accordance with the “laws of history” and up with the intellectual and emotional life in the that therefore they had no right to lose faith. émigré community; he could not escape it. At the Tikhomirov’s own faith was waning rapidly, as he time of his arguments with Plekhanov and Deich he was tormented by visions of the journal’s bankruptcy had exclaimed, “Such petty, dull, unpleasant oppo- and his family’s possible starvation. He entertained nents! I now understand how they could drive Dra- thoughts of suicide, but his sense of obligation to his gomanov to distraction and instill in him repulsion family drove these away. Lavrov could offer him no for radicals.” When the Parisian police advised him help; the older man had his own troubles just now: to leave the city, he chose to settle in Le Raincy, a Besides ill health and his own financial woes, Lavrov village an hour away, but, as he calculated, incon- had to cope with the death of another dear friend, venient for other émigrés to visit to seek him out. Varvara Nikolaevna Nikitina, a well known émigré “I was tired of the émigrés,” he wrote. “I was fed writer. One person close to Lavrov later declared up with them to the point of disgust. I wanted to that he was considering suicide at this time. In his be alone.” To pay for his move, he took money, 700 despondency, Tikhomirov associated all these mis- francs, from the till of the Vestnik. “I took this sum fortunes and cares with Lopatin’s arrest, and he from the journal’s money,” he confessed to his diary. blamed Lopatin’s daring nature: “A fatal person, this “There is nothing to be done. I have to cut the Gor- man German!” he wrote in his diary. dian knot.” Having invested his waning psychological energy Still he responded one last time to the cause. At the in Vestnik, Tikhomirov was thunderstruck to hear beginning of July 1886 money came from St. Peters- from new arrivals in the West that almost no one in burg earmarked for the publication of one more Russia was reading it. Indeed, apparently few even issue of the Vestnik. In cooperation with Lavrov, knew of it. He despaired of this new generation of Tikhomirov decided to go ahead: “Now we will put revolutionaries; echoing the cry of the ages, he com- together the fifth and final number and then go out plained that the youth in Russia “accept nothing on strike.” But he could not fit back in with his com- from the old men but technique. Naturally this does rades. For his column “Life in Russia,” Tikhomirov not keep them from being good people, but in poli- produced a long essay that scandalized his collea- tics this is not enough.” (About this time Vera Zasu- gues, who protested especially his criticism of ter- lich was bemoaning the indifference of readers in rorism, and, as if testifying to his own lack of fire, Russia.) He cried out: “Revolutionary Russia... does Tikhomirov acceded to their demands, truncating not exist.” As for himself, he felt that his revolutio- his essay for publication. nary career, and even his beloved journal, had rea- Before the fifth issue of Vestnik Narodnoi voli could ched a dead end. “To publish Vestnik,” he wrote, “we see the light of day, however, the tsarist police inter- went into debt up to our ears. It is clear that this too vened to confuse and confound the narodovoltsy is a dying cause, beyond the party’s strength.” As a still more. The head of the Foreign Agency in Paris, result of these thoughts, he began to withdraw from Rachkovsky, had been closely watching the work of the revolutionary movement, which now seemed to their print shop in Geneva. He considered publi- have degenerated into a vanity of intellectuals, and cations the major weapon at the émigrés’ disposal: to put his hope in “Russia and the Russian people.” “Since the time of Kolokol,” he told his superiors Still looking for a reading public, Tikhomirov tried at home, the émigré print shops had served “as a to follow Stepniak’s example. With Lavrov’s help strong point of revolutionary infection in Russia he published a few articles, but he put his gre- and among the student youth abroad.” So far as the atest hopes in a book manuscript, published as La narodovoltsy were concerned, their shop in Geneva Russie politique et sociale. If his book could enjoy constituted “the chief base of the revolutionary acti- a reception like Stepniak’s Underground Russia, he vity of the foreign section of Narodnaia volia.” The- told himself, “I can win a position sociale for myself refore he requested and obtained permission from here.” The book appeared in 1886 and indeed won St. Petersburg to attack this hornets’ nest. general acclaim, but it brought him little peace of International good manners and Swiss law dictated mind and not much money. He received 1600 francs that Rachkovsky had to disguise his action, and the- from the publisher, but about half of that had to go refore, as he explained, “I decided to give the entire to his translator – he lacked Kravchinsky’s genius enterprise not a criminal but an exclusively political for language. Tikhomirov became more nervous character, whereby in case of failure the Geneva 92 than ever. He particularly feared that the Russian authorities could not protest but rather would con- Chapter 15: THE AGONY OF LEV TIKHOMIROV sider it necessary to hush the matter up in their own be a member. In his obituary of Tkachev, who had interest and even to threaten the Russian émigrés if died in Paris in 1886, Lavrov took a last shot at his they should complain.” On the night of November terrorist colleagues, declaring that although Nabat 20-21, 1886, several men, using a key that they had had never enjoyed much of a following, one could bought from a neighbor, crept into the shop. Wor- see Nabat’s ideals expressed in Narodnaia volia’s king systematically, the intruders, who had obtained program. a map of the shop from a confederate placed in its When the editors decided to add an account of the staff, destroyed proofs and manuscripts and even- police raid on the print shop, Lavrov asked Tikho- tually scattered the type in the street. Their special mirov to write it. Tikhomirov, however, declined, target was the printed sheets of the fifth issue ofVes - saying that he did not have time. Lavrov then wrote tnik Narodnoi voli, which had just arrived from the the piece himself, declaring, printer. The intruders worked from 9 p.m. to 4.30 in the morning; they complained of aches and pains When these lines are being read, all our sympathi- for several days afterward. zers will know from this very fact that the essential Rachkovsky was very pleased with the result of goal of the perpetrators of this attack has not been his raid. “The importance of the print shop at the achieved. present moment of Narodnaia volia’s existence,” he declared, “demanded its destruction even at the cost When the statement appeared in the journal, Tik- of some diplomatic difficulties or reproaches toward homirov was shocked to find his own name signed the Russian government.” The raid, he insisted, “has to it. The incident drove him further out of the revo- to spread panic among all the political emigration.” lutionary camp. Although the okhranka, as the Okhrana’s Foreign The Russian police recognized Tikhomirov’s loss of Agency was unofficially called, planted the rumor heart. “Writing Russian revolutionary works abroad that the deed was the work of a “man who had pays poorly,” one report declared, “and Tikhomirov worked with Narodnaia volia and had then split constantly lacks even the basic essentials.” Rach- with it for “reasons of principle” – obviously meant kovsky had his agents increase their pressure on to point at Plekhanov – the Geneva police quickly him, imposing such close surveillance that he could identified one Henry Bint, a French detective in the not fail to note their presence. Declaring that Tik- employ of the okhranka, as the leader of the raid and homirov “in general has the appearance of a wret- recognized the hand of the Russian government. To ched and psychologically ill coward,” Rachkovsky Swiss complaints Russian authorities blandly replied wanted to pursue the man “literally to insanity, to that the émigrés’ nefarious publishing activities had the collapse of his intellectual and physical forces.” violated any right of political asylum. For his efforts Rachkovsky received the Order of St. Anne, third By the spring of 1887 every incident or argument class, and all the conspirators received handsome within the emigration added to Tikhomirov’s per- remuneration. sonal crisis. A scandal developed over a declaration supposedly emanating from the younger narodo- Rachkovsky estimated that he had inflicted damages voltsy in Zurich and denouncing Lavrov and Tik- amounting to 10,000 francs, and he claimed to have homirov for the moderate tone of the last issue of destroyed “all means of Narodnaia volia propa- the Vestnik and for their arbitrary leadership of the ganda.” The material effects of the raid, however, revolutionary movement. It made no difference to proved short-lived; the print shop had not been Tikhomirov that almost all the émigrés recognized destroyed beyond recovery. A proclamation of Rus- the document as a concoction from Rachkovsky’s sian students called on all “for whom the free word kitchen; everything looked increasingly futile to is dear” to help in the rehabilitation of the shop, him. Turning back to the faith of his youth but and the other print shops in Geneva came to the fearing the “official” atmosphere of the Orthodox aid of the narodovoltsy. “It turns out that we should church in Paris, he began attending the Roman Cat- have destroyed all three print shops,” Rachkovsky holic church in Le Raincy. He pondered ways for his complained, and the narodovoltsy still succeeded in young son to go back to the Russian motherland; he producing the fifth issue of Vestnik Narodnoi voli. did not want his offspring to grow up cut off from As planned, the issue marked the end of Vestnik’s his ethnic roots. publication; Lavrov and Tikhomirov had already In 1887 Tikhomirov published two more books, agreed on the parting of their ways. In his farewell one in French entitled Conspirateurs et police and statement Lavrov repeated his reservations about the other in Russian, a collection of Herzen’s essays Narodnaia volia’s program but insisted that since culled from Kolokol. In his introduction to the the group was the most important party within the Herzen reader, he admiringly noted that Herzen 93 revolutionary movement, he considered it proper to had always been his own man, not binding him- THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

self to the dictates of any party. These publications, turncoat, and a traitor. When he finished his manu- however, brought Tikhomirov little money; the gro- script, he had trouble finding a printer. The first wing rapprochement between France and Russia, he shop he went to in Paris had only enough Russian calculated, had chilled Parisian attitudes toward the type to prepare one signature at a time; fearing some émigrés: “The French are so making up to Russia sort of sabotage, he went looking elsewhere. Even- that they prefer to remain silent about this book, tually a printer came to him to volunteer his ser- which is written not directly in opposition to the vices; the hand of the Russian police was probably Russian government, but nevertheless in a tone not in the background. Even so, Tikhomirov anguished favorable to that government.” over every delay, constantly expecting trouble from one source or another. Tikhomirov was fast becoming convinced that he had to get out of the emigration. “I need to create a Then, on August 3, 1888, he had his book; he had serious party,” he told himself, “that would become made his statement: Pochemu ia perestal’ byt’ revo- a force in the country, a ruling party.” The way to liutsionerom (Why I Ceased to be a Revolutionary). return to the political stage did not seem to run He took his son to the Orthodox church in Paris, through the intrigues of the emigration, and he had and, to the amazement of many, he requested per- no interest in any new publishing ventures. The pet- mission to return to Russia. Even more amazing, the tiness of émigré life took on a new dimension for him tsarist government welcomed him home. In Russia when Oshanina directed him to rebuff the claims of he became a journalist, gradually moving further Gaspar Turski for the type in the Narodnaia volia and further to the right of the political spectrum. shop that had once belonged to Nabat. Although Yet he abided by the confidences of the period of Tikhomirov had no illusions about Turski, whom his revolutionary activism and never betrayed his he called a “swindler” and possibly a spy, he ordered erstwhile comrades to the authorities. His son grew the print shop to surrender the type – he really did up deeply religious, joined the Orthodox clergy, and not care what happened. Oshanina and Lavrov were became a high official of the church. both aghast as his attitude, and so Tikhomirov obli- Tikhomirov was neither the first nor the last revo- gingly declared that he had no right to dispose of lutionary to give up the struggle and to seek peace the property of the print shop of “the former Vestnik with the Russian government. The police recorded Narodnoi voli.” a number of such requests just in 1887 and 1888. In He was now taking his final steps toward a complete earlier years, Utin and Trusov had already returned break with the revolutionary movement. He still felt home. On the other hand, many revolutionaries sympathy for a veteran like Lavrov, but he intensely who had faced the same emotional and psycholo- disliked the younger generation of radicals. The gical crisis as Tikhomirov’s had sought other means occasion for his public break came in the reprinting to resolve their doubts, some even resorting to sui- of his book La Russie politique et sociale, for which cide. Tikhomirov was the most prominent figure in he wrote a new preface, denouncing terrorism and the movement to surrender in this fashion. praising Nicholas I. He received the first printed His experience of course testified to his own psy- copies of his new preface on February 29, 1888, and chological weakness as well as to the oppressive he immediately sent them off to various friends and atmosphere of emigration in the latter 1880s. His acquaintances. Within just a few days a storm of defection nevertheless did not inspire others to outrage swept through the emigration. follow his example, but it nevertheless represented Tikhomirov had expected an outcry. On February a crisis at the very heart of the revolutionary move- 29 he wrote to a friend, “I fear that the change trans- ment. The other revolutionaries tried to forget him; piring in my views will seem to you as so to speak Stepniak wrote, ‘treason.’ I can only say that I have reached these views through much suffering, they have come to Well he is dead and buried. Much can be said about me by the juices of my brain and the blood of my his treason (in my opinion made not for money but heart.” To Nikolai Chaikovsky he wrote on March 5, out of despicable flaccidity of temper and utter “I believe that terror (Russian, I know no other) has absence of love for freedom as such, which is not corrupted the Russian movement.” He had made his uncommon among the feckless Russians of a cer- break public. tain class to which Tikhomirov always belonged) In order to explain his transformation, he immedia- but the less said of it the better. tely set to writing another book, this one in Russian. He promised his friends – that is, anyone who would But the intensity with which the émigrés denounced still listen to him – that he would not endanger any Tikhomirov showed clearly that they could not 94 of his former comrades by making revelations, but forget his defection. the émigrés angrily denounced him as a renegade, a Tikhomirov’s fundamental criticisms of terror and Chapter 15: THE AGONY OF LEV TIKHOMIROV of the revolutionary program of the narodovoltsy, own activities as a revolutionary and a regicide. In and his emphasis on the need to concentrate on the end, he put his faith not in the development of a the cultural development of the Russian people ref- distinct social class but rather in the idea of Russia lected the same problems that Plekhanov and the itself as a mystic organism. In him it was Russian osvobozhdentsy were addressing. Narodnaia volia’s nationalism rather than a sectarian political creed activist campaign of terror had failed to bring down that triumphed. the government; one had to rethink the priorities Tikhomirov’s collapse also showed that in his case of the revolutionary movement and to find a new the printed word could not provide its own justi- program. Tikhomirov did not accept Plekhanov’s fication. He had put his pen at the service of the answer of Marxism. More than one historian has assassination campaign, of propaganda of the deed, suggested that Tikhomirov was simply too old to and he had worked as a true believer. The task of the become a Marxist at this point, but his rejection of word was to justify the deed. But when the activity Marxism had to come from more complicated roots. cooled, he could no longer sustain his enthusiasm Tikhomirov was contemptuous of the Marxists, and by words alone. His writing lost its purpose when he called their supporters “idiots.” But he had been he found no public response, and he had to look for unable to provide a theoretical justification for his new sources of intellectual support.

95 Chapter 16:

A NEW GENERATION

In 1887, while Lev Tikhomirov was completing his moment, however, the authorities just watched the intellectual transformation, the Russian revolutio- youth scatter. nary movement seemed to be waiting. The tsarist In order to keep better track of events in the emi- authorities considered it a year in which things did gration, Rachkovsky established a new observation not happen. To be sure, there had been an abortive post in Geneva when Henry Bint reached an agree- plot against the life of the Tsar, Alexander III, but ment with Elpidin. Elpidin’s book store, which Tik- this seemed only an isolated incident. The police homirov called the beststocked Russian book store recorded only six political trials in the course of in Western Europe, was a key intellectual center. 1887, and despite the growing population of pri- Newcomers came there to find addresses and to soners throughout Siberia, there were few escapes find friends; it was a convenient mailing address for from exile during the year. As for the emigration, individuals who did not want to divulge their true one police report insisted that during 1887 it had abodes; and of course anyone who needed Russian produced “nothing notable as regards literature.” The books had to visit it. To be sure, many émigrés did revolutionaries seemed demoralized. “The majority not trust Elpidin; but they had to do business with of the émigrés,” an official declared, “are extremely him. Over the next thirteen years, the police paid impoverished; according to their own admissions, Elpidin some 18,000 francs for information and for concerns about their daily bread have occupied copies of mail that he handled for other émigrés. their heads more than revolutionary plans.” Yet by the end of the year, new intellectual currents were Elpidin’s value to the police, however, has to be stirring in a long dormant center, Zurich. questioned. By now no one trusted him with impor- tant information. There were stories of his having The stimulation came from the breakup of the plot denounced one person or another, but apart from against the life of the Tsar. In January the tsarist a few statements he made to the Geneva authori- police had learned of new terrorist plans. They inves- ties, there is no specific evidence on this count. The tigated, and on March 1 they arrested a man they money he received he obviously invested in his busi- had been watching as he and others were carrying ness. Over the course of the thirteen years he was bombs on the Nevsky Prospect, the main street of on Rachkovsky’s payroll, he published about three the Russian capital. Further investigation revealed times the number of titles that he had published in a plot against the life of the Tsar as a protest against his first twenty years of working in Geneva, and he “the abnormal condition of the contemporary social did not change the nature of his titles. The police, order.” The plot had been a poorly kept secret, and accordingly, would seem not to have gotten their even before the arrests of the individuals caught in money’s worth, and in 1900 they dismissed Elpidin the act, students had begun fleeing abroad so as not on the charge of “senility and uselessness.” At the to get caught up in a governmental dragnet. cost of his historical reputation, Elpidin would For the police this case seemed almost routine, seem to have exploited the Russian officials in Paris and they had no idea of the celebrity status that for his own publishing purposes. several participants would subsequently enjoy in Elpidin’s usefulness was also compromised by the the history books. The authorities executed Alek- fact that Geneva had now lost its pride of place sandr Ulianov for his part in the plot, but Ulianov’s within the Russian emigration. The city was still an younger brother Vladimir, under the revolutionary important printing center, but for the next several name of Lenin, would lead Russia into one of the years first Zurich and then London eclipsed it as great social revolutions of the twentieth century. an émigré intellectual center. The editors of Ves- In the city of Vilnius, the center of the Northwest tnik Narodnoi voli had established the precedent of Region of the empire, the police arrested Józef Pił- living even in another country while having their 96 sudski, who thirty years later would lead the new printing done in Geneva. Plekhanov and the osvo- Poland in a war against Lenin’s forces. For the bozhdentsy, to be sure, still centered their activity Chapter 16: A NEW GENERATION in Geneva, but their time had not yet come. Their Lavrov seemed ready to accept the manuscript, the Marxism had yet to take firm root among the Rus- Socialist Literature Fund rejected it. The intellectual sian youth; therefore their presence in Geneva still atmosphere was at best confused. did not attract many new émigrés. The Marxists at the same time were experiencing Instead the émigrés flowed back into Zurich, where internal tensions. The young social democrats they tried to continue their education. A Russian found that the osvobozhdentsy hesitated to take police report called the community there “a chance the newcomers unreservedly and unconditionally selection of politically suspicious youth,” mostly of to their breasts. Plekhanov did not believe that Jewish origin. The new arrivals brought mixed and the newcomers’ experiences in Russia made up for even confused political views; they seemed in some their inadequacies in theory, and in a tumultuous cases capable of combining Marxism, terrorism, and congress held during the summer of 1888 the osvo- even constitutional ideas for at least a time. The older bozhdentsy made clear that they would not allow émigrés looked askance at their ignorance, but they themselves to be dissolved within an organization respected their energy. The elders hoped eventually with a large membership. Plekhanov cared too to direct this young force into the proper channels. much about the nuances of his ideological line to allow this to happen; he openly admitted to having On their own initiative the youth in Zurich esta- Jacobin sentiments. As a result, the congress inten- blished a Socialist Literature Fund. Led by Isaak sified rather than assuaged the frictions within the Dembo, known in Zurich by the name Brinstein, the Marxists’ camp, but the social democrats did not group made tentative plans for the publication of a give up their struggle against the narodovoltsy’s journal and even briefly considered setting up its control of the literary fund. own print shop. It raised money through soliciting contributions, staging special events, and holding a In September 1888, in the shadow of Tikhomirov’s lottery. When it first approached Lavrov to ask for defection, the Socialist Literary Fund broke up amid his guidance, he had denounced as “harmful” the mutual recriminations between the rival groups. group’s thoughts of publishing Tolstoy’s works, and The social democrats took their share of the fund’s then he had questioned the idea of working with treasury. Under Plekhanov’s patronage, they formed Plekhanov, whom he indicated that he respected the Russian Social Democratic Union, a group affi- but did not completely trust. Finally, however, he liated with Osvobozhdenie truda, but not a part of agreed to help them: He would choose titles from it, and as the first in their new series of publications suggestions made by the group, and these would they produced an attack on Tikhomirov written by be printed at the Old Narodovoltsy Print Shop in Plekhanov. Geneva. The fund then went ahead with plans to The arrival of youthful energy in 1887 and 1888 also publish “translated and original brochures on the created new journals. A group of narodovoltsy in theory and history of socialism.” Moscow, having entered into an alliance with some Although the fund’s first publication was an essay liberals, felt the need of a printed organ in which by Marx and the second a work by the German the new partners could discuss their common pro- socialist Karl Kautsky, some of the young Mar- blems. Because they could not print the newspaper xist émigrés objected to the fund’s organization. within the Russian Empire, they sent two emissaries Lavrov, they argued, was unsympathetic to the to Switzerland, armed with their program and notes new “serious socialist literature” emanating from for the first issue of the newspaper. When approa- Plekhanov’s group in Geneva. The Foreign Union ched by the two women, Plekhanov enumerated his of Social Democrats, led by Rafael Soloveichik and differences with the group’s program and refused to Orest Govorukhin, challenged Dembo’s control participate. Vladimir Debogory-Mokrievich, on the of the fund’s organization. They demanded that other hand, agreed to see the project into print, and Plekhanov be recognized as a literary authority the the job of typesetting went to Dragomanov’s Ukrai- equal of Lavrov; Plekhanov in turn objected to the nian print shop. thought that Lavrov might have the right to review The first issue of the new publication, Samouprav- any manuscript of his. lenie (Self-Government), which bore the date of The Marxists made a test cast of a manuscript on December 1887 and the legend “organ of the soci- the history of the International, written by Vera alist revolutionaries,” carried statements by various Zasulich. “Your International should be printed émigré leaders emphasizing the need to continue at any cost,” Plekhanov wrote to Zasulich, and to the political struggle. Debogory-Mokrievich called Akselrod he added, “If the narodovoltsy are not the political struggle the first task of the revolu- agreed, then in my opinion our group must leave tionaries, with local self-government and political the fund as an establishment obviously hostile to all freedoms as the goal. Dragomanov demanded self- 97 social democrats and their publications.” Although government and political freedoms in the form of THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

the rights of man and citizen. Stepniak asserted Few took Svoboda very seriously, and it aroused that personally he favored “gradualism” but that “in little discussion. Neither did Turski’s other new practice” he had to put his faith in “political terror newspaper Bor’ba (The Struggle). The Ohkrana and political-militant conspiracies where possible – deemed Turski’s work “in content and in literary in general, in forceful action.” The forum concluded quality not deserving of attention.” Obshchee delo with an excerpt from the program of the osvoboz- praised it. The osvobozhdentsy, on the other hand, hdentsy, declaring that socialists had to fulfill what had different views. Plekhanov criticized Turski’s would normally be the role of the middle class if conception of the intelligentsia as a distinct class that were a properly functioning social group in and quietly dismissed the publication as a “typical Russia; therefore the socialists supported agitation organ of the liberal intelligentsia,” but he published for a constitution, representative government, fre- an article in it. Turski produced the newspaper in edom of conscience, a free press, and an end to the the osvobozhdentsy’s print shop. As Deich later standing army. explained, the osvobozhdentsy needed the busi- ness. As regards tactics, the editors of Samoupravlenie dis- missed the thoughts of either urban or rural revolts; In the summer of 1888 the Osvobozhdenie truda instead they advocated legal agitation, through the group was able to enter the lists with its own publi- press and through institutions of self-government, cation, which it called “irregular” rather than perio- and they endorsed the terrorist struggle. In the dical, but which it labeled as no. 1. Sotsial-demokrat second issue, dated May 1888, the editors tried to owed its origins to a windfall. Nikolai Kuliabko- make clear that they were socialists, favoring the Koretsky, an erstwhile collaborator of Lavrov’s in “socialization of the means of production.” They publishing Vpered and now a lawyer with consti- favored “heightening the political significance of tutionalist inclinations, had shown up in Switzer- the toiling classes, the expropriation of political land at the end of 1887 ready to support the elusive authority from the hands of the privileged minority goal of uniting the radicals behind a single journal. into the hands of all the people.” When he found it impossible to reach agreement with the narodovoltsy or with the Ukrainian print The newspaper inspired a mixed reaction among shop, he chose to give his funds, which amounted the émigrés. Lavrov hailed its publishers as “my to several hundred rubles, to Plekhanov, who used comrades in arms,” although he warned against the money to underwrite the publication of Sotsial- trusting the liberals. Plekhanov asserted that the demokrat. editors did not understand the class struggle and obviously feared the working class: “It is clear that Publishing Sotsial-demokrat demanded all the petty bourgeois socialists are in principle enemies energy and resources that Plekhanov commanded. of the liberation movement of the proletariat.” The Turski, to be sure, was cooperative; through the assertion by one of the editors that socialism could summer months, when the work on Sotsial-demo- not serve as the “militant slogan” of the day con- krat was the most intense, Svoboda put out only vinced many observers that this group constituted two issues, one at the beginning of the summer and “liberals with bombs.’ one at the end. But Akselrod, still living in Zurich, became ill and could not even complete the article The next newspaper arising in the emigration came that he was supposed to contribute; depressed, he from an old and well known but at the same time was ready to resign from the editorial board. Plek- controversial source. Gaspar Turski began printing hanov convinced him to continue – “The world is his own newspaper, entitled Svoboda (Freedom), large enough and our literary activity will not be and collaborating with him was a man with a suspi- limited to one anthology” – but this still left Plek- cious background, Kagan Solomon, also known as hanov without any help. “You will surely say,” he S. Kniazhnin, E. Semenovsky, and Semenov. (Rumor complained, “that corrections and insertions do not had it that Solomon was the one who had instructed need much time, but I had to run collect the books Bint on the layout of the narodovoltsy’s print shop necessary for copying, and just with Elpidin I had to in Geneva.) Appearing in nine issues in the course listen to the longest story about spies.” Not without of 1888 and one the following year, Svoboda called reason he wrote, “In putting out the first book of itself “the political organ of the Russian intelli- Sotsial-demokrat, we unfortunately cannot even gentsia” and hailed the intelligentsia, rather than approximate the appearance of the second.” the working class, as the dynamic, moving force in society. As Solomon-Kniazhnin put it, “Insofar as By the fall of 1888 the flurry of new publishing acti- the people are not able to struggle, one must look vity had peaked. The first issue of Sotsial-demokrat to society, the intelligentsia, as the most developed remained without a successor, and the publication and aware part of the people.” The newspaper’s pro- efforts of the Osvobozhdenie truda group slowed 98 gram focused on the struggle for political rights. down. Samoupravlenie seemed to be in no better Chapter 16: A NEW GENERATION condition. News came from Russia of the arrests of program of our organ.” Once the political struggle the leaders of the “socialists-federalists,” and Debo- had been resolved, “we will go on to essential eco- gory-Mokrievich despaired of receiving any more nomic reforms and then eventually to socialism.” material. The only periodicals now appearing with The first task, however, was to work with the liberals any continuity were Turski’s Svoboda and the see- for political reforms: “Now we are all liberals, now mingly indefatigable Obshchee delo. we are all revolutionaries, and no one has the right to deny the obligation and honor of being a liberal At this point the emigration added a new figure who and a revolutionary.” Burtsev believed that in a free was to play an important role in the political and cul- society many who now considered themselves revo- tural evolution for decades to come, Vladimir Lvo- lutionaries would in fact be satisfied. vich Burtsev. Twenty-five or twenty-six years of age, a member of the narodovoltsy, he had just fled from Svobodnaia Rossiia also spoke enthusiastically about Siberia. According to his own account, his arrival in the duties and obligations of the émigrés in main- Geneva began his “responsible role in the revolutio- taining their printing establishments. In an essay nary movement,” and he was to gain considerable in the first issue entitled “A Few Words on a Free renown as a historian, an editor, and a pursuer of Press,” Esper Serebriakov argued, government spies. (Some called him the “Sherlock Holmes of the revolutionary movement.”) Ideally Every person in any way familiar with the revolu- he claimed to favor an alliance of the socialists’ tionary movement knows that almost the greater energy with the liberals’ sense of balance. “I always part of those who have perished, perished because asserted,” he recounted, “that we need only the free of secret print shops or because of their relationship word and a parliament; then we can proceed to our to them and their organization. most cherished demands.” In Geneva he found his intellectual circle with Debogory-Mokrievich and The émigrés must continue printing revolutionary Dragomanov, who did not share Burtsev’s belief literature, he concluded, and the revolutionaries in in the usefulness of terror but shared his thoughts Russia must concentrate on smuggling it into the about the necessity of the political struggle. empire. Burtsev had actually come with the charge of taking The narodovoltsy and the osvobozhdentsy vied with over the publication of Samoupravlenie, but the each other in attacking the compromise with the arrests in Moscow made that seem hopeless. Instead liberals that Svobodniaia Rossiia proposed. “There he now proposed to start a new publication. “For me,” is no journal dumber than Bor’ba [published by he later reminisced, “the basis of all struggle with the Turski],” Vera Zasulich wrote to Kravchinsky, “but government even then was propaganda.” Provisio- worse (in its own way) is your beloved Svobodnaia nally calling his publication Kolokol in testimony to Rossiia.” The narodovoltsy and the osvobozhdentsy his vision of uniting the emigration as everyone now even went on to plan a joint periodical through liked to think Herzen once had, he looked around which they could respond to Burtsev. To Burtsev’s for literary and financial contributors. Dragomanov dismay, the liberals welcomed his work only with refused his invitation to become editor, saying words; they kept their wallets closed. To continue that after his experiences with Vol’noe slovo he had the publication he had to keep using his own resolved never to edit another periodical. Eventually, resources. using his own funds, Burtsev decided that he had to On March 6, 1889, an incident in Zurich disrupted take the post of editor himself. Burtsev’s work as well as the activity of all other Using Dragomanov’s print shop, Burtsev set his first émigrés in Switzerland. In experimenting with lead article for Svobodnaia Rossiia (Free Russia) into explosives in the mountains, Issak Dembo blew type and sent it out separately to friends for advance himself up. On his death bed he assured the police comment. From Zurich Isaak Dembo warned him, that he had not meant to use the explosives against “You will destroy your revolutionary career,” and any target in Switzerland. Swiss officials, already he urged Burtsev to keep clear of Dragomanov and concerned about terrorist bombings by Italian anar- Debogory-Mokrievich. Despite such advice, Burtsev chists, launched an exhaustive investigation of the forged ahead, and in the spring of 1889, when new activities and writings of the émigrés from Russia. material came for Samoupravlenie, he printed nos. 3 The émigrés protested that the terrorists repre- and 4 of that newspaper in tandem with nos. 1 and sented only a small group, but the Swiss tightened 2 of Svobodnaia Rossiia. their surveillance of all foreigners, establishing a new agency, the Fremdenpolizei, to watch the acti- Svobodnaia Rossiia strongly endorsed the political vities of aliens in Switzerland. struggle in alliance with the liberals, and it defined the struggle’s goals as civil rights and self-govern- The Russian community in Zurich quickly broke 99 ment: Political freedom – there in two words is the up, as it had in 1873. On May 7 the Bundesrat, the THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Federal Executive Council of the Swiss Confedera- in Zurich after Dembo’s death. An obituary for the tion, expelled thirteen Russians from the country. man praised his dying words whereby he directed In the course of the summer others were forced to his comrades to search his pockets and his room for leave on an individual basis, and in August Plekh- compromising materials before the police could get anov, despite his protests, was expelled, although his there. wife, who was completing her medical education, There was to be no second issue of Sotsialist, alt- could remain in Geneva. Plekhanov was allowed to hough Rappoport apparently had enough mate- reenter the country only to pay her short visits. rial. Burtsev later suggested that the closing of In this atmosphere even Svobodnaia Rossiia was Svobodnaia Rossiia had deprived the publication doomed, but Burtsev faced as much trouble within of its raison d’etre, but more important, Plekhanov his editorial board as he did from outside. Dra- was uneasy with this alliance. The osvobozhdentsy gomanov, while approving the general line of the did not like Lavrov’s contribution – Zasulich com- publication, wanted it to come out more vigorously mented, “It is easier to understand what Hegel is against terrorism. Burtsev resisted, although he con- saying than to understand [Lavrov]” – and when ceded, “We want the peaceful development of the Plekhanov could not get to see Rappoport during country.” Debogory supported Dragomanov, and his visit to Paris in the summer of 1889, he felt the debates reached the point that Burtsev finally insulted. Angrily he announced his withdrawal resolved to withdraw and found another newspaper, from Sotsialist and his intention to resume publica- tentatively called Zemskii sobor (Assembly of the tion of Sotsial-demokrat. Land). Svobodnaia Rossiia therefore ended its brief Overshadowing the demise of Sotsialist in the existence with its third issue, dated May 1889. summer of 1889 was the meeting of the First Con- For Dragomanov this marked the end of his publis- gress of a new workers’ international, to be known hing career in Geneva. To friends he complained in history as the Second International. Organized in that the experience with Svobodnaia Rossiia had conjunction with the exposition in Paris, the con- disappointed him. In 1887 he had thought that gress brought together representatives of socialist the Russians were coming around to his way of parties of various countries. The organizers had first thought, but then he found the ideas of the youthful invited Lavrov and Kravchinsky to represent the émigrés incoherent and even incomprehensible. Russians; the former declined, and the latter, reali- “They seemed to be speaking a different language,” zing that the meeting was meant to bring together he exclaimed. “Sometimes after an explanation you representatives of organizations, rather than indi- understand even less.” He again despaired of further viduals, recommended that they invite the osvo- cooperation with Russian radicals, and by the end bozhdentsy. On Kravchinsky’s recommendation, of the summer he had accepted a professorial post therefore, and also with his financial aid, Plekhanov in Bulgaria. and Akselrod traveled to Paris to represent Russian socialism at this international gathering. In the early summer of 1889 the narodovoltsy put out their own newspaper, Sotsialist, to a great degree The meetings in Paris produced some odd confron- designed as a response to Svobodnaia Rossiia. Edited tations, such as one between Plekhanov and Burtsev. by Iurii Rappoport, the newspaper had the support The Marxist angrily attacked Burtsev’s interpreta- of both Lavrov and Plekhanov. Plekhanov had had tion of the political struggle, and Burtsev tried to some misgivings about such cooperation, but, as he defend himself, saying “I am also a socialist.” To explained, “it seems to me that we have to be diplo- this Plekhanov angrily countered, “I am not an also mats.” In defining the newspaper’s program, Rappo- socialist. I am a socialist.” The exchange produced port had written, “We will struggle with all means, such heat that Plekhanov, harking back to standards beginning with agitation and propaganda, printed of a bygone era, challenged Burtsev to a duel. The and oral, and concluding with terrorist acts, disor- conflict did not reach this ultimate physical dimen- ganizing the very center of the government, depen- sion, but for years afterward the two men refused to ding on which of these means seems at the given speak with one another or generally to acknowledge moment the most expedient and applicable.” Plekh- each other’s existence. anov calculated that he could steer this enterprise in From Paris, again with Kravchinsky’s help, Plekh- the right direction: “Gradually we will either correct anov traveled on to London and fulfilled a longs- them or we will break with them.” tanding dream by meeting Friedrich Engels. For The sole issue of Sotsialist was dated June 1889. the small Osvobozhdenie truda group this was of While the address of the editorial board was in enormous importance, as Plekhanov struggled to Paris, the printing was done in Geneva. Besides impress the socialist patriarch with his little band’s 100 theoretical statements by Lavrov and Plekhanov, credentials. When he returned to Switzerland the issue carried a detailed account of the events in August, he underwent the ignominy of being Chapter 16: A NEW GENERATION expelled from Switzerland, but he was able to settle of not recognizing authorities and a fear of somehow just over the frontier from where he could maintain being obligated to them.” The youth, Plekhanov contact with the print shop in Geneva. complained, “do not speak with me directly, simply.” In this case the conflict focused on money, as Plekh- Stimulated by having participated in the founda- anov called Jogiches as “our Shylock,” and Jogiches tion of the Second International, Plekhanov pushed in turn took his money elsewhere. Plekhanov was ahead with his new periodical, also called Sotsial- left complaining that his own journal Sotsial-demo- demokrat, but different from its earlier namesake. krat could pay him only “one-third of what legal The first issue, carrying the date February 15, 1890, journals pay” for articles. employed a larger format and divided its contents into two parts, each with its own pagination: arti- By the time Sotsial-demokrat’s second issue appe- cles, including translations, and a “contemporary ared in the late summer of 1890, the émigrés had a review,” including book reviews. Announcing that new set of police repressions to discuss and to worry this would now be a “literary-political” quarterly, about. After the trouble in Zurich, a number of Rus- the editors declared that the journal aimed at sho- sian émigrés had moved to Paris, and there some wing the relevance of Marxism for conditions and were continuing the experiments with explosives. developments in Russia, “that even in Russia this The tsarist authorities, still complaining about the teaching has real soil beneath it.” The osvobozh- Swiss’ “complete ignorance of the character of the dentsy recognized that Marxists still constituted activity and the makeup of the Russian emigration,” “a rarity” among Russian revolutionaries, but now followed them to the French capital. In the spring braced by his personal acquaintance with Engels, of 1890, after another accident with explosives, Plekhanov worked with new enthusiasm. the French launched a massive investigation that resulted in six arrests and the expulsion of a number Like the anthology of two years earlier, the new of persons. (The revolutionaries later insisted that periodical gave evidence of the difficult conditions this incident was in fact a case of police provoca- under which the Marxist émigrés lived. Once again tion.) “The results of the past year,” a Russian police the editors noted that publication had been delayed report declared in 1891, “can in general be called by the illness of an associate. In a rather clumsy effort successful,” and the police said this despite the to mislead both Swiss and Russian authorities, the assassination late in the year of a Russian general periodical carried a false imprint, claiming to have in Paris. Both the government and public opinion been printed in London and asking correspondents in France, the Russian authorities believed, were to address inquiries to Stepniak in London. (The outraged by the activities of the émigrés. editors had considered using New York as the false imprint.) In the editorial introduction, however, the The events in Zurich and Paris in 1889 and 1890 subscription price was quoted in Swiss francs. The severely crippled the publishing activities of the second issue, dated August 15, admitted to being Russian émigrés for the time being, putting a tem- printed in Switzerland, and its editors apparently porary halt to the vigor that the emigration had had no problems from the side of the Swiss autho- displayed since 1887. Apart from Sotsial-demokrat, rities. which obviously suffered from financial under- nourishment, periodical publishing in Switzerland In financing the publication Plekhanov received withered away. Even Obshchee delo ceased publi- some help from a new émigré, Leon Jogiches- cation as Belogolovy, its main financial supporter, Tyszko, but this relationship soon disintegrated as gave up and returned home to Russia. The center of the veteran Marxist again had trouble dealing with émigré activity now shifted back to London, where the younger generation. Jogiches demanded aut- Kravchinsky-Stepniak was raising the propagandi- hority and respect that Plekhanov was not ready zing of the Russian revolution among the western to give. “One would think,” Plekhanov’s wife later public to something of an art form. wrote, “that the young people suffer from a disease

101 Chapter 17:

KRAVCHINSKY’S FRIENDS

Sergei Kravchinsky had settled in London in 1884. Immortalized in Russian history for his role in the He lived and wrote under the name Stepniak, but propaganda activities of the early 1870s – the chai- his identity as Kravchinsky, the man who had assas- kovtsy bore his name – Chaikovsky had gone off to sinated Mezentsev, was no secret, even though the United States later in the decade to participate in he did not care to publicize it. As a commentator an experimental socialist colony. When he returned on Russian affairs he quickly acquired a large and to Europe, he settled in London. He agreed to repre- appreciative audience, and his writings included sent the Red Cross of Narodnaia volia mainly as a essays in literary journals, books, and even fiction. means of presenting the revolutionary movement While he did not become rich from the proceeds of to the British public; his pet project was to create an these works, he was able to support himself com- international bureau to provide the western public fortably. with trustworthy information on the Russian revo- lutionary movement. Kravchinsky steadfastly resisted tying himself to the fortunes of any one political group or trend. As he struggled to conquer the mysteries of the Despite his role as one of the pioneers in the assas- English language, Stepniak found easy entry into sinations of the latter 1870s, he refused to put him- British society. His acquaintances soon included self at the command of the Executive Committee of members of parliament, writers such as George Narodnaia volia; indeed he criticized the leadership Bernard Shaw, and theorists like Engels. To the émi- of the group for its Jacobin tendencies. Although grés living in Paris, Geneva, or Zurich, Kravchinsky he was a friend of Friedrich Engels, he would not appeared to be well off; like Plekhanov in 1889, they declare himself a Marxist either. After first denoun- frequently turned to him for help. Kravchinsky res- cing him, Soviet historians came to emphasize his ponded as best he could to their appeals. On the friendship with Zasulich and his cooperation with other hand, his Russian comrades frequently com- Plekhanov, but in his time Kravchinsky called him- plained that he went too far to please his English self a man “without attachments, a free cossack.” friends, but he struggled to integrate these two dif- He wanted to show that the Russian revolutionary ferent worlds. movement was made up of persons “of different His relations with the American George Kennan, views, united by the realization that the destruc- suddenly a very popular writer on the Russian tion of the autocracy and its replacement by a freer, prison system, exemplified Kravchinsky’s talents limited monarchy constitute the organic demand of and problems. Kennan had burst onto to the literary all, and without the achievement of this no one can scene with a series of articles in the American peri- take a step.” odical The Century Magazine, beginning in the fall Plekhanov criticized him for his tolerant attitude of 1886 with an account of the suicide of Aleksandr toward persons like Dragomanov, but Kravchinsky Kropotkin and continuing in subsequent years with argued, “Only by guaranteeing freedom to our oppo- graphic and vivid accounts of the life of political nents do we assure our own.” Upon reading one of exiles in Siberia. The Russian émigrés welcomed the his early essays in the British press, a tsarist official work, although they complained that he made his exclaimed, “Can it be that this article... belongs to a Russian subjects look more like liberals than soci- terrorist pen?” In turn, Kravchinsky aroused consi- alists. As soon as his essays appeared, the émigrés derable criticism from the revolutionary camp for translated and reproduced them. glossing over ideological and theoretical differences In 1885, at the time of his departure for Russia to among the Russians. collect material for his series on the prison system, 102 Kravchinsky’s closest associate in London, Nikolai Kennan had been a respected but unspectacular Chaikovsky, shared Kravchinsky’s sentiments. journalist, holding the post of Night Manager of Chapter 17: KRAVCHINSKY’S FRIENDS the Washington office of the Associated Press. He rough study not only of the life of the political exiles had visited Russia before, first in the 1860s, and had but of the inner history of the whole Russian revo- published a book entitled Tent Life in Siberia that lutionary movement.” A month later he wrote, “I had brought him modest note. After his trip in 1885 should like now to put on leg-fetters and the exile and 1886, however, he was a celebrity; flooded with dress and march two or three days with a party.” invitations to lecture, he resigned from his post with Kennan’s sympathies for the exiles and his hostility the Associated Press, calculating that he could clear for the Russian government grew apace throughout $20,000 annually, after expenses, just by lecturing. the remainder of his journey. From the start of his trip Kennan has in mind the In July 1886 Kennan made a brief trip to London, possibility of eventually producing a book. His con- where he met Kravchinsky as well as Petr Kro- tract with the Century Company, signed on May 1, potkin. Kravchinsky was delighted to hear the 1885, spoke of a “graphic, picturesque account of American’s account of having made “more friends exile life.” Kennan proposed “to collect materials for than ever before in his entire life.” Kennan, Krav- a more vivid and striking picture, and at the same chinsky declared, “has now radically changed time a truer picture of the life of the exiles during his views and fully confirms everything we have their journey to Siberia.” He promised the magazine written in our books. Only his facts are newer and “twelve papers upon the subject hereinbefore indi- more copious than what we can command.” When cated of Siberian exile life,” and these would con- Kennan pledged to expose the evils of the Russian tain “the choicest and ripest fruits of the expedition prison system, Kravchinsky exclaimed, “Seeing what herein set forth.” The magazine agreed to pay a total an impression the Russians made on this good but of $6000 for the work. strongly prejudiced man, I felt pride for my people, for my country.” Because in the past Kennan had discounted stories of exiles’ suffering, he had little trouble in obtaining Once his articles had begun to appear in Century the cooperation of the tsarist authorities for his Magazine, Kennan embarked on a new career. His expedition. He expected that the Russians might lecture topics included descriptions of camp life try to guide his investigation “into safe channels,” in Siberia, the operation of a convict mine, “The but he was ready: “That is all right. I have no fault Great Siberian Road,” and “Vagabond Life.” He to find with their precautions. They have been so illustrated his talks with lantern slides, on occa- much misrepresented that they naturally feel a little sion donning prison garb and irons and singing afraid of foreign writers.” Nevertheless he would not camp songs. His lecture tours ranged up and down allow himself to be led: the east coast of the United States, from Boston to Washington, and stretched into the Middle West, I shall find out what I wish to know all the same. reaching Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa. Ins- The official string is by no means the only string to pired by his stories, audiences invariably wanted to my Siberian bow. know how they could help the unfortunate exiles and contribute to the revolutionary movement. In contrast to many other visitors to Russia, Kennan spoke the language. As Kennan’s main entry into the world of the Rus- sian emigration, Kravchinsky took great care to nur- Kennan’s conversion began with his arrival in ture this new resource and to respect the American’s Siberia. Writing from Tiumen on June 16/28, 1885, personal predilections. When Kennan heard of the he declared, “The forwarding prison is, I must abortive plot of March 1887, he expressed regret frankly say, the worst prison I have ever seen, and that “the Russian revolutionists have resorted again if the places where they keep the exiles generally to the ‘terroristic’ form of activity.” Kravchinsky res- further on in Siberia are as bad as this one, I shall ponded, “We disagree of course upon theoretical have to take back some things that I have said and matters, i.e. upon the question of the use of violent written about the exile system.” In Sempalatinsk he means,” but he went on to declare, “I’ll confess to spoke with prisoners for the first time: you, that had I some disposable funds of my own personal property, I would never give it to the Rus- The revolutionaries whose acquaintance I have sian dynamiters.” Instead he recommended “crea- made here are not at all such people as I expected ting a free Russian press abroad.” Just £500 a year to see. They are more reasonable, better educated, could make émigré publishing “a powerful factor in less fanatical, and have far more character than the struggle and there is no limit to its extension.” the Nihilists I had pictured to myself. Arguing that “the whole of the Russian revolutio- nary party is united nowadays upon the sole ques- In the middle of August he declared, “I defy the tion of political freedom,” he particularly recom- Government to prevent me from making a tho- mended Burtsev’s Svobodnaia Rossiia for Kennan’s 103 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

consideration. This newspaper, he declared, “should geography.” Deploring British ignorance of Russia not be too radical for Americans to support, but if – “I once said, and I believe it to be true, that as a needs be we could create a more moderate one.” He rule the only thing known in England about Rus- also recommended Dragomanov to Kennan, saying sians is that they take lemon with their tea” – she that “he is a mine of information and the cleverest did the best she could to look after Russia’s public of all Russians whom you can meet abroad.” image and to combat Kravchinsky’s efforts. One of Kravchinsky’s supporters declared that the attacks Both Kravchinsky and Kennan had to face oppo- by Novikova and de Windt (whom he called an nents who challenged their good faith and their jud- “Englishman of doubtful nationality”) constituted a gment. Prominent among Kennan’s American cri- sign of the Russian Free Press Fund’s success. tics was Colonel Charles A. de Arnaud, who wrote, “Generally speaking when such a hardened criminal, At the end of 1889 and the beginning of 1890, despite after some years’ residence in Siberia, falls in with a such critics, Kravchinsky expanded his activities certain class of magazine writers, he calls himself a with the formation of a group called “Friends of ‘political prisoner,’ and the magazine writer imme- Russian Freedom,” an association of British citizens diately heralds it to the American world that here is dedicated to publicizing the revolutionary struggle another suffering patriot.” He had no better words for against the autocracy in the Russian empire. Krav- “Stepniak,” whom he advised to follow Tikhomirov’s chinsky had tried to found such an organization example and to repent. After Kennan had sent him before, but with no success. Now he had found the one of de Arnaud’s articles, Kravchinsky commented, proper Englishman to head such an organization, “I read with much amusement de Arnaud’s rubbish, Robert Spence Watson. wondering at the same time at his impudence. He A man in his early fifties, Spence Watson had long must have been drunk when he wrote it, or he is a held strong sympathies for various revolutionary downright scoundrel to lie that way.” movements on the continent. To be sure, he was only Echoing de Arnaud’s charges for the British reading a recent convert to the Russian cause, but Kennan’s public was an English geographer, Harry de Windt, writings had played an influential role in this. A FRBS, who had previously published a travelogue member of the Liberal party, he became a close friend From Pekin to Calais by Land (London, 1887). of Kravchinsky’s and in the fall of 1889 he agreed to When Kennan’s articles began to arouse discussion direct the “Friends of Russian Freedom.” Together in England, de Windt, aided by sympathetic Rus- with ten or twelve friends of similar convictions he sian officials, set off on his own investigation of planned to publish and distribute brochures with life in Siberia. His book on the topic, Siberia as it texts taken from Kravchinsky’s and other works in is, appeared at the beginning of 1892, and notwith- order to inform British public opinion about Russia. standing his disclaimers that he was not “entering In June 1890 the society began publishing a new into a paper war with Mr. Kennan,” there could be journal, Free Russia, which by fall was appearing on no doubt of his intentions. “The credulity of the a monthly basis. It would cease publication only at English,” a Russian official reportedly confided to the beginning of the First World War, a quarter of de Windt, “has always amused me. They will believe a century later. The fact that the title constituted a an American journalist but not their own coun- translation of Burtsev’s Svobodnaia Rossiia was pro- tryman.” Charging that the Russian revolutionaries bably no coincidence, and in response to his Rus- “were currently maintaining their headquarters in sian critics, Kravchinsky spoke of the necessity of Geneva and other European cities,” de Windt sug- uniting “with the Europeans as comrades.” Trying to gested that the prisoners, who in any case deserved emphasize the need to pursue the political struggle their punishment, were perhaps better off than the first, he pointed out that when Narodnaia volia had so-called free population in the eastern reaches of employed assassination as a weapon, there had been the Russian empire. no socialist content to its arguments whatsoever. Behind de Windt stood the formidable figure of His English “Friends” constituted only the first step Madame Olga Novikova, or Novikoff, whom one in Kravchinsky’s vision. With George Kennan’s aid, noted English journalist called “the M. P. for Russia.” an analogous group was formed in the United States, Mme. Novikova served as something of a lobbyist and with the assistance of Lazar Goldenberg, who was for the tsarist regime. “That damn Stepniak,” she now living in New York, an American edition of Free wrote to Tikhomirov, “is stirring up everyone, and Russia began to appear in the fall of 1890. (When the everyone in England is against everything that is publication ran into financial problems after just two dear to Russia. It is just a shame, a shame!” The Bri- issues, Kennan came to its rescue.) In the winter of tish, she complained, should not allow “very young 1891-1892 a German edition, Frei Russland, began to people, even children,” to “discuss and twaddle on appear in Zurich. As Kravchinsky conceived of these 104 politics instead of studying their grammars and the publications, they should summon “all opponents of Chapter 17: KRAVCHINSKY’S FRIENDS the Russian autocracy without distinction of faction” of “reaction” in Russia and of the need for “fresh to the banner of Russian freedom. thought and activity.” Although the endeavor was Kravchinsky’s idea, he remained in the background Kravchinsky’s chief aide in publishing Free Russia so as not to compromise his work for Free Russia. was Feliks Volkhovsky, who in his past had worked with both German Lopatin and Sergei Nechaev and As a new publishing house, the Free Russian Press who had been one of the defendants in the Trial of Fund announced that it would operate on commer- the 193. Volkhovsky had met Kennan in Siberia, cial principles. It would charge for all its publica- and after escaping through Japan, he made his way tions and thereby become a fully self-sustaining around the world to London, where Kravchinsky operation. The fund’s executive committee argued joyfully welcomed him. Since Volkhovsky was at that the practice of donating works had resulted on first concerned about smuggling his small daughter the one hand in limited circulation and on the other out of Siberia, he used the pseudonym of Feliks in unwarranted speculation in such publications. Brant for a while, but once his daughter was safe The Free Russian Press Fund would liberate itself in London, he threw himself into émigré activities from the problem of finding patrons by relying on under his own name. its readers for its support. It promised honoraria to its authors, and it promised to print large editions Kravchinsky realized that many émigrés did not to be distributed “cheaply but not free.” The fund approve of what he was doing, and he had great also set up a book store, managed by Voinich (who trouble in balancing his constituencies. In contrast used the pseudonym I. Kelchevsky), that stocked to his suggestion to Kennan that the émigrés could the publications of all émigré presses. found a publication that would suit the sensitivities of Americans, he assured Lavrov that he unders- The financing of the fund’s work remains rather tood the inherent problems in taking money from obscure. Historians commonly state that Krav- westerners for Russian revolutionary publications. chinsky donated moneys collected on his lecture Yet, eager to assure the western public of the unity tour through the United States, i.e. donations from of the revolutionaries, he told an audience that “as the American public, but at the time, Kravchinsky, a supplement to social democracy, anarchism is a perhaps sensitive to the criticisms of pandering to beautiful thing” – in reporting this back to Plekh- the western bourgeoisie, insisted that the fund’s anov, a socialist exclaimed, “There is an expansive money came from persons “residing in Russia.” Russian nature!” When a Russian émigré assassi- Whatever its financial sources, the group operated nated a tsarist police official in Paris, Kravchinsky on a shoestring budget. told the readers of Free Russia that assassination In order to help its publications to reach their tar- contradicted the principle of majority rule, and the gets, the fund announced its readiness to commis- émigrés in Paris heatedly objected to his judgment. sion “persons known or recommended to the ware- On the other hand, Kravchinsky called his friend house” to deliver books and other publications, Volkhovsky to order when the latter wore a convict’s “unable to appear in Russia because of censorship,” uniform in addressing an English audience. Such to specified addresses within the empire. It stood behavior might be acceptable for an American ready to handle orders of more than 500 copies of like Kennan who did not understand the Russian its own publications without charge for transporta- sense of dignity, he declared, but it was unworthy tion. For other publications it would charge, in addi- of a Russian. Nevertheless many émigrés continu- tion to the costs of the works – ten pounds sterling ally complained that Kravchinsky was pandering to for the first 21 pounds (roughly 10 kilograms) and western liberal tastes. three pounds sterling for each additional fourteen Kravchinsky, sure that a great potential for uncen- pounds in each shipment. sored Russian publications existed within the Rus- The smuggling operation, however, soon gave rise sian empire, had his own vision of how to reach the to problems. In view of the public character of the Russian public. “Under the Tsar’s rule,” he declared, Free Russian Press Fund, the directors of the fund “the book hunger has become just a chronic as the set up a separate secret organization, independent great hunger, having now reached its apogee.” The of the printing operation, to handle smuggling. This Russian youth, he said, wanted books, not for frivo- activity of necessity had to be conspiratorial, and in lous reading but books that in other countries only 1892 the fund experienced an embarrassing contro- specialists read. To this end, on June 26, 1891, five versy concerning one of its agents. Russian émigrés in London – Kravchinsky, Chai- kovsky, Volkhovsky, Leonid Shishko, and Mikhail Voinich-Kelchevsky, who was in charge of smug- Voinich – signed a declaration creating the Fund gling, had hired a Pole, Marcin Kasprzak, guarante- for the Free Russian Press. Addressed simply to eing his expenses as well as providing his subsistence. “Comrades,” the document spoke of the decline Stanislaw Mendelson of the London Polish organi- 105 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

zation Proletarjat got wind of the arrangement and was completing work on the first brochure in the Free demanded to know the amount of money involved. Russian Press Fund’s series. On April 26, 1892, the Kasprzak, who had had his differences with Men- day before Mendelson’s first attack on the directors of delson about questions of cooperation between Poles the fund, Alexander Dębski had presented the fund and Russians, asked Voinich to observe conspira- with a bill for £6.18.3 for the printing of What We torial secrecy, and Voinich felt obligated to protect Should Do, written by Kravchinsky. The Polish press “another person’s revolutionary secret.” His collea- went on to print the next work too, this one an essay gues in the fund supported Voinich’s decision. by Kravchinsky on the usefulness of trying to influ- ence foreign opinion. The fund needed to maintain Tempers flared, and Mendelson called the leaders of good relations with the Proletarjat print shop even as the fund “dishonest men,” accusing them of “dirty it fended off Mendelson’s attacks. action, which is in the character of Russian radi- cals,” and he proposed to submit the matter “to the Trouble also arose among the founding fathers of arbitration of English gentlemen.” At the same time the enterprise. Voinich objected to the distribution Chaikovsky sent Mendelson’s wife a letter in which of jobs. “Feliks, and in particular Shishko, have ima- he complained of Mendelson’s “spying on his com- gined that I am an incompetent person,” he com- rades, opening other people’s letters, etc., in order plained to Chaikovsky, “that I am only good for to get into the secrets of another political organi- manual labor, that I am not a conspirator, that I can zation.” With his own style of fractured English, only be an aide for some general and cannot work Chaikovsky exclaimed, “With him we don’t wish to independently.” He asked Chaikovsky to intercede meet not only in his house but nowhere else.” Men- with Stepniak and to help reestablish his position of delson indignantly criticized Chaikovsky’s “import equality within the fund’s collective. Kravchinsky’s of Asiatic customs” in “addressing his letter to a response to this plea is unknown, but Voinich left lady” and therein insulting her husband. the group at the beginning of 1895. Despite efforts at mediation undertaken by such In its report issued at the end of 1892, after eighteen luminaries as Petr Kropotkin, neither side would months of its existence, the Free Russian Press Fund back down, and August 1892 a court of honor, con- claimed great accomplishments. Stepniak’s What sisting of three Englishmen, considered the argu- We Should Do had sold out its first printing of 3000 ments. In their judgment the arbiters criticized both copies and now only 2340 were left of its second parties: Mendelson could not say that the leaders printing of 5000 copies. Of the 5000 printed copies of the fund had “corrupted” Kasprzak by having of Stepniak’s Foreign Agitation, only 880 remained him work with “Russian constitutionalists”; Chai- in stock. The fund had sold over 12,700 books kovsky had to apologize to Mme. Mendelson; and and pamphlets, and it had smuggled 2000 items Mendelson had to apologize for his unfounded alle- into Russia. On the negative side, 2114 items had gations. “The court would strongly impress upon been lost. The report calculated the fund’s income all persons engaged in the inquiry,” the arbiters in its first eighteen months at 242 pounds, and its declared, “the imperative necessity in the interest of expenses at 231 pounds. Actually, despite the san- the Russian and Polish movements alike of avoiding guine tone of the report, the fund was just limping ill-feeling and jealousy which simply lead to outside along; the Russian émigrés had not supported it to talks and scandal injurious to both causes alike.” the degree that Kravchinsky had hoped. The judgment satisfied the fund, which immediately Even though he at times allowed himself to be pes- printed a broadside carrying the news. Mendelson simistic, Kravchinsky nevertheless kept looking angrily responded that the fund’s version left out the for the key to success, and in 1893 he decided to arbiters’ judgment that the fund’s leaders had deli- go ahead with his dream of establishing a new Rus- berately misled the Proletarjat group. Conjuring up sian language periodical. He justified the enterprise spirits of the past, Mendelson thundered, “Messrs. by saying, “In the meantime, material of a transi- Stepniak & Co.... seek their political inspiration from tory but momentary keen interest was sent from a certain Mr. Dragomanoff, who in collaboration Russia; it became evident that the RFPF must take with an agent of the Russian government Mr. Malt- some steps to meet the ripening demand in Russia chinsky, published a journal in the Russian language, for having news and notes of the moment spread by entitled ‘The Free Word’.” Dragomanov, Mendelson means of print. This demand seems to be the most continued, “urges the depolonization of Lithuania burning necessity of the moment, and let us hope and seeks to create an anti-semitic movement in the answer to it will soon assume some definite and Ukrainia.” In conclusion he warned the Russian Free practical shape.” Press Fund to stay out of Polish affairs. Kravchinsky’s thoughts on the need for a perio- 106 The conflict particularly embarrassed the fund dical echoed Herzen’s considerations in establis- because at just that time the Proletarjat print shop hing Kolokol as a supplement to Poliarnaia zvezda Chapter 17: KRAVCHINSKY’S FRIENDS and Lavrov’s in establishing a biweekly newspaper edom is composed for a good deal of rich people Vpered to supplement the thick journal of the same for whom this [i.e. 215.80 francs – aes] is a trifling name. The coincidence of those two predecessors’ amount,” the editor, Wilhelm Anderfuhren, went on also having been produced in London must have to denounce the society’s activities in general: “But struck Kravchinsky, but as testimony that perhaps if you like to know our opinion about Free Russia he wanted a modest image for his periodical at least and the movement of the society clinging thereto at first, he gave it the unpretentious title of Letuchie in England, I beg your pardon, but I lay it down listki (Flying Sheets). as statement of our conviction that we look upon this whole movement as a trick played by English Nevertheless he had great ambitions. Kravchinsky interests against Russian interests.” There were also had long argued that the periodical press, and its theoretical problems with Frei Russland as a result utmost expression the daily newspaper, constituted of Anderfuhren’s editorial policies. Vera Zasulich the major propaganda innovation of the latter part complained bitterly to Kravchinsky that the publica- of the nineteenth century. The growth of the Euro- tion, in issue no. 9, had attacked the Osvobozhdenie pean reading public made the periodical press an truda group. The group was especially sensitive to awesome weapon for carrying one’s message to the criticisms printed in German, because German people, for educating the people, and he was sure Social Democrats would read them. Kravchinsky that a periodical appealing to the opposition ele- had to let his German publication expire. ments in Russia could yet achieve the popularity and significance once enjoyed by Kolokol. Similarly the American edition of Free Russia closed up shop in 1894, after four years of publication. In Letuchie listki made only a humble start. With this case, Kravchinsky could not know that a Rus- Volkhovsky as its editor it began in December 1893 sian policy spy had sabotaged the operation. The as simply a foldout, one sheet, but it quickly grew – loss of this American venture particularly disap- some of its issues eventually ranged up to 40 pages. pointed Kravchinsky, but he had already begun to It appeared irregularly, with the intervals varying think of the American public as rather flighty and from a week or two to several months. The leaders uncultured. Therefore, he reckoned, the failure of the fund never intended to make it the organ of of this journal was not necessarily the fault of the a political party; it was to serve as a rallying point publishers. for the opposition in general and also to dispense information. Its columns stood open to all comers. In this, the third “London period” of Russian émigré It was not, however, a moneymaker. publishing, Kravchinsky logged his greatest suc- cesses on the foreign front of the Russian revolutio- The publication’s scope covered the whole of the nary movement. The Friends of Russian Freedom Russian empire. In its second issue, dated February remained a forceful lobby in England for years to 19, 1894, Letuchie listki carried a report on the come, although they did not grow into the powerful disturbances in Kražai, Lithuania, where Cos- group that Kravchinsky, in his sanguine moments, sacks attacked a crowd protesting the closing of a had envisioned. With time its work expanded – it church. In the third issue, dated March 23, was a printed pamphlets in English, it rallied to the aid of report on a protest meeting of Lithuanians in She- religious dissidents in Russia, and it raised money nandoah, Pennsylvania. The fifth issue, dated April for various specific causes. The organization stood 30, declared “The movement among Lithuanians as a lasting monument to Kravchinsky’s efforts to in America against the tsarist government is beco- rally support for the struggle against autocratic rule ming stronger,” and it saw here a possible sign of the in Russia. future: “If we recall what a great role the American Irish played in the national-democratic movement Kravchinsky’s own political outlook, especially in in Ireland itself, then we will understand that the the 1890s, emphasizing cooperation between fac- movement of transatlantic Lithuanians can, in cer- tions and groups, was much closer to the parliamen- tain circumstances, provide support for the cause of tary life of England than to the prevailing moods of freedom in Russia itself.” the Russians. No other Russian revolutionary could rival his literary accomplishments in western lan- Kravchinsky had now constructed a formidable guages, but at the same time other émigré leaders network of publications, but this empire was fragile. criticized his lack of ideological commitment. Even The German periodical Frei Russland closed down his concepts of publishing emphasized the distribu- in 1893 amid arguments with its editor as to who tion of information more than organizing political should be responsible for its debts. After claiming action. To the end, he was indeed “a man of the that the “Society of the Friends of Russian Fre- steppe, a free cossack.” 107 Chapter 18:

THE CHIMERA OF UNIFICATION

In the summer of 1891 Russia experienced bad our comrades in Russia will organize a militant weather, and in some twenty normally productive revolutionary party in accord with this program” – regions crops failed. Famine resulted, bringing and in order to explain their party’s historical mis- social unrest on a scale not seen in the empire for sion they announced two new series of publications. over a decade. The government seemed incapable The first, entitled “Materials for the History of the of coping with the crisis; some even charged that it Russian Social-Revolutionary Movement,” would contributed to the problem by continuing to export consist of seventeen titles, and the other, “Principles grain. Urged on by public appeals of figures such as of Theoretical Socialism and Their Application to the writer Lev Tolstoy, the zemstva, institutions of Russia,” would consist of six titles. Each title would local government, rallied to help feed the peasants, be the work of a single author and would appear as and along with relief activities came an upswing in soon as it was ready. the activities of the revolutionaries, who saw in the The series entitled “Materials” was to constitute a crisis new possibilities for mobilizing opposition multi-volume history of the Russian revolutionary forces. movement. Beginning with an introductory volume In the emigration the socialists again argued among on “history, socialism, and the Russian movement,” themselves as to the desirability of working with the it was to include contributions on Russian society liberals. Plekhanov and Akselrod were now ready to before the Decembrists, the Decembrists, the period do so in the name of famine relief, stressing political of Nicholas I, socialism and the era of reforms, as well as humanitarian goals. Others, remembe- Herzen, Chernyshevsky, Bakunin, the decade of ring the controversy that had surrounded the idea 1863-1873, the populists of the ‘70s, Zemlia i volia, of cooperating with the liberals in the publication of Narodnaia volia, workers’ organizations in the Svobodnaia Rossiia and still critical of Kravchinsky’s early 1880s, nationalism and socialism, factions in behavior, considered such thoughts tantamount to 1885-1892, the foreign press on the revolutionary abandoning the class struggle. movement, and finally “Conclusions on the history Unity with the liberals was in fact impossible, of socialism in Russia.” The older generation of acti- because the revolutionaries could not achieve unity vists wanted to justify and explain their programs within their own ranks; the revolutionary move- for the younger generation. According to one of the ment was too diversified to unite under any single senior editors, they were particularly concerned banner. Lavrov refused to serve on any committee with the “good but naive people” who advocated with Kravchinsky. Plekhanov, on the other hand, “childish bombism.” Only five volumes appeared, in contrast to his position in the formative days however, all printed in Geneva, and the Old Naro- of Vestnik Narodnoi voli, preferred Kravchinsky to dovoltsy added an irregular periodical, S rodiny i na the narodovoltsy, saying, “When we unite with Ste- rodinu (From the Motherland and to the Mother- pniak, the narodovoltsy will be neither threatening land), to each volume as it appeared. nor necessary for us.” Kravchinsky, in turn, argued Financially the series did modestly well. In the that the émigrés could not dictate to the people in course of 1893 the group took in almost 2300 francs Russia. Although political activity escalated, the and paid out 1930. It made almost 400 francs on only direct result of Akselrod’s and Plekhanov’s call sales, and, including the money left on hand at the for the creation of a Society for Struggle against the beginning of the year, it had a positive balance of Famine was the publication of a brochure by Plek- almost 1000 francs at the beginning of 1894. A later hanov. accounting made in 1896 showed a continued sur- plus, amounting to almost 1150 francs. The bulk of 108 The “old narodovoltsy” in Paris insisted that their party’s program was still valid – “We are sure that the income came through donations; sales totaled Chapter 18: THE CHIMERA OF UNIFICATION only 587 francs of the 5582 francs listed as income. aring regularly on the 15th of every month – but the campaign failed. In 1896 the publication’s financial In all their publications the old narodovoltsy opposed situation deteriorated seriously, with just £32-2-6 of the thought of cooperating with the liberals. When income as opposed to £66-6 of expenses. Tsar Alexander III died in 1894, a commentator in S rodiny i na rodinu heaped scorn upon the libe- In order to supplement its income, the Free Russian rals who “compose whole madrigals in honor of the Press Fund accepted orders from any oppositional teeth of the autocratic wolf.” The old narodovoltsy Russian group so long as the work would not con- also denounced the frirushianskoe napravlenie (the tribute to further splits within the movement. (In Free Russian tendency). Calling the Free Russian its listings, the fund distinguished between its own Press Fund in London “a commercial enterprise series of publications and works it was publishing dealing in forbidden books,” they allowed the fund’s on a commercial basis.) In the summer of 1895 it bookstore to sell their publications but would have announced that if it had 500 guaranteed subscri- nothing to do with the fund itself. bers, it would republish Chernyshevsky’s What is To be Done? (The subscribers failed to materialize.) The Free Russian Press Fund operated on a On another occasion it accepted a 25 franc contri- somewhat broader financial base than did the old bution to print 1500 copies of a letter to be distri- narodovoltsy, but it too was heavily dependent on buted to Russian tourists abroad. The book store, on donations to balance its budget. For the year 1894, the other hand, was ready to handle all publications. the fund reported £373-10-9 in income, of which Kravchinsky obtained 800 copies of Kennan’s books £179-13 came through sales, as against £371-2-1 in for resale, and at the end of 1895 the fund bought expenses. For the year 1895 income totaled £427- the remaining stock of Herzen’s publications held 19-1, including £112-11-4 in sales, while expenses by Trübner. Kravchinsky planned to start reprinting came to £426-19-2. Particularly disappointing for Herzen’s works in 1896. Kravchinsky were the financial statements of his periodical Letuchie listki, which reported income in Kravchinsky focused the fund’s efforts on the poli- 1894 of only £46-6 against expenses, for issues 1-13, tical struggle for a constitution, but without vio- of £71-7. lence. In a new conclusion that he appended to the Russian edition of Underground Russia – this In March 1895 the fund opened its own print was a translation from the original Italian, with shop. Dissatisfied with their dependence on other corrections, additions, and some alterations – he shops, the directors declared that the publication announced, “Terrorism as a system has outlived its of a periodical such as Letuchie listki demanded time and it cannot be revived.” At best it constituted “speed and promptness of work.” A fund-raising “a weapon of very limited usefulness. It is satisfac- campaign brought in contributions of £61, and the tory only in a period of unconditional hopelessness.” fund moved into its new quarters free of debt. The The new revolutionary period, he continued, would print shop had new type, enough for about five and see “open risings,” resulting from war, financial a half signatures (about 250,000 characters). The crises, or even revolutions in neighboring countries. shop was large enough to employ two typesetters, The task of the revolutionary lay for the moment in but for the moment the fund’s budget could barely “propaganda, propaganda among the intelligentsia, support one. propaganda among the urban workers, among the The next step had to be to raise more money to keep armed forces, among the peasants.” the shop working. As the fund’s directors observed, In 1893 Kravchinsky was delighted to establish con- “Agitational material is flowing to us unceasingly, tact with a new group in Russia called Partiia naro- and the development of agitational activity now dnogo prava (Party of Popular Right), founded by depends exclusively on the flow of funds for publi- Mark Natanson and Nikolai Mikhailovsky, which cation.” Typesetters required pay: “No typesetter sought a united front of all oppositional elements will give up regular work in one print shop to work for the common struggle. They had first thought in another on a temporary basis.” The fund encou- of printing their own periodical – “We now need raged donations of any size: “However small the a Kolokol, only a Kolokol,” declared one member – contribution might be, it will advance the cause; but had then decided to look to the emigration for even the sea consists of drops.” help. Letuchie listki nevertheless could not turn a profit. In 1893 the party took advantage of the Russian The periodical’s income for 1895 came to £76-16, government’s liberalization of regulations for while its expenses, for issues 14-28, totaled £81- foreign travel in 1893 in order to facilitate atten- 15-4. At the end of the year the fund tried to raise 12 dance at the Chicago World’s Fair, and it sent repre- pounds to convert the Listki into a biweekly publica- sentatives, headed by the writer Vladimir Koro- tion – since the late spring of 1895 it had been appe- 109 lenko, to London and then on to the United States. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Kravchinsky welcomed the visitors, and the talks fact be brought together under the roof of one peri- went well. He later reported, “Korolenko likes the odical. The Free Russian Press Fund, moreover, had absence of narrow party spirit in our program, since dispatched representatives to visit Plekhanov, and he, even more than we, is not infected by the Plek- these men had returned with unfavorable reports, hanovite German chauvinism and like us sees the calling him a member of the older generation, no future of the Russian people as a result of all existing longer so active as he had once been. Plekhanov currents and opinions in Russia.” Kravchinsky also had spent his energy “on polemics and arguments sent his own representative to Russia, Constance with other Russian revolutionaries,” one man com- Garnett, an English socialist who subsequently won mented; the experience had left him “nervous, into- considerable note as a translator of Russian litera- lerant, and tactless.” Plekhanov’s arguments with the ture. social democratic youth, moreover, had allegedly alienated him from the mass of the students in the In the United States, Korolenko did no sightseeing emigration, and he was now “physically and ner- as he concentrated on his political conversations vously a beaten man.” On the basis of such evidence, with fellow countrymen. In New York he contacted Kravchinsky was disinclined to pursue the thought Lazar Goldenberg, and in Chicago Egor Lazarev of working with the Marxist group in Geneva. and Aleksandr Linev, at one time the business manager of Lavrov’s Vpered and now an exhibitor The osvobozhdentsy had their own reservations in the Russian section at the World’s Fair. Two other about the possibilities of a joint publication. The representatives of the Partiia narodnogo prava fol- “Americans,” Zasulich declared, wanted a news- lowed Korolenko, and by the time the travelers from paper that would carry interesting articles but not Russia had all returned home, they had stirred up a program. In January 1894 she stated that the emi- considerable debate within the emigration on the gration could not support a newspaper: possibility and feasibility of uniting behind a new periodical. A newspaper must live by the interests of the day, Egor Lazarev took the initiative in this endeavor. A it must advance ideas only in connection with facts participant in the populist movement of the 1870s, of current life, and for this, besides constant close he had been sentenced to exile in Siberia. In 1890 he relations with the Russians, one needs quick and fled to the United States. When Kravchinsky visited accurate distribution in the homeland. the United States, Lazarev began to work with the American Friends of Russian Freedom. After his At present the emigration simply could not meet meetings with Korolenko in Chicago, Lazarev, in these conditions. the words of a police report, turned his “uncommon The osvobozhdentsy, moreover, lacked both phy- energy, independent character, and tremendous sical and financial resources at this time. According practical conspiratorial experience” to the cause of to a contemporary police report, the group’s mem- uniting the revolutionary emigration. bers were barely “eking out a miserable existence, As his first step, he moved to Europe, declaring, not having at their disposal enough means not only “The printed word is necessary in Russia. Obviously for the publication of brochures but even for their the place for a Russian newspaper is in Europe, life.” Plekhanov was in fact depressed by the lack of and not in America, if one wants to have contact response in Russia to his efforts. When Akselrod with Russia.” He refused to take sides in the dis- tried to be encouraging, speaking of him as “chosen putes among Plekhanov, Lavrov, and Kravchinsky, by history,” Plekhanov called himself more of a arguing, “To make an organ of just one of these cur- “squeezed lemon,” but he continued to struggle. rents would mean to weaken both the strength of Particularly disturbing for Plekhanov were the the newspaper and the drive for union.” He wanted continued clashes with the young socialist émigrés to create something new, combining the energies in Switzerland. In 1893, in an effort to calm their that were now spending themselves without clear young sympathizers, the osvobozhdentsy organized direction. Everyone, he insisted, had to be ready to the Union of Russian Social Democrats, a “perip- compromise for the common good. hery,” for which the Osvobozhdenie truda group The émigrés, however, had already debated the would comprise the brain. This arrangement did not question of unification and had arrived at negative satisfy some of the young Marxists, and Leo Jogi- conclusions. Kravchinsky and Zasulich had been ches and Rose Luxemburg led a breakaway faction exchanging letters on the subject, and while she protesting the osvobozhdentsy’s elitism. They had assured him that the Marxists could endorse his no patience for Plekhanov’s concerns about theory; belief in the necessity of popular revolution, rather they wanted more popular agitational literature. 110 than a coup d’état by a small group, both she and Plekhanov struck back by blocking Luxemburg’s Kravchinsky doubted that the emigration could in admission to the Zurich congress of the Second Chapter 18: THE CHIMERA OF UNIFICATION

International, but Jogiches used his money to open of the revolutionary movement. The organ, to be his own print shop in Geneva, publishing the Social- edited by a prominent writer known by all the Rus- Democratic Library. This new series would include sian intelligentsia, would print “all facts that could both popular and theoretical works, and Boris not be published in the censored press,” including Krichevsky, Jogiches’s associate, began translating protests; it would analyze current government poli- works by Marx. cies and actions; and it would propagate “the ideas of political liberty.” He found little enthusiasm for Plekhanov, however, had a trump card. When Kri- these proposals; perhaps his most interested liste- chevsky wrote to Engels, the socialist patriarch ners were Russian police officials. inquired of Plekhanov as to the nature of this new group. Plekhanov replied that Krichevsky had mas- Warned of Lazarev’s mission to Europe by an agent tered only the letter and not the spirit of Marxism in New York, Rachkovsky, still in charge of the and had now come under the influence of Jogi- Foreign Agency of the tsarist police, established ches, whom Plekhanov compared unfavorably with close surveillance of the new arrival’s activity in Nechaev. Jogiches, Plekhanov admitted, had contri- Paris. Lazarev, he reported back to St. Petersburg, buted to the publication of works by the osvobozh- was planning a coordinated campaign that would dentsy, but “at the same time he conducted a hidden employ terrorist attacks, then public bombings, and campaign against us wherever he just could.” The finally public proclamations. Believing that Lazarev Social-Democratic Library, Plekhanov insisted, is was abour to send agents to Russia, Rachkovsky “completely directed against us.” Engels thereupon recommended that the authorities alert the border informed Krichevsky that his own and Marx’s wri- guards, and he launched his own more aggressive tings constituted “my literary property” and there- campaign aimed at disrupting the activities of the fore, “I hereby protest against your behavior and émigrés. As he put it in one of his reports, the English intend to keep all rights.” Krichevsky hastily apo- press was now discussing the activities of the Rus- logized, but Plekhanov had won Engels’s endorse- sian émigrés in a more balanced manner; therefore ment of the osvobozhdentsy as the official Russian he planted articles in the London press critical of Marxists. the “nihilists and revolutionaries.” The assassination of President Carnot in France in June 1894 helped Bolstered by this success, Plekhanov began prepa- him: French officials carried out searches among ring an introduction to a republication of Engels’s the émigrés in Paris and expelled Lazarev. polemic with Tkachev in the 1870s. As his essay developed, it became a major polemic against Mik- Lazarev now moved to London and turned the hailovsky and the populists in Russia, and Plekh- money that he had brought from the United States anov chose to make it into a separate pamphlet. The over to the Free Russian Press Fund with the sti- result, disguised for purposes of passing censorship pulation that it be used to publish a revolutionary under the abstruse title of On the Question of the calendar. The idea of such a calendar dated back to Development of the Monistic View of History and Tikhomirov’s calendar for 1883; Lavrov had sug- under the author’s pseudonym of Beltov, appeared gested such a project to the Literary Fund in Zurich legally in Russia during the winter of 1894-1895 in the late 1880s. (Elpidin, ever alert for an easy and had a far greater impact on the revolutionary publication, reissued Tikhomirov’s calendar but movement than any terrorist bomb had wrought. renamed it 1898.) Kravchinsky applied the money Commenting on the work’s influence in Russia, to his announced “anthology on the history of the Vladimir Lenin later declared that it had “reared a political movements in Russia in the last century.” whole generation of Russian Marxists”; an émigré Although Kravchinsky was listed as the editor of the observer exclaimed, “In the Oberstrasse [i.e., in the publication, Burtsev, who was now working with Russian quarter of Zurich] the Beltov influenza has the fund in London, put it together. Published in not yet abated.” Rather than searching for unity, two volumes, the work, Za sto let (After One Hun- Plekhanov contributed significantly to the differen- dred Years), documented the development of the tiation of the Marxists from the populist traditions revolutionary movement in the course of the nine- both at home and abroad. teenth century, and the second volume offered a year-by-year chronicle, 1801-1896, of arrests, trials, Despite such obviously growing differences among executions, escapes, assassinations, obituaries, and the émigrés, Lazarev argued that all the Russian literary monuments. socialists were in principle agreed on the desira- bility of overthrowing the present Russian govern- The title page of the publication testified to émigré ment, that the struggle against the autocracy consti- disputes, listing Burtsev as the compiler “with the tuted a foundation for coordinating all oppositional editorial participation of S. M. Kravchinsky (Ste- elements, and that “a general oppositional-political pniak).” After Kravchinsky’s death in December organ” could facilitate the further development 1895, Burtsev had claimed the work as his own, 111 THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

but the directors of the fund, because of personal a periodical entitled Zemskii sobor (Assembly of disputes with him, refused to accept the anthology the Land), the name symbolizing the political goal as an official part of their series. When Burtsev of establishing a national legislature. The peri- objected, they relented but still insisted on adding odical would replace the fund’s Letuchie listki, an “editorial introduction.” Burtsev again objected, and the London group would then use the Young arguing, “There can be no talk of editorial intro- Narodovoltsy’s publication Russkii rabochii (Russian ductions since only Stepniak was ‘editor’ for us; I Worker), which was edited in Paris and printed in agreed to his editorship and only to his.” In the Geneva, for its own particular purposes. The arran- end the book appeared with a “publisher’s intro- gement, however, soon fell through. duction,” explaining the collective effort behind In contrast to the misfortunes of the London group, the publication. the Osvobozhdenie truda group in the mid 1890s So complicated and convoluted was the intrusion of soon experienced a sudden surge for the better in the tsarist authorities into the affairs of the emigra- its affairs, but first it had to suffer still more. In 1893 tion by this time that they even played an impor- Plekhanov, in desperation, had considered moving tant role in the publication of Burtsev’s anthology. to America, but friends had advised him against it, A police agent, whom Rachkovsky had planted saying that the Russian public in the United States within Kravchinsky’s group, made a considerable was too unsophisticated to appreciate him. When he contribution to the project, and once it was in print, considered moving to England, on the other hand, a the police purchased at least 30 copies of it for their German friend warned, “England – this is poverty; own use, thereby helping it to become one of the if one is not to be the favorite of rich people, as fund’s bestsellers. Stepniak is, then one can die of starvation.” Krav- chinsky himself advised him not to come. Plekh- Despite Lazarev’s failure, the idea of uniting the anov nevertheless set off for London, but in the fall socialist émigrés behind a single periodical refused of 1894, when the Swiss permitted him again to to die. In January 1895 Lazar Goldenberg suddenly settle in Geneva, he returned to Switzerland. decided to return to Europe from the United States, saying that it would be a simple matter to raise the Summarizing the group’s situation in 1894, a tsarist necessary money for a new periodical if one simply police official reported that it “was declining more mobilized the luminaries of the emigration such and more even in the eyes of the emigration, who as Plekhanov, Kravchinsky, and Lavrov. Startled, considered that it did not correspond to the needs Lazarev immediately tried put his friend off. Golden- of the revolutionary struggle with the government.” berg refused to be discouraged. “I see clearly from A year later, however, the police declared that the your letter,” he wrote, “that the financial situation of group was now showing new life and activity, and it the Fund is such that it is not only not in a position “planned to publish a number of popularly written to assure necessary subsistence of someone working brochures for distribution primarily among the for it, but it does not have funds to pay necessary workers.” debts – in other words, it is almost bankrupt.” He The change had taken place as a result of the suc- thereupon agreed to put off his travel plans, but he cess of Plekhanov’s treatise on the “Monistic View assured Lazarev that he would be no burden. The of History” and the development of Social Demo- enterprise should cost only $800 per year, $300 of cratic groups in Russia, bringing together Marxist which would pay for his work as business manager. intellectuals and workers, who all looked for gui- If Lazarev would send him a “fine proclamation dance from the Osvobozhdenie truda group. In the with many known names,” Goldenberg calculated spring of 1895, two representatives of Moscow and that he could raise $400 by May and then could St. Petersburg Social Democrats came to inquire raise the rest in another six months. On March 2, about the possibility of a publishing program to he assured Lazarev that if he came to London he serve the needs of the groups in Russia, Plekhanov would bring enough money to support himself for could finally claim to have a constituency within six months. Then, unexpectedly, he announced on Russia. In 1896, supported by funds coming from March 27 that he was coming, adding, “I unders- Marxists in Russia, Plekhanov could launch his own tand your difficult situation, old man.” Upon his periodical, Rabotnik (The Worker), on a reasonably arrival in London, he immediately joined the lea- stable financial basis. dership of the fund, but he could not come up with the magic support, financial or intellectual, that he Plekhanov’s success in finding an audience spelled had anticipated. doom for any lingering thoughts of creating a single émigré publication, a Kolokol that could Eventually, in the course of 1895 the Russian Free unite all revolutionaries. In Herzen’s day Kolokol Press Fund and a group of liberals in St. Petersburg had enjoyed a readership in all segments of the 112 reached agreement whereby the fund would publish Russian reading public, including the highest Chapter 18: THE CHIMERA OF UNIFICATION level. Plekhanov had now successfully identified a cated opponent of absolutism and intolerance, who much more specific audience. The Russian market had been unjustly attacked for his opposition to the for uncensored materials was growing rapidly, contradictions of anarchism and Jacobinism. Remi- and in response émigré publishing began to diver- niscences of Dragomanov also dredged up memo- sify more rather than to unite. Parties and special ries of the early tensions between revolutionaries of interest groups replaced the various individuals different nationalist convictions and of the intrigues who had maintained print shops by means of per- of the tsarist authorities within the emigration. sonal self-sacrifice. The old shops in Geneva and In August Friedrich Engels died. At the time of London worked on, but they were soon joined by Marx’s death in 1883, there had been no Russian new enterprises, ranging from the Tolstoyans in Marxist movement to speak of; in the twelve years England to the liberals in Germany. In the next ten since then, Engels had controlled the interpretations years the face of Russian publishing in Western of the master’s writings and had imparted his bles- Europe would change drastically. sing on Plekhanov as the major exponent of Mar- As if following a script, the year 1895, besides mar- xism in Russia. Now the new generation of adepts king Plekhanov’s success in reaching an audience in would no longer have direct contact with either of Russia, saw a remarkable series of deaths cut through the “founders of scientific socialism.” The Russians the emigration, in effect announcing the end of the were free to find their own path. first era of émigré publishing, “tamizdat.” Each of In October Nikolai Belogolovy died in Russia. His these deaths evoked a flood of reminiscences of how role in the publication of Obshchee delo was gene- things had once been, and each drew the curtain on rally unknown to his contemporaries, but as a long- some phase of the history of the emigration. time friend of Lavrov’s, as a patron of good causes, On May 20, 1895, Nikolai Zhukovsky died. In an and as a friend of the satirist Saltykov-Shchedrin, he obituary Varlaam Cherkezov recalled him as one of represented for many the ideal of an activist liberal. the great figures of the 1860s. “A glittering orator,” Then, to complete the picture, Sergei Stepniak-Krav- Cherkezov called him, “a talented publicist, a beau- chinsky died in December. He was hit by a train; tifully educated speaker, a witty conversationalist, witnesses said that he had been reading a book a talented musician.” Zhukovsky had never written while walking onto the track. His Underground very much, but he always seemed to be close to the Russia had taught many a gentle reader to admire activists in the printing world. His death, moreover, the assassin’s spirit and not to think of the victim’s snapped one of the few remaining links to the times blood. His warm personality had won friends for of Herzen and Bakunin. the common cause. But he had been unable to bring On June 20 Mikhail Dragomanov died. He had unity to the emigration, and without his leadership spent the last several years in Bulgaria, far from the the Free Russian Press Fund quickly went into a arena in Switzerland where he had experienced such decline. In many ways, Kravchinsky’s death marked grievous wounds. An obituary, observing the motto the end to the era that had begun with Aleksandr nihil nisi bonum de mortuis, pictured him as a dedi- Herzen’s publications, an era of pioneers.

113 Epilogue:

THE LENINIST INHERITANCE

Between 1853, when Herzen in lonely splendor about his influence in the West in raising money, opened his shop in London, and the end of the cen- helping individuals, and generally winning respect tury, when Plekhanov rejoiced in finally finding rea- for the revolutionaries both at home and in the emi- ders in Russia, émigré publishing passed through a gration. colorful history. Herzen, Lavrov, and Kravchinsky Other émigré publishers played lesser roles in the stood out as strong individuals, human banners panorama; in so far as they targeted any group of calling Russians to assemble around them, but with readers, they looked to the deprived and lesser time each met rejection, in no small part because educated. In the absence of financial support from they believed that the activities of the emigration Russia this tended to limit their readership. Elpidin had to be dependent on initiatives from Russia. began as a flaming nihilist and finally settled for Younger activists criticized all three as not being the role of a garrulous entrepreneur. Utin wanted true revolutionaries. Lavrov accepted the role of to develop a programmatic publication, but in the elder statesman more gracefully, Herzen retired dis- long run he could not sustain it. Bakunin had a pro- gruntled from the field of battle, and Kravchinsky gram, but he could not apply himself long enough to more or less fell victim to modern progress. one project to find a broad public. The “three mus- Herzen’s first target had been intellectuals of good keteers,” adopting the principle of “books for the will, and although he experimented with efforts to people,” directed their agitational message at wor- target special groups, such as the religious dissidents kers and peasants and discovered that this audience in Russia, his purposes in publishing had remained was extremely difficult to reach. Plekhanov chose mainly informational. He appealed to the Tsar and Marxism and had to wait for the capitalist system in the Russian intelligentsia to reform themselves and Russia to catch up with his vision. their system. He eschewed efforts to offer a party In the 1850s Herzen’s voice had sounded alone, but program, partly out of the belief that an émigré the image of his newspaper Kolokol as the rallying should not pretend to lead the revolutionary move- banner for dissident thought posed a lingering ideal ment, partly because of his own distaste for pole- for subsequent generations of journalists, In the mics among the oppositional forces. 1860s the Young Emigration added dissonant tones, Lavrov too had appealed to men of good will and but little substantial in the way of publishing. In the had believed that the émigrés could play only a 1870s the émigrés watched rapturously as young limited role in the revolutionary movement. He radicals in Russia first attempted to carry their new essentially called a party into being when he esta- gospel to the people and then turned to violence. blished Vpered. He gave up his intellectual, thick It was an axiom of émigré life that the greater the publication in favor of a newspaper, but he declined activity in Russia, the less the émigrés could do; to fight to keep control of it. When he withdrew emigration, after all, was an alternative to carrying from Vpered, the enterprise collapsed. on the fight in Russia. But the corollary dictated Kravchinsky was not the only émigré to choose that repression within the empire would stimulate western readers as his target, but he was the most émigré activity. When the assassinations campaign successful financially. His stories of revolutionary of the late 1870s and early 1880s failed, a new wave idealism and heroism transformed the image of the of revolutionaries fled to Western Europe where revolutionaries from bloodthirsty terrorists to Wil- they could debate the lessons to be drawn from liam Tells and Charlotte Cordays. He produced no their experiences. thick journal, and his newspaper was open to all. To In this world of uncensored publishing, editors of 114 be sure, his fellow Russians objected to his muddled the émigré periodicals could not agree whether a ideological picture, but there could be no doubt periodical should be a forum for open discussion of Epilogue: THE LENINIST INHERITANCE issues, an informational bulletin carrying the latest a “strictly determined course” and would not be “a news that the tsarist authorities were suppressing, or simple repository of various opinions.” a vehicle for a particular program. They differed in No one before Lenin had offered such a forceful their selection and rejection of manuscripts. Herzen organizational plan. In his time, Herzen had failed to did not want a program, and Kravchinsky argued follow through on Ogarev’s idea of a grand conspi- that the revolutionary press must grant free speech. ratorial organization spreading out through Russia Herzen refused to publish Serno-Solovevich’s criti- in concentric circles. Piotr Tkachev had argued in cism of him; Narodnoe delo refused to publish an favor of a conspiratorial elite to carry out a revolu- essay by Herzen. Tkachev, Plekhanov, and the Naro- tion and then restructure society; he failed to orga- dnoe delo group had their programs; Lavrov was nize any such group. Narodnaia volia had carried willing to open the pages of Vpered to Kravchinsky out a terrorist campaign without a clear social or but not to Tkachev. Plekhanov kept a jealous con- even political program. Activists scorned theorists trol over all his group’s publications, even rejecting as being irrelevant to what had to be done. Lenin contributions by his associates. put together a powerful combination of theory and A growing number of émigrés gradually concluded practice. that they needed better theory for revolution, that When critics charged that he was advocating the the instinctive and spontaneous call to revolution formation of an elite party in the mode of Naro- was not enough. Marxist ideology began to exert a dnaia volia or even of Tkachev’s proposals, Ulianov- growing appeal as an analysis of society and, more Lenin produced a polemical book entitled What is important, of social development. Although Russia to Be Done? The fact that this was the first major was not yet an industrialized land with a strong work he had written under the name he was forever working class, the obvious growth of capitalism in after to be known by, N. Lenin, testifies to the signi- Russia gave weight to Plekhanov’s argument that ficance of the work. Commentators frequently link time would show the applicability of Marx’s tea- it directly to Chernyshevsky’s novel published in chings to Russia. the 1860s, but the question “What is to be done?” In 1900 the Russian Social Democratic newspaper had been in fact a constant in émigré periodicals. Iskra (The Spark) began publication in Munich, Lenin’s answer was different. Germany, and opened what one might call the Arguing that the revolutionary must be armed with Bolshevik era of Russian history. Vladimir Ulianov- proper theory, namely the true Marxist message, Lenin, who had been one of the two men from Russia Lenin declared that the “mass working class move- who visited Plekhanov in 1895, was the moving ment” imposes on the revolutionary the duty to spirit of the publication, and it laid the foundation assume leadership, for Lenin’s conception of revolution embodied in his Bolshevik party that came to power in Russia a because the spontaneous struggle of the prole- generation later. Although Soviet historians insisted tariat will not become its genuine ‘class struggle’ that Iskra was “a newspaper of a new type,” Lenin, until this struggle is led by a strong organization who was born in 1870, just three months after the of revolutionaries. death of Alexander Herzen, drew heavily on the th heritage of 19 century revolutionary publishing, The organization must be “conspiratorial” because especially on Plekhanov’s principles. in an autocratic country it has to be “secret.” And the The announcement of publication called Iskra a newspaper should play a key role in the program. continuation of the work of Plekhanov’s group Like Plekhanov, Lenin declared that the newspaper Osvobozhdenie truda and emphasized the task of must be programmatic, delivering not just Marxist fighting against perversions and misinterpretations “ideas,” but the true Marxist message, and it must of Marxist thought. Social Democratic ideas, Lenin be in fact the force that directs the revolutionary declared, were spreading rapidly, but local groups movement and ties its parts together. were interpreting these ideas in mistaken ways. As Lenin explained, “The mere function of distri- Therefore, in order to build a revolutionary party, buting a newspaper would help to establish actual there must be a centralized organization, a “revo- contacts,” adding that he meant a newspaper issued lutionary party,” that leads workers on the “correct” at least four times a month. Answering his own rhe- path. The newspaper would provide the skeleton of torical question “Can a newspaper be a collective this organization, reaching “all corners of Russia” in organizer?” Lenin replied that order to develop a “firm ideological union,” and lin- king “all centers of the movement” while providing there is no other way of training strong political timely information and guidance. While not ruling organizations except through the medium of an 115 out polemics in its pages, the newspaper would have all-Russian newspaper…. The publication of an THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

all-Russian political newspaper, it was stated in Lenin declared that party would build its base in the Iskra, must be the main line by which we may uns- masses, educating them and raising them to revolu- wervingly develop, deepen, and expand the organi- tionary consciousness and ultimately action. (“Class zation… political consciousness can be brought to the wor- kers only from outside… the economic struggle.”) The revolutionary movement, he argued, needed He granted that his concepts might not be suited an “official organ” that would “train” working class for representative governments in other lands, but leaders to direct the masses on the correct course he argued that his was the only course for overthro- of action. wing Russia’s autocratic system. Responding to the charge that his concept of party It is beyond the scope of this essay to follow the followed the conspiratorial model of Narodnaia further development of Lenin’s revolutionary pro- volia or Tkachev, he pointed out that Narodnaia gram. He would yet split with Plekhanov, lose con- volia had emerged from the split of the second trol of Iskra, and go on to found other revolutionary Zemlia I volia organization. Narodnaia volia had publications. In contrast to his 19th century prede- of necessity had a conspiratorial character, but cessors he would display a remarkable talent in per- it failed to have the proper theoretical basis. The suading younger radicals to accept his program. The chernodeltsy, the predecessors of Osvobozhdenie purpose here is simply to point out how his concep- truda shared common roots with Narodnaia volia. tion of the purpose of Iskra drew on the history of Narodnaia volia, he argued, had been a product of émigré revolutionary publishing in the 19th century. its time, but his concepts of party organization had Lenin, at this point himself an émigré, insisted that a much broader base, preparing the way for revo- using a newspaper as his key weapon, he could lead lution with the spread and proper interpretation the revolutionary movement in Russia; he endorsed of Marxist thought. As for Tkachev, he wrote that Plekhanov’s principle of a firm hand at the editorial while Tkachev’s plan had “grandeur,” attempts to helm; and Iskra in turn would serve as a prototype revive Tkachev’s proposal were “simply ludicrous.” of Lenin’s conception of the party-state.

116 Additional Readings

The original impetus for this account came through State Library); the Manuscript Section of the Lenin my examination of the Russian Underground Col- Library, however, refused me admission. lection at Memorial Library of the University of Wis- The literature on the life of 19th century Russian émi- consin. Totaling almost 2000 volumes and including grés is enormous, and I have therefore chosen to list both revolutionary and non-revolutionary works, here just a few publications and archives as sugges- this collection suggested a story far greater than just tions for further reading. An obvious place to start a listing of its part. I was then able to study this topic is Svodnyi catalog russkoi nelegal’noi i zapreshchennoi in Moscow as a participant in the exchange between pechati XIX veka, B. S. Itenberg, ed. (Moscow, 1971). the American Council of Learned Societies and the The irregular Soviet series Literaturnoe nasledstvo Soviet Academy of Sciences, administered by IREX. has a number of volumes (39/40, 41/42, 62, 63, 87) There I worked in archives and of course in the Rare containing relevant documentation. Book Room of the Lenin Library (now the Russian

Archives:

Archive of the Soviet Revolutionary Party, International Gruppa “Osvobozhdeniia Truda”, 6 vols. Moscow-Lenin- Institute for Social History, Amsterdam. grad, 1923–1928. Bundesarchiv, Bern, Switzerland. Iz arkhiva P. B. Aksel’roda. Berlin, 1925. Kennan, George, archive, United State Library of Congress, K. Marks, F. Engel’s i revoliutsionnaia Rossiia. Moscow, Washington, D. C. 1967. Nicolaevsky collection, Hoover Institution, Stanford, Cali- Literaturnoe nasledstvo Plekhanova, 8 vols. Moscow, fornia. 1934–1940. Tsentral’nyi gosudarstvennyi arkhiv literatury i iskusstva Perepiska G. V. Plekhanov i P. B. Aksel’roda. B. I. Nikola­ (TsGALI, now RGALI), Moscow. evskii, ed. Berlin, 1925. Tsentral’nyi Gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Oktiabrskoi Revoliutsii Pervaia marksistskaia organizatsiia Rossii – Gruppa (TsGAOR, now GAOR), Moscow. “Osvobozhdenie truda” (l883–1903). Moscow, 1984. Volkhovski, Feliks, Hoover Institution, Stanford, California. Zasulich, Vera, Vospominaniia. Moscow, 1931. Zagranichnaia agentura Okhrany, Hoover Institution, Stan- ford, California. Useful Secondary Works and Alexander Herzen: Memoirs: Gertsen, A. I. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem, M. K. Lemke, ed. 21 vols. Petrograd, 1919–1921. Ascher, Abraham. Pavel Axelrod and the Developmentof Men- shevism. Cambridge MA, 1972. Gertsen, A. I. Sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh. 30 vols. Moscow, 1954–1965. Baron, Samuel. Plekhanov: The Father of Russian Marxism. (Stanford, 1963. Memoirs of Alexander Herzen. 4 vols. New York, 1968. Bergman, Jay. Vera Zadulich: A Biography. Stanford, 1973. Mikhail Bakunin: Burtsev, V. I. Za sto let (1800–1896). London, 1897. Archives Bakounine. Vols 4: Michel Bakounine et ses relations avec Sergei Nečaev (Leiden, 1971) and 5: Michel Carr, E. H. The Romantic Exiles.London, 1933. Bakounine et ses relations slaves, 1870–1875, Arthur Deich, Lev. Rol’ evreev v russkom revoliutsionnom dvizhenii. Lehning, ed. Leiden, 1974. Berlin, 1923. Pis’ma Bakunina k A. I. Gertsenu i N. P. Ogarevu, M. Deich, Lev. Russkaia revoliutsionnaia emigratsiia 70-kh gg. P. Dragomanov, ed. St. Petersburg, 1906. Petrograd, 1920. Petr Lavrov and Vpered: Duran, J. A. Lev Alexandrovich Tikhomirov and the End of the Lavrov, P. L. Gody Emigratsii, 2 vols. Boris Sapir, ed. Age of Populism in Russia. Doctoral dissertation, Urbana, Dordrecht, 1974. 1957. Lavrov, P. L. Narodniki-propagandisty 1873–1878gg. Elpidin, M. K. Bibliograficheskii catalog. Profili redaktorov Geneva, 1895. i sotrudnikov. Geneva, 1906. Golitsyn, N. N. Istoriia sotsial’no-revoliutsionnogo dvizheniia v Rossii, 1861– Vpered! 1873–1877. Materialy iz arkhiva Valeriana Niko- 1881 gg. Glava desiataia. St. Petersburg, 1887. laevicha Smirnova. 2 vols. Dordrecht, 1970. Hulse, James. Revolutionists in London: A Study of Five Georgii Plekhanov and the Group “Liberation of Labor”: Unorthodox Socialists. Oxford, 1970. Aksel’rod, Pavel, Perezhitoei peredumannoe. Berlin, 1923. 117 Katorga I ssylka. Moscow, 1921–1935. THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Kirichenko, T. M. Iz istorii russkoi revoliutsionnoi periodi- Thun, A. Geschichte der revoliutionären Bewegungen in Rus- cheskoi pechati 80-kh godov XIX v. Moscow, 1972. land. Basel, 1883. Koz’min, B. P. Iz istorii revoliutsionnoi mysli v Rossii. Moscow, Thun (Tun), A. Istoriia revoliutionnogo dvizhenia v Rossii, 1961. L. E. Shishko, ed. N.p., 1903. Kuklin, G. A. Itogi revoliutsionnogo dvizheniia v Rossii. Thun (Tun), A. Istorila revoliutsionnykh dvizheni v Rossie. Geneva, 1903. N. p., 1903. Mal’shinskii, A. M. Obzor sotsial’no-revoliutsionnogo dvizhe- Ulam, Adam. In the Name of the People. New York, 1979. niia v Rossii. St. Petersburg, 1880. Venturi, Franco. Roots of Revolution. New York, 1960. McClellan, Woodford. Revolutionary Exiles: The Russians in Volodin, A. and B. Itenberg. Lavrov. Moscow, 1981. the First International and the Paris Commune. London, 1979. Other sources: Masaryk, Thomas G. The spirit of Russia. 2 vols. London, 1955. Senn, Alfred Erich. “Lighting the Road Behind: Soviet His- Meijer, Jan. Knowledge and Revolution. Assen, 1953. toriography of the Russian Revolutionary Movement,” Mysyrowicz, Ladislas. “Agents secret tsaristies et revolu- in Soviet Society & Culture: Essays in Honor of Vera S. tionnaires russes a Geneve, 1987–1903,” Revue Suisse Dunham, Terry L. Thompson and Richard Sheldon, eds. d’histoire, 23:40-46. Boulder CO, 1988. . Mysyrowicz, Ladislas. “Imprimeries revoliutionnaires russe Senn, Alfred Erich. “M. K. Elpidin: Revolutionary Publisher,” et ‘orientales’ à Genève (1865–1917,” in Cinq siècles The Russian Review, 41:11–23. d’imperimerie genevoise (Geneva, 1981), pp. 309–15. Senn, Alfred Erich. ATerorizmo šaknys: Rusijos revoliucinis Obzor vazhneishikh doznanii po delam o gusudarstvenykh judejimas XIX a.,@ Kulturos barai, 2002/3: 65–69. prestupleniakh proizvodivshikhsia v zhandarmskikh Senn, Alfred Erich. The Revolutionary Word. A Guide to the upravleniakh Imperii. 25 vols. 1881–1904. Underground Collection in Memorial Library of theUni- Miller, Martin. The Russian Revolutionary Emigres, 1825– versity of Wisconsin-Madison. Madison, 1987. 1870. Baltimore MD, 1986. Senn, Alfred Erich. The Russian Revolution in Swizerland. Pomper, Philip. Peter Lavrov and the Russian Revolutiionary Madison WI, 1971. Movement. Chicago, 1972. Senn, Alfred Erich, The Russian Revolution of the Nineteenth Rudnitskaia, E.L. Russkaia revoliutsionnaia mysl’ – Demokrat- Century as Contemporary History. Occasional papers of icheskaia pechat’, 1864–1873. Moscow, 1984. the Kennan Institute. Washington, D. C., 1993.

118

Se-88 Alfred Erich Senn Alfred Erich Senn / The Russian Émigré Press: From Herzen’s Kolokol to Lenin’s Iskra. – Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, 2008. – 120 p.

ISBN 978-9955-12-470-2

This account aims at depicting 19th century tamizdat, the émigré publishing world in the second half of the century. It offers the genealogy of the various Russian print shops and the major publications in West- ern Europe – how they defined their missions, how they tried to establish their identities, how they tried to win support, and, of course, how their inventory and ideas passed from generation to generation of émigrés.

UDK 070(470)

Alfred Erich Senn

THE RUSSIAN ÉMIGRÉ PRESS: FROM HERZEN’S KOLOKOL TO LENIN’S ISKRA

Designer / Viršelio autorė, maketuotoja Rasa Švobaitė

2008 12 29. 15 leid. lankų. Užsakymo Nr. Išleido Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, S. Daukanto g. 27, LT–44249 Kaunas.