Lomonosov’s Bastards: Anatolii Fomenko, Pseudo-History and Russia’s Search for a Post-Communist Identity A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree Doctor of Philosophy From School of History and Politics University of Wollongong By Konstantin Sheiko 2004 I, Konstantin Sheiko, declare that this thesis, submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy, in the School of History and Politics, University of Wollongong, is wholly my own work unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged. The document has not been submitted for qualifications at any other academic institution. Konstantin Sheiko 20.3.2004 ii Of you, there are millions. Of us, hordes, hordes and hordes Just try to fight with us! Yes we are Scythians! Yes we are Asiatics! With slanting and greedy eyes’. Alexander Blok, ‘The Scythians’, 1918 iii Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Nationalism 23 3 Fomenko 50 4 Kiev Rus 89 5 Mongols I 136 6 Mongols II 180 7 Ivan the Terrible 208 8 Conclusion 228 9 Bibliography 235 iv List of Illustrations Figure One: A ‘true’ medieval map p. 55 Figure Two: Muscovy and Tartaria p. 59 Figure Three: Cossack Columbus p. 66 Figure Four: Cortez Map p. 70 Figure Five: Russian Horde at Constantinople p. 72 Figure Six: Russian Tatar p. 189 Figure Seven: Kulikovo Field p. 195 Figure Eight: A pile of skulls p. 198 Figure Nine: Horde helmet and sword p. 205 v Abstract Anatolii Fomenko is a distinguished Russian mathematician turned popular history writer. He is the founder of New Chronology, part of the explosion of ‘pseudo- history’ that has emerged in Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Among his more startling claims are that the Old Testament was written after the New Testament, that Russia is older than Greece and Rome and that the medieval Mongol Empire was in fact a Slav-Turk world empire, a Russian Horde, to which Western and Eastern powers paid tribute. Fomenko takes inspiration from Mikhail Lomonosov, Russia’s most celebrated eighteenth century scientist and self-taught patriotic historian. Lomonosov was a layman in matters of history, who was given to patriotic excess but whose account of the past fell within the bounds of what is usually considered to be history. The same is not true of Fomenko whose account of the past is as fantastic as it is popular. The question of this thesis is why such accounts of the past are written and, more importantly, read in post- Communist Russia. I conclude that Fomenko’s version of the past is popular because he finds in history a simple and usable answer to the question of who the Russians are. Fomenko taps into existing Russian notions of identity, specifically the widespread belief in the positive qualities of empire and the special mission of Russia. He has drawn upon previous attempts to establish a Russian identity, ranging from Slavophilism through Stalinism to Eurasianism. Fomenko’s account of the past speaks to the Russian present, which, in the absence of Ukraine and Belarus, is much more firmly placed at the centre of the Eurasian land-mass than it was under the Tsars or Communists. While fantastic, Fomenko’s pseudo-history strikes many Russian readers as no less legitimate than the lies and distortions peddled not just by Communist propagandists but also by tsarist historians and church chroniclers. vi Acknowledgements First and foremost, I am deeply indebted to my family, especially Emily and Boris, Natasha and Alexandra. Secondly, I would like to thank profoundly my supervisors, Dr. Stephen Brown and Associate Professor Greg Melleuish. vii Foreword Growing up as a Russian youth in Kazakhstan, I gained first-hand knowledge of competing nationalisms in a frontier area. As the Soviet Union began to crumble and forbidden historical topics became the subject of an amazing variety of books dealing with Russia’s past, I became interested in alternative histories of Russia, especially the New Chronology movement led by Anatolii Fomenko. When writing my Masters thesis in the United States in the 1990s on the subject of Russia and Chechnya, it became apparent to me that Western writers would place the New Chronology books I recalled from my youth in the category of dangerous ethno-nationalist pseudo-history. The political violence in the Caucasus in the 1990s seemed a case study in the impact that conflicting claims about the past can have on the present. Given the fears that are often held in the West concerning Russia and the rise of anti-Western ‘Eurasianism’, I decided that it would be useful for me, and, hopefully for the scholarly community, if I undertook a study of Fomenko, one of the best-known pseudo-historians in Russia, in the light of Western accounts of Russian nationalism. This thesis is the result of that journey. viii Introduction Since the fall of Communism in 1991, Russian historians have engaged in a process of rewriting, rediscovering and reinventing Russia’s past. They have been joined by an army of popular and amateur historians who write about the past often in the hope of influencing contemporary politics and public opinion. This thesis concerns a group of writers whose focus is the past and whose work, amateur rather than scholarly, is part of the present contest to establish a new identity for post-Communist Russia. A central question for post-Communist Russian identity is the relationship between Russia and its imperial heritage. Vera Tolz has pointed out that for Russia, the process of nation building has been complicated by the fact that: Russia has traditionally been the centre of an empire, and therefore confusion over the 'just borders' of the new state is greater among politicians, intellectuals and even ordinary people than is the case in the non-Russian newly independent states…what is important to note is that the early creation of an empire (well before the process of Russian nation building began), the empire's land-based character and the resulting high level of mutual cultural influences and assimilation between conquerors and conquered to some extent blurred the feeling of difference between the imperial people and other subjects of the empire.1 Another distinguishing feature of Russian identity, according to Tolz, is that the majority of intellectuals in Russia see the broadly defined 'West', rather than non-Russians of the former Soviet Union, as 'the constituting other' in opposition to which Russia seeks to understand itself. According to the historian Alexander Yanov, Russians have always been divided into those who viewed Russia as part of the European tradition and those who favour a special path or sonderweg for Russia. For many Russian patriots, there was 1 Vera Tolz, Russia, Arnold, London, 2001, pp. 70-73. 1 a clash of civilisations, a war between individualistic Romano-German Europe and the more spiritual and collectivist world of Orthodox Russia.2 Vladimir Shlapentokh has noted the importance of what he describes as the 'greatness syndrome' to the Russian sense of identity. Historically, Russians have compared the status of their state to the greatest power of the day - France in the eighteenth century, Britain in the nineteenth century and the United States in the twentieth century. Shlapentokh noted opinion polls in the mid 1990s that suggested 75% of Russians were nostalgic for the Soviet Union and its superpower status. About the same number looked forward to the reappearance of Russian greatness in the future.3 These three broad themes of imperial heritage, opposition to the West and the search for greatness are of crucial importance for the writers whose work is the subject of this thesis. These writers are engaged in the process of imagining a new Russia, although they regard this new Russia as the recovery of something ancient and essential. They have become popular at a time when Russia’s identity is up for grabs, and when it is by no means clear whether Russia’s present rulers will succeed either in building a Western- style nation state or in reestablishing Russia as the powerful international actor it was in centuries past. Anatolii Fomenko (1945-) is a renowned mathematician who belongs to the academic staff of Moscow State University. Fomenko is a member of Russia’s Academy of Sciences, a professor with a doctorate in applied physics and mathematics, head of the Mechanical-Mathematical Department of Moscow State University and author of one hundred and eighty scientific works. He has written twenty-six monographs and textbooks in his specialist field of mathematics. Fomenko was awarded Russia’s State 4 Award in 1996 for his scientific achievements. 2 Alexander Yanov, ‘Russian nationalism in Western studies: misadventures of a Moribund paradigm’, Demokratizatsiia, Fall 2001, v9, i4, p.552. 3 V. Shlapentokh, ‘Is the greatness Syndrome Eroding?’ The Washington Quarterly, Jan 1, 2002, v25, i1, p. 132. 4 A. Fomenko, G, Nosovskii, Novaia khronologia i kontseptsia drevnei Rusi, Anglii, Rima. Fakty, statistikia, gipotesy, II volumes, Moscow State University press (MGU), Moscow, 1995, 1996; A. Fomenko, Novaia khronologia Gretsii. Antichnost’ i srednevekov’e, II volumes, MGU, Moscow, 1996; A. Fomenko, G. Nosovskii, Imperia: Rus’, Turtsia, Kitai, Evropa, Egipet. Novaia matematicheskaia khronologia drevnosti, Faktorial press, Moscow, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999; A. Fomenko, G. Nosovskii, Rus’ i Rim. Pravilno li my poinimaem istoriuy Evropy i Azii? II volumes, Olimp, ACT print house, Moscow, 1997; A. Fomenko, G. Nosovskii, Novaia khronologia Rusi, Faktorial press, Moscow, 1997; A. Fomenko, 2 Fomenko’s interest in astronomy and its application to chronology caused him to undertake what would prove to be a commercially successful journey into popular history writing. He began his historical research in the 1970s but only came to prominence outside of mathematics after the collapse of Communism.