Orientalism in Geopolitical Representations of Imperial Russia’s Military and Diplomatic Elites: Late 19th – Early 20th Century Materials Discussing the ‘Armenian Question’ Analyzed

Introduction. Edward W. Said’s Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient  introduced the category ‘Orientalism’ into scientific and political discourse. So, the article focuses on the Armenian question that became a remarkable part of the Eastern question at the turn of the 20th century — to illustrate features of ‘Russian Orientalism’. The decline of the Ottoman Porte, difficulties faced by ethnic Armenians in Turkey, and the political unrest among Armenians of the Caucasus resulted in that the Russian military and diplomats were paying close attention to those events, which was reflected in related reports. Materials and methods. The published sources examined are those authored by N. Ivanov, A. Nelidov, D. Putyata, P. Tomilov, I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, R. Termen. The archival documents involved (State Archive of Russian Federation) are A. Nelidov’s reports of 1882 and 1896, both addressed to V. Lamsdorf. The theoretical basis is shaped by concepts of Orientalism, Occidentalism, and critical geopolitics, the latter viewing geopolitical ideas of elites as an independent phenomenon referred to as ‘high geopolitics’. Results. After the Treaty of Berlin (1878) the Armenian question became a new domain for interaction between the great powers. The analysis conducted herein confirms that ‘Russian Orientalism’ — in geopolitical ideas of the elites — had an anti-Western shade. Paradoxically, in Eastern contexts Russian imperial elites were positioning themselves as representatives of European civilization. However, when it came to defend national interests, their reasoning would obtain anti-Western tones. Occidentalism presupposes a unification of the Western world, which, for example, can be observed in the reports of Ya. Lundekvist and A. Nelidov. The views and shades of Orientalism were determined by practical job tasks. For instance, Governor-General I. Vorontsov-Dashkov was rather a bearer of ‘internal Orientalism’ suggesting a patronizing concern for the Caucasian Armenians. Therefore, there were certain differences in attitudes of capital-based executives and those articulated by ones in the colonized periphery of the Empire. Conclusions. So, the study concludes as follows. Firstly, how the elites tended to perceive the essence of the Armenian question and its Turkish contexts proves the legitimacy of the category ‘Russian Orientalism’ — directed both outside and inside — the latter covering the Caucasus with a certain portion of Armenian population. Secondly, features of Orientalism in geopolitical representations of Russian elites were determined by practical tasks of their service. Thirdly, ‘Russian Orientalism’ is more heterogeneous and its aspects outnumber those presented in Edward W. Said’s study.

1. State Archive of the Russian Federation.

2. Alekseev P. V. Notes on Russian Orientalism as a phenomenon of cultural transfers. Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 2020. No. 67. Pp. 189–203. (In Eng.) DOI: 10.17223/19986645/67/10

3. Baskhanov M. (comp.) The Armenian Question in Turkey: [Analyzing] Materials of Russia’s General Staff. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2013. 637 p. (In Russ.)

4. Bustanov A. K. Soviet Orientalism and the Creation of Central Asian Nations. London: Routledge, 2015. 172 p. (In Russ.)

5. Johnson C., Coleman A. The internal other: Exploring the dialectical relationship between regional exclusion and the construction of national identity. Cultural Geography & Geohumanities. 2012. Vol. 1. No. 2. Pp. 107–125. (In Russ.)

6. Kemper M. Russian Orientalism. On: Oxford Research Encyclopedias. Asian History. [Posted on] 26 September 2018. Available at: https://oxfordre.com/asianhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.001.0001/acrefore-9780190277727-e-297;jsessionid=84DA4E4A1A2D80644549E885F2CEBB55 (accessed: 21 January 2023). (In Eng.)

7. Kolosov V. ‘Low’ and ‘high’ geopolitics: Images of foreign countries in representations of Russian citizens. Otechestvennye Zapiski. 2002. No. 3. Pp. 33. Available at: https://magazines.gorky.media/oz/2002/3/nizkaya-i-vysokaya-geopolitika.html (accessed: 21 January 2023). (In Russ.)

8. Kryuchkov I. V. The British factor in the development of the national movement of Armenians of Western Armenia in the last third of the XIXth century in the assessment of Colonel D. V. Putyata. Humanities and Law Research. 2021. No. 3. Pp. 48–54. (In Russ.)

9. Margaryan E. G. Modern nomothetic approaches in the analysis of the dynamics of world history: “ReORIENTalization” or “Orientalization” of modern historical consciousness. Dialogue with Time. 2016. No. 55. Pp. 173–193. (In Russ.) DOI: https://roii.ru/r/1/55.10.

10. Metin A. Occidentalism: An eastern reply to Orientalism. Journal of Social Sciences of the Turkic World. 2020. No. 93. Pp. 191–202. (In Eng.)

11. Milyutin D. A. Memoirs by Field Marshal Dmitry Alekseevich Milyutin. Tomsk: Military Academy, 1919. 456 p. (In Russ.)

12. Morrison A. ‘Applied Orientalism’ in British India and Tsarist Turkestan. Comparative Studies in Society & History. 2009. Vol. 51. No. 3. Pp. 619–647. (In Eng.)

13. Nelidov A. I. To occupy the straits. Krasnyi arkhiv. 1931. Vol. 3 (46). Pp. 179–187. (In Russ.)

14. Ó Tuathail G. Postmodern geopolitics? The modern geopolitical imagination and beyond. In: Ó Tuathail G., Dalby S. (eds.) Rethinking Geopolitics. London, New York: Routledge, 1998. Pp. 16–38. (In Eng.)

15. Popov M. E. D. A Milyutin’s contribution in the development of the Russian military science. Historical and Social Educational Ideas. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 5/2. Pp. 100–105. (In Russ.)

16. Rybachenok I. S. Alexander Ivanovich Nelidov: Fate and career of a Russian diplomat. Voprosy Istorii. 2021. No. 10–1. Pp. 16–35. (In Russ.)

17. Said E. W. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. Moscow: Russkiy Mir, 2006. 636 p. (In Russ.)

18. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye D. Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration. P. Bavin (transl.). Moscow: Poligraficheskaya Entsiklopediya, 2019. 287 p. (In Russ.)

19. Velichko L. N. The Armenian question in the context of Russian eastern politics in the XIX-XX centuries. Bulletin of Kalmyk University. 2021. No. 4. Pp. 6–15. (In Russ.)

20. Velichko L. N., Ambartsumyan K. R. The Caucasian factor and Imperial Russia’s position in the Armenian question: Late 19th and early 20th centuries. In: Matishov G. G. (ed.) Peoples of the Caucasus in the 18th–21st Centuries: History, Policy, Culture. Forum proceedings. In 2 parts. Pt. 2. Pyatigorsk, Rostov-on-Don: Southern Scientific Center (RAS), 2021. Pp. 28–34. (In Russ.)

21. Vorontsov-Dashkov I. I. Eight Years as Governor of the Caucasus: Most Humble Report by Adjutant General Count [Illarion Ivanovich] Vorontsov-Dashkov. St. Petersburg: State Publ. House, 1913. 36 p. (In Russ.)