Russian academia was also put to the service of the government. Il’ia Berezin, along with another author, Villiam Dittel’, were among the students of Mirza Kazembek, a distinguished Orientalist professor who taught at Kazan’ University from 1827 to 1849.35 “The period in the history of Russian Orientalism when the needs of scholarly Orientalism were totally sacrificed to the real or alleged interests of political life is closely connected with the name of Kazem-bek [sic] and his most talented students.”
Thus, the Russian travelers’ connection with imperial politics was direct and open, and they were aware of this connection. Indeed, the majority of them represented the Russian Empire in Iran and were unambiguously proud of it. The support of monarchy and nation, for them often synonymous with patriotism, was particularly strong among Russian military officers. They viewed their assignments as part of Russia’s “civilizing mission” in the Orient, including Iran. They also considered their mission important in Russia’s struggle against Great Britain. Even those military men, civilian officials and scholars who were sympathetic to democratic and constitutional movements back home in Russia turned into apologists for Russian imperial politics as soon as they crossed the Russian borders. For them, the “civilizing mission” of the Empire towards the inferior inhabitants of the Orient appeared more important than the struggle between tsarism and democratic movements, and this is characteristic of the travelogues written throughout the whole period analyzed in this work.
The praise for tsarist colonial politics in many travelogues parallels discourses by such apologists for British imperialism and colonialism as Henry Creswicke Rawlinson, George N. Curzon or Rudyard Kipling. And censorship was another factor potentially influencing their attitude. Some authors may have considered the expression of patriotism obligatory, with those paragraphs often differing in style from the rest of the narrative in sounding excessive and insincere. General Ermolov, known for his sympathy for the anti-tsarist Decembrist movement, nevertheless exclaims emotionally: “Having blessed the beloved homeland a hundred times, I felt contempt for the Persian government.”37 During his travels in Iran, Nikolai Murav’ev spends a night in the famous village of Turkmanchai, where in 1828 the Russo-Iranian Treaty was signed, which had brought significant gains for Russia. Murav’ev is moved when he looks at the house where the historic event took place: “This is where the destiny of Persia was decided and where a new branch of glory was woven into the Russian laurel wreath!”
Writing about the objectives of his scientific expedition to northeastern Iran, Nikolai Zarudnyi declares: I was going to visit places in the country where they know very little about Russia and had never seen Russians, but where the British went comparatively often and where, therefore, I had, as much as possible, to uphold the dignity of my Motherland. Doctor Solovkin writes about the life of those Russians who served in the Russian station on the island of Ashuradeh: The long days of the inhabitants of the station drag on in a monotonous and boring way. The only consolation, the only bright reward, is their consciousness that here, in this strange country, they carry on their frontier duty, which is full of deep meaning and benefit for the remote Motherland.
Another example can be gleaned from the writings by Il’ia Berezin who, like most Russian university professors of that time, had liberal political views.41 He assures his readers that only with the help of the Russians would the “highlanders” in the newly obtained Caucasus be able to benefit from education, and that “as long as the highlanders are distant from the family hearth of Russia, as long as they are the only inhabitants of this country, nothing is to be said about the achievements of civilization.” Commenting on the war imperial Russia was fighting in the Caucasus, Berezin exclaims with striking patriotic enthusiasm: “Our wise government, motivated by truly philanthropic values, is pointing the well considered and voluntarily chosen way towards the righteous goal!” He claims that “these battles are fought against barbarian civilization; this war is taking place between darkness and light; this blood is shed against the fallacious teaching of a fanatic and for the tranquility of the Motherland.”42 For these authors, the passages are examples of an uncharacteristically elevated and unnatural style.
Colonial Travelogues: Tourism and Domination
