This study presents a narrative on the current state of Russian Confucianism and Confucian Studies in Russia.
Russian Confucianism is a significant component of Russian Sinology. Since the 18th century, Russian Sinology has been fostering the growth of 19th century Russian Confucianism, extending from imperial Russia to the Soviet period, and lasting to the Russian Federation today.
Russian state power became significant during the 18th century, particularly following the reforms of Peter the Great. It was during this time that Chinese culture took root in Russia via Europe. Following the ratification of the treaty of Kyakhta, cultural exchanges between Russia and China had a legal basis, and the Manchurian Qing Dynasty trice dispatched embassies to Russia, leaving a lasting positive impression. The Russian state actively sought political, economic, cultural, and religious interactions with the Qing government, leading to the foundations of Russian Sinology. Throughout the 18th century, the Russian state continuously absorbed Chinese publications and edited lexicons and dictionary. The introduction of Sinology and translations of the Confucianist canon created a considerably fertile environment for Russian Confucianism in the 19th century, and the results were indeed impressive. Important sinologists include Bichurin and Vasilyev. By the 19th century, Russian interpretation of the Confucianist canon had already demonstrated a distinct character compared to East Asian Confucianism. However, their active engagement was positioned from afar as a third party perspective, and Confucianism did not seep into the Russian public's psyche or ethics.
The Soviet Union of the twentieth century has a socialist ideology-led approach that focused much more on revolutionary themes than Confucianist questions. Confucianist studies were also subject to the uncertainties between Russian and Chinese political relationships. Modern Russian Confucianism was more directed towards pure academic questions, which led to a revival in Russia and a few well-known Confucianist studies centers.
This study focuses on materials associated with Confucianist studies in Russia, approaching the field with primarily a Sinologist's tool kit such as surveys of bibliographical entries, sortition and statistical analysis of existing literature, in order to discuss 18th century Russian Sinology and Russian Confucianism (including Confucianist studies) from the 19th century to the present. The narration of the development of Russian Confucianism is focused on fundamentals, using period-based research and question-formation methods to delineate the rise, dissemination, reception, and significant contributions of Confucianist studies and Confucianist scholars. The result is a holistic presentation of Russian Confucianism.
This study's conclusion on Russian Confucianism's peculiar aspects and values are given as follows. First, Russian Confucianism comprises orientalist studies to Confucianism with the Russian Orthodox Church in the background and is fundamentally non-Eurocentric. Secondly, Russian Confucianism requires knowledge in Chinese, Mongolian, Manchurian, and Latin, which is a clear indication of its missionary roots and political component.
This study of Russian Confucianism identifies several strands of development of Russian Confucianism and its associated studies. First, the tradition began with no knowledge of Chinese, and the primary language of study was Mongolian and Manchurian; the pathway was also first Orientalist studies and Sinology before making inroads with Confucianism itself. Therefore, the critical issue is syntax, lexicon, and dictionary availability, followed by literature compilation and translation. Second, Russian Confucianism is led by the Eastern Orthodox Church, which consciously selects specific study subjects. Third, Russian Confucianists are more theory-based, with little field survey experience. Although Bichurin stayed in Beijing for a considerable period and attempted to penetrate different social hierarchies, his experience remained exclusively limited to the imperial capital. Four, Russian Confucianism is subject to the impact of Russian-China international relations. During the imperial period or the Soviet period, Russian Confucianism and Confucius himself were treated as political weather vanes.
This author hopes that the present study will be able to engage in Russian Confucianism with a meta-analytical framework and treat Russian Confucianism as structurally a matter of comparative cultural studies. A comprehensive view on Russian Confucianism may provide a viable means of self-reflection that leads to new ways of thinking in Confucianist studies.