1 BELYI, ANDREI. “Na perevale: 1—2. Sirin uchenogo varvarstva (Po povodu knigi V. Ivanova Rodnoe i vselenskoe)" [At the pass: 1—2. The Sirin of scholarly barbarity (On Viacheslav Ivanov’s book “Matters native and universal”)]. Znamia truda (Leningrad), no. 163, 26 March; no. 170, 3 April.

In Russian. Mounts an attack on Ivanov’s Dionysiac ideas related to his collection of essays Rodnoe i vselenskoe [Matters native and universal].


Describes his poetic and intellectual landscape through images drawn from Kormchie zvezdy [Pilot stars] and Prozrachnost’ [Transparency]. Emphasizes his use of nouns. Relates his work on the religion of Dionysus to Nietzsche, underlining points of divergence. Characterizes the verse of Cor Ardens as “poisonous” and describes Ivanov as a modern “Faust.” Considers the link between Ivanov’s ideal of “sobornost’” [communality] and the new institutions of the revolution. Disagrees with Ivanov’s view in the essay “Revoliutsiia i narodnoe samoopredelenie” [The revolution and national self-determination] that the revolution is taking place on a nonreligious level. Regards Ivanov as a “Sirin of a ‘bloody deity’” whose Dionysiac interpretation of the barbaric strain in Slav culture renders him an anachronistic relic in the new era. Reprints several passages from 1916.2. Reprinted: 1922.1. See also Kogan, 1922.11; Mochul’skii, 1955.5; Stammler, 1974.9; Bykovtseva, 1981.3.

2 BULGAKOV, SERGEI. “Sny Gei” [The dreams of Gaea]. In Tikhie dumy: Iz statei 1911—15 gg. [Quiet reflections: From essays of 1911—1915]. Moscow: Izdanie G. A. Lemana i S. I. Sakharova, 135—45. Reprint. Paris: YMCA-PRESS, 1976.

Reprint of 1916.7.

3 CHULKOV, GEORGII. “Krasnyi prizrak: Listki iz dnevnika” [The red spectre: Pages from a diary]. Narodopravstvo (Moscow), no. 23—24 (1 February): 13—15.

In Russian. Investigates the link between revolutionary communism and certain episodes in Russia’s spiritual history, focusing on Ivanov’s collection of essays Rodnoe i vselenskoe [Matters native and universal] and Blok’s essay “Intelligentsiia i revoliutsiia” [The intelligentsia and the revolution]. Chulkov reviews his and Ivanov’s development from the booklet of 1906 O misticheskom anarkhizme [On mystical anarchism] through to their present understanding of the revolution. Ivanov remained faithful to his earlier ideas; his acceptance of the ideal of revolution is in line with his reading of Dostoevskii.