Page:The Spirit of Russia by T G Masaryk, volume 2.pdf/162

136 historian while he was yet living. Lavrov wrote as if he were presenting another's thought system instead of his own.

An additional cause of Lavrov's weakness as a leader that, for all his theoretical scepticism, he was a convinced utopian, for he believed in good earnest that the definitive social revolution was impending, that its coming was a matter of two or three years at most.

ICOLAI KONSTANTINOVIČ MIHAILOVSKII is rightly placed beside Lavrov. The two men represent the same philosophical trend, and their writings have considerable resemblance in point of style. Mihailovskii, a self-taught man thirsting for knowledge, had his attention drawn by Lavrov to the rich sources of European literature. This was his introduction to Comte and to socialism, and he was greatly influenced by the fundamental conceptions of "historical realism." Though he was not pleased by the Historical Letters the book had a considerable effect upon his mind.

Mihailovskii belongs to the younger generation, being younger than Černyševskii and Lavrov, and a contemporary of Pisarev and Kropotkin. During the years after the liberation of the peasantry he was exposed to the philosophical and political influences which have been adequately discussed in earlier pages. A good German and French scholar from childhood onwards, Mihailovskii was not solely dependent upon Russian teachers, but early began to absorb French and German literature, belletristic no less than scientific.

He was chiefly distinguished from his somewhat older contemporaries in that the influence of Hegel upon him was small, whereas the influence of Comte was practically decisive. I might speak of him as a fully conscious Comtist, but I cannot term him a critical Comtist, for he did not sufficiently