The World That Never Was (90 page)

6
Forward!

The Manual of Guerrilla Warfare
that Kravchinsky was said to have written remains a tantalising notion on which his impressive biographer Taratuta, uncharacteristically, sheds little light: it is mentioned by Guillaume, who published Kravchinsky’s letter from Santa Maria Capua Venere prison, and the manual is said by Nettlau to have circulated in manuscript form until at least the mid-1890s, but is not preserved in GARF or TsGALI. My account of Kravchinsky’s Bosnian adventures, improbable as certain incidents may seem, are drawn from Taratuta’s thorough research, as are details of the letter sent by Klements to Chaikovsky. The writings of Pick and Gould on Lombroso and criminal anthropology form the basis of my discussion of this theme, the former also alluding to the contemporary perception of southern Italy as being almost African in temperament. Bakunin’s insistence that ‘we must make unceasing revolutionary attempts’, which I imagine being repeated by Malatesta, was written to Debagory-Mokrievich in 1874. The narrative of the Matese expedition, from the availability of the Puglia cache of arms to its ultimate failure, is constructed from the research of Masini and Ravindranathan: the latter noted the mysterious aristocrat for whom marriage to Kropotkin was the price of her financial support, as though she were akin to Bakunin’s patroness Princess Zoe Obolensky, without supplying the accurate but more mundane explanation. Pernicone too contributes to my evocation of the Matese expedition, while Bakunin’s powerful first impressions of Malatesta after his Alpine crossing are taken from his work, which is also interesting on the marriage of Cafiero to the Russian radical Olympia Kutuzov before the Italian consul in St Petersburg in 1874. It is Vakhrushev, however, who reveals that the same consul, in the pay of the Third Section, betrayed her presence in Russia to the police in 1877; he also exposes the patron of Lavrov’s propaganda work in London, Balashevich-Pototsky, as another Third Section agent. Kimball cites a letter from Lavrov’s chief assistant, Smirnov, that recounts how pressure from such agents in London had driven the émigré Sibiryakov to madness and expresses the fear that the same fate might befall Kropotkin. The edition of
Forward!
In which Frey’s letter appeared was published in August 1874. The tension between the Godmen and radicals forced to share overnight accommodation comes from Frolenko; the main narrative of Chaikovsky in America from Hecht and Yarmolinsky, the latter of whom quotes Faresov on Malikov’s disenchantment with Cedar Vale. Hoig captures the wild atmosphere of Wichita, while Miner sets out the painful history of the Wichita tribe and the ‘Happy Valley’. The idea that ‘the anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats’ is first articulated by Benjamin Tucker; Foner is the source for the scandalous circumstances of Hayes’ election as president and the terrible treatment of railroad workers, also in Stowell; d’Eramo for the military operations that saw soldiers deployed from ‘redskins’ to ‘reds’. Adamic and Schveirov throw light on the violent world of labour relations, Mackay on the Pinkerton Agency’s involvement in it.

7
Propaganda by Deed

Concerning both Jogand-Pages (aka Taxil) and Elisée Reclus the APP files for this period are revealing. In the case of the hoaxer, his scurrilous journalism, frauds and sale of aphrodisiac pills are all noted, along with the anti-Catholic sentiments he shared with Garibaldi in an extraordinary exchange of letters that refer to the priesthood as ‘black crocodiles’. In the case of Reclus, whose book
La Terre
had laid out his theory of the existence of a single landmass in the Jurassic period, the informer who progresses from describing him as a ‘dreamer’ to ‘most active’ appears to be Oscar Testut. However, it is hard to imagine how a man described by Christiansen as writing a book that claimed the Commune was a form of red Freemasonry with tentacles across the Continent could have gained Reclus’ trust. Again, Miller and Kropotkin’s own writings provide much of the detail of his life, but Cahm is the source for his claims to scientific socialism, and the anti-intellectualism that temporarily divided him and Reclus. Cahm’s work has also informed my understanding of the theoretical debates at the congresses of the period, though others too deserve much credit here: Jensen for his exploration of the idea and practice of ‘propaganda by deed’, Fleming for her insights into Guillaume’s resistance to the ‘distressing ambiguities’ of the term ‘anarchist’, and Taratuta on the attendance at Ghent of Costa as representative of the imprisoned Matese group. Kropotkin’s brief presence at the congress under the name ‘Levashev’ is traced from the AGR files, which also shed light on the true status of his ‘marriage’ to Sarah Rabinaria. Haekel’s eugenicist interests are discussed by Pick, his anti-Semitic nationalism by Weindling; the obsequies for Bakunin are from Ravindranathan. Liubatovich, quoted by Eyel, testifies to Kravchinsky’s tutorship in coquetry in a letter to Anna Epstein; regrettably, Siljak’s biography of Zasulich,
Angel of
Vengeance
, was not published in time to be consulted, nor was Matthias’
Im Geruch eines Bombenwerfers
concerning Johann Most. Trautmann is my main source for the life of Most, along with his own
Memoiren
, his book
Die Bastille am Plotzensee
, and articles in
Freiheit
, while his comments concerning Reclus are taken from Ramus, in Ishill. My sense of the pressure brought to bear on Switzerland by her neighbours derives from Vuilleumier; of anarchist influence on the Egyptian nationalist movement from Vatikiotis and Un Vecchio; and of the curious origins of the financing of the Suez Canal from Rykwert. Lee offers an excellent critique of
The Begum’s Millions
, though I give more weight to Grousset’s role in the novel’s composition, while the social references examined by Chesneaux too are of interest.

8
Spies and Tsaricides

The early life of Rachkovsky is detailed in Brachev, drawing extensively on the archives of the Okhrana’s foreign agency, though Aronson in his article for
Kniga
‘The Jewish Press in Russia’, quoted by Poliakov, implies a rather later date than April 1879 for his appointment as managing editor of the newspaper
Russian Jew
. His feline demeanour is alluded to by Encausse, quoted in Cohn, while the physical description comes from his police file, compiled by Kletochnikov himself; Vakhrushev supplies further details of their friendship in the Third Section’s offices and of Rachkovsky’s exposure of Tikhomirov. The ruthless instincts Rachkovsky shared with Stieber and his dislike of the Prussian are assessed by Höhne, who also reveals the tip-off by Stieber regarding the Winter Palace bombing, based on Swiss sources, and the sensitivities surrounding the tsar’s mistress. The main source for the chapter’s history of Russian terrorism, however, is Footman, whose hugely impressive biography of Zhelyabov is a model of elegant economy, supplemented by Hingley regarding the train attacks and the conspirators’ ultimate execution. Clutterbuck’s thesis defines the signature technique of the Russian bombers as the use of an electrical charge to detonate homemade explosive, using a spotter and often tunnelling, but his argument that the Fenians rather than the nihilists were the true pioneers of dynamite terrorism is inconsequential. Gaucher describes Plekhanov’s resignation at the Voronezh Congress; Gaucher and Laporte were also the sources for the later story of Zhelyabov’s betrayal by Okladsky. Liubatovich’s disagreement with Tikhomirov, together with information about the death of Kravchinsky’s premature baby, is found in Engel; details of Figner’s role in the plots, including as mistress of the cheese shop and seducer of the stationmaster, are drawn from her memoirs; Confino quotes Engels musing to Marx on whether Nechaev was a provocateur or merely behaved like one. The reversals suffered by Russia in the Balkans are chronicled by Kennan; the rise of anti-Semitism in Russia by Byrnes and Poliakov, who considers the misrepresentation of the tsar’s Slavic assassin, Grinevitsky. Daly, Monas, Wright and Zuckerman cast light on Loris-Melikov’s ‘Dictatorship of the heart’ and the suspension of the Third Section.

9
Inconvenient Guests

The memoirs of Andrieux are a fount of entertaining gossip and reveal the self-regarding and capricious figure of whom his secretary Louis Lepine, later Paris’ most effective police prefect of the period, would comment ‘What was he not? The only thing he lacked, and that only just, was to be a dictator.’ Andrieux’s insights cover everything from the police ‘reptile fund’, to his funding of the anarchist newspaper, Michel’s praise of the nihilists and the seizure of anticlerical publications by Taxil. As Rhodes points out, Bertillon was one blind spot for Andrieux, who was unimpressed by the string-pulling of Bertillon’s illustrious father, president of the Society of Anthropology, and refused to back his experiments. For the furore around Hartmann’s arrest, the petitions for his release and the sleight of hand that resolved the situation, the APP and AN provided a rich resource: there is an echo of Reclus’ advocacy of the name ‘anarchism’ as a name in Hartmann’s declaration, noted by Senese, that ‘“Nihilist” is a word that interests the West and hence it is desirable to use it.’ Joll and Kennan furnish the detail of France’s military preparations and the geopolitical background to the chapter; the hugely successful tombola for the New Caledonian exiles, which saw money subscribed from both sides of the Atlantic, is mentioned by Martinez. Williams is the source for Rochefort’s coinage of the term ‘Opportunist’ and cowardly reputation as a duellist, Jellinek for the background to his insults against Gambetta and Reinarch, while Rochefort’s own
Adventures
and newspaper
L’Intransigeant
of March 1881 celebrate his scoop concerning the Geneva nihilists. Agent reports from his APP file for that month cover his banqueting there and advance warning of the London Congress. The Joly file in the same archive reveals the fact, intriguing for historians of the
Protocols
, that Rochefort’s lawyer and the author of the
Dialogues
were brothers, the former committing suicide at this time, in 1878, the latter a few years later. Sutcliffe examines the technology that transformed Paris; Barrows and Martinez the loss to France of skilled Communards; Casselle paints a vivid picture of the Expo, coordinated by Adolphe Alphand, and explains how the council of ministers pinned the blame on Andrieux for the 1881 confrontations at Père Lachaise.

10
Voices in the Fog

The description of Michel’s return is taken from her memoirs and from Thomas, as are other details of her life at this time. Regarding relations between the Belgian and British police, Dilnot revealed the corruption scandal, Keunings deals with the Sûreté’s reforms, and Sherry the outing in disguise on which Vandervelde accompanies Vincent. Vincent’s reforms are examined by Porter, who also paints a memorable portrait of Williamson, but whose works are drawn on most extensively concerning the trial and arrest of Most. Carlson provides Most’s incriminating quote, ‘May the day not be far off when a similar occurrence will free us from tyranny’, Trautmann gives details of his principled defence lawyer. Like Porter, Quail is a major source for the chapter, as for so much regarding British anarchism: details taken from his work including Neve’s smuggling operation using mattresses and the punishment of the informant, and the informed speculation that Charles Hall who attended the London Congress was a police spy. Oliver recounts the eventual exposure of Serreaux five years later, Miller the disputes surrounding his involvement in the congress, the prospectus for which, signed partially anagrammatically by Brocher as ‘Rehorb’, lies in the IISH [Int 240/4]. Among those attending, Malatesta’s recent background prior to the congress appears in Nettlau, but Dipaola’s unpublished thesis, drawing on material in the Italian archives, provides captivating detail on his life in London at the time: the chinks in the wooden partitions of his lodgings through which Vincent spies, the whitewashed windows of the workshop he shares with Hartmann, behind which the device they are inventing is merely a pea-shelling machine for a competition, and his visits with Chaikovsky to the British Museum Library: Emsley refers to Special Branch’s request in 1883 for access to readers’ records. For the background to the discussion of ‘propaganda by deed’ and Cafiero’s call in
Le Révolté
to spread the anarchist gospel ‘by spoken and written words, by the dagger, the gun, dynamite’, Jensen and Cahm are both informative. The former notes the paradox of anarchists praising the use of dynamite by the People’s Will, whose hierarchical organisation they should have found abhorrent; he also notes the anarchist activity in Lyons; it is Vizetelly who explodes the myth of the Black Hand. Kropotkin’s offhand dismissal of England in favour of France, despite the presence in the West End of a theatrical adaption of the Verne novel
Michael Strogoff
that he is said to have inspired, is quoted by Oliver. Shipley evokes the Rose Street club’s Christmas party; Fleming, Cafiero’s incipient madness; Williams, the Union Générale
krach;
Poliakov, the anti-Semitic backlash. I was delighted to discover in the APP file for Jogand-Pages that Taxil’s satirical response had been to sell notes printed for the ‘Banque Sainte-Farce’, for which he was arrested on the boulevard des Italiens. Madox Ford reports Kropotkin’s belief in the ‘perdurability of the rabbit’, Kimball the flocks of spies who attended him; details of his arrest are taken from the AN files and of his trial from Fleming and Gallet.