This chapter considers the Russian Symbolist movement as an alternative to the utilitarian-populist literary edifice in addressing the socio-political problems that confronted Russia at the turn of the twentieth century. The chapter traces the growth of the Symbolist movement over its two phases, beginning with the searching attempts of the first generation of Symbolists – especially Dmitrii Merezhkovskii, Zinaida Gippius, and Fedor Sologub – to turn a secular culture in the direction of spirituality and religion; and then the ambitious “theurgical” activist partnership of the second generation of Symbolists – Aleksandr Blok, Andrei Belyi, and Viacheslav Ivanov – who rose to prominence during the politically tumultuous age of the fin de siècle (the decade surrounding the revolution of 1905), an era galvanised by a pervasive sense of disorientation, groundlessness, experimentation, and apocalyptic presentiment.

For most people today, in Russia and elsewhere, all they know about Tolstoi’s relationship to the Orthodox Church is the Circular Letter that the Holy Synod issued against him in February 1901, usually referred to as his “excommunication.” The promulgation of this document was perhaps the most egregious miscalculation made by the Russian Church leadership in its struggle against Tolstoi, and repercussions of this “scandal” continue to reverberate even today. The background and intentions underlying this spectacular act have been widely misunderstood, primarily for two reasons. Firstly, Soviet researchers – who for a long time were the only ones with access to Soviet archives – systematically misrepresented their findings, attempting to prove that the initiative to this public announcement had been taken by tsarist state authorities, not by the church leaders. However, the archival documents they referred to and selectively quoted clearly show that the decision was taken in the offices of the Holy Synod itself. Secondly, the Church was trying to do two things at once: to warn the faithful against Tolstoi’s pernicious teachings, and to lure him back into the fold. As a result, they tried to present their Circular as being both an excommunication, and not an excommunication.