"EX ORIENTE LUX!"

A REJOINDER

The curiously instructive article under the above heading in the North American Review of July, 1899, written by Mr. Vladimir Holmstrem, provided an interesting sketch of the Russian view of the Far Eastern question as it affected the United States. It should be equally interesting to look at the same question from the opposite point of view of the Western merchant trading with China, and to trace, if we can, to what extent Russian political interests in the Far East are reconcilable with the commercial interests of the civilised Powers who now hold the largest stake in the trade of China.

Mr. Vladimir Holmstrem's appeal to the American people was fathered by an introduction from the pen of Prince E. Ookhtomsky, the eloquent annalist of the journey of the present Emperor of Russia, then the Czarewitch, through British India and Eastern Asia, seven years before. This short introduction is of special value to the student of Far Eastern politics of the present moment, for it indicates the basis upon which recent official action by Russia in China is avowedly founded, viz. : (i) the idea of autocracy ; (2) the idea that the culture df the West leads to anarchy ; (3) the idea that America must emancipate herself from England's political tutelage, and co-operate with Russia in China.

EX ORIENTE LUX!

來自東方的光！

回應

在 1899 年 7 月的《北美評論》（North American Review）中，弗拉基米爾·霍姆斯特倫（Vladimir Holmstrem）先生撰寫了一篇題為《來自東方的光！》的文章，為讀者提供了俄國對遠東問題的看法，特別是這一問題對美國的影響。從西方與中國進行貿易的商人角度來看這個問題同樣具有意義，讓我們試圖探索俄國在遠東的政治利益與現今掌控中國最大貿易份額的文明列強的商業利益是否可以協調一致。

弗拉基米爾·霍姆斯特倫先生向美國人民發出的呼籲，由俄國皇子 E. 烏赫托姆斯基（Prince E. Ookhtomsky）撰寫的引言支持。這位引言者曾記錄了七年前現任俄國皇帝（當時為沙皇太子）穿越英屬印度與東亞的行程。這段簡短的引言對當前的遠東政治研究具有特殊價值，因為它點明了俄國最近在中國採取的官方行動的基礎，即：（1）專制的理念；（2）西方文化導致無政府狀態的觀點；（3）美國應該從英國的政治保護下解放出來，並與俄國在中國展開合作。

翻譯說明：

• “EX ORIENTE LUX”：翻譯為「來自東方的光」，這句拉丁諺語表示智慧或光明來自東方，本文則暗指俄國在中國與遠東地區的擴展意圖。
• 文化背景：此翻譯基於十九世紀末俄國在遠東的政治擴張背景，以及其與西方列強在中國利益衝突的歷史框架。

Now, seeing that America is in herself the living embodiment of this Western culture which Prince Ookhtomsky so unhesitatingly condemns, and to which alone Russia is indebted for her civilisation and influence in the world,

it will be seen that logic does not play a high part in the Prince's argument. When we bear in mind the extent of his travels, and of his acquaintance with European, notably English, literature, one can only account for such sentiments by the ultra-patriotic wave of Pan-Slavism that dominates the conservative Russians, men who will professedly have no part in the accursed thing called Western progress, and whose leading spokesman has been that notorious reactionary, the (late) Imperial Minister, M. Pobiedonostzeff.

These are Prince Ookhtomsky's words :

" May not the culture of the West (or an excess of it) with its pronounced individuaUstic tendencies, leading almost to anarchy, inflict on the Chinese, these Asiatics who have never known the meaning of material progress, nor have ever striven for it. the misery of a civilisation out of harmony with their natural inclinations ? "

現在，既然美國本身正是烏赫托姆斯基王子（Prince Ookhtomsky）毫不猶豫地譴責的西方文化的具體代表，而俄國的文明與其在世界上的影響力，完全得益於這種西方文化，這樣看來，王子的論點顯然缺乏邏輯性。考慮到他曾經有廣泛的旅行經歷，並且深諳歐洲，特別是英國的文學，這樣的觀點只能歸因於俄國保守派中由泛斯拉夫主義（Pan-Slavism）激起的極端愛國情緒。這些保守派宣稱不願接受所謂的西方進步，而其主要發言人正是那位著名的反動派、已故的帝國部長波別多諾斯采夫（M. Pobiedonostzeff）。

以下是烏赫托姆斯基王子的原話：

「難道西方的文化（或其過度發展的形式）以及它那顯著的個人主義傾向，幾乎導致無政府狀態，會強加給那些從未理解物質進步意義，也從未為此努力的中國人——這些亞洲人嗎？這樣的文明是否與他們的自然傾向不相符合？」