Although he mentioned more than once that Tolstoy was his idol, Aldanov, driven by the force of circumstances and catastrophic dimensions of the contemporary historical process, appears to be closer to Dostoevsky, both in terms of theory and subject matter. Scholarly writings that concern Aldanov’s understanding of chance as a historical trigger are often tinged with irony, dismissing his ideas as a prominent writer’s fancy. Aldanov summarises his views on the role of chance in a brilliant book, possibly the best historiosophical treatise written in Russian — A Night at Ulm: The Philosophy of Chance [Ulmskaya noch. Filosofiya sluchaya] (1953), a kind of manifesto of his main idea, where, citing Descartes and employing his style, Aldanov describes different variants of historical occurrences but leaves out their final resolution, only pointing at the possibility of multiple outcomes. This means that chance rules as ever and sometimes bad luck prevails. Lenin epitomised such a bad turn of events for Russia. The country’s subsequent history became that of survival after the terrible blow. The history continues and it remains unclear if any recovery has been made.