1. Ancient to pre-Soviet Russian History

This section lays out the Territorial and climatic factors, and the strategic, security, and religious factors that shaped the Russian cultural mind-set, (stereo-type of behavior.)

Table of Contents

(no page numbers here, but to get an idea.)

Modernization involves: ................................................…....25

The natural and climatic factor ......................................…..31

The geopolitical factor..........................................................40

Seven geopolitical stages can be distinguished in it……...48

The religious factor. .............................................................53

988 - 989 The baptism of the entire population of Rus occurred under Vladimir Sviatoslavovich ................... 54

Modernization involves:

In the economy - the deepening division of labor and exchange of activities, the emergence of the secondary (industry) and tertiary (services) sectors of the economy development of the market for goods, capital and labor; a steady increase in productivity.

In the social field: the separation of functional roles performed by individuals in society; the displacement of relations of personal dependence between people by relations of personal independence; the replacement of the social criterion of class by the criterion of class relations; the elimination of social differences between the sexes;

¨ in the political sphere - the formation of centralized states and the separation of powers; the integration of the general population into the political process;

¨ in the cultural sphere - the differentiation of cultural systems and value orientations; the secularization of education and mass literacy, the development of media for the transmission of information;

If in the West modernization worked its way as a result of internal development, on its own basis, in our country to a large extent we used the experience of other powers, which by force of authoritarian regime was not always successfully imposed. In Russia modernization began with the Petrine reforms of the early 18th century, but progressed very slowly. Abolition of serfdom and bourgeois reforms of 60 - 70 years of the XIX century. gave a new impetus to the process, especially in the field of industrial development. In the twentieth century modernization continued in the Soviet, socialist version.

The modernization direction divides human history into periods: traditional (agrarian), industrial, post-industrial (informational).

In local-historical theory, the subject of study is local civilizations (qualitatively different unique ethnic or historical formations). Each of the local civilizations is original, fused with the nature and passes through the stages of birth, formation, prosperity, decline and death in its development. The English poet R. Kipling wrote: "The West is the West, the East is the East, and they will not budge until Heaven and Earth come to the terrible judgment of God”. The theory of local civilizations is reflected in the works of historians N.Danilevsky (Russia), O.Spengler (Germany) and A.Toynbee (England). The essence of it lies in the fact that the history of mankind is seen as a historical space, filled with distinctive regional and cultural organisms or local civilizations.

Within the framework of local-historical theory, there are a number of trends - Slavophilism, Eurasianism, ethnogenesis, etc. Thus, in the early twentieth century, a "Eurasian" movement arose among Russian emigrants, which contained the idea of the uniqueness of Russian society, formed at the junction of Europe and Asia. The Russian (Eurasian) local civilization, unlike others, has a "special" way of development. Russian spirituality will never be "suppressed" by the spirituality of other nations. "Russia is a Great Country from birth." According to Eurasian logic, Russia is a multinational country, developing upward and with no dead ends or regression in its path. Thus, the periods of the Golden Horde, Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, Stalin and others are a specific way of progress of the country with its unique inner world, its spirituality. Russian spirituality will never be "suppressed" by the spirituality of other nations. "Russia is a great country from birth."

In the 1990s, the works of the historian L.N. Gumilev aroused great interest in society. Based on the settings of the theory of local civilization (primarily on the works of N.Y. Danilevsky and historians of "Eurasian" direction), he considered as the basic structure of the historical process ethnos - a community of people inhabiting a certain territory and united by the action of passionary spirit (biopsychic energy born by the combination of ethnic, geographical, climatic conditions of life of this community). Under the influence of passionary spirit ethnos is out of equilibrium with the natural and social environment and acquires historical dynamics. It wages wars, creates a state and culture. As the passionary energy expended in historical activities fades, ethnos again dissolves in the natural and social environment, becomes prey to other, rising civilizations, is absorbed by them, often disappearing without a trace, becoming part of a new ethnos (super-ethnos).

Thus, he distinguishes two civilizations in the history of Russia. The first is Ancient Rus, a Kievan-Slavic super-ethnos that existed in the Dnieper basin. Phase fading of its passionary energy fell on XII - XIII centuries, when it fell apart under the blows of the Tatar-Mongol nomadic tribes. The second - Moscow - St. Petersburg Russia, Great Russian ethnos that emerged in the XIV century. from the wreckage of Slavic super-ethnos, Finno-Ugric tribes and part of the Mongols.

The level of passionarity in an ethnos does not remain unchanged, so an ethnos, having arisen as a result of a passionate push, passes through a series of phases of development: 1) passionary rise (formation of a new ethnos - about 300 years); 2) acmatic phase (formation of a super-ethnos - 300 years); 3) fracture (sharp decrease of the super-ethnos' passionarity - 200 years); 4) inertial phase (smooth decrease of passionarity - 300 years); 5) obscuration (destruction of ethnic bonds - 200 years); 6) memorial phase (complete destruction of ethnic relics - 200 years). Thus, the duration of ethnicity L.N. Gumilev defined approximately 1500 years.

He believed that the passionary push, which led to the formation of the Russian people proper, took place in Russia around 1200. In 1200 - 1380 on the basis of the merger of the Slavs, Tatars, Lithuanians, Finno-Ugric peoples a new, Russian ethnos emerged. In 1380 - 1500 the process of formation of the Russian super-ethnos began. The phase of passionate rise ended with the creation of the Grand Duchy of Moscow and liberation from Tatar-Mongol dependence. This phase chronologically corresponded obscurational and memorial phase in the history of Slavic super-ethnos, accompanied by the collapse of the ancient Russian state, its partition between the Horde and Lithuania, and finally the destruction of the last ethnic fragment of Kievan Rus' - in Novgorod. Between 1500 and 1800. (acmatic phase) the Russian super-ethnos spread within the limits of Eurasia, the peoples living from the Baltic to the Pacific Ocean were united under the power of Moscow. After 1800 began the phase of breakdown, accompanied by enormous dispersion of energy, crystallized in the monuments of culture and art (blooming of culture), loss of super-ethnic unity, increase of internal conflicts, which from time to time were flaring up in civil wars. Proceeding from L.N. Gumilev's "passionary theory", at the beginning of the XXI century the inertial phase should begin, which is characterized by the fact that, thanks to the acquired values, super-ethnos lives as if "by inertia", there is a mutual subordination of people to each other, the formation of large states, the creation and accumulation of material wealth.

Thus, there is a constant rethinking of Russian history, there is a research search within the framework of various concepts and theories. In this textbook, the authors used the possibilities offered by modern theories of the study of history.

The literature usually identifies four factors that determined the peculiarities (identity, originality, backwardness) of Russian history.

The natural and climatic factor

As correctly noted, the eminent Russian historian S.M. Solovyov, "for Europe nature was a mother, but for Russia - a stepmother. The natural and climatic conditions of Russia and Russia were much more difficult than in Western Europe. Comparing the two most northern countries in the world, Russia and Canada, the American historian R. Pipes notes that the vast majority of the Canadian population has always lived in the southernmost parts of the country, in the three hundred kilometers corridor along the U.S. border, i.e. at 45 degrees, which corresponds to the latitude of the Crimea and the Central Asian steppes. North of the 52nd parallel, Canada had a small population and almost no agriculture. And the Russian state was formed on the territory between 50 and 60 degrees north latitude. Lands located in more favorable conditions were acquired by Russia only at the end of the 18th century. (Northern Black Sea coast, Crimea, part of the Caucasus).

As a result of conquest campaigns of the first princes of Kiev all the territories inhabited by the Slavic tribes were included into the Old Russian state. Its vertical axis was the line: Ladoga - Novgorod - Kyiv, the horizontal southern one was the line: the Carpathians - the middle course of the Dnieper - the upper Seim and the Northern Donets. If the southern boundary of Kievan Rus captured the forest-steppe strip, then most of its territory lay in the zone of forests. The most favorable conditions for farming and cattle breeding were in the belt of broadleaved forests with brown or gray forest soils. In North-Western (Novgorod land) and North-Eastern Russia (Vladimir-Suzdal land), the beginning of Slavic colonization of which, according to archaeological data, refers to the IX century and coincides with the formation of the Old Russian state, podzolic, low fertility soils, loams and sandy loam prevailed. It is natural that here for a long time was kept under slash agriculture, when the forest was cut down and burnt, and after the soil depletion its cultivation stopped, and the place of the arable land overgrew with time "into brushwood, into sticks, into logs".

Convenient areas for farming in the forest zone were located in the floodplains of rivers and in opolye - open non-forested areas (e.g., the Vladimir-Suzdal opolye). The first colonization flows always followed rivers, both because they were the natural means of communication in the forestlands and because new settlements were established along rivers, with land suitable for farming. Only later did the farmer penetrate deep into the forests, clearing them for arable farming. Scarce land was rapidly losing its fertility, depleted, and the need for new ones moved the pioneers.

The agricultural season in the forest zone was short. From mid-April to mid-September of the old style, from plowing to harvest, there were 125-130 working days. At the same time, plowing, sowing, and harvesting had to be done literally in a matter of days. There was never enough time for thorough tillage. According to Novgorod scribe books of the end of the 15th century, the typical yields of rye were Sam-2 and Sam-3. At the beginning of the 19th century the average yield of grain crops reached Sam-3.4 in the Northern region, Sam-2.7 in the North-Western region, Sam-3.6 in the Western region, Sam-2.6 in the Central Black Earth region, Sam-3 in the Middle Volga region and Sam-3 in the Ural region.

Speaking of yield, it should be noted that only when one sown grain yields at least four grains (sam-4) at harvest, it is possible to feed the population. Despite the fact that the forest zone was favorable for cattle breeding (since the times of the Eastern Slavs cattle breeding prevailed), and cows and horses were notable for their small size and thinness, the long stabling required significant reserves of fodder, which had to be stored for the short period of haying. As noted by L.V. Milov, by the XVIII century ultra economical mode of feeding livestock with hay had a long tradition and became characteristic of agriculture. Stable low yields were also related to the poor quality of fertilization of the fields. The norm of manure removal (1500 poods per tithe) was practically never observed. In the central industrial areas of the monastery lands, in the 18th century, the land was fertilized once in six years, in Tula province, once in 9 and even in 12 years. In Vyatka Province, in some districts, the land was fertilized once in 36 years. The main reason for this was the conditions of cattle housing and the number of cattle. At the end of the 18th century in Moscow, Tver, Yaroslavl, Vladimir, Kostroma, Nizhni Novgorod and Kaluga provinces there were 0,4 - 0,7 dessiatinas of hay per male population. That gave 100 - 150 poods of hay, and even with the starvation rate of 60-70 poods per head of 4-5 head of cattle, 280-350 poods of hay was needed. As a result, the cattle were fed at the rate that ensured only the animal's survival, and with great risk. Acute shortage of hay in the XVIII - XX centuries led to the fact that the main basis of livestock feeding the peasant was straw. But it was also in short supply, for straw was used as bedding for livestock, for roofs of huts and barns. As a result, for centuries the Russian peasant had small, weak and unproductive cattle. Cattle mortality was great. Many farms were forced to sell cattle. In the 70s - 80s of the 19th century in the central regions of the Russian Empire the number of horseless households reached a quarter of all peasant households, and by 1912 there were 31% of such households in 50 provinces. Together with one-horse households, they accounted for 55 to 64% of all households.

In the early Middle Ages yields were also insignificant in Western Europe, but already in the 13th century in Central England good yields reached sam-7 (rye), sam-8 (barley), sam-5 (wheat). The main role in this was played by thorough tillage, for which a farmer of the forest zone in Eastern Europe lacked seasonal time.

The dispersion of the population over vast areas with unfavorable natural and climatic conditions for agriculture slowed down economic growth. If in the Mosel valley (a tributary of the Rhine) archaeologists have counted 590 settlements in the XI century. for the same distance in the Kama valley there were 16 times less. At the turn of the first and the second millennium in England average population density was 9 people per square mile, in Southern Russia in the beginning of XIII century - 6 people per square mile, in Northern Russia - only 2 people.

Since the end of XI - beginning of XII century in Western Europe the rise of agricultural production and rapid growth of cities can be observed. In the course of so-called urban revolution in Western Europe during several centuries about 5 thousand cities arose. A significant growth of cities (XII-I first third of XIII century) went in Russia. During this time 181 new cities appeared here. For example, 129 towns arose in Southern Russia, but only 52 in Northern Russia (the Vladimir-Suzdal land - 19, Novgorod land - 9, Muromo-Ryazan land - 8, Smolensk land - 7, Polotsk land - 6, Turovo-Pinsk land - 3).

Along with the similarities, there were differences between the Western European and Russian medieval town. The latter was not characterized by a significant level of social organization of the urban people, its corporate structure, transformation into a semi-autonomous world, to a certain extent distanced from the central power and the rural environment. Medieval Russian cities retained a more military-administrative and agrarian character than Western European ones. By the XIII century Russia had about 1400 fortified settlements. Unlike Western Europe the "urban revolution" in Russia did not take place. Even Novgorod and Pskov in the social organization of citizens did not rise to the level of, say, the Hanseatic cities (Hansa - the union of North German cities headed by Lubeck).

Being more populated and more developed, the lands of southern Russia were at the same time more open to the devastating raids of steppe nomads. In the Russian classical historiography of the 19th century. (S.M.Solov'ev, V.O.Klyuchevskiy) the opposition of forest Russia and hostile to it Steppe became one of the fundamental explanations of the reasons of the historical lag of the former. Russian historiography of the 20th century (representatives of the "Eurasian school" P.N. Savitsky, G.V. Vernadsky, and later L.N. Gumilev) made an attempt to critically revise the thesis about the negative role of the Steppe in the development of Russia. But no matter how the economic and cultural interaction between Rus' and Steppe was developing, on what the representatives of "Eurasian school" emphasize, and what certainly took place, it is hardly reasonable to "discount" the material and human losses suffered by Rus' as a result of the raids of steppe nomads.

Low crop yields, limited size of the peasant plowing, weak base of cattle breeding in the main historical territory of Russia had the most significant impact on the formation of a particular type of statehood, development of the economy, culture, social relations.

The peasant economy had extremely limited opportunities for the production of marketable agricultural products, and the need for constant participation in agricultural production, almost all the working hands of the peasant family determined the narrowness of the labor market, the seasonal nature of numerous industrial establishments and even their location closer to the resources of labor, as well as the specificity of production. The cottage industry was of great importance. Part of the production (furs and fur products, textiles, honey, etc.) went for export. But neither export nor production for the local market provided an opportunity for rapid accumulation of capital. Hence the slow development of industrial capitalism and more than a century and a half of serf labor in industry. Hence the roots of the traditional interference of the Russian state in the sphere of economic organization. It created the Cannon yard, the Armory, the mechanical and metallurgical industry in the Urals and St. Petersburg, built railroads and steamships, was in charge of the post office, telegraph, etc. And since all this required funds, the state mechanism was constantly used to withdraw a certain share of the total surplus product. It was impossible to accomplish this without a powerful coercive apparatus. This is the origin of the centuries-old tradition of despotic power of Russian autocrats, the strength and durability of serfdom. This is also the origin of the special role of the Russian state in the historical process.

The need for all members of the family to participate in agricultural labor caused a narrow labor market and determined the seasonal nature of industrial activity. This explains the centuries-long delayed genesis of industrial capitalism in Russia. The communal nature of agriculture, its extreme stability in Russia also came from natural and climatic conditions. Severe climate disposes to collective farming, the community was a social guarantor of the survival of the bulk of the peasantry. In Russia there were strong communal traditions, which became an obstacle to the development of private land ownership of peasants even after the abolition of serfdom. Moreover, the instability of the existence of the individual peasant economy was well understood by the landlords, who periodically assisted the peasant with loans, stimulating in every possible way the equalization-democratic functions of the community. Naturally, over the centuries, ideas of community as a supreme value gradually took shape. The community concretized for man such values as society and justice. A person as a personality and as a social being is possible only in a community of a certain type, close to the one in which his ancestors lived. And if the community formed the Russian people as Russians, then it was to be preserved as a fundamental value. Justice was understood as the original social equality. Community formed such traits of the national character as heroism, unselfishness, conscientiousness, reverence. Only the subordination of the individual to the interests of the community allowed the greatest number of people to survive and the Russian people to be preserved as an ethnos. The community was also needed as a "colonizing economic and social unit" for the development of wild forests or steppes. Colonization required constant mutual assistance.

The peculiarities of the peasant economy left an imprint on the Russian national character. Russian people were capable of extreme stress, concentration of all the physical and spiritual energy for a relatively long period of time. At the same time the eternal shortage of time, centuries-long lack of a direct link between the quality of agricultural work and the yield of wheat have not developed a pronounced habit of accuracy, care in the work (hope for "chance") Extensive nature of agriculture, Its risky nature has developed an ease in changing places, a craving for "podrayka land", "whitewater", at the same time multiplied the desire for traditionalism, rooting habits ("the farmer is a slave to the skill").

The geopolitical factor

The fate of any country is determined not only by the state of its economy, the level of development of technology, the number of population, the scale of military power, but also by the size of its territory and geographic location. The sustainability of development, the well-being and prosperity of peoples inhabiting a given country depend on its geopolitical characteristics. That is why for centuries the states sought to strengthen their position, to ensure the future by optimizing territorial self-sufficiency - there was a struggle for access to trade routes and above all to the seas, to convenient straits, valleys of navigable rivers, to areas with large deposits of minerals, etc.

Usually noted the following geopolitical conditions which influenced the specifics of Russian history: vast, sparsely populated territory, unprotected by natural barriers border, isolation (for most of the history) from the seas (and therefore from maritime trade), favorable to the territorial unity of the historical core of Russia river network, the intermediate position between Europe and Asia Russian territories.

The most important component of Russian history is the process of colonization, the expansion of the territory of the Russian state, which from 1462 to 1987 increased by more than 50 times. S.M. Solovyov and V.O. Klyuchevsky considered territorial expansion as a key factor in the history of our country. A comparison with a similar phenomenon in the United States shows that there, colonization initially had an economic dimension, eventually merging with the process of intensification of the economy. In Russia, however, territorial expansion was based on strategic considerations. The development of new lands had an extensive character and, in turn, contributed to the reproduction of an extensive culture. Negative aspects of Russian colonization include: consolidation of extensive form of development, leading to backwardness; difficulty in forming a well-structured system of cities; depletion of resources of the Center; delayed development of a united Russian nation.

Hence the conclusion: the victory of this way over the tendency to intensification created serious problems, which increased as society became more complex. As for the underlying reasons for this historical choice, the inability to find an alternative to it, they can be seen in the mythological basis of the culture of millions of Russian people. The people saw the extensive way "as a departure from unjustified novelty" and transfer to a new place “fair antiquity", as a search for paradise on earth.

The huge expanses of land, low population density, and inadequate means of communication created an increased risk of disintegration, sometimes reaching a critical point. The poorly populated lands of the Eastern European Plain and Siberia created favorable conditions for the outflow of the agricultural population from the historical center of Russia with an increase in the rate of its exploitation, which led to an increase in government control over the individual farmer, up to the complete enslavement of the peasantry in the XVII century.

The natural openness of Russian borders was used by neighboring nations and states: Poland, Sweden, Germany, France, on the one hand, and the nomads of the great steppe, on the other. During 8 centuries (from XIII to XX) Russia was at war more than 500 times, 2/3 of its existence Russia was at war. Since 1400, out of 1,000 wars, 150 wars took place with Russia's participation or on its territory. From 1368 to 1893, i.e. out of 525 years, Russia spent 305 years in wars. In the 16th century, Russia was at war for 43 years, in the 17th century - 48 years, in the 18th century - 56 years. In the 19th century it was at war with France, Great Britain, Iran and Turkey. In the first half of the twentieth century, wars involving Russia (USSR) accounted for 24 years.

Russia (USSR) repeatedly saved European civilization from destruction. This took place during the Mongol invasion, during the fight against Napoleon's invasive plans, and during World War II. In most wars, due to the objective circumstances of its geographical location, Russia was forced to take not only the first, most severe blow of the enemy, but also to bear the heaviest costs of military conflicts.

The invasion of troops of the Mongol khans in the XIII century was the greatest disaster for the homeland. Mass extermination and enslavement of the population, the destruction of large cities - centers of culture - took place. The population of Ryazan, Vladimir, Torzhok, Kozelsk was completely destroyed. Suzdal, Moscow, Yaroslavl, Tver, Dmitrov, Kiev and other cities were burned.

The Vladimir and Suzdal lands were devastated five times that century, the Tver lands two times, the South Russian (Kursk lands) seven times. The Horde destroyed Pereyaslavl-Zalessky four times, and Suzdal and Murom three times each. It is necessary to underline that the concept "to ruin" a city has different meaning in the Russian annals and in the European chronicles. For example, Frederick Barbarossa "destroyed Mainz" by destroying the fortress walls. And in the destruction of Milan the inhabitants were settled in the surrounding villages. The destruction of Russian cities, however, according to the chronicler, had other consequences: "Multitude of the dead laid down and the city ruined, the land is empty, the churches are destroyed", "the people were beaten from the eldest to the newest baby". Architectural and painting monuments were mercilessly destroyed. Instruments of manufacture and metal products were taken out. Some types of crafts disappeared and stone construction stopped. The economy of the Russian lands was exhausted by systematic tribute, various extortions and periodic military invasions.

At the beginning of XVII century such invasion was repeated in the course of Polish and Swedish intervention, at the beginning of XIX century - the French one. It is impossible not to take into account the fact that the enemy, entering the limits of Russia, was initially already set up for an extremely brutal war. Let us compare two statements. Napoleon: "In five years I will be master of the world, there is only Russia, but I will crush it"; A. Hitler - "We are obliged to exterminate the population - it is part of our mission to protect the German population ... I have the right to exterminate millions of people of an inferior race who multiply like worms. And how much effort was required each time to rise literally from the ashes, to restore what had been destroyed, to revive in spirit, not to fall out of the rut of world progress completely, not to become a colonial appendage of stronger neighbors both in the material and in the cultural sense of these words!

No other European country had such a long and vulnerable border, needing numerous garrisons to guard it. Russia was always forced to have a powerful army, and over time to create a fairly strong navy as well.

Sometimes Russia entered wars on its own initiative. But aggressiveness toward its neighbors was often dictated by the inexorable tendencies of internal development, the desire to increase the area of land and human resources. Note that this explains the absence of genocidal tendencies against the annexed peoples in the Russian Empire. The old and new lands were becoming a single living space. The new territories formed a fairly organic whole with the old. This, incidentally, explains the fact that many peoples were firmly assimilated, a common economic life was formed, customs and traditions were closely intertwined, and cultural interactions took place. In wars with neighboring states, Russia sometimes pursued a psychologically understandable goal: not to have potentially strong opponents near its borders. The greatest success was achieved under Peter the Great and his successors. It is no accident that after Peter I no foreign invader dared to set foot on our land during the century. In the late 18th century, Chancellor A.A. Bezborodko told young Russian diplomats sent abroad, "I do not know how you will be, but with us not a single gun in Europe without our permission did not dare to fire."

Russia also fought by virtue of allied commitments. Such were, for example, the Italian and Swiss campaign of the Russian army under the leadership of A. V. Suvorov. Russia could enter the war under public pressure, as happened in 1877 to protect the Balkan Slavs and liberate them from the Turkish yoke. Incidentally, nothing like this was observed in Western Europe, both in the Middle Ages and in the new and modern times.

The victories of Russian arms became bright pages in the annals of the Fatherland. Russian miracle heroes under the command of Potemkin, Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky, Suvorov smashed the enemies by numbers and made a huge contribution to the development of military art. French Emperor Napoleon's attempt to extend his possessions at Russia's expense ended in a parade of Russian troops in Paris. The only major setback in the nineteenth century-the defeat in the Crimean War-ultimately ended with the restoration of all Russian rights on the Black Sea coast, and without a single shot being fired. The glory of their ancestors have not dropped in the XX century generals and admirals of the two world wars in which Russia participated, A. Brusilov and A. Kolchak, G. Zhukov and N. Kuznetsov, A. Vasilevsky and K. Rokossovsky, I. Chernyakhovsky and I. Konev. However, the price of Russia's power and influence is also well known. Up to half of the budget almost always went to maintain the only allies of Russia, which, according to Emperor Alexander III, were only its army and navy.

The country's security is precisely what has concerned Russia since the very beginning of its existence. It affected foreign and domestic policy, the formation of military doctrine, plans for military construction, and the creation of a corresponding military apparatus and defense production. The constant military threat and the openness of the borders demanded enormous efforts to ensure its security: significant material inputs, human resources (with a small and sparse population), and concentration of all efforts. The consequence of this was an increase in the role of the state. To strengthen its military power, the state used the military-potestate system, which was firmly rooted in Russia.

Because of its isolation from the seas and maritime trade, it had to sell its export products cheaply to intermediaries and buy expensive import products from them. To break through to the seas, Russia had to wage bloody wars for centuries. As a consequence, the role of the state and the army in society increased even more.

But there were also favorable geopolitical factors. The first is the specificity of the river network of the East European Plain. The presence of a developed, extensive river network united the country both politically and economically. Second, a considerable part of the Great Silk Road from China to Europe passed through Russian territory. This fact created an objective interest of many countries and peoples in maintaining political stability along this great highway of antiquity, i.e. in the existence of the Eurasian empire: first, such an empire was the state of Genghis Khan, then - Russia.

The geopolitical position of Russia over the course of more than a thousand years of history has changed repeatedly.

Seven geopolitical stages can be distinguished in it.

1. During Kievan Rus', the country was undoubtedly part of Europe, with states with which it maintained intense trade, cultural and dynastic ties (for example, one of Yaroslav the Wise's daughters became queen of France). It is no coincidence that Ukraine now seeks to monopolize the legacy of Kievan Rus, as it sees in it one of the main proofs of its "Europeanness. The most important economic and political axis of the East Slavic state was the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks", which connected the Baltic with the Black Sea and the Mediterranean.

2. 1243 - 1480. After the Mongol-Tatars conquered Kiev in 1240 and before Russia was formally exempted from paying tribute in 1480, it was more an Asian than European state, although, for example, trade between the northern Russian principalities and the Hanseatic cities never stopped. During this period, the Russian principalities that emerged on the territory of the ancient Russian state, and primarily the Moscow principality, which became the core of the future Russian state, were separated from Europe by the Baltic-Pontic belt of unfriendly states and deprived of access to the Baltic and Black Seas, the shortest routes to Europe.

3. 1480-1796. The third stage, which lasted approximately until the end of the reign of Catherine II, was characterized by the struggle to restore the country's access to the seas. Every step to the west was given to Russia with great difficulty, and the conquered at a high cost of sea "openings" to Europe sometimes had to be given back. At the same time, in the east the final disintegration of the Golden Horde and the weakening of its successors (especially after Moscow's conquest of the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates, allies of the Porte which were constantly disturbing it with raids) opened the way to the almost unhindered expansion of the state to the vast, sparsely populated areas of Siberia and the Far East. Even at the beginning of this stage the Moscow state became multinational. By its end, as a result of the reforms and military campaigns of Peter the Great and Catherine the Great, Russia finally established itself as a Baltic state and annexed some of the Ukrainian and Belorussian lands that had once been part of Kievan Rus.

4. During the reign of Catherine II, Russia gained access to almost the entire northern coast of the Black Sea and became a great European power capable of finally realizing its messianic pan-Orthodox program. This program had been outlined during the reign of Ivan III and consisted primarily in the liberation of the Orthodox countries from the Ottoman yoke and their subsequent unification under Russian auspices. By that time, however, it was difficult to change the balance of power in Europe and the world: other European states had no intention at all of freeing Russia for the prominent place it aspired to. This was clearly revealed during the Crimean War (1853-1856), the defeat in which left part of the Russian intellectual elite disappointed in European values. With growing internal social tensions, this disillusionment became one of the important factors. In Russian foreign policy, pan-Orthodoxy was gradually supplemented by pan-Slavism, which preached the unification of the Slavs, including Catholics, as well as the principles of conservatism and legitimism. The latter meant support only for "legitimate," in other words, monarchical and autocratic European regimes, which manifested itself in military expeditions and other political actions.

5. The last third of the nineteenth century - 1917. Delayed but very rapid industrial development marked the beginning of a new period in the geopolitical history of Russia, which can be defined as imperialistic. The need for raw materials prompted the Russian government to finally start developing the economic potential of Siberia and the Far East, which had previously served only as the country's territorial reserve, and to complete colonization of the Caucasus and Central Asia as a source of cheap cotton for textile enterprises in the center of the country. Using "railway imperialism," Russia tried to expand its zone of influence as far as possible, to create military alliances, and fought fiercely against its geopolitical opponents. In domestic policy, the imperialist period was marked by the use of the principle of "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality". Its implementation resulted in an attempt to Russify the country's periphery and transform Russia into a European nation-state.

6. 1917-1991. During the Soviet period, the country retained the messianic, conservative and idealistic essence of its foreign policy, but on an entirely different ideological basis. Even after the illusory hopes for a world revolution had disappeared, the Soviet Union continued to unconditionally support any regime that declared opposition to the "bourgeois" West, above all to the United States. The Soviet Union also maintained a self-perception as a state surrounded by enemies (a kind of besieged fortress), dating back to the time of the Mongol-Tatar yoke. Such an attitude led to the creation of a belt of allies around it after World War II, and contributed to the transformation of the USSR into a global superpower, confronting, together with its allies, the rest of the industrialized states. It also led to an unrestrained arms race and the constant economic overextension of the country, which lived in mobilization mode, and eventually to its dramatic collapse in 1991. "There is probably no place on earth now where we do not have to take into account the state of affairs in our policy," said Leonid Brezhnev at the XXV Congress of the CPSU in 1976.

7. The collapse of the USSR marked the beginning of a new stage in Russia's geopolitical evolution. In some directions it found itself thrown back practically to the pre-Petrine borders, lost again a significant part of access to the seas on its European territory, lost a significant part of the resource base and military infrastructure, etc. The geopolitical position of the country has changed fundamentally: it seems to have no obvious enemies, but at the same time no friends, and it is not guaranteed a favorable attitude of old and new neighbors (except perhaps Belarus), which was shown by the crisis in the autonomous region of Kosovo (Yugoslavia) in the spring of 1999. According to A. Utkin, after the collapse of the USSR, Russia lost all three favorable factors that provided it (the only in the world) independence and autonomy from the West during the whole history:¨ The presence of geopolitical envelopes that separated Russia from Western countries;¨ ties with allies among the Western countries themselves, whose composition was changing, playing on the contradictions between them;¨ a stable and powerful state.

Now instead of geopolitical shells we have NATO at the former borders of the Soviet Union, instead of the Iron Curtain - the Schengen visa barrier, instead of several opposing blocs - a fairly strong alliance of Western powers and their joint actions in crisis situations, instead of a strong state - years of crisis.

The geopolitical factor largely determined the ethnic level of sociocultural organization. Despite the high level of ethnic homogeneity of the population (about 83% of modern Russia is Russian) there is considerable division even at this level. Territorial and climatic factors, different ethnic origins (Slavic, Ugro-Finnic, Turkic, etc.), eastern and western ethno-cultural ties have had a noticeable impact on the way of life, appearance and identity of the Russian population, leading to a marked localization of relations and consciousness.

Another factor of diversity was the interaction with other peoples of Eurasia in those areas where the Russian population settled and where there was mixing and mutual cultural adaptation. An essential characteristic of Russian culture at the primary level is considered to be the ability of Russian people to ethnic interaction and symbiosis. This has determined one of the most important characteristics of Russian ethnocultural makeup: the significant range of variability of dialects, rituals, forms of everyday culture and beliefs.

The religious factor.

The adoption of Christianity was a major event in the history of Ancient Rus'. The affirmation of a new religion was historically conditioned. The political and social development of the Slavic tribes, the formation of a united state and the growth of its international influence came into conflict with pagan beliefs. The conversion of Christianity to the state religion, there are several legends about the baptism of Russia.

In 988 - 989 The baptism of the entire population of Rus occurred under Vladimir Sviatoslavovich

1. Vladimir's choice of the true faith: According to the chronicler, he spoke with representatives of various monotheistic religions: Byzantine Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Muslim and Jewish churches. Vladimir sent ambassadors to various countries to ascertain the benefits of one faith or another. But the lavish rituals of worship, moral standards, and philosophical depth of religious teaching convinced him of the advantages of Eastern Christianity. Of the many religions, Vladimir thus chose the best and truest faith.

2. A personal interest of the prince, who conceived of marrying a relative of the Byzantine emperors, Anna. But the Christian could not marry a pagan. Other historical events intertwined around this marriage contract. For example, Vladimir helped the Byzantine emperor suppress a dangerous rebellion. But even after this, the emperors were slow to marry. Then Vladimir used force, besieged Korsun (Chersonese), the main Byzantine city in Crimea, after which the emperors delivered the bride to Korsun. The rite of marriage and the baptism of Vladimir was performed.

This story is based on true historical events, which are confirmed by Byzantine sources.

3. The church version considers Vladimir's baptism to be a consequence of a profound moral upheaval in the views and life of the Kievan prince, who had previously wallowed in debauchery, and was guilty of many atrocities. According to the chronicler, Vladimir had five wives; he killed his brother Yaropolk, and seized the Kyiv table, and took his Greek wife. The Polotsk princess Rogneda (Yaroslav the Wise's mother) he took by force, without her consent, killing her father Rogvolod and his sons. Vladimir is also attributed the existence of a harem, where 800 concubines were kept. And here to this great sinner was the voice of God, some spiritualization came upon him, and he accepted the new faith and was morally changed. According to this story, Vladimir was baptized before a campaign to Korsun, in 987, in Vasiliev, near Kiev.

4. The legend of the Apostle of Christ Andrew, who, during one of his journeys from Byzantium to the Baltic Sea, found himself on a high hill near the Dnieper, in the place where Kiev later arose. Andrew preached a new faith among the locals and as a sign of memory put a wooden cross on that place. In the XVIII century, the church of St. Andrew was built there in accordance with the project by architect Rastrelli. The legend of St. Andrew was widespread in the 15th-16th centuries, during the period of consolidation of Moscow autocracy. In a discussion with the envoy of the Pope A. Possevin, Ivan IV assured that "we received faith at the beginning of the Christian Church, when Andrew, brother of the Apostle Peter, came to these countries to pass to Rome”. Thus, it was proved that Russian Orthodoxy is more ancient than Catholicism, and comes from Christ himself. The veracity of this myth was refuted by major church historians E.E. Golubinsky and A.V. Kartashov.

The existence of different versions about the history of the Baptism of Russia testifies to the outstanding importance of this watershed historical event. Acceptance of the new faith meant a dramatic turn in the life and attitudes of each person and the people. Such a turning point could not happen all at once. People's baptism, which was carried out not only by persuasion, but also by violence, was only the beginning of the establishment of the new religion. Pagan customs and beliefs persisted for a long time and coexisted with Christianity.

Speaking of the role of Christianity in the development of Old Russian culture, we must bear in mind some peculiarities. Christianity came to Russia from Byzantium. It conditioned the strengthening of cultural ties with Byzantium and its influence. But the external influence should not be exaggerated. Relying on the achieved level of development of Byzantine culture in Ancient Rus was developing original literature, art and architecture. The introduction of the Slavonic alphabet and Slavonic language into Church life had a twofold importance. On the one hand, religion and culture as a whole became accessible to the masses. But on the other hand, it led to a break away from the Greek language, from the ancient Greek literature, philosophy, history, created in this language.

It should be borne in mind, however, that throughout history Russia has been a multi-confessional country. Orthodoxy has been spread in a limited region. Western Christianity - Catholicism - was firmly held in the western parts of the empire. Islam created a distinct commonality among the peoples of Central Asia, parts of the Caucasus, and some inland regions of Russia (Tatarstan). Bukhara and Samarkand were influential centers for Islamic regions of the empire, as well as for foreign Muslims. Buddhism was widespread in southern Siberia, constituting a significant religious region bordering Mongolia and China, and indirectly connected to Tibet as a spiritual center.

Each religious region had a specific structure of spiritual life, influencing not only the organization of worship, but also all spheres of life and activity of the population. Religions defined the limits of the respective civilizations, far from coinciding with imperial boundaries.

The central feature of the Catholic Church is "authority, dominion, discipline. The authority of the pope is based on the Roman tradition, which has developed the political side of human activity.

The Orthodox Church is characterized by greater freedom of internal life. Whereas Catholicism is characterized by external unity, Orthodoxy is characterized by internal unity: synodality, understood as the involvement of the Orthodox with a common Absolute. Without directly interfering in the affairs of secular power, Orthodoxy nevertheless had a decisive influence on the Russian political tradition. In Orthodoxy, the power of the "real", Orthodox tsar became the guarantor of the possibility of future "salvation" after death. Whereas in the European city in the Protestant environment the beliefs pushed man to active economic activity (its success helped him to be convinced in his "chosenness", in the coming individual "salvation"), in the Russian city man was faced not with the economic but with the political way of "salvation", and with a strong collective component. Hence, on the one hand, the economic activity of Europeans and their creation of civil society as a mechanism for asserting their interests, and on the other hand, the search for a "real" tsar in Russia, a collective movement toward a better future, in the ideas of social justice.

An important general mechanism for the organization of society and its consolidation is the state and religion. In the West, the result of the development of civilization was the separation of a single church from the many centers of state power. The political order and the general cultural order were separated from each other. On the contrary, Eastern Christianity developed as a system of independent (autocephalous) churches, which were in a rivalry for power over the minds and souls of "their" believers. This discord drastically reduced the ability of church authorities to resist political power. The autocephalous status of the various churches of Eastern Christianity meant not only their independence from one another, but also their dependence on the state, which acted as guarantor of the faith. With the establishment of the Moscow Patriarchate in the 15th century, the Church in Russia became an essential instrument of centralization, establishing state unity and fighting against "infidels", i.e. states of other denominations.

An important cultural consequence of this situation was the cultural insularity of Orthodoxy and the conservatism of their doctrine. The development of culture bypassed religious life and led not to reformation but to secularization, which took the form of indifference, outright unbelief, and principled atheism.

To a certain extent Orthodoxy was adopted in Russia because it was more relevant to the emerging economic structure and spiritual needs than other religions. Russian civilization which goes back more than 1000 years was built on different foundations than those of the West. Russia has never been a part of European civilization, since the absolute majority of its population was never guided by the ideological baggage of the Great French Revolution and the Protestant ethic as a motivation for work and wealth in their daily lives. For example, take a value such as freedom. In the European tradition, the main emphasis is on clarifying what freedom depends on, for example, state intervention in some areas of society and human life. And in the Orthodox tradition, the main question has always been why a person needs freedom, which implies the search for a moral reference point for its use. Note that the views of Russian philosophers and writers of the 19th century, which had such a strong influence on the whole world, were generated above all by the Orthodox consciousness with its primacy of moral categories over the boundless rationalism of European civilization.

See part 2 for:

The socio/cultural factor

.