Russian Alaska

19
In childhood and adolescence, many were read out by the novels of Emar, Mine-Read and Cooper. It is a pity that in Russia there were no writers who could describe the development of new territories so romantically. There are, of course, wonderful works by N. Zadornov, I. Krap, but they are rather historicalthan adventure-romantic. However, in reality, the development of new sections of America for the inhabitants of Russia was as romantic as in the works of F. Cooper.



However, “romantic” is not an exact word, bearing in itself some kind of “beautiful” experience. The fort, besieged by “bad Indians, girls waiting for salvation in it. Forts, houses - all this was also in the Russian settlements located in America. There was a need for hiking in the woods, for hunting. There were women who needed to be protected from the Indians. Yes, and "bloody" clashes with the Indians lacked.

In order to get an idea of ​​that era, you can look at the map of “Shelikhov's pilgrimage”, which was included in the travel book of 1793 published in the year about the travels of a merchant from Russia, Grigory Shelikhov. It contains information on the majority of Russian settlements that appeared on the American continent at that time. What were they, the settlements of the Russian people in a foreign and distant country?

Russian Alaska


James Cook in the records made in his diary in 1778, there is such a description: “The village consists of one apartment building and two warehouses; besides the Russians, there live the Kamchadals and the natives as servants or slaves of the Russian people. Other natives live in the same place, apparently independent of the Russians. All those natives who belong to the Russians are men, the Russians took them or bought them from their parents, they must have been still in childhood. There were about 20 natives. All people lived in the same house: Russians in the upper part, Kamchadals in the middle, natives in the lower, where a large cauldron was installed for cooking food, consisting mainly of what the sea gives, with the addition of wild roots and berries. ”

It should be remembered that in those days serfdom was not abolished in Russia, and the English-speaking North American states existed at the expense of slavery. Therefore, the memories of James Cook are built on his relationship with the indigenous peoples, in which the concept of "human rights" simply did not exist.

When could this settlement arise? Judging by the fact that the Indians were bought from their parents "as early as childhood," and by the time they met James Cook they had become adult men, they had sold them about 20 years ago. Thus, we can say that the village on the other side of America was founded somewhere in the 50-ies of the XVIII century. This is confirmed by another remark made by Cook. In it, he talks about changing all the furriers from time to time. Those he met at that time arrived from Okhotsk in the 1776 year, and will have to return there in the 1781 year. Very reminiscent of the modern shift method. Only longer in time. Each watch took about five years. This suggests that the above estimates are fair: the coast of America was settled in ancient times.

Also, the great navigator writes about the settlements of the Russian people, who are on all the main islands between Kamchatka and Unalashka. He mentions that he did not ask when they arrived there, but according to the dependency in which the Indians are from the Russians, he concludes that this happened a long time ago.

The references to Cook are quite pertinent due to the fact that he is an independent source. Naturally, there are other descriptions of the settlements of the Russian people in America, for example, the same Grigory Shelikhov. But being an English navigator, Cook, of course, was not a patriot of Russia, therefore his assessments are quite objective. How were the relations between the settlers from Russia and the Indians determined? It is worth remembering one extremely interesting document that belonged to Catherine II. It dates from April-August 1778 of the year and contains a farewell to Russian traders and industrialists in North America. In particular, there it is noted that those of the merchants who “lay on the islands” will be prohibited from further bargaining in those lands. Thus, the authorities of the Russian state were very sensitive about relations with the Indians. And for the most part their instructions were executed.

It is worth recalling some little-known information for modern people. All children from Indian families, who for various reasons ended up in Russian villages, were taught to read and write. Moreover, the most capable were sent to study further, to the metropolis. There is evidence of an Indian boy who was raised by Baranov, the so-called “ruler of All Russian America.” So the boy subsequently graduated from the navigation school of St. Petersburg, and for those times it is a very worthy level of education.

Was the relationship between the Russians and the indigenous people really so cloudless? Naturally not. All Native American tribes were different. There was enough among them those who did not like white aliens at all. For example, the first capital of Russian America befell the sad fate, it was completely destroyed by the Indians. After that, the new final capital, Novo-Arkhangelsk (now the American city of Sitka), was turned into a well-fortified fortress. And the rest of the settlements had defensive fortifications.

However, let us turn again to the notes of James Cook, to the part where he talks about the morals of the Indians. In particular, according to him, this is one of the most peaceful and tranquil people he has seen. He called their honesty a model for all the more civilized inhabitants of the globe. He connects this, oddly enough, with their communication with the Russians, referring to the fact that other peoples who do not have relations with the inhabitants of Russia have such qualities that are very rare.

It turns out that the Russian settlers were able to realize in time that a good relationship with the locals would bring much more benefit than enmity. The first settlers who arrived in America were mainly engaged in hunting, for the sake of valuable furs, and for sustenance. Of course, such food could not be complete. And later, thanks to the perseverance of the ruler Baranov, in agreement with the Spaniards, a Russian colony was founded in California, dubbed Fort Ross, which provided the most of the colonies north of the colony with bread. Various tropical fruits and vegetables also appeared in the diet, as Baranov managed to establish trade with many of the Pacific Island States.

But no wonder they say: if you want peace, be ready for war. Settlers from Russia have repeatedly said about their readiness to "take on their scot" soldiers from the metropolis. In those years, they made requests to the Commission about the commerce of St. Petersburg to supply them with a military team, artillery, and master gunsmiths for protection.

In the report for this commission, which was later provided to the empress, there is one interesting remark about other countries that have shown interest in the territories of America already under the influence of Russia. It deals with the powers that make for the "appropriation of these countries" various assassinations since the days of Captain Cook's travels. It is evident that analysts of that time were aware of what was happening, but they were not heard.

And the result of ignoring the opinions of experts is well known. Russia ceded its citizens living in Russian America and the territories themselves for a ridiculous amount of 7.2 million dollars, in which she valued dreams of the future in a new land.
19 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    12 January 2012 09: 26
    An interesting, entertaining article.
  2. +4
    12 January 2012 10: 54
    By the way, the United States has still not paid money for Alaska, both the money itself and the interest and interest. And the amount is gigantic. The amount of sales of the RAC (Russian-American company) is $ 7,2 million.
    On August 1, 1868, Stekl (the Russian ambassador in Washington) received from the Treasury a check, but not for gold, but for treasury bonds. He transferred the sum of 7 million 35 thousand dollars to London, to the bank of the Baring brothers. The remaining 165 thousand amounted to overhead expenses (including 21 thousand - a reward to Glass from the government).
    Those. it turns out that the Pindos paid not with gold but with pieces of paper as always, but the traces of Glass after the transaction are lost, probably it’s not without some scam
    7 dollars were to be paid in cash, with a "gold coin." On the check, no notes or records indicating that we are talking about gold cash were not identified.
    The payee on the check is the name of Baron Edward de Stekl. According to the conditions, he could receive money as a diplomatic representative of Russia, but immediately after ratification of the agreement, Foreign Minister Gorchakov transferred all powers to complete the case to the Ministry of Finance. The latter was obliged to send to Washington its representative with the appropriate power of attorney. The representative was obliged, having received the "gold coins" in cash, to deliver them to a Russian warship and upon arrival in Petersburg to transfer them to the state treasury. Instead, Baron Stekl, without even trying to protest, received a check for 7 greenbacks, which were quoted significantly lower than gold dollars. In fact, the “oversight” of the baron was worth $ 200. In terms of gold cash, he received 000 gold dollars.
    The difference remained in the US treasury. In fact, this is a fee for silence. At the same time, the vow of silence was assumed by the Russian government. The payment deadlines are long gone, and the American Congress still could not decide whether to pay under the contract. While they debated, the payment deadline has expired. The practice of international treaties in such cases involves penalties or cancellation of obligations. Nothing of the kind happened. The Russian government is silent. Baron Stekl in a letter to Foreign Minister A.M. Gorchakov wrote on July 15/27, 1868: “The American people will fully pay tribute to the imperial government for its grateful and generous position: it did not protest and did not complain, as it had the right, because the refusal to pay remuneration on time was essence, a clear violation of the contract. "
    It seems that if Baron Stekl represented Russia, and not a group of “influential people” (by which is meant Baron Rothschild), then the agreement would indicate the actions of the parties in such circumstances and this agreement would be considered invalid.
  3. +1
    12 January 2012 11: 30
    Was there a sale or was it a long-term lease?
    Why is the American document on the deal in Alaska still classified in the archives of Congress, and Russian lost forever?
    There is one more fact - after the Bolsheviks came to power, negotiations between the Soviet and American governments took place, after which the United States abandoned its claims to Chukotka and completely transferred the Wrangel island in the Chukchi Sea to Russian control - note that this was 10 years before the establishment of diplomatic relations. After this, no one saw the Russian edition of the Alaska treaty. The story is generally foggy.
    1. +2
      12 January 2012 13: 47
      Article VI of the treaty states: “Based on the concession established above, the United States undertakes to pay at the Washington Treasury ten months from the date of exchange of ratification of this convention to a diplomatic representative or other E. emperor, an All-Russian duly authorized person seven million two hundred thousand dollars in gold coin. The above-mentioned concession of the territory and the sovereign right to this right is recognized as free and withdrawn from any restrictions, privileges, privileges or property rights of Russian or other companies, legally or otherwise established, or the same rights of partnerships, with the exception of only property rights owned by private to persons, and this concession established by this, encompasses all the rights, privileges and privileges that now belong to Russia in the said territory, its possessions and belongings. ”
      On August 1, 1868, Baron Stekl gave a receipt to the US Treasury, which received 7,2 million dollars in full. The money was transferred to Riggs Bank. The latter, testifying in the US Congress, claimed that he had transferred only $ 7,035 thousand to the representative of Baring Brothers Bank in New York; 165 thousand dollars Baron Edward Stekl took himself.
      The text of the contract, look at
      http://www.hrono.ru/dokum/1800dok/1867alyaska.php
  4. KGB161rus
    +1
    12 January 2012 12: 20
    Thank you for the article, comments will begin, some will write about what we sold Alaska to the USA, others will write about what they leased, but only you will not know anything, dear users, there is no myth in the myth, the true situation remains unknown. .
    1. 0
      12 January 2012 12: 25
      I didn’t read it in the internet, but in a very old article in a historical journal, there were links to archives. Oh, sorry, I don’t remember where already.
  5. Fireman
    +1
    12 January 2012 12: 50
    The article is full of lies and conspiracies! $ 7,2 million is currently $ 700 billion or more! When the crisis was in 1991-1995, it would be to sell it.
  6. dred
    -2
    12 January 2012 13: 14
    What type of money they did not pay.
  7. -1
    12 January 2012 13: 49
    what really happened there. how it was sold and how it was paid or not paid can be found out only during the official proceedings ... the current authorities don’t give a damn about it, as well as the troubled story with the gold reserves of Russia, which Japan pocketed, because it’s problematic to cut dough on these topics .. laying pipes in Europe and Asia is another matter ...
  8. 755962
    +1
    12 January 2012 14: 11
    One good thing is that "Fort Ross" was founded by our fellow countryman Ivan Kuskov in 1812.
  9. Alexey Prikazchikov
    0
    12 January 2012 15: 38
    Slightly disagree at the expense of writers; there is our cool writer about the Cossacks elegantly wrote Nikolai Samsonov
  10. Farkash
    +2
    12 January 2012 15: 43
    For those wishing to learn more about Russian America, I recommend reading the book by AABushkov "Russian America: Glory and Shame". San Sanych, of course, is still a pepper with his cockroaches in his head, but the book is really very interesting.
    http://www.litmir.net/bd/?b=91721
  11. ballian
    +1
    12 January 2012 17: 56
    Yes, looking at the map, you understand that the tsarist absolutist regime is evil - it should have been ... and after all, the current well-known monarchist Mikhalkov, who simply profiled these lands, glorifies this "tsar" as an ideal tsar!
    It just takes anger - well, where else in the world did such a gigantic, richest land be torn so stupidly? (Where no separatist rebels were observed)
    1. stalker
      0
      12 January 2012 19: 04
      There is an opinion that the United States would take these lands by force if the Russian Empire refused to sell them.
      1. Farkash
        +3
        12 January 2012 19: 25
        At that time, the United States against Russia had a small intestine and the sphincter was weak. Americans above the roof had enough problems within the country that had just survived the civil war. By the way, then, Russia, solving its problems with England, simultaneously provided serious moral support to the North by visiting the cruising squadrons of Popov and Lesovsky in New York and San Francisco. Helped on their own head. bully Therefore, Russia would rather drive Americans out of California than they would us from Alaska. smile
      2. KGB161rus
        -1
        12 January 2012 19: 43
        stalker
        You are confusing with England, America founded its colony from the British and their relations were "strained" at that time.
    2. 0
      13 January 2012 06: 56
      It was during Catherine II, it would be more appropriate to call her Queen, Mikhalkov glorifies Alexander the Liberator II.
      In the short term, there was no need to defend and develop this land, it needed crazy logistics and a strong fleet, Catherine conducted very active operations in Europe against powerful opponents, ground forces capable of succeeding not in natives and in Europe are expensive, the treasury demanded money, do not sell it Alaska, this land would go to England or France through conflict (the United States was not strong)
      In general, absolutely right in his koment KGB161rus
    3. wk
      0
      14 January 2012 19: 17
      Quote: ballian
      Monarchist Mikhalkov glorifies this "tsar" who simply profiled these lands as an ideal tsar!

      Mikhalkov glorifies Alexander III, and sold Alexander II.
  12. SmacXnumx
    0
    12 January 2012 19: 05
    Treason was committed by the Democrats starting with Gorbachev
    Gorbachev began shredding, allowing E. Shevardnadze’s friend to “delimit” the sea spaces in the Bering and Chukchi Seas so that the United States crossed 200 Russian miles of the economic zone, 7,7 thousand square kilometers of the water surface and 46,3 thousand square kilometers of the continental shelf.

    We have not ratified this document and can present US territorial claims at any time.
  13. Artemy
    0
    13 January 2012 11: 04
    We can’t demand Alaska back as if I didn’t want, because when the communists came, they created a new state that is not the heir to Russian imperia (RI), and all the documents accepted by the RI (including the Alaska lease / sale agreement) are not valid (they didn’t give a grandma amer’s amers).
  14. Rodver
    -1
    28 February 2012 13: 19
    Glory and eternal memory and gratitude to our Russian discoverers of America. We always keep the name of Alaska - as Russian America.