XVIII century: on the threshold of Peter's reforms

109
XVIII century: on the threshold of Peter's reforms
Peter I. Hood. V. Serov. Beginning XX century


This article continues the story about the evolution of the Russian state, begun in previous works on this topic in VO. We will talk about the prerequisites for Peter's reforms related to the development of mentalities.



It is known from school that the era of the reign of Peter I (1672–1725) is a time of transformations or significant changes in stories Russia. But assessments of Peter’s activities often differ significantly, less so in scientific literature, radically in pseudo-scientific literature, journalism and journalism. But before we begin to consider the events that occurred during the time of Tsar Peter, it is worth recalling once again how our country developed through the eyes of modern science, or at least part of it.

Rus - Rusiya - Russia by the beginning of the XNUMXth century. has passed a long but standard path for European peoples. All European ethnic groups followed a similar path, but there were also important differences or features. The Eastern Slavs appear on the historical scene in the XNUMXth century, while the Germanic peoples appear at the turn of the millennium. The formation of pre-state structures takes place in territories cultivated by the Romans, to one degree or another, in favorable geographical conditions.

The Eastern Slavs did this in a completely undeveloped and wild territory, in difficult climatic conditions, in a zone of risky agriculture, and much later than their western neighbors: approximately 5-6 centuries.

The Eastern Slavs, being at different stages of the tribal system, were subordinated to the princes of the “Russian clan”. This association is sometimes called a super-union of tribes, when the management of the tribes was reduced to the withdrawal of tribute and involving them in numerous wars for tribute.

The process of uniting the East Slavic tribes into potestar systems began at the end of the XNUMXth century. But the “Russian clan” subjugated all these tribes by force in order to receive tribute from them. From a modern point of view, this association can only be called a state conditionally; it was a potestar system built solely on the basis of military force. The large number of tribes forced the princes of the “Russian clan” to make some concessions to the cities, the clan centers of the Slavs, and the involvement of tribes, constrained by clan boundaries, on long trips to countries with urban civilization, receiving tribute from materially rich countries, caused the collapse of the clan society, which was not built on economic, but on tribal (blood) relations.

The collapse occurred at the end of the XNUMXth – part of the XNUMXth century. At the same time, a territorial community is formed, built on economic relations, in the form of Lands-“principals” or, using modern terms, city-states. They were formalized from the end of the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries, when the prince lost his role as a representative of Kiev or the Russian land, became the executive power in the Land, while the community acquired sovereignty and control (reign) over the city and the land.

The crushing blow to the Russian lands of the Mongols did not change the key vector of development of Rus' as a European state. But the defeat of cities, political centers of Rus' with the simultaneous death of city militias, which took the main blow of the invasion, simultaneously with a new constant threat of invasions and raids, a new, previously unknown for the Russian lands, constant payment of tribute-indemnity, leads to a change in management. Supreme power passes from cities that have lost their military potential to princes. During its concentration, they unite the former sovereign Earths. That is, in modern language, there is a change in the system of managing society while maintaining the formational component, which in Rus' was a neighboring-territorial community.

In the conditions of a constant military threat, a new system of governing society is being formed, a transitional system, as we now understand, a military-service state, on a completely different political basis than the one that previously existed in Rus'. And completely similar to the European countries of the period of transition from the territorial community to feudalism. This was the period of the second half of the XNUMXth century. - the beginning of the XNUMXth century, it coincided with the collapse of the territorial community and the beginning of feudalization at the very end of the period.

All this still happens within the framework of the neighboring territorial community. Its collapse, caused by the productive labor of the rural population, and the deadly threat of the steppe led to the beginning of the formation of an early class state and two only classes: feudal lords and peasants dependent on them, uniting disparate and different-status social groups. As in Europe, feudalism would not have happened without the military threat and Christianity, the world order model of a hierarchical society. The only institution of governance possible under early feudalism, the monarchy, was also being formed. This process began only under Ivan the Terrible, the first Russian feudal monarch. It went through the Time of Troubles, the first civil war or “feudal revolution” and culminated in the Council Code of 1649, as the first legislative code of the early feudal monarchy. And the first, in fact, in the full sense of the word, was state legislation. Thus, in the XNUMXth century. Russia became an early feudal monarchy. While European countries were emerging from the “sad knightly image,” bourgeois relations were rapidly developing in them.

A country at a lower stage of development had little prospects for independent life in such historical conditions, if not for “modernization” or total borrowing of technology. Which the monarchs of Russia - Russia began to implement by trial and error, which is completely natural. The pace of such modernization was insufficient to ensure the security of the country, which was closely intertwined with development.

Peter I and feudal mentality


All that pressure on society, “awakening it from sleep,” dressing in European dress, bans on beards, and the execution of those who did not agree with the “reforms” of the tsar, and those who simply fell under his heavy hand, like the executed lovers of his wives , - all this is explained, for the most part, exclusively by the worldview of the agrarian feudal period.

In European society of a similar period in the XNUMXth–XNUMXth centuries. “anger” in government was not so much a reaction to external stimuli as a pattern of political behavior in numerous wars and other turbulent events.

Any psychotype bears, first of all, the imprint of the mentality at which stage society is located.

Here it is worth saying a few words about mentality or mentalities, giving the floor to one of the authors and founders of this theoretical direction, Georges Duby:

“This is a system (namely a system) in motion, which is thus the object of history, but at the same time all the elements are closely interconnected; this is a system of images, ideas that are combined in different ways in different groups and strata that make up a social formation, but always underlie human ideas about the world and their place in this world and, therefore, determine the actions and behavior of people... All relationships within society they just as directly and naturally depend on such a system of ideas as on economic factors.”

In this regard, the situation with the borrowing of European clothing in Russia is indicative: at first, the complete rejection of “Lash” fashion, right up to the murder of its admirer, False Dmitry. Then the transition to Polish and Hungarian clothing, including for ease of use by foreign regiments. As a child, Alexei Mikhailovich was dressed in a Polish caftan, and knightly armor was forged for him. In the apt expression of V. O. Klyuchevsky:

“The German, with his newly invented tricks, has already climbed into the ranks of the Russian military men, and penetrated into the children’s rooms of the sovereign’s court.”


Polish dress of Tsar Peter

Finally, Peter I radically dressed the entire feudal class in Western European costume. This was not a whim - the subconscious magical connection here is obvious: the “certain” conveniences of this costume were secondary; it is clear that the Russian nobles fought not in an uncomfortable outfit, but in a feryazi, caftan and zipun. The most important thing was its semantic connection with the necessary technologies: if you don’t accept the first, there won’t be a second. And to Peter I, as a man of a feudal worldview, this was “obvious.” My father did not change into a “European” dress, and his reforms did not “succeed” - I will be more persistent, change into a European dress, and everything will succeed. This is a feature of medieval thinking, formed by the dominant agrarian type of production in society, with its sympathetic magical ideas, prejudices and superstitions, trust in the most fantastic or mind-blowing rumors. For example, about bringing brands from abroad with the signs of the Antichrist in order to brand everyone.

Streltsy uprisings of the late XNUMXth century. were generated by the same mental ideas. This was the reaction of the “collective unconscious” to innovations, the reaction of the people of the early feudal Christian society. In the course of modernization, according to the French Ambassador Neuville, the once most combat-ready military infantry units became a “militia.”

The 1689 uprising in Moscow demonstrated that the majority, and not only the Streltsy, viewed modernization as a threat. Because foreign innovations encroached on the “immortal soul” and opened the way to its sale. In the end, this is what happened, the sale of “souls”, Russian serfs, lasted for two centuries. If translated into the language of socio-political history, it will sound like this: innovations strengthened and made irreversible the power of the feudal nobles. Therefore, schismatics even in the “quiet” Alexei Mikhailovich, first of all, and even more so in his son Peter, saw the “Antichrist”, believing that the latter had been “replaced” in Europe.


During the “Khovanshchina,” a debate about faith took place between Patriarch Joachim and the leader of the Old Believers, Archpriest Nikita Pustosvyaty, in the Faceted Chamber of the Kremlin, a dispute typical of medieval thinking that turned into hand-to-hand combat. Nikita Pustosvyat. A dispute about faith in the presence of Princess Sophia. Hood. V. Perov

The natural inertia of Russian early feudal society, the ostentatious formalism of some of the top feudal managers, the “rudeness of morals,” the position of the archers, who, unpurposefully, turned into collective defenders of antiquity - all this forced Peter to abruptly begin the process of “modernization,” resorting to radical actions.

Critics of these actions always forget that in the context of the rapid development of military technologies in Europe, “there was no time for escalation.” And the unsuccessful campaigns of V.V. Golitsyn to the Crimea in 1687 and 1689, the Azov campaigns of Peter in 1695 and 1696. demonstrated the cost of the enormous efforts to borrow technology throughout the XNUMXth century.

Rationalism and modernization


Russia owes its modernization successes to the rational principle. The rational approach that Peter, the “Zandam carpenter,” acquired while working as a craftsman and apprentice in a large number of craft specialties, walking in the “correct” formation to the beat of his own drum, studying navigation and artillery skills.


Peter is studying shipbuilding at the shipyard in Saardam. Hood. K. Lebedev. XX century

Without rational thinking and approach belonging to a different stage of historical development, modernization would be impossible. Just like “conservatism” in Russia, which arose as a reaction to Peter’s changes, was associated primarily with the lack of a rational principle. Indicative in this case is the anecdote about the king’s jester. Balakirev decided to wean the boyars from sighing according to the old Russian order, “resumed the old days”, holding a wedding in ancient clothes and with the same food, thereby demonstrating both the inconvenience of clothing and the low taste of coarse food and drinks.

However, the beginning of rationalism in feudal Europe, as Jacques Le Goff suggests in his fundamental work “Purgatory,” is the XNUMXth century, the time of the beginning of the development of cities.

It is thanks to the modernization of Peter that such a phenomenon of political rational life appears as service to the state, which is completely uncharacteristic of feudal and previous forms of social development.

It will become an integral part of the political development of the country, will contribute to the emergence of citizenship and patriotism, opposed to personal service to a specific person. Under feudalism, built exclusively on personal relationships of subordination, where, as we have seen, the system of governing the country came out of the grand ducal court, the court of the master, there could be no talk of any abstract concept of service other than the head of this court. The state-system, as in ancient Rome, in the European Middle Ages, and then in Rus', did not exist. In Europe it began to take shape with the development of bourgeois relations. Before this period, the “state” was concentrated in the personality of the sovereign, and it could not be any other way, within the framework of the Christian worldview: one God in heaven, one sovereign on earth.

Chapter 8 of the “Table of Ranks” clearly emphasizes this feudal principle through the lips of Peter, addressing the nobility:

“...until they provide us and the fatherland with any services.”

All the ancestors of Peter the Great, starting with grandfather Mikhail, understood the need for “borrowing”, accepted and demanded them, contributed to them and encouraged those who participated in them, but did not participate themselves. They contemplated modernization, shackled by conventions and traditions, and did not organize it. The introduction of infantry, reitar and dragoon regiments, the construction of the frigate "Eagle", the creation of a "German settlement" and the attraction of "foreign specialists" - all this only solved current issues, but did not bring significant changes, just as "spot" modernization did not change Turkey, Persia and Egypt in the XVIII-XIX centuries.

Peter, with his literally understood “regulations”, like any master craftsman, made it with his own hands: the shelves stand in even rows along a line, the ships lined up in one line, St. Petersburg was built along lines, as opposed to the tangled back streets of Moscow, the back streets of tribal disputes and squabbles. But no “regular state,” much less absolutism, arose under Emperor Peter, and could not have arisen. This was only the outer shell of the early feudal country.


Peter is studying shipbuilding from Dutch masters. Hood. E. Grigoriev XIX century

Peter, surrounded by those who professed or pretended to follow rationalism, was able to bring “modernization” to the end, that is, to get as close as possible in feudal society to European “technology.”

The “manager” monarch found himself in his place at the right time - yes, this happens in the history of managing a country and enterprises.


This is what my Alma mater looked like in the XNUMXth century: St. Petersburg in the XNUMXth century. The building of the Twelve Colleges. Hood. E. Lanceray. XX century

Tsar Peter's plans


Peter, after long-term communication with Europeans, both in Moscow and in Europe, where he saw a factory territory teeming with businessmen and craftsmen, saw countries with “amazing” knowledge, including in military affairs, decided to start in his own the country undergoing radical transformations. At that time, there were only a couple of dozen large manufactories in Russia. The army, even with a large number of regiments of the “foreign system,” was a feudal militia. In the complete absence of development and knowledge institutions (schools, universities, etc.).

First, it is important to understand that, contrary to unscientific theories about Russia's eternal "imperial" aspirations, Peter's goal was primarily to participate on an equal basis in international trade. In these plans, the army and navy were only instruments:

“I don’t teach,” Peter wrote to his son Alexei, “to want to fight without legitimate reasons, but to love this business...”

Peter, and he was not the only one in the history of our state, absolutized foreign trade, which was congruent with the understanding of political and economic relations at the end of the XNUMXth century, but did not correspond to the real picture of the country’s development, to which we will return.

Secondly, if the goal of the Russian sovereigns, starting with Ivan IV, was access to the sea, then it was not needed to expand the export of raw materials - with this at the end of the XNUMXth century. Arkhangelsk coped quite well. Not for export, but precisely for import, import of “technology” from Europe, bypassing obstacles along the “wide sea route”.

Thirdly, at the initial stage, Peter, we repeat, was not driven by some abstract imperial ambitions, as if inherent in all Russian tsars: I don’t care about fat, I wish I was alive. And Peter’s naive desire to make Holland out of Russia: if little Holland, thanks the fleet and trade, has become a rich country, then what can we say about Russia in this case.

From these goals plans began to form.


Senate of Peter's time. Hood. V. Kardovsky. XX century

Researchers note careful preparation during reforms such as the creation of a fleet, the construction of mints and monetary reform. At the same time, the copying of “more efficient,” as the tsar saw it, management systems of other European countries, primarily Sweden, occurred spontaneously: the Senate and collegiums (ministries).

But, as you know, man proposes, but God disposes.

Peter's plans were adjusted by the social structure of Russian society and the foreign policy situation. Nevertheless, the implementation of his plans, the use and application of borrowed administrative and military technologies ensured the progressive development of the Russian feudal state until the middle of the XNUMXth century. inclusive.

Продолжение следует ...
109 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    21 September 2023 05: 04
    Thanks Edward!

    Clothes are still important. Even if you don't pay attention to it.
    1. +5
      21 September 2023 05: 52
      Polish dress of Tsar Peter

      I've already seen this somewhere. Well, exactly!
      and Nikolai Zubkov

      And of course, in the Armory Chamber.
      Photo. the so-called Polish caftan from the Armory, which the young Tsar wore before the Great Embassy. After returning home from a European trip, he never wore it again.




      .
      In general, unlike St. Petersburg, in Moscow there is quite a lot of traditional clothing that belonged to Peter, which he wore before his famous trip to Europe, during which he completely switched to Western fashion. [

      Greetings, Sergey! hi
      Good morning everyone!
      1. +5
        21 September 2023 06: 03
        Greetings, Dmitry!

        How can kings manage without the color red?
        1. +5
          21 September 2023 07: 04
          How can kings manage without the color red?

          Especially if the king is a reformer. And all reformers prefer the color red - remember the red jackets from the post-perestroika times of the 90s and the red revolutionary riding breeches from the civil war smile
          Naturally, Peter I had these too; today you can see them in the Armory Chamber
          a photo Red Dutch ports of Peter I from the Armory Chamber

          Not only did he wear them himself, but he also forced others to wear them. How about the authors of “Kozma Prutkov”: wink
          Having opened ports in the Baltic, he dressed the nobles as ports (c)
    2. +3
      21 September 2023 07: 29
      A prestigious foreign car is now more important than clothes - although car loans can be misleading...
      Businessmen I know say that when you come to negotiations, first of all they look out the window and evaluate what you arrived in...
      An acquaintance actually went bankrupt and became impoverished, he had nothing to repay loans with (he complained that he and his wife had switched to expired chickens for dinner), but he didn’t want to sell the prestigious Kruzak - it was the last hope of improving his affairs. Although he now goes to private meetings on... an electric scooter.

      Another was forced to lay off all his workers. But on the phone he says to unfamiliar businessmen: “I won’t be able to come myself, I’m full of orders. I’ll send them with papers for my little man to sign...”. But he goes to the meeting incognito himself - there is no one to send... Peter is abroad - “scorer Mikhailov”, damn it...



      PS In general, the article is sensible and interesting, although with some pretensions to academicism.
      1. +1
        21 September 2023 07: 54
        Probably, the electric scooter is a phenomenon for our time.

        And getting into debt is a bad habit.
      2. 0
        21 September 2023 09: 45
        A prestigious foreign car is now more important than clothes - although car loans can be misleading...
        Businessmen I know say that when you come to negotiations, first of all they look out the window and evaluate what you arrived in...
        An acquaintance actually went bankrupt and became impoverished, he had nothing to repay loans with (he complained that he and his wife had switched to expired chickens for dinner), but he didn’t want to sell the prestigious Kruzak - it was the last hope of improving his affairs. Although he now goes to private meetings on... an electric scooter.

        Another was forced to lay off all his workers. But on the phone he says to unfamiliar businessmen: “I won’t be able to come myself, I’m full of orders. I’ll send them with papers for my little man to sign...”. But he goes to the meeting incognito himself - there is no one to send... Peter is abroad - “scorer Mikhailov”, damn it...

        This is mostly bureaucratic show-off. The thieves show off to each other who stole how much and didn’t sit down (yet. wink ).
        The one who rose himself does not need to prove anything to anyone.

  2. +7
    21 September 2023 05: 51
    Not for export, but precisely for import, import of “technology” from Europe
    Actually, there wasn’t much to export other than raw materials. But having received ports in the Baltic, by and large they established not a lot of new technologies, but luxury goods.
    1. +6
      21 September 2023 09: 15
      And note that now it’s about the same as then - there’s nothing special besides raw materials.
      1. +4
        21 September 2023 09: 51
        as then - there is nothing special except raw materials.

        Good afternoon,
        there were no options during the period under review.
        Since the 70s XX century it became clear that this could be (partially) dispensed with.
        Now again, as in the XNUMXth century. - there are no options.
        hi
    2. +8
      21 September 2023 10: 39
      Can this thesis "not in a cart of new technologies, but in luxury goods"to clarify. Luxury items, those rare products that were not produced here, were often the result of high (at that time) technologies. Actually, there was no import of technology in the modern sense. They did not transport machine tools. Relatively speaking, after looking at certain products they decided “we should do it here necessary" and brought in people, specialists. This is roughly how the spread of new technologies happened in the West at that time. And there is no need to talk about the flow of specialists invited to Russia. Peter personally, during his trips abroad, selected samples and ordered their production in the West with so as to repeat it in Russia.His agents were constantly engaged in purchasing in Europe.
      St. Petersburg as a “window to Europe” from a modern point of view was a territory of rapid development and a “storage and gateway” for receiving foreign specialists.
      1. +1
        21 September 2023 18: 57
        An “abstract” article? a set of words and truisms...no more. not interested.... hi There is a book by Knyazkov “History of Russia in the era of Peter I”, everything is detailed there. maybe the author will read it...before writing a “sequel”? winked
  3. +5
    21 September 2023 05: 56
    What Pyotr Alekseevich did - we all already know approximately that. A much more important question is who he relied on when carrying out his reforms. And thanks to whom, they became successful. It is clear - there were many of these people and they were quite influential since they managed to break such resistance in all layers. I would like to write an article about them - who they were, what they wanted, what they got as a result. Because without them, what would have happened to Peter...
    1. +2
      21 September 2023 07: 23
      Good morning Pavel,
      Because without them, what would have happened to Peter...

      Much has been written about Peter's comrades-in-arms.
      I still wanted to convey the essence of the reforms, from the point of view of modern science, and not repeat the descriptions of all Peter’s reforms.
      But there are doubts about his comrades, as I wrote about in the text.
      All of them were nothing without Peter; it was his “craftsman” rationalism that brought about modernization.
      By the way, the same can be said about Napoleon’s comrades.
      It was they who were nearby, who reached many heights, the same Menshikov after the death of the Tsar, or Bernadotte under Napoleon, but they were the retinue, not the “king”.
      I wonder if our ruler is also a nobody without his comrades? and "shish" what would he have done without them?
      hi
      1. +4
        21 September 2023 09: 48
        No, it's not that simple. And if the interest of idiots like Menshikov is obvious, then what motivated people like Apraksin? Sheremetev? Romodanovsky? Golitsyn? Golovkin? And so on and so forth. This is why all these hemorrhoids were needed?

        In addition, Peter was supported not only by the elite. And a whole layer of serving nobility. Does this mean that his reforms were somehow attractive to them?

        Like Bonaparte - everyone knows his marshals, but a significant part of the people were for him! But here everything is clear - he expressed the interests of the emerging bourgeoisie class, especially the small and rural ones. And Peter?
        1. +3
          21 September 2023 10: 12
          Pavel, in short:
          Does this mean that his reforms were somehow attractive to them?

          In the next article: a direct clear answer to your question.
          hi
          As for individuals: we have practically no material to talk about this from a scientific point of view. Of course, both historians and writers have the right to express what motivated them, and I write this myself here, but we don’t know in detail.
          such specificity of the material and historical sources.
          1. +4
            21 September 2023 11: 04
            Edward, not as a reproach, but as part of a discussion. Without figures describing the economy and analysis of legislative activity during this period, it will be a repetition of previous materials. There is no reform system in sight. Although this will be a full-fledged monograph wink
            1. +2
              21 September 2023 11: 43
              Edward, not as a reproach, but as part of a discussion.

              Vladimir,
              good day.
              No problems.
              The article is: on the threshold of Peter’s reforms
              To be continued hi
      2. +2
        21 September 2023 10: 57
        Peter chose the strategy of “modernization and Westernization,” which is certainly a faster path, but significantly increases political tension in relation to simply “modernization.” As in corporate governance, only a responsible and interested owner with powerful administrative resources can revolutionize the old management system in parallel with building a new one. Evolutionary transformations, the implementation of the new into the old structure, require both time and a deeper understanding of the transformation processes. Russia was late in starting a new economic structure. It was necessary to quickly close the gap, and complete copying tactically gives an advantage, but strategically it can become a drag.
        Therefore, the struggle for new markets, access to the world's main logistics routes, integration into the emerging division of labor in the global market, and the elimination of potential military threats are the goals of Peter's reforms.
  4. +6
    21 September 2023 06: 35
    Leo Tolstoy about Peter I and others:
    “The rampaging beast Peter forces some people to kill and torture other people in hundreds, thousands, he himself amuses himself with executions..., furnishes the entire capital with gallows with corpses, goes on drunken visits among the boyars and merchants..., forcing some people to kill millions of people at work and in war ... And they erect monuments to him and call him a benefactor of Russia and a great man and all his deeds.

    After him, a series of horrors and outrages similar to his reign begins, one harlot after another commits outrages on the throne, torments and destroys the people... and reigns without any right to the throne, a husband-killer, a harlot terrifying with her depravity, giving full scope for atrocity to her changing lovers, and all ѣ horrors - everything is forgotten and some great wisdom is still praised... Not only do they praise it, their animal lovers praise it. The same with the parricide Alexander. The same with Palkin. Everything is forgotten"
    Leo Tolstoy, PSS, M., vol. 26, pp. 568-569.
    1. +2
      21 September 2023 07: 17
      Leo Tolstoy, PSS, M., vol. 26, pp. 568-569.

      Greetings to Alexander,
      why PSS with ѣ?
      1. +3
        21 September 2023 07: 24
        Good morning.
        That's how it was in the original. 1936 edition
        1. +3
          21 September 2023 10: 15
          Quote: ee2100
          That's how it was in the original. 1936 edition

          Strange, is it a foreign publication?
          There was an alphabet reform in 1918...
          Good afternoon, Alexander! hi
          1. +2
            21 September 2023 10: 29
            Hello, Sergey!
            I sent you the link by email.
            Not at home, so only via phone drinks
  5. +1
    21 September 2023 06: 42
    I would like a little about the lack of patriotism before Peter, but what about “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”? It is clear that this is about civil strife, but such words
    “Here the brothers separated on the banks of the fast Kayala;
    there was not enough bloody wine here;
    here the brave Russians finished the feast:
    got the matchmakers drunk,
    and they themselves died for the Russian land."
    Isn’t this about love for the Motherland, isn’t it patriotism? Don't underestimate our ancestors.
    1. +4
      21 September 2023 07: 11
      Good morning,
      Nobody belittles their ancestors.
      But one can write about patriotism in Ancient Rus' only for the purpose of educating a schoolchild, in the 4th grade of school.
      From a scientific point of view, such a phenomenon, of course, did not exist. There was service to the master, I’m writing about this, feudal mentality!
      Even if we assume that “Solov about Igor’s Campaign” is a XNUMXth-century original, then the meaning of “Russian land” is not what is taught about in elementary school. “Russian land” is land that belongs exclusively to the “Russian family”, and not to just anyone, and the Russians were certain Varangians, everyone else on this land did not belong to the “Russian family”, but were Polans, Drevlyans or Slovenes and were their tributaries, later , Kuryans, Vladimirs, Novgorodians, who throughout the XII - XIII centuries. fought with “representatives of the Russian family” for their sovereignty.
      The confusion about patriotism lies in different approaches, scientific and common, built on knowledge from primary school. Because they teach patriotism in school these days (or should teach it), but no one will tell children the essence of historical science: this makes adults crazy.
      Best regards,
      hi
      1. +2
        21 September 2023 07: 22
        Good afternoon Eduard, unfortunately I don’t know your patronymic, but then what about the words of Dmitry Donskoy “The people are unanimous in this, only the princes stir things up and get worse.” Even if this is much later than the Word, but in my opinion this is just a time of unity and patriotism. And very much to Peter
        1. +6
          21 September 2023 07: 45
          Alexey, you can also address Eduard, I don’t know your patronymic either.
          I wrote “patronymic” - and immediately remembered: under Peter and earlier, some had a patronymic, fatherland (i.e., estate), but the vast majority did not. This is where Griboyedov’s subtext comes from: the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us.
          Hence the telegrams from Paris: sell your fatherland (estate) - send money (for the courtesans).
          These concepts were formed gradually. We are talking about patriotism, but at the core, especially for those who still come from the USSR, there is no fatherland: but Soviet patriotism, in contrast to what has been taking shape over the last 30 years: nationalism.
          And here are the words of Dmitry Donskoko:
          “The people are unanimous in this, only the princes are stirring things up and getting into trouble.


          This is the crudest modern interpolation. Donskoy word like that people then he did not know and did not know, and he himself was still that “prisoner” and did not see anything seditious in this, if his rights as “master” and “sovereign” were not encroached upon.
          “People” back in the XNUMXth - XNUMXth centuries meant “rabble,” the lowest tax-paying class, which should serve and not shine.
          The nobles were never people.
          Best regards,
          hi
          1. +1
            21 September 2023 07: 54
            Well, there were also “grandfathers” there, in addition to the “side” laughing
      2. +4
        21 September 2023 07: 25
        And of course I liked the article, thank you for the work done. This is not Super Tartaria with Suer Ethnos, as some people like to pretend wink
      3. +6
        21 September 2023 07: 46
        "Tverichs and Novgorodians,
        For Ryazan residents - foreigners,
        A Christmas tree is not an acacia
        Rus' is not a nation yet" (c)
        1. +5
          21 September 2023 07: 48
          A Christmas tree is not an acacia
          Rus' is not a nation yet" (c)

          + + + + +
          Chicken is not a bird,
          Bulgaria is not a foreign country.
          Greetings Anton hi
          1. +5
            21 September 2023 08: 07
            Hello Edward!
            "They send me, Man,
            A governor in the wilderness,
            Forty huts barely,
            It's called Moscow"(c)
            1. +2
              21 September 2023 09: 48
              "They send me, Man,
              A governor in the wilderness,
              Forty huts barely,
              It's called Moscow"(c)

              ++++++++++++++++++++++
  6. +1
    21 September 2023 06: 57
    Why Tsar Petka was appointed a reformer is not clear. For example, reforms in the army began under Mikhail Fedorovich and continued under Alexei Mikhailovich. And Fyodor Alekseevich did more in his five years of rule than Petka did during his entire time in power. By the way, under Fyodor Alekseevich, no one’s beards were cut with blunt scissors, but the boyars shaved. They dressed in Polish and Hungarian clothes. Fyodor Alekseevich laid the foundations of what is now for some reason called Peter’s reforms.
    1. 0
      21 September 2023 15: 00
      “The boyars shaved,” let me clarify: many, but not all. Peter ordered it to be worn everywhere, but there were exceptions: priests, merchants and peasants retained the right to a beard
    2. +3
      21 September 2023 21: 08
      Quote: Gardamir
      Why Tsar Petka was appointed a reformer is not clear. For example, reforms in the army began under Mikhail Fedorovich and continued under Alexei Mikhailovich.

      Because under my grandfather and father, these reforms were what is called half-hearted and episodic. And Peter brought them to the end.
      After all, before the Northern War the Swedes beat us more often, but after that it was the other way around.
      Quote: Gardamir
      And Fyodor Alekseevich did more during his five years of rule

      can you list?
  7. +3
    21 September 2023 07: 08
    Good day to all! hi

    Edward, thank you very much for the article! I really liked it! good
  8. +3
    21 September 2023 08: 56
    The author continues his thorny path through the “history of the Russian state.” The scale of the plan cannot but command respect. Naturally, there are some rough edges.
    Here it is worth saying a few words about mentality or mentalities, giving the floor to one of the authors and founders of this theoretical direction, Georges Duby

    As for me, within the framework of the cycle, such a serious issue as the history of mentalities or historical anthropology, since the author decided to designate it in his cycle, for a better understanding of the “author’s intention” as a whole, should have been given a separate article.
    Because it is impossible to cover this issue in a nutshell, and a brief reference to the Annales school represented by Georges Duby can hardly reveal the topic of using the history of mentalities as a tool of historical analysis, as well as the difference between mentality and mentality, which is also important for understanding question.
    1. +3
      21 September 2023 09: 37
      Hello!
      Do you think that almost a century of research by the Annales school can be covered in one article?
      1. +2
        21 September 2023 09: 48
        Do you think that almost a century of research by the Annales school can be covered in one article?

        Hello. No I don't think so. And I don't suggest it. I just suggested paying some attention to such a concept as the history of mentalities and the difference between mentality and mentality without delving into theoretical research in this regard. It is quite possible to solve such a problem within the framework of one article.
    2. +3
      21 September 2023 10: 16
      Naturally, there are some rough edges.

      Good afternoon Victor!
      Thank you for rating.
      There are always rough edges, you fight them, you fight them.
      About mentality - you are right, but there is a fear of how interesting it is for readers: reading a separate article.
      Best regards,
      hi
      1. +2
        21 September 2023 10: 26
        there is a fear of how interesting it is for readers: to read a separate article.
        At the very least, I would be interested.
        1. +3
          21 September 2023 10: 59
          At the very least, I would be interested.

          As far as I remember, you do not reject sources in English. Check this one out.
          https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1450&context=hilltopreview
          It’s convenient because the file opens in a browser and you can use auto-translation if necessary.
          1. +2
            21 September 2023 11: 11
            As far as I remember, you do not reject sources in English. Check this one out.
            Thank you!
            1. +3
              21 September 2023 11: 18
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              As far as I remember, you do not reject sources in English. Check this one out.
              Thank you!

              Good afternoon Anton! hi
              It is also possible in Russian:
              1. +2
                21 September 2023 11: 25
                Hello, Sergey!
                I know that Gurevich was one of the first apologists for historical synthesis in our country.
                1. +3
                  21 September 2023 11: 37
                  Quote: 3x3zsave
                  I know that Gurevich was one of the first apologists for historical synthesis in our country.

                  It’s just that in this book you can briefly familiarize yourself with the main theses of the leading annalists until the early 90s.
                  1. +2
                    21 September 2023 11: 46
                    Sergei welcome!
                    theses of leading annalists until the early 90s.

                    J. Duby died in 1996.
                    1. +1
                      21 September 2023 11: 49
                      Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
                      J. Duby died in 1996.

                      The book was published in 1993, although it seems there is a second edition, then it’s probably better to look at it if it’s expanded. hi
                      1. +1
                        21 September 2023 12: 00
                        although it seems there is a second edition, then it’s probably better to look at it if it’s expanded.
                        Yes, there is a 2018 edition, a hundred more pages.
                      2. +2
                        21 September 2023 12: 02
                        Quote: 3x3zsave
                        Yes, there is a 2018 edition, a hundred more pages.

                        I don't know him.
                        Then it’s definitely better to take this publication.
                  2. +2
                    21 September 2023 11: 51
                    Thank you, I will consider.
                    Of the original studies, so far I have only read Le Goff.
                    1. +2
                      21 September 2023 11: 59
                      Quote: 3x3zsave
                      Of the original studies, so far I have only read Le Goff.

                      "The Civilization of the Medieval West"?
                      1. +2
                        21 September 2023 12: 09
                        "The Middle Ages and Money: An Essay on Historical Anthropology"
                    2. The comment was deleted.
                    3. +4
                      21 September 2023 12: 08
                      ...only read Le Goff.


                      Le Goff came to St. Petersburg in the 90s and gave his lectures at the philology department.
                      And M. Blok and L. Fevre? It all started with them, J. Duby was the first to formulate the concept of “mentality”.
                      hi
                      1. +2
                        21 September 2023 12: 20
                        And M. Blok and L. Fevre? It all started with them
                        Until I got my hands on it. But in my opinion, it all started a little earlier, with Johan Huizinga.
                      2. +4
                        21 September 2023 12: 41
                        Of course,
                        But Johan Huizing is already more of a property of historiography, as written in the preface to “Autumn of the Middle Ages” in the academic. edition, if I'm not mistaken, 1988? The first translation was made in 1919 into Russian.
                        "Annals" and many of their works, with many shortcomings and controversial issues, as well as their methodology, like all other histories. schools remain scientifically relevant.
                        And the introduction into science of such a concept of historical psychology as mentality or mentality seriously changed the approach to research not only in history, but also in all related sciences: political science, sociology, psychology. hi
                        Undoubtedly, this is a scientific revolutionary discovery, without which any research in this area looks archaic.
                        hi
      2. +2
        21 September 2023 13: 48
        but there is a fear of how interesting it is for readers: reading a separate article.

        As the discussion shows, there is interest. And to historical anthropology in particular and to historiography in general.
        So, if you wish, you can expect a new cycle in the future - “Scientific schools in historical science.” It’s both educational and not completely worn out, like the Middle Ages.
  9. +3
    21 September 2023 09: 13
    Interesting and informative."""""""
  10. +3
    21 September 2023 10: 14
    Good day, dear Eduard!
    First of all, thanks for the article, and now...
    To the old dispute about the main thing!!! hi
    The Eastern Slavs did this in a completely undeveloped and wild territory, in difficult climatic conditions, in a zone of risky agriculture, and much later than their western neighbors: approximately 5-6 centuries.

    It is debatable, if we take the point of reference from the Chernyakhov culture (conditionally the power of Germanaric), then the Slavic tribes were also involved in this process, albeit under the leadership of the Goths. Moreover, in their campaign to the shores of the Black Sea (2-3 centuries AD), the German tribes were stuck for almost a century in a war with the Antes, whom a number of historians classify as Proto-Slavs.
    By the way, the parity of the Germanic tribes is quite conditional. The Scandinavian countries (with the exception of Denmark) experienced the collapse of the tribal system later or simultaneously with the Eastern Slavs.
    Great Moravia, Bohemia and Bohemia (the latter is in question) are contemporaries of the empire of Charlemagne.
    1. +3
      21 September 2023 10: 21
      a union of tribes, when the management of tribes was reduced to the withdrawal of tribute and their involvement in numerous wars for tribute.

      All the French and English kings did the same thing until the reign of Louis IX Saint and John the Landless.
      The early feudal natural economy is an order of magnitude more defective than the institutions of churchyards formed by Princess Olga.
      1. +3
        21 September 2023 10: 36
        The collapse occurred at the end of the XNUMXth – part of the XNUMXth century. At the same time, a territorial community is formed, built on economic relations, in the form of Lands-“principals” or, using modern terms, city-states. They were formalized from the end of the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries, when the prince lost his role as a representative of Kiev or the Russian land, became the executive power in the Land, while the community acquired sovereignty and control (reign) over the city and the land.

        A classic mistake of the Leningrad historical school, which traditionally overestimates the role of the territorial community.
        The existence of a territorial community does not contradict the existence of the state. Which arises at the end of the reign of Yaroslav the Wise. Whose power was not absolute, like that of his contemporaries in France and England. However, the collapse of his power into fiefs was inevitable. This is a banal copy of the collapse of the “Empire” of Charlemagne. Conditionally dynastic inertia of thinking.
        1. +3
          21 September 2023 11: 59
          Vladislav,
          I greet you!
          Don't consider it discourteous
          I don’t want to answer all your objections.
          Just one thing:
          A classic mistake of the Leningrad historical school, which traditionally overestimates the role of the territorial community.

          Can you name works where, based on historical sources, the “classical error of the Leningrad school” is refuted in detail? laughing And its role before the collapse of the territorial community by the beginning of the XNUMXth century?
          hi
          1. +3
            21 September 2023 14: 16
            A classic mistake of the Leningrad historical school, which traditionally overestimates the role of the territorial community.

            Don't consider it discourteous
            I don’t want to answer all your objections.

            Edward, topics for articles are born before our eyes! Moreover, they are completely in line with your current cycle! How do you like the series of articles “Moscow-St. Petersburg Dichotomy”!? St. Petersburg is a symbol of Russia’s European path, Moscow is a stronghold of pre-Petrine Rus', “Asianism” and inertia. In the light of today’s realities, such a publication will cause a mega-scratch!
            1. +3
              21 September 2023 14: 46
              St. Petersburg is a symbol of Russia’s European path, Moscow is a stronghold of pre-Petrine Rus', “Asianism” and inertia.
              good good good
              It's already in the past laughing
              Moscow is not a stronghold of pre-Petrine rule, St. Petersburg is not a symbol of the European path.
              Just kidding
              1. +5
                21 September 2023 14: 49
                It's already in the past

                So history is the science of the past.
          2. +2
            21 September 2023 23: 13
            Eduard, do not be lazy to open any textbook on the history of state and law of Moscow or Ural Universities after 2005 (Yagofarov, Dvoryanov, etc.).
            By the way, denying the obvious, I ask you to show me the wretched difference in the state structure, form and rule of the Venetian Republic and the Lord of Veliky Novgorod in the mid-13th century?
            However, Edward, you still haven’t answered my question: Is the Empire of Charlemagne a state or not? If so, how does it differ from Vladimir Monomakh's Rus'?
            There is only one difference - there is no mass enslavement of peasants. Rus' falls out of the classical theory of stages, which means we will suck out different variations of communities.
            The “circus” left - the clowns remained, or rather the “dissertations” of the guru on the history of Rybakov and Fotyanov. One modeled feudalism on the example of Kievan Rus, the second - veche government as a rudiment of the tribal system! Everything is in line with Marx and Engels!!!
            Dear Edward, tell me the point of view of any state in Western Europe and I will ruin your version only with your arguments about tribute and military force! Well, in some places I’ll refer to “Leaderism,” or the banal lack of complete sovereignty. Only based on the latter, on formal grounds, can the statehood of the entire German nation and Italian entities be shoved into the firebox! Territorial communities, quasi-entities or sub-state? The threshold for the collapse of the tribal system is the emergence of private property, the rest is all from the evil one.
            Convince me that England under the grandchildren of William the Conqueror is an enlightened state, where, unlike contemporary Rus', they pay taxes and extract tribute. Or is Louis 9 at war with his vassals different from Andrei Bogolyubsky?
            My personal opinion, if not for the invasion of the Tatar-Mongols, the East Slavic principalities would have crossed the stage of feudalism. Only an external threat forced the population to take a step back to the primitive structure of feudal dependence.
            However, this also contributed to the preservation of a common self-identity and ultimately the division of the Slavs into a multitude of small states.
            1. -5
              21 September 2023 23: 18
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              Hello, Vlad!

              Likewise. A couple of questions:

              - Which state are you a cop?
              - enough for now )
      2. +4
        21 September 2023 11: 41
        until the reign of Louis IX Saint
        Now you just spat on the grave of Philip II Augustus!
        Hello, Vlad!
        1. +3
          21 September 2023 14: 28
          Now you just spat on the grave of Philip II Augustus!

          Jews will be only “for”!
          1. +2
            21 September 2023 14: 34
            It seemed to me that the expulsion of the Jews from the kingdom was arranged by Philip the Fair...
            1. +4
              21 September 2023 14: 46
              It seemed to me that the expulsion of the Jews from the kingdom was arranged by Philip the Fair...

              No, the authorship in France of this economically beneficial process entirely belongs to Philippe II Auguste. The famous Parisian Les Halles was located exactly on the site of the demolished Jewish quarters. Moreover, the far-sighted Philip allowed the Jews to return after 16 years! So that the descendants have someone to expel if such a need arises!
        2. 0
          22 September 2023 17: 02
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          until the reign of Louis IX Saint
          Now you just spat on the grave of Philip II Augustus!
          Hello, Vlad!

          Good day Anton!
          In a dispute with Edward (he knows history amazingly), you need to have ironclad arguments, better without ambition - the chicken will peck at the grain!
          However, he is definitely a great guy, with each work his arguments on our dispute improve. The only thing I don’t understand is his stubbornness to play from the works of his fellow historians, ignoring the arguments of legal scholars.
          And yet, my friend, it’s great to discuss (and even argue) with such a smart guy like Eduard!!!
          I wish you health and prosperity Anton, it’s a pity that I didn’t read your comment in a timely manner!
  11. +4
    21 September 2023 10: 59
    My father did not change into a “European” dress, and his reforms did not “succeed” - I will be more persistent, change into a European dress, and everything will succeed. This is a feature of medieval thinking,

    In the spirit of this paradigm, “Nikolai Palkin” immediately came to mind: all our problems come from disorder. If you introduce the German “ordung” everywhere, then everything will work itself out. It didn't work out.
    Good afternoon, Edward! hi
  12. +2
    21 September 2023 11: 11
    This:
    ...when the prince lost the significance of the representative of Kyiv or the Russian land, he became the executive power in the Land, while the community acquired sovereignty and control (reign) over the city and the land.

    Do I understand correctly that the prince was losing importance as an exclusively MILITARY and diplomatic representative of Kyiv and the Russian land and further in the text of the quote.
    From a mercenary to a ruler?

    Good afternoon, Edward!
    Have a nice day to all my dear colleagues! )))
    1. +3
      21 September 2023 12: 02
      Lyudmila Yakovlevna,
      good day,
      The prince was not a diplomatic representative, but the governor of Kyiv...and further in the text. From governor to executive branch (of course, very conditionally, given the period of development).
      hi
  13. +2
    21 September 2023 11: 57
    It is thanks to the modernization of Peter that such a phenomenon of political rational life appears as service to the state, which is completely uncharacteristic of feudal and previous forms of social development.

    It will become an integral part of the political development of the country, will contribute to the emergence of citizenship and patriotism, opposed to personal service to a specific person. Under feudalism, built exclusively on personal relationships of subordination, where, as we have seen, the system of governing the country came out of the grand ducal court, the court of the master, there could be no talk of any abstract concept of service other than the head of this court.

    It seems to me that the idea of ​​serving the state appeared along with this state, that is, at the end of the 15th century, because it is no coincidence that it is a “service state.” Another thing is that initially the service of the state was sublimated in the figure of the ruler - the king. And serving the king at this time was “equal” to serving the state. hi
    1. +4
      21 September 2023 12: 14
      And serving the king at this time was “equal” to serving the state.

      I completely agree, I wrote about this in previous articles.
      I, perhaps not entirely correctly, meant the abstract concept of “state”, and not personified in a king or monarch.
      In this sense.
      Although a specifically historically “abstract state” in general, or “eternal Russian statehood” does not exist in nature.
      The state is a system of managing society and suppressing the subordinates by the ruling class - nothing more.
      In continuation of Peter's reforms about this...
      hi
      1. +3
        21 September 2023 12: 18
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        I, perhaps not entirely correctly, meant the abstract concept of “state”, and not personified in a king or monarch.

        Then it is clear - we are talking about the separation of the concepts of monarch and state. hi
  14. +3
    21 September 2023 12: 24
    And Peter’s naive desire to make Holland out of Russia: if little Holland, thanks to the fleet and trade, became a rich country
    It’s unlikely that he was so naive, he still understood that a breakthrough was needed, but how? I understood that serfdom cannot be abolished, the peasants will simply run away from their owners, and if they run away, nothing can be done at all, and he went to tighten serfdom, assigned peasants to factories, manufactories, nobles, drove them into government service, military, civil, it seemed to distribute to everyone earrings for my sisters, but I couldn’t make the class completely happy.
    1. +3
      21 September 2023 12: 52
      Good afternoon,
      I guess, that:
      I understood that serfdom cannot be abolished, the peasants will simply run away from their owners, and if they run away, nothing can be done at all, and he went to tighten serfdom,
      Peter I could not think in such categories. Although this is, of course, a guess, what he was thinking or not thinking there, no one knows.
      In this regard, there could be no variability: either set free or enslave even more.
      Everything is for a purpose, for the benefit of the nobles, but they too must plow, and the fact that a man must “pull hard” as much as required is out of the question.
      From that thin Russian literature, and even documents from the 17th and early 18th centuries, we know that, if not class suppressed, no one ever cared about the fate of the peasants until the nobles became European.
      But when the European ideas of humanism (oh, this “collective West”) reached our country, this is where discussions about the hard life of the peasant began (Prince Shcherbatov and off we go).
      This will be discussed in detail in the next article.
      hi
      1. +3
        21 September 2023 13: 17
        Perhaps he did not think in such categories, but nevertheless, having become familiar with Dutch life, what kind of social elevator he created for non-serfs, the same Table of Ranks, enrollment in schools and townsman children, he somehow thought about it , how to dilute the nobility. All this does not look like simple copying. You know that during the struggle for independence, officer schools were created in Holland and it cannot be said that they were privileged, but accepted people of different classes. hi
        1. +4
          21 September 2023 13: 36
          I may be getting ahead of myself, since I wrote all this in the following article:
          т
          from the Table of Ranks, enrollment in schools and townspeople’s children, somehow I thought about that

          Holland - the bourgeois revolution, Russia - the beginning of the dawn of feudalism. Why do the townspeople go to school? Why should anyone be allowed into the nobility? We don’t even have cities, in the Dutch sense, at this time.
          The table of ranks, according to the latest research, with which I 100% agree: consolidated the conditional feudal “ladder” until the crisis of feudalism in the middle. In the 19th century, no one was allowed into the nobility, as there are a number of decrees from the 18th century. From ser. In the 19th century, yes, the Table became a document that opened the doors to the nobility, but this happened at a time when there was a crisis of this very nobility, as in Holland, in the 16th century.
          hi
          1. +2
            21 September 2023 13: 47
            We don’t even have cities, in the Dutch sense, at this time
            The presence of an urban population is one of the main conditions for the destruction of the feudal system
            1. +2
              21 September 2023 13: 56
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              The presence of an urban population is one of the main conditions for the destruction of the feudal system

              I remember 1913 with its 14% of the urban population, while a certain and significant percentage was in the first generation.
              1. +2
                21 September 2023 14: 10
                Accordingly, having hands free from the production of natural products is one of the main conditions for industrialization.
              2. +1
                21 September 2023 14: 26
                By the way, the urban population of Europe in 1500 is estimated at 16%.
                1. The comment was deleted.
            2. +3
              21 September 2023 14: 14
              The presence of an urban population is one of the main conditions for the destruction of the feudal system

              urban population of Russia in the 6th century. - XNUMX%
          2. +2
            21 September 2023 14: 18
            Eduard, the Table of Ranks under Peter, it’s like an announcement in the subway: Be careful, the doors are closing! And you run to the carriage, you made it, you’re lucky laughing There were still some lucky ones, but there were an insignificant number of them. As with admission to schools, when the nobles were not willing to go there and took the townspeople, at first. Although sometimes you think when you look at the names of the Baltic Fleet officers at that time, there were not enough conventional Ivanov nobles , all some English surnames. And you wonder how many specialists our home-grown schools graduated from? Still, this disgusting thing was serfdom, they didn’t really train their own personnel, although later in the 19th century they created universities, there was no technical school , everyone relied on foreign specialists, but they were in no hurry to create those schools, you understand what I mean.
            1. +4
              21 September 2023 14: 55
              Eduard, the Table of Ranks under Peter, it’s like an announcement in the subway: Be careful, the doors are closing! And you run to the carriage, you made it, you’re lucky

              I do not agree with you.
              Nobles ride in the subway, the doors are closed to others.
              The next article will contain statistics.
              The table did not allow any new nobles under Peter: this is a perestroika mistake, replicating the opinion of some professional historians: look, they say, anyone could become a nobleman! Come in from the street!
              Until the feudal crisis arrived in the 19th century, entry into the nobility was prohibited, only a select few were allowed, for example, the top of the former Ukrainian regiments (regions).
              Best regards,
              hi
              1. +4
                21 September 2023 15: 40
                Anyone could become a nobleman! Come in from the street!
                My mistake, it is necessary to reconsider, because my comment was based on the opinion of some. And roughly speaking, in Russia they were late in creating their own technical schools in various fields. Therefore, in the era of the USSR, again as under Peter, we had to turn to the West, buy licenses for engines and much more. hi Am I at least not mistaken about this?
                1. +4
                  21 September 2023 17: 12
                  Am I at least not mistaken about this?

                  It seems the same to me too.
                  I will express my thought, observation of the process of Russian history. Those are questions that I have asked many times.
                  and these thoughts are in a number of articles on VO. those. Russia entered the historical path of development late. Therefore, the 17th century. - still early feudalism, and in Europe there is a military revolution and those. progress. But feudal Russia cannot change anything in those terms, neither literature, the foundations of education, nor educational institutions - a desert. One Pustosvyat fights for the dogmas of faith as in the time of St. Bernard.
                  Peter overcame this problem. oMore on this further.
                  But there are no miracles in this until Russia and other European countries. the camps were feudal, which did not go well, in the 18th century, although the lag had an effect, but... The Industrial Revolution came, and the whole “sale of cast iron from serf factories to England” went down the drain.
                  And then the second technological revolution, and Russia is in flight.
                  Yes, the fifth largest economy in the world, but what kind of place is it?
                  and the new acceleration and modernization of the Bolsheviks - the second Westerners in Russia - the words are not mine, Toynbee.
                  But...and here it is not Khrushchev and Gorbachev that come into force, but Mentality.

                  Best regards,
                  hi
                  1. +2
                    21 September 2023 17: 28
                    But...and here it is not Khrushchev and Gorbachev that come into force, but Mentality.
                    That is, do you agree with Shpakovsky’s theses about paternalism of thinking?
                    1. +1
                      21 September 2023 20: 25
                      "paternalism" or Mentality(s) as we discussed today, the Annales school, dominate the collective conscious and unconscious.
                      By the way, I think I wrote an article here about Peter on this topic. laughing
      2. +3
        21 September 2023 14: 05
        But when European ideas of humanism (oh, this “collective West”) reached our country

        The ideas of classical European humanism never reached Russia.
  15. +2
    21 September 2023 14: 13
    Wonderful as always. I hope there will be a discussion in the comments, similar to previous articles.
    I wanted to ask the author what era he plans to focus on?
    It would be interesting to capture the 20th century - how modern history (as science) evaluates the transition from a “backward” formation immediately to an “advanced social experiment.”
    1. +2
      21 September 2023 14: 58
      It would be interesting to capture the 20th century - how modern history (as science) evaluates the transition from a “backward” formation immediately to an “advanced social experiment.”

      Good afternoon,
      And me.
      The problem is how to fit giant material into 10-11 printed sheets.
      I barely fit the 18th century into 4 articles, and the last one is still raw.
      Sincerely.
      1. +2
        21 September 2023 17: 07
        I think no one will mind 5-6 articles on the 20th century))
      2. +2
        21 September 2023 17: 18
        I have another question: when is it planned to return to the sieges of Constantinople? Otherwise we somehow got stuck in the 12th century...
        And yes, I personally was promised a photo walk around Istanbul with historical excursions. It’s not that I have any complaints, I’m just reminding you of my existence. wink
        1. +2
          21 September 2023 17: 36
          Anton!
          To blame
          And yes, I personally was promised a photo walk around Istanbul with historical excursions.

          This is what gnaws at me the most: I’ll start with it.
          hi
          1. +3
            21 September 2023 17: 46
            I'll start with it.
            “That’s great, pum-pum-pum!” (c) smile
  16. 0
    21 September 2023 14: 54
    Good day everyone.
    Edward, I intend to argue with you.
    In general, I agree with you, but in particulars I disagree
    1) “monarchy is the only form of government under the federal system, and what else could there be: a “presidential republic”?, . .
    2) feudalism and Russia, under Peter 1 feudalism was already a thing of the past. Although it is recent, it is the past.
    Ivan the Terrible "broke the back of the feudal system"
    3) tn "local or boyar militia" - already remnants of the feudal system, when the feudal lord brought to his overlord from one to three dozen spears ("memoirs" of Philippe de Commines).
    Sagittarius - a semblance of a regular army, appeared at the "near council of Ivan the Terrible. It seems, on the initiative of Adashev
    I explain the existence of the “local cavalry” by finances: the state could not yet maintain a completely regular army
    1. +4
      21 September 2023 15: 11
      Edward, I intend to argue with you.

      Well, this is a classic!
      "This is what gives me the spirit,
      That I, absolutely without a fight,
      I can get into big bully.
      Let the dogs say:
      “Ay, Pug! know she is strong
      What bark at the Elephant! ”
    2. +2
      21 September 2023 15: 24
      Edward, I intend to argue with you.

      Hello Ekaterina!
      ladies first!

      monarchy is the only form of government under the federal system, and what else could there be

      oligarchy or oligarch. republic, as in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Venice.
      hi
      1. +3
        21 September 2023 15: 29
        You can add a military theocracy in the order lands.
        1. +2
          21 September 2023 20: 32
          under Peter 1, feudalism was already a thing of the past

          A rather controversial statement - this is the very case when it would be appropriate to make a pun like: “The feud is not the same” (almost (c) smile
    3. +3
      21 September 2023 15: 44
      under Peter 1, feudalism was already a thing of the past.
      You are mistaken, it didn’t go anywhere, under Peter it developed rapidly, but under Catherine II, it reached its peak..
      1. +1
        22 September 2023 10: 19
        The feudal worldview has not gone away today. Russia elects a President under the slogan: “for whom else?..” And for life. Just like Mikhail Romanov was elected for life in 1613. The only difference is that Mikhail was elected according to the current law. And today the elections are a complete violation of the law.

        Peter modernized not Russia, but the urban population - an insignificant part of Russia. The village remained as it was until the mid-20th century - in the 17th century.