Central Russia: composition, geographic location. Features of the historical development of Russia

1. Introduction

1.1. Requirements for the level of mastering the content of the discipline:

The course "Features of the historical development of Russia" is offered as an optional discipline in accordance with the requirements of the State Educational Standard for the cycle of general humanitarian and socio-economic disciplines.

The history of Russia is an integral part of world history. The problem of the general and the particular in the historical process. Russian Historical School (S.M.Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky) about identity and the most important dominants national history... The problem of features in the historiography of the Soviet and post-Soviet period.

Natural and climatic factors. Features of soil, climate, landscape. The extensive nature of farming. Features of the labor process. The influence of natural and climatic factors on the type of Russian statehood, forms of non-economic coercion (serfdom), the development of community institutions, culture, mentality of the Russian people. Geopolitical factors.

Geopolitical factors of the development of Russia. Border geographic location of Russia. Influence of the East and West. The flat character of the terrain, its openness, the absence of natural geographical boundaries... The special role of invasions, invasions, a warrior in Russian history... Continuous expansion of the country's territory (colonization) - distinctive feature geopolitical development. Stages of territorial acquisitions of Russia in the XII-XX centuries. The influence of this process on the economic and social life of society, on the psychology of a Russian.

Features of the formation of the Russian state, their influence on the formation of the patrimonial form of government. Mongol conquest and strengthening of state despotism. The specifics of the relationship between the supreme power and the ruling classes. The special nature of the folding of the Russian centralized state in the XIV-XVI centuries. Ivan the Terrible is an attempt to establish absolute personal despotism. "Regular state" Peter I. Features of the monarchy in Western Europe and Russia. "Enlightened absolutism" by Catherine II. Disintegration of the served system. Alienation of society from the state. A special function of the supreme power in Russia is the state regulation of public life. State intervention in social processes The nature of the Russian state in the XX century. The structure of the regime of power in the 20-30th goals. Totalitarianism in Europe and the USSR: common and special, similarities and differences.

The history of reformism in Russia. Types of reforms: general and specific. Modernization of the society of Peter I. "Great reforms" of the 60-70s of the XIX century. Reforms and counter-reforms. The role of bureaucracy in the reform process. Methods of Russian reforms, the degree of public participation in the reform process.

Instability and conflict development is one of the main features of Russian history. Coexistence in Russian society of various sociocultural ethnic formations and the impact of this phenomenon on Russian history. The role of rapid Russian modernizations in the formation of social contradictions. Socio-cultural splits in Russian society and conflict development. Cruel serfdom and the lack of rights of the population are the objective basis for the crisis in Russian history. The centuries-old tradition of a split between despotic power and the people. Features of the formation of the intelligentsia and Russian national consciousness - a reflection of conflict social development.

1.2. The elective discipline "Peculiarities of the Historical Development of Russia" is based on the knowledge gained by students in the course of "National History".

2. Goals and objectives.

To give an idea of the climatic, geopolitical, religious factors that influenced Russian history.

Show the main points of view on the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history.

Pay attention to the special role of the "state principle", the specifics of Russian reforms, the conflicting nature of social processes.

Introduction .

Russia occupies a special place in world history. Although it is accepted to say that it is located in Europe and Asia, it has largely absorbed everything characteristic of the countries of these continents, nevertheless, it must be borne in mind that its history is independent in nature. It cannot be denied that Russia was seriously influenced by both Europe and Asia, but the countries located here also experienced its influence. In other words, the historical process is interconnected and interdependent. Each country has its own special history that sets it apart from others. The above is directly related to the history of Russia.

Topic 1. Natural, climatic and geopolitical conditions for the development of Russia.

In the history of Russia, natural and geopolitical conditions have always influenced the formation and development of society, the form of its statehood and management, and certain historical processes. The flat character of the terrain, its openness, the absence of natural borders - these are the main specific geographic features of Russia. They did not allow the national community to be protected from invasions, raids, invasions, wars. These features were emphasized by the largest Russian pre-revolutionary historians of Russia - SM. Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky and others. And indeed, already in the first centuries of Russian history, the territory of the Slavic tribes was subjected to constant raids by the Khazars, Pechenegs, and Polovtsians. The Mongol-Tatar invasion and the two-century Horde yoke.

An important feature of Russian history was the continuous expansion of the country's territory. It went in different ways. One of them is the development of new desert territories by the peasant population. So, as a result of agricultural colonization in the XII-XIII centuries. the fertile lands of Vladimir-Suzdal and other principalities of North-Eastern Russia, the Zamoskovny Territory were developed. In the XVI-XVII centuries. peasant colonization covered the territory of the Ukrainian and southern Russian steppes between the Don, the upper Oka, the left tributaries of the Dnieper and Desna, the territory of the so-called "Wild Field".

A radical revolution in the history of Russian colonization took place in the middle of the 16th century. after the conquest of the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates. Russian settlers rushed towards the middle Volga, the Urals and further to Siberia. Fortified cities were built along the banks of Siberian rivers and Lake Baikal. Several dozen cities were scattered over a vast, almost entirely forested area. Around the fortified cities, settlements of state peasants, resettled to Siberia by tsarist decrees, were formed. We went to Siberia, to the shores The Pacific, and free settlers, and trappers-industrialists. In the east, mainly desert, virgin lands were developed. The indigenous, nomadic population was extremely small here.

In a number of cases, territorial expansion took place through voluntary accession to Russia. Exhausted by the six-year war with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Ukraine faced a choice: to recognize Polish rule again or to go “under the arm” of Moscow. In 1654 the Pereyaslavl Rada made a decision on the entry of Ukraine into Russia. Voluntary accession of Georgia at the turn of the XIX century. it was also nothing more than a definite historical choice in the face of the threat of enslavement by a neighbor more dangerous than Russia.

But more often Russia “recaptured” the territories they had seized from other states. So, as a result of the Northern War, the Baltic was "taken away" from Sweden, from Turkey - its fortresses - outposts in the Northern Black Sea region and Bessarabia, from Iran - Armenia. The Caucasian wars ended with the subjugation of the North Caucasian tribes. In the 60s. XIX century. the entry of the Kazakh lands into Russia was completed. After the defeat of the Kokand Khanate by the tsarist troops, the Kyrgyz lands were annexed. From the Caspian Sea and Central Asia the lands of the Turkmen tribes were annexed to Russia.

Continuous territorial expansion predetermined a number of historical features Russia.

The increment of territories provided the treasury and the state with new sources of funding, an increase in material and human resources, and additional economic benefits. Only the annexation of Siberia gave for several centuries an increase in enormous material wealth, the rarest Siberian furs, forests, the richest natural deposits, etc.

For centuries economic development went in breadth, was provided by quantitative factors (extensive type). The Russian population did not have an urgent need to move from traditional farming to a more efficient one, since there was always an opportunity to move to new places, to develop new territories. There was no shortage of land.

The scattering and inaccessibility of many settlements, long distance. The high cost of transport, bad roads, and poor development of trade and communications were largely associated with this.

The peculiarities of the Russian historical process were largely determined by the originality of the natural and climatic conditions and the related specificity of agricultural production.

Given the vast expanse of land on the territory that constituted the historical core of the Russian state, there was extremely little good arable land. The predominant type of soil in Russia was podzolic, clayey, swampy or sandy, poorly provided with natural nutrients. Siberia, with its potentially inexhaustible supply of arable land, was largely unsuitable for land tenure. This was due to the fact that the warm air produced by the Gulf Stream cooled as it moved away from the Atlantic coast and moved inland.

Another feature of the natural and climatic conditions was the unusually short cycle of agricultural work. It only took 125-130 business days (roughly April to September). Thus, the Russian peasant was in difficult production conditions: thin soils inevitably required high-quality, nutritious cultivation, and natural conditions did not give sufficient time for agricultural work.

Average yields in Russia were low and labor costs exceptionally high. In order to get the harvest, the peasant had to work literally without sleep or rest. At the same time, all the reserves of the family were used, even children and the elderly. Women were fully employed in all male jobs. Severe agricultural conditions, overstrain and the involvement of everyone, young and old, predetermined the specific way of life of the Russian landowner. In contrast to him, the European peasant, neither in the Middle Ages, nor in modern times, did not need such a exertion of strength, for the agricultural season was much longer. This ensured a more favorable rhythm of labor and the entire way of life of the European peasant.

A characteristic feature of peasant production in Russia was the extremely weak base of animal husbandry. Procurement of feed for livestock became a big problem every year. The period for storing feed in the historical center of Russia was extremely limited (only 20-30 days). During this time, the peasant needed to stock up on a sufficient amount of feed.

Foreign trade did not stimulate the development of agricultural production. Russia stood far from the great trade routes and until the middle of the 19th century. could not sell grain abroad. And the gap in labor productivity between Western Europe and Russia was significant. According to the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary, at the end of the 19th century. one acre of wheat in Russia yielded only one-seventh of the English crop and less than half of the French and Austrian crops.

Russian geography did not favor the sole management of the economy. In the conditions of a short agricultural season, field work was easier to carry out in a collective. This preserved the archaic traditions of the communal organization of village life.

Unlike Europe, the community in Russia did not disappear, but began to develop. From about the 16th century. Russian peasants are increasingly parting with the farm settlement system (it is preserved mainly in the southern regions) and concentrating their yards and farms in multiyard villages and villages. With the strengthening of personal serfdom from the end of the XVI century. the protective functions of the neighboring community, its democracy and equalizing tendencies are increasing.

In addition to organizing sowing, mowing and other collective field work, the community has developed a set of measures to help impoverished and ruined peasants. Arable land was divided by the community into plots of different soil quality and distance from the village. Every courtyard had the right to receive one or more strips of land on each of these plots. Periodically, as the situation within the neighboring community changed, redistributions took place as a way to achieve intra-community “social justice”.

Along with the production functions, the community solved such social problems as the collection of taxes, taxes, the distribution of recruitment, and others.

Despite the vigorous retraction of agriculture from the second half of the XIX v. into market relations, communal traditions were preserved there until 1917.

The millennial existence of the community in Russia, its dominant role in the life of the Russian population were factors that radically distinguish the entire way of life of Russians from Western traditions.

High-cost, labor-intensive farming put the rural population in front of the need for almost the entire family to participate in it. There were no free working hands. Consequently, Russia was characterized by the narrowness of the hired market. work force... And this slowed down the process of becoming industrial production, urban growth.

The poverty of society also predetermined the small number of people living at its expense, the so-called "servants" of society - scientists, teachers, artists, actors, etc. And hence the late genesis of secular culture in Russia. The church has been here much longer than in Western Europe, carried out cultural and ideological functions. It is no coincidence that the first universities in Europe appeared in the 12th-13th centuries, and in Russia - in the 18th century.

Finally, one cannot fail to note the fact that the extremely difficult working conditions of the Russian landowning population left an imprint on the national character. It is primarily about the ability of a Russian to exert himself to the utmost, his readiness to help his neighbor, and a sense of collectivism. The strength of social traditions also played a significant role here. At the same time, the eternal shortage of time and difficult natural conditions, often nullifying all the results of labor, did not develop in the Russian person a pronounced habit of thoroughness and accuracy in work.

Thus, we see that geographic and climatic factors affected the type of management, the political and social structure of the country, its cultural development, and the pace of the most important social processes.

Topic 2. The role of the state in Russian history.

One of the main characteristic features Russian historical process was a hypertrophied role of the supreme power in relation to society. What are the origins of the special state despotism in Russia? There are different opinions on this matter. Historians-researchers pay attention to a number of circumstances.

The Old Russian state arose under the influence of the activities of an alien element - the Varangians, as a result of the development of a vast territory by their separate detachments. The Kiev state, at the origins of which stood the Varangians and their Slavic and glorified descendants, was not formed as a result of the natural evolution of the structure of the Slavic tribes. Neither the princes, nor their warriors were from Slavic society, although later they were assimilated. The noticeable influence of the Varangian element gave statehood a kind of external, external form. Slavic and Finnish tribes who lived in this territory took on the introduced forms state structure, but retained their generic way of life and generic psychology.

This is how a special political entity was formed with an unusually deep chasm between the rulers and the ruled. There was no unifying interest in the Kiev state and Kiev society: the state and society coexisted, preserving their differences.

In Russia, from the very inception of Russian statehood, its lowest form, the patrimonial state, began to be developed. Even in later times, Russian emperors owned, and did not rule, Russia, had their own dynastic, and not state, interests in it. The tradition of considering the country entrusted to them as property was retained by the Russian rulers until the February Revolution of 1917 (until the abdication of Nicholas II from the throne).

The strengthening of state despotism was facilitated by the weakening of the rights and role of cities. The Mongols launched their main blows on the cities. According to archaeologists, of the 74 Russian cities of the 12th-13th centuries, known from excavations, 49 were devastated by Batu. The cities of many principalities were destroyed in the 13th century. several times (Pereyaslavl-Zalessky - four times, Suzdal, Ryazan, Murom - three times; Vladimir - two times, etc.) 1. In conditions of constant external danger, the cities were deprived of their old liberties. At the same time, the role of the prince increased sharply.

And one more factor of that time, which predetermined a special strengthening of the supreme power. As a result of the Horde invasion, the main part of the ruling class perished. According to experts, in the middle of the XII century. of the twelve Ryazan princes, nine perished, of the three Rostov princes, two, of the nine Suzdal princes, five. Analysis of the genealogical books of the Moscow boyars of the 16th century. testified that the Moscow and northeastern clans of boyars had no ancestors before the invasion of Batu. In addition, the bulk of the feudal warriors also perished during the invasion. After all, it was the squads, together with the townspeople, who defended the Russian cities.

The origins of the all-encompassing role of the state in relation to society largely lie in the special nature of the formation of the Russian centralized state in the XIV-XV centuries. If in Western Europe the main role in the process of centralization of lands was played by socio-economic circumstances, then the unification of the Russian lands was dictated by political circumstances, above all the need to combat external danger ( Golden Horde, Livonian Order, etc.) and the establishment of national independence. Such a process of centralization, which took place under “advancing” (in relation to socio-economic) political factors, preserved the emerging purely despotic relations.

In the XIV century. between the strongest Russian principalities (Moscow, Tver, Ryazan, Suzdal and Nizhny Novgorod), an acute rivalry unfolded for the consolidation of the grand ducal power. The Moscow prince Ivan I acted in this struggle in the most cunning and unprincipled manner. He spent most of his reign either in the Horde or on the way there. Being a clever and gifted businessman (popularly nicknamed Kalita - "money bag"), he made a very significant fortune, which allowed him not only to regularly pay his share to the Horde, but also to cover the arrears of other princes. To the latter, he lent money on the security of their estates, which he sometimes took for himself in exchange for debts.

The most serious rival of Ivan Kalita in the struggle for the favor of the Mongols was the prince of Tverskoy, who then had the grand-ducal rank. In 1327 an anti-Horde uprising arose in Tver, and the Tver prince sided with the rebels. Ivan Kalita hastily set off for the Horde and returned at the head of the united Mongol-Russian punitive army, which devastated Tver in the most terrible way. As a reward for his loyalty, Kalita received a khan's label for a great reign and the right to independently collect tribute for the Horde.

So, thanks to the zealous service to the Horde, Moscow gradually isolated its rivals and rose to the fore, becoming an intermediary between the conquerors and Russian subjects. The final rallying of the principalities around Moscow took place under Kalita's grandson, Prince Dmitry Donskoy. He was the first to give his son the title of Grand Duke, without asking the khan's permission.

In the future, the Moscow princes showed foresight and outstanding business and political abilities to preserve and increase their power. They collected villages, cities and crafts, actively traded. In an effort not to divide their principality by inheritance, they gradually introduced the order of succession to the throne by the right of the birthright.

In the XVI-XVII centuries. state autocratic power is strengthening. Under Ivan IV (the Terrible), the remnants of decentralization were eliminated, the rights of feudal lords were limited.

The tendency towards centralization and absolutism develops in the future. Under Peter I, the patriarchate was liquidated and a state body, the Synod, was created to manage the affairs of religion. This marks the final victory of the supreme secular authority over the Church. In 1721 Peter introduced the title of Emperor. Russia is becoming an empire. Instead of an estate-representative elected body under the tsar (Boyar Duma), a Senate is created, whose members are approved and appointed by the emperor.

Estates were formed under the direct influence of the authorities. The society was divided into layers with a clear definition of the status and functions of each. The Cathedral Code of 1649 consolidated the position of various categories of the population and the range of their duties.

Those who served in the army or administration constituted the service class. Others - landowners, artisans, merchants and other manual workers - became the "draft" class. Service people were not originally nobility, did not have class privileges, but they had significant advantages. Having a fund of land, the state, being the supreme owner, provided service people with a plot of land (an estate) with peasants on condition that they performed military or civilian service.

The supreme power tried by all means to consolidate the existing structure. In the XVI and XVII centuries. laws were passed prohibiting peasants from leaving their plots, and merchants from changing their place of residence. The priests did not have the right to relinquish their dignity, their sons had to enter their father's career. Under the threat of severe punishment, commoners were not allowed to move into the ranks of the service stratum. And the sons of service people should, upon reaching the age of majority, register with the appropriate department. The state in every possible way tried to make the social position hereditary. The social structure of society became more and more motionless. This is how an all-embracing system took shape, attaching the entire population to the state.

If the power influenced the formation of the nobility, then the estate of state peasants was generally organized as a kind of institution. Different categories of the non-serf population were recorded in one legal and tax class. A part of yesterday's service people fell into the category of "taxable", which forever blocked their way to the nobility, although some of them had their own serfs and owned land.

Likewise, by establishing states and recording them, a layer of clergy was created. Some of the churchmen also did not get into the state and were assigned to the "tax" class.

The social structure of the city was determined in a purely administrative way. The entire population was divided into guilds and workshops.

The feudal intervention of the autocratic power also distorted the development of the bourgeois stratum. Manufactory owners were forced to spend money on buying land from peasants, and not on the development of production. The wealthy industrialists sought to obtain a title of nobility and join the privileged nobility.

By his intervention in the sphere trade relations the state hindered the development of the merchant trading stratum. Merchants were forcibly drawn into various kinds of state "services", forced to organize special trading companies... Administratively, it was determined in what places and what goods can be traded.

The idea of serving the common good, "the world" for the sake of which a person should sacrifice his personal, was the most important part of the Russian mentality. In this regard, the idea of serving the common state principle played a significant role in the spiritual mood of the Russian people. “Russia is the most powerful and most bureaucratic country in the world; everything in Russia is turning into an instrument of politics. The Russian people suffered great sacrifices to create the Russian state, they shed a lot of blood, but they themselves remained powerless in their immense state, ”the outstanding Russian scientist Nikolai Aleksandrovich Berdyaev wrote about the role of the state principle in the life of the Russian people.

Topic 3. Features of the reform process in Russia

Russian history is in many ways the history of social reformism. Despite numerous wars, riots, conspiracies and revolutions, real changes in the economic and political system over the past centuries have occurred, as a rule, as a result of reforms carried out by the supreme power, sometimes on their own initiative, and sometimes under pressure of circumstances.

Deep modernization and Europeanization of Russia was carried out by Peter the Great. With the name of a prominent statesman, close adviser to Emperor Alexander I, M.M. Speransky connected the reformist process of the first half of the XIX century. The agrarian, urban, zemstvo and other reforms of the 60-70s are also exceptional in their significance. XIX century. We speak of this period as "the era of great reforms." The process of modernization of Russian society at the beginning of the XX century. was started on the initiative of such a significant political figure of Russian reformism as Pyotr Stolypin. In the history of Soviet society, there was also a deep modernization of the social order in the late 1920s - in the 30s, and Khrushchev's reformism, and, finally, attempts to renew society in the second half of the 80s - in the 90s.

The history of Russian reformism has given rise to many types of reforms with varying degrees of state coercion and varying degrees of involvement of social forces in the design and implementation of reforms.

For centuries, Russian reformism was based solely on the idea of statehood. Reforms very often took on the character of state intervention in social relations, and the people acted only as an object. Not only Peter with his idea of violent progress, not other reformers and statesmen proceeded from the principle of developing and implementing reforms exclusively "from above".

A feature of the Russian transformations was their conflict. Reforms were very often carried out by harsh, violent methods, they had "the taste of tears and the color of blood." The reasons for this lay both in the accelerated pace of innovation and in the insufficient consideration of social interests. Russian reformers, as a rule, largely did not take into account the position of those groups of the population who adhered to traditional norms of life.

Peter's reforms were accompanied by a dull and stubborn internal struggle: four mutinies and several conspiracies. Their members opposed innovation. Peter cruelly dealt with the bearers of antiquity: archers, Old Believers churchmen and even the heir to the throne who did not want to follow in his father's footsteps. And since the old boyars, clergy, archers, exhibited some external features (beard, long-length dress) as a sign of their opposition, Peter ardently took up arms even against these trifles.

At the end of the 17th century, after returning to Moscow from abroad, Peter immediately began to trim his beards and cut long single-row hem and females from his entourage, introduced wigs. It is difficult to imagine what legislative and police uproar and clamor was raised because of this rearrangement and re-costume of the Russian people in a foreign way. The clergy and peasants were not touched: they retained the estate privilege of remaining Orthodox and old-fashioned; bearded men and carriers of the "illegal" dress were fined. The nobles who appeared at the sovereign's review with an unhaven beard and mustache were mercilessly beaten with batogs.

Disregard for the heritage of the historical experience of their own people was typical for other Russian reforms. Often the Russian reform carried a destructive rather than constructive charge.

The consequence of this was the accumulation in the process of reforms of the potential of their negation, the state of internal tension, conflict of society.

Reformism in Russia was very often based on uncritical perception, and sometimes on direct borrowing of ideas and views.

A characteristic feature of many reforms in Russia was also the fact that the state, as the initiator of reforms, could not rely on the old bureaucracy, therefore, the modernization of the administrative apparatus, that is, administrative reforms, was the main component of the transformations.

Constant modifications of state institutions inevitably expanded the layer of bureaucracy. It flexibly responded to changes, transformed, poured from one structure to another, but survived and became stronger. The bureaucracy in Russia grew rapidly. Only in the first half of the 19th century. the number of government officials has more than quadrupled.

The special role of the state in the process of Russian reforms "from above" turned the bureaucracy into their sole developer and leader. Therefore, its significance in the fate of Russian reforms was enormous. The final fate of reforms in Russia depended on the position of the ruling elite, on the results of the struggle of various groups and clans of the bureaucracy. In addition, a constant series of reforms and counterreforms, innovations and backward movement is a characteristic feature of the Russian reform process. Finally, it should be noted that Russian reformers very often ignored the rights of the population, thinking primarily about the rulers and the state.

Topic 4. Conflict nature of the Russian historical process.

One of the features of Russian history is the extreme inconsistency, conflict development, the predisposition of Russian society to extremes. This feature lies at the heart of Russian instability, which, in turn, is associated with the contradictory image of Russian society.

Russia, as you know, has developed in cooperation and in the struggle with Europe, then with Asia. Both Eastern and Western elements are present in Russian life, in Russian history.

Social and political thought in Russia constantly turned to this contradictory phenomenon of historical reality. The concepts of Westernizers and Slavophiles reflected the exaggeration of one of the sides that make up the complex civilized image of Russia. Westerners believed that the Russian way was the Western European way. They attributed the distinctive elements of Russian life to manifestations of backwardness. The Slavophiles, on the other hand, developed the idea of the fundamental difference between Russian development and Western European development, in every possible way they highlighted the exclusive originality of communal, patriarchal, Orthodox Russia.

N. Berdyaev also emphasized the dual, contradictory nature of Russian life. In his work "The Fate of Russia" he developed the idea that the Russian people simultaneously coexist both with the Eastern adherence to the state principle and the Western ideal of freedom. In the history of Russia, this duality was expressed, as he believed, in the constant alternation of destructive riots of the freemen and periods of strengthening of power, restraining it with an iron hand.

Adding more and more territories, the empire became a multiethnic society, a conglomerate of many peoples. It was replenished with a variety of ethnic groups - from Tatars and Kazakhs to Chechens and Armenians, from Poles and Latvians to Chukchi and Yakuts. It was a fusion of Indo-European, Ural-Altai, Mongolian, Turkic and other ethnic lines. Moreover, the old lands were not monopolies, and the new ones could not be called colonies. The peculiarity of Russia was that the old and new lands were like a common living space with a single economic and political life, a single administrative division, office work, court, legislation. But within this single society, completely different types of societies, different socio-cultural formations were constantly intertwined and influenced each other. Along with the bourgeois relations developed in the western and southwestern regions, patriarchal and clan relations persisted.

Russian feudalism was less inclined towards social progress. It was characterized by more despotic forms of monarchy than in Europe. The medieval population (the ruling class and commoners) was more dependent on the supreme power than in the West. The exploitation of the peasantry was extremely high. There was a long, for several centuries, conservation of the personal serfdom of the peasants.

The Russian type of evolution of feudal land ownership was also specific. The private ownership of land by the nobility was never the predominant form of land ownership. The main trend was the system of "state feudalism", in which the supreme ownership of land remained with the state, and feudal land tenure bestowed by the state and conditioned by the service of the king. The peasants were the "holders" of the land with taxes, dues and duties obligatory before the state. In certain regions, at certain epochs, such "state land" could turn into the actual property of the "state peasants". The specific features of feudal land tenure in Russia did not contribute to any firm position of the institution of private land ownership. The rural community stood as a solid barrier to the development of private property. Thus, a feature of the Russian type of feudalism was the traditionally weak development of private land ownership and individual economic activity peasantry.

Researchers believe that in the context of a “lagging” type of historical evolution, the process of bourgeoisization of Russian society was incomplete.

Russia is characterized by a rearrangement of the phases of the genesis of capitalism. If in the countries of Europe the bourgeois-agrarian coup preceded the bourgeois revolutions, then in Russia agricultural sector remained, in fact, feudal until 1917. Only after the reform of 1861 did the beginnings of an agrarian market begin to appear, and the peasantry remained largely dependent on the landowners' latifundia.

In Russia, there was no long incubation period for the development of machine production and a long period of formation of the mechanism of capitalist exchange. The industrial revolution was ensured to a large extent by the import of foreign technology. There was a rapid development of railways and steamship lines. Russian “primitive accumulation” did not give a free hired worker. It was basically a "otkhodnik" who had not yet broken with agriculture and "his" master. The peasant reform of 1861 and the abolition of serfdom together with the Stolypin reforms at the beginning of the 20th century. moved forward the process of formation of the market for hired labor, but the final completion of the "initial accumulation" of capital in Russia in the first quarter of the XX century. it didn't work out. The country continued to remain agrarian-industrial with a huge predominance of the agricultural population.

A feature of Russian bourgeois evolution was the delay in the social development of the state. Almost nowhere in modern times has there been such a deep chasm between the poor and the rich as in Russia. This objective basis, which has been preserved for two centuries and is reviving in modern reality, has been and remains an objective ground for social schism, a breeding ground for extreme currents that are organically incapable of synthesis.

The centuries-old serfdom, oppression, powerlessness and oppression of the Russian population formed radical thinking, ignoring any moderate decisions. Reforms, invading the very core of society, usually ignored the interests of those social groups and forces that adhered to the established traditional values of modernization (“great reforms” of the 1860s, Stolypin reform, NEP). They destroyed the Russian patriarchal integrity and led to social stratification, the displacement of entire popular strata to the social periphery. Often these strata became the social base of the counter-reforms, revolutions, and civil wars that followed the reform. So, the abolition of serfdom turned into terrorist activities of the People's Will and the revolution of 1905-1907. The Stolypin reforms, which accelerated the stratification of the peasant country, pushed towards the 1917 revolution and civil war. And the NEP, which drove millions of peasants into the proletarianized cities, generated a powerful response from totalitarianism, which took shape in the brutal Stalinist dictatorship.

The history of Russia has been filled with transitional, critical periods. The people lived in an atmosphere of emergency and civil war.

Many roots of Russian conflicts lie in the peculiarities of the Russian government with its absolutist nature, monopoly and powerful interference in the life of society.

The tragedy of the country was that there were no full-fledged estates, classes, free and free citizens in it. In the era of Ivan the Terrible or Peter the Great, during the reign of I. Stalin, N. Khrushchev, L. Brezhnev or M. Gorbachev, a person's position was determined exclusively by his duties and the absence of real rights, which at best were only declared.

In Russia, the mythological rather than critical type of thinking has always dominated. From generation to generation, a simplified idea of how to achieve the goals of social progress and the belief that the struggle, the destruction of the enemy, the violent and mechanical destruction of old forms of life will by themselves ensure the realization of the social ideal was passed on. Of all the possible options for transforming society, the Russian person was most impressed by the methods of revolutionary logic, rebellion, explosion. It is no coincidence that the Russian intelligentsia was distinguished by its radicalism, a tendency to see in political struggle the closest path to the people's welfare.

The concept of the "social split" of Russian society has not yet been finalized and integral. However, the modern development of Russian society allows us to represent it as the dominant of historical development.

1. Educational and methodological support of the discipline.

9.1 Basic Literature

1. Artamonov V Catastrophes in the history of Russian statehood // Social sciences and modernity.-1994.-№ 3

2. Baluev B.P. Disputes about the fate of Russia // Domestic history. - 2000 - No. 1

3. Beelnky V.Kh. On the paradigm of Russia // Social and humanitarian knowledge. - 2002 - No. 3

4. Berdyaev N. The fate of Russia.-M., 1990; He is. The origins and meaning of Russian communism. -M., 1990.

5. Bessonova O. Distribution economy as a Russian tradition // Social sciences and modernity.-1994 -№ 3

6. Milestones. Intelligentsia in Russia: Sat. Articles 1909 –1910 / Compiled by N. Kazakov –M .: Mol.Gvardia, 1991.

7. Igritsky Yu.I. Russia against Russia, West against the West // Russia and modern world... - 2002 - No. 3

8. Capto A .; Serebryanikov V. Wars of Russia // Dialogue - 2002 –– №6

9. Klimenko V. Energy, climate and historical perspective of Russia // Social sciences and modernity. –1999. -No. 1

10. Klyuchevsky V.O. History of estates in Russia. Special course // Works: In 9 volumes - T. 6.-M., 1989.

11. Kulpin E. S. Socio-ecological crisis of the 15th century and the formation of Russian civilization // Social sciences and modernity. –1995.-№1

12. Kulpin E.S The origins of the Russian state: from the church cathedral of 1503 to the oprichnina // Social sciences and the present. -1997.- No. 1,2

13. Midushevsky A. Reforms of Peter the Great in a comparative historical perspective // Bulletin high school.- 1999.-№ 2 –3.

14. Midushevsky A. Russian statehood of the pre-Petrine era // Bulletin of the higher school. - 1999.-№ 1.

15. Milov L. Influence of the natural-geographical factor on the historical development of Russia // Questions of history.- 1992.-№ 4-5.

16. Milov L.V. Natural and climatic factor and the mentality of the Russian peasantry. // Social sciences and modernity. –1995.- No. 1.

17. Soloviev S.M. History of Russia since ancient times –M. 1993 - I T

18. Toynbee A.J. Civilization before the Court of History. - M., 1995

19. Universal and Specific in Russian History (Round Table) // Social Sciences and Modernity - 1999 - No. 3

20. Khoros V.G. Russian history in comparative coverage. - M., 1996

21. Yakovenko I.G. The Russian State: National Interests, Borders, Prospects Novosibirsk, 1999

22. Yakovenko I.G. Civilization and barbarism in the history of Russia // Social sciences and modernity. –1995.-№ 4, 1996 -№ 3-4

9. Questions for credit

1. Russian historical school about the peculiarities of the development of Russia (S.M. Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky)

2. Special natural and climatic factors of the development of Russia.

3. Territorial expansion of the country. Stages of colonization of Russia. The impact of colonization on the economic and social life of society.

4. Features of the folding of the Russian statehood.

5. The special character of the Russian centralized state of the XIV-XVI centuries.

6. History of Russian absolutism. Peter I and Catherine II.

7. Social processes and the nature of the Russian state in the XX centuries.

8. The structure of the regime of power in the 20-30s of the XX centuries. Totalitarianism in Europe and in the USSR: general and special.

9. The history of the reform of Russia. Types of reforms: general and specific.

10. Modernization development of Russia in the XIX century. "The era of great reforms" - Alexander II

11. Reforms and counter-reforms of the XIX century. The role of bureaucracy in the reform process.

12. Methods for carrying out reforms. The degree of public participation in the reform process.

13. Conflict development as a feature of national history.

14. Socio-cultural splits in Russian society and conflict development.

15. Features of the formation of the Russian intelligentsia.

16. Russian national character and mentality of the Russian people.

Full text search:

Home> Abstract> History

1. Introduction

Requirements for the level of mastering the content of the discipline:

The history of Russia is an integral part of world history. The problem of the general and the particular in the historical process. Russian historical school (S.M.Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky) about the identity and the most important dominants of national history. The problem of features in the historiography of the Soviet and post-Soviet period.

Geopolitical factors of the development of Russia. Border geographic location of Russia. Influence of the East and West. The flat character of the area, its openness, the absence of natural geographical boundaries. The special role of invasions, invasions, warriors in Russian history. Continuous expansion of the country's territory (colonization) is a distinctive feature of geopolitical development. Stages of territorial acquisitions of Russia in the XII-XX centuries. The influence of this process on the economic and social life of society, on the psychology of a Russian.

Instability and conflict development is one of the main features of Russian history. Coexistence in Russian society of various sociocultural ethnic formations and the impact of this phenomenon on Russian history. The role of rapid Russian modernizations in the formation of social contradictions. Socio-cultural splits in Russian society and conflict development. Cruel serfdom and the lack of rights of the population are the objective basis for the crisis in Russian history. The centuries-old tradition of a split between despotic power and the people. The peculiarities of the formation of the intelligentsia and the Russian national consciousness are a reflection of the conflict nature of social development.

1.2. The elective discipline "Peculiarities of the Historical Development of Russia" is based on the knowledge gained by students in the course of "National History".

2. Goals and objectives.

To give an idea of the climatic, geopolitical, religious factors that influenced Russian history.

Show the main points of view on the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history.

Pay attention to the special role of the "state principle", the specifics of Russian reforms, the conflicting nature of social processes.

Introduction.

Topic 1. Natural, climatic and geopolitical conditions for the development of Russia.

In the history of Russia, natural and geopolitical conditions have always influenced the formation and development of society, the form of its statehood and management, certain historical processes. The flat character of the area, its openness, the absence of natural borders - these are the main specific geographic features of Russia. They did not allow the national community to be protected from invasions, raids, invasions, wars. These features were emphasized by the largest Russian pre-revolutionary historians of Russia - SM. Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky and others. And indeed, already in the first centuries of Russian history, the territory of the Slavic tribes was subjected to constant raids by the Khazars, Pechenegs, and Polovtsians. The Mongol-Tatar invasion and the two-century Horde yoke had grave consequences.

An important feature of Russian history was the continuous expansion of the country's territory. It went in different ways. One of them is the development of new desert territories by the peasant population. So, as a result of agricultural colonization in the XII-XIII centuries. the fertile lands of Vladimir-Suzdal and other principalities of North-Eastern Russia, the Zamoskovny Territory were developed. In the XVI-XVII centuries. peasant colonization covered the territory of the Ukrainian and South Russian steps between the Don, the upper Oka, the left tributaries of the Dnieper and Desna, the territory of the so-called "Wild Field".

A radical revolution in the history of Russian colonization took place in the middle of the 16th century. after the conquest of the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates. Russian settlers rushed to the side of the middle Volga, the Urals and further to Siberia. Fortified cities were built along the banks of Siberian rivers and Lake Baikal. Several dozen cities were scattered over a vast, almost entirely forested area. Around the fortified cities, settlements of state peasants, resettled to Siberia by tsarist decrees, were formed. Went to Siberia, to the shores of the Pacific Ocean, and free settlers, and hunter-industrialists. In the east, mainly desert, virgin lands were developed. The indigenous, nomadic population was extremely small here.

But more often Russia “won back” the territories they had seized from other states. So, as a result of the Northern War, the Baltic was "taken away" from Sweden, from Turkey - its fortresses - outposts in the Northern Black Sea region and Bessarabia, from Iran - Armenia. The Caucasian wars ended with the subjugation of the North Caucasian tribes. In the 60s. XIX century. the entry of the Kazakh lands into Russia was completed. After the defeat of the Kokand Khanate by the tsarist troops, the Kyrgyz lands were annexed. From the side of the Caspian Sea and Central Asia, the lands of the Turkmen tribes were annexed to Russia.

Continuous territorial expansion predetermined a number of historical features of Russia.

Over the centuries, economic development went on in breadth, was ensured by quantitative factors (extensive type). The Russian population did not have an urgent need to move from traditional farming to a more efficient one, since there was always an opportunity to move to new places, to develop new territories. There was no shortage of land.

The scattering and inaccessibility of many settlements, long distances did not contribute to effective, profitable management. This was largely due to the high cost of transport, bad roads, poor development of trade and communications.

The peculiarities of the Russian historical process were to a large extent determined by the originality of the natural and climatic conditions and the related specificity of agricultural production.

With a large area of land on the territory that constituted the historical core of the Russian state, there was an extremely small amount of good arable land. The predominant type of soil in Russia was podzolic, clayey, swampy or sandy, poorly provided with natural nutrients. Siberia, with its potentially inexhaustible supply of arable land, was largely unsuitable for land tenure. This was due to the fact that the warm air produced by the Gulf Stream cooled as it moved away from the Atlantic coast and moved inland.

Average yields in Russia were low and labor costs exceptionally high. In order to get the harvest, the peasant had to work literally without sleep or rest. At the same time, all the reserves of the family were used, even children and the elderly. Women were fully employed in all male jobs. Severe agricultural conditions, overstrain and the inclusion in the work of everyone, from small to large, predetermined the specific way of life of the Russian landowner. In contrast to him, the European peasant, neither in the Middle Ages, nor in modern times, did not require such a exertion of strength, for the agricultural season was much longer. This ensured a more favorable rhythm of labor and the entire way of life of the European peasant.

A characteristic feature of peasant production in Russia was an extremely weak base of animal husbandry. Procurement of feed for livestock became a big problem every year. The period for storing feed in the historical center of Russia was extremely limited (only 20-30 days). During this time, the peasant needed to stock up on a sufficient amount of feed.

Foreign trade did not stimulate the development of agricultural production. Russia stood far from the great trade routes and until the middle of the 19th century. could not sell grain abroad. And the gap in labor productivity between Western Europe and Russia was significant. According to the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary, at the end of the 19th century. one acre of wheat in Russia brought in only one-seventh of the English crop and less than half of the French and Austrian crops.

Russian geography was not conducive to sole proprietorship. In the conditions of a short agricultural season, field work was easier to carry out in a collective. This preserved the archaic traditions of the communal organization of village life.

In addition to organizing sowing, mowing and other collective field work, the community has developed a set of measures to help impoverished and ruined peasants. Arable land was divided by the community into plots of different quality of soil and distance from the village. Every courtyard had the right to receive one or more strips of land on each of these plots. Periodically, as the situation within the neighboring community changed, redistributions took place as a way to achieve intra-community “social justice”.

Especially during the years of Stalin's rule ...

Theoretical analysis features innovative development Of Russia in conditions of financial instability

Article >> Economics

Is a general theoretical analysis features innovative development Of Russia in a crisis, i.e. in conditions when ... import substitution - what we, in general, historically have been studying since Soviet times and, by the way, in this ...

Historical the way Of Russia in the 19th century

Examination >> History

V.P. Botkin, etc.). Slavophiles exaggerated peculiarity historical the way development Of Russia believing the capitalist system to be vicious, they ... about the common path with Western Europe historical development Of Russia... In the domestic political field, the liberals insisted ...

Russia in the reign of Catherine the Great

Abstract >> History

The work is the study historical portrait of Catherine the Great, her values in development countries in the years ..., on the ideas of the Enlightenment and, on the other, taking into account peculiarities historical development Of Russia... The most important principles for the implementation of this program ...

Most of the territory of Russia has been occupied by forests for many centuries. He kind of hugged a Russian person. "There are miracles, there is a goblin wandering ..., there is a stupa with Baba Yaga ...". The forest literally protected, fed, warmed, dressed and shod our distant ancestors. Wood was the main building material. Therefore, we can say that Russia, unlike Western Europe, was a wooden country, and therefore often burned. Large sums of money were spent on the restoration of buildings.

Others must be borne in mind. natural features Russia (low average annual temperature, severe winters, difficult soil conditions, etc.). In general, it must be said that the habitat itself significantly hindered the development of civilization here. Geographic and climatic conditions influenced the appearance and psychology of the Russian people.

> Genesis and development of Russian geopolitical thought

The uniqueness of the geopolitical space and the geographical environment of Russia stimulated the relatively earlier emergence and intensive development political geography v Russian Empire... In the middle of the 18th century. German scientists who served in Russia, H.N. Vintsheim and G.V. Kraft published textbooks and works describing the geographic environment, natural conditions, borders, territorial-administrative division, population, its occupations, judicial, church, military systems of Russia, etc.

The foundation of political geography laid by German scientists was continued in the 19th century. K.F.German, K.I.Arseniev. E.F. Zyablovsky, who identified four parts of political geography:

1. parts of the world into which the globe is divided, and the state belonging to them;

2. the administrative-territorial structure and form of government of the countries;

3. characteristics of the population (size, location, density, language, culture, religion, national character);

4. types of economic activities (methods of food for the people).

K. Arseniev divided Russia into 10 agro-climatic, economic zones-spaces, assessed the state of the borders of the Russian state, investigated the process of spatial expansion of Russia. Arseniev considered the colonized lands to be an auxiliary force "of one main and great force, which was in the Russian lands proper. ... This is a great circle, to which all other parts of the Empire adjoin, like radii in different directions, closer or further, and contribute more or less to non-dissolution one ". The conclusion that Russia and the colonized periphery is the first geopolitical scheme that appeared long (1848) before European geopolitics.

At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. in the field of political geography, V.P. and P.P. Semyonov-Tyan-Shanskie, V.I. Lamansky, A.I. Voeikov and others. In their works, Eurasia is studied as a single historical, cultural and territorial-political space, the position of Russia as a "middle world" in Eurasia, characteristics of the regions are given. the globe, features of the development of human organizations, due to geographical and natural conditions, etc.

An outstanding specialist in political geography and geopolitics of this period was V.P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky. In the work “On the powerful territorial possession in relation to Russia. Essays on Political Geography ”(1915), he analyzed the territorial space of Russia, its advantages and disadvantages, identified two zones and 19 regions as integral territories in the political and geographical relation. Considering the geopolitical patterns of human development, Semenov-Tyan-Shansky identified three types of territorial systems of political power: "ring-shaped" (Mediterranean), "patchy" (colonial empires), "overland" (Russia). The global territorial-political system will be a combination of these three historical forms, as well as the buffer states at their junctions.

At the end of the XIX century. the ideas of biological and geographical determinism in the development of civilization were developed by N. Danilevsky and K. Leont'ev. Danilevsky argued that civilizations develop as living organisms, go through stages of maturation, decrepitude and death. The geographic environment determines the specificity and uniqueness of a civilization. Features of the geographical space, population, culture, national character Slavic peoples determine the broad historical perspectives of the Slavic civilization. Based on the conclusions of Danilevsky, K. Leontiev substantiated the position of Russia as the center of the Eurasian space, which should become the center of the Christian world, will unite with eastern countries and become a powerful Eurasian power.

Russian scientists in the late XIX - early XX centuries. developed such problems as "national interests", " national policy", The connection of authoritarian regimes with wars, the influence of society on the foreign policy of states, the creation of systems of" European equilibrium "and collective resistance to the aggressor, the concept of the development of Central Asia and Of the Far East and others. In the first years of Soviet power, adherents of geopolitics continued to study the geopolitical space of the country, worked out recommendations for strengthening borders, locating production forces, developing Siberia, the Far East, Kazakhstan, and so on. Western geopolitical concepts, especially "German geopolitics", were also analyzed.

Geopolitical topics are reflected in the theory of international relations, economic geography, in the course of the political and economic map of the world, etc. In the works of I.А. Vitver, B.N. Semenovsky, A.I. Shiger et al economic regions the planet, as well as the dynamics of population, its ethnic, linguistic, religious composition, the state of the air, sea, land space and transport systems and dt. The theory of international relations recognized and developed such geopolitical categories as national interests, national sovereignty, strength and balance of power, centers of power, as well as the principles of functioning of the UN and regional integration structures, etc.

In the 20-30s. abroad, a course of Eurasianism was formed, representatives of which were N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N.Savitsky, G.V. Vernadsky, G.F. Florovsky and others. The main provisions of the Eurasian concept:

The Eurasian space has little contact with the World Ocean, which excludes its active participation in the world oceanic (colonial) economy and condemns it to autonomy, economic independence, and self-sufficiency. Since Eurasia is self-sufficient for everything, access to the world's oceans does not matter much for it and would mean “going out into the void”.

Russia is the natural center (core) of Eurasia, capable of uniting other Asian peoples around itself.

L.N. Gumilyov was very close to Eurasianism. He considered the history of nature and the history of man in an indissoluble unity. The historical fate of an ethnos is determined by the dynamism of the “intervening and nourishing landscape”. Geographic and natural factors, he explained the specific features of the Russian ethnos, its culture, economy, character and life. Like the Eurasians, Gumilev believed that the steppe and steppe peoples had a huge impact on the people and statehood.

In the 90s, Eurasian ideas found many supporters among scientists and politicians of the right and left spectrum. Also, significant works on geopolitics appeared by such authors as A. Dugin, E. Pozdnyakov, A. Panarin and others, who adhere to the traditional view of geopolitics, which studied the patterns of interaction between politics and geospatial factors. Another group of researchers (K. Pleshak, K. Gadzhev, K. Sorokin and others) believe that the subject, tasks, methodology of geopolitics should be radically changed. The subject of research should be the entire earthly space, they oppose the absolutization of geospatial factors and believe that foreign policy and the system of international relations depends on a whole complex of material, spiritual, cultural and other spheres of life.

Considerable provisions have been made, a methodology for studying the geopolitical situation in the world has been proposed, but does not yet exist in an integral geopolitical theory.

Introduction …………………………………………………………………… 3

1. The peculiarity of natural and climatic conditions ……………………… .5

2. Geographical and geopolitical features ……………………… 8

3. Influence of the religious factor ………………………………………… 12

4. Influence of the factor of social organization …………………………… 16

Conclusion ……………………………………………………………… 18

References ………………………………………………………… 21

Introduction

In Russian and world historiography, there are three main points of view on the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history. The essence of the first (S.M.Soloviev) is based on the concept of one-line world history, according to which all countries and peoples go through in their evolution the same stages common to all. At the same time, certain features of Russian history are interpreted as manifestations of backwardness or are assessed by the term "delay" in movement.

The essence of the second point of view (N. Ya.Danilevsky) is in the concept of multilinearity of historical development, in the light of which the history of mankind consists of the histories of a number of distinctive civilizations, each of which mainly develops one (or a specific combination of several) aspects of human nature.

The third concept (PN Milyukov) tries to reconcile both of these approaches. The historical result distinguishes three main groups of conditions that produce it: the internal law of development, which is inherent in every society and is the same for every society; features of the material environment, among which this society is destined to develop; the influence of an individual on the course of the historical process. If the first condition imparts to various historical processes a character of similarity in the main course of development, the second imparts to them the character of diversity, and the third introduces a character of chance into historical phenomena.

So, representatives of the three approaches interpret the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history in different ways, but they all recognize the influence on its course of certain factors, under the influence of which the history of Russia differs significantly from the history of Western societies: climatic, geopolitical, confessional, social organization.

With all the common historical development, Russia has its own uniqueness and originality, however, like any other civilization. It cannot be denied that Russia was seriously influenced by both Europe and Asia, having in turn influenced them. But Russian civilization is neither Asian nor European. This is a special borderline, intermediate civilization, the value system of which is an inorganic combination of the values of two main civilizations - traditional and liberal.

The purpose of the abstract is to study the factors that influenced the course of the history of Russia: the originality of natural and climatic conditions, geographical and geopolitical features; the religious factor, the factor of social organization. Their influence separately on the historical path of Russia and the result of their mutual influence throughout the centuries-old history.

The relevance of the topic is due to the fact that Russia has its own unique path of historical development. And those features that took place in history cannot but affect the present day. The study of the features of the historical process of the country's development makes it possible to better understand the events taking place at the present time.

The specificity of Russia's development does not necessarily imply its uniqueness, the exclusiveness of the factors and conditions that determine the country's path. Many (perhaps most) of these can be found easily in a wide range of countries. Rather, the specificity is manifested in the uniqueness of the combination of these factors and conditions, in the dynamics of such a combination, which has not remained unchanged throughout history. It is important here that the very ratio of the general and the particular in the development of a given country changes in historical time. The wider and stronger the ties with other countries, the stronger the common features.

1. The originality of natural and climatic conditions

There are few good arable lands in Russia, because its main massif lies beyond the 50th parallel as South Greenland, North Labrador and Alaska, and 64.3% of its territory is located north of the 60th parallel. Therefore, we are a zone of risky agriculture, and not only in the north ("permafrost" occupies more than 10 million sq. Km or 64% of the area of our country), but also in the south, because from the south we are propped up by the northernmost deserts on the planet. As a result, about 45% of all our agricultural land is in the conditions of insufficient moisture.

In terms of the efficiency of the territory (that is, that part of it that lies outside the space with extreme conditions), Russia ranks fifth in the world after Brazil, the USA, Australia and China with a coefficient of 5.51 million square meters. km. Grain yields in our country are traditionally low: on average in tsarist Russia they were about 0.7 t / ha, in the USSR - up to 2.0, in Russia in 1992-1997. - about 1.4 t / ha. But on the other hand, a Russian is 4 times richer in natural and territorial resources and living space than the average inhabitant of the planet.

Our middle zone is characterized by the influence, on the one hand, of powerful Atlantic cyclones with very long precipitation in summer and thaws in winter, and on the other, of the Arctic air from the north, often leading to severe winters and night frosts in spring. The peculiarity of our climate is such that if it is hot in summer, then there is not enough moisture, and if there is a lot of rain, then there is no heat. In both cases, the yield is low.

We have an unusually short agricultural cycle of 125-130 days from mid-April to mid-September. For at least four centuries, the Russian peasant was in a situation where thin soils required careful cultivation, and he simply did not have enough time for it. Using primitive tools, the peasant could only cultivate his arable land with minimal intensity, and his life most often directly depended only on the fertility of the soil and the vagaries of the weather. In reality, with a given budget of working time, the quality of his farming was such that he could not always return even seeds to the harvest. In practice, this meant for the peasant the inevitability of labor without sleep and rest, day and night, using all the reserves of the family.

Agriculture, which is characterized by increased risks in any country in the world (under the influence of climatic factors), is practically extreme in Russia. Frosts in late May and early June can destroy the expected harvest of fruits and berries. A rainy July can interfere with hay making, a rainy August can ruin standing bread. Thus, from sowing to harvesting, agriculture goes through several critical stages, each of which is capable of depriving the peasant of income. That is why lean years were common in tsarist Russia. Only by the mid-1950s. the state managed to organize the economic process in such a way as to prevent starvation of the population. The development of technology and technology can mitigate the destructive influence of the harsh Russian nature, but cannot completely eliminate it.

In Russia, there is an extremely weak base of animal husbandry due to the fact that the period for storing feed is only 20-30 days, and livestock keeping is about 200 days.

Unfavorable agricultural conditions had a direct impact on the type of Russian statehood. Low yields (in our country only 1 out of ten years is high-yielding) led to the fact that Russian agriculture could not produce the necessary surplus production. A few cities and poorly developed trade did not stimulate the development of the agricultural sector. Under these conditions, the estate could become profitable only with a free labor force and brutal methods of withdrawing the "surplus" from the peasants - serfdom. The same conditions determined the conservation of the community and the creation of a powerful centralized system for the purchase and distribution of grain.

The natural and climatic factor largely determined the peculiarities of the national character of the Russians. First of all, we are talking about the ability of a Russian person to exert extreme strength, to concentrate for a relatively extended period of time with all his physical and spiritual potency. At the same time, the eternal shortage of time, the absence of a correlation between the quality of agricultural work and the yield of grain for centuries did not develop in it a pronounced habit of thoroughness, accuracy in work, etc. The extensive nature of agriculture, its riskiness played a significant role in the development in the Russian person of ease to change places, the eternal craving for the "podrayskaya zemlya", for the belovodie, etc., to which Russia owes not least its vast territory, and at the same time multiplied in him a craving for traditionalism, rooting of habits. On the other hand, difficult working conditions, the strength of communal traditions, and an inner feeling of the danger of pauperization threatening society, gave rise to the development of a sense of kindness, collectivism, and readiness for help in the Russian people.

2. Geographical and geopolitical features

We have a huge, sparsely populated space with poor transport and information communications as a result. The breadth of Russian expanses complicates economic activity with huge transport costs. Most of the territory, due to the unfavorable climate, is unsuitable for life, but it is there - in Siberia and in the Far North - that the natural resources of our country are concentrated. These are minerals, water and forest resources that make up the national wealth. The population has historically been unevenly distributed over the territory, giving preference to the European part of the country. Remote areas, where natural resources are concentrated, were settled with the help of freedom, strength and the long ruble.

The flat character of the terrain, its openness and the absence of natural borders made the conditions for protecting the country from an external enemy unfavorable. Russian territories were not protected by natural barriers: they were not protected by either the seas or mountain ranges. Naturally, this circumstance was used by neighboring peoples and states. The constant threat of military incursions and the openness of the border lines demanded colossal efforts from the Russian and other peoples of Russia to ensure their security: significant material costs, human resources (and this with a small and rare population). Moreover, security interests demanded a concentration of popular efforts: as a result, the role of the state should have increased enormously. The autocracy forged the unity of the country, but suppressed the culture.

For almost all of history, Russia has been characterized by isolation from the seas and, accordingly, from sea trade.

Russia occupies an intermediate position between Europe and Asia: a significant part of the “Great Silk Road” from China to Europe passed through the territory of Russia. This circumstance created an objective interest of many countries in maintaining political stability along this great highway of antiquity. Moreover, Russia has accumulated elements of various cultures: the South represented by Byzantium in the X-XIII centuries, the East in the guise of the steppe civilization in the XIII-XV centuries, European culture since the end of the 15th and especially since the 18th century.

In Russia there is a river network favorable to the territorial unity of the historical core of Russia. The gigantic systems of rivers, which almost intertwine with each other, thus constitute a water network throughout the country, from which it was difficult for the population to free itself for a special life; as everywhere, so here rivers served as guides for the first population: tribes settled along them, the first cities appeared on them. Since the largest of them flow to the east or southeast, this also agreed on the predominant spread of the Russian state region in the indicated direction; rivers contributed much to the unity of the people and the state, and with all that special river systems initially defined special systems of regions, principalities. Thus, the river network united the country both politically and economically.

The continuous expansion of the country was a condition for military maneuver, predetermined extensive economic growth, and removed the acuteness of social confrontation. But on the other hand, the constant outflow of opposition elements to the outskirts and the general dispersal of the population and regions restrained the process of consolidation of estates and the legislative consolidation of their rights and privileges. In addition, favorable conditions for the outflow of the agricultural population forced the state to strengthen its control over society. All this slowed down the socio-political development of the country. Due to the low population of the country, the Russians in the process of colonization had no need to win a "place in the sun" in the struggle against the indigenous peoples of Central Russia and Siberia. The enormous size of the country formed the peculiarities of the Russian mentality - "Russia can do anything."

An important feature of the history of Russia is the constant expansion of the country's territory, which went along different paths. The development of new desert territories by the peasant population is one of them. As a result of agricultural colonization in the XII-XIII centuries, the fertile lands of Vladimir-Suzdal and other principalities of north-eastern Russia were developed. In the XVI-XVII centuries, peasant colonization covered the territory of the southern Russian and Ukrainian steppes between the Don, the upper Oka, the left tributaries of the Desna and Dnieper.

Radical changes in the history of Russian colonization took place in the middle of the 16th century after the conquest of the Astrakhan and Kazan khanates. Russian settlers headed towards the middle Volga, the Urals and further to Siberia.

Fortified cities were erected along the shores of Lake Baikal and Siberian rivers. Dozens of cities were scattered over a vast, almost completely forested area. Around the fortified cities, settlements of state peasants were created, who moved to Siberia in accordance with tsarist decrees. Hunter-industrialists and free migrants went to Siberia, to the shores of the Pacific Ocean. In the east, as a rule, deserted virgin lands were developed. The native nomadic population was small here.

Territorial expansion in some cases was carried out by voluntary accession to Russia. Exhausted by the six-year war with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Ukraine was faced with a choice: to submit to Polish rule again or to go “under the arm” of Moscow. In 1654 the Pereyaslavl Rada made a decision on the entry of Ukraine into Russia. The voluntary annexation of Georgia on the border of the 19th century was also a conscious historical choice in the face of the threat of being subordinated to a neighbor more dangerous than Russia.

However, more often than not, Russia "recaptured" the territories they had seized from other states. For example, Turkey was "taken away" from its fortresses - outposts in Bessarabia and the Northern Black Sea region, from Iran - Armenia, from Sweden - as a result of the Northern War - the Baltic. The Caucasian wars were ended by the subjugation of the North Caucasian tribes. In the 60s of the XIX century, the entry of the Kazakh lands into Russia was completed. The Kyrgyz lands were annexed after the defeat of the tsarist troops of the Kokand Khanate. From the side of Central Asia and the Caspian Sea, Turkmen tribes joined Russia.

Constant territorial expansion has led to a number of historical features of Russia.

The expansion of territories gave the state and the treasury new sources of funding, an increase in human and material resources, and additional economic benefits. In other words, over the centuries, economic development has followed an extensive path. The annexation of Siberia led to the emergence of new enormous wealth - rare Siberian furs, forests, colossal natural deposits, etc. The Russian population never had a particular need to move from traditional farming to a more efficient one, since there was always an opportunity to move to a new place, to develop new territories. There was no land shortage.

Efficient management was not facilitated by the absent-mindedness and inaccessibility of many settlements, the huge distances between them, and the low population density. It was with this that the poor development of communications and trade, bad roads, and the high cost of transport were primarily associated.

3. Influence of the religious factor

If the factors discussed above formed the "body" of Russia, the temperament, skills and habits of the Russian people, then Orthodoxy educated her soul. Eastern Orthodoxy could not fail to reflect the features of Greek civilization: aesthetic character (and not political, as in Catholicism); a tendency to abstract thinking about lofty matters as opposed to Western rationalism; great freedom of inner church life; internal unity (conciliarity) in contrast to the Catholic external unity ("power, domination, discipline").

Russia is a Christian state, but it is a special part of the European Christian civilization, which is determined, first of all, by the presence of the Christian idea at the national-state level and spiritual maximalism. Without interfering directly with the affairs of secular power, Orthodoxy had, nevertheless, a decisive influence on the Russian political tradition: in Orthodoxy, the power of the tsar became the guarantor of the possibility of future "salvation" after death.

But we will not understand the phenomenon of Russia if we do not look at it as an eastern wing and a channel for the spread of European civilization to the East. It is in Hellenic-Christian Byzantium that the roots of our Europeanism lie. But if Western civilization is a synthesis of two dissimilar principles (Hellenic and Judeo-Christian), then in Russian history the creative synthesis of two civilizational principles did not take place.

The pagan heroism of this-worldly self-realization did not receive its due place on Russian soil. Our paganism was closer to the Dionysian Bacchic element than to the ancient Logos, therefore we could not help but experience a deep inferiority complex in the era of the triumph of Judeo-Christian spirituality. Therefore, instead of dialogue and agreement, there was a dramatic cyclicality here: the periods of surrender of paganism were interrupted by outbreaks of rebellion, tamed in the course of the next restoration.

Traditional Orthodoxy in one essential point resembled Old Testament monotheism: it was more inclined towards the dialectic of outcast - chosenness and the prospect of the collective salvation of a people who rejected the temptation of Western civilization. Since the time of Ivan III, the Russian state was perceived by the people as an Orthodox state. It has never stood on an entirely secular foundation of administrative centralism and military power.

Russian autocracy was based on the theocratic principle of the unity of religious and state-political power. The area of power was determined by the area of the idea. From this point of view, Russia acted not as a national state, but as a certain type of civilization, held together, like any civilization, by the "world religion" - Orthodoxy. But Orthodoxy in Russia often forgot about the main principles of world religion: supra-ethnic universalism, independence from the state, non-creation of an idol from earthly orders and institutions, that is, the separation of the earthly and the heavenly.

The ideal and creative impulse of self-awareness of our ancestors is humility, fear of the sin of pride, the first and most important of the seven deadly sins. Humility of mind predetermined the prevailing anonymity of the Orthodox-Slavic culture. Our ancestors experienced history and perceived the world spiritually and aesthetically, shunning a culture independent of the Orthodox faith. It is significant that even the printing press at first aroused fears among them, who evangelize the book: after all, if the soul is ruined, why scholarship? Everything technical civilizations- not from God, but from the descendants of Cain. Therefore, right up to Peter's reforms, the Orthodox Slavs did not seek to nurture it.

The essence of Slavic civilization, the term "Byzantism" directly contradicts what D.M. Bulanin (1989). The system of Orthodox-Slavic landmarks was created in the First Bulgarian Kingdom: the Bulgarian scribes imposed a ban on the ancient section of the borrowed Byzantine culture. The monastic culture was assimilated, and Hellenic wisdom was identified with the Hellenic temptation and deception of paganism. Russia adopted this system of guidelines and kept it until the birth of the Muscovite state. The plowman does not need Hellenic wisdom: faith and good deeds are enough to save his immortal soul. Therefore, until the XVII century. in Russia there was no regular school as a social institution. Although Ancient Russia was not illiterate. In the middle of the 17th century. the white clergy were all literate, and the black - by 3/4. Among the merchants, there were from 75 to 96 literate per 100 male souls.

In the nobility, the picture was approximately the same as in the monastic rank. As for the townspeople peasants, here the activities of the Moscow Printing House confirm this picture: in the second half of the 17th century. this printing house, the only one in Russia, published 300 thousand primers and 150 thousand teaching Psalters and Books of Hours, and the primers were sold for 1 kopeck. a piece.

For Russians, the meaning of the world is important, not its structure. The triad "truth, goodness and beauty" is inseparable for Russians, which is reflected in the icon. Prince E.N. Trubetskoy noted that the icon is "speculation in colors." Therefore, it is ethics that should determine the legal norms. The life ideology of Russia is hesychasm (clever, spiritual doing), while European humanism allowed the primacy of the material over the spiritual and the acquisition of material wealth. In Russia, there were no such disasters as religious wars, such terrible epidemics as demonism. There was no eroticism either in the Eastern or Western sense of this phenomenon.

The "Russian idea" is perceived by religious intuition as a national ideal - the maximum Christianization of not only personal, but also social and state life. On the spiritual level, this is the ideal of holiness, on the national-state level - “Moscow is the third Rome”, that is, the idea of continuity and responsibility for the fate of the Christian world. And in this context, the idea of messianism (the Russian people is a "God-bearing people") is understood as bearing the Christian burden, as an effort over oneself, and not violence over others. There is nothing here from the Old Testament ideas about God's chosen people of the Jewish people. The "Russian idea" is an effort over oneself, not violence over others.

4. Influence of the factor of social organization

V.P. Danilov notes that all possible differences and peculiarities - natural, national, cultural and others - are integrated by a social organism, the essence and functioning of which is determined by stage affiliation. Of course, it is important to note the phenomenon of combining various stages, as was the case, for example, in Russia. late XIX- the beginning of the twentieth centuries. However, such an "explosive mixture" nevertheless arises within the framework of a social whole, and not within a separate sector or stratum.

Under the influence of these factors, a specific social organization has developed in Russia, the main elements of which are as follows:

a) the primary economic and social unit is a corporation (community, artel, cooperative, collective farm), and not a private property entity, as in the West;

b) the state is the backbone, and sometimes the demiurge of civil society;

c) statehood has a sacred character or becomes ineffective, giving rise to "troubles";

d) the state, society and the individual are not separated, as in the West, but are integral and interpenetrated;

e) the main support of statehood is the corporation of the service nobility (nobility, nomenklatura). That is, the despotic form of organization of power was based on a powerful, low-skilled bureaucracy, and the arbitrariness of the authorities was a recognized norm for managing individuals and society.

If we talk about the peculiarities of state power in Russia, then it should be noted that the influence of the Varangian elements in the formation of statehood and the huge role of the Mongol-Tatar invasion: if the European system was built on the relationship of vassalage, then Russian history is characterized by relations of the "sovereign-servant" type, which in the yoke with its system of rigid subordination was decisively promoted. However, even during the reign of Andrei Bogolyubsky, a special character of power was noted for the first time in the North-East of Russia.

The process of centralization of the Russian state proceeded under advancing political factors (the fight against an external threat and the establishment of national independence), which preserved despotism. Agrarian and handicraft production was organized in order to ensure the state power necessary to repel the onslaught from the East and West. But at the same time, this social organization was distinguished by extreme stability, ensuring the viability of Russian society and the inner unity of its historical existence.

All of the above conditions influenced the formation of the basic principles of Russian civilization, including:

The state is above all. Its main purpose is paternalism, and political, church and other organizations have the right to exist as a mechanism for strengthening power;

Society as a whole is higher than man as an individual;

The right is recognized to ensure the power of the state, not the protection of the individual;

It is not wealth that guarantees power, but vice versa, which made corruption an integral part of Russian civilization;

Manufacturing, technology, innovation, and science make sense as they contribute to military power, territorial expansion and government power;

The highest moral principle is the justification of any actions aimed at serving the authorities.

Conclusion

Russia is a superethnos (a group of ethnic groups linked by a common historical destiny), a union of peoples. That is, Russia has a supranational, continental vocation. Russia played the role of the unifier of Asia, since by its genotype it is nevertheless closer to the eastern societies of the traditional type - the exaltation of spirituality lies at the heart of ethics. But on the other hand, Russia's location on the border of liberal and traditional civilizations poses the problem of transition to a liberal (Western) civilization, which from a certain time begins to appear as significant for Russia, manifesting itself in the form of a desire for modernization. The inorganic nature of the movement in Russia was expressed in the phenomenon of schism, which from the era of Peter I took on the character of a vicious circle. The Western temptation of Petersburg and the Asian temptation of Moscow are two inevitable disruptions to Russia.

The soul of Russia is not covered by any doctrines. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize the antinomy and terrible contradictoriness of Russia. On the one hand, Russia is the most stateless and anarchist country, and on the other hand, it is the most state-owned and bureaucratic country in the world, in which statehood has become a self-sufficient principle.

The conflict nature of Russian history, in addition to its inorganic nature, is determined by a number of factors:

a) the poverty of society narrowed the market for hired labor, which slowed down the formation of industry and the growth of cities, and predetermined the small number of the intelligentsia and the late genesis of secular culture;

b) the gap between the government and the people, between poverty and wealth, especially during the period of initial capital accumulation;

c) the propensity of the Russian people to extremes;

d) peculiarities of reforms from above in Russia: ignoring their own historical experience and attempts to uncritically borrow from Western achievements gave rise to an inorganic process in the “reform-counterreform” dilemma. Lao She said in Notes on the Cat City: “... we accidentally find out about some country and make a fuss in our country. Then we will hear that a reform has taken place in another country - again it is not without hype. As a result, other countries are really carrying out reforms, developing their own characteristics, and we are developing ours. Our peculiarity is that the more we make noise, the worse it gets ”;

e) the specifics of the catching-up model of capitalist development, caused by the relatively late inclusion of the country in the mainstream of industrial civilization. While Russia was accumulating strength for liberation from the Tatars, Europe was accumulating them for a breakthrough into the industrial civilization. Russia was forced to catch up, primarily in the area that ensured its independence - in the field of armaments. And everything else was sacrificed. To respond to the challenge of the West, Russia could only use the mechanisms of autocracy and serfdom. If in the West a new civilization gradually and organically grew from below, then Russia carried out this process in a short time from above. Therefore, in the West, the entry into the industrial era was accompanied by the growth of freedom, and in Russia - slavery.

If you look carefully and impartially at the thousand-year history of Russia, it turns out that it has grown into a powerful European power not in spite of, but thanks to a reasonable "Westernization". At the very dawn of its history, Russia chooses from the three world religions precisely the "Western" (for the West, Byzantium was the East, and not for Russia). And after the Swedish-Polish invasion of the early 17th century, and after the Napoleonic intervention of the early 19th century, Russia quickly rose to its feet and strengthened its statehood. And vice versa, the Mongol-Tatar yoke sharply stalled the development of the country - "Easternization" did not benefit the Russian statehood.

If we understand civilization as a system of relations, enshrined in law and traditions and fixing the common in communities that arise on the basis of similar technologies, then Russia until recently has developed in a common civilizational channel. The transition to an industrial civilization is a general pattern of world development. Pitirim Sorokin in his book Russia and the United States (1944) showed that the history of the United States and Russia has a lot in common. Both countries are huge continents with huge deposits of minerals, a wide variety of flora and fauna, climatic and geographic conditions. Continental character of these countries imposes on them the role of a great power, promotes a broad mental outlook, great prospects and freedom from thrifty policies. The United States and Russia are united by comparatively little brutality in the creation of a state-power. Both countries are a crucible in which various racial, national and cultural groups and peoples melt.

From all of the above, it follows that Russia's "special path" is not a claim to an exclusive role in the world process. The peculiar "Russian way" has developed in many ways as a response to the historical challenge of the West. And the incompleteness of the processes of world-historical significance in our country has become the reason for the stable rhythm of the dynamics of our development: the alternation of periods of stagnation with advancing breakthroughs. But the history of our Fatherland should also be understood as a strategic choice among equivalent alternatives.

Bibliography

1. Golubev A.V. Russia, XX century. // National history. - 1997. - No. 5. - p.80-92.

2. Zemtsov B. "Where did the Russian civilization come from?" // Social sciences and modernity. –1994. - No. 2. - p.51-62.

3. Klyuchevsky V.O. Works: In 9 volumes. T. I. Course of Russian history. Part I / Ed. V. L. Yanina. - M .: Mysl, 1987 .-- 430 p.

4. Milov L. Influence of the natural-geographical factor on the historical development of Russia. // Questions of history. - 1992. - No. 4. - from 37-41.

5. Pashinsky V. Cyclicity in the history of Russia. // Policy. - 1994. - No. 4. - p. 111-124.

Synopsis of a lecture given at a meeting of the philosophical and esoteric group of the "Kovcheg" GCC (Shakhty) on June 1, 2006

For many centuries, an extremely important issue for the national self-consciousness of Russians was the question of the place of our country in the world, of its belonging to Europe (or of opposing the West), of the meaning and prospects of Russia's interaction with the East, of the possibilities of a special path of development of that civilizational community. which has developed in North-Eastern Eurasia. This question (still relevant) has been the subject of reflection for many generations, statesmen and church leaders, historians, philosophers, economists, and writers.

In the XIX - XX centuries. disputes about the identity of Russia, about the futility or wholesomeness of the search for a peculiar historical path splashed out on the pages of scholarly works and publicistic works. The names of P. Chaadaev, V. Soloviev, N. Berdyaev, V. Klyuchevsky, L. Gumilyov constitute the very beginning of the list of persons whose thoughts about the fate of Russia invariably worried the minds of contemporaries and descendants.

As a result of this keen interest, three main approaches to the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history have developed.

The first approach provides for the one-line nature of world history, all countries and peoples go through stages in their evolution that are common to all; the peculiarities of Russian history are a manifestation of backwardness. The second approach provides for “lagging” (catching up) development, the focus of research here is shifted to identifying the reasons that slowed down the course of Russia's historical evolution. The third approach is based on the principle of multilinear historical development, each civilization evolves in its own way, one of such civilizations is the Russian one.

Thus, the problem of the peculiarities of Russian history is interpreted ambiguously. But all historians and publicists recognize the impact on the development of Russia of certain powerful factors (reasons, conditions), which determine the significant difference between the history of Russia and the history of other countries. Usually there are four factors: natural and climatic, geopolitical, confessional, social organization.

Natural-climatic and geopolitical factors always affect the type of development of society, the form of its state structure and management, the nature of the course of certain historical processes. The uniqueness of the geopolitical development of Russia was noted by many scientists (S. Soloviev, V. Klyuchevsky, R. Pipes, etc.).

What specific geographic and climatic features influenced the history of Russia?

First of all, it is the flat character of the terrain, its openness, and the absence of natural geographic boundaries. This was of great importance for the country's defense capability, and it was twofold, the opposite. There were no natural barriers from invasions, raids, invasions. And indeed, already in the first centuries of Russian history, the territory of the Slavic tribes was subjected to constant raids by the Khazars, Pechenegs, and Polovtsians. The Mongol-Tatar invasion and the two-century Horde yoke had grave consequences. V. Klyuchevsky often mentioned these unfavorable geopolitical conditions in his works.

At the same time, huge spaces made it difficult for the aggressors to move, forced them to spend energy on protecting communications, opened up wide opportunities for guerrilla warfare. Invasion of the new and modern times three aggressors (Charles XII, Napoleon, Hitler) ended with a sad outcome for them. The harsh winter, in many ways unusual for the armies of the aggressors, also mattered.

An important feature of Russian history was the continuous expansion of the country's territory. This provided the treasury and the state with new sources of funding, an increase in material and human resources, and additional economic benefits. Only the annexation of Siberia gave for several centuries an increase in enormous material wealth, the rarest Siberian furs, forests, the richest natural deposits, etc.

For many centuries, economic growth was constantly expanding, it was provided by quantitative factors, which contributed to the consolidation of the extensive type of development. The Russian population did not have an urgent need to switch to a more efficient type of management, since there was always an opportunity to move to new places, to develop new lands. There was no shortage of land, and this was one of the reasons for the policy of enslavement of the peasants, since it was necessary to preserve "working hands" for the estates. Exceptionally long distances and scattered, inaccessible settlements did not contribute to effective, profitable management. This is largely due to the high cost of transport, bad roads, and poor development of trade and communications. The presence of large undeveloped land and the possibility of permanent resettlement partially removed the sharpness of social confrontation in society due to migration to the outskirts. Not wanting to put up with enslavement and lack of land, the most independent, energetic part of the population went to the Don, Volga, Yaik, Siberia. Opposition to the center elements were traditionally grouped in the outskirts. It is no coincidence that these areas often became the starting points of anti-government uprisings, peasant and Cossack movements. The outflow of opposition elements and the general dispersal of the population restrained the process of consolidation of estates in Russia, and, consequently, the process of legislative consolidation of their rights and privileges, i.e. the geographical factor to some extent slowed down the socio-political development.

The specificity of agricultural production should be especially noted. There was extremely little good arable land in Russia. Podzolic, clayey, boggy, sandy soils, poorly supplied with natural nutrients, prevailed. The agricultural cycle was very short: only 120 - 130 working days. Average yields were low, and peasant labor costs were exceptionally high. All family members worked: women, old people, children. This determined the special way of life in the Russian countryside. The base of animal husbandry was weak, the period for storing feed was extremely limited (only 20 - 30 days). And keeping cattle in a stall was necessary for about 200 days. As a result, the cattle were undersized and often sick.

The scarcity of commodity surpluses meant the poverty of society. And this circumstance gave the population limited opportunities for choice. In conditions of unfavorable agriculture, the estate could become profitable only with a free labor force and tough methods of withdrawing the surplus from the peasants for the needs and development of the state and the ruling class. Hence the cruelty of the feudal rent, the hard work of the farmer in the corvée of the landowner, and the trade in serfs, and the institution of servitude. The development in Russia of the service system as a special state mechanism was also largely due to the low level of productive forces and the scarcity of the surplus social product.

Another characteristic feature of Russian reality, associated with the peculiarities of agricultural management and the constant threat of ruin, was the extremely stable existence of the community.

Russian geography did not favor individual farming. In a short agricultural season, field work was easier to carry out collectively. This preserved the archaic traditions of the communal organization of village life. The spread of serf dependence, a difficult regime of additional work on the master's corvee created truly unbearable living conditions for the Russian peasant, and concealed the threat of complete impoverishment. In these conditions, the community became a means of maintaining an individual peasant economy, a certain protective mechanism against natural and social hardships.

Unlike Europe, the community in Russia did not disappear, but developed. With the strengthening of personal serfdom from the end of the XVI century. the protective functions of the neighboring community, its democracy and equalizing tendencies are increasing. The community solved a number of production and social problems of the peasants. Despite the vigorous involvement of agriculture in the second half of the nineteenth century. market relations, communal traditions were preserved there until 1917.

The millennial existence of the community in Russia, its dominant role in the life of the Russian population was a factor that radically distinguishes the entire way of life of Russians from the Western tradition. There were no free hands in Russia; the market for hired labor was narrow. This slowed down the process of the formation of industrial production, the growth of cities, determined the use of labor of attributed and possessory peasants in factories.

The poverty of society also predetermined the small number of people living at the expense of society, i.e. scientists, teachers, artists, actors, and hence the late genesis of secular culture in Russia. The church here has been carrying out cultural and ideological functions for much longer than in Western Europe. It is no coincidence that the first universities in Europe appeared in the 12th - 13th centuries, and in Russia only in the 18th century.

Thus, we see that the geographical, natural and climatic factors have determined a number of Russian features, affected the type of management, the political and social structure of the country, its cultural development, the pace of the most important social processes.

Now let us dwell on one of the main characteristic features of the Russian historical process - the hypertrophied role of the supreme power in relation to society. At one time N. Berdyaev wrote: “The Russian people created the most powerful state in the world, the greatest empire ... The interests of creating, maintaining and protecting a huge state occupy a completely exclusive and overwhelming place in Russian history. The Russian people had almost no strength left for a free creative life, all the blood was spent on strengthening and protecting the state ... ”.

What are the origins of special state despotism in Russia?

There are many opinions, scientists pay attention to a number of circumstances. Among them is the role of the Varangian squads in creating the old Russian state... The noticeable influence of the Varangian element made statehood, as it were, an external, external form. Slavic tribes adopted the introduced forms of government, but retained their ancestral way of life and generic psychology. This led to the formation of a special political entity with an unusually deep chasm between the rulers and the ruled. There was no unifying common interest in the Kiev state and Kiev society: the state and society coexisted, retaining their special differences and hardly felt any obligations towards each other.

In Russia, the Norman elite (unlike the Norman conquerors of England) saw their main interest not in agricultural exploitation, but in the extraction of tribute. The Varangians viewed Russia as their property, their patrimony. The ruling Varangian dynasty, and later the Russian princes, did not have the order of inheritance by Kiev established by the right of primogeniture. After the death of the prince, his principality was split between his sons. The inheritance inherited from his father became a fiefdom and was exploited as property. This is how the patrimonial, possessive manner of exercising sovereign power began to take shape. R. Pipes noted that “in the future, the Moscow tsars looked at their empire, stretching from Poland to China, through the eyes of the patrimonials, as their ancestors once looked at their tiny inheritance”. ...

In Russia, the lowest form of the state arose - the patrimony. Paul I, Alexander I, Nicholas I and others owned, but did not rule, Russia, pursued their dynastic, and not state interests in it.

A characteristic indicator of the hypertrophied role of the state was its interference in naturally occurring social processes. Estates were formed under the direct influence of the authorities. The cathedral code of 1649 consolidated the position of various categories of the population and the range of their duties. The supreme power sought to consolidate the existing structure, to make the social position hereditary. As a result, a general system took shape, attaching the population to the state. The state also intervened in the sphere of interethnic relations. The Russian state has always actively intervened in the field of economic relations. It is this circumstance that constitutes another of the specific features of the history of Russia.

The hypertrophied role of the state was nourished by the peculiarities of the Russian and Russian mentality in general. For many centuries the population lived in a community. Here, for centuries, their own norms of behavior, their ideals have been developed. The historical fate of Russia gradually strengthened the value of the community (peace) in the minds of the people. After all, it was the community that could protect a person. In her, he saw the embodiment of the dream of justice, of equality. The idea of serving the common good, for the sake of which a person should sacrifice his personal, was an essential part of the Russian mentality.

So, the special role of the state in the history of Russia was one of the specific features. “Russian statehood has become a self-sufficient abstract principle; she lives her own life, according to her own law, does not want to be subordinate to the function of the people's life ... ”.

The special role of the confessional factor should be noted. The mother of Russia was Orthodox Byzantium. But, following the Byzantine tradition, Russia made its own amendments and accents. Religion was the core of Russian spirituality, its ideal, however, changed: from the asceticism of the 10th century. before serving society and spiritual self-deepening in the 19th century.

Religion occupied a special place in the Russian state. It was Orthodox leaders who formulated the theory “Moscow is the third Rome”, which in fact became the program of the government's activities.

Determining the specifics of Russian reforms is of paramount importance for understanding the specifics of Russia's historical path. After all, Russian history is in many ways the history of social reformism. Despite numerous wars, riots, revolutions, real changes in the economic and political system of Russia over the past centuries have occurred as a result of reforms carried out by the supreme power - sometimes on their own initiative, sometimes under pressure of circumstances.

Also, one of the features of Russian history is the extreme inconsistency, conflict development, the predisposition of Russian society to extremes. What are the factors underlying Russian instability? Back in the 19th century. many historians were convinced that the conflict in the development of a huge country is associated with the contradictory appearance of Russian society. The border position between Europe and Asia left an imprint on social development, contributed to the contradictory combination of European and Eastern features. In Russia, the civilization of the forests seemed to converge with the civilization of the steppe people. And both of them influenced the formation of the Russian state and society. This left an imprint on the entire course of the country's history. Russia has developed in interaction and struggle with Europe, then with Asia. Eastern and Western elements were present in Russian life, in Russian history. Socio-political thought was constantly addressing this phenomenon of historical reality. The exaggeration of one of the sides was reflected in the concepts of Westernizers and Slavophiles. Westerners believed that the Russian way was the Western European way, the original elements were a manifestation of backwardness. Slavophiles developed the idea of a fundamental difference in Russian history, highlighted its originality. Many scientists wrote about the duality of Russian life (V. Klyuchevsky, N. Berdyaev, A. Akhiezer and others). It was this duality that was expressed in the constant alternation of destructive riots of the freemen with periods of increasing power, which was holding back this freeman with an iron hand.

Russia was a conglomerate of many peoples (and remains so), it was a fusion of various ethnic lines. The country's territory was constantly expanding, and the new lands could not be called a colony. The peculiarity of Russia is that all these lands constituted a single living space, where the administration, legislation, and the court were united. But within this single society, completely different types of societies, different socio-cultural formations were constantly intertwined and influenced each other. Bourgeois relations coexisted with patriarchal and even tribal ones. The age, historical diversity of peoples' existence with each other led to socio-cultural splits in society, gave rise to a particular pain and crisis in social development. The intertwining of Russian polarities could exist only in the presence of a strong, rigid state machine that holds the inorganic unity together. With the weakening of the state mechanism, Russian society has always “broken”. This was the case at the beginning of the 17th century, during the civil war of 1918 - 1920, in 1991.

Part of the historians explain the special crisis and contradictory nature of Russian history by the “catching-up” nature of its development. So, for example, historians E. Pantin, E. Plimak believe that for several centuries the country was in a “regime” constantly “catching up” and hastily modernized. The situation of rapid modernization inevitably gave rise to conflicts and contradictions. Society did not have time to get out of one stage of development, to resolve contradictions specific to it, when it faced problems inherent in the next era.

The picture of the stage development of Russia has always been "blurred". Modernity was complicated by the insurmountable remnants of the past. Hence the pronounced diversity of society. The roots of many Russian conflicts lie in the contradictory existence of phenomena belonging to different eras.

The “catch-up” type of development predetermined the specifics of Russian formation development. Russia was characterized by a special type of feudalism and a special type of bourgeoisization of the country. Russian feudalism was less inclined towards social progress. It was characterized by more despotic forms of monarchy than in Europe. The medieval population, the dominant clan and commoners were more dependent on the supreme power than in the West. The exploitation of the peasantry was extremely high.

The Russian type of evolution of feudal land ownership was also specific. Private land ownership has never been the predominant form of land ownership. The main trend was the system of "state feudalism", in which the supreme ownership of land remained with the state, and feudal land ownership was granted by the state and conditioned by the service of the king. Scientists believe that in the conditions of a lagging type of historical evolution, the process of bourgeoisization of Russian society was incomplete. Russia was characterized by a rearrangement of the phases of the genesis of capitalism (for example, the industrial revolution began before the agrarian revolution, etc.). The technical renewal has not been accompanied by such rapid shifts in social relations.

The political backwardness of bourgeois development was also serious. The absolute monarchy remained, there was no constitution, political rights and freedoms, full-fledged representative bodies of power. Thus, the main components of the integral capitalist formation in Russia did not take shape. Large capitalist industry was being "grafted" into a social structure that belonged to a different formational level. On the basis of this, new knots of contradictions were tied, the conflict of social development increased.

Many roots of Russian conflicts lie in the peculiarities of power with its absolutist nature, monopoly, and powerful interference in the life of society. The tragedy of the country was that there were no full-fledged estates, classes, free and free citizens in it. In the era of Ivan IV, Peter I, during the reign of I. Stalin, N. Khrushchev, L. Brezhnev, the position of a person was determined exclusively by his duties and the absence of real rights, which at best were only declared.

In Russia, the mythological rather than critical type of thinking has always dominated. From generation to generation, a simplified idea of the ways of achieving the goals of social progress and the belief that struggle, the destruction of the enemy, the violent and mechanical destruction of old forms of life would by themselves ensure the realization of the social ideal was passed on.

LITERATURE
1. Berdyaev N. The fate of Russia. M., 1990.
2. Pipes R. Russia under the old regime. M., 1993.