3. 1. The concept of Russian civilization……………………….from 1.

3. 2. Russian civilization and the “Russian idea”……………..p.10

3. 3. Orthodox, East Slavic or Russian civilization?.................................................. ........................................p.16

3. 4. Russian and Western European civilizations: general

and differences. Bifurcation points………………………………p. 18.

3. 5. The concept of Russian civilization and the concept of Eurasianism

and neo-Eurasianism by L. Gumilyov……………………………….p. 19

3. 6. Natural-geographical and climatic features of Russian civilization………………………………………………………32.

3. 7. Orthodox-Russian spirituality in the structure of Russian civilization………………………………………………………………p.56

3. 8. The heritage of ancient Greek culture in the structure

Russian civilization. Maxim Grek………….p.83.

3. 9. Peter's reforms and the evolution of Russian civilization. On the role of European elements in the structure of Russian civilization……………………………………………………….p.92.

3. 10. Cultural and genetic code of Russian civilization……………………………………………………p.119.

3. 1. The concept of Russian civilization.

Russian civilization is a socio-cultural community formed on the basis of universal, i.e., supra-local values ​​of Orthodox Christianity, as well as under the influence of the peculiarities of the geographical location and natural and climatic conditions. These values ​​were expressed in the corresponding systems of morality, law, art, and also found their forms of expression in a vast complex of practical and spiritual knowledge, in symbolic systems that help overcome the local isolation of primary groups.

Russian civilization has historically been determined by its ethno-confessional core – the Russian (Old Russian) people and, accordingly, – Russian Orthodoxy. The language and culture of the “core,” i.e., the Russian language and Russian culture, had a decisive influence on the integration of all elements of civilization into a single whole. It is the “core” that largely determines the character and characteristics of Russian civilization, its differences from other civilizations. At the same time, multi-ethical and multi-confessional is an integral feature of Russian civilization.

Having been the core of Russian civilization, the Russian (originally ancient Russian) people also became the bearer cultural-genetic code. Over time, this code, to one degree or another, became the property of other peoples that became part of Russia, and became the basis of the all-Russian national character, way of life and thought.

The interpretation of Russia as a civilization today is typical for the works of many authors. However, special mention should be made of the works of A. S. Panarin (1940 - 2004) of the 1990s - early 2000s, that is, the time when Russian politics took a one-sided course towards imitating the West and following in line with its political lines. The works of A. S. Panarin resolutely rejected the interpretation of Russia as an inferior country, doomed only to abandon all attempts to preserve its originality and independence and completely and blindly follow the footsteps of the West. When reforming Russian society, it assumed that priority consideration should be given not to abstract general provisions, but to the specific characteristics of Russia, the good and prosperity of its people. “Russia is not an ethnic state of Russians,” noted A. S. Panarin, “but a special civilization with its own super-ethnic potential and a corresponding set of geopolitical ideas.” [Panarin A.S. Russia’s choice: between Atlanticism and Eurasianism//Civilizations and Cultures. Vol. 2. 1996. P. 68.]

TO The cultural-genetic code is what MAKES a given civilization “WHAT IT IS”, preserves its own “I” - something due to which IT REMAINS ITSELF - despite all changes. Kievan-Novgorod Rus', Moscow Rus', Imperial Russia, Russia in the form of the Soviet Union, modern Russia are different historical forms of the same thing - Russian civilization. In other words, the cultural-genetic code forms the core of the national identity of both the country as a whole (in our case, Russia), and the self-identification of an individual - without understanding and sensory perception of which, it is impossible to feel like a Russian, a Russian. At the same time, it should be emphasized that just as genetics does not entirely determine all the properties of living beings, including humans, the cultural-genetic code does not determine all the properties of civilization, but only those that preserve its civilizational identity, or rather , - are a kind of guarantor of its safety.

The cultural-genetic code fixes the main values civilization, its social ideal, characteristics of the spirit civilization.

Looking ahead, we note that attempts to break or radically change the cultural-genetic code - through revolutions or ill-conceived reforms - have occurred more than once in the history of Russia. However, they always led to negative results - to the weakening of Russia, to chaos, a decrease in the level of morality, and the destruction of law and order.

It must be taken into account that the cultural-genetic code is an invariant that develops in the early stages of the existence of civilization. Of course, he is subject to transformation. But replacing it with a fundamentally different one would mean a total denial of the past, and therefore, the destruction of the very supporting structures of a given society, in our case, Russian civilization. The total destruction of old values ​​does not give birth to new ones - as a rule, their place is taken not by those values ​​that are planned by the initiators of destruction, but anti-values. In other words, in practice there is a “reversal” of previous values ​​- what was previously perceived with a “plus” sign acquires a “minus” sign and vice versa. For example, if conscientious work is a value traditional for Russian civilization, then with the radical destruction of the cultural-genetic code, its place will be taken by opposites - idleness, getting money at any cost, etc. But not, for example, creativity, enterprise, “creativity etc., - as reformer-revolutionaries usually plan.

When the cultural-genetic code is destroyed, in general, the same thing happens as during a violent political revolution. “A violent revolutionary action,” wrote V.V. Leontovich, a researcher of the history of liberalism in Russia, “most often destroys precisely the most valuable elements of the old system, without affecting the primitive essence of any state power - that is, forces in their pure form are thereby created prerequisites for state power to manifest itself in the future even more crudely, no longer being limited and restrained by anything at all after the fall of ancient traditions.” [Leontovich V.V. History of liberalism in Russia. 1761 -1914. M. 1995. P. 21.]

The identification of essential features of civilization should not be perceived as normative or imperative. Such a distinction is a theoretical statement based on the history of civilization, on comparison with other civilizations. It should be especially emphasized that comparison with other civilizations cannot be carried out along the lines of “better - worse”, “higher - lower”: each civilization is original and unique in its own way.

When identifying the features of the civilization that the researcher considers his own, two dangers should be avoided, two equally unacceptable extremes - the sin of flattery and the temptation of self-abasement. The uniqueness of civilization, therefore, should not be interpreted either as evidence of its superiority over all other civilizations, or as its deliberate “inferiority.”

The Westernization of part of the Russian intelligentsia, which is characteristic of Russia in recent centuries, comes from the fact that Russia is not fundamentally different from Europe and from the West as a whole. Therefore, for example, in the words of the historian, member of the Provisional Government (1917) P. Milyukov, “Russia is also Europe.” Supporters of this point of view cite, in particular, the saying of Catherine II: “Russia is a European power” and a number of other arguments in support of their position.

“Russian Europeans” and Russian Westerners, as a rule, have a negative attitude towards the entire historical path of Russia, considering it erroneous. They persistently propose to renounce the past, deny the positive significance of Orthodoxy, and strive to remake the political system and the entire Russian way of life according to the Western model. Naturally, they deny any originality of Russia, seeing in such originality nothing but backwardness and barbarism. On the other hand, they idealize the West and do not attach importance to the peculiarities of the development of Western European and North American civilizations. For supporters of this view, the West is a kind of universal image of an “advanced”, advanced society, and therefore a universal role model.

Russian Westernism is the opposite pole to extreme Russian pochvenism. Such extreme Russian pochvenism did not receive theoretical expression in the works of major Russian thinkers. Neither the Slavophiles, nor Danilevsky’s book “Russia and Europe”, nor Dostoevsky (whose views on Russia can be characterized as pochvennicheskie) – in not a single significant work of any famous Russian thinker can one find a sweeping denial of the achievements of the West, a denial of the significance of Western culture and science. If Russian thinkers criticize Western ideas (and this undoubtedly takes place in the history of Russian thought), then Not because they are Western, but because they consider them fundamentally wrong. Having not received theoretical expression in the works of major Russian thinkers, extreme Russian pochvennichestvo (or “Russophilism”), with its characteristic sharply negative attitude towards the West, found spread in the mass consciousness - just like the opposite pole, i.e. Russian “ Europeanization", Westernism.

Let us dwell on some fundamental points of the inconsistency of extreme Westernism. So, for some reason, its representatives do not ask themselves the question: does the West itself consider Russia to be its organic part? Meanwhile, not a single work written by Western authors even talks about considering Russia as a country belonging to Western civilization. Starting from the ancient ones, for example, “Notes on Muscovy” by Sigismund Gilberstein, to the most modern ones, not a single Western author even thinks of classifying Russia as a Western country. On the contrary, they all emphasize the differences in Russia, which are completely obvious to them.

This is typical both for authors who are friendly towards Russia and for those who do not have any sympathy for Russia. The attitude of the West towards Russia is well formulated in the words of N. Berdyaev: “For Western cultural humanity, Russia still remains completely transcendental, some kind of alien East, sometimes attracting with its mystery, sometimes repelling with its barbarity. Even Tolstoy and Dostoevsky attract Western cultured people like exotic food, unusually spicy for him.” [Berdyaev N. The fate of Russia. M. 1990. P. 9.].

The above words refer to 1915. However, it is safe to say that little has changed since then. Except that new projects have appeared. Let's list some of them.

Since it is obvious that Russia in the form in which it existed for more than a millennium will never fit into Western civilization and will not meet its criteria, it is necessary to change Russia in the most radical way, argue some Western authors, and followed by our domestic Westerners. - And that means, first of all, to remove its spiritual core - Russian Orthodoxy, replacing it with Western creeds, and also to divide the country into three or more parts.

Such projects exist in the West, and measures are being taken to implement them. In fact, these projects mean the liquidation of Russia as a civilization, as an independent state. But not a single Russian, who values ​​his country, who values ​​the efforts of his ancestors, who sometimes defended the integrity and independence of Russia with their lives and blood at various stages of history and in various historical forms, will agree with these projects.

Let us also draw attention to a fairly widespread point of view that denies Russia the right to be a special civilization, along with other civilizations of the modern world. This point of view inevitably leads to classifying Russia as an uncivilized country. It also denies the integrity of Russia, considering it as a conglomerate of peoples, territories, etc. that are in no way connected with each other. However, if we assume that this is really so, then such a long existence of Russia becomes inexplicable: a conglomerate of unrelated peoples and territories would crumble at the very first historical test, at the first any significant blow from the outside. However, over more than a thousand years of history, Russia has endured many historical trials, and has not only maintained its integrity, but also developed quite intensively.

This approach to the history of Russia is not much different from extreme Westernism, when the author takes it upon himself to reconsider the entire historical evolution of Russia, filling volumes of “criticism of historical experience” in order to come to the conclusion that the entire historical path is erroneous and, therefore, the complete the worthlessness of historical experience. This approach is untenable from a scientific point of view and unacceptable from a moral point of view. It gives rise to historical negativism, but does not in any way contribute to the improvement of society, giving rise to the illusion that such improvement is possible by denying the past, renouncing it.

Of course, each new generation is called upon to accomplish something new, to advance the development of society and, in this sense, to surpass the past. Therefore, a certain conflict between generations is inevitable. But history in its essence is nothing more than a process of succession of generations. The total destruction of continuity, the breaking of the historical connection between generations inevitably leads to social amnesia. Having forgotten or not knowing the past, the new generation will inevitably begin, as they say in such cases, to “rediscover America”, “reinvent the wheel”, etc. Consequently, innovation must be combined with continuity, or, in the words of K. Jaspers “You can only surpass the past without losing your connection with it.”

The desire to radically remake, reinvent Russia, to start history from scratch, as historical experience shows, does not lead to anything positive. On the contrary, most often it leads to a historical catastrophe, to the destruction of material and intellectual wealth created and accumulated by previous generations. Lamentations about supposedly “failed” history, in fact, serve as an obstacle to normal historical development, giving rise only to a pathological desire to destroy everything, and, through some one-time act, change everything for the better. But, as the same historical experience shows, real improvements along this path are unattainable. Such improvements do not require the feverish activism characteristic of political revolutionaries, but persistent and measured work in all spheres of social life.

Regrets about the past are meaningless, if only because you can’t change anything in the past - it is the way it happened. And in any case, it deserves to be treated how to value, because it is the life and deeds of our ancestors. By treating the life and deeds of our ancestors with disdain, we lose our moral right to expect respectful treatment from our descendants.

The value attitude towards the past was formulated very briefly by A. S. Pushkin in his response to the first “Philosophical Letter” of P. Ya. Chaadaev: “Although I personally am heartily attached to the sovereign, I am far from admiring everything that I see around me; As a writer - I am irritated, as a person with prejudices - I am offended - but I swear on my honor that for nothing in the world I would not want to change my fatherland, or have another history other than the history of our ancestors, the way God gave it to us. » [Pushkin A.S. Letter to P.Ya. Chaadaev//Russian idea. Comp. and the author of the introductory article M. A. Maslin. M. 1992. - P. 51.]

What is the relationship between the interpretation of Russia as a civilization and other concepts that have Russia as a whole as their subject, seeking to answer questions about its essence, historical tasks and purpose?

The term "civilization" is used in many meanings:

• 1) civilization is the form of existence of the human mind in the Universe;
• 2) civilization is understood as a stage in the path of world-historical development;
• 3) there is an understanding of civilization as a region of the globe that is characterized by certain characteristics.

In this case, we will talk about civilization as a collection of peoples who have common economic, political, spiritual culture and are developing in the same direction, or in other words, civilization is a type of human community.

Consideration of Russian civilization in the context of other world civilizations will help determine Russia’s place in the world community as a civilizationally heterogeneous society, will help to understand its culture, mentality, and organization of the Russian state in comparison with other countries. It is not without interest to trace not only the initial path of Russian civilization, but also to form a holistic picture of it. Perhaps this will make it possible to understand the reason for the difficulties that constantly haunt Russia, despite the enormous material, natural, human, and spiritual resources that it has.

Arnold Toynbee, considered a classic of the theory of civilizations, identified six civilizations that exist in the world today: Western Christian, Orthodox Christian, Arab, Iranian, Indian and Chinese. Other authors (for example, Spengler, P. Sorokin, S. Handinton, etc.) give a different classification of civilizations. However, scientists can be reconciled by grouping all civilizations into types of civilizational development.

There are three types of civilizational development.

I. Type of non-progressive development. It is along this path that the Amazon Indians, Australian aborigines, and some African tribes follow. The purpose and meaning of life of these peoples is to maintain the fragile balance between man and nature. Here people use the same tools and apply religious norms that have existed for hundreds of generations. Man seems to stand outside of historical time, and civilization remains unchanged. For this purpose, a system of prohibitions (or taboos) is sacredly preserved, aimed primarily at preventing changes in anything at all. Development here goes in a circle, and the circle is human life. This circle can only be broken from the outside, as, for example, was done by white Americans in relation to the North American Indians, who were joining a different type of civilization. People belonging to this type of civilization have no prospects.

II. Type of cyclical civilizational development (eastern type).

This includes mainly Asian countries. It is characterized by cyclical development with elements of stagnation and stagnation. Here the past, present and future exist simultaneously in the mind, there is faith in the spiritual and in the unreal at the moment.

The features of this type of civilization are:

• 1) corporatism instead of dividing society into classes;
• 2) lack of a developed form of private property;
• 3) communal form of life and management;
• 4) subordination of the interests of an individual to collective interests;
• 5) the presence of a vertical type of social and economic relations (monarch - managers - community organization);
• 6) the colossal role of the state in the life of society;
• 7) a rigid method of government (despotism, totalitarianism, authoritarianism) and the absence of separation of powers;
• 8) non-economic method of coercion;
• 9) charismatic attitude to life, i.e. blind faith in the authority of the ruler, the idea;
• 10) rejection of earthly values ​​and promotion of comprehension of the highest meaning of life as the goal of existence;
• 11) fatalism;

The result of development is a slow ascent in a tight spiral.

III. Type of progressive development (Western type). At the beginning, the center of this civilization was the Mediterranean, then the “palm of primacy” passed to England, and now to the United States of America. The features of this civilization began to be identified in the 12th century. They are:

• 1) rational consciousness;
• 2) civil society, the essence of which is the presence of cells of society, between which there are horizontal relations, and these cells themselves are independent and independent of state power;
• 3) various forms of private property, which is the basis of a market economy;
• 4) the moderate role of the state, which boils down to the unification of these cells, and in general the state power here does not take upon itself more than what society itself entrusts to it;
• 5) parliamentarism;
• 6) liberation from blind faith in whatever it is and from blind obedience;
• 7) the dominance of the ideology of individualism and self-confidence;
• 8) priority of specific pragmatic goals;
• 9) active search to achieve them;
• 10) the meaning of life is constant improvement and self-development, which lead to increased well-being of people;
• 11) high prestige of work;

The result of development is rapid progressive development.

Where is the place of Russian civilization in the world-historical process and in the community of world civilizations?

Scientists have been arguing about this issue for a long time. Everyone knows the dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles. A Eurasian concept has also been proposed, the supporters of which are K. Leontiev, N. Danilevsky, E. Trubetskoy, N. Berdyaev, L. Gumilev and others.

Of course, Russian civilization is unusual. It arose in a territory where winds from the west and east blow simultaneously, in the literal and figurative sense of these words. It differs in the following features.

• 1. Russia is a diverse state. It cannot be attributed only to the West or only to the East. It has both the Muslim east and Baltic motifs. In Russia there is clearly a mixture of two cultures: Western and Eastern. Which one wins? It's hard to say. Most likely, there are periods when either the western wind wins (for example, as in the era of Peter I), or the eastern one (for example, during the reign of Ivan IV).
• 2. Russia is self-sufficient. Due to its large territory and diversity of natural and geographical conditions, it has everything. But with the development of society, specialization gradually occurs, which involves many countries and peoples. Self-sufficiency is gradually disappearing. That is why Russia has made many attempts at Europeanization. This was probably not accidental. A feeling of insufficient self-development was latently brewing in her.
• 3. Russia is a heterogeneous state. It is a conglomerate of the peoples of the West and the East. However, it has a core. They are the Russian people.
• 4. The state occupies a large place in the consciousness and life of Russian people, and statehood is distinguished by its rigidity. But this harshness softens every time Russia turns its face to the West. In general, Russian statehood is softer compared to eastern countries. But if compared with European statehood, it cannot be called “sugar”.

What explains the rigidity of Russian statehood?

Firstly, this is caused by the gigantic size of the territory. In general, the large territory of the state is a factor of centrifugal significance.

Secondly, multinationality also makes connections between people less strong. Of course, it’s not bad to be proud of your nation, but we must not forget that what makes a person beautiful is, first of all, his deeds, and not the blood that flows in his veins.

Thirdly, rather harsh natural and climatic conditions do not allow the economy to run as efficiently as is the case in regions of the globe with a mild climate. For comparison, we can give the following data: St. Petersburg is located at 60° latitude, i.e. on the same latitude with Alaska, Greenland, Northern Labrador; The bulk of the population is grouped near Moscow and lives at 50° latitude, which is equal to the latitude of Southern Labrador, which is an icy desert. Canada, considered a northern country, is located at the latitude of Crimea. That is why average grain yields vary so much: Canada - 50-70 quintals per 1 ha, Germany - 50-80 quintals per 1 ha, Russia - 30 quintals per 1 ha. Russia is the world's largest population cluster, closest to the North Pole, and is in a risky farming zone, with a growing season of just 130 days a year. In a word, poor soils and an unfavorable climate, and therefore a small volume of surplus product, determine the low level of well-being of the population.

This leads to another reason that determines the need for the rigidity of state power: the low level of consciousness of people, which largely depends on their well-being. Hard levers of communication with the population turn out to be the only possible ones until the level of the economy increases and a surplus product appears that could be transformed and used to improve education and develop the culture of the people. It is these events that greatly contribute to raising the consciousness of the people.

• 5. Russia is a state in which ideology occupies an extremely large place. To “bind” different lands and peoples, appropriate mechanisms are needed. One of these “brace” is centralized, rigid state power. But this alone is not enough. That is why, in addition, it is necessary to use other means of binding, in particular means of an ideological nature. It is no coincidence that in Rus' people have always had a passion for speculating about “lofty ideas”, about the meaning of life, rather than carrying out practical matters. To a certain extent, people were ruled by ideas. The “ruler idea” has long helped state power to keep the lands together. Not only Orthodoxy acted as such, but also the idea of ​​sovereignty, patriotism, communism, etc. And now the state authorities are again concerned with the creation of a state ideology to replace the discredited ideology of communism. It seems that the ideology of human rights and freedoms may well act as a “ruling idea” and unite the Russian people at the present stage.
• 6. Russian civilization develops cyclically. The history of Russia has had its ups and downs. But the features of its development are that, firstly, it is discontinuous (Kievan Rus, the Tatar-Mongol yoke, Muscovite Rus, Petrine Rus, Soviet Rus - according to N. Berdyaev), and secondly, this discontinuity is often catastrophic character (the collapse of Ancient Rus'), which means the presence of such changes in the qualitative state of society, the state, the individual, which can be qualified as a reversal.
• 7. Russian civilization can also be defined as a civilization of catching-up development. In fact, the wind from the east always pushed Russia back. But when it weakened and Russia began to look to the west, it saw how far the peoples of the west had gone forward. In Russia, frantic efforts were made every time to catch up with the West. The distance shortened, but then different times came again, which forced the rate of development to slow down or turn back.

The features discussed above lead to the following conclusion: Russian civilization is a mixture of two worlds. It is no coincidence that the eagle depicted on its State Emblem has two heads and looks both to the west and to the east. Analysis of history shows that he still looked more to the east. However, world experience suggests that many countries and peoples have now recognized that Western civilization is moving along the path of historical progress at a faster pace than any other. Many countries that are part of other civilizations are beginning to focus on Western-type civilization (Japan, Egypt, India, etc.). It seems that from now on the Russian eagle will still look more to the west.

Russian civilization is the civilization of Measure. We are stubbornly pulled either to the West or to the East, but we have confidently taken our own place in the world.

What is the difference between Russian civilization and others? First of all, this is the principle by which countries and peoples united in the process of globalization. The West is showing a rather aggressive policy, expanding its zone of influence by oppressing or even destroying the aborigines. An example of this is the multimillion-dollar sacrifices during the “conquest of America,” and they did not stand on ceremony with the colonies, squeezing out resources like juice from an orange.

The origins of our Motherland had different moral principles. It is here that the basic characteristics of mentality, moral, ethical, anthropological and moral attitudes have been preserved. Our people are aware of and distinguish between true and imaginary values.

Throughout its history, Russia has not destroyed any of the indigenous peoples who live on its territory. Many were given writing and education in general. They harmoniously fit into a multimillion-dollar, multinational civilization, enriching each other's culture. Infrastructure was being created. The friendship of peoples was cultivated in line with mutual respect. The Russian concept of globalization is distinguished by goals and meaning of life.

Briefly 10th, 11th grade

• Red wolf - message about a rare animal

  Among the known species of animals in the fauna world, those that have features due to which they can be classified as rare are distinguished. It could be an unusual appearance, a warm skin, or nutritious meat from an animal.

• Crusades - message report grade 6

  The Crusades represent the aggressive expansion of representatives of various knightly orders into the territory of the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean.

• The life and work of Seton-Thompson

  Ernest Seton-Thompson (1860-1946), born Ernest Evan Thompson, is one of the famous Canadian writers who gained popularity for his unusual essays on nature.

• Magnetic field of the Earth - message report on physics (6th, 8th, 9th grade)

  A magnetic field is a field arising from a current of charged particles. It can act on electric charges, as well as on bodies with magnetic properties.

Everyone will not be able to imagine planet Earth without flora, because plants are an integral part of all living things, thanks to which other living beings on the planet live

Features of Russian civilization.
When people talk about Russia in the world, they mean a civilization that is not similar to the Western and Eastern ones, into which the ways of life of the peoples inhabiting the Eurasian continent are conventionally divided. It is impossible to say for sure that Russia is developing according to any specific type. Various scientists at one time - the so-called “Westerners” and “Slavophiles” - proved the legitimacy of Russia’s attraction to one or another pole, but such a specific merger with any civilization did not happen.
There are two main differential aspects on which the concept of Russia as a special civilization is formed.
Firstly, the geographical factor plays an important role. The fact is that from the moment of its inception and development, the Russian state, no matter what it is called, no matter what formation it belongs to, has always balanced between East and West. That is, first this state originated in the western part of Eurasia, then the territory gradually spread to the east. It is customary to divide Russia territorially in relation to the East and West along the Ural Mountains. Hence the ideas about the state’s coat of arms: the creators of the emblem were forced to depict an eagle with two heads, so that each would look to the western and eastern sides, respectively.
Secondly, historically, Russia has been influenced by both Eastern and Western civilizations in different eras. For example, the invasion of the Mongol-Tatars on our land marked a long stage of life “under the East”. During troubled times, Russian soil was full of foreign invaders trying to undermine its strength and self-determination. Under Peter the Great, there was a significant bias towards choosing the Western path of development. And so on until now.
However, even with such visible “throwing”, Russian statehood has established itself as a special civilization, which, like a sponge, has absorbed the features of all civilizations that influenced it at different times. The Russian way of life fully corresponds to one of the definitions of the concept of “civilization” - a society frozen in a certain locus of space and time. The economic, material, spiritual subsystems of this society are unique in their own way. That is why modern Russian society remains one of the most special. It is considered one of the most tolerant in the world, which is why hundreds of nationalities coexist within one state, respecting each other’s traditions and customs. Perhaps the term “multinational” is only suitable for Russia, which has been formed over its centuries-old history into a unique social civilizational complex.

History of world civilizations Fortunatov Vladimir Valentinovich

§ 7. The birth of Russian civilization

Due to various climatic, geographical, geopolitical, cultural-historical and other circumstances, a gradual separation of European peoples and states from each other occurred, and various national languages, cultures, and mentalities were formed. At the turn of the 1st and 2nd millennium, significant differences emerged in the historical destinies of European peoples. The Russian people also had their own fate.

The time of the appearance of the Russian people and the Russian state on the European historical arena is precisely the turn of the 1st-2nd millennium AD. e. The Russian ethnic group appeared later than the Chinese, Indian, Persian, Arabic and some others. The Russian nation is relatively young. But it should be especially emphasized that as a new historical community, representing a new stage in the ethnic consolidation of tribal unions, the Russian nation, the ancient Russian people, the Russians are autochthonous, i.e., indigenous, living here since ancient times, the aboriginal population of the East European Plain, to which their historical ancestors came and united to live together. This territory covered vast spaces from the Baltic (Varangian) Sea, Lakes Ladoga and Onega in the north to the Black (Russian) Sea in the south, from the eastern slopes of the Carpathian Mountains in the west to the upper reaches of the Volga and Oka in the east.

In the 9th–12th centuries. all these lands housed only 5–7 million people. Currently, more than 200 million people live in these same territories.

Thus, the population of the Leningrad region is about 2 million people per 86 thousand km 2. Almost 5 million more people live in St. Petersburg. Moscow alone today has more residents than in all of Ancient Rus'.

When characterizing the system of relations “Man and Nature” in relation to the time of the emergence of civilization on the territory of the East European Plain, one should pay attention to the fact that nature and the geographical environment provided Russian people with dual living conditions. Full-flowing rivers provided the Russians with clean water, fed them with fish, and connected various places of residence of people. Mighty forests provided an abundance of building material, mushrooms, berries, honey, meat and fur of various animals. The land, depending on the natural zone (from swampy and wooded to steppe areas), made it possible to grow various grain crops, vegetables, fruits, and flax. On the one hand, the natural potential of the habitat of Russian people was not bad. But, on the other hand, it was very difficult to use this potential. The climate was harsh, with short summers and long winters, which, in comparison with Europeans, such as the French or Byzantines, required significant efforts from the Russian people to grow crops, insulate the home, and preserve health.

The presence of free land, the opportunity to move from their previous place and settle 50-100 versts north or east, build a house in a few days, clear a plot of land for arable land in a few months, warmed the soul of the Russian people for many decades, gave him a ready “answer” to possible pressure from on the part of the prince and his administration. The country had many unoccupied territories, the colonization of which occurred almost continuously. They escaped from the raids of nomads in the forests.

In numerous cities with populations ranging from several hundred to several thousand inhabitants, crafts (more than 60 specialties) and trade developed. Many residents had small plots of land right next to their houses. Ready-made local (pottery, leather shoes, metal products, etc.) and imported (fabrics, jewelry, wine, etc.) goods had limited demand. Subsistence, self-sustaining farming prevailed over vast areas. A serious problem was the unreliable state of communications. Navigable rivers did not completely solve the problem of creating strong connections between different territories.

A Russian person needed to be very attentive, observant, and capable of creatively solving various problems in order to settle down. Interaction with nature, significant dependence on it, and the need to often wage a real struggle for survival have developed endurance, the ability to work hard, and ingenuity in Russian people. Observations and knowledge gradually accumulated and were passed on (initially orally) from generation to generation.

The development of relations in the “Man and Man” system was influenced by the fact that the majority of the population did not have any significant surplus product. The economy of the ancient Russians was of a subsistence nature. The vast majority of things necessary for life - from agricultural implements to food and clothing - were produced in the universal family economy, which in many of its features survived until the beginning of the 20th century, especially in the regions of the Russian European North. (It is enough to refer to the wonderful book of the writer V.I. Belov “Lad”.)

In modern Russian historical science, the prevailing opinion is that in the Old Russian state the absolute majority of the population were free communal peasants united in a rope (from the rope with which land plots were measured; the rope was also called “hundred”, later – “guba”). They were respectfully called “people”, “men”. They plowed, sowed, cut and burned the forest for new arable land (“slash-and-burn system”). They could kill a bear, elk, wild boar, catch fish, collect honey from forest edges. The “husband” of Ancient Rus' participated in the community gathering, chose the headman, participated in the trial as part of a kind of “jury panel” - “twelve best husbands”, pursued a horse thief, arsonist, murderer, participated in the armed militia in the event of major military campaigns and, together with others fought off the raid of nomads. A free person had to control his feelings, be responsible for himself, relatives and dependent people. For premeditated murder, in accordance with the “Russian Truth”, a set of laws of the first half of the 11th century, property was confiscated, and the family was completely turned into slavery (this procedure was called “flow and plunder”). For a tuft of hair torn out of a beard or mustache, an offended free person was entitled to compensation of 12 hryvnia “for moral damage” (the hryvnia is a silver ingot weighing approximately 200 grams; currently the hryvnia is the main monetary unit in Ukraine). This is how the personal dignity of a free person was valued. Murder was punishable by a fine of 40 hryvnia.

Innovation. Taxes

Taxes arose along with the state. Tax policy is the most important instrument of public administration. The history of taxes represents a continuous process of improving the relationship between government and the population. The first tax reform in the history of our country was carried out by Princess Olga (reigned 945–968). Initially, tribute was collected by “polyudya”, by traveling around controlled territories in order to collect taxes. After the murder of Prince Igor (in 945) for the excessive greed of his squad during the Polyudye, Princess Olga established the exact amounts of the tribute (“lessons”). The collection was carried out in specially designated places - “cemeteries” (originally a place of trade, where the main role was played by “guests” - merchants). It is unlikely that “taxes” in Ancient Rus' were excessive. The unit of taxation was “dim” (yard) and “ralo” (plow, plot of land). One of the main incomes of the state were criminal fines and duties. Korchmita was taken for the maintenance of the tavern, living room tribute and trade tribute - for space for warehouses and markets for foreign merchants, washing and transportation - for state assistance in moving goods across rivers and portages. The population was recruited to build fortifications, build and repair bridges, improve cities, etc. Anti-tax protests in Rus' resumed only under the Mongolian Baskaks.

The “husband” of Ancient Rus' was indisputably liable for military service, a participant in military campaigns. By decision of the people's assembly, all combat-ready men went on the campaign. Weapons, as a rule, were obtained from the princely arsenal. Thus, the army of Svyatoslav (years of real reign 965–972, considered the ruler since 945), including, along with the squad, the people’s militia, numbered up to 50–60 thousand people.

The communal population constituted the absolute majority in the Novgorod, Pskov, Smolensk, Chernigov, Vladimir, Polotsk, Galician, Kyiv and other lands. The population of the cities also constituted a unique community, among which Novgorod with its veche system was of greatest interest. Larger territories and cities were called “thousand” or “regiment”. Large reigns for some time retained tribal names - “all Dregovichi”, “Vyatichi volost”.

Various life circumstances created categories of people of dependent legal status. Ryadovichi were those who became temporarily dependent on the owner on the basis of an agreement (“row”) concluded with him. Those who lost their property became purchasers and received from the owner a small plot of land and tools. The purchaser worked for a loan (kupa), grazed the owner's livestock, could not leave him, could be subject to corporal punishment, but could not be sold into slavery, retaining the chance to buy out his freedom. As a result of captivity, self-sale, sale for debts or crimes, through marriage to a serf or servant, Russian people could become serfs. The master's right in relation to the slave was not limited in any way. His murder “cost” only 5 hryvnia. Serfs were, on the one hand, the servants of the feudal lord, who were part of his personal servants and squads, even the princely or boyar administration. On the other hand, slaves, unlike ancient slaves, could be planted on the ground (“suffering people”, “sufferers”) and worked as artisans. The lumpen proletarians of Ancient Rus' can be called outcasts. These were people who had lost their previous social status: peasants expelled from the community; freed slaves bought their freedom (as a rule, after the death of the owner); bankrupt merchants and even princes “without a place,” that is, who did not receive territory in which they would perform administrative functions. When considering court cases, a person’s social status played an important role, and the principle was “just judge based on your husband.” Landowners, princes and boyars acted as masters of dependent people. Various categories of warriors occupied an important place in society: the older ones were boyars, the younger ones were gridi. The clergy (white - parish and black - monks), as well as foreigners, had a special status. Socially, ancient Russian society presented a rather motley picture. The development of Russian legislation becomes clear. We should not forget about the ancient Russian family, about the exceptional role that women played in arranging the house, raising children, and sharing the moral values ​​of Christianity.

Man and woman in the history of civilizations

In Ancient Rus', the marriageable age was 12 years for girls and 15 years for boys. But there were exceptions. Ivan III was married for political reasons to a Tver princess. He was 12, she was 10 years old.

The Orthodox Church allowed one person to marry only three times. Until the 13th century. Usually only a second marriage was allowed, and a third - only “if someone is young and there are no children.” The fourth and subsequent marriages were not recognized as legal.

Betrothal was a social moral obligation to marry a girl. If someone seduced or desecrated her, the betrothed was still obliged to marry. They could get a fine if they “got married and became unclean.” Parents were obliged to marry off their daughters. There were fines.

The law did not provide for the preservation of virginity until marriage. Church law required this from future wives of clergy members. Innocence was required from participants in “beauty contests”, the selection of wives for Russian tsars already in the Muscovite kingdom.

The solemn wedding ceremony was performed mainly in the first marriage. If a widower married a widow, the wedding was usually replaced by a short prayer. If only one of those getting married remarried, then during the wedding the crown was placed not over the head, but on the right shoulder (in the case of a third marriage, on the left shoulder).

The people, considering weddings to be part of the marriages of princes and boyars, continued to adhere to the pagan customs of kidnapping and buying brides when entering into marriage. Evidence of marriages concluded without a church wedding can be found in literary monuments until the end of the 17th century. The clergy ordered the clergy of those areas (primarily outlying areas) where non-church marriages took place to marry spouses, even if they already had children.

In Rus', as in Byzantium, marriages began with the bride and groom turning to the bishop with a request to bless their marriage. The bishop issued a decree to the petitioner addressed to the priest with a proposal to first carry out a “search,” that is, to identify whether there were any obstacles to the marriage. This decree was called the coronal memory, or banner. A fee was charged for the issuance of the “banner”, the amount of which increased in the case of a second and third marriage. In 1765, by decree of Catherine II, coronal memorials and the collection of duties for them were abolished. Features of marriage in the 17th century. was that the betrothal ceremony was accompanied by the so-called “charge” - an agreement that provided for the payment of a penalty in the event of its termination.

Divorce (“dissolution”) in the 12th–13th centuries. was permitted only as an exceptional phenomenon. The husband could divorce his wife if she cheated. Communication between a wife and strangers outside the home without her husband’s permission was also considered treason. If her husband cheated, the wife could not demand a divorce. Penance was imposed on the husband - church repentance. Since the 15th century women received the right to divorce due to the infidelity of a spouse if he had a mistress and children from her or a second family on his side.

Childbirth most often took place in a bathhouse or in some isolated room. City dwellers have long used the help of midwives or midwives. In the XVI–XVII centuries. the healthy child was baptized in church on the eighth day after birth. The name was given in honor of the saint who was commemorated on this day. Before baptism, the woman in labor was usually in a bathhouse. Women acquaintances brought a gift “for the tooth” (or “for the head”) to the baby, as well as cookies and sweets (pies, rolls, rolls, bagels) for the mother.

The godfather (godfather) acquired a pectoral cross, carried the child in his arms to the church, handed it over to the priest, answered questions for him during the ritual, participated in the future life of the godson or goddaughter, up to the choice of a spouse.

The “World of Man” in Ancient Rus' constantly developed, became more complex and enriched. In the 10th century The Cyrillic alphabet became widespread and became the basis of Russian writing. The greatest spiritual influence on our ancient ancestors was nature, the annual natural cycle. Many pagan customs and rituals were preserved even after the adoption of Christianity, which significantly enriched Russian culture.

Over the centuries, there was a combination of the fundamental, folk culture of the Eastern Slavs, the Old Russian people, with Eastern Christianity of the Byzantine model. It was a complex and fruitful process. A rich spiritual culture consolidated the Russian people, rallied them around common values ​​and guidelines more firmly than the princely sword and tribute. The expression of this unity became the great ancient Russian literature (“The Tale of Law and Grace” by Hilarion, “Prayer” by Daniil Zatochnik, “Teaching to Children” by Vladimir Monomakh, “The Tale of Igor’s Host”, etc.).