The 17th Century European View of Russia Being a Backward, Weak, Isolated and Barbarous State
It must be said that in a broad sense the view (held by most Europeans
in the 17th century) that Russia was broadly accurate. Russia was
definitely a less developed state that those in Western Europe in
several ways. The most widely published works on the subject
(Herbertstein's Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii, and Olearioys's Neue
Bechreibung der Moscowitschen), both draw a picture of a
socio-political order which stood in sharp contrast to west European
societies on critical counts. In these works the essential features of
the Russian state were: the tsar's undisputed rule of the country and
its inhabitants, the status of the people (whether of high or low
degree) as his slaves and serfs; the recognition of his will as the
will of God, and his possessions of all his subjects' property. Thus
the question is now to see exactly to what extent the Russian state
was "backward, weak, isolated and barbarous", and to find the causes
for it.
======================================================================
Backwardness is essentially the measurement of the social and
technological development of a country. Due to the total subordination
to nature that existed in the 17th century, the two most decisive
factors in these two areas were the soil and climate of a nation.
In terms of soil, Russian can be divided into two zones. The north
zone occupies the northern half, from the Arctic Circle to between 45
and 50 degrees. The predominant type of earth here is pozdol, a soil
that requires deep ploughing to be of use. In the southern zone the
...
... middle of paper ...
...f its people. We can see that Russia was willing to
tang and making positive steps to do so, but for the majority of the
17th century at least the Russian people as a whole lived in a
comparatively barbarous society.
In conclusion one can see that the allegations of "backwardness,
isolation, and weakness" are far easier to justify that that of a
barbarian society. Russia was through various historical and
geographical causes, considerably less advanced technologically, had a
much weaker government, and was thus isolated from the west
politically and economically (as well as geographically). Barbarianism
however is somewhat harder to justify. Slavery was the natural state
of most Russians at the time, but the willingness and desire to adopt
western ways of life proves that they were not a totally barbarian
people.
Historically, Russia has always been a country of perplexing dualities. The reality of Dual Russia, the separation of the official culture from that of the common people, persisted after the Revolution of 1917 and the Civil War. The Czarist Russia was at once modernized and backward: St. Petersburg and Moscow stood as the highly developed industrial centers of the country and two of the capitals of Europe, yet the overwhelming majority of the population were subsistent farms who lived on mir; French was the official language and the elites were highly literate, yet 82% of the populati...
Tensions in Russia in the Early 1900 In the early 1900, Russia faced various kinds of problems in terms of society and politics. Although the largest country in the world, Russia could only offer 5% of its land for farming. The rest was useless due to the extremely low temperatures throughout the year. The problem with land meant that peasants did not produce a sufficient amount of food, consequently resulting famine all over the country.
With the coinciding of a revolution on the brink of eruption and the impacts of the First World War beginning to take hold of Russia, considered analysis of the factors that may have contributed to the fall of the Romanov Dynasty is imperative, as a combination of several factors were evidently lethal. With the final collapse of the 300 year old Romanov Dynasty in 1917, as well as the fall of Nicholas II, a key reality was apparent; the impact that WWI had on autocratic obliteration was undeniable. However, reflection of Russia’s critical decisions prior to the war is essential in the assessment of the cause of the fall of the Romanov Dynasty. No war is fought without the struggle for resources, and with Russia still rapidly lagging behind in the international industrialisation race by the turn of the 20th century, the stage was set for social unrest and uprising against its already uncoordinated and temporarily displaced government. With inconceivable demands for soldiers, cavalry and warfare paraphernalia, Russia stood little chance in the face of the great powers of World War One.
European views of non European people reflect the intellectual changes from 1760s to the 1910s. European views of non-European people in the 1760s through 1910s were largely based off of the idea of survival of the fittest, the education of the non-europeans to Europeans, and the thought of Europeans as being superior. These three factors show how intellectual changes in Europe shape the way Europeans viewed non-europeans.
Though the book has no footnotes, it was researched methodically through documents and the work of other scholars. It is very detailed and specific for such a short book. The information about the foreign policy of Russia under Catherine’s rule, and her various wars and military maneuvers, helped explain some of the issues Russian is currently undergoing today in Crimea, the Ukraine and with Turkey. The central theme of reform was also examined in depth, and given the time in which she ruled, and the size of the country, it astonishes me the undertaking Catherine had in front of her. It could take 18 months for an imperial order to reach the far eastern side of Russia, then 18 more months for a reply to get back to her at the
The Russian Revolution occured in two stages/times, February nd October of 1917. As cited in document 1, "Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown and a liberal democratic government came to power." What lead to the Febraury Revolution was the peasant agriculture to the Russian population, autocracy, and the outbreak of WW1. A long-term cause was the peasant agriculture to the Russian population. As said in document 1, "For all of its history before the 20th cwntury, 80-95% of the population were poor pasants, farmers just barely scratching a living form the land. For most of that history (between 1694-1861) the majority of these peasants were enserfed." to enserf means to be aprovd of liberty and personal rights. Before 1917 peasants recieved sympathy from
I have chosen the position of disagree because although contemporary society has responded to legacies of historical globalization, I think we haven’t done enough yet. Although we have definitely moved away from a Eurocentric perspective there are definitely some undertones that remain evident in our everyday society over almost all countries.
While most of Europe had develop strong central governments and weakened the power of the nobles, Russia had lagged behind the times and still had serfs as late as 1861. The economic development that followed the emancipation of peasants in the rest of Europe created strong industrial and tax bases in those nations. Russian monarchs had attempted some level of reforms to address this inequality for almost a century before, and were indeed on their way to “economic maturity” (32) on par with the rest of Europe. But they overextended themselves and the crushing defeats of the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and the First World War in 1917 lost them the necessary support from their subjects and created “high prices and scarcity” which were by far “the most obvious factors in the general tension”
The Romanov Rule in Russia The Romanovs had ruled Russia since 1613. When the last tsar of all,
When Russians talk about the war of 1812 they do not mean the war in which Washington was burned by the British, but the war in which, apparently, the Russians burned Moscow. This war between the French republican empire and the Russian Tsarist Empire was as remarkable a high - spot in the history of the latter as it was a low - spot in the history of Napoleon. For Russia, it was one of those rare moments in history when almost all people, serfs and lords, merchants and bureaucrats, put aside their enmities and realized that they were all Russians. Russia, sometimes called ‘a state without a people’, seemed to become, for a few precious months, one people, and never quite forgot the experience.
Kirby, David, The Baltic World 1772-1993: Europe's Northern Periphery in an Age of Change (London: Longman, 1995).
The European Union is an example of successful political globalization as there is stability in the region. The European Union has united several countries, specifically “twenty seven European countries” (Davies 1) and there has been benefits to this system. There has been a “reduction in crime, a rise in population, life expectancy and income as well as an improving government.” (Rich 3). Through this political system there has been improvement in not only in the government but in the people’s wellbeing.
7) Vernadsky, George. A History of Russia: Fourth Edition, Completely Revised. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954.
Europe is always in a position of strength, The Oriental is irrational, depraved, childlike, "different", thus the European is rational, virtuous, mature, "normal".
Russia had been defeated in all except the war with Turkey and its government and economy had the scars to prove it. A severe lack of food and poor living conditions amongst the peasant population led firstly to strikes and quickly escalated to violent riots. Tsar Nicholas II ruled Russia with an iron hand while much of Europe was moving away from the monarchical system of rule. All lands were owned by the Tsar’s family and Nobel land lords, while the factories and industrial complexes were owned by the capitalists’. There were no unions or labour laws and the justice system had made almost all other laws in favour of the ruling elite.