These “Lectures” owe their first appearance in print to the energy and work of my students at the Military Law Academy, I. A. Blinov and R. R. von Raupach. They collected and put in order all those “lithographed notes” that were published by students in different years my teaching. Although some parts of these “notes” were compiled from the texts I submitted, however, in general, the first editions of the “Lectures” were not distinguished by either internal integrity or external decoration, representing a collection of educational notes of different times and different quality. Through the works of I. A. Blinov, the fourth edition of the Lectures acquired a much more serviceable appearance, and for the next editions the text of the Lectures was revised by me personally. CONTENTS Historicity of the heritage of S.F. Platonov - a brief historical and biographical essay Introduction (concise presentation) Essay on Russian historiography Review of sources of Russian history PART ONE Preliminary historical information Ancient history of our country Russian Slavs and their neighbors The original life of the Russian Slavs Kievan Rus Formation of the Principality of Kievan General remarks about the first times of the Principality of Kievan Baptism of Rus' Consequences of the adoption of Christianity by Russia Kievan Rus in the 11th-12th centuries Colonization of Suzdal-Vladimir Rus The influence of Tatar power on appanage Rus' Specific life of Suzdal-Vladimir Rus' Novgorod Pskov Lithuania Principality of Moscow until the middle of the 15th century The time of Grand Duke Ivan III PART TWO The time of Ivan the Terrible Moscow State before the Troubles Political contradiction in Moscow life of the 16th century Social contradiction in Moscow life of the 16th century Troubles in the Moscow state The first period of the Troubles: the struggle for the Moscow throne The second period of the Troubles: destruction public order The third period of unrest: an attempt to restore order The election of Mikhail Romanov to the kingdom The time of Tsar Mikhail (1613-1645) The time of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (1645-1676) Internal activities government of Alexei Mikhailovich Church affairs under Alexei Mikhailovich Cultural turning point under Alexei Mikhailovich Personality of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Main moments in the history of Southern and Western Rus' in the 16th-17th centuries The time of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich (1676-1682) PART THREE Views of science and Russian society on Peter the Great Position Moscow politics and life at the end of the 17th century The time of Peter the Great Childhood and adolescence of Peter (1672-1689) Years 1689-1699 Foreign policy Peter's since 1700 The internal activities of Peter since 1700 The attitude of contemporaries to the activities of Peter Family relationships Petra Historical significance activities of Peter The time from the death of Peter the Great to the accession to the throne of Elizabeth (1725-1741) Palace events from 1725 to 1741 Management and politics from 1725 to 1741 The time of Elizabeth Petrovna (1741-1761) Management and politics of the time of Elizabeth Peter III and the coup of 1762 The time of Catherine II (1762-1796) The legislative activity of Catherine II The foreign policy of Catherine II The historical significance of the activities of Catherine II The time of Paul I (1796-1801) The time of Alexander I (1801-1825) The time of Nicholas I (1825-1855) Brief overview of the time of Emperor Alexander II and the great reforms
It would be appropriate to begin our studies of Russian history by defining what exactly should be understood by the words historical knowledge, historical science. Having understood how history is understood in general, we will understand what we should understand by the history of one particular people, and we will consciously begin to study Russian history.
History existed in ancient times, although at that time it was not considered a science. An acquaintance with ancient historians, Herodotus and Thucydides, for example, will show you that the Greeks were right in their own way when they classified history as an area of art. By history they meant fictional story about memorable events and persons. The task of the historian was to convey to listeners and readers, along with aesthetic pleasure, a number of moral edifications. Art also pursued the same goals.
With this view of history as an artistic story about memorable events, ancient historians adhered to the corresponding methods of presentation. In their narration they strived for truth and accuracy, but they did not have a strict objective measure of truth. The deeply truthful Herodotus, for example, has many fables (about Egypt, about the Scythians, etc.); he believes in some, because he does not know the limits of the natural, while others, even without believing in them, he includes in his story, because they seduce him with their artistic interest. Not only that, but the ancient historian, true to his artistic goals, considered it possible to decorate the narrative with conscious fiction. Thucydides, whose veracity we do not doubt, puts into the mouths of his heroes speeches composed by himself, but he considers himself right due to the fact that he correctly conveys in a fictitious form the actual intentions and thoughts of historical persons.
Thus, the desire for accuracy and truth in history was to some extent limited by the desire for artistry and entertainment, not to mention other conditions that prevented historians from successfully distinguishing truth from fable. Despite this, the desire for accurate knowledge already in ancient times required pragmatism from the historian. Already in Herodotus we see a manifestation of this pragmatism, i.e. the desire to connect facts causal connection, not only tell them, but also explain their origin from the past.
So, at first, history is defined as an artistic and pragmatic story about memorable events and persons.
Views of history that demanded from it, in addition to artistic impressions, practical applicability, also go back to ancient times. Even the ancients said that history is the teacher of life (magistra vitae). Such a presentation was expected from historians past life humanity, which would explain the events of the present and the tasks of the future, would serve practical guide for public figures and a moral school for other people. This view of history held in full force in the Middle Ages and has survived to our times; on the one hand, he directly brought history closer to moral philosophy, on the other, he turned history into a “tablet of revelations and rules” of a practical nature. One writer of the 17th century. (De Rocoles) said that “history fulfills the duties inherent in moral philosophy, and even in a certain respect can be preferable to it, since, giving the same rules, it also adds examples to them.” On the first page of Karamzin’s “History of the Russian State” you will find an expression of the idea that history must be known in order “to establish order, to reconcile the benefits of people and to give them the happiness possible on earth.”
With the development of Western European philosophical thought, new definitions began to emerge historical science. In an effort to explain the essence and meaning of human life, thinkers turned to the study of history either in order to find in it a solution to their problem, or in order to confirm their abstract constructions with historical data. According to different philosophical systems, one way or another, the goals and meaning of the story itself were determined. Here are some of these definitions: Bossuet (1627-1704) and Laurent (1810-1887) understood history as a depiction of those world events in which the paths of Providence, guiding human life for your own purposes. The Italian Vico (1668-1744) considered the task of history, as a science, to depict those identical conditions that all peoples are destined to experience. The famous philosopher Hegel (1770-1831) saw in history an image of the process by which the “absolute spirit” achieved its self-knowledge (Hegel explained the entire world life as the development of this “absolute spirit”). It would not be a mistake to say that all these philosophies demand essentially the same thing from history: history should depict not all the facts of the past life of mankind, but only the main ones, revealing its general meaning.
This view was a step forward in the development of historical thought - a simple story about the past in general, or a random set of facts from different times and places to prove an edifying thought was no longer satisfactory. There was a desire to unite the presentation with a guiding idea, to systematize historical material. However, philosophical history is rightly reproached for taking the guiding ideas of historical presentation outside of history and systematizing facts arbitrarily. As a result, history did not become an independent science, but became a servant of philosophy.
History became a science only in early XIX century, when from Germany, in contrast to French rationalism, idealism developed: in contrast to French cosmopolitanism, the ideas of nationalism spread, national antiquity was actively studied, and the conviction began to dominate that the life of human societies occurs naturally, in an order of natural sequence that cannot be disturbed and is changed neither by chance nor by the efforts of individuals. From this point of view, the main interest in history began to be the study of non-random external phenomena and not the activities of outstanding personalities, but the study of social life at different stages of its development. History began to be understood as a science of laws historical life human societies.
This definition has been formulated differently by historians and thinkers. The famous Guizot (1787-1874), for example, understood history as the doctrine of world and national civilization (understanding civilization in the sense of the development of civil society). The philosopher Schelling (1775-1854) considered national history a means of understanding the “national spirit.” From here arose the widespread definition of history as the path to national self-awareness. Further attempts were made to understand history as a science that should reveal the general laws of development public life outside of their application to a known place, time and people. But these attempts, in essence, assigned history the tasks of another science - sociology. History is a science that studies specific facts in the conditions of time and place, and main goal it is recognized as a systematic depiction of the development and changes in the life of individual historical societies and all humanity.
Such a task requires a lot to be successfully completed. In order to give a scientifically accurate and artistically complete picture of any era folk life or full history people, it is necessary: 1) to collect historical materials, 2) to investigate their reliability, 3) to restore exactly individual historical facts, 4) indicate the pragmatic connection between them and 5) reduce them into a general scientific overview or into an artistic picture. The ways in which historians achieve these particular goals are called scientific critical techniques. These techniques are being improved with the development of historical science, but so far neither these techniques nor the science of history itself have reached their full development. Historians have not yet collected and studied all the material subject to their knowledge, and this gives reason to say that history is a science that has not yet achieved the results that other, more accurate sciences have achieved. And, however, no one denies that history is a science with a broad future.
These “Lectures” owe their first appearance in print to the energy and work of my students at the Military Law Academy, I. A. Blinov and R. R. von Raupach. They collected and put in order all those “lithographed notes” that were published by students in different years of my teaching. Although some parts of these “notes” were compiled from the texts I submitted, however, in general, the first editions of the “Lectures” were not distinguished by either internal integrity or external decoration, representing a collection of educational notes of different times and different quality. Through the works of I. A. Blinov, the fourth edition of the Lectures acquired a much more serviceable appearance, and for the next editions the text of the Lectures was revised by me personally.
In particular, in the eighth edition the revision affected mainly those parts of the book that are devoted to the history of the Moscow principality in the 14th-15th centuries. and the history of the reigns of Nicholas I and Alexander II. To strengthen the factual side of the presentation in these parts of the course, I used some excerpts from my “Textbook of Russian History” with appropriate changes to the text, just as in previous editions insertions were made from the same in the history section Kievan Rus until the 12th century. In addition, in the eighth edition the characteristics of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich were re-stated. The ninth edition has made the necessary, generally minor, corrections. The text has been revised for the tenth edition.
Nevertheless, even in its present form, the Lectures are still far from the desired correctness. Live teaching and scientific work have a continuous influence on the lecturer, changing not only the details, but sometimes the very type of his presentation. In the "Lectures" you can see only the factual material on which the author's courses are usually based. Of course, there are still some oversights and errors in the printed transmission of this material; Likewise, the structure of presentation in the “Lectures” quite often does not correspond to the structure of oral presentation that I have adhered to in recent years.
It is only with these reservations that I decide to publish this edition of the Lectures.
