O.I. SHESTAK, S.G. KOVALENKO, A.A. VLASENKO, Russian Historiography on the State Administration in the Northern Area Territories and Control over Their Development: A 300 Year Long Path (original) (raw)
Related papers
Role of Siberia in Eurasian Stories of Russian Political and Economic Thought
2021
Russia was and remains to be a Eurasian territory in terms of its geographic location. However, there is nothing specifically Eurasian, either ideologically, politically, culturally or economically, that would make it possible to speak seriously about Eurasianism as a basis for future international political and economic integration of different countries around Russian Siberia and – more broadly – Russia as its centre, without considerable economic achievements of Russia and serious financial inflows in the Siberian economy. The colossal space of Russian Siberia with scattered spots of current economic exploitation activity primarily designed and operated for excavation of natural resources, cannot serve the purposes of Eurasian integration in any way. There remain serious opportunities associated with the development of the Arctic territories, but they can serve Eurasian integration purposes only if large infrastructure projects are implemented that would link the southern and nor...
Journal of Historical Geography, 1988
This essay is an examination of the nature of Russian colonial expansion into Siberia and the Far East in the seventeenth century. The argument is made that this expansion was essentially mercantile in nature, and occurred as a result of the quest for furs, which for the Muscovite state represented a reliable and highly lucrative source of revenue. Russian occupation of the Amur basin was additionally stimulated by the hope of establishing a food base for the fur trappers in the desolate regions to the north. The significance of all these regions for the government in Moscow, therefore, rested solely on their ability to supply a colonial commodity. Beyond this, they had no value, and the Russians were even willing in the case of the Far East to surrender territorial claims, if with this Chinese markets could be made more accessible for Russian furs. This interpretation counters both Western views of Russian expansion overall as an undifferentiated, indeed organic process, and some recent Soviet interpretations, which maintain that the Russians in this period had overriding territorial interests on the Amur lands. 'As when two Polar Winds, blowing adverse Upon the Cronian Sea, together drive Mountains of Ice, that stop th' imagin'd way Beyond Petsora Eastward, to the rich Cathaian Coast.'
Eurasia Border Review, 2013
The article is devoted to the high differentiation of the European and Asian parts of the Russian border regarding the level and rate of development of cross-border relations. In the author's opinion, the main reasons of such differentiation are related to typological features of the given parts of the border, which are caused by the history of their formation and development. The content and origin of the typological features of the European and Asian parts of the Russian border are studied in two representative segments-the Northwestern and Far Eastern-which have strong distinctions in terms of volumes of cross-border flows of people, goods and investments. Based on the developed typology of state borders, the author examines the process of historical development of the Northwestern and Far Eastern parts of the border of Russia from the end of the eighteenth to the beginning of the twenty-first century. These border segments are now at different stages of their typological evolution. The Northwestern border, during the post-Soviet period, has embarked on the road to becoming a transnational border type, but the Far Eastern border has not yet completed the process of forming the attributes of a linear border type. Considering the limits of any state, we usually imagine them as something uniform and homogeneous, the same in its nature as the object whose attributes they are. This approach is applied to the Russian border, which in many publications is presented as a certain indivisible, undifferentiated image or concept. However, Russia is a vast and extremely diverse state with the longest borders in the world. Therefore such simplified representations are a superficial and grossly distort reality. Careful researchers of the problems of history and theory of the Russian border, such as
La Russie et le monde à l’époque moderne : espace régional et routes transcontinentales
Revue de Synthèse, 2018
Russia and the World in the Modern Age: Regional Space and Transcontinental Routes In the third volume of his majestic work Civilisation and Capitalism, 15th-18th Centuries,(est-ce la traduction officielle ? Il manque “matérielle” et “économie”) Fernand Braudel confirmed that, notwithstanding its numerous and long-established contacts with Europe, China, India, Persia and the Ottoman Empire, Russia constitutes “an autonomous world-economy” in the modern age. From the sixteenth to the nineteenth century, Russia built an empire, which was marked by territorial continuity and incorporated European and Asian regions into its sphere of domination that were both densely and sparsely populated and had the common feature of acting as bridges between a Russian world in the process of consolidation and unequally wealthy, powerful and ‘developed’ external worlds. In the twentieth century, the Soviet empire rediscovered the pivotal role of these borders and, moreover, the internationalist project that emerged in 1917 laid the groundwork for the establishment of a continental Eurasian identity. Remarkably, the pages devoted to Russia by Braudel echo the geopolitical tensions that have pervaded the contemporary Russian space since the 1990s, in particular when they are linked to the two reference spaces of Europe and the Russian-Soviet empire in its various historical extensions. We know that Braudel generated crucial impetus in terms of focusing attention for the first time on space and territory in the study of social and human phenomena. Based on the traditional interaction between history and geography, this enabled the French social sciences to play an important role in the innovative spatial turn movement. A considerable distance has been covered since then in the interdisciplinary consideration of territorial factors in the field of public policies – international relations, economics, urbanism, migration etc. The work done on the historical and cultural dynamics of territorialization by the Cluster of Excellence ‘Territorial and Spatial Dynamics’ (LabEx DynamiTe), to which the three authors of this introduction belong, is evidence of this. It is in this context that this project involving a collective examination of the question of the Russian territory both in the light of recent research and from a long-term perspective emerged. In view of its key role in the economic and diplomatic relations between the East and West, this territory is considered a place of both integration and opening. The articles that bookend this publication set out to situate the Russian space and its relationship with the world in the modern period in an epistemological context spanning both geography and history as written about since the 1960s.
The paper presents a comparative analysis of colonization activities in Siberia and America; nonetheless, alongside the traditional aspects and approaches (frontier theory, civilizational approach, etc.), the communication pattern of territorial expansion on the part of scholars, entrepreneurs and states represents an independent research objective. The conclusion is drawn as regards the fact that, impartially speaking, Siberia was not along the lines of the colonization processes for the European countries during the so-called Age of Exploration, except for the resource exploitation of the new territories. However, in order to implement the current domestic and foreign policy projects, the principal subjects of communications of the 16th – 17th centuries create in their messages a different image of Siberia, i.e. annexed in the name of the ‘Christian mission’ and in line with the European paradigm of colonization of the ‘rogue barbarians’
Studying the Russian Arctic: the experience of political analysis
Arctic and North, 2016
The authors discuss the main directions of the political science study of the issues of development of northern regions of the country, the theoretical and applied research in the field of strategic management processes of spatial and territorial development of the North and the Russian Arctic. Key areas of political studies on the management of these processes are systematized and summarized, the main external and internal issues of the Arctic and subarctic regions of the country are analized, connected with the quality of the political process control systems of their spatial and social development. The mechanisms of accounting of interests of key actors in the North of Russia are investigated, recommendations for improving process of control mechanisms of spatial and social development of the northern regions of the country are given. The researchers specify the development of a new paradigm of considering the North and the Russian Arctic, involving the recognition of the value of the northern territories, not only as a resource base of the country, but mostly as social formations.
Siberian regional policy: the past and modern problems
Studies of the Industrial Geography Commission of the Polish Geographical Society, 2012
The regional development of Siberia faces some difficulties nowadays and they are thought to be the result of historical development. According to American authors, Clifford Gaddy and Fiona Hill (“The Siberian Curse”), as well as some Russian scientists, such problems stem from the period of Soviet abusive colonization of Siberia, or even earlier – from the period of monarchy. But it is essentially hard to realize the situation of Siberia from the perspective of Moscow, let alone from abroad. It is also difficult to imagine the huge differences in territorial proportions, contrasts in Siberian regions, and distances between cities. So it is not acceptable to use non-geographical, dot methods in solving regional problems of Siberia. In fact, the regional problems are very complicated and multilateral, and we should study them with an open mind. Development of Siberia, the Eastern and Northern territories, was not something special in Soviet times. It was based on the whole country la...