In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Diffuziia evropeiskikh innovatsii v Rossii (XVIII-nachalo XX v.) [The Diffusion of European Innovations in Russia (from the 18th to the Early 20th Century)]
  • Marc Raeff
Elena Veniaminovna Alekseeva , Diffuziia evropeiskikh innovatsii v Rossii (XVIII–nachalo XX v.) [The Diffusion of European Innovations in Russia (from the 18th to the Early 20th Century)]. 368 pp. Moscow: Rosspen, 2007. ISBN 582430811X.

When Empress Catherine II famously proclaimed that "Russia is a European power," she also stated that Peter I's goal of associating Russia with Western and Central Europe had been reached. From then until the outbreak of World War I, this remained the undisputable fact of the Western world. Between 1914 and the late 1980s, however, Russia, relabeled the Soviet Union, again found itself cut off from the West (although it dominated East Central Europe). Today we still remember that from the mid-1930s to about 1956, an "iron curtain" separated Russia from the outside world in pretty much impenetrable fashion. Moreover, the Soviet government, relentlessly and vociferously, pursued the belittling, nay denying, of foreign, especially Western, contributions to the cultural and economic development of Russia throughout its history. Under the impact of the disintegration of the Soviet system, however, Russia once more opened up to the outside world, and the distorted image of its history had to be revised. In the book under review, the author has set herself the task of restoring the historiographic balance by illustrating the crucial role played by what she terms the "diffusion" of foreign innovations in the modernization (or Westernization) of the public facets of Russian life.

In the pursuit of this laudable didactic purpose, Alekseeva gives a survey of the channels and processes by which foreign innovations were spread to Russia, illustrating their impact on the "modernization" of its political-administrative structures and its economic and scientific development. The period considered stretches from the last quarter of the 17th century to the outbreak of World War I. Roughly the first half of this period was marked by Russia's preeminently passive reception, while in the second Russia increasingly asserted its active participation, nay its own contribution, to the ongoing development and expansion of "modernity" over the globe. Let me first give a succinct synopsis chapter by chapter, to be followed by some critical remarks on the whole work.

The opening chapter deals with the channels by which Europe's (throughout the book Europe is primarily represented by England, Holland, and the [End Page 457] Germanies) innovations penetrated into Muscovy and imperial Russia. Quite correctly, I think, the author first gives a chronological overview of the approximate numbers and socio-cultural categories of Russians who traveled abroad (either by imperial order or voluntarily) to acquire knowledge and practices. We are treated to the well-known avatars experienced by the young men sent by Peter I and told of the rather limited impact they subsequently often had on their homeland. There follows a chronology of the cohorts of Russians going abroad to perfect their skills. The focus is on scientists and scholars, exclusive of all arts. But it might have been also appropriate to distinguish more clearly between those who were state-sponsored and those (increasingly more numerous over the course of the 19th century) who went on their own. A second section sketches the parallel channels by which foreigners came to Russia, temporarily or permanently, to promote innovations and build careers by actively participating in the enterprises and institutions established to that effect. In a third section of the first chapter the author offers a brief overview of the participation of members of the imperial family, in first place the reigning sovereigns, in spreading European practices in administration, science and technology, and culture to their domain. Their positive contributions (acknowledged openly after a long period of silence and denial) were, however, balanced against the restrictions on foreign travel imposed by the fear of the ideas and practices that might subvert the autocracy. Finally, a very superficial description of the role of print (books and journals) concludes the chapter.

As is well known, during the period covered by the book, Russia remained a centralized, bureaucratic autocracy. State administration was the inevitable institutional...

pdf

Share