Eurasian mentality: Siberian aspect

The article emphasizes that Eurasianism was not only a process of cooperation of peoples in the region, but also the cooperation result. So, the Eurasianism may be defined as the synthesis of diachronous cultural phenomena ofpolyethnic communities, with both European and Asian origin, as a result of latitudinal migrations from East to West and vice versa as well. Together with the population, cultural elements and social institutions were transferred directly or indirectly, which were fixed in the population of the region, taking over time mental forms that manifest themselves in the form of feelings, preferences, values, i.e., unconscious principles of the structure of society, attitudes to power, land, and the perception of "others" who are different in lifestyle and religion. The Russians found in Siberia the forms of administrative-tax formations familiar to them from the Horde experience, a functioning system of tributary relations that existed among the local population long before the territories beyond the Urals fell into the sphere of Moscow's influence. The Siberian authorities did not change the nature and order of relations with their new subjects. Russians of the 17th century and the Siberian peoples (with rare exceptions - the Chukchi, Koryaks) spoke the same political language, possessed similar traits of mentality, while Siberia was presented as a huge multitude of uluses with their unagan-bagols, i.e. ethnic groups of aborigines, which were subordinated to Russian cities. Moscow used another principle of relations with the peoples of Siberia, which was also the result of a rethinking of the Horde heritage, which consisted in the minimum interference of the Russian authorities in the internal affairs of the aboriginal society, in its social structure and way of life. Another Eurasian feature of the Russian state and the mentality of Russians was the absence of ethnic, cultural or religious xenophobia, the ability to perceive someone else's life experience and, if necessary, use it, for which there are examples in Russian-Siberian ethnography. No less interesting is the fact that the multi-ethnic, multi-confessional, multi-cultural picture of the Russian state was not reflected by its population. There is no term in the Russian language that would define the specifics of interethnic relations. Relations between people of different ethnic groups were as natural as the change in Russian landscapes, which did not cause the need for reflection.

Keywords

Authors

References