Russia [antikvár]

Introduction Rîis' was the victim of Rossiia Georgii Gachev If this book were in Russian, the title would contain two distinct epithets: nisskii for the people and rossiiskii for the empire. The first derives from Riis\ the word customarily employed to denote the Kievan state and the Muscovite one in its early years. The second comes from Rossiia, a Latinized version probably first used in Poland, which penetrated to Muscovy in the sixteenth century and became common currency in the seventeenth - precisely during the time when the empire was being founded and extended.' In that way the Russian language reflects the fact that there are two kinds of Russianness, one connected with the people, the language and the pre-imperial principalities, the other with the territory, the multi-national empire, the European great power. Usage is not absolutely consistent, but any Russian will acknowledge that there is a considerable difference in tonality and association between the two words. Rus' is humble, homely, sacred and definitely feminine (the poet Alexander Blok called her 'my wife'); Rossiia grandiose, cosmopolitan, secular and, pace grammarians, masculine. The culmr-ologist Georgii Gachev has dramatized the distinction: 'Rossiia is the fate of Rus\ Rossiia is attraction, ideal and service - but also abyss and perdition. Rossiia uprooted the Russian people, enticed them away fi-om Rus\ transformed the peasant into a soldier, an organiser, a boss, but no longer a husbandman.'^ The theme of this book is how Rossiia obstructed the flowering of Rus\ or if you prefer it, how the building of an empire impeded the formation of a nation. So my story concerns above all the Russians. There have been many books in recent years about the non-Russian peoples of the empire, and the problems of dieir national develop- xix