MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY OF INSTRUMENT MAKING AND INFORMATION
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
Test base of the discipline
"Story"
MOSCOW 2012
Compiled by: candidate of historical sciences, associate professor Bespyatova E.B. Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor Gusarova M.N.
The test base covers all sections of the educational basic course "History". Recommended for intermediate and final testing of students' knowledge.
Test base for the training course "National History" for students of technical specialties / Moscow State University of Instrument Engineering and Informatics; Comp.: Bespyatova E.B., Gusarova M.N. M., 2012, 133 p.
Topic 1. Patterns and main stages of historical development. four
Topic 2 . Kievan Rus in the context of the European history of the Middle Ages. ten
Topic 3. Formation of the Russian centralized state. Formation of autocracy 27
Topic 4. Russia at the beginning of the New Age. "Time of Troubles" of the Moscow state. 40
Topic 5. Age of enlightenment. Russian Empire in the 18th century. 47
TOPIC 6. The Russian empire on the way to an industrial society. Features of the industrial revolution in Russia. Social thought and social movements in Russia in the 19th century. 60
Topic 7. Socio-economic modernization and evolution of state power in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. 73
Topic 8. The revolutionary crisis in Russia in 1917 81
Topic 9. Soviet Russia: models of socialist construction. 90
Topic 10. Origins, main stages, consequences of the crisis of international relations in the first half of the twentieth century. 99
Topic 11. The Soviet Union in the post-war period. Scientific and technological revolution and its influence on the course of social development. 113
Topic 12. Modern Russia. 125
Topic 1. Patterns and main stages of historical development
The subject of national history. Functions of historical knowledge: cognitive and intellectual development, ideological and educational. Sources for the study of history. Methods and methodology of studying history, alternativeness and multivariance in historical science.
Unity and diversity of the world-historical process. Approaches to the study of history: stadial and civilizational.
The historical process and the problem of choosing the paths of development. Man and history. Unity and diversity of mankind. The problem of the typology of history. Civilization as an integral social system. Major world civilizations. Types of historical development and their characteristics. Interaction and mutual influence of types of historical development. Growing interdependence of the world. Problems of periodization of world history. The main stages of the world-historical process. Typology and periodization of history as a means of identifying patterns of development.
The problem of the place and role of Russia in world history. Features of the path of Russia: geographical, natural-climatic, social, cultural-religious and other factors. The problem of choosing the path of development. Russia is an organic part of world history.
a) Polybius;
b) Tacitus;
c) Herodotus
2. What is the name of the main historical work of Herodotus?
a) "History"
b) "The Narrative of the Peloponnesian War"
a) Eusebius of Caesarea (late III - early 1Uv.)
b) Thucydides (late rev. BC)
c) Tacitus (c.55-c.120)
4. Establish a correspondence between the function of historical knowledge and its definition
a) cognitive foresight of the future
b) predictive pattern detection
historical development
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY OF INSTRUMENT MAKING AND INFORMATION
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
Test base of the discipline
"Story"
MOSCOW 2012
Compiled by: candidate of historical sciences, associate professor Bespyatova E.B. Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor Gusarova M.N.
The test base covers all sections of the educational basic course "History". Recommended for intermediate and final testing of students' knowledge.
Test base for the training course "National History" for students of technical specialties / Moscow State University of Instrument Engineering and Informatics; Comp.: Bespyatova E.B., Gusarova M.N. M., 2012, 133 p.
Topic 1. Patterns and main stages of historical development. four
Topic 2. Kievan Rus in the context of the European history of the Middle Ages. ten
Topic 3. Formation of the Russian centralized state. Formation of autocracy 27
Topic 4. Russia at the beginning of the New Age. "Time of Troubles" of the Moscow state. 40
Topic 5. Age of enlightenment. Russian Empire in the 18th century. 47
TOPIC 6. The Russian empire on the way to an industrial society. Features of the industrial revolution in Russia. Social thought and social movements in Russia in the 19th century. 60
Topic 7. Socio-economic modernization and evolution of state power in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. 73
Topic 8. The revolutionary crisis in Russia in 1917 81
Topic 9. Soviet Russia: models of socialist construction. 90
Topic 10. Origins, main stages, consequences of the crisis of international relations in the first half of the twentieth century. 99
Topic 11. The Soviet Union in the post-war period. Scientific and technological revolution and its influence on the course of social development. 113
Topic 1. Patterns and main stages of historical development
The subject of national history. Functions of historical knowledge: cognitive and intellectual development, ideological and educational. Sources for the study of history. Methods and methodology of studying history, alternativeness and multivariance in historical science.
Unity and diversity of the world-historical process. Approaches to the study of history: stadial and civilizational.
The historical process and the problem of choosing the paths of development. Man and history. Unity and diversity of mankind. The problem of the typology of history. Civilization as an integral social system. Major world civilizations. Types of historical development and their characteristics. Interaction and mutual influence of types of historical development. Growing interdependence of the world. Problems of periodization of world history. The main stages of the world-historical process. Typology and periodization of history as a means of identifying patterns of development.
The problem of the place and role of Russia in world history. Features of the path of Russia: geographical, natural-climatic, social, cultural-religious and other factors. The problem of choosing the path of development. Russia is an organic part of world history.
a) Polybius;
b) Tacitus;
c) Herodotus
2. What is the name of the main historical work of Herodotus?
a) "History"
b) "The Narrative of the Peloponnesian War"
a) Eusebius of Caesarea (late III - early 1Uv.)
b) Thucydides (late rev. BC)
c) Tacitus (c.55-c.120)
4. Establish a correspondence between the function of historical knowledge and its definition
a) cognitive foresight of the future
b) predictive pattern detection
historical development
History is like a meat pate: it is better not to look at how it is prepared.
Aldous Huxley
V. O. Klyuchevsky in his first lecture gives the following definition of the historical process:
“... Everything that happens in time has its own history. The content of history as a separate science, a special branch of scientific knowledge is the historical process, that is, the course, conditions and successes of human community or the life of mankind in its development and results. Human cohabitation is the same fact of world existence as the life of the nature around us, and the scientific knowledge of this fact is the same unavoidable need of the human mind, as is the study of the life of this nature. Human community is expressed in various human unions, which can be called historical bodies, and which arise, grow and multiply, pass one into another and, finally, are destroyed - in a word, they are born, live and die like organic bodies of nature. The emergence, growth and change of these unions by the very conditions and consequences of their life is what we call historical process ».
A very correct observation! But how does this process of development of complex social systems proceed - ethnic, power, military, scientific and others, which Klyuchevsky called here "historical bodies"? It proceeds gradually, i.e. "by steps", through a constant change of two stages.
At the first, the variety of possible solutions grows: there are many interpretations of certain phenomena (if we are talking about science), or various rules of trade, or a large - in any case, an excessive number of options for using different types of troops in battle. This first stage (conditionally the first, because the two stages are equal) is necessary to search for new development opportunities.
At the second stage, one of the options is singled out, which later, with a change in conditions or the appearance of new models of technology (which itself develops in the same “two-step” way), is again divided. These two types of self-organization alternate, and each prepares the conditions for the other, and this is how the evolution of all systems, subsystems and structures of society takes place.
There is a time to collect stones and a time to scatter stones. There is nothing to scatter without collecting. And vice versa.
It is impossible to "jump" over one stage or another; there will be chaos and degradation of the entire system. A complete analogy is the movement of a person on two legs. You can’t go all the time with one “left” one, you will fall. And such development proceeds, as was noted long before us, from the lowest to the highest, from the simple to the complex.
These considerations, being applied not only to the history of Russia, but also to world history, allow us to draw some conclusions. First of all, to show the unreliability of the so-called "history of the ancient world." In this light, it looks either entirely invented, or “placed” on the time scale, not where it should be. This was very well illustrated by G. D. Kostylev in his work “Military-historical jokes” (Materials of the VII International Conference on the Problems of Civilization, M., 2003, pp. 20–52). Take from this article, for example, the history of the fleet.
From the point of view of traditional history, not until our days, but even before our era, the harmonious and perfect tactics of the naval forces were used by the ancient Greeks. It is impossible to trace the development of this tactic from its beginning to brilliant victories, and yet the Greeks successfully used it first against the Persians, and then against each other, either in the Peloponnesian War or in the continuous quarrels of the epigones of Alexander the Great. Then the ancient Romans went to sea. They began to master this tactic as if from scratch, but then they also perfectly mastered the art of war at sea, already practiced by the Greeks.
Then, for some reason, the era of the gloomy Middle Ages came, and the noble concept of naval tactics was completely lost. Starting again from scratch, European naval commanders only with the advent of the Renaissance, having read Plutarch and Suetonius, began to use some simple tactics.
So, at sea, according to the views of historians, the dynamics of the development of methods of armed struggle is as follows (main milestones):
5th century BC e. The wise Themistocles, who just yesterday was talking his tongue in the agora (simply a politician, not a naval commander at all), confidently commands a fleet of 370 (!) ships against 800 (!!) Persian ones, maneuvers this way and that, deftly smashes the Persians and returns to Athens all in white and in wreaths.
3rd century BC e. The Roman consuls Gaius Duilius and Mark Attilius Regulus in the battle at Cape Ecnom command 330 ships against 250 of the Carthaginians. The detachments cunningly maneuver, go to the rear, crush the flanks, the battle is in full swing, the Carthaginians are defeated, the winners are in triumphal purple.
1st century BC e. In the battle at Cape Actium, 260 ships of Octavian and Agrippa against 170 ships of Antony and Cleopatra. Octavian's victory. What unites these battles? Firstly, the main type of warship of all participants: the trireme (trireme). Secondly, the ways of causing damage to the enemy. The entire ancient world, it turns out, widely used at the stage of approaching the enemy a variety of throwing machines, all sorts of ballista-catapults, threw stones and pots of burning oil at the enemy. Then, converging on the minimum distance, he strove to strike with a ram - a stem bound with copper on the side of an enemy ship, and, finally, having lost speed and the ability to maneuver, he fell down with the enemy on boarding. And the third (which, as you will now see, distinguishes all these battles from the medieval ones) is the excellent organization and confident management of squadrons, numbering two or three hundred ships. This is the most amazing! According to G. D. Kostylev: “Squadrons converge, disperse, maneuver, retreat, advance, bypass the flanks, rush to help their injured units - in a word, they act as if every skipper has at least a cellular radiotelephone in the bosom of his tunic” . In general, Greco-Roman and, in general, ancient sailors demonstrate an unusually high, without any quotes, naval class. On the eve of the “Renaissance era”, the picture is completely different: we see not a revival, but simply the birth of naval science.
XIV century AD. Hundred Years War, Naval Battle of Sluys. The French ships anchor under the shore, the English fleet descends on them downwind, and the classic, unfussy hand-to-hand combat begins. No maneuvers! No catapults! No rams! A simple, unpretentious meat grinder. Apparently, the English "marines" in the course of training were engaged in fencing and boxing more diligently than the Gauls, and poured them hard.
XV-XVII centuries. The era of the most intense confrontation between Christian Europe and the Arab-Turkish world, as well as continuous internecine wars of European powers with each other, including, and first of all, in the Mediterranean Sea. The picture is the same as for the previous hundred years! Here is the classic of the rowing fleet - 1571, the battle of Lepanto: 209 Christian ships against 296 Muslim ones. How do they fight? And so: the squadrons perform the simplest maneuvers of the “forward!” type, on approach they fire at each other from arquebuses and falconets in order, if possible, to thin out the ranks of enemy soldiers, and then - the good old boarding meat grinder. No maneuvers! No rams! We are not talking about catapults, because they have given way to bombards.
And here is the year 1588, the battle of Gravelines, as they call in English historiography a whole series of battles between the British fleet and the "Great Armada" of the Spaniards. This is truly a landmark battle. For the first time, the dubious romance of hand-to-hand combat, as a means of achieving victory, gave way to the no less dubious romance of an artillery duel. But this did not make the battle more beautiful: small detachments and individual ships converge under the pressure of the wind, as God puts it per soul, and from the same soul they thrash each other with cannonballs and buckshot within their fire capabilities.
Well, where is the consistent development of naval technology and tactics in this story? There are none, but there is only one jump from the best to none, and then to the worst. One could believe if history showed us such a phenomenon at the local level: say, the Greeks, having defeated the Romans, would have signed with them some ancient Treaty of Versailles, limiting the rights of the Romans to use the fleet. But the progressive development of military science has stopped EVERYWHERE! This contradicts all the laws of evolution, and looks like complete absurdity.
We confine ourselves to this small example, and return to the consideration of the laws of "step by step" evolution. Of course, reality has always been much more complex than it is described in our scheme. We must also take into account "branching", when several processes were going on in parallel in different areas of human activity, and each of them was in a different phase of evolution; and often development proceeded in different places along different trajectories. This, by the way, explains why the cultures of peoples are so strikingly different - they arose as a result of similar processes, but under different conditions.
And for each period in the history of each people of any territory, we can find the current (that is, the studied) moment culture, which represents the whole complex of community survival techniques: production and everyday rules, morality and ethics, language and beliefs, hierarchy and art. It seems that the following words of V. O. Klyuchevsky are about this:
“The historical process is revealed in the phenomena of human life, the news of which has been preserved in historical monuments or sources. These phenomena are boundlessly diverse, they concern international relations, the external and internal life of individual peoples, the activities of individuals among one or another people. All these phenomena add up to a great struggle in life, which humanity has waged and is waging, striving for the goals that it has set for itself. From this struggle, which is constantly changing its methods and character, however, something more solid and stable is deposited: it is a certain everyday order, a system of human relations, interests, concepts, feelings, mores. People hold on to the established order until the continuous movement of the historical drama replaces it with another. In all these changes, the historian is occupied with two main subjects, which he tries to discern in the undulating stream of historical life as it is reflected in the sources. The accumulation of experiences, knowledge, needs, habits, everyday comforts, improving, on the one hand, the private personal life of an individual, and on the other, establishing and improving social relations between people - in a word, the development of a person and human community - such is one subject of historical study. The degree of this development reached by one or another people is usually called its culture or civilization; the features by which historical study determines this degree constitute the content of a special branch of historical knowledge, the history of culture, or civilization. Another subject of historical observation is the nature and action of historical forces that build human societies, the properties of those diverse threads, material and spiritual, with the help of which random and diverse human units with a fleeting existence are formed into harmonious and dense societies that live for whole centuries. The historical study of the structure of society, the organization of human unions, the development and functions of their individual organs - in a word, the study of the properties and action of the forces that create and direct human society, constitutes the task of a special branch of historical knowledge, the science of society, which can also be distinguished from the general historical study under name of historical sociology. Its essential difference from the history of civilization is that the content of the latter is the results of the historical process, while in the former, the forces and means of achieving it, so to speak, its kinetics, are subject to observation. According to the difference in subjects, the methods of study are also not the same.
And yet, no matter how different these “subjects” are - historical sociology and the history of civilization, what science turned out as a result can be safely called nothing more than political historiography formalized in a literary form. "The accumulation of experiences, knowledge, needs, habits, everyday conveniences, improving, on the one hand, the private personal life of an individual, and on the other, establishing and improving social relations between people", - writes Klyuchevsky. And where is the "accumulation of knowledge"? where is the "relationship improvement"? - the traditional division of history into great antiquity, the "dark ages" and the naive Middle Ages shows nothing of this. Something is not right!
But the fact is that building history on the basis of almost exclusively written sources, without taking into account the laws of evolution, without the use of natural science disciplines - which are used only for confirmation versions, not for them nominations, are obviously doomed to error. This is exactly what we started our book with, writing in the preface that people leave written evidence of the era, but make notes about what is happening to the best of their understanding of events. And this itself understanding goes its own way of evolution, and if we consider that among the written evidence there are simply fictions, then things become very bad. Can future historians deal with the past if they are based on completely different ideas about the world, and cannot understand where is “evidence” and where is a work of art?
But there is another side of the matter: the incompleteness of information. Igor Litvin writes:
“A feature of oral and written speech is that people convey an incomplete description of objects and events, but only their difference from generally accepted ( in their time, - Auth.) images and stereotypes. For example, if one friend tells another in a letter that she is getting married and has already bought a dress, this does not mean that she did not have dresses before. Moreover, she does not try to state the essence of the concept of “getting married” in a letter. The exchange of so much information between people will not survive either regular or e-mail. People communicate to each other only a kind of code that activates one of the already established traditional images in the recipient. Thus, in order to convey the differences between the new image and the traditional one, it is enough to provide a minimum of clarifying details ( and historians are already “molding” an image of the past from them, - Auth.). Perhaps a mathematician reading these lines will exclaim: the selection of a change in magnitude and the inverse transformation is akin to the mathematical operation of differentiation, followed by integration. But with such a transformation, information about the constant component is lost, in our case - basic information about the mentality of the ancestors, their stereotypes of perception, in accordance with which the messages of the chroniclers were written and perceived. It is this lost information about the fundamental concepts of antiquity that interests us. Unfortunately, it has to be restored based on the description of minor details: the amount of oats eaten by horses and the size of clay shards. Perhaps experts in the applied theory of coding and restoration of information arrays will be able to make their contribution to history.”
Let some event happened recently, several decades ago, but due to changes in concepts and even geographical names, a representative of a new generation of people can make a mistake. When studying old documents, mistakes are generally inevitable; our contemporary perceives them on the basis of new ideas, and not from those concepts that the chronicler expected to possess. After all, the chroniclers assumed that their readers would have knowledge that basically coincided with the knowledge and ideas of them, the chroniclers. But centuries later, this does not happen, and now, historians (whose ideas have also changed century by century) have jointly created a very mythologized description of the past, and there is no one to catch them by the hand, due to the complete absence of people with “old” ideas.
Over the past three hundred years, many thinkers around the world have expressed doubts about the veracity of such a story. One of the most interesting and serious critics is our compatriot, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov (1854–1946). His multi-volume work "The History of Mankind in the Natural Science Illumination" exceeds 5 thousand pages; the scientist gave him more than forty years of life. The work is better known under the name "Christ" - this name was proposed by publishers in the 1920s. In this work, Morozov, on the basis of various scientific methods, gives a new periodization of ancient and medieval history. And we will pay attention to the original name: the scientist undertook the work of exposing traditional history as mythical, using the knowledge and methods of natural sciences for this.
N. A. Morozov had predecessors: Isaac Newton (1643–1737), who worked hard to correct the chronology; Henry Buckle (1821–1862), who wrote history from geographical determinism, and others. By the way, Morozov also notes the inevitability of the appearance of fakes, which should “reinforce” the prevailing versions of history:
“From a psychological point of view, it is quite understandable that it is almost unthinkable for a seeker of rare documents, who made the most distant journey for them at a huge cost of his own time and often other people's funds, if he is not a hero of virtue, to return home with nothing, especially when the heads of his compatriots, like himself at the beginning of the journey, were filled with fantasies about the piles of ancient debris and all sorts of cuneiform inscriptions lying there at almost every step. And who will believe it if, on returning, he announces that there are even fewer of them than in his homeland, where you can also dig the earth in different places all your life and still not find anything particularly sensational? The temptation to fake something out of desperation is almost irresistible here. That is why it is necessary to strictly distinguish the learned historian from the collector of raw historical materials. These are two completely different categories of people and each category has a completely different mental hardening. Collectors are always prone to adventurism, and are not averse to mystifying on occasion, while the latter, especially very narrow specialists who find it difficult to make broad generalizations, are often too gullible, especially since history, as a serious science, is looking for in the apparent chaos of historical phenomena of natural causality and evolutionary regularity, has arisen only since the publication in 1858 of Thomas Buckle's brilliant book "The History of Civilization in England". It is true that the first attempts of this kind were made by Voltaire in the second half of the 18th century and partly by Auguste Comte in the first half of the 19th century. But for the first time, Bockl stepped on the natural-scientific and factual ground, and therefore the real “historical science” has to begin only with him, and this study of mine is only a superstructure of the research laid down by Bockle.
Now we must go further. Not only the exposure of official history, which should be called politicized historiography, but also the construction of a truly scientific history of mankind, based on all the data of the natural sciences - this is the task facing science. Such work does not in the least detract from the role of historians, archaeologists, paleographers, etc. On the contrary, a colossal field of activity opens up for them to create precisely scientific discipline history, free from any ideological attitudes. Also, we must not forget that the development of civilization, or culture, with all the need to take into account: whether there is or not resource for such development. A resource is not only the material capabilities of a particular area, but also such human qualities as intelligence (the ability to understand how a resource can be used) and experience (accumulated by society examples of applying intelligence to a resource).
Transitions from phase to phase, or "jumps" on this path of resource development are clearly visible in the technical progress of mankind - they are only slightly obscured by the mythical "antiquity". Let us recall again the history of the development of the navy, and such a phenomenon as the use of catapults. According to the currently accepted version of history, various catapults, arcballists, doribols, onagers and other stone-throwing devices towered like batteries on the decks of ancient galleys. They fired at enemy ships with both cobblestones and pointed stakes and pots with "Greek fire".
The catapults are said to have been mounted on deck. Which one? The design feature of the galley is just the absence of a clean deck, with the exception of small areas in the bow and stern - forecastle and poop. And the catapult is a spreading structure, it has a lot of long moving parts. Let's say we still managed to squeeze onto the tank and ut one at a time (it won't fit anymore). What will happen next? We read G. D. Kostylev:
“Suppose we loaded the catapult with a pound of cobblestone and heroically fired! And where did we get? I answer: a finger to the sky. 102% guarantee, all our cobblestones will either stick with force into the water right at the side, or helplessly tumble in the sky. The one who invented all this simply never went to sea on a small, by today's standards, vessel. Notice I'm not talking about rowing anymore - to hell with it, just go out to sea. What is the difference between a deck and a city square? That's right, she swings all the time. All the time and any. The smaller the ship, the more noticeable the pitching. Calm as a mirror, the sea is extremely rare. You can devote your whole life to the sea and not meet such a phenomenon. The absence / presence of wind does not play a role: it is quiet here - it means that it is storming somewhere, and the waves from there (swell) will roll here and roll our galley from side to side. And someone thinks that in such conditions, with such aiming devices (without them at all), it is possible to hit a moving target from a moving platform ?! Even with the advent of artillery, accurate shooting of a ship against a ship remained a difficult task, and only ... - when would you think? - to World War II, with the creation of gyroscopic stabilizers for fire control devices. But, let's say, a miracle happened: our cobblestone hit the side of the enemy quadrireme. What will happen? But nothing. It will just bounce, another 102% guarantee ... "
Now it becomes clear how it could actually be. With the invention of heavy stone-throwing devices, many types of catapults appeared, as it should be at the "first stage". But, firstly, it was difficult to use them in the navy, and secondly, in the wake of such inventions, another stone-throwing device appeared, only it threw a stone not with the elasticity of twisted veins, but with a blow of gunpowder - a cannon. Therefore, it is quite possible to agree with the conclusion of G. D. Kostylev:
“... there have never been any catapults on warships, and culverins, bombards and falconets are the FIRST weapons of increased power adopted by the fleet. And before that? And everything is the same: a bow, a sling, a spear and a sword.
…People find new raw materials, or come up with new technical devices. This is the "first" stage of evolution. Then comes the time to accumulate experience in the use of any natural (raw materials, materials) and human (knowledge, technology) resource. This is the "second" stage, when there is an evolving replication of products. Experience leads to new discoveries and inventions, a period of development of a new resource (or a new quality of an already known resource) begins. This is how a new technology is born, a technical revolution takes place, which brings civilization to a qualitatively higher level. Evolving replication begins again, and so on.
Moreover, as already mentioned, it is necessary to take into account (and this is very difficult) that in different places on the earth there is a different set of resources, and their development takes place with a different sequence. It is because of this that we have such different types of civilization on the planet.
Without taking into account the laws of natural evolution of systems, without understanding the significance of resource provision, by the 20th century, all traditional history, based almost exclusively on the study of written texts, turned into a collection of ill-dated myths. History turned out to be completely divorced from the actual existence of specific communities of people on a specific planet, with specific natural conditions on the ground.
How can one distinguish, classify and describe the patterns of the historical process, the very thing that G.Yu. Lyubarsky well called “ morphology of history"? Just like any morphology - with m oshchi comparative method. Thus, phylogeneticists single out sequences of stages that form aromorphic changes in organization (during the transition from diapsid reptiles to birds, from synapsid reptiles to mammals), analyzing bundles of parallel lines of development passing through the same stages in independent phylogenetic branches. This process is called theriodont mammalization, ornithization of sauropod dinosaurs (angiospermization of gymnosperms, for example) and is a rule of macroevolutionary change.
Something similar (of the same type?) is found in history. Instead of unique events and inimitable changes in history, we see a series of developmental processes of the same type, decisive the same problem in several different countries located nearby and / or similar typologically (similar in the natural appearance of the problem solved by this development process).
The emerging procedural homology is striking - against the background of sharp cultural, linguistic, civilizational, etc. differences between countries changing in parallel in different "lines" of one "bundle of stories". A good example is the parallel development of Bolshevik Russia and Menshevik Georgia, going through the same stages of establishing a one-party dictatorship, ousting revolutionaries, first by specialists, then by bureaucrats, etc.
Here is how it describes Theodor Shanin the process of political transformation in Georgia, which the leader of the Mensheviks Noah Zhordania considered his socialist revolution and defended as fiercely as the Bolsheviks defended theirs ( Revolution as the moment of truth, M.: Ves Mir, 1997).
In the course of 1917 Zhordania attacked the policy of the Mensheviks in Petrograd more and more fiercely. To September 1917 he demanded an end to the government coalition with the Cadets, spoke in favor of an "active struggle" for peace and a "deepening of the Revolution" as the only way to respond to the Bolshevik challenge.
When news came of anotherrevolution, the authorities of Transcaucasia refused to recognize the new Bolshevik regime and created their own government - Transcaucasian Commissariat and Parliament, in order to maintain control "until the Constitutional Assembly has full power over all of Russia." The Commissariat and the Soviet Regional Center faced a series of splits and many conflicting forces.
In the course of the new elections to the Soviets of Soldiers' Deputies, the Bolsheviks and the Left SRs received a slight majority. Following this soldier's advice(in which the Russians were the majority) declared their support for Lenin's government. Red Guard of Tiflis, i.e. Menshevik workers' militia, then seized the city arsenal from the soldiers who guarded it, and used weapons to establish control of the Menshevik workers' councils and their leading party over Georgia. In Baku, at that time, the conflict escalated into fierce street battles, during which a coalition of Bolsheviks, Socialist-Revolutionaries, and Armenian nationalist Dashnaks defeated the Muslim militia, forming a new body of power - the Council, which from February 1917 was chaired by Shaumyan - a Bolshevik, whom Lenin appointed Extraordinary Commissar of Transcaucasia.
In various parts of Georgia, local governments arose almost daily. The army, which was on the Turkish front, was returning home, and trains full of soldiers moved through the Transcaucasus towards Russia, colliding along the way with local authorities and armed detachments. The Bolsheviks tried to use some of these units to take control of Georgia, but this did not work, primarily due to decisive actions. Tiflis Soviet and its Red Guards.
In an incident that went down in history, armed Red Guards were used in February 1918 to put down a Bolshevik demonstration in Alexander Park in Tiflis, a reversed version of the events that took place on the same days in Petrograd.
Against the backdrop of this struggle for power, splits and strife, one of the nightmares of the Georgians and Armenians of Transcaucasia was gradually becoming a reality. The Turkish army went on the offensive, overcoming the little resistance it met on its way. Under the terms of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, concluded between the governments of Russia, Ukraine and Germany (Transcaucasia was not represented there), the cities of Kars and Batumi were transferred to Turkey. Negotiations continued, but the Turkish army moved further and further. The weak detachments of Georgian volunteers who had gathered to defend Batum were easily defeated by the Turkish troops. Azerbaijani pan-Islamic leaders called on the entire Transcaucasus to completely submit to Turkey. Panic and despondency intensified in the non-Muslim part of Transcaucasia.
In a situation where "every man for himself", the Georgian leaders acted more rapidly, choosing non-standard solutions. They called for German mediation in their conflict with Turkey. (Germany remained, of course, an ally of Turkey, but the two powers pursued different interests). On May 26, 1918, the independence of Georgia was proclaimed and the newly formed Georgian government called on the German army (which was then in Ukraine) to protect the country from further offensive by the Turks. In the next few months, the new government of the Georgian Republic, headed by Zhordania, acted on the territory of the country in the presence of the German army, which, however, did not interfere in its internal affairs (which was very different from how the Germans behaved in Ukraine). The Turkish offensive was finally stopped.
After the end of the First World War, the Germans were replaced by British military units. A new armed conflict began, this time between the Republic of Georgia and its British allies, on the one hand, and the Russian White Army, located in Sochi, for which the independence of Georgia was a scandalous betrayal, on the other. This conflict did not last long.
In 1919, Britain left the Transcaucasus, and the whites moved away from the borders of Georgia, but international relations continued to play an unusually important role in its existence. The country was at the center of conflicts and disputes with Turkey, independent Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Russian White Army now in the Crimea, the Russian Red Army, and many smaller groups. In addition, the territories that Georgia then controlled were inhabited by numerous "minorities", ethnic and religious - Ossetians, Adjarians, Abkhazians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis and Russians.
Inside the country in 1918-1921. the ongoing changes in the political and economic structure of Georgia made it possible to define the creed of its dominant political party. Jordania proclaimed agrarian reform. It passed immediately and was accompanied by very little resistance from the large landowners. As a result of the rapid agrarian reform, more than 1 million acres of arable land and 8 million acres of forests and pastures were nationalized. The 4,000 private estates located on these lands were expropriated without compensation. The maximum amount of land that one peasant farm can have was determined - 15 acres of land for grain or 7.5 for other crops. Some of these lands became the property of the state or regional authorities, but most of the arable land was immediately sold on credit to landless or land-poor sharecroppers. Nothing was done to support the collective economic elements of the agrarian communities.
The government also nationalized the mines (whichry provided the main export of the country), hydroelectric power plants, mineral water sources, ports and railways. By 1920, 52% of all employed people worked for the state, 28% worked in municipal or cooperative enterprises or organizations, and only 19% were employed by private owners. was announced state monopoly on international trade, aimed in particular at controlling the speculative income of Armenian merchants. And in this, as in many other issues of those days, nationalist and socialist goals and rhetoric were combined and mixed.
As for the newly formed authorities, after the February Revolution, democratically elected zemstvos appeared throughout Georgia. The control of the Russian bishop over the Georgian church was ended. In order to form a formal representation of ethnic minorities and meet their cultural and educational needs, experiments were carried out to create a National Council, which was close to the concept of extraterritorial " cultural autonomy" O. Boyer in Austria. Numerous trade unions and cultural associations arose.
The political influence of the Mensheviks was maintained throughout the period of Georgia's independence, as was the support of the National Front from the workers and peasants, who formed the core of the broad multi-class union "In Defense of the Motherland", under the leadership of an orthodox Marxist party. Subsequently, even the most loyal Bolsheviks recognized the firm support that the Georgian workers gave the Mensheviks. An interesting touch, judging by the results of the elections, the Mensheviks were stronger in the countryside. In the 1919 elections (which were also a de facto plebiscite on the announced reforms), the Georgian Mensheviks received 72% of the vote in the cities and 82% in the countryside, winning 109 out of 130 seats in the country's parliament. (The 32 deputies, classified as workers, all without exception called themselves Mensheviks.)
The power of the Jordania party was actually even greater than could be judged by the results of the elections. It completely dominated the trade unions, to a large extent - in the national economy and in most of the country's cultural and public organizations. In addition to the newly created Georgian army, the Red Guard continued to exist, which was later renamed the National Guard. It consisted mostly of Menshevik workers who continued to work in factories and was used as the main armed force of internal control.
When opposition - Bolsheviks and right, complained about the "Menshevik dictatorship", they had reason to do so, despite the fact that the ruling party undoubtedly enjoyed the clear support of the majority of the population. Its leaders were increasingly imbued with a sense of self-righteousness and arrogance. They suppressed, often mercilessly, the opposition of ethnic and political dissidents. Non-Georgians were treated with particular suspicion. The Bolsheviks were not allowed to operate legally for almost the entire period of independence. All this was combined with parliamentary subtleties and some truly democratic procedures.
In fact, there were definitely weak points in the process that the Georgian Mensheviks considered the revolutionary transformation of their society, carried out according to their plans and according to the recipes of their teachers in the field of theory. Here, of course, it is necessary to remember the difficult circumstances - the economic crisis accompanying the war and the loss of traditional markets and suppliers, pressure on the borders and upset finances. But at least three aspects reflected the specific political "line", the strategy adopted by the ruling party: the attitude towards the peasants, the "national question" and the state.
The peasants made up the majority of the electorate of the Georgian Mensheviks and ensured the stability of their rule, but in 1918-1921. it was hardly possible to find at least one Social Democrat among the peasants in parliament or in party bodies. Almost nothing was done to mobilize the peasantry politically or militarily.
On the contrary, the privatization of land, built on complete individualism and determined "from above" without the adoption and consideration of any collective and public projects, led to the political demobilization of the peasantry as a social force. In 1918-1921. nothing like the Red Guria of 1905-1907 arose in the Georgian Republic. and this had important consequences for the future fate of Georgia.
The peasant majority, which had remained loyal to the revolutionary leaders in 1903-1907, were told to stay at home, cultivate their land, go to the polls from time to time, and leave politics to the hegemonic classes of the "bourgeois historical stage". Anti-government actions of the inhabitants of some valleys (for example, in South Ossetia), connected both with ethnic conflicts and with the way social, political and economic issues were resolved, were suppressed by force.
As for the "national problem" both within and between states, Jordania initially called secession from Russia "the main calamity that befell us" and later tried to prevent the collapse of the Transcaucasian Federation. However, mobilization against external dangers was increasingly reflected in xenophobic policies towards Georgia's neighbors and local "minorities". Georgian nationalism, embellished with orthodox Marxist terms of "progress", "class interest", "necessary stage", was gaining strength. Georgia increasingly considered itself defensive rampart of Europe against Asian Russia and Turkey.
Inside the country, force was widely used to ethnically "appease" the highlanders of Ossetia, landowners of Adzharia, Azerbaijani townspeople, etc. (that is, in direct words, ethnic cleansing took place - Wolf Kitses). Ethnic mini-wars continued against Armenia and the Russian White Army for territories. Area Borshalo, where the Georgians were a clear minority in relation to the Armenians and Azerbaijanis, was simply occupied by the Georgian army.
Finally, there was "Statization" of the revolutionary authorities, as a result of which power passed from the Soviets to government agencies. The role of professional officers, employees and diplomats, most of them trained by the tsarist bureaucracy and indifferent or even hostile to the plans of the new regime, increased significantly. The political marginalization of the peasant majority, nationalism and the "stateization" of the political structure of Georgia increasingly merged and tore the Menshevik leadership from popular support, a revolutionary past and the ability to resolve even a serious crisis, calling for the mass actions of their supporters.
And such a crisis has come. By 1920, most of the Transcaucasus became part of Soviet Russia. In May 1920, the Georgian Bolsheviks rose in revolt and several units of the Red Army crossed the border, apparently intending to establish Bolshevik rule in Georgia. Government forces were able to repulse this offensive. Between two neighboring states - one huge and the other small - claiming on the same Marxist legacy and representing its only expression on the territory of the former Russian Empire, a peace treaty was concluded and diplomatic relations were established. But the period of peaceful coexistence did not last long.
In February 1921, a new uprising broke out in the Borchalo region. The rebels organized the Revolutionary Committee, which called for help from the Red Army. Under the command of Zhloba, one of the most famous cavalry commanders during the years of the civil war, the Red Army crossed the border in significant numbers and began to move rapidly towards Tiflis. The Georgian regular army turned out to be incapable of combat, and its commanders - devoid of fighting spirit. There was no attempt on their part to arm civilians. unleash stubborn resistance on the streets of the main cities, start a guerrilla war, or even begin a systematic boycott of the invaders - in a word, use the revolutionary experience and political loyalty of the population. After two weeks, on May 25, Tiflis was taken, and shortly thereafter, a document on the Georgian surrender was signed.
This did not put an end to the idiosyncrasies of Georgian Marxism. The end of the period of independence led to a confrontation in the leadership of the Bolshevik Party and became an important part of Lenin's last political battle in 1923-1924. Lenin's attitude towards this war, the first of its kind between "orthodox" Marxist governments, led to disagreement with his closest supporters, who included both Trotsky and Stalin. On May 29, 1921, Lenin ordered Ordzhonikidze (who had been sent from Moscow to oversee the Red Army and the political life of Georgia) "to look for an acceptable compromise for a bloc with Zhordania or similar Georgian Mensheviks, who even before the uprising were not absolutely hostile to the idea of a Soviet system in Georgia on well-known conditions." Further, Lenin continued: "Please remember that both the internal and international conditions of Georgia demand from the Russian communists not the use of the Russian template, but the skillful and flexible creation of original tactics." Ordzhonikidze did not listen.
Possibility com the promise was rejected by both the Georgian Bolsheviks and the Menshevik government, which preferred to emigrate" ( p.420-424).
Another interesting question - where is the homologue of the natural development of the February Revolution (if it had not been suppressed by the Kornilov rebellion and the Bolshevization of the Soviets, and the Bolsheviks could have been completely suppressed in July)? I think this is the history of Israel with its semi-socialist structure in one sector and a high degree of religious nationalism in another (the same split in society as in the spring and summer of 1917 in Russia). It was not for nothing that then in 1917 the United States so tried on “democratic Russia” as a potential ally in the east of Europe (which France had the Little Entente, England had the Baltic limitrophes). Israel became such an ally, and Russia - for a while - jumped off the hook.
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
"Story"
MOSCOW 2012
a) Polybius;
b) Tacitus;
c) Herodotus
What is the name of the main historical work of Herodotus?
a) "History"
b) "The Narrative of the Peloponnesian War"
c) "Annals"
Which of the Russian historians of the Х1Хв. believed that "the history of the people belongs to the king"?
a) B.N. Chicherin
b) N.M. Karamzin
c) M.P. Pogodin
What is beekeeping
a) mining beaver skins
b) collecting honey from wild bees
c) clearing the forest for arable land
What does the term "basma" mean?
a) a plate issued by the Mongol khans as a pass and credentials
b) type of edged weapons
c) the trade tax paid by the Russian lands to the Golden Horde.
Topic 3. Formation of the Russian centralized state. The formation of autocracy
North-Eastern Russia in the XIV century. The emergence of new political centers (Tver, Nizhny Novgorod, Moscow). The struggle of the Moscow princes for dominance in North-Eastern Russia. The rise of Moscow and its role in the unification of the northeastern Russian lands. The specifics of the formation of a unified Russian state: socio-economic and political prerequisites.
The overthrow of the Mongol-Tatar yoke. Completion of the unification of North-Eastern Russia around Moscow. The development of forms of feudal land ownership. Approval of the local system of land tenure, the stages of enslavement of the peasants. Sudebnik of Ivan III. Command system.
Ivan the Terrible. Reforms of the 50s 16th century and folding forms of estate-representative monarchy. Oprichnina, causes and consequences. Strengthening autocracy.
Western policy of Ivan IV. Livonian war. The struggle for access to the Baltic. Expansion of Muscovy in the East. Conquest of the Kazan Khanate. Accession of the Astrakhan Khanate. Conquest of Siberia. Importance of Russian colonization. Formation of an ethnically and socially heterogeneous society. The influence of space on the formation of a national character, political culture, the principles of state organization, the reproduction of traditionalism on a new scale.
Differences in the socio-political development of the countries of Western Europe and Russia. Russian idea: "Moscow is the Third Rome".
1. Due to what event did Ivan Kalita receive a “label” for the Great Prince of Vladimir and the right to collect tribute?:
a) the construction of the Kremlin;
b) an invitation to Moscow by the metropolitan;
c) participation in the suppression of the uprising in Tver.
2. The event, which went down in history as "standing on the Ugra River", led to:
a) the defeat of the Horde army;
b) the resumption of tribute payments to the Golden Horde;
c) the end of Russia's dependence on the Golden Horde.
3. At the end of the XIII century. in order to become a Grand Duke in Russia, it was necessary to obtain:
a) the blessing of the Patriarch of Constantinople;
b) the consent of the master of the Livonian Order;
c) a label for a great reign from the Horde.
4. What was the specificity of the socio-economic development of Russia in the IX-XI centuries. compared to Western Europe:
a) in the approval of serfdom;
b) in the presence of subsistence farms;
c) in the predominance of free community members among the population.
5. A characteristic feature of feudalism:
a) the conditional nature of land ownership;
b) freelance labor;
c) private property relations.
6. The first mention of Moscow is found in the annals in:
7. Who was the ancestor of the Moscow specific princes:
a) Alexander Nevsky;
b) Daniil Alexandrovich;
c) Ivan Kalita.
8. Between which two principalities there was a struggle for hegemony in North-Eastern Russia in the first quarter of the 14th century:
a) between Moscow and Ryazan;
b) between Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod;
c) between Moscow and Tver.
9. Name the Russian prince of the first "collector" of Russia:
a) Andrei Bogolyubsky;
b) Ivan Kalita;
c) Ivan the Red.
10. When the white stone Kremlin was built in Moscow:
a) in 1272;
b) in 1328;
11. Under the leadership of which Russian prince, Mamaev’s troops were defeated on September 8, 1380 on the Kulikovo field:
a) Alexander Nevsky;
b) Ivan Kalita;
c) Dmitry Ivanovich;
12. The main difference in the process of creating a single centralized state compared to similar processes in Western Europe?:
a) foreign policy factor;
b) increased trade;
c) European Renaissance.
13. The final stage of the formation of the Moscow centralized state:
a) the end of the XIII - the beginning of the XIV centuries;
b) the end of the XIV - the beginning of the XV centuries;
c) the second half of the 15th - the beginning of the 16th centuries.
14. When the Horde yoke was overthrown in Russia:
a) in 1480;
b) in 1500;
15. The first Russian metropolitan, elected at a general meeting of Russian bishops, was:
b) Antony
d) Hilarion
16. Which of the following statements is true? Union of Florence:
a) was an attempt by the Pope to subjugate the Russian Orthodox Church to his influence
b) was concluded between the Russian Patriarch and the Pope to oppose Islam
c) was concluded between Poland and Lithuania, as a result of which the state of the Commonwealth arose
d) an agreement between the Pope and Russia on the joint struggle against the Golden Horde
17. Fee "for the elderly" was first introduced:
a) Ivan the Terrible in the "decree on reserved years"
b) in Sudebnik 1550
c) in the Sudebnik of 1497
d) in Russkaya Pravda
The estate was called (was)
a) a settlement fully or partially exempt from state taxes;
b) land ownership, passed by inheritance;
c) trade and craft part of the city.
d) land ownership granted on the terms of service
46. Names are connected with the rise and strengthening of the Moscow Principality…
a) Vladimir I, Ivan IV
b) Yaroslav the Wise, Boris Godunov
c) Ivan Kalita, Dmitry Donskoy!!!
47. Names are connected with the rise and strengthening of the Moscow Principality…
a) Princess Olga, Yaroslav the Wise
b) Daniil of Moscow, Ivan Kalita
c) Vasily the Dark, Vasily Sh
48. During the reign of Ivan III, the following took place:
a) the proclamation of Russia as an empire
b) the creation of a regular army
c) adoption of the first all-Russian Sudebnik
d) "acceptance of the Council Code"
Ivan 1U ruled in
a) 1533-1584
b) 980-1015
c) 1325-1340
d) 1598-1605
85. For the first time, the crowning of the kingdom took place in……..
5. Domestic history: Textbook for technical universities / Ed. E.V. Bodrovoy, T.G. Popova. M., 2004.
6. Domestic history. Textbook for technical universities / Ed. V.V. Fortunatov. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2005.
2. World history: a reference book for schoolchildren and students / Gubarev V.K. ─ Rostov n / a: "Phoenix", Donetsk: "Credo", 2007.
4. The history of Russia for applicants to universities: textbook / V.I. Moryakov, V.A. Fedorov, Yu.A. Shchetinov. M .: TK "Velby", publishing house Prospekt, 2006.
5. Kuznetsov N.I. Domestic History: Textbook.−M.: "Dash-kov and K0". 2004.
6. New time. Data. Developments. People.//World history for schoolchildren and students/Ed. V.P. Budanova. Moscow: OLISS, Eksmo, 2006.
Topic 12. Modern Russia
Rejection of socialist ideals and a change in the model of social development. The liberal concept of Russian reforms: the transition to the market, the formation of civil society and the rule of law. Economic reforms: price liberalization, privatization of the economy, the formation of the market as a regulator of social production, the inclusion of Russia in the world economic system. Changing the social structure of society: the formation of new classes and social groups, the growth of property differentiation. Reducing the share of national income per capita. General characteristics of the demographic situation. The constitutional crisis in Russia in 1993 and the dismantling of the system of power of the Soviets. The formation of parliamentarism and the institution of the president. Constitution of 1993 Economic and social crisis, conflicts between the legislative and executive branches of power, the growth of centrifugal tendencies as a result of the first stage of reforms.
Search for ways of optimal social development. Stabilization of the economy and the first signs of economic growth. Strengthening the vertical of power, growth in the number and influence of centrist parties and movements as the basis for political stabilization. Problems of further democratization of the political system in the conditions of a small number of middle strata.
Russia in the system of international relations. Russia and CIS countries. Russia and the European Union. Russia and USA. Russia and the Muslim world. Russia's relations with China and India. Problems of national security of Russia.
1. The Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted ...
2. The first presidential elections in Russia took place in…
3. According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993, the executive authority is ...
a) Government of the Russian Federation
b) Federal Assembly
c) Council of State
d) President of the Russian Federation
e) State Duma
4. The body of representative and legislative power under the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993. is…
a) the Federal Assembly
b) Government of the Russian Federation
c) Security Council
d) Federal services
e) President of the Russian Federation
5. The Upper House of Parliament under the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 is…
a) Federation Council
b) State Duma
c) Government
d) Presidential Administration
e) Federal Assembly
6. The lower house of parliament according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 is…
a) State Duma
b) Federation Council
c) Government of the Russian Federation
d) Presidential Administration
e) Public Chamber
7. Constitution of the Russian Federation 1993 was accepted...
a) popular vote
b) by decree of the President V.V. Putin
c) decision of the Federal Assembly
d) decision of the Government of the Russian Federation
e) by the decree of the President B.N. Yeltsin
8. The referendum on the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation was held simultaneously with the elections to the new parliament ...
9. Confrontation between the legislative and executive branches of power in 1993. ended...
a) the dissolution of the Supreme Soviet and the Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR
b) the creation of federal districts
c) signing the Federal Treaty
d) simultaneous election of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin
e) the creation of the Constitutional Court
10. Indicate the event that took place in Russia in September-October 1993:
a) the formation of a committee consisting of G. Yanaev, V. Kryuchkov, D. Yazov and their supporters
b) conflict between the executive and legislative branches
c) victory of the Communist Party in the elections to the Duma
d) All-Russian referendum on the adoption of the Constitution
e) the collapse of the USSR and the creation of the CIS
11. The composition of the CIS included:
a) 9 republics of the former USSR
b) 11 republics of the former USSR
c) all former republics except the Baltics
d) 10 republics of the former USSR
e) Russia, Ukraine, Belarus
12. The implementation of price liberalization (shock therapy) in January 1992 is associated with the name ...
a) E.T. Gaidar
b) V.S. Chernomyrdin
c) A.B. Chubais
d) B. Berezovsky
e) G. Zyuganov
13. Councils of People's Deputies of all levels in 1993 were abolished ...
a) at the request of the Public Chamber
b) in connection with the conduct of "shock therapy"
c) in connection with the adoption of the Federal Treaty
d) in connection with the implementation of price liberalization
e) in connection with the creation of a new structure of authorities
14. Political crisis of 1992-1993 appeared mainly in...
a) confrontation between the legislative and executive branches of government
b) the dissolution of the USSR and the creation of the CIS
c) transition to market reforms
d) adoption of the Federal Treaty
e) voluntary resignation of B.N. Yeltsin
15. Formation in the 1990s a new political system in Russia began ...
a) after the adoption of the Constitution of 1993.
b) after the "August coup"
c) with the election of President V.V. Putin
d) with the transition to "shock therapy"
e) with the victory in the presidential elections in 1996 B.N. Yeltsin
16. The introduction of a state of emergency, shelling and storming of the "White House" are associated with ...
a) the political crisis of 1993.
b) "August coup"
c) the beginning of "shock therapy"
d) the election of B.N. Yeltsin President of the Russian Federation
e) the beginning of the counter-terrorist operation in Chechnya
17. Differences in questions about the choice of ways of development of Russia in the new historical conditions became the reason in 1992-1993. ...
a) political crisis
b) transition to "shock therapy"
c) the beginning of the restructuring
d) acceptance of the concept of "developed socialism"
e) election of V.V. Putin to the post of President of the Russian Federation.
18. Price liberalization and the beginning of the privatization of state property in Russia are associated with the name ...
a) E.T. Gaidar
b) M.E. Fradkov
c) S.V. Kiriyenko
d) V.S. Chernomyrdin
e) E.M. Primakov
19. Refusal of state control over prices for the bulk of goods and services is ... prices.
a) price collapse
b) privatization
c) secularization
d) nationalization
e) liberalization
20. The program of radical reforms for the transition from a planned economy to a market economy was called ...
a) shock therapy
b) inflation
c) price liberalization
d) economic stabilization
e) monetization
21. Russia's transition to "shock therapy" began in ... year
22. One of the consequences of the transition to "shock therapy" in the early 1990s. has become...
a) depreciation of household deposits in Sberbank
b) reducing inflation
c) growth of real incomes of the population
d) reducing unemployment
e) development of high-tech and competitive production
23. Replacing benefits with monetary compensation in 2005 - this is…
a) diversification
b) privatization
c) nationalization
d) secularization
e) monetization
24. Refusal to pay foreign and domestic debts in 1998 - this is…
a) monetization
b) "shock therapy"
c) default
e) secularization
e) privatization
25. The creation of federal districts in the Russian Federation is associated with the name ...
a) V.V. Putin
b) L.I. Brezhnev
c) M.S. Gorbachev
d) M.E. Fradkova
e) B.N. Yeltsin
26. V.V. Putin was elected President of the Russian Federation in ... year.
27. Early termination of the powers of the President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin in 1999 is associated with ...
a) voluntary resignation
b) losing the election
c) "August coup"
d) impeachment
e) the results of the All-Russian referendum
28. In 2006, a new institute was created - ...
a) Public Chamber
b) Federal Assembly
c) federal districts
d) Constitutional Court
e) Council of State
29. Federal districts in the structure of the state administration of Russia were created to:
a) strengthening the vertical of power
b) strengthening local self-government
c) increase in tax revenues to the budget
d) to fight organized crime
d) all of the above
30. The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was created in…
31. For Russia's foreign policy in the 1990s - early XXI century. characteristic (a, en) ...
a) membership in the G8
b) support for NATO bombings in Yugoslavia
c) refusal to support the UN due to the fall of its authority
d) participation in the creation of NATO
e) membership in the European Union
32. For Russia's foreign policy in the 1990s - early XXI century. characteristic (a, en) ...
a) membership in the G8
b) participation in the antiterrorist coalition of developed states
c) participation in the NATO Partnership for Peace Program
d) membership in the UN Security Council
d) all of the above
33. For Russia's foreign policy in the 1990s - early XXI century. not typical (a, en) ...
a) support for the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia
b) refusal to support the UN due to the fall of its authority
c) US support in all military operations abroad
d) approval of the US withdrawal from the 1972 treaty. for missile defense (ABM)
d) all of the above
34. The main problem in the relations between Russia and Japan at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. consists:
a) in large-scale industrial espionage conducted by Japanese firms
b) in Japan's claims to the islands of the South Kuril chain
c) in the contacts of a number of Russian officials with representatives of the Aum Senrike organization
d) Russia's support for China's countermeasures against Japan in the region
e) in the personal hostility of representatives of the ruling circles of Russia and Japan
35. Russia is a member…
a) the big eight
b) Warsaw Pact Organizations
c) North Atlantic Treaty Organization
d) European Union
e) the Union of the Baltic States
36 For the former republics of the USSR, the concept of ...
a) "near abroad" countries
b) non-CIS countries
c) countries of the European Union
d) NATO members
e) neighboring countries
37. With the collapse of the USSR, the task of creating ... a world order arose.
a) multipolar
b) bipolar
c) unipolar
d) bipolar
d) many-sided
38. The successor of the USSR in the international arena was (o) ...
a) Russia
b) CIS
c) Ukraine
d) Belarus
e) Georgia
39. The aggravation of the problem of national security of post-Soviet Russia is associated with ...
a) the intensification of international terrorism
b) the creation of a single union state of Russia and Belarus
c) the creation of a multipolar system of international relations
d) active cooperation with the EU
e) the entry of the Baltic States into the CIS
40. In the fight against what international danger in 2001, Russia and the United States joined their efforts:
a) against the growing global economic crisis
b) against international terrorism
c) against the growth of world hunger
d) against the growth of world energy prices
e) against NATO expansion to the east
1. Barsenkov A.S., Vdovin A.I. Russian history. 1917-2004: Textbook for university students.─M.: Aspect-Press, 2005.
2. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: Textbook. M.: PROSPECT, 2006.
3. History of Russia for technical universities / Ed. prof. B.V. Lichman. 2nd edition. Rostov n / a: "Phoenix", 2005.
4. Orlov A.S. History of Russia. Textbook. M.: PROSPECT, 2006.
5. Domestic history. Textbook for technical universities / Ed. V.V. Fortunatov. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2005.
6. Domestic history: Textbook for technical universities / Ed. E.V. Bodrovoy, T.G. Popova. M., 2004.
7. Semin V.P. History of the Fatherland: Textbook for universities. M .: Academic project: Gaudemus, 2005.
1. Artemov V. V., Lubchenkov Yu. N. History: Textbook. M .: Academy, 2007.
2. Gimpelson E.G. Russia at the turn of the era. Understanding the twentieth century of Russian history. M.: COLLECTION, 2006.
3. Danilov A.A. National history. Textbook. M.: "Project", 2003.
4. Danilov V.P. The emergence and fall of Soviet society: social origins, social consequences // Russia at the turn of the XXI century. Moscow: Nauka, 2000.
5. Dlinn N.A. Russia and the world community: West and East current. − M.: Institute of Oriental Studies RAS, 2001
6. The history of Russia for applicants to universities: textbook / V.I. Moryakov, V.A. Fedorov, Yu.A. Shchetinov. M .: TK "Velby", publishing house Prospekt, 2006.
7. Kuznetsov N.I. Domestic History: Textbook.−M.: "Dashkov and K0". 2004.
8. The latest history of Russia 1914 - 2002: Textbook / Ed. M.V. Khodyakov. Moscow: Yurayt-Izdat, 2004.
9. Skvortsova E.M., Markova A.N. History of the Fatherland: Textbook for universities. M.: UNITI-DANA, 2004.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY OF INSTRUMENT MAKING AND INFORMATION
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
test base of the discipline
"Story"
MOSCOW 2012
Compiled by: candidate of historical sciences, associate professor Bespyatova E.B. Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor Gusarova M.N.
The test base covers all sections of the educational basic course "History". Recommended for intermediate and final testing of students' knowledge.
Test base for the training course "National History" for students of technical specialties / Moscow State University of Instrument Engineering and Informatics; Comp.: Bespyatova E.B., Gusarova M.N. M., 2012, 133 p.
Topic 1. Patterns and main stages of historical development. four
Topic 2 . Kievan Rus in the context of the European history of the Middle Ages. ten
Topic 3. Formation of the Russian centralized state. Formation of autocracy 27
Topic 4. Russia at the beginning of the New Age. "Time of Troubles" of the Moscow state. 40
Topic 5. Age of enlightenment. Russian Empire in the 18th century. 47
TOPIC 6. The Russian empire on the way to an industrial society. Features of the industrial revolution in Russia. Social thought and social movements in Russia in the 19th century. 60
Topic 7. Socio-economic modernization and evolution of state power in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. 73
Topic 8. The revolutionary crisis in Russia in 1917 81
Topic 9. Soviet Russia: models of socialist construction. 90
Topic 10. Origins, main stages, consequences of the crisis of international relations in the first half of the twentieth century. 99
Topic 11. The Soviet Union in the post-war period. Scientific and technological revolution and its influence on the course of social development. 113
Topic 12. Modern Russia. 125
Topic 1. Patterns and main stages of historical development
The subject of national history. Functions of historical knowledge: cognitive and intellectual development, ideological and educational. Sources for the study of history. Methods and methodology of studying history, alternativeness and multivariance in historical science.
Unity and diversity of the world-historical process. Approaches to the study of history: stadial and civilizational.
The historical process and the problem of choosing the paths of development. Man and history. Unity and diversity of mankind. The problem of the typology of history. Civilization as an integral social system. Major world civilizations. Types of historical development and their characteristics. Interaction and mutual influence of types of historical development. Growing interdependence of the world. Problems of periodization of world history. The main stages of the world-historical process. Typology and periodization of history as a means of identifying patterns of development.
The problem of the place and role of Russia in world history. Features of the path of Russia: geographical, natural-climatic, social, cultural-religious and other factors. The problem of choosing the path of development. Russia is an organic part of world history.
a) Polybius;
b) Tacitus;
