It always seemed very funny that the United States, which was formed only two and a half centuries ago, which actually has no history of its own and consists of immigrants and their descendants, are trying to teach the whole world to reason, and assert their path as the only and correct way. And old Russia, with its thousand-year history going back centuries, came under the influence of a teenage state, an upstart country. For example, my hometown is almost four times older than all of the United States combined, and I think your hometowns also have a very ancient and glorious history that you should be proud of.
Despite this, for more than a century, Russian-American relations have been very close, like those of rivals or sworn “friends”. So the question arose, what do the historians of the adolescent country think about the past of their older antagonist? Because history, you know, shapes the vision of the world, and so does the image of geopolitical rivals.
Let's start with the fact that in the USA and Great Britain an amusing book "Peoples of the World" was published, beautiful, illustrated and even translated into Russian. In this book about whom it is not only written, but there is no … SLAVS. Not a word at all.
(Dear reader, quotes have been translated from English verbatim for ease of reading, except for one term)
But on the other hand, in the historical works of the United States on the history of Russia, there are notes that:
This is what Oldowan is, in Russian science it is called an instrument of the Oldowan culture.
Also, in American sources, you can often find references to the fact that the Scythian people lived on the territory of Russia, they even call the country "Scythia", however, for some reason, when it comes to the founding of the Russian state, the term "Rus-Kaganate" appears.
Promotional video:
What do the Americans say about the founding of Russia?
Here, in principle, everything is familiar, though with an American look, but this is basically normal:
Then everything is, in principle, familiar: princely feuds, Tatar-Mongols, the rise of Moscow, the decline of Kiev.
Calling Scandinavian * immigrants * to Russia.
Then you regularly come across phrases about the exploitation of the common population, popular oppression, peasant uprisings, the strengthening of autocracy and expansion to the west and east.
Of the emperors of the 18th century, basically there is information only about Peter I, and then immediately about Catherine II.
There is an interesting quote:
But I don’t remember that much, about the very active cleansing of Western specialists.
Empress Catherine the Great.
In addition, American historians draw attention to the fact that after Catherine the Great the country was in a constant economic crisis.
In the nineteenth century, according to the Americans, the Russian Empire pursued an aggressive foreign policy, especially against the Turks, who were being rescued by the British and French.
Russian Westernizers, whose opinion and philosophy are respected in the USA (as far as they can respect).
Most of all, in the 19th century in Russia, Americans seem to like our Westerners:
For everything else is basically a description of a tough, despotic state that oppresses the people. Well, we already know a lot, and many Russians will agree with this position. But I noticed that in the American history of Russia, there is not a word about the international betrayal of Russians by Western allies, the imposition of a foreign culture and the penetration of foreigners into the ruling elite, which in many ways influenced the formation of the economic crisis in the Russian Empire. Although, on the other hand, American historians, whom I have read, quite restrainedly express a pro-Western position and argue that Russia's problems are in Russia itself and the Russian government.
