"Beautiful era"

Unlike previous periods, in Brezhnev time, no persecution of dissenters could calm the attempts of researchers (including archaeologists) to break out of the limits allocated by ideology. At any scientific discussion, the voices of opponents of the point of view approved by the leadership were heard, although it was difficult for them to break into the seal. It happened that in the opposition to the leadership there were two or three prominent figures, and then reluctantly, the heart had to recognize two or three interpretations permissible. In Moscow, V.V. Sedov (1970, 1979) developed a special concept of the origin of the Slavs. In Leningrad, the Hermitage became the center of awareness of the genuine role is ready in the history of our country (MB Schukin and its seminar); The university group (the author of these lines and his students) in the 60s defended the significance of Norman participation in the formation of the Russian state. In some places, theoretical and historiographical reviews have grown into rethinking and critical reassessment of the past of our science and its present.

Nostalgents. You look around - the air itself is filled with nostalgia for the "beautiful era". La Belle époque - this is how it is customary to call the time before the First World War, the end of the 19th and early twentieth century in French history. We are yearning for the Soviet period. The most stupid and frostbitten pray to the portraits of Stalin. But most of the nostalgents with emotion recall the era of Brezhnev, forgiving him and the “boobs-masses”, and “small earth”, and multiple heroism on the uniform.

But should everyone turn to their industry and see what the “beautiful era” meant in a well -known area, who is yearning for it and why? It is easy for me to do this on the example of archeology.

More than 30 years Acad. B.A. Rybakov, decorated later by Gertrude (the star of the Hero of Socialist Labor - from the title of "Hero of Labor"), headed the Institute of Archeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences. He captured Khrushchev, and Brezhnev, and subsequent short -term Secretary Generals. His ideas about the original (i.e. for many millennia) the residence of the Slavs in the territory of Kievan Rus, about the very ancient, Dokiev statehood of the Eastern Slavs, about their "noble" ancestors-Scythians-Skolots, etc. They became the most privileged concept in archeology (although others were already completely impossible to exclude).

His hypothesis that Kyiv is several centuries older than is commonly built, built talentedly, but the elm of reasoning is too thin, while direct facts (cultural layer) speak against it, and she did not enjoy wide recognition among archaeologists. However, all the objections of the opponents should have silent, since based on the Acadu hypothesis. Rybakova Government of the USSR and the Politburo of the CPSU adopted a joint resolution on a magnificent celebration of a half -thousandth anniversary of Kyiv, with an invitation of foreign delegations, etc. Of course, monumental archaeological works were published in honor of the anniversary, "confirming" such a respectable age of the city. True, they did not reach the age of Rome, but it is necessary to leave something to future research ...

The leadership of archaeological institutions has not been replaced by decades. Sometimes at the head of the museums and academic institutes, their departments were very tenacious elders. (About one such academic lady, my colleague quietly quarreled at the meeting: “For a corpse, she holds her jaw too well”). They calmly slept in the Presidiums, stalls as soon as they were talking about the possibility of retirement, but turned out to be very sensitive to the slightest instructions from above and vigilant. In their subjects, they most appreciated not talent, but modesty and helpfulness. Therefore, not bold thinkers, but ordinary workers, or even gray dealers (often through party positions in scientific groups), made their way upstairs and replaced the deceased leaders. The achievement of scientists of the step of her and the titles was greatly facilitated by the administrative position and the bossal location.

Unlike previous periods, in Brezhnev time, no persecution of dissenters could calm the attempts of researchers (including archaeologists) to break out of the limits allocated by ideology. At any scientific discussion, the voices of opponents of the point of view approved by the leadership were heard, although it was difficult for them to break into the seal. It happened that in the opposition to the leadership there were two or three prominent figures, and then, reluctantly, the heart had to recognize two or three interpretations acceptable. In Moscow, V.V. Sedov (1970, 1979) developed a special concept of the origin of the Slavs. In Leningrad, the Hermitage became the center of awareness of the genuine role is ready in the history of our country (MB Schukin and its seminar); The university group (the author of these lines and his students) in the 60s defended the significance of Norman participation in the formation of the Russian state. In some places, theoretical and historiographic reviews grew into a rethinking and critical reassessment of the past of our science and its present (books on the history of science A.A. Formosov, G.S. Lebedev and mine).

In general, sciences such as archeology, cultural studies, sociology, linguistics, folkloristics, at this stagnant time were still areas of fermentation of the minds, something was committed here, and the specialists of these industries envied the youth of related disciplines.

The attitude to this period subsequently polarized. For the tops of Soviet archeology, close to power, it was a blessed time. It is worth turning to the article by V.I. Gulyaeva and D.A. Belyaev (1995), who headed the head magazine “Soviet Archeology”, which became “Russian archeology” (and Gulyaev - and the theory sector at the Institute of Archeology in Moscow).

“As soon as you turn back,” these authors write, “you feel the danger of falling into the nostalgic admiration of the“ beautiful era ”. After all, it is necessary to admit that in these years the position of archeology - in any case, its social situation - was quite prosperous. Firstly, archeology was officially part of the system of social, historical sciences designed to serve as the basis of the Soviet (“Marxist”) ideology. This provided our science support for the state, although it imposed on it, as well as all public knowledge, certain obligations. However, these obligations were not particularly burdensome ... speaking in the most general form, archeology helped to prove and promote a materialistic understanding of history. It is very important to note that it turned out in archeology, unlike many other historical disciplines, quite natural and solid ... ”(Gulyaev and Belyaev, 1995: 97–98).

The Soviet Empire, they note, distinguished significant means of archeology and had a harmonious and branched system of archaeological institutions.

Forms in his books of 1995–2005, looking from below this system and her life, saw everything differently. He longed for orientation on the knowledge of truth, and not on the satisfaction of the ideological order of the party and the state. The ideological oppression and mass repressions of the Stalin's time, however, were a thing of the past, but archeology, like everything in the country, was arranged according to the principle of administrative-Chinnic arbitrariness, ideology continued to be planted, albeit less gesture methods, linked and blat dominated, and indifference to the heritage of centuries flourished. The security of personnel and means was much less than in other states.

In my 1993 book (“The Phenomenon of Soviet Archeology”) I noted some achievements of Soviet archeology, but in general I recognized its backwardness and rot.

The RAZARKA ONEALLYAMED AND IS AND THE New Year 1980, COGDA Soviet Army entered the AFGANIST. Academician A.D. Sakharov was fired and exiled to Gorky, the arrests of liberal university teachers began in Leningrad. The new new freedom was no longer leaning: the whole top of the Partican Jerarchy was in starzed maras, the entire regime is in the greenhouse. Partican leaders came to the fact that they were already deep stickers and dulled without doing anything.

Perestroika. The coming to power in 1985, the new leader, the lordly young Mihail Gorbhachev, ponked only substantial liberalization, the introduction of moderate freedoms. The new internal politician got a “perestroika”, but at the same time, in addition to the introduction of “glorious (i.e., the iconic freedom of words) and a certain democratization of the elected system, nothing has changed in the page. The public system did not shoot. Control of funds of the Massian Information, on the patch, Finns, armia and a caracematic aboard, in the hands of the same, the only Partia, and its proclaimed goal, - - the purpose of the new leader, was all the same - the construction of the same - the construction of the same Socialism. He only rushed to come to a more civilized guise. It is curious that in the archeology of the “perestroika”, nothing fundamentally new has been made, and archeology, as its history shows, is a fairly sensitive barometer of change.

However, democratic changes, more deeply, have begun: re -evaluating the traditional ideological values ​​of socialism, frank lighting of “white” (in fact - dark) spots of Russian history, cancellation of censorship, discrediting many dogmas and pluralism - freedom to various inconsistent political views.

Gorbachev was not by nature a fighter with the system: the changes were forced, the socialist system could not withstand competition with the market economy and a democratic system. There was no money left in the treasury: everything was wasted on communist adventures and weapons. People had savings in the bank, but these were pieces of paper that were not secured by anything. There was nothing to feed the people. Gorbachev was simply younger than the “Kremlin elders” and by naiveness thought that socialism could be saved in small submission. He did not understand that the system was held on bayonets and prohibitions as a whole: take out a brick - and the whole building collapses. Well, it would have collapsed already, and the collapse would be more terrible.

These years, one, Raede, the Socialist Lager racked. Of the economic inefficiency of its farms, the Soviet Union did not withstand the arms race with SSu and was supposed to give in to the struggle of the sphere of influence. They changed the orientation of the country of the Third Mir, all European socialist regimes, and the flexibility and tributary of the foreigners, and that the learned trips of the Russians have changed the information of Russia - for it, the economic advantages of KPITALISTILASED. Russian guests were overwhelmed by the abundance of the regiments of the tributary supermarkets and the discovery of the appropriation of the squalor and the poverty of the Soviet Magazins.

The "dashing" 90s and archeology . The but -in -standing transformations were in Stan in the Burka 1991, Kogda Yeltsin was beaten by the President of Russia, Kogda, following the example of the former socialists, broke in all directions of the Union republics, and the Claus in the result of the Augustic couple collapsed. The new government was to carry out ranging economic reforms - decollectivization ,omation, liberalization of prices, and the compassion of free market and a consumption of enterprises. Errors of inexperienced democraters in the context of a sharp drop in oil prices (main export of the country), rushed to the storage of the economic system in the absence of a new and rasis of the trial economic ties between the republics and the pans, which resulted in the native wars between some of them, okayed the uninhabited satellites of the democraticity, very painful for ONEALS AND FARTICAL for archeology.

The first consequence of these events for the study of antiquities is the handling of the integrity of non -taxa archeologies. All former union-republican archeologies were separated-Ukraainska and Belarusian, Moldavskai, Probezky, Kavkaka and Central Aviation. This caused the growth of local nationality, and the transition of the Russian nasalization of these republics in the situation of the non -directed minority in another state, with local non -restriction of radical noselia, gave rise to a sense of non -red humiliation, moreover, heated by disasters, and this caused the growth of Russian chauvinism and anestemicism. (Chernykh, 1995). The Piagranes, who for a long time served as the main meaderials for many Russian researchers, and the corresponding museums with collections, okayed the Granitsa, and Tuda trips were trifling and expensive.

The second investigation is deact Center in archeology. Even the basis of newly -built expeditions, the local centers of archeology - on Ural, in Siberia, Na Don, etc. Now, in connection with the general decenteration and the attraction of the center, their role in the study of local antiquities has intensified. Moreover, the Institute of Archeology was wandered out by the non -state -owned institutions in Moscow and Leningrad, who was renamed in St. Petersburg. The St. Petersburg Institute demonstratively regained the use of the Institute of History of Material Culture. For the first time, professional archaeologists have been bore the main archaeological institutions for a long time. But now, the Moscow Institute has reduced its former naucer's leadership, the role of the leader has come to the organizational and economic adjustment.

The third consequence is a sharp honeymoon of state -based subsidies to the same, in the Checles of ON ARCHOOLOGY. In Soviet Russia, everything was replaced from above and everything was state. The clip from the introduction of ideologists deprived of archaeologists and the usual amerial support. I had to clarify new sources of funds-from gas funds, from local metrots (in a new “sponsors”), from funds composed by new state. In the construction of the economic difficulties of the transition period, this was very difficult. The number of expeditions and even more on scientific publications were sharply hidden. The tributary of the foreign circuit in the library has greatly decreased due to the honeymoon of overwhelming allocations.

On the other hand, communication with the zarube archaeologists was extremely intense, and the choice of methodology and non -war - completely free. The headgament was renamed: now it is “Russian Archeology” and it has flickered and flickely thinner, you can hide, zakhirel, but next to it arose in St. Petersburg and other city. The thick archaeological jack of the “Plus Plus”, which was going on 6 in the year in Chisinau, flocked with a large and interesting in the post-Soviet bastard, was a fat archaeological jack of the “Plus” in Chisinau. Archaeological society will be raised, but this has oiled an unsuccessful zaatia: it disappeared that the post is of which the posts for these societies and made these society strong and influential. And the new free entrepreneurs still have neither the strength nor responsibility in order to support archeology, although there are already separate service sponsors.

I must admit, in general, archeology turned out to be obscene to these changes. Developing a little in a general stagnation, she adapted to small steps, small movements and was completely confused before the abyss problems that opened. Acad. Rybakov, who imperiously and confidently holding archeology in an obedient state in the party’s service, imposed an indelible imprint on structures and personnel. He was removed from power, and his relatives sent him to the elderly house, where he died. But his team was preserved at the helm.

( To be continued )