Summary
Russian expansion in Siberia and English and French expansion in North America at the end of the XVIth — middle of the XVIIIth century are compared in this monograph. First records concerning the resemblance of these colonies date back to the middle of the XVIII-th century.
It widespread in scientific discourse (as it is shown in the Introduction), however, no special comparative studies of the early history of Russian Siberia and colonial North America had been carried out until now.Chapter I. «Outward» and «inward» parameters of colonization processes
The chapter opens with paragraph 1 comparing the pace of explorers’ advancement (Russian and French being more swift, the English being relatively slow) territories affiliated to the orbit of expansion of a certain power, and the intensiveness of their developing. This paragraph also focuses on the significance of fluvial routes for Russian and French expansion.
Paragraph 2 deals with Europeans’ interaction with an environment completely unknown to them: in particular, the Russians’ reaction to Siberian frosts and the French’ reaction to Canadian winters (and their adaptation to new conditions) are compared here.
Paragraph 3 focuses on the quantitative indicators of the colonies and the intensity of settlement on different territories. It also deals with
comparison of the social origins of first settlers and their occupation. Demographic situation is a special case-study of this paragraph: Russian Siberia, English America and New France all initially suffered the lack of women.
Paragraph 4 is devoted to comparison of English, French, and Russian colonial policy, the role of State in the colonization process. This role was more significant in Siberia and New France, however even there colonization was not considered a top priority of governmental policy. This paragraph also deals with the social structures of the emerging colonial societies.
Common features, reflected in the transformation of the European institutions under the influence of colonial realities, changes of social frontiers, roles, etc are also shown here.Chapter II. Local authorities and central governments: specificity of colonial administration system
Systems of colonial administration existing in Siberia, English America and New France are compared in the paragraph 1. It also considers administrative organization of colonies and specificity of imperial institutions directly responsible for colonial affairs -- Siberian office (Sibirskii prikaz) in Russia, Ministry of the Navy (Secretariat d’Etat a la Marine) in France, Lords of Trade and Plantations, then Board of Trade and Plantations in England.
Colonial administrations, their structure, character of activities, personal composition are compared in the paragraph 2. Special attention is given to the abuses of colonial authorities, that were most severe in Siberia but also present in colonial North America.
Paragraph 3 deals with the relations between secular and church authorities in the colonies. It is noted that the most active interference of the clergy in the internal life of the colonies and their administration took place in New France; it was also found in Siberia but to a much lesser extent.
Chapter III. Europeans and aborigines: theory and practice of relationship
Objective consequences of contacts between the Europeans and the Native people in North America and North Asia are compared in the paragraph 1. It also considers the problem of determining the aboriginal population by the beginning of the contact era and compares the consequences of spreading of the European diseases which resulted in reduction of aboriginal populations both in Siberia and in North Amer
ica. It also focuses on the circulation of European weapons (fire-arms in North America and mainly cold steel in Siberia), alcohol, and other goods that exerted big influence on different sides of aboriginal communities.
Paragraph 2 focuses on conceptually legal basis of European- Aboriginal contacts. Grounds and contents of claims put forward by the Russians, French and English during their expansion are compared here. Thus, the Russians aspired primarily to substantiate their right for getting fur tribute (iassak) from the aborigines, while the English sought to prove why the Indians have no rights for North-American territories. When the English and the French often appealed to the right of first discovery and real possession, the Russians alluded to the fact of incorporation of the Siberian khanate into the Muscovite Tsardom, and to the right of conquest.
Russian, English and French aboriginal policy is compared in the paragraph 3. Special attention is given to correlation between the directions officially proclaimed by the colonizers (to bring to civilization, to Christianize, to levy of tribute etc) and their real every-day policy, concerned in all cases with multiple excesses. Differences and similarities in the English’ and the French’ attitude toward the Indians (on the example of the attitude to Christianization of the natives, mixed marriages, etc.). It is noted that until the end of the XVIIth century the Russians’ attitude toward aboriginal people of Siberia had been indifferent and depleted of any civilization (the Russians were interested in aborigines only as an object of exploitation), and since the beginning of the XVIIIth century it has become more Europeanized (at least, at the official level). The examples of conflict and peace interaction of Europeans and aborigines in Siberia and in colonial North America are presented here.
In conclusion it is stated that there is a significant resemblance between, first of all, Russian Siberia, Canada under the French Regime and peripheral English colonies (Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Rupert’s Land).