Xu Lu (graduate student of the Department of History, Sun Yat-sen University) finished
On April 13, 2022, the fifth lecture of the second quarter of the series of lectures by overseas masters of the Department of History of Sun Yat-sen University was held, and in this lecture, the keynote speaker Alexei Kraikovski introduced the results of the research on the history of the Russian marine environment in the past two decades in combination with his forthcoming monograph. He pointed out that russia's 18th-century marine resource development involved three governmental activities: monopolies that granted imperial concessions developed the Russian whaling industry; the government tried to replace traditional European and Asian ships with their own controllable fisheries and freight; and finally, the westernization of seafood consumption prompted Russian fishermen to develop new fish processing techniques and develop new fish varieties. In addition, Peter the Great, when he built St. Petersburg, created "Another Amsterdam". As an ocean metropolis, this thriving new consumer hub of Westernization is the hub of this complex story. By altering the relationship between society and the marine environment, Russia is trying to transform itself into a maritime power, and recognizing this is of great significance for the further development of the concept of "maritimity" in the study of global maritime history.
Alexei Kraikovski
Alexei Kraikovski is an associate professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Genoa, Italy. He graduated from the European University of St. Petersburg (EUSP) in 2000 as an associate professor, in 2017 as an associate professor at the Department of History at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the Russian State Higher University for Economic Research (HSE), a senior researcher at the Laboratory of the History of Environment and Technology, and since 2020 a fellow at the University of Padua in Italy. His main research interests are Russian maritime history. He has co-authored environmental history books such as The Exploited Seas: New Directions for Marine Environmental History,Liverpool University Press,2001. Volume I: Explaining, Springer, 2016), Rivers Lost, Rivers Regained: Rethinking City-River Relations, Pittsburgh University Press, 2017, and others.
I. Introduction: Research Topics and Examining "Historical Consensus"
The central thesis to be made today comes from my new book, Another Amsterdam (For the title of "Another Amsterdam," Professor Alexei Krekovsky says that he chose in particular a promise that Peter the Great had promised. Peter the Great said, "If I were to take the day off, St. Petersburg would become another Amsterdam." The book "The Other Amsterdam" is an attempt to explain the words of Peter the Great, and the meaning of St. Petersburg becoming another Amsterdam in the late 17th century. ), the book is expected to be launched at Cambridge University Press. My research focuses on the following questions: What was the continental empire like? To what extent can it be transformed into a maritime empire? What is usually meant by a country when it is considered to be a maritime state? This is somewhat cliché. In the past decade, there have also been many research results on the history of marine fishing in various regions of Russia. But what I'm innovating is trying to integrate diverse, decentralized studies and look at the whole from an oceanic perspective. The period of study is the 18th century, a difficult period in the history of Tsarist Russia. Finally, I will summarize this process. This study aims to promote the study of the Russian maritime issues, because the current research in Russian academic circles focuses on the sphere of influence of the navy, the history of the development of warships, the history of naval development and the history of war. Naval-related research is at the forefront of the list, and is even seen as the only aspect of research on complex marine development issues.
The research will be carried out in three ways: first, the expansion of Russian power into the Arctic island of Spitsbergen, where a series of whaling operations will be carried out; the government will try to develop modern European merchant shipping in Russia. This is very different from the story of the government-controlled naval ship manufacturing industry; the third is the development of St. Petersburg, the new capital of Tsarist Russia. In 1703, St. Petersburg was built on the shores of the Baltic Sea. To become a maritime metropolis, St. Petersburg had to replicate models of early modern port metropolises such as Vienna, Amsterdam, and London. The perspective will also be no longer limited to geography and architecture, but more focused on ship use, ocean use and marine natural resource consumption. The historical relationship between human society and the marine environment is also written in the dimension of the history of the marine environment.
The history of the marine environment was born more than two decades ago as an emerging field of study. During my PhD studies, I had the privilege of working on the Census of Marine Life(CoML), a large-scale international project, the Marine Population History Research Project (HMAP). This global collaborative project aims to assess in some way the state of the world's oceans, understand their dynamics, anticipate how humans should further develop them and clarify historically lost elements of the oceans. Over the past 18 months, the Marine Population History Research Project has grown and grown, now employing 100 historians, archaeologists and marine scientists working on 16 thematic studies. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, a private foundation in the United States, funded the project. Our group is responsible for the sea-related space centered on St. Petersburg and Moscow, and to some extent also includes the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic Sea. Later, our team also participated in some research on the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov projects, but the main research energy was still in the sea areas associated with St. Petersburg and Moscow. The Marine Population History Research Project is also the beginning of my research experience in the history of the marine environment. After officially starting its work, our group found that although the historical development of Russia's fishery was a well-known fact, and historical documents were everywhere, there were few texts devoted to it. Only the experienced and well-known hunters of marine mammals in the far north of Russia and the Eskimos, who were at ease with Arctic affairs such as the expedition to Spitsbergen, were mentioned only briefly. At the same time, traditional accounts are largely based on some repetition of previous research literature. After the first year of archival work, we discovered very strange phenomena in archives, which actually became the starting point for my research.
When our group began to study the traditional fisheries of the Far North, we found some unexpected problems. A colleague asked, "Why don't the Russians kill whales?" ”。 People from the Far North hunt whales, but it seems that the Russians are an exception; "What was the direction of the fishing industry in Tsarist Russia in the 18th century?" "The documents seen today are all from the 17th and 19th centuries, and the 18th century is missing. It seems that the 18th century must have been a major upheaval, and new regulations were born at that time. So what happened in the 18th century? "What are the problems with the use of European-style ships?" Historical documents show that the Russians preferred to use the traditional ships they had used over the centuries. When the Tsarist government tried to force the people to switch to European-style ships, the Russians refused to do so; "Why did the Russians refuse to adopt the Dutch herring preservation technique?" ”。 Dutch herring is the most famous product in its trade network and has always been known for its high quality. From the accounts of historical documents, it can be known that the Russians still used traditional Russian preservation techniques after catching a certain amount of herring in the White Sea. This traditional technique was very poor and would seriously affect the quality of herring, but the Russians chose to stick to it. What the hell is wrong with the Russians? Why don't they switch to more advanced technology?
I began to ask myself the above questions one by one and to delve into the relevant archives. In the end, the whole explanation focused on one point: "maritime metropolis". Tsarist Russia is, or at least can be regarded as, two de facto separate empires: the Continental Empire of the Romanovs, and the Ice and Sea Empire of St. Petersburg, just as we can talk about the Maritime Empire of Boston and the United States of America separately. However, it is a coincidence that St. Petersburg was also the center of two empires, after all, the types of empires were different. Geographically, the maritime empire of St. Petersburg is not in line with the sphere of influence of the Romanov family's continental empire. Although the two empires coexisted and were interconnected, this study is based on the maritime empire of St. Petersburg, not the continental empire of the Romanov family. In the lens of an ocean empire, St. Petersburg is the decision-making center. Whether it happens on the island of Spitsbergen or somewhere in the Baltic Sea, the decision-making place is st. Petersburg. In addition, St. Petersburg is also a consumer center. In the open seas, fishermen fish and preserve freshness, slaughter whales, kill walruses, etc., and finally spend in St. Petersburg. This situation was created solely because St. Petersburg wanted the catchers of the far seas to do so. St. Petersburg is also a resource hub. It is responsible for allocating resources, not only monetary resources, financial resources, but also professional knowledge, professional skills and other resources. St. Petersburg has the ability to attract foreign experts and then uniformly distribute them to the Far North. Vice versa. Finally, St. Petersburg is also a strategic center where social elites construct and share a picture of the future. How can humanity move forward? What to do? What will the world of the future look like?
Generally speaking, when faced with practical problems such as the development of the whaling industry or shipbuilding, it can be dealt with from the following two aspects: one is the visual thing of materiality, that is, the visible fact of killing whales; the other is based on a large number of imaginary things, which are not less important than the previous point. Why did humans go down the path of whale slaughter? What happens to life after becoming a whaler? Our country is a whaling country, why is the importance of whale slaughter to the country that cannot be replaced by the cultivation of cotton, trees and other things? Why are whales killed instead of seals? The vision of the future thus constructed by St. Petersburg became a driving force for change. This should always be kept in mind when arguing the importance of St. Petersburg as the center of the expansion of the maritime empire and its growing growth in the maritime empire.
Lecture posters
Natural Capital: Russians and the Sea in the 17th Century
At the end of the 17th century, Tsarist Russia became the largest country in the world. Russia borders many basins, but cannot be reached directly. It's not hard to understand that many of the ports on the northern coast are not easily accessible to this day, let alone in the 17th century, when there was virtually no navigation possible. However, they are connected by the world's largest river network. In other words, a variety of fish can be caught in the river that inhabit the ocean. When fish spawn in rivers, Russians are adept at dealing with the environmental elements of wading through the sea, at least at the mouth of the river and the confluence of the river network. They use the traditional "fish-specialty" approach to catch fish, marine or freshwater fish that spawn retroactively, and then keep them fresh. Russians have insisted on doing this for centuries.
Russian shipbuilding technology is also the traditional technology that has been used for many centuries, and all kinds of ships used are Russian. Ships are manufactured in accordance with the regulations. The Tsarist government kept an eye on the regulations. It is difficult to imagine today how the above series of regulations actually works. But to be clear, it would be a mistake to imagine that the Russians of the 17th century could go anywhere they wanted by boat. This kind of behavior will certainly be stopped at that time. The Russian government controlled all kinds of movements throughout the territory, and mobility on the water was one of them.
Above all, European travelers who came to Tsarist Russia in the 17th century spoke highly of Russian fish dishes. Russian fish dishes are extremely exquisite, and the Russian experience of preparing and eating fish has been praised by European observers. This is very important because it explains why the Russian public wondered when the Russian government introduced new types of fish products in the 18th century. Indeed, with such a deep heritage in the preparation of fish, it is no surprise that people are hesitant to introduce new types of fish products. Moreover, the traditional Russian fish consumption has always been high-end products such as sturgeon and salmon.
III. Grand Plan: "Big Mission" and Shift of Focus to "Marine Knowledge"
Tsarist Russia had three grand plans: One was to promote whaling, because the Tsar believed that it was the basis for Dutch economic hegemony. Russia wanted to refer to the hegemony of the Dutch whaling industry at the end of the 17th century; the second was to promote the Dutch herring preservation technology. Historical documents clearly record the experience of the development of the Dutch fishery, including the North Sea herring industry, which constituted one of the major industries in the Netherlands in the 17th century; the third is to develop the consumption of modern fish products such as herring while promoting the development of seafood consumption such as oysters, which is loved by the modern world. Oysters became the main consumer product, breaking the traditional seafood consumption pattern of Russians who only ate fish, and it marked the Westernization of The Habit of Russians in the 18th Century. "Oysters" also began to appear frequently in Russian literature. To be honest, oysters are not particularly economically valuable commodities, but they are regarded as a symbol of marine commodities. To clarify these three points, we have to go back to the Grand Embassy and look for clues from where Tsar Peter I stopped. The "Great Mission", which began in 1697, shaped Russia's "impression of Europe" and laid the foundation for future changes in Tsarist Russia.
In 1697, Peter the Great left Russia with more than a hundred retinues and made "private visits" to various parts of Europe. It was also the first time in Russian history that the Tsar had left the country as follows (Figure 1): from Moscow to Riga in March; along the southern shore of the Baltic Sea in the summer, then through Berlin; in the autumn and early winter in Amsterdam; the following year, across the English Channel and in early spring in London. The journey then began, first to Hague, then to Vienna for the summer, and back to Moscow in August. The reason why this "big mission" is worth pondering is that Peter the Great has experienced the most important season of herring. In the autumn, when the fishermen of Amsterdam brought back their hard-earned herring, Peter the Great happened to be in Amsterdam. London is another place, and the January-March he stays for coincides with the preparation season for the seafood fishing industry. Seeing it with your own eyes is undoubtedly the best way to observe, and the seafood fishing practices in those marine metropolises have become more or less part of the "Tsar's impression", and Amsterdam has laid the foundational impression.
Figure 1
On 28 September 1697, Peter the Great visited the whaling fleet on Texel, which had just returned from Spitsbergen with a full load. What he saw could be seen in Adolf van der Laan's engravings: ships, ocean-going fleets, and people on the shore. The people on the shore are most likely the owners of the cargo on board, and the return of the ship is a considerable profit and prosperity for them. Tsar Peter I visited the ships, witnessed everything here, and saw the "fruits" of whaling. As we all know, 1697 was a good year for whaling on Spitsbergen And it was also the most prolific year in the history of whaling on Spitzbergen. When the Tsar saw the whalers, they were all elated and spoke of this incredible success. This scene was so shocking that the Tsar must remember it fondly, and it became the basis for the Tsar's insistence on developing the whaling industry in Russia in the future. In fact, the whaling industry in Spitsbergen in the 18th century was in decline as a whole. Even so, it didn't matter to the Tsar, who had seen firsthand how successful the whaling industry really was. His reforms were largely based on his visual impressions, which transformed into the basis of political decision-making.
The second part of the Tsar's experience came from the shipbuilding industry in which he was involved. There are two traditional shipbuilding techniques: one is used in Amsterdam. That is, the construction starts from the bottom of the ship, and the bottom of the ship is completed first ("shell priority"); the other is used in Rotterdam. That is, build the skeleton of the ship first ("keel first"). Either way, it's practice that produces true knowledge. The Tsar hit a wall in the image-drawing technique. How to make the actual ship consistent with the shipbuilding drawings? The Netherlands had a monopoly on shipbuilding technology. If you wanted to build ships on Russian soil, you needed to hire Dutch shipbuilders. It is not feasible to bring shipbuilding drawings back to Russia and let local technicians build ships according to the drawings. Therefore, the Tsar even decided to create a system of image drawing by himself. But it's hard to say what new type of ship the Dutch artisan paintings were, as was one of the rembrandt paintings of the 1630s. The boats painted by Dutch shipbuilders can be seen in the Maritime Museum in Amsterdam. But Peter the Great always adhered to his grand plan, and the modern shipbuilding industry was crucial to the construction of a maritime metropolis.
Finally, there are cases of herring and oysters. Amsterdam is thriving as a consumer hub, and one of the biggest manifestations of this is the consumption and trade of local fish products. The Dutch herring industry is also part of the industry. Herring is caught in the sea and sent to shore for processing, and finally sent to the table for consumption. Not only do ordinary people consume herring, but some high-end banquets will also choose herring as a dish. As herring fishing draws to a close, local elites also hold feasts to celebrate the considerable profits brought by shipbuilding and fishing. This made the Tsar ponder: How did the people in the ocean metropolis achieve continuous progress? How do they eat? What are they eating? Oysters thus become crucial. One of the jobs of the prostitutes was to handle oysters for their guests, which was actually part of the industry as well. Eating oysters is an aspect of brothel culture (considered aphrodisiac). Many of the entourage of the Tsar's "Big Outgoing Mission" were very young and energetic, and they learned about the experience of eating oysters during their stays in Brussels and Amsterdam. In this way, oysters associate elite consumption with recreational consumption, not only as an integral part of daily diet, but also as an integral part of high-end feasts, or as part of a pastime.
Four or three stories: the blubber monopoly, ship freight, herring and oysters
Proceeding from the above three points, we use three stories to understand the development of Russia's maritime industry. The first was the expedition to Spitsbergen to develop the whaling industry. Between 1703 and 1768, the Russian government established a number of monopolies (Table 1). What they all have in common is that the company is controlled by the imperial elite (especially pet subjects like Menshikov) and has a monopoly on the exploitation and trade of marine mammalian fats. Monopolistic trade makes these companies very profitable, and they are obliged to invest some of their profits in the whaling industry. Therefore, monopolies deal with hunters on the island of Spitsbergen all year round. (Table 2) Traditional hunters' hobbies are to kill walruses rather than whales. Dealing with marine mammals, hunters also have their own set of methods. In short, it is not easy to get such a group of people to give up killing walruses and slaughter whales. Throughout the 18th century, the Russian government tried to force them to switch to whaling. At the end of the 18th century, the government asked hunters, "Why don't you slaughter whales?" What do you have to do to slaughter whales? ”。 The other person replied: "Do not slaughter whales because it is not profitable." But killing walruses and seals is different, small cost investment, profit is relatively considerable. And the fishing site is in the White Sea, there is no need to go deep into the Atlantic Ocean, and the level of danger is much lower. Therefore, there is only one way for us to slaughter whales: under heavy gold, there will be brave men." The hunters were well aware of the deep connection between natural conditions and economic theory, which the imperial elite of St. Petersburg could not understand. For the imperial elite's imagination was based on an impression of the "foreign," a foreign idea based on their imagination.
Table 1
Table 2
The second story is the innovation of ship freight. Between 1705 and 1723, Tsar Peter the Great signed several decrees almost every year to improve shipping lanes and revolutionize shipbuilding (Tables 3-5). St. Petersburg, on the other hand, was the place where reform decrees were promulgated the most at each time. Most decrees stated that the general managers/mechanics of shipping were conscripted to St. Petersburg, which also surprised the Russian scientific community. The reason is that the study of ship freight reform is basically regional, that is, it only examines the reform of a certain region. For example, in the past, scholars only studied Arkhangelsk in the Far North White Sea. As everyone knows, all this is centered on St. Petersburg. If you dig deeper into the historical documents, you will find that the real target of the Tsarist government was in St. Petersburg. St. Petersburg is the main body of the story.
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
The Tsarist government intended to revolutionize shipping in St. Petersburg, mainly around shipping within the capital city and the waterway to the capital. The idea of a foreign water-controlled space was introduced to St. Petersburg, whose city center was seen as the center of modern culture and spatial transformation in Tsarist Russia. The canal flowed radially from St. Petersburg and covered the entire territory of Tsarist Russia. Each canal was a branch of modernity, and the whole canal would meet at the heart of Tsarist Russia. This canal connection is similar to the 17th-century Dutch waterway network, which connects the whole country with the help of modern transportation networks.
In this route horizon, the transplantation of ships to and from the canal has also become one of the main manifestations of modernity. The Tsar decreed that local farmers build several types of Dutch boats, including Dutch flat-bottomed galleons (tjalks), kats, flutes/fluyts, gukor/hoekers, Dutch galleons (galiote/galioot) (Dutch galleons are Dutch fishing galleons or small merchant ships, belonging to small two rows of pulp boats with sails. ), flat sailboats (evers/ewers), etc. This is very difficult in practical operation, because the construction of various types of ships is very different and it is impossible to generalize. And the government has not announced a clear shipbuilding system. The Tsar's reforms seemed to rely on shipbuilding drawings, just telling the people to abandon the broken ships they were using and that it was time to replace them with new ones. The only commonality is that the origins of all types of ships were in the historic province of Friesland, the city of Hamburg in present-day northern Netherlands and the lower Elbe River in northwestern Germany. The Tsar arrived in this area during his second "Great Mission" (1716-1717), and it was only after this that the core project of shipbuilding reform really began to advance. Therefore, the development of the whaling industry and ship freight was only the idea that came out of the first "big mission", and the real implementation of this idea was after the return of the second "big mission". In fact, all the reforms ended in failure. In the 19th century, the fishermen were again questioned by the Tsarist government: "Why do you still use old boats?" ”。 The fishermen's answer was clear: "Traditional boats are better suited to individual requirements, they are more profitable." We understand nature, we know the line, we know how to move forward next. It is best for the government to let us take care of ourselves! ”
This last story is a story of seafood consumption. There are several things worth exploring. The first is a very concrete thing. Peter the Great's letters and articles show very clearly his taste preferences. In the letter, Peter the Great made quality requirements for the quality of the herring he ate, and if he wanted to eat it in a certain place before, he solemnly stated that he was not satisfied with the quality of the last time he sent. Obviously, he knows how to eat, knows what he wants to eat, and has a clear understanding of quality. Food consumption, from the individual Tsar to the whole of Russia, is a very interesting topic, but few people understand it. Current mainstream research is all about the ingredients of French cuisine, as well as the issue of "culinary authority" in the history of French food. The king gave the royal chef authority in cooking. The royal chef can become an authority figure only because of the "authoritative consumption" of the king under the concept of "culinary authority". In essence, the king's dietary consumption demonstrates a power over the state and nature. In the same way, when the Tsar ate herring and trout in the Volga, salmon in the White Sea, or elk in the deep woods, it was not as simple as eating, but behind it was the Tsar's absolute power to allocate the country's natural resources. The "culinary authority" largely explains how and why the Tsar's taste preferences were voluntarily emulated by society as a whole.
Peter the Great's daughter, Elizabeth I Petrovna, succeeded to the throne, and the Russian people during her reign longed for the same food as the Tsar. In the middle and second half of the 18th century, with the permission of the Tsar, the Russian government presided over two major projects. The project aims to establish a Dutch-style herring industry and oyster farming throughout Tsarist Russia, further promoting the development of St. Petersburg, the modern aquatic product consumption center. St. Petersburg is one of the world's major consumer hubs, and there are no unbeaten goods here. As long as there is money, seafood such as herring, lobster, oysters, mussels, anchovies and so on is available. The problem is that all of these seafood are important, so it would be inappropriate to use the concept of "culinary authority" again. Not only because it wasn't worth it to waste money on seafood that he could easily cook, but also because the Tsar was an "authority to conquer nature" at this time. Born in a great empire and possessed of a great king, it is natural to give everything that people need. It is also a more layered interpretation of "power". In 1747, Tsar Elizabeth I ordered oyster farming in the Gulf of Finland (oysters are rare) and the development of a state-owned herring preservation industry in the north. The end result was not satisfactory. According to biological explanations, oysters cannot survive in the Baltic Sea, where salt is too low. It is understood that Tsarist Russia specially invited Danish experts to guide, and also brought biological samples of oysters from the North Sea. After many experiments, oysters in the Gulf of Finland are still struggling to survive. The money for the experts can be said to have been lost, which also declared the failure of the Elizabeth I project. Some herring prepared according to Dutch technology was transported from Arkhangelsk to St. Petersburg, where they were tested and sold through a bidding system. However, Russia's herring preservation industry has never become a lucrative industry. In 1756, the Seven Years' War broke out in Europe, and tsarist Russia and Prussia took a confrontational situation. In this war, the Tsarist government authorities faced far more serious challenges than the herring industry.
In 1763, Catherine the Great (Catherine II Alexeievna) opened a new project. She opposed oyster farming in the Gulf of Finland, but Catherine the Great decided to send a fleet of distant-water fishing vessels deep into the White Sea and barents to catch oysters, lobsters and other types of seafood there. The Russian government organized several expeditions, and Catherine the Great ordered the state to protect private herring companies in order to better develop the Dutch-style herring industry. This project also largely failed. The distant-water fishing fleet was fruitless, and there were no oysters or lobsters there at all. The Dutch-style herring industry is also not profitable.
At the end of the 18th century, the territory of the Tsarist Empire expanded to the south of Europe. The authorities eventually discovered oysters on the Crimean Peninsula on the Black Sea coast, and the oysters were immediately sent to St. Petersburg, reflecting a certain European character of the new territory itself.
5. Conclusion
Based on the above three stories, I would like to summarize three points. First, the idea of "maritimity." What are the minimum things we need to have to be oceanic? When will mainland areas become "oceanized"? To date, there is no standard uniform definition of "oceanicity". However, this is a very central issue for the current development of maritime history. Because we discuss and observe which elements of society make it "oceanized." We can more or less combine some social characteristics to define "oceanicity". Along this line of thought, St. Petersburg in Tsarist Russia became the narrative center of Tsarist Russia. A series of marine activities were organized around St. Petersburg, and the elements of the sea were scattered throughout Tsarist Russia, and eventually St. Petersburg was transformed into a maritime metropolis. It should be noted that the region between St. Petersburg and Arkhangelsk was originally continental. When the Tsarist government-sponsored ocean project was launched, the area became a line of communication between the Baltic and White Sea coasts. On this line of transportation, money, people, knowledge, ideas, etc. circulate here. The scope of impact of ocean projects is also limited to this region. Arkhangelsk is a long way from St. Petersburg, but it doesn't matter. Arkhangelsk became the port of departure for St. Petersburg, and When St. Petersburg made the decision, the ships were instructed to depart from the port of Alhangers. That's exactly how the Ocean Empire works. Even if the ships and ports on both sides are connected by continent, the overall maritime nature of the line of communication cannot be denied.
Second, "ocean knowledge" and the 18th century's cognitive transformation of "ocean". At the end of the 17th century, the Russians began a generalized understanding of the ocean in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and observed the ocean as a natural object through the perspective of the Tsar, forming a holistic understanding of the ocean. Based on ocean experience, ocean cognition eventually translates into "ocean knowledge." The Elizabethan I project and Catherine the Great's project showed the importance of marine knowledge to local authorities, even affecting the careers of local officials. When going to the sea to catch oysters on the orders of the Tsar, the presence or absence of oysters in a certain area of the sea is a matter of urgency. If there are oysters, the local officials have done a good job, which is beneficial to their career. Conversely, local officials either go to great lengths to find oysters or have to make a reasonable explanation for the absence of oysters in the sea. So at the end of the 18th century, naturalists were sent to the White Sea by the imperial authorities, and they were regarded as representatives of state power and heavyweights who had mastered the knowledge of the sea. It can be seen that "marine knowledge" is actually the product of the 18th century empire's use of state power to carry out marine projects.
The third is the most basic and core point of my research, that is, to pay attention to the social technical imaginary. The so-called "translation with the eyes" is very important. The "visual impressions" of those in power were copied, such as what the Tsar wanted to reproduce what he saw during the "Great Mission" mission, and what he hoped to establish in Russia itself and was considered to embody European modernity. The problem is that some parts are true, and some parts are not. And in every big industry, the part that is not visualized is much more important than the part that can be visualized. For example, you can see the merchants, but you can't see the commerce; you can see the parliament, but you can't see the inner democracy; you can imitate the style of the whaling ship, but you can't copy the same brilliant whaling industry. The whaling industry is not only a whaling ship and whalinger that can be seen, but also a system of operation management, financial turnover and technical market. The so-called Westernization of Tsarist Russia was in fact the concretization of the European conception of the ruling elite based on its own experience. The so-called visual translation is to copy the "visual impression" as the so-called reality.
Finally, sino-Russian comparative studies are a potential area of research. Are there any similarities in the 18th-century maritime development between China and Russia? What are the comparable aspects of the Chinese Maritime Empire centered on Guangzhou and the Tsarist Maritime Empire centered on St. Petersburg? The story in it must have been shocking to think of.
Editor-in-Charge: Yu Shujuan
Proofreader: Liu Wei