M O V E M E N T O F C I V I L I Z AT I O N S

Mikhail Sukharev

Institute of Economic Studies, Karelian Research Centre of RAS

suharev@narod.ru

History as a movement of ideas

What is History? Does everything in the Universe have History? Can we speak about
the history of gas, for example?
“Starry sky is observed through telescope; women’s profile - with the naked eye; insect
– through magnifying glass; drop of water – through microscope. And how do we
observe history?” – wrote Lev Goumilev in his book “In search of the imaginary
empire” [1]
If we think about history as a whole, we would see that there must be some changing
pattern, some picture, some order of things, which history we want to see, describe
and understand. Where there is no apparent image, like with gas, where molecules run
randomly in different directions, there is no sense in talking about history.
This is a peculiarity of human perception – we cannot see chaos, we can only see
picture, order, shape, and form. Chaos is just a flicker for our vision.
If we consider human beings as molecules and the society as an aggregation of such
“molecules”, we can see that this aggregation does not look like gas. There is a
multitude of orders or patterns in human interactions and movement. Such as armies,
states, families, enterprises and other multifarious structures of the human society.
People combine in an ensemble with a specific pattern of interactions. Even when some
peoples leave the ensemble and are replaced by other, the whole system – army,
enterprise, even family - remains efficient.
“We are not stuff that abides, but patterns that perpetuate themselves; whirlpools of
water in an ever-flowing river,” - states once the mathematician Norbert Wiener. A
matter flow through our body, like water is involved in the whirlpool and then leaves it,
flows through it – the shape is retained while matter streams. The matter of our own
body is replaced many times in our life; I may now have just a few molecules in my
body from the boy I used to be. But I still believe that I’m the same man.
What does it mean to be the same? Indeed, what remains the same (similar) is the
organization of my body and the information in my brain, not matter. Ideas are the
steady skeleton of the matter; not vice versa. The idea of the living being, which
resides in the DNA, forms matter during the ontogenesis, and the one to mention this
was Aristotle. “The seed gives birth to all living, in the same way as those things which
are made by art; it contains both the form and ability ” – he wrote. The seed is the live,
real idea of the plant, which can grow from ground, can transmute the soil into green
plant.
This is the point for the famous Wiener thought of that a human can to be transferred
by telegraph, because we need to send only information, whereas matter can be
obtained at the receiving end of the line.
In such way, men and women are involved in social patterns and leave these patterns,
as they flow through the whirlpools of life.
In biology, there is the genome that determines which being will grow out of the seed.
What is it then that determines what society will grow out of people? What state will
arise from separate tribes residing in the given territory?
This image, this order is a very complex holistic system of ideas, for which I suggest
the term “social gestalt” [2, 3].
Why the “system of ideas”? Because not every idea does matches for any other random
idea. Like material things do not all match each other. The idea of the free market does
not match to the planned economy, faithfulness to suzerain is not a match to “homo
oeconomicus”, vendetta is not a match to jural state.
Moreover, one idea does not work without another idea. The idea of physics would
not work without the idea of mathematics, the idea of science without the idea of
logics, the idea of civil society without the idea of equality. The idea of the yurta is
necessary for the idea of a nomad tribe, the idea of field under crop – for all
agricultural civilisations, the idea of the engine – for the technological society idea.
Composing together multifarious ideas, we can get various complexes. By combining
the internal combustion engine with the caterpillar track we get a tractor; by adding
armour we get a tank. By combining engine and wheels we get an automobile; by
adding the body we get a lorry. By combining the engine and wings we get an aircraft.
Here we can see the “root ideas”. In reality, the internal combustion engine is a quite
complex machine. But its principle, its “blueprint” is relatively simple. It can be
explained by drawing several simple schemes, in pencil on a sheet of paper. In
constructing something principally new, people use root ideas, and go into more details
afterwards. In the common sense, there are several simple “root ideas”, assumed as a
basis of civilisation. Different combinations of these ideas would build up different
civilisations, accordingly. Technology plus Christianity plus democracy (reasoning very
rough) yields the Western world; technology plus communism plus, in my opinion,
Bizantism – the former Soviet Union.
Such organic systems of social ideas, “root” and less significant, (known in sociology
as “social institutions”) comprise the phenomenon we knew as “culture”, “civilization”.
In physical sense this gestalts stored in very shared form – in human minds, books,
arts, laws and so on. This shared storage is nevertheless quite holistic; some kinds of
books or arts in inappropriate societies will be dumped away.
Surveying the World history, we can see that social gestalts representing culture or big
organic parts of culture (such as “Hellenism”) move through the society, like
whirlpools on the water.
The Western civilization has its roots in the Greece, Rome and Palestine. The rest of
the contemporary Western world – from Australia to Scotland – was not part of the
“Western world” in these times, 2000 years ago. Germanic and Saxon tribes were then
considered “barbarian” by the Romans and Greeks; needless to say about Karelians,
Finns or Slavs.
Then, what is “Western”? Not the peoples, living in certain regions of globe. Not tribes
or even races. This is a characteristic of a certain ideal gestalt, which can move
through historic time and human society, from race to race.
In the medieval times, about 500 – 1300 A.D. several tribes dwells in the land, of the
present day is Finn and Russian Karelias. There were settlements in this territory,

2
inhabited by Finns, Karels, Slavs with different languages and religions – and there
were several different ‘virtual’ Karelias in the same place.

Civilization pathways

How did civilization reach Karelia? If we scrutinize this topic, we may see that there
were several ways, forming on the run several cultures. (Frequently I will tell about
“culture“ instead of “civilization”, because these notions are very close; S. Huntington
in his famous book “The Clash of Civilizations” wrote: “Civilization is the widest
cultural commonality”) The ranges of the cultures sometimes move to the West,
sometimes – to the East, and almost all the time there were areas, where different
cultures coexisted in the same place, in the same society.
The roots of the modern European civilization can be found in the times preceding the
Christian era, first of all, in ancient Greece and Rome.
Ancient Greece began its triumphant procession march at about 1000 B.C. Starting
with some little towns, the Greeks spread their culture around the Mediterranean Sea.
Greece brings to world modern analytical way of thinking. Greece gave the world the
modern analytical way of thinking. Indeed Greek philosophy is the cradle of
contemporary learning. Aristotle Logic underlies every science. Thesis-antithesis-
synthesis is the alpha of the millennial chain of conclusions, leading humankind to
modern power. (You can find the animated map of expanding of Greece in the
Internet-site of the University of Oregon, [4]. To view this map you need the free
Macromedia Shockwave player - http://sdc.shockwave.com/shockwave/download/ )
The art of ancient Greece has hitherto arisen admiration. For centuries it was the
standard for European artists. But, although “knowledge is power”, knowledge alone
is not enough in competition between nations. Rome defeated Greece. I think, this is
due to the specific organization of Roman state. The Roman Law (the illustrious
“Leges duodecim tabularum”), Roman senate and citizens, Roman army constitute the
instrument of triumph.
But conquest did not kill the Greek culture; quite the contrary, it spread to the Rome
and then, with Roman legions, across most of Europe.
This phenomenon is similar to successful gene combinations in Biology, when new
species arise. Gestalt, organic combination of the Greek culture and the Roman state
organization, gave rise to the Great Roman Empire, and moreover, to the Western
civilization.
But this is not the end of the story. Third and essential component of Western
civilization is the Christian religion. This is astonishing, but this kernel component
arose in the East, in Palestine. And here again we see, that idea overcomes matter.
Rome, the conqueror of Palestine, adopts Christianity! The religious Idea shape social
matter in its own manner.
These three parts – Greek philosophy, Roman state and Hebraic Christianity –
comprise the holistic complex, unique gestalt, has spread over vast areas in Europe and
still today serves as a classic example of the empire.

(Animated map of Roman expansion -

http://www.uoregon.edu/~atlas/europe/interactive/map26.html;

3
compare with the expansion of Christianity -
http://www.uoregon.edu/~atlas/europe/interactive/map31.html ;
collection of ancient maps, drawn by medieval authors - http://www.henry-
davis.com/MAPS/EMwebpages/EML.html ).

Probably there was a fourth component, contributed by Germanic tribes, but this
component is difficult to define. This may be, the rules of tribal life, faithfulness to the
tribe and chieftain. However, the ancient Roman Empire crashed down under attacks
of barbarians, and arose again under the name of The Holy Roman Empire under rule
of Germanic Kings.
Why did this complex, this gestalt spread so widely in human societies? We may speak
about some synergy between ideal systems, such as between the governing system and
religion, the synergy, which gives this combination of ideas the power over human
masses. Further, we may speak about competition between different complexes of
ideas, or social gestalts, in the struggle for social matter. It is easy to see the similarity
with the title of famous work by Charles Darwin “On The Origin of Species by Means
of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life”.
In thousands of wars and adaptations of better ideas by different societies, the more
and more “favoured” social gestalts are preserved by History. We can to re-write
Darwin heading in such manner: “On The Origin of Social Ideas by Means of Natural
Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Ideas in the Struggle for Social Matter”.
In recent years, the new scientific discipline has arisen – the so-called “Memetics”. This
discipline tries to understand the principles underlying the spread of ideas or, saying in
a more technical language, develops Evolutionary Models of Information
Transmission. (You can read about Memetics in the on-line Journal of Memetics [5]) I
believe, the Memetic approach gives rise to a new era in Historic Science.
But let us return to the question of the Roman Empire. The combination of the first
two mentioned ideal parts forms an ideal frame for the great state, surrounding the
Mediterranean Sea. (see an excellent Internet site [6]) Christianity takes a part in pre-
Christian Roman Empire, but Rome adhered to a policy of religious equality. Only
baptizing of Constantine the Great in AD 312 established the prevalence of Christianity
in Roman Empire.
In its progress ancient Roman civilization was coming in collision with different races,
introducing new elements to the whole gestalt. In this way Germans became soldiers of
Rome, forming a special military culture, acquiring great influence in the Empire, up to
the election of “Soldier Emperors”, culminating in the constitution of the Gallic Empire
in the West.
Encircling the Mediterranean Sea, the Empire became too big. Governing such
extensive state in ancient times – without phones, radio, and airplanes – was very
difficult. Emperor Valentinian by his first act in AD 364 recognized the practical
necessity to split the Empire into two parts – West and East. No one could hold power
over both east and west. Valentinian chose for himself his native west, and made his
brother Valens Augustus the governor of the east [6, The Collapse]. You can find a
collection of maps of ancient world in the Internet site [7].
Nonetheless, being absolutely reasonable from the point of view of governance, this
decision lead in the long run to splintering of the Roman civilisation into the Western

4
and Eastern branches. In the beginning it was perceived as one and indivisible with two
Emperors in the East and West.
The Eastern Empire, with the capital in Constantinople, persisted the longest, until AD
1453, when Mohammed II the Conqueror seized it. The city was sacked, its literary
treasures dispersed or destroyed, and population sold into slavery [6, Constantinople].
The life of the Western Empire was much shorter. On the one hand, it was constantly
exposed to Gothic attacks. On the other hand, the Eastern Empire appears to have had
a more rigid state structure, which gave rise to “Bizantism”. Russians then adopted this
«Bizantism» as the way of social life.
In AD 476 the Germanic mercenary Odoacer seized power in the Western Empire.
Odoacer chose not to be the Emperor himself, but preferred to be the viceroy of the
single Roman emperor in Constantinople.

After Rome

It is generally known that the Roman Empire was divided into the Eastern and Western
Empires. But a more detailed investigation would show, that there was a very
complicated process. Sometimes leadership belonged to the Western, sometimes to the
eastern Emperors. Sometimes one of Empires begins to disclaim integrity of whole
Empire, and trying to be sovereign state. Sometimes one of Empires unleashed war for
unification to regain past greatness. This rivalry was hanging heavy for more than a
thousand years.
For nearly 400 years there was no Western Empire at all.
But it was restored as The Holy Roman Empire in central Europe and Italy under the
rule of the German kings from 962 to 1806. It was considered to be a restoration and
continuation of the ancient Roman Empire. The first reviver was the Frankish king
Charlemagne. His Roman Empire lasted from 800 to 925. The second revival was due
to joint efforts of Otto I of Germany and Pope John XII in 962. The Pope crowned
Otto the Emperor of the Romans. Since then, the German kings had been claiming the
right to rule the empire.
Later, the Western culture penetrated in to Sweden with German warriors and
clergyman. In AD 829 the German bishop Ansgar introduces the Christian mission to
Sweden. (see also Internet site [8]). In 1004, the King Olof Skötkonung was baptized,
and made Christianity the official religion of Sweden. Several of the following kings
were pagans, though. Swedish conquerors spread Christianity further to the Finland.
Technologies, literacy, laws, book printing goes together with overall civilisation.
Constantinople was the centre of the Eastern Empire. Its emperors assimilated some
ancient Eastern principles of state organisation, as it may to seem, directly from
oriental air and ground. The principles are a stricter and more rigid hierarchy from the
emperor to last subject in the State, much less regard to the rights of those one level
lower in the social hierarchy. Slavophiles termed these principles as “Bizantism” [9].
Bizantism may not looking good to private person, especially to a western man, but it
is very useful for the state. Leontieff wrote, that thanks to Bizantism the Eastern
Empire lived longer, that any other social system – for 1200 years. There may be some
truth in the division, drawn by Halford Mackinder and other geopolitical scientists
between “oceanic” and “continental” states. Continental states are always exposed to

5
the pressure of neighbors and therefore need more rigid social structure. On the other
hand this rigid structure impeded evolution of a “Bizanted” states.
The Ancient Mediterranean civilization absorbed this Bizantism as it was moving North
and in this form spread to the Kiev Russia and then up the Volga, to Novgorod and
further.
It is easy to surmise, that it was Bizantism that was hidden under the communist
slogans in the Stalin times.

Two Ways to North

The Civilisation arrived in Karelia from one source but via two different ways. One
was via Europe (Great Roman Empire – Holy Roman Empire of Germans – Sweden –
Finland) and the other one via contemporary Russia (Eastern Byzantium Empire –
Kiev – Novgorod – Ladoga).
A. Toynbee wrote, “Expansion of the Orthodox Christian society did not proceed
along one line, but along two directions, it producing the figure of crescent with horns,
directed north-west and north-east” [in reverse translation, 10, p.42]. A similar picture
is observed in our case – in the movement of culture to Karelia.
In these ways gestalts of civilizations absorb different ideas and full under various
influences. As a consequence, when these cultural patterns meet, they were quite
different, although coming from a common source. In the small territory of Karelia for
a long time sometime one, sometime another one civilisation predominate another. This
led to some mixed forms of culture, even at the same time and in the same place. At
present some Orthodox churches function in Finland (especially in the East) and
Lutheran churches function in Russian Karelia. We will term the civilisations that had
arrived in Karelia via Europe – Scandinavian like “Western-way civilisation”, and via
Constantinople – Russian like “Eastern-way civilisation”.
In the first half of the First Millennium of the Christian Era there were two coexisting
cultures in Karelia: the culture of the residential population, who preserved the Stone
Age culture and the culture of newly arrived tribes, who brought iron axes and arrow-
heads [11]. Archaeological analysis shows, that there were two sources of ironware in
ancient Karelia – West Finland and Upper Volga [ibid.], where iron-making cultures
existed at the time. Thus, we see further evidence of the two pathways by which
cultures arrived in Karelia – one from the Northwest and one from Southeast, from
Scandinavia and Russia.
In “A narrative Finnish history” [12] we read: “Particularly in Karelia it is known (or
sooner: believed) to have existed Viking trading posts, which became assimilated or
alienated to the original Viking culture in Novgorod, Uppland, Gotland or wherever
they had come from. The town of Staraja Ladoga was a Viking stronghold, for
instance. A Viking type (but Tavastian) trade station has in recent years been excavated
in the heart of Tavastia, in Varikkoniemi. … In early medieval time the eastern ( -
Bizantia’s – M.S.) Christian Church extended its influence to Novgorod, Karelia and
Tavastia. The energetic bishop Thomas (1220-45) extended the Finnish Catholic
diocese to Tavastia, probably with armed assistance in the 1230s from the German
Brethren of the Sword”. The “tides and ebbs” of Western-way and Eastern-way
civilisations created an original mixed culture, which was certainly growing “more
western” in westwards, from present Pudozh to Joensuu.

6
In a dozen of different sagas and letopises (chronicles) we would read something like
this: In 1XXX A.D. King Such-and-Such gathered his men and headed to West (East)
They sailed to Finland (or Karelia) and plundered there, and went up the country. They
burnt fields and destroyed villages. All people fled to the forest, and had emptied their
houses of all household goods. With great loot King Such-and-Such went back home”.
Russians, Norwegians, Swedes, Danes passed Karelia tens of times, and every time
they dropped seeds of their culture there. It would be wrong to assume, that Karelians
were passive victims in these battles. They often took part in these campaigns on the of
conquerors side. For example, in 1187 Karelians (“Korela”, as Russians named them)
takes a part in the Novgorod conquest of Sweden, when Sigtuna (predecessor of
Stockholm) was destroyed.
These interactions have enriched the Karelian culture with elements originated both
from the West and from the East. Archaeologists finds in Karelia include artefacts both
from the West (Sweden, Germanic) and from the East (Novgorod, Volga, Asia).
A multitude of data about Finnish and Eastern Karelia, including linguistic and even
genetic aspect, can be found at the Mauri Rastas Internet-site [13].
In this site there is a picture, an old coat of arms, where a straight western sword is
held up against a curved eastern sable, vividly illustrated division of ancient Karelia
into Western and Eastern (Fig. 2)

In 1323 AD the “Razgranichitelnaja Gramota” (Demarcation Deed) between

Novgorod and Denmark was signed [14]. This document, written in Latin and Russian,
establishes the first official border between West and East Karelia.
“Diuisiones et mete terre landemaerke: de mari in Seestaer in mosan et in medio mosa
est mons, deinde in ampnem Zay, de Zay in Solsten, de Solsten in Rodhahael, de
Rodhahael in Lambotraeski de Lambotraeski in mosan Paeki, de mosan Paeki in
Kangasjaerffi, de Kangasjaerffi in Pwronarffui, de Pwronarffui in Arctojarffui, de
Arctojarffui in Torsajaerffui, in Torsajaerffui in Sarkelakxi, de Sarkelaxi in Samusalom,
de Samusala in Sithi, deinde in Carelakoski, deinde in Kolumakoski, deinde in
Pathajoki, deinde in Helsinghall.” [15]
Both parties to the treaty undertook to collect tribute from Karelian tribes in their
respective territory. In following years the border between Finnish and Russian Karelia
changed many times. But the division into western (Catholic and then Lutheran) and
eastern (Orthodox) Karelias remained invariable.
Thus was the border established between the West and East in Northern Europe, and
this border runs exactly across long-suffering Karelia.
Arnold Toynbee wrote in his “A Study of History”, having in mind the reforms of Peter
The Great: “ … this inward shock urged them (Russians – M.S.) to practical action,
which became apparent in the process of westernisation, headed by Peter himself. This
unprecedented revolution moved the borders of the Western World away from the
7
eastern borders of Poland and Sweden to borders of the Manchurian Empire”
(retranslated from [10]). Thus, the father of the “civilization approach” postulated that
borders of civilisations could be moved, and even more definitely, that Russia had for a
while been part of the Western world.
The revolution of Lenin and Stalin moves this border back to the West; release Finland
from Russian Empire, but Karelia still remains divided.
Now there is a question: whether can it be, what Gorbachev-Yeltsin revolution will
return Russia in the Western world?
Two of the main constituent ideas in the gestalt of the western civilisation – the ideas
of free market and political pluralism, which had been divided the world by
communists and capitalists prior 1991, have been assimilated by Russia. The religious
difference cannot to be determinative, because there are many different religions within
the Western World, and the difference between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches is
not greater, than between the Catholic and Lutheran Churches.
The Gestalt of Russia has changed, and it is now very close to the Western one,
assuming legal system, Christianity, pluralism, market, science, technology and culture.
Russian people need some time to make these principles their own, intrinsic, but this
process is going on very quickly.
This is paradox, but world became more globalised and more regionalised
simultaneously. The question is that world becomes “stratified”, “modular”. Some
“layers” – economy, science – is global, unified. Some layers local – minor languages,
religious communities. The same human may possess many global and local layers. Be
global businessman, Greek and belong to Buddhist community in Finland, for example.
It may happen that in the future, not very distant, if Russia adopts the freedom of
movement of people, ideas and capitals, anyone will be able to choose whichever
Karelia they preferred. At the same time and place.

Conclusions
The form, image of a society determined by social gestalt, which is the organic
complex of ideas, or even ideal systems, such as laws, traditions, norms, scientific and
cultural ideas and so on.
Elements of social gestalts can be transmitted through social matter, passed from one
society to another.
Moving through history, this elements generates different combinations, constituting
new gestalts and, thus way, new societies.
Karelia is the place, where gestalts, spreading from one source but by different routes,
were exposed to different influences and transformed, mixed together.
The division of the word into the West and East is not obsolete, the boundary is
moving over historic time and nations can go in and out of different civilisations.

Additional related sources in Internet:

Official site of the Administrative Bodies of Republic of Karelia:

8
http://www.gov.karelia.ru
Karelian Internet provider and common info, personal pages, news:
onego.ru
Karelian Research Center of Russian Academy of Sciences:
www.krc.karelia.ru
Center of Social Analyses and Reconstruction Socio-Logos:
http://socio-logos.karelia.ru
Petrozavodsk State University:
http://www.petrsu.ru/psu
The Online Medieval and Classical Library (OMACL) is a collection of some of the
most important literary works of Classical and Medieval civilization:
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL
University of Virginia (Roman Map Page):
http://www.historylink101.com/ancient_rome/ancient_rome_maps.htm
Northern European Studies:
http://www.northvegr.org/lore/main.html
Heninen’s family Internet site. Beautiful site devoted to Karelia. In Russian, Finnish
and English:
http://heninen.net

9
1Гумилев Л. Н. В поисках вымышленного царства: Товарищество Клышников, Комаров и К°,
Москва, 1992 г.
2 Сухарев М. В. На границе цивилизаций: Independed Boston Almanac “Lebed”, N 248, 249
December 2001. http://www.lebed.com/art2739.htm, http://www.lebed.com/art2749.htm
3 Сухарев М. В. Эволюция общества, как движение идей: Социально-экономическое,
духовное и культурное возрождение Карелии, КарНЦ РАН, Петрозаводск, 2001 г. С. 32-42.
Internet access http://socio-logos.karelia.ru/Text/IdeaMove.htm
4 University of Oregon, Darkwing Atlas Project:
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~atlas/europe/interactive/map20.html
5 Journal of Memetics: http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/
6 Illustrated history of the Roman Empire: http://www.roman-empire.net
7 Ancient World Mapping Center : http://www.unc.edu/awmc/content/xhtml/maps_wheelock.html
8 European History: http://europeanhistory.about.com
9 Леонтьев, К. Византизм и славянство // Византизм и славянство, М: Эксмо-пресс, 2001 г.
10 А. Дж. Тойнби. Постижение истории: Прогресс, Москва, 1991.
11 А.И. Сакса. Средневековая корела: /http://history.pu.ru/educ/umm/programm/archeolo/03-
23.htm
12 A narrative Finnish history: http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/scn/faq433.html
13 Rastas, M. History of Karelia: http://www.kolumbus.fi/rastas/engcarel.html#split
14 Кочкуркина С.И., Спиридонов А. М., Джаксон Т.Н. Письменные известия о карелах (X-
XVI в): http://www.around.spb.ru/history/wricorela/scand.php
15 Ордин К. Ф. Покорение Финляндии. Санкт-Петербург, 1909 г. Приложение 2.