9 History of Etiquette in Russia

In Russia, which did not experience the classical European Middle Ages, the culture of etiquette spread much later than in Western Europe - in the first half of the 18th century.

Patriarchality as a way of life was inherent in all European nations (and still retains some of its influence). But most often he is associated (especially in our Russian consciousness) with Russia, with the “Russian spirit”.

This is probably due to the fact that Russia, much later than other nations, entered into a single European civilization. The vein is quite closed, away from the upheavals caused in Europe, either by revolutions, or by redrawing the borders of the feudal principalities, or by social unrest of the strengthening “third estate”.

With the movement of the sun, people conformed their movement in space, most prominently speaking in the autumn-winter period: as already mentioned, until the full sunrise everyone worked at home, from sunrise to sunset expanded and the field of activity, especially for men, returned to home again at dusk.

There was an everyday set of greetings, appeals, forms of communication - working and guest. The social difference was reflected in the gestures and formulas of greetings: not only a clergyman, but also a wealthy fellow villager could greet him with a big bow — a bow to the ground, a small bow — a bow to the belt — exchanged level, “gave” him at the entrance to someone else's hut (men and women), the wife bowed to her husband, women to men (the latter could not answer). Communication was permeated with various formulas of good wishes for all occasions: these were allegories or prayer formations.

The forms of behavior of everyday leisure activities, differing according to the nature of the sexes, were worn in men and women as a whole, closed. Men, at whatever time of the year and wherever they gathered, discussed economic and social affairs, listened to the stories of old men, soldiers, wandering craftsmen, “told” (jokes, fairy tales, bylichka), read aloud, sang male songs, drank, played cards. Women have never been idle: combining rest with any kind of work, they discussed family matters, listened to the stories of the praying mantis, religious reading, sang their songs, etc.

One of the brightest economic and everyday characteristics of everyday life was the separation of men and women, perceived at the late stage of development of traditional culture, mainly along with the restriction of social forms of woman’s behavior and penetration by its numerous bans as a social attribute.

Thus, the everyday behavior of adults was composed of vigorous household activities — work, accomplishment of vital affairs and events (matchmaking, christening, family care, teaching children, treating the sick, helping the old, neighbors, hygiene, funeral, etc.) and various ritual actions. associated with vigorous activity, that is, the vast majority of ceremonies of magical-religious origin (the so-called calendar, labor, family, etc.) were performed on weekdays. Everyday behavior was characterized by clarity of tempo-spatial segments and their contents, alternation of work and rest, moderation in everyday life (food, clothing, communication, etc.).

Everyday behavior was based on sacred involvement in life and its constituent deritualized forms went back to ritual, in unity with magical and religious actions: symbolism of gestures, movement, verbal (greetings, addresses, working words, gratitude, blessings, everyday forms of narrative folklore, and .d.) and musical expression (everyday, labor songs, labor and leisure instrumental music), real attributes and their “places”. In this context, sexual isolation was ritually significant and conditioned, and, consequently, the norms of behavior of men and women at this level are equal, since it was only in this division and unity that the normal functioning of the community was carried out. Note that the role of women in the ritualization of everyday life was very great: they were the main custodians of traditions.

Holidays and holiday behavior. Church and state measures to streamline the counting of time were always socially differentiated, since the authorities were primarily interested in organizing work time in the lower strata of society. The famous persecution by the church of “pagan feasts”, mainly of their “untimely”, “inappropriate” time and “obscene” behavior, as well as days that were considered forbidden by the people for various works, intensified as the state grew. for the vitality of individual “unclean” customs, how much because of the desire to introduce into clear limits the limits of working and non-working time and to give the latter a “truly Christian” character. Sunday was the main stable regulator of the ratio — alternation — of the ordinary and festive season; Easter was associated with the resurrection of Christ - the system of moving holidays: Sunday, Trinity (Pentecost), Peter the Great, and Shrovetide.

But the forms of regulation preceding etiquette, supported by the customs and norms of Orthodox morality, were widely represented among the higher strata of Russia in the 16th - 17th centuries. A convincing example of this is the “Domostroy” - a code of conduct that received its final form by the middle of the XVI century. This code of conduct, which was a “ritualist of everything that should be done and how to live,” established a strict hierarchy in relations between people and demanded precise observance of certain cycles and organization of life processes, both family, property, and city, state. It was a kind of scenario plan for vital family and social activities. "Domostroy" covered almost all aspects of the life of the nobility, the landlords. It detailed instructions on parenting, housekeeping, cooking, receiving guests, wedding rituals, trade, etc.

The titles of the chapters of this book speak for themselves: “How to treat the household gratefully to those who come to your house”, “Ordering a key attendant for a feast”, “How to teach children and fear to save”, “How to consult my wife and husband every day and ask everything : and how to visit guests, invite you to yourself, and talk with guests about something ”, etc. Yes, and the instructions themselves are eloquent enough: “eat and drink to you for the glory of God, do not overeat, do not get drunk, do not make empty speeches”, “When you put food and drink in front of someone, or put any food in front of you, blaspheme should not say, “this is rotten”, or “sour”, or “fresh”, or “salty”, or “bitter”, or “foul”, or “raw”, or “overcooked”, or some other To prophesy is expressed, but it is fitting that the gift of God - any “food and drink” - be praised and eaten with gratitude ”. “When they invite you to a feast, do not get drunk until you are intoxicated and do not stay up late, because in many ways drinking and long sitting is a battle and swarm, and a fight, and even bloodshed.” "The master of the house (or his servants) must serve everyone to eat and drink ... by dividing by dignity, by rank, and by custom."

Interesting and important from the point of view of the formation of good manners is the “Basil of Caesarea Teachings for the Young Men”, which was included in “Domostroy” as a fragment in the chapter “How to teach and save children by fear”. This teaching, in particular, says: “One should protect spiritual purity and bodily impassivity, having a gentle walk, a voice low, as if kindly, food and drink are not sharp; in the case of elders, silence; before the wisest — obedience; to the noble, obedience; to peers and younger ones, sincere love; Avoid wicked, carnal, self-indulgent people, speak less, dare more, don’t be bold, dont stay out in conversations, don’t be outraged by laughter, decorate, lecherous women don’t be led ... avoid pretense, don’t strive for high rank and nothing to desire except honor from all. "

The head of the Domostroy family was the unlimited ruler of the household, who, with their disobedience to the owner, was advised to “crush the ribs”. All the etiquette of home life was practically reduced to obedience to those rules and regulations that came from the head of the house. And it completely correlated with the general system of the social and cultural life of Russia of that time. The unlimited power of the man - the master of the house - corresponded to the spirit of feudal relations, when the prince, the boyar was prescribed the role of the "father" of his subjects.

“Domostroy” helped to teach children the craft and trade, while disobedience advised “crushing the ribs”. The wife, according to Domostroi, is involved in the upbringing of children and keeps housekeeping, but she should be punished “menacing” when she commits an oversight.

Despite the fact that “Domostroy” was originally written by Sylvester with a particular purpose - to give guidance to his son Anfim, it does not express the private views of the author himself and not only the views and rules of contemporary Russian society of the XVI century. In “Domostroy” - a reflection of all previous life. He does not present an accurate picture of the life of this society, “it’s not a historical story about how it should live, and it’s more like a didactic poem, where the main element is not historical, but didactic”.

“Domostroy” teaches “not to steal, not to lie, not to slander, not to envy, not to condemn, not to imitate, not to mock, not to remember evil, not to be angry at anyone. With a lot to be obedient and submissive, with the middle one - loving, to the less and miserable - welcoming and gracious. ”

We find in “Domostroi” and the “golden rule”: “What you don’t like, you don’t do both.” However, “Domostroy” is rather a set of moral than etiquette rules, it is rather “what to do” rather than “as it should.”

Thus, the whole etiquette of home life - the main form of communication of people in those days - was reduced to obedience to a home despot, whose will determined the specific rules of behavior of every household, everyone who was dependent on him. The unlimited power of the head of the family, above all, corresponded to the spirit of feudal relations, when the role of the father of his subjects was attributed to the prince, the boyar. In connection with this, the word “domostroy” has become a household word, meaning a conservative household lifestyle.

Because of the cruelty and despotism characteristic of “Domostroi”, the very concept of “domostroy” (“domostroevschina”) in the subsequent epoch became nominal, meaning a conservative everyday lifestyle. Although, of course, the content of “Domostroi” itself does not boil down to the thesis of “wife and fear of her husband ...”, and, by and large, is deprived of that “home-building”, the idea of ​​which is formed in our ordinary consciousness. “Domostroy” is an encyclopedia of the home life of wealthy urban families of the XVI-XVII centuries.

The emerging secular propriety in this period of Russian history often mingled with existing religious norms. Perhaps it was most pronounced in the attitude of society towards a woman who was considered to be “Twelve times unclean” and always dangerous. And “the younger and more beautiful the woman, the more dangerous and deserving the curse”. Therefore, in order to reduce the evil and remove the danger, a woman was tried to be kept locked up. And to a greater extent it concerned the upper class women. (Outside this class, the danger did not seem so strong.) “The room of the boyar,” according to K. Waliszewski, “is in the depths of the boyar’s house. This is a kind of prison. No man can penetrate here, even if he is the closest relative. The windows of the women's premises overlook the courtyard, surrounded by a high fence and thus protected from indiscreet looks. Usually there was a chapel or a chapel where the woman prayed. She went to church only on big holidays, and at the same time she was surrounded by great precautions ... According to the rule, the wife should not appear before her husband’s guests. But an exception was made when they wanted to show their respect to selected guests. A ceremony took place in the middle of the feast, which seemed to reflect the nobility of the West. At a sign from the owner, the noblewoman descended the stairs from her chamber, dressed in her best outfits, with a golden cup in her hand. Touching him with her lips, she then served him to each guest. Then she became a place of honor and took kisses from them. ”

Such recluse propriety Terema led to the fact that it was worth the girl say a few words to another man, not a relative, to lose her good name forever. Even the excessively diligent use of cosmetics (rouge, whitewash, etc.), which was characteristic at that time, was due to the desire to hide what should not be shown - the nature, the body of the woman.

However, the desire for certain higher forms of cultural life was, of course, characteristic of Russian nobility, and, above all, women, which was manifested in the cult of personal beauty and care for her, the constant interest in jewelry, jewelry, expensive clothes, etc. .

The way of life in Russia began to change dramatically in the turbulent era of Peter 1 (1672 - 1725), full of significant events.

Having set himself the task of Europeanizing the whole way of life in Russia, Peter 1 began, with an unprecedented scale, to introduce various innovations into the everyday life and life of the Russian nobility and of Russian society as a whole.

Petr1 pursued three main goals: the introduction of Russian women to public life following the example of Western countries; the accustoming of the upper classes of Russian society to the forms of treatment common in Europe; and, finally, the merging of various classes and their mixing with foreigners. As you know, the last goal was not achieved - the Russian ladies stubbornly sought to select only compatriots for their cavaliers. But the other two were largely implemented.

The reforms carried out by Peter soon affected the life of the nobility, which became significantly different from the life of previous generations. Young people — the offspring of grandees, senior officials and officers — had the opportunity to study in educational institutions, where they mastered secular propriety (the ability to squander smiles and be helpful with ladies and elders), learn dancing, fencing, the art of eloquence, etc. The training of young people was greatly facilitated by the creation of special manuals and manuals, which explained in detail how to behave in society in certain situations.

Undoubtedly, the leading place among these instructions was occupied by a book called “Honest Youth of the Mirror, or Indications for Everyday Life. Collected from different authors ”, which was published in St. Petersburg in 1717

It is believed that the author-compiler of this book was a friend, associate of Peter 1, general-feldtseykhmeyster Ya.V. Bruce, who was known as the Russian Faust. First published under Peter, it was subsequently reprinted many times.

The book was intended for the secular education of young men of nobility. A feature of this manual was that the rules borrowed from European etiquette were concretized and supplemented with reference to the domestic reality and the customs that existed in Russia.

Among the numerous councils, it contained the following instructions:

· “Parents should not interrupt speeches, they should not be put to rest ... but wait until they speak out.” Often, not to repeat a single case, on a table, on a bench or on anything else, not to rely and not be like a peasant from the village who is lying in the sun, but must stand straight ”;

· “The lad should be very courteous and polite, both in words and in deeds: it’s not daring and not pugnacious. Also, having met a friend, in three steps I should take off my hat in a pleasant way, and not past walking past and looking back to greet him. For it is polite to be verbally, and to keep a hat in your hands is excessive, and praise is worthy. And it's better when someone is said about: he is polite, humble and well-done, than when they say about that, he is a haughty blockhead ”.

A feature of this book was the fact that its last sections were devoted to girls who had to have significantly more virtues than young men: humility, hard work, mercy, modesty, frugality, loyalty, cleanliness, etc. Moreover, the girls especially appreciated the ability to blush, which was a sign of moral purity and humility.

This book, of course, played a huge positive role in the development of a culture of etiquette among the Russian nobility. But other cultural actions undertaken by Peter 1, in particular the introduction of new cut dresses, wigs, beard shaving, etc., contributed to this to a small extent.

“Beard was a special, partly personal, hatred for Peter,” writes K. Valishevsky. “She personified in his eyes all the habits, covenants, prejudices that he intended to eradicate.” The beard at that time became a kind of sign in the struggle between reformists and traditionalists, zealots of antiquity. Therefore, Peter 1 struggled with beards mercilessly. Известно, что в 1704 г., производя в Москве обзор штата своих крупных и мелких чиновников, он даже велел наказать плетьми Ивана Наумова, отказавшегося обрить бороду. Эти действия Петра влекли за собой много эмоциональных переживаний у мужчин, привыкших веками носить бороды не только как знак мужского достоинства и красоты, но и как естественную защиту лица от суровых российских морозов. Некоторые, принужденные Петром расстаться со своей бородой, даже завещали положить ее с собой в гроб, чтобы после смерти предстать перед святителем в благообразном виде.

Разрешение носить “волосатое украшение” выдавалось лишь ограниченному кругу лиц, за что им приходилось уплачивать налог до ста рублей в год и носить на виду выдававшуюся при взносе денег бляху с надписью: “Борода – лишняя тягота”.

Эмоциональная напряженность, сопровождавшая реформы Петра, была связана и с той прямолинейностью, с которой он решал многие, требующие деликатности вопросы. Так, одновременно с ликвидацией бород царь решил укоротить и женские одежды, и, если юбка превышала установленную длину, ее всенародно обрезали, нисколько не щадя стыдливости женщин. Хотя тот способ, который употреблялся в борьбе с бородами и национальными русскими платьями, по справедливому замечанию историка С.М. Соловьева, “был завещан ему предшественниками, и другой способ был тогда немыслим... Еще в 1681 году царь Федор издал указ о ношении коротких кафтанов, в охабнях и однорядках было запрещено являться в Кремль”.

The rules of etiquette were introduced by Peter with the relevant decrees containing the threat of punishment for their failure. And in this respect, as in Europe, etiquette had the force of law. The decree of August 29, 1699 suggested that the population shave their beards and start wearing a European dress - French or Hungarian. Samples of the installed dress were pasted through the streets. Poor people were given a temporary postponement to wear old clothes, but from 1705 everyone was obliged to wear a new dress under the penalty of fine or even more severe punishment.

Петр 1 обучал своих придворных различным премудростям этикета с таким же усердием, как офицеров военному искусству. Он составил инструкцию, которой должны были руководствоваться в Петергофе. Она примечательна как свидетельство того, какие элементарные правила поведения царь внушал своим придворным: “Кому дана будет карта с нумером постели, то тут спать имеет не перенося постели, ниже другому дать или другой постели что взять”. Или еще более выразительный пункт: “Не разувся с сапогами или башмаками, не ложиться на постели”.

26 ноября 1718 года первый Санкт-Петербургский генерал-полицмейстер граф Антон Емануилович Девиер опубликовал распоряжение Петра 1 об организации ассамблей – вольных собраний, открывавшихся по вечерам в знатных домах по установленному порядку. Ассамблея, разъяснялось в указе, слово французское. Оно означает некоторое число людей, собравшихся вместе или для своего увеселения, или для рассуждения дворянских и купеческих сословий должны встречаться с иностранцами и перенимать у них формы политеса и одежды, “тут можно друг друга видеть и о всякой нужде переговорить, также слушать, что где делается”.

На ассамблеи приглашалось избранное общество. Вместе с женами туда должны были являться высшие офицеры, вельможи, чиновники, корабельные мастера, богатые купцы и ученые. Лакеям и служителям вход был воспрещен.

Петр1 сам составил правила организации ассамблей и поведения на них гостей, руководствуясь впечатлениями от французских гостиных, в которых он побывал во время заграничных поездок, но с добавлениями собственного изобретения. Он же установил и строгую очередность их созыва.

Ассамблеи сыграли положительную роль в культурном развитии России уже тем, что открыли новую форму общения людей, которое в допетровской Руси было крайне ограниченно. Представители господствующего класса общались редко, фрагментарно, да и сам круг общающихся был очень узок и ограничивался в основном родственниками и соседями. Жили замкнуто, встречи носили преимущественно хозяйственно-деловой характер, даже самой потребности провести время в кругу знакомых еще не появилось. Ассамблеи же разрушили прежнюю замкнутость и значительно увеличили круг людей, вступающих друг с другом в длительное общение. Да и само общение людей, особенно мужчин и женщин, стало более раскрепощенным.

Мужчины стали услужливы и внимательны к дамам, правда, их услужливость часто носила преувеличенный характер. Так, например, в 1721 году, чтобы почтить красоту княгини Кантемир, гости, собравшиеся после обеда у нее в спальне, пили за ее здоровье из вещиц, принадлежавших ей: стеклянных башмаков, сапожков и проч.

В обществе учтивый кавалер должен был подносить даме, которую хотел отличить, букет свежих цветов. На улице, когда ехавший мужчина встречался со знакомою дамой в карете, оба экипажа с многочисленною свитою останавливались, кавалер, невзирая на погоду, выходил из своего экипажа и с обнаженной головою, держа шляпу в руках, подходил к карете красавицы, чтобы иметь удовольствие приветствовать ее поцелуем руки.

Основным законом ассамблеи была “совершенная непринужденность”. “У каждой двери повешено было напоминание посетителям не чиниться, не беспокоить себя ни для какого лица, под опасением наказания осушить огромный кубок Большого Орла, который тут же под крышкой находился на мраморном пьедестале”.

Такому наказанию могли подвергаться все участники ассамблеи – сам царь, царица, все мужчины и замужние женщины, с той лишь разницей, что женский кубок был втрое меньше против мужского.

Этикет в России в это время формируется по образцу, придворной культурой Франции, Голландии и других европейских стран.

Этикет приобретает светский, открытый характер, во многом противоречащий моральным нормам православной церкви. Меняется отношение к красоте. Признается ценность внешней красоты, порою в ущерб красоте нравственной, содержательной. Признается идея о том, что красота должна приносить радость, удовольствие. А для этого она должна быть открытой, доступной глазу.

В то же самое время Петр1 стремился придать этикету черты некоего демократизма. Это проявлялось уже в том, что, формируя правила поведения на ассамблеях, в свете, он исходил из принципов равенства и свободы, правда понимаемых достаточно своеобразно (равенство мужчины и женщины, лиц разного возраста и ранга в исполнении штрафных санкций и т.п.). Разумеется, этими прокламируемыми принципами не следует обольщаться, поскольку, как верно замечает А.М. Панченко, “речь шла только о равенстве пестрого петербургского общества в веселье и смехе... Не следует преувеличивать и свободу поведения на ассамблеях: как-никак, это была служба, развлечение по обязанности, и упаси Боже было уклониться от него”. И все же это придавало некоторую специфичность российскому этикету по сравнению с европейским.

В послепетровское время, когда Российское государство и его ведущее сословие – дворянское – были уже достаточно крепкими, когда боярские нравы были преодолены, в России установился период относительно спокойной, размеренной и выстроенной в западноевропейской манере жизни дворянства. Пышность, роскошь, сословная замкнутость, преобладание игровой, формальной стороны этикета над его нравственным содержанием и т.д. – все эти признаки сохранились в дворянском этикете XVIII века.

The imperial court became the legislator of luxury and brilliance of the ruling class.

Peter 1 did not have a court in the proper sense of the word, since he allocated those funds for the maintenance of the sovereign, his family and his house to the general needs of the state. As a result, the various services that were to be part of the royal court were dissolved along with a whole staff of court officials and ministers. Only at the end of his reign were they introduced several new court posts into the European way. But even then, the persons who occupied these posts performed them only a few times a year on particularly solemn days.

After Peter’s death in this respect, everything changed in the most decisive way. The abundance and luxury of the Russian court amazed even the French, who seemed to be accustomed to the brilliance of the Versailles court. To be in good standing at the royal court required huge expenses for dresses, jewelery, carriages, etc. Otherwise, you could just get lost in the lush, gilded crowd that filled the palace apartments.

The nobility, especially its higher, most affluent strata, erected magnificent city and country palaces, parks, triumphal arches. They spent huge amounts of money, and not so much to satisfy their refined tastes, but rather from the desire to emphasize their particular position. Things emphasized prestige, acted as a “label”.

In this regard, attention is drawn to the immense popularity among the aristocrats of the time ceremonial portraits, in which the nobleman was depicted, as a rule, in full growth, emphasized the pomp and richness of his clothes, the luxury of wigs, hairstyles, various attributes of the costume. Glitter, impressiveness demonstrated the wealth and nobility of a nobleman.

The influence of Western European, especially French culture on the Russian life and morals has increased significantly. In St. Petersburg and Moscow, French fashionistas, hairdressers, tutors and tutors appeared, fashionable French shops and stores opened. This was especially noticeable at Kuznetsky Most (in Moscow), which later caused such indignation of the fathers of families, like Famusov (“Kuznetsky Most and the eternal French ...”). In these stores you could buy everything that corresponded to the latest fashionable tastes: colorful hats, gold and silver jewelry, ribbons, blush, lace, gloves, muslin, artificial flowers, jewelry for dresses and hats, etc.

And at the same time, strict etiquette prescribed each class its own style of dress.

Even Petr1 wrote in the “Table of Ranks”, “that every official should dress in accordance with his official position no worse and no better,” but “as the rank and character requires.” Later, these rules were extended to women officials. In 1742, a decree was issued, allowing only to individuals of the first five classes to wear silk, brocade or lace. In this case, the lace should be no wider than four fingers. Belonging to the third class could wear clothes made of velvet or matter, which cost no more than three rubles for arshin. Those who had no rank were forbidden to wear velvet.

In the middle of the 18th century, women were not allowed to wear black dresses at the court, regardless of whether they were other colors to their face or not. Moreover, during the receptions, the ladies had to come to the palace in so-called uniform dresses specially made for this purpose.

Particularly noticeable is the “alienation” of the noble culture during the reign of Elizaveta Petrovna. At the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th centuries, French became an integral part of Russian culture among the nobility. In Russia, he was almost official, allowing the nobility to maintain an etiquette distance with respect to other classes.

The influence of French culture on Russian manners and etiquette can be traced in the organization of secular salons of the type of Paris, during which it was possible to speak French, and in that stream of translated chivalrous romances and romantic-adventure stories, which read noble youth.

French guesthouses, especially in the years preceding the war of 1812, grew like mushrooms after rain, in most of them the pupils learned French phrases from their voices. All this often led to a superficial assimilation of both the language and the culture itself. As a result, specific types of petimeters and coquette arose in the noble society.

“Petimeter” (from fr. Petit-maitre - “dandy”) is a high society gentleman who was brought up in French style (as a rule, a French tutor). All Russian existed for him only as a subject for ridicule and contempt. He despised the Russian language as the language of the serfs, and in general he did not want to know anything about his homeland. Contemporaries called them "hello".

“Coquette” (from fr. Coqquette) is a lady of high society, brought up also in French. Her main goal was to appeal to someone with her manners, behavior, toilets, and especially men, to her interest. To this end, the coquette spent hours at the mirror: they whitened, flushed, raised their eyebrows, pasted flies, etc. Especially appreciated in this environment is the ability to taste and dress fashionably, to make small talk, to walk gracefully, to bow gracefully, to smile and pretend to make eyes, to accept compliments. Imitating the French women, their boudoir etiquette, coquettes received their guests lying in bed among a pile of pillows. Everything that was done in Paris became mandatory on Nevsky Prospect and Tverskoy Boulevard.

Etiquette at this time is becoming more “marked”. This is well illustrated by the example of the importance attached to fan etiquette. Veer was a compulsory subject of the ladies' toilet, helping to hide indecent laughter, whisper mistress neighbor so that no one would hear, etc.

No less significant was the sword - a sign of the estate status of a nobleman. The sword was a symbol of belonging to the nobility, so in private military schools for noble children - cadet corps - students were presented with a sword. Accordingly, the form of punishment for offenses consisted in "depriving the sword and dressing up in a peasant dress for three days."

Etiquette, of course, permeated all spheres of the nobility, regulating certain forms of behavior and activities. But to the greatest extent, the rules of etiquette, of course, were presented in the social life of aristocrats and, above all, at numerous lush balls, where they could appear in all their splendor.

After the death of Peter 1, the assembly gradually disappeared, balls and masquerades took their place. Ignorance of dancing was already considered a serious lack of education. In the reign of Empress Anna, the holidays became even more magnificent and diverse. “The tobacco smoke and the sound of the drafts did not disturb the already dancing people, and, finally, the punishment to dry the Big Eagle Cup was completely destroyed.”

But even more magnificence and regulation of the balls was acquired at the court of Catherine II, where they invited only “those who had the right to wear a sword,” that is, nobles. Sometimes merchants were also invited, but for them a “personage was given”. The ball began with a pre-established dance in which all the guests took part, including the elderly. Having performed this dance, the latter left the dance hall and sat down at pre-prepared card tables. The youth continued to dance.

It is curious to note the fact that the balls were no longer played with chess and checkers, as under Peter, but into the cards that came into fashion under Anna Ioanovna. At the end of the XVIII century, almost every house was playing cards at night. The rapid and socially dangerous spread of gambling among the nobility forced the government to take the necessary measures: the Charter of Deanery, issued in April 1782, prohibited gambling card games. Particularly stringent measures were taken against the players in 1792, when the police got the right to come directly to the house where the game was played, and to take into custody the players. However, gambling continued, entailed ruin, embezzlement of government money, suicide.

More and more fights began to enter the life of the nobility as a means of restoring desecrated honor. The decree banning fights issued under Peter 1 was not carried out, and in 1787 the government issued a manifesto that increased the punishment for fights, “having opened a weapon was tried as a violator of peace and tranquility”. However, this manifesto was not executed, the duels continued.

Fights often happened among officers. True, they fired very rarely, only for blood insults, but on the other hand they were cut for every insignificant reason. The officer's honor was highly appreciated. He had to perform a service, be brave in battle and keep the honor of his uniform. The officer could not change his word or deceive anyone.

Later, at the end of the XIX century, in order to strengthen the officer's honor, a special order by the military department in May 1894 legalized a duel between officers.

As usual, simultaneously with the fixing of rigid etiquette rules, there appears a criticism of the stiffness of high life in literature. The ridicule of absurdity and ostentatious mannerism of etiquette we find in Fonvizin, Gogol, Griboyedov, and, of course, razochnychtsy writers of the second half of the XIX century.

At the same time, the opposite image also makes its way - the ideal nobleman, the person “comme il faut” (from the French “comme il faut” - as it should, how it should be). He is not much different from the Western European type of nobleman. For him, virtue is necessary above all in order to be different from others. He is engaged primarily in himself and his surroundings.

The image of a man “comme il faut” was perfectly revealed by L.N. Tolstoy in the trilogy “Childhood. Adolescence. Youth ”:“ My favorite and most important division of people at that time, about which I write, was on people of the comme il faut sort and on the comme il ne faut (well-bred and ill-bred). The second kind was also subdivided into people not comme il faut and simple people ... My comme il faut consisted, first and foremost, in excellent French language and especially in reprimand. The second condition of comme il faut was nails - long, cleaned and clean; the third was the ability to bow, dance and talk: the fourth, and very important, was indifference to everything and the constant expression of some graceful, contemptuous boredom. In addition, I had common signs, according to which I, not speaking with a person, decided which category he belonged to. The main of these signs except for the decoration of the room, the seals, handwriting, the crew were legs. The attitude of boots to trousers immediately decided in my eyes the position of a man ... I looked at them enviously and secretly worked on the French language, on bowing to science, not looking at the one to whom you bow, on conversations, dancing, on developing in yourself to everything indifference and boredom, over the nails, on which I cut my meat with scissors - and still felt that I still had a lot of work left to achieve the goal ... Others, without any kind of work, everything went fine, as if not it could be otherwise. I remember once, after hard and vain work over the nails, I asked Dubkov, whose nails were surprisingly good, how long have they had them and how he did it? Dubkov answered me: “Since then, as I remember myself, I have never done anything so that they were such, I do not understand how other nails can be in a decent person.” This answer saddened me greatly. At that time I did not know that one of the main conditions of comme il faut was the secrecy in the relations of those works that accomplish comme il faut ... ”

This personal pattern of a well-bred person in the awareness of noble youth was partly formed under the influence of the epistolary genre (letters of instruction), which became very popular at that time.

Young nobles traveled a lot. And their relatives, usually fathers, wrote them instructive, edifying leadership letters about how to behave in different situations in order to preserve the honor of the Russian nobility and the honor of their last name, since this concept among moral virtues was also in the greatest honor.

In addition, the very correspondence between educated people has become very important. A variety of trips and trips gave rise to the need to exchange information, to communicate spiritually. Letters were carefully kept, they were read to relatives and friends, they were rewritten, etc. As a result of such publicity and publicity of correspondence, its own special etiquette of writing (etiquette of correspondence) took shape. The written word, the treatment begin to pay great attention. And if Peter 1 declared himself the enemy of “beauty” in verbal art (his style was clerical office work), then in the post-Peter epoch a special section of etiquette was formed, followed by written appeals, congratulations, condolences, etc.

All these new secular rules of good manners in the XVIII - XIX centuries were introduced mainly among the higher strata of St. Petersburg and Moscow. In the same strata of society, which consisted of small provincial nobles, merchants, raznochintsy, they acquired a secondary, adapted to the conditions of life and, therefore, in many ways caricatured, imitative. Moreover, this imitation mostly concerned precisely the external, formal side of the life of the nobles.

Evidence of this is the novel of the Russian writer A.I. Ertel, “The Gardenins, Their Courts, Adherents, and Enemies,” in which the customs and manners of the provincial noblewoman are vividly and accurately represented: “... Here everything was once and someone invented, invented and adjusted. Each new day brought with it the exact and most detailed indication of what to do, where to go, whom to accept, what to say, to whom and what to write.

... Waking up at ten and a half hours, she loved to lie down for an hour in bed with a French novel in her hands; half an hour to spend in the bath; in the course of another half an hour, to expose one's wrinkled and shriveled body ... to the hands of the maid Christina, armed with thin and shaggy sheets; and here, then, to half of the first one, to put oneself at the disposal of the other maid, the Germanized German Amalia, that is, to stretch her legs, to put on her stockings, to keep her head still, to have her hair trimmed and decorated with a modest tattoo, to put on such a position that the corset was tightened, and buttoned the dress. This morning division of time carried special names in the house: the hour of the French novel, the hour of the Swedes of Christina and the hour of Amalia. The latter, besides dressing, was filled with some other things: a cup of hot chicken broth was drunk, letters made by butler Klimon were read on a silver tray, the warmed and slightly sprinkled newspaper “Golos” was heard ... reports from Amalia, Klimon and the housekeeper Gedvigi Karlovna O. the weather, the news in the house, how the young gentlemen slept, and the lunch menu compiled by the cook was asserted.

... Children met with the mother only for tea at half past twelve. At the same time, they converged to the table: two tutors, an Englishwoman, Miss Lucy, and a colorless person, Olga Vasilievna, in the indefinite rank of "reader."

The inner life in its content remained completely patriarchal, “domostroevskoy” in most noble estates. Let us recall, for example, the parents of Arkady Kirsanov in the novel “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev or the characters of the story “Old World Landowners” by Gogol.

In 1775, the manifesto of Catherine II marked a special category of the urban population - the commoners. A philistine is a person who is forced to engage in hired labor, earn his daily bread and at the same time strive to "break out into people", get out of the class of burghers, to become rich. This code of the tradesman was well formulated by the hero A.S. Griboyedov Molchalin in the comedy “Woe from Wit”:

... First, to please all people without exception -

Boss, where you happen to live,

To the boss with whom I will serve,

His servant who cleans the dress

To the janitor, the janitor, to avoid evil,

Dog janitor, to be affectionate.

Etiquette in the bourgeoisie environment played the role of a kind of elevator, with which it was possible to rise above its actual position in society. Therefore, the commoners sought to imitate the masters in everything, to copy their way of life, manners, external attributes of culture.

Their manners largely coincided with the manners and manners of the merchants, but in an effort to isolate themselves, to find themselves politely polite in society, the tradesman often used all sorts of scientific terms borrowed from foreign languages ​​(often without a sufficient understanding of their meaning and meaning). So, in “The Balzaminov's Marriage” A.N. Ostrovsky's mother instructs the son of Mikhail Balzaminov: “Instead of saying,“ I will go for a walk, ”you better say,“ I will do the exchange ”.

In his conversation with important persons, burghers usually switched to an excessively courteous and amiable, or, as W. G. Belinsky, “haberdashery”. Sometimes this treatment led to curiosities. So, wanting to serve the lady, to help her carry the luggage, the young tradesman asked: “Is your diarrhea hard for you?” While visiting, in response to the host’s suggestion to change the plate after another dish, the tradesman said: “I ask you not to bother yourself plate.

Такие карикатурные, уродливые формы поведения мещан, их одержимое стремление подражать высшим слоям общества в образе жизни и манерах при общей культурной неразвитости привело к тому, что само понятие “мещанин” (“мещанство”, “мещанский этикет”, “мещанские вкусы” и т.п.) стало нарицательным, несущим в себе негативно-принебрежительный оттенок бездуховности, неинтеллектуальности, бескультурья и т.п.

Купечество также стремилось подражать дворянству в манерах и в быту. В домах зажиточных купцов все было обставлено по последней моде: на кухне – повар, в приемной – лакей для доклада, у подъезда – элегантная карета. Купеческий этикет прекрасно представлен в пьесах А.Н. Ostrovsky.

Купцы, как и провинциальные дворяне, плохо зная иностранные языки, но стремясь придать своей речи оттенки благородства и вежливости в разговоре с представителями вышестоящего сословия, употребляли как вторую часть любого слова частицу “с”: “виноват-с”, “ничего-с”, “это как вам угодно-с” и т.п.

В этой среде были необычайно распространены различные пословицы, поговорки, которые в кругу знакомых заменяли остроумие. Это считалось особым качеством ума, поэтому пословицы употребляли часто без всякой надобности, почти через каждые два-три слова. В этой связи становится понятным то постоянство, с которым А.Н. Островский озаглавливал свои пьесы пословицами, поговорками, описывая жизнь и нравы российского купечества (“На всякого мудреца довольно простоты”, “Не в свои сани не садись”, “Бедность не порок”, “Не было гроша, да вдруг алтын” и др.).

Были свои особенности и в купеческом гостевом этикете. In the book A.I. Эртеля мы находим следующие наставления о светских приличиях: “... в комнатах как можно аккуратнее держись... Боже сохрани в руку сморкаться... Садиться не сразу садись: раза два скажут, ну, сядь. Да смотри развалиться не вздумай, – за это, брат, случается, и в шею накладывают. Барыня или вообще женский пол войдет, – конечно, не считаю прислуживающих, – то должен как на пружинах вскочить со стула. А там уже их дело, что тебе на это сказать. Супруга-то Косьмы Васильевича из дворян, понимает обхождение. В разговоры шибко не вступай... Руку протягивать никак не моги; подадут – ну, другое дело...”

Во второй половине XIX века в среде богатого купечества устраивались, как и в среде дворянства, званые обеды, приемы, маскарады. Они одевались по последней моде, имели дома в лучших кварталах города. При организации приемов гостям рассылались специальные билеты.

“Бал открывали хозяин с хозяйкой. Распорядитель бала объявлял каждое название каждого танца и подавал знак музыкантам. Иногда в программе бала указывались плясуны – исполнители русских плясок, специально приглашенные за плату. В соседних с залой комнатах устанавливались столы с закусками. Молодежь танцевала, а пожилые люди... усаживались за зеленые столы... и начинали излюбленную купеческую игру в стукалку. Под утро, часа в 3 – 4, начинался ужин. Для того чтобы придать особый шик ужину, у каждого прибора помещали специально опечатанное меню и программу музыкальных номеров. В меню и программу старались включить что-нибудь иностранное. Часам к шести утра бал кончался”.

В целом же купеческое сословие, поначалу представлявшее собой “темное царство”, если и имело свой этикет, то суть его, по выражению Н.А. Добролюбова, составляли самодурство сильных, жеманство женщин, раболепие и угодничество слабых.

Вместе с тем в конце XIX – начале XX веков русское купечество настолько дифференцировалось, расслоилось, что выдвинуло из своей среды не только образованных, экономически и политически грамотных людей, но даже меценатов, прекрасных знатоков в области культуры и искусства.

Дети образованных купцов стали получать прекрасное классическое образование с помощью домашних воспитателей, которыми часто становились дети разорившихся дворян, усваивали правила хорошего тона и светского этикета. Возникали смешанные дворянско-купеческие браки. Все это создавало своеобразную социально-культурную базу для появления новой генерации культурных людей России – интеллигентов.

Таким образом, как культурный антипод мещанина в обществе формируется интеллигент – человек образованный, просвещенный, несущий в себе лучшие прогрессивные черты своей эпохи, воспитанный на идеалах Просвещения. Не случайно этот слой людей в России получил еще одно название – “просвещенный читатель”. Как справедливо замечает в своих трудах, посвященных истории русской культуры, А.М. Панченко, книга в России была подобна иконе; это был духовный авторитет и духовный руководитель. Соответственно, чтение не было просто интеллектуальным актом, это была некая “нравственная обязанность” и одновременно “нравственная заслуга”. Поэтому вполне естественно, что интеллигент – человек умственного труда, человек с книгой, читающий ее, а тем более пишущий сам, – становился духовным руководителем, всеобщим авторитетом. А культура речи, которая вырабатывалась в результате постоянного общения с книгами, была отличительным признаком интеллигентного человека.

Интеллигент был воплощением идейности, просвещенности, духовности, непрерывного самосовершенствования, личной нравственной ответственности перед обществом за свои действия и поступки, которые при этом должны были отличаться тонкостью и деликатностью.

В среде интеллигенции вырабатывались свои каноны красивого, приличного, достойного поведения. Этикетный кодекс интеллигента включал в себя заниженное внимание ко всему внешнему, поверхностному: интерьеру, роскоши одежды, различным этикетным атрибутам. Демократичность, неброскость, игнорирование дорогостоящих украшений, обязательное наличие хотя бы небольшой библиотеки создавали стиль жизни интеллигентного человека. Для него главным являлось не внешнее впечатление, производимое им в обществе, в свете, не манеры сами по себе (хотя им и отдавалось должное), а нравственное, духовное, личностное начало. Не случайно среди нравственных ценностей ведущей становится истинная честь – достоинство, то есть качество, подчеркивающее самоценность личности. “Имей мужество пользоваться собственным разумом!” – кантовский лозунг становиться очень популярным в среде русских интеллигентов.

В этой ориентации сознания и нравов на разумность, нравственность, демократизм и служение Отечеству прослеживается преемственность русского интеллигента XIX века с лучшими чертами личностного образца эпохи античности.

И хотя сегодня наши писатели, публицисты, философы по-прежнему много спорят о том, в чем проявляется интеллигентность, кого можно считать интеллигентным человеком и т.д., остается неизменным и достаточно единодушным понимание того, что воспитанность является необходимой и одной из важнейших составляющих интеллигентности.

Обращение к истории этикета в России показывает, что этикет как внутренне противоречивая система норм и правил поведения выполняла в обществе те же социально-культурные функции, что и в западноевропейском обществе. Он нес в себе не только то, что отличало русскую культуру от предыдущих, доэтикетных форм российской культуры и от культур других народов, но и то, что связывало, объединяло их. В истории этикета в России мы обнаруживаем и элементы всеобщего исторического развития этого явления. И в этом отношении российский этикет выступает не только одной из исторических форм, но и своеобразной ступенькой в прогрессивном движении человечества к интернациональной, общечеловеческой культуре.

Как уже говорилось, жизнь и весь быт крестьянства России вплоть до конца XIX века отличались замкнутостью. Забота о поддержании хозяйства поглощала все время и внимание крестьян. Семейная и общественная жизнь, нормы поведения, взаимоотношения между людьми (в селе, в семье, между молодежью и т.п.) были регламентированы патриархальными и религиозными традициями.

В семье, состоявшей из родителей и детей, все подчинялись старшему в роде. За обеденный стол первым садился глава семьи. Он же первый брал ложкой пищу из общей миски, затем по старшинству брали все остальные члены семьи. Ели молча, разговоры во время еды запрещались. Беседуя, крестьяне говорили степенно, не перебивая друг друга. В разговоры старших молодежь не вмешивалась.

Гостя полагалось встречать приветливо, ему предоставляли почетное место в помещении – красный угол. Хозяин был рад гостю, и делился с ним всем, что было в доме. Недаром в русских пословицах говорится: “Хоть не богат, а гостю рад” или “Что есть в печи – все на стол мечи”.

До начала XX века улица была почти единственным местом развлечения и взаимного общения сельской молодежи. Группы молодежи в старину с гармошкой шли с разных концов села на поляну. Девушки водили хороводы, пели песни, играли в горелки и лапту. С конца 90-х годов XIX века в селах, расположенных недалеко от городов, девушки начали гулять на улице вместе с парнями. На улице молодые люди знакомились, плясали под балалайку и гармошку. После гуляния парни провожали девушек домой, стараясь никому не попадаться на глаза. В деревнях появились дома, хозяева которых специально сдавали помещения для устройства вечеров. Снимали помещения на паях. Парень вносил пай за себя и за девушку, за которой ухаживал.

Осенью и зимой девушки собирались на посиделки у какой-нибудь из подруг. Здесь они рукодельничали, разговаривали, слушали сказки, которые рассказывали пожилые женщины, в перерывах между работой пели и плясали. К концу вечера за девушками приходили парни – провожать их домой.

Среди трудового населения русских городов было немало мастеровых людей, которые приходили из близлежащих уездов и смежных губерний. В каждой местности развивались свои излюбленные ремесла: тверитяне поставляли сапожников, рязанцы – портных, владимирцы – плотников и столяров. Придя в город осенью, они нанимались к хозяину мастерской с целью заработать и уехать весной обратно в деревню, где оставались их семьи.

Работа в мастерских начиналась в 5 – 6 часов утра. Проснувшись и умывшись, мастеровые пили чай, после чая работали до 12 часов дня – времени обеда. Ели тут же в мастерской, из общей чашки. Мясо из щей резалось на мелкие куски и опускалось в чашку. Сначала выхлебывали только жидкость, а потом по знаку старшего мастера, который стучал ложкой о край чашки, начинали брать мясо. В 10 часов вечера ужинали, причем считалось неприличным выходить из-за стола до окончания ужина. Затем ложились спать здесь же, где работали.

Пришедший в мастерскую новый ремесленник или ученик, который вышел в мастера, обязан был устроить “вспрыски” для мастеров, в среду которых он вступал. Ученик, ставший мастером, терял свою кличку (“лодырь”, “длинный” и т.п.) и назывался теперь по имени-отчеству.

У трудовой городской молодежи местом общения была та же улица. В праздничные дни, когда не было гуляний, играли в бабки, в орлянку, но более всего любили хороводы, их устраивали за заставой. Женщины в этих случаях надевали пестрые яркие ситцевые платья и сарафаны. Парни – цветные рубахи, поддевки, сапоги, суконные картузы с блестящими лаковыми козырьками.

В 80-х годах XIX века еще сохранялась старая забава русского простонародья – кулачные бои, так называемые “стенки”. Устраивались кулачные бои чаще всего зимой, прямо на улице или на речках, покрытых льдами. В этих боях участвовали сотни людей с той и другой стороны (шли улица на улицу, квартал на квартал).

Революция 1917 года резко изменила не только социально-экономическую жизнь в России, но и вторглась в старый быт и этикет, нарушив гудком бронепоезда “патриархальную тишину” “голубой Руси”. Новые “пролетарские” правила этикета чаще всего исходили из принципа “от противного”, в соответствии с “революционной” идеей – “кто был никем, тот станет всем”. Ломке подвергся и светский этикет столичной жизни, и старосветские нравы русской “глубинки”.

Отменялась, в частности, услужливость кавалеров перед дамами: ибо женщина перестала быть дамой, и перешла в класс “товарищей” (или “классовых врагов”). Ухаживать же за товарищем (если он не болен) – глупо. Ухаживать за классовым врагом – преступно.

Главное в человеке – согласно “инструкциям партии и правительства” – “классовое чутье”, а за пристальное внимание к своей внешности можно было даже понести наказание (известны примеры, когда в первые послереволюционные годы исключали из комсомола за маникюр на руках).

Старший член семьи, который в патриархальном укладе был непререкаемым авторитетом, уступил (не без “некоторого” нажима со стороны) свое влияние партийному лидеру “в центре и на местах”.

Впрочем, столь радикальная “переоценка ценностей”, свойственная любой революционной эпохе (будь это революция социальная или научно-техническая, или какая угодно другая), имела, как обычно, достаточно локальный характер – ибо оставалась ограниченной и временем, и пространством.

Первоначально возвращение к европейскому стилю общения, столь ненавистному радикалам от революции, было вызвано выходом новой России (СССР) на международную арену, признанием ее государственного статуса со стороны мирового сообщества. И этикет вернулся в среду советских дипломатов и высших партийных и правительственных функционеров, представлявших интересы России за рубежом.

Внутри же самой страны, плотно прикрытой от постоянных глаз “железным занавесом”, продолжал насаживаться грубый классовый этикет “победившего пролетариата”. Разумеется, в любом обществе во все времена живут люди, способные сохранять свое лицо при любых ситуациях. Но нас интересует официально принятая в стране доктрина поведения и нравов, а не подлинно героические попытки “отдельно догнивающих интеллигентов” сохранить культуру и себя.

С течением времени Россия все больше и больше “открывалась” для контактов. И все большее распространение получали в ней общепринятые нормы общения, которые во второй половине XX века приобрели универсальный (для цивилизованных стран) характер.

Завершая раздел о развитии этикетных норм России, следует отметить следующее.

Нравственную культуру никак нельзя создать искусственно, в приказном порядке или с помощью одной науки. Нравственность органически вырастает на основе конкретной жизнедеятельности – труда, общения, обычаев и традиций той или иной общности. Она медленно и постепенно складывается путем выработки идеальных целей и норм и их проверки.

For example, peasant labor, the relations of peasants in communication served as important foundations of moral culture. The need to take care of the earth, nature, plants and animals brought up in people a love for a living being, attention to its needs, diligence and accuracy. The land was generous to those who loved it and who knew how to work. The peasant world was a source of mutual aid, collective intelligence, common sense. The proximity of the peasant to nature formed in him an observation, sensitivity, aesthetic feelings. Peasant culture was not without flaws. There were patriarchalism, petty calculation, and narrowness of the spiritual horizon. But she was a living, natural source of moral feelings and concepts.

No less significant source of morality in Russia was the lifestyle of the nobility. The nobility environment originated and strengthened the concept of honor, dignity, respect for the person and the opinions of others, the principles of loyalty and justice. Of course, noble morality was not perfect. Among the nobles, as in other classes of society, there were people strong and weak, conscientious and unscrupulous, good and evil. But both the nobility and the peasantry were living, organic communities that gave birth to and nourished morality. They supported the criteria of morality and public opinion.

The pillar of morality was family, church, school, closely related to each other. Each of these institutions was responsible for the formation of some important aspect of morality. Respect for the sanctity of marriage, its sacraments, which atheism propagandists sometimes laughed at, helped to strengthen a sense of duty, respect for elders, and obligations towards the elderly and children. Of course, not only atheists have shaken family morality. Here the role played by the economic insecurity of the family, and the change in its functions in the conditions of the city. But the ideology, which constantly emphasized inertia, backwardness, and patriarchal family life, made a considerable contribution to the destruction of the family.

One cannot underestimate the role in the development of the moral culture of the intelligentsia. In its environment were formed the ideas of individual rights and freedoms, dedication to truth, respect for individual taste and talent. But free urban life, self-government in cities, and democracy were not widely developed in Russia. Therefore, the socio-political and legal foundations of moral culture were fragile, superficial. The intelligentsia developed and honed its morality in philosophical and literary circles and in artistic creation.

Much more powerful than in other cultures, we had a layer of spiritual morality, expressed in the works of Russian classic writers of the XIX century. We are indebted to Gogol, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Goncharov, Chekhov for the deep development of moral culture, a subtle understanding of the dialectic of the soul.

At the same time, it was the intelligentsia that was destined to play a fatal role in the deformation and destruction of the universal principles of morality. The “spiritual order” of the kind formed in the middle of the last century, the raznochichnaya intellectuals were in a tragic, controversial position. She felt her connection with the people and dependence on power. Speaking of duty to the people, she was alien to folk culture. Elements of the nobility, in combination with Rakhmetov asceticism and Bazarov's nihilism, contributed to the separation from the roots of popular ethics and to the care of social fantasies and dreams. These dreams received strong support from Marxism, which was perceived by many intellectuals as the finally found theoretical “anchor of salvation”, which allowed to unite the dreams of people's happiness with the foundations of economics. However, the economic side of Marxism for many was dull and incomprehensible, and faith in the world revolution of the proletariat, in the possibility of a radical alteration of society and nature, became the credo of life.

Changes in the level and nature of morality after the revolution were associated with the action of many factors. But the main role here was played by the destruction of those natural social communities that were the pillar and nutritive soil of moral consciousness: the peasantry, the nobility, the clergy, the merchants, the urban philistinism, the old intelligentsia. Moral culture has lost its social base. On the one hand, in the conditions of war communism, and then in the period of Stalinism and the strengthening of the command-administrative system, society was automated, turned into an amorphous mass, which was easy to manage, but which did not give rise to living moral feelings, but rather degraded in moral terms. On the other hand, a new elite morality was born in the depths of the bureaucratic apparatus. The propaganda system persistently introduced into the minds of people special, different from the universal, norms of behavior based, ostensibly, on a class approach and devotion to the ideals of communism. In the early years of Soviet rule, so-called etiquette nihilism was common, a complete rejection of the rules of decency, adopted in secular communication before the revolution. The term etiquette itself is identified with the remnants of class morality and disappeared from everyday life until the 1960s.

Fracture times always carry with them, among other things, a certain amount of uncertainty. Especially if the fracture occurs swiftly and radically. Then society has to decide whether the new is really so much better? Was there anything in the past that would make sense to save? Awareness and progress must always go hand in hand.

As a result, moral guidelines are lost in society, the foundation of etiquette is broken. The difficult work of all sections of the population is to revive morality.