Andrey Pavlovich Zaostrovtsev

The article considers the reforms of Peter I from the standpoint of historical sociology and institutional economic theory with the aim to identify the features of Peter's modernization and its role in forming Russia’s path dependence, and this purpose is realized by comparing it with Stalin's modernization. The study rests on the division of modernization into two types: adaptation and westernization models. This division constitutes the methodological basis of the study and allows further use of comparative analysis in reviewing Peter’s and Stalin’s modernization. Peter's reforms are viewed as adaptive modernization: the 17th century formal institutions of Muscovy were replaced by imported (Western) ones, but at the same time basic components of the political system and political culture were preserved. The reforms resulted in a fully state-driven society and developed economy. Totalitarianism in Russia first took shape in the early 18th century. It combined the archaic institutions of Muscovy newly introduced imported ones. The latter strengthened autocratic rule, powerproperty as an institutional foundation of Russia. At the same time, cultural and everyday westernization was built into Peter's reforms. It subsequently became the basis of in-depth westernization in the form of the release of the nobility from compulsory service. A comparative analysis of the Peter’s and Stalin’s modernization showed that they have both common features and differences. Total nationalization of life, focus on militarization, despotism unite them. However, while Peter's modernization transformed the archaic society, Stalin's one revived the archaic in the place of westernized society of the early 20th century.