The formation of the image of Russia in school textbooks of the history of Kazakhstan as a factor of influence on interstate relations

Petrishcheva Mariya Vladimirovna ORCID: 0009-0003-0092-8554 Lecturer, Department of History, Orenburg State University 460018, Russia, Orenburg region, Orenburg, Pobedy Avenue, 13 mariyapetrischeva@bk.ru

Kazakhstan's policy towards Russia is officially directed towards the development of humanitarian cooperation (and other types of cooperation). A fairly extensive regulatory framework has been formed as part of this process. However, the internal policy of the Kazakh authorities, in particular in the field of school education, contradicts the officially chosen course. Meanwhile, school education has a significant impact not only on the formation of national self-awareness, but also on interstate relations.

In the course of school education, personality development takes place, and the worldview of future political figures is formed. As a result, the image of Russia, which is created in school textbooks of the history of Kazakhstan, affects the relations between the two states.

This problem was raised in 2003 in the article "Russia in Kazakh history textbooks", authored by N. Masanov and I. Savin.

They note that the "new interpretation" of the history of relations between the two states sometimes turns into a mass of accusations against Russia ^[1]. The article reports that this mood was reflected in the content of various school curricula for secondary educational institutions, as well as other educational literature ^[1]. The authors of the textbooks, unlike publicists, do not allow one-sided judgments, however, the interpretation of the role of the Russian Federation in Kazakh history is such that the desire to establish diplomatic relations between Russia and Kazakhstan is based not on the desire to help a neighbor, but on selfish calculation ^[1].

In the scientific article, the authors analyzed school textbooks on the history of Kazakhstan. They cite as an example the textbook by J. K. Kasymbaev "History of Kazakhstan" for the 9th grade, which was published in 1995 in Almaty, which talks about "accepting Russian citizenship." According to the authors, this textbook states the following: "At that time, the Kazakh Khanate had no other choice." Initially, attention was focused on the fact that Kazakhstan's accession to Russia was forced. The scientific article also provides an example stating that the adoption of Russian citizenship played a role in limiting the Dzungarian invasions of the Kazakh steppes, but this enabled the tsarist government to colonize the Kazakh region ^[1].

In their scientific article, the authors also highlighted the positive aspects. They write that the textbook contains many pages devoted to cooperation between Russia and Kazakhstan, and note that the image of the Russian Empire in modern school textbooks on the history of Kazakhstan is quite complex and multifaceted.

Masanov N. and Savin I. write that the task of the authors of textbooks is not only to convey to students information about past historical events, but also to interpret them correctly ^[1].

In 2015, A. V. Filippov's article "School History and Public Opinion in post-Soviet countries" was published in the journal "History and Historical Memory". Attention is paid to how the image of Russia is presented in various textbooks on the history of the CIS countries after the collapse of the USSR, including the history of Kazakhstan.

The history of Kazakhstan in school textbooks is characterized as the national liberation struggle against Russia, which lasted from the 18th century to the 1990s.^[2] However, the author omits details and causal relationships, due to which the national liberation war runs like a red thread through the entire history of Kazakhstan. The article is generalized in nature.

In 2020, I. S. Savin's study "Russia in the national History of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan: Common and special in the perception of youth" was published in the journal Central Eurasia, established by the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Based on the materials of field research conducted in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, the image of Russia as an important subject of national history in the perception of students of the two countries is analyzed. Let's take into account that students from different fields of study were interviewed, for whom history is not always a core subject, which means that they have been learning about the history of their country for many years at school. According to the authors, this study was conducted in 2016 and 2017 in three cities, two of which in Kazakhstan are Alma-Ata and Petropavlovsk. In the article, respondents from the focus group directly say several times that they studied these historical events at school in history lessons ^{[3, p. 39]}. The study shows that the image of Russia among young people from Kazakhstan is quite controversial: many people note both positive and negative aspects. However, the article does not consider what exactly the respondents' knowledge is based on, and little attention is paid to the school stage of education.

The study "From the Kazakh SSR to "independent" Kazakhstan: a history textbook as a way of forming national identity" by V. V. Klyuchareva is quite interesting. The study was published in the journal "Bulletin of the Altai State Pedagogical University" in 2022.

The author's concept is based on a comparison of Soviet school textbooks on the history of the Kazakh SSR and modern textbooks from the period of "independent" Kazakhstan. The author concludes that the modern school course is characterized by ethnocentrism and glorification of the history of the Kazakh people. The scientific and educational environment of the Republic of Kazakhstan broadcasts versions about the "merciless colonization" of the Kazakh steppes in the pre-revolutionary period and the tragic consequences of the USSR's policy for the Kazakh people ^{[4, p. 97]}.

The author does not consider modern textbooks in detail. Since 1991, an average of two to three textbooks per class have been published and republished. At the present stage, it is important to consider how history teaching in schools in Kazakhstan has been transformed since 1991.

Thus, pedagogical issues have been covered in some detail, while the problem of forming the image of Russia and the impact of this image on humanitarian relations between the two states has not been sufficiently studied. The topic needs to be worked out in more detail. The opinions of many authors are insufficiently substantiated and to a certain extent tendentious. Authors, especially of modern publications, tend to see only negative features in the emerging image of Russia, ignoring the positive ones.

Four school textbooks from different generations were used for the study. The study is based on their comparison. Some of the earlier ones, conventionally designated as old ones, are textbooks from the 1990s, 2000s, and early 2010s. The new textbooks that were compared with and that are currently involved in the educational process are books from the mid and late 2010s.

To study how history is studied in school textbooks in Kazakhstan, books for grades 7 and 8 were taken. This choice is due to the presence of the very first mentions of the Russian state.

The first analyzed school textbook is "The History of Medieval Kazakhstan" for the 7th grade, authored by S. Zholdasbayev, published in 2012 by the Atamura publishing house. It consists of 12 chapters, 50 paragraphs and 232 pages ^[5].

The second textbook is "History of Kazakhstan" for the 7th grade, authored by N. S. Bakina and N. T. Zhanakova, published in 2017 by Atamura publishing house. It includes 9 chapters, 57 paragraphs and 240 pages ^[6]. Both books are approved by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

The 7th grade history textbooks of the relatively old (2012 edition) and new (2017 edition) formats speak fragmentally about the relationship with the territory of Ancient Russia, then with the Moscow state.

The mention of Russia begins with the theme "The Oghuz State". The paragraphs talk about military alliances and victories that benefited both Kievan Rus and the Oguz state. The alliances are characterized as quite successful and aimed at fighting a common enemy – the Khazar Khaganate, the Pechenegs, and Volga Bulgaria.

Information about concluded military treaties with Russia is the same everywhere: Kievan Rus is represented as an ally.

References to Russian lands are found in the paragraphs of textbooks, which talk about the Golden Horde, its internal strife, split and the formation of various khanates. The old and new textbooks for the seventh grade describe how the Russian state dealt a crushing blow on Kulikovo Field, the attack of Khan Tokhtamysh and the fire in Moscow, and then the restoration of tribute to the Moscow princes ^{[6, p. 118; 5, pp. 103-104]}.

The textbook for 2012 says that after the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates became part of the Russian state, and the Nogai Horde began to decline and separate territories, some of these territories became part of the Younger Zhuz. In the XVII–XVIII centuries. The Nogai Horde had fairly close trade, economic and political relations with the Crimean Khanate, the Kazakh Khanate and the Russian state. At the end of the 18th century, after the fall of the Crimean Khanate, the tsarist Russian government began to persecute the Nogai people. The surviving part of the people were forced to move to Turkey, the North Caucasus, as well as to the lands of Kazakhstan and Bashkortostan ^{[5, pp. 117-118]}.

The paragraph refers to Siberia and Khan Ibak, who concluded an alliance and friendship treaty with Ivan III, according to which trade relations were established with many Russian cities ^{[5, p. 118]}. However, these historical events were not described in detail in the new textbook.

The appearance of the Kazakh Khanate in the international arena dates back to the reign of Kassym Khan. For example, in the old textbook, in paragraph 38 "Khan Kasim (1511-1518)", the establishment of diplomatic relations with the Asian khanates, with the peoples of the Volga region, with Russia and the Siberian khanates is mentioned briefly, while the new textbook provides more detailed information about the reign of Kasim Khan. It consistently reveals how the khanate's territories were expanded by military means and various diplomatic methods. There is a lot of information about this in the archives of Basil III. More details are given about the relations between Kazakhstan and Russia, between which the first contacts were established ^{[6, p. 168]}.

The textbook says that even under Khan Khaknazar, the trend towards strengthening relations with the rulers of the Moscow lands remains. In 1569-1573, Russian ambassadors Semyon Maltsev and Tretyak Chebukov arrived in the Kazakh Khanate. As a result, political relations and trade relations were established between the Kazakh Khanate and the Russian state.

In the second half of the 16th century, the famous Russian merchants Stroganov established trade relations with Kazakhstan and Central Asia. Ivan the Terrible issues them a charter for duty-free trade with the Kazakh Khanate, and also sends his embassy to the Kazakh Khanate in order to conclude a military alliance against the Siberian Khan Kuchum. All this allows us to speak about strong diplomatic ties between the two states ^{[5, p. 165]}. Most of this information is presented in the old textbook, while the new one briefly states that relations between the Kazakh and Moscow lands were improving and strengthening ^{[6, p. 173]}.

In the old-style textbook describing the Khan's rule, there is a separate item "Relations with the Russian state." The paragraph says the following: "Kazakh-Russian relations continued to develop during the reign of Khan Tauekel. In 1595, an embassy was sent to Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich in Moscow, headed by Kul-Mohammed, in order to establish political relations between the two states. The second purpose of this visit to Moscow was the release of Uraz's nephew Muhammad from Russian captivity" ^{[5, p. 169]}, as well as a request for military assistance in the fight against Khan Abdullah.

The Russian state asked to start a fight against the Bukhara and Siberian khanates and to give one of the khan's sons into captivity. No agreements were reached, and, as the textbook indicates, all political relations were interrupted, but this did not affect the caravan trade, which continued to develop.

An important event that influenced the course of development of Kazakhstan was the annexation of the Siberian Khanate to the Russian lands. The Kazakh tribes that were part of the Siberian Khanate became part of the Kazakh Khanate.

In the new textbook, information on these events is given in a concise form, but there are more specific descriptions. For example, that the Russian state agreed to give the "fire fighter" ^{[6, p. 176]} (firearms), but without any other support.

The following paragraphs describe the arrival of Ambassador A. Atalykov from Khan Teuke in order to conclude agreements on trade relations. The fact is that the end of the 17th century, at which these events occur, is associated with the threat of a Dzungarian invasion. This is the time of the closest relations between Russia and Kazakhstan. The Dzungars pushed the Kazakh tribes back, and they moved to the border areas where the interests of Russians, Kazakhs and Dzungars clashed. And the story about Khan Tauke, in both the old and new textbooks, is related to establishing relations with the Russian state, permanent diplomatic missions and the development of mutual trade.

In the old textbook, in paragraph 50 on the topic "Historical works of the XVI-XVII centuries." the Russian tsar Boris Godunov is mentioned. Russian russians note that the Kazakh chronicler and statesman Kadyrgali Kosymuli Zhalairi wrote the "Collection of Chronicles" while in Russian captivity and, as a sign of friendship, handed over his works to the Russian tsar Boris Godunov ^{[5, p. 204]}.

The modern textbook also contains this information in paragraph 57 on the topic "Historical literature of the XVI-XVII centuries" ^{[6, p. 222]}.

Kadyrgali Zhalairi speaks with great respect about Boris Godunov and uses beautiful artistic images such as mountains, seas, and clouds to describe the Russian tsar.

Kazakh 8th grade textbooks have more information on relations between Kazakhstan and Russia. This is mainly due to the annexation of the territories of Kazakhstan to the Russian Empire.

There are three textbooks for the 8th grade. The first of them, "The History of Kazakhstan" by D. Babayev, published in 1992 by the Rauan publishing house, contains 3 chapters, 51 paragraphs and 173 pages. The program of this textbook is identical to the modern one, but for the 7th grade ^[7]. The second textbook, "History of Kazakhstan (XVIII century - 1914)" for the 8th grade, authored by J. K. Kasymbayev, published in 2012 by the publishing house "Mektep", consists of 7 chapters, 40 paragraphs and 256 pages ^[8]. The third textbook is "History of Kazakhstan (XVIII-XIX centuries)" for the 8th grade, compiled by Z. E. Kabuldinov, J. N. Kaliev, A. T. Beisembayeva, published in 2018 by Atamura publishing house and includes 6 chapters, 54 paragraphs and 208 pages ^[9]. All three textbooks are approved by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

The textbook for 2012 says that the long-term diplomatic relations and transit trade of Russian merchants through the Kazakh steppes with Khiva and Bukhara paved the way for the accession of Kazakhstan. To maintain these ties, strongholds and fortresses were built, which contributed to the displacement of some local tribes to the south, thereby weakening the pressure on the borders of Russia ^{[8, p. 5-7]}.

The information in the 2012 textbook is quite contradictory. On the one hand, there is a story about the process of establishing diplomatic relations and trade ties, on the other - about the displacement of indigenous peoples and the construction of military fortresses.

The fight against the Dzungars is the topic that begins the description of the ambiguous process of Kazakhstan's entry into Russia. This entry worries historians of Kazakhstan and Russia equally.

The old textbook describes this topic in more detail. Regarding the Dzungarian Khanate, the author of the 2012 textbook appeals to the fact that Russia, like the Kazakh Khanate, saw a real threat in attacks. The authors of the 2018 textbook interpret these events differently: in the 18th century, due to internal strife, the world powers drew attention to Kazakhstan. Russia, in particular, was interested in the Kazakh Khanate and Central Asia. The main political goal of Russia was military intelligence actions, in connection with which military fortresses were built. All these measures pursued the main goal of weakening both the Kazakh Khanate and Dzungaria.

A 2012 textbook says that the Kazakh state in the 18th century was torn apart by internal strife and was threatened by outside forces. The only country that could provide support was the Russian Empire. The purpose of Khan Abulkhair's appeal to the Russian government was to stop the raids of the subjects of the peoples of the Russian Empire – the Volga Kalmyks and Bashkirs. The khan also pursued his personal goals of strengthening his sole power by fighting the Genghisids. However, the most important goals were to build diplomatic relations with Russia and organize a rebuff to the Dzungarian invasion.

The 2012 textbook highlights the pros and cons of the process of joining the Junior College for Kazakhstan and for the Russian Empire. Due to the adoption of citizenship, the raids of the Dzungars on the Kazakh steppes were significantly reduced. At the same time, the influence of Russia was not felt by the Middle Zhuz and those regions that were adjacent to the Khanate of Khiva. Russian Russian government used internal civil strife to implement its Asian policy, which consisted in pushing Russians deeper into the Central Asian region and building military posts. The accession of the Younger Zhuz made it possible for the Russians to pursue a policy of colonization of the Kazakh lands. In the textbook on this topic, there is a contradictory opinion about Russia, the information is given one-sidedly.

In the textbook for 2018, the reasons for joining and the situation before this event are explained in a more multifaceted way. At the beginning of the 18th century, both states were interested in strengthening relations. For Kazakhstan, such an alliance was necessary to solve the problem of the constant raids of the Dzungars. Russia, in turn, had several reasons. Firstly, the annexed territories could serve as a springboard for penetration into Central Asia, India and Afghanistan. Secondly, Kazakhstan could serve as a sales market. And thirdly, this entire territory could later be a source of raw materials and minerals ^{[9, pp. 25-26]}.

The textbook's authors turn again to the construction of border fortresses, saying that their foundation by the Russians for the Dzungarian rulers was explained as the construction of defensive structures and redoubts to protect against Kazakh raids, while the Kazakhs, on the contrary, were told that these fortifications were intended to protect against the Dzungars. In fact, this manipulation made it possible to annex even those Kazakh lands that were under the rule of the Dzungars.

The cunning political move of the Russian government consisted in frequent diplomatic missions to the Kazakh steppes.

Paragraphs 9-10 of the textbook contain information about the accession of the Younger Zhuz to the Russian Empire. The presentation of this process is identical to what is described in the 2012 textbook. The only difference is in the process of signing documents on citizenship, which were brought to the Kazakh steppes together with the embassy headed by A. I. Tevkelev. The textbook of the new model says that the top of the Kazakh nobility refused to conclude such an agreement, attempts are mentioned to disrupt negotiations and kill Russian ambassadors, but they were under the protection of Abulkhair Khan's son, Nuraly.

According to the textbook of the 2018 edition, the task of the Russian embassy was to persuade the top of the Kazakh nobility to accept Russian citizenship at any cost. In fact, the Russian government allowed the use of bribery ^{[8, p. 18]}.

The paragraph says that after the Younger Zhuz joined Russia, Abulkhair began to rapidly lose his authority. His hopes were not fulfilled: the conflicts of the Kazakhs with the Kalmyks, Bashkirs and Cossacks continued, and Russia did not provide assistance in the war with the Dzungars ^{[9, pp. 30-33]}.

Emphasizing that, while trying to annex new territories, Russia faced resistance from the Kazakh rulers, which soon led to a confrontation between the two states. The Kazakh people did everything possible to stop the colonial expansion of Russia ^{[9, pp. 27-28]}.

In the 2012 textbook, after the topic of the process of the Kazakh lands becoming part of the Russian Empire, a separate paragraph is devoted to the economic development of the Kazakh Khanate, which includes three different industries – trade, fortress construction and the land issue. The paragraph related to economic development is missing from the new 2018 textbook.

The first paragraph says that in the mid-40s and early 50s, a whole line of fortifications appeared in the khanate as a result of construction. After the fall of the Dzungarian Khanate, the fortifications built became strongholds for the colonization of the Kazakh steppe ^{[8, p. 27]}. This line occupied fertile lands, as well as pasture lands of the Kazakhs. Because of this, Kazakh cattle breeding was damaged, and the indigenous population was forced to migrate to the southern regions ^{[8, pp. 27-28]}.

In the paragraph on trade relations, there is information that after the fall of the Dzungarian Khanate, trade between Kazakhs and Russians began to gradually improve. This process was slow due to the shortening of the nomadic routes of the Kazakh clans, the colonization of the Younger Zhuz and cattle rustling by Kalmyks and Cossacks. Some of the top Kazakh nobility still refused to accept Russian citizenship ^{[8, p. 28]}.

The 60s of the XVIII century. ‒ the period of the rise of Kazakh-Russian trade relations. Trade in the fortresses was actively developing, and the number of Kazakhs engaged in trade in the border fortifications was growing. Russia was very interested in trade with the Kazakhs, so mosques were built in the fortresses, and at the request of merchants, the area of caravanserais was expanded. However, Russia pursued a policy of protectionism, restricting the import of goods produced in Kazakhstan ^{[8, pp. 27-28]}.

The third paragraph examines the policy on the land issue, which is defined as colonial. It is said that in the 50s and 60s of the XVIII century. the tsarist government, wishing to strengthen the dependence of the Kazakh Khanate, pursued a special policy. The creation of Cossack troops, the removal of the nomadic indigenous population of the Kazakh steppe, as well as the construction of military fortifications only strengthened Russia's colonial position in the region. The goal of the tsarist government was to oust the Kazakhs from their ancestral nomads and to settle the vacated territory with Cossacks.

The implementation of these actions consisted in the fact that on September 2, 1756, the Orenburg administration forbade Kazakhs to roam and graze their cattle on the right bank of the Ural River. The Cossacks had already divided the lands along the lower reaches of the Urals, and the most fertile and richest were in the hands of the Russian landowners Yusupov and Bezborodko.

Despite the colonization of the Kazakh lands, trade relations with Russia and other states were only gaining momentum. The policy of the Russian Empire, which resulted in the narrowing of the Kazakh nomads, marked the beginning of the agrarian conquest of Kazakhstan ^{[8, pp. 29-31]}.

There is no paragraph related to the economic development of the Kazakh lands in the textbook of the 2018 edition. On the one hand, in the old textbook, the authors repeatedly use the term "colonization" and "colonialism" in relation to the policy of Russians, citing as an example the decisions of the administrations to withdraw Kazakh nomads along the banks of the Yaik and Irtysh in favor of the Cossacks. The Kazakh side also has a negative impact, in which the elites resisted the process of establishing strong ties with the Russian state.

The following paragraphs are devoted to several uprisings. The old textbook contains a whole paragraph "Kazakh participation in the peasant war (1773-1775) under the leadership of E. I. Pugachev." It was a joint struggle of the population against the oppression of landlords and feudal lords, which became a prerequisite for the involvement of Kazakh sharua (a category of dependent cattle breeders and farmers in the Kazakh feudal society) in the struggle against tsarism, who experienced colonial dependence on the Russian Empire. The main reason for the Kazakhs' participation in the peasant war was the ban on wandering to the right bank of the Ural River. In 1742, the Kazakhs demanded that this ban be lifted, but were refused. E. I. Pugachev and his entourage, of course, were aware of the situation and took advantage of this position of the Kazakhs ^{[8, pp. 41-42]}. It was only in 1756 that Kazakhs were allowed to temporarily roam to the right bank of the Ural River ^{[8, pp. 41-43]}.

Having suppressed the peasant uprising, tsarism did not stop and continued to implement its colonial policy. The reaction of the Kazakh people followed, which resulted in an uprising led by Syrym Datov ^{[8, pp. 47-48]}.

At the end of the 18th century, O. A. Igelstrom was appointed the new governor of the Orenburg province. With the support of Catherine II, Igelstrom decided to destroy the khan's power from within ^{[8, p. 50]}. He was endowed with great powers, since the Ural Cossacks were subordinate to him, who constantly expanded their territory by seizing new lands. The outrage of the Cossacks was one of the reasons for the uprising ^{[8, p. 51]}.

The tsarist government exploited the split among the Kazakh elite and eliminated the khan's power, as well as introduced a new management system, authored by O. A. Igelstrom. According to his plan, the power in the Younger Juz was in the hands of the Border Court ^{[8, p. 55]}.

There are also separate paragraphs devoted to the uprising in the modern textbook. In 19-20 paragraphs on the topic "The National Liberation Movement of 1783-1797 under the leadership of Syrym Datula." "The popularly popular batyr of the Baybakty family, Syrym Datuly," is praised in the textbook as a national leader ^{[9, p. 66]}.

The textbook's authors link the suppression of E. Pugachev's uprising and the events that took place in Kazakhstan at that time. The tsarist government only increased the pressure on the Younger Zhuz, as a result of which an uprising against tsarism broke out again.

Unlike the old textbook, the essence of the proposals for the reorganization of the khan's government is revealed in more detail here. However, Igelstrom's reform, according to the textbook, was opposed by the Khan's elite ^{[9, pp. 67-68]}.

Based on the available information in the textbooks of two generations, it can be concluded that the Russian Empire is presented as a colonial power. The empire took away the best lands, the Kazakh people suffered arbitrariness from the tsarist government, which tried to eliminate the khan's power in the Younger Zhuz.

The liquidation of the Khan's power is discussed in more detail in the eponymous paragraph of the old textbook. The author writes that Russia's political influence has only increased. The tsarist government continued to seize new Kazakh lands, carried out its reforms and continued to develop trade, which only strengthened Russia's position ^{[8, p. 71]}.

The development of Kazakh-Russian trade, together with the process of developing political dependence on the Russian Empire, opened the way for the gradual adaptation of Kazakhstan's economy to the needs of Russia's economic development. The economic isolation of the village began to gradually disappear. This was beneficial to tsarist Russia, and the measures taken by the government only expanded its sphere of influence.

In 1822, the "Charter of the Siberian Kyrgyz" was adopted, aimed at changing the political status of the Kazakh lands ^{[8, pp. 71-72]}. It was created under the supervision of M. M. Speransky. The purpose of this document is to eliminate the political system and change the territorial, administrative and judicial administration in the north‒east of Kazakhstan ^{[8, p. 73]}.

The positive aspects of the Charter include the abolition of slavery, education and health care reforms. Thanks to the "Charter on Siberian Kyrgyz", conditions were created for the development of trade relations between Russia and Kazakhstan. The document spoke about the fairly broad rights of Kazakhs: they could trade their cattle on the Russian market, caravan trade was only encouraged.

The Charter of 1822 had an impact on the socio-economic development of Kazakhstan, although the old order of the Kazakh steppe was preserved to some extent. The new law reinforced the political and legal colonization of the Kazakh Khanate. The sultans, as well as the descendants of the great khans, turned into officials. The Khan's system of government was destroyed, and the organs of the colonial authorities were formed ^{[8, p. 76]}.

The Kazakh society of the Younger Zhuz was hostile to administrative and political reforms, as they limited the power of the aristocratic stratum. It included sultans who stood for the preservation of the already established order ^{[8, pp. 76-78]}.

According to the "Charter on Orenburg Kazakhs", it was planned to appoint three khans to the Junior Zhuz, but such an offer was not immediately accepted. It was only in 1824 that he was approved by the Asian Committee. After that, Khan Shergazy went to Orenburg, where he was recruited. Thus, in 1824, the khan's authority in the territory of the Younger Zhuz was eliminated ^{[8, p. 78]}.

The new textbook examines the causes of administrative reforms more consistently:

- the Khan's power in Zhuz was an obstacle to the colonization of Kazakhstan;

- the rulers of the Zhuzs have blackened themselves in the eyes of the Kazakh people;

- a part of the Kazakh elite, which belonged to the Genghisids, increasingly opposed the tsarist government;

- after the end of the Patriotic War of 1812, the tsarist government had all the necessary resources in its hands to complete the process of colonization of the Kazakh Khanate ^{[9, p. 72]}.

The modern textbook, as well as the old one, says that in 1822 M. M. Speransky developed the "Charter of the Siberian Kirghiz." The main goal of this reform was to destroy the khan's power in the Middle Zhuz. In terms of purpose and content, the "Charter" was related to the policy aimed at joining the northeastern regions of Kazakhstan ^{[9, p. 76]}.

The textbook also talks about the "Statute of the Orenburg Kirghiz." The author writes that the abolition of Khan's authority in the Middle Zhuz somewhat facilitated the process in the Younger Zhuz ^{[9, p. 76]}.

The paragraph indicates that these reforms had negative consequences. The Zhuzes lost their independence, and the Kazakh Khanate began to turn into a colony of Russia. The new rules restricted the freedom of nomads, so cattle breeding declined. However, there were also positive consequences – trade, healthcare and education developed. Now immigrants from the Russian Empire had no right to live on the lands of Kazakhstan.

On the one hand, the paragraphs say that the reforms carried out by the Russian Empire benefited the Kazakh Khanate, but on the other hand, these reforms deprived the Kazakh Khanate of independence, made the Kazakh elite tsarist officials, and also led to the decline of the traditional economy. It can be concluded that the view of Russia on this issue is not unambiguous. The textbook authors highlight both the pros and cons of administrative reform.

The next paragraph in the old textbook is devoted to the topic "The Liberation struggle (1836-1838) led by Isatai Taimanov and Mukhambet Utemisov." The author remarks that the Ural Cossacks and local tsarist officials forbade the Kazakh people to graze cattle and fish. In 1818, a decree was issued, according to which Kazakhs were forbidden to move to the Bukeev Horde ^{[8, p. 87]}. It is noted that the uprising of Isatai Taimanov and Mukhambet Utemisov was directed not only against the tsarist government, but also against the oppression of Zhangir Khan ^{[8, p. 99]}.

The new textbook, as well as the old one, says that the uprising was simultaneously directed against tsarism and the khan's power ^{[9, p. 88]}.

In the text of the paragraph "The accession of the Elder Zhuz to Russia" there is information that in the XVIII – early XIX century. most of the territory of the Younger and Middle Zhuz was part of the Russian Empire, but there were still Kazakh lands that were not subordinate to the tsarist government. Some Kazakh clans wintered in the Khiva and Kokand possessions, and in the summer they wandered to those areas that were subordinate to the Russian Empire. The Central Asian khanates and the Russian Empire tried to take advantage of this.

South Kazakhstan and Semirechye actively cooperated with the border regions of the Russian Empire and maintained political and trade relations. Every year, there was an increase in the volume of grain and industrial goods supplies to these regions of the Kazakh Khanate. This increased confidence in the Russian Empire. The textbook also says that in 1817, Sultan Suyuk Abylaev and the Kazakh clans that were under his control declared their desire to accept Russian citizenship. Thus, the power of the Russian Empire was established on the territory of Semirechye, and these lands became part of Russia ^{[8, p. 125]}.

In a modern textbook, the author also writes that in the second half of the 19th century. in the Russian Empire, there was a rapid rise in industry and trade, so there was a need for raw materials, sales markets and labor. Consequently, the importance of Semirechye and Southern Kazakhstan for the Russian Empire has increased ^{[9, p. 105]}. Part of the population of Semirechye and Southern Kazakhstan has accepted Russian citizenship. There were the following reasons for this:

- Kazakhs were often attacked by Central Asian khanates;

- the Kazakhs were interested in developing trade relations with the Russian Empire;

- there was no unity in these regions.

All these reasons created an environment that was favorable for the colonization of the region by the tsarist government ^{[9, p. 105]}.

Note that tsarism, according to the author of the new textbook, also pursued its own goals.:

- it was necessary to eliminate the sultans and batyrs of the Middle and Younger Zhuzes;

- The Russian Empire wanted to establish borders and contacts with China;

- the strengthening of tsarism in the Elder Zhuz was associated with the need to advance into the territory of the Central Asian states ^{[9, p. 106]}.

Both the old and new textbooks, on the one hand, talk about the voluntary acceptance of Russian citizenship and the benefits of trade relations. On the other hand, it is again said about the colonization of the region. However, there is conflicting information. The old textbook says that the Kazakh clans wintered in the Khiva and Kokand khanates, and in the summer they roamed in the possessions of the Younger and Middle Zhuzes. The new textbook says that the Khiva and Kokand khanates raided the territories of the Elder Zhuz, which was one of the reasons for the entry of this zhuz into the Russian Empire.

The administrative and territorial reforms of the second half of the 19th century were as follows: "The entire Kazakh territory was divided into three governorates: Turkestan, Orenburg and West Siberian. Military and civil power was concentrated in the hands of the Governor-General. Each general government was divided into regions. The Ural and Turgai regions belonged to the Orenburg region, the Akmola and Semipalatinsk regions belonged to the West Siberian region, and the Semirechenskaya and Syrdarya regions belonged to the Turkestan governorates general" ^{[8, p. 149]}.

In an old textbook, the author says that the reforms carried out by the tsarist government in 1867-1868 could not solve all the contradictions that existed at that time, but they had an impact on the socio-economic development of Kazakhstan.

The daily life of the Kazakh people has changed. The social stratification of the inhabitants of the village intensified, the formation of a harvest began, the united Kazakhs went to work in nearby villages, cities, as well as in the first industrial enterprises ^{[8, p. 152]}.

A modern textbook on administrative and territorial reforms also says that they were of a colonial nature, which became the final proof of Kazakhstan's complete annexation to Russia. After the sultan's estate was deprived of the right to govern the region, the Kazakh people turned into a disenfranchised mass. The remnants of the Kazakh statehood were destroyed ^{[9, pp. 118-119]}.

However, it is said that new cities and railways were being built, and steamship service along the Irtysh River began. Secular schools appeared, and healthcare developed. All this refers to the positive consequences of the reform ^{[9, p. 119]}.

The old textbook talks about the negative consequences of the ongoing reforms. A modern textbook indicates that the tsarist reforms deprived the Kazakhs of the best lands, pastures and statehood. However, thanks to the ongoing reforms, the social environment of Kazakhs has improved.

"The economic development of Kazakhstan in the second half of the 19th century" is the next topic discussed in the old textbook. According to the authors, the abolition of serfdom in the Russian Empire contributed to the resettlement of Russian peasants to the eastern regions of Kazakhstan ^{[8, p. 158]}. Land was taken from the indigenous population and given to Russian settlers. This led to a deterioration of cattle breeding. For example, in 1855-1893, 250,000 dessiatines of land were seized from the Kazakh population of the Akmola region for 11,000 Russian settlers. In the Semipalatinsk region, about 33 thousand desyatinas of land were taken away from the Kazakh population ^{[8, p. 159]}.

It is noted that in 1855, an expedition led by F. A. Shcherbin was sent to further colonize Kazakhstan. The purpose of the expedition is to find fertile land for extraction. Eight counties were studied, as a result, most of the lands were seized and placed at the disposal of the tsarist government ^{[8, p. 159]}. In the middle of the 19th century, the spread of agriculture and a sedentary lifestyle began, which disrupted the habitual way of life of the Kazakhs.

The author writes that in the 30-50s of the 19th century, areas with rich natural resources were found, as a result of which mining of minerals such as coal, ore, lead and salt only increased every year, and already since the 60s of the 19th century, Russian industrialists began to invest in the development of industry in Kazakhstan ^{[8, p. 162]}.

New market relations had an impact on the volume, content and types of trade. Economic ties and commodity exchange between the Russian Empire and Kazakhstan were expanded ^{[8, p. 164]}. Fairs also had an impact on the development of Kazakh-Russian trade relations. By the beginning of the 20th century, 19 new cities had already been built in Kazakhstan.

A modern textbook says that after the Emperor of Russia Alexander II abolished serfdom in 1861, most of the serfs became landless or landless. In Kazakhstan, with the help of Russian immigrants, the tsarist government wanted to force the Kazakh population to a sedentary lifestyle, as well as to Christianize and Russify. The Russian administration planned to turn Kazakhstan into a grain region ^{[9, p. 128]}.

The old textbook simultaneously talks about the massive seizure of land from the Kazakh population, and that with the resettlement of Russian peasants in the Kazakh region, trade and industry are beginning to develop, banks are opening. In a modern textbook, in the paragraph on peasant resettlement, the assessment is unequivocally negative: Russia is accused here of the massive seizure of fertile Kazakh lands.

Let's summarize the results. In the old and new seventh grade textbooks, the views on events related to Russia are roughly the same, but there are some differences. In the new textbook, information is given either concisely or, due to the different structure of textbooks, expanded, but events are described in other parts of the textbook. For example, in the textbook for 2012, the information is given in detail, there is a mention of the Siberian Khan Ibak, who concluded trade agreements with Ivan III, information is given about the establishment of relations and mutual exchange of embassies of the Kazakh and Russian states in the XVI century. Under Ivan the Terrible, trade relations were established by the Stroganov merchants, who were granted a certificate of duty–free trade - nothing is said about this in the new textbook.

Apart from some differences, there are significant similar events. For example, two textbooks talk about a literary work that was written by Kadyrgali Zhalairi about the Russian tsar Boris Godunov.

If the authors in the 7th grade textbooks have approximately the same attitude to the main events, and Russia is shown mainly as an ally and partner, then in the 8th grade program there are fewer positive ratings, and negative ratings increase.

From the 8th grade, the story begins about the accession of the Younger Zhuz to the Russian Empire. The old textbook says that Dzungaria threatened both Kazakhstan and Russia, while the new textbook says only that Russia took advantage of Kazakhstan's weakness due to the war with the Dzungars to expand territories in the south of the country, and Russia did not feel any danger from Dzungaria. In the old textbook, the events related to the Kazakhs' accession to Russian citizenship are described mainly as negative, with a note that such actions were necessary, and Russia, in turn, pursued the promised policy of protecting the territories of Zhuz from raids by different peoples. The new textbook presents Russia as a bloodthirsty exploiter of new lands and people – "There are practically no cases of voluntary renunciation of statehood in world history," the textbook says ^{[9, p. 31]}. And the consequences of joining Russia were extremely negative: "The acceptance of Russian citizenship by a part of the Kazakhs of the Younger and Middle Zhuz had its own, further deepening negative consequences" ^{[9, p. 33]}.

The new textbook does not record the Pugachev uprising and the participation of Kazakhs in it, but the uprising of Syrym Datov is reflected. The two textbooks reveal the reasons for this event in almost the same way - they boil down to the reorganization of the khan's power as a result of the creation and implementation of two charters on the Siberian Kyrgyz and on the Orenburg Kazakhs. As for the liberation struggle of Isatai Taimanov and Mukhambet Utemisov, the new textbook, on the contrary, focuses on the fact that this liberation struggle was no longer with Russia, but with Khan Zhangir. Regarding this event, the authors of the new textbook are more loyal to Russia.

The process of the entry of the Elder Zhuz into the Russian Empire is described by the authors of both textbooks as the history of colonization of the Kazakh lands. Moreover, if in the old textbook this process is indicated on the positive and negative sides, then the new textbook speaks only about exploitation and colonial seizures by Russia. As an example, the shrine of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi, which was shelled.

The beginning of the 19th century was connected with the Patriotic War of 1812. In the old textbook, a separate paragraph is devoted to the participation of the Kazakhs in this war and the internal processes on the territory of Kazakhstan at that time ^{[8, pp. 80-84]}. The new textbook does not mention this event, and the term "Patriotic War" is used only to refer to the struggle against the Dzungars.

The second half of the 19th century was the time of administrative reform of the Kazakh Steppe territory. As part of the reform, the entire territory was divided into three governorates.: Turkestan, Orenburg and West Siberian. Two textbooks show this event as the colonization of territories by Russia, but none of the textbooks deny that thanks to this reform, the road and railway networks have improved, the construction of secular schools has begun, healthcare and trade relations have improved.

In the old and new textbooks, the opinion was unequivocally expressed that after the peasant reform, the colonization of Kazakh lands intensified. Two textbooks agree that this policy has worsened the situation of local residents, disrupted the nomads of the indigenous population, and deprived them of fertile lands. In the new textbook, the process of railway construction is associated with the eviction of the indigenous population and the seizure of land ^{[9, p. 129]}. The old textbook talks about the construction of the railway network only in a positive way, as about improving the transport network and establishing trade relations with Russia and China ^{[8, p. 162, p. 170]}.

Thus, with the exception of a few positive aspects reflected in the seventh grade school course, the image of Russia is negative. At the same time, it evolves towards outright vilification. Such a school education policy in Kazakhstan has a negative impact on relations with Russia. Despite statements by representatives of the ruling circles that Russia is almost one of the main and important partners of Kazakhstan, students in schools of the Republic receive opposite attitudes. They will learn that Russia has forcibly annexed lands, colonized Kazakhstan, violated traditional nomadic ways, and suppressed many national liberation uprisings. The image is clearly formed not of an ally, but of an enemy.