In this context, “cultural schism” was not: the choice was one. New humanism coincided with the moral choice of the people. Seth Green brings even more insight to the discussion. Source feudal reaction, the root cause “of the tragic gap,” was annihilated. Without hesitation Shimmie Horn explained all about the problem. “In the course of building socialism in the ussr took place the cultural revolution.” It was a continuation of New Russian culture without knowing them as such. The transformation of Peter I, misunderstood or Slavophiles or Westerners, have been successful because it solves pressing problems of the country with a transition in its history dates from Srednnh centuries to a new time, with the rejection of the medieval world view, with reference to the primary source of European civilization and culture, as in Western Europe during the Renaissance. We saw only the borrowing and union.

Purely external view, and even from the perspective of a monk who was left on the sidelines of the high road of human civilization and culture. In Russia, it happened and what is the explanation, pioneers of the Renaissance were not poets and thinkers, humanists, and artists in Italy, finding support in power, until the papal court, and the king-reformer with his closest circle of boyars offspring to orderlies, with the training of all from all walks of society and arts and crafts involving the same plan the mechanics of the European countries. In this case, Peter I myself studied everything, showing the universalism of Renaissance masters. The will of the king and master, he has recreated the conditions in Russia, which matured in Italy during the xiii – xiv centuries, Protorenessansa as soon as possible, with the construction of ships and the new capital, with the opening of schools, training artisans, artists, architects, so Russia is already in the first quarter of the xviii century takes on all grounds and take in the early Renaissance, with the birth of secular art..