The Concepts of Power and State in Russian Political Thinking: On the Difficulties of the Comparative Approach

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
V. Vysokova, Mikhail Kiselev
{"title":"The Concepts of Power and State in Russian Political Thinking: On the Difficulties of the Comparative Approach","authors":"V. Vysokova, Mikhail Kiselev","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.4.859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews a monograph by E. Sashalmi, a Hungarian Russianist, dedicated to the “transtemporal” reconstruction of the political thinking of Russian writers of the early modern period. The innovation of this book lies in the “contextual” and historical-comparative approaches. Comparing the political discourse of Muscovy with the Western Christian political thought of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the author does not find the concepts of “sovereignty”, “state”, or “politics” in Russian political thinking. E. Shashalmi connects the adaptation of the idea of a “modern sovereign state” in Russian intellectual discourse with Western Russian intellectuals of the second half of the seventeenth century and Feofan Prokopovich in the early eighteenth century. While appreciating the innovative character of the research goal and approaches, the reviewers evaluate the Hungarian historian’s conclusions as historiographic clichés about the immaturity of Russian culture and the political thought of pre-Petrine Rus’. In fact, E. Shashalmi’s research concerns the Westernisation of Russian political thought. The reviewers conclude that the main difficulty of such innovative historical and comparative studies is the problem of translatability of “concepts” from one culture to another.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"67 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestio Rossica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.4.859","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article reviews a monograph by E. Sashalmi, a Hungarian Russianist, dedicated to the “transtemporal” reconstruction of the political thinking of Russian writers of the early modern period. The innovation of this book lies in the “contextual” and historical-comparative approaches. Comparing the political discourse of Muscovy with the Western Christian political thought of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the author does not find the concepts of “sovereignty”, “state”, or “politics” in Russian political thinking. E. Shashalmi connects the adaptation of the idea of a “modern sovereign state” in Russian intellectual discourse with Western Russian intellectuals of the second half of the seventeenth century and Feofan Prokopovich in the early eighteenth century. While appreciating the innovative character of the research goal and approaches, the reviewers evaluate the Hungarian historian’s conclusions as historiographic clichés about the immaturity of Russian culture and the political thought of pre-Petrine Rus’. In fact, E. Shashalmi’s research concerns the Westernisation of Russian political thought. The reviewers conclude that the main difficulty of such innovative historical and comparative studies is the problem of translatability of “concepts” from one culture to another.
俄罗斯政治思想中的权力与国家概念:论比较方法的困难
本文评述了匈牙利俄罗斯学家 E. Sashalmi 的专著,该书致力于 "跨时空 "重建近代早期俄罗斯作家的政治思想。本书的创新之处在于采用了 "语境 "和历史比较的方法。作者将莫斯科的政治话语与十六、十七世纪西方基督教政治思想进行比较,发现俄罗斯政治思想中没有 "主权"、"国家 "或 "政治 "的概念。E. Shashalmi 将 "现代主权国家 "思想在俄罗斯思想话语中的嬗变与 17 世纪下半叶的西方俄罗斯知识分子和 18 世纪初的费奥凡-普罗科波维奇联系起来。在赞赏研究目标和方法的创新性的同时,评论者认为这位匈牙利历史学家的结论是关于俄罗斯文化和前彼得大帝时代罗斯政治思想不成熟的历史学陈词滥调。事实上,E. Shashalmi 的研究涉及俄罗斯政治思想的西方化。评论者认为,此类创新性历史和比较研究的主要困难在于 "概念 "从一种文化到另一种文化的可转换性问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Quaestio Rossica
Quaestio Rossica HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Quaestio Rossica is a peer-reviewed academic journal focusing on the study of Russia’s history, philology, and culture. The Journal aims to introduce new research approaches in the sphere of the Humanities and previously unknown sources, actualising traditional methods and creating new research concepts in the sphere of Russian studies. Except for academic articles, the Journal publishes reviews, historical surveys, discussions, and accounts of the past of the Humanities as a field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信