title: On the Organization of the All-Russian Inspection of the Governorates
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Tot, Yurii V.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2021-04-16T09:21:13Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2021-04-16T09:21:13Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2021-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Tot Yu. V. On the Organization of the All-Russian Inspection of the Governorates. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. History, 2021, vol. 66, issue 1, рp. 56–78.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.isbn
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2021.104
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/27900
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The inspection of local government in 1800, the largest ever conducted in Russia, is very
  modestly presented in historiography. On the one hand, this is due to the predominance of
  a negative tradition in the study of the epoch of Paul I despite the “new direction” laid down
  by M. V. Klochkov, on the other hand — due to the source base for studying the issue formed
  in the work of A. E. Nolde. It was A. E. Nolde, followed by V. N. Bochkarev, who had a decisive
  influence on the development of the historiography of the issue. In addition to the term
  “audit”, the established historiographical parameters include: limited funding, small number
  of participants in the inspection; uncertainty regarding the rights of senators; formal pattern
  of reports; the predominance of positive feedback in them in order to avoid the consequences
  of “hot-tempered nature of the monarch”; perfunctory, and therefore “inconclusive”, pattern
  of the inspection not providing the materials “for any general reform or reorganization of any
  parts of management”. We object to such interpretations of predecessors and to the definition
  of inspection as “audit”, to the issue with the initiator of the inspection, the reasons for its
  conducting, the time, the content of instruction. All of the above mentioned problems require
  further studying, and first and foremost — the text of the instructions, which is a key to their
  understanding. Reconsideration the biased assessments of the first and last all-Russian inspection
  of 1800 by extracting new information from traditional sources and introducing previously
  unknown archival materials into scientific circulation is an objective historiographical
  necessity.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. History;Volume 66; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Russian Empire at the turn of the 18th — 19th centuries
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Paul I
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Senate
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: local government
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: audit
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: inspection
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: On the Organization of the All-Russian Inspection of the Governorates
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 56-78.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/27900/1/56-78.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 740,82 kB