title: The Phenomenology of the Russian Autocracy at the Turn of the Nineteenth Century Through the Optics of “Political Everyday Life”
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Andreev, D. A.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2020-07-07T19:12:56Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2020-07-07T19:12:56Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2020-06
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Andreev D. A. ‘The Phenomenology of the Russian Autocracy at the Turn of the Nineteenth Century Through the Optics of “Political Everyday Life”’, Modern History of Russia, vol. 10, no. 2, 2020, pp. 521–528.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu24.2020.216
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/18556
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: This article discusses one of the main issues in K. A. Solovyov’s 2018 monograph on the political system
  of the Russian Empire from Emperor Alexander III until the reforms of 1905–1906. Solovyov, a chief research
  fellow of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, states that the regime in this period
  should be studied from the point of view of “the political everyday life”. This would help scholars develop a “new
  political history” and reconstruct the past in a way closer to historical reality than is done at present. This approach
  has met criticism. Despite a number of successful examples of the use of Solovyov’s optics of “political everyday
  life,” it is not sufficiently comprehensive or robust for understanding the phenomenology of the late autocracy, because
  it does not take into account the most important features of this regime: the status of the monarch and the
  nature of his power. Those phenomena cannot be understood in the context of exclusively administrative practices.
  To support this claim, the author analyzes both the concepts of political thinkers Solovyov studied and did not
  mention. The author suggests that the prism of “everyday life” cannot provide a correct interpretation of events.
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: Modern History of Russia;Volume 10; Issue 2
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: political everyday life
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: autocracy
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Slavophilism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: absolutism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: political system
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: political history
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: The Phenomenology of the Russian Autocracy at the Turn of the Nineteenth Century Through the Optics of “Political Everyday Life”
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 521-528.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/18556/1/521-528.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 728,21 kB