“他希望谁成为他的继任者”——保罗·布什科维奇谈近代早期俄罗斯的继承与绝对主义

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY RUSSIAN HISTORY-HISTOIRE RUSSE Pub Date : 2022-03-22 DOI:10.30965/18763316-12340030
Russell E. Martin
{"title":"“他希望谁成为他的继任者”——保罗·布什科维奇谈近代早期俄罗斯的继承与绝对主义","authors":"Russell E. Martin","doi":"10.30965/18763316-12340030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Paul Bushkovitch’s study of succession in Russia challenges a number of received historiographical traditions about succession and absolutism in early modern Russia. He questions the common view that power transferred from one ruler to the next by primogeniture and instead sees a long and largely uninterrupted tradition of parental designation. He also rejects the view that the concept of absolutism is useful for understanding monarchical power in Muscovy. Instead, Bushkovitch joins a growing group of historians who see the tsar ruling collaboratively with his boyars, making this a study as much about political culture as it is about succession. Some readers may find the conclusions about primogeniture to be highly revisionist and in need of further investigation, but the arguments about absolutism will no doubt influence in significant ways future works on power and politics, as historians continue to expand their understanding of pre-modern Russian political culture.","PeriodicalId":43441,"journal":{"name":"RUSSIAN HISTORY-HISTOIRE RUSSE","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Whomsoever He Wishes As His Successor”: Paul Bushkovitch on Succession and Absolutism in Early Modern Russia\",\"authors\":\"Russell E. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.30965/18763316-12340030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Paul Bushkovitch’s study of succession in Russia challenges a number of received historiographical traditions about succession and absolutism in early modern Russia. He questions the common view that power transferred from one ruler to the next by primogeniture and instead sees a long and largely uninterrupted tradition of parental designation. He also rejects the view that the concept of absolutism is useful for understanding monarchical power in Muscovy. Instead, Bushkovitch joins a growing group of historians who see the tsar ruling collaboratively with his boyars, making this a study as much about political culture as it is about succession. Some readers may find the conclusions about primogeniture to be highly revisionist and in need of further investigation, but the arguments about absolutism will no doubt influence in significant ways future works on power and politics, as historians continue to expand their understanding of pre-modern Russian political culture.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RUSSIAN HISTORY-HISTOIRE RUSSE\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RUSSIAN HISTORY-HISTOIRE RUSSE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30965/18763316-12340030\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUSSIAN HISTORY-HISTOIRE RUSSE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30965/18763316-12340030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

保罗·布什科维奇对俄罗斯继承的研究挑战了现代早期俄罗斯继承和专制主义的一些公认的史学传统。他质疑通过长子继承权将权力从一位统治者转移到另一位统治者的普遍观点,相反,他看到了父母指定的长期且基本上不间断的传统。他还驳斥了专制主义的概念有助于理解莫斯科的君主权力的观点。相反,布什科维奇加入了越来越多的历史学家的行列,他们认为沙皇与他的儿子们合作执政,这使得这项研究既是一项关于继承的研究,也是一项关于政治文化的研究。一些读者可能会发现,关于长子继承制的结论是高度修正主义的,需要进一步调查,但随着历史学家继续扩大他们对前现代俄罗斯政治文化的理解,关于专制主义的论点无疑将对未来关于权力和政治的著作产生重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“Whomsoever He Wishes As His Successor”: Paul Bushkovitch on Succession and Absolutism in Early Modern Russia
Paul Bushkovitch’s study of succession in Russia challenges a number of received historiographical traditions about succession and absolutism in early modern Russia. He questions the common view that power transferred from one ruler to the next by primogeniture and instead sees a long and largely uninterrupted tradition of parental designation. He also rejects the view that the concept of absolutism is useful for understanding monarchical power in Muscovy. Instead, Bushkovitch joins a growing group of historians who see the tsar ruling collaboratively with his boyars, making this a study as much about political culture as it is about succession. Some readers may find the conclusions about primogeniture to be highly revisionist and in need of further investigation, but the arguments about absolutism will no doubt influence in significant ways future works on power and politics, as historians continue to expand their understanding of pre-modern Russian political culture.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
50.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Russian History’s mission is the publication of original articles on the history of Russia through the centuries, in the assumption that all past experiences are inter-related. Russian History seeks to discover, analyze, and understand the most interesting experiences and relationships and elucidate their causes and consequences. Contributors to the journal take their stand from different perspectives: intellectual, economic and military history, domestic, social and class relations, relations with non-Russian peoples, nutrition and health, all possible events that had an influence on Russia. Russian History is the international platform for the presentation of such findings.
期刊最新文献
The Gorbachev Moment – and Why It Was So Brief The Socialist Great Divergence. Why Mikhail Gorbachev Failed Where Deng Xiaoping Succeeded Mikhail Gorbachev and the Politics of Perestroika Rescuing Gorbachev from the Memory Hole Official Responses to Ethnic Unrest in the USSR, 1985–1991
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1