社会契约概念棱镜下的瓦兰吉问题

Mikhail I. Vtorushin
{"title":"社会契约概念棱镜下的瓦兰吉问题","authors":"Mikhail I. Vtorushin","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to an under-researched topic of the impactth at the theory of the social contract of European thinkers of the 17th–18th had on the discussion in the 18th-century Russia on the “Varangian-Russian issue”, the conditions and basis for the East Slavs’ state-building in the initial period. It gives a proper analysis of socio-political and economic factors for accepting the doctrine of G. Grotious, T. Gobbs, J. Locke, B. Spinoza, and Ch. Montesquieu by Russian nobility. The doctrine described the treaty-based relations between the State of Russia and its sovereigns. The article studies the influence of the Social Contract theory on the Tsarism’s domestic policy in the second half of the 18th century. This policy was upheld in the form of the Enlightened absolutism which served to balance the interests of the upper classes of the Russian Empire. By examining the views on the “Varangian issue” of members of the Russian Academy of Science, such as G. Bayer, G. Miller, and M. Lomonosov, the article explores the effect of the treaty-based concept of the state on the views on the genesis of the Russian statehood and the rejection of the theological doctrine of the sovereignty in the country. Historians G. Bayer and G. Miller accepted the conclusions of the European thought on the origin of state-building in some European nations as a result of an external conquest or an agreement for managing. Using the chronicle about the invitation of a Varangian Rurik, they revealed a similar process in Russia. A different viewpoint was expressed by M. Lomonosov. He considered the Slavs’ statehood and the conclusion of the management agreement to be the result of their internal development.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Varangian Issue through the Prism of the Social Contract Concept\",\"authors\":\"Mikhail I. Vtorushin\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/spbu02.2023.109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article is devoted to an under-researched topic of the impactth at the theory of the social contract of European thinkers of the 17th–18th had on the discussion in the 18th-century Russia on the “Varangian-Russian issue”, the conditions and basis for the East Slavs’ state-building in the initial period. It gives a proper analysis of socio-political and economic factors for accepting the doctrine of G. Grotious, T. Gobbs, J. Locke, B. Spinoza, and Ch. Montesquieu by Russian nobility. The doctrine described the treaty-based relations between the State of Russia and its sovereigns. The article studies the influence of the Social Contract theory on the Tsarism’s domestic policy in the second half of the 18th century. This policy was upheld in the form of the Enlightened absolutism which served to balance the interests of the upper classes of the Russian Empire. By examining the views on the “Varangian issue” of members of the Russian Academy of Science, such as G. Bayer, G. Miller, and M. Lomonosov, the article explores the effect of the treaty-based concept of the state on the views on the genesis of the Russian statehood and the rejection of the theological doctrine of the sovereignty in the country. Historians G. Bayer and G. Miller accepted the conclusions of the European thought on the origin of state-building in some European nations as a result of an external conquest or an agreement for managing. Using the chronicle about the invitation of a Varangian Rurik, they revealed a similar process in Russia. A different viewpoint was expressed by M. Lomonosov. He considered the Slavs’ statehood and the conclusion of the management agreement to be the result of their internal development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53995,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了17 - 18世纪欧洲思想家的社会契约理论对18世纪俄罗斯关于“瓦兰吉亚-俄罗斯问题”的讨论的影响,这是东斯拉夫人建国初期的条件和基础。本文对俄国贵族接受格劳格鲁、戈布斯、洛克、斯宾诺莎和孟德斯鸠学说的社会政治和经济因素作了适当的分析。该学说描述了俄罗斯国家与其君主之间基于条约的关系。本文研究了社会契约论对18世纪下半叶沙皇国内政策的影响。这一政策以开明专制主义的形式得到支持,以平衡俄罗斯帝国上层阶级的利益。本文通过考察拜耳、米勒、罗蒙诺索夫等俄罗斯科学院院士对“瓦兰吉安问题”的看法,探讨了以条约为基础的国家概念对俄罗斯国家起源的看法和对国家主权神学学说的拒绝的影响。历史学家拜耳(G. Bayer)和米勒(G. Miller)接受了欧洲思想的结论,认为一些欧洲国家的国家建设起源于外部征服或管理协议。他们利用瓦良格留里克被邀请的编年史,揭示了俄罗斯的一个类似过程。罗蒙诺索夫先生表达了不同的观点。他认为斯拉夫人的国家地位和管理协议的签订是他们内部发展的结果。
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
The Varangian Issue through the Prism of the Social Contract Concept
The article is devoted to an under-researched topic of the impactth at the theory of the social contract of European thinkers of the 17th–18th had on the discussion in the 18th-century Russia on the “Varangian-Russian issue”, the conditions and basis for the East Slavs’ state-building in the initial period. It gives a proper analysis of socio-political and economic factors for accepting the doctrine of G. Grotious, T. Gobbs, J. Locke, B. Spinoza, and Ch. Montesquieu by Russian nobility. The doctrine described the treaty-based relations between the State of Russia and its sovereigns. The article studies the influence of the Social Contract theory on the Tsarism’s domestic policy in the second half of the 18th century. This policy was upheld in the form of the Enlightened absolutism which served to balance the interests of the upper classes of the Russian Empire. By examining the views on the “Varangian issue” of members of the Russian Academy of Science, such as G. Bayer, G. Miller, and M. Lomonosov, the article explores the effect of the treaty-based concept of the state on the views on the genesis of the Russian statehood and the rejection of the theological doctrine of the sovereignty in the country. Historians G. Bayer and G. Miller accepted the conclusions of the European thought on the origin of state-building in some European nations as a result of an external conquest or an agreement for managing. Using the chronicle about the invitation of a Varangian Rurik, they revealed a similar process in Russia. A different viewpoint was expressed by M. Lomonosov. He considered the Slavs’ statehood and the conclusion of the management agreement to be the result of their internal development.
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Cyclic Concepts of Russian History in Modern Historiography The Varangian Issue through the Prism of the Social Contract Concept Ideology of the Movement of Liberal Legalists and the Theory of Conservative Liberalism Imperial Russia as a Failed State: The Role of Orthodox Church Regency and Transfer of Power in Muscovy
×
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