Towards a Conceptual-Historical Critique of the Essentialist and Teleological Interpretations of Russian History. Part 1

The author discusses some of the dominant assertions in literature on Russian history. One them is disqualification myth benevolent tsar as “false”. This accompanied by formulas “naïve or popular monarchism”, which designate “pre-scientific illusions” that would have guided collective movements resistance to autocracy. Given importance representations and power history, theoretical premises above-mentioned disqualifications are based affect general interpretation this for example conception people “passive”. proposes abandon positivist scaffolding approach sources from other perspectives, particular conceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte), pose a radically different question: what truth contained reconstruct, against essentialist teleological vision, historicity Russia. first part studies genealogy expression samozvan/ets/stvo (self-appointment), its original meaning – individual initiative divine appointment functions autocratic political paradigm. lack heuristic value “popular, naïve monarchism,” logic deprive most oppressed segments population their culture language, emphasized.