Карамзин: самопознание, или Сотворение европейской России
Author examines one of the most important spiritual issues of growing Russian culture. Peter the Great has returned Russia to Europe as a military and political force. This cultural hero was a military and political builder. Needed was a second cultural hero – Russian builder of spiritual meanings. Incredible effort Karamzin, who gave Russian self-awareness and self-knowledge, which approved the European values in Russia meant that the second was a cultural hero – a creator of spiritual meanings. It can rightly be called a European Russian, paves the way for the development of a great culture.
Stretching from the end of the Middle Ages to the Second Industrial Revolution (c. 1500-1900), the authors in this volume analyze spiritual kinship in Europe and its associated social customs - with special attention given to godparenthood. These customs had great importance for Early Modern and Modern European societies, and this collection represents an interdisciplinary effort to combine the work of social and economic historians, historical demographers, anthropologists and sociologists. Arranged chronologically and geographically, chapters cover specific areas of the European continent, from the Mediterranean to Scandinavia and Eastern Europe. Reconstructing changes in theological thought about spiritual kinship, particularly before and after the Reformation, and comparing Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox views and practices, Spiritual Kinship in Europe provides a comprehensive picture of how social practices and religious ideas related to spiritual kinship and godparenthood.
This two-part overview of contemporary Russian anthropology focuses in detail on the work of several scholars and situates it in the changing landscape of Russian academia. The main issue I address is debates about an academic identity of Russian anthropology as ‘historical science’. Given that in Western anthropology, history has become one of the leading modes of anthropological analysis and that the turn to history marked a radical repositioning of anthropology’s very subject, it is important to explore how such configurations of history and anthropology work in other anthropological traditions and what the reasons are for turning to history or, conversely, avoiding it, for specific national, continental and transnational anthropological schools. In this article, I explore these questions by focusing on anthropology in Russia with an aim of reassembling the relationship between anthropology and history from the point of view of the anthropology of time. I ask what temporal frameworks underscore the relationship between anthropology and history. I explore these understandings ethnographically, that is, through ethnographic interviews with Russian scholars in addition to close readings of their works.
The book is dedicated to the 100th anniversary of Russian parliamentarism. The analysis of historical experience and actual problems of development of parliamentarism in Russia, Germany and a number of other European countries is presented. The authors are leading Russian and foreign experts from a number of research centers in Russia and Europe. Materials on the analysis of the development of parliamentarism in Germany and other European countries are based on the results of the European project "Parliamentary representation in Europe: recruiting and the career of legislators in 1848-2005", implemented during the last decade.
The book is addressed to a wide range of readers - scientists, politicians, public servants, teachers and students, everyone who is interested in the history and modern experience of Russian and European parliamentarism.
Russia’s policy towards Northeast Asia cannot be understood independently of its general Asian strategy, primarily its pivot to Asia, which has practically become an official policy after 2014. We are witnessing two contradictory tendencies in Washington and Seoul. The Trump administration seeks to assume a tougher stance on North Korea. At the same time, South Korea’s new government is likely to be more moderate towards Pyongyang. At the same time Russian experts expressed considerable hope.