Home Releases 2022, №3 (47)

ACTUALIZATION OF HISTORY IN PARLIAMENTARY DISCUSSIONS IN THE STATE DUMA OF THE FIRST AND SECOND CONVOCATIONS OF LATE IMPERIAL RUSSIA, 1906–1907

History of Russia: from ancient times to 1917 , UDC: 94:328.1(470) DOI: 10.25688/20-76-9105.2022.47.3.06

Authors

  • Kiryanov Igor K. Doctor of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor

Annotation

The paper deals with the practices of using historical knowledge at the sessions of the State Duma of late imperial Russia (1st and 2nd convocations). The theoretical framework of the study is the concept of symbolic politics. The source base is the verbatim records of the State Duma meetings. The study was conducted using the instrumental capabilities of the web portal Parliamentary History of Late Imperial Russia. We have identified the following techniques of instrumental use of historical experience/knowledge in parliamentary debates to resolve the problems of Russia’s development at the beginning of the XXth century: referring to history (events, personalities) as a weighty argument to justify the position expressed; negative assessment of the historical knowledge of opponents with the aim of their political and intellectual discreditation; explaining what is happening in the present with reasons from the past; calls for oblivion of the past / forgetting / forgiving the past for the sake of social reconciliation; interpretation of Russia’s history to mark the group identity of parliamentary parties and associations: the past as negative experience vs as great history; articulation of historical trauma / resentment. The paper shows that the institutionalization of public politics in late imperial Russia opened up opportunities for the political “mobilization” of the past by various actors, including their rivalry in the politics of memory and historical politics. The repertoire of the “mobilized” past, a certain attitude towards it served as a significant marker of group identity not only for parliamentary associations but also for voters. The historical component turned into an important component of the civil type of political culture (the culture of participation) that was being formed in late imperial Russia.

How to link insert

Kiryanov, I. K. (2022). ACTUALIZATION OF HISTORY IN PARLIAMENTARY DISCUSSIONS IN THE STATE DUMA OF THE FIRST AND SECOND CONVOCATIONS OF LATE IMPERIAL RUSSIA, 1906–1907 Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 2022, №3 (47), 71. https://doi.org/10.25688/20-76-9105.2022.47.3.06
References
1. 1. Aizenshtat M. P. Istoricheskoe znanie v politicheskoi kul`ture Britanii vtoroi poloviny XVIII veka [Historical knowledge in the political culture of Britain in the second half of the XVIIIth century]. Moscow: Institut vseobshchei istorii RAN, 2019. 214 p. (In Russ).
2. 2. Aizenshtat M. P. Istoricheskoe znanie i politicheskaia kul`tura Britanii XVIII v.: problemy issledovaniia [Historical knowledge and political culture of Britain in the XVIIIth century: research problems] // Liudi i teksty: istoricheskii al’manakh. 2019. Vyp. 12. / ed. by M. S. Bobkova. Moscow: Institut vseobshchei istorii RAN, 2019. P. 76–95. (In Russ).
3. 3. Aizenshtat M. P. Proshloe kak komponent parlamentskoi polemiki [The past as a component of parliamentary controversy] // Istorik i obshchestvo. Istoricheskii fakt kak argument politicheskoi polemiki / ed. by M. P. Aizenshtat. Moscow: Institut vseobshchei istorii RAN, 2011. P. 137–149. (In Russ).
4. 4. Gromyko S. A. «Natsional`nyi argument» v russkoi parlamentskoi ritorike (na materiale diskussii v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossiiskoi imperii) [“National argument” in Russian parliamentary rhetoric (based on the discussion in the State Duma of the Russian Empire)] // Vestnik Tomskogo universiteta. Filologiia. 2018. № 2 (56). P. 23–33. (In Russ).
5. 5. Gromyko S. A. Obrashchenie k istorii kak ritoricheskii argument v russkoi parlamentskoi rechi (na materiale vystuplenii deputatov-natsionalistov v dorevoliutsionnoi Gosudarstvennoi Dume) [Appeal to history as a rhetorical argument in russian parliamentary speech (based on the speeches of Nationalist deputies in the pre-revolutionary State Duma)] // Mezhdunarodnyi nauchno-issledovatel’skii zhurnal (Ekaterinburg). 2017. № 7 (61). Ch. 1. P. 112–115. (In Russ).
6. 6. Malinova O. Iu. Politika pamiati kak oblast` simvolicheskoi politiki [The politics of memory as a domain of symbolic politics] // Metodologicheskie voprosy izucheniia politiki pamiati / ed. by A. I. Miller, D. V. Efremenko. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriia, 2018. P. 27–53. (In Russ).
7. 7. Repina L. P. Sobytiia proshlogo v diskussiiakh nastoiashchego: istoriia i politika v Britanii «epokhi peremen» [Events of the past in discussions of the present: history and politics in Britain’s “Era of Change”] // Dialog so vremenem. 2020. Vyp.73. P. 438–444. (In Russ).
8. 8. Faber K-G. The use of history in political debate // History and Theory. 1978. Vol. 17. № 4. Р. 36–67.
Download file .pdf 294.2 kb