Ilya Kalinin

Proceeding from materials relating to the “Time of Troubles”, this article examines the phenomenon of imposture (samozvanchestvo) as one of the symbols of Russian political history from the early 17th to the mid-19th century. The duration of the “impostor epidemic” coincides exactly with that of serfdom, and imposture itself can be described as a social reaction to a form of authority founded on total personal dependence. The article aims to develop further Boris Uspenskij’s argument that reveals in sacralization of the Tsar’s power in medieval Russia the main reason of imposture. Rene Girard’s conception of mimetic desire serves as the theoretical perspective for such a development.Опираясь на материал Смутного времени, статья исследует феномен самозванчества как один из символов, характерных для русской политической истории с XVII по середину XIX века. Период «самозванческой эпидемии» совпадает по времени с существованием в России крепостного права, а сама фигура самозванца может быть описана как социальная реакция на такую форму власти, которая основывается на абсолютной личной зависимости. Целью статьи является дальнейшее развитие тезиса Бориса Успенского, который обнаружил в сакрализации царской власти фундаментальную причину возникновения самозванчества. Концепция миметического желания Рене Жирара служит в качестве теоретической перспективы, актуальной для развития этого тезиса.Lahtudes nn “Segaduste aega” puudutavatest materjalidest vaadeldakse artiklis isehakanud trooninoudluse (samozvanchestvo) nahtust kui uht Vene poliitilise ajaloo sumbolit 17. sa jandi algusest kuni 19. sajandi keskpaigani. “Trooninoudlusepideemia” kestvus langeb ajaliselt tapselt kokku parisorjuse omaga ning trooninoudlemist ennast voib kirjeldada kui uhiskondlikku reaktsiooni voimuvormile, mis pohines taielikult isiklikul soltuvusel. Artikli peamine eesmark seisneb katses arendada edasi Boriss Uspenski argumenti, mis paljastab tsaarivoimu sakraliseerimises keskaegsel Venemaal trooninoudlemise pohiprintsiibi. Selle arengu teoreetiliseks perspektiiviks sobib Rene Girard’i mimeetilise iha moiste.

The subject of this article is the conceptual core of early Soviet cultural policy in the field of nation-building, as indicated by the well-known Stalinist formulation “socialist in content, national in form.” In addition to being well recognizable, there are several reason to address this phrase: 1) an interest in the Soviet regime’s language of self-description, which not only “conceals” real social practices from us, but also gives us access to them; 2) the opportunity to extend its descriptive power not only to the culture of socialist realism but also to the nature of production in the multinational socialist space; and 3) the formulation is not as vague and empty as it may seem, despite the manipulativeness so characteristic of the language of ideology that allows one to avoid any meaningful definition through multi-stage rhetorical moves.This article describes both the logical-rhetorical effects produced by the phrase and the sociocultural problems it was attempting to respond to. The main material for the present analysis is the work of Bolshevik leaders on the nationalities question and on issues of cultural construction. Its theoretical framework is contemporary research focused on the specific features of the Soviet multinational political project.