Following the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, and again during the Gorbachev and Yel’tsin eras, the issue of individual legal rights and freedoms occupied a central place in the reformist drive to modernize criminal justice. While in tsarist Russia the gains of legal scholars and activists in this regard were few, their example as liberal humanists remains important today in renewed efforts to promote juridical awareness and respect for law. A case in point is the role played by Vladimir Solov’ev. One of Russia’s most celebrated moral philosophers, his defence of the ‘right to a dignified existence’ and his brilliant critique of the death penalty not only contributed to the development of a legal consciousness during his lifetime, but also inspired appeals for a more humane system of justice in post-Soviet debate. This book addresses the issues involved and their origins in late Imperial legal thought. More specifically, it examines competing theories of crime and the criminal, together with various prescriptions for punishment respecting personal inviolability. Charting endeavours of the juridical community to promote legal culture through reforms and education, the book also throws light on aspects of Russian politics, society and mentality in two turbulent periods of Russian history.

Following the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, and again during the Gorbachev and Yel’tsin eras, the issue of individual legal rights and freedoms occupied a central place in the reformist drive to modernize criminal justice. While in tsarist Russia the gains of legal scholars and activists in this regard were few, their example as liberal humanists remains important today in renewed efforts to promote juridical awareness and respect for law. A case in point is the role played by Vladimir Solov’ev. One of Russia’s most celebrated moral philosophers, his defence of the ‘right to a dignified existence’ and his brilliant critique of the death penalty not only contributed to the development of a legal consciousness during his lifetime, but also inspired appeals for a more humane system of justice in post-Soviet debate. This book addresses the issues involved and their origins in late Imperial legal thought. More specifically, it examines competing theories of crime and the criminal, together with various prescriptions for punishment respecting personal inviolability. Charting endeavours of the juridical community to promote legal culture through reforms and education, the book also throws light on aspects of Russian politics, society and mentality in two turbulent periods of Russian history.

This title was first published in 2000. This work identifies the differences between the Russian intellectual approach to reading Plato and that of other European countries. This study offers a complex perspective on Russian philosophical learnings up to 1930. The book contains five chapters with the first aiming to provide the general institutional context in which Russian 19th century Plato scholarship developed, caught as it were, between the rise of the historical sciences and the heavy hand of state interference in standardizing the educational system in the name of nation building and modernization. The second chapter attempts to illustrate how Plato served as a reference in Russian philosophical culture and the third deals with aspects of Russian philosophy of law. In the fourth chapter, the author shifts his approach to compare and contrast a number of reactions to a single dialogue, the "Republic" and in the final concluding chapter, addresses the question of whether it is legitimate to speak of a Russian Platonism.

Following the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, and again during the Gorbachev and Yel’tsin eras, the issue of individual legal rights and freedoms occupied a central place in the reformist drive to modernize criminal justice. While in tsarist Russia the gains of legal scholars and activists in this regard were few, their example as liberal humanists remains important today in renewed efforts to promote juridical awareness and respect for law. A case in point is the role played by Vladimir Solov’ev. One of Russia’s most celebrated moral philosophers, his defence of the ‘right to a dignified existence’ and his brilliant critique of the death penalty not only contributed to the development of a legal consciousness during his lifetime, but also inspired appeals for a more humane system of justice in post-Soviet debate. This book addresses the issues involved and their origins in late Imperial legal thought. More specifically, it examines competing theories of crime and the criminal, together with various prescriptions for punishment respecting personal inviolability. Charting endeavours of the juridical community to promote legal culture through reforms and education, the book also throws light on aspects of Russian politics, society and mentality in two turbulent periods of Russian history.

Following the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, and again during the Gorbachev and Yel’tsin eras, the issue of individual legal rights and freedoms occupied a central place in the reformist drive to modernize criminal justice. While in tsarist Russia the gains of legal scholars and activists in this regard were few, their example as liberal humanists remains important today in renewed efforts to promote juridical awareness and respect for law. A case in point is the role played by Vladimir Solov’ev. One of Russia’s most celebrated moral philosophers, his defence of the ‘right to a dignified existence’ and his brilliant critique of the death penalty not only contributed to the development of a legal consciousness during his lifetime, but also inspired appeals for a more humane system of justice in post-Soviet debate. This book addresses the issues involved and their origins in late Imperial legal thought. More specifically, it examines competing theories of crime and the criminal, together with various prescriptions for punishment respecting personal inviolability. Charting endeavours of the juridical community to promote legal culture through reforms and education, the book also throws light on aspects of Russian politics, society and mentality in two turbulent periods of Russian history.

This title was first published in 2000. This work identifies the differences between the Russian intellectual approach to reading Plato and that of other European countries. This study offers a complex perspective on Russian philosophical learnings up to 1930. The book contains five chapters with the first aiming to provide the general institutional context in which Russian 19th century Plato scholarship developed, caught as it were, between the rise of the historical sciences and the heavy hand of state interference in standardizing the educational system in the name of nation building and modernization. The second chapter attempts to illustrate how Plato served as a reference in Russian philosophical culture and the third deals with aspects of Russian philosophy of law. In the fourth chapter, the author shifts his approach to compare and contrast a number of reactions to a single dialogue, the "Republic" and in the final concluding chapter, addresses the question of whether it is legitimate to speak of a Russian Platonism.