Suchergebnisse

Статья посвящена рассмотрению дискуссии между А.Я. Гуревичем и Л.М. Баткиным, которая внесла значительный вклад в становление «несоветской» медиевистики. Цель исследования состоит в определении характерных черт полемики между А.Я. Гуревичем и Л.М. Баткиным, ее значения в процессе трансформации эпистемологического поля отечественной исторической науки. Теоретической основой статьи стали принципы интеллектуальной истории. Исследование осуществлено на основе сравнительно-исторического и историко-генетического методов. В настоящей работе проанализированы взгляды А.Я. Гуревича и Л.М. Баткина на ряд методологических вопросов, которые оказались в центре прений между учеными. В публикации делается вывод о том, что рассматриваемый диспут затрагивал вопросы о культурной и социальной сущности личности, о реализации личностью функций внутри общественных структур, о причинах и механизмах изменения культурных ценностей и доминант. Трактовка понятия «личность» определяла выбор подхода к изучению общества. Если для А.Я. Гуревича личность является порождением социально-культурной системы конкретной эпохи, а особенность личности заключается в оригинальном соединении общих черт культуры, то для Л.М. Баткина личностью является индивид, который, руководствуясь общими нормами и установлениями, пропускает их через свое сознание и словно вновь порождает нормы и ценности. Согласно Л.М. Баткину, «осознающая личность» – начало преодоления стереотипов и матриц общественного сознания. В этой связи подход А.Я. Гуревича был нацелен на реконструкцию общественных стереотипов и матриц, определявших поведение людей. Л.М. Баткин анализировал выдающиеся литературные произведения, которые, по мысли ученого, открывают в исследуемой культуре ее изменение и трансформацию. Ряд тезисов, высказанных Л.М. Баткиным в ходе полемики, был воспринят и интерпретирован Ю.Л. Бессмертным, А.Л. Юргановым, А.В. Каравашкиным, И.Н. Данилевским и оказал влияние на формирование их научно-исследовательских программ. Ученые сошлись во мнении, что средневековую культуру необходимо изучать исходя из особенностей развития самой культуры, следует уделять внимание пониманию специфики культурного языка, особенностей мышления и самовыражения исследуемой эпохи, надлежит учитывать уникальные черты культуры и использовать принципы герменевтики в качестве методологической основы интерпретации письменных источников.
he article is devoted to the discussion between A. Gurevich and L. Batkin, who made a significant contribution to the development of "non-Soviet" medieval studies. The purpose of the study is to determine the characteristic features of the controversy between A. Gurevich and L. Batkin and its significance in the process of transformation of the epistemological field of Russian historical science. The principles of intellectual history constitute the theoretical foundation of the article. The study was carried out on the basis of comparative historical and historical genetic methods. The present work analyzes the views of A. Gurevich and L. Batkin on a number of methodological issues that were at the center of the debate between the scholars. The author concludes that the dispute under consideration raised questions about the cultural and social essence of the individual, about the implementation by the individual of his functions within social structures, and about the causes and mechanisms for changing cultural values and dominants. The interpretation of the concept of personality determined the choice of approach to the study of society. While for A. Gurevich, the personality is a product of the socio-cultural system of a particular era and the peculiarity of the personality lies in the original combination of common features of culture, L. Batkin views the personality as an individual who, being guided by general norms and regulations, lets them go through his consciousness and as if generates norms and values again. According to L. Batkin, "the conscious personality" is the beginning of overcoming stereotypes and matrices of social consciousness. In this regard, the approach of A. Gurevich was aimed at reconstructing social stereotypes and matrices that determined people's behavior. L. Batkin analyzed outstanding literary works, which, according to the scholar, reveal change and transformation in the culture under study. A number of points made by L. Batkin during the polemic were perceived and interpreted by Yu. Bessmertnyi, A. Yurganov, A. Karavashkin, and I. Danilevskii and influenced the formation of their research agenda. The scholars agreed that medieval culture should be studied proceeding from the peculiarities of the development of the culture itself; attention should be paid to understanding the specifics of the language of culture, features of thinking and self-expression of the era under study; unique features of culture should be taken into account; it is required to use the principles of hermeneutics as a methodological basis for the interpretation of written sources.

The profound social and political changes that took place in China at the turn of the 19th century led to a significant reappraisal of spiritual and aesthetic values in the society. The Western culture infiltration contributed to the reform movement and encouraged new trends in the Chinese visual arts. The artists who returned to China after studying abroad created various associations and art schools. They tried to find new forms and merge the heritage of traditional Chinese painting with the achievements of Western art. In the beginning of the 20th century Beijing becomes the center of social transformation in China and the source of a new cultural movement.

In this article the image of Mongolia in the Soviet press during the 60s-80s years of the 20th century is analyzed. It is noted that all materials of the press of that time have an exclusively propaganda mode and are inseparably linked with the political processes happening in the country. The main questions brought up in the 60s-80s are connected with the entry of Mongolia into the United Nations, development of economy and agricultural industry. At the same time articles about the top officials of the two countries were published. The significant role in promoting the image of Mongolia was played by the Soviet writers and poets who wrote about the friendship of the two peoples in a manner peculiar to them. They also wrote about the development of agricultural industry and the relationship between the peoples of the two bordering states. In the 80-s there comes a new round of foreign policy interaction between the USSR and Mongolia that, in turn, is assessed in the media positively. In particular, the famous Soviet journalist, the publicist, the correspondent of the Pravda newspaper Alexey Mitrofanovich Krivel spent in Mongolia more than five years. During his stay in the republic he wrote many sketches, articles, stories and other publicistic texts.

The article is devoted to the philosophical interpretations of Dostoevsky's work in Bulgaria in the first half of the twentieth century. Dostoevsky's initial presence in Bulgaria was investigated as well the response of the Bulgarian intelligentsia to his ideas compared to those of Tolstoy. The beneficial influence on the image of the writer as a thinker, philosopher, exerted by the Russian emigration in Bulgaria since the beginning of the 1920s is noted. Particular emphasis is placed on the work of Petr Bitsill, one of the best experts in the field of Dostoevsky studies. The types of interpretations of Dostoevsky as a philosopher are distinguished as follows: Dostoevsky as a Nietzschean. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche (opposition and identification) – bearing in mind the strong influence of Nietzsche in Bulgaria since the beginning of the twentieth century; Dostoevsky as one of the founders of Russian religious philosophy – considering the penetration of the Silver Age ideas in Bulgaria; Dostoevsky and psychoanalysis; Dostoevsky as a religious philosopher and innovator. The author concludes that the study of the peculiarities of the reception of Dostoevsky's work in Bulgarian culture of the first half of the twentieth century reveals not only the variety of world views but also the specifics of the national spiritual tradition.

The article examines the attitude to radical means of political struggle, in particular, to terror, Russian party of the early twentieth century, referring to the populist direction of socialism — the socialist–revolutionaries (SRS) and people's socialists (Anosov). The similarities and differences of views of the most prominent representatives of these parties on the need to use extreme methods of struggle, as well as the evolution of their attitude to terror due to changes in the political situation in Russia are shown. Main research methods: analysis, synthesis, biographical method, analogy, comparison.

This article analyses one of the main characteristics of the demographic behaviour of Russian citizens, i.e. their age at first marriage and its dynamics in the early twentieth century. The authors examine the situation in Yekaterinburg, a compact but an intensively developing industrial city. Together with aggregated census data, the authors refer to microdata extracted from several city parish registers (metricheskie knigi), which they transcribed into the Ural Population Project database.As a result of the analysis of nominative data of parish registers, the authors establish the age of first marriages including both averages in the city as a whole and per parish which enables them to conclude about the citizens' demographic behaviour conditioned by their ethnic or religious affiliation, social status and migration patterns, and other personal characteristics.The analysis demonstrates that Yekaterinburg seems to be closer to the "European" marriage pattern, at least in terms of mean age at first marriage in men which grew with the beginning of the war. However, according to the 1926 Census and the age of first marriage and that of never married significantly decreased as compared to the imperial period. The results of the analysis of aggregated and nominative data for Yekaterinburg enable the authors to put forward an idea that following the revolution and the establishment of a new political regime, migration from western provinces stopped while migration from rural areas increased. Rural migrants brought their own marital patterns to the city which implied mandatory marriage. Living in an increasingly stressful environment as a result of World War I, the revolution and the civil war, migrants were trying to get married earlier than on average to secure family support for themselves. ; Статья посвящена анализу одной из важнейших характеристик демографического поведения городского населения России — возрасту вступления в первый брак и его динамике в начале XX в. В качестве объекта исследования выбран Екатеринбург, один из небольших, но интенсивно развивавшихся промышленных российских городов. Наряду с агрегированными данными переписей населения 1897, 1920 и 1926 гг. в качестве источников были использованы сведения метрических книг, которые были транскрибированы в базу данных «Регистр населения Урала». В результате анализа номинативных данных метрических книг был установлен возраст вступления в первый брак не только в среднем по городу, но и по отдельным его приходам, что позволило выявить особенности в демографическом поведении горожан, обусловленные этнической или религиозной принадлежностью, социальным, миграционным статусом и другими персональными характеристиками. На основе проведенного исследования сделан вывод о том, что дореволюционный Екатеринбург приближался к «европейской» модели брака, по крайней мере, с точки зрения среднего возраста вступления в первый брак у мужчин, а с началом войны этот показатель еще увеличился. Однако согласно данным переписи 1926 г., расчетный возраст вступления в брак и уровень окончательного безбрачия значительно снизились по сравнению с имперским периодом. Результаты анализа агрегированных и номинативных данных по Екатеринбургу позволили предположить, что после революции и установления нового политического режима миграция из западных губерний прекратилась, а из сельской округи — возросла. Переселенцы из сельской местности приносили в город традиционные брачные нормы, которые подразумевали обязательное вступление в брак. Находясь в состоянии стресса, вызванного Первой мировой войной, революцией и начавшейся гражданской войной, эти мигранты пытались вступить в брак раньше, чтобы получить социальную поддержку в кругу семьи.

The paper introduces the concept of integral conservatism, covering the spiritual heritage of the German philosopher Ernst Jünger (1895 – 1998) in the final period of his work. The author analyzes the impact of his ideas on the European conservatism and considers their relation to the ideological and political theory and practice throughout the whole political spectrum in the last third of the 20th century. As a result, the paper concludes that the final period of Ernst Jünger's work is characterized by special synthesis, giving reason to believe his conservative to be integral, that is, including all types of conservative ideological and political tradition, as well as to talk about the serious influence of the writer's ideas on the entire conservative camp without exception. The research results can be used for further analysis of the nature of the changes taking place in the modern Western conservatism. ; В статье представлена концепция интегрального консерватизма, охватывающая духовное наследие немецкого мыслителя Эрнста Юнгера (1895 – 1998) в заключительный период его творчества. Проводится анализ влияния его идей на европейский консерватизм, рассматривается их взаимосвязь с идейно-политической теорией и практикой различных течений всего консервативного политического спектра в последней трети ХХ века. В результате делается вывод о наличии в заключительный период творчества Э. Юнгера особого синтеза, дающего основание считать его консерватизм интегральным, то есть включающим в себя все типы консервативной идейно-политической традиции, а также говорится о серьезном влиянии идей писателя на весь консервативный лагерь без исключения. Результаты статьи могут быть использованы для дальнейшего анализа характера изменений, происходящих в современном западном консерватизме.

Поступила в редакцию 28.06.2019. Принята к печати 14.08.2019. ; Submitted on 28 June, 2019. Accepted on 14 August, 2019. ; Статья посвящена анализу одной из важнейших характеристик демографического поведения городского населения России — возрасту вступления в первый брак и его динамике в начале XX в. В качестве объекта исследования выбран Екатеринбург, один из небольших, но интенсивно развивавшихся промышленных российских городов. Наряду с агрегированными данными переписей населения 1897, 1920 и 1926 гг. в качестве источников были использованы сведения метрических книг, которые были транскрибированы в базу данных «Регистр населения Урала». В результате анализа номинативных данных метрических книг был установлен возраст вступления в первый брак не только в среднем по городу, но и по отдельным его приходам, что позволило выявить особенности в демографическом поведении горожан, обусловленные этнической или религиозной принадлежностью, социальным, миграционным статусом и другими персональными характеристиками. На основе проведенного исследования сделан вывод о том, что дореволюционный Екатеринбург приближался к «европейской» модели брака, по крайней мере, с точки зрения среднего возраста вступления в первый брак у мужчин, а с началом войны этот показатель еще увеличился. Однако согласно данным переписи 1926 г., расчетный возраст вступления в брак и уровень окончательного безбрачия значительно снизились по сравнению с имперским периодом. Результаты анализа агрегированных и номинативных данных по Екатеринбургу позволили предположить, что после революции и установления нового политического режима миграция из западных губерний прекратилась, а из сельской округи — возросла. Переселенцы из сельской местности приносили в город традиционные брачные нормы, которые подразумевали обязательное вступление в брак. Находясь в состоянии стресса, вызванного Первой мировой войной, революцией и начавшейся гражданской войной, эти мигранты пытались вступить в брак раньше, чтобы получить социальную поддержку в кругу семьи. ; This article analyses one of the main characteristics of the demographic behaviour of Russian citizens, i.e. their age at first marriage and its dynamics in the early twentieth century. The authors examine the situation in Yekaterinburg, a compact but an intensively developing industrial city. Together with aggregated census data, the authors refer to microdata extracted from several city parish registers (metricheskie knigi), which they transcribed into the Ural Population Project database. As a result of the analysis of nominative data of parish registers, the authors establish the age of first marriages including both averages in the city as a whole and per parish which enables them to conclude about the citizens' demographic behaviour conditioned by their ethnic or religious affiliation, social status and migration patterns, and other personal characteristics. The analysis demonstrates that Yekaterinburg seems to be closer to the "European" marriage pattern, at least in terms of mean age at first marriage in men which grew with the beginning of the war. However, according to the 1926 Census and the age of first marriage and that of never married significantly decreased as compared to the imperial period. The results of the analysis of aggregated and nominative data for Yekaterinburg enable the authors to put forward an idea that following the revolution and the establishment of a new political regime, migration from western provinces stopped while migration from rural areas increased. Rural migrants brought their own marital patterns to the city which implied mandatory marriage. Living in an increasingly stressful environment as a result of World War I, the revolution and the civil war, migrants were trying to get married earlier than on average to secure family support for themselves.

This contribution has a historiographical nature and is devoted to the interpretations of the esoteric content of Dante's works made by British and Russian scholars from the middle of the nineteenth to the second half of the twentieth century. In particular, the meaning of the British tradition of interpreting Dante's esotericism – from George MacDonald to C.S. Lewis, with a special focus on Charles Williams – is here explored. The neo-Romantic theology of Williams is analyzed along with its rigid connection between the metaphysics of love and the doctrine of Empire. This connection, in fact, makes it possible to compare Williams' achievements with the later works of Guido de Giorgio and Romano Guardini. In this regard, Williams' interpretation of Beatrice image appears to be close to Sophiology. The main achievements of Western European studies of Dante's esoteric heritage are then compared with the contributions of the Russian specialists. The role of Rev. Georgy Florovsky, who was interested in Dante's metaphysics of the Empire and was the first to introduce Williams' works among Russian authors, is highlighted. Particular attention is paid to Rev. Pavel Florensky's "Imaginary Numbers in Geometry" – a work that was ahead of its times both in approaching the "Divine Comedy" from a cosmological point of view and in making a unique attempt of interpreting its physical and mathematical structure. Finally, this article considers the works of the late Soviet (1960s – 80s) and post-Soviet academic scholars, who reexamined a number of esoteric issues in Dante's output. The author concludes that – unlike what happened in Italy and in France – both in Great Britain and in Russia it is not possible to speak of a historiographical continuity within the studies on Dante's esotericism. However, this fact does not prevent from emphasizing the outstanding achievements of some individual Russian, English, and Scottish scholars.

Анализируется монография старшего научного сотрудника Центра «Истории России ХIХ – начала ХХ вв.» Института российской истории РАН Нины Борисовны Хайловой, посвященная центризму в российском либерализме начала ХХ в. Рецензируемая работа является первым в историографии комплексным исследованием данной проблемы. Показано, что в монографии на основании широкого круга источников, часть из которых была опубликована ее автором, досконально исследован весь комплекс вопросов, касающихся организационных особенностей, социальной базы, программных и тактических установок, основных направлений и особенностей думской и внепарламентской деятельности центристских либеральных партий. Отмечена существенная роль приложения к монографии – биографического словаря, включающего сведения об основных деятелях либерального центризма начала ХХ в. Подчеркивается серьезный вклад рецензируемой монографии в изучение истории российского либерализма.
The article analyzes the monograph by Nina B. Khailova, a senior researcher at the Centre for the History of Russia in the 19th – early 20th Centuries of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, dedicated to centrism in Russian liberalism in the early 20th century. The work under review is the first comprehensive study of this problem in historiography. It has been shown that based on a wide range of sources, some of which were published by its author, the monograph thoroughly studies the whole complex of issues concerning organizational features, social base, programmatic and tactical attitudes, and the main directions and features of the Duma and extra-parliamentary activities of centrist liberal parties. The reviewer notes an essential role of the appendix to the monograph (which is a biographical dictionary that includes information about the main figures of the liberal centrism of the early 20th century) and emphasizes a significant contribution of the monograph under review to the study of the history of Russian liberalism.

This article represents the first stage of a research project dedicated to analyzing the structuration of Russian society throughout the period since the mid 1800's and until this day. The timeline for part one includes the period up until 1917, while part two will be dedicated to Soviet and post-Soviet times. This article utilizes the methodology of A. Giddens, who suggested using the term "structuration" in order to analyze social relationships in space and time. This methodology implies examining structuration processes through the lens of those studies which were conducted during periods when radical shifts were occurring within the structure of Russian society. The main event which defined the direction for social change turned out to be the emancipation of the serfs in the Russian Empire, which lead to shifts in the population's structure: accelerated development of a working class, social transformations in the village, and the advancement of internal migration in Russia. The article shows that in Russia these processes were accompanied by science, which included official agencies conducting population censuses, studying the composition and working conditions at factories and plants (this function was carried out by plant and manufactory inspectorates), as well as studies conducted by scientists and practitioners. The works of Nikolai Kalachov, N. Flerovsky, Evgeny Pogozhev, Mykhailo Tuhan-Baranovskyi and others aided in developing detailed social characteristics of workers and their position in the structure of society and at work. Studying the village (and consequently the largest social class – the peasants) was the prerogative of provincial councils. Comprehensive monographic studies were conducted by Piotr Semionov, Vassily Pokrovsky, Vassily Orlov, Piotr Chervinsky, Fedor Shcherbina, as well as other researchers. The article shows that the population's structuration at the turn of the century in regards to the territorial aspect depended on resettlement and internal migration to a significant degree. Remarkable studies of this process were conducted by Denis Davydov, Evgeny Anuchin, Isaac Hourwich, Ivan Yamzin and other Russian scientists. Aside from scientists, practitioners also took part in these studies. The Russian intelligentsia actively partook in field research. The educated class' efforts made it possible to attain valuable data on society's structure, on the state of social relationships in Russia, migration processes, and the social characteristics of society's key structural elements – peasants and workers.

The article explores masonic activities of businessman and politician A.I. Konovalov (1875-1948). A good deal of attention is paid to the verification of the fact of his joining the Masons, reasons to join the lodge and the character of his participation. It has been concluded that when he joined the lodge, Konovalov's intention was to create a united block opposed to the government. At the eve of the February Revolution, Russian freemasonry provided a neutral platform for the secret coordination of the actions of the opposition. However, the rejection of moral and ethical questions in favour of political agenda led to the situation when Russian masons were not recognized by freemasons in other countries. © 2017 Aquilo. All rights reserved.

This article continues to examine the issue of 'escapees' raised by L. Siegelbaum and L. P. Moch in their work Escaping in Twentieth-Century Russia. In the author's opinion, during most of the 20th century the Russian state reacted most strongly to violations of the political regime, often preferring not to notice economic migration. This was due to the carefully concealed inability of the authorities to control the population totally. Violations of the regime of territorial movement by individual migrants were possible due to the uncoordinated actions of central and local authorities. With the gradual liberalisation of the Soviet system in the second half of the twentieth century, migrants were increasingly able to move legally. Refusing to coercively regulate migratory flows led to the displacement of the political factor in migrations by the economic one, which in turn caused a narrowing of 'autocratic' space. ; Статья продолжает тему «самовольных мигрантов», поднятую Л. Сигельбаумом и Л. П. Мох в работе "Escaping in Twentieth-Century Russia". По мнению автора, Российское государство в течение большей части XX столетия наиболее остро реагировало на нарушения политического режима, часто предпочитая не замечать экономическую миграцию. Это происходило из-за тщательно скрываемой неспособности власти тотально контролировать население. Нарушения режима территориальных перемещений индивидуальными мигрантами были возможны по причине несогласованных действий центральных и местных органов власти. По мере постепенной либерализации советской системы во второй половине XX в. у мигрантов появлялось все больше возможностей для легальных перемещений. Отказ от силового регулирования миграционных потоков, вытеснение политического фактора в миграциях экономических привели к сужению пространства «самовольности».

This article is an extension of a series of works dedicated to the shaping of Russian society's structure. The author's reasoning is based on the assumption that, when evaluating changes in the structuration of Russian society over a long period of time – from the mid-1800's and until today, which is the focus of the series of articles we mentioned – one should bear in mind that the most radical and, in many respects, catastrophic shifts occurred as a result of two groundbreaking events – the Bolshevik coup of 1917 and the collapse of the Soviet Union with the consequent transition to a market economy, which took place during the 1990's. Both of these occurrences disrupted the evolutionary development of Russian society, and caused social shifts which cannot be definitively assessed, with them having radically changed society's structuration. Influenced by these events, the country's social composition underwent some fundamental changes, as did the people's life-worlds, relationships between different social groups and layers of the population, and finally interactions with the new elites that sprouted from these social crises. In this article, which deals with processes that took place during the 1920's and 1930's, the author once again relies on the methodology of A. Giddens', who suggested using the theory of structuration to analyze social relationships in space and time. Structuration processes are examined through the lens of studies conducted during that period, in the heat of the moment, so to speak. Even when taking into account the political restrictions of the time, you can still trace how exactly contemporary scientific studies and statistical research reflected those social processes, including the structuration of society. This article utilizes the works of P. Sorokin, A. Rashin, L. Minz, A. Khryasheva and S. Prokopovich, among other researchers, as well as materials from the 1897, 1926 and 1937 population censuses. The article is limited to the period from the beginning of the century and up until the 1920's and 1930's, and consequently the studies that were conducted during that period.

The article deals with the problems of organization the cultural heritage protection in Russia in late 19th – early 20th century. The author analyzes the archival documents. The article studies the activities of the Imperial Archaeological Commission and the Crimean archeologist Alexandr Bertie-Delagard associated with construction at the territory of the medieval fortress Kalamita (Inkerman, Sevastopol) in the 1900-1905. The special attention is paid to analysis the causes of insufficient measures of the protection of the archaeological site. The author demonstrates these were the lacunae of the Russian Empire legislation, the absence of effective service of cultural heritage protection. ; Статья посвящена проблеме организации сохранения объектов культурного наследия в России на рубеже XIX-XX вв. Автор, на основании архивных документов, рассматривает действия Императорской Археологической Комиссии и крымского археолога А. Л. Бертье-Делагарда, предпринятые в связи со строительством на территории средневековой крепости Каламита культовых построек в 1900-1905 гг. Особое внимание уделено анализу причин, не позволивших предпринять эффективные меры охраны памятника, в связи с пробелами в законодательстве Российской империи и отсутствием эффективной службы сохранения объектов культурного наследия.