Trouble with the biography of the sovereign: historiography, archives and national memory

V. Fadieiev
{"title":"Trouble with the biography of the sovereign: historiography, archives and national memory","authors":"V. Fadieiev","doi":"10.15407/fd2021.03.092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The proposed article is an exploration of realistic social ontology, devoted to the study of the interaction between national memory, historiography and archives as defining social institutions of the modern era. The study focuses on the problems of formation and transformation of perceptions of the past of the national community — the bearer of sovereignty. During the analysis, the author concludes that national memory, archives and historiography are endowed with their own dynamics, and the relationship between them is a changing constellation of relations, that has undergone a complex evolution over the last two centuries. Beginning in the 19th century, the nature of relations changed in the direction of emancipation of archives from the guidelines of official historiography, distancing historiography from the exercise of state power, and the emergence of a new memorial culture in the late twentieth century. The result of these changes was the emergence of affirmative historiography, which has a significant impact on public life. The author concludes that the urgent problem of today is to create conditions for conflict-free interaction of all participants in the politics of memory in order to avoid politicization caused by inconsistencies in the interpretation of past events.","PeriodicalId":315902,"journal":{"name":"Filosofska dumka (Philosophical Thought)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofska dumka (Philosophical Thought)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2021.03.092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The proposed article is an exploration of realistic social ontology, devoted to the study of the interaction between national memory, historiography and archives as defining social institutions of the modern era. The study focuses on the problems of formation and transformation of perceptions of the past of the national community — the bearer of sovereignty. During the analysis, the author concludes that national memory, archives and historiography are endowed with their own dynamics, and the relationship between them is a changing constellation of relations, that has undergone a complex evolution over the last two centuries. Beginning in the 19th century, the nature of relations changed in the direction of emancipation of archives from the guidelines of official historiography, distancing historiography from the exercise of state power, and the emergence of a new memorial culture in the late twentieth century. The result of these changes was the emergence of affirmative historiography, which has a significant impact on public life. The author concludes that the urgent problem of today is to create conditions for conflict-free interaction of all participants in the politics of memory in order to avoid politicization caused by inconsistencies in the interpretation of past events.
君主传记的麻烦:史学、档案和国家记忆
这篇文章是对现实社会本体论的探索,致力于研究民族记忆、史学和档案之间的相互作用,以定义现代社会制度。这项研究的重点是国家社会- -主权的承受者- -对其过去的看法的形成和转变的问题。在分析过程中,笔者认为,民族记忆、档案和史学具有各自的动态,它们之间的关系是一个不断变化的关系星座,在过去的两个世纪里经历了复杂的演变。从19世纪开始,关系的性质发生了变化,档案从官方史学的指导中解放出来,历史学远离国家权力的行使,20世纪后期出现了一种新的纪念文化。这些变化的结果是平权史学的出现,这对公共生活产生了重大影响。作者的结论是,今天的紧迫问题是为所有参与者在记忆政治中无冲突的互动创造条件,以避免由于对过去事件的解释不一致而导致的政治化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信