如何研究今天的东欧历史?讨论

IF 0.1 Q4 HISTORY
D. Alimov, Vyacheslav Vasilyevich Churzin, M. Daniš, M. Dmitriev, A. I. Filyushkin, J. Hackmann, L. Ivonina, A. V. Kuz’min, A. Martyniouk, Mihailo V. Popović, Anti Selart
{"title":"如何研究今天的东欧历史?讨论","authors":"D. Alimov, Vyacheslav Vasilyevich Churzin, M. Daniš, M. Dmitriev, A. I. Filyushkin, J. Hackmann, L. Ivonina, A. V. Kuz’min, A. Martyniouk, Mihailo V. Popović, Anti Selart","doi":"10.21638/spbu19.2020.103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary: The discussion, devoted to the consideration of the papers of Alexander Filyushkin and Alexey Martyniuk, took part at the special section of the Petersburg Historical Forum. The participants are from Russia, Austria, Slovakia, Estonia, Germany etc. Participants in the discussion highlighted the problematic points in the study of the history of the Eastern European region: the difficulty of defining the geographical and chronological framework, the problems of an established terminology, the break in the historiographic tradition, the need to search for new methodological tools and, at the same time, to verify the correctness of its application. Arguments were expressed both “for” and “against” the pro- posed thesis of Alexey Martyniuk about the “Byzantinization” of the history of Old Rus’. Most of the speakers spoke in favor of overcoming the situation of “national fragmentation” of the medieval history of Eastern Europe. The development of that research perspective that would allow us to see the history of this region as the history of a single space, which has its own dynamics, its own “rhythms” and its own characteristics, which are not reducible only to the common history of modern states and nations. The importance of comparative studies was emphasized — the need, when considering the history of Old Rus’ and the Eastern Slavs in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times, to refer to the experience of studying the history of the southern and western Slavs, Byzantium and the medieval Balkans, the regions of the Baltic and Black Seas and, in the end, not to be afraid the search for typological parallels in “distant lands and eras” — in the history of Antiquity, the medieval Latin world, classical Western European Modernity. The discussion showed the importance of historians’ reflection on the subject and method of their research, as well as the need for constant professional dialogue between representatives of different national schools and historiographic traditions.","PeriodicalId":41089,"journal":{"name":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to study the history of Eastern Europe today? Discussion\",\"authors\":\"D. Alimov, Vyacheslav Vasilyevich Churzin, M. Daniš, M. Dmitriev, A. I. Filyushkin, J. Hackmann, L. Ivonina, A. V. Kuz’min, A. Martyniouk, Mihailo V. Popović, Anti Selart\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/spbu19.2020.103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary: The discussion, devoted to the consideration of the papers of Alexander Filyushkin and Alexey Martyniuk, took part at the special section of the Petersburg Historical Forum. The participants are from Russia, Austria, Slovakia, Estonia, Germany etc. Participants in the discussion highlighted the problematic points in the study of the history of the Eastern European region: the difficulty of defining the geographical and chronological framework, the problems of an established terminology, the break in the historiographic tradition, the need to search for new methodological tools and, at the same time, to verify the correctness of its application. Arguments were expressed both “for” and “against” the pro- posed thesis of Alexey Martyniuk about the “Byzantinization” of the history of Old Rus’. Most of the speakers spoke in favor of overcoming the situation of “national fragmentation” of the medieval history of Eastern Europe. The development of that research perspective that would allow us to see the history of this region as the history of a single space, which has its own dynamics, its own “rhythms” and its own characteristics, which are not reducible only to the common history of modern states and nations. The importance of comparative studies was emphasized — the need, when considering the history of Old Rus’ and the Eastern Slavs in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times, to refer to the experience of studying the history of the southern and western Slavs, Byzantium and the medieval Balkans, the regions of the Baltic and Black Seas and, in the end, not to be afraid the search for typological parallels in “distant lands and eras” — in the history of Antiquity, the medieval Latin world, classical Western European Modernity. The discussion showed the importance of historians’ reflection on the subject and method of their research, as well as the need for constant professional dialogue between representatives of different national schools and historiographic traditions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu19.2020.103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu19.2020.103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:在彼得堡历史论坛的特别部分,专门讨论了亚历山大·菲柳什金和阿列克谢·马蒂纽克的论文。与会国家有俄罗斯、奥地利、斯洛伐克、爱沙尼亚、德国等。与会者在讨论中强调了东欧区域历史研究中存在的问题:难以确定地理和时间框架,既定术语的问题,对历史编纂传统的破坏,需要寻找新的方法工具,同时还要核查其应用的正确性。阿列克谢·马蒂纽克提出的关于古罗斯历史的“拜占庭化”的论点既“赞成”又“反对”。大多数发言者都赞成克服东欧中世纪历史中“民族分裂”的情况。这种研究视角的发展将使我们将这一地区的历史视为一个单一空间的历史,它有自己的动态,自己的“节奏”和自己的特征,而不仅仅是现代国家和民族的共同历史。他们强调了比较研究的重要性——在考虑中世纪和近代早期的老罗斯和东斯拉夫人的历史时,需要参考研究南部和西部斯拉夫人、拜占庭和中世纪巴尔干半岛、波罗的海和黑海地区的历史的经验,最后,不要害怕在“遥远的土地和时代”寻找类似性在古代历史,中世纪拉丁世界,古典西欧现代。讨论显示了历史学家对其研究主题和方法进行反思的重要性,以及不同国家学派和历史传统代表之间不断进行专业对话的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to study the history of Eastern Europe today? Discussion
Summary: The discussion, devoted to the consideration of the papers of Alexander Filyushkin and Alexey Martyniuk, took part at the special section of the Petersburg Historical Forum. The participants are from Russia, Austria, Slovakia, Estonia, Germany etc. Participants in the discussion highlighted the problematic points in the study of the history of the Eastern European region: the difficulty of defining the geographical and chronological framework, the problems of an established terminology, the break in the historiographic tradition, the need to search for new methodological tools and, at the same time, to verify the correctness of its application. Arguments were expressed both “for” and “against” the pro- posed thesis of Alexey Martyniuk about the “Byzantinization” of the history of Old Rus’. Most of the speakers spoke in favor of overcoming the situation of “national fragmentation” of the medieval history of Eastern Europe. The development of that research perspective that would allow us to see the history of this region as the history of a single space, which has its own dynamics, its own “rhythms” and its own characteristics, which are not reducible only to the common history of modern states and nations. The importance of comparative studies was emphasized — the need, when considering the history of Old Rus’ and the Eastern Slavs in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times, to refer to the experience of studying the history of the southern and western Slavs, Byzantium and the medieval Balkans, the regions of the Baltic and Black Seas and, in the end, not to be afraid the search for typological parallels in “distant lands and eras” — in the history of Antiquity, the medieval Latin world, classical Western European Modernity. The discussion showed the importance of historians’ reflection on the subject and method of their research, as well as the need for constant professional dialogue between representatives of different national schools and historiographic traditions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信