New view on the Russia’s political history of the last third of the 20th century

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (01) ◽  
pp. 258-265
Author(s):  
Sergei Devyatov
2018 ◽  
pp. 4-12
Author(s):  
Pavlo Hai-Nyzhnyk

The controversial issue of periodization of the political history of Ukraine at the beginning of the 20th century, including the period of the National liberation struggle and Ukrainian State entities during 1917–1922 is considered. Scientists and experts have not yet reached a consensus not only on determining the place, role and character of the Hetmanate in 1918 in the latest Ukrainian past, but also about the periodization of the Ukrainian political history of the 20th century, defi nition of the term and chronological boundaries of the Ukrainian Revolution and Ukrainian statehood, etc. The issute of the periodization of the National liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people from the beginning of the 20th century, the aspiration and purpose of which was to gain and assert its own statehood, had several main schemes, models and periodizations in the national historiography. However, disputes over defi nitions not only of the chronological framework of this historical path, but also of the interpretations and characteristics of its individual days, periods, and stages are still ongoing in the scientifi c community. It is up to me, that the times from 1917 to 1922 should be defi ned as one of the days of the Ukrainian political history of the 20th century, namely: The Day “National Liberation Struggle and Ukrainian State Formation (1917–1922 biennium)”. This title was due to historical processes and components, that took place in the specifi ed chronological period, the logic of interrelated events, factors and circumstances, objective signs of fl uidity, similarity and diversity of periods, the identity of the causal eff ects of both internal and external circumstances and infl uences, interconnectedness of cultural, social, ideological and political, and state-evolutionary factors of nation-wide signifi cance, the regularity of the beginning and end of the national-political breakdown, holding otvorchyh eff orts and organized struggle for their own rights to self-determination of Nation-Ukrainian people. It is the author’s conception of the periodization of this era, that would be discussed in this essay


Author(s):  
Sarah Osten

The history of the 20th century in the Southeast of Mexico is bookended by two revolutions: the Mexican Revolution as it played out in the region, along with its antecedents and aftermath, and a very different but related revolutionary movement that emerged in the state of Chiapas in the mid-1990s. The former has been little studied at the multistate regional level by historians but is critical for understanding the history of the states of the Southeast in the decades that followed. The latter has been intensively studied by scholars in numerous disciplines, but its long-term historical implications remain to be seen. Equally important but scarcely studied and relatively little known is the political history of the Southeast in between these periods of conflict and revolution. The Southeast is a region that is commonly regarded as distinct, and even marginal, within national histories of Mexico. In the 1980s, President Miguel de la Madrid suggested that the Mexican Revolution had never reached Chiapas. Yet decades earlier, President Lázaro Cárdenas (1934–1940) famously praised neighboring Tabasco as Mexico’s “laboratory of revolution.” Meanwhile, historian Ben Fallaw contends that Yucatán was one of the most important of Mexico’s political laboratories during the 1930s. Taken together, these seemingly conflicting assertions underscore that many of the things that made the Southeast unique within Mexico also made the region important and influential to the course of modern Mexican history. They also raise the question of the Southeast’s experience of the Revolution and the long-term legacies of the revolutionary political projects that unfolded there.


2009 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Eppel

The term effendiyya (singular: effendi) appears in many articles and books on the social and political history of the Middle East between the end of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century. Many authors have made use of this term, but very few have paused to discuss its meaning. At least one important scholar, however, raised doubts about its usefulness.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 246-251
Author(s):  
Anastasiya Andreevna Androsova

The paper deals with the development of photography in Samara and the Samara province during the period of the Samara province establishment to the beginning of the 20th century. The history of the photography as a technology is briefly presented. The paper also contains the data on the chronology of photo workshops appearance in Samara and the province as well as of the first photo business organizers. The author also describes methods of photography lovers organization in Samara at the turn of the 19th20th centuries. The main categories of photographs of the period under review are considered. Having appeared almost simultaneously with the establishment of the province, the photographic business in Samara became an integral part of cultural life at the beginning of the 20th century. Photography in pre-revolutionary Samara developed from individual wealthy citizens entertaining to the establishment of the Samara Photographic Society. By 1917 photographic establishments had spread throughout the Samara province and were accessible to most residents. The analysis of the photographic documents used allows us to say that the Samara photography of the period under review was dominated by photographic portraits and photographs, photographic postcards with views of the city. The paper is based primarily on documents and photographs of the Central State Archives of the Samara Region and the Samara Regional State Archives of Socio-Political History, most of which have not been included in scientific circulation.


Author(s):  
Guillermo Nieva Ocampo ◽  
Daniela Alejandra

El objetivo de este trabajo es exponer las diversas interpretaciones que se realizaron sobre la historia política del Tucumán durante el siglo XVII. A la luz del desarrollo historiográfico del siglo XX hasta nuestros días, proponemos, además, nuevas perspectivas de investigación que consideramos necesarias.  The objetive of this work is to expose the various interpretations that were made about the political history of Tucuman during the 17th century. In the light of the historiographic development of the 20th century to the present day, we also propose new research perspectives that we consider necessary.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document