Gorky as an editor of his own texts (exemplified by his sketch V. I. Lenin)

2020 ◽  
pp. 121-127
Author(s):  
N. M. Godenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian History ◽  
Soviet History ◽  
Central Figure ◽  
Original Volume ◽  
First Time

The article examines various versions of M. Gorky’s character sketch V. I. Lenin, written in 1924. The sketch is of interest for many reasons. First, it appeared right after the death of the revolutionary leader and laid the foundation of the Lenin myth, actively propagated throughout Soviet history. Second, Gorky portrays Lenin as a larger-than-life personality. The writer thoroughly reworked his sketch following its first publication. Its second edition happened to be twice the original volume, with additional episodes and characters introduced for the first time. The principal methods applied by Gorky include stylistic corrections, expunging of certain fragments, repositioning of paragraphs, and transposition. The article provides numerous examples of alterations and additions in the text. However, considerable modifications driven by the publishers’ demand notwithstanding, the sketch remains essentially unchanged. Gorky’s self-editing was aimed at preserving the concept of Russian history with Lenin as its central figure.

scholarly journals Disputable Issues in the Russian History of the 16th Century

2019 ◽  
pp. 19-25
Author(s):  
Knud Rasmussen
Keyword(s):  
Associate Professor ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
Russian History ◽  
State University ◽  
10Th Anniversary ◽  
History Of ◽  
Controversial Problem ◽  
Ivan The Terrible ◽  
First Time ◽  
Death Of The Author

Knud Rasmussen (1930–1985) was a famous Danish historian, Professor at Institute of Slavic Studies at University of Copenhagen, specialist in medieval Russia, author of a dozen of scientific monographs published in large editions including in Russian. In 1973, he defended his thesis titled “The Livonian crisis of 1554–1561”. According to the list of works published by J. Lind, 13 publications are devoted to the epoch of Ivan the Terrible. This article, published for the first time, is presented in the form of a report at the conference in Hungary. The scientist consistently outlined the main tasks and problems related to the study of Russian history abroad, in particular, in Denmark. He told what plan was built for the team of Danish historians who decided in the early 1970s to prepare a textbook on Russian history in the form of a problem historiographic course for Danish students, and how this plan was implemented. The study of works on Russian history and their systematization helped the team of Danish historians, which included K. Rasmussen, develop a special historiographic method and its principles, which led to developing understanding of the problematic historical field as a whole and placing individual research in it. As a result, a multivolume manual was written; by the time of K. Rasmussen’s speech, 3 volumes were published, covering the period of Russian history from the 17th to the 20th century inclusive. K. Rasmussen worked on preparing a volume on the Russian history of the 16th century. In the second part of his speech (article), the author shared his thoughts on the chosen approach to the assessment of historiography and spoke about the content of this volume, where he outlined the controversial problem of enslaving peasants, discussions on the reasons for backwardness of Russian cities as the basis of Moscow defeats in Livonia, possible ways of Russian revival, on the state and its institutions and on the development of historical events in the field of domestic policy. This volume was published after the death of the author in the same year: Rasmussen Knud. Ruslands historie i det 16. Arhundrede: En forsknings-og kildeoversigt. Kobenhavn, 1985. 161 s. Bibliography about K. Rasmussen: Lind J. Creative Way Knud Rasmussen (on the 10th anniversary of his death) // Archeographic Yearbook for 1995. – Moscow : Nauka, 1995. – P. 160–165; Lind J. H. Knud Rasmussen in memoriam // Jacob Ulfeld. Travel to Russia. – M. : Languages of Slavic culture, 2002. – Р. 17–25; Vozgrin V. E. Knud Rasmussen and Zans Bagger – Danish historians of Russia // Proceedings of the Department of the History of New and Newest Times of St. Petersburg State University. – 2016. – № 16 (2). – Р. 205–219. The abstract is prepared by Candidate of Sciences (History), Associate Professor N.V. Rybalko.

Russian Military History, 1762-1825

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Mikaberidze
Keyword(s):  
Military History ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Napoleonic Wars ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Constant Feature ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
The Impact ◽  
First Time

The sixty-three years between the accession of Catherine II and the death of Alexander I mark a key moment in Russian history. The Russian state enjoyed a long streak of successful wars and territorial acquisitions and fully established itself as a great European power. The reigns of Catherine II and Alexander I saw Russian conquest and annexation of Poland, Finland, Bessarabia, Moldavia, Georgia, and territories on both sides of the Great Caucasian Gorge. Russia also successfully projected its power well beyond its traditional boundary. In 1799, the Russian troops appeared for the first time on the plains of Italy and the mountain valleys of Switzerland while, in 1814, they marched triumphantly along the Champs-Élysées in Paris. Warfare was an almost constant feature of this period as Russia fought three wars against the Ottoman Turks (1768–1774, 1787–1792, 1806–1812), two wars against Sweden (1788–1790, 1808–1809), four campaigns against the Poles (1768–1772, 1793–1795), five campaigns against France (1799–1800, 1805–1814), and one prolonged conflict with Iran (1804–1813). The strain of the Napoleonic Wars, when Russia was almost continually at war between 1805 and 1815, surpassed the impact of all other conflicts that had preceded them.

Gasparino Barzizza's Commentaries on Seneca's Letters

Traditio ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 297-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Letizia A. Panizza
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Considerable Contribution ◽  
Central Figure ◽  
Introductory Material ◽  
University Professor ◽  
University Town ◽  
First Time

Gasparino Barzizza of Bergamo, a humanist educator and university professor of rhetoric at Padua and Milan in the early fifteenth century, has come down to us chiefly as a pioneer expounder of Ciceronian eloquence, the man to whom the precious old manuscript of Cicero's complete rhetorical works was confided in 1421 for transcription and divulgation. For centuries, however, his considerable contribution to Seneca studies made before this date has been almost totally neglected. But for a few excerpts from his commentary on Seneca's Letter 1 to Lucilius, tucked away in Francesco Novati's footnotes to a letter of Coluccio Salutati, nothing substantial from these commentaries and their introductory material has to my knowledge ever been printed. Judging from the scanty literature on Barzizza, one is forced to conclude that the content of these commentaries has not even been examined. Still worse, the only biography of Barzizza written in the twentieth century says they are lost. Yet Gasparino Barzizza emerges from these commentaries as a leading Seneca scholar of early fifteenth-century Italian humanism. He was the central figure of Seneca studies while at Padua, a university town with a tradition of interest in Seneca stretching back to Lovato Lovati and Albertino Mussato and the revival of Senecan tragedy, and continuing with Sicco Polenton and his Life of Seneca. As part of the introductory material to his Seneca commentaries, Barzizza wrote the first humanist Latin biography of Seneca using Tacitus, and developed more fully than anyone before him the image of Seneca as a religious dissimulator, calling him for the first time a ‘Nicodemus.’ In a sadly mutilated and anonymous form, it can now be shown, Barzizza's life of Seneca was the only one printed in several early editions of Seneca's works, including the 1515 and 1529 ones edited by Erasmus, and later mistakenly attributed to Sicco Polenton. Erasmus' caustic prefatory remarks on deformers of Seneca that characterize his 1529 edition are aimed, it can also be shown, at Barzizza. Barzizza's lengthy commentary on the controversial opening of Seneca's Letter 1 to Lucilius, a set piece in its own right, stands at the centre of a dispute very much alive in his own time, in which Petrarch and Salutati participated before him, and Pier Candido Decembrio, his brother Angelo, and Leonello d'Este, Duke of Ferrara, participated after him, not to mention Erasmus himself.

scholarly journals Periodization of the Reign of Alexander I in Soviet Historiography

2020 ◽  
pp. 378-393
Author(s):  
A. V. Chernov ◽  
V. V. Blokhin
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Soviet State ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Special Studies ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
First Time ◽  
Soviet Historiography

The problem of the periodization of the reign of Emperor Alexander I in the works of Soviet historians is considered. The relevance of the study is due to the fact that even now the question of the periodization of this period causes controversy among scientists. Understanding that any periodization is conditional, which has emerged among modern historians, requires a revision of various approaches to the periodization of history. As part of the study, a review of a wide range of historiographic sources was carried out, which included special studies devoted to the reign of Alexander I, as well as generalizing works and textbooks that characterize this period of Russian history. The novelty of the research is seen in the fact that for the first time in Russian historiography, it is analyzed how researchers solved the issue of the periodization of the Alexander I reign throughout the Soviet period. Various approaches to the periodization of Russian history in the first quarter of the 19th century are revealed. Their development has been traced throughout the entire existence of the Soviet state. Particular attention is paid to the contradictions that take place in the approaches to the periodization of the reign of Alexander I, proposed by Soviet historians.

Albert Charles Chibnall, 28 January 1894— 10 January 1988

1990 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 55-96 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Nitrogen Metabolism ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Chemical Study ◽  
Space Time ◽  
Protein Chemistry ◽  
Central Figure ◽  
The World ◽  
First Time

It was almost by chance that A.C. Chibnall was inducted into the second generation of British biochemists. He made important studies of the nitrogen metabolism of plants, crowning this work with a remarkable historical review. He also initiated serious chemical study of the natural waxes. For a quarter of a century he was the central figure in British protein chemistry, itself, for the first time, at the centre of protein chemistry in the world. He was instrumental in sending scientists into many of the variegated branches of British agricultural research and was, moreover, a distinguished historian of medieval England. Space, time and our personal limitations prevent us from doing justice to all of that. What we have mainly tried to do is to indicate starting points for future scientists and historians, wishing to go over any of this ground in greater detail. We try at the same time to record some of the personal impressions made on his contemporaries (including ourselves) by this unique and lovable man. In an age of male address by surname, Chibnall was familiarly known to colleagues as “Chib”, “Chibby” or “Chibs”, though latterly more people spoke about him thus than dared so to address him. To his parents and siblings (also H.B. Vickery) he was “Bert”. In his family, and with a few friends in his last years, he became simply “Charles”. Here it is convenient to use just the initials A.C.C., with which he signed many of his less-formal letters.

Russian Idea, the

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej Walicki
Keyword(s):  
Russian History ◽  
Russian Culture ◽  
The Third ◽  
Peter The Great ◽  
First Case ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
First Time ◽  
Vladimir Solov'ev ◽  
Russian Idea

‘The Russian Idea’ is a term used by Russian thinkers to define specific features of Russian culture, the spiritual make-up of the Russian nation, the meaning of Russian history and, as a rule (although not always), Russia’s unique mission in the universal history of humanity. The term was introduced for the first time in 1861 by Dostoevskii, for whom the essence of the Russian Idea was the ‘universal humanity’ (or ‘all-humanity’) of the Russian spirit. At the same time however, Dostoevskii linked the Russian Idea with Russian imperial messianism. Thus, the notion of the Russian Idea included from its beginning a characteristic tension between striving for universalism and nationalist self-assertion.. The first philosopher to devote a special separate work to the Russian Idea (l’Idée russe, Paris, 1888) was Vladimir Solov’ëv, for whom the national idea was ‘not what a given nation thinks about itself in time, but what God thinks about it in eternity’. He was influenced by Dostoevskii but, challenging Russian nationalists, put much greater emphasis on universalism, stressing that the peculiar greatness of the Russians consisted in their capacity for ‘self-renunciation’. The first case of this self-renunciation was the so-called ‘calling of the Varangians’, that is, the voluntary acceptance of foreign rule; the second was the reforms of Peter the Great: rejection of native traditions for the sake of universal progress. Now the Russian nation should commit itself to the third, most important act of self-renunciation: to submit itself to the authority of the pope, restoring thereby the unity of the Universal Church and bringing about the reconciliation between East and West. But this act of humility was seen by Solov’ëv as a precondition from the fulfilment of Russia’s great mission of creating the universal, freely theocratic Christian Empire. Solov’ëv invoked in this connection the monk Philotheus’ idea of ‘Moscow as the Third Rome’ but reversed its meaning by putting emphasis on symbolic Rome, that is, not on national isolationism and keeping intact the purity of the Orthodox faith, but on ecumenical universalism and the messianic task of the Christian transformation of the world. Owing to Solov’ëv, the term ‘Russian Idea’ came to be applied retrospectively, as a designation of a set of problems characteristic for Russian philosophical discussions about the essence of ‘Russianness’. Most historians agree that these problems were formulated under the reign of Nicholas I and that the first thinker who posed them forcefully was Pëtr Chaadaev.

scholarly journals Surrealism and the Reliefs of the Sasanian High Priest Kartir

CLARA ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Soltani
Keyword(s):  
Art History ◽  
Religious Leader ◽  
High Priest ◽  
Central Figure ◽  
Sasanian Empire ◽  
Iranian Art ◽  
Traditional Construction ◽  
First Time

Kartir was the most important religious leader in early Iran at the time of the Sasanian empire. The rock reliefs and inscriptions left by him contain some important features that occur for the first time in Iranian art history. Specifically, Kartir’s rock reliefs reveal that someone who was not a king could still be influential enough to commission a monument in which he was the central figure. Kartir’s inscriptions appear next to the reliefs of the previous king, or were even inserted into the same panel. In this way, the traditional construction of these reliefs was altered, as were their respective meanings. Furthermore, Kartir describes an imaginary journey to another world in his inscriptions. The article considers the role of dreams in Kartir's art and what influence this had on this new style of composition, comparing it with what we now call ‘surrealism’.

scholarly journals Counteraction to Criminality In the Ukrainian SSR In the Second Half of 1930S

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Methodological Principle ◽  
General Level ◽  
Collective Farm ◽  
Soviet History ◽  
Political Situation ◽  
Different Types ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
First Time

For today there is a far of the publications sanctified to soviet history of 1930th. However basic attention in them is spared there are 1937-1939 to strengthening of the totalitarian mode and repressions. And the problems of combating crime have received little attention.Research aim. Taking into account insufficient worked out of theme, an author put an aim to itself to light up the role of militia in counteraction to some types of criminality in the second half 1930th. This range of problems is wide enough, that is why we specially did not investigate some of directions of activity of militia at this time, in particular fight against gangsterism, counteract to economic criminality and role of militia in repressions 1937-1938, as it is an object other our scientific researches.Research methodology. The fundamental methodological principle of the study for the author was historicism. We tried to study the processes, events and facts in chronological order, taking into account the then socio-political situation. The method of comparison allowed to consider the general and special in activity of militia of different regions of the republic and differences in counteraction to different types of crimes.The scientific novelty of the article is that for the first time in the historical literature it reveals the activities of the police in combating crime in the second half of the 1930s., related to improving the work of investigators, district inspectors.In the article basic directions of activity of militia are exposed in relation to counteraction to some types of crimes in Ukraine, in the second half of 1930th. In this time a "liberal" period made off relatively in history of soviet legislation.It was considered that in connection from completion of building of socialism in the USSR the main causations of crime, related to the inheritance of, are czarism on the whole removed, and the pore of the most rapid liquidation of criminality came, although at this time appeared and new types of crimes : 1. crimes related to the passport system (imitation, sale and purchase, theft of passports); 2. violation of charter of agricultural artel, violation of soviet and of a collective farm democracy; 3.sabotage of Stakhanovsky motion, pursuit ofStakhanov’ s men.New Constitution of the USSR was accepted in 1936, and in 1937 is new Constitution of Ukraine. For them wide rights for soviet citizens were proclaimed, but in reality they were not realized, becoming illustration to neglect of law and law and order.However would be an overstatement to consider that there was complete legal anarchy and raging of criminality in the state .Conclusions. In the second half 1930th a militia, without regard to mass repressions and certain vagueness of fate of many workers, continued counteraction to criminality. Certain attention was spared to the improvement of work of investigators, district inspectors, secret-service-informative work, bringing in of public to counteraction to criminality. In the total it was succeeded to attain some reduction of general level to criminality.

scholarly journals Systematization of the Russian Legislation in the Soviet Period

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-51
Author(s):  
Tat'yana Yaschuk
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Period ◽  
Soviet History ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
The Third ◽  
General Logic ◽  
Third Stage ◽  
Comprehensive Development ◽  
First Time ◽  
Primary Form

The paper studies the reasons, forms, and stages of the systematization of the national legislation in the Soviet period. The reasons are of two origins: due to the need to adapt legislation for economic and social improvement and to the general logic of the development of law and its institutionalization by sectors. The author defines the following historical stages in the systematization of legislation: 1918–1920s; 1930 – mid-1950s; late 1950s – 1980s. The first stage included a comprehensive development of codes of the Soviet legislation that defined the legislation system. Drafts of the Soviet codes were developed in the second stage; however, they were not approved. At the third stage all major branches of the Soviet legislation were defined as codes. Codes of the 1920s were replaced by acts with current regulations; for the first time in the Soviet history codes were adopted in a number of sectors. Based on the subjects of joint jurisdiction of the USSR and the Union republics, the fundamentals of the Soviet legislation and republican codes were adopted. Despite the fact that codification was the primary form of systematization of the Soviet legislation, incorporation was widely used as well. Chronological and systematic collections of laws were published. In the late 1920s, the State first attempted to compile a code of laws of the USSR; however, the USSR Code of Laws and the RSFSR Code of Laws were prepared and published only in the 1980s. Throughout the Soviet period, the systematization of legislation was an important area of state legal policy.

SOURCES ON THE PARTICIPATION OF SOVIET PEOPLE IN THE FRENCH RESISTANCE MOVEMENT. PART 2

2021 ◽  
pp. 67-87
Author(s):  
Roman V. Lebedenko ◽  
◽  
Victoria B. Prozorova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Relevant Information ◽  
Learning Material ◽  
Soviet History ◽  
Soviet People ◽  
History Of ◽  
Resistance Movement ◽  
First Time ◽  
Second World ◽  
Reference Apparatus ◽  
French Resistance

The article reveals the history of the formation, description, and use of the documentary systems preserved in France and Russia about the participation of Soviet people in the Resistance and the creation of their scientific and reference apparatus. For the first time, historians analyzed Russian and French materials, comparing the informative value of the French and Soviet documents on the participation of Soviet citizens in the French Resistance, evaluating their authenticity and reliability. The article also describes the integration methodology of the Resistance movement participants Database of the French Defense Ministry Archives and specifies the complexity of extracting information about the Soviet citizens from this integrated source. Furthermore, the main databases created by the Resistance Foundation are analyzed. The authors demonstrate how these sources were used in the French and Russian historiography of the Resistance during various periods of Soviet history and the Franco-Russian relations. They also show the historian’s specific use of the Resistance movement participant’s memoirs. The authors provided the most relevant information about the training and learning material, about the libraries, museums, and archives that store and collect these documents; for the first time, recommendations are made – including the Russian-speaking researchers of the Second World War, as well as family history researchers – on how to work with their scientific and reference apparatus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document