Пожалуйста, используйте этот идентификатор, чтобы цитировать или ссылаться на этот ресурс: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/19437
Полная запись метаданных
Поле DCЗначениеЯзык
dc.contributor.authorAlimov, Denis Evgenyevich-
dc.contributor.authorChurzin, Vyacheslav Vasilyevich-
dc.contributor.authorDaniš, Miroslav-
dc.contributor.authorDmitriev, Mikhail Vladimirovich-
dc.contributor.authorFilyushkin, Aleksandr Ilyich-
dc.contributor.authorHackmann, Jörg-
dc.contributor.authorIvonina, Lyudmila Ivanovna-
dc.contributor.authorKuz’min, Andrey Valentinovich-
dc.contributor.authorMartyniouk, Aleksey Viktorovich-
dc.contributor.authorPopović, Mihailo-
dc.contributor.authorSelart, Anti-
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-11T12:34:39Z-
dc.date.available2020-09-11T12:34:39Z-
dc.date.issued2020-03-
dc.identifier.citationHow to study the history of Eastern Europe today? Discussion. Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana, 2020, vol. 1 (27), pp. 39–65.en_GB
dc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.21638/spbu19.2020.103-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11701/19437-
dc.description.abstractThe 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 proposed 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.en_GB
dc.language.isoruen_GB
dc.subjectOld Russiaen_GB
dc.subjectEastern European Middle Agesen_GB
dc.subjectByzantiumen_GB
dc.subjectmedieval studiesen_GB
dc.subjectglobal historyen_GB
dc.subjectcivilizational approachen_GB
dc.subjectregional studiesen_GB
dc.subjecthistoriographyen_GB
dc.subjectmethodologyen_GB
dc.subjecthistorical memoryen_GB
dc.titleHow to study the history of Eastern Europe today? Discussionen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
Располагается в коллекциях:Issue 1

Файлы этого ресурса:
Файл Описание РазмерФормат 
39-65.pdf732,52 kBAdobe PDFПросмотреть/Открыть


Все ресурсы в архиве электронных ресурсов защищены авторским правом, все права сохранены.