Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  American historiography
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Revizionismus a studium říjnové revoluce 1917

100%
Klepárník V.
Slovanský přehled: historická revue pro dějiny střední, východní a jihovýchodní Evropy (Slavonic Review: Review for Central, Eastern and Southeastern European history)
|
2018
|
vol. 104
|
issue 3
677-722
EN
The article focuses on the stream of the historical study of Russian and Soviet history labelled as revisionism in Western historiography, where it pays special attention to the research of the October Revolution in 1917. It discusses the circumstances of the rise of revisionism in American historiography from the end of the 1960s to the mid-1980s. In the second part, selected starting points of revision are compared and distinguished in terms of ideal type from the previous totalitarian interpretation. The text points to differences in approaches and interpretations by revisionists, but at the same time emphasizes their unifying interest in the neglected social and economic conflicts in Russian society since the beginning of the 20th century and the interaction of social groups, political parties and state power. It also reminds us of the revisionist thesis that we cannot understand the events of October only through the ideological influence of the Bolsheviks or their allegedly conspiratorial efforts to acquire power. The revisionists, through archival research, have shown that the Bolsheviks gained greater and authentic support from the Petrograd masses before the overthrow of the Provisional Government than has been admitted until now.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

German Unification in the Works of British and American Researchers in 1945–1949: Pro et Contra

94%
Kaviaka I.
Historia i Polityka
|
2020
|
issue 34 (41)
PL
In the paper, the main approaches of British and American researchers to the analysis of German unification prospects in 1945–1949 are stated. The key arguments of supporters and opponents of the united Germany are determined, chronological periods of each approach’s prevalence on the pages of foreign publications established, and the key historical events that determined the final predominance of the supporters of the Germany’s partition identified. Finally, two main trends within the framework of this approach are stated, and the essential characteristics of them defined.
3
Content available remote

Od subjektivity k dějinám společnosti? Igal Halfin a formování studií "sovětské subjektivity" v západní historiografii sovětského Ruska:

84%
Klepárník V.
Slovanský přehled: historická revue pro dějiny střední, východní a jihovýchodní Evropy (Slavonic Review: Review for Central, Eastern and Southeastern European history)
|
2020
|
vol. 106
|
issue 3
657-698
EN
The study of so-called Soviet Subjectivity belongs to the most visible versions of the linguistic or cultural turn in the Anglophone historiography of Soviet studies, especially during its growth between the mid-1990s and the end of the 2010s. This current of historical research is introduced on the background of new cultural history, the influence of post-structuralism and the writings of the late Michel Foucault. The depicting of the process “subjectivation”, and so-called productive subject in the early works of the leading representatives of the genre – Jochen Hellbeck, Igal Halfin and Oleg V. Kharkhordin, is the way out to the critical debate of the central premises of two subsequent Halfin’s books, Intimate Enemies (2007) and Stalinist Confessions (2009). I do not object to his post-structuralist epistemology but his discursive over-determination, and his explication of the period of the 1920s and 1930s solely through the lenses of the “communist eschatology”. I point out as well that he does not persuasively expound the pivotal category of confession, among else because he does not comply with the principles adhered by Foucault.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.