Six by five: Soviet and emigrant historians at the 7th International congress of historical sciences

Valentina Yurievna Voloshina, Valentina Pavlovna Korzun
{"title":"Six by five: Soviet and emigrant historians at the 7th International congress of historical sciences","authors":"Valentina Yurievna Voloshina, Valentina Pavlovna Korzun","doi":"10.21638/spbu19.2023.111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The focus of the authors’ attention is the dialogue between emigrant historians and their Soviet colleagues during the International historical congress that was held in Warsaw in August 1933. It was the first congress that took place in a Slavic country. The main sources of research are the reports and accounts of the participants of the congress, presented in the form of publications in Soviet scientific magazines («Historian Marxist», «Class Struggle»), in emigrant periodicals («Russia and Svadom») and in European reviews («Revue historigue de droit francais et etranger»). The authors also use paperwork documents from the Foundation of the Institute of History of the Comacademy. The Soviet delegation consisted of six members, while there were five emigrant scientists, who were at the same time members of national delegations of other countries where they were living. The common interest of both sides, which appeared behind the congress venues, was recorded, the features of self-descriptions and presentations and self-presentation to the world scientific community were revealed. The constructed corporate portraits of each other were demonstrated. The conclusion was made that there was not a constructive dialogue between different sides. At the same time it was noted that there was not a provocative dialogue either, like one that occurred during the congress at Oslo. The reasons for this stagnation were identified. The authors of this article characterize prevailing atmosphere at the congress (let’s not quarrel) as «communicative plateau», that was connected with the increasingly complicated international situation of the early thirties.","PeriodicalId":41089,"journal":{"name":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","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/spbu19.2023.111","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

Abstract

The focus of the authors’ attention is the dialogue between emigrant historians and their Soviet colleagues during the International historical congress that was held in Warsaw in August 1933. It was the first congress that took place in a Slavic country. The main sources of research are the reports and accounts of the participants of the congress, presented in the form of publications in Soviet scientific magazines («Historian Marxist», «Class Struggle»), in emigrant periodicals («Russia and Svadom») and in European reviews («Revue historigue de droit francais et etranger»). The authors also use paperwork documents from the Foundation of the Institute of History of the Comacademy. The Soviet delegation consisted of six members, while there were five emigrant scientists, who were at the same time members of national delegations of other countries where they were living. The common interest of both sides, which appeared behind the congress venues, was recorded, the features of self-descriptions and presentations and self-presentation to the world scientific community were revealed. The constructed corporate portraits of each other were demonstrated. The conclusion was made that there was not a constructive dialogue between different sides. At the same time it was noted that there was not a provocative dialogue either, like one that occurred during the congress at Oslo. The reasons for this stagnation were identified. The authors of this article characterize prevailing atmosphere at the congress (let’s not quarrel) as «communicative plateau», that was connected with the increasingly complicated international situation of the early thirties.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
六乘五:在第七届国际历史科学大会上的苏联和移民历史学家
作者关注的焦点是1933年8月在华沙举行的国际历史大会上移民历史学家与苏联同事之间的对话。这是第一次在斯拉夫国家举行的代表大会。研究的主要来源是代表大会参与者的报告和叙述,这些报告和叙述以出版物的形式发表在苏联科学杂志(“历史马克思主义”,“阶级斗争”),移民期刊(“俄罗斯和斯瓦多姆”)和欧洲评论(“Revue historigue de droit francais et aliens”)。作者还使用了来自共产主义学院历史研究所基金会的书面文件。苏联代表团由六名成员组成,而有五名移居国外的科学家,他们同时也是他们所居住的其他国家国家代表团的成员。记录了会议会场背后出现的双方共同的兴趣,揭示了自我介绍和向世界科学界自我介绍的特点。演示了相互构建的企业肖像。得出的结论是,各方之间没有进行建设性的对话。与此同时,有人指出,也没有象奥斯陆大会期间那样的挑衅性对话。查明了这种停滞的原因。这篇文章的作者将大会上盛行的气氛(让我们不要争吵)描述为“交流高原”,这与三十年代初日益复杂的国际形势有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 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
期刊最新文献
Representation of the Council of ambassadors of the Russian diaspora in Bulgaria (1919–1940) Orders of Socialist Yugoslavia awarded to Russian diaspora representatives Six by five: Soviet and emigrant historians at the 7th International congress of historical sciences The cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the 17th century: Between religious intolerance and proselytism The veneration of the Ostrobram icon of the Mother of God in the context of Lithuanian identity
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1