在男爵R.F.昂格恩的史学中,伪造是制造神话的一个来源

Q3 Arts and Humanities Vostok (Oriens) Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.31857/s086919080025187-2
Sergius Kuzmin
{"title":"在男爵R.F.昂格恩的史学中,伪造是制造神话的一个来源","authors":"Sergius Kuzmin","doi":"10.31857/s086919080025187-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses different kinds of falsifications of documents, memoirs and artifacts as one of the sources of making mythologized narratives on the life and activity of Baron R.F. von Ungern-Sternberg (1886–1921), one of well-known warlords during the Civil War in Russia, who restored the independence of Outer Mongolia in the year 1921. Falsifications and hyperbolizations of events became important factors influencing the development of the historiography of Ungern. The most important cause of these falsifications and hyperbolizations was ideologization. Ideological and propagandistic clichés were broadly used by both sides, “red” and “white”, of the confrontation during the Civil War in Russia and the Bolsheviks-aided revolution of 1921 in Mongolia. Studies of documents, memoirs, mass media, scientific and popular publications revealed that these more or less similar labels were introduced into historical discourse mainly as a result of multiyear repetitions of the same ideological clichés. Examples of different kinds of falsifications are given. A number of items of phaleristics connected with the Asiatic Cavalry Division, commanded by R.F. Ungern, are the objects made after this division ceased to exist. Some texts claimed to be documents, related and/or written by R.F. Ungern, which were published in scientific journals, were demonstrated to be fakes. Some of these materials, indicated as documents from Russian state archives, were found to be really absent from these archives. It is concluded that the fact of publication of a document does not mean its authenticity. In some cases a document's published version may also contain falsifications","PeriodicalId":39193,"journal":{"name":"Vostok (Oriens)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Falsifications as a source of myth-making in the historiography of Baron R.F. Ungern\",\"authors\":\"Sergius Kuzmin\",\"doi\":\"10.31857/s086919080025187-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article discusses different kinds of falsifications of documents, memoirs and artifacts as one of the sources of making mythologized narratives on the life and activity of Baron R.F. von Ungern-Sternberg (1886–1921), one of well-known warlords during the Civil War in Russia, who restored the independence of Outer Mongolia in the year 1921. Falsifications and hyperbolizations of events became important factors influencing the development of the historiography of Ungern. The most important cause of these falsifications and hyperbolizations was ideologization. Ideological and propagandistic clichés were broadly used by both sides, “red” and “white”, of the confrontation during the Civil War in Russia and the Bolsheviks-aided revolution of 1921 in Mongolia. Studies of documents, memoirs, mass media, scientific and popular publications revealed that these more or less similar labels were introduced into historical discourse mainly as a result of multiyear repetitions of the same ideological clichés. Examples of different kinds of falsifications are given. A number of items of phaleristics connected with the Asiatic Cavalry Division, commanded by R.F. Ungern, are the objects made after this division ceased to exist. Some texts claimed to be documents, related and/or written by R.F. Ungern, which were published in scientific journals, were demonstrated to be fakes. Some of these materials, indicated as documents from Russian state archives, were found to be really absent from these archives. It is concluded that the fact of publication of a document does not mean its authenticity. In some cases a document's published version may also contain falsifications\",\"PeriodicalId\":39193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vostok (Oriens)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vostok (Oriens)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31857/s086919080025187-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vostok (Oriens)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31857/s086919080025187-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文讨论了各种伪造文件、回忆录和文物的行为,作为对俄罗斯内战期间著名军阀之一、于1921年恢复外蒙古独立的R.F.冯·昂根-斯滕贝格男爵(1886-1921)的生活和活动进行神话化叙述的来源之一。对事件的篡改和夸大成为影响昂根史学发展的重要因素。这些篡改和夸大的最重要原因是意识形态化。在俄国内战和1921年布尔什维克支持的蒙古革命期间,“红”和“白”双方都广泛使用意识形态和宣传上的陈词滥调。对文件、回忆录、大众传播媒介、科学和大众出版物的研究表明,这些或多或少相似的标签被引入历史论述,主要是由于多年来重复同样的意识形态陈词滥调。给出了不同类型的弄虚作假的例子。由R.F. Ungern指挥的亚洲骑兵师的许多射电学物品是该师不复存在后制造的。在科学期刊上发表的一些声称是与R.F. Ungern相关或撰写的文件的文本被证明是伪造的。其中一些材料,作为俄罗斯国家档案的文件,被发现实际上不在这些档案中。结论是,文件的发布事实并不意味着其真实性。在某些情况下,文件的发布版本也可能包含伪造内容
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Falsifications as a source of myth-making in the historiography of Baron R.F. Ungern
The article discusses different kinds of falsifications of documents, memoirs and artifacts as one of the sources of making mythologized narratives on the life and activity of Baron R.F. von Ungern-Sternberg (1886–1921), one of well-known warlords during the Civil War in Russia, who restored the independence of Outer Mongolia in the year 1921. Falsifications and hyperbolizations of events became important factors influencing the development of the historiography of Ungern. The most important cause of these falsifications and hyperbolizations was ideologization. Ideological and propagandistic clichés were broadly used by both sides, “red” and “white”, of the confrontation during the Civil War in Russia and the Bolsheviks-aided revolution of 1921 in Mongolia. Studies of documents, memoirs, mass media, scientific and popular publications revealed that these more or less similar labels were introduced into historical discourse mainly as a result of multiyear repetitions of the same ideological clichés. Examples of different kinds of falsifications are given. A number of items of phaleristics connected with the Asiatic Cavalry Division, commanded by R.F. Ungern, are the objects made after this division ceased to exist. Some texts claimed to be documents, related and/or written by R.F. Ungern, which were published in scientific journals, were demonstrated to be fakes. Some of these materials, indicated as documents from Russian state archives, were found to be really absent from these archives. It is concluded that the fact of publication of a document does not mean its authenticity. In some cases a document's published version may also contain falsifications
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Vostok (Oriens)
Vostok (Oriens) Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
The Democratic Republic of the Congo: the Rise of Islamic Radicalism At the Origins of European Oriental Studies: an Unknown Letter by Benjamin Schultze to Georg Jacob Kehr The Problem of the Eu's Defense Identity: the Peacekeeping Experience in Africa Overseas ports of China: evolution, geography, investment structure. Stylistics of Amaravati and Poetics of “Lalitavistara”: Comparative Analysis of Visual and Textual Narrative
×
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