波黑史学:在学术纪律与政治行动主义之间

IF 0.8 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Contemporary European History Pub Date : 2023-09-15 DOI:10.1017/s0960777323000516
Husnija Kamberović
{"title":"波黑史学:在学术纪律与政治行动主义之间","authors":"Husnija Kamberović","doi":"10.1017/s0960777323000516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The wars of Yugoslav succession in the 1990s dramatically stimulated interest in the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). To satisfy this interest from the outside world, many historical publications offered up various explanations for the outbreak of the wars. 1 Yet the prior, and perhaps more significant, development occurred on the eve of the war, when historians in Bosnia and Herzegovina – although to a considerably lesser extent than in Serbia and Croatia – made an important contribution to national(ist) mobilisation and to the creation of a belligerent atmosphere by sensationally broaching traumatic topics linked to the Second World War. 2 The war in the 1990s left behind a devastated and divided country and created deep social divisions which have also affected the role and status of the nation's historiography. Many today accept the claim that Bosnia and Herzegovina is a country in which there exist three views on history, although this is only partly true, because in this country far more than ‘three views on history’ exist. In practice, the thesis of three national historiographies (Serbian, Croatian, and Bosniak) 3 turns out to be completely erroneous, because the existence of ‘national historiographies’ would also presume the existence of clearly defined thematic and methodological approaches to historical research, and that is not the case with historiography in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Hence, it is more precise to speak of a scholarly historiography that exists alongside an ideologically or politically motivated historiography or ‘parahistoriography’, by which is meant ‘dealing with history . . . in a completely different way than studying history’. 4","PeriodicalId":46066,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Historiography in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Between Academic Discipline and Political Activism\",\"authors\":\"Husnija Kamberović\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0960777323000516\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The wars of Yugoslav succession in the 1990s dramatically stimulated interest in the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). To satisfy this interest from the outside world, many historical publications offered up various explanations for the outbreak of the wars. 1 Yet the prior, and perhaps more significant, development occurred on the eve of the war, when historians in Bosnia and Herzegovina – although to a considerably lesser extent than in Serbia and Croatia – made an important contribution to national(ist) mobilisation and to the creation of a belligerent atmosphere by sensationally broaching traumatic topics linked to the Second World War. 2 The war in the 1990s left behind a devastated and divided country and created deep social divisions which have also affected the role and status of the nation's historiography. Many today accept the claim that Bosnia and Herzegovina is a country in which there exist three views on history, although this is only partly true, because in this country far more than ‘three views on history’ exist. In practice, the thesis of three national historiographies (Serbian, Croatian, and Bosniak) 3 turns out to be completely erroneous, because the existence of ‘national historiographies’ would also presume the existence of clearly defined thematic and methodological approaches to historical research, and that is not the case with historiography in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Hence, it is more precise to speak of a scholarly historiography that exists alongside an ideologically or politically motivated historiography or ‘parahistoriography’, by which is meant ‘dealing with history . . . in a completely different way than studying history’. 4\",\"PeriodicalId\":46066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary European History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary European History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0960777323000516\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary European History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0960777323000516","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20世纪90年代南斯拉夫的继承权战争极大地激发了人们对波黑历史的兴趣。为了满足外界的这种兴趣,许多历史出版物对战争的爆发提出了各种各样的解释。然而,更早的,或许也是更重要的发展发生在战争前夕,当时,波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那的历史学家——尽管在很大程度上比塞尔维亚和克罗地亚的历史学家要小得多——通过耸人听闻地提出与第二次世界大战有关的创伤性话题,为全国(ist)动员和创造一种交战气氛做出了重要贡献。20世纪90年代的战争留下了一个满目疮痍、分裂的国家,造成了深刻的社会分裂,这也影响了国家历史编纂的角色和地位。今天许多人接受波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那是一个存在三种历史观的国家的说法,尽管这只是部分正确的,因为在这个国家存在的远不止“三种历史观”。在实践中,三个民族史学(塞尔维亚、克罗地亚和波斯尼亚)的论文被证明是完全错误的,因为“民族史学”的存在也假定存在明确定义的主题和方法方法来进行历史研究,而波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那的史学并非如此。因此,更确切地说,学术史学与意识形态或政治动机的史学或“准史学”并存,其意思是“处理历史……”用一种与学习历史完全不同的方式。”4
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
Historiography in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Between Academic Discipline and Political Activism
The wars of Yugoslav succession in the 1990s dramatically stimulated interest in the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). To satisfy this interest from the outside world, many historical publications offered up various explanations for the outbreak of the wars. 1 Yet the prior, and perhaps more significant, development occurred on the eve of the war, when historians in Bosnia and Herzegovina – although to a considerably lesser extent than in Serbia and Croatia – made an important contribution to national(ist) mobilisation and to the creation of a belligerent atmosphere by sensationally broaching traumatic topics linked to the Second World War. 2 The war in the 1990s left behind a devastated and divided country and created deep social divisions which have also affected the role and status of the nation's historiography. Many today accept the claim that Bosnia and Herzegovina is a country in which there exist three views on history, although this is only partly true, because in this country far more than ‘three views on history’ exist. In practice, the thesis of three national historiographies (Serbian, Croatian, and Bosniak) 3 turns out to be completely erroneous, because the existence of ‘national historiographies’ would also presume the existence of clearly defined thematic and methodological approaches to historical research, and that is not the case with historiography in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Hence, it is more precise to speak of a scholarly historiography that exists alongside an ideologically or politically motivated historiography or ‘parahistoriography’, by which is meant ‘dealing with history . . . in a completely different way than studying history’. 4
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: Contemporary European History covers the history of Eastern and Western Europe, including the United Kingdom, from 1918 to the present. By combining a wide geographical compass with a relatively short time span, the journal achieves both range and depth in its coverage. It is open to all forms of historical inquiry - including cultural, economic, international, political and social approaches - and welcomes comparative analysis. One issue per year explores a broad theme under the guidance of a guest editor. The journal regularly features contributions from scholars outside the Anglophone community and acts as a channel of communication between European historians throughout the continent and beyond it.
期刊最新文献
‘Lab Rats for Science’: Uranium Mining, Expellees, Public Health, and Narratives of Radiation Danger in Cold War West Germany, 1955–1968 Fall of a New Soviet-Jewish Person: The Unmasking of Anti-Antisemite Aleksandr Litinskii, aka American Spy Big Boss Tourism Diplomacy in Cold War Europe: Symbolic Gestures, Cultural Exchange and Human Rights CEH volume 33 issue 2 Cover and Front matter CEH volume 33 issue 2 Cover and Back matter
×
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