T. N. Granovsky in commemorative practice of the community of Moscow historians
Present-day scholars invariably point out that by the turn of the 19th — 20th centuries, the process of self-identifi cation of historians within the framework of specific scientific communities had been fi nished. Very often, the role of textsmarkers playing an important role in the course of such...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Russian |
| Published: |
St. Tikhon's Orthodox University
2020-12-01
|
| Series: | Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия ИИ. История, история Русской Православной Церкви |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://periodical.pstgu.ru/ru/pdf/article/7196 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Present-day scholars invariably point out that by the turn of the 19th — 20th centuries, the process of self-identifi cation of historians within the framework of specific scientific communities had been fi nished. Very often, the role of textsmarkers playing an important role in the course of such intellectual self-defi nition is played by memorial and anniversary publications dedicated to prominent scholars who stand at the beginning of a certain community of scholars. The history of memory about Granovsky in Moscow University allows one to study the process of forming the identity of the community of Moscow historians during a long period of time. All generations of pre-revolution university professors (S. M. Soloviev as Granovsky’s younger contemporary, he is accompanied by B. N. Chicherin and V. I. Guerrier; V. O. Klyuchevsky, the fi rst generation after Granovsky who did not witness Granovsky’s lectures; P. G. Vinogradov and R. Yu. Wipper, the second generation after Granovsky) left their texts about Granovsky. It is obvious that memory about Granovsky was used instrumentally. The interest in the personality and intellectual experience of the Moscow professor was particularly typical of the younger contemporaries of the scholar. Historians at Moscow University of the turn of the centuries desired to make Granovsky’s experience more topical in dealing with issues of the contemporary agenda. As an example, in the situation of methodological choice that was to face Russian historians at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, Vinogradov and Wipper in their reasoning about Granovsky showed the infl uence of shared European intellectual processes on Russian historical science and emphasised that the Russian historian always came to be independent as to the foreign intellectual experience. But a certain unity in the idea about Graovsky who was seen as a founder of the professional community of historians at the university was nevertheless observed. Following Granovsky, the historian at Moscow University, so thought the champions of his cause, must have a general historical view of his subject and stand close to young people at the university, on whom he should have a moral infl uence. The duty of Granovsky’s heir is to struggle for science at the university and to form a specific subculture of professors. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1991-6434 2409-4811 |