The article is a review on a new edition of the memories of the famos historian N.P. Anciferov "Fatherland of my soul. Memorials of travels to Italy".
The paper analyses two aspects of the legend of the pythagoreanism of King Numa Pompilius. The one aspect considers Numa as a disciple of Pythagoras of Samos, the other deals with the episode of the discovery of Numa's Books in 181 BC, and burnning them in accordance with the resolution of the Roman Senate. According to information received from Greek and Roman authors it is possible to fix the date of origin of this myth, to trace back the stages in its development and to point out different forms of its existence in the Republican Rome. The author stresses the decisive role of the pontiffs in making Numa the founder of Roman religious and legal institutions.
The article discusses the key images of eternal which are typical for early Greek thought: the time of gods, the temporal status of the laws of nature, and the memorialization of the glorious deeds of the past. Along with the philosophical fragments, poetic, historical, and dramatic works are analyzed. Here the problematics of temporality and eternity was articulated for the first time. Thus, the explication of inherent images of eternal is extremely important for an understanding of ancient Greeks’ worldview, and for the further development of the concept of eternity in philosophy, history of ideas and intellectual history.
The article examines the work of the Irish historian Geoffrey Keating (1570–1644) ‘Foras Feasa ar Éirinn’, which narrated about the history of ancient and medieval Ireland as a specific format of memory. The author introduces two terms borrowed from Aleide Assmann — ‘active memory’ and ‘archival memory’. On the basis of the analysis of the Keating’s narrative the author concludes that ‘Foras Feasa ar Éirinn’ had a potential of acting as both active and arachival memory. First and foremost, Keating’s work contributed to the formation of archival memory of Irish catholic consciousness and afterwards of Irish nationalism.
The article is a review of the monograph by a Western intellectual historian Rolf Petri, made in the genre of “reflections on the book”. The author not only retells Petri’s key theses on the history of "Western ideology", but also tries to conceptualize some ideas that have not been clarified because of the abundant quotations of primary sources.
Ladynin Ivan Andreevich
The Notion of Hellenism in Soviet and Post-Soviet Research: A Regular Stage or an Idiographic Contingency?
The definition of Hellenism by A. Ranovich as a stage in the evolution of the slave-owning society was backed, on one side, by the traditional perception of it as a stage since the introduction of this notion by J. Droysen, and, on the other side, by the recognition of the socio-economic determinism in the Soviet Marxist theory. Reluctant both to accept Ranovich’s arguments and to quit Marxist method, K. Zelyin declined the perception of Hellenism as a stage and defined it as an “idiographic”, historically specific phenomenon. According to the author of this article, Hellenism is a condition of the Hellenic world after Alexander’s conquests; Hellenism as such is not a stage in any process but a specific form of the recourse of the Greek polis from the situation of its regular crisis in the 4th century B.C.
The paper discusses the place and role of historical subjects in British popular music culture of the 1970s on the example of London based rock band the Clash. Focusing on acute contemporary themes of racism, oppression of immigrants in England, and the British colonies struggle for independence, however, musicians often turned to historical subjects. Drawing primarily scenes of national history of the former colonies, and, more broadly, the different subjects of national wars, musicians presented a critical view on the British imperial past. The paper examines how and which historical subjects were “engaged” in British punk music culture of the 1970s, and how the very statement about the past was constructed.
Analyzed the transformation of the mechanisms of formation of historical memory and commemorations at the change of rationality types / models of science. The problem is considered in the context of source studies of historiography and the study of narrative. Hypothesis: for the classical model of historical science peculiar to the meta-narration and coupled with the hierarchical structure of narratives, that forms the basis of “natural” commemorations; for non-classical science in the history of history is a landmark occurrence that contributes to the destruction of the “natural” commemorations, in postnonclassical science problematization of narrative is accompanied by destruction of the commemorations, which a new construction begins in a situation of postpostmodern and is accompanied by a process of renarration.
The article examines the debates between A.I. Herzen and B.N. Chicherin in the newspaper “Kolokol” in 1858-1859. It's shown that role of emotions in politics was the main subject of the controversy. Analysis of various arguments demonstrates that A.I. Herzen was a proponent of sincere expression of emotions in politics and journalism, whereas B.N. Chicherin advocated rationalization of the political sphere for the sake of prevention of unrests and revolutions. It is argued that the controversy had a certain impact on attitude of Russian socialists and liberals towards emotions.