eNGSUIR JSPUI
Electronic Nizhyn Gogol State University Institutional Repository
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://lib.ndu.edu.ua/dspace/handle/123456789/478| Title: | Трансформація норманської та антинорманської теорій походження Русі в історичній науці XVII - початку ХХ ст. |
| Authors: | Кириленко, С. О. |
| Keywords: | походження Русі історіографічний процес ідеологія Kievan Rus origin historiographical process crisis, ideology |
| Issue Date: | 2017 |
| Publisher: | Видавництво НДУ ім.М. В. Гоголя |
| Abstract: | Стаття присвячена комплексному вивченню історіографічних до- сліджень з питання походження Русі в контексті розвитку істо- ричної думки XVII - початку ХХ ст. Проаналізовано причини заро- дження двох антагоністичних напрямків в історіографії - норман- ського та антинорманського. Зосереджено увагу на проблемі авторства норманської теорії, розглянуто хід боротьби анти- норманського та норманського історіографічних підходів. |
| Description: | The article is devoted to the comprehensive study of historiographical studies on the Rus origin in the context of the development of historical theories of the XVII - beginning of the XX century. The causes of the origin of the Norman and Anti-Norman theories as two antagonistic trends in historiography are analyzed. The attention is focused on the problem of the authorship of the Norman theory, which, according to modern historians, belongs to the Swedish diplomat and historian of the beginning of the XVII century Peter Petreius. The author refutes the thesis that T. S. Bayer could be the founder of the Norman's theory, since the thesis about the Norman origin of the Varangians has been declared three years before the publication of the article "De varagis" by the other German historian G. Miller. The paper also emphasizes the evolution of the anti-Norman and Norman historiographical approaches since M. Lomanosov, G. Miller, A. Schlosser, G. Evers, D. Ilovajsky till the works of M. Pogodin, M. Maksymovych, M. Kostomarov, S. Gedeonov, Yu. Venelin, V. Thomson and others. The author concludes that the activity of representatives of the anti- Norman direction of the second half of the XIXth century deprived Normanism of the halo of scientism because anti-normanists mobilized more historical material than the most erudite normanists had done. Therefore, at the end of the XIXth century skepticism towards Norman ideas prevailed in the historical literature. Lack of trust in Normanist constructions in the second half of the XIXth century was a reason that the research center which generated arguments in favor of the Norman origin of Rus had been moved abroad. At the turn of the century the fund of written sources that would help to solve the problem was exhausted; direct facts were not enough for a convincing solving the problem. There was a need to attract new sources, on the one hand, and to change the methodological approaches toward research, on the other hand. Therefore, at the turn of the XIXth and XXth centuries, despite the emergence of a solid stratum of historiographical works, the availability of various methodological approaches and the involvement of a wide range of written and archaeological sources, the research of the problem of the Rus origin was in a deep systemic crisis The overcoming of that crisis required the development of completely new criteria for reading historical texts, involving new methodological tools, as well as close interdisciplinary connections. |
| URI: | http://lib.ndu.edu.ua/dspace/handle/123456789/478 |
| Appears in Collections: | Література та культура Полісся. Випуск 87 (2017 р.) |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.