Share this article with friends
V. D. KOROLYUK and I. S. MILLER. The Millenary of Polish Statehood
The article gives a characteristic of Polish historiography devoted to the principal landmarks in the thousand-year history of the Polish state. Particular attention is devoted to research works by Polish scientists published since 1958, following the government's decision on the nation-wide celebration of the millenary of Polish statehood. The authors make a detailed analysis of the literature on the emergence of Polish statehood and its role in the country's Christianization, on the national- liberation and revolutionary movement at the end of the 18th and in the 19th centuries, and of the historiography of People's Poland. At the same time the article examines a number of research works devoted to the history of Russian-Polish and Polish-German relations. While highly appreciating the achievements of Polish historians, the authors draw attention to certain deficiencies and shortcomings, to a number of controversial or unsolved problems still existing in Polish historiography, especially on the history of People's Poland. The article contains a brief survey of the origin of the ancient Polish state and the formation of the feudal system in Poland. The authors fully share the view of Polish historians that the celebrations of 1960 - 1966 do not mark the thousandth anniversary of Polish statehood or the appearance of Christianity in Poland (which actually penetrated there way back in the 9th century), but the thousandth anniversary of Poland's written history, the millenary of Poland's emergence on the broad international arena.
A. D. DANIYALOV. The Daghestan and Chechen Mountaineers' Movement Under Shamil's Leadership
A. D. Daniyalov's article is devoted to the investigation of an extremely complicated and inadequately studied problem. Drawing on extensive and carefully verified factual material, including the latest achievements of Soviet historical science, the author examines a number of major problems concerning the Daghestan and Chechen mountaineers' anti-feudal and anti-colonial struggle in the first half of the 19th century.
His profound analysis of Daghestan's internal and external position enables the author to draw the conclusion that the movement of the Daghestan and Chechen mountaineers was essentially local in character. The article reveals the chief causes that gave rise to the movement, shows the specific features and peculiarities of the mountaineers' long and stubborn struggle, briefly surveys the class and ideological struggle on the eve of the movement, discloses the motive forces and their role at the different stages of this struggle, gives a scientifically substantiated appraisal of the state legal system of Imam-ate, highlights the social and economic measures carried out in the course of the protracted and persevering struggle waged by the Daghestan and Chechen mountaineers.
The article contains a detailed periodization of the anti-feudal and anti-colonial struggle and characterizes the main distinctive features attending the movement.
M. Y. GEFTER and V. L. MALKOV. Reply to an American Scientist
The journal publishes 14 questions addressed to Soviet scientists by Professor Arthur Mendel of Michigan University (U.S.A.) and replies to these questions by two Soviet historians, M. Y. Gefter and V. L. Malkov. This dialogue has a direct bearing on many fundamental problems of historical knowledge, which have long been the object of polemics between Marxists and representatives of diverse trends in idealist sociology and historiography. Dr. Mendel's formulation of "the main controversial points" reflects not only the existence of a profound divergence in views but also a misguided notion of the historical conception of Marxism. At the same time, M. Y. Gefter and V. L. Malkov believe that the very need and desire to elucidate and clearly define the positions are symptomatic as a manifestation and reflection of the interest shown by a much broader audience in the laws governing the development of mankind, in the range of problems characteristic of Marxism and organically connected with the most urgent and pressing contemporary problems. The basic content of the replies can be summed up in the following way: the concept of "conformity to law"; the interaction of the economic and other factors of social development and the reflection of this interaction in historical cognition; the correlation of the historical theory of Marxism and the. concepts of non-Marxist historical and philosophical thought; dialectics of the general and the particular in the process of historical development; the role and place of "law" and "fact" in reconstructing the historical whole; the prerequisites and causes of the October Revolution in the light of the historical theory of Marxism; the problem of verity, objectivity and partisanship in historical science; the role of historical science in social practice.
A. A. KISLOVA. Problems of Religious Modernism in Protestant Theology
The article examines the sum and substance of modernism-one of the present-day religious-apologetical trends-which comes out in defence of religion under the slogan
of establishing an "alliance of faith and reason." Most widespread in the first two decades of this century, religious modernism is still being used by contemporary Western theologians and religious-minded scientists for "reconciling" science with religion, or, in the final analysis, for consolidating the positions of religion in this age of tempestuous technical-scientific and social progress. Religious modernism essentially represents a trend in the Christian Church of a number of European countries which lacks a clear organizational shape or form. At the beginning of this century its "theoretical" principles were scrupulously elaborated by America's Protestant theologians. The author makes an attempt to give a critical analysis of the basic content of religious modernism and trace the causes responsible for its spread in U. S. Protestant circles. Religious modernism emerged as a peculiar kind of reaction to scientific progress. Formally, it looked like a protest against Christian orthodoxy, against its irreconcilable attitude to the question concerning the development and spread of Darwinism. Coming out against the authority of fundamentalism-the official Christian orthodoxy, the American modernists have declared their intention to establish "freedom in thought and faith," thereby extending the sphere of activity of religion and bringing it closer to the practical, everyday needs of man. Actually, this can only be regarded as a new attempt on the part of religion to strengthen its positions, to arm its champions with a more effective weapon in the struggle against a scientific world outlook.
V. T. YERMAKOV. The Content and Chronological Boundaries of the Cultural Revolution in the U.S.S.R.
Up to the end of the 1950's the generally accepted view in Soviet historical and philosophical literature was that the cultural revolution in the U.S.S.R., initiated by the Great October Revolution, ended with the building of socialism in our country. This point of view, in the author's opinion, essentially corresponds to the Leninist conception of the content and chronological boundaries of the cultural revolution in the U.S.S.R. The article points out that in certain works published in 1959 - 1961 there emerged a different view on this question. The exponents of this view claim that the cultural revolution in the U.S.S.R. has entered the final stage of its development, which chronologically coincides with the period of full-scale communist construction. The tasks to be accomplished by the cultural revolution in its concluding stage are formulated as follows: the moulding of the new man, the elimimation of essential distinctions between mental and physical labour, between town and country, the advancement of the cultural and technological standards of the masses to the level of workers by brain. The author believes it would be more correct to regard these tasks as the general problems of communist conctruction than associate them entirely with the development of Soviet culture. Any attempt to include these tasks in the content of the cultural revolution, the author holds, is tantamount to arbitrarily extending its boundaries, both in substance and chronologically.
I. A. BULYGIN, F. I. INDOVA, A. A. PREOBRAZHENSKY, Y. A. TIKHONOV and S. M. TROITSKY. The Initial Stage of the Genesis of Capitalism in Russia
The article is aimed at substantiating the conception, according to which the emergence of the capitalist formation in Russia in the latter half of the 18th century was preceded by a protracted period (from the 17th to the first half of the 18th century) of the rise and development of bourgeois relations in Russia. The article is sharply polemical in character, for its authors resolutely come out against those historians who affirm that up to the middle of the 18th century elements of the new relations were not yet firmly established, that they emerged sporadically and disappeared under the influence of the prevailing feudal mode of production. The authors maintain that the latest investigations convincingly prove the existence in industry, beginning with the 17th century, of the early bourgeois forms in the shape of simple capitalist cooperation and manufacture. The development of commodity- money relations in Russia's agriculture is regarded by them as a manifestation of the conflict between the new phenomena and the old system founded on feudal relationships and serfdom. The article makes a point of stressing that the problem of the formation of an all-Russian market, put forward by V. I. Lenin, must be regarded as a socio-economic category of a definite stage of Russian history associated with the beginning of the genesis of capitalism. In conclusion the article emphasizes that the changes in the political superstructure and ideology occurred under the impact of the struggle between bourgeois and feudal forms in the country's economic life. A close study of the class struggle in Russia during that period testifies to the profound influence exerted by the genesis of capitalist relations on all aspects of Russia's social life from the 17th to the first half of the 18th century.
Permanent link to this publication:
LRussia LWorld Y G