Memoria, identità, politica della storia nei contesti europeo e (post)-sovietico : atti della Giornata di studio – Napoli, 12 aprile 2024
The result of collaboration between the Research Projects of Relevant National Interest “Eastern Europe” between Russia and the West (2022) and Myths of Legitimation and Government of Difference in the European Imperial Regimes (2020), this volume explores the themes of memory, identity, and the pub...
Gespeichert in:
| Format: | Online |
|---|---|
| Sprache: | Italienisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
FedOA - Federico II University Press
2026
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/173325 |
| Tags: |
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie das erste Tag hinzu!
|
| Zusammenfassung: | The result of collaboration between the Research Projects of Relevant National Interest “Eastern Europe” between Russia and the West (2022) and Myths of Legitimation and Government of Difference in the European Imperial Regimes (2020), this volume explores the themes of memory, identity, and the public use of history in the European context, with particular reference to Central and Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet space. The contributors analyze the ideologization of the past in academia and schools, proposing a critical approach to notions such as “ethnogenesis,” “nation,” and “empire.” Specific cases are examined, such as the construction of Slavic identity, Bulgarian cultural nationalism, the return of nationalist themes in post-communist Romania, and historical-memorial controversies related to the Holocaust and totalitarianism. The volume also focuses on the “necropolitical” practices of exhuming the victims of 20th-century atrocities and on the representation of the Holocaust in Czech and Ukrainian school textbooks. Considerable attention is also devoted to central aspects of the politics of history and memory wars in the Soviet and post-Soviet space: the memory of the First World War in Russia; the “myth” of the Great Patriotic War in Kazakhstan; the “battle of monuments” that has raged over the last two decades in Ukraine, particularly in the Donbas/Donbass region. The concluding essays address the more general theme of the role of the professional historian in contemporary society, discussing the crisis of history as an academic discipline, the “presentism” of current historical culture, and the ability of historiography to still perform a public and civic function as magistra vitae. |
|---|