For citation: Fhing in histiry. From the Editors, in Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. 2018. № 2. Pp. 3-4.
|Title of the article||Thing in history. From the Editors|
|In the section||Commentarii / Articles|
|Type of article||RAR||Index UDK||Index BBK|
Paradoxically, the thing in everyday life and the thing in history are two completely different things. Nobody denies the importance of the former. It is clearly impossible to live without things. As for the latter, the situation is the opposite. We know (or sense by intuition) that all historical events developed against the background and in the context of a certain complex of things. However, this complex — the world of the things of the past — attracts our attention at best as theatrical scenery (e.g., “domestic life of Russian tsars and tsarinas”) or as a research area of specialist communities — archeologists, ethnographers and students of artefacts. What people do is in no way related to what things do, since things do nothing — that is one the central postulates of Cartesianism, which until recently was the basis of the modern European view and understanding of the world.
|Keywords||sources studies, museology, museum, thing, object, collection|
|Full text version of the article.||Article language||Russian; English|