Zdeněk Nebřenský
Marxismus a česká historiografie
Číslo: 1/2020
Periodikum: Historická sociologie
DOI: 10.14712/23363525.2020.5
Klíčová slova: Marxist historiography; Bohemian Lands; 17th–20th century; manufactory; factory
Pro získání musíte mít účet v Citace PRO.
Anotace:
This article deals with the history of the concept manufaktura that came about in the
Czech historiography after 1948. Based on an examination of period economic, dictionary and
historical writing samples from 17th–20th century, the article shows which intellectual traditions
this term is based upon and which ones it developed. At a general level, it deals with the construction of the terms that historians use and the synonyms that are (not) to be found in the sources.
This article attempts to show that the concept of manufactory was not only the result of ideological
hegemony in the social sciences and humanities, which was enforced in Eastern Europe after the
Second World War. Nor can it be dismissed with references to “ideological ballast” with “extensive
factographic heuristics” behind it, as the Marxist historiography is sometimes interpreted. Rather
than by adopting the binary view which distinguishes between a “Marxist veneer” and “factography” within the history of historiography, this study shows that a concept of manufactory builds
upon a number of texts (and contexts) that came about long before the Communist coup d’etat.
Zobrazit více »
Czech historiography after 1948. Based on an examination of period economic, dictionary and
historical writing samples from 17th–20th century, the article shows which intellectual traditions
this term is based upon and which ones it developed. At a general level, it deals with the construction of the terms that historians use and the synonyms that are (not) to be found in the sources.
This article attempts to show that the concept of manufactory was not only the result of ideological
hegemony in the social sciences and humanities, which was enforced in Eastern Europe after the
Second World War. Nor can it be dismissed with references to “ideological ballast” with “extensive
factographic heuristics” behind it, as the Marxist historiography is sometimes interpreted. Rather
than by adopting the binary view which distinguishes between a “Marxist veneer” and “factography” within the history of historiography, this study shows that a concept of manufactory builds
upon a number of texts (and contexts) that came about long before the Communist coup d’etat.