Slavic Studies

(redirected from Slavicist)
Also found in: Dictionary, Wikipedia.
Related to Slavicist: Slavist

Slavic Studies


the study of the Slavs, a scholarly field uniting several disciplines, including past and present Slavic history, literature, language, folklore, ethnography, economy, art, and religion, as well as the study of monuments of material and spiritual culture. Within each Slavic country, the history, culture, and language of that country are not included within the framework of Slavic studies but are studied as part of that country’s own history, philology, and other branches of the social sciences.

Before the 20th century. The origin of Slavic studies dates back to the establishment and consolidation of the earliest Slavic states, when the Slavs, becoming conscious of Slavic communality and ethnic unity, began expressing these concepts in written works. Such writings included Nestor’s Primary Chronicle, the chronicles of Anonymous Gallus and Cosmas of Prague, and the Chronicle of Priest Duklianin. During the period of feudalism, historical works and works of topical fiction dealing with Slavic affairs included the Hussite treatises, the Czech Dalimil verse chronicle, the Pulkava chronicle, the History of Poland by J. Długosz, the Treatise on the Two Sarmatias by Ma-ciej of Miechów, the historical works of Marcin Kromer, and the works of the Polish poet J. Kochanowski. Other works of this type included Russian chronicles and chronographs, Byelorussian, Lithuanian, and Ukrainian chronicles, and V. Priboevich’s treatise The Origin and Destinies of the Slavs.

During the 17th century, a heightened interest in the past and present of the Slavic peoples was reflected in works by the Croatian scholars J. Križanić and R. P. Vitezović, in The Slavic Kingdom (1601) by the Dalmatian historian M. Orbini, and in translations made in Russia of works by such Polish historians as M. Stryjkowski.

The consciousness of a communality of Slavs gave birth to Slavic studies as a scholarly discipline. This was facilitated by advances in the study of ancient Greek and Roman literature and by a modern, scholarly approach to the publication of medieval sources. Slavic studies emerged in the second half of the 18th century as a primarily philological discipline; the term also came into use about the same time. Slavic studies were concerned mainly with the language and literature of the Slavic peoples, their ancient life and culture, and the publication and analysis of the oldest Slavic written works. To a great extent, the advances in Slavic studies in the Slavic countries during the late 18th and early 19th centuries were connected with the rise of the national liberation movement among the West and South Slavs. These advances were also linked with the Enlightenment and with the national surge of sympathy among progressive Russian circles for the oppressed Slavic peoples.

As a scholarly discipline, Slavic studies were founded in Bohemia by J. Dobrovský, whose works encompassed almost the entire scope of problems that were later to be dealt with by Slavic philology. Important works were also written by J. Jungmann, F. Čelakovský, F. Palacký, and V. Hanka. The literary works of the Slovak writer J. Kollár were of great importance in reinforcing the sense of a Slavic communality. P. J. Šafařik’s Slavic Antiquities (1837) became a basis for the further study of Slavic archaeology, ethnography, philology, and comparative historiography.

During the 18th century, a growing interest in the history of the Slavic peoples was reflected in Bulgaria in Paisii of Hilen-dar’s Slavo-Bulgarian History (1762), in Montenegro in the works of V. Petrović, and in Serbia in those by J. Raić and Z. Orfelin. An important contribution to Slavic studies among the South Slavs was made by V. Karadzic, the creator of the Serbian literary language, collector of folk songs, and author of A Serbian Dictionary (1818). Other important works were written by Dž. Daničić, the author of A Dictionary of Serbian Literary Antiquities (parts 1–3, 1863–64), the Slovene B. Kopitar, and the Bulgarians G. Rakovskii and L. Karavelov. During the mid-19th century, the brothers D. Miladinov and K. Miladinov worked in the field of folklore. An increasing interest in Slavic studies was also expressed by such members of the Illyrian movement, as the Croats L. Gaj and I. Kukuljević-Sakcinski and by S. Vraz, a leader in the Slovene and Croatian national renaissance.

The emergence of Slavic studies in Russia was preceded by the works of M. V. Lomonosov, who focused attention on the kinship of the Slavic languages, the role of Church Slavonic in forming the Russian literary language, and the historical role of the Slavs in world culture. The Russian historian V. N. Tatishchev studied Slavic antiquities, and in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, I. N. Boltin and N. M. Karamzin became involved in Slavic studies. On the whole, Slavic studies in Russia, as in other countries, were as yet not a separate field of scholarship; philology predominated, as did philology’s characteristic methods of source criticism and scholarly analysis. The circle of N. P. Rumiantsev and A. S. Shishkov was instrumental in establishing scholarly Slavic studies in Russia; a supporter of this circle was A. Kh. Vostokov. The works of the philologist, Slavicist, and historian Iu. I. Venelin fostered the development of Russian and Bulgarian Slavic studies.

One of the founders of Slavic studies in Poland during the late 18th century was the scholar and civic leader J. Potocki. In the first half of the 19th century, S. Linde, J. Mroziński, and A. Kucharski worked in the field of Slavic linguistics, W. Su-rowiecki and Z. Dolęga-Chodakowski studied the history, archaeology, and ethnography of the Slavic peoples, and O. Kolberg investigated Slavic folklore. An important contribution to Polish Slavic studies was the Course in Slavic Literature (1841–49) by A. Mickiewicz, who was instrumental in increasing knowledge about the Slavic world in Western Europe. J. Lelewel studied the history of the Slavic peoples. The four-volume History of Slavic Law (1832-35) by W. A. Macie-jowski was a major work in the field of Slavic studies.

With the development of Slavic studies in the Slavic countries, Slavic studies were also initiated in France, Italy, England, and particularly Germany. During the 18th century, J. G. Herder laid the foundation for the study of Slavic culture in Germany. In Russia, works on the history of the Slavs were written by the German scholar A. L. Schloz̈er. In Bonn (after 1850, in Prague), A. von Schleicher engaged in research on the Slavic languages and published Slavic materials in his Compendium (1861–62).

During the first half of the 19th century, the first departments of Slavic studies were established at universities in Slavic and non-Slavic countries; they included the department of Slavic languages and literatures headed by A. Mickiewicz at the Collège de France in Paris (1840) and the departments of Slavic studies at the universities of Vienna, Leipzig, Berlin, and Budapest. In Russia, departments of Slavic studies were founded during the 1830’s at the universities of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan, and Kharkov, where during the 1840’s they were headed by professors O. M. Bodianskii, I. I. Sreznevskii, P. I. Preis, and V. I. Grigorovich. During this period, a wealth of historical, philological, linguistic, and ethnographic material was discovered and collected, manuscripts were analyzed, texts were edited, and dictionaries, grammars, and folklore collections were compiled.

Slavic studies underwent considerable development during the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Specialized Slavic journals and associations of Slavic studies were founded. The disciplines within Slavic studies became more sharply differentiated. Philology predominated, but historical and ethnographic studies developed as well. Within philology, literary theory and criticism became a separate branch of study. From a complex discipline predominating in philology, Slavic studies became a complex of independent scholarly disciplines.

Important philological and linguistic monographs were written by the Slovene F. Miklosich (F. Miklošič), the Croat I. V. Jagić, the Poles I. Baudouin de Courtenay and W. Nehring, and the Czech J. Gebauer. In Russia, Slavic philologists studied comparative Slavic linguistics. Old Church Slavonic, and the history, phonetics, grammar, and dialectology of the Slavic languages. These scholars included F. I. Buslaev, A. A. Potebnia, F. F. Fortunatov, A. I. Sobolevskii, M. N. Speranskii, and A. A. Shakhmatov. Shakhmatov also studied Slavic ethnogeny, and his works on Russian chronicle writing helped advance Slavic historical studies. Important contributions to the study of Slavic mythology were made by A. N. Afanas’ev and V. F. Miller. A. F. Gil’ferding investigated Slavic folklore and the history of the Polabian-Baltic and South Slavs.

The scholar V. I. Lamanskii studied the history of Slavic culture and the ancient history of the Slavs in their relations with Byzantium and other countries; he also carried out important research on Slavic ethnography. F. F. Zigel’ studied the history of Slavic law. Innovative research on the history of the Slavic literary languages was carried out by A. S. Budilovich. The founders of the democratic tradition in Slavic studies during the 19th century were the Russian revolutionary democrats A. I. Herzen, N. G. Chernyshevskii, N. A. Dobroliubov, and V. G. Belinskii and the Narodniki (Populists), including P. L. Lavrov.

Early in the 20th century the Moscow linguistics school of Fortunatov became well known and initiated the exact, or formal, study of language. The principal founder of the Russian comparative-historical school of literary theory and criticism was A. N. Veselovskii. Veselovskii’s student E. V. Anichkov wrote valuable works on Slavic paganism. Contributions to literary theory and criticism were made by the Russian A. L. Po-godin, the Polish and Russian cultural figure V. D. Spasovich, I. Ia. Franko, V. G. Shchurat, and M. S. Vozniak (the Ukraine), A. Brückner (Poland), J. Vlček, J. Jakubec, and F. X. Šalda (Bohemia and Slovakia), I. Shishmanov, D. Blagoev, and B. Penev (Bulgaria), J. Skerlić and P. Popović (Serbia), and M. Šrepél (Croatia). A systematic study of Wendish philology and history was initiated by J. E. Smoleŕ, M. Górnik, and J. Mucha.

Generalized studies of Slavic literatures were written by J. Polívka (Bohemia) and A. N. Pypin (Russia). Monographs were published on topics from the history of the Slavic peoples, including the early Slavic migrations, the history of Slavic law, the Reformation in the Slavic countries, and the national liberation movement. Such works were written by M. Drinov (Russia and Bulgaria), N. N. Liubovich, A. S. Trachevskii, V. V. Ma-kushev, F. I. Uspenskii, F. I. Leontovich, F. Ia. Fortinskii, A. A. Kotliarevskii, and A. N. Iasinskii (Russia), V. N. Zlatarski (Bulgaria), R. Hube, O. Balzer, and A. Pawiński (Poland), F. Rački, I. Ruvarac, B. Bogišić, and S. Novaković (the South Slavic countries), and K. Jirećek (Bohemia).

Important Slavic ethnographic studies were written in Russia by P. A. Rovinskii. A major event in the history of Slavic studies was the publication of Slavic Antiquities (vols. 1–4, 1902–34) by the Czech historian, archaeologist, and ethnographer L. Niederle. In Russia the historian I. I. Pervol’f devoted an extensive study to relations among the Slavs from the earliest times; the Russia historian M. K. Liubavskii pubished A History of the West Slavs (1912).

Outstanding contributions to Slavic studies during the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries were made in France by the historians L. Léger, E. Denis, and A. Rambaud, in Germany by A. Leskien, L. Ranke, E. Berneker, and R. Trautmann, and in Rumania by B. Haşdeu and I. Bogdan. Important contributions were also made in Great Britain.

In the mid-19th century, when K. Marx and F. Engels developed a materialist conception of history, Slavic studies acquired a consistently scientific methodological foundation. The decisive precondition for the emergence of Marxist Slavic studies was V. I. Lenin’s development of a Marxist theory and methodology for historical research.

Modern Slavic studies. The application of Marxist-Leninist methodology to research in the social sciences triumphed at first in the USSR and, after World War II (1939–45), in the other socialist countries. As a result, the scope of Slavic studies became extended by the inclusion of new historical issues and by a new approach to the discipline’s basic problems.

SOVIET SLAVIC STUDIES Before World War II, philological research continued to dominate Slavic studies. At that time, P. A. Lavrov, E. F. Karskii, V. N. Shchepkin, and N. K. Grunskii produced works summarizing their prerevolutionary research. Soviet historians published widely, and a more profound study was made of tsarist foreign policy and of the history of the revolutionary and workers’ movements in Russia and other Slavic countries. As a result, source studies and a scientific methodology were developed. These advances aided in the organization of extensive research in Slavic studies in the USSR.

A number of Marxist historians emigrating from the Slavic countries to the USSR helped establish Soviet Slavic studies. These scholars, who included G. Bić, Kh. Kabakchiev, J. Krasny, and J. Witkowski, continued to study the history of their native lands. Between the 1920’s and the early 1940’s, the first works on Slavic literatures of the 19th and 20th centuries were published by N. S. Derzhavin, A. V. Lunacharskii, and V. G. Chernobaev. Works on Slavic folklore appeared, and A. M. Selishchev’s fundamental Slavic Linguistics (1941) was published. Slavic accentology was investigated by M. G. Do-lobko and L. A. Bulakhovskii, ancient Slavic writings by G. A. Il’inskii, N. N. Durnovo, V. V. Vinogradov, and V. M. Istrin, and Slavic ethnography by D. K. Zelenin. The Institute of Slavic Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, which functioned in Leningrad from 1930 to 1934, sought to coordinate Slavic studies in the USSR. However, its scope was insufficiently broad owing to the incorrect evaluation of the social role of Slavic studies made by the school of M. N. Pok-rovskii and N. Ia. Marr. The development of Slavic studies experienced a turning point just before and during World War II. Centers of historical Slavic studies were founded at the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR and at Leningrad State University. The subdepartments of Slavic philology and of the history of the South and Western Slavs were founded at Moscow State University. These developments facilitated the solution of a basic problem of Soviet Slavic studies: the training of historians and Slavic philologists. Important contributions to the organization of Slavic studies were made by B. D. Grekov, Iu. V. Got’e, V. I. Picheta, M. N. Tikhomirov, and N. P. Gratsianskii and by the Czechoslovak Slavicist and sociopolitical leader Z. Nejedlý.

Late in 1946, a central institution for Slavic studies was established, known since 1968 as the Institute of Slavic and Balkan Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Subdepartments and centers of Slavic studies were founded at the universities of Leningrad, Kiev, L’vov, Minsk, Voronezh, Kharkov, and Saratov and at the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR. In 1956 the Soviet Committee of Slavicists was organized.

Close contacts were established with scholars in the People’s Republic of Bulgaria, the People’s Republic of Poland, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, and the Socialist Federated Republic of Yugoslavia, as well as in other countries. The 1950’s and 1960’s saw the appearance of major general histories of Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia. Research was continued on the social and economic development of the Slavic countries and on relations among the Slavs. Studies were initiated on the cultural changes that took place in the foreign Slavic countries after the war.

At this time, Slavic studies investigated the role of the Slavic peoples in European and world history of all periods, as well as relations among the Slavs, Slavic ethnogeny, Slavic-German relations, and links between the Slavic peoples and other peoples of Central and Eastern Europe and of the Balkans. Important contributions to these fields were made by B. A. Rybakov, P. N. Tret’iakov, Iu. V. Bromlei, and V. D. Koroliuk. C. G. Litavrin investigated Slavic-Byzantine relations, and L. V. Razumov-skaia and D. L. Pokhilevich studied the history of the Polabian and Baltic Slavs and of the peasantry, as well as the growth of cities in feudal Slavic society. The Hussite revolutionary movement in Bohemia was the subject of research by B. T. Rubtsov, and Russia’s historical relations and ties with the South and West Slavs during the period of feudalism were studied by S. K. Bogoiavlenskii, I. B. Grekov, A. S. Myl’nikov, and F. P. Shevchenko.

The scholars S. A. Nikitin, I. S. Dostian, V. G. Karasev, V. I. Freidzon, and I.I. Leshchilovskaia published works on the national liberation struggle of the South Slavs during the 18th and 19th centuries, the national revival, and the social and economic development of the Balkan Slavic countries and their ties with Russia. Research on the participation of the Slavic peoples in the revolutionary events of 1848 was summarized in the joint work The Revolutions of 1848–1849 and in works by I. I. Udal’-tsov. Studies by I. S. Miller, I.I. Kostiushko, I. M. Beliaevskaia, V. A. D’iakov, A. F. Smirnov, and P. N. Ol’shanskii investigated the development of capitalist relations in the Polish lands, the formation of the Polish nation, the Polish national liberation movement, the antifeudal struggle of the Polish peasantry, the agrarian reform of 1864, and Russo-Polish revolutionary ties during the 19th century.

Important works were written on the history of the workers’ and national liberation movements in the Slavic countries in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries and during World War I (1914–18). Scholars dealing with these topics included I. A. Khrenov, A. Ia. Manusevich, Iu. A. Pisarev, Ia. B. Shmeral’, M. V. Misko, A. Kh. Klevanskii, V. A. Zhebokritskii, and S. M. Stetskevich. Works by M. A. Birman and other scholars traced the workers’ movement as well as the political and economic development of the Slavic countries during the inter-war period. The history of World War II and the rise of socialism in the countries of Central and Southeastern Europe were studied by A. I. Nedorezov, L. B. Valev, and V. K. Volkov, who also investigated the mutual cooperation among these countries and the social and economic changes that took place within them.

Since the mid-1950’s, works have been written on the history of Slavic studies. Research has been carried out by P. G. Boga-tyrev, I. F. Belza, N. I. Kvartsov, and V. N. Lazarev on the history of the art of the Slavic peoples and on cultural ties among the Slavs. A broad range of studies on Polish classical literature has been written by S. S. Sovetov, I. K. Gorskii, B. F. Stakheev, and V. V. Vitt. The establishment of romanticism and critical realism in Czech and Slovak literature and the links between these tendencies and Russian literature have been studied by A. P. Solov’ev, S. V. Nikol’skii, and L. S. Kishkin. Bulgarian literature has been the subject of works by V. I. Zlydnev, L. V. Vo-rob’ev, and K. N. Derzhavin, and the emergence of the literature of socialist realism has been investigated by S. A. Sherlaimova. D. F. Markov has devoted works to the revolutionary literature of the 1920’s, the establishment of socialist realism, and the theory of the comparative study of Slavic literatures.

In the late 1950’s and during the 1960’s, general histories of Bulgarian, Czech, Slovak, and Polish literatures of the 19th and 20th centuries were written. D. S. Likhachev studied Russian literary ties with the literature of the South Slavic peoples, and A. I. Rogov initiated the study of analogous West Slavic ties. I. N. Golenishchev-Kutuzov determined the role of the Slavic literatures in the European Renaissance. The ties and contacts between foreign Slavic literatures and Russian and Soviet literature were investigated by K. A. Koperzhinskii, M. P. Alekseev, A. I. Beletskii, and I. Vozniak; Slavic folklore was studied by B. N. Putilov, Iu. I. Smirnov, and V. E. Gusev. Works on the material and spiritual culture and the life and customs of the foreign Slavs were written by S. A. Tokarev, K. V. Chistov, O. A. Gantskaia, M. S. Kashuba, N. N. Gratsianskaia, L. V. Markova, and N.N. Beletskaia.

Major achievements in Slavic linguistics from the 1950’s through 1970’s have included S. B. Bernshtein’s two-volume Outline of Comparative Grammar of the Slavic Language (1961-74). Studies on the Proto-Slavic language have been written by P. S. Kuznetsov, V. K. Zhuravlev, V. V. Martynov, and V. N. Toporov, and Balto-Slavic relations have been studied by V. V. Ivanov, V. M. Illich-Svitych, and B. A. Larin. Slavic ac-centology has been investigated by V. A. Dybo, L. A. Bula-khovskii, and V. V. Kolesov, Slavic glottogony by F. P. Filin, and etymology by O. N. Trubachev.

Synchronic methods for the study of the modern Slavic languages have been developed by I. I. Revzin; grammars of the Bulgarian, Czech, Serbo-Croatian, and Lower Lusatian languages have been published by Iu. S. Maslov, A. G. Shirokova, V. P. Gudkov, and M. I. Ermakova. Studies on the history of the Bulgarian language have been written by E. V. Cheshko, E. I. Demin, and I. K. Bunin, and on the Serbian language by R. V. Bulatov. Atlases of Bulgarian dialects in the USSR were published, and in 1963 an atlas of southeastern Bulgarian dialects was compiled in collaboration with Bulgarian scholars. Wendish dialects have been studied by L. E. Kalnyn’, and East Slavic, Carpathian, and Polesian dialects compared with South and West Slavic dialects in A Carpathian Dialect Atlas (1967) and in works by G. P. Klepikova, T. V. Popova, N. I. Tolstoi, and G. A. Tsykhun.

An increased interest in toponymy has resulted in studies by V. A. Nikonov, E. M. Murzaev, and E. M. Pospelov. Balkan studies have developed in close connection with Slavic studies and in their own historical and typological aspects. The Old Church Slavonic language, whose study occupied an important place in Russian Slavic studies, is also of great interest to Soviet specialists in this field. Important in this connection are Selish-chev’s Old Church Slavonic (1951-52) and studies by V. V. Bor-odich, A. S. L’vov, L. P. Zhukovskaia, K. I. Khodova, R. M. Tseitlin, E. M. Vereshchagin, and B. A. Uspenskii. A dictionary of the oldest Old Church Slavonic texts is being prepared in collaboration with Czechoslovak scholars.

SLAVIC STUDIES IN FOREIGN SLAVIC COUNTRIES. Between the two world wars, Czech Slavic studies predominated in the foreign Slavic countries. Czech scholars who continued the historical and philological study of Cyril and Methodius’ achievements and of the Church Slavonic tradition in medieval Bohemia included V. Chaloupecký, F. Hrušovský, J. Vajs, M. Weingart, and V. Vašica. Slavic literatures and folklore were investigated by F. Wollman, J. Horák, J. Mâchai. J. Dolanský, and M. Murko. The Linguistic Circle of Prague, whose members included N. S. Trubetskoi, V. Mathesius, B. Havránek, J. Mukařovský, B. Trnka, and S. Kartsevskii, contributed greatly to the development of Slavic linguistics and literary theory and criticism. Scholars working in the field of Czech and Slovak ethnography included K. Chotek, V. Pražak, B. Václavek, and J. Kubin.

Czech scholars studying ties among the Slavs, particularly between Bohemia and Russia, included J. Macurek and the Russian historians A. V. Florovskii and V. A. Frantsev. Analogous topics were studied in Polish Slavic studies, as were comparative Slavic ethnography, philology, and history. The works of K. Moszyński, including Folk Culture of the Slavs (vols. 1–2, 1929–39), served as modern supplements to such classic works of L. Niederle as The Life of the Ancient Slavs and laid the foundations for a synchronic study of the material and spiritual culture of the Slavs. Moszyński’s works aided in the study of the ethnogeny of the Slavs, as did J. Czekanowski’s Introduction to the History of the Slavs (1927) and the studies of the linguist T. Lehr-Spławiński.

Important works on Slavic dialectology were written by K. Nitsch and M. Małecki. The study of ancient Slavic law and the Polabian and Baltic Slavs was continued by J. Widajewicz and K. Tymieniecki. Research on Russian literature and language was carried out by W. Lednicki and other scholars. In Bulgaria, the scholars B. Tsonev, A. Teodorov-Balan, L. Miletich, S. Mladenov, and I. Ivanov studied Slavic philology, the achievements of Cyril and Methodius, the role of Old Bulgarian literature in the cultural history of the Slavs, and Slavic dialectology and comparative linguistics. Comparative ethnography and folklore were the subject of research by M. Arnaudov, S. Romanskii, and Kh. Vakarel’skii.

In Yugoslavia, historical and ethnographic research was intensively developed by the school of J. Cvijić and his followers T. Djordjević, J. Erdeljanović, and V. Čajkanović and by the ethnologists M. Gavazzi and N. Županić. Yugoslav linguistics and philology were developed by A. Belić, T. Maretić, R. Nahtigal, F. Ramovš, S. M. Kuljbakin, B. Popović, I. Prijatelj, and J. Badalić. An increasingly prominent nationalistic spirit, engendered by the policies of German imperialism, was apparent in Polish and Czechoslovak works on the history of Polish-German and Czech-German relations. Bourgeois Slavic studies were opposed by the works of progressive historians of culture and literary scholars and critics, including Z. Nejedlý (Czechoslovakia), G. Bakalov and T. Pavlov (Bulgaria), and I. Fik and F. Fiedler (Poland).

A crucial task for historians in foreign Slavic countries after the establishment of socialism was the training of qualified Marxist researchers. Historians focused on the complex problems of their own native histories; the history of the peasantry and its class struggle, the formation of the proletariat, the development of the workers’ movement and the national liberation movement during the 19th and early 20th centuries, and the antifascist struggle during World War II. Historians were then able to write general histories of their native countries.

In Poland and Czechoslovakia, Slavic ethnogeny has been studied by historians, archaeologists, and linguists. Important studies on Great Moravia and on the related literary, ecclesiastical, and political activities of Cyril and Methodius have been written by L. Havlik, V. Hrubý, J. Dekan, and F. V. Mareš (Czechoslovakia), V. Kiselkov, E. Georgiev, and K. Kuev (Bulgaria), and J. Widajewicz (Poland). In Poland and Yugoslavia, new works on the history of the state of Samo have been published by the Polish scholar G. Labuda and the Slovene B. Grafenauer.

Subjects of common study in the Slavic countries are the formation of early feudal state systems, the rise of Slavic cities, and, for the West Slavs, medieval German colonization; Polish scholars investigating the last problem have included K. Tymieniecki, H. Łowmiański, A. Gejsztor, W. Hensel, and Z. Kaczmarczyk. Ancient Slavic law has been studied by V. Vanĕček (Czechoslovakia) and J. Bardach (Poland), and the Polabian and Baltic Slavs have been the subject of works by Labuda (Poland) and L. Hrabová and H. Bulin (Czechoslovakia).

A major contribution to Slavic studies is the publication by Polish Slavicists of the multivolume Dictionary of Slavic Antiquities (vols. 1–4, 1961–72—). Slavic-German relations have been studied in Czechoslovakia by Z. Fiala, in Poland by J. Pajewski, Z. Wojciechowski, J. Gierowski, and K. Piwarski, and in Bulgaria by J. Paskalev and Kh. Khristov. The Yugoslav scholars M. Kos and F. Zwitter have investigated medieval German colonization in Slovenia and Slovene-German relations during the national revival, respectively.

In the field of medieval history in Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, studies have been carried out on the migrations of the Slavs to the Balkan Peninsula, the formation of the Slavs to the Balkan Peninsula, the formation there of early feudal states and cities, and Slavic-Byzantine relations. Scholars writing on these subjects have included D. Angelov, I. Duichev, and N. Todorov (Bulgaria) and G. Ostrogorskii (Yugoslavia). Studies of Serbian-Turkish, Bulgarian-Turkish, Bulgarian-Greek, Serbian-Greek, Croatian-Hungarian, and Croatian-Italian relations from the 14th to 19th centuries have been written; Slovak and Polish historians have investigated Slovak-Hungarian and Polish-Hungarian relations.

An important subject of Slavic studies in foreign Slavic countries is the history of the USSR: Russia, the Ukraine, and Byelorussia. Works on this topic have been written by L. Bazylow, M. Wawrykowa, Z. Młynarski, P. Łossowski, W. Sliwowska, A. Podraza, and A. Pope (Poland) and by B. Zástĕrová (Czechoslovakia). S. Kieniewicz has investigated Russo-Polish relations and revolutionary ties. The joint Soviet-Polish publication of documents on the Polish Uprising of 1863–64 is continuing. Such Polish historians as H. Batowski have become concerned with the modern and recent history of the Balkans and Austria-Hungary. In Czechoslovakia, successful work is being achieved on Russian-Czech economic ties prior to the late 18th century and on Russian-Czech cultural and political relations from the late 18th to 20th centuries by H. Amort, V. Král, J. Vávra, and V. Čejchan. Studies have been made on all aspects of Polish-Soviet and Czechoslovak-Soviet relations, including the participation of Polish and Czechoslovak internationalists in the October Revolution of 1917.

Historians and cultural historians working in the field of Russian-Bulgarian and Russian-Yugoslav relations during the period of feudalism and especially in modern times include I. Snegarov, A. Vasilev, and P. N. Rusev (Bulgaria) and B. Pavilević, D. Perović, and V. Mišin (Yugoslavia). Scholars in Yugoslavia and Bulgaria (V. Khadzhinikolov) are investigating the history of Soviet-Bulgarian and Soviet-Yugoslav relations and cooperation.

In the postwar period, literary criticism has dealt intensively with the general processes of development of the Slavic literatures and the problems of their interrelations with Russian and Western European literatures. Scholars active in these areas have included J. Dolanský, K. Krejči, A. Mraz, D. Ďurišin, S. Wollman, R. Parolek, and M. Pisút in Czechoslovakia; W. Jakubowski, T. Grabowski, M. Jakubiec, M. R. Maionowa, and B. Białokozowicz in Poland; E. Georgiev, V. Velchev, S. Rusakiev, and P. Dinekov in Bulgaria; and J. Badalić, A. Flaker, V. Vuletić, Dj. Živanovič, Dj. Trifunovič, S. Subotin, and M. Pavić in Yugoslavia. The Prague and Polish schools of poetics and folklore (the former represented by Mukařovský), through their study of the national literatures proper, arrived at a number of conclusions in general literary criticism.

Folklore is being systematized and published in Poland by J. Krzyżanowski and in Bulgaria by Dinekov, as well as in Yugoslavia.

The subject matter and volume of works in Slavic linguistics have expanded. Works in this field include those on traditional comparative problems by I. Machek, Z. Stieber, and F. Sławski in Poland, K. Horalek and V. Machek in Czechoslovakia, V. Georgiev and I. Lekov in Bulgaria, and R. Bošković, S. Ivšić, P. Skok, and F. Bezlaj in Yugoslavia and on problems of structural description of languages by B. Havránek in Czechoslovakia, W. Doroszewski in Poland, P. Ivić in Yugoslavia, and L. Andreichin in Bulgaria. Lexicographic work has acquired broad scope, with the compilation of etymological and dialectal dictionaries. Studies are appearing on linguistic geography (A. Zaremba, M. Karaś, Z. Stieber, and K. Dejna in Poland; S. Utĕšený in Czechoslovakia; S. Stoikov in Bulgaria) and ono-mastics (J. Šmilauer in Czechoslovakia, S. Rospond and W. Taszycki in Poland, F. Bezlaj and M. Pavlović in Yugoslavia, and V. Georgiev in Bulgaria).

A major scholarly event was the work on the Pan-Slavic Linguistic Atlas, with the participation of academicians from all Slavic countries, including the USSR.

Slavic studies in Hungary, Rumania, and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) are developing in close contact with the field in the USSR and other Slavic socialist countries. A great deal of attention in these three countries is being devoted to the study of Slavic-Hungarian, Slavic-Rumanian, and Slavic-German (particularly Russian-German) political, economic, and cultural relations and linguistic ties. Among those active in these areas are J. Perényi, E. Niederhauser, I. Dolmányos, I. Kniezsa, Z. Balecki, L. Hadrovics, and O. Asbóth in Hungary; E. Petrovici, J. Pătruł, G. Mihăilă, and D. Bogdan in Rumania; and S. Michalk in the GDR. Particular attention is being paid to the study of the revolutionary events of 1848–49 and the nature of relations in this period between the Hungarians and Slavs (E. Andics, A. Modi). Studies and publications are appearing on questions on Hungarian and Rumanian foreign policy in the interwar period (E. Campus and others in Rumania) and during World War II (the departure of Rumania and Hungary from the Hitlerite coalition; those countries’ struggle, together with the Slavic peoples, against fascism), and also questions of the cooperation of Hungary and Rumania with the Slavic socialist countries in the postwar period (P. Con-stantinescu-Iaşi, I. Cupşa, and G. Matei in Rumania; and S. Tóth in Hungary.

An important place in Slavic studies in the GDR is occupied by criticism of West German historiography on Slavic subjects (B. Spiru, F. C. Henzen, E. Wolfgram) and by the study of German relations with Russia (B. Widera, K. F. Grau), the Soviet Union (L. Stern, A. Norden, G. Rosenfeld), Poland (I. Kalisz, W. Basler, J. Maj), and Czechoslovakia (G. Peikert, K. Obermann), and also Russo-German scholarly ties (E. Winter, J. Tetzner, and G. Mormann). The study of the history, language, and culture of the Wends is widespread in the GDR, and the archaeological study of the Polabian and Baltic Slavic peoples has begun (F. Metsch, J. Scholta, N. Schiller, and J. Bračkačk). The Slavists of the GDR have made a significant contribution to the study of Slavic toponymics (R. Trautmann, R. Fischer, and E. Eichler) and the study of Slavic-German, particulary Russo-German, literary ties (G. Ziegengeist, G. Grasshoff, H. Raab, E. Reisner, and E. Winter), and of philological and linguistic problems (R. Eckert, H. Bielfeldt, and P. Letsch).

In the capitalist countries, major centers of Slavic studies in the interwar period were the French Institute of Slavic Research in Paris (directed by A. Meillet and A. Mazon), the departments of Slavic studies in Leipzig and Berlin that were organized by prewar Germany (directed by Trautmann and M. Vasmer) and the German university in Prague (H. Hezeman, E. Šnevejs, and others). In addition to journals, the Slavic scholars at these institutions published a number of monographs on Slavic history, ethnography, philology, and linguistics (the French scholars F. Dvornik, A. Vaillant, L. Tegnier, J. Patouillet, and P. Pascal; the prewar German scholars P. Diels, G. L. Weigand, and M. Braun). In the interwar period scholarly Slavic studies were initiated in Italy (E. Lo Gatto, G. Maver, and A. Cronia), the Scandinavian countries (R. Ekblom, A. Stender-Petersen, H. C. Stang), Great Britain, and the USA.

After World War II (1939–45) the number of departments and institutes of Slavic studies in Western Europe and the USA grew significantly. In the USA, Slavic studies developed partly because of the attraction of European scholars (R. Jakobson, W. Lednicki, K. Taranovsky, B. Unbegaun, H. Birnbaum, and N. Pribić), and particularly through native personnel (W. B. Edgerton, D. S. Worth, E. Stankiewicz, and H. Lunt). Excluding the works on so-called Sovietology, which have caused considerable harm to scholarship, American Slavic studies attained a certain success in solving a number of problems.

Objectivity of research is inherent even in the work of many Slavists of the Federal Republic of Germany (M. Braun, E. Koschmieder, R. Olesch, A. Schmaus, and L. Müller). French Slavists, among them A. Granjard, R. Portal, J. Patouillet, J. Veyrenc, J. Lepissier, and P. Gardet, are continuing their studies of the Slavic countries and of their history, language, and literature. Interest in Slavic studies in Italy has grown (E. Gasparini, R. Picchio, B. Meriggi, S. Graciotti, C. Verdiani, and F. Venturi). English Slavic studies in the postwar period has also achieved considerable success in the works of W. K. Matthews, S. Konovalov, B. Unbegaun, and R. Auty. The traditions of the department of Slavic studies at the University of Vienna, one of the oldest such departments, are being continued in Austria by J. Hamm, F. W. Mares, A. V. Isačenko, G. Hüttl-Worth, and G. Wytrzens.

In other capitalist European countries, Slavic studies is represented by fewer scholars, but their level of scholarship is high: V. R. Kiparsky, I. S. Vahros, and E. Nieminen (Finland), K. O. Falk and G. Jakobsen (Sweden), C. S. Stang and A. Hallis (Norway), and C. Stief and G. Svane (Denmark). Slavic studies are developing in India, the Near East, and Australia.

The international Slavic conferences organized by the International Committee of Slavists, working with national committees, have been of great significance in the development of Slavic studies. The first congress was held in Prague in 1929; the second, in Warsaw and Kraków in 1934; the third, in Belgrade in 1939 (not held; materials have been published); the fourth, in Moscow in 1958; the fifth, in Sofia in 1963; the sixth, in Prague in 1968; and the seventh, in Warsaw in 1973.

The main centers for Slavic studies are the Austrian Institute for the Study of Eastern and Southeastern Europe and the Institute of Slavic Philology and Archaeology in Austria; the Institute of Balkan Studies in Bulgaria; the Slavonic Society at Trinity College, Cambridge University, in Great Britain; the Institute of Wendish Studies under the Academy of Sciences of the GDR; the Institute of Slavic Philology in Italy; the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences; the Institute for Southeast European Studies under the Rumanian Academy of Sciences; the Institute of Slavic and Baltic Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR; the Joint Committee of Slavic Studies (USA); the Institute of Slavic Studies in France; the Society for the Study of Southeastern Europe in the FRG; the Institutes of History of European Socialist Countries of the Czech and Slovak Academies of Sciences; and the Institute of Old Church Slavonic Studies in Yugoslavia.

The main publications on Slavic studies are Wiener Slavis-tisches Jahrbuch (Vienna, since 1950), Etudes balkaniques (Sofia, 1964), Oxford Slavonic Papers (Oxford, 1950), The Slavonic and East European Review (London, 1922), Studia Slavica (Budapest, 1954), Letopis (Budišyn, 1952), Zeitschrift für Slavistik (Berlin, 1956), Scando-Slavica (Copenhagen, 1954), Ricerche slavistiche (Rome, 1952), Slavistica (Winnipeg, 1948), Pamie̦t-nik słowiański (Kraków, 1949), Rocznik Sławistyczny (Wrocław-Kraków-Warsaw, 1908), Slavia Antiqua (Poznań, 1948), Slavia Occidentalis (Poznań, 1921), Slavia Orientalis (Warsaw, 1952), and Romanoslavica (Bucharest, 1958).

Major publications on Slavic studies appearing in the Soviet Union are Sovetskoe slavianovedenie (Soviet Slavic Studies; Moscow, since 1965), Slov’ians’ke movoznavstvo (Slavic Linguistics; Kiev, 1958), Ukrains’ke slov’ianoznavstvo (Ukrainian Slavic Studies; Kiev, 1970), and Slov’ians’ke literaturoznavstvo i fol’klorystyka (Slavic Literary Criticism and Folkloristics; Kiev, 1965).

Other major publications on Slavic studies include Slavic Review (New York, since 1941), Südost-Forschungen (Munich, 1936), Zeitschrift für Slavische Philologie (Heidelberg, 1925), Slavia (Prague, 1922), Slovanský přehled (Prague, 1898), Slovanské štúdie (Bratislava, 1957), Byzantinoslavica (Prague, 1929), and Južnoslovenski filolog (Belgrade, 1913).


Dokumenty k istorii slavianovedeniia ν Rossi (1850–1912). Moscow-Leningrad, 1948.


Jagić, V. I. Istoriia slavianskoi filologii. St. Petersburg, 1910.
Ocherki istorii istoricheskoi nauki v SSSR, vols. 1-4. Moscow, 1955-56.
Sovetskoe slavianovedenie: Obzor literatury. Moscow, 1963.
Sovetskoe slavianovedenie: Literatura o zarubezhnykh slavianskikh stranakh na russkom iazyke, 1918-1960. Moscow, 1963.
Kravchuk, R. V. Z istorii slov’ians’koho movoznavstva. Kiev, 1961.
Koroliuk, V. D. “Sovetskie istoriko-slavisticheskie issledovaniia (1917–1967).” Sovetskoe slavianovedenie, 1967, no. 5.
Zlydnev, V. I. “Izuchenie zarubezhnykh literatur ν Sovetskom Soiuze (1917–1967).” Ibid.
Bernshtein, S. B. “Sovietskoi slavianskoi filologii 50 let.” Ibid.
Sovetskoe iazykoznanie za 50 let. Moscow, 1967.

V. D. KOROLIUK (history), N. I. TOLSTOI (philology) [23–1625–]

References in periodicals archive ?
Nevertheless, the existing translation cannot be recommended, mainly because, having been done during the Tito era, it was printed, according to the Yale South Slavicist and Krleza expert Ivo Banac, with its sharp comments about the Communists of the 1930s excised.
Importantly, Pelevin is discussed widely by Slavicists, but not in terms of magical realism.
Learned Slavicists have long fought against this false hypothesis about Bulgarian history (Veselinovic 1908:22).
His contribution to the array of bibliographic tools available to Slavicists is unequaled.