title: How Quickly They Forgot: Ivan IV in Muscovite Historical Memory
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Halperin, Charles J.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2018-04-04T14:48:33Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2018-04-04T14:48:33Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2018-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Halperin Ch. J. How Quickly They Forgot: Ivan IV in Muscovite Historical Memory. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. History, 2018, vol. 63, issue 1, pp. 223–243.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: 10.21638/11701/spbu02.2018.115
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/9289
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: This article deals with the history and historical memory of medieval Russia. Because sources
  written after the death of Ivan the Terrible (1533–1584) figure prominently in historical
  studies of his life and times, the accuracy of information about him in Muscovite historical
  memory is a vital concern. Meanwhile, no one has systematically posed this question as far the
  corpus of relevant sources as a whole is concerned. A comprehensive survey reveals that late
  sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Muscovite texts contain a significant number of historical
  errors. This article discusses the extent to which errors in later sources reflect ignorance of sixteenth-
  century Russian history. Authorial ignorance of Ivan’s reign must be taken into account
  in evaluating these sources. The author draws the conclusion that ignorance of Ivan’s reign in
  Muscovite historical memory was far greater than has been appreciated. This situation may be
  connected with a common feature of Russian culture: Muscovy remained a manuscript culture
  at this time. But the author draws another conclusion: this ignorance was probably not a product
  of Muscovy’s failure to join the Print Revolution. The virtual absence of print technology
  in Muscovy might not have been the cause of ignorance of the reign of Ivan Groznyi in Muscovite
  historical memory. The author “tentatively” formulated the following five observations:
  the transition to print was a process, not a rapid “revolutionary” change; typographical errors
  replaced scribal errors; bias, both dynastic and religious, dominated interpretations even in
  relatively accurate histories; Printing did nothing to eliminate ancient myths and legends in
  historiography; although printing could generate myths and legends about more recent rulers,
  it is possible that printed histories avoided the most fantastic myths and legends about more recent
  history. Historical memory is always selective, and errors of omission are just as erroneous
  as errors of commission.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. History;Volume 63; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Ivan the Terrible
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Muscovy
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: historical memory
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: printed books
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: manuscript sources
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: How Quickly They Forgot: Ivan IV in Muscovite Historical Memory
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 15-Halperin.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/9289/1/15-Halperin.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 681,4 kB