ИСТИНА |
Войти в систему Регистрация |
|
ИПМех РАН |
||
In the present paper, drawing on the example of Anatolii Bogdanov (1834–1896), one of the most original and industrious figures in Russian science of the second half of the 19th century, I analyzed the factors that made this popular man of science essentially invisible for Soviet historians of science. To understand the reasons for this first of all we have to pay attention to some particular qualities of Soviet official ideology. The Soviet state successfully coped with gender problems opening wide possibilities for women in science and higher education but in the meantime it created new invisibilities covering activities and scientific contribution of the so called “bourgeois” scientists unfriendly to the Soviet power They included not only active scientists and thinkers who were exiled from the country or left Soviet Russia but also science actors of Imperial Russia who had nothing to do with the Soviet state but were considered reactionaries. This was the case of Bogdanov who during his lifetime had a misfortune to provoke displeasure of some of his liberal colleagues, especially Kliment Timiriazev who was an icon of Soviet ideology. Political changes of the 1980s helped to return many previously ignored names to Russian-language literature. But in Bogdanov’s case some additional factors were involved that prevented to fully appreciate his contribution. First of all it was a repugnance he had to time-consuming honourary duties, so that he eagerly passed them to other members of his projects. As a result some of his achievements were erroneously ascribed to the latter, as it was evidenced by the story of Ethnographic exhibition and museum and Polytechnic Museum. Moreover, after Bogdanov’s death some of his students were eager to play down his contribution to strengthen their own leading position in anthropology. These and other facts that led to underestimation of Bogdanov’s work will be analyzed using extensive archival and published sources.