The Intellectual Legacy of V.I.Picheta (1878-1947) : Historiographical Study

My research is devoted to the intellectual heritage of the Russian historian Vladimir Ivanovich Picheta (1878-1947). This topic is relevant because at present, within the framework of intellectual history, the study of a person in the context of his creativity is in demand. This topic also touches on the Author's current problem – to what extent he is in relation to the text. The "death of the author" is now more likely to be perceived as a reflection of the situation in the humanities of the 1970s, but now, on the contrary, they are talking about the return of the author . In addition, the relevance of the topic lies in the fact that it embraces the period of the two world wars, which causes very great interest, many disputes and questions. Especially in this vein, the problem of a person's fate, his strategy, features of the path, etc. is relevant. These questions are touched by the topic of V. I. Picheta's intellectual heritage, since the years of his active work were just 1901-1947. In addition, in the person of V. I. Picheta, we find an interesting example of how a person managed to adapt to different political circumstances in that difficult time. In 1911, the historian, among a large group of liberal-minded professors, resigned from Moscow University in protest against the appointment of L. A. Kasso as Minister of Public Education, after the revolution he returned to the university, but then went to Minsk, where he became one of the founders and the first rector of the Belarusian State University. In 1930, V. I. Picheta was arrested on the so-called academic case, in 1935, after prison and exile, he returned to scientific teaching and even became the founder of the Department of Western and Southern Slavs, and the Institute of Slavic Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences. This is just a brief retelling of how V. I. Pichet "moved" from one position to another. And, in my opinion, the most interesting thing in this case is how, why, and with the preservation / loss of what, the historian moves from one "space" to another. How did being in opposition / disgrace / loyalty to the current political regime affect his professional activities? In addition, the historian also moved in real space – he worked at different times in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, both as part of the Russian Empire and as part of the USSR. This geographical dispersion is also reflected in the scientific interests of the historian. But what turns out to be primary? Whether V. I. Picheta was so actively engaged in the history of Belarus, if he had not been the rector of the university in Minsk for almost a decade?