Keywords: narrative, historical space, Droysen, Classicism, Hellenism


The article is concentrated on the issue of great importance having two sides at once. This multifaceted issue comprises the episode of history of historical science of XIX century and theoretical aspect of its self-consciousness rise simultaneously. The last one hints to the roots of professional history establishment. Previously history used to be nothing but the reading of good style, or the selection of moral stories at least (both addressed to anyone). There was no special meaning of its orientation to non-existent Past and, thus, no understanding of the Past’s importance for mankind even if no connection with contemporary life was evident.

The constellation of newborn professionalism with two influential currents of thought of the period – romanticism and classicism – lied beneath this process. According to our research, these trends existed at the same time and showed out much interdependence. The issue of our main interest is the classicist research of Hellenistic world by German historian and methodologist Johann Gustav Droysen. The creator of new research subject, so-called Hellenism, he used the topic as the field of experiments. The number of novelties among working tools to deal with historical space (given in comparison to analogical ones in the output of another great German historian of the period, Leopold von Ranke) reveal the increasing possibilities of the representation of period non-corresponding to the view of ancient historians (never been able to spot Hellenistic world as integrity). No wonder that the inventions made by Droysen became acceptable for upcoming generations of researchers and got their further development. These aspects of the problem are touched in the article too. All the above mentioned aspects are significant for the development of modern theoretic history.


Ankersmit F.R. Historical Representation. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. 317 p.
Breisach Ernst. Historiography: ancient, medieval & modern. Chicago–London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994. 481 p.
Ka-Mei Cheng Eileen. Historiography: An Introductory Guide. London – New York: Continuum, 2012. 244 p.Ranke
Leopold von. The Theory and Practice of History. Indianapolis–New York: The Bobbs–Merrill Company, Inc., 1973. 515 p.
White Hayden. Metahistory. The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Baltimore–London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1975. 448 p.
Barg M.A. Kategorii i metody istoricheskoj nauki. Moskva: Nauka, 1984. 344 s.
Drojzen I. Istoriya ellinizma. Rostov-na-Donu: Feniks, 1995. T.1. 607 s.; T.2. 544 s.; T.3. 608 s.
Istoriya drevnego mira / pod red. I.M. D’yakonova, V.D. Neronovoj, I.S. Svencickoj. Moskva: Nauka, 1983. T.2. 576 s.
Ocherki po istorii mirovoj kul’tury; ucheb. posobie / pod red. T.F. Kuznecovoj. Moskva: Yazyki russkoj kul’tury, 1997. 496 s.
Savel’eva I.M., Poletaev A.V. Teoriya istoricheskogo znaniya: uchebnoe posobie. Sankt-Peterburg: Aletejya, 2007. 523 s.
Topol’s’kij Ezhi. YAk mi pishemo і rozumієmo іstorіyu. Taєmnicі іstorichnoї naracії. Kiiv: KIS, 2012. 400 s.
Shamu Fransua. Ellinisticheskaya civilizaciya. Ekaterinburg: U-Faktoriya, 2008. 480 s. (Seriya “Velikie civilizacii”).
Yakovenko Natalya. Vstup do іstorіi. Kiiv: Kritika, 2007. 376 s.
How to Cite
Chekanov, V. (2022). THE CREATION OF HELLENISTIC WORLD AS HISTORICAL SPACE (SOME OF COMPOSITIONAL METHODS OF J.G. DROYSEN). Zaporizhzhia Historical Review, 5(57), 21-26. Retrieved from
Методологія історії