Leo as a Literary Historian (Cultural-Historical School)
Leo as a Literary Historian (Cultural-Historical School)
Aleksanyan Aram
Summary
Key words: Buckle, scientific historiography, Leo, Hegel, geographical determinism, Mekhitarists, natural influences
The article examines the historical transition of Armenian literary criticism from the Enlightenment tradition to positivist criticism in connection with the development of modern science. Substantiating the positivist character of the historical interpretation of Armenian literature, Leo also emphasizes the continuity of Armenian literary schools.
Unlike many of his predecessors, Leo can be regarded as a representative of the positivist school of literary criticism. Building on the work of earlier scholars, he contributed to the shift in Armenian literary and historical studies from providential interpretations toward scientific explanations of cultural processes.
Leo argued that literature should contain a clear ideological tendency and be evaluated from a utilitarian perspective. Literary works, in his view, must express ideals of historical and social progress and provide a positive understanding of life and human nature. Such literature, aimed at the welfare of the nation, society, and humanity, may be described as a form of utilitarian realism grounded in utilitarian philosophical thought.