Writing a historical work on any issue of interest is impossible without taking into account existing knowledge and concepts, without their analysis and criticism, that is, the historiography of this topic. As a rule, the object of historiography is understood as historical science itself. However, there are other ways to read this concept. What is our historiography? The history is in this article.
It is necessary to immediately make a reservation that historiography is not only “the history of history.” This science can consider the stages of development of other disciplines. In particular, one can find works on the historiography of the natural sciences, literary criticism, linguistics, and so on. However, consideration of these forms of existence of historiographical science is not within the scope of this article.
Experts have identified several basic ways of understanding the content of the term “historiography”. In the broad sense of the word, it is understood as a specific scientific discipline that deals with the history of the emergence, development and functioning of various historical concepts and history as an independent field of knowledge. However, this does not exhaust the content of the term.
Firstly, historiography can be understood as the entire body of scientific work on a specific problem or a specific historical period. Secondly, it is possible to identify all scientific literature created in a particular region during a certain period of time, regardless of its content. In this way, for example, the liberal historiography of the Russian Empire of the mid-19th century can be distinguished. And not only. Also modern foreign historiography. The identification of such subsections is often based on the views of the researcher and is determined by his scientific attitudes.
The third option for defining the concept is based on the development of the science in question itself. Historiography can be called the totality of all works created on the history of the development of historical science.
The problem of the emergence of historiography
It is difficult to trace the history of the emergence of this section of knowledge. First of all, it is necessary to decide which works can be considered purely historical. And although most researchers agree that the origins of this science are Herodotus and Thucydides, folklore works cannot be ignored: mythology and epic. An example is the ancient Babylonian poem “On Who Has Seen Everything.” For a long time it was considered only as a work of oral folk art, subsequently written down, and reflecting only some of the realities of the society of that time. But then it was discovered that its main character, Gilgamesh, is a real historical figure, a king in the city of Uruk at the turn of the 27th-26th centuries BC. e. Thus, we can talk about the existence of a historiographical tradition in ancient times.
If we approach the problem from a more academic position, then it is necessary to recognize that historiography as an independent branch of knowledge was formalized and received its scientific apparatus only in the middle of the 19th century. Of course, this does not mean that some work and ideas on this topic did not exist before. In this case, we are talking about the institutionalization of such elements of science as methodology, problems, and there is an awareness of the specific tasks and goals of historiography.
Conditions for distinguishing historiography as a science
Some researchers believe that the division of the origin of history and historiography is erroneous. This opinion is based on the fact that when creating a historical work, its author was always guided by certain goals. And he turned to the experience of previous generations. That is, the birth of historical historiography occurred simultaneously with the creation of historical science as such. But it was precisely the relationship between the two disciplines that did not make it necessary to distinguish historiography as an independent discipline. This required the fulfillment of several conditions:
- Accumulation of sufficient knowledge in the field of theory and methodology of historical science.
- Formation of centers and schools that develop specific issues.
- The formation of a special layer of historians focused specifically on studying the past of their science.
- The emergence of special studies in historiography.
- Formation of a specific conceptual apparatus.
One more thing could be added to these conditions. The emergence of historiography as a science occurred spontaneously. This was due to the need of the liberal sections of society, and scientists in particular, to find new arguments in the fight against the Old Regime (this term refers to the order of the times of feudal society and absolutism). For this purpose, a critical examination of the historical works of previous generations was undertaken.
Objectives of historiography
The functioning of science is impossible without awareness of its goals. To achieve them, historians have to solve a number of problems, which brings them closer to the most adequate and accurate perception of the level, directions and features of the development of historical knowledge.
Briefly, the tasks of historiography are as follows:
- studying changes in historical concepts, features of their change;
- study of existing and emerging trends in historical science, study of the features of their methodology and analysis;
- understanding the essence of the process of accumulation of historical knowledge and its development;
- search and introduction of new sources into scientific circulation;
- finding ways to improve source analysis;
- study of institutions and schools engaged in historical research, as well as the system of training scientific personnel;
- dissemination of new scientific concepts and historical works, including in periodicals;
- studying the relationships between national historical schools, their influence on each other;
- analysis of the influence of existing conditions (political, economic, social) on the development of historical science.
The principle of historicism
In their essence, the general principles of historical science coincide with the principles of historiography. The most important of them were formulated back in the 19th century with the direct participation of Russian scientists. In particular, Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov formulated the fundamental principle of historicism: not a single phenomenon or event can be considered in isolation from the context in which it arose. In relation to historiography, this principle is implemented as follows: when criticizing an established direction or specific research, one cannot discount the level of development of the science of that time. Using a specific example, this can be illustrated as follows: one cannot deny the significance of the work of Herodotus only for the reason that he compiles his own observations and received rumors, practically without using the methods of scientific criticism. Firstly, in the 5th century BC. they simply did not exist, and secondly, this does not negate the possibility of correcting Herodotus’ information in accordance with other works that have come down to us from that era.
The principle of integrity in historiography
In the scientific discipline under consideration, he instructs the researcher to structure the study of the topic with an understanding of the systematic nature of the causes and conditions for the emergence of a certain scientific direction. When studying, for example, the works of Nikolai Ivanovich Kostomarov on the Western European Middle Ages, a scientist must take into account his concept of historical development, his system of views, and the methods he used to criticize the source.
As a special case of this principle, we can note the principle of partisanship that existed in Soviet historiography. Researchers of that time found out the political views of the historian being studied, his affiliation or sympathies with a particular party, and from this point of view assessed the significance of his works. At the same time, it was a priori believed that only the Marxist-Leninist theory of formations is scientific. Fortunately, in modern historiography this principle has been rejected.
Methods of historiography
In fact, the methodology of any research presupposes the presence of an arsenal of mental or experimental techniques for studying the chosen problem. In historiography, this is the past of historical science, which imposes certain specifics on general scientific methods. There are the following methods for a historiographer to obtain new knowledge:
- comparative-historical, that is, consideration of scientific concepts in order to clarify the common and different between them;
- chronological, which involves studying changes in concepts, ideas and approaches over time;
- method of periodization, which makes it possible to group changes occurring in historical science over a long period of time in order to highlight the most significant trends in scientific thought and their features in comparison with other periods;
- retrospective analysis, the essence of which is to search for residual elements, previously existing concepts in comparison with today’s ones, as well as comparing the conclusions obtained now and those formulated previously;
- prospective analysis, that is, determining the problems and range of topics for future historical science on the basis of currently available knowledge.
Features of pre-revolutionary domestic historiography
The identification of such a gap in the history of Russian historical science is based largely on political considerations and the desire of Soviet historians to dissociate themselves from previous concepts.
As in foreign historiography, the origins of Russian history are epic and mythology. The first historical works - chronicles and chronographs - usually began with a review of existing ideas about the creation of the world, and briefly provided information from world history, especially ancient and Jewish history. Already at that time, learned monks were raising programmatic questions. The chronicler Nestor directly states on the first pages of the Tale of Bygone Years that the purpose of his work is to clarify the origin of the Russian state and identify its first rulers. His followers worked in the same direction.
The historiography of that time was based on a pragmatic approach, most of the attention was paid to the personalities and psychology of rulers and significant persons. With the advent of the rationalist trend in science, these considerations faded into the background. M.V. Lomonosov and V.N. Tatishchev in their historical writings proceeded from the understanding of knowledge as the driving force of history. This affected the nature of their work. Tatishchev, for example, simply rewrote old chronicles, giving his comments to them, which later made it possible to speak of him as the last chronicler.
A significant figure for Russian history is Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. His “History of the Russian State” is based on the idea of the benefit of a wise autocracy for the country. The historian illustrated his idea by describing the crisis of Russian statehood and society during the period of fragmentation and, conversely, its significant strengthening under the strong figure of the ruler. Karamzin had already used special techniques for criticizing sources and provided his work with numerous notes, where he not only referred to sources, but also expressed his thoughts about them.
Contribution of 19th century scientists to the development of historiography
The entire enlightened society of that time was brought up on the work of Karamzin. It was thanks to him that interest in Russian history arose. New generations of historians, among whom S.M. Soloviev and V.O. Klyuchevsky occupy a special place, formulated new approaches to comprehending history. Thus, the first formulated for Russian historiography the main factors of historical development: the physical and geographical position of Russia, the mentality of the peoples inhabiting it and external influences such as campaigns against Byzantium or the Mongol-Tatar yoke.
Klyuchevsky is known in Russian historiography for the fact that, developing the ideas of Solovyov, he came to the conclusion that it was necessary to identify a set of geographical, economic, ethnic and social factors for each historical period and study their impact on the events that took place.
Historiography in the USSR
One of the consequences of the revolution was the denial of all scientific knowledge of the previous era. The basis for obtaining new historical knowledge was the Marxist principle of the staged development of society - the well-known theory of five formations. Previous studies were assessed with bias, since previous historians did not master Marxist methodology and were used only as an illustration of the correctness of new conclusions.
This situation remained until the mid-30s. The established totalitarian dictatorship sought justification for itself in the past, which is why works on the era of Ivan the Terrible and Peter I appear.
The historiography of problems of socio-economic development, the study of the life and everyday life of the masses constitute the most important achievement of historical science of that period. However, it should be noted that the obligatory quotation of the classics of Marxism, turning to them on any issue that they did not even consider, significantly reduced the quality of historical writings of this period.
In your workbook, indicate the names of the light microscope elements corresponding to the numbers in the figures:
Introduction.
Historiography as a science
People have always been interested in their past. History is a science that studies the past of human society. As a science, it took shape in the 18th century, although historical works were created before the 18th century, but they cannot be considered scientific. Period until the 18th century is the period of existence of historical knowledge (as opposed to historical science).
The process of accumulating historical knowledge is a necessary process that leads to the transformation of any knowledge into scientific knowledge. The task of historical science (as opposed to historical knowledge) is not only to describe events and reproduce historical facts, but also to explain them, generalize them, and highlight cause-and-effect relationships between events and patterns. Historical knowledge is transformed into historical science, first of all, thanks to the emergence of theoretical understanding. Instead of theology from the 18th century. The principle of causality and internal regularity comes first in historical research. In addition, the description of historical facts within the framework of scientific historical knowledge is also changing: it is carried out on the basis of a critical attitude towards sources. And finally, historians begin to theoretically comprehend and formulate the tasks of historical research. All these innovations appeared in the 18th century, so history as a science took shape precisely in the 18th century.
The term "historiography" comes from the Greek words history(narration about something) and count - I'm writing. Thus, Literally, historiography is translated as a written story about the past. For a long time, historians were called historiographers, using the term historiography as a synonym for historical works, historical literature. For example, N.M. Karamzin was the “official historiographer” of the Russian state. In this sense, the term “historiography” today is outdated and practically not used.
By the end of the 19th century. historiography emerged from history into an independent scientific discipline. Since that time, historiography (in the broad sense of the word) has been understood as a science that studies the history of historical science as a whole or in a particular country.
The concept of “historiography” can also be used in in the narrow sense words. In this case, historiography is understood as a set of scientific works on any topic. For example, the historiography of the Decembrist movement, the historiography of the First Russian Revolution of 1905-1907, the historiography of the Great Patriotic War, etc. A historiographic review on any topic includes not only a bibliography and listing of works, but also their analysis, critical analysis of the literature . At the same time, it is necessary not only to consider various historical works and concepts, but also to explain why in different periods of time precisely such theories dominated, precisely such topics were predominantly studied (or not studied), and precisely such cause-and-effect relationships were highlighted. But still, the basis of the historiography of individual problems is the history of historical science as a whole.
The subject of historiography in the broad sense of the word is historical science in its development. Historiography studies the development of historical science: the accumulation of factual material, attitude to the source, changes in topics, concepts of historical science. Therefore, the main sources of historiography as a science are the works of historians themselves, historical works, and materials of scientific historical conferences.
The specificity of historical knowledge lies in the fact that the historian studies the past. The subject of research for a historian is, first of all, objective reality itself, which breaks down into individual historical facts. Historical knowledge is retrospective in nature, that is, it is directed from the present to the past. The historian cannot perceive the past sensually. History, as a science, is based on facts that are the subject of research by professional historians. Historical fact- this is a real event, phenomenon. Since the historian was not a participant in the events being studied, his ideas about historical facts are formed only on the basis of historical sources.
Historical source- this is everything that is created in the process of human activity, carries information about the diversity of social life and serves as the basis for scientific knowledge. This is everything that was created in the society that the historian studies: monuments of material culture (tools, homes, buildings, household items, clothing, etc.) and, of course, written monuments: chronicles, legislative sources, actual sources , office documents (protocols, reports, etc.), statistics, periodicals, memoirs, diaries, etc. Scientific historical works are created only on the basis of sources (primarily written). Therefore, a historian must be able to work with historical sources, be able to identify objective information from them, using critical methods.
In addition, historical works are greatly influenced by the era in which the historian lives, his political and scientific views. All this makes historical knowledge quite complex.
The historian faces the following tasks:
Describe historical facts based on a thorough critical analysis of sources;
Explain why this or that event happened, trace cause-and-effect relationships between historical events;
Create a periodization of the historical process, a specific scheme of historical development;
Formulate and define the tasks of historical science and research methods.
At different times, events were explained in different ways. This was largely due to the methodology that underlay the historical research. Methodologists I is a theory of historical knowledge, a set of research methods. The term "methodology" comes from the Greek words methodos And logos Literally it means path of knowledge. The methodology of history in its content is, first of all, a system of certain ideological theoretical positions used by scientists as cognitive principles.
As society developed, new philosophical socio-political movements appeared that explained historical events in different ways: sentimentalism, Hegelianism, Marxism, positivism, neo-Kantianism. Depending on which one the historian adheres to, he may explain the same events differently. Therefore, works written by liberal historians and Marxist historians will differ from each other, even if they cover the same events.
Thus, it can be noted that the development of historical science is influenced by the following factors:
The level of socio-economic and political development of society. Of great importance is the time at which this or that historical work was written, since historical knowledge is the restoration of the past in the conditions of the requirements of the modern era. It is society that determines the leading concepts and research topics.
Philosophical and political views of the historian, his methodology.
Source base: publication of sources and the degree of accessibility of archival materials, as well as developed methods of working with sources.
All these factors are studied by historiography. Of course, when assessing a particular scientific concept, it is important to identify its significance, to determine what new this or that historian has contributed to the development of historical science from the point of view of theory, methodology, research methods, source base, and conclusions.
The range of tasks that historiography as a scientific discipline must solve is quite wide. The following tasks facing historiography can be identified:
To identify patterns and features of the development of historical science, to show its connection and dependence on the socio-economic and socio-political level of development of society.
Consider government policy in the field of historical science and education;
Study the activities of historical scientific institutions and the system of training historians;
Study the history of the development of research methods and techniques, the struggle of opinions in different eras according to fundamental theoretical and methodological principles;
Explore the process of accumulating factual knowledge about human society, introducing new sources into scientific circulation;
Monitor the improvement of criticism techniques and methods of working with historical sources;
Trace changes in the topics of historical research.
The study of historiography is of great importance in the training of historians. Knowledge of historiography helps when choosing a research topic. When justifying the choice of a topic for scientific research, it is necessary, first of all, to analyze all the available literature on the selected period and issue, noting the most unstudied problems, after which the topic and objectives of the study can be finally formulated. In addition, in the course of his work, the historian always has known material that is formed in the course of the previous development of historical science. It contains not only previously accumulated facts, but also assessments, conclusions, and concepts. And before you formulate your vision of the problem or support an existing concept, you need to know all the assessments and opinions expressed in the scientific literature.
The term “historiography” consists of two Greek words: “history”, i.e. reconnaissance, research of the past and “grapho” - I write. The concept of “historiography” is not unique.
Historiography 歴史学 - in the broad sense of the word - is an auxiliary historical discipline that studies the history of historical science. Historiography examines the correct application of the scientific method when writing a historical work, focusing on the author, his sources, the separation of facts from interpretation, as well as on the style, author's preferences and the audience for which he wrote this work in the field of history.
In the narrow sense of the word, this is a body of research in the field of history devoted to a specific topic or historical era (for example, historiography of the Tokugawa era), or a body of historical works that have internal unity in ideological, linguistic or national terms (for example, Marxist, Russian-language or Japanese historiography) .
I would like to draw your attention to one more circumstance. The term “historiography” often refers to historical literature on any issue, problem, or period. In this sense, it is customary to talk about the historiography of feudalism, the historiography of the Great French Revolution, the historiography of the peasant reform of 1861 in Russia, etc.
The term “historiography” is also used as a synonym for historical works, historical literature in general. Based on this understanding, in the last century, authors of historical works were called historiographers.
It is important to take into account that historiography or the creation of written works on history is not inherent in every society. Before the advent of writing, of course, written history did not exist either: the events of the past were reflected only in oral folk art - folklore.
The idea of the subject of historiography developed gradually as the theory and practice of historiographic research developed.
History of historiography
In ancient times, even before the advent of writing, historical ideas and some elements of historical knowledge existed among all peoples in orally transmitted tales and traditions, in the genealogies of their ancestors. The emergence of classes and the state expanded the need for historical knowledge, and the emergence of writing made it possible to begin accumulating it. In early class societies, some conditions were prepared for the development of historical knowledge (for example, various chronology systems were developed), the first records of historical content arose: historical inscriptions (of kings, pharaohs), weather records of events, etc. Religion had a huge influence on the description and interpretation of historical events . All historical events were explained by the “will of the gods.” Such historical ideas were enshrined in “holy books” (for example, the Bible).
An important stage in the progressive development of historical knowledge was ancient Historiography
It found its highest manifestation in the writings of ancient Greek and then Roman historians. The works of these historians are no longer fragmentary, but a coherent, entertaining narrative, devoted primarily to political history.
from history (see) and Greek. grapo - I write, lit. - description of history) - 1) History of history. science, which is one of the most important forms of self-knowledge of human society. I. called also a set of studies devoted to a specific topic or historical era (for example, I. Chartism, I. Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union), or a set of historical studies. works that have internal unity in social-class, theoretical and methodological. or national attitude (French I., German bourgeois-Junker I., Marxist I.). 2) Scientific discipline that studies history. science. 3) In its broadest (and less commonly used in modern language) meaning, I. is called history itself. science (hence a historiographer is the same as a historian) - see History. -***-***-***- History of historical science Main stages of development. In the report. slave owner and feud. societies when religion was dominant. worldview, history thinking almost did not go beyond a simple description of history. facts, mainly There was only accumulation of history. knowledge and development of history. representations. The process of transformation ist. knowledge into science, the formation of history as a science took a significant part in history. period. Even individual ancient historians, and then during the Renaissance of humanistic history, took the very first steps in this direction (the emergence of scientific methods of research, a critical attitude to sources, elements of a rationalistic explanation of historical events). But the most important milestone was the beginning of scientific research. studying history is the era of the early bourgeoisie. revolutions in the West. Europe, marked by a revolution in history. thinking - the understanding of history is finally freed from the church. put, a more or less developed idea of the laws of development of history arises, in history. representations include the idea of historicism, historical knowledge is separated into a special branch of the humanities. K ser. 19th century The process of becoming a bourgeois is being completed. ist. science, rapidly developing in the 2nd half. 19th century From the end of the 19th century. a new stage begins, associated with the transition of capitalism to the stage of imperialism and characterized by the beginning of the crisis of the bourgeoisie. AND.; further evolution of the bourgeoisie. The history of the era of imperialism is associated with the processes occurring in the bourgeoisie. ideology during the period of the general crisis of capitalism. However, the evolution of bourgeois. I. is only one aspect of the process of development of history. science. Another, defining side of it was the emergence and development of Marxist history. The most important milestones in the development of Marxist history. sciences are: the emergence of Marxism, as a result of which history for the first time received a consistently scientific. methodological basis; further development of Marxist methodology of history and Marxist history. concepts of V.I. Lenin, the development of the Marxist direction of history (in conditions when bourgeois historical science remained the dominant direction); transformation of Marxist India after the victory of Oct. revolution into the mainstream of history. science in the USSR, and after the creation of the world system of socialism - in other socialist countries. countries, strengthening in these conditions the Marxist trend in I. capitalist. countries An important phenomenon in the global process of development of India was the development of history in the countries of the East that were freeing themselves and freed from colonial rule (a process that became universal under the conditions of the collapse of the colonial system of imperialism after World War II). The accumulation of historical knowledge and the development of historical ideas in pre-class, slave and feudal societies. Even before the advent of writing. representations and certain elements of history. knowledge existed among all peoples in orally transmitted tales, legends, etc. Being a product of synthetic thinking and reflecting the ideas of the human collective about itself, about large historical sources. events, about the relationship of man to nature, the epic often reflected history in a mythological, artistically generalized form. facts. The selection of facts itself is an indicator of what seemed essential for the first beginnings of history. consciousness (labor processes, the struggle to master the forces of nature, the relationship of human groups, changes in their internal structure, etc.). Historical-critical. analysis allows us to detect traces of sources. presentations report. era in the editions that have come down to us. epic - "Mahabharata", "Ramayana", ancient China. "Book of Songs" ("Shi Jing"), in plural. Ancient Greek myths and epics "Iliad", "Odyssey", in some Russian. epics, etc. Transition from pre-class. society to class, the emergence of the state expanded the need for history. knowledge and in connection with the advent of writing (see Letter) made it possible to begin to accumulate it. This is evidenced by the sources. inscriptions of the kings of Sumer and Akkad, China. inscriptions of the Shang-Yin era, ancient weather records of events (chronicles) of early slave owners. state in Egypt, as well as the emergence of state, temple and private archives. Class-oriented selection and interpretation of history emerge. facts (inscriptions from the era of the Ancient and Middle Kingdoms in Egypt, glorifying the conquering campaigns of the pharaohs, inscriptions about the Urukagina reform in Lagash, other Persian Behistun inscription, etc.). Huge influence on the description and interpretation of history. events were provided by the other east. religious systems; all ist. events were explained by the “will of the gods.” East. the books of the Bible ("The Book of Kingdoms" and others) had a strong influence on the subsequent feudal-church. I. At the same time, in the slaveholding. The states of the Ancient East prepared certain conditions for the development of history. knowledge (creation and development of various chronology systems - see Calendar), chronological. systems, etc. The formation of certain forms of history is taking place. cit.: annalistics (chronicles), biographical. and autobiographical op., there is a complication and change in the forms of history. op. (for example, in Ancient China - from laconic inscriptions to chronicles in the form of a dry list of events and dates (1st Chinese chronicle "Chunqiu", 8th century BC), and then to commented chronicles). An important stage in the progressive development of history. knowledge was historical. ideas that arose in the ancient world and were associated primarily with the activities of the ancient Greeks. historians Herodotus and Thucydides. Although Herodotus has historical the narrative in the proper sense of the word has not yet been separated from the story containing information on natural science, geography, ethnography, literature, but the focus of its attention is precisely the presentation of history. events, united by a common concept (to describe the prehistory and history of the Greco-Persian wars) and containing a certain concept (it is characterized by coverage of historical events in the spirit of the ideology of Athenian slave-owning democracy and an understanding of history based on the idea of the decisive role in the lives of people of inexorable fate - Nemesis). In op. Herodotus, elements of history appear. criticism, an attempt to separate reliable facts from fiction. Attention to the document. validity of the narrative, refusal to explain history by the intervention of deities. strength, the desire to penetrate internally. the cause-and-effect relationship of events and on this basis to establish common features in the history of different peoples made Thucydides’s work “History of the Peloponnesian War” an important stage in the progress of history. knowledge. Covering primarily politics. history, rivalry between Greek. Mr. you, but partly also class. the struggle within these states, as well as certain elements of the history of social and economic. relations, the work of Thucydides was in many ways the pinnacle of history. thoughts of the ancient world, having a great influence not only on ancient history, but also on historians of modern times. East. liters Dr. Greece 4th-2nd centuries. BC e., significant in volume, in its research. level as a whole did not go further than Thucydides. The largest phenomenon in it was Polybius’s “General History” (2nd century BC), in which for the first time the history of not just one country, but all the most important countries of the Mediterranean conquered by Rome was outlined - for the first time the concept of world history arose. Significant importance in ancient history in terms of the development of historical forms. narratives had op. Sallust, Tacitus and Plutarch, the Crimea was characterized by a desire to explain events by the psychology of the persons participating in them, the use of portrait characteristics as a means of depicting history. eras. A special place among historians of the times of Rome. The empire is occupied by Appian (2nd century). “Of the ancient historians who described the struggle that took place in the depths of the Roman Republic,” F. Engels pointed out, “only Appian tells us clearly and distinctly why it was ultimately waged: because of land ownership” (Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 21, p. 312). The desire “...to get to the bottom of the material basis of these civil wars” was combined in Appian, as K. Marx noted, with the image of Spartacus “... the most magnificent guy in all of ancient history” (ibid., vol. 30, p. 126 ). Means. ist. op., created in ancient times, were "Historical Notes" ("Shi Ji") China. historian Sima Qian (turn of the 2nd-1st centuries BC) is the first generalizing work on the history of China. With the emergence of feud. society and right up to the appearance of the preconditions for the disintegration of feudalism, feudal-religious ideology was the force that determined history. thinking that hampered the development of history. knowledge. Permeated with ideas of strengthening the feud. social relations, exaltation of politics. and religious figures, history op. at that time they assessed the history. events as a result of the intervention of heavenly forces in the lives of people, they believed that the course of history was predetermined by the deities. will (providentialism). Initially the most common form of history. works of feud. I. most peoples had annals, then ch. Chronicles gained importance (in Rus', annals and chronicles corresponded to chronicles). “Stories” also appear (op. Jordanes, Gregory of Tours, Paul the Deacon, etc.), sources. biographies (for example, written by the Arabic historian of the 8th century Ibn Ishak, Frankish authors of the 8th-9th centuries Eingard and Tegan), hagiographies (see Lives of the Saints). The idea of a universal, world history is being revived (but already on a feudal-religious basis) ("The History of Prophets and Kings" by the Baghdad historian of the 9th - 1st quarter of the 10th centuries. Tabari), characteristic of Christian-feudalism arises. I. middle-century. In Europe, the periodization of history according to the “four monarchies”, which lies, for example, at the basis of op. German chronicler of the 12th century Outflow of Freisingen. Due to the limitations of religions. worldview, the authors of chronicles and annals could, as a rule, highlight only the external. connections between phenomena in the form of their chronological sequences; hence the form of weather recording of events (“chronicle”); their authors, as a rule, lacked criticism. relation to the source. Middle-century chronicles and annals often contained processed works. folklore and literature, being synthesized cultural and social monuments. thoughts. An important cultural and historical monument of Dr. Rus' is the Tale of Bygone Years (early 12th century), which had a great influence on the entire subsequent feud. I. middle-century. Rus'. One of the characteristic types of feud. I. China (as well as certain other countries of the Far East) were (until the 19th century) the so-called. dynastic stories. Complication of the structure of the Middle Ages. society, urban growth, aggravation of class. struggle, the process of feudal centralization. state - all this expanded the circle of history. phenomena covered in chronicles (chronicles). The number of chronicles is increasing, different types are emerging, and the principles of selection and interpretation of facts are becoming more complex. material, political intensifies. biased description. Such genres of history are developing. op., like memoirs, that is. History textbooks and anthologies are becoming widespread. Gor. chronicles, remaining on feudal soil. I., are, however, largely secular in nature (like all urban culture). Some from the mountains. chroniclers, unlike the majority of the Middle Ages. historians described the people with sympathy. movements. In this regard, the Parisian Jean de Venet narrates the Jacquerie; democratic sentiments manifested themselves in the Novgorod and Pskov chronicles. The process of liquidation of the fief. fragmentation leads to the emergence of a common state. chronicle collections that substantiated the need for state. unity and strong center. authorities. These are the “Great French Chronicles” (13-15 centuries), “General Spanish Chronicle” (13-14 centuries), Moscow Chronicles of the 15-16 centuries. etc. These same ideas find vivid expression in other forms of history. op. (for example, “Memoirs” of F. de Comines, which had a significant influence on French political literature of the 16th-17th centuries). Exacerbation of social contradictions feudal. society is reflected in different understandings of the meaning of history. If feudal-Catholic I. Zap. Europe, guided by the ideas of Augustine, considered the future of humanity in terms of the inevitable end of its earthly history, followed by the “pacification of the righteous” in the “kingdom of heaven,” then, expressing the ideology of the masses fighting against feudal rule. oppression, Joachim of Flora put forward in the 12th century. concept of history the development of humanity from slavery to freedom (clothed in mystical form). This concept contained a statement about the inevitability of death and Catholicism. churches, and fief. state long before the end of the earthly history of mankind. A similar understanding of the course of history is characteristic of many ideologists of the peasant-plebeian opposition to feudalism, expressed in cf. -century heresies. Later, in conditions of a sharp aggravation of the anti-feudal struggle in the Czech Republic in the 15th century. and Germany of the 16th century, socialist history emerges. theories consistently hostile to feudalism. Their pinnacle was the concept of Thomas Münzer, who put forward the idea of revolution. destruction of class. inequality and private property. A turning point in the development of history. knowledge on the way to overcoming feudal-religious. concepts and feud. methodological principles of understanding history was the emergence of humanistic. I. of the Renaissance, associated with the emergence of early capitalist. relations in the West Europe. Created by Italian philosophers and historians of the late 14th-16th centuries. humanistic I., however, had its predecessors far beyond the borders of Italy. The largest Arab. historian of the 14th century Ibn Khaldun in the "Introduction" to the extensive history. The work “Book of Examples on the History of Arabs, Persians, Berbers and the Peoples Who Lived with Them on Earth” developed philosophical and historical ideas that were largely at the level of the views of the leading representatives of humanistic history in Italy. Rejecting explanations of history from the standpoint of religious ideology, Ibn Khaldun viewed history as a constant change in the life and morals of people, as a continuous process of the rise and fall of states. Believing that he “penetrated the study of particular phenomena through the gates of general causes,” Ibn Khaldun attached particular importance to the influence of geography. environment on the history of society. Humanistic I. in Italy, represented by the names of L. Bruni, F. Biondo, N. Machiavelli, F. Guicciardini and others, decisively broke with feudal-theological. interpretation of history development. She looked for an explanation of history within herself, posing the question of her internal. laws and believing that they are determined by human nature. Turning to a person, to his interests and motives for his activities, the most outstanding representatives of humanistic. I. (Machiavelli, Guicciardini) saw the driving force of history. process in politics the struggle of parties and social groups that replaced each other at the helm of the state. authorities. Although humanist historians extremely exaggerated the role of the individual in history, they paid almost no attention to the actions of the masses and limited themselves almost exclusively to politics. history, but such a secular approach to history. events was a huge progressive step in the development of history. For humanist historians, the reliability of history. knowledge was determined by its evidence, as well as the possibility of a rational explanation of history. events. This resulted in great attention to issues of historical criticism. sources, which in the hands of humanist historians was a powerful weapon for overcoming the concepts and ideas developed by feudalism. I. Attention to evidence gave rise to the emergence of scientific. apparatus in op. a number of humanist historians. The beginning of philology was laid. criticism (L. Valla), the beginnings of archeology arise, history. topography (F. Biondo). A huge role in the development of humanistic. I. and I. of subsequent times were influenced by the invention (mid-15th century) and the spread of printing. Showing the inconsistency of what prevailed in Wed. century ideas about the “continuity” of existence Rom. state, representatives of humanistic. I. proved the qualitative originality of antiquity in comparison with the subsequent period (the dominance of feudalism), to which they contrasted modern times. them the era. Thus, the foundations were laid for a new - three-part - periodization of history (ancient, middle and modern history); this periodization has been completed. recognition only in the 18th century. A new understanding of history by humanist historians would be impossible without the achievements of humanism. Philosopher and political thoughts, without success in the field of linguistics, without a deep study of ancient culture, and most importantly - without the study of modern times. im ist. experience, which for the first time revealed in Italy the transient nature of feudalism and the political policies generated by it. and ideological. systems Humanistic I. had a pan-European character. Its prominent representatives outside Italy were W. Camden, F. Bacon in England, J. Wimfeling, S. Frank and others in Germany. Franz. political the thinker J. Bodin made an attempt to reveal the laws of history. development and connect them with more general laws, to which the world is subordinated; he was the first to systematize the question of the influence of nature on history (which had already been raised by ancient writers). Humanistic I., having undermined the monopoly of feudal I., was unable to completely overcome the latter, because in the 16-17 centuries. in most countries its social base was preserved, relying on the feud. I. waged a fierce struggle with a new understanding of history. In this struggle, representatives of the feudal-absolutist I. for new equipment of the factual. the material of their views was used by certain methodologists. principles put forward by humanist historians. Representatives of feudal-absolutist history paid great attention to the collection, systematization and processing of sources in accordance with their history. representations. This led to the appearance in the 17th century. auxiliary historical disciplines, such as diplomacy, paleography, etc., to the creation of extensive publications of documents (publications undertaken by Bollandists, Maurists, Baluz, etc.). This activity posed reactionary tasks - the defense and glorification of Catholicism, but it objectively had a certain scientific significance, i.e. K. contributed to the improvement of private methods of source analysis and made a huge mass of medieval documents available for study. The formation of history as a science. In the long process of the formation of history as a science, a huge role belongs to the ideological movements of the 17th and 18th centuries that arose in the era of the early bourgeoisie. revolutions in Europe and related to the further development of the bourgeoisie. ideology. 17th and especially 18th centuries. are characterized by decide. fight against feudal-religious worldview, persistent searches in the field of general laws of development of human society - scientific attempts. approach to history. In overcoming feudal-religious worldviews as methodological. basics of history Enlightenment education was of great importance in thinking. Despite the fact that in various countries this education had significant features, it had certain common features. It was part of a broad ideological and political agenda. and philosopher currents in society. thoughts of the era of rising capitalism, when the focus of all social life was the struggle against the feudal-absolutist system in all its manifestations, clearing the way for the bourgeoisie. development. In conditions of underdevelopment of contradictions bourgeois. social-economic relations, the struggle for liberation from the medieval, feudal in its essence, worldview, against feudalism. society and political system determined the general ideological basis of the views of historians-enlighteners, with all their often very significant theoretical and methodological. discrepancies. Decisive for the formation of history. the views of the enlighteners had the most acute socio-political. struggle of the early bourgeois era. revolutions. Theoretical understanding by educators of achievements in the field of modern science. Natural science and technology have fertilized them with history. thinking with philosophical conclusions drawn on this basis. French figures Enlightenment of the 18th century, which was a classic. zap form The Enlightenment as a whole raised the question of laws in history with a clarity unknown until then. Their predecessors were Dutch and English. thinkers of the 17th century (G. Grotius, T. Hobbes), who made attempts to create theories of societies. development based on the so-called "social physics", natural law theory and other rationalistic. theories. Italian the thinker J. Vico made the first deep attempt to embrace the entire history of mankind as a process determined by a strict pattern, and put forward the idea of a cycle in history. Franz. Enlighteners, approaching the problems of history from the standpoint of rationalism, looked for the laws of history either in the rational essence of man, or in the interaction of human society with nature, or mechanically likened the laws of history to the laws of nature. For all their metaphysics. and idealistic. the limitations of the research of educators in the field of history. patterns were of great importance for the development of history as a science. The Enlighteners put forward the demand for the creation of a universal history of mankind, based on the recognition of the unity of the destinies of the human race, and the associated principle of comparative study of the history of all peoples (Voltaire); the theory of the “state of nature”, which states that at the beginning of history. development, man was only a part of nature (Rousseau); the idea of continuous progress, which affirms history as the essence. the process of the movement of humanity along an ascending line from lower to higher forms of social life (found its most complete embodiment in Condorcet); the doctrine of the influence on social development of natural geography. environment (Montesquieu). The first b. were directly related to the experience of revolutions. or m. certain attempts to give I. materialistic. basis, in particular the emergence of the idea that the forms of the state and its institutions depend on the distribution of property in the state (J. Garrington - on the experience of the English revolution, A. Barnave - on the experience of the French revolution). Rejecting politics as the only object of study. history, representatives of educational history believed that the main subject of study for historians should be the history of culture, covering all aspects of the life of society and including the history of science, education, literature, economics, etc. English. educational I., which developed after English. bourgeois revolution and generally different political. moderation, gave in the works of its most prominent representatives W. Robertson and E. Gibbon a detailed coverage of anti-clerical and anti-feudalism. positions of important periods in the history of the Middle Ages. The most prominent figure in the educational philosophy of history in Germany, I. G. Herder, developed the ideas of unity and regularity of history. development, characterized by inconsistency, but moving towards a higher state - humanity. Herder's generally idealistic understanding of history included, however, certain elemental materialism. moments. New trends in the development of history manifested themselves in a unique way in Russia, which continued in the 18th century. remain a noble-serf. country. Liberation from religions. view of history, rationalism, understanding of history as a political. the history of the state is characteristic of V. N. Tatishchev, one of the largest representatives of Russian. noble I.; he tried to give a holistic scheme of Russian. history, which served his ideas of justifying the progressiveness of Russian. autocracy. The desire to explore national history within the framework of world history. a process in which periods of decline and prosperity alternate, revealing the repeatability of stages in the development of different peoples; a view of history as a means of educating citizens and patriots. qualities in Russian people are characteristic of history. views of M.V. Lomonosov. Further development of Russian. the history of noble history is associated with the names of M. M. Shcherbatov, I. N. Boltin, and others, and Boltin put forward the ideas of comparative history. method of studying history and cause-and-effect relationships. phenomena. In the 18th century in Russia, the beginning of collecting and publishing was laid. ist. sources (Tatishchev, N.I. Novikov and others - see article Archaeography). The revolutionary-enlightenment understanding of history found vivid expression in the views of A. N. Radishchev, who approached questions of history from the point of view of the revolutionary. struggle against autocracy and serfdom. This allowed him to approach history as a cyclically developing struggle between freedom and despotism and thereby substantiate the pattern of revolutions. revolutions in history. In contrast to the revolutionary understanding of history by Radishchev, noble-monarchical. I. in Russia (N. M. Karamzin, M. P. Pogodin and others) defended the thesis about the supposedly decisive role of the autocracy in Russia. history. In conditions of growing bourgeois revolutionary movements in the West Europe and the maturing crisis of serfdom. building in Russia Russian noble I. developed the idea of Russian identity. history as supposedly excluding the possibility of revolution in Russia. With strong criticism of the monarchy. Karamzin's concepts were advocated by noble revolutionaries - the Decembrists. Tl. opponent of educational history in Europe at the end of the 18th century - beginning of the 18th century. 19th centuries became reactionary romanticism, which originated and took shape as the ideology of the noble reaction to the French. bourgeois revolution, educational philosophy and ideology. In the development of an ideological and political ideology that is reactionary in its essence. basics of romance And the decisive role was played by E. Berk, J. de Maistre, F. Chateaubriand, F. Schlegel, K. L. Haller, A. Muller. Having set as its goal the rehabilitation of the Middle Ages, its inherent social and political. system and ideology, romantic historians resolutely rejected the idea of a coup, a revolution in history (this idea was clearly formulated and resolved by them in a reactionary-negative sense). They rejected rationalism. explanation of history by the enlighteners, they refused to see in nature. laws of human nature laws of history. Speaking out against will enlighten. I. with reaction. political positions, they at the same time rightly pointed to anti-ism. attitude of the enlighteners to the Middle Ages and insisted on the presence of internal. connections in all sources. eras. They believed that modern the condition of every people is the product of slow and lasting. ist. development (the idea of the so-called “organic development”), in which the “spirit of the people” is embodied. In this regard, the romantics put forward history as a priority task. research study of the qualitative uniqueness of the history of various peoples, clarification of the individual characteristics of history. phenomena. The ideas of romanticism became most widespread in Germany, where they influenced the study of the history of the state and law (historical school of law - Savigny, Eichhorn and their followers). East. the law school gave it away. the importance of studying history. sources and criticize them. A huge role in the development of critical research methods in history. science also played a role in their development in philology (F.A. Wolf) and especially scientific. activities in the field of antiquity. the history of A. Beck and, above all, B. G. Niebuhr. This made it possible, in particular, to begin creating serial publications of sources on the history of antiquity (Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum) and the Middle Ages (Monumenta Germaniae Historica), which are in many ways exemplary. Guided by theoretical and methodological Based on the principles of romanticism, the brothers J. Grimm and V. Grimm did a great job of studying the history of Germany. languages, mythology, folklore, customary law. With a romantic direction was connected with the formation of L. Ranke's school in Germany. East. Ranke's concept with its characteristic providentialism in the interpretation of history. process, the idea of the decisive role of ideas (primarily religious) in the development of society, the cult of a strong state, an apology for war, an assertion of the primacy of external affairs. politics over domestic, extreme nationalism had a significant impact on the Junker-Bourgeois. German I. If romantic. direction of I., despite all the reactionary nature of his politicians. ideas made in the first decades of the 19th century. a definite step forward in the development of history. knowledge, then even greater importance for the creation of history. sciences had philosophical-historical utopian concepts socialism, the philosophy of Hegel and the work of representatives of bourgeois liberal history. schools 1st half 19th century (especially in France). Fundamental ideas of the philosophy of history of utopianism. socialism were put forward by A.C. Saint-Simon. Among them: the necessity and relative progressiveness of each source. era and the social-political societies it generated. institutions dependent on property relations; inconsistency and unevenness of history. process, leading to a natural change in all social and state. forms; recognition of the economy and class. struggle - along with human reason and philosophy - the driving forces of history; ist. the inevitability of the transition to socialism. organization of society. Saint-Simon's idea of class. struggle, which arose from his generalization of history. French experience bourgeois revolution, was adopted by the French. bourgeois-liberal historians of the Restoration era - O. Thierry, F. Minier, F. Guizot, A. Thiers. “Since the time of the great French Revolution, European history has especially clearly revealed in a number of countries this real background of events, the struggle of classes. And already the era of the Restoration in France put forward a number of historians (Thierry, Guizot, Minier, Thiers), who, generalizing what was happening, could not help recognize class struggles as the key to understanding the entire French history" (V.I. Lenin, Soch., vol. 21, p. 42). These historians could not yet give scientific information. answers to the question about the origin of classes (for example, Thierry explained the origin of classes from conquests), identified the struggle of classes with the struggle of different nationalities. In addition, the image is liberal-bourgeois. historians, only the class acted as a natural one. feudal struggle society, the struggle of the "third estate" led by the emerging bourgeoisie against the feudal. aristocracy, a struggle that finds its completion in the transition of political. power to the bourgeoisie, and the class. They did not notice the struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie or considered it a violation of the normal, natural order. However, despite all this, the development of a specific history of France and England as a history of class. struggle led to scientific results of paramount importance. There has also been an expansion of source studies. source base Numerous studies have appeared. publications on socio-political history. Within the idealistic framework. philosophy of history is the most fruitful attempt to reveal the inner. the connection between continuous movement, change and transformation inherent in human history was undertaken by F.W. Hegel. In his picture of the development of human society, Hegel seemed to combine the idea of world history. progress put forward by the Enlightenment, and the principle of “organic development” put forward by the romantics. But the main thing was that Hegel introduced world-ist into the concept. dialectical process principle of development - history. development appeared as a struggle of opposing principles. This led to a significant enrichment of the historical methodology. research. However, Hegel's principle is dialectical. development was applied not in relation to the material development of society, but in relation to the development of the idea of the “absolute spirit”; Due to the idealism of his system, Hegel interpreted the internal connection of history. events as a constant desire for the implementation of an absolute idea. The scheme of world history proposed by Hegel, based on the idea of its essence as the progress of the consciousness of freedom, turned out to distort the true process of societies in its content. development (the division of peoples into historical and non-historical, the exclusion of most of the peoples of the East from the historical process, the proclamation of the history of the German peoples as the pinnacle of human history, the apotheosis of the Prussian militaristic state, etc.). It was this side of Hegel’s views that had the greatest influence on the reaction. direction bourgeois I., especially in Germany. At the same time, some historians accepted the progressive sides of Hegel’s teachings. The "Left Hegelians" D. Strauss and B. Bauer made a great contribution to the development of problems in the history of Christianity. However, the true heirs of everything revolutionary in Hegel’s teaching were Marx and Engels. Hegel's views had a great influence on the formation of the mid-19th century. liberal-bourgeois I. in Russia, represented in the field of general history by T. N. Granovsky, in the field of national history by S. M. Solovyov and others. For history. Solovyov's concepts were characterized by ideas about internal, "organic." patterns of history a process conditioned by objective (primarily geographical) factors, the supra-class character of the state, as the highest embodiment of the history of the people, is denied. attitude towards people speeches and to the revolution in general, understanding the struggle of opposites in history as a struggle of “tribal” and “state” principles. Soloviev believed that with the reforms of Peter the Great, Russia took the path of “Europeanization.” Ideas of the opposite of history. patterns in the West, where the development of society went “from below,” and in Russia, where the autocratic state allegedly acted as the “organizer” of society, classes and their relations among themselves, were developed by historians of the state school (K. D. Kavelin, B. N. . Chicherin, etc.) and obtained theoretical data from them. justification. Pre-Marxist scientific history. thought received its highest development in the revolutionary-democratic. history concepts. In its most consistent form, it was developed by Russian. revolutionary democrats based on revolution. ideology of struggle against autocratic serfdom. building, criticism of social antagonisms of capitalist. building in the West Europe. In the history In the views of V. G. Belinsky, A. I. Herzen, N. A. Dobrolyubov, N. G. Chernyshevsky, the approximation of history found expression. knowledge to materialistic understanding of history. Having mastered the achievements of pre-Marxist philosophy, history. and sociologist. thoughts in the West Europe, relying on the progressive traditions of Russian. philosophy and science, the revolutionary democrats saw the limitations of the liberal-bourgeois. theory class. struggle, Hegel's philosophy of history, rejected ideas about the possibility of socialism. transformations as a result of peaceful evolution (characteristic of Western European utopian socialists), subjected the noble and bourgeois to extensive criticism. I. in Russia (the theory of official nationality, the historical concept of the Slavophiles, public school). The core of the revolutionary democratic concept was the idea of the decisive role of the people. masses in society development, in the course of which the revolutionary is of decisive importance. the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressors. Socio-political The conclusion from this concept was the thesis of inevitability - as a result of the revolution. people's movements the masses - liberation from all types of social oppression. Ultimately remaining in the position of idealism in the field of methodology of societies. sciences, revolutionary democrats, at the same time, when raising the question of the objective laws of history, which they considered common to all peoples, attached special importance to the development of economics. everyday life, changes in socio-economic. position wt. Having shown the social conditionality of the interpretation of history by the nobles and bourgeois. historians, revolutionary democrats at the same time were convinced of the objectivity of the results of scientific history. knowledge. At the same time, they believed that the greatest objective truth of knowledge is ensured by considering history from a perspective. people's benefits. Revolutionary-democratic the concept of history largely contributed to preparing the conditions for the spread of materialism in Russia. understanding of history process. The emergence of Marxist historiography. Despite the meaning. progress ist. knowledge, all pre-Marxist history was characterized by idealism. interpretation of the main reasons for the development of society. With the discovery of materialism by K. Marx and F. Engels. understanding of history, their consistent spread of materialism to the area of societies. phenomena, history for the first time received consistently scientific. methodological basis. Being a turning point in the development of knowledge of societies. life, the discovery of materialism. understanding of history was based on the entire set of objectively true results of the cognitive activity of many generations of historians, philosophers and economists (representatives of classical bourgeois political economy - A. Smith, D. Ricardo, etc.). Speaking about the connection between the development of societies. science before Marx and the emergence of Marxism, V.I. Lenin wrote: “Since this science was built, firstly, by classical economists, discovering the law of value and the basic division of society into classes, - since this science was further enriched in connection with them, the enlighteners of the 18th century in the fight against feudalism and clericalism - since this science was moved forward, despite their reactionary views, by historians and philosophers of the early 19th century, clarifying even further the question of class struggle, developing the dialectical method and applying or beginning to apply it to social life - then Marxism, which has taken a number of enormous steps forward precisely along this path, is the highest development of the entire historical, economic and philosophical science of Europe" (Op. , vol. 20, p. 184). Having emerged and developed as a scientific generalization of “... the totality of revolutionary experience and revolutionary thought of all countries of the world” (ibid., vol. 21
THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES AND TECHNIQUES OF THE HISTORY OF HISTORICAL SCIENCE
HISTORIOGRAPHY AS A SCIENCE.
LECTURE 1
Historiography is the history of historical science. It appeared when the subject of its research already existed, that is, historical science. Before this, the term “historiography” meant historical science in general (1). So, in the 18th century. G. Miller had the title of court historiographer in Russia, and at the beginning of the 19th century. N. M. Karamzin. However, they did not engage in historiography, but created works on history.
When divergences between various historical schools, directions and movements were discovered, the need arose to analyze historical views. This happened in the first half of the 19th century. It was then that historiography emerged, and with it the methodology of history. From that time on, historiography began to be understood as the history of historical science itself.
Historiography is closely related to the history of society; it arises from the needs of social development. Historical science has at all times been both an instrument of knowledge and a means of ideological confrontation. Historiography is constantly dependent on the socio-economic and political processes occurring in society. At the same time, it has a reverse impact on the development of the history of society, as well as on historical ideas, which depend on what ideological and theoretical positions the historiographer adheres to.
Historiography as a science differs significantly from historical bibliography, although even today there is often a mixture of these two scientific disciplines. M.V. Nechkina emphasized that “without detracting from the great auxiliary importance of historical bibliography for research work, we must clearly distinguish ourselves from historiography: it only registers and classifies historical literature - an important source for historiography and nothing more” (2).
Historiography is the science of the emergence and accumulation of historical knowledge, the transformation of knowledge into historical science, the development of various historical directions, trends and schools in accordance with their methodology and socio-political positions. Historiography studies the source base of the works of historians and their interpretation of sources.
The objective of the course in Russian historiography is to trace the entire process of development of historical knowledge and science throughout the history of Russia.
Historiography clarifies the leading trends in historical science. At the same time, it must be remembered that these goals are closely related to the position that the ideas of the ruling class in each era are dominant. This conclusion is fully applicable to historical science.
Historiography reveals the conditions for the development of historical knowledge and science, the alignment of class and socio-political forces, the severity of social and ideological contradictions. Without taking these circumstances into account, an objective assessment of the historical views of historians is impossible. At the same time, various directions of theoretical searches are highlighted, the confrontation between various ideas and schools is shown.
Historiography is part of the science of science and at the same time part of the history of spiritual culture. It is located at the intersection of two sciences: history and the history of social thought, hence its importance and the extraordinary prospect of new discoveries. In this respect, historiography can be compared with the history of philosophy.
One of the important aspects of historiography is to understand what a “historiographic source” and a “historiographic fact” are.
The source for the historiographer is, first of all, research in the field of history - monographs, dissertations, articles, scientific reports, theses, reviews, etc. In addition, materials from personal funds of historians, their correspondence, and memoirs can be used as a historiographical source.
A historiographic fact is the assessments, views, and thoughts of authors about history.
So, without research in the field of history, there can be no historiography as a science, just as there can be no history of physics, chemistry, literature without the presence of knowledge produced in these branches. Historiography studies not only the result of research, but also the research process itself. To understand the essence of the research, we must be interested in the very progress of the research, the creative laboratory of the scientist, and the process of creation. Of course, we are talking here about both technology and research methodology.
In our time, historiography has become both an academic discipline and a scientific approach to solving a problem (scientific ethics requires compliance with these conditions).
Dissertators write historiography on the topic of research, students conduct their first historiographic experiments while working on coursework and dissertations. The main task is to find out the degree of knowledge of the problem being developed and to contribute to the coverage of yet unresolved issues.
But the historiographic approach most often leads to the fact that the historian either joins or dissociates himself from his predecessors and draws his own conclusions based on new facts. This approach is completely justified.