General concept of history as a science. History as a science

1. The concept is the subject of historical science we can name all manifestations of human life, starting from the birth human society and until now. Respectively,the main task of history (its main purpose) should be considered knowledge (study and understanding) of the past of humanity - knowledge necessary for understanding the current state of human society and foreseeing its development in the future.
2. Such is the subject and purpose of history as a whole. But since the heritage of the past is enormous, and human activities are very diverse, it is almost impossible to cover them entirely. Therefore, in historical science there is specialization according to several principles:
– by time (chronological) coverage ; in the historical process, the main eras are distinguished (traditionally - primitiveness, antiquity, the Middle Ages, modern / modern times) and their individual periods;
– by spatial (geographical) coverage ; world history can be presented as the history of individual continents (history of Africa, Latin America), regions (Balkan studies, history of the Middle East), countries (Chinese studies), peoples or groups of peoples (Slavic studies);
– By various areas human activity (political, legal, economic, military, scientific, etc.).

In addition, historical science includes several special branches:archeology , studying the past from material sources;ethnography , studying living peoples and ethnic communities, their way of life and culture;source study , developing the theory and methodology of studying and using historical sources;historiography , studying the formation and development of historical science (history of history). There are also a numberspecial (auxiliary) historical disciplines , researching certain forms and types of historical sources. These include archaeography, genealogy, heraldry, historical metrology, numismatics, paleography, chronology, sphragistics, etc.
3. Development of historical knowledge. History, as a form of human knowledge, originated in the ancient world. Its roots go back to folklore and mythology, to the most ancient sacred texts of the East. The founder of history is considered to be the ancient Greek writer Herodotus of Thurii (c. 485–425 BC), who created the work “History” about the events of the Greco-Persian wars. Prominent historians of the ancient world also include the ancient Greek authors Thucydides (c. 460–396 BC), Xenophon (c. 430–355/54 BC), Plutarch (c. 45– 127 AD) and ancient Roman – Titus Livius (59 BC–17 AD), Cornelius Tacitus (c. 58–117 AD), Suetonius Tranquillus (c. 70–122 AD). At the same time (2nd–1st centuries BC) Sima Qian created his history of Ancient China.
In ancient times, historical knowledge was highly valued; it is no coincidence that the Romans called history “the teacher of life.” Interest in describing the past did not wane in subsequent centuries. However, in most cases, historical works of those times were purely descriptive in nature, intended to praise, edify, or even simply entertain. Thus, in antiquity, history was considered as one of the arts, closely related to literature, philosophy, and geography. One of the nine muses, Clio, daughter of Zeus and the goddess of memory Mnemosyne, was considered the patroness of history. The name Clio itself comes from the Greek word “I glorify,” which directly indicated her main task. In addition, the perception of history reflected in the historical works of antiquity was under the strong influence of mythological and religious consciousness. A striking example This can be illustrated by Western European medieval chronicles, literally permeated with the idea of ​​​​divine predestination. It is quite obvious that in such cases there is no need to talk about research in the modern sense of the word.
Only during the Renaissance (XV-XVI centuries) did European historical writers - such as Leonardo Bruni (1370/74-1444), Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527), Francesco Guicciardini (1483-1540) - first try, relying on criticism of sources and rational interpretation of facts, determine the internal patterns of the course of history. The real revolution in historical knowledge, with which the birth of history-science can be associated, occurred in the 19th century, when, with the advent and development of sociology, the first attempts were made to identify the structure of human society and consider human history as a single natural process. Further accumulation and systematization of concrete historical material, the development of clear rules for historical research and the gradual expansion of the previously relatively narrow scope of the subject under study led to the fact that from the second half of the 19th century. Historical science is gradually turning into an increasingly complex and extensive field of knowledge. Currently, the number of branches and areas of history is difficult to count.
4. Approaches and concepts . The question of by what laws and thanks to what the world historical process develops has worried historians of all times. There are many opinions on this matter, and all of them are vulnerable and imperfect to one degree or another. There are several main approaches to understanding history.
The most ancient aremythological and religious concepts . Within their framework, history is viewed as the result of the action of supernatural forces, as their whim or orderly plan. For example, in Christian church historiography, the essence and meaning of the historical process is considered to be the movement of humanity towards salvation, approaching God, spiritual progress, and the driving force of history is the divine will, directing the world to the final goal, God's providence (Latin providentia, hence the name of this historical and philosophical approach -providentialism ). Religious concepts are relatedobjective-idealistic philosophical concepts . Their adherents assign the main role in the historical process to objective superhuman forces - the Absolute Spirit (G.V.F. Hegel), the World Will (A. Schopenhauer), etc.
Subjectivist concepts present history as a series of deeds of outstanding personalities, focusing attention on the inner world of such people. Originating in antiquity and rising with the humanism of the Renaissance, this approach remains relevant to this day (“psychohistory,” a historical-biographical genre), and the question of the role of the individual in history remains open.
Within materialistic approach The theory of historical materialism of K. Marx and F. Engels became the most famous. According to her, world history represents an objective, progressive process of development and is subject to general laws, and the driving force of history is the progress of means and methods of producing material goods. The method of production (“base”) determines the social, political and spiritual life of humanity (“superstructure”), and shapes the appearance of the so-called socio-economic formation. All human communities go through five formations in their evolution: primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist and communist. Although the Marxist concept is strong in its integrity, clarity of the model of historical development, detailed development economic issues, it also has a number of disadvantages: a strict linkage of all historical phenomena to the economy, extrapersonal factors, absolutization of the role of conflict relations ( class struggle), social utopianism (inevitable communism at the end of development).
The Marxist approach can be characterized as world-historical (universalist) or linear - it proceeds from the fact that all humanity sequentially goes through the same stages of development that are mandatory for everyone (although it is possible that some regions or peoples lag behind in their development). An alternative to this view of history iscultural-historical concept based on an idea local civilizations, multivariate (pluralistic) historical development. According to this concept, human history is a set of histories of various civilizations (cultural-historical types) - historically established communities that occupy a certain territory and have characteristics cultural and social development. Each such community is original and unique. It is born, develops and dies, like a living organism, and the development of different civilizations is not synchronized in time. One of the founders of the cultural-historical approach was the Russian historian and sociologist N.Ya. Danilevsky (1822–1885; 1871 – book “Russia and Europe”), and the most prominent representatives of the concept are O. Spengler (1880–1936; 1918–1922 – book “The Decline of the West”) and A. Toynbee (1889–1975; 1934 –1961 – book “Comprehension of History”). The obvious advantages of such a view of history are that instead of an absolute hierarchy of countries (division into advanced, catching up, lagging behind), a relative one appears (each civilization is unique), that regional specifics are taken into account, and due attention is paid to spiritual and intellectual factors (religion, culture, mentality) . The disadvantages of the concept include the fact that the driving forces of the historical process and human history remain unclear. A unique solution to this problem was proposed by L.N. Gumilev (1912–1992), who connected the historical behavior of peoples with passionarity - a special biopsychic energy, the surge of which depends on cosmic radiation, leading to mutation of one or another part of the human population.
Finally, there is an approach that is an unattainable ideal for historians - the so-calledtotal or global history (F. Braudel and others). It is conceived as a synthesis of world-historical and cultural-historical approaches, a combination of their best qualities while eliminating shortcomings, as a study of all kinds of factors and the smallest details along with the identification of the most general historical patterns.
5. Principles and methods of historical science. The process of formation of historical science was inextricably linked with the improvement of the methodology of history, i.e. the whole complex of principles and techniques within the framework of which historical research is carried out.
The basic principles of scientific historical research include:
– principle of objectivity , which implies the reconstruction of historical reality based on true facts and knowledge of the objective laws of historical development. Each phenomenon must be studied, taking into account both its positive and negative aspects, regardless of the subjective attitude towards it, without distorting or adjusting the existing facts to fit pre-developed schemes;
– principle of determinism – a scientific approach, according to which all observed phenomena are not random, but have a cause, are conditioned by certain prerequisites, and all reality appears as a web of cause-and-effect relationships;
– principle of historicism , requiring consideration of the phenomenon under study, taking into account specific chronological framework and specific historical situation. In this case, it is necessary to consider the phenomenon in development, i.e. take into account what reasons gave rise to it, how it was formed and how it changed over time. It is also necessary to study each phenomenon in conjunction with other phenomena that took place during that period and developed over time, in their interrelation and interdependence (principle of the unity of the historical process );
– principle of social approach , implying the need to take into account the interests, traditions and psychology of certain classes, estates, social strata and groups, the correlation of class interests with universal human interests, the subjective moment in the practical activities of governments, parties, individuals;
– principle of alternativeness , allowing for the possibility of multivariate historical development. Guided by it, the researcher creates models of alternative development by comparing them with similar phenomena in world history, and determines the degree of likelihood of a particular event occurring. Recognizing historical alternativeness allows us to see untapped opportunities and learn lessons for the future.
Methods used in historical research can be divided into two groups: general scientific and special (special scientific). General scientific methods are divided intoempirical (observation, description, measurement, comparison, experiment) andtheoretical (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, abstraction, generalization, analogy, inversion, modeling, system-structural approach, building hypotheses). Special historical methods include:
– specific historical or ideographic method ; its essence is in the description of facts, phenomena and events, without which no research is possible;
– comparative historical method ; implies that the phenomenon is not studied in itself, but in the context of similar phenomena separated in time and space; comparison with them makes it possible to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under study;
– historical-genetic method ; associated with tracing the genesis – i.e. the origin and development of the phenomenon being studied;
– retrospective method ; consists of consistent penetration into the past in order to identify the causes of events;
– historical-typological method ; associated with the classification of objects of knowledge according to a selected characteristic (characteristics) to facilitate their analysis (in its pure form it appears, for example, in archeology, where extensive classifications and chronologies are built on certain types of tools, ceramics, jewelry, form of burials, etc.)
– chronological method ; provides for the presentation of historical material in chronological sequence.
In addition, historical research uses methods of other sciences that come to the aid of history within the framework of interdisciplinary interaction: linguistics, anthropology, biology, medicine, sociology, psychology, geography, geology, physics, chemistry, mathematics (statistics). A significant part of these methods is used through the mediation of source studies, in the process of expanding the source base.
6. Historical sources. Historical sources are the basis of any historical research, without which scientific knowledge of the past is impossible. Identification of sources, their systematization and analysis constitute one of the main components of historical science. These tasks are handled by a special discipline -source study .
There are many definitions of the concept of “historical source”. According to one of them underhistorical source refers to any object that directly reflects the historical process and makes it possible to study the past of mankind. In other words, a historical source is everything created or modified in the process of human activity, and therefore objectively capable of carrying information about it.
The classification of historical sources is also a controversial issue. There are several typological approaches - sources can be classified by genre, by mass distribution, by time and place of origin, by awareness and intentionality of creation, etc. The most common classification is based on the form of coding and storage of information. In the most general form, it divides sources into written and non-written; with a more detailed typology, written, material, pictorial, linguistic, oral, ethnographic, phonological and photographic film documents are distinguished (recently, historical sources stored on the Internet have also been added to the listed types).
Number of potential historical sources in in a broad sense limitless. However, when studying different historical periods, their numbers turn out to be far from the same. The smallest number of monuments, as a rule, comes to us from the primitive era and the era of antiquity. In subsequent centuries, as it developed public relations and technologies, the source base is noticeably expanding and differentiated. Also, the role of different groups of sources is different for different periods. The most important watershed in this sense can be considered the invention of writing and the appearance of written sources. Written sources traditionally form the basis of historical science. They have their own specific classification - for example, they can be divided into sourcesnarrative , i.e. descriptive, narrative (these include chronicles and annals, biographies and lives, memoirs and diaries, journalism and private correspondence) and sourcesdocumentary or factual (monuments of law, international treaties, business documentation, official correspondence, etc.).
During the research, all historical sources are subject tohistorical criticism . Its main tasks are, firstly, to clarify the meaning of the source as such, and secondly, to analyze the information it contains. Deals with the source as suchprimary criticism , exploring the process of origin of a source (author, place, time, conditions and purpose of creation, connections with other sources) and having the main goal of establishingauthenticity source. Its important element is external criticism, that is, an external description of the source, including detailed consideration material, shape, size and other physical characteristics.Secondary criticism source implies criticism of his testimony and clarificationreliability (i.e., a sufficient degree of correspondence between the phenomenon and its reflection in the source) of the information reported in it.
7. History functions . History has traditionally been the basis of humanities education and the most important factor in the formation of people's self-awareness. It performs a number of functions that often go beyond the world of science. These include:
– descriptive (narrative) function , which boils down to recording what is happening and the primary systematization of information;
– cognitive (cognitive, explanatory) function , the essence of which is the understanding and explanation of historical processes and phenomena;
– prognostic function (prediction of the future) And practical-recommendatory (practical-political) function . Both involve using the lessons of the past to improve the lives of human communities in the near and distant future;
– educational (cultural and ideological) function, social memory function . These functions are responsible for the formation of historical consciousness, self-identification of society and the individual.
Existence and further development of any nation is inextricably linked with its historical past. People without historical memory doomed to inevitable degradation and extinction. In addition to forgetting history, there is another threat - distortion of the historical past. The reason for this may be either the lack of scientific research on the history of the people, or the complete rejection or lack of interest in this research among the majority of the population. As a result, all historical events are perceived at the level of everyday consciousness, facts are distorted or forgotten, and a fragmentary, semi-mythical picture is created, leading to the loss of the true historical memory of the people. Another reason may be a deliberate distortion of the historical past. As a rule, this is done for specific political purposes in the interests of individual political parties and population groups. In order to avoid such transformations, a balance of cognitive, practical and social principles must be maintained in historical knowledge.

Ticket number 2. Basic concepts of studying history (Christian, Marxist, civilizational).
Modern concepts of understanding history are based on two scientific paradigms:

1. 
   Isaac Newton defined the universe as a kind of gigantic mechanism in which any event is determined by cause-and-effect relationships. Within this paradigm there are three concepts of understanding history. Active participation in the formationChristian concept received by the first Russian chroniclers (John Metropolitan, Karamzin). The main problems are the problems of the beginning and end of human history, the problem of the meaning of human history, the problem of the driving forces of human history. Of course, positive factors for this concept are the presence of rich and numerous sources, a developed conceptual apparatus and international traditions. Somewhat inconvenient is the presence of a powerful religious-fantastic element, or element of faith.Marxist concept is based most of all on the material side of human life; everything depends on the distribution of material wealth in the world. For example, the method of production determines political, social and spiritual processes in the life of society. Inconsistency in the level of development of production forces and industrial relations causes social revolutions, "locomotives of history." The class struggle inevitably leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat. And finally, the history of society is the process of development of successive socio-economic formations.The positive features for this concept are : seriousness of attitude towards problems material production, the connection between economic and social problems, universalism. However, insufficient attention is paid and not properly to the problems of man, culture, and law. In addition, this concept is characterized by Eurocentrism and schematism. N. Danilevsky, O. Spengler and A. Toynbee made a great contribution to the developmentcivilization concept understanding of history. The basic concept of this theory is civilization - a community of people united by unique, natural living conditions, fundamental spiritual values, which has special stable features in socio-political organization, culture, economy and psychological feeling belonging to this community (L.I. Semenikova).
2. 
   Second scientific paradigm called synergetic. Its founder is Ilya Prigozhin. Synergetics studies self-organizing systems that arise from chaos. Without going into details, the subject of the study of synergetics is the connections between events, they are considered separately, within the framework of the theory of randomness, then, with appropriate conclusions (I don’t know which ones), a general picture is built, i.e. gradually, but not completely, the entropy (measure of disorder) of the resulting system decreases and the researcher can draw certain conclusions, for example, about the rationality and significance of a particular reform, etc.

   Development of historical science in Russia
   Historical science in Russia has come a long and difficult path. Its formation dates back to the times of Kievan Rus. One of the oldest and greatest historical monuments that has reached us is “The Tale of Bygone Years” (11th century). In the 16th century individual chronicles began to be compiled into chronicle codes, united by one general idea. The first such set was the “Degree Book,” which outlined historical events by generation (degree). In 1674, the first textbook of Russian history, “Synopsis,” written by Innocent Gisel, appeared in Kyiv. It was a literary treatment of chronicles and legends. Of course, all these works were not strictly scientific. They mainly contained a list historical facts, important and minor, with the addition of legends and lives of saints, without deep attempts to somehow connect and explain the facts themselves. History as a science began to emerge in Russia, as well as in Europe, in the 18th century. But in Russia it found its feet in more difficult conditions: for a very long time, in comparison with Europe, the country did not have secular higher educational institutions that would train scientific personnel. In Europe, the first secular university appeared in the 12th century, and in Russia the Academy of Sciences opened only in 1725, the first university (Moscow) in 1755. The first Russian researchers had to face the virtual absence of a source base, which is the foundation of historical science . When Peter 1 issued a decree on the need to write the history of Russia and ordered the Synod to collect manuscripts from dioceses, only 40 of them were submitted, and only 8 of them were of a historical nature. The first attempt to write a systematic review did not belong to academics, or even to a historian by training. Its author was V.N. Tatishchev (1686-1750), who was a civil servant and a widely educated person. This was the first systematic work on national history. In addition, Tatishchev created instructions for collecting geographical and archaeological information about Russia, adopted by the Academy of Sciences. At the same time, assessing Tatishchev’s contribution to the formation of historical science, we note that he failed to comprehend the collected material and connect it with a conceptual idea. His history of Russia was a collection of chronicle data. The lack of literary treatment and heavy language made Tatishchev’s work difficult to perceive even by his contemporaries. In the second half of the 18th century. In the development of historical science in Russia there is a turning point associated with the beginning of the era of “enlightened absolutism”. During this period, first on the initiative of the sovereigns, primarily Catherine II, interest in the history of Russia rose among the educated part of the population. This movement united historians, writers, government officials, and private individuals. In the second half XVIII-early XIX V. Significant steps have been made in creating a source base for the development of historical science. The famous educator of the 18th century, writer and publisher N.I. Novikov made an attempt to bring together the collected chronicles, state acts, and ancient literary works into a single collection. It was the 20-volume Ancient Russian Vivliofika. Thanks to the selfless efforts of collectors and the creation of a source base, N. M. Karamzin’s famous work “History of the Russian State” was able to appear. (He came out separate volumes from 1816 to 1829). This was the first comprehensive look at Russian history, presented from certain ideological positions. Karamzin moved away from a simple chronicle listing of historical facts and, relying on sources, told and described history. Since he was not only a historian, but also a famous writer, the history he created was written in literary language. Contemporaries read it with great interest. All of Karamzin’s work was connected by one fundamental idea - the creation of the national state power of Russia. Since, according to Karamzin, Rus' was led to this power by its statesmen then attention was paid specifically to the Russian Grand Dukes and Tsars. This one-sidedness of the historian’s view was already noted by his contemporaries, who criticized him for this. Karamzin’s approach to the history of Russia, the method of its presentation, unfortunately, were actively used in the 30s and 40s. for the authorities to create an official historical doctrine. Karamzin, for his work, was appointed the first official state historiographer in Russian history. In the 30-50s. historical science in Russia found itself under severe state control and strict censorship. She was able to take a step forward in the post-reform period of the 60-70s. XIX century It was then that a fairly broad liberal trend began to take shape in historical science, which had to defend its positions in the fight against official ideology. Among the most prominent Russian historians of the second half of the 19th century. Let us also note V. O. Klyuchevsky (1841-1911), whose work had a decisive influence on the formation of domestic historical schools. Speaking about the development of historical science in Russia, we should remember the almost forgotten historian N. Ya. Danilevsky (1822-1885). Meanwhile, long before European scientists, he developed the basic principles of a cultural-civilizational approach to the study of the historical process. It was he who put forward the theory of cultural and historical types (civilizations) and for the first time tried to examine Slavic civilization from this angle. Thus, at the beginning of the 20th century. historical science was on the rise. She stood on the threshold of new historical discoveries. There could well have been a significant leap forward. However, this did not happen. After the October Revolution of 1917, as the totalitarian political regime became established, historical science found itself in a difficult, often tragic, situation. Historical science was turned into a political instrument and a means of indoctrinating the people. Each historian was obliged to follow those concepts that were approved from above. Only one, the Marxist approach was recognized as the only correct one. By the end of the 30s. under the direct supervision of I.V. Stalin, to ensure a unified interpretation of the historical process, created a concept that became normative for historians. It was reflected in the textbook “History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)” published in 1938. Short course". Domestic historical science was cut off from the global one, since all works published abroad were either carefully selected or not allowed into the country at all. After the revolution, many scientists emigrated from Russia. In 1922, about 300 representatives of the intelligentsia were expelled from Russia , including historians. And in the early 30s, a purge was carried out among historians, as a result of which about 130 of them were among the repressed. Among them were such prominent specialists as S. F. Platonov, academicians N. P. Likhachev and E.V. Tarle, professor Yu.V. Gauthier and many others, Soviet historical science essentially continued to exist in such conditions until the mid-80s of our time, although after Stalin’s death there were periods of some. softening of ideological dictates, especially during the “thaw” of the 50-60s. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to assume that during the Soviet period the development of historical science was completely paralyzed. Even in these difficult conditions, serious scientific works appeared, which are still of value today. . In the early 80s. In connection with the policy of perestroika and glasnost proclaimed by M. S. Gorbachev, a kind of “collapse” occurred in historical science, the consequences of which we are experiencing today. A flurry of previously unknown documents and works poured into historians, archives and special storage facilities, and works of foreign colleagues became available. This was not only a long-awaited event for historical science, but also a test. Today, the most relevant tasks for historical science are the following: firstly, a thorough, objective, thoughtful study of all new sources, both domestic and foreign, and secondly, the search for new methodological approaches in the study of history.
   Ticket number 3. Eastern Slavs in ancient times
   The ancestors of the Slavs, the so-called Proto-Slavs, belonged to the ancient Indo-European unity that inhabited the vast territory of the Eurasian continent. Gradually, related tribes, similar in language, economic activity, and culture, emerged among the Indo-Europeans. The Slavs became one of these tribal associations. The area of ​​their settlement in Central and
   Eastern Europe - from the Oder in the west to the Dnieper in the east, from the Baltic states in the north to the European mountains (Sudetes, Tatras, Carpathians) in the south.
   In the VI-VII centuries. The Slavs were at the last stage of development of the communal-tribal system. The basis of social organization is the patriarchal family community. There is no state yet, society is governed on the principles of military democracy: it meant the power of elected military leaders
   (princes) while maintaining the power of the elders and the remnants of primitive collectivism and democracy. All issues are decided by the people's assembly of free community members, priests and military leaders belonging to the emerging tribal nobility, which is increasingly distinguished from the bulk of community members by its property status.
   Cities arose either as defensive centers, or as places of trade and centers of craft.
   The oldest large, well-fortified Russian cities were:
   Ladoga on Volkhov, Novgorod, Pskov, Kyiv, Polotsk, etc.
   The economic activity of the Eastern Slavs was based on agriculture, cattle breeding, hunting, and fishing. Later the craft began to develop.
   Agriculture was the main branch of the economy. The main agricultural crops were wheat, rye, oats, barley, millet, peas, beans, buckwheat, flax, hemp, etc. In the second half of the first millennium AD, shifting farming was gradually replaced by arable farming with iron plowshares. The active use of iron made it possible to produce surplus agricultural products for exchange with other peoples. Cultivated: rye, barley, oats, flax, etc.
   Crafts separated from agriculture in the 6th - 8th centuries. AD Iron and steel industry developed especially actively non-ferrous metallurgy, pottery. Slavic craftsmen produced over 150 types of various products from steel and iron alone.
   Trades (hunting, fishing, beekeeping - collecting honey from wild bees, etc.), livestock breeding also occupied a prominent place in the economy of the Eastern Slavs.
   Trade between Slavic tribes and with neighboring countries, primarily with the eastern ones, was highly active. This is evidenced by numerous finds of treasures of Arab, Roman, Byzantine coins and jewelry.
   The main trade routes passed along the Volkhov-Lovat-Dnieper rivers
   (the path "From the Varangians to the Greeks"), Volga, Don, Oka. The goods of the Slavic tribes were furs, weapons, wax, bread, slaves, etc. Expensive fabrics, jewelry, and spices were imported.
   The life of the Slavs was determined by the nature of their activities. They lived sedentary lives, choosing hard-to-reach places for settlements or building around them defensive structures. The dwelling was a semi-dugout with a two- or three-pitched roof.
   The beliefs of the Slavs testify to their enormous dependence on environmental conditions. The Slavs identified themselves with nature and worshiped the forces that personified it: fire, thunder, lakes, rivers, etc. and did not know historical time. Deification of the powerful forces of nature
   - sun, rain, thunderstorms - was reflected in the cults of the god of sky and fire Svarog, the god of thunderstorms Perun, and sacrificial rites.
   Little is known about the culture of the Slavic tribes. Examples of applied art that have survived to this day testify to the development of jewelry. In the VI-VII centuries. writing emerges. An essential feature of Old Russian culture is the religious and mystical overtones of almost all its manifestations. The custom of burning the dead and erecting mounds over funeral pyres, where things, weapons, and food were stored, are widespread. Birth, wedding, death were accompanied by special rituals.

   Ticket number 4. Formation of the Old Russian state

   The prerequisites for the formation of the Old Russian state were the collapse of tribal ties and the development of a new method of production. The Old Russian state took shape in the process of the development of feudal relations, the emergence of class contradictions and coercion.

   Among the Slavs, a dominant layer gradually formed, the basis of which was the military Nobility of the Kyiv princes - the squad. Already in the 9th century, strengthening the position of their princes, the warriors firmly occupied leading positions in society.

   It was in the 9th century. In Eastern Europe, two ethnopolitical associations were formed, which ultimately became the basis of the state. It was formed as a result of the unification of the glades with the center in Kyiv.

   Slavs, Krivichi and Finnish-speaking tribes united in the area of ​​Lake Ilmen (center in Novgorod). In the middle of the 9th century. this association began to be ruled by a native of Scandinavia, Rurik (862-879). Therefore, the year 862 is considered the year of formation of the ancient Russian state.

   The presence of Scandinavians (Varangians) on the territory of Rus' is confirmed by archaeological excavations and records in chronicles. In the 18th century German scientists G.F. Miller and G.Z. Bayer proved the Scandinavian theory of the formation of the ancient Russian state (Rus).

   M.V. Lomonosov, denying the Norman (Varangian) origin of statehood, associated the word “Rus” with the Sarmatians-Roxolans, the Ros River, flowing in the south.

   Lomonosov, relying on “The Legend of the Princes of Vladimir,” argued that Rurik, being a native of Prussia, belonged to the Slavs, which were the Prussians. It was this “southern” anti-Norman theory of the formation of the ancient Russian state that was supported and developed in the 19th and 20th centuries. historians.

   The first mentions of Rus' are attested in the “Bavarian Chronograph” and date back to the period 811-821. In it, the Russians are mentioned as a people within the Khazars inhabiting Eastern Europe. In the 9th century Rus' was perceived as an ethnopolitical entity on the territory of the glades and northerners.

   Rurik, who took control of Novgorod, sent his squad led by Askold and Dir to rule Kiev. Rurik's successor, Varangian Prince Oleg(879-912), who took possession of Smolensk and Lyubech, subjugated all the Krivichi to his power, and in 882 he fraudulently lured Askold and Dir out of Kyiv and killed them. Having captured Kyiv, he managed to unite by force of his power the two most important centers of the Eastern Slavs - Kyiv and Novgorod. Oleg subjugated the Drevlyans, Northerners and Radimichi.

   In 907, Oleg, having gathered a huge army of Slavs and Finns, launched a campaign against Constantinople (Constantinople), the capital of the Byzantine Empire. The Russian squad devastated the surrounding area and forced the Greeks to ask Oleg for peace and pay a huge tribute. The result of this campaign was peace treaties with Byzantium that were very beneficial for Rus', concluded in 907 and 911.

   Oleg died in 912, and his successor was Igor(912-945), son of Rurik. In 941 he attacked Byzantium, which violated the previous treaty. Igor's army plundered the shores of Asia Minor, but was defeated in a naval battle. Then in 945, in alliance with the Pechenegs, he launched a new campaign against Constantinople and forced the Greeks to once again conclude a peace treaty. In 945, while trying to collect a second tribute from the Drevlyans, Igor was killed.

   Igor's widow Duchess Olga(945-957) ruled due to the childhood of his son Svyatoslav. She brutally took revenge for the murder of her husband by ravaging the lands of the Drevlyans. Olga organized the sizes and places of collecting tribute. In 955 she visited Constantinople and was baptized into Orthodoxy.

   Svyatoslav(957-972) - the bravest and most influential of the princes, who subjugated the Vyatichi to his power. In 965 he inflicted a number of heavy defeats on the Khazars. Svyatoslav defeated the North Caucasian tribes, as well as the Volga Bulgarians, and plundered their capital, the Bulgars. The Byzantine government sought an alliance with him to fight external enemies.

   Kyiv and Novgorod became the center of formation of the ancient Russian state, and the East Slavic tribes, northern and southern, united around them. In the 9th century both of these groups united into a single ancient Russian state, which went down in history as Rus'.

   Ticket No. 5. Main stages in the formation of statehood Ancient Rus'. Acceptance of Christianity. Features of the social system of Ancient Rus'.

   IN VI-IX centuries East Slavic tribes united into communities that had not only a tribal, but also a territorial and political character. Such unions included 120-150 separate tribes, which in turn consisted of a large number of clans and occupied a significant territory. Along the middle reaches of the Dnieper lived clearing , on the right bank of the Dnieper - Drevlyans . Along the rivers Oka and Moscow were located Vyatichi , to the west of them lived Krivichi , along the Sozh River - Radimichi , around Lake Ilmen - Ilmen Slavs . The most developed lands of the Slavic world - Novgorod And Kyiv- controlled the northern and southern sections of the Great Trade Route “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, which arose at the end of the 9th century.

   Tribal unions were headed princes . There was a militia (“regiment”, “thousand”, divided into “hundreds”), headed by the thousand and sotsky. Special military organization was squad , which was divisible by older(ambassadors and princely rulers who had their own land came out of it) and younger, who lived with the prince and served his court and household. On behalf of the prince, the warriors collected tribute (“polyudye”) from the conquered.

   One of these associations was a union of tribes led by cue (known from the end V century). On the territory in the area of ​​Lake Ilmen with the center in Novgorod there was Slavia .

   According to the so-called "Norman theory" (authors G. Bayer, G. Miller, A. Shletser, its adherent was N. Karamzin), the statehood of Rus' arose in connection with the appeal of the Slavic tribes to the Norman warrior Rurik with brothers Sineus And Truvor come and rule them. However, archaeological sources indicate minimal influence of the Scandinavians on the Slavs, and the entry in the chronicle "Tales of Bygone Years" about the calling of the Rurikovichs, on which Norman historians rely, turned out to be a late insertion into its original text.

   Modern historians have convincing evidence that the Eastern Slavs had strong traditions of statehood long before the appearance of the Varangians.

   Features of the social system of Ancient Rus'

   Ancient Rus' was a typical example early feudal monarchy , although the process of feudalization here was noticeably slower than in Western European countries. The basis of social relations was the feudal lord's ownership of the main means of production - land - and incomplete ownership of the feudal-dependent worker. During this period, the military-retinue nobility became the owner of the land, and the community farmers living and working on it paid it a tax for the use of the land. There are two main classes - peasants (primarily smerds) and feudal lords.

   Stinkers called people engaged in agricultural labor. They made up the bulk of the population and were divided into free community members, who conducted subsistence farming and paid tribute to the prince, and dependent people. The dependent population consisted of procurement - ruined community members who became dependent on the prince, taking out a debt from him in money, livestock, seeds or equipment; rank and file - dependent people who entered into an agreement with the prince (“row”); outcasts - impoverished people from communities; serfs - dependent people who were in the position of slaves and performed household work on the estate.

   The class of feudal lords consisted of the military-princely nobility - representatives of the grand-ducal house with Grand Duke at the head, princes of tribes or lands, boyars, senior warriors . The most respected, senior, warriors were called boyars and formed a permanent council under the prince - Boyar Duma .

   The supreme owner of the land and all natural resources (furs, honey and wax of wild bees, fish, etc.) was the state. Since the time of the first Rurikovichs, boyars and warriors received from the prince part of the tribute, in the collection of which they took a direct part. In the localities, princely power was limited by elements of preserved popular self-government represented by elected elders (city elders) who participated in the princely Duma and influenced the adoption of this or that decision, as well as the national assembly (evening) .

   Generally hierarchical structure the power was as follows: the Grand Duke of Kyiv; squad, appanage princes, mayors, volostels, local squad, graveyards, encampments, volosts.

   
   Acceptance of Christianity

   The young Russian state made a noticeable step forward in its development during the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (980 - 1015). Especially important had it religious reform - adoption of Christianity in 988 The ancient Russians were pagans, they worshiped many gods (the god of the sky - Svarog, the god of the Sun - Dazhbog, the god of thunder and lightning - Perun, etc.). Christianity was already known in Rus' even before Vladimir’s baptism. As N.M. Karamzin writes in “History of the Russian State,” Princess Olga in 955, “captivated by Christian teaching, went to Constantinople to be baptized. The Patriarch was her mentor and baptizer, and Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus was the successor from the font.”

   “Having returned to Kyiv, she tried to enlighten the son of Prince Svyatoslav, but received the answer: “Can I accept one new law so that the squad doesn’t laugh at me?”

   Svyatoslav's son, Grand Duke Vladimir, took the Kiev throne in 980., already in the first years of his reign he realized the need to adopt a single state religion. However, the future baptist of Rus' began his journey as a convinced pagan, and a lot of time passed before his views changed. “He began to seek the true faith, talked with the Greeks, Mohammedans and Catholics about their religions, sent ten intelligent men to various countries to collect news about divine services and, finally, following the example of his grandmother Olga and on the advice of the boyars and elders, he became a Christian” (N M. Karamzin).

   The matter of the baptism of Rus' was facilitated by external circumstances. The Byzantine Empire was shaken by the blows of the rebels - Bardas Skleros and Bardas Phocas. Under these conditions, the brother emperors Vasily the Bolgar-Slayer and Constantine turned to Vladimir for help. As a reward for military assistance Vladimir asked for the hand of the emperors' sister Anna.

   The emperors did not fulfill their obligation to give their sister Anna for Vladimir. Then Vladimir besieged Korsun and forced the Byzantine princess to marry in exchange for the baptism of a “barbarian” who had long been attracted to the Greek faith. “Returning to the capital, Vladimir ordered the destruction of idols and statues, and the people were baptized in the Dnieper.” (N.M. Karamzin).

   The spread of Christianity often met resistance from the population, who revered their pagan gods. Christianity took hold slowly. On the outlying lands of Kievan Rus it was established much later than in Kyiv and Novgorod. As noted by the famous historian of feudalism S.V. Bakhrushin, Christianization lasted for a number of decades.

   The adoption of Christianity in Rus' in the Orthodox tradition is a natural and objective process associated with the development of feudal relations, familiarization with European civilization, the formation and development of national Russian culture through Byzantine and ancient culture.

   The head of the church was the Kyiv Metropolitan, who was appointed from Constantinople or by himself prince of Kyiv followed by the election of bishops by a council. In the large cities of Rus', bishops were in charge of all practical affairs of the church. The metropolitan and bishops owned lands, villages, and cities. The princes gave almost a tenth of the funds collected to the treasury for the maintenance of churches. In addition, the church had its own court and legislation, which gave the right to intervene in almost all aspects of the life of parishioners.

   Christianity contributed to the acceleration of the development of the feudal mode of production in Ancient Rus'. Church institutions, along with princes, had large land ownership. The progressive side of the activities of the Christian Church was its desire to eliminate elements of slave labor.

   Christianity played a large role in the ideological justification and thereby in strengthening the power of the Kyiv princes. The Church assigns to the Kyiv prince all the attributes of Christian emperors. On many coins minted according to Greek designs, princes are depicted in Byzantine imperial attire.

   The transition to Christianity was objectively of great and progressive significance. The unity of the Slavs strengthened, the withering away of the remnants of marriage law accelerated.

   Baptism also influenced the cultural life of Rus', the development of technology, crafts, etc. From Byzantium, Kievan Rus borrowed the first experiments in coinage. The noticeable influence of baptism was also reflected in the artistic field. Greek artists created masterpieces in the newly converted country comparable to the best examples of Byzantine art. For example, St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv, built by Yaroslav in 1037.

   Painting on boards penetrated from Byzantium to Kyiv, and examples of Greek sculpture also appeared. The baptism also left a noticeable impact in the field of education and book publishing. The Slavic alphabet became widespread in Rus' at the beginning of the 10th century. As it is written in the chronicle: “It is marvelous, how much good the Russians have done in the land by baptizing it.”

   Ticket number 6. Rus' IN THE PERIOD OF FEUDAL Fragmentation

   1. Reasons for the transition to feudal fragmentation

   Feudal fragmentation in Rus' was a natural result of economic and political development early feudal society.

   The formation of large landholdings - estates - in the Old Russian state under the dominance of a natural economy inevitably made them completely independent production complexes, the economic ties of which were limited to the immediate surroundings. Existing trade and craft needs could be satisfied in rapidly developing local economic and political centers - cities. The rise of local productive forces caused an increase in the number of cities and urban population, including in those cities that previously did not play a significant economic role.

   The early feudal society of the times of Kievan Rus was characterized by inevitable social contradictions between the upper and lower classes. The emerging class of feudal landowners sought to establish various forms economic and legal dependence of the agricultural population. But in the XI-XIII centuries. the existing class antagonisms were mainly local in nature; the forces of local authorities were quite sufficient to resolve them, and they did not require national intervention. These conditions made large landowners - patrimonial boyars - almost completely economically and socially independent of the central government. The local boyars did not see the need to share their income with the Grand Duke of Kyiv and actively supported the rulers of individual principalities in the struggle for economic and political independence.

   Outwardly, the collapse of Kievan Rus looked like a division of the territory of Kievan Rus between various members of the expanding princely family. According to established tradition, local thrones were occupied, as a rule, only by the descendants of the house of Rurik.

   The process of onset of feudal fragmentation was objectively inevitable. He made it possible to more firmly establish the developing system of feudal relations in Rus'. From this point of view, we can talk about the historical progressiveness of this stage of Russian history, within the framework of which further development of the economy and culture took place. The collapse of the former unified power also had a number of negative consequences, the main one of which was the increased vulnerability of Russian lands from external danger, especially in the face of the possible emergence of a strong enemy.

   Signs of the political fragmentation of Kievan Rus appeared, as indicated above, soon after the death of Yaroslav the Wise in 1054. The struggle between the descendants of Yaroslav, who enjoyed the support of the local boyars, led to the emergence of a system of isolated princely domains, recognized by the Lyubech Congress of Princes in 1097 (inheritance according to the rule "Let each one keep his homeland").

   For some time, under the princes Vladimir Monomakh and his son Mstislav the Great, Kyiv again rose to prominence as an all-Russian center. These princes were able to repel the increasing danger of the invasion of the nomadic Polovtsians. After the death of Mstislav, instead of a single power, about one and a half dozen independent lands arose: Galician, Polotsk, Chernigov, Rostov-Suzdal, Novgorod, Smolensk, etc. The process of economic isolation and political fragmentation was repeated within these lands, almost each of them in turn turned into a system of small and semi-independent feudal principalities. The feudal fragmentation of Rus' existed until the end of the 15th century. , when most of the territory of the former Kyiv state became part of the Moscow state.

   Ticket number 7. Culture of Kievan Rus

   Culture is a set of material and spiritual values ​​created by man in the process of his socio-historical labor practice.

   The culture of Kievan Rus is based on Slavic pre-Christian culture, which, with the adoption of Christianity, was influenced by Byzantium, Bulgaria, and through them ancient and Middle Eastern cultural traditions.

   One of the main indicators of cultural level is the presence of writing. The first evidence of writing among the Slavs was found near Smolensk and speaks of its presence back in the 10th century. (before accepting Christianity).

   There is evidence of the adoption of the Glagolitic alphabet in Rus' in the second half of the 9th century, attempts to write Greek alphabet. Missionaries Cyril and Methodius in the 60s of the 9th century. saw the Gospel written in Slavic script.

   Examples of the presence of writing and the spread of literacy in Rus' are birch bark letters discovered during archaeological excavations ancient Russian cities.

   In the second half of the 9th century. Brothers-monks Cyril and Methodius created the Glagolitic alphabet, which was later converted into the Cyrillic alphabet.

   Years of reign Yaroslav the Wise(1019-1054) became the time of political and cultural heyday of Kievan Rus.

   In 1036, near the walls of Kyiv, Yaroslav finally defeated the Pechenegs, and this event became the beginning of the prosperity of the great city. In honor of the victory, the Hagia Sophia Cathedral was erected, which was not inferior in beauty and grandeur to a similar cathedral in Constantinople.

   Kyiv during the time of Yaroslav turned into one of the largest urban centers in all Christendom. “The city had 400 churches, the entrance to it was decorated with a golden gate, there were eight markets. To strengthen the power of Rus', Yaroslav, without the permission of Constantinople, appointed the head of the church with his authority. Hilarion Berestov became the first Russian metropolitan.

   During Yaroslav's reign, great attention was paid to education. Schools for clergy opened in Kyiv and Novgorod. Under Yaroslav, Russian chronicle writing began in Kyiv.

   The first chronicle, dating back to the end of the 11th century, reached contemporaries as part of the Novgorod Chronicle.

   Yaroslav's associate, Metropolitan Hilarion, created a monument of Russian theology, philosophy and history - “The Sermon on Law and Grace.”

   Rus' owes the successes of enlightenment of this period to the personal merits of Yaroslav. Being a convinced Christian and an enlightened person, he gathered translators and book writers in Kyiv and began publishing Greek books brought to Rus' from Byzantium.

   This is how the process of familiarization with the culture of the ancient world and Byzantium went on. During this period, a national epic epic developed, which reflected the events of the reign of Yaroslav the Wise (“Nightingale Budimirovich”) and Vladimir Monomakh (epics about Alyosha Popovich, “Stavr I Odinovich”).

   An outstanding cultural achievement was the compilation of a set of written laws, which was called “Russian Truth” or “Yaroslav’s Truth”. The document included criminal and civil laws, established legal proceedings, and determined punishments for committed offenses or crimes.

   Based on this, it was possible to judge the social structure, morals and customs of Russian society of that time.

   In civil cases, Russkaya Pravda established a court of twelve elected officials (torture and the death penalty were absent).

   Under Yaroslav, Rus''s foreign policy ties developed successfully. The powerful monarchs of the Christian world considered it an honor to become related to the Rurik family.

   Yaroslav's son Vsevolod became the son-in-law of the Emperor of Byzantium, his daughters Anna, Anastasia and Elizabeth married the kings of France, Hungary and Norway.

   Ticket number 8. Russia and the medieval states of Europe and Asia

   Towards the middle XIII century Russian lands found themselves between Golden Horde And Grand Duchy of Lithuania . In the Baltic states, on lands inhabited by Lithuanian tribes, an early feudal state arose, the founder of which is considered to be the prince Mindovga . Russian chronicles first mention him in 1219 Since its inception, the Lithuanian state has included lands in the Neman River basin (the cities of Novogrudok, Grodko, etc.), the so-called Black Rus'. Principality of Galicia became part of Poland; lands of Southern and Southwestern Rus' (Kyiv, Volyn, Podolia, etc.) after the conquest by the Mongols they paid tribute to the Horde. However, due to the strengthening of the Lithuanian state after the Battle of Blue Water with the Horde (1363) these lands became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia. The Ukrainian nation took shape on the lands of southwestern Rus'.

   In the North-West there were Livonian And Teutonic orders founded by Catholic missionary knights. IN 1201 German and Danish feudal lords founded Riga and created the knightly Order of the Swordsmen to conquer the Baltic states. At the same time, the Teutome Order moved to Europe from Palestine, which completely exterminated the Prussian tribes and gave their lands to the Germans. IN 1238 An alliance of German, Danish and Swedish feudal lords was concluded against Rus'.

   IN July 1240 The Swedish fleet entered the Neva. Having passed the Neva to the mouth of the river Izhora, the knightly cavalry landed on the shore. Prince Alexander of Novgorod with a small squad and warriors moved to the landing site of the Swedes. July 15, 1240, secretly approaching the Swedish camp, the cavalry squad attacked the center of the Swedish army. The remnants of the defeated Swedish army went down the Neva into the sea. This brilliant victory of Alexander had great historical meaning: the threat from the North was eliminated, access to Baltic Sea, trade routes to Western countries.

   In a year, April 5, 1242, on Lake Peipsi Alexander won an equally convincing victory over the knights of the Livonian Order ("Battle on the Ice") , thereby stopping the expansion of Catholics to the east.

   The period of Mongol-Tatar rule in Rus' lasted about two and a half centuries.

   
   The first clash with the Mongol-Tatars on the river. Kalka on May 31, 1223 showed: the futility of attempts by Russian troops to help the allies, the lack of a unified organization, the weakness of command.
   Made it all together further battle with the invaders is meaningless for the Russians. IN December 1237 The Mongols, led by Batu, began an attack on the Russian principalities.
   “Batu’s ruin” of Rus' took place in two stages: in 1237 - 1238- through the Ryazan principality to the Vladimir-Suzdal land (northeast) and to 1239 - 1240 gg.- to Southern Rus'. IN 1237 After the defeat of the Volga Bulgaria, Batu's troops headed to the Ryazan principality. After the pogrom of Ryazan, the Mongols moved to the northeast, where in February 1238 Kolomna, Moscow, Suzdal, Rostov and Vladimir fell under their onslaught. The decisive battle took place on the City River, March 4, 1238, which ended in disaster for the Russian army. After this, the troops of Khan Batu freely began to occupy individual principalities, moving north. However, the advance towards Novgorod was stopped for almost two months by fierce resistance from the inhabitants of the small town of Kozelsk. From Kozelsk the Mongols moved south, where Batu’s main nomadic camps were located between the Volga and Don.
   In the spring of 1239 The second stage of the invasion began - this time on the southern Russian principalities. Pereslavl, Glukhov, and Chernigov were captured. IN 1240 g. The Mongols besieged Kyiv and took the city after a long siege, subjecting it to complete destruction. After the capture of Kyiv, Batu's hordes continued to move west and captured the Principality of Galicia-Volyn, which occupied a prominent place among the leading states of Europe.
   The war did not affect the Orthodox Church.
   The Mongols, being pagans, were distinguished by religious tolerance and understood the great ideological role of the clergy, trying to attract them to their side. Therefore, during the conquest, the Mongols did not touch the church, which was the main spiritual organization of the Russians.
   The Mongol-Tatar yoke was established in Rus':
   1) Rus' fell under the rule of the Horde protectorate. Golden Horde- Juchi ulus, a powerful state created by the Mongol khans. 2) Khan presented label for the great reign Vladimirskoe and controlled the situation throughout the entire territory. The label was a desired goal for the Russian princes and the cause of feudal strife. 3) The conquerors in every possible way encouraged feudal fragmentation, pitting the descendants of Rurik against each other. 4) main form dependencies came from the Horde collection of tribute, “Horde exit”. Khan's officials (baskaks) dealt with it in Rus'. Tribute was collected from the household. The actions of the Baskaks were characterized by extreme cruelty. They captured people and censused the entire population of North-Eastern Rus' in 1257–1259. The “Great Baskak” had a residence in Vladimir, where he practically moved at that time political center countries.
   The main reasons for the defeat of Rus' and the establishment of the Horde yoke were:
   1) the feudal fragmentation that existed at that time, since each principality found itself alone with the forces of the conquerors. Thus, the Russian princes were defeated one by one by their enemies. 2) The Mongol-Tatars used advanced military equipment (stone throwers, battering machines, gunpowder). 3) numerical superiority of the enemy.
   Results of the conquest: cities and villages were burned, skilled artisans were taken into slavery, fields fell into disrepair, and Rus''s foreign economic relations were disrupted for many years. The change and significance of the prince in the state is the establishment of the despotic power of the prince, the continuation of the process of forming a dependent population.
   Rus' and the Horde: problems of mutual influence.
   In historical science, the problem of the influence of the Golden Horde on the development of medieval Rus' was considered from different positions.
   First point of view: CM. Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky, S.F. Platonov, M.N. Pokrovsky and other historians believed that the Mongol yoke brought ruin, loss of life, delayed development, but did not significantly affect the life and way of life of the Russians, their statehood. During the period of Mongol rule, Rus' continued to develop along the European path, but lagged behind significantly due to large-scale destruction, human losses, the need to pay tribute, etc.
   Second point of view: N.M. Karamzin, N.I. Kostomarov, V.V. Leontovich, N.P. Zagoskin, V.I. Sergievich and the Eurasians insisted on the thesis that the Mongols had a significant influence on social and social organization Russians, on the formation and development of the Moscow state. Eurasians believed that Muscovy was part of the Great Mongol State. The main borrowings of Rus' from the Mongols were despotism in the political sphere and serfdom in the socio-economic sphere.

   Third point of view: V.A. Kuchkin, B.V. Kobrin, L.I. Semennikova and other modern historians note that during the Mongol invasion, North-Eastern Rus' depended on the Golden Horde, which entailed indirect Mongol influence on the process of formation of the Russian people and the Moscow state. The legal code of the Mongols - "Yasa" of Genghis Khan - was not in force on the territory of the Russian principalities. Special laws were not created for Rus', which lived on the basis of its own legal norms, which were later reflected in the Code of Laws. In addition, the Mongols did not remove the Russian princes from power and did not create their own dynasty in Rus', as was the case in Iran they conquered. They also did not have a permanent governor or governors with specific functions. Baskaks were appointed sporadically to individual places; they did not perform managerial functions, but only observed the collection of tribute. And finally, Rus' retained its spiritual basis - Orthodoxy, since the Mongols did not insist on a change of faith.

   Ticket number 9. The Rise of Moscow

   The fight to overthrow Tatar-Mongol yoke in the XIV - XV centuries. was the main national task of the Russian people. At the same time, the core of the political life of this period became the unification process of Russian lands and the formation centralized states A. The main territory of the Russian state, which emerged in the 15th century, consisted of the Vladimir-Suzdal, Novgorod-Pskov, Smolensk, Murom-Ryazan lands and part of the Chernigov principality.

   The territorial core of the formation of the Russian nationality and the Russian state becomes the Vladimir-Suzdal land, in which gradually Moscow rises, turning into the center of the political unification of Russian lands.

   The first mention of Moscow (1147) contained in the chronicle, which tells about the meeting of Yuri Dolgoruky with Prince of Chernigov Svyatoslav. The town on the outskirts of the Vladimir-Suzdal land rises at the end of the 13th - beginning of the 14th century. What are the reasons for this rise?

   1. Favorable geographical location.

   According to V.O. Klyuchevsky, Moscow was in “Russian Mesopotamia” - i.e. between the Volga and Oka rivers. This geographical position guaranteed its security: from the north-west of Lithuania it was covered by the Tver Principality, and from the east and south-east of the Golden Horde - by other Russian lands, which contributed to the influx of residents here and an increase in population density. Being at the junction of trade routes, Moscow becomes the center of economic relations.

   In conditions of feudal fragmentation and German aggression knightly orders southern and southwestern lands(including Kyiv) became part of the Principality of Lithuania, therefore the geographical center of the Russian lands gradually in the XIII - XIV centuries. moves to the northeast.

   Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the XIII-XV centuries.

   2. Church support

   The Russian Church was the bearer of Orthodox ideology, which played important role in the unification of Rus'. Moscow in 1326 under Ivan Kalita became the seat of the Metropolitan, i.e. turns into the ecclesiastical capital.

   3. Active policy of the Moscow princes

   A subjective but decisive factor in the rise of Moscow.

   The main rival of the Moscow principality in the struggle for leadership was Tver Principality, the strongest in Rus'. Therefore, the outcome of the confrontation largely depended on the smart and flexible policy of the representatives of the Moscow dynasty.

   The founder of this dynasty is considered to be the youngest son of Alexander Nevsky Daniel (1276 - 1303)(see table). Under him, the rapid growth of the Moscow principality began. In 1301, Daniil Alexandrovich captured Kolomna from the Ryazan princes, in 1302 the Principality of Pereyaslavl passed to him, in 1303 Mozhaisk was annexed, as a result of which the Moscow River, which was an important trade route, ended up from source to mouth in the Moscow Principality. In three years, his principality almost doubled in size and became one of the largest and strongest in North-Eastern Rus'.

   In 1303, the reign passed to Daniil's eldest son Yuri, who for a long time fought with the Tver prince Mikhail Yaroslavovich. Prince Yuri Danilovich, thanks to his flexible policy with the Golden Horde, achieved significant political success: he enlisted the support of Khan Uzbek, having married his sister Konchak (Agafya), received a label for the great reign in 1319. But already in 1325, Yuri was killed by the son of the Tver prince , and the label passed into the hands of the Tver princes. The Golden Horde, therefore, pursued a policy of conflict between the Moscow and Tver princes, since it was not interested in strengthening their political influence and strengthening their power.

   Ticket number 10.Formation of the Russian centralized state

   At the end of XV - early XVI centuries Chernigov-Seversky lands became part of the Russian state. In 1510, the Pskov land was also included in the state. In 1514, Russian became part of the Moscow Grand Duchy old City Smolensk And finally, in 1521, the Ryazan principality also ceased to exist. It was during this period that the unification of the Russian lands was largely completed. A huge power was formed - one of the largest states in Europe. Within the framework of this state, the Russian people were united. This is a natural process of historical development. From the end of the 15th century. The term “Russia” began to be used.

   State activities of Ivan III and Vasily III

   Ivan 3 created a centralized system of government: At the head of the state was the Grand Duke-Sovereign of All Rus', the Boyar Duma (an estate advisory body under the sovereign), the Treasury (the civil service in charge of finances), orders (government bodies) were subordinate to him. and boyar-governors governing the districts. Under Vasily3 the unification of Rus' was completed. The Church recognized the power of the prince as supreme. Conclusion. Under Ivan and Vasily, the Russian lands were united into a single centralized Russian state, and the preconditions for the transition to absolutism were taking shape.
   Ticket number 11. Reforms of Elena Glinskaya and the Elected Rada. Domestic and foreign policy of Ivan IV in the period 1547-1564.

   The heir of Vasily III, who died in 1533, was his three-year-old son Ivan IV (1533–1584). In fact, the mother, Elena Glinskaya, ruled for the child. The short regency of Elena Glinskaya (1533–1538) was marked not only by the fight against numerous conspirators and rebels, but also reform activities. Conducted currency reform unified the monetary circulation system. Unified banknotes - kopecks - were introduced, and a standard for the weight of coins was determined. Measures of weight and length were also unified. Reform has begun local government. In order to limit the power of governors, the institution of provincial elders was introduced in the country. This elective position could only be held by a nobleman. Representatives of the upper strata of the urban and rural population were elected to help him. Such people received the right to occupy the position of zemstvo elder. The government of Elena Glinskaya paid great attention strengthening the country's defense. To protect the Moscow suburb, the walls of Kitai-Gorod were built.

   After sudden death Helena in 1538, the next few years were spent in the struggle for power of the boyar groups Shuisky and Belsky.

   In January 1547, when the heir of Vasily III turned 17 years old, Ivan Vasilyevich accepted the royal title. The political meaning of this event was to strengthen the power of the Moscow sovereign, his authority excluded from that moment any claims to the supreme power of the descendants of aristocratic families. The new title equated the head of the Russian state with the khans of the Golden Horde and the emperors of Byzantium.

   Domestic policy of Ivan the Terrible in the 1550s. was related to the activities The chosen one is pleased. Together with his closest associates - landowner A. Adashev, princes A. Kurbsky and M. Vorotynsky, Metropolitan Macarius, the Tsar's confessor Sylvester and major official I. Viskovaty in the 50s. Ivan IV carried out important reforms to strengthen the centralization of the country.

   In 1549, for the first time in history, the Zemsky Sobor was convened. The convening of Zemsky Sobors meant the establishment of an estate-representative monarchy in Russia. At the council of 1549, it was decided to create a new Code of Law. In 1550, the Code of Law of Ivan IV was adopted.

   Reform of governing bodies. Under Ivan the Terrible, a system of central government bodies - orders - was formed.

   The reorganization was of great importance local government. The labial reform, begun back in 1539, was completed mainly in 1555–1556. As a result, the local court for the most important criminal cases was removed from the hands of governors and volosts and transferred to provincial elders, who were selected (usually by district) from the provincial children of the boyars. The lip prefects obeyed the Robbery Order. (See the diagram “Bodies of power and administration in the 2nd half of the 16th century.”).

   The most important decree of the tsar was the “Tsar’s Verdict on Feeding and Services” (1555 – 1556). The main idea of ​​this decree was that self-government was recognized as a “royal service”, which was delegated to localities by the supreme authority. By 1556feeding system was basically liquidated. The collection of taxes, which had previously been the responsibility of the feeders, was now transferred to the “favorite heads.” The collected taxes went to the royal treasury.

   Military reform of 1550. During military campaigns, localism was limited in appointments to command of troops. According to the reform, the recruitment of the army proceeded in two ways: the first recruitment into the army of “serving people according to the instrument”, first of all - archers. At first there were 3 thousand of them, then - 25 thousand archers, armed with small arms - arquebus.

   Second - service people“according to the fatherland” - boyars and nobles who were part of the militia. The Service Code of 1556 established a uniform procedure for military service from both estates and estates: each secular feudal lord was obliged to send one man on horseback and in full armor from 150 acres of land at his disposal. For each rider, compensation was paid (1 - 2 rubles). Thus, the patrimonial owners were equal in terms of service with the nobles who owned estates. This meant a new step towards blurring the lines between patrimonial and local land ownership.

   Military reforms in the mid-50s increased the combat effectiveness of the noble cavalry and contributed to the success of Russian weapons. At the same time, the government was convinced of the need to expand the Streltsy infantry and the “outfit” (artillery), which were a permanent army.

   Stoglavy Cathedral. In 1551, a church council (meeting) was convened, which went down in history as the Stoglavy. It received this name because the collection of its decrees consisted of one hundred chapters (“Stoglav”). The Church approved the Code of Laws and the Tsar's reforms.

   Thus, the reforms of the 1550s. The reign of Ivan IV was aimed at strengthening central power.

   Foreign policy of Ivan the Terrible

   In the southern direction, the main task was to protect Russian borders from attacks by the Crimean Tatars. For this purpose, a new defensive line was built - the Tula serif line. The campaign of Russian troops to Crimea in 1559 ended in failure. As mentioned above, in 1571 the Crimean Khan Devlet-Girey raided Moscow. The next Crimean raid in the summer of 1572 was stopped. The Khan's army was defeated by Prince M.I. Vorotynsky.

   The reign of the Elected Rada was marked by major successes in the state’s foreign policy in the eastern direction. In the early 1550s. 2 large ones were annexed to the Russian state Tatar states, formed after the collapse of the Golden Horde: in 1552 the Kazan Khanate was conquered, in 1556 - the Astrakhan Khanate. Thus, the borders of the Muscovite kingdom crossed the Volga and approached the borders of Asia. This milestone was crossed in the early 1580s. Armed with funds from the wealthy merchants Stroganov, the Cossack expedition led by Ermak Timofeevich made a trip to Siberia, defeated the troops of the Siberian Khan Kuchum and annexed his lands to the Russian state. From that moment on, the development of Siberia by Russian people began.

   After the annexation of the Volga region, foreign policy became a priority Western direction. The main goal of the Livonian War, which began in 1558, was the conquest by Russia of access to the Baltic Sea. In 1558–1560 military operations were carried out against the knightly Livonian Order, which owned the territory of the Baltic states. The beginning of the war turned out to be successful: the troops of Ivan IV passed through almost all of Livonia, took 20 cities, and the Order was virtually defeated. In 1561, the Livonian Order collapsed. However, the victories of Russian weapons ran counter to the interests of Poland, Denmark and Sweden, to which the former possessions of the Order passed, so Russia had to fight with three strong opponents. In 1563–1564 Russian troops suffered a number of serious defeats. Poland and Lithuania, fearing the strengthening of Russia and also striving to capture Livonia, united in 1569 into a single state, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. As a result, Russia lost the Livonian War. In 1582, a truce was concluded in Yam-Zapolsky, according to which the old state border between Russia and Poland was maintained. A truce with Sweden was concluded in 1583 in the city of Pluss. Russia not only did not acquire the desired access to the sea, but was also forced to cede Yam, Koporye, Ivangorod and the adjacent southern coast of the Gulf of Finland.

   Ticket number 12. Oprichnina and its consequences

   In December 1564, the tsar, unexpectedly for his subjects, left Moscow and took refuge with his family in Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda, which was located about a hundred kilometers from the capital. Messengers sent from there brought two letters to Moscow. One of them accused the boyars and high clergy of treason and conspiracies against the tsar. Another, addressed to the townspeople, announced that the tsar did not hold “anger and disgrace” against them. With this deft maneuver, Ivan hoped to gain allies in the population. A few days later, the tsar received a delegation from the Boyar Duma and the highest clergy. As a condition for returning to the throne, Ivan named the establishment oprichnina. The oprichnina, which existed for a very short time (1565–1572), left a deep mark on Russian history.

   Oprichnina (from the word “oprich” - except) began to be called the land plot specially allocated to the tsar, and the staff of the tsar’s entourage, and a special army. Oprichnina possessions included a number of cities and counties in the center of the country (Suzdal, Mozhaisk, Vyazma), rich lands of the Russian North, and some counties on the southern borders of the state. The rest of its territory was called “zemshchina”. The entire state apparatus was divided into two parts - the oprichnina and the zemstvo. The feudal lords who joined the oprichnina (initially there were one thousand of them, and by 1572 - six thousand) wore a special uniform: a black caftan and a black pointed hat. Devotion to one’s sovereign, the readiness to “sweep out and gnaw out” traitors were symbolized by brooms and dog heads tied to the necks of horses and quivers for arrows.

   Already the first months of the existence of the oprichnina were marked by monstrous cruelty in their execution of people disliked by the tsar. The victims of bloody massacres were boyars and government officials suspected of treason, members of their families and servants. One of the most terrible crimes of Ivan the Terrible was a punitive expedition to Novgorod in the winter of 1570. A false denunciation of the betrayal of the Novgorod boyars and clergy served as a reason for the murder of thousands of innocent residents of the city. The rural and commercial population suffered from the raids of the oprichnina army. From constant bloody orgies royal army was decomposing. In 1571 it demonstrated its complete inability to face an external enemy. During his raid, the Crimean Khan Devlet-Girey reached Moscow, the Tatars set fire to the Moscow settlement and took more than 100 thousand Russian captives into slavery. The next summer the raid was repeated. The enemy was stopped and defeated by a small army, which included guardsmen, zemstvo boyars and nobles.

   In the fall of 1572, the oprichnina was officially abolished. Under threat of punishment, the king forbade his subjects to even utter this word. Many former guardsmen turned from executioners into victims. They were accused of state crimes and executed. After the abolition of the oprichnina, the tsar created the so-called “yard” and again divided the country into zemstvo and courtyard parts. But this no longer played a big role in the political and economic life of the country. With the abandonment of the oprichnina order, mass terror decreased.

   The oprichnina had far-reaching political consequences. It led to the elimination of the remnants of appanage times and the strengthening of the regime of the tsar’s personal power. Its socio-economic order turned out to be disastrous. Oprichnina and protracted Livonian War ruined the country. The deep economic crisis that engulfed Russia in the 1570s–1580s was called “rukha” by contemporaries. One of the disastrous consequences of Ivan the Terrible’s domestic policy was the enslavement of the Russian peasantry. In 1581, “Reserved Summers” were established, until the abolition of which peasants were forbidden to leave their owners. In fact, this meant that the peasants were deprived of the ancient right to move to another owner on St. George’s Day.

   part 1 part 2
   

The “object of knowledge” refers to objective reality. The object of knowledge of historical science is the entire set of events, phenomena and processes that occurred in society throughout the history of mankind.

If various social and human sciences have their own objects of knowledge and their own methods and are aimed at studying certain aspects of modern society, then historical science studies the past, is comprehensive in nature, synthesizes, and integrates the achievements of these sciences. In turn, the latter are based on the results historical research. These contacts are a characteristic feature of modern science, which widely uses an interdisciplinary approach that produces positive results.

The limitlessness of the properties and interrelations of phenomena and processes in society makes it impossible to understand an object in its entirety and depth. Therefore, the researcher also identifies the subject of research, determines the range and nature of research tasks, and studies part, individual aspects of reality. As the study deepens, the subject of research expands.

M. Weber believed that there is no objective subject of history. It is created by the “ability and will” of the historian himself. The historian knows what he snatches from an immense object, a fragment that he himself gives meaning to. Neo-Kantians considered the subject of study to be individual and unique, reconstructed on the basis of the personal assessments and preferences of the historian, in contrast to the natural sciences, which discovered laws independent of the researcher.

However, some historians and, above all, Marxists, believed that history should see the general in the particular, the individual - the laws of development. If history wants to be a science, it must show patterns (like any science). K. Marx’s definition that history “is the activity of a person pursuing his goals” has still not lost its meaning.

Historical research has long been limited to political history. The focus was on the deeds of the kings; historians were not interested in the masses. As F. Voltaire wrote: “I see almost everywhere only the history of kings; I want to write the history of people." D. Hume considered the subject of history to be the emergence, flourishing and death of great empires. E. Gibbon - history of wars and management of public affairs, L. Ranke history diplomatic relations. G. Gallam wrote a constitutional history of England. Of course, this was diversity within political history.

In the 19th century, interest in economic history developed. The advent of statistics gave impetus to these studies. Cultural history also attracts attention. J. Winckelmann wrote a history of ancient art, and J. Burghart believed that culture would become the main theme of history. According to N.A. Erofeev, historians were the last to include the field of social history in the subject of study. And here Marxism played an important role, drawing attention to the life of the working masses, in particular the working class.

After the Second World War, not without the influence of the “Annals School,” a “new historical science,” an anthropological approach, emerged. The focus was on man in his social and cultural dimension, his environment. Historical anthropology, historical psychology appeared, historical sociology, demography, urban studies. The history from below, the history of women, and local history attracted attention. A powerful branch of “oral history” developed, based on memories not only prominent figures, but also ordinary participants in historical events.

Historians even started talking about the “dissolution” of the subject of history, the excessive fragmentation of science itself. But integration processes were also underway. The famous English historian E. Hobsbawm proposed creating a holistic history of society on the basis of social history, paying attention to social psychology: a system of thinking, behavioral stereotypes, and people’s way of life. F. Braudel put forward the idea of ​​global history (the historian is interested in everything related to human life and society). Domestic historian M. Barg believed that there is no need to litter history with “minor” facts that are unworthy of being included in “universal history.” And he was wrong.

In Russian historiography Soviet period the subject of science was defined by I. Kovalchenko, B. Mogilnitsky and some other historians as the study of human activity as a natural process in all the diversity of spatial and temporal specificity. B.G. Mogilnitsky introduced the concept of a “specific historical pattern.” It is not entirely clear what was meant, since a pattern can only be identified by abstracting from concrete reality. The subject of history was most successfully defined by N.A. Erofeev: history studies man and society in their development, change, in various sections of society, what stages in this development society and public man went through, what shifts occurred and how they themselves changed. This definition is close to the latest trends in the development of social history. The historian's attention is focused not only on historical figures and unique events, but also on social structures and trends that have a certain mechanism of interaction. So, there is no single generally accepted definition of the subject of historical science. The subject itself is historical, changing, different directions put forward their understanding of the subject. New scientific disciplines are being isolated all the time. If the subject of science were rigidly defined once and for all, research would stop. But what has been said does not mean that the question of the subject of science is not important: having defined the subject, we largely predetermine the results.

Some historians strive to reduce everything to a description of facts, ignoring theory, while others, on the contrary, ignore event history and fall into excessive sociologization or psychologization of history, when the scheme displaces the material. Obviously, there is no history without description, but there is no history without theory and methodology. Historians do not have a single axiomatic theory; there is a pluralism of theories and interpretations. This is its specificity.

Branch structure of historical science.

Military history is one of the oldest branches of science. Already the “father of history” Herodotus and other ancient historians wrote about wars. Since the 18th century, military history has developed as a history of battles. From the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries, due to the changing nature of wars, the subject began to include the study of not only purely military issues, but also society itself. After the Second World War, the subject includes the socio-economic history of the country itself involved in hostilities. The subject of military history is now widely understood as “war and society.” However, military experts are brought in to study the progress of hostilities.

Political history is also a long-existing branch of historical science and has also significantly changed the subject of study, improved research methods, and included the history of civil society, political events, the functioning of the political system, and executive power. The famous English historian D. Elton believes that political history studies a person acting in society. Moreover, we need to understand these actions, and not just describe them. Of course, it is not enough now to write the history of kings and ministers. D. Elton believes that political history should deal with people, not statistics, avoid abstractions and not merge with social history. However, this approach is not shared by many historians who consider contact with sociology useful; everything valuable should be taken from social history.

More and more, the attention of political historians is focused on studying the mechanism of power, on which the fate of people largely depends. The subject of research is expanding: population movements, local problems and even pop culture have become the focus of attention of political historians. E. Hobsbawm played a major role in reviving interest in this branch of science, considering not only the sphere of “high politics”, but history various groups, conflicts, continuity and discreteness of politics. We need to study everything: economics, social psychology: Politicians adapt to a specific situation, although the rationality of their actions should not be exaggerated.

Economic history is actively developing with the advent of statistics. Today they are used mathematical models. A historian cannot do without knowledge of what monetarism, lasseférism, the theory of D. Keynes, etc. are. The historian is not limited to purely economic analysis: data on per capita income do not give a picture of the situation of people: these figures hide income inequality, and this is not only in money but also in the environment, people’s behavior, it is necessary to attract data from demography and sociology to the study of economics.

Social history. Already in the 19th century, the interest of historians began to be attracted by the history of “ordinary” people, the people. Marxism focused on the study of the working class. In the 20th century, the Annales School began to study social structures and processes. In the 60s, the famous book by the English historian E. Thomson on the emergence of the working class showed the possibilities of an interdisciplinary approach. The history of the family and women began to be studied. There has been increased attention to the history of everyday, private life, the history of leisure and free time.

For many years, domestic historiography paid attention only to the history of the class struggle, leaving aside other contradictions in society. In addition, schematism prevented the creation of a comprehensive picture of the life of the masses. Only recently did B. N. Mironov’s work on social history appear Imperial Russia, the first large-scale attempt to apply new approaches.

Religious history. It has been successfully developed in the West for a long time and very poorly here. Meanwhile, underestimating this aspect of life leads to a distortion of the overall picture. There are two extremes in studying these problems - go into theology or completely ignore religious ideas. In the West, they are convinced that a believing historian better understands the meaning of religion. Today, religious history is an indispensable element of intellectual and social history. A historian cannot ignore this aspect while studying earlier eras.

History of science. The historian views science not as a list of discoveries, but as a product of human activity, an integral part of the life of society and culture. Science is social and ideological. Historians should not forget non-scientific forms of thinking (spiritism, astrology, alchemy). The connections between science and society are being increasingly studied.

History of women and gender studies. Women have been written about in history since the birth of feminism. But in the late 60s and early 70s of the 20th century, “women’s studies” appeared, and in the 80s “gender studies” were born and the subject and conceptual apparatus of women’s history was rethought. Already at the first stage, a fraternity of women historians emerged with a certain degree of aggressiveness and a painful reaction to criticism. In their opinion, male historiography has “erased” women from history; this gap needs to be filled, to show the relations of dominance and subordination between the sexes. In the 80s, gender became a key category - “gender-gender-sociocultural” (as opposed to “semi-sex”), emphasizing the social nature of inequality between the sexes, which was a product of cultural and historical development. Family and marriage, household and market, law and politics, religion and education, culture - research topics.

History of art. If art historians were only interested in the date of painting, authorship and style, then the historian is interested in the conditions of creation, composition, context, intellectual and social history. Of course, the historian must know aesthetic views of the period he is studying, and himself have certain views. Studying art helps to develop a deeper understanding of a culture as a whole. And here the historian occupies his own niche, different from the art critic.

Intellectual history. At first it developed as a history of the ideas of major thinkers. Then doubts arose whether this should be studied, since many ideas did not materialize and did not have an impact. In connection with the development of postmodern approaches, intellectual history has been updated. She extremely expanded the subject of her research: she studies religious, scientific views, ideas about diseases, music, etc.

There is still interest in major thinkers and their texts - you need to know the situation, the vocabulary of that period. The circle of intellectuals and representatives of various cultural strata has expanded. In our country, the Center for Intellectual History has been created at the Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which publishes the almanac “Dialogue with Time,” which gives an idea of ​​​​the development of this direction in our country and abroad.

History of culture. This is a traditional branch of research. Philosophers and cultural scientists constantly offer new interpretations of this concept. There are more than a dozen definitions of culture, and historians have practically used all the new ideas. Currently, a new cultural history has emerged, which comes from the recognition leading role language, text and narrative structures (semiotic approach). She rejects the opposition between folk and elite cultures. Classes in cultural history today require serious training in the field of philosophy of culture and cultural studies. New approaches produce new results. Many historians believe that it is the history of culture that can become the basis for the historical synthesis that many generations of historians dream about.

Diplomatic history. At first, they studied only the history of negotiations between individuals: the king, diplomats. Then they came to understand the need to take into account the economic and social situation. The history of international relations emerged - a broader subject of study of the system of states. Recently, interest has shifted to the study of the problems of “identity” of a particular people, the creation of its image (“image”). The cultural emphasis is studied to understand the values, mentality of peoples, and their ideas about each other. The idea of ​​cooperation between historians from different countries is being strengthened in the name of strengthening mutual understanding between peoples.

Of course, we have not listed all thematic areas of research. In addition, history can be distinguished by chronology ancient world, the history of the Middle Ages, modern and contemporary times. You can study the history of a particular country, region, local history. Along with the global approach, world history, one can study microhistory (individuals, villages, communities, etc.).

National history and international relations of historians. Historical science, like any science, is international in nature. Of course, historians in every country study, first of all, their national history as a subject. Traditions and culture determine the topics and approaches to research. However, since the formation of scientific approaches to history in late XIX century is intensifying mutual influence historical schools of different countries. Positivism and Marxism influenced the development of historical science in all countries, as did structuralism and postmodernism after the Second World War. All these approaches coexist in historical science and are common in all countries. True, there are features that are studied in the course of historiography. Psychoanalysis, mathematical methods, semiotics are used everywhere, but to varying degrees. Historians closely follow the successes of their colleagues in other countries. When interesting works appear, they are immediately translated into other languages ​​and become the property of all historians. It is impossible to imagine that some group of historians isolates themselves from world science in our age of informatization, the Internet and the development of “globalization” processes. Such an “isolated” science, without participating in the “dialogue of cultures,” will not be able to fulfill its social functions.

Historians have been gathering at international congresses for many years. The last, XIX took place in August 2000 in the capital of Norway, Oslo. Several thousand historians gathered at the congress: they presented a wide panorama of various trends, methodological approaches, and the development of new historical disciplines. Congress is the most convenient place for creative contacts. At this congress, three major topics were discussed, 20 special topics were discussed, and 25 round tables were held. During the days of the congress, 22 international organizations historians and 18 international committees in various fields of science.

The first “big” theme of the congress: “Prospects for global history, concepts, methodology; Is World History possible? cultural interaction between continents over the centuries."

The second “big” topic: “millennium, time and history; construction and division of time: periodization and chronology, Eschatology.” Third topic: “The role of history and the responsibility of the historian.”

Special topics were discussed: Multimedia, the Internet and the work of a historian. Memory and collective identity (how societies create and manage their past). Assessment of historiography of the 20th century, professionalization, methodology, essays on history. Scientific discoveries: transmission and perception of scientific knowledge. Theory and practice of jurisprudence: law, norms and their violation. Muslim societies over the centuries. Religion and gender. Christian missions, modernization, colonization and decolonization. Generations and generational conflicts. Slavery and other forced forms of labor. Family and society: a comparison of Europe and Asia. Regions and regionalism. Social practice of writing and reading (from antiquity to the present day). Masculinity in practice and image. Totalitarianism and dictatorship. Work and unemployment in historical perspective. Minority culture, its relationship to the dominant majority culture. A changing approach to the Pacific. Modernization and traditions in Latin America. New advances in the study of habitats. Types of information and communication in the 16th - 20th centuries. Violence and death: comparison of the XIV - XV and XX centuries.

Let's call the topics of the round tables. Teaching history: new technology, textbooks, the place of history in the curriculum. Orientalist historians and writing Arab history. Travel and exploration of the North Atlantic from the Middle Ages to XVIII century. Interaction and confrontation between legislative and legal systems in Europe. Television news as a historical source. Concepts of humanity over the centuries. Children and war. Family, marriage and property rights. Nobility: comparative analysis. Underground economy. Fisheries: food and commerce. Crime and criminality: new historical perspectives. Local history. Gender, race, xenophobia and nationalism. Athens and Rome in the culture and construction of Europe. The Baltic zone in history. China and the world in the 18th century. History of diseases. History of suicide. Opening of archives and history of communism. Propaganda and image of power. Reappraisal of the Cold War. Tourism and history. The idea of ​​peace and the practice of peace. Central Europe - unity and diversity. Personality and the idea of ​​privacy.

The Congress convincingly demonstrated an extremely broad understanding of the subject of history, all regions were covered, all traditional and new approaches were covered, and research topics were diverse.

Of course, historians take different positions. The problem of understanding a “foreign” culture remains. When studying the history of another country, a historian must understand cultural characteristics and decipher cultural “moves.” There are cases when historians “from the outside” contributed to the study of the events of “another” national history. Let us recall, at least, the works of the Englishman T. Carlyle and the German G. Siebel on history french revolution or the works of E. Tarle on the history of France.

Undoubtedly, the subject of history has expanded, covering all new aspects of the object - the past of humanity. Some historians express concern about the excessive fragmentation of the subject, in their opinion: synthesis and a coherent narrative history are impossible. The specialization of historians is so great that it seems that history has lost its subject and dissolved in related sciences... Of course, this is not so. Rather, the consideration of any problem becomes complex, and all of these sectoral approaches are mutually intertwined. Historians are looking for new approaches to synthesizing history. But a new paradigm does not appear on demand; prerequisites must be created for this.

Historians study their subject unevenly in time and space, from different angles. Fragmentation, unevenness, mosaic nature of the study of different periods, different geographical areas, “blank spots” - such is the fabric of historical time. But historical knowledge allows us to see the diversity of the world, events and structures, daily life, heroes and little man, microhistory and global problems.

“The subject of history is the sum of all stories, new approaches and points of view: past, present and future” (F. Braudel)

The subject of history As a science, there is a need to understand historical reality. The need to know the past in order not to repeat the mistakes of the past. And here scientists—historians—come to the fore, trying to understand historical reality.

The task of a historian, like any other scientist, is to search for truth. The process of comprehending the truth is extremely complex and difficult. On this path, a scientist may encounter failures. Due to the complexity of the problem, lack of facts, etc. he, wanting to come to the truth, without noticing it, may fall into error. But in addition to purely cognitive difficulties, the scientist faces other dangers, the sources of which are outside the boundaries of science.

To know history there are few facts, you need information about them. The historical past is reconstructed by scientists using objects of material culture, written sources or some other basis.

Methods of history

Basics of the historical method

Modern historians pose the following questions:

1. When was the historical source written?
2. Where was it created?
3. What pre-existing material did the author draw on?
4. What was the original form of the source?
5. How trustworthy is the source?

The historical method consists of following the principles and rules of working with primary sources and other evidence found during research and then used in writing a historical work.

Among other historians who influenced the development of the methodology of historical research, we can mention Ranke, Trevelyan, Braudel, Blok, Febvre, Vogel. Authors such as H. Trevor-Roper opposed the use of scientific methodology in history. They stated that understanding history requires imagination, so history should be considered an art rather than a science. An equally controversial author, Ernst Nolte, following the classical German philosophical tradition, viewed history as a movement of ideas. Marxist historiography, represented in the West, particularly by the works of Hobsbawm and Deutscher, aims to confirm the philosophical ideas of Karl Marx. Their opponents, representing anti-communist historiography, such as Pipes and Conquest, offer an interpretation of history opposite to the Marxist one. There is also extensive historiography from a feminist perspective. A number of postmodern philosophers generally deny the possibility of an unbiased interpretation of history and the existence of scientific methodology in it. Lately, cliodynamics has begun to gain more and more strength - math modeling historical processes.

Essence, forms and functions of historical knowledge and cognition.
Methods for studying history.

Historical science (history) can be considered 1) as a form of social consciousness, 2) as a social institution.

From the point of view of the form of social consciousness, historical science is, firstly, one of the ways knowledge world, which is characterized by specific methods, secondly, the field of scientific knowledge about processes and patterns of development.

Among other forms of social consciousness stands out historical consciousness, i.e. a set of ideas, views, perceptions, feelings, moods that reflect the perception and assessment of the past in all its diversity.

When considering historical science as a social institution, its other components come to the fore: institutions of historical science (historical public organizations, the Academy of Sciences), groups of scientists (orientalists, medievalists, scientists Leningrad school), system of historical education (secondary school – university history department – ​​graduate school), etc.

Historical knowledge– a form of reflection of historical reality. There are different levels of knowledge - thinking, empirical, theoretical.

At the first level (stage) of knowledge, the historian studies various sources to identify facts in them.

Methods of reconstructive cognition are diverse and include both methods of specific problem (special historical) research and methods of general scientific historical research.

The main task of historical knowledge is to obtain knowledge that is recorded in the source, as well as to obtain new knowledge that is not directly recorded in it.

TO special historical methods relate:

— conventional documentary and grammatical-diplomatic methods, i.e. methods of dividing text into component elements are used to study office work and office documents.

— methods of textual criticism. For example, logical analysis of the text allows you to interpret various “dark” places, identify contradictions in the document, existing gaps, etc. The use of these methods makes it possible to identify missing (destroyed) documents and reconstruct various events.

— historical and political analysis allows you to compare information from various sources and recreate circumstances political struggle, which gave rise to the documents, specify the composition of the participants who adopted this or that act.

There are other special methods historical analysis and synthesis.

To methods general historical Scientific research includes:

— Historical-genetic (retrospective) method allows you to show cause-and-effect relationships and patterns of development of a historical event (phenomenon, structure). It consists of consistent penetration into the past in order to identify the causes of any facts, events, or phenomena. The historical-genetic method is also used to identify the relationship between the subjective, personal factor in historical development and objective factors (the logic of political struggle, economic development, etc.).

— problem-chronological method involves the division of broad topics into a number of narrow problems, each of which is considered in chronological order. This method is used both when studying the material (at the first stage of analysis, together with methods of systematization and classification), and when arranging it and presenting it within the text of a work on history.

Methods of empirical historical knowledge belong to the methods of general historical research:

— historical-comparative method(in combination with the method of identification, analogy as the logical basis of this method) allows us to identify both general and special features in the development various events, phenomena, structures.

— historical-typological method allows you to organize subjects of study into qualitatively different types (classes) based on their inherent essential features. Typologization by form is a type of classification, but it allows one to identify the essential features of an object. The basis of the method is an understanding of the relationship between the individual, the particular, the general and the universal in the historical process.

— periodization method allows us to identify a number of stages in the development of various social, social phenomena. The criteria for periodization in each case may be different.

— structural-diachronic method aimed at studying historical processes at different times. The use of this method makes it possible to identify the duration, frequency of various events, as well as the dynamics of development of various elements of a complex system.

The concept " historical theory"is still controversial and unsettled in the scientific and philosophical literature. And yet, historical theories are those that 1) record differences in systems, 2) indicate transitions from a system of one quality to another (for example, the law of development of socio-historical formations), 3) theories containing the laws of historical science.

TO methods of theoretical knowledge may be attributed modeling method(although it is not strictly historical).

Historical knowledge- the result of the process of historical knowledge of reality, tested by practice and justified by logic, its adequate reflection in the human mind in the form of ideas, concepts, judgments, theories.

Historical knowledge can be conditionally divided (according to methods of cognition) into three levels.

1) reconstructive knowledge - fixation of historical facts in chronological sequence - formed in the process of reconstructive activity of the historian. In the course of this activity (usually using special historical methods - textual, diplomatic, source studies, historiographic, etc.) the historian establishes historical facts. Reconstructive knowledge, a reconstructive picture of the past is created in the form of a narrative (story, narration) or in the form of tables, diagrams.

2) empirical historical knowledge- knowledge about the regularities and relationships between various facts, phenomena, processes - is the result of reconstructive processing. Its purpose is to clarify repetition in the process of historical development. In the course of such research, the historian establishes facts of a higher level - empirical (open regularities - similar signs of processes, typology of phenomena, etc.).

3) theoretical historical knowledge- knowledge about typology and repeatability, regularity of facts, phenomena, processes, structures - explains empirical facts in the course of theoretical knowledge. The task of theoretical knowledge is to formulate a theory, i.e. identifying the laws of history development(But not functioning. For example, political science studies the laws of functioning of state institutions, and history studies the laws of their development. Economics studies the laws of functioning economic systems, and history is the laws of their development. And so on.). The function of historical theory is to explain the regularities of the historical process and model its development.

Sometimes the place of theory can be taken by an ideological construct, but this has nothing to do with science.

Since historical cognition and knowledge are forms of social consciousness, their functions (i.e. tasks, methods and results) are socially determined. The functions of historical knowledge include:

- the need to form social self-awareness,

— satisfaction of the need for social education,

- needs for political activity and politics itself,

- the need for explanation, foresight and prediction of the future.

Methodology of historical research is the object of attention of both historians and philosophers. The word methodology denotes the doctrine (concept) of a system of principles and methods of organizing and constructing theoretical and practical activities.

IN Russian historiography there was an understanding of the methodology as

- description of the object and objects ( various sides object) of historical research,

- clarifying the purpose of the study,

- setting problems and tasks,

— disclosure of sources of assigned tasks,

— historiographical justification research objectives,

— description of tools (methods, procedures for establishing knowledge),

- description of knowledge itself, i.e. definitions used in the study.

It should be noted that in modern Western historiography the concept of “methodology” is limited either to the “technical” application of methods, or to the “philosophy of history”.

The concept of a historical source, their classification.

Historical source Any document used to understand reality is called. A document that contains information about the past, but is not used by a historian, is not a source (of information) for the latter.

Classification- the distribution of objects of any kind into interrelated classes according to the most essential features inherent in objects of this kind and distinguishing them from objects of other kinds, with each class occupying a certain permanent place in the resulting system and divided into subclasses. A correctly compiled classification reflects the patterns of development of classified objects, deeply reveals the connections between them and serves as the basis for generalizing conclusions and forecasts.

In historical science, there are different approaches to classifying sources.

- real

- written,

— fine (fine-artistic, fine-graphic, fine-natural),

- phonic.

This classification allows us to determine general methods for solving problems that arise when analyzing and using each group of sources.

2) type classification, which is based on a certain function of the source’s influence on certain spheres of social relations. Species classification makes it possible to identify and trace the evolution of sources.

Thus, the sources of the period of feudalism can be divided into

1) Public legal acts:

A) contractual type - international treaties from the 10th century, princely treaties from the 12th century. and so on.

B) contractual-legislative type - charters from the 12th century, charters from the 14th century, acts Zemsky Sobors from 1566, etc.

C) judicial procedural type - from the 15th century.

2) Private acts:

A) contractual type - land deeds from the 12th century. acts on movable property from the 13th century, monetary acts from the 16th century, acts of labor hiring from the 17th century. and so on.

B) administrative type - letters to clerks, instructions on managing the estate from the 17th century.

3) office documents - administrative type, reporting type, protocol type, reporting type,

Textet TB-700HD

1. What is history? The subject of history as a science: purpose, objectives of study, socially significant functions.
2. Periodization of world history.
3. Basic concepts (interpretations) of the historical process.

1. WHAT IS HISTORY? SUBJECT OF HISTORY AS A SCIENCE:
GOAL, OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY, SOCIALLY SIGNIFICANT FUNCTIONS

History is one of the oldest sciences, about 2500 years old. Its founder is considered ancient Greek historian Herodotus (5th century BC). The ancients valued history very much and called it “magistra vitae” (teacher of life).

History is usually defined as a science about the past- past reality, about what once happened to a person, people, society as a whole. Thus the story comes down to simple analysis events, processes, states that have somehow sunk into oblivion. This understanding of history is neither accurate nor complete, moreover, it is internally contradictory. In fact, history does not allow people to forget “their former life.” History, as it were, resurrects the past, the past, rediscovering and reconstructing it for the present. Thanks to history, historical knowledge, the past does not die, but continues to live in the present, serving the present.

It is noteworthy that in Ancient Greece the patroness of history was Clio - the goddess who glorifies. The scroll and slate stick in her hands are a symbol and guarantee that nothing should disappear without a trace.

History is the collective memory of the people, the memory of the past. But the memory of the past is no longer the past in the proper sense of the word. This is the past, restored and restored according to the standards of modernity, with an orientation towards the values ​​and ideals of people's lives in the present, for the past exists for us through the present and thanks to it. K. Jaspers expressed this idea in his own way: “History directly concerns us... And everything that concerns us, thereby constitutes the problem of the present for a person” (Jaspers K. The meaning and purpose of history. M., 1991. P. 9).

Initial meaning of the word "story" goes back to the Greek "ioropia", which means "investigation", "recognition", "establishment". Thus, initially "story" identified with a way of recognizing, establishing true events and facts. However, in Roman historiography it has already acquired second meaning (story about past events), that is, the center of gravity was transferred from the study of the past to the narration of it. During the Renaissance, there is third the meaning of the concept "history". History began to be understood type of literature, special function which was establishing and recording the truth.

However, how independent field of knowledge, especially scientific, history has not been reviewed yet for a long time. It did not have its own subject during the period of Antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and even during the Enlightenment. How is this fact consistent with the fairly high prestige and widespread prevalence of historical knowledge? How to reconcile it with the huge number of works containing historical information, from Herodotus and Thucydides, through countless medieval chronicles, chronicles and “hagiographies”, to historical studies of the early modern era? This is explained by the fact that history has been for a long time integrated into the general knowledge system. In the eras of Antiquity and the Middle Ages, it existed and developed in combination with mythology, religion, theology, literature and, to some extent, geography. During the Renaissance, it was given a powerful impetus by geographical discoveries, the flowering of art, and political theories. In the XVII-XVIII centuries. history was connected with political theory, geography, literature, philosophy, and culture.

The need to isolate scientific knowledge itself began to be felt since the time of the natural science revolution (17th century). However, even at the beginning of the 19th century, the “indivisibility” of the “philosophical” and scientific knowledge, on the one hand, and science itself across disciplines, on the other.

One from the first attempts to determine the place of history as a scientific discipline, having own subject, was undertaken by the German philosopher W. Krug in his work “The Experience of a Systematic Encyclopedia of Knowledge.” The circle divided sciences into philological and real, real into positive (legal and theological) and natural, natural into historical and rational, etc. In turn, the “historical” sciences were divided into geographical (place) and historical (time) disciplines.

At the end of the 19th century. French philosopher A. Naville divided all sciences into three groups:

1. “Theorematics” - “sciences about the limits of possibilities or laws” (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology).

2. "History" - "the sciences of realized opportunities or facts" (astronomy, geology, botany, zoology, mineralogy, human history).

3. “Canon” - “the science of possibilities, the implementation of which would be good, or of ideal rules of behavior” (morality, art theory, law, medicine, pedagogy).

The study of any science begins with defining the concepts with which it operates in the process of cognition of both nature and society. From this point of view the question arises: What is history as a science? What is the subject of its study? In answering this question, it is first necessary to distinguish history like any development process nature and society, closely related to each other, and history as a science about these processes.

We will study history as science in the development of human society in all its diversity. And since the history of society is a set of specific and diverse actions and actions of individual people, human communities, which are in a certain relationship, constituting all of humanity, subject The study of history is the activities and actions of people, the entire set of relationships in society.

Famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote about history as a science: “In scientific language the word "history" is used in a double sense: 1) as movement in time, process and 2) how process knowledge. Therefore, everything that happens in time has its own history. Contents of the story, as a separate Sciences, a special branch of scientific knowledge, serves as a historical process, i.e. the course, conditions and successes of human society or the life of mankind in its development and results" (V.O. Klyuchevsky. Course of Russian History. M., 1956. T. I. Part I. P. 14).

Historians study their subject in a diversified way over time, in parts, from different angles. Disorder, fragmentation, unevenness, “white spots” and “gray niches” of the past - such is the fabric of historical time. But historical knowledge in general allows, when necessary, to turn your gaze and see all the diversity of the “world of history,” structures and connections, events and actions, the existence of peoples and the everyday life of heroes and “little” people, everyday consciousness and the global worldview.

Due to the fact that the content of historical science is the historical process, revealed in the phenomena of human life, and these phenomena are extremely diverse, accordingly history is a science diversified, it is composed of a number of independent branches of historical knowledge, namely: political history, civil history, economic history, cultural history, military history, history of state and law, etc.

History is divided and by breadth of object study: history of the world as a whole (world or general history); history of world civilizations; history of continents (history of Asia and Africa, Latin America); history of individual countries and peoples (history of the USA, Canada, China, Russia, etc.).

There was a row auxiliary historical disciplines, developing general issues methods and techniques of historical research. Among them: paleography (the history of writing), numismatics (coins, orders, medals), toponymy (the study of names of geographical places), source studies ( general techniques and methods of studying historical sources), etc.

History is a concrete science that requires precise knowledge of chronology (dates), facts, events. It is related to other humanities and social sciences. These relations developed differently in different periods, but the largest representatives of historiography have always believed in the “common market” of the social sciences. This belief continues today. Interpenetration and mutual enrichment of social sciences, the so-called interdisciplinarity, is a phenomenon characteristic of the 20th century. It is due to the demarcation of social sciences, their separation into independent fields of knowledge, as a result of which the process of division of labor and specialization was accompanied by deepening relationships.

History, as well as other humanities and social sciences of the late XIX - XX centuries. did not escape the influence and psychology. They were very popular at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. books by G. Lebon " Psychological laws evolution of peoples" (Le Bon. 1894) and "Psychology of Peoples and Masses" (Le Bon. 1895), which substantiated the assumption of the entry of European society into the "era of the crowd", when the rational critical principle embodied in the individual is suppressed by the irrational mass consciousness. Austrian psychologist S. Freud believed that his concept of the “subconscious” could be the key to understanding historical figures, and Freud’s “Essay on Leonardo da Vinci,” written in 1910, was essentially the first experience psychohistory.

Term "psychohistory" appeared in the 50s in the USA, where at that time journals on psychohistory were published. Their heroes were such historical figures as Hitler, Trotsky, Gandhi, etc. Psychoanalysis has had big influence to criticize some historical sources - diaries, letters, memoirs.

The fact of the author’s psychological need for fantasy began to be taken into account. A separate topic was the study of diary entries about dreams. There are examples of the application of psychoanalysis to social groups, for example, to the history of peasant and urban religious movements, in the study of which historians often deal with deviations. But in general, the flourishing of psychohistory turned out to be short-lived, and the possibilities were limited.

Today, both the significance and the limitations of psychoanalysis for their discipline are obvious to historians. The areas where psychoanalysis can be effectively used are outlined quite clearly: the study of outstanding personalities, the study of cultural traditions. The task of synthesizing history and psychology, if it makes sense, is still a matter for the future.

Compared to other humanities and social sciences that study any one aspect of social life, history differs in that subject her knowledge is the entirety of the life of society throughout the entire historical process. In addition, many problems of the past and present, which are dealt with by political scientists, economists, sociologists, ethnologists and other specialists in the humanitarian and social cycle, can be solved only on the basis of a historical approach and historical analysis, on the basis of the work done by historians, because only collection, systematization and generalization of vast factual material allows us to see and understand trends in social development.

The study and teaching of history in modern conditions is complicated by a number of circumstances:

1. The process of rethinking the past in our country is taking place in the context of a change in the socio-economic and political system, in the conditions of the formation of new moral values. In this regard, history has become a real battlefield, a field of political struggle on which not only scientifically based criticism collides, but also politicized points of view, whose supporters are interested not so much in historical truth as in arguments in favor of their existence. And this, instead of one half-truth, gives rise to another.

2. History has always been closely connected with the politics, interests and destinies of rulers, who rarely encouraged the desire of historians to know the truth and communicate it to society. This is felt especially acutely today. Therefore, we have to deal with bias and subjectivity in assessing historical events, especially the Soviet period.

3. Unfortunately, the level of historical training and general political culture of our youth does not create favorable conditions for deep critical understanding and perception of numerous publications that distort the picture of the historical development of our country.

4. The situation is complicated by the lack of textbooks. The available individual textbooks and teaching aids are rare.

In these conditions, teaching history acquires a general civil meaning.

The purpose of the study Our course is the formation of future specialists in the knowledge system, laying the methodological foundation of historical consciousness, social self-awareness and establishing connections with other disciplines.

The main objective of the course is to give a complete picture of the historical path of human development, to form in students a certain system of theoretical ideas and knowledge about historical processes in the world, to show the unity and diversity of human history, the specifics of various civilizations, their types, the history of the development of different countries, peoples, societies, person.

At the same time, to give a complete picture of the historical path of development of Russian civilization, to identify the impact on it of powerful civilization-forming flows of the West and East, to determine the historical place of Russia in the global human community, to understand the features of its social organization and culture in comparison with the experience of other nations.

The most important objectives of studying this course are also: activation cognitive activity students, teaching them methods of rational explanation of historical phenomena, ways of understanding them, as well as the choice of personal orientations, conscious behavior and activities.

This course relates to the disciplines general cultural training. He is generalizing, synthesizing and performs several socially significant functions: cognitive (intellectual and developmental), ideological, practical-political, educational.

Cognitive (intellectual and developmental) function consists primarily of a specific study of the historical path of development of human society (the history of world civilizations), a theoretical generalization of facts and events, as well as identifying the main trends in the history of the development of world civilizations and their characteristics, reflected in historical sources.

Worldview function is that a worldview - a view of the world, society, the laws of its development can be scientific only when it is based on objective reality, that is, historical facts. The history of world civilizations, its factual side, is the foundation on which the science of society is based. One of the most important ideological aspects of studying the course is the formation of historicism of thinking, because it teaches one to think in historical categories, see society in development, evaluate the phenomena of social life in relation to their past and correlate it with the subsequent course of development.

Practical-political function is that history, by identifying patterns of development of human society on the basis of a theoretical understanding of historical facts, helps to develop a scientifically based political course and avoid subjective decisions. The unity of the past, present and future is the root of peoples’ interest in their history. History is intended to facilitate self-awareness for society and people and show the path to self-improvement. The past does not go away without a trace, it has no boundaries, it cannot be canceled. Its oblivion is a tragedy for subsequent generations, for human society cannot develop without a spiritual heritage. Without it, it is doomed to degradation.

Educational function contributes to the formation of civic qualities, helps to understand such categories as honor, duty to society, good and evil, and, in general, the moral values ​​of humanity in their development.

1.History as a science. The structure of historical knowledge.

2. Essence, forms, functions of historical knowledge.

3. Historical sources and their classification.

4. The main stages of the development of science. The place of history in the system of sciences.

5. Methodology of historical science.

Love of history seems inseparable from human nature because it is inseparable from love of oneself. It is this root cause that draws us forward and back, into the future and to past centuries.

(Lord Bolingbroke)

1.History as a science. The structure of historical knowledge.

The study of any science, as is known, begins with its definition, disclosure of the concepts and categories with which it operates.

The term “history” comes from the Greek word “ίστορία” - research, story. In Ancient Greece, the word “history” meant any knowledge obtained through research, and not just historical knowledge itself in the modern sense. For example, Aristotle used this word in the History of Animals. It is also found in the hymns of Homer, the writings of Heraclitus and the text of the oath to the Athenian state.

The original meaning of the word continues to be widely used in everyday vocabulary and literature. This word has entered all modern languages. In science, the term “history” is used in most languages, in two main senses:

History is like any process of development in nature and society, that is, the very objective process of development of the Universe, the Earth, nature, society, and individual sciences.

History as a science is a complex of social sciences (historical science) that studies the development of human society in all its specificity and diversity. History gives us knowledge about the past in order to understand the present and prospects for development in the future.

Herodotus of Halicarnassus (Old Greek Ἡρόδοτος Ἁλικαρνᾱσσεύς, about 484 BC e.- near 425 BC e.) - ancient Greek historian, author of the first full-scale historical treatise - “Stories", - describing Greco-Persian wars and the customs of many contemporary peoples. The works of Herodotus were of great importance for antique culture. Cicerocalled him "the father of history."

The history of society is a set of specific and diverse actions and actions of individual people, human communities, which are in a certain relationship, making up all of humanity. Hence, subject of history study is the activities and actions of people, the entire set of relations in society. Famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky (1841-1911) wrote about history as a science: “In scientific language, the word “history” is used in a double sense: 1) as movement in time, a process, and 2) as knowledge of the process. Therefore, everything that happens in time has its own history. The content of history, as a separate science, a special branch of scientific knowledge, is the historical process, i.e. the course, conditions and successes of human society or the life of mankind in its development and results" (Klyuchevsky V.O. Works in 8 volumes. T.1. Course of Russian history. Part 1. - M., 1956. - S . 14).

In modern historical science, there is a noticeable fusion of these two meanings due to increased attention to the study of the influence, firstly, of geological and biological factors on the development of an individual and human society; secondly, through studying the influence human civilization on the environment. Environmental problems become the bridge that connects the natural, humanities and exact sciences, and therefore they gradually move into the field of practical politics.

Thus: History is the science of the past of human society and its present, of the patterns of development of social life in specific forms, in space-time dimensions.

The content of history in general is historical process, which is revealed in the phenomena of human life, information about which is preserved in historical monuments and sources. These phenomena are extremely diverse and relate to the development of the economy, the external and internal social life of the country, international relations, and the activities of historical figures.

The structure of historical knowledge.

Today, historical science is a whole complex of interconnected sciences. Let us imagine the diagram of historical sciences in the form of a triangular truncated pyramid. Historical knowledge has several facets.

Firstly, this history of certain types of human activity– The basis of historical science is the collection, systematization and generalization of facts, consideration of them in close connection and totality. Thanks to the gradual accumulation of facts, entire branches of historical knowledge have emerged:

civil history,

history of state and law,

history of the economy,

military history,

cultural history,

science and technology,

political history,

history of economics,

history of spiritual culture, etc.

It is easy to notice that each of these sections includes more specific divisions, for example, the history of economics - the history of agriculture, the history of crafts, the history of industry. Political history - the history of wars, revolutions, state and law, finally, the history of dynasties and much more.

The other facet is The World History, which is based on the history of types of human activity, includes it, but in turn is divided into

history of the continents,

history of countries,

individual peoples,

individual regions

The third facet of historical science is a number of historical disciplines, which serve historical science itself, developing general issues of methodology and technology of historical research.

auxiliary historical disciplines, as well as various methods of historical research,

archeology,

source studies (general techniques and methods for studying historical sources),

paleography (history of writing),

heraldry (coats of arms),

sphragistics (prints),

numismatics (coins, medals, orders),

toponymy (study of names of geographical places)

ethnography, etc.

This structure of historical knowledge corresponds to the process of specialization in all areas of scientific knowledge, which sharply intensified at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Completes this structure "philosophy of history" or more precisely, theory of historical process, which is designed, on the basis of the historical material accumulated today, to reveal general patterns, trends in the development of human society, and at the same time highlight the totality of those factors that determined the various stages of its development.

History is a concrete science. It requires precise knowledge of chronology, specific facts, events, which makes it possible to compare, generalize, and extrapolate them. Many problems of our time, which are in the field of view of economists, sociologists, political scientists, ethnologists and other specialists in the humanities, can be successfully solved only on the basis of a historical approach and historical analysis, on the basis of the work done by historians to collect, systematize and generalize a huge array of facts that make it possible to identify main trends in social development. In this sense, in terms of the way of understanding social phenomena and processes, all social sciences are historical.

The existing set of social disciplines that study various aspects of human civilization (history, philosophy, sociology, political science, jurisprudence, philology, linguistics, ethics, etc.), in contrast to the natural and exact sciences, is usually called the system of humanities. Being independent and relatively independent, they are organically connected with each other. Only in the aggregate are the humanities able to solve in dialectical unity the main task facing humanity: knowledge of the past and current state of society in order to understand its laws, understand its present and future prospects.

The study of humanities is an important part of the general educational and worldview training of modern specialists and contributes to the intellectual development of the individual and the development of creative thinking. History is one of the most important social sciences.

In the structure of historical knowledge, the interconnection of history with both the exact and natural sciences, not to mention other humanities, is clearly visible. Try to determine the most visible lines of this relationship yourself.