Subject and objectives of the Russian history course. The structure of historical science

Story. Subject of history. Story. Subject of history. The connection between history and other humanities. The connection between history and other humanities. Functions of historical knowledge. Functions of historical knowledge. Periodization of world history. Periodization of world history. Basic concepts of the historical process. Basic concepts of the historical process.

Industry structure historical science Political history Civil history Economic history Cultural history Military history History of state and law Auxiliary historical disciplines Paleography (history of writing) Numismatics (history of money) Toponymy (study of names of geographical places) Source study (general techniques and methods for studying historical sources)

Studying the historical path of development of human society. Studying the historical path of development of human society. Identification of the main trends in the history of the development of world civilizations and their characteristics. Identification of the main trends in the history of the development of world civilizations and their characteristics. Theoretical generalization of facts and events. Theoretical generalization of facts and events. Cognitive and developmental functions Formation of a worldview based on historical categories. Formation of a worldview based on historical categories. Formation of skills to evaluate the phenomena of social life in relation to their past and future. Formation of skills to evaluate the phenomena of social life in relation to their past and future. Worldview function Development of a scientifically grounded political course. Development of a scientifically grounded political course. Prevention of making subjective decisions. Prevention of making subjective decisions. Political function Formation of civic qualities and patriotism. Formation of civic qualities and patriotism. Awareness of such categories as honor, duty to society, good and evil. Awareness of such categories as honor, duty to society, good and evil. Educational function

Herodotus considered the main content of the historical process to be the struggle between Asia and Europe. Polybius considered the main result of the development of human civilization to be the establishment of the power of the Roman Republic throughout the Mediterranean. He considered the main result of the development of human civilization to be the establishment of the power of the Roman Republic throughout the Mediterranean. Christian interpretation of history (IV-V centuries – mid-18th century c.) It was argued that the will of God controls the entire course of historical development according to laws known and understandable only to him. It was argued that the will of God controls the entire course of historical development according to laws known and understandable only to him. The meaning of history is in the consistent movement of man towards God. The meaning of history is in the consistent movement of man towards God.

Enlightenment thinkers (rationalist concept of history) The belief that the world is driven by the ideas and aspirations of people. The belief that the world is driven by the ideas and aspirations of people. J. Locke, Voltaire, J.-J. Rousseau, G. Hegel. J. Locke, Voltaire, J.-J. Rousseau, G. Hegel. Materialistic concept of history (formational approach) (XIX century) Belief about great influence on the history of material factors: natural, geographical environment, economy, culture, traditions, etc. Conviction about the great influence on the history of material factors: natural, geographical environment, economy, culture, traditions, etc. The decisive driving force behind all important historical events is economic development society, a change in the method of production. The decisive driving force of all important historical events is the economic development of society, a change in the method of production. K. Marx, F. Engels. K. Marx, F. Engels.

Cultural-historical concept of history ( civilizational approach) (XX century) “Humanizing history.” “Humanizing history.” Orientation towards knowledge of history, taking into account countries and regions. Orientation towards knowledge of history, taking into account countries and regions. Great importance of religion and culture, spiritual and moral and intellectual factors. The great importance of religion and culture, spiritual, moral and intellectual factors. N.Ya.Danilevsky, P.A.Sorokin, O.Spengler, A.Toynbee.N.Ya.Danilevsky, P.A.Sorokin, O.Spengler, A.Toynbee.

Key words: History of the Fatherland.

The object of the study is the analysis of the conditions “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.” The subject of the study is to consider individual issues formulated as tasks this study.

The purpose of the study is to study the topic “Relationship of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” from the point of view of the latest domestic and foreign research on similar issues.

In the process of work, a theoretical and methodological analysis of the topic “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” was carried out, including exploring the theoretical aspects of the study of the phenomenon “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences”, and the nature of the topic “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” was studied.

As a result of the study, specific ways to solve the problem “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” were identified and quantitatively substantiated, including some possibilities for solving the problem “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” were identified and trends in the development of the topic “Relationship of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” were identified. sciences."

Degree of implementation - proposals and specific activities have been tested in the activities of the organization that served as the basis for educational practice.

The proposed activities, with some specificity, can be used in the work of personnel services of Russian enterprises.

The implementation of the proposed measures allows us to provide a more accurate understanding of the nature and current problems of "The connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences."

Review of sources on the topic "The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences"

The list of references used in the preparation of this work includes 36 bibliographic sources. Let's characterize some of them:

The identified problem “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” is considered in the book “History of the Fatherland in the biographies of participants in the most important events. Biographical dictionary-reference book,” published in 2002 and containing 560 pages. From the description of the book we can conclude that

The dictionary-reference book contains over seven hundred articles about political, state and religious figures who played a significant role in the history of Russia from ancient times to the present day. The publication is intended for the most wide circle readers - school and lyceum students, students, teachers, everyone interested in Russian history.

Also regulatory problems contemporary issues on the topic “The connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” concerns V.V. Artemov, Yu.N. Lubchenkov in the monograph “History of the Fatherland. From ancient times to the present day.” This book was published by the publishing house "Academy" in 2012, contains 360 pages.

The textbook presents in an accessible form the main events of Russian history from ancient times to the present day. The most important patterns of development of Russian civilization are revealed. Much attention is paid to issues of the spiritual life of society, culture and life, and the history of the church. Portraits of prominent historical figures are given. For students of secondary institutions vocational education. The book will be useful to teachers, as well as to anyone interested in history.

A number of topical problems were touched upon in the book "History of Russia since ancient times. Book 1". S. M. Solovyov determined the relevance and novelty of this topic in his study, published in 2005 by DirectMedia Publishing. The book description says the following.

Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov is a famous Russian historian. "The History of Russia from Ancient Times", created by Solovyov, has no equal in national science. This work became an outstanding event in Russian society, a phenomenon of truly global scale. The scientist spent 30 long years of tireless work on the creation of this colossal work. daily work. And so far no one has been able to eclipse the glory of S.M. Solovyov, to repeat his civic feat - to study the events of Russian history so carefully, in detail, in detail, to show their internal logic and connection, their causes and consequences, to so clearly state the facts and study in detail phenomena of Russian life.

In addition, when studying the topic “Relationship of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences,” the following periodic sources were used:

1. Telephone communication: accounting difficulties. S. Kazantsev, “New Accounting”, issue 9, September 2007.
2. The concept of “dominant position” and its relationship with other categories of Russian legislation. Yu.M. Bochenkov, "Laws of Russia: experience, analysis, practice", No. 6, June 2007.
3. The company combines UTII with other modes: distribution of expenses. S.A. Soloviev, "Russian Tax Courier", No. 6, March 2007.
4. Comparison of leasing with other investment projects. L.G. Kisurina, "Economic and Legal Bulletin", No. 2, February 2007.
5. Keepers of credit histories. interview with A. Klychkov, President of the National Bureau of Credit Histories. V. Plekhanova, “Consultant”, No. 3, February 2007.

Introduction sample

The presented work is devoted to the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

The problem of this study is relevant in modern conditions. This is evidenced by frequent examination of the issues raised.

The topic “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” is studied at the intersection of several interrelated disciplines. The current state of science is characterized by a transition to a global consideration of problems on the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

Many works are devoted to research questions. Basically, the material presented in educational literature is general character, and in numerous monographs on this topic, narrower issues of the problem “The connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” are considered. However, accounting is required modern conditions when researching the problems of the designated topic.

The high significance and insufficient practical development of the problem “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” determine the undoubted novelty of this study.

Further attention to the issue of the problem “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” is necessary in order to more deeply and substantively resolve particular current problems of the subject matter of this study.

The relevance of this work is due, on the one hand, to the great interest in the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” in modern science, and on the other hand, to its insufficient development. Consideration of issues related to this topic is of both theoretical and practical significance.

The results can be used to develop an analysis methodology “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

Theoretical value studying the problem “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” lies in the fact that the problems chosen for consideration are at the intersection of several scientific disciplines.

The object of this study is the analysis of the conditions “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

In this case, the subject of the study is to consider individual issues formulated as the objectives of this study.

The purpose of the study is to study the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” from the point of view of the latest domestic and foreign research on similar issues.

1. Study the theoretical aspects and identify the nature of the “Relationship of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences.”
2. Talk about the relevance of the problem “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” in modern conditions.
3. Outline the possibilities for solving the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”
4. Outline the trends in the development of the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

The work has a traditional structure and includes an introduction, a main part consisting of 3 chapters, a conclusion and a bibliography.

The introduction substantiates the relevance of the choice of topic, sets the goal and objectives of the research, characterizes research methods and sources of information.

Chapter one reveals general questions, the historical aspects of the problem “The connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences” are revealed. The basic concepts are defined and the relevance of the questions “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” is determined.

Chapter two examines in more detail the content and contemporary problems of “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

Chapter three is of a practical nature and, on the basis of individual data, an analysis of the current state is made, as well as an analysis of prospects and development trends “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences.”

Based on the results of the study, a number of problems related to the topic under consideration were revealed, and conclusions were drawn about the need for further study/improvement of the state of the issue.

Thus, the relevance of this problem determined the choice of the topic of the work “Connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences”, the range of issues and the logical scheme of its construction.

Theoretical and methodological basis research were legislative acts, normative documents on the topic of work.

The sources of information for writing a work on the topic “The connection between the history of the Fatherland and other social sciences” were the basic educational literature, fundamental theoretical works of the largest thinkers in the field under consideration, results of practical research by prominent domestic and foreign authors, articles and reviews in specialized and periodical publications devoted to the topic “The connection of the history of the Fatherland with other social sciences,” reference literature, and other relevant sources of information.

A characteristic feature of historiography of the second half of the 20th century. has become used to analyze the past social reality theories of different levels created in other social and human sciences. Therefore, when analyzing modern historiography, the focus is on the problem of interdisciplinarity, which, in relation to history, has clearly expressed specifics and manifests itself in two main configurations. They can be designated as a “strategy of appropriation” on the part of historians and “recourse to the past” on the part of representatives of other social sciences. (We will try, if possible, not to touch upon the topic of “historiographic turns” that we have studied.)

Although interdisciplinarity as a theoretical problem of history came to the fore only in the second half of the 20th century, the interdisciplinary approach itself has become a distinctive feature of historiography, essentially since its formation. It is enough to look at this direction of historical knowledge back in the 19th century. - be it the established Marxist school, geohistory or socio-cultural history - in order to understand that scientific historical knowledge already in the period of self-determination was based on the methodological tools of various social and human sciences, which, of course, turned out to be fruitful only if history retained its own methods of construction past social reality.

The topic of the place of history in the system of social and human sciences as a methodological problem was articulated already in the first third of the last century, in particular, by the founders of the “Annals school” M. Blok and L. Febvre. However, in the 1930s, most social disciplines were in their infancy, and the founders of the “Annals school” felt reverence not for the social sciences (according to Blok, these disciplines, like history, were still in their infancy 16), but for the natural sciences. First of all, they were amazed by discoveries in the field of physics. A fundamentally important consequence of this situation was relatively equal relations between representatives of the social sciences, including history (the “historical synthesis” proposed by A. Burr was based on this principle). Perhaps the not so prestigious position of the social sciences at that stage, some ignorance of their achievements or underestimation of their successes gave a very important result. In the first half of the last century, the claims of historians to produce their own theories were clearly higher. For example, the “old” social history that was being created then (A. Pirenne, M. Bloch, L. Febvre, F. Braudel) in the sense of theoretical independence, in our opinion, is not inferior to the “new” social history of the 1970s, and, perhaps , and surpasses it.

But in the last half century, historians have practically not produced actual “historical” theories. Examples of several important exceptions, which appeared, however, quite a long time ago, are “The Two Bodies of the King” by E. Kantorovich (1957), a book that laid the foundation for the “ceremonialist” trend in historiography; the theory of three levels of social change by F. Braudel (1958); theory of childhood in the early modern era by F. Ariès (1960); “The Long Middle Ages” by J. Le Goff (1985). Basically, by creating large conceptual works, historians began to solve the problem of theoretical renewal, turning to the theories of various social and human sciences. This process was later called the “appropriation strategy.”

Implicit in the “strategy of appropriation” is the idea that history, which can be seen as a social science that analyzes past, no longer existing societies, can naturally draw on the theoretical apparatus of the social sciences concerned with modernity. Since the 1960s, the renewal of historiography has been taking place at a high pace and the following interaction model has developed everywhere: one or another social science - the corresponding historical subdiscipline - the choice of macro = (later and micro =) theory - its application to historical material.

This model overturned the relationship between history and the social sciences that existed in the positivist paradigm. If in the 19th century It was assumed that historians should collect empirical material for the social sciences so that theories could be developed on their basis; now, on the contrary, the social sciences are becoming suppliers of theoretical concepts for history.

Increasing popularity theoretical knowledge and the degree of acquaintance of historians with modern social concepts (no matter how superficial it may sometimes be) is explained by a whole complex of obvious prerequisites. The social and human sciences themselves had to not only be established, but also sufficiently developed so that theories could be selected from among them with greater partiality and analysis, promising new perspectives in the study of the past. In addition, the theories developed in social science and their authors should have become quite well-known or even popular. And, finally, the dissatisfaction necessary for the creation of new scientific knowledge, the feeling of another epistemological “crisis” - disappointment in old approaches, a feeling of exhaustion of possibilities - must be constantly reproduced.

The “strategy of appropriation” that has emerged in historiography over the last half century faces several dangers, each of which is associated with the loss of a “sense of time.”

First of all, in the works of historians there is often a kind of “theoretical lag”, i.e. the use of fairly old and no longer entirely adequate, from the point of view of modern science, theories. It happens that historians focus on “classics” that have lost relevance in the context of their discipline. Not to mention the enduring popularity of K. Marx, conceptual historical works are replete with references to the works of S. Freud, E. Durkheim, M. Weber, L. Levy=Bruhl, early works N. Elias, etc. Typical example- work in line with “historical memory”, a new direction in historiography, whose representatives completely ignored modern social psychology, choosing as a theoretical basis the concept of “collective memory” by M. Halbwachs, developed in the first half of the last century 17 .

The reasons for such a time lag are different: information gap; difficulties associated with orientation in a “foreign” discipline and the ability to assess the potential of new theories; professional unpreparedness to master complex concepts, etc. But this, as far as we can judge, is not the specificity of history. For the same reasons, a “bad mix” occurs in many interdisciplinary fields.

At the same time, there are a sufficient number of examples of historians’ “quick response” to innovations in the social and human sciences. Thus, at one time, the theory of modernization, world-system analysis, and the concept of symbolic power almost immediately penetrated into historical research. Some theories of modern social and cultural anthropology were just as quickly mastered by historians. The same can be said about the “linguistic turn” in historiography. Today we have many interesting examples of constructing microhistory in the image and likeness of microsociology and microeconomics using relevant concepts 18 .

In addition to the “theoretical lag” within the framework of the “strategy of appropriation,” there is potentially (and often realized) the threat of anachronisms caused by the application of theories focused on the functioning of a society of one type (one time) to societies of another time, as we have already discussed above.

These kinds of anachronisms have been observed in different areas. As a result, many historians who tried to combine proven methods of working with historical material and theoretical models of the social sciences failed (as did a number of sociologists who came up with macro-theories of historical sociology). In those sections of historiography where impressive results were initially obtained, over time the question arose about the limits of applicability of theories created to explain modern society to societies of the past. Overall, it turns out that very little of social theory can be successfully applied to the study of past societies.

It is useful to look at the problem of interdisciplinary synthesis from a different perspective - after all, other social sciences also have their own areas of research related to the study of the past (history).

In principle, when an interdisciplinary direction arises, two disciplines are involved in it, and its creation and functioning can either take place autonomously within the framework of each of the two disciplines, or only in one of them. “Division of labor” in related sciences between specialties and specialists, in in this case historians and non-historians, things happen very differently. Let us explain our thesis using the example of such a pair of disciplines as sociology and history, which, respectively, produce social history and historical sociology. Representatives of historical sociology either make specific historical problems the subject of sociological analysis, or offer theories of synthesis of sociology and history, continuing in a certain sense the work of the first generation of sociologists of the 20th century. or even traditions laid down in the 19th century.

As the American sociologist P. Berger wittily noted, “It is believed that sociologists are divided into two subspecies. The larger group consists of people who have close relationships with computers and other computing devices; these people carry out expensive surveys of very specific areas of social life; they report the results of their research in barbaric English; from time to time their findings are relevant to one or another public policy issue. A smaller group consists of people who ended up in sociology due to a biographical mistake (they should have ended up in philosophy or literature); these people mostly write books about theories proposed by long-dead Germans; their theorizing has nothing to do with public policy, and it’s good that this is so” 19.

However, despite the atypicality noted by Berger, this minority is respected in their corporation and does not seek to join the guild of historians. It is interesting that even in certain cases known to us, when a scientist with a historical education came forward with a major theoretical concept (for example, I. Wallerstein, S. Aizenstadt, G. Diligensky), he smoothly (and willingly) moved into the ranks of sociologists 20 . We can only assume what played a larger role here: the theorizing historian’s sensitivity to recognition by the sociological community or the underestimation of his contribution by the historical guild, or something else, but this is a fact. The very process of such initiation is described in a few lines by the French historian F. Ariès. He notes that after the publication of his study Child and Family Life under the Old Order (1960), “sociologists, psychologists and even pediatricians redirected my book, dragging me along with it. In the United States, journalists called me a “French sociologist,” and one day I became an “American sociologist” for a famous Parisian weekly!” 21.

The process of “crossing the border” by individual defectors is objectively facilitated by the fact that demarcation by disciplinary areas at the level of results, i.e. ready-made research often really looks artificial. How conditional the division into different versions of historical/sociological synthesis is can be judged from the works of N. Smelser “Social Changes in the Industrial Revolution”, C. Tilly “Vendee”, S. Aizenstadt “Revolution and Transformation of Societies”, B. Moore “ Social prerequisites of dictatorship and democracy”, M. Mann “The Origin of Power in Society” and many others 22. They can reasonably be classified into any category, although in general social history differs from historical sociology precisely in that it uses theories developed by sociologists. Social history can be more period and country oriented, historical sociology- on the concept and problem. This is partly a question of the scientist's orientation: whether his task is to contribute to history or to sociology, with all the normative restrictions that this entails.

In general, although the relationship of history with other social sciences developed differently in different periods, the largest representatives of historiography have always believed in a “common market” of the social sciences 23 . This belief continues today, only the euphoria about the unlimited possibilities of universal laws, historical synthesis, mathematical methods, strong theory, etc. has diminished. The idea of ​​the nature of our knowledge about the past, and indeed about the past itself, has changed, which is now no longer what “really was,” and not even a reconstruction, but an image, representation or construction. The number of topics and subjects that are interesting and accessible to the historian has increased many times over. The construction of more bizarre, previously not obvious connections between elements of different subsystems of past social reality has begun and is actively continuing. Although interdisciplinary interaction is not one-sided - the historical approach is preserved as a general scientific method, and historical reality itself is noticeably present in all social and human sciences - it is history that is the main discipline that creates scientific knowledge about the past.

* Savelyeva Irina Maksimovna- Doctor of Historical Sciences, Director of the Institute of Humanitarian Historical and Theoretical Research of the State University - Higher School of Economics.

Poletaev Andrey Vladimirovich - Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Deputy. Director of the Institute of Humanitarian Historical and Theoretical Research of the State University - Higher School of Economics.

1 See, for example: Faire de l’histoire. Eds. J. Le Goff, P. Nora, t. 1 - 3. Paris, 1974; La nouvelle histoire. Eds. R. Chartier, J. Le Goff, J. Revel. Paris, 1978; International Handbook of Historical Studies: Contemporary Research and Theory. Ed. by G.G. Iggers, H.T. Parker. Westport, 1979; Wehler H.= U. Historische Sozialwissenschaft und Geschichtsschreibung. Studien zu Aufgabe und Traditionen der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft. Göttingen, 1980; The New History: The 1980's and Beyond. Studies in Interdisciplinary history. Ed. by Th.K. Rabb, R. Rothberg. Princeton, 1982; Novick P. That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession. Cambridge, 1988; New Perspectives on Historical Writing. Ed. by P. Burke. Cambridge, 1991; Iggers G.G. Historiography in the Twentieth Century. From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge. Hanover, 1993; Passés recomposites: Champs et chantiers de l'histoire. Eds. J. Boutier, J. Dominique. Paris, 1995; L'Histoire et le métier d'historien en France 1945–1995. Ed. F. Bédarida. Paris, 1995; Windschuttle K. The Killing of History: How Literary Critics and Social Theorists are Murdering Our Past. San Francisco, 1996; Hobsbawm E. On History. London, 1997; Pomian K. Sur l "histoire. Paris, 1999; Tosh J. The pursuit of truth. How to master the skill of a historian. M., 2000; Clark E. History, Theory, Text. Historians and the Linguistic Turn. Cambridge, 2004.

2 Repina L.P.“New historical science” and social history. M., 1998; Problems of source study and historiography. Materials of the II scientific readings in memory of academician I. D. Kovalchenko. M., 2000; XX century: Methodological problems historical knowledge, parts 1 - 2. M., 2001; etc. This topic is regularly discussed on the pages periodicals- “Odysseus. Man in History", "Dialogue with Time. Almanac of Intellectual History”, etc.

3 In this article, in order to avoid terminological confusion, we use the term “history” only to refer to history = knowledge. In cases where we are talking about history-text (historical narrative) and history = reality (the existence of humanity in time), this will be specially discussed.

4 See Savelyeva I.M., Poletaev A.V. History and time: in search of the lost. M., 1997, ch. 1.

5 Speaking about the fact that modern social sciences (including the humanities) do not specifically deal with the past, but transferred it to the jurisdiction of historical science, it is necessary to mention one important exception, namely, philology. History has always been closely connected with philology, which was also manifested in the structure of education: from the inclusion of history in the grammar course in the trivium to those that arose in the 19th century. historical and philological faculties of universities. This “connection” was determined by the fact that history, like philology, is connected with texts - historians use texts to study the past and write “history-texts”. Moreover, philology, at least since the Renaissance, also deals with the past. Moreover, it was Lorenzo Valla who was perhaps the first to conceptualize the concept of the past as another at the level of text analysis, putting forward and proving the idea that in the past other texts.

6 Stone L. The Past and the Present Revisited. London, 1987.

7 In relation to economics, this idea was developed by representatives of the German historical and economic school of the 19th - early 20th centuries. (for example, K. Bucher and A. Spiethof), who considered it necessary to develop special economic theories for each “economic stage” or “economic style.” Such theoretical concepts, tied to a particular historical period, they called “visual theories” in contrast to the “timeless” or “formal” theory of economics, which should explain phenomena that are not subject to historical changes.

8 The idea that history studies only the past and not the present is not generally accepted. IN modern historiography the tendency to position the historian as a researcher of the “present” (histoire des temps présents - fr.) is represented primarily by the French historian P. Nora. As he wrote at the end of the 20th century. “the history of modernity” is undergoing a metamorphosis, turning into a “historicized present” ( Nora P. Preface to the Russian edition. - P. Nora et al. France=memory. SPb., 1999, p. 5 – 14). In this case, we are talking about the possibility of applying methods of historical analysis to current events, i.e. about the abandonment of specialization in the past, which has become a distinctive feature of historical science since its differentiation from other social sciences. It is significant that the new approach rather provides a theoretical basis for noticeable new directions in historiographical practice, which primarily include “historical memory” and histoire des temps présents, developed most of all in French-language historiography. See for example: Chauveau A., Té tart Ph. Questions à histoire des temps présents. Bruxelles, 1992; Écrire l"histoire du temps présent. En hommage à François Bédarida. Institut d"Histoire du Temps Présent. Paris, 1993; Hartog F. Regimes d'historicité. Présentisme et expériences du temps. Paris, 2003.

9 Châtelet F. La naissance de l'histoire: La formation de la pensée historienne en Grèce. Paris, 1962, p. 11.

10 Duby J. The development of historical research in France after 1950. - Odysseus. Man in History, 1991. M., 1992, p. 58.

11 See Collingwood R.J. Story idea. Autobiography. M., 1980, p. 238.

12 Wed. “In the historical and humanities, natural science experiment corresponds to criticism of sources,” wrote M. Heidegger in the 1940s. - Heidegger M. Time and being. M., 1993, p. 45.

13 The most famous work in Russia is still the work of I. Kovalchenko, which also contains a bibliography of previous studies on this topic. Cm. Kovalchenko I.D. Methods of historical research. M., 1987, p. 106-127.

14 Mayminas E.Z. Planning processes in economics: information aspect. 2nd ed. M., 1971, p. 244 - 245.

15 Malakhov V.S. Interpretation. - Modern Western Philosophy, 2nd ed. M., 1998, p. 169 - 170.

16 Blok M. Apology of history, or the craft of the historian. M., 1986, p. 11.

17 Halbwachs M. Les cadres sociaux de la mémoire. Paris, 1925; idem. La topographie légendaire des évangiles en Terre Sainte. Etude de mémoire collective. Paris, 1941; idem. La mémoire collective. Paris, 1950.

18 In the most explicit form, the conceptual, conceptual and theoretical apparatus of the social sciences is used in the works of J. Levy, devoted to economic and social history, as well as discussions of theoretical problems of microanalysis. In this sense, the work of this Italian historian is extremely representative. Here are just a few examples of the productive use of social theories of microanalysis in Levy's works. From microeconomics, he used the concept of “bounded rationality” of the behavior of economic agents, developed by G. Simon, who later received the Nobel Prize in Economics, and the neo-institutional theory of the functioning of markets, which dates back to the works of R. Coase, and since the 1960s has been developed by A. Alchian , D. Northom, etc. From the apparatus of microsociology, Levi borrows the theories of symbolic interactionism (J. G. Mead, G. Blumer); “scales of social interaction” by F. Barth; symbolic power of P. Bourdieu, network interactions of J. Homans, etc.

19 Berger P. In Praise of Particularity: The Concept of Mediating Structures. - Review of Politics, July 1976, v. 38, no. 3, p. 399–400.

20 Back in 1923, K. Breisig became the first German historian to head the department of sociology created especially for him at the University of Berlin.

21 Aries F. Child and family life under the Old Order. Ekaterinburg, 1999, p. 12.

22 Smelser N. Social Change in the Industrial Revolution: An Application of Theory to the British Cotton Industry. Chicago, 1959; Tilly Ch. The Vendée: A Sociological Analysis of the Counterrevolution of 1793. Cambridge, 1964; Eisenstadt Sh. Revolution and transformation of societies: a comparative study of civilizations. M., 1999; Moore W.E.. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston, 1966; Mann M. The Sources of Social Power, v. 1 - 2. V. 1. A History of Power from the Beginning to AD 1780, v. 2. The Rise of Classes and Nation States. Cambridge, 1986 - 1993.

23 See, for example: Braudel F. History and social sciences. Historical duration. - Philosophy and methodology of history. Collection of translations. M., 1977, p. 116.

What is history? History is one of the oldest sciences, about 2500 years old. The ancients valued history and called it “magistra vitae” - the teacher of life. History is usually defined as the science of the past - the past reality, what once happened to a person, a people, and society as a whole. Thus, history was reduced to a simple analysis of events, processes, conditions that one way or another have sunk into oblivion. This understanding of history is inaccurate and incomplete, moreover, internally contradictory. In fact, history does not allow people to forget “their old 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.

The original meaning of the word “history” goes back to the Greek “ioropia”, which means “investigation”, “recognition”, “establishment”. Thus, initially “history” was identified with the method of recognizing and establishing true events and facts. Already in the 7th – 8th centuries. BC this concept was used by the ancient Greek philosophers Thales and Anaximander in relation to questions of the origin and essence of the Universe, as well as in relation to rare and mysterious phenomena. In the 5th century BC the founder of the scientific approach to the study of history in antiquity, the “father of history” Herodotus emphasized that his method of writing books about the events of the past was questioning and recognition. However, in Roman historiography it acquired a second meaning (a story about events of the past), that is, the center of gravity was transferred from the study of the past to the narration of it.

D For a long time, history was considered not as a science, but related to literature and art. It is no coincidence that Greek mythology The patroness of history was one of the muses, depicted as a young woman with a spiritual face and with a scroll of papyrus or parchment in her hand. The name of the muse of history - Clio - comes from the Greek word “I glorify”. And indeed, the first chronicles, chronicles, and biographies were devoted mainly to the glorification of rulers.

During the Renaissance, a third meaning of the concept of “history” emerged. History began to be understood as a type of literature, the special function of which was to establish and record the truth.

However, history was not considered as an independent field of knowledge, especially scientific, 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? This is explained by the fact that history has been integrated into the general system of knowledge for a long time. 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. The need to isolate scientific knowledge itself began to be felt since the time of the natural science revolution (XVII - XVIII centuries). It was at this time that the concept of “history” in the modern sense began to establish itself in Europe. However, even in early XIX V. “indivisibility” continued to persist philosophical knowledge, on the one hand, and the science of history itself, on the other.

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, first of all, it is necessary to distinguish history as the process of development of nature and society, closely related to each other, and history as the science of these processes.

Famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote about history as a science: “In scientific language the word "history" is used in double meaning: 1) as movement in time, 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, that is, the course, conditions and successes of human society or the life of mankind in its development and results.”

Let's consider this situation in more detail:

1) History is the entire past, everything that happened in the previous time. In other words, history is a specific form of the movement of matter in time and space, which is realized in the evolution of inanimate and living nature and in the historical process. The evolution of inanimate and living nature is an endless, continuous, objective phenomenon (i.e., it depends only on natural disasters), alternative (i.e. multivariate), largely random.

The historical process begins with the beginning of the processes of ethno- and sociogenesis, the emergence of human communities, which, as they develop, distinguish themselves from nature and begin to change the world around them in their own interests. If the evolution of inanimate and living nature develops on the basis of the natural laws of nature, then in the course of the historical process the human community began to develop according to its own laws, separate from nature. Such laws are called social (sociological).

2) History as a science is the science of the past of human society and its present, of the patterns of development of social life in specific forms, in spatio-temporal dimensions.

Accordingly, history is a multidisciplinary science; it is made up of a number of independent branches of historical knowledge, namely: the history of economic, political, social, civil, military, state and law, religion, etc. History is also divided according to the breadth of study of the object: the history of the world in as a whole (worldwide or general history), the history of continents (for example, the history of Asia and Africa), the history of individual countries and peoples or groups of peoples (for example, the history of Russia).

There are auxiliary historical disciplines that have a relatively narrow subject of study, study it in detail and thus contribute to a deeper understanding of the historical process as a whole. These include: ethnography, which studies the life and culture of peoples; archeology, which studies history using material sources of antiquity - tools, household utensils, jewelry, etc., as well as entire complexes - settlements, burial grounds, treasures; chronology, the study of time systems; paleography – handwritten monuments and ancient writing; diplomacy - historical acts; numismatics – coins, medals, orders, monetary systems, trade history; metrology – system of measures; flag studies – history of flags and state symbols; heraldry - coats of arms of countries, cities, individual families; sphragistics – seals; epigraphy – inscriptions on stone, clay, metal; genealogy - the origin of cities and surnames; toponymy - the origin of geographical names; Local history – history of the area, region, region, etc. (see appendices)

The most significant auxiliary historical disciplines include source studies, which studies historical sources, and historiography, whose task is to describe and analyze the views, ideas and concepts of historians and study patterns in the development of historical science. More recently, in connection with the development of computer technology, arose new industry– historical information science, which develops the theoretical foundations and methods of translating historical sources into electronic form, their preservation and processing of the information contained in them.

History is one of two thousand existing sciences, serving modern humanity, It is closely connected with other sciences, in particular with psychology, sociology, philosophy, legal sciences, economic theory, mathematical statistics, linguistics, literary criticism, etc. In contrast, it examines the process of development of society as a whole, analyzes the entire set of phenomena of social life, all its aspects (economics, politics, culture, everyday life, etc.) and their interrelations and interdependence. At the same time, each of the existing sciences (social, economic, technical) has gone through its own history during the development of human society. And on modern stage all sciences and arts necessarily include a historical section, for example, the history of medicine, pharmacy, physics, biology, etc. At the intersection of historical and other sciences, interdisciplinary sciences are created - such as historical geography, historical geology, historical computer science, etc.

The place of history among other sciences. The process of formation of modern sciences took place through differentiation and separation of various fields of knowledge from a previously unified science. In the 16th – 17th centuries, when the formation of modern European civilization was underway and the theological picture of the world was questioned, many natural scientists came to the conclusion that outside world divided into two main areas: nature and society. The next step in the development of the modern theory of knowledge was the identification of three main areas for scientific analysis:

1. Philosophy as a general science about everything that exists.

2. Natural and technical sciences, as a complex of sciences covering various areas nature (this includes all medical sciences).

3. Social sciences, which study society, its various structural elements and man in society.

IN medical school students receive professional knowledge and competencies in medical disciplines, and basic knowledge in the disciplines of the social, humanitarian and economic cycle.

All social and human sciences represent a form of spiritual activity of people aimed at producing knowledge about society and man. Knowledge of historical experience is the most important component of the collective production of social knowledge and is associated, first of all, with highlighting the specifics of history and its place among other social sciences and humanities.

Classification of social sciences:

1. Sciences that give the most general knowledge about society: philosophy and bioethics.

2. Sciences that reveal certain areas of social life: economics ( economic sphere), political science (political sphere), cultural studies (spiritual sphere), sociology (social sphere).

3. Sciences that permeate all spheres of society: history, jurisprudence.

Thus, history occupies a leading place in the system of social knowledge and permeates all spheres of social life. Studying economics is impossible without studying the history of economics and economic thought, spiritual sphere - without the history of culture and art, obtaining knowledge in any fundamental, natural or technical discipline is impossible without knowledge of its history. Yes, cognition medical specialties will be incomplete without the history of medicine and pharmacy. The history of the Fatherland is the discipline from which the study of the basic socio-economic cycle in medical universities begins.

Questions for self-control

1. What is history? What are its substantive boundaries, scientific and disciplinary framework?

2. What is the difference between historical science and natural sciences?

3. How is history related to other humanities and social sciences?

4. Indicate the features of historical science in the early stages of its development.

5. What were the limitations of historical knowledge in ancient times?

6. What is the relationship between scientific-historical and artistic reflection of reality?

7. Define the historical process.

8. What branches of historical science do you know?

9. What auxiliary historical disciplines do you know?

The subject of history as a science.

Her social functions

Subject of history as a science. Subject of history is defined ambiguously. The subject of history can be social, political, economic, demographic history, the history of the city, village, family, private life, etc. Usually, the subject of historical science is understood as “social development.” In terms of content, there are stages of development of society, shifts in the conditions of people’s existence, changes in the person himself. The definition of the subject of history is subjective, connected with the ideology of the state, political situation in society, the worldview of a historian. Historians who take a materialist position believe that history as a science studies specific patterns of social development, limited by a certain space-time framework. Hence the subject of history is defined as knowledge of the laws of the historical process in all its diversity, variability and specificity.

With this understanding of the subject of history, several questions arise: is it possible to study the past in all its specificity and diversity? Where is the border between past and present? What is a historical pattern, etc.? The search for answers to them has pushed a number of scientists to paradoxical conclusions.

Already at the beginning of the 20th century. many researchers have stated that the past cannot be the subject of history. We study the past to discover general laws development and evolution of the historical process. This is necessary in order to understand the present and predict the future. Hence, the subject of the study of history is not the past, but the future. This is exactly how the German philosopher O. Spengler and the French historian L. Febvre defined the subject and significance of historical knowledge.

Is it possible to study the historical process in all its diversity and specificity? Most modern historians believe that this is impossible. You cannot be a “garbage collector”, take into account any information and investigate all problems. The question, according to the historian of the “Annals school” L. Febvre, rests on the choice of the capital problem of history. The subject of history as a science can only be those problems and questions that are valuable for understanding the present. Similar ideas were developed by the domestic methodologist, Professor B.G. Mogilnitsky. The historian must highlight the most significant phenomena from the entire diversity of the historical process. In this sense, history as a science is selective, and the difficulty of research lies in ensuring the optimal selection of such phenomena from the past, which would allow us to recreate its objective reality.

But if a researcher has found such pressing problems, then, according to Marxist historians, he should focus on studying the patterns of their development. Thus, under the subject of history began to be understood not human activity as such, and above all, a social process that had a natural-historical, progressive-progressive character.

Today there has been a definite shift towards “updating” the subject of history. The essence of the changes is to move “research interests from ideological constructs to worldview.” Researchers' interest has focused on human personality, on a person’s actions in certain circumstances, his experiences, “little things” and survival tactics in everyday life. In other words, the subject of history has become a person who must act as a participant in the dialogue between the past and the present. This approach to the study of history is called anthropological.

In our opinion, this vision is most accurate subject of history was revealed by the wonderful French historian M. Blok. « History,” he wrote, “is the science of people in the past.” In other words, history is not a collection of facts from the past, but an understanding of the actions of our ancestors in certain historical conditions. If we understand why our ancestors, in their time and in their circumstances, acted this way and not otherwise, we will understand who we are.

Social functions of history

The question about the benefits of historical science for society is as natural as the question about the benefits of any other field of scientific knowledge: science does not exist for its own sake. History by its nature does not have such obvious evidence of its practical application in the life of society, which most of the natural sciences have, related to the field of material relations, technology development, etc. This fact is one of the reasons for a skeptical or clearly negative attitude towards historical science.

What social (socially significant) roles does history play? In ancient times, she was assigned the role of “teacher of life.” In the 10th century The Byzantine historian Leo the Deacon tried to answer this question. “If there are any of the benefits that bring benefit in life,” he wrote, “then, in any case, history is the necessary and useful service that renders us the most, not the least.”

The highest social prestige of historical science was observed in the 19th century, called the “golden age” of history. The works of that time breathe social pathos; their authors were convinced of the high social significance of their works. They argued, not without reason, that neglect of historical knowledge is fraught with social disasters.

The social usefulness of history should not be understood in a simplified way, reducing the matter to social orders. History is significant because it satisfies man's thirst for knowledge. As the English educator, Lord G.S.-D. noted. Bollingbroke, the love of history seems inseparable from human nature. A similar thought was formulated by Mark Bloch: “If we discard all the scientific usefulness of history, then we must leave behind one property - its study is an extremely entertaining activity.”

Of course, in addition to being entertaining, there are also specific, very important functions stories that define her high social significance and make its study a necessary activity for millions of people. Among the many public functions, we highlight the main ones:

1. Scientific-cognitive function

A mandatory attribute of any science is the cognitive function, which also includes informative and communicative components. Historical science provides the receipt, accumulation, storage and transmission of information. This allows contemporaries to discover unknown pages of the past, and also introduces people to specific facts and events that contribute to the understanding of ongoing processes.

Actually cognitive task This function consists of creative processing of received and accumulated information, understanding it and providing society with the necessary knowledge for the correct (rational) solution of the problems facing it at a given time.

In the past, this task was understood in a simplified way - as a collection of precedents for all occasions. The search for the meaning of history led nineteenth-century science. to the task of discovering the laws of the historical development of mankind. It must be admitted great importance historical knowledge for comprehensive self-knowledge of society, including the study of the laws of its functioning. History provides its data to generalizing social sciences, at the same time through comparison of historical series, individual cultures, typology historical phenomena makes his own contribution to the theoretical understanding of the past and identifying trends in modern development. Without knowledge of the lessons of history, disclosure is impossible valid laws society. History and generalizing social sciences work hand in hand in this direction.

At the same time, the assessment of the cognitive function of history cannot be limited to taking into account its contribution to the disclosure social laws. The very specific scientific study of the course of social development from ancient times to the present has fundamental scientific significance. In addition, the study of historical experience is important for the implementation of other functions of history as a science.

2. Social memory function

One of the fundamental social functions historical science is the formation of historical consciousness. Historical consciousness, by definition, is mass, one of the forms of social consciousness along with legal, political, national, moral and other forms. Historical consciousness means the connection of times - past, present and future - in the consciousness of the individual and society as a whole. Historical consciousness is a kind of genetic memory of humanity.

The degree of stability of society, its ability to survive in critical circumstances and situations depends on the state of historical consciousness. A stable historical consciousness is the most important indicator of the stability of society, just as the torn state of historical consciousness is evidence of an impending crisis. The function of social memory involves the accumulation and preservation of the experience of previous generations. History provides a connection between times and plays the role of a kind of mediator between generations. Historical memory is aimed at giving society confidence in the future.

The historical unconsciousness of people deprives people of the ability to navigate in the present, turns them into an object of manipulation political forces, as a tool for realizing a variety of goals, including those directed against their fundamental interests. As the writer F. Abramov rightly noted: “A people dies when it becomes a population. And it becomes a population when it forgets its history.” Therefore, what makes us human is our historical memory. Thus, historical consciousness is the most important way self-identification of society and the individual, a means of socialization, “orientation” of a person in society, acquiring racial, national, cultural and civilizational affiliation. The broader the historical horizon, the easier it is for a person to navigate the world around him.

Social memory is always selective. Society cannot treat its past with indifference. Therefore, the function of social memory also includes the assessment of individual historical phenomena and personalities. Too much of what took place affects the interests of our time.

The criterion for selecting phenomena worthy of study and their evaluation is the prevailing value system in society, state interest, the worldview of the researcher, etc. At the same time, the historian should not allow himself to inflate historical conflicts, focus on past internecine and national clashes, or search for “original borders,” calls for revenge for injustices that were once committed. All this can only lead to new tragedies and a universal catastrophe. Thus, an incorrect assessment of the results of the First World War and the desire to revise them in Germany ended in a new world massacre and the division of the country. Therefore, the task of historians is, without distorting the past, to try to identify an objective scientific picture past, avoiding harsh judgments and moralizing, giving extremely balanced assessments. The credo of historical scholarship is rather to become a “reconciling memory.”

At the same time, historical assessments in society may change. Historical science can restore justice, rehabilitate individual historical figures or entire nations whose true role in the past was distorted, overthrow established assessments, and tear off the masks from former charismatic heroes. “The judgment of history” is not only a beautiful phrase, but also the real result of historical science fulfilling its purpose.

3. Educational function

Already ancient authors saw the most important task history in developing high moral and civic qualities among fellow citizens. All ancient historians European Middle Ages and modern times, including Russian ones, were, to one degree or another, moralists. Of course, they were right that historical works have enormous educational value.

First of all, it is important for the younger generation to find ideals to be guided by and to imitate. It is from the historical past that such examples can be drawn.

An educated person cannot be indifferent to criminal acts in history. He cannot indifferently perceive the heroic achievements of his ancestors. Emotional experience such historical facts influence the formation of personality, its moral qualities, determines value orientations, affects the formation civic position and a sense of patriotism. Knowledge of the history of other cultures and peoples prevents the development of xenophobia and promotes tolerance.

Historical knowledge is of particular importance for shaping the worldview of the younger generation. It is no coincidence that compulsory history courses were introduced into school (gymnasium) curricula in Europe and Russia already in the second half of the 19th century. Experience has shown that, despite all the flaws and shortcomings in teaching history, without knowledge of its fundamentals one cannot talk about a full-fledged education.

At the same time, it should be noted that the effect of the educational function depends on the personality of the author or teacher. Presentation or analysis of the same national issues before a wide audience can shape the feelings of a patriot or nationalist, that is, give a completely opposite result. It all depends on the content of the lecture or text, on the worldview of the lecturer, and his influence on the audience.

Is it possible to ignore the lessons of history? It should be said that history teaches, but it cannot force one to do it. Failure to learn lessons is not in vain, but not for history, but for those who allow it. It is said about the French Bourbon dynasty, which ruled in the post-Napoleonic era, that they forgot nothing and learned nothing - for this they paid with the crown. Those who do not learn from history will definitely be taught a lesson by history. It is appropriate to remember here famous aphorism: “Whoever shoots into the past with a pistol, the future will shoot at him with a cannon.” Payment varies depending on the actions and scale of activity of certain individuals. How many mistakes in social reform could have been avoided if it had been preceded by historical analysis the current socio-political situation, studying the experience of previous reforms, constantly taking into account the impact of historical tradition. Insufficient consideration of these factors has ruined more than one of the most sound initiatives in history (an example is the anti-alcohol campaign of the perestroika era in the USSR).

To learn or not to learn lessons from the past does not depend on the past, but on the specific historical situation with its needs and problems real life. It is from her that the impulse comes. General condition learning the lessons of history is the presence of some objective similarities between a given real situation and the past from which a lesson is learned. If there is no such similarity, there is no way to rely on this past. The learned experience is not some cliche that is transferred unchanged from the past to the modern situation, but a kind of recommendation for action, the meaning of which may be directly opposite to what happened in the past.

Therefore, historical trend analysis social development acts as a necessary prerequisite for the rational management of society and the implementation of sound public policy.

However, in the implementation of this function of historical science there are many pitfalls and turbulent currents. Often the problems of history become very relevant for contemporaries. Historical experience becomes the subject of great discussions, in which political, ideological and historical arguments are intertwined so closely that it is impossible to separate them. Various social strata and political groups are drawn into historical disputes. History turns into an instrument of the struggle for power, which affects its objectivity and often turns science into a servant of ideology. Thus, regardless of the wishes of scientists, instead of practical and recommendatory functions, history actually performs certain political and ideological functions.

This trend began to appear in the 18th century. and was developed during the formation of industrial society. In the 20th century the political bias and partisanship of historical science has become even more obvious. Already in the 1920s. in the USSR, one of the first Marxist historians, academician M.N. Pokrovsky, viewed history as a policy facing the past, as a front of the proletarian struggle against bourgeois ideology. In the era of Stalinism " Short course history of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)” was declared “a powerful ideological weapon of Bolshevism,” and partisanship was proclaimed the most important principle of historical science.

The confrontation between world social systems also affected the state of historical science on both sides of the Iron Curtain. During the Cold War, there was an even greater politicization of both Soviet and Western historiography. Thus, in 1949, the President of the American Historical Association, K. Reed, in an address to his colleagues, directly linked the tasks of politics and history: “Total war, hot or cold, mobilizes us all and requires that everyone fulfill their role. The historian must fulfill this obligation no less than the physicist." Today, the question of political and ideological functions has turned out to be very relevant for young states formed as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the bipolar system of world relations. Proving their rights to exist and special role in world geopolitics, they actively turn to the past. Under these conditions, historical science receives a social order and is oriented towards political conjuncture, and not towards the truth.

It is important to keep in mind that society can only receive truthful recommendations from independent science. When ideology prevails over scientific conclusions, the educational function is unjustifiably protruded, the scientific-cognitive and social ones are belittled, and the practical-recommendatory function is either distorted or goes into the shadows.

5. Prognostic function

Even ancient historians put forward the idea that one of the tasks of history is to study the past in order to understand the present and predict the future. Tradition says that Herodotus of Halicarnassus loved to repeat: “I saw further than others because I climbed onto the shoulders of my predecessors.”

Trying to lift the veil on the future is of vital importance, both for the individual and for society. Being an integral element of the connection of times, the category of the future is included in the structure of historical consciousness; Without the future, without confidence in it, there can be no healthy historical consciousness.

Is it possible to predict the future? It is necessary, first of all, to distinguish between two methods of forecasting. They differ both terminologically and in meaning. This is prediction, or prophecy, and foresight. Prediction lies outside the realm of science and rational thinking; foresight is scientific in nature.

It is important to realize that history is not only “the legends of ancient times,” but also the present day, and there is no gap between the present and the future. The future can be imagined as a fan of ever-changing probabilities (alternatives) until one of them becomes a reality. However, the development of society (in contrast to the material world, where objective laws prevail, and only sometimes chance intrudes) provides subjects with the freedom to choose alternatives. Of course, this freedom is not unlimited. There is a certain “inertia” of the historical process; it forms a “field” modern life and current politics, dictates certain rules of the game and, therefore, limits the choice of options. That is why it is possible, based on historical experience, knowledge of the specifics of the historical process makes it more likely to foresee the choice of a future model of social development.

So, historical research is the basis for social forecasting. However, simple extrapolation of any data from the past, as a rule, leads to the collapse of attempts to foresee even the main trends of the future. The most famous in this regard was the collapse of forecasts about the world revolution and the decline of Western civilization, which was much talked about at the beginning of the last century, or the complete failure of the concept of building communism in the USSR by the 1980s. Many constructs of Western sociology also turned out to be incorrect (for example, the special mission white man etc.). At the same time, we must understand that historical science cannot give a forecast. specific situation or indicate what event will happen on a particular date.

We can talk about the predictive function of history only at the level of global trends, or about probable knowledge. Even cases of successful foresight are more than probabilistic nature. In this, the historian's forecast is fundamentally different from the forecast of a scientist - natural scientist or doctor. A physician with a high degree of probability can predict the course of the disease and the patient’s condition in the future, but a historian can never predict the specific future.

Questions for self-control

1. Does the story have any specific meaning?

3. What is historical consciousness? What are its types and sources of formation?

4. What is the role of the scientific-cognitive function of history?

5. What is the significance of historical science for the self-identification of society and the socialization of the individual?

6. Does humanity need the court of history?

7. Why is the education of a full-fledged personality impossible without knowledge of history?

8. What are history lessons, what is their purpose?

9. What is the purpose and what is the mechanism for predicting the future?

10. What is the difference between foresight and prophecy and fantasy?

SECTION I: INTRODUCTION

Topic 1: INTRODUCTION. HISTORY OF RUSSIA AS A SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE

Questions for discussion:

1. Subject and objectives of the course on the history of Russia. The structure of historical science. Connection of history with other sciences.

2. General concept about sources on the history of Russia and methods of studying them. Specifics of the conceptual apparatus and historical and geographical nomenclature of the course.

3. Periodization of the course “History of Russia”.

4. Methodological approaches to the study of Russian history. Methods and principles of historical research.

5. Features of the historical development of Russia.

Literature

Basic literature:

1. History of Russia: textbook / A. S. Orlov [etc.]; Moscow state University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Faculty of History. - 4th ed., revised. and additional - M., 2014. – 527 p. (24 copies)

2. History of Russia from ancient times to the present day: textbook / [A. N. Sakharov, A. N. Bokhanov, V. A. Shestakov] ; edited by A. N. Sakharov. - M., 2014. - 766 p. (30 copies)

3. Pavlenko N.I. History of Russia: a textbook for students. universities / N. I. Pavlenko, I. L. Andreev, L. M. Lyashenko; edited by N. I. Pavlenko. - M., 2012. - 660, p. (8 copies)

4. Fortunatov V.V. History: textbook. for bachelors. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2012. – 464 p. (10 copies)

Sources:

1. Materials on the history of the USSR for seminars and practical classes. – M.: Higher School, 1987.

2. Workshop on the history of the USSR from ancient times to late XVIII V. /Ed. Nagaeva. – M., 1984.

3. Workshop on the history of the USSR from ancient times to the end of the 18th century. / Rep. ed. A.V. Ushakov. - M.: Higher School, 1976.

4. Collection of documents on the history of the USSR for seminars and practical classes / Ed. A.M. Sakharov. Part 2. XIV-XV centuries – M., 1972.

5. Reader on the history of Russia from ancient times to 1618 / Ed. A.G. Kuzmina. – M., 2006.

6. Reader on the history of the USSR from ancient times to the end of the 15th century. / Ed. M.N. Tikhomirov. – M., 1960.

Further reading:

1. Barg M.A. Epochs and ideas: The formation of historicism. - M., 1987.

2. Blok M.A. Apology of history, or the craft of the historian. - M., 1986.

3. Blokhin V.F. History of the Fatherland in terms and concepts. – Smolensk, Bryansk, 1999.

4. Big Russian encyclopedic dictionary. - 3rd ed. - M., 2003.

5. Hegel G. Philosophy of history // Collected Works. T. 18. – M., 1983.

6. Gubman B.L. The meaning of history: Essays on modern Western concepts. – M., 1991.

7. Gulyga A.V. The art of history. – M., 1980.

8. The world of Russian history: Encyclopedic reference book. - M., 1997.

9. Domestic history: Encyclopedia: In 5 volumes - M., 1994-2002.

10. Porshnev B.F. Social psychology and history. – M., 1979.

Subject and objectives of the Russian history course. The structure of historical science. Connection of history with other sciences.

Subject of history. Origin of the term "history". The concept of “history” in a broad and narrow sense. The main stages in the development of historical knowledge. Transformation of history into a field of scientific knowledge. Object of study of history. Main categories of historical science (historical facts, historical time). Historical facts: concept, features, nature, typology. The subject of history and its components. Contents of the story.

Functions (tasks) of historical science. Social memory function. Scientific-cognitive function. Ideological and political function. Worldview and prognostic function. Main goal historical science.

Historical knowledge. The concept and forms of historical knowledge (scientific didactic (educational), popular science, journalistic, artistic, everyday). Features of historical knowledge.

The structure of historical science. Organizational (institutional) structure of historical science (academic, university science, community centers). Historical science as a complex. Basic historical sciences and their classification: by historical eras; on a territorial basis; by spheres of public life; by type of historical events. Auxiliary (special) historical disciplines and their role in historical knowledge. Disciplines related to history (archaeology, ethnology, anthropology, historiography, cultural studies, local history). Related disciplines(history of culture, military history, history of religions, etc.).

The connection between history and other sciences. History and social science(common and distinctive features). Interdisciplinary sciences. The connection of history with natural, physical and mathematical, information, philological, legal and other sciences.

Terms and concepts: