Features of historical research and its types. Methodology of historical research
Introduction
Interest in history - natural interest. People have long sought to know their past, they were looking for some sense in it, fond of ancient and collecting antiquity, wrote and talked about the last. History Family leaves indifferent - this is a fact.
When the question is why the story is so powerfully attracts a person to him, to answer it is not difficult. In the famous French historian, the brand block is reading: "Ignorance of the past inevitably leads to the lack of understanding of the present." Perhaps most people would agree with these words. And indeed, as L.N. wrote Gumilyov, "Everything that exists is the past, since any accomplishment immediately becomes past." And this is precisely, it means that, studying the past as the only reality available for us, we are therefore studying and understand the present. Therefore, they say often that history is a genuine teacher of life.
For a person, an understanding of the present is not only an understanding of its environmental and social reality, but, first of all, the comprehension of himself and its place in the world, the awareness of its specifically human essence, its goals and tasks, the main existential values \u200b\u200band installations, in one word , all that allows personality not just to fit into a certain sociocultural context, but also to actively participate in its formation, being subject and the creator. Therefore, it should be borne in mind that the problem of history is of interest to us and in a purely philosophical plan.
In close connection with the philosophy there is a human worldview, therefore, to ignore the role of historical knowledge in its formation is also impossible. According to B.L. Gubman, "Status of history as an ideological category is determined by the fact that outside of her person cannot realize the involvement of its people and humanity as a whole." It is clear that the story acts as a guarantor of self-preservation of local cultures and civilizations in all their uniqueness of originality and uniqueness, without losing spiritual unity with the rest of mankind. Simply put, the story as a common fate makes the people who are the people, and not the faceless quotation of two-legged creatures. Finally, it is not necessary to lose sight of the fact that the story teaches patriotism, thus performing an educational function - the requirement, as it is not more relevant today.
It is clear that when studying at the university, the role of history during the educational and educational process increases many times. Before students there is a task of competent, methodically correct and systematic obtaining historical knowledge, on the basis of which only the formation of historical consciousness occurs. However, as practice shows, not all students have experience and the skills of independent work, understand the specifics of historical science, are able to draw up abstracts and prepare for seminary classes. In order to help them in this, this methodological manual is written.
History like science
The traditional definition of history states that history is a science that studies past of human society in its entirety and concreteness to understand the present and prospects of the future. What is the main thing here? Of course, the story is science. This formulation of the accent is not very random. The fact is that the concept of history throughout human development has repeatedly changed. The "father of history" is considered to be in V c. BC. Ancient Greek writer Herodotus. The word "story" comes from Greek Historia, which means there is a story about the past, the story about what was. Since the main task for the ancient historians was to convey to their contemporaries (and descendants) news of those or other events that happened in the past, they sought to make their works with bright, shaped, memorable and often embellished facts, gave the will of fantasy, prevented the truth with fiction, Invented phrases and whole speeches, which made their heroes. Actions and events most often explained the will of the gods. Naturally, such a history was not science.
She did not become science and later, in the Middle Ages. And how could she become a science, if "the most common and popular genre of the literary work - the life of the saints, the most typical sample architecture - a cathedral, in painting the icon prevails, in sculpture - the characters of the Holy Scriptures"? . Nevertheless, a lot has changed, and has changed seriously. In antiquity, they did not think over the exact meaning of history and did not believe in the idea of \u200b\u200bprogressive development. Gesiod in the epic poem "Proceedings and Days" expressed the theory of historical regression of mankind from a happy golden century to gloomy century Iron, Aristotle wrote about the infinite cyclicity of existence, and simple Greeks were relied on the role of a blind case, rock, fate. It can be said that antiquity lived as if "out of history". The Bible in this regard performed a revolutionary coup, because Expressed a new understanding of history - progressively straightforward. The story was filled with meaning and acquired the features of universalism, for all historical events were now considered through the prism of the Christian faith. It should be added that during the times of the Middle Ages, it did not have a complete oblivion of the ancient tradition, which, in the end, predetermined the return of historical thought to the ideas of humanism at Renaissance.
The crisis of historical knowledge began in the Epoch of Enlightenment. The XVIII century - the heyday of the natural sciences, to which historians were completely not ready; They are completely confused in attempts to explain the dizzy scientific knowledge. In this regard, he even expressed an opinion on the full bankruptcy of the "historical method, which, desperately finding the opportunity to find a genuine explanation, attributes very fortunate consequences to the most banal reasons." And since the Epoch of Enlightenment is the time of the rigid and cruel ideological struggle between the supporters of the old building and the apologists of the revolutionary restructuring of society on the new principles, the story was degenerated into a simple propaganda.
The crisis continued almost until the end of the century, and only at the turn of the XVIII - XIX centuries the position began to change. By the way, it should not be thought that this crisis struck one story. No, the time was generally difficult for all humanitarian disciplines, so nothing surprising that the way out of it was inspired, first of all, changes in philosophical knowledge. And could it be otherwise? Of course, it was the philosophy as the most crowned from all sciences, as a discipline that has the status of metouchuki, was to play the role of a locomotive, followed by other areas of humanitaristics and among them - history. So it happened. The changes were so significant that R. J. Collingwood in his (long ago, has already become a classic) study of the "idea of \u200b\u200bhistory", one of the parts (III part) called "on the threshold of scientific history." In his opinion, thanks to the works of Kant, Gerder, Schelling, Fichte, Hegel the story closely approached to become science in the exact meaning of the word. Finally, the formation of history as science was completed by the end of the XIX century.
So, what is the historical science, what is its specificity? Before answering this question, you need to figure out what science is in general and what the difference between the sciences natural and humanitarian. Under science is the scope of human activity, in which the development and theoretical systematization of objective knowledge of reality is carried out. Scientific knowledge must certainly meet the criteria for consistency, verifiable and efficiency. As V.A. writes Kank, "It is important to understand that any science is multi-level. Information about studied phenomena, regardless of their nature, is given in feelings (perceptual level), thoughts (cognitive level), statements (linguistic level). " Here, at these levels, the difference between sciences natural and humanitarian lies, and history belongs to the number of the latter. Natural sciences are studying natural phenomena, and on the perceptual level, natural science is dealing with feelings fixing the state of affairs in the observed area. At the cognitive level, the mental activity of a person operates with the concepts, and the objective object (i.e., on the linguistic level) are natural processes that are described by universal and single statements using words denoting concepts. In the humanitarian sciences it is different. Instead of observed natural phenomena, the scientist dealt with social actions of people who are overpowered by the perceptual level in feelings (impressions, sensations, experiences, emotions, affects). At the cognitive level, they, actions, are comprehended through values. And at the linguistic level, the theory of these actions is presented through universal and single statements, with which certain human actions either receive approval, or rejected.
To understand the specifics of the historical science, it is very important to always remember that the comprehension of history is a creative process and deeply individual, so any good historian necessarily contributes to something of his own, purely personal, in its own way treats the story and its tasks in his own way Works focuses on certain parts and principles of the study of the past. That is why the wealth of historical science constitutes the works of such different authors, such as Fuchidide and Karamzin, Maths and Pavlov Silvansky, Solovyov and Ten, Mommesen, Pokrovsky and many, many others. You can illustrate this at least how to understand the very story of such different scientists like already mentioned above M. Bloka, R.J. Kollingwood and L.N. Gumileva.
For example, a prominent representative of the so-called "Annal School" "- French historian Mark Blok says that history is the science of" about people in time ". As you can see, in first place it puts human and temporary factors. British Neogerian philosopher and historian Robin George Collingwood under history understands the science engaged in the search for actual data ("Actions of people committed in the past") and their interpretation. And the Creator of the Theory of Ethnogenesis Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov does not get tired of reminding the extreme importance of the geographical factor in historical research.
Further consideration of the specifics of historical science is impossible without applying to the most common and specific methods of historical science, which is devoted to the next chapter.
Basic principles and methods of historical research
The methodology of historical science is quite diverse. "Translated from Greek methodology means the path of knowledge, or a system of principles and methods of organizing and building theoretical and practical activity, as well as the doctrine of this system. The methodology is closely related to the theoretical meaning of the subject, the process and the results of knowledge. " However, methodologies should precede the most general principles and rules of historical knowledge and approaches to the study of history. They are the foundation without which any methodology will be meaningless.
The general principles of knowledge include the principles of objectivity and historicism. The principle of objectivity briefly comes down to the impartiality of the research look. This scientist can not afford the facting facts on the basis of some momentary goals or their own ideological, political, personal, etc. Sympathies and antipathy. Follow the ideal of truth is the high demand on which generations of scientists and scientific schools have always been brought up. Students who study the story at the Institute, where it is not a specialty specialty, in this regard, no difference from some Mastyatny Academician, deciding the most complicated problems of the genesis of feudalism or the decrypting of ancient manuscripts. In the previous section, it was already shown that any historian in his classes inevitably brings a personal beginning, that is, an element of subjectivity. Nevertheless, it is necessary to strive for overcoming subjective views. These are the rules of elementary scientific ethics (as far as possible is another question). The principle of historicism is that the study of the past should be carried out taking into account the specific historical situation and interconnectedness and interdependence of studied phenomena. Simply put, it is impossible to pull out the facts and events from the general context and consider them isolated, without communication with the whole other array of historical information.
Unfortunately, our recent past, and often the present, full of crying examples of scientific unscrupiance and violation of both of the above principles. What is only one figure of King Ivan the Terrible, cursed (in the literal sense of the word!) Many historians for the "mass terror" and "the despotism of power", although it is reliably known that for all the years of his reign, people were destroyed about as much as in Modern France is cut out for one Bartholomev night! But France is not the leader among European countries in the number of victims in this era. Nevertheless, the name of Ivan Grozny became a symbol of a cruel and inhuman ruler, oppressing his people, but the name of no less cruel and criminal English king Henry VIII - no. We observe such a picture and in relation to both Russian revolutions - February and October, many myths have been created around the events of the Great Patriotic War, etc. Examples can be added further, but they all testify to the urgent relevance of the principles of objectivity and historicism in our day.
Approaches to the study of history are classified on the subjectivist, objective and idealistic, formational and civilizational. Of these, at present, the three first have already become the property of the past, and now a civilization approach is dominated in historical science, although even recently the formation membership of social development was supported by many scientists. The dominance of a civilization approach is associated with its advantages, since it is based on the recognition of the intrinsicity and the uniqueness of all local human communities and their cultures, which eliminates the Eurocentrist understanding of the story as a unidirectional linear progressive process. With this approach, each civilization should be studied on the basis of the logic of its own development and in its own criteria, and not from the point of view of civilizations of other types.
Regardless general principles, approach and research methodologies in the process of historical knowledge should be avoided two extremes - voluntarism and fatalism. Under voluntaryism it is understood as an excessive exaggeration of the role of a person in history, so that the whole course of historical development appears as a result of exclusively desires and arbitrariness of the subjective human will. The story, thus, is solid chaos, devoid of any patterns. Another extreme is fatalism, i.e. Vera in the fact that absolutely everything is predetermined and toughly determined by the inexorable objective laws of social development, so that conscious and targeted human activity does not play any significant role in history. It should always be firmly remembered that in real story There is a combination of both subjective and objective factors. Hypertrophies the role of one of them is incorrectly and unproductive.
Now consider brief the main features of the most well-known methods of historical research. Typically, three groups of such methods are distinguished: general scientific, which include historical, logical and classification method (systematization); Special, which includes synchronous, chronological, comparative historical, retrospective, structural system and periodization method; Methods of other sciences used in historical studies, for example, a mathematical method, a method of social psychology, etc.
Historical methodit is one of the most frequently used in modern historical science. As N.V. writes Efrevenkov, he "implies the study and reproduction of events and phenomena of domestic or universal history as a developing process with common, special and individual features for it." This method is directly based on chronological and event approaches to the events studied and the principle of historicism. Historical phenomena are necessarily considered in the context of their era, irrelevant from her. The historical process itself, taking into account its integrity, is divided into a number of stages interrelated with each other. The latter is very important, because flashes to trace the presence of causal relationships between events.
Logical methodit is very often used along with historical, so both of these methods usually complement each other. In most cases, it reduces to the analysis and disclosure of the role of elements when studying certain historical phenomena. Functions, meaning of individual facts or events are studied in their entire specifics, which makes it possible to determine the essence of the phenomenon as a whole and to reveal to the level of theoretical understanding of both the particular historical nature and general patterns. The essence of this method can be determined as a compliance with the conceptual content of the entire array of actual materials, resulting in climbing from a single and individual to general and abstract.
It should be noted that the role of logic in scientific knowledge is generally large, but it is especially growing in constructing a scientific hypothesis or nomination of the theoretical position. It is the use of ideas, methods and apparatus of scientific logic that makes it possible to solve such issues such as consistency and completeness of the theory, the testability of the hypothesis, the correctness of the selected classification, the rigidity of the definitions, etc.
Classification method (systematization)- This is a special case of applying a logical separation operation of a concept. Historical facts, events based on any signs of similarities or differences between them are grouped by a researcher in a specific system for continuous use. Classifications may be several, their number is determined by the needs of scientific work. Each individual classification is based on only one criterion or feature. Classification is called natural if it is built by significant facts for these facts or events. In such cases, it has cognitive importance and is usually called typology. Artificial classification consists in systematization of facts or events for the signs insignificant for them, which, however, represents a certain convenience for the researcher himself. It should be remembered that any classification of conditional, because It is usually the result of the simplification of the studied phenomena.
Synchronous methodit is used to study the parallelism of events occurring at the same time, but in different metas. This method allows to determine the general and special in the events and phenomena of the political, cultural and socio-economic spheres of society. When studying the history of Russia, the relationship between the internal political or economic situation in the country with global development trends is traced. This method was actively used by an outstanding Russian historic L.N. Gumilev.
Chronological methodallows you to study the phenomena and events in their relationship, development and temporal sequence with the fixation of the changes occurring in them. He is especially useful when comparing historical chronicles, in which the close unity of the subject with the chronology of the presentation is traced.
Problem-chronological methodthere is one of the varieties of the chronological method. Its essence lies in the dismemberment of one large topic or a problem of several private topics or problems that are then studied in chronological sequence, which contributes not only to an in-depth and detailed study of individual elements of the historical process, but also to comprehend their interconnectedness and interdependence with each other.
Periodization method (diachrony) It is based on the allocation of certain chronological periods in the history of society or a separate phenomenon of public life, characterized by their specific features and features. It is this specificity that is the main criterion for allocating periods, since it expresses the essential content of studied phenomena or events. The criterion, as in the classification method, should be only one. The periodization method is used to study the historical process as a whole, some individual parts, as well as specific events and phenomena.
Comparative historical methodin a different way, they are called the method of historical parallels, or by the method of an analogy. It consists in comparison of two objects studied (facts, events), one of which is known for science well, and the other is not. During the comparison, the presence of certain signs on the basis of fixation of the similarity existing in some other signs is established. This method allows you to find a common between the facts studied and events, but the differences between them should be taken into account during its use. Currently, the analogy method is most often used when extending the hypotheses as a means of clarifying the problems and directions for its solutions.
Retrospective methodsometimes it is referred to as the method of historical modeling, since its essence in creating a mental model of any phenomenon of the past on the basis of a thorough study of the entire complex of materials at the disposal of the researcher. However, this method should be used with great care: when creating a model, it is impossible to neglect even the crumbs available in the presence of information, but here it also lies the danger of a distorted model construction - because fragmentary and partial information do not allow one hundred percent confidence in the purity of the experiment. There is always the likelihood that any fact or event was not attached to the appropriate value either, on the contrary, their role was excessively exaggerated. Finally, the problem of the accuracy of the historical sources themselves, usually carrying advocacy and subjectivity to themselves.
System-structural methodit is based on the study of society as a complex system, in turn, consisting of a number of subsystems located with each other in close cooperation. With the system-structural method, the attention of the researcher addresses the first thing in connection of the elements of the whole. Since subsystems are areas of social life (economic, social, political and cultural), then they are studied, respectively, all diverse ties between them. This method requires an interdisciplinary approach to historical research, but also allows you to thoroughly explore a variety of parties to the life of the past.
Quantitative methodused relatively recently. It is associated with mathematical processing of digital data and quantitative characteristics of studied phenomena and processes, which achieves a qualitatively new, in-depth information about the study object.
Of course, there are other methods of historical research. They are usually based on an interdisciplinary approach to the process of historical knowledge. As an example, you can mention specific Social Research Method, in which the principles of sociology are actively used, or method of social psychology, built with accounting psychological factors, etc. However, summing up brief review The historical methodology should pay attention to two points: first, it is important to remember that in practical work is usually used not one, but a combination of two or more methods; Secondly, it should be very carefully related to the choice of the method in each particular case, for the wrong selected technique is able to give only relevant results.
Work with literature
Independent work of students in the overwhelming majority of cases, one way or another is associated with scientific literature, so the importance of skillful treatment of printed products is not doubtful. This is all the more relevant, because Sociological surveys and studies of our days unequivocally testify that the interest in reading young people falls. It is clear that there is a lot of reasons here - the computerization of our life, the prevalence of electronic media, a limit of free time, etc., but all this does not cancel the main thing, namely: the need to work with literature, and work with the literature should be able to work.
Since the number of published information is already large enough, and every year it increases more and more, it is not lishically pay attention to the reading process itself. A student accounts for a lot, therefore it is important to give great importance to rapidly, high-speed reading. A rather significant number of special and popular science literature is devoted to this issue, and to purchase any methodological guide in the bookstore. Nevertheless, I would like to make several fundamental comments here.
First, you need to read a lot. Reading should turn into a habit. Right learn to read only one who reads a lot. It is very helpful to establish a constant reading rate, let's say regular familiarization with periodic printing (newspapers, magazines) and up to 100 pages of book text per day - this is not counting the fiction, reading, which is also necessary, at least to expand the horizons and increase its general cultural level.
Secondly, you need to read carefully and try to understand read in the process of reading. To do this, you need to memorize the thoughts and ideas of the author, and not separate words, phrases or facts. It does not hurt and make notes for memory in the course of reading.
Finally, thirdly, it is necessary to read the quick vertical movement of the eyes - down - down. At the same time, it is necessary to strive to "take a picture" immediately entire page and instantly put into memory the main meaning of read. On average, this whole operation should take 30 seconds to 1 page. With persistent and measured training, this result is quite achievable.
Special reading techniques require preparation for exams. The volume of material to repeat or learn the student by a certain period is usually large enough - most often this is a textbook or lecture entries. In this case, read three times. The first time is a runaway and informational reading. The second time should be read very slowly, carefully, thoughtfully, trying to remember and understand the read. After that, you need to take a break and distract, engaged in other affairs. And immediately before the exam, read everything quickly and run quickly, restoring in memory what was forgotten.
Now, it concerns working with educational literature. Of course, the most massive and common books are university history textbooks. Here it should be immediately noted that it is best to use them in the principle of "the less - the better." This is by no means associated with some negative or predensive attitude towards certain authors and their teaching benefits. On the contrary, in general, most of the institute history textbooks (and there are quite a lot) written by quite competent specialists and at a fairly high professional level. Moreover, the textbook is indispensable when preparing for the exam or standings, here without him just can not do. But in the process of the analysis of the issues of seminars or when writing students or reports, the role of the textbook should be minimized. Tutorials, with all the differences in the author's approaches and stylistics, illuminate the same set of facts and events, set out the same material. Students come to the institute, already having an experience of studying history in school and a connected picture of the historical past, so the main array of historical information reported by textbooks, they are more or less familiar. No need to duplicate what has already been studied before.
It is clear that the study of history in principle is underway to produce the personality of historical identity, and the school here is no exception. But the study of history in the university is a qualitatively new, higher level in this process, involving the acquisition of a young man skills and the ability of a comprehensive theoretical understanding of both individual historical facts and events and all historical development as a whole. Students must be able to choose and analyze the historical material, to own the methodology of its processing and interpretation - in one word, to see the story in its own way, and this look should be strictly scientific.
How to achieve this? Of course, by the detailed and detailed study of the most important, controversial or little-known pages of the domestic past. And for this you need to read a special research literature: books, articles, monographs, written by professional professionals, the best scientists of the past and modernity, which have their own point of view and capable of convincingly expressly express and reasonably prove. Only a job in the author's course of thought, noting the interesting approaches, concerned with each other opposite approaches, opinions and concepts, learning the newest achievements of historical science, you can learn to think historically independently. In a word, you need to focus on the best and higher, which created a tortuous human thought. In the textbooks, we only encounter the necessary, verified, established, intended for memorization and assimilation, so textbooks are best used as a reference material, where you can find out what, where and when.
Of course, each teacher recommends students that they need to be read on mandatory, and this is usually enough. However, it is desirable that students themselves manifest themselves initiative and find the materials necessary for them independently, the benefit of each library has directories - alphabetical and thematic. Yes, and in any scientific monograph necessarily placed a list of the writer used by the author, contacting who can be easier to navigate in search of the necessary articles and books. An independent selection of literature students can only be welcomed, because the skills gained at the same time will be useful not only when studying history, but in general in any scientific search.
To give a complete overview of the historical literature and the features of its classification within the framework of this methodological manual - the task is obviously impossible. We will try to do this at least in general terms. It follows from specialized historical magazines, the role and importance of which is difficult to overestimate, since on the operationalization in the present of fresh scientific information, the diverseness of the materials, the diversity of content and expressed points of view, logs do not have analogs. Historical magazines that can be recommended to students are located both in urban libraries and in the library of our institute. This is, first of all, the "domestic history" and "Issues of History", which regularly publish the research of leading Russian and foreign specialists on the most similar problems of the history of our country. To a greater extent, this refers to the magazine "Patriotic History", whose specialization is already visible from the name, although in the "Questions of History" there are works very interesting and useful. Abundance of historical research, articles, reviews, reviews, etc. Materials are so great that, perhaps, any student will be able to find the texts of interest there. And only should be reminding that the last annual number of any journal is helped by the last annual number of any magazine, in which the summary of the authors printed in the form of transfer of the authors and the names of their articles arranged in the arrangement of the log number and pages, Where this article is printed.
"Patriotic History" and "Questions of History" are not the only periodical publications covering the history of Russia. From time to time, something interesting and on the pages of the "New World", "Our Contemporary", "Moscow", "Stars" appear. I would especially like to highlight the Motherland, regularly issuing thematic numbers, and devoted to individual historical issues and problems. So, for example, No. 12 for 1995, the publication of materials on the unknown pages of the Soviet-Finnish war of 1939-1940, and in No. 6-7 in 1992, it is possible to learn a lot of interesting things about the invasion of Napoleon to Russia. By the way, the full set of "Motherland" for several years is kept in the office of the Humanitarian Sciences of the OIATE.
However, it is undoubted that books are the main source of information, and it is working with them a particularly effective performance. Scientific literature on history in terms of content, chronology and issues is traditionally divided into large collective works of a generalizing nature, comprehensive studies of individual historical events and collective and individual monographs. In addition, books differ in the scientific level, and in terms of the number and quality of information contained in them, and according to the research methodology, and according to the evidence system, which means that the approach to them should be differentiated. Some books are enough to view, in others - to familiarize yourself with the introduction and conclusions of the author, somewhere you need to pay attention to the well-used literature, and somewhere - to shut up individual chapters, other deserve a terrible and thoughtful reading, etc. It is very useful in the process of studying the literature to make an extract from it. They can concern both statistical and actual material and the conceptual views of the author or its working methodology, but in any case they strongly help in work. Overly to remind that any literature studied literature must have the status of scientific. In no case can not be descended before the Scriptures of Neki G.V. Nosovsky and A.T. Fomenko with their "new chronology" or noisy and scandalous opuses of the type "icebreaker" and "day-M" Mr. Tubana-Suvorov and a number of other less than those known, but as ambitious personalities with their "discoveries". Unfortunately, lately there were too many irresponsible writers who are trying to subjected to revisions as Russian and (wider) world history. This is usually done, as a rule, amateur amateurs exclusively in commercial or ideological purposes (the latter, however, it is less common now). Science in their "creations" and does not smell, and therefore, and the truths there - on the pen. You can trust only the literature that the strict scientific criticism was horn.
A few more words about books that can be recommended to students to help for independent work. It is very useful to read the classics of historical thought, such as N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyov and V.O. Klyuchevsky. The name of Karamzin is, of course, first of all, with his "Russian state history" in 12 volumes, which, among other things, is an outstanding literary product, whose stylistics is well transmitted by the fragrance of that era when history as science has been in his formation. Karamzin can be read just immediately, entirely, but it is possible to read selectively, selecting individual chapters to specific seminar classes. Chief Labor S.M. Solovyova - 29-Tomny "History of Russia from ancient times", even today amazing with its volume and a huge number of thoroughly collected factactive material. Of course, read all these volumes - the task is quite difficult, but by now (and more than once) are published by large essays from them and abbreviated options for "history", acquainted with whom it would be unfair to students studying our country. For example, publishing house issued in 1989
At the heart of history as the subject and science lies the historical methodology. If in many other scientific disciplines there are two main names - observation and experiment, then only the first method is available for history. Even despite the fact that every true scientist tries to reduce to a minimum impact on the observation object, he still interprets seen in his own way. Depending on the methodological trips applied by scientists, the world receives various interpretations of the same event, a variety of teachings, schools, and so on.
The following historical research methods are distinguished:
- brain teaser,
- general scientific
Special,
- Interdisciplinary.
Historical research
In practice, historians have to enjoy research, which are based on logical and general scientific methods. The logical includes an analogy and comparison, modeling and generalization and others.
Synthesis involves the reunion of any event or an object from the more of small components, that is, the movement from simple to complex one is used here. The complete opposite of the synthesis is the analysis in which you have to move from difficult to simple.
Such research methods in history as induction and deduction are equally important. The latter allows you to develop theory on the basis of systematization of empirical knowledge about the object being studied, deriving numerous consequences. Induction translates everything from private to a common, often probabilistic, position.
Also, scientists use anxgle and comparison. The first makes it possible to see some similarity between different objects having a large number of relationships, properties and other things, and the comparison is a judgment on signs of differences and similarities between objects. Comparison is extremely important for qualitative and quantitative characteristics, classification, assessment and other things.
Especially methods of historical study allocate modeling, which only suggests the connection between objects to identify their location in the system, and the generalization is a method that provides general features to make an even more abstract version of an event or any other process.
General scientific methods of historical research
In this case, the above methods are complemented by empirical methods of cognition, that is, experiment, observation and measurement, as well as theoretical methods of research, such as mathematical methods, transitions from abstract to a specific and vice versa, and others.
Special methods of historical research
One of the most important in this area is which not only distinguishes the deep problems of phenomena, but also indicates similarities and features in historical processes, indicates the trends of certain events.
At one time, the theory of K. Marx also received a special distribution and his counterweight to which a civilization method was performed.
Interdisciplinary research methods in history
Like any other science, the story is interconnected with other disciplines that help to know the unknown to explain certain historical events. For example, using the methods of psychoanalysis, historians got the opportunity to interpret the behavior of historical personalities. The interaction between geography and history is very important, as a result of which a cartographic study method appeared. Linguistics made it possible to learn a lot of early history on the basis of the synthesis of history and linguistics approaches. Also very close links between history and sociology, mathematics, etc.
Research is a separate section of cartography, which has an important historical and economic importance. With it, you can not only determine the place of residence of individual tribes, designate the movement of tribes and other, but also to find out the location of minerals and other important objects.
Obviously, the story is closely interconnected with other sciences, which greatly facilitate research and make it possible to obtain more complete and extensive information about the object being studied.
In the scientific literature, the concept of methodology is used to designate, in some cases, the combination of techniques, methods and other cognitive funds used in science, and in others, - as a special teaching about the principles, methods, methods and means of scientific knowledge: 1) Methodology - This is the doctrine of the structure, logical organization, methods and means of activity. 2) The methodology of science is the doctrine of the principles, methods and forms of construction of scientific knowledge. 3) History Methodology is a variety of methods of methods that are used in the process of historical research in accordance with the specifics of various historical scientific schools. 4) Methodology of history is a special scientific discipline formed within the framework of historical science in order to theoretical ensuring the effectiveness of historical research in it.
The concept of a historical research methodology is close to the concept of paradigm of historical research. In modern science methodology, the concept of paradigm is used to designate a system of prescriptions and rules of cognitive activity, or research models. Under paradigms understand recognized by all scientific achievementswhich within a certain time give the scientific community model formulation and solutions. Paradigms of historical research that are followed in scientific activity Those or other scientific communities of historians set a way of vision of the subject area of \u200b\u200bhistorical research, determine the choice of its methodological benchmarks and formulate the basic rules of cognitive activity in a historical study.
The methodology of historical research has a multi-level structure. According to one presentation that exists in the scientific literature, its first level is of knowledge of a philosophical nature. At this level, the methodological function performs epistemology as the theory of knowledge. The second level is scientific concepts and formal methodological theories, which includes theoretical knowledge of the essence, structure, principles, rules and methods of scientific research at all. The third level is represented by theoretical knowledge, which is distinguished by their subject affiliation and the assistance of methodological recommendations only to a certain class of research tasks and cognitive situations specific to this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge.
According to another idea, to understand the methodology of scientific knowledge in relation to the historical study, the following levels can be distinguished in the structure of the methodology of a specifically historical study: 1. A model of historical research as a system of regulatory knowledge that determines the subject area of \u200b\u200bhistorical knowledge, its cognitive (mental) strategy, the main Cognitive means and the role of a scientist in obtaining new historical knowledge. 2. The paradigm of historical research as a sample and standard of setting and solving a certain class of research tasks, adopted in the scientific community to which the researcher belongs. 3. Historical theories related to the subject area of \u200b\u200bspecific historical research forming its scientific thesaurus, a model of the subject and used as explanatory constructs or understanding concepts. 4. Methods of historical research as ways to solve individual research tasks.
In accordance with modern ideas about science, the theory means understanding in the concepts of certain empirical observations. This is a reflection (putting the meaning, attributing meaning) is synonymous with theoretization. As well as collecting information (empirical data), theorizing is an integral component of any science, including historical. As a result, the final result of the historian's work, - historical discourse, - contains various theoretical concepts on which the historian is based on, starting with the dating of the described event (whether it is about an era or simply specifying the year in a certain summer system). Theorization (understanding in concepts) can take different forms. There are various ways to structuring theories, the typology of the classification of theoretical approaches, from simple empirical generalizations to the metatorelia. The most simple concept is reduced to dichotomy "Description - Explanation". As part of this scheme, scientific theories are divided into two "ideal types" - a description and explanation. The proportions in which these parts are present in a particular theory can vary significantly. These two parts or types of theory correspond philosophical concepts Private and general (single and typical). Any description, first of all, operates with a private (single), in turn, the explanation relies on the general (typical).
Historical knowledge (as well as any other scientific knowledge) may also be predominantly described (inevitably comprising some elements of explanation), and mainly an explanation (certainly includes some description elements), as well as represent these two types of theory in any proportion.
The differences between the description and explanation occur at the dawn of the development of philosophical thought in ancient Greece. The founders of two types of historical discourse - descriptions and explanations are Herodotus and Fuchdide. Herodotus is mainly interested in the events themselves, the degree of guilt or the responsibility of their participants, while Fuchidis interests are aimed at the laws on which they occur, clarifying the causes and consequences of the events.
With the consolidation of Christianity in the era of the late Roman Empire, and after its fall and the beginning of the era, called average centuries, the story (historical discourse) becomes almost exclusively description, and the history of the explanation for many centuries disappears from practice.
In the era of Renaissance, the story appears mainly in the meaning of the text, not knowledge, and the study of history is reduced to the study of ancient texts. A radical change in the attitude towards history occurs only in the XVI century. As an explanatory factor, in addition to providening and individual motives, Fortune still appears, resembling some impersonal historical strength. In the second half of the XVI century. A real breakthrough is committed in understanding the history as a type of knowledge, for a few more than half a century, dozens of historical and methodological treatises appear.
Next change in the interpretation theoretical foundations Stories takes place in the XVII century, and this coup comes F. Bacon. Under history, he means any descriptions, and under philosophy / science - any explanations. "History ... deals with single phenomena ( individua.), which are considered in certain conditions of place and time ... All this is related to memory ... Philosophy does not matter with single phenomena and not with sensual impressions, but with abstract concepts derived from them ... It fully refers to Areas of reason ... We consider history and experienced knowledge as a single concept, just like philosophy and science. " The F. Bacon scheme gained wide fame and was used by many scientists of the XVII-XVIII centuries. Up to the end of the XVIII century. The history was understood by scientific and descriptive knowledge, which was opposed to scientifically explaining knowledge. In the terminology of the time it was reduced to opposing the facts and theory. In modern terms, the fact is a statement about the existence or implementation recognized by true (relevant truth criteria adopted in this society or social group). In other words, facts are an integral part of the description. In turn, the fact that during the time of Bacon was called the theory, now referred to as an explanation, and under theoreticals are meant, including descriptive statements.
In the XIX century Positivistic studies appear, they did not distinguish between natural and social sciences. Two generalized disciplines belong to the social sciences: explaining ("theoretical") Society science - sociology, and descriptive ("factographic") Society Science - History. Gradually, this list was expanded due to the economy, psychology, etc., and under the history continued to understand the descriptive part of social and scientific knowledge, as the areas of knowledge of specific facts as opposed to the "real" science engaged in the cognition of general laws. For a historian, according to a positivist, the main thing is the presence of a real object, document, "text". At the end of the XIX century. Antiposivistic "counter-revolution" begins. Popularizer of Darwinism T. Huxley, proposed to distinguish between prospective sciences - chemistry, physics (where the explanation comes from the cause to the consequence), and the sciences of retrospective - geology, astronomy, evolutionary biology, the history of society (where the explanation proceeds from the investigation and "rises" to the reasons). Two types of sciences, in his opinion, suggest two types of causality accordingly. Prospective sciences offer "reliable" explanations, while retrospective (essentially historical) sciences, including the history of society, can offer only the explanations of "probable". Essentially, Huxley was the first to formulate the idea that in the framework of scientific knowledge there may be different ways to explain. This created an opportunity for refusal to the hierarchy of scientific knowledge, equalizing the scientific status of various disciplines.
A significant role in the development of philosophy of science was played by the struggle for the sovereignty of social studies in the framework of the philosophical flow arising in Germany in the XIX century, which is denoted as "historicism". His representatives united the idea of \u200b\u200ba fundamental difference in natural and social sciences, refusal to build "social physics", the proof of the "inaccuracy" of social studies and the struggle with the ideas about the secondary value of this other, compared with naturally scientific, type of knowledge. These ideas were developed at V. Dieltea, V. Vindelband and Rickert. They abandoned the traditional separation of the descriptive and explaining knowledge, and the term "understanding" began to use as a generalizing sign of public sciences, which was opposed to naturally scientific "explanation." "Historicists" began to denote "history" all socio-scientific knowledge (or the collection of social sciences begins to be called "historical").
In the second half of the XX century, the process of sizing natural-scientific and social and scientific types of knowledge, which began at the end of the XIX century), ended (at the conceptual level). There was an idea that the explanation in the same extent inherent in the humanitarian (public) sciences, as well as natural, simply the nature of the explanation (procedures, rules, techniques, etc.) in these two types of scientific relations differ markedly. Social sciences dealing with social reality, i.e. With human actions, their reasons and results, inherent in their own, special methods of explanation other than natural sciences.
So, in historical discourse, as in any science, you can allocate two "ideal types" theories - a description and explanation. Along with the terms "Description and Explanation" to distinguish between two types of historical scientific discourse, other names are used. For example, at the beginning of the XX century. N. Kareyev proposed to use the terms "historiography" and "historology", currently use the terms "descriptive" and "problem" history.
Unlike specific public sciences, specializing in studying some one part of one social reality (this society), history studies almost all elements of all-known past social reality. In the 60-70s of the XX century. Historians actively mastered the theoretical apparatus of other social sciences, the so-called "new" stories - economic, social, political were developed. "New" History very different from the "old". Studies written in the spirit of "new" history were characterized by a distinctly expressed explanatory (analytical), and not a descriptive (narrative) approach. In the field of processing of sources, "new" historians also produced a real coup, widely applying mathematical methods that allowed to master the huge arrays of statistics, dotole inaccessible historians. But the main contribution of "new stories" in historical science was not so much in the distribution of quantitative methods or computer processing of mass sources of information, as in the active use of theoretical explanatory models for analyzing past societies. In historical studies, the concepts and concepts developed in theoretical economy, sociology, political science, cultural anthropology, psychology began to be applied. Historians adopted not only macro-theoretical approaches (economic cycles, conflict theory, modernization, accurativity, the problem of power, mentality), but also turned to microanalysis with the involvement of relevant theoretical concepts (consumer function, limited rationality, network interaction, etc.) .
Consequently, any historical discourse "pushing" theory, but taking into account the existing objective restrictions and specific functions of historical knowledge, theoretization in this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge takes other forms than in other humanitarian sciences.
Like any other science, historical science, relies on both the general methodological foundations and a specific set of principles and research methods. Principles are the most common settings, rules, the initial provisions that the scientist is guided by solving this or that scientific problem. In historical science, there are their principles, the main of which are: the principle of historicism; principle of systemic approach (system); principle of objectivity; Principle of value approach.
The principle of historicism, which is based on the consideration of facts and phenomena in their development, provides for the study of facts and phenomena in the process of their formation, changes and transition to new quality, in connection with other phenomena, requires researcher to consider phenomena, events, processes in their relationship and interdependence and just as they took place in a specific era, i.e. Assess the era in its internal laws, and not be guided by its own moral and ethical, political principles that belong to another historical time.
The principle of systemicity (systemic approach) suggests that any historical phenomenon can be understood and is explained only as part of something more common in time and space. This principle focuses the researcher to disclose the entire integrity of the object being studied, the reduction of all components of the relationships and functions that determine the mechanism of its activities into a single picture. Society in historical development is considered as an ultra-empty self-regulating system with diverse bonds, which are constantly changing, but remain a holistic system that has a certain structure.
The principle of objectivity. The main goal of any historical study is to get reliable, true knowledge of the past. The truth means the need to achieve the ideas of the studied phenomenon or subject to it are adequate. Objectivity is an attempt to reproduce the object of study as it is in itself, regardless of human consciousness. However, it turns out that "actually" researchers are interested in not actually objective reality, more precisely, it is not that these words seem to be ordinary thinking. As the modern historian I.N. noticed Danilevsky, it is unlikely that we are worried about the fact that one day, about 227,000 average sunny day ago, approximately at the intersection of 54 ° C. sh. and 38 ° c. d., on comparatively little plot Earth (about 9.5 square meters), limited on both sides by rivers, several thousand representatives of the biological species of Homo Sapiens were gathered, which for several hours with various devices destroyed each other. Then, the survivors diverged: one group went south, and the other to the north.
Meanwhile, it was what happened, "in fact," objectively in the Kulikov field in 1380, but the historian is interested in completely different. Much more important, who were considered to be the most "representatives", as they identified themselves and their communities, because of which, and why they tried to destroy each other, as they evaluated the results of the self-destruction act, etc. Questions. It is necessary to strictly divide our ideas about what and as happened in the past, from how it all seemed to contemporaries and subsequent event interpreters.
The principle of the value approach. In the historical process, the historian explorer is not only interested in the general and special, but also an assessment of a particular phenomenon that occurred in the past. The value approach in historical science proceeds from the fact that in world history there are certain generally accepted achievements of culture that constitute unconditional values \u200b\u200bfor human existence. From here, all the facts and acts of the past can be assessed, correlating them with such achievements and, on the basis of this, to make an estimated judgment. Among them are the values \u200b\u200bof religion, states, rights, morality, art, science.
At the same time, it should be borne in mind that there is no generally accepted gradation of values \u200b\u200bfor all peoples and communities. Because of this, there is no possibility of creating an objective evaluation criterion, and therefore, when applying this method, there will always be subjective differences between individual historians. Moreover, for each historical time, the value orientations were different, therefore, it is necessary to not judge, but to understand the story.
In practice, the principles of historical knowledge are implemented in specific methods of historical research. Under the method implies a set of techniques and operations that allow new knowledge from the already known material. The scientific method is a theoretically based regulatory informative, a set of requirements and tools to solve the task.
First of all, general scientific methods used in any field of knowledge are necessary. They are divided into the methods of empirical research (observation, measurement, experiment) and methods of theoretical research (logical method comprising methods for analyzing and synthesis, induction and deduction, the method of climbing from a particular one-to-abstract, modeling, etc.) are general scientific methods of classification and typology, implying the allocation of the general and special, which ensures the systematization of knowledge. These methods allow you to allocate types, classes and groups of similar objects or phenomena.
In historical research, in addition to general scientific methods, special historical methods are applied. We highlight the most significant of them.
The ideographic method is a descriptive method. The need to consider any event in connection with others involves a description. The human factor in history is a person, team, mass - needs a characteristic. The image of a participant (subject) of historical action is individual or collective, positive or negative - can only be descriptive, therefore, the description is the necessary link in the picture of historical reality, the initial stage of historical research of any event or process, an important prerequisite for understanding the essence of phenomena.
Historical and genetic methods in its application for the literal meaning of the Greek concept " genesis"- origin, occurrence; The process of education and the formation of a developing phenomenon. The historical and genetic method is part of the principle of historicism. With the help of the historical and genetic method, the main causal relations are established, as well as, this method allows to distinguish key positions of historical development due to peculiarities historical era, countries, national and group mentality and personal traits of participants in the historical process.
The problem-chronological method involves the analysis of historical material in the chronological sequence, but within the framework of the isolated problem blocks, it allows you to concentrate on considering this or that component of the historical process in the dynamics.
Synchronous method. Sync ("horizontal section" of the historical process) allows you to compare such phenomena, processes, institutes of different nations, in various states in the same historical time, which makes it possible to identify common patterns and national characteristics.
Diaphricious method. The diachronic comparison ("vertical section" of the historical process) is used to compare the state of the same phenomenon, the process, the system in different periods Activity. Didname identifies the essence and nature of the changes that makes it possible to trace the dynamics of the development of qualitatively new parameters in them, which makes it possible to allocate qualitatively distinguished steps, the periods of their evolution. With the help of the diachronous method, periodization is carried out, which is a mandatory component of research.
Comparative historical (comparative) method. It consists in identifying similarities and differences between historical objects, comparing them in time and in space, explaining the phenomena with the help of an analogy. At the same time, the comparison must be applied in the complex of two opposite parties: an individualizing, which allows to consider the unit and special in fact and phenomenon, and the synthetic, which gives you the opportunity to conduct a logical thread of reasoning to identify common patterns. A comparative method first embodied the ancient Greek historian Plutarch, in his "life-writers" of portraits of political and public figures.
The retrospective method of historical knowledge involves consistent penetration into the past, in order to identify the causes of the event. Retrospective analysis is a gradual movement from contemporary state Phenomena to the past, in order to make earlier early elements and reasons. Methods of retrospective (recurrent) and promising analysis make it possible to update the information received. The method of perspective analysis (making a similar operation, only in the "reverse" direction) allows you to consider the meaning of those or other phenomena and ideas for subsequent historical development. The use of these methods can contribute to predicting the further evolution of society.
The historical system of knowledge is to establish the relationships and interaction of objects, disclosure of internal mechanisms for their functioning and historical development. All historical events have their cause and interrelated among themselves, that is, they are systemic. Even in ordinary historical systems there are diverse functions, defined both the structure of the system and its place in the hierarchy of systems. The historical system method requires an appropriate approach to each specific historical reality: carrying out structural and functional analyzes of this reality, studying it not as consisting of individual properties, but as qualitatively holistic systemhaving a complex of own traits that occupies a certain place and playing a well-known role in the system hierarchy. As an example of system analysis, the work of F. Strameli "Material civilization, economics and capitalism" can be given, in which the author formulated a systematic "theory of a multi-stage structure of historical reality". In history, it highlights three layers: event, conjunctural and structural. Explaining the peculiarities of its approach, Strettle writes: "Events are only dust and are in history only with brief flashes, but they cannot be considered as not meaningless, for they sometimes illuminate the reasons." With these system approaches The author considers the material civilization of the XV-XVIII centuries. Reveals the history of the global economy, industrial revolution, etc.
Special methods borrowed from other branches of science can be used to resolve specific private objectives of the study, verifying its results, studying formerly not affected aspects of society's life. Attracting new methods from related industries has become an important trend in historical studies due to a significant expansion of the source base, which has been replenished due to archaeological research, introducing into the turnover of new arrays of archival materials, as well as as a result of the development of new forms of information transfer and storage (audio, video, Electronic media, Internet).
The use of certain methods depends on the purposes and tasks that the scientist poses. The knowledge obtained with their help is interpreted in the framework of different macrojectories, concepts, models, measurements of history. It is not by chance, therefore, in the course of the development of historical science, several methodological approaches to explain the meaning and content of the historical process were established.
The first of them is to look at the story as a single stream of the progressive, ascending movement of humanity. Such an understanding of history implies the existence of the stages of human development in general. Therefore, it can be called unitary-stadium (from Lat. unitas. - Unity), evolutionist. The linear model of history was formed in antiquity - in the Iranian-Zoroastrian medium and the Old Testament consciousness, on the basis of which the Christian (as well as the Judist and Muslim) historosophy has developed. This approach has found its manifestation in the exhaustion of such basic stages of human history, like wildness, barbarism, civilization (A. Ferguson, L. Morgan), as well as in the History of History on Hunting-Collective, Cottle Tool (Shephealth), Agricultural and Trade and Industrial Periods (A. Turgo, A. Smith). It is present in the allocation in the history of civilized humanity of four world-historical eras: ancient, ancient, medieval and new (L. Bruni, F. Bjondo, K. Keler).
The Marxist concept of history also includes the unitary-stagneal. In it, five socio-economic formations (primitive, antique, feudal, capitalist and communist) are performed as stages of human development of mankind. It is her who mean when they talk about the formation concept of history. Another unitary concept is the concept of post-industrial society (D. Bell, E. Toffler, Kan, 3. Brzezinsky). In its framework there are three stages: traditional (agrarian), industrial (industrial) and post-industrial (sensitive, informational, etc.) of society. The space of historical changes in this approach is one and has the structure of the "Puff Cake", and in its center - Western European history - there is a "right" (exemplary) location of the layers and movement from the lower to the top. At the edges of the layers are deformed, although the overall pattern of movement from the lower layers to the highest is preserved with amendments to the specific historical specificity.
The second approach to the comprehension of history is cyclical, civilizational. The cyclic model of the worldview was formed in the ancient-period civilizations and received a philosophical interpretation in ancient Greece (Plato, Stoics). The space of historical changes in a cyclical approach is not one, but decays to independent education, each of which has its own history. However, all historical entities in principle are arranged in the same way and have a circular structure: the origin - the growth - flourishing - Doma - decline. These formations are referred to in different ways: civilization (J.A. Gobino and A.J. Toynby), cultural and historical individuals (Ryuckert), cultural and historical types (N.Y. Danilevsky), culture or great cultures (about . Spengler), Ethnic groups and super ethnos (L.N. Gumilev).
The evolutionary approach allows to identify the accumulation of new quality, shifting in the economic, socio-cultural, institutional-political spheres of life, certain stages that society goes in their development. The picture, which is obtained as a result of the use of this approach, resembles a set of discrete segments stretched along a hypothetical line that personifies motion from the point of insufficient development to progress. The civilization approach focuses on a complex of sufficiently slowly changing parameters characterizing the sociocultural and civilizational core of the social system. As part of this approach, the researcher focuses on the inertia of history, on continuity (continuity, sequence) of the historical past and present.
Various in their own essence, these approaches complement each other. Indeed, the whole course of human history convinces that there is a development, progress, despite the possibility of serious crises and reversing movements. Moreover, individual components of the social structure change (and develop) unevenly, with different speeds, and the rate of development of each of them has a certain impact on other components (accelerating or slowing them). Society at a lower stage of development for a variety of parameters differs from society, which is at a higher level of development (this applies to a separate society discussed at different phases of its development). At the same time, the changes are usually not capable of blurring the features that are attributed to a specific society. The transformation themselves often lead only to regrouping, rearrange the accents in the complex characterizing its root parameters, to the transfiguration of the relationships that exist between them.
The perception of the historical process based on these approaches allows to realize that the world is infinitely diverse and that is why there can be no configality, but at the same time objectivity and the need for progressive development determine the search for compromises, tolerant development of humanity.
In addition to these approaches, a significant addition to the development of modern history methodology is a political scientific approach that allows you to compare political systems and make objective conclusions about historical and political processes.
The theory of mentality, in turn, allows you to enter into scientific turns new circle Historical sources reflecting the daily lives of people, their thoughts and feelings and more adequately reconstruct the past across the view of a man who lived in this past.
Enrichs the modern methodology of historical science and a synergistic approach that allows us to consider each system as a certain unity of order and chaos. Special attention is paid to the complexity and unpredictability of the behavior of the studied systems during the periods of their unstable development, at bifurcation points, when non-essential causes can directly affect the selection of social development vector. According to the synergistic approach, the dynamics of complex social organizations are associated with regular alternation of acceleration and slowing the development process, limited decay and recreation of structures, periodic displacement of influence from the center to the periphery and back. Partial refund in new conditions to cultural and historical traditions, according to a synergistic concept, - Therefore, condition Maintain a complex social organization.
In historical science, a wave approach, which focuses on the wave-like character of the evolution of complex social systems. This approach also admits alternative variants of the development of human society and the possibility of changing the vector of development, but not the return of society into its original state, but the promotion of it along the path of modernization is not without the participation of traditions.
Other approaches are also worthy of attention: historical and anthropological, phenomenological and historicophy approach that determines the task - to disclose the meaning and appointment of the historical process, the meaning of life.
Student acquaintance with various methodological approaches to the study of the historical process allows one to overcome one-sidedness in explaining and understanding history, contributes to the development of historicism of thinking.
Control questions
1. Name the main levels of the methodology of historical research, which one, in your opinion, is the most important and why?
2. What, in your opinion, should prevail in a historical study: a description or explanation?
3. Can historians be absolutely objective?
4. Give examples of the use of historical and genetic and problem-chronological methods.
5. What approach to the study of history: evolutionist or cyclical to you is more understandable and why?
Literature
1. Historical science today: theories, methods, prospects. M., 2012.
2. Methodological problems of history / under total. Ed. V.N. Sidortsova. Minsk, 2006.
3.Pepina L.P. Historical science at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. M., 2011.
4.Saveveva I.M., Poletayev A.V. Knowledge of the past: theory and history. C-PB., 2003.
5.Ternya A.T., Trofimov A.V. Russia: Images of the Past and the meaning of the present. Yekaterinburg, 2012.
Methods of historical research.
The method is a means of historical research. With the help of research methods, historical knowledge is accumulated, as well as clarifying ideas about the past.
Methods of historical research are divided into:
- Specially - historical.
- Generally.
Specially - historical include the following research methods:
1) The ideographic (descriptively narrative) method implies not only a description of historical events and phenomena, but also reduces the function of historical knowledge as a whole.
Historical knowledge begins with the description of a phenomenon. To disclose the individual identity of the object of historical knowledge, the corresponding language means of expression are used. The ideographic method allows you to fix the unique features of the historical phenomenon.
Description - this is not an indiscriminate transfer of information about the depicted, but a connected statement that has its own logic and meaning. The logic of the image can in one way or another to express the true essence of the depicted
Description - this is the necessary link in the picture of historical reality, the initial stage of the historical study of any event or process, an important condition and prerequisite for understanding the essence of phenomena. However, in itself, it does not give such an understanding. In fact, the description is although it is an important step of this knowledge, it does not constitute a universal method. This is just one of the historian thinking procedures. It prepares the soil for further essential - meaningful analysis.
2) a retrospective method (from Latin. Retro - back and Specio - I look) - this is a consistent immersion in the past in order to identify the causes of events.
Historical processes are developing in the direction of "from the past to this", from the formation of the causes of the phenomenon to the emergence of the phenomenon itself. The process of historical knowledge "is moving" in the opposite direction: from knowledge of events and phenomena to determine their causes and prerequisites. That is, it is drawn to how events developed in reality - from the cause of the consequence. The historian goes from the investigation to the cause. The value of earlier historical phenomena can only be comprehended by recording later.
The essence of the retrospective method is to use knowledge about a higher level of historical development for understanding and evaluating the previous one. The fact is that to understand the essence of the event being studied or the process of thinking, it is necessary to trace its development from the end to the end. Each previous stage can be understood not only due to its connection with other stages, but in the light of the subsequent and higher stage of development as a whole, in which the essence of the whole process is most fully expressed.
The essence of the retrospective method was best expressed by K. Marx. We are talking about understanding quite specific phenomena and the history as a whole. About the method of studying the medieval community of German G. L. Maurer K. Marx wrote: "But the seal of this" agricultural "community is so clearly expressed in the new community that Maurer, having studied the latter, could restore the first."
In domestic historiography, I. D. Kovalchenko was successfully used in the study of agrarian relations in Russia in the XIX century. The essence of the method was attempting to consider the peasant farm at different system levels: individual peasant farms (yards), a higher level - peasant communities (villages), even higher levels - parish, county, province. The provincial system represents the highest level, it is on him, according to a scientist, the main features of the socio-economic building of the peasant economy were most clearly manifested. I. D. Kovalchenko believed that their knowledge was necessary to disclose the essence of structures at a lower level. The nature of the structure at the bottom (residential) level, being correlated with its essence on summit, shows, to what extent general trends in the functioning of the peasant economy were manifested in a single one.
The retrospective method is applicable to the study of not only individual phenomena, but also entire historical eras. The most clearly this essence of the method is expressed in K. Marx. He wrote: "Bourgeois society - there is the most developed and most multilateral historical organization of production. Therefore, the categories expressing his relationship, understanding its organization, are given the possibility of penetrating into the organization and the production relations of all those who have narrated social forms, from the debris and elements of which it is built, part of continuing to carry out more continuing remnants, part of developing to the complete value. that first was only in the form of a hint, etc. Anatomy of man is the key to the anatomy of the monkey. On the contrary, hints of higher animals can only be understood if it is already known to be known. "
3) "Research Method". In a particularly historical study, the retrospective method is very closely associated with the "remotes" method, under which historians understand the method of reconstruction of those who have left the past objects on the preserved and reached to the modern historian of the era residuals.
The famous researcher of the primitive society E.Tealor (1832-1917) wrote: "There is an extensive class of facts between testimonies that help us, for the designation of which I would have fully easy to enter the term" relic. " These are the customs, rites, the views, which, while the habit of habit were transferred from one stage of culture, which they were characteristic, to another, later, remain a living testimony or monument of the past. "
For remnants in the broad sense of the word, we can attribute monuments, a reference information.
If we are talking about written sources related to a certain era, then the relict ones may be data or fragments included from more ancient documents. The most striking example of sources containing the information of their contemporary emergence (fixation) of the era and the remnants of more ancient eras are the barbaric truths. The emergence of the state, the privileges of its officials, these sources contain many information relating to the relatives relating to the relatives relating to the routine-bottle relationship regulations, i.e. To normal law.
4) Historical - the system method is consideration of society as a holistic system. The objective basis for the use of the systemic approach is the fact that public reality does not consist of individual and isolated objects, phenomena and processes, and represents the combination of interrelated and interacting objects defined by holistic, system education.
5) Comparative (comparatively historical) method is a comparison of historical objects in space and time. With the help of a comparative method, simultaneous (synchronous) and diverse (diachronic) events can be compared. The comparison allows you to identify both similar in various historical phenomena and their unique, individual features.
Receipt of comparison is known in science from the era of antiquity.
The provision of productive use of a relatively historical method is the analysis of single-order events and processes. It is quite clear that such an analysis cannot be implemented by applying this method as such. As long as the characteristic of the compared events is given by detailed, if possible, an exhaustive identification of their signs, relatively - the historical method will not give the result or the result will be false. Moreover, it should be emphasized: the degree of study of the compared must be in each case approximately the same, since the lack of study of any of the compared events can be taken for insufficiently their development, which will inevitably lead to erroneous conclusions. Consequently, the productive use of this method is preceded by a detailed description of the studied as a result of the application of the descriptive - narrative method. The description acts as a comparison basis.
A comparison of studied phenomena varies according to the degree of penetration into their essence. The initial stage of the comparative analysis is an analogy. The judgments are similar to whether they relate to simple events, acting individuals or complex phenomena and processes, do not contain decoding their essence and are usually used as an illustration or evidence of something. Analogy implies not an analysis, but directly transferring views from an object to an object.
The next step of comparative analysis is to identify essentially - the content characteristic of the studied. In this case, we are talking about comparing one-order phenomena as a result of natural repeatability.
In the XVI century A number of Western European countries held a reformation. It was caused by a number of similar reasons, based on her the transition of society from medieval orders in all spheres of life to new, capitalist. In this - "Earth" roots of the Reformation, although its course in different countries had its own characteristics, including in the content of the ideas nominated.
The next step of relatively historical analysis is the reception of typology. Typology goes on the substantive - essential analysis by comparison in the sense that the types of single-order phenomena stand out.
6) Historical - the typological method is to highlight the types of historical phenomena, their classification. Selection of types (classification) of single-order phenomena relies on comparative studies, but does not boil down to them. The essence of the historical - typological method is to determine the signs (criteria) that can be the basis for the classification.
7) Problem - the chronological method is to study the sequence of historical events in time. Since the historical process is developing "from the past to this", the result of the historical reconstruction of events is to build their sequence according to the chronological principle, the formation of the "chain" of the stories connected by the causes of the stories.
8) The biographical method is one of the oldest approaches to the study of history.
Some of his features were labeled already in antique historiography. So, Plutarch (approx. 45 - Ok. 127) In his work, "comparative lives" did not simply presented the biographies of great people, but also tried to look at their actions as a story. Of course, antique historians did not come to the conviction that the story is a product of people's activities. Before the formation of this thesis, still centuries, as in historical thinking, more than millennia prevained the idea of \u200b\u200bprovidencylism. Even G. V. F. Hegel considered people with their passions, will, actions like a puppet of the Spirit.
With the development of historiography, the biographical method acquired an increasing role in historics. It is especially characteristic of various directions of the so-called political historiography, where the subject itself is a political history - to a certain extent contributed to the nomination of the policy as a real carrier of the highest state power to the first plan.
An extreme expression of the biographic method was the option of his interpretation associated with the theory of "Heroes and the crowd" of the English historian T. Karlalyl. This historian outlined his understanding of the role of great personalities in history in the history of the historian in the lecture, read in 1841. In the published book, he considered the story as a biography of great personalities, and the people are like a blind and lacking gun of their actions. .
The most notable varieties of the biographical method include the method of collective biographies of the English historian L. Namira (1888-1960), used by him during the study of the activities of the English Parliament and subsequently distributed in a number of national historiography of the West and in the United States. L. Namir applied to the average, ordinary person, however, not to a person from the street, but to the deputy of the English parliament. This is the novelty of his approach. In 1928, the historian began writing the history of the English parliament, which he presented in the form of a biography of deputies. L. Namir considered each of them as a representative of a certain social institution and identified the dates of life, social origin and position, education, personal and business relations, behavior in various situations, etc. The theoretical idea of \u200b\u200bthe collective biography method is associated with confidence that only through the thickness of biographical parts can be made to understanding the causes and explanation of their nature, which is thus not impaired, and the genuine interests of a person. The only way to this is to study all the details of his life. In accordance with this, the activities of Parliament looks just like the struggle of his members for power, career, personal well-being.
The narrowing of the scope of the biographical method in the historiography of the second half of the XX century. Related, firstly, with the loss of the political history of its former traditional role and, secondly, with the emergence of new branches of historical research in the historical science of a number of countries in the world.
The appearance of a Great Personality is an accident or depends on the era, from the conditions surrounding it? Undoubtedly, only with regard to the nature of historical conditions, the actions of the historical personality can be understood, therefore, the reasons for its occurrence. The appearance of it is obliged not to itself, more precisely, not only to itself, not only to his talent, will, aspiration for the result, etc., but also the environment. One can only assume how many people outstanding in their personal quality remained unreserved or who did not realize themselves due to the fact that they were prevented by the epoch in which they lived that their time did not come, etc. One of these people was the well-known Russian statesman M.M.Sepransky (1772-1839), the projects of reforms of which were significantly ahead of their time. Paradoxically: to appear the great commander, you need a war. To appear a great personality, the conditions are necessary, and more specifically - the situation of the pivoting of public changes. These changes nominate identity, on their background, the personality becomes a great, which has a large-scale effect on the course of events in that it realizes the desire to change the necessity of millions.
