HISTORIOGRAPHY

Historical science is inconceivable without historiography. The historian treats countries, peoples, entire epochs and outstanding personalities as a judge. The historiographer has been given an even more honorable right: he acts as a judge in relation to the historian himself.

Historiographyis a science that studies the process of accumulation of historical knowledge. Unlike historical science, which studies the past by extracting data from historical sources and analyzing them, historiography explores this science itself. Therefore, historiography is, as it were, the history of history.

Historiography has recently appeared. The need to describe all previously existing historical knowledge first arose in the middleXIX in. Teaching students of historical and historical-philological faculties, historians came to the conclusion that it is no longer enough to teach history itself, it is time to acquaint students with the experience of professional historians and their scientific methods. To this end, in the 1848/49 academic year, a professor at Moscow University, a well-known historian, Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov, gave students a course of lectures on historical literature. The lectures turned out to be useful for the students, and soon their reading became

regular. Similar lectures were given at St. Petersburg, Kazan and other universities. This is how historiography in Russia took its first steps. Nowadays, a historian who is not familiar with historiography will not be able to work professionally.

So much historical information has accumulated that it is impossible to conduct a serious study without making a historiographical review on this topic, i.e., before setting out his position on any problem, each scientist should find out the opinion of his predecessors. It is necessary to make sure either that the judgment is new, or that it is a confirmation of the already known opinion of other historians.

Description of the literature on the historical problem under study is the very first and most important task of historiography. Now in this science a lot has changed. The subject of her research has greatly expanded; and now what used to be called "historiography", meaning a review of the literature on a topic, is proposed to be called a "historiographic review on a topic". The term "historiography" itself is used today mainly in the sense of "history of historical science."

The historical past is a complex subject of study. How to find out about events alreadysewing? How to describe these events if people's memory is unreliable? And how to reconstruct the events that happened so long ago that there are no witnesses anymore? Where can I find the missing information? They are found in historical sources. Finding these sources and extracting the necessary information from them is the task of history. But how? What tools? In what ways? In different centuries, the methods and tools used by historians were different. Historiography is the study of them.

The whole process of accumulation of historical knowledge can be divided into two periods − prescientific and scientific. Before the advent of writing, legends about the past were passed from mouth to mouth. It was the time of oral traditions, epics, sagas. Some of them were recorded over time and in this form have survived to this day. Epics are the first sources that carry information about the past. Later, historical information began to be recorded. This is how chronicles appeared - the first historical works, which contained all the information that the chronicler managed to find out. Historical knowledge was not yet a science at that time, since information about the past was not analyzed. This period is called pre-scientific. The historical works of the pre-scientific period include oral tales, epics, chronicles, lives of saints,

chronicles, etc. The path to scientific historical knowledge was long and difficult and ended only in the middle - second halfXVIII in.

In the end XVII- early XVIII centuries there were works on history that cannot yet be called scientific, but they differ from the previous ones in that the authors not only described the events, but also tried to analyze them. Many of these works are associated with the activities of PeterI, reformer king. During this period, the historical writings of Prince Boris Ivanovich Kurakin (1676-1727), a participant in the Azov campaigns and the Northern War, who commanded the Semyonovsky regiment in the Battle of Poltava, appeared. In his work "History of the Russian Empire" about a third of the narrative refers to the pre-Peter time, and the rest - the events of the reign of PeterI, in many of which Kurakin himself took part.

The work of Pyotr Pavlovich Shafirov (1669-1739) is called “Reasoning, what are the legitimate reasons for His Royal Majesty Peter the Great to

Old Russian chronicler.

the beginning of the war against King Carolus the Twelfth of Sweden in 1700 had. As the name implies, it is about the Northern War. That is, again, about the event, a contemporary of which was the author himself. Unlike the ancient chroniclers, representatives of the historical literature of the endXVII- start XVIII centuries trying to make sense of the events they describe. Sometimes, for greater objectivity, they involve various sources of information. So, Shafirov used documents on international relations, Russian foreign policy when creating his work.XVII— XVIII centuries In his work, the reader was offered not just a list of events, but a kind of "view of events", the author's position. "Reasoning ..." liked PeterIwho understood the need for the development of historical knowledge in Russia and was interested in its dissemination. That is why he himself wrote the preface to this work. Shafirov's work was translated into German and distributed abroad. Of course, Boris Kurakin, Pyotr Shafirov, Feofan Prokopovich, Dmitry Kantemir cannot be called professional historians. They did not specifically study history and did not have broad knowledge in this area. The beginning of historical science in Russia was laid by the works of the German historians Gottlieb Siegfried Bayer (1694-1738) and August Schlözer (1735-1809), who worked in our country. These scientists were the first to use special methods to extract reliable information from historical sources. HistoriansXIX in. their writings were greatly appreciated.

But is it only scientific knowledge that should be considered the subject of historiography? In recent years, the attention of historiographers has been increasingly drawn to the historical ideas of those who were not professionally connected with history. After all, many people who have expressed interesting thoughts about history have never specially studied the trade of a historian. Among them are philosophers - Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev, Alexei Stepanovich Khomyakov, Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky, Vladimir Sergeevich Solovyov; writers - Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol, Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy, Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov. As a development of historical thought in its figurative form, one can also consider some works of Russian poets: Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, Nikolai Alekseevich Nekrasov, Alexander Alexandrovich Blok.

Historiography also studies everything that is directly connected with the life of historical science at different times: the activities of research institutes, higher educational

Russian historian XVIII in.

institutions, museums, periodicals, etc. Historiography is no less interested in ideas about the fate of the fatherland that exist in the mass public consciousness (this is the least explored area). But the main subject of research in historiography is scientific historical knowledge. Complexity

its study consists in the need to comprehend what in itself is the result of comprehension.

Historiography is the self-knowledge of history. The emergence of this science indicates that history has reached a high degree of maturity. History tries to understand itself.

• Banion- Banyon (Jean Bagnyon) - a Swiss writer who lived in the second half of the 15th century. It was known about him that he was a bachelor (bachelier), citizen and syndic of the city of Lausanne, and that in 1487 he wrote in defense ...
• Narushevich- Narushevich (Adam-Stanislav) - Polish poet and historian (1733-1796); studied with the Jesuits and joined their order; was a professor at the Jesuit College in Vilna and the collegium nobilium in Warsaw; later Bishop Luc...
• Historical Herald- Historical Herald - a historical and literary journal, published monthly since 1880, ed. S. N. Shubinsky; publisher - A. S. Suvorin. The magazine has set itself the goal of "acquainting readers in a live, social ...
• Campredon- Campredon (H. de Campredon) - French diplomat. In the first years of the XVIII century. K. was in Sweden; in 1719 he was again sent there to support the interests of France during the tragedy that took place in Sweden ...
• Kulomzin Anatoly Nikolaevich- Kulomzin Anatoly Nikolaevich - Secretary of State, chamberlain, b. in 1838. After graduating from the course of St. Petersburg. univ. in the Faculty of Law, served in the state. office and in the office of the committee of ministers; was comrade. mi...
• ALDANOV- ALDANOV (real name Landau) Mark Alexandrovich (1886-1957), Russian writer. He emigrated in 1919. In the historical tetralogy "The Thinker" (1921-27, the novels "The Ninth Thermidor", "Devil's...
• BARSOV Nikolai Pavlovich- BARSOV Nikolai Pavlovich (1839-1889), historian. Professor at Warsaw University (since 1888). Proceedings on the historical geography of Russia ["Essays on Russian historical geography. Geography of the Primary (Non-Storo...
• BYCHKOV- BYCHKOV, historians and archeographers, father and son. Afanasy Fedorovich (1818-99), Academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (1869). Member of the State Council (since 1890). Chairman of the Archeographic Commission. Works on the history...

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

FSBEI HPE "Tambov State Technical University"

Department of History and Philosophy

abstract

in the discipline "History of Russia"

on the topic: "Outstanding Russian Historians"

Completed by a 1st year student K.V. Osadchenko

Checked by Ph.D., Associate Professor K.V. Samokhin

Tambov 2011

Introduction

Chapter 1. Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich

1 Biography of V.O. Klyuchevsky

2 V.O. Klyuchevsky as a historian

Chapter 2. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich

1 Biography of N.M. Karamzin

2 Karamzin as a historian

3 Karamzin as a writer

Chapter 3. Tatishchev Vasily Nikitich

1 Biography of V.N. Tatishcheva (life, career, literary works)

Chapter 4. Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov

1 Biography of L.N. Gumilyov

2 The main works of L.N. Gumilyov

Chapter 5. Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov

1 Biography of S.M. Solovyova

2 Teaching activities

3 Traits

4 "History of Russia"

5 Other writings

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Outstanding Russian historians used to clearly imagine that historical science has general theoretical methodological problems in itself.

In the academic year 1884/85, V.O. Klyuchevsky gave a special course for the first time in Russia Methodology of Russian history , heading the really original section of the first lecture thus: Lack of method in our history.

Commenting on this formulation, Klyuchevsky said: Our Russian historical literature cannot be accused of a lack of diligence - it has worked out a lot; but I will not charge her too much if I say that she herself does not know what to do with the material she has processed; she doesn't even know if she handled it well.

How can there be methodological concepts gleaned by historical science and corresponding criteria and approaches? Especially in conditions of zero level of development of own approaches? It is clear that only the personality, including its sociological profile, can serve as such an initial source.

What has been said about the relationship between the social concept of personality and history, with well-known far-fetched corrections (in each case, purely amazingly specific, taking into account the specifics of this science), perhaps this exists extrapolated specifically to any branch of humanitarian, social science knowledge.

The purpose of the abstract is to analyze, on the basis of existing literature, the life and work of Russian historians during their lifetime and what they left behind.

Based on the goal, when writing the abstract, the following tasks were formulated:

.Consider the biography of V.O. Klyuchevsky and his activities as a professor of history.

.Consider the biography of N.M. Karamzin and his literature.

.Consider the life, career and literary works of V.N. Tatishchev in his biography.

.Consider the life and main works of L.N. Gumilyov.

.Consider S.M. Solovyov as a teacher, a person with character and his contribution to the "History of Russia".

Chapter 1. Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich

.1 Biography of V.O. Klyuchevsky

Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich- (1841-1911), Russian historian. He was born on January 16 (28), 1841 in the village of Voskresensk (near Penza) in the family of a poor parish priest. His first teacher was his father, who died tragically in August 1850. The family was forced to move to Penza. Out of compassion for the poor widow, one of her husband's friends gave her a small house to live in. “Was there anyone poorer than you and me at the time when we were left orphans in the arms of our mother,” Klyuchevsky later wrote to his sister, recalling the hungry years of childhood and adolescence. In Penza, Klyuchevsky studied at the parish theological school, then at the district theological school and at the theological seminary.

Already at school, Klyuchevsky knew the works of many historians well. In order to be able to devote himself to science (the authorities predicted for him a career as a clergyman and admission to a theological academy), in his last year he deliberately left the seminary and spent a year independently preparing for the entrance exams to the university. With admission to Moscow University in 1861, a new period began in the life of Klyuchevsky. F.I. Buslaev, N.S. Tikhonravov, P.M. Leontiev, and especially S.M. Soloviev became his teachers: and it is well known what a pleasure it is for a young mind, beginning a scientific study, to feel in possession of a whole view of a scientific subject.

The time of study for Klyuchevsky coincided with the biggest event in the life of the country - the bourgeois reforms of the early 1860s. He was an opponent of extreme measures of the government, but did not approve of the political actions of the students. The subject of his graduation essay at the university, Tales of Foreigners about the Muscovite State (1866), Klyuchevsky chose the study of about 40 legends and notes of foreigners about Russia in the 15-17th centuries. For the essay, the graduate was awarded a gold medal and left at the department "to prepare for a professorship." Klyuchevsky's master's (candidate's) dissertation, Ancient Russian Lives of the Saints as a Historical Source (1871), is devoted to another type of medieval Russian sources. The topic was pointed out by Solovyov, who probably expected to use the secular and spiritual knowledge of the novice scientist to study the question of the participation of monasteries in the colonization of Russian lands. Klyuchevsky did a titanic work on the study of at least five thousand hagiographic lists. During the preparation of his dissertation, he wrote six independent studies, including such a major work as the Economic Activity of the Solovetsky Monastery in the White Sea Territory (1866-1867). But the efforts expended and the result obtained did not justify the expected - the literary monotony of the lives, when the authors described the life of the heroes according to a stencil, did not allow us to establish the details of "the situation, place and time, without which there is no historical fact for the historian."

After defending his master's thesis, Klyuchevsky received the right to teach at higher educational institutions. He taught a course in general history at the Alexander Military School, a course in Russian history at the Moscow Theological Academy, at the Higher Women's Courses, at the School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. From 1879 he taught at Moscow University, where he replaced the late Solovyov in the department of Russian history. Teaching activities brought Klyuchevsky well-deserved fame. Gifted with the ability of figurative penetration into the past, a master of artistic expression, a famous wit and author of numerous epigrams and aphorisms, in his speeches the scientist skillfully built entire galleries of portraits of historical figures that were remembered by listeners for a long time. The doctoral dissertation The Boyar Duma of Ancient Russia (first published on the pages of the Russian Thought magazine in 1880-1881) constituted a well-known stage in the work of Klyuchevsky. The subject of subsequent scientific works of Klyuchevsky clearly indicated this new direction - the Russian ruble of the 16th-18th centuries. in its relation to the present (1884), The origin of serfdom in Russia (1885), Poll tax and the abolition of servility in Russia (1886), Eugene Onegin and his ancestors (1887), The composition of the representation at the zemstvo councils of ancient Russia (1890), etc. The most famous scientific work of Klyuchevsky, which received worldwide recognition, is the Course of Russian History in 5 parts. The scientist worked on it for more than three decades, but decided to publish it only in the early 1900s.

Klyuchevsky called colonization the main factor in Russian history around which events unfold: “The history of Russia is the history of a country that is being colonized. The area of ​​colonization in it expanded along with its state territory. Falling, then rising, this age-old movement continues to this day. Based on this, Klyuchevsky divided Russian history into four periods. The first period lasts approximately from the 8th to the 13th century, when the Russian population concentrated on the middle and upper Dnieper with tributaries. Russia was then politically divided into separate cities, foreign trade dominated the economy. Within the framework of the second period (13th - mid-15th century), the bulk of the population moved to the interfluve of the upper Volga and Oka. The country was still fragmented, but no longer into cities with adjacent regions, but into princely destinies. The basis of the economy is free peasant agricultural labor. The third period continues from the middle of the 15th century. until the second decade of the 17th century, when the Russian population colonized the southeastern Don and Middle Volga chernozems; in politics, the state unification of Great Russia took place; in the economy began the process of enslavement of the peasantry. The last, fourth period until the middle of the 19th century. (the Course did not cover the later time) - this is the time when "the Russian people spread throughout the plain from the Baltic and White to the Black seas, to the Caucasus Range, the Caspian and the Urals." The Russian Empire is formed, headed by autocracy, based on the military service class - the nobility. In the economy, the manufacturing industry joins the serf agricultural labor.

The scientific concept of Klyuchevsky, with all its schematism, reflected the influence of social and scientific thought of the second half of the 19th century. The allocation of the natural factor, the importance of geographical conditions for the historical development of the people met the requirements of positivist philosophy. The recognition of the importance of questions of economic and social history was to some extent akin to Marxist approaches to the study of the past. But nevertheless, the historians of the so-called "state school" - K.D.Kavelin, S.M.Soloviev and B.N.Chicherin are closest to Klyuchevsky. “In the life of a scientist and writer, the main biographical facts are books, the most important events are thoughts,” wrote Klyuchevsky. The biography of Klyuchevsky himself rarely goes beyond these events and facts. His political speeches are few and characterize him as a moderate conservative who avoided the extremes of the Black Hundred reaction, a supporter of enlightened autocracy and the imperial greatness of Russia (it is no coincidence that Klyuchevsky was chosen as a teacher of world history for Grand Duke George Alexandrovich, brother of Nicholas II). The political line of the scientist was answered by the “Eulogy” to Alexander III, pronounced in 1894 and causing indignation among the revolutionary students, and a wary attitude towards the First Russian Revolution, and an unsuccessful ballot in the spring of 1906 in the ranks of electors in the First State Duma on the cadet list. Klyuchevsky died in Moscow on May 12, 1911. He was buried in the cemetery of the Donskoy Monastery.

1.2 V.O. Klyuchevsky as a historian

history literary teaching Klyuchevskiy

Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich- professor of Russian history at the Moscow Theological Academy and at Moscow University (in the latter - since 1879); currently ( 1895 ) is the chairman of the Moscow Society of History and Antiquities.

During the existence of the higher women's courses in Moscow, Professor Guerrier gave lectures on Russian history at them, and after the closing of these courses, he participated in public lectures organized by Moscow professors.

Not particularly numerous, but rich in content, Klyuchevsky's scholarly research, of which his doctoral dissertation ("Boyar Duma") stands out, is devoted primarily to clarifying the main issues of the history of administration and the social system of the Moscow state of the 15th - 17th centuries.

The wide scope of the study, covering the most essential aspects of the life of the state and society, in their mutual connection, a rare gift of critical analysis, sometimes reaching petty, but leading to rich results, a brilliant talent for presentation - all these features of K.'s works, long recognized by special criticism, helped him to enrich the science of Russian history with a number of new and valuable generalizations and put him in one of the first places among its researchers.

The most important of the works of Klyuchevsky: "Tales of foreigners about the Moscow State" (M., 1886), "Old Russian Lives of the Saints, as a historical source" (M., 1871), "Boyar Duma of Ancient Russia" (M., 1882), "Russian ruble of the 16th - 18th centuries in its relation to the present "(1884), "The Origin of Serfdom" ("Russian Thought", 1885, $ 8 and 10), "Poll tax and the abolition of servility in Russia" ("Russian Thought", 1886, $ 9 and 10), "The composition of the representation at the zemstvo councils of ancient Russia" ("Russian Thought", 1890, $ 1; 1891, $ 1; 1892, $ 1).

In addition to scientific works, Klyuchevsky published articles of a popular and journalistic nature, placing them mainly in Russkaya Mysl.

While retaining his talent for exposition, Klyuchevsky in these articles moved further and further away from the scientific ground, although he tried to keep it behind him. Their distinctive feature is the nationalist tint of the author's views, which is closely connected with the idealization of the Moscow antiquity of the 16th-17th centuries. and an optimistic attitude towards modern Russian reality.

Such features were clearly reflected, for example, in the articles: "Eugene Onegin", "Good people of old Russia", "Two educations", "Recollection of N. I. Novikov and his time", as well as in Klyuchevsky's speech entitled: " In memory of the deceased Emperor Alexander III in Bose "(" Readings of Moscow. General. Ist. and Ancient. ", 1894 and separately, M., 1894).

Chapter 2. Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich

.1 Biography of N.M. Karamzin

Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich- the famous Russian writer, journalist and historian. Born December 1, 1766 in the Simbirsk province; grew up in the village of his father, a Simbirsk landowner. The first spiritual food of an 8-9-year-old boy was old novels, which developed natural sensitivity in him. Even then, like the hero of one of his stories, "he loved to be sad, not knowing what," and "could play with his imagination for two hours and build castles in the air."

In the 14th year, Karamzin was brought to Moscow and sent to the boarding school of the Moscow professor Shaden; he also attended the university, where one could then learn "if not the sciences, then Russian literacy." He owed Schaden a practical acquaintance with the German and French languages. After finishing his studies with Shaden, Karamzin hesitated for some time in his choice of activity. In 1783, he tries to enter the military service, where he was enrolled as a minor, but at the same time he retires and in 1784 is fond of secular successes in the society of the city of Simbirsk.

At the end of the same year, Karamzin returned to Moscow and, through his countryman, I.P. Turgenev, became close to Novikov's circle. Here began, according to Dmitriev, "Karamzin's education, not only the author's, but also moral." The influence of the circle lasted 4 years (1785 - 88). Serious work on oneself, which Freemasonry demanded, and which Karamzin's closest friend, Petrov, was so absorbed in, is not noticeable in Karamzin, however. From May 1789 to September 1790 he traveled around Germany, Switzerland, France and England, stopping mainly in big cities like Berlin, Leipzig, Geneva, Paris, London. Returning to Moscow, Karamzin began to publish the Moscow Journal (see below), where Letters from a Russian Traveler appeared. The Moscow Journal ceased in 1792, perhaps not without connection with the imprisonment of Novikov in the fortress and the persecution of Masons.

Although Karamzin, starting the Moscow Journal, formally excluded articles "theological and mystical" from his program, but after Novikov's arrest (and before the final verdict) he published a rather bold ode: "To Mercy" ("As long as a citizen is calm, without fear he can fall asleep, and freely dispose of life according to your thoughts to all your subjects; as long as you give freedom to everyone and do not darken the minds of light; as long as the power of attorney to the people is visible in all your affairs: until then you will be sacredly revered ... nothing can disturb the tranquility of your state") and almost came under investigation on suspicion that the Masons had sent him abroad. Karamzin spent most of 1793-1795 in the countryside and prepared two collections here called Aglaya, published in the autumn of 1793 and 1794.

In 1795, Karamzin limited himself to compiling a "mixture" in the Moscow Vedomosti. "Having lost the will to walk under black clouds," he set out into the world and led a rather dispersed life. In 1796, he published a collection of poems by Russian poets, entitled "Aonides". A year later, the second book "Aonid" appeared; then Karamzin decided to publish something like an anthology on foreign literature<#"justify">Chapter 3. Tatishchev Vasily Nikitich

.1 Biography of V.N. Tatishcheva (life, career and literary works)

Tatishchev (Vasily Nikitich) - a famous Russian historian, was born on April 16, 1686 on the estate of his father, Nikita Alekseevich T., in the Pskov district; studied at the Moscow artillery and engineering school under the guidance of Bruce, participated in the capture of Narva (1705), in the Battle of Poltava and in the Prussian campaign; in 1713-14 he was abroad, in Berlin, Breslau and Dresden, for improvement in the sciences. In 1717, Tatishchev was again abroad, in Danzig, where Peter I sent him to apply for the inclusion of an old image in the indemnity, about which there was a rumor that it was painted by St. Methodius; but the magistrate of the city did not yield to the image, and T. proved to Peter the infidelity of the legend. From both of his trips abroad T. took out a lot of books. Upon his return, T. was with Bruce, the president of the Berg and Manufactory College, and went with him to the Aland Congress. The idea made by Bruce to Peter the Great of the need for a detailed geography of Russia gave impetus to the compilation of the "Russian History" by Tatishchev, whom Bruce pointed out to Peter in 1719 as the performer of such a work. T., sent to the Urals, could not immediately present the plan of work to the tsar, but Peter did not forget about this matter and in 1724 reminded Tatishchev of it. Having set to work, T. felt the need for historical information and therefore, pushing geography into the background, began to collect materials for history. At the time of the beginning of these works, another, closely related plan of T. dates back: in 1719, he submitted a presentation to the tsar, in which he pointed out the need for a delimitation in Russia. In T.'s thoughts, both plans were connected; in a letter to Cherkasov in 1725, he says that he was determined "to survey the entire state and compose detailed geography with land maps." In 1720, a new order tore T. from his historical and geographical works. He was sent "in the Siberian province on Kungur and in other places where convenient places are searched, to build factories and smelt silver and copper from ores." He had to operate in a country little known, uncultured, which has long served as an arena for all sorts of abuses. Having traveled around the region entrusted to him, Tatishchev settled not in Kungur, but in the Uktussky plant, where he founded a department, called at the beginning the mining office, and then the Siberian higher mining authorities. During T.'s first stay at the Ural factories, he managed to do a lot: he moved the Uktus factory to the river. Iset and there laid the foundation for the present Yekaterinburg; he obtained permission to allow merchants to enter the Irbit fair and through Verkhoturye, as well as post offices between Vyatka and Kungur; at the factories he opened two primary schools, two for teaching mining; procured the establishment of a special judge for factories; compiled instructions for the protection of forests, etc. P.

Tatishchev's measures aroused the displeasure of Demidov, who saw the undermining of his activities in the establishment of state-owned factories. To investigate disputes, Genik was sent to the Urals, who found that T. acted fairly in everything. T. was acquitted, at the beginning of 1724 he presented himself to Peter, was promoted to councilor of the Berg College and appointed to the Siberian Oberberg Amt. Soon afterwards he was sent to Sweden for the needs of mining and for the execution of diplomatic missions. T. stayed in Sweden from December 1724 to April 1726; with many local scientists, etc. Returning from a trip to Sweden and Denmark, Tatishchev spent some time compiling a report and, although not yet expelled from Bergamt, was, however, not sent to Siberia.

In 1727, Tatishchev was appointed a member of the mint office, to which the mints were then subordinate; the events of 1730 found him in this position.

Regarding them, Tatishchev drew up a note, which was signed by 300 people from the nobility. He argued that Russia, as a vast country, most of all corresponds to monarchical government, but that, nevertheless, "to help" the empress, she should have established a Senate of 21 members and an assembly of 100 members, and elected to the highest places by ballot; here various measures were proposed to alleviate the situation of different classes of the population. Due to the unwillingness of the guards to agree to changes in the state system, this whole project was in vain, but the new government, seeing in T. the enemy of the leaders, treated him favorably: he was the chief master of ceremonies on the day of the coronation of Anna Ioannovna. Having become the chief judge of the coin office, T. began to actively take care of improving the Russian monetary system. In 1731, T. began misunderstandings with Biron, which led to the fact that he was put on trial on charges of bribery. In 1734, Tatishchev was released from court and again assigned to the Urals, "for breeding plants." He was also entrusted with the drafting of the mining charter. While T. remained at the factories, his activities brought a lot of benefits to both the factories and the region: under him, the number of factories increased to 40; new mines were constantly opened, and T. considered it possible to arrange another 36 factories, which opened only a few decades later.

Between the new mines, the most important place was occupied by the mountain Blagodat indicated by T.. T. used the right to interfere in the management of private factories very widely and thus more than once aroused reproaches and complaints against himself. In general, he was not a supporter of private factories, not so much out of personal self-interest, but out of the consciousness that the state needs metals, and that by mining them itself, it receives more benefits than entrusting this business to private people. In 1737, Biron, wishing to remove Tatishchev from mining, appointed him to the Orenburg expedition for the final pacification of Bashkiria and the control devices of the Bashkirs. Here he managed to carry out several humane measures: for example, he procured that the delivery of yasak was entrusted not to the yasaks and kissers, but to the Bashkir foremen. In January 1739, T. arrived in St. Petersburg, where a whole commission was set up to consider complaints against him. He was accused of "attacks and bribes", not diligence, etc. It is possible to assume that there was some truth in these attacks, but T.'s position would be better if he got along with Biron. The commission subjected T. to arrest in the Peter and Paul Fortress and in September 1740 sentenced him to deprivation of his ranks.

The sentence, however, was not carried out. In this difficult year for T., he wrote his instruction to his son - the well-known "Spiritual". The fall of Biron again advanced T.: he was released from punishment and in 1741 was appointed to Tsaritsyn to manage the Astrakhan province, mainly to stop the unrest among the Kalmyks. The lack of the necessary military forces and the intrigues of the Kalmyk rulers prevented T. from achieving anything lasting. When Elizaveta Petrovna came to the throne, T. hoped to get rid of the Kalmyk commission, but he did not succeed: he was left in place until 1745, when he, due to disagreements with the governor, was dismissed from his post. Arriving in his village near Moscow Boldino, T. did not leave her until his death. Here he finished his story, which he brought to St. Petersburg in 1732, but for which he did not meet with sympathy. An extensive correspondence conducted by T. from the village has come down to us. On the eve of his death, he went to the church and ordered the workmen with shovels to appear there. After the liturgy, he went with the priest to the cemetery and ordered that a grave be dug for himself near his ancestors. Leaving, he asked the priest to come the next day to partake of him. At home, he found a courier who brought a decree forgiving him, and the Order of Alexander Nevsky. He returned the order, saying that he was dying. The next day he took communion, said goodbye to everyone and died (July 15, 1750). The main work of T. could only be published under Catherine II. All literary activity of T., including works on history and geography, pursued journalistic tasks: the benefit of society was his main goal. T. was a conscious utilitarian. His worldview is set forth in his "Conversation of two friends about the benefits of science and schools." The main idea of ​​this worldview was the then fashionable idea of ​​natural law, natural morality, natural religion, borrowed by T. from Pufendorf and Walch.

The highest goal or "true well-being", according to this view, lies in the complete balance of spiritual forces, in "peace of soul and conscience", achieved through the development of the mind by "useful" science; Tatishchev attributed medicine, economy, law teaching and philosophy to the latter. Tatishchev came to the main work of his life as a result of a combination of a number of circumstances. Realizing the harm from the lack of a detailed geography of Russia and seeing the connection between geography and history, he found it necessary to collect and consider first all historical information about Russia. Since foreign manuals turned out to be full of errors, T. turned to the primary sources, began to study the annals and other materials. At first he had in mind to give a historical essay, but then, finding that it was inconvenient to refer to annals that had not yet been published, he decided to write in a purely annalistic order. In 1739, T. brought to St. Petersburg the work on which he had worked for 20 years, and transferred it to the Academy of Sciences for safekeeping, continuing to work on it and subsequently, smoothing the language and adding new sources. Lacking special training, T. could not give an impeccable scientific work, but in his historical works valuable vital attitude to questions of science and connected with this breadth of outlook. T. constantly connected the present with the past: he explained the meaning of Moscow legislation by the customs of judicial practice and memories of the mores of the 17th century; on the basis of personal acquaintance with foreigners, he understood ancient Russian ethnography; explained ancient names from the lexicons of living languages.

As a result of this connection between the present and the past, T. was not in the least distracted by his work in the service from his main task; on the contrary, these studies broadened and deepened his historical understanding. The conscientiousness of Tatishchev, previously questioned because of his so-called Joachim Chronicle (see Chronicle), is now beyond any doubt. He did not invent any news or sources, but sometimes unsuccessfully corrected his own names, translated them into his own language, substituted his own interpretations, or compiled news similar to chronicles from data that seemed to him reliable. Citing chronicle legends in a set, often without indicating the sources, T. gave, in the end, in essence, not history, but a new chronicle set, unsystematic and rather clumsy. The first two parts of the first volume of "History" were published for the first time in 1768 - 69 in Moscow, G.F. Miller, under the title "History of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors after 30 years, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan Governor V.N.T." Volume II was published in 1773, Volume III - in 1774, Volume IV - in 1784, and Volume V was found by M.P. Pogodin only in 1843 and published by the Society of Russian History and Antiquities in 1848. T. put the material in order before the time of the death of Vasily III; he also prepared, but did not finally edit the material until 1558; he also had a number of handwritten materials for later eras, but no further than 1613.

Part of T.'s preparatory work is stored in Miller's portfolios. In addition to the history of T. and the conversation mentioned above, he compiled a large number of essays of a journalistic nature: "Spiritual", "Reminder on the sent schedule of high and lower state and zemstvo governments", "Discourse on the revision of the total" and others. "Dukhovnaya" (published in 1775) gives detailed instructions covering the whole life and activity of a person (landowner). She talks about education, about different types of service, about relations with superiors and subordinates, about family life, managing the estate and economy, etc. Tatishchev's views on state law are set out in the "Reminder", and in the "Discourse", written about revisions of 1742, indicate measures to increase state revenues. T. - a typical "chick of Petrov's nest", with a vast mind, the ability to move from one subject to another, sincerely striving for the good of the fatherland, having his own definite worldview and firmly and steadily pursuing it, if not always in life, then in every way. case, in all his scientific works.

Wed ON THE. Popov "T. and his time" (Moscow, 1861); P. Pekarsky "New news about V. N. T." (III volume, "Notes of the Imperial Academy of Sciences", St. Petersburg, 1864); "On the publication of the works of V. N. T. and materials for his biography" (A. A. Kunik, 1883, published by the Imperial Academy of Sciences); K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin "Biographies and Characteristics" (St. Petersburg, 1882); Senigov "Historical and critical research on the Novgorod chronicle and on the Russian history of Tatishchev" (Moscow, 1888; review by S.F. Platonov, "Bibliographer", 1888, No. 11); edition of "Dukhovnaya" T. (Kazan, 1885); D. Korsakov "From the life of Russian figures of the XVIII century" (ib., 1891); N. Popov "Scientists and literary works of T." (St. Petersburg, 1886); P.N. Milyukov "Main Currents of Russian Historical Thought" (Moscow, 1897).

Chapter 4. Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov

.1 Biography of Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov

Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov (October 1, 1912 - June 15, 1992) - Soviet and Russian scientist, historian-ethnologist, doctor of historical and geographical sciences, poet, translator from Persian. The founder of the passionary theory of ethnogenesis.

Born in Tsarskoye Selo on October 1, 1912. The son of the poets Nikolai Gumilyov and Anna Akhmatova (see pedigree),. As a child, he was brought up by his grandmother in the estate of Slepnevo, Bezhetsky district, Tver province.

From 1917 to 1929 he lived in Bezhetsk. Since 1930 in Leningrad. In 1930-1934 he worked on expeditions in the Sayans, the Pamirs and the Crimea. Since 1934 he began to study at the Faculty of History of the Leningrad University. In 1935 he was expelled from the university and arrested, but after some time he was released. In 1937 he was reinstated at Leningrad State University.

In March 1938, he was arrested again, as a student at Leningrad State University, and sentenced to five years. He was involved in the same case with two other students of Leningrad State University - Nikolai Yerekhovich and Teodor Shumovsky. He served his term in Norillag, working as a geotechnical technician in a copper-nickel mine, after serving his term he was left in Norilsk without the right to leave. In the autumn of 1944, he voluntarily joined the Soviet Army, fought as a private in the 1386th anti-aircraft artillery regiment (zenap), which was part of the 31st anti-aircraft artillery division (zenad) on the First Belorussian Front, ending the war in Berlin.

In 1945 he was demobilized, reinstated at Leningrad State University, from which he graduated in early 1946 and entered the graduate school of the Leningrad branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, from where he was expelled with the motivation "due to the inconsistency of the philological preparation of the chosen specialty."

On December 1948, he defended his dissertation as a candidate of historical sciences at Leningrad State University, and was accepted as a researcher at the Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR.

Memorial plaque on the house where L. N. Gumilyov lived (St. Petersburg, Kolomenskaya st., 1)

On November 1949, he was arrested, sentenced by a Special Meeting to 10 years, which he served first in a special purpose camp in Sherubay-Nur near Karaganda, then in a camp near Mezhdurechensk in the Kemerovo region, in the Sayans. On May 11, 1956, he was rehabilitated due to the lack of corpus delicti. In 1956, he worked as a librarian in the Hermitage. In 1961 he defended his doctoral dissertation in history ("Ancient Turks"), and in 1974 - his doctoral dissertation in geography ("Ethnogenesis and the biosphere of the Earth"). On May 21, 1976, he was denied the second degree of Doctor of Geography. Until his retirement in 1986, he worked at the Research Institute of Geography at the Leningrad State University.

He died on June 15, 1992 in St. Petersburg. Funeral service in the Church of the Resurrection of Christ near the Warsaw railway station. He was buried at the Nikolsky cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

In August 2005, in Kazan, "in connection with the days of St. Petersburg and the celebration of the millennium of the city of Kazan," a monument was erected to Lev Gumilyov.

On the personal initiative of the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, in 1996, in the Kazakh capital of Astana, one of the leading [source not specified 57 days] universities of the country, the Eurasian National University named after L. N. Gumilyov, was named after Gumilyov. In 2002, an office-museum of L. N. Gumilyov was created within the walls of the university.

4.2 The main works of L. N. Gumilyov

* History of the Xiongnu people (1960)

* Discovery of Khazaria (1966)

* Ancient Turks (1967)

* Quest for the Fictional Realm (1970)

* Xiongnu in China (1974)

* Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth (1979)

* Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe (1989)

* Millennium around the Caspian (1990)

* From Russia to Russia (1992)

* End and start again (1992)

* Black legend

* Synchronization. The experience of describing historical time

* Part of the works

* Bibliography

* From the history of Eurasia

Chapter 5. Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov

.1 Biography of S.M. Solovyova

Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov(May 5, 1820 - October 4, 1879<#"justify">5.2 Teaching activities

Department of Russian history<#"justify">5.3 Traits

As a character and moral personality, Solovyov was outlined quite definitely already from the very first steps of his scientific and service activities. Neat to the point of pedantry, he did not waste, it seems, not a single minute; every hour of his day was foreseen. Solovyov and died at work. Elected to the rectors, he accepted the position "because it was difficult to fulfill it." Convinced that Russian society does not have a history that satisfies the scientific requirements of the time, and feeling in himself the strength to give one, he set to work on it, seeing in it his social duty. In this consciousness, he drew strength to accomplish his "patriotic feat."

5.4 "History of Russia"

For 30 years Solovyov worked tirelessly on the History of Russia, the glory of his life and the pride of Russian historical science. The first volume appeared in 1851.<#"justify">§ the question of dividing Russian history into epochs;

§ the influence of the natural conditions of the territory (in the spirit of the views of K. Ritter<#"justify">5.5 Other writings

To a certain extent, two other books by Solovyov can serve as a continuation of the "History of Russia":

§ "The History of the Fall of Poland" (Moscow, 1863, 369 pages);

§ "Emperor Alexander the First. Politics, Diplomacy” (St. Petersburg, 1877, 560 pages).

Subsequent editions of the "History of Russia" - compact in 6 large volumes (7th - index; 2nd ed., St. Petersburg, 1897<#"justify">§ "Writers of Russian History of the 18th Century" (“Archive of historical and legal information of Kalacheva”, 1855, book II, floor 1);

§"G. F. Miller” (“Contemporary<#"justify">For general history:

§ "Observations on the historical life of peoples" ("Bulletin of Europe", 1868-1876) - an attempt to capture the meaning of historical life and outline the general course of its development, starting with the most ancient peoples of the East (brought to the beginning of the 10th century<#"justify">Conclusion

So what conclusions can we come to? It would be wrong to limit the methodological function of the social concept of personality only to the sphere of modern humanities. As an art, the philosophical, social personality performs this function in relation to all arts and sciences, including natural science.

Many problems and in this place can be solved only with methodological substantiation with the help of laws, discovered since ancient times, by the social concept of personality.

In particular, the periodization of the history of a particular science, the role of many social conditions in the emergence and solution of many scientific problems; the role of worldview in historical scientific creativity...

And, of course, the moral responsibility of a scientist as a classifier of sciences and the transformation of science into a direct productive force of society, etc.

In addition, it must be taken into account that in modern natural science, many branches that study objects related to both nature and society have been destroyed.

The achievements of these sciences, in order to become effective, must rest on knowledge not only of the laws of nature, but also on knowledge of many laws of the sociological needs of society and the laws of the corresponding level of social development.

Bibliography

1."N.M. Karamzin according to his writings, letters and reviews of contemporaries" (Moscow, 1866).

.Letters to N.I. Krivtsov ("Report of the Imperial Public Library for 1892", appendix).

.K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin "Biographies and Characteristics" (St. Petersburg, 1882).

.Senigov "Historical and critical research on the Novgorod chronicle and on the Russian history of Tatishchev" (Moscow, 1888; review by S.F. Platonov, "Bibliographer", 1888, No. 11).

.N. Popov "Scientists and literary works of T." (St. Petersburg, 1886).

."M. T. Kachenovsky ”(“ Biogr. dictionary of professors of Moscow Univ. ”, Part II).

7. "N. M. Karamzin and his literary activity: History of the Russian State” (“Notes of the Fatherland » 1853-1856, vols. 90, 92, 94, 99, 100, 105).

."BUT. L. Schletser ”(“ Russian Bulletin ” , 1856, № 8).

. “Ancient and New Russia” by Koyalovich P. V. Bezobrazov (“S. M. Solovyov, his life and scientific and literary activity”, St. Petersburg, 1894, from the series “Biographical Library” by Pavlenkov).

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

The history of the Russian people is part of the world, so the importance of studying it is clear to everyone. A person who knows the history of his people can adequately navigate in the modern space and competently respond to emerging difficulties. Russian historians help to study the science that tells about the affairs of past centuries. Let us dwell in more detail on those who played a significant role in scientific research in this area.

First chronicles

While there was no written language, historical knowledge was passed from mouth to mouth. And such legends existed among different peoples.

When writing appeared, events began to be recorded in chronicles. Experts believe that the first sources date back to the X-XI centuries. Older writings have not been preserved.

The first surviving chronicle belongs to the pen of the monk of the Kiev-Pechora monastery Nikon. The most complete work created by Nestor is The Tale of Bygone Years (1113).

Later, the Chronograph appeared, compiled by the monk Philotheus at the end of the 15th-beginning of the 16th century. The document provides an overview of world history and outlines the role of Moscow in particular and Russia in general.

Of course, history is not just a presentation of events; science is faced with the task of comprehending and explaining historical turns.

The Emergence of History as a Science: Vasily Tatishchev

The formation of historical science in Russia began in the 18th century. At that time, the Russian people tried to realize themselves and their place in the world.

The first historian of Russia is considered to be an outstanding thinker and politician of those years. The years of his life are 1686-1750. Tatishchev was a very gifted person, and he managed to make a successful career under Peter I. After participating in the Northern War, Tatishchev was engaged in state affairs. In parallel, he collected historical chronicles and put them in order. After his death, a 5-volume work was published, on which Tatishchev worked throughout his life - "Russian History".

In his work, Tatishchev established the cause-and-effect relationships of the events taking place, relying on the annals. The thinker is rightfully considered the ancestor of Russian history.

Mikhail Shcherbatov

Russian historian Mikhail Shcherbatov also lived in the 18th century, he was a member of the Russian Academy.

Shcherbatov was born into a wealthy noble family. This man possessed encyclopedic knowledge. He created the "History of Russia from ancient times."

Scientists of later eras criticize Shcherbatov's research, accusing him of some haste in writing and gaps in knowledge. Indeed, Shcherbatov began to study history already when he began to work on writing it.

The history of Shcherbatov was not in demand among his contemporaries. Catherine II considered him completely devoid of talent.

Nikolai Karamzin

Karamzin occupies a leading position among Russian historians. The writer's interest in science was formed in 1790. Alexander I appointed him a historiographer.

Karamzin throughout his life worked on the creation of the "History of the Russian State". This book introduced the story to a wide range of readers. Since Karamzin was more of a writer than a historian, in his work he worked on the beauty of expressions.

The main idea of ​​Karamzin's "History" was reliance on autocracy. The historian concluded that only with the strong power of the monarch, the country prospers, and with its weakening, it falls into decline.

Konstantin Aksakov

Among the outstanding historians of Russia and famous Slavophiles, the man born in 1817 occupies his place of honor. His works promoted the idea of ​​the opposite paths of the historical development of Russia and the West.

Aksakov was positive about returning to traditional Russian roots. All his activities called for precisely this - a return to the roots. Aksakov himself grew a beard and wore a kosovorotka and a murmolka. Criticized Western fashion.

Aksakov did not leave a single scientific work, but his numerous articles became a significant contribution to Russian history. Also known as the author of philological works. He preached freedom of speech. He believed that the ruler should hear the opinion of the people, but is not obliged to accept it. On the other hand, the people do not need to interfere in government affairs, but need to focus on their moral ideals and spiritual development.

Nikolai Kostomarov

Another figure from among the historians of Russia, who worked in the 19th century. He was a friend of Taras Shevchenko, had an acquaintance with Nikolai Chernyshevsky. He worked as a professor at Kiev University. He published "Russian history in the biographies of its leaders" in several volumes.

The significance of Kostomarov's work in Russian historiography is enormous. He promoted the idea of ​​folk history. Kostomarov studied the spiritual development of Russians, this idea was supported by scientists of later eras.

A circle of public figures formed around Kostomarov, who romanticized the idea of ​​nationality. According to the report, all members of the circle were arrested and punished.

Sergei Solovyov

One of the most famous Russian historians of the 19th century. Professor, and later rector of Moscow University. For 30 years he worked on the "History of Russia". This outstanding work has become the pride of not only the scientist himself, but also the historical science of Russia.

All the collected material was studied by Solovyov with sufficient completeness necessary for scientific work. In his work, he drew the reader's attention to the internal content of the historical vector. The originality of Russian history, according to the scientist, was in a certain delay in development - in comparison with the West.

Solovyov himself confessed to his ardent Slavophilism, which cooled down a little when he studied the historical development of the country. The historian advocated a reasonable abolition of serfdom and a reform of the bourgeois system.

In his scientific work, Solovyov supported the reforms of Peter I, thereby moving away from the ideas of the Slavophiles. Over the years, Solovyov's views shifted from liberal to conservative. At the end of his life, the historian supported an enlightened monarchy.

Vasily Klyuchevsky

Continuing the list of historians of Russia, it should be said about (1841-1911) he worked as a professor at Moscow University. Considered a talented lecturer. Many students attended his lectures.

Klyuchevsky was interested in the basics of folk life, studied folklore, wrote down proverbs and sayings. The historian is the author of a course of lectures that has received worldwide recognition.

Klyuchevsky studied the essence of the complex relations between peasants and landowners, and attached great importance to this idea. Klyuchevsky's ideas were accompanied by criticism, however, the historian did not enter into polemics on these topics. He said that he expresses his subjective opinion on many issues.

On the pages of the Course, Klyuchevsky gave many brilliant characteristics and key moments in Russian history.

Sergei Platonov

Speaking of the great historians of Russia, it is worth remembering Sergei Platonov (1860-1933) He was an academician and university lecturer.

Platonov developed the ideas of Sergei Solovyov about the opposition of the tribal and state principles in the development of Russia. He saw the cause of modern misfortunes in the coming to power of the nobility.

Sergei Platonov gained fame thanks to published lectures and a history textbook. He assessed the October Revolution from a negative point of view.

For hiding important historical documents from Stalin, Platonov was arrested along with friends who had anti-Marxist views.

Nowadays

If we talk about modern historians of Russia, we can name the following figures:

• Artemy Artsikhovsky - professor at the Faculty of History of Moscow State University, author of works on ancient Russian history, founder of the Novgorod expedition of archaeologists.
• Stepan Veselovsky - a student of Klyuchevsky, returned from exile in 1933, worked as a professor and lecturer at Moscow State University, and studied anthroponymy.
• Viktor Danilov - took part in the Patriotic War, studied the history of the Russian peasantry, was awarded the Solovyov Gold Medal for his outstanding contribution to the study of history.
• Nikolai Druzhinin - an outstanding Soviet historian, studied the Decembrist movement, the post-reform village, the history of peasant farms.
• Boris Rybakov - historian and archaeologist of the 20th century, studied the culture and life of the Slavs, was engaged in excavations.
• Ruslan Skrynnikov - professor at St. Petersburg University, a specialist in the history of the 16th-17th centuries, studied the oprichnina and the politics of Ivan the Terrible.
• Mikhail Tikhomirov - academician of Moscow University, studied the history of Russia, explored numerous social and economic topics.
• Lev Cherepnin - Soviet historian, academician of Moscow University, studied the Russian Middle Ages, created his own school and made an important contribution to Russian history.
• Serafim Yushkov - Professor of Moscow State University and Leningrad State University, historian of state and law, participated in discussions on Kievan Rus, studied its system.

So, we examined the most famous historians of Russia, who devoted a significant part of their lives to science.

Domestic historians - scientists S. M. Solovyov, N. M. Karamzin, V.O. Klyuchevsky, M. N. Pokrovsky, B. A. Rybakov, B. D. Grekov, S. V. Bakhrushin and others and their contribution to the development of Russian historical science

CM. Solovyov

The author of many historical works written on current political topics ("The History of the Fall of Poland", 1863; "Emperor Alexander I. Politics, Diplomacy", 1877; "Public Readings on Peter the Great", 1872, etc.). The main work is "The History of Russia from Ancient Times" (29 volumes, 1851-1879), in which, on the basis of a huge number of historical sources, the scientist substantiated a new concept of national history. Its originality was explained by three factors: “the nature of the country” (natural and geographical features), “the nature of the tribe” (ethno-cultural originality of the Russian people) and “the course of external events” (foreign political reasons). He recognized the common features of the historical path of Russia and the West. Europe and the possibility of a comparative historical method of research. He proved the historical regularity and preparedness of the reforms of Peter I, their necessity for the country to enter the path of "Europeanization". He considered the attachment of peasants to the land and serfdom as a forced measure caused by the “spreading” of the peasantry over the vast territory of Russia and the military needs of the state.

N.M. Karamzin

He was appointed by Nicholas 2 to the post of historiographer. Until the end of his life, he was engaged in writing the "History of the Russian State", practically ceasing the activities of a journalist and writer.

Karamzin's "History of the Russian State" was not the first description of the history of Russia, before him there were works by V. N. Tatishchev and M. M. Shcherbatov. But it was Karamzin who opened the history of Russia to the general educated public. According to A. S. Pushkin, “Everyone, even secular women, rushed to read the history of their fatherland, hitherto unknown to them. She was a new discovery for them. Ancient Russia seemed to have been found by Karamzin, like America by Columbus. This work also caused a wave of imitations and oppositions (for example, "History of the Russian people" by N. A. Polevoy)

Karamzin took the initiative to organize memorials and erect monuments to outstanding figures of Russian history, in particular, K. M. Minin and D. M. Pozharsky on Red Square (1818).

IN. Klyuchevsky

Today it is difficult to imagine the study of national history without the works of Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky. His name is among the largest representatives of Russian historical science in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Contemporaries secured his reputation as a deep researcher, a brilliant lecturer, an inimitable master of the artistic word.

The scientific and pedagogical activity of Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky lasted about 50 years. The name of a brilliant and witty lecturer was widely popular among the intelligentsia and students.

Noting the significant contribution of the scientist to the development of historical science, the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1900 elected him an over-staff academician in the category of history and Russian antiquities, and in 1908 he became an honorary academician in the category of fine literature.

In recognition of the merits of the scientist in the year of the 150th anniversary of his birth, the International Center for Minor Planets assigned his name to planet No. 4560. In Penza, the first monument in Russia to V.O. memorial museum opened.

M.N. Pokrovsky

Author of works on the history of Russia, the revolutionary movement of the XIX-XX centuries, historiography and methodology of history. He argued that the development of Russia is based on economic processes. He put the doctrine of socio-economic formations as the basis of his concept, considering the history of Russia as a successive change of the primitive communal, feudal, capitalist stages. He exposed the conquering, colonial-oppressive policy of tsarism, showed the class struggle of the masses in Russian history.

B.A. Rybakov

Many scientific works of Rybakov contained fundamental conclusions about the life, way of life and the level of socio-economic and cultural development of the population of Eastern Europe. Thus, in the work “The Craft of Ancient Russia” (1948), the researcher was able to trace the origin and stages of development of handicraft production among the Eastern Slavs from the 6th to the 15th centuries, and also identify dozens of handicraft industries. Rybakov's goal was to show that pre-Mongolian Russia not only did not lag behind the countries of Western Europe in its economic development, as many scientists had previously argued, but also outstripped these countries in some respects.

In the monograph "Ancient Russia. Legends. Epics. Letopisi (1963), he drew parallels between epic stories and Russian chronicles. He put forward the hypothesis that individual weather records in the Kievan state began to be made not in the 11th century, but already in the second half of the 9th-10th centuries, which gave rise to a fashion for speculation about the existence of a pre-Christian written tradition among the Eastern Slavs

The scientist studied the ancient Russian chronicle in detail, suggested versions of the authorship of individual chronicle fragments, subjected the original news of the 18th century historian V.N.

Thoroughly studied B. A. Rybakov and such outstanding monuments of ancient Russian literature as "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" and "The Prayer of Daniil Zatochnik". In the books The Tale of Igor's Campaign and His Contemporaries (1971), Russian Chroniclers and the Author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign (1972) and Pyotr Borislavich: Search for the Author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign (1991) he substantiated the hypothesis according to which the "Word" was written by the Kyiv boyar Pyotr Borislavich. According to another hypothesis by Rybakov, the outstanding thinker and publicist of the late 12th - early 13th centuries Daniil Zatochnik was the grand ducal chronicler at the courts of Vsevolod the Big Nest and his son Konstantin. In the works "Paganism of the Ancient Slavs" (1981) and "Paganism of Ancient Russia" (1987), B. A. Rybakov actually reconstructed the pre-Christian beliefs of the Eastern Slavs, causing accusations against him of fantastic speculation and the lack of a unified methodology

S.V. Bakhrushin

Soviet historian, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (since 1939), full member of the APS of the RSFSR (1945), Honored Scientist of Uzbekistan. SSR (1943). In 1904 he graduated from the historical and philological. Faculty of Moscow. university Ped. activity began in 1905 as a teacher of history in the Moscow mountains. early schools. Since 1909 - Privatdozent, and then until the end of his life prof. Moscow university From 1937 he also worked at the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, where for the last 10 years he was in charge of the sector of the history of the USSR until the 19th century. Participated in the preparation of the "History of Diplomacy" (State Prize of the USSR, 1942),

B.D. Greeks

The first research works of B. D. Grekov were devoted to the socio-economic history of Novgorod. He focused on the socio-economic side of feudal relations and the study of the internal processes that took place in the feudal patrimony. The main topic of Grekov's research was the history of Ancient Russia and the Eastern Slavs. In his fundamental study "Kievan Rus" (1939), based on a thorough analysis of all types of sources, he refuted the opinion that existed in the historical literature about the slave-owning nature of ancient Russian society and proved that the Eastern Slavs moved from the communal system to feudal relations, bypassing the slave-owning formation. He showed that the basis of the economic activity of Ancient Russia was highly developed plow agriculture, and not hunting and animal trade, and thereby challenged the opinions of Western historians about the backwardness of the socio-economic system of the Eastern Slavs. Grekov was an opponent of the Normanist theory and stood for the position of having a state in Ancient Russia, which played a significant role in international affairs. At the same time, in his work “Culture of Kievan Rus” (1944), he refuted the nationalist concept of the Ukrainian historian M. S. Grushevsky and proved that Kievan Rus was the common cradle of the Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples.

An important topic of scientific research by B. D. Grekov was the study of the history of the Russian peasantry. In 1946, he published the work Peasants in Russia from Ancient Times to the 17th Century, in which he examined the history of the Russian peasantry in the 10th-17th centuries. in close connection with the history of the peasants of Lithuania and Poland. Grekov made a significant contribution to the development of historiography and the development of source studies in Russia, paying great attention to the collection and publication of many primary sources, especially historical chronicles.

Historiography is a special historical discipline that studies the history of historical science as a complex, multifaceted and contradictory process and its patterns.

The subject of historiography is the history of historical science.

Historiography solves the following tasks:

1) the study of the laws of change and the approval of historical concepts and their analysis. Under the historical concept is understood the system of views of one historian or group of scientists both on the entire course of historical development as a whole, and on its various problems and aspects;

2) analysis of the theoretical and methodological principles of various trends in historical science and the elucidation of the patterns of their change and struggle;

3) study of the process of accumulation of factual knowledge about human society:

4) the study of the objective conditions for the development of historical science.

The history of historical science in our country begins in the period of the existence of Ancient Russia. Until the end of the XVI century. chronicles were the main type of historical writings.

The Tale of Bygone Years (I quarter of the 12th century) served as the basis for most of the chronicles. The most valuable lists are the Lavrentiev, Ipatiev and First Novgorod chronicles. Since the 18th century, the authorship of The Tale of Bygone Years has been attributed to the monk Nestor, but at present this point of view is not the only one and is being questioned.

During the period of feudal fragmentation, chronicles were kept in most major principalities and centers.

With the creation of a single state at the turn of the XV - XVI centuries. the chronicle acquires an official state character. Historical literature follows the path of creating works of grand scale and magnificent forms (the Resurrection Chronicle, the Nikon Chronicle, the Facial Code of Ivan the Terrible).

In the 17th century historical novels, chronographs and power books are approved. In 1672, the first textbook on Russian history "Synopsis" by I. Gizel was published. The word "synopsis" means "general view". In 1692, I. Lyzlov completed his work "Scythian History".

Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev (1686-1750) is considered the father of Russian historical science. He was not a professional historian, he came from a seedy family of Smolensk nobles, but, thanks to his abilities, he made a public career under Peter I. Tatishchev participated in the Northern War, carried out diplomatic missions, led the mining industry of the Urals (1720 - 1721, 1734 - 1737) , was the Astrakhan governor. But for a significant part of his life, in parallel with state activity, Tatishchev collected historical sources, described them and systematized them. times" in 5 books was published in 1768 - 1848. In this essay, the author gave a general periodization of the history of Russia, identified three periods: 1) 862 - 1238; 2) 1238 - 1462; 3) 1462 -1577. Tatishchev associated the development of history with the activities of rulers (princes, kings). He sought to establish a causal relationship of events. When presenting history, he used a pragmatic approach, relying on sources, primarily chronicles. Tatishchev was not only the founder of historical science in Russia, but laid the foundations for source studies, historical geography, Russian metrology and other disciplines.

In /725, the Academy of Sciences founded by Peter I was opened. Initially, invited German scientists worked in it. A special contribution to the development of historical science in Russia was made by G.Z. Bayer (1694 - 1738), G.F. Miller (1705 - 1783) and A.L. Schlozer (1735 -1809). They became the creators of the "Norman theory" of the emergence of statehood in Russia.

This theory was sharply criticized by Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov (1711-1765), the first Russian academician, one of the founders of Moscow University, and a scientist-encyclopedist.

M.V. Lomonosov believed that engaging in history is a patriotic affair, and the history of the people closely merges with the history of rulers, the reason for the power of peoples is the merits of enlightened monarchs.

In 1749, Lomonosov made comments on Miller's dissertation "The Origin of the Russian Name and People." The main historical work of Lomonosov is "Ancient Russian history from the beginning of the Russian people to the death of Grand Duke Yaroslav the First or until 1054", on which the scientist worked from 1751 to 1758.

The scientist believed that the world-historical process testifies to the progressive movement of mankind. He assessed historical events from the standpoint of enlightened absolutism, widely drew on sources, and was the first to raise the question of the level of development of the Eastern Slavs before the formation of the state.

In the second half of the XVIII century. the largest representatives of noble historiography were M.M. Shcherbatov and I.N. Boltin.

A major event in the development of historical science in / quarter XIX century. was the publication of the "History of the Russian State" N.M. Karamzin.

II.M. Karamzin (1766 - 1826) belonged to the provincial Simbirsk nobility, was educated at home, served in the guards, but retired early and devoted himself to literary creativity. In 1803, Alexander I appointed Karamzin a historiographer, instructing him to write a history of Russia for the general reader. Creating the "History of the Russian State", N.M. Karamzin was guided by the desire for the artistic embodiment of history, he was guided by love for the fatherland, the desire to objectively reflect the events that took place. For Karamzin, the driving force behind the historical process was power, the state. Autocracy, according to the historian, is the core on which the entire social life of Russia is strung. Destruction of autocracy leads to death, revival - to the salvation of the state. The monarch must be humane and enlightened. Karamzin objectively revealed the insidiousness of Yu. Dolgorukov, the cruelty of Ivan III and Ivan IV, the villainy of Godunov and Shuisky, he assessed the activities of Peter I inconsistently. people in respect for her. The first eight volumes of "History .." were published in 1818 and became compulsory reading in gymnasiums and universities. By 1916 The book went through 41 editions. In Soviet times, his works were practically not published as conservative-monarchist ones. At the end of the XX century. "History ..." Karamzin was returned to readers.

An outstanding historian // pol. XIX century was Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov (1820 -1879), creator of the 29-volume "History of Russia from ancient times", professor, rector of Moscow University. Beginning in 1851, he published a volume every year until his death. His work covers Russian history from antiquity to the end of the 18th century. Solovyov set and solved the problem of creating a generalizing scientific work on Russian history, taking into account the current state of historical science. The dialectical approach allowed the scientist to raise the study to a new level. For the first time, Solovyov comprehensively considered the role of natural-geographical, demographic-ethnic and foreign policy factors in the historical development of Russia, which is his undoubted merit. CM. Solovyov gave a clear periodization of history, highlighting four main periods:

1. From Rurik to A. Bogolyubsky - the period of domination of tribal relations in political life;

2. From Andrei Bogolyubsky to the beginning of the 17th century. - a period of struggle between tribal and state principles, culminating in the victory of the latter;

3. From the beginning of the XVII century. until the middle of the 18th century. - the period of Russia's entry into the system of European states;

4. From the middle of the XVIII century. before the reforms of the 60s. 19th century - a new period of Russian history.

Trud S.M. Solovyov has not lost its significance to this day.

A student of S.M. Solovyov was Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky (1841 - 1911). The future historian was born into the family of a hereditary priest in Penza and was preparing to continue the family tradition, but his interest in history forced him to leave the seminary without completing the course and enter Moscow University (1861-1865). In 1871, he brilliantly defended his master's thesis "Old Russian Lives of the Saints as a historical source." The doctoral dissertation was devoted to the Boyar Duma. He combined scientific work with teaching. His lectures on the history of Russia formed the basis of the "Course of Russian History" in 5 parts.

V. O. Klyuchevsky was a prominent representative of the national psycho-economic school that was formed in Russia in the last quarter of the 19th century. He considered history as a progressive process, and associated development with the accumulation of experience, knowledge, and everyday comforts. Klyuchevsky saw the task of the historian in the knowledge of the causal relationships of phenomena.

The historian paid close attention to the peculiarities of Russian history, the formation of serfdom and classes. He assigned the role of the main force in the history of the formation and development of the state to the people as an ethnic and ethical concept.

He saw the scientific task of the historian in understanding the origin and development of human societies, in studying the genesis and mechanism of human society.

Klyuchevsky developed the idea of ​​S.M. Solovyov about colonization as an important factor in historical development, highlighting its economic, ethnological and psychological aspects. He approached the study of history from the standpoint of the relationship and mutual influence of the three main factors - personality, nature and society.

Klyuchevsky combined historical and sociological approaches, specific analysis with the study of the phenomenon as a phenomenon of world history.

IN. Klyuchevsky left a deep mark on the history of Russian science and culture. His students were P.N. Milyukov, M.N. Pokrovsky, M.K. Lyubavsky and others. He had a profound influence on his contemporaries and descendants.

In October 1917, the Bolsheviks came to power. The conditions for the development of historical science in the country have changed dramatically. Marxism became the unified methodological basis of the humanities, the research topics were determined by the state ideology, the history of the class struggle, the history of the working class, the peasantry, the communist party, etc. became priority areas.

Mikhail Nikolaevich Pokrovsky (1868 - 1932) is considered the first Marxist historian. He received his education at Moscow University. Since the mid-1890s, he has evolved towards economic materialism. Under economic materialism, he understood the explanation of all historical changes by the influence of material conditions, the material needs of man. The class struggle was perceived by him as the driving beginning of history. On the question of the role of the individual in history, Pokrovsky proceeded from the fact that the individual characteristics of historical figures were dictated by the economy of their time.

The central work of the historian "Russian history from ancient times" in 4 volumes (1909) and "History of Russia in the XIX century" (1907 - 1911). He saw his task in considering the primitive communal and feudal system, as well as capitalism, from the point of view of economic materialism. Already in these works, the theory of "commercial capital" emerged, more clearly formed in Russian History in the Most Concise Essay (1920) and other works of the Soviet period. Pokrovsky called the autocracy "commercial capital in Monomakh's cap." Under the influence of his views, a scientific school was formed, which was defeated in the 30s. 20th century

Despite the repressions and harsh ideological dictates, Soviet historical science continued to develop. Among Soviet historians, Academician B.A. Rybakov, Academician L.V. Cherepnin, Academician M.V. Nechkin, Academician B.D. Grekov, who made a significant contribution to the development of national historical science.

After the collapse of the USSR (1991), a new stage in the development of historical science began: access to archives expanded, censorship and ideological dictate disappeared, but state funding for scientific research significantly decreased. Domestic historical science has become part of world science, and relations with scientists from all over the world have expanded. But it is too early to talk about the results of these positive changes.