Positivists believed that scientific methods are the same for the natural and human sciences. Neo-Kantians contrasted the method of history with the method of the natural sciences. In reality, everything is more complicated: there are general scientific methods used in all sciences, and there are specific methods one or another specific science or complex of sciences. Most thoroughly in the domestic historical literature I. Kovalchenko spoke about the use of general scientific methods in his book on methods of historical research. We will not characterize these methods in detail from a philosophical point of view, but will only show the specifics of their application in historical science.

Logical and historical method. History uses synchrony, the study of an object in space as a system, their structure and functions (logical method) and the study of objects in time - diachrony (historical method). Both methods can act as pure form and in unity. As a result, we study the subject in space and time. The logical method is provided by a systems approach and structural-functional analysis.

The historical method implements the principle of historicism, which was discussed above. The development process is studied through analysis of the state of the object in different time slices. First an analysis of structure and function, then a historical analysis. These two methods cannot be separated.

I. Kovalchenko gives an example. If we use only the historical method, we can conclude that semi-serf relations dominated in Russian agriculture at the beginning of the 20th century. But if we add a logical analysis - a systemic-structural one - it turns out that bourgeois relations dominated.

Ascent from the concrete to the abstract and from the abstract to the concrete. I. Kovalchenko considers this method the most important and decisive. The concrete is the object of knowledge in all its richness and diversity of its inherent features. Abstraction is a mental distraction from some features and properties of the concrete, while it must reflect the essential aspects of reality.

The ascent from the concrete to the abstract is carried out in three ways. Through abstraction (certain properties are considered in isolation from other properties of the object, or a set of characteristics of the object is isolated and it is possible to build essentially substantive and formal-quantitative models).

The second technique is abstraction through identification of the non-identical: states and characteristics that it does not possess are attributed to the object. It is used for various types of classifications and typology.

The third technique is idealization - an object with certain ideal properties is formed. They are inherent in the object, but are not sufficiently expressed. This allows for deductive-integral modeling. Abstraction helps to better understand the essence of an object.

But in order to understand the essence of concrete phenomena, a second stage is necessary - the ascent from the abstract to the concrete. Specific theoretical knowledge appears in the form of scientific concepts, laws, and theories. The credit for developing this method goes to K. Marx (“Capital”). This method is complex and, according to I. Kovalchenko, is not widely used.

Systems approach and systems analysis. A system is, as already noted, an integral set of elements of reality, the interaction of which leads to the emergence of new integrative qualities that are not inherent in the elements that form it. Each system has structure, structure and functions. System components - subsystems and elements. Social systems have a complex structure, which a historian must study. The systems approach helps to understand the laws of functioning of social systems. The leading method is structural-functional analysis.

Foreign science has accumulated extensive experience in the application of systems analysis in history. Domestic researchers note the following disadvantages in the use of new methods. The interaction of the system with the environment is often ignored. The basis of all social structures are subconscious-mental structures that are highly stable; as a result, the structure turns out to be unchanged. Finally, the hierarchy of structures is denied, and society turns out to be a disordered collection of closed and unchanging structures. The tendency towards synchronous static study often leads to the rejection of dynamic diachronic analysis.

Induction - deduction. Induction is a study from the individual to the general. Deduction - from the general to the particular, the individual. The historian examines the facts and arrives at a generalized concept and, conversely, applies the concepts known to him to explain the facts. Every fact has elements of commonality. At first it is merged with a single fact, then it stands out as such. F. Bacon considered induction to be the main method, since deductive conclusions are often erroneous. Historians in the 19th century used mainly the inductive method. Some people are still suspicious of the deductive method. D. Elton believes that the use of theories from sources other than empirical material can be detrimental to science. However, this extreme point of view is not shared by most historians. To get to the essence of phenomena, you need to use concepts and theories, including those from related sciences. Induction and deduction are organically connected and complement each other.

Analysis and synthesis. Also widely used by historians. Analysis is the isolation of individual aspects of an object, the decomposition of the whole into individual elements. The historian cannot cover as a whole the period or object of study he is studying. Having studied individual aspects and factors, the historian must combine elements of knowledge obtained about individual aspects of historical reality, and the concepts obtained during the analysis are combined into a single whole. Moreover, synthesis in history is not a simple mechanical addition of individual elements; it gives a qualitative leap in understanding the object of study.

The idea of ​​“historical synthesis” was developed by A. Burr. He created the Journal of Historical Synthesis at the beginning of the 20th century and International Center synthesis, which united historians, sociologists and representatives of natural and mathematical sciences from several countries. He advocated cultural-historical synthesis, the merging of history and sociology, and the use of the achievements of psychology and anthropology. About a hundred monographs by different historians were published in the series “The Evolution of Humanity. Collective synthesis." The focus is on social and mental life. But priority is given to psychology. A. Burr, in fact, prepared the emergence of the “Annals School,” but the latter, after World War II, went further than him in search of synthesis.

Each philosophical direction offered its own basis for synthesis, but so far the factors were shuffled in a positivist spirit. IN Lately the idea of ​​synthesis based on culture in the postmodern sense arose. We should wait for concrete historical work in this direction.

One thing is clear: analysis and synthesis are inextricably linked. Advances in analysis will not be significant if they are not in synthesis. Synthesis will give a new impetus to analysis, which, in turn, will lead to a new synthesis. There have been successes in achieving synthesis, but they are private and short-term in nature; sometimes material and sometimes ideal factors are put forward as determining ones, but there is no unity among historians. The larger the subject of research, the more difficult it is to obtain a synthesis.

Modeling. This is the most common form of scientific activity. All sciences use models to obtain information about the phenomenon being modeled, test hypotheses, and develop theory. Historians also use this technique. Modeling of a historical phenomenon is carried out by means of logical design - mental models of a content-functional plan are created. Modeling involves some simplification, idealization and abstraction. It allows you to check the representativeness of information from sources, the reliability of facts, and test hypotheses and theories. This method is used at all stages of the study. An example might be given of community studies. When creating its model, data from sociology, law, psychology are used, and mentality is taken into account. This already means taking an interdisciplinary approach. At the same time, we must remember that it is impossible to simply transfer a model from another discipline; it must be reconstructed taking into account conceptual constructs.

There is mathematical modeling. Methods of nonlinear dynamics, mathematical chaos theory, and catastrophe theory are used. The construction of statistical models will be discussed in the section on mathematical methods in history.

Intuition. It is well known that scientists often use intuition to solve scientific problems. This unexpected solution is then tested scientifically. In history, at the end of the 19th century, V. Dilthey, classifying history as the sciences of the spirit, considered the historian’s intuition as the main method for understanding historical events. But this point of view was not shared by many historians, since it destroyed history as a science, preaching extreme subjectivism. What kind of truth could one talk about, relying only on the intuition of historians of very different erudition and abilities? Objective research methods were needed.

But this does not mean that intuition does not play a serious role in scientific research. For a historian, it is based on deep knowledge of his subject, broad erudition, and the ability to apply one or another method in a timely manner. Without knowledge, no intuition will “work”. But, of course, talent is needed for “insight” to come. This speeds up the work of the historian and helps create outstanding works.

History is knowable, but in order to reveal the process of development, to comprehend the characteristics of each period, to overcome one-sidedness and subjectivism, it is necessary to have a perfect scientific methodology, have precise instruments. In the study of historical reality in history, as in any other science, scientists are guided by both general criteria scientific research, and by his own methods of historical research.

The scientific method is understood as a set of various techniques and processes of scientific knowledge, with the help of which one comes to the knowledge of truths. The basis for developing methods is scientific theory. In turn, the methods provide new knowledge, develop and enrich the theory. Often, the establishment of certain facts or the introduction of new research methods is the reason for the abandonment of an old theory.

Most often in historical science two groups of methods are used:

general scientific;

specifically historical.

General scientific methods

General scientific methods are divided into two subgroups:

empirical research methods: observation, measurement, experiment;

theoretical research methods: typology, idealization, method

thought experiment, formalization, modeling, induction, deduction, systems approach, as well as mathematical, axiomatic, historical, logical and other methods. Methods of theoretical research also include a number of modern methods, such as: system-structural and functional analysis, information-entropy method, algorithmization and etc.

In cognitive activity, methods are in dialectical unity, interconnected, complement one another, which makes it possible to ensure the objectivity and truth of the cognitive process.

So, for example, methods classification and typology make it possible to identify classes and groups of similar historical objects, as well as their various types. This selection, as a rule, occurs on the basis of one or several characteristics and therefore does not cover their entire diversity. The exception is classifications carried out by multivariate statistical analysis , in which historical objects are included in a certain group based on the use of a whole set of their characteristics.

In the process of scientific research, the need arises to apply idealization, a special form of mental activity, when in the process of studying a problem, objects with certain ideal properties are mentally formed. This absoluteness of the properties of an ideal object is transferred to reality, and on this basis the patterns of functioning and development of historical objects are determined, their qualitative and formal-quantitative models are built.

Induction is a logical technique for deriving general judgments based on a number of particular observations. It serves as a means of obtaining presumptive judgments-hypotheses, which are then tested and justified. During induction, when in a number of special cases the repeatability of the properties or relationships of historical objects appears, a chain of individual judgments is built, which is confirmed by this repeatability. If there are no facts contradicting the scheme, then such a chain becomes the basis for a more general conclusion (inductive hypothesis).

Induction is closely related to deductive method . They are usually used in combination. The basis of deduction is the transition from general provisions to particular ones and the derivation of the particular and individual from the general. It is constantly resorted to in the process of cognitive activity. Through deduction, any general provision (law) is applied to a particular fact. It is actively used to substantiate hypotheses. Single historical facts can be considered explained if they are included in a certain system of concepts from which they can be obtained deductively. The deductive method underlies the formation of scientific theories. With its help, schematization and idealization of the structure of practical activity is carried out.

If the inductive method is necessary when accumulating material, then the deductive method is necessary in the cognitive process of a theoretical nature. By applying the deduction method to accumulated material, one can obtain new knowledge that goes beyond the boundaries of established empirical facts.

Method is important in historical science modeling - the study of objects of knowledge based on their models that reproduce or reflect these objects. The foundation of the method is the theory of similarity. According to the nature of the models, there is a distinction between subject and sign (information) modeling.

Subject modeling is the study of models that reproduce the geometric, physical, dynamic or functional characteristics of the original object. The basis for this operation is an analogy.

At iconic modeling The models are diagrams, formulas, tables, etc. Its most important type is considered to be mathematical modeling, reproduced by expressive and deductive means of mathematics and logic.

Model- this is a system created or chosen by the researcher that reproduces with a certain accuracy the ascent from the abstract to the concrete, and then the transition from the concrete to the abstract occurs. In this case, the specification can be as detailed as desired. As a result, the general and special things that are inherent in the objects, phenomena and processes being studied are deeply revealed.

This approach is possible when the theoretical level of knowledge of historical objects allows us to construct their abstract, essentially meaningful model. This possibility is not always available. But the study of many historical phenomena has quite reached this level. And then it may be most effective math modeling.

Mathematical methods at the modeling level can also be used in the formation of a system of quantitative indicators. This is important both for checking the reliability and accuracy of quantitative and descriptive information from historical sources and assessing their representativeness, and for solving other information and source studies problems.

The general scientific method has become widely used in historical research. systematic approach. It is based on the study of objects as systems, which makes it possible to reveal their essential nature and principles of functioning and development. The method involves the creation of a number of simplified models that imitate or replace (to a certain extent) the original system. Such models must allow an adequate return transition to the original modeled object without loss of information essential for its understanding.

The systems approach does not exist in the form of a strict methodological concept: it performs heuristic functions, remaining a set of cognitive principles, the main meaning of which is the appropriate orientation of specific studies. Therefore, this approach requires the use of various general scientific methods, including such as ascent from the abstract to the concrete, logical, deductive, as well as quantitative methods.

Specific methods of systems research are structural and functional analyzes aimed at studying the structure of systems and identifying their functions. Comprehensive knowledge of any system requires consideration of its structure and functions in organic unity, i.e. structural and functional analysis.

General scientific methods as such are necessary at the theoretical level of historical science. In relation to specific historical situations, they are used to develop special historical methods, for which they serve as a logical basis.

Methods of other sciences, such as psychology, demography, sociology, geography, mathematics, statistics, are also widely used in history.

Special historical methods.

Special historical methods are a different combination of general scientific methods adapted to the characteristics of the historical objects being studied. Special historical methods include:

Ideographic- description of historical events and phenomena;

Retrospective -consistent penetration into the past in order to identify the cause of an event;

Historical-comparative- comparison of historical objects in space and time;

Historical-typological - classification of historical phenomena, events and objects;

Historical-systemic - disclosure of internal mechanisms of development and

functioning of historical phenomena and objects;

Historical-genetic - analysis of the dynamics of historical processes.

Through historical-genetic The method studies historical phenomena in the process of their development - from origin to destruction or current state. By its logical nature, this method is analytical-inductive (ascending from specific phenomena and facts to general conclusions), and by its form of expressing information it is descriptive. It gives a “biography” of a historical object (state, nation, etc.). The historical-genetic method is aimed at analyzing the dynamics of historical processes. Allows you to identify their cause-and-effect relationships and patterns of historical development. This method is used at the first stage of historical research, when information is extracted from sources, systematized and processed.

Weaknesses of the historical-genetic method: reduced role of theoretical analysis of collected historical facts, lack of a clear logical basis and developed categorical apparatus. This means that the research carried out with its help cannot be brought together and created on their basis a complete picture of historical reality. Consequently, the method is actually not suitable for studying a number of historical phenomena and processes, for example mass ones. It must be used in combination with other special historical methods.

Historical-comparative method consists of comparing historical objects in space and time and identifying similarities and differences between them. The method is focused on the consideration of historical objects in certain time slices and involves the use of various techniques to compare the essence of heterogeneous historical phenomena. Therefore, when applying it, the main attention is concentrated on the statistical position of objects in space and time and in identifying the similarities and differences between them. Through the historical-comparative method, the researcher obtains additional information about little-studied historical objects.

By using historical-typological method identify common features in spatial groups of historical events and phenomena and identify homogeneous stages in their continuous-time development. Typology has the goal of systematizing and ordering objects according to their inherent common characteristics, dividing their aggregates into qualitatively defined types (stages). Typology in form is a type of classification, but in essence it is one of the methods of qualitative analysis.

Currently, the practice of scientific-historical research is becoming increasingly widespread. historical-systemic method. This is due to attempts to reveal the internal mechanisms of their functioning and development. The fact is that all historical events have their own cause and are functionally interconnected, i.e. are systemic in nature. Even simple historical systems have diverse functions, determined both by the structure of the system and its place in the hierarchy of systems. To carry out a system analysis, it is necessary to isolate the system that interests us from the hierarchy of historical realities. This complex process is called decomposition(separation) of the system. When it is implemented, system-forming (systemic) features are identified, usually several of them. These features are interconnected, determine the structure of the system, express its integrity and stability. Having carried out the system decomposition procedure, the researcher performs its structural analysis, which consists of determining the connections of the system elements, as well as their main features. Its result is direct knowledge of the historical system itself.

Diachronic method is typical for structural-diachronic research, when the problem of discovering the features of the construction of processes of various natures over time is solved. Its specificity is revealed through comparison with the synchronistic approach. Terms "diachrony"(multitemporality) and “synchrony” (simultaneity) characterize the sequence of development of historical phenomena in a certain area of ​​reality (diachrony) and the state of these phenomena at a certain point in time (synchrony). Diachronic (multi-temporal) analysis is aimed at studying essentially-temporal changes in historical reality.

Reception retrospective cognition consists of consistent penetration into the past in order to identify the cause of an event.

A significant role in historical research is played by psychological motives, which manifest themselves in two cases: on the one hand, the subject of research (historian) inevitably enters into an emotional relationship with his object, on the other hand, the characters of history with their feelings, emotions, passions participate in economic social political , religious and other relationships, subject to certain psychological laws. Therefore, the emergence of a whole trend in historiography that considers the psychological aspects of the historical process and uses psychological methods for historical explanation turned out to be completely natural. This direction is called psychohistory , traditionally associated with its publication in the first half of the 20th century. works of the Austrian doctor, neurologist and psychiatrist Z. Freud.

Each method is formed on a certain methodological basis, i.e. any method is based on a certain methodological principle (one or a set).

Methodology – the basic principles on which the historian proceeds (is based). That is why there is such a great variety of interpretations of the same eras and events (for example, the degree of significance of the role of the USSR and Western countries in the victory in World War II).

Methodology of historical research - means, methods, techniques with the help of which the historian obtains historical information and builds his narrative.

Specific historical methods most common. Why does a historian need to know them?

1. In order to research results were richer, the study is more complete.

2. Clearer become flaws reliance on sources and others methods of historical research.

Methods of historical research:

1. Method of relying on sources (source analysis method).

2. Descriptive method.

3. Biographical method.

4. Comparative-historical method.

5. Retrospective method.

6. Terminological method.

7. Statistical method.

Method of relying on sources (method of source analysis).

Methodological principle of the source analysis method– the historian must conduct external and internal criticism of the source to establish the authenticity, completeness, reliability and novelty, significance of both the source itself and the information it contains.

The advantage of this method of historical research: comes from information, messages from contemporaries, documentary sources (they are more or less objective).

The disadvantage of this method of historical research: information from one source is not enough; it is necessary to compare one source with other sources, data, etc.

Descriptive method

Descriptive method historical research (one of the oldest) is based on the methodological principle according to which history should study the peculiar, individual, non-repetitive (historical events do not repeat) in the past.

Based on the originality, uniqueness, singularity of historical events, descriptive method boils down to this:

1. Method of presentation wears not “formalized” (i.e. in the form of diagrams, formulas, tables, etc.), but literary, narrative character.

2. Because dynamics(movement, path) development of events is individual, then it can be expressed only by describing it.

3. Because any event is connected with others, then to determine these connections you must first describe them (connections).

4. Definition of the subject (image) is possible only with the help of description (if you rely on terms (for example, civilization), then you first need to agree on what it is (subject, object), i.e. describe).

conclusions.

1. Description– a necessary step in historical research.

2. Description is only the first step, because event essence is expressed not in individual, but in general outline(signs); common features can be expressed in narrative logic, generalizations, conclusions(for example, when describing a person (let’s say Turgenev’s Bazarov), we can only describe a specific person, but not a person as a phenomenon, a concept).

3. Generalization without description is schematization, description without generalization is factography, which means these descriptions and conclusions, generalizations are closely related, But with this method (descriptive), description prevails over generalization.

Biographical method

Biographical method historical research is one of the oldest.

Used in Antiquity ("Comparative Lives" Plutarch), was widely used in the 19th century. in political history.

INXIXV., V political historiography There were both supporters and opponents of the biographical method.

Supporters of the biographical method (Thomas Carlyle, Pyotr Lavrov etc.) proceeded from the methodological position, according to which the biographical method is the most sensible (the subject of the historical process is heroes, outstanding, unique personalities; their (heroes, outstanding personalities) biography, motives, actions, behavior were studied).

Critics of the biographical method: subject of history – masses(German historian Highway) and their needs (from this position Chausser studied uprisings and rebellions).

Compromise position: English historian Lewis Nahmir (Nahmir) considered mid-level politicians(medium-level deputies of the English parliament, ordinary deputies): what influenced the results of their voting, analyzed their life path, biography, social status, personal connections (career, household); L. Namir believed that he was able in this way to determine not imaginary, abstract (generalized) class motives, but true, specific motives of behavior of the social stratum, expressed in the figure of an ordinary (average) deputy; at Namira the political struggle in the English parliament looked only like a struggle for personal power, career growth and well-being, parliamentary seats, so these are the true motives of behavior and social strata that the above deputies represent? Namir does not take into account the means of production and social interests in its concept.

In what cases and to what extent is the biographical method applicable?

1. The biographical method can be used with taking into account the nature of historical conditions, the needs of the masses(since a historical figure expresses the needs of the masses, he plays a very important role).

2. The combination of the role of the masses and the individual is such that the leading role belongs to the masses, personality can only speed up or slow down, but not give birth historical conditions.

T. Carlyle exaggerated the role of the individual, many Soviet historians– the role of the masses. Namir did not connect the motives of people's behavior with specific historical conditions (i.e., the motives for the behavior of a medieval lord and a townsman are not identical to the motives for the behavior of a lord and a townsman in the English parliament of the 19th century), which is determined production method (primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist, communist) material goods.

Comparative historical method

Comparative historical method is now very widely used (especially in domestic historiography).

The comparative historical method was also used in Age of Enlightenment , but very peculiar:

1. Compare different types of society, state, therefore, they came to false conclusions (for example, about the superiority of European civilization over the American Indians using the example of the Spanish monarchy and the Aztec state).

2. Basis for comparison different types societies, states was the conviction of the truth of the methodological principle, according to which human nature is unchanged in all eras, times (for example, by the English historian Lewis Namir), history was perceived as general patterns, motives for the behavior of human society.

Conclusion. Thus, the methodological basis of the comparative historical method in the Age of Enlightenment was the incorrect definition of the general, natural in the form of one and the same human nature as the basis of motivation. One cannot examine the common on the basis of the immutability of human nature (for example, the empire of Charlemagne and the Qing Empire).

IN XIX V. (especially towards the end of the century) the comparative historical method began to be used both for identifying common(general patterns - for example, HELL. Toynbee (tried to find common features among civilizations of different times, etc.)), and for identifying originality(for example, at Gerhardt Elton , German historian at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries), i.e. Some historians absolutized the general, other historians - the originality (skewed in one direction).

The possibility and necessity of using the comparative historical method is associated with the recognition of the truth of the following methodological principle(if derived from the following methodological principle): there is a close connection between the general and the individual (i.e. in events that are repeated and non-repetitive (peculiar) in the understanding of history).

The condition for the correct application of the comparative historical method is comparison of “one-order” events, which suggests preliminary use of the descriptive method:

I – analogy , “parallel”, i.e. transfer of ideas from an object of one era to a similar object of another era, but comparison of “single-order” events, phenomena, etc. involves the use of the next stage of the comparative historical method (at stage I the descriptive nature predominates);

IIstage of the comparative historical method– identification of an essential nature (for example, war, revolution) events, the basis is "repetition" in time and space(the essence is repeated both in the same era and in different eras and space).

If the comparison is incorrect at stage I (the descriptive nature predominates), the historian may come with incorrect elements of “repetition” at stage II. For example, commodity production at the second stage of the comparative historical method was equated to capitalist production (for example, Eduard Meyer (1855 - 1930), a German historian who saw capitalism in Ancient Greece and in the modern world; according to one criterion, one phenomenon is equated to another).

IIIstage of the comparative historical method– essentially horizontal “repetition” –

typology technique , i.e. must be compared Not only separate(albeit important) events, but also system of events in a given era, i.e. types are distinguished.

Types of feudal society:

1) Romanesque (Italy, Spain) beginning;

2) Germanic (England, Scandinavian countries) beginning;

3) a mixture of Romanesque and Germanic principles (the Frankish kingdom from the Merovingians to the Capetians).

Gradually, the general comes to the fore, the originality is gradually erased. Typology is an attempt to establish a balance between generality and originality.

Sampling method

A more complex type of quantitative analysis is sample statistics , which is a method of probabilistic conclusion about the unknown based on the known. This method is used in cases where there is no complete information about the entire statistical population and the researcher is forced to create a picture of the phenomena being studied on the basis of incomplete, partial data, or when the information is complete, but it is difficult to cover or its study in its entirety does not provide noticeable advantages in comparison with sampling.

Example. Based on a small part of the surviving household inventories, generalized indicators were calculated for the beginning of the 19th century, and 1861, in particular, which made it possible to judge the presence of livestock in the peasant household (namely, serfs), the ratio of various strata and etc.

Sampling method It is also used with complete information, the processing of which in its entirety does not provide any significant advantage in obtaining results.

How are calculations made according to sampling method? Calculated an arithmetic mean applied to the entire set of phenomena. Generalizations obtained through a sampling approach become valid only if they are sufficiently representative, i.e. adequately reflecting the properties of the studied set of phenomena.

Selective statistical analysis in most cases leads to detecting development trends.

Example. Comparison of selected quantitative data on the provision of peasant farms with workers and other livestock at the beginning of the 19th century. in comparison with the post-reform period, it helped to identify a tendency towards a deterioration in the situation of the peasant economy, to show the nature and degree of social stratification in its environment, etc.

The results of a quantitative assessment of the ratio of the studied characteristics are not absolute results at all and cannot be transferred to situations with other conditions.

Retrospective method

Historical knowledge is retrospective, i.e. it is addressed to how events developed in reality - from cause to effect. The historian must go from effect to cause (one of the rules of historical knowledge).

The essence of the retrospective method is relying on a higher stage of development in order to understand and evaluate the previous one. This may be due to the fact that there may be a lack of factual data, sources, or because:

1) to understand the essence the event or process being studied thinking needs to be followed his development from end to end;

2) everyone previous stage Can understand not only thanks to him connections with other stages, but also in the light subsequent and a higher stage of development in general, in which the essence of the whole process is most fully expressed; this also helps to understand the previous stages.

Example. French Revolution endXVIIIV. developed in an ascending line, if we bear in mind the degree of radicalization of demands, slogans and programs, as well as social essence layers of society that came to power. The last, Jacobin stage expresses this dynamics to the greatest extent and makes it possible to judge both the revolution as a whole and the nature and significance of its previous stages.

The essence of the retrospective method was expressed in particular Karl Marx . On the method of studying the medieval community by a German historian Georg Ludwig Maurer (1790 – 1872) K. Marx wrote: “...the stamp of this “agricultural community is so clearly expressed in the new community that Maurer, having studied the latter, could restore the first.”

Lewis Henry Morgan (1818 – 1881), American historian and ethnographer, in his work “Ancient Society” showed the evolution of family and marriage relations from group forms to individual ones; recreated the history of the family in reverse order down to the primitive state of the dominance of polygamy. Along with recreating the appearance of the primitive family formL.G. Morgan proved the fundamental similarity in the development of family and marital relations among the ancient Greeks and Romans and the American Indians. What helped him understand this similarity was the idea of ​​the unity of world history, which also manifests itself asynchronously, and not only within the time horizon. Your idea of ​​unity L.G. Morgan expressed as follows: “Their” (the forms of family and marital relations in Ancient Greece and Rome with the relations of the American Indians) “comparison and comparison indicates the uniformity of the activity of the human mind under the same social system.” Opening L.G. Morgana reveals the interaction of retrospective and comparative historical methods in the mechanism of his thinking.

In domestic historiography, the retrospective method was used Ivan Dmitrievich Kovalchenko (1923 – 1995) when studying agrarian relations in Russia in the 19th century. The essence of the method was an attempt to consider the peasant economy in terms of different systems nal levels: individual peasant farms (yards), a higher level - peasant communities (villages), even higher levels - volosts, counties, provinces.

I.D. Kovalchenko considered the following:

1) the system of provinces represents the highest level, it was at this level that the main features of the socio-economic system of the peasant economy were most clearly manifested; their knowledge is necessary to reveal the essence of structures located at a lower level;

2) the nature of the structure at the lower (household) level, being correlated with its essence at the highest level, shows to what extent the general trends in the functioning of the peasant economy were manifested in the individual.

Retrospective method applicable not only to the study of individual phenomena, but also entire historical eras. This essence of the method is most clearly expressed in K. Marx, who wrote the following: “ Bourgeois society- is the most developed and most versatile historical organization of production. That's why categories, expressing his relationships, understanding of his organization, give at the same time possibility of penetration into organization and industrial relations of all obsolete social forms, from the fragments and elements of which it is built, partly developing to full meaning what was previously only in the form of a hint, etc. Human anatomy is the key to ape anatomy. On the contrary, hints of something higher in lower species of animals can only be understood if this later itself is already known.”

In a concrete historical study retrospective method very closely related to "method of remnants" , by which historians understand a method of reconstructing objects that have passed into the past based on the remains that have survived and reached the modern historian of the era.

"Method of Remnants" used E. Taylor, German historian A. Meitzen, K. Lamprecht, M. Blok and etc.

Edward (Edward) Burnett Taylor (1832 - 1917), an English researcher of primitive society, ethnographer, understood the term “survivals” as follows: “... there is a wide class of facts for which I would consider it convenient to introduce the term “survival.” These are those customs, rituals, views, etc., which, being by force of habit transferred from one stage of the culture to which they were characteristic, to another, later one, remain a living testimony or monument of the past.” E. Taylor wrote about the significance of the study of survivals: “Their study invariably confirms that a European can find among the Greenlanders and Maoris many features to reconstruct a picture of the life of his own ancestors.”

Relics in the broad sense of the word include monuments and information of a relict nature. If we are talking about written sources dating back to a certain era, then data or fragments included from more ancient documents may be relicts (for example, among the titles of Salic truth (IX century) of archaic content is title 45 “On migrants”) .

Many German historians of the 19th century, engaged in agrarian-historical research and actively using the “survival method”, believed that historical development is evolutionary in nature, the past is reproduced in the present and is its simple continuation, deep qualitative changes in the communal system throughout its existence absent; remnants– these are not relics of the past in conditions of a qualitatively different reality, but generally similar phenomena to it (reality).

This led, for example, to the following. Over-generalization of data obtained by a German historian A. Meitsen by using "method of remnants“, was expressed in the fact that without proper critical verification he illuminated the agricultural practices of one region on the basis of boundary maps of another region and transferred the evidence of German boundary maps to the agricultural system of France, England and other countries.

German historian Karl Lamprecht (1856 - 1915) when studying household communities that took place in the first half of the 19th century. in the area of ​​the city of Trier, discovered in them features that were not a direct relic of the ancient free community.

French historian Mark Block (1886 – 1944) and representatives of his school successfully applied the “method of survivals” to the analysis of French survey maps of the 18th century.

Main methodological requirement, presented to the “method of vestiges” –

the need to determine and prove the relict nature of the evidence on the basis of which the historian wants to scientifically reconstruct a picture of a long-vanished historical reality. At the same time, genuine historicism must be observed in assessing the phenomena of the past. A differentiated approach to relics of the past that are different in nature is also necessary.

Terminological method

The overwhelming majority of information about the past is expressed for the historian in verbal form. This raises a number of problems, the main one of which is linguistic: does the meaning of the word have reality or is it a fiction?? The latter view was shared by the famous Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857 – 1913).

Methodological basis studying the role of terminological analysis in the historian’s research is the thesis according to which The terminological apparatus of the sources borrows its subject content from life, from reality, although the relationship between thought and the content of the word is not entirely adequate.

Taking into account the historical, i.e. changing, content of terms, words of sources – one of the necessary conditions for scientific historicism in understanding and assessing social phenomena.

IN XIX V . scientists have come to the conclusion that language becomes one of the sources of knowledge of social phenomena from the moment when it begins to be treated historically, i.e. when it is seen as one of the results of historical development. Taking advantage of the achievements of classical philology and comparative linguistics, German historians B.G. Niebuhr , T. Mommsen and others widely used terminological analysis as one of the means of cognition social phenomena Antiquity.

Terminological analysis is of particular importance when using various categories of ancient and medieval sources. This is explained by the fact that the content and meaning of many terms related to the modern era of the researcher are not as clear as the contemporary language or the language of the recent past. Meanwhile, the solution to many fundamental concrete historical problems often depends on one or another interpretation of the content of terms.

The difficulty of studying many categories of historical sources also lies in the fact that the terms used in them are ambiguous or, on the contrary, different terms are used to denote the same phenomena.

Famous peasant researcher Ancient Rus' academician Boris Dmitrievich Grekov (1882 – 1953) attached great importance to the analysis of terms from historical sources. He wrote about the need to find out “... what terms the writing left to us as a legacy denoted the farmer... what terms used to designate the sources of the various layers of the mass of the people who fed the country with their labor.” According to Grekov, The researcher’s conclusions also depend on one or another understanding of the terms.

An example of the relationship between language data analysis and historical analysis is the work Friedrich Engels "Frankish dialect". This work is an independent scientific, historical and linguistic study. Studying Engels Frankish dialect is accompanied by generalizations on the history of the Franks. At the same time, he widely uses the retrospective method of studying the Salic dialect in contemporary languages ​​and dialects.

F. Engels uses a language for solving a number of problems in the history of the ancient Germans. By analyzing the High German movement of consonants and establishing the boundaries of dialects, he draws conclusions about the nature of the migrations of the tribes, the degree of their mixing with each other and the territory they occupied initially and as a result of conquests and migrations.

The development of the content of terms and concepts recorded in historical sources, in general, lags behind the development of the real content of historical events hidden behind them. In this sense, many historical terms are characterized by archaism, which often borders on the complete death of their content. Such a lag is a problem for the researcher that requires a mandatory solution, because otherwise, historical reality cannot be adequately reflected.

Depending on the nature of the historical source, terminological analysis may have different meaning to solve historical problems themselves. Clarification of the property status of various categories of holders hidden under the terms villani, borbarii, cotarii, found in book of the Last Judgment(end of the 11th century), is of paramount importance for the study of the history of feudalism in England.

Terminological analysis is a productive means of cognition in cases where sources are written in the native language of a given people, for example Russian truth or Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon truths.

Special a type of terminological analysis as one of the sources of historical knowledge is toponymic analysis . Toponymy, needing historical data, as well as data from other branches of knowledge, itself is kind a primary source for the historian. Geographical names are always historically determined, so they somehow bear the imprint of their time. Geographical names reflect the features of the material and spiritual life of the people in a particular era, the pace of historical development, and the influence of natural and geographical conditions on social life. For a historian, the source of knowledge is not only the content of a word, but also its linguistic form. These are formal elements in toponymic material that cannot serve as a reliable source without linguistic analysis; the latter, however, must have a truly historical basis, i.e. It is necessary to study both the bearer of the names and those who gave these names. Geographical names reflect the process of settlement of territories; individual names indicate the occupation of the population in the past. Toponymic data are of great importance for history of unliterate peoples; they to a certain extent replace chronicles. Toponymic analysis gives material for drawing up geographical maps.

A certain source of knowledge of the past is names of people, anthroponymic analysis (used relatively rarely in modern historiography) The processes of name-education and name-creativity were closely related to real life people, including those with economic relations.

Example. The surnames of representatives of the feudal nobility of medieval France emphasized the ownership of their bearer to the land. The need to register subjects in order to receive feudal rent from them was one of the important reasons for the introduction of the surname. Often first and last names were unique social signs, the decoding of which allows us to judge social status of their bearers, as well as pose and resolve other specific historical questions.

Without a preliminary study of the content of the term, it is impossible to achieve an understanding of any phenomenon. The issue – language and history – is important scientific problem, both for linguists and historians.

The fruitfulness of using terminological analysis(method) depends, first of all, on compliance with the following conditions:

1. Necessary consider polysemy of the term , used to designate various events or phenomena that differ from each other; Associated with this is the need to consider a set of terms relating to the same events, and to clarify this ambiguity, the widest possible range of sources in which it occurs is involved.

2. To the analysis of each term should approach historically , i.e. take into account the development of its content depending on conditions, time, place, etc.

3. C the emergence of new terminology it is necessary to find out whether there is a new content hidden behind it or something that already existed before, but under a different name.

Statistical method (methods of mathematical statistics)

In historical science, more and more wide application find quantitative, mathematical methods. What caused this, what is the essence and purpose of these methods, what is their relationship with the methods of essential-substantive, qualitative analysis in the work of a historian?

Historical reality is the unity of content and form, essence and phenomenon, quality and quantity. Quantitative and qualitative characteristics are in unity, characterized by the transition from one to the other. The ratio of quantity and quality is expressed by a measure that reveals the mentioned unity. The concept of "measure" was first used Hegel. There is a lot of variety quantitative methods – from the simplest calculations and calculations to modern mathematical methods using computers.

The application of mathematical analysis varies depending on the measure of the relationship between quantity and quality. For example, to conquer China, Genghis Khan required, among other things, military leadership abilities ( quality) and a 50,000-strong army ( quantity). The properties and nature of phenomena determine the extent and features of the application of their quantitative analysis, and in order to understand this, a qualitative analysis is necessary.

Ivan Dmitrievich Kovalchenko (1923 - 1995) - a historian who was early proficient in the methods of substantive and quantitative analysis, wrote: “... the widest use of mathematical methods in any branch of knowledge does not in itself create any new science (in this case, “mathematical history” ") and does not replace other research methods, as is sometimes mistakenly thought. Mathematical methods allow the researcher to obtain certain characteristics of the characteristics being studied, but by themselves they do not explain anything. The nature and inner essence of phenomena in any field can be revealed only by methods inherent in a particular science.”

Although measurement, to one degree or another, can be used to characterize any qualitative characteristics, including individual, phenomena, but there are objects during the study of which qualitative analysis is insufficient and cannot do without quantitative methods. This is the area massive phenomena reflected in mass sources.

Example. For example, land donations in Western Europe in the Middle Ages in favor of the church were expressed in the design of charters (cartularies). Cartularies number in the tens of thousands, in particular the cartulary of the Lorsch Monastery. To study the movement of land property from hand to hand, qualitative analysis is insufficient; labor-intensive operations of a quantitative nature and properties are required.

The use of quantitative analysis methods is dictated by the nature of the object of historical science and the needs for the development of its study. Historical research opens up the possibility of using mathematical methods when it is “ripe” for this, i.e. when the necessary work has been carried out on a qualitative analysis of the event or phenomenon being studied in ways inherent in historical science.

The original form of quantitative analysis in historical research was statistical method. Its development and application are associated with the emergence of statistics as a social discipline that studies the quantitative side of mass social phenomena and processes - economic, political, cultural, demographic, etc. Statistics(originally “political arithmetic”) originated in England in the second halfXVIIV. The term "statistics" came into use inXVIIIV. (from lat.status- state). The statistical method has been widely used in middle - second halfXIXV. This method was used by: English historian Henry Thomas Buckle (1821 – 1862), German historians K.T. Inama-Sternegg (1843 – 1908), Karl Lamprecht (1856 – 1915), Russian and Soviet historians IN. Klyuchevsky, ON THE. Rozhkov, N.M. Druzhinin, M.A. Barg, I.D. Kovalchenko and etc.

The statistical method can be effective means historical knowledge only under certain conditions of its application. In the works IN AND. Lenin the requirement of social typology is clearly formulated as one of the conditions for applying the statistical method: “... statistics should give not arbitrary columns of numbers, but digital illumination of those various social types of the phenomenon being studied, which have been fully outlined and are being outlined by life.”

To the number general conditions for the rational application of the statistical method relate:

1. A priority , primacy qualitative analysis in relation to to quantitative analysis .

2. Study qualitative and quantitative characteristics in their unity.

3. Identification qualitative homogeneity of events subject to statistical processing.

The availability of massive material from medieval sources does not always open up the possibility of using a statistical method. In connection with the study of the history of the free and dependent peasantry in Germany in the 8th – 12th centuries. Alexander Iosifovich Neusykhin (1898 – 1969) wrote: “ The nature of the sources at our disposal, in particular, for the first two regions (Alemannia and Tyrol), – does not allow the use of a statistical method surveys, because the cartularies we studied do not make it possible to make quantitative calculations of different strata of the peasantry or different forms of feudal rent.” In such cases, a qualitative analysis of the content of sources, associated with an individual approach to them, becomes an educational tool that fills the indicated gap in the application of the statistical method.

One type of statistical analysis is descriptive statistics . Its similarity with the descriptive method is that the description procedure is applied to quantitative data, the totality of which constitutes a statistical fact. For example, in In pre-revolutionary Russia, 85% of the population was peasantry.

Correlation method

There is also correlation method , in which a relationship (correlation coefficient) of two quantities is established with a much greater degree of probability and reliability than a qualitative analysis can provide (see below).

Example. The historian sets the task of finding out the dependence of the size of corvee duties and their dynamics on the state of peasant farms and its changes. In this case, the historian uses the calculation of the relationship between the level of corvee and the provision of peasant farms with draft animals, between corvee and the number of able-bodied men, and then the total dependence of duties on the number of draft animals and the amount of labor.

The correlation method is of little use for determining the comparative role various reasons(factors) in a particular process.

Regression method

There is also a regression method, which is used where a combination of factors operates (i.e. almost always). Example. One of the important tasks of studying agrarian relations in the Russian village of the 19th century. was to identify the degree of impact of peasant duties and their growth on the state of the peasant economy and its dynamics. In such a situation, the calculation of the regression coefficient is used, which shows the degree of change in the result of a particular development process from a change in the factor (factors) influencing it. The use of the regression method made it possible to obtain indicators characterizing the scale of the impact of the size of duties on the state of the peasant economy. Quantitative analysis operates with numerical data about the phenomena being studied, helps to identify and characterize their important signs and features, i.e. leads to an understanding of their essence, makes this understanding more accurate than with qualitative analysis, or is even the only way to achieve such an understanding.

History as a subject and science is based on historical methodology. If in many other scientific disciplines there are two main ones, namely observation and experiment, then for history only the first method is available. Even though every true scientist tries to minimize the impact on the object of observation, he still interprets what he sees in his own way. Depending on the methodological approaches used by scientists, the world receives different interpretations of the same event, various teachings, schools, and so on.

The following methods of historical research are distinguished:
- brain teaser,
- general scientific,

Special,
- interdisciplinary.

historical research
In practice, historians have to use research based on logical and general scientific methods. Logical ones include analogy and comparison, modeling and generalization, and others.

Synthesis implies the reunification of an event or object from smaller components, that is, a movement from simple to complex is used here. The exact opposite of synthesis is analysis, in which you have to move from the complex to the simple.

No less important are such research methods in history as induction and deduction. The latter makes it possible to develop a theory based on the systematization of empirical knowledge about the object being studied, drawing numerous consequences. Induction transfers everything from the particular to the general, often probabilistic, position.

Scientists also use analgia and comparison. The first makes it possible to see some similarity between different objects that have a large number of relationships, properties, and other things, and comparison is a judgment about the signs of difference and similarity between objects. Comparison is extremely important for qualitative and quantitative characteristics, classification, evaluation and other things.

Particularly important methods of historical research are modeling, which allows us to only assume the connection between objects in order to identify their location in the system, and generalization, a method that identifies common features that make it possible to make an even more abstract version of an event or some other process.

General scientific methods of historical research
In this case, the above methods are supplemented by empirical methods of cognition, that is, experiment, observation and measurement, as well as theoretical methods of research, such as mathematical methods, transitions from the abstract to the concrete and vice versa, and others.

Special methods of historical research
One of the most important in this area is the comparative historical method, which not only highlights the underlying problems of phenomena, but also points out the similarities and features in historical processes, and indicates the trends of certain events.

At one time, the theory of K. Marx and his civilizational method, as opposed to which, became especially widespread.

Interdisciplinary research methods in history
Like any other science, history is interconnected with other disciplines that help to understand the unknown to explain certain historical events. For example, using psychoanalytic techniques, historians have been able to interpret the behavior of historical figures. The interaction between geography and history is very important, as a result of which the cartographic method of research appeared. Linguistics has made it possible to learn a lot about early history based on a synthesis of approaches from history and linguistics. There are also very close connections between history and sociology, mathematics, etc.

Research is a separate section of cartography, which has important historical and economic significance. With its help, you can not only determine the place of residence of individual tribes, indicate the movement of tribes, etc., but also find out the location of minerals and other important objects.

Obviously, history 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.

“Chapter 19 METHODS OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH Methods of historical research are traditionally divided into two large groups: general methods of scientific research and special historical ones...”

-- [ Page 1 ] --

METHODS OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Methods of historical research are traditionally divided into two

large groups: general methods of scientific research and special historical methods. However, it must be borne in mind that such a division is to some extent arbitrary. For example, the so-called “historical” method is used not only by historians,

but also representatives of a wide variety of natural and social sciences.

The task of the general methodology of scientific knowledge is to provide a system of general theoretical principles for solving assigned tasks and problems.

For this reason, it is much more difficult to write about methodological techniques of research than about specific methods of collecting factual material or source analysis. The latter also presupposes the presence of certain skills and efforts aimed at acquiring them. However, mastering such skills is in some ways much easier. These skills are acquired in special practical classes, for example, in paleography, sphragistics, and source studies; when studying a special course (for example, on the analysis of ancient documents) or on an archaeological and ethnographic expedition under the guidance of an experienced mentor. Figuratively speaking, technique is “tactics”, while methodology is the “strategy” of scientific research.

For this reason, methodology is not so much a set of some strict mandatory technical rules and procedures (although this aspect must be taken into account), but rather a certain set of general ideas, approaches and principles that cannot be comprehended in the same way as specific methods collection of material or its source criticism. In this regard, J. Tosh wrote that “the rules of research cannot be reduced to a single formula, and specific analysis procedures vary depending on the nature of the source” (Tosh 2000: 102). The use of a particular method can best be illustrated by the example of the works of major historians of the past and present. Apparently, studying the works of predecessors, an attempt to open the door to the creative laboratory of a venerable researcher or his school is the most correct way to comprehend this or that Chapter 19. Methods of historical research method. True, it is necessary to keep in mind that often outstanding scientists use not one method, but several at once, or rather, even a system of methods, so it is not always possible to immediately understand what belongs to one method and what to another.

There are quite a large number of general scientific and special methods that are used in conducting historical research.

Narrative method (sometimes called descriptive-narrative). History was, and in many ways still is, a narrative of events. It is no coincidence that the very name of historical science comes from the word story - narrative, story.

Back at the end of the 19th century. C. Langlois and C. Senobos called history the science of “glue and scissors” (Langlois, Senobos 2004). The task of the historian was, in their opinion, reduced to collecting facts in the archives and assembling them into a single narrative. In this case, “by itself” a holistic description of the past and theoretical conclusions should be obtained.

This method is used by many historians to this day.

Accordingly, the narrative method is important, although not sufficient, for the presentation of historical facts. The story itself about events (narrative) presupposes a certain sequence, which is built according to a certain logic of the events themselves. The historian interprets this chain of events based on certain cause-and-effect relationships, established facts, etc. The conclusions obtained are important for the primary analysis of a historical event or era. However, this is clearly not enough for a deep insight into the essence of events. But, on the other hand, without such a coherent presentation, a deeper analysis is simply impossible. Here it would be appropriate to recall the well-known rule that “research without theory is blind, and theory without research is empty” (Bourdieu, Wacquant 1992: 162). Ideally, the description of the collected sources and the synthesis of the data should be closely related to each other.

Historical (historical-genetic) method. In the first decades of the 19th century. acquired mature features and the principle of historicism became widespread (see Chapter 2 of this edition for more information).

The famous historian and philosopher of history F. Meinecke (1862–1954) believed that the emergence of historicism was one of the most significant intellectual revolutions in Western historical science. It has even been compared to a “scientific revolution” in the Kuhnian sense (Igers 1984: 31–41).

388 Theory and methodology of history The principle of historicism means considering any phenomenon in its development: origin, formation and death. Historicism as a way of understanding the past, the present and the probable future requires looking for the roots of all phenomena in the past; understand that there is continuity between eras, and each era must be assessed from the point of view of its historical characteristics and capabilities. As a result, it was possible to look at society as something integral and interconnected, and integrity allows for a deeper understanding of its individual elements.

At the same time, the historical method of studying events, phenomena and processes also developed. The very name of this method clearly indicates its essence - the study of changes when considering a particular phenomenon, institution, process, etc. For historians, turning to the past is not some special method. The past is the subject of a historian’s study, and therefore, separating its study – from the point of view of the modern ideology of historians – into some special historical method is probably not entirely logical, since any method used by a historian has a historical orientation. However, when analyzing the transformation of institutions, phenomena and processes, it is important to establish cause-and-effect relationships in the process of historical change in the phenomenon or process being studied. At the same time, it is important to identify in a huge variety of different processes and events those that are most relevant to the task at hand.

The historical method is widely used in other sciences.

Thus, lawyers use the historical method to study the formation of a legal system, a particular set of laws and rules. This can be illustrated by the example of changes in the legal position of the medieval Russian peasantry in the process of gradual enslavement. An engineer can use the historical method to study the development of technology, such as shipbuilding or the construction of bridges and high-rise buildings.

One way or another, studying the past contributes to a better understanding of the present. Often, at the intersection of turning to the past (the subject of history) and any social science, a borderline discipline arises (economic history, historical demography, historical sociology, history of state and law, etc.). The interdisciplinary nature of such studies lies in the fact that the traditional subject of research is

toric (past) research methods from other sciences (economics, demography, etc.; see examples of such research in Chapters 7, 8, 10, 12) are superimposed.

A striking example of the use of the historical (historicogenetic) method are the works of representatives of the Annales school, F. Ariès, “Man in the Face of Death” (1992; see also about this book in Chapter 14) and J. Le Goff’s “The Birth of Purgatory” (2009). Aries used a wide variety of sources:

iconography data, tombstones and epitaphs, painting, literary sources. He showed that ideas about death in Western Europe have undergone significant changes over time. If in a barbarian society death was perceived as a natural necessity, today it has become largely a taboo concept.

In the second work, Le Goff showed that it turns out that ideas about purgatory appeared among the people of the Middle Ages only between the 11th and 13th centuries. Officially, Pope Innocent IV recognized purgatory in 1254. However, at the everyday level, these ideas existed earlier. The French historian believes that the emergence of these ideas was due to the commercialization of society, the desire of people associated with money - moneylenders, merchants - to find hope of salvation in the afterlife. In fact, both examples demonstrate that collective beliefs can undergo significant changes over time.

One of the most striking examples of the use of the historical-genetic method is the famous work of M. Weber “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”, in which this historian and sociologist discovers the roots of modern capitalist ethics and ideology (about Weber, see also Chapter 5). Another good example of the use of this method is P. Mantoux’s monograph “The Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century in England.”

The author of the study shows a number of prerequisites that determined the occurrence of this revolution in England. In particular, Mantu makes excursions into the history of the creation of steam engines, which began in the 17th century, reveals the features of the English scattered manufacture, in whose environment the first machines were born (John Kay's shuttle loom, James Hargreves's "Jenny" mechanical spinning wheel), explores the features of English legislation, which introduced a ban on the import of Indian cotton fabrics into England, which greatly contributed to the growth of the production of such fabrics in England. He also describes the features of the process of the emergence of the first Arkwright factories (which was associated with the peculiarities of English patent law), etc. (Mantoux 1937). As a result, the reader is faced with a complex but understandable set of factors that ensured the emergence of a completely new phenomenon in history: the industrial revolution in England. We will return to this issue below.

Another option for using the historical method is the so-called “retrospective” (“regressive”, “reconstruction”) method. Its essence lies in relying on the historical states of society that are closer to the researcher for a better understanding of the state in the past. Thus, the past is interpreted or reconstructed on the basis of any theoretical premises or knowledge about the later state of a given or similar phenomenon or process. This method was used, in particular, by K. Marx in analyzing the genesis of capitalism. "Human anatomy is the key to ape anatomy."

A similar approach was fully applicable to M. Blok when studying the medieval agrarian system in France. To understand the agrarian structure of medieval France, Bloch proposes to rely on data from a later time (18th century), which gives a holistic picture of the French countryside. In the “Introduction” section.

A few remarks on the method,” he describes in detail the essence of this method: “The historian is always a slave to his documents, and most of all he who devotes himself to agricultural research; for fear of not understanding the incomprehensible past, he most often has to read history in reverse order... Reverse method, wisely applied, does not at all require a photograph from the near past, which is then sufficient to project unchanged in order to obtain a frozen image of more and more distant centuries. He pretends only to begin with the last part of the film and then try to show it in reverse order, accepting that there will be many gaps, but determined not to disturb its movement” (Bloch 1978: xxviii–xxix).

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

The historical method is often associated with the reconstruction of events using special methods and the use of general logical and heuristic methods. R. Collingwood (1889–1943), who was both a historian and a philosopher of history, wrote that a historian is very often similar in his methods to an investigator who must solve a crime. Like an investigator, the historian tries to collect all the factual evidence and, using imagination, logic and deduction, to build hypotheses that do not contradict the facts (Collingwood 1980).

One of the results of applying the historical method is the creation of periodization.

Periodization is very important for a historian, and not only for one who studies material over a fairly long time interval. Any long historical process, for example revolution, war, modernization, colonization, is always divided into periods, each of which has its own characteristics. This allows you to better understand the course of the historical process within the scope of data being studied, organize the facts, and make it possible to adhere to the natural outline of the presentation.

Periodization is a special kind of systematization, which consists in the conditional division of the historical process into certain chronological periods. These periods have certain distinctive features, which are determined depending on the chosen basis (criterion) for periodization. There are a huge number of different periodizations of history.

A variety of reasons are chosen for periodization: from changes in the nature of ideas and thinking to environmental transformations and intercultural interaction. Many scientists note its great significance for history and other social sciences(See, for example: Gellner 1988; Bentley 2001; Gellner 2001; Green 2001; Grinin 2006; McNeil 2001; Rozov 2001a; Stearns 2001, etc.).

It is important to take into account that periodization deals with extremely complex processes and therefore inevitably coarsens and simplifies historical reality. Some scientists contrast the concepts of process and stage, considering them mutually exclusive (see, for example: Sztompka 1996: 238). However, one can agree with R. Carneiro that the opposition between process and stages is a false dichotomy (Carneiro 2000), since stages are components of an ongoing process, and the concept of process can serve to develop the concept of stages.

392 Theory and methodology of history In other words, any periodization (like any systematization) suffers from one-sidedness and some discrepancies with reality. “However, these simplifications can serve as arrows pointing to essential points” (Jaspers 1994: 52). Subject to the necessary methodological rules and procedures, it is possible to minimize these disadvantages of periodization and at the same time increase its heuristic effectiveness.

There are certain rules for constructing historical periodizations.

The rule of identical grounds, according to which the construction of periodization requires, when identifying periods of equal taxonomic significance, to proceed from the same criteria. Unfortunately, this rule is not observed very often, therefore many periodizations do not have clear criteria, the chosen bases are either incomprehensible or completely arbitrary and inconsistent; Often the basis of periodization is eclectic and changes from stage to stage.

The rule of hierarchy is that with complex periodization, that is, one where large steps are divided into smaller stages (and such division, in principle, can have several levels - period, stage, etc.), the periods of each subsequent level of division must be taxonomically less important than periods of the previous level.

The rule of equivalence of periods of one division stage indicates the need to characterize each period with approximately the same completeness. In practice, some theorists identify a number of periods only with the aim of highlighting one of them. This, in particular, applies to post-industrialist sociologists, such as, for example, D. Bell and E. Toffler, for whom periodization serves as a kind of background to the main topic (to show the features of the new post-industrial society that is replacing the industrial one).

The early chapters on various theories of the historical process provided examples of the many periodizations that have been used by various historians, philosophers, and other thinkers since late antiquity. The periodization Ancient World - Middle Ages - Modern Time, the origins of which go back to the Renaissance, is still widely used. Initially, the idea was that society was returning to the values ​​of Antiquity (Renaissance).

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

Later, in the 17th century, it was rethought by the German historian H. Keller (Kellarius, Cellarius) (1634–1706), who extended the Eurocentric scheme to the entire world history. This was acceptable for Western science at that time. Indeed, in the 17th–18th centuries. very little was known about other stories.

However, the division into the three above periods is not typical for other regions of the world (this is one of the reasons for the criticism of the so-called Eurocentrism, which was discussed in Chapters 3, 5, etc.). Many non-European countries use other periodizations (in particular, historians of China prefer to use the old periodization by dynasties).

Attempts to connect this periodization with Marxism (three formations plus “modern” history after 1917) led to strong tensions in it. It was necessary to invent slavery and feudalism in the East, to come up with “slave revolutions,” etc. At the same time, in fact, the Soviet (this tradition was partially preserved in Russian science) and Western “Keller” periodizations diverged just as the Julian Orthodox and Gregorian Catholic calendars diverged .

Periodization may be based on other criteria, depending on the task at hand and the aspect of the study. Thus, for W. McNeil, the main criterion is the diffusion of military technological information and other innovations important for all mankind (McNeil 2004; 2008). He identifies the following periods and stages in world history.

1. The period of cultural dominance of the Middle East (before 500 BC). It begins with the genesis of civilization in Mesopotamia and Egypt and ends with the spread of secondary civilizations in China, India and Greece.

2. The period of Eurasian cultural equilibrium (500 BC - 1500 AD). The period begins with the expansion of Hellenism (500–146 BC), ending with the formation of a single Eurasian ecumene (by 200 AD) and the great migration of barbarians (200–600 AD). This is followed by the stage of the Muslim response (according to McNeil, "Renaissance of the Near East", 600-1500) and the time of steppe conquests and the spread of empires (1000-1500).

3. The period of Western dominance (from 1500 to the mid-twentieth century), which begins with the Challenge to the East (1500–1700), which led to a precarious world balance (1700–1850) and Western dominance (after 1850). ).

394 Theory and methodology of history A similar approach was chosen by J. Bentley (2001), who identified six periods in world history on the basis of intercultural interaction.

1. Early period complex societies(3500–2000 BC) is characterized by the domestication of the horse, the appearance of sailing ships, and the beginning of exchange between the states of the Near and Far East through nomads.

2. The period of ancient civilizations (2000–500 BC) consists of several waves of diffusion (bronze, chariots, iron). During this period, large agricultural empires emerged, alphabetic writing spread, and large-scale migrations of nomadic and semi-nomadic peoples occurred.

3. The period of classical civilizations (500 BC - 500 AD) is distinguished by the consolidation and improvement of large states, the emergence of world religions, the strengthening of nomads and the formation of large steppe empires, the establishment of a complex network of trade routes, including including the "Silk Road".

4. The Postclassical period (500–1000) begins with the spread of Islam. During this period, three large centers dominated (Abbasids, Byzantium, Tang), trade developed in the Indian Ocean, Africa south of the Sahara was included, and world religions diffused.

5. The period of transregional nomadic empires (1000–1500) – the time of domination of the Old World by transcontinental nomadic empires, especially the Mongolian one; establishment of direct contacts between the West and the East, global plague epidemic.

6. Modern period(since 1500) dates back to the Great Geographical Discoveries and is characterized by the expansion of Western civilization, the involvement of all parts of the world in large-scale economic, technological, and cultural exchanges.

Comparative method. Comparison is one of the basic principles of scientific knowledge of the world. Observing recurring phenomena, since ancient times people have tried to understand the reasons for this.

As a result, they had answers to certain questions. The logical basis of the comparative method is analogy.

Analogy is the similarity of objects and phenomena. The way of thinking by analogy assumes that, with external similarity, the properties and characteristics characteristic of one object are transferred to others. This is one of the most common thinking mechanisms.

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

However, analogy is not sufficient to explain the similarity. This requires deep scientific analysis. Such an analysis can be done precisely through the comparative method.

Its premise is that many natural and social phenomena repeat themselves, although the latter are not nearly as obvious as the former. The researcher's task is to understand the reasons for this recurrence. Therefore, the comparative method is one of the most common methods in the social sciences.

History is no exception. Most historians deal with individual phenomena of the past. However, it is important to identify general patterns of development of various cultural phenomena. For this reason, historians most often use the comparative method in their research (Melkonyan 1981). Sometimes it is called comparative historical (Kovalchenko 1987).

An example of the use of the comparative method is the fundamental work of B. N. Mironov on the social history of Russia in modern times. Throughout the entire work, the author compares Russia with European countries and comes to the conclusion that our country developed with a certain delay. For this reason, what many researchers seem to be shortcomings and even vices of Russian society, “are nothing more and no less than diseases of growth and stage of development: when compared with more mature societies, many features seem to be shortcomings, and when compared with younger ones - advantages” ( Mironov 1999, vol. 2: 303). Therefore, Mironov believes, it is incorrect to make simultaneous comparisons between Western European countries and Russia.

The comparative method was actively used in the works of F. Braudel on the economic history of the Mediterranean and other topics. However, in the three-volume work “Material Civilization, Economics and Capitalism” F. Braudel actively used not only the comparative method, but also the historical (historical-genetic) one, showing the conditions preceding the analyzed phenomena, as well as the emergence of capitalism on different levels society (for other examples of the use of the comparative method, see

in chapters 5, 6, 8, 11, etc.).

In the study of primitive society, there was a whole discussion about what, how and with what can be compared. The discussion participants came to the conclusion that incorrect use of external analogies can lead to unjustified conclusions. According to this theory and methodology of history, it is necessary to observe a number of mandatory principles of comparative historical analysis. The main conditions are to carry out comparisons under the conditions of a single (or as close as possible) object: economic and cultural type, close time period and approximately comparable stage level of development of the society under study and the society used as an analogue (Pershits 1979).

A point of view was expressed about the need to distinguish between peoples who, to one degree or another, have already experienced the influence of more developed societies. It was proposed to call such primitive societies synpolite (from the Greek “syn” - simultaneous and “polity” - society, state, city, that is, “synchronous with the state”).

For this reason, when reconstructing societies of classical pre-state primitiveness - apopolytean societies (from the Greek "apo" - to) - it is necessary to remember that synpolitean societies are just analogues of apopolytean societies and therefore in this case, comparative historical research should be supplemented by the historical-genetic method (Pershits, Khazanov 1978). In foreign literature there is a similar distinction between societies of colonial and pre-colonial times.

From the above it follows that the comparative method has common analytical foundations with the historical method, since both are based on comparison. Only the historical method involves a comparison of the diachronic states of the object being studied, while the comparative method can use different types of comparisons. According to C. Tilly, several types of different comparisons can be distinguished (Tilly 1983). Individualizing comparisons are when all the examples used serve only as auxiliary ones to explain the main form considered by the researcher. Apparently, this type of comparison is close to what is called a case study in the social sciences. This type of comparison is typical for the work of many historians. They consider a particular case and provide corresponding or contrasting examples to support the thesis being proven.

An example of individualizing comparisons is M. Blok’s book “The Miracle-Working Kings” (1998). In this work, a French researcher asks why people believed in the miraculous abilities of French and English crowns.

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

lei to heal those sick with scrofula. He turns to a large number of examples from early medieval history and ethnography, starting with the famous work of J. Frazer “The Golden Bough” (Block 1998: 122–124 et seq.) and as a result comes to a conclusion that is paradoxical for that time. The mentality and ideas about the sacredness of power in the era of the first French kings were much closer to ethnographic cultures than to European rational man. Kings were considered bearers of supernatural abilities; they were intermediaries between the sacred and profane worlds (for more details, see Kradin 2004:

137–148). Over time, ideas about royal power transformed, but the belief in some miraculous qualities remained.

Variational comparisons have a different purpose. They should show the general and special features of the cases under consideration. For example, if a researcher compares Western European chivalry and Japanese samurai, with this approach he identifies common features characteristic of both institutions, as well as their individual, special features inherent only to them. A good example of the use of this method is T. Earle's book How Leaders Come to Power (Earle 1997). The author uses three main examples in his work - the pre-state societies of Northern Europe, the Peruvian coast and Hawaii (the regions in which he worked). A comparison is made for all the main aspects discussed in the book (ecology, economics, ideology, etc.), which is supplemented by facts from other regions of the world. As a result, the author creates a holistic picture of the variability of the historical process on the way to the early state. The book of the Canadian archaeologist B. Trigger “Understanding Early Civilizations” (Trigger 2003) was written in the same vein. The author selected six examples of ancient centers of politogenesis (Maya, Incas, Benin, Mesopotamia, Egypt, China) and compared them according to more than twenty indicators: economy, trade, urbanization, kinship system, law, cosmology, art, architecture, etc.

Probably one of the most famous examples of the use of the comparative method is T. Skocpol's famous work “The State and the Social Revolution: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia and China” (Skocpol 1979; see also Chapter 8 on this). Despite the fact that the revolutions under consideration have different temporal and civilizational foundations, the author not only finds 398 Theory and Methodology of History common features between the selected examples (agrarian nature of the old regimes, successful results, etc.

), but also comes to new conceptual generalizations. Comparisons of even quite different cases (such as the three revolutions mentioned above) can raise new questions, which, in turn, will make it possible to offer other interpretations and generalizations of the events under discussion. Such comparisons are sometimes called contrastive.

Finally, sweeping comparisons include a large number of cases and highlight the multiplicity of forms available.

An example of the use of such a method is the famous book by G. Niebuhr “Slavery as an Economic System” (1907). The author summarized all known ethnographic cases of the use of slave labor. After this he turned to their interpretation.

Explaining his scientific method more than a century ago, Niebuhr wrote:

“Many ethnologists use a rather strange method. They have some theory obtained by deductive reasoning, and to it they add a few facts by way of illustration... The only scientific method is to collect facts impartially and examine whether they cannot be brought under some general rule!” (Niebuhr 1907: 8–9). In general, this work is close in spirit to cross-cultural methods (on which see Chapter 21).

It should be noted that it is in anthropological science (in our country it is more often called ethnology) that the comparative method occupies a special place. Many anthropologists have emphasized the importance of this method for their science. “The only feature that distinguishes every branch of anthropology and is not characteristic of any other of the human sciences is the use of comparative data. A historian usually studies the history of England, or Japan, or the nineteenth century, or the Renaissance. If he engages in systematic comparison of moments in the history of different countries, periods or directions, he becomes a philosopher of history or an anthropologist! (Kluckhohn 1998: 332). A classic example of the application of the comparative method in anthropology are the works of G. Spencer (1820–1903) or the famous work of James Frazer (1854–1941) “The Golden Bough” - a book in which a huge amount of information about various cults and religious beliefs is collected and analyzed in comparison .

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

That is why the comparative method is often used in the works of researchers who gravitate towards a historical-anthropological understanding of history (the Annales school, social history, etc.). The effect of using this method is so great that it often opens up new perspectives in the study of classical topics and trends. Thus, the use of comparative ethnographic data allowed A. Ya. Gurevich to take a completely new look at the nature of European feudalism (1970;

1972). Similar prospects opened up when using the comparative method in relation to the ancient Scythians (Khazanov 1975), Ancient Rus' (Froyanov 1980; 1999), ancient and medieval civilizations of the East (Vasiliev 1983).

An example of the use of the comparative method can be considered the books of V. P. Ilyushechkin (1986; 1990, etc.). Ilyushechkin was one of the most thoughtful critics of the five formations scheme in Soviet science. He collected a huge amount of empirical information that refuted the then ideas that slavery existed in ancient times, and in the Middle Ages - serfdom and feudalism. V.I. Ilyushechkin, in particular, showed that slavery not only existed, but also played a big role in the Middle Ages and Modern times. Another example of the application of a comparative approach can be the work of Yu. M. Kobishchanov on the theory of polyudya. Back in the 1970s. he discovered similarities between the ancient Russian polyudye and similar institutions in Africa. Later, he expanded the range of historical parallels, which made it possible to create a holistic concept of one of the important mechanisms of institutionalization of power in the era of politogenesis (Kobishchanov 1994; 2009). Ultimately, the comparative method provided the basis for the formation of cross-cultural methodology.

The typological method is one of the most important methods used in the social and human sciences. Like the comparative method, it is based on comparison. It also makes it possible to identify groups of similar phenomena and processes, which is achieved through a schematic display of specific historical reality in the form of logical models - the so-called “ideal types”. The value of such types is not so much in the exact correspondence to empirical reality, but in the ability to understand and explain (many examples of this kind are given in chapters 6–8, 18 and others).

400 Theory and methodology of history This is where typology differs from conventional classification. The latter is based on grouping real objects according to certain criteria. For example, an archaeologist can create a classification by putting artifacts into groups based on certain selected criteria. Typology is based on the creation of mental objects in the mind of the researcher. Type is an ideal construct that reflects the most important features and connections of the phenomenon being studied. In this case, other features that are not included among the essential parameters of the model may be ignored. Moreover, it may turn out that specific objects can have features of several types. This can be illustrated by the example of four classical types of temperament identified in psychology: sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic, melancholic. In reality, specific individuals may have traits of one or more temperaments. Try to distribute your friends and acquaintances into these groups, and you will understand that not everyone fits into the canons prescribed in textbooks.

A classic example of typology is the famous three ideal types of domination by M. Weber - traditional, rational and charismatic. Traditional is based on compliance with traditional norms and belief in the sacred functions of power, rational - on the bureaucracy's observance of rational and legitimate rules, charismatic - on faith in the supernatural abilities of the leader. In reality, the phenomena under study may not always correspond to ideal types. Take for example the figure of a political leader. It can combine the characteristics of two, or even all three forms of domination. Thus, the modern British monarchy combines elements of traditional and rational dominance, but is not without a certain charismatic aura. However, as Weber himself repeatedly emphasized, the more “alien the world” the ideal types are, the better they express their heuristic functions. The essence of typology is not to sort all the studied objects into categories, but to better understand the variability of observed phenomena and their essence.

It is no coincidence that the typology of three forms of domination has not lost its attractiveness and is actively used in modern research representatives of various social sciences (including, of course, historical research). Majority

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

theories developed in the humanities are represented by ideal types. In fact, concepts such as “feudalism”, “tribe”, “chiefdom”, “state”, “city”, etc., represent ideal types.

Among representatives of the sciences of the past, especially close attention The development of the typological method is devoted to archaeologists (Klein 1991). For this discipline, this method is especially important, since archaeologists deal with a large array of artifacts obtained during excavations. The work of an archaeologist is unthinkable without the preliminary stage of processing and organizing excavated sources. Moreover, since things change over time (look at changes in clothing, for example), the shape of objects can indicate the time of their appearance or existence among people. This became the basis for the use of typology as one of the possible dating methods in archaeology. For a more in-depth study of the typological method, it is best to refer to the following collective works in Russian:

“Types in culture” (1979), “Problems of typology in ethnography”

(1979), as well as to the book by L. S. Klein (1991).

However, not only archaeologists used the typological method in their research. Various historians have also used the typological method in their works. Discussions regarding the typology of feudalism in the works of Soviet medievalists are widely known. The most popular typology was based on the principle of the relationship between the ancient (Romanesque) and barbarian (Germanic) components in the political culture of early medieval societies. This led to the identification of three types: 1) with a predominance of the Romanesque origin (Italy and Spain); 2) synthesis version (Frankish state); 3) with a predominance of barbarian origins (England, Scandinavia) (Lublinskaya 1967).

Another well-known example among specialists in ancient history is the typology of the early state. The basic principles of this typology were set out in the book edited by H. Klassen and P. Skalnik “The Early State” (Claessen, Skalnik 1978). The authors understand the early state as “a centralized sociopolitical organization for regulating social relations in a complex stratified society, divided into at least two main strata, or emerging social class– into rulers and the governed, the relationship between which is characterized by the political dominance of the former and the tributary responsibilities of the latter; the legitimacy of these relations is sanctified by a single ideology, the basic principle of which is the mutual exchange of services” (Claessen, Skalnik 1978: 640).

The editors identified three types of early states according to the degree of maturity - inchoate, typical and transitional (Ibid.: 22, 641). Early states must transform into mature forms of the pre-industrial state (mature state), which have a developed bureaucracy and private property (Claessen 2000). This typology shows how society was transformed in the process of creating and strengthening the state. It is clear that in reality states could include features of several types, but such a typology allows us to more clearly see the differences and different evolutionary trajectories of different early states. It also makes it possible to more clearly determine the factors (ecological, historical, technological, etc.) that determined the reasons for the choice of one or another political genetic type and development path. It also allows us to better understand why only some of the early states were able to reach a higher evolutionary type (level) of statehood, developed statehood, and why mature states necessarily (unlike early ones) had a bureaucratic apparatus.

Structural method. The Latin word structura means “structure, arrangement.” This method is based on identifying stable connections within the system that ensure the preservation of its basic properties. This is where its proximity to the systemic method comes from. It is no coincidence that in the social sciences there is such a movement as structural functionalism.

The origins of structuralism go back to the work of linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913) and sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858–1917). Important contributions to its development were made by the British anthropologist A. Radcliffe-Brown (1881–1955) and the Soviet folklorist V. Ya. Propp (1895–1970). The most thorough structuralism for the social sciences of the twentieth century. was developed by French professor Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908–2009). His book “Structural Anthropology” was published in Russian (1985). According to Lévi-Strauss, behind every phenomenon or process there are hidden structural connections that are unconscious to everyday experience. The task of the anthropologist is to identify the structure of these connections. Levi-Strauss developed this method using the example of myths, totemism, and rituals. Vpo

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

As a result, the method was applied to unconscious structures in psychology.

Structuralism received particular development in linguistics, where specialists (long before Lévi-Strauss) showed that there is a set of rules for grammatical transformations that all languages ​​obey. In addition, all languages ​​represent special sign systems. The meaning of each symbol (word) is determined by its structural place, in accordance with existing binary oppositions. In other words, the meaning of a word does not derive from physical properties, but from a structural relationship with another word, often opposite in meaning (hot - cold, top - bottom, left - right, etc.). Subsequently, similar ideas were developed in the semiotic approach in the works of R. Barth (1915–1980) and Yu. M. Lotman (1922–1993) and had an important influence on historical science in the field of source criticism of texts. This became the basis of deconstructivism, which broke the monopoly on the only correct interpretation of the text, and over time led to postmodernism.

However, structural connections can be discovered not only in the process of analyzing narrative sources, but also in the study of social systems. Let us demonstrate the rich possibilities of using the structural method using the example of studying ancient societies. In Chapter 25 of The Early State, H. J. M. Claessen compared 21 early states using almost 100 different indicators (Claessen, Skalnik 1978: 533–596). Studying, in particular, the structure of the management apparatus, he noted the following stable correlations. At a level of almost 99% agreement, early states were characterized by a three-tier administrative system (central government, regional and local authorities).

So-called general functionaries (performing several different functions at the same time) are just as often found mainly at the regional level and somewhat less frequently at the national and local levels. According to the collected data, most often they were engaged in collecting taxes or tribute, somewhat less often they performed judicial or military duties. Both inheritance and appointment of “general” functionaries were rare. In most cases (68%) there was a mixed method of recruitment. There was no complete empirical information regarding the connection between income and position, the degree of independence of administrators from higher authorities and the latter’s desire to control the func- tioTheory and methodology of the history of ners, although the available data predominantly indicated a stable positive relationship.

Klassen believes that it is quite justified to conclude that there is a tendency to maximize the power of functionaries at the regional level. At the same time, it records the strongest control of the center precisely for this level of management. No less interesting conclusions were obtained by Klassen regarding the so-called “special” functionaries (in M. Weber’s terminology, more suitable for the definition of professional bureaucrats).

Like any scientific method, the structural approach has its drawbacks. The weak point of structuralism is considered to be its static nature, its inapplicability to the study of diachronic historical changes. Neo-Marxist anthropology also points out that structuralism reduces the role of the historical subject to the deterministic elements and functions of structure (Anderson 1991). Nevertheless, this method is important for, say, the study of political systems and power structures.

Another example of the use of the structural method can be gleaned from the work of B. N. Mironov, already mentioned above, “Social History of Russia” (1999). The author asks how much and how hard the Russian peasantry had to work. There are two opposing opinions on this matter.

According to the first, the peasantry was distinguished by significant industriousness, according to the second, the Orthodox people worked quite moderately, exactly as much as was necessary. The author takes the level of labor costs as a conditional criterion of work ethics. Since this is a relative criterion, Mironov uses three different ways to calculate this variable.

As the first indicator, he takes the number of holidays and weekends per year. Next, he uses data on the timing of a number of labor processes and, finally, tries to determine the total time spent on business activities.

The total number of holidays and weekends exceeded 100 days.

Zemstvo statistics on labor costs indicate that there was enormous potential for properly organized labor.

Finally, counting the time spent on agricultural work showed that there was a surplus of male labor in the village.

Chapter 19. Methods of historical research

The intensity and organization of labor of Russian peasants was lower than that of the rural population of Western Europe. During periods of suffering, Russian peasants could work just as intensively (but were inferior in the organization of labor), but the rest of the time the intensity and productivity of their labor was lower (Mironov 1999, vol. 2:

305–309). By the way, these same features of work ethics can be traced later, for example, in Soviet times (the emergency nature of work - “end of the quarter”, “end of the year”).

System method. The basic principles of the systems approach (method) were first formulated in 1949 by the biologist L. von Bertalanffy (1969a; 1969b). A major contribution to its development was made by the mathematician N. Wiener and the psychiatrist W. Ashby. In the domestic literature, the development of the system method was carried out by I.V. Blauberg, V.N. Sadovsky, G.P. Shchedrovitsky, E.G. Yudin and other researchers (Blauberg et al. 1970; Blauberg, Yudin 1973; Shchedrovitsky 1981 and others. ).

The systems method is based on the understanding of the system as a set of interconnected elements. The method involves consideration of several main tasks: 1) isolating the elements that are included in the system; 2) analysis of the nature of the relationships between elements (horizontal, hierarchical); 3) study of the interaction of the system with the external environment.

The study of the structure of a system - the totality of its elements and the connections between them - is actually an analysis of the internal structure. That's why system method closely connected with the structural one. Some researchers even combine them, classifying them as a single group of system-structural methods.

The principle of isomorphism occupies an important place in the system method. Its essence lies in the fact that if the elements of different systems are similar to each other, then similarities in their properties can be found between these systems.

Since most systems are open (that is, they exchange energy with the external environment), the system must strive for self-preservation by maintaining its integrity and supplying the energy necessary for life. This aspect can be illustrated by the example of the so-called “energy theory of power” by anthropologist R. Adams.

From Adams' point of view, any stable human community is an open system that exchanges energy with the external environment and transforms this energy. Every system strives to reduce internal entropy. This is best achieved by those systems that optimize the mechanisms for storing and using energy flows. The concentration of power in the hands of a few contributes to better “energetic adaptation” of the community to external environment. Since the emergence of chiefdoms, control over energy takes on a hierarchically centralized character, separated from the broad masses. The centralized organization of redistribution is energy basis stratification in the chiefdom and then in the state. Further, as the means of controlling energy flows improve, the scope and methods of power also expand (Adams 1975).

It cannot be said that before von Bertalanffy no one had applied the systems approach in practice. Upon careful study, many outstanding scientists can find certain components of the systemic method. In particular, they were used, for example, by K. Marx in his studies of the economics of capitalist society (Kuzmin 1980). To a large extent, the principles of the systems approach were anticipated at the beginning of the twentieth century. A. A. Bogdanov (1989) in his work on tectology - “universal organizational science”, as well as in the functional method of the British anthropologist and ethnologist B. Malinovsky in the 1920s. Somewhat later, the system method was used by M. Blok in his book “Feudal Society” (2003). In this fundamental work, Blok analyzes medieval Western European society as an integral social organism. It not only shows the key components of the social structure (kings, knighthood, townspeople, peasants, etc.), but also reveals the relationships between these social groups, the place of Europe in a broader geopolitical context. In fact, the medieval world appears in his work as a living, developing organism.

Similar works:

“Problems on postmodernism, Volume IV, Broy 3, 2014 Postmodernism problems, Volume 4, Number 3, 2014 Medianata literacy kato element from public competence for participation in the digital environment Dobrinka Peychevax Statiyat e highlighted on medianata literacy kato element from public competence for participation in digital environment. Implemented within the framework of the national project “European approach to public competences and participation in the digital environment” with the director Dobrina Peycheva (YUZU “N. Rilski”) on the line on Naredba...”

“Issue 2 SPIRITUAL-MORAL AND HEROIC-PATRIOTIC EDUCATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS OF PATRIOIC UNIONS Not for the sake of glory, for the good of the Fatherland! Issue 2 SPIRITUAL-MORAL AND HEROIC-PATRIOTIC EDUCATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS OF PATRIOIC UNIONS Funds are used in the implementation of the project state support, allocated as a grant in accordance with the order of the President of the Russian Federation dated March 29, 2013 No. 115-rp and on the basis of a competition held...”

“Seminar “City Anthropology and Urban Folklore” 2010/2011 academic year February 16, 2011 Mikhail Lurie. Street song traders and an unpublished collection of urban folklore (Leningrad, early 1930s) A.M. Astakhova, known to folklorists as a collector, publisher and researcher of Russian epic folklore, prepared a collection of “Songs of Street Singers” for publication in 1932. The materials in this book provide unique material to study urban folklore and ethnography of the city and...”

“UDC 373.167.1(075.3) BBK 63.3(O)ya7 B Conventions: - questions and tasks - questions and tasks of increased difficulty - pay attention - remember - interdisciplinary connections - historical documents Declaration - a concept in regular italics, given in terminological dictionary T. S. Sadykov and others. World history: Textbook for 11th grade. social-humanitarian In the direction of general education. school/ T. S. Sadykov, R. R. Kairbekova, S. V. Timchenko. - 2nd ed., revised, additional - Almaty: Mektep, 2011. - 296...”

“CONGRATULATIONS! DEAR COMRADES! Please accept my sincere congratulations on the 35th anniversary of the formation of the school and our faculty. This is how history has decreed, and, as you know, it is not customary to rewrite it, that the Minsk Higher Military-Political Combined Arms School (MVVPOU), on the basis of which the combined arms department was formed, was created during the period of active growth of the national liberation movement of the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America . In order to improve the situation in these countries, it was..."

“Igor Vasilyevich Pykhalov Why they were imprisoned under Stalin. How they lie about “Stalinist repressions” Series “Dangerous History” Text provided by the publishing house http://www.litres.ru/pages/biblio_book/?art=12486849 Igor Pykhalov. Why they were imprisoned under Stalin. How they lie about “Stalinist repressions”: Yauza-press; Moscow; 2015 ISBN 978-5-9955-0809-0 Abstract 40 million dead. No, 80! No, 100! No, 150 million! Following Goebbels’s behest: “the more monstrously you lie, the sooner they will believe you,” “liberals” overestimate the real ones...”

"YU. P. Averkieva AT THE ORIGINS OF MODERN ETHNOGRAPHY (TO THE CENTENARY OF THE PUBLICATION OF L. G. MORGAN’S “ANCIENT SOCIETY”) Classic work by L. G. Morgan “Ancient society” 1 (1877), which, according to F. Engels, made a revolution in the science of primitiveness, was the result of his many years of research. As F. Engels rightly noted, Morgan did not come to his conclusions immediately: “He worked on his material for about forty years until he completely mastered it” 2. Indeed, “Ancient Society” was...”

"William Frederick Engdahl Gods of Money. Wall Street and the Death of the American Century William F. Engdahl MONEY GODS. Wall Street and the Death of the American Century Preface to the Russian Edition In March 2011, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced the creation of an international working group that would advise the Russian government on how to transform Moscow into a global financial center. In his statement, the president said that this is an attempt to reduce Russia's dependence on natural resources by ... "

“Moscow International Historical Model of the UN RSUH 201 International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea CASE OF THE SAIGA TANKER (1997) Expert Report Moscow Contents Contents Introduction Chapter 1. General provisions 1.2. About the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea 1.2. On the sources of international maritime law 1.3. On maritime spaces in international maritime law Chapter 2. General characteristics of the Saiga tanker case 2.1. Background of the case 2.2. The applicant's position 2.3. Defendant’s position 2.4...”

“LESSONS ON TRAFFIC RULES. IN CLASSES 1-9 (Manual for teachers.) Compiled by: Komyshev V.N., Lyukhin V.A., Zharkova T.A., Gilmutdinova M.M. Lessons on traffic rules for grades 1-9. – Manual for teachers.g. Ufa The manual provides recommendations for conducting lessons on the Traffic Rules of the course “Fundamentals of Safe Life.” Particular attention is paid to the formation of skills for the safest behavior of children in various road situations, the history of development...”

"Policy. Political studies. 2014. No. 4. P. 181-190. DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2014.04.15 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND POLITICAL NETWORKS S.I. Petrov PETROV Sergey Ivanovich, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Political Management, Faculty of Political Science, St. Petersburg State University. To contact the author: [email protected] The article was received by the editor: November 15, 2013. Accepted for publication: 04/23/2014 Abstract. The article presents an analytical review of three books published in 2013 and devoted to the issues...”

"Federal state budgetary educational institution of higher professional education" Saratov State Agrarian University named after N.I. Vavilov" ABSTRACT on the history and philosophy of science (biological sciences) on the topic: "Microclonal propagation of plants as a modern method of increasing the efficiency of plant seed production" Completed by: graduate student Beglov Sergey Mikhailovich Reviewer: Ph.D. agricultural Sciences Tkachenko O.V. Scientific supervisor: Ph.D. agricultural Sciences Tkachenko O.V. Saratov..."

« ETHNOGRAPHY 198 JOURNAL OF S N O V A N IN 1926 PUBLISHED 6 TIMES A YEAR CONTENTS N. B. TER AKOPYAN (Moscow). The work of F. Engels “The Origin of the Family.” private property and the state" and some questions of the theory of the historical process N. P. JI obacheva (Moscow). From the history of Karakalpak women's costume (To the problems..."

"2. REQUIREMENTS FOR MASTERING THE DISCIPLINE. In the process of studying the discipline, students must: Master competencies: acquire the ability to analyze socially significant problems and processes occurring in society and predict their possible development in the future (OK-4). Master the following professional competencies: In analytical, research activities: acquire the ability to analyze and interpret data from domestic and foreign statistics on...”

“Interview with Ildus Faizrakhmanovich YARULIN “NEW TEXTS, NEW PEOPLE PUSHED FOR RETHINKING” Yarulin I.F. – graduated from the Faculty of History and Philology of Kazan State University (1981), Doctor of Political Sciences (1998). professor (2000); Pacific State University, Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Professor of the Department of Sociology, Political Science and Regional Studies. Main areas of research: informal institutions and practices; institutionalization of civil..."

“RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL ON PROBLEMS OF LITHOLOGY AND SEDIMENTARY MINERAL RESOURCES AT ONZ RAS (NS LOPI OZ RAS) RUSSIAN STATE UNIVERSITY OF OIL AND GAS NAMED AFTER I.M. GUBKIN RUSSIAN FOUNDATION FOR BASIC RESEARCH EVOLUTION OF SEDIMENTARY PROCESSES IN THE HISTORY OF THE EARTH Materials of the VIII All-Russian Lithological Meeting (Moscow, October 27-30, 2015) Volume II RSU OF OIL AND GAS NAMED AFTER I.M. GUBKINA 2015 UDC 552.5 E 15 E 15 Evolution of sedimentary processes in the history of the Earth: materials...”

“Annotation The bestseller of the talented American journalist and TV presenter George Crile, “Charlie Wilson's War” - the hitherto unknown story of the last battle cold war. The author talks about the affairs of a quarter-century ago, which greatly spurred the current offensive of Islamic extremists around the world. It all began with the fact that the eccentric Congressman Charlie Wilson from East Texas, for his love affairs and stormy life ... "

“Alexander Andreevich Mityagin Alexander Alekseevich Mityagin History is the mentor of life I was born in the village of Cheboksa, Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, as a child I lived in Kazan and got to work in the banking system purely by chance - no one in the family had anything to do with it. In 1971, after graduating from the Kazan Institute of Finance and Economics, I was assigned to the Krasnodar Territory, where I remained to work. My work activity began in the regional center - the village of Krasnoarmeyskaya (since 1994 -..."

“Annotation This is the perfect training book! The quintessence of all intellectual training for the development of the mind and memory. The authors have collected all the best gaming techniques for pumping up the brain. The book also contains over 333 educational, witty and practical problems that you can solve on your own. Nurali Latypov, Anatoly Wasserman, Dmitry Gavrilov, Sergey Yolkin Dreaming is not harmful, but playing is useful About IQ and educational games...”

« HISTORY RUSSIAN SOCIETY OF INTELLECTUAL HISTORY DIALOGUE WITH TIME DIALOGUE WITH TIME DIALOGUE WITH TIME INTELLECTUAL HISTORY REVIEW 2015 Issue 51 EDITORIAL COUNCIL Carlos Antonio AGUIRRE ROJAS Valery V. PETROFF La Universidad Nacional Institute of Philosophy RAS Autnoma de Mexco Mikhail V. BIBIKOV Jefim I. PIVOVAR Institute of World..."

2016 www.site - “Free electronic library - Books, editions, publications”

The materials on this site are posted for informational purposes only, all rights belong to their authors.
If you do not agree that your material is posted on this site, please write to us, we will remove it within 1-2 business days.