The simplest method of historical research. Working with literature

Historical methodology (methodology of historical research)- the main theoretical discipline in the family of historical sciences, studying in unity the theory of historical knowledge and cognition, that is, the theory of the subject of history and the theory of methods of historical research.

The methodology of history is based on the general logical principles of the methodology of science, but of the two main methods of scientific knowledge - observation and experiment - history has the opportunity to use only the first. As for observation, the historian, like any scientist, is faced with the task of minimizing the impact of the observer himself on the subject being studied. The methodology and theory of historical science determine the historian’s own understanding of the nature, factors and direction of the historical process. Differences in methodological approaches, along with features creative individuals researchers, lead to a variety of interpretations of historical subjects, the formation of scientific schools, the emergence of competing concepts, and create the basis for scientific discussions.

Logical methods of historical research

Methods of historical research, designed to perform an equally important function - to formulate the basic principles of the theory of knowledge - nevertheless differ both in essence and in the material to which they are applied, and in the tasks solved with their help. In specific historical practice, special research methods are used, which are based on philosophical (logical) and general scientific methods.

Logical methods include, in particular, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, analogy and comparison, logical modeling and generalization.

The essence of analysis and synthesis is the actual or mental decomposition of the whole into its component parts and the reunification of the whole from the parts. Analysis allows us to identify the structure of the object under study, separate the essential from the unimportant, and reduce the complex to the simple. Its forms are the classification of objects and phenomena, the identification of stages in their development, the detection of contradictory trends, etc. Synthesis complements analysis, leads from the essential to its diversity, to the unification into a single whole of parts, properties, relationships identified through analysis.

Induction and deduction are methods of cognition that are interconnected and condition one another. If induction provides the possibility of moving from individual facts to general and possibly probable propositions, then deduction is intended to build a scientific theory. The deductive method is used, as a rule, after the accumulation and theoretical understanding of empirical material in order to systematize it and derive all its consequences.

Analogy is the establishment of similarities between non-identical objects. It should be based on as many relationships as possible, on essential properties, on establishing a closer connection between the resultant and factor characteristics. Comparison is a cognitive operation that underlies judgments about the similarity or difference of objects, a strictly thought-out concept for the selection and interpretation of existing material. With the help of comparison, the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of objects are identified, their classification, ordering and evaluation are carried out. Its simplest types are relations of identity and difference.

Since many facts, phenomena, events, etc. cannot be historically attested due to the weakness of the source base; they can be restored and reconstructed only hypothetically. Then the modeling method is used. Modeling is a way of establishing connections between objects in order to determine their place in the system, which indicates the properties of these objects. In logical modeling, the technique most often used is extrapolation, which means the extension of conclusions drawn as a result of studying one part of a phenomenon to another part of this phenomenon; Finding from a series of given values ​​of a function its other values ​​that are outside the given series.

Generalization - transition to a higher level of abstraction by identifying common features(properties, relationships, trends). Generalization is one of the most important means of scientific knowledge. If, for example, the inductive method is necessary when accumulating material, and the deductive method is necessary in the cognitive process, then the method of generalization allows us to unify and identify many different facts, judgments, and theories using a single formula.

General scientific methods of historical research

General scientific methods include:

1. general logical techniques (comparison, generalization, abstraction, etc.);
2. methods of empirical research (observation, measurement, experiment);
3. methods theoretical research(idealization (see, in particular, the works of M. Weber), formalization, thought experiment, mathematical methods, modeling, methods of ascending from the concrete to the abstract and from the abstract to the concrete, etc.).

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

Special methods of historical research

Among the special methods of historical science greatest distribution received a comparative historical method. It allows us to identify trends in the historical process, forms the scientific basis for its periodization, indicates the general and special in history, and makes it possible to penetrate into the essence of phenomena. The comparative historical method involves typologizing historical phenomena, making it possible to separate their essential characteristics from secondary, optional ones.

From ser. XIX century A historical-dialectical method began to take shape, which was based on the formation theory of K. Marx, the idea of ​​an ascending unidirectional stage-by-stage development of the historical process. Competing with it is the civilizational method, which considers the history of each community (ethnic group, state, etc.) as a historical process of the development of culture, passing through several phases of change like a living organism (see in particular the works of A. Toynbee). The controversy of this method lies in defining the boundaries of the concept “civilization”. Recent times have been marked by attempts to identify, on the basis of civilizational approaches to the study of history, a special discipline - civilology.

Interdisciplinary research methods

With the involvement of mass sources in the research circulation, mathematical methods became widespread in historical science (the works of Academician I.D. Kovalchenko). The rapprochement with sociology allowed historians to actively apply the methods practiced in sociological research. Thus, content analysis came from sociology to history. Gender history, which in recent years has emerged as an independent branch of historical science, also actively uses sociological methods. In the same way, from the practice of using new methods, such directions and schools of historical research as proposography, which developed from historical and biographical research, microhistory, etc. grew. Historical and linguistic research, combining the approaches of history and linguistics, is of utmost importance for the study of the early history of mankind. Historians, especially researchers of mentality, practice approaches developed by psychoanalysis , what brings certain results when explaining the motives of behavior of individual historical characters.

The central place in the development of history methodology in modern stage occupied by the ideas of interdisciplinarity, that is, the interdisciplinary study of the past, the systematic integration of historical science into a single research space with geography, economics, sociology, and social psychology. Movement along this path allowed historians to see new horizons and contributed to the emergence of new disciplines that lie at the intersections with other sciences (historical geography, historical demography, etc.). History itself is increasingly seen as part of a larger broad science- social anthropology.

New methods are constantly appearing in both foreign and domestic historical science, which is associated with the needs of the science itself and with borrowings from related disciplines. The categorical-conceptual apparatus of historical science is being improved. The experience of historical research in recent centuries has shown that the above and other methods make it possible to more or less accurately describe and explain the department. aspects of the historical process, provide the key to solving specific research problems, but cannot claim to be universal. Typically, historical research uses a combination of various methods, which allows the historian to maximize the range of scientific problems to be solved. This is also facilitated by adherence to such an important principle of approach to the object under study as

Ranke recognizes this method as key in historical research. Description is one of many research procedures. Essentially, research begins with a description; it answers the question “what is this?” The better the description, the better research. The uniqueness of the object of historical knowledge requires appropriate linguistic means of expression. The natural language method of presentation is the most adequate for the perception of the general reader. The language of historical description is not the language of formalized structures (see the topic The Language of the Historian).

The description expresses the following points:

Individual qualitative originality of phenomena;

Dynamics of development of phenomena;

Development of phenomena in connection with others;

The role of the human factor in history;

The image of the subject of historical reality (the image of the era).

Thus, description is a necessary link (CONDITION) in the picture of historical reality, the initial stage of historical research, an important condition and prerequisite for understanding the essence of the phenomenon. This is the quintessence of this method. But the description itself does not provide an understanding of the essence, since it is the internal essence of the phenomenon. Description is like an external factor. The description is supplemented by a higher degree of cognition - analysis.

Description is not a random listing of information about what is depicted. A scientific description has its own logic, its own meaning, which are defined methodological principles(author). For example, chronicles. Their goal is the exaltation of the monarch. Chronicles - chronological principle + recognition, showing the dynasty's chosenness by God, a certain moralizing. In research, the proportion of description, as a rule, prevails over conclusions and generalizations.

Description and generalization within the framework of historical research are interconnected (description without generalization is simply factuality. Generalization without description is schematization).

The descriptive-narrative method is one of the most common in historical research.

2. Biographical method.

It is one of the oldest methods of historical research. We find the beginning of the biographical method in antiquity, I-II centuries. AD in Plutarch's work "Comparative Lives". In this work, Plutarch tries to perceive human activity as history. Moreover, the main idea proposed by Plutarch is the idea of ​​providentialism. At the same time, the role of the individual in history is insignificant. However, the biographical method raises an important question - about the role of the individual in history. He doesn’t just stage, he either indirectly or directly defines this role as significant. During the Age of Enlightenment, an important rethinking of the role of the individual in history took place.

In fact, Carrel is the most famous adherent of the biographical method in history. In the 20th century we also meet in the biographical method. Lewis Namer said that the essence of history is in personal connections, at the center of the study is an ordinary person. But for him, a simple person is a deputy. He explored the history of English parliamentarism in the form of biographies of deputies of different convocations. The essence of the story is the essential points in the biographies of deputies.

The most important things in history are the dates of their lives, origin, position, education, all kinds of connections, possession of wealth. Namer's approach involves perceiving a person as social unit. Through biographies, the personal interests of an individual transform public ones. The activity of parliament is a struggle for personal well-being, power, and career. In the 20th century There is some narrowing of the possibilities of the biographical method.

This is due to the fact that political history loses its former role and new branches of historical research appear: social, structural, gender history, etc. A surge of interest in the biographical method was observed in the 60-70s, especially manifested in the work of Fest, the work “Adolf Hitler”. Fest tried to unite the fate of the little corporal, who became the Fuhrer, with the fate of Germany. Hitler is the flesh and blood of the German people with all their fears, successes, decisions, etc. Biography of Hitler is mirror reflection the fate of the German people.

Modern methodological foundations for the application of the biographical method. At the center of the possibility of using this method is the solution of an important methodological problem - the role of the individual and the masses in history. This is one of key issues, therefore, one cannot abandon the biographical method. Any historical fact has personal and collective features. it is necessary to determine the combination of these factors in specific conditions. The question of the emergence of great personalities.

Historical science is trying to answer this question in a broad aspect - to what extent this or that figure can correspond to the concept of “great personality” + assessment of the results of the activities of this person. As a result, in answering this question, the researcher is one way or another faced with the problem of an inexplicable event in history. There is no definite answer to this question. At the same time, one must keep in mind the external conditions for the emergence of a great personality. Based on external factors, the relationship between the role of the individual and the conditions is adjusted.

3. Comparative historical method.

This is one of the most widely used methods. The focus of this study is the technique of comparison. In antiquity, various cycles in history were compared. Comparison is used as a means of creating an understanding of historical cycles. There is no qualitative certainty social phenomena. In new times comparative method was determined by searching for similarities in phenomena. The use of comparison led to insufficient emphasis on individual traits, therefore there is no criterion for evaluation.

In the era of enlightenment, a criterion for comparison appears - this is human nature - reasonable, kind, of an unchanging nature (comparison with the golden age, i.e. with the past). widespread use of the comparative method during the Age of Enlightenment. The characteristic of versatility has been assigned to it. The comparison method was used so widely that even non-comparable quantities were compared. When comparing, the emphasis was still on finding similarities. But it was still impossible to completely solve this problem - to search for something similar, because the criterion is in the distant past, outside of time.

As a result, it turned out to be difficult to understand the uniqueness of the phenomenon. It is difficult to understand the uniqueness of a phenomenon located in the time stream. XIX century: the comparative method is subjected to serious analysis, problems of the cognitive capabilities of the comparative method are identified, scientists are trying to find the framework for using the comparative historical method. It was recognized that homogeneous structures and repeating types could be compared. the so-called “typology of phenomena” (Mommsen). Opportunities for identifying the individual and the general are identified. Gerhard emphasized the individual.

The use of the comparative historical method made it possible to compare and draw analogies with phenomena at different times.

Methodological foundations of the comparative historical method.

The methodological basis is the need to recognize the inextricable connection similar, repeating and individual in historical events. This is a condition for the rational application of the comparative historical method. The essence of the approach is that the comparison shows both similar and repeating. We can raise the question of comparing phenomena of the same order (to what extent is it possible to compare the uprising of Spartacus and the Jacquerie).

Conditions for productive comparison:

The most detailed description of the phenomena being studied

The degree of knowledge of the compared phenomena should be approximately the same.

Thus, the descriptive-narrative method precedes the comparative-historical one.

Stages of the comparative historical method:

1. Analogy. There is no definition of the essence of phenomena here. An analogy is used to illustrate something. This is not analysis, but a simple transfer of the representation of an object to an object. Raises the question of the quality of analogies: how similar one object is to another. Analogies were widely used by Arnold Toynbee.

2. Identification of essential and meaningful characteristics, comparison of one-order phenomena. The main thing here is to determine to what extent the phenomena are of the same order. This is the task of methodology. The criterion of one-order is a natural repeatability both “vertically” (in time) and “horizontally” (in space). An example is the revolutions in Europe in the mid-19th century.

3. Typology. Within the typology, types of single-order phenomena are distinguished. selection of classification features. For example, the Prussian and American paths of development of capitalism. Main principle- noble land ownership. Development feudal relations in Europe: which relations predominate - Germanic or Romanesque? What do Romanesque beginnings mean? The Romanesques are the Pyrenees and Apennines. The Germanic type is England and Scandinavia. Mixed type - Frankish state (Michael de Coulanges approach).

Thus, the use of the comparative historical method involves identifying a set of phenomena of the same order, the same degree of study of them, identifying the differences and similarities between them in order to achieve generalizing ideas.

4. Retrospective.

The very word “retrospect” is the essence of historical knowledge (I look back). Within the framework of the retrospective method, the course of the historian’s search is, as it were, the opposite of standard study. The essence of the retrospective method is reliance on a higher stage of development. The goal is to understand and evaluate previous phenomena.

Reasons for using the retrospective method:

Lack of factual source data;

The need to trace the development of an event from beginning to end;

The need to obtain data of a new order.

There are phenomena that manifest themselves over time on a new essential basis and have consequences that were not initially expected. For example, the campaigns of Alexander the Great (planned to avenge the hardships during the Greco-Persian wars, but as a result the Hellenistic era was launched), the FBI (the original goal was to free the Bastille prisoners), the February revolution in Russia, etc.

Morgan's research, which studies family and marital relations from group forms to individual ones. He studied contemporary Indian tribes and compared them with the Greek family. He came to the conclusion that family and marital relations develop in the same way, regardless of the era. Kovalchenko studied agrarian relations in Russia in the 19th century. He brings the idea of ​​a rural community of the 19th century back to earlier stages. The retrospective method is related to the survival method.

This is a method of reconstructing objects that have passed into the past based on the remains that have survived to the present day. This is the method Taylor used. He studied customs, rituals, and views based on ethnographic material. By studying the beliefs of modern primitive tribes, one can understand the ancient beliefs of Europeans. Or a study of German XIX history V. Such a study allows us to consider certain features agrarian history Middle Ages. In order to understand medieval processes, non-living documents, plans, and maps of the 19th century are studied. (Meitzen).

The retrospective method cannot always be applied individually enough (what is suitable for studying Germany may not be suitable for studying France, etc.). The study of French boundary maps was carried out by Marc Bloch. He immediately highlighted the difference between the boundary maps of France and Germany. A study of barbaric truths. These truths are the source where many survivals are preserved.

A necessary condition for the use of the retrospective method is proof of the relict nature of the evidence on the basis of which the reconstruction will be carried out. Those. you need to understand that modern relics are indeed such. Within the framework of applying the retrospective method, the most important assistant is the principle of historicism.

5. Method of terminological analysis.

The main tool of information for a historian is the word. Very sharp linguistic problem. The meaning of this problem is that there are difficulties in determining the meaning of the word, i.e. how the meaning of a word relates to the reality it reflects.

We are faced with a terminological analysis of the source. As part of this analysis, the terminological apparatus borrows its content from real life. Although the meaning of the word is not entirely adequate to reality . The word must correspond to what it expresses. Therefore, in conducting many studies, the problem of concepts is posed. Carl Linnaeus said that if you do not know words, then it is impossible to study things.

Nowadays, in modern historical research, terminological analysis is becoming increasingly important, and in some cases it is absolutely necessary. Moreover, over time, the meaning of words changes. The meaning of words in the past may not coincide with the meaning of the same words in the present. Since the 19th century language began to be perceived as a source of historical knowledge. Historians Mommsen and Niebuhr drew attention to the importance of language when they studied ancient subjects.

Features of the use of terminological analysis:

The development of the content of the terms of historical sources lags behind the real content of the historical event hidden behind it. the term is always archaic in relation to the event. learned historians can take this lag into account + this allows us to study earlier historical reality (for example, barbaric truths, which in their own way vocabulary can reflect the reality of the 4th-5th centuries; they can be used to study the events of the 6th-7th centuries. The term "villa" = single-yard settlement or village or settlement area);

Terminological analysis is productive in cases where the source is written in the native language of the people being studied. possibilities of terminological parallels (for example, Russian truth and chronicles; Salic truth and chronicles) - internal and external (Russian truth and Scandinavian truths; chronicles and European chronicles);

Dependence of terminological analysis on the nature of the source. the relationship between the methodological position of the historian and the analysis of the source. relevant conclusions;

Toponymic analysis as a type of terminological analysis. An important point is the dependence of geographical names from time (for example, Khlynov and Vyatka). Toponyms provide an opportunity to study the process of settlement of the territory, occupations of the population, etc. Place names have special significance for non-literate cultures;

Anthroponymic analysis - study of names and surnames;

Opportunities for researching social issues, preferences, qualities of people.

Thus, a word can be considered as the key to understanding a phenomenon only when the terms are clear. Solutions to various aspects in the problem of language and history is a necessary condition searching for the true meaning of historical events.

The condition for the successful use of terminological analysis:

It is necessary to take into account the polysemy of the term (including a set of terms)

Approach to the analysis of a term historically (take into account time, place, consider the term as a changing structure)

Comparison of new terms with old ones (identification of content).

6. Method of mathematical statistics.

There are methods that reveal qualities, there are methods that reveal quantity. Quantity is very important sign reality.

For a historian it is very important point is the correlation of the quantitative and qualitative aspects of reality. This is the measure that reveals the unity of quantity and quality. In addition, quantity as a category reflects the essence of phenomena to varying degrees.

The perception and use of quantitative research methods varies and varies. For example, how much did the number of soldiers in Genghis Khan’s army influence how quickly China was captured, how much can they be correlated with the talent of these soldiers, Genghis Khan himself, the talent of his enemies, etc. The conquest of China by Genghis Khan can be considered in the correlation of categories that cannot be counted (the talent of commanders and soldiers), the number of troops.

The laws of Hammurabi - a clear gradation is given for the crime: for example, killing a bull is one payment, a bull is another, free man- third, i.e. different actions are reduced to one denominator - a monetary unit. Based on this, one can draw conclusions about the quality of society (the importance of a slave, a bull, a free person).

On the other hand, quantitative analysis cannot provide new knowledge in isolation from qualitative analysis. Kovalchenko: “Quantitative mathematical methods allow the researcher to obtain certain characteristics of the characteristics being studied, but by themselves they do not explain anything.” As a result, the quantitative moment is, as it were, neutral.

Mathematical methods in to a greater extent are of an applied nature. It is impossible to explain events using only these data. Quantitative methods are dependent on substantive methods. But there are moments in history in which quantitative characteristic is an essential feature. This applies, as a rule, to the field of economics. Another area is mass phenomena (wars, revolutionary movements). This is where we intersect with statistical methods.

The original form of the quantitative method in history is the statistical method. The main thing in statistics, which is used in historical science, is the statistics of social phenomena related to economics, politics, demography, cultural aspects, etc. Statistics began to be involved in historical phenomena in the second half of the 17th century.

The next stage in the development of the statistical method is associated with the 19th century. and named after Thomas Buckle. In addition to Buckle, the statistical method is actively used to study agrarian history as such (how much was grown, when, what crops, what is their ratio, etc.). In the 20th century actively used the Druzhinin statistical method. Kosminsky, Barg, Kovalchenko, Mironov.

Conditions for the qualitative application of the statistical method:

1) recognition of the priority of qualitative analysis over quantitative analysis;

2) the study of qualitative and quantitative characteristics - in unity;

3) identifying the qualitative homogeneity of events for statistical processing;

4) taking into account the principle of using homogeneous data of “considerable numbers” (it is correct to operate with statistics from thousands of homogeneous quantities);

5) involvement of mass sources (censuses, chronicle data, etc.).

Types of statistical analysis:

1) the simplest type of statistics is descriptive (for example, census data without analysis, VTsIOM data). Descriptive data is used for illustration purposes.

2) selective. This is a method of probabilistic conclusion about the unknown based on the known (for example, the situation of the peasant economy in Russia in the first half of the 19th century is analyzed using household inventories. But only a part of these inventories has reached historians. On their basis, a conclusion is made about the general state of the economy)

This approach does not reflect the exact characteristics, but nevertheless can show in the study important thing- trend.

7. Correlation method.

Associated with quantitative method. The task is to determine the dependence of the size of duties and their dynamics on the state of the peasant economy. What type of peasant farm and how does it respond to various duties? This task involves deriving the correlation coefficient. The correlation coefficient may be the ratio between the size of the duty and the number of livestock. Another coefficient is the ratio between the number of employees and the level of duties.

In studying this problem, you can look at the ratio of the coefficients.

8. Regression method.

Within the framework of the regression method, we must determine the comparative role of various causes in a particular process. For example, the decline of the noble household. In order to assess the reasons for its decline, regression coefficients are derived: the ratio of the quantitative composition of families and their wealth, the ratio of households below a certain level of income and above it. Regression method- This is a type of correlation.

Thus, quantitative analysis helps to identify and characterize important features and symptoms of phenomena, making understanding more accurate (moving away from “better-worse” formulations).

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND YOUTH POLICY

KHANTY-MANSI AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT - YUGRA

State educational institution

higher professional education

Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra

"Surgut State Pedagogical University"

BASIC METHODS OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Essay

Completed by: Vorobyova E.V. group B-3071,IVGFS course Checked by: Medvedev V.V.

Surgut

2017

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION

A modern historian faces the difficult task of developing a research methodology, which should be based on knowledge and understanding of the capabilities of methods existing in historical science, as well as a balanced assessment of their usefulness, effectiveness, and reliability.

In Russian philosophy, there are three levels of scientific methods: general, general, and particular. The division is based on the degree of regulation of cognitive processes.

Universal methods include philosophical methods that are used as the basis for all cognitive procedures and allow one to explain all processes and phenomena in nature, society and thinking.

General methods are used at all stages of the cognitive process (empirical and theoretical) and by all sciences. At the same time, they are focused on understanding individual aspects of the phenomenon being studied.

The third group is private methods. These include methods of a specific science - for example, physical or biological experiment, observation, mathematical programming, descriptive and genetic methods in geology, comparative analysis in linguistics, measurement methods in chemistry, physics, etc.

Particular methods are directly related to the subject of science and reflect its specificity. Each science develops its own system of methods, which develops and is supplemented by related disciplines along with the development of science. This is also characteristic of history, where, along with the traditionally established methods of source study and historiographic analysis based on logical operations, methods of statistics, mathematical modeling, mapping, observation, survey, etc. began to be used.

Within the framework of a particular science, the main methods are also identified - basic for this science (in history these are historical-genetic, historical-comparative, historical-typological, historical-systemic, historical-dynamic) and auxiliary methods with the help of which its individual, particular problems are solved .

In the process of scientific research, general, general and particular methods interact and form a single whole - a methodology. The universal method used reveals the most general principles human thinking. General methods make it possible to accumulate and analyze the necessary material, as well as give the obtained scientific results - knowledge and facts - a logically consistent form. Particular methods are designed to solve specific issues that reveal individual aspects of a cognizable subject.

1. GENERAL SCIENTIFIC METHODS OF KNOWLEDGE

General scientific methods include observation and experiment, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, analogy and hypothesis, logical and historical, modeling, etc.

Observation and experiment belong to the general scientific methods of cognition, especially widely used in natural sciences. By observation we mean perception, living contemplation, directed by a specific task without direct interference with the natural course in natural conditions. An essential condition for scientific observation is the promotion of one or another hypothesis, idea, proposal .

An experiment is a study of an object when the researcher actively influences it by creating artificial conditions necessary to identify certain properties, or by changing the course of the process in a given direction.

Human cognitive activity, aimed at revealing the essential properties, relationships and connections of objects, first of all selects from the totality of observed facts those that are involved in his practical activity. A person mentally, as it were, dismembers an object into its constituent aspects, properties, parts. Studying, for example, a tree, a person identifies different parts and sides in it; trunk, roots, branches, leaves, color, shape, size, etc. Understanding a phenomenon by breaking it down into its components is called analysis. In other words, analysis as a method of thinking is the mental decomposition of an object into its constituent parts and sides, which gives a person the opportunity to separate objects or any of their aspects from those random and transitory connections in which they are given to him in perception. Without analysis, no knowledge is possible, although analysis does not yet highlight the connections between the parties and properties of phenomena. The latter are established by synthesis. Synthesis is a mental unification of elements dissected by analysis .

A person mentally decomposes an object into its component parts in order to discover these parts themselves, in order to find out what the whole consists of, and then considers it as composed of these parts, but already examined separately.

Only gradually comprehending what happens to objects when performing practical actions with them, a person began to mentally analyze and synthesize the thing. Analysis and synthesis are the main methods of thinking, because the processes of connection and separation, creation and destruction form the basis of all processes in the world and practical human activity.

Induction and deduction. As a research method, induction can be defined as the process of removing general position from the observation of a number of isolated facts. On the contrary, deduction is a process of analytical reasoning from the general to the specific. The inductive method of cognition, which requires going from facts to laws, is dictated by the very nature of the cognizable object: in it the general exists in unity with the individual, the particular. Therefore, in order to comprehend the general pattern, it is necessary to study individual things and processes.

Induction is only a moment of movement of thought. It is closely related to deduction: any single object can be comprehended only by being included in the system of concepts already existing in your consciousness .

The objective basis of the historical and logical methods of cognition is the real history of the development of the cognizable object in all its concrete diversity and the main, leading tendency, pattern of this development. Thus, the history of human development represents the dynamics of life of all peoples of our planet. Each of them has its own unique history, its own characteristics, which are expressed in everyday life, morals, psychology, language, culture, etc. World history is an endlessly motley picture of the life of mankind in different eras and countries. Here we have the necessary, the accidental, the essential, the secondary, the unique, the similar, the individual, and the general. . But despite this endless variety life paths different peoples, their history has something in common. All peoples, as a rule, went through the same socio-economic formations. The commonality of human life is manifested in all areas: economic, social, and spiritual. It is this commonality that expresses the objective logic of history. The historical method presupposes research specific process development, and the logical method is research general patterns movement of the object of cognition. The logical method is nothing more than the same historical method, only freed from its historical form and from the accidents that violate it.

The essence of the modeling method is to reproduce the properties of an object on a specially designed analogue of it - a model. A model is a conventional image of an object. Although any modeling coarsens and simplifies the object of knowledge, it serves as an important auxiliary research. It makes it possible to study processes characteristic of the original, in the absence of the original itself, which is often necessary due to the inconvenience or impossibility of studying the object itself .

General scientific methods of cognition do not replace specific scientific methods of research; on the contrary, they are refracted in the latter and are in dialectical unity with them. Together with them they perform common task– reflection of the objective world in human consciousness. General scientific methods significantly deepen knowledge and make it possible to reveal more general properties and patterns of reality.

2. SPECIAL METHODS OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Special historical, or general historical, research methods represent one or another combination of general scientific methods aimed at studying the object of historical knowledge, i.e. taking into account the features of this object, expressed in the general theory of historical knowledge .

The following special historical methods have been developed: genetic, comparative, typological, systemic, retrospective, reconstructive, actualization, periodization, synchronous, diachronic, biographical. Methods related to auxiliary historical disciplines are also used - archaeology, genealogy, heraldry, historical geography, historical onomastics, metrology, numismatics, paleography, sphragistics, phaleristics, chronology, etc.

The main general historical methods of scientific research include: historical-genetic, historical-comparative, historical-typological and historical-systemic.

Historical-genetic method is one of the most common in historical research. Its essence lies in the consistent disclosure of the properties, functions and changes of the reality being studied in the process of its historical movement, which allows you to come closest to reproducing the real history of the object. This object is reflected in the most specific form. Cognition proceeds sequentially from the individual to the particular, and then to the general and universal. By its logical nature, the historical-genetic method is analytical-inductive, and by its form of expressing information about the reality under study, it is descriptive .

The specificity of this method is not in the construction of ideal images of an object, but in the generalization of factual historical data towards the reconstruction of a general scientific picture of the social process. Its application makes it possible to understand not only the sequence of events in time, but also general dynamics social process.

The limitations of this method are the lack of attention to statics, i.e. to fix a certain temporal reality of historical phenomena and processes, the danger of relativism may arise. In addition, he “gravitates towards descriptiveness, factualism and empiricism. Finally, the historical-genetic method, despite its long history and breadth of application, does not have a developed and clear logic and conceptual apparatus. Therefore, its methodology, and therefore the technique, is vague and uncertain, which makes it difficult to compare and bring together the results of individual studies .

Idiographic method was proposed by G. Rickert as the main method of history . G. Rickert reduced the essence of the idiographic method to the description of individual characteristics, unique and exceptional features of historical facts, which are formed by a scientist-historian on the basis of their “attribution to value.” In his opinion, history individualizes events, distinguishing them from the infinite variety of so-called. “historical individual”, which meant both the nation and the state, a separate historical personality .

Based on the idiographic method, it is appliedideographic method - a method of unambiguously recording concepts and their connections using signs, or a descriptive method. The idea of ​​the ideographic method goes back to Lullio and Leibniz .

Historical-genetic method is close to the ideographic method, especially when used at the first stage of historical research, when information is extracted from sources, systematized and processed. Then the researcher’s attention is focused on individual historical facts and phenomena, on their description as opposed to identifying developmental features .

Cognitive functionscomparative historical method :

Identification of features in phenomena of different order, their comparison, juxtaposition;

Clarification of historical sequence genetic connection phenomena, establishing their generic connections and relationships in the process of development, establishing differences in phenomena;

Generalization, construction of a typology of social processes and phenomena. Thus, this method is broader and more meaningful than comparisons and analogies. The latter do not act as a special method of historical science. They can be used in history, as in other areas of knowledge, and regardless of the comparative historical method.

In general, the historical-comparative method has broad cognitive capabilities .

Firstly, it allows us to reveal the essence of the phenomena under study in cases where it is not obvious, based on the available facts; to identify the general and repetitive, the necessary and natural, on the one hand, and qualitatively different, on the other. Thus, the gaps are filled and the research is brought to a complete form.

Secondly, the historical-comparative method makes it possible to go beyond the phenomena being studied and, on the basis of analogies, to arrive at broad historical generalizations and parallels.

Thirdly, it allows the use of all other general historical methods and is less descriptive than the historical-genetic method.

The successful application of the historical-comparative method, like any other, requires compliance with a number of methodological requirements. First of all, the comparison should be based on specific facts, which reflect the essential features of phenomena, and not their formal similarity.

You can compare objects and phenomena, both of the same type and of different types, located at the same and at different stages of development. But in one case the essence will be revealed on the basis of identifying similarities, in the other – differences. Compliance with the specified conditions for historical comparisons essentially means consistent application of the principle of historicism.

Identifying the significance of the features on the basis of which a historical-comparative analysis should be carried out, as well as the typology and stage nature of the phenomena being compared, most often requires special research efforts and the use of other general historical methods, primarily historical-typological and historical-systemic. Combined with these methods, the historical-comparative method is a powerful tool in historical research. But this method, naturally, has certain range the most effective action. This is, first of all, the study of socio-historical development in broad spatial and temporal aspects, as well as those less broad phenomena and processes, the essence of which cannot be revealed through direct analysis due to their complexity, inconsistency and incompleteness, as well as gaps in specific historical data .

The historical-comparative method has certain limitations, and the difficulties of its application should also be taken into account. This method is not generally aimed at revealing the reality in question. Through it, one learns, first of all, the fundamental essence of reality in all its diversity, and not its specific specificity. It is difficult to use the historical-comparative method when studying the dynamics of social processes. The formal application of the historical-comparative method is fraught with erroneous conclusions and observations .

Historical-typological method. Both the identification of the general in the spatially singular and the identification of the stage-homogeneous in the continuous-temporal require special cognitive means. Such a tool is the method of historical-typological analysis. Typology as a method of scientific knowledge has as its goal the division (ordering) of a set of objects or phenomena into qualitatively defined types (classes) based on their common essential features. Typologization, being a type of classification in form, is a method of essential analysis .

Identifying the qualitative certainty of the set of objects and phenomena under consideration is necessary to identify the types that form this set, and knowledge of the essential nature of the types is an indispensable condition for determining those basic features that are inherent in these types and which can be the basis for a specific typological analysis, i.e. to reveal the typological structure of the reality under study.

The principles of the typological method can only be effectively applied based on a deductive approach . It consists in the fact that the corresponding types are identified on the basis of a theoretical essential-substantive analysis of the considered set of objects. The result of the analysis should be not only the definition of qualitatively different types, but also the identification of those specific features that characterize their qualitative certainty. This creates the opportunity to assign each individual object to one type or another.

The selection of specific features for typology can be multivariate. This dictates the need to use both a combined deductive-inductive and the inductive approach when typologizing. The essence of the deductive-inductive approach is that the types of objects are determined on the basis of an essential-substantive analysis of the phenomena under consideration, and those essential features that are inherent in them are determined by analyzing empirical data about these objects .

The inductive approach differs in that here both the identification of types and the identification of their most characteristic features are based on the analysis of empirical data. This path has to be followed in cases where the manifestations of the individual in the particular and the particular in general are diverse and unstable.

In cognitive terms, the most effective typification is that it allows not only to identify the corresponding types, but also to establish both the degree to which objects belong to these types and the degree of their similarity to other types. This requires methods of multidimensional typology.

Its use brings the greatest scientific effect when studying homogeneous phenomena and processes, although the scope of the method is not limited to them. In the study of both homogeneous and heterogeneous types, it is equally important that the objects being studied are comparable in terms of the fact that is fundamental for this typification, in terms of the most characteristic features, underlying the historical typology .

Historical-systemic method is based on a systems approach. The objective basis of the systematic approach and method of scientific knowledge is the unity in the socio-historical development of the individual (individual), the special and the general. This unity is real and concrete and appears in socio-historical systems of different levels. .

Individual events have certain features unique to them that are not repeated in other events. But these events form certain types and genera human activity and relationships, and, therefore, along with individual ones, they also have common features and thereby create certain aggregates with properties that go beyond the individual, i.e. certain systems.

Individual events are included in social systems and through historical situations. A historical situation is a spatiotemporal set of events that qualitatively form certain state activities and relationships, i.e. it is the same social system.

Finally, the historical process in its temporal extent has qualitatively different stages or stages, which include a certain set of events and situations that make up subsystems in the overall dynamic system social development .

Systemic nature socio-historical development means that all events, situations and processes of this development are not only causally determined and have a cause-and-effect relationship, but are also functionally connected. Functional connections seem to overlap cause-and-effect relationships, on the one hand, and are complex in nature, on the other. On this basis, it is believed that in scientific knowledge the decisive significance should be not a causal, but a structural-functional explanation .

The systems approach and system methods of analysis, which include structural and functional analyses, are characterized by integrity and complexity. The system being studied is considered not from the perspective of its individual aspects and properties, but as a holistic qualitative certainty with a comprehensive account of both its own main features and its place and role in the hierarchy of systems. However, for the practical implementation of this analysis, it is initially necessary to isolate the system under study from an organically unified hierarchy of systems. This procedure is called systems decomposition. It represents a complex cognitive process, because it is often very difficult to isolate a specific system from the unity of systems .

The isolation of the system should be carried out on the basis of identifying a set of objects (elements) that have qualitative certainty, expressed not simply in certain properties of these elements, but also, first of all, in their inherent relationships, in their characteristic system of interconnections. The isolation of the system under study from the hierarchy of systems must be justified. In this case, methods of historical and typological analysis can be widely used.

From a specific content point of view, the solution to this problem comes down to identifying the system-forming (system) features inherent in the components of the selected system.

After identifying the corresponding system, its analysis as such follows. Central here is structural analysis, i.e. identifying the nature of the relationship between the components of the system and their properties, the result of the structural-system analysis will be knowledge about the system as such. This knowledge is empirical in nature, because it in itself does not reveal the essential nature of the identified structure. Translating the acquired knowledge to the theoretical level requires identifying the functions of a given system in the hierarchy of systems, where it appears as a subsystem. This problem is solved by functional analysis, revealing the interaction of the system under study with higher-level systems .

Only a combination of structural and functional analysis allows us to understand the essential nature of the system in all its depth. System-functional analysis makes it possible to identify which properties of the environment, i.e. systems of a higher level, including the system under study as one of the subsystems, determine the essential and meaningful nature of this system .

The disadvantage of this method is its use only in synchronous analysis, which risks not revealing the development process. Another drawback is the danger of excessive abstraction - formalization of the reality being studied.

Retrospective method . Distinctive feature This method is directed from the present to the past, from effect to cause. In its content, the retrospective method acts, first of all, as a reconstruction technique that allows one to synthesize and correct knowledge about the general nature of the development of phenomena .

The method of retrospective cognition consists in sequential penetration into the past in order to identify the cause of a given event. In this case, we are talking about the root cause directly related to this event, and not about its distant historical roots. Retro-analysis shows, for example, that the root cause of domestic bureaucracy lies in the Soviet party-state system, although they tried to find it in Nicholas’s Russia, and in Peter’s transformations, and in the administrative red tape of the Muscovite kingdom. If during retrospection the path of knowledge is a movement from the present to the past, then when constructing historical explanation– from past to present in accordance with the principle of diachrony .

A number of special historical methods are associated with the category of historical time.These are methods of actualization, periodization, synchronous and diachronic (or problem-chronological).

The first step in the work of a historian is to compile a chronology. The second step is periodization. The historian cuts history into periods, replacing the elusive continuity of time with some kind of signifying structure. The relationships of discontinuity and continuity are revealed: continuity occurs within periods, discontinuity occurs between periods.

To periodize means, therefore, to identify discontinuities, violations of continuity, to indicate what exactly is changing, to date these changes and to give them a preliminary definition. Periodization deals with the identification of continuity and its disruptions. It opens the way to interpretation. She makes history, if not quite understandable, then at least already conceivable.

The historian does not reconstruct time in its entirety for each new study: he takes the time on which other historians have already worked, the periodization of which is available. Since the question asked acquires legitimacy only as a result of its inclusion in the research field, the historian cannot abstract from previous periodizations: after all, they constitute the language of the profession.

The diachronic method is characteristic of structural-diachronic research, which is a special type of research activity when the problem of identifying the features of the construction of processes of various natures over time is solved. Its specificity is revealed through comparison with the synchronistic approach. The terms “diachrony” (multi-temporality) and “synchrony” (simultaneity), introduced into linguistics by the Swiss linguist F. de Saussure, 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 the essential-temporal changes in historical reality. With its help, you can answer questions about when this or that state may occur during the process being studied, how long it will persist, how long it will take this or that historical event, phenomenon, process .

CONCLUSION

Methods of scientific knowledge are a set of techniques, norms, rules and procedures governing Scientific research, and providing a solution to the research problem. The scientific method is a way of searching for answers to scientifically posed questions and at the same time a way of posing such questions, formulated in the form of scientific problems. Thus, the scientific method is a way of obtaining new information to solve scientific problems.

The basis of history as a subject and science is historical methodology. If in many other scientific disciplines there are two main methods of knowledge, 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 various interpretations the same event, various teachings, schools, and so on.

The use of scientific methods of cognition distinguishes historical science in such areas as historical memory, historical consciousness and historical knowledge, of course, provided that the use of these methods is correct.

LIST OF SOURCES USED

Barg M.A. Categories and methods of historical science. - M., 1984

Bocharov A.V. Basic methods of historical research: Textbook. - Tomsk: Tomsky State University, 2006. 190 p.

Grushin B.A. Essays on the logic of historical research.-M., 1961

Ivanov V.V. Methodology of historical science. - M., 1985

Bocharov A.V. Basic methods of historical research: Textbook. - Tomsk: Tomsk State University, 2006. 190 p.

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 of a particular science or complex of sciences. I. Kovalchenko spoke most thoroughly in Russian historical literature about the application 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 appear in their 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. Recently, the idea of ​​synthesis based on culture in the postmodern sense has emerged. 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 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. Construction 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.

With all the variety of research approaches, there are certain general research principles, such as systematicity, objectivity, and historicism.

The methodology of historical research is the technique by which methodology is implemented in historical research.

In Italy, during the Renaissance, a scientific research apparatus began to take shape, and a system of footnotes was first introduced.

In the process of processing specific historical material, the researcher needs to use various research methods. The word “method” translated from Greek means “way, way.” Scientific research methods are ways of obtaining scientific information in order to establish regular connections, relationships, dependencies and build scientific theories. Research methods are the most dynamic element of science.

Any scientific-cognitive process consists of three components: the object of knowledge - the past, the knowing subject - the historian, and the method of knowledge. Through the method, the scientist understands the problem, event, era being studied. The volume and depth of new knowledge depend, first of all, on the effectiveness of the methods used. Of course, each method can be applied correctly or incorrectly, i.e. the method itself does not guarantee the acquisition of new knowledge, but without it no knowledge is possible. Therefore, one of the most important indicators of the level of development of historical science is research methods, their diversity and cognitive effectiveness.

There are many classifications of scientific research methods.

One of the common classifications involves dividing them into three groups: general scientific, special and special scientific:

• general scientific methods used in all sciences. These are mainly methods and techniques of formal logic, such as: analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, hypothesis, analogy, modeling, dialectics, etc.;
• special methods used in many sciences. The most common ones include: functional approach, systems approach, structural approach, sociological and statistical methods. The use of these methods allows us to more deeply and reliably reconstruct the picture of the past, systematize historical knowledge;
• private scientific methods have not universal, but applied value and are used only in specific science.

In historical science, one of the most authoritative in national historiography is a classification proposed in the 1980s. Academician I.D. Kovalchenko. The author has been fruitfully studying this problem for more than 30 years. His monograph “Methods of Historical Research” is a major work, which for the first time in Russian literature provides a systematic presentation of the basic methods of historical knowledge. And this is done in organic connection with an analysis of the main problems of historical methodology: the role of theory and methodology in scientific knowledge, the place of history in the system of sciences, historical source and historical fact, structure and levels of historical research, methods of historical science, etc. Among the main methods of historical knowledge Kovalchenko I.D. refers:

• historical-genetic;
• historical-comparative;
• historical-typological;
• historical-systemic.

Let's consider each of these methods separately.

Historical-genetic method is one of the most common in historical research. Its essence lies in the consistent disclosure of the properties, functions and changes of the reality being studied in the process of its historical movement. This method allows you to come closest to reproducing the real history of the research object. In this case, the historical phenomenon is reflected in the most concrete form. Cognition proceeds sequentially from the individual to the particular, and then to the general and universal. By nature, the genetic method is analytical-inductive, and in the form of expressing information it is descriptive. The genetic method makes it possible to show cause-and-effect relationships, patterns of historical development in their immediacy, and to characterize historical events and personalities in their individuality and imagery.

Historical-comparative method has also long been used in historical research. It is based on comparisons - important method scientific knowledge. Not a single scientific study is complete without comparison. The objective basis for comparison is that the past is a repeating, internally determined process. Many phenomena are identical or similar internally

their essence and differ only in spatial or temporal variation of forms. And the same or similar forms can express different content. Therefore, in the process of comparison, the opportunity opens up to explain historical facts and reveal their essence.

This feature of the comparative method was first embodied by the ancient Greek historian Plutarch in his “biographies.” A. Toynbee sought to open as much as possible more laws, applicable to any society, and sought to compare everything. It turned out that Peter I was Akhenaten’s double, the era of Bismarck was a repetition of the era of Sparta during the time of King Cleomenes. A condition for the productive use of the comparative historical method is the analysis of single-order events and processes.

• 1. The initial stage of comparative analysis is analogy. It does not involve analysis, but the transfer of ideas from object to object. (Bismarck and Garibaldi played prominent roles in unifying their countries).
• 2. Identification of the essential and content characteristics of what is being studied.
• 3. Reception of typology (Prussian and American type of development of capitalism in agriculture).

The comparative method is also used as a means of developing and verifying hypotheses. On its basis it is possible retroalternative-vistics. History as a retro-story assumes the ability to move in time in two directions: from the present and its problems (and at the same time the experience accumulated up to this time) to the past, and from the beginning of the event to its ending. This introduces into history the search for causality, an element of stability and strength that should not be underestimated: the end point is given, and the historian starts from there in his work. This does not eliminate the risk of delusional constructs, but at least it is minimized. The history of an event is actually a completed social experiment. It can be observed from indirect evidence, hypotheses can be built, and they can be tested. A historian can offer all kinds of interpretations of the French Revolution, but in any case, all his explanations have a common invariant to which they must be reduced: the revolution itself. So the flight of fancy has to be restrained. In this case, the comparative method is used as a means of developing and verifying hypotheses. Otherwise, this technique is called retro-alternativeism. Imagining a different development of history is the only way to find the reasons for the real history. Raymond Aron called for rationally weighing the possible causes of certain events by comparing what was possible: “If I say that Bismarck’s decision was the cause of the war of 1866... ​​then I mean that without the chancellor’s decision the war would not have started (or at least would not have started at that moment)” 1. Actual causation is revealed only by comparison with what was possible. Any historian, in order to explain what was, asks the question of what could have been. To carry out such a gradation, we take one of these antecedents, mentally consider it non-existent or modified, and try to reconstruct or imagine what would have happened in this case. If you have to admit that the phenomenon under study would have been different in the absence of this factor (or in the event that it were not so), we conclude that this antecedent is one of the causes of some part of the phenomenon-effect, namely that part of it. parts in which we had to assume changes. Thus, logical research includes the following operations: 1) division of the phenomenon-consequence; 2) establishing a gradation of antecedents and identifying the antecedent whose influence we have to evaluate; 3) constructing a surreal course of events; 4) comparison between speculative and real events.

If, when examining the causes of the Great French Revolution, we want to weigh the importance of various economic (the crisis of the French economy at the end of the 18th century, the poor harvest of 1788), social (the rise of the bourgeoisie, the reaction of the nobility), and political (the financial crisis of the monarchy, the resignation of Turgot) factors , there can be no other solution than to consider all these different causes one by one, supposing that they might have been different, and trying to imagine the course of events that might follow in that case. As M. Weber says, in order to “untangle real causal relationships, we create unreal ones.” Such “imaginary experience” is the only way for the historian not only to identify causes, but also to unravel, weigh them, as M. Weber and R. Aron put it, that is, to establish their hierarchy.

Historical-typological method, like all other methods, has its own objective basis. It consists in the fact that in the socio-historical process, on the one hand, the individual particular, the general and the universal are closely interconnected, on the one hand, they differ. Therefore, an important task of understanding historical phenomena and revealing their essence is to identify the unity that was inherent in the diversity of certain combinations of the individual (single). The past in all its manifestations is a continuous dynamic process. It is not a simple sequential flow of events, but a replacement of one qualitative state by another, it has its own significantly different stages, the identification of these stages is also

an important task in the study of historical development. The first step in the work of a historian is to compile a chronology. The second step is periodization. The historian cuts history into periods and replaces the continuity of time with some semantic structure. The relationships of discontinuity and continuity are revealed: continuity occurs within periods, discontinuity occurs between periods.

Particular varieties of the historical-typological method are: the method of periodization (allows us to identify a number of stages in the development of various social, social phenomena) and the structural-diachronic method (aimed at studying historical processes at different times, allows us to identify the duration and frequency of various events).

Historical-systemic method allows you to understand internal mechanisms functioning of social systems. The systems approach is one of the main methods used in historical science, since society (and an individual) is a complexly organized system. Basis of application this method in history there is unity in the socio-historical development of the individual, the special and the general. In reality and concretely, this unity appears in historical systems of different levels. The functioning and development of societies includes and synthesizes those basic components that make up historical reality. These components include individual unique events (for example, the birth of Napoleon), historical situations (for example, the Great French Revolution) and processes (the influence of the idea and events of the French Revolution on Europe). It is obvious that all these events and processes are not only causally determined and have cause-and-effect relationships, but are also functionally interconnected. The task of system analysis, which includes structural and functional methods, is to provide a complete, comprehensive picture of the past.

The concept of a system, like any other cognitive tool, describes some ideal object. From the point of view of its external properties, this ideal object acts as a set of elements between which certain relationships and connections are established. Thanks to them, a set of elements turns into a coherent whole. In turn, the properties of a system turn out to be not just the sum of the properties of its individual elements, but are determined by the presence and specificity of the connection and relationships between them. The presence of connections and relationships between elements and the integrative connections generated by them, the integral properties of the system ensure the relatively independent separate existence, functioning and development of the system.

The system as a relatively isolated integrity is opposed to the environment. In fact, the concept of environment is implicit (if there is no environment, then there will be no system) contained in the concept of the system as an integrity, the system is relatively isolated from the rest of the world, which acts as the environment.

The next step in a meaningful description of the properties of the system is to fix its hierarchical structure. This system property is inextricably linked with the potential divisibility of system elements and the presence for each system of a variety of connections and relationships. The fact of the potential divisibility of system elements means that system elements can be considered as special systems.

Essential properties of the system:

• from point of view internal structure any system has appropriate orderliness, organization and structure;
• the functioning of the system is subject to certain laws inherent in this system; at any given moment the system is in a certain state; a successive set of states constitutes its behavior.

The internal structure of the system is described using the following concepts: “set”; "element"; "attitude"; "property"; "connection"; "channels of connection"; "interaction"; "integrity"; "subsystem"; "organization"; "structure"; “leading part of the system”; "subsystem; decision maker”; hierarchical structure of the system."

The specific properties of the system are characterized through the following features: “isolation”; "interaction"; "integration"; "differentiation"; "centralization"; "decentralization"; "Feedback"; "equilibrium"; "control"; "self-regulation"; "self management"; "competition".

The behavior of the system is determined through such concepts as: “environment”; "activity"; "functioning"; "change"; "adaptation"; "height"; "evolution"; "development"; "genesis"; "education".

Modern research uses many methods designed to extract information from sources, process it, systematize and construct theories and historical concepts. Sometimes the same method (or variations thereof) is described in different authors under different names. An example is the descriptive-narrative - ideographic - descriptive - narrative method.

Exploratory-narrative method (ideographic) - a scientific method used in all socio-historical and natural sciences and ranking first in terms of breadth of application. Requires compliance with a number of requirements:

• a clear understanding of the chosen subject of study;
• sequence of description;
• systematization, grouping or classification, characteristics of the material (qualitative, quantitative) in accordance with the research task.

Among other scientific methods, the descriptive-narrative method is the original one. To a large extent, it determines the success of work using other methods, which usually “look through” the same material in new aspects.

A prominent representative of narrative in historical science was the famous German scientist L. von Ranke (1795-1886), who, after graduating from the University of Leipzig, where he studied classical philology and theology, became interested in reading the novels of W. Scott, O. Thierry and other authors, after which began to study history and published a number of works that were a resounding success. Among them are “History of the Roman and Germanic Peoples”, “Sovereigns and Peoples Southern Europe in the 16th-17th centuries,” “The Popes, their Church and State in the 16th and 17th centuries,” 12 books on Prussian history.

In works of a source study nature, the following are often used:

• conventional documentary and grammatical-diplomatic methods, those. methods of dividing text into component elements are used to study office work and office documents;
• methods of textual criticism. For example, logical analysis of the text allows you to interpret various “dark” places, identify contradictions in the document, existing gaps, etc. The use of these methods makes it possible to identify missing (destroyed) documents and reconstruct various events;
• historical-political analysis allows you to compare information from various sources, recreate the circumstances of the political struggle that gave rise to the documents, and specify the composition of the participants who adopted a particular act.

In historiographical studies, the following are often used:

Chronological method- focusing on the analysis of the movement towards scientific thoughts, changes in concepts, views and ideas in chronological order, which makes it possible to reveal the patterns of accumulation and deepening of historiographic knowledge.

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

Periodization method- is aimed at highlighting individual stages in the development of historical science in order to discover leading trends in scientific thought and identify new elements in its structure.

Method of retrospective (return) analysis allows us to study the process of movement of the thoughts of historians from the present to the past in order to identify elements of strictly preserved knowledge in our days, check the conclusions of previous historical research and the data of modern science. This method is closely related to the “remnants” method, i.e. a method of reconstructing objects that have gone into the past based on the remains that have survived and reached the modern historian of the era. The researcher of primitive society E. Taylor (1832-1917) used ethnographic material.

Prospective analysis method identifies promising directions, topics for future research based on an analysis of what has been achieved modern science level and using knowledge of the patterns of development of historiography.

Modeling- This is the reproduction of the characteristics of an object on another object specially created for its study. The second of the objects is called the model of the first. Modeling is based on a certain correspondence (but not identity) between the original and its model. There are 3 types of models: analytical, statistical, simulation. Models are resorted to in case of a lack of sources or, conversely, a saturation of sources. For example, in the computer center of the USSR Academy of Sciences, a model of the ancient Greek polis was created.

Methods of mathematical statistics. Statistics arose in the second half of the 17th century. in England. In historical science, statistical methods began to be used in the 19th century. Events subject to statistical processing, must be homogeneous; quantitative and qualitative characteristics must be studied in unity.

There are two types of statistical analysis:

• 1) descriptive statistics;
• 2) sample statistics (used in the absence of complete information and gives a probabilistic conclusion).

Among the many statistical methods we can highlight: method correlation analysis(establishes a relationship between two variables, a change in one of them depends not only on the second, but also on randomness) and entropy analysis (entropy is a measure of the diversity of the system) - allows you to track social connections in small (up to 20 units) groups that do not obey probable statistical patterns. For example, academician I.D. Kovalchenko subjected the tables of zemstvo household censuses of the post-reform period to mathematical processing and revealed the degree of stratification among estates and communities.

Method of terminological analysis. The terminological apparatus of sources borrows its subject content from life. The connection between language changes and changes in social relations has long been established. A brilliant application of this method can be found in

F. Engels “Frankish dialect” 1, where he, having analyzed the movement of consonants in words with the same root, established the boundaries of German dialects and drew conclusions about the nature of tribal migration.

A variation is toponymic analysis - geographical names. Anthroponymic analysis - name formation and name creation.

Content analysis- a method of quantitative processing of large amounts of documents, developed in American sociology. Its use makes it possible to identify the frequency of occurrence of characteristics of interest to the researcher in the text. Based on them, one can judge the intentions of the author of the text and the possible reactions of the addressee. The units are a word or a theme (expressed through modifier words). Content analysis involves at least 3 stages of research:

• dividing the text into semantic units;
• counting the frequency of their use;
• interpretation of text analysis results.

Content analysis can be used in the analysis of periodic

prints, questionnaires, complaints, personal (court, etc.) files, biographies, census forms or lists in order to identify any trends by counting the frequency of repeating characteristics.

In particular, D.A. Gutnov applied the method of content analysis when analyzing one of the works of P.N. Milyukova. The researcher identified the most frequently occurring text units in the famous “Essays on the History of Russian Culture” by P.N. Miliukov, constructing graphs based on them. Recently, statistical methods have been actively used to construct collective portrait historians of the post-war generation.

Media analysis algorithm:

• 1) the degree of objectivity of the source;
• 2) number and volume of publications (dynamics by year, percentage);
• 3) authors of the publication (readers, journalists, military personnel, political workers, etc.);
• 4) frequency of occurring value judgments;
• 5) tone of publications (neutral informational, panegyric, positive, critical, negatively emotionally charged);
• 6) frequency of use of artistic, graphic and photographic materials (photos, caricatures);
• 7) ideological goals of the publication;
• 8) dominant themes.

Semiotics(from Greek - sign) - a method of structural analysis of sign systems, a discipline dealing with the comparative study of sign systems.

The foundations of semiotics were developed in the early 1960s. in the USSR Yu.M. Lotman, V.A. Uspensky, B.A. Uspensky, Yu.I. Levin, B.M. Gasparov, who founded the Moscow-Tartu semiotic school. A laboratory on history and semiotics was opened at the University of Tartu, which was active until the early 1990s. Lotman's ideas have found application in linguistics, philology, cybernetics, information systems, art theory, etc. The starting point of semiotics is the idea that the text is a space in which the semiotic character literary work implemented as an artifact. For semiotic analysis historical source it is necessary to reconstruct the code used by the creator of the text and establish their correlation with the codes used by the researcher. The problem is that the fact conveyed by the author of the source is the result of choosing from the mass of surrounding events an event that, in his opinion, has meaning. The use of this technique is effective in the analysis of various rituals: from everyday rituals to state rituals 1. As an example of the application of the semiotic method, one can cite the study of Lotman Yu.M. “Conversations about Russian culture. Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII - early XIX centuries)", in which the author examines such significant rituals of noble life as a ball, matchmaking, marriage, divorce, duel, Russian dandyism, etc.

Modern research uses methods such as: discourse analysis method(analysis of text phrases and its vocabulary through discourse markers); "dense description" method(not a simple description, but an interpretation of various interpretations of ordinary events); narrative history method"(considering familiar things as incomprehensible, unknown); case study method (study of a unique object or extreme event).

The explosion of interview material into historical research as a source led to the formation of Oral History. Working with interview texts required historians to develop new methods.

Construction method. It consists in the fact that the researcher studies possible larger number autobiographies from the point of view of the problem he is studying. When reading autobiographies, the researcher gives them a certain interpretation based on some general scientific theory. Elements of autobiographical descriptions become “bricks” for him, from which he constructs a picture of the phenomena under study. Autobiographies provide facts to build a general picture, which are related to each other according to consequences or hypotheses arising from the general theory.

Method of examples (illustrative). This method is a variation of the previous one. It consists of illustrating and confirming certain theses or hypotheses with examples selected from autobiographies. Using the method of illustrations, the researcher looks for confirmation of his ideas in them.

Typological analysis- consists of identifying certain types personalities, behavior, patterns and patterns of life in the social groups under study. To do this, autobiographical material is subjected to a certain cataloging and classification, usually with the help of theoretical concepts, and all the wealth of reality described in biographies is reduced to several types.

Statistical processing. This type of analysis is aimed at establishing the relationship various characteristics authors of autobiographies and their positions and aspirations, as well as the dependence of these characteristics on various properties of social groups. Such measurements are useful, in particular, in cases where the researcher compares the results of studying autobiographies with the results obtained by other methods.

Methods used in local studies:

• excursion method: travel to the study area, familiarization with the architecture and landscape. Locus - place - is not a territory, but a community of people engaged in specific activities, united by a connecting factor. In the original understanding, an excursion is scientific lecture, which is of a motor (moving) nature, in which the element of literature is reduced to a minimum. The main place in it is occupied by the feelings of the tourist, and the information is of a commentary nature;
• the method of complete immersion in the past involves long-term residence in the region in order to penetrate into the atmosphere of the place and more fully understand the people inhabiting it. This approach is very close in views to the psychological hermeneutics of V. Dilthey. You can identify the identity of the city as whole organism, identify its core, determine the realities current state. On the basis of this, a whole state is formed (the term was introduced by local historian N.P. Antsiferov).
• identification of “cultural nests”. It is based on a principle put forward in the 1920s. N.K. Piksanov on the relationship between the capital and the province in the history of Russian spiritual culture. In a general article by E.I. Dsrgacheva-Skop and V.N. Alekseev, the concept of “cultural nest” was defined as “a way of describing the interaction of all areas of the cultural life of the province during its heyday...”. Structural parts of the “cultural nest”: landscape and cultural environment, economic, social system, culture. Provincial “nests” influence the capital through “cultural heroes” - outstanding personalities, leaders acting as innovators (urban planner, book publisher, innovator in medicine or pedagogy, philanthropist or philanthropist);
• topographic anatomy - study through names, which are carriers of information about the life of the city;
• anthropogeography - the study of the prehistory of the place where the object is located; analysis of the logical line: place - city - community 3.

Methods used in historical and psychological research.

Method of psychological analysis or the comparative psychological method is comparative approach from identifying the reasons that prompted an individual to take certain actions, to the psychology of entire social groups and masses as a whole. To understand the individual motives of a particular personality position, traditional characteristics are not enough. It is required to identify the specifics of thinking and the moral and psychological appearance of a person, which determines

that determined the perception of reality and determined the views and activities of the individual. The study touches on the psychology of all aspects of the historical process; general group characteristics and individual characteristics are compared.

Method of socio-psychological interpretation - involves a description of psychological characteristics in order to identify the socio-psychological conditionality of people’s behavior.

Method of psychological construction (experience) - interpretation of historical texts through reconstruction inner world their author, penetration into the historical atmosphere in which they were located.

For example, Senyavskaya E.S. proposed this method for studying the image of the enemy in a “borderline situation” (the term of Heidegger M., Jaspers K.), meaning by it the restoration of certain historical types behavior, thinking and perception 1.

Researcher M. Hastings, when writing the book “Overlord,” tried to mentally make a jump to that distant time, even took part in the exercises of the English Navy.

Methods used in archaeological research: magnetic prospecting, radioisotope and thermoluminescent dating, spectroscopy, X-ray structural and X-ray spectral analysis, etc. To reconstruct the appearance of a person from bone remains, knowledge of anatomy is used (Gerasimov’s method). Geertz Kn. “Rich description”: in search of an interpretive theory of culture // Anthology of cultural studies. TL. Interpretations of culture. St. Petersburg, 1997. pp. 171-203. Schmidt S.O. Historical local history: issues of teaching and learning. Tver, 1991; Gamayunov S.A. Local history: problems of methodology // Questions of history. M., 1996. No. 9. P. 158-163.

2 Senyavskaya E.S. The history of Russian wars of the 20th century in the human dimension. Problems of military-historical anthropology and psychology. M., 2012.S. 22.

Anthology of cultural studies. TL. Interpretations of culture. St. Petersburg, 1997. pp. 499-535, 603-653; Levi-Strauss K. Structural anthropology. M., 1985; Guide to the methodology of cultural and anthropological research / Compiled by. E.A. Orlova. M., 1991.