Isolating in the process of research certain stages in the development of a person, society or individual components of its phenomena and processes is periodization.

Periodization is one of the most important special methods of historical research. It allows us to identify changes in the qualitative features of the historical process over time, establish with the possible degree of accuracy the moments of these changes, reveal the form and class content of historical phenomena in each historical period, and trace the action of certain historical patterns. The use of the method of periodization, based on the Marxist-Leninist principles of historicism and partisanship, makes it possible to study historical processes and phenomena in all their specific and unique originality, taking into account their changes and development, as well as the historical trends manifested in them, general and specific patterns.

If the synchronous method allows us to study a horizontal section of society in its instantaneous (synchronous), but in connection with this static state, if the chronological method reveals the time sequence of the chain historical events, following each other, but not always logically and especially causally connected with each other, then the method of periodization, which requires a comparison of the state of society or the processes and phenomena occurring in it at the beginning and at the end of the period (stage), opens up the opportunity to establish the main direction of social development, its inherent features and trends, the degree and form of their manifestation, to detect moments of the emergence of new phenomena and processes, etc.

Let's move on to the second group of special historical research methods, directly related to the logical general scientific method. Using a system of group methods, certain logical operations are carried out with historical facts.

Method of historical parallels (comparative historical)

The method of historical parallels (comparative-historical) is based on establishing similarities or differences between the phenomena being studied; it plays an important role in inferences by analogy. This method consists primarily of comparison, comparing the phenomenon being studied and, therefore, still unknown with the already studied, known, in order to understand the essence of the first of them.

This method has long been used by historians. IN late XIX– early 20th century consider this method as the only scientific one.

In terms of logic scientific research It is necessary to note two points characterizing the comparative historical study of phenomena. Firstly, the particularly cognitive role of such study is due to the fact that it involves the consideration of phenomena in the development and disclosure of their diverse aspects and properties in the process of this development. As a result of studying a number of stages, steps in phenomena, it becomes possible to clarify the historical development of phenomena when they develop their content to the greatest extent (for example, bourgeois relations at various stages and in different countries). Secondly, the strength of the comparative historical method lies in the breadth of coverage of the phenomena under study. Due to the fact that in in this case a parallel study of at least two “rows” of phenomena and processes is assumed; the researcher has the opportunity to trace the nature of the connection between individual phenomena against the background of others similar to them. Consequently, the interpretation of phenomena as isolated, absolutely individual, “unique aspects” of reality is excluded.

Comparison of the phenomena being studied in the process of development enriches knowledge in depth (for example, identifying patterns in phenomena, revealing their new qualitative aspects) and breadth (for example, expanding the factual basis of knowledge). This means that the comparative historical method, along with others, serves the task of quantitative and qualitative deepening of knowledge, solving it with specific feature, specific load.

This specificity is reflected in the cognitive functions of the method under consideration. These include: a) identification of features in phenomena of various orders, their comparison, juxtaposition; b) finding out historical sequence, genetic connection of phenomena, establishment of their genus-species connections and relationships in the process of development, establishment of differences in phenomena; c) generalization, construction of a typology of social processes and phenomena.

For a more complete understanding of the essence and function of the method under consideration, it seems advisable to distinguish between logical and structural-typological aspects in its application. The logical aspect means the identification and consistent comparative study of similar, but not identical aspects in phenomena; in this case, of course, the simultaneous and consistent use of not only comparison, but also other logical techniques (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, hypothesis and etc.).

The logical aspect only approximately covers one and not the most main principle comparative historical method. Using comparison as a logical technique, it is possible to clarify certain connections between social phenomena, mainly external ones. However, this is clearly not enough to understand their essence. To reveal the general and specific content of the phenomena under study, it is necessary to establish their structural and typological connections, then, on this basis, determine the uniformity of the compared phenomena. In general, the structural-typological aspect can be characterized as systematization and generalization of research, which is associated not only with the establishment of scientifically reliable facts, but also with the identification of significant trends and features in the objects being compared.

Of course, these aspects in the comparative historical method are presented as a single whole; their differentiation is only a conditional technique that allows us to emphasize the practical significance of the historical aspect itself in the application of this method.

Marxist researchers rightly see in the comparative historical method not the function of comparison in cognitive activity in general, but a relatively independent, systematically organized method of research, in which comparisons serve to achieve specific goals of cognition. This side of the problem should be especially emphasized, since sometimes in our literature logical comparisons are unconditionally identified with the comparative historical method.

This point of view cannot be considered justified, since it leaves in the shadow the connection of the method with historiographical practice, which was indicated above. When comparing and contrasting different variants of the types and structures being studied, one should not lose sight of the following point: seemingly insignificant phenomena at first glance in combination with other signs and in the process of further research work may take on a more significant value than during the first assessment.

In terms of methods of comparative study of history, this circumstance acquires particular importance. It contributes to a more complete disclosure of the essence of the compared phenomena, their multifaceted relationship, while the latter itself will be presented not in a static form, but in the process of development. Thanks to this approach, it becomes possible not only to have a generalized, concentrated characteristic of each of the phenomena being compared, but also to consider the latter in historical connection, taking into account the general and special features inherent in them.

All these arguments speak in favor of the previously stated position that the comparative historical method is broader and more meaningful than comparisons and analogies. The latter do not act as a special method of a given science or group of sciences. They can be used in historical science, as in other areas of knowledge, and independently of the comparative historical method (although, it goes without saying, the former cannot be mechanically opposed to the latter).

The application of the comparative historical research method requires a specific historical analysis of the situations being compared; it is unacceptable to compare phenomena based on their external similarity; It is important to remember the conventions of any comparison. Taking into account these limitations, the comparative historical method is for the researcher an effective means of understanding man and society.

Historical modeling method (retrospective)

The historical process is unique, historical time irreversible. It is impossible to really recreate or repeat a bygone event. But what is impossible as reality is quite feasible as a mental model, as an objectively reliable description of a historical phenomenon or event. Actually, the creation of such descriptions (or models) of historical phenomena, processes, events and facts, as well as the identification of patterns of their occurrence, development and functioning in certain specific historical conditions constitute the task of historical science. Thus, the method of historical modeling performs a vital function in historical research.

A mental model, a description of a historical event or phenomenon recreated by historians on the basis of historical sources - material remains, documents, photographs and other materials that have survived to this day and allow us to restore the real picture of the past.

The method of historical modeling is also called retrospective - from the Latin words “retro” - back and “spekto” - I look. The essence of the method lies in “retro-storytelling,” that is, in the movement of the researcher’s thoughts from the present to the past, from the study of elements of the old, preserved to this day, to the reconstruction on their basis of events and phenomena that took place in history. The possibility of retro-telling is explained by the unity of the past, present and future.

Going from the present to the past, the researcher has the opportunity to consider the various stages of phenomena. Consequently, to delve deeper into the essence of the processes being studied and later reveal their content.

This position does not mean, of course, that the developed phenomenon of that time serves as a standard.

This selection serves only as a general scale for a detailed study of past phenomena. Therefore, when applying the retrospective method, the movement from a mature object to the previous one must necessarily be combined with a movement from a less mature to a more mature one. Otherwise, the retrospective method is fraught with the danger of modernizing history. But when we talk about the retrospective method, this concept is given a more specific meaning: it is considered as a way of obtaining inferential knowledge about past phenomena. In this case, the mediating element can be either the experience of science or the learned fact of social practice.

1. The concept of “historical methods of scientific research”, its structure. The essence and purpose of logical methods of scientific historical research, their place in the system of scientific research methods.

2. The main types of historical methods of scientific research. Their structure, basic conceptual apparatus and application procedure.

3. Advantages and costs of applying historical methods of scientific research.

1. The group of historical methods most fully reflects the specifics of historical knowledge. And this conversation must begin by distinguishing historical methods from the principle of historicism.

Historicism is traditionally (in a positive sense) understood as a principle (rule, attitude, position) of knowledge of objective and subjective reality that changes over time. And this involves analyzing a phenomenon from its origin to its disappearance and transition to another quality in chronological order with the specifically changing historical conditions of the process. The deep meaning of historical methods is the “decomposition” of the subject of research “vertically” of development.

But the alignment of knowable elements according to certain rules forms a method of scientific research.

The need to use historical methods in scientific research is determined by the fact that, as V.I. Lenin wrote, it is impossible to understand the result without understanding the path of its development that led to this result. Therefore, historical analysis forms the core of dialectical materialism.

“The whole spirit of Marxism, its whole system requires that every position be considered

...only historically;

...only in connection with others,

... only in connection with the concrete experience of history.”

Many ways of this alignment form different varieties of this method. These include historical-genetic (or chronological), problem-chronological, retrospective methods, the method of actualization and the method of prospects (usually used as an extrapolation method). Let's dwell on them.

2. Chronological method . Perhaps this is one of the first methods of presenting material on history. It consists in studying the sequential changes in the reality under study in the process of its movement in time. We are talking about studying changes in a phenomenon or process from the point of view of their sequence in accordance with the passage of time.

It represents the most universal, flexible and accessible method of historical research.

The basic concepts that are used when using this method are second, minute, hour, day, week, month, year, century, period, epoch, millennium, etc. Based on these historical intervals chosen, all the phenomena being studied are arranged sequentially.

The undeniable advantage of this method is the ability to trace the intensity of the general historical process.

This relative simplicity determined the relatively early emergence and use of the method.

However, like any method, the historical-genetic method has its costs. These include the high labor intensity associated with identifying, processing and locating historical facts, phenomena, processes, a desire for descriptiveness, the illusion that this is the main activity of a scientist, of anyone interested in history. In addition, this method leads to a chaotic accumulation of facts, and the resulting chronological series does not always allow one to connect phenomena; the general logic of the emergence, development and disappearance of a historical fact is not always visible in the formed series.

Problem-chronological or historical-genetic research method . To overcome the shortcomings of the historical-genetic method, a problem-chronological method appeared. The basic rule in applying this method to study historical reality is to divide a more or less broad topic into a number of narrow subjects, each of which is analyzed in chronological order.

The use of this method allows us to trace the intensity of development from the emergence to the disappearance of a specific process, its death, the accumulation of qualities that leads to these changes. But this method also has certain limited opportunities. In particular, they are related to the fact that this method does not allow us to trace and identify the relationship of the fact being studied with other processes and phenomena. These limitations are compensated by other methods of scientific research.

Thus, for a reasonable division of the whole into its component parts, there is a need to turn to the method of classification.

A variant of the problem-chronological method is the analysis of alternativeness in historical development and the problem of choice in history on the part of the subject being studied, which has already been discussed.

Retrospective method of scientific research. The name of the method comes from the Latin word and is translated into Russian as “back”, “look back”.

The essence of the method is to study the past at later stages of its development, at the remnants of this past in the material and spiritual culture of subsequent times. The method involves searching for the causes of this or that phenomenon in their consequences.

Therefore, the main direction of the research logic was the movement from effect to cause.

It is based on the recognition of unity, the connection of the past, present and future, on the fact that each stage of social development contains elements of the previous one. Thus, the retrospective method or the method of recurrent analysis consists in reconstructing the old from the remains of the latter in the future or in the present.

The main routes of descent from the present to the past are:

a) study of material (material) sources and, on their basis, reconstruction of the past;

b) the study of the remnants of the past in the present and, on this basis, also the reconstruction of the past;

c) comparison of the results of activities with its plans and promises.

Method of actualization in scientific research. Translated from Latin, “actual” means “active”. Relevance is understood as the correspondence of a particular study to the fundamental needs of the time or to one or another active social force, the selection from the topic of those directions that can be used in the contemporary activity of a researcher of time public institutions, social groups and individuals.

The relevance of historical work does not depend on the proximity in time of the object of study from the researcher (according to the principle: the closer the connection, the more relevant the topic), but on whether the research meets the needs of today.

The actualization method makes it possible to develop recommendations for the further activities of the subject of the historical process based on the so-called. “lessons of history”, “historical experience”. This turns this method into one of the politicized methods of research that orient historical science to serve the interests of one or another political force.

Therefore, the method of actualization becomes an important political tool in the dominant political power, but also for opposition forces. Thus, V.I. Lenin used this method to justify the choice of the moment of political action in October 1917, using the method of comparing the conditions of the events of July 3–4 and the fall of 1917.

L. D. Trotsky exposed the political course of the Stalinist leadership in the 1920s, analyzing the political behavior of his opponents in 1917 in his work “Lessons of October”. And the political leadership of the USSR in the 1920s. actively participated in the discussion of this problem.

To justify the justification political course The Soviet leadership was widely involved in official historical science. Propaganda of the experience of the CPSU acquired particular significance in the context of the active emergence (maybe not always conscious) of the idea of ​​​​transforming the social system in the 1970-1980s. And at the XXVII Congress of the CPSU in the report of the Central Committee, then Secretary General In this game, M. S. Gorbachev introduced a plot about “lessons of truth.”

In the context of the latest reform of Soviet society, which grew into a deep transformation of the entire post-Soviet space, which also included Russia, various political forces again turned to the method of actualization, to the extraction of “historical experience.” This increased the politicization of public consciousness.

What is “historical experience”? This is the totality of knowledge, skills, and abilities acquired by subjects of historical activity, tested and verified in practice. Historical experience is knowledge about the past, correlated with its results, the identification of those forms and methods of activity that can be used directly or with appropriate adjustments to solve modern problems. However, historical experience can be not only positive, but also negative.

The concept of “experience” can be correlated with the concept of “practice”. The difference is that the concept of “experience” is the objective content of the process, and “practice” is the action of the subject of this process.

The bearer of experience is the subject of historical action: the subject

economic (state, public or private economic organization),

social (social group or specific person),

political (state or public political organization or structure, specific political figure),

spiritual culture (state, public or private cultural organization, cultural figure).

Every experience is concrete and can be perceived at different levels: at the level of everyday consciousness, which is inconsistent and contradictory, and at the level of ideology.

Historical experience may be

positive (positive, identifying optimal paths and methods of action) and negative (negative, analyzing mistakes made in the past and proposing measures to prevent them in the future);

hidden (reflected in sources, but not studied) and potential (obtained through scientific study);

relevant (requiring immediate implementation) and irrelevant (implementation of which can wait).

The method of actualization, like the method of identifying historical experience, presupposes

assessing the appropriateness of certain forms of organization or methods (methods) of activity from the point of view of positive results, identifying how suitable they are in a specific modern case;

identifying mistakes and miscalculations made, establishing ways to overcome them or prevent them in the future.

From the position of the official Soviet idea of ​​learning the lessons of Soviet history, it was necessary to draw positive conclusions. In the first decade of post-Soviet development - mostly negative. But what about now? Let's imagine this option.

History is a specific form of reflection in the consciousness of society or its part (before the personal) of the changing reality and the position in it of the bearer of this consciousness. It faces, directly or indirectly, the task of preserving civilization, warning it against undesirable consequences, encouraging and developing the necessary qualities, and on the basis of this constructing the logic of its development. In this regard, the question of the place of the history lesson in the construction of historical constructions is of interest.

Historical and theoretical thought shows that the construction of a “history lesson” is an element of “historical experience” and is considered as a conclusion from experience, the conclusion of which is educational in nature, being a recommendation for action, a means of mastering experience. In this regard, the interpretation of the nature of a history lesson is of interest, especially in comparison with the nature of historical experience.

IN Soviet period development of historiography, the nature of historical experience was considered as subjective, and the nature of the history lesson as an objective entity. But in light of the thesis put forward about the origin of the history lesson, a significant clarification should now be made: both in historical experience and in the history lesson there is a significant subjective element: who forms the content of these concepts and for whom.

Why is it possible to draw lessons from history? The epistemological basis of this operation was understood to be the recognition of developmental patterns, repeatability of deep features historical processes similar development processes.

Historical experience is social, that is, class-subjective (partial) in nature. The use of this experience is also class-party. Therefore, only those experiences that correspond to certain interests are perceived.

Or you can do this: experience is more objective, but the lesson is subjective. From the same social experience, different forces draw different historical lessons.

…Formally, historical experience, as a historical lesson, can be studied at any time. But it is more effective to do this in relation to the key points of development, at the moment of accumulation of the necessary quality of historical action, when the need for this experience, for these lessons is added to this accumulation. Moreover, this need is recognized on a subjective level by the potential rehearser (reproducer) of this experience. Here, society has not yet revealed a potential force capable of accepting the experience of the war years. You need to look not only for positive experiences and lessons, but also for negative ones. Only this approach will enrich practice. An important condition for the competent identification of historical experience and a lesson is that the subject has the necessary historical knowledge.

Important elements In the methodology of deducing historical experience and historical lessons, Soviet historiography recognized the study of taking into account and applying these conclusions. Attention has already been drawn to taking into account both the conditions for the emergence and formation of historical experience, and taking into account the conditions of its application.

For a specific topic, this means the impossibility of automatically accepting the experience of the past, without taking into account new conditions of development, even with some semblance of external indicators (for example, a drop in production, disruption of economic ties). Apparently, the lessons proposed for discussion cannot be realistically implemented in every system. After all, the historical environment has fundamentally changed, the social system, its resources and social interests have changed. But the difficulties of transformation (declining traffic volumes, the problem of preserving rolling stock, etc.) stimulate the search for analogies in the past. Analysis of the historical environment of the first half of the 1940s. shows that only that power can accept the noted successful social technology, which, in addition to talented managers, will also have support in those social strata that are ready to bear significant social costs for the sake of the future. And these layers must be formed at the cost of real and future social guarantees. But when making promises, management must be ready to fulfill them.

Thus, a significant theoretical basis for analyzing the categories of “historical experience” and “history lesson” has been accumulated in the baggage of historiography. The beginning of transformation processes, one of the features of which was the departure from the previous legacy, weakened attention to the dialectical negation of the Soviet legacy. But the difficult experience of recent decades forces us to return to the heritage of the past.

But the emphasis on the use of historical experience can also be a means of politicizing science: what to study in it, why, and what to ignore.

Typically, the use of this method is traditional for the introduction to the entire work, to its section. It encourages both the researcher and the reader to pay attention and explain those issues that acquire special significance at the moment the research results are made public.

Method of prospectivity (extrapolation) in scientific research. Translated from Latin, “perspective” means “to look through”, “to penetrate with one’s gaze.” In this context, a promising method of historical research is understood as a way of predicting, predicting the future or its features through knowledge of the developing process in the past, determining promising directions for further development, topics of problems arising from the level of research achieved at the previous stages of the work of scientists.

Typically, the method of perspective in historical science is based on comparison and the phenomenon of historical analogy of processes in the past and the present.

In historiography, the method of prospects is based on the lack of knowledge about some processes or phenomena, identified on the basis, again, of a comparative analysis of various historical studies.

The second way of forecasting is the insight of outstanding thinkers, for example, Nosterdamus. A. Tocqueville’s prediction of the French Revolution of 1848 and subsequent events in Europe, as well as F. Engels’s prediction of the First World War and its social consequences, is also called insight. However, the nature of this insight is not fully understood.

3. Therefore, in order to overcome such difficulties as much as possible, in historical science they not only use methods that arose in other sciences, but also widely use the so-called mixed methods, i.e. methods that arose by combining the methods of different sciences.

Among these methods are historical-comparative (or comparative-historical), comparative-legal or comparative-legal, comparative-philological, comparative-political, comparative-sociological, historical-typological, historical-systemic, method of periodization, etc. .

Let's look at some of them. Let us highlight those that are most closely related to the specifics of historical knowledge. This is a method of periodization of historical processes, comparative historical methods and historical legal method.

Method of periodization of historical processes (“period” from Greek “circumvention”, “circulation”) or diachronic (from Greek - “through”, “through” “time”) – this is a method that consists of dividing the time during which the process takes place into separate time periods, which can be called “period”, “stage”, “step”, etc.

Using this method, firstly, the chronological (time) framework of the phenomenon, the stages of its occurrence, development, and disappearance are established. In other words, a phenomenon or process acquires temporal certainty.

Secondly, changes in the qualitative features of historical processes and phenomena over time are identified, and the moments of these changes are tracked.

Thirdly, the main direction of development of processes, its trends, features of various stages, changes in the form of this development at each of them are revealed, moments of the emergence of new phenomena and the withering away of old ones are revealed.

The time periods into which the historical process is divided are designated through the following concepts: stage, period, socio-economic formation, historical era, civilization. When describing historical processes, more fractional units of time are also used: year, month, decade, day, hour, minute, second.

In this case, general and local periodization may not coincide. All edges are conditional and movable. Any periodization is conditional, since it cannot cover the entire diversity of historical phenomena and processes.

To effectively apply the periodization method to date, firstly, the identification and justification of the periodization criterion. This may include the degree of industrialization of an economic society, the form of ownership, the class composition of the main participants in the historical process, the degree of connection with the masses of the organizers of the historical process, the mass character of the movement, the originality of strategic and tactical tasks, their changes, changes in the forms, methods and content of economic, social, political action, action in the field of spiritual culture, etc.

Secondly, the rules for using the periodization method include the fact that the developed criterion must reflect the main content, the essential side of the analyzed process.

Thirdly, only one criterion should be used in one periodization operation. Substitution of the criterion is not allowed.

Fourthly, any periodization is conditional and flexible. It cannot reflect all the diversity of historical phenomena.

Historical-comparative or comparative historical method of scientific research. Being a continuation and development of the comparative method of scientific research, this method allows, firstly, through identifying repetition in the historical process to restore its unity within one or several eras.

Secondly, to predict the prospects for the development of the modern process for the researcher.

Thirdly, to highlight the universal, general and individual in historical phenomena.

Fourthly, compare the information contained in various historical sources, scientific, journalistic, artistic, religious studies, thereby achieving the complementarity of some works with others, identifying reliable information, and in historiographic studies - tracking the process of accumulation of knowledge. Experience shows that to apply this method, certain conditions must be taken into account.

First. The application of this method must be accompanied by the accumulation of sufficient historical material, and the researcher must have a sufficient outlook covering various fields of knowledge.

Second. This is a search for analogies (from the Greek “similarity”) and the establishment of external similarities. This occurs in the absence of accurate and indisputable facts about the phenomena and processes being studied. Is born scientific hypothesis, which has yet to be refuted or proven.

Third. Justification of the legitimacy of comparison of historical phenomena. The first stage of this justification is to clarify the commonality of the causes that gave rise to the compared phenomena and processes. The second is to establish the internal similarity of these phenomena and processes. If one of the objects being compared is one that is contemporary to the author, then the possibility of a third stage of comparison arises: on the basis of general trends in the development of present and past facts, it becomes possible to predict development and make recommendations.

There are two main options for using the historical-comparative method. The first option includes a “vertical” comparison, that is, a comparison of different states of development of the same phenomenon or process. This reveals their evolution, the degree of acceptability and innovation in the process of change.

The second option includes a “horizontal” comparison, that is, identifying the degree of commonality of various historical events occurring in the same time dimensions, in different geographical spaces, in different social environments. This achieves the identification of the degree of unity of the historical process and enhances the predictive aspect of historical knowledge.

But this second option for using the historical-comparative method in modern Russian historiography does not always receive due attention. Usually it concerns a comparison of the Tilsit (1807) and Brest-Litovsk (1918) peace, the revolutionary events of 1905 - 1907 and 1917, the general and special in social processes in the states of the pro-Soviet eastern bloc of 1917 - 1960s, the search for ways other so-called “non-capitalist path of development” of the countries of the former periphery in comparison with the development option of some peoples within the framework former USSR, features of restoration processes in the Soviet economy in the first half of the 1920s. after civil war 1918 – 1920 and in the second half of the 1940s. after the Great Patriotic War 1941 – 1945

In modern conditions of a radical change in the social structure, original lines of historical comparison can acquire a special relevance. Among them there may be such lines. Historical and comparative analysis of all modernizations of the social structure of Russia in the 18th – 20th centuries. History of post-Petrine Russia (1725 – 1860). A new understanding of the counter-reforms of the reign period Alexandra III and the so-called period Brezhnev's "stagnation". Revealing general stages more or less developed revolutionary process in different countries, in different historical eras. Comparison of historical processes in individual regions of the country. Development of regional policies of individual historical figures belonging to the same or different historical eras.

This work is only a beginning; deepening it will significantly expand the cognitive and methodological capabilities of historical science.

The study of each phenomenon in isolation from others is fraught with exaggeration or understatement of its significance, loss of the ability to correctly determine its role and place among other phenomena. And this leads to subjectivism, distortion of the historical process and its understanding.

The development of the use of the historical-comparative method is facilitated by the synchronous (from Greek - “together” and “time”) method of scientific research. Its main content is to identify what events took place at the same time in different areas (spheres) of public life, in different geographical locations (regions of the world, a group of countries, individual states or smaller administrative units), with different subjects of the historical process.

It is believed that this method or the method of historical parallels was first received by representatives of the Enlightenment S. L. Montesquieu (1689 - 1755), F. M. A. Voltaire (1694 - 1778), D. Diderot (1713 - 1784), C. A. Helvetia (1715 – 1771).

In subsequent times, it was mainly used in understanding the processes of world history.

This method is based on the recognition of the unity of the historical process, the presence of deep internal connections between the main phenomena and processes. In addition, many researchers have an urgent need to embrace the historical process in all its complexity, versatility and integrity, to place emphasis not on identifying the causes, but on the connection between the co-occurrence of the phenomena and processes under consideration. Therefore, the synchronous method is used to overcome the external dismemberment of the historical process, to compare single-order phenomena occurring at the same time in different geographical spaces (continents, bodies of water, space, countries, regions of individual countries, etc.). The synchronous method can also be used in the analysis of historical objects operating in the same geographical space, but in different areas (spheres), as well as among different subjects of the historical process.

Dimensions of history may vary. For example, along the lines of the internal or external life of a particular person, social group, social (in the broad sense of the word) institution, country, continent, etc.

Another dimension may be proposed: a comparison of processes in the field of economics, social, political or spiritual life, or their sub-spheres.

Thus, in the economic sphere, one can highlight the development of each industry, material and technical base, and industrial relations. And the latter relations, in turn, are divided into a production and economic block, including relations of ownership, exchange, distribution and consumption, and production and organizational relations between management levels and subjects of production life.

Similarly in social sphere social and subject relations differ (class, according to the level of general and vocational education, by territory of residence and place of residence, by marital status, by age, by gender, by type of activity, etc.) and social and organizational relations. The latter include internal and interpersonal relationships, intersocial (professional, ethnic, etc.) relations.

In political relations, one can also distinguish between political-subject and political-organizational relations. The first group of relations includes relations regarding power in the community, regarding “supra-sphere” regulation of economic, social, political and cultural-spiritual processes. The main thing in these relationships is the acquisition and regulation of power resources.

Political-organizational relations cover relations along the lines of the political leader - the masses, between members of one and different political institutions and participants in political processes, between themselves political institutions etc.

Similar components are distinguished in the sphere of spiritual culture.

By comparing processes in different areas and mutually explaining them, the researcher clearly shows the relationship between different areas of life in society, a social group and a specific person.

The synchronous method is implemented through a comparison of graphs in synchronological tables, in which horizontal rows, for example, indicate time periods from an epoch to a second. Smaller divisions of time are usually not used in historical science. The time period is selected depending on the intensity of the historical process being studied.

Vertical lines usually reflect territorial or spheral (subsphere) frames.

But, like other methods of scientific research, the synchronous method or the method of historical parallels, as well as the comparative historical method in general, has its limited capabilities. These methods do not involve studying the dynamics of the process. In addition, the study within the framework of these methods is limited to a certain historical period of time.

And a few more words about one of the methods of such a group, which is quite often used when conducting historical research. We'll talk about historical-normative method . The main thing in it is the degree of compliance of the actions of a particular historical subject with the official or unofficial norms of community life that are in force during the period under study. In this process, the correspondence between the expected standard of action and the original specific decision regarding it is clarified. This shows the activity of the subject of history, his originality and relevance.

4. The advantages of the group of historical methods are

relative cheapness,

naturalness of procedures,

wide availability.

The costs (limitations) of historical methods lie in a certain degree of deceptiveness: using them, you can easily fall under factualization and thereby not develop a logical analysis of the issue, not make deep theoretical conclusions, and remain in the “zone of superficial analysis.”

Assignments: Select a set of logical methods to apply in your thesis. Present an overview of methods in accordance with the following plan: what method, for what and how. Show the independence and relative value of the chosen methods.

In addition to methodological principles in historical knowledge, specific methods of historical research. This section is also more likely for Researchers than for Students.

The most favorite among Students (which they don’t even suspect) is chronological a method, the essence of which is that events are studied and presented strictly in chronological order. Give them the opportunity - the WRC will turn into a simple listing of events. It’s good that managers are trying to prevent this from happening. However, this method is effective when used in writing biographies and chronicling events.

Typically used in WRC problem-chronological a method expressed in the study of any part of an object/subject in its sequential development. Let’s take for example the research topic already mentioned above – “The Role Russian fleet in the Northern War." The first problem is the war itself. We will consider it in a separate chapter from beginning to end. The second problem is the fleet. Let's highlight the internal structural elements(construction, organization, personnel training, tactics, etc.) and we will consider each of them again in chronological development. As a rule, this is how chapters and paragraphs of the WRC are formed.

When reviewing the thesis, I very rarely came across studies in which it was used (not to mention indicated) chronological-problematic a method that involves research by periods or eras, and within them by problems. Usually, fundamental generalizing works and lecture courses are built on this principle.

It is used even less often in VKR synchronous a method that allows you to establish connections and relationships between phenomena and processes occurring at the same time in different countries or different regions of the country.

Among other methods used in historical research, you can also note:

Historical-systemic(as an option - with system-structural) method. It involves the construction of a generalized model that reflects the relationships of the process being studied. Consideration of objects as systems consisting of many interacting elements requires revealing the integrity of the object, studying the structure of the elements, identifying the diverse types of their internal and external relations, identifying system-forming elements and combining them into a single system.

Historical periodization. It is based on the fact that any historical phenomenon goes through various stages of development, separated from each other by qualitative boundaries. The main thing is to establish clear criteria and apply them consistently in the study.

Statistical(or, at different authors, quantitative, mathematical). Used in the study of quantitative aspects of the historical process. It is a quantitative analysis of many homogeneous facts, when each of them individually does not have much significance, but together they determine the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones. Working with numerical indicators allows us to identify the extent, prevalence, pace of development and other aspects of the process.

Comparative-historical(or historical-comparative, or comparative, depending on the tastes of the writing methodologists) method. It consists in a comparative study of comparable aspects of the object being studied and similar objects located in other spatial (territorial), temporal (chronological) or social (national, religious, etc.) frameworks. At the same time, they are revealed common features, differences and developmental features. As a result, the reasons for these features can be identified.

Historical-typological method. Involves the classification of various historical events based on their common essential features. In essence, it is a variant of the comparative historical method.

Method sociological research. Used in the study of modernity. One of my graduate students used it when working on the topic “The Monarchical Idea in modern Russia”, when it came to the attitude of young people towards monarchism. The result was interesting and the interpretation was convincing. This method is effective when studying mainly recent political history. Among the techniques of this method are questionnaires, surveys, interviews, etc.

It is impossible not to mention a number speculative methods, which, with a sufficient amount of factual material and sufficient professionalism of the researcher, can be quite effective and justified.

Method analogies. In fact, it is a particular manifestation of the same comparative historical method. Allows one to draw conclusions about the similarity of several phenomena in some specific respects based on their similarity in other respects and to identify the unknown in one object based on the known in another. This method is based on the recognition of the known repeatability of historical events in world history. The analogy is used in cases where information about the phenomena being studied is inaccurate or fragmentary.

Method retrospections. It is based on the fact that the past and present of the research object are closely related. This makes it possible to recreate a picture of the past even in the absence of all sources relating to the time being studied. Using this method, when studying the past, one can go from phenomena and facts that are well known from surviving sources to those that preceded them, but remained unknown due to the scarcity of ancient monuments.

Method extrapolations. Provides for the dissemination of conclusions obtained during the study of the completed stage of development of the object to the present or upcoming stages. This contributes to understanding current events and forecasting the historical process.

When using this method for futurological conclusions, serious errors are possible. Thus, K. Marx’s conclusion about the inevitability of the death of small peasant farms in competition with capitalist latifundia was completely justified for the 19th century, when such latifundia were, in fact, agricultural manufactories that always won in competition with small commodity producers. This conclusion of Marx gave rise to the confidence of Soviet leaders in the preference of large farms and justified the desire for gigantomania - the creation of state and collective farms - giants. But mechanization and electrification Agriculture led to the fact that the farmer began to manage thousands of horsepower, which may well represent an analogy of at least hundreds of working hands, and turned into a kind of “latifundist” who “exploits” them. At the same time, the overhead costs of a small entrepreneur are always lower than those of a large one. Therefore, individual farming not only survived, but also remained the main supplier of food in the world. But the collective farm-state farm system was never able to solve the food problem in the USSR. There are many more examples of such erroneous extrapolations. One conclusion about the construction of the material and technical base of communism in the USSR by the early 1980s, based on extrapolation of the rate of development of the Soviet economy at the end of the 1950s twenty years in advance, is worth it.

So historians need to use the extrapolation method with great caution. Let political scientists, sociologists and others like them use it.

Method scientific abstraction. With its help, the historian, as it were, completes in his mind some events that are poorly covered in the sources that have reached us. It represents a certain hypothesis, which can subsequently be accepted or refuted by facts or an even more convincing hypothesis. The entire “alternative” history is built on this method.

An example of the application of this method is given in the domestic scientific literature - the interpretation of V.B. Kobrin briefly reported from the Ipatiev Chronicle about the reception in April 1147 in Moscow by Prince Yuri Vladimirovich (Dolgoruky) of his ally, the Chernigov-Seversk prince Svyatoslav Olgovich. A “strong dinner” was held in honor of the guest. Since mid-April is still a fairly cold time of year, we can assume that dinner took place not in collapsible fabric tents, but in wooden chambers, spacious enough to accommodate the owners, guests and their squads. It can also be assumed that food supplies were sufficient for the event. From this we can conclude that Moscow in the year of its first chronicle mention was already a fairly large settlement for its time, with an established princely economy, where there was the necessary amount of livestock, there were storerooms with supplies, etc.

TO non-traditional special historical methods include:

socio-psychological methods;

linguistic methods;

methods semiotics;

method art historical analysis.

I won’t reveal their contents due to lack of time, and because it’s unnecessary, if anyone feels like it, look around on the Internet.

Sections with methodology And methods, if they do exist, they usually occupy from one (with a simple listing of principles and methods) to several (with their disclosure) paragraphs ranging from a quarter to half a sheet (for the WRC). Sections are placed after the characteristics of the sources.

UDK 930.24 BBK 63.211

Methodology of historical and chronological research (based on materials from the Novgorod chronicles)

N.P. Ivanova1, S.V. Tsyb12

1 Altai State University(Barnaul, Russia)

2 Altai branch Russian Academy national economy and civil service under the President of the Russian Federation (Barnaul, Russia)

Methodology of Historical and Chronological Study (Based on the Novgorod Chronicles)

N.P. Ivanova1, S.V. Tsyb1-2

1 Altai State University (Barnaul, Russia)

2 Altai Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (Barnaul, Russia)

The development of methodological principles and a special set of research methods is an important factor in the formation of a branch of scientific knowledge, including such as historical chronology. The article is devoted to the identification and analysis of basic and special methods of historical and chronological research used by the authors in the study of chronicles (based on materials from the Novgorod chronicles). The dates recorded in the Novgorod chronicles may be the basis for the reconstruction of time-calculation systems used in Veliky Novgorod. It is concluded that the use of historical and chronological methods makes it possible to obtain fairly complete knowledge about time-cleaning systems Ancient Rus' and the rules for their application, will help historians in resolving the issue of the reliability of chronological information from sources, and to some extent, the reliability of the sources themselves. In addition, it will contribute to more accurate dating of historical events, and in some cases, attribution of the source text or the establishment of the compiler’s preferences in using a certain time system. This technique allows us to identify the hitherto little-explored potential of the Novgorod chronicles as historical sources for the reconstruction of time systems of the past.

Keywords methodology, methods, chronology, Novgorod chronicle, analysis, Ancient Rus'.

BOT 10.14258/1gua8i(2015)4.1-18

The development of methodological principles and specific set of research methods is an important factor in the development of such a scientific knowledge branch as historical chronology. The article is devoted to identifying and analyzing the basic and special methods of historical and chronological studies used by the authors in the study of chronicles (on the materials of the Novgorod chronicles). The dates fixed in the Novgorod chronicles may be the basis for the reconstruction of time counting systems used in Veliky Novgorod. It is concluded that the use of historical and chronological methodology makes it possible to obtain sufficiently complete knowledge of ancient Russia time counting systems and rules of their application; it will help historians solve the question of the reliability of chronological information of the sources, and to some extent the reliability of the sources. Furthermore, it will facilitate more precise dating of historical events and in some cases the attribution of the source text or identifying preferences of the compiler in the use of a certain time counting system. This methodology allows revealing hitherto little explored potential of the Novgorod chronicles as historical sources for the reconstruction of time counting systems of the past.

Key words: methodology, methods, chronology, Novgorod chronicles, analysis, Ancient Russia, the subject of messages.

Reconstruction of ancient time recording systems, reconstruction of the specific history of their appearance and development are the main tasks of historical

chronology. Chronology is considered one of the most complex special historical disciplines, so there are not many researchers ready to

It is impossible for them to engage in such painstaking and difficult work, as was pointed out in the last century by the Russian historian of the Orthodox Church, corresponding member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences V.V. Bolotov. Like any branch of scientific knowledge, chronology requires not only the introduction of a special categorical apparatus, conceptual, theoretical schemes and models, but also the creation of its own methodological principles and a special set of scientific research methods. Within a particular branch of science, there are usually identified basic methods for this science and special methods with the help of which its individual, particular problems are solved. Thus, the development of methodological principles and a special set of research methods is an important factor in the formation of a branch of scientific knowledge, including such as historical chronology.

Our article is devoted to the identification and analysis of basic and special methods of historical and chronological research used by the authors in the study of chronicles and, in particular, the chronology of the Novgorod chronicles (Novgorod First Chronicle, Novgorod Fourth Chronicle and Sofia First Chronicle).

The first attempt to “catalog” historical and chronological methods two centuries ago was made by H.L. Ideler. A century and a half after this, another work on the methods of chronology was published. However, the authors of these publications did not go beyond discussions about the difference in research methods of mathematical and historical varieties of chronological knowledge. Another experience based on the modern understanding of the tasks of historical and chronological science can be called more meaningful.

The development of research techniques for any science depends on an understanding of its particular and strategic objectives. The target orientation of scientific research naturally forms the idea of ​​directions research activities and specific forms of advancement of a scientist along these paths. Thus, to describe the methodology of historical and chronological research, first of all, one should form an unambiguous idea of ​​the main goal of chronology as a special historical discipline. Without a deep and thorough reconstruction of the ancient time systems reflected in the sources, no reduction of ancient dates can create a true chronological picture of the past. To find all the elements of the ancient rules of time accounting preserved in the sources, to establish systemic connections between them, to restore the history of the origin, use and modification of these systems - the main objective and the basic concept adhered to by the authors of this

significant research in developing a methodology for historical and chronological research.

Another factor that determines the set of methodological actions is the specificity of the research source base. We have focused our attention on chronicles as the most saturated sources with chronological elements, although this does not mean that we do not take into account possible dating options and original time recording systems recorded in other types of sources (hagiographical, legislative, etc.). The choice of the Novgorod chronicle is not accidental, since the chronicle monuments of this tradition contain the most diverse variations of chronological elements, in addition, they represent a relatively integral and consistent work of their compilers over a fairly long time interval (XI - mid-XV centuries).

Any technique consists of a set of methods. Of course, research cannot be based only on specific methods, and it necessarily uses both general scientific methods and general historical ones. Reconstruction of ancient Russian time-calculation systems is impossible without the use of traditional and new source study methods (comparative textual analysis, database technology, etc.). However, in the article we will consider only the basic methods of historical and chronological research of handwritten texts, allowing for a critical study of those ancient dating records that represent the primary information for reconstruction, grouping them depending on the approach chosen by the researcher. It should be noted that these methods can be used at any stage of the study, depending on how the primary material presented in the source allows it to be done.

The sequence of methodological actions consists of the following main stages of research: 1) search for various chronological elements in source texts; 2) comparison of chronological evidence from different sources in order to identify discrepancies in dating; 3) reconstruction (if possible) of the original type of dating records; 4) restoration (if possible) of the ancient time recording systems themselves through the establishment of systemic connections. The technique is universal and can be used for any types of sources containing chronological information.

The most complete knowledge about these systems and the rules for their application will help historians in resolving the issue of the reliability of chronological information from sources and in assessing the reliability of the information from the sources themselves. In addition, it will help establish accurate dating

ki of historical events, and in some cases, if not attribution of the source text, then at least establishing the preferences of the compiler (s) in using a certain time system.

Dating records in chronicles can have different forms and be presented in the form: absolute (“In the year 6663”, “December month 25”), relative (“princes in the year 17”), contextual annual (“the same year”), monthly ( “month of September”), weekly (“on Saturday”), daily dates and church-chronological designations (“on the Holy Day of the Virgin Mary”, “on the 5th week of Great Days”), may represent borrowings from other calendar systems (“indicta on 14”, “formerly 14th calendar of August”). Chronological information from sources can be indirect, i.e. expressed not by specific dates, but by information about natural phenomena or human actions that have a certain connection to the seasons, months, days (“in the morning”, “at the same time in the Grichko land” Tsar, named Mikhail and his mother Irina"), etc.

There are several possible approaches to their study. Firstly, they can be studied as part of those complexes that are recorded on the pages of sources, but it is also possible to separate them from complex support in order to compare them with foreign elements. In addition, it often becomes necessary to compare heterogeneous chronological complexes as a whole.

The most effective in the group of complex methods is checking the calendar-mathematical coordination of different types of elements included in the dating records (complexes). For the first time in Russian chronology, this method was used by V.N. Tatishchev. The discovery of an impeccable order in the connection of such elements makes it possible to accurately establish their system affiliation and obtain so-called reference dates, which open up wide possibilities for further reconstruction of time-calculation systems, as well as carrying out the most accurate reduction. The establishment of violations in the coordination of elements is also not a negative result, since it can be assessed not only as a statement of errors of ancient authors, but also as the discovery of other methods of ancient time recording. To translate dates of ancient Russian history, this method began to be widely used back in early XIX V. Academician I.-F. Circle, and a century later N.V. Stepanov turned it into the most important way of conducting historical and chronological reconstructions. To be fair, it should be noted that the presence of discrepancies in dating is not always the result of the use of a different time system.

system, sometimes it becomes a different principle for compiling a chronicle (thematic, eschatological, retrospective), and, nevertheless, even in this case, remnants of original, sometimes archaic ways of counting time could be preserved in the chronicles.

A chronological complex can also be considered to be some section of the source text selected by the author himself, for example, a separate annual article in a chronicle or a plot of a work isolated from others. In this case, it is necessary not only to check the coordination of all elements of the complex with each other, but also to coordinate them with the main indication that determines the nature of the entire complex (in chronicle articles this is the year number).

One event can be dated by several elements; most often, combinations of two or three chronological elements are observed, but there are exceptions. The maximum number of different chronological elements (32) located in one annual article was noted by us in 6724 of the Sofia First Chronicle (SPL) in the story about the war of Prince Mstislav Mstislavich the Udal against Yaroslav and Yuri Vsevolodovich, which ended in the Battle of the Lipitsa River, but in it includes several events. The maximum number of chronological elements dating one event was identified in article 6644 of the Synodal list of the Novgorod First Chronicle (NPL-S), and describes the arrival in Novgorod of the Chernigov prince Svyatoslav Olgovich “on the month of July in 19, formerly on the 14th calendar of August, in week, for the gathering of Saint Euthymia, at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, and for the heavenly moon on the 19th day.”

The objects of inspection can be different kinds complexes. The most common combination of elements in the complex is the number of the year from the Creation of the world (CM), the Julian number and the day of the week. As an example, we can cite a message about the battle of the Lithuanian prince Vytautas and the Tatar troops at the Vorskla River, posted in the SPL under 6906: “m(e)s(ya)tsa August (ta) 12 d(e)n, Tuesday” . The contradiction of this dating with the testimony of the NPL (August 5) made it possible to prove its inserted nature, restore the original appearance of the dating record, find out the reasons for the appearance of other dating options and finally establish the dating of the battle (August 12, 1399).

Another option for combining chronological elements in a complex is the year number, month indication, day of the week. An example is the date of the defeat of the Vladimir-Suzdal troops of Andrei Yuryevich Bogolyubsky in the battle with the Novgorodians, dated in the NPL of 6677 “on the fourth day on Wednesday... m" Xiatsa Feurar 25 on the holy bishop

Tarasiya." The date indicated corresponds to 1170, in which February 25 fell on a Wednesday. In this case, it is quite possible to agree with N.G. Berezhkov about the use of the NPL of the March style of the Constantinople era in this article.

Another option for combining chronological elements is the year number, the Julian number and the day of the week of the Easter year from the schedule of the altar Gospels. We find this combination in the message of the NPL about the arrival in Novgorod and the beginning of the reign of Prince Roman Mstislavovich, the son of Mstislav Izyaslavich in 6676 “April month on the 14th, in the second week according to the greatest days, the indictment of the first.” We can without any doubt recognize this message as dated March year of the Constantinople era, because in 1168 Easter was March 31, i.e. April 14 was really the second Sunday after Easter, on St. Thomas's post-Easter week, and this year was the first indict.

It is also possible to have such a combination of chronological elements - the year number and church chronological elements (indicts, Circles of the Moon and the Sun), which can also help in restoring the time-calculating system. Let us immediately note that in the Novgorod chronicles we have never come across any mention of the Circles of the Moon or the Sun, as well as the vruceleta, etc. Of this variety, Novgorod chroniclers use only indicts for dating, 17 news recorded in 25 messages from different chronicles. One interesting pattern is observed in their use. Indicts were used twice in articles of chronicles within the Tale of Bygone Years (6360, 6479), then in the 12th century. - five cases of using indicts to date events (6623, 6644, 6645, 6676, 6686), then a break of more than a century and a half, and again active use of indicts, until 6929 (6845, 6853, 6880, 6883, 6904, 6907,6914, 6917, 6916, 6929). The presence of an indict may also contribute to the restoration of the time-calculating system, since indicts were calculated according to the September style of the Constantinople era.

Complexes of this kind can be considered ideal, exemplary, since they make it possible not only to accurately establish dating, but also to reconstruct the time calculation system. Unfortunately, such complexes are rarely found in source texts. Much more often, historical incidents are dated only by the Julian date or, less often, only by the day of the week, and most written ancient Russian messages do not contain any specific time references at all, except for annual ones. Sometimes we have the opportunity to supplement the understatement of written messages with knowledge about the calendar rules of the Christian church ritual.

sti. There is an opinion that the construction in church ranks was carried out according to certain rules. Thus, the ordination of a bishop, according to the Apostolic Rules, was carried out by several bishops (a council of bishops), with a particularly solemn liturgy performed, and this usually happened “on the Lord’s Day” (i.e., Sunday). “Of course, this was not always observed, because the concern of the pastors was to replace his see immediately after the death of the bishop.” Taking into account this circumstance, we can, for example, understand the origin of the “silent”, seemingly in the chronological sense of the NPL message: “In 6613. The appointments of the former bishop: Lazor, Mina, Amphilohiy.” Having supplemented this news with Julian dates from the South Russian chronicle (November 12, December 10 and August 27, respectively, for each name), we will find in this NPL chronicle article signs of the September calendar style, since events line up sequentially from November to August within one September year. If we take into account the Sunday timing of consecration ceremonies, we come to the undoubted conclusion that the Constantinople counting of years is used here, since all Julian dates fell on Sundays in 1105 (6613 - 1105 = 5508 years). With the same confidence, we can recognize the artificial appearance of this September complex in the Novgorod chronicle, since in its composition, following the events dated November 12 and December 10, 1105, the event with the date August 27, 1105 is placed with mechanical rudeness and completely inappropriately. Let us note that that the middle of the 19th century When studying Old Russian chronology, the method of determining the annual boundaries of complexes (chronicle articles) began to be widely used, which is demonstrated in the above example. One of his first consistent supporters were N.S. Artsybashev and I.D. Belyaev.

The beginning of construction and consecration of church temples also had a certain calendar timing, which to some extent makes it possible to compensate for the lack of chronological information. Analysis of chronicle information allowed P.A. Rappaport establishes that in the 11th - early 13th centuries. the consecration of new church buildings most often took place on the day of remembrance of the saint (on the day of commemoration of that event) whose name (name) was assigned to the building, for example: “In l£ /8x]^...Togb. l£ sschna b1 tsrkb1 gathering of the Staga Btsach.. and sschna b1 on the eve of Btsi Ouspenga ". A study of the orientation of ancient Russian churches by parts of the world allowed the same researcher to come to the conclusion that “the foundation of churches in Rus' was considered possible only in the spring or summer, and, in any case, not in the end

construction season and not in winter,” it often took place on memorable days, church holidays, days of remembrance of revered saints, etc. So, for example, it is clear that the chronologically “faceless” news of the NPL about the foundation of the Church of St. Nicholas (on Lipna), described in 6621 without a calendar date, can be associated with the specific day of memory of St. Nicholas, Archbishop of Myra in Lycia (December 6, 9 May), and since the first date refers to the “non-construction” season, therefore the founding day of the St. Nicholas Church can confidently be considered May 9. This idea is confirmed by other circumstances related to the construction of this church.

Another version of the complex can be considered a fragment of text highlighted by the author of the source or the researcher himself. This can be one year-long article or several year-long articles, which, according to the researcher, may belong to one author or chronicle center. Independent works inserted by chroniclers inside the text of the chronicle can act as an independent complex, for example, “The Tale of the Murder of Borisov”, “The Tale of the Capture of Constantinople”, “The Tale of the Battle of Kalka”, “The Tale of the Life of Alexander Nevsky”, etc. Such complexes also require checking the consistency within the text, and, importantly, it is necessary to coordinate them with the main indicator of the complex - the annual article. Most often, only a small number of news from the complex are accompanied by chronological elements suitable for verification; in this case, indirect or contextual data can be included.

The order of listing Julian dates and seasons within one chronicle article, as well as the direct indications of the chroniclers themselves at the beginning or end of the years, make it possible to determine the calendar style of the dating records, carry out contextual dating of news intermediate between the Julian dates, and also identify foreign chronological elements that violate the structure and boundary frames of complexes.

As an example of a relatively agreed-upon complex, article 6644 of the NPL can be cited. All chronological elements of the article fit within the framework of the March year of the Constantinople

era: “Indikta lta Ts14___month Maya v 28. sbde

2nd month... of July on the 15th month of July on the 19th, the previous 14th month of August, in the week for the gathering of Saint Euthymia, at 3 o'clock in the afternoon, and to the heavenly moon on the 19th day... I instruct the indictment of the 15th month of September... on December 5th." In this article, firstly, within one year there was a change in indicts (from 14 to 15), secondly, there is no gap in years between July and September (they are included in one year), and, finally, thirdly, all chronological elements of the large complex

inside the annual article (“Month of July on the 19th_ and the heavenly moon on the 19th day”), relating to the plot of Svyatoslav Olgovich’s coming to reign in Novgorod, with the exception of one (Yuletide designation - “to the gathering of St. Euthymia”) are consistent with each other and refer to 1136 G. .

However, this method also makes it possible to identify violations of the chronological sequence within the complex (for example, one annual article). Thus, in article 6704 of the same NPL there is a clear violation of chronology (April, July 8, January 19, September 13, indication of the end of the year - “Outgoing flight”, St. George’s Day - November 26, all winter, the same winter). Obviously, these events cannot fit into the framework of one year (neither March nor September). This article has already been analyzed in some detail, and one can agree with the author that a different principle of composing the article is applied here - thematic. Most likely, the compiler of the chronicle “sought to compactly present the events related to one plot, without interrupting them with insertions from other plots.”

The method of analyzing the visual features of chronological artifacts (analysis of the form of the dating record) allows us to identify differently designed chronological elements within the complex. B.A. Rybakov was the first to notice him. This method allows one to observe changes in the wording of dating records. Their similarities and differences may be signs of a common or different system affiliation. Thus, a detailed chronological dating of the type “m(e)s(ya)tsa maiya v 4 d(e)n”, in a certain period of time, can be replaced by a laconic one - “Maiya 4”. This requires additional attention from the researcher. Sometimes this may be due to an attempt by the compiler to shorten the text to fit into a particular notebook, but it may also be a sign of the existence of a certain layer in the chronicle. This method is best used when a system has already been determined for most of the dating elements of the complex, but there are cases that do not fit into the general scheme.

Another equally effective method is the method of meaningful analysis of news of the chronological complex. As an example, we can cite a fragment of the NPL for 6597-6599. - chronological errors are clearly observed in this time interval. Obvious contradictions can be noted, for example, in article 6597 it is said about the death of Princess Yanka (Anna) Vsevolodovna, in the next 6598 Yanka returned from Byzantium with the future Metropolitan John the Skopts, and in 6599 the new Metropolitan died. Analysis of the content of a source often helps to identify violations of the natural chronology of events.

The entire written source (for example, one chronicle) can act as a chronological complex; then a comprehensive study will consist of “stratifying” the text of the monument into parts, each of which has its own boundaries and a special set of chronological elements. In combination with the results already obtained by linguists on the stratification of chronicle monuments, this can provide an additional argument in the attribution of a written source. This method (method of identifying chronological layers) makes it possible to take into account not only the originality of dating elements, but also their distribution throughout the source text.

The second group of methods that can be used in the study of chronological elements includes comparative methods traditionally used in source studies, i.e. the main goal of these methods is to compare the chronological evidence of one source with another. Moreover, both different types of sources (chronicles, Byzantine or Western European sources or chronicles and lives, monthly books, etc.) and similar ones (chronicles of the same or different chronicle traditions) can be compared; it is important that these sources contain comparable information. These methods began to be actively introduced in historical science in connection with the formation and development of “critical chronology” at the beginning of the 19th century. . Comparative methods allow not only to identify similarities or differences in chronological data from different sources, but also to assess the degree of reliability of certain texts using complex methods, in some cases they help restore the original appearance of the dating record and, finally, reconstruct the ancient time-keeping system of one or another source.

Among this group of methods, the most effective, in our opinion, are the method of analyzing non-synchronous dating and the astrometric method. The essence of the first method comes down to the search and analysis of conflicting chronological evidence dating the same historical events. Differences in dating can be observed even in chronicles belonging to the same chronicle tradition. Thus, the construction of the Church of the Annunciation in Novgorod on the Rurik settlement is dated differently in the chronicles. The church was erected by Prince Mstislav the Great, son of Vladimir Monomakh, in 1103. SPL dates the construction

6607, and the NPL and NPL attribute it to 6611. This difference confirms the idea that elements of the Byzantine-Bulgarian counting of years were preserved in the Novgorod-Sophia group of chronicles (in particular, in the SPL) (the era of the era falls on September 1, 5505 BC).

Once again we find confirmation of the presence of this archaic chronology in the Novgorod-Sofia group of chronicles using the astrometric method. A method known since the time of V.N. Tatishcheva, on scientific basis was staged in the middle of the last century by M.P. Pogodin and D.M. Perevoshchikov. At the beginning of the last century, D.O. Svyatsky, using astronomical and mathematical calculations, identified the dates of most astronomical and natural phenomena of the past, comparing them with the testimony of chronicles. This method allows you to establish the most accurate dates for the signs described in the chronicles (solar and lunar eclipses, etc.). Thus, NHL and SPL under 6596 describe the sign of the Sun. BEFORE. Svyatsky established that a solar eclipse occurred on May 21, 1091. With a high degree of probability, it can be argued that the chronicler used the Byzantine-Bulgarian chronology to date this eclipse.

Of course, none of the presented methods can insure the researcher from mistakes, but the combination of historical and chronological methods with textual, linguistic, hermeneutical and others will help achieve the truth.

Thus, the use of historical-chronological methods makes it possible to obtain fairly complete knowledge about the time-calculation systems of Ancient Rus' and the rules of their application, and will help historians in resolving the issue of the reliability of chronological information from sources, and to some extent, the reliability of the sources themselves. In addition, it will contribute to more accurate dating of historical events, and in some cases, attribution of the source text or establishment of the compiler’s preferences in using a certain time-numeral system. This technique allows us to identify the hitherto little-explored potential of the Novgorod chronicles as historical sources for the reconstruction of time-keeping systems of the past.

Bibliography

1. Bolotov V.V. Collection of church-historical Trukov's history / prev. A.V. Khrapova, approx. A.I. Brilliant. T. 2: Lectures on the history of the ancient church. Introduction to Tserantova, A.I. Sidorova. - M., 2000.

2. Novgorod first chronicle of the older and younger editions // Complete collection of Russian chronicles. - M., 2000. - T. III.

3. Novgorod fourth chronicle // Complete collection of Russian chronicles. - M., 2000. - T. IV. Part 1.

4. Sofia’s first chronicle, senior edition // Complete collection of Russian chronicles. - M., 2000. - T. VI. Vol. 1.

5. Ideler L. Handbuch der mathematischen und techni-chen Chronologie: Aus den Quellen bearbeitet. - B., 1826. - Bd. 1.

6. Zaremba S.Z. Before nutrition about theory and methods of chronological research // Ukrainian Journal of Literature. - 1974. - Issue. 2 (155).

7. Tsyb S.V. Methodology of historical and chronological research (using the example of Old Russian chronology) // Source, method, computer. - Barnaul, 1996.

8. Ivanova N.P., Tsyb S.V. Historical chronology: course of lectures. - Barnaul, 2008.

9. Tatishchev V.N. Russian history. - M.; L., 1962. -

10. Krug Ph. Kritischer Versuch zur Aufklärung der byzan-tichen Chronologie, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die früher Geschichte Russlands. - St. Petersburg, 1810.

11. Stepanov N.V. Calendar-chronological factors of the Ipatiev Chronicle until the 13th century // News of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. - 1908. - T. XX. - Book 2.

12. Dobrovolsky D.A. When did Vseslav go to Novgorod? (experience in interpreting the chronicle article 6575) // Auxiliary historical disciplines in the space of humanities: materials of the XXI International Scientific Conference. January 29-31, 2009 - M., 2009.

13. Danilevsky I.N. The idea and title of the Tale of Bygone Years // National history. - 1995. - № 5.

14. Gimon T.V. Novgorod chronicle of the 11th - mid-14th centuries. as a sociocultural phenomenon: dis. ... Dr. Ist. Sci. - M., 2014 [Electronic resource]. - URL: http:// www.igh.ru/upload/information_system_8/6/3/4/item_634/gimon-dissertazia.pdf (Access date: 02/05/2015)

15. Ivanova N.P. Statistical analysis frequency of use of chronological elements identified in the Sofia First Chronicle (senior edition) // Izvestia Alt. state un-ta. - 2013. - No. 4/2 (80). D0I:10.14258/ izvasu(2013)4.2-42.

16. Ivanova N.P. Analysis of monthly dating of historical events (based on materials from the First Novgorod Chronicle) // Palaeoslavica. - 2009. - Vol. XVII. - No. 2.

17. Berezhkov N.G. Chronology of Russian chronicles. - M., 1963.

18. Neselovsky A. Ranks of consecrations and consecrations. - Kamenets-Podolsk, 1906. [Electronic resource]. - URL: http://krotov.info/spravki/essays_vera/18_r_vera/rukopol.html (access date: 02/05/2015)

19. Complete collection of Russian chronicles. - M., 1962. -

20. Complete collection of Russian chronicles. - M., 1965. - T. 9.

21. Artsybashev N.S. A story about Russia. - M., 1838. - T. I. - Book. 2.

22. Belyaev I.D. Chronology of Nestor and his successors // Readings in the Imperial Moscow Society of History and Russian Antiquities. - 1846. - No. 2.

23. Rappoport P.A. Orientation of Old Russian churches // Brief messages Institute of Archeology. Vol. 139: Slavic-Russian archeology. - M., 1974.

24. Ivanova N.P. On the reasons for the emergence and rooting of the cult of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker in Ancient Rus' // First historical readings of the Tomsk State University. ped. University: materials of the International Conference - Tomsk,

25. Ivanova N.P. Months of the Synodal list of the First Novgorod Chronicle // Problems of source study / rep. ed. CM. Kashtanov. - Vol. 1 (12). - M.,

26. Ivanova N.P. Months of the First Novgorod Chronicle: monograph. - Barnaul, 2013.

28. Gimon T.V., Gippius A.A. New data on the history of the text of the First Novgorod Chronicle // Novgorod Historical Collection. - Vol. 7 (17). - St. Petersburg, 1999.

29. Ivanova N.P., Tsyb S.V. Historical chronology: tutorial. - 3rd ed. extension, add. - Barnaul, 2013.

30. Tsyb S.V. Chronology of pre-Mongol Rus'. Part 1: Kyiv period: monograph. - Barnaul, 2003.

31. Pogodin M.P. Research, remarks and lectures on Russian history. - M., 1850. - T. IV.

32. Svyatsky D.O. Astronomical phenomena in Russian chronicles from a scientific-critical point of view // Izvestia of the Russian Branch. language and words. Imperial Academician Sci. - 1915. - T. XX, Book. 1-2.

33. Svyatsky D.O. Astronomy of Ancient Rus' / preface, comments, additions by M.L. Gorodetsky. - M., 2007.

34. Tsyb S.V. Old Russian time calculation in the Tale of Bygone Years. - 2nd ed., rev. -SPb., 2011.

Functions.

1. Cognitive function is to identify patterns historical development. It promotes the intellectual development of students and consists in the very study of the historical path of countries and peoples, in an objective reflection, from the position of historicism, of all the phenomena and processes that make up the history of mankind.

2. The educational function contributes to the formation of civic, moral qualities and values ​​using historical examples.

3. The prognostic function is the ability to foresee the future based on the analysis of historical events of the past and present.

4. The function of social memory is: that historical knowledge acts as a way of identification and orientation of society and the individual.

The method is a way of studying historical processes through their manifestations - historical facts, a way of obtaining new knowledge from facts. Specific methods include:

1) general scientific;

2) actually historical;

3) special - borrowed from other sciences.

Common methods for everyone humanities serve: - logical; - historical.

To study and research Russian history, the following methods are usually used:

1. CHRONOLOGICAL - consists of presenting phenomena in strictly chronological order. ok;

2. CHRONOLOGICALLY PROBLEM - consists of studying and researching history by periods (eras), within periods - by problems;

3. PROBLEM-CHRONOLOGICAL - explores one aspect of the life and activities of the state in its gradual development;

4. SYNCHRONIC - used less often; with its help it is possible to establish a connection between individual phenomena and processes occurring at the same time, but in different parts country or outside it.

Methodology of history

Method - translated from Greek means " the right way", that is, a method or plan for achieving a certain goal. In a narrow scientific sense, “method” is understood as a method and procedure for studying a subject in order to obtain a more complete result that corresponds to the truth. History as a science uses both general scientific methods and specific scientific methods appropriate to the subject of study.

1. The comparative method involves comparing historical objects in space and time and identifying similarities and differences between them.

2. The systematic method involves the construction of a generalized model that reflects the relationships of the real situation. Consideration of objects as systems focuses on revealing the integrity of the object, identifying the diverse types of connections in it and bringing them together into a single theoretical picture.

3. The typological method involves the classification of historical phenomena and events based on their common essential features.

4. The retrospective method involves consistent penetration into the past in order to identify the cause of an event or phenomenon.

5. The ideographic method consists of a consistent description of historical events and phenomena based on objective facts.

6. The problem-chronological method involves studying the sequence of historical events in time..

Methodology of history.

Methodology- teaching about research methods, coverage of historical facts, scientific knowledge. The methodology of history is based on scientific principles and approaches to the study of historical facts. The fundamental principles of studying historical facts include:

1. the principle of historicism, which involves the study of historical phenomena in development, in accordance with the specific historical situation;

2. the principle of objectivity, which provides for the researcher’s reliance on objective facts, consideration of the phenomenon in all its versatility and inconsistency;

3. the principle of the social approach involves considering phenomena and processes taking into account the social interests of various segments of the population, taking into account the subjective aspect in the practical activities of parties, governments, and individuals;

4. the principle of alternativeness determines the degree of probability of a particular event, phenomenon, process based on an objective analysis of the real situation.

Compliance with these principles ensures scientificity and reliability in the study of the past. In the modern methodology of history there is no unitary (single) platform; it is characterized by a variety of methodological approaches that have emerged as a result of the progressive development and formation theoretical foundations historical knowledge. The most significant and widespread are the following methodological approaches to the study of history: theological, subjectivism, geographical determinism, evolutionism, Marxism and civilizational approach.