ON THE QUESTION OF THE “BEGINNINGS” OF HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE RUSSIAN SCIENCE OF UNIVERSAL HISTORY

DOI: 10.47026/1810-1909-2022-2-15-20

УДК 930(01)

ББК 63

Farit N. AHMADIEV

Key words

historiography, universal history, university, concept, education, formation, dissertation

Abstract

The paper presents the results of the study on the importance of the historiographical component in the Russian science of universal history at the beginning of the second half of the XIX century. Special attention is paid to the study by Russian historians of the European science of universal history, which had a significant impact on the formation of the Russian science of universal history, starting with the university lecture courses by T.N. Granovsky and P.N. Kudryavtsev in the middle of the XIX – the beginning of the XX century. Special attention is paid to the first historiographical works by Mikhail Nazarovich Petrov (“The Latest National Historiography in Germany, England and France”) and Vladimir Ivanovich Guerrier (“Essay on the Development of Historical Science”), due to whom the European historiography of universal history turned into a research field. These two works, one of which was published in Kharkov in 1861, and the other – in 1865 in Moscow, laid the “beginnings” of historiography per se, i.e. historiography as an independent scientific discipline with its own research subject, methods, methodology, etc. In fact, there was rethinking of historiography as a historical phenomenon, and consequently, there was a need to find the “point” where knowledge about the history of science acquired its internal logic and thus turned from historiographical experience into systematized knowledge. The essence of this “point” (or moment) is that a system or organized knowledge (in other words, a concept) appeared in historiography, which turned knowledge about the history of science into a scientific discipline. The questions when and how this happened remain open. In any case, M.N. Petrov and V.I. Guerrier were the first Russian historians who sought to turn the “beginnings” of historiography into a scientific discipline. The question of the priority of the first Russian professional historiographer is still unresolved. V.E. Illeritsky expressed an opinion that it belongs to S.M. Solovyov, according to R.A. Kireeva – to M.O. Koyalovich.

References

1. Akhmadiyev F.N., Georgiyev P.V. Afinskaya demokratiya i evropeyskiye revolyutsii: politichekiye idei v russkoy istoriografii vseobshchey istorii vtoroy poloviny XIX – nachala XX vv. [Athenian democracy and European Revolutions: political ideas in Russian Historiography of World History in the second half of the 19^th and early 20^th centuries]. Kazan, YAz Publ., 2016, 108 p.
2. Akhmadiyev F.N. K nachalu istoriografii kak nauchnoy distsipliny [To the beginning of historiography as a scientific discipline]. Vestnik Chuvashskogo universiteta, 2013, no. 2, pp. 7–10.
3. Buzescul V.P. Istoriko-kriticheskiy etyud [Pericles. Historical-critical study]. Kharkov, 1889, 218 p.
4. Buzeskul V.P. Vvedeniye v istoriyu Gretsii [ntroduction to the History of Greece]. Kharkov, 1903,. 348 p.
5. Granovskiy T.N. Lektsii po istorii srednevekoviya [Lectures on the History of the Middle Ages]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1987, 428 p.
6. Ivanova T.N. Nauchnoye naslediye V.I. Ger’ye i formirovaniye nauki vseobshchey istorii v Rossii (30-ye gg. XIX – nachalo XX veka) [Scientific heritage of V.I. Guerrier and the formation of the science of World History in Russia (1830s – early 20^th century)]. Cheboksary, Chuvash University Publ., 2010, 382 p.
7. Kareyev N.I. Istoriki Frantsuzskoy revolyutsii. T. 2. Frantsuzskiye istoriki vtoroy poloviny XIX veka i nachala XX v. [Historians of the French Revolution. Vol. 2: French historians of the second half of the 19^th century and the beginning of the 20^th century]. Leningrad, 1924, pp. 69–111.
8. Kireyeva R.A. Izucheniye otechestvennoy istoriografii v Rossii s serediny XIX veka do 1917 g. [The study of Russian historiography in Russia from the middle of the 19^th century to 1917]. Moscow, 1983, 186 p.
9. Kudryavtsev P.N. Sochineniya. Izbrannoye [Lectures. Works. Selected]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1994, 343 p.
10. Koyalovich I.O. Istoriya russkogo samosoznaniya po istoricheskim pamyatnikam i nauchnym sochineniyam [The history of Russian self-consciousness according to historical monuments and scientific writings]. Petersburg, 1901, 218 p.
11. Modestov V.I. Tatsit i yego sochineniya. Istoriko-literaturnoye issledovaniye [Tacitus and his writings. Historical and literary research]. Petersburg, 1864, 206 p.
12. Modestov V.I. Vvedeniye v rimskuyu istoriyu: voprosy doistoricheskoy etnologii i kul’turnykh vliyaniy v dorimskuyu epokhu v Italii i nachalo Rima [An Introduction to Roman History: Issues in Prehistoric Ethnology and cultural influences in pre-Roman Italy and the beginnings of Rome]. Petersburg, 1902, part 1, 326 p.
13. Ot redaktsii [From the editors]. In: Vestnik Yevropy [Bulletin of Europe]. Petersburg, 1866, vol. 1, p. IV.
14. Stasyulevich M.M. Istoriya srednikh vekov v yeye pisatelyakh i issledovaniyakh noveyshikh uchenykh [History of the Middle Ages in its writers and research by the scholars]. St. Petersburg, 1863–1865, vol. 1, 231 p.

Information about the author

Farit N. Ahmadiev – Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology and World History, Institute of International Relations, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Russia, Kazan (ahmadiev101@mail.ru).

For citations

Ahmadiev F.N. ON THE QUESTION OF THE “BEGINNINGS” OF HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE RUSSIAN SCIENCE OF UNIVERSAL HISTORY. Vestnik Chuvashskogo universiteta, 2022, no. 2, pp. 15–20. DOI: 10.47026/1810-1909-2022-2-15-20 (in Russian).

Download the full article