M .: Krug, 2006 .-- 768 p. - ISBN 5-7396-0099-5. In this collective work, based on specific material from various historical eras (from Antiquity to the middle of the 17th century), key aspects of the historical culture of Western Europe and Russia / Russia, in countries and regions with very different historical experiences, are investigated, political and cultural traditions. The study of the history of ideas about the past, a comprehensive study of the phenomenon of historical culture (and historical tradition) is based on new approach, which is based on the synthesis of socio-cultural and intellectual history - an analysis of the phenomena of the intellectual sphere in the broad context of social experience, historical mentality and general processes of the spiritual life of society. For historians and culturologists, as well as a wide range of readers. Introduction
Historical culture as a subject of research (L.P. Repina)
Memory and history writing (L.P. Repina)
The culture of remembrance and the history of memory (Yu.A. Arnautova)
Antiquity
Paradoxes of Historical Memory in Ancient Greece (I.E.Surikov)
Roman annalism: the formation of the genre (O. V. Sidorovich)
The mythology of historical memory at the turn of Antiquity and the Middle Ages (P.P.Shkarenkov)
Western Europe. Middle Ages and Early Modern Times
Historical memory in the German oral tradition (E.A. Melnikova)
Images of the Past by Early Medieval Christian Historians (V.V. Zverev)
Representation of the Past by a Medieval Historian: Einhard and His Writings (M. S. Petrova)
The image of history and historical consciousness in Latin historiography of the X-XIII centuries (Yu.A. Arnautova)
Memoria Welfs: the home tradition of aristocratic families (O. G. Axle)
The idea of the authentic in the Medieval historical tradition (E. V. Kalmykova)
The Norman Conquest in English Historical Writing of the XIII-XIV Centuries (M. M. Gorelov)
"Historical" memory in women's visionary literature of the late Middle Ages (A.G. Supriyanovich)
Historical culture of Quattrocento (Yu.V. Ivanova, P.V. Leshchenko)
Continuity and innovations in the historical culture of the late Middle Ages and the beginning of the New Age (M.S.Bobkova)
History and English religious polemics of the 16th - early 17th centuries (A. Yu. Seregina)
Ancient Russia - Russia of the 17th century
Historical memory of pre-Mongol Rus: religious aspects (I.V. Vedyushkina)
The oldest period of Russian history in the historical memory of the Moscow kingdom (A.S. Usachev)
Moscow as a new Kiev, or Where did the Baptism of Rus take place: a view from the first half of the 17th century (T.A. Oparina)
History in the ambassadorial service: diplomacy and memory in Russia in the 16th century (K. Yu. Erusalimsky)
Conclusion
Historical culture of Europe before the beginning of modern times (L.P. Repina)
Memory, Images of the Past and Historical Culture in pre-Modern Europe (L. P. Repina)
The article was prepared within the framework of the project "Crises of critical epochs in the mythology of historical memory" under the program of the Department of Physical Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Historical experience of social transformations and conflicts".
L. P. REPINA
Repina L.P. Experience of social crises in historical memory // Crises of critical epochs in historical memory. 2012.S. 3-37.
The memorial turn in modern historical science led to a significant expansion of the subject field of the "new cultural history", which covered the problems of "places of memory" and "historical mythology". Having started his way in historical science in the 1980s, the study of social, cultural, historical memory, or rather - memory histories, firmly established itself as an independent and rapidly developing interdisciplinary direction of socio-humanitarian knowledge at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. In the 1990s. the number of studies focused on the study of collective representations of the past in different historical societies has already grown exponentially, covering a wide range of specific topics and plots. In close connection with the problems of historical memory, but less intensively at the first stage, the theoretical development of the problems of historical consciousness, its structure, forms and functions began in Western historiography. Progressing, albeit at a slower pace, is also the study of a more complex phenomenon of historical culture, which acts as an articulation of the historical consciousness of society and the totality of cultural practices of individuals and groups in relation to the past, including all cases of the "presence" of the past in Everyday life.
The problems of the formation and content of ideas about the past in different communities and cultures attract the attention of representatives of humanitarian scientific schools, and, despite the ongoing discussions around such concepts as historical memory, historical consciousness, images of the past, the scale of the corpus of research conducted with their use (we are talking about the so-called "history of the second level"), as well as the results obtained in them, are impressive, and the latter eloquently testify to the closest connection between the perception of individual historical events, integral images of the past, as well as the relationship to him in historical memory, with the socio-cultural context of the actual present.
The widely used concept of "historical memory" is interpreted in different ways by individual authors: as one of the dimensions of individual and collective / social memory; as a historical experience deposited in the memory of a human community (or, rather, its symbolic representation); as a way of preserving and transmitting the past in an era of loss of tradition; as part of the social stock of knowledge that already exists in primitive societies; as a collective memory of the past when it comes to a group, and as a social memory of the past when it comes to society; as an ideologized history, most of all associated with the emergence of the nation-state; as a whole - as a set of pre-scientific, scientific, quasi-scientific and extra-scientific knowledge and mass perceptions of society about the common past; finally, simply as a synonym for historical consciousness.
In recent decades, "historical memory" has come to be viewed, on the one hand, as one of the main channels for the transfer of experience and information about the past, and on the other, as the most important component of an individual's self-identification and a factor that ensures the identification of political, ethnic, national, confessional and social groups. , a sense of community that is forming in them, for the revival of shared images of the historical past is a type of memory that is of particular importance for the constitution and integration of social groups in the present. The images of events fixed by the collective memory in the form of various cultural stereotypes, symbols, myths act as interpretive models that allow an individual and a social group to orientate themselves in the world and in specific situations: “Everything historical shows a person different possibilities. What was once valid, now, as what he knows, is for him a variety of paths, orders, basic approaches. "
Historical memory is not only socially differentiated, it is subject to change. The history of various cultural and historical communities knows many examples of "actualizing the past", referring to past experience in order to rethink it. Interest in the past is part of social consciousness, and major events and changes in social conditions, the accumulation and comprehension of new experience give rise to a change in this consciousness and a reassessment of the past. In the network of interactive communications, there is a constant selection of events, as a result of which some of them are forgotten, while others are preserved, re-interpreted, overgrown with new meanings and turned into symbols of group identity.
This line of research is based on the analysis of social experience, historical mentality and historical consciousness, which constructs the image of the past, in accordance with the needs of the present: the changes taking place in modern society give rise to new questions for the past, and the more significant these changes, the more radically the image of the past changes. emerging in the public mind. At the same time, the images of the past, which constitute an important part of collective identity, can serve to legitimize the existing order, performing the function of a positive social orientation, or, conversely, oppose it with the ideal of the lost “golden age”, forming a specific matrix of negative perception of what is happening. Through the transmission of the accumulated experience, both positive and negative, communication between generations is ensured.
Historical memory is a complex socio-cultural phenomenon associated with the comprehension of historical experience (real and / or imaginary), but at the same time it can act as a product of manipulation of mass consciousness for political purposes. One of the most important problems, the solution of which is becoming increasingly urgent, concerns the study of ideas about the deep social transformations and conflicts that took place in the past, since these ideas play a key role in ideological polemics and political practice. As you know, “the one who controls the past controls the future”: we are talking about historical legitimation as a source of power and the use of historical myths to solve political problems. The struggle for political leadership often manifests itself as a rivalry between different versions of historical memory and different symbols of its greatness and shame, as a dispute over which episodes of history a nation should be proud of or ashamed of.
The content of the collective memory changes in accordance with the social context and practical priorities: reordering or changing the collective memory means a constant “invention of the past” that would be appropriate for the present. The image of the past, actively imposed on the audience, becomes the norm of its own self-image and shapes its real behavior. Due to the fact that these images, perceived as reliable "memories" (as "history") and constituting a significant part of this picture of the world, play an important role in the orientation, self-identification and behavior of individuals and groups, in maintaining collective identity and transmitting ethical values , there is a need for a scientific analysis of the process of formation of individual historical myths, their specific functions, the environment of existence, marginalization or re-actualization in everyday historical consciousness, their use and ideological reevaluation, including in successive or competing narratives of national history (since all peoples are aware itself in terms of historical experience rooted in the past).
Contemporary historiography, addressing the problems of historical memory in a political context, is mainly focused on the development of various aspects of the "use of the past" (including technologies of political manipulation) and "rhetoric of memory" (both the rhetoric of "progress and modernization" and the rhetoric of "decline and nostalgia ”), As well as competing memorial practices and“ wars of memory ”. However, the diverse mechanisms of fixation, accumulation, preservation, dissemination, transformation and reconstruction in the historical memory of different generations of the historical experience of peoples and individual groups of major historical events, social shifts and conflicts, especially in a cross-cultural and comparative historical perspective, remain to this day. insufficiently studied.
The situation at the turn of the millennium, of course, fueled public interest in this issue, in how people perceived major social shifts and events, of which they were contemporaries or participants, how they evaluated them, how they stored information about events, interpreting what they saw or experienced. Moreover, this situation itself is described by many intellectuals in terms of conflict, crisis and transit, which naturally stimulates the study of historical situations and processes of historical memory of turning epochs, characterized by a similar constellation of crisis trends, social conflicts, the experience of radical transformations, entailing a breakdown of the existing system of basic structures of social life, social norms, ideals and values. And even without going beyond the limits of European history, we will find many examples when the problems of the present time dictated the need not only to refer to the past, but to radically reappraise it. At the same time, speaking about crises, wars, major social conflicts and revolutions in the context of studying transitional eras, researchers are increasingly paying attention not so much to their direct role in the process of historical transformations, but to the perception of crisis phenomena and events by their contemporaries, to the transmission and reception of experience. their experiences in the historical consciousness of subsequent generations, on the fixation and mythologization of historical memory in the so-called "identity narratives".
In addition to radical actualization in the light of modern social problems and cultural preferences, the high demand for the concept of "historical memory" is largely due to both its own "laxity" and the presence of many definitions, and the fluidity of the phenomenon conceptualized in the original concept of "memory" when it is not used only to the individual. The conceptual link "memory - identity - trauma" today is one of the most demanded tools of social and humanitarian analysis. However, these concepts, borrowed from psychology, have undergone a significant redefinition. In the very general view psychologists usually define memory as a reflection of the consciousness of what was in the past experience, through memorization, reproduction and recognition. But this mental phenomenon, which psychologists deal with, turns into a socio-mental or sociocultural when it comes to sociological analysis that focuses attention on the collective, normative and cultural-semiotic aspects of memory of the past. It is from this perspective that the forms of memory organization are studied and the concept of trauma is used to analyze the narratives of national historiography.
Researchers, arguing on many issues, show striking unanimity in defining the basic characteristics of historical memory, which include selectivity, symbolism, and mythology. Indeed, memory is selective, it retains only the most vivid and important events, great deeds, and the systems of collective ideas about the past differ not only in their interpretation of historical events, but also in what events they consider as historically significant. The fact that people remember about the past - and also that they forget about it - is one of the key elements of their unconscious ideology. At the same time, the central events of history, the outstanding personalities of its heroes and antiheroes, preserved by historical memory, acquire symbolic meaning. But historical memory is not only selective, not only symbolic, it is also mythological, if only because it is determined not by the individual elements that make up its composition, but by the way in which these elements are combined into an integral image of the past. The processing, selection and systematization of past experience includes two interrelated, complementary and essentially inseparable processes, or two sides of the memory process - remembering and forgetting, as well as the key process of directly experiencing the real situation of the present and "designing" the future. As Antoine Pro put it: “Our society, obsessed with memory, thinks that without history it would lose its identity; it would be more correct, however, to say that a society without history is incapable of making plans. " The concepts of the future (in a “transformed” form) reflect the problems that worried the studied societies in their present: “Societies mobilize their memory and reconstruct their own past in order to ensure their functioning in the present and resolve current conflicts. Likewise, when they project themselves into the future in their imaginations - in the voice of their prophets, utopian thinkers or science fiction authors - they only talk about their present, about their aspirations, hopes, fears and contradictions of modernity. " Creating its mythological images, memory refers to a whole series of past events, but they are included in often opposing schemes, each of which is designed to explain the contradictions of the lived present and to connect the “remembered” past with the expected and constructed future: “the power of memory determines the features of identity and makes the past a projection of the future. " One of the most successful and meaningful definitions of historical memory vividly highlights its creative social role: “Memory is the creator of the past, the historical ability to be in time; in a universal sense, it is the selection, storage and reproduction of information ... But human memory does not just accumulate information, it forms experience, correlates the past with the present and the future, the individual with the generic, the single with the general, the transitory with the stable. "
So, it is precisely on the basis of the schemes laid down in memory and previously accumulated knowledge that a person is guided when faced with new phenomena that he has to realize. The content of ideas about the past in individuals and groups changes in accordance with the social context and practical priorities: reordering or changing collective memory means the constant construction (“invention”) of the past, which would be suitable for the present. Pierre Bourdieu referred to the most typical design strategies as “those aimed at retrospective reconstruction the past, applying to the needs of the present, or constructing the future through creative foresight, designed to limit the always open meaning of the present. " The thesis of the “reconstructive nature” of historical memory, which emphasizes the role of value ideas implicit in it and the connection between the “knowledge of the past” transmitted by it and the situation of the present moment, was developed in the theory of cultural memory by Egyptologist Jan Assmann. But the role of "cultural amnesia" in stereotyping and mythologizing ideas about recently experienced experience with a radical change in the ideological and value orientations of society, as well as the opposing strategy of activating emotionally colored individual and collective memories, historians have yet to explore. However, as regards the category of historical consciousness, inextricably linked with the phenomenon of collective memory, the fundamental innovative contribution to its development belongs to the outstanding Russian historian and methodologist M.A. acts as one of the most important and essential characteristics of its culture and determines the scheme of organizing the accumulated historical experience.
Today, historical consciousness is one of the most important subjects of historical analysis. Historical consciousness is understood as the totality of historical knowledge and assessments of the past. Defining the studied form of consciousness as historical, come, first of all, from its meaningful, genetic and functional certainty, manifested in the fact that historical consciousness captures the past in its ideal forms (content ), is formed in the process of historical development ( genesis), itself participates in the creation of stable connections between time periods of social reality ( function). Historical consciousness is viewed as a process and result of the cognitive and evaluative activity of the subject, directed to the past, and is expressed in various phenomena of the spiritual sphere of society. Although knowledge about the past occupies an important place in the functioning of historical consciousness, it characterizes only one of the sides of its manifestation, its second side manifests itself in the subjective-emotional toward it. respect... Reflecting the past in accordance with the existing system of value attitudes, historical consciousness becomes a direct prerequisite for using acquired experience to satisfy necessary needs, but, of course, historical knowledge is not always a direct prerequisite for human activity and, accordingly, there is no clear correlation between historical experience and the nature of practical activity. ...
In modern humanitarian knowledge, parallel typologies of historical memory and historical consciousness coexist. The initial, most primitive form of awareness and representation of the past is directly related to the myth, in which the past and the present are fused together and enshrined in ceremonies, rituals and prohibitions. The Christian concept of history represents a utopian form of consciousness, with an established category of finite time. "From that time on, on the basis of Christianity, it was no longer possible to study the past without thinking about the future, just as it was impossible to consider the present only in connection with the recent past." Humanists laid the foundation for the "secularization of historiography" and the rational interpretation of historical experience (at this time, not only a new form of historical consciousness appears, but "proper historicized public consciousness "), and the scientific revolution of the XVI-XVII centuries. created the methodological prerequisites for the historiographic revolution of the Age of Enlightenment. The subsequent development of historicism in line with "scientific history", deepening the difference between elite (professional) and ordinary (mass) historical consciousness, led to the approval of a linear temporality scheme corresponding to the modernist type of historical consciousness, which is called "historical consciousness in the strict sense of the word." However, historical science by no means supplants the previous forms: religion, literature, and art continue to play an important role in the formation of historical consciousness. The mass consciousness feeds mainly on old and new myths, retains a penchant for traditionalism, for nostalgic idealization of the past or a utopian belief in a bright future. "Historical consciousness" in the strict (modern) sense of the word collapsed in the postmodern period. In general, modern historiography is characterized by the separation of the spaces of the present and the future and the rejection of the idea of predicting the future.
The famous German historian Jorn Rusen considers the process of changing collective self-consciousness precisely as a result crisis of historical memory, which occurs when historical consciousness collides with experience that does not fit into the framework of the usual historical concepts. Rusen proposed a typology of crises ( normal, critical and catastrophic) depending on their depth and severity and the strategies for overcoming them determined by this. In Rusen's scheme, unlike his other critics, I find the least convincing model normal crisis, which can be overcome on the basis of the internal potential of the existing historical consciousness with insignificant changes in the methods of meaning formation, characteristic of this type of historical consciousness. The second type (“critical”) casts doubt on the ability to adequately interpret the past experience recorded in historical memory in connection with new needs and tasks. As a result of overcoming such a crisis, fundamental changes take place, and, in fact, a new type of historical consciousness is being formed. It is such a model that, in my opinion, can quite adequately describe the crises of historical consciousness at the turn of historical epochs. Finally, the crisis, defined as “catastrophic,” hinders the restoration of identity, casting doubt on the very possibility of historical meaning-making. Such a crisis acts as a psychological trauma for the surviving subjects. Alienation of "catastrophic" experience by means of silence or falsification does not solve the problem: it continues to influence modern reality, and refusal to take it into account narrows the possibilities of adequately setting goals and choosing the means to achieve them.
The main way of overcoming a traumatic experience perceived as a catastrophe is the creation of a historical narrative (narration), through which all past experience, recorded in memory in the form of separate events, is again formed into a certain integrity, within which these events acquire meaning, and as a narrative can interpreted not only the written texts of historians, but also other forms of historical memory: oral traditions (folklore), customs, rituals, monuments and memorials. Ryusen identifies three main functions of historical storytelling. First, the historical narrative mobilizes the experience of the past, captured in the archives of memory, so that the present experience becomes understandable and the expectation of the future is possible. Secondly, organizing the internal unity of the three modalities of time (past - present - future) with the idea of continuity and integrity, the historical narrative allows us to correlate the perception of time with human goals and expectations, which actualizes the experience of the past, makes it significant in the present and influencing the image of the future. Finally, thirdly, it serves to establish the identity of its authors and listeners, convincing readers of the stability of their own world and themselves in the temporal dimension.
By giving the event “historical” meaning and significance, its traumatic nature is eliminated. This detraumatization can be achieved through various strategies that place traumatic events in a historical context: these are anonymization(instead of murders, crimes, atrocities, they speak of a "dark period", "evil fate" or "invasion of demonic forces" into a more or less ordered world), categorization(denoting trauma in abstract terms, as a result of which it loses its uniqueness, becoming part of the story-telling), normalization(traumatic events are seen as something constantly repeating and are explained by the unchanging human nature), moralizing(the traumatic event takes on the character of a warning case), aestheticization with an emphasis on emotional-sensory perception (provides a traumatic experience to feelings, placing it in perceptual schemes that make the world understandable and orderly), teleologization(uses the painful experience of the past to historically justify an order that promises to prevent it from happening again or to offer protection against it) metahistorical reflection(bridging the time gap caused by trauma with the concept of historical change, answering critical questions about history as a whole, its principles of comprehension and types of representation), finally, specialization(divides the problem into various aspects, which become the sphere of research for various specialists, as a result of which "the disturbing dissonance of the full historical picture disappears"). All of these historiographic strategies can accompany mental procedures for overcoming the destructive features of historical experience that are well known in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis, Rusen believes, can teach historians that there are many opportunities to transform the meaninglessness of past experience into historical meaning. Those who are aware of their involvement and responsibility take this burden off themselves by taking the past outside their own history and projecting it onto other people (in particular, by reversing the roles of torturers and victims). This can also be done by creating a picture of the past, in which a certain person disappears from the selected facts, as if she had never (objectively) belonged to the events that make up her identity. Similar strategies can be observed in historiography and other forms of historical culture, but the alienation of a catastrophic experience by suppression or falsification does not solve the problem: it continues to influence modern reality, and the refusal to take it into account narrows the possibilities of adequately setting goals and choosing the means to achieve them.
The conscious or unconscious choice of a particular strategy for overcoming the crisis is expressed in the type of historical narrative, and the typology of historical narratives can become a heuristic means of studying the principles of such a choice. There are four main types of narrative that express the consistent development of historical consciousness: 1) historical narrative of the traditional type, which asserts the significance of past patterns of behavior, perceived in the present and being the basis for future activities (in this case, identification is achieved by adopting given cultural patterns, and time is perceived as eternity); 2) historical narrative of an edifying type, which asserts a rule that is a generalization of specific cases (here, identification involves the application of a specific experience of the past, generalized to the rules of behavior, to a modern situation, which makes human activity rationally justified); 3) historical narrative of a critical type, denying the significance of past experience for modernity by creating alternative narratives (criticism allows you to free yourself from the influence of the past and self-determine regardless of the assigned roles and pre-established patterns, it is this type of narration that serves as a means of transition from one type of historical consciousness to another, since criticism creates an opportunity for the development of historical knowledge ); 4) finally, genetic type historical narrative represents an understanding of the essence of history as change (past patterns of activity are transformed in order to be included in modern conditions, the recognition of the variability of life forms and moral values leads to an understanding of others, and therefore a deeper understanding of oneself). Generally, historicization(in its various forms) is a cultural strategy for overcoming the destructive consequences of a traumatic experience.
So, assessing the scale of the revision of the prevailing concepts of national history after the catastrophe, the authors of the appeal of the Scientific and Pedagogical Society of History Teachers published in the summer of 1918 expressed themselves very accurately: the future, a sense of responsibility to the dead and a duty to those who come to accept our inheritance. The past gives form to the present and life to the future. The richness of historical memory and the awareness of the value of its history, together with the will to jointly grow and multiply this value, make the nationality a nation. The school reinforces this memory and shapes this will. It keeps the continuity of generations alive and builds a bridge from the best traditions of the past to the future. A nation is created in the school, and its disintegration proceeds through the school. "
Of course, some changes in the historical consciousness occur not only in situations of catastrophe. Let us recall, for example, the unfolding in Europe in the XVIII-XIX centuries. large-scale movements to study the people's past, folklore and culture, which were supposed to form and affirm a sense of national identity. In particular, the studies of the historical consciousness of post-reform Russia in the second half of the 19th century, carried out by O.B. the formation of the identity of the Russian society.
The transformation of everyday historical ideas was carried out everywhere under the influence of universal education, and a significant role in this process belonged to professional historiography, the achievements of which (in a significantly simplified form) were transmitted to the masses. Appearing in various European countries during the 19th and 20th centuries, numerous teaching aids and textbooks for secondary and primary schools offered clear and accessible historical images that awakened national identity in the semi-literate masses. School courses in the history of the fatherland, based on the targeted selection and ordering of events and facts, formed the fundamental basis of the national mythology of the Modern era and, being an influential social institution for the transfer of historical experience, continue to solve the same problems, albeit with less success, in our information age.
Traumatic events are pushed out of the collective memory if they do not fit into the structure of the mass self-image. Collective assessment is preceded by at least two acts: the development of this assessment and presentation of it to the public by an authority that has sufficient authority or power for this assessment to be accepted. This is how a certain ideological construct is formed that interprets the event in the interests of the ruling elite. Gradually, the memory of critical events, such as war, takes on a canonical form. An official picture of the crisis (war) is created. This formalized, socially sanctioned and cultivated "memory" sets an obligatory model of what exactly and how should be remembered (it is often reproduced in the stories and memories of the participants in the events). However, this memory is not the only one; it coexists with other images of the same events in the unofficial, folk, and group memory. And besides this, there is scientific historiography. Historical inquiry has a critical function to clarify facts. By interpreting them critically, the research historian transforms trauma into history without limiting himself to narrative models.
In this regard, the study of the culminating points of history, its turning points, always marked by a high public interest in the past, sharp political debates, competition of socio-political projects and "positional war" in historiography, looks especially promising. It is at historical crossroads, when in the current situation of choosing from fundamentally different paths of historical development (ideal programs for reorganizing society and the state, improving institutions, laws and mores), the role of accidents, difficultly predictable influences of socio-ethical and socio-psychological factors increases sharply, a clear or, for the time being, a latent transformation of historical consciousness. A long train of emotional experiences of political cataclysms and social conflicts that took place in the distant and even relatively recent past is gradually lost in mythologized images of social and cultural memory, creating a richest and truly inexhaustible spiritual resource for the formation of a wide range of programs in emerging crisis situations - from a purely conservative to radical revolutionary, not excluding, of course, all sorts of compromise projects that appeal to a common "glorious past" shared by all groups.
A brilliant analysis of the consistent mythologization of October in post-revolutionary art and mass consciousness is presented in N.M. Zorka's article "The Myth of October as the Crown of History": as a kind of “Second Coming”, the Soviet ideology endowed “October” with all the signs of a planetary, universal event, declared it the fulfillment of all hopes and aspirations of mankind, the crown of history, the coming of Eden on earth. The cornerstone of the Soviet ideology was the myth. This demanded in the further course of events "justification of the myth." It was impossible to realize the myth of an earthly paradise. The myth of the Beginning (he is the end of everything that was) generated and multiplied all new myths. "
I. E. Koznova in her detailed study of the memory of the Russian peasantry in the twentieth century. , with his huge negative experience of social catastrophes, emphasizes, along with the changes introduced into the collective memory and behavior patterns by each new generation, the preservation of some universal constants and highlights in the memory structure ideas about the past, present, future and identification ideas, significantly expanding the very concept of social memory: “... If at the beginning of the twentieth century, fighting for land and freedom and relying at the same time on historical memory, looking in the past for the main argument of its present, the peasantry rushed into the future, then at the end of the twentieth century for a significant part of the peasantry of Central Russia there was no hope the future, and the past, and the relatively recent, is relatively satisfying and calm, giving confidence to everyday existence. "
The task of translating the analysis of socio-historical discussions of the era of perestroika (1985–1991) into the perspective of a project understanding of the reconstructed past was posed in the work of T.M. from the present to the past, so easily politicized? And the equally productive, but rarely asked inverse question: What makes political representations, turned from the present into the future, easily historicized? " ... The interpenetration of history and politics in the field of public history is presented to the author as one of the products of the social consciousness of the modern era.
According to this hypothesis, the possibility of politicizing history is rooted not in deliberate manipulation, but in the “project understanding of history” as a result of the conscious and effective activity of collective or individual subjects: “the past is discussed in such a way as to predict and influence the future ”,“ a huge store of historical experience ”is used to give“ solidity to all alternative political projects embedded in historical interpretations. The guarantor of the viability of the political alternative is here historical reality as a precedent: how embryo future project or as a ready-made model a project carried out in the past and subject to restoration in the future. Or as a decisive proof of the non-viability of a certain project or its historical sterility ... ". It is important that this is not just about the use of history as an illustration for ready-made political projects, but it is shown how “public history partially sets the political language itself and the design horizon, within which political projects are conceptualized: collective subjects of politics, boundaries and opportunities for future actions. ". The author rightly notes: “Within the framework of modernity, as a project attitude to history, the past, which is similar to a different present, rather expands the possibility of choosing a different future, i.e. the past opens up an alternative to the present. " Evaluating the highly positive inclusion of the projective mode in the discussion of the social status of historiography, one cannot, however, agree that "the awareness of political projection as ... the main social function of historical science is a condition for the greater scientific independence of historiography."
However, in foreign historiography at the end of the twentieth century, one can find similar statements about the “politics of history” and “politics of memory”, albeit made in different ideological contexts and with different intentions. So, from the point of view of F. Fure, "the politics of memory, understood as the power of stereotypes of thinking influencing the present from the past, is ignored in the face of another policy, which implies a conscious strategy of projecting images of the past in the plans of the future." And for the renowned gender theorist and history scholar Joan Scott, "making history is a political act: it does not represent the past, but rather creates a template for it," and "when we are busy constructing the future today, reconstructing our understanding of the past can only help us." And much earlier, at the very beginning of the twentieth century. The "independence" and social benefits of history were justified in a similar way. The recognized classic of positivist historiography, Charles Seignobos, posed in 1907 the question of how history can serve as a "tool of political education", gave a very eloquent answer: "A historically educated person has seen in the past such a number of transformations and even revolutions that will not be at a loss to see something similar in the present. He saw that many societies underwent profound changes, among those that learned people declared deadly, and yet they did not get any worse from it. This is enough to cure him of his fear of change and stubborn conservatism in the manner of the English Tories. "
However, to study the role of social memory about the conflicts of the past in specific historical situations requiring the adoption of important political decisions, a more complex model of interaction of ideas about the past, present and future, which was mentioned above, is needed. Its heuristic nature is especially clearly manifested in the study of a long series of post-revolutionary crises and in the accompanying competition of projects using historical argumentation, as well as in the change of images of “great revolutions” in public consciousness, the history of political thought and professional historiography.
Patrick Hutton used the historiography of the French Revolution as an opportunity to rethink "the connection between remembering the past and its historical understanding," pointing out the direct impact of memory of the revolution on French politics up to the Paris Commune of 1871. According to Hutton, the historiographic tradition, going from Jean Jaurès to Albert Sobul, "connected the sympathies of its representatives with a more promising future than the revolution itself foreshadowed." But in the nationalist tradition, the memory of the revolution was revised: the revolution contributed to the formation of the modern state, but "it no longer corresponded to its future goals." And if for J. Lefebvre “the memory of the revolution was dissolved in the tradition of a long struggle for freedom, which would culminate in the realization of the socialist ideal”, then on the whole “from Michelet to Fure” “in the historiography of the revolution there is a far-reaching decline in enthusiasm for its events and personalities as factors that form the tasks of the current day ”.
The experience of the revolution (including the “alien” revolution), taken as an example (positive or negative) and a lesson (inspiring or cruel), largely determined the boundaries of decisions and actions of individuals and groups. PI Pestel, in his testimony to the Investigative Commission, wrote: “The terrible incidents that happened in France during the revolution made me look for a means to avoid such talk about all kinds of prevention of any civil strife. " And MF Orlov, in the face of the past experience of the “great disasters” of the French Revolution, asserted back in December 1814: “I see how from the depths of this immense catastrophe a wonderful lesson arises for peoples and kings. Such an example is given in order not to follow it ... ".
Perhaps it was the comprehension of the experience of the two civil wars and the Interregnum in England, which discredited the revolution as a means of solving socio-political problems, that contributed to the constant search for compromises in the course of the subsequent history of the country, and the bloodless experience of compromise of the Glorious Revolution consolidated this attitude. The attitude to the events of this period changed along with the change in the state of society, but the history of the revolution became a source of examples and arguments in the course of its entire subsequent development. Ideological disputes of contemporaries, projects for the best structure of society, the experience of events and attempts to explain them, the "living memory" of participants and eyewitnesses, captured in memoirs about the events of the revolution, and the first interpretations of the completed conflict, then the rethinking of the revolution by different generations - over a century - already in context new "revolutionary experience" in 1688-1689. and, after that, in the context of comparison with the French Revolution, with subsequent, throughout the 19th and, especially, the 20th century, all new revisions of the established historiographic concepts that carry a weighty charge of projective thinking.
The revolution is gradually becoming a myth. If the participants and contemporaries of the historical Event-Conflict correlate its interpretation with personal experience, in the “second generation” - with the “living memory of fathers”, then the “third” and subsequent generations perceive ready-made schemes, moreover, with distance from the Event, all new interpretation models overlap with previous readings.
The memory of the central events of the past (in the model of "catastrophe" or "triumph") forms an identity, largely determining the life situation of the present. Studying the memory of conflicts and catastrophes of the 20th century (world wars, the Holocaust, mass repressions, etc.) is of increasing interest to historians, and precisely in connection with the role of memory in the historical construction of social (collective) identity. In the discussion of these topics, two specific traits: firstly, the presence of irreconcilable contradictions between living experience and historical memory and, secondly, significant intergenerational differences in perceptions and representations, as a result of which the focus is on the issues of the diachronous dimension of identity: how identity spreads over several generations and how it is is built in the historical narrative in the form of a chain of events of the past that are significant for each of them. Historical events, the representation of which delineates group identity, are divided into several types: 1) events with a positive basis that create identity by approving; 2) events with a negative basis that create identity by denial; 3) events or chain of events that renew the old identity. Among these the latter are distinguished: a) turning events; b) events that invalidate the models of collective identity that were in force before that time; c) events that update the current models of collective identity.
In the construction of collective identity, significant generational differences are noticeable arising from the contradictions between the social memory transmitted senior, and life experience of interaction with the already changed reality of the present, which forms ideas junior and, accordingly, their "design" of the past and the future. J. Rusen, in particular, proposed the following typology of the perception of the Holocaust in the minds of three generations of Germans in accordance with the differences in the strategy of building identity. In the first generation, the German identity is "all right": the Nazis are externalized as a small group of political gangsters. In the middle (second) generation, which comes into conflict with their parents, there is a desire to view the Holocaust in a historical perspective, to comprehend the entire period of Nazism as a whole as a counter-event that constituted consciousness in a negative way (“by contradiction”). On the basis of moral principles and moral criticism (“they are criminals, we are others”), self-identification with the victims of Nazism takes place, and the national historical tradition is replaced by universal (universal) norms. This creates a new, very tense type of collective identity. In the third generation, a defining new element arises - the “genealogical attitude towards criminals”: “these are our grandfathers, yes, they were different, but at the same time they are Germans, which means“ we ””. So - through a conflict of generations - the re-conceptualization of German identity is carried out, and the shocking historical experience "returns" to national history.
Major social shifts, political cataclysms give a powerful impetus to changes in the perception of images and the assessment of the significance of historical persons and historical events (including purposeful intellectual activity): the process of transformation of collective memory is underway, which captures not only "living" social memory, the memory of the experiences of contemporaries and participants in the events, but also the deep layers of the cultural memory of society, preserved by tradition and turned to the distant past. Historical memory is always mobilized and actualized in difficult periods of the life of a nation, society or any social group, when they face new difficult tasks or a real threat to their very existence is created. Such situations have repeatedly arisen in the history of every country, ethnic or social group.
Arguing about the artificially constructed "biographies of nations", B. Anderson wrote: "The consciousness of being placed in the mundane, consistently progressive flow of time, with all the continuity that follows from this, but at the same time with the" forgetting "of the experience of this continuity - the product of ruptures that occurred at the end XVIII century - gives rise to the need for a narrative of "identity" ". This kind of need for a historical narrative of identity, as well as vivid evidence of gaps in sociocultural memory, are found in much earlier eras of world history.
Studying the historiography that followed the crises, one can see that the integrity of the mythological canvas of memory over time (in the absence of catastrophes on a global scale), as a rule, was restored. The eminent British historian and philosopher Herbert Butterfield wrote in his book The Englishman and His History: “Always, even plunging into a sea of changes and innovations, England did not break ties with its traditions ... We were prudent, for we were attentive to everything that binds the past and the present together, and when great breaks happened - for example, during the Reformation or Civil wars- the next generation did everything possible to eliminate the holes and gaps they made in the fabric of our history. The British, who lived immediately after that, seemed to return with a needle back and a thousand small stitches again sewed the present to the past. That is why we have become a country of traditions and a living continuity is constantly preserved in our history. " This idea is developed and introduced into it new accents by S.A. Ekstut: “History has its own break points, points of oblivion, points of repression of historical memory. On its pages, along with the unexplored and mysterious, there is so much unspoken and unspoken. White spots alternate with default shapes. Both are indicative of a memory gap. And by no means always is a professional historian able to sew this gap. Moreover, sometimes it is he - consciously or unconsciously resorting to lies and distorting historical events - that intensifies this gap and contributes to the final ousting from the world of unwanted remnants of the recent past. "
In maintaining and "reformatting" collective identity during dynamic social shifts, the role played by deeply rooted national historiographic traditions is extremely important. In this regard, there is a need to analyze not only the historical myths of mass consciousness that form the basis of national identity, their specific functions, their marginalization or re-actualization, but also their use and ideological reevaluation in successive or competing narratives, including “national history” as a form professional historiography, in which, at different stages of the development of society, a new image of a single national past is created, corresponding to the needs of its time.
The combination of cognitive-critical and national-patriotic functions allowed the "scientific" versions of the past to make a significant contribution to strengthening national identity. The laws of the genre of "biography of a nation" themselves require dramatic development and plot completion of the event series, converging to the subject of identification and demonstrating key "places of memory" and symbols of "common destiny." National history “is more often than not actually the autobiography of the people. Other participants in history are for her only a background, a context ... As a result, national historiography consists of centuries-old dialogue (dispute, sometimes conflict) of ethnocentrisms. "
The central structure-forming elements and key moments of ethnic identification in the powerful force field of the cultural tradition, which has a communicative nature, are the ethnogenetic myth - the myth of a common origin ("common ancestor"), the idea of a special territory recognized as a "historical homeland", and a common group the past (it does not matter - real or assumed) constituting the perceived community of individuals (living and gone into oblivion). Within the framework of an integral historical canvas, myths about the origin, habitat and settlement, about common ancestors, cultural heroes, glorious leaders and wise rulers of antiquity, about “fateful” events of the common past, captured in the “legends of deep antiquity” and constantly reproduced in rituals, symbols and texts, act as the basis of any ethnocentric identification. Ideas about the past, and often about the very distant past, emphasizing the continuity and deep roots of the national tradition, also act as an important factor in national identity, which is formed in the era of Modernity from ethnocultural and territorial-state components. So, in the center of V. A. Shnirelman's studies devoted to contemporary modernity is precisely the “image of the distant past of peoples”, since “those key periods in the life of modern society when history is radically revised is of great importance, and it is important for us to understand what kind of the moments why they require such a reverent attitude to history and how exactly the socio-political situation influences the new images of the distant past being created ”. In this case, we can talk not only about the reproduction or re-designation of old myths, but also about the birth of new ethnocentric myths (in the context of a new “narrative of identity”), designed to clearly delineate the boundaries of “their” community, distinguishing it from a wider territorial-political entity or combining several such entities.
The national idea, which for more than a century has determined the theme of historical works in the genre " national history", Was embodied in different ways in states of various types: in mono-ethnic and multi-ethnic nation-states. In the context of dynamic social shifts, appeals to the “roots” and the concept of unchanging identity can strengthen the idea of national “originality” and even exclusivity (including along the line “civilization” - “barbarism”, or in the actualized form of “clash of civilizations”). In this regard, there is a need to analyze not only the historical myths of mass consciousness that form the basis of national identity, their specific functions, their marginalization or re-actualization, but also their use and ideological reevaluation in successive or competing narratives, including “national history” as a form professional historiography, in which, at different stages of the development of society, a new image of a single national past is created, corresponding to the needs of its time.
The social function of "national stories" has long been known: after all, "without an awareness of the common past, people would hardly agree to show loyalty to all-embracing abstractions." The notions of the past, emphasizing the continuity and deep roots of the national tradition, act as an important factor in the national identity that develops in the modern era and then continues to be fueled by the works of professional historians in the genre of academic “national historiography” for more than a century. The combination of cognitive-critical and national-patriotic functions allowed the "scientific" versions of the past to make a significant contribution to strengthening national identity. The role of the intellectual constructs of the historical science of the New and Modern times, transmitted into educational literature, turned out to be extremely important in the formation of national identity and ideology of nationalism, in the mobilization of national movements.
The idea of progress, which dominated in European historiography of the 19th century, substantiated the positive coverage of the strategy of “joining” and “reckoning” small peoples with larger nations from the point of view of the prospects for general development. At the same time, in polyethnic countries, not to mention empires, ethnocentric history and national-state (with varying degrees of “nationalism”) history, acting in the logic of traditional “master narratives”, could enter into dissonance, emphasizing negative differences (“the image of the enemy "), Confrontation, tension and open conflict.
Marc Ferro once convincingly showed that educational texts that are used in different countries to educate young people often interpret the same historical facts in very different ways, depending on national interests. However, in the XXI century. traces of harsh mutual rejection (especially in relation to neighboring countries and peoples), a scattering of “taboo topics” and the ineradicable persistence of ethnocentric myths in national curricula, fostering a sense of patriotism in growing citizens, cause historians and educators to feel a serious threat to the process of European integration. And here it is important not only to pedal the triumphant past or situations of historical tragedies of national humiliation, but also blockade layers of memory of the shameful past, the use of meaningful defaults to construct an acceptable picture of the past. Often, in public polemics, competing models of national identity are formed, correlated with different types of worldview and value orientations, with different pictures of the past and projects for the future, with different political and pragmatic goals.
What is the difference between the "history of historians" from other representations of the past? History as a science strives for the reliability of the concept of the past, to ensure that knowledge about him were not limited to what is relevant at the moment of the present. While social memory continues to create interpretations that meet new socio-political needs, the prevailing approach in historical science is that the past is valuable in itself, and the scientist should, as far as possible, be above considerations of political expediency. Memory “… draws strength from the feelings that it awakens. History, however, requires arguments and proofs. " Meanwhile, the historian's position in relation to social memory is not always consistent, and professional historians are actively involved in the process of transforming collective memory, responding to social needs. Here is found Feedback with the most important ethical problems of the historical profession, among which - just the inadmissibility of "invention of the past", its distortion and instrumentalization for any purpose.
One of the most important tasks of historical science is the demythologization of the past, but nevertheless, historiography does not have a sufficiently stable immunity from pragmatic considerations. There are many means of social control over history - not only direct pressure or prohibitions, but also softer, hidden restrictions and special “incentive mechanisms” that, in one way or another, influence the formation of various historiographic traditions. Observing the situation in modern historiography, one cannot fail to notice contradictory tendencies: on the one hand, in the statements of famous historians and public discussions, questions are raised about the most important ethical problems of the historical profession, overcoming Eurocentrism, "orientalism" and myths about national exclusivity, the inadmissibility of "invention the past ”, its distortion and“ instrumentalization ”for political and any other purposes, and on the other hand, the role of history as a factor of“ social therapy ”that allows a nation or social group to cope with the experience of“ traumatic historical experience ”is actively discussed.
All of the above problems have been the subject of research in a number of projects carried out at the Center for Intellectual History of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences since 2000. Collected in the collective work "History and Memory: Historical Culture of Europe before the Beginning of Modern Times" a variety of historical material covering more than two millennia, demonstrated the closest connection between the perception of historical events and social phenomena: with the expansion of cultural contacts and profound changes in the life of society, the priorities of historical memory, interpretation and assessment of key phenomena and events, the pantheon of heroes, etc. were changing. : oral recollections, legends and traditions, various kinds of records and documents, monumental monuments, festivals, stage performances, etc. Such a role was played, for example, by the concept of "eternal Rome" both in pagan and Christian writings of the transitional era from late Antiquity to the Middle Ages, which ensured the continuity of the universalist idea, the medieval modifications of which were reflected in the empire of Charlemagne, the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, in theocratic claims of the papacy, as well as in the concepts of "second" and "third" Rome. The transition to modern times gave a powerful impetus to the development of historical consciousness and the formation of a new historical culture.
The large-scale comparative project "Images of Time and Historical Representations in a Civilizational Context: Russia - East - West" was intended to develop key aspects of the problem posed on specific material from different regions of Western Europe, Russia and the countries of the East, to study how existing cultural universals (with all the pluralism of historical cultures and the specifics of the trajectories of their development), as well as civilizational features, as well as their refraction at various stages of development of societies. In order to obtain comparable results in specific studies, a number of key categories and parameters were identified, including such fundamental aspects of historical consciousness as its rootedness in historical experience, normative-value character, recognition - to varying degrees and in different terms - of the difference between the past and the present, and understanding of history as a process - connections between events in time. The forms of historical consciousness and methods of constructing images of the past, the functioning of historical legends and myths, multiple interpretations and ways of describing events, various models of representing the past and types of historical discourse, methods of constructing a national past, memorial practices and models of historical writing, processes of transmission, interaction and contamination of historiographic traditions in vast cultural areas in the West of Europe, in Russia and in the countries of the East. It is shown how representatives of various civilizational systems interpreted their past, comprehending the present, consolidating old ideals, norms, behavioral canons, heroic models or putting forward new life guidelines and outlining pictures of the future; how meaningful and universal were the concepts and categories they used, how these images, judgments and assessments were connected with life priorities, with the depth and vector of historical memory, and much more.
Some of the results of the third project ("Crises of critical epochs in the mythology of historical memory"), aimed at a comprehensive study of ways to comprehend the experience of social conflicts and catastrophes, their subsequent transfer and transformation into cultural and historical memory, are presented in this publication.
The bibliography of this kind of research, starting with the pioneering project of Pierre Nora (see: Les Lieux de Mémoire. Ed. P. Nora. T. 1-7. P., 1984-1992), has already hundreds of books and articles. At the same time, a huge array of it is made up of works analyzing the memory of traumatic events of the 20th century.
For details, see: Repina L. P... Historical memory and modern historiography // New and Newest history. 2004. No. 5. S. 33-45; Axle O. G... “History of Memory” - a New Paradigm of Historical Science // Historical Science Today: Theories, Methods, Prospects / Ed. L.P. Repina. M., 2011.S. 75-90. Appreciating heuristic potential memory studies Axle rightly warns the enthusiasts of the new approach against its absolutization: “The concept of the“ history of memory ”should by no means replace all other forms of historical knowledge, it is complementary to them and should complement them” (p. 90).
Rüsen J. Was ist Geschichtskultur? Überlegungen zu einer neuen Art, über Geschichte nachzudenken // Historische Faszination: Geschichtskultur heute / K. Füßmann, H. T. Grütter, J. Rüsen. Köln, 1994. S. 5-7. This direction of historical science, which arose under the direct influence of the study of pictures of the world within the framework of the history of mentalities, gradually expanded its methodological foundations. For more on this see: Repina L.P. Historical culture as a subject of research // History and memory: Historical culture of Europe before the beginning of modern times / Ed. L.P. Repina. M., 2006. C. 5-18.
Jaspers K. World history of philosophy. Introduction. SPb., 2000.S. 115.
"It is impossible to change the actual material side of the past, but the semantic, expressive, speaking side can be changed, because it is incomplete and does not coincide with itself (it is free)." Bakhtin M. M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M., 1986.S. 430.
At one time, the outstanding British historian Christopher Hill spoke very accurately and succinctly on this score: "We are formed by our past, but from our advantageous position in the present, we constantly give a new form to the past that shapes us." Hill C. History and the Present. L., 1989. P. 29.
Here it is appropriate to recall the words of Yu. M. Lotman that even if "such a text is at odds with the obvious and familiar reality of the audience, then it is not he who is questioned, but this reality itself, right up to declaring it non-existent." ... Lotman Yu.M. Literary biography in a historical and cultural context // Lotman Yu.M. Selected articles. T. 1. Tallinn, 1992.S. 368.
The vagueness of the concept of "historical memory" causes quite understandable dissatisfaction and the desire to find an alternative to it among the supporters of more rigorous theoretical principles of conceptualization. Cm. Savelyeva I.M., Poletaev A.V."Historical memory": to the question of the boundaries of the concept // Phenomenon of the past. M., 2005.S. 170-220. In particular, recognizing the legitimacy of using the concept of "historical memory" to describe the conventional images of past events, the authors point out the incorrectness of extrapolating the cultural-anthropological approach to collective memory to modern society with its structures of mass, common and special education and the Internet and prefer to use the term social (collective) ideas about the past.- In the same place. S. 216, 218.
This approach has already proven to be highly productive. See for example: Zerubavel, Eviatar... Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past // Qualitative Sociology. 1996. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 283-300; Idem... Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Cambridge (Mass.) 1997; Idem... Time Maps: Collective Memory and the Social Shape of the Past. Chicago, 2003; Idem... The Social Marking of the Past: Toward a Socio-Semiotics of Memory // Matters of Culture: Cultural Sociology in Practice / Ed. by R. Friedland and J. Mohr. Cambridge, 2004. P. 184-195.
Assmann J. Cultural memory. Writing, memory of the past and political identity in the high cultures of antiquity. M., 2004.
Barg M.A. Historical consciousness as a problem of historiography // Questions of history. 1982. No. 12. S. 49-66.
Barg M.A. Eras and ideas. M., 1987.S. 167.
Barg M.A. Eras and ideas. S. 305-323.
In one of his lectures, V. A. Shkuratov proposed a typology of historical memory similar in meaning: a) archaic memory, characterized by cyclicity and the absence of a concept of linear time, dissolving individual experience in the archetypal present, that is, in eternity; b) traditional memory, with the concept of an axis of times, but still an archetypal connection between the past and the future (creation of the world and the end of the world); c) modern (modern), embedding human experience in linear time from the present to the past and the future and depriving history of an axiological coloring; d) postmodern, or postmodern, with the opposite sequence of temporal modalities "future - present - past": we construct our past, which comes to us from the future (through perceived tendencies in the present). Let me continue this argument: each historical type of memory corresponds to a certain form of historical consciousness: archaic memory - myth, traditional - utopia, modern - historical science, or scientific history.
Rüsen J. Studies in Metahistory. Pretoria, 1993; Rusen J. Losing the sequence of history (some aspects of historical science at the crossroads of modernism, postmodernism and discussion of memory) // Dialogue with time. Issue 7. M., 2001. S. 8–26. See also: Rusen J. Crisis, Trauma and Identity. S. 38-62.
"Historicization" is a meaning-generating relationship of events in time, which connects the present-day situation with the experience of the past in such a way that the future perspective of human activity can be outlined from the course of changes from the past to the present. On the historicization of the catastrophic experience of the total wars of the 20th century, see, in particular: Experience of World Wars in the History of Russia / Ed. I. V. Narsky, O.S. Nagornaya, O. Yu. Nikonova, Yu. Yu. Khmelevskaya Chelyabinsk, 2007.
Rusen J. Crisis, Trauma and Identity. S. 56-60. When comparing, it becomes obvious that, differing in terminology, Rusen's typology is very similar "in spirit" to the reasoning of MA Barg about the change in the types of "historical writing" and "schemes of organizing historical experience." Wed: Barg M. A. ↩ Labutina T. L. English revolutions of the 17th century in the assessments of the early enlighteners // Clio Moderna. Foreign history and historiography. Issue 4. Kazan, 2003. S. 53-61; Erlikhson I. M... English social thought of the second half of the 17th century. M., 2007.
For more details, see the book: The English Revolution of the Mid-17th Century: To the 350th Anniversary. M., 1991.
Cm.: Repina L.P. Conflicts in the Historical Memory of Generations: Towards a Problem Statement // Conflicts and Compromises in a Socio-Cultural Context. M., 2006.S. 62.
See for example: Boroznyak A.I. Redemption. Does Russia need the German experience of overcoming the totalitarian past? M., 1999; He... Against oblivion. How German schoolchildren preserve the memory of the tragedy of Soviet prisoners of war and Ostarbeiters. M., 2006.
Rusen J. Crisis, Trauma and Identity. S. 52-54. See, for example, analysis of the mythologization of events Polish history in national memory and historiography: Domanska, Ewa... (Re) creative Myths and Constructed History. The Case of Poland // Myth and Memory in the Construction of Community: Historical Patterns in Europe and Beyond / Ed. by Bo Stråth. Brussels, 2000. P. 249-262.
For more details see: Repina L.P. Time, history, memory (key problems of historiography at the XIX Congress of the ICIN) // Dialogue with time. Issue 3. M., 2000. S. 5-14. S. A. Ekshtut examines the problem of memory of generations in a slightly different aspect: “In our time, time lag between the moment an event occurs and the beginning of its study by scientists, it is quite comparable with the period of active life of one human generation. “The historian gets acquainted with the declassified documents, which refer to the events recent history and their mechanisms, hidden from the views of contemporaries, which prompts him to solve difficult ethical problems: direct witnesses of the recent past are still alive, painfully experiencing the very fact of a reassessment of former absolute values taking place before their eyes. Death has not yet reaped its harvest, and a specialist in contemporary history is already beginning and completing his work - and he will have not only a meeting with readers, but also communication with veterans ... ”. Ekshtut S.A. Battles for the Temple of Mnemosyne. SPb., 2003.S. 33.
Anderson B. Imaginary communities. Reflections on the origins and spread of nationalism. M., 2001. S. 222. In a different perspective, the topic of ethnic and national identities in their temporal refraction is considered in the book: Friese N. Identities: Time, Difference and Boundaries. N.Y .; Oxford, 2002.
Among the ethnopolitical myths of the Middle Ages, the clearest example is the “myth of the Trojan origin” (“the legend of Troy”), whose role in the “construction” of the identity of the peoples of Western Europe is undeniable. Cm.: Maslov A.N. The Legend of the Trojan War in the Medieval Western Tradition / Dialogues with Time: Remembrance of the Past in the Context of History. S. 410-446. See also: Smith A. D. Chosen Peoples: Sacred Sources of National Identity. Oxford, 2003.
Butterfield H. Englishman and his history. L., 1944. P. 5.
Ekshtut S.A. Battles for the Temple of Mnemosyne. P. 103.
Wrzosek, Wojciech... Classical historiography as the bearer of the national (nationalist) idea // Dialogue with time. 2010. Issue. 30.S. 10-11.
Shnirelman V.A. Memory wars. M., 2003.S. 26.
By the way, some universal components of modern ethnocentric versions of the past, such as: “the myth of autochthonousness”, “the myth of the ancestral home”, “the myth of linguistic succession”, “the myth of the ethnic family”, “the myth of glorious ancestors”, “the myth of kulturtragerstvo "," The myth of ethnic homogeneity "," the myth of the sworn enemy "," the myth of ethnic unity "( Shnirelman V.A. National symbols, ethno-historical myths and ethnopolitics // Theoretical problems of historical research. Issue 2. M., 1999. S. 118-147), have their prototypes in historical writings and official documents of many previous eras.
Tosh J. Striving for truth. M., 2000.S. 13.
Cm.: Hobsbawm E. Nations and Nationalism after 1780. SPb., 1998; Gellner E. Nations and nationalism. M., 1991. However, the idea of a nation dominated the minds much earlier ( Armstrong J. A. Nations before Nationalism. Chapel Hill, 1982). The richest concrete material, reflecting the development of national ideas, national consciousness and various versions of the ideology of nationalism in Western Europe, is presented in the collective monograph: The National Idea in Western Europe in Modern Times. Essays on history / Otv. ed. V.S.Bondarchuk. M., 2005.
Hobsbawm E. Nations and Nationalism after 1780. S. 54-62.
Ferro M. How a story is told to children around the world. M., 1992.
Approaches to European Historical Consciousness - Reflections and Provocations / Ed. by Sharon MacDonald. Hamburg, 2000; Phillips P. History Teaching, Nationhood and the State: A Study in Education Politics. L., 2000. See also: Lowenthal D. Possessed by the Past. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. Cambridge, 1998. It is noteworthy that even under the brand of academic "global history" sometimes "hidden ethnocentrism" appears as an exception of non-European examples. See about this: Rüsen J. How to overcome ethnocentrism: Approaches to a culture of recognition by history in the twenty-first century // History and Theory. 2004. Theme Issue 43. P. 118-129.
About A. Twelve lessons in history. P. 319.
See: History and Memory: Historical Culture of Europe before the New Time (Moscow, 2006).
The scientific results of this project are reflected in the collective work "Images of Time and Historical Representations: Russia - East - West" (Moscow, 2010).
http:// abuss. narod. ru/ Biblio/ kukartzeva/ repina0. htm(date of access, 07.04.2011 13:26)
FOREWORD - p. 3 4
INTRODUCTION - p. 4 4
Chapter 1. WHAT IS HISTORY - p. 8-31 8
Terms and problems - p. 8-10 8
Historical consciousness and historical memory - p. 10-11 10
Historical memory and oblivion - p. 11-13 10
Historical memory and historical fact - p. 13-16 12
Historical consciousness and historical science - p. 18 15
Objectivity and reliability of historical knowledge - p. 19-25 15
History as a science of unique and isolated phenomena - p. 25-28 19
History and social theory - p. 28-31 21
Chapter 2. HOW THE HISTORY IS WRITTEN - p. 32-49 24
Historical source - p. 32-36 25
Event and fact - p. 36-39 28
Chronology and periodization - p. 39-43 30
General history - p. 43-46 34
History and Literature - p. 46-49 36
Chapter 3. ANTIQUE HISTORIOGRAPHY: THE BIRTH OF HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE - p. 50-123 39
At the origins of new knowledge - p. 50-52 40
Herodotus - the father of European history - p. 52-55 41
Thucydides: history as an eyewitness account - p. 55-59 43
Greek historiography of the Hellenistic era - p. 59-63 44
Greek Heritage in Roman Historical Writings - p. 63-67 46
The genre of world history - p. 67-70 49
Historians of the Early Empire - p. 70-73 52
At the end of the ancient tradition - s. 73-74 53
Ancient historical consciousness and historical writing - p. 74-75 55
CHAPTER 4. MEDIEVAL HISTORIOGRAPHY - pp. 77-123 57
Christian concept of history - p. 77-81 57
The medieval concept of historical time - p. 81-85 59
The subject and methods of work of a medieval historian - p. 85-90 62
Medieval historians and their audience - p. 90-97 67
Humanistic historiography of the Renaissance - p. 97-98 72
Antiquity in the historical consciousness and historiography of the Renaissance - p. 98-102 73
Secularization of historical consciousness and methods of historical criticism - p. 102-109 77
Byzantine historiography - p. 109-117 82
Old Russian historical works (XI-XVII centuries) - p. 118-123 90
Chapter 5. Historical knowledge of early modern times - p. 124-152 95
Scientific revolution and historical knowledge of the 17th century. - With. 124-131 95
"Philosophical history" of the Enlightenment - p. 131-139 101
Theories of progress and historical cycles - p. 139-143 108
"Philosophical History": Practices of Historical Writing - p. 143-152 110
Chapter 6. HISTORIANS AND PHILOSOPHERS OF THE XIX CENTURY: CONCEPTS OF THE HISTORICAL PAST - p. 153-176 118
Historical culture of romanticism - p. 153-159 118
Directions of romantic historiography - p. 159-165 123
Interpretation of the historical process in the philosophical systems of the second half of the 19th century. - With. 171-177 132
Chapter 7. HISTORICAL THOUGHT AND PROFESSIONAL HISTORIOGRAPHY of the second half of the XIX - early XX century. - With. 177-205 137
Positivism and scientific history - p. 178-183 138
Formation of historiographic schools - p. 183-185 142
Discussions about the subject and status of history - p. 185-192 144
Russian historiography and the "Russian historical school" - p. 192-201 150
The critical method and principles of scientific research - p. 201-205 155
Chapter 8. HISTORY IN THE XX CENTURY: CRISES AND REVOLUTIONS IN HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE - p. 206-241 158
The relativity of historical knowledge - p. 208-214 160
Economic history - p. 214-217 165
Civilizational and cultural-historical approaches to the study of the past - p. 217-221 168
"Servant of Ideology" - p. 221-225 171
"Fights for history". History as a problem - p. 225-228 175
"New Historical Science" - p. 228-231 178
Social history and historical anthropology - p. 231-239 180
"New local history" and microhistory - p. 239-241 187
Chapter 9. AT THE BORDER OF A MILLENNIUM: NEW PROBLEMS AND NEW APPROACHES - p. 242-275 189
From social history to sociocultural history - p. 243-254 190
What is gender history - p. 254-262 200
Historical biography and "new biographical history" - p. 262-268 207
Intellectual history today: problems and prospects - p. 268-275 211
FOREWORD - p. 3
The manual presents a picture of the evolution of historical knowledge, the formation of the latter as a scientific discipline. Readers can familiarize themselves with various forms of cognition and perception of the past in their historical development, enter the course of modern polemics about the place of history in society, focus on in-depth study of the key problems of the history of historical thought, the peculiarities of various forms of writing of history, the emergence, distribution and change of research attitudes , the formation and development of history as an academic science.
Today, ideas about the subject of the history of historiography, the model of historical and historiographic analysis, and the very status of the discipline have changed significantly. The so-called problem historiography fades into the background, the emphasis is shifted to the study of the functioning and transformation of historical knowledge in a socio-cultural context. The manual shows how the forms of cognition of the past have changed in the course of the development of society, being interconnected with the fundamental features of a particular type of cultural and social organization of society.
The manual consists of nine chapters, each of which is devoted to a separate period in the development of historical knowledge - from the origins in the culture of ancient civilizations to the present time (the turn of the XX-XXI centuries). Special attention is paid to the relationship of history with other areas of knowledge, the most common conceptual models of historical development, the principles of analyzing historical sources, the social functions of history, and specific features of historical knowledge.
| Instead of a Preface | |||
| L.P. Repina | |||
| Interdisciplinarity and history | |||
| Science: history and modernity | |||
| Stephen Gaukroger (Australia) | |||
| Scientific revolution, modernity and the West | |||
| I. M. Savelyeva, A. V. Poletaev | |||
| The fruits of romanticism | |||
| Otto Gerhard Axle (Germany) | |||
| Historical science in a constantly changing world | |||
| History and theory | |||
| A.V. Gordon | |||
| The great French revolution as a great historical event | |||
| Historiography of General History | |||
| V.M. Khachaturyan | |||
| The Image of Ancient Chinese Civilization in Russian Historiography of the 1990s (concept of statehood) | |||
| D.S. Konkov | |||
| Politogenesis of the states of the Red Sea basin in the works of Russian historians | |||
| Ideas and people | |||
| A. V. Korenevsky (Rostov-on-Don) | |||
| Filofey Pskov: portrait of the scribe against the background of texts | |||
| Olga V. Mishutina (Novosibirsk) | |||
| English Catholics during the reign of Elizabeth Tudor: features of communicative practice | |||
| G. A. Sibireva | |||
| A.A. Samborsky: on the history of the formation of the Russian intelligentsia and its ties with the West (late 18th - early 19th centuries) | |||
| O. V. Khazanov (Tomsk) | |||
| On one national-historical concept in Judaism: R. Cook and his modern followers | |||
| O. L. Protasova (Tambov) | |||
| "Russian wealth" in the inter-revolutionary period (1907-1916) | |||
| Popular culture ideals | |||
| V.Ya.Maul | |||
| The Pugachev rebellion in the mirror of folk culture of laughter | |||
| Artifacts in history | |||
| V.V. Petrov | |||
| Kinnor, cithara, psaltery in iconography and texts (to the interpretation of one Anglo-Saxon gloss) | |||
| From the history of science | |||
| V. I. Borodupin, E. E. Berger | |||
| Case history through the eyes of a historian: archive of A.A. Ostroumov's clinic | |||
| Historical science and education | |||
| T.A. Sidorova (Sochi) | |||
| Methodological possibilities of hermeneutics in teaching the history of the Middle Ages | |||
| Z.A. Chekantseva (Novosibirsk) | |||
| Contemporary writing of history as a component of humanitarian discourse | |||
| M.P. Lapteva (Perm) | |||
| Intellectual history in the educational process | |||
| Publications | |||
| A.V. Sveshnikov (Omsk) | |||
| To Paris in search of myself | |||
| O.A. Dobiash-Christmas | |||
| Report on a business trip to Paris in 1908-1909 (A.V. Sveshnikov) | |||
| Chronicle I. V. Vedyushkina | |||
| XV readings in memory of Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences V.T. Pashuto "Eastern Europe in Antiquity and the Middle Ages" | |||
| All-Russian Scientific Conference: "Intercultural Dialogue in a Historical Context" | |||
| V.G. Ryzhenko (Omsk) | |||
| V All-Russian Scientific Conference: "Culture and intelligentsia of Russia at the turn of the century" | |||
| Reading books | |||
| V.P. Lyubin | |||
| History Defines Modernity: Discussions of Italian Intellectuals (Review) | |||
| Summaries | |||
| Content | |||
L.P. Repina. Interdisciplinarity and history
History is not everything, but everything is history, or at least can become history.
Interdisciplinarity is an integral characteristic of modern historical science, although this concept, which came into active circulation in the historiography of the second half of the 20th century, changed its content more than once, and these changes reflected a change in the epistemological guidelines of historical knowledge itself.
In 1970, the founders of the international Journal of Interdisciplinary History, opening its first issue with a program editorial, emphasized the importance of interdisciplinary interaction (they did not accidentally compare this process with cross-pollination) and the positive impulse that was given to historical science as a result of borrowing the achievements of related social and humanitarian disciplines that developed rapidly in the middle of the 20th century. A significant enrichment of the conceptual and methodological apparatus and, accordingly, our understanding of the processes of the past was expressed in the fact that "historians began to pose questions that they had never asked before, and to undertake research that once seemed impossible." The trend noted in 1970 in the past decades not only continued, but gained strength, and "cross-pollination" in the field of humanitarian knowledge covered ever more extensive research fields.
If we follow the metaphor of "research fields", then any complex of sciences, including historical ones, can be represented as a vast research space, consisting of fairly large territories, divided into separate fields cultivated using special technologies, which, in turn, are divided into more small areas and just narrow stripes. But many Siamese twins, brought to life by complex and contradictory processes of internal differentiation and interdisciplinary cooperation, multiple mergers and new demarcations of subdisciplines and related sciences, have long dug this once ordered space with a dense network of communications, making all the supposed delimitations more than conditional.
In the history of science, a long-noted pattern is manifested: periods characterized mainly by the accumulation of factual material inevitably give way to periods when the task of its scientific comprehension and generalization comes to the fore. The importance of such predominantly reflective moments in the development of each science is truly difficult to overestimate. This is the time of active self-knowledge, redefinition of the subject, change of goals and methods, categorical-conceptual apparatus. Exactly when science becomes able to look at itself from the outside, its cognitive means are tested, honed and enriched, the prerequisites are created for the transition to a qualitatively new stage of mastering the reality it is studying. But modern sciences do not develop in isolation, but in the system of sciences. This means that really major cognitive shifts in one of the links of the system cannot pass without leaving a trace for all the other links. Their interaction leads to the introduction of new objects, provides conditions for obtaining new knowledge, improves methods, techniques and models of explanation.
The second half of the 20th century was marked by complex processes of specialization, internal differentiation, cooperation and reintegration of various scientific disciplines and subdisciplines, which not only posed new problems to the professional consciousness of modern social scientists and humanities, but also created serious tensions in the academic environment. Comparative analysis of the situations that developed in the late 1960s - early 1970s, in the second half of the 1970s - early 1980s, in the late 1980s - early 1990s. and at the very turn of the two centuries, as well as the heated discussions that accompanied their transformation about the subject and methods of related sciences, fixes differences and changes in the very understanding of interdisciplinarity, in relations between individual disciplines, in the configuration of research fields and in the "balance of power" in the world of sciences about person and society. The question arises: what is the current role and prospects of interdisciplinary history in this complex? And what are the possible consequences of the emergence of a new concept of "polydisciplinarity" for the educational system and the reverse impact of its restructuring on the subsequent development of historical sciences?
The interdisciplinary system depends on the content of each of the human sciences, which are constantly evolving, although by no means synchronously. The evolution of each science is described by parallel or alternating processes of integration and disintegration. All the humanities are related to the same type of cognition and there are various connections between them, but the variety of research methods also generates many inconsistencies, due to which the ideal interdisciplinarity, in the form of the final unification of social and humanitarian sciences around a single methodology and a single subject, unattainable. Any translation of problems, methods, concepts initially gives rise to the problem of adaptation and therefore is inevitably accompanied by their distortion and transformation.
P. Bourdieu described the difficulties of interdisciplinary dialogue: "... The meeting of two disciplines is a meeting of two personal stories, and therefore two different cultures; each deciphers what the other says, based on its own code, from its own culture."
With interdisciplinary collaboration, the internal connection of the fundamental principles of each scientific discipline is destroyed and reorganized in accordance with the logic and structure of interacting related disciplines. But after a while, seemingly strong alliances begin to be perceived as "misalliances", and after the collapse of the old alliances, new ones emerge.
And in the middle of the 19th century, when various social sciences were just forming, there was a desire to apply interdisciplinary methods. E. Durkheim and the French sociological school advocated unified approaches in the social sciences. The formal method, based on comprehensive comparative analysis, allowed the social sciences to be grouped around sociology and to reduce history, geography, social statistics and ethnography to the category of auxiliary disciplines that have a base of empirical facts, but lack the ability to explain them and therefore do not have true independence. Later, the founders of the Annals, Marc Bloch and Lucienne Fevre, in whose professional development these processes played an important role, emphasized overcoming the barriers between different spheres of intellectual work and urged each specialist to use the experience of related disciplines. As you know, Blok and Febvre saw in the polydisciplinary approach to the past one of the most important elements of the entire scientific strategy, and at the same time they believed that it was historical science that should "take possession" of all related human sciences and become the "core" of the social sciences. By the time of Fernand Braudel, many of the difficulties of the interdisciplinary dialogue of the social sciences were better understood than before. In particular, it became clear that it was impossible to contemplate any direct integration of the social sciences into history. It is no coincidence that Braudel was already at the end of the 1950s. preferred in connection with an interdisciplinary approach to speak not about "colonization", but about the fraternal union of history with the social sciences. According to Braudel, history can claim no more than to become "an independent member of the necessary community of all human sciences," which must acquire a historical dimension. They must rediscover and use the historical dimension, outside of which "there can be no success."
Since the 1960s. there is a rapid development of the processes of interdisciplinary interaction. At this time, the very idea of \ u200b \ u200bthe relationship between adjacent disciplines also changes. A fundamentally new type of relationship between history and social sciences was based on mutual conviction of the need for an integral, interdisciplinary approach to the study of society and the formation of a new socio-historical science. The new movement reached its peak in the 1970s, when its basic principles were clearly formulated, aimed at a radical theoretical and methodological restructuring of historiography, ridding it of the tradition of individualizing history and turning it into a social science. To the fore was the task of broad cooperation and integration of history and related social sciences, the introduction of systemic and structural-analytical research methods, methods and techniques of quantitative analysis into history. A key place in their program was occupied by a radical expansion of the subject of historical science at the expense of the sphere of public life, getting rid of the priority of political history, with which historiography has traditionally been associated. The cognitive ideal of that time was embodied in sociology, and the creation of a fundamentally new historical science (it was called differently - social, socio-theoretical, sociological, socio-structural) was seen on the paths of interdisciplinary synthesis, which in turn required a change in the research program in accordance with with the methods and procedures of social sciences and a form of presentation of research results that is adequate to the general canons of social analysis.
However, this process was only part of a broader movement in social and humanitarian knowledge. Calls to destroy traditional barriers, to overcome the "exclusion zones" were expressed by representatives of all social sciences: "After a period of differentiation and the search for autonomy, all disciplines feel the need for unity. In place of" academic kleptomania ", which consists in the fact that other sciences borrow their observations, came the demand for an "interdisciplinary approach" connecting all virtues. "
The intensive and accelerated development of interdisciplinary ties of history, especially with such sciences as sociology, economics, psychology, linguistics, was perceived by many representatives of traditionally rooted schools with apprehension and caused active opposition. But there were also noticeable discrepancies in the understanding of the methods of interdisciplinary interaction by its supporters themselves. We can conditionally distinguish two ways of using the tools of the social sciences to analyze the phenomena of the past. The first was to rethink the historical material collected and described in the language of traditional historiography, in the concepts and concepts of the social sciences. The second - in the use of borrowed tools, mainly sociological (it is not for nothing that this interdisciplinary situation is associated with a "sociological turn" in historiography, already in the collection of empirical material, its processing and interpretation; in other words, it was a sociological study of the historical object of study.
"New historical science" is already in the full sense of the word interdisciplinary history. But it can be said that historical science arose on an "interdisciplinary basis," since it relied on the achievements of a number of special disciplines known as auxiliary ones. What was the novelty of this interdisciplinary situation? The concept of "interdisciplinarity" in historical science, as it was formed in the 1960s and 70s, was distinguished by the fact that not only methods but also objects of scientific interests of other disciplines were in the center of attention. Setting as its goal the comprehension of the place of man in history, the "new historical science" invaded the most diverse areas of the socio-historical being of man. The widespread use of the methods of sociology, social and structural linguistics, individual and social psychology, anthropology, geography, demography and other sciences ultimately led to changes on a revolutionary scale in the subject area of history, which included such areas as historical demography, historical geography, historical ecology, ethnohistory. , historical anthropology, historical psychology, historical sociology, etc. "Total" history has transferred to the territory of the historical discipline the historical sections of all sciences that have as their object society and man (in particular, anthropology, demography, psychology, etc.), and natural its environment (historical geography, historical climatology, etc.).
Already quite soon, new serious difficulties appeared due to the fact that the passion for interdisciplinary methods was not accompanied by deep study epistemological problems. Historians have rarely thought about the extent to which their interdisciplinary approaches and techniques affect the final result of research. In other words, to what extent are these or those methods adequate to the cognitive specifics of history as a science? The main problem is that the subject, as it were, belongs to history, and the methodology for studying it is determined by the subjects of those disciplines whose methods are borrowed, but the subject of their study is usually considered in one time dimension - the current present. Detect sources of motion and changes inside subject using structure-oriented approaches was not possible.
The paradox was that instead of solving the central cognitive problem of interdisciplinary history - a new historical synthesis, the situation that had developed by the end of the 1970s testified to the growing fragmentation of historical science: as a result of intense interdisciplinary interactions, a sharp expansion of the subject of history, the range of sources and research methods caused the emergence of many new subdisciplines and a significant complication of the structure of historical science. The American historian Theodore Rabb, in his forecast of development for the 1980s, expressed the fear that history might gradually break up into separate subdisciplines corresponding to various aspects of the study of the human world, just as happened with the splitting of the physical world in the sciences of nature. The inconsistency of such an interdisciplinary approach, which was designed to reveal its capabilities directly on empirical material, became obvious. At the same time, a new stage of interdisciplinary cooperation was marked by a change in the research strategy of social history from a macroanalytical to a microanalytical perspective, from studying large social processes of the past to analyzing interindividual relationships in small groups, ideas and beliefs, and everyday life experience of past generations.
"Man in society" - this is the object, the study of which, according to the plan of his supporters, was to ensure the convergence of different social sciences. This unifying object of research, anticipating any methodological approach, seemingly ensured the unity of the disciplines that historians were going to structure. The point was not to unite the human sciences around an a priori chosen methodology, but to practically create an interdisciplinary situation, offering various disciplines a common and, moreover, limited field of study. However, attempts to generalize the obtained material for a number of such projects have met with complete failure. This, of course, did not mean that the interdisciplinary approach should be abandoned altogether, but it sharpened the question of how it could be implemented. Progress on this issue was outlined in connection with a new, "anthropological turn" in the historiography of the last quarter of the 20th century.
In the early 1980s. the lines of force of interdisciplinary interaction are concentrated in the space of historical anthropology, there is a decisive shift from structural to sociocultural history associated with the spread of methods of cultural anthropology, social psychology, linguistics (primarily in the history of mentalities and folk culture), with the formation of a stable interest in microhistory, with " a return "from impersonal structures to the individual, to the analysis of specific life situations.
The possibility of historical synthesis and recreation of the history of a social person not as an object, but as a subject of history in the mainstream of historical anthropology was highly appreciated from the very beginning. During the discussion on the relationship between history and anthropology in the journal Historical Methods, when the need to overcome the consequences of the schism between social and cultural anthropology that had negatively affected both disciplines, the American historian Darreth Rathman gave a vivid (and surprisingly accurate) metaphor of the duality of history as a science in the image two-faced Clea, who, on the one hand, appears as the sister of mercy of Florence Nightingale, and on the other, as the impassive naturalist Marie Curie. Ratman emphasized that both sides of Clea can be realized in relations with social and cultural anthropology, which will allow history to turn into a humanitarian-social history science, in which Sister Nightingale will have a chance to discover radium.
The originality and advantage of interdisciplinary history in the image of historical anthropology lies in the fact that it proposes to synthesize the research results of the social sciences about the past in the focus of human individuality, which, being structured by the historical environment and interacting with it, combines the pictures of two realities - the objective reality of nature and society and the so-called subjective reality, formed from the totality of socio-cultural ideas.
And although already in the late 1980s - 1990s. serious changes are taking place as a result of the "semiotic challenge", "linguistic turn" and the emergence of the so-called postmodern situation in historiography, precisely with the further development of the historical and anthropological approach on a renewed basis - with the maximum expansion of the subject field, conceptual core and arsenal of applied analytical methods - - the present and, probably, the near future of interdisciplinary history is connected. It is on this basis that at the end of the 20th century it makes its next round - a "culturological" turn, as a result of which a sociocultural approach to the study of the historical past takes shape with a new large-scale task - to reveal the cultural mechanism of social interaction.
Taken as a whole, the features of interdisciplinary approaches in the second half of the 20th century confirm a close connection with changes in historical epistemology. It is interesting that, unlike representatives of other disciplines, historians did not immediately pay attention to the consequences for the very problem of interdisciplinarity that followed from the theory of "epistemes" by Michel Foucault. Let us recall some of its provisions, which are key in terms of understanding interdisciplinarity. According to this theory, the human sciences include three epistemological areas (with internal dismemberment and mutual intersections), which are determined by the tripartite relationship of the humanities to biology, economics, and philology. This is the "psychological" area, "where a living being opens itself to the very possibility of forming representations," the "sociological" area, "where the producing and consuming individual composes an idea of the society in which this activity takes place ...", and finally, the "area studies of literatures and myths "," verbal traces left behind by a culture or an individual. " The role of "categories" in that special kind of cognition, which is the humanities, is played by three fundamental models, transferred from three other areas - biology, economics, philology. "In biological projection, a person is identified as a creature that has functions, certain conditions of existence and the ability to determine the average norms of adaptation that allow it to function. In economic projection, a person is revealed as something that has interests and manifests itself in an extreme situation conflict with other people, or establishing a set of rules that are both a limitation and overcoming the conflict. Finally, in linguistic projection, human behavior manifests itself in its focus on expressing something, receives meaning, and everything that surrounds him, the entire grid of traces that he leaves behind him, folds into the system signs. Thus, these three pairs are - function and norm, conflict and the rule, meaning and system- completely and completely cover the entire area of human knowledge ... All these concepts find a response in the general space of the humanities, they are significant for each of its areas; ... all the humanities intersect and can always be mutually interpreted, so that their boundaries are erased, the number of adjacent and intermediate disciplines increases infinitely, and in the end their own object is dissolved ... ". The place of history, in Foucault's definition," is not among humanities and not even close to them. "She enters with them into" unusual, indefinite, inevitable relationship, deeper than the relationship of neighborhood in some common space ... Since a historical person is a person who lives, works and speaks , insofar as any content of history is sent from psychology, sociology, the sciences of language. And vice versa, since a human being becomes thoroughly historical, no content analyzed by the humanities can remain closed in itself, avoiding the movement of History ... Thus, History forms the "environment" of the humanities.
In connection with the formation of the postmodern paradigm and changes in the general epistemological strategy of the humanities, a revolution took place in the professional consciousness and self-consciousness of historians: the postmodern challenge forced us to reconsider the traditionally established ideas about their own profession, about the place of history in the system of humanitarian knowledge, about its internal structure and the status of its subdisciplines , about their research tasks. This is why many historians have met the "postmodernist offensive" literally with hostility: the psychological aspect of experiencing a paradigm shift played a decisive role in this. It was the threat to the social prestige of history education and the status of history as a science that led to the acuteness of the reaction and the restructuring of the ranks within the professional community. That generation of historians who conquered a leading position in the professional community at the turn of the 1960s - 70s. (and earlier), had a hard time going through the collapse of the familiar world, established corporate norms. The more constructive supporters of the so-called third position also opposed the tendency to deny history as a scientific form of knowledge. They saw the scientific nature of historical knowledge in the connectedness of the historian's judgments by the traces that he finds in the sources. From this point of view, the ambiguity of interpretation does not mean arbitrariness, it is only about the relativity and limitations of historical knowledge, about the rejection of the absolutized concept of objective truth. At the same time, the historian's subjectivity in his judgments about the past is subordinated to the norms of the historical craft and is limited by the control of the scientific community.
But the central point, of course, is the need to determine the specificity, and therefore - to redefine the subject of historical science. What is its own subject that distinguishes it from all other social sciences and humanities, and what is the essence of the latest interdisciplinarity? And positions differ on this issue.
Bernard Lepty, "from the standpoint of a historian-practitioner," formulated the main principles of interdisciplinarity in this way: 1) the introduction of new objects (no object of research is self-evident, only the viewpoint of the researcher determines its contours); 2) providing the conditions necessary for the emergence of new knowledge and a better understanding of reality, to overcome the burden of accumulated traditions (the practice of interdisciplinarity is a springboard for this incessant renewal); 3) improving the methodology, techniques and models, the system of explanation. In an interdisciplinary dialogue, Lepty noted, the historian could undertake the task of analyzing in detail how the evolution of human society is simultaneously contained in its past and is unpredictable.
According to Maurice Aimard, "history is not everything, but everything is history, or at least it can become, if only the objects of analysis are defined, questions are posed and sources are identified ..."
"History should be open to all directions of thought and hypotheses put forward by other disciplines that also study the sphere of the social ... If the" crisis of history "does exist, then it is a complex phenomenon in which a number of elements are combined. , which has significantly expanded the scope of analysis and is experiencing difficulties in determining the methods and the scope of their application, in developing working hypotheses.This is the crisis of history as an independent, distinctive field of research, caused by the intensification of relations with other disciplines, especially with the social sciences. borrowed from the latter their problematics, terminology, concepts, which seemed to be more rigorous in scientific terms.But we did not go to the logical end and did not pose the question in a cardinal way: is it necessary to preserve the boundaries rooted in the 19th century between different disciplines, or, on the contrary, the time has come to create a unified social science ..? Or maybe re who should talk about some kind of "internscience" that unites social or other disciplines, for example, into the "science of life and nature"? ... If the historian wants to offer an effective solution, then he should not limit himself to the framework of one discipline ... From now on history is written on the basis of a plurality of views and assessments. Very often interdisciplinary subjects become the subject of her interest. Questions of methodology and technique of work, criteria of scientific character are discussed ... Such a stage, undoubtedly, was necessary. It is also clear that, despite the fragmentation of forces and a new wave of epistemological research, most historians essentially feel that they belong to a disciplinary community. "
The problem of the formation of new interdisciplinary, by its origin, communities is beginning to occupy a worthy place in modern historical and scientific research. The very problem of the relationship between research fields and disciplines is of interest. One thing is the initial specialization in the form of a new subject orientation of individual researchers and the institutionalization of the allocated areas through the creation of associations of scientists, and another is the subsequent stage of its consolidation on a more solid basis, in formal university structures. At the same time, many specialized disciplines have a common theoretical, methodological and conceptual arsenal, that is, a general direction of development, and differ only in a special subject area. And this creates the preconditions not only for fruitful cooperation between different historical specializations and hybrid disciplines, but also for their reintegration. However, for all the interdisciplinary rhetoric, the old-fashioned academic structures have not lost their strength. In most cases, interdisciplinary cooperation continues to be limited to the framework of individual research projects, and the activity of new directions - to the sites of international scientific symposia and journals, also mainly international ones, which provide the means of scientific communication necessary to acquire at least informal autonomy for new disciplines.
Assessments of interdisciplinary approaches fluctuate between two extremes: glorification of the coming "golden age" and disappointment with the experience. The history of historical science is often viewed as a continuous struggle for liberation from foreign oppression: first from the oppression of the philosophy of history, then from political economy and sociology. Will this line be continued and how? Will history have to free itself from the oppression of semiotics and literary criticism? The answer may not be as straightforward as it seems now.
Historical science, in comparison with other specific social and humanitarian sciences, acts as an integral science: it deals in a complex with all the phenomena that are studied by these sciences separately. However, between the various areas of historical science itself, which have great specificity, it is difficult to find something in common other than the fact that they all tell about the past. Only ideas about what is significant in this past are characterized by high variability. So, all the same, it should be about what is in the focus of historical research?
The focus of modern historiography is man, and more and more - human individuality. History is viewed as the science of a person changing in the social-temporal space of the past and by his actions continuously changing this space.
After the "culturological" turn, interdisciplinary history, using the theoretical potential of related sciences, is looking for new integral approaches towards the study of individual activity, consciousness and human behavior. If at the first stage the methodological reorientation resulted in the dualism of macro- and microhistories with their incompatible conceptual grids and analytical tools, then by the mid-1990s. the experience of specific research was accumulated, which made it possible to present different options for solving the problem of integrating micro- and macro-approaches within the framework of "another social history", or "cultural history of the social", which presupposes the construction of social being through cultural practice, the possibilities of which, in turn, are determined and are limited to the practice of everyday relationships. Great hopes are pinned on a new paradigm of interdisciplinary analysis, capable of taking into account the creative role of the individual and the mechanism for making decisions by the individual, and thus designed to ensure the synthesis of the individual and the social in history.
E-mail address of the Editorial Office: [email protected]
This book is unique: for the first time in a single complex, the formation of historical consciousness and the evolution of historical thought, as well as the process of professionalization of historical knowledge, the formation of history as a scientific discipline are considered. Special attention is paid to the relationship of history with other areas of knowledge, the most common conceptual models of historical development, social functions of history, specific features of historical knowledge. The textbook describes various forms, methods and levels of perception of the past, concepts of representatives of historical thought of different eras, outstanding works of domestic and foreign historians, modern discussions about the nature, criteria of reliability, scientific and social status of historical knowledge.
Step 1. Select books in the catalog and press the "Buy" button;
Step 2. Go to the "Basket" section;
Step 3. Specify the required quantity, fill in the data in the Recipient and Delivery blocks;
Step 4. Press the button "Go to payment".
At the moment, it is possible to purchase printed books, electronic accesses or books as a gift to the library on the EBS website only for one hundred percent advance payment. After payment, you will be given access to the full text of the textbook in the framework of the Electronic Library, or we will begin to prepare an order for you in the printing house.
Attention! Please do not change the payment method for orders. If you have already chosen a payment method and failed to make a payment, you need to re-order the order and pay for it in another convenient way.
You can pay for your order in one of the following ways:
- Cashless way:
- Bank card: all fields of the form must be filled in. Some banks ask to confirm the payment - for this an SMS code will be sent to your phone number.
- Online banking: banks cooperating with the payment service will offer their own form for filling out. Please enter the data correctly in all fields.
For example, for "class =" text-primary "> Sberbank Online mobile phone number and email required. For "class =" text-primary "> Alfa-bank you will need a login to the Alfa-Click service and email. - Electronic wallet: if you have a Yandex wallet or Qiwi Wallet, you can pay for the order through them. To do this, select the appropriate payment method and fill in the proposed fields, then the system will redirect you to the page for confirming the invoice.