| |
This research is devoted to the identification of the specifics of N.M. Karamzin's philosophical, historical and political views, as well as to the determination of his place in the Russian historiographical tradition through the prism of the assessments given to his works by the most prominent representatives of the «state school» S.M. Solovyov and V.O. Klyuchevsky. The methodological basis of the research is the principle of historical and genetic analysis, supplemented by the comparative historical method for comparing the judgments of the two classics about the Karamzin heritage, as well as the method of critical analysis of primary sources, primarily the "History of the Russian State" and "Notes on Ancient and New Russia". In the course, it is established that, despite the conservative and monarchical pathos that permeates the «History of the Russian State», it is its scientific apparatus and literary language that have become the foundation for professional academic historiography. At the same time, the nature of the discrepancies between N.M. Karamzin and the later «state school» is revealed: S.M. Solovyov resolutely criticized Karamzin's «moralism» and the obvious lack of critical work with sources. In his studies, V.O. Klyuchevsky, on the contrary, paying tribute to the literary genius of the historiographer, noted with regret the absence in his work of an analysis of the socio-economic causes that drive historical events. The theoretical significance of the work lies in the clarification of the role of N.M. Karamzin: he is the first representative of critical historiography, and the era of Russian historiography itself demonstrates a complex dialectic of continuity and gap between the Karamzin and post-Karamzin (Solovyov) stages.
Keywords:N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyov, V.O. Klyuchevsky, historiography, «History of the Russian State», conservatism, public school
|
LEGAL
INFORMATION:
