Какое слово в переводе с греческого имеет такие значения исследование рассказ о событиях

This article is about the academic discipline. For a general history of human beings, see Human history. For other uses, see History (disambiguation).

History (derived from Ancient Greek ἱστορία (historía) ‘inquiry; knowledge acquired by investigation’)^[1] is the systematic study and the documentation of the human activity.^[2][3] The time period of event before the invention of writing systems is considered prehistory.^[4] «History» is an umbrella term comprising past events as well as the memory, discovery, collection, organization, presentation, and interpretation of these events. Historians seek knowledge of the past using historical sources such as written documents, oral accounts, art and material artifacts, and ecological markers.^[5] History is not complete and still has debatable mysteries.

History is also an academic discipline which uses narrative to describe, examine, question, and analyze past events, and investigate their patterns of cause and effect.^[6][7] Historians often debate which narrative best explains an event, as well as the significance of different causes and effects. Historians also debate the nature of history as an end in itself, as well as its usefulness to give perspective on the problems of the present.^{[6][8][9][10]}

Stories common to a particular culture, but not supported by external sources (such as the tales surrounding King Arthur), are usually classified as cultural heritage or legends.^[11][12] History differs from myth in that it is supported by verifiable evidence. However, ancient cultural influences have helped spawn variant interpretations of the nature of history which have evolved over the centuries and continue to change today. The modern study of history is wide-ranging, and includes the study of specific regions and the study of certain topical or thematic elements of historical investigation. History is often taught as a part of primary and secondary education, and the academic study of history is a major discipline in university studies.

Herodotus, a 5th-century BC Greek historian, is often considered the «father of history» (as he was one of the first historians) in the Western tradition,^[13] although he has also been criticized as the «father of lies».^[14][15] Along with his contemporary Thucydides, he helped form the foundations for the modern study of past events and societies.^[16] Their works continue to be read today, and the gap between the culture-focused Herodotus and the military-focused Thucydides remains a point of contention or approach in modern historical writing. In East Asia, a state chronicle, the Spring and Autumn Annals, was reputed to date from as early as 722 BC, although only 2nd-century BC texts have survived.

Etymology

The word history comes from historía (Ancient Greek: ἱστορία, romanized: historíā, lit. ‘inquiry, knowledge from inquiry, or judge’^[17]). It was in that sense that Aristotle used the word in his History of Animals.^[18] The ancestor word ἵστωρ is attested early on in Homeric Hymns, Heraclitus, the Athenian ephebes’ oath, and in Boeotic inscriptions (in a legal sense, either «judge» or «witness», or similar). The Greek word was borrowed into Classical Latin as historia, meaning «investigation, inquiry, research, account, description, written account of past events, writing of history, historical narrative, recorded knowledge of past events, story, narrative». History was borrowed from Latin (possibly via Old Irish or Old Welsh) into Old English as stær («history, narrative, story»), but this word fell out of use in the late Old English period.^[19] Meanwhile, as Latin became Old French (and Anglo-Norman), historia developed into forms such as istorie, estoire, and historie, with new developments in the meaning: «account of the events of a person’s life (beginning of the 12th century), chronicle, account of events as relevant to a group of people or people in general (1155), dramatic or pictorial representation of historical events (c. 1240), body of knowledge relative to human evolution, science (c. 1265), narrative of real or imaginary events, story (c. 1462)».^[19]

It was from Anglo-Norman that history was borrowed into Middle English, and this time the loan stuck. It appears in the 13th-century Ancrene Wisse, but seems to have become a common word in the late 14th century, with an early attestation appearing in John Gower’s Confessio Amantis of the 1390s (VI.1383): «I finde in a bok compiled | To this matiere an old histoire, | The which comth nou to mi memoire». In Middle English, the meaning of history was «story» in general. The restriction to the meaning «the branch of knowledge that deals with past events; the formal record or study of past events, esp. human affairs» arose in the mid-15th century.^[19] With the Renaissance, older senses of the word were revived, and it was in the Greek sense that Francis Bacon used the term in the late 16th century, when he wrote about natural history. For him, historia was «the knowledge of objects determined by space and time», that sort of knowledge provided by memory (while science was provided by reason, and poetry was provided by fantasy).^[20]

In an expression of the linguistic synthetic vs. analytic/isolating dichotomy, English like Chinese (史 vs. 诌) now designates separate words for human history and storytelling in general. In modern German, French, and most Germanic and Romance languages, which are solidly synthetic and highly inflected, the same word is still used to mean both «history» and «story». Historian in the sense of a «researcher of history» is attested from 1531. In all European languages, the substantive history is still used to mean both «what happened with men», and «the scholarly study of the happened», the latter sense sometimes distinguished with a capital letter, or the word historiography.^[18] The adjective historical is attested from 1661, and historic from 1669.^[21]

Description

Historians write in the context of their own time, and with due regard to the current dominant ideas of how to interpret the past, and sometimes write to provide lessons for their own society. In the words of Benedetto Croce, «All history is contemporary history». History is facilitated by the formation of a «true discourse of past» through the production of narrative and analysis of past events relating to the human race.^[22] The modern discipline of history is dedicated to the institutional production of this discourse.

All events that are remembered and preserved in some authentic form constitute the historical record.^[23] The task of historical discourse is to identify the sources which can most usefully contribute to the production of accurate accounts of past. Therefore, the constitution of the historian’s archive is a result of circumscribing a more general archive by invalidating the usage of certain texts and documents (by falsifying their claims to represent the «true past»). Part of the historian’s role is to skillfully and objectively use the vast amount of sources from the past, most often found in the archives. The process of creating a narrative inevitably generates a silence as historians remember or emphasize different events of the past.^{[24][clarification needed]}

The study of history has sometimes been classified as part of the humanities and at other times as part of the social sciences.^[25] It can also be seen as a bridge between those two broad areas, incorporating methodologies from both. Some individual historians strongly support one or the other classification.^[26] In the 20th century the Annales school revolutionized the study of history, by using such outside disciplines as economics, sociology, and geography in the study of global history.^[27]

Traditionally, historians have recorded events of the past, either in writing or by passing on an oral tradition, and have attempted to answer historical questions through the study of written documents and oral accounts. From the beginning, historians have also used such sources as monuments, inscriptions, and pictures. In general, the sources of historical knowledge can be separated into three categories: what is written, what is said, and what is physically preserved, and historians often consult all three.^[28] But writing is the marker that separates history from what comes before.

Archeology is especially helpful in unearthing buried sites and objects, which contribute to the study of history. Archeological finds rarely stand alone, with narrative sources complementing its discoveries. Archeology’s methodologies and approaches are independent from the field of history. «Historical archaeology» is a specific branch of archeology which often contrasts its conclusions against those of contemporary textual sources. For example, Mark Leone, the excavator and interpreter of historical Annapolis, Maryland, US, has sought to understand the contradiction between textual documents idealizing «liberty» and the material record, demonstrating the possession of slaves and the inequalities of wealth made apparent by the study of the total historical environment.

There are varieties of ways in which history can be organized, including chronologically, culturally, territorially, and thematically. These divisions are not mutually exclusive, and significant intersections are often present. It is possible for historians to concern themselves with both the very specific and the very general, although the modern trend has been toward specialization. The area called Big History resists this specialization, and searches for universal patterns or trends. History has often been studied with some practical or theoretical aim, but also may be studied out of simple intellectual curiosity.^[29]

Prehistory

Human history is the memory of the past experience of Homo sapiens sapiens around the world, as that experience has been preserved, largely in written records. By «prehistory», historians mean the recovery of knowledge of the past in an area where no written records exist, or where the writing of a culture is not understood. By studying painting, drawings, carvings, and other artifacts, some information can be recovered even in the absence of a written record. Since the 20th century, the study of prehistory is considered essential to avoid history’s implicit exclusion of certain civilizations, such as those of Sub-Saharan Africa and pre-Columbian America. Historians in the West have been criticized for focusing disproportionately on the Western world.^[30] In 1961, British historian E. H. Carr wrote:

The line of demarcation between prehistoric and historical times is crossed when people cease to live only in the present, and become consciously interested both in their past and in their future. History begins with the handing down of tradition; and tradition means the carrying of the habits and lessons of the past into the future. Records of the past begin to be kept for the benefit of future generations.^[31]

This definition includes within the scope of history the strong interests of peoples, such as Indigenous Australians and New Zealand Māori in the past, and the oral records maintained and transmitted to succeeding generations, even before their contact with European civilization.

Historiography

Historiography has a number of related meanings.^[32] Firstly, it can refer to how history has been produced: the story of the development of methodology and practices (for example, the move from short-term biographical narrative toward long-term thematic analysis). Secondly, it can refer to what has been produced: a specific body of historical writing (for example, «medieval historiography during the 1960s» means «Works of medieval history written during the 1960s»).^[32] Thirdly, it may refer to why history is produced: the philosophy of history. As a meta-level analysis of descriptions of the past, this third conception can relate to the first two in that the analysis usually focuses on the narratives, interpretations, world view, use of evidence, or method of presentation of other historians. Professional historians also debate the question of whether history can be taught as a single coherent narrative or a series of competing narratives.^[33][34]

Methods

The historical method comprises the techniques and guidelines by which historians use primary sources and other evidence to research and then to write history.

Herodotus of Halicarnassus (484 BC–c. 425 BC)^[35] has generally been acclaimed as the «father of history». However, his contemporary Thucydides (c. 460 BC–c. 400 BC) is credited with having first approached history with a well-developed historical method in his work the History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides, unlike Herodotus, regarded history as being the product of the choices and actions of human beings, and looked at cause and effect, rather than as the result of divine intervention (though Herodotus was not wholly committed to this idea himself).^[35] In his historical method, Thucydides emphasized chronology, a nominally neutral point of view, and that the human world was the result of the actions of human beings. Greek historians also viewed history as cyclical, with events regularly recurring.^[36]

There were historical traditions and sophisticated use of historical method in ancient and medieval China. The groundwork for professional historiography in East Asia was established by the Han dynasty court historian known as Sima Qian (145–90 BC), author of the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji). For the quality of his written work, Sima Qian is posthumously known as the Father of Chinese historiography. Chinese historians of subsequent dynastic periods in China used his Shiji as the official format for historical texts, as well as for biographical literature.^{[citation needed]}

Saint Augustine was influential in Christian and Western thought at the beginning of the medieval period. Through the Medieval and Renaissance periods, history was often studied through a sacred or religious perspective. Around 1800, German philosopher and historian Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel brought philosophy and a more secular approach in historical study.^[29]

In the preface to his book, the Muqaddimah (1377), the Arab historian and early sociologist, Ibn Khaldun, warned of seven mistakes that he thought that historians regularly committed. In this criticism, he approached the past as strange and in need of interpretation. The originality of Ibn Khaldun was to claim that the cultural difference of another age must govern the evaluation of relevant historical material, to distinguish the principles according to which it might be possible to attempt the evaluation, and lastly, to feel the need for experience, in addition to rational principles, in order to assess a culture of the past. Ibn Khaldun often criticized «idle superstition and uncritical acceptance of historical data». As a result, he introduced a scientific method to the study of history, and he often referred to it as his «new science».^[37] His historical method also laid the groundwork for the observation of the role of state, communication, propaganda and systematic bias in history,^[38] and he is thus considered to be the «father of historiography»^[39]
[40] or the «father of the philosophy of history».^[41]

In the West, historians developed modern methods of historiography in the 17th and 18th centuries, especially in France and Germany. In 1851, Herbert Spencer summarized these methods:

From the successive strata of our historical deposits, they [Historians] diligently gather all the highly colored fragments, pounce upon everything that is curious and sparkling and chuckle like children over their glittering acquisitions; meanwhile the rich veins of wisdom that ramify amidst this worthless debris, lie utterly neglected. Cumbrous volumes of rubbish are greedily accumulated, while those masses of rich ore, that should have been dug out, and from which golden truths might have been smelted, are left untaught and unsought^[42]

By the «rich ore» Spencer meant scientific theory of history. Meanwhile, Henry Thomas Buckle expressed a dream of history becoming one day science:

In regard to nature, events apparently the most irregular and capricious have been explained and have been shown to be in accordance with certain fixed and universal laws. This have been done because men of ability and, above all, men of patient, untiring thought have studied events with the view of discovering their regularity, and if human events were subject to a similar treatment, we have every right to expect similar results^[43]

Contrary to Buckle’s dream, the 19th-century historian with greatest influence on methods became Leopold von Ranke in Germany. He limited history to «what really happened» and by this directed the field further away from science. For Ranke, historical data should be collected carefully, examined objectively and put together with critical rigor. But these procedures «are merely the prerequisites and preliminaries of science. The heart of science is searching out order and regularity in the data being examined and in formulating generalizations or laws about them.»^[44]

As Historians like Ranke and many who followed him have pursued it, no, history is not a science. Thus if Historians tell us that, given the manner in which he practices his craft, it cannot be considered a science, we must take him at his word. If he is not doing science, then, whatever else he is doing, he is not doing science. The traditional Historian is thus no scientist and history, as conventionally practiced, is not a science.^[45]

In the 20th century, academic historians focused less on epic nationalistic narratives, which often tended to glorify the nation or great men, to more objective and complex analyses of social and intellectual forces. A major trend of historical methodology in the 20th century was a tendency to treat history more as a social science rather than as an art, which traditionally had been the case. Some of the leading advocates of history as a social science were a diverse collection of scholars which included Fernand Braudel, E. H. Carr, Fritz Fischer, Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Bruce Trigger, Marc Bloch, Karl Dietrich Bracher, Peter Gay, Robert Fogel, Lucien Febvre, and Lawrence Stone. Many of the advocates of history as a social science were or are noted for their multidisciplinary approach. Braudel combined history with geography, Bracher history with political science, Fogel history with economics, Gay history with psychology, Trigger history with archeology, while Wehler, Bloch, Fischer, Stone, Febvre, and Le Roy Ladurie have in varying and differing ways amalgamated history with sociology, geography, anthropology, and economics. Nevertheless, these multidisciplinary approaches failed to produce a theory of history. So far only one theory of history came from the pen of a professional Historian.^[46] Whatever other theories of history we have, they were written by experts from other fields (for example, Marxian theory of history). More recently, the field of digital history has begun to address ways of using computer technology to pose new questions to historical data and generate digital scholarship.

In sincere opposition to the claims of history as a social science, historians such as Hugh Trevor-Roper, John Lukacs, Donald Creighton, Gertrude Himmelfarb, and Gerhard Ritter argued that the key to the historians’ work was the power of the imagination, and hence contended that history should be understood as an art. French historians associated with the Annales School introduced quantitative history, using raw data to track the lives of typical individuals, and were prominent in the establishment of cultural history (cf. histoire des mentalités). Intellectual historians such as Herbert Butterfield, Ernst Nolte and George Mosse have argued for the significance of ideas in history. American historians, motivated by the civil rights era, focused on formerly overlooked ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic groups. Another genre of social history to emerge in the post-WWII era was Alltagsgeschichte (History of Everyday Life). Scholars such as Martin Broszat, Ian Kershaw and Detlev Peukert sought to examine what everyday life was like for ordinary people in 20th-century Germany, especially in the Nazi period.

Marxist historians such as Eric Hobsbawm, E. P. Thompson, Rodney Hilton, Georges Lefebvre, Eugene Genovese, Isaac Deutscher, C. L. R. James, Timothy Mason, Herbert Aptheker, Arno J. Mayer, and Christopher Hill have sought to validate Karl Marx’s theories by analyzing history from a Marxist perspective. In response to the Marxist interpretation of history, historians such as François Furet, Richard Pipes, J. C. D. Clark, Roland Mousnier, Henry Ashby Turner, and Robert Conquest have offered anti-Marxist interpretations of history. Feminist historians such as Joan Wallach Scott, Claudia Koonz, Natalie Zemon Davis, Sheila Rowbotham, Gisela Bock, Gerda Lerner, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, and Lynn Hunt have argued for the importance of studying the experience of women in the past. In recent years, postmodernists have challenged the validity and need for the study of history on the basis that all history is based on the personal interpretation of sources. In his 1997 book In Defence of History, Richard J. Evans defended the worth of history. Another defense of history from postmodernist criticism was the Australian historian Keith Windschuttle’s 1994 book, The Killing of History.

Today, most historians begin their research process in the archives, on either a physical or digital platform. They often propose an argument and use their research to support it. John H. Arnold proposed that history is an argument, which creates the possibility of creating change.^[5] Digital information companies, such as Google, have sparked controversy over the role of internet censorship in information access.^[47]

Marxian theory

The Marxist theory of historical materialism theorises that society is fundamentally determined by the material conditions at any given time – in other words, the relationships which people have with each other in order to fulfill basic needs such as feeding, clothing and housing themselves and their families.^[48] Overall, Marx and Engels claimed to have identified five successive stages of the development of these material conditions in Western Europe.^[49] Marxist historiography was once orthodoxy in the Soviet Union, but since the collapse of communism there in 1991, Mikhail Krom says it has been reduced to the margins of scholarship.^[50]

Potential shortcomings in the production of history

Many historians believe that the production of history is embedded with bias because events and known facts in history can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Constantin Fasolt suggested that history is linked to politics by the practice of silence itself.^[51] He also said: «A second common view of the link between history and politics rests on the elementary observation that historians are often influenced by politics.»^[51] According to Michel-Rolph Trouillot, the historical process is rooted in the archives, therefore silences, or parts of history that are forgotten, may be an intentional part of a narrative strategy that dictates how areas of history are remembered.^[24] Historical omissions can occur in many ways and can have a profound effect on historical records. Information can also purposely be excluded or left out accidentally. Historians have coined multiple terms that describe the act of omitting historical information, including: «silencing»,^[24] «selective memory»,^[52] and erasures.^[53] Gerda Lerner, a twentieth century historian who focused much of her work on historical omissions involving women and their accomplishments, explained the negative impact that these omissions had on minority groups.^[52]

Environmental historian William Cronon proposed three ways to combat bias and ensure authentic and accurate narratives: narratives must not contradict known fact, they must make ecological sense (specifically for environmental history), and published work must be reviewed by scholarly community and other historians to ensure accountability.^[53]

Areas of study

Periods

Historical study often focuses on events and developments that occur in particular blocks of time. Historians give these periods of time names in order to allow «organising ideas and classificatory generalisations» to be used by historians.^[54] The names given to a period can vary with geographical location, as can the dates of the beginning and end of a particular period. Centuries and decades are commonly used periods and the time they represent depends on the dating system used. Most periods are constructed retrospectively and so reflect value judgments made about the past. The way periods are constructed and the names given to them can affect the way they are viewed and studied.^[55]

Prehistoric periodization

The field of history generally leaves prehistory to archeologists, who have entirely different sets of tools and theories. In archeology, the usual method for periodization of the distant prehistoric past is to rely on changes in material culture and technology, such as the Stone Age, Bronze Age, and Iron Age, with subdivisions that are also based on different styles of material remains. Here prehistory is divided into a series of «chapters» so that periods in history could unfold not only in a relative chronology but also narrative chronology.^[56] This narrative content could be in the form of functional-economic interpretation. There are periodizations, however, that do not have this narrative aspect, relying largely on relative chronology, and that are thus devoid of any specific meaning.

Despite the development over recent decades of the ability through radiocarbon dating and other scientific methods to give actual dates for many sites or artefacts, these long-established schemes seem likely to remain in use. In many cases neighboring cultures with writing have left some history of cultures without it, which may be used. Periodization, however, is not viewed as a perfect framework, with one account explaining that «cultural changes do not conveniently start and stop (combinedly) at periodization boundaries» and that different trajectories of change need to be studied in their own right before they get intertwined with cultural phenomena.^[57]

Geographical locations

Particular geographical locations can form the basis of historical study, for example, continents, countries, and cities. Understanding why historic events took place is important. To do this, historians often turn to geography. According to Jules Michelet in his book Histoire de France (1833), «without geographical basis, the people, the makers of history, seem to be walking on air».^[58] Weather patterns, the water supply, and the landscape of a place all affect the lives of the people who live there. For example, to explain why the ancient Egyptians developed a successful civilization, studying the geography of Egypt is essential. Egyptian civilization was built on the banks of the Nile River, which flooded each year, depositing soil on its banks. The rich soil could help farmers grow enough crops to feed the people in the cities. That meant everyone did not have to farm, so some people could perform other jobs that helped develop the civilization. There is also the case of climate, which historians like Ellsworth Huntington and Ellen Churchill Semple cited as a crucial influence on the course of history. Huntington and Semple further argued that climate has an impact on racial temperament.^[59]

Regions

• History of Africa begins with the first emergence of modern human beings on the continent, continuing into its modern present as a patchwork of diverse and politically developing nation states.
• History of the Americas is the collective history of North and South America, including Central America and the Caribbean.
  • History of North America is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation on the continent in the Earth’s northern and western hemisphere.
  • History of Central America is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation on the continent in the Earth’s western hemisphere.
  • History of the Caribbean begins with the oldest evidence where 7,000-year-old remains have been found.
  • History of South America is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation on the continent in the Earth’s southern and western hemisphere.

• History of Antarctica emerges from early Western theories of a vast continent, known as Terra Australis, believed to exist in the far south of the globe.
• History of Eurasia is the collective history of several distinct peripheral coastal regions: the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Europe, linked by the interior mass of the Eurasian steppe of Central Asia and Eastern Europe.
  • History of Europe describes the passage of time from humans inhabiting the European continent to the present day.
  • History of Asia can be seen as the collective history of several distinct peripheral coastal regions, East Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East linked by the interior mass of the Eurasian steppe.
    • History of East Asia is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation in East Asia.
    • History of the Middle East begins with the earliest civilizations in the region now known as the Middle East that were established around 3000 BC, in Mesopotamia (Iraq).
    • History of India is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation in the Sub-Himalayan region.
    • History of Southeast Asia has been characterized as interaction between regional players and foreign powers.
• History of Oceania is the collective history of Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands.
  • History of Australia starts with the documentation of the Makassar trading with Indigenous Australians on Australia’s north coast.
  • History of New Zealand dates back at least 700 years to when it was discovered and settled by Polynesians, who developed a distinct Māori culture centered on kinship links and land.
  • History of the Pacific Islands covers the history of the islands in the Pacific Ocean.

Military

Military history concerns warfare, strategies, battles, weapons, and the psychology of combat.^[61] The «new military history» since the 1970s has been concerned with soldiers more than generals, with psychology more than tactics, and with the broader impact of warfare on society and culture.^[62]

Religious

The history of religion has been a main theme for both secular and religious historians for centuries, and continues to be taught in seminaries and academe. Leading journals include Church History, The Catholic Historical Review, and History of Religions. Topics range widely from political and cultural and artistic dimensions, to theology and liturgy.^[63] This subject studies religions from all regions and areas of the world where humans have lived.^[64]

Social history, sometimes called the new social history, is the field that includes history of ordinary people and their strategies and institutions for coping with life.^[65] In its «golden age» it was a major growth field in the 1960s and 1970s among scholars, and still is well represented in history departments. In two decades from 1975 to 1995, the proportion of professors of history in American universities identifying with social history rose from 31% to 41%, while the proportion of political historians fell from 40% to 30%.^[66] In the history departments of British universities in 2007, of the 5723 faculty members, 1644 (29%) identified themselves with social history while political history came next with 1425 (25%).^[67] The «old» social history before the 1960s was a hodgepodge of topics without a central theme, and it often included political movements, like Populism, that were «social» in the sense of being outside the elite system. Social history was contrasted with political history, intellectual history and the history of great men. English historian G. M. Trevelyan saw it as the bridging point between economic and political history, reflecting that, «Without social history, economic history is barren and political history unintelligible.»^[68] While the field has often been viewed negatively as history with the politics left out, it has also been defended as «history with the people put back in».^[69]

Subfields

The chief subfields of social history include:

• Black history
• Demographic history
• Ethnic history
• Gender history
• History of childhood
• History of education
• History of the family
• Labor history
• LGBT history
• Rural history
• Urban history
  • American urban history
• Women’s history

Cultural

Cultural history replaced social history as the dominant form in the 1980s and 1990s. It typically combines the approaches of anthropology and history to look at language, popular cultural traditions and cultural interpretations of historical experience. It examines the records and narrative descriptions of past knowledge, customs, and arts of a group of people. How peoples constructed their memory of the past is a major topic. Cultural history includes the study of art in society as well is the study of images and human visual production (iconography).^[70]

Diplomatic

Diplomatic history focuses on the relationships between nations, primarily regarding diplomacy and the causes of wars.^[71] More recently it looks at the causes of peace and human rights. It typically presents the viewpoints of the foreign office, and long-term strategic values, as the driving force of continuity and change in history. This type of political history is the study of the conduct of international relations between states or across state boundaries over time. Historian Muriel Chamberlain notes that after the First World War, «diplomatic history replaced constitutional history as the flagship of historical investigation, at once the most important, most exact and most sophisticated of historical studies».^[72] She adds that after 1945, the trend reversed, allowing social history to replace it.

Economic

Although economic history has been well established since the late 19th century, in recent years academic studies have shifted more and more toward economics departments and away from traditional history departments.^[73] Business history deals with the history of individual business organizations, business methods, government regulation, labour relations, and impact on society. It also includes biographies of individual companies, executives, and entrepreneurs. It is related to economic history. Business history is most often taught in business schools.^[74]

Environmental

Environmental history is a new field that emerged in the 1980s to look at the history of the environment, especially in the long run, and the impact of human activities upon it.^[75] It is an offshoot of the environmental movement, which was kickstarted by Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in the 1960s.

World

World history is the study of major civilizations over the last 3000 years or so. World history is primarily a teaching field, rather than a research field. It gained popularity in the United States,^[76] Japan^[77] and other countries after the 1980s with the realization that students need a broader exposure to the world as globalization proceeds.

It has led to highly controversial interpretations by Oswald Spengler and Arnold J. Toynbee, among others.

The World History Association publishes the Journal of World History every quarter since 1990.^[78] The H-World discussion list^[79] serves as a network of communication among practitioners of world history, with discussions among scholars, announcements, syllabi, bibliographies and book reviews.

People’s

A people’s history is a type of historical work which attempts to account for historical events from the perspective of common people. A people’s history is the history of the world that is the story of mass movements and of the outsiders. Individuals or groups not included in the past in other types of writing about history are the primary focus, which includes the disenfranchised, the oppressed, the poor, the nonconformists, and the otherwise forgotten people. The authors are typically on the left and have a socialist model in mind, as in the approach of the History Workshop movement in Britain in the 1960s.^[80]

Intellectual

Intellectual history and the history of ideas emerged in the mid-20th century, with the focus on the intellectuals and their books on the one hand, and on the other the study of ideas as disembodied objects with a career of their own.^[81][82]

Gender

Gender history is a subfield of History and Gender studies, which looks at the past from the perspective of gender. The outgrowth of gender history from women’s history stemmed from many non-feminist historians dismissing the importance of women in history. According to Joan W. Scott, «Gender is a constitutive element of social relationships based on perceived differences between the sexes, and gender is a primary way of signifying relations of power»,^[83] meaning that gender historians study the social effects of perceived differences between the sexes and how all genders use allotted power in societal and political structures. Despite being a relatively new field, gender history has had a significant effect on the general study of history. Gender history traditionally differs from women’s history in its inclusion of all aspects of gender such as masculinity and femininity, and today’s gender history extends to include people who identify outside of that binary.
LGBT history deals with the first recorded instances of same-sex love and sexuality of ancient civilizations, and involves the history of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) peoples and cultures around the world.^[84]

Public

Public history describes the broad range of activities undertaken by people with some training in the discipline of history who are generally working outside of specialized academic settings. Public history practice has quite deep roots in the areas of historic preservation, archival science, oral history, museum curatorship, and other related fields. The term itself began to be used in the U.S. and Canada in the late 1970s, and the field has become increasingly professionalized since that time. Some of the most common settings for public history are museums, historic homes and historic sites, parks, battlefields, archives, film and television companies, and all levels of government.^[85]

Historians

Professional and amateur historians discover, collect, organize, and present information about past events. They discover this information through archeological evidence, written primary sources, verbal stories or oral histories, and other archival material. In lists of historians, historians can be grouped by order of the historical period in which they were writing, which is not necessarily the same as the period in which they specialized. Chroniclers and annalists, though they are not historians in the true sense, are also frequently included.

Judgement

Since the 20th century, Western historians have disavowed the aspiration to provide the «judgement of history».^[86] The goals of historical judgements or interpretations are separate to those of legal judgements, that need to be formulated quickly after the events and be final.^[87] A related issue to that of the judgement of history is that of collective memory.

Pseudohistory

Pseudohistory is a term applied to texts which purport to be historical in nature but which depart from standard historiographical conventions in a way which undermines their conclusions. It is closely related to deceptive historical revisionism. Works which draw controversial conclusions from new, speculative, or disputed historical evidence, particularly in the fields of national, political, military, and religious affairs, are often rejected as pseudohistory.

Teaching

Scholarship vs teaching

A major intellectual battle took place in Britain in the early twentieth century regarding the place of history teaching in the universities. At Oxford and Cambridge, scholarship was downplayed. Professor Charles Harding Firth, Oxford’s Regius Professor of history in 1904 ridiculed the system as best suited to produce superficial journalists. The Oxford tutors, who had more votes than the professors, fought back in defense of their system saying that it successfully produced Britain’s outstanding statesmen, administrators, prelates, and diplomats, and that mission was as valuable as training scholars. The tutors dominated the debate until after the Second World War. It forced aspiring young scholars to teach at outlying schools, such as Manchester University, where Thomas Frederick Tout was professionalizing the History undergraduate programme by introducing the study of original sources and requiring the writing of a thesis.^[88][89]

In the United States, scholarship was concentrated at the major PhD-producing universities, while the large number of other colleges and universities focused on undergraduate teaching. A tendency in the 21st century was for the latter schools to increasingly demand scholarly productivity of their younger tenure-track faculty. Furthermore, universities have increasingly relied on inexpensive part-time adjuncts to do most of the classroom teaching.^[90]

Nationalism

From the origins of national school systems in the 19th century, the teaching of history to promote national sentiment has been a high priority. In the United States after World War I, a strong movement emerged at the university level to teach courses in Western Civilization, so as to give students a common heritage with Europe. In the U.S. after 1980, attention increasingly moved toward teaching world history or requiring students to take courses in non-western cultures, to prepare students for life in a globalized economy.^[91]

At the university level, historians debate the question of whether history belongs more to social science or to the humanities. Many view the field from both perspectives.

The teaching of history in French schools was influenced by the Nouvelle histoire as disseminated after the 1960s by Cahiers pédagogiques and Enseignement and other journals for teachers. Also influential was the Institut national de recherche et de documentation pédagogique, (INRDP). Joseph Leif, the Inspector-general of teacher training, said pupils children should learn about historians’ approaches as well as facts and dates. Louis François, Dean of the History/Geography group in the Inspectorate of National Education advised that teachers should provide historic documents and promote «active methods» which would give pupils «the immense happiness of discovery». Proponents said it was a reaction against the memorization of names and dates that characterized teaching and left the students bored. Traditionalists protested loudly it was a postmodern innovation that threatened to leave the youth ignorant of French patriotism and national identity.^[92]

Bias in school teaching

In several countries history textbooks are tools to foster nationalism and patriotism, and give students the official narrative about national enemies.^[93]

In many countries, history textbooks are sponsored by the national government and are written to put the national heritage in the most favorable light. For example, in Japan, mention of the Nanking Massacre has been removed from textbooks and the entire Second World War is given cursory treatment. Other countries have complained.^[94] Another example includes Turkey, where there is no mention of the Armenian Genocide in Turkish textbooks as a result of the denial of the genocide.^[95]

It was standard policy in communist countries to present only a rigid Marxist historiography.^[96][97]

In the United States, textbooks published by the same company often differ in content from state to state.^[98] An example of content that is represented different in different regions of the country is the history of the Southern states, where slavery and the American Civil War are treated as controversial topics. McGraw-Hill Education for example, was criticized for describing Africans brought to American plantations as «workers» instead of slaves in a textbook.^[99]

Academic historians have often fought against the politicization of the textbooks, sometimes with success.^[100][101]

In 21st-century Germany, the history curriculum is controlled by the 16 states, and is characterized not by superpatriotism but rather by an «almost pacifistic and deliberately unpatriotic undertone» and reflects «principles formulated by international organizations such as UNESCO or the Council of Europe, thus oriented towards human rights, democracy and peace.» The result is that «German textbooks usually downplay national pride and ambitions and aim to develop an understanding of citizenship centered on democracy, progress, human rights, peace, tolerance and Europeanness.»^[102]

See also

• Outline of history
• Glossary of history
•  History portal

References

Further reading

External links

• Official website of BestHistorySites
• Official website of BBC History
• Internet History Sourcebooks Project See also Internet History Sourcebooks Project (Collections of public domain and copy-permitted historical texts for educational use)

This article is about the academic discipline. For a general history of human beings, see Human history. For other uses, see History (disambiguation).

History (derived from Ancient Greek ἱστορία (historía) ‘inquiry; knowledge acquired by investigation’)^[1] is the systematic study and the documentation of the human activity.^[2][3] The time period of event before the invention of writing systems is considered prehistory.^[4] «History» is an umbrella term comprising past events as well as the memory, discovery, collection, organization, presentation, and interpretation of these events. Historians seek knowledge of the past using historical sources such as written documents, oral accounts, art and material artifacts, and ecological markers.^[5] History is not complete and still has debatable mysteries.

History is also an academic discipline which uses narrative to describe, examine, question, and analyze past events, and investigate their patterns of cause and effect.^[6][7] Historians often debate which narrative best explains an event, as well as the significance of different causes and effects. Historians also debate the nature of history as an end in itself, as well as its usefulness to give perspective on the problems of the present.^{[6][8][9][10]}

Stories common to a particular culture, but not supported by external sources (such as the tales surrounding King Arthur), are usually classified as cultural heritage or legends.^[11][12] History differs from myth in that it is supported by verifiable evidence. However, ancient cultural influences have helped spawn variant interpretations of the nature of history which have evolved over the centuries and continue to change today. The modern study of history is wide-ranging, and includes the study of specific regions and the study of certain topical or thematic elements of historical investigation. History is often taught as a part of primary and secondary education, and the academic study of history is a major discipline in university studies.

Herodotus, a 5th-century BC Greek historian, is often considered the «father of history» (as he was one of the first historians) in the Western tradition,^[13] although he has also been criticized as the «father of lies».^[14][15] Along with his contemporary Thucydides, he helped form the foundations for the modern study of past events and societies.^[16] Their works continue to be read today, and the gap between the culture-focused Herodotus and the military-focused Thucydides remains a point of contention or approach in modern historical writing. In East Asia, a state chronicle, the Spring and Autumn Annals, was reputed to date from as early as 722 BC, although only 2nd-century BC texts have survived.

Etymology

The word history comes from historía (Ancient Greek: ἱστορία, romanized: historíā, lit. ‘inquiry, knowledge from inquiry, or judge’^[17]). It was in that sense that Aristotle used the word in his History of Animals.^[18] The ancestor word ἵστωρ is attested early on in Homeric Hymns, Heraclitus, the Athenian ephebes’ oath, and in Boeotic inscriptions (in a legal sense, either «judge» or «witness», or similar). The Greek word was borrowed into Classical Latin as historia, meaning «investigation, inquiry, research, account, description, written account of past events, writing of history, historical narrative, recorded knowledge of past events, story, narrative». History was borrowed from Latin (possibly via Old Irish or Old Welsh) into Old English as stær («history, narrative, story»), but this word fell out of use in the late Old English period.^[19] Meanwhile, as Latin became Old French (and Anglo-Norman), historia developed into forms such as istorie, estoire, and historie, with new developments in the meaning: «account of the events of a person’s life (beginning of the 12th century), chronicle, account of events as relevant to a group of people or people in general (1155), dramatic or pictorial representation of historical events (c. 1240), body of knowledge relative to human evolution, science (c. 1265), narrative of real or imaginary events, story (c. 1462)».^[19]

It was from Anglo-Norman that history was borrowed into Middle English, and this time the loan stuck. It appears in the 13th-century Ancrene Wisse, but seems to have become a common word in the late 14th century, with an early attestation appearing in John Gower’s Confessio Amantis of the 1390s (VI.1383): «I finde in a bok compiled | To this matiere an old histoire, | The which comth nou to mi memoire». In Middle English, the meaning of history was «story» in general. The restriction to the meaning «the branch of knowledge that deals with past events; the formal record or study of past events, esp. human affairs» arose in the mid-15th century.^[19] With the Renaissance, older senses of the word were revived, and it was in the Greek sense that Francis Bacon used the term in the late 16th century, when he wrote about natural history. For him, historia was «the knowledge of objects determined by space and time», that sort of knowledge provided by memory (while science was provided by reason, and poetry was provided by fantasy).^[20]

In an expression of the linguistic synthetic vs. analytic/isolating dichotomy, English like Chinese (史 vs. 诌) now designates separate words for human history and storytelling in general. In modern German, French, and most Germanic and Romance languages, which are solidly synthetic and highly inflected, the same word is still used to mean both «history» and «story». Historian in the sense of a «researcher of history» is attested from 1531. In all European languages, the substantive history is still used to mean both «what happened with men», and «the scholarly study of the happened», the latter sense sometimes distinguished with a capital letter, or the word historiography.^[18] The adjective historical is attested from 1661, and historic from 1669.^[21]

Description

Historians write in the context of their own time, and with due regard to the current dominant ideas of how to interpret the past, and sometimes write to provide lessons for their own society. In the words of Benedetto Croce, «All history is contemporary history». History is facilitated by the formation of a «true discourse of past» through the production of narrative and analysis of past events relating to the human race.^[22] The modern discipline of history is dedicated to the institutional production of this discourse.

All events that are remembered and preserved in some authentic form constitute the historical record.^[23] The task of historical discourse is to identify the sources which can most usefully contribute to the production of accurate accounts of past. Therefore, the constitution of the historian’s archive is a result of circumscribing a more general archive by invalidating the usage of certain texts and documents (by falsifying their claims to represent the «true past»). Part of the historian’s role is to skillfully and objectively use the vast amount of sources from the past, most often found in the archives. The process of creating a narrative inevitably generates a silence as historians remember or emphasize different events of the past.^{[24][clarification needed]}

The study of history has sometimes been classified as part of the humanities and at other times as part of the social sciences.^[25] It can also be seen as a bridge between those two broad areas, incorporating methodologies from both. Some individual historians strongly support one or the other classification.^[26] In the 20th century the Annales school revolutionized the study of history, by using such outside disciplines as economics, sociology, and geography in the study of global history.^[27]

Traditionally, historians have recorded events of the past, either in writing or by passing on an oral tradition, and have attempted to answer historical questions through the study of written documents and oral accounts. From the beginning, historians have also used such sources as monuments, inscriptions, and pictures. In general, the sources of historical knowledge can be separated into three categories: what is written, what is said, and what is physically preserved, and historians often consult all three.^[28] But writing is the marker that separates history from what comes before.

Archeology is especially helpful in unearthing buried sites and objects, which contribute to the study of history. Archeological finds rarely stand alone, with narrative sources complementing its discoveries. Archeology’s methodologies and approaches are independent from the field of history. «Historical archaeology» is a specific branch of archeology which often contrasts its conclusions against those of contemporary textual sources. For example, Mark Leone, the excavator and interpreter of historical Annapolis, Maryland, US, has sought to understand the contradiction between textual documents idealizing «liberty» and the material record, demonstrating the possession of slaves and the inequalities of wealth made apparent by the study of the total historical environment.

There are varieties of ways in which history can be organized, including chronologically, culturally, territorially, and thematically. These divisions are not mutually exclusive, and significant intersections are often present. It is possible for historians to concern themselves with both the very specific and the very general, although the modern trend has been toward specialization. The area called Big History resists this specialization, and searches for universal patterns or trends. History has often been studied with some practical or theoretical aim, but also may be studied out of simple intellectual curiosity.^[29]

Prehistory

Human history is the memory of the past experience of Homo sapiens sapiens around the world, as that experience has been preserved, largely in written records. By «prehistory», historians mean the recovery of knowledge of the past in an area where no written records exist, or where the writing of a culture is not understood. By studying painting, drawings, carvings, and other artifacts, some information can be recovered even in the absence of a written record. Since the 20th century, the study of prehistory is considered essential to avoid history’s implicit exclusion of certain civilizations, such as those of Sub-Saharan Africa and pre-Columbian America. Historians in the West have been criticized for focusing disproportionately on the Western world.^[30] In 1961, British historian E. H. Carr wrote:

The line of demarcation between prehistoric and historical times is crossed when people cease to live only in the present, and become consciously interested both in their past and in their future. History begins with the handing down of tradition; and tradition means the carrying of the habits and lessons of the past into the future. Records of the past begin to be kept for the benefit of future generations.^[31]

This definition includes within the scope of history the strong interests of peoples, such as Indigenous Australians and New Zealand Māori in the past, and the oral records maintained and transmitted to succeeding generations, even before their contact with European civilization.

Historiography

Historiography has a number of related meanings.^[32] Firstly, it can refer to how history has been produced: the story of the development of methodology and practices (for example, the move from short-term biographical narrative toward long-term thematic analysis). Secondly, it can refer to what has been produced: a specific body of historical writing (for example, «medieval historiography during the 1960s» means «Works of medieval history written during the 1960s»).^[32] Thirdly, it may refer to why history is produced: the philosophy of history. As a meta-level analysis of descriptions of the past, this third conception can relate to the first two in that the analysis usually focuses on the narratives, interpretations, world view, use of evidence, or method of presentation of other historians. Professional historians also debate the question of whether history can be taught as a single coherent narrative or a series of competing narratives.^[33][34]

Methods

The historical method comprises the techniques and guidelines by which historians use primary sources and other evidence to research and then to write history.

Herodotus of Halicarnassus (484 BC–c. 425 BC)^[35] has generally been acclaimed as the «father of history». However, his contemporary Thucydides (c. 460 BC–c. 400 BC) is credited with having first approached history with a well-developed historical method in his work the History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides, unlike Herodotus, regarded history as being the product of the choices and actions of human beings, and looked at cause and effect, rather than as the result of divine intervention (though Herodotus was not wholly committed to this idea himself).^[35] In his historical method, Thucydides emphasized chronology, a nominally neutral point of view, and that the human world was the result of the actions of human beings. Greek historians also viewed history as cyclical, with events regularly recurring.^[36]

There were historical traditions and sophisticated use of historical method in ancient and medieval China. The groundwork for professional historiography in East Asia was established by the Han dynasty court historian known as Sima Qian (145–90 BC), author of the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji). For the quality of his written work, Sima Qian is posthumously known as the Father of Chinese historiography. Chinese historians of subsequent dynastic periods in China used his Shiji as the official format for historical texts, as well as for biographical literature.^{[citation needed]}

Saint Augustine was influential in Christian and Western thought at the beginning of the medieval period. Through the Medieval and Renaissance periods, history was often studied through a sacred or religious perspective. Around 1800, German philosopher and historian Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel brought philosophy and a more secular approach in historical study.^[29]

In the preface to his book, the Muqaddimah (1377), the Arab historian and early sociologist, Ibn Khaldun, warned of seven mistakes that he thought that historians regularly committed. In this criticism, he approached the past as strange and in need of interpretation. The originality of Ibn Khaldun was to claim that the cultural difference of another age must govern the evaluation of relevant historical material, to distinguish the principles according to which it might be possible to attempt the evaluation, and lastly, to feel the need for experience, in addition to rational principles, in order to assess a culture of the past. Ibn Khaldun often criticized «idle superstition and uncritical acceptance of historical data». As a result, he introduced a scientific method to the study of history, and he often referred to it as his «new science».^[37] His historical method also laid the groundwork for the observation of the role of state, communication, propaganda and systematic bias in history,^[38] and he is thus considered to be the «father of historiography»^[39]
[40] or the «father of the philosophy of history».^[41]

In the West, historians developed modern methods of historiography in the 17th and 18th centuries, especially in France and Germany. In 1851, Herbert Spencer summarized these methods:

From the successive strata of our historical deposits, they [Historians] diligently gather all the highly colored fragments, pounce upon everything that is curious and sparkling and chuckle like children over their glittering acquisitions; meanwhile the rich veins of wisdom that ramify amidst this worthless debris, lie utterly neglected. Cumbrous volumes of rubbish are greedily accumulated, while those masses of rich ore, that should have been dug out, and from which golden truths might have been smelted, are left untaught and unsought^[42]

By the «rich ore» Spencer meant scientific theory of history. Meanwhile, Henry Thomas Buckle expressed a dream of history becoming one day science:

In regard to nature, events apparently the most irregular and capricious have been explained and have been shown to be in accordance with certain fixed and universal laws. This have been done because men of ability and, above all, men of patient, untiring thought have studied events with the view of discovering their regularity, and if human events were subject to a similar treatment, we have every right to expect similar results^[43]

Contrary to Buckle’s dream, the 19th-century historian with greatest influence on methods became Leopold von Ranke in Germany. He limited history to «what really happened» and by this directed the field further away from science. For Ranke, historical data should be collected carefully, examined objectively and put together with critical rigor. But these procedures «are merely the prerequisites and preliminaries of science. The heart of science is searching out order and regularity in the data being examined and in formulating generalizations or laws about them.»^[44]

As Historians like Ranke and many who followed him have pursued it, no, history is not a science. Thus if Historians tell us that, given the manner in which he practices his craft, it cannot be considered a science, we must take him at his word. If he is not doing science, then, whatever else he is doing, he is not doing science. The traditional Historian is thus no scientist and history, as conventionally practiced, is not a science.^[45]

In the 20th century, academic historians focused less on epic nationalistic narratives, which often tended to glorify the nation or great men, to more objective and complex analyses of social and intellectual forces. A major trend of historical methodology in the 20th century was a tendency to treat history more as a social science rather than as an art, which traditionally had been the case. Some of the leading advocates of history as a social science were a diverse collection of scholars which included Fernand Braudel, E. H. Carr, Fritz Fischer, Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Bruce Trigger, Marc Bloch, Karl Dietrich Bracher, Peter Gay, Robert Fogel, Lucien Febvre, and Lawrence Stone. Many of the advocates of history as a social science were or are noted for their multidisciplinary approach. Braudel combined history with geography, Bracher history with political science, Fogel history with economics, Gay history with psychology, Trigger history with archeology, while Wehler, Bloch, Fischer, Stone, Febvre, and Le Roy Ladurie have in varying and differing ways amalgamated history with sociology, geography, anthropology, and economics. Nevertheless, these multidisciplinary approaches failed to produce a theory of history. So far only one theory of history came from the pen of a professional Historian.^[46] Whatever other theories of history we have, they were written by experts from other fields (for example, Marxian theory of history). More recently, the field of digital history has begun to address ways of using computer technology to pose new questions to historical data and generate digital scholarship.

In sincere opposition to the claims of history as a social science, historians such as Hugh Trevor-Roper, John Lukacs, Donald Creighton, Gertrude Himmelfarb, and Gerhard Ritter argued that the key to the historians’ work was the power of the imagination, and hence contended that history should be understood as an art. French historians associated with the Annales School introduced quantitative history, using raw data to track the lives of typical individuals, and were prominent in the establishment of cultural history (cf. histoire des mentalités). Intellectual historians such as Herbert Butterfield, Ernst Nolte and George Mosse have argued for the significance of ideas in history. American historians, motivated by the civil rights era, focused on formerly overlooked ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic groups. Another genre of social history to emerge in the post-WWII era was Alltagsgeschichte (History of Everyday Life). Scholars such as Martin Broszat, Ian Kershaw and Detlev Peukert sought to examine what everyday life was like for ordinary people in 20th-century Germany, especially in the Nazi period.

Marxist historians such as Eric Hobsbawm, E. P. Thompson, Rodney Hilton, Georges Lefebvre, Eugene Genovese, Isaac Deutscher, C. L. R. James, Timothy Mason, Herbert Aptheker, Arno J. Mayer, and Christopher Hill have sought to validate Karl Marx’s theories by analyzing history from a Marxist perspective. In response to the Marxist interpretation of history, historians such as François Furet, Richard Pipes, J. C. D. Clark, Roland Mousnier, Henry Ashby Turner, and Robert Conquest have offered anti-Marxist interpretations of history. Feminist historians such as Joan Wallach Scott, Claudia Koonz, Natalie Zemon Davis, Sheila Rowbotham, Gisela Bock, Gerda Lerner, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, and Lynn Hunt have argued for the importance of studying the experience of women in the past. In recent years, postmodernists have challenged the validity and need for the study of history on the basis that all history is based on the personal interpretation of sources. In his 1997 book In Defence of History, Richard J. Evans defended the worth of history. Another defense of history from postmodernist criticism was the Australian historian Keith Windschuttle’s 1994 book, The Killing of History.

Today, most historians begin their research process in the archives, on either a physical or digital platform. They often propose an argument and use their research to support it. John H. Arnold proposed that history is an argument, which creates the possibility of creating change.^[5] Digital information companies, such as Google, have sparked controversy over the role of internet censorship in information access.^[47]

Marxian theory

The Marxist theory of historical materialism theorises that society is fundamentally determined by the material conditions at any given time – in other words, the relationships which people have with each other in order to fulfill basic needs such as feeding, clothing and housing themselves and their families.^[48] Overall, Marx and Engels claimed to have identified five successive stages of the development of these material conditions in Western Europe.^[49] Marxist historiography was once orthodoxy in the Soviet Union, but since the collapse of communism there in 1991, Mikhail Krom says it has been reduced to the margins of scholarship.^[50]

Potential shortcomings in the production of history

Many historians believe that the production of history is embedded with bias because events and known facts in history can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Constantin Fasolt suggested that history is linked to politics by the practice of silence itself.^[51] He also said: «A second common view of the link between history and politics rests on the elementary observation that historians are often influenced by politics.»^[51] According to Michel-Rolph Trouillot, the historical process is rooted in the archives, therefore silences, or parts of history that are forgotten, may be an intentional part of a narrative strategy that dictates how areas of history are remembered.^[24] Historical omissions can occur in many ways and can have a profound effect on historical records. Information can also purposely be excluded or left out accidentally. Historians have coined multiple terms that describe the act of omitting historical information, including: «silencing»,^[24] «selective memory»,^[52] and erasures.^[53] Gerda Lerner, a twentieth century historian who focused much of her work on historical omissions involving women and their accomplishments, explained the negative impact that these omissions had on minority groups.^[52]

Environmental historian William Cronon proposed three ways to combat bias and ensure authentic and accurate narratives: narratives must not contradict known fact, they must make ecological sense (specifically for environmental history), and published work must be reviewed by scholarly community and other historians to ensure accountability.^[53]

Areas of study

Periods

Historical study often focuses on events and developments that occur in particular blocks of time. Historians give these periods of time names in order to allow «organising ideas and classificatory generalisations» to be used by historians.^[54] The names given to a period can vary with geographical location, as can the dates of the beginning and end of a particular period. Centuries and decades are commonly used periods and the time they represent depends on the dating system used. Most periods are constructed retrospectively and so reflect value judgments made about the past. The way periods are constructed and the names given to them can affect the way they are viewed and studied.^[55]

Prehistoric periodization

The field of history generally leaves prehistory to archeologists, who have entirely different sets of tools and theories. In archeology, the usual method for periodization of the distant prehistoric past is to rely on changes in material culture and technology, such as the Stone Age, Bronze Age, and Iron Age, with subdivisions that are also based on different styles of material remains. Here prehistory is divided into a series of «chapters» so that periods in history could unfold not only in a relative chronology but also narrative chronology.^[56] This narrative content could be in the form of functional-economic interpretation. There are periodizations, however, that do not have this narrative aspect, relying largely on relative chronology, and that are thus devoid of any specific meaning.

Despite the development over recent decades of the ability through radiocarbon dating and other scientific methods to give actual dates for many sites or artefacts, these long-established schemes seem likely to remain in use. In many cases neighboring cultures with writing have left some history of cultures without it, which may be used. Periodization, however, is not viewed as a perfect framework, with one account explaining that «cultural changes do not conveniently start and stop (combinedly) at periodization boundaries» and that different trajectories of change need to be studied in their own right before they get intertwined with cultural phenomena.^[57]

Geographical locations

Particular geographical locations can form the basis of historical study, for example, continents, countries, and cities. Understanding why historic events took place is important. To do this, historians often turn to geography. According to Jules Michelet in his book Histoire de France (1833), «without geographical basis, the people, the makers of history, seem to be walking on air».^[58] Weather patterns, the water supply, and the landscape of a place all affect the lives of the people who live there. For example, to explain why the ancient Egyptians developed a successful civilization, studying the geography of Egypt is essential. Egyptian civilization was built on the banks of the Nile River, which flooded each year, depositing soil on its banks. The rich soil could help farmers grow enough crops to feed the people in the cities. That meant everyone did not have to farm, so some people could perform other jobs that helped develop the civilization. There is also the case of climate, which historians like Ellsworth Huntington and Ellen Churchill Semple cited as a crucial influence on the course of history. Huntington and Semple further argued that climate has an impact on racial temperament.^[59]

Regions

• History of Africa begins with the first emergence of modern human beings on the continent, continuing into its modern present as a patchwork of diverse and politically developing nation states.
• History of the Americas is the collective history of North and South America, including Central America and the Caribbean.
  • History of North America is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation on the continent in the Earth’s northern and western hemisphere.
  • History of Central America is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation on the continent in the Earth’s western hemisphere.
  • History of the Caribbean begins with the oldest evidence where 7,000-year-old remains have been found.
  • History of South America is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation on the continent in the Earth’s southern and western hemisphere.

• History of Antarctica emerges from early Western theories of a vast continent, known as Terra Australis, believed to exist in the far south of the globe.
• History of Eurasia is the collective history of several distinct peripheral coastal regions: the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Europe, linked by the interior mass of the Eurasian steppe of Central Asia and Eastern Europe.
  • History of Europe describes the passage of time from humans inhabiting the European continent to the present day.
  • History of Asia can be seen as the collective history of several distinct peripheral coastal regions, East Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East linked by the interior mass of the Eurasian steppe.
    • History of East Asia is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation in East Asia.
    • History of the Middle East begins with the earliest civilizations in the region now known as the Middle East that were established around 3000 BC, in Mesopotamia (Iraq).
    • History of India is the study of the past passed down from generation to generation in the Sub-Himalayan region.
    • History of Southeast Asia has been characterized as interaction between regional players and foreign powers.
• History of Oceania is the collective history of Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands.
  • History of Australia starts with the documentation of the Makassar trading with Indigenous Australians on Australia’s north coast.
  • History of New Zealand dates back at least 700 years to when it was discovered and settled by Polynesians, who developed a distinct Māori culture centered on kinship links and land.
  • History of the Pacific Islands covers the history of the islands in the Pacific Ocean.

Military

Military history concerns warfare, strategies, battles, weapons, and the psychology of combat.^[61] The «new military history» since the 1970s has been concerned with soldiers more than generals, with psychology more than tactics, and with the broader impact of warfare on society and culture.^[62]

Religious

The history of religion has been a main theme for both secular and religious historians for centuries, and continues to be taught in seminaries and academe. Leading journals include Church History, The Catholic Historical Review, and History of Religions. Topics range widely from political and cultural and artistic dimensions, to theology and liturgy.^[63] This subject studies religions from all regions and areas of the world where humans have lived.^[64]

Social history, sometimes called the new social history, is the field that includes history of ordinary people and their strategies and institutions for coping with life.^[65] In its «golden age» it was a major growth field in the 1960s and 1970s among scholars, and still is well represented in history departments. In two decades from 1975 to 1995, the proportion of professors of history in American universities identifying with social history rose from 31% to 41%, while the proportion of political historians fell from 40% to 30%.^[66] In the history departments of British universities in 2007, of the 5723 faculty members, 1644 (29%) identified themselves with social history while political history came next with 1425 (25%).^[67] The «old» social history before the 1960s was a hodgepodge of topics without a central theme, and it often included political movements, like Populism, that were «social» in the sense of being outside the elite system. Social history was contrasted with political history, intellectual history and the history of great men. English historian G. M. Trevelyan saw it as the bridging point between economic and political history, reflecting that, «Without social history, economic history is barren and political history unintelligible.»^[68] While the field has often been viewed negatively as history with the politics left out, it has also been defended as «history with the people put back in».^[69]

Subfields

The chief subfields of social history include:

• Black history
• Demographic history
• Ethnic history
• Gender history
• History of childhood
• History of education
• History of the family
• Labor history
• LGBT history
• Rural history
• Urban history
  • American urban history
• Women’s history

Cultural

Cultural history replaced social history as the dominant form in the 1980s and 1990s. It typically combines the approaches of anthropology and history to look at language, popular cultural traditions and cultural interpretations of historical experience. It examines the records and narrative descriptions of past knowledge, customs, and arts of a group of people. How peoples constructed their memory of the past is a major topic. Cultural history includes the study of art in society as well is the study of images and human visual production (iconography).^[70]

Diplomatic

Diplomatic history focuses on the relationships between nations, primarily regarding diplomacy and the causes of wars.^[71] More recently it looks at the causes of peace and human rights. It typically presents the viewpoints of the foreign office, and long-term strategic values, as the driving force of continuity and change in history. This type of political history is the study of the conduct of international relations between states or across state boundaries over time. Historian Muriel Chamberlain notes that after the First World War, «diplomatic history replaced constitutional history as the flagship of historical investigation, at once the most important, most exact and most sophisticated of historical studies».^[72] She adds that after 1945, the trend reversed, allowing social history to replace it.

Economic

Although economic history has been well established since the late 19th century, in recent years academic studies have shifted more and more toward economics departments and away from traditional history departments.^[73] Business history deals with the history of individual business organizations, business methods, government regulation, labour relations, and impact on society. It also includes biographies of individual companies, executives, and entrepreneurs. It is related to economic history. Business history is most often taught in business schools.^[74]

Environmental

Environmental history is a new field that emerged in the 1980s to look at the history of the environment, especially in the long run, and the impact of human activities upon it.^[75] It is an offshoot of the environmental movement, which was kickstarted by Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in the 1960s.

World

World history is the study of major civilizations over the last 3000 years or so. World history is primarily a teaching field, rather than a research field. It gained popularity in the United States,^[76] Japan^[77] and other countries after the 1980s with the realization that students need a broader exposure to the world as globalization proceeds.

It has led to highly controversial interpretations by Oswald Spengler and Arnold J. Toynbee, among others.

The World History Association publishes the Journal of World History every quarter since 1990.^[78] The H-World discussion list^[79] serves as a network of communication among practitioners of world history, with discussions among scholars, announcements, syllabi, bibliographies and book reviews.

People’s

A people’s history is a type of historical work which attempts to account for historical events from the perspective of common people. A people’s history is the history of the world that is the story of mass movements and of the outsiders. Individuals or groups not included in the past in other types of writing about history are the primary focus, which includes the disenfranchised, the oppressed, the poor, the nonconformists, and the otherwise forgotten people. The authors are typically on the left and have a socialist model in mind, as in the approach of the History Workshop movement in Britain in the 1960s.^[80]

Intellectual

Intellectual history and the history of ideas emerged in the mid-20th century, with the focus on the intellectuals and their books on the one hand, and on the other the study of ideas as disembodied objects with a career of their own.^[81][82]

Gender

Gender history is a subfield of History and Gender studies, which looks at the past from the perspective of gender. The outgrowth of gender history from women’s history stemmed from many non-feminist historians dismissing the importance of women in history. According to Joan W. Scott, «Gender is a constitutive element of social relationships based on perceived differences between the sexes, and gender is a primary way of signifying relations of power»,^[83] meaning that gender historians study the social effects of perceived differences between the sexes and how all genders use allotted power in societal and political structures. Despite being a relatively new field, gender history has had a significant effect on the general study of history. Gender history traditionally differs from women’s history in its inclusion of all aspects of gender such as masculinity and femininity, and today’s gender history extends to include people who identify outside of that binary.
LGBT history deals with the first recorded instances of same-sex love and sexuality of ancient civilizations, and involves the history of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) peoples and cultures around the world.^[84]

Public

Public history describes the broad range of activities undertaken by people with some training in the discipline of history who are generally working outside of specialized academic settings. Public history practice has quite deep roots in the areas of historic preservation, archival science, oral history, museum curatorship, and other related fields. The term itself began to be used in the U.S. and Canada in the late 1970s, and the field has become increasingly professionalized since that time. Some of the most common settings for public history are museums, historic homes and historic sites, parks, battlefields, archives, film and television companies, and all levels of government.^[85]

Historians

Professional and amateur historians discover, collect, organize, and present information about past events. They discover this information through archeological evidence, written primary sources, verbal stories or oral histories, and other archival material. In lists of historians, historians can be grouped by order of the historical period in which they were writing, which is not necessarily the same as the period in which they specialized. Chroniclers and annalists, though they are not historians in the true sense, are also frequently included.

Judgement

Since the 20th century, Western historians have disavowed the aspiration to provide the «judgement of history».^[86] The goals of historical judgements or interpretations are separate to those of legal judgements, that need to be formulated quickly after the events and be final.^[87] A related issue to that of the judgement of history is that of collective memory.

Pseudohistory

Pseudohistory is a term applied to texts which purport to be historical in nature but which depart from standard historiographical conventions in a way which undermines their conclusions. It is closely related to deceptive historical revisionism. Works which draw controversial conclusions from new, speculative, or disputed historical evidence, particularly in the fields of national, political, military, and religious affairs, are often rejected as pseudohistory.

Teaching

Scholarship vs teaching

A major intellectual battle took place in Britain in the early twentieth century regarding the place of history teaching in the universities. At Oxford and Cambridge, scholarship was downplayed. Professor Charles Harding Firth, Oxford’s Regius Professor of history in 1904 ridiculed the system as best suited to produce superficial journalists. The Oxford tutors, who had more votes than the professors, fought back in defense of their system saying that it successfully produced Britain’s outstanding statesmen, administrators, prelates, and diplomats, and that mission was as valuable as training scholars. The tutors dominated the debate until after the Second World War. It forced aspiring young scholars to teach at outlying schools, such as Manchester University, where Thomas Frederick Tout was professionalizing the History undergraduate programme by introducing the study of original sources and requiring the writing of a thesis.^[88][89]

In the United States, scholarship was concentrated at the major PhD-producing universities, while the large number of other colleges and universities focused on undergraduate teaching. A tendency in the 21st century was for the latter schools to increasingly demand scholarly productivity of their younger tenure-track faculty. Furthermore, universities have increasingly relied on inexpensive part-time adjuncts to do most of the classroom teaching.^[90]

Nationalism

From the origins of national school systems in the 19th century, the teaching of history to promote national sentiment has been a high priority. In the United States after World War I, a strong movement emerged at the university level to teach courses in Western Civilization, so as to give students a common heritage with Europe. In the U.S. after 1980, attention increasingly moved toward teaching world history or requiring students to take courses in non-western cultures, to prepare students for life in a globalized economy.^[91]

At the university level, historians debate the question of whether history belongs more to social science or to the humanities. Many view the field from both perspectives.

The teaching of history in French schools was influenced by the Nouvelle histoire as disseminated after the 1960s by Cahiers pédagogiques and Enseignement and other journals for teachers. Also influential was the Institut national de recherche et de documentation pédagogique, (INRDP). Joseph Leif, the Inspector-general of teacher training, said pupils children should learn about historians’ approaches as well as facts and dates. Louis François, Dean of the History/Geography group in the Inspectorate of National Education advised that teachers should provide historic documents and promote «active methods» which would give pupils «the immense happiness of discovery». Proponents said it was a reaction against the memorization of names and dates that characterized teaching and left the students bored. Traditionalists protested loudly it was a postmodern innovation that threatened to leave the youth ignorant of French patriotism and national identity.^[92]

Bias in school teaching

In several countries history textbooks are tools to foster nationalism and patriotism, and give students the official narrative about national enemies.^[93]

In many countries, history textbooks are sponsored by the national government and are written to put the national heritage in the most favorable light. For example, in Japan, mention of the Nanking Massacre has been removed from textbooks and the entire Second World War is given cursory treatment. Other countries have complained.^[94] Another example includes Turkey, where there is no mention of the Armenian Genocide in Turkish textbooks as a result of the denial of the genocide.^[95]

It was standard policy in communist countries to present only a rigid Marxist historiography.^[96][97]

In the United States, textbooks published by the same company often differ in content from state to state.^[98] An example of content that is represented different in different regions of the country is the history of the Southern states, where slavery and the American Civil War are treated as controversial topics. McGraw-Hill Education for example, was criticized for describing Africans brought to American plantations as «workers» instead of slaves in a textbook.^[99]

Academic historians have often fought against the politicization of the textbooks, sometimes with success.^[100][101]

In 21st-century Germany, the history curriculum is controlled by the 16 states, and is characterized not by superpatriotism but rather by an «almost pacifistic and deliberately unpatriotic undertone» and reflects «principles formulated by international organizations such as UNESCO or the Council of Europe, thus oriented towards human rights, democracy and peace.» The result is that «German textbooks usually downplay national pride and ambitions and aim to develop an understanding of citizenship centered on democracy, progress, human rights, peace, tolerance and Europeanness.»^[102]

See also

• Outline of history
• Glossary of history
•  History portal

References

Further reading

External links

• Official website of BestHistorySites
• Official website of BBC History
• Internet History Sourcebooks Project See also Internet History Sourcebooks Project (Collections of public domain and copy-permitted historical texts for educational use)

История (греч. Ιστορία, «исследование») — сфера гуманитарного познания, занимающаяся исследованием человека (его деятельности, состояния, миропонимания, соц связей и организаций и т. д.) в прошедшем; в более узеньком смысле — наука, изучающая письменные источники о прошедшем для того, чтоб установить последовательность событий, объективность обрисованных фактов и сделать выводы о причинах событий. Считается, что люди, не понимающие историю, склонны повторять ошибки прошедшего .

Первоначальное значение слова «история» всходит к древнегреческому термину, означавшему «расследование, узнавание, установление». История отождествлялась с установлением подлинности, истинности событий и фактов. В Древнеримской историографии (историография в современном значении — ветвь исторической науки, изучающая её историю) это слово стало обозначать не метод узнавания, а рассказ о событиях прошедшего. Скоро «историей» стали именовать вообщем всякий рассказ о каком-либо случае, происшествии, реальном либо измышленном.

Николаос Гизис. Аллегория истории, 1892 г.Истории, пользующиеся популярностью в той либо другой культуре, но не подтверждаемые посторонними источниками, к примеру, легенды о короле Артуре, числятся обычно частью культурного наследства, а не «беспристрастным исследованием», которым должна быть неважно какая часть истории как научной дисциплины.

Этимология и смысл термина

Слово история пришло из греческого языка ( ἱστορία, historia), и происходит от праиндоевропейского слова wid-tor-, где корень weid-, «знать, видеть». В российском языке представлен словами «видеть» и «ведать».

В Старой Греции слово «история» означало хоть какое познание, получаемое методом исследования, а не только лишь фактически историческое познание в современном смысле. К примеру, Аристотель использовал это слово в «Истории животных». Оно встречается также в гимнах Гомера, сочинениях Гераклита и тексте присяги Афинскому государству. В древнегреческом было также слово historeîn, «исследовать», которое поначалу использовалась исключительно в Ионии, откуда потом распространилась на всю Грецию и, в конце концов, всю эллинистическую цивилизацию.

В том же древнегреческом смысле слово «история» употреблялось Френсисом Бэконом в широкоупотребительном термине естественная история. Для Бэкона история — «знание о предметах, место которых определено в пространстве и времени», и источником которого является память (так же как наука — плод раздумий, а поэзия — плод фантазии). В средневековой Великобритании слово «история» почаще использовалось в смысле рассказа вообщем (story). Особенный термин история (history) как последовательность прошедших событий появился в британском языке в конце XV в., а слово «исторический» (historical, historic) — в XVII в. В Германии, Франции и Рф в обоих смыслах как и раньше употребляется одно и то же слово «история».

Так как историки являются сразу наблюдателями и участниками событий, их исторические труды написаны исходя из убеждений их времени и обычно не только лишь являются политически пристрастными, да и делят все заблуждения собственной эры. По словам Бенедетто Кроче, «Вся история — современная история». Историческая наука обеспечивает настоящее изложение хода истории методом рассказов о событиях и их объективного анализа . В наше время история создается усилиями научных институтов.
История — слово вышло от от греческого historia — рассказ о прошедшем — об узнанном

1


Окружающий мир 4 класс

2


«История» – очень древнее слово. В переводе с греческого языка оно означает «исследование, рассказ о событиях прошлого»

3


История – совокупность наук, изучающих прошлое человеческого общества. Историк – это учёный. Историки изучают прошлое человечества. Основной работой историков является сбор и исследование исторической информации, работа с архивными материалами и документами. Муза истории Клио

4

5


это всё то, что может рассказать нам о прошлом людей. Исторические источники учёные делят на группы: вещественные, устные, письменные, произведения искусства и другие. это всё то, что может рассказать нам о прошлом людей. Исторические источники учёные делят на группы: вещественные, устные, письменные, произведения искусства и другие.

6


жилища орудия труда предметы быта одежда украшения монеты оружие посуда жилища орудия труда предметы быта одежда украшения монеты оружие посуда

7


легенды былины сказания мифы песни обряды пословицы поговорки легенды былины сказания мифы песни обряды пословицы поговорки

8


летописи папирус книги указы хроники газеты исторические сочинения летописи папирус книги указы хроники газеты исторические сочинения

9


Многие исторические источники были обнаружены благодаря археологии. «Архео» (греч.) – древний. Археология – наука, которая узнаёт о прошлом, изучая древние предметы, сооружения. Свои удивительные находки учёные-археологи выкапывают из земли. Поэтому археологию иногда в шутку называют историей, вооружённой лопатой.

10


Многие предметы старины бережно хранятся в музеях. Первым российским музеем была Кунсткамера (в переводе – «кабинет редкостей»), открытая по приказу Петра I в Петербурге в 1710 году.

11


Экспонаты для музея – всевозможные диковинки – привозили из всех уголков России, и даже из-за границы. Они рассказывают нам о том, как выглядели люди из разных стран, каковы их занятия и обычаи. Деревянный боевой шлем Солнечные часы-глобус Скелет сиамских близнецов

12


Не только в музеях и архивах хранятся ценные находки. При желании их можно отыскать в каждом доме: старые книги, фотографии, предметы домашнего обихода. Это семейные реликвии.

13


К сожалению, бывает и так, что памятники старины продолжают гибнуть и в наши дни, а это огромная потеря для нашей культуры. Мы должны сохранять и беречь те сокровища, которые достались нам в наследство от наших предков.

14


МЕРКУРИЙ ВЕНЕРА ЗЕМЛЯ МАРС ЮПИТЕР САТУРН УРАН НЕПТУН

15


1.Что изучает история? 2.Что называют «историческим источником»? 3.Какие исторические источники вам известны? 1.Что изучает история? 2.Что называют «историческим источником»? 3.Какие исторические источники вам известны?

16

17


kinder.de/de_start/risunki/kultur/bilder.php?strDir=./set2/&strBig=gross/&Bild=bild01.jpg&nLupe=&PHPSESSID=42471bfc45a68f7c533bf54044ab13 d4 kinder.de/de_start/risunki/kultur/bilder.php?strDir=./set2/&strBig=gross/&Bild=bild01.jpg&nLupe=&PHPSESSID=42471bfc45a68f7c533bf54044ab13 d

18


Панова Оксана Владимировна учитель начальных классов МАОУ «Гимназия 4» г. Великого Новгорода Персональный сайт:

Это статья о научной дисциплине. О процессе развития человеческого общества см. Всемирная история.

	Портал «История»
	История в Викисловаре?
	История в Викицитатнике?
	История в Викитеке?
	История на Викискладе?
	Проект «История»

Исто́рия (др.-греч. ἱστορία — расспрашивание, исследование) — область знаний, а также гуманитарная наука, занимающаяся изучением человека (его деятельности, состояния, мировоззрения, социальных связей и организаций и так далее) в прошлом.

В более узком смысле история — это наука, изучающая всевозможные источники о прошлом для того, чтобы установить последовательность событий, исторический процесс, объективность описанных фактов и сделать выводы о причинах событий^[1][2][3][4].

Первоначальное значение, этимология и смысл термина

Первоначальное значение слова «история» восходит к древне­греческому термину, означавшему «расследование, узнавание, установление». История отождествлялась с установлением подлинности, истинности событий и фактов. В Древнеримской историографии (историография в современном значении — отрасль исторической науки, изучающая её историю) это слово стало обозначать не способ узнавания, а рассказ о событиях прошлого. Вскоре «историей» стали называть вообще всякий рассказ о каком-либо случае, происшествии, действительном или вымышленном.

Истории, популярные в той или иной культуре, но не подтверждаемые сторонними источниками, например, легенды о короле Артуре, считаются обычно частью культурного наследия, а не «беспристрастным исследованием», которым должна быть любая часть истории как научной дисциплины^[5][6].

Слово история пришло из греческого языка ( ἱστορία, historia), и происходит от праиндоевропейского слова wid-tor-, где корень weid-, «знать, видеть»^[7][8]. В русском языке представлен словами «видеть» и «ведать»^[9].

В Древней Греции слово «история» означало любое знание, получаемое путём исследования, а не только собственно историческое знание в современном смысле. Например, Аристотель использовал это слово в «Истории животных»^[10]. Оно встречается также в гимнах Гомера, сочинениях Гераклита и тексте присяги Афинскому государству. В древнегреческом было также слово historeîn, «исследовать», которое сначала использовалось только в Ионии, откуда затем распространилось на всю Грецию и, в конце концов, всю эллинистическую цивилизацию.

В том же древнегреческом смысле слово «история» употреблялось Френсисом Бэконом в широкоупотребительном термине естественная история. Для Бэкона история — «знание о предметах, место которых определено в пространстве и времени», и источником которого является память (так же как наука — плод размышлений, а поэзия — плод фантазии). В средневековой Англии слово «история» чаще использовалось в смысле рассказа вообще (story). Особый термин история (history) как последовательность прошедших событий появился в английском языке в конце XV в., а слово «исторический» (historical, historic) — в XVII в.^[11] В Германии, Франции и России в обоих смыслах по-прежнему употребляется одно и то же слово «история»^[10].

Поскольку историки являются одновременно наблюдателями и участниками событий, их исторические труды написаны с точки зрения их времени и обычно не только являются политически пристрастными, но и разделяют все заблуждения своей эпохи. По словам Бенедетто Кроче, «Вся история — современная история». Историческая наука обеспечивает истинное изложение хода истории путём рассказов о событиях и их беспристрастного анализа^[12]. В наше время история создаётся усилиями научных институтов.

Все события, которые остаются в памяти поколений, в той или иной аутентичной форме составляют содержание исторической хроники^[13]. Это необходимо для выявления источников, наиболее важных для воссоздания прошлого. Состав каждого исторического архива зависит от содержания более общего архива, в котором найдены те или иные тексты и документы; хотя каждый из них претендует на «всю правду», часть таких заявлений обычно опровергают. Кроме архивных источников, историки могут использовать надписи и изображения на памятниках, устные предания и другие источники^[14], например, археологические. Поставляя источники, независимые от исторических, археология особенно полезна для исторических исследований, не только подтверждая или опровергая показания очевидцев событий, но и позволяя заполнить информацией временные промежутки, о которых нет свидетельств современников.

История одними авторами относится к гуманитарным наукам, другими — к общественным^[15], а может и рассматриваться как область между гуманитарными и общественными науками^[16]. Изучение истории часто сопряжено с определёнными практическими или теоретическими целями, но может быть и проявлением обычного человеческого любопытства^[17].

Историография

Термин историография имеет несколько значений. Во-первых, это наука о том, как пишется история, насколько правильно применяется исторический метод, и как он развивается. Во-вторых, тем же термином обозначают совокупность исторических трудов, часто тематически или иным способом отобранных из общей совокупности (например, историография 1960-х годов о средних веках). В-третьих, термином историография обозначают причины создания исторических сочинений, выявляемые в ходе их анализа, по выбору тематики, способу интерпретации событий, личным убеждениям автора и аудитории, к которой он обращается, по использованию доказательств или методу ссылок на других историков. Профессиональные историки обсуждают также возможность создания единого рассказа об истории человечества или серии таких рассказов, конкурирующих за аудиторию.

Философия истории

Философия истории — часть философии, пытающаяся решить вопрос о конечном смысле человеческой истории. К этой же области философии относятся спекуляции о возможном телеологическом конце истории, то есть развивается ли история по какому-то плану, имеет ли какую-то цель, направляющие принципы и конечна ли она во времени. Философию истории не следует путать с историографией, то есть с исследованием истории как академической дисциплины, которая имеет определённые методы, их практическое применение и собственную историю развития. С другой стороны, не следует путать философию истории с историей философии, то есть исследованием истории философской мысли.

Профессиональные историки обсуждают также вопрос, является ли история наукой или свободным искусством. Это разделение является в значительной степени искусственным, так как историю как область знания обычно рассматривают в разных аспектах^[18][19][20].

К основным подходам к развитию философии истории можно отнести следующие:

• формационный (К. Маркс, Ф.Энгельс, В. И. Ленин, И. М. Дьяконов и др.)
• цивилизационный (Н. Я. Данилевский, О.Шпенглер, А.Тойнби, Ш.Айзенштадт, Б. С. Ерасов, Д. М. Бондаренко, И. В. Следзевский, С. А. Нефёдов, Г. В. Алексушин и др.)
• мир-системный (А. Г. Франк, И.Валлерстайн, С.Амин, Дж. Арриги, М. А. Чешков, А. И. Фурсов, А. В. Коротаев, К.Чейз-Данн, Л. Е. Гринин и др.)
• Школа «Анналов»: М. Блок, Л. Февр, Ф. Бродель, А. Я. Гуревич.
• Эстафетно-стадиальный (Ю. И. Семёнов) (по сути, не более чем модифицированный марксистско-формационный подход, где главной движущей силой общественного развития выступает та же классовая борьба, а конечной целью — коммунизм.)

Методы истории

Исторический метод заключается в следовании принципам и правилам работы с первоисточниками и другими доказательствами, найденными в ходе исследования и затем используемыми при написании исторического труда.

Геродот (484—425 гг. до н. э.)^[21] большинством историков считается «отцом» этой науки:

Геродот из Галикарнасса собрал и записал эти сведения, чтобы прошедшие события с течением времени не пришли в забвение и великие и удивления достойные деяния, как эллинов, так и варваров не остались в безвестности, в особенности же то, почему они вели войны друг с другом^[22] .

Однако начало использования научных методов в истории связывают с другим его современником, Фукидидом, и его книгой «История Пелопоннесской войны». В отличие от Геродота и его религиозных коллег, Фукидид рассматривал историю как продукт выбора и поступков не богов, а людей, в которых искал все причины и следствия^[21].

Собственные традиции и развитые методы исторического исследования существовали в древнем и средневековом Китае. Основы профессиональной историографии там заложил Сыма Цянь (145—90 гг. до н. э.), автор «Исторических записок». Его последователи использовали этот труд как образец для исторических и биографических сочинений.

На христианскую и вообще западную историографию большое влияние оказал Аврелий Августин. Вплоть до XIX века историю обычно воспринимали как результат линейного развития по плану, определённому Творцом. Гегель также следовал этой идее, хотя и придал ей более светский вид^[17]. Из философии Гегеля идея линейного исторического прогресса попала и в марксистскую философию истории.

Арабский историк Ибн Хальдун в 1377 году анализировал ошибки, которые часто совершают историки. Он подчёркивал культурные различия между современностью и прошлым, что это требует внимательного отношения к источникам, выделения принципов, согласно которым можно дать им оценку и наконец, интерпретировать события и культуру прошлого. Ибн Хальдун критиковал предвзятость и легковерие историков^[23]. Его метод заложил основы для оценки роли государства, пропаганды, средств коммуникации и систематической предвзятости в историографии^[24], в связи с чем Ибн Хальдун считается «отцом арабской историографии»^[25][26][27]. Большое значение имела разработка Ибн Халдуном концепции политико-демографических циклов, представлявшей собой одну из первых попыток научного описания исторической динамики^[28].

Среди других историков, оказавших влияние на становление методологии исторических исследований, можно упомянуть Ранке, Тревельяна, Броделя, Блока, Февра, Фогеля. Против применения научной методологии в истории выступали такие авторы, как Х.Тревор-Ропер. Они заявляли, что для понимания истории требуется воображение, поэтому следует считать историю не наукой, а искусством. Не менее спорный автор Эрнст Нольте, следуя классической немецкой философской традиции, рассматривал историю как движение идей. Марксистская историография, представленная на западе, в частности, работами Хобсбаума и Дойчера, ставит целью подтверждение философских идей Карла Маркса. Их оппоненты, представляющие антикоммунистическую историографию, такие как Пайпс и Конквест, предлагают интерпретацию истории противоположную марксистской. Существует также обширная историография с точки зрения феминизма. Ряд постмодернистских философов вообще отрицает возможность непредвзятой интерпретации истории и существования в ней научной методологии^{[источник не указан 1140 дней]}. В последнее время всё большую силу начинает набирать клиодинамика — математическое моделирование исторических процессов.

Постижение закономерностей исторических процессов

В начале XIX века основатель позитивизма Огюст Конт обещал доказать, что «существуют законы развития общества, столь же определенные, как и законы падения камня». Но установить законы истории было не так просто. Когда немецкий историк Карл Лампрехт попытался отстаивать точку зрения Конта, то Эдуард Мейер, другой немецкий историк, ответил, что в течение многолетних исследований ему не удалось открыть ни одного исторического закона и он не слышал, чтобы это удалось другим. Макс Вебер считал бессмысленными попытки поиска исторических закономерностей. Философ Карл Ясперс писал: «История имеет глубокий смысл. Но он недоступен человеческому пониманию». Эдвард Хьюлетт Карр утверждал, что на Западе больше не говорят об «исторических законах», что само слово «причина» вышло из моды.

При этом отрицание причинной обусловленности событий прошлого ставило под сомнение право истории считаться наукой. Так, философ Бертран Рассел говорил: «История — ещё не наука. Её можно заставить казаться наукой лишь с помощью фальсификаций и умолчаний». Социолог Эмиль Дюркгейм говорил: «История может считаться наукой лишь в той степени, в которой она объясняет мир».

На постижение законов истории претендовал марксизм, выдвинувший теорию общественно-экономических формаций и утверждавший, что развитие производительных сил приводит к изменению производственных отношений, которые и определяют сущность каждой формации. Но этот подход не позволяет объяснить глубокие различия между характером развития общественных отношений у различных народов.

Герберт Спенсер и Освальд Шпенглер рассматривали человеческие общества как подобия биологических организмов, которые рождаются, живут и умирают. Арнольд Тойнби проделал колоссальную работу, описав в 12 томах историю 21 цивилизации (первый том этого труда вышел в свет в 1934 году). Он пытался сравнивать развитие этих цивилизаций и пришел к выводу, что цивилизация рождается как «ответ» конкретного общества на «вызов» со стороны природы или других обществ. «Вызовом» могло быть перенаселение, вторжение внешних врагов или другое событие, ставящее под угрозу существование общества, а «ответом» — социальная организация или технические новшества, позволяющие обществу выжить.

В середине XX века наиболее популярной теоретической концепцией исторического развития стала теория модернизации. По определению одного из создателей этой теории, Сирила Блэка, модернизация — это процесс адаптации традиционного общества к новым условиям, порожденным промышленной революцией.^[29]

Вопрос о распространении различных общественных систем во многом сводился к проблеме распространения технических инноваций, культурной диффузии. Наиболее четко идеи диффузионизма были сформулированы в так называемой теории культурных кругов. Eё авторы Фридрих Ратцель, Лео Фробениус и Фриц Гребнер считали, что сходные явления в культуре различных народов объясняются происхождением этих явлений из одного центра, что важнейшие элементы человеческой культуры появляются лишь однажды и лишь в одном месте. Они дают народу-первооткрывателю решающее преимущество перед другими народами.

В 1963 году Уильям Макнил, один из учеников Тойнби, опубликовал монографию «Восхождение Запада». Он детально описал фундаментальные открытия древности и Средних веков, которые вызвали радикальные перемены в общественной структуре.

Но эта концепция не давала ответа на вопрос о причинах катастрофических кризисов, время от времени постигавших различные страны. Немецкий экономист Вильгельм Абель, сопоставив динамику численности населения Европы с динамикой цен, пришел к выводу, что картина циклического развития экономики с XII века вплоть до промышленной революции в целом соответствует мальтузианской теории.^[29]

В 50-е и 60-е годы XX века мальтузианская теория циклов нашла подробное отражение в обобщающих трудах Слихера ван Бата, Карло Чиппола и ряда других авторов. Большую роль в разработке этой теории играла французская школа «Анналов», в частности работы Жана Мевре, Пьера Губера, Эрнеста Лабрусса, Фернана Броделя, Эммануэля Ле Руа Ладюри. В 1958 году, подводя итог достижениям предшествующего периода, редактор «Анналов» Фернан Бродель заявил о рождении «новой исторической науки», La Nouvelle Histoire. Он писал: «Новая экономическая и социальная история на первый план в своих исследованиях выдвигает проблему циклического изменения. Она заворожена фантомом, но вместе с тем и реальностью циклического подъема и падения цен». В скором времени существование «новой исторической науки» было признано во всем западном мире. В Англии она стала называться новой научной историей, а в США — новой экономической историей, или клиометрией. Исторический процесс описывался клиометристами с помощью огромных числовых массивов, баз данных, закладываемых в память компьютеров.

В 1974 году вышел первый том «Современной миросистемы» Иммануила Валлерстайна. Развивая идеи Фернана Броделя, Валлерстайн показал, что становление мирового рынка связано с неравномерностью экономического развития. Страны «мирового центра», где появляются новые технологии и откуда исходит диффузионная (а иногда и завоевательная) волна распространения инноваций, благодаря этому эксплуатируют страны «мировой периферии».

В 1991 году появилась демографически-структурная теория Джека Голдстоуна. Она опиралась на неомальтузианскую теорию, но предлагала более детализированный подход, в частности, она рассматривала влияние кризиса перенаселения не только на простой народ, но также на элиту и на государство.

В работе «В погоне за мощью» Уильям Макнил, описывая диффузионные волны, порожденные техническими открытиями Нового времени, дополняет свою модель описанием мальтузианских демографических циклов. Таким образом, можно говорить о новой концепции развития человеческого общества, в которой внутреннее развитие общества описывается с помощью неомальтузианской теории, однако на демографические циклы иногда накладываются волны завоеваний, порожденных совершенными в других обществах открытиями. За этими завоеваниями следуют демографические катастрофы и социальный синтез, в ходе которого рождается новое общество и новое государство.^[29]

Исторические периоды

Разбиение истории на те или иные периоды используется для классификации с точки зрения определённых общих идей^[30]. Названия и границы отдельных периодов могут зависеть от географического региона и системы датировки. В большинстве случаев, названия даны ретроспективно, то есть отражают систему оценок прошлого с точки зрения последующих эпох, что может влиять на исследователя, и поэтому к периодизации следует относиться с должной осторожностью^[31].

История (исторический период) в классическом понимании начинается с появлением письменности. Период, предшествующий её появлению, называют доисторическим периодом. В российской историографии выделяют следующие крупнейшие периоды мировой истории:

• Первобытное общество: на Ближнем Востоке — до ок. 3000 года до н. э. (объединение Верхнего и Нижнего Египта);
• Древний мир: в Европе — до 476 года н. э. (падение Римской империи);
• Средние века: 476 год — конец XV века (начало эпохи Великих географических открытий);
• Новое время: конец XV в. — 1918 год (окончание Первой мировой войны);
• Новейшее время: 1918 год — наши дни.

Существуют также альтернативные периодизации всемирной истории. Например, в западной историографии окончание средних веков связывают с XVI веком, после чего начинается единый период современной истории.

Исторические дисциплины

• Археография — теория и практика издания письменных источников.
• Археология — изучение по вещественным источникам исторического прошлого человечества.
• Архивоведение — изучение вопросов комплектования архивов, а также хранения и использования архивных документов.
• Архонтология — изучение истории должностей в государственных, международных, политических, религиозных и других общественных структурах.
• Бонистика — изучение истории печатания и обращения бумажных денежных знаков.
• Вексиллология (флаговедение) — изучение флагов, знамён, штандартов, вымпелов и прочих предметов подобного рода.
• Генеалогия — изучение родственных взаимосвязей людей.
• Генетическая генеалогия — изучение родственных взаимосвязей людей путем использования методов генетики.
• Геральдика (гербоведение) — изучение гербов, а также традиция и практика их использования.
• Дипломатика — изучение исторических актов (юридических документов).
• Документоведение — комплексная наука о документе и документно-коммуникационной деятельности, изучающая в историческом, современном и прогностическом планах процессы создания, распространения и использования документных источников информации в обществе.
• Историография — изучение истории и методологии исторического познания, а также изучение взглядов и работ различных историков.
• Историческая география — наука на стыке истории и географии.
• Историческая демография — наука о демографической истории человечества.
• Историческая метрология — изучение употреблявшихся в прошлом мер — длины, площади, объёма, веса — в их историческом развитии.
• Источниковедение — изучение исторических источников.
• Методология истории — изучение различных систем методов, которые могут быть использованы в процессе исторического исследования и специфики различных исторических научных школ.
• Нумизматика — изучение истории монетной чеканки и денежного обращения по монетам.
• Палеография — изучение истории письма, закономерности развития его графических форм, а также памятников древней письменности.
• Папирология — изучение текстов на папирусах, находимых преимущественно в Египте.
• Сфрагистика — изучение печатей (матриц) и их оттисков на различных материалах.
• Фалеристика — изучение наградных знаков отличия.
• Хронология — изучение последовательности исторических событий во времени либо наука об измерении времени.
• Эортология — изучение церковных праздников.
• Эпиграфика — изучение надписей на твёрдых материалах (камне, керамике, металле и пр.)

Дисциплины, связанные с историей

• Антропология — изучение человека и его взаимодействия с миром.
• Гендерная история — история взаимодействия мужского и женского опыта как одного из наиболее важных аспектов социальной организации.
• Социокультурная антропология — наука о культуре как совокупности материальных объектов, идей, ценностей, представлений и моделей поведения во всех формах её проявления и на всех исторических этапах её развития.
• Культурология — наука, изучающая культуру, наиболее общие закономерности её развития.
• Краеведение — изучение архитектуры, биологии, географии, истории, культуры, литературы, медицины, религиозных культов, самоуправления, сельского хозяйства, спорта, топонимики, фортификации, экологии конкретного региона.
• Психоистория — изучение психологической мотивации поступков людей в прошлом.
• Этнология и этнография — изучение народов и этносов, их происхождения, культуры и поведения (определение предмета обеих дисциплин, а также их связь с социокультурной антропологией остаются дискуссионными).

Смежные дисциплины

• Военная история — наука о происхождении, строительстве и действиях вооружённых сил, составная часть военной науки.
• Историческая психология — наука на стыке истории и психологии.
• История культуры — наука о ценностном мире исторических эпох, народов, индивидов и других носителей исторического процесса.
• История науки — история научных знаний, политических и правовых учений, история философии и т. п.
• История государства и права — изучает закономерности развития государства и права у различных народов мира в разные исторические периоды.
• История политических и правовых учений — изучает особенности взглядов на вопросы сущности, происхождения и существования государства и права различных мыслителей в различные исторические периоды.
• История религии — изучение возникновения и развития религиозных верований и сакральных культов, взаимосвязей и особенностей локальных и мировых конфессий.
• История экономики — изучение явлений и процессов, связанных с эволюционным развитием и взаимодействием хозяйственной деятельности человека.

Примечания

Литература

• Блок М. Апология истории или ремесло историка. — 2-е изд. — М.: Наука, 1986.
• Тойнби А. Постижение истории. — М.: Прогресс, 1990.

Обзор всемирной истории
Исторические периоды	Первобытное общество · Древний мир (до 476 года) · Средние века (476—середина XVII века) · Новое время (середина XVII века—1918 год) · Новейшее время (с 1918 года)
Экономическая организация	Охотники и собиратели · Аграрное общество (примерно до 1800 года) · Индустриальное общество (1800—1960) · Постиндустриальное общество (после 1960 года)
История регионов	История Африки История Америки История Северной Америки  · История Южной Америки История Антарктиды История Океании История Австралии История Евразии История Европы  · История Азии

История по странам
Страны Азии: История Азербайджан • Армения • Афганистан • Бангладеш • Бахрейн • Бруней • Бутан • Восточный Тимор • Вьетнам • Грузия • Египет¹ • Израиль • Индия • Индонезия • Иордания • Ирак • Иран • Йемен • Казахстан² • Камбоджа • Катар • Кипр • Киргизия • КНР • КНДР • Республика Корея • Кувейт • Лаос • Ливан • Малайзия • Мальдивы • Монголия • Мьянма • Непал • ОАЭ • Оман • Пакистан • Россия² • Саудовская Аравия • Сингапур • Сирия • Таджикистан • Таиланд • Туркмения • Турция² • Узбекистан • Филиппины • Шри-Ланка • Япония Зависимые территории Непризнанные и частично признанные государства Республика Абхазия • Китайская Республика • Нагорно-Карабахская Республика  • Палестинская национальная администрация • Государство Палестина • Турецкая Республика Северного Кипра • Республика Южная Осетия ¹ В основном в Африке      ² Частично в Европе Страны Африки: История Алжир • Ангола • Бенин • Ботсвана • Буркина-Фасо • Бурунди • Габон • Гамбия • Гана • Гвинея • Гвинея-Бисау • Джибути • Египет¹ • Замбия • Зимбабве • Кабо-Верде • Камерун • Кения • Коморы • Демократическая Республика Конго • Республика Конго • Кот-д’Ивуар • Лесото • Либерия • Ливия • Маврикий • Мавритания • Мадагаскар • Малави • Мали • Марокко • Мозамбик • Намибия • Нигер • Нигерия • Руанда • Сан-Томе и Принсипи • Свазиленд • Сейшельские Острова • Сенегал • Сомали • Судан • Сьерра-Леоне • Танзания • Того • Тунис • Уганда • Центральноафриканская Республика • Чад • Экваториальная Гвинея • Эритрея • Эфиопия • ЮАР • Южный Судан Зависимые территории Азорские острова • Британская территория в Индийском океане • о. Вознесения • Канарские о-ва • Мадейра • Майотта • Мелилья • Реюньон • о. Святой Елены • Сеута • о-ва Тристан-да-Кунья • Французские Южные и Антарктические территории Непризнанные и частично признанные государства Сахарская Арабская Демократическая Республика • Сомалиленд ¹ Частично в Азии Страны Европы: История Австрия • Азербайджан¹ • Албания • Андорра • Белоруссия • Бельгия • Болгария • Босния и Герцеговина • Ватикан • Великобритания • Венгрия • Германия • Греция • Грузия¹ • Дания • Ирландия • Исландия • Испания • Италия • Казахстан² • Кипр¹ • Латвия • Литва • Лихтенштейн • Люксембург • Республика Македония • Мальта • Молдавия • Монако • Нидерланды • Норвегия • Польша • Португалия • Россия² • Румыния • Сан-Марино • Сербия • Словакия • Словения • Турция² • Украина • Финляндия • Франция • Хорватия • Черногория • Чехия • Швейцария • Швеция • Эстония Зависимые территории Азорские острова • Аландские острова • Гернси • Гибралтар • Джерси • Остров Мэн • Фарерские острова • Шпицберген • Ян-Майен Непризнанные и частично признанные государства Республика Абхазия¹ • Республика Косово • Приднестровская Молдавская Республика  • Турецкая Республика Северного Кипра¹ ¹ Частично или полностью в Азии, в зависимости от проведённой границы  • ² В основном в Азии Страны Северной Америки: История Антигуа и Барбуда • Багамы • Барбадос • Белиз • Гаити • Гватемала • Гондурас • Гренада • Доминика • Доминиканская Республика • Канада • Коста-Рика • Куба • Мексика • Никарагуа • Панама • Сальвадор • Сент-Люсия • Сент-Винсент и Гренадины • Сент-Китс и Невис • США • Тринидад и Тобаго • Ямайка Зависимые территории Американские Виргинские острова • Ангилья • Аруба • Бермуды • Бонайре, Синт-Эстатиус и Саба (Карибские Нидерланды) • Британские Виргинские острова • Гваделупа • Гренландия • Каймановы острова • Клиппертон • Кюрасао • Мартиника • Монтсеррат • Навасса • Пуэрто-Рико • Сен-Бартельми • Сен-Мартен • Сен-Пьер и Микелон • Синт-Мартен • Тёркс и Кайкос Страны Южной Америки: История Аргентина • Боливия • Бразилия • Венесуэла • Гайана • Колумбия • Парагвай • Перу • Суринам • Уругвай • Чили • Эквадор Зависимые территории Фолклендские острова • Французская Гвиана • Южная Георгия и Южные Сандвичевы острова Страны Океании: История Австралия • Вануату • Кирибати • Маршалловы Острова • Микронезия • Науру • Новая Зеландия • Палау • Папуа — Новая Гвинея • Самоа • Соломоновы Острова • Тонга • Тувалу • Фиджи Зависимые территории Американское Самоа • Гавайи • Гуам • Острова Кука • Кокосовые острова • Новая Каледония • Остров Рождества • Остров Норфолк • Ниуэ • Остров Пасхи • Питкэрн • Северные Марианские острова • Токелау • Уоллис и Футуна • Французская Полинезия