Contribution of B. G. Mogilnitski to the development of the Tomsk historiographical school (to the 90th anniversary of B. G. Mogilnitski)

Abstract

The appeal to the work of the scientist famous by his works on historiography and methodology of the history is relevant for several circumstances. It is not limited only by the desire to pay tribute to the memory of the teacher in connection with the anniversary date. In addition to this important reason, there is also a need to emphasize his contribution to the development of the Tomsk Historiographical School, the foundations of which were laid by the B.G. Mogilnitski's teacher A.I. Danilov, about which Boris Georgievich himself wrote repeatedly. At the same time, the rethinking of Soviet historiographical science, taking place in modern Russian historiography and often expressed in its refusal in the status of science, requires a concrete analysis of the works of outstanding Russian historians and to sift out ashes from cinders, rather than bare denial. The article considers the works of the early period of the creativity of Boris Mogilnitski, late 60s - 70s of the 20th century, among which a special place is taken by the monograph, the final study devoted to the national historiography of the 19th - early 20th century and presented by the names of D. M. Petrushevsky, A.N. Savin, I.D. Lucitsky, M.M. Kovalevsky, N.I. Kareev, P.G. Vinogradov, R.Y. Vipper and V.K. Piskorsky. This period of scientific activity of Mogilnitski can also be considered the years of the rise of the Tomsk Historiographic School. Based on the analysis carried out, the author of the article comes to the following conclusions such as: 1. Certain scale of a research. 2. It is noted that for the first time in the Russian historiographic science Mogilnitski made a conscious attempt to combine and apply in the analysis of historical thought three main approaches - the structural, genetic and functional approaches. The systemicity of the analysis allowed the scientist to combine the group of investigated historians into a single "socio-economic direction". 3. It is also worth noting the author's conclusion about the influence of historians on the production of ideology, while his contemporaries researchers insisted on the influence of ideological attitudes on the creativity of historians. The principles of the scientific approach implemented by Mogilnitski in research were instilled in students and postgraduate students in his pedagogical practice, where regular methodological seminars took a special place. On the basis of the above, it can be argued that today, despite the Marxist paradigm within which the study was carried out, this work can be considered as a model of theoretical historiographic research. Thanks to which researchers already in the early 1970s began to talk about the Tomsk Historiographic School.