Journal of International Eastern European Studies

Yazarlar: Yaroslav KALAKURA

Konular:Tarih

Anahtar Kelimeler:Omelyan Pritsak,Taras Shevchenko Kyiv University,Department of Historiosophy,Historical Science,Historiography,Methodology,Oriental Studies

Özet: It’s highlighted the role of Academician Omeljan Pritsak in the revival of historiography and historiosophy at the Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, his contribution to the methodological and theoretical reorientation of post-Soviet historians of Ukraine.  They considered on the basis of works of predecessors,.the own studios, observations and personal memories of communication with scientists, his idea and the concept of the founding of the first on the post-Soviet space of the historiosophical chair, formation of its composition, elaboration of the educational-professional program, problems of lectures and seminars.  The unique combination of the scientific work of O. Pritsak and his pedagogical skills is revealed, it was emphasized that the lectures of the scientist were content-rich and methodically perfect, they paid much attention to the works of G. Hegel "Philosophy of History", the views of F. Savigny, Leopold Ranke, leaders of the French school  Annals of Mark Blok and Lucien Fever, their follower Fernand Bradeel, analysis of the positivist doctrine of Auguste Comte, neo-Kantianism, modernism, instrumentalism, uniqueness of approaches to the history of supporters of the civilizational understanding of history  O. Spengler and O. Toynbee.  The atmosphere of high activity and recklessness was marked by historiosophical seminars, turning into lively scientific discussions, interesting and sharp polemics on the basis of reports prepared by their participants, abstracts.  Lectures and seminars, individual work and personal communication of the professor with students and post-graduate students contributed to the conception of the historiosophical conceptualization of Ukrainian and foreign history.  It is shown that the practical formation of the chair of historiosophy, the organization of its work encountered bureaucracy and was hampered in every way by the post-Soviet conservatism.  Her leader did not receive proper support and assistance.  In spite of this and for a brief period of the functioning of the department, the contours of historiosophical preparation of historians, ways of integrating Ukrainian historiography in the world historiographic and historiosophical field were laid.  The expediency of using the experience and work of academician O.Pritsak in theoretical, historiosophical and methodological training of professional historians and the return to his idea of ​​separation in the structure of the University of a Separate Department of historiosophy as a scientific-theoretical and methodological center of the interfacial format is substantiated.

---