On the development of military historical science. Military history is really in decline

What does Military History study?

Military history studies the past of peoples and states, evaluates it in order to reveal patterns social development, correctly understand its most important trends, as well as draw certain lessons from it and take them into account in the practice of today and tomorrow.

Military historical science is inextricably linked with modernity, since the problem of war and peace continues to be one of the most pressing. Secondly, military-historical science, objectively assessing the military past of our country and other countries, develops theoretical provisions and assessments on the history of wars, military art, military development, etc.

Thus, it is actively involved in solving the state’s defense problems. Thirdly, the objective truth obtained by military historical science is reflected in concepts that reveal the laws of military events and the forms of their implementation, helping people better understand the essence of the historical process and its contradictions.

Revealing the activities of people in different eras aimed at achieving political goals by military means, military history science shows the features and forms of this activity, its mechanism. And finally, military historical science not only explores the history of wars and the military past as a single natural process, but also forms and determines the basic patterns of development of military art, thereby creating the basis for the development of modern military theory and practice.

Speaking about this side of the methodological function of military historical science, it should be noted that, by studying the past, especially military actions of various nature and scale, it provides direct assistance to military science and serves as important scientific material from which the latter develops theoretical and practical recommendations armed forces, taking into account modern conditions, the level of development of military equipment, weapons, etc. With her research, she shows the factors and conditions that led to this particular result, and not to another, and evaluates the various possibilities that exist in the military operations (war) under study. , but pays special attention to showing the realized opportunity. For example, the factors and conditions for the successful counter-offensive of our troops near Stalingrad and Kursk in the Great Patriotic War were described and assessed in detail. Patriotic War and etc.

The facts show that the close, organic, strong connection between military history and military science is not accidental. It is natural and deeply necessary. This relationship justifies the words of N. G. Chernyshevsky, who said that “without history there is no theory, but without theory there is no history.” By studying the experience of past wars, military historical science makes a huge contribution to the development of domestic military theory. In this sense, it is an important factor in strengthening the country's defense power. The most important function of military history is its ideological function. It is expressed, firstly, in understanding the place of war in the historical process, developing attitudes towards war and the role of man in it, as well as towards war and military actions (the art of waging them) as a means of changing reality in the interests of society and the state.

Secondly, this function contributes to the development of the general, including military, culture of a person and citizen; influences the formation of correct ideas about the nature of modern war and understanding of the military doctrine of the state. In other words, military history as science is an active and equal participant in the formation of the scientific component of the development of society as a whole (and this contains its ideological potential).

Discipline

"Military History"

Topic 1

“Military history as a science. The Origin of Armies and the Art of War"

Lecture 1

"Military history as a science"

School time 2 hours

Reviewed and approved at the ORP cycle meeting

Protocol No._____ dated “____” ____________ 20___

Topic 1. Military history as a science. The origin of the army and military art.

Lecture 1. Military history as a science and academic discipline.

School time: 2 hours.

Place: audience.

Method: lecture.

Material support: projector, laptop.

Study questions and time allocation:

I. Introductory part – 10 min.

1. Checking the presence of students and readiness for class – 1 minute.

2. Announcement of the topic of the lesson and the time allocated for its study - 3 minutes.

4. Justification of the relevance of this topic, its place in curriculum and connections with the previous lesson – 3 min.

5. Setting learning goals – 1 min.

II. Main part – 70 min.

2. Object and subject of military history. The relationship of military history with other disciplines.

III. Final part – 10 min.

1. Brief conclusions on the topic, answers to student questions – 4 min.

3. Bringing up questions for self-study – 5 min.

1. The origin of military historical science. Structure, methods, concepts, categories and main tasks of military history.

Military history as a science and as an academic discipline studied in military educational institutions is the result of its long development. It originated in ancient times in the form of simple stories about wars and battles, about the activities of generals and military leaders in Egypt, Assyria, China, Persia, and in the countries of the ancient world ( Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome). Russian military-historical science has its own path. At the dawn of the Fatherland, the initial form of covering military-historical events were chronicles, which were kept at princely courts and at monasteries. At the same time, the first military-historical works appeared. However, their theoretical level of generalization was low. These were descriptions of events and facts, as well as glorification of military leaders of various ranks.

Object and subject of military history. The relationship of military history with other disciplines.

Each science has its own object and subject of research. The object of science is the phenomenon or process that is being studied. The same phenomenon can be studied by different sciences, focusing on a certain aspect of it. Consequently, the subject of science is that side of the object that is studied by this science.

The name itself scientific discipline indicates that her object is the process of creating and functioning of the army, preparing and waging wars of the past. In it, military history explores the historical patterns of military development, the emergence, course and outcome of wars; military activity (in the unity of all its parties) of states, masses, classes, parties, movements both in peacetime and in wartime in various historical eras. Moreover, this activity is connected both with the preparation and conduct of military actions, and with their prevention.

Subject Military-historical science includes historical patterns of the emergence, course and outcome of wars, the emergence and development of the military organization of the state, military activity in the unity of all its aspects - economic, political, social, spiritual and military itself - the masses, military armies, parties, movements both in peacetime and in wartime in various historical eras. Moreover, this activity is related

The object and subject of military history indicate that it studies an extremely wide range of problems. In solving these problems, military-historical science functions as a certain aspect of everything general history and as such interacts with other sciences, including military science. In her research, she uses the theoretical principles of military science on the issues of preparation, conduct and support of armed struggle and at the same time is the historical basis of military science.

Military history as a science changes under the influence of the entire set of social relations, and above all the object of study: the army, war, military affairs, which determine the emergence and development of numerous branches of military historical science. The famous historian and theorist A. Svechin wrote: “Each specialty of military affairs has its own history. There is a history of military knowledge, infantry, cavalry, artillery, long-term fortification, sieges, supply, military law, discipline, etc. Many of these special disciplines have their own very venerable, extensive and scientifically based literature." This development of military historical science allows us to conclude that military history is a collective science. It consists of a number of relatively independent industries. The most important of them are: the history of wars, military art, the construction of armed forces, military equipment, and military thought.

Military history consists of a number of relatively independent branches. The most important of them are: the history of wars, military art, the construction of armed forces, military equipment, and military thought.

History of wars studies the social essence, reveals the goals, causes and nature of specific wars, their course, consequences and results. When studying wars, military history studies all the processes associated with it, focusing both on the history of direct armed struggle and its support, and on non-military forms and means of struggle during war - economic, diplomatic, ideological and others. All this provides an objective, specific historical approach to the war in question.

History of military art refers to the forms and methods of direct armed struggle. The term “art of war” itself came to us from the depths of the Middle Ages. At that time, any type of activity - shoemaking, blacksmithing, carpentry, pottery, military and other activities - was called art. Into the new and modern times, when all these types of labor began to be called crafts, the art of war retained its name. Based on this, it should be borne in mind that in this case the concept of “art” cannot be identified with the concept of “skillful”. The art of war is the activity of military personnel in preparing and conducting armed struggle, which in some cases can be assessed as skillful and victorious, and in others leading to defeat.

Forms and methods of armed struggle, depending on the scale, the forces and means involved, and the tasks being solved in military science, are usually divided into campaign, operation and battle. The listed forms of armed struggle correspond to the components of military art: strategy, operational art and tactics.

Strategy(from the Greek stratos - army and ägö - lead) - the highest form of military art, covering the theory and practice of preparing the country and armed forces for war, planning and conducting strategic operations and war in general.

Operational art- an integral part of military art, covering the theory and practice of preparing and conducting combined arms (all-naval) joint and independent operations (combat actions) by associations of various types of armed forces.

Tactics(from the Greek taktika - the art of forming troops) - an integral part of the military art, covering the theory and practice of preparing and conducting combat by units, units and formations of various types of armed forces and branches of the armed forces1.

The history of military art accordingly includes the history of strategy, operational art and tactics.

History of the construction of the armed forces explores forms of organization, principles of army recruitment, the emergence and development of types of armed forces and branches of the military ( ground forces, navy, air force, engineering troops, artillery, etc.). The emergence of new types of armed forces and combat arms as a result of scientific and technological progress has posed the task of military history to study and generalize the experience of their creation and combat use. At present, the history of the country's Air Defense Forces, Strategic Missile Forces, Airborne Forces, and Military Space Forces have resolutely declared their existence.

History of military equipment studies the process of creating and improving various types of military equipment and weapons: armored vehicles, aviation, missiles, artillery, engineering, etc.

History of military thought explores the works and theoretical concepts of scientists and military leaders of many generations. It is known that not all theoretical and methodological developments of military thinkers are in demand in practice. Many remain forgotten, although they contain original and rational conclusions and provisions, taking into account which will largely allow us to avoid new mistakes in military development and most objectively determine the main trends and directions of development of military affairs.

Military history also includes the so-called auxiliary or special branches: military historiography, recreating the history of military historical science; military historical source study, engaged in the theory and practice of studying and using written, oral, material, ethnographic and other military-historical sources; military archeology, which studies, based on material sources, the activities of people in the military field in the past; heraldry - stampology, which allows one to establish the origin, authenticity and ownership of documents, samples of weapons, and military equipment; faleristics, exploring the history of orders and medals, insignia, award documents and award statistics; emblems, a special historical discipline about symbolic conventional images that reflect certain concepts and denote the belonging of military personnel and various property to the branch of the armed forces, special troops and services, and a number of other branches.

In the study and generalization of the military experience of the past, all branches of military history are in organic unity and interaction. This is facilitated by the use of methods for studying the past common to all branches of military history. The method of science is the methods of studying reality, the initial principles on which this science is based. The set of methods used forms the methodology of science.

Military history science Soviet period was based on the provisions and principles of Marxism-Leninism, absolutizing some principles (for example, party membership and class analysis) and leaving other philosophical, sociological, and historical views without due attention. Marxist-Leninist methodology focused more on analyzing the objective side of the military-historical process. As a result, subjective aspects, man and his spiritual world remained, as it were, in the background. Meanwhile, there are methodological approaches in which the subjective side of the historical process is a priority.

Reconsidering the significance of Marxism-Leninism as the methodological basis of military history does not mean that everything previously stated by military historians is fundamentally wrong and that the principles of the Marxist methodology of military history must be completely abandoned. Many of them are based on the fundamental principles of other sciences and have not lost their significance. These include, for example, the principles of explaining history based on the laws of dialectics (unity and struggle of opposites, mutual transition of quantity and quality, negation of negation), as well as categories (cause and effect, essence and phenomenon, content and form, necessity and chance, possibility and reality, etc.). General scientific methods: analysis, synthesis, comparison, abstraction, generalization, as well as logical techniques: induction, deduction, analogy, have not become outdated and have not lost their importance for military historical science. And this is not a complete list of methods that were in the arsenal of the methodology of military historians of many generations.

The accumulated experience of domestic military-historical science indicates that in order to objectively reflect and understand historical reality, it is necessary to use all achievements in the field of methodology, not to be confined within the framework of any one doctrine or methodological approach, but to rely on the entire arsenal of social, historical thought, including including foreign ones.

3. Functions of military history. Development of military art.

Military history as a science and academic discipline, objectively reproducing the past, forms views and ideas, develops theoretical principles and assessments on the history of wars, military art, the history of military development, etc. Being involved in the life of society, in the functioning of many of its institutions, military historical science performs a number of functions and, above all, educational. Being a historical form of cognition, organically connected with the theoretical one, following the general laws of cognition, it is specific because it is aimed at knowing events of the past that cannot be reproduced experimentally and in this sense are unique. Military-historical knowledge always includes the moment of assessing events, because in armed struggle people act with their personal and social characteristics, characters and interests.

Military historical phenomena and events, their course and outcome, are studied (cognized), as a rule, in a specific chronological form. At the same time, theory is present in it as a starting point and as a basis, and as a result of knowledge. And this is nothing more than the ability to understand the essence of military-historical events and the patterns that manifest themselves in them. The study of each war includes knowledge of its causes and prerequisites, both essential and secondary, an understanding of its essence as the unity of politics and the armed struggle itself, consideration of the armed struggle in connection with the activities of the rear and the moral and political state of the people and the army. When studying armed struggle, it is important not only to understand what the balance of forces was and how it changed during military operations, but also how direct leadership of these actions was carried out, how the new, born of the war, fought with the obsolete, how the leadership of the troops was influenced by the personal qualities of the leaders and etc.

The multifaceted experience of military history carries a significant ideological, methodological, educational and educational load.

Military historical science is by no means limited to only reproducing the factual side of events. Its goal is not only to restore the picture of the military past, but also to explore it in a single natural process of history. And this inevitably leads the researcher to the discovery of historical patterns, general and typical. Military historians can discover and formulate historical patterns themselves, or they can borrow them from other sciences. Thus, military history as a science is an active and equal participant in the formation scientific picture development of society as a whole, that is, fulfills ideological function.

Methodological function military history is that military historical science, reflecting objective truth in concepts, categories, patterns, makes it possible to use them in the research of other sciences, to apply the methods it has developed scientific knowledge reality. Revealing the historical experience of previous generations in the field of military affairs, it equips contemporaries with specific forms and methods of this type of activity.

Educational function military history is that this science carries a huge charge of knowledge necessary for military personnel in their daily activities and on the battlefields. Arming military personnel with specific knowledge on military issues, the theory and practice of preparing and conducting combat operations, it lays the foundation for a broad military outlook, is an effective means of improving operational-tactical thinking, and helps solve the problems facing the troops.

Educational function is expressed in the presence of great opportunities in military history for the formation of high spiritual moral qualities. A truthful and vivid reproduction of pages of the heroic past, selfless service to the Fatherland, showing the traditions of the people and the army, the history of their struggle for independence help to increase morale, foster a sense of patriotism, self-confidence, devotion to the Motherland, one’s people, readiness to show courage and heroism, to complete your military duty.

It is impossible to correctly understand and explain military-historical events without relying on certain methodological foundations that provide the right direction for knowledge, indicating its paths, methods and means. The methodology suggests how to approach the study of connections and relationships in military-historical events, to identify the essence of wars and their patterns.

A special role is played by philosophical and general scientific principles and, first of all, the principles of comprehensiveness, historicism, explanation of history based on a materialistic understanding of history, the law of causality (determinism), as well as such fundamental categories as essence and phenomenon, content and form, necessity and chance, possibility and reality. General scientific methods are important for military historical science: analysis, synthesis, comparison, abstraction, generalization and such logical techniques as induction, deduction, analogy. At the same time, their comprehensive use is necessary. The principles of the historical and logical approaches are aimed at revealing the essence of military-historical phenomena, their cause-and-effect relationships, and developing holistic ideas about them. Heuristics as a set of techniques and methods that contribute to a faster and more targeted search for truth are acquiring an increasingly important role in military historical research. Empirical methods play an important role - analysis of documents and historical descriptions, statistical research.

A methodological role is played by the position on the continuity of military-historical experience, the need to preserve and develop everything valuable accumulated in the theory and practice of military affairs, and at the same time identify trends and prospects for its development.

In modern conditions, some methodological problems military historical science. Firstly, this is the problem of a person’s personal responsibility for the course of history and related questions about the meaning of military history, negation and continuity in it, the criteria for progress and its price. For example, the question of what the world wars of the 19th century left behind. humanity has acquired not only scientific, but also important ideological and political significance. In this context, the problem of the cost of victory in a war and the cost of war in general is of particular importance.

Secondly, in the process of studying military history, interest in the problem of lessons from military-historical events, wars and armed conflicts is growing. The lessons of the past must serve the present. The meaning of history is seen through the past, ideas about historical experience. The latter is the result of man’s cognitive and spiritual mastery of the social world and its future. It is not only in knowledge, but also in value and worldview ideas.

Thirdly, in the knowledge of the phenomena and processes of past wars, in the development of military affairs, the problem of choice occupies an increasingly important place. Because history is human activity, then it itself implies the need to choose from a number of possibilities. Solving the problem of choice means correctly defining the task of the activities of individuals, parties and movements.

Fourthly, the importance of the problem of historical memory is increasing. Whatever a person does, he is somehow forced to think about the military history of his fatherland, determining his place in the chain of generations. Historical memory carries within itself an evaluative moment - to accept or not to accept the past, to approve or not to approve of it, etc. On this basis, public consciousness, military-historical traditions, and patriotism are formed.

Increasing the role of military history in the system of social sciences is of methodological importance. It plays an increasingly important role in developing the military policies of states and in determining the tasks facing the armed forces, the national doctrine for the security of the country and society both in peacetime and in wartime.

Realities of the 21st century with him global threats oblige military history to provide such knowledge that would help strengthen international, regional and national security, generalize the experience of using military force, both for the purposes of armed struggle and the prevention of wars, and solving peacekeeping tasks.

Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that military history solves the most important task - the study and generalization of military experience, which has theoretical and practical significance for strengthening the country's defense capability.

The current stage of development of military affairs places increased demands on the training of military personnel. The increasing complexity of military equipment and weapons, the increasing role of man in the “man-weapon” system, the presence of numerous specialties in the army and navy determine the need for narrow professionalization of the officer corps, and aim future officers at high-quality academic disciplines in the chosen specialty. At the same time, the acceleration of scientific and technological progress, leading to the rapid updating of weapons and equipment, qualitative changes in personnel conscripted into the armed forces, a wide range of issues that an officer has to solve in his daily activities, during the preparation and conduct of combat operations require appropriate fundamental and community training. For the above reasons, military history is a mandatory military discipline in the training of the officer corps of the Russian army.

Conclusion.

The problems of fundamental military-historical knowledge include issues of the construction and development of the armed forces, the emergence, course and outcome of the most significant wars, military art, the activities of great commanders and military leaders in the history of the Fatherland, as well as the features of military construction and military art of foreign countries. In order to deepen professional knowledge, it is planned to develop experience in organizing and conducting educational work, moral and psychological support for combat operations.

Cm.: Arzamaskin N.Yu. and others. History. Textbook. – M.: Kuchkovo pole, 2014.

Cm.: Orlov A.S. and others. History of Russia. Textbook. – M.: Prospekt, 2014.

1 See: Military encyclopedic Dictionary. M., 1986. S. 514, 711, 724.

Ageev Nikolay Valentinovich

On the structure of military history as a science, its general provisions and methodology

Ageev Nikolay Valentinovich,

Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Professor of the Department of Personnel Management, Document Management and Archival Science of the Russian State Social University.

Basic education: Kiev Higher Anti-Aircraft Missile School named after S.M. Kirov in (1982), Military Academy Air defense of the SV in Smolensk (1997)

Topic of the candidate's dissertation: “Experience of fighting enemy air in local wars and armed conflicts of the second half of the twentieth century”

Topic of the doctoral dissertation: “Development of the theory of the use of air defense troops in army operations and its implementation in local wars of the second half of the twentieth century.”

Main publications: Ageev N.V. Application of expert-intuitive methods in forecasting control systems. 2010, Ageev N.V., Kostin K.K. Military history. 2010, Ageev N.V. Description, explanation and understanding as procedures of scientific knowledge. 2010, Ageev N.V. Some issues of control theory. 2011. and others.

Sphere of scientific interests: methodology of scientific research, general theory of management, fundamentals of sociological research, military history of Russia, military conflictologymail: [email protected]

Abstract: currently among scientists Russian Federation there is no unity in views on the place, subject and mutual connection of military science and military historical science. At their core, the views on these issues of the second half of the 1980s of the twentieth century continue to dominate. The article presents the author's version of the structure of military history as a science, the relationship between the subjects of military history and military science, and reveals the main aspects of the methodology of military historical research.

Keywords: object of science, subject of science, history, military history, military science, methodology of military history, military historical research.

Military history as a science evolved throughout the process of human development. In ancient times and in the Middle Ages (until the 16th-17th centuries), the most typical form of historical writings were annals and chronicles (in Rus' - chronicles). They were descriptive in nature and contained events and facts of historical life, and also glorified military leaders of various ranks. At the same time, the first military-historical works appeared.

IN XVIII-XIX centuries, as factual material accumulated, more and more often the authors sought to assess certain events, identify cause-and-effect relationships, and formulate fundamental patterns and principles of military affairs. The final formation of the second half of military history as a science (including domestic science) became possible in the 19th century, by the time the foundations of general science as a whole were determined. Since that time, the study of military history has become part of the practice of training officers of the Russian army and navy.

So what kind of science is military history? How does it relate to general history and military science?

Each science has its own object and subject of research. The object of science is precisely that holistic phenomenon or process that is being studied. At the same time, different sciences can study the same phenomenon, focusing on a certain aspect of it. Consequently, the subject of science is that side of the object that is studied by this science.

History (Greek i st o r i a - a narrative, a story about the past, information obtained through inquiries) in the broadest sense of the word, this is the process of development of nature and humanity. In this meaning, the term history is applicable to all phenomena in the life of nature and human society without exception. History in a narrower sense is a science that studies the past, specific manifestations and patterns of the historical process, the development of society and the activities of people in all its diversity. By the way, upon careful analysis of this formulation, it is not difficult to conclude that the essence of history as a science is identical with the essence of the history of sociology.

The subject of historical science according to Great Encyclopedia is “the entire concrete and diverse life of society in all its manifestations and in its historical continuity, from the emergence of human society to the present.” At the same time, the study of the historical process as a single whole does not exclude the fact that individual historians focus their attention on certain aspects of this process, on their subject, for which the object will be the science of history.

In this case, two approaches can be distinguished. So, for example, from the point of view systematic approach « National history"studies only the history of Russia, and " Ancient history(Story Ancient world)" explores the development of ancient slave states. With a functional approach, one should highlight such components of history as “History of Culture”, “History of Economics”, “History of Law”, “History of Politics”, etc. Following the logic of the second approach, it is history as a science that is the object of study for military history, that is, military history is the subject of the science of history.

In accordance with currently accepted views, military history is considered in two aspects and represents:

) the process of development of military affairs from ancient times to the present;

) science that studies wars and armed forces of the past, the development of means, forms and methods of conducting armed struggle.

It is interesting that in the encyclopedia of the Soviet period, the formulation of the content of military history as a science was more voluminous: “a science that studies the wars and armed forces of the past, depending on changes in the material, technical, socio-economic and political conditions of society, revealing the experience of military activity of the masses, strata (classes), parties."

Indeed, war as a complex socio-political phenomenon is studied by many sciences. At the same time, the military encyclopedia, already published in the Russian Federation, interprets the subject of military science as “armed struggle in war.” It is no coincidence that one of the most prominent military theorists Russian Empire late XIX - early XX centuries N.P. Mikhnevich considered sociology to be the object of military science. However, in the same encyclopedia, military science is defined as “a system of knowledge about the laws, the military-strategic nature of war (the war that can happen!), ways to prevent it, the construction and preparation of the armed forces and the country for war (predicted war), methods of waging armed. The same encyclopedia identifies the subject of military history contrary to the above, namely, as “the history of military thought, military art, armed forces, weapons and other branches of military affairs.” Thus, a rather confusing interpretation of subjects and objects of military history and military science confuses researchers, not allowing them to draw a conclusion about the mutual correspondence and relationship of these branches of science.

At the same time, it seems obvious that military history is the system of scientific knowledge about wars and armed forces of the past, from which military science receives basic, initial data for modern military theoretical research. It is military history, on the basis of knowledge about the essential patterns and interrelations of the process of development of military affairs, that reveals the trends in the development of certain branches of the military field; it is precisely this that is the basis for military science. So, on the one hand, military history is an integral part of history, on the other hand, it is the basis of military science.

At the same time, military history as a science itself can be an object of study for each of its components and special branches. According to modern military-historical views (see Fig. 1), the structure of Russian military history as a science includes the following components: the history of wars, the history of military art, the history of military thought, the history of the construction of armed forces and the history of weapons and military equipment. In addition to its constituent parts, special branches of military history are also distinguished, namely historiography, source studies, military statistics, military archaeology, military archeography, etc.

At the same time, the study of works on military history recent years, own scientific activity the author's analysis of the topics of domestic military-historical research at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st centuries, the difficulties that arose and are arising during the scientific supervision of students indicate that this structure requires some adjustment.

It is proposed that the composition of military history as a science should include (Fig. 2): general provisions and the methodology of military history, the history of military policy and wars, the history of state and military administration, the history of military science (in turn including the history of military art and the history of military thought), the history of military construction and the development of branches of the armed forces and branches of the military.

Rice. 1. The structure of Russian military history as a science according to the views of the late 20th - early 21st centuries

military history armed science

Special and interdisciplinary branches of military history are those subjects of research that are at the intersection of subjects of several scientific disciplines. For example, the history of weapons and military equipment should be considered a special branch of military history, since, on the one hand, weapons and military equipment have been used in military affairs since ancient times, and on the other hand, the development of technology is inextricably linked with the development of its military models. Historiography as a branch of science has its own section - military historiography, source studies - respectively military source studies, heraldry - military heraldry, etc.

Interdisciplinary branches include military sections of the relevant sciences: military pedagogy, military law, military economics, etc.

Despite the fact that the structure of military history shown in Figure 2 is somewhat different from the generally accepted one today, the main purpose of this publication is still not so much raising the question of specifying the names of its component parts (subjects), but rather the urgent need to introduce a methodological section into military science as direction, subject or individual scientific discipline.

Rice. 2. Military history as an object and subject of research. A proposed version of its structure.

Let's figure out what kind of discipline this is - the general provisions and methodology of military history. Considering that the subject of methodological science is the study of those methods and techniques with the help of which new knowledge in science is acquired and substantiated, let's start by considering the general provisions of military history, what do they include?

Firstly, the study of military history is impossible without developing it philosophical aspect, without identifying and analyzing the factors that determine changes in the military field of the social sphere, without objective knowledge and subsequent generalization of experience in solving state-political, economic and other problems by means of armed violence in historical retrospect. It is philosophy that allows us to identify projects of theoretical problems in science, ideas, methods, rules and operations of thinking.

Secondly, only all of the above makes it possible to identify the direction of development of military history in historical retrospect and carry out a scientifically based forecast and subsequent clear formulation of goals, and, accordingly, topics of military historical research, taking into account the theoretical and practical orientation of the expected results.

Thirdly, it is this fundamental knowledge that will help to theoretically develop and subsequently create in practice a well-founded structure of military history that takes into account the latest achievements of science as a whole, to determine its content, to formulate both the name of its components and their minimum required number, relationships between them and the interdependence of scientific problems solved by individual branches of military history.

Fourthly, important when implementing scientific approach in the course of studying the general foundations of military history is to identify the relationship of this branch with other branches of science. We are talking here about revealing the location of military history in the system of sciences and the correct formulation of its object and subject. It is this knowledge that makes it possible to determine the area of special research for auxiliary military historical disciplines, determines the understanding of the requirements for the final results of military historical research, such as their importance and relevance for military history itself and other sciences (relevance), the possibility of use in further theoretical and scientific research. research and practice (theoretical and practical significance).

However, all of the above results, which are part of the general foundations of military history, are a consequence of the development and subsequent correct application of the methodology of military historical research.

Another area of the discipline called general provisions and methodology of military history is the identification, formulation and resolution problematic issues of a conceptual nature in the apparatus of both military historical science and in the apparatus of sciences that, with varying degrees of depth, consider in their research the military area of the social sphere.

The main difficulties for the military historian are as follows. Considering that the results of military historical research must be presented in such a way that they can be used in modern conditions (for example, by military science), the entire conceptual apparatus, which has undergone even minor changes from the specific chronological stage chosen by the historian to the present, requires “translation” into modern scientific language.

In practice this means the following. Firstly, a military historian must know the state of the subject being studied not only in the chronological framework chosen for the study, but also in specific modern conditions. That is, for example, when studying the tactics of motorized rifle (tank) companies and battalions based on the experience of local wars, the historian must understand modern views on the same subject.

Secondly, the result presented by the historian can, if necessary, be “translated” into the “languages” of other sciences. In other words, the result of military historical research can be used by specialists from other disciplines to achieve their goals. For example, a specialist in the field of history of tactics, when calculating the combat capabilities of units, units or formations, should use modern scientific terms and concepts accepted in mathematics, and not “specially invented” by military specialists earlier or now. It is precisely this approach that will make it possible to use the results of military research when developing, say, requirements for the tactical and technical characteristics of promising models of weapons and equipment.

Thirdly, the methodology defines the requirements for the scientific text itself - simplicity, clarity, intelligibility, brevity, semantic accuracy, etc. However, when choosing a structure for presenting research results, one should remember the correctness of its architectonics (that is, the need to comply with the internal logic of the presentation of the material) .

Another section of the methodology of military history should include special methods, methods and techniques used in conducting military historical research both previously and developed taking into account their development in modern conditions. In this case, one should focus on the development of the methodology of knowledge at the general philosophical or general scientific level and on modern methodological achievements of other sciences.

It is known that methodology (like logic) cannot serve as an infallible tool for the discovery of new truths in science, but this does not at all exclude the use of logical and especially methodological norms, rules and recommendations for a more organized and systematic search and verification of new truths. At the same time, both the goal and the possible result of research in the field of methodology for military history should be considered the development of new ones or the improvement of existing ones. special methods.

For example, the general scientific method of systematization was used by the author when adjusting the structure of military history as a science. Systematization of the topics of military historical research in recent years has made it possible to conclude that it is necessary to correct the titles of the components of military history: instead of “history of wars” - “history of military policy and wars”, instead of “history of military thought” - “history of military science”, instead of “history construction of the Armed Forces" - "history of military construction and development of types of Armed Forces and branches of the armed forces." A comparative analysis using another general scientific method - classification, namely the classification of sections of general history (according to the specialty passport), led to the conclusion that it is necessary to include the subject “history of state and military administration” in military history. Analysis of the classification of other sciences and the identification of sections related to military affairs in them allowed us to conclude that there are interdisciplinary disciplines (see above), as well as the conclusion that the history of weapons and military equipment is more appropriate to be considered a special branch rather than an integral part of the military stories.

If it is necessary to study the military-historical process, periodization can be considered the most important method, with the help of which the trends of the process under study can be identified. When studying a specific historical phenomenon, it is often impossible to do without identifying its levels and their relationships through structuring in order to reveal the patterns inherent in this phenomenon. A method that combines features of both periodization and structuring, and therefore more complex, but at the same time much more universal, should be considered the tabular method.

It should be noted that the simultaneous use of methods of periodization, structuring, and systematization can, on the one hand, complicate military-historical (sociological) research, and on the other hand, lead to new, often original results. This effect was observed when studied by Professor M.V. Vinichenko. problems of using underground space by social systems in extreme conditions.

And finally, the methodology of military history will be incomplete without defining the principles (requirements for..., rules that are followed in their practical activities) of military historical research. The most general of them include the reliability of the data obtained (this includes both the reliability of the source of the data itself and the reliability of the data obtained when creating the source). In the course of military-historical research, reliability is achieved by increasing the objectivity of assessments, identifying the most significant cause-and-effect relationships for the subject under study, and can be ensured by taking into account a number of factors, including:

· using modern methods collecting and processing initial information, including special information, used in the study of branches of military history;

· cross-checking information from various sources;

· increasing the array of statistical and factual material;

· representative sample population;

· availability of the applicant personal experience as a participant in the events under study;

· correct choice of evaluation indicators historical event, phenomenon or process.

The need to comply with the principle of validity in the course of generalizations of the results obtained as a result of military historical research and formulation of conclusions is determined, first of all, by the requirement to comply with the laws of formal logic - identity, sufficient reason, excluded middle, contradiction, as well as the representativeness of the sample of data used . At the same time, their evidence can be confirmed:

· comparison of research results with data from foreign and domestic experience;

· discussion of the research results at international and all-Russian scientific conferences with the involvement of specialists from various areas of military history;

· publications of research results in peer-reviewed scientific publications, incl. included in the lists of the Higher Attestation Commission;

· correct application of research and analytical apparatus already tested in scientific practice;

· confirmation of results expert assessments specialists and the dynamics of developments in modern conditions.

In addition, a military historian must constantly remember that taking into account the experience of the past when formulating recommendations and developing proposals for modern military affairs is not always possible. Narrowing the chronological framework of the process under study when revealing the dynamics of events or their excessive temporary distance from today significantly reduces the degree of concreteness of proposals and, as a consequence, theoretical and practical significance the results of the military historical research for modern military science.

Thus, from all of the above it follows that knowledge of the general provisions of military history as a science and the assimilation of its methodology lay the foundations of a scientific approach to conducting military historical research as a whole, making it possible to predict not only the timing of its implementation, but also the quality of the result obtained. At the same time, it is this component of military history that is the least developed by military historians, not only in our country, but also abroad. It is the general provisions and, especially, the methodology of military history that require immediate and in-depth development in the interests of the highest quality development of all military historical science.

Bibliography

1.Great Russian Encyclopedia: In 30 volumes /Chairman, Scientific Ed. Council of Yu.S. Osipov. Rep. ed. S.L. Kravets. T. 12 Iceland - Stationery. -M.: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 2008. -767 p.

.Great Encyclopedia: In 62 volumes. T. 19. -M.: TERRA, 2006. -592 p.

.Vinichenko M.V. System-structural idea of the use of underground space by troops. //Military thought. -2007. No. 7.- pp. 54-56

.Military encyclopedia: In 8 volumes. /Chairman of the Main Editorial Commission P.S. Grachev. T. 2: Babylonia - Guys. -M.: Military Publishing House, 1994.- 544 p.

.Military encyclopedia: In 8 volumes. /Chairman of the Main Editorial Commission P.S. Grachev. T. 3: “d” - Apartment owner. -M.: Military Publishing House, 1995.- 543 p.

6.Kirillov A.V. Clarification of the conceptual apparatus in the interests of increasing management efficiency. //Economics and Management<#"justify">Spisok literatuy

1.Bolshayia Rossiyskayia entsiklopedia: V 30-i t. /Presedatel Nautsh-red. soveta U.S. Osipov. Otv. red. S/L/ Kravez. T. 12 Islandiyia - Kantzelayrizmi. -M.: Bolshayia Rossiyskayia entsiklopedia, 2008. -767 s.

.Bolshayia entsiklopedia: V 62 tomah. T. 19. -M.: TERRA, 2006. -592 s.

.Vinichenko M. V. Sistemno-strukturnoe predstavlenie ob ispolzovanii podzemnogo prostranstva voiyskami. //Military misl. -2007. No. 7.- S. 54-56

4.Voennayia entsiklopedia: V 8 tomah. / Chairman Glavmoi red. komissii P.S. Gratchev. T. 2: Vaviloniyia - Gyis. -M.: Voenizdat, 1994.- 544 s.

.Voennayia entsiklopedia: V 8 tomah. / Chairman Glavmoi red. komissii P.S. Gratchev. T. 3: “D” - Kvartiryer. -M.: Voenizdat, 1995.- 543 s.

.Kirillov A.V. Utothenie ponyatiynogo apparata v interesah povisheniya effektivnosti upravleniya. //Ekonomika i upravlenie. 2013. No. 10 (96). - S. 55-59

.Otetchestvennayia istoriyai: entsiklopedia. V 5 vol.: T. 2. D-K. /Red. coll.: V.L. Yianin (Gl. red.) i dr. -M.: Bolshayia Rossiyskayia entsiklopedia, 1996. -656 s.

.Ruzavin G.I. Metodologiyia nautchnogo poznaniyai: Utch. pos. dlyia vuzov/G.I. Ruzavin. -M.: UNITI-DANA, 2009.- 287 s.

9.Sovttskayia voennayia entsiklopedia. V 8 tomah. T. 3. Grajdanskayai - Yaiokota. / Chairman Glavmoi red. komissii N.V. Ogarkov. -M.: Voenizdat, 1977.

.Filosofiyia nauki. /V.O. Golubintzev, V.A. Dantzev, V.S. Lubtchenro. -Rostov n/D: Feniks, 2007. -541 s.

of historical sciences, professor, professor of chair of human resource management, document science and archive science of the Russian state social university.education: The Kiev highest antiaircraft rocket school of a name of S. M. Kirov in (1982), the SV air defense Military academy to Smolensk (1997)of the master"s thesis: "Experience of fight against the air opponent in local wars and armed conflicts of the second half of the XX century"of the doctoral dissertation: "Development of the theory of application of armies of air defense in army operations and its implementation in local wars of the second half of the XX century".publications: Ageev N. V. Application of expert and intuitive methods in forecasting of control systems. // Interdisciplinary scientific and practical Sociology magazine and social policy. 2010, Ageev N. V., Kostin K. K. Military history. 2010, Ageev N. V. Description, explanation and understanding as procedures of scientific knowledge. 2010, Ageev N. V. Some questions of the theory of management. 2011, etc.of scientific interests: methodology of scientific research, general theory of management, basis of sociological research, military stories of Russia, military conflictologymail: [email protected]

: at present, scientists of the Russian Federation there is no unity in views on the place, the subject and the interconnection of military science and military history. Essentially continue to dominate views on these issues in the second half of the 1980s of XX century. In the article the author's variant of the structure of military history as a science, the ratio of items of military history and military science, describes the main aspects of the methodology of the military-historical research.words: object of science, the subject of science, history, military history, military science, methodology of military history, military history research.

Home address: 127576 Moscow

Altufevskoe highway street, 89A, apt. 126

phone: home 8-915-474-30-92

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Military history as a body of knowledge arose at an early stage of human development. In ancient times and the Middle Ages, the most typical form of historical writings were annals and chronicles (in Rus' - chronicles) - narratives about the most important events of military life. At the same time, the first military-historical works appeared. However, their theoretical level of generalization was low. They were based on descriptions of events and facts, as well as the glorification of military leaders of various ranks.

Subsequently, as a result of attempts to evaluate certain events, identify cause-and-effect relationships, and formulate the fundamental principles and patterns of military art, certain methods of military-historical research gradually began to take shape, professional military historians appeared, and military history became an independent branch of science. In Russia, the process of establishing military history as a science occurred in the 19th century. At the same time, the study of military history became firmly established in the practice of officer training in the Russian army.

The very name of the scientific discipline indicates that its object is the process of creating and functioning of the army, preparing and waging wars of the past. In it, military history explores the historical patterns of the army, the emergence, course and outcome of wars; military activity in the unity of all its aspects (economic, political, spiritual and military itself) of states, masses, classes, parties, movements, both in peacetime and in wartime in various historical eras. Moreover, this activity is connected both with the preparation and conduct of military actions, and with their prevention.

The object and subject of military history indicate that it studies an extremely wide range of problems. In solving these problems, military historical science functions as a certain aspect of general history and, as such, interacts with other sciences, including military science. In her research, she uses the theoretical principles of military science on the issues of preparation, conduct and support of armed struggle and at the same time is the historical basis of military science.

Military history as a science changes under the influence of the entire set of social relations and, first of all, the object of study: the army, war, military affairs, which determine the emergence and development of numerous branches of military historical science. The famous historian and theorist A. Svechin wrote: “Each specialty of military affairs has its own history. There is a history of military knowledge, infantry, cavalry, artillery, long-term fortification, sieges, supply, military law, discipline, etc. Many of these special disciplines have their own very honorable, extensive and scientifically based literature." This development of military historical science allows us to conclude that military history is a collective science. It consists of a number of relatively independent industries. The most important of them are: the history of wars, military art, construction armed forces, military equipment, military thought.

The history of wars studies the social essence, reveals the goals, causes and nature of specific wars, their course, consequences and results. When studying wars, military history studies all the processes associated with it, focusing both on the history of direct armed struggle and its support, as well as non-military forms and means of struggle during war - economic, diplomatic, ideological and others. All this provides an objective, specifically historical approach to the war in question.

The history of military art turns to the forms and methods of direct armed struggle. The term “art of war” itself came to us from the depths of the Middle Ages. At that time, any type of activity - shoemaking, blacksmithing, carpentry, pottery, military and other activities - was called art. In modern and modern times, when all these types of labor began to be called crafts, military art retained its name. Based on this, it should be borne in mind that in this case the concept of “art” cannot be identified with the concept of “skillful”. The art of war is the activity of military personnel in preparing and conducting armed struggle, which, in some cases, can be assessed as skillful and victorious, and in others - leading to defeat.

Forms and methods of armed struggle, depending on the scale, the forces and means involved, and the tasks being solved, in military science are usually divided into campaign, operation and battle. The listed forms of armed struggle correspond to the components of military art: strategy, operational art and tactics.

Strategy (from the Greek - leading an army) is the highest form of military art, covering the theory and practice of preparing the country and armed forces for war, planning and conducting strategic operations and war in general.

Operational art is an integral part of military art, covering the theory and practice of training and conducting combined arms naval operations (joint and independent combat operations) by associations of various types of armed forces.

Tactics (Greek - the art of forming troops) is an integral part of the art of war, covering the theory and practice of preparing and conducting combat by subunits, units, and formations of various types of armed forces and combat arms.

The history of military art accordingly includes the history of strategy, operational art and tactics.

The history of the construction of the armed forces examines the forms of organization, the principles of recruiting the army, the emergence and development of types of armed forces and branches of the armed forces (ground forces, navy, air force, engineering troops, artillery, etc.). The emergence of new types of armed forces and combat arms as a result of scientific and technological progress has posed the task of military history to study and generalize the experience of their creation and combat use. At present, the history of the country's air defense forces has resolutely declared its existence, missile forces strategic purposes, airborne troops, military space forces.

The history of military equipment studies the process of creating and improving various types of military equipment and weapons: armored vehicles, aviation, missiles, artillery, engineering, etc.

The history of military thought explores the works and theoretical concepts of scientists and military leaders of many generations. It is known that not all theoretical and methodological developments of military thinkers are in demand in practice. Many remain forgotten, although they contain original and rational conclusions and provisions, taking into account which will largely allow us to avoid new mistakes in military development and most objectively determine the main trends and directions of development of military affairs.

Military history also includes the so-called auxiliary or special branches: military historiography, which recreates the history of military historical science; military historical source studies, which deals with the theory and practice of studying and using written, oral, material, ethnographic and other military historical sources; military archeology, which studies the activities of people in the military field in the past based on material sources; heraldry, which studies coats of arms, which makes it possible to establish the origin, authenticity and ownership of documents, samples of weapons, and military equipment; faleristics, which studies the history of orders and medals, insignia, award documents and award statistics; emblems, which deals with the study of symbolic conventional images that reflect certain concepts and denote the belonging of military personnel and various property to the branch of the armed forces, special troops and services, and a number of other branches.

In the study and generalization of the military experience of the past, all branches of military history are in organic unity and interaction. This is facilitated by the use of methods for studying the past common to all branches of military history. The method of science is the methods of studying reality, the initial principles on which this science is based. The totality of research methods used forms the methodology of science.

The military-historical science of the Soviet period was based on the provisions and principles of Marxism - Leninism, absolutizing some principles (for example, party membership and class analysis) and leaving other philosophical, sociological, historical views without due attention. Marxist-Leninist methodology focused more on analyzing the objective side of the military-historical process. As a result, subjective aspects, man and his spiritual world remained, as it were, in the background. Meanwhile, there are methodological approaches, for example, those of K. Clausewitz, N. Berdyaev, D. Parsky and others, in which the subjective side of the historical process is a priority.

Reconsidering the significance of Marxism-Leninism as the methodological basis of military history does not mean that everything previously stated by military historians is fundamentally wrong and that the principles of the Marxist methodology of military history must be completely abandoned. Many of them are based on the fundamental principles of other sciences and have not lost their significance. These include, for example, the principles of explaining history on the basis of the laws of dialectics - the unity and struggle of opposites, the mutual transition of quantity and quality, the negation of the negation, as well as categories - cause and effect, essence and phenomenon, content and form, necessity and chance, possibility and reality, etc. General scientific methods: analysis, synthesis, comparison, abstraction, generalization, as well as logical techniques - induction, deduction, analogy, have not become outdated and have not lost their importance for military-historical science. And this is not a complete list of methods that were in the arsenal of the methodology of military historians of many generations.

Like any science, military history performs certain functions that characterize its theoretical and practical significance for the progressive transformation of social life. The multifaceted experience of military history carries a significant ideological, methodological, educational and educational load.

Military historical science is by no means limited to only reproducing the factual side of events. Its goal is not only to restore the picture of the military past, but also to explore it in a single natural process of history. And this inevitably leads the researcher to the discovery of historical patterns, general and typical. Military historians can discover and formulate historical patterns themselves, or they can borrow them from other sciences. Thus, military history as a science is an active and equal participant in the formation of a scientific picture of the development of society as a whole. In this way it performs a worldview function.

The methodological function of military history is that military-historical science, reflecting objective truth in concepts, categories, patterns, makes it possible to use them in the research of other sciences, to apply the methods it has developed for the scientific knowledge of reality. Revealing the activities of people in different historical eras, it shows them the way, equips them with specific forms and methods of activity in the military field.

The educational function of military history is that it carries a huge charge of knowledge necessary for military personnel in their daily activities and on the battlefield. Arming military personnel with specific knowledge on military issues, the theory and practice of preparing and conducting combat operations, it lays the foundation for a broad military outlook, is an effective means of improving operational-tactical thinking, and helps solve the problems facing the troops.

The educational function is expressed by the great possibilities of military history for the formation of high spiritual and moral qualities A truthful and vivid reproduction of pages of the heroic past, selfless service to the Fatherland, showing the traditions of the people and the army, the history of their struggle for independence help to increase morale, foster a sense of patriotism, self-confidence, devotion to the Motherland, one’s people, readiness to show courage and heroism, to complete your military duty.

MILITARY HISTORY - 1) the process of development of military affairs from ancient times to the present; 2) a discipline of classical historical science that studies such practices of the existence of human society as waging wars, building and developing the armed forces. Military history, in addition to studying specific wars and military events, analyzes their goals and causes, results and significance, explores the history of the construction of armed forces and recruitment of armies, their equipment, the principles of distinguishing types and branches of troops, military leadership and the history of military thought, uniform and tactics military actions. Military history is divided into sections: military historiography, military source studies, military archeography. The sources of military history are laws, regulations, instructions, orders, reports, chronicles, legends, memoirs, theoretical works (L. G. Beskrovny).

The history of wars was written about Ancient East, especially historians of Ancient Greece (Herodotus, Plutarch, etc.) and Ancient Rome(Tacitus, Josephus, etc.). In the 18th century, during the formation of European historical science, attempts were made to make consistent descriptions of wars, individual campaigns, the past of regiments, warships, etc. Military history was given much attention in historical narratives, since the past and present of all European states was closely connected with wars. Military history played an important role in the training of future officers, so works on the history of wars were of practical importance. Military history became an independent discipline of historical science in the second half of the 19th century. One of the first historians to create scientific works on military history was the infantry general, teacher at the Imperial Military Academy, Prince. N. S. Golitsyn. The military historian created a major work known as “General Military History” in 15 parts, where he defined the concept of “military history”, its subject and purpose, methods of study, sources and historiography, as well as the meaning of military history. The German military historian G. Dalbrück at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries introduced new rules for testing existing ideas about the events of past wars into the theory of military history: the relationship of such information with the theory of military science, with topographical data, physiological and technical capabilities of the warring parties. In Russia, military history has become one of the most developed branches of historical science. It was represented by numerous military-historical descriptions that complemented general historical works on issues foreign policy and wars. D. F. Maslovsky, A. Z. Myshlaevsky, F. F. Veselago developed methods for analyzing sources on military history and were involved in their publication. In the USSR, military history was ideologized and opposed to the research of so-called “bourgeois military historiography.” The study of military history was carried out by the Military Historical Commission (1918-1921), the Military Historical Department (1924-1946 and since 1953), and the Military Historical Directorate of the General Staff (1946-1953). In 1966, a directive was signed by the Chief of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces on the creation of the Institute of Military History of the USSR Ministry of Defense; Now it is called the Scientific Research Institute (military history) - Scientific Research Institute (VI). The Institute published about 1,500 scientific works, including more than 30 fundamental publications, including “History of the Second World War 1939-1945” (12 volumes), “Military Encyclopedia” (8 volumes), etc. Problems of military history are covered in periodicals: “Military History Journal” (Russia), “Army History”, “The Journal of Military History” (USA), “Military History Monthly” (Great Britain), etc. In 1938, an international body of researchers dealing with military issues was created history, - “International Commission of Military History” (Commission internationale d "histoire militaire).

S. I. Malovichko

The definition of the concept is quoted from the publication: Theory and methodology of historical science. Terminological dictionary. Rep. ed. A.O. Chubaryan. [M.], 2014, p. 49-51.

Literature:

Beskrovny L.G. Essays on source studies of the military history of Russia. M., 1957; It's him. Essays on military historiography of Russia. M., 1962; Golitsyn N. S. General military history of ancient times: in 4 hours. St. Petersburg, 1872-1875; It's him. General military history of middle times. St. Petersburg, 1876; It's him. General military history of modern times: in 3 hours. St. Petersburg, 1872-1874; It's him. General military history of modern times: in 2 hours. St. Petersburg, 1872-1875; It's him. Russian military history: at 5 o'clock. St. Petersburg, 1877-1878. Essays on Soviet military historiography. M., 1974; Black Jer. Rethinking Military History. L.; NY, 2004; Delbruck H. Die Perserkriege und die Burgunderkriege. Zwei combinierte kriegs- geschichtliche Studien nebst einem Anhang iiber die romische Manipular-Taktik. Berlin, 1887.