Этнос как субъект истории и мера объективности исторической науки

Abstract

The article is devoted to methodological problems, the solution of which determines the correspondence of ethno-historiography to the modern level of science, its further successful development. It is shown that she adheres to outdated views on the structure, subjectivity and role of traditional society in the historical process; docs not take into account the new views of philosophy and the theory of history on the essence of local civilization, the mechanisms of its existence, its role and significance in historical processes. It docs not pay due attention to the factor of interethnic relations and their specific (in particular, local civilizational) forms in historical processes. As a result, ethnohistoriography reflects the subjectivity of the ethnos in history only partially. It is also noted that discourses about the processes of formation and development of Russian civilization are contradictory, while ignoring the role and place of ethnic groups in these issues and the lack of representation of ethnic historiography in the discourses themselves about the processes of formation of this civilization.