О понятиях всеобщая – всемирная – глобальная история: источниковедческий аспект
In the XX century the process of globalization has revealed the insufficiency of the Eurocentric “General history” and stimulated the search for methods going beyond its limits and implementation of the projects “Universal world history” / “Global history”.
The aim of the study – to explicitate theoretical limits of the project “Universal world history” / “Global history” and to propose a methodology of comparative study as the approach to its design.
Material and methods. The study is based on the analysis of concepts of “General history”, “Universal world history”, “Global history” and the theories of the historical process of G.W.F. Hegel, K. Marx–F. Engels, and F. Fukuyama to E. Husserl, K. Jaspers, as well as concepts of historical memory of P. Nora, P. Hatton, Yu.M. Lotman. The methodological basis of research is the phenomenological concept of source study.
Results and discussion. Justified boundaries of “General history”, geographically covering the “spiritual Europe” (the Husserl's term), and chronological period from the turn of VII-VI centuries BC to the mid XX century. Respectively the project of extensive expansion of “General history” to “Universal world”/“Global” history by overcoming Eurocentrism has been questioned. It is shown that “Universal world”/ “Global” history is possible either as a global narrative, allowing any interpretation and not verifiable or as comparative-historical research to achieve a synthesis on the basis of the comparative analysis of different cultures, identifying both general and special characteristics. Explained the construction of the “Global history” on the basis of comparative source study – method comparative-historical research based on a theoretical understanding that the main unit of classification of sources – genus of historical sources – represents the forms of social human activity – the history of society. The method is based on neo-classical phenomenological concept of source studies, conceptual stretching back to the Russian version of neo-Kantianism (A.I. Vvedensky, A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky), the specificity of which was determined of special attention to the empirical object of historical knowledge – historical source. It is shown that the development of ideas about the object from a historical source to the system of types of historical sources and then – to the universal concept of “empirical reality of the historical world” (O.M. Medushevskaya) allowed to propose on this basis a method of constructing a “Global history”.
Conclusion. The construction of the “Universal world”/“Global” history is possible in nonclassical and postnonclassical models of science as narrative, dependent on to the will of the historian, in the neoclassical model of science – as a comparative study, based on the explication of the structure of global empirical object –, empirical reality of the historical world.