Abstract

The author of the article examines two ways of scientific heritage research on the basis of the A. S. Lappo-Danilevskyi’s book “The methodology of history”: the historiography analysis and the reception of the ideas of historian. The author raises a problem of the novelty and origin of the historical research. The main features of these two elements of historical study are being revealed, as well as being characterized and discerned. If we talk about historiography, we mean that a historian analyses and describes the ideas of other authors. As a rule in large studies there is a special chapter in the beginning with the structured and analyzed historical theories of predecessors. So the main function of historiography consists in the review of the present theories and streams. The author creates his own theory against their background. We detected the following main traits of historiography. Firstly it is an integral part of the historical research. Secondly the historiography can be divided in two categories – depending on the presence or absence of criticism. Thirdly the criticism, which in this case could be regarded as analysis, is an important part of historiography, it couldn’t exist separately. It is the criticism that makes the review of the predecessors ideas comprehended and helps to avoid just a retelling of their theories. The criticism is also important in comparison of the present streams and detecting of conviction continuity. Fourthly the historiography doesn’t suppose the development of the regarded views of other authors; it focuses on the already created theories and is always “directed to the past”. The reception implies an intellectual process of perception of information, which exists in a material product. This information is to be reconstructed, compared with an aim of the product’s creation and after that the ideas of farther development are to be made. The principle of “accepting another’s soul” is to be used. The criticism could be a part of reception as well it divides it into two sorts by its presence or absence. We detected the following main traits of reception. Firstly it is aimed to the creation of new theories, “directed to the future”. Secondly the views of colleagues as well as the other facts, contained in their studies, could be the sources for the new historical theories. Thirdly the studies shouldn’t be necessarily devoted to the historical subject, especially on the present situation of interdisciplinary.