An Analysis Of Sergei Mikhailovich Soloviev's Historical Thoughts

The thesis contains four parts: introduction,main body,conclusion and references.The main body of the doctoral dissertation is made up of four parts.In the first part,it clarifies the historical background and academic context of S.M.Soloviev.The second chapter analyzes basic academic premises and core issues of S.M.Soloviev's historical thought.The third chapter reveals the history of historiography or the intellectual history related to S.M.Soloviev from the perspective of comparative history.The fourth chapter expounds the academic heritage and practical influence of S.M.Soloviev's historiography from the perspective of the history of Russian historiography in the 19 th century.The introduction mainly introduces the basis and value of the research,the current status of research in domestic and foreign academy,relevant research routes and methodologies,as well as the personal life of S.M.Soloviev and his position of the westerner.The first chapter introduces the background and academic terminology of S.M.Soloviev.The historian is the product of his era and society.Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812,the Slavonic and Western debates in Russia,the European Rankean history,Kizo history,and Hegelian philosophy of history as seen and accepted by S.M.Soloviev,Russia before the 19 th century The accumulated historical research heritage,the philosophical interpretation of the early Western representative Peter Chadayev,is the background of the great era that S.M.Soloviev faced.It is in this context that S.M.Soloviev discovered problems from the times,inherited and surpassed previous academic traditions,wrote history,and expounded his view of history.The second chapter analyzes the basic academic premise and core problems in S.M.Soloviev's historical thought.In answering the question of the origin of Russian civilization,S.M.Soloviev paid attention to the basic role of geographical factors in the origin of Russian history.Geographical factors have shaped the historical difference between Western Europe and Eastern Europe,showing a historical pattern of “the former fast,the latter slow” in the pace of development.In addition,S.M.Soloviev also took geographical factors as the deep determinants of the characteristics of Russian historical unity and the imbalance and stage of historical development.In the course of the development of Russian history,Christianity facilitated the exchange of Russian and Western history,realized the enlightenment of the East Slavs,and promoted the formation of the East Slavs' national consciousness.Similar to geographical factors,the clan system is also a basic premise for the development of Russian history.The clan system plays an important role in maintaining the unity of Russian territory and shaping the Russian state.From the aspect of national development,unlike the Slavophiles' national concept of emphasizing ethics and patriarchal clan,S.M.Soloviev took political rule and legal development as the norm of state rule as the core of the Russian state.The whole country is centered on the monarchy and its apex,forming a top-down power pyramid structure.The Slavic legal consciousness gradually emerged,and the gradual formulation and implementation of the legal system is one of the other basic clues of the development of Russian history since ancient times.Territorial conquest is an important external manifestation of Russian national development.From the perspective of the relationship between the East and the West represented by Russia,there is both something in common and their own uniqueness.The third chapter reveals the history of historiography or the history of thoughts related to the historical thoughts of S.M.Soloviev from the perspective of comparative history of thoughts.In an era when S.M.Soloviev conducted historical research from a Westerners' standpoint,the Slavophiles thinkers two Aksakov brothers valued Russian history before Peter's reforms and believed that it was unpolluted by Western culture,Russian native history.Correspondingly,they believe that the history of Russia after Peter's reform is a “Westernized” history,and they hold a negative attitude towards this.This divides Russian history as a whole into two different stages.In contrast,S.M.Soloviev believed that the ancient Rus were not independent,but developed continuously in the process of blending with other peoples around them.Therefore,national unity is one of the attributes of the Russian state.Unlike the Slavophiles' static view of state and history,S.M.Soloviev believes that Russian history is constantly evolving.In the view of S.M.Soloviev,national unification not only refers to territorial unification,but also refers to the past and present of Russia as a unified whole.There is continuity and inheritance between ancient Ross and modern Russia.Klyuchevsky is the second generation of the core representative of the Russian State School after S.M.Soloviev.In the construction of the concept of the state,Klyuchevsky and S.M.Soloviev have in common that they emphasize geographical factors,propose colonial historical views,focus on the use of historical materials,and possess a vision of world history.The difference between them is reflected in the attitude towards the stages of Russian history,the historical time period and the starting point of historical interpretation when analyzing the history of Russian historiography.One of the representatives of the third generation of the National School,Milyukov,in his book “The Outline of Russian Cultural History”,Milyukov expressed the similarities and differences with S.M.Soloviev's concepts.The consistency between them is reflected in: affirming the role of great historical figures,focusing on the study of political history,and focusing on economic phenomena and economic processes.The difference between them is reflected in the attitude towards the development of law in the course of Russian history.The philosopher Vladimir Soloviev was a great Russian thinker at the turn of the 19 th and 20 th centuries.In the process of trying to construct a comprehensive philosophical system that transcends Slavism and Westernism,Vladimir Soloviev expressed his view of Russian history.Upholding the concept of progressive history,having a vision of world history,and realizing the uniqueness of the Slavic civilization are common features of their Russian history concepts.But the attitude towards the Orthodox Church reflects their difference in position.The fourth chapter evaluates the value and influence of S.M.Soloviev's history on the development of Russian history in the 19 th century from the perspective of the history of Russian historiography.On the one hand,from the second half of the 19 th century to the beginning of the 20 th century,the movement of historical materials collation promoted by the Russian government and the political circles led to the publication of a large number of precious Russian and foreign historical materials,which contributed to the development of Russian historical research.On the other hand,Russian scholars,including S.M.Soloviev himself,are the specific executors of this publishing movement and plan.This is a historical achievement jointly promoted by Russian officials,politics,and academia.Under this premise,S.M.Soloviev's “History of Russia from Earliest times” studied in the field of Russian history in terms of the citation of original historical materials,the citation of source language historical data,and the richness and authority of historical materials.In practice,it provides a high-quality model and example.S.M.Soloviev's historical writing practice of “Speaking one word based upon one material” has promoted the standardization of Russian historical studies.From the 1850 s to the middle of the 20 th century,the State school,as the Russian historiography school that continued to exist in the history of Russian historiography for nearly one century,experienced three generations of inheritance and evolution.S.M.Soloviev is the core figure who created the State school and promoted the inheritance of the national school.Together with B.N.Chicherin and K.D.Kavelin,it became the first representative of the national school.From the early 1880 s to the end of the first decade of the 20 th century,Klyuchevsky became the core leader of the national school of thought.Through his own teaching and research practices,he trained a group of Russian historians.From the second decade of the 20 th century to the middle of the 20 th century,the students of Klyuchevsky became the third generation representative of the National School.Among them are Milyukov,Riasanovsky and so on.Finally,S.M.Soloviev used the academic research practice of “History of Russia from Earliest times” to influence and exemplify the four basic characteristics of Russian historiography in the second half of the 19 th century: constructing historical interpretations from historical materials;absorbing theories and methods of other humanities and social sciences;constructing a world historical interpretation of the Russian position from the perspective of the fusion of East and West;carrying out world historical research with attention to the questions of the times.In conclusion,it evaluates the academic status and historical influence of S.M.Soloviev's historical thoughts from the perspective of the connection between history and reality.