Suchergebnisse

The aim of the article is to identify some important, general methodological issues of the historical science of Uzbekistan, mainly its relationship with society, politics, ideology, as well as the close connection of the historical past and present. The article discusses the theoretical and methodological issues of the historical science of Uzbekistan at the present stage of its development. The author emphasizes that the methodology of historical science is a complex of content problems. It is also noted that historical science differs from many other disciplines, mainly by close attention to its own history. It has a large amount of accumulated scientific information that requires systematic theoretical study. The methodology of historical science is considered as one of the necessary conditions for improving research. Also, much attention is paid to the effectiveness and social usefulness of historical science, to which society itself is interested. The author shows the improvement of the style of scientific thinking, which was reflected in the ways of seeing the problems of the past, the standards for the presentation of scientific knowledge - that is, on everything that is included in the circle of scientific methodology. The article traces the meaning of historical continuity through the works of one of the ideologists of the young Bukhara movement A. Fitrat and other representatives of intellectual circles of Turkestan and Central Asia, including I. Ibrat, M. Kori, M. Chokai, who emphasized the importance of modernizing society in the sphere of world culture and science.

Despite the urging of classical sociologists such as Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, history and sociology have largely followed different professional and institutional tracks. The result has been detrimental to both disciplines. The loss is especially apparent in the study of empires. Historians have made great contributions to the study of individual empires but have been reluctant to theorize and generalize about them. Sociologists for their part have followed their founders in largely ignoring empires, though there has been a new interest more recently. A rapprochement, or perhaps a synthesis, between history and sociology is urgently needed if the study of empires is to progress. Especially important is the need for a comparative approach, which sociologists are particularly well placed to offer.

Why are the British so Euro-sceptic? Forget about tedious treaties, party politics or international relations. The real reason is that the British do not feel European. This book explores and explains the cultural divide between Britain and Europe, where it comes from and how it manifests itself in everyday life and the academic world.

BibliographyMethodology, theory and history of economic thoughtSources and source studiesGeneral publicationsDemographySocial structure and mobilityLabour, social movements and trade unionsSocial and economic relations in rural communitiesTowns and urbanization processesIndustry, mining, handicraft and architectureTransport and communicationMaritime economy, aquatic economyTradeCredit, finance, money and pricesInsurance and social welfareConsumption

Back in the fall of 1980, Edward Keenan, then Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University, asked whether I would organize an oral history project on Iran. A Soviet specialist, Keenan saw certain similarities between the Russian and the Iranian revolutions and considered the immigration to the West of hundreds of former Iranian officials to be an exceptional opportunity to collect and preserve valuable historical data.In our subsequent discussions it became clear that an in-depth study of the internal workings of Iran's former regime was difficult, as few reliable primary sources are available for this purpose. Because of the autocratic nature of Iran's political system, government papers, documents, and reports were (and still are) infrequently prepared prior to major decisions and subsequent to important events. Moreover, the relevant documents that were produced have not been preserved systematically and, in cases where they do exist, are not generally available to researchers.