home › Reviews › N. and

N. and

Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev

Kareev Nikolai Ivanovich (1850-1931), Russian historian, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1925; corresponding member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences since 1910, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences since 1917), honorary member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1929). Works on the agrarian history of France in the 2nd half of the 18th century, the history of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century; course on the modern history of Western Europe.

Kareev Nikolai Ivanovich (1850–1931). Russian historian and positivist sociologist, one of the founders of scientific sociology in Russia. A consistent supporter of O. Comte, popularizer and critic of his teachings. The formation of Kareev’s views was greatly influenced by anthropological ideas L. Feuerbach And N.G. Chernyshevsky. As a sociologist, Kareev was close to the subjective school. Founder of the Russian tradition in the philosophy of history. He developed the theory of personality, issues of methodology of social sciences, history of sociology. He criticized Marxist sociology from the standpoint of positivism. Developed the concept of sociological education. Author of the first systematic lecture course on sociology (1897), fundamental works on the theory and history of sociology.

A. Akmalova, V. M. Kapitsyn, A. V. Mironov, V. K. Mokshin. Dictionary-reference book on sociology. Educational edition. 2011 .

Kareev Nikolai Ivanovich - Russian historian and philosopher, sociologist. Professor of European history at St. Petersburg University. After P. L. Lavrov And N. K. Mikhailovsky- supporter of the so-called "subjective method in sociology". Kareev’s main ideas are related to the interpretation of the views of representatives of the “first positivism” ( Konta , Spencer , Mill): “mind, thought, idea belong not to the world as a whole, but to the world within the boundaries of human knowledge” (“Basic questions of the philosophy of history.” St. Petersburg, 1883, vol. 1, p. 326), therefore the meaning of history does not lie in some absolute meaning, but in its meaning for a person. At the same time, Kareev rejects Comte's (and Hegel's) idea of the laws of the historical process. Kareev believes that history can in no way be thought of as a linear process; she is “a living fabric of lines, irregular and winding, intertwined in the most diverse and unexpected ways” (ibid., p. 153). History as a set of random events acquires meaning only in the aspect of its subjective assessment (primarily moral), the idea progress is significant for Kareev only when applied to the destinies of humanity. The main questions of the philosophy of history are revealed through philosophical understanding of a specific historical process. Trying to build a consistent system of social sciences, Kareev distinguishes between theoretical and concrete historical philosophy of history; the general theory of history is divided into historical epistemology, or historian, and sociology, which includes social statics and social dynamics. History and sociology act as complementary disciplines, the subject and method of which are not reducible to each other. Kareev's works in the field of history and sociology had a great public resonance in the academic environment at the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries.

A. I. Reznichenko

New philosophical encyclopedia. In four volumes. / Institute of Philosophy RAS. Scientific ed. advice: V.S. Stepin, A.A. Guseinov, G.Yu. Semigin. M., Thought, 2010 , vol. II, E – M, p. 217.

Kareev Nikolai Ivanovich (11/24 (12/6/1850, Moscow - 02/18/1931, Leningrad) - historian, sociologist, gymnasium friend and biographer of V. S. Solovyov. Kareev combined the abilities of a concrete historian and theorist. In these areas his op. include ancient, medieval, modern and modern history. His master's thesis "Peasants and the peasant question in France in the last quarter of the 18th century." (1879) K. Marx called it excellent. “The History of Western Europe in Modern Times” in 7 volumes (1892-1917), according to academician V.P. Buzeskul, for its time is a work unprecedented in its breadth and comprehensiveness of coverage. His contribution to the problems of historical theory is significant. Here, in the first place we must put “Basic questions of the philosophy of history” (In 3 volumes, 1883-1890, the 3rd volume was published as a supplement entitled “The Essence of the Historical Process and the Role of the Individual in History”) and a collection of articles against Marxism “ Old and new studies on economic materialism" (1896). He also wrote many articles related to the assessment of contemporary trends in the philosophy of history and sociology. As a theorist of history, Kareev is a supporter of the “first positivism” (O. Comte, G. Spencer, J. S. Mill, E. Littre), that branch of it that in Russia was associated with populist subjective sociology. Kareev adheres to the idea of a complex structure of historical knowledge. The philosophy of history is divided, according to Kareev, into two parts: theoretical and concrete historical and is a philosophical consideration of the specific course of universal history. Next comes the general theory of history, which, in turn, is divided into social epistemology (the theory of historical knowledge, or historian) and sociology, traditionally consisting of social statics and social dynamics. The latter includes social morphology, which deals with the results of movement, and the theory of the historical process (or historiology), i.e., the doctrine of the very mechanism of development of society. If Comte dissolved concrete history in sociology, then for Kareev they are interdependent, but special sciences. Like some other positivists, Kareev rejected Comte’s “System of Positive Politics,” who considered the historical process to be natural. Kareev denies his law of three stages in the development of society as a whole, believing that it relates only to the sphere of thinking. Kareev does not agree with Comte’s identification of any abstraction with regularity. Comte does not distinguish between evolution and progress, does not see their different nature, but for Kareev, progress is associated with a subjective ethical assessment, and evolution is an objective process. Comte does not separate theory and method; Kareev insists on such a separation. Kareev’s critical assessments of modern social theories are associated with the idea of overcoming them as one-sided. He advocates their synthesis, strives to combine pragmatic and socio-cultural theories, philosophy of history and sociology, psychological and economic concepts. His goal was also to overcome concepts that deny the laws of the historical process and, on the contrary, reduce everything only to them, and equally to reject theories that overestimate the role of historical heroes and those that assign a decisive role to the masses. Kareev belonged to the first generation of positivists in the Russian academic environment, which was prepared by sociological journalism (Pisarev, Mikhailovsky, Lavrov, etc.). He lived through all the stages of the formation of sociology in Russia, taking an active part in this process, and was its historiographer. For many years his great work “Fundamentals of Russian Sociology” remained unpublished. Published in 1996.

B. G. Safronov. N. G Samsonova

Russian philosophy. Encyclopedia. Ed. second, modified and expanded. Under the general editorship of M.A. Olive. Comp. P.P. Apryshko, A.P. Polyakov. – M., 2014 , With. 266-267.

Works: Historical, philosophical and sociological studies. M., 1895; Introduction to the Study of Sociology. M., 1897; Collection op. St. Petersburg. 1912-1913. T. 1: History from a philosophical point of view; T. 2: Philosophy of history in Russian literature; T. 3: The essence of the historical process and the role of the individual in history; Istorika (Theory of historical knowledge). St. Petersburg, 1913 (2nd ed. Pg., 1916); General foundations of sociology. Pg., 1919 (M., 2010); Fundamentals of Russian sociology. St. Petersburg, 1996; Past and experiences. M., 1990; Historiology. Theory of historical process. M., 2011.

Literature: Buzeskul V.P. General history and its representatives in Russia in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Part 1-2. L., 1929-1931; Mogilnitsky B.G. Political and methodological ideas in Russian medieval studies. Tomsk, 1960; Myagkov GII Russian historical school. Methodological and ideological and political positions. Kazan, 1988; Zolotarev V.P. Historical concept of N.I. Kareev. L., 1988; Safrolov B. G. N. I. Kareev on the structure of historical knowledge. M., 1994; Pogodin S.N. Russian school of historians: N.I. Kareev. I. V. Luchitsky, M. M. Kovalevsky. St. Petersburg, 1998: Sociology of history by N. I. Kareev. St. Petersburg, 2000; N. I. Kareev: person, scientist, public figure. Syktyvkar, 2002; Pozdeeva G. G. Historiosophical views of N. I. Kareev. Glazov. 2010.

Kareev Nikolai Ivanovich (XI 24 (XII 6).1850 - II/18/1931) - Russian historian of modern times. From a poor noble family. In 1879-1885 he was a professor at Warsaw and then St. Petersburg universities. Since 1910 - corresponding member. Russian Academy of Sciences, since 1929 - honorary member of the USSR Academy of Sciences. He graduated from Moscow University in 1873, where, under the leadership of V. I. Guerrier, he studied the French bourgeois revolution of the late 18th century. In his youth he was exposed to revolutionary enlighteners, in particular the ideas of D.I. Pisarev. Later he was strongly influenced by the populist ideologists P. L. Lavrov and N. K. Mikhailovsky. Already in the 70s, Kareev became familiar with K. Marx’s “Capital”, which was reflected in his first major study. He remained, however, a typical eclectic-idealist, sharing the positivist-evolutionist views of his liberal peers. Politically, he also aligned himself with the liberals of the post-reform generation - constitutionalists and supporters of social reforms.

In the context of the democratic upsurge of the late 70s, when, according to Kareev, “the peasant question... in the consciousness of Russian society was the central social issue,” Kareev released his best work (master’s thesis) - “Peasants and the Peasant Question in France in the last quarter of the 18th century." (M., 1879, translated into French in 1899), which was followed in 1881 by “Essay on the history of French peasants from ancient times to 1789.” Before Kareev, the main - peasant - question of the French bourgeois revolution was not subjected to serious analysis even in France, and Kareev, thus, with his book secured the priority of Russian science in its specific study. Using rich printed and archival material, including the electoral mandates of 1789, he was the first historian to show that the French peasantry until the end of the 18th century was subject to not only unabated, but even more intensified feudal oppression (later called feudal reaction). Thus, the tendentious thesis of A. Tocqueville, widespread in French historiography of the 2nd half of the 19th century, was refuted, as if even before the revolution feudal relations were gradually dying out and the peasants for the most part became free landowners. At the same time, Kareev painted a vivid picture of the French split that had not yet ended at the time of the revolution. “...the semi-medieval peasantry against the village bourgeoisie and proletariat” (V.I. Lenin, Soch., vol. 1, p. 231). For all his liberal-bourgeois narrow-mindedness, Kareev paid some attention to the struggle of the masses for the elimination of feudal relations during the revolution. Marx called Kareev’s work excellent (see Correspondence of K. Marx and F. Engels with Russian political figures, 1951, pp. 232-233), Engels - “the best work on the peasants” (see K. Marx and F. Engels , Selected letters, 1953, p. 407). Following Kareev, the same range of problems was developed starting in the 90s, from different points of view, by M. M. Kovalevsky and I. V. Luchitsky, who are often combined with Kareev by the general term “Russian school” in the study of the agrarian question during the French period. bourgeois revolution of the late 18th century.

In the context of the disputes of the 80s about the ways of further development of Russia and the increased interest of wide circles in the general problems of historical science in connection with this, Kareev wrote a work (doctoral dissertation) “Basic questions of the philosophy of history” (vol. 1-3, M., 1883-90), permeated with eclecticism. Here and in numerous other historical, philosophical and sociological works, he contrasted history with sociology, essentially denying its truly scientific character. Taking a position of extreme subjectivism, Kareev declared, like Mikhailovsky, the content of the philosophy of history is “the ideal world of norms, the world of what should be, the world of the true and just, with which actual history will be compared.” From the same subjective idealistic position, Kareeva since the 90s stubbornly fought against Marxism, identifying it with “economic materialism.” For this, along with Mikhailovsky, he was rightly criticized and quite ridiculed, in the words of V. I. Lenin (see Works, vol. 5, p. 365), by G. V. Plekhanov in his book “On the question of the development of a monistic view of history”, written as “a response to Messrs. Mikhailovsky, Kareev and others.”

Despite all the moderation of his liberalism, Kareev was dismissed from St. Petersburg University in 1899 due to student unrest, where he returned only in 1906. During the years of the first Russian Revolution, he joined the ranks of the Cadet Party and was elected a member of the 1st State Duma.

A number of his books and articles on the history of Poland are associated with the period of Kareev’s professorship in Warsaw (“The Fall of Poland” in historical literature,” St. Petersburg, 1888; “Historical sketch of the Polish Sejm,” M., 1888, etc.) . After Kareev moved to St. Petersburg University, his course, also eclectic in its methodology, but valuable in its wealth of material, began to be published - “The History of Western Europe in Modern Times” (vol. 1-7, St. Petersburg, 1892-1917). In this course, brought up to the beginning of the 1st World War, a significant place was given, in contrast to other contemporary Russian and foreign manuals, not only to political and cultural history, but also to socio-economic processes. Kareev did not stop his studies of the French revolution of the 18th century, systematically responding to works devoted to it in Russian and foreign literature (“What has been done in historical science on the issue of the situation of French workers before the revolution of 1789,” St. Petersburg, 1911; "Quick notes on the economic history of France in the era of revolution", St. Petersburg, 1911, etc.). In 1910, Kareev began to develop important, but then poorly studied material on the history of the Parisian revolutionary sections (Unpublished documents on the history of the Parisian sections 1790-1795, St. Petersburg, 1912; Unpublished protocols of the Parisian sections of 9 Thermidor II, St. Petersburg, 1914; Parisian sections during the French Revolution (1790-1795), St. Petersburg, 1911; Political speeches of the Parisian sections during the Great Revolution, "Russian wealth", 1912, No. 11, etc.). After the Great October Socialist Revolution, Kareev published in 1924-1925 the work “Historians of the French Revolution” in 3 volumes - a historiographical overview of the main works in this area, unsurpassed in its completeness, considered, however, by the author from his former liberal-bourgeois point of view.

B. G. Weber. Moscow.

Soviet historical encyclopedia. In 16 volumes. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1973-1982. Volume 7. KARAKEEV - KOSHAKER. 1965 .

Works: List of K.’s works in the collection: From the distant and near past, P.-M., 1923, p. 7-18, as well as in his work: Historians Franz. revolutions, vol. 3, L., 1925, p. 298-300 (works on the French Revolution).

Literature: Marx K., (Letter) M. M. Kovalevsky. April 1879, in the book: Correspondence of K. Marx and F. Engels from Russian. political figures, 2nd ed., M., 1951, p. 232-33; Engels F., (Letter) to K. Kautsky. February 20, 1889, in the book: Marx K. and Engels F., Izbr. letters, M., 1953, p. 407-11; Buzeskul V., General history and its representatives in Russia in the 19th and early years. XX century, part 1, L., 1929, p. 153-68; Weber B. G., First Russian. French research bourgeois Revolution of the 18th century, in: From the history of socio-political. ideas, M., 1955, p. 642-63; Frolova I. I., The significance of N. I. Kareev’s research for the development of the history of French. peasantry in the era of feudalism, in collection: Wed. century, vol. 7, 1955, p. 315-34; Essays on the history of history. sciences in the USSR, (vol.) 2, M., 1960, p. 461-83, 503.

Read further:

Historians (biographical index).

Philosophers, lovers of wisdom (biographical index).

Essays:

Historical, philosophical and sociological studies. M., 1895;

Old and new studies on economic materialism. St. Petersburg, 1896;

Istorika (Theory of historical knowledge). St. Petersburg, 1916;

General foundations of sociology. Pg., 1919.

Literature:

Buzeskul V.P. General history and its representatives in Russia in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Part 1-2. L., 1929-1931;

Mogilnitsky B.G. Political and methodological ideas in Russian medieval studies. Tomsk, 1960;

Myagkov G.P. Russian historical school. Methodological and ideological and political positions. Kazan, 1988;

Zolotarev V.P. Historical concept of N.I. Kareev. L., 1988;

Safrolov B. G. N. I. Kareev on the structure of historical knowledge. M., 1994;

Pogodin S.N. Russian school of historians: N.I. Kareev. I. V. Luchitsky, M. M. Kovalevsky. St. Petersburg, 1998:

Sociology of history N. I. Kareeva. St. Petersburg, 2000;

N. I. Kareev: person, scientist, public figure. Syktyvkar, 2002;

Pozdeeva G. G. Historiosophical views of N. I. Kareev. Glazov. 2010.

In addition to thorough purely historical works, which had a serious influence on many domestic and foreign historians, Kareev fruitfully worked on various methodological problems of sociology. Thus, he early and independently of the German neo-Kantians raised the question of the peculiarities of generalization in the natural and human sciences, of typological analysis, etc. Carefully following the history of the formation of world and Russian sociology, he quickly responded to the latest innovations in this area, either with an article or a review . Controversy often ensued. The articles were collected into collections and republished many times.

Kareev came to science at a time when there was an intense search for arguments in favor of the independence of sociology. He actively participated in this work and, along with the development of specific topics in the field of sociology and history, created a number of original studies on general issues of the theory and methodology of sociological knowledge.

Kareev belonged to the subjective school, trying to systematize many of its lessons and protect them from criticism from Marxists, neo-Kantians, and religious social metaphysics. Among specific sociological problems, he paid special attention to the interdisciplinary relations of sociology
(especially with psychology), the role of the individual in history, progress, etc. His most significant contribution to the development of the history of sociological science; he is the founder and founder of the well-known “Russian tradition” of historical-critical review of sociological schools and trends, which included influential sociologists - M. Kovalevsky, V. Khvostov, P. Sorokin, P. Timashev and others. Kareev is one of the first successful bibliographers of sociology and the compiler of early educational programs in this discipline. The ideological heritage of N. Kareev is multifaceted and extensive, and philosophical, historical and sociological works occupy a significant place in it.

Kareev, basically, remained committed to positivist attitudes in the study of real factors (“empirical events”). He saw his main task as discovering the laws of human development using precise research methods. Society as an organized whole - social progress, social organization, control and regulation - all these factors are closely interconnected, Kareev argued, and form the basis for the natural development of society as a complex system of mental and practical interactions of an individual.

Kareev gave definition of sociology as an abstract science that studies the nature and genesis of society, its basic forces and their relationships, and the processes occurring in it, regardless of the time and place of their occurrence.

“Sociology,” he wrote, “is a general abstract science about the nature and genesis of society, about its basic elemental factors and forces, about their relationships, about the nature of the processes taking place in it, wherever and whenever all this exists and happens. ".

In his work “General Fundamentals of Sociology” Kareev develops his idea of sociology. He writes: “Sociology takes society integrally, meaning that the state, law and national economy, taken separately for isolated study, exist only in the abstract, that in reality there is no state in which there would be no law and economy, that there is no economy without state and law and that, finally, there is no latter without the first two."

The main source of Kareev’s sociology is positivism, especially Kontism. At the same time, Kareev criticized his theories - he did not accept Comte’s thesis, according to which all history can be represented by a three-phase scheme expressing the laws of movement of sciences in accordance with the forms of the worldview; had a negative attitude towards Comte's ignorance of the importance of political economy for the construction of sociology. classification of sciences, considering it incomplete. Auguste Comte, according to Kareev, due to the underdevelopment of psychological knowledge in that period, made a leap from biology to sociology, bypassing psychology. “Between biology and sociology we place psychology, but not individual, but collective,” wrote Kareev. Collective psychology is capable, in his opinion, of becoming the true basis of sociology, since all social phenomena are ultimately spiritual interaction between individuals.

The main problems of sociology, according to Kareev, are: 1) sociology as a science; 2) scientific and ethical element in it; 3) the relationship of sociology with other social sciences, as well as with biology and psychology; 4) the economic aspect of society; 5) social structure; 6) progress as the essence of the historical process and 7) the role of the individual in history.

Kareev attached great importance to the development theoretical sociology. In accordance with the principles of positivism, Kareev considered sociology as a purely theoretical discipline, striving exclusively to understand the objective trends of social development and not allowing in its constructions any assessments that go beyond what can be verified.

Kareev did not agree with Comte regarding the tasks of sociology, which the founder of sociology expressed with the following aphorism: “Know in order to foresee, foresee in order to dominate.” Kareev wrote: "" Sociology, like any positive science about what is, how it is, must be non-partisan and supra-class... In order to preserve its scientific character. Sociology should not only not decide the question of the best structure of society, but should not even undertake predictions about what the further development of the existing society will be, because in this area of fortune-telling too much is suggested by the aspirations of the heart. Since sociology is the science of the laws of phenomena, there is no place in it for moral assessment, since only individual phenomena and people’s actions, different relationships between them and certain social norms can be subject to more complex ones.”

Attaching great importance to the theoretical form of knowledge and the problem of method in scientific research, Kareev was engaged in substantiating the theories being carried out explanatory(explicative) and prescriptive(normative) functions.

N.I. Kareev, several years before Western sociologists, came to the idea of the need to divide all social sciences according to the nature of the object being studied into phenomenal sciences(phenomenological - history, philosophy of history) and about laws(nomological), to which he included sociology. The emergence of sociology as an independent science of society posed the task of determining its place among other sciences, both natural and humanities, developing its own special method, different from others, and clearly defining the problems and research program. In this regard, the contribution of N.I. Kareev, who most fully developed the issue of methods of social sciences during the period under review, deserves special attention.

Kareev based the classification of social sciences on the degree of their generalization of social phenomena or the level of abstraction. In accordance with this, he identified three main sciences - history and other related sciences: sociology And philosophy of history,- each of which has its own subject, method and level of information generalization.

Kareev believes that the task of history includes identifying sources of information, their critical verification, and describing individual and unique phenomena of the past. History, therefore, is a descriptive science, representing the preliminary stage of the study of society. “The task of history,” writes Kareev, “is not to discover any laws (that is sociology) or to give practical instructions (this is a matter of politics), but to study the specific past without any attempts to predict the future, no matter how the study of the past helps in other cases to foresee what may happen and come.” Rejecting the idea of considering history as a nomological science (i.e., studying the law of society), Kareev sees its goal, firstly, in obtaining facts, secondly, in establishing real relationships between them and, thirdly, in their primary generalizations.

Taking a position of extreme subjectivism, Kareev declared, like Mikhailovsky, the content of the philosophy of history is “the ideal world of norms, the world of what should be, the world of the true and just, with which actual history will be compared.” From the same subjective idealistic positions since the 1890s. fought against Marxism, calling it “economic materialism.” There are a number of critical works by Kareev, in which he substantiates his view of the theory of Marxism as a scientifically untenable direction in sociology.

Kareev did a lot in the field of studying the problem personalities, the deep development of which he considered the main calling of sociology. He considers the personality as a subject of mental experiences, thoughts and feelings, desires and aspirations, constituting the starting point of social processes.

Personality in Kareev’s theory - a subject of history, combining anthropological, psychological and social principles. It is this understanding of personality that forms the basis of the subjectivism on which the scientist so insisted as a method of understanding social phenomena. He argues that subjectivism is inevitable in the study of society, since both individual events and the social process as a whole are assessed from the point of view of a certain ideal.

Society in Kareev’s sociology appears in an abstract form, outside of its historical, economic and other features. Society, according to Kareev, is a complex system of mental and practical interactions of individuals. It is divided into two parts: cultural groups and social organization. Cultural groups are the subject of individual psychology. The distinctive features of cultural groups are not natural properties, but those habits, customs, and traditions that arise as a result of upbringing. The second side of society - social organization - is the result of collective psychology and is studied by sociology. Social organization is a combination of economic, legal and political environments. Kareev’s basis for such a scheme is the position of the individual in society: his place in the social organization itself (political system); private relations with other persons protected by state power (law); its role in economic life (economic system). For Kareev, social organization is an indicator of the limits of personal freedom.

The main achievements of all scientific thought of the 19th century. Kareev, like other scientists, believed in the discovery of two main methods of understanding society - comparatively historical(allowing us to present a statistical picture of society, its horizontal section) and evolutionary(allowing us to imagine society in development, dynamics, consisting of a change in a number of phases or cultural types, i.e., to carry out a vertical slice).

If the comparative historical method deals with similar historical phenomena, identifying their actually existing types, then the task of the evolutionary method is to analyze the processes of their development, stages or phases of this process, as well as to clarify the reasons for their occurrence, design and change.

Kareev, without denying the role of the economic factor in history, assigned the primary role to the factor mental, which made it possible to take into account the complex nature of human actions, the role of creative and volitional impulses. He views human behavior as a unity of the social and the individual; the achievement of a social ideal is realized exclusively through the actions of individuals. This interpretation of personality underlies the concept of individualism of the subjective school. Close to the position of the subjective school are Kareev’s views on the relationship between the subjective and the objective, the essence of which is that the environment, indifferent to individual existence, is processed by the individual in the course of his practical actions and in accordance with his ideal, as a result of which all human forms of existence are created.

A special place in Kareev’s historical and sociological works is occupied by the analysis of the process penetration of positivist ideas into Russian sociology and the formation here on their basis of the most significant trends. In the history of Russian sociology, he noted as the most influential - the subjective school and Marxist sociology; He used the opposition of these currents as a defining feature when developing a periodization of the history of Russian sociology. In the history of Russian sociology, Kareev distinguishes three major periods: the end of the 60s - the mid-90s of the 19th century; from the mid-1890s to 1917; after 1917. The first stage corresponds to the period of the birth of the subjective school. The second is characterized by the simultaneous development of Marxist and non-Marxist sociologies, accompanied by the struggle between them. The third was marked by the establishment of the dominance of Marxist sociology and, as Kareev imagined, the emerging possibility of bringing together “economism” and “psychologism.” Kareev expressed an original approach to the study culture, in the definition of which he included the entire set of results of psychological interaction between people. The content of human culture in Kareev’s concept is presented in the form of two large layers.

One of them unites such products of spiritual activity as language, religion, art, science, philosophy; the other consists of the structures that ensure the functioning of society: the state. national economy, law.

In conclusion, it should be noted that N.I. Kareev had an excellent knowledge of the history of sociology. His works were one of the first attempts in Russia to understand the general patterns of the development of sociology and analyze its successes and failures.

Kareev, along with extensive research work throughout his life, taught history and sociology, created many works devoted to the tasks of teaching history and sociology, speaking in this area as a theorist and methodologist. He cared about improving the system of school and university education, petitioned for the creation of sociology departments at Russian universities, was engaged in scientific research in the field of teaching methods, and studied traditions. prevailing in the Russian education system. Overcoming the publicity characteristic of Russian social science of that time, Kareev took care of strengthening professionalism in the training of qualified sociologists.

Bibliography:

1. Guseinova F.D. "Sociology. Tutorial.", part 2. M., 1997.

2. "Anthology of Russian classical sociology"/ under. ed. Klementyev and Pankova. M., 1995.

4. Goffman A.B. "Seven Lectures on the History of Sociology" M., 1995.

5. Radugin A.A., Radugin A.K. "Sociology: course of lectures" M., 1996.

USSR Place of work Moscow University, Warsaw University, St. Petersburg University

Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev(November 24 [December 6], Moscow - February 18, Leningrad) - Russian historian and sociologist. Since 1910 - corresponding member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (since 1917 - Russian Academy of Sciences), since 1929 - honorary member of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 3

✪ 2001184 Ocherk 01 Audiobook. Kareev N. I. "The general course of world history"

✪ Social psychology. Sociological doctrine of Kareev.

✪ 2000115_Glava_1_Audiobook. Soloviev Sergey Mikhailovich. History of Russia from ancient times. Volume 1

Subtitles

Biography

“My grandfather on my father’s side (his name was Vasily Eliseevich) was a general and held the position of regimental commander when he died back in the forties in Moscow, where his wife settled and where in her house on November 24, 1850 I saw the light on my mother’s name day "

- Kareev N. I. Lived and experienced. L., 1990. P.48

N.I. Kareev spent his childhood years in the village of Anosovo, Smolensk province. He studied at the 5th Moscow Gymnasium (until 1869), and in 1873 he completed a course in the historical and philological faculty of Moscow University, and initially he chose the Slavic-Russian department and academician F. I. Buslaev as a scientific supervisor, but under the influence of lectures and seminars V.I. Guerrier transferred to the history department in his fourth year. Left at the university to prepare for a professorship, he was, at the same time, a history teacher at the 3rd Moscow gymnasium. Having passed the master's exam in 1876, he received a business trip abroad, which he used to write his master's thesis (“Peasants and the peasant question in France in the last quarter of the 18th century.” M., 1879), which he defended in 1879. In 1878-1879, at the invitation of the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University, N. I. Kareev taught a course in the history of the 19th century as an outside teacher, and from the fall of 1879 to the end of 1884 he was an extraordinary professor at the University of Warsaw, from where he also received a business trip abroad to prepare doctoral dissertation (“Basic questions of the philosophy of history”, M., 1883). This work caused great controversy, to which Kareev responded with a book - “To My Critics.” Warsaw, 1883.

In September 1899, he was dismissed without request for political reasons from his position as a professor at St. Petersburg University (resumed teaching in 1906) and at the Higher Women’s Courses, but continued to teach at the Alexander Lyceum. Since 1902, he lectured at the economics department of the St. Petersburg Polytechnic Institute. Together with St. Petersburg University, Kareev also left the Committee of the Society for Needy Students. He took an active part in the Union of Mutual Assistance of Russian Writers (1897-1901); in the Union of Higher Education Workers, founded in 1905, he was the chairman of the “academic commission”, which developed the main issues of the structure and life of higher educational institutions and worked on the literary fund committee (in 1909 - chairman of the committee), as well as in the department for promoting self-education, where from the very beginning he was the de facto chairman. Since 1904, he was a member of the St. Petersburg City Duma.

On January 8, 1905, he participated in a deputation of ten people (Maxim Gorky, A. V. Peshekhonov, N. F. Annensky, I. V. Gessen, V. A. Myakotin, V. I. Semevsky, K. K. Arsenyev, E.I. Kedrin, N.I. Kareev and Gapo worker D. Kuzin), who came to the Minister of Internal Affairs P.D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky demanding the cancellation of some military measures being taken. Svyatopolk-Mirsky refused to accept this delegation. Then the deputation came to a reception with S. Yu. Witte, convincing him to take measures so that the tsar would appear to the workers and accept Gapon’s petition. Witte refused, answering that he did not know this matter at all and that it did not concern him at all. After the events of January 9, 1905, Kareev was subjected to 11 days of imprisonment in the Peter and Paul Fortress.

In July-August 1914, he was in German captivity for five weeks.

In mid-September 1918, he was arrested along with his entire family in Zaitsev (on the estate of his relative O.P. Gerasimov in the Smolensk province), and was under house arrest for five days.

On October 18, 1930, he was subjected to unfair criticism by Academician N. M. Lukin at a meeting of the methodological section of the “Society of Marxist Historians.”

February 18, 1931 - N.I. Kareev died at the age of 81. He was buried at the Smolensk cemetery in Leningrad.

Family

Wife - Sofya Andreevna Linberg (1863-1926), daughter of the famous teacher, author of geography textbooks and compiler of geographical atlases Andrei Leonardovich Linberg (1837-1904).

The All-Russian competition of scientific works of students, graduate students and young scientists in the field of sociology (Russian Sociological Association; Faculty of Sociology of Moscow State University) and the St. Petersburg Kareev Readings on Novistics bear the name of Kareev.

Scientific activity

In the work of N. I. Kareev, three themes can be distinguished that echo the works of his teacher, V. I. Guerrier:

French revolution;
Russian-Polish relations;
problems of philosophy of history.

While he was a student, Kareev collaborated in the Voronezh “Philological Notes” and in “Znanie”, after which he did not stop writing in many magazines. Kareev dedicated his first major works to the history of the French peasantry (the aforementioned master's thesis and “Essay on the history of the French peasantry.”).

Other important works by N. I. Kareev:

“Philosophy of cultural and social history of modern times”,
"The Monarchies of the Ancient East and the Greco-Roman World"
"Old and new studies on economic materialism"
"Political history of France in the 19th century."
"The general course of world history"
"Polonica" (collection of articles on Polish affairs).

Essays especially intended for young people:

“Letters to students about self-education” (1894)
“Conversations on the development of a worldview”
"Thoughts on the Fundamentals of Morality"
"Ideals of General Education"
“Choosing a faculty and taking a university course”

Notes

Literature

List of works

Kareev N. I. Cosmogonic myth // Philological notes Voronezh 1873
Kareev N. I. Mythological studies // Philological notes Voronezh 1873
Kareev N. I. Book of Laws of Manu // “Philological Notes”, Voronezh, 1874
Kareev N. I. About Mr. Shapiro’s “new look” at the modern system of comparative linguistics. (Objection) // “Philological notes”, Voronezh, 1874
Kareev N. I. Slavs in ancient times // “Philological notes”, Voronezh, 1876
Kareev N. I. Races and nationalities from a psychological point of view // “Philological Notes”, Voronezh, 1876
Kareev N. I. Historical essay of the Polish Sejm. - M.: Type. A. I. Mamontova and Co., 1888
Kareev N. I. Western European monarchy of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. - St. Petersburg: printing house of M. M. Stasyulevich, 1908
Kareev N. I. History of Western Europe in Modern Times (in 7 volumes). - St. Petersburg: Printing house of I. A. Efron, 1892
Kareev N. I. Monarchies of the Ancient East and the Greco-Roman World. - St. Petersburg, 1908.
Kareev N. I. General course on the history of the 19th and 20th centuries until the beginning of the World War. - M.: Sytin’s printing house, 1919
Kareev N. I. Philosophy of cultural and social history of modern times (1300-1800). Introduction to the history of the 19th century. (Basic concepts, the most important generalizations and the most significant results of the history of the XIV-XVIII centuries). - 2nd ed. - St. Petersburg: Type. Stasyulevich, 1902. - 205 p.
Kareev N. I. City-state of the ancient world: experience. construction polit. and social. evolution ancient. citizen communities - 3rd ed. - St. Petersburg: Type. Stasyulevich, 1910. - 362 p. (unavailable link since 05/21/2013)
Kareev N. I. The essence of the historical process and the role of the individual in history. - 2nd ed., with add. - St. Petersburg: Type. Stasyulevich, 1914. - 574 p.
Kareev N. I. The French Revolution. Pg.: Ed. T-va A.F. Marx. 1918. 476 p. (Appendix to the Niva magazine). The same: M.: State. publ. ist. b-ka of Russia, 2003. 487 p. (To help a history student)
Kareev N. I. Historians of the French Revolution. - L.: Kolos, 1924.
Kareev N. I. Fundamentals of Russian sociology. - St. Petersburg: Limbach, 1996. - 368 p.
Kareev N. I. Lived and experienced. - L.: Leningrad State University, 1990. - 384 p.
Kareev N. I. On the question of the classification of modes of government in Aristotle’s Politics // Rubezh (almanac of social research). - 1996. - No. 8-9. - P. 4-11.
Kareev N. I. Fundamentals of Russian sociology // Sociological Research. - 1995. - No. 8. - P. 122-129.
Kareev N. I. The attitude of historians to sociology // Rubezh (almanac of social research). - 1992. - No. 3. - P. 4-36.
Kareev N. I. Judgment of history (Something about the philosophy of history) / Introductory article and comments by V. P. Zolotarev // Rubezh (almanac of social research). - 1991. - No. 1. - P. 6-32.
Kareev N. I. Essay on the history of the reformation movement and Catholic reaction in Poland. - M., 1886.
Kareev N. I. Unpublished documents on the history of the Paris sections 1790-1795. - St. Petersburg, 1912.
Kareev N. I. Istorika (Theory of historical knowledge). - St. Petersburg, 1913.
Kareev N. I. Unpublished minutes of the Paris sections of 9 Thermidor II. - St. Petersburg, 1914.
Kareev N. I. The general course of world history: Essays on the most important historical eras (inaccessible link since 05/21/2013 - story , copy) . - Pos. Zaoksky (Tula region): Source of life, 1993.
Kareev N. I. About Saint-Just / The publication was prepared by Yu. V. Dunaeva // Historical studies about the French Revolution. In memory of V. M. Dalin (on the 95th anniversary of his birth) / Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. - M., 1998.
Kareev N. I. Two English revolutions of the 17th century. - M.: State. public ist. b-ka of Russia, 2002.
Kareev N. I. Educational book of New History. - St. Petersburg: Type. Stasyulevich, 1906.
Kareev N. I. Educational book on the history of the Middle Ages. - St. Petersburg: Type. Stasyulevich, 1905.
Kareev N. I. Educational book of ancient history. - St. Petersburg: Type. Stasyulevich, 1903.
Kareev N. I. Lived and experienced. L.: Leningrad University. 1990. 384 p.
Sociology of the history of Nikolai Kareev: To the 150th anniversary of his birth: Interuniversity. collection / Ed. A. O. Boronoev, V. V. Kozlovsky, I. D. Osipov. - St. Petersburg: SPbU Publishing House, 2000. - 420 pp. - (Russian Sociology; Issue 2).
Weber B. G. The first Russian study of the French bourgeois revolution of the 18th century. // From the history of socio-political ideas. - M., 1955.
Frolova I. I. The significance of N. I. Kareev’s research for the development of the history of the French peasantry in the era of feudalism // Middle Ages. - Vol. 7. - 1955.
Zolotarev V. P. Historical concept of N. I. Kareev: Content and evolution. - L.: Leningrad State University Publishing House, 1988.
Safronov B. G. N.I. Kareev on the structure of historical knowledge. - M.: Publishing house Mosk. University, 1995.
Rostislavlev D. A. N. I. Kareev about the Jacobin dictatorship // Historical studies about the French revolution. In memory of V. M. Dalin (on the 95th anniversary of his birth) / Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. - M., 1998.
Classics of Russian sociology (To the 150th anniversary of the birth of N. I. Kareev) // Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. - 2000, volume III. - Vol. 4.
Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev: person, scientist, public figure: Materials of the First All-Russian Scientific and Theoretical Conference dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the birth of N. I. Kareev, Syktyvkar, December 5-6, 2000 / Rep. ed. Zolotarev V.P. - Syktyvkar: Syktyvkar. University, 2002.
Khalturin Yu. L. Anti-positivist conception of historical law N.I. Kareev
Khalturin Yu. L. The structure of historical knowledge according to N. I. Kareev // Sofia: Manuscript Journal of the Society of Devotees of Russian Philosophy / Philosophy. fak. Ural. state university; Ed. B.V. Emelyanov. - Ekaterinburg: B.I., 2003. - No. 6.
Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev. Biobibliographic index (1869-2007) / Comp. V. A. Filimonov. - Kazan: Kazan State University Publishing House, 2008. - 224 p. ISBN 978-5-98180-567-7
Filimonov V. A. Lecture courses by N. I. Kareev on ancient history // The historian and his work: the fate of scientists and scientific schools. Collection of articles of the International Scientific and Practical Conference dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of Professor Vasily Evgenievich Mayer. - Izhevsk, 2008. - pp. 68-75.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev about the national determinant in the history of Russia. // National identity in the problematic field of intellectual history. Materials of the international scientific conference (Pyatigorsk, April 25-27, 2008). - Stavropol-Pyatigorsk-Moscow: SSU Publishing House, 2008. - P. 81-84.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev: in memoriam (towards the publication of little-known biographical materials about the historian) // Stavropol almanac of the Russian Society of Intellectual History. - Vol. 10. - Stavropol-Pyatigorsk: PGLU, 2008. - P. 408-416.
Filimonov V. A.“Basic questions of the philosophy of history” and “The essence of the historical process and the role of personality in history” by N. I. Kareev in reviews of domestic researchers // Theories and methods of historical science: a step into the 21st century. Proceedings of the international scientific conference. - M.: IVI RAS, 2008. - P. 286-288.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev in the discussion about the place of classical disciplines in the humanities and education // Formation of a single space of education and science in Russian higher education: history and perspective. Sat. Art. scientific conf., dedicated memory prof. A. V. Arsenyeva / Rep. ed. L.P. Kurakov - Cheboksary: Chuvash Publishing House. Univ., 2008. - pp. 347-354.
N. I. Kareev and Kazan sociologists // Bulletin of Economics, Law and Sociology. Peer-reviewed Federal scientific and practical. and analyte. j-l. Kazan, 2008. - No. 6 - P. 115-122.
Myagkov G. P., Filimonov V. A. Kazan scientists in the communicative space N. I. Kareeva // Scientific notes of Kazan University. - Ser. Humanitarian. Sciences. - 2009. - T. 151, book. 2, part 1. - pp. 164-173.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev and the First World War: an eyewitness’s view and a historian’s reflection // Image of wars and revolutions in historical memory. Mat. intl. na-uch. conf. - Pyatigorsk-Stavropol-Moscow: PGLU, 2009. - P. 178-186.
Filimonov V. A. M. S. Kutorga and N. I. Kareev: communicative specifics and difficulties of verification // Dialogue with time. Almanac of Intellectual History - Vol. 30. M.: KRASAND, 2010. - pp. 223-235.
Myagkov G. P., Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev in 1899-1906: “leisure discourse” of a historian // Scientific notes of Kazan University. Ser. Humanitarian. Sciences. - 2010. - T. 152. - Book. 3. - Part 1. - pp. 169-178.
Myagkov G. P., Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev and the “thick magazines” of his time: in search of “his” publication // The World of a Historian: a historiographic collection / Ed. V. P. Korzun, A. V. Yakuba. - Issue 6. - Omsk: Om Publishing House. state Univ., 2010. - pp. 347-366.
Veshninsky Yu. Development of the urban tradition of I. M. Grevs in domestic science. Supplemented report at the scientific and practical seminar at the Institute for the Humanities of the Russian State University for the Humanities “At the origins of domestic local history, urban studies, and excursion studies.” - “Municipal Authority”, 2011, No. 5.
Filimonov V. A. Antiquists of the University of Warsaw in the communicative space N. I. Kareeva // Stavropol almanac of the Russian Society of Intellectual History. - Vol. 12. - Stavropol: SSU Publishing House, 2011. - P. 229-240.
T. N. Ivanova, A. N. Zarubin. N. I. Kareev and P. N. Ardashev: towards the publication of a forgotten obituary // Dialogue with time. Almanac of Intellectual History, 34, 2011,
Rostovtsev E. A. N. I. Kareev and A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky: from the history of relationships among St. Petersburg scientists at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. // Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. 2000. T.III. No. 4. P.105-121

Dolgova E. A"Documentary sources for the scientific biography of the historian N. I. Kareev 1917-1931 // Domestic archives. 2012. No. 2. P. 75-82.
Dolgova E. A. “Unexplored pages of the life of N. I. Kareev // Questions of history. 2012. No. 8. pp. 131-137.
Dolgova E. A., Tikhonova A.V.” “The difficult financial situation will have to be reflected in the progress of scientific work...”: the private life of N. I. Kareev 1917-1931. // Homeland. 2012. No. 7. P. 158-160.
Dolgova E. A"From the history of the publication of N. I. Kareev’s work “General Methodology of the Humanities” // Bulletin of the Archivist. 2012. No. 1. P. 239-24.
Veshninsky Yu. Ivan Grevs and the urban tradition. A shortened version of the article. - Website “Knowledge-Power”, 2012.
Veshninsky Yu. Development of the urban tradition of I. M. Grevs in domestic science. - “TELECOPE”, 2013, No. 2 (98).
“I based my right to write ... on our scientific partnership”: the activities of N. I. Kareev in the Committee for Assistance to Russians in Germany. 1914 / prepared. E. A. Dolgova // Historical archive. 2013. No. 3. P.126-136.
Filimonov V. A. The universal discourse of N. I. Kareev as an experience in the representation of ancient history // Antiquities 2010. Kharkov Historical and Archaeological Yearbook - Vol. 9 - Kharkov: Publishing House of KhIAO, LLC "NTMT", 2010. - P. 325-332.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev on the Jewish question in Western Europe and Russia // The image of the “Other” in multicultural societies. Mat. Intl. scientific conf. 22 - 24 April 2011 - Pyatigorsk-Stavropol-Moscow: PSLU Publishing House, 2011. - P. 430-437.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev on the reception of ancient cultural heritage in the Middle Ages and modern times // Dialogue with time. Almanac of Intellectual History - Vol. 40. M.: IVI RAS, 2012. - pp. 240-257.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev as a gymnasium teacher: comprehension of the profession and communicative practices // Historical work as a cultural phenomenon. Sat. scientific Art. - Vol. 7 - Syktyvkar: Komi Pedagogical Institute, 2012 - pp. 66-80.
Filimonov V. A. Antique scholars - authors of the “Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron” in the communicative space of N. I. Kareev // Dialogue with time. Almanac of Intellectual History - Vol. 41. M.: IVI RAS, 2012. - P. 129-164.
Filimonov V. A., Myagkov G. P. The problem of monarchical power and its organization in ancient societies in the political and historical discourse of N. I. Kareev // Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod University. N.I. Lobachevsky. 2013. No. 4. Part 3. pp. 161-167.
Filimonov V. A. Russian classical scholars in the communicative space of N. I. Kareeva (Section 4.3 in the collective monograph) // Ideas and people: intellectual culture of Europe in modern times / Ed. L.P. Repina. - M.: “Akvilon”, 2014. - P. 643-708.
Filimonov V. A. Publishing project as a platform for scientific communication (“History of Europe by era and country in the Middle Ages and Modern Times”, edited by N. I. Kareev and I. V. Luchitsky) // Scientific notes of Kazan University. Ser. Humanitarian. Sciences. - 2014. - T. 156. - Book. 3. - pp. 197-206.
Filimonov V. A. N. I. Kareev and M. S. Korelin: communication within the framework of Greco-Roman discourse // Dialogue with time. Almanac of Intellectual History - Vol. 49. - M.: IVI, 2014. - P. 138-162.
Scientist in an era of change: N. I. Kareev in 1914-1931: research and materials / author-compiler E. A. Dolgova: ROSSPEN, 2015. 512 p.

(1910), honorary academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1929).

Graduated from the Faculty of History and Philosophy of Moscow University (1873), student of V.I. Guerrier. Professor of Warsaw (1879-1884) and St. Petersburg (since 1886) universities, lecturer at the Bestu-Zhevsky courses (since 1886) . One of the or-ga-ni-za-to-rov and the permanent director of the Historical Society at St. Petersburg University. In 1899, after student unrest, together with a group of professors, he was fired for reliability" from St. Petersburg University and from the Bes-tu-zhev-skih courses, where the goiter saw excellent activity only in 1906. Deputy of the 1st State Duma (1906), member of the Ka-de-Com faction.

Kareev’s historical works “The Cre-st-I-Not and the Cre-st-Yan” brought wide-spread fame in Russia and abroad -question in France in the last quarter of the 18th century" (1879), "Essay on the history of French peasants from ancient times" modern times until 1789" (1881). Among Kareev’s many works are fundamental research on the history of the French revolution of the 18th century, -to-ria of Poland, “Is-to-ria of Western Europe in the New Time” (volumes 1-7, 1892-1917), in popular- new courses on ancient, middle-century and new history, used in Russia as Ve-gym-school textbooks, works on me-to-do-lo-gy of history, etc. Kareev was the editor of the is-to-ric department -la En-tsik-lo-pe-di-ches-to-word-va-rya Brock-gau-za and Ef-ro-na. Notably active participation in various movements and schools of social thought of the 2nd half of the 19th - early 20th centuries, becoming a major the most is-to-rio-gra-fom of pre-revolutionary Russian socio-logy.

Kareev’s theoretical views were formed under the influence of O. Kon-ta, “sub-ek-tiv-noy so-tsio” -logia" P.L. Lav-ro-va, N.K. Mi-hai-lov-sko-go, S.N. Yuzha-ko-va. According to Kareev, socio-logy as “general ab-st-rakt-naya science about nature and gene-ne-zi-se of society » is a “but-mo-lo-gi-che-sky” (for-the-established) science, then-where-as-is- ria - science “fe-no-me-no-lo-gi-che-skaya”, researching specific com-bi-na-tions of events that have happened th. Social phenomena have a mental basis, they are involved in the result of spirit and emotion -nal-no-vo-le-vo-go inter-mo-dey-st-via in-di-vid-dov. At the center of Kareev’s attention is the mutuality of personalities as the “exact source” of cultural creativity. va, in-no-va-tion, and social-ci-al-environment, og-ra-ni-chi-va-shay and norm-mi-ru-sche-che-lo-ve-che-skie actions. General-po-zi-ti-vi-st-skaya an-ti-me-ta-physical us-tanov-ka me-to-log-gy Kareeva co-che-ta-las with before -becoming about the impossibility of establishing a thread from the research practical social science “subjective element” (worldview of a scientist, moral assessments, etc.). You are standing in the ka-che-st-ve of the Kri-ti-ka Mar-xi-st-skaya theory of society and recognizing its partial right -that, Kareev noted the limit-ness of any mo-ni-stic explanatory models of social life, considering there is no justification for their claims to in-tele-lec-tu-al-in-exclusiveness. Remaining in Soviet Russia after 1917, Kareev came up with the idea of a theoretical syn-thesis of Mar-xi-st-eco-no-mis ma and psi-ho-lo-giz-ma “sub-ek-tiv-noy school”.

Essays:

Basic issues of philosophy and history. M.; St. Petersburg, 1883-1890. T. 1-3;

Mo-im kri-ti-kam. Var-sha-va, 1884;

Letter to a student's student about education. St. Petersburg, 1894;

Is-to-ri-ko-fi-lo-soph-skie and so-cio-lo-gi-che-che-studies. St. Petersburg, 1895;

Old and new studies about the eco-no-mi-che-sky ma-te-ria-liz-me. St. Petersburg, 1896;

Introduction to the study of sociology. St. Petersburg, 1897;

The general course of the world's history. Essays on the main historical eras. St. Petersburg, 1903. Za-ok-sky, 1993;

Polonica. Collection of articles on Polish affairs (1881-1905). St. Petersburg, 1905;

General course of the history of the 19th century. St. Petersburg, 1910;

Theory of the is-t-knowledge. St. Petersburg, 1913;

Is-to-rio-logia (Theory of is-to-ri-che-go-go-process). P., 1915;

The French Revolution. P., 1918. M., 2003;

General basics of sociology. P., 1919;

Is-to-ri-ki of the French re-vo-lu-tion. L., 1924-1925. T. 1-3;

Two English revolutions of the 17th century. P., 1924. M., 2002;

About-living and re-living. L., 1990;

The basics of Russian sociology. St. Petersburg, 1996.

Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev is one of the most famous Russian historians of the late 19th – early 20th centuries. He was born on November 24 (old style) 1850, in Moscow. Kareev's parents were nobles, but were not very wealthy. The grandfather of the future historian, Vasily Eliseevich, received the rank of general in military service. His father, Ivan Vasilyevich, also began his career in the army, however, having been wounded during the Crimean War, he was forced to switch to the civilian field and later served as a mayor in a number of cities in the Smolensk province. N.I. Kareev’s mother, Ekaterina Osipovna, bore the surname Gerasimova as a girl.

The parents took great care of their son, giving him a primary education at home, which consisted of reading, writing the basics of mathematics, French and the basics of geography. To continue his studies, Kareev was sent to one of the Moscow gymnasiums. To get him there, his mother and father had to sell part of their property. Young Nikolai immediately stood out among his classmates for his talents, became the first student, and at the end of the course received a gold medal.

Vladimir Solovyov, the son of the great Russian historian Sergei Solovyov, studied at the same gymnasium with Kareev. Later, Vladimir Solovyov became famous as one of the largest and most original Russian philosophers. Having completed the gymnasium course, Kareev entered the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University, where he listened to lectures by Vladimir Solovyov’s father, Sergei Mikhailovich, and other outstanding scientists - for example, M. Kutorgi and V. Guerrier. Already in 1868, 18-year-old Kareev published his first printed work, “The Phonetic and Graphic System of the Ancient Hellenic Language.”

At the university, Kareev initially entered the Slavic-Russian department, however, carried away by Guerrier’s lectures, three years later he switched to history. There Kareev became especially interested in the theme of the great French Revolution. One of its main reasons was the difficult situation of the French peasantry. The young historian began to collect materials on this issue, which for a long time remained one of the central topics of his scientific research. As a student, Kareev collaborated in a number of magazines: in the Voronezh “Philological Notes”, “Knowledge” and some others.

Kareev completed his studies at the university in 1873 and was left at the department to prepare for a professorship. Along the way, he worked as a history teacher at the Third Moscow Gymnasium. In 1876, Kareev submitted a work on French peasants of the 18th century for the master's exam - and defended himself brilliantly. This early work of his was highly appreciated even in France. Kareev received a business trip abroad to compile his master's thesis. It was called “Peasants and the Peasant Question in the Last Quarter of the 18th Century” and was defended by the author in 1879. Kareev collected material for his dissertation in the National Library and the National Archives of France.

In 1878-79, Kareev, as an invited, outside teacher, taught a course on the history of the 19th century at the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. In the fall of 1879, he moved to Poland, which then belonged to the Russian Empire, and until the end of 1884 he was listed as an extraordinary professor at the University of Warsaw. From there, Kareev again received a business trip abroad - to write now not a master’s thesis, but a doctoral dissertation. Showing an increasing inclination towards sociological research, Kareev gave it the name “Basic Issues of the Philosophy of History.” This work was defended by him at Moscow University in 1884, but due to the novelty of the ideas expressed, it even earlier caused a number of polemical comments. Parrying objections, Kareev published the book “To My Critics” (Warsaw, 1883).

At the beginning of 1885, Kareev returned to St. Petersburg, where he received a chair first at the Alexander Lyceum, and a little later at the university and at the Higher Women's Courses. In 1889 he became one of the founders of the Historical Society of St. Petersburg University. Soon Kareev was elected its chairman and editor-in-chief of the society's scientific organ, the Historical Review.

His stay in Warsaw aroused Kareev’s long-term interest in Polish history. He dedicated many works to her: “Essay on the history of the reform movement and Catholic reaction in Poland” (1886), “Historical sketch of the Polish Sejm” (1888), “The Fall of Poland in historical literature” (1889), “Polish reforms of the 18th century” (1890 ), "Causes of the Fall of Poland" (1893). Along with research on the topic of the French Revolution, Polish history became the second of the main topics of Kareev’s scientific research.

The third topic was historiosophical and sociological theories. Kareev’s works “Basic questions of the philosophy of history”, “The essence of the historical process and the role of personality in history” (1890), “Philosophy of cultural and social history of modern times” (1893), “Historical-philosophical and sociological studies” 1895) and a number of others.

Before the revolution, Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev was famous as the author of exemplary gymnasium and university courses on history. His “Training Books” on the history of antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Modern Age are published on our website. Before the revolution, Kareev’s “Training Book of Ancient History” was published nine times, “Training Book of the History of the Middle Ages” – ten times, and “Training Book of New History” – sixteen times. They were translated into Bulgarian, Polish, and partly into Serbian. Kareev's textbooks are not outdated to this day, noticeably superior in quality and quantity of material to Soviet and modern Russian school textbooks.

Kareev’s multi-volume university lectures were published under the title “History of Western Europe in Modern Times.” This publication has gained high scientific authority. Part of it was published on our website - and, for the first time, in the format of recognized text with modern spelling. The rest is expected to be published very soon.

Kareev's letters to students about self-education, published in the fall of 1894, went through several editions. In the famous pre-revolutionary encyclopedia Brockhaus-Efron Kareev acted as editor of the historical department. In addition to scientific work, he took an active part in social activities: he was one of the leaders of the Society for Benefits for Needy Writers and Scientists and the Society for Benefits for Students of St. Petersburg University.

Cover of the book by Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev “Letters to students about self-education”

Being a professor at this university, Kareev during the student unrest of 1899 demanded the resignation of its rector. For this reason, in September 1899 the government removed him from teaching at the university and at the Higher Women's Courses. However, Kareev continued to lecture at the Alexander Lyceum, and from 1902 at the St. Petersburg Polytechnic Institute. In 1904 he was elected to the St. Petersburg City Duma.

With the beginning of the revolution of 1905-1907, Kareev, who had long established himself as a liberal, joined the constitutionalist intellectuals. On January 8, 1905, the day before Gaponov’s demonstration scheduled in the capital, a deputation of a number of famous public figures (M. Gorky, A. Peshekhonov, V. Myakotin, I. Gessen, etc.) requested an appointment with the most prominent member of the Russian government, P. Svyatopolk - Mirsky, trying to prevent a possible clash between the people and the troops. This delegation also included N.I. Kareev. Svyatopolk-Mirsky did not accept it, and another famous minister, S. Yu. Witte, stated that the matter did not concern him. After Bloody Sunday on January 9, 1905, Kareev was subjected to an 11-day arrest in the Peter and Paul Fortress. Being a supporter of the liberal constitution, he joined the Cadet Party, at one time he was even the chairman of its city committee and a deputy of the First State Duma. In the Duma, Kareev, in his own words, hoped to “defend the rights and dignity of the violated human personality.” But he soon moved away from active politics, realizing that he was “not born for a political career.” In 1906, Kareev returned to St. Petersburg University and again devoted himself entirely to scientific work.

At the beginning of the First World War, in the summer of 1914, Kareev was captured by the Germans, spending five weeks there.

Kareev's attitude to the events of 1917 was contradictory. Russian liberals at the beginning of the 20th century, and in particular many Cadets, were distinguished by great leftism and, even during the Duma period, easily agreed to cooperate with socialists and radicals. In the First and Second Dumas, the Cadets often supported socialist projects for the socialization of the land and came out with sharp opposition to the right-wing statist Stolypin. Like many other cadets, Kareev did not change his overly liberal views even in the face of the terrible anarchy that opened up in Russia after the February Revolution of 1917. A. I. Solzhenitsyn introduced a characteristic episode in this sense in his “March of the Seventeenth.” The revolutionary impressions of one of the main heroines of the epic, Olda Andozerskaya, are conveyed by Solzhenitsyn as follows (Chapter 619):

“...the revolutionary excitement also gripped the leading professors. Professor Grimm became a colleague of the Minister of Education and was in charge of higher education affairs. Now, all the professors who had taken the post by appointment and not by election were dismissed indiscriminately - and within three days - even though there were talented specialists. This is how the well-known ophthalmologist Professor Filatov was fired... Professor Bulich persuaded his colleagues to look for new forms of communication with listeners, while he and Professor Grevs hurried to pay a visit to the former rather absurd, but liberal minister Ignatiev. Karsavin and Berdyaev have already signed up to compile the History of the Liberation of Russia - they haven’t even seen the liberation, but they are already compiling it! Yes, they acted wildly, hastily, irresponsibly, almost all the lights in a row. According to Dostoevsky: “First they want the republic, and then the fatherland.” A society in memory of the Decembrists was opened in the library of the Academy of Arts - and Repin, Beklemishev, Gorky met there together with the revolutionaries, began a nationwide subscription to the monument and called on professors to better familiarize the masses with the ideas of the Decembrists. How disgusting it all was, and how everyone rushed into the wrong direction of worries!

But what else did Andozerskaya discern in some of her fellow democrats: they actually carried only a thin veneer of egalitarian ideas, and in the recesses of their consciousness they retained the motto of mental pride, intellectual aristocracy, and, in fact, contempt for the mob. But they curry favor.

During a break in one meeting, Olda Orestovna hoped to relieve her soul with. She knew how much he always hated these student political strikes, cancellations of classes, innumerable revolutionary anniversaries... She spoke - and immediately did not find the language: she did not blame the revolution, but the supposedly eternal Russian idleness, the abundance of religious holidays in the past, which had always prevented us from accumulating cultural and material values. And these skills from the slave times of Russia are now supposedly mechanically transferred to the new Russia.

Olda Orestovna froze. And this one was one of our best professors and the best experts on Western revolutions..."

After October 1917, Kareev, unlike many other prominent Russian scientists, did not emigrate abroad, but remained in the Soviet state. In mid-September 1918, he and his entire family were subjected to Bolshevik arrest at a relative’s estate, Zaitsev (Smolensk province), but five days later he was released.

During the communist era, Kareev continued his scientific work, although the new government increasingly hindered it over the years. In 1923, the Communists stopped republishing the scientist’s works. Kareev was deprived of the opportunity to lecture. His situation worsened further on the eve of Stalin’s “great turning point” of 1929–1932. Along with the trials of “bourgeois” technical specialists (“Shakhtinsky case”, etc.), persecution of old humanities scientists who lived in the USSR was launched. At this time, the largest researcher of Russian history, S. F. Platonov, suffered. In 1928, N.I. Kareev’s son, Konstantin, was arrested and then expelled from Leningrad. On October 18, 1930, Kareev himself was subjected to far-fetched “criticism” at a meeting of the methodological section of the “Society of Marxist Historians.” Death saved him from more severe repressions. On February 18, 1931, Kareev died in Leningrad at the age of 80.