The ethnological component of Mykhailo Hrushevsky’s methodology: contemporary historiographic reflection

The purpose of the article is to analyze the ethno-social component in the theoretical and methodological approaches of M. Hrushevsky to the reconstruction of the past, presented in modern studies of Ukrainian scientists. The scientific novelty. Mykhailo Hrushevsky as a scientist tried to combine the most effective methodological tools from the arsenal of various humanitarian disciplines, including ethnology. However, modern researchers of his scientific heritage are unable to define clearly the specifics of such heuristic innovations. Today the most constructive look at M. Hrushevsky’s theoretical and methodological model is its interpretation as “ethnosocial”. This demonstrates the multidisciplinary nature of his scientific heritage regarding the reconstruction of the past. In general, the use of the ethnological component in research can be considered a rather significant feature of his theoretical and methodological approaches. The historian’s methodological concept was constantly improved throughout his life and had a polystylistic nature. It should be taken into account that his historical narrative was created according to the canons of the end of the 19th century, but in different cultural eras. Turning to ethnology in a broader context, the outstanding historian considered a significant addition to the analysis of purely historical material from written sources. However, the ethnological and sociological aspects of the scientist’s methodology are still analyzed in a cursory and superficial manner. Conclusions. Modern Ukrainian historians understand perfectly well that the theoretical and methodological innovations in the field of ethnology and sociology, which were applied by the "Great Historian", significantly influenced his research potential. In this context, current historians can use the experience of M. Hrushevsky and significantly expand the theoretical and methodological arsenal of their own research practices. At the latest stage, the most constructive view of the theoretical and methodological model of the author of IUR is its interpretation as “ethno-social”. Today, the ethnological aspect of the scientist's methodology is still superficially analyzed and is only beginning to be developed in historical science. Unfortunately, not all modern researchers who seek to explore the methodological foundations of M. Hrushevsky’s concept can boast of their own high methodological culture. An equally significant problem is the general development of ethnological science in Ukraine and the level of its reception by historians.