«M. M. Kovalevsky’s historical and comparative method in the context of structural and functional analysis»
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.131.55593Keywords:
method, historical and comparative, comparative, structure, theory, methods, techniqueAbstract
Problem setting: Recent trends of the science of history of state and law development are convincing evidence of the urgent need to improve and put in order all the methodological arsenal that is used. Sometimes the question is raised more radically: historical and legal science immediately needs its own means of scientific knowledge. This is due to the fact that in modern research on historical and legal subject-matter, that is extremely complex, a scientist needs a qualitative methodological tools acting primarily as a guideline in the vast historical and legal space. Comparative historical and legal method is able to be one of those guidelines which main difference from other comparative means of scientific knowledge is a flexible combination of comparative, historical and legal approaches. Despite the fact that this method is qualitatively different from the comparative and historical, and comparative and legal ones they have development history in common. M. M. Kovalevsky is considered to be the scientist who made the most weighty contribution to the working out of that methodological tendency of legal science. The work of this pre-revolutionary researcher in the field of legal comparative study is so fruitful that still remains a subject of attention of various legal disciplines, including the history of state and law science.
Recent research and publications analysis: A lot of prominent history scientists and lawyers have repeatedly focused on M. M. Kovalevsky’s historical and comparative method. Furthermore, M. A. Damirli, V. T. Zonov, O. V. Kresin, M. N. Marchenko, N. Nikolaenko, A. H. Saidov, A. O. Tille, E. O. Skrypilyov, I. M. Sytar, G. V. Shvekov and others are among them. At the same time, despite the coverage of the individual elements of M. M. Kovalevsky’s comparative method in the scientific literature, the holistic view of its structure and functions of each of its components is not formed yet. Appropriate research using structural and functional approach is required.
Paper objective: The purpose of this scientific paper is the structural and functional analysis of M. M. Kovalevsky’s historical and comparative method by isolating its elements such as the theory, methodology and research technique. As a result, this should allow to debate about the importance of this way of knowledge for the development of law comparative study as the subject matter at hand.
Paper main body: In his work «Historical and comparative method in jurisprudence and ways of studying the history of law» M. M. Kovalevsky seeks not only to prove the importance of comparative way of knowledge for research in the field of law, but also provides initial theoretical and methodological reasoning of the new method. In the context of structural and functional approach to the content of M. M. Kovalevsky’s historical and comparative method it is already possible to single out its necessary elements such as the theory, methods and research technique, indicating the scientist’s attempts to develop a certain concept of use of this means of knowledge. In particular, he reveals the theory of his method by setting tasks of building the history of progressive forms development for living together and studying the history of law of one nation or another and also through historical and comparative approaches to their solution. In M. M. Kovalevsky’s work we can also find the principles of the research objectives use which are the basis of his method theory. Methods and technique of historical and comparative analysis subject to the requirement to compare the largest possible number of objects, in the form of legislation, that should belong to peoples which are close in their social development, and are specified in the appropriate practical recommendations. In addition, M. M. Kovalevsky directly indicates the possibility for involving other methodological ways during the comparative analysis to obtain new facts.
Conclusions of the research: Estimating the M. M. Kovalevsky’s efforts in the methodology of historical and legal comparative study it should be noted that the attitude to his method in the scientific community is controversial. While agreeing, in general, with a positive appreciation of the M. M. Kovalevsky’s scientific heritage it should be pointed that the scientist first qualitatively tried to develop theoretical and methodological basis for the historical and comparative method in the domestic comparative study. Despite the fact that while theoretically reasoning his own method, M. M. Kovalevsky lacked modern structural and functional approach, but in most cases he was able to aptly describe the individual elements of the theory, methods and technique of the new means of special and scientific knowledge.References
1. Damirli M. A. Sravnitelnoe pravovedenie v nauchno-pravovyih traditsiyah Ukrainyi (dosovetskiy period) [Comparative jurisprudence in the scientific and legal traditions of Ukraine (pre-Soviet period)].Visnik Luganskogo derzhavnogo universitetu vnutrishnih sprav [Visnyk of Lugansk State University of Internal Affairs],2007, no. 3,pp. 3-15[in Russian].
2. Damirli M. A. Sravnitelno-pravovaya nauka v Ukraine: teoretiko-metodologicheskie traditsii (XIX – nachalo XX vv.) [Comparative and legal science in Ukraine: theoretical and methodological traditions (XIX - early XX c.)]. Odessa : Feniks, 2007, 96 p.[in Russian].
3. Zonov V. T. Ideyno-teoreticheskie osnovyi issledovaniy M. M. Kovalevskogo (70-90-e godyi XIX v.) [Ideological and theoretical fundamentals of research by M.M.Kovalevsky (70s-90s of XIX c.)]. Metodologicheskie i istoriograficheskie voprosyi istoricheskoy nauki: Sb. st. [Methodological and historiographic questions of History science: Col.of art.]. Tomsk : Pub.of Tomsk University, 1969,Is.6,pp. 136-169[in Russian].
4. Kovalevskiy M. M. Istoriko-sravnitelnyiy metod v yurisprudentsii i priyomyi izucheniya istorii prava [Historical and comparative method in jurisprudence and ways of the history of law study]. Moscow : O.B.Miller Pr., 1880, p. 76[in Russian].
5. Kovalevskiy M. M. Sravnitelno-istoricheskoe pravovedenie i ego otnoshenie k sotsiologii. Metodyi sravnitelnogo izucheniya prava [Comparative and historical jurisprudence and its relation to sociology. Methods of law comparative study]. Ukrayinsko-gretskiy mizhnarodniy naukoviy yuridichniy zhurnal “Porivnyalno-pravovi doslidzhennya” [Ukrainian-Greek international scientific law journal “Comparative and Legal Research”], 2010,no. 1,pp. 9-19[in Russian].
6. Kovalchenko I. D. Metodyi istoricheskogo issledovaniya [Methods of historical research]. 2nd Ed. Moscow : Nauka, 2003, 486 p.: ill.[in Russian].
7. Kresin O. V. Sotsiologichniy napryam u porivnyalnomu pravoznavstvi u drugiy polovini XIX - na pochatku XX st. [Sociological trend in comparative jurisprudence in the 2nd half of XIX - early XX c.]. Ukrayinsko-gretskiy mizhnarodniy naukoviy yuridichniy zhurnal “Porivnyalno-pravovi doslidzhennya” [Ukrainian-Greek international scientific law journal “Comparative and Legal Research”], 2007, no. 1-2,pp. 44-50[in Ukrainian].
8. Marchenko M. N. Sravnitelnoe pravovedenie. Obschaya chast. Uchebnik dlya yuridicheskih vuzov [Comparative jurisprudence. General body. Textbook for law schools.]. Moscow : Publishing “Zertsalo”, 2001,560 p. [in Russian].
9. Nikolaenko N. Sutnist ta osoblivostiistoriko-porivnyalnogo metodu pravovih doslidzhen M. Kovalevskogo [Essence and peculiarities of historical and comparative method of legal research by M.Kovalevsky]. Viche, 2010, no. 14, pp. 16-18[in Ukrainian].
10. Porivnyalne pravoznavstvo u sistemi yuridichnih nauk: problemi metodologiyi [Comparative jurisprudence in legal sciences system: methodology problems].Ed.by Yu. S. Shemshuchenka. Kyiv: V.M.Koretsky Institute of State and Law NAS of Ukraine, 2006. Seriya “Entsiklopediya porivnyalnogo pravoznavstva” [Series “Encyclopedia of comparative jurisprudence”], Is.3,256 p.[in Ukrainian].
11. Saidov A. H. Sravnitelnoe pravovedenie (osnovnyie pravovyie sistemyi sovremennosti): Uchebnik [Comparative jurisprudence (main legal systems of the present): Textbook]. Ed.by V.A.Tumanov. Moscow : Yurist, 2000, 448 p. [in Russian].
12. Saidov R. A. Iz istorii sravnitelnogo pravovedeniya v Rossii [From the history of comparative jurisprudence in Russia]. Obschestvennyie nauki v Uzbekistane [Social sciences in Uzbekistan], 1987, no. 2, pp. 51-54[in Russian].
13. Sitar I. M. Istoriya porivnyalnogo pravoznavstva: navchalniy posibnik [History of comparative jurisprudence: educational textbook]. Lviv : LvSUIA, 2009, 172 p. [in Ukrainian].
14. Skripilev E. A. Istoriko-sravnitelnyiy metod v pravovedenii Rossii vtoroy polovinyi XIX - nachala XX v. [Historical and comparative method in Russia jurisprudence of the second half of XIX- early XX c.]. Metodologiya istoriko-pravovyih issledovaniy: Sb. st. [Methodology of historical and legal research : Col.of art.]. Ex. ed. V. E. Guliev.Moscow : Institute of State and Law, 1980, pp. 17-29[in Russian].
15. Tille A. A. Sotsialisticheskoe sravnitelnoe pravovedenie [Socialist comparative jurisprudence]. Moscow: Law lit., 1975, 208 p.[in Russian].
16. Tille A. A., Shvekov G. V. Sravnitelnyiy metod v yuridicheskih distsiplinah [Comparative method in legal disciplines]. Is.2nd,enl.& rev.Moscow : Vyisshaya shkola, 1978, 199 p. [in Russian].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Денис Анатолійович Шигаль
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
