The article presents a comparative analysis of the phenomena of history and historical memory; the problem of limits of the historical method as a general scientific competence is analyzed. A retrospective is given the phenomenon of skepticism about the objectivity and validity of the conclusions of the historical science. Different forms of historical memory and their interactions are considered, which is recorded in modern historiography. The conclusion is being done that historical memory is a phenomenon that has deep roots in depths of anthropogenesis, in connection with which the teachings of K. Jung are affected about archetypes. There is a provision that there is feedback (interaction) of historical memory on history, which is quite active involved in politics. The archetypal imprint is one of the main features of the ethnicity. Archetypal origins of human memory, role of the historical memory in the formation of national identity, modifications and varieties of perception of the "historical past" are studied. The phenomenon of politicization of historical memory under the influence of ideological conjuncture are commented. The problem is extremely relevant now as today the political situation and the value system of the society are mostly determining the specifics of seeing, understanding and interpreting events of the past. Particular attention is paid to the term "national historical memory", a phenomenon that, together with history, is representing the historical consciousness. The provision of incorrectness of radical split of nations into "political" and "ethnic" is argued. Modern interpretations of the phenomena of ethnocentrism and presentism in the historical context. It is concluded that in general the problem of national self-identification is becoming enormous significance in our time, when the Ukrainian society raised a number of fundamental issues, in particular, the choice of strategy for the future development of the independent policy formation and achievement mutual understanding in the international arena.
Archimandrite Raphael (Karelin). (2009). Church and intelligentsia. Saratov : Publishing house of the Saratov diocese. 320 p. [In Russian].
Assman, Alida. (2012). Spaces of memory. Forms and transformations of cul-tural memory. Kyiv: Nica-Center. 437 р. [In Ukrainian].
Badzio, Yuri. (2010). Fighting generals, gray-haired guys from the Ukrainian street and Trojan mare of the historical process. Kyiv: Library of the political party “Our Ukraine”. 152 p. [In Ukrainian].
Beck, W. (2000). Risk Society. On the way to another modern. Moscow: Pro-gress-Tradition. 384 p. [In Russian].
Berdyaev, Nikolai. (1993). Nationality and humanity. Modernity, N 1, р. 154-157. [In Ukrainian].
Berdyaev, N. (1990). A The fate of Russia. Moscow: Publishing house MGU. 240 s. [In Russian].
Block, M. (1986). Apology of history or the craft of the historian. Moscow: Nauka. 256 s. [In Russian].
Blumenkrantz, M. (2014). In Search of Ethics, or The Archeology of the Mir-ror. Letter to a German friend. Voprosy filosofii (Questions of philosophy), № 1, 166-170. [In Russian].
Buldakov, V. P. (2013). Historian and myth. Perversions of the modern histor-ical imagination. Voprosy filosofii (Questions of philosophy), № 8, 54-64. [In Russian].
Gadamer, H. G. (1988). Truth and method. Fundamentals of philosophy. her-meneutics. Moscow: Progress. 704 p. [In Russian].
Kiselyov, M. M., Kanak F. M. (2000). National existence among ecological realities. Kyiv: Tandem. P. 91-116. [In Ukrainian].
Collingwood, Robin J. (1996). The idea of history. Kyiv: Osnovy. 615 p. [In Ukrainian].
Nagornaya, L. P. (2014). Historical culture: concept, information re-source, reflexive potential. Kyiv: SP and END. 382 p. [In Ukrainian].
Olic, Jeffrey. (2012). Memory figurations: process-relational methodology illustrated by the example of Germany. Sociological review. Vol. 11, № 1, p. 40-74. [In Russian].
Plutarch. (1990). Selected biographies. Moscow: Pravda Publishing House, Vol. 1. 592 p. [In Russian].
Popper, Carl. (1994). Poverty of historicism. Кyiv: Abtys. 192 р. [In Ukrainian].
Rusen, J. (2010). New ways of historical thinking. Lviv: Chronicle. 358 р. [In Ukrainian].
Ryabchuk, Mykola. (2019). Overcoming ambivalence: The Ukrainian dichot-omy of national identity. Historical causes and political consequences. Kyiv: IPiEND. By name of I. F. Kuras NAS of Ukraine. 252 p. [In Ukrainian].
Semenov, Y. I. (2003). Philosophy of history. (General theory, basic problems, ideas and concepts from antiquity to the present day). Moscow: Sovremennyye tetradi. 776 p. [In Russian].
Tacitus, Conellius. (1993). Soch, in 2 vol. SPb.: Nauka. 736 p. [In Russian].
Ukrainian political nation: genesis, state, prospects. (2004). Кyiv: НІСD. 648 p. [In Ukrainian].
Jung, Carl Gustav. (1997). Man and his symbols. Moscow: Serebryanyye niti. 338 р. [In Russian].
Yakovenko, Natalia. (2007). Introduction to history. Кyiv: Krytyka. 375 р. [In Ukrainian].
Jaspers, K. (1991). The meaning and purpose of history. Moscow: Politizdat. 527 p. [In Russian].
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.