The article analyses three texts from the second quarter of the 16th century, dedicated to works of ecclesiastical art and architecture, and contained in the Novgorod chronicles. These can be identified as three precisely dated entries, in which individual objects and complexes created in Novgorod on the orders of the Novgorod Metropolitan Macarius and the abbot of the Novgorod Khutyn Monastery Theodosius are described in considerable detail. The first text, which represents a true ekphrasis, describes the royal gates of the iconostasis of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral and the monumental painting adorning the western facade of the cathedral (1527/1528). The second text provides a detailed description in 1533. Finally, the third chronicle entry, dated 1535, discusses the Church of St. Gregory of Armenia in the Novgorod suburban monastery of the Transfi guration of the Savior at Khutyn. The architectural design of the church is notable for its octagonal shape, the presence of five entrances, the positioning of bells at the uppermost point, and the crowning of the structure with a solitary dome. The chronicle names the architect of this building — the Tver master Ermola — and emphasizes that there were no such buildings in the city before, although the church of 1535 was preceded by a small bell tower church from 1445, built at the request of the Novgorod Archbishop Euphemios II. The descriptions under consideration in this article are distinguished not only by literary processing, as evidenced by the use of elevated epithets and the highlighting of the unusualness of the objects and their sizes, but also by attention to detail. This attention enabled the author of the Novgorod ekphrases to “see” not only the number of corners, sculptures, or icon inserts, but also some features of the forms. These texts can be regarded as early manifestations of an inclination towards aesthetic form, which can be termed an interest in art in general. The descriptions are incomplete and fragmented, but they already reveal a historical and persistent view, characteristic of the scribes of the late Middle Ages.

The Department of Archaeology at the Faculty of History of Lomonosov Moscow State University celebrated three anniversaries in the 2024/2025 academic year: the present year marks the 85th anniversary of the department, the 90th anniversary of the Faculty of History, and the 270th anniversary of Moscow University. Archaeology was sporadically taught at Moscow University as early as the first third of the 19th century, and regular scholarly and teaching activities in the field of archaeology were initiated in 1880 by Professor D.N. Anuchin. The Department of Archaeology was preceded by the Archaeological Section of the Faculty of Social Sciences, which was founded in 1921 by V.A. Gorodtsov. The Department of Archaeology at the Faculty of History was established and headed by A.V. Artsikhovsky, a student of Gorodtsov, in 1939. The work of A.V. Artsikhovsky was subsequently continued by V.L. Yanin, who occupied the position of department head from 1978 until 2016. Following the inaugural graduation of archaeologists in 1940, the department has consistently produced a significant number of specialists in the field. By the summer of 2024, a total of 859 graduates, including both bachelors and masters, had completed their studies from the department. Of these, 346 (40.2% of the total graduates) subsequently defended their candidate dissertations, and 114 (13.2%) defended their doctoral theses. In accordance with the traditions established by eminent scholars who have previously headed the department, as well as other distinguished specialists, the staff of the Department of Archaeology continue to actively engage in scientific and pedagogical activities. In recent years, there has been an updating of traditional courses, and the development of a number of new elective special courses. It is noteworthy that the vast majority of departmental personnel (17 out of 18) have engaged in a wide range of research activities encompassing diverse fieldwork, laboratory-based research, and office-based research. In the period spanning 2020 to 2024, the number of articles published by the researchers in leading journals, including those in the top-25, totalled 118. In addition, the researchers have published 122 articles in collected volumes, two personal monographs, and one collective monograph, as well as chapters in collective works. The department has organized seven expeditions (with student and postgraduate internships), which have researched various archaeological sites, ranging from the Paleolithic to the Middle Ages, from Veliky Novgorod in the north to the Central Caucasus in the south, and from Smolensk in the west to the Southern Urals in the east.

The article explores the history of the Department of Foreign Languages in the Faculty of History of Lomonosov Moscow State University. This history is presented within the broader context of foreign language instruction at Moscow University, which began with the university’s foundation. Initially introduced as an auxiliary academic subject, foreign languages gradually gained the significant role they hold today, particularly in the Faculty of History. A period of almost 200 years elapsed between the initial appointment of foreign language instructors, who included historians, and the establishment of dedicated foreign language departments at the university. The establishment of the Department of Foreign Languages in the Faculty of History in 1965 was a response to the necessity for foreign language training to be incorporated into the broader framework of university-level historical education. The seminal contributions of E.A. Bondi to the realm of professional foreign language training for history students have been instrumental in establishing a paradigm shift towards an organic unity of foreign language teaching and history. The leadership of the department by S.G. Ter-Minasova signifies a new phase of productive activity in the theory and practice of teaching professionally oriented foreign languages to students of history and art history. The department makes a significant contribution to the education of students receiving a historical education with a high level of foreign language proficiency. The primary focus of its work is interaction and cooperation with history departments in educational and scientific activities, as well as the methodological development of the linguistic foundations of foreign language teaching for future historians to carry out their professional activities. The department accords considerable importance to the cultivation of student creativity, acknowledging its pivotal function in enhancing foreign language proficiency. The Department of Foreign Languages in the Faculty of History is commemorating the 270th anniversary of Moscow University with a significant contribution to the training of historians and art historians who have a strong proficiency in foreign languages and have achieved notable professional success, including the creation of more than two hundred textbooks, teaching aids and dictionaries.

It is only possible to comprehend the logic of the formation and development of ethnography (ethnology) as a discipline at Moscow University if one is aware of its context(s). Primarily, this is a disciplinary context, as evidenced by its long-term and decisive influence on ethnography within the university environment. The development of ethnology as a discipline has been shaped by a dynamic socio-historical context, which has exerted and continues to exert a significant influence on its evolution. The establishment and institutionalization of ethnology in Russia occurred in the second half of the 19th century. During the 1880s, two distinct trends began to emerge in the organization of ethnological education. One of these trends integrated ethnological education into the context of the natural sciences, while the other placed it within the broader historical and humanitarian context. In the early decades of the 20th century Russian ethnography possessed serious potential, including the ability for independent original theorization. During the Soviet era, ethnography experienced significant development, both as a scholarly discipline and as a formally recognized academic department. Since 1939, ethnography within the university has undergone phases of institutionalization (S.P. Tolstov and N.N. Cheboksarov). The concept of ethnographic education was formed, substantial scientific research and expeditionary activities were carried out, and the profession developed an attractive image. The stability and conservative ethos of Moscow University and its academic community enabled the department to successfully navigate the period of social and political turbulence (the late 1980s — 1990s), thereby preserving the foundational aspects of the professional training system and introducing necessary innovations (V.V. Pimenov). At the beginning of the twenty first century, ethnology as a discipline underwent a significant development, marked by an anthropological turn in research and methodology. The anthropological approach was integrated into the academic framework of professional education at Moscow University, serving as a complement to, rather than a replacement for, the prevailing ethnographic and ethnological methodologies (A.A. Nikishenkov, D.A. Funk). The Department of Ethnology has recently been experiencing an increase in student enrolment, while concurrently maintaining a judicious balance between ethnographic, ethnological and anthropological components. It is noteworthy that the department has adopted an interdisciplinary stance and has instituted measures to ensure the seamless transmission of professional tradition in close collaboration with academic science.

The article examines the key events and trends associated with the establishment and development of the “Belarusian Studies, History of Belarus and the Belarusian Diaspora” academic programme at the Faculty of History, Lomonosov Moscow State University. For the first time, it introduces data on the main stages of intergovernmental cooperation between the Faculty of History at Moscow State University and leading Belarusian educational and scientific centres involved in the study and teaching of history. These centres include the Faculty of History of Belarusian State University, the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, the Academy of Management under the President of the Republic of Belarus, and others. The article identifies the initiative contributions of national-cultural autonomies, public organizations, and associations of the Belarusian diaspora in Russia and worldwide to this process. The key results of the joint activities between historians from the Union State are highlighted, including the creation of the academic programme “Belarusian Studies, History of Belarus and the Belarusian Diaspora”, the launch of the first Russian-Belarusian international joint master’s programme off ering dual qualifications from Lomonosov Moscow State University and Belarusian State University in “History of the Belarusian Diaspora”, the creation of the unique format of inter-university event “Days of Friendship between Lomonosov Moscow State University and Belarusian State University”, the establishment of the Archive of the Belarusian Diaspora History and the Belarusian Scientific Literature Cabinet at the Faculty of History, and the regular organization of scientific events involving representatives of the Moscow University History Faculty and Belarusian historians. The article also discusses projects in which the Faculty of History played an active role, which have since become significant intergovernmental initiatives, including the establishment of the Russian-Belarusian Expert and Consulting Council on History. The final conclusion is that the Faculty of History at Lomonosov Moscow State University has made a special contribution to the formation of a unified Russian- Belarusian socio-humanitarian space. Within the framework of this collaboration, a unique Russian-Belarusian intergovernmental unifi ed scientific school is being systematically established.

The article examines the development of 3D modelling for the virtual reconstruction of cultural heritage sites that are entirely lost or partially preserved. This research direction emerged in Russia in the early 21st century. The Department of Historical Informatics at the Faculty of History, Lomonosov Moscow State University, is the preeminent scientific and educational center in this field. The article draws upon materials prepared by the department’s staff and other Russian researchers, and outlines modern approaches to implementing projects related to the creation of 3D models of various monuments of Russian cultural heritage. Moreover, an analysis is conducted of the issues that have accumulated over a period of twenty-five years of work in this area. The reconstructed objects include churches and monastic complexes, historical urban buildings that have since disappeared, industrial structures, noble estates (not only the exteriors of manor houses but also their interiors, as well as the surrounding park ensembles and other natural recreational complexes), the study of Emperor Nicholas I, postal and railway stations of the late 19th century, a 19th-century prison castle, revenue houses, and residential interiors of notable figures, as well as historical costumes. The paper presents a systematic overview of the data concerning the source base of 3D modelling of historical objects, with a particular emphasis on the distinctive characteristics of the analysis of its constituent elements. It provides examples of specifi c objects virtually reconstructed by the Department of Historical Informatics. In addition to the reconstruction of specifi c buildings, VR and AR technologies were utilized to recreate entire urban spatial environments in which these objects once existed. These reconstructions, when coupled with their historical contexts, can be exhibited on smartphones and tablets, thereby markedly enhancing the utilization of 3D modelling outcomes in educational tours and activities. The author concludes with a discussion of the potential for applying developments in virtual reconstruction of historical objects in museum exhibitions and in the preparation of restoration projects for surviving historical structures.

The article examines the contradictory results of the evolution of historiography of US political history in the late twentieth and early twenty first centuries. In the context of the multiplicity of research paradigms, it analyses the theoretical and methodological approaches that led to the renewal of the foundations of American historiography and identifi es the key trends that emerged on the basis of interdisciplinary alliances. The rejection of the study of the legacy of “great figures” and the shift of attention to ordinary people of past eras, their inner world and everyday behavior led to a sharp shift from macro- to microhistory, where the main emphasis is placed on the relationship between the goals of “big” politics and the interests of a specific person, who acts simultaneously as the subject and object of power relations. Initially, research focused on the specifics of the electoral process within the concepts of “party regrouping” and “critical” elections. Subsequently, scholars shift ed their focus to the sphere of the political culture of voters. Finally, the subject of the discipline itself dissolved into the vicissitudes of social policy. The study of political history, having undergone a protracted process of evolution, has not yet developed a coherent view of the past. The interdisciplinary alliances have resulted in the active use of tools from related humanities, leading to significant fragmentation of the subject field. This has resulted in the creation of a “new” discipline characterized by amorphousness, a lack of broad conceptualization, a loss of a holistic view, and a focus on micro-level analysis, devoid of any clearly defi ned boundaries. Concurrently, a radical shift has occurred in the societal perception of political history. Nevertheless, the dissemination of scientific knowledge has concomitantly engendered a transformation in its representation. The advent of the Internet gave rise to new forms of media, facilitating direct dialogue between representatives of academic and “amateur” history. These dialogues sought to adapt scientifi c knowledge to the needs of mass culture. The academic community is confronted with the challenge of disseminating objective historical knowledge to a general audience. It is the position of some scholars that in order to bridge the gap between armchair and online knowledge, political history must be reincarnated as a “synthetic and integrative” science, in which the concept of “political” is understood as broadly as possible.

The article is devoted to an exposition of the activities of the Department of the History of Southern and Western Slavs at the Faculty of History of Moscow State University. It traces the early stages of Slavic studies in Russia, beginning during the reign of Nicholas I. The authors examine the revival of this interdisciplinary field in the interwar Soviet Union, driven largely by foreign policy considerations. The article delineates the primary phases in the development of the department, which was founded on the eve of the Great Patriotic War through the efforts of the eminent Slavist V.I. Picheta. The subsequent sections focus on the department’s evolution during the second half of the twentieth and the early twenty first century, assessing its role and significance in shaping both Soviet and post-Soviet Slavic studies. The authors emphasize the department’s guiding principles in training researchers of Slavic history, underscoring the significance of a meticulously structured curriculum and an individualized approach to working with students, graduate students and doctoral candidates. It is vital to note the particular focus that has been placed on the department’s trajectory in the wake of the Bologna system’s implementation. The article sets forth a thorough examination of the reform, its implications for the training of historians specializing in Slavic countries, and the outcomes and consequences thereof, which are predominantly negative. It delineates the specific measures that the department has initiated with the objective of optimizing the benefits of the two-tier higher education model, while concomitantly seeking to minimize its adverse effects. The article also presents recent innovations in the department’s curriculum, offering insights into newly introduced courses. Moreover, the authors address the challenges currently affecting both the educational process, including the training of young scholars, and the scholarly and teaching activities of the department’s staff . The article reflects on the recent generational renewal of faculty members, which the authors of the article view as being crucial for the preservation of academic traditions and scholarly schools. Among the department’s recent major publishing initiatives, particular mention is made of the new three-volume textbook History of the Southern and Western Slavs and the Historians-Slavists of Moscow State University series. T e article concludes with reflections on the future of Slavic studies teaching at the Faculty of History of Moscow State University.

The concept of “town”, its content, and the definition of its essence have been addressed by historians at various stages in the development of historical science. In the Russian historiography of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries, two main approaches to the definition of a town emerged. Representatives of one of these approaches (A.P. Prigara, I.I. Dityatin, A.A. Kiesewetter) considered all settlements called towns in the sources as towns. Conversely, an alternative conceptualization of the town emerged, centering on its role as a socio-economic category and a nexus of craft and trade (N.A. Rozhkov). This definition has become firmly established in Russian historiography and, during the Soviet period, was supplemented with the notion of the posad community as an essential social structure of the town (Ya.E. Vodarsky). In the context of Soviet historiography, there was a lively discourse surrounding the question of what criteria could be utilized to categorize a settlement as a town. The response to this enquiry possessed both theoretical and practical ramifications, including the enumeration of urban settlements, the calculation of the urban population, and the comprehension of urban network development. In contemporary academic discourse, specialists tend to consider settlements that were previously referred to as towns as such. Nevertheless, the question of the contemporary meanings attributed to the term, and the contexts in which it was used, remains unresolved. The term “town” is utilized in a variety of ways in the sources from the period under scrutiny. It is employed to denote a center of voivode authority, a center of a district, or a location where the posad community resided. A significant role was also played by the tradition related primarily to the military functions of settlements and fortifications. In the majority of cases, the center of a district, the administrative center, and the location of the posad community coincided, enabling contemporaries to perceive the urban network as a cohesive entity. Concurrently, numerous settlements exhibited an unstable and context-dependent designation of “town” suggesting that the formation of the state’s urban network was unfinished.

The article examines the informational potential of new sources on the history of the medieval Black Sea region and Byzantium from the 13th through the 15th centuries, in conjunction with recent research conducted by Russian scholars on this topic. The new sources include materials from Italian archives and archaeological discoveries in Crimea and Novorossiya. The significance of documents from the Genoese Bank of St. George is emphasized, as they have facilitated the reconstruction of administrative mechanisms in the Black Sea colonies, the interaction between these colonies and the communication between the metropolis and its colonies. These archival documents also provide information on the involvement of Russians in trade activities in Caffa, the emergence of an independent Crimean Khanate apart from the Golden Horde, and its history. It is noteworthy that published and archival Genoese documents elucidate various aspects of Genoese and Tatar interactions, including during the formation of Crimean Tatar statehood, as well as relations between Caffa and the Turks. The archival materials from the funds of Colleggio, Archives of Venice, have been instrumental in the restoration and clarification of data on Venetian commercial activity in the Black Sea region, while the documents from the Venice State Archive have elucidated the ethno-confessional relations in Tana. New interpretations of archaeological epigraphic sources related to the “Crimean Gotia” and found at a settlement located at Mangup serve to strengthen assumptions about the social structure of the Feodorites and their interactions with Latins and Mongols. The author emphasizes the efficacy of correlating archaeological data on late medieval Byzantine settlements with written sources. This correlation has facilitated the creation of a digital map of the settlements in the Sudak area. A signifi cant research trajectory within the domain of medieval history in the region pertains to the digital reconstruction of the topography of its prominent localities. This approach has already been implemented in the city of Cembalo, where a comprehensive reconstruction of its master plan has been undertaken. The comprehensive analysis of written and archaeological sources, and the correlation of their data with the historical map of Crimea, will continue.