PHILOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESEARCH METHODS OF CLASSICAL STUDIES

The aim of the research is to consider the characteristics of "philological" and "historical" research methods in classical studies. The methodology of the research of the study is based on the principles of science, historicism, objectivity, system analysis, etc., as well as on the use of general scientific methods, special-historical and source study methods. The scientific novelty is that for the first time in Ukrainian historiography the question of "Philological" and "historical" research methods in classical studies has been investigated. The Conclusions. At the end of the 19th century, the disadvantages of the philological method of studying the ancient texts became obvious. Where the investigated ancient author referred to the names his predecessors or at least pointed at them, it was easy to find the "main core" or the main author. But when such links or hints were completely absent, the difficulties arose, and sometimes they were simply insurmountable. The philological method which was based on an unrestrained desire to find the original core of the source under study was reduced to "plus ultra", i.e, was carried to the point of absurdity One must fully agree that in one aspect historians were in a better position than philologists, in particular: a historian, in order to explain the facts of an ancient historiography, has a greater opportunity to use the appropriate phenomena in the historical literature of different times and places. Historians and philologists have different goals in the study of the primary source of ancient literature, so they cannot replace each other. Both classical philology and ancient history have their own subject and the study methodology and both have reasons to work in an area that we call classical studies. Classical philology and history use a particular research method according to their own subject, goals and objectives which is consistent with the research method of a particular scholar.