Abstract
The article aims to make final conclusions on methodological issues of personalities in national history. The main purpose of the research on this topic is the analysis of methodological problems of personalities with the aim of forming an independent historical consciousness. Since the methods used in the methodology of historical personalities in the Soviet and post-Soviet space depend on ideological principles, the place and role of research objects in historical events and phenomena have been underestimated.Therefore, subjective judgments and conclusions were made in the analysis and evaluation ofbiographies, social and political activities and the work of historians. Formation of criteria for assessingthe position of historians and their place in history using the modern methodological approach of nationalpersonality allows us to draw objective conclusions when updating the content of history. The articleanalyzes the wording of the party-state nomenclature used in the Soviet personalities, with the methodsof elite conclusions. As an alternative to the ideology of the party-state nomenclature, the advantagesof using the concept of elite in historical research are defined. Considering historical events and phenomenawith an elite approach, we present the methodological criteria for assessing the socio-politicalactivity and creativity of individual historians. Conclusions about the scientific assessment of individualsin the history of the Fatherland for their service to national-state interests are made. Considering that onlycertain aspects of the methodology of historical personalities are considered in the works of domesticresearchers, the scientific results achieved in the article complement the theoretical foundations of thisindustry. The criterion for evaluating the activities of historical personalities can also be used to updatethe content of history, scientific research and the content of special disciplines.