The article analyzes the problems and prospects of the development of historical tourism in the Transcarpathian region. The author came to the conclusion that the diversity of historical and cultural monuments creates the necessary prerequisites for the intensive development of historical and, accordingly, ethnic tourism in this region.The formation of the history of Transcarpathia took place under the influence of European countries.In particular, 11th to 15th centuries. King Stephen I joined Transcarpathia to Hungary while his son, Imre (Emeric), was titled Prince of the Ruthenians. From that time until the beginning of the 20th centuryTranscarpathia remained within the Hungarian state as its border province in the northeast. Through Transcarpathia passed a fortified defense line consisting of stockades and wooden forts manned by the local Slovak and Ruthenian population (the Ruthenian March). It was completely destroyed during the Tatar campaign against Hungary (1241), when the invaders made their way through the mountain passes. In the 13th and 14th centuries stone castles capable of withstanding a long siege were built in place of wooden stockades. Feudalism developed as well, and royal domains were transformed into gentrylatifundia, which in part survived into the 20th century. Simultaneously Transcarpathiawas subdivided according to a new komitat, or territorial-administrative structure.After the First World War Transcarpathiawas separated from Hungary, and the bulk of its territory was formed into an autonomous region within Czechoslovakia called Subcarpathian Ruthenia (PidkarpatskaRus’) or Carpatho-Ukraine. A small part of Transcarpathia, located south of the Tysa River within the drainage basin of the Vyshava River (Vişeu in Romanian), became part of Romania (see Maramureş region); in Transcarpathia's western reaches, the Prešov region was allocated to Slovakia. A narrow strip of Hungarian ethnographic territory was added to Carpatho-Ukraine with the intent of securing an east–west railroad link (Košice–Chop–Khust–Rakhiv) for direct communication with the rest of Czechoslovakia and a connection, via a branch line, to Romania.Historical memorials of Transcarpathiaare represented by wooden churches, medieval castles.Disclosure of the theme became possible through the use of general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, system, generalization, concreteness, historicism and dialectical method. The scientific research also uses special scientific methods of research: historical-comparative, historical-synthetic, historical-diachronic, empirical analysis, etc.

У статті проаналізовано проблеми та перспективи розвитку історичного туризму у Закарпатській області. Авторка дійшла висновку, що різноманіттям історико-культурних пам’яток створюють необхідні передумовами для інтенсивного розвитку історичного і відповідно етнічного туризму у цьому регіоні.Розкриття теми стало можливим завдяки використанню загальнонаукових методів пізнання: аналізу, синтезу, системності, узагальнення, конкретності, історизму та діалектичного. Використано також спеціально-наукові методи дослідження: історико-порівняльний, історико-синтетичний, історико-діахронний, емпіричного аналізу тощо.