Historical criticism. Basic Elements of Scientific Criticism of Sources Founders of Scientific Criticism of Historical Source

And source science - a term denoting a body of knowledge about historical sources and their study. At the same time, a "historical source" means literally everything that can testify to accomplished facts, events, processes and phenomena. Sources can be oral, written, material, pictorial, in connection with which a scientific classification of historical sources is also being built. Depending on the tasks of studying sources, scientific specialties of source study are distinguished. Classical methods of linguistic and historical source studies are applied. Thus, linguistic source studies analyze written sources in order to find evidence of the history of the language in their texts. Historical source studies analyzes sources on the history of a state, people. Historical and book source studies aim to find and study sources that reveal the history of the book. These can be written sources and monuments of material culture, for example, the means of producing handwritten and printed books. Books are independent historical sources. The subject of science in the source study of the history of the book is the search for evidence of the emergence and development of writing, the means and forms of its fixation and distribution, the ways of consumption, reading features, etc. The historical and book source study has developed special techniques that are used in the historical study of book signs (bookplates), typographic fonts, engraving and printing methods, printing house equipment.

One of the main methods of source study is external and internal criticism of a historical source.

External source criticism - this is its characteristic from the side of attribution and dating, that is, origin, binding to certain historical circumstances, manufacturer (author), time and place of creation.

Internal criticism - characterization of the structure, content of the source, comparative analysis of information, data that the researcher expects to receive. The ways of checking their reliability are indicated. Groups of questions are outlined, to which sources can give answers. It is established what is their value and significance for specific research results. There are two types of sources: documentaries - those that accurately convey a fait accompli, and interpreted - those who state it, narrate (abbreviated, subjectively, etc.). Interpreted historical sources include periodicals, memoirs and notes, memoirs. External and internal criticism of the source aims to determine the degree of interpretation of the materials contained in it. Based on this, a specific analysis plan is developed. In addition to setting the objectives of the study and establishing its chronological framework, the sequence of techniques and methods of source study is determined, depending on its stages and directions. The analysis ends with conclusions about the significance of the discovered group of sources.

Periodicals and continuing publications newspapers, bulletins, magazines, almanacs, collections, etc., published at pre-announced dates, etc. are called. Newspapers and magazines have always actively expressed public opinion; the market as a whole. The most valuable material for a student of the history of the book is acts placed in periodicals (laws, press regulations), book advertising, various kinds of information, letters from readers, etc.

Before proceeding to the source analysis of periodicals, it is necessary to identify whose press organ the publication is, its frequency of publication, format, volume, and the presence of special applications. Especially interesting is the presence of readers' letters and editorial reviews on them. Taken together, this makes it possible to establish the public face of the body, its political orientation, and the general attitude towards book publishing and its problems.

It is also necessary to take into account the presence of special periodical journals of the bibliology direction, which are a real treasure for the modern historian. The earliest of these organs was probably the St. Petersburg "Book Bulletin" (1860-1867). Its main merit was systematic information about published books. However, the magazine was closed for critical articles on the state of the book market. The same fate befell the Moscow magazine "Knizhnik", published in 1865-1866. bookseller A.F. Cherenin. Of all the subsequent bibliographic publications in our country (and there are more than fifty of them), the most famous was "News on Literature, Sciences and Bibliography of Bookstores T-va MO Wolf" (1897-1917). For the newest period, the most valuable ongoing publication of the scientific collection "Book. Research and Materials." From 1959 to 2000, seventy-eight issues were published.

Source research in periodicals should begin with bibliographic print indexes, and then, choosing what is necessary, gradually narrow the search circle until a specific source is determined.

Work with memoirs has its own specifics. There are numerous works on source research and criticism of memoirs. When studying memoirs (memoirs, diaries, notes, correspondence), subjective inaccuracies (for example, memory deficiencies), political, ideological inaccuracies should be identified and, if possible, eliminated. The memoirs under study are compared with already existing reliable historical sources on the history of the book: legislative acts, newspaper reports, advertisements, address books and other reference materials.

From the point of view of the history of the book, memoirs can be divided into memoirs of a general nature and memoirs of the book's figures; objectively, both of them can contain extremely useful sources for our purpose. However, memoirs, business notes, diaries of famous publishers (for example, I.D. Sytin, A.S. Suvorin, M.V. Sabashnikov, etc.), booksellers (for example, P.P. Shibanova, F.G. Shilov, N.N. Nakoryakova), censors, librarians, bibliographers and many others. Unfortunately, a consolidated work on the bibliography of memoirs on the history of the book has not yet been created in our country.

Print Statistics includes quantitative indicators of book production. This is the number of titles both in total volume and by types, types of publications, by language, nationality. Circulations are taken into account, the volume of publications - in author's, publisher's lists, in pages. Printing statistics keeps records of book publishing and book distribution enterprises: printing plants, printing houses, book warehouses, shops, kiosks. The subject of statistics can also be readers (consumers, buyers) of a book.

The well-known bibliographers A.K. Storch and F.P. Adelung. A systematic publication of statistical collections began, where the book was first taken into account among other cultural objects. Over time, special collections of statistical indicators of Russian book publishing and book distribution appear. In the newest period, such fundamental statistical publications as "Press in the USSR" (yearbook), "Book chronicle" and others have become famous. At present, the issue of publications on press statistics is entrusted to the Russian Book Chamber.

In the source analysis of statistical publications in terms of external criticism, it is necessary to determine what type of statistical tables belong to, why use an introductory article and notes, if any. If possible, evaluate statistical sources in terms of their origin and reliability. In terms of internal criticism, to establish the possible dynamic characteristics of book publishing, bookselling, printing activities, to reveal the newly emerging features of their development, to evaluate them.

The most important sources on the history of the book are concentrated in state, departmental, public and personal archives - sources that are usually referred to as unpublished. According to Academician N.M. Druzhinin, historians "cannot limit themselves to printed publications and strive to search for new materials in archival funds... Direct contemplation of a document, gradual reading, pondering, ... empathizing with its content, enrich the researcher with the best knowledge of the era and the phenomenon under study."

The history of the book should develop its own approaches to the study of sources, based both on the features of the book, considered as a historical fact, and on the features of the sources that contribute to the disclosure of the historical patterns of development, production of the book, its distribution and use. In this regard, it is customary to call the studied books and documents of this kind historical sources.

The Polish historian of the book K. Migon proposes to group the facts reflected in the historical and book sources as follows: the appearance of new elements in the content of the book, the appearance of new elements in the form of a book, a change in the technique of book production, a change in the organization of book production, a change in the organization of book distribution , social phenomena, processes that determine the growth or decline of interest in the book.

Classification of historical sources. Domestic historiography on classification. Classification of written sources.

IV. Late 19th - early 20th centuries

III.70s 19th century

II.30-50s. 19th century

The concept of "historical source" appears - a field one, but they did not set out to give a definition.

1872 - course of lectures K. Bestuzheva-Ryumin . In the introduction, for the first time, attention is drawn to the differences in the historical source and historical research. The term " historical source"began to use more deliberately.

Klyuchevsky, Koreev ...

The need to define.

Klyuchevsky lectured on source studies at Moscow State University:

historical source- a written or material monument, which reflected the extinct life of individuals and whole ...

Zagossky: historical source- everything that can serve us as a means of knowing the past life.

· historical source- an objective reflection of historical reality.

· historical source- the result of the analysis of the human psyche.

Medushevsky - Lappo-Danilevsky considered the source as a form of communication between people.

Stages after 1917(on Pushkarev):

Saar: source- materials by which we can learn the past.

Greeks: source- in a broad sense, this is everything from where we can get information.

Tikhomirov: source- a monument of the historical past, testifying to the history of human society and characterizing the level of its development at a certain stage.

Pushkarev: source is an object created by a person on the basis of personal subjective images of the real objective world.

Classification- a process that consists in the division of a single complex according to one or more features.

Cherepnin: classification This is not the main source problem.

Bulygin and Pushkarev : this is the most important problem of source study.

1985 - Schmidt: Art. “On the Classification of Historical Sources” (classification is an important tool).

What to take as a basis?

Zimin: content and (politics, economics).

chestnuts: by origin.

Medushevsky: formation sign.

Pushkarev: divided by the method of fixing (coding) information:

1. Written.

2. Real.

3. Oral.

4. Ethnographic.

5. Linguistic.

6. Photo-cinema.

7. Photo documents.

Kovalchenko suggested fewer groups:

1. Real.

2. Written.

3. Fine.

4. Phonetic.

Pushkarev: "Written sources should be divided according to the commonality of structure, content, origin, purpose."

He highlighted the following groups:

1. chronicle,

2. legislative acts,

3. statistical acts,

4. business documents,

5. private acts,

6. periodicals,

7. journalism,

8. personal documents.

Kovalchenko: mass source- characterizing the objects that form social systems.

Litvak: mass source- documents that reflect single facts and have a single interest, but in the aggregate make it possible to identify a pattern.

Criteria:

· homogeneity– everyday life of the conditions in which the source arose (birth certificate),

· homogeneity– similarity or repeatability (birth certificate),

· uniformity of form(birth certificate, characteristics).

stages:

1. Identify a historical source (know which institutions ...),

2. Select the desired historical source (+ criticism),

3. It is correct to use a historical source.

5. Historical source - the unity of the objective and subjective.

Marxism-Leninism is the recognition of the objectivity and subjectivity of a historical source.

Every source is subjective, because he is a product of human consciousness, at the same time historical source is objective, because it is part of historical reality and the author could express reality quite objectively.

Marxism-Leninism recognizes the objective feature of the source.

The historical source is also objective because the historian can separate the objective side of the source from the subjective side. The basis of this is the inexhaustibility of sources.

The source arises in the process of human activity and is a reflection of human consciousness. The source is the product of activity on the human psyche of the surrounding world.

At the same time, a person affects the world around him. Therefore, reflection is inseparable from the practical activity of a person.

Historical sources are everything that reflects the development of human society and is the basis for scientific knowledge, i.e. everything created in the process of human activity and carrying information about the diverse aspects of social life.

The basis of the source is information. Information links.

The main principles of the Marxist-Leninist methodology of the historical analysis of sources:

§ The principle of objectivity. Comprehensive study. Two aspects of the application of this principle: in the basis of the analysis of each individual source, in identifying and selecting sources for research.

§ The principle of partisanship. The source belongs to a certain social group.

§ The principle of historicism.

Stages of working with a source :

2. identification of the source;

3. source analysis (in other words, scientific or source criticism);

4. development of methods of study, processing and analysis.

The widespread allocation in the analysis of external and internal criticism of sources is unreasonable. Such a division is based on a formal approach to the source, on breaking its single and integral structure. Therefore, it does not disclose the content and tasks of the researcher's work with the source.

The concept of source study analysis, or scientific criticism, of a source contains a number of sequentially solved questions of studying a historical source :

determination of the external features of the monument,

the circumstances and motives for the origin of the text,

text interpretation,

Determining its credibility

completeness,

representation,

scientific significance.

Criticism is conditioned by the very nature of the historical source, therefore it is wrong to limit this task only to a source analysis of documents that came out, for example, from the environment of the exploiting classes. All sources need to be analyzed..

Critical analysis of the source requires both establishing the origin of the source (authenticity, circumstances and purposes of compilation) and its text (identifying the original text, additions and revisions, editions and lists). Analysis of a written source begins with the establishment of its authenticity. It is necessary to find out that the existing document really arose in a certain place and at a certain time. When establishing the authenticity of a source, its external features, chronological and metrological information, language and style data, form and structure, information about events, persons, organizations, institutions, geographical locations, etc., are taken into account. Having established the fact of the authenticity of the source, it is necessary to determine whether the document that has come down to the researcher is the first copy, a copy, or a list. The next step is reading the text. It requires special paleographic preparation, taking into account the peculiarities of statutory, semi-statutory and cursive writing with their abbreviations, extended letters, lack of division into phrases and words. Their text should be divided into phrases and words, and the translation into modern language should be made on the basis of knowledge of grammatical forms and vocabulary of the language of the eras to which the document belongs. In addition to establishing the existing literal meaning of the text, it is important to identify the original text and possible additions and changes. As a result, there are revisions, i.e. works based on one protograph (original text), but given a new direction, form, content. Reading the text may require a textual analysis of the source, when the main text is established, it is codified and commented. The problem of dating is related to the task of establishing the place of origin of the source. There is also an important question about the authorship of the source. This is necessary not only for the sake of finding out the name of the person who wrote the source, or establishing the institution, organization that took part in its compilation. These data require a critical attitude. Aliases are possible. Possibly handwriting.

Having revealed the authenticity of the source, after reading the text, establishing the place and time of its compilation, authorship, one can find out the circumstances and goals of compiling the document, i.e. historical conditions of its appearance.

The next stage of work with the source requires studying the content of the source and establishing its correspondence to historical reality. Each written source contains facts characteristic of certain events and phenomena.

The source expresses the interests of a certain circle of people, a certain social environment.

All this gives the most general idea of ​​the main ways, directions, stages and content of scientific criticism of written sources.

Source criticism of sources is a prerequisite for the development of methods for processing and subsequent analysis of the data contained in them. Only a comprehensive critical analysis of the source can ensure the identification of its scientifically significant information and help the researcher in choosing methods for processing it to create a system of historical facts that reveal the inner essence of the studied phenomena and processes, their relationship and development trends. The development of science is carried out to a large extent due to the development of more advanced techniques and methods for interpreting sources, as well as processing their data.

1.1. External and internal criticism of historical sources. The subject of study of auxiliary historical disciplines

When recreating a true picture of the historical past, researchers use a variety of historical sources in their work. historical sources- all evidence of the past that is associated with human activities and reflects the history of human society. Any object to which human labor activity has been applied at least twice is a historical source.

Historical sources are:

· material (various objects of everyday life and culture created by human civilization);

· ethnographic (preserved traditions in the manners and customs of peoples);

· oral (folklore);

· linguistic (outdated words and names, which in ancient times were called various phenomena and objects);

· written (signs made on organic or inorganic material that can be identified as writing);

· film, photo, phono, video documents.

Historical sources are varied and in order to prove their authenticity they must be criticized. Criticism of sources is divided into external and internal.

External criticism is, first of all, obtaining information about the origin of the source. This is what they do auxiliary historical disciplines- establishing the time and place of the source, authorship, conditions of its writing, authenticity, as well as restoring the original text.

Auxiliary historical disciplines allow for the analysis of text, language data, proper names, geographical information, observation of the form, handwriting, writing signs and writing material.

Purpose of external criticism – determination of the degree of legitimacy of using the source in a scientific study.

Internal criticism is based on the study of the content of the source and aims to establish its reliability, that is, to determine the degree of correspondence of life events to their reflection in the source. The completeness of the information and the scientific value of the source is established. In internal criticism of the source, it is necessary to identify social status, national and cultural affiliation of the author. The author can ignore or modify some facts and, on the contrary, highlight those of them in which he is interested in detailed coverage. A certain influence on the author is exerted by historical setting where he lives and works. Source science deals with internal criticism of a historical source.

source study - This is an auxiliary historical discipline that needs to be singled out in the first place, which develops a methodology and theory for the study and use of historical sources. Source studies are concerned with methods of identifying, classifying historical sources, developing a comprehensive methodology for processing, studying and using sources.

The subject of study of source studies is written sources.

The main tasks of source study:

1. Identification of sources, search for sources;

2. Establishment of the text (identification of later inserts - intercolations). Reading the text.

3. Establishing the origin of sources - authorship, place of writing, year of writing, authenticity, establishing the purpose of writing.

4. Determining the completeness of information, the political orientation of the document.

5. Synthesis of historical sources.

Source study, having separated from the auxiliary historical disciplines, is currently striving to become a special historical discipline.

The main sources involved in this study are the following subspecies of clerical documentation: minutes of meetings of the political and educational committee, minutes of meetings of school workers, minutes of meetings of school councils and parents' meetings; information on schools in the form of statistical documentation; teacher questionnaires; school reports on the work done; sick leave and vacation sheets of teachers; estimates for school renovations; lists of students, etc.

Speaking about the appearance of the sources, it should immediately be noted that all of them have been preserved in a fairly good condition. An archival storage unit is a "Case" folder containing a certain number of documents. On the cover, in large letters in the center, “Minutes of the meetings of the volost political and educational committee” are written, and the date is indicated at the bottom right, for example, in storage unit No.

Documents are hemmed with threads from the left side in chronological order. Cases contain from 60 to 500 sheets.

Most of the documents are drawn up in writing by hand, less often on a typewriter. The minutes of the meetings, for example, were kept during the meeting, the handwriting of the writers is sometimes illegible, which complicates their study. The ink color is also different:

• · Black;
• · Blue;
• · Green;
• · Violet;
• · Red;

It should be noted that the “original” protocols, as a rule, had copies compiled for storage in an institution in order to transfer information to higher authorities (for example, to county or provincial committees). On the copies of the protocols in the upper right corner there was a printed sign COPY and at the end of the document the chairman of the meeting wrote “The copy is correct” and signed it.

Paper for maintaining documents changed at almost every meeting. Most often, the paper was of low quality, dark color, A4 format (especially in rural areas). The protocols were kept on paper of various types:

• "in line"
• "into a cell"
• · "White list;
• office paper of other institutions;

For the most part, documents were kept on two sides of the sheet, in order to save money (especially copies), only sometimes clerks used only one (front) side of the sheet.

By the 1920s, in office work, in general, the basic structure for the introduction of protocols had already developed. This stability makes it possible to bring the content of the protocols:

• 1. Province, county, volost, village, society;
• 2. Date;
• 3. Self-name of the gathering (if present);
• 4. Composition and number of participants;
• 5. Chairman, official members of the society;
• 6. The presence of outsiders (representatives of the authorities, the public, etc.);
• 7. Self-name of the document;
• 8. List of issues discussed;
• 9. Point-by-point listening to each question;
• 10. Decisions made after each question;
• 11. The presence of the signature of the clerk (secretary);
• 12. Signature of the chairman of the meeting;
• 13. Seal of the institution;

Unfortunately, this structure was not always observed, which complicates the study. Sometimes, in order to save time, or maybe the inexperience or illiteracy of the secretary, such important points as the date of the protocol, the composition of the participants, or the list of issues discussed were omitted. It should be noted, also, unfortunately, the vast majority of protocols are "deaf". “Deaf” protocols are protocols containing only an indication of the agenda, a list of speakers and brief decisions (for example, minutes of meetings of the presidium of the volost political and educational committee for 1926 GATO. F. R-1666. Inv. 1. Item. hr. 24.).

It is not difficult to establish the time and place of origin of sources, in this case, since all documents, firstly, are distributed according to the geographical principle in the archival file itself, and secondly, it is possible to establish the dating and place of creation from the text of the document itself, in which it is necessary either at the beginning or at the end, the place of creation and the exact time are indicated. Finding out the time of the appearance of the source is very important, since the assessment of both the source itself and the information reported by it largely depends on this.

When working with clerical documents, it is necessary to take into account how the clerical work of this institution was conducted, on what basis the case was formed, how archivists-custodians subsequently invaded it, unforeseen accidents, and also take into account the history of state institutions. Since clerical documents arise directly in the process of practical activities of institutions and organizations in the performance of their functions in the field of management or the implementation by public organizations of the duties assigned to them. Chernomorsky M. N. Source study of the history of the USSR: the Soviet period. M., 1976. S. 181.

In the 1920s, the People's Commissariat of Education of the Republic, headed by A. V. Lunacharsky, acted as the main state body in the field of education, science and art by decree of the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets. In the area of ​​local importance, according to the decision of the People's Commissariat of Education of the RSFSR of January 21, 1918, educational districts and their entire administration were abolished, the management of the local school was transferred to local Soviets of Workers' and Peasants' Deputies. As part of the executive committees of provincial, district, city and volost Soviets, special bodies were formed - departments of public education, which functioned on the principle of dual subordination. Being bodies of local Soviets, they at the same time represented the local apparatus of the People's Commissariat for Education of the RSFSR. Nelidov A. A. History of state institutions of the USSR 1917-1936. M.:, 1962. S. 694.

The activities of local departments of public education, the volume of their work, the breadth of coverage of issues of cultural development, and at the same time their apparatus were in direct proportion to the size of the territory under their jurisdiction (province, county, city, etc.), the power and complexity of their subordinate networks of educational institutions. But with all this, as A. A. Nelidov notes, the following functions were common to all departments of public education: school reform, concern for the material support of educational work within their jurisdiction, concern for providing educational institutions with qualified Soviet personnel, development of a network of educational institutions, the development of the most appropriate organizational forms, programs and methods of educational work, instructing grassroots bodies and educational institutions, propaganda of the ideas of Soviet education among the population, linking educational work with the activities of trade union and party bodies, as well as with the work of economic bodies and the population, organizing public initiative , in the matter of public education, control over the execution of orders, etc. Nelidov A. A. History of state institutions of the USSR 1917-1936. S. 700. clerical source criticism archival

Local authorities were represented by provincial and district departments of public education, and in the regionalized territories by regional, district and district public education organizations. In this study, we mean Novotorzhsky district ONO and Likhoslavl VONO. At the same time, it should be noted that, in the territories where the district administrative division was introduced, the management of public education in the district was entrusted to one of the members of the district executive committee. Under him, a public education apparatus was created, consisting of 2-3 workers.

Thus, the features of the source will come from the structure and organization of the work of departments of public education.

Establishing the reliability (authenticity of the source) is one of the stages of external criticism. A source is considered authentic if all its details (seals, signatures, handwriting, paper, ink) are authentic.

First of all, it is necessary to find out What does the concept of "historical sources" mean and why is it necessary to be able to work with them?

The historian is completely deprived of the opportunity to personally establish the facts that he studies. No Egyptologist has ever seen pharaohs. Not a single expert on the Napoleonic wars heard the guns of Austerlitz. One can speak about previous epochs only on the basis of the evidence left from them. As Mark Blok (which has already been discussed) noted, the historian plays the role of an investigator trying to reconstruct a picture of a crime in which he himself was not present, or a physicist who is forced to stay at home due to the flu and learns about the results of his experience from the reports of a laboratory attendant. Thus knowledge of the past will never be direct. But even a researcher who recreates the history of the recent past, which he himself witnessed, is not in the best position. After all, direct, "direct" observation is almost always an illusion. The historian cannot be a witness to all the events taking place in his time, he can directly observe only an insignificant part of them. In addition, what the researcher "sees" to a large extent consists of what others have seen. The historian studies the state of affairs in the economy on the basis of summaries compiled by economists; public opinion - based on data from sociologists, etc.

Thus, historical knowledge is always not direct, but indirect. Between history as a process and the activity of a historian there are peculiar intermediaries, which are called historical sources. Historical source is a very broad concept. This is all that can give an idea of ​​a person's life in the past. The variety of historical sources dictates the need for their classification. There are several types of such classifications. For example, sources are divided into intentional and unintentional. Unintentional sources include what a person created not with the aim of entering history, leaving a trace about himself in it, but with the aim of simply providing himself with everything necessary for life. These sources usually include material sources. There is a special historical discipline - archeology, which studies the ancient past of mankind on the basis of what remains of dwellings, tools, etc. Intentional sources are usually written sources. Many of them were created with a very specific goal - to declare themselves. This is especially true for the sources studied by political history: these are the programs of political parties; transcripts of congresses, conferences, meetings; speeches and writings of politicians and similar documents.

There are other classifications of historical sources: they are classified by period of creation, by type(materials of mass media, memoirs, etc.), in the areas of historical science, for whom these sources may be of interest (sources for economic history, for political history, for cultural history, etc.).

The search for historical sources is the most important component of the work of both a professional historian and a person studying history. But the mere presence of sources is not enough. This is easy to verify with a specific example. For many years in our country, access to a significant part of the sources was difficult, many archives were closed even to specialists. Under these conditions, the idea arose that, as soon as the doors of special vaults and secret funds were opened, all questions related to our past would be answered. Access to sources has now become easier, but the expected breakthrough in historical science has not occurred, since its source crisis has been revealed. It follows from this that without the ability to work with historical sources, an adequate reconstruction of history is impossible.

It should be borne in mind that sources are what is created by people, and therefore they cannot be a reflection of objective truth. They bear both the stamp of the era and the worldview, social, psychological and other orientations of their authors, i.e. they represent a complex combination of objective and subjective factors. To reproduce the point of view of the source without analysis and comments in historical research means to repeat the long-noted mistake of historical science, which sometimes believes in any era, no matter what it says about itself.

Here are the words of Karl Marx expressed on this occasion: “While in everyday life any shopkeeper is perfectly able to distinguish between what this or that person pretends to be and what he really is, our historiography has not yet reached before this trivial knowledge. She believes in the word of each era, no matter what it says or imagines about itself.

Therefore, it is necessary to be able to analyze historical sources. The development of methods for their analysis is carried out by a special historical discipline - source study.

Having found out what historical sources are and what their classifications are, it is necessary to move on to the question: What are the directions of analysis of historical sources and methods of working with them?

Source study contains the concept "criticism of sources"(that is, their analysis). Usually isolated external and internal criticism of historical sources. External criticism establishes the authenticity, time, place of creation of the source, its authorship. (Time, place and authorship are established even when they are indicated in the document, since sometimes they are deliberately distorted). Internal criticism focuses on the content of the source. Its essence lies in the study of the testimony of a source about a historical fact, in determining the reliability, completeness and accuracy of the information contained in the source.

Since students get acquainted with sources through anthologies and collections of documents, which include documents that have undergone external criticism, mastering its techniques for them and for all students of history is not a priority. It is much more important to learn how to analyze a historical source in terms of content.

The main areas of internal criticism are:

- establishing the purpose of creating a particular source;

- establishing the place of the source in the context of the era, its

representativeness relative to the most historical

reality;

- establishing the reliability of the source (it should not be

confused with authenticity).

What do these directions mean?

An intentional historical source is created for some purpose. Highlighting this goal will allow a deeper understanding of the content of the source, its logic and argumentation. The realization that the source was created for a specific purpose will allow students to understand that there were other purposes, and, therefore, there are other documents that cover the same historical fact from a different angle. This will target the search for multiple documents, and therefore their comparison.

Finding out the place of the source in the context of the era involves the solution of several problems at once. First, it is necessary to establish how important this source is for studying the era reflected in it. After all, the real scale of historical events does not always coincide with how it is reflected in the documents. More significant facts may be given a glimpse, and less significant ones may be given too much importance. In other words, it is necessary to understand how the source is representative (representative) for the study of a particular time. Secondly, this is a clarification of the positions from which the document was written. This will answer the question: what other points of view on the event under consideration existed in the past and, thus, will again guide the search for other documents. In addition, understanding that the source belongs to a certain system of views will lead to the fact that his point of view will not be mechanically transferred to historical research as the ultimate truth.

Establishing the reliability of a source involves finding out how correctly it explains the causes of certain events. There may be situations when the source will be authentic from the point of view of external criticism (that is, not fake), but will contain unreliable information or interpretation. For example, many speeches by politicians are authentic in the sense that they are speeches of these political figures, and not their doubles or impostors. But this does not mean at all that the information contained in these speeches is true and reliable. Therefore, comparison with other documents is necessary.

What are the rules and techniques for working with historical sources?

There are many methods of working with historical sources that allow you to fulfill the tasks of their criticism. Let us dwell on the basic techniques, without the knowledge of which any meaningful work with historical documents is impossible.

▼ First of all, it is necessary to learn the rule: sources should not be selected for ready-made theories, but theories and conclusions should be formulated based on the analysis of numerous sources. If you break this rule, then the result will be anything you like, but not historical science. There are a lot of historiosophical constructions that operate with specially selected facts, but they cannot be considered historical science; they distort historical reality, proceeding not from documents to theory, but from theory to documents. Sources are not illustrations of pre-constructed theories. The worst scientific crime that a historian can commit is to throw out a fact that does not fit into his historical concept.

▼ From this follows the rule: to study not individual sources (no matter what principle they are selected for), but the whole complex of sources on the topic under study.

▼ The study of the entire complex of sources will inevitably lead to situations where the same historical fact will be covered by different sources, not just from different angles, but from completely opposite positions. It should be treated as a natural phenomenon. Each source reflects the view of one part of society on the event, and there are many views. If we confine ourselves to one source, this will lead to a one-sided vision of a historical event.

What methods of working with sources are necessary in this situation? It is not at all the ability to make something arithmetic mean from various sources. This is not possible, nor is it necessary. It is necessary to be able to compare and compare sources, showing the versatility of a historical event and the ambiguity of its perception.

Let's look at this with a specific example. December 6, 1876 in St. Petersburg, on Nevsky Prospekt in front of the Kazan Cathedral, the first demonstration in the history of Russia under the red banner took place. One of its organizers was G.V. Plekhanov, then a student of one of the St. Petersburg universities, later - the first Russian Marxist. It is a fact. Let's see how it is reflected in various sources.

Source one. G.V. Plekhanov himself, a participant in this demonstration, recalls:

“On the morning of December 6, all the “rebellious” workers' circles came to the scene. But there were no outside workers. We saw that we had too little strength and decided to wait. The workers dispersed to the nearest taverns, leaving only a small group at the cathedral porch to observe the progress of affairs. Meanwhile, young students came up in large groups. …

The bored "nihilists" began to go out onto the porch, from the neighboring taverns, the "rebels" who were sitting there - the workers, came up. The crowd assumed quite impressive proportions. We decided to act. …

There were few policemen and gendarmes on Kazanskaya Square. They looked at us and "waited for action." When the first words of the revolutionary speech were heard, they tried to squeeze through to the speaker, but they were immediately pushed back. ... When, after the speech was delivered, the red banner was unfurled, the young peasant Potapov grabbed him and, lifted up by the workers, held him high above the heads of those present for some time. …

“Now let’s all go together, otherwise they will arrest us,” some voices shouted, and we moved in a crowd towards Nevsky. But as soon as we took a few steps, the police ... began to grab those walking in the back rows. …

New and strong reinforcements came to the police. A whole detachment of policemen, accompanied by many janitors, quickly approached the square. … The most severe dump began. ... Those who acted alone were immediately seized and, after brutal beatings, dragged to the stations.

(G.V. Plekhanov. Russian worker in the revolutionary movement. Collection of articles. L., 1989. P. 84 - 88.)

This is the testimony of a demonstrator. Here's a look from the other side. The famous Russian lawyer Anatoly Fedorovich Koni testifies, describing in his memoirs the same day, December 6, 1876:

“I found Trepov in the office of the Minister of Justice, Fuchs, Prosecutor of the Chamber, Comrade Prosecutor Poskochin, and Comrade Minister Frisch. The latter briskly related that, walking along the Nevsky an hour ago, he had witnessed a demonstration at the Kazan Cathedral by a group of young people of a "nihilistic streak", which was stopped by the intervention of the police, who began to beat the demonstrators. In view of the undoubted importance of such a fact in the capital, in broad daylight, he hurried to the ministry and found Trepov there, who confirmed that a handful of young people were outrageous and carried in their arms some kind of boy who waved a banner with the inscription "Land and Freedom". At the same time, Trepov said that they were all arrested - one who resisted was tied up, and some were probably armed, because. a revolver was found on the ground. ... Demonstration ... caused a very indifferent attitude on the part of society. Cab drivers and shop clerks rushed to help the police and beat with whips and fists "gentlemen and girls in headscarves [plaids]."

(Koni A.F. Memories of the case of Vera Zasulich // Selected Works. M., 1958. V.2. S. 8, 10.)

And one more piece of evidence that demonstrates a completely unexpected view of these events.

One observer of street life told about a merchant who said: “We went out with my wife and child to take a walk on Nevsky; we see a fight near the Kazan Cathedral. ... I put my wife and child at Milyutin's shops, rolled up my sleeves, climbed into the crowd, and - it's a pity only two of them and I managed to hit them in the neck ... I had to hurry to my wife and child - after all, there were only one left! “But who and why did you hit?” “But who knows who, but how, pardon, suddenly I see, they are beating: do not stand with folded arms ?! Well, he gave it twice to anyone, he amused himself - and to his wife ... ”(The character’s language is preserved unchanged).

(Koni A.F. op. op. P. 10 - 11.)

Let's see what happens if, in the reconstruction of this event, we restrict ourselves to only one source. What will the use of Plekhanov's memoirs as such a source lead to? (After all, it is natural for the participant and organizer of the demonstration to recall it in an upbeat, pathetic tone). Moreover, this demonstration will have to be portrayed as an event of great importance and had a significant impact on the socio-political life of the capital, and even the whole country. So it was in the Soviet historical literature, which used only this source (omitting unnecessary everyday details about taverns). And if you use only the opinions of officials as a source? Then this event will have to be portrayed as a turmoil, completely groundless, which did not cause any resonance in society. If, however, we use only the above opinion of the merchant as a source, then this event should generally fall into the category of a police chronicle or even curiosities of St. Petersburg life. Therefore, the use of a single source will result in an inadequate reproduction of the story. At the same time, it is clear that it is impossible to make something arithmetic mean from these sources. Therefore, the use of different sources is necessary in order to show the real scale of this historical event, its perception in different sections of society.

▼ When working with sources, it is necessary to systematize, generalize them, and also compare them with each other to determine their reliability.

For example, source studies teach that memoirs as a historical source can only be used when compared with other sources. This is explained by the fact that a memoirist can fail his memory, he can (even unwittingly) exaggerate his role in historical events, ascribe to himself views that he did not share at that time. Finally, he may be under pressure from the political circumstances of the time of writing his memoirs. It is, of course, so. But would a document written on official letterhead, with a signature and official seal, be more reliable? Many materials of the state and former party archives of the Soviet era are nothing more than reports. You don't have to be a great specialist in source studies to understand that if the historians of the future reproduce the history of our recent past from reports, they will have an absolutely wrong idea about it. But some historians have formed a kind of reverence for official documents. This stereotype needs to be overcome. These documents need to be carefully rechecked and compared with many other historical sources.

This applies to all sources. For example, there is not a single political party whose program states that this party wants to harm the people or the country (and party programs are also a historical source). Alas, there has been enough blood in history. Thus, here again it is necessary to compare programs with other documents.

▼ When working with historical sources, it is necessary to understand that some of the information may be hidden from the researcher. Therefore, methods of working with sources should lead to finding out not only what the authors of documents testify to, but also what they are silent about, to the ability to see the nature of the era behind the individual facts of the document.

Of course, this is not all, but only the basic rules and techniques for working with historical sources. But without owning them, it is impossible to understand history.

So, the above material is an introduction to historical science. It reveals the specifics of history as a science, the methodology of historical research, directions and techniques of source analysis. This knowledge is necessary for the formation of historical consciousness, for the meaningful study of specific topics of the university history course.

1. The specifics of history as a science. The problem of objective truth in historical science……..p. 3

2. Methodology of historical research. Main methodological approaches and schools…………………………………………………p.15

3. Historical sources and their criticism…………………………………………………..p.37