Historical criticism. External criticism Criticism of a source according to its formal features is called

External criticism

Determining the external features of a written source

To determine the external characteristics of the source, data and methods of paleography, sphragistics, filigree studies and a number of other auxiliary historical disciplines are used. Establishing external features allows you to date the text and determine its authenticity. This procedure includes finding out the writing material (paper, parchment, fabric, birch bark, etc.), writing or printing tools, type of writing, handwriting or font, and the external design of the text.

Initially, parchment, birch bark, and wood were used as writing material. From the 15th century paper became the main writing material. Paper production began in Russia only at the beginning of the 18th century. Prior to that, foreign-made paper was used. During production, each full paper sheet was marked with a watermark (filigree). By restoring the watermark, you can date the text. This is helped by special reference books on filigrees. The best among them are the works of N.P. Likhachev “Paleographic Significance of Paper Watermarks” (in 2 volumes, St. Petersburg, 1898–1899) and S.A. Klepikov “Filigree and Stamps on Paper of Russian and Foreign Production of the 17th-20th Centuries.” (M., 1959). The ink used to write medieval manuscripts was usually brown or brown, but black was also found.

Most handwritten monuments of the XI-XVII centuries. was issued in the form of books, letters and scrolls. Old books differed in format, depending on the size of the paper sheet. The formats used were 1/4; 1/8; 1/16 and 1/32 sheets. As a rule, handwritten books were made up of notebooks of 16 pages. The notebooks were numbered. The binding of the book was made of wooden boards, which were always covered with leather or fabric. Letters were written on separate sheets on one side. If one sheet was missing, then other sheets were glued to it from below, and as a result a rather long scroll was obtained. The places where the sheets were glued on the clean reverse side were marked with a paper clip or a scribe's signature, which certifies the authenticity of the text. During storage, the scrolls were placed in columns (columns). The size of the columns can be judged from the Council Code of 1649, composed of 959 sheets. As a result, its length exceeded 300 m. In 1700, column office work was canceled. It was replaced by business as a form of organizing documents.

The elements of the external design of the text include decorations of manuscripts that changed over time: ligature, ornament and miniature. Elm is a decorative style of writing that has a certain ratio of the height of the letter to its width and characteristic curls. A handwritten ornament is understood as the totality of its constituent elements: initial, headband, ending and marginal decorations. An initial is a beautifully drawn initial letter of a text. In addition to the initial, a headband was placed at the top - an ornamented drawing at the beginning of the text. An ornamented drawing placed at the end of the text was called the ending. An ornamental pattern made in a certain style was also located on the margins. In many manuscripts, painted drawings of miniatures (faces) were performed. Manuscripts painted with miniatures were called obverse.

The most significant of the external features of the text is the type of writing. The most ancient type of writing in Russia was the charter, which existed in the XI-XV centuries. In the XIV - early XVI centuries. semi-ustav was used, in the 16th-17th centuries. - cursive. In the XVIII century. its simplified type was established. In the XIX - early XX centuries. the civil letter became widespread and, since 1918, the modern one.

Setting the time of occurrence of the text

Many Russian documents of the Middle Ages, modern and recent times have a direct indication of the time of their creation - the date in the text, stamp or near the signature. Similar evidence is also found in some sources of an earlier time, when a name, title, position, church rank, or belonging to the “face of saints” are mentioned on the document. The dates of writing documents are also established according to the events mentioned in the text, persons, institutions, banknotes, quality of paper, ink, physical measures and seals used in the text, lists and registers of papers, vocabulary and dialect features of the language. One of the important techniques is dating by the external features of the text: writing, material, watermarks, design. In some cases, astronomical and other data help to date the text. The situation is more complicated when you have to work with a copy or revision of the text. In this case, it is necessary to find out whether the indicated date is the time of compilation of this version. To date written sources, a researcher often has to use data from paleography, filigree studies, numismatics, heraldry, historical metrology, historical linguistics, and other auxiliary historical disciplines.

Establishing the origin of the source

Determining the place of creation of a written source helps to find out the reasons, goals, historical, cultural and local conditions for its occurrence, to find the author and, ultimately, to correctly interpret its content. When working with spatial information, it is necessary to know the political and territorial division of the country, its geography, toponymy, local features of culture and language in the studied time and in their historical development. Therefore, data of historical geography, toponymy, and linguistics are used to localize the document. In addition, materials are used, paleography, heraldry, sphragistics, historical metrology. For example, in medieval Russia, a variety of local systems of physical measures was preserved for a long time. In Novgorod until the end of the 15th century. the volumes of loose bodies were measured in boxes and squares. In the rest of Russia, the units were kad, ladle, quarter and octopus.

In some sources there is direct information about the place of origin. Most often, these are toponyms - proper names of objects and areas of the terrain: settlements (oikonyms) and rivers (hydronyms). In many medieval documents there are no direct spatial indications. Then, for localization, the indirect data available in them are used, first of all, ethnonyms - the names of peoples and tribes. In this group of names, ethnotoponyms are important - the names of peoples transferred to geographical objects and topoethnonyms - the names of places transferred to the people. Evidence of the local origin of one or another written source can be a detailed description of the events that took place in any land, the author's knowledge of small geographical and topographic objects. Indirectly, the place of origin of the document is often evidenced by the local features of the form (for acts), seals, emblems and the external design of the text. In a number of cases, anthroponyms are considered as localizing features - nicknames, names and surnames of people formed from the names of places. Usually they indicate the origin and belonging of a person to a particular region, city, area.

Establishing the author allows you to get more accurate ideas about the place, time, causes and conditions for the origin of the source, more fully reveal its socio-political orientation. Having studied the worldview, practical activity, sociocultural affiliation of the author, it is possible to more accurately interpret the text and determine the degree of reliability of the information reported in it. Even incomplete, non-personalized (corporate-cultural) attribution of the source is important.

The author of the text could be either an individual or a collective entity: a corporation, a state or public institution, a sociocultural community. Collective texts were, first of all, the remnants of the functioning of social systems: legislative, clerical, act and statistical materials, periodicals, many annals.

The name of the author is quite often determined on the basis of direct evidence from the source. A person's proper names (anthroponyms) include a personal name, nickname, surname, pseudonym and kryptonym (ciphered name). Personal names are names that were assigned at birth and were known to society. The main thing was the canonical personal name, which was given according to the church calendar, at baptism and was secret. A non-canonical, worldly name was used in everyday life. Nicknames more often expressed the qualities and origins of their carriers.

An important part of the name was patronymic (patronymic nickname). It indicated the ancestral origin of a person, was honorary and reflected the social affiliation of its bearer. Aristocrats had a full patronymic ending in "vich" (Petrovich). Persons of the middle classes used a semi-patronymic ending in "ov", "ev", "in" (Petrov, Ilyin). The lower classes until the end of the XIX century. got along without patronymic. Later than all other forms of the name, surnames began to spread in Russia. Their origin is attributed to the XV-XVI centuries. The first surnames were received by princes, boyars, nobles. Most of them arose from patronymics, grandfathers and nicknames. In the XVIII - early XX centuries, pseudonyms were often used. To identify them, you can use special reference books, in particular, “Dictionary of pseudonyms of Russian writers, scientists and public figures” by I.F. Masanova.

Most of the medieval texts of the XI-XVII centuries. expressed corporate consciousness. They were written according to the canons, had an anonymous character, at different times were repeatedly copied, processed, which further strengthened their anonymity. The attribution of such evidence is carried out indirectly. To do this, use the data of anthroponymy, genealogy, heraldry, sphragistics, paleography, historical linguistics.

The possibilities of indirect attribution of a source depend on the information it contains about the personality and social status of the author. Openly testifying to the author are indications of his place of birth, gender, age, age of majority (12–15 years for princes and servicemen) and marriage, ethnic origin, family and kinship ties. A good basis for restoring the degree of family kinship, in addition to genealogies, is the knowledge of the “ladder” system of the ascension of ancient Russian princes to thrones and an idea of ​​the parochial system of occupying positions of the 16th–17th centuries. Also significant is the information in the text about the social origin and position (estate, rank, position, awards) of the author, his worldview, value orientations and socio-political position.

Determination of authorship often requires an analysis of the stylistic features of the text. This is especially true when studying narrative sources, since the analysis of style is sometimes the only way of indirect attribution. Everyone, even a writer who works according to the canon, has his own stable style, expressed in the peculiarities of constructing a text and sentences, in the use of favorite words and phrases. The style structure can be given a quantitative-stylistic form, which can be analyzed by computer methods. The coincidence of the stylistic characteristics of an anonymous work and compositions whose creator is known makes it possible to attribute it to a given author.

Authentication of the monument

In source studies, a special technique for detecting fakes has been developed. In many cases, they are found at the stage of clarifying the time, place, authorship and conditions of the document. If it is established that the source arose at the wrong time, in the wrong place and in the wrong conditions in which, by all indications, it should have appeared, if the author is not the person that is meant, then it should be considered a fake. According to the degree of authenticity, all historical sources are divided into originals, copies that repeat the external signs of the original and fakes.

To distinguish fakes, you need to know the reasons for their creation. All fabricated evidence can be divided into three groups. Most of them have been forged in the past they represent. Most often, these were forged legal documents. They confirmed the right of ownership, or gave various benefits. Another group of false testimonies does not express the past at all. These false testimonies were originally fabricated at a later time as fake sources. They were created in order to form the necessary ideas about the past. Such fakes fabricated the historical facts themselves. In addition, there are still collectible fakes that were created by collectors for prestige and to extract certain benefits.

All methods of falsifying sources are divided into falsifications in content and falsifications in form. The first includes completely forged documents. Some of them can be executed in compliance with external signs of authenticity (handwriting, seals, etc.). Such fakes are recognized by analyzing the content of the text and comparing it with already known and well-established facts. Forgeries in form usually have genuine content. But some of them have fabricated outward signs. Other sources, while appearing to be authentic, include fake text inserts, records, scribes' notes, and so on. So most often chronicles, letters and office documents were forged.

Studying the nature of genetic links of sources (Stemma)

Many ancient sources have come down to us in dozens of lists and editions, so their source analysis involves establishing the relationship between editions and lists, identifying the genetic connection of all surviving and lost texts of the monument, and reconstructing the history of the texts. These tasks are solved by means of comparative textological analysis, which can be facilitated with the help of a computer-aided construction of the classification of lists. To do this, use the method of constructing a "family tree" (stemma). It is based on the method of "groups", proposed by the French textologist D.J. Frozhe. The main idea of ​​the method is as follows: if lists-"descendants" acquire all the features of lists-"ancestors", then the history of copying lists is quite definitely encrypted in the discrepancies of the lists. Then, based on the analysis of the structure of discrepancies, a genealogical tree of lists is built.

The "groups" method has the following conditions:

1) each list has only one protograph;

2) each list contains all the errors of its protographer;

3) identical errors are not contained in lists that have independent lists as their protographs.

To study the genetic links of sources, the methods of conventional and historical textual criticism are used.

The methods of conventional textology are used in the study of texts that were edited by the author of the source himself or by a collective author. In this case, all surviving versions of the text (initial, intermediate, final) are sequentially checked. The study of connections allows you to find out all aspects in changing the original text, to trace the change in the intention of the author / authors, their ideological orientation, the influence of individuals in the work on the final version of the text.

Methods of historical textology are used in the study of the original text, which has been repeatedly rewritten and revised by various authors over a certain period of time. Such texts have come down to us in dozens of lists and editions. The ultimate goal of historical textology is the restoration of the original, which acts as a source of historical reality. Unlike conventional textology, in historical textology research proceeds in the reverse order: first, later stages in the history of the text are restored, and then all earlier ones. The research process looks like this: comparison of lists makes it possible to identify their individual and general properties and restore the protograph of the text revision, in turn, their comparison also allows us to identify their individual and general properties and ultimately restore the protograph of the original text.

Internal criticism

The identification and external criticism of sources brings the researcher to the final stage of working with the document - the interpretation of the text, the interpretation of the revealed historical facts, i.e. hermeneutics. It is preceded by the study of the actual content of the historical source and the elucidation of its correspondence to historical reality.

Analysis of the actual content of a historical source involves identifying all the historical facts in the text, disclosing the completeness of its sociocultural information, determining the correspondence of the actual content of the source to historical reality, assessing the accuracy and reliability of its data, and determining the authenticity of texts. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the socio-cultural affiliation of the source, its functions, historical conditions of occurrence; personal characteristics of the author, his worldview, the influence of the social atmosphere and political situation at the time of the creation of the work in the selection, recording and evaluation of events, facts and persons, his attitude towards them, the degree of awareness of the author, sources of his information (rumors, eyewitness accounts, personal impressions , documentation).

Authentic sources include texts that are a direct remnant of the event, that is, there were no indirect links in time and space between the source and the event. Genetically, they are the result of the act of one of the participants in the event. Their occurrence influenced the course of events. Authentic sources, as a rule, include business documentation aimed at solving specific practical problems. These sources predominate among the sources of modern and recent times. According to the source of information, non-authentic sources are divided into several groups: 1) sources compiled by participants in events; 2) sources compiled by eyewitnesses of events; and 3) sources compiled by contemporaries of events. In turn, a contemporary of the events - the author of the text could use information gleaned from a participant in the events, their eyewitness or other contemporaries, which also influenced the degree of his awareness of the events. The measure of reliability of all these sources is different. It depends not only on the source of information, but also on the time when the text was compiled, by one or another author - participant, eyewitness, contemporary.

Determining the reliability of historical sources comes down to clarifying the question of the nature of the coincidence of their information. Such information can coincide independently of each other and as a result of genetic relationships. In source studies, rules have been developed for formal verification of source information for authenticity. The first rule says: if, in the event of a coincidence, the sources arose independently of each other, then this information is reliable. The second rule: if, with the coincidence of information, one source is compiled on the basis of another, then it is impossible to determine the reliability. And, finally, the third rule: if the information of the sources contradict each other, then it is also impossible to determine the reliability. Dependence and independence of sources is checked with the help of their attribution and methods of historical textual criticism. In the presence of three or more sources, which happens not infrequently, the rules for verifying the reliability of information from sources become somewhat more complicated:

1. if the information of one independent source contradicts the information of other independent sources that coincide with each other, then the information of this group is reliable;

2. if the information of one independent source contradicts the information of a group of dependent sources, then the reliability cannot be established;

3. If the matching information from one group of sources contradicts the matching information from another group of sources, then it is first necessary to find out the presence of genetic links.

Most known sources contain information about several events. At the same time, the reliability of all information from one source is a contradictory property. A source may be reliable in describing some events, unreliable in describing others, and tendentious in describing others.

The identification of all historical facts in the text, the disclosure of the completeness of its socio-cultural information, the representativeness of sources in historical research is associated with ensuring representativeness, which logically follows the identification of reliability. Representativeness is the property of a group of sources to display a phenomenon comprehensively and with the same level of detail. In source studies, there are several ways to ensure representativeness. Firstly, when studying the phenomena of the past, one should select sources that belong to different types and, secondly, depending on the type of historical phenomenon (act, event, process, situation). In addition, it is necessary to actively involve non-authentic sources (memoirs, memoirs, diaries, journalistic writings), especially when studying major social upheavals, when information was mainly transmitted orally, and the total number of documents decreased.

Text interpretation (hermeneutical analysis)

Hermeneutics is a special branch of knowledge (from the Greek epmnvevw - interpret, explain) that aims to explain, interpret, interpret the meaning of the document being studied. At this stage, the problem of interaction in the system: "source-historian" is solved. C. Langlois and C. Segnobos believed that the main thing in hermeneutics is the art of recognizing and explaining the hidden meaning of texts, their images and metaphors. According to A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky, the tasks of hermeneutics are much broader: "To determine which historical fact can be restored on the basis of a given source, or rather to identify the very meaning that the author pressed down on the whole work."

Representatives of the Annales school, who pay considerable attention to issues of hermeneutics, believe that the historian's method finds expression both in the selection of sources and in the way they are interpreted. M. Blok decisively breaks with the tradition of old historiography and criticizes Alfan, who believed that “it is enough to surrender, so to speak, to the sources, reading them one after another in the form in which they have come down to us, in order for the chain of events to be restored almost automatically". M. Blok is against the fact that the functions of a historian are reduced to the role of a passive registrar of archival storage units, a narrator of texts. He compares the historian to an investigating judge who "is not satisfied with the version of the accused and even his confessions, looking for evidence and trying to recognize all the circumstances of the case."

Soviet historians S.N. Bykovsky, E. M. Kashtanov, A.A. Kursnosov, A.A. Novoselsky believe that the analysis of the document should be comprehensive and there is no need to divide criticism of sources into "external" and "internal". To a large extent, it is conditional. The main thing is to determine the tasks of scientific criticism and methods for their implementation. The historical source reflects a certain socio-cultural system of the past. The historian working with him represents a different (scientific and social) culture. There is a large temporal and cultural distance between the source and the historian. The researcher must overcome it by correctly understanding the content of the text used. Therefore, the historian, having established all the circumstances of the origin of the written message, proceeds to its interpretation (interpretation). The essence of the interpretation is to reveal the true meaning invested in the testimony by its author. The interpretation uses the methods of hermeneutics (the science of understanding), ethnology and auxiliary historical disciplines. In order to correctly interpret the text, it is necessary to understand it as a historically conditioned socio-cultural integrity (typing method), take into account the peculiarities of the worldview, values, character and interests of the author (psychological and individualizing methods). For this purpose, the true meaning of the concepts and expressions used in the text is initially determined. They need to be properly translated, understood and interpreted. In principle, the historian begins the interpretation of the text while reading and translating. Unlike a simple translation, when interpreting a text, the researcher focuses on revealing its meaning in accordance with the specific historical and cultural conditions in which this source arose. Words, concepts, phrases receive a direct, unambiguous interpretation. At the same time, omissions and errors are eliminated, idioms, symbols, allegories, allegories and allusions are revealed, individual parts of the text and the text as a whole are interpreted. These operations are especially important for revealing the meaning of narrative monuments, and the literal meaning often does not matter.

Basic concepts of the course "Source Studies"

Historical sources are everything that was created by people in the process of social activity, has come down to the present and is used in science to obtain primary knowledge about the past of mankind.

Authenticity is the property of a historical source to be in the past part of the event about which it reports.

Reliability - the correspondence of the source information to the facts of historical reality.

Interpolation - words or phrases arbitrarily inserted into the text during correspondence or editing.

Information expressed - consciously fixed, obvious.

Fixed information - fixed on a material carrier.

Unfixed information - unfixed on a material carrier (oral).

Information hidden - not expressed in the content of the source, fixed involuntarily.

A narrative source is a narrative source.

A copy is a text that completely reproduces the text of the original and has the formal features of a copy certificate.

Mass sources - reflecting the essence and interaction of mass objects.

Authenticity is the correspondence of the source to what the author claims to be.

Fake source - not corresponding to what the author claims to be.

Representativeness is the property of a source to display a separate historical phenomenon comprehensively, with an equal degree of detail.

Bias is the incomplete correspondence of the source to the facts of historical reality.

The fact of a historical source is a subjective reflection of the facts of reality in a historical source.

The fact of historical reality is a concrete manifestation of reality in its past state.

Scientific and historical fact - a reflection of the facts of historical reality on the basis of the facts of historical sources in the scientific works of historians.

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 allow 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 a 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. 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.

Revealing the authenticity of the source, reading the text, establishing the place and time of its compilation, authorship, you 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.

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 the 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.

Historical criticism

Under the name of historical K. they mean, first of all, the totality of methods that the historian uses in order to distinguish truth from falsehood in historical evidence. The so-called K. text aims to decide the question of the authenticity or falsity of this or that document. For example, one of the founders of historical culture in the new Europe, an Italian humanist of the 15th century. Lavrenty Valla (q.v.), wrote a whole essay to prove the forgery of the famous gift of Konstantinov, the authenticity of which was believed throughout the Middle Ages. Further, the document itself may be authentic, but the information contained in it may be incorrect. The author of this or that historical source often conveys what he himself learned from others, entering into his work, without any criticism, known to him only by hearsay. Often the author himself, consciously or unconsciously, intentionally or unintentionally, distorts the facts in relation to which he was a direct witness. The scientific nature of historical work should be based primarily on the elimination from the sources of everything that may contradict factual reliability. Historical K. gives rules worked out through experience on how to treat news contained in historical sources of various categories. The main general basis of these rules is simple common sense, but their successful application in practice is possible only with a certain kind of skill, the possession of which indicates a good school passed by the historian. Nevertheless, many scholars have attempted to formulate the rules of historical philosophy as a special methodological discipline; There is an entire literature on this subject. Historical K. is usually divided into external and internal. By external criticism is meant the investigation, in relation to each document or monument, firstly, whether it is what it claims to be, and secondly, whether it really represents what it has been taken to be until now. When examining the source from the first point of view, for example, either a direct forgery, or any inserts in the original text or other distortions can be found. When examining a monument from the second point of view, incorrect ideas about it, formed and confirmed regardless of the author's intentions, can be eliminated. Science knows a lot of such cases when scientists mistook this or that monument for what it really was not. Once the authenticity of a source is established, it is very often necessary to resolve questions about the time and place of its origin, about its author, whether it is a primary source or borrowing from some other source, etc. It is necessary to distinguish internal K. from this external K., which consists in deciding the relation of the news contained in the sources to the actual facts, that is, whether these news can be considered completely reliable, or only probable, or the very possibility of reported facts must be rejected. The main questions are resolved here by examining the internal dignity of the sources, which depends on the nature of the sources themselves, on the individuality of the author, and on the influences of place and time. At the same time, it is very often necessary to check the reliability of some sources by others, and many sources about the same fact may, to a greater or lesser extent, either coincide with each other or contradict each other. In all cases of historical research, both external and internal, in addition to common sense and skill, impartiality and close acquaintance with the subject of research are also required from the researcher. Some theorists of historical criticism also point to the need to keep to the golden mean between gullibility and excessive skepticism. The newest treatise on historical K., with references to the literature of the subject, is the fourth chapter of E. Bernheim's excellent book: "Lehrbuch der historischen Methode" (1889, 2nd ed. 1894). Russian historical literature is very poor in writings on historical K. A number of remarks on this subject can be found in the first volume of Bestuzhev-Ryumin's "Russian History" and in the first volume of Ikonnikov's "Experience in Russian Historiography". See also Fortinsky's article: "Experiences in the Systematic Processing of Historical Criticism", in "Kyiv University News" for 1884, as well as the Russian translation of Tardif's pamphlet: "Fundamentals of Historical K." (1894). In a broader sense, the name of historical criticism is given to a critical attitude, from a historical point of view, to the very phenomena studied by historical science; but such a usage cannot be considered correct, and it can give rise to great misunderstandings.

N. Kareev.

Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron. - St. Petersburg: Brockhaus-Efron. 1890-1907 .

See what "Historical Criticism" is in other dictionaries:

- (Greek xritikn the art of judging, disassembling) the study, analysis and evaluation of the phenomena of muses. claim. In a broad sense, classical music is part of any study of music, since the evaluative element is an integral part of the aesthetic. judgments. ... ... Music Encyclopedia

THEORY. The word "K." means judgment. It is no coincidence that the word "judgment" is closely related to the concept of "judgment". To judge this, on the one hand, means to consider, reason about something, analyze some object, try to understand its meaning, give ... ... Literary Encyclopedia

- (Greek krittke, from krino I judge). Analysis and judgments about the merits and demerits of any subject, work, especially essays; discussion, evaluation. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. CRITICISM of Greek ... ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

Criticism- Literary criticism is a type of literary creativity, the subject of which is literature itself. Just as the philosophy of science is the theory of knowledge, epistemology is the organ of self-consciousness of scientific creativity, so criticism is the organ of self-consciousness of creativity ... ... Dictionary of literary terms

CRITIQUE, critics, wives. (from Greek kritike). 1. only units Discussing, examining, investigating something, testing something for some purpose. Criticize something. Treat something without any criticism. Criticism of pure ... ... Explanatory Dictionary of Ushakov

Contents 1 Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses 1.1 Notable critics 1.2 Translation ... Wikipedia

Female search and judgment about the merits and demerits of any labor, esp. essays; parsing, evaluation. Historical criticism, analysis of everyday life, search for events, cleaning them from embellishments and distortions. Human criticism cannot be avoided, gossip, ... ... Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary

- "New chronology" is a non-academic theory that claims that the generally accepted chronology of historical events is generally incorrect, and offers its own version of the chronology and the history of mankind in general. According to the statements of its authors, it is based on ... ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Historical school. Historical school of law - a trend in jurisprudence in the first half of the 19th century. It originated and gained the greatest popularity in Germany. Contents 1 Basic provisions ... Wikipedia

Books

• A. Pushkin. Collected works in 6 volumes (set of 6 books), A. Pushkin. The collection of works of the great Russian poet and writer A. S. Pushkin includes all of his most significant works ...

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 are 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