Inquisitorial anthropology as generator of historical narratives of the Soviet era

The article focuses on the use in historical research of ego-documents obtained in the course of investigative activities. The term “inquisitorial anthropology” is introduced to denote the origin of sources of this type, and comprises the practices of observation, intelligence from informers, private denunciations, interrogations of suspects and collection of witness testimonies. The article presents the genesis of such practices, their generic properties and species differences. The characteristics of evidence resulting from inquisitorial anthropology are described and the necessity of scientific criticism of this type of sources is substantiated. They are biased, one-sided and contain falsifications. The article offers criteria to distinguish spontaneous authentic speech from its deformation by an unscrupulous investigator. Spontaneous speech is characterized by vagueness, the presence of dialectisms, and repetitions. In relation to the objectives of the investigation it contains redundant information. The article analyses the obvious signs of falsification of investigative materials. The article presents situations in which there are no alternatives to inquisitorial sources. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of archival and investigative files and minutes of party meetings from the 1930s in Soviet Russia . The article points out possible subject fields for everyday historians who use materials from inquisitorial anthropology as sources: structures of mentality, everyday practices, human subjectivity, types of social behaviour and everyday communication. The article addresses the problems of research ethics for historians working with materials of “inquisitorial anthropology”.

1. Alevras, N. N. (2014). Istoriograficheskii tekst kak ego-dokument: k postanovke i obsuzhdeniiu podkhoda [The historiographical text as an ego-document: Towards a framework and discussion of the approach]. In N. A. Surzhikova (Ed.). Istoriia v ego-dokumentakh: Issledovaniia i istochniki (pp. 41–54). AsPUr. (In Russian).

2. Benderskii, I. [I.] (n. d.). Ot skandala k kanonu [From Scandal to Canon]. Magisteriia: Obrazovatel’nyi sait … https://magisteria.ru/war-and-peace/from-scandal-to-canon. (In Russian).

3. Blium [= Blum], A. (2011). Administratory, nauchnye elity i otnosheniia s vlast’ju [Administrators, scientific elites and power relations]. In J. Barberowski et al. (Eds.). Istoriia stalinizma: Itogi i problemy izucheniia: Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii, Moskva, 5–7 dekabria 2008 g. (pp. 78–92). Rossiiskaia politicheskaia entsiklopediia (ROSSPEN); Fond “Prezidentskii tsentr B.N. El’tsina”. (In Russian).

4. Ginzburg, C. (1976). Il formaggio e i vermi. Il cosmo di un mugnaio del ‘500. Einaudi. (In Italian). Ginzburg, C. (1990). Clues, myths, and the historical method. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.

5. Green, T. (2007). Inquisition: Тhе reign of fear. Масmillаn Press.

6. Hellbeck, J. (2006). Revolution on my mind: Writing a diary under Stalin. Harvard Univ. Press.

7. Kabatskov, A. N., & Leibovich, O. L. (2019). Sub’’ektivnyi obraz sotsial’noi struktury sovetskogo obshchestva v dnevnikakh A. I. Dmitrieva [The subjective image of the social structure of Soviet society in A. I. Dmitriev’s diaries]. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta, Ser. Gumanitaarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2019(1), 15–22. (In Russian).

8. Kharkhordin, O. V. (2002). Oblichat’ i litsemerit’: genealogiia rossiiskoi lichnosti [Denounce and dissemble: A genealogy of Russian identity]. Evropeiskii universitet v Sankt-Peterburge; Letnii sad. (In Russian).

9. Kolchanova, Iu. S. (2017). “Ne lichnaia vygoda menia derzhala zdes’…”: Zhiznennye miry sovetskikh inzhenerov v 1930-e gg. [“It wasn’t personal gain that kept me here...”: The life worlds of Soviet engineers in the 1930s]. Perm. gos. in-t kul’tury. (In Russian).

10. Le Roy Ladurie, E. (1975). Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 à 1324. Gallimard. (In French).

11. Leybovich, O. L. (2018). Sledstvennye fal’sifikaty ob istokakh bol’shogo terrora [Investigators’ forgeries on the origins of the Great Terror]. In O. R. Airapetov, M. A. Kolerov, B. Menning, A. Iu. Polunov, & P. Cheisti [= Chaisty] (Eds.). Russkii Sbornik: Issledovaniia po istorii Rossii (Vol. 25, pp. 173–201). Modest Kolerov. (In Russian).

12. Llorente, J. A. (1815). Histoire critique de l’inquisition d’Espagne, depuis l’époque de son établissement par Ferdinand V…. Paris. Treuttel et Würz. (In French).

13. Panchenko, A. A. (2001). Inkvizitory kak antropologi, antropologi kak inkvizitory [Inquisitors as anthropologists, anthropologists as inquisitors]. Zhivaia starina, 2001(1), 7–9. (In Russian).

14. Shcherbakova, E. I. (2008). “Otshchepentsy”: Put’ k terrorizmu (60–80-e gody XIX veka) [“Renegades”: The road to terrorism (1960s–80s)]. Novyi Khronograf; AIRO-XXI. (In Russian).

15. Togoeva, O. I. (2016). Eretichka, stavshaia sviatoi: Dve zhizni Zhanny d’Ark [Heretic turned saint: Two lives of Joan of Arc]. Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ. (In Russian).

16. Troitskii, Iu. L. (2014). Analitika ego-dokumentov: instrumental’nyi resurs istorika [Ego-document analytics: The historian’s instrumental resource].

17. In N.A. Surzhikova (Ed.). Istoriia v ego-dokumentakh: Issledovaniia i istochniki (pp. 14–31). AsPUr. (In Russian).

18. Zelenina, G. S. (2018). Ognennyi vrag marranov: zhizn’ i smert’ pod nadzorom inkvizitsii [The fiery enemy of the Marranos: Life and death under the watchful eye of the Inquisition]. Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ. (In Russian).