Letters of Historians of the 2nd Half of the 20th Century as a Channel of Scholarly and Business Communications (Based on Letters from Siberia to the Capital)

The article analyzes the letters of specialists in Russian history of the 17^th – 19^th centuries who sent correspondences to their colleagues in Moscow. The reason these letters are being analyzed is because, due to the distance and communication methods available at the time, correspondence was the main way for Siberian scholars to communicate with the representatives of the important scientific centers, to stay updated on the latest research trends and discoveries. During this era, authors were comparatively unrestricted in their statements, and their internal and external interactions were diverse and significant. Historians from Siberia and Moscow used to correspond on scientific and organizational matters through letters. The topics of discussions included participation in scientific conferences, invitations, opportunities for business trips, publications, cooperation, and reviews. The scholars shared their professional thoughts, ideas, and plans, characterized the sources they found and analyzed, expressed hypotheses and explained preliminary conclusions, reported the outcomes of research, and sometimes talked about the progress in their research projects and the development in their understanding of scientific problems. The letters often described events in the scientific careers of the authors. The content and emotional tone of the correspondence were significantly influenced by the author's character and relationship with the addressee. The letters often contained information of both scientific and personal nature. Sometimes, Siberian scientists requested assistance and help from their colleagues from the capital. The article concludes that letters were a reliable and effective communication channel among the professional community of historians. They were used to convey scientific, business, and occasionally personal information. The recipients of these letters were typically scholars from Moscow who were older in age and higher in status. As a reference group, they played a significant role in determining the specifics of the letters addressed to them.

1. Bukhert V. G. Predislovie [Preface]. In: Professor Basharin: perepiska s istorikami (1943–1989 gg.) [Professor Basharin: Correspondence with Historians (1943–1989)]. 2nd ed., exp. Yakutsk, Aiar Publ., 2022, pp. 4–8. (in Russ.)

2. Chistyakova E. V. Formirovanie novykh printsipov istoricheskogo povestvovaniya [Formation of New Principles of Historical Narration]. In: Russkaya literatura na rubezhe dvukh epokh (XVII – nachalo XVIII v.) [Russian Literature at the Turn of Two Eras (17th – Early 18th Century)]. Moscow, 1971, pp. 171–184. (in Russ.)

3. Druzhinin N. M. (chief ed.). Krest’yanskoe dvizhenie v Rossii v XIX – nachale XX veka [Peasant Movement in Russia in the 19th – Early 20th Century]. Moscow, Sotsekgiz Publ., 1959, 882 p. (in Russ.)

4. Gromyko M. M. Zapadnaya Sibir’ v XVIII v. Russkoe naselenie i zemledel’cheskoe osvoenie [Western Siberia in the 18th Century. Russian Population and Agricultural Development]. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1965, 267 p. (in Russ.)

5. Gromyko M. M. Trudovye traditsii russkikh krest’yan Sibiri (XVIII – pervaya polovina XIX veka) [Labor Traditions of the Russian Peasants of Siberia (the 18th – 1 st Half of the 19th Century]. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1975, 351 p. (in Russ.)

6. Istoriografiya gorodov Sibiri kontsa XVI – nachala XX v. [Historiography of Siberian Cities at the End of the 16th – Beginning of the 20th Century]. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1984, 179 p. (in Russ.)

7. Korzun V. P. Professiya kak zhizn’. Pis’ma deistvitel’nogo chlena AN SSSR N. M. Druzhinina i chlena-korrespondenta AN SSSR (RAN) E. I. Druzhininoi [Vocation as Life. The Letters of Full Member of the Academy of Sciences of USSR N. M. Druzhinin and Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of USSR (RAS) E. I. Druzhinina]. Istoricheskii arkhiv [Historical Archive], 2019, no. 2, pp. 194–197. (in Russ.)

8. Korzun V. P., Mamontova M. A., Sveshnikov A. V. Istorik v sobstvennykh pis’makh: zerkalo ili mir zazerkal’ya? (Neskol’ko zamechanii o spetsifike pisem russkikh istorikov XIX–XX vekov v kachestve istoriograficheskogo istochnika) [A Historian in His Own Letters: A Mirror or a World through the Looking Glass? (A Few Comments about the Specifics of Letters of Russian Historians of the 19th – 20th Centuries as a Historiographic Source)]. In: Pis’ma russkikh istorikov (S. F. Platonov, P. N. Milyukov) [Letters of Russian Historians (S. F. Platonov, P. N. Milyukov)]. Omsk, 2003, pp. 3–36. (in Russ.)

9. Kuchina T. G. K voprosu ob izuchenii evolyutsii epistolyarnykh istochnikov vtoroi poloviny XIX – nachala XX v. [On the Study of the Epistolary Sources Evolution in the 2nd Half of the 19th and the Beginning of the 20th Century]. In: Problemy istochnikovedeniya istorii SSSR i spetsial’nykh istoricheskikh distsiplin: Stat’i i materialy [Problems of Source Studies in the History of the USSR and Special Historical Disciplines: Articles and Materials]. Moscow, 1984, pp. 40–48. (in Russ.)

10. Matkhanova N. P. Vysshaya administratsiya Vostochnoi Sibiri v seredine XIX v.: problemy sotsial’noi stratifikatsii [Higher Administration of Eastern Siberia in the Middle of the 19th Century: Problems of Social Stratification]. Novosibirsk, Sibirskii khronograf Publ., 2002, 250 p. (in Russ.)

11. Mitrofanov V. V. Spornye problemy istorii Sibiri v otzyve S. V. Bahrushina na dissertatsiyu Z. Ya. Boyarshinovoi [Controversial Issues of the History of Siberia in S. V. Bakhrushin’s Feedback on Z. Ya. Boyarshinova’s Thesis]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin], 2016, no. 9 (174), pp. 71–78. (in Russ.)

12. Pokrovsky N. N. Biografiya orenburgskogo kazaka [Biography of the Orenburg Cossack]. In: Issledovaniya po istorii obshchestvennogo soznaniya epokhi feodalizma v Rossii [Research on the History of Social Consciousness in the Era of Feudalism in Russia]. Novosibirsk, 1984, pp. 103–130. (in Russ.)

13. Pokrovsky N. N. Pamyatniki literatury i obshchestvennoi mysli epokhi feodalizma [Literature and Social Thought’s Materials of the Era of Feudalism]. Novosibirsk, 1985, pp. 135–163. (in Russ.)

14. Redin D. A. Russkaya administrativnaya istoriya Novogo vremeni i neofitsial’naya perepiska: istochnikovedcheskie razmyshleniya [Russian Administrative History of the Modern Times and Unofficial Correspondence: Source Analysis]. Novoe proshloe [The New Past], 2019, no. 3, pр. 116–127. (in Russ.)

15. Rezun D. Ya. Gorodovye letopisi kak istochnik po istorii sotsial’noi bor’by i kul’tury gorodov Sibiri XVII – nachala XVIII v. [City Chronicles as a Source on the History of Social Struggle and Culture of Siberian Cities in the 17th – Early 18th Century] In: Istochniki po kul’ture i klassovoi bor’be feodal’nogo perioda [Sources on Culture and Class Struggle during the Feudal Period]. Novosibirsk, 1982, pp. 17–47. (in Russ.)

16. Rezun D. Ya. Ocherki istorii izucheniya sibirskogo goroda kontsa XVI – pervoi poloviny XVIII veka [Essays on the History of Studying the Siberian City in the Late 16th to the 1st Half of the 18th Century]. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1982, 220 p. (in Russ.)

17. Sidorova L. A. B. A. Romanov i E. N. Kusheva v 1951 godu: nezavershennyi spor istorikov [B. A. Romanov and E. N. Kusheva in 1951: An Unfinished Dispute among Historians]. Rossiiskaya istoriya [Russian History], 2013, no. 2, pp. 155–170. (in Russ.)

18. Shmidt S. O. Pamyati uchitelya (Materialy k nauchnoi biografii M. N. Tikhomirova) [In Memory of Teacher (Materials for the Scientific Biography of M. N. Tikhomirov)]. In: Arkheograficheskii ezhegodnik za 1965 god [Archaeographic Yearbook for 1965]. Moscow, 1966, pp. 7– 30. (in Russ.)