The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography
When researching and writing the history of the Holocaust, it is crucial not only to select (and match the topic and approach) the main primary sources, but also to find an adequate critical relationship with them. In the case of the historiography of the beginning of the Holocaust (which is also t...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Vilnius University Press
2023-12-01
|
| Series: | Lietuvos Istorijos Studijos |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/lietuvos-istorijos-studijos/article/view/33913 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1823857948907012096 |
|---|---|
| author | Nerijus Šepetys |
| author_facet | Nerijus Šepetys |
| author_sort | Nerijus Šepetys |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
When researching and writing the history of the Holocaust, it is crucial not only to select (and match the topic and approach) the main primary sources, but also to find an adequate critical relationship with them. In the case of the historiography of the beginning of the Holocaust (which is also the beginning of the Holocaust in Lithuania), at least in the twenty-first century, such a relationship is often a challenge for the researcher: there is a tendency to automatically rely on, or to question, particular groups of sources (according to origin). This also leads to serious problems in understanding history, some of which the paper attempts to address. For example, how is the possibility of such an understanding disrupted when reliance is placed on specific (accidental) primary sources without questioning the setting and meaning of their origins and ignoring others? Or what is the picture of history that emerges when the attempts to apply both the attitudes of primordial trust and primitive questioning to subjective sources are uncontrolled? Finally, what are the implications of ignoring primary sources for the historical understanding of Holocaust situations, first of all the “pinning down” of testimonies, and then the subsequent processing (writing them down, reworking them, making them up, swiping them)? Importantly, these are questions not only of today’s historical scholarship, but of the Jewish scholars who survived the Catastrophe immediately after the war.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-fb035f1b02464740acf26d3aa39bc799 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1392-0448 1648-9101 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-12-01 |
| publisher | Vilnius University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Lietuvos Istorijos Studijos |
| spelling | doaj-art-fb035f1b02464740acf26d3aa39bc7992025-02-11T18:10:50ZengVilnius University PressLietuvos Istorijos Studijos1392-04481648-91012023-12-015210.15388/LIS.2023.52.5The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust HistoriographyNerijus Šepetys0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2982-1406Vilnius University, Lithuania When researching and writing the history of the Holocaust, it is crucial not only to select (and match the topic and approach) the main primary sources, but also to find an adequate critical relationship with them. In the case of the historiography of the beginning of the Holocaust (which is also the beginning of the Holocaust in Lithuania), at least in the twenty-first century, such a relationship is often a challenge for the researcher: there is a tendency to automatically rely on, or to question, particular groups of sources (according to origin). This also leads to serious problems in understanding history, some of which the paper attempts to address. For example, how is the possibility of such an understanding disrupted when reliance is placed on specific (accidental) primary sources without questioning the setting and meaning of their origins and ignoring others? Or what is the picture of history that emerges when the attempts to apply both the attitudes of primordial trust and primitive questioning to subjective sources are uncontrolled? Finally, what are the implications of ignoring primary sources for the historical understanding of Holocaust situations, first of all the “pinning down” of testimonies, and then the subsequent processing (writing them down, reworking them, making them up, swiping them)? Importantly, these are questions not only of today’s historical scholarship, but of the Jewish scholars who survived the Catastrophe immediately after the war. https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/lietuvos-istorijos-studijos/article/view/33913Holocaustsource criticismdocumentstestimonieshistoriographyunderstanding |
| spellingShingle | Nerijus Šepetys The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography Lietuvos Istorijos Studijos Holocaust source criticism documents testimonies historiography understanding |
| title | The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography |
| title_full | The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography |
| title_fullStr | The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography |
| title_short | The Historian and the Source: Some Contemporary Problems in Holocaust Historiography |
| title_sort | historian and the source some contemporary problems in holocaust historiography |
| topic | Holocaust source criticism documents testimonies historiography understanding |
| url | https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/lietuvos-istorijos-studijos/article/view/33913 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nerijussepetys thehistorianandthesourcesomecontemporaryproblemsinholocausthistoriography AT nerijussepetys historianandthesourcesomecontemporaryproblemsinholocausthistoriography |