コンテンツにスキップ

「利用者:Ordinary Fool/sandbox」の版間の差分

削除された内容 追加された内容
民族史en:Ethnohistory(2024年5月28日、Ffffrr)
1行目: 1行目:
{{Short description|Study of cultures and indigenous peoples customs}}
{{Infobox document
{{For|the journal|:en:Ethnohistory (journal)}}
| document_name = レーニンの遺書
{{人類学}}
| image = Без названия1 20230219110046.png
'''Ethnohistory''' is the study of cultures and [[:en:indigenous peoples]] customs by examining historical records as well as other sources of information on their lives and history. It is also the study of the history of various [[ethnic group]]s that may or may not still exist. The term is most commonly used in writing about the [[:en:history of the Americas]].
| caption =
| image2 = Без названия2 20230219110037.png
| caption2 = 1922年12月23日
| orig_lang_code = RU
| date_created = 1922年-1923年
| date_presented = 1924年1月
| writer = ウラジーミル・レーニン
| subject = ソビエト連邦の将来の指導部
}}
'''レーニンの遺書'''は1922年後半と1923年前半に[[ウラジーミル・レーニン]]により口述筆記された文書である。遺書でレーニンはソビエトの統治体への変更を提案した。迫り来る死期を感じながら[[ボリシェヴィキ]]指導部の[[グリゴリー・ジノヴィエフ|ジノヴィエフ]]や[[レフ・カーメネフ|カーメネフ]]、[[レフ・トロツキー|トロツキー]]、[[ニコライ・ブハーリン|ブハーリン]]、[[ゲオルギー・ピャタコフ|ピャタコフ]]、[[ヨシフ・スターリン|スターリン]]の批判も行った。防ぐ適切な手段が講じられなければトロツキーとスターリンの党内指導部で分裂が拡大する可能性があると警告した。追伸で[[ヨシフ・スターリン]]は[[ソビエト連邦共産党書記長|ロシア共産党中央委員会書記長]]の職から排除すべきと提案した。遺書の原本について歴史的な疑問はあるが、大方の意見は遺書はレーニンが書いたものであるというものである<ref name="Red Flag Wounded">{{cite book |last1=Suny |first1=Ronald |title=Red Flag Wounded |date=25 August 2020 |publisher=Verso Books |isbn=978-1-78873-074-7 |page=59 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=I4XzDwAAQBAJ&dq=Few+other+scholars+doubt+the+authorship+of+the+document,+which+accurately+reflected+Lenin%E2%80%99s+views,+nor+was+it+questioned+at+the+time+it+was+written+and+debated+in+high+party+circles.+Kotkin%E2%80%99s+interpretation,+fascinating+as+it+is,+relies+on+conjecture+rather+than+evidence&pg=PA59 |language=en}}</ref>。


Ethnohistory uses both historical and ethnographic data as its foundation. Its historical methods and materials go beyond the standard use of documents and manuscripts. Practitioners recognize the use of such source material as maps, music, paintings, photography, folklore, oral tradition, site exploration, archaeological materials, museum collections, enduring customs, language, and placenames.<ref name="Axtell1979">{{cite journal | last1 = Axtell | first1 = J. | year = 1979 | title = Ethnohistory: An Historian's Viewpoint | journal = Ethnohistory | volume = 26 | issue = 1| pages = 3–4 | doi=10.2307/481465| jstor = 481465 }}</ref>
==背景==
{{Multiple image
| total_width = 350
| image1 = Lenin in 1920 (cropped).jpg|thumb|Lenin in 1920|upright=0.80
| image2 = Trotsky Profile.jpg|Trotsky_Profile
| footer = レーニンとトロツキーは(共に1920年に撮影された){{仮リンク|レーニンの第1次・第2次政権|label=第1次ソビエト政権|en|Lenin's First and Second Government}}の指導的人物と見られた。
}}


== Historical development ==
[[聴覚過敏]]や[[不眠症]]、日常的な頭痛を患っていたレーニンの病状は1921年の後半までに深刻なものになっていた{{sfnm|1a1=Shub|1y=1966|1p=426|2a1=Lewin|2y=1969|2p=33|3a1=Rice|3y=1990|3p=187|4a1=Volkogonov|4y=1994|4p=409|5a1=Service|5y=2000|5p=435}}{{sfnm|1a1=Shub|1y=1966|1p=426|2a1=Rice|2y=1990|2p=187|3a1=Service|3y=2000|3p=435}}。政治局の強い勧めに応じて7月にモスクワを出て妻や姉妹の世話を受けるゴーリキーの邸宅に一か月間移動した{{sfnm|1a1=Service|1y=2000|1p=436|2a1=Read|2y=2005|2p=281|3a1=Rice|3y=1990|3p=187}}。レーニンは自殺の可能性を考え始め、[[シアン化カリウム]]を入手するようクルプスカヤとスターリンの二人に依頼した{{sfnm|1a1=Volkogonov|1y=1994|1pp=420, 425–426|2a1=Service|2y=2000|2p=439|3a1=Read|3y=2005|3pp=280, 282}}。医者が26人晩年のレーニンを助けるために雇われ、多くは外国人で、多額の費用をかけて雇われていた{{sfnm|1a1=Volkogonov|1y=1994|1p=443|2a1=Service|2y=2000|2p=437}}。一部は病気は1918年の暗殺未遂事件から身体に残っている[[弾丸]]の金属的[[酸化還元反応]]による可能性があると指摘し、1922年4月に弾丸除去の外科手術を受けた{{sfnm|1a1=Fischer|1y=1964|1pp=598–599|2a1=Shub|2y=1966|2p=426|3a1=Service|3y=2000|3p=443|4a1=White|4y=2001|4p=172|5a1=Read|5y=2005|5p=258}}。レーニンの医者は原因に確信が持てないまま症状はこの後も続き、一部は[[神経衰弱 (精神疾患)|神経衰弱]]や[[動脈硬化症]]を患っていると指摘した。1922年5月に最初の脳卒中を起こし、一時的に話す能力を失い右半身に麻痺が残った{{sfnm|1a1=Fischer|1y=1964|1p=600|2a1=Shub|2y=1966|2pp=426–427|3a1=Lewin|3y=1969|3p=33|4a1=Service|4y=2000|4p=443|5a1=White|5y=2001|5p=173|6a1=Read|6y=2005|6p=258}}。ゴーリキーで快方に向かい、7月までに概ね回復していた{{sfnm|1a1=Shub|1y=1966|1pp=427–428|2a1=Service|2y=2000|2p=446}}。10月にモスクワに戻り、12月に2回目の脳卒中を起こしゴーリキーに戻った{{sfnm|1a1=Fischer|1y=1964|1p=634|2a1=Shub|2y=1966|2pp=431–432|3a1=Lewin|3y=1969|3pp=33–34|4a1=White|4y=2001|4p=173}}。
[[File:Potters at work. The one on the right is a man in woman's garb (Itneg people, 1922).jpg|thumb|[[Itneg people|Itneg]] potters in northern [[Philippines]]. The person on the right is biologically male and is wearing women's clothes, a common practice in pre-colonial Philippines.]]
Scholars studying the history of [[Mexico]]'s indigenous have a long tradition, dating back to the colonial era; they used alphabetic texts and other sources to write the history of Mexico's indigenous peoples. The ''[[Handbook of Middle American Indians]]'', edited by archeologist [[Robert Wauchope (archaeologist)|Robert Wauchope]] was involved with creating a multiple volumes on [[Mesoamerican]] ethnohistory, published as ''Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources'', appearing in 1973.<ref>''Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources'', volumes 12-16, Howard F. Cline, general editor. Austin: University of Texas Press 1973.</ref> At the time that the volumes were published, "both the term 'ethnohistory' and its concepts in the sense used here have entered the literature rather recently and are not fully agreed upon."<ref>Howard F. Cline, "Introduction: Reflections on Ethnohistory" in ''Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources'', vol. 12, p. 3.</ref> The volumes were intended to be an inventory of sources "which in later hands could utilize to produce professionally acceptable ethnohistory."<ref>Cline, "Introduction: Reflections on Ethnohistory", p. 4.</ref>


In the mid to late 20th century, a number of ethnohistorians of Mexico began to systematically publish many colonial alphabetic texts in indigenous Mexican languages, in a branch of ethnohistory currently known as the [[New Philology (Latin America)|New Philology]]. That built on an earlier tradition of practitioners writing the [[history of Mexico]] that fully integrated the history of its indigenous peoples.<ref>James Lockhart, "[[Charles Gibson]] and the Ethnohistory of Postconquesst Central Mexico" in ''Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest Central Mexican History and Philology.'' Stanford University Press and UCLA Latin American Studies, vol. 76. 1991, p. 178</ref><ref>Restall, Matthew, "A History of the New Philology and the New Philology in History", ''Latin American Research Review'' - Volume 38, Number 1, 2003, pp.113–134</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=http://whp.uoregon.edu/Lockhart/index.html | title=Sources and Methods for the Study of Postconquest Mesoamerican Ethnohistory, Provisional Version, James Lockhart, Lisa Sousa, and Stephanie Wood, editors (2007)}}</ref>
レーニンの不在でスターリンは自分の支持者を要職に任命し{{sfnm|1a1=Shub|1y=1966|1pp=426, 434|2a1=Lewin|2y=1969|2pp=34–35}}レーニンの最も身近な親友であり後継者に相応しいという印象を深めることで{{sfn|Volkogonov|1994|pp=263–264}}権力固めを開始していた。1922年12月にスターリンはレーニンの養生計画を担当し、レーニンに接触する人を管理する仕事を政治局から任された{{sfnm|1a1=Lewin|1y=1969|1p=70|2a1=Rice|2y=1990|2p=191|3a1=Volkogonov|3y=1994|3pp=273, 416}}。


In the United States, the field arose out of the study of American Indian communities required by the [[Indian Claims Commission]]. It gained a pragmatic rather than a theoretical orientation, with practitioners testifying both for and against Indian claims. The emerging methodology used documentary historical sources and ethnographic methods. Among the scholars working on the cases was Latin Americanist [[Howard F. Cline]], who was commissioned to work on Florida Indians and [[Jicarilla Apache]] and [[Erminie Wheeler-Voegelin]], Director of the Great Lakes and Ohio Valley Research Project and founder of the American Society for Ethnohistory.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Newsroom |first=IU Bloomington |title=IU ethnohistory archives to bear name of pioneering researcher Wheeler-Voegelin: IU Bloomington Newsroom: Indiana University Bloomington |url=https://news.indiana.edu/releases/iu/2014/10/wheeler-voegelin-archives.shtml |access-date=2022-03-01 |website=news.indiana.edu |language=en |archive-date=2015-09-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904155533/http://news.indiana.edu/releases/iu/2014/10/wheeler-voegelin-archives.shtml |url-status=dead }}</ref>
レーニンは益々スターリンに批判的になり、レーニンが国家は1922年半ばに国際貿易で独占権を保持するよう強く要求していた一方で、スターリンは失敗に終わる反対行動で他のボリシェヴィキを率いていた{{sfnm|1a1=Fischer|1y=1964|1p=635|2a1=Lewin|2y=1969|2pp=35–40|3a1=Service|3y=2000|3pp=451–452|4a1=White|4y=2001|4p=173}}。二人の間で同様に議論が行われ、スターリンは自分の苛立ちを表す手紙をスターリンに送ったレーニンを大いに怒らせる電話でクルプスカヤを怒鳴りつけることでクルプスカヤを苛立たせた{{sfnm|1a1=Fischer|1y=1964|1pp=637–638, 669|2a1=Shub|2y=1966|2pp=435–436|3a1=Lewin|3y=1969|3pp=71, 85, 101|4a1=Volkogonov|4y=1994|4pp=273–274, 422–423|5a1=Service|5y=2000|5pp=463, 472–473|6a1=White|6y=2001|6pp=173, 176|7a1=Read|7y=2005|7p=279}}。


The field has also reached into [[Melanesia]], where recent European contact allowed researchers to observe the early postcontact period directly and to address important theoretical questions. [[Michael Harkin]] argues that ethnohistory was part of the general rapprochement between history and anthropology in the late 20th century.<ref>Michael E. Harkin, "Ethnohistory's Ethnohistory," ''Social Science History,'' Summer 2010, Vol. 34#2 pp 113-128</ref>
レーニンも妻に対する無礼を知ると1923年3月に書いた手紙でスターリンとの関係を断絶すると脅した<ref>{{cite web |title=Lenin: 813. TO COMRADE STALIN |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1923/mar/05.htm |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogovin |first1=Vadim Zakharovich |title=Was There an Alternative? Trotskyism: a Look Back Through the Years |date=1992 |publisher=Mehring Books |page=112}}</ref>。レーニンはスターリンが1920年から1922年まで監督していた{{仮リンク|労働者農民査察人民委員部|en|Rabkrin}}についても強い批判を表明した。「労働者農民査察人民委員部より悪い組織は誰も知らないし現状ではこの人民委員部から期待するものは何もないことを皆が知っている」と述べた<ref>{{cite web |title=Better Fewer, But Better |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1923/mar/02.htm |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogovin |first1=Vadim Zakharovich |title=Was There an Alternative? Trotskyism: a Look Back Through the Years |date=2021 |publisher=Mehring Books |isbn=978-1-893638-97-6 |page=78 |language=en}}</ref>。


Ethnohistory grew organically thanks to external nonscholarly pressures, without an overarching figure or conscious plan; even so, it came to engage central issues in cultural and historical analysis. Ethnohistorians take pride in using their special knowledge of specific groups, their linguistic insights, and their interpretation of cultural phenomena. They claim to achieve a more in-depth analysis than the average historian is capable of doing based solely on written documents produced by and for one group.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Lurie | first1 = N. | year = 1961 | title = Ethnohistory: An Ethnological Point of View | journal = Ethnohistory | volume = 8 | issue = 1| page = 83 | doi=10.2307/480349| jstor = 480349 }}</ref> They try to understand culture on its own terms and according to its own cultural code.<ref>{{cite journal | doi = 10.2307/482586 | last1 = DeMallie | first1 = Raymond J. | year = 1993 | title = These Have No Ears": Narrative and the Ethnohistorical Method | jstor = 482586| journal = Ethnohistory | volume = 40 | issue = 4| pages = 515–538}}</ref> Ethnohistory differs from other historically-related [[methodology|methodologies]] in that it embraces [[emic]] perspectives as tools of analysis. The field and its techniques are well suited for writing histories of [[Indigenous peoples of the Americas|Native American]] peoples because of its holistic and inclusive framework. It is especially important because of its ability to bridge differing frameworks and access a more informed context for interpretations of the past.
逆にレーニンは指導部からトロツキーを排除しようとする[[三頭政治]]による当初の考えに反感を示した。カーメネフに宛てて書いた1922年のメモで「トロツキーを船外に投げる」中央委員会による試みを「愚の骨頂で、君が私をもうどうしようもない愚か者と考えないならこの件についてどう考える?」と強く非難した<ref>{{cite book |last1=Swain |first1=Geoffrey |title=Trotsky and the Russian Revolution |date=24 February 2014 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-81278-4 |page=89 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_a3pAgAAQBAJ&dq=to+throw+trotsky+overboard+lenin&pg=PA89 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogovin |first1=Vadim Zakharovich |title=Was There an Alternative? Trotskyism: a Look Back Through the Years |date=2021 |publisher=Mehring Books |isbn=978-1-893638-97-6 |page=57 |language=en}}</ref>。


The definition of the field has become more refined over the years. Early on, ethnohistory differed from history proper in that it added a new dimension, specifically "the critical use of ethnological concepts and materials in the examination and use of historical source material," as described by [[William N. Fenton]].<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fenton | first1 = W. N. | year = 1966 | title = Field Work, Museum Studies, and Ethnohistorical Research | journal = Ethnohistory | volume = 13 | issue = 1/2| page = 75}}</ref> Later, [[James Axtell]] described ethnohistory as "the use of historical and ethnological methods to gain knowledge of the nature and causes of change in a culture defined by ethnological concepts and categories."<ref name="Axtell1979"/> Others have focused this basic concept on previously ignored historical actors. [[Ed Schieffelin]] asserted, for example, that ethnohistory must fundamentally take into account the people's own sense of how events are constituted, and their ways of culturally constructing the past.<ref>Schieffelin, E. and D. Gewertz (1985), ''History and Ethnohistory in Papua New Guinea'', 3</ref> Finally, Simmons formulated his understanding of ethnohistory as "a form of cultural biography that draws upon as many kinds of testimony as possible over as long a time period as the sources allow." He described ethnohistory as an endeavor based on a [[holistic]], [[wikt:diachronic|diachronic]] approach that is most rewarding when it can be "joined to the memories and voices of living people."<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Simmons | first1 = W. S. | year = 1988 | title = Culture Theory in Contemporary Ethnohistory | url = http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/2k09f06d| journal = Ethnohistory | volume = 35 | issue = 1| page = 10 | doi=10.2307/482430| jstor = 482430 | type = Submitted manuscript }}</ref>
様々な歴史家がトロツキーを[[政府の長]]として後継者にするつもりであった証拠として{{仮リンク|ソビエト連邦副首相|label=ソビエト連邦副議長|en|Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union}}にトロツキーを任命するレーニンの申し出を引用している<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Danilov |first1=Victor |last2=Porter |first2=Cathy |title=We Are Starting to Learn about Trotsky |journal=History Workshop |date=1990 |issue=29 |pages=136–146 |jstor=4288968 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4288968 |issn=0309-2984}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Daniels |first1=Robert V. |title=The Rise and Fall of Communism in Russia |date=1 October 2008 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-13493-3 |page=438 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=27JGzAoMLjoC&dq=Victor+Danilov+Trotsky&pg=PA438 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Bullock |first1=Alan |title=Hitler and Stalin : parallel lives |date=1991 |publisher=London : HarperCollins |isbn=978-0-00-215494-9 |page=163 |url=https://archive.org/details/hitlerstalinpara0000bull/page/132/mode/2up}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Deutscher |first1=Isaac |title=The prophet unarmed: Trotsky, 1921-1929 |date=1965 |publisher=New York, Vintage Books |isbn=978-0-394-70747-1 |page=135 |url=https://archive.org/details/prophetunarmed00isaa/page/134/mode/2up?q=promote+rykov+}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Dziewanowski |first1=M. K. |title=Russia in the twentieth century |date=2003 |publisher=Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Prentice Hall |isbn=978-0-13-097852-3 |page=162 |url=https://archive.org/details/russiaintwentiet0000dzie/page/162/mode/1up?view=theater}}</ref><ref>「トロツキーは政府内の十分な地位を得ながら政府内でナンバーツーになっているかもしれないが、断固としてレーニンの次官の地位を受け入れなかった。「党内の一般党員」に訴えるために戦うことを決めると、列車は既に出発していた。」{{cite book |last1=Antonov-Ovseenko |first1=Anton |title=The time of Stalin--portrait of a tyranny |date=1983 |publisher=New York : Harper & Row |isbn=978-0-06-039027-3 |page=24 |url=https://archive.org/details/timeofstalinport00anto/page/24/mode/2up?q=swearing}}</ref>。{{仮リンク|国民経済最高ソビエト|label=国民経済評議会|en|Supreme Soviet of the National Economy}}や[[ゴスプラン]]に関する責任を引き受けると思われていた<ref>{{cite book |last1=Getty |first1=J. Arch |title=Practicing Stalinism: Bolsheviks, Boyars, and the Persistence of Tradition |date=27 August 2013 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-16929-4 |page=53 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RaYzAAAAQBAJ&dq=Lenin+Trotsky+chairman+gosplan+1923&pg=PA53 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Douds |first1=Lara |title=Inside Lenin's Government: Ideology, Power and Practice in the Early Soviet State |date=22 August 2019 |publisher=Bloomsbury Academic |isbn=978-1-350-12649-7 |page=165 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Yf5aEAAAQBAJ&dq=on+lenin%27s+initiative+trotsky+deputy&pg=PA165 |language=en}}</ref>。歴史家[[シェイラ・フィッツパトリック]]によると[[人民委員会議]]の第一次官の地位を引き受けたらトロツキーはレーニンに相応しい後継者になっていたであろうしこの地位は党内のスターリンの拠点に対する制度上の拠点になっていたであろう<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Fitzpatrick |first1=Sheila |title=The Old Man |url=https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v32/n08/sheila-fitzpatrick/the-old-man |journal=London Review of Books |language=en |date=22 April 2010|volume=32 |issue=8 }}</ref>。


Reflecting upon the history of ethnohistory as research field in the US, Harkin has situated it within the broader context of convergences and divergences of the fields of history and anthropology and the special circumstances of American Indian land claims and legal history in North American in the mid-20th century.<ref>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1215/01455532-2009-022 | last1 = Harkin | first1 = Michael | year = 2010 | title = Ethnohistory's Ethnohistory: Creating a Discipline from the Ground Up | journal = Social Science History | volume = 34 | issue = 2| pages = 113–128| doi-broken-date = 2024-05-28 | s2cid = 257979216 }}</ref>
1922年にレーニンは党内で力を付ける[[ノーメンクラトゥーラ|官僚主義化]]と[[ヨシフ・スターリン]]の影響力に対抗して[[レフ・トロツキー]]と同盟した<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mccauley |first1=Martin |title=The Soviet Union 1917-1991 |date=4 February 2014 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-90179-2 |page=59 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7cbKAgAAQBAJ&dq=the+soviet+union+1917+1991+lenin+trotsky+bloc+1922&pg=PA59 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Deutscher |first1=Isaac |title=The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky 1921-1929 |date=2003 |publisher=Verso |isbn=978-1-85984-446-5 |page=63 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mgubj5z1XUcC&dq=lenin+trotsky+bloc+1922+stalin&pg=PA63 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Kort |first1=Michael G. |title=The Soviet Colossus: History and Aftermath |date=18 May 2015 |publisher=M.E. Sharpe |isbn=978-0-7656-2845-9 |page=166 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BHaWGEZA5zMC |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Volkogonov |first1=Dmitriĭ Antonovich |title=Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary |date=1996 |publisher=HarperCollins |isbn=978-0-00-255272-1 |page=242 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FdqOQgAACAAJ |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=V.L.Lenin |title="To L. D. Trotsky", 13 December 1922 |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/21.htm}}</ref>。全ての証拠が1923年の冬を使ってレーニンが{{仮リンク|第12回ロシア共産党大会 (ボリシェヴィキ)|label=第12回党大会|en|12th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks)}}でスターリンへの攻撃を開始する準備をしトロツキーにグルジア事件の責任をとらそうとしていたことを示している<ref>{{cite book |last1=Khlevniuk |first1=Oleg V. |title=Stalin: New Biography of a Dictator |date=19 May 2015 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-16694-1 |page=72 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Dy7CCAAAQBAJ&dq=attack+stalin+at+the+twelfth+party+congress&pg=PA72 |language=en}}</ref>。レーニンは欠席中にグルジアのボリシェヴィキを管理する手法について第12回党大会でスターリンと対峙するよう説得した<ref>{{cite book |last1=Patenaude |first1=Betrand |title="Trotsky and Trotskyism" in The Cambridge History of Communism: Volume 1, World Revolution and Socialism in One Country 1917–1941 |date=21 September 2017 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-21041-6 |page=199 |language=en}}</ref>。


Commenting on the possibilities for ethnohistory studies of traditional societies in Europe (such as Ireland), Guy Beiner observed that "pioneering figures in the development of ethnohistory … have argued that this approach could be fruitfully applied to the study of Western societies, but such initiatives have not picked up and very few explicitly designated ethnohistories of European communities have been written to date".<ref>Guy Beiner, [https://global.oup.com/academic/product/forgetful-remembrance-9780198749356? Forgetful Remembrance: Social Forgetting and Vernacular Historiography of a Rebellion in Ulster (Oxford University Press, 2018)], p.10.</ref>
1922年12月と1923年1月にレーニンは同志特にトロツキーとスターリンの個人的資質を論じている「レーニンの遺書」を口述筆記した{{sfnm|1a1=Fischer|1y=1964|1pp=638–639|2a1=Shub|2y=1966|2p=433|3a1=Lewin|3y=1969|3pp=73–75|4a1=Volkogonov|4y=1994|4p=417|5a1=Service|5y=2000|5p=464|6a1=White|6y=2001|6pp=173–174}}。速記した物に基づく遺書の最初のタイプされた物はスターリンの命令でレーニンの秘書M.A.ヴォロディチェヴァにより燃やされた<ref>{{cite book |title=Lenin and His Comrades: The Bolsheviks Take Over Russia 1917-1924 |date=26 October 2010 |publisher=Enigma Books |isbn=978-1-936274-15-4 |page=230 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xlHrXDnmOeQC&dq=Volodicheva+testament+burned&pg=PA230 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Service |first1=Robert |title=Lenin: A Biography |date=2000 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-00828-1 |page=467 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=frDGHIxc4EUC&dq=Volodicheva+testament+burned&pg=PA467 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Read |first1=Christopher |title=Lenin: A Revolutionary Life |date=11 January 2013 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-134-62471-3 |page=280 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UNkev4PJX5AC&dq=Volodicheva+testament+burned&pg=PA280 |language=en}}</ref> 。しかし他の4部の遺書は無事に保管された<ref>{{cite book |last1=White |first1=James D. |title=Lenin: The Practice and Theory of Revolution |date=14 March 2017 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-0-333-98537-3 |page=174 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_JNKEAAAQBAJ&dq=Volodicheva+testament+burned&pg=PA174 |language=en}}</ref>。


== See also ==
==文書の由来と信頼性==
*[[History]]
レーニンは1923年4月に開催される[[ソビエト連邦共産党]]の{{仮リンク|第12回ロシア共産党大会 (ボリシェヴィキ)|label=第12回党大会|en|12th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks)}}で遺書が読み上げられることを望んだ<ref name="CUPArchive">{{cite book|title=The New Cambridge Modern History, Volume XII|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LLg8AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA453|publisher=CUP Archive|page=453|id=GGKEY:Q5W2KNWHCQB}}</ref>。遺書は元々レーニンの私設秘書{{仮リンク|リディヤ・フォティエヴァ|en|Lydia Fotiyeva}}に口述筆記させたものであった<ref>{{Cite news |date=1975-08-29 |title=Lidiya Fotiyeva, 93, Secretary To Lenin After Revolution, Dies |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1975/08/29/archives/lidiya-fotiyeva-93-secretary-to-lenin-after-revolution-dies.html |access-date=2022-10-11 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>。しかし麻痺が残り話せなくなる1923年3月のレーニンの3回目の[[脳卒中]]の後でレーニンが徐々に回復することを望みながら遺書は妻[[ナデジダ・クルプスカヤ]]により非公開のままとなった。レーニンの姉妹{{仮リンク|マリヤ・イリイニチナ・ウリャーノヴァ|label=|en|Maria Ilyinichna Ulyanova}}が一部を所有する一方でクルプスカヤが4部を所有した。1924年1月21日にレーニンが死ぬとクルプスカヤは遺書を共産党[[中央委員会]][[ソ連共産党書記局|書記局]]に引き渡し1924年5月の{{仮リンク|第13回ロシア共産党大会 (ボリシェヴィキ)|label=第13回党大会|en|13th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks)}}の代表が見られるように依頼したのが唯一のことであった<ref>{{cite book |last=Sebesteyn |first=Victor |date=2017 |title=Lenin the Dictator |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0WCdCwAAQBAJ |publisher=Orion Publishing Group |isbn=9781474600460}}</ref><ref name=Felshtinsky>{{cite book | first1 = Yuri | last1 = Felshtinsky | first2 = Alexander | last2 = Litvinenko | author-link = Yuri Felshtinsky | author-link2= Alexander Litvinenko | title = Lenin and His Comrades: The Bolsheviks Take Over Russia 1917-1924 | publisher = Enigma Books| location = New York| isbn = 9781929631957| date = October 26, 2010}}</ref>。
*[[New Philology (Latin America)|New Philology]]
*[[Aztec codices]]
*[[Maya codices]]
*[[Ethnography]]
*[[Ethnic group]]
*[[Ethnoarchaeology]]
*[[Indian Claims Commission]]
*[[History of the Romani people]]


== References ==
編集された遺書が第15回党大会代表に制限された形で公開されて1927年12月に印刷された。広く遺書を公開することは全体として党に打撃を与えるとして公には印刷できないという党指導部内の合意により実らなかった。

The text of the testament and the fact of its concealment soon became known in the West, especially after the circumstances surrounding the controversy were described by [[:en:Max Eastman]] in ''Since Lenin Died'' (1925). The full English text of Lenin's testament was published as part of an article by Eastman that appeared in ''[[:en:The New York Times]]'' in 1926.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Eastman |first=Max |date=October 18, 1926 |title=Lenin's 'Testament' at Last Revealed |page=1 |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1926/10/18/archives/lenin-testament-at-last-revealed-letter-hidden-after-leaders-death.html |access-date=June 26, 2020}}</ref> In response to Eastman's article, Trotsky described the claim that the Central Committee concealed the testament as "pure slander".<ref name=eastman>{{Cite web |date=2022-07-22 |title=Leon Trotsky: Letter on Eastman's Book (1925) |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1925/07/lenin.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220722135207/https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1925/07/lenin.htm |archive-date=2022-07-22 |access-date=2022-07-22 }}</ref> Trotsky also rejected the characterization of the document as a "will", describing the document as one of Lenin's letters providing advice on organizational matters.<ref name=eastman/> Trotsky would later explain his decision during the [[:en:Dewey Commission]] hearing in 1937, in which he stated that Eastman had made the publication without his consent and pressure from the majority of the Politburo members had led him to disavow Eastman's publication.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=In Defence of Marxism |date=25 March 2019 |publisher=Wellred Publications |isbn=978-1-913026-03-5 |page=210 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=r52JwwEACAAJ |language=en}}</ref>

Historian [[:en:Stephen Kotkin]] argued that the evidence for Lenin's authorship of the Testament is weak and suggested that the Testament could have been created by Krupskaya.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kotkin |first=Stephen |year=2014 |title=Stalin: Paradoxes of Power, 1878–1928 |pages=473–505 |location=London |publisher=Allen Lane |isbn=978-0-7139-9944-0}}</ref> However, the Testament has been accepted as genuine by other historians, including [[:en:E. H. Carr]], [[:en:Isaac Deutscher]], [[:en:Dmitri Volkogonov]], [[:en:Vadim Rogovin]] and [[:en:Oleg Khlevniuk]],<ref>{{cite web|last=White|first=Fred|date=1 June 2015|url=https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/01/kot1-j01.html|title=A review of Stephen Kotkin's ''Stalin: Paradoxes of Power, 1878-1928''|access-date=29 January 2021|website=[[World Socialist Web Site]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|last=Gessen|first=Keith|url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/how-stalin-became-stalinist|title=How Stalin Became a Stalinist|date=30 October 2017|access-date=29 January 2021|magazine=[[The New Yorker]]}}</ref> and Kotkin's argument was specifically rejected by [[:en:Richard Pipes]].<ref>Richard Pipes, “The Cleverness of Joseph Stalin,” New York Review of Books, November 20, 2014.</ref> [[:en:Moshe Lewin]] cited the document as a representation of Lenin's views and argued that “the Soviet regime underwent a long period of “[[:en:Stalinism]]”, which in its basic features was diametrically opposed to the recommendations of the testament”.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lewin |first1=Moshe |title=Lenin's Last Struggle |date=4 May 2005 |publisher=University of Michigan Press |isbn=978-0-472-03052-1 |page=136 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iheBbViwVksC |language=en}}</ref>

Historian [[:en:Ronald Suny]] wrote that Kotkin's hypothesis lacked mainstream support in a review: <blockquote>"Few other scholars doubt the authorship of the document, which accurately reflected Lenin’s views, nor was it questioned at the time it was written and debated in high party circles. Kotkin’s interpretation, fascinating as it is, relies on conjecture rather than evidence".<ref name="Red Flag Wounded"/></blockquote>

A number of modern Russian historians, most notablly Valentin Sakharov author of the book “Political testament” of V. I. Lenin" express doubts about the authorship of Lenin, affirming that Krupskaya or even Leon Trotsky could be the true author of the letter, a view which is shared by historians Vladimir Ermakov and [[:en:Yuri Zhukov (historian)|Yuri Zhukov]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Сахаров |first=В. А. |date=2003 |title="Политическое завещание" В.И.Ленина: реальность истории и мифы политики |url=https://istina.msu.ru/publications/book/2090531/ |language=ru}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ermakov |first1=Vladimir |last2=Tyutyukin |first2=Stanislav |date=2005 |title=Продолжение споров вокруг "Политического завещания" В. И. Ленина четыре взгляда на одну книгу. |journal=[[Russian History (RAS journal)]] |pages=162–172}}</ref>

Conversely, historian [[:en:Mark Edele]] was critical of this hypothesis and argued that Kotkin "went as far as embracing the empirically shaky thesis that Lenin’s 'Testament' was a forgery. As one of his critics pointed out, this discredited position is otherwise embraced only by Russian [[:en:neo-Stalinism|neo-Stalinists]]".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Edele |first1=Mark |title=Debates on Stalinism |date=11 June 2020 |publisher=Manchester University Press |isbn=978-1-5261-4895-7 |pages=137–239 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1-rqDwAAQBAJ&dq=lenin+testament+forgery&pg=PT126 |language=en}}</ref>

Historian Hiroaki Kuromiya has attributed claims of a forgery to Russian historian Valentin Sakharov who argued that Lenin's entourage had forged some of the documents to discredit Stalin. However, Kuromiya stated that Sakharov's claim had "generated much controversy and little consensus".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul R. |last2=Naimark |first2=Norman |title=The Lost Politburo Transcripts: From Collective Rule to Stalin's Dictatorship |date=1 December 2008 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-15222-7 |page=43 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XRhVO07o_bEC |language=en}}</ref>

Historian [[:en:Peter Kenez]] believed that Trotsky could probably have removed Stalin with the use of Lenin's testament but he acquiesced to the collective decision not to publish the document.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kenez |first1=Peter |title=A History of the Soviet Union from the Beginning to the End |date=13 March 1999 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-31198-4 |page=77 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aIY9qb6iIEcC&dq=lenin+testament+collective+leadership+trotsky&pg=PA77 |language=en}}</ref>

Historian [[:en:Geoffrey Roberts]] stated that none of the Soviet figures questioned the authenticity of the document at the time. He noted that Stalin himself quoted the full passage of the testament and commented that "Indeed I am rude, Comrades, to those who rudely and perfidiously destroy and split the party. I have not hidden this, and still do not".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Roberts |first1=Geoffrey |title=Stalin's Library: A Dictator and his Books |date=8 February 2022 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-26559-0 |pages=62–64 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zYpaEAAAQBAJ&dq=Lenin+testament+authenticity&pg=PA63 |language=en}}</ref> Similarly, historian Roman Brackman stated that Krupskaya circulated copies of Lenin's testament to all the [[:en:Politburo]] members and noted that Stalin upon reading the Lenin's testament had "exploded with obscene swearing at Lenin in the presence of Kamenev and Zinoviev".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Brackman |first1=Roman |title=The Secret File of Joseph Stalin: A Hidden Life |date=23 November 2004 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-135-75840-0 |page=165 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PY2RAgAAQBAJ&dq=Trotsky+testament&pg=PA165 |language=en}}</ref><ref>“Lenin’s testament almost knocked Stalin out of the saddle, but cursing Lenin wouldn’t have helped matters”.{{cite book |last1=Antonov-Ovseenko |first1=Anton |title=The time of Stalin--portrait of a tyranny |date=1983 |publisher=New York : Harper & Row |isbn=978-0-06-039027-3 |page=22 |url=https://archive.org/details/timeofstalinport00anto/page/22/mode/2up?q=swearing}}</ref><ref>"Stalin threatened to produce another woman who would swear that she, not Krupskaya, was Lenin's true wife if she dared to publish Lenin's "Last testament". {{cite book |last1=Noonan |first1=Norma C. |last2=Nechemias |first2=Carol R. |title=Encyclopedia of Russian Women's Movements |date=30 September 2001 |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |isbn=978-0-313-30438-5 |page=150 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qk-ICsx5L90C&dq=stalin+swearing+lenin+testament&pg=PA150 |language=en}}</ref> Historian [[:en:Vadim Rogovin]] cited a letter written by Grigori Zinoviev between July and August 1923 which referenced Lenin's characterization of Stalin in the testament as "a thousand times correct". Rogovin also cited a published correspondence from Zinoviev and Bukharin which was addressed to Stalin and stated, "there exists a letter by V.I., in which he advised (the Twelfth Party Congress) not to elect you Secretary".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogovin |first1=Vadim Zakharovich |title=Was There an Alternative? Trotskyism: a Look Back Through the Years |date=2021 |publisher=Mehring Books |isbn=978-1-893638-97-6 |page=72 |language=en}}</ref> According to Stalin's secretary, [[:en:Boris Bazhanov]], Lenin "in general leaned towards a [[:en:Collective leadership in the Soviet Union|collegial leadership]], with Trotsky in the first position".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bazhanov |first1=Boris |last2=Doyle |first2=David W. |title=Bazhanov and the Damnation of Stalin |date=1990 |publisher=Ohio University Press |isbn=978-0-8214-0948-0 |page=62 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0_ANAQAAMAAJ |language=en}}</ref> Old Bolshevik and historian, [[:en:Vladimir Nevsky]], believed that Stalin was appointed the General Secretary because he used false rumors to convince Lenin that the party faced a split. Nevsky also claimed that Lenin would later deeply regret trusting Stalin and strove to correct this mistake with his "Testament".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogovin |first1=Vadim Zakharovich |title=Was There an Alternative? Trotskyism: a Look Back Through the Years |date=2021 |publisher=Mehring Books |isbn=978-1-893638-97-6 |page=47 |language=en}}</ref> According to Kuromiya, Stalin pleaded with the People's Commissar for Finance, [[:en:Grigory Sokolnikov]], not to discuss Lenin's testament at the [[:en:15th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)|15th party Congress]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kuromiya |first1=Hiroaki |title=Stalin |date=16 August 2013 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-86780-7 |page=68 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BRV4AAAAQBAJ&dq=Stalin+cunning&pg=PA70 |language=en}}</ref>

===Related documents===
This term is not to be confused with "Lenin's Political Testament", a term used in [[Leninism]] to refer to a set of letters and articles dictated by Lenin during his illness on how to continue the construction of the Soviet state. Traditionally, it includes the following works:
*''A Letter to a Congress'', "Письмо к съезду"
*''About Assigning of Legislative Functions to [[Gosplan]]'', "О придании законодательных функций Госплану"
*''To the "Nationalities Issue" or about "Autonomization"'', "К 'вопросу о национальностях' или об 'автономизации' "
*''Pages from the Diary'', "Странички из дневника"
*''About Cooperation'', "О кооперации"
*''About Our Revolution'', "О нашей революции"
*''How shall We Reorganise the [[Rabkrin]]'', "Как нам реорганизовать Рабкрин"
*''Better Less but Better'', "Лучше меньше, да лучше"

== Contents ==
The letter is a critique of the Soviet government as it then stood. It warned of dangers that he anticipated and made suggestions for the future. Some of those suggestions included increasing the size of the [[Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union|Party's Central Committee]], giving the [[Gosplan|State Planning Committee]] legislative powers and changing the nationalities policy, which had been implemented by Stalin.

Stalin and Trotsky were criticised:

{{blockquote|Comrade Stalin, having become Secretary-General, has unlimited authority concentrated in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution. Comrade Trotsky, on the other hand, as his struggle against the C.C. on the question of the People's Commissariat of Communications has already proved, is distinguished not only by outstanding ability. He is personally perhaps the most capable man in the present C.C., but he has displayed excessive self-assurance and shown excessive preoccupation with the purely administrative side of the work.

These two qualities of the two outstanding leaders of the present C.C. can inadvertently lead to a split, and if our Party does not take steps to avert this, the split may come unexpectedly.}}

Lenin felt that Stalin had more power than he could handle and might be dangerous if he was Lenin's successor. In a postscript written a few weeks later, Lenin recommended Stalin's removal from the position of [[General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union|General Secretary of the Party]]:

{{blockquote|Stalin is too coarse and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be a negligible detail. But I think that from the standpoint of safeguards against a split and from the standpoint of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky it is not a [minor] detail, but it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.}}

Marxist historian [[Ludo Martens]] argues that the postscript's complaints about Stalin's coarseness refers to a rebuke that Stalin had made to Krupskaya twelve days earlier.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Martens |first=Ludo |title=Another View of Stalin |publisher=Proles of the Round Table Edition |year=2019 |pages=24 |language=English}}</ref>

By power, Trotsky argued Lenin meant administrative power, rather than [http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/12/lenin.htm political influence], within the party. Trotsky pointed out that Lenin had effectively accused Stalin of a lack of loyalty.

In the 30 December 1922 article, ''Nationalities Issue'', Lenin criticized the actions of [[Felix Dzerzhinsky]], [[Grigoriy Ordzhonikidze]] and Stalin in the [[Georgian Affair]] by accusing them of "[[Great Russian chauvinism|Great Russian Chauvinism]]".

{{blockquote|I think that a fatal role was played here by hurry and the administrative impetuousness of Stalin and also his infatuation with the renowned "social-nationalism". Infatuation in politics generally and usually plays the worst role.}}

Lenin also criticised other Politburo members:

{{blockquote|[T]he October episode with [[Grigory Zinoviev|Zinoviev]] and [[Kamenev]] [their opposition to seizing power in October 1917] was, of course, no accident, but neither can the blame for it be laid upon them personally, any more than non-Bolshevism can upon Trotsky.}}

Finally, he criticised two younger Bolshevik leaders, [[Bukharin]] and [[Pyatakov]]:

{{blockquote|They are, in my opinion, the most outstanding figures (among the younger ones), and the following must be borne in mind about them: Bukharin is not only a most valuable and major theorist of the Party; he is also rightly considered the favorite of the whole Party, but his theoretical views can be classified as fully Marxist only with the great reserve, for there is something scholastic about him (he has never made a study of [[dialectic]]s, and, I think, never fully appreciated it).

As for [[Pyatakov]], he is unquestionably a man of outstanding will and outstanding ability, but shows far too much zeal for administrating and the administrative side of the work to be relied upon in a serious political matter.

Both of these remarks, of course, are made only for the present, on the assumption that both these outstanding and devoted Party workers fail to find an occasion to enhance their knowledge and amend their one-sidedness.}}

[[Isaac Deutscher]], a biographer of both Trotsky and Stalin, wrote that "the whole testament breathed uncertainty".<ref>Isaac Deutscher, "Stalin – a Political Biography", 2nd edition, 1967, English {{ISBN|978-0195002737}}, pp. 248–251</ref>

==Political impact and repercussions==
{{Expand section|date=February 2021}}

===Short term===
Lenin's testament presented the ruling [[triumvirate]] or [[list of Troikas in the Soviet Union|troika]] ([[Joseph Stalin]], [[Grigory Zinoviev]] and [[Lev Kamenev]]) with an uncomfortable dilemma. On the one hand, they would have preferred to suppress the testament since it was critical of all three of them as well as of their ally [[Nikolai Bukharin]] and their opponents, [[Leon Trotsky]] and [[Georgy Pyatakov]]. Although Lenin's comments were damaging to all of the communist leaders, [[Joseph Stalin]] stood to lose the most since the only practical suggestion in the testament was to remove him from the position of the General Secretary of the Party's Central Committee.<ref name=Felshtinsky/>

On the other hand, the leadership dared not go directly against Lenin's wishes so soon after his death, especially with his widow insisting on having them carried out. The leadership was also in the middle of a factional struggle over the control of the Party, the ruling [[political faction|faction]] being loosely allied groups that would soon part ways, which would have made a coverup difficult.

The final compromise proposed by the triumvirate at the Council of the Elders of the 13th Congress after Kamenev read out the text of the document was to make Lenin's testament available to the delegates on the following conditions (first made public [http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/12/lenin.htm in a pamphlet] by Trotsky published in 1934 and confirmed by documents released during and after [[glasnost]]):

* The testament would be read by representatives of the party leadership to each regional delegation separately.
* Taking notes would not be allowed.
* The testament would not be referred to during the plenary meeting of the Congress.

The proposal was adopted by a majority vote, over Krupskaya's objections. As a result, the testament did not have the effect that Lenin had hoped for, and Stalin retained his position as General Secretary, with the notable help of [[Aleksandr Petrovich Smirnov]], then [[Ministry of Agriculture and Food (Soviet Union)|People's Commissar of Agriculture]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/12/lenin.htm|title=Leon Trotsky: On Lenin's Testament (1932)|last=Trotsky|first=Leon|website=www.marxists.org|access-date=2017-08-09}}</ref>

According to Rogovin, Lenin's proposals for party reform such the elevation of the [[Central Control Commission of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union|Central Control Commission]] and [[Rabkrin]] were significantly watered down. Rogovin stated that the membership of the Central Committee increased by nearly ten times but two-thirds of those elected to Congress were local officials subject to party and state control.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogovin |first1=Vadim Zakharovich |title=Was There an Alternative? Trotskyism: a Look Back Through the Years |date=2021 |publisher=Mehring Books |isbn=978-1-893638-97-6 |page=132 |language=en}}</ref>

===Long term===
Failure to make the document more widely available within the party remained a point of contention during the struggle between the [[Left Opposition]] and the Stalin-Bukharin faction in 1924 to 1927. Under pressure from the opposition, Stalin had to read the testament again at the July 1926 Central Committee meeting.

Lenin's concerns over Stalin's harsh leadership and over a split between Trotsky and Stalin were later confirmed, with Trotsky being expelled from the Soviet Union by the Politburo in February 1929. He spent the rest of his life in exile, writing prolifically and engaging in open critique of [[Stalinism]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Beilharz |first=Peter |title=Trotsky, Trotskyism and the Transition to Socialism |publisher=Barnes & Noble |year=1987 |isbn=978-0-389-20698-9}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=McNeal |first=Robert H. |year=2015 |title=Trotsky's Interpretation of Stalin |journal=Canadian Slavonic Papers |volume=5 |pages=87–97 |doi=10.1080/00085006.1961.11417867}}</ref> In his later autobiography, ''[[My Life (Trotsky)|My Life]]'', Trotsky would view his "testament" as reflective of his wider struggle against [[nomenklatura|the bureaucratization of the party]]. He also maintained that Lenin had intended for him to be his successor as [[Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet Union|Chairman of the Soviet Union]] with his proposed appointment as deputy chairman.<ref name="Courier Corporation">{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=My Life: An Attempt at an Autobiography |date=5 April 2012 |publisher=Courier Corporation |isbn=978-0-486-12340-0 |page=479 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=F4fqc7eZbjUC&dq=as+would+allow+me+to+become+lenin%27s+deputy+and+as+he+intended+his+successor+to+the+post+of+chairman+of+the+soviet+of+people%27s+commissaries&pg=PA479 |language=en}}</ref> He explained that this process would have begun after their alliance in 1923 with the formation of a [[Central Control Commission of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union|commission]] to mitigate the growth of the [[bureaucracy|state bureaucracy]]. Trotsky maintained that this action would have facilitated the conditions for his succession in the party.<ref name="Courier Corporation"/>

In 1938 Trotsky and his supporters founded the [[Fourth International]] in opposition to Stalin's [[Communist International|Comintern]]. After surviving multiple attempts on his life, Trotsky was assassinated in August 1940 in [[Mexico City]] by [[Ramón Mercader]], an agent of the Soviet [[NKVD]]. [[Censorship in the Soviet Union|Written out of Soviet history books]] under Stalin, Trotsky was one of the few rivals of Stalin to not be [[Rehabilitation (Soviet)|rehabilitated]] by either [[Nikita Khrushchev]] or [[Mikhail Gorbachev]].{{sfn|Deutscher|2003b|p=vi}} Trotsky's rehabilitation came in June 2001 by the [[Russia|Russian Federation]].<ref>[http://memorial-nic.org/iofe/3.html В. В. Иофе. Осмысление Гулага.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110821184248/http://memorial-nic.org/iofe/3.html|date=21 August 2011}} НИЦ «Мемориал»</ref>

From the time that Stalin consolidated his position as the unquestioned leader of the Communist Party and the Soviet Union, in the late 1920s, all references to Lenin's testament were considered [[anti-Soviet agitation]] and punishable as such. The denial of the existence of Lenin's testament remained one of the cornerstones of [[historiography in the Soviet Union]] until Stalin's death on March 5, 1953. After [[Nikita Khrushchev]]'s [[On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences]], at the [[20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union|20th Congress of the Communist Party]], in 1956, the document was finally published officially by the Soviet government.

==References==
===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}
{{Reflist}}


===Works cited===
== ==
*Adams, Richard N. "Ethnohistoric research methods: Some Latin American features." ''Anthropological Linguistics'' 9, (1962) 179-205.
{{refbegin|2}}
*[[Ignacio Bernal|Bernal, Ignacio]]. "Archeology and written sources.". 34th International Congress of Americanists (Vienna, 1966). ''Acta'' pp.&nbsp;219–25.
* {{cite book |last=Deutscher |first=Isaac |title=Trotsky: The Prophet Unarmed |year=2003b |orig-year=1959 |publisher=Verso Books |isbn=978-1-85984-446-5}}
*Carrasco, Pedro. "La etnohistoria en Meso-américa." 36th International Congress of Americanists (Barcelona, 1964). ''Acta'' 2, 109-10.
* {{cite book |title=The Life of Lenin |last=Fischer |first=Louis |author-link=Louis Fischer |year=1964 |publisher=Weidenfeld and Nicolson |location=London |url=https://archive.org/details/lifeofleninfischer}}
*[[Howard F. Cline|Cline, Howard F.]] "Introduction: Reflections on Ethnohistory" in ''Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, Part 1'', vol. 12. pp.&nbsp;3–17. Austin: University of Texas Press 1973.
* {{cite book |last=Lewin |first=Moshe |title=Lenin's Last Struggle |author-link=Moshe Lewin |year=1969 |publisher=Faber and Faber |location=London |translator-last=Sheridan Smith |translator-first=A. M. |translator-link=Alan Sheridan}}
*Fenton, W.N. "The training of historical ethnologists in America." ''American Anthropologist'' 54(1952) 328-39.
* {{cite book |last=Read |first=Christopher |title=Lenin: A Revolutionary Life |year=2005 |series=Routledge Historical Biographies |publisher=Routledge |location=London |isbn=978-0-415-20649-5}}
*Gunnerson, J.H. "A survey of ethnohistoric sources." ''Kroeber Anthr. Soc. Papers'' 1958, 49-65.
* {{cite book |last=Rice |first=Christopher |title=Lenin: Portrait of a Professional Revolutionary |year=1990 |publisher=Cassell |location=London |isbn=978-0-304-31814-8}}
*[[James Lockhart (historian)|Lockhart, James]] "[[Charles Gibson (historian)|Charles Gibson]] and the Ethnohistory of Postconquesst Central Mexico" in ''Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest Central Mexican History and Philology''. Stanford University Press and UCLA Latin American Studies, vol. 76. 1991
* {{cite book |last=Shub |first=David |title=Lenin: A Biography |edition=revised |author-link=David Shub |publisher=Pelican |location=London |year=1966 |url=https://archive.org/details/leninbiographyshub}}
*Sturtevant, W.C. "Anthropology, history, and ethnohistory." ''Ethnohistory'' 13(1966) 1-51.
* {{cite book |last=Volkogonov |first=Dmitri |title=Lenin: Life and Legacy |author-link=Dmitri Volkogonov |year=1994 |translator-last=Shukman |translator-first=Harold |translator-link=Harold Shukman |publisher=HarperCollins |location=London |isbn=978-0-00-255123-6}}
*Vogelin, E.W. "An ethnohistorian's viewpoint" ''The Bulletin of the Ohio Valley historic Indian conference'', 1 (1954):166-71.
* {{cite book |last=White |first=James D. |title=Lenin: The Practice and Theory of Revolution |year=2001 |series=European History in Perspective |publisher=Palgrave |location=Basingstoke, England |isbn=978-0-333-72157-5}}
{{refend}}

===Bibliography===
'''Journals'''
* {{cite journal |first=Lars T. |last=Lih |title=Political Testament of Lenin and Bukharin and the Meaning of NEP |journal=Slavic Review |year=1991 |volume=50 |issue=2 |pages=241–252 |issn=2325-7784 |doi=10.2307/2500200 |jstor=2500200 |s2cid=147234935 }}
'''Newspapers'''
* {{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1925/07/12/archives/lenin-betrayed-by-his-party-his-testament-praising-trotsky-and.html |title=Lenin Betrayed By His Party; His "Testament," Praising Trotsky and Attacking Stalin-Zinovieff Group, Was Suppressed |first=J. Donald |last=Adams |work=New York Times |date=July 12, 1925 }}
* {{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1927/11/03/archives/stalin-and-trotsky-in-furious-debate-true-i-am-harsh-cries-the.html |title=Stalin and Trotsky in Furious Debate |first=Walter |last=Duranty |work=New York Times |date=November 3, 1927 }}


==External links==
==External links==
*[http://ethnohistory.org American Society for Ethnohistory]
*[http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/index.htm Lenin's Last Testament (text)]
*[https://ethnohistory.verbix.com/ Ethnohistory Map of Tribes in Europe]
*[http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/12/lenin.htm On the suppressed Testament of Lenin] by Leon Trotsky (written in December 1932, published in 1934, sometimes incorrectly dated as 1926)


{{Vladimir Lenin}}
{{}}
{{Leon Trotsky}}
{{Joseph Stalin}}
{{Authority control}}
{{Authority control}}


[[Category:1922 documents]]
[[Category: ]]
[[Category:1923 documents]]
[[Category:]]
[[Category:Documents of the Soviet Union]]
[[Category:]]
[[Category:Wills and testaments by person|Lenin]]
[[Category:]]
[[Category:Works by Vladimir Lenin]]
[[Category: ]]


[[レーニンの遺書]]:[[:en: Lenin's Testament]](2024年418日、I dream of horses)
[[]]:[[:en:]](2024年月日、

2024年6月11日 (火) 21:25時点における版

Ethnohistory is the study of cultures and en:indigenous peoples customs by examining historical records as well as other sources of information on their lives and history. It is also the study of the history of various ethnic groups that may or may not still exist. The term is most commonly used in writing about the en:history of the Americas.

Ethnohistory uses both historical and ethnographic data as its foundation. Its historical methods and materials go beyond the standard use of documents and manuscripts. Practitioners recognize the use of such source material as maps, music, paintings, photography, folklore, oral tradition, site exploration, archaeological materials, museum collections, enduring customs, language, and placenames.[1]

Historical development

Itneg potters in northern Philippines. The person on the right is biologically male and is wearing women's clothes, a common practice in pre-colonial Philippines.

Scholars studying the history of Mexico's indigenous have a long tradition, dating back to the colonial era; they used alphabetic texts and other sources to write the history of Mexico's indigenous peoples. The Handbook of Middle American Indians, edited by archeologist Robert Wauchope was involved with creating a multiple volumes on Mesoamerican ethnohistory, published as Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, appearing in 1973.[2] At the time that the volumes were published, "both the term 'ethnohistory' and its concepts in the sense used here have entered the literature rather recently and are not fully agreed upon."[3] The volumes were intended to be an inventory of sources "which in later hands could utilize to produce professionally acceptable ethnohistory."[4]

In the mid to late 20th century, a number of ethnohistorians of Mexico began to systematically publish many colonial alphabetic texts in indigenous Mexican languages, in a branch of ethnohistory currently known as the New Philology. That built on an earlier tradition of practitioners writing the history of Mexico that fully integrated the history of its indigenous peoples.[5][6][7]

In the United States, the field arose out of the study of American Indian communities required by the Indian Claims Commission. It gained a pragmatic rather than a theoretical orientation, with practitioners testifying both for and against Indian claims. The emerging methodology used documentary historical sources and ethnographic methods. Among the scholars working on the cases was Latin Americanist Howard F. Cline, who was commissioned to work on Florida Indians and Jicarilla Apache and Erminie Wheeler-Voegelin, Director of the Great Lakes and Ohio Valley Research Project and founder of the American Society for Ethnohistory.[8]

The field has also reached into Melanesia, where recent European contact allowed researchers to observe the early postcontact period directly and to address important theoretical questions. Michael Harkin argues that ethnohistory was part of the general rapprochement between history and anthropology in the late 20th century.[9]

Ethnohistory grew organically thanks to external nonscholarly pressures, without an overarching figure or conscious plan; even so, it came to engage central issues in cultural and historical analysis. Ethnohistorians take pride in using their special knowledge of specific groups, their linguistic insights, and their interpretation of cultural phenomena. They claim to achieve a more in-depth analysis than the average historian is capable of doing based solely on written documents produced by and for one group.[10] They try to understand culture on its own terms and according to its own cultural code.[11] Ethnohistory differs from other historically-related methodologies in that it embraces emic perspectives as tools of analysis. The field and its techniques are well suited for writing histories of Native American peoples because of its holistic and inclusive framework. It is especially important because of its ability to bridge differing frameworks and access a more informed context for interpretations of the past.

The definition of the field has become more refined over the years. Early on, ethnohistory differed from history proper in that it added a new dimension, specifically "the critical use of ethnological concepts and materials in the examination and use of historical source material," as described by William N. Fenton.[12] Later, James Axtell described ethnohistory as "the use of historical and ethnological methods to gain knowledge of the nature and causes of change in a culture defined by ethnological concepts and categories."[1] Others have focused this basic concept on previously ignored historical actors. Ed Schieffelin asserted, for example, that ethnohistory must fundamentally take into account the people's own sense of how events are constituted, and their ways of culturally constructing the past.[13] Finally, Simmons formulated his understanding of ethnohistory as "a form of cultural biography that draws upon as many kinds of testimony as possible over as long a time period as the sources allow." He described ethnohistory as an endeavor based on a holistic, diachronic approach that is most rewarding when it can be "joined to the memories and voices of living people."[14]

Reflecting upon the history of ethnohistory as research field in the US, Harkin has situated it within the broader context of convergences and divergences of the fields of history and anthropology and the special circumstances of American Indian land claims and legal history in North American in the mid-20th century.[15]

Commenting on the possibilities for ethnohistory studies of traditional societies in Europe (such as Ireland), Guy Beiner observed that "pioneering figures in the development of ethnohistory … have argued that this approach could be fruitfully applied to the study of Western societies, but such initiatives have not picked up and very few explicitly designated ethnohistories of European communities have been written to date".[16]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Axtell, J. (1979). “Ethnohistory: An Historian's Viewpoint”. Ethnohistory 26 (1): 3–4. doi:10.2307/481465. JSTOR 481465. 
  2. ^ Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, volumes 12-16, Howard F. Cline, general editor. Austin: University of Texas Press 1973.
  3. ^ Howard F. Cline, "Introduction: Reflections on Ethnohistory" in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, vol. 12, p. 3.
  4. ^ Cline, "Introduction: Reflections on Ethnohistory", p. 4.
  5. ^ James Lockhart, "Charles Gibson and the Ethnohistory of Postconquesst Central Mexico" in Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest Central Mexican History and Philology. Stanford University Press and UCLA Latin American Studies, vol. 76. 1991, p. 178
  6. ^ Restall, Matthew, "A History of the New Philology and the New Philology in History", Latin American Research Review - Volume 38, Number 1, 2003, pp.113–134
  7. ^ Sources and Methods for the Study of Postconquest Mesoamerican Ethnohistory, Provisional Version, James Lockhart, Lisa Sousa, and Stephanie Wood, editors (2007)”. Template:Cite webの呼び出しエラー:引数 accessdate は必須です。
  8. ^ Newsroom, IU Bloomington. “IU ethnohistory archives to bear name of pioneering researcher Wheeler-Voegelin: IU Bloomington Newsroom: Indiana University Bloomington” (英語). news.indiana.edu. 2015年9月4日時点のオリジナルよりアーカイブ。2022年3月1日閲覧。
  9. ^ Michael E. Harkin, "Ethnohistory's Ethnohistory," Social Science History, Summer 2010, Vol. 34#2 pp 113-128
  10. ^ Lurie, N. (1961). “Ethnohistory: An Ethnological Point of View”. Ethnohistory 8 (1): 83. doi:10.2307/480349. JSTOR 480349. 
  11. ^ DeMallie, Raymond J. (1993). “These Have No Ears": Narrative and the Ethnohistorical Method”. Ethnohistory 40 (4): 515–538. doi:10.2307/482586. JSTOR 482586. 
  12. ^ Fenton, W. N. (1966). “Field Work, Museum Studies, and Ethnohistorical Research”. Ethnohistory 13 (1/2): 75. 
  13. ^ Schieffelin, E. and D. Gewertz (1985), History and Ethnohistory in Papua New Guinea, 3
  14. ^ Simmons, W. S. (1988). “Culture Theory in Contemporary Ethnohistory”. Ethnohistory 35 (1): 10. doi:10.2307/482430. JSTOR 482430. http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/2k09f06d. 
  15. ^ Harkin, Michael (2010). “Ethnohistory's Ethnohistory: Creating a Discipline from the Ground Up”. Social Science History 34 (2): 113–128. doi:10.1215/01455532-2009-022. 
  16. ^ Guy Beiner, Forgetful Remembrance: Social Forgetting and Vernacular Historiography of a Rebellion in Ulster (Oxford University Press, 2018), p.10.

Further reading

  • Adams, Richard N. "Ethnohistoric research methods: Some Latin American features." Anthropological Linguistics 9, (1962) 179-205.
  • Bernal, Ignacio. "Archeology and written sources.". 34th International Congress of Americanists (Vienna, 1966). Acta pp. 219–25.
  • Carrasco, Pedro. "La etnohistoria en Meso-américa." 36th International Congress of Americanists (Barcelona, 1964). Acta 2, 109-10.
  • Cline, Howard F. "Introduction: Reflections on Ethnohistory" in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, Part 1, vol. 12. pp. 3–17. Austin: University of Texas Press 1973.
  • Fenton, W.N. "The training of historical ethnologists in America." American Anthropologist 54(1952) 328-39.
  • Gunnerson, J.H. "A survey of ethnohistoric sources." Kroeber Anthr. Soc. Papers 1958, 49-65.
  • Lockhart, James "Charles Gibson and the Ethnohistory of Postconquesst Central Mexico" in Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest Central Mexican History and Philology. Stanford University Press and UCLA Latin American Studies, vol. 76. 1991
  • Sturtevant, W.C. "Anthropology, history, and ethnohistory." Ethnohistory 13(1966) 1-51.
  • Vogelin, E.W. "An ethnohistorian's viewpoint" The Bulletin of the Ohio Valley historic Indian conference, 1 (1954):166-71.

Template:Ethnicity

民族史en:Ethnohistory(2024年5月28日、Ffffrr)