Holodomor oral history: to question of interpretation of historical source

Abstract

The goal of the research. The article aims to elaborate instruments of correlation between documents and oral history sources that deal with the Holodomor. Using contemporary approaches toward theoretical foundation of oral history, to apply them toward the Holodomor oral history from the point of view of their credibility and validity. Methodology. The research uses historical-comparativist approach that allowed separating common and distinctive features of documents and oral history sources in general and in particular (regarding the Holodomor). Also, method of deduction is used as a way to divide general (features of oral history in general) to parts (features of the Holodomor oral history). Scientific novelty. The article reveals strong and weak sides of the Holodomor oral history as a historical source. It shows that existing shortcomings, providing source criticism, like with any other historical source, can me minimized. Using examples of the Holocaust, Rwanda genocide and the Holodomor in Ukraine, the author analyzes their differences, suggests comparative characteristics of using oral history as information that has evidentiary value. Conclusions. The Soviet regime had destroyed part of official documentation, chronologically connected to 1930s. That is why oral history is irreplaceable for further research of the Holodomor and for overcoming of post-Soviet hypotheses about the causes of the famine (such as poor harvest, bad weather etc.). Respondents’ age, traumatical nature of the event, fight of collective and individual memories, poorly organized passportization of oral history, mixing of two events in memory of respondents – famine of 1930-s and 1940-s is not an obstacle to use oral history. Juridical value of oral history has been confirmed in Ukraine by initiating of a criminal case by the Security Service of Ukraine toward organizers of the genocide.