V originále
Amerikanskije istoriki, izučaja novgorodskuju ekspansiju v severovostočnom napravlenii v period Crednich vekov, začastuju ispol'zujut metodičeskije podchody, kotorye poka v russkoj istoriografii javljajutsja redkost'ju, a takže prichodjat k zaključenijam, otličajuščimsja ot vzgljadov ich rossijskich kolleg. Avtor stat'i obraščajet vnimanije na otraženije těmy kolonizacii Novgorodom sosednich těrritorij v amerikanskoj istoriografii ChCh veka i rešajet rjad voprosov: kak zaroždalos' i razvivalos' issledovanije dannoj těmy v těčenije prošlogo veka sredi amerikanskich učenych, kakije koncepty i stratěgii istoriki primenjali pri jeje rassmotrenii, kak menjalas' istočnikovaja baza i kakije elementy javljalis' prioritětom dlja rjada istorikov. V osnove issledovanija nachoditsja istoriografičeskaja škola universitěta Berkli (Kalifornija), analizirujuščaja na protjaženii něskol'kich děsjatiletij novgorodskuju kolonizaciju s točki zrenija těorii granicy i jeje posledujuščeje sravněnije s metodikoj drugich istorikov-sovremennikov.
Anglicky
American historians often use methodological approaches that are still rare in Russian historiography. Also, when studying Novgorodian expansion in the northeast territories during the Middle Ages, their conclusions sometimes differ from their Russian colleagues. The author of this article draws attention to the reflection on the formation of the Novgorod colonies in American historiography of the 20th century and solves the following questions: how the study of this topic was established and later developed over the past century among American scientists, what concepts and strategies these historians used when considering it, how the source base changed, and what elements were considered a priority for certain historians. The study is based on the historiographical school of the University of Berkeley (California), where the Novgorodian colonisation has been analysed for several decades from the point of view of the frontier thesis. Results of the frontier approach are subsequently compared with the methods of other historians of that time.