3. As we have told above, for a comprehensive study of ostracism the most desirable method would be a constructive synthesis of «institutional» and «non-institutional» approaches, provided positive sides of both. In our case, it should be manifested in researching the institution in question in close connection with political processes of the epoch and society that used it. The general methodological base of the work is the system conception of polls as an integral political and socio-cultural body in which all aspects of public and ideological life are interconnected and mutually conditioned; so they must be investigated not separately but integrally.
In other words, we believe that isolated analysis of material out of touch with the historical epoch should be avoided. In particular, the institution of ostracism should be a subject of thorough study in the context of polls, as an integral element of its political system and political life. We see as one of our tasks an attempt to show how general changes in the classical Athenian polls naturally influenced ostracism (its introduction, more frequent or rare use, becoming obsolete). One may say that our general methodology is most similar to the concept of histoire totale advanced by French historians of the Annales school. We are faraway from primitive determinism, from a notion about rigid conditioning of on forms of social reality («secondary» or «superstructural») by others («primary» or «basic»), whether the latter are interpreted as economic relations, or political system, or mentality of the epoch, or anything else. In our opinion, all those spheres developed and evolved as parts of an integral body, only through close mutual connections.
As applied to the history of ostracism, such an approach implies, in particular, disagreement with the common opinion of that institution as exclusive feature of democratic poleis. In the course of investigation we try to show that ostracism (surely if we deal not only with its specific «Clisthenic» form, but take the phenomenon on a broader base) was not determined by democracy, but could be (and really was) used in one or another form in various Greek political systems, such as aristocracy, oligarchy, etc. Ostracism was an outcome rather of polis as such than of some specific polis form.
For most effective and comprehensive research of Athenian ostracism such a methodological approach is very useful as correlated study of diverse source types. It is especially actual for ostracism, for, as we shall see below, there are two main kinds of sources that give information on it. They are, a) data of ancient narrative tradition, and b) ostraka and inscriptions on them, that is, artifacts of material and epigraphic character. Both of these source types have strong as well as weak sides. So, the main value of ostraka consists in the fact that they are contemporary and absolutely authentic sources. However, information they bear can be fully interpreted only in light of written sources, as inscriptions on these "ballots" are short, often in poor condition and in any case mostly do not contain any facts relating to specific causes of one or another ostrakophoria and to its historical context. As to the narrative tradition of ostracism, it is naturally much more informative. It contains information on a number of important details of ostracism and its history. But at the same time data kept by ancient writers are sometimes contradictory, and in some cases there are grounded doubts in the question of trustworthiness. It is ostraka that can serve in the greatest degree for verification of written information. Thus, the two above-mentioned kinds of sources on ostracism are mutually complementary.
The comparative-historical method also takes some place in the study. As ostracism displays certain features of resemblance with archaic forms of banishment, which had religious and ritual character (in particular with the scapegoat rite peculiar to many ancient cultures), we have to touch upon specificity of rites in question and to compare them with ostracism, in order to better define origins and characteristics of the latter.
4. The research novelty of the monograph is defined by the following circumstances:
— it is the first in Russian literature and one of very few in world literature (after a break of several decades) comprehensive and full-scale study of ostracism. The history of the institution is investigated on up-to-date level, in detail and in the whole complex of all aspects;
— the author draws intensely not only data of narrative tradition, but also material of ostraka, which is only presently beginning to be introduced into scholarly circulation on a large scale. Accordingly, ancient historians have almost not yet used that material;
— the author attempts to reconstruct as fully as possible the chronological sequence of events connected with the history of Athenian ostracism;