The article examines the source-critical foundations of general-theoretical research on the state and law and substantiates the role of historical source criticism in constructing a verifiable empirical basis for legal scholarship. It argues that the limited observability of state-legal phenomena in real time necessitates reliance on historical data and their primary legal-historical interpretation within the discipline of the history of state and law. The study conceptualizes legal qualification as a sequential analytical procedure that matches the reconstructed features of a given phenomenon with the defining attributes of general-theoretical legal categories, thereby enhancing conceptual clarity and the evidentiary strength of conclusions. It further maintains that the qualification-based approach facilitates the alignment of empirical material with the system of legal concepts, mitigates the risk of arbitrary interpretation, and reinforces legal certainty when analysing complex regulatory regimes that combine public-law and private-law elements. Methodological transparency is presented as a prerequisite for good-faith scholarly inquiry and for the stability of general-theoretical constructs.
Sergey Nikolaevich Khrameshin (Fri,) studied this question.