I. K. Bogomolov. Review of monograph: McGeever B. Antisemitism and the Russian Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. 247 p. // Petersburg Historical Journal, no. 3, 2022, pp. 282–288

Abstract:
The review analyzes the monograph of the Doctor of Philosophy, professor of Sociology at Birkbeck (University of London) Brendan McGeever on anti-Semitism in revolutionary Russia and in the first years of Soviet power. It is stated that the title of the book — “Antisemitism and the Russian Revolution” — does not fully correspond to the content. The author focuses on the response of the Bolshevik leadership to anti-Semitism in 1917–1920 and the difficulties that it had to face in this struggle. Neither the anti-Bolshevik forces, nor the Provisional Government, nor the late Imperial period are practically mentioned in the monograph. Nevertheless, the study of the Bolshevik response to antisemitism during the Russian Civil War was carried out at a high level with the involvement of a large number of archival sources. It is also important to address the little-studied topic of left-wing antisemitism.

Keywords:
antisemitism, Russian revolution, Russian Civil War, evkom, pogroms, Grigorievshchina, V. I. Lenin, I. V. Stalin.

Author:
Bogomolov, Igor Konstantinovich — PhD, Senior Researcher, Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
E-mail: bogomolov@inion.ru

FULLSCREEN TEXT

Similar Posts

PHJ No 3 (35) 2022 – V. V. Mirkin. Mobilization forms of labor organization in telecommunications (1940s–1980s, on the example of Siberia)

On the basis of publications of communications periodicals (Vestnik Svyazi, Elektrosvyaz magazines), regional periodics, departmental publications, as well as archival materials, on the example of the Siberian departments, the personnel policy of the Soviet telecommunications industry in the post-war period is considered, the use of various mobilization forms and methods of labor organization. A brief review of such practices is provided.

PHJ No 3 (35) 2022 – A. Yu. Bendin. Reviewed in: Journals of the Committee of Western Provinces / Ed. by T. V. Andreeva, I. N. Wibe, B. P. Milovidov, D. N. Shilov. Vol. 1-2. St. Petersburg. 2017-2021

For Russian historical science, the western provinces of Russia still remain a topic in many ways. It will require many years of efforts by a large number of researchers whose will have extensive work to identify new arrays of sources, assimilate new research approaches and develop new concepts in it study. The idea that the Western Edge of the Russian Empire was one of the most problematic for the policy of the imperial center has a long history. Historiographical schools and traditions of studying this region began to form in the XIX century In Russia, having been developed after the Polish rebellion of 1863-1864.

PHJ No 3 (35) 2022 – S. I. Grigoriev. “…The independence of the Tatars in Crimea is unreliable for us…”: when did St. Petersburg actually decide to annex Crimea to Russia?

The article analyzes the process of formation and subsequent changes in the views of Empress Catherine II and the top leadership of Russia on the “Crimean question” in the 1770s: from the desire to proclaim an independent state in Crimea (1769), through the approval of the actual protectorate of the Russian Empire over the Crimean Khanate (1777) — to the adoption of a strategic course for accession Crimea to Russia in the near future (1779).

PHJ No 3 (35) 2022 – T. V. Andreeva. Return: M. M. Speransky in 1821–1824 (according to the diary of a reformer)

The article is devoted to the diary of M. M. Speransky, which refers to the period of the reformer’s arrival from Siberia to St. Petersburg and is a valuable source of information not only about the complex process of his return to big politics, but also about the most important domestic and foreign policy problems of the last period of the reign of Alexander I. Diary of the greatest statesman of the 19th century allows you to expand and, possibly, to some extent change the ideas that have developed in historiography, both about the role and place of M. M. Speransky in public life in the early 1820s, and about the activities of the administrative apparatus of that time.

PHJ No 3 (35) 2022 – A. Yu. Andreev. Sources on the resignation of M. M. Speransky in 1812: an experience of a systematic analysis

The article analyzes the source base for studying one of the “mysteries of Russian history” — the sudden resignation of M. M. Speransky from the post of State Secretary of Emperor Alexander I, held in March 1812. The article states that the existing multiple interpretations of these events are based in a large number of cases on the uncritical use of historical sources. A new analysis of the source structure has been carried out and a new classification has been proposed. As a result, it was concluded that the considered base of sources, provided that the methods of their critical analysis are applied, allows reconstructing the events that led to Speransky’s resignation with a sufficient degree of completeness.