evacuation.

This article examines the specific features of postgraduate education in history during the Great Patriotic War. Drawing on statistical data, legal regulations, administrative records, and personal documents, the author analyzes how wartime mobilization and the general context of war influenced the training of highly qualified academic personnel. The article highlights challenges related to student recruitment, the quality of academic preparation, and the shifting focus of postgraduate activity toward propaganda work and the production of popular literature — trends that had a tangible impact on dissertation research. Concrete examples reveal a tendency to narrow the scope of dissertation topics to individual sources or specific historians which led to an increase in historiographical and source-critical studies during the war years. Starting in 1943, the All-Union Committee for Higher Education sought to tighten its oversight of postgraduate training. This was to be achieved through formal bureaucratic procedures — including the introduction of individual work plans, reporting activities, and scheduled evaluations — and by strengthening the responsibility of the academic advisor. In both administrative practice and normative documents, particular attention was given to the advisor’s role, with an emphasis on intensifying their engagement with the candidate.