USSR

Home page » USSR
|

PHJ № 4 (48) 2025 — V. A. Berdinskikh. PROBLEMS OF HISTORY IN THE STALIN ERA AS A SUBJECT OF SCIENTIFIC REFLECTION. BOOK REVIEW: TIKHONOV V. V. THE USEFUL PAST: HISTORY IN THE STALINIST USSR. MOSCOW: NOVOE LITERATURNOE OBOZRENIE, 2024. 367 P.

The article examines the main problems of the book of the Moscow historian V. V. Tikhonov, devoted to the problems of interaction between Soviet historians and the authorities in the era of Stalinism. The book is written in the genre of scientific essay. The transformation of the ideology of Stalinism and the complex of relations between the authorities and the scientific and historical community are the focus of the author’s attention. An attempt to understand how the “historiographic vertical of power” works is clearly a success for V. V. Tikhonov. He posed important and relevant questions of the place and role of historians in historical politics.

|

PHJ № 4 (48) 2025 — N. V. Tikhomirov “THE WORK IN THE VILLAGE IS VERY, VERY WEAK”: THE SOVIET PEASANTRY IN THE REPORTS OF STUDENTS OF THE LENINGRAD POLYTECHNIC

Previously unknown to researchers, documents containing information about the life of the Russian countryside in the conditions of Soviet modernization of the first post-revolutionary decade are being introduced into scientific circulation. The publication presents the reports of students of the Leningrad Polytechnic of Railways, prepared by them based on the results of their work in practice in the villages of the North-Western region of Russia in 1924. The records reflect various aspects of everyday life, leisure, economic relations and the mentality of rural inhabitants. These materials help to understand better the general state of the Russian peasant world during this historical period and the problems faced by the leadership of the USSR in implementing the socialist restructuring of the country. The reports reflect the contradictions that have arisen in connection with the introduction of a new taxation system, cooperative construction, the implementation of the ideas of the cultural revolution, and the training of personnel for party and Komsomol work. The publication aims to expand the scientific understanding of the participation of Soviet students in the implementation of Soviet government activities in rural areas. These reports quantitatively and qualitatively complement the existing database of sources used by historians to study the Russian peasantry in the 20th century. Their involvement in research practice will make it possible to strengthen the anthropological component of modern peasant studies and will serve as information support for scientific research in the field of rural everyday life, the everyday thinking of rural inhabitants, and contradictions in the interaction of the city and the countryside. The published materials will also be useful for clarifying the specifics of understanding the problems of rural areas by party and Komsomol activists and their tasks in solving them.

|

PHJ № 4 (48) 2025 — Yu. S. Nikiforov. “NOW WE’LL LIVE! BREZHNEV AND KOSYGIN ARE NOT KHRUSHCHEV”: THE DYNAMICS OF REGIONAL POWER IN THE UPPER VOLGA REGIONS ON THE EVE OF AND IN THE FIRST YEARS AFTER THE RESIGNATION OF KHRUSHCHEV

The article employs an analytical approach to examine the personnel changes that occurred in the corps of first secretaries of the regional committees of the Upper Volga regions on the eve of and in the initial years following Khrushchev’s resignation. It is important to note that the division of the regional apparatus of power in 1962 according to the production principle and the appearance of two first secretaries of the regional committee (industrial and rural) significantly affected the dynamics of regional power. It is noteworthy that the primary responsibility for communication with the center was assigned to the “senior secretary”. The material pertaining to the party power of the Upper Volga region discloses the practices of replacing key nomenclature The article employs an analytical approach to examine the personnel changes that occurred in the corps of first secretaries of the regional committees of the Upper Volga regions on the eve of and in the initial years following Khrushchev’s resignation. It is important to note that the division of the regional apparatus of power in 1962 according to the production principle and the appearance of two first secretaries of the regional committee (industrial and rural) significantly affected the dynamics of regional power. It is noteworthy that the primary responsibility for communication with the center was assigned to the “senior secretary”. The material pertaining to the party power of the Upper Volga region discloses the practices of replacing key nomenclature
posts in the regional government during the 1950s and 1960s. These include the transfer of experienced management personnel from region to region, the appointment of an ethnic Russian as a second secretary in the national (union) republics, and the consideration of the region’s production specialisation when appointing a regional leader. The publication presents a study of the personal characteristics of individual party leaders in the Upper Volga regions during the 1950s and 1960s. This study draws conclusions about two possible scenarios that may have occurred in the careers of the first secretaries of the Upper Volga regional committees in the period following Khrushchev’s resignation. The first scenario is the stabilisation of the power status in the region, and the second is the transfer of the first secretaries to Moscow to a higher post in the nomenclature hierarchy. The first option pertained to the case of Ponomarev and Loshchenkov, the respective party leaders of the Vladimir and Yaroslavl regions. The second variant was realised in the careers of the first secretaries of the Ivanovo and Kostroma regional committees — Kapitonov and Florentyev, respectively — who went to the capital for promotion. As was subsequently demonstrated, by the close of the 1960s, an emergent pattern of “regional political longevity” among the first secretaries of the regional committee had come to the fore, The article employs an analytical approach to examine the personnel changes that occurred in the corps of first secretaries of the regional committees of the Upper Volga regions on the eve of and in the initial years following Khrushchev’s resignation. It is important to note that the division of the regional apparatus of power in 1962 according to the production principle and the appearance of two first secretaries of the regional committee (industrial and rural) significantly affected the dynamics of regional power. It is noteworthy that the primary responsibility for communication with the center was assigned to the “senior secretary”. The material pertaining to the party power of the Upper Volga region discloses the practices of replacing key nomenclature posts in the regional government during the 1950s and 1960s. These include the transfer of experienced management personnel from region to region, the appointment of an ethnic Russian as a second secretary in the national (union) republics, and the consideration of the region’s production specialisation when appointing a regional leader. The publication presents a study of the personal characteristics of individual party leaders in the Upper Volga regions during the 1950s and 1960s. This study draws conclusions about two possible scenarios that may have occurred in the careers of the first secretaries of the Upper Volga regional committees in the period following Khrushchev’s resignation. The first scenario is the stabilisation of the power status in the region, and the second is the transfer of the first secretaries to Moscow to a higher post in the nomenclature hierarchy. The first option pertained to the case of Ponomarev and Loshchenkov, the respective party leaders of the Vladimir and Yaroslavl regions. The second variant was realised in the careers of the first secretaries of the Ivanovo and Kostroma regional committees — Kapitonov and Florentyev, respectively — who went to the capital for promotion. As was subsequently demonstrated, by the close of the 1960s, an emergent pattern of “regional political longevity” among the first secretaries of the regional committee had come to the fore, The article employs an analytical approach to examine the personnel changes that occurred in the corps of first secretaries of the regional committees of the Upper Volga regions on the eve of and in the initial years following Khrushchev’s resignation. It is important to note that the division of the regional apparatus of power in 1962 according to the production principle and the appearance of two first secretaries of the regional committee (industrial and rural) significantly affected the dynamics of regional power. It is noteworthy that the primary responsibility for communication with the center was assigned to the “senior secretary”. The material pertaining to the party power of the Upper Volga region discloses the practices of replacing key nomenclature posts in the regional government during the 1950s and 1960s. These include the transfer of experienced management personnel from region to region, the appointment of an ethnic Russian as a second secretary in the national (union) republics, and the consideration of the region’s production specialisation when appointing a regional leader. The publication presents a study of the personal characteristics of individual party leaders in the Upper Volga regions during the 1950s and 1960s. This study draws conclusions about two possible scenarios that may have occurred in the careers of the first secretaries of the Upper Volga regional committees in the period following Khrushchev’s resignation. The first scenario is the stabilisation of the power status in the region, and the second is the transfer of the first secretaries to Moscow to a higher post in the nomenclature hierarchy. The first option pertained to the case of Ponomarev and Loshchenkov, the respective party leaders of the Vladimir and Yaroslavl regions. The second variant was realised in the careers of the first secretaries of the Ivanovo and Kostroma regional committees — Kapitonov and Florentyev, respectively — who went to the capital for promotion. As was subsequently demonstrated, by the close of the 1960s, an emergent pattern of “regional political longevity” among the first secretaries of the regional committee had come to the fore, a phenomenon that can be attributed to the policy of “trust in personnel” espoused by Brezhnev. Following Khrushchev’s resignation, the center permitted the replacement of the post of first secretary of the regional committee with a representative of the local party organisation. This trend was manifestly evident in the Ivanovo region. a phenomenon that can be attributed to the policy of “trust in personnel” espoused by Brezhnev. Following Khrushchev’s resignation, the center permitted the replacement of the post of first secretary of the regional committee with a representative of the local party organisation. This trend was manifestly evident in the Ivanovo region. a phenomenon that can be attributed to the policy of “trust in personnel” espoused by Brezhnev. Following Khrushchev’s resignation, the center permitted the replacement of the post of first secretary of the regional committee with a representative of the local party organisation. This trend was manifestly evident in the Ivanovo region. posts in the regional government during the 1950s and 1960s. These include the transfer of experienced management personnel from region to region, the appointment of an ethnic Russian as a second secretary in the national (union) republics, and the consideration of the region’s production specialisation when appointing a regional leader. The publication presents a study of the personal characteristics of individual party leaders in the Upper Volga regions during the 1950s and 1960s. This study draws conclusions about two possible scenarios that may have occurred in the careers of the first secretaries of the Upper Volga regional committees in the period following Khrushchev’s resignation. The first scenario is the stabilisation of the power status in the region, and the second is the transfer of the first secretaries to Moscow to a higher post in the nomenclature hierarchy. The first option pertained to the case of Ponomarev and Loshchenkov, the respective party leaders of the Vladimir and Yaroslavl regions. The second variant was realised in the careers of the first secretaries of the Ivanovo and Kostroma regional committees — Kapitonov and Florentyev, respectively — who went to the capital for promotion. As was subsequently demonstrated, by the close of the 1960s, an emergent pattern of “regional political longevity” among the first secretaries of the regional committee had come to the fore, a phenomenon that can be attributed to the policy of “trust in personnel” espoused by Brezhnev. Following Khrushchev’s resignation, the center permitted the replacement of the post of first secretary of the regional committee with a representative of the local party organisation. This trend was manifestly evident in the Ivanovo region.

|

PHJ № 4 (48) 2025 — K. A. Boldovskii. THE RECONSTRUCTION OF LENINGRAD DURING THE YEARS OF THE SIEGE — THE PRACTICE OF LABOR MOBILIZATIONS

The author conducts an analysis of the process of labour mobilisations of the Leningrad population during the Siege, with a view to restoring urban infrastructure and the economy. The population was engaged in activities contributing to the urban economy, thereby playing a pivotal role in ensuring the uninterrupted functioning of the Leningrad life support system during the Siege. The city’s leadership initiated the organisation of labour mobilisations at the onset of the war. The bureau of the City Party Committee, the Leningrad City Executive Committee and the Military Council of the Leningrad Front constituted the primary mobilisation management bodies. The resolution of the Leningrad City Executive Committee, adopted on June 27, 1941, defined the main categories of citizens who could be called up for labour mobilisation. The length of working hours and responsibility for evading labor mobilization were also determined. The administration of enterprises and institutions mobilised working residents of the city, while the management of educational institutions mobilised students. Household administrations at the place of residence mobilised non-working residents. During the initial phase of the war, extending until the spring of 1942, the majority of mobilised individuals were engaged in construction activities, including the erection of defensive structures, the execution of loading and unloading operations, the construction of bomb shelters, the remediation of the consequences of artillery shelling and bombing, the harvesting of firewood, and other associated tasks. In the initial period, there was a paucity of a clearly defined plan for mobilising the working population. By the onset of spring 1942, a functional management system for labour mobilisations had been formulated. This enabled the project to be expanded on a wide scale in 1942–1943.The most extensive measures involving the mobilisation of labour were implemented in the spring of 1942 (for the purpose of cleaning the city) and in the winter of 1942–1943 (for the purpose of clearing snow from the city and railway communications). Commencing in the autumn of 1943, the municipal administration established the primary objective of its operations as the organisation of work on the construction project. For its implementation, both mass labor mobilizations and mobilizations of certain categories of workers were widely used.

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — A. N. Chistikov. ORDERS OF THE FILM REPERTOIRE CONTROL DEPARTMENT AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE

The article is devoted to the analysis of the orders of the Department for the Control of film Repertoire of the Main Directorate of Cinematography and Film Distribution as a historical source. These materials have not yet been subjected to a source assessment. The orders for 1954–1955 are used for the study. In the history of the country, these were the first years of the activity of the new political leadership, which led to noticeable changes in the domestic and foreign policy of the state. In the history of cinema, the period of low-quality has come to an end. The orders included an assessment of the movies’ readiness for rental or for continued display. According to the results of such an examination, they were divided into four groups: 1) allow, 2) extend, 3) remove, and 4) make corrections. The analysis of the orders leads the author to the conclusion that their use by historians will contribute to a more in-depth study of the history of Soviet cinema and film distribution, as well as state policy in the field of leisure. In some cases, orders can be considered as one of the tools for recording changes in the domestic and foreign policy of the Soviet country in the mid‑1950s and forming a new public opinion of Soviet viewers.

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — O. V. Tatarnikov. THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORENBURG TELEVISION STUDIO DURING THE “THAW” (1961–1964)

The article examines the period of formation and development of the Orenburg Television Studio in 1961–1964. The main focus is on studying the structure of the TV studio, its repertoire and the everyday moments of its work. The article also describes various difficulties that plagued Orenburg television Broadcasting in the early years of its operation. The author emphasizes the influence of the “thaw” era on the active development of central and regional television in the USSR. Due to the fact that television staff have a certain creative freedom during this period, the Orenburg Television Studio was able to come from chaotic broadcasting to regular production of programs and films of its own production on central television in the 4 years that fell during this era. The author concludes that Orenburg television of the “thaw” era simultaneously combined an educational, entertaining and ideological repertoire. This feature has allowed local television broadcasting to become one of the main ways for Orenburg residents to spend their leisure time. The article is based on an extensive source base consisting of office records, periodical materials and sources of personal origin.

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — A. V. Lomakin. FROM ILYICH TO KUMACH: THE POETIC DESIGN OF SOVIET HOLIDAYS ON THE AIR OF LENINGRAD RADIO IN THE 1950S AND 1970S

The article is devoted to specific works of fiction — poems written for the public holidays of May 1 and November 7 and played on holiday radio broadcasts in Leningrad in the 1950s and 1970s. Based on the documents of the Central State Archive of Literature and Art of St. Petersburg, the thematic diversity of festive poetry is studied, its functions in festive narratives and the Soviet holiday as a whole are revealed, special attention is paid to the motivation of writers and poets when fulfilling a state order to create poetic agitation. Poetry “on occasion”, written for the Leningrad radio committee by local poets, was most often dedicated to V. I. Lenin, the Great October Socialist Revolution, Leningrad, and the Communist Party. The poems not only complemented the announcers’ comments about the parades and demonstrations on the Palace Square, created a festive mood, but also carried a certain ideological load and performed an educational function. At the same time, these works were usually performed without specifying the authorship, and later the authors did not include them in their printed collections. The participation of poets and writers in the creation of artistic texts for radio broadcasts can be considered a kind of fulfillment of a state order, in which each individual author could have his own motivation, whether it was establishing relations with the authorities or making easy money.

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — K. V. Godunov. DEBATES ON CIVIL WAR DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

This article examines how the debates that took place during the First World War influenced the dissemination of the concept of “civil war” and the impact this had on the political situation of the time. Particular attention is paid to discussions within the radical socialist milieu. It is demonstrated that the proponents of the slogan advocating the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war — first and foremost, V. I. Lenin and his supporters — acted within a specific historical and ideological context. They took into account the earlier discursive articulations of civil war as well as the experiences of socialists in other countries, particularly the rhetoric of Karl Liebknecht. Drawing on the views of prominent Bolsheviks such as A. G. Shlyapnikov, A. M. Kollontai, and N. I. Bukharin, the study shows that not all members of the party unequivocally supported Lenin’s call for civil war. Even among Lenin’s prominent allies, interpretations of the slogan varied, with differing views expressed regarding its meaning and practical implementation. Debates about the means of ending the global conflict and about the prospects for revolution and civil war were significant in several respects. During the First World War, the Bolsheviks acquired the reputation of being the “party of civil war”. This image played a major role in various anti-Bolshevik propaganda campaigns in 1917, even though in reality, not all members of the party fully endorsed Lenin’s position. Disputes surrounding the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war contributed to the cultural preparation for internal conflict. The notion of “civil war” gained renewed momentum and expanded its reach; its articulation during the crises of the First World War contributed to the radicalisation of the political situation. These debates among socialists led party activists at various levels — regardless of their agreement or disagreement with the necessity of civil war — to engage with the idea and to participate in the development of a political language centred around violence.

PHJ № 2 (46) 2025 — E. Yu. Zubkova. «VICTORY AND THE GREAT FAREWELL»: COLLECTIVE MEMORY AND THE POLICY OF REMEMBERING THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR. 1945–1965

In the Russian context, multiple memories of the war coexist, with one type forming spontaneously as a “living” experience of what was lived through, and the other emerging as the result of a targeted state project, driven by a policy on constructing memory. To what extent did the state commemorative project take into account the public demand for remembrance of the war? Furthermore, what objectives did the state memory policy pursue in creating the image of the Great Patriotic War? In what ways did this image manifest itself in various memorial formats? The present article is devoted to these and other issues of the formation of memory of the war — from Victory Day 1945 to Victory Day 1965.

|

PHJ №1 (45) 2025 — E. D. Tverdyukova. “BECOMING NOT ONLY TOBACCO WORKERS, BUT ALSO AMMUNITION MANUFACTURERS”: THE LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE LENINGRAD TOBACCO FACTORY NAMED AFTER URITSKIY V. N. RUMYANTSEV TO THE V. P. ZOTOV (7.7.1942)

The published document is a primary source on the history of the 1st Leningrad Tobacco Factory named after Uritsky. It was the largest enterprise in the USSR to operate during the siege of Leningrad, supplying the city’s population and its defenders with cigarettes and tobacco. In the challenging conditions of war and blockade, smoking frequently served as means of coping with psycho-emotional distress, alleviating hunger, and acquiring a certain ritualistic significance. The factory’s activities in the initial year of the Great Patriotic War are discussed by the factory director, V. N. Rumyantsev, in a letter to V. P. Zotov, A. I. Mikoyan’s commissioner on food issues. The factory’s staff, in their efforts to substitute scarce raw materials, not only produced tobacco products but also successfully mastered the production of ammunition and medicines. The author of the letter goes on to describe his efforts to maintain the factory’s operational capacity during the first blockade winter, and characterizes the domestic characteristics of the workers.