Advertisement

Delineating the Past

  • Stephen Velychenko

Abstract

The official interpretation of the “History of the USSR” was formulated between 1927 and 1953. Up to 1932, historians had some scope for debate, although it was increasingly directed and restricted. Afterward, interpretation evolved according to politically determined guidelines. Scholars had little choice but to acquiesce to direction.

Keywords

Survey History Class Struggle National History National Liberation Worker Movement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    J. V. Stalin, Problems of Leninism (Moscow, 1947), pp. 378–89;Google Scholar
  2. J. Barber, Soviet Historians in Crisis (London, 1981), p. 131.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Avtorkhanov, Memuary (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1983), pp. 375–79.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    E. H. Carr, Socialism in One Country (London, 1970), II: 219–32, 241;Google Scholar
  5. A. Avtorkhanov, Stalin and the Soviet Communist Party (Munich, 1959), pp. 102–07; T. H. Rigby, “Early Provincial Cliques and the Rise of Stalin,” Soviet Studies, no. 1 (1981): 3–28.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Fitzpatrick, “Cultural Revolution as Class War,” in Cultural Revolution in Russia, ed. S. Fitzpatrick (Bloomington, 1984), pp. 18–39;Google Scholar
  7. G. M. Enteen, “The Stalinist Conception of Communist Party History,” SST 29 (1989): 261; Interview with Ia. Dashkevych, November 1988.Google Scholar
  8. 15.
    H. Kostiuk, Zustrichi i proshchannia: Spohady khyhapersna (Edmonton, 1987), pp. 197–98. I was not able to locate a published version of this speech. This idea was not incorporated into the celebrations of the tenth anniversary of the Revolution. See Visti Vseukrainskoho Tsentralnoho Vykonavchoho Komitetu, November-December 1927, passim.Google Scholar
  9. 16.
    J. V. Stalin, Sochineniia (Moscow, 1954), 8: 152Google Scholar
  10. 19.
    P. Gorin, in Trudy Pervoi vsesoiuznoi konferentsii istorikov marksistov (Moscow, 1930), I: 449–51; J. Mace, Communism and the Dilemmas of National Liberation (Cambridge, MA, 1983), pp. 97–98;Google Scholar
  11. P. Gorin, M. N. Pokrovsky (Moscow, 1933), p. 44.Google Scholar
  12. 30.
    M. Rubach, “Federalisticheskie teorii istorii Rossii,” in Russkaia istoricheskaia literatura v klassovom osveshchennii, ed. M. N. Pokrovsky (Moscow, 1930), II: 91–97, 103, 108. Rubach submitted his article in 1926. It was part of a larger unpublished study.Google Scholar
  13. 35.
    “Zamechaniia po povodu konspekta uchebnika po ‘Istorii SSSR,’” Krasnyi arkhiv 75 (1936): 6. Although cited by historians in 1934, the decree was not published until 1936. On Stalin’s historical reading, see D. Volkogonov, Stalin: Triumph and Tragedy, trans. H. Shukman (London, 1991), p. 227.Google Scholar
  14. 47.
    S. Kovaliov, “Vypravyty pomylky u vysvitlinni deiakykh pytan istorii Ukrainy,” Literaturna hazeta, July 25, 1946; repr. from Kultura i zhizn, no. 3 (1946); S. Petroff, The Red Eminence, (Clifton, NJ, 1988), pp. 55–58.Google Scholar
  15. 49.
    “Pro zhurnal ‘Vitchyzna,’” Vitchyzna, no. 9 (1946): 35. An earlier Ukrainian CC resolution associated Shevchenko with Russian “revolutionary democrats”: “T. H. Shevchenko 1914–1934: Tezy do 120-richchia z dnia narodzhennia,” Chervonyi shliakh, no. 2–3 (1934): 6,12. Historians began to write that there were sharp differences between Shevchenko and most other members of the brotherhood after a 1939 All-Union CC resolution explained that the poet was not anti-Russian and that his ideas echoed those of the Russian radicals. “Velikii syn ukrainskogo naroda,” Pravda, March 6, 1939; F. Iastrebov, “T. H. Shevchenko i revoliutsiinyi rukh 30-kh-50kh rokiv XIX stolittia,” in Pamiati T. H. Shevchenko, ed. S. Belousov (Kiev, 1939), p. 66;Google Scholar
  16. V. Horbatiuk, “T. H. Shevchenko i Kyrylo-mefodiivske tovarystvo,” Trudy istorychnoho fakulteta Odeskoho derzhavnoho universiteta 1 (1939): 45–58.Google Scholar
  17. 53.
    “Za patrioticheskuiu sovetskuiu nauku,” Vestnik Akademii nauk SSSR, no. 4 (1949): 10. More detailed condemnation of Mints for “belittling” Russians may be found in “V Akademii obshchestvennykh nauk pri TsK VKP(b)” and in M. Stishov, “Na istoricheskom fakultete MGU,” VI, no. 3 (1949): 151–58. On the political background, see W. Hahn, Postwar Soviet Politics (Ithaca, NY, 1982), pp. 67–136.Google Scholar
  18. 54.
    D. Myshko, “Vichna druzhba rosiiskoho i ukrainskoho narodiv,” Visnyk Akademii nauk URSR, no. 10 (1949): 68 – 75; O. Kasymenko, “Znachennia prats I. V. Stalina,” Visnyk Akademii nauk URSR, no. 12 (1949): 35–47; Kasymenko, “Rozrobka i vysvitlennia osnovnykh etapiv istorii Ukrainy,” Naukovi zapysky Instytutu istorii Ukrainy 3 (1950): 63–77; F. Shevchenko, “Istorychne znachennia vikovoi druzhby ukrainskoho i rosiiskoho narodiv,” ibid., pp. 78–95.Google Scholar
  19. 55.
    Pravda, January 12, 1954; English text in J. Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654: A Historiographical Study (Edmonton, 1982), pp. 270–88. See also S. Velychenko, “The Origins of the Official Soviet Interpretation of Eastern Slavic History,” Forschungen zur Osteuropaischen Geschichte 46 (1990): 221–53.Google Scholar
  20. 65.
    N. N. Lysenko, “Metodicheskie puti sviazi prepodavaniia istorii soiuznoi respubliki s obshchim kursom otechestvennoi istorii,” in N. P. Kuzina et al., Iz opyta obucheniia istorii soiuznykh respublik (Moscow, 1979), p. 4; M. Lysenko, “Vyvchennia temy ‘Ukrainski zemli v XIV-XV st.,’ v elementarnomu kursi istorii SRSR i URSR v VII klasi vosmyrichnoi shkoly,” UIZh, no. 5 (1961): 101–5; V. Hordiienko, “Vykhovannia uchniv molodshykh klasiv u dushi druzhby narodiv SRSR,” Metodyka vykladannia istorii ta suspilnykh nauk v shkoli, no. 3 (1970): 40–48; N. Arkhipovna, “Z dosvidu roboty nad poniatiam ‘vitchyzna’ v kursi istorii SRSR u VII klasi,” Metodyka vykladannia istorii ta suspilnykh nauk v shkoli, no. 4 (1973): 29–37. Arkhipovna noted students in Sevastopol identified their city and the USSR as “fatherland.” There was no “Ukraine” interposed between the two.Google Scholar
  21. 66.
    B. Jakubowska, Prżeobratenia szkolnej edukacji historycznej w Polsce w latach 1944–1956 (Warsaw, 1987), pp. 23–32.Google Scholar
  22. 72.
    E. Valkenier, “The Soviet Impact on Polish Historiography 1946–1950,” Journal of Central European Affairs 11, no. 4 (January 1952): 380.Google Scholar
  23. 76.
    Reputedly Party Secretary Boleslaw Bierut decided not to publish the Soviet history in Poland. See J. Rupnik, The Other Europe (London, 1988), p. 194.Google Scholar
  24. 82.
    I Kongres Nauki Polskiej. Sekcja nauk społecznych i humanistycznych, series I (Warsaw, 1951); J. Sieradzki et al., Pierwsza konferencja metodologiczna historyków polskich (Warsaw, 1953); Z. Kormanowa, “Referat Podsekcji historii,” KH, nos. 1–2(1951): 260.Google Scholar
  25. E. Valkenier, “Sovietization and Liberalization in Polish Postwar Historiography,” Journal of Central European Affairs 10, no. 2 (July 1959): 149–73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Stephen Velychenko 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Velychenko

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations