Гуманитарные и юридические исследования (Sep 2021)
STAVROPOL TERRITORY IN RUSSIAN HISTORICAL SCIENCE OF THE 20-30s OF THE XX CENTURY
Abstract
The article shows what problems interested humanities scholars and publicists in the prewar period of the Soviet history and how these problems were covered from new methodological positions. The works created at that time by historians of the old school are examined, it is emphasized that even in articles written by authors who have not mastered Marxist theory, much attention is paid to the problems of the life of the masses, the manifestations of the class struggle, and public relations in Stavropol villages. The activity of local history societies and organizations is highlighted. Researchers paid much attention to the problems of the agrarian history of Stavropol, works of this time, as a rule, affect both the pre-Soviet and Soviet periods, since most of them give comparative material. In the 1920s, when the ways of agricultural development were not yet determined, the practical needs of the agricultural sector caused increased attention to the issues of developing cooperation, forms of land ownership and land use in the past. The restructuring of the economy in a socialist manner in the late 1920s and early 1930s is reflected in the journalistic articles of party and Soviet leaders. In the period under review, the history of the revolutionary movement and the struggle for power of the Soviets became the most relevant topics for research. The article discusses the activities of Eastparts - commissions on the history of the revolutionary movement and civil war. It is shown that these organizations, including the Stavropol Istpart, have done a lot to collect and publish materials on this topic. The analysis of journal publications is given, the errors made by the authors are revealed. The widespread publication of the memoirs of participants in revolutionary events, characteristic of the 1920s, was not accompanied by a critical check, therefore, over articles containing incorrect information or a controversial assessment of events, discussions arose in which both historians and participants in the events took part. The characteristic is given to generalizing works on the history of the October Revolution and the Civil war in the Stavropol Territory.
