scholarly journals The History of the 1947 Monetary Reform of the USSR in Moscow and Leningrad

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-84
Author(s):  
Sergey G. Bandurin ◽  
Igor B. Tsvetkov

Introduction. World and domestic economic history are the history of ups and downs, the history of finding ways out of difficult, sometimes crisis and critical situations, most often manifested both during and after wars. The Great Patriotic War, which dealt a blow to all spheres of life of the belligerent countries, was no exception. Testing the viability of the country’s economic model, in particular the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, began directly during the war and continued after the end of hostilities. The relevance of the topic under study lies in the study of a positive example of the country’s recovery from the economic crisis, as well as the study of the reaction of the general population to the measures taken. The purpose of this article is to retrospectively analyze the economic situation of those years, to model the reader’s understanding of the reaction of society at that time to events and the way of solving the problem chosen by the party, as well as to demonstrate the results of the government’s activities. Materials and Methods. This study is based on the traditional methods used in the national historical science: problem-chronological, systemic and comparative-historical. Research Results. The analysis of the measures taken in the financial and economic sphere showed the consistency of the methods chosen by the government, however, the general assessment of the measures among the population turned out to be versatile. The assessments of the researchers of this problem, both Soviet and modern, are generally positive. Discussion and Conclusion. As a result of the monetary reform of 1947, the Soviet Union managed to avoid the depreciation of the ruble, the surplus of banknotes issued during the war years was eliminated, the state’s internal debt on bonds was significantly reduced, and the salaries of the population were preserved. This money was used to rebuild the post-war country. The abolition of cards ensured a decrease in market prices for many groups of goods and significantly reduced the number of speculators.

1970 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 256-276
Author(s):  
Dariusz Miszewski

During the Second World War, the national camp preached the idea of imperialism in Central Europe. Built peacefully, the Polish empire was supposed to protect the independence and security of countries in Central Europe against Germany and the Soviet Union, and thus went by the name of “the Great Poland”. As part of the empire, nation-states were retained. The national camp was opposed to the idea of the federation as promoted by the government-in-exile. The “national camp” saw the idea of federation on the regional, European and global level as obsolete. Post-war international cooperation was based on nation states and their alliances.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 475-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
MORITZ FÖLLMER ◽  
MARK B. SMITH

How can we write the history of urban societies in Europe after 1945? This article offers an interpretative overview of key developments in both Eastern and Western Europe, while also discussing some key conceptual issues. Along the way, it takes stock of the relevant historiography (much of which is very recent) and introduces a selection of papers from a cycle of three international workshops held between 2011 and 2013. The papers range geographically from Britain to the Soviet Union and cover topics as diverse as post-war reconstruction and alternative communities in the 1970s. Their respective approaches are informed by an interest in the way societies have been imagined in discourses and reshaped in spatial settings. Moreover, the papers move beyond case studies, urban history's classic genre, and can therefore facilitate synthetic reflection. It is our hope that, in so doing, we can make urban history more relevant to contemporary European historians in general.


1963 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-364
Author(s):  
John Day ◽  
Frank Bealey ◽  
Justin Grossman ◽  
Allen Potter ◽  
Edgar Thomas ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-94
Author(s):  
Sergey A. Bakanov ◽  
Ivan A. Medvedev

Introduction. This article deals with the subject of thesis in the direction of “Economic history”, which were prepared and defended in Russia in the post-Soviet period (1991–2019). The dissolution of the Soviet Union is getting rid of research from ideological clichés, which made the topic of economic history relevant and in demand. Materials and Methods. On the basis of the e-catalog of authors’ abstracts of the Russian State Library, the database “Dissertations on economic history of the late XX – early XXI centuries” was formed. The bibliographic information about the authors’ abstracts became the formal attributes of the described database. The analytical units were the attributes of the “geographical range”, “chronological frame” and “research problem”. Results. The analysis of the database showed that during the entire period were formed stable trends scientific subdirectories within the frame of economic history (history of industry, history of agriculture, history of entrepreneurship, history of banks, etc.), and in maintaining the status of leading research centers. The historical period from the second half of the XIX to the first half of the XX centuries attracts the main attention of the authors of thesis on economic history. Discussion and Conclusion. A quantitative analysis of the dynamic of thesis defenses showed a decline in the interest of authors of thesis in the problems of economic history in the 2010s. The key factors of this decline were changes in the requirements to thesis. Nevertheless, the authors believe that the direction of “economic history” has a potential to overcome designated problems.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-66
Author(s):  
Maryna Berezutska

AbstractBandura art is a unique phenomenon of Ukrainian culture, inextricably linked with the history of the Ukrainian people. The study is dedicated to one of the most tragic periods in the history of bandura art, that of the 1920s–1940s, during which the Bolsheviks were creating, expanding and strengthening the Soviet Union. Art in a multinational state at this time was supposed to be national by form and socialist by content in accordance with the concept of Bolshevik cultural policy; it also had to serve Soviet propaganda. Bandura art has always been national by its content, and professional by its form, so conflict was inevitable. The Bolsheviks embodied their cultural policy through administrative and power methods: they created numerous bandurist ensembles and imposed a repertoire that glorified the Communist Party and the Soviet system. As a result, the development of bandura art stagnated significantly, although it did not die completely. At the same time, in the post-war years this policy provoked the emigration of many professional bandurists to the USA and Canada, thus promoting the active spread of bandura art in the Ukrainian Diaspora.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1119-1130
Author(s):  
Ivan A. Ladynin ◽  

The article presents a publication of the letter from Vasily Vasilievich Struve (1889–1965), pioneer in the research of the Ancient Near East societies in the Soviet Union, to Mikhail Ivanovich Rostovtzev (1870–1952), the prominent Classicist, one of the first scholars in socio-economic history of the Antiquity in pre-revolutionary Russia. The letter was written during Struve’s post-graduate sabbatical in Berlin in 1914; it is stored in the Russian State Historical Archives in St. Petersburg. The document is significant due to its information on Struve’s stay in Berlin and on his contacts with leading German scholars (including Eduard Meyer and Adolf Erman), but it also touches upon a bigger issue. In the early 1930s Struve forwarded his concept of slave-owning mode of production in the Ancient Near East, which was immediately accepted into official historiography, making him a leading theoretician in the Soviet research of ancient history. It has been repeatedly stated in memoirs and in post-Soviet historiography that this concept and, generally speaking, Struve’s interest in socio-economic issues was opportunistic. His 1910s articles on the Ptolemaic society and state published prior to the Russian revolution weigh heavily against this point of view. The published letter contains Struve’s assessment of his future thesis (state institutions of the New Kingdom of Egypt) and puts its topic in the context of current discussions on the Ptolemaic state and society and of his studies in the Rostovtzev’s seminar at the St. Petersburg University. Struve declares the study of Egyptian social structure and connections between its pre-Hellenistic and Hellenistic phases his life-task, introduced to him by Rostovtzev. Thus, Struve’s early interest in these issues appears to be sincere; it stems from pre-revolutionary trends in the Russian scholarship.


2021 ◽  
pp. 213-239
Author(s):  
Aleksander Głogowski

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE MILITARY AND CIVIL UNDERGROUND IN THE VILNIUS REGION IN 1939-1941 The first years of the occupation of the Vilnius Region were an unusual period in terms of the history of the Polish Underground State and the Polish armed resistance movement. This area was occupied after September 17, 1939 by the Soviet Union, but part of it was transferred to the Republic of Lithuania, along with which it was re-incorporated into the Soviet Union. The Lithuanian occupation was a considerable challenge both for the Polish authorities in exile and for the inhabitants of the Vilnius Region. Meeting such a challenge required certain diplomatic talents (not to worsen the situation of Poles living in this area) as well as knowledge of the relations in the area, which was a problem for the Polish authorities in France, and especially in Great Britain. The Polish inhabitants of the Vilnius Region considered the legal status of their land to be illegal occupation, while the Lithuanians claimed that thanks to a new agreement with the USSR, the period of occupation of these lands by Poles ended. These opinions, together with the mutual resentments and stereotypes flourishing for nearly 20 years, made the peaceful coexistence of two nations difficult, or even impossible. The government of the Republic of Poland tried to prevent the attempts to start an anti-Lithuanian uprising, not wanting to provoke the other two occupiers into military intervention. To this stage, it sought an intermediate solution between the abandonment of any conspiracy (which carried the threat of forming armed groups beyond the control of the legal Polish authorities) and its development on a scale known, for example, from the German or Soviet occupation. The Vilnius Region was to become the personnel and organisational base for the latter. The dilemma was resolved without Polish participation at the time of the annexation of the Republic of Lithuania by the Soviets. Then the second period of the Soviet occupation began, characterised by much greater brutality than the first one, with mass arrests, executions and deportations. The policy of repression primarily affected the pre-war military staff and their families, who were the natural base for the resistance movement of the intelligentsia. Fortunately, this process ended at the time of the German aggression against the USSR. Those that survived the period of the “second Soviet invasion” could in the new conditions continue their underground activities and prepare for an armed uprising in the circumstances and in the manner indicated by the Home Army Headquarters and the Polish Government in London.


1963 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 51-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon T. Kuark

Since the end of the Second World War, which brought the division of the country into northern and southern halves, North Korea has become a thoroughly orthodox Communist state with but few deviations from the Russian type. The “Marxist-Leninist line” has been followed with fidelity and enthusiasm in the field of economic planning and organisation as laid out in both the early Five-Year Plans of Soviet Russia and in the similar pattern of socialisation in Red China. What deviation exists is said to be characteristic of the transitional period in building Socialism or a “people's democracy,” where exploiting elements still exist, as contrasted with the Soviet Union, where it is claimed “Socialism” is a reality. The government so far has launched the two One-Year Plans of 1947 and 1948, the first Two-Year Plan of 1949–50 with emphasis on Soviet assistance, the Three-Year Plan of 1954–56, the first Five-Year Plan of 1957–61, and the Seven-Year Plan of 1961–67.


1965 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 31-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Feuerwerker

It will be evident to a reader of historical works produced in the People's Republic of China that this article, in the choice of subject-matter and in its treatment, is decidedly influenced by the current domestic and foreign political “line” of the Communist Party and Government. This is a relative matter, not absolute, but I would suggest that the dominant “class viewpoint” of the first decade of the Peking régime which produced an anonymous history of dynasties without “feudal” emperors or bureaucrats, literature minus the landlord-scholar-official literatus and nameless peasant rebellions as the central matter of China's history, was to a degree correlated with the process of the internal consolidation of power which may more or less be said to have been accomplished with the completion of the collectivisation of agriculture. The more recent “historicist” trend, which while not rejecting entirely its predecessor concentrates on what may be “positively inherited” from the “feudal” past, represents a quickening of Chinese nationalism fanned to a red-hot intensity, one cannot resist the temptation to conjecture, by the increasingly severe quarrel with the Soviet Union. Soviet Russian commentary on recent Chinese historiography, for example, accuses the Chinese of the “introduction of dogmatic, anti-Marxist and openly nationalistic and racist views.” The Chinese, for their now relatively favourable view of the thirteenth-century Mongol conquests (which are seen as calamitous by the Russians and other Europeans), for their claim that Chinese “feudalism” is the classical model of this historical phenomenon, and because they exaggerate the role of Confucian ideas and their influence on Western philosophy, are roundly condemned by the Russians for “bourgeois nationalism.”


Slavic Review ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-44
Author(s):  
Andrei Markevich ◽  
Ekaterina Zhuravskaya

Alessandro Stanziani’s article re-launches the discussion about the quality of Russian imperial statistics and the relevance of quantitative analysis for historical research at an important moment for Russia’s economic history, when a lot of new data are being compiled and used by scholars. Similar productive discussions took place at other critical junctions for the fields of history, economics, political science, and other social sciences. For example, Robert Fogel’s and Stanley Engerman’s “Time on the Cross” (1974) triggered a profound discussion of potential benefits and limitations of quantitative approach to studying the history of the United States. The punch line of that discussion can be illustrated by the justification of the 1993 Nobel Prize in economics dedicated to Fogel “for having renewed research in economic history by applying economic theory and quantitative methods in order to explain economic and institutional change.” In the context of Russian history, similar discussions took place in the Soviet Union in the 1970s between Ivan Koval'chenko and Boris Litvak and then later in this journal in the 1990s.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document