M. Mysl'. 1983. 270 p.

Researchers have turned to studying the history of Lenin's Iskra at all stages of Soviet historical science. An important result was the establishment of the problem structure. It is characterized by a formula that belongs to the Iskra editorial board itself (No. 18, 10. III. 1902): revolutionary thought, revolutionary organization, revolutionary cause. Indeed, along with the development of theoretical questions, Iskra's activities were aimed at creating an organization of professional revolutionaries and leading the revolutionary liberation movement. These main links of the problem are considered in a monograph by senior researcher of the Institute of History of the USSR of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Doctor of Historical Sciences K. N. Tarnovsky.

One cannot but agree with the author that "the history of Lenin's Iskra belongs to such (for the beginning of the XX century) problems, in the development of which documentary publications are crucial" (p. 20). It seems, however, necessary to define more clearly the stage when documentary publications on the Iskra theme formed an integral system. The end of the 60s and the beginning of the 70s should be recognized as such a milestone; at that time, the Institute of Marxism-Leninism under the Central Committee of the CPSU completed the publication of the three-volume Correspondence of V. I. Lenin and the editorial board of the Iskra newspaper with Social-democratic organizations in Russia on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the birth of V. I. Lenin. 1901-1903" If the publication of internal editorial correspondence in the 1920s provided a solid documentary basis for the study of Iskra's theoretical activities, the published correspondence of the editorial board with Russian social-democratic committees and groups provides an opportunity for special development of the editorial board's organizational activities in connection with the growth of the revolutionary movement in Russia. Without such a solid publication work of a large team of historians, the creation of a peer-reviewed generalizing study on Iskra would have been impossible. The author is undoubtedly right in drawing attention to the important organizing role of archeography in the development of scientific research.

K. N. Tarnovsky has been dealing with various aspects of the problem since the 60s, he is the author of a number of articles, corresponding sections in collective monographs, the popular science book " December 24, 1900 "(Moscow, 1977), the author managed to find his own aspect of the problem development.

The methodological basis of the book is the works and utterances of V. I. Lenin, taken in their chronological sequence and logical connection and containing both direct and retrospective assessments of phenomena and events in the history of Iskra . A meticulous analysis of Lenin's writings in the book concretely shows the defining significance of Lenin's concept of the revolutionary struggle in creating the history of the RSDLP and Bolshevism, as well as Lenin's role as the first historian of our party.

The author focuses on the interaction of Iskra's theoretical and organizational principles and policies, and identifies four main periods: the setting up of the newspaper, the separation from the Economists, the transition to the Iskra position of most of the local committees of the RSDLP, and the immediate preparation of the congress. When covering these issues, the author relies on a very wide range of archival sources, including those introduced into scientific use for the first time. Among them are documents from the personal funds of Iskra members, the archives of the Plekhanov House, and police agencies. We should especially mention the 20-volume investigative case on Iskra organizations identified by the author in the Central State Institute of the Ukrainian SSR in Kiev, as well as the materials of the I. I. and L. N. Radchenko Foundation in the Central State Academy of Sciences of the USSR, which allowed not only to cover a number of issues of the topic in more detail, but also in a new way. K. N. Tarnovsky also used some documents kept by relatives of the Iskra agents. Thus, from E. S. Radchenko he received a copy of the autobiography of I. I. Radchenko and memoirs of L. N. Radchenko, from N. S. Yanovskaya - materials about the participation of her mother, M. I. Willim, in the activities of the transport group of I. O. Klopov-F. V. Gusarov, etc. As a result, the materials of editorial correspondence, which served as the main source of research, turned out to be a kind of center of attraction for a huge number of different documents.-

page 129

cops. The correspondence made it possible to bring them together in a single complex, and this helped to better understand the correspondence itself.

These are the sources that made it possible to examine in detail the activities of the editorial six, to identify all the elements of the Iskra organization both in Russia and abroad, and to establish the personal composition of the Iskra agents. However, the correspondence does not contain sufficient data for special development of the history of individual links of the Iskra organization. Obviously, the possibilities of such a study are not exhausted by K. N. Tarnovsky's monograph. We must assume that in the future it will rise to the next level, and the involvement of an even wider range of sources will reveal in more detail the structure of the cells of the Iskra organizational complex under study.

These features of the peer-reviewed work characterize it as a generalizing study. The movement towards a new level of understanding of Iskra and the Iskra organization that has been outlined in it is based on an understanding of their activities and their historical role in close connection with the historical situation of 1899-1903, the state and character of the working-class movement in Russia and abroad, the ideological and political struggle of those years, and Lenin's development of theories of Marxism on the eve of the first revolution in Russia.

It should be emphasized, however, that the above results from the analysis of the monograph content, is a kind of reconstruction of the research methods used by the author, and this indicates a certain gap in it: along with the historiography and sources of the topic, the author needed to characterize the methodology of the work he did, the boundaries he set for himself.

Let us now turn to some results of the discussion of the topic. "Before uniting, and in order to unite," Lenin wrote, "we must first resolutely and definitely separate ourselves." 1 . Accordingly, when describing the struggle of Lenin and Iskra for the building of the party, the author draws attention to the practical role of the so-called Russian Socialist post in this process, and recalls Lenin's definition of the goals and content of Iskra's activities in 1901, which led to its creation. The book correctly states that the Russian Socialist Post Office was built "from different sides" - through the efforts of Lenin, the newspaper's editorial staff, and the initiative and actions of more and more "practitioners", whose tasks and functions were constantly expanding along with the growing influence and authority of Iskra in the Russian labor movement. The book describes positively the dynamics of the Iskra organization's structure (from the time of the Iskra editorial board's creation to its victory in the social Democratic movement of Russia on the eve of the Second Congress of the RSDLP). While defining the changes and differentiation of the functions of its component parts, the author, unfortunately, limited himself to a verbal description of this complex structure and did not represent it schematically. On the other hand, one cannot but approve of the fact that the book is provided with two maps that make it possible to visualize the geographical scope of the activities of the Russian Socialist Post and the Iskra organization.

A detailed review of the entire process of formation and development of the Iskra organization allowed the author to reveal the originality of the methods of Lenin's leadership of the Iskra organization. K. N. Tarnovsky notes, in particular, " Lenin's exceptional attention to the suggestions and opinions of practitioners. The truth and vitality of the theoretically found propositions he checked and corrected with real action." According to the author's observation, Lenin sought to create groups of agents specialized in various branches of party activity, put forward real achievable tasks subordinate to the main one, so that their solution would lead to qualitative changes in the position, structure and cohesion of the collective of agents (p.88).

The book comprehensively substantiates an important conclusion about the maximum observance of democratic principles in Iskra's activities in Russia at the beginning of the XX century (pp. 240-241). The editorial board of Iskra did not artificially impose its own line and positions on either the Russian Marxists or the movement as a whole, and the centralism of its organization was developed by the entire course of joint revolutionary activity, voluntarily accepted by the members of the Iskra agents ' collective as the most expedient form of organizing professional revolutionaries. -

1 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 4, p. 358.

page 130

It is also established as the overall result of joint efforts. This conclusion is directed against the conjectures of former and modern falsifiers of the history of our party, who tried to accuse Lenin of neglecting the principles of democracy and of creating a "cult" of professional revolutionaries.

Considering the concrete history of Iskra in connection with the course of the revolutionary movement in the country, the author came to the not entirely new, but extremely important conclusion that Lenin and Iskra discovered a new type of revolutionary liberation movement peculiar to the new historical epoch and developed in the conditions of the modern world revolutionary process: the class struggle was united in a single revolutionary stream the politically independent proletariat, the peasant agrarian revolution, and the national liberation movement. Another point of the monograph concerns the movement of the world revolutionary center to Russia at the beginning of the XX century. It was qualitatively different from the European revolutionary centers and movements of the eighteenth and first half of the nineteenth centuries in that they were led by the bourgeoisie, who from a certain point opposed the expansion of the revolutionary liberation movement and became a counter-revolutionary force; later, opportunist tendencies strengthened in the old social-democratic parties and workers ' organizations, and the will to hegemony in the revolutionary struggle weakened. In Russia, however, at the beginning of the twentieth century, the proletariat led the revolutionary forces. "The process of moving the revolutionary center is over," the author writes. - Its growing influence on the development of revolutionary processes all over the world has begun " (p. 244). Perhaps the book should have given a more detailed account of Iskra's influence on the international social-democratic movement, and given more details about the polemics that Iskra conducted with foreign social - democratic bodies. This would provide an opportunity to show more deeply its international role.

K. N. Tarnovsky's book sums up a long search and reflection; it is a useful work, and we recommend it to the interested reader: after reading the book, he will receive a set of information about Iskra that meets the current level of research, its role in the development of revolutionary thought and in the formulation of the revolutionary cause in Russia.

page 131

Permanent link to this publication: