10. He had ceased to show his romantic aspect since leaving the Tiflis Spiritual Seminary: see above, pp. 40–1.
11. Easily the best work on the transmutation of Stalin’s political and ‘personal’ persona is A. Rieber’s ‘Stalin, Man of the Borderlands’, which highlights the artificial qualities of his self-representation from 1900 — and not just from 1912. My belief, though, is that Stalin after 1912, rather than becoming a sort of Russian, adopted a binational persona which at any given time might give emphasis either to the Russian or to the Georgian aspect.
12. V. I. Lenin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 48, p. 162. For the contents of the booklet, see below, pp. 96–100.
13. S. Vereshchak, ‘Stalin v tyur’me’.
14. A. S. Allilueva, Vospominaniya, p. 115.
15. S. Vereshchak, ‘Stalin v tyur’me’.
16. Stalin related the story to A. E. Golovanov shortly before the 1943 Tehran Conference. Golovanov in turn related it to Felix Chuev: see Molotov. Poluderzhavnyi vlastelin, p. 202.
17. A. S. Allilueva, Vospominaniya, p. 113.
18. Ibid., p. 115.
19. Ibid., p. 116.
20. V. I. Lenin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 22, pp. 207–9. The article was unpublished at the time.
21. Bol’shevistskoe rukovodstvo. Perepiska, 1912–1927, p. 16.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Zastol’nye rechi Stalina, p. 301. He told a similar story to Kandide Charkviani: see his unpublished memoirs, p. 25.
25. N. Lenin, ‘Zametki publitsista’, p. 9.
26. RGASPI, f. 558, op. 4, d. 647, p. 432.
27. See below, p. 441.
28. RGASPI, f. 558, op. 4, d. 647, pp. 432–3.
29. Ibid., p. 433.
30. Ibid.
31. The contents of the booklet are discussed below, pp. 96–100.
32. F. Samoilov, ‘O Lenine i Staline’: RGASPI, f. 558, op. 4, d. 659, p. 1.
33. Prosveshchenie, nos 3–5 (1913).
34. I. V. Stalin, Sochineniya, vol. 1, pp. 368–72: ‘Polozhenie v sotsial-demokraticheskoi fraktsii’. It was published in Pravda on 26 February 1913.
9. Koba and Bolshevism
1. Bogdanov developed ideas which, if he had become more widely known, would have given pause to thinkers since the 1960s who have become known as post-modernists. Although he insisted that ‘culture’ is never simply a reflection of economic production relations, he stipulated too that collective insights, indeed insights which reflect the interests of particular social groups, inform and condition what both is and can be thought in society. Bogdanov did not have all the answers. Yet his turn-of-the-century oeuvre was overlooked abroad and suppressed at home, and the neglect of his ideas has delayed the philosophical demise of fashionable postmodernism.
2. See below, pp. 357–8.
3. J. Davrichewy, Ah! Ce qu’on rigolait bien, p. 212.
4. Slovo tovarishchu Stalinu, p. 462: from notes taken by V. D. Mochalov at meeting with Stalin on 28 December 1945.
5. Even Davrishevi admitted this: Ah! Ce qu’on rigolait bien, p. 212.
6. See also below, p. 300.
7. See above, pp. 62–3.
8. See above, p. 63.
9. S. Shaumyan, Izbrannye proizvedeniya, vol. 1, p. 267.
10. I. M. Dubinskii-Mukhadze, Shaumyan, p. 156.
11. F. D. Kretov, Bor’ba V. I. Lenina za sokhranenie i ukreplenie RSDRP v gody stolypinskoi reaktsii, p. 141.
12. I. M. Dubinskii-Mukhadze, Shaumyan, p. 156.
13. ‘Sotsial-demokratiya i natsional’nyi vopros’ in I. V. Stalin, Sochineniya, vol. 1, p. 295.
14. Ibid.
15. See above, p. 53. I am grateful to Stephen Jones for his help with formulating this paragraph. See also chapter 8 of his forthcoming history of Georgian Marxism before the October Revolution.
16. ‘Sotsial-demokratiya i natsional’nyi vopros’, Prosveshchenie, no. 5 (1913), p. 27.
17. I. V. Stalin, Sochineniya, vol. 1, p. 296.
18. See above, p. 38.
19. I. V. Stalin, Sochineniya, vol. 1, p. 307.
20. Ibid., p. 313.
21. Prosveshchenie, no. 5 (1914), p. 27.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid., pp. 32–6.
24. An [N. Zhordaniya], ‘Natsional’nyi vopros’, Bor’ba (St Petersburg), no. 2, 18 March 1914, p. 31.
25. Ibid., p. 26.
26. Sotsial-demokratiya i natsional’nyi vopros’, Sochineniya, vol. 1, p. 340.
27. Ibid., pp. 340–1.
28. Ibid.
29. ‘K natsional’nomu voprosu: evreiskaya burzhuznaya i bundovskaya kul’turno-natsional’naya avtonomiya’, Prosveshchenie, no. 6 (June 1913), pp. 69–76.
30. Molotov. Poluderzhavnyi vlastelin, p. 258.
31. See R. Service, Lenin: A Biography, pp. 16–18.
10. Osip of Siberia
1. B. I. Ivanov, Vospominaniya rabochego bol’shevika, p. 21.
2. N. L. Meshcheryakov, Kak my zhili v ssylke, p. 63.
3. A. V. Baikalov, ‘Turukhanskii “bunt” politicheskikh ssyl’nykh’, p. 56; Atlas aziatskoi Rossii, map 56.
4. Atlas aziatskoi Rossii, maps 48–51 and 54–5.
5. Atlas aziatskoi Rossii, map 58a; S. Spandar’yan (Timofei), Stat’i, pis’ma, dokumenty, 1882–1916, p. xxxviii (editorial note).
6. A. V. Baikalov, ‘Turukhanskii “bunt” politicheskikh ssyl’nykh’, pp. 51–2.
7. See the account of G. Kennan, Siberia and the Exile System, vol. 1, p. 329 and vol. 2, p. 43.
8. Bol’shevistskoe rukovodstvo. Perepiska, 1912–1927, p. 18.
9. N. L. Meshcheryakov, Kak my zhili v ssylke, p. 75.
10. A. V. Baikalov, ‘Turukhanskii “bunt” politicheskikh ssyl’nykh’, pp. 53 and 57.
11. A. V. Baikalov, ‘Turukhanskii “bunt” politicheskikh ssyl’nykh’, p. 53.
12. Report of 27 April 1914 in ‘K 20-letiyu smerti Ya. M. Sverdlova’, Krasnyi arkhiv, no. 1 (1939), pp. 83–4.
13. Bol’shevistskoe rukovodstvo. Perepiska, 1912–1927, p. 19.
14. Ibid.
15. See A. Ostrovskii, Kto stoyal za spinoi Stalina?, pp. 400–1.
16. Bol’shevistskoe rukovodstvo. Perepiska, 1912–1927, p. 19.
17. Ya. M. Sverdlov, Izbrannye proizvedeniya, vol. 1, p. 266.
18. This was made clear, if only implicitly, in S. Spandar’yan (Timofei), Stat’i, pis’ma, dokumenty, p. xxxviii (editorial note). As far as I know, no biography of Stalin has pointed out that Sverdlov’s letter contained a basic misapprehension or that Stalin therefore did not live on the River Kureika north of the Arctic Circle.
19. Yu. Trifonov, Otblesk kostra (Moscow, 1966), pp. 47–8 in R. Medvedev, Let History Judge, pp. 5–6.