title: Archival Fetishism and Historiographical Nihilism in One Approach to Studying the History of the Defense of Leningrad
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Sobolev, G. L.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Khodjakov, M. V.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2020-07-07T19:19:51Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2020-07-07T19:19:51Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2020-06
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Sobolev G. L., Khodjakov M. V. ‘Archival Fetishism and Historiographical Nihilism in One Approach to Studying the History of the Defense of Leningrad’, Modern History of Russia, vol. 10, no. 2, 2020, pp. 529–539.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu24.2020.217
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/18558
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The article describes The Defense of Leningrad. 1941–1945, a collection of documents and materials
  about the Blockade of Leningrad. The editors of the book attempted to demonstrate the uniqueness of their published
  sources, obtained from collections of the State Defense Committee, I. V. Stalin, A. A. Zhdanov, V. M. Molotov,
  G. M. Malenkov, and A. I. Mikoyan, which are stored in the archive RGASPI. However, an acquaintance with
  the materials in this collection reveals that many have already been in circulation and are the basis for numerous
  monographs and articles. In the introduction to the collection, there is no historiographical discussion. Choosing
  such an approach to presenting the material, the editors not only ignored achievements of their predecessors,
  but also fell under the influence of these supposedly “new” documents. They “rediscover” questions of military
  and party leadership in Leningrad besieged by enemy armies, the scale of mortality among the civilian population,
  and they “learn” about the existence of privileges in providing residents with food. Unfortunately, the archeographical
  part of the introduction violates accepted professional norms: the editors do not indicate whether this or
  that document has already been published or is it being published for the first time. Recognizing the importance
  of publishing documents on the history of the Blockade of Leningrad from Russian archival collections, we draw
  attention to the need for correctly introducing materials into scholarly circulation.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Modern History of Russia;Volume 10; Issue 2
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: siege of Leningrad
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: new documents
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: archival materials
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: food supply
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Second World War
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Archival Fetishism and Historiographical Nihilism in One Approach to Studying the History of the Defense of Leningrad
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 529-539.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/18558/1/529-539.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 779,57 kB