Encyclopedia of Russian History

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

MACARIUS See MAKARY, METROPOLITAN.

MACHINE TRACTOR STATIONS

The Machine Tractor Stations (MTS) were budget-

financed state organizations established in rural ar-

eas of the Soviet Union beginning in 1930. Intended

mainly as a mechanism to provide machinery and

equipment (including repairs and maintenance) to

the kolkhozes (collective farms), they also exerted

state control over agriculture. Payment for the ser-

vices of the Machine Tractor Stations was made in

kind (product) by the farms. The emergence of the

MTS was closely tied to the introduction of the col-

lective farms and especially the continuing debate

over organizational arrangements in the country-

side, notably the appropriate scale or size of the col-

lective farms. The original model of the Machine

Tractor Stations was based upon experimental

arrangements of the Shevchenko sovkhoz (state

farm) in Ukraine. The Machine Tractor Stations

were introduced rapidly. By the end of 1930 there

were approximately 150 Machine Tractor Stations

controlling approximately 7,000 tractors. By 1933

there were 2,900 stations controlling approxi-

mately 123,000 tractors, roughly 50 percent of all

tractors in agriculture, the remaining tractors be-

longing to state farms. Overall, the growth of the

tractor park was rapid, from some 27,000 units in

1928 to 531,000 units in 1940.

The Machine Tractor Stations became the dom-

inant mechanism for providing equipment to the

kolkhozes. While the stations themselves provided

state support to kolkhozes, especially to those pro-

ducing grain, the political departments of the MTS

(the politotdely), established in 1933, became an im-

portant means for exercising political control over

the collective farms. This control extended well be-

yond the allocation and use of machinery and

equipment, and specifically involved the develop-

ment of production plans after the introduction

of compulsory deliveries in 1933. The MTS was,

therefore, an integral part of kolkhoz operations,

and conflict often arose between the two organi-

zations.

The Machine Tractor Stations were abolished

in 1958 during the Khrushchev era. However, their

abolition and short-term replacement with the Re-

pair Tractor Stations (RTS) was in fact a part of a

much more significant process of continuing agri-

cultural reorganization in the 1950s and thereafter.

883

In addition to changes within farms during the

1950s, there was continuing emphasis on consol-

idating farms, converting kolkhozes to sovkhozes,

and changing the organizational arrangements

above the level of the individual farms. In effect,

state control came to be exercised through differ-

ent organizations, for example, the Territorial Pro-

duction Associations (TPAs). While the machinery

and equipment were dispersed to individual farms,

in effect the organizational changes in the agricul-

tural sector during the post-Stalin era consisted

largely of agro-industrial integration. The changes

introduced during the 1950s were mainly reforms

of Nikita Khrushchev, and they became a major

factor in Khrushchev’s downfall in 1964.

See also: COLLECTIVE FARM; COLLECTIVIZATION OF AGRI-

CULTURE

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Miller, Robert F. (1970). One Hundred Thousand Tractors:

The MTS and the Development of Controls in Soviet Agri-

culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

OBERT

C. S

TUART

MAFIA CAPITALISM

Mafia capitalism is a term that emerged to describe

Russia’s economic system in the 1990s. While the

implied parallel goes to the classic protection rack-

ets of the Sicilian mafia, the actual Russian prac-

tice was different. In order to reflect this, both

scholars and journalists have taken to describing

the Russian system of organized crime as “mafiya.”

There are obvious similarities between mafia

and mafiya, in the form of organized gangs im-

posing tribute on businesses. This is the world of

extortion, hitmen, and violent reprisals against

those who fail to pay up. In the case of mafiya,

however, it mainly affects the small business sec-

tor. Major actors will normally have affiliations

with private security providers that operate a

“cleaner” business of charging fees for protection

against arson and violent assault.

To foreign businesses in particular, the latter

offers plausible deniability in claiming that no

money is being paid to Russian organized crime.

MAFIA CAPITALISM

884

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

The first tractors coming off the assembly line at the tractor works in Stalingrad. © H

ULTON

RCHIVE

Money paid to private security providers, or to of-

ficials “helping out” with customs or other tradi-

tionally “difficult” parts of public administration,

may also frequently be offset against lower pay-

ments of taxes, customs, and other fees.

The real outcome is one where the Russian state

and thus the Russian population at large suffer

great damage. Not only is the government’s tradi-

tional monopoly on violence both privatized and

decentralized into hands that are under no effective

control by the authorities, but money destined to

have been paid to the Russian government ends up

instead in the coffers of security firms.

Moreover, businesses in Russia are subjected to

demands for tribute not only from organized crime

gangs, but also from a broad variety of represen-

tatives of the official bureaucracy. This far exceeds

the corruption associated with mafia in many other

parts of the world, and explains in part why, in

the compilation of international indices on corrup-

tion, Russia tends to rank amongst the worst cases.

Russian entrepreneurs will typically be sub-

jected to several visits per month, maybe even per

week, by representatives of public bodies such as

the fire department or the health inspectorate, all

of which will expect to receive a little on the side.

The burden on the small business sector in par-

ticular should be measured not only in financial

terms, as the tribute paid may be offset by tax

avoidance. Far more serious is the implied tax on

the time of entrepreneurs, which often tends to be

the most precious asset of a small business. The

number of hours that are spent negotiating with

those demanding bribes will have to be taken from

productive efforts.

The overall consequences of mafiya for the

Russian economy are manifested in the stifling of

private initiative and degradation of the moral ba-

sis of conducting business.

See also: CRONY CAPITALISM; ORGANIZED CRIME

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Center for Strategic and International Studies. (1997).

Russian Organized Crime. Washington, DC: Center for

Strategic and International Studies.

Handelman, Stephen. (1995). Comrade Criminal. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

TEFAN

EDLUND

MAIN POLITICAL DIRECTORATE

Officials from the Communist Party of the Soviet

Union (CPSU) monitored workers in key occupa-

tions to ensure their adherence to party doctrine

and loyalty to the CPSU and the Soviet Union.

In the Soviet army and navy, the CPSU main-

tained a shadow system of command parallel with

the military chain of command. In the early days

of the USSR, Party commanders (politruks) ensured

the political reliability of regular officers and sol-

diers. As the Party became more secure in the po-

litical allegiance of the military, party commanders

became “deputies for political work” (zampolit).

These officers were directly subordinated to the unit

commander, but they had access to higher party

officials through a separate chain of command. By

and large, the zampolit dealt with matters such as

morale, discipline, living conditions, training, and

political indoctrination. Security issues such as po-

litical reliability were the primary concern of the

Special Section. The Main Political Directorate also

scrutinized the content of military publications, in-

cluding the official newspaper Krasnaya zvezda and

military publishing houses.

In the post-Soviet era, military discipline is

handled by the Main Directorate for Indoctrination

Work. Without the power of the Party behind this

institution, problems such as discipline, desertion,

crime, and others have become increasingly more

serious.

See also: COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION; MIL-

ITARY, SOVIET AND POST-SOVIET

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Herspring, Dale R. (1990). The Soviet High Command,

1967–1989: Personalities and Politics. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.

Whiting, Kenneth R. (1978). The Development of the Soviet

Armed Forces, 1917–1977. Maxwell Air Force Base,

AL: Air University Press.

E. R

OBERTSON

MAKAROV, STEPAN OSIPOVICH

(1849–1904), naval commander during Russo-

Japanese War; prolific writer on naval affairs.

Vice Admiral Stepan Osipovich Makarov, com-

mander of the Pacific Squadron of the Russian navy

MAKAROV, STEPAN OSIPOVICH

885

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

during the Russo-Japanese War and the author of

more than fifty works on naval tactics, technol-

ogy, and oceanography, was born in Nikolaevsk

on the Bug River and graduated from naval school

at Nikolaevsk on the Amur in 1865. While still in

school he was deployed with the Pacific Squadron

in 1863, and after graduation he joined the Baltic

Fleet. Serving on the staff of Vice Admiral A.A.

Popov from 1871 to 1876, Makarov was involved

in naval engineering projects, including studies of

problems related to damage control.

During the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878,

Makarov commanded the Grand Duke Konstantin

and successfully conducted mine/torpedo warfare

against Turkish units in the Black Sea, using steam

launches armed with towed mines and self-

propelled torpedoes. In 1878 he took part in the

unsuccessful effort to construct a mine-artillery

position to prevent the British Royal Navy from

entering the Turkish Straits and began the devel-

opment of techniques for underway minelaying.

He conducted a major study of the currents in the

Turkish Straits during the late 1870s, commanded

the riverine flotilla that supported General Mikhail

Skobelev’s Akhal-Tekke Campaign in Central Asia

in 1880-1881, commanded the corvette Vityaz on

a round-the-world cruise from 1886 to 1889,

served with the Baltic Fleet during the early 1890s,

and was inspector of naval artillery from 1891 to

1894. During the mid-1890s Makarov completed

another round-the-world cruise. In December 1897

he published his essay “Discussions on Questions

of Naval Tactics.” Makarov wrote extensively on

the impact of technology on naval tactics and was

one of the foremost authorities on mine warfare at

sea. During the late 1890s he directed the con-

struction of the Baltic Fleet’s first icebreaker, the

Ermak. In 1899 he was appointed commander of

the naval base at Kronstadt.

After the Japanese surprise attack in January

1904, Makarov assumed command of the Russian

squadron at Port Arthur, immediately instituting

measures to raise the morale of its crews. On April

13 Makarov ordered a sortie to support Russian de-

stroyers engaged with Japanese vessels. Shortly af-

ter getting under way his flagship, the battleship

Petropavlovsk, struck a mine that detonated the for-

ward magazine. Vice Admiral Makarov died along

with most of the ship’s crew and the painter Vasily

Vereshchagin.

See also: ADMIRALTY; BALTIC FLEET; BLACK SEA FLEET;

RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR; RUSSO-TURKISH WARS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Makarov, Stepan Osipovich. (1990). “Discussions of

Questions on Naval Tactics.” In Classics of Sea Power,

ed. John B. Hattendorf. Annapolis, MD: Naval In-

stitute Press.

ACOB

W. K

IPP

MAKARY, METROPOLITAN

(c. 1482–1563), also known as Macarius; arch-

bishop of Novgorod (1526–1542); metropolitan of

Moscow and all Rus (1542–1563); prominent reli-

gious and political figure of the sixteenth century.

Makary’s parentage is not known, and noth-

ing is known about him before he was tonsured at

the Pafnuty-Borovsk Monastery at the end of the

fifteenth century. In February 1523, Metropolitan

Daniel appointed Makary archimandrite of the

Luzhetsk Monastery near Mozhaisk. He became

archbishop of Novgorod and Pskov on March 4,

1526, the first archbishop to be appointed to that

city since 1508. This appointment may have come

about, at least in part, as a result of Makary’s sup-

port of the divorce of Grand Prince Basil III from

his wife Solomonia in 1525 and the subsequent

marriage of the grand prince to Elena Glinskaya.

As archbishop, Makary undertook reorganization

of the monasteries and promoted missionary ac-

tivity to the Karelo-Finnic population in the north-

ern reaches of his jurisdiction. He also undertook a

number of building and restoration projects, in-

cluding the direction of the unsuccessful construc-

tion of the first water mill on the Volkhov River.

The greater complexity of Novgorodian church ar-

chitecture in the 1530s, such as tri-apse construc-

tions and five-cupola designs, has been attributed

to Makary’s intervention. Makary also undertook

a number of literary and mathematical activities,

including updating the Novgorod Chronicle, com-

piling a menology, which became the prototype of

the Great Menology, and calculating the date of

Easter through the year 2072. In 1531 he partici-

pated in the council that tried the monks Maxim

the Greek, Isaak Sobaka, and Vassian Patrikeyev for

holding heretical views.

Makary replaced Ioasaf (Joseph) as metropoli-

tan of Moscow and all Rus on March 16, 1542,

and took over responsibility for the education and

upbringing of the young Ivan IV. He continued as

a close adviser of the tsar until the end of his own

life. In 1547 Makary presided over the coronation

MAKARY, METROPOLITAN

886

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

of Ivan as tsar (January), the marriage of Ivan to

Anastasia (February), and (with Ivan) a church

council (January–February) that canonized a num-

ber of Rus saints. Makary was badly injured in the

Moscow fire in June of that year when he was be-

ing lowered from the Kremlin wall to escape the

flames. Nonetheless, he continued to remain active

in religious and political affairs while he recovered.

In February 1549, along with Ivan, he presided over

another church council that canonized more Rus

saints. In June 1550, Makary and Ivan presided

over the assembly that compiled the Sudebnik of

1550, the first major revision of the law code

since 1497. During January and February 1551,

Makary presided with Ivan over the Stoglav (Hun-

dred-Chapter) church council, which codified the

regulations of the Church similar to the way gov-

ernment laws had been codified the previous year

in the Sudebnik. Also in 1551, Makary released

Maxim the Greek from imprisonment and allowed

him to move to the Trinity–St. Sergius Monastery

in Zagorsk but would not allow him to return to

Greece.

While Ivan IV was away on the campaign

against Kazan from June through October 1552,

Makary, along with Ivan’s wife Anastasia and

brother Yuri, was left in charge of running the civil

affairs of the Muscovite state. By 1553, his first

large literary compilation project as metropolitan,

the Great Menology, was completed. Makary also

presided over several significant heresy trials, in-

cluding those of the archimandrite of the Chudov

Monastery Isaak Sobaka (1549), the military servi-

tor Matvei Bashkin, the hegumen of the Trinity–St.

Sergius Monastery Artemy (1553–1554), and the

monk Feodosy Kosoi (1554–1555). Also in 1555,

Makary established the archiepiscopal see of Kazan.

In addition, Makary directed the introduction of a

new style of icon painting, which combined polit-

ical and ideological concepts with religious themes.

This new style was manifested in the wall and ceil-

ing paintings of the Golden Palace in the Kremlin.

The state secretary Ivan Viskovaty criticized a

number of the new icons for violating the estab-

lished standards of Eastern Christian icon painting.

As a result, Viskovaty was brought to trial before

a Church council in 1553 presided over by Makary.

Viskovaty’s views were condemned, but he escaped

punishment and maintained his position by re-

canting. During the remainder of his tenure in of-

fice, Makary concentrated on a number of

construction projects, including the Cathedral of

the Intercession of the Virgin on the Moat

(1555–1561), popularly known as Basil the Blessed

after one of its chapels, as well as two major liter-

ary compilations, the Book of Degrees and the Illu-

minated Compilation.

As an ideologist, Makary is credited with for-

mulating the Church-based justification for the

Muscovite conquest of Kazan as well as solidify-

ing into a formula the Church’s anti-Tatar dia-

tribes. The close relationship between the Church

and the State that he fostered was in accord with

Eastern Church political theory and received visi-

ble articulation in the style of icon painting he

helped to introduce. Several important letters and

speeches are attributed to Makary, although he

cannot be considered a major literary figure. There

exist several letters of his from the time he was

archbishop of Novgorod and Pskov. In his speech

at the coronation of Ivan IV in 1547, Makary, in

his role as metropolitan, reminded the new tsar of

his duty to protect the Church. His Reply (Otvet)

to Tsar Ivan IV was written around 1550 shortly

before the Stoglav Church Council. In it, Makary

cites a number of precedents concerning the in-

alienability of Church and monastic lands, includ-

ing the Donation of Constantine, the Rule of

Vladimir, and the false charter (yarlyk) to Metro-

politan Peter.

He ends the Reply with a plea to the tsar not

to take away the “immovable properties” belong-

ing to the Uspensky (Assumption) Cathedral, the

seat of the metropolitan. In his speech after the con-

quest of Kazan, Makary depicted victory as the re-

sult of a long-term religious crusade and thereby

articulated the Church-based justification for Mus-

covy’s claim to Kazan.

Perhaps Makary’s most remarkable achieve-

ment was the Great Menology (Velikie minei-chety),

which consisted of twelve volumes, one for each

month, and which comprised a total of approxi-

mately 13,500 large-format folios. The Great

Menology included full texts of almost all Church-

related writings then known in Russia, including

saints’ lives, sermons, letters, council decisions,

translations, condemnations of heretics, and so

forth, all arranged in categories of daily readings.

Makary had competed a shorter version of this

menology while he was archbishop of Novgorod,

and the resources of the Muscovite Church allowed

him to expand it to comprehensive proportions.

During his tenure as metropolitan, two other

major compendious works were begun that were

completed only after his death. One was the Book

of Degrees (Stepennaya kniga), a complete rewriting

MAKARY, METROPOLITAN

887

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

of the Rus chronicles to provide a direct justifica-

tion for the ascendancy of the Muscovite ruling

dynasty from Vladimir I. The other was the Illu-

minated Compilation (Litsevoi svod), based on the Rus

chronicles. Twelve volumes were projected, of

which eleven volumes are extant with more than

ten thousand miniatures.

Makary died on December 31, 1563. He was

buried the next day in the Uspensky Cathedral in

the Moscow Kremlin. Despite apparent attempts

immediately after his death and in the seventeenth

century to raise him to miracle worker (chu-

dotvorets) status, Makary was not canonized until

1988.

See also: BOOK OF DEGREES; IVAN IV; KAZAN; METRO-

POLITAN; MUSCOVY; SUDEBNIK OF 1550; TRINITY-ST.

SERGIUS MONASTERY

BIBLIOGRAPHY



i evskij, Dmitrij. (1960). History of Russian Literature:

From the Eleventh Century to the End of the Baroque.

’s-Gravenhage: Mouton.

Miller, David B. (1967). “The Literary Activities of Met-

ropolitan Macarius: A Study of Muscovite Political

Ideology in the Time of Ivan IV.” Ph.D. diss., Co-

lumbia University, New York.

Pelenski, Jaroslaw. (1974). Russia and Kazan: Conquest

and Imperial Ideology (1438–1560s). The Hague,

Netherlands: Mouton.

ONALD

STROWSKI

MAKHNO, NESTOR IVANOVICH

(1889–1934), leader of an insurgent peasant army

in the civil war and hero of the libertarian Left.

Born in Ukraine of peasant stock in Hulyai-Pole,

Yekaterinoslav guberniya, Nestor Makhno (né

Mikhnenko) became an anarchist during the 1905

Revolution. Makhno’s father had died when he was

an infant, so he worked as a shepherd from the age

of seven and as a metalworker in his teens, attend-

ing school only briefly. In 1910, following his ar-

rest two years earlier for killing a police officer,

Makhno was condemned to death, but the sentence

was commuted to life imprisonment because of his

youth. Freed in 1917 from a Moscow prison, where

he had befriended the anarchist Peter Arshinov,

Makhno returned to Hulyai-Pole to chair its soviet

and organize revolutionary communes. In 1918, he

established a peasant army in southeastern Ukraine

and during the Civil War proved himself to be a

brilliant and innovative (if unorthodox) comman-

der. Makhno’s forces battled the Central Powers,

Ukrainian nationalists, the Whites, and the Reds (al-

though he also periodically collaborated with the

latter). Makhno’s Revolutionary Insurgent Army

played a decisive role in defeating the Whites in

South Russia in 1919 and 1920, utilizing techniques

of partisan and guerilla warfare to dramatic effect.

The Makhnovists also oversaw an enduringly in-

fluential anarchist revolution (the Makhnovshchina)

in southern Ukraine, summoning non-party con-

gresses of workers and peasants and exhorting them

to organize and govern themselves. In 1920, hav-

ing refused to integrate his forces with the Red

Army and hostile to Bolshevik authoritarianism,

Makhno became an outlaw on Soviet territory. In

August 1921, Red forces pursued him into Roma-

nia. After suffering imprisonment there and in

Poland and Danzig, Makhno settled in Paris in 1924.

In 1926, he helped create Arshinov’s Organizational

Platform of Libertarian Communists, but broke

with his former mentor when Arshinov came to

terms with Moscow. Thereafter, Makhno devoted

himself to writing. In 1934, in poverty and isola-

tion, he died of the tuberculosis he had originally

contracted in tsarist prisons, but his name and

achievements are revered by anarchists the world

over. He is buried in Père La Chaise Cemetery, Paris.

See also: ANARCHISM; CIVIL WAR OF 1917–1922

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arshinov, Peter. (1974). History of the Makhnovist Move-

ment. Detroit: Black & Red.

ONATHAN

D. S

MELE

MALENKOV, GEORGY

MAXIMILYANOVICH

(1902–1988), prominent Soviet party official.

Georgy Maximilyanovich Malenkov was born

in Orenburg on January 13, 1902. In 1919 he

joined the Red Army, where he worked in the po-

litical administration at various levels during the

Russian civil war. In April 1920, he became a mem-

ber of the Bolshevik Party, and during the follow-

ing month he married Valentina Alexeyevna

Golubtsova, a worker in the Central Committee

(CC) apparatus.

MAKHNO, NESTOR IVANOVICH

888

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

Malenkov’s career during the 1920s was typ-

ical of many during that period. He was a ruthless

party official without any clear political views. He

studied at the Moscow Higher Technical Institute

between 1921 and 1925, during which time he was

a member of a commission investigating “Trot-

skyism” among fellow students. In 1925 he became

a technical secretary of the Organizational Bureau

of the Central Committee.

During the early 1930s he worked in the

Moscow party committee as the head of the sec-

tion for mass agitation, conducting a purge of op-

position members. Between 1934 and 1939 he ran

the party organization for the Central Committee

and reviewed party documents in preparation for

the Great Purge beginning in 1936. Malenkov took

an active role in various aspects of this purge, su-

pervising particularly harsh actions in Belarus and

Armenia in 1937.

In 1937 Malenkov was appointed a deputy of

the Supreme Soviet of the USSR (he was promoted

to the Presidium in 1938), and in this same year

became the deputy to Nikolai Yezhov, head of the

NKVD. By 1939 Malenkov was also a member of

the party Central Committee (CC), and shortly he

became the head of the administration of party

cadres and a CC secretary.

Before the outbreak of the war with Germany,

Malenkov became a candidate member of the Polit-

buro. During the war, he supplied planes to the Red

Air Force, and he appears to have undertaken his

tasks efficiently. Josef Stalin relied on Malenkov in-

creasingly after 1943. In that year Malenkov

headed a committee of the Soviet government for

the restoration of farms in liberated areas, and af-

ter mid-May 1944, he was the deputy chairman

of the Council of Ministers of the USSR (second

only to Stalin himself). From March 18, 1946,

Malenkov was a member of the ruling Politburo.

During the ascendancy of Andrei Zhdanov af-

ter the war, Malenkov’s career briefly declined. Af-

ter the exposure of a scandal in the aviation

industry, he lost both his deputy chairmanship of

the government and his role as CC secretary con-

trolling party personnel, in March and May 1946,

respectively. Thanks to the intervention of Lavrenty

Beria, however, he was able to recover both posi-

tions by August. In 1948 he took over the position

of ideological secretary of the CC and was also given

responsibility for Soviet agriculture, at that time

the most backward sector of the Soviet economy.

During the late Stalin period, Malenkov once

again played a leading role in new purges, includ-

ing the Leningrad Affair and the exposure of the

“Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee.” The aging leader

entrusted him to present the main report at the

Nineteenth Party Congress (the first party congress

in thirteen years). With Stalin’s death on March 5,

1953, Malenkov became the chairman of the Coun-

cil of Ministers (prime minister) and the main party

secretary. On March 14, however, the latter posi-

tion was given to Khrushchev.

Malenkov joined with Khrushchev to overcome

a putsch by Beria in 1953, but then a power strug-

gle between the two leaders developed. Malenkov

eventually had to make a public confession re-

garding his failure to revive Soviet agriculture. By

MALENKOV, GEORGY MAXIMILYANOVICH

889

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

Georgy Malenkov, Soviet prime minister, 1953–1955. C

OURTESY

OF THE

IBRARY OF

ONGRESS

February 1955, he was demoted to a deputy chair-

man of the government and given responsibility

over Soviet electric power stations. Malenkov and

former old-guard Stalinists Lazar Kaganovich

and Vyacheslav Molotov resented Khrushchev’s

de-Stalinization speech at the Twentieth Party

Congress of February 1956. In 1957 the three en-

gineered a majority vote within the Presidium for

Khrushchev’s removal. Khrushchev, however, was

able to reverse the vote in a CC plenum, which saw

the defeat of the so-called Antiparty Group. On

June 29, Malenkov lost his positions in the Presid-

ium and the Central Committee.

Though he was still relatively young, Malen-

kov’s career was effectively over. He became the

director of a hydroelectric power station in Ust-

Kamengorsk, and subsequently of a thermal power

station in Ekibastuz. In 1961, the Ekibastuz city

party committee expelled him from membership,

and Malenkov retired on a pension until his death

in Moscow on January 14, 1988. He is remem-

bered mainly as a loyal and unprincipled Stalinist

with few notable achievements outside of party

politics.

See also: ANTI-PARTY GROUP; KHRUSHCHEV, NIKITA

SERGEYEVICH; LENINGRAD AFFAIR; PURGES, THE

GREAT; STALIN, JOSEF VISSARIONOVICH

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ebon, Martin. (1953). Malenkov: A Biographical Study of

Stalin’s Successor. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Radzinsky, Edward. (1996). Stalin: The First In-Depth Bi-

ography Based on Explosive New Documents from

Moscow’s Secret Archives. New York: Doubleday.

AVID

R. M

ARPLES

MALEVICH, KAZIMIR SEVERINOVICH

(1878–1935), founder of the Suprematist school of

abstract painting.

Kazimir Severinovich Malevich was initially a

follower of Impressionism. He was influenced by

Pablo Picasso and Cubism and became a member

of the Jack of Diamonds group, whose members

were the leading exponents of avant-garde art in

pre–World War I Russia. According to the Supre-

matists, each economic mode of production gener-

ated not only a ruling class but also an official

artistic style supported by that dominant social

class. Deviations from that official style were the

products of subordinate classes. All art, prior to the

rule of the proletariat, therefore, manifested the ide-

ology of some class. But the revolution would bring

about the destruction not merely of the bourgeoisie,

but of all classes as such. Consequently, the art of

the proletarian revolution must be the expression

of not merely another style but of absolute, eter-

nal, “supreme” values.

Constructivism was brought into Soviet avant-

guard architecture primarily by Vladimir Tatlin

and Malevich. Malevich’s “Arkhitektonica,” Tatlin’s

Monument to the Third International (the “Tatlin

Tower”), and El Lissitsky’s “Prouns” shaped in large

measure the conceptualizations of the modernist

architects as they sought a means to combine

painting, sculpture, and architecture. Tatlin’s stress

on utilitarianism was challenged by Malevich’s

Suprematism, which decried the emphasis of tech-

nology in art and argued that artists must search

for “supreme” artistic values that would transform

the ideology of the people. Malevich thus contrasted

the work of engineers, whose creations exhibited

simple transitory values, with aesthetic creativity,

which he proclaimed produced supreme values.

Malevich warned: “If socialism relies on the infal-

libility of science and technology, a great disap-

pointment is in store for it because it is not granted

to scientists to foresee the ‘course of events’ and to

create enduring values” (Malevich, p. 36). His

“White on White” carried Suprematist theories to

their logical conclusion. With the turn against

modern art under Josef Stalin, Malevich lost influ-

ence and died in poverty and oblivion.

See also: ARCHITECTURE; CONSTRUCTIVISM; FUTURISM.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Malevich, Kazimir. (1959) The Non-Objective World, tr.

Howard Dearstyne. Chicago: P. Theobald.

Milner, John. (1996). Kazimir Malevich and the Art of

Geometry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

UGH

D. H

UDSON

MALTA SUMMIT

A summit meeting of U.S. President George W. Bush

and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev took place on

December 2–3, 1989, on warships of the two coun-

tries anchored at Malta in the Mediterranean. The

MALEVICH, KAZIMIR SEVERINOVICH

890

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

meeting, the first between the two leaders, followed

the collapse of communist bloc governments in East

Germany, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Czecho-

slovakia (Romania would follow three weeks later).

Soviet acceptance of this dramatic change, without

intervention or even opposition, dramatically under-

scored the new outlook in Moscow.

President Bush, who had been reserved and cau-

tious in his assessment of change in the Soviet

Union during most of 1989, now sought to extend

encouragement to Gorbachev. Most important was

the establishment of a confident relationship and

dialogue between the two leaders. No treaties or

agreements were signed, but Bush did indicate a

number of changes in U.S. economic policy toward

the Soviet Union to reflect the new developing re-

lationship. Malta thus marked a step in a process

of accelerating change.

Two weeks after the Malta summit, Soviet For-

eign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze paid an un-

precedented courtesy visit to North Atlantic Treaty

Organization (NATO) headquarters in Brussels.

Clearly the Cold War was coming to an end. In-

deed, at Malta, Gorbachev declared that “the world

is leaving one epoch, the ‘Cold War,’ and entering

a new one.”

Some historians have described the Malta Sum-

mit as the last summit of the Cold War; others

have seen it as the first summit of the new era. In

any case, it occurred at a time of rapid transition

and reflected the first time when prospects for fu-

ture cooperation outweighed continuing competi-

tion, although elements of both remained.

See also: COLD WAR; UNITED STATES, RELATIONS WITH

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Beschloss, Michael R., and Talbott, Strobe. (1993). At the

Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold

War. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

Garthoff, Raymond L. (1994). The Great Transition: Amer-

ican-Soviet Relations and the End of the Cold War.

Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

AYMOND

L. G

ARTHOFF

MANDELSHTAM, NADEZHDA

YAKOVLEVNA

(1899–1980), memoirist and preserver of her hus-

band Osip Mandelshtam’s poetic legacy.

Nadezhda Yakovlevna Mandelshtam (née Khaz-

ina) is known primarily for her two books detail-

ing life with her husband, the Modernist poet Osip

Mandelshtam, and the years following his death in

Stalin’s purges. She grew up in Kiev in a tight-knit,

intellectually gifted family, fondly recalled in three

biographical sketches. With the onset of revolution

and civil war, she enjoyed a bohemian existence as

a painter in the artist Alexandra Ekster’s studio.

In 1922 Nadezhda married Mandelshtam, and

the two moved to Moscow and then to Leningrad

in 1924. In 1925 her friendship with the poet Anna

Akhmatova began. Osip Mandelshtam was arrested

in Moscow in 1934 after writing a poem that de-

nounced Josef Stalin. Nadezhda accompanied him

into exile in Voronezh until 1937 and in 1938 was

present when he was arrested and sent to the gu-

lag where he died. She escaped arrest the same year.

For the next two decades, Nadezhda Man-

delshtam survived by teaching English and moved

frequently to avoid official attention. In 1951 she

completed a dissertation in linguistics. She also be-

gan working on her husband’s rehabilitation and

researching his life and fate. Many of his poems

survived because she committed them to memory.

Her first book of memoirs, Vospominaniia (New

York, 1970, translated as Hope Against Hope, 1970),

was devoted to her final years with Osip Man-

delshtam and to a broader indictment of the Stal-

inist system that had condemned him. The book,

which circulated in the Soviet Union in samizdat,

attracted attention and praise from Soviet and

Western readers. Her second book, Vtoraia kniga

(Paris, 1972, translated as Hope Abandoned, 1974),

offended some Russian readers with its opinionated

descriptions of various literary figures. Treatments

of Nadezhda Mandelshtam’s work have noted her

success in achieving a strong and vibrant literary

voice of her own even as she transmitted the cul-

tural legacy of a previous generation.

See also: AKHMATOVA, ANNA ANDREYEVNA; GULAG;

MANDELSHTAM, OSIP EMILIEVICH; PURGES, THE GREAT;

SAMIZDAT

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brodsky, Joseph. (1986). “Nadezhda Mandelstam

(1899–1980): An Obituary.” In Less Than One: Se-

lected Essays. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux.

Holmgren, Beth. (1993). Women’s Works in Stalin’s Time.

Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

MANDELSHTAM, NADEZHDA YAKOVLEVNA

891

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

Proffer, Carl R. (1987). The Widows of Russia and Other

Writings. Ann Arbor, MI: Ardis.

UDITH

E. K

ALB

MANDELSHTAM, OSIP EMILIEVICH

(1891–1938), Modernist poet and political martyr.

One of Russia’s greatest twentieth-century po-

ets, Osip Mandelshtam died en route to the gulag

after writing a poem critical of Josef V. Stalin. Born

to a cultured Jewish family in Warsaw, Man-

delshtam spent his childhood in St. Petersburg,

traveled in Europe, and, in 1909, began to frequent

the literary salon of the Symbolist poet Vyacheslav

Ivanov. In 1911, while enrolled at St. Petersburg

University, he joined the Guild of Poets headed by

Nikolai Gumilev and Sergei Gorodetsky and sub-

sequently became a leading figure in a new poetic

school called Acmeism. His collections Kamen (Stone,

1913), Tristia (1922), and Stikhotvoreniia (Poems,

1928) show a poet steeped in world culture and fo-

cused on themes such as language and time, con-

cepts also addressed in his prose works. In 1922

Mandelshtam married Nadezhda Khazina, who

later wrote memoirs of their life together.

Mandelshtam recognized that the Bolshevik

takeover in 1917 threatened the cultural values he

held dear, and in his poetry and essays of the 1920s

he attempted to define the relationship of the poet

to the age. Literary prose such as Shum vremeni (The

Noise of Time, 1925) and Egipetskaia marka (The

Egyptian Stamp, 1928) included autobiographical

themes. By the late 1920s, Mandelshtam’s lack of

adherence to Soviet norms led to increasing diffi-

culties in getting published. A trip to the Caucasus

and Armenia in 1930 provided new inspiration for

creativity. But in 1934, after writing a poem crit-

ical of Stalin, Mandelshtam was arrested in

Moscow and sent to Voronezh for a three-year ex-

ile. During this period he wrote Voronezhskie tetradi

(Voronezh Notebooks), preserved by his wife. In May

1938, Mandelshtam was arrested once again, sen-

tenced to a Siberian labor camp, and considered a

non-person by the Soviet government. He died the

same year. In 1956 his rehabilitation began, and in

the 1970s a collection of his poetry was published

in the Soviet Union.

See also: GULAG; MANDELSHTAM, NADEZHDA YAKOV-

LEVNA; PURGES, THE GREAT

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, Clarence. (1973). Mandelstam. Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press.

Cavanagh, Clare. (1995). Osip Mandelstam and the Mod-

ernist Creation of Tradition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Freidin, Gregory. (1987). A Coat of Many Colors: Osip

Mandelstam and His Mythologies of Self-Presentation.

Berkeley: University of California Press.

Shentalinskii, Vitalii. (1996). Arrested Voices: Resurrecting

the Disappeared Writers of the Soviet Regime. New

York: Free Press.

UDITH

E. K

ALB

MANIFESTO OF 1763

Signed by Empress Catherine II, this lengthy, de-

tailed document that invited foreign settlers to Rus-

sia, was published in St. Petersburg by the Senate

on August 5,1763. The official English version ap-

pears in Bartlett, Human Capital (1979). It evolved

from several circumstances. In October 1762 the

newly crowned empress ordered the Senate to en-

courage foreign settlement (except Jews) as a means

to reinforce “the well–being of Our Empire.” In re-

sponse, a short manifesto of mid–December 1762

was translated into “all foreign languages” and

printed in many foreign newspapers. Both mani-

festoes crystallized Russian government thinking

about immigration in general by considering spe-

cific cases and problems amid European popula-

tionist discourse over many decades.

Catherine II championed “populationism” even

before she gained the throne, probably from read-

ing German cameralist works that postulated in-

creasing population as an index of state power and

prestige. Also, Peter the Great had formulated in

a famous decree of 1702 the policy of recruiting

skilled Europeans, and Catherine endorsed the

Petrine precedent. The notion that Russia was un-

derpopulated went back several centuries, an is-

sue that had become acute with the empire’s recent

expansion, and the Romanov dynasty’s rapid Eu-

ropeanization. Cessation of the European phases

of the Seven Years’ War (1756–1763) also sug-

gested that the German lands might harbor a reser-

voir of capable individuals and families eager to

settle Russia’s huge empty, potentially rich spaces.

The impatient empress felt pressured to demon-

strate her governing abilities by pursuing peaceful

policies that her immediate predecessors had barely

MANDELSHTAM, OSIP EMILIEVICH

892

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY