Soviet Socio-Political History of the 1920s and its Interpretive Periodization in the Works of Robert Conquest

Abstract

The purpose of the article. Investigate the scientific works of the American scientist R. Conquest, his factual priorities and conceptual approaches to the coverage of Soviet socio-political history of the 1920's, his interpretation of its periodization, compared with Soviet historiography. The research methodology consists of classical methods of historical research (chronological, comparative, historiographical analysis, scientific analogy). A combined approach is used, which combines the presence of a historical context with its critical historiographical interpretation. For the first time, the object of comprehensive research is the scientific work of historian R. Conquest, author of famous works - "The Great Terror" and "Harvest of Sorrow", which to some extent determines the scientific novelty. The intellectual activity of the scientist is associated mainly with the study of the Holodomor. However, his original interpretations of socio-political events in Ukraine in 1917–1929, the formation and functioning of the Soviet system of power, the role and place of its elites, the interpretation of the NEP era, and the mass famine of 1921–1923 were overlooked. The periodization of Soviet political history used by the Conquest is considered by us in a historiographical sense. It is important to highlight his scientific interpretations of events and phenomena, to emphasize the author's concept, to find out the differences in comparison with Soviet historiography. This approach seems innovative to us. Conclusions. It is noted that the Conquest's periodization of socio-political processes in the 1920's was digital (classical dating of events) and purely interpretive (author's interpretation of phenomena and processes). His scientific assessments of military communism, the NEP, and the political struggle in the CPSU (B) for leadership and power are historically reliable and well-argued. The key chronological periods (1917–1921, 1921–1927, 1928–1929), which are called out by the scientist, are logically and historically interrelated. The periodization of the Bolshevik occupation of Ukraine, the very formulation of the problem and its coverage are original and innovative. Soviet history researcher, political scientist and historian Conquest abandoned the periodization of socio-political history of the 1920s, canonized by Soviet historiography.