THE SOVIET HISTORIOGRAPHY AND THE QUESTION OF KAZAKHSTAN’S HISTORY

28
THE SOVIET HISTORIOGRAPHY AND
of Kazakh people.”
M. Morozov, who was a servant of the party and had nothing to
do with Kazakh history, raised his objection regarding “Kazakh SSR
History” in 1945 in the journal “Bolshevik” as it was a publication
of the Communist Party, Secretary Şerbakov, Andreyev, and Malenkov
could not even raise their voice and thus, Morozov’s view was
accepted as the idea of the Central Committee of the KP. It occurred
that Yakovlev and Morozova were not as important as it appeared to
be from the influential people. It was later understood that a letter
was written on behalf of Malenkov, Andreeva, and Şerbakov in 1944
underlining that “there were deficiencies and mistakes about Lenin’s
works in some studies of Soviet historians”. The letter later known to
be that signed by KP Director of the Propaganda Department of the
Central Committee G.F. Alexandrov, his deputy P.N. Fedoseyev, and
newspaper “Pravda” editor P.N. Pospelov. 41
In one part of this letter about “Kazakh SSR History” it was wrongly
understood that they failed to understand Stalin’s views regarding
nation, because according to Stalin, the participation of other nations
to Russia brought less harm compared to the significant harm if it
invaded Georgia, Iran, Ukraine, and Poland by force. In this respect,
we would not point out that colonialism brought “great loss” and
defending this idea would have been protecting and softening the
losses of the Russian invasion.
The Kazakhstan Communist Party Central Committee, based on the
opinion emerging from Morozov’s article, decided on 14 August 1945 to
prepare a second edition of “Kazakh SSR History”. Most importantly,
this action led the way to criticize some heroes who awakened the
national consciousness of Kazakh people. A year before this decision,
Kazakhstan KPI secretary J. Şayahmetov (emulating Stalin) tried
to encourage Kazakh soldiers going to war by giving examples of
the spirit of such Kazakh heroes as Abılay, Sırım, İsatay, Mahambet,
Kenesarı and Navrızbay. 42 But, later, the First Secretary was forced
to renege on its promises. The decision in 1945 proved subsequent
events deficient in awakening the historical national consciousness
of our people during and after the war. The capable historian E. Bekmakhanov
became a sacrificial lamb as he was thrown into the fire
of the “fight with Nationalism” (A. Takenov).
In the session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of
Kazakhstan in 1947, the “political errors on the Kazakh SSR Academy of
41 Voprosy İstorii, 1991, No 1, pp. 188 – 205, 48.
42 “Qazaq Halkının Javıngerlik Dastürü”, Sosyalistik Qazaqstan, 1944, 18. VШ.