THE SOVIET HISTORIOGRAPHY AND THE QUESTION OF KAZAKHSTAN’S HISTORY

THE QUESTION OF KAZAKHSTAN’S HISTORY 71
State Pedagogical Institute named after Abay, called the work politically
harmful and scientifically complicated. M.V. Zhiznevskiy, a Deputy Director
of State Public Library named after Pushkin, accused the author
of violating the Marxism-Leninism statements considering the historical
events and the role of personality in history and masses in history;
he accused Bekmakhanov of “admiration of Kenessary’s personality”. 95
According to Kh.G. Aydarova, the harmfulness of the book lies in the
fact that “the citations from the Marxism-Leninism classics veiled the
bourgeois-nationalist concept” that may mislead an unsophisticated
reader of Kazakh history. 96
Speaking at the final session of the discussion on 19 July 1948,
the head of the department of 19 th century history, B.S. Suleymenov,
declared that “I have to say with Bolshevik directness and frankness,
that the author (Bekmakhanov – G.K.) failed the trust of the scientific
community and made in his work significant ideological mistakes”.
Suleymenov made the following allegations against Bekmakhanov,
the author of the monograph “Kazakhstan in 20-40s of XIX. Century”:
• The author of the monograph leads the reader directly to invent
idea that the working people of Kazakh society did not make
any marks in the history, and consequently scientific, cultural
values in the history of Kazakhstan;
• The author adheres to the concept of ignoring the value of the
common people;
• The author does not hesitate to rehabilitate publicly the leader
of Alash-Orda party Alikhan Bukeykhanov, giving him without
any reservations the tribute in his book, promoting and using his
materials and works, as a reliable and valuable historical source;
• The author preaches anti-Marxist theory of “single stream”;
• The author ignores the resolution of Central Committee of the
Communist Party(b) of Kazakhstan “About the serious political
mistakes in the work of the Institute of Language and Literature”,
using the statements of reactionist poets, such as Shortanbay;
• On the practical side, the book is incomplete; in terms of ideology,
it is indefensible. 97
On the contrary, in the speeches of the second group of historians
95 Қозыбaев М. Қ., “Нұрпейісов К.Н. Тaдыры күрделі ҚАйсaр тaлaнт”, Социaлистік ҚАзaҚстaн,
1989, 18 ҚАнтaр; История Кaзaхстaнa: белые пятнa. – С. 34-49, pp. 41-53.
96 Қозыбaев М. Қ., “Нұрпейісов К.Н. ТaҒдыры күрделі ҚАйсaр тaлaнт”, Социaлистік ҚАзaҚстaн,
1989, 18 ҚАнтaр; История Кaзaхстaнa: белые пятнa. – С. 34-49, pp. 65-71.
97 Қозыбaев М. Қ., “Нұрпейісов К.Н. ТaҒдыры күрделі ҚАйсaр тaлaнт”, Социaлистік ҚАзaҚстaн,
1989, 18 ҚАнтaр; История Кaзaхстaнa: белые пятнa. – С. 34-49, pp. 134-145.