the Stalinist leadership always considered terror as its main method of struggle with a potential 'fifth column'. The cruel repression of 1937-8 was above all determined by biographical particulars. The basis for shooting or dispatch to the camps might be an unsuitable pre-revolutionary past, participation in the civil war on the side of the Bolsheviks' enemies, membership of other political parties or opposition groups within the CPSU, previous convictions, membership of 'suspect' nationalities (Germans, Poles, Koreans etc.), finally family connections and associations with representatives of the enumerated categories. [8]
Sources
The first two volumes of the Leningradskii Martirolog, 1937-1938, published in St Petersburg in 1995 and 1996, constitute the source base for this study. These are used in conjunction with the results of the 1939 census.
From the late 1980s, with the re-evaluation of different aspects of the Soviet past under Gorbachev, various regional studies were undertaken which attempted to identify the victims of the purges in the period 1936-38. [9] Early listings were sometimes published in regional newspapers. Employing records collated by the voluntary organisation Memorial and formerly top secret NKVD files, the Leningradskii Martirolog provides an alphabetical listing of the victims of the purges in Leningrad city, Leningrad oblast' and surrounding districts starting from August 1937, when the terror escalated to unprecedented proportions in both quantitative and qualitative terms.
A multi-volume set is in preparation, but at the time of writing only two volumes have so far been published. The first volume lists those who were executed in August--September 1937 and the second lists those who were executed in October 1937. It is estimated that these two volumes alone contain somewhere approaching 8000 entries. According to the census data, in 1939 the Leningrad population (city and oblast') totalled almost 6.5 million. [10]
Each entry in the Leningradskii Martirolog contains the following information: full name (surname, first name, patronymic); date of birth; where relevant, details of Communist Party membership; nationality; occupation and place of work; date of arrest; date of trial; state organisation responsible for overseeing the trial; [11] statute of the RSFSR criminal code under which the individual was arrested; and date of execution. The second volume of the Leningradskii Martirolog is slightly less detailed and contains more errors and inaccuracies than the first.
In addition to the detailed information contained in the Leningradskii Martirolog, the published findings of the 1939 All-Union Census [12] and the more specific unpublished results of the 1939 census for Leningrad city and Leningrad oblast' have been used for comparative purposes. [13] These census returns provide a picture of social composition in the Soviet Union and the RSFSR, including the Leningrad region, in the late 1930s.
Methodology
From the information contained in the Leningradskii Martirolog two separate datasets have been created with entries based on the original source. [14] The larger dataset includes all of the full entries on every 10th page of the listing, i.e. not quite 10% of the total, and contains 673 entries. [15] It should be noted that this method of selection (as opposed to every tenth entry, for example) has the disadvantage that it may disproportionately reflect surnames applicable to particular ethnic groups. On the other hand, it may be possible to identify familial and kinship relationships from such a sample. [16] The second dataset includes all of the women listed in the two volumes and contains 297 entries. [17] There is some inevitable overlap between the two datasets. Where applicable, for each of the datasets a separate subset notes the years of Communist Party membership.
From the data contained in the original source it has been possible to calculate an age profile of the victims of the purges, as well as the number of days spent in detention, both from arrest to trial and from trial to execution.
Sex ratios
Women constituted approximately 53.7% of the population in the Leningrad region in 1939. However, the victims of the Great Terror were overwhelmingly male. Very few women were victims of the purges. From the larger dataset under analysis here it seems that less than 4% of those executed were women (22 of the total 673 entries). It is important to remember that men were far more likely than women to have been engaged, firstly, in paid employment and, secondly and more importantly, in political activities, either as functionaries of the Communist Party or by participating in vociferous opposition. [18] Men were also more likely to have been regarded as heads of households. Women's maternal and familial responsibilities may have resulted in them being treated less harshly, even in instances when they did voice opposition to the regime.
Possibly in view of the relatively small proportion of female victims, so far, apart from the roles women played as wives and mothers of male victims of the terror, and the individual memoirs and reminiscences left by survivors of the forced labour camp system, the impact of mass repression specifically on women has not yet received serious academic attention. [19] The smaller dataset offers some preliminary information on the female victims of the terror, and we shall return to this later.
Age profile
The victims of the purges, based on sample data taken from the Leningradskii Martirolog, ranged from 19 to 78 years of age. According to the 1939 census returns almost 40% of the Leningrad population (city and oblast') as a whole was under 20 years of age (including those where an age was not specified). Discounting these, and more specifically therefore in relation to the adult population of the Leningrad region, the purges had a disproportionate impact on those over 40 years of age, as can be seen from Table 1. The average age at execution for the purge victims was 46.34 years for the larger dataset and 48.03 years for the women. The age profile of the victims may partly reflect the fact that, for those in employment, older people were more likely to occupy senior positions. [20]
Although only approximately 40% of the Leningrad population was over 40 years of age, almost 70% of all purge victims (according to the larger dataset [21]) and nearer 75% of women (according to the smaller dataset) were over 40. It should be noted that women tend to live longer than men and therefore constitute a greater proportion of the older age groups. This fact serves to intensify the impact of the purges particularly on men in the older age ranges. It should be noted also that those who were born and reached adulthood before the October Revolution were more likely to find themselves victims of mass repression.
Residency
By 1939 approximately one-third of the USSR population lived in urban centres and approximately two-thirds lived in rural areas. No distinction has been made in this study between urban and rural residents in Leningrad oblast', where the distribution of the population was similar to that of the USSR as a whole.
A selective listing of the residency of purge victims is offered in Table 2. No place of residence was provided in the Lenin gradskii Martirolog for 16 of the larger dataset, or for four of the women. As can be seen from the example of the Kirov railway, some of the victims were listed as residents of stations along major communications networks.
Despite the fact that the population of the Leningrad region as a whole was divided almost evenly between Leningrad city and Leningrad oblast', only just over one-quarter of the larger dataset of purge victims, and around one-third of the women, were resident in the city. [22] Outside the city of Leningrad the victims of the purges were dispersed throughout the region. For one individual in the larger dataset, Avgust Georgievich Oll', the place or residence is listed as a hospital (Gdovskaya gorodskaya bol'nitsa). Individuals were occassionally listed as 'homeless': five from the larger dataset and 11 women.
Communist party membership
In 1939 fewer than 1.5% of the USSR population were either full or candidate members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. [23] Women, for a variety of reasons, were far less likely than men to have been party members. [24] Women constituted less than 15% of the party membership in the later 1930s. [25]
In contrast to the first wave of the Great Terror (from the summer of 1936 to the summer of 1937), the victims of the purges during the second wave (from
summer 1937 to spring 1938), in relative terms at least, were far less likely to have been drawn from local and party elites. However, it is important to recognise that, despite the fact that the victims of the terror during the second wave encompassed a broader social spectrum, Communist Party members were still purged in a greater proportion than their weighting amongst the Soviet population as a whole. Of the 673 individuals in the larger dataset under analysis here, 44 (approximately 6.5%) were or had beep members of the party at the time of their arrest. Eight of the 297 women (2.7%) were party members and they had all joined the party since the revolution.
One of the purge victims, Vladislav Aleksandrovich Pruss, is recorded as having joined the Social Democrats in 1899; Viktor Yakovlevich Baier joined in 1905; and Ignatii Petrovich Nezhinsky joined in 1911. All of the others had joined the Communist Party during or after 1917. [26] Seven of the dataset had left or been expelled from the party before their arrest. Although no reason is given in the source for leaving the party, these were all recorded as having relinquished membership in either 1935 or 1936, that is after the murder of Kirov on 1 December 1934. [27]
Nationality
Despite the fact that only 58.39% of the entire Soviet population in 1939 was ethnically Russian, the population of the Leningrad region was predominantly Russian (88.79%), as was the case with the RSFSR as a whole (82.5%). See Table 3. The data drawn from the Leningradskii Martirolog demonstrate that ethnic Russians were purged in proportion more with their Union-level weighting than their representation amongst the republican or local populations: 63% of the larger dataset of purge victims and just over 69% of the women were ethnic Russians.
Some ethnic groups suffered disproportionately in relation to their weighting in the Soviet population as a whole, as well as the republican and local population figures. Most notable amongst these are the ethnic Poles, who constituted over 16% of the purge victims in both datasets, despite the fact that they formed less than 1% of any of the national, republican or local population figures. This is clearly in line with the order issued by Ezhov (prikaz 00485) on 9 August 1937 which was directed specifically against the Poles. [28] Likewise, Germans, national groups who may have potentially been involved in independence movements (such as Finns and Ukrainians), and the indigenous Finnish and Karelian ethnic groups living in the Leningrad region (such as the Veps and Izhory) suffered disproportionately. [29] This is particularly significant because there was a growing threat of war by the late 1930s. It has been pointed out that the attacks on ethnic minorities were part of a broader campaign against potential 'fifth columists', that is, those who might support opposing forces in the event of a war. [30] The findings of this study would tend to support this.
It is interesting to note that, despite widespread popular anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union, the Jewish population were victims of the purges in a smaller proportion than their weighting amongst the Leningrad population as a whole. In comparison with national and republican figures, however, the Jewish victims of the purges constituted a greater proportion.
Social composition
The social composition of the victims of the purges is a much debated historiographical issue. For the purposes of this study social composition has been determined using the broad occupational categories utilised in the 1939 Soviet Census: [31]
(1) Rabochie (blue-collar workers)--includes waged workers directly involved in the industrial production process using physical labour in factories and enterprises; waged workers employed in agriculture (such as middle-ranking supervisory personnel, tractor drivers, etc.); waged workers in forestry, fishing, mining and construction; workers on the railways, water transport and other forms of transport; employees in public catering; other unskilled labour; and also includes domrabotnitsy (waged domestic servants or housekeepers);
(2) Sluzhashchie (white-collar workers/service personnel): includes waged workers in administrative occupations and service jobs, such as leading party and state functionaries, technical personnel, medical workers, employees in education and training, artists and musicians, judicial personnel, employees in emergency services, communications workers, employees in trade, planning, economics and accounting; and also includes domashnie khozyaiki (unwaged housewives); [32]
(3) Kolkhozniki (collective farm peasantry)--includes unwaged peasantry working on kolkhozy;
(4) Kooperirovannye kustari (artisans working in cooperatives); [33]
(5) Nekooperirovannye kustari (artisans working independently);
(6) Krest'yane-edinolichniki (independent peasantry);
(7) Neukazavshie obshchestvennye gruppy (i.e. those not included in the above)--includes, for the purposes of this study, individuals listed in the original source as bez opredelennykh zanyatii (without definite occupations/unspecified); religious personnel; military personnel; individuals living in Leningrad illegally (such as 'bezhala s mesta vysylki' (escaped from place of detention) or 'prozhivala nelegal'no' (illegal resident)); pensioners; and students.
For the purposes of this study, two further categories have been added:
(0) No occupation given in the original source;
(8) Netrudyashchiesya (unemployed)--as stated in source.
Occasionally, the Leningradskii Martirolog records two different occupations for one entry. The first listed occupation has generally been used in the analysis undertaken here, except if this is 'unspecified'.
As can be seen from Table 4, the social categories most affected by the purges, in relation to their weighting amongst the Leningrad population as a whole, were firstly, white-collar workers and service personnel (occupation code 2, the category to which the majority of Communist Party members and all of the women party members belonged); secondly, independent peasantry (occupation code 6, those who were not accommodated within the state and collective farm system and therefore some of whom were possibly former kulaks); and, thirdly, the 'other' social groups (occupation code 7, who were more likely to be economically inactive and/or who were possibly family relations of other purge victims). Yet this was not simply a campaign against 'former kulaks, criminals and other anti-Soviet elements', as Ezhov's order (no. 00447) of 30 July 1937 would suggest. [34]
In contrast to the early stages of the purges, ordinary workers, collective farm peasantry and artisans were targeted by the second wave of the terror, but not in proportions which reflected their representation within the population as a whole. The second wave of the purges, therefore, affected the ordinary peasantry as well as the former kulaks, shop floor workers as well as enterprise managers and party members, religious personnel and pensioners as well as criminals and high-ranking military officers.
Dates of arrests, trials and executions
According to the datasets under review here, arrests started as early as November and December 1936, and a particular spate of arrests appears to have taken place in April 1937. Although a number of arrests predated the wave of mass repression, as can be seen from Table 5, arrests did not begin in earnest until June-July 1937, and these took on a mass character from 5 August. This is clearly in accordance with the date in Ezhov's order, which stated also that the campaign was to continue for four months and set quotas for the various regions. Trials did not begin until 9 August 1937, with the first executions taking place two days later. Arrests for the datasets under review continued until 18 October.
Although arrests took place on a daily basis, trials and executions may not have taken place daily. For example, no trials or executions are recorded in either of the datasets for the following dates: 12 August, 23 August, 30 August, 7 September, 12 September, 27 September, 30 September, 2 October, 5 October, 13 October and 16 October. A more extensive sampling of the original data, however, might indicate that trials and executions did take place on at least some of these dates. According to the data under review here, trials continued until 27 October, though trials continued after this date for those executed in November, for which data are not yet available. The numbers of individuals executed remained high at the end of the month.
The bunching of arrests, trials and executions may be indicative of the targeting of particular enterprises, collective farms, ethnic groups or localities during particular phases of the purges. For example, a number of arrests seem to have been made amongst workers on the Kirov railway between 21 and 23 August 1937, and a number of Ukrainian nationals living in Kirovsk were put on trial on 29 September 1937. Such trends are more easily identified by analysing the dataset on women (see below).
State organisation responsible for conducting trials
In both datasets, approximately 70% of cases were held before the Special Troika of the Administration of the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs of the Leningrad District (okrug) (Osobaya Troika UNKVD LO), and approximately 30% were held before the Commission of the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs and Procuracy USSR (Komissiya NKVD i Prokuratury SSSR). [36]
Three cases in the larger dataset were held before the Military Tribunal of the Leningrad Military District (okrug) (Voennyi tribunal LVO). Two of these victims had been arrested before the period of mass arrests and all three spent relatively long periods of time between their trial and execution. Efim Evmenovich Dubenchuk was arrested in February 1937 but was not tried until the end of August. He was executed in October, on the same day as Zinovii Efimovich Tsukkert, who had been arrested on 15 August and tried five days later.
Article 58 of the RSFSR criminal code detailed political offences. Article 58-6 dealt with cases of espionage, where individuals were charged with handing over state secrets to foreigners or counter-revolutionary organisations, and such offences (in conjunction with other charges) accounted for over 15% of charges. [38] Article 58-7 was used against those who had led attacks on state industry, transport, trade or finance, and again these (in conjunction with other charges) accounted for roughly 15% of cases. Article 58-8 dealt with terrorist activities against Soviet power, but, from the datasets analysed here, it appears that this was little used. [39] Article 58-9 was used against those charged with 'wrecking' on the railways or other communications networks, and, as can be seen from these datasets, was used (though not exclusively) against workers on the Kirov and October railways. These, however, accounted for only a very small proportion of cases.
By far the most widely used statute in the trials of the victims of the purges was article 58-10 of the RSFSR criminal code, which was used against individuals charged with conducting propaganda or agitation against Soviet power, or participation in counter-revolutionary activities, or the handling of literature dealing with such issues. This statute also encompassed involvement in religious or nationalist mass agitation. Further to this, article 58-11 dealt with individuals who belonged to organisations which conducted such propaganda. The statutes were loosely worded and widely employed. It was the individuals charged under these articles who were identified as 'enemies of the people'.
During the period of mass repression these two statutes alone were used in over 50% of cases identified in the larger dataset, and over 66% of the trials involving women. In combination with other statutes, articles 58-10 and 58-11 were evident in the vast majority of trials: nearly 90% of the larger dataset and over 85% of the cases brought against women.
Women
According to the dataset on women, over 60% of the women who were executed during the period of mass repression were economically inactive, or were not engaged in paid productive employment (occupation code 7, including 'unspecified', plus 'housewives' listed under occupation code 2).
What is immediately obvious from this dataset is that by far the largest single 'occupational' category of women who fell victims to the tenor were former or active religious personnel, mostly nuns but also a few individuals who were recorded as church elders or psalm readers. These tended to be older women who did not work and, presumably, had no family or maternal responsibilities. The datasets both include a number of striking incidences of campaigns against religious settlements. For example, from the dataset on women it is clear that there was a purge of a former convent in Belozersk on 24 September 1937. The occupants were put on trial on 4 October and executed five days later. Of the 31 women executed on 9 October, 14 are recorded in the Lenin gradskii Martirolog as being nuns or other religious personnel from Belozersk, and a further four from Belozersk are listed as 'unspecified'. Of the other women executed on this day, two are recorded as homeless, one of whom was a former nun and the other 'unspe cified'.
It is not evident from the information cited in the Leningradskii Martirolog whether any of the women who were arrested were prostitutes, though it is possible that known former or working prostitutes may have been targeted in the purges, as Sheila Fitzpatrick's recent study of 'everyday Stalinism' has suggested. [40] Prostitutes certainly constituted a significant proportion of women sent to the forced labour camps in this period.
The dataset on women also provides evidence that family groups could become victims of the purges. For example, Aleksandra Vasil'evna Baleeva and her twin sisters Vera and Tat'yana were all arrested on 5 August 1937. The twins, charged under articles 58-7-10-11 of the criminal code, were put on trial on 22 August and executed two days later. Their elder sister, however, charged under articles 58-10-11 of the criminal code, was not tried until 20 September and was executed four days later.
Family ties
Family connections, as Khlevnyuk has argued and the example given above demonstrates, also played a part in determining the victims of the terror. The larger dataset includes numerous examples of brothers (sharing the same surname, patronymic and place of residence, as well as place of work on occasions) and fathers and sons who fell victim to the purges. No examples of spouses being arrested together are evident in the larger dataset though a more thorough sampling would probably reveal such a relationship to be a factor in the purges. Broader kinship relationships are not easy to determine from the limited information provided by the Lenin gradskii Martirolog but these too can be surmised from the available data.
Conclusions
It is evident from the preliminary analysis of the listings contained in Lenin gradskii Martirolog, 1937-38 that the second wave of the great terror extended far beyond the Communist Party members and other elite personnel in the higher echelons of Soviet power, who had provided the main focus of the early stages of the purges in this period. During the second wave of the terror the purges had a wider impact and included former kulaks, the national minorities and religious personnel. In this respect there is considerable evidence to support the argument that mass repression was geared towards the destruction of a potential 'fifth column'. Yet this does not provide a complete picture.
From the preliminary data outlined here, there is evidence to suggest that the second wave of the purges may also be seen partly as a social cleansing exercise. To some extent the purges, possibly in a bid to meet strictly determined quotas in a short period of time, also targeted those who were not actively engaged in actual or potential opposition to Stalin's policies, or the Soviet regime more generally, but who did not fit into the new Soviet way of life and were therefore regarded as easily dispensable by local authorities. [41] These were people who could be regarded as 'anti-Soviet' elements in only the broadest interpretation of its meaning. They might be classified in other terms as socially marginal individuals and groups, and may have included known criminals. They were often vulnerable and little able to resist arrest, such as the elderly and infirm, vagrants, hospital residents and the otherwise unemployed. The case of the oldest victim in the datasets exemplifies this argument: Aleksandr Aver'y anovich Bibiksarov was 78 years old and homeless when he was arrested on 10 August 1937 under article 58-10 of the criminal code. He was placed on trial on 13 September and executed the same day.
