Edited by corresponding member. A. D. Udaltsov (editor-in-chief) and Professor, Doctor of Historical Sciences L. V. Cherepnin. Moldavian branch of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of History, Language and Literature. State Educational and Pedagogical Publishing House of the Ministry of Education of the Moldavian SSR "Shkoala sovetike". Chisinau, 1951, 653 pages.

The book under review is an experience of building a Marxist course on the history of Moldova. The scientific development and systematic presentation of the history of individual peoples of the U.S.S.R. are only just beginning, and the "History of Moldavia" is one of the works undertaken in this direction.Marxist-Leninist coverage of the past of our peoples is of great importance for the ideological, theoretical and political education of the working masses and the eradication of the remnants of capitalism in the minds of people. This is especially important for the workers of Moldavia, a large, right-bank part of which was under the yoke of boyar Romania for 22 years, and the entire territory of the Moldavian SSR was occupied by fascist invaders in 1941-1944. The population of Moldavia at that time was exposed to the false propaganda of the German-Fascist invaders and their minions - Romanian bourgeois nationalists. A significant role in poisoning the consciousness of the working masses was also played by Romanian bourgeois-nationalist historiography, which gave a perverted view of the past of the Moldavian people in order to justify the predatory seizure of Moldavia by Boyar Romania.

The periodization adopted in the "History of Moldova", in accordance with the requirements of the Marxist-Leninist methodology, is based on a change in socio-economic formations. The entire material of the first volume is divided into " six sections corresponding to major periods in the history of Moldova: 1. Primitive communal system on the territory of Moldova. The decomposition of primitive communal relations and the emergence of the first political formations; 2. The oldest Slavs on the territory of Moldavia. Formation and development of feudal relations. Formation of the Moldavian state and its history before the loss of independence (VI-XV centuries); 3 Development of feudal-serf relations in Moldavia in the XVI - early XIX centuries. The struggle of the Moldovan people to overthrow the Turkish yoke. The annexation of Moldavia to Russia; 4. The disintegration of serfdom and the formation of capitalist relations in the first half of the nineteenth century; 5. The development of capitalism in Moldavia in the second half of the nineteenth century; 6.The Era of imperialism. Moldavia in the period of bourgeois-democratic revolutions in Russia.

This periodization is not objectionable.

The authors and editors of "History of Moldova" correctly approached the solution of their task, highlighting three main aspects of the historical process: socio-economic development-

The authors of our study guides, unfortunately, rarely manage to do this in terms of economic history, political history, and cultural history.

Much attention is paid to the development of productive forces and production relations and the history of producers of material goods, primarily the main producing class of Moldavia in the feudal period - the peasantry. A significant place is given to the history of the peasantry during the period of capitalism, since even at this time Moldova remained an agrarian country and the peasantry continued to play the role of the main producer of material goods.

Along with the history of the feudal and capitalist countryside and its population, the development of Moldavian cities is also shown. The author traces the growth of the social division of labor, the history of handicraft and the process of its transformation into commodity production, the development of commodity-money relations and the growth of exchange, the birth and development of large - scale industry, the formation of the urban bourgeoisie and, at the other pole, the working class.

The book reveals the forms of class struggle in the countryside and in the city, shows the process of growing class consciousness of Moldavian workers, and shows the formation of the first organizations of the Marxist Workers ' Party using concrete examples.

The political history of Moldova is correctly described. Moldova's relations with its neighbors are well shown. The Turkish aggression and Turkish oppression in Moldova, as well as the struggle of the Moldovan people against the Turkish enslavers, which met with the support of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples, are correctly covered. The recent sign of the annexation of Bessarabia to Russia is rightly emphasized.

The internal administration of Moldavia in different periods of its history is covered with sufficient completeness, in particular, the policy of tsarism in Bessarabia, the structure and activities of the tsarist administration in it, and the bourgeois reforms of the 60s are correctly shown.

The development of the revolutionary movement and social thought is systematically traced, and the class essence of its main trends is revealed. A great place in the book is occupied by the history of Moldovan culture. Detailed characteristics are given to folk life, the state of education, oral folk art, literature, and art. These characteristics are given in the light of Lenin's doctrine of two cultures for each nation.

The advantage of the "History of Moldova" is the successful resolution of an important problem in it - showing the economic, political and cultural ties of the Moldovan people with the Russian and Ukrainian peoples and the role of these ties in the history of Moldova.

These connections are well described in the book both in the period before Moldavia became part of the Russian Empire, and especially in the XIX-XX centuries, when, " sharing with the Russian people and with other peoples of Russia all the weight and oppression of the autocratic system, the Moldavian people at the same time perceived the influence of advanced Russian culture, joined in the Russian revolutionary movement " (p. 346).

Along with these advantages of a principled order, the book is not without some drawbacks.

In the "History of Moldova" there is no clear indication of the time of Moldova's loss of political independence. On pages 135-136, it is stated that in 1456, under the Lord Peter Aron, the boyar council, unable to resist Turkish aggression, agreed to pay tribute to the Turks. It seems that this time should be dated to the loss of Moldova's political independence. Meanwhile, the Lord Stephen III, who succeeded Peter Aron on the Moldavian throne in 1457, acts as an independent sovereign and actively fights against Turkish aggression. Stefan's relationship with Poland is also complicated. Like his predecessors, Stefan was at war with Poland, then entered into an alliance with her and even recognized himself as her vassal. Despite a series of victories against Turkey, Stephen was ultimately unable to resist Turkish aggression, since the forces of Moldavia and Turkey were far from equal, and concluded peace with the Turks in 1479, promising to pay the sultan an annual tribute of 4 thousand ducats (p. 147). Elsewhere in the History of Moldavia, where the increase in tribute to the Turks is discussed, it is mentioned that Stephen III in the last years of his reign paid tribute to Turkey in the amount of 4 thousand ducats per year (p. 168). Obviously, this refers to the treaty of 1479. Based on these data, the reader is entitled to conclude that the loss of political independence by the Moldovan state occurred in 1479. But ab-

the Torah does not explicitly say this anywhere, and even the chronological table attached to the book does not mention this date or the earlier one of 1456, although less important events, such as the capture of certain Moldavian cities by the Turks, are noted in it. The subordination of the Moldovan state to Turkey had grave consequences for the Moldovan people, and this should have been clearly stated in the" History of Moldova".

There is no necessary clarity in the interpretation of another important issue - the question of the initiative of negotiations on the transition of the Moldovan population to Russian citizenship in the middle of the XVII century. According to the authors, the Russian government, after the annexation of Ukraine to Russia, turned to the Moldavian and Wallachian gospodars "with a proposal to go over to the side of Moscow, promising them their patronage and deliverance from Turkish captivity. In response to this proposal, George Stefan (Moldavian Gospodar. In the spring of 1656, he asked through his ambassador in Moscow for the admission of Moldavia to Russian citizenship, just as it was done in relation to Hetman Bohdan Khmelnitsky and the Zaporozhye army" (p.225). The Russian government offered - the Moldavian ruler agreed. This coverage is incorrect. In this case, the author follows the bourgeois historian Yu. V. Arsenyev, who claimed that in February 1654 such a proposal was sent from Moscow to George Stefan ¹ . Meanwhile, in the bourgeois literature there is a correct reference to the initiative of George Stefan in this matter, since Moldavia needed the patronage of the Russian state. ² The newest researcher on this issue, N. Y. Kishkina, based on the original documents of the Embassy Order, quite accurately established that on February 7, 1654, the Russian government notified George Stefan about the admission of Ukrainians to Russian citizenship and asked the Moldavian gospodar not to help Poland-against Bohdan Khmelnitsky and report to Moscow about the hostile actions of the Polish government against the Russian state and Ukraine. There was no proposal to annex Moldavia to the Russian state in this document. On April 1, 1654 (and not in 1656, to which the second embassy of George Stefan belongs), an embassy of the Moldavian gospodar arrived in Moscow with a letter of reply containing a request to Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich, "that the sovereign grant Stefan to the voivode with his sovereign grace, and accept him under his high hand in the same way as Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky and the whole Zaporozhye army." The Moscow government agreed to comply with this request and sent an ambassador to Moldova. But the situation in Moldavia was difficult, and George Stefan was not only unable to take the oath of allegiance to the Moscow tsar, but was forced "to come out with the support of Poland. The Russian government refused to negotiate. Only in the winterof 1655-1656, when the situation in Moldavia became less tense, did negotiations resume, with Hetman Bohdan Khmelnitsky and the Eastern patriarchs Paisius of Jerusalem and Macarius of Antioch acting as mediators who influenced the decision of the Russian government. Having received the consent of the Russian government to resume negotiations, George Stefan sent a second embassy in the spring of 1656, together with which the conditions of citizenship of the population of Moldavia were worked out in Moscow, signed on May 12, 1656 ^.3 Consequently, the question of starting negotiations on citizenship requires clarification and correction. Controversial and contradictory is the assessment of the secret treaty concluded in 1711 between the Russian Tsar Peter I and the Moldavian ruler Dmitry Cantemir, on the annexation of Moldavia to the Russian state. The author (N. V. Bereznyakov) emphasizes that "the treaty was essentially concluded by a group of boyars, supporters of the union with Russia and the expulsion of the enslaved Turks from Moldova", that "the treaty was a document drawn up in the interests of the class of serf boyars, who were the support of Dmitry Cantemir and on whose help Peter I hoped to rely" (page 232). Were only the feudal boyars interested in freeing themselves from the Turkish yoke? Is there a tax exemption?

¹ See Yu. Arsenyev. Moldavian ruler Stefan George and his relations with Moscow. "Russian Archive" No. 2 for 1896, pp. 163-164.

² See N. Kapter V. The nature of Russia's relations to the Orthodox East in the XVI and XVII centuries, pp. 367-368. Sergiev Posad. 1914.

³ See N. Kishkin. Relations between Russia and Moldavia in the seventeenth century (manuscript used with the kind permission of the author, to whom the reviewers take this opportunity to express their gratitude), pp. 25-34.

The dash of Turkey and the refusal of tribute in favor of Russia were beneficial only to the serfs? After all, tribute was a heavy burden primarily on the working masses. Moreover, the following discussion convincingly shows that the treaty had a much broader meaning and that the detachments formed by Cantemir were mainly composed of the working population of Moldavia. Thus, the author's assessment of the treaty of 1711 does not make ends meet.

Finally, a final note on the section covering the period of feudalism. In the third paragraph of the fourth chapter, devoted to the development of feudal relations in the Carpathian-Dniester regions, the authors (F. A. Grekul and V. M. Sienkiewicz) cite a huge number of princely names (pp. 65-70), which implies a good knowledge of the history of the Galician - Volhynian Principality, in particular in the dynastic context. And if the reader does not know this, then he will get confused in a kaleidoscope of princely names. Here is a sample of the presentation: "Under Volodar's son, Vladimirko, the struggle for the Galician land flared up even more. The initiators in the seizure of Russian lands were Hungarian and Polish feudal lords. But the invaders ' claims were repulsed. Yaroslav Osmomysl, despite the resistance of the boyars, consolidated his power and became one of the most powerful Russian princes" (p.69). It was about Vladimir Volodarevich, and where Yaroslav came from is unclear. Neither in this context, nor anywhere else above, it is said that Yaroslav Vladimirovich Osmomysl was the son of Vladimir Volodarevich. It was possible not to mention so many princely names at all, but if they were mentioned, it was necessary to explain the connection between these princes.

The author's team rightly points out in the preface that the history of Moldavia should be presented within the framework of the territory occupied by the Moldavian SSR. This correct principle can not always be observed due to the state of the sources, and the authors ' team does not actually adhere to it. But if the authors failed to fully comply with this principle, they should have violated it as little as possible. From this point of view, it is unjustified to substitute the territory of Moldova for the territory of Bessarabia when considering the history of Moldova in 1812-1917. Of course, it is difficult to accurately distinguish from these sources about Bessarabia material related to the territory of the Moldavian SSR. But it was possible to do this approximately in most cases, and it should be done. And in any case, when describing the history of colonization and the national economy of Moldavia in 1812-1917, it was necessary to distinguish more clearly between data related to the territory of the Moldavian SSR and data related to the southern part of Bessarabia, which was not included in the Moldavian Union Republic. This clarity is especially important when presenting the issue of settling the region.

The presentation of the socio-economic history of Bessarabia in 1812-1917 is overloaded with digital material given without the necessary comparisons and does not allow the reader to understand the meaning of numbers. For example, it is reported that at the end of the 19th century the annual fruit harvest in Bessarabia reached 2 million poods (p. 475). Whether this is too much or too little for an entire province remains unclear. Figures are not rounded: multi-digit numbers are specified to the nearest unit, and percentages are specified to the nearest tenths. An excessive abundance of numbers leads to the fact that not only secondary, but also basic digital data cannot be assimilated by the reader.

The book is provided with maps, cartograms, photographs from ancient manuscripts, drawings and diagrams. Unfortunately, in some cases the drawings are unsatisfactory, partly due to the poor quality of the paper (for example, a picture from the picture "The Batumi demonstration led by Comrade Stalin on March 9, 1902").

The "Map of the Bessarabian Province" attached to the book is not quite satisfactorily executed. The size of the territories of the southwestern part of Bessarabia, which was separated from Russia by the Peace of Paris in 1856, is shown on the map larger than they were in reality. For example, the map shows that the village of Comrat moved away from Russia, but in fact it remained part of it. Railways are generally difficult to find on the map, and it is impossible to find out which one was built when (the map sets itself this task), and it is absolutely impossible. In the symbols printed: "Railways built in... year", while the map shows not the years of construction, but the years when these roads were opened to traffic. On the map, as on all cartograms, the borders of the Moldavian SSR should be clearly shown.

it would help the reader to distinguish data on Bessarabia from data on Moldova. It would be good to increase the number of maps and cartograms.

One has to regret the absence at the end of the book of the list of sources and literature that form the basis of the text of the textbook. Such a list would give the reader an opportunity to get acquainted with additional literature and expand and deepen their knowledge of Moldova.

It is not difficult to see that these shortcomings are of a particular nature and do not shake the deeply positive assessment of the book. The publication of the first volume of the History of Moldavia is an event in the scientific life of the Moldavian SSR. This book is also of great interest to all Soviet historians.

N. V. Ustyugov, V. K. Yatsunsky

*

One of the most important achievements of Soviet historical science is the creation of major studies on the history of the peoples of the USSR, such as "The History of the Armenian people", "The History of the Tajik people", "The History of the Buryat-Mongolian ASSR", etc. Among such works is the recently published " History of Moldavia "(vol. 1).

"The History of Moldavia" appeared as a result of the hard scientific work of a team of authors created in the fall of 1947 by the decision of the Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Moldavia. The authors were kindly assisted by Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev and other Soviet historians who participated in the discussion and review of the book.

For the first time, the history of the Moldovan people received Marxist coverage. During the reign of the Boyar-Romanian invaders (1918-1940) and the Romanian - German fascist occupiers (1941-1944), bourgeois and bourgeois-nationalist Moldavian and Romanian historians, falsifying the past of the Moldavian people, sought to separate it from the great socialist family of the peoples of the Soviet Union. Only in recent years, after the victorious end of the Great Patriotic War, a genuine, Marxist-Leninist study of the history of the Moldovan people has unfolded.

Moldovan historians correctly defined their task and consistently followed the Marxist method of presenting the historical process when writing the work. They make extensive use of historical literature (in Moldavian, Russian, Romanian, Ukrainian, Polish, Latin and other languages) and numerous written sources; the Bystritskaya Chronicle, the chronicle of Stephen the Great, the Chronicle of the Moldavian Gospodars and their biography of Gregory Ureke, the Chronicle of the Moldavian Country from the time of Aron-Voivode Miron Kostin, documents and materials of the Gospodar Dmitry Kantemira, collections of sources by Yu. Vanelin, J. Golovatsky, N. Mazurkevich, V. Ulyanitsky, A. Yatsimirsky and P. Syrku, multi-volume editions "Documente privitore la istoria Romanilor", Akta grodskie i ziemskie, Volumina legum. Archive of South-Western Russia, Acts of Southern and Western Russia, Acts of Western Russia, various archival and other materials.

The authors managed to expose the bourgeois-nationalist falsifiers of history and, despite great difficulties, to develop a Marxist periodization of the history of the Moldovan people, basically correctly describe the history of Moldova, starting from ancient times until the victory of the second bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia. The book also has the advantage of considering the history of the Moldovan people in close connection with the history of the Russian, Ukrainian and other peoples of the Soviet Union.

The periodization of Moldavian history is based on the development of productive forces and relations of production, the history of classes and the class struggle. The authors take into account the influence of external factors on the process of historical development of the Moldovan people.

The first section of the book examines the primitive communal system, the disintegration of primitive communal relations and the emergence of the first political entities on the territory of Moldova. This section covers several millennia and ends with the period of the offensive of various barbarian tribes and nationalities on the Roman state in the III-V centuries. It should be noted that this section deals with many issues that are not directly related to the history of Moldova. For example, it was possible not to mention the Cimmerians at all, who did not live on the territory of Moldavia. It was also unnecessary to set aside as much space as possible.-

lano in the book, the description of the "barbarian offensive on Rome" , etc.

Much attention is paid to the coverage of the life of Slavic tribes on the territory of Transnistria before the formation of the Kievan State in the IX-XI centuries and the inclusion of the Carpathian-Dniester lands in its composition. Despite the weak study of this period in the historical literature, the authors of the book managed to show mostly correctly the life of various tribes that inhabited the territory of the modern Moldavian SSR in the VI - IX centuries, their material culture, everyday life and the history of their struggle against various hostile nomadic tribes and nationalities.

The special chapter examines the process of formation of the Moldovan nation and the formation of the Moldovan state. The authors managed to refute various "theories" and views of representatives of the Romanian-Boyar and Moldavian bourgeois-nationalist historiography on this issue. Guided by the works of the classics of Marxism-Leninism, Moldovan historians were able to outline the right ways to solve this extremely complex problem on the basis of a large historical material. The book says: "... by the end of the XIV century, in the territory between the Dniester and the Carpathians, called "Moldavian land", an independent nationality was formed, with its name gradually being determined from "Volokhs", "Moldovlakhs" to "Moldovans" (p.90). It would be necessary to develop this correct position and more clearly highlight the processes of fusion and fragmentation, unification and separation, conquest and assimilation that took place in previous centuries among the local and incoming tribes that were the direct ancestors of the Moldavian people. The reader will be able to imagine more clearly how the long process of formation of the Moldavian people and its language took place, which developed from "tribal languages to tribal languages, from tribal languages to ethnic languages, and from ethnic languages to national languages"⁴ .

The book correctly notes the positive influence of Kievan Rus on the formation of the Moldovan people, their culture, everyday life, etc. Many of the achievements of Kievan Rus in economic, political and cultural life were largely inherited by the Moldavian people. It is known (and this is noted in the book) that about 40% of the vocabulary of the modern Moldovan language is of Slavic origin in its root (p. 91). The enrichment of the Moldavian language with Slavic words undoubtedly took place over the course of many subsequent centuries.

Until almost the 16th century, most of the documents in the Moldavian Principality were written in Old Russian. All this was of great importance for the development of fraternal relations between the Moldovan, Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples, starting from the period of their formation and throughout the following centuries.

Bearing in mind J. V. Stalin's instruction that historical science "should first of all concern itself with the history of producers of material goods, the history of the working masses, and the history of peoples,"⁵ the authors paid much attention to the study of the development of agriculture, domestic crafts, urban crafts, and trade in Moldavia. On the basis of a large amount of factual material, they were able to show that the peasants in the era of feudalism made up the bulk of direct producers, which created all the material and cultural wealth of the country. Since the 14th century, large-scale feudal land ownership has been growing on the territory of Moldavia due to the seizure of the best communal peasant lands by feudal lords and the strengthening of feudal-serf oppression. In the XV - XVI centuries, a significant part of the Moldavian peasants-Rezes were enslaved, the economic and political situation of the Moldavian peasants was especially difficult also because they were subjected to double oppression: local feudal lords and Turkish conquerors. The Moldavian people, as well as the Balkan peoples, languished for several centuries under the heavy Turkish yoke, But the Turkish conquerors could not break their strength. The oppressed Moldavian peasantry fought against the Turkish and their own exploiters. The book notes the active participation of the peasant masses of Moldavia in the uprising of Ukrainian peasants under the leadership of I. Mucha against feudal-serf oppression, which took place on the territory of Northern Bukovina, Galicia and Podolia in 1490-1492.-

⁴ and. Stalin. Marxism and Questions of Linguistics, p. 12. Gospolitizdat. 1950.

⁵ "History of the CPSU (b). A short course", p. 116.

the same peasant uprisings in 1566, 1581, 1583, 1591, 1633, and many others.

Emphasizing the heroic struggle of the Moldovan people against the Turkish conquerors, the authors simultaneously show the progressive role of Russia, which since the XVII century began an active struggle against the Sultan's Turkey. Campaign of Russian troops to Moldavia in 1711, war between Russia and Turkey in 1735-1739, Russo-Turkish wars 1768 - 1774, 1787 - 1791, 1806 - 1812 They were aimed at liberating the Ukrainian and Moldavian lands from the heavy Turkish yoke.

Much attention is paid to the development of urban crafts, domestic and foreign trade, and the growth of the urban population and cities. Close trade relations between Moldova, Russia and Ukraine are shown, as well as the positive impact of these economic ties on the overall development of Moldova, strengthening friendly relations between the Moldovan, Russian and Ukrainian peoples.

Two separate sections are devoted to the history of the XIX century, which cover the process of disintegration of the feudal-serf system and the formation of the capitalist mode of production.

Noting the colonialist policy of Russian tsarism in Moldavia, the authors were able to show at the same time the friendly attitude of the Russian people towards the Moldavian people, their assistance to Moldovans in developing the free steppes of Bessarabia, raising agriculture, crafts, and the development of capitalist industry. Based on numerous factual materials, the article highlights the penetration of Russian advanced social thought into Moldova, the positive influence of Russian culture on the development of Moldovan culture. The positive influence of Russia on the Moldavian people and the peoples of the Balkan countries can be found in the works of Karl Marx and Franz Liszt. Engels:"...a Serb, a Bulgarian, a Bosnian Raya, a Slavic peasant from Macedonia and Thrace have a great national sympathy for the Russians and have more points of contact with them, more means of spiritual communication, than with Roman Catholic South Slavs who speak the same language."⁶

When discussing the question of the formation of the working class in Moldova, the authors correctly note that the proletariat of Moldova consisted of Moldovans, Russians, Ukrainians, and representatives of other nationalities. Among them, the advanced Russian workers played a leading role: many of them were experienced revolutionary fighters against the autocracy, landlords and capitalists. Russian revolutionary workers spread revolutionary literature and the works of Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin in Moldavia, led workers ' circles, organized strikes and demonstrations, and were at the head of the entire revolutionary struggle. In this way the advanced Russian workers won the confidence and gratitude of the Moldavian proletariat.

It should be noted that chapter XXIV does not sufficiently cover the peculiarities of Moldavia's development during the period of imperialism. Undoubtedly, this development was delayed by the remnants of serfdom. Here it was necessary to provide much more factual material on the country's economic development than is available in the book. (Especially since it is published. See the collection "Moldavian SSR", Moscow-L. 1947.)

The book correctly notes that at the beginning of the 20th century Chisinau became one of the most important revolutionary centers of Russia's outskirts. The Kishinev Committee of the RSDLP operated here, the Leninist newspaper Iskra was reprinted, revolutionary leaflets were published, etc. Under the leadership of the Lenin - Stalin party, the workers and peasants of Bessarabia took an active part in the revolution of 1905-1907 and in the second bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia in 1917.

Along with the major advantages of the book, its shortcomings should also be noted. The scheme of the book is not fully developed and not fully thought out. The second section deals with the most ancient Slavic tribes, the disintegration of the primitive communal system, the formation and development of feudal relations, the formation of the Moldavian state, etc. - in essence, the history of an entire millennium. Here we talk about the events of the VI-XII centuries, when the Moldavian people did not exist yet, and the events of the XIII - XV centuries, when the history of the Moldavian people really begins. Of course, all this colossal material should have been divided into two sections.. One of the chapters of the second section is called "Culture of Moldavia of the IX-XIV centuries", although in

⁶ K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. IX, p. 377.

IX-XII centuries.there was neither Moldavia nor the Moldavian people.

The third section, "The development of feudal - serf relations in Moldavia in the XVI-early XIX century", is also poorly named. There is no reason to speak about the development of feudal relations in Moldavia at the beginning of the XIX century, since the process of disintegration of the feudal-serf system began there in the XVIII century, which, however, proceeded much more slowly than in Russia and Ukraine.

Much attention in the book is paid to covering the life of various segments of the rural population. But the authors have not sufficiently shown the growth of feudal rent throughout the entire era of feudalism. In many cases, feudal rent is referred to in general terms, such as "feudal oppression is increasing, ""corvee is growing," and so on.

The book speaks several times about the role of cities in the economic and political life of the Moldovan people. But when these cities appeared, which of them are the most ancient, what was their significance in the formation of the Moldavian people, what was the role of the rural population in the development of cities, etc. - all this, in essence, is not said. In addition, Moldovan cities include those that are located outside Moldova. "On the territory of the Galician Principality," the authors write, "cities located within the borders of modern Moldova are growing: Galich, Kolomyia, Khotyn, Kilia, Belgorod" (p. 67). If we are talking about the second half of the XII century, then the Moldavian Principality did not yet exist. If the words "modern Moldavia" refer to Soviet Moldavia, then the reader has a legitimate question why these cities turned out to be Moldavian. Unfortunately, there are many similar omissions on the part of the editorial staff.

The authors provide information about the settlement of Moldova by " vtikachs "(fugitives) from Ukraine and Russia (pp. 346-347). According to their calculations, by the 60s of the XIX century, about 300 thousand Ukrainians and Russians lived in Bessarabia. However, the authors do not provide detailed coverage of the process of colonization of Moldova, although this issue is covered in the literature ^.7 In fact, since ancient times, Ukrainians have lived in the northern regions of Moldova and, along with Moldovans, were its indigenous population. The settlement of the Beletsky steppe took place at the beginning of the XIX century. In the central and southern regions of Bessarabia, the Ukrainian population appeared by the end of the first half and especially in the second half of the XIX century. In terms of their number, Ukrainians in Bessarabia occupy the second place after Moldovans.

When describing the colonization of Southern Bessarabia, little is said about the Bulgarians, Serbs, and Greeks, although the authors find it necessary to note the significance of the German colonies, whose appearance they correctly associate with the reactionary policy of tsarism in 1814-1825.

Very briefly and unintelligibly it is said about the formation of the Moldavian nation (pp. 392-393). This important issue of the history of the Moldovan people requires further in-depth research.

The book focuses on the role of political factors in social development, while economic factors are less well covered. The prerequisites for the implementation of the peasant reform in Moldova are not sufficiently covered (pp. 445-449). The book states that "the development of capitalism in agriculture in Moldova was relatively faster than in the central provinces of Russia." But this is not confirmed by the facts.

The book is provided with illustrations, maps, diagrams, plans and diagrams that significantly enliven the text, making it more accessible to the reader. Unfortunately, most of the illustrations are poorly executed.

A number of maps of Moldavia and Bessarabia, placed in the book, are made schematically and do not show which countries Moldova bordered on. Historical maps of Moldova are completely missing.

In the preface to the book, it would be useful to give a brief overview of the main sources and literature used by the authors.

Summing up, it should be recognized that, despite the noted shortcomings of the book, the authors ' team and editors of the "History of Moldova" mostly successfully coped with the task assigned to them. The book is written from the standpoint of Marxist-Leninist methodology, based on a large and interesting factual material. The appearance of this book is an indisputable achievement of Soviet historical science.

D. I. Myshko, N. M. Tkachenko

⁷ See L. Berg. Bessarabia, St. Petersburg, 1918; "Moldavian SSR", Ed.of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Moscow, 1941.

Similar publications: L^France L^World Y G

Publisher:

Andre Chevrolet → Contacts and other materials (articles, photo, files etc)

Author's official page at Libmonster: https://elibrary.fr/Chevrolet

Find other author's materials at: Libmonster (all the World) • Google • Yandex

Permanent link for scientific papers (for citations):

N. V. USTYUGOV, V. K. YATSUNSKY, D. I. MYSHKO, N. M. TKACHENKO, Criticism and bibliography. Reviews. History of the USSR. HISTORY of MOLDAVIA, Vol. I. (From ancient Times to the Great October Socialist Revolution) // Paris: France (ELIBRARY.FR). Updated: 12.06.2024. URL: https://elibrary.fr/m/articles/view/Criticism-and-bibliography-Reviews-History-of-the-USSR-HISTORY-of-MOLDAVIA-Vol-I-From-ancient-Times-to-the-Great-October-Socialist-Revolution (date of access: 24.01.2026).

Found source (search robot):

Publication author(s) - N. V. USTYUGOV, V. K. YATSUNSKY, D. I. MYSHKO, N. M. TKACHENKO:

N. V. USTYUGOV, V. K. YATSUNSKY, D. I. MYSHKO, N. M. TKACHENKO → other publications, search: Libmonster France • Libmonster World • Google • Yandex

Comments: