Abstract
Leaving Petrograd, Stalin retained no sentimental attachment to the city of the revolution. He returned to Russia’s second city on only three occasions during the rest of his life.1 Moscow, in contrast, became his home for life and the city on which he lavished much personal attention and the wealth of the state. He did, however, bring with him from Petrograd one souvenir of his sojourn there, a bride. This was Nadezhda Sergeevna Allilueva, who, in the spirit of the socialist emancipation of women, retained her birth-name after marriage. She was the youngest daughter of Sergei and Olga Alliluev, whom Stalin had known since 1900 and his Tbilisi days, a year before Nadezhda’s birth. Having seen the family intermittently in the following years, Stalin had made their apartment in Petrograd his home around the beginning of August 1917. Sergei was a skilled electrician who worked in a power-plant and ran a small repair business on the side, his wife working as a nurse. So the family, though ‘proletarian’ in some sense, could afford a spacious apartment on Rozhdestvennsky Street. Stalin’s room was small but large enough to contain all his belongings in one wicker basket that he had brought with him from Siberia. It probably was the most comfortable and sociable residence he had ever known, admired by the two girls of the family, pampered by their mother.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
D. Tutaev (ed.), The Alliluyev Memoirs (London, 1968) 131–45, 168–75, 211–15;
S. Allilueva, Twenty Letters to a Friend (New York, 1967) 47. The author visited the apartment, now a museum in honour of Lenin, in 1976.
Allilueva (1967) 93, states that the marriage occurred shortly after her mother wrote a particular letter, dated ‘February’. The context of the letter shows that it was composed before 18 February. See also S. Allilueva, Only One Year (New York, 1969) 367.
D. Shturman, Mertvye khvataiut zhivie (London, 1982) 23; PSS, LIV, 44; VILBK, V, 632–3; Allilueva (1967) 108.
S. Pestkovsky, ‘Vospominaniia o rabote v Narkomnatse’, Proletarskaia revoliutsiia, no. 6 (1930) 129 – 30.
Delo L. ‘Martova v revoliutsionnom tribunale’, Obozrenie, no. 15 (1985) 456; no. 16 (1985) 43–6;
G. Aronson, ‘Stalinskaia protsess protiv Martova’, Sotsialisticheskii vestnik, no. 7–8 (1939) 435 – 6.
W, IV, 66–75, 87–94, 463; G. S. Gurvich, Istoriia sovetskoi konstitutsii (Moscow, 1923 ) 21 – 37.
W, IV, 479; J. Erickson, The Soviet High Command (London, 1962 ) 65 – 7.
DKFK, II, 348–91 (showing forty-one orders signed or co-signed by Stalin); W, IV, 479–86; A. Zamoyski, The Battle for the Marchlands (New York, 1981) 58–9; TP, I, 758–62; TP, II, 26–9, 66–7; PSS, LI, 138, 409.
W. Lerner, ‘Attempting a Revolution from without: Poland in 1920’, in T. T. Hammond (ed.), The Anatomy of Communist Takeovers (New Haven, Conn., 1975), 94–106; Zamoyski (1981) 154–60. The exchange of messages between Lenin and Stalin on 4 August 1920 shows that there was no idea that Stalin was betraying the attack on Warsaw (DKFK, III, 244–5). On the fate of Tukhachevsky, see below, p. 204.
Lenin nominated Stalin as narkom of state control in a speech to the Central Committee (VILBK, VI, 598). W, IV, 221–4, 231–2, 473; G. A. Dorokhova, Raboche-krest’ianskaia lnspektsiia v 1920–1923 gg. (Moscow, 1959), 15–16; PSS, XXXVII, 541–2.
PSS, LIII, 441; PSS, XLV, 56, 531; S. N. Ikonnikov, Organizatsiia deiatel’nosti RKI v 1920–1925 gg. (Moscow, 1960) 72–3. Trotsky, too, thought that Lenin’s proposal was Utopian (TP, II, 731–3.)
E. G. Genkina, Protokoly Sovnarkoma RSFSR kak istoricheskii istochnik (Moscow, 1982 ) 90;
T. H. Rigby, Lenin’s Government: Sovnarkom 1917–1922 (New York, 1979) 36–9, 54, 76–84, 87, 184, 252. On Stalin’s connection with the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic and the Council of Labour and Defence, W, IV, 457, 468–70, 474, 487–8; VILBK, VI, 311. On the Mensheviks, VILBK, XI, 211, 242, 251; G. Legget, The Cheka. Lenin’s Secret Police (Oxford, 1981) 290–1.
Legget (1981) 108, 112, 134, 139, 145; M. Jansen, A Show Trial under Lenin (The Hague, 1982) in general and especially 23, 139 – 40.
L. D. Trotsky, My Life (New York, 1930) 177
and R. A. Medvedev, Let History Judge (New York, 1971) 17–18, attempt to absolve Lenin of responsibility for Stalin’s appointment as General Secretary, but there is persuasive evidence that Lenin had entrusted Stalin with party affairs during Lenin’s leave of absence (VILBK, XII, 140, 143, 161, 167, 173, 197, 215, 230, 237, 248) and that he proposed him as General Secretary (PSS, XLV, 139; VILBK, XII, 267). On Stalin’s office hours, P, 4 April 1922.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1988 Robert H. McNeal
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McNeal, R.H. (1988). Narkom. In: Stalin. St Antony’s. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-07461-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-07461-7_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-07463-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-07461-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)