The Phenomenon of Leningrad Military Museum in the first decades of the Soviet era

Anisimova Margarita Vyacheslavovna ORCID: 0000-0002-3674-5210 Postgraduate student, Department of History of Western European and Russian Culture, Saint Petersburg State University 199034, Russia, Sankt-Peterburg, g. Saint Petersburg, ul. Universitetskaya Nab., 7/9 anisimovamarg@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The modern "Russian Museum Encyclopedia" includes historical-everyday and military-historical museums in the profile groups of historical museums ^[1], however, in the first post-revolutionary years there were also various projects for the organization of military-everyday museums. The events of 1917 caused, among other things, a radical restructuring of the national museum network. A large number of new museums appeared, including a significant group of historical and domestic ones opened in grand ducal and noble mansions, most of which were concentrated in Petrograd, the former capital of the empire. Their organizers pursued important goals: the preservation of collections, the search for ways to update collections and methods of exhibiting.

The situation was different with museums that were previously part of the military department. In tsarist Russia, they made up the most significant group, only the number of museums of regimental units exceeded 300. The first attempts to preserve the military museum property were made in early 1918 thanks to the efforts of a special commission led by V. E. Gushchik: the collections of more than 40 regimental museums were moved to the territory of Kronverk ^{[2, p. 207]}. However, later some of the exhibits were transferred to Moscow ^{[3, l. 16]}, some were given to the Red Army to improve living conditions, some were merged with the collections of the Artillery Museum ^{[4, p. 100-101]}. Despite this, the tasks assigned to the commission were completed during 1918.

After saving some collections from loss and dispersion, the question arose about the further development of military museums. Some of them were subordinated to the People's Commissariat for Military Affairs (People's Commissariat for Military Affairs): the Artillery and Naval Museums, as well as the Museum of the Naval School.

However, most of the military museums turned out to be without departmental affiliation, among them the Museum of Military Educational Institutions of the old time in the Menshikov Palace, the Quartermaster, Suvorov, the Museum of Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich, the World War Museum and the Znamenny Department, the historical and household funds of regimental museums, the central and children's Village military museum funds ^{[5, pp. 67-68]}. To streamline the work in July 1919 they were taken over by the Petrograd Department for Museums and the Protection of Monuments of Art and Antiquity. The general scientific management of all military museums began to be carried out by the Section for Military Museums created at the Museum Department of the People's Commissariat of Education (Narkompros) ^{[6, L. 6]}. Military historian A. K. Bayov was appointed to the post of head. However, in the autumn of 1919, he joined the army of N. N. Yudenich and subsequently emigrated to Estonia. P. P. Potocki, the organizer of the regimental museum of the I Artillery Brigade, was elected the new chairman.

The Section included historians, archivists, organizers of regimental museums from among the officers of the former imperial army, which had a huge impact on the nature of its activities. Members of the Section in 1919 were heraldist and collector N. A. Tipolt, organizer of the museum of the Life Guards Sapper Battalion, military archivist G. S. Gabaev; specialist in vexillology, heraldry and numismatics P. I. Belavenets; military historian B. N. Riznikov, military writers V. V. and N. P. Gervais

^{[7, L. 34-34 However, the Section for Military Museums was already removed from the staff of the Museum Department of the Drug Survey in 1922, continuing to exist thanks to the personal initiative of the members under the name of the Meeting of Military Museums. The staff of the Section (Meetings) dealt with the organization of a single military museum. The idea of setting up a joint museum telling about the military history of Russia arose in the early twentieth century, but was not implemented due to lack of funding and external and internal political circumstances [8, pp. 167-168]}. Employees of the Section, former career officers, took part in the First World War, in connection with which the main task of the new united museum was to perpetuate the memory of her. Thus, the recently ended Great War acted as a unifying factor for the officers' corporation, and the unified military museum was supposed to serve as a universal memorial legitimizing the memory of the war.

In 1919, the Chairman of the Section on Military Museums, P. P. Potocki, presented his project for the organization of a single military history museum, consisting of three large departments ^{[9, l. 11-12 vol.]}. The first of them - the exhibition part – assumed the formation of three sections. The historical section was to be organized according to the epochs corresponding to the time of the reign of the Russian emperors, and the exhibits were to reflect significant military battles and personalities of the commanders. The second section assumed the representation of large military equipment, weapons, military-sanitary equipment of troops. The last section was called household and was designed to reconstruct the regimental museums, which are memorial rooms, and assumed the changeability of expositions.

The Scientific Reserve was the second department of the future museum, complementing the exhibition part, which assumed the same division according to the chronological principle. From the presented project, it remains unclear the selection of exhibits in the scientific reserve, "which cannot add anything from the point of view of the historical depiction of each epoch in the indicative part of the museum, but at the same time will appear in addition to the one in this part of the museum" ^{[9, l. 11 vol.]}. Probably, this section can be correlated with scientific and auxiliary funds of modern museums. The third department, which was a reserve fund, was apparently supposed to make up a doublet fund for the exchange of objects with non-military museums. In addition, the unified military museum was to include an archive, a library, a lecture hall, a restoration workshop, its own publishing house and a photo workshop.

The collections of the regimental museums were to form the basis for the household section, which is why it is necessary to consider in detail which exhibits were part of them. In 1919, an inventory of the regimental property was compiled, thanks to which it is possible to identify the main groups of exhibits. They included: portraits and engravings, uniforms and equipment (uniforms, saddles, bandoliers, shells, insignia); albums, blotters, notebooks, notebooks, brochures, books, archival files; gifts from the highest persons (relics, insignia, cups); church property of regimental units (vestments icons, images, vestments of priests); banners, weapons; busts, bas-reliefs, high reliefs, medals ^{[10, l. 2-2 vol.]}. Thus, in the representation of regimental museums, "everyday life" was considered not as objects of a utilitarian nature used in marching or everyday life, but as objects of painting, decorative andapplied art, cult, granted regalia, samples of uniforms, equipment, weapons. The first post-revolutionary project of the military history museum assumed, thus, the preservation of memorial rooms, and not their reinterpretation taking into account the requirements of modern times.

The following project was presented by G. S. Gabaev at the Petrograd Museum Conference in 1923 and assumed not only the history of the Russian imperial army, but also the development of the Soviet army and its weapons and equipment. According to the author of the project, the museum being created should not be military-historical, but military ^{[9, l. 13]}. To do this, he proposed to conduct an inventory of exhibits in all military museums and divide them into several groups, including:

1. material and organizational, including diagrams and diagrams on the history of the organization of the armed forces in the country, equipment and uniforms, weapons, sanitary supplies;

2. military equipment with division by type of troops;

3. the history of military art with photographs and diagrams of the organization of military service depending on the era;

4. military-historical monuments, namely the highest gifts, regalia, trophies taken in battles, portraits of military leaders;

5. military and everyday monuments "illustrating the training and preparation of troops" ^{[11, pp. 26-27]}. The draft version preserved in the Manuscripts Department of the Russian National Library explains that this group should include "former regimental museums, with the preservation of all specifically regimental in its composition" ^{[12, L. 7]}.

The unification of exhibits of all military museums proposed by G. S. Gabaev can be considered difficult to implement. Obviously, they differed in the nature and organization of stock collections. In addition, the 1923 project is dominated by illustrative material (drawings, diagrams, diagrams), which should remain auxiliary both in the formation of collections and in the organization of expositions, complementing the theme, and not replacing it with itself.

In general, both presented projects needed additional development of the types of structural units and their functions, in a specific plan for the acquisition of stock collections, as well as a conceptual justification of activities taking into account the current political situation. Nevertheless, these projects can be considered as the first steps towards the organization of a single military museum.

By 1925, the staff of the Section (Meetings) a new project was developed, which attempted to finally divide military museums by departmental affiliation. Museums run by the People's Commissariat of Military Affairs were named military-technical and special. Museums related to the People's Commissariat of Education were called military-household. An Engineering castle was assigned to them, where it was planned to place art collections: art galleries, graphics, sculpture, as well as samples of uniforms, equipment and memorable gifts. The collections of the following museums were concentrated here: regimental, Suvorov, Quartermaster, military educational institutions of the old time, Mikhail Nikolaevich, the World War, as well as the collections of the military department of the State Museum Fund ^{[9, l. 6 vol.]}. In case of non-receipt of an Engineering lock to accommodate collections, the Quartermaster Museum was transformed into a museum of uniforms and equipment and deployed on the spot ^{[13, p. 94]}, and temporary exhibitions of the household department could be held in the premises of the Suvorov Museum ^{[9, l. 7 vol.]}.

Thus, a household department was organized from the museums of the People's Commissariat of Education, "where a section for each historical epoch should give a vivid picture of the horrors of war and the oppression of militarism in accordance with the politics, economy and culture of the era" ^{[9, L. 9]}. In the absence of a clear structure and elaborated thematic and exposition plans, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the future structure of the military household department. However, from the proposed division of exhibits into military-technical and military-household items, it was hardly possible to organize a full-fledged exposition, which requires a variety of material that gives a holistic characterization of the issue.

By the middle of 1925, the People's Commissariat of Education recognized the idea of creating a unified military museum as untenable, which was due to a lack of funding. Moreover, the Section staff was informed that it would not be possible to keep the People's Commissariat for the care of the current military museums and funds. G. S. Gabaev began developing a project to include military household property in the State Russian Museum as a department ^{[14, l. 3 vol.]}, which was also unsuccessful.

Preserving the memory of the military exploits of the past was a function of the military department, which was developed at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries. in the form of the creation of regimental museums and research on the history of military units, it was aimed at consolidating the officer corporation. Due to the lack of continuity between the old and new armies after 1917, this function was lost by the military department, but it was continued by former officers of the Russian Imperial Army, united by the Section for Military Museums. Its employees assumed the responsibilities of perpetuating the memory of the First World War and creating a unified military history museum. However, the projects they developed turned out to be untimely. In April 1926, the head of the Quartermaster Museum, B. N. Riznikov, was arrested, in June – G. S. Gabaev, in September P. P. Potocki was suspended ^{[14, L. 25 vol.]}. In 1927, the Section for Military Museums ceased its activities. The last surviving meeting log is dated May 19, 1927 ^{[15, l. 40]}.

In 1927, all military museums were transferred to the system of the People's Commissariat of Military Affairs, and in March 1930, as part of the Political Directorate of the Workers' and Peasants' Red Army (Red Army), the Military Household was founded, renamed in May into the Military Historical and Household Museum. The basis of his collections were the funds of museums previously located under the jurisdiction of the People's Commissariat of Education ^{[16, L. 1, 3]}. The new museum is located on the territory of Kronverk in several rooms unsuitable for storing exhibits, with a leaky roof and without heating ^{[17, L. 5]}, where repairs have not been carried out for 30 years. In 1932, the office of the museum was transferred to the House of the Red Army on Volodarsky Avenue (sovr. Foundry). A watchman remained in Kronverka to protect the exhibits and monitor fire safety ^{[16, l. 18]}. The state of the Military-Historical-Everyday Museum was reflected in the memoirs of M. F. Kosinsky, who became an employee in 1934: "I saw not even a warehouse, but rather a dump, also called a "museum" for the diversion of eyes. <...> The Museum was given negligible funds, which were barely enough to pay for a few employees and for current expenses.<...> Funds for the repair of premises, not to mention the restoration and conservation of exhibits, were not allocated" ^{[18, p. 152]}.

Nevertheless, the work on the scientific inventory was carried out ^{[19, p. 19]}, which is also confirmed by the preserved markings and end-to-end numbering on museum items. By 1937, about 17.5 thousand exhibits out of a total of 100 thousand were accounted for ^{[17, l. 5]}. The funds were organized according to the source of receipt: Mikhailovsky, Znamenny, Suvorovsky ^{[19, p. 19]}.

There was also the acquisition of funds with exhibits reflecting the life of the new army: in 1933-1937, the number of museum items increased by 20 thousand units. The preserved archival documentation does not allow us to give them a detailed description, but some exhibits can help in this – for example, a set of situational photographs "From the life, life and studies of the Red Army", currently in the funds of the Military Medical Museum of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation ^[20]. Many of the photos have several markings: through numbering and ink stamps of the Military Historical and Everyday Museum. Of particular interest among them are photographs of consumer societies organized in the Leningrad region. In the mid-1920s, consumer societies took patronage over military units and orphanages, participated in agitation against illiteracy. At a meeting of the board of the Peterhof Consumer Society on February 12, 1926, it was decided to involve military personnel in cooperation ^{[21, l. 30]}, which was reflected in this set of photographs. The Society organized Red Army canteens and tea shops, shops and benches, children's rooms, bookstalls. It should also be noted the punctures in the corners of the passepartout. Perhaps the photographs could be used at reporting exhibitions dedicated to the work of the societies. In this set there are also group photos of students of the Atheists Seminary at the House of the Red Army and Navy and Artillery Advanced Training courses for Commanders (AKUX) for political workers.

Despite the absence of a permanent exhibition, the collections of the Military Historical and Everyday Museum in the early 1930s were repeatedly exhibited at exhibitions in the House of the Red Army in Leningrad and in the Central Museum of the Red Army in Moscow: "Life and life of foreign armies" (1931), "Civil War" (1932), "KVZhD" (1932), "To the XV anniversary of the Red Army" (1934). The following were also issued to Leningrad museums: the State Hermitage, the Russian Museum, the State Museum of the Revolution and its branch estate "Gruzino", the State Museum of Ethnography, suburban palaces-museums, as well as costume workshops at film studios and theaters ^{[22, l. 21-22 vol.]}.

In 1933, a special commission was created to assess the condition and exhibits of the Military Historical and Everyday Museum, which found it possible to turn again to the creation of a military historical museum. The main difference of the new project was its closed type. Thus, the new museum was supposed to help the Red Army soldiers adopt the pre-revolutionary experience. Separately, it was pointed out that "the exposition and selection of material should be based on strictly verified scientific sources, based on Marxist-Leninist methodology." It was decided to make up for the lack of premises with the help of the building of the Suvorov Museum occupied by Osoaviakhim ^{[17, l. 6-7]}.

The commission divided the collections of the Military-Historical-Household Museum into groups to systematize the funds and arrange the exposition, and decisions were immediately made on some of them.

1. The form of clothing. In this group, the best samples of domestic uniforms should be selected for preservation, the rest should be transferred to the theater of the Leningrad Military District for use in productions and to the Military Economic Management for implementation. Foreign uniforms were supposed to be used for exhibition purposes.

2. Painting and graphics;

3. Sculpture;

4. Horse and human equipment;

5. Banners;

6. Compile a reference library from the book fund, restore one officer's and one soldier's libraries belonging to a certain era.

7. Albums must be completely saved for the device exposures. Select the most valuable of the individual photos, transfer the rest for implementation.

8. Orders, medals, badges were supposed to be preserved completely.

9. Partially transfer archival material to archival institutions.

10. Relics, gifts, souvenirs.

11. Of the objects of worship, save one set of objects of worship for use at exhibitions, and implement the rest by turning to the political and educational needs of the Leningrad Military District.

12. The negative fund was supposed to be preserved completely.

13. The Suvorov Foundation was supposed to be preserved completely and to organize the Suvorov corner, where to concentrate graphic and written materials on the era of Suvorov.

Prior to the deployment of a full-fledged exposition, it was necessary to take inventory and make complete inventories, allocate valuable material and preserve it for a long time, transfer the remaining items for sale ^{[17, l. 10-17]}.

The new project of the military History Museum also remained only on paper, no further steps were taken to implement it. However, in this case, the time chosen for another attempt to return to the idea of creating a military museum is interesting. The head of the Military Historical and Everyday Museum and one of the participants of this commission was T. I. Vorobyov, who was called up for service in 1918. During the Civil War, he fought on the side of the Bolsheviks, after its completion he graduated from the Archival Institute, was fond of military history and was an expert in the military activities of A.V. Suvorov ^{[18, pp. 152-153]}. Thus, it can be concluded that the function of memory preservation has returned to the military department thanks to a new generation of servicemen who realized the continuity of the two armies and the need to turn to the military history of the pre-revolutionary period. Confirmation of this can be seen in the need to organize a "Suvorov corner". Probably thanks to the efforts of T. I. Vorobyov.

The financing of the Military Historical and Everyday Museum, which had been practically stopped for several years ^{[22, l. 9]}, did not allow to deploy a full-fledged exposition, and in June 1937 it became part of the Artillery Museum as a Historical Department. Such consolidation was aimed at solving current problems. First of all, the Artillery Museum had an active exposition, where it was possible to present the exhibits of the Military Historical and Everyday Museum, and also had a staff of researchers necessary for inventory and systematization of funds. In addition, there was no need to organize the transportation of collections, since both museums were located on the territory of Kronverk.

The military-historical-household Museum existed in 1930-1937 in a closed form, without being able to arrange an exposition. Its organization was a direct consequence of the work carried out by the Section on Military Museums of the Museum Department of the People's Commissariat of Education. However, from the projects of the 1920s. The military-historical-household Museum was different. An analysis of some of the preserved exhibits indicates that the acquisition of funds took place with the help of museum objects that record the life of military personnel of a modern, post-revolutionary country. The approach to the evaluation of household items has also changed: in the first half of the 1920s they were perceived as exhibits of high artistic or memorial value, in the 1930s - as carrying a utilitarian function, really used in the military environment. Thus, the preserved state of military museums, in which they were located during the first post-revolutionary decade, was overcome.

The Military-Historical-Household Museum also differed from non-military museums of everyday life, many of which were liquidated or repurposed in the early 1930s. The reason for the preservation of military museums was the growing militarization of society. The new Empire needed museums that served as a means of ideological education, historical and everyday museums could not claim this role.

It should also be noted the important symbolic significance that the transfer of collections to the Artillery Museum had. During the 1930s, there began to be tendencies in the internal politics of the country to return to the imperial model of government, which can be traced in the museum sphere. The Artillery Museum was one of the oldest military museums, and it included the collections of the Russian Imperial army, which allows us to talk about historical and cultural continuity. Thus, museum experiments and searches of the 1920s were completed, including attempts to divide military museums into "destructive" (technical) and "creative" (everyday) ones. They were united in the pre-revolutionary imperial museum.

Estimates of military museum construction in the early years of Soviet power appeared already in the early 1930s. In an article by S. V. Polunin, published in 1932 in the magazine "Soviet Museum", this time (1918-1928) is called "the period of complete calm". The author points out that "there was no time for museums" ^{[23, p. 42]}. The attitude to the problem did not change in the early 1960s. E. I. Vostokov negatively assesses the activities for the preservation of military museum property, seeing in these actions an attempt to preserve the relics of the imperial army, the nobility and the Russian monarchs ^{[24, p. 208]}. The author sees a special threat to the Soviet system in attempts to perpetuate the memory of the First World War in the form of a museum. In his opinion, in this way, attention could be diverted from a really important event – the establishment of Soviet power ^{[24, p. 209]}. At the end of the 1990s, studies began to appear that consider this topic from a different angle ^[4].

Currently, the issue of the preservation of military museum property in the first decades of Soviet power and the attempts made to represent it does not lose relevance. This article is intended to highlight the existing gaps in the topic of domestic military museums.