page96

GRANDPARENTS

Grandfathers

I didn't have any grandfathers. Both died before I was born, and my mother and father never told me much about them. They each had their own reasons. My mother's father was dispossessed and then repressed as an enemy of the people. Daddy's father was Jewish and had the last name of Rabinovich. I do not know if my father was informed about this dark spot in his biography when they met in 1948 in the editorial office of "Young Bolshevik" magazine. But I do know that he concealed the fact that he bore my mother's and not my father's surname. Mum only found this out by chance after I was born. It was like this. Auntie Shura, my mother's sister, was walking with me in the yard of our house in Glazovsky Lane. My grandparents had lived there since the mid-20s, the yard was small and everyone knew each other. "Is this Rabinowitz's granddaughter?" - Aunt Shura was suddenly asked by an old man sitting next to her on the bench. It was 1949, the campaign against cosmopolitanism was in full swing, and this question hardly pleased my aunt. "You are mistaken," she replied, "this is the granddaughter of the Dadikins. "Do you live on the first floor? In flat 3?" - the old man persisted. "Yes," said Aunt Shura. "That's what I'm telling you, that's Rabinovitch's granddaughter." Aunt Shura grabbed me in her arms and ran home. "Nina, do you know who that is?" "My Mashenka," my mother said confusedly. "It's Rabinovitch's granddaughter!".

page97

The news had no effect on our family, except that Auntie Shura started calling me "Our little Sarochka".

My grandfather's picture was on my father's desk. I knew he was a maths teacher and died during the war in evacuation in Sosnovskoye in the Gorki region. Dad and his brothers went to look for his grave, but they didn't find it.

Mum didn't have a picture of Dad. When he was first arrested, she was 5 years old. She did not remember him and did not recognise him when he returned from the camp. He was buried in Andreapol. In 1990 my mother and I went to her motherland, the cemetery was abandoned, only mounds with some crosses and monuments remained. We could not find my grandfather's grave.

Peter (Nathan) Osipovich Rabinovich

Parents. Baptism. University

My acquaintance with my grandfather took place seventy years after his death. It began with the personal file of a Moscow University graduate, preserved in the Central Historical Archive of Moscow. I learned that he was born in Kishinev, Bessarabian Province, on 19 February 1876 and was baptised on 13 November 1888 in Odessa by Kornman, the pastor of the Evangelical-Reformed parish. Being baptised at the age of 12 in an Evangelical-Reformed church is understandable. After all, his father Joseph Rabinowitz himself converted to Christianity in 1885. My grandfather received the name Peter at baptism, was named Nathan until he was 12 years old, and later in many official documents was referred to as Nathan-Peter.

page98

Gradually the name Nathan fell away and the patronymic Josephovich was transformed into Osipovich.

Nathan was the youngest of seven children. The difference between him and his elder brother Vladimir was 20 years. The closest in age was David (after baptism Ivan), born in 1874. David and Nathan were baptised on the same day and studied at the same Grammar School - Second Kishinev Grammar School, with a one year difference, Ivan studied in the Grammar School for 11 years and Peterfor 12. Peter did well in all subjects, but German he got an 'excellent', the same as his brother Ivan. It is possible that the family spoke Yiddish, so German was easy to learn. One after the other the brothers entered Moscow University - Ivan in 1895 into the Department of History and Philology, Peter in 1896 - into the Mathematics Department of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics. In Moscow the brothers lived together, near the university. Ivan's personal file contains his Moscow address: Tverskaya section, 128, B. Nikitskaya str. 1. Their father Joseph did not attend gymnasium or university, but he gave his sons a good education. After their baptism they were not subjected to the rule.

page99

Arrest, expulsion from Moscow and return

In February 1899 a wave of student unrest spread across Russia. They began at St Petersburg University, then spread to other educational institutions, Moscow, Kiev and other cities. In all, over 25,000 students took part in the unrest. Mass arrests and expulsions weakened the movement and by the end of March it subsided. But on April, 6, student G. E. Lieven committed suicide in Butyr prison, which caused a new rise in unrest. About 200 people gathered for a demonstration in Moscow. To what extent Peter was involved in the student protests is difficult to judge, but clearly he did not stay away. Let us turn to the documents of the Department for the Protection of Public Safety and Order in Moscow. By order of Colonel D.F.Trepov, chief police officer of Moscow, on the night of 11 April 1899. The Security Department proceeded to eliminate the student Executive Committee at Moscow University, of which Nathan-Peter Rabinovich was a member. On April 11 his room was searched. At the same time the room of Brother David-Joann was also searched.

page100

The brothers then rented two rooms in Sergeev's house on Znamenka 11. Five manuscripts, 22 notes, 12 business cards, nine books and six photographic cards were seized from Nathan-Petr, and he himself was sent to the Basmanny Police House under arrest. The contents of the seized materials are not disclosed in the search report. Nothing was found in the brother's possession. A total of 23 students were arrested. David-John did all he could to help his brother. According to his version, his brother was mistaken for his namesake, in reality he was not involved in the riots. On the very next day after his arrest, David-Joann secured a letter from Veliaminov, Chairman of the Tver Trust for the Poor, in order to go to Trepov and clarify the misunderstanding. It is not known whether he was received by the chief of police, but Trepov asked the security office for information about Nathan-Peter Rabinowitsch. According to the security office there was no mistake. The guilt of the arrested Rabinowicz was confirmed by the Executive Committee Bulletin found in his possession and the note: "Save yourselves! We are open. I am losing my head." Furthermore, surveillance of the Rabinowitzs' flat on Znamenka revealed that Nathan- Peter's deputy on the Executive Committee visited the brother of the arrested Rabinowitz after his arrest.

Sitting in solitary confinement in the Basmanny Police House, Peter wasted no time. On 14 April he wrote a four-page petition requesting his release. He writes that he has always stood aloof from the student movement, that he has devoted all his time to dance evenings, tutoring and patronage, being an employee of the Tversky Trusteeship of the Poor, citing the illness of his father. He asks to be released in time to come home for Easter and signs "loyal subject N. Peter Rabinowitz". The members of the student movement were treated quite humanely. A few days after their arrest the Chief of Police of the Moscow Regional Police, decided that all arrested students were to be released from custody and sent from Moscow to their places of residence.

page101

The police were not allowed to take Nathan-Peter to the city, but on 16 April he received a pass from the Okhrana department to travel from Moscow to Kishinev. On arrival he was obliged to report immediately to the local police department. He was forbidden to reside in Moscow and elsewhere in the Empire. It was in fact an exile.

The expulsion of his youngest son from Moscow a year before his graduation was a serious blow to his ailing father. Joseph Davidovich died a month after Peter's arrival, on 17 May. It was undoubtedly a great loss for the whole family and for the 23-year-old Peter. It is difficult to judge from photographs, but from descriptions he and his father looked alike - both blond-haired and grey-eyed. V.V. Rozanov, who met Peter and his young wife on the steamship, remarked that Peter did not look Jewish at all, and the same was said about Joseph by people who knew him. As for his religious views, the son was far from his father. Joseph Davidovich gave his sons the freedom to choose, and none of them continued his cause.

A few days after her husband's death, Olga Danilovna began a struggle to get her son back to Moscow. She sends telegrams to the head of the Moscow Security Office and the Moscow chief of police with a request to allow her son, student Nathan-Peter Rabinovich, to come to Moscow for 5 days. The mother's request was supported by Prince Kantakuzen of Kishinev. In a telegram to the police chief of Moscow he wrote that he vouched for the reliability of Nathan-Peter. The Moscow Security Office complied with the mother's request. On 28 May a telegram was sent to the Kishinev police chief that Nathan-Peter Rabinovich was allowed to come to Moscow for five days. The circumstances of his return to Moscow and to the university raise questions. On 4 June, just after his arrival in Moscow, Nathan-Peter received permission to stay in the city.

page102

On the 16 June (Nathan-Peter is already in Moscow) the policemaster appeals to the governor of Bessarabia to inform Nathan-Peter that he has not been expelled from Moscow University and can return to Moscow. In other words, only two months after his expulsion from Moscow and expulsion from the university, the ban on Nathan-Peter Rabinovich living in Moscow was lifted and he could continue his studies. Could it really be that he was arrested and exiled by mistake? No. A certificate from the Okhrana office dated September 9, 1899 confirms Rabinovich's participation in the activities of the Executive Committee, many of whose members were banned from living in Moscow and Moscow Province for two years.

It remains to be assumed that the attention of the Moscow Governor General's attention to the case of student Rabinovich was due to the fact that he was the son of Joseph Davidovich, whose activities had aroused interest in Russian society and whose death was reported in the newspapers. It is possible that the departed father helped his son to return to Moscow and finish university with his name.

Peter passed the remaining examinations and one more special examination in the physics and mathematics testing commission, and on 31 May 1900 he was awarded a 1st degree diploma.

page103

Having obtained a degree from Moscow University, Nathan-Peter returned to Kishinev and in July 1900 applied to the State Bank for employment. Without confirmation from the Police Department that he was fit to work for the bank, he was not accepted. On August 12, the Police Department informed the State Bank that there were no obstacles for serving in the bank; Peter was not subject to unofficial police surveillance and was not restricted in his choice of residence. In September Peter arrived in Moscow, rented a flat in Leontievsky Lane in the Shkott House, expecting to be assigned to the bank. But that was not the case. Things were dragging on.

The Moscow governor showed interest in appointing Peter Rabinovich to the bank's service. On September 22, a request was received from the governor's chancellery to the chief of police asking about the "moral qualities and political trustworthiness" of PeterOsipov Rabinovich. The answer came more than a month later, 25 October. The Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs reported to the Governor that there were no obstacles to Rabinowitz being appointed to the Moscow office of the State Bank. This did not mean that Peters' participation in the student Executive Committee, his arrest, his exile to Kishinev, his close acquaintance with the rioters had been forgotten. In internal correspondence from the Police Department relating to October 1900, all of his past "transgressions" were set out in detail. My grandfather was not destined to become a bank clerk. While this bureaucratic correspondence was going on, he searched for alternative ways and found a job, which became his profession for life.

Revel. Pernov. Marriage

On 10 October 1900. Petr was appointed mathematics teacher at Revelskaja female gymnasium, and from the next school year he was transferred to the position of mathematics teacher at Revelskaja Imperial Gymnasium according to his application. It was the oldest grammar school in town and apparently paid a higher salary.

page104

After his father's death, Peter lost his material support and had to help his mother. As a student he moonlighted as a tutor, but the main support came from his father, who paid for his sons' university tuition and their living expenses in Moscow. While working in the Nikolaev Gymnasium, Peter additionally gave lessons at various educational institutions: the Girls' Gymnasium, the City Girls' School, and at the private school of P. Ebergardt. Thus he almost doubled his earnings, getting 750 rubles in the gymnasium and 636 rubles for extra lessons. The money was needed for trips abroad. In the summer of 1903, after the Jewish pogrom in Kishinev, he travelled to London to make arrangements with the Mildmay Mission to restore Somerville Hall, the house his father had built for the New Testament Israelite community. In 1905 he took ten days leave during the school year to take his sick nephew abroad. He travelled abroad during the summer holidays of 1905 and 1906.

In the summer of 1904, Peter did not travel west, but went on a business trip to the east. When the Russo-Japanese War broke out, he petitioned to the General Directorate of the Russian Red Cross Society and was sent to the Far East on an errand.

page105

Apparently the assignment involved escorting loads for the wounded. Judging by the Red Cross medal he received in 1907, he did well. After two school years in the Nikolayevskaya grammar school Peter made an attempt to move to Warsaw. But things did not go well there. On July 31, 1903 he was assigned to the Warsaw Secondary School, and on September 19, without having started classes, he returned to the Nicholas I gymnasium. It seems that things were going quite well for him at St. Nicholas Gymnasium. Apart from teaching he was approved as a class teacher, which gave him a raise in salary. The director of the Gymnasium said that his service was "very useful and very zealous". His social activities were shown by his work as a clerk in the Society for the welfare of needy pupils of the upper secondary school. In August 1905, an order was signed approving him to the rank of collegiate assessor with seniority from 10th October .1900 a year later, on 19th May 1906, he was promoted to the rank of court counselor. On November 5, 1906. On November 5, 1906, "on the basis of the imperial order of August 28, 1904". On 5 November 1906, "on the basis of the Imperial order of 28 August 1904", the Ministry of National Education awarded him the title of teacher of a gymnasium from the time when he started teaching, i.e. from 10 October 1900. Not everything is clear in the last order. It is possible that a university graduate needed pedagogical experience in order to be promoted to the post of secondary school teacher. But was it really necessary to receive the imperial permission to acquire this rank? If so, why did it take another two years for the Ministry of Public Education to issue the relevant order after the Imperial command? What was it: bureaucratic delays or some real problems? It is more likely the former.

page106

A few months later, on the first day of the new year 1907, he was awarded the Order of St Stanislaus, 3rd class, for "excellent and diligent service and special labour". This was the youngest and most common order in the hierarchy of the Russian Empire. It was received by almost all civil servants, who served the established terms and had the class ranks. I am not going to belittle the merits of my grandfather, but it is not very clear what the "special works" are and whether it is possible to judge the "excellent " service of a teacher who had worked for only 6 years and had changed (or 3, if you discount the Warsaw Secondary School).

On 20 April 1907, at the age of 31, Petermarried Glafira Ivanovna Dadykina. Where and how they met is unknown. Grandfather was working in Revel. Grandmother was 23, she lived with her parents in Vilna, taught French in gymnasium and in real school. She moved to her husband in Revel, and in the summer they went on a honeymoon trip on the Volga by steamer. It was on this trip that they met .V.V. Rozanov, and from him we can learn about the impression given by

page107

by the young couple. Peter, "a fair blond man of good height, with an open cheerful face... With a simplicity that I know of no example, he told me how their "affair" had been two weeks old, how he had not left her side since their first chance and unforeseen meeting, and was now taking her, his treasure, to show her to his family somewhere in the south. She remained silent, inserting few words. And though she taught new languages and he taught maths and physics, but, being the same age as him, she was somehow mentally and spiritually more mature than him, older than him. In him so fermented marital "champagne": never have I seen that the young husband to such an extent mlel was captured by his "new happiness", was so enthusiastic about the object of his adoration, which I didn't find particularly beautiful at all. My grandmother did not like the last phrase, and she was seven years younger than my grandfather. Looking at pictures of her in her youth, I, too, cannot agree with Rozanov in his assessment of her appearance. Otherwise he is probably right. I remember my grandmother as taciturn and slow, but I knew her in her old age, when the effects of a stroke were taking their toll. On 2 October 1908 they had their first child, named Ivan after Glafira Ivanovna's father. Peter looked for extra income to provide for his growing family. He took lessons in mathematics at the Estonian Knight's and Dome College, and tried to obtain a job at the V. F. Stürmer Commercial School in St Petersburg. Instead, in August 1909, he was assigned to teach mathematics in Pernov Gymnasium, with the duties of inspector of the gymnasium, and the family moved to Pernov. Of course, Pernov was not Revel, but the post of inspector was a promotion and salary. The inspector was assistant to the headmaster for teaching and educational work, and in the absence of the headmaster, he fulfilled his duties. In the same year he was promoted to the rank of collegiate counselor and received a commemorative medal on the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Poltava.

page108

On 3 April 1910 a second son, Vsevolod, was born. His biography lists Vilna as his birthplace, although the family was living in Pernov at the time. Apparently Glafira Ivanovna left for her parents at the time of delivery. The elder Vanya was only a year and a half old and it was difficult to cope with the two little ones alone. And two years later, in 1912, another son, Pavel, was born.

On the first day of the new year 1912, PeterOsipovich received a new award - the Order of St. Anna, 3rd class. The Order was superior to the Order of St. Stanislaus and gave him the right for personal nobility. In 1913 he received a commemorative medal in honour of the 300th anniversary of the House of Romanov and the highest gratitude for the booklet presented to the Emperor on the role of the House of Romanov in the history of the Russian education and Russian. .science.

page109

In 1913, after four years in Pernod, the family returned to Revel. Peter Osipowicz was appointed to Alexander Gymnasium in Reval as a teacher of mathematics and physics with the responsibilities of inspector. At the beginning of 1914 he received the rank of State Counsellor.

Arkhangelsk Lomonosov Grammar School

Despite his successful promotion, awards and new rank, he worked for only one year in Revelsk Alexander Gymnasium, and by the decision of the trustee of the Petrograd school district of July 17th, 1914. Petr Osipovich was transferred to the Wesenberg Gymnasium as a mathematics .teacher. It is not known whether the transfer from the provincial centre to the district centre was connected to any kind of trouble in the service. It is also unknown why on September 25, 1914, after the family had moved to Wesenberg and the school year had begun, he was appointed to the Lomonosov Grammar School in Arkhangelsk. The new job was well worthwhile. The Lomonosov Grammar School, the oldest in the Arkhangelsk Province, was founded in 1811 on the basis of the main public school and was named after Lomonosov. By the time Peter Osipovich entered the service, the gymnasium had its own buildings: a three-storey stone one on Troitsky Prospect and a two-storey wooden one on Pskovsky Prospect. Both buildings had electric lighting. The gymnasium had a house church, a good library, subject rooms, a gymnasium and a canteen for low-income .pupils.

page110

From 7 August to 8 September and from 18 September to 1 October 1914. PeterOsipovich takes leave to move and settle his family in the new place. By this time there are already three children in the family: Ivan 6 years old, Vsevolod 4 years old, and two-year-old Pavel. The move to Arkhangelsk, 1400 versts away from Vesenberg, demanded great expenditure for the family of five. Just packing and transporting their belongings cost about 400 roubles. Peter Osipovich had to go into debt and on 31 October he approached the director of the Gymnasium with a petition for financial assistance of 200 roubles. The request was approved, and although a flat was not mentioned in the petition. he was apparently given a service flat. The new teacher turned out to be proactive. As soon as he began his work, Peter Osipovich approached the trustee of the Petrograd school district with a proposal to set up a popular scientific cinematograph for pupils. It was a new undertaking, the popular-science cinema was just taking its first steps. It is not known whether popular science films were shown in Revel

page111

In his memorandum to the director of the gymnasium he refers to St Petersburg, Moscow and other major cities where attempts had been made to organise educational cinematography for students, but he certainly had some experience of organising cinematographic sessions for students. There was also persistence. After receiving a refusal from the trustee of the Petrograd school district in November, he shared his idea with the pupils' parents, had talks with the inspectors of public schools in Arkhangelsk and, having secured their support, on January 16, 1915, sent a letter to the director of Lomonosov Moscow State University. He sent a memo to the director of Lomonosov gymnasium proposing to organize for the students several film shows of scientific content, educational films about travels along the Volga, the White Sea, the Caucasus and the Crimea, as well as classical films, "Dead Souls", "Eugene Onegin", "Macbeth", historical films "Life for the Tsar", "Peter the Great", "Dmitry Donskoy". Everything was thought out: programme of shows, participation of teachers, minimum ticket price, (for poorer pupils - free of charge).

The idea was quite sensible. But even this time, Peter Osipovich's proposal was not supported by his superiors. The Trustee of the Petrograd School District granted permission after a year and a half. In August 1916, the heads of educational institutions of Arkhangelsk met to discuss the issue of setting up a scientific cinematograph for students. P.O. Rabinovich was a member of the commission in charge of this matter. It is unlikely that the commission was able to carry out its plans. There was a war going on and a revolution looming. Despite the fact that the city was far from the fronts and had never been attacked by the enemy, the First World War, which began in the summer of 1914, felt like a war. The First World War broke out in Arkhangelsk. Arms and military equipment for the needs of the Russian army coming from the Entente countries passed through the port of Arkhangelsk. A brigade was sent to guard the maritime traffic.

page112

The city has a large number of military units from Russia and abroad. A large number of military units, both Russian and foreign, were stationed in the town. From the summer of 1915. Arkhangelsk and the province were placed under the direct authority of the War Ministry. The construction of the broad-gauge railway from Arkhangelsk to Vologda for the transport of goods was started, new warehouses were built, and ship-repair workshops were expanded. The population was growing rapidly. The outbreak of World War II could not but affect the life of the gymnasium. The teaching load increased as some teachers were conscripted to the army. Classes went on as usual, but meetings of the teachers' council were more and more often told about the recruitment of new graduates, the collection of donations and aid for the army, the organisation of a workshop for casting shrapnel, the creation of a medical unit consisting of school pupils which could operate during the summer months in the near rear of the army and a field work unit for the central provinces. From the teachers' salaries, 1% was deducted monthly for the Red Cross and 1% for the families of front-line soldiers. PeterOsipovich was not conscripted, but was stationed, albeit briefly, in the active army. In March 1915 he was sent to the front to escort transports with Easter gifts from pupils of the Lomonosov Grammar School. He found himself in Peremyshl, the Austro-Hungarian stronghold, which capitulated on 9 March after a lengthy siege. Four army corps, no less than four, surrendered. How did the town look like, judging by the testimony of V. Brusov, who was a war correspondent during World War I: "All roads from Peremyshl are filled with prisoners. Highway for tens of versts looks blue of bluish Austrian uniforms. The prisoners march in large crowds under escort of few Cossacks, they also march in small groups, with out escort and none

page113

attempt to escape Peter Osipovich managed to collect eighty items of Austrian marching equipment from the streets of the city and brought them to Arkhangelsk for the gymnasium museum. In autumn 1915 the family had more problems. On October 12 (25 New Style) my father Rostislav was born. Labor were difficult, Glafira Ivanovna was ill for a long time. The director of the gymnasium allocated 100 rubles for her treatment. At the beginning of the next school year Peter Osipovich petitioned the Petrograd school district for a transfer to He was transferred to Velikolutskoe Non-Formal Secondary School and received a new appointment on September 10, 1916. What was the reason for his desire to change his job? He had worked in Arkhangelsk for only two years, moving from Revel with three small children was a difficult and costly undertaking. And now there were four children, the youngest was not even a year old. Velikolukskoe Secondary School was the oldest and best in town, but Arkhangelsk's Lomonosov Grammar School was hardly inferior. Maybe they did not like the northern climate? Or did PeterOsipovich's eagerness to change places make itself felt? From further developments it is clear that his leaving Lomonosov gymnasium was not due to problems at work or bad relations with his superiors. Whatever the motives of this decision, the family move to Velikie Luki did not take place. It turned out that there was no suitable flat in Velikie Luki and the headmaster of the Lomonosov Grammar School interceded for PeterOsipovich to return to his old job. The family remained in Arkhangelsk, where they were to survive revolution and the civil war.

page114

1917. A new private grammar school

Life in what was regarded as a political backwater town was relatively peaceful. Army mobilisation and food difficulties did not cause widespread unrest among the local population until the spring of 1917. There were no workers' strikes, no revolutionary organisations. The main engine of the revolution were, as historian L.G. Novikova notes: "Not the workers or peasants of the province, but military garrisons and naval teams arriving during the war, along with guest construction workers, providing support for the more radical political forces. "

The news of the events of February in Petrograd and the abdication of the Tsar was greeted with great enthusiasm in Arkhangelsk. On 10 March, a solemn divine service was held in the square in front of the Trinity Cathedral. The huge cathedral could not accommodate all those wishing to attend. After the service the celebration continued in different parts of the city.

The Red Cross appealed to N.K. Kiesel, chairman of the pedagogical council of the Olginsky gymnasium. Kiesel asked for the hours of cocoa distribution so that the Red Cross representatives could note how much the children's general appearance had improved since the hot lunches were given to them, he replied with a letter full of bitter sarcasm: "In consequence of your honourable letter I consider it my pleasant duty to inform you that the pupils of the 2nd Mixed Grammar School (Olginsky) entrusted to me, whose own building has been placed entirely at the disposal of the Allied American troops, study in various temporary rooms and in the same rooms they are served cocoa at the following hours: [continued listing 6 addresses with breakfast times]. While I heartily welcome the desire of the representatives of the American Mission to visit us, I feel at the same time obliged to express my regrets that I shall not be able to meet representatives of the American Red Cross in all the premises mentioned above and to thank them for their kind attitude towards Russian children in this difficult time which we are experiencing in Russia. When the onslaught of the Reds began, it became even more difficult. It is enough to read the decrees of Lieutenant General Miller, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces on the Northern Front, to be convinced of this. From December 1st 1919 the inhabitants of the town were obliged to hand over new and used fur coats, warm hats, blankets, overcoats, uniforms and trousers to the War Department. From December, 19th it was forbidden to take cattle and meat out of limits of Arkhangelsk and Pechersk districts.

Failed evacuation

In August 1919 the evacuation of the Allied Expeditionary Force began. and Civilians began to prepare for evacuation. On August 23rd, 1919, a list of employees of the Lomonosov Grammar School was submitted to the office of the Governor-General of the Northern Region. The revolution led to confusion in the system of government. Alongside the Arkhangelsk City Duma and the newly formed Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, various improvised committees appeared. In the spring and summer of 1917, the Provisional Government Commissar, the Duma Ordinary Committee, the Public Security Committee and the Provisional Provincial Committee were all vying for supreme political power in the city and province. It was not a dual power as in Petrograd, but a multiple power system, in fact a power vacuum. The city's food supply was deteriorating, prices were rising, and it was becoming increasingly difficult to survive in these conditions.

page115

Among the many different organisations in the city, a small professional association emerged, far removed from politics and with no pretensions to power. On 31 August 1917, the Association of Teachers of the Lomonosov Grammar School was founded. Its initiator was PeterOsipovich Rabinovich, who suggested opening a grammar school for children of both sexes through the efforts of the Association. At the founding meeting he was elected chairman of the Association and head of the gymnasium. There was a definite need for a new high school in Arkhangelsk. During the war the population of the city increased from 45 thousand people in 1915 to 56 thousand in 1917. There was a shortage of educational institutions. The teachers of the local high school had to earn extra money to supplement their income. It is evident that the question of organizing the Partnership and the new school was agreed beforehand with the management of Lomonosov Grammar School. After all, classes were planned to be held in its wooden building The tuition fee (50 rubles per semester) corresponded to the tuition fee of the Gymnasium.

page116

The only difference was that the Lomonosov gymnasium was male and the Tovarstvo gymnasium, in keeping with the tendency of the time, was mixed. The recruitment to the gymnasium went well and the first class was full, but the legal status of the new gymnasium was unclear.

Correspondence between Peter Osipovich and the trustee of the Petrograd school district about the opening of an evening school with the same programmes and the rights of the state high schools in Arkhangelsk lasted for months. And what months! During this time the Provisional Government fell, Soviet power was established in Petrograd, and the management of public education was taken over by the State Commission on Public Education, headed by the president A.V. Lunacharsky.

Confusion reigned in the administrative structures and all matters previously subject to the approval of the Trustee of the Educational District and the Minister of National Education were temporarily handed over to the Pedagogical Councils of the upper secondary schools. By decision of the teachers' council. In January 1918, the Gymnasium was granted legal status of a secondary school.

Under the Bolsheviks and the Provisional government of the Northern Oblast.

Soviet power was proclaimed in Arkhangelsk. On 17 February 1918, but it was not until the summer that the Bolsheviks managed to take control of the Arkhangelsk Soviet and abolish the previous provincial authorities. The Petrograd Provincial People's Commissariat for Education started to send out circulars announcing the general plan for the organisation of public education, the election of all the teachers and administrators, and the removal of the information about religious beliefs and origins from certificates of education. All these orders

page117

were noted by the Pedagogical Council of the Lomonosov Gymnasium, but took no action. The first step of the new government that directly affected the gymnasium was the decision to abolish preliminary school exams and preparatory classes, it was passed by the Archangelsk Collegium for Public Education on May 8, 1918. On behalf of the Pedagogical Council, which the new government had not yet had time to reform, a request was sent to the Public Education Department demanding an explanation on what grounds this decision had been taken. The answer was an angry letter from the Commissar of the Arkhangelsk Public Education Department to the Narcompros, in which he referred to the Lomonosov Grammar School as "one of the most bourgeois grammar schools in Arkhangelsk", "a school for plutocrats and sabotaging, always putting sticks in the wheels, bourgeois clique". We can imagine what awaited the Lomonosov Gymnasium in the next academic year, had the Soviet regime survived a few more months in the city. But the gymnasium and the whole population of the province were saved by the weakness of the new government. From the spring of 1918, the popularity of the moderate socialists in Arkhangelsk, as in the whole country, began to grow rapidly again. In June, the Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries in Arkhangelsk called on the city's population to oust the "robbers and traitors in power", and managed to secure the re-election of the provincial and city councils. The local Bolsheviks, fearing that they would not be able to retain leadership in their hands, requested urgent dispatches from the centre of agitators, Cheka officers and military units of Latvians. The arrival in Arkhangelsk at the end of May of the "Soviet revision" led by Commissar M.S. Kedrov with the broadest powers delayed the fall of the Soviet power in the city. The intervention of the members of the revisionists in the conduct of the elections succeeded in securing a majority for the Bolsheviks and the Left Socialist Revolutionaries in both councils.

page118

Despite the suppression of organised opposition, the threat of famine fuelled mass discontent with Bolshevik policies. At the beginning of July food rations were again reduced in Arkhangelsk province. The last straw which broke the cup of patience and pushed the population into open revolt against the Bolshevik authorities was the mobilization into the Red Army. Revolts broke out in a number of district towns. On 2 August 1918, in support of the opposition, an uprising took place in Arkhangelsk.

A 9,000-strong detachment of the British army landed in Arkhangelsk. By autumn, the total number of expeditionary troops had reached 23,500. The Bolshevik leadership was evacuated. Soviet power was replaced by the Supreme Administration, and then by the Provisional Government of the Northern Region.

Allied troops had to be accommodated somewhere. The Government Commissar of the Arkhangelsk province ordered almost all the schools in the town, except the primary schools, to house the military units of the Allied command arriving in Arkhangelsk. The start of classes was postponed indefinitely. A meeting of the heads of the city's educational institutions, attended by PeterOsipovich, decided to enforce the vacancy of the occupied premises. As a result, the educational institutions had to squeeze in, But the school year started on time. They switched to work in 2 or even 3 shifts. Classrooms were hardly available at various schools, attached to churches and orphanages. The children suffered from overcrowding, lack of special furniture, and stuffiness. Lessons and breaks were shortened, and teaching of handicrafts, gymnastics, singing and drawing was discontinued.

During the last week of August 1918, meetings in the public education department of the Northern Oblast Administration were held almost daily. They discussed the laws passed during the Bolsheviks' rule, school autonomy, teaching of God's law, new spelling, etc.

page119

The first step in public education taken by the new government was the provision for secondary school autonomy. The board of trustees of the upper secondary school was abolished. The treasury took over the costs of teachers' salaries. The men's gymnasiums received full subsidy for the maintenance of the building and the household expenses. The professional organizations were forbidden to interfere into the educational-administrative affairs of the schools.

The instructions of the Provisional Government's Department of Public Education were discussed at pedagogical councils and were carried out only if the teaching staff agreed with them. For example, the teachers' council of Lomonosov Gymnasium, having discussed the proposal of the Public Education department to present programmes of study for the next academic year by June 1st , concluded that this was not possible before the start of the school year. In the opinion of the teachers, the course programmes should not have been once and for all fixed, as they were a reflection of the internal character of each class. Even the question of switching to new spelling was decided by pedagogical councils. Some schools adopted the new spelling, others did not.

A draft of the Rules of extracurricular supervision for pupils of Arkhangelsk secondary schools, proposed by the Department of Public Education was widely discussed. The goal was clear - to protect children from the temptations and dangers that lurked in a city filled with foreign sailors, where all sorts of debauchery places were open. Pupils were forbidden from visiting masquerades, clubs, restaurants, pubs, billiard rooms, tea rooms, coffee houses, kitchens, etc. The theatre, cinema, circus and concerts were accessible only after obtaining a permit from the authorities of the educational establishment. Participation in dances and games was only allowed at children's and pupils' parties.

Some schools accepted these rules completely. Others considered them unnecessary. The Lomonosov Grammar School for Boys in Arkhangelsk accepted, by a majority vote, the publication of

page120

government rules are unnecessary. According to Peter Osipovich, who spoke at a joint meeting of the Presidium of Parents' Committees, teachers' councils of secondary schools and higher primary schools in Arkhangelsk, the rules did not stand up to criticism because prohibitive measures could not be implemented. He felt that in addition to prohibitive rules, positive measures were needed. The joint caucus decided to ask parents' committees and teachers' councils to hastily work out the issue of educational entertainment for pupils.

Authorities changed, but the problems remained the same. Survival was essential. Prices were rising and salaries could not keep up. In May 1918, while the Bolsheviks were still in power, the teachers' council of Lomonosov gymnasium decided to ask for a monthly allowance for half a month from the gymnasium's special resources. This did not work at that time because a law had been passed which stated that all money would have to go to the state treasury. Under the conditions of autonomy, the gymnasium was given back the right to have a special fund. In January 1919 the teachers of Lomonosov Grammar School received half pay for the previous year from the school.

The Pedagogical Council of the Tovarstvo Gymnasium decided to raise the tuition fee to 150 roubles per year in the Preparatory Class and to 200 roubles for the others. - There was an increase of fees for the other classes. The teachers were paid a higher tuition fee. The teacher's fee in the preparatory year was 120 roubles per month, the fee in all other classes was 150 roubles, and the superintendent was paid 200 roubles so that he could work in the school during his reception hours. By the 1919-1920 school year, the gymnasium had 4 basic classes and one preparatory one.

To enrich the school's finances, a charity performance was staged in January 1919 in the theatre of the Union of Industrial and Commercial Employees, followed by a dance with sale of drinks and goodies. The net proceeds from the evening amounted to 8781 roubles. 55 kop.

page121

The Pedagogical Council, which met after the charity event, decided to buy its own house for the gymnasium. Peter Osipovich was instructed to enter into negotiations with a certain Nedoshivin, who was selling a house on Pskovsky Prospect and, if not successful, to find other premises, mostly in the centre of the city. Funds were also allocated to buy books for the pupils' library and a fund of aid to the poorest pupils was started.

Some help to the Arkhangelsk pupils was provided by the allies. The American embassy organised free showings for the pupils at the Edison cinema. The American Red Cross delivered free breakfasts to schools - cocoa and biscuits. True, from February 1919 only cocoa was given out. Of course, this was a paltry compensation for the requisitioned school buildings. When the American Red Cross Mission

page122

appealed to N.K. Kiesel, chairman of the pedagogical council of the Olginsky gymnasium. Kiesel asked for the hours of cocoa distribution so that the Red Cross representatives could note how much the children's general appearance had improved since the hot lunches were given to them, he replied with a letter full of bitter sarcasm: "In consequence of your honourable letter I consider it my pleasant duty to inform you that the pupils of the 2nd Mixed Grammar School (Olginsky) entrusted to me, whose own building has been placed entirely at the disposal of the Allied American troops, study in various temporary rooms and in the same rooms they are served cocoa at the following hours: [continued listing 6 addresses with breakfast times]. While I heartily welcome the desire of the representatives of the American Mission to visit us, I feel at the same time obliged to express my regrets that I shall not be able to meet representatives of the American Red Cross in all the premises mentioned above and to thank them for their kind attitude towards Russian children in this difficult time which we are experiencing in Russia.

When the onslaught of the Reds began, it became even more difficult. It is enough to read the decrees of Lieutenant General Miller, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces on the Northern Front, to be convinced of this. From December 1st 1919 the inhabitants of the town were obliged to hand over new and used fur coats, warm hats, blankets, overcoats, uniforms and trousers to the War Department. From December, 19th it was forbidden to take cattle and meat out of limits of Arkhangelsk and Pechersk districts.

Failed evacuation

In August 1919 the evacuation of the Allied Expeditionary Force began. Civilians also began to prepare for evacuation. On August 23rd, 1919, a list of employees of the Lomonosov Grammar School was submitted to the office of the Governor-General of the Northern Region

page123

of 9 people wishing to evacuate from Arkhangelsk with their families. Peter Osipovich Rabinovich and his family: his wife Glafira Ivanovna aged 36, sons Ivan aged 11, Vsevolod aged 9, Pavel aged 7 and Rostislav aged 3. In the column "Desired place of evacuation" PeterOsipovich wrote "south of Russia". For some reason he wanted to go to the south and not to the Baltic, where he had worked for many years and where Glafira Ivanovna's parents lived. Maybe he wanted to return to his native Kishinev. The question of the desired place of evacuation was rather symbolic, since all three steamships provided by the Union Evacuation Bureau were going to England. This was the only possible route from Arkhangelsk. For those wishing to leave for the Baltic region and to the south of Russia, it was proposed to register places on these steamships, in order to change in England to steamships, going to the south of Russia and the Baltics. The steamships set sail on 12 September. Passports and tickets had to be obtained before departure. One can imagine the haste and turmoil with which the passengers had to pack their bags and prepare their documents.

The staff of the High School did not have enough money to pay for the journey. The Provisional Government of September 9, 1919, granted the evacuated men who were on government, military or civil service a lump-sum payment of 1000 roubles per family member, up to 3,000 R; the head of the family got 2 months' pay which had to be paid within 2 months. The treasury paid for 3rd class travel, for 1st and 2nd class you had to pay extra. Anyway, the last British ship left Arkhangelsk on 27 September, and PeterOsipovich Rabinowitsch's family stayed in the town. Couldn't leave? They did not want to? Were they afraid of the difficulties of the long journey into the unknown? God knows. But they were clearly not expecting the Bolsheviks to come. In November 1919, PeterOsipovich became a member of the Cultural and Educational Department of the Staff of the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Armed Forces of the Northern Front.

page124

What could a mathematics teacher in the cultural education department at headquarters do? Organise film screenings for soldiers, as he had once suggested for students? Why did he, who had worked in two gymnasiums, burdened with a family, take on an extra workload? Did he need the extra income? Did he expect to evacuate with his headquarters? If so, PeterOsipovich's calculations were not justified. On February 19, 1920, together with General E. K. Miller, more than 800 military and civilian refugees left Russia. The Rabinowitz family was not among them.

On 20 February the Red Army occupied Arkhangelsk. On 20 April Peter Osipowicz was arrested by order of the provincial Cheka. His colleagues tried to save him. A day after his arrest the chairperson of the school board of Lomonosov gymnasium turned to the Archangelsk GubChK (the provincial special commission for counterrevolutionary struggle and sabotage) with a request to release Rabinovich because the gymnasium had lost its only high-school mathematics teacher, and there was nobody to replace him at the end of the school year. The answer came the next day: we could not release him until the end of the investigation. The 1920 minutes of the Arkhangelsk GubChKhK meetings are very short: "We heard the case of ... accused of ..., we decided ...". Often the ruling boiled down to one word: "Shoot". I could not find my grandfather's name, and the protocols for the following years have not survived. My grandmother told my mother that when the Bolsheviks came to Arkhangelsk, she had to bake pies and sell them at the market. It most likely dates back to 1920, when she was left alone with four boys. Daddy recalled that as a child he used to wake up in the night from hunger and ask his mother for food.

page125

Moving to Moscow

Grandfather did not stay long in the Cheka. In the questionnaire filled in November 8, 1921, when he joined the Glavprofobr, he wrote that in 1920-1921 he worked as a manager in the Himdrevbureau. That is, having been released from prison, PeterOsipovich did not return to the gymnasium, but took up an administrative position. Such a drastic turn in his professional activities was most likely due to financial reasons. His salary in the Chemdrevbureau was three times higher than in the gymnasium. But he did not give up his teaching job either: he concurrently held classes at the Water Technical School.

The Arkhangelsk period of his life ended there. As you know PeterOsipovich did not like to sit in one place for long. His next goal was Moscow. First he had to find work in the capital. In October 1921 he goes to Moscow and submits an application to the organization department of Glavproprofobrazov with a request to enroll him as an instructor. The address on the application was Tverskaya, St George's Lane, 1, apt. 22, where Sister Sofia lived.. The family remained living at Pskovsky Prospect, 8, apt. 7, Arkhangelsk

Since October 25 Peter Osipovich was enrolled at Glavprofobr for the position of travel instructor for a period of 2 months. On November 17 he joined Glavkustprom after only one month of service. It is possible that he applied to several organisations at the same time in order to choose a suitable position.

page126

According to Dad, the whole family moved to Moscow in 1925. In his brother Seva's biography, the date of the move is 1924. Pavlik's diary survives, in which the trip is described in such detail that there can be no doubt that it took place earlier. Pavlik refers to the end of 1920 or the beginning of 1921. 8 years old at the time, and recorded his memories of the trip in 1930. From documents about Peter's employment with the Glavprofobr, it seems likely that the move took place in the winter of 1921-1922. According to Pavlik's recollections, his grandfather managed to obtain through the Cavalry School, where he was teaching, a teplushka, a freight car with a stove, converted to carry people.

page127

The wagon was loaded with all the family belongings and firewood.. The journey was 11 days, while the journey by passenger train from Arkhangelsk to Moscow took no more than a day and a half. Pavlik writes that "it was a terrible ride. The frost was 20-25 degrees, and you had to heat the stove all the time".

Here in the wagon, father and the boys were sawing and chopping wood, and someone was constantly on duty near the stove, tossing fuel into it. The wagon was overcrowded, and someone was constantly touching the heated cooker, burning their clothes. The wagon was attached to various goods trains which were going in the direction of Moscow, but no one paid any attention to the fact that there were people in the teplushka. When the locomotives were maneuvering at the stations,pushing the carriage, all the things moved, threatening to crush the passengers. A derailment occurred on the way, delaying the journey for more than a day. Fortunately the teplushka, in which the Rabinowicz family was travelling, was not damaged. There was only a strong jolt which caused the belongings to fall and the cast-iron stove to fly apart.

At the beginning of January 1922 the train reached Moscow-3 station but it was 3-4km before the city, and the passengers were told that the train would be sent to the freight station of the Yaroslavsky railway station only the next morning. There was no patience to sit and wait in the teplushka. At a family meeting we decided to leave our things in the wagon, lock it and go to Moscow on foot. On a frosty January evening Peter Osipovich, Glafira Ivanovna and the boys, the eldest being 12 and the youngest 5, walked to Yaroslavsky Railway Station, got on a tram and went to Sofya's house on Tverskaya Street.

The next day the father, his mother and older sons, Vanya and Seva, found a few carts and moved their belongings from the teplushka to the flat. The younger ones, Pavlik and Rostik stayed at their aunt's for two days.

A flat was given to Glafira Ivanovna, who had taken up the position of a teacher in the Rukavishnikov orphanage. It was not a flat, but four rooms with a kitchen,

page128

in the main residential building on two floors. Two rooms on the third floor and two rooms with a kitchen on the second floor. Things were piled up on the first floor, as these rooms were not heated, and the family was housed in two tiny rooms on the third floor. It was a difficult life. As Pavlik wrote in his diary, "the food was disgusting". PeterOsipovich and Glafira Ivanovna received food rations, but very little for a family of six. They mainly ate frozen potatoes.

The Moscow period of life is evident from scattered mentions in documents and surviving letters.

In the list of Moscow teachers for the years 1922-1923 I found three Rabinovichs, Peter and Ivan Osipovich and Glafira Ivanovna. Peter Osipovich and Glafira Ivanovna worked at School No 5, Ivan Osipovich at School No 31. Unfortunately, we could not find out anything about these schools apart from their addresses. Another testimony to the early years of his life in Moscow is contained in a letter from Peter Osipovich to his sister Rachel in England on 31 December 1926: "Lately my affairs have improved a little; I don't know if for how long, but for the time being I am in misery." In his vocabulary, the word 'miserable' had a different meaning from the accepted one. Grandfather's life could never be

page129

aimless and contentless. It is worth mentioning that, as well as teaching, he spent his whole life writing popular science articles and pamphlets and producing physics and mathematics textbooks. For him, "to be poor" meant, not being able to provide a standard of living. In order not to "vegetate", he worked hard.

From a letter to Seva in 1936: "Working now in two schools. Apart from last year's school, I also work at the adult school in the factory. I have a lot of classes there, so I have to leave in the morning and only come back late at night. On such days, I don't even eat lunch at home but in the canteen. In 1936 his youngest son Rostislav was preparing to enter university. Peter Osipovich wrote to Seva: "With Rostislav entering college, Mom and I will consider our mission in relation to the children, to ensure they have a higher education. Of course, we have to wait another five years until Rostik will finish the course, but the main thing will be done."

Peter Osipovich turned 60 in 1936. He worked, as always, from morning till late at night. "You can't have it any other way, otherwise we won't live, we'll be in misery. "It's a good thing I'm healthy enough to work all day long." He was healthy enough for another six years. Peter Osipovich was still to see his three sons off to the army, to evacuate from Moscow. A terrible blow for him was the loss of Pavlik, who disappeared at the end of March 1942 on his way from the newly liberated Kaluga to Gorky. Peter Osipovich died on 1 May 1942 in Sosnovskoye in the Gorky region.

page130

Vasily Panfilovich Boykov

The image of my maternal grandfather, formed in my mind from scrappy references to him by my mother and her sisters, was of a man with golden hands and a very kind heart. It was said that he built a house, one of the best in the village, with gold coins placed in the corners of the crown for good luck, remembering his tender attitude towards his daughters, dreaming of giving them an education. Had it not been for collectivisation, he would have lived with his family in this house for the rest of his days, educated his children, brought his grandparents' grandchildren for the summer. He was 46 years old when normal life ended for him, and not only for him.

My historic homeland is not accessible now - the roads are overgrown. The village of Zabolotye, as well as others nearby, are gone, although they are still marked on the map. When I went with my mother in 1990, life in the village was still warm, but no longer were there any friends or relatives there. Only the foundations of the house my grandfather built have survived. We were told that someone had bought it from the timber company and moved it to another village.

I found out everything I could about my grandfather in the criminal files kept at the Tver Center for Documents of Contemporary History. The OGPU and NKVD investigators recorded in detail the testimony of the accused and witnesses, collected certificates, made an inventory of property, wrote indictments, "troikas" passed sentences. In the investigation, which were done in a hurry, words were missed and words were twisted

page131

names and surnames, sometimes difficult to make out, and fiction cannot be separated from truth. The life of Vasili Panfilovitch Boykov from September to December 1930 can be reconstructed literally day by day. In my account of him, therefore, this period will be described in the greatest detail. I do not intend to prove that the charges against him were fabricated and he was unjustly convicted. That is obvious. Especially since my grandfather didn't need it - he was rehabilitated in 1989 in both cases, those of 1930 and 1937. I just want to look into the events that changed the life of the Boykova family dramatically and influenced his daughters' and, indirectly, mine to a considerable degree.

Ancestors

Let me begin from afar. Vasiliy's ancestors, serfs, found according to the revision lists (censuses of the tax population), lived in this land in the middle of the XVII century. The grandfather belonged to an ancient peasant family. But one cannot call it a Boikov family. The serfs had no surnames. In the revision lists peasants were recorded by their own name, indicating the name of the father, date of birth and children. The surname Boykov appeared not earlier than the 1860s, that is after serfdom had been abolished. In a revision list of 1858 Vasily's father Pamfil was recorded as Ivanov, i. e. Ivan's son. At the time of the revision he was 13 years old, so he was born in 1845.

page132

We may assume that the origin of the surname is connected with my great-grandfather's quick-witted nature. I must say that his son Vasili was distinguished by this character trait, and Vasili's daughters, my mother and aunts, fully justified their surname.

My great-great-grandmother, Marfa Vladimirovna born in 1828, married at 15, and had a daughter Marya (1843) and son Pamphil, and at 18 was widowed. She married for the second time to Andreyan Ivanov. He was only a year older than Marfa, and also a widow with two small sons. Pamphil Ivanov lived with his mother and stepfather. Andreyan and Marfa had 5 more children: Fedosya (1849), Natalia (1850), Lukeria (1852), Titus (1855), and Tatiana (1856). In 1858, when the revision list was compiled, Andreyan was 31 years old. Marfa was 30.

This still very young family by today's standards had nine children aged from one and a half to 14 years old and lived in the same household with Ivan Evstigneev, Andreyan's father who was 57 years old. Mark Kozmin also lived with them. In the village of Zabolotye there were only 4 households, of 17 men and 20 women. Its owner was Ostashkov landlord, Lieutenant of the Guard Vasily Sergeyevich Kushelyov. Along with other neighboring villages of the Ostashkov district Zabolotye was inherited from his father, Major-General Sergei Andreyevich Kushelyov, after partition with his mother, brothers and sisters.

Next door to the family of Andriyan and Marfa lived the family of Andriyan's aunt, Vasilisa Evstigneeva 58 years: the head of the family,

page133

her husband Semyon Tikhonov, 52, and their married sons, Ivan, 22, and Isai, 19, cousins of Andriyan. Ivan married Fevronya Safonova, who was 8 years older than he and had two daughters by his first marriage. Their son Sergei was born in 1857. Isaiah had no children in 1858. Seme's aunt Praskovya Ostafeva lived with them. Two other households were transferred from the village of Tserkovishche after the revision of 1850. They were the family of a widow Sofia Andreeva 74 years old and her daughter Alexandra Ivanova 39 years old. There were seven illegitimate children of Alexandra. The senior one in 1852 was taken in recruits, the others 3-22 years old, lived with their mother and grandmother. From Tserkovishche the family of Mikhail Ilyin, aged 38, and Avdotya Nikitina, aged 32, with four children was moved to Zabolotye. Such was the population of Zabolotye in the middle of the 19th century. Large families lived together for several generations. Pamphil's birth father was not easy to find.

It was known only that his name was Ivan, that he was between 20 and 30 years old in 1840s, and died between 1845 and 1849 (between the birth year of his son Panfil and the revision of 1850). In the villages of landlord Kushelyov, there was only one Ivan iand he lived in Kocherginya Niva, next to Zabolotye. Thre peasant's name was Ivan Ageevich, who, according to the 1834 revision, was 8 years old (that means he was born in 1826), and he died in 1847. There are no other Ivan's, who died at a young age between 1845 and 1849, in the landlord's property. It appears that Marfa Vladimirovna lived in Kochergin Niva before marrying a second time, and her first husband was Ivan, son of Agey Pavlov. Ivan was Vasily Panfilovich's grandfather and Ivan was my great-great-grandfather. So, the historical homeland is moving from Zabolotsk to Kochergin Niva, but it's not far. Let's go further back, into the 18th century. Agey was born in 1774, and, at the time of the birth of his son Ivan was no less than 52 years old. It's likely that this, too was a second marriage.

page134

His father Pavel Kuzmin was born in 1756, married early and became a father at the age of 18. Ivan was apparently his first-born. Pavel died in 1806 at the age of 50. Pavel's father Kuzma Fyodorov was born in 1738, at the age of 18 he already had a family and a son. Kuzma died in 1796. Fedor Vasiliev, who is Kuzma's father according to the register books, was not a native of Kocherginaya Niva, but was transferred here from the village of Khvostovo. Regarding his paternity arise some doubts. After all, he was born in 1674. So in 1738 at the time of Kuzma's birth he was 64 years old. He died after 1744, the date of his death is unknown exactly. Thus nothing prevented him from becoming a father. We do not wish to throw out Fyodor from the rosary on the basis of suspicions of infirmity. All the more so since we have reached the 17th century. And there remains the last known ancestor - Vasily Nikiforov. There is no doubt that he is the father of Fyodor. He was born around 1650, and died in 1719 at the age of 70 years. I have to write "Pra" before the word "grandfather" seven times to determine my kinship with the venerable Vasily Nikiforovich.

Youth. Work. Family. Children

But let's return to Vasily Panfilovich. He was born in 1884 in the village of Zabolotye of Davydovskaya volost of Ostashkov district. Vasily was younger, when he was born, his father, Panfilu Ivanovich, was 39-40 years old. According to the memories of my aunts, there were five children in the family - Peter, Mikhail, Catherine, Semyon and Vasily, perhaps more if you count those who died in infancy. They were the first generation of peasant children born free. His father's farm was small - 5 dessiatinas of land, a horse and a cow. According to Vasiliy, his father worked part-time selling buttons and other small items. Neighbors recalled that at one time Boykov's father was selling herrings. A certificate, issued by the Klyuchevskii Village Council in November 1930 after Vasiliy's arrest, stated that he was a trader before the revolution. Vasiliy was referred to as "the former trader" by some of the witnesses interrogated by the investigator in the autumn of 1930. Vasiliy himself didn't confirm it. It is likely that before he went to work, his trading activity was limited to helping his father in the shop.

page136

From the age of 14 Vasily worked in the cities in various factories, visiting home from time to time. In 1908, at the age of 24, he married Maria Yegorovna, and in 1909 they had a daughter. She was named Maria, like her mother. She was the only one of my aunts who remembered her grandfather Panfil and spoke of the strict order in his house. We ate from the communal cauldron, taking meat from the soup was allowed only at the sign of my grandfather. The guilty would be hit on the forehead with a spoon.

Vassili's family lived in his parents' house and he earned money at various enterprises and construction sites. For three years he worked in Riga as a carpenter, then in the settlement of Okhvat, and during the war at a stud farm in Ostashkov. Vasiliy did not serve in the army, neither in the tsarist, nor in the White, nor in the Red, but in 1919 he helped the Red Army as a handyman. After the war he worked in an artel of lumberjacks, from 1925

page137

In 1927 he worked as a carpenter in the Tsentrbumtrest in Andreapol, then for a year and a half until 1927 in Zaples, and then in the Leninskiy Regional Executive Committee in Andreapol. As he himself told the investigator, "I have not been home much all these years, because I live only on side earnings, and my wife runs the household at home". This was confirmed by other witnesses: "He wasn't at home much - he worked as a carpenter, locksmith and a blacksmith. He was a jack of all trades. The family was growing. A son Ivan was born in 1915, a daughter Vera in 1919, and a daughter Alexandra in 1922. Four children, Ivan, Peter, Martha and Varvara, died in infancy. Returning to the village in 1923, Vasily began farming but did not abandon his carpentry trade. Apparently at this time he separated from his parents and built his own house. Nina, my mother, was born in that house in 1925, when Vasili and Maria were already in their forties. Vasili was an enterprising man, running a blacksmith's shop in the village, organising a carpenters' artel of seven men, being the commissioner of this artel and supervising the work. Although the artel worked for the state organizations - it built a stall and a storehouse for Zapadoles - he was accused of exploiting other people's labor and in 1929 was individually taxed 155 rubles for agricultural work, which was 10 times higher than the usual tax. Vasily filed a complaint and after a prosecutor's inspection he was exempted from the individual taxation.

1930. The "kulak" and the "dispossessor".

In the second half of 1930 the economic pressure on the one-man farm increased. Tax policy became its main tool. According to the decree of the USSR Council of People's Commissars of July 7,

page138

The tax on the individual farmer had risen by 15% compared to the previous year. In comparison to the collective farmer, the individual farmer had to pay 10 times as much. The accelerated industrialisation demanded more and more money. On 5 September 1930. The Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) adopted a resolution "On the mobilization of the population's money". This decision of the Party was to be implemented by the local authorities.

The Commission of the Executive Committee of the Lenin district, relying on the local groups of the poor, drew up lists of kulak households for individual taxation. In the Kliuchevskii village council four people made the list: Feofan Andronov (Lapshin), Evgeny Khorkov, Filipp Kuzmin, and only one from Zabolotye - Vasily Boykov. He was given a firm task: to deliver 36 poods of rye, 36 poods of oats, 20 poods of flax seed, 12 poods of barley, 50 poods of hay. This turned out to be practically impossible. Vassili complained to the procurator and he withdrew his firm assignment. But times came when the law was no longer in force and the prosecutor's ruling had no weight whatsoever. The events that changed the life of Vasiliy Panfilovich Boikov and his whole family began on September 9, 1930, when the chairman of the Kliuchevskoe village council, Fedor Bogdanov, with witnesses Alexander Fedotov and Grigory Panfilov came to Zabolotye village to hand to Vasiliy Boikov a decree of the Leninskiy District Executive Committee that he should pay 138 rubles. 65 kopecks of agricultural tax and a penalty of 33 rubles. 24 kopecks, for a total of 171 roubles. 89 kop. He was threatened with arrest for malicious non-compliance with the firm assignment. The landlord was not at home, he was working in Andreapol. His wife, Maria, refused to sign the documents and stated categorically that she would not pay. She said: "Take what you need". On the same day, in the presence of the same witnesses, an inventory of the property was drawn up. The "mobilisation of funds from the population" was well under way. The inventory was made on a printed form specially designed for the non-poor peasants.

page139

The list is a list of all the buildings and livestock of the peasantry. It listed all the possible farm buildings and livestock, indicating the number and approximate value. The most valuable property of the Boykova family was the new house. It was valued at 400 rubles. The immovable property included 2 old barns, a new barn, a old riga, a new bathhouse, an old stable and an old blacksmith shop. Together the value of these buildings was 158 rubles. The iron cart was valued at 30 roubles, and the old sledge at 5 roubles. The livestock included an old horse (50 rubles) and a cow (70 rubles), one sheep (10 rubles), one calf (5 rubles), one pig (25 rubles) and six hens. The house furnishings are clearly incompletely described: a chest, a bed, a samovar and an accordion. All the items except the accordion are listed as old. I can believe that there was only one bed in the family - for the parents, and the children slept on the stove and on the bed. But where was the table? What did the samovar stand on? Where were the chairs? Of course, there were a table, chairs or benches, but most likely they were homemade (Vasiliy was a carpenter), and these household items were of no value to the inventory. However, there was a very detailed list of all the carpenter's, blacksmith's and farming tools, everything with which Vasili Boykov earned his living - plough, lathe, grinder, hammer, saw, lantern, various planers, vice, axe, workbench, pliers, tongs, anvil, hammers. And who played the new accordion? I think it was bought for Ivan. If his father had played it, the accordion would have been in the family. Most likely, the accordion came when the son grew up. On September 30, 1930 Vasiliy Bojkov's fate was decided by the People's Court of Leninskiy district of Western region under the chairmanship of Petrova with the people's assessors Egorova and Lapshina. The public trial took place in the village of Klyuchevoye. Vasiliy had come to the trial from Andreapol, where he was working at the time. He was charged under Article 61, part 2 of the Criminal Code -.

page140

failure to fulfil an individual task. The chief witness for the prosecution, Fyodor Bogdanov, chairman of the Kliuchevskoi village council, stated that Boykov used hired labour, that he was maligned by the Soviet authorities, did not obey any regulations, had been contracted to work and had rented out his house in recent years. Vasiliy did not plead guilty. He said that his daughter Maria was a member of the collective farm, and that he himself had been employed all the time. He does not work the land because he is disabled, his wife works in the fields. They hired a worker to help her for three weeks. He turned in only 3 poods of rye for the harvest because there was not enough crops. The court decided to postpone the decision and demand from the District Executive Committee whether the district commission had cancelled the individual taxation of Boykov and whether he had been deprived of the right to vote. The next hearing was held on 19 October. The composition of the court assessors was changed: Sintsova presided, Klauser and Savitskaya were people assessors. It turned out that the district executive committee and the village council had disobeyed the decision of the prosecutor of the Toropets district to withdraw the individual taxation and the firm grain-raising task from Boykov, and the property of the accused had been seized in his absence. The prosecutor filed an appeal against the dismissal of the case against Boykov with the Regional Prosecutor's Office. This time too, the court considered that there was a lot of ambiguity in the case and postponed the decision. The notarized copy of the Prosecutor's decision to abolish individual taxation "due to the contradictory nature of the decisions of the RNC and the Poor People's Group and the lack of evidence of wage labour" can be found in the archived criminal case file. It came by post to Zabolotye on 9 November, when the addressee had already been arrested. If the letter had arrived earlier, nothing would have changed. Neither the court decision nor the prosecutor's order had any weight. The Boykova case was taken up by the Leninski District Party Committee. In spite of

page141

the party committee, which was not aware of the prosecutor's protests, ruled on 7 October 1930 that the Kharkov and Baykov farms were kulaks and were individually liable to agricultural taxation correctly. The ruling of the Party Committee is certified by the signature of the head of the general department of the RCVP(b). In order to hand down a court verdict, it was necessary to back up the decision of the "Party Troika" with additional charges. On October 16 the GPU received a denunciation that on October 14 a kulak and a deprived man Boykov, being intoxicated, propagandized against the Soviet Union at a mass congregation of people. The economic crime (non-payment of the agricultural tax) turned into a political one. The denunciation was brought against one person, while the investigation case was brought against four peasants, who were listed as individually taxed by the Kliuchevskii village council. In this way the case looked more weighty, and stretched to the exposure of an anti-Soviet kulak organization. The individual tax arrears were all different: Kuzmin, the only one on the list, completed the task. Khorkov and Andronov did half of it, and Boykov was the worst defaulter - he turned in nothing. But this was overshadowed, the main thing was to collect testimony about their anti-Soviet activities. The investigation was short. Within three days, on 23-25 October, the OGPU investigator interrogated five witnesses. They were all poor, fellow villagers, and some relatives of the suspects, most of them illiterate. The investigator himself was not good at literacy, there were many grammatical mistakes and repetitions in the protocols, and it was difficult to distinguish one witness from another by the wording of the protocol. The accusations common to all were as follows. The kulaks Andronov, Boikov, Kharkov and Kuzmin evaded the grain harvesting tasks and hindered measures

page142

The Soviet government and incited the middle classes and the poor to do the same. They conspired not to pay tax, with the aim of materially undermining the Soviet state, and agitated among the poor and collective farmers, saying that under the guise of grain procurements the Bolsheviks were plundering. They spread rumours that the Soviet government was about to end, threatened revenge against the Communists and anyone who joined the collective farms, and intimidated the poor. The gravest accusation against Vasili Boikov was that he threatened to kill the chairman of the village council, Bogdanov. Gerasim Yegorov claimed to have heard Boykov say: "It will be necessary to remove from this world the chairman of the village council, Bogdanov, who, like all Bolsheviks, robs and taxes individually. According to Maria Artemyeva, Boykov said that all collective farmers should be shot and hanged for supporting Soviet power. The evidence gathered was sufficient to warrant an arrest. Fedor Andronov (Lapshin) was arrested on 25 October, and on 27 October Vasily Boykov was arrested at his workplace, both of whom were sent to Velikie Luki. Their third accomplice, Yevgeny Khorkov, was arrested on 7 November and also placed in a house arrest facility in Velikiye Luki. Filipp Kuzmin was already under arrest by this time. They were accused of organised agitation against the Soviet power and deliberate failure to carry out a firm task, i.e. crimes under Article 58, paragraphs 10, 11 and 14 of the Criminal Code, and Boykov, in addition, of threatening and preparing to commit terrorist acts against responsible officials, Article 58, paragraph 8. Article 58 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR established liability for counter-revolutionary activity. Paragraph 10 referred to propaganda and agitation calling for the overthrow, undermining or weakening of Soviet power, paragraph 11 to all kinds of organisational activity aimed at protests of the prosecutor, it ruled on October 7, 1930, that the farms of Kharkov and Baykov were kulaks and were individually liable to an agricultural tax. The ruling of the Party Committee is certified by the signature of the head of the general department of the RCVP(b). In order to hand down a court verdict, it was necessary to back up the decision of the "Party Troika" with additional charges. On October 16 the GPU received a denunciation that on October 14 a kulak and a deprived man Boykov, being intoxicated, propagandized against the Soviet Union at a mass accumulation of people. The economic crime (non-payment of the agricultural tax) turned into a political one. The denunciation was brought against one person, while the investigation case was brought against four peasants, who were listed as individually taxed by the Kliuchevskii village council. In this way the case looked more weighty, and stretched to the exposure of an anti-Soviet kulak organization. The individual tax arrears were all different: Kuzmin, the only one on the list, completed the task. Khorkov and Andronov did half of it, and Boykov was the worst defaulter - he turned in nothing. But this was overshadowed, the main thing was to collect testimony about their anti-Soviet activities. The investigation was short. Within three days, on 23-25 October, the OGPU investigator interrogated five witnesses. They were all poor, fellow villagers, and some relatives of the suspects, most of them illiterate. The investigator himself was not good at literacy, there were many grammatical mistakes and repetitions in the protocols, and it was difficult to distinguish one witness from another by the wording of the protocol. The accusations common to all were as follows. The kulaks Andronov, Boykov, Kharkov and Kuzmin were evading the tasks of grain harvesting, hindering measures

page143

The charges of revolutionary sabotage. All of these charges were punishable by requisitioning part or all of their property and imprisonment for up to three years. Paragraph 8 stipulated responsibility for committing terrorist acts directed against representatives of the Soviet power, for which the highest measure of social protection was the execution or declaration as an enemy of the workers with confiscation of property and deprivation of citizenship; under mitigating circumstances, imprisonment for not less than three years with confiscation of all or part of the property. The questionnaire of the arrested man, Vasiliy Boykov, aged 46, listed him as illiterate, a carpenter and locksmith by profession, living from his farming, carpentry and locksmithing trades. The family consisted of 6 persons: wife Maria aged 46, son Ivan aged 19, daughters Vera aged 10, Alexandra aged 7 and Nina aged 5. The eldest, Maria, by this time was living separately. A certificate issued by the Village Council stated that from 1929-1930, he was deprived of his electoral rights as a former merchant and kulak, exploiter of others' labour, although there were no documents to prove that in the criminal case file. In 1929 he owned 5 dessiatinas of land, 1 horse, 2 cows, 2 sheep, a 16x14 arch house with outbuildings, 3 barns, a smithy, a barn, and a threshing-floor. As a kulak he was assessed with an individual tax, fined five times, and his property confiscated.

Vasiliy Boikov's associate Yepifan (alias Feodor or Theophan) Andronovich (or Andreevich) Lapshin (alias Andronov), 66 years old, lived in Sintsovo village of Klyuchevskii village Soviet together with his wife Katerina for 70 years. He was illiterate, engaged in rural labour. During the first interrogation he admitted that he had hired a worker, i.e. used hired labour, but only in 1927 or 1928 during the harvesting for three weeks, when his wife was ill. A certificate from the village council states that he employed

page144

The Lapshin farm was taxed to the tune of about 200 roubles. In 1927 Lapshin's farm was taxed about 200 roubles, and he was deprived of voting rights. In 1929 he owned 2 cows, an ox, 2 horses, 6 sheep, 6,9 dessiatinas of land, 2 huts, 2 barns, 4 barns, a threshing shed and a bath. As a kulak he was subjected to an individual tax, fined five times and his property confiscated. Another accomplice of Vasily, Yevgeniy Efimovich Khar'kov, 48 years old, not very literate, lived in the village of Maloe Vdovino, Klyuyevsky village council, had a large farm (2 huts, a yard, 2 sheds, a stable, a barn, a bathhouse, 2 cows and heifer, 1 horse, 4 sheep and a piglet), but his family was not small - seven people, including five children aged 4 to 17. In addition to farming, from 1920 to 1929 he worked as a forester for the Tsentrbumtrest of the Leninsky District. In 1929, he injured his leg, spent 6 months in the hospital, and then lay at home and could not work. This is confirmed by available in the file certificate of Andreapol outpatient clinic, issued on March 1, 1930, according to which he was considered disabled of the third group for 6 months. His disability had not saved him from trial. In 1930 he was tried for failure to meet a firm grain procurement target and although the prosecutor reversed the court order, his property was confiscated and nothing was given back. As a former merchant in 1929-30 he was deprived of voting rights. Philip Kuzmin lived in the village of Khvostovo; before the revolution he was engaged in trade, hired farmhands until 1924, and afterwards during the summer season he resorted to day labourers on field work. For this reason, in 1930, he was taxed individually, he was deprived of the right of suffrage and his property was confiscated. Many of the defendants and witnesses referred to him as a nurse and said that they had sought medical help from him, including Vassili's treatment for Spanish flu. None of the official certificates, however, confirm this. One month before the investigation began, Kuzmin had already been sentenced to two years for failing to comply with a firm

page145

He was not summoned for interrogation. After the arrests, the investigation continued and new facts confirming and aggravating the guilt of those arrested were entered in the interrogation reports. The defendants denied everything. They did not organize any gatherings, knew each other only slightly, did not agitate, did not threaten anybody, did not intimidate the poor. Lapshin, the only one among them, pleaded guilty for having failed to fulfil the firm assignment in time, "because I have no able-bodied men besides me". Boykov and Khorkov referred to the prosecutor's order, which cancelled the firm assignment, and to the absence of the required grain.

Vasiliy Panfilovich said at the interrogation that no evil On the contrary, I worked in the collective farm of Kliuchevskoe village council for two days for free, made beds for them, organized the Red corner in Zabolotsk school, bought them a red flag with my own money. When my daughter joined the collective farm, I gave her a cow. I myself helped to conduct contracting in the village council, which can be confirmed by members of the REC Zaytsev and Alekseev. I have no doubt that he was telling the truth, because each of these facts could be easily verified. The question is what was the motivation of his actions. Did he want to help the collective farm? Most likely, he helped Maria, his eldest daughter, who had been drawn to the collective farm when she was young. He gave her a cow and for two days he made beds for the collective farm for free. As my eldest aunt told me, collectivization in Zabolotye started with a commune; they lived in the lord's house, slept and ate together. Vasily Panfilovich made beds for the communards, so that my daughter would not have to sleep on the floor. He organized a Red Corner in the school? But his children were studying there. According to Vasily Panfilovich, during the grain harvest In 1929 his daughter Maria, a member of the Komsomol and a collective farmer of the Kliuchevskoe kolkhoz, brought him a representative of the Komsomol to stay with him.

page146

He was the head of the grain procurements office with a group of four men. He did not speak of any agitation against the grain procurements, on the contrary, by housing the brigade he indirectly assisted in the campaign.

It is evident from the materials of the investigative case that all the anti-Soviet statements of the accused were recorded from the words of witnesses. Thus, Gerasim Yegorov claimed that at one of the kulaks' meetings Kuzmin proposed "not to give a single pound of bread, and let them Communists turn around and go away with nothing to eat, it is better to let the bread rot than to give it to the brigands". And Lapshin made a suggestion: "Hide your bread, so it won't rot, otherwise they will come to us with searches and tell the peasants the same, and make them do it". Boykov briefly said: "And if anyone doesn't listen to us, we will remove him quietly, we will say that bread will be taken away before grain, and then the Communists will give him a pound each". At another meeting, according to Yegorov, they decided "to make it clear to the peasants that they will be branded in the collective farm and there won't be a damn thing of their own". Questions arise: How did the collective farmer Yegorov end up at the meeting of the kulaks? Why did the "evil kulaks," as Egorov calls them, openly urge him to resist the authorities in his presence? How accurately was the witness able to convey the statements of the assembly participants? The only answer to these questions can be that there were no kulak meetings. They were invented by the investigators to increase the gravity of the guilt. The testimony of witnesses on the statements of the accused at village meetings on grain procurements and collectivization is more like the truth: Kuzmin, Lapshin and Boykov shouted: "We have no bread, why do they shake out the last crumbs", and at a meeting on collectivization: "We do not need your collective farms, you want to force the people into the serfdom". But the same testimony shows that the poor supported and defended the screamers when they tried to drive them out of the meetings. References to the darkness of the peasants who believed the "kulak provocateurs" do not look convincing. The "kulaks" were not distinguished

page147

from the rest of the peasant population, neither by education nor literacy. The wealthy, energetic landlords were more confident because they had something to lose. They did not believe the promises of the government and spoke openly about it. Witness Yegorov described their agitation as follows: "Don't trust those bastards, communists, that they will improve peasants' life. Where is their improvement, when a peasant did not receive a herring for many years - on the contrary, they took away last bread. Now they made up this five-year plan in order to rob peasants of their debts for five years". During the subscription for the loan, Boykov told everyone everywhere: "Do not subscribe to the loan, it is enough to rob peasants, they promise to give peasants goods, but in fact they take away everything from peasants". According to Fyodor Bogdanov, chairman of the village council, Andronov and Kharkov spoke in the village council in the presence of the poor about the policy of grain procurements as a policy of robbery. But they were telling the truth! Indeed, the authorities were robbing the countryside, feeding peasants with empty promises that were never fulfilled, splitting the peasant community, trying to destroy even the slightest pockets of resistance, and inciting war. Clearly, there was no room for neutrality in this war. Vasiliy Panfilovich Boykov had either to abandon his entire household and leave for the city with his family, who had extensive experience as a carpenter and locksmith, or stay in the village in the hope that such unjust rule would not last long. According to witness testimony, he believed that the Soviet regime would collapse soon, especially since official propaganda justified the emergency measures by the threat of war. Indeed, if the world war had brought about the fall of the tsarist regime, how could the Soviets have survived the war? The third option is to join a collective farm and voluntarily give everything The money that Vasiliy Panfilovich had gained was hardly worth considering. Firstly, as a rule, kulaks were not admitted to collective farms. Secondly, he would never forget his kulak past.

page148

The use of hired labour, the occupation of trade before the revolution. And thirdly, he was not restrained with his tongue, he said what he thought. When workers at the logging operations in Andreapol were driven to the river to unload firewood in the fall in bad weather, Vasili declared to the public: "There is no smoking, no food, nothing in power, and fools go out to work". It was on October 14, when he was already accused of the failure of the firm assignment. It was this and other similar statements of his that were cited in the statement which reached the local department of the OGPU that served as the reason for his arrest. Thus, looking at the events of autumn 1930 from a distance of ninety years, the arrest of Vassily Panfilovitch looks quite logical. However, the view from the distant future allows us to see only the most general picture; the details which are visible to contemporaries are blurred.

"By evil and personal accounts"?

The only living witness I was able to ask about the reasons for my grandfather's arrest - my great-uncle Ivan Semenovich Boykov, Vasily's nephew - told the following story. It was as if the chairman of the village council had started courting Maria, Vasily's eldest daughter, and she had not reciprocated. The chairman threatened that he would dispossess her father. Maria told her father about this and advised him to join the collective farm. Vasili refused, and the chairman took revenge on the unyielding girl by dispossessing her father. I confess, I didn't believe Uncle Vanya's story. But not because I doubted his memory at all. In 1930 he was 16 years old, living in Zabolotye, so everything happened in front of his eyes for a while.

page149

And at his 97 years of age, he was sane and remembered a lot of things. My opinions came from the fact that Uncle Vanya's story of his grandfather's arrest took on a romantically implausible connotation, as is often the case in family lore. Even if one does not use the cliché "kulak", it cannot be denied that Vasiliy Boykov's family was quite wealthy by village standards. Wasn't it enough to shake out all the money from such farms during the mass forced collectivization, the struggle to fulfill the state grain procurement plans, for the failure of which the local authorities were responsible with their heads? So Uncle Vanya's story remained in my memory as an amusing family tale, and I remembered it when I read my grandfather's criminal record.

On December 5, as the investigation was nearing its end, Vasili Panfilovitch was again summoned for interrogation. Investigator Mindlin again asked about threats against the chairman of the village council Fyodor Bogdanov. Vasiliy replied that his "daughter, a member of the Komsomol together with Bogdanov revealed the kulaks every year", and he himself was with Bogdanov on good terms, had no malice towards him, and never threatened him, and Bogdanov spent several nights in his house.

On 6 December, the investigation was completed. On 8 December, two days after the interrogation, Vasil applied to the Smolensk investigation department of the OGPU with a statement, which refuted what had been said during the interrogation. He wrote: "I have had strained relations with the chairman of the village council since last year because of my daughter, a Komsomol member of the collective farm, who lives in the same collective farm with the chairman of the village council and does not get on with him. The statement said that accusations from Bogdanov and other witnesses are based on personal accounts: "Many people are angry with me because of my daughter, who as a Komsomol member participated last year in the commission on individual taxation and the provision of bread". According to Vasiliy Panfilovich, one of the witnesses, Maria Artemieva, was exposed by him

page150

as a moonshiner, for which she was fined 150 rubles. It was for this that she told the chairman of the village council that Vasiliy threatened to kill him. I wonder who helped Vasiliy Panfilovich to write this statement. It is written in ink on ruler paper, more competently than the protocols of the investigators. The arguments in defense are quite convincing:

1) according to his social status he cannot be an enemy of the Soviet power, because for 14 years he was a worker,
2) for the last 8 years he has been working as a carpenter, the tax was paid, personal taxation was taken off by prosecutor's decision,
3) during the grain procurement he was not at home, thus he could not conduct any subversive work in his village,
4) the accusations are based on settling personal scores.

The following statement to the chief of the OGPU from the investigator The report was written by prisoner Baikov Vasily Panfilovich himself. It is dated 11 December. This means that the previous statement of 8 December was ignored. He requests to be summoned for interrogation once again. He still hopes to prove his innocence, as he believes that he is being accused "out of malice and personal accounts". This is the only document in the case, written in Vasiliy Panfilovich's hand, and it is so illiterate that it is hard to understand in some places. When I imagine my grandfather, still hoping for justice in cell 8 of Velikolukskiy Domzak, scrawling crooked letters on a piece of paper in a box with a simple pencil, tears well up in my eyes. All in vain. He was not summoned for interrogation, and even if he had been, it would not have changed anything.

The question remains as to the personal motives of Fyodor Bogdanov, The main witness for the prosecution was Bogdanov.. Fyodor Bogdanov was not a local, originally from the village of Sobolevo, Kozhukhovsky village council. A 30-year-old bachelor, indigent, member of the VKP(b), he was appointed Chairman of the Kliuchevskii Village Council in the spring of 1930, moved to Kliuchevoye and energetically took up his work.

page151

Vasily's eldest daughter Maria was 21 at the time. She had already been married and had a son. My aunt told me that she had married at 16 for love to a man of her age, Konstantin, a year later the young family had a son Lyova, but the family broke up. She didn't return to her parents' house but joined a collective farm. The collective farmers lived in a commune in the former masters' estate in Klyuchevoye. She did not mention Bogdanov and his courtship, but the young single chairman might well have been attracted to Maria. Even in her old age she was attractive, cheerful, sharp-tongued, and in her youth she had enough suitors. What was going on between her and Bogdanov was unknown, but if he was rejected, he could hold a grudge against Maria and her whole family.

Other witnesses to the prosecution may have had personal motives as well. With the appointment of Bogdanov as chairman, the entire composition of the Kliuchevskii village council changed. Alekseev, Yemelyanov, and Ivan Fedorov were dismissed. They were accused of being "peasants", for giving certificates to kulaks, that they are serfs and in this way allowed to avoid taxes. The new chairman in accordance with the line of the Party started an attack on the wealthy landowners, and of course there were people who willingly supported him. There were many people who resented their rich neighbours - some owed money and could not repay, some were jealous.

For example, Yegor Aleksandrovich Gorbachevsky from the village of Kochergino, born in 1901, from poor and illiterate family, was a hired labourer before the revolution, and in Soviet times he was employed by wealthy neighbours. In 1927 and 1928 he worked for Boykova, in his own words, for free, i.e. without wages. He received only bread and old boots in return for his work. Gorbachevsky dared to ask for money only at the end of his second year of service. In reply, Boykov said: "What salary do you want, you be content to chew my bread" and chased him away. According to Gorbachevsky, he was afraid to sue for fear of his master. It is not clear from the witness' testimony why Gorbachieuski worked for two whole years for free and why he was afraid of Boyko?. According to

page152

Gorbachevsky, the other kulaks, Kuzmin, Lapshin and Kharkov, also hired poor people to do the harvest without paying anything. Whether this was in fact the case is unknown, but it is clear that different forms of economic relations existed in the village community, intertwined with kinship relations. Poor people could borrow money or food from wealthy neighbours and then work it off in a neighbour's field. A hired labourer could work for food and lodging.

The style and content of Gorbachevsky's other testimonies reveal the hand of an investigator who used ready-made formulations of party documents and instructions. As if the enemies of Soviet power, Boykov, Lapshin, Kuzmin and Kharkov, had organized themselves into a group and carried out counter-revolutionary work since the October Revolution. During the Civil War, they hid bread in wagons and openly campaigned. They practically seized power - they did whatever they wanted. During the collectivization they campaigned against peasants joining the kolkhoz, called for revolt and intimidated them in every possible way. Can we believe that all this was said by an illiterate peasant?

This is roughly the same picture of kulak lawlessness, another witness, fifty-year-old Ivan Petrovich Petrov from the village of Sokroshchino, Kholmsk district. He and his wife did not have their own house and farm and from 1923 they were hired to graze cattle in Zabolotye and the surrounding villages. According to the protocol of the interrogation, the illiterate shepherd, after taking a good look at the population, quickly realized that "Soviet power does not exist in these villages thanks to the counter-revolutionary work of kulaks, Vasily Boykov and Yevgeny Kharkov, who all these years, until they were arrested, were continuously agitating against Soviet power, having totally disorganized the population". Petrov said to the District Police Committee, that he had taken the cattle away from Boykov , and when he returned, his wife told him that a meeting of peasants had ruled that Boykov and Kharkov were not kulaks and that he, Petrov, should be evicted from the village as an informer.

page153

The shepherd was refused an apartment, and only thanks to the chairman of the village council he managed to find a place to live.

It seems that Soviet power really only reached these remote places with the beginning of collectivization. In the twenties, the usual way of life was preserved in Zabolotye and the surrounding villages. For generations, farming families had lived in the same place, bound together by kinship ties, neighbourly friendship or enmity. There was certainly opposition between the rich and the poor in the village community, but there was much that united them. A rich neighbour would lend money or grain. The meeting that Petrov describes was spontaneous; it was not the local authorities or the village council that brought the peasants together. People came out to defend their fellow villagers, those who were not afraid to defend common interests at village council meetings. Petrov, an outsider, was a stranger to them.

page154

Sentence

When the investigation was completed, Lapshin was released on his own recognizance. He was the oldest of the accused, complained about his health and pleaded guilty to failing to fulfil a firm assignment. Dudikov, head of the outpatient clinic of Velikolutskiy Domzak, issued a certificate that Lapshin was suffering from atherosclerosis. Boykov and Kharkov remained under arrest. They also had health problems. In 1929 Vasiliy Panfilovich was declared disabled of the 3rd group by the Leninskiy Regional Executive Committee because of atrophy of the right leg muscles. But that was not confirmed by the manager of Domzak's dispensary. The medical report on the results of medical examination read "healthy". The medical report from Kharkiv indicated "low mobility in the left limb joint".

The indictment in the case of Boykov, Kharkov and Lapshin is five pages of typewritten text. For the credibility of the charges, it includes all the materials collected by the two investigators working on the case, Lenin District Commissioner Lobanov and D. Mindlin, Assistant Commissioner of the 3rd Division of the Velikolukskiy Operative Sector. The accused are presented as persistent enemies of Soviet power, who organized "anti-Soviet activities aimed at disrupting all activities of Soviet power". The most dangerous among them is Boykov, who, in addition, "terrorized and threatened the public workers of the village". All these offences fell under Article 58, paragraphs 10, 11 and 14 of the Criminal Code, and in addition, Boyko? was added to Article 58, paragraph 8.

On December 7, the case was sent to the Special Board of the OGPU Collegium for extrajudicial consideration. On 25 December, at a meeting of the "troika" of the OGPU Department for Zapablasts, it was decided that Boikov and Kharkov should be sent to a concentration camp.

page155

Lapshin was released from prison for three years, the first from 27/X-30 and the second from 7/XI-30. Lapshin was released on old age.

Given the nature of the charges, this was a relatively lenient sentence. In fact, of the three, and for Boykov four, paragraphs of Article 58, only one remained - paragraph 10, propaganda and agitation, which contained a call to overthrow, undermine or weaken the Soviet authorities. The organized counterrevolutionary activity (item 11), counterrevolutionary sabotage (item 14), and also the terroristic act against the representatives of the Soviet power (item 8) that Vasiliy Panfilovich was accused of, were not taken into consideration by the "troika" despite all the evidence that had been collected and included into the indictment. On January 31, 1931, the place where they were to serve their sentences was determined - the Mariinsk concentration camp

. Whether he was sent to Mariinsk is unknown. My mother said that her father was working on the construction of the White Sea-Baltic Sea Canal. Three years later, by the end of 1933, Vasily Panfilovich returned to Zabolotye. After all the requisitions, the family was left with a house with outbuildings and a cow. Vasiliy was registered as a peasant as a sole proprietor, and worked part-time as a carpenter. Children grew up: Ivan lived separately, the daughters Vera, Shura and Nina studied in Andreapol. It seemed that life gets better. But in 4 years all the nightmare we had gone through was repeated.

1937

On July 31, 1937 N.I. Yezhov, People's Commissar of Internal Affairs of the USSR, signed Operative Order #00447 "On the Repression Operation of the Former Kulaks, Criminalists and Other Antisoviet Elements". The order stated: "Since August 5, 1937, in all republics, regions and districts to begin the repressive operations against former kulaks, active anti-Soviet elements and other criminals."

page156

One of the largest mass operations of the Big Terror was launched. Plans for the number of arrests were approved at the local level, but they were exceeded. On November 23, 1937 the house of the Boykova's was searched. The owner was arrested, although nothing was found. There is no arrest warrant in the investigation file, only the search warrant and the search report. On the back of the warrant and the copy of the search report it is written: "for illiteracy, I signed my name at my personal request", and there is a signature of the witness Sergey Smirnov. It turns out that Vasiliy refused to sign the documents and the witness signed for his illiterate wife. What was Vasiliy Panfilovich accused of? In the certificate of the Village Council, enclosed in the investigation file, he lists Boykov's past "sins": before the Revolution he owned a kulak farm with 4 cows and 2 horses, before 1918 he owned a grocery store, under Soviet rule he used hired labour and had his own blacksmith shop. He had already paid for all this with three years of camp and requisitioned property. What did the investigators charge him with this time? When one reads the investigation file, one is led to the conclusion that the charges against Vasili were sought after he was arrested. He was interrogated for the first time on 29 November, six days after his arrest. These six days were spent questioning witnesses. The interrogations were conducted by Junior Lieutenant Filippov, Head of Leninsky NKVD Department. He was one of the first to summon Yakov Smirnov. He said that he went to Boykov's house on November 23 and had a conversation with him about life on the collective farm. Boykov allegedly said: "You work day and night at the collective farm ... and you will be hungry, you will never earn money for bread at the collective farm". On the same day, November 23, Boykov was searched and arrested for no apparent reason. The whole thing looked like a planned action. Boykov, as a former fist and anti-Soviet element, was an obvious candidate

page157

for an arrest. All that was needed was a reason. Knowing Vasiliy's attitude to collective farms, his neighbor Yakov had no difficulty in steering the conversation in the right direction. On the same day a search warrant was issued and the arrest warrant was probably forgotten. The investigator easily transforms the anti-colkhoz statements of the accused, which Yakov quotes, into "anti-Soviet agitation".

The testimony of one witness was not enough. The next was a Komsomol member, Nikifor Fedotovich Tsvetkov from the village of Zabolotye. According to him, at Yakov Smirnov's house, where the collective farmers had gathered on the occasion of the October holidays, Boykov said: "You won't get anything for your workdays, you have to fill up a lot of funds and give them to the state, and until you pay, you will go hungry yourself". Nikifor remembered a meeting of collective farmers in early May, where Boykov said: "The plans of the collective farms are exorbitant, you cannot fulfil your plan, your land is bad, and no matter how hard you work, you will still starve". It turns out that the former kulak, who had served his time, was attending collective farm meetings and, moreover, was conducting anti-Kolkhoz propaganda there. Who invited him to these meetings and how was he allowed to say such things?

Tsvetkov and Smirnov testified that Vasiliy Panfilovich had great influence over the chairmen of the kolkhoz, and that their miscalculations were connected with this. Smirnov said that in 1935, when Boykov had just returned from serving his sentence, at his request, kolkhoz chairman Modestov ordered all the kolkhoz cows to be herded into one stable to make room for Boykov's cows. As a result of the excessive restraint 5 calves were run over by the cows. The absurdity of this accusation does not embarrass the investigator. How many cows could a newly freed former kulak have?

According to Smirnov, after Modestov's death Boykov's nephew Pyotr Vasiliev became the chairman of the kolkhoz, through whose fault the potatoes were badly insulated for the winter. According to Tsvetkov, 24 quintals of oats given from the storehouse to the chairman of the kolkhoz for sowing,

page158

were not sown. The act submitted to the REC remained without consequences, and the seeds ended up in the barn of the kulak Boykov. In addition to these accusations, Ivan Semenovich Myagi, the receiver of the Andreapol lumberyard, said that in October, a peasant named Ivan started asking Boykov to make frames for the windows of a shop in Kliuchevoe. Boykov quoted a high price. To Ivan's objection, Boykov said: "That's not how the Soviets are treating us, they've skinned us all over, but this mockery of the people won't last long. Soon there will be no Soviet power".

If everything the witnesses said is true (and each of them has been warned about the responsibility for giving false testimony), it turns out that the former kulak, a communalist and anti-Soviet, after serving his sentence, felt at ease in his native village. He went to the collective farm meetings, gave instructions to the chairman of the collective farm, cursed the collective farms and the Soviet power, slammed high prices for his work. I think this is not far from the truth. After all, Soviet orders had not had time to take deep root in peasant life, had not broken the relationships established over generations within the village community. Vasiliy Boykov was known as a jack-of-all-trades, brave with his tongue, saying what many thought, but were afraid to say. Such people were respected and listened to. Such people were ruthlessly mowed down by the authorities with the hands of the NKVD.

On the basis of the testimonies, the following were formulated charges, none of which Vasili Panfilovich knew. Here is an extract from an interrogation on 29 November, conducted by investigator Prokofyev in the prison in Toropets, where the arrestee was held: Question: The investigation has information that in October of this year you were talking near a shop and conducting propaganda, spreading provocative rumours about the overthrow of the Soviet power. Do you confirm this?

page159

Answer: Not confirmed. Question: The investigation established that during the October festivities in the house of Yakov Smirnov you conducted propaganda against the collective farm system. Do you confirm this? Answer: I do not confirm that. Question: The investigation knows that in May of this year in the house of collective farmer Tsvetkov you conducted propaganda against the implementation of the state sowing plan among the present collective farmers. Do you confirm this? Answer: I don't confirm that. Question: The investigation has data that on November 23rd of this year in the house of Baikov Vasiliy in a private conversation you conducted propaganda against the collective farms, at the same time you disseminated provocative rumours about hunger in the collective farms. Do you confirm this? Answer: I don't confirm that. Question: The investigation found that in September 1928 on the porch of the Cvetkov house you were carrying on propaganda among the people present; at the same time you used foul language with regard to the Soviet authorities. Do you confirm this? Answer: I don't confirm that. Question: Do you plead guilty to the crime? Answer: I plead not guilty. The defendant's confession mattered only if a public trial was being prepared. But Vasiliy Boykov was too small a man, one of hundreds of thousands, and his fate was decided by The "troika" of the UNKVD of Kalinin Oblast. Case No. 10717 of the Leoninskiy District Department of the Administration of People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (UNKVD) about Vasiliy Panfilovich Boykov was considered on December 4, 1937. The charge read that he "being hostile to the Soviet power, carried out the k-r agitation of defeatism and anti collective farm character, called collective farm workers for non-fulfillment of state plans and assignments, discredited the Soviet power bodies". In the minutes of the "troika" meeting this issue is number 62. One can imagine how many cases per session had to be resolved

page160

The court had to take a look at it, and how the decisions were stamped. The grandfather received 10 years of imprisonment in a correctional labour camp, counting the term from 23.XI.37. Where he was sent, it is not specified in the case file, it remains to be found out.

In 1940. Vasiliy Panfilovich filed a complaint to the prosecutor of the Kalinin region with a request to review his case. The review was formally carried out. The Prosecutor requested the case of Boykov, and on July 8, 1940, Azarov, Assistant to the Regional Prosecutor for Special Cases, reviewed it. Azarov's conclusion was a summary of the case file with the conclusion that Boykov had been "convicted correctly and that there was no basis for reconsidering the case against him". For the second time, the Boykov case was requested by the MGB Department of the Kalinin Region on April 21, 1951, and was returned in May. The reason is not specified. We can only speculate on the fact that Lieutenant Colonel Filippov was the head of Division A of the MGB in Kalinin Region. Wasn't it the same Filippov who, in November 1937, as a junior lieutenant in charge of the Leninsky District Department of the NKVD, interrogated witnesses and fabricated the Boykov case?

page161

The last letter

The only letter Granddad sent to his wife on January 9, 1944 has survived in the family archives. I present it in full, correcting the spelling.

"Hello, dear wife Masha.
I am pleased to inform you that I received your letter of December 27, 43, for which I thank you. I didn't know that the children had moved back to their homeland and I kept writing them letters and receiving nothing. I gave Nina a telegram, but there was no answer. All the time I was thinking about the children. Masha, I received your letter, I've been missing you, and I want to go home. Masha, if you get my letter, go to the district executive committee and ask from them to give me a summons. On the call they will give me a ticket and I will come home. When you go to the district executive committee, talk to the chairman of the village council. Maybe he'll help you, take the summons and send it to me. Masha, I work at the collective farm, making wheels and sleds. It's a lot of work. I eat well, I dress warmly. I bought a fur coat. Masha, why do not you write me anything about Vanya and nephews. You write that Nina has moved in with Vera. I don't know if Misha's nephew is dead. Did Nura come with Nina or stayed in Ufalei? Write everything in detail. Then goodbye. I send my best regards to my wife Masha and Praskovya Yegorovna and to all the relatives and my friends. Your Vasya.

A man of low literacy (the letter is full of errors and lacks punctuation), he addressed his wife in "You" and with a capital letter. He has been separated from his family for many years, and has been worried about his children and nephews, writing letters to relatives and sending telegrams, but not always getting answers. He doesn't complain about anything, on the contrary, he writes that he works hard, eats well, is warmly dressed and about to return home. How is that possible? His ten-year sentence of 1937 is not over yet and he is already free? And in order to return home he only needs a summons from the District Executive Committee, which during the war was required for any travel of civilians. His mother said that he had been released from the camp due to illness, although there was no mention of his health in the letter. Perhaps he did not want to frighten and upset his wife. I do not know if it is possible to find out where he served his time, when and why he was released. It is known that he returned from the camp totally ill and died in his homeland in 1945. She did not recognize him. Mother was a Komsomol member. She did not believe that in our country an innocent person could be condemned. Vasily Panfilovich was buried in Andreapol. The grave has not been preserved.

page162

Grandmothers

My grandmothers were born in the same year - 1883. Glafira Ivanovna was born in Vilnius. It is now Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania. Maria Yegorovna - in the village of Zabolotye in Tver province. This village no longer exists, only its name on the map. Maria Yegorovna studied in Paris, taught French and German, translated children's stories from French. Maria Yegorovna was illiterate and used to put an X instead of her signature. Glafira Ivanovna had four sons, Maria Yegorovna had four daughters. It so happened that the youngest son of one of them married the youngest daughter of the other. Now both my grandmothers lie side by side in Vvedensky cemetery. Glafira Ivanovna Dadykina

What I remember about my grandmother: My most vivid memory of my grandmother is from December 1, 1956. I was coming back from school, entering our courtyard, and my friend Galya came running towards me: "Masha, your grandmother has died! In the scale of our yard, where everybody knew each other, and my grandmother had lived here for more than thirty years, it was a significant event. Mattresses, pillows, sheets and blankets were being taken out of our apartment to the rubbish bin. I was seven years old and it was my first encounter with death. I can't say that I grieved too much, but rather that

page163

I was curious. I was not allowed into my grandmother's room, only in the evening the next day my mother took me in her arms and came up to the coffin so that I could say goodbye to my grandmother. It was a little scary. My parents didn't take me to the funeral and asked my teacher to leave me after school. When I said that my grandmother had died, the teacher calmly said: "It can't be helped, old people die." Her indifference surprised me then. At home, all the adults talked about my grandmother's death with sadness.

A few months after the funeral, the phone rang, and I picked it up, asking for Glafira Ivanovna. "She's not here," I answered, and my mind raced: "No, and she never will be, she's dead. I couldn't say those words out loud.

When I was born, Grandma was 66 years old. It doesn't seem like much now, but Grandma seemed old and tired then. The photographs from those years confirm that impression. There was much to be tired of. Grandmother raised four sons, lost one of them, buried her husband, moved many times with her family from city to city, survived the revolution, two wars, evacuation, and a stroke. The family, already not small, grew. Sons married, grandchildren were born. They all lived in one flat, to be exact, in three rooms of a five-room flat with no conveniences. Only the eldest son Ivan lived with his family separately, but often came to stay overnight at his mother's place. Grandmother's room was passable, the bed was behind a screen, next to it there was a washbasin and a jug of water. The same room was usually used for family celebrations, for receiving guests.

I realize now how difficult it was for her to keep the peace in the home, building relationships with her daughters-in-law, and taking care of her grandchildren. She was neither a housekeeper nor a housewife, giving wise advice, meddling in other people's affairs, and always in the kitchen. In this apartment crowded with sons, daughters-in-law, grandchildren and neighbours, she managed to maintain her

page164

private world and live their lives. And this commanded respect. All her sons called her by her first name, while her father was addressed as 'You'. This had been the custom since childhood. The older grandchildren, Lyonya, Olya and Nina, were also on a first-name basis with their grandmother, daughters-in-law and neighbours called her only by her first and middle names. I never heard anyone call her "Baba Glasha". My grandmother made a strong impression on me the first time I met her.The old grey-haired woman was sitting in an armchair, reading a French book

page165

I was struck by her appearance, her manner of speaking, the interior of the room, the atmosphere of the old house. Mamma was 23, she had lived with strangers for most of her life, and when she arrived in Moscow, she huddled in her older sister's nine-metre room. She really wanted to stay here.

I was the youngest granddaughter, the fifth. A month after the birth my mother's maternity leave ended, she went to work and I was left with my grandmother. After the stroke, she couldn't take me in her arms and even talking to me was difficult for her. That's why I was a late talker. It got easier when Natasha came. She was a housekeeper in the family of Séva, my father's brother, and she lived in the same flat as us. When Seva moved to a separate flat Natasha came to live with us and became an au pair for my mother and a nanny for me. But she is a separate story.

There was an icon in my grandmother's room, but I didn't see what- if she had ever prayed or been baptized. My parents were communists, but they didn't mind if my grandmother baptized me. She did not, saying that baptism only made sense if the child was brought up religiously.

I don't remember my grandmother playing or doing anything with me. It must have been difficult for her. Once a friend came to her, with whom she was speaking French. Pointing at the objects around her, I began to ask her what they were called in French. My curiosity quickly waned but the three French words that I took from her have remained in my memory for all my life: "le table", "la chaise" and "la fenêtre". The teaching of German was entrusted to her friend Krimhilde Karlowna who stayed with us for several years after my grandmother's death. Since then I learned more German words than French, but I did not master the language. I can't blame it on Krimgilda Karlowna, for whom the German. She loved me. And I used her kindness to do all sorts of things. I'd crawl into the closet so she wouldn't find me, or hide my textbook. I'm ashamed to remember. My mother told me that in the last years of her life my grandmother used to give her belongings, something left over from her jewelry, a sewing machine, to her loved ones. "So they wouldn't wait for me to die," she used to say. It was a wise thing to do. On the one hand, it was a pleasure for her to please a relative, on the other hand, by giving away her belongings she prevented possible quarrels that often break out when dividing an inheritance, no matter how modest it was. However, the sons did fight after her death. It was the first family quarrel I had ever witnessed, maybe the only one I ever had. I remember that Daddy shouted at my brothers and they shouted at him, but Daddy was louder. I was scared. I didn't know what it was then, but now I can was a native tongue. She was a very gentle person and loved me

page166

I took advantage of her kindness to do all sorts of things. I'd crawl into the wardrobe so she wouldn't find me, or hide my textbook and notebook. I'm ashamed to remember. My mother told me that in the last years of her life, my grandmother used to give her belongings, something left over from her jewellery, and a sewing machine to her loved ones. "So they wouldn't wait for me to die," she used to say. It was a wise thing to do. On the one hand, it pleased her to please a loved one; on the other, by giving away her belongings, she prevented the possible quarrels that often erupt when dividing an inheritance, however modest it may be. However, the sons did quarrel after her death. It was the first family quarrel I had ever witnessed, and perhaps the only one I had ever witnessed. I remember that Dad shouted at my brothers and they shouted at him, but Dad was louder. I was scared. I didn't know what it was then, but now I can

page167

guess that the reason was the room that had been vacated by my grandmother. Uncle Vanya, who had family problems and needed a place to live, wanted to occupy it. Uncle Vanya was supported by Uncle Seva. Dad stood up for his right to a place to live. As a result, we took over Grandma's room and Dad's relationship with his older brothers deteriorated for many years. The last "hello from my grandmother" I received unexpectedly many years after her death. One day in the cafeteria at the Faculty of Journalism, I found myself at the same table with an elderly man in whom I recognized Vsevolod Ruzhnikov. He had been married to a friend of my mother's when he was young and used to come to our house. I told him I was Nina Dadykina's daughter. 'I remember your family,' he replied, 'and I remember very well your grandmother Glafira Ivanovna, who taught German at our school. How pleased I was!

Vilna

By studying the history of the family, I learned a lot about my grandmother. She was born on April 26 (May 9), 1883 in Vilna, in the family of Ivan Makarovich Dadykin, gymnasium teacher, and his wife Maria Ivanovna, née Sidorska. She was baptised on 12 May in the Prechistensky Cathedral. The godparents, that is godparents, were her grandmother, the priest's wife Stephanida Pavlovna Sidorskaya, and a collegiate secretary Vasily Georgievich Bogoyavlensky. Glafira was the eldest child in the family, and in 1886 Andrew was born, Olga in 1888, and Ivan in 1889. When it came time for the children to study, Ivan Makarovich, who already had extensive teaching experience and had worked in various educational institutions of the city, Glafira and Olga entered

page168

the Mariinsky Girls' High School, and the brothers, the Vilna First Gymnasium. After graduation her father sent Glafira to the Alliance Française course in Paris. The journey was not limited to Paris. Then there was a trip to Berlin and Cologne. A lot of impressions for a twenty-year-old girl who had spent her whole life in Vilna. In Berlin we stayed in the New York Hotel and had lunch in a restaurant on Friedrichstrasse.

Lunch cost 1 mark 40 pfennigs. We visited museums, the aquarium, and the famous Berlin Zoo. She wrote to her parents about all this in French. Glafira returned to Vilna in August 1903, and for a long time afterwards she received French postcards from her new friends.

This is how my grandmother obtained the profession she had been doing all her life - she became a foreign language teacher. She had the title of house teacher, which gave her the right to teach in private boarding houses and junior classes of city schools.

page169

Glafira Ivanovna started working in 1903 at the age of twenty in the Vilna Trade School, a year later she moved to the Vilna First Men's Grammar School, where her brothers studied , and to the Vilna Secondary School, where her father worked, and to the Vilna Normal School, where her father worked. Apart from teaching, she did translations. In 1905 she published two fairy tales, translated from the French in the children's magazine "Zorka" in Vilnius, under the editorship of S A Kovalyuk, "The Real Treasure" and "Christmas Night". She also travelled to Geneva and Vienna during the summer holidays of that year, to practise her German. She wrote to her sister Olya and brother Vanya in Russian: "I send greetings to the inhabitants of Leonovka from mountain Switzerland. My soul is always in Leonovka. I am dreaming of coming back. She was anxious about her work, asking her brother if the magazine “Zorka” had been sent, and if her stories were in it, she was also concerned about having lessons at the Real School when she returned..

page170

Where and when my grandmother met my grandfather is unknown. I believe it happened in the winter of 1907. She was 23 at the time and he was 30. My grandmother's business card has been preserved and on the back of it is written in fine calligraphic handwriting:

"Dear Petya, please accept this cushion made by me as a present on your birthday. Put it on the sofa and think of me while you are looking at it. Your Glasha".

Grandfather was born on the 19th of February. So, acquaintance took place earlier. In a conversation with VV. Rozanov on the steamer during the wedding journey, Peter Osipovich said that their romance was made in a fortnight with the first casual and unforeseen meeting. They were married on 29 April in Vilna in a secondary school church. An invitation was preserved in which the parents of the bride and groom "humbly ask to welcome their daughter and son to the marriage".

Pioter Rabinowitz taught mathematics in a grammar school in Revel. After the wedding journey along the Volga, Glafira Ivanovna moved in with her husband and, as appropriate, took his surname. The address where the young family settled - Gonziora street, 11, flat.3, echoes her grandmother's last address - Glazovsky lane, 10, flat.3.

page171

Revel, Pernov, Arkhangelsk,p> In Revel, Glafira Rabinowitz joined the newly established private Gymnasium. This was the first private grammar school for girls in the Estonian province. The very next year, she decided to start her own business. In July 1908, she received permission to found a two-class private school for boys with a preparatory class, teaching in Russian. The first success was inspiring. The private school of Mrs Rabinowitz had not yet begun to operate when the plan to convert it into a four-class progymnasium emerged. Glafira Ivanovna justified this by the fact that there was an acute need for a Russian educational institution in Reval, that the two government gymnasiums were overcrowded and could not accept all the children who had passed their examinations. The hand of Peter Osipovich can be felt here. In August 1908 she was seven months pregnant when she applied for a pro-gymnasium. It is unlikely that Glafira Ivanovna made up her mind to undertake such a demanding and responsible undertaking without her husband's support and assistance.

page172

On 2 October her first son Ivan was born. Not without her husband's help, the young mother with a baby in her arms continued to take care of the school's affairs throughout the school year: selecting teachers, looking for premises, corresponding with the inspector. She was waiting for permission to open a pro-gymnasium. The answer came negative at the end of the school year. The Board of Trustees of the Riga educational district justified its refusal by the impossibility to evaluate the educational work in the school, the tutor of which was Glafira Rabinovich, as it had only been opened recently. Having failed to obtain permission for a pro-gymnasium, Glafira Ivanovna announced the closure of the school. Instead of Mrs. Rabinowitz's school, it became Jan Kirsipu's school, at the same address with the same statutes and programme.

It happened in August 1909 when Peter Osipovich was appointed the teacher of mathematics in Pernów gymnasium, in August 1909, with the duties of inspector. It is difficult to say what was the cause and the consequence. Did Glafira Ivanovna give up the school because of her husband's new appointment and the family move, or did the failure of the private gymnasium venture prompt Peter Osipovich to look for a new job with a higher salary? As far as I'm concerned, Grandfather's character was all about him. He was impulsive, restless, often changed jobs, moved from town to town. Obviously

page173

it was he who wanted to establish a private grammar school in Revel, but could not do so as he was working in the state grammar school. So the documents were drawn up in the name of his young wife, even though she was pregnant. We started with the school, hoping to turn it into a gymnasium. It did not work out at once and the interest was lost.

Jan Kirsipu, who inherited the college after Glafira Ivanovna left, tried again in 1916 to get permission to turn it into gymnasium, but was again refused.

But in 1917 my grandfather managed to organise his own gymnasium in Arkhangelsk. However, it was not private, but belonged to the teachers' association, headed by Peter Rabinovich. The time was difficult and the school did not exist for long.

My grandmother no longer took part in my grandfather's undertakings, but took care of the children. Two years after Ivan Vsevolod was born in 1910, in 1912, Pavel and in 1915 Rostislav .

With the advent of 1917 life became increasingly difficult, grandfather's wages were insufficient. When the youngest son was only 2 years old, Glafira Ivanovna had to go out to work. From 1917 to 1919 she taught French

page174

at the Olginsky Grammar School, as French was not a compulsory subject. The teaching load was light.

Things became especially difficult in 1919-1920 when Arkhangelsk was occupied by the Reds and Peter Osipovich was arrested by the KGB. His son Pavlik recalled that time as a famine, when his mother and brothers travelled to the village to get food in exchange for items. By some miracle Peter managed to free himself and bring his family from Arkhangelsk to Moscow in the early 1920s

. Surname

When and for what reason Glafira Ivanovna regained her maiden name is unknown. Obviously it was not earlier than 1920 and not later than 1928. In 1920 Glafira Ivanovna Rabinovich's name can be found on the list of those wishing to occupy

page175

pedagogical posts in Arkhangelsk. In the list of teachers of Khamovniki district of Moscow for 1918-1924. Glafira Ivanovna is listed with the surname Dadykina-Rabinovich. Ivan Makarovich Dadykin's letter to his daughter, written in July 1928, was preserved; the addressee is Glafira Ivanovna Dadykina, with a postscript "Rab. Probably wanted to write "Rabinovich". In the preserved pre-revolutionary postcards addressed to Glafira Ivanovna Rabinovich, the surname is obscured. Who, when and why did it is a mystery. The surname was also changed for her sons. In the lists of students of Lomonosov Grammar School, Ivan and Vsevolod are Rabinovichs. In the yearbook of the Agricultural Academy's Organizer Agronomists Course for 1931, Vsevolod has a double surname - Dadikin - Rabinovich. Perhaps he enrolled for studies in 1927 under his father's surname, and during his studies he changed his surname. So this confirms the assumption about the time of the surname change. The younger ones, Pavel and Rostislav, went to school after the revolution, under which surname is unknown. But eventually they all became Dadykins. And this surname the sons passed on to their children. The surname Rabinovich suddenly returned to the family in the next generation. The great-granddaughter of Peter Osipovich Rabinowicz, Irina Dadynovych as an adult and very consciously took the surname, that was put under the photo of her grandfather Vsevolod Petrovich in 1931 and became Dadynovych-Rabinowitz. I wonder what her grandfather and grandmother would have said.

Moscow

The first temporary accommodation in Moscow was two rooms in the building of the former Rukavishnikov Orphanage (Nesvitskaya's house on Smolensky Boulevard)

. Soon the Peter Osipovich received three rooms in a five-room communal apartment for the rest of their life.

page176

The neighbours, like the grandparents, were school teachers.

Since French was not taught in a Soviet school, Glafira Ivanovna began to teach German. Grandfather and grandmother worked hard, they had to raise their sons and give them an education. The older sons graduated from institutes and got married, and some children were born. The oldest was Lyonya, the son of Ivan and Lina. He was born on January 22, 1934. The same year, on June 9, Nina, daughter of Seva and Lelya, was born in Magadan. Ivan's family lived separately, while Seva and Lelya moved to Moscow after the birth of their daughter and settled in Glazovsky with their parents. Ninotchka, the first girl in the family, became everyone's favourite. Peter Osipovich wrote to his son in the north that Glafira Ivanovna often took Ninotchka for walks on the boulevard, and on weekends they all went together to Filevsky park. In the summer Lelya and Ninotchka were sent to the country house and the grandparents missed their granddaughter.

Every summer Glafira Ivanovna and Peter Osipovich went to Kislovodsk. In 1936, Peter Osipovich was lucky to receive a free voucher, while the Glafira Ivanovna baught a voucher to the same sanatorium. After Kislovodsk they planned to go to the sea. Peter Osipovich wrote to his son Seva: "The sanatorium is brand new, a good one. The rooms are only for two, so it is possible that we will be in the same room, and no one will annoy us, as it happens for the most part in the common rooms of most sanatoriums." Peaceful life was cut short on 22 June 1941, when Ivan, Seva and Rostislav were conscripted into the army. Pavel worked in Kaluga.

In August Peter Osipovich, Glafira Ivanovna, Lelya and Nina evacuated to the Gorki region. Letters from their sons went to the address:

. 43 Kantaurovo, Gorki Region, Borsky District.

Here Peter Osipovich and Glafira Ivanovna received news of the disappearance of Pavlik, who was on his way to them from Kaluga. Soon Peter Osipovich passed away. He died on 1 May 1942.

Glafira Ivanovna returned to Moscow, apparently in late summer 1943.

page177

Birthday in 1944

My grandmother's letter, sent to him at the front in May 1944, has been preserved in my father's archives, in which she describes in detail how she spent her birthday. I shall present this story in full with some comments. According to the new style, grandma's birthday was on May 9, i.e. the day she described was exactly a year before the end of the war. Grandmother had already returned from the evacuation and was living in Glazovsky Lane with her daughter-in-law, Sevina's wife Lelya (Olga Fyodorovna) and granddaughters. Nina was 10 years old and Irina was 1 month old on her grandmother's birthday. Sons Vanya, Seva and Rostik were at the front.

Here is what the grandmother wrote:

"I got up at 4 o'clock in the morning and fried pies with rice and keta until six o'clock. At six o'clock Lelya got up, fed the baby and came to congratulate me. She gave me some sugar, and from Vanya she brought a bottle of cologne (a rarity nowadays) and a real napoleon cake. Vanya heard from me that I wanted to buy a pastry and have coffee with it at the commissary. He remembered all this when he left, and instructed Lelya to bring me such a present. At 6:30pm Lelya left for the distribution centre, where they only give us food on Tuesdays, and I stayed with the children. At 8 a.m. N.A. Brzezinska came to see me. I treated her to tea and cakes. I did this while holding tiny Irina, who was already hungry and screaming her head off. Then

page178

Lelya came in. I prepared something for dinner and cleaned my rooms. I decided not to go to the dining room and sat down at your table to mend my stockings. At one o'clock Galya came in, congratulating me on behalf of my mother, who seemed to have a headache, so she couldn't come. By four o'clock I had set the table. Sasha came in, brought me two bars of chocolate, had coffee with me and quickly left. At 5:30pm An.Os. and Alex.Os. and their niece Ira. We sat down for tea. I did not move the table away from the wall, as I was not expecting anyone except Aunt Katya. Aunt Katya came in after 6pm. And then the Aksenovs came, whom I wasn't expecting at all. AN came, and Leonid Sergeyevich came. As you can see, so many people remembered me that day, and I didn't feel lonely. After all, I sometimes get very bored without my father, and I even get a little scared when I start to feel my loneliness.

page179

Aunt Katya slept over at my place. I love it when she comes: she brings with her so much affection and warmth. I wasn't poor on the table. There were sprats, white bread, butter, red caviar, sugar, sweets, chocolate and milk.

As you can see we are not living poorly. This is how Granny celebrated her 61st birthday. After the war, Granny suffered a stroke, the effects of which lasted the rest of her life. Next stroke she did not survive. Glafira Ivanovna died on December 1, 1956. and was buried in Vvedenskoye Cemetery.

page180

Maria Yegorovna Boykova

I only saw my grandmother Maria Yegorovna once. She lived in the village with the family of Aunt Vera, my mother's older sister. When I was about four, my mother and I went to visit her, but I don't remember it. Everything I know about her I heard from my mother and my mother's sisters, something I managed to find in the criminal record of my grandfather Vasily Panfilovich. I will try to collect these crumbs and tell you about her life.

Maria Yegorovna was born in 1883 in the village of Zabolotye, Tver province. The exact date is unknown. birthdays were not celebrated in the village. The parents' names were Yegor and Maria. When I asked about my grandmother's maiden name, my mother and her older sisters answered that it must have been Yegorova, as her father was Yegor. Maria had a sister Praskovia and a brother Semion. There may have been more children in the family, but in those years in village families many died in infancy. It is known that before her marriage Maria served as a maid in the house of the landowner V.S. Kushelev. She did not study anywhere and remained illiterate for the rest of her life.

In 1908, at the age of 25, rather late by village standards, Maria married a fellow villager Vasily Boykov. He was a year younger than she, was a tradesman and was away from home for long periods of time. They lived with their father-in-law, Panfil Ivanovich, until 1925, when Vasiliy built his own house.

page181

In 1909 they had a daughter, who was given the same name as her mother and grandmother - Maria. Maria Yegorovna gave birth to nine in all: after Maria came Ivan, then Vera, Pyotr, Martha, Varvara, another Ivan, Alexandra and Nina. Five survived: Maria, Ivan (1915), Vera (1919), Alexandra (1922) and Nina (1925). The youngest, my mother, was born when my grandmother was 42. It turns out that about twenty years of Maria Yegorovna's life were spent pregnant and nursing her children. As my mother's older sisters told me, my grandmother gave birth at home behind the stove, and nursed for a long time, the youngest until she was about four or five years old. My mother remembered quietly asking my grandmother to go out into the halls and suckle, embarrassed in front of everyone. Maria Yegorovna was already a grandmother at that time. Her first grandson, Lyova, was born in 1926. Grandmother nursed him too.

Pregnancy and nursing did not relieve the village woman from housework and household chores. Vasily continued to work as a carpenter, and a blacksmith, to earn money. Field work and the vegetable garden fell to Maria. Was she happy? She hardly thought about it. There was no time to care for the children, when there was the livestock, the work in the fields, and the housework. Her husband did not drink or hit her, but was often absent from work and brought guests when he returned. We did not live poorly by village standards. I can judge the relationship in the family by my mother and her sisters. They were all very affectionate. I never heard a rude word from them, they never punished us children. They could take offense at each other, but they never fought.

The family's life changed dramatically in the autumn of 1930, when Vasili was arrested and imprisoned for three years. The details of the arrest and trial are described in an essay about Vasili Panfilović. Little is said about Maria Yegorovna in her husband's criminal record, but even this little testifies that her grandmother behaved with dignity. When the commission came to describe the property, Vasiliy was not at home. Maria refused to sign the documents, saying only: "Take what you need. No begging, no tears, no shouting.

page182

She was left with four children; the youngest, Nina, was 5, Shura was 8, Vera was 12 and Vanya was 15. The eldest daughter, Maria, lived alone. The property was requisitioned, they were left with only the house with outbuildings and a cow. How did the grandmother live after her husband's arrest? How was she, the wife of a kulak, treated by the fellow villagers, many of whom testified against her grandfather? How did she cope with her one-man farm when the majority joined the collective farm? From the sketchy memories of my mother and her sisters, we know that they lived poor, milk with crumbled black bread was a delicacy. But that was the way almost everyone lived. A primary school was opened in their house. Mother recalls that when she was very young she was not allowed to go to school, and would hide under the table during lessons. She was very keen to learn.

At the end of 1933 Vasily returned to Zabolotye. He did not join the collective farm, registered as a sole proprietor, earned his living as a carpenter. In 1937 he was arrested again, accused of anti-Soviet agitation. The investigation took about 10 days, he was arrested on November 23rd, and on December 2nd a "troika " issued a verdict of 10 years.

page183

in labour camps. Maria Yegorovna was again left alone. Her husband sent her rare letters. She could neither read them, nor answer them herself, she asked her children.

Children grew up and moved away. Only two children - Maria Yegorovna and younger daughter Nina, are listed in the household book for 1940. Vera got married by that time. Shura moved in with her older married sister Maria. Next door lived son Ivan with his wife Praskovia and stepdaughter, Vasily's nephew Vasily Semenovich with his wife Marfa and two children. Among her neighbours were also those with whom Maria Yegorovna found it difficult to meet. They were Nikifor Tsvetkov and Yakov Smirnov, on whose denunciation Vasily Panfilovich was convicted.

With the beginning of the war the Leninsky district, which included the village of Zabolotye, quickly found itself on the front lines. In July 1941. Nina left for evacuation, and Maria Yegorovna was left alone. Fierce fighting raged until the end of August, by September the area was occupied by the Germans. Zabolotye stood far from the roads and there was no military action there. The house built by Vasiliy was not destroyed, and Vera moved in with Maria Yegorovna with her two-year-old son Valerik. Vera helped the partisans and went to the location of German units, on the instructions of the squad leader, while Maria Yegorovna baked bread for the partisans. The occupation was short. On January 16, 1942 the Leninskiy district was liberated.

At the beginning of 1944 she received a letter from her husband. He asked her to speak to the chairman of the village council and go to the district executive committee, to petition for him to be sent a summons to return home. The ten-year sentence had not yet expired and Vasili could only be released because of illness. Maria did her best to get her husband to return home. It succeeded in March 1944. In the farm book for 1945 they were both registered, Vasily Panfilovich as the head of the family, and he got his old job back. .

page184

On 1 December 1945, Maria Yegorovna left Zabolotye for good. She moved to Turginovo with her daughter Vera. Maria Yegorovna lived the last years of her life with Vera's family. She died on 5 September 1954 in Moscow and was buried in Vvedenskoye Cemetery.

page185

⦿ Next Page