A notable distinguishing feature of the ideological and cultural life of a developed socialist society was the broad participation of the Soviet public, including the scientific community, in the noble cause of protecting and using the historical and cultural wealth of the peoples of the USSR. Important milestones of this social movement in the Russian Federation were the congresses of the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments (VOOPIK) held in 1966, 1972, 1977, and 1982. The congresses were held under the beneficial influence of the decisions of the regular congresses of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The XXVI Congress of the CPSU committed to improving the "protection and promotion of historical, cultural and natural monuments" 1 . The Party gives the mass movement for the identification, protection and promotion of monuments organization, planning and ideological orientation. This is reflected in the strengthening of the relationship between the socio-economic and cultural progress of the USSR at the present stage.

The Soviet country became a pioneer in creating a national system of registration, protection and promotion of historical and cultural monuments as a national treasure. Lenin's decrees laid the foundations of socialist legislation, the legal framework, and the practical activities of Soviet authorities and public organizations to preserve and effectively use cultural heritage in the interests of communist construction, for the development of science, public education, and culture. Lenin's ideas are reflected in the articles of the Constitution of the USSR and the Constitutions of the Union Republics, as well as in modern legislation on monuments.

Lenin's ideas and actions in the field of preserving cultural wealth, Lenin's harsh criticism of the manifestations of nihilistic attitude to the heritage of the past remain fundamental for the Soviet people to this day. Monuments are primarily objects of ideological, scientific and cultural significance. Treasures of history, architecture and art help to form high feelings of Soviet patriotism and socialist internationalism, ideological and moral education, strengthen friendship between peoples, and embody bright communist ideals. Monuments are a kind of archive of sources for studying national history. They serve as a means of widespread dissemination of knowledge, raising the level of education and culture of Soviet people, and their aesthetic education.

During the Great Patriotic War, more than 2 thousand unique buildings and structures were destroyed and damaged, and many monuments fell into disrepair. The Nazis looted more than 400 museums. In after-

1 Materials of the XXVI Congress of the CPSU, Moscow, 1981, p. 182.

page 13

During the war years, huge restoration works were carried out in Moscow, Leningrad, Novgorod, Pskov, Smolensk, Ryazan, Kazan, Gorky, Astrakhan, Suzdal, Rostov Veliky, and by the mid-60s impressive results were achieved. The world-famous kremlins and palace and park ensembles of these cities have once again entered the priceless cultural fund of the country. In a number of places, historical and architectural reserve museums have been created on the basis of restored unique monuments. All these works were carried out on the basis of scientific methods developed by Soviet art historians, architects and restorers, which have received worldwide recognition.

However, there were serious shortcomings in the protection of monuments on the territory of the RSFSR. Many monuments (especially in rural areas) were in a neglected state. There were cases of ill-considered, and sometimes irresponsible approach to valuable historical and architectural monuments, their destruction, alteration, unauthorized development of protected areas. This was also due to the lack of necessary state discipline and responsibility and insufficient public participation in the protection and maintenance of monuments. The involvement of the public was intended to create an environment of intolerance to nihilism and irresponsibility in dealing with issues related to the fate of cultural property .2
In the 1960s, there was a need to create a mass public organization whose tasks would include attracting the general population to participate in the protection of monuments; actively assisting state bodies in their work on the preservation, promotion and restoration of monuments; promoting knowledge about monuments in order to foster love for the Motherland and its glorious history. The success of education and enlightenment, the introduction of Soviet people to the achievements of science, including historical science, and art, in turn, predetermined an unprecedented increase in interest in monuments on the part of broad sections of the working people.

According to the legislation of the USSR and the Union republics, monuments consist of three complexes: documentary, museum and so-called immovable. VOOPIK congresses review and discuss the work of the public on all types of monuments 3 . But since the bulk of documentary and museum monuments are kept in state archives, museums, and libraries, it is natural that the congresses paid the greatest attention to immovable monuments (architectural ensembles and individual buildings, memorials, battle sites with foreign invaders, works of monumental painting and sculpture, burial mounds, etc. archaeological sites, garden and park complexes). These monuments are the visual embodiment of many glorious events in the centuries-old history of the peoples of our country, materialized symbols of great labor, revolutionary and military traditions, visible witnesses of the work of scientists, literature and art. The number of immovable monuments in the Soviet Union is currently approaching 200,000.

The first (constituent) VOOPIK Congress was held in Moscow on June 8-9, 1966. Conferences were held in all the regions, territories, and autonomous republics of the Russian Federation, where the following topics were discussed:

2 See Kochemasov V. I. Monuments of culture - an important means of education. - Kommunist, 1966, N 14.

3 The transcripts of the first and fourth congresses are kept in the archive of the Central Council of VOOPIK. Materials of the second and third congresses were published (Materials of the second VOOPIK Congress, Leningrad, July 4-6, 1972, Moscow, 1973; Materials of the Third VOOPIK Congress, Suzdal, July 26 - 27, 1977, Moscow, 1979). In the future, the article cites only excerpts from the reporting reports and resolutions of the congresses, and therefore references to the archive and the mentioned publications are not given.

page 14

The congress elected 392 delegates. The congress was attended by senior officials of the Central Committee of the CPSU, heads of a number of ministries and departments of the USSR and RSFSR, representatives of public organizations, creative unions, scientists, historians, archaeologists, architects, sculptors, artists, restorers, writers, journalists. Among them are I. L. Andronikov, P. D. Baranovsky, N. N. Voronin, S. T. Konenkov, P. D. Korin, L. M. Leonov, S. V. Mikhalkov, I. G. Petrovsky, B. B. Piotrovsky, B. A. Rybakov, M. I. Tsarev and other figures of science and culture. On behalf of the All-Russian Organizing Committee, V. I. Kochemasov, Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR, delivered a report on the goals and objectives of the society at the congress. The report on the draft charter of the society was made by the Minister of Culture of the RSFSR N. A. Kuznetsov. 28 people took part in the debate on the reports (about 800 people took part in the discussion of the draft charter at regional, regional, and republican conferences). The Congress approved the provisions of the report on the goals and objectives of the VOOPIK and adopted its charter .4
The specific program of activities that the company was involved in was outlined in the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR of May 24, 1966 "On the state and measures to improve the protection of historical and cultural monuments in the RSFSR". This decree obligated the Soviet authorities, in connection with the upcoming 50th anniversary of Soviet power and the 100th anniversary of the birth of V. I. Lenin, to "put in exemplary order monuments and memorials related to the life and work of V. I. Lenin, the history of the conquest and defense of Soviet power" 5 . All activities were to be carried out with the participation of local branches of VOOPIC6 .

The second VOOPIK Congress was held in Leningrad on July 4-6, 1972. 506 delegates were elected to the congress. The congress consisted of six sections (historical monuments, monuments of art and literature, monuments of archeology, monuments of architecture and urban planning, monuments of wooden architecture and open-air museums, propaganda). 24 people spoke at the plenary sessions, and 86 people spoke at the breakout sessions. The report of the Central Council outlined the main results of the company's activities for the first six years of its existence. During this time, important changes have taken place in the field of monument protection, and above all, the social and moral environment in which this work was carried out has improved. At the initiative and with the participation of VOOPIK, a number of important state decisions were developed and adopted, which outlined quantitative and qualitative parameters for the improvement and restoration of monuments, the design and creation of tourist centers. The Central Committee of the CPSU, the Council of Ministers of the USSR, and the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR accepted proposals from scientists, architects, and museum workers to create Lenin memorials in Ulyanovsk and Shushenskoye (now these projects have been implemented); developed proposals for the restoration of the museum-reserve in Gorki Leninsky; decided to carry out restoration work in the Moscow Kremlin and on Red Square; in Moscow Monuments in honor of the heroes of the Great Patriotic War were erected in Leningrad , Volgograd and other regions; much has been done to preserve and restore memorial complexes in Yasnaya Polyana, Mikhailovsky, Karabikha, Spassky-Lutovinov, Tarkhany, Konstantinov, etc. In total, in accordance with government decisions, the base was restored-

4 V. I. Kochemasov was elected Chairman of the Presidium of the Central Council (in 1983 he moved to diplomatic work). In February 1984, the Presidium was headed by the Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR, Corresponding member. Academy of Sciences of THE USSR E. M. Cheharin.

5 Okhrana pamyatnikov istorii i kul'tury [Protection of Historical and cultural monuments]. Sb. dokl. Moscow, 1973, p. 151.

6 Kochemasov V. I. The Year of Search, the Year of Hope. - History of the USSR, 1967, N 5.

page 15

More than 30 nature reserve museums have become operational. VOOPIK proposed to turn Suzdal into a tourism center. Restoration of architectural monuments in the Trinity-Sergius, Solovetsky, Kirillo-Belozersky, Ferapontov monasteries, in the Kizhi Museum - Reserve was launched.

Holding the congress in Leningrad was a tribute of admiration and gratitude for everything done to preserve the cultural riches in the hero city and its suburbs. During the years that have passed since the victory over the fascist invaders, the greatest works of Russian architecture, monuments of the Great October Revolution and socialist construction, memorable places of life and activity of V. I. Lenin and his associates, houses and apartments of great figures of Russian culture have been recreated in Leningrad, Petrodvorets, Pushkin, Pavlovsk, Lomonosov and others .7
By the time of the second congress, VOOPIK had become a mass organization (more than 8 million people) with many thousands of assets and large funds. Local branches were strengthened thanks to the help of regional, regional, city party and Soviet organizations. The Congress called on the public to focus their main efforts "on a diverse, immensely interesting and important work on identifying, studying, restoring and improving monuments, monuments, and memorial sites that perpetuate the heroic achievements of the Soviet people and the Communist Party." The Congress proceeded from the fact that, in addition to taking care of the existing monuments of the past, the Communist Party and the Soviet State show great attention to the preservation and creation of new monuments that "glorify the history and present day of Soviet society." The Congress called on local branches to make better use of monuments in the communist education of workers, and to take an active part in events dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the founding of the USSR.

The most important event in the social and political life of Soviet society was the adoption on October 29, 1976 by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR after discussing the reports of the candidate for the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU, the Minister of Culture of the USSR P. N. Demichev and the Chairman of the Commission on National Education, Science and Culture of the Council of Nationalities protection and use of historical and cultural monuments " 8 . VOOPIK was tasked with promoting the Law and ensuring its continued compliance .9
The third Congress (to which 520 delegates were elected) was held in Suzdal on July 26 - 27, 1977. Given the rapid development of museums and mass tourism, it was important to study the experience of the Vladimir region in centralizing museums and creating a tourist center. 29 people took part in the discussion of the reports. Fundamental to the work of the Congress was the order of the XXV Congress of the CPSU "to improve the work of museums, the protection and promotion of historical and cultural monuments" 10 . The delegates of the Congress warmly supported the provisions of the draft Constitution of the USSR on the preservation and use of cultural wealth. The new Constitution proclaimed the rights of citizens of the USSR to enjoy the achievements of culture and obliged them to take care of the preservation of historical monuments and other cultural values. On the eve of the 60th anniversary of the Great Ok-

7 See, for example, Kedrinsky A. A., Kolotov M. G., Ometov B. N., Raskin A. G. Restoration of architectural monuments of Leningrad, L. 1983; Maidanskaya N. Second birth. - Soviet Museum, 1984, N 2 (76), p.56-59.

8 Sessions of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of the ninth convocation. Fifth session (October 27-29, 1976). Stenogr. otch. M. 1976, pp. 304-322, 357-369.

9 See Kommunist, 1978, No. 11, pp. 53-66.

10 Materials of the XXV Congress of the CPSU, Moscow, 1976, p. 222.

page 16

On September 11, the Congress called on the public to further expand the work on identifying and promoting monuments of socialist construction .11 The number of employees of the company has increased significantly and reached more than 12 million people. The attitude towards the preservation of historical and cultural heritage has noticeably changed for the better, and an understanding has been formed that the preservation and use of monuments is not a temporary campaign, that it is a manifestation of the laws of the cultural life of developed socialism. VOOPIK became a reliable assistant to the party and Soviet authorities in this area.

The fourth congress of the society was held on June 30-July 1, 1982 in Novgorod, known all over the world for its historical, architectural and artistic monuments. 591 delegates were elected to the Congress at the conferences of local branches of the IUCN. 27 speakers addressed the plenary sessions. The congress had six sections (monuments of the history of Soviet society; monuments of history, archeology and documentary monuments; monuments of architecture, fine and folk art; monuments of the history of science and technology; propaganda and youth work; organizational issues). 85 people participated in the discussion of the recommendations.

The Congress was held under the motto of strengthening ideological, political and educational work, improving its forms and methods in the light of the requirements of the XXVI Congress of the CPSU, implementing its instructions to improve the protection and promotion of historical and cultural monuments. Serious attention was paid to increasing the contribution of society to the development of socialist culture, to the education of a person in a communist society. In the spirit of the program guidelines of the Communist Party, the activities of the VOOPIK were aimed at " inheriting all that is advanced and progressive, contributing to the creation of new cultural values on this basis, protecting both antiquity and the riches of culture that had already emerged in Soviet times, turning them to the benefit of the whole people." Guided by this, the society (more than 15 million members) came to the 60th anniversary of the formation of the USSR with new achievements.

Bodies of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR, with the participation of the public, identified and registered about 4 thousand objects, and now more than 30 thousand of them are under state protection. The company has allocated almost 30 million rubles for restoration work over five years. These funds, flowing into a powerful stream of state appropriations, were mastered by specialized workshops and land plots. The ensembles of the Moscow Kremlin and 12 Red Square began to play with new colors , and architectural and landscape ensembles in Kolomenskoye, Kuskovo, Ostankino, Petrodvorets, Pushkin, etc. were transformed. Buildings of Moscow museums have been created or restored.-

11 After a special plenum of the Central Council of the VOOPIK held in 1973 and a scientific and practical conference on "Protection and promotion of monuments of the labor glory of the Soviet people", local branches identified several thousand monuments of the Soviet era. Materials about the monuments were compiled in the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR and presented to the Council of Ministers of the Russian Federation. They reflect the entire history of the Soviet country from the victorious march of the October Revolution to the present day, the heroism of industrialization and the socialist transformation of agriculture, the feats of arms in the fight against fascism, and the manifestations of friendship and mutual assistance of the Soviet peoples. In 1978, the section of historical monuments of the Soviet Society was formed under the Central Council of the VOOPIK (chairman M. T. Belyavsky). Currently, sections are organized in 60 local branches, and commissions operate in 13 branches. A number of manuals have been prepared, including "Concepts, signs and types of monuments of socialist and communist construction, methods of their identification and study" (see Protection and propaganda of monuments of the labor glory of the Soviet People, Moscow, 1973; Belyavsky M. T. Trud naroda, slava naroda. - History of the USSR, 1974, N 1).

12 See Yu. Aleksandrov. Red Square, Moscow, 1983, p. 366-368; Tsukanov M. Drevny Kreml segodnya i zavtra [Ancient Kremlin today and Tomorrow]. Restoration of the Moscow Kremlin monuments is being completed. - Soviet Museum, 1984, N 1 (75), p. 54-59.

page 17

by M. Y. Lermontov, A. I. Herzen, A. N. Ostrovsky, F. M. Dostoevsky, and L. N. Tolstoy. The houses-estates of M. I. Glinka in Smolensk and S. V. Rakhmaninov in Tambov regions were recreated. Many buildings have been restored in Veliky Ustyug, Pskov, Suzdal, Irkutsk, and Tobolsk. What was done in Novgorod, which was turned into ruins by the Nazis, is like a feat. In the Urals, work has begun on the museumification of monuments of the mining industry. Monuments were erected to the heroes of the 1905 - 1907 revolution and the Great October Socialist Revolution. Battle sites of the Great Patriotic War are immortalized. The Battle of Stalingrad panorama opened in Volgograd. The construction of the memorial complex in Novorossiysk has been completed. The Council of Ministers of the RSFSR adopted resolutions on the development of the natural and architectural complexes of the Solovetsky Islands and Valaam Island, the creation of a nature reserve in Ples in the Ivanovo region, the memorial sites of A. A. Blok in the Moscow region, M. P. Mussorgsky in the Pskov region, the further development of the Pushkin Museum-Reserve in the village of Bolshoe Boldino, and the construction of monuments the siege of Leningrad.

The Congress delegates evaluated the activities of the VOOPIK in the light of the Law "On the Protection and Use of Historical and Cultural Monuments" adopted on December 15, 1978 by the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR .13 Article 13 of the Law defines the directions of work of the society, which helps attract the population to the protection of monuments, carries out their propaganda, promotes the work of state bodies and the establishment of patronage of enterprises and organizations over monuments, exercises public control over their preservation and proper use.

Unfortunately, there are many significant shortcomings in the activities of a number of regional and city branches of VOOPIK. Propaganda work is not always carried out at a sufficiently scientific level, does not cover all groups of the population, does not give tangible results in creating an environment of public intolerance to individual facts of neglect on the ground for the preservation of monuments, for their reasonable use. The department's activists have not always established strong ties with historians, art historians, architects, writers, and others. In some cases, the public voice is ignored when designing new buildings in old city blocks.

VOOPIK's activities are extremely diverse, and naturally many of its issues were raised and discussed at the society's congresses. Among them, we can distinguish the main ones that determine the face of this mass public organization - the problems of searching, studying and especially promoting monuments, their use, restoration and improvement of monuments and memorial sites, etc. One of the main tasks of VOOPIK is to participate in a large and complex work on identifying, studying and promoting monuments. It is difficult to overestimate the assistance provided to state bodies by the public in finding historical and cultural objects on the territory of the RSFSR and in registering them. The widespread activity of researchers, university teachers, museum staff, archives, libraries, secondary school teachers, and amateur local historians, thanks to the support of party and Soviet authorities, is bearing considerable fruit.

Recently, many buildings and structures have been identified, I am-

13 The ninth session of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR (ninth convocation). December 14-15, 1978 Stenogr. otch. M. 1979, pp. 159-185, 206-225.

page 18

they are considered historical and cultural monuments. New exhibits are constantly being added to the collections of state and national museums. Some of the finds are of great artistic value. It is enough to recall the discoveries of paintings by forgotten artists Grigory Ostrovsky and Yefim Chestnyakov in the cities and villages of the Kostroma region, brought back to life by Soviet art historians and restorers. Head of the Novgorod Archaeological Expedition, corresponding member. V. L. Yanin, speaking on the first day of the fourth VOOPIK Congress, reported on the discovery of the 600th birch bark letter in the Troitsky excavation site. The richest archaeological finds in Novgorod became possible thanks to the care of the city authorities and architects about the protection of the cultural layer, their help in planning and conducting excavations.

At the fourth congress, S. O. Schmidt, Chairman of the Archeographic Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences, drew public attention to the collection of not only ancient books and manuscripts, but also documents and papers of modern times. "The history of the Fatherland," he stressed, " is perceived primarily as the history of the people. The traditional interest in exceptional historical phenomena and outstanding personalities is accompanied by an increasingly conscious desire to know ordinary historical facts, the activities of ordinary people in history, and the understanding of the need to preserve traces of this activity for posterity." S. O. Schmidt called for introducing Soviet people, especially young people, to the romance of searching for documents, provided they master the skills of scientific research. approach to search work and follow the same methodological recommendations for all managers of search museum work of public museums. Such recommendations were prepared and published by the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, the Central Committee of the Komsomol and the Ministry of Education of the USSR. A special collection of articles 14 was prepared by the Documentary Monuments Section of the Central Council of the VOOPIK (Chairman S. O. Schmidt) and the Archeographic Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences .

At the third and fourth VOOPIK congresses, attention was drawn to the development of work to identify and preserve monuments of the history of science and technology. The achievements of scientific, engineering and technical thought and their real embodiment are the most valuable monuments of the productive forces of the socialist system. Monuments of science and technology are especially attractive for young people. Meanwhile, the situation in this area is alarming. And difficulties in selecting monuments and lack of understanding of their value led to the loss of many samples of machine tools and time machines of the pre-war five-year plans, tanks and aircraft of the Great Patriotic War period, etc. Delegates spoke about the need to create pei museums at large enterprises, organize a museum of science and technology 15 .

The public also participates in the work carried out by the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR on drawing up registration cards and passports for immovable monuments, which is preceded by a comprehensive study of them.

All the listed types of works serve the cause of monument protection, and allow us to solve the problem of selecting monuments from the list on a scientific basis.

14. Schmidt S. O. Responsibility to the future. - Monuments of the Fatherland, 1982, N 1 (5), pp. 130-136; Issues of collecting, recording, storing and using documentary monuments of history and culture. Part 1. Monuments of modern times and the Soviet era; Part 2. Monuments of ancient writing. Moscow, 1982.

15 The Section of Monuments of the History of Science and Technology under the Central Council of VOOPIK was established in 1979 (Chairman of acad. E. P. Velikhov). In collaboration with the State Historical Museum in 1980-1981, a number of methodological recommendations were prepared for the identification, selection and scientific description of immovable and museum monuments (including tillage tools, wood processing tools, weapons samples, etc.).

page 19

the mass of existing objects, set boundaries between valuable, unique buildings and ordinary structures that do not have historical or artistic significance. Along with the positive facts of enriching our history and culture in the field of architecture and urban planning, there are tendencies to preserve everything old without critical evaluation. At the second congress of the VOOPIK, it was stated that the registration and protection of any monument should be preceded by its thorough and comprehensive study with the involvement of specialists, and "the decision should be made not on the basis of subjective opinions, but on a deeply scientific basis."

The most important means of introducing Soviet people to the protection of monuments is their propaganda. It is thanks to ideological work that the cause of preserving historical and cultural riches becomes popular. "Propaganda that is smart, precisely balanced, politically literate, and when necessary - militant, active, and offensive" was given great attention at all the congresses. As stated in the report to the Fourth Congress, "we must raise the question of the personal and civil responsibility of every Soviet person for the fate of monuments, for the careful treatment of them as a priceless national treasure created by previous generations."

The propaganda of monuments plays a great role in patriotic and internationalist education, in developing a sense of legitimate pride in the grandiose achievements of the Soviet people. The importance of such ideological work is emphasized in the materials of the XXV and XXVI Congresses of the CPSU16 .

The forms of propaganda, propaganda and mass work of VOOPIK are diverse (lectures, thematic documentary and art exhibitions, film and photo contests, reviews, festivals, musical, ethnographic and folk concerts, excursions to monuments, youth trips to places of revolutionary, military and labor glory, radio and television programs, solemn ceremonies at monuments,etc.). functioning of the faculties of local lore and monument protection at national universities of culture, etc.). The all-pervading basis of all forms is the promotion of historical knowledge related to monuments. At the first congress, the ACAD drew attention to such an interconnectedness of knowledge of history and attitude to monuments. B, A. Rybakov. Nihilistic views of monuments are largely fueled by ignorance of past events and phenomena.

The special meaning of promoting monuments lies in educational work with young people. Monuments serve as a powerful means of introducing the young generation to the revolutionary, martial and labor traditions of the Soviet people. It is no coincidence that about half of the members of VOOPIK are young people - students, schoolchildren, students of the vocational education system. Therefore, at the congresses, proposals were put forward to improve the work of the public, to search together with secondary and higher educational institutions for new forms of introducing the younger generation to the protection of monuments, pre-schools, etc.-

16 Materials of the XXV Congress of the CPSU, p. 75; Materials of the XXVI Congress of the CPSU, p. 57. On the significance of historical monuments in ideological work, see: Khromov S. S. Ideological and educational functions of Soviet historical science. - Voprosy istorii, 1980, No. 7, pp. 16-17; see also his article " School of Citizenship. On the ideological and educational role of historical knowledge". - Pravda, 4. IX. 1981. The most important role in the promotion of monuments belongs to newspapers and magazines. Such materials are regularly included on the pages of Pravda newspapers (such as "Monuments of the Fatherland", "My Fatherland", etc.), "Sovetskaya Kultura", "Sovetskaya Rossiya", and "Stroitelnaya Gazeta? and others, magazines "Science and Life", "Ogonyok", etc.

page 20

view in school programs the study of the basics of legislation on the protection of monuments, as well as monuments and memorials of their region.

At all VOOPIK congresses, the need to promote monuments from party and class positions was emphasized, based on Lenin's position on two cultures in the national cultures of exploitative societies, on the determining role of the masses in creating cultural wealth. Accuracy of ideological assessments, depth of social analysis, and aesthetic exactingness should become the rule of mass-political work. At the second congress of the society, the facts of primitive propaganda activities were sharply criticized, when the disclosure of the public, historical and cultural value of monuments, their ideological and artistic content was replaced for entertainment purposes with dubious stories about the personal lives of high-ranking osabs of the distant past. They also condemned " attempts to idealize obsolete elements of national culture, church and feudal styles under the guise of national art forms, fascination with archaic vocabulary, ignoring new words and concepts that the Soviet reality brought to life." The scientific community opposed some cases of idealization of certain events and phenomena, kings and princes, religious figures, "attempts to whitewash religion and the church, to pass them off as supporters of progress, champions of culture", because this leads to belittling the role of the people in the historical process, in the creation of material and spiritual values. The dialectical approach is especially necessary in propaganda work on religious monuments. The form and content of such monuments, created at a time when creativity was regulated by church canons, revealed the reactionary views of the ruling class as a social customer. It is necessary to debunk the aura of religiosity, so that monuments appear to the viewer as works of art filled with deep human meaning.

In the report at the fourth VOOPIK Congress, the issue of improving lecture propaganda and strengthening contacts with the Znanie Society of the RSFSR in this regard was raised. The volume of such propaganda is constantly increasing: in 1977, about 177,000 lectures were delivered, and in 1981 their number reached 250,000 17 .

One of the features of VOOPIK's activities is to establish strong and permanent ties with creative unions of the Russian Federation, since literary and artistic figures are extremely interested in preserving cultural heritage.

For a number of years, the issue of creating a permanent press organ of the VOOPIK has been raised. In 1970, four collections of articles "Monuments of the Fatherland"were published. Since 1980, the illustrated almanac "Monuments of the Fatherland"has been published. Its Editorial Board (Chairman of acad. I. V. Petryanov-Sokolov, academicians D. S. Likhachev and B. A. Rybakov, corresponding members). Academy of Sciences of the USSR V. L. Yanin, pilot-cosmonaut V. I. Sevastyanov, writer L. M. Leonov, People's Artist of the RSFSR N. A. Plastov, Honored Architect of the RSFSR V. A. Peter-

On March 17-30, 1983, the Presidium of the Board of the Znanie Society of the RSFSR, the Board of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR, and the Presidium of the Central Council of the VOOPIK adopted a resolution "On measures to strengthen the promotion of historical and cultural monuments and their use in the communist education of workers" and approved the approximate topics of lectures. In order to improve scientific and methodological work, a commission for the promotion of historical and cultural monuments was established under the board of the Znanie Society of the RSFSR (Chairman V. I. Buganov); similar commissions were formed under the boards of republican (ASSR), regional and regional organizations. In February 1984, a republican seminar of lecturers was held on the topic "The role of historical and cultural monuments in the formation of the spiritual culture of working people in a society of developed socialism".

page 21

burzhtsev et al.) managed to attract many scientists, writers, and artists to cooperate. From the pages of the almanac sounds an excited story about historical monuments, archeology and architecture, about the collection of ancient books and manuscripts, about memorable objects of science and technology, painting and literature, about the organization of open-air museums, about folk museums. Delegates of the fourth congress noted the popularity and weight of their body and expressed their wishes to increase the number of scientific problem articles, reports on the work of local branches of the society and their sections.

A large role in the promotion of monuments on a scientific basis will be played by the prepared Code of Historical and Cultural Monuments of the peoples of the USSR. It will include vaults of monuments in all the Union republics. The Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, the collegiums of the Ministry of Culture of the USSR and the State Committee for Publishing the Code on an All-Union scale formed the Main Editorial Board (the chairman is Deputy Editor-in-Chief). Minister of Culture of the USSR E. V. Zaitsev, Deputy Chairmen Academician-Secretary of the Department of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences Academician S. L. Tikhvinsky and Deputy Chairman of the State Committee for Publishing of the USSR A. A. Nebenzya). The list of monuments is a state cadastre, which includes all immovable monuments that are or should be under state protection. It is intended to provide a scientific basis for further extensive study, protection and use of historical, architectural, artistic, ethnographic and archaeological monuments of the Soviet people.

The Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences (on historical monuments), the Institute of Archeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences (on archaeological monuments), and the All-Union Research Institute of Art Studies of the USSR Ministry of Culture (on monuments of Urban Planning, Architecture, and Art) are responsible for general management of scientific and methodological work (scientific consulting, scientific editing, and reviewing). Direct scientific and methodological work on the national monument codes is assigned to the institutes of the USSR Academy of Sciences (including the institutions of branches, the Siberian branch, the Ural and Far Eastern research Centers) and the Academy of Sciences of the Union Republics, to the institutes of the USSR Ministry of Culture and the Ministries of Culture of the Union Republics, institutions of the North Caucasus Scientific Center of Higher Education, research institutes under the Councils of Ministers autonomous republics. Higher educational institutions of the country, state archives, libraries and museums, as well as national societies for the protection of monuments are involved in this work18 . At the fourth congress of VOOPIK, all local branches of the society were assigned the task of developing a well-thought-out work to prepare materials for the volumes of the Collection of Historical and Cultural Monuments of the RSFSR, to attract scientists, local historians, and members of creative unions to it.

At the second, third, and fourth congresses, issues related to the restoration of immovable monuments were discussed in detail. In the report to the second congress, a proposal was put forward to create a single production and restoration association in the RSFSR. By this time, practice has shown that along with great achievements in this area, the shortcomings associated with an unprecedented increase in the volume of restoration work were becoming more and more noticeable. It was necessary to strengthen the material base, expand the training of personnel, and use the latest scientific achievements in the field of creating long-lasting MA-

18 On May 29, 1984, the Bureau of the History Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences discussed the status of work on the Code and outlined measures to strengthen scientific coordination activities in this area.

page 22

materials and construction technologies. It was also important to advance the development of scientific foundations and principles of restoration, to determine a reasonable ratio of restoration and conservation work.

Already at the third congress, the Central Council could report on significant developments in this area. The total amount of restoration work has increased by more than 2 times. At the request of the Ministry of Culture and VOOPIK, the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR allowed the creation of the republican scientific and production restoration association "Rosrestavratsiya", In May 1977 the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR allowed the organization of a Research and Design Restoration Institute in Moscow" Spetproektrestavratsiya " with a branch in Leningrad as part of the association. The advantages of a large specialized farm, which has the ability to solve the issues of introducing new technology, specializing production, and improving design, quickly manifested themselves in practice.

The Congress supported public participation in the restoration and construction work. So, in the village of Verkhnyaya Sinechikha, Sverdlovsk region, local residents restored the building of the former church and arranged a folk museum in it. In the Ryazan region, the teacher N. I. Panin, having received the support of local party and Soviet bodies, restored the buildings of the Cherneyev Monastery with the help of enthusiasts to house a museum in them. Palaces of the 18th century in Podolsk, Moscow region, and Bogoroditsk, Tula Region, were recreated using the method of folk construction. Muscovites regularly hold subbotniks and Sundays to improve and repair monuments 19 . The fourth VOOPIK Congress called for an increase in the number of student restoration and construction teams, especially for work on monuments of ancient architecture of the Russian North.

The report to the fourth congress noted as a gratifying fact the further strengthening of the Rosrestavratsiya association, which during the tenth five-year plan commissioned more than 300 objects, having mastered the amount of work for 130 million rubles. Up to 1.5 thousand objects are now in production annually. Now the association includes 32 special workshops. Branches of the Special Project Restoration Institute have been established in Pskov, Taganrog, Ulyanovsk, and Tomsk. In accordance with the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR of January 24, 198020, the Ministry of Culture and the Central Council of the VOOPIK drew up a republican plan for the restoration of monuments until 1990. The Congress also noted the existence of serious shortcomings in the field of restoration. These include the dispersion of forces and resources on numerous objects, a large amount of work in progress, and their poor quality. In order to increase the efficiency of the development of state and public investments, it was recommended to strengthen public control by local branches of VOOPIK over the rational use of funds, and to apply temporary conservation of monuments more widely (especially in cases of incomplete project or its insufficiently substantiated and scientific development, as well as in cases of disagreements on the future use of objects).

As noted by the Minister of Culture of the RSFSR Yu. S. Melentyev, in order to implement the program for the restoration of objects, it is necessary for the Soviet authorities, together with local branches of the VOOPIK, to strengthen the material base of each workshop and site, and to achieve high organizational efficiency.-

19 The work of enthusiasts under the leadership of the Moscow City and Moscow Regional branches of VOOPIK is constantly covered in the newspapers Moskovskaya Pravda, Moskovsky Komsomolets, and in radio programs.

20 Collection of Resolutions of the Government of the RSFSR, No. 7, Moscow, 1980, article 53, pp. 118-139.

page 23

improve labor efficiency and advanced technology, and improve the supply of quality materials. The most important issue is personnel. Now the Moscow and Sverdlovsk Architectural Institutes train highly qualified architects and restorers, and a school for training restoration artists has opened in Suzdal. In general, the task of turning the restoration business (this was emphasized by Yu.S. Melentyev) into an independent branch of the national economy is put forward.

At the fourth VOOPIK Congress, the provisions on the preservation of monuments in combination with the surrounding natural and cultural landscape were further developed. They were prompted by practical activities to restore such objects that are both historical and natural monuments (Borodino field, Kulikovo field, battle sites near Moscow, Stalingrad, on the Kursk Bulge, the Belt of Glory near Leningrad, partisan forests of the Bryansk region). The same monuments are manors of scientists, artists, and literary figures, palace and park ensembles, and monastery complexes. The Congress criticized attempts to damage such memorable places by ill-considered placement of industrial, transport enterprises, shopping establishments, excesses in the arrangement of the territory, unnecessary decoration, as well as cases of neglect of parks and gardens. Pilot-cosmonaut of the USSR V. I. Sevastyanov called for increased attention to the monuments of the Russian North in connection with the project development of the transfer of part of the flow of northern rivers to the south. The Congress called for strengthening ties with the All-Russian Society for Nature Protection.

At all VOOPIK congresses, much attention was paid to the problems of preserving monuments in solving urban planning tasks. In the age of rapid development of large and small cities, the task of preserving monuments, historically formed buildings of streets and squares, and sometimes entire districts, and using especially valuable buildings as city-forming factors in new construction is faced by architects in full growth. The architectural heritage of cities organically includes works of Soviet architecture. Speaking about this, the first secretary of the Union of Architects of the USSR G. M. Orlov criticized the cases of uncontrolled reconstruction of buildings erected by A.V. Shchusev, I. A. Fomin, the Vesnin brothers, the Golosov brothers, M. Ya. Ginzburg and others. At special meetings in Leningrad (1974, 1978), Kostroma (1975, 1982), Smolensk (1976), the methodology of design work on the planning, construction and reconstruction of historical cities and the preservation of the historical urban environment was developed. Examples of successful solutions for the preservation and use of architectural monuments in the development of the city's master plan are available in Vladimir, Novgorod, Kostroma, Kasimov, etc. However, there is still a lot of work to be done to further improve the planning, design and organization of conservation and restoration activities. Now you can no longer rely on the traditional experience of restorers. Without high-quality design and estimate documentation, it is impossible to restore objects.

VOOPIK congresses were very interested in the preservation of monuments in cities with a long history. On the initiative of the society, in July 1970, the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR and Gosstroy of the RSFSR adopted a joint resolution approving the list of 115 cities with architectural monuments, town-planning ensembles and complexes that are monuments of national culture, as well as those that have preserved natural landscapes and the ancient cultural layer of the earth. The list opens in Moscow and Leningrad. Together with them, the list includes cities such as Novgorod,

page 24

Pskov, Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov Veliky, Veliky Ustyug, etc., which by their cultural value are on a par with the greatest monuments of the world. Design and construction of such cities should be carried out according to special conditions and rules. This act was aimed at the organic inclusion of ancient monuments in the modern life of the city.

Increasing the role of the public is provided for by the RSFSR Law "On the Protection and Use of Historical and Cultural Monuments", which states that "projects for planning, building and reconstruction of cities and other localities with monuments of history, archeology, urban planning and architecture, monumental art are subject to approval by the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR and the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments". culture" (Article 40). The Central Council makes extensive use of this right. In 1979-1982 alone, its urban planning commission (which for many years was headed by K. F. Knyazev) considered more than 170 projects, including general plans, detailed planning projects, projects of protection zones and reconstruction. Delegates of the VOOPIK congresses raised the question of the need for strictly scientific development of detailed plans for historical cities with indication of monument protection zones and regulated development zones. The complexity of such work is due to its unprecedented scale (the number of cities in the Russian Federation is approaching 1 thousand, and urban-type settlements - by 1900) 21 .

Speaking at the fourth congress of the society, Dmitry Popov, Deputy Chairman of the State Construction Committee of the RSFSR, reported to the delegates that district planning schemes (including mapping of natural, historical and cultural monuments) cover all regions, territories and autonomous republics of the Russian Federation, while master plans, planning and development projects cover all cities, most working settlements and central farmsteads of collective farms and state farms. However, the intensity of work during the eleventh five-year plan will increase even more, since, in addition to further planning work, it is necessary to adjust the general plans of cities and towns (including historical ones). This adjustment is also carried out in order to preserve architectural ensembles, to draw the boundaries of protected areas of monuments and areas of regulated development. The reliability of scientific elaboration of the initial data for this purpose is provided by materials prepared by the bodies of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR and the departments of VOOPIK 22 . Currently, the restoration activity begins to capture not only individual buildings and ensembles, but also moves to the preservation of valuable mass ("ordinary") development of historical cities and villages. At the fourth VOOPIK congress, the problem of developing small towns was put forward, the renewal of which should be combined with "continuity, preserving the originality of the urban landscape and the individuality of the artistic image", and new construction should not be carried out.

21 See Peterburgtsev V. A. Sovremennye drevniye goroda [Modern ancient cities]. In: Monuments of the Fatherland. Book 3. Moscow, 1977, pp. 82-92. It should also be taken into account that previously low-rise buildings prevailed everywhere, building materials were almost unchanged, and manual labor prevailed. Today, architects operate in a completely different environment (see Yaralov Yu. S. Traditions and innovation in the planning and construction of historical cities. In: Monuments of the Fatherland. Book 4. Moscow, 1979, p. 40-41).

22 In the Regulations on the Protection and Use of Historical and Cultural Monuments approved by the Council of Ministers of the USSR on September 16, 1982, urban planning bodies are responsible for drawing up district planning projects, general plans of cities, reconstruction projects in order to ensure the preservation of immovable monuments: a) maps and diagrams of the location of historical, archaeological, urban planning and architectural monuments, monumental art; b) reference historical and architectural plans of cities and other localities (Collected resolutions of the Government of the USSR, ed. 1, No. 26, Moscow, 1982, pp. 489-507).

page 25

"to the detriment of the monument, urban landscape or their individuality and uniqueness" 23 .

The importance of preserving monuments in the capital of our Motherland was emphasized at the congresses. The general plan for the development of Moscow, approved in 1971 by the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Soviet Government, provides for the complete preservation of the original appearance of Moscow and the continuity of its urban planning and architectural traditions. In the 1970s, the Moscow City Committee of the CPSU and the Executive Committee of the Moscow City Council adopted a number of resolutions on the development and improvement of the central part of Moscow, on the creation of protected areas in the city center, on adding to the list of monuments and the order of their restoration. In 1974, the boundaries of nine protected areas were approved within the Garden Ring. Within their limits (about 30% of the total area), mass construction is prohibited, and development can be carried out mainly according to individual projects, taking into account the existing ensembles. Currently, more than 200 monuments are being restored in the capital .24
The VOOPIK congresses did not ignore the issues of preservation of monuments in rural areas, which presents great difficulties in comparison with urban areas. The delegates expressed concern about the fate of monuments of wooden architecture, which require a special mode of operation, special methods of protection and conservation, and special craftsmen during restoration work. VOOPIK participates in financing the restoration of wooden buildings in museums near Arkhangelsk (Malye Korely), Novgorod (Vitoslavlitsy), Kostroma, Irkutsk (Angarsk Village), etc. At the congresses, there was a call for scientific fixation, conservation, restoration and leaving in place the best monuments of wooden architecture in order to preserve their environment. Only if it is impossible to preserve them in their original place, the Central Council of VOOPIK recommended that they be transported to open-air architectural and ethnographic museums.

Questions of protection of rural monuments in connection with the adoption of the Food Program of the USSR by the Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU were raised at the fourth congress in full voice. The Plenum's guidelines for improving social, cultural and living conditions in collective and state farms are directly related to the activities of the VOOPIK. Taking into account the peculiarities of the life of each particular village, its history, architectural and artistic traditions and culture, local branches, relying on local historians, can do a lot to preserve, restore monuments and use them wisely to foster love for the native village, the father's house, to every inch of the earth 25 . "Historical relics, architectural monuments, places of culture". armed with the revolutionary, labor, and military glory of the best sons of the Fatherland - all this well-tested arsenal of ideological and moral influence must work towards the realization of the party's grandiose plans for the transformation of life-

23 In total, there are about 500 cities and localities in our country that have preserved areas of memorable architectural development or individual complexes and ensembles, natural landscapes and an ancient cultural system, which is taken into account during planning and survey work (N. T. Fe Dorenko To preserve the spiritual treasures of Europe. In: Monuments of the Fatherland. Book 3, pp. 131-132).

24 Posokhin M. V. General plan of reconstruction of Moscow and monuments of history and culture. In: Monuments of the Fatherland. Book 3; his own. Unity of valuable old and progressive new in the architecture of Moscow. In: Monuments of the Fatherland. Book 4; his own. Historical and architectural heritage in urban planning in Moscow. In: Monuments of Architecture of Moscow. Kremlin. Kitay-gorod. Central squares. M 1982.

25 "The Russian village, which has practically no analogues in the modern world, can find, being preserved and modernized, a new life" (Bokov A.V. Rural values. In: Monuments of the Fatherland. Book 4, p. 223).

page 26

not in the countryside" - this appeal met with unanimous approval of the delegates. We should also try, the congress said, to ensure that with the huge volume of construction, "rural settlements have their own face, do not resemble each other like twins, are not only comfortable, which goes without saying, but also beautiful, would be in harmony with the surrounding nature and thus would be attractive to people."

At all VOOPIK congresses, the problem of using monuments was discussed with particular urgency. This is explained by the fact that the effectiveness of the political and educational impact of monuments on people, introducing them to glorious traditions, and raising the culture of the people directly depends on the correctly found forms of use. In addition, the correct practical use of monuments is the most important condition for their preservation, the key to their long-term life. It is necessary to decide how monuments will be used before restoration and even before the start of its design. The conventions supported the provision that the best use of monuments is for museums, exhibitions, concert halls, libraries, and administrative institutions. Long-term practice puts the use of monuments for museum purposes in the first place. "Life itself," said the report at the third congress, " puts museums and monuments in a single, unbroken stream."

Now the country has a well-developed museum network. The number of state museums, including art, history and local lore with branches, is about 2 thousand. They were visited by more than 160 million people in 1983. The number of public museums in factories, collective and state farms, schools, technical schools and institutes has exceeded 12 thousand 26 . In the RSFSR there are 872 state and about 5 thousand public museums. In 1982, the state museums of the Russian Federation were visited by about 72 million people (1 million more than in 1981). As you know, the collection activity of museums is extremely fruitful, and the limited museum space allows you to exhibit only a part of the funds. The use of immovable monuments for branches or branches of existing museums or for new museums, both state and public, will expand the expositions.

Museum use of monuments is related to their use for sightseeing and tourist purposes 27 . Tourism, in turn, contributes to the preservation of monuments. Therefore, VOOPIK, together with other departments and organizations, initiates a number of proposals and projects. Among them are the creation of tourist routes "Golden Ring", "Northern Ring", " Literary Constellation "(in the central regions of the RSFSR), "Pushkin Places" (in the Kalinin region), etc. 28 . A number of organizational and managerial measures taken by the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR and the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR largely contributed to the preservation and use of museum and architectural monuments on excursion and tourist routes. In 1974, a single State museum-reserve was established in the Vladimir Region, bringing together all city and district museums. The creation of the Vladimir-Suzdal Nature Reserve made it possible to solve many issues of restoration, museumification and promotion of monuments in a complex. Following Vladimir, large centralized associations-

26 Soviet Museum, 1983, N 1 (73), p. 2; Golubtsova T. V. Museums of historical profile. - Voprosy istorii, 1979, N 4, p. 193.

27 See Belyavsky M. T. Istoriki i turizm [Historians and Tourism]. - History of the USSR, 1970, N 4.

28 In 1983, according to the CSO of the USSR, 35 million people visited the country's tourist routes and bases; 194 million people participated in excursions. (Pravda, 29. I. 1984).

page 27

Research institutes are formed in Smolensk, Novgorod, Pskov, Kalinin, Astrakhan, etc. (in a total of 26 territories). The third VOOPIK Congress recognized this way of developing the museum business as the most promising. The Congress also called for providing all possible assistance to national museums, which play an important role in the universal preservation of historical and artistic values and are associated with amateur collecting. At the fourth Congress, the Board of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR and the Central Council of the VOOPIK supported the long-term development plans of the Novgorod and Pskov United Museums-reserves. Such plans even more strongly connect historical and architectural monuments with museums in a single whole.

The decision to create a mass organization for the protection and use of monuments on the territory of the Russian Federation can be put among the most important actions of the Communist Party to further raise Soviet science and culture in the period of developed socialism. In a relatively short period of time, VOOPIK has grown and strengthened and, as the society's congresses have shown, has determined the main directions of its activities and, on the whole, successfully fulfills the tasks assigned to it. With the participation of VOOPIK, a number of important measures have been prepared for the restoration, improvement, and museumification of many of the most valuable monuments related to the life and work of Lenin, the revolutionary movement, the struggle of the Soviet people to build a socialist society, military exploits during the Civil and Great Patriotic Wars, and the work of great figures of literature, art, and science. Recently, VOOPIK finances restoration and conservation works on more than 300 monuments throughout the Russian Federation.

VOOPIK brought together all those who cherish the historical and cultural riches of the Soviet people, it contributed to the multiplication of cultural values, their preservation and propaganda in order to foster Soviet patriotism and socialist internationalism. It brought together wide circles of the scientific community. Historians, archaeologists, ethnographers, art historians, etc., taking an active part in the work of the Central Council, the governing bodies of local branches of the society, successfully promote historical knowledge. The sections that have been active at the Central Council in recent years have brought together many scientists from Moscow. Together, they have become an important body of scientific and methodological work designed to strengthen the development of the scientific foundations of the multi-faceted activities of the VOOPIK.

Guided by the decisions of the XXVI Party Congress, the materials of the June and December (1983), February and April (1984) Plenums of the Central Committee of the CPSU, VOOPIK is called upon to make better use of such areas as propaganda of the advantages of the socialist system, social and spiritual achievements of Soviet society, the main features of the socialist way of life, education of pride in our great Motherland, the formation of Marxist-Leninist conviction. Strengthening the fruitful participation of the Soviet public in building up the country's cultural wealth will help raise the ideological, educational, and propaganda work of the VOOPIK to the level of those large and complex tasks that the party solves in the process of improving developed socialism.

page 28

Permanent link to this publication: