Opinions about the need to rename cities and streets named after political figures of the past are heard regularly in Russia. And every time they give rise to fierce disputes. Moreover, a significant part of people are guided not by sympathy for historical figures, many of whom really evoke a complex range of feelings, but by completely practical considerations.
Double standards?
ForPost – Politics talks about yet another call to get rid of the burden of the dark past in the form of Soviet toponymy. The issue of renaming the streets of Russian cities was raised at the conference “Reds in the city: what to do with the legacy of the Bolsheviks?”, which was organized in Moscow by members of the political movement “Society. Future”.
Few people have heard of the existence of this political movement, including in Sevastopol. Meanwhile, it was established in 2020 in our city. ForPost – Politics journalists also talked about this.
At a conference held in Moscow, one of its participants, the organizer of the “Alarm of the Lost” project, Stanislav Savushkin, said that lists of streets that deserve renaming in different cities of Russia are now being compiled.
“In the near future we plan to include Sevastopol and the cities of Crimea among them,” he told reporters.
At the same time, Savushkin emphasized that we are not talking about getting rid of all Soviet toponyms: only streets that were named after people directly associated with politics need to be renamed. That is, the Sevastopol streets of Aivazovsky (formerly Rybnaya or Molochnaya) or Gogol (formerly Monastyrskaya) are not threatened with change. But to the streets of Volodarsky (formerly Michmanskaya) and Lenin – yes.
“As for Sevastopol, I can confidently say right away that, in my opinion, Lenin Street should be renamed Ekaterininskaya,” emphasized Stanislav Savushkin.
The authors of the idea have a particularly negative attitude towards toponyms that are associated with the names of terrorists. And this is understandable. Meanwhile, there are examples of such toponyms in Sevastopol, and they are very vivid. Thus, in our city the name of Sofia Perovskaya, who participated in the preparation and direct murder of Alexander II, is immortalized. In this case, 20 people were injured, including complete strangers. In addition to the tsar, the Cossack Alexander Maleichev and the 14-year-old peasant Nikolai Maksimov, who worked in a butcher shop, died.
The name of Stepan Khalturin, who “worked” as a carpenter in the Winter Palace under a false name and staged an explosion on February 5, 1880, is also immortalized in our city. The victims of this terrorist attack were 11 soldiers, heroes of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, who were enlisted for service in the palace for special distinctions. Another 56 people were injured of varying degrees of severity.
“It is ethically unacceptable to preserve names on the map in honor of people who have stained themselves with blood,” says Savushkin.
And it’s hard to disagree with him. Unless, of course, we are not only verbally against terrorist attacks and innocent victims.
Stepan Khalturin, according to numerous testimonies of Lenin’s contemporaries, was one of his favorite heroes. And in one of his books, reminds Stanislav Savushkin, the leader of the proletariat himself “gave recommendations” to those who wanted to make a bomb.
An opinion was also voiced at the conference about the dangers of monuments to Lenin and his mausoleum on Red Square. How Sevastopol residents feel about this building and what they generally know about Lenin was shown by a survey conducted by ForPost on the occasion of this man’s birthday, celebrated on April 22.
Half a step forward
It must be admitted that consistency in the return of historical names in Sevastopol and other Russian cities is truly lacking. Some of the Sevastopol streets and iconic objects in different years received their historical names back, and thank God: it is unlikely that we would like Bolshaya Morskaya to this day to be Karl Marx Street, and the Grafskaya Pier to be called the pier of the Third International. But the names of Volodarsky, Khalturin, etc., who had never been to Sevastopol, were preserved for unknown reasons.
The same thing is happening in other cities of the country – in particular, the name of Voikov, who in 1918 made the decision to kill the royal family, causes sharp rejection. However, opinions on renaming streets and squares, as a rule, differ diametrically. And it’s not always about the sympathy that citizens have for terrorists and other dubious heroes.
“According to the conference participants, the negative attitude of part of society towards such initiatives is associated with a fear of change, which, in turn, is caused by distrust of the state. The generation that lived through the 90s is accustomed to the fact that any changes “from above” lead only to the worse, and prefer not to change anything at all and “not to touch”,” states Stanislav Savushkin’s point of view “ForPost – Politics”.
The author of this material, who studied this issue at one time, will risk adding one more reason: often people are driven by their reluctance to the consequences that renaming will entail. After all, “st. Khalturina” or “st. Lenin” appear in various documents that will need to be replaced. Plus, opponents of renaming remind us, budget expenditures on the production and installation of new signs with street names are inevitable.
When asked about choosing between the name of the killer that their home street bears and the price of new signs, everyone answers in their own way. Sevastopol residents also disagree. Previously, “ForPost – Politics” had already addressed some of them with a request to express their attitude to this problem. Representative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Roman Kiyashko shared his confidence that “this kind of initiative creates additional threats to stability in society.” However, he emphasized: in some cases it is really necessary to look carefully and “substantively.”
Admiral Oktyabrsky Street was given as an example – the question of renaming it in Sevastopol was raised more than once. This is due to the role of Oktyabrsky in the tragic events of the final defense of the city during the Great Patriotic War. Let us remind you: the fleet command led by Oktyabrsky was evacuated on the night of July 1, 1942, leaving the remaining defenders of Sevastopol to certain death or at least captivity, into which, according to various estimates, from 70 to 100 thousand people ended up. Moreover, these people continued to resist the enemy even after Sevastopol was officially surrendered.
There are also different opinions regarding the decisions made by Oktyabrsky during the defense of Sevastopol. Now one of the central streets of Sevastopol bears his name (in fact, the admiral’s surname was Ivanov). And the names of the soldiers abandoned by them are still being returned from oblivion one by one by the employees of the museum complex “35th Coastal Battery”.
In 2020, the leader of the public organization “Sevastopol Alternative”, Vsevolod Radchenko (currently the author of the ForPost project “Okolovoyny”), categorically spoke out in favor of abandoning such toponyms.
“Think: in the city created by the will of Catherine the Great, the street named in her honor still bears the name of the man who usurped power, plunged the country into a fratricidal civil war and the “Red Terror.” Moreover, a person who has never been to Sevastopol, unlike Catherine,” he said then.
So in 2008 on the street. Lenin unveiled a monument to the founder of the city, Catherine II / author Dmitry Nikitin.
Other streets were also mentioned – for example, Sovetskaya, previously called Chesmenskaya in honor of the famous victory of the Russian fleet.
“This is a glorious historical page that predetermined the defeat of Turkey in the Russian-Turkish War of 1768–1774 and, as a consequence, the annexation of Crimea to Russia. Why is the street named after a political entity that has lost its relevance instead?” — Radchenko explained his position.
Four years later, he confirmed to ForPost that his opinion has not changed.
Not the time
State Duma deputy from Sevastopol Dmitry Belik previously expressed the opinion that the request for renaming should come from the Sevastopol residents themselves. A strong-willed decision by the authorities can provoke conflict and division in society. Similar concerns are expressed by Vadim Prokopenkov, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Chairman of the SROO “Historical Club “Sevastopol Tauride””, whom we asked to comment on the initiative of the “Society. Future”.
The first thing that Vadim Prokopenkov emphasized in a conversation with a ForPost journalist is that the answer to the question about the need for renaming largely depends on the time when it is asked. There are periods when discussion on this topic is beneficial and can become a prologue to some kind of consensus, but there are times when it’s really not the time to excite people unnecessarily. It is impossible, the historian adds, not to take into account the chance of causing mental discomfort to people who were brought up with respect for Lenin and associate his name with the successes of the country.
“You always ask yourself the question: will this painful action for part of the population really solve any problems?” – he says.
In the future, this topic will probably be raised, and then the decision to rename will not entail the negative consequences that may occur today, he believes. But before this, you need to carefully think through the mechanism of such actions – you need a clear algorithm for both decision-making and the renaming itself.
The historian also reminds us of the already mentioned difficulties for both the authorities and ordinary citizens.
“Let’s take the street. Lenin,” he suggests. — Of course, “Ekaterininskaya” is a fairer name for it. But this street houses a huge number of authorities, legal entities, and citizens, especially those of the old school, are accustomed to this name. Therefore, each of them will most likely ask themselves the question: “What will this give me?” And the answer is nothing but trouble and, perhaps, some kind of negativity.”
An alternative to renaming, Vadim Nikolaevich believes, could be placing signs on historical streets with the names that they bore at different times. There is definitely no need to escalate the situation by renaming streets by a willful decision – at least not now.
And one more important circumstance.
“I know people who sincerely want to rename streets, guided by their views and conscience. But often this question is raised by organizations that, it seems to me, are trying to attract attention to themselves and raise their ratings – not with good concrete deeds, but with populist work,” notes Vadim Prokopenkov at the end of the conversation.
And you can’t argue with that either. So, apparently, those who want to rename the streets right now will have to wait.
Olga Smirnova
