Abstract
<jats:p>The purpose of the study is to identify the main results and key contradictions in the activities of one of the stages of the development of the Stalingrad Istpart (the Commission on the History of the October Revolution and the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks)) – the period from 1925 to 1928, when it was headed by a prominent local Bolshevik, G. T. Gavrilov. The article examines in detail the reasons and the course of the personnel reorganization of the Stalingrad Istpart in 1925, as a result of which the leadership of the Istpart passed to the “old Bolsheviks”. The main content of the Istpart’s activities during this period is revealed: the completion of the publication of a collection about the First Russian Revolution, the introduction of a fundamentally new form of work – chronicling revolutionary events, as well as the intensification of work on the history of the Komsomol. Special attention is paid to the problems and contradictions of this stage of the development of the Stalingrad Istpart: the “jubilee” nature of the work, the lack of study of the topic of Tsaritsyn’s defense and the ideological vulnerability associated with the active use of the works of the disgraced leader of the Tsaritsyn Bolsheviks, a prominent supporter of the “new opposition” S. K. Minin in the chronicle of revolutionary events. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that for the first time it comprehensively reconstructed the activities of the Stalingrad Istpart under the leadership of G. T. Gavrilov, identified the causes of personnel changes, proved the key role of the Stalingrad professional historian N. N. Sokolov in the preparation of scientific reference apparatus publications. As a result of the study, it was found that, despite the undoubted scientific achievements, the Istpart’s activities came into conflict with the new political realities. The focus on studying the events of 1917 to the detriment of the topic of Tsaritsyn’s defense, as well as the use of the memoirs of the disgraced S. K. Minin, predetermined the ideological vulnerability of the Istpart and the subsequent change of leadership.</jats:p>