Preparatory Works For The All-Union Census Of 1959 In The City Of Zlatoust

Abstract

The article analyses the process of preparation to the All-Union Census of 1959 in Zlatoust, Chelyabinsk oblast. The author uses archival materials, statistical data, fundamental studies and monographs to study the procedure used to prepare documentation necessary for the census, selection, approval and training of census takers. The researcher substantiates in detail the necessity for the census, provides explanations for the territorial boundaries selected. The author describes geographical features of the territory. The work shows the assignment loads for instructor sections on the basis of population and density of residential development, telephone communication in the district is characterized. A detailed account is given for training of counting station administrators, their deputies, instructor-controllers and head counters. Special attention is given to the question of custodial institutions (hospitals, resorts, etc.), where autonomous instruction and enumeration districts were created. The author considers the plan of mass awareness-building works in the Zlatoust district, which provided conducting taking necessary measures to acquaint population with the importance of the All-Union Census, its procedure and their responsibilities as citizens. The article pays special attention to procedure of census in institutions of the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Committee for State Security. Head counters were additionally instructed that when filling census forms or control forms for personnel of these institutions, the head counters should record the answers verbatim without asking for details. The end of the article contains conclusions on preparation to the All-Union Census of 1959 in Zlatoust, Chelyabinsk oblast.

Keywords: Historical demographycensusUral

Introduction

Questions of demography appeal to researchers at each historical stage, independent of sexual, national and territorial characteristic. This is supported by multiple scholarly works, of which only a small number is used in this research. For example, Zhiromskaia (2009) in her monograph Life Opportunities of Post-War Generations In Russia: Historical Demographic Aspect: 1946–1960 , provided in-depth justifications for the All-Union Census of 1959 as well as a thorough analysis of the census form and stages of preparing and taking the census.

It is also impossible not mentioning Zhiromskaia’s (2012) monograph Main Trends In Demographic Development Of Russia In 20th Century , which has major importance for studying issues related to demography. The author consistently analyses historical stages of the demographic development and draws logical conclusions (Zhiromskaia, 2012).

An undoubted contribution to demographic studies was made by Aralovets (2009), who on the basis of archival, regulatory, statistical, sociological and other materials showed what a Russian family had by the time of the All-Union Census of 1959.

Suvorova (2018), in her article Preparing and Taking the All-Union Census of 1959 in Chelyabinsk Oblast analyzed the Resolution of the Cabinet Council of the USSR dated 05.05.1958 no. 480 "On All-Union Census of 1959”, which was the foundation for taking the census. At that, the author analyzed the census form, terms of preliminary rounds, timing of control rounds of census stations, etc. (Suvorova, 2018).

Foreign researchers are also interested in problems of demography. For example, Kohon (2018) in his work "Social inclusion in the sustainable neighborhood? Idealism of urban social sustainability theory complicated by realities of community planning practice" considers such an aspect as social stability. Within this project he studies planning of sustainable development at a community level in Portland, Oregon, USA, Copenhagen, Denmark and Nagoya, Japan (Kohon, 2018).

A group of authors including Huovinen, Timonen, Leino, and Seppälä (2017) in their work "Changing urban identities on a discursive map" consider changes in identity of urban locations in four districts of the city of Helsinki. The purpose of their study was in describing identity of domicile as a cultural discourse map. The authors were especially interested in personal relations, values and ideologies (Huovinen, Timonen, Leino, Seppälä, 2017). A collective of authors including Ferilli, Sacco, Luigi, and Noda (2015) in their study titled "Culture driven policies and revaluation of local cultural assets: A tale of two cities, Otaru and Yūbari" place greater focus on managing the cultural heritage and its transformation with accounts for integration of the economic component.

Arifwidodo (2012) is the work titled "Exploring the effect of compact development policy to urban quality of life in Bandung, Indonesia" studies correlation between quality of life and the spatial structure of urban system resulting from political changes in the city of Bandung, Indonesia. Felton (2013) is interested in problems in adaptation of creative industry employees to traditional workplaces. This is the topic of her article "Working in the Australian suburbs: Creative industries workers’ adaptation of traditional work spaces". The author is studying the consequences of policy and planning for industries located in Australian suburbs (Felton, 2013). In the article titled "Understanding the process of parks’ attachment: Interrelation between place attachment, behavioural tendencies, and the use of public place" a group of authors including Moulay, Ujang, Maulan, and Sumarni (2018) touches upon such a timely problem as a threat of aggressive urbanization in cities. The authors regard public space as of paramount importance, especially parks, which play a significant role in improving social and psychological component of the modern society.

Problem Statement

This study is dedicated to preparatory works for the All-Union Census of 1959, which is often called unique. Twenty years passed from the day of previous Census of 1939, the years full of historical and fateful events.

The year of the census was determined with accounts for the need in data on population for planning economic and cultural development of the USSR, as well as taking into account recommendations of the UN Statistical Commission on taking censuses globally in a year ending in zero or close to it (Orekhov, 1962).

One of winter months (January) was selected for census as during this time the population migration is at its lowest, which is favorable for census. The same considerations were also taken into account when establishing the census day: January, 15, 1959 was in the middle of the week (Thursday), when there are less population movements as compared to the rest day or those next to it. Conducting the census close to the beginning of a year is also practical as it provides an opportunity to compare census data with the running record of population and use it for calculations timed to coincide with the beginning of the year.

Territorially, the boundaries of our research were limited to the Zlatoust district. Zlatoust is a city in Chelyabinsk Oblast, Russia, founded in 1754. It is one of the most high-altitude cities of Ural, where residential blocks are located at elevation of 400-600 m A.S.L. The unique nature of Zlatoust is also in that to the east of the city lies the boundary between Europe and Asia, the city itself being located in the European part of Russia, on the Ay river (in the basin of the Ufa river). Besides, a historical path of the Trans-Siberian Railway crosses the city. The city of Zlatoust stretches for 15.4 km from north to south and for 10.4 km from west to east.

Research Questions

The subject of this research is the process of preparation to the All-Union Census of 1959 in Zlatoust, Chelyabinsk oblast.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to consider the separate set of measures organized under the guidance of the Central Statistical Administration (CSA) in anticipation to the All-Union Census of 1959 in the region and aimed at practical implementation of this large-scale project.

Research Methods

In this work, the author used such research methods as historical-descriptive, historical-chronological, comparative method, as well as analysis and synthesis.

Findings

Territory of the Zlatoust district is about 236.4 km². Population according to 1956 data was 143 thousand people. As of 1958, there were two rural councils in the district: Veselovskii and Kuvashinskii; there were 50 settlements and 1 state farm – Medvedevskii (Nikolaeva, 1971). Rural settlements were unevenly distributed through the territory of the district. The average distance between settlements varied between 3 and 15-25 km. In the southern rural council, where settlements were larger, the average distance between them was somewhat larger as well, at 6-27 km. A feature of the district was presence of a significant number of people not involved in agriculture in the countryside. It was the result of a situation, where most of workers and clerks working at enterprises of Zlatoust lived in rural localities that were included with the rural councils.

These features of the Zlatoust district obliged the head counters operating in the countryside to pay special attention to questions 12, 13 and 15 of the census form, which considered place of employment, occupation and social group of the surveyed person.

Situation with communications in the district was as follows: all the urban settlements and rural councils were provided with telephone communication, however, this communication was often out of order for several months in a row and the quality of connection was low when it was operable: understanding words over the phone was often problematic. All the census sections and training facilities were provided with telephonized premises.

Most enumeration districts in the countryside had population between 551 and 600 people. For 12 enumeration districts (in rural councils with a large number of small settlements), population was below 550 people (minimum population per enumeration district was 420). In two enumeration districts, population was about 800 people each (maximum load rate).

The population in instructor districts in the countryside was defined by population in the rural councils. An instructor district was formed in each rural council. The minimum population of the instructor district was 2040 people, the maximum population was 2998.

Most enumeration districts in the urban localities had population varying between 600 and 650 people. According to load rates for instructor districts, the loads for urban districts were calculated: in sections where smaller buildings prevailed being scattered through a significant territory, the load was lowered to 3100 persons per instructor-controller, while in the sections where large buildings and compact development were common the load was increased to 3900 persons per instructor-controller (Zlatoust Archival Department, L. 6).

The borders of electoral districts used for elections to the Supreme Council of the USSR were respected when forming the instructor districts in the countryside. The 4th census district of the city of Zlatoust was expanded to include 2 instructor districts covering the neighboring rural councils.

Custodial institutions (hospitals, resorts, etc.) were covered by 9 enumeration districts grouped into two instructor districts. In addition, 18 enumeration districts were organized in the rest of the custodial institutions that were parts of the main instructor districts within territory of which they were located. Average load per head counted in such institutions was 52 persons. Two independent enumeration districts were organized for hotels, guest houses, etc.; there, the average load was 49 people.

The plan for selection and approval of census-taking personnel was approved by governing a authorities. This plan provided for personal approval of the census-taking personnel at meetings of the District Executive Committee. Training and checking the knowledge of deputy administrators of enumeration stations was performed by two groups: the 1st one covered deputy administrators of urban census stations and included 3 persons (1 person in reserve); the the 2nd one covered deputy administrators of rural and mixed stations, 5 persons in total (including 1 person in reserve). The training lasted for 4 days and was completed in a period between 3rd and 13th of November 1958. Training and checking the knowledge of deputy administrators of enumeration stations was performed by the district inspector. Deputy district inspector was present at the training with the aim of being able to independently train the subsequent groups of instructor-controllers and head counters.

From 17th of November to the 4th of December 1958, instructor-controllers of urban and rural localities were trained in groups of 9-16 persons. The head counters were trained at the 3rd stage, from the 8th to the 27th of December in groups of 20 persons maximum. Training schedule of head counters was composed in such a way that during the training of the first group for all the three days there were district inspector or their deputy at each census station.

The plan for mass awareness-building in the Zlatoust district provided for holding all the necessary events to make population aware of the importance of the All-Union Census, its procedure and responsibilities of citizens. In particular, the plan made provisions for: holding meetings at enterprises, the state farm, machinery and tractor stations, in offices, as well as meetings with housewives; delivering lectures in the theater and the movie theaters; regular publications in district press and wall newspapers about preparations to the census, including articles about importance of the census and citizens’ responsibilities; timing for training of propaganda workers and school teachers who were to hold talks with school pupils about the census.

In the district there were 11 city clubs, 32 rural clubs and reading houses, 1 district newspaper, 2 factory newspapers, about 200 wall newspapers, 1 radio station of the Ministry of Communications, 2 factory-based radio stations.

On January 2, 1959, CSA inspector for Zlatoust, V.A. Andriianov received a document from the head of the Statistics Administration, I.Iasiukov on approval of census personnel in accordance with the organizational plan of the All-Union Census of 1959 as approved by the CSA USSR. The document included 470 participants, front line workers of the census, including administrators and deputy administrators of census stations (10 persons), instructor-controllers (54 people, including those involved at train stations, on trains, in control points and a reserve group), head counters (406 people, including those in hotels, at train stations, on trains, in custodial institutions and a reserve group). However, a telegram dated 06.01.1959 and addressed to the Zlatoust district inspector from Renev introduced changes in the number of instructors, head counters, etc. As of January 6, there were 262 head counters, 47 instructors, 55 head counters in custodial institutions, 3 instructors, 3 head counters in hotels in Zlatoust; the reserve was removed.

There were also special instructions to procedure of census in institutions of the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Committee for State Security. First, census of military personnel was taken at duty stations, not at domicile. All military personnel living outside the closed territory should have had certificates of having passed the census at their duty station issued by the HQ or head of their institution. For military personnel not having such certificates, head counters drew a control form, at that, under question 12 they stated “Soviet Army“, under question 13 they stated “officer”, “sergeant” or “soldier”, while at the back of the control form a mark was made about location of the census taking (postal address of the military unit or institution).

Second, family members of military personnel, workers and clerks with military units and institutions of the Ministry of Defense were taking census at their domicile on the usual terms, as civilians.

Additionally, military personnel detached for work to other ministries and administrative units were registered by the CSA head counters on the usual terms.

Third, persons working in high-security facilities and institutions of such ministries and administrative units but residing in the open territory and subject to census were instructed at their workplace on how to answer the questions of the census form and the control form. They provided head counters with short answers to questions 12-15.

Dependents of such persons, if they lived separately, under question 14 answered that they were “at expense of military father”, or “at expense of military husband" etc., and in some cases even omitting the relation: "at expense of a military person”.

During the training, it was important to instruct head counters that when filling in the census form or the control form for such persons, the head counter should record the answers verbatim and not ask for additional details, this especially concerned questions from 11 to 15.

Conclusion

Thus, preparation to the All-Union Census of 1959 in Zlatoust, Chelyabinsk Oblast proceeded in accordance with the government-issued recommendations. Within the framework of preparation to the large-scale event, the provincial city strictly conformed to instructions and met all the deadlines under the guidance of Central Statistical Administration then helmed by V.A.Andriianov.

References

1. Aralovets, N. A. (2009). Urban Family In Russia, 1927–1959. Tula: Grif & Co.
2. Arifwidodo, S. D. (2012). Exploring the effect of compact development policy to urban quality of life in Bandung, Indonesia. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 303–311.
3. Felton, E. (2013). Working in the Australian suburbs: Creative industries workers’ adaptation of traditional work spaces. City, Culture and Society, 4(1), 12–20.
4. Ferilli, G., Sacco, Luigi P., & Noda, K. (2015). Culture driven policies and revaluation of local cultural assets: A tale of two cities, Otaru and Yūbari. City, Culture and Society, 6, 135–143.
5. Huovinen, A., Timonen, E., Leino, T., & Seppälä, T. (2017). Changing urban identities on a discursive map. City, Culture and Society, 11, 20–28.
6. Kohon, J. (2018). Social inclusion in the sustainable neighborhood? Idealism of urban social sustainability theory complicated by realities of community planning practice. City, Culture and Society, 15, 14–22.
7. Moulay, A., Ujang, N., Maulan, S., & Sumarni, I. (2018). Understanding the process of parks’ attachment: Interrelation between place attachment, behavioural tendencies, and the use of public place. City, Culture and Society, 14, 28–36.
8. Nikolaeva, M. E. (1971). Chelyabinsk Oblast. Administrative and Territorial Division as of 01.01.1970. Chelyabinsk: South-Ural Book Publishing House.
9. Orekhov, K. A. (1962). Results of the All-Union Census of 1959. Moscow: Gosstatizdat.
10. Suvorova, A. V. (2018). Preparing and Taking the All-Union Census of 1959 in Chelyabinsk Oblast. In Collected in Demographic and Family Policy In the Context Of Sustainable Development Goals, vol. 2. Ekaterinburg: Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
11. Zhiromskaia, V. B. (2009). Life Opportunities of Post-War Generations in Russia: Historical Demographic Aspect: 1946–1960. Moscow: Russian State Humanities University Publishing Center.
12. Zhiromskaia, V. B. (2012). Main Trends in Demographic Development of Russia in the 20th century. Moscow: Kuchkovo pole.