“History of Material Culture” or “History of Technology”? A Debate in the State Academy of the History of Material Culture in the Soviet Union in the Early Days of 1930s

Abstract

The option for the philosophical view on technology was open to some extent even in the Soviet Union during the early days of 1930s. Although the Soviet-style Marxist view formed within the Governmental Commission for the Marxist History of Technology was eventually authorized and regarded as the main stream, there used to be other currents. The author of this paper has already traced the activities for the creation of Marxist view and methodology for the history of technology by one of such currents represented by Khaim Garber and his institute, the Institute for the History of Sciences and Technology, that were repressed and eventually eliminated during the Great Terror. There was, however, the third current in the quest for the Marxist view on technology and methodology for the history of technology. This paper sheds new light on this current. Vladislav Ravdonikas and others from the State Academy of the History of Material Culture proposed to replace the history of technology with their newly conceptualized “history of material culture.” Having been originally a research institute in the field of archeology, their institution was well versed in the research of non-written artifacts and had a grand vision to approach the history of humankind from the beginning to the present from the perspective of non-written artifacts. This paper tries to clarify the basic features of their argument, objections to such conception, and an ensuing debate inside their institution before their plan faded away.