Name: Kyle Judy Class: HIS2015 Date: 2/14/25

Primary Source Title: Testament, 1922; Secondary Source Title: Since Lenin Died (Chapter 3), 1925

Who was the author? (Not the editor or the translator) Vladimir Illyich Lenin Max Eastman
Who is the audience? Be Specific. This is never ALL people. The Central Committe of the USSR. The acronym C.C. is used several times throughout the piece, both inreference to specific members of the C.C. and addressing the group as a whole. Members of the Leninist public, seeking further information on the death of Lenin.
What type of document is it? (**More than a primary or secondary source. i.e. autobiography, letter, law, etc.) Appears to be a letter. The sections in the post script, specifically the addition to the original, shows this pretty clearly. Book.
What is the subject or author's thesis? Stalin should be removed from the Central Committee of the USSR. Lenin's last will and testament should have been read before Stalin gained control of the Party.
What was the author's motive for writing the source? Knowing what Lenin would go on to do, it appears this was a power grab. Anyone who knows passing knowledge about the Communist regime in Russia during the 20th century knows that Lenin lead the USSR after Stalin. To provide further context for the public about the death of Lenin and the tragedy of Stalin. Little did he know.
Does the author have an obvious bias? (**Note that all authors have biases, but not all are obvious.) What is the bias? There is a clear anti-Stalin bias, however this is obscured by Lenin cleverly not just talking about Stalin. He mentions several members of the Central Committee in not so flattering terms. Clear bias towards Lenin's teachings and Leninism in general.
Where was the document written? How does this influence what is written? Unsure of precisely where, but generally: this letter was written in the USSR under Stalin's rule. This affects the piece greatly, I reckon without Stalin's rule the piece would have been anti-current leader. Once again unsure of exactly where, but this book was published by Boni and Liveright Publishers, New York 1925. This suggests that Mr. Eastman was living in the United States while this was written, so shows that Eastman might have had less familiarity with the subject.
When was the document written? December 24-25th 1922 1925.
What was the effect of the source on history? I suspect this source was either the inciting incident or a contributing factor to the overthrowing of Stalin as Secretary-General of the Central Committee. Trotsky disagreed heavily with the claim that the Central Comittee deliberately concealed Lenin's Testament as "pure slander".
What was the historical context of the document? What was going on at the time that might have influenced the author's opinions? How did the source affect your view of the topic or event, if a secondary source? 1922 was 4 years after WWI ended. Discontent can pretty clearly evolve from distaste to revolution in 4 years, Lenin was probably fed up with some of his coworkers and wanted change. The USSR was a very young country at the time, stability of governance rarely lasts with new nations. 1925 was but 3 years after the original document, at this point Stalin had taken control of the Central Committee of the USSR. Further on in history, of course, Stalin would make many decisions that lead to mass death in the USSR. This document gave me much more information around the culture of the Committee at the time.
Why was the document written? (**You may have to infer this by reading between the lines or doing further research.) I think this was pretty clearly a power grab. Not unlike modern posts on Twitter calling out those above you for minor grievances (or fabricating grievances for added effect), Lenin probably wanted the Secretary-General position for himself so made a "call-out post" to try to shame Stalin into leaving his position. To inform readers more about the situation around Lenin's Testament.
Is the document credible? Why or why not? (**See how to determine reliability or credibility in the "Credibility" subheading on page 5.9 Primary and Secondary Source Analysis of the e-text) As the unfairly chided Joseph McCarthy taught us, never trust a communist. In seriousness, Lenin clearly had something to gain by writing this letter, so trusting his judgements becomes difficult without exterior knowledge. So... probably not. To be clear, my ignorance of Russian history is not to be understated, I have no idea of the context of this letter. I say it's probably not credible due to ignorance and motivations of the author, not because I'm certain of it's incredulity. I would say so, it appears that the document does try to look at the subject from an objective standpoint. There is, however, a clear Lenin bias. This is of course not to say that I would have preferred a Stalin bias.

Bibliography:

Vladimir Illyich Lenin: Testament, 1922. https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/lenin-testament.asp

Max Eastman: Since Lenin Died (Chapter 3), 1925. https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/eastman/1925/lenin/ch3.htm

Who was the author? (Not the editor or the translator)	Vladimir Illyich Lenin	Max Eastman
Who is the audience? Be Specific. This is never ALL people.	The Central Committe of the USSR. The acronym C.C. is used several times throughout the piece, both inreference to specific members of the C.C. and addressing the group as a whole.	Members of the Leninist public, seeking further information on the death of Lenin.
What type of document is it? (**More than a primary or secondary source. i.e. autobiography, letter, law, etc.)	Appears to be a letter. The sections in the post script, specifically the addition to the original, shows this pretty clearly.	Book.
What is the subject or author's thesis?	Stalin should be removed from the Central Committee of the USSR.	Lenin's last will and testament should have been read before Stalin gained control of the Party.
What was the author's motive for writing the source?	Knowing what Lenin would go on to do, it appears this was a power grab. Anyone who knows passing knowledge about the Communist regime in Russia during the 20th century knows that Lenin lead the USSR after Stalin.	To provide further context for the public about the death of Lenin and the tragedy of Stalin. Little did he know.
Does the author have an obvious bias? (**Note that all authors have biases, but not all are obvious.) What is the bias?	There is a clear anti-Stalin bias, however this is obscured by Lenin cleverly not just talking about Stalin. He mentions several members of the Central Committee in not so flattering terms.	Clear bias towards Lenin's teachings and Leninism in general.
Where was the document written? How does this influence what is written?	Unsure of precisely where, but generally: this letter was written in the USSR under Stalin's rule. This affects the piece greatly, I reckon without Stalin's rule the piece would have been anti-current leader.	Once again unsure of exactly where, but this book was published by Boni and Liveright Publishers, New York 1925. This suggests that Mr. Eastman was living in the United States while this was written, so shows that Eastman might have had less familiarity with the subject.
When was the document written?	December 24-25th 1922	1925.
What was the effect of the source on history?	I suspect this source was either the inciting incident or a contributing factor to the overthrowing of Stalin as Secretary-General of the Central Committee.	Trotsky disagreed heavily with the claim that the Central Comittee deliberately concealed Lenin's Testament as "pure slander".
What was the historical context of the document? What was going on at the time that might have influenced the author's opinions? How did the source affect your view of the topic or event, if a secondary source?	1922 was 4 years after WWI ended. Discontent can pretty clearly evolve from distaste to revolution in 4 years, Lenin was probably fed up with some of his coworkers and wanted change. The USSR was a very young country at the time, stability of governance rarely lasts with new nations.	1925 was but 3 years after the original document, at this point Stalin had taken control of the Central Committee of the USSR. Further on in history, of course, Stalin would make many decisions that lead to mass death in the USSR. This document gave me much more information around the culture of the Committee at the time.
Why was the document written? (**You may have to infer this by reading between the lines or doing further research.)	I think this was pretty clearly a power grab. Not unlike modern posts on Twitter calling out those above you for minor grievances (or fabricating grievances for added effect), Lenin probably wanted the Secretary-General position for himself so made a "call-out post" to try to shame Stalin into leaving his position.	To inform readers more about the situation around Lenin's Testament.
Is the document credible? Why or why not? (**See how to determine reliability or credibility in the "Credibility" subheading on page 5.9 Primary and Secondary Source Analysis of the e-text)	As the unfairly chided Joseph McCarthy taught us, never trust a communist. In seriousness, Lenin clearly had something to gain by writing this letter, so trusting his judgements becomes difficult without exterior knowledge. So... probably not. To be clear, my ignorance of Russian history is not to be understated, I have no idea of the context of this letter. I say it's probably not credible due to ignorance and motivations of the author, not because I'm certain of it's incredulity.	I would say so, it appears that the document does try to look at the subject from an objective standpoint. There is, however, a clear Lenin bias. This is of course not to say that I would have preferred a Stalin bias.

P/S Worksheet