Skip to content

← Home

"Poetic Atlas of Crimea" (1989 Edition and Its Critique)

The Soviet publication Poetic Atlas of Crimea (Poetichesky atlas Kryma, Simferopol, Tavria Publishing House, 1989) is a guidebook for tourists and local historians that compiled poems by russian poets about Crimea. A critical analysis of the publication exposes it as an instrument of imperial propaganda: through literature, an image of Crimea as the "russian Riviera" was constructed, where the peninsula's multicultural history was ignored in favor of events post-1783, while local peoples and cultures were pushed to the margins.

Overview

Poetic Atlas of Crimea was compiled as a collection of poems dedicated to historical sites and landscapes of Crimea. As intended, it was supposed to be a guide for tourists. However, as demonstrated by the analysis of Roza Krymska (newspaper Krymska Svitlytsia, 2019), the book consistently constructs an imperial narrative: Crimea appears as an "exotic" land, "russian Italy," belonging to russia and celebrated by russian poets. The very first note declares: "Crimea has been known in russian literature since the origin of its oldest monuments" — erasing alternative cultural traditions (Crimean Tatar, Karaite, Greek, Armenian).

The publication covers four geographical regions: the Southern Coast (Yalta, Alushta), the Southeast (Feodosia, Staryi Krym, Koktebel), Kerch and the Kerch Peninsula, and Sevastopol. A consistent logic runs through every section: local history prior to 1783 is mentioned only in passing or hushed up entirely, while the emphasis is placed on the events of the russian empire and the USSR.

Key Details / Subtopics

Southern Coast: Yalta as "russian Nice"

  • In the atlas, Yalta is presented as a resort that flourished only after the tsarist family acquired Livadia (on the advice of S. P. Botkin, 1860s). The pre-revolutionary history of the town is completely ignored.
  • Poetry depicts Yalta exclusively as a place of rest and healing: "Miraculous is this climate, / like a healing balm" (D. D. Minayev). Minayev's poem introduces the image of the "ferocious Little russian" civilized by Crimean air — a typical colonial trope.
  • The poets visited Crimea in large numbers solely for vacation, writing about superficial impressions without delving into the local context. Crimea served merely as decoration, a backdrop.

Southeast: Voloshyn, Grin, and the Displacement of the Muslim Past

  • Koktebel became famous thanks to Maximilian Voloshyn, whose "House of the Poet" hosted an entire generation of russian writers (M. Gorky, the Tsvetaeva sisters, O. Mandelstam, M. Prishvin, etc.).
  • Despite his reputation as a "bard of russian Crimea," Voloshyn was one of the few to raise the issue of russia's responsibility to Crimea: "In a century and a half — since Catherine — / We have trampled down the Muslim paradise" (poem House of the Poet). His poetry conceives the peninsula as a layering of epochs and cultures — from Roman plaques to the "button of a russian soldier."
  • Staryi Krym (medieval Solkhat, capital of the Crimean Ulus of the Golden Horde) is reduced in the atlas to the place where Alexander Grin lived. The city's Muslim past is mentioned only in Yulia Drunina's poem "Staryi Krym" as a contrast: majestic Solkhat vs. a Soviet town, "resembling a village."
  • The destruction of the Muslim portion of Crimea after 1783 and the transfer of the Khanate capital to Bakhchysarai led to the decline of Staryi Krym; in Soviet times, the city was redefined through the figure of Grin.

Kerch: War vs. Antiquity

  • Kerch is the oldest city in Crimea (Pantikapaion, 6th century BCE), yet was bypassed in literature. Alexander Pushkin, visiting Kerch in 1820, did not find the tomb of Mithridates and remembered only the smell of fish.
  • The main motif of the "Kerch" sections of the atlas is World War II. This was the result of a deliberate shift in emphasis following the publication of Leonid Brezhnev's memoirs Little Land (Malaya Zemlya): Kerch received the title of "Hero City," pushing the ancient cultural layer into the background.
  • Four out of five sections are dedicated exclusively to wartime events: Adzhimushkay (the 170-day defense in the quarries), Ak-Monay, Mithridates (the hill with the acropolis of Pantikapaion, viewed solely through the lens of 1943), and Eltingen (the 1943 landing, "Fire Land").
  • Poetry about Kerch illustrates a colonial approach: "Over the Ak-Monay plain / Winter rain fell..." (K. Simonov) — Crimea is merely a backdrop, a stage set for events and emotions, possessing no intrinsic value of its own.
  • Poems by M. Ushakov and Vs. Rozhdestvensky depict Kerch as an industrial fishing town, stripped of its ancient majesty.

Sevastopol: Panegyric to Empire

  • Sevastopol (founded in 1784 on the site of ancient Chersonesus) serves as the central argument for the "russianness" of Crimea. In the atlas, six pages are dedicated to it, glorifying the feats of the Crimean War (1853–1856) and World War II.
  • The poetry takes on a panegyric tone: "With pride I can say to all: I am russian!" (A. Maykov), "In the bays, the clatter of russian anchors" (A. Surkov), "Midnight guardians of the Soviet country" (V. Lugovskoy).
  • A separate section is devoted to Malakhov Kurgan — a key defense point of the city in both wars.
  • Chersonesus is presented in two registers: as an object of melancholic contemplation of ruins (N. Minsky, Ye. Zaitsevsky — motifs of decay and eternity) and as a source of personal experiences (A. Akhmatova, "By the Very Sea").
  • Pantikapaion is missing as a standalone section in the atlas — unlike Chersonesus, underscoring the selective nature of the imperial narrative.

Contradictions and Open Questions

  • The atlas positions itself as a "tourist and local history guidebook," yet in reality serves as an ideological tool that shaped stereotypes long before the 2014 annexation.
  • The figure of Maximilian Voloshyn is contradictory: he is simultaneously cited to justify the "russianness" of Crimea (as a eulogist of the peninsula), even though he explicitly wrote about russia's destruction of Muslim Crimea.
  • The question remains open regarding the formation of an alternative literary tradition that would re-examine multicultural Crimea.