28 April 2024 marked 104 years since the establishment of Soviet rule in Azerbaijan. Generations who lived during the Soviet era remember well the demonstrations every year dedicated to the Day of International Solidarity of Workers, May 1, on Baku’s central square, now called Freedom Square. The statue of Nariman Narimanov, the leader of the Azerbaijani Bolsheviks, stands on Baku’s highest point. The majority of Azerbaijani citizens live in buildings constructed in Soviet times and most of the younger generation, unaware of the Soviet era, grow up and attend kindergarten and school in Soviet-era buildings. As the social situation in today’s Azerbaijan worsens, a sense of public nostalgia for Soviet times has emerged. Not only the older generation, but also youth believe that social projects that were launched during the Soviet era were fairer and more accessible. It is the memories of the senior generation and collective memory formed in historiography that have encouraged young people to think like that. Modern Azerbaijani historiography projects a positive image of Soviet rule as a whole, with the exception of the first two decades.
It is not the intent of this article to explore the reasons for nostalgic feelings about the Soviet past, but rather to analyze a view of the Soviet government’s social projects in two times: past and present. How did representatives of the older generation, who today positively assess the Soviet government’s social projects, feel about Soviet-era projects then? Were those projects really fair and accessible as claimed today? To answer these questions, the article will cover issues related to social housing, which has long been regarded as one of the most successful Soviet-era public projects.
From elites to people
In the early 20th century, when Soviet power was first established, military clashes, massacres on the grounds of ethnic hatred, and political conflicts caused serious disruptions in cities and villages, leaving hundreds of thousands homeless. Rapid industrialization, initiated by Stalin in the late 1920s, prompted millions of peasants to migrate from provinces to industrial centers. Between December 1926 and January 1939, more than 30 million peasants left their homes and settled in towns and cities.[1] It was impossible to provide housing for these people in a short period of time. Representatives of the growing working class in the USSR lived in barracks-type houses or communal apartments. Providing these people with housing was incompatible with Stalin’s plan for heavy industry development. It was for this reason that the 33% increase in housing construction planned in the first five-year plan (1929-1932) was not achieved. Housing construction was put on the back-burner in 1926, as a result of which the average living floor-space per capita fell from 5,6 square meters to 4,5 square meters.[2] Gregory Grossman, an economist from UC Berkeley, has estimated that the Soviet government was able to achieve a two-year investment in industrialization by lowering the living standard of urban workers by 40%.[3]
With the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, the housing problem became even more acute. The war caused no direct damage to Azerbaijan, but the destruction of the European part of the USSR and intense military battles led to the resettlement of thousands of people to the Central Asian republics and the Caucasus. Soviet statistics report the destruction of 1.710 cities and urban-type settlements and more than 70.000 villages and hamlets during the war.[4]
About 25 million people were deprived of shelter as a result of the damage inflicted. The need to provide housing for the 4.800.000 people demobilized from the Soviet Army at the end of the war reminded political leadership once again how poor the living conditions of the Soviet people were. Officers and soldiers of the Soviet Army, who had liberated not only their homeland, the USSR, but also a number of European countries from German occupation, had no roof to put over their heads. However, Stalin’s heavy industrial policies and political ambitions again prevented housing from becoming a priority in the social policy of the Soviet state until 1953.
The housing stock that epitomized the Stalinist totalitarian system was designed to meet mainly the needs of the state elite. These apartments were not intended for ordinary Soviet people, but for Soviet party, law enforcement officials and elite intellectuals who supported the Stalinist regime and formed its social backbone. It is true that from time to time this elite was also sent from those apartments to camps or execution cellars, but those who replaced them were representatives of the new elite. Severe restrictions on housing construction garnered an unprecedented level of bribery in the distribution of the housing stock. There was a special group of intermediaries in this regard. This group was usually represented by people who had certain influence in society: they had access to high-ranking people, and this access enabled them to mediate between those who had power and authority and those who had money. In Moscow, for example, Vera Chapayeva, the stepdaughter of Vasily Chapayev, a hero of the Russian Civil War whose exploits were adapted into novel and film, acted as an intermediary in obtaining housing for people with means. Vera received 800.00 rubles in three years as a result of her work and was one of the richest people in the Soviet Union.[5]
Knowing that the housing issue had become a serious problem for the Soviet state, party leadership began to take serious steps after Stalin’s death. Unlike Stalin, Khrushchev believed that the economy needed to be redirected toward the consumer economy and housing. Historians who have studied Khrushchev’s housing policy have suggested that the main reason for this was to win public sympathy and to meet demand, however slightly, for housing of the rapidly growing post-war population.[6] In the mid-1950s, the demobilization of 1.200.000 men from the army and a significant reduction in military spending made it possible to put a part of budgetary funds in the construction of residential complexes. He was able to improve living conditions for 5,3 million people in 1950 and 12 million people in 1960.[7]
As a result of the construction project implemented in 1956-1964, when Khrushchev was in power, 84,4 million people—one third of the USSR population—received new housing.
To speed up housing construction work, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) Presidium on 26 July 1957 adopted a Resolution On the Construction of Apartments. The resolution acknowledged the need to start production of building materials and tools for mass housing. In addition, the Cabinet of Ministers of the USSR in November 1957 passed a Resolution On the Development of Cooperative Residential Construction.[8]
In December 1957, a draft on cooperative and separate apartments in the USSR noted that cooperative residential construction was too small in scale and, in general, cooperative housing accounted for about 1% of residential buildings. According to the Central Statistical Committee (CSK), from 1917 until 1955, private buildings accounted for 33% of total construction works carried out by various state institutions, while houses intended for personal use of citizens accounted for 32,5% of the total number of units of living space. American researcher Christine Varga-Harris characterized the construction endeavor launched by Khrushchev as “perhaps the most ambitious governmental housing program in human history,” adding that between 1955 and 1970, more than 126 million people–more than half the country–moved into new units of living space, improving their life conditions.[9]
Khrushchev’s social program to build residential apartments has been ambiguously assessed in historiography. The project, aimed at improving the living conditions of ordinary Soviet citizens, contained several points that ignored socialist principles. Western literature unequivocally calls Khrushchev’s social housing program “the beginning of ideological changes” in the minds of the Soviet people.[10] Private housing and personal belongings paved the way for the creation and expansion of private property. The fact that people had a social space where they could keep their private lives far from the public spotlight, and an environment where they could spend their leisure time, gradually distanced them from public life. The desire to create for themselves comfortable living conditions in private homes encouraged Soviet citizens to equip their private apartments with convenient appliances and decorate with beautiful household items. The new flats—known as khrushchevki—were private units of living space, though they were small. Private apartment buildings seriously changed the way Soviet people viewed society and political leadership. They preferred to spend their leisure time with family members in their cozy homes rather than in public spaces as before. Soviet citizens who moved from Stalin-era communal forms of housing to single-family homes had their own personal space and possessions. This actually blunted Stalinist political behavior, asserting an individualism that was contrary to socialist thinking. In 1955, a newspaper in the United States compared capitalist life with socialist life and asked its readers this question: “If Russians got decent homes, TV sets and excellent food wouldn’t they, being human, begin to develop a petit bourgeois philosophy? Wouldn’t they want to stay home before the fire instead of attending the political rally at the local palace of culture?” As the author of the article points out, those who moved into Khrushchev-era apartments faced this dilemma: “Soviet citizens had to choose either communism or comfort.” The American correspondent noted that “If there were to be comfortable homes in the Soviet Union, they would be a place opposite to the party-state utopia because they would be a potential center of resistance and a space destroying the root of state socialism.”[11]
The housing issue in Soviet Azerbaijan
The aggravation of the housing problem in Azerbaijan dates back to the late 1950s. There were several reasons for this. Aside from the oil industry, the post-war construction of many large industrial enterprises in the republic and the launch of a large number of repair and construction enterprises associated with Khrushchev’s housing campaign stimulated the inflow of a large labor force to cities. In addition, after the end of the war, thousands of officers and soldiers were discharged from the army to return to a peaceful life and raise families. It was necessary to provide them with housing. A lack of focus on housing construction for many years led to the fact that in Baku alone thousands of people began to live in basements and semi-basements, barracks-type houses and communal apartments. Their living conditions needed to be improved. Thousands of people, released under the Voroshilov amnesty,[12] began to ask for the return of their confiscated houses after their arrest. All these problems required both the observance of the principle of social justice in the provision of housing in Soviet Azerbaijan, i.e., first and foremost the provision of housing for people with greater needs and rights, and compliance with existing legislation.
How did the political authorities of Azerbaijan deal with these complex problems? The archives in Moscow and Baku contain large number of materials to answer this question. These materials consist of letters of complaint sent by Soviet citizens to the USSR and the Republic’s party leadership as well as to various state structures; transcripts of meetings of official bodies; and decisions taken. Of particular interest among these materials are letters of complaint, which make it possible to find out what Soviet citizens think about both the authorities and social projects launched by the Soviet state. In one year alone, in 1960, 2.860 letters of complaint on housing problems were sent to Khrushchev from the Azerbaijan SSR. If we take into account that local party organs imposed serious restrictions on sending letters from the republic to the central party organs, this figure seems quite large. A report on the letters of complaint addressed to Khrushchev was submitted to the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan SSR on 6 May 1961 by head of the Letters Department, V. Ievlev.[13] What did Soviet citizens complain about?
The complaints indicated that local authorities had committed administrative violations in terms of allocating housing, that small-sized apartments had been provided to many families, and that complaints had not been dealt with in a timely and thorough manner. 2.382 letters described poor housing conditions and suggested improvements. 84% of the letters came from Baku. 496 letters reported that they lived in apartments with 3 or less square meters per person. In 139 letters, citizens stated that they lived in basements and other sub-optimal dwellings. Letters about difficult housing conditions also came from Kirovabad (now Ganja), Sumgayit, Mingachevir, Nakhchivan, and Stepanakert (now Khankendi), to name a few.
An economist Malikov, in one of these letters, wrote that “In 1959, the Azerbaijani government took a very humane step by announcing that it would provide housing first of all for those living in basements. However, this decision just remained on paper; they did not fulfil it […] Workers who had lived in damp basements for years without any light and air, into which mice crawled, still continue to live there.”[14] Two citizens, Mammadov and Burkov, criticized Baku leadership for irresponsible decision making. They wrote that Alish Lambaranski, the famous chairman of the Baku City Executive Committee, who was engaged in improving the city, never concentrated on the people. The letter further said: “To put in order the territory around old buildings, Lambaranski ordered that people be evicted from residential accommodation, demolish buildings and erect unnecessary structures in their place. He also ordered the demolition of 2-3-story buildings in front of the Azneft building, ignoring the fate of the people [who lived there]. Having demolished the building where 75 families lived, he built a reinforced concrete umbrella for taxi parking. After demolishing many houses in Chambarakand, people found out that a road will be built in their place. The townspeople said that they did not need such a road.”[15]
Most complaints concerned the unfair distribution of apartments: apartments were mainly given out to people who worked in in leadership positions and already had accommodation, while slight changes were felt in the situation of the workers. The head of a household of 12 living in a 29-square-meter house, first registered on the list of those needing an apartment in 1948, stated in a complaint that officials refused provide his family with an apartment as late as 1961. Master Bulakin, who had worked at the battery factory for 22 years, wrote that his family of 8 lived in a non-residential area of 8 square meters. Despite the fact that he lived in difficult conditions, the leadership of the Ministry of Automobile Transport did not take his condition into account when distributing apartments and did not grant his family an apartment.
In another letter, a citizen Almazov reported that his family of 11 people lived in an apartment of just 10 square meters. The head of the family wrote that one of his children, who was suffering from tuberculosis, was forced to share the same room and bed with healthy children. Some of the complaints were written by servicemen who were discharged in 1960. Tagiyev, a reserve officer, wrote in a letter that since 1946 he had been living with his family of 6 in a 12 square meter house that was not designed for residency. He further wrote: “Are we not heroic people who fought the Nazis and captured Berlin, the capital of Nazi Germany? … Now no one needs us. I’ve been waiting for a home for 10 years, but I can’t afford it and I don’t have a back-up.”[16]
In the letters, citizens also complained about abuse and neglect by officials. The applicants further stressed that there was no point in complaining to the Kremlin because it only forwarded these complaints to those same offending local officials. Therefore, they never responded to the complaints. One of the workers wrote in his complaint that a response to his first housing application to the Baku City Executive Committee (BCEC) indicated that he was registered, but a second letter that came sometime later said that he would not be given housing because he was not registered. Stressing that both letters were signed by the same person, the Soviet worker condemned and criticized the unprofessional behavior of Soviet officials. Complaints of ill-treatment, abuse of authority, and neglect of citizens’ appeals by senior officials were usually left unanswered. A response to Tagiyev’s letter of complaint about the authorities’ refusal to register him in his apartment only came 11 months later.[17]
Socialist justice and social housing
In 1961, the BCEC organized a commission to inspect the measures taken to improve housing for workers in Baku’s Stalin district. The department that organized the inspection was directly responsible for the distribution of housing, i.e., it inspected itself. The prepared document contains interesting information about the distribution of housing in Baku districts. From 1 September 1959 to 22 September 1961, some 1.944 families were registered in the Stalin district, 189 of whom lived in basements, 259 in unsuitable places, 69 in emergency housing. In addition, 171 officers were discharged from the army, 179 were rehabilitated, 49 were suffering from tuberculosis, while 1.028 were from other groups in dire need. During this period 531 apartments were handed over to the BCEC for distribution to citizens. The apartments were given to 126 people living in basements, 37 people living in unsuitable places, 28 people living in emergency housing, 45 people in rehabilitation, 65 officers discharged from the army, 27 people suffering from tuberculosis, and 203 from the other groups in dire need.[18]
Prior to 1 April 1961, 6.369 families were registered for better housing conditions in the Stalin district, of which 5.674 people were registered through the district executive committee. Of those registered, 959 lived in basements, 191 lived in emergency housing, 998 lived in unsuitable places, while 180 were rehabilitated, 198 were discharged from the army, 57 were suffering from tuberculosis, and 3.091 were characterized as other category of people in dire need. Of this total, 22 people living in basements, 33 officers discharged from the army, and 67 other people in dire need had been able to improve their housing conditions before apartments were distributed.
These statistics show that when distributing housing, authorities grossly violated Soviet laws and distributed the main housing stock to the other category of people in dire need. Archival documents do not provide information on who falls into this category, but since the data names those living in many harsh conditions explicitly, the other people in dire need can be assumed to work in the Party and Soviet organs, or belong to a group close to them or get support from them. More than half of the housing stock, for example, 54,9% of the apartments distributed in the Stalin district, were not given to Soviet workers, but to high-rank officials or their relatives who already had housing. According to the decision of the Central Committee of the Azerbaijani Communist Party, the first priority was to provide housing for people living in basements. Officers were to be provided with housing not later than 5 months after being discharged from the army, but this law was not respected. The Central Committee made decisions for the people but took into account the interests of the top party leadership in their implementation.
In 1961, 1.475 families lived in basements in Baku’s Oktyabr district, and only 55 of them (3,7%) were provided with housing that year.[19]
In 1961, the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan SSR on the results of the inspection of measures related to the resettlement of citizens living in basements and the continued use of these basements indicated that out of 15.971 people registered in the Stalin, Oktyabr and Narimanov districts, 3.924 (24,5%) lived in basements in early 1961. However, from July 1960 to May 1961, the heads of executive committees of the mentioned districts distributed only 559 apartments (35,4%) out of 1,577 apartments allocated to them for citizens living in basements, while 646 apartments were given out to the other category of people in dire need (41%). In this regard, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan SSR M. Iskenderov instructed the BCEC and executive committees of the mentioned districts to eliminate all the above-noted problems within a month. Because registration and allocation of apartments was not carried out properly and in accordance with the laws, many violations of the law were committed, and additional apartments were bought illegally.
Needless to say, all this could not have taken place without the knowledge of senior officials. To buy a residence illegally, one had to either pay a bribe or have a high-ranking relative. According to letters of complaint in the archives, the high-ranking official behind much illegally activity in the housing sector was Sadiq Rahimov, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan SSR from 1954 to1958 and thereafter head of the Baku General Construction Department. The inability of the state to solve the housing problem forced people to resort to various ways of improving their living conditions. The lack of affordable housing for the labor force in Baku increased the number of unauthorized constructions, popularly known as nakhalstroy. It goes without saying that at a time when restrictions were imposed on the sale of building materials, when the police strictly checked every construction site, construction work was only possible with the consent and permission of senior officials.
High-ranking local Soviet officials thus hindered Soviet housing goals while enriching themselves illegally. Subsequently, they supplemented decrees with exceptions to legitimize their illegal actions.
On 16 April 1959, the Azerbaijan SSR Council of Ministers notified the Central Committee that in accordance with Resolution 300 on Introducing a Passport Regime in Baku, Kirovabad and Sumgayit, no eviction of unregistered people from Baku and other cities was carried out, and that people continued building houses without permission. Building houses without a permit was a violation of the law on the construction of private houses and the acquisition of building materials. On 24 March 1961, the Supreme Soviet of the Azerbaijan SSR adopted a Resolution on increasing the criminal liability for violations of legislation on the construction of individual houses, the acquisition of building materials and the regulation of use of the housing stock. The Council of Ministers, in this regard, commissioned the Baku City Executive Committee to end the widespread construction of illegal private residential houses across Baku city, and to take strict measures against the those responsible for this violation. Under the last article of the resolution, signed by Chairman of the Council of Ministers Anvar Alikhanov, the BCEC was tasked with ensuring registration of persons living in illegal constructions as an exceptional measure.[20]
A February 1965 letter to Alikhanov from A. Rzayev, head of the Department of Soviet Bodies of the AzSSR Council of Ministers said that 9.271 illegal buildings were constructed in Baku from 1956 to 1958, and 3.852 from 1958 to 1964. According to Rzayev, the large number of illegal buildings are the result of the work of Baku City district executive committees and militia. “Special attention is paid to this work in the Narimanov district. 1.382 illegal buildings have been constructed in this district, 1.069 in the Oktyabrski, 726 in 26 Baku Commissars, 341 in Kirov and 78 in Shahumyan districts since 1958.”[21]
From the names of the districts, we know that those illegal buildings were mainly constructed in the center of Baku. Alish Lambaranski, secretaries of the national committees and, of course, First Secretary Vali Akhundov passed by those buildings every day on their way to work. It was impossible for them not to see those buildings. However, there were no attempts to stop the construction. Several housing officials were reported to have been dismissed and severely punished for illegal constructions, with 986 people prosecuted. However, the main perpetrators – Lambaranski, his deputies, the chief of Baku city Militia and his deputies – were not held accountable for their actions. In February 1964, a certificate addressed to Alikhanov signed by mayor Lambaranski stated that the decision of the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan SSR of 16 April 1959 on illegal buildings prohibited the construction of such buildings and the registration of people living in them. Nevertheless, 3.852 illegal buildings were constructed in the city, in which 12.151 people were registered after 1958. The Council of Ministers and the City Executive Committee found a way to register people living in illegal buildings. A letter to Lambaranski stated that a large number of unregistered people in the city negatively affects the implementation of operational work related to the protection of public order, as well as the provision of medical care for them, their participation in elections, applications for passports, and military records of young people, etc. For the coming local council elections, Lambaranski sought permission from the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan SSR, which was leading the campaign, to register people living in illegal locations.[22] Following this appeal, the Council of Ministers exceptionally authorized the registration of the people living in illegally built houses.
In Azerbaijan, the problems were not only found in building new apartments, but also in refurbishing the existing housing stock. Local councils identified serious defects during their periodic inspections. As a result of inspections, one of the certificates presented to the party was prepared by K. Ahmadov, head of the Azerbaijan branch of the State Bank. The document notes that the condition of residential apartments in Baku is unsatisfactory, with the housing stock being utilized ineffectively and buildings being demolished prematurely.[23]
Major repair and construction works were carried out with defects and deficiencies, and financial resources were spent on third-party construction. The executive committees of the republic focused not on the construction of housing stock, but on landscaping In Kirovabad, the housing construction plan was 75% fulfilled and the landscaping plan 94%, while in Salyan, 50% and 90% respectively. Modern-day readers might think that the councils sought to beautify the environment and to show the Soviet state as a modern environment, but this was not true. There were simply more opportunities for theft of funds from landscaping work than from construction. Another reason is that executives channeled large amounts of public funds allocated for the construction of accommodation to build magnificent guest houses, sanatoriums, gardens, etc., for their personal use.
Moscow failed to solve the housing problem for Soviet citizens before the Soviet Union’s collapse. A part of the population in Azerbaijan lived in communal apartments until the early 1990s. Residents of these apartments had to share a kitchen and sanitary facilities with other families. The lack of hot water and sometimes even a bathroom in apartments caused serious inconveniences. However, complaints about living conditions in most cases were left unanswered. People were forced to solve the problems created by the state themselves
Conclusion
Both younger and older generations of present-day Azerbaijan believe that Soviet housing policy the state’s most successful social project. At present there is a sufficiently large number of modern, high-rise, beautiful vacant housing units in downtown Baku. But these apartments were not intended to be distributed to ordinary people, as was the case in Soviet times, but for sale to affluent individuals. Against the background of urgent need of ordinary people for residential apartments, these empty luxury locations appear to be a prime example of social injustice in modern-day Azerbaijan. This example makes the Soviet government, criticized for its anti-national character, more attractive in comparison to the modern Azerbaijani state. Today the housing in Azerbaijan is quite expensive and pay scales are very low to make these apartments unaffordable for the young generation. Young people also believe that the Soviet Union’s disregard for elementary human rights was at least compensated for by its social projects. Even the older generation, still living in apartments purchased during the Soviet era, believes that the housing policy of the Soviet government was more just, forgetting that it was the Soviet government that deprived them of their locations, confiscated their homes, evicted them from their homes, from their homeland, branded them counterrevolutionaries, traitors to the motherland, saboteurs, and put an end to all economic initiatives.
Qeydlər və istinadlar:
[1] Прокопович С. Н. Народное хозяйство СССР. Том 1, Издательство имени Чехова, 1952, с.56
[2] Меерович М. Г. Наказание жилищем. Жилищная политика в СССР как средство управления людьми. 1917–1937. М., РОССПЭН, 2008, с.17.
[3] Henry Morton. Housing in the Soviet Union. Proceedings of the Academy of Political Sciences. Vol. 35, No. 3, The Soviet Union in the 1980s (1984), pp. 69-80.
[4] Сборник сообщений Чрезвычайной Государственной Комиссии о злодеяниях немецко-фашистских захватчиков. М.: Государственное политическое издательство, 1946.
[5] Heizen J. The Art of Bribe. Corruption under Stalin, 1943-1953. Yale University Press, 2016, 116.
[6] Steven E.Harris Communism on Tomorrow street: Mass housing and everyday life after Stalin. Baltimore John Hopkins University Press. Woodrow Wilson Center, 2013.
[7] Народное хозяйство СССР в 1970 году. Статистический сборник. М.: Госстандарт, 1957, 545
[8]Архивы Кремля, 677, 741.
[9] Christine Varga-Harris. Homemaking and aesthetic and moral perimeters of the soviet home during the Khrushchev era. Journal of Social History, 2008, Spring, Vol.41, N3, 2008, pp.561-589.
[10] Susan E. Reid, ‘Communist Comfort: Socialist Modernism and the Making of Cosy Homes in the Khrushchev Era’ Gender & History, Vol.21 No.3 November 2009, pp. 465–466.
[11]Susan E. Reid, ‘Communist Comfort: Socialist Modernism and the Making of Cozy Homes in the Khrushchev Era’ Gender & History, Vol.21 No.3 November 2009, pp. 465–498.
[12] Amnesty of Voroshilov – a decree On amnesty, signed by the Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR K. Voroshilov in March 1953. More than 1,200,000 people were released from Stalin’s camps in 1953 alone by this decree.
[13] The State Archive of the Republic of Azerbaijan (SARA), fund 411, list 48, file 108, page 2-8.
[14]SARA f.411, siy.48, iş 108, v.2.
[15] SARA f.411, siy.48, iş 108, v.3.
[16] SARA f.411, siy.48, iş 108, v.6.
[17] SARA f.411, siy.48, iş 108, v.8.
[18] SARA f.411, siy.48, iş 108, v.53-54.
[19] SARA f.411, siy.48, iş 108, v.80.
[20] SARA, f.411, siy.48, iş 184, v.9-10.
[21] SARA, f.411, siy.48, iş 184, v.21.
[22] SARA, f.411, siy.48, iş 184, v.27-28.
[23] SARA, f.411, siy.48, iş 184, v. 55-58.
