Lyssna fritt i 30 dagar! Ange kod: play Du kanske gillar. Inbunden Engelska, Spara som favorit. Skickas inom vardagar. Skickas inom vardagar specialorder. Discover collections unused by other scholars! Russian immigrants are one of the least studied of all the Slavic peoples because of meager collections development. Unfortunately, they made no effort to preserve any record of it such as the UIK acquisition numbers.
This now makes it much more difficult to establish the provenance of the materials or the source of their acquisition by UIK in Prague. The administrative files of UIK in Prague that came to Kyiv with the transfer do contain the original detailed inventory registers in addition to reports and correspondence with important data about provenance and about the organization and development of the UIK collections, but they have not been thoroughly analyzed, either during initial processing of the materials in Kyiv or even today.
Extensive card index files on the Ukrainian emigration were compiled, and by the end of the Division had already prepared:. The report noted a total of fonds devoted to "documentary materials of the Ukraine-Nationalist emigration," out of which by the end of the year they could already report on By then, however, many fonds involving politically suspect "bourgeois-nationalist" organizations and individuals were being transferred from Lviv and other western Ukrainian centers for scrutiny by authorities in Kyiv. The "operational" analysis gained momentum.
During the Special Secret Division of the archive reported that "for operational aims and use of documentation by agencies of the MGB and MVD," on the basis of some 13, files processed during the year, they had prepared "72, cards on White emigrants," "55, cards on C[ounter]-R[evolutionary] elements," and more detailed reports on people in the SS "Halychyna" Division. Later Receipts from Prague. Archival retrieval shipments from Prague did not end with the "gift. At least 25 fonds received were initially deposited in TsDIAK, and the current Chief of the Ukrainian Archival Administration gave orders for their "appropriate processing" during A list of many of these and other materials received from Prague, which was prepared at the time of their transfer, has recently come to light.
Of particular significance, much of this documentation was earlier held by the interwar Museum of the Struggle for Liberation of Ukraine sometimes translated as the "Museum of the Ukrainian Struggle for Independence" in Prague, founded by the well-known Ukrainian historian Dmytro Antonovych, but in it was rechristened the Ukrainian Museum in Prague for obvious political reasons. The museum activities and some of its rich documentation had been surveyed in interwar publications in Prague. Photographic albums from the Museum were transferred to the state audiovisual archive in Kyiv; library materials went to the TsDIAK library and other libraries; while some of the museum exhibits went to the Historical Museum.
An additional 27 crates of documents were received in Kyiv from Prague in , although some files from the museum still remain in Prague. Some of the materials came from other sources. Unlikely to be of provenance in Prague or UIK, for example, are some files from student societies in Berlin and Gdansk, and some materials relating to the ZUNR leader levhen Petrushevych which probably came either from Berlin or Vienna.
An example of the materials split between the two archives is the correspondence of Ivan Rudychiv, the librarian of the Petliura Library in Paris, who was summoned to Berlin by the Nazis in In his report to the library board in Paris in December after his return, he admits to having given some documentation from the library, along with his own memoirs written in Berlin, to a colleague from Prague to be safeguarded and some of them to be placed in the Museum of the Struggle for the Liberation of Ukraine.
Hence, quite possibly, the Rudychiv materials and some other files from the Petliura Library may have come to Kyiv via Prague, unless the Nazis had seized them in Berlin.
What would you like to find at the library today?
Extensive archival materials relating to post-revolutionary Ukrainian political and cultural developments had been scattered throughout Europe with the Ukrainian emigration during the interwar period. This included documentation relating to the struggle to establish an independent Ukrainian state during and Ukrainian opposition to Bolshevik rule.
In fact, during the war, Nazi specialists succeeded in seizing and preserving much more of such materials than is realized. In many instances the materials were removed to Nazi research or storage centers, first in Berlin, then increasingly in more remote areas from Silesia to the Austrian Tyrol, but also in Prague and Cracow. The seizure of these collections and their transport to Kyiv and Moscow has been mentioned in print on several occasions, but a full scholarly account of those developments is long overdue.
Some had been seized by Nazi military intelligence and research agents and were found with remnants of the Heeresarchiv; still others came from ERR sources. Soviet authorities were also on the lookout for politically sensitive archival Ucrainica of potential "operational" value elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Archival materials were brought in through intelligence or counter-intelligence agents in Vienna, Cracow, and other European centers after the war, and during the subsequent decade of Soviet control over Eastern Europe.
Of particular importance here was the shipment of a freight train wagon of UNR records from Cracow. For example, one freight car load with 78 crates was received in Kyiv from Vienna in July , but the crates contained military service records for Austria-Hungary A special report was prepared on these records with card files and alphabetical indexes for the registration books from the Consolidated Military Registration Bureau in Vienna. Elsewhere, Soviet authorities found many of the archival materials that the Nazis had removed in from the Petliura Library in Paris.
Other larger portions of the Library have recently been identified in Moscow, some of which first went to Belarus and thence to Moscow.
A small collection of documentation from and relating to the Petliura Library came to Kyiv via Berlin and Prague. Shipments came so frequently during and that archivists were overwhelmed. Although individual separate fonds - or those that could be so identified - were almost always assigned for institutional records, fonds that had been established for individuals often received materials from several different sources.
Most of the materials involved have remained arranged in those same fonds, although some of these have been reorganized several times. In almost all cases, fond numbers have changed as they were moved from one archive to another. Half of the fonds in line to be processed that year were of provenance in Poland, including several UNR prisoner-of-war camps called in Russian "lageria internirovannykh petliurovtsev" in Poland and a Society of UNR Veterans in Kalisz Among the central Polish records that were held in Kyiv in were records from the Presidium of the Cabinet of Ministers , the Ministry of Internal Affairs , the Post and Telegraph Direction , the Ministry of Finance , the Polish Consulate in Kharkiv , and other scattered local administrative records from Volhynia and Galicia during the interwar period.
Some of these had been evacuated to Volhynia early in the war. Subsequently evacuated to Czechoslovakia by the Nazis, they came to Kyiv with other retrieved records. Most of them were later transferred to Lviv, but it has not been determined if any of them were revindicated with other materials to Poland in May Indeed, their top secret list of fonds in indicates a UNR Foreign Ministry fond covering the years with file units.
Their arrangement completely revised, they were broken down and reorganized into many different fragmentary fonds in Kyiv. Some fonds for UNR diplomatic missions in other countries were still there. Archivists claim no history of the fond or " sprava fonda " is available, and if it were, it would not be available to researchers. Additional Foreign Ministry files are found in the current fond from Meanwhile, in Prague during the fall of , preparations continued for the removal of remaining parts of RZIA and other Prague Russian collections to Moscow.
Two Glavarkhiv representatives from Moscow had joined the Ukrainian delegation in July Sutotskii representing the Institute of Marxism-Leninism. Neither Bonch-Bruevich nor the literary specialist Ilia S. It was signed by Aleksandr Iziumov. Similar to the Ukrainian case, the shipment even included the materials technically "on deposit," which had not been officially signed over to RZIA by their legitimate owners. The shipment also included another crates from the archive-museum of the Don Cossacks, which had been taken from Novocherkassk during the Civil War, and which were then under the jurisdiction of the Military Archive in Prague.
Archival materials from the interwar Russian Cultural-Historical Museum were also included as "a gift for the Academy of Sciences specially designated by the former secretary of L. Tolstoi, V. The RZIA administrative records, including acquisition correspondence, registers, and other related documentation accompanied the collections. The protocol and shipping lists only cursorily describe the materials transferred. They reference 18 RZIA inventory books covering 10, inventory units sent to Moscow, in some cases indicating the RZIA acquisition numbers; however, many of the items were simply described as "unprocessed archival materials.
Of particular importance for Ukraine, these data could also help establish more precise provenance of the Ukrainian materials held by RZIA that went to Moscow. Many of the reference books from RZIA also went to Moscow, but as noted above with the UIK materials, the precise figures for library collections are difficult to establish. Some books are noted in the RZIA shipping lists, but these were supposed to be only the duplicates.
Crates of newspaper were listed separately. According to official figures, approximately 1, books and volumes of newspapers were sent to Moscow from RZIA. Although card catalogs are now open to researchers in GA RF, it remains difficult to determine how many printed materials came from RZIA, since RZIA library holdings were integrated with printed materials from other sources.
Besides, some of the printed materials were classified as file units within various archival fonds. It is possible that more books and newspapers were sent to Moscow from other sources than is apparent in the RZIA shipping lists. Aside from the microfiche edition of the of the RZIA library catalog, several recently reissued bibliographies cover parts of the RZIA library collections.
RZIA in Moscow. The importance attached to the RZIA collections by the Soviet leadership is demonstrated by that two-page document; among other notable items enumerated specifically mention was made of "documents of the government of Denikin and his staff [and] documents of the Petliura government. By October NKVD archivists in Moscow reported having completed 10, reference information cards from the "fonds of the White counterrevolutionary government and their military units," in addition "to preparing 4, reports spravki in answer to inquiries of operational agencies.
By the end of the year, the plan included 17, individual cards, although not all of those came from RZIA. In Prague by contrast, acquisition numbers had been retained, and archival materials for the most part had been kept intact with the collection in which it was received. When more detailed arrangement was undertaken, it usually was made by type of document e. Further confusion arises here because the materials removed to the Heeresar-chiv by the Nazis were subsequently packed by the Soviets for transfer to Moscow before they had been reintegrated with the other remaining RZIA collections.
Besides this fundamental problem, many of the materials acquired at the end of the s or during the war by RZIA in Prague had hardly been processed, if at all. Since RZIA archivist Iziumov had been imprisoned by the Nazis and there had been considerable staff turnover, archivists were uncertain about the extent to which other materials may have been removed by the Nazis. Thus, when the materials were hastily prepared for shipment in , finding aids were grossly inadequate, and the accompanying shipping lists with their frequent references to "unprocessed archival materials," were all the documentation that the Moscow archivists could use.
The Prague acquisition numbers were never retained in Moscow. The various points of provenance of the Prague materials themselves, even to the extent that they might have been apparent, was not respected in Moscow. Unfortunately, the dispersal of the Prague materials among different Soviet archives was even more tragic for the integrity of the collections than their processing in a multitude of separate fonds.
Soon after the Prague shipment arrived, NKVD Chief Kruglov had assured Zhdanov that none of the "fonds or individual collections of documents would be transferred to other archives or research institutions. Among those listed in the official transfer are important Ukrainian diplomatic files from the Petliura government, including documents of UNR representatives in Western Europe. Had the Ukrainians been aware of the situation, they probably would not have been successful, given the tremendous Moscow interest in UNR records among others , as is apparent from the specific mention of the Petliura government documents in the arrival notice sent to Stalin in January This interest also is clear in the transfer of UNR diplomatic files to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the end of the year.
For example, a large file of letters and inventories of incoming materials during the years clearly shows the extent to which Ukrainian and Belarusian materials were intermingled with Russian documentation. Sometimes the different materials would be acquired simultaneously-often as part of the same collection. They do not constitute an integral group of ministry records, and probably most of them would better have been assigned to the fond of the UNR Council Rada of Ministers, rather than the Foreign Ministry.
These records already were listed as such in the guide. It is quite certain that the documents came to RZIA in the late s or early s from several different sources. However, the materials described cannot be matched up with current GA RF holdings. Porsh, who served as the UNR ambassador in Berlin. One of those letters has a separate presentation note to RZIA attached.
There is some indication that another had been sold to RZIA. This is another group of records that is documented as having, at least in part, been acquired by RZIA. The transfer of RZIA materials to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in , despite earlier assurances that the collections would be kept intact, unfortunately set a precedent. Many RZIA materials of more local interest were sent to regional archives and other Soviet republics.
In the late s Kyiv archivists furnished descriptions of those fonds included in the Moscow RZIA guide, but their descriptions so far are not publicly available to researchers in Kyiv. A few of the archival materials that came to Kyiv with the UIK collections went the other direction-from Kyiv to Moscow. Since they had been a "gift" to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, and since they were officially considered to be part of the State Archival Fond of the USSR, they had a more "legitimate" status than the trophy fonds from other sources that preceded or followed their arrival in Moscow.
They joined the RZIA collections, and in some cases became intermingled with them. Soviet archival agents were already on the scene in Romania in February By spring the Soviet archival envoys reported the recovery from Bucharest of the archive of an International Refugee Office that was helping Ukrainian and other refugees after the October Revolution.
The materials also include some of the administrative records and prewar catalogs of the library, as well as archival materials that had been collected by the library before The archival materials from the Petliura Library that went to Minsk were later transferred to the Special Archive in Moscow in , which explains why the collections are now divided. In both cases, they were broken down into six or eight splinter fonds following Soviet archival procedures. This is clear in a preliminary version of the RZIA guide annotations for those fonds. Because of the multiple archival transfers in the postwar decades, and the fact that all of the incoming miscellaneous collections were broken down into artificially specific fonds without regard to the archive where they were last held or the collection with which they were received, considerable research and verification has been needed before any attributions can be accurately assigned.
Further research has revealed, however, that they were in fact received from the Lenin Library in , having been earlier received by the Library from Geneva with the papers and library of the Russian bibliographer Nikolai Aleksandrovich Rybakin. The guide covers all of the fonds as established after transfer of the RZIA collections to Moscow, and after their subsequent dispersal to nearly thirty archives throughout the USSR.
Funding for the publication was provided from international sources in Western Europe concerned about the fate of those collections. Preparation of the comprehensive fond-level guide to the RZIA collections started in She prepared what was intended to be completed as a candidate dissertation about RZIA.
As if to compensate for such dispersal, the new guide provides an attempted intellectual reconstruction. Russian specialists have already taken the lead in identifying the archival Rossica that was retrieved from Prague after World War II. But what about the Ucrainica? Now that the RZIA guide has been completed, it is time for Ukrainian specialists to keep pace with their Russian colleagues. If Ukrainian archivists and historians together would be willing to make similar efforts, it is quite likely that supporting funding could be found from foreign, if not domestic Ukrainian sources.
Even the most preliminary list of the Ukrainian collections retrieved from the related Ukrainian Historical Cabinet in Prague UIK has not reached the planning stage in Kyiv. Ukrainian specialists have made no attempt to study the original acquisitions and composition of the UIK holdings with an aim of indicating the fonds into which they were subsequently divided in Kyiv. Neither have they traced the current location and archival designations of those materials, the vast majority of which are held in Ukraine.
After half a century, it is time for these extremely valuable materials to be brought fully to light. The most significant transfer took place in , involving at least a dozen fonds with approximately file folders of the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries UPSR and related left-wing political groups. Most of this had come from Prague with the UIK collections. Another transfer occurred in , involving a relatively small group of Ukrainian "bourgeois-nationalist" files, particularly relating to Ukrainian organizations operating in Poland.
These included a few UNR files along with predominantly foreign-language military-oriented files regarding Poland. So it is possible that the materials from Kyiv were interfiled in other Moscow fonds. Again, it is difficult to tell now if those materials were acquired in Kyiv as part of the UIK collections. Ucrainica Reorganized in Kyiv. Upon receipt of a copy of the list in Kyiv, the director of the TsDIAK Special Secret Division was requested to verify their holdings and report any additional materials that should be part of these fonds.
There they continued to remain closed to public research, and even their existence was denied. Despite the protests of many Kyiv archivists, some brief references to these collections and notes about the lack of public information about their availability in Kyiv first appeared in my Ukrainian archival directory with additional bibliographic references to earlier descriptions from Prague.
Access to Ucrainica in Kyiv after Independence. It was not until that published reports openly admitted that most of the interwar Ukrainian collections from Prague were, in fact, in Kyiv. Two others were written by Liudmyla Lozenko.
CEEOL - Article Detail
They also do not distinguish UIK materials from those seized elsewhere or seized by the Nazis elsewhere. Some of the lists do, however, have penciled annotations identifying their provenance as UIK. Others clearly note their origin as Paris, Vienna, Berlin, or Cracow. Some of the lists have penciled annotations indicating archival transfers and changes of fond numbers. Even if incomplete and needing verification, such lists and their annotations could provide the basis for an initial guide for researchers. The lists also need to be compared with similar ones that were undoubtedly prepared for TsDAZhR in Kharkiv to indicate archival transfers and organizational changes.
Those files have not yet been made available to researchers. But it would be helpful for scholars to know about their fate and about their journey to Kyiv and back. It is possible that some "operational" card files and other reference materials for them remain in Kyiv.
Despite this, many of the fonds in Kyiv archives could not be opened for research owing to their inadequate processing. In many cases the inventories that were made available had little relationship to the contents described, nor were they usable for public research, since they had been prepared hastily for the purposes of operational analysis.
Most of the inventories prepared in Kyiv in the immediate postwar decade were prepared in Russian. In some cases this has led to further confusion and occasional mistakes in translation. The original Russian-language inventories have since been added as file units within the particular opys of the fond in question, but they often are not readily accessible to researchers. Researchers throughout the world should know of the existence of these highly important materials, despite any hesitation that Ukrainian archivists might have about announcing them.
Even before further efforts to locate, describe, and retrieve more archival Ucrainica abroad, it is essential to describe those collections that already exist in Kyiv. There will be little credence in the seriousness of further retrieval and descriptive programs for archival Ucrainica abroad, particularly among the Ukrainian diaspora, before it is openly known what materials were seized by Soviet authorities and from whence they were taken during and immediately after World War II. But even in independent Ukraine in , not all the files regarding these materials, their acquisition, and their transfers are themselves open for scholarly research.
The story of postwar archival seizures and transfers has been suppressed far too long. It is to be hoped that those reports and indexes will be located and declassified soon, since they would be extremely helpful for scholarly research with the materials. Discussion of this long-suppressed episode in the fate of archival Ucrainica abroad, including its seizure by Soviet authorities, is crucial in the present context. We still do not know how many of their families and loved ones were arrested or adversely affected by information contained in these records.
We do not yet know to what "operational" uses the information contained in those files were put. Today, the search and identification of Ucrainica abroad is obviously being undertaken with sharply contrasting motivations. But the identification and proper description of the important materials seized after the war, aside from their obvious political and historiographic significance, is vital in a larger perspective. Such a descriptive effort would demonstrate that the purposes of the present national archival Ucrainica retrieval program are no longer linked with postwar Stalinist "operational" aims.
Equally important, the publics both in Ukraine and in the diaspora need assurance that such archival materials-and related reference aids and "operational" card files-are open for public research at last, available for full scholarly examination by those who are interested in reconstructing Ukrainian history free from the blinders and blank spots of Soviet historiography. The Ukrainian community in Prague and its heirs that have subsequently been dispersed throughout the world may harbor pretensions on at least some of the materials seized. Hence, following our earlier typology, they would not be considered archival records of provenance in the present territory of Ukraine.
However, it is fitting that microform copies, together with professional description, should make many of the most interesting fonds available to researchers elsewhere, besides providing security copies for the originals in Kyiv. It should also not be forgotten that the microfilm copies of the UIK holdings, promised to the Czechoslovak government at the time of their transfer in , still have not been provided.
Parts of the Ukrainian collections that remain in Prague-all of which are open to research-were surveyed in a report presented at the International Association for Ukrainian Studies world congress in Kyiv August The published proceedings include many revelations regarding the archival materials remaining in the Czech Republic and abroad, as well as a few in Ukraine. An item-level inventory of a major Ukrainian collection from the former Ukrainian Museum in Prague now held in the National Archives in Prague was published in Kyiv in , under sponsorship of the Institute of Ukrainian Archeography in collaboration with the compiler in Prague.
The National Archives of Canada recently presented to Ukraine some files that had been deposited there from a Ukrainian government in exile. Other such sources are to be found in various countries of Western Europe, in Israel, and in the United States and Canada. It will grow increasingly harder to convince individuals in these countries to transfer these materials to the Ukrainian homeland if the government of Ukraine does not provide funding for a professional archival service to insure their processing, preservation, and public availability.
There is no reason for such materials in Kyivan arhives to remain hidden from Ukraine. The original signed copy has not yet been located. In a September communication, the Archive of the President of the Russian Federation AP RF reported to me that neither a copy nor any related materials were found there. U A resolution by Zhdanov at the top notes that a copy was to be sent to Deputy Foreign Minister "t.
- The Jersey Clump, and Other Oddities!
- Finding Slavic and East European Resources at UTL.
- Gadfly (Ricky Steele Mysteries Book 2)?
- El almuerzo en la hierba (Spanish Edition);
- Ubuy Kuwait Online Shopping For ro in Affordable Prices.;
- Anatol Shmelev books and biography | Waterstones.
Lozovskii with the request to present his reaction. Bonch-Bruevich had been negotiating photocopies since the mids; his earlier activities in this regard are analyzed in the study in my Archival Rossica-Rationalizing the Search. Archival materials collected during the first ten years were surveyed by Aleksandr F.
Iziumov, Otdel dokumentov. Russkii zagranichnyi istoriclieskii arkhiv v Prage gg. Pavlova, "A. RZIA," Otechest-vennye arkhivy 4 : Iz kataloga biblioteki RZI arkhiva , ed. Sergei Blinov, 2 vols. New York: Norman Ross Publishing, , vol. RZIA," p. The inventories reflect the order of the accession numbers by which they had been listed in RZIA. Iziumov, who was freed from Nazi prison in June , was apparently unaware of the extent of transfers to the branch Heeresarchiv in Prague, or may have been repeating rumors in Prague.
Surmach, "Belorusskii zagranichnyi arkhiv," in " Russkaia, ukrainskaia?
Pavlova, "Russkii zagranichnyi istoricheskii arkhiv v Prage," Voprosy istorii 11 : , the first scholarly account about RZIA to appear in the period of glasnost. Iz kataloga bibtioteki RZ1 arkhiva , ed. Davis, Jr. For the other part of this register see fn. The printed and manuscript materials nos. The 1, photographs are listed later in the volume, starting with acquisitions nos. II , covers archival groups nos. Ill covers archival groups nos. Three inventory registers are mentioned in the act of transfer, although only two are specified as being transferred nos.