Émigré Archival Ucrainica Retrieved: Prague, Kyiv, and Moscow

Émigré Rossica and Ucrainica and the End of the RZIA in Prague

Postwar Retrieval Incentives. The extensive Ukrainian émigré-related documentation that was brought to Kyiv after the war now constitutes the most significant component of Soviet postwar archival plunder for the archival heritage of Ukraine. At the time one large component was officially presented as a "friendship gift" of the Czechoslovak government to the Ukrainian SSR. And even today many would argue that the shipment of one freight wagon of materials from the Ukrainian Historical Cabinet (UIK) from Prague to Kyiv, like the much larger shipment to Moscow of nine wagons from the Russian Foreign Historical Archive (RZIA), should be considered neither "plunder" nor "trophy" archives. Others-this author included-demur and insist that its status as a gift should remain in quotation marks. As we will see, those shipments represent only a portion of the postwar retrieval of archival Ucrainica as well as Rossica. Yet, contrary to popular opinion, most of the émigré archival "Ucrainica" transferred from Prague and elsewhere in Europe in the wake of the war is now held in Kyiv, not in the Russian Federation.

The Soviet archival authorities in Moscow who ordered the seizures made no distinction between "Rossica" and "Ucrainica"-or sometimes more correctly "Sovietica" (also including Ucrainica). Those actual terms, however, were rarely used in the operations. The émigré component of the extensive postwar Soviet archival seizures consisted of two prime categories. First, the Soviets sought out twentieth-century émigré materials relating to the Civil War and foreign intervention, Ukrainian attempts to establish an independent state, the White political emigration, and records of Russian and Ukrainian émigré communities abroad during the interwar period.

A second high-level priority for the Soviet authorities was material relating to the international labor and revolutionary movement that was considered of prime "historical-scientific" value in the context of "Sovietica." These included records of Russian and Ukrainian non-Bolshevik factions, such as the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries (SRs), as well as non-Russian Marxist elements. Most of this second category of records were deposited in the former Central Party Archive (now RGASPI), although most of the non-later-CP émigré components went to the Central State Archive of the October Revolution of the USSR (TsGAOR SSSR, now GA RF) in Moscow. 1

In neither category was the distinction made as to whether the files involved were of provenance within the lands of the former Russian Empire or Soviet Union and then alienated, or whether they had been created abroad in exile or emigration. These were retrieved by Soviet archival scouts everywhere they were found, from Prague and Pode´brady to émigré caches in Sofia and Manchuria. Other émigré materials that were seized had earlier been captured from West European sources by Nazi archival scouts for their "anti-Bolshevik" research operations mentioned earlier. In the policy of Soviet authorities, they were all subject to seizure.

The intellectual background and rationale for current archival Ucrainica retrieval efforts abroad are quite different. Today the aim is to open Ukrainian historical and cultural research in the broadest possible extent, and to reunite the Ukrainian diaspora with the now independent homeland. Present efforts and the rationale behind them should be seen first and foremost as stemming from the renaissance of a national historical and cultural identity in Ukraine in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Freed from the narrow shackles of Soviet ideology and its concomitant cultural iron curtain, Ukrainian scholars and cultural leaders have been acutely aware of the need to rewrite their political and cultural history based on newly opened archives at home and access to Western interpretive literature and divergent methodologies. Equally important, they are anxious to redefine their own historiographic and cultural context following decades of a political regime that sought to redefine Ukrainian culture in a narrow Soviet and often russified Soviet image. Today, Ukrainian intellectuals of all shades in the political spectrum are seeking reintegration with the "lost" or exiled Ukrainian history and culture in emigration.

In the process today, however, Ukrainian political and intellectual leaders often tend to look abroad to try to find archival Ucrainica in exile, but they appear to be unaware of the even more important, and perhaps even sensational, Ucrainica that was seized by Soviet authorities and brought back to Kyiv after World War II. While they are anxious to travel abroad in search of Ucrainica, they overlook the exiled Ucrainica that was already retrieved in the postwar decades, but that was kept hidden for "utilization" only by the security services-and never described and made available to the public. Accordingly, we should survey these extensive postwar retrieval operations. In the decade since the archival doors were thrown open, not a single new guide or even brief list of fonds has appeared in print in Ukraine, not to mention preliminary electronic or typescript form. Once these extensive collections are made known, the public will have reason to appreciate the extensive archival Ucrainica that was brought back to Ukraine after the war. At the same time, one cannot avoid the realization of the sinister purpose of its retrieval and the operational, anti-Ukrainian purposes for which it was employed during its long suppression from the public eye.

In the 1940s, a few individuals in Moscow emphasized the scholarly and cultural as opposed to the operational value of seizing archival Rossica abroad. Most particularly, the well-known Bolshevik intellectual Vladimir V. Bonch-Bruevich, who survived the 1930s as director of the State Literary Museum in Moscow, wrote a now-famous letter to Stalin in February 1945 outlining the most aggressive possible plan for retrieval of Russian- (and by implication Ukrainian-) related archival and manuscript holdings.2 Written as the victorious Red Army was advancing through Eastern Europe, he predicted, "Germany itself would soon be utterly routed and the time for reparations would be immediately at hand."3 He identified major collections of Rossica "held within the aggressor countries and their satellites (i.e., Germany, Austria, Romania, Hungary, Finland, and Bulgaria)" and strongly recommended, "while it is possible, to confiscate such archives from abroad either in whole or in part and join them to our Soviet holdings." He continued:

In contrast to his NKVD and other archival imperialist contemporaries, Bonch-Bruevich added the important caveat that such confiscation had as its ultimate aim "thorough study, and-even more importantly-quality scholarly publications." He emphasized "the extent to which such materials are needed for our history, for our literature, and for our scholarship."5 Had his recommendations been followed, fewer medieval Slavic manuscripts or important Rossica and Ucrainica would remain in Germany and other East European repositories today.

Stalin´s security henchman and Commissar of Internal Affairs, Lavrentii Beria, and his archival scouts, in contrast, were most interested in Rossica (and Ucrainica, although never so labeled), not because it represented "lost elements" of Russian culture that would be the basis "for scholarly editions," but because it could serve as a tool for secret police and intelligence "operational" aims to identify members of various émigré factions involved in "anti-Soviet" activities and those who had collaborated with the Nazis. Bonch-Bruevich´s letter went to Andrei Zhdanov, who headed one of the main ideological and cultural offices in the CP Central Committee, and thence was forwarded to Deputy Commissar of Foreign Affairs Lozovskii (pseud, of Solomon A. Dzidzo).6 Lozovskii approved Bonch-Bruevich´s plan, although in his formulation, the search for Rossica was understandably in third place after the tasks of: "(1) retrieval of all documentary materials taken by the Germans during the Great Patriotic War 1941-45," and "(2) retrieval of documentation taken by the Germans from Russia during the First World War and the period of intervention in Ukraine in 1918." Zhdanov agreed.7

Even before the Nazi capitulation, the Ukrainian Commissar of Internal Affairs Valentin Riasnoi telegraphed Beria on 4 May 1945 that valuable archival materials removed by the Nazi authorities from Ukraine were being held in Troppau (Czech Opava) and Berlin. But of even higher political importance, he noted that "in Berlin and Prague, and other cities, there were Ukrainian-German nationalist organizations which held a tremendous quantity of documents having scientific and operational interest." In his traditional red crayon across the transcript of the top secret telegram, Beria ordered action.8 A Ukrainian search team set out soon after to Czechoslovakia to retrieve materials plundered by the Nazis. Equally important, retrieval operations also targeted, in the euphemism of Moscow archival leaders, "archives of foreign provenance having operational and scientific-historical significance for our country."9 Most valuable for "operational" aims were the Russian and Ukrainian émigré collections in Prague. Soviet authorities (especially those from Moscow), considered such émigré collections of top priority because they would potentially provide information about "counterrevolutionary nationalist elements" and their "anti-Soviet activities."

The End of RZIA in Prague. Bonch-Bruevich´s most important prize was the Russian Foreign Historical Archive-RZIA (Russkii zagranichnyi istori-cheskii arkhiv, sometimes translated as the "Russian Historical Archive Abroad"), the extensive "Russian Archive under the auspices of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs," which he had been able to visit during one of his trips to Czechoslovakia. He mentioned the "tremendous wealth of manuscript and epistolary literature of the nineteenth century" there and in the Prague museums with "many interesting documents relating to the Civil War." He had described this archive in a personal appeal to Stalin already in 1935 and quoted Edvard Benes´s agreement to assist with photocopying efforts:

Having failed to obtain the funds needed for copying in the mid-1930s, ten years later, Bonch-Bruevich was much more aggressive in his plea for the acquisition of RZIA, which, he assured Stalin in 1945, "Benes would be prepared to present to the Soviet Union."11

The Russian Foreign Historical Archive (RZIA), founded initially in 1923, came under the auspices of the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1928. It was unquestionably the most important archival center for politically sensitive materials that were taken abroad after 1917 and created in exile by the Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian émigrés. Regular published reports starting in 1929 show the prewar development of the collections.12 RZIA had agents throughout Europe actively searching out and soliciting archival materials for donations or purchase. The RZIA Documentary Division was long headed by Aleksandr Filaretovich Iziumov (1885-1951), who had served as an archivist in Russia in the early post-revolutionary years before he was arrested and exiled abroad in 1922 for his participation in the People´s Socialist Party. He had been active in the development of RZIA after settling in Prague in 1925, and in 1935 was named Deputy Director, also continuing to head the Documentary Division.13

A separate Ukrainian Historical Cabinet (UIK) was organized in 1929, also under the Czech Foreign Ministry, which provided funding for the operation through the interwar period. While housed in the same building (Toskansky Palace, Prague IV, Loretanske nam. 109), the two archives "worked independently," according to Iziumov, who claims he "did not even know the contents of the Ukrainian Archive," although "to be sure some Ukrainian documentation was also held in the Russian Archive."14 A Belarusian Archive, established as a separate entity under the Czech Foreign Ministry in 1933 parallel to UIK, constituted a second, but much smaller, RZIA subsidiary.15

After the Nazi annexation of the Sudetenland in 1938, and establishment of the Nazi Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, control over the RZIA, UIK, and Belarusian collections was transferred to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Efforts of the Russian and Ukrainian émigré community in Prague to evacuate the archive to the West were unsuccessful, including proposals for its sale or transfer to the United States.16 The Nazis imprisoned Iziumov in June 1941, and hence were deprived of the most knowledgeable RZIA archivist.

During the war, the Nazis left the collections in Prague, although they removed most of the military-related materials from RZIA to a branch of the Reich Military Archive (Heeresarchiv) in the building of the Czech Military Museum in Žižkov in the outskirts of Prague.17 The Nazis had detailed German-language inventories prepared of those files that were transferred.18 Iziumov later suggested that the Germans removed one-fifth of the archive which was probably taken to Berlin.19 However, no other available sources indicate any significant Nazi archival seizures that left Prague, and the majority of the collections remained in Prague when the Red Army liberated the city from Nazi control in May 1945.20

Belarusian émigrés, however, were more successful in removing the Belarusian Archive from Prague, although its fate is still unknown. Mikola Abramchyk, who headed the Belarusian People´s Republic (BNR) after the death of its exiled president, Vasil´ Zakharka, in Prague in 1943, reportedly managed to take "two suitcases" of BNR files to Paris in 1943. While Abramchyk´s papers still remain in private hands in Paris, the rest of the Prague materials that had come to be known as the Krechevskii-Zakharka Archive have disappeared.21 So far as is known, only a few Belarusian files that had been accessioned directly by RZIA itself were included in the RZIA transfers to Moscow, and none went to Minsk.22 One Prague specialist suggests that at least part of the Belarusian archive remained in Prague, but there is no information there about its subsequent fate.23 Further efforts are needed to determine exactly what may have survived in Paris or elsewhere and to insure that it has found a suitable archival home.

Bonch-Bruevich may well have been one of the first to alert the Soviet leadership as early as the mid-1950s regarding RZIA´s riches, and later recommend transfer to Moscow after the war. We do not know the extent to which his discussions with Benes may well have been instrumental in preparing the way for the Czech "gift" of those collections to Russia and Ukraine, but official negotiations in 1945 were conducted without him. The Soviet appropriation of the RZIA and UIK holdings in 1945 and their shipment to Moscow and Kyiv illustrate well the nature of Soviet-style archival retrieval and repatriation and the traditional Soviet attitudes towards émigré archival Rossica and Ucrainica abroad during the Cold War years. In June 1945, an article in Pravda had already announced the "gift of the Czech government to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR."24 A few days later, the Commissariat of Internal Affairs declared that "the documentary materials in RZIA should be considered an integral part of the State Archival Fond of the USSR and should be returned to the Soviet Union." Commissar of Foreign Affairs Viacheslav Molotov was requested "to make the appropriate official request to the diplomatic representation of the government of the Czechoslovak Republic for [its] return."25

The most detailed recent Russian study of RZIA does not reveal the still untold full story of the transfer negotiations, nor does it take into account the potential strong émigré objections to the transfer of RZIA to the USSR at that time.26 American Slavist George Fischer visited Prague in the summer of 1948; by that time, the archive was already in Moscow, and his report presented few details about the fate of RZIA.27 As he realized, however, the fate of the archive was caught up in higher politics, not unlike the documentation in its important contents. That point of view was voiced at a 1995 conference in Prague devoted to the Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian interwar emigration in Czechoslovakia. The "political" factors involved in the "End of RZIA in Prague" are well documented by Czech journalist and translator Vladimir Bystrov.28

The Russian émigré community in Prague that collected the archive undoubtedly intended for its eventual return to Russia. When RZIA came under the Czech Foreign Ministry in 1928, it was agreed that "that RZIA might be transferred to Russia "only when power would be changed from the Communist Party dictatorship" to a political power that would "guarantee legal order, personal freedom, societal self-government, and the legal return of the present emigration to Russia."29 After the triumphal Red Army raised the Soviet flag in Berlin in May 1945, many among the émigré community were impressed with Stalin´s victory over Hitler and had hopes for a better future in the USSR. Aleksandr Iziumov, recovering from incarceration under the Nazis, lent his support to the RZIA transfer to Moscow. In his memoir prepared after the transfer to Moscow had been decided, he realized that "sooner or later the archive would be returned to the Motherland." He considered that "the gift to the Academy of Sciences made my stay outside the Motherland appear as a business trip (sluzhebnaia komandirovka), which I had done all in my power to fulfill."30 Nevertheless, Iziumov himself chose to remain in Prague.

Others undoubtedly would not have agreed that the time was ripe in 1945 for RZIA´s transfer to Moscow, although at that point, they had no choice in the matter. Some, like Lev Magerovskii, who had headed the RZIA newspaper division, fled to the United States. Sergei Porfir´evich Postnikov (1883-1965), who headed the RZIA library, was tried, convicted for his membership in the Socialist Revolutionary Party, and imprisoned in the USSR. Although he survived his years in prison and exile and returned to live his final years in Prague, two other RZIA librarians who were incarcerated perished.31

Bystrov raises the ugly specter of the politically incriminating documentation in the archive for these and many others of the Russian and Ukrainian émigré community in Czechoslovakia who were in fact imprisoned in the postwar decade. Bystrov reminds us that, indeed, such political and human factors need to be considered today in understanding the context of the "gifts," or what others would call "seizures," including the disregard for the wishes of émigrés whose papers were on "deposit" in RZIA and UIK. And it is not surprising to hear Czechs speak out today in complaint that they never received the promised microfilms of the materials after they arrived in Moscow and Kyiv.32

The Ukrainian Historical Cabinet (UIK) in Prague. When it was established in 1929 under the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ukrainian Historical Cabinet (UIK) was enriched by materials held earlier by the Ukrainian National Museum-Archive-UNMA (Ukrams´kyi natsional´nyi Muzei-arkhiv) in Prague, which had been active during the 1920s. Receipts for the archive, earlier held in the museum, started in 1925. The first 29 collections (most received on deposit) had been received before the separate Ukrainian Cabinet was established in 1929.33 A complete item-by-item inventory now held in Kyiv covers the archival materials and books from the museum (nos. 1-3232), over half of which are manuscripts, and photographs (nos. 1-1927), all of which were apparently kept together as a separate collection within UIK.34 Additional detailed registers of the other documentary materials acquired by UIK were prepared. File-level descriptions remain for most arcHival groups (institutional records, personal papers, or collections) that were received later (i.e., those numbered 451 to 549). These were transferred to Kyiv with the collections themselves and could now serve as a comprehensive guide to the riches of UIK in the form in which they were originally arranged in Prague.35 UIK, however, never took over all of the Ukrainian materials already deposited in RZIA. Important Ukrainian documentation, including many groups of UNR files, continued to be either purchased by or donated to RZIA as part of more general collections. This Ukraine-oriented collection activity in RZIA continued even after the formation of UIK.

During the first two years of operation, UIK was headed by the ethnographer and poet Mykhailo Obidnyi (Myxajlo Obidnyj), with Arkadii Zhyvotko (Arkadij Životko) and another assistant.36 There had been a third assistant the first year, at the end of which a printed report of limited circulation was prepared.37 By the years 1934-1936, however, Arkadii Zhyvotko was running UIK alone, or at least he had no paid assistant. He prepared a five-year report at the end of 1935, but it was not published. By that time the documentary fond numbered 78,895 folios.38 Active accessioning continued of many important Ukrainian archival collections- acquired by gift or purchase or deposited under provisional arrangements- together with books, newspapers and journals, and photographs.

In 1940, while under Nazi occupation, Zhyvotko published a ten-year report, summarizing those activities and mentioning a few of the most important archival acquisitions.39 The Documentary Division had brought together considerable documentation from the period of the struggle to establish an independent state, including materials from the Central Rada, the Hetmanate, and the Ukrainian National Republic (UNR), including collections of documents from Ukrainian military units and organizations, military internment camps in Poland and Czechoslovakia, and files from diplomatic missions. There were files from various Ukrainian political parties, such as the Revolutionary Ukrainian Party (RUP), the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries (UPSR), and the Ukrainian Social-Democratic Workers´ Party (USDRP), among others. The collection had important groups of correspondence of Symon Petliura, Volodymyr Vynny-chenko, and Pavlo Skoropads´kyi. Already by the mid-1930s, among files of Ukrainian émigré organizations, UIK had received at least part of the records and other collections from the Ukrainian Sociological Institute, the Ukrainian Higher Pedagogical Institute in Prague, the Ukrainian Agricultural Academy in Podebrady, and the Ukrainian Community Committee in Czechoslovakia, along with files of student organizations and newspapers, among others.40

Some holdings had been transferred from the Shevchenko Scientific Society in Lviv and some from the Ukrainian Scientific Institute in Warsaw. In 1939, UIK received the records of the UNR diplomatic mission in Washington, DC, among others, and the personal collection of the writer, journalist, and publisher Yurii Tyshchenko. Among the many personal papers of Ukrainian émigrés acquired during the 1930s were those of the ethnographer and poet Mykhailo Obidnyi, Mykyta Shapoval, General O. Pil´kevych, and those of the civic and political activist and law professor Serhii Shelukhyn (Serhij Šeluxyn; Šeluchyn). More of Shelukhyn´s archive was received on deposit later during the war.41

Zhyvotko continued to head UIK throughout the Nazi occupation; his last monthly report was signed in February 1945.42 The wartime records preserved in Kyiv and Prague give no suggestion that the Nazis removed any of the archival materials from UIK, although a receipted list remains for 34 books taken in July 1939 for the Russian library under the high-level security services (SS) in Berlin.43 There are no reports of transfers of UIK documentation to the Military Archive in Prague as was the case with RZIA. Dr. Georg Leibbrandt, Alfred Rosenberg´s special assistant for Ukraine and the Soviet area, visited UIK in January and May of 1940, but apparently decided not to move or extract any of the archive.

The Nazis apparently increased the supporting staff, since there were again two, and sometimes three, assistants. Mykola Balash (Czech M. Balaš), was particularly active, and served briefly as the last head of UIK in Prague. He prepared the last report from the wartime period for March 1945.44 Descriptive work continued during the war for the archival materials, including an inventory for the archive of the Ukrainian Pedagogical Institute (on deposit), the archive and library from the Ukrainian Sociological Institute and the Ukrainian Technical-Agricultural Institute in Poděbrady, the records of the Prosvita Theater from Uzhhorod, the Ukrainian Peasant Association (Ukrams´ka selians´ka spil´ka), the Kuban Archive and Library, the archive and collection of Yurii Tyshchenko, some materials received from V´ia-cheslav Lypyns´kyi and Mykyta Shapoval, and the personal papers of the literary historian and critic Leonid Bilets´kyi.45 Inventories had been prepared earlier for the materials received on deposit from Shelukhyn.46 During the war, Nazi authorities also kept the staff busy preparing press summaries and analytic files for articles from journals and newspapers received by UIK.47

The End of UIK and Transfer to Kyiv. Soon after the agreement to transfer RZIA to Moscow, a Ukrainian archival mission arrived in Prague in July 1945 searching out Ukrainian archival materials that the Nazis had looted. It had as an additional special mission the retrieval of Ukrainian émigré collections located in Prague. Pavlo I. Pavliuk, Chief of the Main Archival Administration of the NKVD UkrSSR, headed the group, which also included Hordii S. Pshenychnyi, director of the Central State Archive of Films and Photographs, and Hryts´ko P. Neklesa, Chief of the Archival Administration of Lviv Oblast.48 Before their arrival, they seem not to have been well informed about the Ukrainian émigré community in Prague and the location and status of UIK. In early August 1945, Pavliuk reported that they:

In terms of the Ukrainian materials involved, the August 1945 negotiations, according to Bystrov, led to a decision "to extract from RZIA the Ukrainian Historical Archive and send it in advance to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic to exemplify the sincere friendly relations of both countries. "50 That explanation, however, is somewhat misleading, because there is no indication that any Ukrainian materials were in fact extracted from RZIA for transfer to Kyiv. The Kyiv transfer involved only materials from the still separate Ukrainian Historical Cabinet (UIK), with the possible addition of materials from other Ukrainian émigré institutions in the Prague region, most of which were already on deposit in UIK. The official UIK transfer ceremony for the "gift of the Czechoslovak government to the Ukrainian people," took place in Prague on 4 September. The transfer was signed on the Czech side by Josef Borovičký, the Head of the Archive of the Czech Ministry of Internal Affairs, Mykola Balash, the last Head of UIK in Prague, and Václav Pešák, Special Advisor to the Archive of the Czech Ministry of Internal Affairs, and on the Ukrainian side, by the above-mentioned three representatives of the Archival Administration under the NKVD UkrSSR who were in Prague.51

Different reports and registers have different figures for the total number of archival groups that had been acquired and registered by UIK by mid-1945, at which time the transfer negotiations were under way. The brief summary acquisition register for UIK lists 605 entries with indication of the person responsible for transfer and whether they were a donation, purchase, or deposit.52 The latest (1946) published report about the activities of UIK, by the responsible archivist from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Vaclav Pešák, indicated 604 archival groups.53 However, some of those entries comprised only books or photographs, and so should not be counted as separate archival groups (records, personal papers, or collections).54 The last volume of the more detailed register of the UIK documentary section, which in most cases includes file-level descriptions of the documentary holdings, extends through number 549.55 It seems, though, that some of the later receipts had not yet been fully described in that register. It is clear that this particular register did not cover the acquisitions that were only printed books.

As indicated in the official act of transfer, the "gift" included all of the 588 archival collections (that is, groups of institutional records, personal papers, or collections) of the Ukrainian Historical Cabinet itself, as listed in its three inventory registers by 1945, including photographs and some unprocessed files. Related photographic materials, the three inventory registers themselves, and the relevant administrative records of UIK in Prague were also sent. The archival documents from the former Ukrainian National Museum-Archive (UNMA; nos. 1-3232) and the UNMA photographic collection (nos. 1-1344), which were both covered by a separate register, were likewise included.56

In addition to the archival materials from UIK and UNMA listed in the inventory registers, the official act of transfer listed "unprocessed" archival materials from eleven other Ukrainian émigré institutions that were apparently still held in deposit status, or, in a few cases, all the files which had never been formally accessioned by UIK. These included the Ukrainian Workers´ University, the Ukrainian Sociological Institute, the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries Abroad (UPSR), the Ukrainian Pedagogical Institute in Prague, and the Ukrainian Community Publishing Fund, among others.57 Some of these materials, as is apparent from the wartime reports mentioned above, had already been processed in UIK and their contents are listed in the UIK inventory registers, but that was not true in all cases. A subsidiary document was issued by the Czech Foreign Ministry to prevent any potential claims in connection with those records and personal papers that had not been legally accessioned by UIK (i.e., that were still on deposit, and hence not legally owned by the archive), including some of the other materials of provenance in Ukrainian émigré institutions in Prague and Podebrady.58

Ukrainian NKVD Chief Riasnoi proudly announced the UIK "gift" to Ukrainian Party Secretary and Chairman of the Council of People´s Commissars Nikita Khrushchev and to Beria in Moscow:

In October 1945 the important railroad freight car of materials from the Ukrainian Historical Cabinet was transferred directly from Prague to Kyiv.

A consolidated "Ukrainian Archive" as referenced in those official reports and others is something of a misnomer, because most of the materials transferred to Kyiv were either formally accessioned by, or were on deposit with, UIK in Prague. That most important collection of Ukrainian materials from Prague in fact came from UIK (as Pavliuk had indicated in his initial report in August), not the university in Poděbrady, so the Poděbrady reference is also misleading. (As far as can be determined, UIK was never associated with institutions in Podebrady.) Some materials from Podebrady that had already been processed in UIK were included in the official UIK transfer, but others were held in deposit status, and their transfer to Kyiv was undoubtedly not authorized. These included, for example, the administrative records of both the Ukrainian Agricultural Academy and its correspondence arm, the Ukrainian Technical-Agricultural Institute, some of which had already been processed in Prague and for which separate fonds were assigned in Kyiv, as well as those for organizations associated with these institutions.60 Part of the records of some of those institutions still remain in Prague, as is evident from the 1995 guide to Russian and Ukrainian émigré archival fonds and collections in the Czech Republic.61

There is no indication that the Ukrainian materials that had been interspersed in RZIA collections (rather than UIK) were brought to Kyiv, but were rather taken to Moscow. Accession registers for the Ukrainian materials in RZIA had not been kept separately, and Ukrainian materials acquired by RZIA, especially those accessioned before the founding of UIK in 1929, remained a pail of RZIA. Besides, many later collections acquired by RZIA had intermixed Ukrainian and Russian documentation.

UIK had one of the largest collections of Ukrainian newspapers and émigré publications outside the USSR, but according to recent estimates, only approximately 35 runs of newspapers and approximately 2,100 books from the UIK newspaper and library collections went to Kyiv. None are indicated in the official act of transfer.62 However, many library books and serials came to Kyiv along with the records and archival collections from other Czech Ukrainian institutions, which makes it more difficult to access the extent and nature of library holdings that came with the shipment to Kyiv. One 1945 report notes a total of 5,000 volumes received from Prague, but the source libraries are not indicated; presumably less than half of these were from UIK.63 Some émigré internal agency publications were later processed as part of some of the archival fonds. Most of the library books, however, were deposited in the main archival library in Kyiv, later consolidated in the present building of the Main Archival Administration, although some were transferred to other libraries. Book markings or ex libris were understandably not recorded in library catalogs in Kyiv, so it is difficult now to determine how many books remain from what émigré collections. One recent preliminary survey conducted in the Holovarkhiv library identified over 500 volumes in Ukrainian and over 125 in foreign languages from the Ukrainian Free University and the Ukrainian Taras Shevchenko Library-Reading Room in Prague. A more thorough survey of the holdings in that library and others from Prague will be needed, especially to determine if any UIK printed holdings were received.64

Although more of the books and newspapers in the RZIA and UIK library collections were initially to be included in the shipments to Moscow and Kyiv, plans changed in the course of negotiations, and most of the RZIA library and newspaper division, along with those in UIK, remained in Prague.65 Subsequently, those collections become part of the Slavonic Library (Slovanska knihovna); however, the RZIA collections were not integrated into the general library collections and their existence in Prague was kept quiet during the communist period. Some books had been removed by the censor during those years, and access generally was extremely limited. The collections are now part of the National Library of the Czech Republic, although they still remain intact as separate collections. A microfiche edition of the catalog of the RZIA library, recently filmed in Prague, is currently available commercially, together with several bibliographies covering parts of the collections. The UIK newspapers and book collections that had been kept separately in Prague are also covered by that catalog and are part of the RZIA library there.66

An official Czech communique to the Soviet ambassador in Prague, V. A. Zorin, in August 1945, a week before the UIK "act" of transfer was signed specified two important Czech provisions for the "presentation to the Government of the Ukrainian SSR as testimony of the sincere friendly relations between our peoples, now close neighbors, of the Ukrainian part of the so-called ´Russian Archive.´" First, that "the Ukrainian Central Archive would supply Czechoslovakia with photocopies of the documentation transferred," and, second, that "the transferred archive would be retained in Kyiv in the Ukrainian Central Archive as an integral division to be named the ´Prague Ukrainian Archive.´" 67 Those provisions were not included in the official act of transfer (30 August 1945), and neither of them have been carried out since.

Several articles have appeared about the so-called "Prague Ukrainian Archive" in Kyiv. One brief report prepared by the director of TsDAVO in Kyiv, the archive where most of the archival materials from Prague are now housed, appeared in 1994. This was followed by a somewhat more detailed report by Liudmyla I. Lozenko. Lozenko, following the Czech communique, treats the Ukrainian émigré materials in Kyiv as if they constituted an integral "Ukrainian Archive" in Prague and a separate entity in Kyiv, but she gives few details about UIK and does not cite that document. More seriously, she unwittingly assumes that most of the UNR and other important Ukrainian émigré materials in Kyiv came from Prague.68 A comprehensive study of the Ukrainian émigré archival materials as organized in Prague, and as transferred after the war from Prague and other countries, will require more thorough research, based on sources in Moscow and Prague, as well as those in Kyiv. The initial observations given here may provide the basis for further study.

Ucrainica in Kyiv from Prague and Elsewhere

The Prague Ukrainian Collections in Kyiv. The Prague Ukrainian collections that arrived in Kyiv in October 1945 were immediately placed in the Special Division of Secret Fonds-OOSF (Osohyi otdel sekretnykh fondov) of the Central State Historical Archive of the Ukrainian SSR (TsDIA URSR, later TsDIAK). Some 1,496 photographic positives from the Prague collections were placed in the Central State Archive of Documentary Films, Photographs, and Sound Recordings (TsDAKFFD URSR).69 Regrettably, however, and despite the above-mentioned Czech provisions, the UIK collections were not retained intact and their original arrangement was not taken into account when they were processed in Kyiv. Today it is almost impossible to identify their components in either archive.

The émigré documentary materials from UIK and other sources in Prague were initially broken down into over 280 fonds according to the agency from which the files initially came or the individual whose personal papers were involved. In UIK, by contrast, the materials had been kept together as an integral extensive collection, internally numbered in 588 archival groups roughly in the order of their acquisition. When the fonds- often artificial-were established in Kyiv, no reference was made, nor correlation to the earlier archival disposition, numeration, or existing finding aids for the materials in Prague.

The Soviet organization of the Prague materials into strict, but often highly fragmentary, fonds completely destroyed the UIK order and thereby completely disguised their archival provenance. If the Kyiv archivists understood that order, they had no time to reconstruct it out of the often miscellaneous and sometimes unsorted bundles that arrived from Prague. 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. One reason for this may have been that the official "gift" of the Prague collections was principally identified with UIK, whereas in fact, many of the émigré materials retrieved from Prague and other sources had never been formally accessioned by UIK, and many of them did not even come from Prague. The administrative files of UIK in Prague that came to Kyiv with the 1945 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.70

"Operational" Utilization. NKVD/MVD archivists in Kyiv had more important priorities than prudent archival basics. As is apparent in now declassified archival reports from the immediate postwar period, some of the Ukrainian émigré "fonds of highest operational interest" brought from Prague and elsewhere were indeed already "prepared for immediate operational use," even during 1945 in Special Secret Division of the TsDIA URSR. "Others were to be ready by early 1946." The annual report promised full reports on:

  1. (1) the Ukrainian-White emigration in Czechoslovakia,
  2. (2) counter-revolutionary activities of Ukrainian political parties (especially UPSR and USDRP),
  3. (3) Ukrainian fascist organizations abroad, and
  4. (4) the Directorate of the UNR abroad.71

Extensive card index files on the Ukrainian emigration were compiled, and by the end of 1946 the Division had already prepared:

The 1946 report noted a total of 291 fonds devoted to "documentary materials of the Ukraine-Nationalist emigration," out of which by the end of the year they could already report on 188.73 By 1948, they had prepared reports on 19,298 predominantly "Ukrainian bourgeois-nationalist émigrés," and sent the MGB detailed reports on several organizations of Ukrainian nationalists abroad.74 Besides, in connection with their "utilization of archival materials in operational aims," they planned "to enlarge the scientific reference system (NSA) for 58 émigré fonds with three groups of historical reports on: (1) Ukrainian educational institutions in Czechoslovakia, (2) Ukrainian student organizations in Czechoslovakia, and (3) Ukrainian peasant associations (selians´ki spilky) in Czechoslovakia." For the MGB and MVD they were compiling a comprehensive card file of "Ukrainian White émigrés abroad, and reference lists with appended copies of the most important documents on counterrevolutionary elements, characterizing their activities."75 The extent to which reports prepared in Kyiv were used for arrests or surveillance in Prague or elsewhere awaits further investigation.

By 1948, Kyiv archivists could list 75 émigré fonds and personal papers that had already been processed, most of them from Prague and Poděbrady, and an additional 41 they intended to process during that year.76 By the end of the year they had 148 fonds that were still being worked over and 16 that they planned to process during 1949. 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.77 In April 1949, they were reporting a total of 361 separate fonds in the Special Division of Secret Fonds of TsDIA UkrSSR.78

The "operational" analysis gained momentum. During 1949 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 13,781 files processed during the year, they had prepared "72,000 cards on White emigrants," "55,400 cards on C[ounter]-R[evolutionary] elements," and more detailed reports on 235 people in the SS "Halychyna" Division."79

Later Receipts from Prague. Archival retrieval shipments from Prague did not end with the 1945 "gift." Another important group of Ukrainian émigré archival materials was transferred from Prague in 1958 with the assistance of Czech security service authorities and the Slavonic Library. 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 1959.80 Others came in 1962. 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.81

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 1945 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.82 The fate of the museum and its holdings is the subject of a recent monograph by Mykola Mushynka.83 According to one report, the materials from the museum that were transferred to Kyiv in 1958 and processed during the 1959-1963 period were divided into 173 fonds with 7,232 file units, providing an important supplement to those of the Ukrainian Historical Cabinet and earlier receipts from Prague (some materials from the museum came already with the UIK shipment in 1945). Other fragmentary archival materials from the Museum were distributed to other Ukrainian state archives including TsDIAL, and oblast archives in Volhynia, Rivne, Ternopil, and Kharkiv. 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 1983, although some files from the museum still remain in Prague.84 An item-level inventory of the holdings from the Ukrainian Museum remaining in the National Archives in Prague was published in Kyiv in 1996 in collaboration with the Prague compiler.85

In 1988, a considerable group of archival materials that had been held by the KGB or MVD (or both) in Ukraine were transferred by the MVD to the former Communist Party Archive in Kyiv, now known as the Central State Archive of Public Organizations-TsDAHO. Still being processed in TsDAHO, they are tentatively arranged as a consolidated fond under the title of the Ukrainian Museum in Prague. Not all the documents came from that source, having unfortunately been separated from the larger groups that went earlier to TsDAVO (and its TsDAZhR and TsDIAK predecessors).86 Gathered by secret service agents from many sources, the collection contains many important documents of various Ukrainian émigrés, ranging from letters of Petliura and Volodomyr Doroshenko to the large collection of editorial files that had been compiled for a Ukrainian émigré encyclopedia, which was coordinated in Prague by Vasyl´ Symovych.

Some of the materials complement contingent documents held across the city by TsDAVO, and undoubtedly were withheld by the security service from incoming acquisitions or subsequently turned over to the MVD following analysis in the Special Secret Division of TsDIAK. 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).87 As important as it is that these Ukrainian émigré materials are now finding professional archival processing in TsDAHO in Kyiv, their countless transfers and fragmentation has caused the unfortunate further dispersal of many earlier integral collections.

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 1941. The few Rudychiv letters now held in TsDAHO apparently came from the same source as some of his other papers, which are intermingled with some files arranged as the fond of the Petliura Library and now held in TsDAVO.88 Although these materials were either part of the Paris library holdings or Rudychiv´s personal papers before the war, most of them are his correspondence and writings from the 1941-1942 period, during which he was in Berlin under Nazi orders. In his report to the library board in Paris in December 1942 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. 89

Ukrainian Émigré Archives from Other Countries. 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. During World War II, almost all such surviving documentation of the Ukrainian National Republic (UNR), the Western Ukrainian National Republic (ZUNR), and other Ukrainian émigré organizations throughout the Continent was targeted by the Nazis as of potential propaganda use in its Drang nach Osten and anti-Bolshevik campaign. 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.90

The same types of émigré materials that had been seized by the Nazis were likewise a high priority for Beria´s archival scouts-both those who, with the victorious Red Army, followed the Nazis to Berlin, and those who were sent out on special missions to retrieve looted archival materials. When Soviet agents found Nazi archival stores, Russian and Ukrainian émigré files were among their highest priority. 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.91

As seen previously, some collections came to Moscow from the RSHA Amt VII research centers in Silesia, while others came with the French security and intelligence files from the Sudetenland. 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. By and large, most Ukrainian émigré archival materials seized by Soviet agents after the war went to Kyiv, especially the major shipments from Prague and Cracow. 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. In March 1945, a Red Army counterintelli-gence (SMERSH) unit located and seized the UNR Foreign Ministry and Finance Ministry records in the State Archive in Cracow.92 The Nazis had brought the materials from Tarnó-w during the war and had them provisionally inventoried by a Ukrainian archivist brought from Lviv.93 The UNR materials seized from Cracow were apparently joined to four wagon loads of Lviv archival holdings that the Nazis had evacuated early in 1944 to the Abbey of Tyniec near Cracow and which were retrieved by Red Army units and returned to Lviv in April 1945.94 Another report to Moscow notes that "a freight-train wagon-load of documentary materials of the former Petliura Directorate and its ministries, under the jurisdiction of a counterintelligence ´SMERSH´ unit of the Ukrainian Fourth Army transported from Vienna" had already arrived in Lviv at the end of May 1945.95 With archival materials coming from many sources, some confusion-or else intentional camouflage-is evident in incoming Ukrainian reports between those materials received from Vienna and the UNR materials from Cracow. However, given the Nazi inventory of the UNR Foreign Ministry records in Cracow, Soviet reports of the SMERSH seizure, and several reports of its shipment, we know that these materials came to Kyiv from Cracow.

As evidenced in the postwar lists of fonds in the Special Secret Section of TsDIAK, there were other Ukrainian émigré collections shipped from Vienna, although more specific reports of the seizures there have not surfaced.96 Despite Soviet efforts to find some of the UNR and ZUNR materials known to be held there, as far as is known, no major groups of UNR records were seized by Soviet authorities in Vienna. For example, one freight car load with 78 crates was received in Kyiv from Vienna in July 1947, but the crates contained military service records for Austria-Hungary (1868-1945). 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.97

Elsewhere, Soviet authorities found many of the archival materials that the Nazis had removed in 1940 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.98 Another "half wagon load of documents" was found in 1947 "in a wagon that arrived from Germany, among which were some documents from Paris in French." Their contents have not been identified. 99

Shipments came so frequently during 1945 and 1946 that archivists were overwhelmed. Some acquisitions from Prague were intermingled in the Special Secret Division of TsDIAK with materials received from elsewhere. Others went directly to TsDAZhR in Kharkiv. 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.

To give some idea of the range of sources for these materials, consider that the initial pages of the list of fonds being worked over in TsDIA URSR in Kyiv during 1949 included a small fond of a Ukrainian Teachers´ Seminary in Vienna (1915-1918), the League of UNR Military Veterans in France from Paris, a Branch Ukrainian Military Aid Committee in Graz (earlier Gratz), Austria, a Committee to Aid Refugees from Ukraine in Uzhhorod, a Ukrainian Committee for Famine Relief in Ukraine from Prague, and the Society of Ukrainian Economists in Czechoslovakia from Poděbrady. 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 (1919-1924) and a Society of UNR Veterans in Kalisz (1925-1932).100

Among the central Polish records that were held in Kyiv in 1946 were records from the Presidium of the Cabinet of Ministers (1921-1930), the Ministry of Internal Affairs (1925-1939), the Post and Telegraph Direction (1936-1939), the Ministry of Finance (1930-1939), the Polish Consulate in Kharkiv (1931), 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 1959. 101

TsDIA URSR reported in 1948 that it had finished processing the UNR Foreign Ministry fond, although they never noted it came from Tarnów, and they never had a copy of the German inventory prepared in Cracow. Indeed, their top secret list of fonds in 1949 indicates a UNR Foreign Ministry fond covering the years 1918-1923 with 858 file units. It also enumerates a number of contingent fonds for UNR diplomatic missions in several different countries, which suggests that the UNR records from Tarnów, which the Nazis had arranged and described in Cracow, were again reprocessed. Their arrangement completely revised, they were broken down and reorganized into many different fragmentary fonds in Kyiv. Because of this reorganization, it is virtually impossible to tell if all the UNR Foreign Ministry records from Tarnów remain today in Kyiv; nowhere is there reference to the fact that at least some of the materials came from Tarnów.102 A group of 18 Ukrainian émigré fonds transferred to TsDAZhR URSR in October 1954 included at least some of the UNR Foreign Ministry records.103 A 1962 list of émigré fonds in TsDIAK still lists one fond of the UNR Foreign Ministry (fond no. 3696; 17 units). Some fonds for UNR diplomatic missions in other countries were still there.104 But how do those materials relate to the materials presently arranged as fond 3696 of the UNR Foreign Ministry in TsDAVO? Archivists claim no history of the fond or "sprava fonda" is available, and if it were, it would not be available to researchers.

TsDAVO has two other fonds containing Foreign Ministry files from the UNR that had been held in Ukraine before the war, but both of these represent the period while the UNR government was still in Ukraine. One is now entitled the Secretariat for National Questions of the Ukrainian Central Rada, with at least one opys devoted to Foreign Ministry files. Additional Foreign Ministry files are found in the current fond 3766 from 1918. 105 The same unresolved problems of undefined provenance are apparent there. And, as will be seen below, a few small fonds with UNR diplomatic files are now held in GA RF in Moscow, but those apparently came directly from RZIA.

Ucrainica and Rossica to Moscow

The RZIA Transfer to Moscow. Meanwhile, in Prague during the fall of 1945, 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 1945. 106 After the UIK materials had left in October, a commission from Moscow was sent to Prague to negotiate final details of the RZIA transfer. Departing for Prague in November, that commission was headed by Glavarkhiv chief Major General Nikitinskii, with Corresponding Members Sergei K. Bogoiavlenskii and Isaak I, Mints representing the Academy of Sciences, and S. Sutotskii representing the Institute of Marxism-Leninism. Neither Bonch-Bruevich nor the literary specialist Ilia S. Zil´bershtein-whom the president of the Academy of Sciences recommended for the mission-were sent to Prague, because "the entire archive was being brought to Moscow...[and] Comrade Zil´bershtein will be able to work with the archive in Moscow."107

The official protocol of transfer signed 13 December 1945, carried the "Czech government´s hope that the archive would subsequently be put to scholarly use by the Academy and contribute to strengthen the scholarly relations between Czechoslovakia and the USSR."108 An appended verification protocol lists the 396 crates of materials to be sent to Moscow from RZIA. 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 145 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. N. Tolstoi, V. F. Bulgakov."109 The Russian Cultural-Historical Museum had been established in 1935 under the Russian Free University in Zbraslav Castle near Prague. In addition to archival materials, that collection also included museum exhibits, books, and many runs of émigré newspapers. The RZIA administrative records, including acquisition correspondence, registers, and other related documentation accompanied the collections. 110

The protocol and shipping lists only cursorily describe the materials transferred. They reference 18 RZIA inventory books covering 10,343 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."111 Nevertheless, as GA RF archivists have recently discovered, these lists together with data from RZIA accession registers, correspondence and acquisition files, German wartime inventories, and other data among the RZIA administrative records in Moscow could help reconstruct the complex as it existed in Prague. 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. The Belarusian holdings that came with RZIA and now remain in Moscow have been described in a 1997 conference report in Minsk.1l2

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 1,100 books and 879 volumes of newspapers were sent to Moscow from RZIA.113 According to figures of the GA RF Central Library, on the other hand, where most of the printed acquisitions from RZIA were long held in the secret division (spetskhrari), there are now approximately 30,000 books, brochures, journals, and newspapers (1917-1940) that came from Prague. 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. However, as noted above, the bulk of the RZIA library holdings remained in Prague and are now part of the Slovanska knihovna within the National Library of the Czech Republic. Aside from the microfiche edition of the of the RZIA library catalog, several recently reissued bibliographies cover parts of the RZIA library collections.114

RZIA in Moscow. Nine freight cars of RZIA collections arrived in Moscow just after New Year´s Day 1946, officially a "gift" to the Soviet Academy of Sciences on the occasion of its 220th anniversary from the Czech "working classes." A "Special File" (Osobaia papka) from the NKVD Secretariat documents the immediate announcement of its arrival to Stalin. 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."115

Once in Moscow, the materials never came under Academy custody, but rather were immediately delivered to the Main Archival Administration of the NKVD and deposited in the secret division of the Central State Archive of the October Revolution of the USSR (TsGAOR SSSR).116 At the end of January the president of the Academy of Sciences, Sergei I. Vavilov, signed an official transfer document, turning the collections over to TsGAOR SSSR "in light of their great value."117

A Soviet archival administration official in Moscow assured Stalin´s ideological henchman Andrei Zhdanov that the Prague documents would be analyzed for "data on anti-Soviet activities of the White emigration to be used in operational work of agencies of the MVD and MGB SSSR." He added the assurance that there would be "no access to the materials by research institutions."118

Within TsGAOR itself, operational work was soon under way with the RZIA holdings. By October NKVD archivists in Moscow reported having completed 10,000 reference information cards from the "fonds of the White counterrevolutionary government and their military units," in addition "to preparing 4,560 reports (spravki) in answer to inquiries of operational agencies." They found files with photographs of 6,835 emigrants. By the end of the year, the plan included 17,000 individual cards, although not all of those came from RZIA.119 This goal, and the qualified archivists devoted to it, may explain the extent of reference descriptive work for those records in Moscow-as witnessed by the two and a half million card files on Russian and Ukrainian émigrés and those who served in the White Army that remain today in GA RF. Unlike the counterpart files in Kyiv, these extensive card files in Moscow are open to researchers and provide in many cases a document-by-document reference aid-particularly for personal names-to many of the émigré fonds brought back to the USSR in postwar years.

As was the case in Kyiv, the RZIA materials in Moscow were separated out into many, fragmentary fonds comprised of different groups of institutional files that could be identified as coming from government agencies, private émigré institutions and community organizations, and personal papers. 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.g., letters, manuscripts, etc.). 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 1930s 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 1945, 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. In some cases the RZIA materials were intermixed with documents acquired by TsGAOR from other sources. 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. For example, some of the materials from the interwar Russian Cultural-Historical Museum in Zbraslav Castle were subsequently intermingled with those from RZIA, and many of those were transferred to TsGALI (now RGALI).120

A fond-level guide to the émigré materials in TsGAOR, including those from RZIA, was issued in a secret edition in 1952.121 The main problem with that guide and with the corresponding indications in the often hastily prepared opisi for individual fonds, is that details are not provided about the provenance of the fonds, nor the migratory pattern by which they reached TsGAOR SSSR.

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."122 Such assurances not withstanding, a large group of foreign-policy related materials from RZIA were transferred to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the end of the first year. Among those listed in the official transfer are important Ukrainian diplomatic files from the Petliura government, including documents of UNR representatives in Western Europe.123 We still do not know how many of those Ukrainian files remain in MID archives, but UNR holdings there have not yet been publicly described.124

Ukrainian Components in RZIA. As RZIA archivist Aleksandr Iziumov noted, despite the existence in Prague of the separate Ukrainian Historical Cabinet, "some Ukrainian documentation was also held in the Russian Archive."125 However, during the preparation in Prague for the hasty 1945 transfer of the. RZIA and UIK to the USSR, no attempt was made to separate out the Ukrainian materials from the RZIA in order to ship them to Kyiv. 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 1946. This interest also is clear in the transfer of UNR diplomatic files to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the end of the year.

The intermingling of Ukrainian materials in the RZIA in Prague is readily apparent in the RZIA acquisition correspondence and related administrative records now held in GA RF. For example, a large file of letters and inventories of incoming materials during the years 1926-1939 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.126

Once the RZIA collections arrived in Moscow and were resorted into fonds in TsGAOR, designations of institutional provenance were not accurately or consistently made. A case in point: although most of the UNR diplomatic files were transferred to MID in late 1947, among Ukrainian fonds now held in GA RF is a small group of files designated as UNR Foreign Ministry records. TsGAOR and later GA RF archivists initially attributed their provenance to Turnovo, Bulgaria, but in 1999 that was corrected to Tarnów, Poland.127 According to the inventory of the fond in GA RF, three kilos of materials initially assigned to that fond were consigned to waste paper in 1956 as "having no scientific value," and six more files-more clearly of Foreign Ministry relevance-were then added to the fond from unsorted materials.128 The 17 files now in that fond (mostly dating from the early 1920s) most probably all came directly from RZIA (as part of three different groups of documents in 1924, 1926, and 1935), and were probably created either in Tarnów or Warsaw. 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. Indeed, GA RF also has a separate fragmentary fond with files designated as of provenance in the Chancellery of the UNR Rada-which is now listed in GA RF as of Polish provenance. Archivists initially thought that these files also came from RZIA, and, indeed, a few documents bear RZIA stamps. Other documents possibly came with other archival materials from the Petliura Library in Paris that were transferred to TsGAOR from the Lenin Library in 1948.129

Another fragmentary UNR fond in GA RF is devoted to records of the UNR Embassy in Berlin. These records already were listed as such in the 1952 guide.130 This fond also turns out to be artificial in its formation. It is quite certain that the documents came to RZIA in the late 1920s or early 1930s from several different sources. For example, notes in RZIA records confirm the receipt of a collection containing documents from the Berlin Embassy, also contained documents from the UNR delegation in France, UNR missions in England, Turkey, Italy, Vienna, and other countries, as well as a large packet from the UNR Ministry of Finance (1919-1920). However, the materials described cannot be matched up with current GA RF holdings.131 A folder later added to the Berlin Embassy fond in TsGAOR SSSR contains some personal letters from Petliura to Viktor V. Porsh, who served as the UNR ambassador in Berlin. One of those letters has a separate 1934 presentation note to RZIA attached. There is some indication that another had been sold to RZIA.132 This particular fond was one of those listed among the UNR materials from RZIA to be transferred to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the USSR in December 1946; however, it was not included in the transfers.133 Other RZIA materials held in the Foreign Ministry archives have been documented recently (although other UNR materials are not among them).134

A separate fond also remains in GA RF for the UNR Delegation to the Paris Peace Conference (fond R-7027; 40 units; 1919-1921). This is another group of records that is documented as having, at least in part, been acquired by RZIA. GA RF has separated these fragmentary files from the related files of the UNR Mission to France, which now forms a separate fond.135 Other files from those records were known to have been held in the Petliura Library in Paris before the war. Some of these files, along with archival materials from the Petliura Library in Paris, most probably were transferred to TsGAOR from the Lenin Library in 1948.136

The Dispersal of RZIA in the USSR. The transfer of RZIA materials to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1946, despite earlier assurances that the collections would be kept intact, unfortunately set a precedent. Afterward, parts of the RZIA collections were dispersed to over 30 different repositories throughout the former USSR. Soon after their receipt, some Polish materials from RZIA were transferred to the Special Archive-TsGOA. Some Herzen and Ogarev manuscripts from Prague and Sofia had been transferred to the Manuscript Division of the Lenin Library. Then in 1956, 801 Herzen and Ogarev documents, including some from RZIA, were transferred to the Central State Archive of Literature and Art-TsGALI (now RGALI). Those were among the first of the retrieved émigré collections to be described openly in print with acknowledgment of their provenance.137 They were followed to TsGALI later in the early 1960s, by many more fonds relating to literature and art, including numerous personal papers and materials from the Russian Cultural-Historical Museum in Prague.138 White Army records went to the Soviet-period military archive, the Central State Archive of the Soviet Army-TsGASA (now RGVA), where they, along with those acquired from other sources, are described in a new 1998 guide.139 The reference card catalogs compiled for White Army participants, however, remained in TsGAOR SSSR. Many RZIA materials of more local interest were sent to regional archives and other Soviet republics.

Although most military records from the pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods were traditionally concentrated in Moscow after World War II, fragments from 55 fonds from RZIA in TsGAOR SSSR-predominately files relating to UNR military units during the attempt to establish an independent Ukrainian state-were sent to Kyiv in 1964. In the late 1980s 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.140 During the period when RZIA fonds were being dispersed, however, not all Ukrainian fonds were sent to Kyiv (as is evident from the RZIA Ukrainian materials discussed above). A few of the archival materials that came to Kyiv with the UIK collections went the other direction-from Kyiv to Moscow.

RZIA and Trophy Rossica and Ucrainica from Other Sources in Moscow. Most of the RZIA materials shipped to Moscow and deposited in TsGAOR SSSR formed what then became a special "RZIA Division" of the archive. 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. Even today, most Russian archivists do not consider the RZIA collections to be "trophies."

Many other Russian émigré fonds from various countries that were acquired with the trophy archives after World War II were also deposited in TsGAOR SSSR. They joined the RZIA collections, and in some cases became intermingled with them. These included émigré records brought back from Bulgaria, from Germany, and from Yugoslavia later in 1948, to name only a few of the sources. As noted above, there was considerable documentation from Russian and Ukrainian "bourgeois-nationalist" political parties and émigré circles held by the RSHA Amt VII in Silesia. This included a large part of the archive of Pavel Miliukov from Paris that went to TsGAOR SSSR, together with the records of the journal Poslednie novosti, which Miliukov edited in Paris until 1940.141 Popov´s 1998 monograph on archival Rossica in Moscow archives has appended lists of fonds (some of them Ukrainian) in a number of Moscow archives and manuscript collections, providing the most complete listing to date of such holdings.142

Soviet archival agents were already on the scene in Romania in February 1945. 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.143 Most important were parts of the archive of the former imperial Russian Embassy and two crates of papers from the former Russian ambassador Aleksei Savinov, which had been seized by the Romanian security service (Sigurante) after his death.144

Two years later, in May 1947, another special mission was directed to Yugoslavia, this time under joint Foreign Ministry auspices, where they found "records of the Yugoslav Commission for Affairs of the Russian emigration, files relating to the evacuation of emigrants from Crimea (1922-1923), and card files on the Russian émigrés in Yugoslavia (1922-1923)," among other materials "that have serious operational and historical significance for the Soviet Union."145 They dispatched 82 crates, which arrived in Moscow in early February 1948. Most of the documentary materials went to TsGAOR SSSR, while a few files of literary materials were directed to TsGLA (now RGALI), some documentation on military-history to TsGVIA, and other documentation to the MID archive.146 Materials from the special museum established in Belgrade by Russian émigrés to honor Nicholas II went to the State Historical Museum in Moscow in 1947, although it was 1998 before the rich documentation involved was described in print.147

In November 1948 the Lenin Library in Moscow transferred 170 crates of archival materials to TsGAOR SSSR, and the act of transfer specifically directing them to the RZIA Division. That document specifies files of the In November 1948 the Lenin Library in Moscow transferred 170 crates of archival materials to TsGAOR SSSR, and the act of transfer specifically directing them to the RZIA Division. That document specifies files of the Ukrainian National Committee in Paris, the Orthodox Church, records of the Turgenev Library, and materials of "Ukrainian émigré organizations in Paris, among others," that had been received by the Lenin Library from Berlin in 1946-1947.148 Presumably, that transfer also included the records of the Petliura Library and the UNR journal Tryzub, which had been housed in the library before the war. 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 1940. Those Ukrainian émigré1 materials from Paris that had been found in Silesia together with major library holdings were shipped in part to Moscow and in part to Minsk. The archival materials from the Petliura Library that went to Minsk were later transferred to the Special Archive in Moscow in 1955, 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.149 Many of the materials from the Petliura Library now held in GA RF were earlier listed as having come to GA RF from RZIA.

When GA RF started preparing its guide to the RZIA archival collections transferred to Moscow-and even as late as several years ago-its staff still assumed that these Petliura Library materials, along with other UNR documentation held in GA RF, had all come from Prague. This is clear in a preliminary version of the RZIA guide annotations for those fonds.150 It has since been determined that none of these Petliura Library materials were ever held in Prague, but were rather seized by the Nazis in Paris, along with the records of the Turgenev Library, that are also now held in GA RF.151 Quite possibly, some of the files in a portion of the Ukrainian émigré archival fonds from Paris in GA RF were added to those fonds from other sources. Some of those fonds do indeed have stray file units, or even stray documents, of alternate provenance, including material that may well have been received with the Prague RZIA shipment (which itself also included materials from other émigré institutions in Czechoslovakia). 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.

Two additional Ukrainian émigré fonds of Swiss provenance in GA RF were also earlier thought to have come from RZIA: the Ukrainian Press Bureau in Lausanne and the editorial records of the journal Ukra?na (also received from Lausanne). Further research has revealed, however, that they were in fact received from the Lenin Library in 1949, having been earlier received by the Library from Geneva with the papers and library of the Russian bibliographer Nikolai Aleksandrovich Rybakin.152

The Intellectual Reconstruction: A New Guide to RZIA Holdings in the Former USSR. Following ten years of research and gathering data about the dispersed RZIA collections, archivists in GA RF completed a comprehensive guide to the RZIA collections that were transferred to Moscow in 1945/46. 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.153

Preparation of the comprehensive fond-level guide to the RZIA collections started in 1989.154 The project director, Tat´iana F. Pavlova, former deputy director of TsGAOR SSSR, was the first to publish openly about RZIA, after the collections had been declassified in the days of glasnost. She prepared what was intended to be completed as a candidate dissertation about RZIA.155 At a 1995 international conference in Prague, one of the present GA RF archivists heading the project gave a presentation about the forthcoming guide.156

The new guide certainly will help fulfill a part of the responsibility and debt that Russian archivists must feel vis-à-vis the Russian diaspora for the dispersal of the RZIA collections. As if to compensate for such dispersal, the new guide provides an attempted intellectual reconstruction. At the same time it furnishes information of the collections´ original content, current location, and their present division into fonds.

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.

Ukrainian Émigré Files from Kyiv to Moscow. Despite popular belief, only a few of the Ukrainian émigré materials received in Kyiv from abroad were transferred to Moscow, although reports on "anti-Soviet" and "Ukrainian bourgeois-nationalist" elements were shared with the secret service agencies in the Soviet capital. In fact, relatively few transfers from Kyiv to Moscow of Ukrainian émigré files have been documented.

The most significant transfer took place in 1954, involving at least a dozen fonds with approximately 825 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. These materials went to TsGAOR SSSR.157 At least a major part of these files now form part of the GA RF fond established as "Collection of Materials of Foreign Organizations of the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries, 1919-1938." The files were obviously reprocessed in TsGAOR after arrival in Moscow, but that fond now has only 360 file units dating from 1919-1931.158 Further research is needed to determine if other SR files from Kyiv are held elsewhere, or if they were added to other fonds in TsGAOR SSSR after their arrival in Moscow.

Orders came to Kyiv from Moscow from the Central State Archive of the Soviet Army in 1956 for the transfer of the remaining files from Ukrainian Sich Riflemen Units (Sichovi Stril´tsi) although most such materials, of predominantly west Ukrainian origin, had earlier been returned to Lviv.159 At the end of 1955, some 6,661 "printed editions" from TsDIA-K were transferred to the Special Archive (TsGOA SSSR).160

Another transfer occurred in 1957, 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. They were forwarded to the Special Archive (TsGOA SSSR).161 It has not yet been possible to document the current location of these materials in Moscow in terms of specific fonds among the former TsKhlDK holdings. It should also be noted, however, that some materials of Ukrainian émigré origin came directly to Moscow in the course of various postwar archival retrieval operations, and some were later transferred to TsGOA SSSR from Belarus. 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.

Archival Ucrainica Retrieved in Kyiv

Ucrainica Reorganized in Kyiv. In 1960, when additional shipments were being received from Prague, the Special Secret Division of what was then TsDAZhR URSR in Kharkiv prepared an extensive list of all of the Ukrainian émigré fonds that it had received from Prague and other sources in Czechoslovakia. This list clearly shows that virtually all of the materials from UIK and other sources in Czechoslovakia had by that time been consolidated in TsDAZhR URSR with the same fond numbers that most of them preserve today. 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.162 Of importance in this list, archivists then were quite aware that other émigré archival materials in Kyiv had come from other countries, such as from Vienna, Berlin, and various cities in Poland, or the Petliura materials from Paris, because none of those are included in the TsDAZhR Czech list.

In the early 1970s a new archival building was constructed in Kyiv and the former Central State Archive of the October Revolution (TsDAZhR URSR-now TsDAVO) was moved from Kharkiv to Kyiv. The Prague and other émigré collections in the Special Secret Divisions of both TsDAZhR URSR from Kharkiv and TsDIA URSR in Kyiv (at that time TsDIAK) were then consolidated in the secret division of the newly-moved TsDAZhR URSR. 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 1988 Ukrainian archival directory with additional bibliographic references to earlier descriptions from Prague.163

Access to Ucrainica in Kyiv after Independence. It was not until 1994 that published reports openly admitted that most of the interwar Ukrainian collections from Prague were, in fact, in Kyiv. One report, as mentioned above, was prepared by TsDAVO director Larysa lakovlieva. Two others were written by Liudmyla Lozenko.164 None of these articles identified specific fonds, nor were they detailed enough to serve as finding aids for researchers. None discussed the other important Ukrainian émigré materials in Kyiv that came from sources other than Prague.

As we have seen earlier, in the course of their "operational" work with the archival Ucrainica retrieved, NKVD/MVD archivists in the Ukrainian SSR prepared careful lists of the fonds held and processed in the Special Secret Divisions of TsDIAK and TsDAZhR UkrSSR. Some of the earliest postwar lists of fonds in the secret division of TsDIA URSR do not indicate those that had been brought back from Czechoslovakia. 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.165 These early lists still need to be coordinated with later ones. 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.

Most of the archival materials listed are now held in TsDAVO, although some have been transferred to other archives, including the Central State Archive-Museum of Literature and Art-TsDAMLM in Kyiv. Many of the fond numbers in TsDAVO have been changed from those originally assigned in Kyiv, particularly since the émigré materials in TsDIAK were later consolidated with those in TsDAZhR URSR. Undoubtedly, there are similar records covering the Special Secret Division of TsDAZhR (now TsDAVO) in postwar decades-both while it still was in Kharkiv and after it was transferred to Kyiv. Those files have not yet been made available to researchers.166 TsDAVO needs both to verify the lists, in order to add current fonds numbers for those that remain in Kyiv, and to indicate fond numbers elsewhere for those sent to Moscow or returned to Lviv. The latest guide to TsDAZhR, published in 1984 and declassified only after independence, does not list any of the émigré fonds.167

The TsDIA lists and transfer documents also confirm the location in that same Special Secret Division of TsDIA URSR in Kyiv of many fonds of western Ukrainian nationalist and Ukrainian Greek Catholic (Uniate) organizations that were brought to Kyiv from Lviv and elsewhere in western Ukrainian oblasts during the immediate postwar years.168 Almost all of those western Ukrainian materials were returned to Lviv in the 1950s or transferred to other archives. 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.

The fact that important TsDIAK archival reference lists have survived and have now been declassified could provide the basis for a comprehensive list of the records of early Ukrainian governments and their various agencies (1917-1923), fragmentary files of Ukrainian émigré institutions and organizations, and the personal papers of many important Ukrainian political and cultural leaders-a clear boon to researchers interested in Ukrainian political, cultural, and intellectual development in the twentieth century. At the core of such a project should be the intellectual reconstruction of the Ukrainian Historical Cabinet (UIK) as it was brought together in Prague, parallel to the RZIA guide just completed in Moscow.

Starting with the period of glasnost and, especially, after Ukraine´s independence, the change in the political climate meant that captured records from Prague and other Ukrainian émigré communities elsewhere in the West could at last be opened to the public. 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. After independence, TsDAVO started translating all of their earlier Russian-language inventories into Ukrainian. 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.169

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.170 The crucial point is that most of these materials relate to the "blank spots" of Ukrainian history; many of them were long thought to have been lost or destroyed during the war. 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.

In preparing lists of Ukrainian émigré fonds, indications (to the extent possible) are needed regarding their provenance and migratory details, all of which may help to reveal related files held elsewhere. But even in independent Ukraine in 1999, not all the files regarding these materials, their acquisition, and their transfers are themselves open for scholarly research.171 Many essential sources, as we have seen, remain in Moscow, where researchers may also find_ access problems or incomplete records covering the postwar years (or both). The story of postwar archival seizures and transfers has been suppressed far too long.

The referenced reports and card indexes for the Ukrainian émigré collections in Kyiv prepared in the archives for "operational use" by the Soviet secret services have not been located in Kyiv, although presumably they remain either in TsDAVO or in the MVD archive. 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. The extensive counterpart card files in Moscow are already open to the public in the State Archive of the Russian Federation (GA RF).

* * *

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 must not forget that the motivation for the seizure of these important collections was for use by Stalin´s operational agencies against suspected "enemies of the state." It is hard for older émigrés and their families to forget this fact. 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. Published professional description of the rich stores of retrieved émigré archival Ucrainica in Ukraine today will encourage others in the Ukrainian diaspora harboring additional important archival materials to consider transferring or "returning" them to the Ukrainian homeland.

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. Some of the files may in fact be records of Ukrainian governments in exile, but many of them were the personal papers of Ukrainian émigrés or records of émigré communities created abroad. Hence, following our earlier typology, they would not be considered archival records of provenance in the present territory of Ukraine. Today, with Ukrainian independence, it may be considered most fitting that the materials remain in Kyiv, just as the RZIA collections now remain in Moscow and dispersed throughout the former USSR. 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 1945, still have not been provided.

Aside from the intrinsic interest of the materials themselves, there is an added need for coordinating listings of related parts of the Prague Ukrainian collections that are now scattered in various repositories and contingent files held elsewhere abroad-some in Moscow, a few in Lviv, and some related materials of Prague émigré provenance still in Prague and Paris. 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 1990).172 In Prague, a comprehensive guide to remaining Ukrainian and Russian émigré fonds in the Czech Republic appeared in 1995; research in these collections is open to all.173 Many examples of their riches and current research regarding the Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian emigration in Czechoslovakia between the wars were reported at a conference in Prague in 1995. The published proceedings include many revelations regarding the archival materials remaining in the Czech Republic and abroad, as well as a few in Ukraine.174

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 1996, under sponsorship of the Institute of Ukrainian Archeography in collaboration with the compiler in Prague.175 It is a telling fact that a catalog of the Prague part of the collection appeared before even a simple list of fonds of the Kyiv materials has been made available to researchers. It is to no one´s credit that a history of the Museum and the transfer of the rest of its documentary holdings has already appeared in Australia, before so much as even a preliminary list of those holdings-with the simple indication of their current fond numbers in the two archives currently holding them-has appeared in Kyiv.

The National Archives of Canada recently presented to Ukraine some files that had been deposited there from a Ukrainian government in exile. Others were transferred by members of the Ukrainian UNR government in exile in the United States; more came from the UNR mission in Switzerland. 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. Ukrainian émigré communities abroad should, correspondingly, be wary of advocating the return of archival treasures to Ukraine until information is publicly available about the extensive émigré holdings already located in official Kyivan archives. There is no reason for such materials in Kyivan arhives to remain hidden from Ukraine.


NOTES

1 For a discussion of the search for Russian- and Ukrainian-related émigré materials and more details about some of the seizures and collections brought back to Moscow mentioned below, .see also my Archival Rossica-Rationalizing the Search and Retrieval of the Russian Archival Legacy Abroad (Amsterdam: IISH, forthcoming). See also my earlier articles, "Archival Rossica/Sovietica Abroad: Provenance or Pertinence, Bibliographic and Descriptive Needs," Cahicrs dn Monde russe et sovietique 34(3) 1993, esp. pp. 449-52, 463-65, and the earlier Russian variant "Zarubezhnaia arkhivnaia Rossika ? Sovetika. Proiskhozhdenie dokumenlov ili ikh otnoshenie k istorii Rossii (SSSR): Potrebnost´ v opisanii ? bibliografii," Otechest-vennye arkhivy 1993 (1): 20-53.   back...

2 Bonch-Bruevich to Stalin (24 February 1945), RGASPI, 71/125/308, fols. 2-8 (unsigned copy, received by Zhdanov´s office 5 March 1945). Initial manuscript and typewritten drafts remain among Bonch-Bruevich´s papers in RGB OR, 369/206/11, fols. 28-34 and fols. 35-40. The original signed copy has not yet been located. In a September 1994 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. The text (from the RGASPI copy) is published by Pavel Knyshevskii, Dobycha: Tainy germanskikh reparatsii (Moscow: "Soratnik," 1994), pp. 89-94.   back...

3 Bonch-Bruevich to Stalin (24 February 1945), fols. 2-8.   back...

4 Ibid., fol.3.   back...

5 Ibid. fols. U 7-8.   back...

6 The copy of Bonch-Bruevich´s letter cited above from RGASPI was stamped as having been received by Zhdanov´s office 5 March 1945. A resolution by Zhdanov at the top notes that a copy was to be sent to Deputy Foreign Minister "t. Lozovskii with the request to present his reaction."  back...

7 As explained by Nikitinskii to Deputy Commissar of Internal Affairs S. N. Kruglov (16 May 1945), GA RF, fond 5325/2/1353, fol. 33   back...

8 Riasnoi telegram to Beria (4 May 1945), GA RF, 5325/10/2029, fol. 2; see the typed copy with Beria´s instruction in red crayon (fol. 1).   back...

9 "Spravka ?ezul´tatakh raboty GAU NKVD SSSR po vozvrashcheniiu v Sovetskii Soiuz dokumental´nykh materialakh Gosudarstvennogo arkhivnogo fonda SSSR ? ?yvoze v SSSR arkhivov inostrannogo proiskhozhdeniia," signed by Golubtsov and Kuz´min (15 December 1945), GA RF, 5325/10/2148, fol. 1.   back...

10 Bonch-Bruevich to Stalin (5 July 1935), RGB OR, 369/206/10, fol. 47-47v (signed typewritten copy).   back...

11 Ibid., fol. 6. Bonch-Bruevich had been negotiating photocopies since the mid-1930s; his earlier activities in this regard are analyzed in the study in my Archival Rossica-Rationalizing the Search.   back...

12 Annual reports started with 1929, although not all of them were published separately: Russkii zagranichnyi istoriclieskii arkhiv pri Ministerstve inostrannykh del Chekhoslovatskni respuhliki v 1929 godu (Prague, 11930]); through ...v 1931 (Prague, 1932; |microfiche=IDC-R-11,233]), and ...v 1936 g. (Prague, 1936; |microfiche=IDC-R-11.236]). Archival materials collected during the first ten years were surveyed by Aleksandr F. Iziumov, Otdel dokumentov. Russkii zagranichnyi istoriclieskii arkhiv v Prage (1923-1932 gg.) ([Prague, 1932]; |microfiche=IDC-R-l 1,232], updated from the article version published in Ročenka slovanského ústavu, vol.4 (1931), pp. 22H-45; his contribution to the 1936 annual report (pp. 12-21) updates the 1932 coverage, and lists recent acquisitions (p. 45). Copies of these reports and other typescript ones are filed with the RZIA administrative records, GA RF, 7030/1/20, 21, 28, 30, 39, 114, among others.   back...

13 Regarding Iziumov, see Tat´iana F. Pavlova, "A. F. Iziumov ? RZIA," Otechest-vennye arkhivy 1996 (4): 28-37. A few files from Iziumov´s personal papers constitute a separate fond in GA RF (fond R-5962; 29 units; 1922-1940).   back...

14 Aleksandr Iziumov, "Zapiska ?usskom Istoricheskom Arkhive," in Sergei Porfir´evich Postnikov, Politika, ideologiia, byl ? uchenye rnidy russkoi emigratsii: 1918-1945: Bihliografiia. Iz kataloga biblioteki RZI arkhiva, ed. Sergei Blinov, 2 vols. (New York: Norman Ross Publishing, 1993), vol. 2, p. 406. The manuscript of Iziumov´s July 1945 report on RZIA remained with the RZIA administrative records transferred to Moscow with the RZIA collections, GA RF, 7030/1/95, fols. 1-15.   back...

15 A brief notice about the Belarusian Archive in Prague prepared by its director, Tomash Hryb, "Belaruski zahranichny arkhiu u Praze," Kalos´sc: Belaruski lite-ratunia-navukovy chasapis (Vilnius) 1 (1935): 72, explains the organization of the archive along the lines of RZIA, but does not describe the holdings.   back...

16 Pavlova documents Iziumov´s attempts to find a home for RZIA in America-"A. F. Iziumov ? RZIA," p. 35. Iziumov recalls an offer of $1,()()(),()()(), which he considered inadequate-Iziumov, "Zapiska ?usskom Istoricheskom Arkhive," p. 407.   back...

17 A report filed with the RZIA transfer documents in GA RF provides more details of wartime developments-GA RF, 5325/10/2024. See also the earlier published article on wartime developments by Václav Pešák, "Zpráva ?innosti Ruského historického archivu, Ukrajinského historického kabinetu a Bĕloruského archivu v lĕtech 1939-1946," Ročenka slovanského ústavu v Praze, vol. 12, Za lĕta 1939-1946 (Prague, 1947), pp. 211-21, but there is no specific identification of important groups of holdings, nor reference to Nazi documentation and RZIA reports from the wartime period, which have since become available.   back...

18 The German typescript inventories describing the documents transferred are preserved with the RZIA administrative records in Moscow, GA RF, 7030/l/103a (1941, 390 p.), 103b (476 p.), and 119 (1942-through no. 10,265). The inventories reflect the order of the accession numbers by which they had been listed in RZIA.   back...

19 Iziumov, "Zapiska ?usskom Istoricheskom Arkhive v Prague," p. 406. Iziumov, who was freed from Nazi prison in June 1945, was apparently unaware of the extent of transfers to the branch Heeresarchiv in Prague, or may have been repeating rumors in Prague.   back...

20 In addition to sources available in Moscow, files and reports about the wartime operation of the archive itself are held in the records the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the State Archive in Prague-Státní ústřední archiv III, Ministerstvo vnitra, nová registratura (especially P 1411-P 1313, k. 5488-5489). My colleagues from the Institute of Ukrainian Archeography in Kyiv and I studied them in August 1991.   back...

21 See Hanna A. Surmach, "Belorusskii zagranichnyi arkhiv," in "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? belorusskaia èmigratsiia" 1995, vol. 1, pp. 85-90; and her later report, "Poshuki strachanykh arkhivaŭ pa history? belaruskai dziarzhaŭnastsi (Praha, Maskva, Paryzh)," in Restytutsyia kul´turnykh kashtoŭnastsei, pp. 185-88. Mikola Abramchyk succeeded Vasil´ Zakharka as president of the Council of the Belarus People´s Republic (BNR) in exile. According to this account, Surmach reports-based on a memoir source-that the files taken to Paris in 1943, together with some of his own files from the government in exile for the period 1943-1970, remain with Abramchyk´s widow Madame Liaukovich.   back...

22 See Nina Stuzhynskaia, "Materyialy pa historyi Belarus? u Ruskim zamezhnym histarychnym arkhive," in Restytutsyia kul´turnykh kashtoŭnastsei, pp. 188-92.   back...

23 Vladimir Bystrov, "Konets Russkogo zagranichnogo istoricheskogo arkhiva v Prage," in "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? belorusskaia èmigratsiia" 1995, vol. 1, pp. 79-80.   back...

24 The Pravda announcement appeared on 18 June 1945-"Dar Akademii nauk SSSR ot Chekhoslovatskogo pravitel´stva" (TASS, 17 June 1945), Pravda 18 June 1945.   back...

25 Chernytsov to Molotov (22 June 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/1353, fol. 51; another copy is found in a top secret "special file" addressed to Molotov, GA RF, 9401/2/103, fols. 2()8v-209. RZIA had been declared part of the Slate Archival Fond of the USSR already on 27 March 1941, according to a SNK postanovlenie (no. 723).   back...

26 See Tat´iana F. Pavlova, "Russkii zagranichnyi istoricheskii arkhiv v Prage," Voprosy istorii 1990 (11): 19-30, the first scholarly account about RZIA to appear in the period of glasnost. The most detailed study of RZIA is Pavlova´s unpublished dissertation-I appreciate Pavlova making her typescript available to me. See also the 1990 interview by Natal´ia Davydova with MGIAI specialist Valerii Sedel´nikov, "Arkhiv, ?otorom dolgo molchali," Moskovskie novosti 15(15 March 1990): 16.   back...

27 See George Fischer, "The Russian Archive in Prague," American Slavic and East European Review 8 (December 1949): 289-95.   back...

28 Bystrov, "Konets RZIA," pp. 70-84.   back...

29 Bystrov quotes from the 1928 protocol of transfer from Zemgor, "Konets RZIA," p. 75. A copy of the RZIA transfer papers from Zemgor are preserved with the RZIA records in Moscow.   back...

30 Iziumov, "Zapiska ?usskom Istoricheskom Arkhive v Prague," p. 407.   back...

31 Regarding Postnikov, see the biographical note in the posthumous publication of his bibliography-Sergei Porfir´evich Postnikov, Politika, ideologiia, byt ? itchenye trudy russkoi èmigratsii: 1918-1945: Bihliografiia. Iz kataloga bibtioteki RZ1 arkhiva, ed. Sergei Blinov, 2 vols., introduction by Edward Kasinec and Robert H. Davis, Jr. (New York: Norman Ross Publishing, 1993), vol. 1, pp. vii-ix. Bystrov names the librarians who perished, Petr Bovrovskii and Nikolai Tsvetkov, in "Konets RZIA," p. 79.   back...

32 Although not included in the official act of transfer, the provision for microfilms was one of the items in the preliminary agreement. See the 22 August letter to Ambassador Zorin reproduced below in Appendix VI1F. See "Konets RZIA," p. 78.   back...

33 A separate handwritten summary register briefly lists the early collections received by name of the person responsible for transfer-owner, donor or from whom purchased-TsDAVO, 3866/1/23, fols. 1-9. For the other part of this register see fn. 52, below.   back...

34 The handwritten inventory register covering the UNMA holdings is held with the other UIK records in TsDAVO, 3866/1/33. The printed and manuscript materials (nos. 1-3232, fols. 1-152) are listed with dates of receipt and designated accordingly. The 1,344 photographs are listed later in the volume, starting with 1927 acquisitions (nos. 1-1344).   back...

35 Two handwritten inventory registers (vols. 2 and 3) are held with the other UIK records in TsDAVO, 3866/1/34 and 36. No. 36 (labeled vol. II), covers archival groups nos. 451-487; no. 34 (labeled vol. Ill) covers archival groups nos. 488-549. Three inventory registers are mentioned in the act of transfer, although only two are specified as being transferred (nos. 451-588 [sic]). See the text in Appendix VIII, ยง5, and fns. 51 and 56, below). In July 1999, when I was first able to survey these materials, archivists could not find the first volume, which, as indicated in the act of transfer, covers archival groups nos. 1-450. The multiple manuscript corrections and lack of order or precision in the present opys of fond 3866 makes it very difficult to determine if the first volume is in fact missing or was never transferred. The inventory register covering the earlier UNMA collections (3866/1/33; see above fn. 34]) is now marked (in pencil) on its cover as "Documentary Division, vol. I," although that could not be the missing first volume.   back...

36 Arkadii Zhyvotko (1890-1948) had been active in the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries during his student days in St. Petersburg, and in 1917-1918, he represented Voronezh in the Central Rada. After emigrating to Prague, he taught at the Ukrainian Pedagogical Institute. Zhyvotko fled to West Germany at the end of the war, where he directed the Aschaffenburg branch of the Museum-Archive of the Ukrainian Academy of Arts and Sciences until his death in 1948.   back...

37 Biuleten´ Ukra´ins´koho istorychnoho kabineni v Prazi 1 (Prague, 1932 [microfiche=IDC-R-14,895]), which lists newspapers and journals received and also mentions the archival holdings. Reports and correspondence for those years are found in TsDAVO, 3866/1/1-3. An archival copy of the 1932 bulletin (covering operations for 1931) is held as 3866/1/20 and another copy in 3866/3/4. See also the report on the Ukrainian collection in Ročenka slovanského ústavu v Praze, vol. 11 (Prague, 1938), pp. 159-60.   back...

38 That report is found in TsDAVO, 3866/1/6, which also includes correspondence and monthly reports for 1935. Reports and correspondence for other years comprise separate files in TsDAVO, 3866/1/4 (1933), 5(1934), 7(1936), 8(1937), 9(1938-1939).   back...

39 Arkadii Zhyvotko, Desiat´ rokiv Ukra´ins´koho istorychnoho kabinetu (1930-1940) (Prague, 1940 [microfiche=IDC-R-14,920; reprint ed.=New York: Norman Ross Publishing, 1994]) [=lnventari Arkhivu Ministerstva vnutrishnikh sprav, series S, 1]. The central section (pp. 12-19) describes the documentary holdings with emphasis on materials from the successive independent Ukrainian governments (1917-1919) and their collapse, with mention of official documentation, personal papers, and collections of letters, manuscripts, maps, and photographs. Drafts and proofs remain in TsDAVO, 3866/1/21 and 22; and also an untitled and undated copy as 3866/3/3.   back...

40 Many of these are listed in various unpublished UIK reports, as well as the UIK registers mentioned above. Some of these receipts are also listed by Zhyvotko, Desiat´ rokiv UIK, especially pp. 16-18.   back...

41 Many of the personal papers received are listed in unpublished UIK reports, as well as the UIK registers mentioned above. See, for example, for 1939, TsDAVO, 3866/1/9, fols. 73-75, fol. 85. Some of these receipts are also listed by Zhyvotko, Desiat´ rokiv UIK, especially pp. 12-19. For a survey of the Shapoval papers (now held in TsDAVO, fond 3563), see N. Mironets, "Dokumenty fonda Nikity Shapovala kak istochnik dlia i/.ucheniia ukrainskoi emigratsii v Chekhoslovakii," in "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? helontsskaia emigratsiia" 1995, vol. 2, pp. 565-71.   back...

42 Reports and correspondence for the years 1940-1945 remain in TsDAVO, 3866/1/10; the latest March 1945 report is found on fol. 189.   back...

43 TsDAVO, 3866/1/8, fol. 189.   back...

44 See UIK records for the years 1940-1945 in TsDAVO, 3866/1/10. The added staff during the war under Nazi occupation may explain why more detailed registers are preserved for archival collections numbered 451-549 (see fn. 35, above).   back...

45 TsDAVO, 3866/1/10, fol. 1 and fol. 7.   back...

46 These inventories, and possibly others are preserved among the UIK records in TsDAVO, 3866/1/39 and 41, but apparently they were never coordinated with later descriptions after those materials came to Kyiv. In Prague, most of the other descriptive work was simply recorded in the main UIK register books: vol. II, covering collections nos. 451-487 (fond 3866/1/36) and vol. III, covering nos. 488-549 (fond 3866/1/34); again, see above, fn. 35.   back...

47 For example, the last almost half of the now-bound file with correspondence and reports for the wartime period (TsDAVO, 3866/1/10, fols. 189-306) contains press and radio summaries for 1938-1939.   back...

48 The dispatch of the mission, listing the participants, was announced in a top secret "special file" addressed to Molotov, GA RF, 9401/2/103, fol. 254. In 1989, I had an opportunity to meet with Pavliuk and Pshenychnyi, under the auspices of the Ukrainian Archival Administration, and hear some (limited) reminiscences about the mission. They were, however, not prepared to discuss the UIK transfer at that time.   back...

49 Pavliuk to Nikitinskii (Prague, 9 August 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/1353, fol. 81. Another copy of Pavliuk´s report is preserved in Kyiv, TsDAVO, 14/7/56, fols. 37-39.   back...

50 Bystrov, "Konets RZIA," p. 77.   back...

51 Copies of the official act of transfer (30 August 1945) in Ukrainian and Czech, and a copy translated into Russian, are found in the recently opened secret npys of the administrative archive (AA) of TsDIAK, which is now officially cited as TsDAVO, 4703/2/2, fols. 15-23. When 1 first consulted these documents in 1994, they were held by TsDIAK. They were due for subsequent transfer to TsDAVO (fond 4703) with the other administrative records of TsDIAK, although the formal transfer had not taken place by the end of 1999; 1 cite the TsDAVO designations, as requested by archivists in Kyiv. As of fall 1998, this opys still requires special permission of the TsDlAK director for access. Another copy of the act of transfer is held in TsDAVO, 3866/3/1. The act itself and relevant transfer documents are reprinted herein as Appendix VIII.   back...

52 A separate handwritten summary lists the collections from 1-605-TsDAVO, 3866/1/23, fols. 10-22. For the first part of this register covering UNMA collections, see fn. 33, above.   back...

53 Pešák, "Zpráva ?#269;innosti Ruského," pp. 218-19.   back...

54 In fact the last receipt listed in the summary register (605) was a collection of photographs, which immediately explains the discrepancy of one number.   back...

55 This register describes collections, record groups, or personal papers numbered from 488-549-TsDAVO, 3866/1/23, fols. 10-22. See fn. 35, above-including regarding the missing first part of this register.   back...

56 The figures cited here are those that appeared on the official transfer act. There is still some question as to whether any additional émigré collections from Prague were also transferred that had not been registered in UIK. The official act of transfer does not list any Ukrainian-related materials from RZIA itself that were transferred to Kyiv. The UNMA collections are listed in fn. 34, above.   back...

57 Listed separately in the official act of transfer (30 August 1945) were: Ukram-s´kyi robitnychyi universytet, Ukrams´kyi sot.siolohichnyi instytut, Ukrams´kyi hromads´kyi komitet, Ukrams´ka Zahranychna Partiia Sotsialistiv-Revoliutsioneriv (UPSR), Ukra´tns´ka selians´ka spilka, Ukra´i´ns´ka vil´na spilka, Orhanizatsiia "Ukra´ins´ka khata," Ukra´i´ns´ka "knyhozbirnia" v Prazi (1927-1928), Kubans´kyi arkhiv, and the Ukrams´kyi hromads´kyi vydavnychyi fond-see the act of transfer cited in Appendix Vlll-TsDAVO, 4703/2/2, fol. 17 (Ukrainian). Most of these are in fact listed in the UIK register, and some of their records were processed and described in the more detailed registers, as is also apparent from UIK monthly reports.   back...

58 A copy of the separate document dismissing potential claims is held in TsDAVO, 4703/2/2, fols. 13 and 14. See the text in Appendix VIII. Czech documents regarding the Soviet appropriation and the status of the various fonds involved are to be found among the records of the Interior Ministry, Statnf ustfednf archiv III, Ministerstvo vnitra, nova registratura, P1412/k. 5488.   back...

59 The official announcements from Ukraine describe the "gift"-Riasnoi to NikitaS. Khrushchev (25 September 1945), TsDAVO, 4703/2/2, fols. 28-30, and to Beria, fols. 31-33. (Full text below, in Appendix VIII.) The official top secret Archival Administration report in Moscow follows the same text: Nikitinskii to S. N. Kruglov, "Spetsial´noe soobshchenie ?ostave ´Ukrainskogo arkhiva´" (September 1945; received 29 September), GA RF, 5325/2/1353, fol. 88-88v. This same text was repeated in the year-end report, "Spravka ?ezul´tatakh raboty GAU NKVD SSSR po vozvrashcheniiu v Sovetskii Soiuz dokumental´nykh materialov Gosudarstvennogo arkhivnogo fonda SSSR ? ?yvoze v SSSR arkhivov inostrannogo proiskhozhdeniia," signed by Golubtsov and Kuz´min (15 December 1945), GA RF, 5325/10/2148, fol. 2-2v.   back...

60 These records appear as separate fonds on the TsDIA URSR work plan for 1949. The Ukrainian Technical-Agricultural Institute (Ukrams´kyi tekhnichno-hospodars´kyi instytut zaochnohonavchannia, Podĕbrady), listed in Russian on the 1949 list (8,667 units; 1932-1945) had been assigned fond no. 3879 in TsDAZhR by 1960 (2 opysy, 8,250 and 250 units; 1927-1945). The Ukrainian Agricultural Academy (Ukrams´ka hospodars´ka akademiia v Chekhoslovachchyni, Poděbrady) as listed in 1949 (2,135 units; 1922-1936) was assigned fond no. 3795 with four opysy by 1960 (2,298 units, 1922-1936; 339 units, 1922-1939; 104 units, 1922-1939; and 49 units, 1922-1927), apparently reflecting receipts from different sources. A fond with the same number is listed in TsDIA in 1962 with five opysy (780 units; 1922-1938). Later these materials were all consolidated in TsDAZhR.   back...

61 Václav Podaný and Hana Barvíková, et al., Russkaia ? ukrainskaia èmigratsiia v Chekhoslovatskoi respublike, 1918-1938: Putevoditel´ po arkhivnym fondam ? sobraniiam v Cheshskoi respublike, trans. L´ubov Beloševská and Marina Luptáková (Prague: Euroslavica, 1995).   back...

62 Statistics for UIK books and newspapers transferred to Kyiv were listed by Pešák, ´Zprava ?innosti Ruskeho," p. 219. That figure has recently been confirmed by specialists in Prague, although possibly some additional collections that had not been catalogued by UIK were also transferred to Kyiv.

   back...

63 As quoted in theTsDIA URSR report for 1945 (12 January 1946), TsDAVO, 14/2/5l.fol. 70.   back...

64 As reported to the author by librarians in the HAU (now DAKU) Central Library in Kyiv. Since the library had been requested to search for only those markings, they were not prepared to report on others found in the process, and their search involved only the formerly classified "Special Fond" and not those in the open part of the library.   back...

65 These developments, as reported by Bystrov, "Konets RZIA," p. 78, confirm reports from the Moscow and Kyiv representatives in Prague.   back...

66 The microfiche catalog is Katalog byvshei Biblioieki Russkogo zagranichnogo istorichnogo arkhiva/Catalog of the Former Library of the Russian Historical Archive Abroad (New York: Norman Ross Publishing, 1995). The printed guide includes introductory comments by Richard J. Kneeley and Edward Kasinec, based on their earlier article, "The Slovanska knihovna in Prague and its RZIA Collection," Slavic Review 51(1) Spring 1992: 122-30. See fn. 114, below, regarding other published bibliographies from RZIA. The Prague library director Milena Klimova recently kindly confirmed some of these details.   back...

67 See the full texts below, in Appendix VIII.   back...

68 Larysa lakovlieva, "Praz´ki fondy v Kyievi," Pam´iatky Ukra?ny 1994 (3-6[26]): 120-22. Liudmyla I. Lozenko, "Praz´kyi ukra?ns´kyi arkhiv: Istoriia ? s´ohodennia," Arkhivy Ukra?ny 1994 (1-6): 18-30. Lozenko issued a second article, "Z istori? Praz´koho ukra?ns´koho arkhivu," in Mizhnarodni zv´iazky Ukra´iny: Naukoviposhuky ? znakhidky (Kyiv, 1997), pp. 85-94.   back...

69 According to a July 1946 report: Pshenichnyi, "Dokladnaia zapiska ?rodelan-noi rabote TsGAFFKD MVD UkrSSR za 1-?olugodie 1946 g." (13 July 1946), GA RF, 5325/2/1620, fol. 114. The report noles that an inventory opis´ for that collection was already established. Archivists in TsGAFFKD have been unable to locate a separate inventory for the Prague photographic materials that were subsequently integrated into the general thematic organization of the archive.   back...

70 The original UIK administrative records are now all held inTsDAVO, fond 3866 (ca. 230 units, 1930-1945). These materials were not mentioned by Larysa lakovlieva and Liudmyla Lozenko in their articles about the Prague holdings, nor have they been thoroughly studied or referenced in other works.   back...

71 "Otchet ?abote Osobogo sekretnogo otdeleniia TsGIA UkrSSR za 1945-i god," signed by Strel´skii (30 November 1945/27 December 1945), TsDAVO, 4703/2/1, fols. 3-4. The report gave the figure of 280 fonds from Czechoslovakia, at least 203 of which were from UIK. It singled out with annotations those of the first order of importance, including the Ukrainian Community Commission in Prague (1921-1939), and the personal archives of Mariia(?) Derkach, Spyrydon Dovhal´ (1931-1942), Myroslav Hryhoriv (1943-1944), Nykyfor Hryhoriv (1919-1933), Pan´ko Kaluizhnyi, Professor Dmytro Antonovych (1943-1944), and Professor Borys Martos (1919-1944).   back...

72 "Otchet ?abote TsGIA UkrSSR za 1946-i god," to Gudzenko (12 January 1947), TsDAVO, 4703/1/18, fols. 27-28.   back...

73 "Otchet ?abote TsGIA UkrSSR za 1946-i god," TsDAVO, 4703/1/18, fols. 27-28. The 188 fonds had 20,617 units and 350 kilos of unarranged materials (rossypi). Compare reports and work plans from the secret division of TsDIA URSR in the formerly secret opys´ of the administrative records of TsDIA URSR-TsDAVO, 4703/2/7 (1946), and sprava 9 (1947).   back...

74 "Otchet ?abote Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov za 1948 god," TsDAVO, 4703/2/13, fol. 35.   back...

75 "Plan raboty Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov na 1948 god," signed by Oliinyk [Oleinik] (4 February 1948), TsDAVO, 4703/2/13, fols. 8-9. The TsDlAK Special Secret Division report for 1948 in the same folder (fol. 3) mentions six special cabinets in the archive containing these files and reference materials, but their present whereabouts has not been determined.   back...

76 Ibid., fols. 13-17.   back...

77 "Spisok fondov Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov TsGIA UkrSSR, podlezhashchikh uporiadocheniiu v 1949 g." (25 January 1949), TsDAVO, 4703/2/16, fols. 10-18; and "Spisok fondov Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov TsGIA UkrSSR, podlezhashchikh razrabotke v 1949 godu" (25 January 1949), ibid., fols. 19-20. These lists were both appendices to the official archival work plan for 1949. Almost half the fonds named in the first list arc from Lviv, with personal papers and material from Ukrainian social, political, cultural, and religious organizations.   back...

78 "Spisok fondov Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov Tsentral´nogo gosudarstven-nogo istoricheskogo arkhiva UkrSSR" (April 1949), TsDAVO, 4703/2/18, fols. 18-73.   back...

79 "Otchet ?abote Osobogo otdela TsGIA USSR za 1949 g." (5 January 1950), TsDAVO, 4703/2/16, fols. 47-48.   back...

80 Pil´kevich to TsDIA-K Chief Teslenko (18 December 1958), TsDAVO 4703/2/39, fol. 2 and fol. 8. A list of 25 fonds follows (fols. 3-7).   back...

81 TsDAVO, 4703/2/39. The 1958 and 1962 Prague receipts (fols. 58-62, and fol. 79), together with the lists of other fonds received from Prague earlier (fols. 65-78 and 85-98) are bound together in a recently declassified folder.   back...

82 See the newsletters published in Prague, ed. D. V. Antonovych, Visti Muzeiu vyzvol´no´i borot´by Ukra?ny, 22 issues (Prague, 1925-1938 [microfiche=lDC-R-14,894]). Thirteen additional issues were published by the Museum through 1944, but copies were not available for inclusion in the microfiche edition at the time it was prepared.   back...

83 Mykola Mushynka, Muzei vyzvol´no´i borot´by Ukra´iny ta dolia ioho fondiv (Melbourne: Monash University, Slavic Section, 1996). See also Mushynka´s report, "Muzei vyzvol´no´i borot´by Ukra?ny u Prazi ta ioho ostannii dyrektor Symon Narizhnyi," in "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? helonisskaia èmigratsiia" 1995, vol. 1, pp. 806-815. That article provides a helpful list of publications relating to the history and fate of the Museum, which are given in more detail in monograph.   back...

84 These details are noted, but not specifically documented, by Mushynka, "Muzei vyzvol´no? borot´by Ukra?ny," pp. 806-815 (see esp. pp. 812-13). See more detail in Mushynka, Muzei vyzvol´no? borot´by. Mushynka´s figures quoted from Kyiv reports about the number of fonds and units require further verification, because it is not clear if they all came from the Museum itself.   back...

85 Inventáře a katalogy fondů Státníhn ústředniho archivu v Prazc-Ukrajinské muzeum v Praze, UM, (1659) 1925-1948: Inventář/Inventari ? katalohy fondiv Derzhavnoho tsentral´noho arkhivu v Prazi-Ukra?ns´kyi muzei v Prazi, UM, (1659) 1925-1948: Opys fondu, comp. Raisa Machatková (Kyiv, Prague: IUAD, 1996) |=Naukovo-dovidkovi vydannia z istori´i´ Ukramy, 41 ].   back...

86 These collections, along with several other fragments collected by the KGB and MVD from Czechoslovakia, were transferred from the Ukrainian MVD archive. An announcement to this effect was circulated on electronic mail by TsDAHO in February, 1994. TsDAHO director Ruslan la. Pyrih showed these materials to the present author in 1994. Initially, they had been assigned to fond no. 269, and a detailed card catalog of the collections was started. Their transfer from Prague is mentioned in lakovlieva, "Praz´ki fondy v Kyievi," p. 12?.   back...

87 I am grateful to TsDAHO archivist Anatolii Kentii, who is currently processing these materials, for discussing the problems he is finding and the difficulties of attributing provenance. My report is based on his preliminary description prepared for the forthcoming TsDAHO guide.   back...

88 Details about these files are in my "The Postwar Fate of the Petliura Library from Paris and the Records of the Ukrainian National Republic." Harvard Ukrainian Studies 21(3-4): 395-462.   back...

89 "Prymushenyi vy?zd bibliotekaria Ivana Rudycheva ? ioho perebuvannia v Berlin! (Dopovid´ na zasidanni Rady Biblioteky 3-oho hrudnia 1942 roku)"; a typescript copy of this report was kindly furnished to me by Professor Arkady Joukovsky from the Petliura Library in Paris. See fn. 9X, below.   back...

90 Cf. my "The Odyssey of the Petliura Library and the Records of the Ukrainian National Republic during World War II," Harvard Ukrainian Studies 22 (1998): 181-208 = Cultures and Nations of Central and Eastern Europe: Essays in Honor of Roman Szporluk, ed. Zvi Gitelman et al.J.   back...

91 Cf. my "Ukrainian Cultural Treasures," Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas 39(1) 1991: 73-74; and my "Archival Rossica/Sovietica Abroad," Cahiers du Monde russe et soviétique 34(3) 1993: 463-65.   back...

92 See the report that in Cracow a SMERSH unit of the Ukrainian Fourth Army "was in the possession of Petliura documents in the Ukrainian language, 1918-1922," Gudzenko to Nikitinskii (Kyiv, 27 March 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/1353, fol. 17; see also the copy in a more recently declassified file in Kyiv, TsDAVO, 14/7/56, fol. 11. This confirms a penciled note regarding the March 1945 seizure by archivist Adam Kamiński on a report by Wtodzimierz Budka, "Archiwum Państwowe w Krakowie podczas okupacji niemieckiej (6 September 1939-17 January 1945)" (Cracow, 2 March 1946), Archiwum Panstwowe w Krakowie, fond APKr, 167, fol. 26v. See more details about these records in Grimsted, "Odyssey of the Petliura Library."   back...

93 Details of these operations are found in the files of the Nazi Archival Administration in Cracow, which was headed by Dr. Randt. A copy of one of Randt´s reports to Berlin and his detailed survey of these materials "Archiv der ukrainischen National-regierung (Petlura) aus den Jahren 1917-1922" (Cracow, 25 March 1942), also remains in the records of the Nazi Archival Administration in Kyiv, TsDAVO, 3206/5/26, fols. 2-5. The transfer and inventory work on the UNR records in Cracow are summarized in the Budka report mentioned immediately above, fols. 25-26. A copy of the Nazi inventory was found in the Bundesarchiv-"Verzevchnis des Archivs des Aussen-Ministeriums der Ukrainischen-Volks-Republik, 1918-1926," BAK, R 146/73.   back...

94 Lists of the materials from Lviv returned from Tyniec and Cracow are included in a report dated IX April 1945, TsDAVO, 14/7/55, fols. 10, 20-21. It is not clear in that report if the UNR materials from Cracow were included in that shipment or a later one.   back...

95 Gudzenko and Grinberg to Nikitinskii (Kyiv, 30 May 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/1353, fol. 39. Several other separate references have been found referencing the Petliura materials from Cracow.   back...

96 Several collections from Vienna are listed among the fonds held by the Special Secret Division of TsDIA URSR in the immediate postwar years - TsDAVO, 4703/2/6, among others.   back...

97 Bondarevskii to V. P. Gudzenko (9 July 1947), TsDAVO, 4703/2/10, fols 9-13.   back...

98 See fn. 89, above. It has not as yet been possible to document where the Paris Petliura materials (seized by the Nazis from Paris in January 1940) were found by Soviet authorities, but fragmentary Petliura files from Paris and Geneva were noted as having been accessioned by TsDIA URSR on 10 January 1946 (after the Prague materials that had been received in October of 1945). In the 1947 list of secret fonds they appear as nos. 245-248, 250, 251, and 253- TsDAVO, 4703/2/6, fol. 35; in the 1949 list (fol. 35) they appear as fond nos. 243, 246-248, 250, and 256. Other parts of the same fonds have recently been identified in Moscow. See my "Odyssey of the Petliura Library" and "The Postwar Fate of the Petliura Library."   back...

99 laropenko to Gudzenko (4 April 1947), TsDAVO, 4703/2/1 1, fol. 6.   back...

100 "Spisok fondov...TsGIA UkrSSR, podlezhashchikh uporiadocheniiu v 1949 g," TsDAVO, 4703/2/16, fol. 10; and "Spisok fondov...TsGIA UkrSSR,podlezhashchikh razrabotke v 1949 godu" (25 January 1949), ibid., fol.s. 19-20.   back...

101 "Spisok fondov Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov TsGIA UkrSSR" (1946), TsDAVO, 4703/2/6, fol. 34; (1948), fol. 82. The 1959 revindications to Poland are mentioned by Krystyna Wróbel-Lipowa, Rewindykacja airhiwaliów polskich z ZSSR w latach 1945-1964 (Lublin, 1982; Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Sktodowskiej), pp. 103-104, but other indications suggest the materials all remain in Lviv. See Chapter 11.   back...

102 102 "Otchet ?abote Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov za 1948 god," TsDAVO, 4703/2/13, fol. 34. "Spisok fondov Osobogo otdela sekretnykh fondov Tsentral´nogo gosudarstvennogo istoricheskogo arkhiva UkrSSR" (April 1949), TsDAVO, 4703/2/1 8, fol. 5 1 . The fond number cited for the main UNR Foreign Ministry records (346s) corresponds to the old number indicated on the present ?.??or TsDAVO, fond no. 3696. However, there is no correlation possible with the German-language inventory of these records prepared in Cracow, a copy of which was found in BAK, NS 30. See more details about these records in my, "The Postwar Fate of the Petliura Library."   back...

103 The transfer protocol listed 18 émigré fonds including UNR MID records (26 October 1954), TsDAVO, 4703/2/31, fol. 38.   back...

104 "Spisok fondiv orhanizatsii, ustanov ta osobystykh fondiv ukra?ns´kykh emihrantiv viddilu fondiv respublikans´kykh ustanov TsDIA URSR" (6 January 1962), TsDAVO, 4703/2/39, foi. 96.   back...

105 Fond 2592 (earlier 344s) - Sekretarstvo natsional´nykh sprav Ukra?ns´ko? tsentral´no? Rady (1917-1918; 4 opysy; 121, 10, 3, and 19 units), a part of which is devoted to the files of the Narodne ministerstvo sprav zakordonnykh, 1918 - UNR. The first opys had been prepared in 1942 in Zlotoust, so had obviously been in Ukraine before the war; the second opys had earlier comprised fond no. 4614. Fond 3766 - predominantly from the Hetmanate, 1918, has an even more complicated genealogy (3 opysy); the first 2 opysy had earlier comprised fond 345s/2593; opys 3 had earlier been the separate fond 46.   back...

106 According to the instruction of 11 July 1945, the official Glavarkhiv delegation consisted of Sergei Ivanovich Kuz´min, and TsGAOR SSSR director, Nikolai Romanovich Prokopcnko, GA RF, 5325/10/2023, fol. 1; another copy is found in a top secret "special file" addressed to Molotov, GA RF, 9401/2/103, fol. 253.   back...

107 G. Aleksandrov to G. M. Malenkov, "Spravka" (6 December 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/1353, fol. 30; the Academy request a month earlier addressed to L. V. Beria (2 November 1945), had been signed by President S. I. Vavilov and Academic Secretary N. G. Bruevich, RGASPI, 17/125/308, fol. 29.   back...

108 The official leather bound, elaborately printed act of transfer is retained in GARF, 5325/2/1354.   back...

109 Kruglov to Stalin, GA RF, 9401/2/134, fols. 1-2. Sec also fn. 120, below.   back...

110 These records now constitute the separate fond of RZIA, GA RF, 7030. Related fonds in GA RF are also important for the history of RZIA, including the personal papers of the last RZIA archivist and deputy director, Aleksandr F. Iziumov (fond 5962; 29 units; 1922-1940).   back...

111 The verification protocol was also signed in Prague (13 December 1945), GA RF, 5325/10/2024, fols 3-4v; the shipping lists follow (fols. 5-32). Another copy is found among the RZIA records, GA RF, 7030/2/727.   back...

1l2 Nina Stuzhynskaia, "Materyialy pa historyi Belarusi u Ruskim zamezhnym histarychnym arkhive," in Resrytutsyia kul´iurnykh kashtoŭnastsei, pp. 188-92.   back...

113 As reported by V. Bystrov, "Konets RZIA," p. 78. Bystrov´s figures come from the official transfer documents but do noi involve shipments to Kyiv.   back...

114 See fn. 66, above, regarding the microfiche catalog available from Norman Ross Publishing in New York. The same publisher has recently issued reprint editions of the bibliography of newspapers from the revolutionary period held by RZIA, Lev Magerovskii, Bihliografiia gazetnykh sobranii Russkogo istoricheskogo arkhiva ?gody 1917-1921 (Prague, 1939), reprint ed. with an introduction by Richard Kneeley (New York: Norman Ross Publishing, 1994) [="Inventari Arkhiva Ministerstva vnutrennikh del v Prage," Ser. B, "Inventari R1A," no. 1], and the bibliography by Postnikov, Politika, ideologiia, byt ? uchenyc trudy russkoi èmigratsii, which survived only in typescript, but was published in New York in 1993.   back...

115 Kruglov to Stalin (3 January 1946), GA RF, 9401/2/134, fols. 1-2.   back...

116 Details about the RZIA arrival in Moscow under tight security and its immediate transfer to TsGAOR SSSR appear in a report dated 3 January 1946, among Glavarkhiv records in GA RF, 5325/10/2023, fol. 40, with a further explanatory letter (15 May 1946), fol. 42.   back...

117 See the official letter of Vavilov to Nikitinskii (31 January 1946), GA RF, 5325/10/2023, fol. 42.   back...

118 118 Kruglov to Zhdanov (15 May 1946), GA RF, 5325/10/2023, fol. 46.   back...

119 A series of reports on the work of the archive during 1946 are found in the same file among Glavarkhiv records (GA RF, 5325/2/1791)-for example, Gur´ianov and Golikova to Nikitinskii (15 October 1946), fols. 8-11, with a list of fonds they had processed (10 October 1946), fols. 12-18; Golikova to Starov (27 October 1946), fols. 19-20; Prokopenko to Kuz´min (25 November 1946), fol. 23, and to Starov (23 December 1946), fol. 24. See also the 1946 report, covering specifically work on the Prague materials, GA RF, 3961/5/219, fols. 7-9.   back...

120 A major group of the records of this museum also came from Prague and are held today in GA RF, fond R-6784, but many have been transferred to TsGALI (now RGALI). Other pertinent sources about the museum in GA RF are revealed in the report by M. lu. Dostal´, "Russkii kul´turno-istoricheskii muzei v Prage v tvorcheskoi sud´be V. F. Bulgakova (po novym arkhivnym dannym)," in "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? belorusskaia èmigratsiia" 1995, vol. 1, pp. 806-815. See also the brochure by E. S. Dokasheva, Russkii kid´turno-istoi´icheskii muzei v Prage (Moscow, 1993).   back...

121 Tsentral´nyigosudarstvennyi arkhiv Oktiabr´skoi revoliutsii ? sotsialisticheskogo stroitel´stva SSSR: Pittevoditel´, vol. 2 (Moscow, 1952). Published in a "secret edition" in 1952, that guide was not declassified until 1987, along with most of the RZIA materials remaining in TsGAOR SSSR. One of the few remaining copies of that guide, now available in the GA RF reading room, has marginal notes indicating that the materials transferred elsewhere.   back...

122 Kruglov to Zhdanov (15 May 1946), GA RF, 5325/10/2023, fol. 46.   back...

123 An official request for transfer addressed to I. I. Nikitinskii from V. Khvostov from MID (24 December 1946), is accompanied by a seven-page list of the files involved-GA RF, 5325/2/1705a. The original typescript list with a covering letter from Madik to Kruglov (dated 24 June 1947) remains in another file, GA RF, 5325/2/2286a.   back...

124 During informal inquiries, MID archival officials in Moscow denied that any UNR files were still held in their archives. This may mean that they are still classified or were arranged as part of a composite collection. Other RZIA fonds that were transferred to MID and that can be identified now in AVPRI are listed in the new RZIA guide: Fondy Riisskogo zagraniclmogo istoricheskogo arkhiva v Prage: Arkhivnyi putevoditel´, comp. O. N. Kopyleva et al.; ed. T. F. Pavlova et al. (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 1999). See also the listings by Andrei V. Popov, Russkoe zaruhezh´e ? arkhivy: Dokumenty rossiiskoi emigratsii v arkhivakh Moskvy: Prohlemy vyiavleniia, komplektovaniia, opisaniia, ispol´zovaniia (Moscow: IAI RGGLJ, 1998), p. 132 [="Materialy k istorii russkoi politicheskoi emigratsii," 4].   back...

125 Iziumov, "Zapiska ?usskom Istoricheskom Arkhive," p. 406.   back...

126 See particularly the administrative records of RZIA itself, GA RF, fond 7030. Of particular interest in this respect is, for example, 7030/1/91, where clearly many Ukrainian and Belarusian receipts are intermingled.   back...

127 GA RF, fond R-6087. Recently GA RF archivists agreed with me that the Tŭrnovo attribution was inaccurate and changed it at the last minute in the RZIA guide. They kindly provided me with an advance copy of the proof page describing that fond (see above, fn. 124). In several GA RF publications the fond is listed erroneously under "Bulgaria, Diplomatic Missions," with its provenance in Tyrnovo [sic.for ???? Bulgaria-see, e.g., the comprehensive list of fonds in Perechcn fonclov Gosudarstvennogo arkhiva Rossiiskoi Federatsii ? nauchno-spravochnyi apparal k dokumemam arkhiva, comp. L. G. Aronov, O. N. Kopylova, et al.; ed. S. V. Mironenko (Moscow: Red.-izd. otdel Federal´nykh arkhivov, 1998), p. 161.   back...

128 See the preface to the opis´ for GA RF, fond R-6087. See the description in Fondy RZIA, pp. 99-100.   back...

129 GARF, R-7526 (16 units; 1920-1930). The original opis´ covering file nos. 1-11 is dated 1957; nos. 12-16, were added in I960. The fond is not listed in Fondy RZIA. In November 1948, TsGAOR received 170 crates of archival materials from the Lenin Library in Moscow, which included materials of "Ukrainian émigré organizations in Paris, among others." The official receipt in the records of TsGAOR SSSR was signed by Mikhail Il´ich Rubinskii, chief of the RZIA Division of TsGAOR SSSR (9 November 1948), GA RF, 5142/1/423, fols. 140-141.   back...

130 A fond of the UNR Embassy in Berlin remains in GA RF, as was indicated in the secret 1952 TsGAOR Putevoclitel´-fond 5889 (28 units, 1918-1926). Presently, however, the fond has 35 units; file no. 36 is the original opis´ of the fond (14 May 1947). Other fragments of these records are held in TsDAVO in Kyiv, probably that came with the UNR Foreign Ministry records from Tarnów that were seized by SMERSH in Cracow in March 1945. See the description in Fondy RZIA, pp. 54-55.   back...

131 See a descriptive list of a UNR collection received by RZIA, GA RF, 7030/1/91, fols. 7-8. The name of the collector or its source is not indicated, except that it was sent through "M.A."; nor was the exact date given. The printed 1931 RZIA report mentions that some files of the UNR Embassy in Berlin were received that year-GA RF 7030/114, 1931 report, p. 7. Several other RZIA annual reports in the same folder (1928-1931) also mention the receipt of UNR documentation.   back...

132 GA RF, 5889/1/34. One of the Petliura letters was sold to RZIA by V. L. Forna with a receipt for 600 crowns. There is also a letter of V. K. Vynnychenko (no. 26), and a 1919 letter about UNR funds in the Reichsbank (no. 29a).   back...

133 See the list that accompanied the official MID transfer request (24 December 1946)-GARF, 5325/2/1705a. The fond does not appear in the official acts of transfer, as recorded in the dela fond, and recently verified for me by GA RF archivist Ol´ga Kopylova. The fond retained 28 units in 1948, after the transfers to MID.   back...

134 Further investigation in the MID archives is still required, since all of the UNR files are not listed in the RZIA guide.   back...

135 See the RZIA annual report listing receipts for 1928, with mention of 500 pages of documents of the Ukrainian delegation in Paris (1919-1922). GA RF 7030/1/114, p. 7. See the descriptions in Fondy RZIA, pp. 125-27.   back...

136 See fns. 129, above, and 148, below, and my "Postwar Fate of the Petliura Library."   back...

137 L. R. Lanski and V. A. Putintsev, "Rukopisi proizvedenii Gertsena v ´Prazhskoi´ ? ´Sofiiskoi´ kollektsiiakh: Opisanie," Literanirnoe nasledstvo 63 (1956): 725-52. Additional Herzen and Ogarev materials from Prague in TsGALI (fond 5770) were described in the same volume 752-92, 793-830, 831-54, 855-64. S. A. Makashin, "´Sofiiskaiu´ kollektsiia rukopisei´ iz arkhiva Gertsena ? Ogareva," Izvestiia Akademii nauk SSSR. Otdelenie literatury ? iazyka 13 (1954) 5: 456-63.   back...

138 Many of the transfers are noted by Popov, Russkoe Zarubezh´e ? arkhivy, pp. 132-33. Popov had access to TsGAOR SSSR acquisition and transfer registers that I have not consulted. 1 have found many transfers registered in annual reports and transfer correspondence; those given here are only a few examples.   back...

139 [Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi voennyi arkhiv], Putevoditel´po fondam Beloi Armii, comp. N. V. Pul´chenko, N. D. Egorov, and L. M. Chizhova; ed. N. D. Egorov and L. V. Dvoinykh (Moscow: Russkoe bibliograficheskoe obshchestvo, 1998) [="Acadcmia ROSSICA," vol. 4]. Some of the RZIA materials involved were earlier listed in the 1952 guide to TsGAOR SSSR.   back...

140 GA RF archivists earlier acquainted me with the list of transfers and the incoming descriptions from Kyiv. See Fondy RZIA, pp. 371, 430, 463, 466, 4X1-89.   back...

141 See the list of holdings dated 21 September 1945, GA RF, 5325/10/2027, fol. 7-7v. Regarding their capture in Silesia, see Chapter 8, p. 291.   back...

142 Popov, Russkoe zarubezh´e ? arkhivy. Many of his descriptions must still be considered preliminary. The forthcoming fourth volume of the guide to GA RF will include annotated coverage of all of the émigré fonds held by that archive.   back...

143 Susaikov to Kruglov (Bucharest, 19 May 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/992, fols. 209-210. The materials were received officially in Moscow on 10 May 1945, as indicated by a receipt found in fol. 207.   back...

144 Istomii and A. lur´ev to E. I. Golubtsov (19 May 1945), GA RF, 5325/2/992, fol. 205.   back...

145 See the report of Deputy Foreign Minister A. Vyshinskii to S. N. Kruglov (19 May 1947), GARF, 5325/2/2172, fol. 1: Nikitinskii to Kruglov (31 May 1947), GA RF, 5325/2/2172, fols. 2, 5, 7.   back...

146 See the report of Sofinov and Golubtsov to Riaskov (21 October 1947), GA RF, 5325/2/2172, fols. 14-17, with an appended list (fols. 18-20); and the official document of receipt (3 February 1948), GA RF, 5323/2/2172, fols. 24-26.   back...

147 M. B. Falaleeva, "Fond Romanovykh v sobranii OPI ??" Arkheograficheskii ezhegodnikza 1996 god (Moscow, 1998), pp. 270-81 (see especially pp. 279-81).   back...

148 The official receipt in the records of TsGAOR SSSR was signed by Mikhail Il´ich Rubinskii, chief of the RZIA Division of TsGAOR SSSR (9 November 1948), GARF 5142/1/423, fols. 140-141. GA RF archivist Ol´ga Kopylova found this document and kindly showed it to me, after 1 had questioned the accuracy of attributing the provenance of the Petliura Library files to RZIA or other Prague sources. Although received in a shipment from Berlin, the Turgenev Library and other Ukrainian materials were actually found in Silesia and brought to Berlin for shipment.   back...

149 The "S. Petliura Ukrainian Library, Paris" itself constitutes fond R-7008 in GARF with 141 units (1909, 1914-1917, 1919-1920, 1922, 1924-1939). The "Editorial Records of the Journal Tryzub, Paris" constitutes fond 7498 (earlier 3882s; 93 units). See more details about these and related archival materials from the library and the problems of their migration in my "The Postwar Fate of the Petliura Library."   back...

150 I was shown those preliminary annotations in the fall of 1997, which is when I started examining various files in those fonds in effort to determine their provenance. I found many stamps and dedicatory inscriptions to the Petliura Library in files in both those fonds, and I assured GA RF archivists that the library had been looted by the Nazis from Paris and that none of its materials had ever been in Prague. Possibly some publications (many are included now as files within the fond) might have been received or sent to RZ1A/U1K on exchange. I appreciate the assistance of archivists in GA RF, who were willing to work with me in trying to correct the provenance attributions.   back...

151 Archivists in TsGAOR SSSR (now GA RF) first showed me the Turgenev Library records in 1990, when I questioned their provenance, after which it was clear to me that they all came from Paris and not Prague. A parallel article on the odyssey of the Turgenev Library is in preparation in collaboration with Helene Kaplan in Paris.   back...

152 The Ukrainian Press Bureau now constitutes fond R-7050 (2 opisi; 2,011 units; 1902-1944); records of (he journal Ukra?na are now grouped as fond R-7063 (257 units; 1911-1924). Their receipt by TsGAOR SSSR (16 August 1949) is documented in the archive of TsGAOR SSSR, GA RF, 5142/1/449, fol. 72. Ol´ga Kopylova kindly showed me the relevant documents she had found.   back...

153 Fondy RZIA. See the bibliography (section VII) for the funding agencies.   back...

154 See Metodicheskie rekomendatsii po sostavleniiu mezharkhivnogo spravochnika po fondam byvshego Russkogo zagranichnogo istoricheskogo arkhiva v Prage (b. RZIA) (Moscow: TsGAOR SSSR, 1991); Tat´iana Pavlova kindly furnished me a copy for review when it was first published in limited edition for internal circulation. I appreciate the continuing opportunity for discussion about the project with Pavlova and her colleagues on numerous occasions since the project started in 1989.   back...

155 Pavlova, "Russkii Zagranichnyi istoricheskii arkhiv." Pavlova's administrative career prevented the research needed to complete and defend her dissertation (cf. fn. 26, above).   back...

156 L. I. Petrusheva, "Dokumenty prazhskoi kollektsii v nauchno-spravochnom apparate Gosudarstvennogo arkhiva Rossiiskoi Federatsii," in "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? helorusskaia èmigratsiia" 1995, vol. 1, pp. 91-97.   back...

157 Notes to this effect are found penciled on one of the copies of the list of fonds then held in the Special Secret Division of TsDIA URSR-TsDAVO, 4703/2/6. Among materials requisitioned by TsGAOR SSSR in Moscow were those relating to different local operations of the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries (UPSR) in Prague and elsewhere abroad. Documentation regarding the transfers is found in the TsDIAK correspondence file for 1954 (TsDAVO, 4703/2/31), where there are references to transfers on 20 February 1954 (fol. 5) and 10 March 1954 (fol. 6) to TsGAOR SSSR (referencing a Soviet order dated 19 January 1954), encompassing 444 folders of Ukrainian SR fonds (and some files of Jewish committees) from Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Poland, and on 18 October 1954, referencing 381 folders of Ukrainian SR files. It is difficult to determine now if all of these came from UIK and what their status had been there.   back...

158 GA RF, R-7744, "Kollektsiia materialov zagranichnykh organizatsii ukrainskoi partii sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov, Prague, 1919-1938." As currently listed in GA RF, the fond is supposed to have 10 opisi (361 units). Within the first opis´ (unit no. 3) is one of the original Kyiv opisi from TsDIAK-(opys 3, prepared 10 July 1946) indicating 122 units (1928-1938), under the Ukrainian title "Holovnyi politechnyi komitet Ukr.P.SR (za kordonom) v Prazi, Tsen. kom." (with the indication that it was earlier fond no. 86s/3956s). The fond number 86s corresponds to the fond of that title listed on the April 1949 and April 1952 TsDlAK lists, when that particular fond in TsDlAK had 116 units. Other parts of the GA RF collection may represent materials from TsDAZhR, although further verification is needed to determine if all of the original files sent from Ukraine are retained in the GA RF fond.   back...

159 See the Moscow communiquè claiming that according to their data, 7 fonds and 8 units were held in Kyiv (fol. 36), and the note confirming transfer (5 April 1956) from TsDIA URSR toTsGASA, TsDAVO, 4703/1/192, fol. 42.   back...

160 The act of transmittal to TsGOA (4 January 1956) notes an attached list, but a copy has not been retained in the TsDlAK records, TsDAVO, 4703/2/33, fol. 1. So far, an incoming copy of the list has not been available in TsKhlDK. We therefore do not know-although we may well suspect-that they involved émigré or other foreign-language materials.   back...

161 See the communique regarding the transfer from TsDlAK to TsGOA SSSR, listing 16 files in Polish and other languages (29 February 1957), TsDAVO, 4703/1/193, fol. 31. A few émigré files are also listed among 5 crates of materials of various foreign provenance transferred in another communiqué dated 29 March 1957, TsDAVO, 4703/1/193, fols. 39-51. Although most of the materials transferred mentioned in the above shipments were previously held in TsDIA URSR, some transfers were also made from TsDAZhR URSR, but it has not yet been possible to document them.   back...

162 "Spisok fondov uchrezhdenii ? organizatsii ukrainskikh burzhuaznykh natsionali-stov na territorii Chekhoslovakii" (5 February I960),TsDAVO, 4703/2/39, fols. 9-23. The list and covering letter are signed by the TsDAZhR director, Vostrikova, and the chief of the Division of Special Secret Fonds, Chernov.   back...

163 Grimsted, Archives: Ukraine, pp. 244-45. Information about them and their existence was constantly denied to the author before the publication of that directory in 1988. Archival officials in Kyiv requested that I not include such references, but numerous colleagues both in Ukraine and abroad assisted in tracking down earlier published descriptions.   back...

164 lakovlieva, "Praz´ki fondy vKyievi"; Lozenko, "Praz´kyi ukrams´kyi arkhiv" and "Z istori´i Praz´koho ukra?ns´koho arkhivu."   back...

165 TsDAVO, 4703/2/6. This folder contains lists of fonds dating from 1945 through 1949. Separate lists of processed fonds and those being worked on during 1949 give a relatively comprehensive idea of those being held by TsDIA URSR (TsDIAK) at that time-TsDAVO, 4703/2/16, fols. 10-20, 54-59. See references to other lists above in the notes, passim.   back...

166 The administrative records of TsDAVO (earlier TsDAZhR) are available in TsDAVO as fond no. 4665. As of the summer of 1999, they could be viewed only with the special permission of the director. (I was unable to obtain at such permission at that time due to the director being on vacation.) The records of the Special Secret Division were not among the opysy publicly available in that fond when my Ukrainian colleagues and 1 were permitted to consult them earlier.   back...

167 Tsentral´nyi gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Oktiahr´skoi revoliutsii, vysshikli organov gosudarstvennoi vlasti ? organov gosudarstvennogo upravleniia Ukrainskoi SSR: Kratkii spravochnik, comp. R.I. Tkach, V. M. Brozhek, V. V. Prokopchuk, and O. L. Rybalko (Kyiv: HAU, 1984) [microfiche ed.=East View Publications].   back...

168 These are seen especially starting with the reports of the Special Secret Division for 1947 and 1948-TsDAVO, 4703/2/9 (1947), 6 (1948), fols. 76-95, and 13 (1948). See the list of transfers from Lviv (6 April 1947), 4703/2/6, fols. 34, 54-65.   back...

169 Usually, researchers are permitted to consult the original opysy, although often that has required special permission; many researchers may not even know about their existence.   back...

170 Which, especially in the case of TsDAVO, is due to the lack of adequate processing to make the materials immediately available to public researchers.   back...

171 After a long series of requests, I was shown for the first time in March of 1994 the hitherto secret files describing these materials that had been held in the secret division of TsDIA URSR (now TsDIAK), before they were later consolidated with those inTsDAZhR. As explained above, the files are part of a hitherto top secret opys of the administrative records (AA) of TsDIA URSR/TsDIAK from the immediate postwar years (scheduled for deposit with the rest of the TsDIAK records in TsDAVO, fond 4703, as opys 2); some parts of that fond were reportedly destroyed. These data still need to be compared and coordinated with data from TsDAVO (TsDAZhR), i.e., the parallel secret opysy for the administrative records of TsDAZhR/TsDAVO (TsDAVO fond no. 4665), if they have been preserved. Access to only a few of the relevant postwar files among the secret section of the Ukrainian Holovarkhiv records (fond 14, opys 7) was granted in 1994, but other contingent files were still not declassified by 1998. At the end of 1998, the opys itself still was not available for consultation. It has been declassified since then.   back...

172 The Prague archivist Bohdan Zilyns´kyi´s survey, "Ukra?nistyka v praz´kykh arkhivakh," has not been published, but is now less crucial, given the new guide compiled by Podaný and Barvíková, Russkaia ? ukrainskaia èmigi´atsiia v Chckhoslo-vatskoi respuhlike, 1918-1938.   back...

173 Ibid.   back...

174 "Russkaia, ukrainskaia ? helorusskaia èmigratsiia" 1995. In terms of Ukrainian materials, see there, for example, the report by N. Mironets, "Dokumenty fonda Nikity Shapovala."   back...

175 Inventáře a katalogy fondů Státního ústředního archivu v Praze-Ukrajinské nuizeitm v Praze (Kyiv/Prague, 1996). See also Václav Pešák, "Zpráva ?#269;innosti Ruského historického archivu," pp. 218-19.   back...

Go top

Home | About Us | News | Q&A | Archives on the Internet | Contacts