Libraries in Russia: History of the Library of the Academy of Sciences from Peter the Great to Present 9783110955873, 9783598115936

Citation preview

Libraries in Russia History of the Library of the Academy of Sciences from Peter the Great to Present

Valerii Leonov

Libraries in Russia History of the Library of the Academy of Sciences from Peter the Great to Present

K-G-Saur München 2005

Translated by Nikolai I. Yashugin, Mikhail A. Prokofiev and Marcus A. Sherwood-Jenkins

Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.ddb.de abrufbar.

© Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier

© 2005 by K. G. Saur Verlag GmbH, München Printed in Germany Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Das Werk ist in allen seinen Teilen urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung in und Verarbeitung durch elektronische Systeme. Druck/Bindung: Strauss GmbH, Mörlenbach ISBN 3-598-11593-8

To the People of the Academy of Sciences Library (BAN)

FOREWORD Libraries in Russia affords Western readers a unique insight not only into the history of the Library of the Academy of Sciences (BAN) in St.Petersburg, but also into three centuries of Russian librarianship, its roots traced back to the foundation of the Russian Empire. With his historical study, Valerii Leonov - director of BAN since 1988 - draws on documents and primary materials that have either never been published previously, or else ceased to be available after the revolution. In this way, he can be seen to have made a significant and necessary contribution within the field of the historical reappraisal in Russia, casting light on numerous 'grey areas' in the wake of seventy years of socialist historiography, which shaped even the history of librarianship. Leonov has repeatedly been praised in the Russian specialist press for this particular contribution. Some readers may have accused Leonov's first work that was translated into English, The Library Syndrome (München, Saur Verlag, 1999. 295 p.), of focusing excessively on internal power struggles, intrigues and recriminations within the Library of the Academy of Sciences. This new study, however, offers a rigorous scholarly and scientific discussion and analysis of the Library's history. For Leonov, a library is far more than simply a site for acquisition, preservation and making available of information. He regards it rather as a living entity, akin to a human being, that passes through various stages of development determined by internal developmental cycles. Rhythms and cycles - in Leonov's terminology, even the 'pulse' of a library - are intrinsically bound up in the life and signification of a book, and in the dissemination of information; although he cites other determining factors besides these. For example, he also firmly believes that a library's history is dependent above all on those who work there and leave their imprint on it. Thus, Leonov views institutional history not merely from the standpoint of a historian, but also that of a biographer, positing direct links between those who influenced BAN at various times and events within the Library. The history of BAN commences with Peter the Great's appointment of its first director, the German Johann Daniel Schumacher. After long years of service, Schumacher found himself the subject of recriminations, and his reputation under fire, when a number of leading academics including Mikhail Lomonosov put their names to a petition accusing him of embezzlement, preferential treatment of foreign academics, and theft of library holdings. Although the case against Schumacher was dropped due to lack of evidence, he never recovered from these years of personal upheaval and tribulation. The figure of Schumacher opens the way for Leonov to broach the relationship between foreign and domestic interests, a subject matter that offers deep insights into the development of Russian culture, and which continues to play a defining role to this day. The interplay of Western and National influences does not characterize only the work of an institution such as the Library of the Academy of Sciences, of course; rather, the effects, positioning and posturing that result from such interplay have exemplified — and still exemplify —a broader cultural position. Foreign readers are generally struck by the emotional harshness that tends to distinguish the ensuing clashes and debacles, as well as by the career- and even life-threatening consequences that frequently follow.

8

Foreword

Leonov undertakes an impressive exposition of the parallels between this area of the BAN's history and the period of reprisals extending from 1929 to the late 1930's, in which he also draws on his own experiences during the 1980's. Within this discussion, it is the documents recording victims of Stalinist purges in purely statistical terms which prove most shocking: in 1931, fourteen library employees were given ten-year prison camp sentences, and three more executed by firing squad. By the end of the decade, 648 employees of the Academy of Sciences — almost half the entire workforce — had been discharged, and further prison camp sentences handed out. We are also privy for the first time to eyewitness testimonies describing the period of the blockade when, despite hunger, sickness and death, the safeguarding and evacuation of holdings retained utmost priority. Furthermore, Leonov discusses the appalling fires of 1901 and, in particular — with its memory still fresh in our minds — 1988, both of which left an indelible mark on the library. Who at this point would not relish the opportunity to document the history of a library and its employees? As a foreigner who has lived in Russia and worked in the area of library services here for almost five years, I expressed my willingness to write this foreword following numerous collaborations between Valerii Leonov, in his capacity as director of BAN, and the Information and Library Services section of the Goethe-Institut Inter Nationes. Over the years, it has been my privilege to get to know and to value Valerii Leonov not merely as a colleague, but also as an adviser and a friend. Through his advice and assistance, many hazy areas have been clarified, several stony ways smoothed over, and numerous hurdles cleared. Katrin Ostwald-Richter Regional Head of Information and Library Department Goethe-Institut Inter Nationes Moscow

INTRODUCTION

In 1714, while Peter the Great was working on his book collection, he realised that the specific character of Russia and its national problems were different from those of France, England and America, as reflected in their main libraries. As a result of Peter the Great's musings, his collection became the core of the future Library of the Academy of Sciences (Biblioteka Akademii Nauk - BAN). His pivotal ideas, if not so discernible to an outside observer, were in fact a leap through the cultural time-space abyss. They marked a transition from the first Old Russian public library in Kiev (which embodied seven centuries of library tradition) to a modern national library in St. Petersburg. The importance of this transition has never been fully appreciated. Peter the Great, the establisher of BAN, was the tsar, the head of the Russian State. His Old Russia predecessor had been the Kievan prince Yaroslav Mudry (the Wise). Both of these men offered splendid examples of marked individuality in the library culture of Russia. Peter's theme of "Science and Enlightenment" was born during his travels abroad, for the concept was not traditionally Russian. During his forty-three years of rule the country had only enjoyed one year of true peace, and only later the form and the funds to realize his ideas came forth. Young Russia was unsparing in her efforts and spent a lot of funds to organize a library of the new type in its northern capital. During its first forty years of life this library succeeded in forming the language of communication between the academic science of St.Petersburg and the West, and thus to become an international centre of attraction for the scientific and social thought that offered a comfortable information environment open for and available to foreign partners. The reader of BAN is something else yet — a surprising phenomenon of Russian culture that kept forming together with the library. Moreover, BAN also includes its staff: librarians, bibliographers, historians, philologists - individuals that passed through all BAN'S life, gave BAN their best years and left an ineffaceable trace in it. BAN is an imprescriptible part of St.Petersburg, reflecting all the great transformations and miseries the city went through. The first national library of the State became a model, an example to be imitated in all the succeeding large libraries of Europe and America. 6 years later (in 1720) the Royal Library would open to the readers in Paris; in 1795 that library would be renamed the National Library by the Convent. In another 16 years the British Museum Library would be founded in London (1753). Finally, the end of the XVIII centuiy would be known for the foundation of two more libraries —the Imperial Public Library (St.Petersburg, 1795) and the USA Library of Congress (1800). This is an excellent paradigm! "The existing Imperial Library of the Imperial Academy of Sciences that occupies the area of different departments and consists of many thousand books in various languages and which at this Reigning St.Petersburg began to develop under the Sovereign decree of the Emperor Peter the Great from 1714 and was connected together with the Imperial Academy of Sciences in 1724"\ rightfully stands first there. 1

Bogdanov A.I. Opisanie Sanktpeterburga. 1749-1751 gg. SPb., 1907. P. 165.

10

Introduction

What do we know about it? Do we know the true, real character of this great library? And if we do, what was it like in its childhood, the green years, the mature age? BAN was fated to be the leader, the first to stand against the attacks of authorities, to accrue experience in survival, and to share it with others, progressively transforming into the biggest national library in the world. But what is the meaning of all this? What is in store for BAN, and what will be its future? To answer these questions, one has to try to reconstruct BAN's life without any speculations and excogitations, building a kind of a document drama closest to reality, delving into its past and sensing the heartbeat of that time. It would seem that only the historians might have the power to carry out that tremendous work: they are the masters of reconstructing scientifically an object long gone. Now, as a librarian I am interested not in the historians' opinion on some specific library issues (though it is important also), but in the history of BANs' life perceived by a man working in that library. In other words, I am interested in the process of "evolving" of this marvelous phenomenon of Russian science and culture. One important digression. For many a year, while elaborating the BANs' theme, I did not consider it possible to publish anything on its history. As a rule, I confined myself to reports on conferences or to small articles devoted to isolated facts of BAN's complex life. Never mind your utterances on or your perception of the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Whether you exalt in it, overthrow it or render it mediocre, you are constantly haunted by the thought that you are forcing an open door. You have a kind of dejä vu: something that had been told and retold in textbooks, monographs, articles and dissertations. This way or another BAN is always within hearing — at least in St.Petersburg, as Nikolai Gogol would have said, and not only in the library environment. And all the while one has a gnawing feeling that nobody knows or wants to know the real life of the library. Thirty-six years passed since a collective monograph "History of the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences. 1714-1964" ("Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR. 1714 1964" M.; L.; Nauka, 1964.599 P.) had been written. That fundamental work, compiled mostly by historians, people from BAN's staff and printed in 3200 copies, had a strange lot too. It is hard to believe: that such a book of unique value has passed unnoticed in our library literature. But yes, looking through the leading Soviet publications of 1964-1966 ("Librarian ", "Libraries of the USSR: Experience of Work", "Library-Bibliographical Information of Libraries of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR and the Academies of the Union Republics", "Book: Research and Materials", "Soviet Bibliography", "Technical Libraries") I found no reaction to the "History...", except the synopsis in the "New Books " section of the collective "Libraries ofthe USSR: Experience ofWork" (\965.tm. P. 164). Foreign colleagues, apparently attendees at the 250-th anniversary of BAN at the Leningrad A.S. Pushkin Academic Theatre reacted to that book with short reports or summaries. The "Library of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 1964-1968" bibliographical index compiled by N.A. Laskeev cites six references to the "History... " in library publications of the Deutsche Demokratische Republik, Hungary, Poland, Belgium, Rumania, and Bundesrepublik Deutschland. I failed to find any factual analysis of that book. Why? Was it because it was written by bibliologists and historians, not by librarians, or were there grave "ideological considerations"? It is difficult to find a formal explanation if one recalls the occasion, the time when it was edited, its publishing body, and the quality of publication... Apparently, the reasons must have been numerous.

Introduction

11

The fact was that the "History... " had passed unnoticed, and so much for it. Soviet library specialists had failed to comprehend in its depth the singular cultural event of the XVIII century — the emergence of the first Russian national library or to understand its consequences. Hardly a person is qualified to do it today. A poor perception of the causes of BANs' emergence tinted the understanding of its specific functions. While reading scientific and educational literature or looking through reference books one gets a impression that from the moment BAN was born it either developed apart from the national library environment or pursued "its own way", intentionally withholding from active contacts with that environment. Of course, both impressions are wrong. One fact is evident: the world history of librarianship of the XVIII-XX centuries may only be known and expounded if one takes into consideration the influence of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. Since the publication of that book momentous events had reshaped the political map of our country. The three decades elapsed have changed the world, and the generation of the late 1990-ies sees and perceives the past differently than the people of the 1960-ies. Many new sources of data on different aspects of the library and book science, bibliography appeared; censorship was relieved; archives inaccessible during the Soviet period were opened; studies of highly specialized problems were published. In other words, now we may study BAN easily and without the prohibitions of our recent past. One may begin studying this enormous library in the same manner one might study the city of St.Petersburg: start with the landmarks, survey the buildings holding it and gradually penetrate its inner life. Thus even a superficial excursion to locations of the future library of the Academy of Sciences (the Summer Palace, the Kikiny Palaty (Chambers), the University Embankment, the Demidov House, Birzhevaya Liniya) would draw our attention to small details that turn out to be very important for understanding its history. Let us spend a while in three periods: XVIII century — BAN is the only public and scientific library in Russia; from XIX century up to 1921 BAN is divided into the Russian and the Foreign departments; from 1921 on it is in the stage of constant structural reorganization. A short chronicle of the main events looks approximately as follows. The Tsar-reformer, tsarinnovator Peter I had been aware of the necessity to create a library in the new Russian capital and became its organizer himself. It kept growing, won its first fame so that Diderot wrote about BAN in the 2-nd volume ofhis "Encyclopaedia "; it became a full-fledged national book depositary to receive depository copies not only of academic publications, but also of all the publications in Russia. In 1795 the foundation of another St.Petersburg library, the Imperial Pubic Library, was announced. It was to reflect quite noticeably on the further formation and development of BAN. During the XIX and the beginning of the XX centuries BAN gradually lapsed into background. Its division into two independent departments further aggravated its unsteady position. Since 1921 BAN fell into the grip of bureaucracy; together with the Academy of Sciences as a whole it weathered through accusations of serving first the tsars and then the Bolsheviks and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (C.P.S.U.). The Library was chronically short of money and premises, floods and fires threaten it. Generally, it may be regarded as one more sacrifice science and culture suffered not only through the Soviet period, but through the perestroika and the modern reforms in Russia as well. Even so superficial a glance at the Library that never adapted to the regime and turned out to be "epactal, redundant" prompts the researcher to study and analyze every period of its life. Is that life a down curve? How to understand this? What lies further - hopelessness?

12

Introduction

Let us go upstream to the source, to the prologue, to the concepts of the founder of the Library and the Academy of Sciences and Arts first. The prologue chants that the sovereign library formed earlier than the Academy. Before claiming anything, we will show two possible ways of that formation. The first, coming from the depth of the middle ages, goes the traditional Russian way; the second follows Peter's ideas. It seems that the tsar's concepts formed spontaneously, originating from his own education, his impressions gained abroad and his correspondence with the scholars and public persons of the time. One thing was clear anyway — the new tsar library had to belong, as before, to the Monarch, but at the same time be public, that is, generally available, so that two days a week the entry would be "free for anyone". Even today one can hardly overestimate the significance of that fact. A small advertisement in the St.Petersburg "Vedomosti" (The Gazette) of November 26, 1728, (N 95. P.383-384) had started the most important rule of library work in Russia — that of general availability of the national book depository to all its readers. The chronicle of life of the sovereign library and of the Academy of Sciences, available to researchers, accurately and punctually documents, not unlike an encyclopaedia, both Russian life and science from the XVIII through the beginning of the XX centuries. That is a peculiar encyclopaedia: everything went into St.Petersburg, the city called to consolidate the state-formed' national science and culture with the foreign. And the main function of the Library was to form a new type of scholar — a Russian closely connected with world scientific thought through all the accessible sources regardless of the language. Thus to grasp the principles of BAN forming as a national library one has not only to take in Peter's intellectual world, but to absorb the origins of Russian book-learning, to see its distinctive features different from those in Western Europe. This is the key to understand BAN's peculiarity as a new type of library that formed by fusing home and foreign traditions and cultures on the principles of interrelating the "native" with the "foreign". Initially it oriented towards the foreign cultural standard (which seemed natural in the tsar's library with its specially hired foreigners). Then, cut from its roots on the Russian ground, the "foreign" filled with national contents and formed a heteronomic cultural phenomenon. A few words about the genre of the present book. I see it as a novel-analysis based on notes, documents and comments. I suppose three centuries of life of a large universal scientific library offer ample ground for it. It is not only a work describing well- or little-known historical events, it involves the lives of many a person. It is so interesting and fascinating to follow the stages of creation of BAN through subjective perceptions of an individual. Furthermore, intruding so into the history and life of BAN entails enormous responsibility and a system of strict inner control on the author's part throughout his narration. This book contains a lot of documents, mostly published, some —archive. Some of them are only known from special publications, others haven't been republished for a century, so familiarizing the reader with them is a difficult point. That is why I attached complete documents in some cases. Stating my own point of view on the problem, my vision and interpretation precedes such quotations. It is not offhand that I invite the interested reader to step in with me to study the library life in Russia through the example of one of its largest collections, the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Please, make your own conclusions. It would be very interesting to compare them with mine. And then perchance there will appear a new book.

CHAPTER!

LIBRARY PROCESS: THE BEGINNING

The library space formed by the first national Russian library in the XVIII century originates in Russian book-learning, in the times when Old Russian literature and, respectively, the library traditions began to shape. We have to look into those times intently. Never touching the controversial problem of native writing in heathen Rus or denying the availability of Old Slavonic, Greek and other texts there, one should agree that it was only after its official baptism in 998 that books started to circulate in Rus on a large scale. "Christian belief — M. P. Pogodin wrote - also became the source of our education, the only source, in contrast to Western nations that had, beside their Christian faith and even before its introduction inherited the strong and versatile Greek and Roman education, "'. So a book in Old Slavonic became a symbol of Christianity and education, of a new way of life in the consciousness of an ancient Russian2. Experts note that works of Old Russian literature were mostly anonymous. Some disappeared quickly, but parts people liked were included in new works, while yet others went through several centuries of readings and rewritings. As in folklore, "platitudes" gained special attention. Literature thus "behaving" itself, its registration and keeping was another duty for the first librarians. With the advent of the book a need arose for its special repository so as to reuse it (it would be called 'book depository' later). Literature process gradually fusing with manuscript life budded in the library process that has been going on for several centuries since then. Mind you, that despite A.N. Vaneev's assertion that the history of librarianship in the XIXVII century Russia is one of the better studied periods, it still has many many blanks.3 The history of books and that of librarianship of the period was studied by S.A. Belokurov, N.P. Likhatchev, S.P. Luppov, N.N. Rozov, Β.V. Sapunov, M.I. Sluhovsky, A.A. Zimin, A.N. Vaneev and many, many others. However, scientifically describing the library process and merging these informative but isolated researches into some system that would relate in time the literature and the library processes still lies ahead. From the historical point of view this problem seems to be the central one for me. Beside its abstract ideal the library process also has a material aspect to be subjected to scientific research. It includes chronologically studying those facts and circumstances that came together to facilitate the evolution of book as a phenomenon of culture and art, the rising 1 Pogodin M.P. Obrazovanie i gramotnost' ν drevnem periode russkoj istorii // Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosvescheniya. 1871. Chast' 153, yanvar'. P. 1. 2 Kalugin V.V. «K'NIGY»: Otnoshenie drevnerusskih pisatelej k knige // Drevnerusskaya literatura: Izobrazhenie obchestva. M., 1991. P. 85. 3 Vaneev A.N. Razvitie bibliotekovedcheskoj mysli ν Rossii ν XI-XVIII vekah / S.-Peterb. gos.in-t kul'tury. S P b , 1992. P. 6.

14

Chapter I

of book collections and their topics; examining bibliognosts' (chirographists', authors', librarians') personalities; analyzing the literacy of the population, readers' interests and the peculiarities of their perception of literature; studying the history of libraries and classifying their collections, that of book exchange; the influence of typography on the development of librarianship. To feel the pulse of the library process, to catch its rhythm and cycle one has to identify its places of origin in the cultural centres, to understand the circumstances forming the machinery of its movement, to determine the causes of acceleration or deceleration of its development. Quite a number of publications examine those subjects but one should consider the facts already ascertained by historians and philologists and shift one's point of view so as to perceive afresh the familiar works of literature and those by the library scholars and find among the various accounts those referring to our subject. That is a hard task requiring thorough and laborious work. In my view these difficulties and the respective inner state of a researcher are best presented by Pavel Simoni in an introduction to his work (Pavel Simoni was a Member of the Imperial Moscow Archaeological Society, the Imperial Russian Geographical Society and a Member-Correspondent of the Imperial Society of Lovers of Old Literature and Art and the Imperial Russian Archaeological Society4). Beside the fundamental works by P. Simoni note several major studies of literary monuments in the cultural centers of Old Russia. In 1914, while planning a program of studying manuscripts Academician N.K. Nikolsky, rigorous in all his historical judgments, wrote: "Whatever tasks the historian of Old Russian literature outlines for himself and whatever borders he draws for those literary works that are bound to get on the list of his original sources, it is beyond his powers to refute the observation that, to the extent best available for modern study, the history of our Pre-Petrine polite letters had been most tightly connected to the lot of library book of old times... Library calendars, inventories, and other such documents related to bibliology of Old Russia stillfail to attract a well-deserved attention. They had not been collected, had seen almost no publications or sufficient studies in spite of the fact that the history of old libraries is the history of those 'think tanks' in which regional writing with its local interests had been developing in the old days"s. N.K. Nikolsky succeeded with his outlined program only partially. Times of involution were coming: World War I, then the February and the October Revolutions of 1917. After the sudden death of A.A. Shakhmatov on August 16, 1920 Nikolsky accepted the Library of the Academy of Sciences (1920-1924). Sixteen years after N.K. Nikolsky another famous Russian historian A.A. Zimin developed a similar program: " ...only imagining the actual composition of the monuments that were created, existed and were preserved in this or that cultural centre — he asserted one may understand their meaning in Russian history "6. 4 Simoni P.K. Κ istorii obihoda knigopisca, perepletchika i ikonnago pisca pri knizhnom i ikonnom stroenii... Vyp. 1. SPb., 1906. P. Ι-ΙΠ, VII. In his other, earlier work P. Simoni set himself the task of "...exposition of slow process of gradual evolution from the general profession of bibliognost-bookscriber chiefly — special craftsman, artist-bookbinder" (P. XI). See: Simoni P.K., Opyt svedenii po istorii i tehnike knigoperepletnogo hudozhestva na Rusi, preimuschestvenno ν dopetrovskoye vremya, s XI po XIII stoletie vkluchitelno: Texty, Materialy, Snimki. SPb., 1903. 307 p. 5 Nikolsky N.K. Rukopisnaya knizhnost' drevnerusskih bibliotek (XI-XVII vv ): Materialy dlya slovarya vladel'cev rukopisej, piscov, perevodchikov, spravschikov i knigohranitelej. Vyp. 1. (Α-B). SPb., 1914. P. III, VIII. 6 Zimin A.A. Iz istorii sobraniya rukopisnyh knig Iosifo-Volokolamskogo monastyrya // Zapiski Otdela Rukopisey Gos. bibl. im. Lenina. Vyp. 38. M., 1977. P. 15.

Library Process: the Beginning

15

In 1991 the Pushkin House published a collection of articles "Book Centres of Old Russia. XI-XVI centuries". In the introduction to that book R.P. Dmitrieva notes: "... observations on the vital activities of book centres, on the work of certain chirographists and collectors of private libraries, collected by researchers, point to constant interrelations within the circle of bibliologists of Old Russia, from the XI through XVI centuries. Through all the historical periods the main literature corps was known to the reading world of Old Russia" (P. 15-16)1. Now, what had this 'main literature corps' been during the conception stage of the library process we are interested in, first of all during the XI-XIV centuries? Beside the data from the sources listed above we note that from works by B.V. Sapunov8, N.N. Rozov9,L. P. Zhukovskaya10 who obtained it during their studies, and from the materials collected by the Archaeographical Commission. According to B.V. Sapunov's data first published in mid-1950-ies and then repeated in his final monograph of 1978, the gross volume of book funds in Old Russia remained within 13 ΟΙ 40 thousand volumes up to the middle of the XIII century. In his calculations Sapunov used the materials on construction of church buildings yielded by historians and archaeologists. He came to the conclusion that in 250 years since 988 "about 10,000 churches were built and supplied with books in Russia, including approximately 300-500 monastery churches". In his opinion, at least eight books were needed to conduct church services. Thus 90 thousand books were needed for ecclesiastic services. With the account of menologies and secular literature that number increased to 130-140 thousand books (P. 82-83). N.N. Rozov argued with B.V. Sapunov doubting his method of calculating the number of urban and rural churches and churches in feudal mansions. Moreover, he believed that only in some individual cases was a church restored after a fire re-supplied with books. N.N. Rozov explained the prevalence of B.V. Sapunov's data in publications by the impression the incredibly big number of Russian books of the XI-XIII centuries produced on some Russian researchers. Another reason was a poor state of statistics on old Russian books in general (P. 79-81). From the middle of the 1960-ies statistics became more accurate. According to estimates by the Archaeographical Commission from 1965, 1,493 manuscripts of the XI-XIV centuries, preserved completely or in part, were revealed in 38 organizations, 960 Russian ones among them. 424 of those are kept in the Saltykov-Schedrin State Public Library, 306 — in the Historical Museum in Moscow, 262 — in the Russian State Library, 165 — in the Central Archive of Old Acts in Moscow, and 152— in BAN In the beginning of the 1970-ies while working with books that have come down to our days L.P. Zhukovskaya reached conclusions not unlike B.V. Sapunov's: "The number of manuscripts written in Old Russia up to the XIV century — she wrote—... numbered about 100 thousand, and together with those brought from the South Slavonic countries it had to exceed that number" (P. 80). The next step is dividing the total book stock into three groups: 1) divine service books, 2) religious and 3) semi-secular and secular literature. Thus we have not only an idea about the literature corps of the XI-XIV centuries but an attempt to systematize it, though very simplified. What may one conclude on the basis of these data? 7 Knizhnye centry Drevnej Rusi. XI-XVI vv.: Raznye aspekty issledovaniya / Red. D.S. Likhatchev. SPb.: Nauka, 1991. 365 p. 8 Sapunov B.V. Kniga ν Rossii ν XI-XIII vv. / Pod red. S P. Luppova. L.: Nauka, 1978. 231 p. 9 Rozov N.N. Kniga Drevnej Rusi (XI-XIV w ) . M.: Kniga, 1977. 122 p. 10 Zhukovskaya L P. Skol'ko knig bylo ν Drevnej Rusi? // Russkaya rech'. 1971. Ν 1. P. 73-80. 11 Arheograficheskij ezhegodnik za 1965 g. M., 1966. P. 177-272.

16

Chapter 1

The Pre-Mongol period book collection spread through 10 thousand churches and monasteries requires some special attention. Within the scope of our study it forms the essence of the notion of "existence of literature". When saying "existence" I mean special skills of literature preservation, accumulation and dissemination, which together ensured literature movement through society. The library process was rising through that "existence" and it seems that it sprang up quite soon after the beginning of the literature process. "The Word was in the Beginning".... It is impossible to specify the exact date it happened in Russia, but most probably the process origins go back to the middle of the XI century. In order to move along the library path, let us turn to the repertoire of Old Russian literature, very difficult to grasp from the remains of a 100 thousand strong collection of those times. The hard times of foreign invasions, wars and internal conflicts had come to Russia12, towns and books burning in their fires. "We don't know, — O.V. Tvorogov writes,— what PreMongol collections of books had been ruined then"u. What remains from the XI-XIII centuries are 498 Slavonic-Russian manuscripts, including pieces, all revealed and scientifically described, 376 of them being biblical or meant for divine services14. As for the library process and the existence of books, hagiology, annals, legendaries, divine service writings and instructive words remain the only source by which one may reconstruct the social ideas and spirits, level of education and knowledge prevalent and available in that remote past. As to its function, Old Russian book-learning had a double role. On the one hand, together with churches and monasteries it emerged as a way to render and keep safe the Christian faith, while on the other, as emphasized in a special study by M.S. Kiseleva, Old Russian book-learning "was the only way of existence, rendering and preservation of knowledge, because Old Russia had no other such forms (educational, theological, scientific). So, in spite of an oft-repeated motive of self-humiliation a bibliologist in Old Russia was necessarily a teacher called upon by God. Another position gradually crystallized inside this teacher's one, similar to it at first glance but opposite to it in fact. A bibliologist was also a guru. He advised princes, and up to the certain time tsars also, estimating the events, taking the role of the defendant of human deeds in God's eye"15. As a way to preserve and transfer Christian faith Biblical texts carried the divine word itself and were considered samples, the standard of language use. One aimed at attaining it in one's individual creative work. "Theoretically, all the readers' demands, diverse in genre — V. V. Kalugin supposes — could be satisfied by confession literature alone "16. It performed the main book function: to become the means of saving the soul, to portray an 'ideal' human being. So secular literature not pursuing didactic goals did not deserve any serious attention, while 'false' writings abnegated by church fell outside the bounds of the official book system. "All that serves not the sake of good, but the sake of embroidery, is subject to accusation of 12 According to V.V. Mavrodin, only durung XIH-first half of XV c. the Russians endured more than 160 wars with external enemies. See.: Mavrodin V.V. Obrazovanie russkogo mnogonacional'nogo gosudarstva. M.; L„ 1939. P. 124. " Tvorogov O.V. Prinyatie hristianstva na Rusi i drevnerusskaya literature // Vvedenie christianstva na Rusi. M., 1987. P. 153. 14

See: Kalugin V.V. «K'NIGY»... P. 90.

15

Kiseleva M.S. Drevnerusskie knizhniki i vlast' // Voprosy filosofii. 1998. N7. See: Kalugin V.V. «K'NIGY»... P. 89.

16

P. 127.

Library Process: the Beginning

17

worldliness ". These words of Vassili the Great, one of the Fathers of Church determined many an attitude of Old Russian society towards the works of writing17. Hence, when the sources of the XI-XIV centuries tell us about the use of books they speak not about reading in general but that of religious texts, first of all the Holy Writ as a means of saving the soul. This explains the fact that confessional literature, in particular the Gospel, the Apostle and the Psalter remained better preserved than the monuments of secular writing, though fails to reflect the diversity and wealth of the total book stock at the same time. "The mistake of many library and museum workers — Β. V. Sapunov notes — lies in the fact that they directly estimate dissemination of some or other book or monument in antiquity by the degree of its preservation. Rather one should assume an inverse picture: the most popular, most read books had been preserved much worse because of their prevalence and 'readability "M8. The next important library problem of the existence of books in Pre-Mongol Russia is that of education and erudition of the Russian people, their manner of reading and readers' comprehension of hand-written texts. Compared to historical-literary researches there is considerably less material available on these questions. In my view, however, scholars have enough information to study the library aspect of the data at their disposal. That data peculiarity is that they are scattered through very different documents, remain non-systematized, fragmented and never serve the specific aim of author's study. They should be comprehensively researched starting with facts from the original works of the time in the context of the Russian-Slavonic cultural relations with the Western world and the Byzantium. Comparing tidings on any given event from various chronicles we must remember that beside editing and commenting they were subjected to more substantial revisions for a long time as well. Returning to specific analysis of the book existence in the documents from post-Mongol period, one should consider individual partiality and biases of the authors to past events. One may find abundant material on this and other subjects in a book by one of the leading historians of our time - Ya.S. Lurie. He comes to the conclusion that the annals of the XV-XVI centuries cannot be considered reliable sources on history of the Oldest Russia19. Let us discuss the question of literacy of the Russian people. It is quite within reason to suggest that if the XI-XIII centuries text corps included 130-140 thousand items, then the level of literacy had to be rather high. Until quite recently (the early 1950-ies) we had rather fragmented data on the question from written sources20. As for results of special research, on the whole they did not offer any convincing evidence of widely spread literacy either. I mean the publications by M.P. Pogodin, A.I. Sobolevsky, V.N. Peretz21, first of all. In his article "The Erudition " (1904) professor V.N. Peretz concluded the following: "For us the picture of erudition in Old Russia presents a desert in which one sometimes happens to 17

Kuskov V.V. Istoriya drevnerusskoj literatury. 4-e izd. M., 1982. P. 5-6. Sapunov B.V. Kniga ν Rossii... P. 153. " Lurie Ya.S. Istoriya Rossii ν letopisanii i ν vospriyatii novogo vremeni // Rossiya drevnyaya i Rossiya novaya. SPb., 1997. P. 99. 20 Thus, in Commentaries to "Nestor's Chronicle" under year 1030 we read: "the late chronicles, going back to Novgorodsko-Sophijsky anaclystic summary of the thirties of XV century, after a report about Yaroslav's campaign against chiud' there is the following story, apparently old: "And when came to Novgorod, gathered 300 of leader's and priest's children to learn books" (PVL. SPb., 1966. P. 480). In the hagiologies of some Novgorod saints written in the middle ages, is told that they went to schools. 21 See: Pogodin M P. Obrazovanie i gramotnost' ν drevnem periode russkoj istorii // Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosvescheniya. 1871. Chast'. 153, yanvar'. P. 1-28; Sobolevsky A.I. Obrazovannost' Moskovskoj Rusi XV-XVII vekov. SPb., 1892.23 p.; Peretz V.N. Obrazovannost' /Kniga dlya chteniya po russkoj istorii. T. 1. M., 1904. P. 533-549. 18

18

Chapter I

meet oases — circles ofpeople who are more or less educated by the standards of these times; sometimes those educatedpeople even seem to be some solitary figures dwarfed to insignificance among the mass of not only uneducated, but simply illiterate people ". And further: "In any case we have no reasons to suppose that the degree of literacy among the commoners of the XIXIV centuries was higher than in the XIX century, before the reforms of Alexander II, when literate people in the country were few" (P. 537). It was only during the last 50 years that the works of archaeologists, historians, philologists, and art critics radically changed our notion of literacy in the XI-XIII century Russia. The discoveries of birch-bark scrolls in Novgorod and then in other towns showed that the living language heard across the wide areas of Old Russia was not unified. The language of church literature was Church Slavonic. Only practical and legal documents were written in the proper Old Russian, the living language of communication. That of the annals and fiction usually combined the elements of Church Slavonic and proper Russian. It is extremely important that among the eight hundred extra birch-bark scrolls known by now more than 280 belong to the XIXII centuries. These scrolls were used for everyday purposes and are valuable as documentary evidence of those days22. As an example I will quote two messages from the remote past. The first one dates from the beginning of the XII century (N 424): "The letter from Gurgy to father and mother. When sold the homestead go here — to Smolensk or Kiev: grain is cheap there. If you don't go, send a message to me, how are you". Gurgy wrote the letter in Smolensk (this text comments are by V.L. Yanin, a historian), but he himself intended to go further, to Kiev. His parents, when having sold their homestead, could join him in Smolensk, but could also go to Kiev. What for? What might be a need to liquidate the homestead in Novgorod and migrate to the South? The letter gives us an unambiguous answer to this question: "cheap grain "23. The second message is from the XIV century (the scroll Ν 271): "My obedience to the fellow sponsor and my friend Maxim from Jacob ". Jacob is in need of oats and asks Maxim to buy it for him from Andrey. If the latter agrees to sell oats, it would require a kind of note from him, maybe a notice of receipt. But what is most interesting is another of Jacob's recourses to Maxim: "Send me some good reading matter ". This is how V.L. Yanin interprets that phrase: "He needs an interesting book. A divine service book cannot be implied here. If Jacob needed a bookfor divine service, he would have accurately named it because selection of such books was strictly regulated. Jacob needed some entertaining reading matter. Maybe it was the annals or some military story. Or it was a translated work offiction. Or it was a legend of some war saint, which for a medieval reader was same as a novel of adventure for a modern one. Maxim knows the taste of his fellow sponsor and his friend Jacob and will decide himself what book he has to choose for Jacob to enjoy. From this letter we find for the first time that literacy was so widespread in Novgorod that some people developed a taste and a desire to read. Jacob s letter is written in a natural, easy, living language of an intellectual person. But this letter is also important in describing our Maxim — V. L. Yanin emphasizes. —A man capable ofselecting an interesting bookfor his friend undoubtedly had to have an interesting library himself, an outstanding detail in itself. 22 See: Zaliznyak A.A. Posleslovie lingvista // Yanin V.L. Ya poslal tebe berestu... 3-e izd., ispr. i dop. Μ., 1998. P. 4 3 7 - 4 3 9 . 23 Yanin V.L. Ya poslal tebe berestu... P. 210-211.

Library Process: the Beginning

19

Moreover, he should have been quite a good person if his friends were not shy to bother him with their requests "24. In the process of Christian book education based on a lot of available writings of Byzantine-Bulgarian origin that elaborated on cosmogony, ethics, human psychology, behavior and interrelation with the environment such "book-learning" gained the greatest respect in Russia. Publications by V.P. Adrianova-Peretz, N.N. Rozov, Β.V. Sapunov, V.V. Kalugin25 offer important information on the attitudes of writers and readers of Old Russia to reading and treat it from a point of view interesting for us. Please consider some distinctive features of reading, as our ancestors knew it. 1. Reading theological literature was considered to be a public duty, a "collegiate" doing and not an individual engagement in Old Russia; it had to be not simple reading, but a "scrutiny" of subject matter under the guidance of scholars and righteous edifiers since these were the only persons capable of reaching the reading essence. 2. The scribe was obliged to share with others what he read. "Book honoring is good, ο brothers, for any Christian "; "with all one s heart" and "sensible eyes " should one apprehend what one reads "26. 3. The reader of theological books had to aspire to kind acts as the texts he read instructed him to do. We read in "The Nestor's Chronicles" under 1037: "Ifyou diligently lookfor wisdom in the books, then you ΊI find great use for your soul. Because the one who reads the books often, he does talk with God or with the saints. The one who reads prophetic discussions, and the gospel, and apostolic instructions, and the hagiology of saintly fathers, he does find great help for his soul". 4. "Irreverence to books" was considered to be the main source of many a sin and misery. The Novgorod chronicler said definitely: "wise man without a book is similar to a stronghold standing without a counterforce: if there is a wind, it shall fall"11. 5. Along with the need for ecclesiastic writings, the storage vault for eternal values, diverse life situations evoked in readers in Old Russia a yearning for secular, lay books of a different origin. Lists of abnegated works not recognized by the church started to appear; their reading declared sinful. ... Having written the above I decided to surface for a moment after immersing into "booklearning". Images and various associations that must have sprung in the conscious of readers in Old Russia as they internalized instructions, in particular those from ecclesiastic books always interested me. Fine arts yield many examples of those readers' reflections. I would like in particular to tell about one of the XII century masterpieces from Staraya (Old) Ladoga, a town about 120 km east of St.Petersburg. On October 8,1998, the St.Petersburg Scientific Center of RAS convened a field meeting there, and we familiarized ourselves in passing with wonderful monuments of old architecture, especially the Georgievskaya (St.George) Church and its unique frescoes. The one best preserved in all the temple cycle devoted to St.George is "St.George and the Dragon". In that church the plot routinely depicting the one-on-one combat of the holy warrior finds an uncommon interpretation. The plot and its artistic rendering are deeply impressive. 24

Yanin V.L. Ya poslal tebe berestu... P. 144-146. See: Adrianova-Peretz V.P. Κ voprosu ο kruge chteniya drevnerusskogo pisatelya // Trudy Otd. drevnerus. lit. T. 28. L., 1974. P. 3-29; Rozov N.N. Kniga Drevnej Rusi (XI-XIV vv ). M., 1977. P. 18-34; Sapunov B.V. Kniga ν Rossii... P. 110-162; Kalugin V.V. «K'NIGY». P. 94-109. 26 Izbornik, 1076 g. M„ 1965. P. 151;156. 27 See: Novgorodskaya pervaya letopis' starshego i mladshego izvodov. M.;L., 1950. P. 561. 25

20

Chapter I

To describe it let us call upon the authors of the book "Old Ladoga — the Ancient Capital of Russia" by k.Ή. Kirpichnikov and V.D. Sarabianov: "The central part ofthe composition is taken up by a majestic image of the holy equestrian warrior with a banner in his hand. He is dressed in a suit of armor and behind his back there flutters a dark-red mantle decorated with stars. His huge figure, roughly twice as big as those of other characters, is perceived as an image of an ethereal messenger. By the horse's legs we see the dragon led by a tsarevna who keeps him on a leash. "And the terrible dragon, it followed her, — tells the legend,— crawling upon the ground like a lamb to a slaughter". In the top corner of the composition there is a town-wallfrom which the tsar and the tsarina are watching the event with their retinue. Perceived outwardly as a narrative illustration to an instructive story so often found in medieval literature, this fresco has a deeper imagery as well. St.George, portrayed in the Byzantine tradition as a martyr or a combat-ready victorious warrior, the patron of the native troops, appears flying quite different colors here. Behind the scene of armorial triumph one can behold a new meaning: earthly evil, its bearer the dragon emerging as a purveyor of death and decay cannot be defeated by force. Force brings forth violence, so the evil can only be overcome by humility and faith. And the fresco characters represent these eternal ideals of Christianity exactly. Undoubtedly in the "militant gallantry - humility " antithesis the latter is principal"2*. But let us return to how all that had been read and perceived by an Old Russian reader. In library language, we are interested to learn what we can about that reader's contemporaneous environment and literature. Publications on that subject are even fewer. I would like to turn to the three well-known works, cornerstone in my view, by V.P. Adrianova-Peretz, M.M. Peschak and O.V. Tvorogov. "In writers' statements on and estimates of the environment — V. P. Adrianova-Peretz stresses— we look for traces of their acquaintance with that book-learning from which they and, thereby, their readers derived their religious, philosophical, naturalistic, historicalgeographical knowledge. No private libraries have survived from those times; only through notes in various manuscripts do we learn the names of compilers of composite books, those of copyists and book owners. Thus the hard problem emerges of identifying — even though in general — the circle of reading of Russian writers and readers. For each writer, even though anonymous, this problem is solved on the basis of his own works. As for the readers one has to search for the answer among the notes in books, in part judge it by the degree ofprevalence of copies of each separate work or its extracts, even look for its after-sounds left in spoken language "M. Selecting "Izmaragd", one of the most popular books of the Russian Middle Ages of the XIV-XVI centuries for the object of her study the author shows that it had been an original encyclopaedia for "home" reading, not an ecclesiastic work chiefly addressed to "lay" people. The predominant form of the "words" is hortative, touching a specific topic: "on alms", "on obedience", "on anger", "on envy", "on the rich and the disgraceful". It contains practical admonishments addressed to a "reasonable" head of the house: how to behave oneself in the court of law, where to ask for assistance, descriptions of the "offences" that may be caused to him or his household. In fact, turning to methodological significance ofAdrianova-Peretz research 28 29

Kiipichnikov A.N., Sarabianov V.D. Staraya Ladoga — drevnyaya stolitsa Rusi. SPb.: Slaviya, 1996. P. 121. See: Adrianova-Peretz V.P. Κ voprosu ο kruge chteniya... P. 3.

Library Process: the Beginning

21

we may see that, taking "Izmaragd" as an example she describes the processes of forming of world outlook, defines the tasks of literature and elaborates on verbalization means of an Old Russian writer and hence — his readers. Another author, the well-known Ukrainian linguist and literary scholar M.M. Peschak studied annals from the XI-XVII centuries conducting a linguistic-semantic analysis of old texts30. In her monograph she described the process of reconstructing the compositional structure of handwritten materials determining the "native" and the "alien" in an author's text by quoting. She also showed peculiarities of "explicating" the subject matter and the formal text features such as primary and secondary (bibliographical) information that helps to identify such elements as contents and synopsis. Describing the structure of the chronicle text M.M. Peschak singled out introductory, main and final parts. One of her conclusions is the following: "history of scientific literature confirms an existing objective regularity: the more generalized is the description of scientific problems in the book, the more harmonized is the way it is presented in the main text; meanwhile, the more concrete is the object investigated by the author, the more broken is his presentation of material, and, strange though it may seem, such a text is perceived with difficulty by the reader. Syntax plays a great role in delimiting the harmonized vi. the broken exposition of written texts ... Rhythm and melodies at the disposal of the Old Russian chirographists had been used as disjunctive symbols to emphasize their statements. As testified by East-Slavonic monuments the arsenal of such symbols was wide enough" (P. 194). Two works by Ο. V. Tvorogov devoted to reading and perception of the Old Russian texts attracted my attention. Accurate and clear assertions in the first make it in fact a program of a comprehensive study31. I singled out four separate aspects of the work. The first is the way a problem is stated. The author formulates the task as follows: 1) what concrete facts or indirect evidences allow us to judge the character of past literature perception by its contemporaries, 2) we are interested not in the historical literary process, but specifically in that perception of literature by the reader. It is especially difficult to answer that question with respect to literature of the remote past, yet unfamiliar with such a true mirror of literary life as criticism. The second aspect touches upon peculiarities of the research itself. If we, Ο. V. Tvorogov writes, set out to reveal the reader's perception, that is either his interest in problems, or admiration of aesthetic merits of a work of literature, we have to remember the strict limitations on the repertoire of Old Russian book-learning, especially during the older period: there had been books needed for the divine service or books included in the obligatory repertoire of monastery libraries. Such material is not very promising for solving the question that interests us. To pronounce our judgments we have to select such material that is either not an obligatory part of Christian book-learning, or permits monuments of the same genre or even the same subject to compete. Particularly outstanding are the cases when a work of literature had been read and copied in spite of an official prohibition. The third aspect of Ο. V. Tvorogov's program for studying readers' perception is interesting for its prompts on the possible sources of research. First of all these are the Old Russian anthologies — collections of works of literature, constructed according to certain subject or calendar principles that reflect the varying readers' demands. One may obtain objective material analyzing the mutual influence of literary monuments. "The most ostensive example — the 10 Peschak M.M. Rozvitok davn'orus'kogo i staroukrains'kogo naukovogo tekstu. Kiev: Ukrainoznavstvo, 1994. 270 p. " Tvorogov O.V. Ob izuchenii chitatel'skogo vospriyatiya literatury // Klassicheskoe nasledie i sovremennost'. L., 1980. P. 55-59.

22

Chapter I

author emphasizes — is not even the influence of "The Lay of Igor's Warfare" upon "Zadonschina", but the influence of "Zadonschina" upon the other work of literature about the Kulikovskaya battle — "The Saga of the Mamay Battle ". The latter has some fragments included from the text of "Zadonschina " which attracted the attention of the author with their aesthetic features: bright imagery, colorful comparisons and figures of speech". If several versions of the monument have been preserved in the form of thorough revisions, paraphrases, if it gained new features, changed the plot, all this is a cogent argument in favor of its popularity, offering material to judge as to what exactly attracted the Old Russian readers, which characteristics of the plot or peculiarities of style had developed. The forth aspect of the program touches upon interpreting the results obtained. The author warns: it may seem that all he says isn't new and that similar observations were already made. But they refer to judgments on separate monuments. The moment we elevate to wider generalizations, we start treading trickier grounds. Material of stable collections, of apocrypha, of the translated hagiography has not been drawn on yet. We usually solve the question of readers' perception in passing. Meanwhile, a special study of inventories of monastery and private libraries, registration and analysis of readers' notes in Old Russian books is necessary. And it will not be the history of literature but the history of social thought or rather that of social tastes and social psychology, concludes O.V. Tvorogov. I will add that the author succeeded in realizing his program in another article where he analyzed the repertoire of translated hagiology of the XII-XIV centuries. Mind you, hagiology of that time depicted the original "real world". There, writes S.V. Polyakova, an expert in the Byzantine hagiography "political events, details of economic life, intrigues at the court find their reflection... We are visiting Imperial Palaces, craftsman shops, pirate ships, sinister shelters of magicians, estates of the rich, dungeons, rural hovels and taverns"32.O.V. Tvorogov adds: " ...hagiology acts develop in the vast areafrom Italy to Caucasus, from Greece to Syria, Egypt and the mysterious lands at oecumene's end... Saints always move from town to town, cross the seas, trudge through stony deserts, reach mysterious dwellings of the blessed and even the Heaven itselfBasing on the analysis of facts reflected in many monuments that coexisted in the XII-XIV centuries the author comes to the conclusion that studying translated hagiology is extraordinary important for reconstructing the historical, aesthetic and literary profile of the Old Russian readers (P. 225). And yet, and still... Reading these studies by well-known authors I could not find an answer to the question that always interested me: if "The Lay of Igor's Warfare " is the monument of the XII century, the pearl of world culture and so on, then why do we find no references to it as a source in the circle of reading of Old Russian writers and readers? No traces tell us whether it was known or read in the XII-XIV centuries. From the library point of view this question is central. In search of an answer I went again with a fine comb through the fundamental work by V.P. Adrianova-Peretz34. She never touches on the "reader's" theme there at all! Varvara Pavlovna starts with the text of "The Lay", carefully analyzes its vocabulary, phraseology, folklore and literary traditions of the XI-XII centuries. She compares "The Lay" with other monuments of the time: translations ("Chronicle" by Georgy Amartol, "History of the Judaic War" by Joseph 32 Polyakova S.V. Vizantijskie legendy kak literaturnoe yavlenie // Vizantijskie legendy / Izd. podgot. S. V. Polyakova. L., 1972. P. 2 4 5 - 2 4 6 . (Literaturnye pamyatniki). 35 Tvorogov O.V. Drevnerusskie chet'i sborniki XII-XIV vv. Stat'ya vtoraya: Pamyatniki agiografii // Trudy Otd. drevnerus. lit. T. 44. L., 1990. P. 196-225. 34 Adrianova-Peretz V.P. «Slovo ο polku Igoreve» i pamyatniki russkoj literatury XI-XIII vekov. L.: Nauka, 1968. 202 p.

Library Process: the Beginning

23

Flavius), Russian texts ("Word" by Daniil Zatochnik, "Analecta" by Svyatoslav, "Hortative" by Vladimir Monomakh) and many others. And naturally she corroborates connections of "The Lay" with the poetics, history and events of those days. "The poetical talent of the author — writes V.P. Adrianova-Peretz — had been the only power to raise "The Lay of Igor's Warfare " so high over everything circumfluent that even in our days it continues to participate actively in the life of Soviet and foreign polite letters andfine arts " (P. 40). What sort of unlimited height was it to remain unattainable and to leave no trace among the literate, moreover quite educated Old Russian reader as we saw above? I repeat once more: while reading about literature perception in the Pre-Mongol period I could find no references to "The Lay". Why? Did the researchers really disregard that fact earlier or was it glossed over intentionally? Or was the Moscow historian A.A. Zimin right to consider "The Lay of Igor's Warfare " to have been written in the end of the XVIII century35? Unfortunately, his manuscript has not yet been published in full (45 printer's sheets) up to now. Too bad. Despite the "escort duty" of polemic articles by the advocates of "The Lay" 36 1 picked two essential facts from what has been published of A.A. Zimin that seemed to be very important in dating the time of creation of this work of literature. 1) "Pushkin regarded "The Lay" as an old monument. At the same time he wrote that Igor's song looked a solitary monument in the desert of our old polite letters". Now we know that Old Russian writing had never been a desert, but with a clear vision of a genius Pushkin felt the sharp antithesis between "The Lay " and other monuments of old literature (my italics -V. L.) (P. 136). 2) "Quite recently G.A. Lesskis, a linguist detected an interesting objective relation between the length of a sentence and the dating of a work of literature. According to his observations sentences in Old Russian literary monuments are considerably longer than in literary works of the XVIII century, on the average. By that parameter, taking "Zadonschina " to correspond to Old Russian tales "The Lay of Igor's Warfare " should belong to the literature circle of the XVIII century. Characters in old monuments speak directly in phrases of 16-18 words, whereas in Igor's song they utter 11,9 and Radischev's characters only use 10,8. "Zadonschina"'s author's continuous narration stretches for 18-22 words, and that of "The Lay" for 11,6. Radischev scores 12,5. Methods of mathematical linguistics may solve the dispute on the dating of creation of Igor's song yet." (P. 147). I will add another fact, the third in favor of A.A. Zimin's concept: references are absent in literature that would touch on the reaction of writers and readers of the XII-XIV centuries to "The Lay of Igor's Warfare ".

35

Zimin A.A. Kogda bylo napisano «Slovo»? // Voprosy literatury. 1967. N3. P. 135-152. See: Voprosy literatury. 1967. Ν 3. P. 133-134; 153-176. To readers interested in discussion problems around "The Lay... ", advisable is to acquaint themselves with publications in two issues of the magazine "Russkaya literatura"oi 1994: To the history of the dispute on the authenticity of "The Lay of Igor's Warfare". From Academician D.S. Likhatchev's correspondence / (L.V. Sokolova's publication) // Rus. lit. 1994. N2. P. 232-268; Ν 3. P. 213-245. Ya.S Lurie was right, writing in his memories about Zimin: "The book had not been published not only in the end of 1964, when Khruschev was owerthrown. It was not published in the following years also. It is not published up to now. 'DoctorZhivago', 'Archipelago GULag' and volumes of "The Red Wheel", Trotzky's writings and Melgunov's 'The Red terror' have been published. But Zimin's 'The Lay of Igor's Warfare' turned out to be more dangerous, then all of them". See: Lurie Ya.S. From memories about Alexandr Alexandrovich Zimin // Odissey, 1993. M.: Nauka, 1994. P. 201. 36

CHAPTER II

THE ORIGINALITY OF RUSSIAN LIBRARY CULTURE

Today, in spite of the diversity of actual information of historical and literature nature, library science has neither a common theory of the library process nor a description of the dynamics of book circulation in Old Russian society. It would seem that this problem might be now solved: scholarly works are under no prohibitions now and no outward circumstances limit such studies. The only barrier to consider at every step is the formidable layer of concepts and steady traditions of presenting the material in scientific literature. There is a cohort of outstanding Russian bibliognosts, their activities widely known: Yaroslav Mudry, Vladimir Monomakh, Ilarion... As to those other chirographists, translators, writers whose works replenished the libraries not only of Kiev and Novgorod but also of many monasteries and princes' countryseats, we know quite little about them. Discovering new facts, finding new names in the process of studying the lives of old libraries — or the "brain centers", as Academician N.K. Nikolsky had called them, will continue. However I do not plan to write my own version of library history. In this chapter I'd like to substantiate the thesis that a special phenomenon in the sphere of culture — Russian library culture— sprang to life with the conception of the library process in the country. Sources testify that it formed off the beaten track and not only aimed at developing literature itself but originated in the general problems of the Russian history and the history of Russian culture. To clarify my train of thought to the reader I will introduce two pieces touching on the declared theme. The first is the "Tragedy of the Russian Culture — an article by a Russian philologist RM. Bicilli, little-known to the modern reader: "The fact that Russia fell behind Europe in its development and had to overtake it in a hurry then was a great disaster in terms of Civilization. Now, as a matter of Culture, it had been the greatest gift of fortune. Culture follows its own progress of a kind, irregular, nonrectilinear, without the need to realize any consciously stated goals. That progress consists in accumulating the results of spiritual experience, in enriching the reserve of spiritual incentives and creative potentials... Culture is tragic by its own nature and so it is unusual for it to flow quietly and idyllically, without obstacles and dangers. Otherwise it becomes threatened with yet the most horrible and overwhelming danger — to be imperceptibly, gradually sucked ' The article was published in 1933, in the magazine"Sovremennye zapiski" (N 53. P. 297-309). In 1990 it was published in the magazine "Ruskaya literature" (N 2. P. 134-154). I quote P.M. Bicilli's work (as published in 1996). See: Bicilli P.M. Tragediya Ruskoy kultury //Izbr. trudy po philologii. M.: Nasledie, 1996. P. 147-157.

The Originality of Russian Library Culture

25

in by civilization, as it happened time after time with certain European cultures. Being their heiress, the Russian culture ran its wealth with true royal ease... The more mature is the culture, the more distinct become its tragic problems, the more compellingly they are forced to the conscious — and the more urgent becomes the need to free one's spirit from the depressing anxiety... The extraordinary, unparalleled freedom of development of the Russian culture, its apparent, outward disorder, irregularity along with its utmost perfection, - by no means is all that an indicator of some immanent characteristic of "the Russian soul" (or "ame slave"). Culture is just the soul being created and becoming national, its peculiarities determined by the sociological texture of the nation. Only this fact is of importance to the historian of culture. In the context of the philosophy of culture another circumstance becomes significant. The historical mission of Russia is that, due to a specific texture of the Russian society, its culture has become "pure". Among all the European countries of the Christian cultural circle Russia has appeared to be the only country where culture affected civilization just barely and thus did not degenerate into civilization completely. Therefore its tragic ruin instead of a gradual fade into arteriosclerosis; and that is why it ennobles the result of European culture and its ruin guarantees a global Renaissance, impossible without great upheavals, without an excruciating awareness of the tragedy of the Spirit awakening (P. 147; 149; 157) ". The second piece is taken from a book by a contemporary author, B.A. Uspensky2. It is devoted to the perception of secular vs. ecclesiastic powers in Russia. "Russia has always been explicitly oriented towards foreign culture. Atfirst it looked to Byzantium, then —towards the West. The reforms of Saint Vladimir that marked initiation of Russia to the Byzantine civilization, and the reforms of Peter I that declared the initiation of Russia to civilization of the Western Europe bear a principal resemblance. In fact these reforms are similar in character, the only difference being the cultural reference point. First, the principle of "ex Oriente lux" is declared and then — "ex Occidente lux". In both cases however the values are set from the outside and a necessarily conscious absorption offoreign cultural models and conceptual schemes is presupposed. The problem of the old vs. the new comes in the guise of the native vs. the alien, and the cultural development permeates via internalization of a foreign experience. Now, when striking the Russian soil these models usually interpenetrate to form something essentially new, distinct from both the adopted culture (that is, the culture of the country of its origin) and the culture of the recipient. In the result this orientation towards a foreign culture strongly facilitates the development of an originally Russian culture. This orientation towards a foreign cultural standard has brought certain texts (both in the narrow linguistic and the wide semiotic sense) to Russia to express the assimilated cultural tradition. Here though they functioned out of their historical-cultural context that had caused their initial appearance in their due time. Moreover, they were actually adopted to recreate the appropriate cultural context. The cultural set, the ideological task thus left reality behind and was actually called to create new reality. Specifically, the orientation towards the Byzantine culture had led to the appearance of certain rituals somehow related to the concept of power; ...the Russians adopted the ritual andfilled it with substance. Naturally that semantic substance did not necessarily correspond to the initial one. The rituals borrowed from Byzantium or created in the process of orienta2 Uspensky B.A. Tsar' i patriarh: Harizma vlasti ν Rossii (Vizantijskaya model' i ee russkoe pereosmyslenie). M.: Shkola «Yazyki russkoj kul'tury», 1988. 680 p.

26

Chapter II

tion towards the Byzantine culture acquired new meaning in Russia and conduced to form the new cultural concepts — inter alia the specific notions of power. Rituals, usually reflecting some ideology, served an opposite task in this case, forming an ideology" (P. 5-7). Despite the 65 years between them, the works quoted consolidate the idea that, on the one hand, the originality of Russian culture is determined by the "sociological texture of the nation" in the process of accumulating "the results of spiritual experience" (P. Bicilli) and, on the other, having assimilated foreign cultures, it manifests itself "inter alia in the form of specific notions of power... forming ideology" (B. Uspensky). Let us first appeal to literature. If the above is true, if those ideas correspond to reality, then it is logical to observe their development 'in library', tracing the experience of Russian writers, scribes and translators as they communicated with foreign books, first of all Byzantine, that came to Russia together with Christianity. It is necessary to explain the meaning I put into the notion of "communicating with foreign books". It should not be considered as oversimplified, that is I don't reduce it to just reading the book and responding to it. My wider meaning is: - Selecting a specific Byzantine book for either an ecclesiastic or a secular service; - Selecting the translators and chirographists, masters of the language of the original; - Reading and interpreting the foreign text by the translator; - Communicating with other translators and scribes who have practical translation experience; - Preparing the Russian translation; - Appraising the translation quality on the whole or in certain parts as judged via the reader's perception. I think that the numerous scribes, translators and writers implementing the orders of either the ecclesiastic or secular powers in the process of communication with a foreign book step out not only as witnesses but also as the spokespersons of their time. I would also add that there had been no special studies of communication with "foreign" books in studies of the history of librarianship in Old Russia. That is why one should regard the fragments of texts below as illustrations meant to confirm the author's point of view. It would be interesting to find similar studies that analyze the Old Russian texts of non-Byzantine origin and compare them with the Byzantine translations. Then we would have a more complete picture of contacts of the Russian writers, chirographists, translators and readers with foreign books. Here are just some facts taken from the works of N.A. Meschersky, M.M. Kopylenko, M.V. Bibikov, D.E. Afinogenov, Z.G. Samodurova, O.V. Tvorogov that testify to such an intercourse with the Byzantine books. Books analyzed in these works are of a special interest since they are of a narrative nature and don't belong to ecclesiastic writing in their subject matter. It is also important that some translations are larger than the originals and are preserved in a lot of copies. N.A. Meschersky devoted his studies to comparing the language of Slavonic translations with the language of their Greek originals. One of his works analyzes "The History of the Judaic War " by Joseph Flavius (the Judaic historian of I A.D.) 3 . Pages 253-254 of the book contain a story of educated occupations of the Essenes — members of one of the main Judaic sects. "The readers of Old Russia — N.A. Meschersky notes — had read these pages with a censorious eye, discovering in ancient Essenes the prototype of the monkshood of their own times. But one may conclude from the translation that old books, which the Essenes were so insistently 5

Meschersky N.A. «Istoriya Iudejskoj vojny» Iosifa Flaviya ν drevnerusskom perevode. M.; L., 1958. P. 492.,

The Originality of Russian Library Culture

27

looking for and "queried" — had been the works on natural science, history and geography that brought good to soul and body ". Intuition never let the Old Russian readers down: they had been on the right track appealing to Byzantium for this knowledge. One of the main sources of knowledge in natural sciences in Byzantium had been the works of the ancients in which they developed the problems of mathematics and natural philosophy, as well as those by their early Byzantine commentators. Recent studies show that the curriculum for the population of the Empire was formed by disciplines of literary (trivium) and scientific (quadrivium) cycles4. The scientific cycle included arithmetic, geometry, music or harmony, astronomy and physics. Internalization of such subjects 'improved' one's mind that is promoted the development of one's cognitive faculties and logical thinking. During the IX-X centuries some mathematical studies appeared in Byzantium. Among these were the writings of Leo the Mathematician, e.g., his lecture about Euclid, in which he pioneered using letters instead of figures to express arithmetic relations, and the works of Michael Pcell, inter alia his treatise "On the numbers ". Among the others were Michael Ankhial, the deacon, who based his teachings on Aristotle's works and taught the logics, dialectics, physics, metaphysics, astronomy and meteorology to his students. Numerous copies of a textbook on cosmology and geography by Eustratius Nikeysky have been preserved. It is now ascertained that in the process of its creation the author leaned on Aristotle treatises on natural science, the works by Claudius Ptolemaeus, the writings by Empedocles, the stoics and other thinkers of the past. A detailed analysis of the Byzantine scientific sources from the VII-XII centuries by Z.G. Samodurova shows that people of that period could get knowledge about the phenomena of the surrounding world reading and studying works of the ancients, the original treatises of their contemporary scholars, studying quadrivium guides, works of literature and theology or attending studies by professors of mathematics, natural science and physics5. Still in the context of the Old Russian reader's communication with foreign books let us tum to just one more publication by Z.G. Samodurova in which she touches on the so-called 'minor' Byzantine chronicles 6 . The author writes that these chronicles, circulating in the West, East and among the Slavs were nothing but chronological tables consisting of short notes indicating the number of years between the two events and the number of years of the tsars' rule. In Russia such chronicles were named "short chronicles", "chronicles in brief', "rapid chronicles". And many of them have reached us. Now let us turn again to the pillars of translation produced in Old Russia. A special role among them belongs to "Alexandria" (late XI - the beginning of the XII centuries). "The history of Alexander the Great — as Academician A.S. Orlov noted — became one of the books belonging to the world, those always descending to the general use "7. The degree of closeness of the book language to living speech always depends on the genre. In the Medieval 4

Samodurova Z.G. Κ voprosu ο haraktere istochnikov estestvennonauchnyh znanij ν Vizantii VII-XII vv. // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 53. M., 1992. P. 62-70; T. 54. M., 1993. P. 49-61; T. 55 (80), ch. 1, M., 1994. P. 127-131. 5 Samodurova Z.G. Κ voprosu ο haraktere istochnikov estestvennonauchnyh znanij ν Vizantii VII-XII vv. // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 55 (80), ch. 1. M., 1994. P. 131. 6 Samodurova Z.G. Κ voprosu ο malyh vizantijskih hronikah. Po rukopisyam moskovskih sobranij // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 21. M., 1962. P. 127-147. 7 Orlov A.S. Perevodnye povesti feodal'noj Rusi i Moskovskogo gosudarstva XII-XVII vv. M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1934. P. 9.

Chapter II

28

environment a biographical story with elements of fantasy undoubtedly had to become The genre, most comprehensible to people and closest to the common speech in its language. In this respect "Alexandria" surpasses not only the literature of the divine service and hagiography, but also the historical chronicles. It had influenced the style, metaphors and artistic formulae of many a monument of the Old Russian writing, including the chronicles of the XIII or even the XII centuries8. Studies by M.M. Kopylenko devoted to the syntactic constructions of "Alexandria" offer an opportunity to appreciate the high language culture of the Old Russian translators, who had approached the Greek original creatively and produced a most accurate translation of the substance of the original9. M.M. Kopylenko did a similar analysis of the translation of "The Chronicles " by George Amartol10. That work also became the object of a literature study by D.E. Afinogenov". He emphasized that the popularity of the chronicle among the medieval readers is proved, specifically, by the large number of preserved manuscripts (more than 30), and also by the fact that the monument had already been translated into Slavonic and Georgian as early as the X-XI centuries, gaining wide popularity in Russia. In particular, Nestor used "The Chronicles " by George in the historical part of his "The Nestor's Cronicles". Besides, later historians had actively studied that material — "almost all the later chronographs sippedfrom it"12. Finally note one more contemporary collective work related to the preparation of an academic edition of "The Analecta" by Svyatoslav (1073). According to its authors' idea that publication included the Greek text of the Byzantine source too. Μ. V. Bibikov wrote a series of articles on identifying the Greek prototype of the Slavonic "The Analecta" 13. By way of the successive collation of texts of ten Greek manuscripts that seem to be copies of the Byzantine original he came to the conclusion that: 1) the prototype of the Slavonic "The Analecta" acquired its own rather stable forms while on the Byzantine ground yet, and 2) the times by which the collection reached the state then taken as a basis for the Slavonic translation should be dated to the reign of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, and before December 17,92014, in any case. In contrast to the widely spread translated works such as those mentioned above, O.V. Tvorogov's attention was attracted to the menology collections of the XII-XV centuries. He studied 34 such collections including: hagiology, extracts from the Kievo-Pechersky hagiology, Apocrypha, homilies, festival and hortative commentaries and even fragments of a translation of "The Chronicle " by George Amartol15. "These composite books, — O.V. Tvorogov points— were particularly intended for individual reading (as one can judge from their contents and 8

Orlov A S . Op. cit. P. 12. Kopylenko M.M. Iz issledovanij ο yazyke slavyanskih perevodov pamyatnikov vizantijskoj literatury: Gipotakticheskie konstrukcii slavyano-russkogo perevoda «Aleksandrii» // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 16. M., 1959. P. 82-91. 10 Kopylenko M.M. Gipotakticheskie konstrukcii slavyano-russkogo perevoda «Hroniki» Georgiya Amartola // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 12. M., 1957. P. 232-241. 11 Afinogenov D.E. Kompoziciya «Hroniki» Georgiya Amartola // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 52. M., 1991. P. 102-112. 12 Afinogenov D.E. Op. cit. P. 102. 13 Bibikov M.V. Rukopisnaya tradiciya grecheskih spiskov prototipa Izbornika Svyatoslava 1073 g. // Vizantijskij vremennik. T. 53. M., 1992. P. 106-123. 14 Ibid. T. 54. M., 1993. P. 106. 15 Tvorogov O.V. Drevnerusskie chet'i — sbomiki XII-XIV vv. Stat'ya pervaya // Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoy literatury. T. 41. L., 1988. P. 197-214. 5

The Originality of Russian Library Culture

29

the positioning of monuments included), and that makes possible judging the reader's interests of their owners and copyists; selection of the genres, monuments, repetition of certain texts — all these are important evidences when judging the circle of reading of the Old Russian bibliognosts of the XII-XIV centuries "16. According to results of his analysis the interrelation of the native and the foreign was resolved in favor of the latter. That was a natural process, we may affirm now, since back in the XI-XII centuries translations were still disseminated among all the book centers and thus appeared to be more competitive than other Russian homilies. Another case is presented by the original Russian hagiology that sprang to being during the same times and described spiritual feats of the Russian compatriots. "The first Russian hagiologies (the anonymous legend of Boris and Gleb, "The Reading about Boris and Gleb ", and "The Legend of Feodosy Pechersky " by Nestor) convince us — O.V. Tvorogov concludes— that Old Russian bibliognosts perfectly mastered the Byzantine hagiography instrument of weaving the plot. They knew it well enough and could create original and highly artistic works "17. I assume the material offered is enough to take for a fact that the literature of the XI-XIII centuries was one of the most important sources of formation of the Russian library culture. So let us now move on from literature to the general problems of Russian history and history of the Russian culture. Doing so one should bear in mind that the Old Russian book learning was the only form of passing the knowledge on, so that a bibliognost still acted as an ideologist too. Consider how "accumulation of the results of spiritual experience" (in terms used by RM. Bicilli) manifested itself in the relations of the church and the secular powers. It is important since the problem of that interrelation was imbedded in Russian culture and history the moment Vladimir accepted Christianity and baptized Russia. All the authors of that time valuated this event positively. The keynote in their works was an approval of the alliance between the church and the secular power18. But approval per se had not been enough for bibliognosts. In his "The Nestor's Chronicles "19, acting as an ideologist of power, Nestor cites a plot, where support and recognition of the Church by the Princes are shown. M.S. Kiseleva calls the character of such relations between the prince and the church "paternal cooperation "20. It had existed in Russia before the Mongol invasion. The author sees the reason for such cooperation in the indivisibility of powers, when both had to act concurrently. "So long as power belonged to the prince alone, there was no need to determine its competence. The customary law was functioning. The appearance of a second power required demarcation of the spheres of influence... So up to a certain time the prince and the bishop, the prince and the hegumen of the monastery to which the prince contributed were tied together extremely tight by a common interest of a political character first of all. That particular interest had shaped the ideological service of the first Russian bibliognosts ", — concludes M.S. Kiseleva21.

16 Tvorogov O.V. Svoe i chuzhoe: Perevodnye i original'nye pamyatniki ν drevnerusskih sbornikah XIII-XIV vekov // Russkaya Literature. 1988. Ν 3. P. 136. 17 Tvorogov O.V. Svoe i chuzhoe... P. 138. 18 Biblioteka literatury Drevnej Rusi. Τ. 1. XI-XII vv. SPb.: Nauka, 1997. P. 45; 49. " Ibid. P. 293; 295. 20 Kiseleva M.S. Drevnerusskie knizhniki i vlast' // Voprosy filosofii. 1998. Ν 7. P. 127-147. 21 Ibid. P. 130.

30

Chapter II

The process of separation of powers was slowed down by internecine conflicts and wars. Literature needed a positive model in such a situation. The search for it embodied in the image of a peace-loving prince adhering to "the Christian behest of obedience to a senior"22. The disobedience of princes leads to disasters and angers God. The chronicle tales of the Tatar-Mongol invasion offer many such examples23 A small comment is needed here. In spite of the fact that the Tatar-Mongol invasion had drastically slowed the development of the Old Russian culture, it appeared incapable of changing the social function of the Russian Church and its institutes. The Tatar-Mongolian yoke did not seek to change the social function of the Church or indeed the religions of subject peoples, it was not an empire of conversion but one of vasselage and tribute. The Mongol empire was temporal rather than spiritual. Very soon the successors of Batyi became aware of this fact and permitted the Orthodox clergy to pursue their spiritual guidance. It was reflected in the creation of a separate episcopate in Sarai and the receiving of their own brush from the Khan. It was not at once that the changes in the hierarchy of the secular and the church powers took shape, but the epoch of the Kievan Rus had been gradually passing away. "The independence of Russian church, — M.S. Kiseleva pointed,— manifested itself in the choice made in the end of the XIII - the beginning of the XIV centuries, during the strengthening of the Rostov principality, the Moscow and Tver rivalry, and the internecine war in Russian lands. In due time prince Vladimir had chosen the faith, but now the church had to make its choice that was to depend on the force and the power of one principality set against the internecine wars and horde raids... Bibliognosts could not but reflect these contradictions in their works. Moreover, the more the Moscow principality established itself, the more persistently bibliognosts kept representing its interests as both the Orthodox and the Russian in general, hence sanctified by the church "24. As to the Moscow principality, there are so many writings about it that I will only quote historian A.E. Presnyakov's conclusion: "the grandeur of the rapid growth of Moscow, its new meaning in both the national and international life were in need of ideological comprehension. It was developed in some book theories (My italics - V. L.) of church-political and world-historical character. According to these theories Moscow ranks high in the lots of the Christian world"25. I believe the material presented confirms well enough a close interrelation between the forming Russian history and culture and the Russian library culture, and, specifically, between the ecclesiastical and the secular powers 26 . From the moment Russian library culture was born its originality manifested itself in two ways. On the one hand, it reflected in the active use of foreign experience, chiefly the Byzantine, by Russian scribes, and on the other, both the book and the library cultures in Russia developed from the very start in a close relation with the ultimate power. 22 23 24

Biblioteka literatury Drevnej Rusi. Τ. 1... P. 335. Ibid. T. 5. XII v. P. 93-131. Kiseleva M.S. Drevnerusskie knizhniki i vlast'... P. 135-136.

"Presnyakov A.E. Moskovskoe gosudarstvo. 1500-1650 // Istoriya novogo vremeni (1500-1910). T.' 1, vyp. 14-15 / Pod red. prof. I. Pflug-Garttunga. SPb., b. g., P. 723. 26 See also: Goldberg A.L. Istoriko-politicheskie idei Russkoi knizhnosti XV-XVII vekov // Istoriya SSSR. 1975. Ν 4. P. 60-77. Borisov N. S. Russkaya tserkov ν politicheskoi bor'be XIV-XV vekov. M.: Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo universiteta. 1986. P. 207. The bibliognost's role was increasing. He was not a teacher only, but also expressed his opinion of occurring events and actions of higher powers. Here is Borisov's typical observation: "In XIV-XV centuries the Metropolitan chair participation in ideological substantiation of political claims and in glorifying military victories of Moscow princes was minimum. The main work in this field was made by courtier bibliognosts and the 'elders' of Moscow monasteries closely connected with the ruling classes. " (Op. cit. P. 195-196). The new reality of relations with power formed in such a way.

The Originality of Russian Library Culture

31

A natural question arises: how are we to study library history and library culture in the light of these peculiarities? To answer it we shall proceed from the fact that every library lives a "double" life. The first is empirical, that is real, common, everyday. One can watch it, describe it and study it. In that sense any library is a mirror of the society, since it reflects the organization of contemporary life. If a researcher sets out to discover and describe as many libraries as possible, the contents of their book collections, reference, the necessary empirical material is available for subsequent generalization. Specifically, such material is contained in the quoted works of P.K. Simoni, N.K. Nikolsky and others. One should add of course the dedicated XIX century studies by S.P. Shevyryov27 and N.S. Bokachev28. Such studies are continued today as well, chiefly by the Moscow and St.Petersburg historians. Unfortunately, they lack a system, since no coordination centre runs any general supervision, planning or financing of such activities. The other life of a library may only be perceived in direct observation, it is innermost. The only way to know it is through the relations of that particular library with the power, with other libraries and institutions, through investigating their interaction, the movement of its collections, its functions and place in the society. As compared with an empirical description such an investigation is more complex and remains at its initial stage. In fact, we have only one substantial work of a kind. This is a study by N.N. Zarubin, published as far back as 192429. Basing on the data from 80 inventories of the Old Russian libraries he analyzed the use of the format principle in book arrangement in depositaries of the North and Central regions, and in the Northwest and Southwest Russia too. One of that author's conclusions deserves attention: the format principle of arrangement spread through the Russian libraries of the XV-XVIII centuries due to "intense reading of books" (P. 229). Of course, this inference by N.N. Zarubin contains valuable information for a library science specialist, testifying to the fact that the function of service in the stocks was becoming basic. Such inferences are of a long-term nature. As for the later materials I would select the final article by N.N. Rozov who described a rather ramified migration of books in the library of the Novgorod Sophia and tried to reconstruct it30. Returning to the subject of a "double" life of every library let us stress that a researcher joining manifestations of these two different lives within the framework of a single study may arrive at some non-trivial, though not necessarily clear results. The situation we described causes a theoretical possibility of a double "perusal" of the library. In the first case it emerges as the subject of text as a particular institution, and we study it as a phenomenon of culture. In the second we regard the library as an element of a more general library system and analyze it at the context level, where its interrelations and concerns may actually be presented. The library is of interest to the researcher not only due to its valuable editions but to its relations with other libraries as well. Such an interaction shows the library as an integral part of the library process having its own rhythm, dynamics, motion and sensations that we often miss in our researches. 27 Shevyrev S.P. Istoriya russkoj slovesnosti. Chast' pervaya, soderzhaschaya vvedenie i stoletiya IX i X. Izd. 2-e, umnozhennoe. M „ 1859. P. XXIX-CX. 28 Bokachev N.S. Opisi russkih bibliotek i bibliograficheskie izdaniya. SPb., 1890. 316 p. 29 Zarubin N.N. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechnogo dela ν Drevnej Rusi. 1. Primenenie formatnogo principa k rasstanovke knig ν drevnerusskih bibliotekah i ego vozniknovenie // Sbornik Rossiyskoy publichnoy biblioteki. T. 2. Materialy i issledovaniya. Vyp. I. XV-XVII w . Pg.: Izd-vo Brokgauz-Efron, 1924. P. 190-229. 30 Rozov N.N. Iskusstvo knigi Drevnej Rusi i bibliogeografiya (po novgorodsko-pskovskim materialam) // Drevnerusskoe iskusstvo: Rukopisnaya kniga. M.: Nauka, 1972. P. 24-47.

CHAPTER III

ON THE LIBRARY LIFE CYCLE

In October 1998 the V.l. Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine celebrated its 80th anniversary. First day plenary reports were devoted to the 1000th anniversary of chronography and bibliology in Ukraine. Between the sessions I managed to visit at last the Sophia museum conservation area. The golden Ukranian autumn was on. A monument attracted my attention on site, not far from the cathedral. It was one by I. Kavaleridze erected in 1969 to commemorate the foundation of the first library in Old Russia. A huge brown granite block showed Yaroslav the Wise with a book in his hands and carried a piece from "The Nestor's Chronicles " of 1037 (herein a modern translation follows): "In the year 6545 Yaroslav, Vladimir s son, had sown bookish words in the hearts of the believers... Great use, after all, happens from booh learning". I do not remember how long I had spent in the Sophia Cathedral, totally enchanted. In my imagination I saw the book collection of the first library, lying in chests lining a gallery... What astonished me most though were the mosaics and frescoes portraying saints with books and rolls in their hands. Already back in St.Petersburg while examining a photographic album of the Kiev Sofia presented to me by Valentina Nikiforovna Achkasova, Director of the museum I counted fifteen similar XI century mosaics and frescoes. Now what, beside the chronicle story of 1037 are the sources on the deepest history of Russia by which to judge the Kiev library? They are quite scanty and defy generalization. Books lost, chirographists' and readers' names not preserved, composition and volume of the collection unknown. According to E.I. Shamurin "... no book inventory of the Kiev State came down to us Statements by V.E. Vasil'chenko on the availability of the Gospels, the books of prophets, The Wisdom of Solomon, the Apostle, hagiology, original Russian works and even secular literature remain unfounded2. M.I. Sluhovsky refuted them easily writing that no library book of the early period escaped3. Note the two facts on the history of that first library that are most interesting in my opinion. I borrowed the first from "History of Russian Church " by E.E. Golubinsky, a prominent historian, Professor Emeritus in ordinary of the Moscow Ecclesiastic Academy, published in 19014. It is of interest since the author attempted theoretically to reconstruct the Sophia library of the XI century. 1 Shamurin E.I. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoj klassifikacii. Τ. 1. M.: Izd-vo Vsesoyuzn. kn. palaty, 1955. P. 277. 2 Vasil'chenko V.E. Ocherk istorii bibliotechnogo dela ν Rossii Xl-XVIII veka. M.: Goskul'tprosvetizdat, 1948. P. 1 7 - 1 8 . 3 Sluhovsky M.I. Bibliotechnoe delo ν Rossii do XVIII veka: Iz istorii knizhnogo prosvescheniya. ML: Kniga, 1968. P. 5 0 - 5 1 ; 155; 206. 4 Golubinsky E E. Istoriya russkoj tserkvi. Τ. 1, polovina 1-ya. 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. Μ., 1901. P. 191-193.

On the Library Life Cycle

33

The second one relates to the collection of manuscripts in the Kiev Sophia. In the same 1901 when E. Golubinsky published his book professor V.N. Peretz used an opportunity to acquaint himself with that library and discovered that just the XVIII-XIX century Russian and foreign manuscripts in it counted 7345. Among them were "... the remains of the library of Metropolitan Evgeny Bolkhovitinov, the famous XVIII-XIX century scholar; these included the materials he prepared for his learned studies, copies of ancient monuments, others that often bore traces of work by the eminent Evgeny, his notes and inscriptions". Peretz also marked that the library received extremely diverse manuscripts, mostly contributions by and heritage of the Kiev Metropolitans and the Sophia parish. "A lot of composite books... consists completely of documents, gathered by diligent hands of Metropolitans Samuel Mislavsky, Ierophei and others" (P. 121). There are two opinions on the date of foundation of the library as well. Some authors date it to early 1037, the time of erection of the St. Sophia Cathedral, others delay it by four years, asserting that Yaroslav handed the books over only in 1041. On July 15,1891, the reading Russia celebrated the 850* anniversary of foundation of its first book depository6. But while the discussion continues7, the memory of the first library of Old Russia stays preserved in the record of 1037, in "The Nestor's Chronicles", in images in sacred books, is inscribed in the cathedral mosaics and frescoes of the XI century and in the image of the library founder, Yaroslav the Wise. I also want to speak about the immaterial. Looking at the wonderful cathedral one involuntarily thinks of those innumerable ancestors who entered the cathedral, went up the gallery, took the books, read them, then retold them to many and perfected themselves through that bookish learning. This feeling of inner library life stays with it for almost a thousand years already. And apparently it will last for a long time yet. So, how many lives does a library have and what is it in general? What is the meaning of that notion "the life of a library" and what is its duration? The question, I suppose, is neither idle, nor rhetorical. To start, let us try to examine and clarify it. Searching for an answer we appeal to the lot of another famous library of antiquity, the Alexandria, lost 400 years before a book depository was founded in the Kiev Sophia. Its life cycle reached almost 1000 years, its incredible legends are still with us even now, it constantly attracts attention of scholars like a magnet. What is known about the Alexandria library today? Below follows a short history of its life laid out with the data available8. Alexander the Great founded the Egyptian city of Alexandria during the winter of 331 - 330 BC. It is believed to have been the first city built of stone. Descendants of Alexander ruled Alexandria, and Ptolemy Lagos soon made it the capital of the Ptolemy dynasty. Ptolemy I Soter (300- 284 BC), Lagos' son and heir, Ptolemy II Philadelphus, who had reigned for forty years, 5 Peretz V.N. Ocherk biblioteki Kievo-Sofijskogo sobora: (Iz zapisnoj knizhki) // Literaturnyj vestnik. T.2, kn. 6. SPb., 1901. P. 121-127. 6 Pervaya russkaya biblioteka // Bibliograf. 1891. Ν 9-10. P. 135-136. 7 See: Sluhovsky M.I. Bibliotechnoe delo... P. 50 8 See for example: Freeman Ch. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. P. 275-285; Bergier J. Proklyatye knigi. M.: Kron-Press, 1998. P. 2940; Firsov G.G. Knigoopisanie i organizaciya alfavitnogo kataloga: Uchebnik dlya bibl. fak. in-tov kul'tury. M.: Kniga, 1971.P. 40-41; Callimahus // Knigovedenie: Encikl. slov. M.: Sov. enciklopediya, 1982. P. 233; Derevitzky A.N. Ο nachale istoriko-literaturnyh zanyatij ν Drevnej Grecii. Kharkov: Tipografiya Adol'fa Darre, 1891. 226 p.; Gintovt S. Muzej i biblioteki drevnej Aleksandrii // Gimnaziya. 1893. Ν 10. P. 451-465; Semenovker B A. Bibliograficheskie pamyatniki Vizantii. M.: Arheogr. centr, 1995. P. 18-30; 155-158; 166.

34

Chapter III

named themselves Pharaohs, and everybody considered them "Ra chosen, Amon favorites". Shortly the new capital became the crucible to synthesize the Greek and the Egyptian cultures. Book shops were opened at specially assigned places in the city streets. After reading aloud pieces of manuscripts to interested listeners book sellers accepted orders for their copies. One could also order works absent in the shop. Copyists used to be well-educated prisoners of war or slaves (in Rome slave copyists were called "libraries"). Moreover, they used to read books to their owners and worked as directors of home libraries. These "libraries" produced multiple copies of the originals so that they appeared on sale at large, the number of copies reaching a thousand simultaneously. Alexandria ships went to Greece and among other goods brought in manuscripts by Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides from there. Every ship entering port was obliged to pass one copy of each work to the library. The tsar paid for such book purchases. Meanwhile the Greek literary production was fairly large9. The famous city library and its museum (Museion) owed their existence not only to Greeks but to Egyptians, bearers of vast knowledge in astronomy, mathematics, crafts and arts, as well. Museion became the first research institute in the history of mankind: the state rendered material assistance to science for the first time there. John Bernal commented that subsidies and organized studies that distinguished scientific work by the Museion placed it ahead of any other dedicated scientific activities before or after for the next 2000 years10. It all resulted in a significant development of such disciplines as mathematics, astronomy and mechanics, associated with the names of Euclid, Archimedes, Hipparchus in our minds. A special edifice with ten halls and separate study rooms was built for the library. The design and size of that building remain unknown. All we know is that when erecting public edifices architects of that time always paid much attention to selecting the locality, mutual positioning of separate blocks, etc. In this connection A.N. Derevitzky quotes a piece from the Vitruvius work "On Architecture "". Though the exact date of foundation of that book depository is still argued about, the name of the man who contributed very much to it is known. That was Demetrius of Phaleron, the Greek. He was born between 354 and 348 BC and is known to have been acquainted with Aristotle, himself an owner of a large personal library (part of it then appeared in Alexandria). In Athens Demetrius became the people's tribune and then the elected governor. He ruled in Athens for 10 years, then went to Thebes and devoted himself to science. One of his works is called "On the Light Pencil in the Sky". In 297 BC Ptolemy I Soter, the Pharaoh, son of Lagos invited Demetrius to Alexandria. According to Plutarch Demetrius in fact advised his sovereign patron to collect and study works treating on the state. "Books, — he kept saying — have even more courage to tell the truth to sovereigns than their friends. " I2 . It is possible that Soter, who was thinking about starting a library, considered this advice a pretext for its foundation. He granted Demetrius a right to collect manuscripts from everywhere, and to the end of Soter reign Demetrius managed to amass about 200,000 scrolls. Demetrius devoted fifteen years of his life to the library and became famous in Egypt as a patron of sciences and arts in the name of Ptolemy I Soter. "In its cultural aspect the service that Demetrius rendered mankind there, far from his homeland,— '

Derevitzky A.N. Op. cit. P. 102-103. Bernal J. Nauka ν istorii obschestva: Per. s angl. M.: Izd-vo inostr. lit., 1956. P. 100; 125. " Derevitzky A.N. Op. cit. P. 86-87. 12 See: Derevitzky A.N. Op. cit. P. 51-52. 10

On the Library Life Cycle

35

as A. Derevitzky quotes the German researcher Yu. Schwartz in his book, — surpassed significantly everything the public government of Athens did from the moment Poliorkete entered Athens and to the times of domination of Roman despots like Hadrian or Marcus Aurelius. For Demetrius of Phaleron highly promoted the merge of Greek erudition with the Egyptian, Babylonian and Judaic, and all the West-European culture owes its origin to that merge" (P. 50). Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the son of Ptolemy I, interested in science, specifically zoology himself, continued to actively promote the library. He is particularly interesting for us as a compiler of a systematic register of works by Aristotle, an undertaking similar to that by Callimachus. Philadelphus himself chose his librarians from a number of persons on the museum staff, and those persons retained their authority for life. The first librarian Philadelphus appointed was Zenodotus of Ephesus who worked in the library for 22 years. A team of assistants was at Zenodotus' disposal. One of them ran the register of all the new acquisitions; another validated and examined manuscripts that came from book traders and commissioned agents; still another copied works impossible to purchase into full possession by the library; the fourth maintained order on the premises, took care to protect manuscripts from humidity and worms, insects, arranged them conveniently in cases and on shelves; the fifth ran fiscal records. The librarian however had a leading role in every process. Centuries rolled and the library collection grew to become priceless, new manuscripts constantly added to it. Beside the Greek works on history, philology, natural sciences, works in translation purchased in the East joined it. Researchers stress repeatedly that the acquired texts "were in need of examination and correction, frequently by way of laborious critique, and that was the task of scholars belonging to the library and the adjacent Museum... Numerous copyists were laboring for the library and it deeply influenced bibliology (both in the sense of processing the text and the external book format)"13. Spatially the library occupied two buildings by the Museum and the Serapis shrine. The first contained up to 440,000 scrolls and the second about 428,000, including duplicates too. The list of library custodians survived to our days: Zenodotus of Ephesus, 282 to 260 BC Callimachus of Cyrene, 260 to 240 BC Apollonius of Rhodes, 240 to 230 BC Eratosthenes of Cyrene, 230 to 195 BC Aristophanes of Byzantium, 195 to 180 BC Apollo Eidographus, 180 to 160 BC Aristarchus of Samothrace, 160 to 131 BC On this list the name of Callimachus, the scholar and the poet, is well known. The legend has it that he wrote about 800 works of literature of which only six hymns, 60 epigrams and some papyrus fragments survived. Ptolemy II Philadelphus selected him from among the members of the Museum and appointed him librarian of the Alexandria library for life. By right Callimachus is considered "the father of bibliography", the author of the first ever catalogue of 120 books. The full name of the catalogue reads "Tables of those that became famous in all fields of knowledge " ("Pinakes ton enpasepaideia dialampsantön "). Even today the surviving fragments of the Table or Pinakes amaze one with the idea of Callimachus inventory and the scope of his achievement. 13

Garelin N. Aleksandrijskaya biblioteka // Bol'shaya sovetskaya enciklopediya. 1-e izd. T. 2. M., 1926. P. 170.

36

Chapter III

The true name of the author stood first in the inventory entry. What is more, his patronymic was indicated. If the latter was questionable, all the patronymics found in various manuscripts by the same author were given. Then came the data on the author's actual or possible place of birth and on his most fruitful years, followed by information on his teachers and the scientific school he belonged to (in cases of doubt the compiler could express his own opinion). The list of works ascribed or actually belonging to an author followed his name. It included full titles of works and offered different versions of those in case disagreeing titles were found in different inventories. If authorship remained uncertain yet, other possible names were offered as probable authors of the work. Then followed the initial words of the book or even its first phrase, the number of lines of poetry (if the work was a poem). As for dramas the list indicated the time and circumstances of their staging. The entry ended with the total number of lines in all the author's works. A.N. Derevitzky, the author of an exaustive study on Callimachus Tables concludes that that was the first attempt to systematize Greek pieces of literature in history into its genres. In other words it was a historical-literary abstract..., so that "one may affirm a priori that in any case the Alexandria 'Pinakes' were something more significant than a simple catalogue" 14. According to various sources when Julius Caesar arrived in Alexandria (47 BC) the library had about 700,000 manuscripts. During the fight for the city Caesar incinerated the Egyptian fleet in the port, and the fire spread to the city is . The next serious plunder happened during the times of Xenobia the Empress and then Diocletian, the Roman Emperor (284-305 AD). He wanted to destroy the books containing recipes for production of gold and silver. It resulted in the destruction of alchemy manuscripts. Then in 391 AD a crowd of fanatics (it is believed to had been lead by Theophilus, a Christian monk) burst into the Serapis shrine and ruined the second part of the library. It was finally destroyed in 646 AD. A generally shared opinion is that it was the undoing by the Arabs, supposedly acting on books in general: "no books are needed except the Book", that is the Koran. The Moslem historian Abd-al-Latif affirmed: "the Alexandria library was put to fire by Amr ibn al-As by the 14

Derevitzky A.N. Op. cit. P. 154, 162, 167, 168. Bernard Shaw in his play "Caesar and Cleopatra" described a scene, when learned Egyptian Theodotus begged Caesar to prevent library ruin: Theodotus. The fire has spread from your ships. The first of seven wonders of the world perishes. The library of Alexandria is in flames. Caesar. Is that all? Theodotus. All! Caesar: will you go down to posterity as a barbarous soldier too ignorant to know the value of books? Caesar. Theodotus: I am an author myself; and I tell you it is better that the Egyptians should live their lives than dream them away with the help of books. Theodotus. Caesar: once in ten generations of men, the world gains an immortal book. Caesar. If it did not flatter mankind, the common executioner would burn it. Theodotus. Without history, death will lay you beside your meanest soldier. Caesar. Death will do that in any case. I ask no better grave. Theodotus. What is burning there is the memory of mankind. Caesar. A shameful memory. Let it burn. Theodotus. Will you destroy the past? Caesar. Ay, and build the future with its ruins. See: Shaw B. Polnoye sobranie sochinenij. T. 2. M : Iskusstvo, 1979.P. 166-167. 15

On the Library Life Cycle

37

order of Omar the Victorious'"6. Abu al-Faradge, a Syrian scholar (1226-1286) said the library lot was decided by the words of Omar: "All the books seized in the city and including the same doctrines as the Koran are unnecessary. Those containing doctrines that contradict the Koran are harmful"17. A surprising truth is that al-Latif was the first to have written this almost 600 years after the fire, and there is no another confirmation. Can one believe him if there are no earlier sources? Below comes a later example. In 1801, in Paris, Paren Senior, a Frenchman published a book "Experience in Bibliography and the Talents of a Librarian ". That book is interesting for its reconstruction of 14 chronological epochs "important to bibliography into which the comprehensive republic of literature devides". For Paren the first epoch meant Homer, father of the poets and the prodigy of his centuiy; the second —Alexander the Great, avenger of Greece, the patron and connosier of arts;... the sixth epoch — Omar I who burnt the famous Alexandria library and wanted to substitute all the richness of bibliography by the al Koran; ... the eighth epoch — Gutenberg in cooperation with Faust and Shefer who introduced typography craft and so on1'. Meanwhile (and this shows the modern impact of the Alexandria library) publications to the opposite start to appear today. One of it belongs to Hamavi19, another to E.I. Zelenev, a historian from St.Petersburg. In his monography devoted to the history of Egypt the latter insists: "Amr (one of the warlords of Omar the Caliph - V. L.) prohibited looting by the army. The Arab military expansion did not cause any serious destruction in Egypt. The well-known legend that the Alexandria library was burnt by the Arabs was invented several hundred years later, and the first to promote it was the work by Abdallatif al-Bahgdad"20. As far as we can judge by the materials available, arguments from the opponents of the view that the library had been ruined by the Arabs give reason to revise that literature-formed view. And the fate of the Alexandria library will for a long time remain the topic of research by scholars of various countries and professions. But let us return to our days. Thirteen centuries after the destruction of the library something incredible happened. By the UNESCO initiative and with participation of the Egyptian government and UN a decision was made to revive the Alexandria library. The project is named "Library of Alexandria'™. Naturally, the talk is about quite a different library, related to the former by its geographical position and the common nostalgia of mankind for the ancient Greco16 Bergier J. Proklyatye knigi... P. 35-36. Running ahead, let me say that in other parts of the world had been similar actions. Thus, on July 12, 1562, a Franciscan monk Diego de Landa in the town of Mani, Yukatan (Mexico) with a purpose of forcible introduction of Christianity ordered to annihilate in public Maya's manuscripts in hieroglyphic writing on deer's leather. "As far as, — Landa wrote, — the book contents was nothing but superstition and devilish falsehood we burnt them all...". See: Landa Diego de. Soobschenie ο delah ν Yukatane. 1566 g. / Per. i prim.: Yu. V. Knorozova. M.; L.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1955. P. 4; 3 1 - 3 2 ; 138; 241; Gallenkamp Ch. Maya. Zagadka ischeznuvshej civilizacii: Per. s angl. M.: Nauka, 1966. P. 21. 17 See: Nemirovsky E L . Mir knigi: S drevnejshih vremen do nachala XX veka. M.: Kniga, 1986. P. 42. 18 Parent l'aine. Essai sur la bibliographie et sur les talents du bibliothecaire... Paris, [1801]. Cit. in: Shamurin E.I. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoj klassifikacii. Τ. 1... P. 236-237; 368. 19 Hamavi A T. Novoe ν istorii Aleksandrijskoj biblioteki // Bibliotechnoe delo i problemy informatizacii obschestva: Tezisi dokl. mezhdunar nauch. konf., Moskva, 27-28 aprelya 1999 g. Ch. 2. M.: Mosk. gos. un-t kul'tury, 1999. P. 204-205. 20 Zelenev E.I. Egipet: Srednie veka. Novoe vremya. SPb.: Izd-vo SPbGU, 1999. P. 39. 21 Bibliotheca Alexandrina: The revival of an idea. Paris: UNESCO, 1990. 36 p. (Yazyki: angl., franc., arab ). See also: Helal A.H. Bibliotheca Alexandrina: The revival of an idea // Bücher, Menschen und Kulturen: Festschrift für Hans-Peter Geh zum 65. Geburstag. München: Saur Verlag, 1999. P. 354-365.

Chapter 111

38

Roman classical science and culture only. The first one will remain forever in the past except for the data on Greek and Roman writers cited in the Callimachus Tables that have reached us22.1 had an opportunity to see that wonderful dream-model, the Alexandria library at the UNESCO headquarters in Paris and to acquaint myself with the full set of documents on its construction. Both the model and the materials make quite an impression, especially when one compares them with facts of destitute existence of our native Russian libraries, large and small, both having a statute of national property and devoid of it. Whether one likes it or not, a question arises: can a poverty-stricken culture and science reduced to a miserable state ensure preservation of all the cultural artifacts accumulated in Russia, and do they have a right to assume such an exhausting burden? Undoubtedly, the Alexandria library will be reborn shortly, but it will have a new life of its own. May one imagine the same fate for another library, the Sophia Kievsky, as valuable for the world culture? The answer is obvious. Returning to Alexandria I would like to understand the life term of that ancient library and somehow look into it tracing its stages. We start with the fact that the Alexandria library life cycle included three stages: generation, relatively stable existence and destruction stretching to complete ruin. In its thousand-year history the stage of generation or formation was the shortest taking about 50 years, from 297 to 247 BC, up to the time when Callimachus catalogued the library so that it could execute its primary functions. The second stage was stable or relatively steady and embraced a period of 200 years. As N. Garelin stresses, the first three centuries ofthat library existence was an epoch of its greatest blossoming23. Next the longest stage started: slow degradation and destruction. In 47 BC it was damaged by fire during the clash between Caesar's troops and the inhabitants of the city. Library collections were partly ruined and partly plundered. Assistance by yet another Rome emperor, Antony helped not revive the library. He handed Alexandria a collection from the Pergamos library in Rome at least as famous as the Alexandria. By II century BC it counted about 200,000 parchment manuscripts and papyruses (a case without precedence in the history of world libraries!). Augustus followed Antony's example. He showed interest in the great creation of Ptolemy and had a special edifice, Sebastea, the book depository constructed near the Museum in its honor. However Antony's successors cared very little for the new Alexandria repository and after 273 AD the remains of that rich collection were moved to the Serapis shrine. Then came 391 AD and the rest is history... The ruin of Alexandria terminated long development of the Hellenic science: knowledge accumulated was lost. John Bernal summed this up: "knowledge not usedfor its self-perpetration, he wrote, is not preserved at all, it degrades and disappears. Atfirst the books simply wallowed on shelves, since very few people felt a necessity or a wish to read them; soon nobody could even understand them and they were going to rot and ruin unread. Eventually these monuments were burnt to heat water for public baths or disappeared in hundreds of other unknown ways, predicting the legendary lot of the Alexandria library "24. The story of the Alexandria library is the only 'pure' example showing all the stages of the library life cycle, offering its estimate for a library 500,000 volumes strong: Taking its full span at a thousand years we have its first stage of about 50 years, the second (steady or stable) stage 22 See.: Firsov G.G. Knigoopisanie i organizaciya alfavitnogo kataloga... P. 40-41. "Garelin N. Aleksandrijskaya biblioteka... P. 170. 24 Bemal J. Nauka ν istorii obschestva... P. 135.

On the Library Life Cycle

39

of 250 years, and the third, of about 600 years is all the time remaining. Why was the third stage the longest? Supposedly its duration depends on the external situation, on what one might call transformation and disintegration of stable social fabrics. Factors working to break up that fabrics are wars, natural disasters and other similar phenomena. If these remain local, and the state is capable to mend the situation social stability is sustained. Disintegration continues when social contradictions reach a critical level so that the ruling power cannot restore former life patterns using its inner reserves. And the library is gradually ruined... The Alexandria library is believed to have totally vanished as Atlantis did, so no books or buildings survived. However, a report appeared in the Russian "Government Bulletin" back in 1898 on a find by Bernert Granfell and Arthur Bunt, the two English Egyptologists. Under their guidance a part of the famous Adrian library, completely buried for centuries was discovered in the desert near Alexandria. Among the relics of that book depository one appeared to be of paramount value — a complete poem by Sappho, a poetess in ancient Greece... That papyrus was a precious discovery, the more so since experts on Old Greek writing testified that Sappho had personally handwritten the poem25. A hundred years later, in the end of the XX century the international community made a step to give rebirth to the idea of the Alexandria library by way of a "Library of Alexandria" project... Now, to continue a theoretical discourse on the library life cycle: consider the period from library birth to collapse to be its life duration. In its turn, each stage splits into its own development phases during which the library undergoes certain qualitative and quantitative changes. Specifically, we may single out foundation phase in the first stage. During it the type and function of the future library are discussed, sources of its financing are determined, place for its construction is chosen and construction works begin. Next phase reference point resides with the beginning of library services towards its readers. Looking for such references from the BAN history we find that the respective term from its foundation (1714) to the beginning of services was six years, while that for the Imperial Public Library in St.Petersburg was somewhat longer (1795-1814). Every phase of the library lifespan follows a certain routine. As any developing entity it goes through its ups and downs, constantly changing. Life sets new tasks and poses new problems, experience shows that not everything done before was as it should have been or as we want it now. The inner life of the library changes. Now, the final element of the library lifespan is a stage, that is time needed to shape the library-bibliographical process when its starting stimulus to real life comes. Among these stages I identify the initial accumulation of its collection, forming its reference instruments, developing its readers audience and others. The level of intensity at which the library proceeds from one stage to another prescribes its life rythm. Transformational decline of a library is an inevitable, hence a natural state of a library. It is not necessarily related to its possible destruction and ruin. In dependence of its value for the society a library can gain new development progressing to a new quality from its preceding state (it may completely or partially merge with another library, expand its services and so on). Its transformational decline may end in a change of its status so that it injects into a new orbit of its life cycle, as a new, not the former library though. The reader may think: 'it all sounds quite smooth theoretically, but what conclusions may stem from such abstract reasoning?' Now, since no publications on research in library life cycles are available from our experts in library science, let us reason together. 25

Pravitel'stvennyj vestnik. 1898. Ν 199 (11 sentyabrya).

40

Chapter 111

It is well known that the life of a library evolves against a certain historical epoch. Every subsequent epoch absorbs and assimilates the library legacy of the preceding ones. Place and role of libraries in societies keep changing, the circle of their readers expand or shrink, some libraries perish, others survive, part of their remaining collections merge with the new ones. Imagine we could identify and restore locations and life spans of a maximum number of libraries from all the historical epochs and put them on the map. One would then have an opportunity to study an integrated library history of the world. This would be the history of relations between the accumulated book wealth and the people called to make that wealth public property. That would be the history of resolving contradictions between memory and reality, between the human intellect and actions of individuals, those who have an assignment to protect and represent these within their own life span. This would be a story of an ideal library: how to create and preserve it for posterity. Of course, writing such history of libraries' life is a task insurmountable for any individual, but working on it seems to be so fascinating and interesting. In front of the entrance to the City Public Library of Los Angeles, resurrected after two acts of arson in 1986, there is a waterfall cascade. One of its steps bears a map of the world. Water is flowing slowly over it, washing the continents, and each of them bears the marks where libraries—the treasuries of human mind once stood and then perished or got severely damaged in wars, fires, floods, earthquakes or were plundered during various historical periods. Here is just a small part of that sad list*: China, 213 BC. In 213 BC the Emperor Xing Chi Huang Ti ordered every page of writing in the empire to be burned publicly so that he could then rewrite history and make himself China's first emperor. A few pages of authentic historical accounts survived, so that the history of China could be restored more accurately. Aristotle's Peripatetic School Library. Athens, 86 BC. This was the most famous book collection of ancient Greece. It was founded and organized by Aristotle with the intention of facilitating scientific research. A full edition of this library was prepared in Rome from surviving texts by Andronicus of Rhodes and Tyrannion (60 BC). Its texts reached Rome as war booty seized by Sulla when he sacked Athens. Imperial Library. Constantinople, 477 AD. The library was incinerated during a revolt of 477 AD. Over 120,000 volumes burned, including a copy ofthe "Iliad" on a twelve-foot snakeskin. Taxlia University and Library. India, V century. Taxlia was the capital of Gandhara. Its university and library were the first of their kind in the world, probably built in the V century BC, and were visited by many, including Alexander the Great. Both destroyed by the Hunns in the V century AD. Nalanda University and Library. India, VII century. Famous throughout Asia, attracting scholars and philosophers from distant countries during the Gupta period (320-467 AD.), this library was destroyed by barbarians in the VII century. Odantapuri University and Library. India, \ Ί Π century. The exact date of their foundation still unknown, both the library and the university functioned in that important Buddhist city long before the Pala came to power in India in 730 AD. It was a centre of learning that reputedly served as a model for the first Tibetan monastery built in 749 AD. Both were destroyed when Muhammed Bactiyar Khilji conquered India. Afghani Turks later raised a fortress on that site. * Further discussion in: Fine J., Reese H. Spine: An account of the plan at the Maguire Gardens Central Library. Los Angeles, 1993. P. 28-33.

On the Library Life Cycle

41

Novalesa Monastery Library. Italy, 905 AD. Saracens destroyed the library of the Novalesa Monastery in 905 AD. It was reported to have contained more than 6,500 volumes. St Gall Abbey Library. Switzerland, 937 AD. In 937 AD a student to be punished for his misdeeds had set the abbey and its library on fire. Almost all of the books were lost. Lorsch Monastery and Library. Germany, 1091. Both the monastery and its library were accidentally set on fire during a party on March 21, 1091. Everything was destroyed. Croyland Monastery Library. England, 1092. A fire completely destroyed the library and its 700 books in 1092. Somapury University and Library. India, XI century. In the middle of the XI century these were destroyed by fire, but were shortly rebuilt by Vipul Srimitra, the monk. Gloucester Monastery and Library. England, 1122. The entire monastery, including the library, was burnt in 1122. Canterbury Cathedral and Library. London, 1174. The Cathedral and its library suffered three great fires. The first happened in the XI century, the second in 1168, and the third in 1174. Each time the Cathedral and library were rebuilt. Paris, 1242. In 1242 a fanatic anti-Semite publicly burned 24 cart-loads of ancient Hebrew manuscripts in Paris. Polonnaruna, XIII century. King Parakramabahul (XII century AD) constructed many libraries, including a royal library in the city called "Pol-Gul-Vehera". All these libraries were destroyed by the Magha of Kalinga in the XIII century. Ibn Hiban. Baghdad, 1258. Libraries were completely destroyed in 1258 when sacked by the Mongolians under Hulagu Khan. Among these was the library of Ibh Hiban (d. 965), the qadi of Nishapur who bequeathed his living quarters and his vast personal library for use by foreign scholars. Damascus, 1400. In 1400 Tamerlane (d. 1405) warriors set fire to the city of Damascus, making a point to burn all the mosque libraries with their thousands of books. Cordoba, 1492. The greatest and largest library of its times was founded by Caliph Habim II in Cordoba, in the Arabic Spain, conquered by Moors in 711 AD, in 988 AD. The library is said to have contained 400,000 to 600,000 books and used to attract scholars from around the world until the expulsion of Moors and the destruction of the library in 1492. Granada, 1500. During the Spanish occupation of Granada, P. 1500, Cardinal Ximines found 5,000 copies of Koran and had them all incinerated. Timbuktu University and Library. Songhai (near Mali), XVI century. The invading Moroccan armies destroyed both the university and the library some time during the XVI century. Sri Lanka, XVI century. When the Portuguese invaded Sri Lanka (Ceylon) in the XVI century, they burned down many libraries and other seats of culture. Germany, XVI century. During the times of Martin Luther rebels attacked hundred of churches, palaces and monasteries, books being their target. Mutinee leaders knew that their sworn debts and obligations were recorded in books and burned all books to destroy these accounts. Vatican and Apostolic Libraries. Rome, 1527. During the Pillage of Rome in 1527, the Vatican Library lost many a manuscript and papal document, while the Apostolic Library was completely destroyed. 'Rinis, 1536. When in 1536 Charles V of Spain, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire pillaged the city of Tunis, all the books in Arabic were burned.

42

Chapter III

Cremona, 1569. In 1569 12,000 books printed in Hebrew were burned, as their content was considered heretical. St. Paul's Cathedral. London, 1666. During the great London fire of 1,666 many private and church libraries burned. In an attempt to save as many books as possible many of these libraries were moved to St. Paul's Cathedral for safety, but it also burned with all its contents. Escorial Library. Madrid, 1670. The library was heavily damaged by fire in the 1670's during the reign of King Philip I. Over 150 Greek manuscripts were among the works destroyed. British Museum Library. London, 1731. On October 23, 1731 a fire destroyed 114 manuscripts from the initial museum collection. Harvard Library. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1754. In 1754 a fire destroyed more than 500 volumes. By 1790 the library built up its collection to between 12,000 and 13,000 books. Brazil, 1759. In 1759 Jose I, Emperor of Portugal became the first monarch to expel the Jesuits from all his domains, ordering the destruction of all their writings and books. France, 1790. In 1790 upon suppression of the country monasteries about 25,000 Catholic manuscripts and 4,169,000 books were burned throughout the country. Mainz Cathedral Library. Germany, 1793. The library was burned by the Germans on June 28, 1793, when they bombarded the city during the Thirty Years War. Library of Congress. Washington, D. C., 1851. More than half of its collection was destroyed by fire in 1851. The library reopened on its new premises on August 23, 1853. Mandalay, 1855. Many private and school libraries were burned when the Burmese city of Mandalay was captured by the British in 1855. Some books survived, eventually making thenway into Burma's first free public library, the Bernard Free Library, built in 1889. Strasbourg Library. France, 1870. The German Army set the library on fire in 1870 during the Franco-Prussian War. Among the books and papers destroyed were the original lawsuit records of Johann Gutenberg vs. his partners, so that any hope to ascertain the primacy of invention of printing in the West was lost. Mercantile Library. Philadelphia, 1877. The library and its collection were damaged in 1877 by water that was poured onto a burning adjacent building. Free Library. Birmingham, England, 1879. Destroyed by fire on January 11,1879. Lima, 1881. During the 1881 territory dispute between the two countries Chilean army invaded Peru. In the course of occupation of Lima its library was used as a barracks by the order of Pedro Lagos. 56,000 books and 8,000 priceless manuscripts, including every Peruvian publication since 1584, were used as toilet paper or thrown into the street. Peoria Public Library. Peoria, Illinois, 1888. In 1888 that library was almost destroyed by fire and water used to put it out. Lorsch monastery and library. Germany, 1901. Caught a casual fire during an evening party. Everything burned to ashes. Germany, 1933. During the times of the Third Reich book burning took a massive scale. 1933 was particularly notorious, when publications not consistent with the 'goals' of the National Socialist government were destroyed. World War II destroyed many as well, including the Territorial and University Libraries in Kiel and Kassel, the City Library in Mainz, plus all the libraries of Dresden. An estimated 25 to 75 million volumes perished in Germany during the first half of the XX century. Belfast, 1976. In 1976 IRA terrorists accidentally demolished a shop housing the largest commercial collection of antique books in Northern Ireland in an attempt to bomb a British Army observation post next door.

On the Library Life Cycle

43

Los Angeles, 1986. The first Los Angeles Central Library fire started shortly before 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, April 29,1986. It was a deed by an arsonist never apprehended. While it raged, the fire destroyed 370 thousand documents and books. Damage by water and a threat of rot were the fate of yet another 700 thousand (however, most of these were eventually saved). On September 3 that year another arson happened. Sarajevo, 1992. As the Serbian/Croatian peace talks got under way in London on August 26,1992, heavy mortar and rocket fire pounded the city of Sarajevo for several weeks. The city main library was severely damaged by fire. ...Now, let us continue discussing the life of libraries. Does one need to follow the existing historical periods attribution (for example, that of the stages of social or literature history) to analyze the available data? The answer depends on the desired final result. If one intends to read into and comprehend the "double" life of a library (perceiving it as the subject of its history and against the context of its relation with other libraries), then following the accepted historical criteria will hardly yield principally new knowledge. It would provide certain new information on libraries identified and described, on their collections, classification schemes, etc. But such descriptions would not involve the general library process, treating the origin of any historical or library fact against a specific period only. An example is due by way of illustration. How should one interpret the two historical facts, separated by a time-space abyss? Here are the Egyptian city of Alexandria and StPetersburg, Russia. Libraries initially established in both were both state and public. But an issue more important is whether there is a scientific explanation of the fact that the Egyptian library was initially stacked with Greek books, that Greek culture and literature were first artificially transferred to an alien soil, were then absorbed by it and enjoyed periods of unprecedented flourish in Egypt? Moreover, according to current knowledge during its first 166 years of existence all the librarians of the Alexandria library had been Greeks, foreigners who had left their own country. Something similar happened with the first library in St.Petersburg: the initial collection was mostly foreign, intercommunication languages of the XVIII century were Latin and German, the first scientific publications and periodicals were initially published in foreign languages and only then in Russian. For nearly 60 years the BAN librarians were Germans. Add the rapid growth of its prestige in Europe and the world. Is it a mere coincidence? Or may there be some inner logic there? I believe such facts are aplenty. Explaining them opens an opportunity to look at such events as if from above, to see their development in the context of world culture, since every library, regardless of its size, is a particle of the common human-made culture. Having said this it seems expedient to use a periodization based on the cyclicity principle in library science, joining libraries or their separate elements (collections, catalogues, readers, buildings) into polysynthetic entities. To put it differently: cyclicity implies a constructive tendency aimed at creating essentially holistic entities, cycles. The author conceives a cycle, stepping out as a problem setter as well. The author formulates a cycle with just a single purpose of getting new knowledge while assuming a certain type of relations between independent objects or their parts, thus forming a complementary research field. The library cycle is then a totality of libraries or its elements presented through their correlation with each other. By our definition this concept of correlation bears a specific function. We state it so that the researcher (in our case - the reader) may get additional information about objects studied, the nature of that new information being such that it is not explicit but may only be retrieved by way of forming that cycle.

44

Chapter 111

The cycle's integrity results from interaction between the libraries entering it. Moreover, the library cycle is a vehicle of a process developing within a certain period of history. Its duration depends on the duration of communicative interrelations between the cycle author and the researcher (the reader). The machinery driving those communicative relations are associative connections. The more associative connections the researcher has in the process of communication, the more semantic load does the cycle itself bear, and the longer its own life term becomes26. Now, bearing in mind all the material already laid out in this book I would venture some library cycles for the librarians to ponder, discuss and criticize. I identify three such cycles within the framework of the problem "Formation ofLibraries in Russia during theXI-XVII centuries (prior to BAN) ". Thefirst is "Pre-Mongol". It embraces the period of formation of Old Russia libraries from the XI to the first third of the XIII centuries. The second relates to the period of library resurrection after the Mongol invasion and stretches to the start of book printing (first half of the XIII to second third of the XVI centuries). The third is "transitory": it stretches from the start of book printing in Russia to Peter the Great times (second third of the XVI through XVII centuries). How may one select the libraries so varied and correlate them with each other for the researcher to spring up associations that would form that complementaiy research field? In my opinion Zimin, the historian exhaustively formulated the rules of such search (not to use the word "cycle"). One may read in one of his articles devoted to searching for the Moscow Monarchs' library: "One may study three aspects of the tsar's library lot. The first is the analysis of sources speaking in favor of its existence. The second is examining the monuments of Russian literature from the late XV through XVI centuries. Their authors were able to use that library in the first place. The task is to trace the echo of the Greek, Latin and oriental writings in the works of Maxim Greek, Theodore Karpov, Andrey Kurbsky, Ivan the Terrible. After all, the 'tsar's liberia', if it ever existed, had to be accessible to those writers, first of all. The third, final aspect of our subject is the search for the vestiges of the library both among the manuscript collections preserved to our days and in the Kremlin catacombs "(P. 126)11. Very unfortunately Zimin never had a possibility to finish his extremely interesting work on the library of Ivan the Terrible28. 26 The problems of cycle-formation are actively elaborated in art, history and literature criticism. See also, for example: Lyapina L.E. Ciklizaciya ν russkoj literature XIX veka. SPb.: Nil himii SPbGU, 1999. 281 p. 27 Zimin A.A. Κ poiskam biblioteki moskovskih gosudarej // Russkaya literatura. 1963. Ν 4. P. 124-132. 28 In this connection one more fact is curious. Long before Zimin library specialist Shamurin stated almost the same, substantiating scientific approach to the study o f systematical catalogue: "About the systematical, or may be group arrangement of books indicate: 1) preserved literary signs, 2) fragments of sporadic catalogues that came down us, 3) discovered during excavations of some ancient libraries selections of b o o k s and d o c u m e n t s according to its contents". See: Shamurin E. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechnobibiliograficheskoj klassifikacii Τ. 1. M.: Izd-vo Vsesoyuz. kn. palaty, 1955. P. 8. As to the Ivan Grozny's (the Terrible) library, vast literature both in our country and abroad is devoted to the problem of its search and more then a century and a half it evokes constant interest. I would compare these searches with searches of the Amber Room, stolen by fascists from the Tzar's Village (the town of Pushkin) in 1941. Both the Ivan Grozny's library and the Amber Room represent those values of the world culture, that attention to them will steadily increase. In 1982 there was an attempt to reconstruct the tzar's library. Edition was based on N.N. Zarubin's manuscript, kept in B A N together with his private stock, and also on bibliographical description of books within reach of Ivan Grozny, that he used in his literary activities. (Do not forget, that he was a bibliognost and

On the Library Life Cycle

45

Inside each of the three cycles one may create new ones, constructed in accordance with the correlation of library elements. This is especially true of: 1) item arrangement in book depositories of Old Russia and 2) the emerging of Russian reader during the XI-XII centuries. A mandatory prerequisite for studying the cycle of item arrangement in those Old Russia book depositories lies in imagining the wide spread of keeping techniques of those days. (Moreover, this is also important to better appreciate the meaning of Schumacher's decision, who first presented the books from the St.Petersburg Imperial Library in their fine luxurious covers to the lay public). According to S.P. Luppov29 and M.I. Sluhovsky30 Old Russians kept their books in closets and chests in boxes and baskets...: - Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich, 1634 inventory: "eleven books kept in a big box"; - Tsarevich Aleksei Alekseevich, representative of Romanov's family third generation: "192 books in closets"; - Merchant Maxim Maximovich Stroganov's (d. 1627) library: "An inventory of 141 books and 115 handwritten song collections. Part of books kept in baskets for reading during journeys "; - The Patriarch library, inventory of 1658: "1,384 books accounted, 154 of them comprising the private (cell) library of Nikon the Patriarch. Of the total 1,384 books 92 kept in a 'treasury iron chest', about 60 were 'in chest ',13 books 'in wooden cells andporchs'; 394 books under the Church of The Three Hallowers "; - The Typography library, inventory of 1649: 148 books. In 1620 the whole library could fit into a single basket. In my opinion, the next step towards mastering of the cycle approach was made by N.N. Zarubin31. While studying the inventories of monastery libraries he formulated six principles of book shelf arrangement in a book depository. It may follow: subject matter, alphabet; format; nature of writing (handwritten vs. printed matter); language; value/significance of writing. Following his analysis Zarubin claimed that the spread of format arrangement through libraries was a secondary phenomenon. It was preceded by size identification of manuscripts. Hence, one may consider the appearance of paper size identification within a single format as a product of further development of format identity ("book in tenth, paper major, paper minor; book in quarter, paper major, paper minor")... As for the second cycle ("Emerging of Russian reader during the XI-XII centuries") the key task there is identification of sources and character of reading, of the degree of reader initiator of book-printing in Old Russia). Starting from this work, a scholar can go further in his searches, but with more certitude. (See: Zarubin N.N. Biblioteka Ivana Groznogo: Rekonstrukciya i bibliograficheskoye opisaniye / Podgotovka k pechati, prim, i dop. A.A. Amosova; Pod red. S.O. Schmidta. L.: Nauka, 1982. 159 p.). It is strange to read sometimes reasonings of certain "greatest in the world connoisseurs of Old Russia", that "instead of flackery about the searches and mysteries of Ivan Grozny's library it would be more important for us to save those book treasures that are in ruin nowadays" ( the newspaper "Nevskoye vremya ". September, 18, 1997). And this Petersburg newspaper, further quoting Academician D.S. Likhatchev, in an item named "It is better to save what is remained" continues: "To Likhatchev's opinion, even if Ivan Grozny's library is discovered, this finding will not be of great scientific value (in mass media its value is apparently exaggerated). A considerable part of this collection, as Academician supposes, were books that Sophia Paleolog brought to Old Russia from Byzantine in order to pray in her native language". Well, what one can say? N o problems. It is all evident with Ivan Grozny's library to D.S. Likhatchev. 25 30

Luppov S P. Kniga ν Rossii ν XVII veke. L.: Nauka, 1970. P. 112; 113; 118; 175-176; 189-190.

Sluhovsky M.I. Russkaya biblioteka ν XVI-XVII w . M.: Kniga, 1973. P. 9-10; 18-20; 139-140. " Zarubin N.N. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechnogo dela ν Drevnej Rusi.. P. 194-195; 218.

46

Chapter III

participation in the library process. In addition to what has already been said on the readers' tastes, needs, circle of reading, ways of finding the needed information in Old Russian texts, one should note a work by A.S. Demin 32 . He wrote himself that he was "running ahead" trying to describe the principal readers interests for whole periods. Having selected the most popular sources and analyzing prefaces to such works of literature he drew judgments on their readers. Undoubtedly, the works on cycles we examined are absolutely not sufficient to yield general conclusions. One needs to continue searching for new publications, replenish the lists. I would include in their number articles by R.P. Dmitrieva33, G.I. Vzdornov34, L.D. Likhatcheva35, rich in factual data. To conclude the first three chapters let us digress a little into the realm of music, and then turn to BAN. We touched just the top of iceberg named "Russian library culture". Reading into the pre-Petrine period publications on libraries, tapping the issues of Russian book-learning and problems of native vs. alien in literature, imagining a bibliognost, an ideologist teacher with all his complex relations with the ecclesiastic and secular powers, or fancying the exacting reader, to follow them step by step through wars, invasions, internecine conflicts, natural disasters we seem to be reading the notes of music yet to be heard. These notes are so different, but upon hearing them one begins to analyze ascertaining or denying, searching for one's own fulcrum outside oneself. What does the music of Russian library culture bring with it, what is its nature? Mind you, music may never become old, be modem or obsolete. Whenever it sounds, it is always modern, alive. Hearing it we submerge in its sounds and tiy to interpret its content. First of all, we want to comprehend the set key, its polyphonic structure, rhythm and the tempo inherent to that music. Meditations start. Researcher feels he is right in some things, while his imaginary opponent is in the others, but our researcher wants to find the ultimate truth, to possess it as his o w n When studying the history of Russian library culture and the world history of libraries a question arises, whether the Russian national tradition influenced the creation of the national Library of the Academy of Sciences. The answer is — 'certainly'. However, it took time to manifest itself, when the "alien", torn from its natural roots, first settled down on the Russian soil and then gradually began to develop harmonically. History witnesses that such things happen. Did the founder of BAN know about this? I think he did not. He could feel it, imagine, assume. But it takes time, separation in time, movement through time to become aware of the significance of the formation of the first national Russian library...

32

Demin A.S. Knizhnye predisloviya ΧΙ-ΧΠ w . i nekotorye literaturnye potrebnosti drevnerusskogo obschestva // «Slovo ο polku Igoreve»: Pamyatniki literatury i iskusstva XI-XVII vekov. M.: Nauka, 1978. P. 207-226. 35 Dmitrieva R.P. Svetskaya literature ν sostave monastyrskih bibliotek XV i XVI w . (Kirillo-Belozerskogo, Volokolamskogo monastyrej i Troice-Sergievoj lavry) // Tr. Otd. drevnerus. lit. T. 23. L„ 1968. P. 143-170. Vzdornov G.I. Knigoopisanie i hudozhestvennoe oformlenie rukopisej ν moskovskih i podmoskovnyh monastyryah do konca pervoj treti X V v. // Ibid. T. 22. M.; L., 1966. P. 119-143; The same. Rol' slavyanskih monastyrskih masterskih p i s ' m a Konstantinopolya i Afona ν razvitii knigopisaniya i hudozhestvennogo oformleniya russkih rukopisej na rubezhe XIV-XV vv. // Ibid. T. 23. L., 1968. P. 171-184. 55 Likhatcheva L.D. Miniatyuristy — chitateli novgorodskih literatumyh proizvedenij // Ibid. T. 22. M.; L„ 1966. P. 355-341.

CHAPTER IV

PETER'S LIBRARY: ABOUT THE LIBRARY AND PUBLISHING ACTIVITY OF PETER THE GREAT

Contemplating his future "History of Russia During the Days of Peter the Great" Voltaire wrote a letter to count I.I. Shuvalov, the Chamberlain of Empress Elisabeth. He was distressed that no information was available on "the opening of manufactories, river -works, on construction ofpublic buildings, coinage, justice, army and fleet. In a word, monsieur, on everything that might characterize a nation, yet unknown to anybody"1. That is to say, Peter I interested the great Frenchman primarily not as a military leader who spent more than 20 years at war, but as a creator. The theme declared in the title of this chapter occupies a very modest place in boundless literature devoted to Peter I. We cannot say that researchers never touched the subject intentionally2. But I will hardly be mistaken stating that many of such historical searches predominantly tended to treat Peter's views and the initial period of BAN's life projecting them against the subsequent activity of the library. Those authors tended to put in the foreground those materials that blend with the library prehistory and serve to prove the exceptional nature of Peter's concept. Even one of the best authors of books about BAN, S.P. Luppov went that way3. One can understand him of course: if the task is to prove that "Peter's reforms were conditioned by the general trend of historical process, then their vitality had to manifest itself even during the years immediately following Peter s death, despite the lack offoresight and conservatism of the rulers of Russia, mostly random, who succeeded him " (P. 4). Consequently we arrive at the following conclusion by the author: "Multi-aspect analysis of all the facts of history of Russian book during the years 1725-1740 confirms the vitality of Peter's reorganizations and shows that further development of education in Russia followed the way outlined by Peter's reforms. Noteworthy, no significant reduction in the development rate is found... not only had the pace of book-printing no slowdown; in the field ofperiodicals it even considerably exceeded that pace from Peter's times, when it had seemed excessive. The Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences played a special role as one of the largest book depositories in the country; it constantly increased its collection and served as an example of organization of librarianship for all the other Russian libraries " (P. 364-365). 1

Akimova A.A. Vol'ter. M.: Mol. gvardiya, 1970. P. 271. See for example.: Murzanova M.N. Pervye fondy rukopisnyh knig akademicheskoj biblioteki // Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov rukopisnogo otdela Biblioteki Akademii nauk. Vyp. 1. XVIII vek. M.; L.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1956. P. 5-31; Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR. 1714-1764. M.; L., 1964. P. 9-36; Likhatchev D.S. Ot redaktora // Bobrova E.I. Biblioteka Petra I: Ukaz.-sprav. / Pod red. D.S. Likhatcheva. L., 1978. P. 3-4; Sluhovsky M.I. Iz istorii biblioteki Akademii nauk // Knigotorgovoe i bibliotechnoe delo ν Rossii ν XVII-pervoj polovine XIX v. L„ 1981. P. 95-103. 3 Luppov S.P. Kniga ν Rossii ν poslepetrovskoe vremya. 1725-1740. L.: Nauka, 1976. 380 p. 2

48

Chapter IV

Of course, the actual situation was somewhat different. While implemented Russian reforms never followed a straight and smooth way. Everything was complicated. One has to search for new facts and sources of data, since generalizations of expert opinions of authors on Peter's library and his publishing activity alone, even if validated by way of criticism and "rational selection", may hardly help to form one's own concept. Compilation in data selection inevitably results in patched up concepts. One may only form an original point of view in case one studies Peter's epoch and his ways immersing oneself into the material, asking questions and trying to reconstruct the times... The subject matter of our interest was only just nucleating then, separate facts belonging to it came to light, then became obscured by others, more important, then appeared again, yet in a different interpretation. The keynote of Peter's activities was always the spring of individuality: each of his undertakings was "Peter's deed and creation ". Everything came forth through his personal attitude and was tested for correspondence to Russia's national interests. Starting with book collecting, with his indomitable thirst for education, for constant learning, with impressions picked abroad, the thread extended to school reforms, to introduction of civil font, to opening of printing-houses, to translating and editing activities, to preoccupation with educating and enlightening the Russian people and further to creating the first national library, the first museum and the national Academy of Sciences. So let us discuss the library subject posing questions and searching for correct answers. Let us first turn to Peter's childhood years. Remember that he became a tsar at the age of 10 so that his school years overlapped the years of learning to rule the state. Who were his teachers, what and how he learned, what was he enthusiastic about, what was his sphere of interests? The respective data offered by N.G. Ustryalov, P.N. Krekshin, I.E. Zabelin is pretty monotonous. As every boy of the same age of his times, the tsarevich studied three obligatoiy subjects: 1) reading and learning by heart the Hour-Book, the Psalter, The Deeds of the Saints and the Gospel; 2) writing and 3) ecclesiastical singing. One of Peter's teachers, Nikita Zotov, who was teaching him the first two subjects tried to expand his primary education. He kept giving tsarevich "kunst" books with pictures of towns, buildings, ships, military battles, portraits of famous generals, etc. These play books intended to entertain a child were called "funny". Peter liked them greatly. So, to produce "funny" books, a hundred "fiyazhsky" ("coming from the lands of the Vikings" or just foreign) sheets were acquired for him in 1682". The tsarevich was an eager pupil and spent a lot of his time in games. He had a taste for knowledge and a brilliant memory. Nevertheless one may hardly speak about Peter's serious primary education. He never learned to write properly. Undoubtedly, I. Zabelin is right saying that "...the course of education was chiefly practical, or as they kept saying in those times, it was mostly pleasure or fun. Its substance was too poor and had no advanced system. On the other hand it splendidly fitted the tastes and needs of the gifted pupil, fitted them particularly in that together with his first games it worked to develop the very practical and active character of further amusements and pastimes of the tsarevich"5. 4 Amusing sheets were bought as far back as in 1632-1635 for young Aleksei Mikhailovich and his sister Irina; amusing books had Fedor Alekseevich and his sisters. In the time of Fedor Alekseevich the walls of his wooden chambers and princess rooms were pasted with engravings. In the room of czarevitch Aleksei Alekseevich were hanging "fifty frames with fryazhsky sheets". See: Shmurlo E. Kriticheskie zametki po istorii Petra Velikogo // Zhurn. M-va nar. prosvescheniya. 1902. Ch. 340, Ν 4. P. 421-439; Zabelin I.E. Domashnij byt russkih carej ν XVI i XVII st. Ch. 2. M.: Sinodal'naya tipografiya, 1915. P. 89; 100-101; 226-229. 5 Zabelin I.E. Domashnij byt russkih tsarej... P. 229.

Peter 's Library

49

Peter's scope of interests was remarkable for its amazing breadth: history, geography, military and navy skills, artillery, fire fighting, mechanics, medicine, literature, linguistics. Books, which he constantly collected, occupied a special place in those encyclopedic series. Books attracted him with their mystery and uncertainty, and it is possible that in his rare lonely moments in his library he imagined himself pictures of the great future of Russia. Undoubtedly, having such diverse interests, his library was the practical, working instrument for his policy. Later Peter's interests expanded to embrace the wider circle of his soul mates and then the country as a whole. Hence the need for more and more books6. Let us add that through all of his life Peter held men of science in great respect and demanded the same from the others. "Foreigners" with whom Peter liked to spend his time, mainly lived in the Moscow German "sloboda". Many of them owned paintings and drawings. We know that pictures hung in the houses of F. Lefort and A. Vinius, and Peter certainly saw them. A curious collection piece from those circles came down to the present: a large album with 171 drawings and 138 engravings by Dutch painters. There are some true works of art by first-rate masters among them, Ya. Livence and N. Kniupfer. The origin of that album is exactly documented: an inscription by its owner says "Book of Matthew Vinius". (This album belongs to the BAN collection and has attracted general attention recently during its restoration in the Netherlands ) 7 . Vinius's album is particularly interesting since a man quite intimate with Peter collected it, a man that deeply influenced Peter and his education. Moreover, Vinius was in regular correspondence with N. Vitsen, an Amsterdam burgomaster who helped Peter get a better acquaintance with Dutch art, museums and libraries while travelling abroad. These trips abroad affected greatly Peter's perception of the world. The Great Embassy (1697-1698) became a turning point on Russia's advance towards peaceful changes, although their initial plan pursued military and defense aims. As the Duma speaker Yemelian Ukraintsev thunderously proclaimed: here comes the embassy for the sake "of corroborating friendship and love of old, for deeds common to all the Christianity, for weakening the enemies of the Holy Cross, the Turkish Sultan, the Khan of the Crimea and all the barbarian hordes". In practice it meant reviving the alliance against the Turks and attracting its new supporters. Oh, and buying ammunition and hiring foreign experts for the army and the navy, en passe. Beside all that, to have a look at how those Europeans lived. Now, what seemed to be primary in the beginning, receded into the background while the secondary came to the front and became principal. The overall diplomatic task of the Great Embassy failed, while its side plans materialized beyond the best of expectations. Later ViceChancellor P.P. Shafirov had to rewrite the story of the Great Embassy, while Peter himself read and edited the manuscript. The new version claimed three goals of the travel: - to get to know European political life, because neither the tsar, nor his ancestors had ever seen it; - to organize one's own state politically and especially militarily following the example of the European states; - to offer one's own example by way of inducing one's subjects to travel abroad.

6 The reader should remember, that during the time o f book-printing in Russia from 1 5 6 4 up to 1698 (from Ivan Grozny to Peter I) there had been published about 1,000 books. See: Shamurin E.I. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoj klassifikacii. Τ. 1... P. 289. ' See about: Stepanova I. Delo Al'boma Viniusa // Russkaya mysP. 1997. Ν 4174. (15-21 maya).

50

Chapter IV

Thus Europe started to forget the diplomatic task of Peter's journey and it turned into something akin to a triumphal procession through Europe8. As for the first period of his journey, one finds it rather difficult to assess Peter's attitude towards arts and libraries in contrast to his scientific interests. One finds some information about books, paintings and drawings he saw, but one can say almost nothing about his perception of those. In his "Stories... " Ya. Shtelin tried to bring together reminiscences about Peter's attitude to paintings9. According to P.I. Yaguzhinsky, Peter saw nothing except icons up to the age of 25, so that he could simply cultivate no taste for art. During his first journey some pictures of quite a different sort attracted his attention. In the town hall and many private houses of Amsterdam he saw collections of best paintings by the Netherlands masters that highly impressed him. It was then that he first became enthusiastic about the idea of gathering similar collection for himself. However, it had to wait until 1717 for its first materialization. His taste formed by the Netherlands school of painting, Peter remained true to it through all his life10. The data on Peter's visits to libraries is even poorer. In his "Journal of the Year 206" G. Guissen, a Dutch baron mentioned casually how Peter and his attendants passed through Leiden on January 7, 1698. He wrote: "In its university there is quite a big library and a medicinal herbs yard, in which there are a great many foreign potions, trees, animals and other things of nature from both Indias"11. Guissen described in more detail Peter's visit to the English city of Oxford on April 6,1698. "Oxford — the first city in the province by the same name, lies 47 miles from London by the rivers of Isis and Cherwel. It is of middle size, but built well and populous and has a glorious university, which was founded by king Alfred in the year 880, or 890 or 895; here is a famous library named Bodlean's after the name of Thomas Bodleo, its first collector and organizer, who was also a bishop under the archbishop of Cantebury"12. A.I. Andreev, a historian was the man to first introduce the quoted "Journal of the Year 206" by G. Guissen and his second work, "The History of Great Russia" to scientific literature. According to A.I. Andreev's comments, in his "History... " G. Guissen gives very interesting additional information about Peter's visit to Oxford13. P. V. Postnikov, who was in England as member of the Russian embassy, acquired for Peter I a book "in which the inventory was of the Oxon book depository", that is the one that contained the catalogue of the Oxford Bodlean library. V.F. Levinson-Lessing wrote to express his following opinion on this: "Indirectly this is confirmed by the story reported on the base of an unknown English source in "The History of England" by T. Macaulay. It relates the strongest impression produced upon Peter by the library of the Lambert Palace while he visited the Archbishop of Canterbury in his residence at that palace; looking at it Peter 8

See about: Grinevsky O.A. Tajna velikogo posol'stva Petra: Diplomaticheskij detektiv. SPb.: Novyj Gelikon, 1995. 206 p. 9 Further discussion in: Shtelin Ya, Lyubopytnye i dostopamyatnye skazaniya ο imperatore Petre Velikom... SPb., 1786. P. 55-57; 267-268. 10 Levinson-Lessing VF. Pervoe puteshestvie Petra I za granicu // Istoriya kartinnoj galerei Ermitazha (1764-1917). L.: Iskusstvo, 1985. P. 330. " Ibid. P. 319; 334, prim. 10, 15. 12 Andreev A.I. Petr Velikij ν Anglii ν 1698 g. // Petr Velikij: Sbornik statej / Pod red. A.I. Andreeva. T. 1. M.; L.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1947. P. 78-79. 13 Andreev A.I. Petr Velikij ν Anglii... P. 79. Among the Oxford University colleges is mentioned the College of the Christ Church, from which graduated two mathematicians — Gwinn and Grice whose services were requested in Russia by Peter I.

Peter 's Library

51

supposedly said that he could never imagine there were so many printed books in the world... Apparently, that naive amazement manifested in Lambert transformed into a desire to form a notion of the library by the time he came to Oxford and the acquisition of that catalogue showed that"u. (The catalogue of the Bodlean library, published in 1674, is kept in the Rare Book Department of BAN: Hyde T. Catalogus Impressorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae.) Amazing as it is, several remarkable facts describing Peter's attitude towards books and libraries are still of certain general significance for us today. Judge them for yourself. -1684. Seeing the Patriarch library in a great disorder, Peter "was angry with the Patriarch and left without a word". Then he ordered to put the library in order, to run an inventory on it and to hand it over to N. Zotov for keeping under the tsar's seal15. - 1691 and 1720. Peter presented two big Gospels in silver and gilded settings to the Kievo-Pecherskaya Lavra. - 1696. Peter ordered "to collect all books and to keep them in the Posolski Prikaz (Ambassadorial Department) with care and to write them down for knowing". -1711. While visiting Koenigsberg Peter admired the Koenigsberg (Radzivill) annals and ordered to copy them for his own library. (Both the original and the copy are kept in the Manuscript Department of BAN). - 1718. Peter learned about the destructive fire in the library of the Kievo-Pecherskaya Lavra, where among others, the manuscripts of Sophia Kievskaya had been kept. "When these news reached Peter I, he could not restrain unintentional tears'"6. -1720. Peter I ordered governors, vice-governors and voyevodas (local military commanders) to inspect and copy every original "curious" (historically rare) charter, letter and historical manuscript and printed book and send these copied books to the Senate17. -1720. Collecting materials on the history of the Russian State Peter wanted to examine the oldest extant Russian books and ordered: "the book Gospel, written on parchment, which is 560 years old, to send to Peter-Burkh". The book was packed with greatest care and delivered from Moscow to the capital by sledge. This was the "Ostromirovo Evangelie" (The "Ostromir" Gospel) dating to 1057. (It is kept in the Empire Public — now Russian National — Library, since 1806)18. -1722. Peter I decreed forwarding ancient church and civil manuscripts and chronographs from all the dioceses and abbeys to the Synod desk room in Moscow and promised that books would be returned after copying19.

14

Levinson-Lessing VF. Pervoe puteshestvie Petra I za granicu... P. 326; Istoriya Anglii ot vosshestviya na prestol Iakova II // Macaulay T. Poln. sobr. soch. T. 13, ch. 8. SPb., 1865. P. 67. Further discussion o f the catalogue of the Bodlean library: Philip I. The Bodleian Library in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. P. 50-51; 88. 15 Golikov I.I. Deyaniya Petra Velikogo. Ch. 1. M., 1789. P. 184. A.S. Pushkin, making abstract of "The History of Peter" reflected this fact in his materials. See: Pushkin A.S. Sobr. soch. T. 8. M„ 1981. P. 20. 16 17

Sementovsky N. Kiev i ego dostopamyatnosti. Kiev, 1852. P. 208; 211.

Polnoe sobranie zakonov. T.6. Ν 3693. P. 277. 18 Nemirovsky E L. Mir knigi: S drevnejshih vremen do nachala X X veka. M.: Kniga, 1986. P. 55. On my part let me note that to gather materials on Russian State history there was needed also the national library. Perhaps, then, in the end of 1720, he "dimly saw perspectives of national library through a magic crystal"? " Polnoe sobranie zakonov. T. 6. Ν 3908. P. 511-512.

52

Chapter IV -1723-1724. By Peter's order catalogues of the principal Moscow book depositories were compiled to serve as a basis for the 1723 publication, with dedication to Peter, of catalogues of ancient Greek and Slavonic manuscripts from the Synod and the typography libraries. - 1724. The opening of the V.A. Kipriyanov "Public All-People Library". Peter set its prerequisites: free-of-charge use and availability of an "alphabet with numbers" "for quick a-searching" of books.

All these episodes show the tsar acting expressively with relevance to and in favor of the library matters. Also noteworthy is the discussion, cited by I.I. Golikov, between Peter and a certain scholar who suggested a comment that many facts on the history of Ancient Russia had already been published in Germany, France and Holland quite a while ago. Peter I retorted saying: "All that is worthless: can they ever write anything on our ancient history while we ourselves have published nothing on it yet?!", and pointing there and then that the historical sources are scattered throughout the state with particularly numerous ones residing in the abbeys20. Peter was impatient; he was in a hurry hastening to outrun time. After returning from his first journey to Europe he spoke about the need to disseminate knowledge in Russia for the first time while talking with Patriarch Adrian (1698 or 1699)21. Soon the Kiev-Mogilyansk and the Moscow Slavonic-Greek-Latin academies plus the few elementary schools became insufficient for him. In 1701 Peter founded the School of Mathematical and Navigation Sciences; in 1703 the Glyuck's secondary school opened in Moscow that was up to the standards of Western gymnasiums. The "Vedomosti" (Gazette) newspaper, reported on January 2,1703: "By the order of His Majesty Moscow schools multiply in number, 45 persons are taking philosophy and already finished dialectics. In the Mathematical Navigation School (Leonty Magnitsky taught there.- V. L.) more than 300 persons are studying and engage in science well". Glyuck's school planned to teach Cartesian philosophy, European, Hebrew, Syrian and Chaldaic languages. Soon Glyuck himself died and the school passed into the hands of JochannWerner Pause, Master of Philosophy. The school did not live long, but it gave the world such educated men as Isaac and Fyodor Veselovsky, Ivan Kellerman, Ivan Gramotin and Lavrenty Lavrentievich Blumentrost, the first President of the Russian Academy of Sciences22. In 1706 a medical and in 1712 an engineering schools were started; a net of "digit" schools was established (by 1722 these operated in 22 cities). The year 1715 saw the foundation of the Naval Academy and the School of Artillery in Petersburg and mining schools opened in Yekaterinburg and Olonetz. Human qualities of Peter and his impulsive nature rule out the possibility of perceiving his personality evenly. He was very difficult to understand and even while understood, to accept. The youths of Peter's epoch, sent abroad to study "by Peter's iron will", were service persons 20 21 22

Golikov I.I. Deyaniya Petra Velikogo. Ch. 8. M., 1789. P. 113. Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya Imperatorskoj akademii nauk ν Peterburge. Τ. 1. SPb., 1870. P. XVII. Ibid. P. XVIII-XX.

Peter 's Library

53

under their sovereign and the state. Looking not for side impressions they but searched for available practical knowledge. Forgotten, often high and dry, they suffered need and hardships. There remained a letter by Aleksey Yurov and Abraham Hannibal (the ancestor ofA.S. Pushkin) addressed to the tsar from Paris (March 5, 1718)23 that illustrated such circumstances. Captain-ancient Konon Zotov (the son of Nikita Zotov, first teacher of the young Peter) whom A. Yurov and A. Hannibal mention in their letter was sent to France to study French naval and admiralty's regulations and to hire skilled craftsmen in early 171524. Russian marine guards studying in France caused Zotov many troubles: "Dying of hunger many of them (marine guards) want to become serfs,— reported Zotov to Makarov, the Cabinet-Secretary, — but I frighten them by cruel punishment. In Toulon youngster Sunbulov shot one Frenchman from an arquebuse. Youngster Glebov stabbed youngster Boryatinsky with an epee and is under arrestfor that: Mr. Vice-Admiral does not know how to order their keeping because such cases never take place among themselves, though they also have fights but only honest face to face duels"25. Peter valued Konon Zotov highly. On January 24, 1715, before his departure to Paris Zotov received a personal instruction from the tsar: "Find books on everything referring to the navy, on sea and in ports; also, anything not in books, but done by custom, these things to memorize and translate to Slavonic language in our manner, never strivingfor their manner"16. From the library point of view Peter perfectly formulated the mode for collecting publications on the navy in that instruction. This "...referring to the navy... " and "...findbooks... to translate in Slavonic language" could only mean exhaustive collecting, but not for a private library. Konon Zotov not only succeeded in executing Peter's commission, but in 1724 printed "An Admiral's Conversation with a Captain on Ship's Crew, or a Complete Instruction on How to Run a Ship in All Sorts of Cases " in the Naval Typography. "Konon Zotov, Captain of the Navy did done" the book27. Having extreme personal talents, energy and capacity for work Peter was never afraid of rivals and surrounded himself with talented people. Hungry for talents, he searched for them. Such were Pheophan Prokopovich, Vasily Tatishchev, Pheophilakt Lopatinsky and Lavrentius Blumentrost, all the people who helped him to substantiate his reforms ideologically. According to Yu.M. Lotman: "Nikolai Ivanovich Novikov was able to find and attract talented people to himself. In all the Russian history of the XVIII century only Peter I could compete with him in an ability to define at a glance a talent in a person had and decide what work to put him to "2S. Peter was extremely attentive to opinions by G. Leibnitz and Ch. Wolf on organizing the Academy of Sciences in the new capital. It all found its reflection in his translating and publishing activities. Among the books published in Peter's days were: 23

Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literature ν Rossii pri Petre Velikom. Τ. 1. SPb., 1862. P. 164. When he left Petersburg, at court were preparing to buffoonery wedding of his father. Peter paid no attention to Zotov's letter, where he asked him not to inflict new humiliation on his father, to show mercy to his old age and his family name. See: Pavlov-Silvansky N. Proekty reform ν zapiskah sovremennikov Petra Velikogo: Opyt izucheniya russkih proektov i neizdannye ih teksty. SPb., 1897. P. 68-69. 25 Pavlov-Silvansky N. Proekty reform... P. 71. 26 Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literatura ν Rossii... T.l. P. 156-157. 27 In Peter's private library there are Naval regulations of Louis XIV (1687), translated by Zotov in 1715; Regulations of naval troops and their arsenals of Louis XIV, King of France and Navarre ... Translated from French by Zotov. SPb., 1715. 28 Lotman Yu.M. Sotvorenie Karamzina. M., 1998. P. 39. 24

54

Chapter IV 1. Books introducing the Russian society to new theories in the field of science, state system, history of law and legislation, "General Geography" by Berngrad Varenius, "Brief Problems from New Geography" by Johann Giubner, "On Laws of Battle" by Hugo Grocius, "On Laws of the Family of Nations" and "On Ranks of Person and Citizen" by Samuel Puffendorf and others; 2. Books of general educational character "Aesopus's Parables", "Spectacle of Human Existence", "History of Devastation of the City of Troy", "Ovidius Metamorphoses", "Friendly Talks" by Erasmus of Rotterdam, "Youth's Honest Mirror" and others; 3. Text-books, ABC's, grammar books of Latin, Dutch and other languages, mathematical books, lexicons, calendars, various reference books.

Single title printings reached 1,200 copies; and as for ABC's these were printed in Moscow typography in an unprecedented number of 12,292 copies in 1722. During Peter's lifetime as many as 295 book titles were printed using the new civil font, all the titles printed during his reign totalled 600 (not to count various engraved sheets, the famous "Celestial Globe", 1,707 among them). Notably, only 48 ecclesiastic and religious works are found among those six hundred29. E.I. Shamurin quotes two interesting facts that show the mood of a certain part of Russian society towards these new Publishings. The first refers to the circumstances of printing the Huygens "Book of Viewing the World" in 1717. The director of typography Mikhail Petrovich Abramov (sometimes written as Avramov) took advantage of the tsar's temporary absence (Peter visited France) to print only 30 copies of the book instead of 1,200 as Peter ordered. He acted in conviction that it was "an atheist book-monster by a scatter-brain" "godless and loathsome", its author and translator worthy of getting "burned in a log-stack". The second relates to a situation when the Academy of Sciences published a calendar compiled by mathematician Meyer without astronomic predictions. "There raised a dissatisfaction in society over it (according to G.F. Müller), and henceforth the prediction part appeared in academic calendars again"30. Now, here is an example illustrating our thesis that one should look for the roots of the tsar's personal interest in each of his initiatives. In 1718, while celebrating a wedding (!), Peter called Ivan Alekseevich Musin-Pushkin and asked: "Why has a book by Vergily Urbirt on the origin of all sorts of inventions not been translated up to now? The book is not large, and you loiter?" The tsar's reminder worked and in May, 1720 the work of Polidor Vergily Urbinsky "Eight Books on Inventors of Things " was published. It was probably the first work on the history of science and technology in the world; it saw its first publication in Venice in 1499. This book was translated into Russian by Pheophilakt Lopatinsky, the "rector of Moscow specialized schools"31. ...Through his educational reforms, including those in libraries, Peter kept forming a new type of Russian reader for the XVIII century. He was introducing that reader to Europe not as a curious barbarian, but as a European, an equal proprietor of its book treasures. A natural process of transformation and convergence of cultures was starting in Russia, aiming to make 29 See.: Zdobnov N.V. Istoriya russkoj bibliografii do nachala XX veka. 2-e izd. M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1951. P. 38. 30 Shamurin E.I. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoj klassifikacii. Τ. 1... P. 377. 31 Nemirovsky E L. Mir knigi... P. 147.

Peter 's Library

55

that reader capable of finding his way to scientific progress. He needed to make a gigantic leap from the neophyte reader of the XII century to that of the XVIII century. Meanwhile, according to V.N. Peretz, there were no reasons to believe that the level of literacy in the latter was any higher than that in the XV century32. Did Peter understand this? I suppose, he had no time for such reflections. As Pushkin brilliantly said, "he cast a glance at the polite letters that was inattentive but penetrating Whether Peter had thought so or not, he did what he did. He was a man of action and he acted. In that connection the example is typical of discussion on the first Charter of the Academy. On January 22, 1724 Peter stayed from 8 a. m. till noon in the Senate scrutinizing carefully the "Draft Design for Foundation of the Academy of Arts and Sciences"3*, prepared by L. Blumentrost and I.D. Schumacher. After four hours of discussion the tsar came to two important decisions: 1) he approved the "Design..." and 2) defined the final sum for financing the future Academy to the amount of 24,912 rubles a year, making a fat blot by the figure, instead of 20,000 rubles, as L. Blumentrost proposed35. That day is considered birthday of the Academy. Consider this "Design...". Its paragraph 3 says that the Academy is founded not only to develop sciences, but also "via education and presentation of those to yield support to the people in future ". Paragraph 8. Nothing indicates direct subordination of the library to the Academy. (This is very significant!) It is only stressed that the Library and the Kunstkammer have to allow free use by the Academicians, while their directors are to carry out commissions for the Academicians. What is more, from the very beginning that process was reciprocal. Members of the Academy considered future BAN to be their creative laboratory: they engaged directly in collecting the library stock. Moreover, "every Academician ought to read good authors published in other countries in his science field. Thus it will be easy for him to compile extracts from them. These extracts, together with other discourses have to be published in due time on behalf of the Academy "36. Actually, this is nothing but the first state program of reforming scientific literature. Abstracting was intended, as notes for the editorial board of the "The Content of Scholarly Discourses ofthe Imperial Academy of Sciences "journal indicated: it was meant to disseminate scientific achievements in popular form, so that the Russian people "...clearer understand in what the authors of those discourses just exerted their best efforts in their concern for the increase of science"37. To better appreciate both the professionalism of the creators of the "Design..." and Peter's foresight in approving it, it is interesting to compare that document with the program of the first scientific journal in Europe, "Journal des Sgavans " (Journal of scientists), that came 32

Peretz V.N. Obrazovannost' // Kniga dlya chteniya po russkoj istorii. Τ. 1. M., 1904. P. 537. Pushkin A S. Ο nichtozhestve literatury russkoj // Sobr. soch. T.6. M.,1981. P.207 34 About Schumacher's activity in the design of a project see: Andreev A.I. Osnovanie Akademii nauk ν Peterburge // Petr Velikij: Sb. st. / Pod red. A.I. Andreeva. Τ. 1. M.; L.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1947. P. 313 and comm. 35 At first Blumentrost wrote 24,000, but then crossed it out. See: Andreev A.I. Osnovanie Akademii nauk... P. 318. What is 24,912 rubles yearly at that time? For comparison: to arrange the street lighting in St.Petersburg was needed 2 1 , 4 3 8 rubles—including both the price of the street-lamps and their maintenance costs. (See: Luppov S P. Istoriya stroitel'stva Peterburga ν pervoj chetverti XVIII veka. M.; L.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1957. P. 172.) 36 Istoriya A N SSSR. Τ. 1. M ; L., 1958. P. 431. 37 Soderzhanie uchenyh rassuzhdenij... Τ. 1. 1748. P. 6-7. 33

56

Chapter IV

off the press on January 5, 1665. In its address to the reader it stated that the task of the journal was to: 1) "Offer catalogue and summary of books. 2) Publish obituaries on distinguished people and summarize their works. 3) Publish information about: experiments in the field of physics and chemistry, serving to explain phenomena of nature; new discoveries in the field of arts and sciences; useful machines; curious inventions of mathematicians; sky observations; meteorological phenomena and new anatomical discoveries concerning animals. 4) Publish main verdicts of courts and universities*. 5) Elucidate current events in the world of literature. " Here we are with nothing to more say. One may only repeat after Pushkin: "Strange rapprochements do happen"n. In 1728 first proceedings of the Academy of Sciences started in Latin under the title "Commentaries ofthe Petersburg Academy of Sciences ". An abridged translation of the "Digest of Proceedings of the Academy ofSciences " was published especially for the Russian reader. It had four parts: physical, mathematical, astronomical and historical. Academicians had some concerns about the possible reaction of Russian society to it and wrote a special introduction to the reader. In reality, the process of formation of the new Russian reader moved very slowly, now fading, now weakly surfacing. For example, due to poor interest shown in the "Digest of Proceedings " that edition terminated upon its first volume39. "In the days of Peter the Great — P. Pekarsky writes, — the circle of readers was so small and the need in reading so infinitesimal that even the few books printed at that time found almost no market, and were destroyed with time as unwanted or unnecessary. As early as 1703 one of the Dutch merchants who bought and sold Russian books printed in Amsterdam by the tsar s will, wrote to Peter the Great claiming that he suffered losses in that trade "because merchants and volunteers are too scarce in the lands of Your Majesty". Further Pekarsky explains why such a small number of books from Peter's period came down to our days. Examining old typographical files of the Synod archive he found that the Synod authorities decided "to sell them to paper manufactories or to use as book jackets for the newly published books". To sum up: 11 thousand items of "Vedomosti" dating to various years and of different formats, 3,462 copies of "The Journal of Taking of Noteburg" (only three copies remaining), about 8 thousand decrees, 4,552 calendars including 1,812 copies ofthe 1709 calendar (one item remaining), from 100 to 300 scientific books were all used for covers to the total sum of 7 thousand 412 rubles and 48 copecks. In its time publication of these works cost the government the same money40. Nevertheless, it was impossible to turn the process back since it began. There opened a * Noted in paragraph 4 "basic verdicts of courts and universities" mean settling of numerous at that time arguments between the scholars about priority of scientific discoveries (for example, between Pascale and Newton, Newton and Leibnitz), because owing to absence of composite books of scientific printed works it was difficult to ascertain, who made either discovery first. 38

Pushkin A.S. Zametka ο «Gräfe Nuline» // Sobr. soch. Τ. 6. Μ., 1981. P. 156. It is very difficult not to quote Pushkin's apt remark again: "I cannot but note, — he wrote, — that from the time of Romanov's House ascending the throne our government always lead the way in the field of erudition and education. The people follow it always slow, and, sometimes, unwillingly also". See: Pushkin AS. Puteshestvie iz Moskvy ν Peterburg // Sobr. soch. T. 6. M., 1981. P. 181. 40 Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literatura ν Rossii... Τ. 1. P. I-II. 39

Peter 's Library

57

possibility for the Russian people to look at the general history and culture of Europe in a new way. Thus Peter was forming national topics, that differed our, specifically library, culture from the Western one. May this be compared with what was before him? Let us turn to the library of Peter I. Thanks to E.I. Bobrova we have a detailed description of it41. It is kept in BAN and numbers 1,663 titles. Among them are: - manuscripts in Russian — 293 titles; - printed books in Russian — 490; - manuscripts in foreign languages — 68; - printed books in foreign languages — 812. The library formed from several sources. Part of it consists of books and manuscripts, both Russian and foreign, brought from the old Moscow palaces. They passed into Peter's hands by inheritance and belonged formerly to his close relatives: his father, tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich, his brother, Fedor Alekseevich and his sister, tsarevna Sophia Alekseevna. Among them were works on geography, medicine, horse riding, textbooks on foreign languages and technology, and also laudatory addresses and calendars. The second part of his library includes books acquired by Peter himself or through his agents, and also books presented to him while he was touring Germany, Holland, England and France or was meeting various people in all sorts of circumstances, both in Russia and abroad. These books, now in simple, now in luxurious gold-plated covers, with engravings by the best artists of the times, contain information on architecture, applied art and technology. Particularly numerous are such acquisitions from the last decade of his reign. Translated literature forms the third part of Peter's private library. The tsar was passionately attentive to the quality of translations and sometimes he examined them himself. All the new translations had to be delivered to him immediately upon printing. Thus, on October 18, 1722, being in Astrakhan, Peter wrote to the Synod demanding that the printed translation of Orbini's book on Slavonic peoples be sent to him42. What kind of a person does Peter appear to us through the prism of his library? According to E.I. Bobrova the tsar attributed great importance to directing ecclesiastical matters, particularly in relation to the spread of "old rituals" in the Russian Orthodoxy and to church reform. We find treatises by Pheophan Prokopovich and Gavriil Buzhinsky among his books. Peter took a lively interest in history and in books of travels. His library index includes 16 works about Russia, West Europe, Asia and the Orient. Mark particularly the first editions of instructions, regulations, general signals, works on fortification and artillery in foreign languages. Peter tracked closely publications and reprints of old and new textbooks, grammar books, ABC's and especially vocabularies. Books in Russian and foreign languages published under the guidance of I.F. Kopievsky in the Amsterdam typography established in 1699 with Peter's assistance occupy a special place. E.I. Bobrova identified four manuscripts in Italian in the library. These are designs of palaces and parks both in the city and the suburbs sent to Peter by Venetian architects. Wellknown was his love for magnificent festivals and celebrations in which he took personal part. Among the books there are descriptions of fireworks, writings referring to symbols and emblems in Russian and foreign languages. Notes Peter made in Russian books are sporadic and of practical character. They concern 41 42

Bobrova E.I. Biblioteka Petra I... P. 214. Bobrova E.I. Op. cit. P. 6.

58

Chapter IV

corrections of texts or their use to some purposes. Noteworthy, there are no marks in foreign books at all. One should mention two more catalogues included in description of the tsar's personal library: 1) catalogues of books from the Patriarch's library and the book-preserving chamber of the Moscow printing yard (N 95) and 2) the two catalogues of Greek manuscripts, "being in the Synod library" compiled by A. Skiada (N 690). His library's books show Peter to be an educated and creative statesman, continually striving to accumulate more knowledge. ...Peter was ahead of his time. The world surrounding him, law and legislation, right, morality, etc. seemed incomplete to him, he constantly doubted, condemned and criticized, seeking for changes. He was not lonely in his views and had his soul mates both in his native land and in Europe. Their successors would determine the character of the epoch evoking extraordinary rise of scientific thought, the appearance of new universities, academies and first national libraries. The name of that epoch would be the Age of Enlightenment. The foundation in Petersburg of a library of the national type and of the Academy of Sciences a decade later was a matter of no small consequence in the system of measures meant to show Europe that Russia was entering a new era of its existence, an era of rapid blossoming of science and culture. Everybody knows that everything happens quickly in Russia. So it was in the early 1700's: just yesterday the traditional organization of Russian library life seemed so confident of itself, nothing foretelling any cardinal changes. Even in 1707 Kornily de Bruin, the Dutch traveller visiting the Moscow Pharmaceutical Prikaz and the pharmacy under it, noted that the library room had books together with plants and stuffed rare animals. (That institution was in charge of Robert Areskin, a Scot who served as head physician of the tsar)43. In 1713 Baron G. Guissen, also of Dutch origin who worked for Peter to promote the achievements of the new Russian state, composed a report on the need to open a public library and a hall for arts and natural sciences44. And suddenly, in 1714 Peter invited by his decree a German, Johann-Daniel Schumacher to start sorting out approximately two thousand foreign books delivered from Moscow to Peter's Summer Palace (that was the library of the Pharmaceutical Prikaz, already renamed the "Pharmaceutical Chancellery"), "from Ostsee provinces as spoils of war and from other places"*. The contract between the President of the Academy of Sciences, Laurentius Blumentrost and J.D. Schumacher of January 1,1724 stated: "In the name of H. / . M. Decree the following contract is drawn with librarian Schumacher: This librarian, Danilo Schumacher takes the library and the kunst-kammer to have in his management, to keep all in order both in the library and the kunst-kammer, to set up catalogues in the library for the books, and in the kunst-kammer for the various available things it has; also, till the academy be increased, to perform secretary duties in it For this, according to the same Η. I. M. Decree, it is promised to this librarian, Danilo Schumacher a salary of eight hundred rubles a year, to be given one year in advance, same as to other members of the Academy. Also a free apartment, firewood and candles to be given unto him 43 Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Evropy k pervomu russkomu grazhdanskomu knigohranilischu: Opyt obzora zarubezhnyh otzyvov ο Biblioteke Akademii nauk ν XVIII veke //Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya informaciya bibliotek Akademii nauk SSSR i akademij nauk soyuznyh respublik. M., 1973. Ν 4(89). P. 90. 44 Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literatura ν Rossii... Τ. 1. P. 101. * In 1725-1727 Peter's private library was handed over to form a part of future BAN by Ekaterinal.

59

Peter's Library from January 1 this year 1724. Laurentius

Blumentrost"*5.

This contract is quoted in a lot of publications in its various versions, but none of the researchers ever paid attention to the fact that, first, the contract was indefinite, and, second that, according to it, Schumacher became a government employee, independent of the members of the Academy. Later that became the cause of many conflicts. Might it be that, following the traditions ascending to the Hellenistic epoch, the position of librarian appointed by the tsar's order was supposed to be lifelong, as in Alexandria? Anyhow, Schumacher worked in BAN and the Kunstkammer for 47 years to the end of his life (1761). On February 14, 1724 after signing that contract L. Blumentrost sends a very important document to the Senate. "To the high governing Senate Dispatch As Η. I. M. Himself explained: "Danilo Schumacher is to perform his secretary and librarian duties at the academy, and when I am away, with members of the academy have correspondence; and for their arrival here to send money for their travel expenses; and to those who are at the academy, kunst-kammer and library today pay salary and supply other things; for the sake of this I ask that the above Danilo Schumacher, according to his request for money or something else, in what the academy will have the need, be ordered to grant. Laurentius Blumentrost"*6. The library was born as if at once! As early as 1715 there appeared an entry on a charge to a Swede, Lorenz Lang (a traveller, a writer, a collector then to become the first Russian consul to China) of a book from the Library of the Summer Palace, by instruction of R. Areskin. It was the "Dictionnaire Critique et Historique "47 vocabulary by Pier Bayle (1647-1706). In 1716 a German resident at the Russian court Christian Friedrich Weber reported: "Ifthere is a constant increase ofthe already precious library then in afew years it will come along with other most significant European ones, not by number, but through the worth of books it has "48. In 1718 erection of the Libraiy and the Kunstkammer began by the cape of the Vasilevsky 45

Materialy dlya istorii Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk. Τ. 1. (1716-1730). SPb., 1885. P. 14 (N 20). Ibid. P. 30. 47 If Schumacher had not done such a record, the name of one of the first, if not the very first BAN's reader would remain unknown to future researchers of its history. Another fact is regrettable: Lorentz Lang had not returned a book given out to the library. In BAN's Department of Rare Books there are several Beil's dictionaries, but all of them issued after 1715. The fact of giving out of a book is established by N.M. Karataev on the base of list of books lost. In a manuscript of history of the library of the Academy of Sciences Ν. M. Karataev wrote about the list made in 1733 —"Von denen Büchern die da fehlen oder ausgeleset sind", where, specifically, Beil's dictionary was in Lang's name. See: Shafranovsky K.I Ο vremeni osnovaniya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR // Tr. B-ki AN SSSR i Fundament, b-ki obwestv. nauk AN SSSR. Τ. V. M.; L„ 1961. P. 268. See detailed article about Lang: Shafranovskaya T.K. Lorentz Lang i ego svyaz' s peterburgskoj Kunstkameroj //Pervye skandinavskie chteniya: E'tnograficheskie i kul'turno-istoricheskie aspekty. SPb., 1997. P. 170-180. 48 Weber H. Zapiski braunshvejgskogo rezidenta Webera ο Petre Velikom i ego preobrazovaniyah / V perevode P.P. Barsova // Russkij arhiv. 1872. Ν 7-8. In 1716 the Library had 4,763 volumes. To compare: in 1715 the Prussian Royal library in Berlin had 50 thousand volumes; by 1726 San-Genieve library in Paris had about 40 thousand items. See: Shamurin E.I. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoj klassifikacii. Τ. 1... P. 144. 46

60

Chapter IV

Island. A report with a brief note remained in Peter's cabinet papers, "written by hand of Peter Alekseev Kurbatov"49. The Library and the Kunstkammer were completed in 1724. For the reader to imagine the situation in which all this was taking place let me remind you that to fulfill the new project of developing the capital Peter intended to speed up the works on the Vasilevsky Island in particular. From April 1719 to March 1721 Peter issued ten decrees to the effect50. In one of them he prohibited any construction activity all around Russia(!) to focus exclusively on the Vasilevsky Island. Admittedly, it worked through 1719-172051. By 1719 the library had of about 10,000 volumes, and since the Summer Palace was obviously not spacious enough, it went over to the Kikiny Palaty (Chambers) "across the Okhta sloboda"52. (Aleksei Vasilevich Kikin, a favorite of the executed tsarevich Aleksei, was broken on the wheel, and his house, built in 1714, "signed away to government".) The library occupied three side rooms on the second floor of its new premises. Again we face a non-trivial decision by Peter. Ya. Shtelin retells a story by Schumacher who already held the "post of librarian and chief supervisor of natural and artistic chamber": "On the eve of opening the Kunstkammer and the Library P. I. Yaguzhinsky, OberProsecutor of the Synod suggested to Peter to set an admittance charge "of one or two rubles, on account of gathering a sum from which it would be possible to spend on maintaining and increasing these rarities ". The tsar at once interrupted Yaguzhinsky and said: "Pavel Ivanovich, you do say unreasonable things! And your proposal would hinder more than facilitate my intention. Because who would have need in my rarities and who would wish to see my Kunstkammer, if he would have to pay money for this? Besides I even order not only to admit everyone free, but, beyond this always, as soon as a company gathers, to entertain them with a cup of coffee, a tumbler of wine, a glass of vodka or another drink at my expense in the Kunstkammer itself'. Further Schumacher concludes: "Owing to this highest order the Librarian was granted an additional 400 rubles per year beyond his annual salary for the refreshments mentioned; and even during the reign of the Empress Anna loannovna I often saw that most distinguished visitors were entertained in the Kunstkammer by coffee, Hungarian wines, cakes and various fruits according to the season; common people were led there by a sub-librarian or another attendant to whom all things were known, and with brief explanation he was showing them all the rarities Following Schumacher's stories Ya. Shtelin comes to a conclusion that Peter often visited the Kunstkammer and the Library himself. One day he received the ambassador of the Sacred Roman Empire there. When the Vice-Chancellor remarked to the tsar that such a reception would be more appropriate in His Majesty's palace, Peter answered in such a way according to Shtelin: "Let the ambassador arrive here: it's all the same for him wherever I receive him for the first time. After all, he is sent to me, but not to some or other house. If he has something to tell me he 49

Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literatura ν Rossii... Τ. 1. P. 59. Polnoe sobranie zakonov. T. 5. N N 3348, 3399; Τ. 6. N N 3505, 3530, 3538, 3541, 3634, 3673, 3 6 8 3 , 3766. 51 Further discussion in: Semencov S.V. Etapy razvitiya planirovki Vasil'evskogo ostrova ν 1720-e gody // Petrovskoe vremya ν litsah: Kratkoe soderzhanie dokl. nauch. chtenij pamyati A.D. Menshikova. SPb.: Gos. Ermitazh, 1998. P. 42-49. 52 See also: Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR. P. 17-20. 53 Shtelin Ya. Lyubopytnye i dostopamyatnye skazaniya ο imperatore Petre Velikom... SPb., 1786. P. 77-78. 50

Peter 's Library

61

may tell it wherever I am ". The audience was granted at 5 a. m. (!)54. Peter accounted for every little detail in that episode. Apparently, he wanted Rome very much to know about his Library and Kunstkammer in the new capital of Russia. He understood that the ambassador would spare nothing in his description of the first audience with the Russian Emperor, including his impressions gained outside the palace walls, so that these descriptions would take much space in his report. What do the accounts and reflections on the library and book-publishing policy and activities of Peter I collected in this chapter tell us? What were they? Manifestations of his genius or wonderful provisions? Genius, we say upon the lapse of so long a period of time. Prodigious anticipation — judged his contemporaries following their own standards. It was necessary to invite people, to interest them, to make a visit to Kunstkammer and the Library a necessity. Not to forget that from those times these two institutions started to be included into the program of essential visits for foreigners. They demonstrated the new face of the state, its new culture. These foreigners pronounced their judgment on the Russian nation, and the library was considered nothing less than the Russian national library. In my opinion, both in these decisions and his other creative actions Peter manifested a trait of his character inherent from his green years. He never hurried to side up with adherents of some point of view, or bowed at once to opinions by others. So it was with the decision on the Academy of Sciences. He listened to Leibnitz and Wolf, visited some of the academies himself, had many talks with scholars from various countries, but not a single advice or project was accepted as 'the base' as we say today. Prizing independence of thought most of all Peter did it in his own fashion and followed his own path, leaving after him a kind of sandwich of things good and bad... It was good when the majority accepted his ideas and new sprouts started growing on the Russian soil. It was bad when the native ground and environment interested nobody and such seedlings were implanted by force; then all his efforts came to nothing. May it be that this duality remains one of the reasons we are still paying such hard a cost for the ambiguity of the Europeization Peter I began?

54

Shtelin Ya. Lyubopytnye i dostopamyatnye skazaniya ο imperatore Petre Velikom... SPb., 1786. P. 75-76.

CHAPTER V

EUROPEANS ON THE FIRST RUSSIAN LIBRARY In his book "The Apology of History or the Historian's Craft" that the wellknown French historian Marc Bloch worked on during the years of war while fighting in the Resistance, he proffered such an avowal: "A historian as such, they tell us, is completely deprived of a possibility to ascertain personally the facts he studies. No Egyptologists have ever seen Ramses. No experts in Napoleonic wars ever heard the cannons of Austerlitz. So we can talk about previous epochs only on the basis of hearsay evidence. We play the role of a preliminary investigator who tries to embrace the scene of a crime committed in his absence, or of a physicist who has to stay home because of his flu and can only learn the results of his experiment through a report of an attendant. In a word, unlike cognition of the present, cognition of the past will always remain "indirect" How authentic are such appraisals, how much may one trust them? Evidence by contemporaries, on the one hand, is very valuable, immediacy of perception is preserved in it, it bears such details and feelings impressed that almost always escape those who never participated in the events or witnessed them. Only a representative of an epoch may catch and convey the typical features of his days. On the other hand, subjectivism and personal bias prevent contemporaries from estimating a historical fact, a person or an event in their completeness and authenticity. And generations to follow are forced to percieve history from those positions that their predecessors held. Hence deceptively opposite conclusions appear. Nevertheless, evidences by eyewitnesses are very important since they reflect the life of a past epoch. And in many respects our choice of this or that presentation depends on things we want to know. As for our case of looking for contemporaries' evidences from the XVIII century, I would suggest beginning our exposition with the description of the library made by Audrey Bogdanov, an assistant librarian in his book "Description of St.Petersburg"2: "This state library is used for all free sciences pursued at the Imperial Academy of Sciences, and then it is open twice a weekfor others fond of reading. The arrangement of this state library is as follows. The first part of the library, in which books are kept in various closets, is this: Class 1, contains lettered history or books about sciences. Class 2, philosophical books. Class 3, author s books about natural and nations' rights and besides moralizing and political books. Class 4, mathematical books. ' Bloch Μ. Apologiya istorii ili remeslo istorika. M.: Nauka, 1973. P. 30. Bogdanov A I. Opisanie Sanktpeterburga. 1749-1751 gg. SPb., 1997. P. 165-166.

2

Europeans on the First Russian Library

63

Class 5, grammar books and lexicons. Class 6, critical books and miscellanea. Class 7, books about antiquities and monetary science. Class 8, oratorical books, rhetorical, and those about the writing of letters. Class 9, books of various poets. Class 10, books on universal history, chronological and geographical. Class 11, books on church history. Classl2, books on the history of Greece, Persia and Constantinopole. Class 13, books on the ancient and new Roman history. Class 14, books on German state history and others. Class 15, books on Portuguese, Spanish and Italian history. Class 16, books on French history. Class 17, history of Great Britain. Class 18, history of the Netherlands. The second part of the library: Class 19, medical, anatomical, surgical, pharmaceutical and chemical books. Class 20, writers on natural history. Class 21, description of travels and of the other three parts of the world. Class 22, legal books. Class 23, ecclesiastic books. The third part of the library: Class 24, Russian ecclesiastic and secular printed books. Class 25, books of academic printing. Class 26, Chinese books. Class 27, atlases and topography books. Class 28, iconic books. Class 29, books on civil architecture. Class 30, books on military architecture. Class 31, economic books. Class 32, genealogy books. Class 33, books on Northern history. Class 34, Russian ecclesiastic and secular manuscripts ". Bogdanov's classification of the library stock presented in very general terms provokes a lot of questions in a systematizer, a desire to discuss it from the point of view of its practical utilization in the first half of the XVIII century. Such a discussion would be extremely interesting because, as I see it, this classification has not been studied by library scholars since E.I. Shamurin and I.N. Koblenz3. In pursuance of our topic let us present opinions on the library that remained in records by eyewitnesses and in publications and reference books. Since those descriptions in literature are 3

See. Shamurin E.I. Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoj klassifikacii. T.l... P. 301-306; Koblenz I N. Andrey Ivanovich Bogdanov (1692-1766): Iz proshlogo russkoj istoricheskoj nauki i knigovedeniya. M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1958. P. 89-101, 141-145.

64

Chapter V

not found in any regular form and are lacking a system, we will present separately testimonials on BAN by diplomats, guests and those other persons for whom the Library and the Kunstkammer were places of obligatory visits in the new capital, and those by scholars for whom the library was their principal scientific laboratory. I completely agree with the appraisal of BAN by M.I. Sluhovsky who dedicated a special article to that subject4. "The academic library — he wrote, —played an appreciable role in the development of our library thought. It is less known to have played a role at least as important in propagation of the Russian book and, to a degree, of Russian science abroad. No other library of ours attracted such a close attention in the West. Foreign appreciation fancifully combined mistrust and envy, amazement and delight but usually showed respect. Observers were immutably convinced not only of the book riches of the Petersburg Library that was quickly nearing in its scope the greatest world collections, but of its state function. The Library thus comparedfavourably with a number of cultural institutions of the "enlightened monarchies " of the XVIII century " (P. 88-89). Here are some eyewitness evidences from those for whom the Library and the Kunstkammer were the sites of obligatory sightseeing visits in St.Petersburg. 1720. A diplomat with the Polish Embassy5: "Out of town, towards the monastery by the Neva river there stands quite a small stone palace (TCikiny palaty - V. L·) where His Majesty showed us his [collection of] Anatomy. He bought it somewhere beyond Holland from some celebrated physician coming from beyond the sea... for 12,000 chervontsy6. In three other rooms an excellent library is on the exhibit; it has ancient books of a thousand and a half years old, according to calculations by Father Jesuits. These are Greek books mostly, but also there are many books printed in Slavonic. Other works are related to the art of war and contain [descriptions] of new ways to attack towns, castles and other fortresses. Many such books the tsar ordered to print for young people. Moreover, there are old German Bibles and many Latin books and German, French, Russian books are to a total value of more than ten thousand [rubles]"*. 1721. Friedrich Wilhelm Bergholtz, a Holstein kamer-junker7 "With this Kunstkammer there is a first-rate muntz-cabinet and a considerable library that apparently arrivedfrom Poland mostly. Also there stands apart the library of Areskin, the former Surgeon Ordinary to the Tsar that consists chiefly of medical, 4 Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Evropy k pervomu russkomu grazhdanskomu knigohranilischu: Opyt obzora zarubezhnyh otzyvov ο Biblioteke Akademii nauk ν XVIII veke // Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya informaciya bibliotek Akademii nauk SSSR i akademij nauk soyuznyh respublik. M., 1973. Ν 4(89). P. 88-109. Information he collected is considerably heavier than presented in the monograph «Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR. 1714-1964» (M.; L., 1964. P. 26-28), and its translation sometimes essentially differs in literary aspect also. Further on I shall quote this M.I. Sluhovsky's article. 5 Kratkoe opisanie goroda Peterburga i prebyvaniya ν nem pol'skogo posol'stva ν 1720 g. Cit. from: Bespyatyh Yu.N. Peterburg Petra I ν inostrannyh opisaniyah: Vvedenie. Teksty. Kommentarii. L.: Nauka, 1991. P. 143-144. 6 Collection of Holland anatomist F. Ryuisch had been aquired for 30,000 guldens. At that time one ruble was equal three guldens. So, the price of collection was 10,000 rubles. (Ibid. P. 159, note Ν 27). * I should want to emphasize correlation of costs. 10,000 rubles had been spent for F. Ryuisch's collection, and the same sum had been spent for purchase of books for the library. 7 According to: Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Evropy... P. 93. See also: Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 27. Bergholtz is mistaken, supposing that books have arrived from Poland.

Europeans on the First Russian Library

65

physical and philosophical books but very good and rare. All these books are finely bound. The librarian, whose surname is Schumacher, is now abroad to acquire all sorts of rarities. While he is away a sort of a pharmacist holds his post". 1726. European publications described the grand meeting of the Academy in Shafirov's house in the presence of Empress Ekaterina I. In particular, the Leipzig "Neue Zeitung für gelehrten Sachen " (March 7, 1726) noticed: "Further on the imperial library, quite well stacked with excellent books is to be open for everybody [so wishing] on Tuesdays and Fridays from 1 to 4 p.m. When visits of foreigners became a tradition, depending on the rank of the guest the Academy Registry invited some of its employees to provide explanations during the guest tour. For example: "This June 18 (1745 - V. L.J to announce it to Professors Del'Isle, Richmann, underlibrarian Taubert and in other places to those who need to know, so that by about three p.m. everybody be at his post since the Swedish Ambassador Zederkreiz is to arrive for excursion by the Academy"9. Or "This September 19 (1745), that is on Thursday, there are to visit the Kunstkammer, the Library and other Academic departments Messrs. English, Danish and Dutch Ambassadors; and because of this it is determined in the Registry of the Academy of Sciences so: in all academic apartments all that belongs to them to put in order and to clean. "10 On September 25 that year the Library and the Kunstkammer were visited by the Princess ofAnhalt-Zerbst, mother of the future Empress Ekaterina II. Here is how her visit was reflected in "The Materials for the History of the Imperial Academy of Sciences ": "When Her Serenity the Princess of Anhalt-Zerbst, mother of Her Imperial Highness the True Believing Monarchess High Princess Ekaterina Alekseevna deemed to visit the Kunstkammer and the Library, then various portraits printed in the Academy were presented to Her Serenity, which were at a cost of seven rubles and fifty five copecks apiece, and Her Serenity pleased to promise to send to this Library a book of Chronicle. And today Preiser, the book-shop accountant made an account of these portraits and demanded either payment for them or a note of instruction to write them off On that it is reasoned: as those were presented to Her Serenity to honour the Academy, and because of that he, Preiser should write these portraits off as expenditure into the corded-book and further not count those to Her Serenity account, and issue him a copy of that deed"". I may add that mother of the future Empress Ekaterina II did not forget her visit to the Library and the Kunstkammer, and in 1747 she kept her promise. That event was reflected in the well-known book by I. Bakmeister: "The same year (1747 - V. L.) is also noteworthy for the reason of many other things importantfor us. Her Serenity, the late Duchess of Anhalt-Zerbt deigned to send us Bekmanov's works in three volumes, fullsheet, the "Anhalt Chronicle ", — a magnificent book decorated 8

Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Evropy... P. 95 Materialy dlya istorii Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk. T. 7 (1744-1745). SPb., 1895. P. 4 2 6 ^ 2 7 (N 500). 10 Ibid. T. 7 . P. 616 (N 648). 11 Materialy... T. 7. P. 625 (N 658).

9

66

Chapter V

with portraits. The thing most precious for us in that book is the inscription in the beginning written with Her Serenity's own hand. That Princess honoured the Academy with utterly flattering praises "n. In 1751 in Paris the second volume of the famous "Encyclopaedia" by Diderot and d'Alembert went off the press. It contained a review article "Libraries " with descriptions of the greatest book depositories of Europe; its author was Diderot who collected enormous material from various sources to write it. Rumours about the Petersburg library also reached the Encyclopaedists. Here is a fragment from the article "Libraries " with its first mentioning of the BAN: "As for Russia, it is known that, except for some works in Slavonic on religion there were no scientific books and even almost not a shadow of literature in the country before tsar Peter I, who, between his military campaigns promoted arts and sciences to blossom and founded many an academy in different parts of his Empire. This great monarch collected fairly significant stocks for the library of his Petersburg Academy, supplied with a multitude of books related to all fields of science" (P. 234). Here also comes an opinion of another eyewitness, d'Korberon, a staff member with the French Embassy in Russia. He visited the Academy of Sciences on February 7, 1776: "In this Academy which I visited this morning together with M. Kozimo Mari, there are many rooms. We began with the library: its interior is not quite good; it contains 40,000 volumes, of which, to tell the truth, 14,600 items were brought from Poland, from prince Radzivill"u. ... I have presented only a few eyewitness evidences on BAN by those who did not belong to scientific circles. I think they are enough to conclude that almost all of their authors recall only the brightest episodes from their Petersburg life and activities. They never explain what they saw but only retell it from the point of view of Peter's reforms, so broadly conceived, trying at the same time to present themselves favorably in readers eyes. Consider for comparison a report by the same Korberon on his visit to the Hermitage in 1776: "The gallery is too narrow, there is not enough space to look at pictures and the light falls from insufficient height, or, to be more precise, windows are positioned too low and these are simple windows that in the Kassel gallery are arranged in quite a different way"1*. As to the actual explanations, I suppose some of those contemporaries really failed to understand what might be the reason and purpose to establish such a museum and a library in ' the new capital; we know not either whether anybody from their circle became a BAN reader later. Meanwhile such information would be extremely useful. Now let us move on to valuations of our library by European scholars. In its issue of May 12, 1726 the already mentioned "Neue Zeitung für gelehrten Sachen " published an unsigned letter. It is supposed to belong to G.S. Bayer, a historian15. 12

Bakmeister. I. Opyt ο biblioteke i kabinete redkostej i istorii natural'noj Sanktpeterburgskoj Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk, izdannyj na francuzskom yazyke. Na rossijskij yazyk perevedennoj Vasil'em Kostygovym. SPb., 1779. P. 38-39. 13 Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Evropy... P. 106-107. Prince Karl II Stanislav Radzivill is referred to (1734-1790). Nesvizhskaya library of Radzivills was handed over to the Academy of Sciences after taking of Nesvizh by Bibikov's troops in 1768. " Levinson-Lessing VF. Istoriya kartinnoj galerei E'rmitazha (1764-1917). L.: Iskusstvo, 1985. P. 111. 15 Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Evropy... P. 96-97.

Europeans on the First Russian Library

67

"The library occupies a large, extremely elegant building — the author writes, — and houses, together with books, the Kunstkammer and the muntzcabinet... in order for you to form a true notion of the library, know that Diuvernua assured me that he couldn't name any rare book on mathematics, medicine and physics that he would fail to find there, and thus I was just lucky with unique editions; on account of this I can see before me now everything that I might ever dream of. [Here] they have such a custom that whatever anyone might wish he may advise on this, — and an instruction is immediately issued of the need to acquire that thing. Del'Isle thus purchased in Danzig Hevelius's correspondence at a cost of 100 ducats for the library ". Michael van der Bech, the head physician of the St.Petersburg Army Hospital during 1723 -1725 sent a letter to Samuel Keleser, the Secretary of the Transylvanian Principality that was published in 1727 in the report of the German Society of Naturalists and Physicians16. In particular he wrote there: "The library, which in its selection and abundance of books collected for use by bibliophiles is by now not weaker than any other, and which is going to occupy the wellprepared excellent premises, will be moved to that enormous building from its former place. For its order, arrangement, beauty, equipment and build-up we are indebted to persistence and care of Schumacher, the director of the Imperial Library, a person most experienced in bibliology. During his last Paris trip which he undertook on behalf of His Majesty with the purpose of presenting to the Royal Academy of Sciences a new geographic or, to be more accurate, rather a hydrographic map of the Caspian Sea, it was he who collected the richest stocks of most remarkable and rare books, not available before, in all the fields of science; he spared no costs to acquire it so as to increase the Petersburg library ". The opening of the library on the Vasilievsky Island on November 5, 1728 evoked new interest in Europeans. Obri de Lamotrait, a French traveller was the first to write about a systematic arrangement of the library stock mentioning such sections as history, bookprinting, geography, astronomy, botany, mineralogy17. In 1731 a member of the Petersburg Academy, Professor George-Bernhard Bülfinger cancelled his service contract due to his disagreements with Schumacher and went back to his native Tubingen. On September 17, making a report at the university there about the new Russian capital he pronounced thus in his capacity of a scholar who had worked in the library for about four years: "He who plans to study thoroughly natural sciences and land survey, let him aim at Paris, London or Petersburg. There are teams of experienced persons and equipment available there. Peter himself had engaged in sciences. So he did collect everything necessary for that, — a remarkable library". And further on to comment on Schumacher: "a skillful and painstaking keeper of that collection showed me the books newly received"™. On August 11, 1778 Johann Bernulli, a Berlin astronomer visited the library. Librarian I. Bakmeister was offering explanations to him. Bernulli was seriously interested in what he saw and reflected his impressions in his travel notes. He granted much attention to the German publication of Bakmeister's book "Versuch über die Bibliothek" (1776)19. While visiting the Hermitage Bernulli voiced critical comments concerning the arrangement of pictures and their selection for the gallery: 16

Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii 18 Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie " Sluhovsky M.I. Otnoshenie 17

Evropy... P. 97-98. nauk SSSR... P. 28. Evropy... P. 100. Evropy... P. 107-108.

68

Chapter V

"Pictures hang without any order or selection, different schools alternate, but the long side on the left is allotted mainly to better works of the Italian school. I can guarantee, — Bernulli wrote, — that this collection contains unexpected treasures of precious pictures, although I would not always agree with the originality of canvases ascribed to greatest masters (who would believe that all the pictures imputed to Korredgio are truly of his brush). Taking into consideration their numbers one might also expect a better selection of pieces; many masters are presented with a great number of works, others are not presented at all and all that contradicts the purpose of so brilliant an institution. Many mediocrities are also found there "20. With all their diversity evidences by scholars pursue a particular aim: to value the new library as a perspective place for science research and to recommend it to their colleagues. So it was not by mere chance that some of their private letters were printed in scientific publications. That was a fairly widespread phenomenon in the XVIII century. According to opinions by contemporaries the "outward" biography of BAN was starting to shape. To complete the picture I will adduce one more evidence. It belongs to Andrey Bolotov, our compatriot who visited the Koenigsberg Library of the royal castle during the 60's and 70's of the XVIII century. It is interesting not only for the possibility to compare the two libraries but also for the simple fact that during that time, from 1766 to 1772 Immanuel Kant worked there holding the post of an assistant librarian with quite a moderate salary of 62 thaler a year. The library occupied the lower floor of the main tower of the castle and contained 16 thousand volumes. Andrey Timofeevich left its description of it: "These books are mainly ancient and part of them handwritten, and I happened to see very rare ones, written by ancient monks in extremely neat and fair halfcanonic letters decorated with various ornaments and small figures made in most vivid paints; and what is more astonishing is that many of them are chained to shelves with long iron chains, so that everybody may take them off the shelves and examine and read to one's contention, but to steal and take them away would be impossible. In summer that library was open every week and everybody was free to come and be there and read any book even for a whole day, while they only kept an eye so that nobody would take any of those books away, and in order that it would be easier to read long tables with benches around them were placed in the middle of the hall, and many, especially learned people and students really availed themselves of this permission, and I happened to find sometimes ten and sometimes twenty persons engaged in reading there. "21 ...There is another way, specific to librarians of appreciating the work of a library institution to which its contemporaries have resorted and will always resort. That is book exchange: a direct exchange of scientific publications between scholars and the library, between the library, universities and libraries of other institutions. It impresses itself in an enormous correspondence (today BAN has more then 2,5 thousand foreign partners for book exchange, and almost half of its collection, about 9 million items is formed of foreign magazines and mono20

Cit. from: Levinson-Lessing VF. Istoriya kartinnoj galerei E'rmitazha... P. 111. Gulyga A.V. Kant. 2-e izd. M.: Mol. gvardiya, 1981. P. 74. Except of summer time the Koenigsberg's library was opened on Wednesdays and Saturdays from one to four hours p. m. Apparently, not only the library work attracted Kant, but also the possibility to have necessary for him books at hand. Other is also interesting: hours and days of week of its work coincided with BAN's work. At first it was opened for readers on Tuesdays and Fridays from two to four hours p. m. Later this schedule changed more than once. 21

Europeans on the First Russian Library

69

graphs). Schumacher himself stood at the spring source of book exchange, when back in 1721 on instructions by Peter he visited Berlin, Viena, Leiden, Paris, Oxford, Cambridge and "in addition more than 200 private libraries" during his travel abroad. Exchange in scientific publications was thus starting on the basis of the relations developed22. I will give an example from the history of book exchange between the Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society of London (founded in 1662). Sending to the Society its first publications on September 6, 1726, the Petersburg Academy was writing among other things: "There would be nothing more honorary for us, if our works that we are sending to Your learned Society standing the first among the other Academies by both the time of its foundation and its scientific authority would not yield to Yours in their quantity and scientific value and would with time surpass them "23. In February 1727 this address was reported at the Conference of the Royal Society that happened to be the last under the chairmanship of I. Newton. Newton's successor at the post of the President of the Royal Society became Hans Sloan who held it from 1727 to 1741. He was also the first English scholar to have been elected an Honorary Member of the Petersburg Academy of Sciences in 1734. In my opinion letters we are publishing here offer a proof of greed-free international cooperation between England and Russia and of the strengthening exchange of scientific publications during those times24. Ν 1

From H. Sloan to J.D. Schumacher, May 1,1730. Dear Sir, The splendid present that You were so kind as to send me on behalf of Mr. President Blumentrost, namely the first volume of the Petersburg Memoirs was handed to me safely; I was very glad to receive it and would become even happier if You would do me the honour of joining the second volume to it also, or "Centuries" of plants by Mr. Booksbaum, done in natural paints as You mentioned in Your letters. I am very thankful to You for Your troubles in that connection. If only I might render You some service here, please do not refuse to tell me about it. I hope that You will be so kind as to hand Mr. President Blumentrost the two latest volumes of our "Philosophical Transactions" and the two Decades of New Plants, just published by Mr. Martin, in order that he might see what is happening here. Having the honor of remaining, my dear Sir, Your faithful servant Hans Sloan London, May 1, 1730. 22 It is also important to know the history of your library. In Paris, during the seminar "Big libraries of the future" I got to know a director of the Vatican Library, Leonard Boil, who hardly recalled BAN — only according to publications concerning the fire in 1988. "And do You know, — I asked him, — that there are book exchange relations between our libraries from 1751?" He was very surprised. Indeed, the facts are the following: at first 29 books had been sent from the Vatican Library to B A N in 1751 (see: Istoriya Biblioteki A N SSSR... P. 109). Nowadays the book exchange with the Vatican, interrupted in the years of World War II, was resumed in 1960. B A N receives 10-12 serial publications on history, Oriental research, archaeology and law every year; the same number is sent to the Vatican Library, University and Archaeological Academy (according to K.A. Sviridova and N.V. Vedernikova). 23 Cit. from: Andreev A.I. Petr Velikij ν Anglii ν 1698 g. // Petr Velikij: Sb. st. M.; L.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1947. P. 92. 24 Further discussion: Radovsky M.I. U istokov anglo-russkih nauchnyh svyazej // 1st. aihiv. 1956. N3. P. 139-155.

Chapter V

70 Ν2

From Η. Sloan to J.D. Schumacher, June 2,1731. Dear Sir, I am very grateful to You for the books that I received from Mr. Müller and ask You to assure Your celebrated President that I was so late to thank him only on the account of lack of occasion since the time the ice broke up at sea. Now, together with expressions of my great respect I am sending him the last "Philosophocal Transactions", the second part of Martin's work, a new report from Caroline and a Chinese chronological table which I ask You to present to him and to tell him on my behalf that I shall always be flattered with a possibility to express to him my gratitude for all the boons I had received from him. I have no plants from the St.Petersburg environs and I would wish to get a collection of those. The news about the happy arrival of Mr. Müller would afford me great pleasure. And if I could be useful here in any way, for instance so that I would be sending You books or some collections, please, make use of me, because You will thus give me a chance to convince You of my sincere devotion, with which I remain, my dear Sir, Your resigned and obedient servant Hans Sloan London, June 2, 1731 N3 From H. Sloan to J.D. Schumacher, April 20,1732. Dear Sir, I received "Centuries" of plants painted in natural colors which You had kindly sent me several months ago; I am infinitely thankful to You for them and would have expressed my gratitude long ago, but for the ice which stopped communication during winter. Now, when the sea has cleared, I ask You to accept the "Philosophical Transactions"published after I had the honour of writing You, and a part of the "Natural History of Carolines" by Mr. Cats by that You will receive from Mr. Nettleton; I shall never miss an opportunity to send You the fourth Decade by Mr. Martin, the sequel to the "Philosophical Transactions" and the "Natural History of Carolines" as soon as they will be published. In case You are missing some "Transactions"please inform me and, undoubtedly, You will receive them. If Messrs. Members of the Petersburg Academy suppose that I can do them some favour, You may assure them that I am completely at their disposal. With sincere devotion, my dear Sir, forever Your resigned and obedient servant Hans Sloan London, April 20, 1732 Just one more fragment of another letter by H. Sloan addressed to I. Amman, the botanist who in 1733 became a member of Petersburg Academy of Sciences and at the time moved to Russia for work. The creation of the Botanical Garden and Herbarium at the Academy are connected with his name. On May 6, 1736 Sloan was writing to Amman in Petersburg25: "I regret that now I can find no occasion to send the "Transactions" and other books to You, but in spring I will seize the opportunity at once. I am sending this letter with Prince Kantemir who several days ago handed me the diploma on behalf of President Korf together with his very kind letter. I am extremely grateful and ready to do everything possible to 25

Radovsky M.I. U istokov... P. 148.

Europeans on the First Russian Library

71

promote the glorious goals of the institution a member of which I am now honoured to be. How amazing that now when there are many who are busy with other businesses, oftentimes related to war capabilities, the Empress is so very attentive to the successes of science and so vigorously supports them ". In conclusion of this chapter I will cite materials about the Library, published on the pages of the main newspaper of the capital, the "Saint-Petersburg Vedomosti" during 1728177226. 1728. 11.26.03, 1728. 1.26.4.* A notice on moving the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer to the new Academic chambers and on their opening that was attended by: Admiral von P.I. Sivers, General von B.X. Minikh, Arch-Chamberlain of the Duke of Holstein Count Ν. Bonde, General-Major I.I. Bibikov, General-Major von I.L. Liuberas, Rear Admiral P.P. Bredal and the courtier chevaliers of the Duke of Holstein. The Library working hours are indicated: "From now on the Library will equally stay unlocked twice a week, namely on Tuesdays and Fridays from 2 to 4 p. m. and have its entry free for everyone, but those desiring to visit the Kunst- and the natural-kammer, those are to make their wishes khown to a librarian the day before, and get advised by him on a good time for this". 1728. 12.14.04. A notice on the visit by Pitirim, the Archbishop of Nizhni Novgorod and Alatyr with various cleric persons accompanying him to the Gymnasium, the Typography, the Book Chamber, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1730. 07.06.04. A notice on the visit of the Dutch Envoy de Die to the Academy of Sciences, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1732. 03.09.03. March 3. A notice on the visit of Empress Anna Ioannovna to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1732.03.16.03. March 15. Anotice on the visit of Prince Mohammed Bek of Kabarda to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1732. 06.08.03. June 3. A notice on the visit of the Chinese Ambassadors to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer, accompanied by Justice Counsellor Samarin, the excursion conducted by the Ober-Hoffmarshal Count R.G. von Levenvolde. 1733. 01.25.03. January 25. Anotice on the visit of Father Henry Zumklen, the Father Confessor to the Austrian Ambassador, Count von Vratislav to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1733.06.04.03. June 1. A notice on the visit ofAnton-Ulrich, Prince Brawnschweigwebem to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer in the presence of all the Professors and Members of the Academy of Sciences among whom Professors [G.N.] Del'Isle and I.V. Kraft were mentioned. 1733. 08.23.03. August 3. A notice on the visit of the Polish Envoy, Mr. Antony Rudomina with his retinue to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1734. 04.04.04. A notice on the visit of the Persian Ambassadors to the Academy of Sciences, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer, in the presence of Professors I.V. Kraft and [G.N.] Del'Isle. 1734.10.10.07-08. October 4. A notice on the visit of L. Lang, the Russian Representative at the Chinese court to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer, wherein he brought

26 This material is kindly given by workers of BAN's scientific-bibliografical department — T.I. Solovieva and N.S. Trofimova. * Year. Month. Date. Page.

72

Chapter V

the land map of the Chinese State and Chinese books, examined by Professors Del'IsIe and G.S. Bayer, and, on October 5 of the Bukhara Ambassador, Wazir Bek with all his retinue. 1735. 03.13.08. March 12. A notice on the visit of the Kalmyk Ambassadors to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1741.07.21.07. A notice on the visit of Generalissimo Anton Ulrich and Ludvig, Duke Brawnschweig-Luneburg to the Academy Chambers, the Astronomical Observatory, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1741. 10.13.06. A notice on the visit of the Grand Duchess Anna Leopoldovna to the Academy of Sciences, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1745. 03.26.08, 1745. 03.29.08. Advertisement to announce that "The description of the Library and the Kunstkammer with its drawings" in Latin, Russian and German is for sale in the Academy bookshop. 1746.12.12.07. December 11. A notice on the visit of the Grand Duke Peter Feodorovich and the Grand Duchess Ekaterina Alekseevna with their retinue to the Academy of Sciences, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1746. 06.13.09. June 11. A notice on the appointment of Count Razumovsky, Kiril Grigorievich — the President of the Academy of Sciences and on the visit of all Members of the Academy, including Professors, among whom were J.D. Schumacher, the Counsellor and the Librarian of the Empress and V.K. Trediakovsky, Professor of eloquence to the Imperial Library, the Astronomical Observatory and the Gymnasium. 1747.12.08.06-07. A notice on the fire that burst out on December 5 at 5 o'clock in the morning on the premises of the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1748. 01.01.05. A notice on the Decree by the Empress Elisaveta Petrovna on moving the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer to the house of Demidovs, the nobles until the new Academic Chambers be built on site of the fire. 1748. 07.12.09. A notice on the visit of the Maltese Chevalier Marquis Sagromoso, Count Hamilton and others to the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer now positioned in the house of Demidovs, the nobles where various books printed in China in Chinese and Manchurian were shown to them, and where translator Rassokhin told the guests the contents of some books on history, astronomy and architecture printed in China. 1755.06.09.03. May 27. Anotice on the visit of the Turkish Envoy, Dervish Mohammed Efendy with his retinue, accompanied by Captain Tjutchev, the usher of the lifeguard to the Academy of Sciences and Arts, the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1761. 03.20.06, 1761. 03.23.08, 1761. 03.30.08, 1761. 05.04.04, 1761. 06.01.06, 1761. 06.15.06, 1761. 06.26.06, 1761. 07.03.05. Advertisements to hire those wishing to make closets, paint halls, guild galleries in the newly built chambers of the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1762.10.04.05,1762. 10.15.06. Advertisements to hire woodworkers to make closets for the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1762. 12.13.05, 1762. 12.17.08, 1762. 12.20.08. Advertisements calling on those wishing to supply black and white marble for the building of the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer. 1763. 03.07.07, 1763. 03.11.08, 1763. 03.28.08, 1763. 04.08.05, 1763. 04.15.06, 1763. 05.06.08, 1763. 05.20.08, 1764. 03.23.06. Advertisements to hire those wishing to paint and guild galleries and closets, to make frames and glaze them for the chambers of the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer.

Europeans on the First Russian Library

73

1772.05.25.04,1772.05.29.05,1772.06.01.04. Announcements on the working hours of the Imperial Library and the Kunstkammer: "Those who wish to see natural things in the Kunstkammer of the Academy of Sciences and also to make use of the Library of this Academy, the Kunstkammer will be open weekly from the beginning of June till August 1, namely on Thursday it will begin from the start of the tenth hour before noon until the beginning of the first in the afternoon, and after midday it will begin from the beginning of the fourth until the eighth, and the Library will from now on be always open on Tuesdays during the same hours with the only exception that from September 1 to May 1 it will not be open during the afternoon hours owing to short days". * * *

Thus while studying the early history of BAN evidences by eyewitnesses allowed us to undertake some minor "excavations of the cultural stratum" accumulated in almost 300 years. Their results, plus the appreciations and opinions revealed made it possible to see BAN of the XVIII century: young, full of strenth, occupying a wonderful building at a best place in town. Very likely, that was the happiest period of our library life. It was then the principal library, the national library of Russia. We learned how there in Petersburg born of Peter's sheer will (him being a statesman of a type yet unknown before in Europe) national science and culture started gradually to form. Many things were copied initially, transferred from the West to the Neva shores. Something of a kind happens to be inevitable in such cases; just remember how the Russian culture had initially been forming in Old Russia and during later times. What was indubitable however from the very first steps was the right choice of a language for intercommunication between the young Russian science and the West. Latin and the European languages ensured it a stable intercommunication and an international recognition from the beginning. One may only sympathize with the Russian scholar. He was thrown into the hardest living conditions. He had to learn foreign languages and science on the go, so to say, and along with that to teach his young countrymen. But there was no other way. Owing to Schumacher mostly the Library managed to escape possible strategic mistakes and to stand on a par with the others in the European academic community. However, his opinions were not shared by everybody in the Academy, and conflicts kept flaring up. The struggle for leadership in the Library and the Academy promised to be far from simple.

CHAPTER VI

SCHUMACHER AND LOMONOSOV If when signing the contract with Laurentius Blumentrost in 1724 Schumacher would foresee the trials he had to come through working at the Imperial Library, the Kunstkammer and the Registry of the Academy of Sciences, if he could foresee that the two years of removal from his post and a subsequent hearing would irretrievably damage his morale and do havoc to his health, that he would die in poverty and his widow would beg her living from the Academy, he would have never signed it of course and would have fled Russia immediately. But naturally, Schumacher could never know any of that and, with his German pedantry he honestly and painstakingly proceeded to create what we have an opportunity to appreciate now. Certainly Johann Daniel Schumacher merits a book. Unfortunately there are no images of him left nowadays and we don't know what he looked like. Only his handwriting, notes and records in catalogues, his letters, requests, instructions, reports and explanations remained. Owing to him we have a strictly documented chronicle of the inner and outer life of the Library, the Kunstkammer and the Academy of Sciences of more than 2000 volumes. These materials were partly published (before 1750), but they never came into focus during researches on BAN history. It is to such individuals as Schumacher that the statement of G.A. Fisher, an English historian relates. In his preface to "History of Europe ": "Men wiser and more learned than myself perceived in history its succession, its rhythm, the predetermined type of its events. This harmony escapes my notice. I can only see surprises following one another like surging waves and only identify great facts that defy any generalization because of their unique nature: a historian has only one reliable rule: in the unveiling destinies of people he must recognize the interplay of fate and chance (stressed by me - V.L.). This is not a doctrine of cynicism and despair. Thefact ofprogress clearly enters the pages of history. However progress is not a law of nature. Ground gained by one generation can be lost by next. People's thoughts may follow a course that leads to catastrophe and barbarity Mikhailo Lomonosov was three years old when Schumacher first started sorting out foreign books and forming the future library in the Summer Palace in Petersburg. It is worth remembering such details when addressing the essence of the so-called dispute between Lomonosov and Schumacher. It appeared to be the first clash between Peter's design and its implementation, on the one hand, and reality on the other. It started thus, then to perpetuate on and on. At every turn of 1

Cited from: Bernal J. Nauka ν istorii obschestva: Per. s angl. M.: Izd-vo inostr. lit., 1956. P. 564.

Chapter VI

75

history certain influential persons, groups or, finally, authorities kept changing the initial design, trying to subject the library to their own interests*. And they still are. By 1740, following Peter's instructions, Schumacher already elaborated some realistic operational routine for both the Library and the Academy. (Lomonosov appeared in the Academy in 1741). Remember that according to his contract Schumacher was on state service. He was a Counselor and did not depend on members of the Academy. Moreover he individually managed its finances; and the expenditures allotted by the tsar as far back as 1724, remained to be 24,912 rubles a year. The beginning of a struggle for the Library meant, in fact, a struggle for the future Academy. By that time BAN had a library stock of more than 20 thousand items that covered, according to contemporaries, all their needs in literature, ensured rich choice and quality of research. It may seem strange now, but in the beginning of the XVIII century availability of books offered a basis for successful development of a proper scientific school. On December 5, 1747, six years after Lomonosov started working in the Academy of Sciences, a fire happened there. That event caused numerous publications describing library books to be burnt (less publications concerned the Kunstkammer), cursing Schumacher for inefficiency and concealment of the real losses and admiring Lomonosov's courage (he carried books and exhibits out of the fire, organized rescue measures and boldly stated Schumacher's negligence). Here is one of such contemporaneous descriptions 2 : "At the site of a fire there arrived Nartov and Lomonosov. The three upper floors of the building were in flames. The fire destroyed wooden wall partitions and threatened the "Imperial cabinet", in which Peter's machine tools and his waxen figure were kept. Nartov and the soldiers rushed to the fire. They managed to carry out many things already when the burning Gottorp Globe turned into a fireball. It was impossible to save collections in the gallery of the left wing. People were in despair. Lomonosov, with his face black smutty, resolutely rushed to meet the fire. People followed him into the building and began to carry out closets and machine tools. Windows were thrown open. Books, garments of various nations, stuffed animals all went flying into the snowdrifts. The fire was going down when Schumacher appeared. He was moving pale around the exhibits scattered in the snow and made helpless gestures. Lomonosov looked in his direction and accused the manager loudly, in order for everyone to hear, of what had happened... "Except for quite a number of anatomy books and exhibits, the Academy lost all the gallery of the Siberian and Chinese things in the fire", — he answered those asking him " (P. 20-21). However, if we put aside the panic, the rumors, the urge to find immediate culprits, all inevitable in such cases, and turn to documents published, for example, in the same ten-volume book "Materials on the History of the Academy of Sciences" the scene appears to become quite different. Let us leave its study to future researchers. I want to quote other documents and facts about the fire of 1747. One of them is taken from the work "Description of Saint Peters* I'll cite an instance from the field of art. In the middle of 60-ies, in Leningrad, in the Lensovet Palace of Culture there took place guest-performances of the famous French mime M. Marceau. One of his miniatures was simply genius: comic actor sorts and tries various masks in an attempt to select the best. And suddenly one of them, the mask with grimace of a blockhead, sticks to the face, and no matter how the actor tries to tear it off, he suffers a reverse. He cries, rolls on a floor, his body shakes with sobs — but in vain. He just dies in this mask with convulsions, never showing his true face to the public. 2

Its R.F. Kunstkamera. L.: Nauka, 1989. 134 p.

76

Schumacher and Lomonosov

burg" (1751) by Andrey Bogdanov, written four years after the event 3 . It is very difficult to accuse that author of biasing towards anybody or anything: "And this quite celebrated and complete Kunstkammer and the Library... was burnt down on November 5, 1747, but all things and books were safely carried out from it and only the Grand Gottorp Globe burned out, greatly to be pitied, but, owing to the efforts of the Academy of Sciences, it is now set in good condition, very skillfully as before". In the Russian part of his working copy of "The Cameral's Catalogue " (1744) Andrey Bogdanov indicated, along with his other notes, what books were burnt. Their total number was 33 out of 727 counted in the catalogue. Among them were both manuscripts and printed books. And here is a description of that fire written thirty years later and found in a book by another librarian, I. Bakmeister: "It all began at about 4 a. m. on the noon side so that first the rafters caught fire, and later the lower layers went on fire too. I believe that fire had started through a crack in the chimney raised from the apartment where professor Del 'Isle had lived before, occupied at the time by engraver's apprentices. Books kept in neighboring apartments had not suffered severely since there was time enough to throw them out the windows and, when gathered, to carry them in the quickest possible way to Demidov s house, luckily a nearby building. By the Court order everyone living there left at once. At last after many difficulties books were put in order; those with best covers were arranged in the first layer, and others were carried to the third one. This time there was the greatest disorder and no means to put it right until the building predetermined for books as early as 1766 was repaired"4. So such are the final figures. As list of books preserved in the Archive shows, the number of books burnt reached 224. Those were on humanities mainly. According to Bakmeister only 50 were destroyed by the fire from the total of 333 manuscripts and 294 printed books of the Russian section...5. Lomonosov's perception of Schumacher was not only that by a contemporary but one of an immediate participant in the events, including all the implications. He was too actively involved in the struggle against Schumacher. So one may hardly expect an objective attitude towards a rival there. In his appreciations Lomonosov treated both events and characters not only as an observer and immediate participant but also as an opponent of those other persons. Before elucidating the essence of the conflict of 1742-1744 that eventually developed into opposition one should offer more data on both Schumacher and Lomonosov and on their activity in the Academy of Sciences. I will try mostly to use documents they wrote themselves at different times. And let the readers analyze the data provided and make their choice independently. So here comes Schumacher. P. Pekarsky, a man surely not to treat our hero objectively, begins his biography in such a way6: "Schumacher (born September 5, 1690) first attended a gymnasium in his native town of Kolmar, Alsace, in 1717 to enter Strasbourg University and to devote himself to polite letters, as he felt a special calling for poetry. Lectures on philosophy he attended with reluctance, and only studied mathematical sciences in passing since he paid most attention to jurisprudence and theology in the hope to hold a university chair on one of these sciences with time. In 1711 3 Bogdanov A.I. Opisanie Sanktpeterburga. 1749-1751. SPb., 1997. P. 168. "Bakmeister I. Opyt ο Biblioteke i Kabinete redkostej... SPb., 1779. P. 39-40. 5 Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 49. 6 Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk ν Peterburge. Τ. 1. SPb., 1870. P. 16-20.

Chapter VI

77

Schumacher defended his dissertation "De Deo, Mundo et Anima" ("Of God, World and Soul"), presented to confer a degree, and was awarded his Master of Science. Then he continued to attend lectures on law and theology but suddenly had to leave Strasbourg on the account of affliction for some verse, considered too free-swinging there. He got employed as a tutor for children of Count Leiningen-Gartenburg, and later left for Paris. It was there that Schumacher was invited to service in Russia. The offer camefrom Lefort, the nephew of Peter's favorite, who himself then fell off from Russian service and began working in Saxony and who used to be an envoy at our Court for a long time. In September 1714 Schumacher arrived in Petersburg and under Peter's head physician, Areskin, who was also in charge of all the matters medical in Russia, started as a foreign correspondence secretary and a librarian of a book collection that the tsar acquired during his campaigns in Lifland, Kurland and Poland, and also of the tsar's little cabinet of curiosities. Schumacher displayed tireless activity, efficiency and promptitude at these occupations: an enormous correspondence with doctors who were Areskin's subordinates was at his mercy; he presented Areskin detailed reports not only on the latter's medical but also managerial affairs and later, when the collections of books and rarities mentioned began to grow due to new acquirements, he bustled around the premises putting them in order, taking care of paying for them and so on. Having so many concerns, Schumacher still had time to maintain relations with Areskin's friends, to write, for example, to prince Kurakin in Paris about the Petersburg news; to Binion about missionaries in China; to doctor Schoeber about his travels through Russia and so on. Schumacher's field of activity was not too wide yet by that time but as seen from his letters he found time to win the sympathy of his chief, and some features started showing that were foretelling the future Counselor of the Academy: Schumacher spared nothing to satisfy Areskin in organizing his household, he even bustled around the man's parrot, and when a skilled craftsman, invited from abroad to bind tsar's books arrived in Petersburg, the first thing Schumacher did was order him to produce magnificent covers for the books of Surgeon Ordinary to the Tsar. It was only then that Schumacher put that craftsman to work in the government library. It is interesting that he himself reported that fact back to his chief with particular solemnity". Here is how Schumacher himself tells about his progress after the death of his chief in hjs handwritten "Lifetime"·. "After Areskin's death in 1719 I applied for a leave of absence (retirement - V. L.), but Mr. Blumentrost, now the State Counselor, at that time promoted to the post of doctor Areskin as the first Surgeon Ordinary to the Tsar and the director of the Library and the Kunstkammer of His Majesty, did not want to let me go, either because of the sympathies he had towards me, or through my knowledge of everything stored in the Library and the Kunstkammer, or even more so for the reason that the secret or preserving anatomical preparations, which the Sovereign Emperor Peter the Great purchasedfrom doctor Ryuisch together with his anatomy cal cabinet, happened to be in my hands, offered me quite profitable conditions to keep working on for his Sovereign Majesty. * When he understood that I did not want to change my intentions, he suggested that I take a leave of six months instead of retiring. I did agree with that and made my request to His Imperial Majesty, which His Majesty not only deemed mercifully to permit but beyond that charged me with three commissions: 1) to take a thankful latter of His Majesty and a newly made map of the Caspian Sea to the Paris Academy of Sciences; 2) to find learned people who would want to begin working for His Majesty on correspon* Schumacher, as I see it, properly indicated the reasons why Blumentrost had not fired him. Beginning from 1714 he, first, showed himself as an efficient and competent worker, and, second, did not refuse from constantly increasing scope of work. At that time he was simply indispensable.

78

Schumacher and Lomonosov

dence that His Majesty intended to have with the Academy mentioned as its member; 3) to visit both public andprivate libraries and kunstkammers to better arrange and enlarge His Majesty s own Library and the Kunstkammer, for which His Majesty ordered special premises to build on the Vasilievsky Island. Upon receiving everything that I needed for my journey as well as letters, maps and instructions, I intended to leave next day; but to show me his most obvious particular kindness this great Monarch was pleased to grant me with his own hands my fiancee, whose parents His Majesty was then pleased to present with an exceptional favor, namely that very day His Majesty arrangedfor me to marry the eldest daughter ofYan Feiten, his Ober-Kitchenmeister... When being on His Persian campaign His Majesty was informed of my return to St. Petersburg, then His Majesty wrote at once a decree with his own hands to send to the then buildings Quartermaster, Ulian Yakimovich Sinyavin, so that buildings and decorations of the Kunstkammer be made according to my instructions. That was the wish of this Monarch to see immediately in a perfect state what he had once begun! Upon arrival of His Majesty in St.Petersburg I wrote a detailed report to His Majesty about my journey, and after its examination His Majesty ordered Mr. Blumentrost to make a roster of such scholars that in his opinion would be able to meet His Majesty's pronounced intention. Mr. Bluementrost namedfive such scholars to His Majesty, namely: onefor astronomy, one for geography, one for anatomy, one for botany and natural history and one for chemistry. When discussing that number His Majesty asked Mr. Bluementrost how many more people were needed to found the Academy of Sciences? And when the latter said that only four or five more should be added to theformer, His Majesty ordered him to write a project on that, the one that was approved on behalf of His Majesty in 1724. This was the true beginning of the St. Petersburg's A cademy!"... Schumacher's "Report" to Peter is really detailed and very interesting for us today not only due to its factual aspect, but also as an expression of its author's views that characterize him as an uncommon man7. In view of its bulky nature I will quote in full only the "library" part of the "Report". "12. In my instruction I was ordered also to make inquiries about a complete library and to inform on this. In Hamburg, The Hague, in France and England quite large libraries were for sale during my stay there, and from them I bought some indispensable books. However, the truth is, I can say nothing of whole libraries offered for sale, such that would be complete in all the faculties; it is very rarely that such auctions happen, perhaps one may commission a good bookseller to do it, and he, I would think, might do it easily. Such a bookseller should be given a copy of the library catalogue, from which he may know what is its stock short of in any subject, so that he can make up for such a shortage in good time. But to avoid fraud, correspondence should be maintained with others as well, to try and get catalogues with the prices of libraries offered at auctions. I left a list of Your Imperial Majesty's Library with a good and skilled bookseller Vasenberg in Holland together with descriptions of books from 16 years old with their prices that I had written with great difficulty, and thus it is only Your Imperial 7 The Report was published completely only once in 1862 by P. Pekarsky. See: Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literatura ν Rossii... Τ. 1. P. 533-558. Fragments often quoted in literature by no means give full notion of Schumachers' views concerning the Kunstkammer, the Library and the Academy of Sciences.

Chapter VI

79

Majesty's expressed will, and in a few years time that Library may be brought to perfection without any great difficulty. And surely it must be done, if its inner and outer structures are to be made similar. Although, as mentioned, I had bought a sufficient number of books, they are still the most indispensable only, those that one should have in a public library, to the exception of one book, which I had bought only through my love of knowledge. Remarkably, Mainz, Strasbourg and Harlem are disputing among themselves as to which of them had the first typed publications, since first books had been printed without indication of place and time. And now there is a book in Dutch, named 'Speculum Salutitas'. It also has small biblical figures carved in wood that represent the mystery of belief and an inscription; they say, that that book was printed in Harlem when nothing of the printing was known in Mainz. In his 'Harlem's History' Professor Skriverius tells that he ostensibly has this book in Latin; to that there are many who object saying that it is only a boast. That book, O, the Omnipotent Emperor, I happened to purchase in Holland, and it is worth belonging to Your Imperial Majesty's Library because it may be learnedfrom that book why art was not perfect at first, but how little by little by many corrections it attained perfection. As for the libraries, be they public or private, almost every free city can boast of one since it has a library in the use of people; as for those belonging to kings, princes and universities, all of them hardly refraining from squabbling on their competitive merits, I will pass them over in silence, because it would be boring to Your Imperial Majesty to hear the stories of those or else I would have to describe every library in detail. Because of this and nothing else I will describe the very first ones, and what they contain I will not mention since the published, printed or hand-written catalogues that I brought in with me give sufficient explanations on them. In German land beside the Roman Caesar s one in the Vienna Library, there merits to be mentioned the Wolfenbittel one, the saddest. The Berlin's Royal Library is also glorious, the more so when the Spangheim's one is added to it. In Holland the headmost one is the Leiden University Library. In France none can equal the Royal Library both in quantity and quality of printed and handwritten books, there being about 80,000 printed and 17,000 hand-written books there, and though the catalogue of the Royal Library is not published yet, I, however, brought its draft with me; Monfocon announced most of the written books in it. The initial and the oldest Greek books are N°N° 1095 and 2245, the first consisting of various books of the Old and New Testament. The most surprising is that a chirographist scraped out old characters in the XII sequelae, and instead of it wrote 'Efremi Operae', but if you look at it attentively, it is possible to read the old letters. The second contains the writings of Apostle Paul, which, I believe, were written in the VII sequelae. As for the Leiden Library, in his Paleography Monfocon narrates on it in details, and then Mashelius tells about the libraries of Paris. The Oxford University Library is almost as large as the Cambridge one, but the latter is richer in manuscripts, while this one — together with the library that arrived from Bishop Von Eli — in printed books. The best adornment of that library is the code, named Bese, which consists of writings offour Evangelists and Deeds of Apostles, and coming from the V and VI se-

80

Schumacher and Lomonosov quelae is considered to be old. This one code has such a similarity with the above book N" 2245 of the Royal Library that some people believe that both had been written by the same hand. There are many public libraries in London, but the Kotinpanskaya, the catalogue of which I brought in, is best of all — the books with gilded letters are anything but rare in it. 1 visited more than 200 private libraries, but the best of them, as is usual now, is in France and Marshal de 'Etre has it. After auctions very profitable for him he increased it very much. In England Milord Sunderland and Milord Harley have the best. In German land I did not find any private library that would be worthy of these or equalled them. I, however, heard that the library of Prince Eugene not only equals, but even surpasses these. Their intentions are to fill their libraries not only with most expensive and marvellous but oldest books. However they pay more attention to their curiosity and price than to benefit. And for the sake of this they keep booksellers in Germany, Holland, France and Italy on orders to buy books, although at a very high price, and I saw myself how the above Milord Sunderland paid 50 guineas for an edition of Homer. But there are many who consider it a disease instead of an immediate craving for knowledge. Good Menke, thanks to whom the Proceedings of the Leipzig Learned Ones (Acta Eruditorum) are published, has a full historical library. I suppose that it is possible to urge him to sell it to Your Imperial Majesty. Order in libraries varies, since every librarian follows his own disposition. The most common and comfortable though is when books are arranged according to subjects and sizes. But I think one must not stick to the subject of books so strictly so that beauty, which is needed in any public library, is never lost. And, beyond this, sometimes one and the same book may belong to different departments. In the Library of Your Imperial Majesty I will try to take care of this: the building for it is comfortable and roomy, it only lacks good and well-chosen books. And if Your Imperial Majesty would mercifully deem to allocate some money for this, then, in a short time, it would be possible to put it in a good state. It is also possible to trade duplicates among the books of Your Imperial Majesty for new ones while everything else will be done little by little. 13. Beyond this the best way to improve the Library and the Kunstkammer is to have correspondence with learned people and amateurs of arts and sciences, which, I think, is already organized so that one may hope to gain use and pleasure from. Namely, these are Dr. Martini in Riga, Dr. Gartman in Koenigsberg, Jacob Brein in Danzig, M. de la Kroz and Jablonsky in Berlin. In Hamburg — Messrs. Anderson the synodic, Fabricius and Wolf. In Hanover — Messrs. Ekard and Keisler. In Leipzig — Mr. Dr. Schacher, Menke the Court Counselor, and Dr. Leman, in Hull — Professor Wolf and Dr. Hofman. In Dresden — the Librarian, in Kassel — Dr. Wolfrat and Orfirey. In Eisenach — the astronomer Wagner, in Rintlen — Dr. Beechtold, in Amsterdam — Messrs. le Klerk, Klermont and Limer, who promises to write books for Your Imperial Majesty for a small salary.

Chapter VI

81

In Leiden — Messrs. Burhaven, Burman and Sgravesand. In England — Mr. Stones, Dr. Woodward and Mr. Saint-Andrew, the good anatomist; Mr. Desakilier, Mr. Haley and Mr. Vanley, and also Mr. Dean the mechanic, Mr. Scarlet the optician and others. In Paris— Messrs. Duverney, Venslow, Dubo, Jeofre, Jusie, Dinord, Danten, Pojot, Count Dosenbre, Messrs. Homur, Varignion, Monfocon, Fontenell and Del 'Isle. In Strasbourg — Dr. Sheid, Shertz, Bekler, Link and Liderlo. I oftentimes associated with all the above-mentioned gentlemen. The Omnipotent Emperor: the beginning is already marked, and it only depends on the will and ruling of Your Majesty for it to continue with benefit and culminate in high spirit. Johann Daniel Schumacher S. Petersburg 10... 1722 an". Practical results that Schumacher achieved during his journey are not so much important for us in that report, written 277 years ago; it is his vision of perspectives to develop the new library in St.Petersburg and his direct contacts serving to cooperate with the libraries in the West that he outlined. Schumacher clearly propounds the idea that continuously enriching the library must become a matter of state significance. Among other steps he proposes some urgent measures: 1) "trade duplicate books for the new ones" and 2) "correspond with learned people and amateurs of arts and sciences". Beside the Library and the Kunstkammer, Schumacher furthered starting side organizations at the Academy of Sciences: typography, a bookshop, an engraving chamber and a binding workshop. All his publishing activity, except for publication of textbooks for the Emperor Peter II, which were printed in Russian, French and German, was generally aimed at scholars in Western Europe. From 1728 administrating the Academy of Sciences became practically Schumacher's personal occupation: the Imperial Court and with it the Surgeon Ordinary to Peter II, the first President of the Academy L. Blumentrost moved to Moscow delegating all his powers to "Mr. Librarian". And almost at once a struggle for primacy broke out between the two establishments: the Meeting of Professors and Adjuncts (the Conference) and the Registry headed by Schumacher. In 1734 the Member of the Academy, astronomer D.N. Del'Isle marked its beginning: he considered unacceptable a situation when a scientific institution of Russia and its library were headed by an administrator, a man inexperienced in sciences, and openly spoke up to the new President, Baron Korf. Schumacher had a different opinion. Keeping an eye on Petersburg's Academicians, especially on those who were the natives of various German states, he regarded some of them to be careerists, even mere idlers who moved to Russia to make money and achieve high social status. Apparently, he had a base for such a view and he was neither afraid to say so openly. Naturally, this pleased nobody. As the course of events had shown, Korf disregarded Del'Isle criticism and supported Schumacher. Since then the Academician ceased to attend the Academy meetings. An explanation is needed here. What was the Academy of Sciences like in the 1730-ies early 1740-ies? It split into several departments: the Professors Assembly, the Russian Assembly, the Geographical Department, the Gymnasium and the University, all of them occupying different buildings. Administration of the Academy as a whole was concentrated in the registry

82

Schumacher and Lomonosov

managed by its chancellor, the "Librarian to His Imperial Majesty", — Schumacher. Frequent absence of the first Presidents and their superfluous participation in the Academy affairs helped "Mr. Librarian" take its management in his own hands. "In all his actions — Academician Ya.K. Grot writes, — we see a cunning, smart, masterful person; however, we must remember that his activities in the environment of Russian society were not a lonely exclusive phenomenon but one connected with all the Russian administration of the time... Future historian of our Academy, by the way, is going to face the task of defining the character and motives of that man, distinctive by any standards, more precisely "'. One of the most important undertakings realized in the Library and the Kunstkammer under Schumacher was the forming and publishing in Latin of systematic catalogues of both institutions (1741-1744). The BAN catalogue was named "The CameralCatalogue"* following the arrangement of material according to premises, or cameras in which the books described were kept. Though Academicians were against that, since cataloguing was obviously done in a hurry, up to now that publication remains the only printed catalogue of the XVIII century BAN collection that makes it possible to assess its composition by the end of 1730-ies, the library of Ya. V. Brius being the last included in it. Since the catalogue served an inventory for the books described and corresponded with the position of the book on the bookshelf, it was used for official purposes. With the large number of additions, including those by Schumacher himself, it lasted until the 1760-ies, when a new handwritten systematic catalogue replaced it. On September 22,1742 Andrey Nartov, the Counselor of the Academy of Sciences wrote a denunciation (or a dispatch as they kept saying then) to the Senate on Counselor Schumacher, blaming him "for dishonorable acts and great embezzlement of treasury"9. It happened so that a copy of Nartov's complaint turned out among Lomonosov's papers. Apparently because of that P. Pekarsky published it in the second volume of his "History... " as an appendix to the biography of Lomonosov 10 . And there, in Appendix XV a "Description... " is given of Lomonosov's papers coming from a collection of Count N.M. Orlov. Under Point 2 there we find an interesting note: "1742, January 22. A copy of Nartov's dispatch on Schumacher to the Senate. (The document, contemporary to Lomonosov, is handwritten, and in its beginning there is a pencil mark, apparently made recently: "copy — the whole draft is written by Lomonosov's hand")n. Now, we cannot affirm unequivocally that Lomonosov took part in composing Nartov's complaint, but indubitably he knew of its content and behaved himself respectively. Our researchers still have to say their decisive word on this. It is worth noting here that in spite of his unbalanced difficult character Lomonosov was lucky to meet good people in his life. They say that when he came to Moscow to study at the Zaikonospasskoe school and learned that personal taxpayers were not admitted there, he called himself a nobleman. Having heard about it Pheophan Prokopovich, who knew of Lomonosov's achievements in science told him: "Don't be afraid of anything: even when they name you an impostor at the sound of the big Moscow cathedral bell, I will be your advocate!"12. 8 Grot Ya.K. Ocherk akademicheskoj deyatel'nosti Lomonosova, chitannyj ν torzhestvennom sobranii Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk 6 aprelya 1865 goda. SPb., 1865. P. 11-12. * This comes from the Dutch/German for "room" which is "kammer". 9 Materialy dlya istorii imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. 5. SPb., 1889. P. 377. 10 Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii... T. 2. SPb., 1873. P. 893-895. 11 Ibid. P. 955. I call the reader's attention to the fact that in Lomonosov's papers the text is dated January 22, 1742, but Nartov's complaint is dated "February 1 day 1742 year". 12 Pekarsky P.P. Nauka i literature ν Rossii... Τ. 1. P. 490.

Chapter VI

83

Christian Wolf, the celebrated German was his teacher and supervisor in Germany, in Marburg... After his return from abroad on June 10,1741, the Academy of Sciences decided "to send student Lomonosov to doctor Amman with a letter, so that this doctor teaches him, Lomonosov, natural history and mineralogy even more, plus anything having to do with that science with diligence"13. On June 13,1741, three days after decision by the Academy Schumacher himself wrote a letter to Academician Amman, his son-in-law (!) who was in charge of academic collections of materials on natural history: "Since Lomonosov returned here again, I kindly ask You, until further order, to teach him natural history, especially the minerals kingdom, and to guide his studies so as to achieve with him the targeted goal the soonest"14. On November 10, 1741, Amman informs Schumacher: "I have looked through all the catalogues formed by Mr. Lomonosov, except for the catalogue of ambers, in which I find no necessity to make changes, the more so that it was made a fair copy. "1S. About this work there is an opinion A.F. Gebel, an expert, the curator of the mineralogical museum of the Academy of Sciences16. The catalogue started by Academician Gmelin Sr. was then continued by Amman and finished by Lomonosov. In 1865 it was published under the title "Musei Imperialis Petropolitani vol. 1. Pars tertia, qua continentur res naturales ex regno minerali". About 90 pages of its 227 total were written by Lomonosov. "The original of that part of the catalogue, — A. Gebel writes, — which belongs to Lomonosov, was written in haste and superficially, showing that the compiler wished to end the work as soon as possible to get rid of an unpleasant task. Apparently, he did not attach least importance to indicating the locations since in a separate part, which he developed himself, he did not adduce such indication, although they, probably, were attached to a very large number of items in collection. There is also no reason to assume that little importance was attached in general to such significant indices as designation of locations at the time: catalogues of collections by Lomonosov's teacher, minecounselor I.F. Genkel in Freiburg, later bought to the Academy, proves the opposite, because there places where items had been found were designated with particular detail, indicating not only mines but also shafts and adits "u. Lomonosov had been working with Amman for just months (on December 4, 1741, when he was 34 years old, the Member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, the brother-in-law of Counselor Schumacher, Iohann Amman, died), but Amman was able to perceive in Lomonosov that man's potential gifts. Thanks to his patronage the Russian student gained scientific acknowledgment: "late professor Amman, recommended him, Lomonosov, to the Registry"18. In other words, the beginning of Lomonosov's scientific career is connected with the name of Amman. As Academician Ya.K. Grot sums it up, "Schumacher gave Lomonosov good reception: he granted him a subsidy, allotted him a government flat in the Botanical Garden in the 2nd Linia near the present Roman-Catholic Academy, offered him his first job, consisting mostly in translations, and thereby gave him an opportunity to work for appointment to the chair at the

13

Materialy dlya istorii imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. 4. SPb., 1887. P. 694. Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. 2. P. 314. 15 Ibid. P. 317-318. 16 Gebel A.F. Über die von Lomonosoff edirten Cataloge des mineralogischen Museum's der Academie und deren inhalt // Bulletin de l'Academie Imperiale des sciences de St.Petersbourg. 1865. Vol. 9, Ν 1. P. 26-35. 17 Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii Nauk... T. 2. P. 318. To my opinion it is a fine sample of a review of a bibliographical index even today. 18 Ibid. P. 321. 14

84

Schumacher and Lomonosov

Academy. Presenting his two scientific works as early as in August, Lomonosov insisted on the appointment. But since consideration of those papers was delayed in spite of Schumacher s hints to the opposite'9, in January, 1742 Lomonosov put an application with the Academic Registry listing his own achievements in physics, chemistry and mining industry, stressing that he could teach these sciences to others and also write works "with new inventions " concerning them; he complained that his requests for appointment were disregarded. This application was satisfied and just four days later Lomonosov was appointed an adjunct to the class of physics with a salary of 360 rubles a year. The special subject of his new position became chemistry; he also had a task to teach at both the gymnasium and the university, though the latter had almost no students. Beside chemistry, Lomonosov was charged to teach physical geography, mineralogy, "versification and the style of Russian language "20. In spite of so short a term with the Academy he was already displeased with Schumacher. "Upon personally experiencing all the burden of his despotism Lomonosov said about him: "He was always hateful of high science and, hence, of me, and persecuted all the professors"21. I think that if there would be no complaint by Nartov, something of that kind connected with the name of Lomonosov would have taken its place. Here is the full text of that complaint, first published in 187322. The complaint by Andrey Nartov to the Senate on the abuses of Schumacher, the Counselor to the Academy.23 The dispatch to Imperial Senate from Andrey Nartov, the Counselor of the Academy of Sciences. Since it is known all around the world, what indefatigable care the Sovereign Emperor Peter the Great, blessed and ever worthy of memory, had, on the account of his highest kindness and merciful love to his subjects, among his other glorious and outstanding deeds displayed to creating sciences in the Russian Empire; for the sake of His all-merciful order to establish the Academy of Sciences and Arts not only for foreigners, but mostlyfor his subjects, and at the very first opportunity offered to invite at once the necessary and skillful professors and teachers, fixed the time-limit and this establishment He did during his lifetime and was pleased to set it going. After the death of His Imperial Majesty, Her Imperial Majesty, the blessed and ever worthy of memory Sovereign Empress Ekaterina Alekseevna facilitating this, His Majesty's highest intention, increased the number of professors and teachers, and exerted her merciful efforts to the better development of sciences, this so necessary a thing, in accordance with the intention of Her Imperial Majesty to be only under the patronage of Their Majesties. And that is why after the beginning the state of things was in order and effective. But when, obeying the all-powerful God's will, the lifetime of Their Majesties ceased, then this Academy, having during certain time been under the directorship of the same defi19 On November 17, 1741, in the minutes of a conference was written that "counsellor Schumacher again insisted that the conference stated its opinion about presented and read up dissertations of students Teplov and Lomonosov because it is very important both for him and the students to give then instructions". See: Pekarsky P.P. Dopolnitel'nye izvestiya dlya biografii Lomonosova // Zapiski imperatorskoj Akademii nauk. T. 8, kn. 1. SPb., 1865. P. 18. 20 Grot Ya.K. Ocherk akademicheskoj deyatel'nosti Lomonosova... P. 12-13. 21 Ibid. P. 16. 22 Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii Nauk... T. 2. P. 8 9 3 - 8 9 5 . 25 The first six points of this complaint were published by V. Passek. (See: Passek V.V. Ocherki Rossii. Kn. 2. SPb., 1840. P. 9-13).

Chapter VI

85

nite members (among which the then and present Counselor Schumacher had power over all of the board), did reduce to such a poor state as to bear no fruit to Russia except harm only through the actions that run counter to the former establishment of His Majesty Peter, and unprofitable to government, that I, a faithfully subjected servant of Her Imperial Majesty, looking at all this and preserving the highest interest ofHer Imperial Majesty according to my post, as a member of that government and a son of the fatherland, could not keep silent and not inform the governing Senate about the following. 1. The Regulation of the Sovereign Emperor Peter the Great about founding this Academy, which should have been known not only to the curators of the Academy so that everyone would know one's post, but for others to be published, he, Schumacher, concealed, and did not announce even up to this time; and because of that former teachers, while not seeing His Imperial Majesty intention and looking at disorders taking place around were forced to return to their fatherlands without any benefit for Russia. 2. Instead of them he, Schumacher, had written others to come and take over without any instructions, and for salary and pensions allocated considerable sums unmerited, and then again at the expense of service granted them without any result, which he is not to do himself. 3. He made up staff and presented it to confirmation, assigning and requesting large sums of money, and had written what was not necessary to considerable loss, without which it could have been done very well with the sum assigned first, if the expense had been made with good circumspection. 4. Money income and expenditure he holds under his own directorship and does whatever he wishes, without anybody's knowledge, and does not present correct and detailed accounts for revision up to this time. 5. To show himself off to theformer government he invented to present the description of academic establishment as if it occurred due to his efforts, and he carried this out and presented it to the former Princess Anna and then handed it over to print on behalf of himself only; by superficial andfalse evidence he closed down affairs of the High Monarch well-known all over the world (1), having written that the intention of the Sovereign Emperor Peter the Great was to subject the Academy ofArts and Crafts to the Academy of Sciences; such a thing has never happened, and as accusatory evidence I have the autograph order made with His Imperial Majesty s own hand that there was assigned a special sum for the purpose, but he, Schumacher took it without order for other use in the Academy of Sciences; (2) in the same book he included honorary members to the number of 23 persons, and in the staff he presented he wrote in 14; (3) he claimed as though civil typography, casting and other crafts had appeared owing to his efforts, while these have already been in reality during the Sovereign Emperor Peter the Great lifetime through His inventions to which He devoted a lot of energy; (4) according to the highest kindness of His Imperial Majesty I am a Member of this Academy, but because of his, Schumacher s malice he didn't include me among the others. 6. Subjects of discursions by the Professors written in by Schumacher he handles to print in foreign dialects, while formerly those went to print in the Russian dialect so that the Russian people would learn too and those curious would utilize, and now all this came to an end, education of young Russians is stopped, and those trained are educated in foreign sciences that can never have use for the Russian Empire except bring loss to its treasury, as in this case it is spent on salary and other things with which they escaped to their own fatherlands in time, while the Russians abroad are always educated at their own or treasury expense. And

86

Schumacher and Lomonosov

though for better development of Russian sciences it would be possible to find some learned people among the Russians, this does not come to Schumacher's mind and he would not hear of anything else except that nobody is in the way of his self-willed and dishonorable deeds that make a profit of his own. And because of these disorders and indifference not one of Russians in sciences was made a professor since the opening of the Academy. 7. The sum granted to the Academy is quite considerable and besides the Academy also has considerable dues, but on the account of spending this money inappropriately, academic curators receive their salary much later and with deduction, and always receive moneyfor the last yearfrom the sum receivedfor the new year and notfrom the sum for the year during which they were engaged, and consequently these curators experience bad poverty. 8. To work in my expedition and also to help in the work recently placed on me by an order of Senate, the one most necessary and useful to His Imperial Majesty that concerns the artillery science, I was appointed a special secretary, a clerk and a scribe, and he, Schumacher, being cross with me that it was done without his knowledge, does not pay proper salary to the above employees, pleading as if there is lack of money, while the fact is concealed that he assigned considerable sums disregarding the merits of others and there was no talk about deficiency there; asfor the secretary, when shortly afier his appointment he died, he, Schumacher, creating me obstacles in my work reported to the Governing Senate that that post should remain free until the academic staff be confirmed, his intention being that when this staff is confirmed and there is no secretary post appointedfor my expedition there since at the time I was not yet charged with doing artillery science, it would be abolished as a whole and 1 would not be admitted to my further work. 9. The Library and the Kunstkammer collected owing to the great and indefatigable work of the Sovereign Emperors for the Russian Empire consist of innumerable treasures in his, Schumacher's hands, and its keeping is quite bad and imprudent; because of his negligence stoves were made and kept going in proximity to undue places, and on account of this a fire had happened last December, from which all the collected could barely escape with God's help. And in other European countries such treasures are kept with a care not only for inner fire but for the outward remote buildings as well, while here there is a lot of various wood around the Academy. It is unknown whether he has an inventory of things that he himself is a keeper of, and I have no hope that one would be in the Governing Senate, and so I have doubts that if any calamity happens, God save us from this, there will be nothing by which one may search for losses or know about them. And since it was ordered, hereby is my report to the Governing Senate, to accept it and register it, so as not to make me an accomplice to his disorders; because I am wary of other disorders that happen at this Academy owing to him and which I don't know about since he, Schumacher, does many things alone concealing all this from others; if it is ordered to investigate these through a special commission they may be revealed. This was submitted to the Governing Senate on Day 22 of this January, 1742. February 1, 1742 ". Andrey Nartov supported his complaint with proofs. A most important one was a letter by I. Gorlitsky, the translator to Nartov. Gorlitsky proved Schumacher to be a thief of various items belonging to the Academy and to hand them over to Sutov, a broker. In conclusion he wrote that apparently fearing persecutions Schumacher had moved to that broker himself. Nartov's example was followed by commissar Mikhail Kamer, clerk Dmitry Grekov, scribe Nosov and Polyakov, an apprentice of "giydorovanny" art. On March 12 they submitted a claim against

Chapter VI

87

Schumacher accusing him of embezzlement of government money. The grave character of those accusations induced Empress Elisaveta to pay special attention to that incident. On September 30,1742, a special commission was set up to examine it. Spinning as a fast vortex the feud dragged in more and more people.

CHAPTER VII

THE DISOBEDIENCE OF THE GENIUS AND THE LIBRARY The year 1743 belonged to most troubled times for the Academy of Sciences in the XVIII century. It passed under the sign of an uncompromising struggle, its echo to have been heard for two decades after. Everybody struggled against everybody else: Academicians against Schumacher and Lomonosov, Nartov and Lomonosov against the inquiry commission, the inquiry commission against Lomonosov. Here are some fragments of that stand-off. On February 21 Lomonosov was prohibited to visit the Academic Assembly until the verdict of the inquiry commission on complaints lodged against him with regard to insulting Professors be known. What did Lomonosov have against the Academic Assembly? There seemed to be a lot of pretexts, most of them springing from the unrestrained temperament of the Russian genius. Professors complained: immediately upon his appearance in the Academy Adjunct Lomonosov "...in many cases showed himself not to behave according to hopes of the Professors and, drinking frequently, made many disturbances and brawls, for which on September of the same 1742 he was also arrested by the police and taken to the guardhouse. Beyond this, he, Lomonosov, while the inquiry commission of the Academy of Sciences assembled, showered intolerable offences and dishonor on all the Professors of the Academy "This April 26, 1793, — the Academicians reported again — being drunk before noon, he behaved with extreme impudence and high-handedness in the apartment where the Professors were in conference. And although there was no Professors' conference there that time but Professor Wintzgeim and some of the curators with him attended the archive of the conference, and he, Lomonosov, without greeting anybody and with his hat on passed them in the geographical department where land maps are made, and when passing near Professors' table he stopped, cursing those Professors and in a very indecent manner making disgraceful and slandering gestures with his hands against them, and then entered that geographical department where Adjunct Treskov, students Chadov, Shishkarev, Starkov and Kovrin were present to draw land maps and, accidentally, the Secretary of the Commission Andrey Ivanov was present also. In that department, where he again had his hat on, he scolded Professor Wintzgeim and all the other Professors with many swearing and invective words, calling them rogues and using other bad words of dishonor that one is ashamed to write. Beyond that he threatened Professor Wintzgeim, being yet in the same apartment and scolding him with all sorts of abuse and promising 'to get his teeth well', and called Counselor Schumacher a thief And when coming out of that geographical department he came back to the conference where by that time Adjunct Geliert joined the above, and scolded all the Professors with swearing and invective words and called them thieves for the reason that he was refused attendance to the Professors 'Assembly. And while he kept repeating the same abuse he said with great outrage and sneer that the whole event should be registered in the minutes "2. 1 2

Materialy dlya istorii imperatorskoj Akademii nauk. T. 5. SPb., 1889. P. 743. Materialy... T. 5. P. 743-744.

Chapter VII

89

Schumacher never participated in Professors' complaint because by that time his case was under investigation and he was in custody. Only G.F. Müller acted in concert with the Academicians, later to confess in a letter to G.N. Teplov, the Assessor of the Academic Registry: "I have at least as many reasons to distrust Lomonosov since he himself once declared to me that he could notforgive me for being in concert with other Professors against him during his quarrel with Mr. Wintzgeim, when he himself was still an Adjunct, — an offence that I considered sufficiently atoned by my assistance to him when he was offered Professor's post (1745) "3. Basing on complaints of the Academic Assembly the commission's verdict on the accused Lomonosov was 'guilty'; in its opinion he deserved not just a censure but a "taking away of his life", or at least a "bodily punishment" or "deprivation of his property"4. By the Empress Decree he was arrested and put under guard. Nartov took Lomonosov's side. On June 30, same year he applied to the inquiry commission writing that "Lomonosov is not only abnegatedfrom sciences, particularly from writing useful books and giving public lectures. And because of this not only his sincere zealfor sciences is weakened, but also the time in which he may use his other knowledge is wasted, and he is of no use for the Motherland because he is in extreme distress." (Are those the arguments in the manner of the XVIII century!) In conclusion of his application Nartov asked to release Lomonosov from custody "so that he could his mentioned needs concerning sciences restore freely"5. The Commission however disregarded Nartov's requests. Beside mishaps with the Academicians and his arrest Lomonosov fell on other hardships: he lacked means of subsistence. In July he wrote that he received only two thirds of his salary for 1742; after paying his debts he had no money again and was begging for a mercy of more salary for the two months of the same year 1742. For lack of money the Registry only paid Lomonosov ten rubles more. In August he reminded of himself again: "I, the humblest, am due to receive from the Academy of Sciences the remainder of my earned salary for the September third of the past 1732 and almost two thirds for this 1743.1, the lowest, almost never received my salaryfrom the A cademyfor the whole year, and because of this I reside in extreme poverty. And now I, the lowest, am ill, and besides have no means not only for my medicine but for my daily food to buy and cannot borrow any money. For the sake of that I most obediently ask the Academy that it orders, on the account of my deserved salary, to pay me money as much as the Academy chooses ". By September 9 a resolution on that application followed: "Due to lack of money in the treasury to pay Lomonosov five rubles ". For the same reason on October 29 instead of money Lomonosov was issued 80 rubles worth of academic publications by virtue of his future salary "for his sustenance "6. On December, 1743 the Empress Decree followed: Schumacher to proceed with his work as before, Nartov to proceed with his former work that he did before Schumacher's removal. Lomonosov commented on all that happened in his own way: "on Schumacher's part idlers from the academic lower curators were instigated, those punishedfor their drinking by Nartov, to catch a moment during Her Majesty's coming out and prostrate themselves at Her feet complaining on Nartov that he ostensibly forced them to suffer starvation without salary. They 3

Pekarsky P.P. Dopolnitel'nye izvestiya dlya biografii Lomonosova // Zapiski imperatorskoj Akademii

nauk. T. 8, kn. 1. SPb., 1865. P. 20. 4 Lomonosov i peterburgskaya Akademiya nauk // Sovremennik. 1865. T. 107, mart. P. 102. s Materialy... T. 5. P. 729-730. 6 Pekarsky P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. 2. SPb., 1873. P. 340-341.

90

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

did so, and according to slanders by Schumacher's patron Her Majesty directed to release Nartov from the registry and to put Schumacher there a chief as before"1. The Senate recognized the justice of commission ruling that denunciations concerning Schumacher's State crimes were void and did not go into considering complaints on academic disorders or embezzlement of public funds. The Empress ordered to exempt the informers from any punishment. The roster of 'persons under the yoke' preserved in the commission papers has "Mikhaila Lomonosov" the last on the list8. On January 18, 1744 he was presented the following verdict in the Senate for him to undersign: "to exempt Adjunct Lomonosov from punishment due to his sufficient education, but for his recognized and announced impertinences for him to beg pardon from the Professors; andfor his obscenities that he made in the Commission, conferences and also in courts, for all that to pay him, Lomonosov half of his present salary for a period of one year "9. The inquiry into the case of Counselor Schumacher came to an end but the struggle for power inside the Academy never stopped. Now the Library of the Academy of Sciences became the target of increased attention on the part of Professors: one only had to prove that it fell into neglect under Schumacher's authority and then correct its current state. For that one had to inspect it, punish the guilty and then put it under the control of the Academy Assembly. On October 3, 1745, a lengthy report by the Professors of the Academy, the name of Lomonosov found there for the first time, reached the Senate. The application emphasized, among other things: "For the library to be under the Professors Assembly is because the approbated project by the blessed andforever glorious H.M. Emperor Peter I envisaged the post of the librarian to be such that he would order from foreign countries for the Professors and in favor of the Academy those books which might be needed for them. And since it is owing to that post that the librarian is admitted among the Academy members, he has to do nothing without the knowledge of the Academy, and this subordination is so much necessary because up to this time the librarian and under-librarian have not done their work in a proper way. It is known about Counselor Schumacher that when he was yet only a librarian he took little care of the library; but instead he interfered in other people's affairs, incidental to him; without any order he had established the registry and appointed a large number of craftsmen and artisans and was engaged in their affairs; the library, meanwhile, remained neglected. As for the under-librarian he does not know what is necessary for the library, and during his tenure at that under-librarian's post, as far as it is known, he did nothing at the library. And the disorders taking place currently are the following: 1. Books necessary for the Academy projects by Professors' demand are not ordered. 2. There is no proper care to preserve books belonging to the library: they are almost always covered with dust and many of them are moth-eaten. 3. Not enough care is executed to prevent book losses, as these are in open bookcases and it often happens that there are many people present there simultaneously, and many low people are admitted whom there is no possibility to track. * 7

Soloviev S.M. Istoriya Rossii s drevnejshih vremen. Kn. 11. T. 21-22. M., 1963. P. 545. Soloviev S.M. Istoriya Rossii s drevnejshih vremen. Kn. 11. T. 21-22. M., 1963. P. 341. 9 Bilyarsky P. Materialy dlya biografii Lomonosova. SPb., 1865. P. 52. * An interesting "complaint" by the professors in view of the fact that Peter I established opening hours for all persons and did not exclude "low people". Clearly a case of Academic snobbery. (Explanatory note by Marcus A. Sherwood-Jenkins). 8

Chapter VII

91

4. Books are arranged in a very bad way unheard-of in libraries, and that does not only concern books in general, but also books within one and the same class; and if one needs any book, it is very difficult to find it. 5. The library is not used properly because it is never open on specific hours when anyone can enter it to read or apply for information, as is usual in other places and as it used to be here before, during the days of Academy foundation. Now one has to require some specific time and repeatedly send for this or that book to get it. 6. No record is run on books allotted from the library that would specify to whom they were given and when were returned. And when issuing books from the library receipts are written out on special sheets or scraps then mostly lost, so that these cannot be received back when books are returned. It may be that many books were given without any receipts so it is not strange that many books are missing from the library... By Counselor Schumacher's order catalogues of the Library and the Kunstkammer were printed, and that act would not be useless provided these catalogues were written in a proper order. But since some of them were written quite poorly, one can not only expect any use from them, but again they will put the Academy to shame in front of foreign countries. These catalogues were printed without the knowledge of the Academy, with no check by the Professors Assembly, without any effort to correct many of their errors. However they are already distributed among the foreigners for everlasting dishonor of the Russian state and the Academy, as if there are no such persons here who could expose and correct these errors. Also he, Counselor Schumacher published a book "The Description of the Library and the Kunstkammer " instead of the one printed before and presented it privately to the former Princess Anna, the only difference being that the previous book had been printed full sheet while the present — in quarter, and he, the Counselor wanted to dedicate the newly printed book to His Imperial Majesty Grand Duke on behalf of the whole Academy. But we argued with him reasoning how improper it would be now, after presenting Princess Anna that book full-size, to dedicate a smaller size one to His Imperial Majesty the Grand Duke and for the second time at that. Moreover, the Academy cannot recognize as its own a book in which the history of the Library and the Kunstkammer are presented unfairly; and again it was resolved in the Professors Assembly to correct the errors and supplement the book subject where it ignores the growth of the Kunstkammer thanks to efforts of Professors Gmelin and Müller. But attributing not the slightest importance to this resolution Counselor Schumacher responded to the conference with a rude letter and ordered to publish the book as it was before, canceling the suggested dedication only... Joseph Nicolas Del 'Isle. Joann Georg Gmelin. Josias Weitbrecht. Gerard Friedrich Müller. Pierre Louis Le Roy. Georg Wilhelm Richmann. J. G. Siegesbeck. Vasilei Trediakovsky. Michael Lomonosov. Done on October 3, 1745"10. 10

Materialy... T. 7. 1895. P. 639-640; 643-644; 647.

92

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

So the inspection of the Library took place. I.F. Brem, the Adjunct and I.K. Taubert, the librarian conducted it under the guidance of Assessor I. Melissino and Schumacher. During the inspection supplements were made to the "Cameral Catalogue". Moreover they were introduced as separate sheets into the 'Catalogue' printed copy. On January 16 I.K. Taubert reported to the Registry: "since all the announced catalogues are now printed and been recently inspected by Assessor Melissino, appointed by the order of the Senate office for revision of books in the Library and the Kunstkammer, these catalogues inspected by assessor Melissino •with their insertions of what appeared beyond the printed catalogues, all those signed by both the above Mr. Assessor and Mr. Counselor Schumacher, I hereby present to Registry of the Academy of Sciences and ask that Adjunct Brem be ordered to pass the Library to me person to person according to these catalogues, as well as all written catalogues and academic definitions concerning the Library that he has, and besides that he, Adjunct Brem, comes to the library at proper times on all the days in order that he might end handing the Library over to me as soon as possible"11. Taubert's resolution sums up the case of inspection of the Library. I. Melissino inserted additions to the printed catalogue in Latin and I.D. Schumacher did so in German. Moreover they both warranted these or affixed their signatures at the end of each part. By 1745 the general number of all the books registered in "The Cameral Catalogue" reached 18,238 volumes. That revision of BAN indirectly confirmed the verdict of the inquiry commission about the innocence of Schumacher, who was promoted to the rank of State Counselor to appease his moral loss at the hands of his 'reporters'. ...On May 21, 1746 Empress Elizabeth appointed the twenty-two year old Count Kirila Razumovsky the new President of the Academy of Sciences. The new president gave the post of the Assessor of Academic Registry to Grigory Teplov. "Upon such an appointment, — notes P. Pekarsky,— it is not difficult to guess that the President of the Academy of Sciences will be its leader in title only, while in fact it will be managed by Teplov'"2. And that is exactly what happened. When in 1748 the Court moved over to Moscow, President Razumovsky took Teplov along with him. Correspondence then started between Schumacher and Teplov. Here are the two fragments from Schumacher's letters. In 1749 he wrote Teplov: January, 22: "You are doing right, my Dear Sir, working with an ardor for the sake of the Academy. Like me, in due time You shall reap the fruits of Your own labors: these will not be in earthly riches but in a peace of Your soul — the fruit of clear conscience... " February, 11: "Am I pleased with thefact that they begin to understand the true emotions of Messrs. Professors! It is not I, Schumacher, who is repulsive to them but my rank. They want to be masters, to have distinguished ranks with huge salaries without caring at all for anything else!... "u In a whirlpool of events related to drafting and adopting the new Charter of the Academy (1747), the Registry never forgot the Library. In 1750 President Razumovsky approved the new rules of its use (mind you, they are still operative for personal users even now!). Their text sounds remarkably acute in our days.

11 12 13

Ibid. T. 8. P. 17. Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... P. XXI. Pekarsky P.P. Dopolnitel'nye izvestiya... P. 43-44.

Chapter VII

93

"As His Excellency Mr. President of the Academy of Sciences has become aware that Messrs. Academicians and Professors, when receiving various books from the Library are keeping them home for exceptionally long times then to return them with damaged covers and quite dirty ragged sheets, His Excellency deigned it to order so: announce to all Messrs. Academicians and Professors that anybody in need of some library book, may he keep it for not more than a month only, and anyone failing to read it within that month, let him in that case require the Registry permission to keep that bookfor another month, and the Registry not to permit anybody keep any book for more than three months. And let anybody failing to adhere to this ruling after his third notice or ignoring his commander s will not be issued books from the library or any public funds ever more on any pretext. And on this to send copies to the Academy and History Assemblies and also copy Mr. Assessor and Under-Librarian Taubert for execution "14. Naturally, that decision caused an immediate surge of negative emotions in Academicians and Professors*. They saw an infringement upon the freedom of scientific activity, a lack of confidence and respect for the person in the new rules. Imagine something incredible for a moment: Lomonosov is appointed the head of the library and checks the discharge of new rules by academicians and Professors. Upon my word, I cannot even fancy what it would do to the BAN... The struggle for power exhausted Schumacher, he was lonely, did not have the support he needed, strength was leaving him and only the certainty that he was right stayed with him. He was tired, rarely showed up in conferences, was afraid of Lomonosov and took almost no part in discussions. His letters to I.K. Taubert convey his inner state. March, 11,1753: "I am quite indifferent as to in whose good graces Lomonosov is and what advantages he derives as compared with others; neither can I penetrate anybody's heart and so cannot divine how much may one be in favor with another. Equally, it is not a part of my nature to envy their advantages. All is not gold that glitters. There are many who profess an opinion that the extraordinary preferences he gained while increasing his own happiness will also work to bring about his ruin. It is true that the timid and modest may not go far, but on the other hand he treads firmer. On the contrary, the audacious and the proud strains to attain his target quicker, but during the races he often falls into an abyss where he dies. In this case I do quote Solomon who wisely says: speed is no help in running, nor strength in struggle; it is not enough to be gifted to have subsistence, nor be reasonable to gain riches. To be agreeable does not promote success in ones deeds, but it all depends on time and luck". March, 15,1753: "Mr. Counselor Lomonosov is rather unfair when he complains of me: not I, but he treats me impolitely. If his understanding of rude treatment is that not everything is done according to his will in violation of right andjustice, then I am to agree that I behave impolite towards him. His laboratory assistant filed a report with the Registry requesting to let him go to Moscow for 29 days on his own business. The Registry let him go. One day later Mr. Counselor Lomonosov comes to the Registry to tell me by word of mouth to give that laboratory assistant two horses because he is sending him to Moscow in connection with his mosaic 14 Materialy... T. 10. 1900. P. 312. * They were divided into these two classes by Regulations of 1747. According to this rule Academicians worked in the Academy of Sciences, and professors lectured in the University. Before Regulations of 1747 the scholars had been called both Academicians and professors — making no difference between them.

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

94

works. I object to him saying that I cannot do it because in his application the laboratory assistant explained that he would go to Moscow on his own domestic affairs. 'It has to be done,'— Mr. Counselor Lomonosov replies, — 'andyou shall learn how it will be done! 'And I said that it would not be. 'You should not have so high an opinion of yourself — said Lomonosov, — 7 am also a colonel just like you!' I objected to him saying that I am not a colonel but the Counselor of the Registry where he can never order anybody. Then, being beside himself with all that he had left. I never talked to him since then, but the laboratory assistant left at his own expense. Mr. Lomonosov may act against me just as he likes but I shall always say that he would have a splendid intellect and would hold a high science position, were he to remain polite besides. Haughtiness, meanness and booze, — these are the sins that brought many a person to misfortune "1S. Let us agree that we hardly knew such a person in Schumacher. On July 3, 1761, Ann-Dorothy Schumacher wrote a letter to the Academic Registry: "My husband, State Counselor and Member of the Academy Daniil Schumacher passed away by God's will on this July 2, and for a burial decent for his rank I have an extreme need of money". When notifying I.E. Gebenschtreit about this death G.F. Müller added that for a long time Schumacher lead a purely vegetarian life. Ann-Dorothy was issued a full salary "for the long and diligent service of her husband, that he executed, first ... in instituting the Library and the Kunstkammer during the lifetime of Peter the Great and then in managing the Academy of Sciences from its very beginning, and organizing of many Crafts at the Academy, almost all of them pursued so vigorously and successfully to a significant profit by native Russians'"6. As to be expected, the inner life of the Academy did not change after Schumacher's death: what really changed were the emphases in the lasting struggle. Lomonosov, appointed the Counselor of the Academic Registry as far back as 1757, now saw an enemy in I.K. Taubert as well. According to Pekarsky, both sides had an overpowering desire to belittle each other in any way. The Academy was split: some people supported Lomonosov, others — Taubert. Whatever one proposed, the other tried to ruin and so on. Of course, all this had lamentable consequences for the scientific community and furthered its flourishing not in the least, although the issues of that struggle often related to the interests of education, science and common prosperity"17. Four years after Schumacher's death Lomonosov also died. On April 7,1765, A.F. Büshing was writing to G.F. Müller in Moscow: "Monday evening, no sooner than I dispatched my previous letter to You, in just a quarter of an hour did I learn that on the afternoon of the same day Counselor Lomonosov had died. Maybe this death will promote changes in the Academic system, if only it does not disintegrate within the next two years ". Next day Taubert was also writing to Müller: "Counselor Lomonosov did exchange his temporal life in this world for the eternal one last Monday about 5 p.m., after a new attack of his old malady in the result of chill. Two days before his passing he had his house! and expired in the course of his last sacrament, in full possession of his faculties, in the presence of his wife, daughter and those in his household. Early today he was buried in the Nevsky Monastery in the presence of a vast congregation. 15 16 17

Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. I P. 60-61. Ibid. T. 1. P. 63. Pekarsky P. P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. I P. 653.

Chapter VII

95

Next day after his death Count Orlov ordered to seal his cabinet. Undoubtedly, there must be some documents there that some would desire not to get into strange hands "18. Another Lomonosov's contemporary, Jacob Shtelin had written in his "Synopsis of a Word of Praisefor Lomonosov ": "There was a man who met his death in the spirit of a true philosopher; said so: Ί regret only that I am leaving in imperfection what I contemplated for the benefit of the Fatherland, for increase of sciences andfor rehabilitation of the disordered Academy affairs: that will die together with me' A genius of Russian science passed away, a man left life whose personality has not been fully appreciated even up to now20. For readers to compare I wish to cite three characteristics of Lomonosov that various people proffered at various times: Jacob Shtelin, who had known that scholar through the whole Petersburg period of his life; A.S. Pushkin in the XIX century; and P.L. Kapitza, a Noble Prize winner, an Academician who devoted to Lomonosov some special studies in the middle of the XX century. Jacob Shtelin21: "Characteristic Physical features: remarkable strength and almost athletic power. For example, fought three attacking sailors whom he overpowered and took their dress off. Tempestuous: life modes of the common people. Mental abilities: thirst for knowledge, researcher straining to discover new things. Moral qualities: uncouth, stern with his subordinates and household. Aspiring for superiority, contempt towards equals". A. S. Pushkin22: "Lomonosov was a great man. Between Peter I and Ekaterina II he alone was a distinctive comrade-in-arms fighting for enlightenment. He founded the first university. It is better to say, he himself had been our first university. But in that university the Professor of poetry and eloquence was nothing else but a conscientious official, not a poet inspired from above, not a powerfully enthralling orator. Monotonous and awkward forms into which he had to cast his cogitations made the course of his prose tiring and heavy. That scholastic majesty, semi-Slavonic, semi-Latin almost became mandatory; fortunately, Karamzin set our language free of foreign yoke and gave it back its freedom, routing it to the enlivening springs of the folk-word. Lomonosov had neither feeling nor imagination. His odes, written following the template of the German poets of those days, long forgotten in Germany itself, are tiring and puffed up. His influence on the polite letters had been harmful and keeps manifesting itself even now. Grandiloquence, refinement, repugnance "Pekarsky P. Dopolnitel'nye izvestiya... P. 88-89. About the archive of Lomonosov see: Kulyabko E S., Beshenkovsky E.B. Sud'ba biblioteki i arhiva Μ. V. Lomonosova. L.: Nauka, 1975. 227 p. 19 20

Zapiski Yakoba Shtelina ob izyaschnyh iskusstvah ν Rossii. Τ. 1. M.: Iskusstvo, 1990. P. 113.

"Lomonosov's life and activity are studied for two centuries already, — noted P.N. Berkov, in 1961, — the literature is enormous, but still we know him little and not well". See.: Berkov P.N. Literaturnye interesy Lomonosova // Literaturnoe tvorchestvo Μ. V. Lomonosova. M.,L., 1961. P. 14. 21 Zapiski Yakoba Shtelina... P. 113. 12 Pushkin A S. Puteshestvie iz Moskvy ν Peterburg // Sobr. soch. T. 6. M., 1981. P. 186-192.

96

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

to simplicity and exactness, lack of any national character and originality — these were the traces Lomonosov left. Lomonosov himself never valued his poetry and took much better care of his chemical experiments than of his compulsory odes scheduled for the ever-grand name-day, etc... But what a heat is ablaze when he speaks about sciences, about education! See his letters to Shuvalov, to Vorontsov, etc. Nothing can give one a better chance to understand Lomonosov than the following report he addressed to Shuvalov on the experiments he conducted from 1751 to 1757*: "By an order of Your Highness all the Academic Professors and Adjuncts were instructed to report Your Highness on their scientific labors and exercises from 1751 up to now. Due to which I am hereby reporting that from that time up to present date what I executed in my profession and in other sciences, year on year. In 1751. In chemistry. 1) Carried out many chemical experiments, mainly with the help of fire to study the nature of colors, as specified by the laboratory log of 12 sheets and other notes. 2) Delivered a speech of my own on the advantages of chemistry in Russian. 3) Invented some new devices for physical chemistry. In physics. 1) In hard frosts carried out experiments to search and find the proportions at which the air compresses and expands across all the thermometer degrees. 2) In summer carried out experiments with the use of a magnifying glass and a thermometer: how high would mercury rise in dependence of distance from point of ignition. 3) Carried out experiments how to separate tin from lead by means of pure melting, without any external materials, by way of simple mechanics alone that becomes very successful and quite cheap. In history. Have been reading books to collect the materials in order to write Russian history: Nestor, the laws of Yaroslavlya, the Large Chronicler, the first volume by Tatishchev, Kromer, Veisel, Gelmold, Arnold and others, from where I took the needed excerpts or extracts and annotations — 635 articles in 15 sheets total. In verbal sciences. 1) Wrote a tragedy named 'Demothontus'. 2) Kept composing poetiy for the occasions of festive fireworks. 3) Started bringing in order the materials collected before that are needed to write a grammar-book. Delivered private lectures on Russian versification to students and especially to Popovsky who is a Professor now. 4) Dictated to students the beginning of the third book on eloquence composed by myself — it is on versification in general. In 1752. In chemistry. 1) Carried out many chemical experiments on the theory of colors that are apparent from the 25 sheets of log for this year.2) Demonstrated to students chemical experiments to follow the course that I myself followed when studying with Genkel. 3) For a clear understanding and concise knowledge of chemistry in whole dictated and interpreted to students the prolegomena of physical chemistry in Latin that I composed, which consist of 150 paragraphs in 13 sheets with many figures in six half-sheets. 4) Discovered ways and proved in practice how to produce musia (mosaics). 5) Pursuing the Registry order taught pupil Druzhinin, sent by the Registry of Buildings composing glasses of different colors for the local glass-works. * Lomonosov's report was published in the magazine "Moskovskij telegraf' (1827, Ν 22) wherefrom Pushkin copied it.

Chapter VII

97

In physics. 1) At considerable personal risk executed electrical air observations. 2) In winter repeated experiments on expansion and compression of air with respect to thermometer degrees. In history. To collect materials on Russian history I read Kranz, Pretory, Muratory, Iornand, Prokopy, Paul the Deacon, Zonar, Pheophan the Confessionary, Leon the Grammatik and collected other needed excerpts to the amount of 161 articles in 5 sheets. In verbal sciences. 1) Wrote an ode devoted to the Ascension to the Throne of Her Imperial Majesty. 2) A letter on the benefits of glass. 3) Kept designing fireworks and composing poems dedicated to them for: April 25, September 5, and November 25. 4) Wrote oratories for the second part of the book of eloquence in 10 sheets. In 1753. In chemistry. 1) Continued experiments to study the nature of colors, as the log from the same year in 56 sheets gives evidence to. 2) Having completed the lectures, carried out new chemical-physical experiments in order to bring chemistry as close as possible to philosophical knowledge and make it part of fundamental physics: from those numerous experiments where respective measures, weights and their proportion were shown many tables were composed expressed in figures, 24 half-sheet pages all in all, their every line containing a whole experiment. In physics. Together with the late Professor Richmann carried out chemical-physical experiments in the laboratory to study heat degree that water accepts after immersing in it minerals initially heated to burning hot. 2) At great personal risk executed observations of electric power in the air. 3) Spoke in a public meeting to deliver a speech on the air phenomena caused by electric power accompanied also by interpretation of a large number of other properties of nature. 4) Carried out experiments through by which it appeared that colors, red in particular, become brighter in frost than in heat. In history. 1) Notes from the authors mentioned before did put in order as numbered foot-notes to articles. 2) Read through the Russian Academic chronicles taking no notes, in order to acquire a general broad concept of Russian deeds. In verbal sciences. 1) Put verbs in order for the Russian grammar. 2) Had five projects with verses for illustrations and fireworks on: January 1, April 25, November 25 and December 18. In 1754. In chemistry. 1) Conducted various chemical experiments that are described in 46 sheets of the log for the present year. 2) By repetition verified physical-chemical tables drafted last year. In physics. 1) Invented some methods of defining longitude and latitude at sea under overcast skies. Practice studies of those are impossible without the Admiralty. 2) Conducted experiments in meteorology on water brought from the Northern Ocean to find at what degree of frost it might freeze. Along those various chemical solutions were put to freeze to compare. 3) Did experiments at a village sawmill to study how water flowing down an incline accelerates it flow and what the force of its impact is. 4) Experimented with a machine that would, while flying up itself, be able to lift a little thermometer with it, in order to learn the degree of heat at heights, and though it was made lighter by more then two zolotniks (a Russian measure of weight), it was not yet brought to desirable result. In history. Composed an essay on the history of the Slavonic people before Rurik: Dedication, Introduction; Chapter 1 on the olden inhabitants of Russia; Chapter 2, on the

98

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library size and generations of the Slavonic people; Chapter 3, on the antiquity of the Slavonic people, 8 sheets on the whole. In verbal sciences. 1) Composed an ode on the birth of Pavel Petrovich, the Sovereign Grand Prince. 2) Invented the firework that was demonstrated on the eve of the New Year 1754 and wrote the poem. Also designed the projects of illumination and fireworks for: April 25, September 5 and November 25. In 1755. In chemistry. Carried out various physical-chemical experiments, as made obvious by the log of the same year, 14 sheets. In physics. 1) Wrote a dissertation about journalists' positions, where I refuted all the criticisms made in Germany against my dissertations and printed in commentaries, especially those against the new theories concerning heat and cold, chemical solutions and air elasticity. That dissertation was translated into French by M. Formey and printed in that language in the "German Library" (Biblioth£que germanique). 2) Composed a letter about the northern passage to the East Indies through the Siberian Ocean. In history. Made an experiment by way of describing domains of Rurik, Oleg, Igor, the first Russian Grand Princes. In verbal sciences. Wrote and delivered in a public meeting the word of praise to Peter the Great, the Sovereign Emperor of the blessed memory. 2) Having composed the better part of the grammar-book I brought it to an end, and this year it comes to full publishing. 3) Composed a letter on similarities and changes in languages. In 1756. In chemistry. 1) Among the various chemical experiments their log being in 13 sheets, did experiments in firmly soldered glass vessels to study whether the weight of metals increases from pure heat. By way of those it was discovered that the view of glorious Robert Boil was false, since without an inflow of outside air the weight of burned metal remains of the same measure. 2) Chemical experiments were conducted with the help of air pump, in the course of which minerals put to fire in chemical vessels from which the air was pumped out demonstrated such phenomena that are still unknown to chemists. 3) Now laboratory assistant Klementiev is seeking under my guidance how to produce high flying green starlets for fireworks. In physics. 1) I did invent a new optical instrument that I called a nyctoptic tube (tubus nyctopticus); this one should serve so that one may see through it at night. Its first attempts at testing during twilight showed clearly those things that are not seen with the naked eye and one may quite expect that through the efforts of skilful craftsmen it may be brought to a perfection now available in telescopes and microscopes that had in their times started from negligent beginnings. 2) Produced four pendulums invented by myself anew, one of them made from copper, about a fathom long but such that it works through mechanical pointers to become equal with a one that would be a mile high. It is used to learn whether the earth centre drawing massive bodies to itself remains stable or changes its position. 3) Delivered a speech of my own composition about colors in a public gathering. In history. Compared between themselves historical Russian manuscripts that I collected for my library this year—fifty books—to observe similarities in Russian deeds. In verbal sciences. 1) I am composing a heroic poem named "Peter the Great". 2) Designed a project with verses for a firework on December 18, this year.

Chapter VII

99

Beyond during various years certain dissertations were initiated: 1) On improved educated navigation. 2) On a hard-body thermometer. 3) On earth quakes. 4) On the primordial particles forming bodies. 5) On the degrees of heat and cold and how to determine those in view of the moderate dissolution of air on the planets. Other affairs partly prevented me from accomplishing those and partly because all my desire keeps disappearing in view of procrastinations in printing the commentaries". ...To trifle with him (Lomonosov - V. L.) was to loose. He was the same everywhere: at home, where everybody trembled before him; in the palace, where he used to tweak the pages by the ear; in the Academy, where as Schletzer witnessed nobody ever dared to utter a sound in his presence. Few people are aware of his wrangle in verse with Dimitry Sechenov on his "Hymn to the Beard", never published in any of his complete works. It can give an idea of both the arrogance of the poet and the intolerance of a preacher. With all that Lomonosov was a good-natured man. How fine is his letter about the family of poor Richmann! In his attitude towards himself he was very careless, and it seems that his wife, though German was but quite a poor householder. Having caught a talk going on about Lomonosov a widow of an old Professor asked: "Who is that Lomonosov you are talking about? Ain't that Mikhailo Vasilievich? Now, there's an unfounded person indeed! They always used to run up begging for a coffee-pot to us. Take Trediakovsky, Vasily Kirilovich for a difference, that was a respectable and esteemed man". Of course, Trediakovsky was a respectable and esteemed man. His philological and grammatical researches are very remarkable. He had a far wider concept of Russian versification than Lomonosov and Sumarokov. ...Lomonosov kept filling his ceremonial odes with grandiloquent praise: he never minced to call Count Shuvalov his benefactor; in some courtier idyll or other he sang Count Shuvalov to name him Polidorus; he congratulated Count Orlov upon the latter's return from Finland in verse; he wrote: "Thanks to his high favor to me His Excellency Count M.L. Vorontsov was pleased to take from me the samples of mosaic compositions to demonstrate them to Her Majesty". — Now all that style has fallen into disuse. The thing is that there still existed a distance between the different estates at that time. Lomonosov, born into the low estate, never thought to uplift himself to persons of the higher state by way of insolence and familiarity with them (although, however, his rank made it possible for him to stand equal with them). But was he able to stand up for himself not caring about either the protection by his Macanese or his own well-being when the matter was his honor or the triumph of his favorite ideas. Listen how he wrote to the same Shuvalov, the muses advocate, his high patron who took into his head to play a joke on him. "Not only in front of the great nobles, but even in the face of the God Almighty do I not want to stand a fool". Some other time, while arguing with the same grandee Lomonosov made him so angry that Shuvalov shouted: "I will move you aside the Academy!" — "Not unless, — Lomonosov countered proudly — "the Academy is moved aside me". There was that humiliated writer of laudatory odes and courtier idylls for you!". This is Pushkin's characteristic of Lomonosov. In front of us there stands a man full of life, a genius researcher faithful to science and the Academy of Sciences, a scholar in love with his country and not the administrator, as we would say now. Impractical in his family and

100

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

everyday life, we should add. Lomonosov's image depicted by Pushkin urges one to further studies, while the poet only outlined the possible objective directions of such studies... But let us return to nowadays. It is no secret that one has to approach with caution the task of analyzing the activities and appreciating the Russian genius, not forgetting to look back into our recent past. Everything seems to be known: sources available earlier to a very narrow circle of researchers only published and commented on, the complete works of Lomonosov printed. However, as soon one tries to get deeper, one starts stumbling upon barriers of various kinds, those that one has to overcome in order to see a human person in Lomonosov instead of an idol canonized in science*. Somebody is still to tread that road, and we are only approaching it. As for the contemporary scholars, in my opinion the one coming closest of all to a full appreciation of Lomonosov was Academician P.L. Kapitza. One of his articles "On the Creative Disobedience " bears a shade of his personal meditations on what is a genius, how a genius manifests itself in a human being, how it affects the people of its circle, — all that taking Lomonosov as an example. The article was written in the beginning of 1970-ies, almost ten years after Kapitza's well-known report "Lomonosov and the World Science " that he delivered on November 17, 1961 at the Department of Physical and Mathematical Sciences of the USSR Academy of Sciences in connection with the 250-th anniversary of the Russian scholar. The lot of that report is curious23. Its abridged version was published in the "Izvestiya" newspaper on November 18, 1961. The complete text was only published in 1965 that is four years later in a book "Life Dedicated to Science". The "Priroda" (Nature) and "Advances in Physical Sciences " (APS) magazines were planning to publish the report in 1962, but then they started to demand such deep corrections of the contents from the author that the latter was forced to decline. The letter to the editor of "Priroda " dated November 24, 1961 illustrates the great importance P.L. Kapitza attributed to that work: "On Your request I am hereby sending You the text of my speech on Lomonosov. If it turns out to be too voluminous for the magazine I would prefer not to print it all than to print abridged". So that's how things turned out to be actually! On April 11, 1962, the editor-in-chief of the magazine, Academician D.I. Shcherbakov wrote to P.L. Kapitza: "Please accept my apologies for the delay with publication of Your article on Lomonosov. Meanwhile I would like to draw Your attention to the fact that I cannot agree with some items in Your article. For example, I agree with V.l. Vernadsky who stressed that those who believed Lomonosov's ideas and his works not to have adequately influenced his contemporaries and his nearest descendants were wrong...". * Here is one of the last examples: "together with such celebrated scholars as Leonard Euler or physicist Georg Richmann, — writes F.A. Petrov in his monograph, published in 1997, — to the Academy rushed a stream of foreigners of extremely dubious reputation, patronized by its Secretary J.D. Schumacher (emphasis mine.-V.L.). And of all others they formed that "German party", against which Lomonosov struggled for quarter of a century. Indifferent and even hostile to the lot of Russian science and education, they in every way created obstacles to training of Russian scholars and promoted their compatriots, and it is not mere chance that the "Academic University" languished by the middle of XVIII century, and then, practically, faded". See: Petrov F.A. Nemetskie professora ν Moskovskom universitete. M: Hristianskoe izd-vo,1997. P.5. That's the whole story without colouring! 23

See for example: Kapitza P.L. Lomonosov i mirovaya nauka // Eksperiment. Teoriya. Praktika. 2-e

izd., ispr. i dop. Μ.: Nauka, 1977. P. 255-272. Circumstantially commentaries to the report in the composite book: Kapitza PL. Nauchnye trudy // Nauka i sovremennoe obschestvo. M.: Nauka, 1998. P. 516-518.

Chapter VII

101

In his letter of reply (its rough draft preserved in Kapitza's Archive is not dated) P.L. Kapitza writes: "It was a great pleasure for me to learn that my article would appear in the nearest issue of Your magazine. I welcome every criticism of my work and will by no means object if You step out with its critique. Following Your letter it was with great interest that I got to know V.l. Vernadsky's statements. It seems to me that Vernadsky was mainly interested in Lomonosov's works in mineralogy and geology, the fields in which, as an exception, his works merited acknowledgement. This happened because of an interest displayed by Swedish scholars who are well known to have elected Lomonosov an Honorary Member of their Academy owing to those works. Despite that Vernadsky himself writes in his article "Some Words About Lomonosov's Works in Geology and Mineralogy" published in a collective monograph "Lomonosov's Works in the Field of Natural History Sciences. Extracts and Explanatory Articles" (SPb.: Izd-vo Akad. nauk, 1911): "Lomonosov's works in geology and mineralogy gained their rightful valuation during the second half of the XIX century only. His contemporaries failed to comprehend them and they had a sort of influence that quickly evaporated from their minds ". Thus this statement by Vernadsky somewhat differs from those You quoted and which entered the public anniversary article in the newspaper; in my opinion these latter represent a less serious statement. Being acquainted in minute details with other articles by Vernadsky I found no essential differences between our views. "Works by Lomonosov were so prominent, — P. L. Kapitza carries on, — that even in the XVIII century his name had to rank with such names as Huygens, Humboldt, 0rsted and others. There should be no talk at all about Lomonosov failing to influence science. The discussion should concentrate on thefact that that influence remainedfar less than the unique Lomonosov genius. As to the acquaintance with Lomonosov's works abroad, here my opinion completely coincides with Vernadsky's views. In my speech I said: "Thus there is no reason to assume that scholars could not know about Lomonosov s works either abroad or at home. They knew them but did not pay them necessary attention ". If You are interested in the issue of acknowledging Lomonosov's works that question is examined in detail in an article by Professor N.I. Bulich "To the Centennial of Lomonosov's Passing" published in "The Proceedings and Transactions of the Kazan' University" (1865, issues 2,3 and 4). Plekhanov's work is also of extraordinary interest: he analyzed in most minute detail the issue of reasons for lack of acknowledgement of Lomonosov's works. As You know the same question was examined by Menshutkin and Ostvald. These authors appreciation of the issue differs from mine in details only. So if You find a possibility to look at that issue in a new way it would be very interesting and I would be ready to discuss it with You". This is where correspondence with "Priroda" comes to an end. Kapitza's report was never published in that magazine. P.L. Kapitza's correspondence with the APS editor-in-chief E.V. Shpolsky on publishing his report in that magazine was alsofruitless.On January 19,1962 E.V. Shpolsky sent P.L. Kapitza proposals by the APS editorial board on principal theses of the report, at that time very actual and sharp.

102

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

Here are some examples of the corrections the editor proposed. Author's text

Board suggested text

The tragedy of isolation of the works by Lomonosov, Petrov and other individual scholars lied only in the fact that they could not join in the collective work of scholars abroad because they were devoid of possibility to travel abroad. And this is the answer to our question propounded for the reasons for lack of influence of their works on world sciences.

The tragedy of isolation of the works by Lomonosov, Petrov and other individual scholars lied only in the fact that they could not join in the collective work of scholars abroad since they had no possibility to personally discuss results of their research in the leading scientific centers of their times.

...If we fail to create our own advanced scienitific community then however many Lomonosovs may be born in our country, we shall not be able to create advanced science in it..

...It is not difficult to see that one of the important prerequisites for developing advanced science in our country is building a scientific community...

In his letter of reply P.L. Kapitza writes to E.V. Shpolsky: "I shall be grateful if the editorial board be so kind as to let me know the reasoned critique of my article that caused a necessity to introduce changes into my text. Without this I, for the present, am deprived of a possibility to agree with changes made. " OnApril 12,1962,E.V. Shpolsky sends new editions to the text of the report to P.L. Kapitza. "Upon inserting Your corrections, — he writes, — there still remain some formulations that might give rise to undesirable and erroneous conclusions. Considering that and on instructions from the Editorial Board editing was made of the last pages of the manuscript". And again there followed two pages where in parallel columns went "the author's text" and "the Board suggested edition ". On April 17 in his letter of reply P.L. Kapitza writes: "I cannot agree with changes You propose as long as there is no detailed and persuading explanation of the erroneousness of judgments I proffered". P.L. Kapitza fights persistently to defend his text, and again and again the editor proposes "softened" versions of the closing part of the report. In 1962 the report was still not published in APS. But since in January 1965 the book "Life Dedicated to Science" by P.L. Kapitza containing the full text of his report on Lomonosov was published, APS reprinted it without any corrections! Same year, also without any corrections the report "Lomonosov and the World Science" was published in the "Lomonosov" collection of articles and materials (M.: Nauka, 1965. P. 13-26). In 1965 P.L. Kapitza wrote rather a small preface to his report aimed for foreign readers, giving there a short essay of life and activities of the great Russian scholar. (See: Collected Papers of P.L. Kapitza. Vol. 3. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1967. P. 168-170.)

Chapter VII

103

Quoting that commentary here I kept thinking whether such a report on Lomonosov with such arguments could ever be published during its time, were its author not a world-renowned scholar P.L. Kapitza? Pyotr Leonidovich also treated on Lomonosov theme in his other work "On Creative Disobedience "24. Here is its beginning: "Nowadays when one starts talking about Lomonosov they usually talk about his scientific achievements. These are not only comprehensible to us now, but during those 200 years science has gone forward so far that they seem to be self-evident, and to understand the power of Lomonosov's genius one has in one's imagination to fall back to the level of culture of his time. Of course such a feat is possible, but the only gain one may derive from it is an appreciation of the exceptionally strong and increasing rate of progress in science and of its influence on the human culture. Meanwhile one can approach the problem from a different side as well. It has to do with mutual understanding between a genius and society, and that is what remains of interest for us nowadays too. There is something eternal in a life of a genius, something that never loses its interest, and thatforces people to be interested in the lives ofgreat persons of any epoch. This is related not only to individuals, but also to all the highest achievements of human culture ". P.L. Kapitza then continues: "Due to his genius one can find many things engrossing and interesting and useful to understand in Lomonosov's character, his life and activities, regardless of the fact that there is an abyss of 200 years between us. I would like to dwell upon one of the aspects of manifestations of Lomonosov's genius and discuss it from our point of view. I want to attract your attention to one of the very well-known facts of Lomonosov's life: that defiance of his father s will a son of a common peasant from a distant Archangel Province came to Moscow on foot at the dawn of development ofscience in our country to devote the power of his genius to servicing it. Even children's digests describe all the hardships that Lomonosov had to overcome to reach the highest rank in the Academy of Sciences, and of course you know them well. Now let us try to answer the following question that I ventured to put in a somewhat simplified form. It gives however better possibilities for discussing it. In our days it is by far easier and simpler for young people not only from the Archangel Region but from the very distant areas of Siberia to reach Moscow and devote their services to science, and all that without Lomonosov's heroism. Then why do Lomonosovs not appear in great numbers now? ...I will dare to mark one prerequisite for the development of scholar's talent that was present during Lomonosov's days, the one [that is] possibly lacking now... When studying Lomonosov's life everybody learns about his unbridled temperament. From numerous examples of that unruliness I remember now one of the incidents related to the times when Lomonosov was already an Adjunct at the Academy of Sciences, something similar to a senior researcher or maybe even a Correspondent Member in our language. Now, his quarrels with some Academicians, especially with foreigners are well known. After one incident he came up to Schumacher, that notorious secretary of the Academy, who, albeit considered number two in the Academy after Count Razumovsky, its President, was in reality running all the Academy affairs. To proceed, the official protocol report describes how Lomonosov 'put his fingers together indecently, waved them to andfro under the nose of Academician Schumacher and said: "Ain 'tya' got a whiff of 'at... " I have to refer those interested to the official report for further details, 24

Kapitza P.L. Ο tvorcheskom neposlushanii // Nauka i sovremennoe obschestvo. M.: Nauka, 1998. P. 388-391.

104

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

because, even though Lomonosov uttered the ensuing text in German, its reproduction appears impossible here. Lomonosov is known to have had troubles after that case, but not as bad any more; his genius was already recognized and his great benefactors, such as Count Shuvalov, Vorontsov and others did not allow depriving Lomonosov of a possibility to proceed with his scientific research. Now let me ask the following: is a similar incident possible in our days and in our Academy of Sciences? Naturally, at first glance the way it is put seems absurd and ridiculous. One must have quite a weird imagination to fancy even approximately [something of a kind] to happen in our days and in our Academy of Sciences. But in reality the whole incident described bears something quite instructive for our times. After all, a genius usually manifests itself in disobedience. A person starts looking for something new when disagreeing to follow [the existent] since it does not satisfy him. Recall the cases of disobedience in Pavlov's,Pirogov's, Suvorov's, Mendeleev's lives and you would hardly avoid the conclusion that disobedience is one of the inevitable traits showing in a person seeking and creating something new in science, art, literature, philosophy. Thus, it would seem that one of prerequisites for a talent flourishing in a human being is freedom to disobey. ...One cannot help asking, which gates to life are thrown open wider now — the ones to obedience or to independent creativity and how much disobedience does a society forgive a genius? " And here comes the answer Academician P. Kapitza offered: "It is both difficult and risky for those belonging to an epoch to judge it objectively, however in the field of the humanities in our country obedience is now indubitably valued higher. As for the area of natural sciences, even though possibilities for a manifestation of a genius are broader there, we are far from the scope of Lomonosov's disobedience. Of course, I am speaking not about the attitudes of bureaucratic machinery, but about the general public... We cannot answer precisely, whether a clear-cut, rigid system and organization vs. freedom of activity of an original genius are necessary during a given historical interval of development of a country in a given field ofscience or art. It is quite possible that the strength and success of our epoch lies in the social structure as opposed to individual talents, that we do not need persons of genius in science, art, literature at the present stage of our development. This is not a paradox but the dialectics of a historical moment in our development. It is an epoch that gives birth to geniuses, not the geniuses that give birth to an epoch ". .. .Now, let us return to our library. How did its life develop after the deaths of Schumacher and Lomonosov? Their opposition marked a turn of epochs for BAN, a digression from the initial design by Peter that Schumacher followed and tried to realize; as for Lomonosov, he did step out too early on the side of the "dawning future". The driving feature in the character of the Russian genius was his fighting tempo. All his feats were marked with highest rate possible, and that extremity inevitably presupposed permanent conflicts and arguments. I think that from Lomonosov's point of view his war with the Academy Registry seemed something natural and comprehensible. He was constantly pushing onwards, was eager to forereach the events, and was looking for a foothold in the transitional and the unshaped. The tension of that struggle ceased after his death. However an almost quarter-century stand-off extending through the period of Lomonosov's work in the Academy imprinted itself upon the Academy of Sciences to confirm its special status in Russia for a long time.

Chapter VII

105

Disobedience of a genius resulted (after his death already) in disbanding the Academy Registry and in destroying individual personal management of its Library, which, it appeared later, caused an irretrievable damage to BAN. Essentially, a national library cannot be managed by a collective body formed as a commission of Academicians: a conflict of interests is inevitable, destructive first of all in shaping the library collection. Undoubtedly, Schumacher had been absolutely right fighting, at all costs, for the principle of personal management of the library. But the external situation in Russia had radically changed. "Say, ain't there no proper order among us: say, foreigners 'ave grabbed it all to seize; them that Biron hisself got it all through and through!" — this is the way P. Pekarsky begins the part called "Management of the Academy of Sciences and its State during 1742-1766" in his second volume of "History...". Andheadds: "It was in a whisper and only with heart-to-heart friends that such talks went during the reign of Empress Anna, because pranks against Germans were not tolerated in the highest circles of the Russian society during those times "25. Later that negative attitude to foreigners, especially to Germans and Swedes splashed out into open fights in the streets of Petersburg. On November 22, 1835, in his letter to Pushkin Ivan Lazhechnikov, historian and writer retells a story he had heard from I.V. Stupishin, one of the 'enthroners' of Ekaterina II who lived on to his nineties and died in 1820: "...when used to come to the palace with his odes, by Biron's order he always had to crawl on his knees from the very anteroom through all the palace rooms holding his poems in his hands on top of his head, and having thus crawled to Biron and the Empress he had to bow to the floor. Biron always kept fooling him and was dying of laughter"26. Escapades of that kind were exciting the society and calls were heard to do away with foreigners. And it was just then and there that Nartov complained against Counselor Schumacher. "And one must agree, — P. Pekarsky concludes, — that the time for such a denunciation was chosen very well "2?. However, relations between Lomonosov and Schumacher were, perhaps, not so much of a problem of German dominance in the Imperial Academy of Sciences, but that of shaping the ground for a new scene. Any take-over is inevitably accompanied by convulsions. Old ways and relations are demolished and this demolition involves many a person. When transiting from one epoch to another, losses are inevitable, as are victims, and numerous ones at that. But one should discern victims and victims. Though some may be inevitable while meaningless, evadable, others are, so to say, necessary, essential, those that introduce the advent of a new epoch. Both Schumacher and Lomonosov were such necessary victims on the side of each of the fighting parties. An epoch was dawning when Peter's magnificence had to give way to moderation and sober view of things... On October 5, 1766, Ekaterina II introduced the post of a Director of the Academy of Sciences in addition to the post of its President and appointed her favorite's brother, Count "Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T.2. P. I. 26

Pushkin A.S. Poln. sobr. soch. T.16. M., 1949. P. 64.

And nevertheless interesting is Pushkin's estimate of Biron. Ih his letter to I.I. Lazhechnikov of November, 3, 1835 he wrote: "We may also say some words about Biron. He had a misfortune to be a German; all horror of Anna's reign that was in the spirit of his time and in people's manners and customs was pushed on to him. Incidentally, he had great mind and great talents". Ibid. P. 62. 27 Pekarsky P.P. Istoriya imperatorskoj Akademii nauk... T. 2. P. IV.

106

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

Vladimir Grigorievich Orlov the Director of the Academy. By her order of October 30, same year the Academy Registry that had existed for more than forty years was closed. The Academy and the Library started to be run by scholars. The Commission of Academicians: Ya.Ya. Shtelin, L. Euler (who returned to Russia in 1766), I.A. Euler (his son), I. Leman, S.A. Kotelnikov and S.Ya. Rumovsky led by V.G. Orlov took over from Schumacher and Taubert. In the end of 1766 BAN moved into the Kunstkammer now reconstructed after the fire of 1747 and that is where it existed up to 1924. With a change of power there was an instant upsetting in operations of collecting the library. On October 2, 1767 I.K. Taubert, still restless writes to the Academy Commission: "By determinations of the former President it is orderedfrom both Academic printing-houses... to give to the Library in six copies, both for the sake of its present collection and its further preservation, all books that are to be sold in the book-shop, whatever is to be printed in the Academy up to the last sheet'™. However, the Library never received those books for more than a year since. After Taubert's death in May, 1771 Academician S.K. Kotel'nikov, a Russian scholar was charged to take care of the library. Duties of the new director mainly concentrated around the inner life of the Library. And it could not be otherwise. To solve any problems S.K. Kotel'nikov now needed preliminary consent from all the members of the Academic Commission and that seemed to be rather difficult to secure. While, as we remember, Schumacher's duties specifically demanded that he "administers the library himself, keeps it in proper order, initiates book catalogues", during the days of S.K. Kotel'nikov the budget remained as small as before, books from the Academic printing-house arrived "inaccurately", and as a result noticeable lacunas formed in the array of Russian editions. And though Kotel'nikov's activities as the Director find positive valuation with the researchers, he appeared incapable of doing anything more than "minding the Library". There was another reason for that as well. Sergey Pavlovich Luppov, a historian of BAN strict in his judgments was right to confirm that by that time the Library of the Academy of Sciences had already lost it exclusive position of a single large library in Russia"29. That appeared to be one of the results of the change of epochs in the XVIII century for the first Russian national library. In my view, some directions of possible search are interesting in this connection for future researchers of the history of BAN. Starting with report to Peter (1722) the XVIII century saw only fourteen publications dedicated to the Library and the Kunstkammer30. Was it much or little and how could one explain that number? In 1928 Sophia Aleksandrovna Ryshkova, a librarian assistant in BAN compiled a list of the Library personnel from 1728 to 1928. Archive documents, accounting log-books and copies of request registers, lists of personnel as per references by the Secretariat of BAN of the USSR yielded the basis for that list. It contained 460 names. When comparing it with the name index to the monograph "History of the Library of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 1714-1964" (1964) I found that the latter had only a part of the names of the BAN staff. I counted 30 names 28

Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 133. Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 133 50 See: Shafranovsky K.I., Fedotova Z.S. Bibliografiya pechatnyh rabot Biblioteki Akademii nauk za 17141916 gg. // Tr. B-ki AN SSSR i Fundament, biblioteki obschestv. nauk AN SSSR. T. 6. M.; L., 1962. P. 332-337. 29

Chapter VII

107

related to the initial history of the Library. Actually they appeared to number 77. So what was the fate of those whom we hardly know or know not at all? Below comes an alphabetical list of the members of staff of the Library and the Kunstkammer, those who held various posts in it during the XVIII century: from worker, through grammar-school boy, a student at the university, a teacher to a catalogue copyist and Academician (years of activity indicated in brackets). 1. Amman Iohann, academician (1741). 2. Arnautov Peter, graphic artist apprentice (1780-1781). 3. Bakmeister Iohann, Adjunct, under-librarian (1766-1788). 4. Barkov Ivan Stepanovich, translator, (1759-1765). 5. BarsovAleksei, translator, (1760-1764). 6. Belyaev Joseph (Osip) Petrovich, student, assistant librarian (1783-1803). 7. Belyi Grigory, graphic artist (1775-1783). 8. Berkgan Natan Christophorovich, artist, painter of animals and birds (1748-1751). 9. Bogdanov Andrei Ivanovich, apprentice, assistant librarian, registrar (1737-1766). 10. Bogdanovich Pyotr Ivanovich, translator (1777-1780). 11. Bolotov Nikita, apprentice (1754-1757). 12. Borodulin Stepan, apprentice, copyist(1728-1783). 13. Brem Johann Frederic, student, Adjunct (1735-1747). 14. Bukchvostov Semyon, teacher, assistant in the Kunstkammer (1740-1789). 15. Busse Johann Frederic, Academician (1788-1799). 16. Dal Ivan, fowler (1787-1790). 17. Denisov Dmitry, stuffer (1779-1781). 18. Dmitriev Nikolai, graphic artist (1774-1775). 19. Dubrovsky Adrian, translator (1758-1759). 20. Fatervald Andrei, teacher (1740). 21. Fedorovsky Ivan, translator (1758). 22. Freigang Gustav, student (1742-1757). 23. Fyodorov Ivan, apprentice (1737-1738). 24. Gall Pyotr, apprentice (1756-1760). 25. Gavrilov Fyodor, apprentice, (1754). 26. Gell Maria, artist (1742-1743). 27. Genshel Ivan, fowler (1790). 28. Gerr Bogdan, catalogue copyist (1790-1842). 29. Gmelin Philipp, secretaiy (1732-1734). 30. Gofinan Jacob Genrikhovich, actuary (1737-1738). 31. Golubtzov Ivan, translator (1758). 32. Gorlitzky Ivan, translator (1724-1744; 1749-1776). 33. Grekov Andrei, apprentice (1748). 34. Grigoriev Pyotr, graphic artist (1768-1785). 3 5. Ivanova Matryona, maid (1741 -1742). 36. Kalmykov Ulian, copyist (1744 -1748). 37. Kedrin Pavel, translator (1799). 38. Kondratovich Alexander, student, under-librarian, (1789-1797). 39. Kondratovich Kipriyan (Kipriyak), translator (1751 -1774). 40. Konstantinov Aleksei, translator (1755-1757).

108

The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library 41. Kotel'nikov Semyon Kirillovich, academician, curator of the Library and the Kunstkammer (1771-1797). 42. Kotov Mikhail, junior apprentice (1760-1761). 43. Krabe Abraham, translator (1751 -1757). 44. Lebedev Fyodor, worker (1741). 45. Lebedev Vasily, translator (1748-1765). 46. Lerzenius (Liurzenius), graphic master (1766-1767). 47. Marov Illarion, apprentice (1756-1761). 48. Milovidsky Venedict, student (1776-1778). 49. Miller Fyodor, chambers curator(1798-1799). 50. Nichman David, graphic artist (1774-1777). 51. Nikitin Ivan, worker (1741). 52. Ostapov Nikolai, graphic artist (1799). 53. Parshukov Pyotr, copyist(1766-1773). 54. Pashke Gotfrid, student, secretary (1725-1728). 55. Petrov Semyon, student (1792-1796). 56. Petzold Ivan, painter of amimals and birds (1777-1788). 57. Polenov Andrei, translator (1762). 58. Polonsky Pankrat, translator (1763-1765). 59. Rassokhin Illarion, translator (1753-1760). 60. Schumacher Johann Daniel, librarian (1728-1761). 61. Shalaurov Mikhail, graphic artist (1774-1783). 62. Shtelin Jacob, Academician (1740-1747). 63. Shumsky Pavel, librarian assistant (1767-1768). 64. Sokolov Fyodor, translator (1758). 65. Sokolov Ivan, apprentice (1760-1761). 66. Sokolov Pyotr Ivanovich, under-librarian; librarian, first department (1797-1835). 67. Sumarokov Alexander, student (1767-1768). 68. Svetov Vasily, translator (1774-1776). 69. Taubert Iohann Kasper, under-librarian, librarian (1741 -1771). 70. Teplov Vasily, translator (1750-1757). 71. Tzeitler-de Johann, catalogue copyist (1739-1740). 72. Villers Karl, translator (1758- 1759). 73. Vnukov Stepan, assistant librarian, attached to the Kunstkammer (1769-1773). 74. Volkov Boris, translator (1758-1762). 75. Yakimov Ivan, graphic artist (1795-1799). 76. Zakharov Alexander, graphic artist (1787-1795). 77. Zeipel Ivan, artist (1799-1800).

CHAPTER VIII

UNDER THE ROOF OF THE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES The romantic phase of life of the first Russian national library remained in the XVIII century. Gradually BAN began to change moving further and further away from the initial design of its great founder. It entered the XIX century independent already, free of the Kunstkammer but divided in two departments (the Russian and the Foreign); each of them had its own director and finances. Compared with the past century its status had sunk. The main function of the Library was now seen to consist in ensuring the needs of academic science. The Imperial Public Library, opened to the reader in 1814, became the leading library in St.Petersburg. In the new situation life and well being of the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences were determined not only by the role and significance of the Academy of Sciences in the society but also by the influence of its President. In other words, the romantic epoch was replaced with the realistic one. Nothing may reflect the dynamics of the change of attitude towards the Library inside the Academy of Sciences itself better than the regulations of that Academy. For example, compare the following: REGULATIONS OF 1747 51. The Librarian must be the chief leader of the Library and the Kunstkammer of Her Imperial Majesty under the President [of the Academy] and with him there is to be an Under-Librarian: they are to keep the Library and the Kunstkammer in order and cleanliness and to increase them further with both new books and things... Also there are to be two translators from German into Russian and from Russian into German under the Librarian's leadership, both for newspapers and other political publications for people. 52. Since the Library still lacks many books, and the Kunstkammer — a considerable number of curiosities, then for the sake of increasing them further the Library and the Kunstkammer are allocated two thousand rubles each annually from the profits of the book-magazine they have. I would also add that, according to Regulations of 1747, the Librarian's salary was fixed at a sum of 1,200 rubles a year, the same salary set for the University Rector and the Counselor of the Academic Registry. That was how high the post of the Librarian of the Imperial Library of the Imperial Academy of Sciences was valued back in the XVIII century! REGULATIONS OF 1803 4. ...the Academy is to consist of 18 Academicians Ordinary and 20 Adjuncts, an indefinite number of Academicians Extraordinary to be admitted among them.

110

Chapter VIII 117. The two Academicians elected by the majority at the Academy Conference are entrusted with administrating the Library and the Museum. These Academicians get a salary rise fixed in the staff roster1. 118. The Librarian and the Curator of the Museum are responsible for attention of the safe-keeping of precious collections entrusted to them. They cannot make any significant changes in their departments at will... Any Academician has a right to put proposals concerning these two collections to the attention of the Conference. 120. The President fixes two days a week when admission to the Library and the Museum is to be free for those who want to visit them. The Managing Board will issue instructions necessary for that, these being in agreement with the safety of the Academy. REGULATIONS OF 1836 5. The Academy consists of 21 Academicians Ordinary and 10 Adjuncts. The latter may have positions of Academicians Extraordinary, their number undefined. 103. The Library, divided into two departments: 1) the one for books in Russian and in other Slavonic dialects; 2) for books in all the other languages jointly — is under the management of two Librarians who, following an approval by the minister, are appointed by the President from among the Academy Members or outsiders. 104. (For) the Librarians ... provided they are from among the full Members of the Academy an increase in their Academician or Adjunct salary of one thousand rubles a year is fixed for this work2. 105. Librarians and Directors of collections are responsible for the safety of the assemblies entrusted to them. They cannot introduce any significant changes into those departments at their own will but with their improvement or multiplication in mind they put forward proposals to the Conference that reports these to the President with its own approval provided it finds that profitable. Any Academician has a right to suggest proposals to the Conference concerning such collections.

The Regulations of 1836 had remained functional until 1927. Thus the great started to be replaced by the little*. In the beginning of the XIX century replenishment of the BAN book-stocks almost ceased. No new manuscripts were acquired. It was only in the forties that the situation with the manuscript fund somehow improved, thanks to the Russian Academy joining the Academy of Sciences in its capacity of the second Department of the Russian Language and Polite Letters3 (it happened on October 19,1842). However, the enormous documentary material accumulated during the XVIII century did not fit into frames narrow for a truly academic library. As before, it was still needed to a wider circle of readers. On suggestion by Academician F.I. Schubert in 1804 the Conference adopted a decision published in the newspapers that "twice a week the Library has admission free for all who 1 According to the manning table the sum of Academician's annual pay was 2,200 rubles. An increase of pay was equal to 400 rubles, that is pay total was 2,600 rubles. Pay of the President of the Academy of Sciences was equal to 3,000 rubles per year. 2 Annual salary of ordinary Academician was 5,000 rubles. * I would compare this with "a toy theatre effect", when we, as an audience, accept the scale of things offered by the theatre and big magnitudes begin to seem small. 3 The Russian Academy had been established on October 21, 1783, for elaboration of problems of Russian language and polite-letters.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

111

want to visit it, namely on Mondays and Thursdays from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. ". But it turned out not to be enough for the readers and they kept insisting on it being open every day. Those particularly insistent were "those of mediocre condition " who had no money to buy books. In 1811 "The Military Magazine " wrote specifically about such readers4. But the Academy stood its ground. It came so far that the Academy administration did not yield any privileges to V.S. Sopikov who was compiling a repertoire of the Russian book. He was only allowed to work on regular conditions, just as everybody else5. In the middle of the thirties, thanks to efforts by Academician K.M. Baer, the Director of the II Foreign Department the situation in BAN changed for the better. In 1836, taking as a basis his special report the Conference approved the new rules of use according to which the Library became accessible for Academicians and outsiders from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. daily. A personal register was introduced for each reader in which all the books issued to that reader during the year were recorded. The rules prohibited the Academicians to take books for outsiders. At the same time outside readers could receive books for periods up to six months under the guarantee of the Conference members. Manuscripts and valuable books could only be given out by the Conference permission. The conditions for readers to study at the Library were not very satisfactory, to put it mildly. On September 18,1835 Ya.I. Berednikov, the Librarian of the First Department was writing in his letter to the Managing Committee of the Academy of Sciences about the cold in the Library in winter, lack of a special attendant for BAN (there was just a single attendant for both the Library and the Mineralogical Cabinet), shortage of closets and other furniture, about the fact that the Library was almost never cleaned so that "acrid dust, getting into, covers books and manuscripts". Sometimes Berednikov and his assistant had to "set to brushes " themselves. In the same letter he was asking the Committee to provide the Library with "decent furniture" (two tables, an arm-chair and half a dozen chairs) for a case of "the President's and other nobles visit"6. Apparently, they paid no attention to such letters at the top. Sixteen years later (1851) the situation was still the same. In his appeal Ya.I. Berednikov was writing "that owing to bad set-up of the stove the two rooms in the First Department intendedfor studies of outsiders warm up insufficiently, so that in winter it is almost impossible to work for a long time here for people not of a fine health "7. Things were no better in the II Department. In 1866 A.I. Pershchetsky, a Senior Assistant Librarian was writing to K.M. Baer that for long years he had "patiently endured all the difficulties due to muddled Library affairs, there being no stoves, where ink used to often freeze because of cold, where we had of necessity to work sitting in our fur-coats and overshoes"1. Many such evidences are available. What a strong drive had a reader to have, what difficulties he had to overcome so as to work in his field of science! And how did the Academy of Sciences contribute to studies of stocks of its main library? In 1848 the Conference confirmed the "Regulations on Use of the Library of the Imperial Academy of Sciences " developed by the Committee. The third part of these "Regulations " was titled "On Issuing Books for Home Reading ". There we read: 4

See.: Voenny zhurnal. 1811. Ν 13. P. 64 Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 218. See.: Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov Rukopisnogo otdela Biblioteki Akademii nauk. Vyp. 2. XIXXX veka. M.; L., 1958. P. 17. 7 Ibid. P. 22. 8 Bibliologicheskij sbornik. T. 2, vyp. 2. Pg„ 1918. P. 83. s

6

112

Chapter VIII "§11. Right to receive books directly home from the Academic Library have only: 1. Members Ordinary of the Academy. 2. Science officers, such as: astronomers of the main observatory, museum curators, technicians, librarian assistants, archivists and translators of the Conference. 3. Counselors and the Secretary of the Managing Committee."

Paragraph 8 is of a special interest: "Manuscripts and rare printed books are entrusted to such outside visitors only who are known to the Librarians or some of the Academicians as educated people engaged in science "9. In my view the "Regulation " gives one an opportunity to imagine clearly how BAN was gradually transforming from a library generally available into a departmental one, such that it became difficult for a non-academic reader to get access to it, in contrast to the XVIII century. Its "readership " isolation from educational establishments, first of all from the university and the Public Library was growing. Unfortunately that process was taking an irreversible course. Here is one more example. In 1926 (!) byway of an experiment, they worked out "Rules for Dispensing Circulating Books From the Library of the Academy of Sciences " before considering them at the general meeting of the Academy. According to new rules, the right to have books from BAN had: a) Members of staff of the Academy and b) outside science researchers living in Leningrad and its suburbs who could receive circulating books by resolution of the conference of department managers of the Library approved by its Director or, in some cases, by personal decision by the Director. Manuscripts, engravings and particularly valuable editions were not to be released from the Library at all. Term of use of circulating books was not to exceed three months and half a year for Academicians. Mailing of books out of Leningrad could only happen by permission of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences. A special committee established by a resolution of the General Meeting of the Academy composed ofAcademicians I.Yu. Krachkovsky, V.l. Vernadsky, N.K. Nikolsky, S.F. Platonov and F.I. Uspensky failed to come to a common opinion. The point on granting non-members of the Academy right to use circulating books gave rise to doubts. It was proposed to present the issue of purposes and tasks of the Academic Library to the General Meeting. Now, what did the Library write by way of its reply to the committee of Academicians? It claimed it was necessary "to comfirm exactly the principles of the old Rules of 1848-1869, namely, that the Library should not assume functions of a public library, that it was exclusively a scientific Library obliged to serve scientific interests of Members of the Academy, the scientific personnel of its institutes and a limited circle of outside scholars "10. (No comments -V.L.) For fullness of information about accessibility of the Imperial Libraries of StPetersburg in the middle of the XIX century, I will give some extracts from the "Rules for Studying in the Public Library and for Reviewing It"u:

9

Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 21. Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 375-376. 11 The rules were confirmed by the Minister of People's Education on December, 23, 1870. See: Zhurn. M-va nar. prosvescheniya. 1871. Ch. 153, Yanvar'. P. 19-23. 10

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

113

1. The Imperial Public Library is open: a) for studying in it and b) for reviewing it. 2. Visitors to the library are admitted to work: a) in the reading hall and the cabinet for artists' work and for reading current year periodicals adjacent to it, and b) in the department of manuscripts by a special permission of the Director. Ladies can, if they so wish, study in a special room attached to the reading hall. 3. The reading hall is open for studies all year long, both on week-days and Sundays and red-letter days. On week-days the reading hall is open from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., and on Sundays and red-letter days: from October 1 to February 1 — to 3 p.m., and from February 1 to October 1 — to 4 p.m. The department of manuscripts is open for studies every day of the year, except Sundays and red-letter days, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. 4. Each library visitor receives a special sheet from the usher. 8. Requests of visitors are satisfied from a library by the reading hall and from departments. 9. Books entered in the catalogue of the reading hall are issued immediately, if they are not read by anyone else currently. 10. Books belonging to library departments are issued the same day by request sheets submitted from 10 a.m. to 2 p. m., and next day before noon by sheets submitted after 2 p.m. 12. If a reader's request for a book belonging to a department may not be satisfied due to some reasons, the respective request sheet is returned to the reading hall with explanation of refusal indicated, and in case the book was issued to another person with designation of the reading card number of the latter. 14. The number of works and volumes requested by an individual reader from departments is not limited. As for the library by the reading hall a visitor may not receive more than two works or more than ten volumes total simultaneously. 15. A reader may use books and manuscripts issued by departments for four weeks; having remained without use for one week books and manuscripts are returned to the department. On expiry of the above terms the visitor does not lose a right to request same works and manuscripts again, and they may be issued to him, provided these were not issued to another reader before his application. 16. Books issued from the library by the reading hall remain with the reader for the time of his stay in the library only. 17. Not issued for reading are: a) works banned by censorship, b) publications subject to secrecy regulations. 18. Issued for reading only by a special permission of the library Director: a) single copies (unica) and books of bibliographical rarity; b) publications released by issues, until those form a full volume; c) novels, stories, poems and dramatic works in living languages. 22. No visitors have a right to carry away with them books and other things belonging to the library. Visitors are not barredfrom bringing books of their own to the library (Italics are mine - V.L.) 23. Two days a week are appointed for general reviewing of the library: Tuesday and Sunday, at one p.m., except for those when the library is closed for studies (point 3). 26. Smoking in the library building is prohibited.

114

Chapter VIII

27. On entering the library street-clothes, as well as male hats, sabres, umbrellas, sticks, etc. are to be left under a number tag with the usher. As well as that tag one has to return the request sheet to the usher to get them back. Books brought to the library by visitors are also to be presented to him. Note: No charge is collected for keeping street-clothes, etc. ...In the eighties, overcoming great organizational difficulties, BAN managed to receive all the Kunstkammer building into its possession. By the middle of the XIX century the situation with collecting stocks improved, but that did not change the material situation of the Library: as usual it remained short of means to acquire literature, keep the building in order and support its servicing staff. Resolving almost any problem depended on the authority of department Director, his persistence, his ability to convince members of the Conference. Regulations of the Academy of Sciences of 1836 were not up to its new demands. Scholars were repeatedly speaking up for creating new professorship chairs, organizing relations with universities and scientific societies, attracting young scholars to the Academy, raising its financing. In 1882 Academician A.M. Butlerov wrote: "... the interest to Academic affairs and sympathies to the Academy itself have quite disappeared from the Russian society, initiative in scientific undertakings belongs to the Academy comparatively rarely but concentrates largely in various scientific societies; representatives of Russian science at international scientific congresses are quite often not Academicians but scholars not belonging to the Academy; Russian scientific works pass Academy publications and come off the print by alternative ways "u. Appointment of persons remote to science to key posts did not stimulate the development of native science either. Thus, D.A. Tolstoy, combining the posts of the Minister of the Internal and the Gendarmerie Chief in 1882 was appointed President of the Academy of Sciences in 1882. It is not surprising that such scholars of world fame as D.I. Mendeleev, A.G. Stoletov, I.M. Sechenov "were conspicuously absent from it"13 according to K.A. Timiryazev (who had written about the same state of things back in the 1860-ies). After D.A. Tolstoy's death (1889) Grand Prince Konstantin Konstantinovich Romanov (K.R.) was appointed to the post of the eleventh President of the Academy by the decree of Emperor Alexander III. He had been holding it for twenty six years since. Academician N.P. Karpinsky became the next President, elected by scholars themselves after the February Revolution. It happened in May 1917. Konstantin Konstantinovich came to a very poor legacy but he felt very resolutely. From his first day of managing the Academy the Grand Prince addressed his colleagues, Academicians Ya.K. Grot, K.S. Veselovsky, V.P. Bezobrazov, L.N. Maikov seeking their advice. He had kept working to increase financing successively and persistently. V.S. Sobolev, a historian was the first to have published a letter of economist V.P. Bezobrazov that the latter directed to Konstantin Konstantinovich after the Grand Prince entered the post of the President14. In that letter he wrote about the urgent tasks "of reanimating or even renewing the Academy, which now looks an institution ready for extinction, the one that lags far behind 12 Butlerov A.M. Russkaya ili tol'ko Imperatorskaya Akademiya nauk ν S.-Peterburge // Rus'. 1882. 20 Fevr. P. 20. " Timiryazev K.A. Sochineniya. T. 8. M., 1939. P. 147. 14 Sobolev VS. Avgustejshij prezident // Velikij knyaz' Konstantin Konstantinovich vo glave Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk. 1889-1915 gg. SPb.: Iskusstvo, 1993. P. 11.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

115

the great idea of its great founder and from it former high position with the state... The principle and inevitable way to solve such tasks is to strengthen considerably the Academy means, it being incapable to perform its mission now owing to their shortage ". In October 1892 the Treasury increased credits to the Main Physical Observatory by eight thousand rubles. Upon approval of the new staff roster of the Academy of Sciences by Alexander III (1893) scholars' salaries changed. Thus, it became 4,200 rubles for an Academician Ordinary (basic wages - 2,400, accomodation allowance - 600, rank - 1,200); 3,000 rubles for an Academician Extraordinary (basic wages -1,500, accomodation allowance - 500, rank -1,000). Vice-President and Secretary Permanent got annual raises in their wagess of 1,500 and 1,200 rubles respectively15. From 1894 "Memoires de l'Academie Imperiale des Sciences de St.Petersbourg" and "Bulletin de l'Academie Impdriale des Sciences de St.Petersbourg" published in foreign languages were renamed "Transactions of the Imperial Academy of Sciences " (Departments of Physics and Mathemathics and of History and Philology), and "Proceedings of the Imperial Academy of Sciences ". Materials there were mainly in Russian or in the language selected by the author. Also appeared the new publication — "The Byzantine vremennik" — edited by V.G. Vasilevsky and V.E. Regel (printed in 510 copies). For these purposes it was decided to grant from the State Treasury 3,500 rubles yearly. In the same 1894 the staff of BAN was doubled, its scientific staff increased to ten persons, and for book acquisition was granted 9,500 rubles. The President had also managed to solve difficult situation with "collecting of stocks in the form of a deposit copy". In 1897 A.A. Kunikand K.G. Zaleman, Directors of two departments of BAN submitted a note to the Administration of the Academy "On Constructing a New Building for the Academic Library ". It indicated that from 1714 to 1897 the Library stocks increased from 2,500 to five hundred thousand volumes. The note was met with approval and an architect was charged with drafting a preliminary cost breakdown for the new building. But for all that, in spite of a visible resuscitation of BAN activities, the principle attention in the capital was paid to another library. And that was natural. "The number of tickets issued by the administration of the Imperial Public Library for studies in the reading hall up to day is 11,000. The wave of requests is quite considerable". ("Novoe Vremya". September 13, 1889.) Or "The works on the annex to the Imperial Public Library are making progress. An imposing reading hall is planned for 400-600 persons (the old one accommodates 180 persons). Electric light will come from eight powerful frosted glass lantern-lamps. Ventilation will be electric in summer and thermal in winter, air will be regenerated every hour. The cost of the new building including its furnishings is 650,000 rubles". ("Novosti i Birzhevaya Gazeta". September 6, 1898) ...On January 8, 1901 the second fire in the history of BAN happened. Owing to a dilapidated heating system more than 1,500 volumes of valuable editions were lost. The event staggered everyone and, apparently, somehow changed the attitude of Academicians to the Library. 15

See: Sobolev V.S. Avgustejshij prezident... P. 18-19.

Chapter VIII

116

New arguments on the need to build a new depository already appeared in the appeal to the General Meeting. It emphasized the Library readiness "to realize its high educational task", it expressed conviction that "in the near future the Academic Library will serve the same centre for scholars and students in the part of the city on this side of the Neva that the Imperial Public Library has become long since for the rest of the city"]6. In 1902 following a resolution by the General Meeting of the Academy a committee was formed for designing the new building of the Library. However, it was only in 1907 that a special conference, in which representatives of the Ministry of National Education, the Treasury, the Ministry of the Internal and the State Control took part, charged R.R. Marfeld, Academician of Architecture to produce its architectural design. On May 27, 1909 five thousand rubles was allocated for the purpose. In 1911 the proposal to erect the new building was submitted for consideration by the Council of Ministers, and to the State Duma same year, following which in December, 1912 1,084,306 rubles was allocated for construction of the building17. The project evoked great interest in Petersburg. On June 4,1911 during the First All-Russia Congress on Librarianship the director of the II Department, Academician K.G. Zaleman presented his report "The Project of Construction of New Building for the Library of the Imperial Academy of Sciences "1S. Here are some extracts from his speech touching on description of the building and its inner structure: "The new library will be built on the plot of the Old Gostini Dvor, its pediment facing the square in the end of the University line (the so-called Tiflisskaya Street) and its facade along the Birzhevaya Line. It (the building) is divided into two independent blocks though connected to each other: the administrative and the magazineping, each with its own yard and drive-in entry. Beside it, across behind the plot of the Treasury there will be a dwelling house for the Academy attendants and its servicing premises. Beside its ground floor the administrative block has four floors more, each two sagen' high, while the reading hall passes through the second and third floors. The ground floor of that block is intended for a vestibule leading to the main stairs, the registry, public conveniences and a smoking-room for the public, usher's apartment, unpacking rooms, store-rooms, central heating and ventilation system; the front side room under the reading hall will be occupied by newspapers. The ground floor is mainly intended for the Manuscript Department. A large front hall, and if necessary, some of the side-rooms will serve as depositories for manuscripts, books of old print and some particular collections. On both sides of the large hall there are cabinets of the Director of Department I and the Manuscripts Custodian, while a manuscripts reading hall will be organized in the room adjacent to the hall and looking into the yard. In the end of the inner yard wing there are rooms for librarians of the Slavonic Department, directly connected with that part of the magazine where Slavonic books are kept. In the end of another wing opening into the street same wing rooms are allotted to librarians of Department II, while the major part of the transverse wing is intended for Russian maps and prints. 16

Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 264. See.: Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... P. 28. At the same time with the building of the Library on the same plot was constructed a house for curators of the Academy of Sciences. The building was started on April 18, 1913 and finished by the end of the year. 18 Trudy Pervogo vserossijskogo s'ezda po bibliotechnomu delu. Ch. 2. SPb., 1912. P. 140-147. 17

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

117

The first floor is largely intended for the library outward relations with its readers. Taking the main stairs or availing of an elevator the visitor enters either the hall for circulating books or the fore-room (which serves at the same time as a waiting-room for the library personnel) or, finally the catalogue-room; from the latter two there opens access into the reading hall that is two storeys, i.e. 12 arshin high with its gallery housing that will hold the full collection of Academic publications from two centuries of its existence. The reading hall with its 132 seats is equipped, same as the catalogue-room with a manual reference library along the walls, and also, like the circulating books hall has a book elevator. Next to it is the office of Director of Department II and behind it, in the yard annex are the archive, the units of foreign maps and prints and the librarians room. The transverse wing is occupied by the library personnel rooms and in the corridor bookcases between windows serve to form a number of niches for studies by the library personnel and privileged readers. In the street annex, beside the working-rooms there is a hall for the systemic catalogue, and close to it by the very entry, there is an office of the duty librarian. Thanks to such an arrangement of premises the librarians enjoy full convenience of applying for references they constantly need, while, on the other side, the traffic of the public is concentrated within the relatively narrow space, which simplifies monitoring it considerably. The second floor embraces, beside the librarians' and working rooms, the tea-room and the smoking-room for personnel and the mintzkabinet, various premises for foreign manuscripts and incunabula. The big corner room above the hall for circulating books is expected to have an exhibition of rare and outstanding works of print and manuscripts arranged, to be open on certain days to interested visitors. Most of the street annex is occupied with a lecture-hall for periodicals where the latest issues of periodicals from both Departments are exhibited. Meanwhile the corridors concentrate the traffic of light carts delivering books from the magazine to elevators mentioned above. The fourth floor is in full possession of the Asia Museum that, strictly speaking, does not merit such a name any more, since now, upon transferring all its material collections to the Ethnographical Museum of the Academy it only contains collections of books and manuscripts on every branch of Orientalistics. Owing to the special class of visitors it entertains, the Museum has its own reading hall arranged exactly as that of the Manuscript Department, offices of its Director and the Learned Custodian, the librarian rooms and the numismatic cabinet. Other premises and the large hall above the reading hall serve as a depository for manuscripts, wood engraving publications from East Asia and maps. Meanwhile printed books are stored in the seventh layer of the magazine. Thus the historically formed peculiarities of book collection found their proper expression in the assignment of the building aimed to manage and use them. Special collections — those of Slavonic manuscripts and Orientalistics literature are set quite apart to pursue their special goals favorably, however they remain in close connection with the chief institution, the library itself, its assistance needed for their florishing. There is no need to go into any details on the stairs, passages and telephones linking all the building that provide constant quick communications, on lighting, water supply and other details envisaged by the plan. I will only mention the photography workshop — unfortunately, we had to refuse having our own binding department — and proceed to a short description of the book magazine.

118

Chapter VIII The book depository represents a continuation of both annexes of administrative block around the second yard and ends in a transverse annex again. Beside its first floor that building has seven floors, or better to say, tiers one sagen' high each, so that two tiers correspond to a floor of the main building, and there remains a possibility, if necessary, to construct one more tier on the fifth floor. All that vast space is occupied with open iron closets with movable iron or wooden shelves, each of them a meter long. Both annexes have third passages between the closets, while the transverse annex only has passages along the windows. With low ceilings of reinforced concrete there is no need to have stairs, and passages are narrow enough. If all the space be used then the overall distance in the magazine may be brought to 42,000 m approximately, and counting thirty volumes to a meter it comes to 1,260,000 volumes total that would cover the library needs for a long time. The magazine is arranged in the following way: the basement tier is allotted to newspapers, and here, same as in all the other tiers from one to six, the inner annex and half of the transverse one are put at the disposal of Department I; the street annex and the remaining part of the transverse one is reserved for Department II. However, tier 7 is totally reserved for the Asia Museum; there are approximately 6,100 meters of length in it. The magazine is heated by electricity, and on both sides it has lifts for attendants and book-carts that are sent to book lifts along the corridors of the third floor of the block. Other details on the allocation of library departments by shelves, request fulfillment and so on can only be specified later. Now there only remains a hope to express that assigning the necessary sums will not be delayed, so that one may set down at last to the great work of providing the oldest library in the capital with its well-deserved premises that give it a real possibility to live up to its destination of serving science and the fatherland".

Zaleman's report was met with interest and evoked discussion19. A.R. Voinich-Syanozhetsky, Director of Library of the Military Medical Academy "attracted attention to the coal-bunker on the first floor of the building that, according to the speaker was to contain daily coal reserves. He pointed to the system of heating library buildings themselves, absolutely unacceptable in his opinion so far as it produced a threat of a fire without any specific need. An isolated heater building should be erected standing at a fair distance, from which the heating water pipes should run hot water to be received in the library building, as, for example, is done in the Library of Congress in Washington. A.I. Kalishevsky also supported these instructions drawing attention to the fact that the heater occupies a separate building in the Library of the Rumyantzev Museum as well. The speaker never contested but marked the inconvenience of such a design and explained it by shortage of means that the Academic Library could count on in the process of construction works ". Then there came the comments by other librarians. Ya.A. Lukashevich and P.G. Miloslavov noted the solution to be inconvenient with respect of delivery of books from the book depository to the reading hall. Expected delivery from upper floors was to be by an elevator; in case of its damage books would have to be carried down the stairs. Meanwhile, only one inner staircase was indicated in 19

Trudy Pervogo vserossijskogo s'ezda po bibliotechnomu delu. Ch. 1. SPb., 1912. P. 86-87.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

119

the plan. P.G Miloslavov considered seven sagen' length of the corridors connecting the book depository with the reading hall and lack of any means for mechanical delivery of books (carts, etc.) which indicated that in such a situation satisfying readers requests would become extremely slow. The speaker emphasized again the financial stringency of the Academy that forced it to refuse mechanical devices and resort to cheaper "human" labor. N.S. Safroneev found it irrational to locate manuscripts in two separate halls as shown in the plan since it complicated its usage. N.N. Vakulovsky expressed a wish to have not only a smoking-room, but a refreshment tea-room in the Library. Welcoming the proposal in the "Project" to offer visitors access to the alphabetical catalogue of the library as well, A.R. Voinich-Syanozhetsky pointed out that it would predetermine the need to have an identical second catalogue for the library personnel; meanwhile, the plan does not foresee any second premise for the catalogue-room anywhere. According to the speaker, preparation of the second catalogue is really implied by the Academic Library; as for its allocation free space on the library personnel premises may be used for it. Ch.K. Skrzhinsky expressed bewilderment of the fact that the "Project" only provided the use of the elevator for personnel only, and pointed out desirability of the widest possible access to the reference department of the Library. ...I do not know about you, my BAN reader, but I had had a chance repeatedly to learn through my own bitter experience of 1988-1993 that my colleagues-librarians had been so right in that distant 1911. Now, like then, no means were available for these purposes. Another quote, this time though from a report by the Director of the Moscow University Library, A.I. Kalishevsky, also presented during the congress. "The Russian academic libraries, — he emphasized, — in their current legal position are still striving through such a stage that similar libraries in Western Europe had already passed long ago... Our academic libraries are still far from such a position. Their situation is defined by a fatal term 'auxiliary institutes' — with all the consequences to follow. An auxiliary institution as such by the very essense of its position is fully dependent on the main institution it belongs to "20. In expectation of its new building, with the support of Konstantin Konstantinovich, the Academy President, the Library went on developing. I.A. Volter conceived compiling a general reference book on Russian libraries and distributed respective questionnaires on behalf of the Academy. Sections formed inside Department II on: books, manuscripts and periodics. Foreign experience in libraiy construction was actively studied. In 1912 the BAN staff was brought to 18 persons, to reach 34 together with free-lancing employees. Money assigned for purchasing foreign literature reached 19,000 rubles. The number of new compulsory single copy deposits reached 30,145 books and booklets in 1913 only.

20 Kalishevsky A.I. Κ voprosu ο poryadke upravleniya bibliotekoj // Trudy Pervogo vserossijskogo s'ezda... Ch. 2. P. 92.

120

Chapter VIII

.. .About the same time (1910) in Moscow there took place an event that merits our attention. I mean the "I.V. Tzvetaev Case". Tzvetaev was a Corresponding Member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, the director of Rumyantzevsky Museum21. After Schumacher's case, inspired within the walls of the Imperial Academy, the new one was originated in the depths of another agency, as respected — the Ministry of National Education. Both are interesting now due to their plot similarities, the course of investigation and the results. But that is far from all. Twenty years after I.V. Tzvetaev the "Case of Academician S. F. Platonov ", the director of BAN sprang to life (within the frame of a wider "Academy Case ") and by the end of the same century — another "BAN" case. Apparently, these are inevitable during transition epochs. Osip Mandelshtam has a fine article — "The Nineteenth Century", wherefrom come such lines: "The veins of every century run a strange blood not its own, and the stronger, historically more intense is that century, the harder is the weight of that blood"11. The poet speaks about retribution that, probably, makes victims inevitable. So, here is the I.V. Tzvetaev case. I shall quote some pages from an addition to the book by the Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences that Tzvetaev published separately. Tzvetaev published both for his own means and, following the custom sent them to Members of the Academy, its Vice-President and BAN23. "In summer, 1910 scholars and educated classes of Moscow, including rich persons known for their great philanthropy in education were astonished by the hard reprisals inflicted by the then Minister of People's Education, A.N. Schwartz upon his colleague from the Moscow University, a distinguished professor, Secret Counselor Ivan Tzvetaev, whom he had put under a criminal trial by the Ruling Senate and then removed him prematurely from his long service as a Director of the Rumyantzevsky Museum not awaiting the final decision on the case he himself inflicted. Professor Tzvetaev was removed on accusations of lack of action in power and of service half-heartedness. This accusation was put in connection with a theft from the Engraving Department of the Rumyantzevsky Museum, executed by one of its particularly diligent visitors, a man formerly rich, an owner of books, paintings and prints, an 'in' person in Moscow homes, both financial and aristocratic. That thief appeared to be Mr. Koznov, a Hereditary Honorary Citizen. The theft became public knowledge via newspapers; but soon Moscow learned that Director Tzvetaev himself having quickly found the thief surrendered him immediately to the authorities while the engravings were found by the Director at the same time and returned to the Museum to the three fourths of those stolen. There was no fault of the Director in that theft. Initially Mr. Shchurov, the custodian of the Engraving Department was accused of the unwarranted credulity; but when Minister Schwartz brought him to trial having fired him by his own authority, the Moscow Judiciary Board acquitted that custodian after examining the case in all detail. Now Shchurov, the former custodian is seeking compensation for damages from the Ministry of People's Education for putting him on trial and for his removal from service, before the verdict, as envisaged by the law. 21 22

Ivan Vladimirovich Tzvetaev — father of celebrated Russian poetess Marina Tzvetaeva.

Mandelshtam O.E. Slovo i kul'tura. M.: Sov. pisatel', 1987. P. 85. 23 The case of the former Minister of People's Education, Secret Counselor A.N. Schwartz and director of Rumyantzevsky museum, Secret Counselor I.V. Tzvetaev: Addition to the book of professor Tzvetaev: "Moskovskij publichnyj i Rumyancevskij muzei. Spornye voprosy. Opyt samozaschity. Moskva-Drezden, 1910". Leipzig: Tipografiya F A. Brokgauza, 1911. 28 p.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

121

Now, Minister Schwartz wished to be especially strict with Director Tzvetaev. Within a single year he sent five inspectors* in to audit the Rumyantzevsky Museum. For an incomprehensible reason of his, however, having bypassed experts of the museum service or the distinguished professors from Petersburg and other cities with his confidence, he manifested a particular lack of luck in his choice of inspectors. These inspectors, who in their education appeared not to be up to the mission entrusted to them, submitted reports that did not conform with reality and misled Mr. Minister Schwartz drastically. As disclosed then, though a Moscovite himself for many years he had never seen the Rumyantzevsky Museum. One of the inspectors reported a lack of catalogues in the Engraving Department of the Museum, not caring to acquaint himself with the vast inventory catalogue compiled by professor Tzvetaev himself during several years; failing to inspect a number of catalogues of the Numismatic Cabinet the same inspector forced Minister Schwartz to report to the Ruling Senate unnecessarily on lack of action by the custodian in describing the numismatic collections; the inspector's report about the plaster casts of the Rumyantzevsky Museum appeared to disagree with the reality and so on. Now, while acting with some particular haste to put Director Tzvetaev under the Senate criminal trial, Minister A.N. Schwartz never wished not only to check evidences by the inspectors, but not even bothered to reread attentively the papers written on the case in his own name. Because of that accusatory documents by the Minister of National Education appeared to be of very questionable worth in the Senate, so that the Ruling Senate offered Senator A.N. Schwartz to conduct an additional inspection of the Museum at his will, due to insufficient substantiation of his accusatory papers. For all this the Minister was refused a legal judicial investigation of Director Tzvetaev, to say nothing of his preliminary removal from his post (Senate Resolution of December 17, 1909. Decree of March 15,1910). It would seem that such a resolution by Department I of Ruling Senate should serve a proper inducement for the accuser to be particularly wary and careful in further persecuting an expert in museumship Professor Tzvetaev. But providence had it that Minister A.N. Schwartz would again, not troubling himself with due diligence toward this outstanding process that he himself caused, fully rely upon the writings of his subordinates. Two months later Minister Senator A.N. Schwartz sent to the Ruling Senate his third and last Report on Tzvetaev being unfit for the post that he had been appointed to by Minister N.P. Bogolepov and General-Adjutant P.S. Vannovsky, repeating again his old request to dismiss preliminarily Secret Counselor Tzvetaev from his Director's post. Waiving all the appropriate serenity Minister A.N. Schwartz signed again this third time that accusation composed in a dogmatic tone without bothering to read it at all. This third accusatory document appeared even fainter and flimsier than the two preceding. This judicial statement strange in the abundance accusations unacceptable in their meaning lowered the impact of the whole trial. Three new inspectors forced a Doctor of Greek polite letters a more than quarter of a century Professor of that science with the * In order that the reader could imagine general picture, I present one paragraph from "Birgevye Novosty" of 1910: Over the telephone on April 10 (from Moscow to Petersburg). "Professor Adamovich is finishing inspection of the Rumyantzevsky museum. Except of already known abuses is revealed missing of a lot of rare books, substitution of books in costly bindings with books without bindings. Are stolen some valuable paintings and works of sculpture. Inspection ascertained that all these abuses happened owing to the evident negligence —on Museum director, professor Tzvetaev's part, who continually was away and did not visit the Museum. Tzvetaev's retirement is inevitable. "

122

Chapter VIII Moscow University Minister A.N. Swartz to report to the Ruling Senate that there existed in the Rumyantzevsky Museum a Greek coin of Tsar Spartaki, a tsar who never reigned anywhere or at any time. With their impossible report from Moscow on the ill-starred Stradivarius's violin A.N. Schwartz was caught in an inconceivable predicament of a minister who, by way of official correspondence had been seeking in the Rumyantzevsky Museum a violin that nobody ever presented to it and that it never had... And again the Ruling Senate did not honor Schwartz's move to dismiss Director Tzvetaev from his post in the Rumyantzevsky Museum. True to its duty and first priority to incorruptibly maintain stipulations of the law, in this case the Ruling Senate also followed its right path well treaded over the two centuries. The Senate issued a copy of those accusation to Director Tzvetaev for explanations. Seeing nothing but overall inaccuracies and unjust reproaches, witnessing that the accusing powers did not know either the Rumyantzevsky Museum, or its director's activities, Professor Tzvetaev wrote and printed a book in his own defense, named "Moscow Public and the Rumyantzevsky Museums. Controversial Issues. Experience in Self-Defence " (Moscow-Drezden, 1910) and presented it to the Ruling Senate. That book revealed various impressive negative aspects of persecution that Minister A.N. Schwartz whipped up against Director Tzvetaev, punished prematurely. Ministerial accusatory documents displayed: a) exceptional exaggerations and inaccuracies in conveying the facts that the Secret Counselor Tzvetaev was blamed with; b) confusion in the documents examined on the side of the accuser; c) insufficient knowledge of his Ministry papers by Mr. Minister; d) inadequate knowledge of the historical life-style of the Rumyantzevsky Museum on the part of Minister A.N. Schwarz and e) such haste and such lack of circumspection, that particularly numerous errors gained their place in the Ministry papers: against the first rules of arithmetic the Minister's Report to the Ruling Senate also informed with a particular reproach towards Director Tzvetaev on a project of money allocations completely devoid of practical sense, the one that Director Tzvetaev openly protested against in the same Ministry of National Education and which he completely rearranged there together with Minister Deputy Ulyanov... And thus accusatory documents by A.N. Schwartz against Director Tzvetaev are composed without proper reserve from beginning to end. Professor Tzvetaev's book is full of documented explanations of such falsities in the accusatory papers by the Minister of National Education; these were also formulated in short in the "Reply Theses" by the victimized Director with references to the respective pages of his book. So there is no need, especially after the Ruling Senate pronounced its judgement, to repeat proofs from that book against the flimsy statements by the accusing power. It is quite enough that the Ruling Senate found no possibility to recognize information in the reports by the Minister of National Education A.N. Schwartz valid, and the very case was dropped. That decision by the Department of the Ruling Senate was adopted on May 26, this year and the next day newspapers in Petersburg, Moscow and other cities spread the news all over Russia. Accusation instituted by A.N. Schwartz in the Ruling Senate found no honor and the case was declared terminated; but the public injury in services and the material ruin of professor Tzvetaev stayed uncompensated for up to this time. Mr. Minister removed Director Tzvetaev from the Museum prematurely, "attaching him to the Ministry of Na-

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

123

tional Education" and never thinking about either his material losses or his dishonor in services. Of course, A.N. Schwartz would not have done such a thing if he would only waited for the resolution of the case he instigated himself in the Supreme Court of Russia, himself bearing that high title. That punishment without fault that soiled the good name of the victim is even harder since in this case a director, an honoured Professor is punished during his 40-ish year of state service; Minister A.N. Schwartz fully ignored, it would seem, his undoubtable merits: 1) in the face of the Rumyantzevsky Museum, 2) in the face of Russian Science and 3) in the cherished memory of the Emperor Alexander III resting in peace. What reasons could the compiler of the accusation have to forget these substantial aspects of activities of victimized Professor Tzvetaev one finds hard to understand from the outside. Audiatur et altera pars. (One should listen to the other side as well). ...1914 came. On July 19 (August 1) Germany declared war on Russia. The time of great ordeals was on. What was our Academy in 1914? It consisted of three Departments: physics and mathematics, history and philology, and the Russian language and polite-letters. The system of Academic institutions included the Library, the Archives, the Physical Cabinet, the Chemical and Physiological Laboratories, the Laboratory in Anatomy and Physiology of Plants, the Main Geophysical Observatory, the Botanical and Zoological Museums, the Geological and Mineralogical Museums, the Pushkin House, and also some Commissions: on Archaeography, the Permanent Historical, the one on publishing A.S. Pushkin works and others. Attached to the Department of the Russian language and polite-letters was a class of polite literature. Before the war the Academy organized a new institution: The Polar Commission (its library is in BAN). At that time such eminent scholars were working in the Academy of Sciences as: physiologist I.P. Pavlov, chemists P.I. Valden and N.S. Kurnakov, mathematicians A.M. Lyapunov, A.A. Markov, V.A. Steklov, astronomer A.A. Belopolsky, geologists V.l. Vernadsky and A.P. Karpinsky, meteorologist and physicist M.A. Rykachev, seismologist B.B. Golitzin, botanists A.S. Famintzin and I.P. Borodin. In the field of humanities there worked philologist A.A. Shakhmatov (the Director of Department I of BAN), orientalists V. V. Bartold, K.G. Zaleman (the Director of Department II of BAN) and S.F. Oldenburg, historians A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky, F.I. Uspensky and others. In October 1914 a hospital for the wounded was opened in the Academy of Sciences24. In 1915 it started to be named "Hospital in the Name of Grand Prince Konstantin Konstantinovich for Wounded Warriors at the Imperial Academy of Sciences, under the Patronage of her Imperial Majesty Grand Princess Elizaveta Mavrikievna". The Academy offered its Great Conference-Hall in the main building, part of its Anthropology and Ethnography Museum premises, a room in the Slavonic Department of BAN for the hospital. The war brought to a stop works to complete the new building of the Library; in 1916 it was fully handed over to the hospital, financed, as it were — and one should take a special note of it—through voluntary contributions. It was generally managed by Vice-President P. V. Nikitin (died on May 5,1916) and Academician I.P. Borodin. According to the Report on BAN activities during 1917 that quotes the data by Α. V. Koltzov, from October 16,1914 to December 14,1916 24 About the influence of war on activities of the Academy of Sciences see: Koltsov A.V. Sozdanie i deyatel'nost' Komissii po izucheniyu estestvennyh proizvoditel'nyh sil Rossii. 1915-1930 gg. SPb.: Nauka, 1999. P. 8-12.

124

Chapter VIII

two hundred and seventy seven soldiers were cured of wounds in that hospital. On May 26, 1917 it was closed". The Academy also took care to preserve scientific and cultural valuables. The beginning of the war (July 19, 'Old Style') found A.A. Shakhmatov, the Director of BAN Department I on leave in the Saratov Province. Just three days later, on July 21 he wrote to the President of the Academy: "Today I learned about the war declared on us by Germany. Would You recognize, Your Imperial Highness the need to request the Highest order to carry to safe places the following book collections among others ". And proceeded further to enumerate: the archives and the library of the Pochaevsky Monastery; the Volynsky Eparchial Repository of Antiquities in Zhitomir; the archives and the library of the Lutzk Catholic Monastery; the Museum of Svyato-Bogoroditzsky Kholmsky Fraternity; the Svyato-Simonovsky Cathedral archives in Brest26. On November 29,1914 a General Meeting of the Academy was held and A. A. Shakhmatov spoke to call for saving of monuments "that are in the area of military operations". By resolution of the Meeting a special committee of nine Academicians was formed to include A.A. Shakhmatov, N.P. Kondakov, A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky, F.I. Uspensky and V.M. Istrin. Representatives of the Academy were sent to the action area. For example, E.F. Shmurlo headed operations to save valuable monuments on the Western front, specifically from Lvov; F.I. Uspensky and N.Ya. Marr — on the Caucasian front27. In 1914 the War Archives sprang up at the Manuscript Department of BAN to accumulate letters, post-cards, caricatures, popular prints and other materials related to the war theme28. According to S.F. Oldenburg "a large number of valuable and interesting documents" was collected there29. Two more cases from the Academy activities during the war are to be marked. On January 21, 1915 in conference of the Department of Physics and Mathemathics V.l. Vernadsky read out the declaration by A.P. Karpinsky, N.S. Kurnakov, N.I. Andrusov and Prince B.B. Golitzin on organizing a Commission to study natural productive forces of Russia (CSNPFR). "In the historical epoch we are living through, the Imperial Academy of Sciences must not stay aside from the movement that has seized and affected all the institutions of our Motherland, — the declaration told. — And its aspirations, as those of everybody else are directed towards the same goal: to develop and support Russia s strength and power that are necessary as much to fight successfully the armed enemy as to reduce as much as possible the war burden both now, at its peak, and after its end". The declaration marked the urgency of developing Russian productive forces, of freeing it from economical dependence on Germany, of raising its domestic industry, agriculture and trade30. CSNPFR existed up to 1930. The second Academic Commission, the Commission to Study Tribal Composition of the Population of Russia (CSTCRP) with a task of "scientific and proper accounting of consequences of war " was formed in the beginning of 1917. In that connection S.F. Oldenburg wrote: "the struggle still continues, but it cannot last endlessly... a clear understanding of the tribal composition, particularly of those parts of the country that lie on both sides of our European 25

Koltsov A.V. Op. cit. P. 11. See: Sobolev VS. Dlya buduschego Rossii: Deyatel'nost' Akademii nauk po sohraneniyu natsional'nogo kul'turnogo i nauchnogo naslediya 1890-1930 gg. SPb.: Nauka, 1999. P. 53. 27 Ibid. P. 53-54. 28 Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 35. 29 Koltsov A.V. Op. cit. P. 12. 30 See: Koltsov A.V. Sozdanie i deyatel'nost' komissii... P. 13. 26

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

125

and Asian borders, where they are contiguous with lands of our enemies will have enormous significance "31. These eventful activities of the Academy during World War I influenced respectively the work of the main academic Library. At that time its stocks were added to most intensively. By the beginning of 1917 the BAN book collection exceeded one and a half million volumes, that is to say that within seventeen years (from 1900) it more than doubled. Department I received about 310 thousand volumes, whereas Department II got less than 100 thousand. Taking into account the general situation in the country sources of such a build-up were quite diverse: from depository copies to purchases, exchange, and private contributions. One should comment specifically on those collections of literature that reflect the social and political struggle in Russia. I mean illegal and foreign publications by the Social-Democratic Party, the collection of papers and correspondence of P.L. Lavrov, the V.D. Bonch-Bruevich library delivered from Switzerland and many other materials. They were all preserved in the Manuscript Department32. After the 1917 February Revolution the archives of the Police Department, the Secret Police Department and the Gendarmerie Provincial Department were all handed over to BAN. (Who could then foresee the fatal role these and other similar archives would play in the Library lot ten years later!) One more episode in BAN life of that time which I would like to pause on. Considerable attention is given in library literature to the description of V.l. Lenin's visit to the Manuscript Department of BAN in 1917". I noticed that a whole number of publications quote one and the same fragment from V.D. Bonch-Bruevich article published in the magazine "The New World" in 1945(?)34: "When Vladimir Ilyich returned from his emigration after the February Revolution, — he wrote, —while questioning me about various aspects of literary activity in Petersburg, he remembered about illegal section of the Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. He started questioning me about it in detail, and also was quite interested to know whether packets from abroad reached the Academy and in what state: whether they were opened or sealed as all the other letters. I told him all that in detail and he was so much interested in those things that once he went to the Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences where he got acquainted with Vsevolod Izmailovich Sreznevsky, the custodian of that department. Staying there for more than two hours, Vladimir Ilyich took great interest in that very section so widely demonstrated to him, and generally paid close attention to the Manuscript Department itself. Particularly he took interest in illustrations to unique books, paying his special attention to miniatures, vignettes, initial letters and illustrations, splendidly done in most subtle water-colors. At the time he visited the Departments of Newspapers and Periodics that simply fascinated him. He rapidly examined endless rows of shelves and repeated all the time: 'What an enormous wealth, and how all that is necessary!'. After expressing thanks to Vsevolod Izmailovich for the things he showed Vladimir Ilyich apologized for the time he took up and instantly asked whether it was possible to come to work at that Department". 31 32 33 34

Sobolev VS. Dlya buduschego Rossii... P. 58. See: Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 270-271; 273-276. See: Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 298; Istoricheskij ocheik i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 44-45; 47. Bonch-Bruevich V.D. Lenin i Biblioteka Akademii nauk//Novyj mir. 1945.N 8. P. 101.

126

Chapter VIII

Why so important an event only became known twenty eight years later? It gave rise to my doubts as to whether the visit really took place or it was a piece of fiction by V.D. Bonch-Bruevich. But what for? Here are some results of my search for truth. Vladimir Dmitrievich did not indicate the exact date (month, day) of Lenin's visit to BAN, he only named the period, 1917 after the February Revolution. I appealed to a competent source, the materials of V.l. Lenin's "Biographical Chronicle ". I am reading on page 43 of its fourth volume (March-October, 1917): April Lenin visits the manuscript department of the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Vasilievsky Island, University Emb., 3) and gets acquainted with the stock of illegal Bolshevik literature kept there. Ϊ., "Archive Work", 1939, Ν 2. P. 16. I., "TheNew World'. 1945. Ν 8. P. 101. I am looking into "Archive Work" (1939), issue two. There is a reference to V. Bonch-Bruevich article "On Archive Stocks of Men of Literature". P. 16: "... by 1917 the largest stock of illegal Bolshevik literature was concentrated in the Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences that Vladimir Ilyich, when he arrived in Petrograd, visited himself and left very satisfied with it". That is all. Next comes "The New World" (1945). And again an article of the same author with the quotation already well-known to the reader. So we are in a vicious circle. Who can tell details? Yes, of course there is V.l. Sreznevsky! The event was not only to impress itself in his memory but, apparently, in his records also. I find an article by A.I. Kopanev35. A circumstantial work of one and a half print-sheets. On pages 236-23 8 it tells in detail about the February Revolution and Sreznevsky's attitude towards revolution in general. But again there is not a word about Lenin's visit to BAN. On June 29,1936, V.l. Sreznevsky dies. Three years later in his "Archive Work" V.D. Bonch-Bruevich mentions for the first time Vsevolod Izmailovich in connection with Lenin's visit to the Manuscript Department. Next I turn to BAN archives and find an interesting document there. It appears that in the course of compiling a collective monograph "The History of the Library of the Academy of Scienses of the USSR. 1714-1964 " its authors addressed some former members of the Library staff who, as it was supposed, could eyewitness the event. Authors of that appeal letter were asking "to name persons who spoke about Lenin's visit to the Library". On May 20, 1960 Vladimir Popov, a former student of Academician A. Shakhmatov responded to that message from Tashkent: "Dear comrade... I will gladly respond to Your wish to recollect my work in the Manuscript Department of the Library of AS, old building, the 'Tolstovsky' room, as it had been called then, back in 1914-1917, and Lenin's visit to the Department in 1917, who for the first time took to working in the 'rotunda', at V.l. Sreznevsky's table, while I stayed working in the 'Tolstovsky' room, somewhat isolated from stocks between itself and the rotunda. Alas, I did not see him, because it seemed to be indiscreet to run to the end of the 35

Kopanev A.l. Vsevolod Izmailovich Sreznevskij — bibliotekar' Biblioteki Akademii nauk // Sb. st. i materialov Biblioteki AN SSSR po knigovedeniyu. Vyp. 3. L., 1973. P. 214-245.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

127

Department of Periodics singulalrly to have a look; nor did I see him the second time either when he visited the 'Tolstovsky' room itself, where we gathered all that we managed to save in the first days of the February fires. At that time I was absent, and when I came back in the end of 1919 -the beginning of 1920, it were Sreznevsky, Nat.Aleks. Vukotich, Fedor and Ilya, the guardians and, upon his entry, A.A. Shakhmatov, while he was sitting at Sreznevsky's table in the rotunda at the original Radzivil chronicle, who told me about that fact. I only saw the latter somewhat later when returning from Smolenschina, where I used to live in quite a remote place among the peasants. It is interesting that the very first phrases by Alexei Alexandrovich addressed to me were exactly about Lenin's visit to the Manuscript Department. Somewhat agitated, he wanted to be the first to share that message with me and was quite disappointed to hear that I already knew about it*. And so V.D. Bonch-Bruevich, though not present in the library at the time, described properly that event in BAN history, evidently following the words of its staff employees". And one more source, this time a printed one, from the collection of documents "Lenin and the Academy of Sciences"36. Under number 146 there I find once again a reprint of V.D. Bonch-Bruevich article from "The New World", without its last paragraph, however. Here it is, the last paragraph from the article of 1945 (P. 102): "It is very important to remember all that nowadays in particular, in the year of the national celebration on the occasion of two hundred twentvith anniversary of the All-Onion Academy of Sciences, because I think that modern men of science and future workers of our historical science will mark with gratitude that work of the Manuscript Department of BAN and its zlorious figures. Academician A.A. Shakhmatov and V.l. Sreznevsky, work most useful and risky to the highest degree " (highlighting mine - V. L.). Thus, dear reader, I would reply negatively to Your question whether V.l. Lenin visited the Manuscript Department of BAN in April 1917. On the other hand, where Lenin's assistance was actual and extraordinary important, was the handover of half-finished building of the Library, then occupied with hospitals and evacuation centres, to the library for its specific needs. From 1918 the Academy repeatedly appealed to the Narkomat (People's Comissariat) for Military Affairs with a request to return the Library building. One of the participants to the delegation of scholars to Lenin, Academician V. A. Steklov wrote later: "For a year and a half (up to 1921) all the attempts to return that building to the Academy remained futile... We were forced to appeal to Lenin with a special deputation, and when he listened to the report on the situation in the Academy he gave instructions to hand the building over to the Academy immediately and to call those guilty in non-performance of orders to account"11. In the same "Lenin and the Academy of Sciences" collection there one finds notes by N.P. Gorbunov in connection with Lenin's instruction to clear up the matter of returning the building of the Library, occupied by a field hospital, to the Academy of Sciences (P. 96): January 27-February 5, 1921 "To put the premises of the Library of the Academy of Sciences (Petrograd, corner of Birzhevaya Liniya and the Tiflisskaya Street), now occupied by the Combined reserve * After I had finished this chapter, BAN received the new fundamental book about A. Shakhmatov (Makarov V.l. «Takogo ne byst' na Rusi prezhe...»: Povest' ob akademike A.A. Shakhmatov. SPb.: Alteya, 2000. 416 p.). I found there no materials concerning Lenin's visit to BAN's Manuscript Department in 1917. 56 Lenin i Akademiya nauk: Sb. dokumentov / Pod red. P.N. Pospelova. M.: Nauka, 1969. 342 p. 37 See. Lenin i Akademiya nauk... P. 96 (prim.).

128

Chapter VIII field hospital Ν 763, at the disposal of the Academy of Sciences. From document attached one may see that Trotzky ordered to clean it on 1 .V. 1918. Nothing done ever since. Necessary to check, execute and, perhaps, start a procrastination inquiry. Issued on 27.1.1921 (see entry Ν 70). On February 1 papers with c. (comrade) Lenin's resolution were sent to RMC (Revolutionary Military Council) of the Republic (as of Memo Ν 753/up) with a request to report on results urgently. On February 5 (exit Ν 2341/41114) Chief of the RMCR General Department reported that investigation of that case was charged to c.Anskin, and that the evacuation unit of the Chief Sanitary Department ordered the Petrograd Chief of the Sanitary Unit to clear the premises of the Library without any delay"38.

However, BAN building was in a neglected state and needed urgent repairs. These were to take a whole year together with preparations to move the library. The move from the Kunstkammer to Birzhevaya Liniya, 1 as such began on October 12, 1922 and ended on October 8, 1924. In other words, relocation of almost three million stock of BAN (by that time count) took exactly two years39. Today, seven decades later we may say that it was not a mere physical relocation of stocks from one building to another, it was the beginning of the hardest trial for the Library under the new historical conditions. It old life, not easy but generally comprehensible for its curators remained in the past forever; the new political reality was subordinating both the Academy of Sciences and BAN to itself powerfully. It was not a book-learner or a librarian as it used to be once in Russia, who stepped forth as teachers or interpreters of relations with the power, now the power itself was yearning for a rigid control over any action in the sphere of science and culture. A totalitarian epoch was beginning. The events happening in the Library speeded up reformation of its administration. In 1919 the Director of Department II, Academician M.A. Diakonov died. The Academy General Meeting entrusted the Director of Department I, Academician A.A. Shakhmatov "to assume provisional management of the Library Department II"40. But it did not last long. According to historian A.A. Alekseev "the lot of A.A. Shakhmatow is known. As the Director of the Library of the Academy of Sciences he himself had to fuel stoves, and because of extraordinary efforts of lifting firewood under starvation he developed ileus; he died on August 16, 1920"4[. The Academy devoted a special issue of "The Communications of the Department of Russian Language and Polite-letters" to his obituary. Academician V.M. Istrin wrote in his article "A.A. Shakhmatov as a Scholar": "...years will pass... And then they will seem a legend, discussions of the fact that a famous Russian scholar who devoted forty years of his life to selfless service to his dear science, Professor and Academician A.A. Shakhmatov was eventually forced to carry on his weak shoulders two-arsheen logs to the fourth floor, kept falling exhausted under their weight, then sawed and axed them and thus speeded up his untimely death. Yes, it 38 See also: Istoricheskij arhiv. 1961. Ν 5. P. 35. " A b o u t removal into a new building see: Istoriya biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 340-343. 40 See.: Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 56. 41 Alekseev A.A. Pravedniki slavyanskoj bibleistiki //Russkoe podvizhnichestvo. M.:Nauka, 1996. P.274.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

129

will become a legendfor future generations. But for us, his contemporaries this is not a legend but a living reality, severe, sad and... disgraceful. The memory of this reality will never desert us up to the end of our days "A1. Academician N.K. Nikolsky replaced Academician Shakhmatov in BAN. On January 15, 1921 the General Meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences listened to a report of the Library Committee on reorganizing the Academic Library. The General Meeting decreed: "Introduce a post of a single Director of the Library ofthe Russian Academy of Sciences, the Library itself to be divided into four departments: department I of printed books in Russian, department II of printed books in foreign languages, department III of printed books in Slavonic languages, and IV— the manuscript department"™. Nikolai Konstantinovich Nikolsky held the post of the Director of BAN up to 1925. After the Civil War scientific life in the Academy was beginning to take shape very slowly. In summer, 1921 the government adopted a decision on the routine of official organization of foreign study tours for scholars. At the same time the Narkomat of Education authorized resuming the international publications exchange "of a type of former committees on international book exchange", while the Academy was recognized as the "main publisher of scientific works". S.K. Pilkin, senior librarian of Department II headed the Bureau for Book Exchange (BBE)44. In the beginning of 1922 Sovnarkom (the Soviet of People's Comissars, Resolution N° 847 of March 15, 1922) gave the Academy of Sciences the right of duty-free import of foreign books, devices and instruments. The same document permitted export of collection material for exchange, manuscripts for printing in other countries, instruments and devices for repairs, and so on. At last, in June, 1925 CEC (the Central Executive Committee) of the USSR and the Sovnarkom of the USSR adopted a Decree "On Acknowledging the Academy of Sciences the Highest Scientific Institution of the USSR". The Decree stated: "To acknowledge the Russian Academy of Sciences the highest Ail-Union institution reporting to Sovnarkom of the USSR and acting on the basis of its Regulations ". This document was signed by the CEC Chairman A.G. Chervyakov, Sovnarkom Chairman A.I. RykovandCEC Secretary A.S. Enukidze45. In the same time (1925) unexpected changes in the administration of BAN took place. Academician N.K. Nikolsky engaged "into inconsiderate conflict with the Board of the Academy of Sciences on the issue of library equipment and had to resign from the post he held". President A.P. Karpinsky complied with his request but nonetheless "expressed his gratitude and sincere thanks to him " for "his exceptional services to the Library of RAS"46. The acting Library Director became Academician S.F. Platonov, a historian. Later Sergei Fedorovich was elected BAN Director. The General Meeting confirmed the Corresponding Member S.V. Rozhdestvensky his assistant in scientific work. 42 Istrin V.M. A.A. Shakhmatov kak uchenyj // Izvestiya otdeleniya russkogo yazyka i slovesnosti Rossijskoj Akademii nauk, 1920. T. 25. Pg., 1922. P. 42. 43 Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 56. 44 By 1924 the number of scientific institutions abroad, from which BAN received books according to book exchange, reached 500 (in 1917 there were 107, in 1918 — 36). See: Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 326-327. 45

See: Sobolev V S . Akademiya nauk i Sovetskaya vlast' ν period stanovleniya totalitarnogo rezhima

(1918-1930 gg.) // Peterburgskaya Akademiya nauk ν istorii akademij mira: Κ 275-letiyu Akademii nauk: Materialy mezhdunar. konf. Τ. 1. SPb., 1999. P. 90-96. 46 Kukushkina M.V., Voronov V.N. Biblioteka A N SSSR za 50 let. 1917-1967 gg. // Materialy X nauchnoj konferentsii Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR, 18-20 oktyabrya 1967 g. L„ 1970. P. 12.

130

Chapter VIII

Two new departments appeared in the Library structure: number V, cartographic and number VI, the reading hall. Granting the Academy some privileges, the new powers in the Kremlin did not want to miss the initiative and continued more and more insistently to interfere with its inner life*. On June 21,1927, Sovnarkom of the USSR adopted the Decree "On Starting a Committee to Examine the Report on the Activities of the USSR AS during 1925-1926". The committee with V.P. Miliutin at its head, included A.N. Bakh, V.P. Volgin, A.Ya. Vyshinsky, N.P. Gorbunov, P.S. Osadchy, M.N. Pokrovsky and D.B. Ryazanov47. The final document by Sovnarkom bore a dull title "Report on the Activities of the All-Union AS during 1925/26 and its Operations Plan for 1927/28" but it already contained the "proper" theses, those that later would sound an alarm bell. While the activities of institutions of natural sciences was evaluated positively, humanitarian sciences were severely criticized. For instance, in his conclusion A.Ya. Vyshinsky, member of the committee wrote that "some AS institutions have no right to exist at all, and some of them have no right to exist as independent institutions ". Further on the report spoke about the isolation of the Academy from other institutions in the country, lack of coordination of its field research with the State Planning Committee. Shortcomings in operations of its administrative and technical staff were especially stressed. The committee recommended a "thorough reorganization" of personnel and its "staff improvement". The Academy answered Sovnarkom in November, 1927. Its permanent secretary S.F. Oldenburg declined many of the critical remarks on field studies, on relations with the other scientific and state institutions of the country, the planning of scientific research. As to the statement by A. Vyshinsky, he said: "One may only assume that such a groundless criticism could only result from some inexplicable sad misunderstanding". This was a test exchange of blows between the sides. Outwardly everything looked decent in scientific institutions. As late as in autumn, 1928, historian N.M. Druzhinin, on his research sabbatical in Leningrad, was still full of positive impressions from what he saw in the city, its libraries and archives. Here are some fragments on BAN from his diary48. "8.IX. It was a fresh cloudy morning when I arrived in Leningrad. Extraordinary excitement in the streets. Beautiful Nevsky. Traces of summer repairs everywhere. Went by horse-cab through the Koniushennaya square to the House of Scientists. My room is in parade quarters overlooking the Neva and the Peter and Paul Fortress. ...I stralled down the embankment to the Academy of Sciences. In the Secretariat I met S.F. Oldenburg. Filed the application on studies. 13.EX. . ..Headed towards the Academy of Sciences — first to Secretariat (got the clearance to study in the Archives, the Library and the Pushkin House) ... decided to call at and * By 1929 in the Academy of Sciences there were 9 institutes, 7 museums, 2 0 committees and also library, archive, stock of academic editions, publishing house, typography, bureau of international book exchange (48 institutions as a whole). 47 See: Koltsov A.V. Sozdanie i deyatel'nost' komissii... P. 110-116. 48 See: Dnevnik Nikolaya Mihajlovicha Dnizhinina //Voprosy istorii. 1997. Ν 1. P. 130-132; 134; 136; 138.

Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

131

check on the Academy Library hours, saw the inscription "The Manuscript Department", entered, just in case, and was amazed to find that just there they kept all the materials 1 was interested in. P.G. Vasenko very kindly provided the inventory of Dubrovin's archives for my disposal and I had time to look it through almost completely, found many interesting things there and what was most important — a copy of the constitution from Zakrevsky's papers that was so hard coming to me and a copy of some unknown manuscript by Muraviev. At the same time I wrote myself up to the reading hall, so spacious, bright and quiet; if (?) will be found here, I will readily prefer this room to poky, stuffy and noisy hall of the Public Library. 15.IX. ...After the museum had couple of hours to do some work in the Academic Library, did in paralel the inventories of Dubrovin's archives, looked through the first files ordered. 18. IX. ...In the Manus[cript] Department of the Academic Library took time copying Muraviev's French note... Looked through the inventory of Dubrovin's archives and kept marvelling at the wealth of the material he had collected. 20. IX. ... Spent all day, from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. in the Manus[cript] Department of the Academy of Sciences, extracting material from Dubrovin's archives. 25. IX. Finished looking through the first part of Dubrovin's papers and the inventory of Dubrovin's archives in the Acad[emy] of Sciences. 26. IX. ...After the P[ublic] L[ibrary] went to the Ac[ademy] of Sciences. Looked through the inventory of Turgenev's archives and found many interesting things there... 27. IX. ... In the Academy finished extracts from Dubrovin's collection and found some materials in Turgenev's archives... Most severe wind from the sea for the whole day. The Neva and canals all rose and threatened a flood. 30. IX. I am in Moscow. Keep examining excerpts received and summing up my Leningrad study tour. What did I obtain in the result of my trip? ...4) Due to my search in various archives (the Central Historic Archive in Leningrad, the Manuscript Department of the Academy of Sciences, the Manuscript Department of the Public Library, the Pushkin House...) I expanded my archive horizon, developed my own feeling of an archive document and gained initiative in archive search. ...6) Percieving the city through its historical monuments, urban landscapes, the Decembrists typography and the street crowd I lived through the tragic aspect of Petersburg and related to it the tragic fate of Decembrism...". Meanwhile life was bubbling over on the surface. Attacks on the Academy continued. As it is always in such cases, the media weighed in first. In May, 1927 the "Leningradskaya 49

Cited from: Perchenok F.F. Akademiya nauk na «velikom perelome» // Zven'ya. Vyp. 1. M., 1991. P. 177. See: Koltsov A.V. Op. cit. P. 112.

50

132

Chapter VIII

Pravda " newspaper published an article "Academic Shrine ". Everything surfaced there again: clogging of the administrative and technical staff with "has-beens", isolation of scientific research from practice, plundering of the national means, and so on. It was a deliberate move: discussion of the new Regulations of the Academy of Sciences was in progress. In June Sovnarkom approved at last the Regulations debated for a year and a half. The number of Membership of the Academy was increased from 45 to 70. The election campaign was starting. The right to nominate candidates to the AS was now given not only to scientific but to social bodies of the country. To execute it in May, 1928 the Leningrad Regional Committee of the Ail-Union Communist Party (of Bolsheviks) passed a special secret "Directive on Running the Election Campaign for the Candidates to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR". The Committee for People's Control of the Workers' and Peasants' Inspection (WPI) started numerous investigations. After the completion of some such checks "Leningradskaya Pravda" writes: "The lower rank employees of the Academy joke bitterly: 'If Russia would return to a Monarchy, the Academy of Sciences would have a ready government for it. All the ranks are filled except for the crowned head"49. Articles flash headings: "The Academic Shrine is Quite Safe", "Prince Dunduk", "Academic Grabbers ". "Nothing else could one expect of the have-beens who are at work within the walls of the Academy, those who worry about their own prosperity far more than about the flourishing of Soviet science. Nothing else could one expect of the not so pure dealers who are dishonouring the name of an authoritative scientific organization", — so the newspaper summed up the first checks50. Academic administration was not silent either. Its letters to "Leningradskaya Pravda" remained preserved. On June, 15 A. Karpinsky, A. Ioffe, S. Oldenburg sent a request to the newspaper asking to publish a denial of the article "Prince Dunduk". The newspaper Editorial Board did not comply with that request. It was getting worse and worse. In July, 1928 an article appeared "Our Esteemed Bitter Oranges " which sharply criticized the work of the Pushkin House and the Lexics Comission. On July, 19 Academician V.M. Istrin addressed a letter to the Presidium of RAS: "...consider it essential to explain that as a Chairman of the Academic Scientific Committee I would in no case take upon myself the initiative of engaging in polemics with a newspaper article of modern Soviet press. I would consider such an initiative an abasement of my dignity as an Academician of the Academy of Sciences"51. * * *

Hence, a compromise was out of the question. A new, global opposition this time was hatching between the methods and style of the Academy of Sciences and its institutions, already formed and the demands of Soviet power. In that opposition the principal active parties were not individuals like Schumacher and Lomonosov in the XVIII century, or Tzvetaev and Schwartz in the beginning of the XX century, but the authorities of the Academy of Sciences and Sovnarkom of the USSR. Thus during the "Year of the Great Turning Point" a trail was blazed to the "Academy Case ". It only remained to find an excuse. And in 1929 it was found in the Library of the Academy of Sciences, the Pushkin House, and the Archeographic Comission.

51

Ibid. P. 113

CHAPTER IX

THE "ACADEMY CASE 1929-1931" The "Academy case" marked the beginning of mass repressions based on fabricated charges. Studying the materials 70 years later cannot leave anyone indifferent. When touching those documents one goes through mixed emotions — from indignation and annoyance to pity and sympathy. A staggering human drama that left its ineffaceable mark in the lots of the defendants still awaits its thorough scrutiny1. Ideological traps and selfdenial of scholars, souls expansive and egoistic, honesty and unscrupulousness, solidity and irrationality — all these intertwined into a solid mix there. The event was a tragedy of the Academy of Sciences, its old features already gone by that time. "A rupture from among those that form the misfortune of Russian life and prevent it from developing a true succession, such that may only offer a true covenant of creative work in life "2 occurred there and then. I have selected some documents, dated from October, 1929 to early January, 1930 that tell us what the Academy and its scientific workers had to go through and also how it had begun. Document Ν l3.

Telegram by S.M. Kirov and Yu.P. Figatner To I.V. Stalin and GK. Ordzhonikidze

October 20, 1929. URGENT

From Leningrad MOSCOW, CENTRAL COMMITTEE, ALL-UNION COMMUNIST PARTY cc. STALIN and ORDZHONIKIDZE. According to clandestine data the 'Nondeciphered Fund'4 of the Library of the Academy of Sciences contains originals of abdications by Nikolai and Mikhail, the 1 See: Rostov A. [Sigrist S.V.] Delo chetyreh akademikov // Pamyat': Sb. St. Vyp. 4. M., 1979; Parizh, 1981. P. 469-495; Brachev VS. «Delo» akademika S.F. Platonova// Vopr. istorii. 1989. Ν 5. P. 117-129; Perchenok F.F.: Akademiya nauk na «velikom perelome» // Zven'ya: 1st. al'manah. Vyp. 1. M., 1991. P. 163235; «Delo Akademii nauk» // Priroda. 1991. Ν 4. P. 96-104; Akademicheskoe delo 1929-1931 gg.: Dokumenty i materialy sledstvennogo dela, sfabrikovannogo OGPU. Vyp. 1. Delo po obvineniyu akademika S.F. Platonova / Otv. red. V.P. Leonov. SPb.: Biblioteka RAN, 1993. 296 p.; Vyp. 2. Delo po obvineniyu akademika E.V. Tarle: In 2 parts. / Otv. red. V.P. Leonov. SPb.: Biblioteka RAN, 1998. 746 p.; Leonov V.P. Akademicheskoe delo // Bibliografiya. 1998. Ν 1. P.85-94; Brachev VS. «Delo istorikov» 1929-1931 gg. SPb.: Nestor, 1997. 131 p. See also reviews: A.Yu. Dvornichenko, V.M. Paneyakh, N.N. Pokrovsky // Otech. istoriya. 1998. Ν 3. P. 134145; Potapova N.D. // Otech. istoriya. 2000. Ν 2. P. 196-200. 2 KarpinskyA.P. Pis'mo A.V. Lunacharskomu ot 24 marta 1918 g. // Dokumenty po istorii Akademii nauk SSSR. 1917-1925 gg. L.: Nauka, 1986. P. 38. 3 Documents NN 1-3 were published in the magazine: Istochnik: Dokumenty russkoj istorii. 1997. Ν 3. P. 108-110. 4 Uncatalogued (non-ciphered) BAN'S stock represented a collection of private libraries, bequeathed to

134

Chapter IX archives of the Central Committee of Social Revolutionaries, the Central Committe of Constitutional Democrats, Metropolitan Stadnitzsky, two rolls of manuscripts on dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, materials about emigration in 1917, proclamation of the Soviet opposition from 1918 and other materials. This is known to Academicians Oldenburg, Platonov and others, five persons all in all. There are reasons to believe [availability of similar materials] in the archives of the Pushkin House, the Tolstoy Museum and the Archeographical Commission. We regard expedient the following routine of extraction: Sergo [Ordzhonikidze] in his capacity of the Narkom of RKI (Workers and Peasants Inspection) sends the following telegram to Figatner: "Propose Commission on Checking Staff Academy of Sciences gets firsthand view of factual contents of materials in NonDeciphered Fund of Library Academy of Sciences, library and archives of Pushkin House, materials Archeographical Commission and Tolstovsky Museum. Send materials of historical and political sinificance to Moscow. This is your personal responsibility". One is to consider Academicians capable of denying the existence of such archives, while we may by no means reveal them the sources of our data. Take into account the covening of Session of the Academy on October 28. There are grounds to fear destruction and stealing of materials. Their extraction may yield some new threads. An immediate reply is necessaiy by Monday at the latest due to misgivings of destruction or stealing of materials. Advise Your agreement bringing OGPU in on technical execution of this operation under Figatner's commission supervision. KIROV and FIGATNER.

Document Ν 2. Telegram by Yu.P. Figatner and S.M. Kirov To I.V. Stalin and G.K. Ordzhonikidze October 21,1929. URGENT From Leningrad MOSCOW, CENTRAL COMMITTEE, ALL-UNION COMMUNIST PARTY cc. STALIN and ORDZHONIKIDZE. Secret service information confirmed. Found inNondeciphered Fund of the Academy of Sciences: originals of abdications by Nikolai and Mikhail, archives of the: Police Department, Third Department, Nikolai Registry, Secret Police Department, Central Committee of Social Revolutionaries, Constitutional Democrats, Metropolitan Stadnitzsky, Special conference with Nikolai, War Office, Treasury, Duke Maklenburg-Strelitzsky, 66 volumes of Konstantin Romanov's diary — each volume locked with a special lock. Everything now sealed, guard posted. In Pushkin House there are seven boxes of archives of Dzhunkovsky, Chief of Gendarmerie Corps, part of Konstantin Romanov's archives and so on. Two premises with materials sealed in Pushkin House. Report on war to Nikolai and large archives of Prince Mikchail Nikolaevich found in the Archeographical the Academy of Sciences by former owners, handed over for temporary keeping or brought together there after the October upheaval. For example, among collections there were Libraries of the Marble Palace, of Grande Princess Elena Pavlovna, of I.I. Sreznevsky, of the nobles Mikhalkovs and many others. By 1924 when by efforts of 24 workers was started sorting and cataloguing of non-ciphered stock, it came to 1,369,640 items.

The "Academy Case 1929-1931'

135

Commission. Bookcase with materials sealed. Starting detailed roster of documents tomorrow. There are grounds to believe not everything found yet. Advise whether to send documents to Moscow. We consider it expedient to initiate a special government three person commission under Figatner to investigate the fact of nondelivery of materials by the Academy of Sciences, this can help us to expose very much. Will offer candidatemembers to the commission separately. Standing by for instructions. FIGATNER, KIROV. Document Ν 3 Extract from Minutes of the Political Bureau, Central Committee of All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevics) of October 25,1929. Ν PB/quest.s. Top secret By questioning CC members on 22.X.29 Consider Resolve 23. Telegrams of Figatner and 23. Accept proposal by c. Ordzhonikidze to Kirov on 20 initiate, as per prorosal by cc. and21.X.29 Kirov and Figatner, a Commission of Workers' and Peasants' Inspection including Figatner (chairman), Peters and Agranov to receive files and investigate the case in full. SECRETARY OF CC Document Ν 4 s Verbatim record session of Special Commission including comrades Figatner, Peters, Agranov October 24,1929 (QUESTIONING OF S.F. PLATONOV) Figatner: Sergei Fyodorovich, in connection with those materials discovered in the Library, the Pushkin House and the Archeographical Commission the WPI Narkomat now ordered to initiate a special commission including three persons: Peters, Agranov and myself. The Commission arrived here and wants to pose some questions to You. Agranov. Well, my question is this. Tell me, please, when did You learn that the original acts of abdication of Nikolai and Mikhail Romanov are preserved in the Manuscript Department of the Academy of Sciences? Platonov: I cannot name the exact date, but I think, probably, in 1927. Agranov: From whom did You learn it first? Platonov: I will tell you. This story is accidental enough. I became the director of the Library in 1925.1 knew nothing about this. Not long before his death Modzalevsky handed over a quarter slip of paper [stating] that Senator Diakonov and Staritzky were 5

Nachalo "Dela" Akademii nauk // 1st. arhiv. 1993. Ν 1. P. 100-105.

136

Chapter IX sending to the Academy through (the late) Kotlyarevsky two acts for custody in the Library. Since the Manuscript Department was under my management, I went to Sreznevsky (head of the Department), presented the paper and asked: "Is it with You?"— says: "Yes." —"Is it in the inventory?"—"It is". I do not know whether the book is safe or have you had it? There was a package from Staritzky, Ν 607, and there was a quadrangle on its side (a diagonal and some mark). I say: "What is it?" — "It is a mark showing that we received [it]". "Prove it, please." He proved and I ordered to keep that quarter together [with the rest]. Agranov: Did You inform Oldenburg that such acts were on store? Platonov: Yes, but I should say I did not attach any unique significance to it, because I knew from publication sources that the text was altered several times. Agranov: According to Shulgin's memoirs the original that Nikolai signed had an erasure. Platonov: Did not notice any. Ought to say, attached no importance. Agranov: You said, 'in 1926'? Platonov: I do not remember: 26 or early 27. Agranov: Issued no instruction? Platonov: No. Figatner: Told Oldenburg only? Platonov: Only him. Figatner: I had put a question (when we had a conversation with You), You mentioned that You informed the Presidium. Platonov: I do not remember. Maybe. Agranov: Say, Staritzky, is he not a mythical person but really a Senator? Platonov: Yes, he was a Senator of the Provisional Government. Diakonov — Academician Diakonov seems to have been a director of one of Library Departments. Agranov: Why do You believe it necessary further to keep this document secret and retain it in a package, signed 'from Staritzsky'? Platonov: I did not consider it necessary to make it public due to a general instruction that was valid then and is still valid now. Figatner: On the basis of resolution by the commission? Platonov: Yes. Agranov: Did You inform the commission what kind of documents You had? Platonov: Yes, the list of documents was reported to the cmmission. It was rather a difficult thing for me. The point is, it was in 26-27.1 proved to myself that there was great disorder in the Manuscript Department... Agranov: What sort of a disorder? Platonov: For instance, this document had also been registered incorrectly. Next, a whole set of other errors were noticed on Sreznevsky's part. It was just during that period that I accumulated a lot of such material. If I were in Leningrad during the time when all that was happening (report to Sovnarkom on what was at our disposal) it would all have been different. But as far as I know even Oldenburg was not here at that time. I was away as well. I did not know about that paper for rather a long time. If I knew, I would not have permitted this. This was, of course, quite a disorder. The institute declared the total quantity of material. Taken separately the Library did not. Under such impressions I requested to instigate an inspection of the Manuscript Department. It was done. The

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

137

document on it is in the archives of the Library. That inspection revealed some disorders and entailed some practical measures and proposals. We considered it possible to return some of the materials back to their owners, and decided to add something to Library stocks... We began to open Berg's archives. All that was presented to the Presidium as a result of the inspection. The Presidium agreed with the conclusions by the commission. All that was reported to the Library and remained without any attention. Peters: Is that in the minutes of the Presidium? Platonov: I think, it is. Figatner: When was that? Platonov: 26, beginning of 27.1 requested another inspection. It took place, and one must say we disclosed non-performance. Now, in the result decisions were left without action again. Figatner: Why? Platonov: But one cannot trace everything... I did not accept the post with the Academy Library for the third year, since I felt myself powerless to remove the person causing all that disorder. Figatner: Who was the cause of disorder? Platonov: Sreznevsky. Agranov: I agree these were Sreznevsky and the person who, having signed the document, went wrong... Platonov: Sreznevsky alone. Agranov: An obvious lawlessness. But did you realize that one could not conceal a document of national importance from the Soviet power? Platonov: How do you mean, conceal? Agranov: In a package after the name of some obscure Staritzky. Absolutely impossible. How could You keep the document? Platonov: Excuse me, I have a different point of view. During these years the Academy preserved a lot of materials. It really preserved very much. There is no proof that it had lost any single document. I am stating this in confidence. Agranov: I did not say so. Platonov: We looked at it this way: we have a reliable repository. .. Figatner: But the acts of abdication are kept there. Platonov: I explained my point of view. These acts seemed not to be unique for me. On the other hand, we have no idea that those papers are of actual importance for now and the future. Figatner: Mikhail's abdication is in single copy. There is no doubt for us that no alternative [abdication] by Nikolai exists. The document signed by Mikhail himself is unique. Platonov: We know, that he (Nikolai) hesitated. I am decisively not ready to accept this formula: 'concealing the document'. The Academy of Sciences never concealed. Peters: But You knew that a search for that document was on? Platonov: I did not. Agranov: You could regard the document not to be unique but to keep it, the document of historical importance, without a name, in a package, in a drawer of Sreznevsky's table... Platonov: It was mentioned in the inventory. Figatner: Entered as Ν 607? Agranov: Why not legalize the act of abdication by Nikolai II? Platonov: But there was never any malicious intention and there could be none.

138

Chapter IX Agranov: Suppose we had evidences by persons questioned today who tell us it was deliberately concealed. Platonov: I strongly object! Agranov: I am not saying You did it, but the fact is, some special importance was attributed to that document and there was no wish to make it public. Were there such a disposition? Peters: Was there an intention to limit the knowledge of that document to a small circle of persons? Platonov: Within the Library? Peters: No, within the Academy. Platonov: I can say nothing to this. Agranov: Was the document handed over by Staritzky and Diakonov via Kotlyarevsky to Sreznevky? Platonov: Yes, and as a proof that we conceal nothing I can refer to the fact, how we were handing over the Third Department card index. During these years we had no reproofs on anything concealed. I do not know whether You know, but using those cards one may always learn what was concealed. So there is not a single reproof that anything was lost or concealed. Here remainned bundles of documents that the workers simply forgot with us, and nothing was concealed. You are presenting to me a point of view that remained unknown to me — that the government kept searching for those documents. Agranov: I did not say so. The point is that the documents that ended up here are not at the disposal of those stocks that were authorized to hold them. Platonov: Nobody from the Sovnarkom Management Agency ever reprimanded us that we had interesting documents and that these were not returned. Figatner: Back in '26 did You see a receipt with the late Academician Modzalevsky to the effect that Diakonov handed that document over to Sreznevsky? Platonov: I cannot exactly quote that quarter sheet because I only had it for half an hour. Figatner: Who headed the Library before You? Platonov: Academician Nikolsky did. Figatner: Did Academician Nikolsky know about this? Platonov: I do not know. Figatner: And before Nikolsky? Platonov: The point is that before him the Library was divided into two departments. Shakhmatov was working in one, and Diakonov in the other, but I do not know how they alternated. Figatner: Did Academician Shakhmatov know about this? Platonov: I do not know. Agranov: I wanted to ask the question concerning the Dzhunkovsky Archive kept in the Pushkin House. Did Dzhunkovsky himself apply to You for his access to that archive? Platonov: Yes, he came twice. Agranov: When? Platonov: Last time was in winter. He kept flicking around quite frequently in Leningrad. So I cannot give a guarantee, perhaps it could even be in spring this year... Figatner: And did he happen here before that? Platonov: He was around frequently. Agranov: Did he have a permit to work on the archive? Platonov: He had access to work. This was a prerequisite on which he handed the Archive over in 1923.

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

139

Figatner: The Archive was handed over in Ί 8. Platonov: I do not know. This story is known to me from the spring of '24 or the beginning o f ' 2 4 . Kotlyarevsky was abroad. No one was standing in for him. There was some mishap with Modzalevsky: due to some denunciation that he sold something belonging to the government Modzalevsky was arrested and when he was set free, he declared that had an urgent request to appoint some Academician as Director. This was in February-March, '24.1 was asked to assume that job provisionally, until Kotlyarevsky's return. And at first Modzalevsky told me that he had archives on temporary storage that had to be transferred to the Library. Figatner: Did You know the content of those archives? Platonov: No, I did not. The archives were in a bookcase. Figatner: Who transferred them to boxes? Platonov: [They did it] by Kotlyarevsky's order. He returned from abroad in '24. This was in the beginning of the summer, he returned with the first steamboats and died in the spring of 1925. Modzalevsky showed up and said: "archives, I do not know what useful we may do with them. They had to be transferred to the Library, but the process grinded, because there was no space in the old premises of the Library". Agranov: You knew the value of the archives and of historical documents. Do You think it is appropriate (and why, if You think so) that You allowed Dzhunkovsky, Chief of Gendarmerie to work on the archives concerning his own activities? Platonov: It was when he came here. He addressed... Figatner: How many times was he allowed in? Platonov: Twice, I think. Agranov: Why was it allowed? Platonov: I do not know. Peters: Was it discussed? Platonov: No. Peters: Do you have a Board, Academic or Scientific? Platonov: We do, but there is the rule that persons are admitted to do work on director's permission only. Figatner: Who gave that permission? Platonov: Conventionally speaking, Dzhunkovsky had to get a permission signed by the director. Figatner: Who gave it? Platonov: Perhaps, it was me. Figatner: Was it twice? Platonov: It was, but I do not remember when it happened first. Figatner: Where did he work? Platonov: In study premises. Figatner: Were the materials brought there? Platonov: As far as I remember, so it was. Figatner: The materials were brought to him. What did he do? Platonov: I do not know. Figatner: May it be that he took them to work at home? Platonov: No, I think, since the materials had to be presented to senior custodian. Figatner: Did You check what he could take along? Platonov: I do not think so, nevertheless the reading room is supervised. Agranov: Did Sergei Fyodorovich Oldenburg also attach no importance to information that there is the act of abdication in the Academy of Sciences? Platonov: No. I repeat this was beyond our perception that these documents could

140

Chapter IX be of interest as having importance for the present and the future. We regarded them as exclusively historical documents. And now I also think they have no other impotance. Agranov: If there are no other documents in nature... Peters: Historical importance... have they? Agranov: The revolution swept aside and eliminated... Platonov: So it did. Those documents, we looked after them and you received them. Agranov: Sreznevsky declared that he understood the illegitimacy of keeping... Platonov: We have not a single example of items missing, not a single thing. Perters: It needs proving. A man kept working, but only Allah knows what he might take away with him. Figatner: Some part of his inventory was cut off. There is an act stating that the end of that document was obliterated. Platonov: But the list does end there in the Pushkin House inventory as well. Figatner: But the Dzhunkovsky inventory lacks correspondence in its numbers. Agranov: Did anyone approach You with a request to send materials to Moscow? Platonov: Nobody. Agranov: Were the materials issued to Dzhunkovsky? Platonov: No. He used to take some items himself. Agranov: Do You think that he took something? Platonov: Yes, but legally. He laid down such prerequisites. You said the case went on since ' 18. That case began in Ί 5 , when he went to the Caucasus. Agranov: When did he hand the archives over? Platonov: It was before me. Peters: In '19 Dzhunkovsky went on trial, was convicted and sentenced to concentration camps until the end of Civil War. Meanwhile a government institute it ought to inform that there were such archives here. Platonov: I was not an Academician then. Peters: But the sentence is valid for You as well. He was convicted as the Chief of Gendarmerie corps, he concealed some documents from the state that can by no means be considered his personal papers. These are the documents of the Chief of Gendarmerie, not the papers of Mr. Dzhunkovsky. Hence, these materials should have ended in our archives so that they might be used properly. And You were looking at it this way: Dzhunkovsky handed something over and is laying down prerequisites... Platonov: I do not embark on any judgements here. I was not an Academician in 1919... Peters: But You were in charge of these things for a very long time, You knew when he went on trial. And now, according to You, it appears you considered those archives personal property, You — a person very competent in this respect who knows to whom such documents belong. Can that be private property? Platonov: I am no judge of that, because I knew Dzhunkovsky not as a defendant but a man enjoying citizenship. Lived in his own apartment, was giving lessons (he was teaching physical culture in school), nobody prevented him moving around. He had all the rights and that was the way the Academy looked at him. I know nothing of Dzhunkovsky trial. I know he used to do time in the Smolensk prison. Ryazanov summoned him to Moscow from there in connection with the trial of Malinovsky, agent provocateur. Thanks to Ryazanov Dzhunkovsky got his political acquittal and the fact that he had been convicted — that I never knew. I know that his political arrest was exonerated. I beleive he could be considered a full-fledged citizen. Figatner: Do You suppose he might have taken some documents with him?

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

141

Platonov: I hesitate to say so. Peters: I am not saying that he goes around free illegally, but I am putting my case so: he cannot claim those archives as his private papers. Platonov: I assume we received these archives. I had to do with that case from the summer of 1925 to 1928. If he took something away from the Pushkin House it must have happened after I retired from both the Pushkin House and the Library 6 . Figatner: I have no more questions. Document Ν 57. Yu.P. Figatner's report on work of the Commission of WPI at AS USSR. October 28,1929. Classified. To C. ORDZHONIKIDZE, Chairman, Central Control Commission of the Ail-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks). I am reporting briefly on our findings in the Academy of Sciences and the situation developed there. /. The abdication of Nikolai and Mikhail. The abdication of Nikolai and Mikhail reached the Non-Deciphered Fund of the Academy of Sciences in summer 1917 from Senator Staritzky and Academician Diakonov, who was appointed Senator by the Provisional Government. These two documents were then kept by V.l. Sreznevsky, Director of the Non-Deciphered Fund. Academicians Diakonov, Shakhmatov, Sobolevsky, Nikolsky, Platonov, Oldenburg, professor Rozhdestvensky, and possibly others knew about keeping the abdication. In view of statement by Academician Platonov that there are several versions of abdication of Nikolai and his conjecture that the document may not be original, on agreement with c.c. Peters and Agranov I convened a special meeting with Academicians Fersman, Oldenburg, Borisyak, Professors Nikiforov, Schegolev, deputy chief of the Leningrad Department of Central Archive and an expert on autographs attending. Inspection of signature went on from 2 to 5 p.m. The meeting unanimously established that it was the original signed by Nikolai and Fridericks, his Minister of Court; the abdication by Mikhail was established to be original too. The act of authentication stating that abdications had been signed by Nikolai and Mikhail was signed by all the aforesaid persons. 6 On October 8, 1928 after the resignation o f Academician S.F. Platonov from post the General Meeting recommended Academician S.A. Zhebelev (1867-1941), a historian of antiquity to the post of the Library Director, but during 1929 the actual work of the Director was carried out by the Senior Learned Custodian of BAN, bibliographer F.I. Pokrovsky. In October, 1929 he was discharged and the director job went to I.I. Yakovkin (initially invited to the post of Assistant Director). His transfer to the Academy of Sciences happened by way of a recommendation by the Section of Scientific Workers, although S.F. Platonov proposed the candidacy of Professor D.N. Egorov, a wellknown bibliographer and organizer o f library activities.

It was I.I. Yakovkin who passed information about keeping of the acts of abdication to Yu.P. Figatner with whom he actively collaborated. When he used information about the most interesting materials of the Manuscript Department that he received from V.l. Sreznevsky, Yakovkin in the course o f the "case" raised a query about his discharge. Soon after this Sreznevsky was arrested and repressed. See: 1st. arhiv. 1993. Ν 1. P. 108. Prim. Ν 18, 19; Akademiya nauk SSSR i CC VCP (b). 1927-1930 gg. // 1st. arhiv. 1997. Ν 4. P. 126. 7 Documents N N 5-8 are cited according to: Istochnik... 1997. Ν 3. P. 110-114; 116.

Chapter IX

142

According to Your instructions I passed the Acts of abdication by Nikolai and Mikhail, as well as the Act of that Commission to c. Siomushkin on signature. 2. Room 14. In room 14 we discovered and confiscated: part of the Archives of Police Department; the Third Department; the Gendarmerie Corps; the Peter and Paul and the Shlisselburg fortresses; archives of the Central Committee of Constitutional Democrats; part of archives of the Central Committee of Social Revolutionaries; materials of the Petersburg Secret Police Department; archives of Sladkovsky, a Commissar of the Provisional Government, that is, material of exceptionally high importance, according to Agranov, the one offering a possibility to identify quite a number of agents of the Secret Department; archives of Metropolitan Antony Staritzky (he is in Solovki now); code of the Gendarmerie Department from the first half of the XIX century; papers of Dolgorukov, the Gendarmerie Chief; papers of secret agent Statkovsky; case files on Gertzenshtain's murder; a folder of the Kiev Committee to Defend the Constituent Assembly; files of a special committee of the Vindavsko-Rybinsky railway in the folder of the Gendarmerie Corps; files of regimental committees for election to the Constituent Assembly; regulations by the Gendarmerie Corps; a copy of an article by P. Volgar on the decade of Soviet power and resolution of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences on it, and so on. 3. The Pushkin House. There we took the archives of Dzhunkovsky, the former chief of the Gendarmerie Corps. Until 1918 these archives were preserved as those of Governor Dzhunkovsky. It was in 1926 that the Commission with the SNK (Soviet of the People's Comissars) in charge of the affairs of the Academy of Sciences was informed on preservation of those archives, as well as on the archives of Count Valuev, the diary of Konstantin Konstantinovich and some other materials. Comrade Sergo, I think it necessary to bring your attention to the fact that Dzhunkovsky's archives were kept in a garage without any guard, and that according to a statement by Izmailov, the learned custodian of the Pushkin House, later confirmed by Academician Platonov, Dzhunkovsky was allowed to work with his own archives several times. Last time he was admitted there was this year, and for about a week he kept visiting the Pushkin House daily, was allotted a separate room on the premises of the Pushkin House and boxes [of archive materials] were brought there for him according to his instructions. What had he taken from those boxes, what had been done to things taken from those boxes — nobody knows anything. As per Izmailov's statement confirmed by Platonov, it was repeatedly that Dzhunkovsky had had access to his archives before. The Pushkin House also has archives of Gurevich, a Member of the Central Committee of Constitutional Democrats and some other materials. We sealed the iron room in which Gurevich's and other materials are kept. 4. Archeographical Commission. From Archeographical Commission we took wartime reports of the Army Headquarters to Nikolai the Second and part of archives belonging to the Russian Historical Society. The aforesaid materials found in room 14, as well as Dzhunkovsky's materials were packed into 13 boxes and 2 packages, sealed with the seal of the Leningrad WPI and handed over to the Leningrad GPU for dispatching to Moscow. * #

*

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

143

Beside the above the following materials were found: 1. Archives of the Kharkov Social Democratic organization dating to 1905-06. They include a note-book of one of the participants to the Party Congress of that time. 2. Original minutes of conferences of the Social Democratic faction in the fourth State Duma. 3. Voluminous archives of "Liberation" magazine (Struve); there is a lot of exceptionally valuable material in those archives. 4. Archives of the illegal Red Cross in Siberia for the year 1916. 5. Materials of the Special Conference under Nikolai the Second belonging to Oldenburg. 6. Archives of Bogucharsky. 7. Manuscripts by Purishkevich. 8. Archives of Berg, the Polish ruler. 9. Archives, diaries and correspondence of Konstantin Romanov. 10. Trepov correspondence with Nikolai the Second and some other materials. All these materials are sealed and put under guard. I also sealed two cellars of the Nondeciphered Fund. As per a statement by the director of that Fund, Sreznevsky (original orthography retained -V.L.), there is a lot of materials extremely valuable and interesting for us there. Illegal publications. There is also extremely valuable important printed material on historical revolutionary struggle extending to the sixties in the Manuscript Department of BAN. There is much valuable on the history of our Party and some of its local organizations. I think the Lenin Institute may hardly have much of what is available from this Library. There is also a lot of interesting material in the Pushkin House — about twenty folders. Undoubtedly, our further acquaintance with the content of these cellars as well as that of room 14 and the Pushkin House will yield us much valuable and interesting material. Cartographical Department of the Academy of Sciences. I believe it necessary, comrade Sergo, to also bring your attention to the fact that there is a Cartographical Department in BAN. That Department collected more than fourty thousand maps — geographical and others. I cannot be definite, but there are reasons to believe that secret maps are also there, i.e. maps they conceal from us. It is not out of the question that there are also maps of earth depths. Commission for Studying Productive Forces of the USSR. I consider it also necessary to bring your attention to the Commission for Studying Productive Forces of the USSR. There are grounds to assume that in this Commission for Studying Productive Forces there is much interesting and important but unknown to us. Chemical Institute of the AS. One may refer the same to the Chemical Institute of the Academy of Sciences. As to chemical institutes, I have a right to suppose it because of a statement by its learned secretary and custodian, namely that they have secret material unknown to anybody on gases and defence. Professor Krylov. In our discussion Professor Krylov stated that he has drawings of the Navy from the Tsar's times and materials related to artillery.

144

Chapter IX Academician Vernadsky. Academician Vernadsky informed me that the Keps' stock contains sealed publications of the Committee on Raw Materials, Military and Technical Aid from 1916-17. This gives grounds to believe that other employees of the Academy of Sciences have materials in their at homes. GPU arrested several persons and one of them, Pokrovsky who seems to be a deputy head of Non-Deciphered Fund gave evidence that they illegally forwarded the Archives of Uniates to Estonia for Poland. One may presume that several other archives were also sold. Andreev, the learned custodian of the Archeographical Commission is also arrested by GPU, and certain material was found with him. Leningrad Central Archives. I consider it necessary to call your attention to the following: my acquaintance with the situation in the Academy and its book depositories, my talk with Academicians Platonov and Schegolev and some other employees of the Academy of Sciences give me grounds to believe that things are worse than bad with the Leningrad Department of the Central Archives. Documents disappear and are stolen and the content of some arhives in the Leningrad Central Archives is quite unknown to us. According to some of those whom I talked to, there are archives there not only of historical but of quite actual significance. GiproMez; Geological Committee and museums. I would also consider it necessary to bring attention to some organizations and institutions outside the Academy of Sciences: these are GiproMez, the Geological Committee, the Hermitage and Russian museums. There is much in those institutions that deserves WPI attention. We can find very much there that needs to be stopped and the sooner the better. I consider it necessary to note great work executed by the Leningrad GPU and the assistance it rendered us. This is, in brief, what I believed necessary to advise you on. Conclusions: To further proceed successfully with the work we started it is necessary to: 1. Select quite a small group of highly competent comrades, about 5-6 persons, who can have a good understanding of materials that are in the Non-Deciphered Fund of the Academy of Sciences, so as to make them get down to analysis of such materials. It will take about a month, then to attach those comrades to the Academy and its NonDeciphered Fund as permanent employees. 2. One or two workers, best taken from the RevVoenSovet (Revolutionary Military Soviet) could be seated to look through and examine the Cartographical Department. They might also be enlisted from the Leningrad Military District by an instruction from the RevVoenSovet. 3. Identify and select a dedicated expert, certainly devoted to us, to get acquainted with the Chemical Institute. 4. Send a senior employee of Lenin's Institute, sufficiently responsible, to get acquainted with the illegal literature of tsarist times, so that in order that all that is valuable for it could be transferred to the Lenin's Institute.

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

145

5. Issue a permit to hand over to the Institute of Marx and Engels materials of interest for it, such as letters of Liebknecht, Bebel, Kautsky and others, possibly Marx himself, as well as other manuscripts and materials concerning the history of revolutionary movement in the West. 6. A resolution or an order in writing, by either yourself or the government authorizing me to inspect all the materials and archives in the Academy of Sciences and outside it, and confiscate them if necessary. 7. An official order for me to inspect situation at Central Archives and the keeping of its documents. 8. A permit to start preparations to work with the Gipromez, the Geological Committee and the museums. With respect to the Geological Committee and the Gipromez preparations will take at least 1 Vz to 2 months. The Leningrad GPU should take a most active part in preparations for this work. 9. Currently the Academy of Sciences is in session where, according to our information, Fersman will present a report on staff purging. Therefore a permission is needed to withdraw Fersman's report, since, if a report on the progress in purging is necessary, such information should be presented by the Commission itself. 10. A permission to present information during the session of the [Communist] fraction of the Academy of Sciences about things revealed in the Academy. Instructions are also necessary on the expendiency of presenting information on our findings during a closed meeting of the Academy session. So these are preliminary conclusions suggesting themselves in the course of our work. As I must leave back to Leningrad today, I am asking to resolve a number of urgent questions immediately. FIGATNER. 28-X-29.

Document Ν 6. Telegram by M.N. Pokrovsky, Yu.P. Figatner, S.M. Kirov to A.I. Rykov, I.V. Stalin, G K. Ordzhonikidze. TO RYKOV, STALIN, ORDZHONIKIDZE Connection discovery documents concealment Academicians frame of mind depressed. Consider absolutely necessary agree Oldenburg resignation so as to retain him provisionally to execute duties of permanent secretary until next session while preparing suitable alternative candidate. Meanwhile Fersman laid resignation off, continues behave decently. Consider Karpinsky's retirement currently unfavorable, not an issue now. Believe expedient presenting Figatner's information documents revealed to private Academy meeting, everybody talking about and no reason concealing within Academy. That private meeting may be scheduled Wednesday, 30 17 o'clock latest, as 19 o'clock will be Khibiny celebration impossible to postpone. Earnest request put this issue Politbureau first, absolutely summon Gorbunov to meeting, has full exhaustive information. Awaiting reply before 15 o'clock October 30.30/10. POKRO VSKYF1GA TNER KIRO V

Chapter IX

146 Document Ν 7. Excerpt from minutes of meeting of the Political Bureau, Central Committee, Ail-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks). October 30,1929 N° Protocol 106/5 rs Comrade Rykov

Top secret LISTENED 29. On the Academy of Sciences.

RESOLVED Decision of the PolitBureau of 30.10.29. Confirm text of telegram by c. Rykov on the Academy of Sciences and Oldenburg (see Appendix).

Secretary, Central Committee. Document Ν 8. TEXT OF TELEGRAM BY c.RYKOV (Approved by Political Bureau, CC AUCP(B) 30.X.29) Appendix Ν 3. to item. 29, Protocol PB Ν 1061 LENINGRAD PRESIDENT ACADEMY SCIENCES KARPINSKY. I received message by Figatner, Chairman of Commission of NC WPI USSR on discovery of documents very important from state point of view in Academy archives. As governmental authorities were not informed of existence of those documents I believe it necessary to remove Academician Oldenburg from his post of permanent secretary of Academy immediately and request Academy session to identify new candidacy. A.I. RYKOV Document Ν 98. Top secret. TO SECRETARY OF CCOFAUCP(B)— COMRADE STALIN MEMORANDUM On state of inquiry into activities of counter-revolutionary groups in the USSR Academy of Sciences. On October 12,1929 information reached OGPU, that important political archives and documents are illegally kept in the Library of the Academy of Sciences with the purpose of concealing them from the Soviet power bodies. On October 18 via the Commission on checking the staff of the Academy of Sciences confiscations of these documents were started and members of staff of the Academy of Sciences related to keeping of those documents were arrested. Arrested are: Professor ANDREEV A.I. — learned secretary of the Archeographical Commission, POKROVSKY F.I. — learned custodian of the Library, MARTINSON F.F. — former learned secretary of the Library, BELYAEV M.D. — learned custodian of the 8 « O s t a l o s ' esche nemalo hlama ν lyudskom sostave»: Kak nachinalos' «delo Akademii nauk» // Istochnik... Ν 4. P. 114-118.

The "Academy Case 1929-1931'

147

Pushkin House, IZMAILOVN.V. — learned custodian of the Pushkin House, MOLAS B. N.—Director, Scientific Secretariat of the Academy of Sciences, PILKIN S.K. — Director, Foreign Department of the Library, KHALTURIN D.N. — former business-manager of the Academy of Sciences, RAEVSKY V.N. — learned secretary, Commission for Field Studies, PETROV—Assistant Director, International Book Exchange Bureau, Professor ROZHDESTVENSKY S.V. — former Deputy Drector, Libraiy of the Academy of Sciences and others. Frther inquiry into the case of concealment of exceptionally important political documents in the Academy of Sciences established the following: according to evidence by MOLAS confirmed by evidences from ANDREEV, ROZHDESTVENSKY, BELYAEV and others existence is corroborated of a monarchical group in the Academy of Sciences that includes Academicians: PLATONOV Sergei Fyodorovich, ISTRIN Vasily Mikhailovich, PERETZ Vladimir Nikolaevich, ROZANOV Matvei Nikanorovich, LEVINSON-LESSING Frantz Yulievich, KRACHKOVSKY Ignaty Yulianovich, SCHERBATSKY Fyodor Ippolitovich and SOBOLEVSKY Aleksey Ivanovich and LAVROV Pyotr Alekseevich, these two recently passed away. The group leader is Academician PLATONOV closely related to prominent figures of White Emigration movement. PLATONOV's trips abroad in 1926 and 1928 were, almost exclusively, of political nature. In Paris PLATONOV repeatedly had business meetings with N.V. KOKOVTZEV, V.A. MAKLAKOV, P.N. MILIUKOV, P.B. STRUVE, former Academician ROSTOVTZEV, GURLYANT, General MARCHENKO and others and discussed with them situation in the USSR and the state of White Emigration. These meetings took place at the flat of PLATONOV's daughter — KRAEVICH who plays a noticeable role in life of the White Emigration. KRAEVICH's husband — formerly a prominent landowner in the Orel region, a participant in monarchical organizations, participant in White Movement in the South, is presently connected with Kyrill group and the Black Squadron group of Metropolitan Antonii. It was via KRAEVICH that in 1928 PLATONOV received a large sum of money to provide periodic material support to "close people" in the USSR. As to the connection of Academician PLATONOV with White Emigration leaders, the arrested Prof. ROZHDESTVENSKY evidences: "While abroad PLATONOV negotiated in Paris with KOKOVTZEV, MAKLAKOV, GURLYANT, STRUVE, Baron NOLDE and KULMAN. On PLATONOV's words I know that their talks focused on political delineation of situation in the USSR and the Russian emigration, and on respective anti-Soviet activities inside the USSR, which has to be headed by a certain group of top intelligentsia". OGPU disposes of clandestine data on spy activities of Academicians: KRACHKOVSKY, A.N. KRYLOV and E.A. TOLMACHEVA, daughter of KARPINSKY, President of the Academy. Embassies were mainly informed about situation in the USSR during banquets and dinners organized at TOLMACHEVA's salon and MOLAS's flat. Academician PLATONOV had personal contact with German Consul TZEKHLIN, who sent abroad PLATONOV's correspondence and some of his documents by diplomatic mail. M.D. BELYAEV, former learned custodian of the Pushkin House notes in his evidence that PLATONOV also had capability to illegally transfer people abroad. For in-

148

Chapter IX stance, BELYAEV knows that the family of KRAEVICH (PLATONOV's son-in-law) illegally crossed the Finnish frontier thanks to assistence by S.F. PLATONOV. The easiest way to deal with abroad, widely used by the Academicians, was sending correspondence and documents via Academic Bureau for International Book Exchange (BIBE). The arrested PILKIN - former Director of BIBE, and PETROV his assistant, former officer evidence that Academicians PLATONOV, KRACHKOVSKY, OLDENBURG, KARSKY, ISTRIN, TARLE and others kept sending their correspondence via BIBE. Professor SREZNEVSKY, Director of the Library Manuscript Department interrogated on this case as a witness, while confirming evidence by PILKIN and PETROV informed in addition that with the aid of BIBE White Emigration literature ("Dni "(Days), "Rul'"(Rudder), "Poslednie novosti"(Latest news), "Russkaya mysl'"(Russian Thought) and others) were also illegally received. Certain Academicians and heads of academic institutes were closely connected to active figures of counter-revolutionary organizations inside the USSR. Thus, the arrested Professor ANDREEV evidences: "As for PLATONOV's contact with 'Resurrection', the eliminated counter-revolutionary organization I must point out that it was realized through Professor ZAOZERSKY (his trainee) who had the groups of STEPANOV and PODSONOV. PLATONOV also maintained relations with MEIER, the leader of'Resurrection' and BAKHTIN, one of its members who was working in the Manuscript Department of the Public Library. I was told about that organization by Professor DOBIASH-ROZHDESTVENSKAYA and she, undoubtedly, was informed about that organization". Note: 'Resurrection'represented a religious-political organisation connected with White Emigration circles, in particular with KARTASHOV and the religious wing of the 'Struggle for Russia' organization in Prague. 'Resurrection' set for itself the task of creating a wide antiSoviet public movement. In pursuance of the case of that organization liquidated in Leningrad in March, 1929 more than 70 persons were convicted, its leaders put in concentration camps for a term of TEN years. N.V. VOLENS, a former scientific worker with the Commission to Study the Yakut Republic was a resident of the 'Struggle for Russia' terrorist White Emigration organization; several times she was sent on Academy study tours abroad where she got instructions on her work in the USSR. She had a contact with the Estonian Consulate and through it she was sending information to Prague. According to evidence by MOLAS Academician OLDENBURG knew about the counter-revolutionary activities of VOLENS and the nature of her trips abroad. (VOLENS is confined to concentration camp for a term of TEN years). PLATONOV's group has considerable weight and influence in the circles of rightwing Academicians and antiSoviet Professorate of Leningrad and Moscow. In the result of activities ofthat group cc. DEBORIN, LUKIN, FRICHE candidacies failed during additional elections to the Academy of Sciences in 1928 while candidacies of POKROVSKY, BUKHARIN, KRZHIZHANOVSKY and GUBKIN did not get an absolute majority vote. Selection of heads of Academic institutes was biased, they are exclusively from former courtiers, Black Squadron members, tsarist officials of high standing, etc., and significant political documents were kept with the aim to conceal them from Soviet authorities.

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

149

Parallel with the PLATONOV's monarchic group that generally lead and directed life and activities of the Academy, another such group is currently identified, group that existed under the guidance of FERSMAN and OLDENBURG (evidence by MOLAS, STAROSTIN, ANDREEV and others). This group that set for itself a formal task of "smoothing things over" and finding compromises in its relations with Soviet authorities, also actively fought against the Soviet influence in the Academy. FERSMAN's group originates from the "Association of scientific and civil leaders" that had existed in 1918-20 and had initially sprung up on the initiative of PALCHINSKY and FERSMAN, who was then claiming in his appeal on foundation of the association that he was standing "on the ground of inexorable struggle against bolshevism". The association that disintegrated in 1920, recovered again in 1923 under the name of "Association of scientific workers to assist the activities of the Academy of Sciences". By MOLAS's evidence the task of the association was "to embrace all the aspects of cultural and economic life of the USSR by grouping around the Academy of Sciences scientific workers of different specialised fields who, however stand close in their political convictions irreconciable with the existing political order". A striking document illustrating tasks and goals of the Association is the project of reorganizing the Academy, proposed by Academician FERSMAN in 1929, in which he talked about the necessity to impart on the Academy the functions of planning all the scientific and part of the economic life of the country. According to our information the main figures of the Association are Academicians FERSMAN, VERNADSKY, KRYLOV A.N. and OLDENBURG and former members ofthe staff— RAEVSKY, KHALTURIN, RUDENKO, VITTENBURQ ANDREEV and others. AntiSoviet activities of this group acquired a welldefined shape during the purging of academic staff and the inner struggle between the left- and right-wing trends among the scientific workers of the Academy that unfurled then. Considering the importance of Soviet activists that arose and were increasing, FERSMAN impeded its work by all the means within his reach and tried, by way of private conversations to "talk in" the leaders of the left wing and force them to refrain from mutual struggle. In face of the facts of t he case OGPU considers it necessary to arrest Academician Sergei Fyodorovich PLATONOV immediately, and if necessary, interrogate Academicians PERETZ, KRACHKOVSKY, NIKOLSKY and KRYLOV A.N. with the right of their subsequent arrest provided the available compromising materials concerning these persons find confirmation or new ones are dicovered. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF OGPU YAGODA CHIEF SOU OGPU EVDOKIMOV Januaiy 9,1930.

The wheel of repressions started spinnnig. In January 1930 Academicians S.F. Platonov, E.V. Tarle, N.P. Likhatchev were arrested and later, in August — M.K. Ljubavsky. Investigation into the case of the "Nation-Wide Union to Fight for Resurrection of Free Russia " begun that

150

Chapter IX

entailed new arrests. By the end of 1930 648 of 960 employees of the Academy of Sciences were discharged by way of purging. The trial of February 10, 1931 sentenced 53 persons to imprisonment in concentration camps for terms from three to ten years. On May 10, 1931 the following persons were sentenced to the firing squad 9 : 1. Verzhbitsky Jurii Aleksandrovich. Scientific worker of the USSR Academy of Scienses. Arrested September 19,1930, executed May 17,1931; 2. Zisserman Pyotr Ivanovich. Scientific worker of the Pushkin House. Arrested June 19.1930, executed May 17,1931; 3. Kupreyanov Yakov Pavlovich. Employee of the book depository of the Academy of Sciences. Arrested June 30,1930, executed May 17,1931; 4. Puzinsky Vladimir Frantsevich. Chief of the quartermaster museum, Leningrad Military District Headquarters. Arrested on July 18,1930, executed May 17,1931; 5. Putilov Aleksey Sergeevich. Director of the Archives of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Arrested February 15,1930, executed May 17,1931. 18 persons were convicted to ten year terms of concentration camps. OGPU Board passed the sentence on chief defendants on August 8, 1931. The Russian Academicians were exiled to various towns: 1. Platonov Sergey Fyodorovich to Samara, where he died on January 10, 1933; 2. Tarle Evgeny Viktorovich to Alma-Ata. Released in October 1932, returned to teaching and scientific activities; 3. Ljubavsky Matvey Kuzmich to Ufa, five year term, where he died in 1936; 4. Likhatchev Nikolai Petrovich to Astrakhan. Returned to Leningrad in 1933. Died in 1936. Less than half of convicts eventually returned from camps and exile. Internal life of BAN also changed radically: the arrests of the leading scientific workers, mass purgings and dismissals, destruction of the totality of book and manuscript collections that kept forming for two centuries — only participants and witnesses of the events remembered all that. Comparing the cumulated list of the accused in the book by V. Brachev with the list of BAN employees compiled by S.A. Ryshkova in 1928 I selected those who went through the "Academy Case ". There appeared 14 such names on my list: 1. Arnoldi Aleksei Alexandrovich. Assistant librarian, Department II. Arrested February 10.1931. Five years of concentration camps. 2. Borodin Arkady Vladimirovich. Librarian, Department I. Former colonel. Arrested February 10,1931.10 years of camps. 3. Vasenko Platon Grigorievich. Learned custodian of the Manuscript Department*. Arrested February 17, 1930. Sentenced to exile in the Urals, five year term. In February 1933 released ahead of time, banned to live in Lenigrad or other large cities of the USSR. 4. Yeremin Stepan Antonovich. Scientific worker of the Manuscript Department. Arrested October 23, 1929.Three years of concentration camps. 5. Zaozersky Aleksei Ivanovich. Learned custodian of the Manuscript Department. Arrested March 7,1929. September 2 sentenced to five years of concentration camp (Solovki). On February 10, 1931 sentenced to firing squad with substitution for ten years of concentration ' S e e : consolidated list of defendants presented in the book: Brachev V.S. «Delo istorikov» 1929-1931 gg. SPb.: Nestor, 1997. P. 104-112. * It was about his work in B A N that historian N.M. Druzhinin spoke with admiration (see ch. 8).

The "Academy Case

1929-1931"

151

camps. Released ahead of time May 22, 1932, exiled to Alma-Ata for three years. From midthirties lived in a village in Yaroslavl oblast. 6. Malov Aleksei Fyodorovich. Scientific worker of the Manuscript Department. Arrested November 14, 1929. Sentenced to firing squad May 10, 1931 with substitution for ten years of concentration camps. 7. Pilkin Sergei Konstantinovich. Director, Department II. Arrested December 9,1929. Sentenced to firing squad with substitution for ten years of concentration camps (town of Kem')· Died in 1946. 8. Rozhdestvensky Sergei Vasilievich. Assistant Director of BAN. Corresponding member of RAS. Arrested December 1,1929. Exiled to the town of Tomsk for five years. 9. Rozanov Sergei Pavlovich. Senior librarian of the Manuscript Department. Arrested November 14, 1930. Sentenced to ten years of concentration camps. 10. Serebryansky Nikolai II'ich. Professor, scientific worker of Department III. Arrested December 22, 1930. Sentenced to ten years of concentration camps. 11. Scribanovich Fyodor Fyodorovich. Senior learned custodian of the Manuscript Department. Arrested December 7, 1929. Sentenced to ten years of concentration camps. 12. Fetisov Ivan Ivanovich. Librarian, Manuscript Department. Arrested October 23, 1929. Sentenced to three years of concentration camps. 13. Shangin Mstislav Antonovich. Librarian, Department II. Arrested November 14, 1930. Sentenced to ten years of concentration camps. 14. Engelgardt Boris Mikhailovich. Scientific worker of the Manuscript Department. Arrested November 14, 1930. Sentenced to ten years of concentration camps. After crushing the Library personnel there followed disbanding of its stocks. The Manuscript Department suffered most of all. As the authors of the "Historical Essay... " write, in the beginning of the thirties "specific character of the Manuscript Department as a depository for manuscripts of the XII-XVII I centuries mainly was clearly defined. It also determined the character of further assembly of its stocks. While before historical materials of most wildly differing character (the archives of institutes and public organizations, manuscripts and papers by Academicians, members of the Academy staff and writers, and also all kinds of literary collections)... were accepted here, now the Manuscript Department restricted the boundaries of its assembly to the Old Russian and Slavonic hand-written books "10. In 1931 the Manuscript Department handed over to other depositories such materials that already became non-profile for BAN: To the Leningrad Department of the Central State Historical Archives — materials from the Senate (431 bundles), those of statistic census of 1897 (62 bundles), of the Chief Military Court Agency (1 bundle) and of the Constantinople Imperial Embassy. To the Leningrad section of the Central Historical Archives — manuscripts from the collection of the Anichkov Palace, papers of A.P. Balosoglo, papers of R.A. DrutzkoiPodberesky, the archives of I.P. Liprandy, papers of P.A. Monteverde, papers of Academician Oldenburg, of S.N. Palauzov, of P.I. Kutaisov, of N.K. Sredinsky, the archives of the Strukov family, of the Kem' land court from the XVIII-XIX centuries, unsorted collections of G.S. Sarkisov, M.I. Smelsky and the remainders of the archives of the Nobles Assembly. 134 volumes of the famous Rumyantzev description of Malorossia (the Ukraine) transferred to the Kiev Central State Archives. '"Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 52.

152

Chapter IX To the Archives of the USSR AS — archives and collections of Academicians received to the Library as early as the XVIII-XIX centuries, materials on the Library anniversary exposition of 1929, to offer an example, letters by Dagger and Nieps, I.P. Kulibin Fund initially received by the Manuscript Department from the Moskow Historical Museum. To the Archives of the USSR AS — plans of St.Petersburg drawn one — by the architect J. Leblon (1717) and another — by M.I. Makhaev (1753), plans of erecting of the Gostiny Dvor behind the building of the Kunstkammer. To the Archives of the USSR AS — a collection of dialectological materials totalling 574 storage units, as well as materials from the archives of Academician N.K. Nikolsky. To the archives of the Institute of Literature, USSR AS (from April, 1931 to 1934) — all the autographs of writers of the XIX-XX centuries, including a collection of autographs of A.S. Pushkin, A.I. and N.I. Turgenevs and others. To the History Archeographical Institute — materials of general history chiefly concerning the feudal and serfdom epoch. Now they are in the Archives of the Leningrad Section, Institute of History, USSR AS. In 1931 the Institute has received the vast Vorontsov's arcives from the Manuscript Department, in May same year—the Kashkins' archives, M.I. Semevsky's tables, Kurostrov's tables, copies of reports by Dutch residents and other archive materials. To the History-Archeographical Institute —A.D. Menshikov archives, archives of the XVIII century Arkchangel Registry, files of the Moscow 'Uprava Blagochiniya' (Vice Squad Agency) and others materials. In 1933 and 1934 to the Institute of Oriental Studies, USSR AS — Georgian and Armenian manuscripts, and in April 1939 — 68 Sogdiana manuscripts. To the Museum of the Books, Documents and Letters, USSR AS — 130 copies storage units, mainly pancharts and P.A. Valuev archive materials in 114 binded volumes. To the M.E. Saltykov-Schedrin State Public Library — manuscripts of the composer N.A. Rimsky-Korsakov and others.

During 1931 248 archive collections (including 28,000 storage units) and 5,555 separate manuscripts were transferred from the Manuscript Department to other institutes11. In 1939 after all those events the special Commission of the Head Archive Agency inspected the Manuscript Department again and noted with satisfaction that "the nature of the Department collecting operations became quite consistent" and that "the keeping of manuscripts answers all the modern requirements "n. All the activities of the Library underwent reconstruction. Essentially it focused on "turning the Academic repository into a scientific-auxiluarv institution functioning according to a plan and actively participating in the general production work of the Academy of Sciences". With its new Director, Innokenty Ivanovich Yakovkin there formed four functional departments: 1) a Department of reception, inventory and storage with subdivisions of processing of mandatory deposit copy and of storage; 2) the catalogue Department; 3) the scientific bibliography, actual catalogue and collecting Department; 4) the Department of issuance. " Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov... Vyp. 2. P. 53-54. Ibid. P. 60.

12

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

153

The Cartographic Department was disbanded; the Department of Special Stocks (rare book) was formed the new, into which the incunabula, books of civil printing as well as the collection of engravings and prints were transferred from the Manuscript Department. However the consequences of the "Academy Case" were not over for BAN with the above. One case smoothly transformed into another. Naturally, its essence did not change but now its unofficial name was the "Slavonic Experts case " while officially it was called the "Case of the Russian National Party". Such distinguished scholars and specialists as V.N. Peretz, G. A. Ilinsky, N.N. Durnovo, V.V. Vinogradov, A.M. Selischev, V.N. Sidorov, P.N. Sychov, P.D. Baranovsky became its victims and the museum workers, regional ethnographers, librarians together with them. Among the arrested in connection with the "Slavonic Experts case " were also the two leading members of the BAN staff: S.A. Scheglova and A.B. Nikolskaya13. Sophia Alekseevna Scheglova was born in 1886, in Penza. She studied at the Kiev University and V.N. Peretz, an expert in Slavonic paleography was her teacher. She joined BAN in 1922 as an assitant librarian. From 1925 she worked as a scientific worker of Department I (Russian) and then moved up to Departmert IV (Manuscript). A full-fledged Professor, she was arrested on November 26, 193 3 and exiled to the Middle Asia for three years. She stayed there until 1937. The conviction was stricken off S.A. Scheglova in July, 1945. In the fifties, already quite disabled she moved to her sister in Kiev, where she died in 1965. Anna Borisovna Nikolskaya was born in 1899, in Petersburg. A daughter of a hereditary nobleman, Professor Β .V. Nikolsky, she studied at the Aleksandrovsky Liceum, then the Kharkov, Voronezh and Leningrad Universities. She had a perfect command of French, German and Old Slavonic. After her father was shot in 1919, her badly ailing mother and Roman, her younger brother were left in Anna Borisovna's charge; later Roman denounced his family, became an employee of the OGPU and was shot in 193714. A student of V.N. Peretz, Nikolskaya took part in folklore and ethnographic field studies of the Academy of Sciences, lectured on paleography and Old Russian literature at the university. In 1931, on N.Ya. Marr recomendation she was received to the post of a senior paleograph with the Manuscript Department of BAN; later she was also in charge of the Incunabula Cabinet and of the custody of special stocks (rare books). In summer 1933 Nikolskaya was arrested. Anna Borisovna herself believed that the culprit was the Director of the Library whom she prevented in his misappropriation of the unregistered stocks, sanctioned from above15. After Nikolskaya's arrest her mother committed suicide. In her exile, having mastered the Kazakh language, she became an interpreter, participated in the activities of the Writer's Union of Kazakhstan and tought French and lectured on Old Russian literature in the local pedagogical institute. In November 1937 she was arrested 13

Ashnin F.D., Alpatov V.M. «Delo slavistov»: 30-e gody / Otv. redaktor N.I. Tolstoy. M.: Nasledie,

1994. 285 p. 14 In Petersburg diaries of Zinaida Gippius (1914-1919) one finds a bloodcurling record: "Recently Professor B. Nikolsky got the firing squad. His property and the finest library were confiscated. His wife went mad. Left are his daughter of eighteen and the son of seventeen. These days the son was summoned to Vsevobuch ("Universal military training"). He showed up. The commissar there immediately announced to him with a chuckle (the wags these commissars are!): Don't you know where the body of your father is? We fed him off to those beasties!" Wild animals in the Zoo, those not having concked off yet, they are feeding them fresh corpses of persons shot, particularly since the Peter and Paul Fortress is close nearby, and that is common knowledge. It seems, though, that that was never announced to the relatives before. This statement affected the boy so that this is the fourth day that he lies in delirium. (I know the name of that commissar) ". See: Gippius Z. Zhivye litsa: Stihi. Dnevniki. Tbilisi: Merani, 1991. P. 187-188. 15

See her story: Innokentij Vasirevich // Prostor. 1987. Ν 9. P. 133-152.

154

Chapter IX

again and convicted to 10 years confinement. As an exile she settled near Alma Ata, lived in a dug-out and earned her living by literary work. In 1977 Nikolskaya died. "Her main works were not merely autobiographical or based on a concrete fact, a recollection, an episode, —writes A.L. Zhovtis, Doctor of Philology who knew Anna Borisovna for more than thirty years. — It is as if every plot taken from the life acquires some selfvalue, it becomes intereresting, as, we will say in Veresaev style, is 'living life', at which one managed to take a look from the point of view found and offered by the artist"16. A.B. Nikolskaya wrote the story "Innokenty Vasilievich " that I mentioned in 1974; it was published posthumously in 1987. After many long hesitations as well as accounting for a poor availability of the magazine for a today reader I made up my mind to present some parts of that story in this book. INNOKENTY VASILIEVICH ...The desk lamp in the room had a bright green lamp-shade. It did not soothe the eyes, nor did it rouse energy. It seemed that it was poisoning its surroundngs. True, its area of influence was not that large; a desk, an arm-chair, a revolving bookcase with reference books, a wall shelf, several pictures on the wall, a corner of carpet on the parquetry nearest to the desk, — further away the room was immersed in a greenish gloom where contours of things dissolved in it: the room could be endless and could stop right there, just behind the edge of a wardrobe standing by the wall beyond the armchair. Was it because of it, that venomous color that the host of the room seemed to be so haggard and wizened? Here was his head, oblong, lavishly streaked with grey, bent over the book, his long, dried up fingers with bumpy joints were still on opened page. Eyelids halfcovered his eyes as blackened bits of parchment. Let those eyes remain thus halfclosed, since when they raise their stare, you dread their almost colourless emptyness. How can one look and see with such a dispirited glance! But he both looked and saw... I used to visit that room, full of subtle contradictions that created in their totality an original ensemble, into which one wished to gaze steadily like into an ancient criptographic manuscript, where each sign is full of latent significance... At last the host of the room turned his eyes upon me, but his hand still rested on the opened page. Are you are reading, Innokenty Vasilievich? — I nodded towards the book. — What is it that carries you away? — Leonid And'eev, — answered he, softly burring. And his voice was also gentle, a little toneless, as if he spoke on the sly. I lifted my eyebrows in surprise. How did you think that up? soon You seem to be having to speak on bibliographing the Yakut materials? And here is Leonid Andreev all of a sudden! He leaned back in his armchair and again, half closing his eyes, as if depressed by an insurmountable fatigue: —Nothing... Coincidence... I kept my silence temporizingly. Innokenty Vasilievich smiled slightly—his mouth,

16 Zhovtis A.L. Peredano lyudyam!: Ob Anne Borisovne Nikol'skoj// Nikolskaya A.B. Peredaj dal'she!: Rasskazy, povest'. Alma-Ata: Zhazushy, 1989. P. 268.

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

155

concealed by dark trimmed moustaches turning into a small pointed beard, was twisting in that smile — and held out to me the book, that he was examining intensely just now. I took the book. It was really Leonid Andreev's volume of a cheap edition of supplements to the "Niva" magazine, binded into simple tattered particolored cardboard. There was a "presentation" inscription on the title page: "To Judas on Judas ". I glanced at Innokenty Vasilievich bewildered. — That is not all, — said he as if in answer to my astonishment. — Do find that story and have a peep. I opened the "Judas Iscariot" story — and from its first pages saw in conviction that somebody underlined whole strings of lines, sometimes full paragraphs most meticulously. When connecting the underlined there surfaced a curious whole, and inwardly I could not but recognize a biting wit and powers of observation of an anonymous glossator. "He is thinking some thoughts of his own and gets into the house silently as a scorpion"... ..."Had no offspring and it showed once more that Judas was a bad man, so that God wants no progeny of Judas"... ..."Was of a lean, good height ... a strong enough constitution ... but for some purpose pretended to be ailing and delicate and had a changeable voice"... ..."Judas's face was doubling as well"... — A conscientious work, — I shook my head. Any conjectures as to whom do you owe such an attention to? Innokenty Vasilievich shook his head negatively. — To whom — I have no idea, but with regard to what — I can suppose. Except that... it's wrong, it's wrong, my God, it's not my fault! How could that be my fault if people themselves never follow my advice? — he finished suddenly with some affection and closed his eyes. My position was not quite comfortable: should I soothe him? Polemize with an anonymous author? This would be more than a silly idea! — A-a-h, what's the difference! — Innokenty Vasilievich suddenly waved his hand. — A great sinner I am in the face of God, and they will understand in the next world what's truth and what is garbage... Innokenty Vasilievich never hurried, he used to walk slowly — some sort of a defect in his leg was in his way... I often heard his public lectures, exact, accurate, documented; listened to his antireligious presentations (he was a member of Presidium of the "God-Foresaker" society), and these presentations were never cheap agitation or generalities, — he spoke with erudition but penetratingly to any audience, skilfully including literature or documentary illustrations in his speech. His only shortcomings were monotonous speech and its slight defects, but everybody listened to him with an immutable interest, bombarded him with questions... These presentations of a scholar convinced, who had perfect command of both the analysis and synthesis of the phenomena... An Athe-ist!... —After all I am an Irkutsk citizen as all Rokotkins... From the time of his Irkutsk bishopry somebody in our family got his name in every generation. And it was my lot to bear it. And together with that name there went a posthumous blessing of our saintly ancestor: that of a lifetime keeping of his robe. After my death it will pass into the hands of my nephew Innokenty, a Siberian, because I have no children.

156

Chapter IX I did not interrupt but listened. He streched fully out in my direction, as if he was sharing some terrible secret with me and said hastily, almost in a whisper: —You know... it's that I am a secret oldbeliever... It sounded, as if he was informing me —"I am a secret member of the White Guard" or "A member of a monarchic organization". —And the "Halleluiah" do I double, and I cross myself with two fingers as well. I kept endlessly recalling Rokotkin's words: ..."At fault... are those who might ward off the undeserved retribution but... did not: those who could withhold from assisting in the crime but assisted... Those are the ones who should pray knocking their foreheads on stone pliths!" And his almost ascertaining whisper: "Maybe they were..." I said above that it was rarely that I met Innokenty Vasilievich during those years. Meanwhile, I heard a lot of him and often. Following a wise example of Mikhail Sergeevich, while listening to those stories I kept repeating aloud or sometimes to myself: where are the facts? Facts, where are they? Nevertheless it was strange enough. At that time Innokenty Vasilievich headed consecutively two large institutes of the humanities. And persons started to disappear from those institutes,— experiensed old workers, those who seemed to stand beyond suspicion. Further on those people embarked on long journeys, or their traces were simply lost. Innokenty Vasilievich kept sighing, darkened of face, went somewhere to "put a word in for them", then returned and, impotently lowering himself into his armchair said in a crestfallen voice: — It is useless. I cannot undersand anything... A fact most remarkable was that when he transferred to the other institute disappearences stopped in the first one while in the other they began. Need one to say anything about the kind of reputation that followed the descendant of the saintly man of Irkutsk? Now, to object... what could one really offer in objection? Facts, there they were. One could hardly plead random coincidences all the time! True, there was one circumstance which those who considered him "kind", "good", "honest"... and "direct" always plead: as soon as he was appointed to a new institute, simultaneously or just after that appointment, posts were given to persons known to nobody, who were no experts in the field of that body but took administrative posts. Those, they said, were the real culprits!... Innokenty Vasilievich himself remained always as quiet as usual, as usual he kept walking slowly, limping to his leg, and when questioned about his life and his health got rid of those slightly familiar with general vague phrases, and to those intimate with him and to people he considered "his" he kept answering in a barely audible voice: — Difficult to live. It is hard. Time is thickening over us... And time went on and on, thickening into a big blue-grey thundercloud. And lightnings flashed here and there. Innokenty Vasilievich kept directoring his second institute. Workers kept disappearing. An old man vanished, the one that had been working there for about fifty years, a great expert and a man of knowledge, who held a very simple post. For all his life he kept waving aside the matter of taking his Ph.D. saying that what counted for him was not

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

157

getting a degree, but the skill itself. They were trying to tempt him with a raise in wages and promotion that would undoubtedly ensue his degree. Innokenty Vasilievich summonned him repeatedly trying to convince him "not to be a Don Quixote" but he kept replying that his salary was enough for him and that a high post entailed high responsibility, while he was an old man and it was beyond his powers. Some woman at an insignificant post dissapeared, — a widow living with two children... Rumours were spreading in circles. By the second year of his directorship Innokenty Vasilievich engaged our common friend, — a young woman, of whom he said — "she is amazingly cleve' and accu'ate, one may ent'ust he' with any job, she will cope with it". And then he added, pulling a face: "Too st'aightfo'wa'd though, catego'ical, not up to ou' times, afte' all". The girl was really "doing well" and Innokenty Vasilievich kept pulling her up. She was entrusted with particulary valuable book stocks of the institute and also with elaborating and classificating new valuable stocks that arrived from some palace. She lived alone with her sick mother, had no family of her own and was enthusiastic about her work, devoting to it not only her office, but her leisure hours too. Once I met her in the street and started questioning her about her work. — And are you not afraid of responsibility for such values? She shrugged it off: — No risk, no gain, — she answered. If I would see that I am failing, I would immediately resign. Now as to responsibility for the stocks, after all I am responsible for single sheet of paper that belongs to this organization. If I am the "custodian" I keep absolutely everything with the the same thoroughness. Besides, it is just interesting for me. And everybody is satisfied with my results. — And Innokenty Vasilievich? — I undertstand what you mean, — she nodded. And I will answer: he is, first and foremost. He is interested in what I am doing in general and how. He helps me very much with his reading erudition. He is like a walking encyclopaedia. Recently he told me about a unique copy of the Talmude that was on keeping here in Leningrad in the library of the Roman Catholic Academy, or maybe the seminary, I am a poor expert in that. In the Vasilievsky Island, where the Vera Slutzkaya Hospital is now, you know? Well, on that Talmude and Father Pranaitis. In his rendering it is a political detective story of top interest! Well, all right, and good luck... with Your permission I would suggest offering you an advice: be very cautious and careful. A slightest misstep — and you are to answer. Since then I never saw her for more than twenty years. According to people working in the same department with her, the history of her disappearance unfurled in such a form for me: One morning, having come to sort out the stocks, she saw that seals were torn off two bookcases and a whole number of books were missing from them. She rushed to the superintendent, to the official on duty, those who were on the night watch, — nobody knew anything. When Innokenty Vasilievich came, she rushed to him. He did not even wait for her to finish. —And why are you so excited, Elena Vladimirovna? — he wrinkled. — Books are not missing, Comrade Bersh took them with my knowledge. Nothing dreadful there.

158

Chapter IX

— What do you mean saying "nothing dreadful"? After all I entered them into the inventory already, and their availability is confirmed in the inventory by the learned secretary and two members of staff. Let Bersh issue me an official reference enumerating all the books taken and you will confirm in writing that this was done with your knowledge. — You should not insist on this, Elena Vladimirovna. And anyway, those books taken are not worth such measures. — It is all the same to me, — retorted the girl. I want to have covering vouchers. As for the reasons to withdraw those books from the stocks you may not share them with me, if you wish. Innokenty Vasilievich braced all up. —And there was no need to make such a noise: officers on duty, the superintendent... You should have better waited for me, — he said coldly, almost sharply. — I cannot recognize you, Innokenty Vasilievich, — the girl protested again. First you said that I must guard everything as an apple of my eye, not even give the keys from a single bookcase to anybody, and now — using some keys they take the books from under seals, and I do not even know how many and what they are since part of them I can check against the inventories, but others I did not enter there yet, the sorting is not finished after all, — and you suggest that I should not pay attention to this fact and keep silent! —Yes, I believe it would be better for You, Elena Vladimirovna, first of all. Said he somehow maliciously. Then added: —Now, generally speaking, you should obey me. It would be better for you also. Well, she at once asked for a sheet of paper, and without leaving his office, wrote a motivated application requesting to release her from sorting the new stocks and put her on to old stocks as before. Director read the application. His face all distorted. He tore that paper into small pieces at once and said: — You filed me no applications. And you should not leave the sorting. I have no right to force you, this was some additional workload and besides it was for free. All right, remain with the old stocks, and pass the keys on... — To whom? The learned secretary? — To me alone, — cut he. — Moreover, without any documents. She passed on the keys and was concerned with new stocks no more. As for the talk she related in detail to one of her lady-collaborators, the one she was the closest with. When reporting to the Director on the proceedings at her department that lady asked why did such-and-such left the sorting of stocks, a job nobody but her could be charged with. He shook his head as if the collar was too tight for him. — On her own wish, — he answered annoyed. — I tried to talk her out of it, but she is stubborn. All right, why not, it will not be the stocks, nor I, but her to suffer! — I am surprised, Innokenty Vasilievich, — countered his companion, — I know Elena Vladimirovna well, she is not one of those capricious women who start working and then give it up for some unnown reason. — To put it briefly, she told you about everything and, from your point of view, she is right?

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

159

— I would do the same, Innokenty Vasilievich. — Oh, how easily reason you all, — he answered bitterly. — She is digging the pit for herself. And then, if something happens, it will be my fault, will it? — And what may happen? She did motivate her resignation, didn't she — and very thoroughly, too. —I know nothing of any motivations. I have no documents on that fact. Now, did the girl weave some nonsense about motivations in writing to you? Very neat! And then... they are taking a close look at her... and her scientific tutor is under scrutiny... and something is wrong with her ancestry... — Whom are you telling all that, Innokenty Vasilievich? — his companion, who was herself a countess by marriage, interrupted him sadly and at the same time indignantly. — Very well, the matter is settled, as they say... And she left the office. After this the girl tried to discuss her position in the local trade-union committee, talked to her section head and in the other places, offered them explanatory notes but, by her own expression, they all "kept looking at her with empty eyes of Innokenty Vasilievich"and went repeating that they had no need in any explanatory notes, everything was clear as it was. Four days later the girl did not show up at work and generally never appeared again. She lived in the same building with Innokenty Vasilievich... It was winter — unsteady, cruel. The city stood now ice-bound, now thawed altogether, flattening and darkening, then fine snow succeeded a thaw, snowdrifts snaking down the steets, swirling and showering the faces of the passers-by with stinging dust. The wind was blowing, it was hard to breathe. It was just one of such unattractive snowstormy evenings that I was striding up the Marat Street, returning from a meeting. A silhouette of an oldfaith church appeared before me through snow blanket. A divine service was on — next day was to be a holy day. When letting those praying in or out the church doors also let out some monotonous traditional service singing and opened on a glimpse of the dark mass of parishioners scaresly lightened with candles and icon lamps. I do not know why I entered. Never in my life had I been present at an oldfaith divine service, — I cannot even decide whether it was curiosity that prompted me to do so or it was really too drear and snow windy in the street... Not far from me, somewhat ahead and slightly to the right there stood a tall, spare man. I noticed that he was listening attentively to both the voicings of the priest and the clear voice of canonarch and was praying ardently, kneeling down. Then he stood up and began his earth bows again and again ... five, eight, ten, fifteen ... I lost my count. The divine service was nearing its end. The man who prayed so obliviously bowed for the last time, stood up and turned to exit... Coming up to me, he lifted his eyelids. Our eyes met. Before me stood Innokenty Vasilievich, entirely shriveled, pitiful and bewildered. I bowed to him in silence. He replied in the same manner. I added in a whisper: — Let's go, it's all over now.

160

Chapter IX He stopped for a moment by the very door, crossed himself once again with two fingers and bowed three times to those remaining in the church: forward (towards the altar), then right and left. The praying people replyed him with a silent bow. We exited. The snow was falling abundantly, hastily, wind-driven... Almost a year later the vanished girl appeared for a few days to pack her things and move away on a long journey. Of course, she never showed up at work. But in the house where they lived — both she and Innokenty Vasilievich — they bumped into each other right at the gate. Something like a smile convulsed his face, he stretched his hand to her. The girl did not held out her hand, and looked him straight in the eye without a smile. — Let me help you carry your paper-bags, — he found a way out. After all, it was silly to stand there as a person refused a handshake! —Are you, thank God, back home ... for good? — Thank you, Innokenty Vasilievich, I'll carry my bags myself, — she refused dryly. —And as to "home for good" I'll answer: no, I am moving away. — Where? She named the place of her destination. Innokenty Vasilievich brightened up. — I have acquaintances there, they may be useful to you. You may address them referring to my name... — Thank you again, but people live anywhere, and I think I'll come about right somehow. — Yes, we all go in God's eye, nobody can be guaranteed from anything... She smiled bitterly. — Well, I believe if there is a man sure of a good night's sleep, it's you, 'cause they value you so much... And added, with a pause: —As an expert. He pretended he failed to understand. — Now, what about your mother? — Mother is the one I worry about. For the time being she will have to stay here. But then... When I make it there — I'll bring her over to myself. — Yes, yes, of course. And after wishing her health and good luck he said his good-byes, without stretching his hand though. During the short time of preparations for her journey the girl learned from her mother that while she was absent, Innokenty Vasilievich looked in several times, aked about the daughter, spread his hands and invariably repeated one and the same: — I cannot understand... Well, really, what do you think yourself, Lidiya Sergeevna, what might Elena Vladimirovna have done? Such a strict isolation, what could that be for? And with her poor health! Solitary... No sendings... What could be that wrong? Perhaps, some undesirable connections? It is very serious! Tell me about it!... Do, tell me everything!... — He would enter as some kind of ghost, — her mother recalled, — so quiet, you could never find anything faulty with his speech... Everything as if in sympathy, but my feeling was as if he kept coming to pester my wound! A sanctimonious sadist! Once I could stand it no more and gave it to him straight: "Get away, Innokenty Vasilievich, and never come again! Do not torture me, leave me in peace! I am barely alive as it is!

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

161

My daughter did nothing wrong — and you know as well as I do! What is all that questioning for then? What is such a torment for?" He only shrugged his shoulders, hung his head and went away. A shady character... Her daughter left, and the mother, after spending some time in a mental hospital, returned and committed suicide. I learned about it from Mikhail Sergeevich. The deceased was a religious woman and left a note asking to be buried according to the church ritual. They failed releasing the body for quite a while, investigation was under way. Then, when it became apparent that "everything is clear", a permission was given to "do as you wish" and bury "the rest". A niece of the deceased on her husband's side and a friend of the girl's parents took all the troubles upon themselves. So many people came to the small church: relatives, and friends, and former colleagues of the girl. Mikhail Sergeevich with Tatiana Grigorievna attended as well. Many people paid the tribute to that tragic death. I never tried to make my way forward — there were her friends of long standing and relatives there. However it was pretty cramped even where I stood. I could only see a mound of flowers covering the coffin and its base — it was spring and flowers were sold everywhere. A whisper sounded behind: somebody was asking to let him to the coffin. Unwillingly I turned around — and was struck dumb: Innokenty Vasilievich was making his way through the crowd with a big bouquet of palepink peonies, framed with some semitransparent verdure. He did appear! Spent a night beating his bows... And came... It was only in 1946 that I decisively returned home. I visited Mikhail Sergeevich and heard that Innokenty Vasilievich had passed away. Do not remember presisely when... Olga Fyodorovna started telling me in detail how he went sick and took time dying. He knew that he was dying, he suffered, and during his last days, in spite of the narcotics, he screamed of pain continuously. She never suspected what a final twist of his involuted biography tangled into stiff knots she offered me: — He died of cancer of his tongue... Please pay attention: with all the exactness attainable I have drawn both an external and a psychological portrait of a man whom nobody ever called abnormal, who underwent treatment for anything one might imagine, except a nervous or a mental disease. Some said he was a "good, kind, fine" man, others called him scum, betrayer, a doublefaced Janus or Judas. So, his base was kind and soft. But he was in the grips of a constant animal fear that kept leading him the way of consistent human crimes. Having committed them and comrehending what he had done with his wholesome ego he threw himself into another psychic extreme — into uncotrollable mysticism, he confessed, he prayed, he kept "beating his bows" and in vain did he try to hide from himself and from the "leashing power"... How many are there those like him? They march and march passing you in a neverending succession, never touching you, never attracting your attention and curiosity. You simply do not know them at all. And they continue to commit their dark deeds, after which they themselves shrudder with horror.

162

Chapter IX

...Let us return to the "Academy Case". The stamp of secrecy was only lifted off the case of the "All-Nation Union to Struggle for Rebirth of Free Russia" in 1992, after the respective Decree of the President of the Russian Federation, however as early as in April 1992, before the Decree BAN management aplied with the St.Petersburg Head Office of the Ministry of State Security of the RF with an appeal to study such materials in connection with preparing studies on the history of BAN. Clearance was granted, and even while initially reviewing the corpus of texts from the "Academy Case " its indisputable significance as a most valuable source of information not only on the history of BAN and the Academy of Sciences at whole, but on the history of our country became apparent. A question naturally arose on ways to involve the documents from the "Academy Case" into scientific circulation. Immediately upon waiving their label of secrecy, on June 31, 1992 a meeting was held in the Head Office of the RF State Security for St.Petersburg and its 'oblast' ("Bolshoy Dom" in the Liteiny Avenue), its attendees being Academician Zh.I. Alferov, Vice-President of RAS, Chairman of the St.Petersburg Scientific Center, RAS; S.V. Stepashin (at that time— a Ph.D. in Historical Science, Director of the Head Office of the RF State Security for StPetersburg and its 'oblast'), Ε. V. Lukin, a former press service leader of the same Head Office and the author of these lines. During that meeting it was decided to publish all the investigation materials on the "Academy Case" without exception as one of the most valuable historical monuments: this publication had to be carried out at the expense of the Library itself. Workers of the St.Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Russian History—Academician B.V.Ananich, Doctors of History V.M. Paneyakh and A.M. Tzamutali were also invited as members of the editorial board. The first meeting of the editorial board where the discussion focused on principles of the publication took place on August 4, 1992, and in December 1993 the first issue of the "Academy Case " prepared by the publishing house of BAN already went off the print. It is necessary to emphasize here that there had been no such publications before. Publishing an investigation case as a complete set of documents without any omissions that would promote a most complete involvement of materials accompanying the investigation into scientific circulation had no precedents in the archeography of our modern history. Such a publication would pursue no other aim than studying the documents that remained inaccessible for researchers before. While preparing the materials of the "Academy Case " we tried in every way possible to avoid subjective evaluations of the events and persons described, preferring to present the past in a dispassionate language of facts. Let me emphasize the literary memorial importance of our publication. For me, as a Director of the Library of the Academy of Sciences damaged by one of the fiercest fires in its history the necessity to preserve the unique monuments via reproducing them in any form available was apparent. Manuscripts never burn in the well-known quotation only; in reality we shall never know what bulks of historical memory had we lost in wars, revolutions and fires of the XX century. As to the materials we were publishing like the principal bulk of the FSB archives they only existed in single copy. It is also reasonable to ask whether the moral aspect of that publication was discussed. Specifically, is publication of testimonies where one obviously innocent person slandered another obviously innocent person acceptable? We considered that problem during the very first meeting of the editorial board where we decided to publish the case as a whole — everything without exception — otherwise the publication would lose its value of a historical source. Almost all the persons summonned to testify for the "Academy Case" were forced to

The "Academy Case 1929-1931"

163

give fictitious evidence against others who slandered the first ones themselves. It was this allpervading lie inspired by procecutors that formed the basis of the case. In introduction to the first edition we spoke in detail on the conditions under which those texts were drafted, and I can hardly imagine a reader that would dare blame those summoned to the "Academy Case". On the contrary, it seems to me that publishing all the documents preserved would end the discussions of those who are only familiar with that tragic page of our history by hearsay — who slandered whom and who among the defendants succumbed one way or another, followed the lead of prosecutors and to what extent. Such reasonings are immoral. By now not a single participant of the "Academy Case", neither executioners, nor their victims remain alive. Moreover, following the inexorable logic of events, many executors themselves shared the fate of their victims by the end of the thirties. After the first two issues of the "Academy Case" went off the press, members of the editorial board and persons who prepared the publication had to talk to readers, people of every conviction, — and not a single among them developed an "illusion of actual existence of a counter-revolitionary conspiracy". It seems to us, one should not try in advance to belittle abilities of a hypothetic "uninformed reader" for critical judgement. A modern reader coming across this small-circulation scientific edition would hardly treat it as either an entertaining reading or as a trustworthy historical sourse. Mind you again: initially, not having such a publication in mind at all, we turned to the "Academy Case" in search of information on the history of the Library of the Academy of Sciences during the 1920's and were astonished with the wealth of data on the subject. Among that material, exceptionally interesting and quite often unique, biblioraphical data on the number of our workers as well as the documents from 1929 by the Commission on BAN Inspection were of particular value. We had no right to decline involving all that into scientific circulation: we see it as our duty in the face of a memory of our precursors and of future generations of BAN workers. Our Library workers always considered it their moral duty to collect the precious grains of historical facts referring to its past. Finally a word on the commentary to issues published: what should it be? The need for such a commentary on documents published is indubitable, but its form should be related, first, to the common sense, second, to architectonics of the edition as a whole, and finally, to the volume and actual term of publication of all the issues. A traditional commentary, including complete on the text could hardly accompany each document of the present edition. As to a realistic commentary, its scope is limited, first of all, by the level of factographic authenticity of the text. Views of the editorial board and the reviewers on this issue coincide. Only after we introduce the full body of documents on the "Academy Case " into scientific circulation will an actual real possibility appear to produce in the shortest time possible such a user-friendly commentary on all the issues that would follow the principles of its formation mentioned above. Note that as we advance in our work to publish the "white" body of documents of the investigation, we keep accumulating the "rough" material attendant with the "Academy case " and arranging and preparing it for publication and commentary. The search we undertook in a number of archives, including the one that remained absolutely inaccessible for researchers before the Archive of the President of the Russian Federation (the so-called "Special Files ") allowed us to broaden considerably our concept of the "Academy Case" history and methodics of its organization. However, even agency archives may not always provide one with exhaustive answers.

164

Chapter IX

Some words about the structure of every volume and the publication as a whole and about the scope and term of its appearance. Every issue consists of an introduction, a bibliographical essay, the corps of documents, appendices, an index and a table of contents. We plan to publish about twenty issues all in all that would fully embrace the twenty eight volumes of basic and supplementary materials of the procecution from the "Academy Case". The first two issues published are devoted to S.F. Platonov and E.V. Tarle. Issues from fifth to tenth will contain materials related to the other 27 persons prosecuted within the main case. Issue 11 will include the indictment and rehabilitation materials. Subsequent issues will be devoted to persons prosecuted within the "additional" "Academy Case ". The last issue is expected to round the publication up; it will serve as a reference to the edition as a whole: there, in particular, we shall place a consolidated sinopsized name index. The size of each issue will reach at least 25 editorial lists. As to the term of publication, we shall try to publish at least one issue annually, fully to be borne by BAN own resourses. Of course it is difficult to talk firmly about the future in our turbulent times, but such a study program is planned for about fifteen years.

CHAPTER Χ

THE OTHER LIBRARY Let us start from afar. Sir Mortimer Wheeler, a distinguished English archaeologist, once said: "Archaeology is not a science at all, it is a vendetta ". Deeper in the book containing that statement there follows an explanation of the idea the author actually implies: "There is no other field of knowledge to which this statement applies with such fullness than Egyptian archaeology, where frenzied clashes between romantic and classic archaeologists are still taking place. For classic archaeologists Egyptian archaeology presents no problem, they see the period as a smooth natural transition from neolithic age to a more developed form of civilization. Meanwhile romantics and independent researchers, not belonging to the clan of official archaeologists, on the contrary, attach far greater importance to Egyptian antiquities, and from their point of view there are many more unsettled problems there than first meet the eye"\ Thus, vendetta is a revenge to researcher for distorting historic truth in science. I think that Mr. Wheeler's words may be applied not only to archaeology but also to history in general and to the library history in particular. Immersing oneself in study this or that epoch we develop our own notions of the past, offer its interpretation of our own, in our case — that of the library legacy. The past goes as if through a rebirth, stops aging and serves as material for further research. One has to be particularly careful when analyzing the epochs that set global tasks in front of the society. Ahead of us lies the search for answers to questions that are not so simple for the author: what is it that we are trying to learn and why, what is it that we appeal to the past for from our standpoint of today? How and where from do we get the necessary information, what does it yield to researcher and how may one use it? Some prefer a long and winding road, struggling through the thorny contradicting facts in search of what is called historic truth; others (and their path is much shorter) try to justify theoretically the political expediency of an event that happened. The first path leads to historic truth, to perceiving that truth through historic knowledge, however grim and cruel it may be; the second dwindles to searching for an instrument to justify the State politics of the past as well as expediency of not only the research itself but even of setting the problem itself today. Historic truth and political expediency intertwine very intricatedly in the life of the epoch the scholar studies. Their interpenetration results in one of the paradoxes of global development clearly formulated by F. Engels in his letter to V. Zasulich: "Assume, — he wrote, —... that people imagine they can seize power, so what? Let them only make a breach in the dam that will destroy it, — the stream itself will quickly put an end to their illusions. But even if it really happens that their illusions lend them more will-power should one complain in such a case? People boasting of the fact that they did make a revolution were inadvertently ascertained

'Bergier J. Proklyatye knigi. M.: Kron-press, 1998. P. 14.

166

Chapter Χ

the very next day that they never knew what they were doing, that a revolution made was entirely unlike the one they had wished to make. This is what Hegel called the irony of history, the irony that only a handful of political figures managed to evade "2. Here is a typical example from a not too distant past. In 1979 in London A.M. Nekrich, a historian published a book "Renounce your Fear: Memoirs of a Historian ". It contains an episode on the procedure of Party inquiry during the trial into the author's personal case. A CPSU Central Committee Inspector, Mr. Sdobnov is asking A. Nekrich: "What, in your opinion, is more important—political expediency or historic truth? As if implicitly the inquiror was trying to let me understand that the issue was not whether my book was truthful or not — that was a secondary matter; the thing was how expedient it was at that particular moment to raise the topic of the USSR unreadiness to the German invasion and of resposibility for that... My answer to Sdobnov s question was the following: one cannot oppose political expediency to historic truth. Historical experience demonstrated that eventually historic truth does correspond to political expediency. — Still, what is more important for You? — Sdobnov kept on prying, — is it historic truth or political expediency? — Historic truth, — was my answer"3. My reader's key to understand my own position in this chapter is an interlink between the two disappointing conclusions, or, better to say, disillusionments that I arrived at while studying the history and state of the art of librarianship. My first conclusion formed in the beginning of the 1970-ies after my post-graduate and hands-on training in the US. Comparing the history and having first-hand experience of both the Soviet and US State attitude towards librarianship I saw similar features in both, namely: prevalence of the principle of political expediency over historic truth. States of different systems were pursuing similar political goals4. My second disappointing conclusion refers to the late 1990-ies, when after the February 1988 fire at BAN and irreversible transformations in political life of our country I was over2

Engels F. Pis'mo V.l. Zasulich 23.04.1885 g. // Marx K., Engels F. Soch. 2-e izd. T. 36. M„ 1964. P. 263. See: Afanasiev Yu.N. Fenomen sovetskoj istoriografii // Sovetskaya istoriografiya. M.: Ros. gos. gumanit. un-t, 1996. P. 24-25. Further Afanasiev comments: "The Party and the Soviet State needed historians, for whom political expediency was the criterion, undoubtedly more significant, than the historical truth. And the given demand was laid down as the basis both of professional education and forming of moral qualities of a person. A historian could be considered as a professional only to the extent that he felt himself "soldier of the Party". This circumstance often led to professional and moral deformations" (Ibid.). 4 In Summer 1998 my friend Miguel Angel Corzo presented me a book by an American historian, James Loewen with an unusual title: "Lies my Teacher told me" (Loewen J.W. Lies my Teacher told me: Everything your American History Textbook Got Wrong. N.Y.: Simon & Schuster, 1996. 383 p.). It analyzed history textbooks and drew not very comforting conclusions about how tendentiously it is taught in the universities. It is useless to retell this book, it is necessary to read it slowly and thoroughly. Let me give the names of some chapters: 1) "Handicapped by History: The Process of Hero- Making"; 2) "1493: The True Importance of Christopher Columbus"; 3) "The Truth About the First Thanksgiving"; 5) "Gone with the Wind": The Invisibility of Racism in American History Textbooks"; 6) "John Brown and Abraham Lincoln: The Invisibility of Antiracism in American History Textbooks"; 7) "The Land of Opportunity"; 10) "Progress Is Our Most Important Product"; 11) "Why Is History Taught like This?"; 12) "What Is the Result of Teaching History like This?". Afterword: "The Future Lies Ahead and What to Do about Them". 3

I'll name another book that is close to the theme: Spitzer A.B. Historical truth and lies about the past: reflections on Dewey, Dreyfus, de Man, and Reagan. Chapel Hill, London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1996. 162 p.

The Other Library

167

whelmed with a feeling of powerlessness when I found it impossible to shake the indifference and incompetence of persons charged to conserve and develop Russian science and culture. Now, to order: on political expediency in academic science and librarianship. The Academy Case of 1929-1931 "resulted" in new principles of interaction between science and the state. The previously existent principle of relative autonomy of science bodies and institutions became unacceptable now. The Academy of Sciences with its branches and the spirit of academic freedom was becoming a foreign element. Meanwhile it had quite a well-shaped structure that had to be efficiently used; in particular, that truly scientific body had to be converted into an organ keeping an eye on the "purity" of science. The process began of "the professionaal and moral deformation" of individuals (in Yu. Afanasiev terms). First rigid censorship of the access of scientific workers to foreign literature was introduced. Exceptions happened though that testified to the high civil standards of some scholars. Academician V.l. Vernadsky was undoubtedly among them. Recently documents were made public that even today amaze us with the courage and independence of his attitudes. Correspondence between V.M. Molotov, Chairman of the Soviet of People's Commissars of the USSR and V.l. Vernadsky clearly highlights the tragedy of situation in which a Soviet scientist found himself: it was at the top that they decided what he could read and what was harmful for him. Let the documents speak for themselves5. (Spelling and syntax of the times is preserved). Document Ν 1. V. I. VERNADSKY — to V. M. MOLOTOV Moscow 69 Durnovsky Lane lb Apt.2 13.11.1936 Tel. G1-59-16 Highly honoured Vyacheslav Mikhailovich, I appeal to You in connection with a case that may seem minute but which touches on issues of the highest State and human importance. The issue is the activities of our foreign censorship, — actually it is on the limits of free thought of an individual in our Union. And — accounting for the difficult moment that our state is living through — I am limiting it to a narrower framework, — that of the limits of free thought in scientific work in our Union. One of the fundamental elements of scientific work is wide and immediate availability of information on changes taking place in the world of science, on the progress of scientific thought for a scholar. Science is a unified whole and a scholar is infinitely diverse in the character and scope of his interests. Only he himself may set limits to his thought. Censorship cannot limit him. One of the most substantial shortcomings in scientific research in our Union, urgently demanding resolute, radical and sharp changes is restricting us in possibility to acquaint ourselves with global scientific progress. This restriction is disorganized and is getting worse. It is a great though fixable calamity. 5 See: "Ya stradayu ot cenzury nepreryvno" // Istochnik: Vestnik Arhiva Prezidenta Rossijskoj Federacii. 1996. Ν 3. P. 141-145.

168

Chapter Χ I will not touch on that problem here. If You cosider it incorrect, I can present my considerations separately. I will now move on to a specific matter. G.M. Krzhizhanovsky and N.P. Gorbunov wanted to talk to You about it but I want to appeal to You personally. From 1935 on (as far as I know nothing like that ever happened even in the days of the tsarist censorship) our censorship turned its attention to scientific literature that is penetrating to us in such insufficient amounts, if compared with our needs and capabilities. It finds its expression, in particular, in the fact that from the summer of 1935 articles from the London "Nature" magazine, the one most well-informed and influential among the global scientific publicaions, are systematically cut out. A whole number of articles and pieces of knowledge become inaccessible to our scholars. I keep receiving "Nature " from 1926 via CAS6 and no such thing ever happened before. One of the last issues of "Nature " had an article "On Transformation of Energy" by Rutherford, the greatest scholar and thinker of our time to whose ideas all the world listens attentively, cut out. We are deprived of a chance to learn it! Even the Academicians are! It is necessary to stop it. In particular I am suffering from censorship continuously. Now two books are withheld and, apparently, another one that I received will be. The first two are: one by my son G V. Vernadsky, Professor at Nell University in New-Haven "Essay of History of Eurasia" and another — a Czech book by a Christian philosopher and scholar Radie ("East and West"). The book to be detained is by my late friend I.I. Petrunkevich, "From Memoirs of a Civic Leader — Memoirs from Pre-Revolution Days". Of course, P., who had died long ago, sometimes speaks inimically of his political opponents in his book, but that is a book of recollections from before 1906, it seems. Censorship attested the book by my son as an "obviously hostile to the Soviets". It is wrong. This is not a political but a scientific book. He offers a new historical concept of Russian history, regarding it as history of nations in the area of Russia and the Union. He discloses deep historical roots that show the Union polilicy is right. Of course, he is not a dialectic materialist, but he is not an ideologist of the past either — on the contrary, hardly anyone among the emigre historians have so truthfully and deeply revised a historical reconstruction of the past — all the history of Russia. I suppose this historical book may now interest and put to thinking every cognitive political figure in our country — it offers facts poorly known. I am asking to issue those books to me personally for my individual use — I agree to all the terms to be offered me in this connection, but at the same time I do think that an Academician should be entitled to receiving such books as it used to be in the old Academy of Sciences — since its very foundation, if I am not mistaken — and in any case since the 1860-ies. Yours truly V.l. Vernadsky

6

CAS - Committee of assistance to scientists.

The Other Library

169

Document Ν 2. N.P. GORBUNOV—to V.M. MOLOTOV March 5,1936, Ν 62-71 To Com. MOLOTOV Vyacheslav Mikhailovich. Some scholars lodge complaints with the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences on the censorship cutting separate paragraphes, and sometimes whole pages out of foreign scientific magazines they receive. I demanded these magazins. Here are the examples: 1) English magazine "Nature", Ν 3456 — received by Acad. Vernadsky V.l. Pages 132-136 with Rutherford's speech about transformation of energy are cut out. It is interesting that the same issue of that magazine reached Prof. Berkenheim not disfigured. Rutherford's speech is so interesting that I forwarded it to translate and publish in the next issue of the "Advances in Chemistry" magazine that I am am the editor of. The translation is enclosed. 2) German magazine "Zeitschrift für praktische Geologie ", Heft 11, received by the Institute of Mineral Raw Materials. On p. 156 a paragraph on the Ukranian Institute of Chemistry in Odessa that developed a procedure to extract salts of Zirconium and Hafnium from the Ural ores is cut out, and on p. 157 — another stating that the Baku oil-extracting enterprises fell short of their plans for 1935, and that a Caspian to Orsk oil pipiline test took place on October 1. Both press-clips are enclosed. 3) German magazine "Zeitschrift für Elektrochemie und angewandte Chemie", volume 41, Ν 7a, received by the Institute of Fertilizers. Pages 365-366 are cut out with Prof. Grimm greeting at the opening of the meeting of German Bunzen Society of applied physical chemistry (Berlin, 30/V-2/VI-35) printed there. The article was apparently cut out because Prof. Grimm hails Hitler in the end. I have some more issues of foreign magazines with similar cuts. This fate even befell the magazines addressed to G.M. Krzhizhanovsky. I ask You to instruct Glavlit to suspend such censorship of scientific magazines. Secretary Permanent of the USSR Academy of Sciences N. P. Gorbunov Three magazines indicated are attached as samples. Document Ν 3. V.M. MOLOTOV—to V.l. VERNADSKY March 9,1936. to ACADEMICIAN V.l. VERNADSKY Highly esteemed Vladimir Ivanovich! In connection with Your and Com. N.P. Gorbunov's reports on erroneous actions by the Department of Foreign Censorship the Soviet of People's Commissars issued appropriate instructions to Representative on Censorship Affairs (I am attaching a copy of my order).

170

Chapter Χ Thereby it seems to me that the necessary answer is also given to the more general question on the conditions of scholars work in the USSR that You touched upon in the letter You addressed to me, at least as far as that question was touched upon in Your letter in connection with specific facts. Respecting You V. Molotov

Copy M a r c h , « » , 1936. Ν M-355. To REPRESENTATIVE OF SPC OF UNION OF THE USSR ON PROTECTION OF MILITARY SECRETS IN PRESS — Com. INGULOV From reports received by the Soviet of People's Commissars from the Secretary Permanent of theAcademy of Sciences Com. Gorbunov and Academician V.l. Vernadsky one may see that pursuing the task of censoring publications, hostile to Soviet power and socialism the Department of Foreign Censorship of Your Office has lately engaged in cutting out some articles and paragraphs from foreign scientific magazines and also in confiscating foreign publications addressed to separate scholars necessary for their scientific work. Regarding such actions of the Department of Foreign Censorship as a bureaucratic abuse of authority damaging scientific work in the USSR I order You to rescind all such instructions and never permit such abuses of authority on the part of the Department of Foreign Censorship in the future. I charge You personally responsible for implementing the present insruction into practice. Chairman of the Soviet Of the People's Commissars of the Union of SSR V. Molotov Document Ν 4. V.l. VERNADSKY—to V.M. MOLOTOV Moscow 69 Durnovsky Lane lb Apt.2 13.ffl.1936 Highly esteemed Vyacheslav Mikhailovich, Let me express You my deep gratitude. I have already received two of the books withheld. It seems to me that the instructions issued by the Soviet of People's Commissars to the Department of Foreign Censorship are quite sufficient—provided they will be exactly adhered t o — t o offer the necessary freedom for scientific work of scholars in our country. Thank You for your attention once again. Yours truly V.l. Vernadsky

The Other Library

171

Document Ν 5 S.B. INGULOV—to V.M. MOLOTOV Secret To CHAIRMAN OF SPCOF THE USSR Com. MOLOTOV V.M. N1577/C.

20.ΧΠ.36. Esteemed Vyacheslav Mikhailovich! On 9.III this year You instructed me to provide unhindered admittance of foreign publications to Soviet scholars necessary for their scientific work (to Acad. Vernadsky in particular). Your instruction to the Department of the Control of Foreign Literature is steadily adhered to. However I believe it necessary to advise You that certain scholars, Acad. Vernadsky specifically start to abuse rights granted them by Your letter. For instance, Acad. Vernadsky demands very insistently admittance of religious and reactionary publications. He subscribed to a French magazine "Etudes " that contains sharply anti-Soviet articles. Some days ago a package of books arrived for him, and among them there was a book by Etien Gilson "Christianity and Philosophy", its content to be judged from the following chapters: "Calvinism and Philosophy", "Catholicism and Philosophy", "Theology and Philosophy", "Mind To Service Jesus Christ" and also from the following final paragraph of the book: "How many erroneous statements would the historians and men of science have avoided, if they would only lend their ear to the voice of the church warning them against tresspassing the boundaries of their competence. We are only demanding one thing from them: to refuse expensive and fruitless experiments and recognize superiority of theology, fully restore theological values in all the spheres. We demand that mind be put to servicing Jesus Christ because it results in the triumph of the realm of God. The only thing that Christ demands from us is help him save the world". This book and other similar publications were released to Acad. Vernadsky. But in view of the fact that Your letter of 9. Ill offered to let without hindrance only publications of scientific value for scholars, I consider it necessary to bring to Your attention that Secretary Permanent of the Academy of Sciences, Com. Gorbunov and Acad. Vernadsky were notified by me that religious, hostile to the USSR and fascist publications will not be admitted in the future so that consequently they should ensure subscription of such publications only that are really necessary for scientific work. Representative of SPC of the USSR for Protection of Military Secrets in Press and Director of Glavlit of the RSFSR S. Ingulov Having read Ingulov's letter V.M. Molotov wrote him an assignment: "Comrade Ingulov. This is wrong and contradictory to my letter of 9.III. You were NOT charged to control scientific work and it is BEYOND Your powers"1.

7

Istochnik: Dokumenty russkoj istorii. 1996. Ν 3. P. 144 (prim.).

172

Chapter Χ

However even such assignments coming from the Chairman of SPC could not stop the fly-wheel of censorship gathering speed any more8. ...Let us turn to the general state of the library policy in the country. It cardinally changes after the dramatic events of 1917. Library work started turning into an instrument of state operations, and the state was only going to maintain it within such limits that were necessary to serve ideology of the new state. Lenin and his associates understood that perfectly. The first step intended was to centralize library activities. And as early as June 27,1918 a wire went to Petrograd, to the Library Department of the People's Commissariat of Education: Summoned to Moscow to conference on centralizing librarianship and introducing the Swiss-American system in Russia — July 1, Monday, 5 p.m., on the premises of the People's Commissariat of Education, Ostrozhenka, 53,—representatives of the Libraries: Public, Academic, University, Polytechnical College, Means of Communication, Technological Institute, Ecclesiastical Academy, former State Council and State Duma and also the Central Book Chamber. Non-performance of this dispatch will entail severe revolutionary punishments. Deputy of the People's Commissar of Education Pokrovsky Chairman of the Soviet of People's Commissars Lenin"9. The history of the text of that telegram is of interest. M.N. Pokrovsky, First Deputy of People's Commissar of Education of RSFSR compiled it and then showed it to Lenin. Lenin made two additions (underlined) on introducing the Swiss-American system in Russian libraries and on "non-performance entailing severe revolutionary punishments" and signed it. The telegram was first published in 1933 in the volume 24 of "Lenin's Collection ". Vladimir Ilich's signature stands first in that book, as it should (P. 161). Next follows an editorial note that Lenin crossed out the phrase on severe revolutionary punishments (it is bracketed in the text). From that time on this telegram keeps being printed in its two versions: "Decrees of Soviet Power" (V.2. M., 1959) has it without the editorial note but Lenin's signature stands second after Pokrovsky's (P. 624); meanwhile the composite "Lenin on Librarianship " (M., Goskomizdat, 1960) retains the note of 1933, but Lenin's signature stands there first (P. 54). In the third revised and expanded publication of the composite "V.l. Lenin and Librarianship" (M.: Kniga, 1987) both texts are given: the first comes according to the "Lenin's Collection" with Lenin's signature standing before Pokrovsky's (P. 148), and the second follows the "Decrees of Soviet power", without the editorial note and with Lenin's signature coming second (P. 389). These are all trifles, the reader may think, what is the difference? The difference is great. We have a distinct case of canonizing Lenin's text. Which source is there to believe, which to quote? Include the phrase on severe punishments or omit it? They never paid much attention to such miniscule details during Soviet days, but one would wish very much to get an understanding now. I will only add that judging by the third edition of the composite on librarianship (1987) the complete works of Lenin miss such a telegram. One thing more. What is that "Swiss-American system ", why was it necessary to introduce it to the libraries of Russia so urgently? What does it mean? The native librarianship knows quite well that V.l. Lenin paid great attention to the state of librarianship not only as a 8 See: Lyutova K.V. Spetzkhran Biblioteki Akademii nauk: Iz istorii sekretnykh fondov. SPb.: BAN, 1999. P. 70-80. 9 Istoriya bibliotechnogo dela ν SSSR: Dokumenty i materialy. 1918-1920. M.: Kniga, 1975. P. 18.

The Other Library

173

reader that had studied in many European libraries, but later also as a statesman who participated immediately in forming the library policy of the Soviet Russia. Suffice it to name one of his works written way back in 1913: "What can be donefor people's education ". Having studied the reports by the New York Public Library he formulated his understanding of accessibility and efficiency of servicing the readers in that work: "see pride and glory of a public library not in the number of rarities in it, not in the number of editions of the XVI or manuscripts of the X century it has, but in the span of circulation of its books among the people, in how many new readers has it attracted, in how fast any demand for a book was met, how many books were taken home, how many children felt drawn to reading and to using libraries... "10. Lenin's term "Swiss-American system "appeared later to indicate some synthesis of his indivilual experiences of studying in Swiss libraries with the impressions of business attitudes and practicality of the US libraries (picked from publications), namely: open access to book shelves, inter-library loan, availability of consolidated catalogues in the libraries, developing necessary conveniences for the readers in using books and so on. That "Swiss-American system " found its concise reflection in another document by Lenin: "On the Tasks of a Public Library in Petrograd"n. Apparently, he considered the main library city of Russia as — would we say today — a possible model for introducing that system to other major universal libraries. As for the "revolutionarypunishments " I believe the new power was so short of time and wanted so much to convince all the librarians in a single sweep that intimidation seemed to be the best approach. Introduction of the "Swiss-American system " into actual library life went on poorly. On January 25-Februaiy 1,1919 the first library session of the People's Commissariat of Education took place in Moscow11. M.N. Pokrovsky made a report on the Resolution by the Soviet of the People's Commissars of January 14, 1919. The minutes of the session has such an entry: Listened to: Report of the Deputy of People's Commissar M.N. Pokrovsky on the Resolution by the Soviet of the People's Commissars of January 14 this year that for the third time points it officially to the People's Commissariat of Education on its insufficient care in proper setting of librarianship in Russia and charges the Commissariat to take immediately most vigorous measures to: first, centralize the librarianship in Russia; second, to introduce the Swiss-American system; and also charges the Commissariat to demand from every local institution and every library a report on what they are doing on this issue and set periodic reporting by all the local institutions; in two weeks enter the Soviet of the People's Commissars with a report on the matter, with an addition that wishing to listen to the opinion of library circles on the problem of organizing the libraries according to the American system the People's Commissariat of Education convened a committee including Kudryavtzev, Briusov and Maslovsky. In view of convening of such a session it is desirable to enforce the commission with members of the session. Resolved to: 1) Accept Resolution by the Soviet of the People's Commissars of January 14 as the basis of session activities. 2) Not elect a special commission for introducing [a unified] network, but reinforce the commission already formed and represented personally in session by all its members with new persons the representative of out-of-school department O.I. Chachina, A.A. Pokrovsky and L.B. Khavkina identified for the role. 10

See: Lenin V.l. Poln. sobr. soch. T. 23. P. 348-350.

" Ibid. T. 35. P. 132-133. 12 See: Pervye gosudarstvennye soveschaniya po bibliotechnomu delu (iyuP 1918 g.- yanvar'-fevral' 1919 g ): Dokumenty i materialy / Ros. gos. b-ka; Sost.K.I. Abramov. M., 1993. P. 60-63.

174

Chapter Χ

...As Lenin expected, it all started in Petrograd. On November 28, 1918 a decree was issued on starting a special institute to train instructors and workers for out-of-school education, as signed byA.V. Lunacharsky and L.R. Menzhinskaya13. On December 20 ,265 students arrived for their first studies at N° 35, Nadezhdinskaya (now Mayakovsky) Street. They were getting ready to become experts in librarianship and theatre craft, musical education, directors of cultural and educational departments, organizers of museums and expositions. Essentially, it was the first Soviet institution for higher education — a center for the re-training of workers of out-of-school education, the first 'smithy' of new cadres of library, cultural and educational activities. Under close scrutiny of the powers to be librarianship was changing by the day. Two decrees by the Soviet of the People's Commissars of the RSFSR from 1920 should be particularly marked: the first of June 30 "On transferring bibliographical work in the RSFSR to the State Publishing House " and the second of November 3 "On centralizing librarianship ". They implied a gigantic scenario of all the Soviet library life to follow. In conformity with these decrees libraries of all types, bibliographical services, institutes, publishing houses were not only becoming pillars and bases of Party activities but were also turning into a mechanism to implement the principle of political expediency in life. The task of bringing up the country population "inthe spirit of Socialism " gradually converted from a Party task into a State one. Librarianship somehow suffered flattening, emaciating and discoloring in every respect. Before long stocks started to be moved from the center to remote regions of the country. Thus during the thirties the books from BAN were sent to Buryat-Mongolia, Tadjikistan, the Far East and later to the libraries of Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia14. After the Academy of Sciences moved from Leningrad to Moscow (1934) together with its Presidium and its leading institutions eleven Academic libraries, with the total stock of 180,000 items followed1S. Several years more, and the question sprang up on what to do with the five million stock of the main library now (BAN) separated from its direct leaders, how to redistribute it and how to do it so that it would serve the building of socialism. How did the staff of the Library behave at that time of trouble, what was their attitude to that situation? In BAN's archives many documents of the thirties were preserved, and these reflect its life from within after the "Academy Case ". Here is a chronicle of just a single year. The year is 1937! On March 22 the General Meeting of BAN discusses the issue "On the profile of the future Library of the Academy of Sciences". Pre-history of the issue is this: Presidium of the Academy, dissatisfied with efforts on servicing the readers and collecting stocks, formed a special commission including personally Academicians I.V. Grebenshchikov 13

See: Sankt-Peterburgskaya gosudarstvennaya Akademiya kul'tury: Κ 80-letiyu osnovaniya. SPb.:

Kul't Inform Press, 1998. 159 p. During 80 years the name of the institution of higher education changed more than once: on August 28, 1924, it was renamed to the Pedagogical Institute of Political Educational work after N.K. Krupskaya; in 1925 — to the Communist Political Educational; in 1941 — to the Library; in 1964 — to the Institute of Culture after N.K. Krupskaya; in December 1993— it have been conferred the status of St.Petersburg State Academy of Culture and in 1999 the Academy was renamed to the University of Culture and Arts. In 1930 a similar institute was established in Moscow. 14

Only in 1939 BAN sent to West Ukraine and West Belorussia 12 408 titles. See: Kukushkina Μ. V.,

Voronov V.N. BibliotekaAN S S S R z a 5 0 let. 1917-1967 gg. //Materialy nauch. konf. B-kiAN SSSR. L., 1970. P. 17. 15 Ibid. P. 17.

The Other Library

175

(chemist) and D.S. Rozhdestvensky (optician). The commission proposed to "separate special sections that would contain books in such numbers, that it would be impossible to confuse them even if a reader would take them from the shelf himself'. That suggestion evoked mixed reactions among the personnel. I incuded into the book excerpts from speeches by I.I. Yakovkin, the BAN Director, members of the commission and some persons from BAN staff. (Samuil Semyonovich Gurevich, Director of the Processing Department was elected Chairman of the meeting)16. YAKOVKIN I.I. In my opinion the principal question propounded is the question what should the Library of the Academy of Sciences be like. Samuil Semyonovich described one way for the Library, the Commission outlined an absolutely different one. Samuil Semyonovich is saying that the first question to be posed is that the Library of sciences should be an integral organism, while its tentacles reach to scientific-research centres, that is the Library itself should hold a rigid stock not subject to dissemination among scientific workers. But in that case a question arises whether such a library is needed at all? As I see it, such a library should not be transferred to Moscow, it would be easier to create libraries at the Institutes. Samuil Semyonovich is saying exactly that, that it is better to start 20 separate libraries at the Institutes than divide our Library into departments. Now, how BAN will function in that case, — Samuil Semyonovich is silent about. I believe one should state unequivocally: either BAN will exist, but as a living library organism having all the prerequisites to serve properly the appropriate reader with books, or this library is to be some sort of reserve which is not worthy of any special measures and reforms. That is the question to be resolved with full clarity. For me it is resolved absolutely definitely. Libraries by the Institutes are auxiliary machines for the work carried out there. Even within the limits of their specialized field libraries by the Institutes cannot set for themselves the task of book servicing those experts that are not connected with a given Institute, because each new person entering the library of the Institute is actually a disturber of the Institute work.... So it seems to me that either we really divide the giant library between the Institutes or create a special strong stock in the Library of the Academy of Sciences itself. They say we shall thus duplicate the work of Library of the Lenin All-Union Academy. But I think it may also be scientific whereas the ways of its handling the book, the ways of its work with the readers will be different. Under such circumstances I suppose we must decide that our stocks will be actual stocks and then start setting the question of sectors. I will disregard indications by K.I. Shafranovsky that the library, say, came to decayed stocks, that stocks are not subject to systematizing. I will also leave aside implications by S.S. on creating twenty to thirty libraries with the Institutes. I will follow neither. One should never forget that the young library of the Leningrad Section of the Academy of Sciences that emulates American libraries is systematic. One can work in a scientific library only in case it is properly specialized. We will not cope with that task just using catalogues. If you keep quoting foreign literature, let me cite another reference. You know that in the beginning of the twenties of this century the Americans state quite openly that our 16

Arhiv BAN SSSR. Op. 3, Ν 79. L. 45-70.

176

Chapter Χ system — the system of general arrangement is wrong, experts do not see books in it. Take American literature, you will find these complaints there. So I do not consider a department a separate library, supposing that a department is organically connected with other departments. I find that in this case we shall improve the service, this will allow us to include a library that will be really useful for specialists into the system. It was and it is thus in a number of both Western and our advanced libraries. As to doubts that somebody will forget what department he must go to and will get frightened by their great number, those apprehensions are, of course, unwarranted. Do not forget that the library will also have a common hall and specialized departments. And I myself imagine that specific apprehensions may dispell after attentive deep study of this scheme the Commission outlines. An important question, the principle one whether the Library of the Academy of Sciences should exist or not. S.S. solves this question negatively; the Commission assumes it necessary to stimulate this library and then it will become what it should be — a library by the supreme institution in the country—the Academy of Sciences. (Applause). MEINSTER A. Ya. (Deputy Director). Generally I would say, basing on the results of my acquaintance with literature and librarianship, that no library of such type, I daresay, exists nowadays, I cannot name you a library organized in such a way that the Academicians Commission outlines. Maybe somebody names me some foreign library organized according to this type, but I do not know any such library in our country. We, of course, have libraries that are organized on the basis of systematic arrangement, but these are two different things. Today Konstantin Illarionovich Shafranovsky wanted to propound such a theory that after some period of systematic arrangement we proceed to format arrangement. I just check on this question, I asked Com. Uspensky and have to tell you that neither in conference in Moscow (that we attended) nor in the Commission on constructing library buildings anybody named a single library building that would be constructed by format, certainly except the Lenin Library that oftentimes regrets that fact. Some representatives of the Lenin Library stated that that library was built by saboteurs. The library thought now came to the conclusion that books should be arranged systematically, not by format. But we are not posing the question of systematic arrangement now. That is not the point now. I should say that when the Academicians Commission arrived here first I initially adopted a formal attitude to the job, thinking that nothing particularly serious will come out of it, but the case acquired great importance. Members of the Commission took an exceptionally serious approach, and we — the librarians — learned many things from them, if you wish. For me the Academicians Commission was a school because Academicians started from life, from practice itself and gave really valuable instructions on how a scientific worker should be served. Up to now we had, to put it bluntly, lived under very thick accretions and almost failed to notice our readers. Konstantin Illarionovich noticed readers neither, workers of Systematization Department did not see their readers and so on. And now we wish to create such a library where every staff member would work with the reader and see him. It is when You all together begin working with the reader, notice him that You may properly serve him. ... A lot was said here about specialists. But after all, K.I., a bibliographical index compiled by people who have nothing to do with the case is not worth a dime.

The Other Library

177

What are we proud of? Of the fact that we have specialists in bibliography. We take pride in the fact that we have Specialization Department, that we have there a staff of experts. We keep saying that a library organized so that there are both specialists and their assitants, non-specialists (though, undoubtedly, specializing ones) will function well. One thing is indubitable to me, that if a person working with catalogues and bibliographical indexes does not know the book, things will not be going too well. But if that person works as Musatov, who knows books well, does, then he certainly will serve the reader well. That is the principal meaning of the decision that the Commission is reporting today. It is necessary to organize the library so that it is capable of actually, properly serving scientific workers. There is a second, politically important message that Com. Gurevich strikes out. He is saying that a public library should chase the reader, while the Library of the Academy of Sciences should not. The Commission rejected this approach, and I reject it too. There is not a single library in the country that would not pursue its readers. It was Lenin who taught us so, if you managed to read his article on libraries. It is not enough to take pride and glory of the library in the fact that it possesses enormous treasures. We have an attendance of personnel higher than the attendance at our reading hall. It is impossible, Com. Gurevich, to let five million [books] stand dead, we are to pursue the reader. If you read the report it speaks about it. We are not a reference type library, we ought to be a living library, but now BAN is not living, because it is not stacked with foreign books. It is stacked with everything and with nothing. Being a deputy director I can tell you not what it is that we collect in the field of chemistry or mathematics. Almost nothing actually, or take physics — nothing at all. See, strictly speaking, we are not setting our course to service the reader in a given professional field. There we pursue our own policy of servicing institutes. That is why we are saying something different now — life is evolving, the masses grow culturally, and together with books at institutes there should be books in BAN. This is exactly what the report is speaking about, it indicates that we have no such books but should. Com. Gurevich is wrong saying that we should not emulate a library of a branch institute, that we should not substitute it. If a reader fails to get a book in a branch library he will come to us. Let me ask you what will he come here for if we do not have necessary books. GUREVICH—It means the library was wrongly collected. MEINSTER — If we aim at such a reader one hardly needs to have a book depository such as ours. I believe it is wrong to turn our library into a single book depository. Here they cite the case of the Public Library. I am still maintaining some contact with it, and when I have an occasion to speak to some of its workers (and I am stating this with full responsibility) with old workers of the Public Library, those that I worked together to dismantle a certain system of a public library, they tell me rightly that we erred to destroy it. We had systematic departments there. True, there happened something else there, they shaped into independent libraries, but we shall not allow such things here, because we shall have a general catalogue and centralized collecting. That is why we shall not have a situation observed in the Public Library now when there are no personnel to know stocks and because there are no personnel to know stocks well, they cannot serve a scientific

178

Chapter Χ worker with deep requirements properly. It is certainly a simple feat to serve a student, and that work comes to 80 % in the Public Library, but when the question arises about servicing scientific workers — things come to a standstill though they do have systematic catalogues (the truth is, these systematic catalogues are not offered to readers). Therefore I believe that it is not enough to have catalogues, it is necessary to have living stocks — and well-informed people. Our new Library will have such living stocks and so our reader will be served properly. Much was said here about the number of departments. I listened to all the speeches and, to my mind, only Com. Gurevich and Com. Shafranovsky, who do not agree with the conclusions by the Commission, spoke against the new library on the whole, while other comrades did not object generally to the Commission conclusions in their speeches but only pointed out such details as the number of sectors, spoke of the desirably less number of them and so on. I should say, comrades, that details are not the thing now, that is a task for future technologies. I only want to say that some comrades think wrong that sectors will be an obstacle in quickest servicing of our readers, and that is why they are afraid of a large number of sectors. I believe sectors will pose no barrier for our work, our work may only be disturbed if we have this noble system that Com. Gurevich so likes, those functional workshops. We expect in the future to have not those functional workshops that would give us no opportunity to develop our work properly, but divisions that will produce certain ready-made semi-finished products. You, Com. Gurevich, are telling us that will not be a factory but an association of separate workshops. No, Com. Gurevich, it will be a factory. Our Library needs to become and will become such a factory. True, large sums of money will be needed to reorganize our library, but these means will be spent properly, since we shall create such a type of library in which our country will take pride. CHAIRMAN — Lenin did not suggest that large libraries should pursue the reader, he suggested to pursue the rate of use of books in large libraries. That is exactly what I said in my speech. VOICE FROM A SEAT — This is one and the same thing. COM. MEINSTER — How can one make the highest use of stocks in every possible way and not pursue the reader. What does it mean? CHAIRMAN — This is not the same. To pursue the reader means to print 23-30 thousand copies of books of highest demand and service the reader with books he wants, not employing stocks of our own... N O V O S A D S K Y I.V. — Perhaps, A c a d e m i c i a n s Grebenshchikov and Rozhdestvensky who are present here, will take the floor and speak on the issues involved. It is very important for us to know their opinions. General meeting yesterday asked them so insistently to attend today. It seems to me that everybody is interested to know their opinion. VOICES—Please. Academician GREBENSHCHIKOV — The questions posed here were on how the Library of the Academy of Sciences should work in the future. When forming the Commission Presidium of the Academy of Sciences was not content with the work carried out by the Library, hence it was not satisfied with those principal prerequisites laid in the basis of the former project. I, at any rate, understood the tasks that the Presidium assigned to our Commission thus. Indeed, everything in those prerequisites remained as it had been, and now the Library of the Academy of Sciences

The Other Library

179

in this building is a gradually dying organism that will come to its natural death in a decade, so that instead of the Library of the Academy of Sciences we shall have just a single book depository, or, perhaps, a dust-heap of books which will have neither catalogues, nor reference-books — nothing. In order for that organism to live people are needed who will carry out fruitful work. That fruitful work cannot be done if we have no living people, if catalogues and systematizaion gradually dwindle. BAN's position is exteremely difficult now. And, having started to think what could the main cause of the disease of our library be, we came to a unanimous opinion that that cause lies, undoubtedly, in a lack of those stocks in the library, of those books that are the main reason for a library to live. The library cannot live by its old books only. That is why a number of departments on natural sciences turn out to be gelded, and the Library cannot develop any work in that direction because of that. We got quite throughly acquainted with various aspects of work of your Library. All the ime we kept asking the Library personnel to take part in our work; our conferences were never closed and we would be very glad if you would attend. As to separate questions considered in our conferences, one should say that the first that arose was how better to organize the Library not from the point of view of a librarian or a bibliographer, but from the point of view of people immediately using its books. And proceeding from that point of view each of us expressed a thought that it would be very pleasant to have a library where one could come and receive a book one needs, come right to to the shelf where one could find all the books published on the topic by the time. Essentially one needs just 3-4 thousand such books, and those that one needs to get not off the shelf comprise only 1-2 % of the fund, while books to be taken from old stocks make just a trifle 0.01 %. If one approaches the Library stocks from that point of view, it appears the stocks of the Library have different value, not in the sense of their value as such, but in the sense of their exploitation. And then we got an idea that it would be desirable to bring the living part of the Library as close to the reader as possible. According to our estimates one would need approximately 100-150 thousand books of such stock to cover all fields of science. It is absolutely evident that in that case one cannot position such a stock either in the general reading hall alone or even in three halls, and it is also impossible to try tracking those books, checking that they are used by the reader directly. So we need to have separate sectors containing such a number of books each that it would be impossible to confuse them even if the reader himself is taking them off the shelf. Many comrades asked how to deal with those sectors that fall in between two sciences. Such a person working in the frontier field will undoubtedly come visiting both the department of chemistry and that of physics. If he studies in the field of theoretical physics, he will automatically address both mathematics and chemistry and even if You try to force him to go nowhere except the department of physics he will go to a mathematical library all the same. And for every given reader those boundary fields are a problem for two libaries, three libraries at most. This is an exception only, and scientific workers will not have to bounce from sector to sector as a football. When considering these problems we ascertained that there are libraries which strive to shake their reader off, while others approach individually each scientific worker, trying to satisfy all his demands, search for necessary books in order that he may take

180

Chapter Χ them home. A scientific worker may keep a book at home for a long time but if a library dispenses all its current books, current magazines then such a library cannot really serve a non-resident reader. If we have such stocks in library that using them one may guarantee that the demands of all the readers be satisfied, then, undoubtedly, such a librarary will be quite valuable, more valuable than two libraries of branch institutes. Assume I am interested in the theory of fluids. There is such a book — a book by the Faraday Society. But you may not find it in a single library because the question is interesting and the book is kept home. Apparently, with such an organization the library cannot satisfy all those interested. That is why we believe a library where one can get exhaustive information is extremely valuable. Some of the library workers get an idea that decisions by the Commission are not fully reasonable, not totally correct. We are possibly faulty in a certain sense, that we did not have such a discussion with you earlier and did not include everybody in corpore in our work, but that is explained by the fact that the first task we received from the Academy of Sciences was to cover all the problems in just two weeks. We failed to fit within that period solving the task. Look into our minutes, there are very many individual statements there. The Commission had its time extremely limited. That is why we failed to incorporate you in the process of work. We supposed that having discussed it with BAN management we would finalize the project and then submit it for discussion with all the activists. No doubt, all those questions could never pass you. We adopted this memorandum. Moreover, it may be submitted to higher authorities for consideration. On March 29 principal issues will be discussed, and now if you have any disagreements or doubts I believe it necessary for you to present them to the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences thus drawing specifically Presidium's attention to your library. I will tell you one more thing — about constructing the library. The Commission started working in January, while the issue of capital construction of the library and its reorganization is on the agenda for, like, a year and a half. (FROM SEAT. Longer.) Could be longer, but then I turn the question on to you, why did you keep silent until now, why did you fail to prompt us yourselves, why did you wait until this Commission be formed the one that forced you to stir. You should have been the initiators yourself. I believe that the Commission did stir you all, and this fact is extremely expedient. It was necessary to stir all the library workers. Possibly, the decision suggested by the Commission has to be correlated and deliberated more. Never think that we consider this decision perfectly obvious and specific. You may well feel — it reads between the lines — that there is another option, that is to preserve everything as of old, to leave the Library in a position it finds itself in now, mostly dying with respect to natural and mathematical sciences. But we are saying that though thrifty, that option is unsafe, so one may only take that way only after a prolonged discussion. We suppose that our resolution, after it goes through its hearing at the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, will be sent to the Librarians Association for another decisive discussion, and so we believe that the problem we raised is so wide and serious that it cannot be resolved in Commission such as ours. Our Commission is only preparatory, it was busy preparing this issue, and I think that the Presidium of the Academy will initiate

The Other Library

181

another additional commission in which this problem will be thoroughly discussed particularly since what our Commission is suggesting is absolutely new. I understand that many get an idea whether this problem is solved correctly or not? You feel there is something new here and so you are afraid of an inadvertently erroneous setting of this problem. Apparently, that problem may only be solved either by the Presidium of the Academy or even the Soviet of the People's Commissars. NOVOSADSKY I.V. — I have two questions to Academician Grebenshchikov. First, do You believe it necessary to systematize only the active stock including 2-3 thousand books in each sector or all the stocks in the Library? Second, is the number of sectors, in Your opinion, final or will it undergo changes? Acad. GREBENSHCHIKOV I.V. — The first question of systematizing all the stock and of pressmark re-coding in general is most closely connected with the state of Your catalogues and cards. Were Your catalogues decent enough, then, believe me, nobody would ever raise the question of dividing and reconstructing. It is the existence of five pressmarks and a heap of catalogues in your library that force us to take this hard work on. But having started any job one has to bring it to the end. We supposed systematizing stocks in this case would offer some way out, however, were everything all right with You, that problem would of course never be raised. The second question of how many sectors you need was debated in the Commission for quite a while. We have never specified exactly how many sectors are needed — 20-25 or 15. When we actually start counting separate volumes in different disciplines then one may update that issue. Now the figure remains approximate. So far 20 sectors are earmarked, but the number of sectors may undergo changes in future. CHAIRMAN. The report by Acad. Grebenshchikov gladdened me very much, particularly since it disagrees in principle with speeches of those who defended the status of sectors. While they offered to split the library into deparments, the Commission opinion boils down to creating separate stocks on separate disciplines, so as to create main stocks of interest of 100-150 thousand books in number by the reading halls. Our point of view was fully supported by the Academicians Commission, and those who defended those regulations were not right, since those opinions differed in principle. We may welcome the position of the Academicians Commission and fall upon those who set the problem wrong. In the theses we were clearly told that the Libraiy will be divided into 30 libraries instead of allocating active stocks for servicing the readers. (BOROVINSKY A. F. Our chairman got out of a tight corner, at last). Acad. ROZHDESTVENSKY D.S. When we came here in our capacity of the Commission, we, of course, did not understand things in a proper way, but, after all, according to A. Ya. Meinster, working with us was quite helpful. We came as consumers. And we saw that there are no consumers in this library, simply no consumers at all. Now, while we amateurs, people who did not know librarianship, could not understand your work properly, it turned out that the librarians absolutely do not know how to do their job because they do not see the consumer. Let me begin my speeech with this paradox. Our discussion turned out to be very useful. We indicated the things we wanted to get from the library.

182

Chapter Χ I will tell you how we proceeded during our conferences. We were discussing how should the library proceed, we were talking about reforms that have to be put into practice. Consider any library of a branch institute. I will offer the library of the Optical Institute as an example, a specialized library in physics most familiar to me. That small library is right here next door to you. But if we compare these libraries, yours and the library of the Optical Institute the difference will be striking. You have nothing like it has. Now, since there is not a single book interesting for me on a special problem, it becomes completely excessive for me to come here. I am taking books in that library and never take books on physics from yours. Besides, I want to draw a parallel between these libraries in the sense of quick servicing. If you order a book here and in our Optical Institute, the impression is absolutely different. Those talks I heard here today opened my eyes to many things. Somebody agreed here that a book may be found in a week, others settled for 2 hours, 30 minutes, nobody went lower than 10 minutes. We, consumers, have different demands — not more than 2 minutes or even one. The choice is just this, there is no alternative. Is it possible to organize? Undoubtedly it is, I am saying so because it is actually relaized in the branch library. When I come to the library I name the author of the book and receive it not later then in 2 minutes. Never did I take longer to receive it. When I enter the reading hall I use one-and-a-half to two thousand books lined up there on the shelves along the walls without any librarian. Such a desire is not a fancy or a whim. That is why I am saying — you do not know your customer and do not know your job techniques, and that is why one may hear such suggestions on terms that sounded here. The consumer needs various books, sometimes he needs 15-30 books in an evening. If you spend 6 minutes only searching for each, you will spend 3 hours on this, meanwhile one sometimes is forced to look through a book quickly, maybe just a few seconds, and it becomes unnecessary after. Hence quick servicing of books is an extremely important thing. The most cardinal task in life of a library is to give a book out immediately, not later than in 2 minutes. No talk about 10 minutes, 2 days or 2 weeks all the more. They keep asking here whether it is possible in a large library. If immediate dispensing of books cannot be organized in large libraries, then we have no need for large libraries at all, let there only remain small libraries. Let me tell you, when I started looking into the issues of library work I took a book from the just founded American Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. This is a wonderful library and everybody was very glad when it opened. And on its opening day the public came to that Library and one of the citizens invited demanded a Russian book of some outlandish title and it happened not to be on stock; another citizen demanded some other book and it was produced in 6 minuties. Everybody was in raptures and bliss. Certainly, such a library has its own raison d'etre, but in our situation such a general library is not needed, that is, it will not provide the services necessary for those extemely narrow and fundamental experts that scientific workers are. I stress this because one of the orators here said that there is no narrow reader now, so one should not divide the library into branches. This is far from being true: a scientific worker is a professional, a narrow expert, and it is just for such narrow specialists that the libraries must be created. Thus even the American library system is not suitable for us.

The Other Library

183

I was very happy when I saw that the Library itself, without our interference has already chosen a course that, in my opinion, is right, the course of dividing into departments. Such a project was alredy drafted in the library. Apparently what was done in the library of the Optical Institute may be done here too: take books on physics, put them together, compile a separate catalogue, and then these books may be dispensed to the reader very quickly. It is important to imagine the type of the reader and get to know that type, and then the division into departments will follow. This is inevitable, nothing else can be done for the library to function well. I believe it is necessary to stop talking about this. There is nothing terrible in departments. Certain comrades somehow think that a non-resident reader is a drivelling idiot, that he will not know where to go. Perhaps every expert is that small, a librarian is of course always educated wider, but an expert is not so stupid as not to find the library where he will find the books he is interested in. The question of overlapping specialized fields — I consider it details. What is important is that the very type of library is clearly expressed already. For us the type of the library shapes quite definitely — it is separate departments. First of all effective living stocks in these departments are very small, these are what one may take off the shelf and put back then. It is possible to do that. Practice shows that books do not vanish, that in the long run it is more advantageous to lose one, two books in two years than to hamper readers. This is where you have living stock. That stock gives a possibility to work through a whole evening not appealing to the librarian. There exist a number of books that are needed for wider use, but a book from that stock is available in 2 minutes. Suppose there are 5-7 thousand books on physics on stock. Those 5-7 thousand books fit into a room this size, and a lecturer always has them at hand, they are within his easy reach. Not every single evening, maybe once an evening a reader will need a book from another stock. To that end the main stock is divided. A historian, for instance, may somtimes happen to be in need of a book that for some reason became popular at a given moment — such things happen, when suddenly, at once, a book from the XVIII or XIV century becomes extremely actual. For such a case that stock should always be somewhere near. I do not see why selection may become so difficult here, it seems to me that the library should have a proper arrangement and then there will be no need to stir all the books. The state of books we discovered here defies all description, words fail to express the condition they are in. Unfortunately, that situation is familiar for us not only from this our library, but from all the Russian libraries in general. This is merely a way of Russian libraries unlike the libraries abroad. The fault is equally yours and those who dispense subsidies. Such a situation should be corrected, because it cannot contunue this way further. They kept telling us about fine bibliographical works here, at the same time pointing out that there are no catalogues, no systematic catalogue at all, and that the general catalogue is extremely bad. Now take the library of the Arctic Institute where the catalogues occupy more space than books. The library there is about 70-80 thousand books and 13,000 catalogues. It seems to me that the problem of departments is not our whim at all, not something terrible, it grew naturally from a desire to serve the reader better with the book and from

184

Chapter Χ reader's knowledge. We, who came here, know the reader, that is, know ourselves. And that is what we have taught librarians. True, we ourselves acquired 100 times as much knowledge from librarians—now we are using various intricate words and can, in general, talk to librarians which used to be difficult earlier. I imagine it very important for all the library personnel to seriously discuss these problems and enter the realm of ideas in which we remain for these 3 months; moreover, I think that the closer the library personnell approach these problems, the deeper it familiarize itself with the gist of the matter and the more will it agree with our material. I think it important that every staff member acquaints himself with this material and shares his opinion on this question. I cannot imagine myself a situation when our notion differs from that of the whole Library body. If one still assumes such a situation that our notions still differ despite everything, we shall have to talk until we convince each other. CHAIRMAN — I think we shall ask the Commission to emphasize in its materials that the talk is about allocating 3-4 thousand books, that is, about allocating what we call "cabinets" in our terms and the note provisionally calls "departments". That is what Acad. Grebenshchikov indicated in his report. PAGIREVA M.N. — It seems to me that nevertheless we do have disagreements with the Commission. Indeed, these may not be in substance but in technology, but for all that we have disagreements. All of us agree that working libraries of this or that size should be allocated, but all of us object to dividing the main stock that consists not of 5-6 thousand, but of millions of books, because it would not be an assitance in work but rather an obstacle. If You are saying that books from the old stock are needed extremely rarely, then what should we divide them into sectors for? Indeed, is it not better to allocate only the most actual literature to the amount of 4-5 thousand at first, as Acad. Grebenshchikov suggested, and consolidate all the rest somehow and arrange it in a more compact and handy way that would allow us to dispense the books to the readers not in 2 minutes of course (even with the new project it would be impossible to dispense a book from old stocks in 2 minutes) but, perhaps, in 6, provided we have reasonable, uniform press-marks, good transportation, various mechanical devices and so on. I think that with such an organization our work will become significantly easier, and we will save in the sense of both space and expenditures... CHAIRMAN — There is a motion to approve the project of the new profile of the Library in general, and then proceed to details that arise disagreements in the meeting. Are there any objections to this suggestion? (Voices from the seats: "No"). Let us consider the project of new profile of the library approved in general. Now let us proceed to details. In my opinion these are the following: should our Library be divided into sectors, or should it allocate tiny working stocks from its complement to service the reader branch by branch. Thus, there are two wordings. Does the meeting have other opinions on formulas? BOROVINSKY A.F. — The first formula is wrong. The library is divided not into sectors but into three main departments: of social sciences, of natural and mathematical sciences and of general and special stocks. This is completely different from what You, Comrade Gurevich, are saying.

The Other Library

185

PAGIREVA M.N. — I believe we may accept and approve the project in general, but have no right to solve the problem in detail, we first have to thoroughly acquaint ourselves with it and discuss it. I suggest we approve the project in general now and not pronounce a judgement on details, but instead pose a question of initiating a working commission that would examine and discuss all the material and in the very nearest days and to submit it for the secondary discussion of the general meeting of the Library staff. I believe that the working committee must just work the details of this project up, these are not perfectly clear for many of our employees. And only then we shall may submit for some resolution or other, and for details too... Acad. GREBENSCHIKOV I.V. — I suppose the problem—in the format we have it — is principally solved; we have to work it through in more detail during April so as to have the final decision by May. I have to advise you that we want to draft a memo by May, like a charter on capital construction and the library. Apparently all these departments have to be analyzed there in every detail, because the role of every sector head and so on will depend on it... If you could do your work during the first six-day terms of April and present your conclusion, that would be exceptionally helpful. On March 29 the principal questions are to be resolved, and the Presidium will not go into discussing them in detail. CHAIRMAN — There is a proposal not to hurry but to fit within the term that Academician Grebenshchikov indicated. On June 1 1937 the 'active' of the Library gathers together. Subject of the meeting is reconstructing BAN work and self-criticism. I.I. Yakovkin has the floor17. I.I. Yakovkin stops in detail on the basic issues of V.M. Molotov's report that was discussed during the all-Academy 'active'. Then he draws the attention of the meeting to shortcomings in the libraries operations. He presents facts of carelessness. The Catalogue Department had insufficient management, Borovinsky A.F. may serve an example; he did not penetrate to the essense of his matters; there were signals of that, but we failed to draw the needed conclusions. Every institution must be capable of self-criticism. Selfcriticism is necessary to expose every mistake present in management and the departments. In our case self-criticism should be even deeper. When uncovering errors one should find ways to organize the work properly. Currently the Library has huge perspectives. Moving to Moscow... All the wrongdoings and mistakes should be noticed in due time. Once there were indications that the Bibliographical Department did not have proper guidance and one has to recognize that it was right. In his report Com. Molotov points to the need to be honest with respect to the state. There was a financial audit in the Library that found a number of errors in spending state means... Upon examining the act of financial auditing Presidium of the Academy of Sciences took note of careless spending of state means. But the issue is not only roubles. We must seriously strive to improve labour discipline. We ourselves should thoroughly cultivate our vigilance towards the enemy. The Library also failed to manifest itself vigilant enough. Borovinsky was arrested from among our 17

Arhiv BAN SSSR. Op. 3, Ν 4. L. 115-122.

186

Chapter Χ staff. What did we do to expose him? There were signals but the management displayed certain thoughtness and light-mindedness. Among the tasks mentioned we must pay particular attention to that of vigilance. Train an ability to have a good understanding of people, pay great attention to selection of personnel. One should not only check staffs biographies. We are not too safe in that respect. Management never engaged in such checking. The bureaucracy Molotov speaks about takes its place in the Library of the Academy of Sciences as well. We did not pay enough attention to the task of selecting personnel, of knowing one's staff, to the ablility to properly recommend people for promotion by their merits. It is necessary to correct our errors as quickly as possible. I especially point to operations of the directorship, to our bureaucratic style of leadership and red tape. We keep managing by methods that do not promote operative and opportune performance. The Library can only properly adjust and organize its work if it finds an ability to fall into step with its activists... Either BAN is a vigorous collective or it must be reorganized accordingly. Today one has to speak about the deficiencies we have and expose them. The Library faces a great serious task. You know what staff the Library has (it is meager). So we should ask ourselves, whether all the planned works are really necessary; perhaps, some are just traditional? It is necessary to revise our work from the point of view of standardisation. The 'active' today is not discussing details but has to discuss the Library situation in connection with liquidating the so-called permanent staff positions. I suppose the activists today must reveal shortcomings in management. Look at all the activities in departments. It will give us a possibility to tune up our work so that the Library may truly develop as the Library of the Ail-Union Academy of Sciences. Com. Novosadsky I.V. puts a number of questions and draws a special attention to the issue of what is done to liquidate sabotage in connection with Borovinsky's arrest. I.I. Yakovkin answers that nothing was found in the Collecting Department, because its director did nothing and shifted all his work on to the others. As for checking his work in his capacity of a political editor nothing is done yet. TZIKLINSKAYA. Yakovkin hardly posed the question about part-time jobs by A.Ya. Meinster. It is disgraceful to work part-time in three jobs. It is an anti-Party action. Meinster is doing nothing in the Library. He outrageously behaves himself with his colleagues. He tresspasses decency limits. We should admonish him for his boorish attitudes towards his associates. Irresponsible in his associates qualifications. If Meinster behaves himself in such a way the cause of it is soft-heartedness of Innokenty Ivanovich. Meinster's absence from today meeting is a disgraceful action, for which he should be held responsible, he acts like a messing cat. His absence is to be fixed in the minutes and reported to the Party committee. One must hoist him up for such a slapdash attitude. KALVEIT. One wants to share impressions of work of the Manuscript Department. It is impossible to enter there — Glagoleva immediately springs up at the threshold to keep not only those workers of BAN who came on their own, but even those sent there on director's approval out of the Department. That is what happened to representative of BAN Moscow Section Com. Bogorad. I believe that with such an organization there disappears any desire to take interest in the work of that Department... UTKINA — believes that good criticism is a work organizer. Production conferences should go under the emblem of criticism. Criticism has to find its place in the

The Other Library

187

newspapers as well. There is no criticism of principal production problems in our newspaper. Only such a criticism is valuable that is objective. Production issues remain aside. One must reproach administration with respect to the memo by the Commission submitted to the Presidium of AS. That work was carried out without participation by activists. The experience of lay persons was disregarded. Activists only heated up when all the principal issues were already decided. A few words on personnel. We have all the conditions to raise personnel. There are no irreplaceable persons, but not all of us understand this well enough. It is necessary to train new personnel. There is also a very serious issue of distribution of staff through the Library. Has management considered it, or, finally, what is the distribution of forces in the administration itself? About specialists. Under our conditions a person called a specialist is that who worked in the Library for a long time and knows librarianship, but we have it the other way: a specialist is a botanist, a chemist but not a librarian. About part-time job payment. Persons receiving that payment are those with impressive character who can stand up for themseves, but if you lack such features nobody will pay you anything. It is necessary to clear that question up. KRAUSH. Utkina touched on the questions that I am sensitive to for maybe half a year. Administration considered the question about work distribution. The instruction was drafted in such a way that a number of sectors fell through. (Instruction on the distribution of administrative duties). Until the directorship has clear-cut duties for each of its members, these deficiencies will prevail. On the scientific profile of the Library. First of all the Library should be scientific. Innokenty Ivanovich spoke about the bureaucratic style of management. This is unacceptable. I am deeply indignant with Tziklinskaya's speech. It will be wrong if we accept Tziklinskaya's speech. Meinster brought the Library out of a deadlock. ISAKOVA. Believes that it is necessary to strenghten BAN Moscow Section with experienced library workers. BAN is responsible for the work of its Moscow Section, so we are not to miss the facts characterizing worker's professional quality. Our Department received a letter by Alekseeva, director of'OTN'library. It has a number of mistakes and is drawn carelessly. Meanwhile Alekseeva had the cheek to ask for a rise in her wages there. GARKAVI L.M. Speaks not only as a librarian but also as a reader... There is no connection with branches at all. The Library organised an exposition of revolutionary literature from Spain. That was a very important question but I had no guidance. For a whole year nobody came. We can do all we wish — nobody ever comes to us. Yernshtedt, the network director visited us just once, but that was not her fault, she is so busy with various things in the Library, branches are not her responsibility. Branch libraries live in isolation. Neither the institute, nor the BAN local trade-union committees display any interest in the needs of branch librarians. All that intereferes very much with the work and creates no favorable conditions for proper organization of work. BERG N.A. On distribution of duties among the directors. We have no Learned Secretary since May and the tasks are shared among department heads and Yernshtedt. Some have no direct duties, and there is nobody to bear them since the Learned Secretary was discharged and we have no new one...

188

Chapter Χ GUREVICH S.S. We witnessed sharp criticism. We have some mould that we have to reveal... What is the situation in the Library in the sense of its management? We have scientific managenent — I.I. Yakovkin, there is also director's administrative assistant. We have no responsible production organizer, though the post is occupied. There is no administrative leader in the Library. That is the cause of all our troubles. This is why senior officials tell us that the atmosphere is stuffy. A leader loses touch, gets out of his depth, that becomes bad for work. An order was issued for certain scientific workers to conduct research. That is a scandal. Such work cannot be conducted by order. A department head does not see the one giving him the task to also feel responsibility. Nobody in management cares about how this work will be done. Until we have a production organiser one may adopt a thousand resolutions but there will be nobody to carry them out. In fact, Meinster had the roles of the Learned Secretary. They say the Library has to carry out scientific research. For the time being this question should not be raised and one should not try turning the Library off its true path. LIVSHITZ E.I. They often forget about the necessity to protect and preserve socialist property. Com. Uspensky has books from 1931, but it is simply impossible to get them. The same with Com. Polkovnikov. He has no number or reader's card even, so it is impossible to register his books properly. Now when they tell him about it, he sharply protests. POLKOVNIKOV V. Asks to be told how it happened. LIVSHITZ. Com. Polkovnikov tells us he can very well do without it. POLKOVNIKOV. And what is extraordinary about it? LIVSHITZ. Com. Kraush takes the "Banner" magazine in her own name and sends it to Com. Zubov in Moscow. Are there no magazines in Moscow? Deputy director Meinster completely ignores the library rules. BOBROVA E.I. One cannot force anybody to do scientific research. One should interest workers in it. It is easy to find interest in scientific work in many people, but one has to know how to stimulate it. In BAN they disregard personnel aptitude to work in certan departments. Take the XVIII century for example. Are the personnel working there trained for fruitful scientific work? They work there as they would work in any other department. And meanwhile we have workers better prepared for and inclined to just that work, but for some reason they are keeping them aside from what they are interested in. FEINSTEIN. The question of vigilance. Vigilance is necessary, but talking about it will not help if there is no real control and accounting. Under these conditions it is difficult to catch a wrecker... We work poorly in the Library. It is necessary to concentrate all our attention on organising all library work for the quickest cultured service of the reader. Work of all the Library Departments has to be subordinated to the task of cultured service of the reader and revise the Library plan of activities respectively. NOVOSADSKY I.V. The meeting passes spiritlessly. Is there nothing to criticise? Poor preparation of the meeting is noticeable... Because of that self-criticism is not biting. We have something worth mentioning. After all, two persons were apprehended by the NKVD. One doubts whether no traces of wrecking remained after Borovinsky in the Collecting Department. In this same room Borovinsky spoke in defence of Trotzkyists. They, he insisted, could be intimidated... Sometimes I.I. Yakovkin sounds as if giving the management up. It remains unknown who guides the work in reality. Rather, nobody. Sometimes Com. Polkovnikov

The Other Library

189

happens not to follow director's orders. Polkovnikov needs to learn politeness from I.I. Yakovkin, but as for resolution there is nothing to learn from Com. Yakovkin. ISAKOVA. Takes the floor since there were no real answers to certain questions. About vigilance. Who must be responsible for this? Every staff member, every step of the way. There is no organisation in the Department of Special Keeping. Take the case of com. Polnitzky. A whole closet of books from special keeping is transferred, but there is no exact instruction whom to hand it over and how. LUKOMSKAYA A.M. The work of the Service Department is one of important areas in the Library activities. Berner is arrested and in his place they put Feinstein who is runnig a job that has nothing to do with the Service Department. I am asking why is the directorship acting that way. KUBISH E.M. About the bindery of BAN — calls attention to the need for more efficient work there and to necessity to shorten its terms. VILNITZ. A lot was said about Borovinsky and Pokrovsky arrested from the Complecting Department, but no conclusions are drawn. Why is the administration not reacting to the fact that fascist magazines were put on display? Why are the magazines of poor value presenting no scientific interest subscribed to from Germany? These are the magazines on botanies and other branches of knowledge. POLKOVNIKOV. We were talking abot vigilance. Beginning from 1929 the enemies Viktorov, Gorlovsky, Gaidorova, Pokrovsky, Borovinsky cooped up in the Library. What were the conclusions we drew on that issue? One has to recognize, none. Take BAN work during 1936. We spent 300,000 roubles for contracted jobs. This is not a small sum. I do not want to say that I have no need for contracted jobs, but the financial audit that took place exposed many wrongdoings. And after all that audit only touched on the financial aspect, unfortunately there was no audit on the essence of the work done. What was done for that money? I am sure nobody knows. Here is an example, work on incunabula. It was carried out by V.E. Bank. When we started looking into what he was doing, it became clear he carried his work poorly. We spent 5,000 roubles on his works, but could have done it for 1,000 or 1,500 roubles at the most. That is how we managed. Another question is quotas. Kraush included it in the plan but the work has not been done so far. There I went together with Meinster to the Collecting Department, Com. Kuzeneva is working there on unciphered stocks. I inquire what she is doing and it appears that she ciphers books and because of lack of space she puts them back and all that is buried under unciphered books once again. YAKOVKIN. It may be that we shall be unable to answer all the questions posed here and now. The first one on BAN profile is an enormous and principal one. The library cannot be anything but a scientific-auxiliary institution. One may not compare the Library with the Physical or any other Institute of the Academy of Sciences. We should examine our own stocks. Not a single Library has such branch libraries as BAN. We are to serve fully with scientific books everybody coming here. This is the scientific task of BAN. It is necessary to organize: a) adequate contacts with the Institute; b) guide correctly the activities of branch libraries according to the specific tasks of the Academy of Sciences. The BAN profile has to be clearly fixed. The BAN Charter has to define precisely the role and place of the Library in the scientific research work of AS institutions. First of all that role should consist in scientific processing of its own stocks and expedient contacts with

190

Chapter Χ other scientific institutions. It is also necessary to decide on the role of BAN in the system of other libraries of the Union. Those contemplating the future of the Library pessimistically are worrying in vain. Indeed one has to pose the question of delimiting management responsibilities. Com. Novosadsky interprets and understands my attitude to work incorrectly. By no means am I declining responsibility. Besides it is impossible, because the Presidium of AS belives that the responsibility lies with the director first and foremost. The director is even responsible first for Meinster's poor work... Books from the special keeping were transferred to the Reference Department and then Com. Polnitzky raged over the fact that those books were not ciphered. Work of the special keeping should be uprighted. POLKOVNIKOV. There are no persons fitting the needs of the special keeping. ISAKOVA. Supervision is absent. One may take any book away. Belov, Vagner, I.I. Yakovkin, Silin keep taking books from there. NOVOSADSKY. Papayan, Sklyarov also took books away. RUDOVSKAYA. Does not consider herself responsible for the fact that books are taken away on management permission.

Meeting is adjorned until June 7. The second meeeting took place on June 20. Opening it I.I. Yakovkin called attention to the "need to upgrade and accentuate self-criticim over a wide range of activities of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. This will help to get rid of shortcomings and improve the work of BAN'" 8 . Here are some speeches reflecting the atmosphere of June 1937. USPENSKY. I shall begin my speech with separate theses that I will then summarize. The main thing in our work is co-ordination between the parts, that is correct posting of personnel. Among all the department heads I am the unluckiest one since I had no opportunity to work in the department from the day of my appointment. My work has to be directed to a different course. What is taking place in separate parts of my department — I do not know, and I am not alone in such a situation. Take for instance Ο. K. Yemshtedt and A.P. Wagner who were not guiding the work of the department for a long time. It is a great error in organizing our work. It would be correct to call us special mission librarians. T.N. Khokhryakova also took a long time not working at her department, while engaged in the activities of Grebevshchikov's Commission... USPENSKY. This has to be given very serious attention. Further. They are not selecting people for any given job, but a job is selected for a person. They took a long time deciding what to put Tziklinskaya to, and when the task arised of Chugrova's transfer some departments were afraid that she would hit there. Are all transfers correct? Next, we have a group of colleagues who are awaiting their promotion for a long time, the so-called spinsters. In the Systematisation Department these are Sokolova, Strebkova, Stepanova and one has to say that transfers not always follow pure production reasons. Now about sick leave — we have Fein and Dinze who are very ill. We cannot cope with our work without them, and the issue of their treatment is extremely acute. It is very difficult for us to select personnel, and we need these people so much.

18

Arhiv BAN. Op. 3 , Ν 552.

The Other Library

191

I.I. Yakovkin was raising the question, whether our leaders do know production. Polkovnikov does not know production and does not care to. He is saying: "Meinster is smarter than I, let him make heads or tails of it". One has to force him to learn production, not to fence himself off with ignorance. Polkovnikov does not trust his employees ("staying through the evenings since they think nothing during the day"). There forms an unhealthy attitude towards the entire work of the library. The 'Trishkin caftan' trend is very harmful. There is not enough attention to important things (this reproach is aimed at Meinster too). There is always a guarded attitude towards new initiatives, and even if somebody agrees from the very beginning, nevertheless the work is still not done. A number of undertakings that were started but never ended: the chronicle, entering articles onto cards that were undertaken by Meinster initiative last year, and now he himself is braking them. We follow an emergency routine, and the work with the Academician's Commission would have passed calmer if everything would be done in time, there would be no need to take us off our work for such a long term. KALVEIT. On the mass group. I regret so much that Polkovnikov is absent. I am hereby posing a question before the 'active' and asking for an answer: should the Department of Mass Keeping exist? Last year when I was invited for the job the management in the persons of Meinster and Yakovkin believed that materials of mass keeping are very necessary for the library, and there was a task issued to examine and systematize all that heap so that one might use that valuale material. Now most of that work is already done. And somehow talks are beginning for some reason that that work is unnecessary. Polkovnikov claims that personnel is doing nothing and that there is nothing to do there at all. In his opinion systematizing is technical work. It always ends up with such a discussion with Com. Polkovnikov. I am asking to resolve whether the group of mass keeping is necessary. This job is new; it is conducted both in the Lenin and the Public Libraries. There is very valuable material in mass keeping that will be necessary for a historian. Take for example the appeal by Com. Voroshilov to Red Army servicemen on saving bread, or the appeal by pioneers to Com. Stalin. You must take into account, comrades, that books you can find in hundreds of copies, while these leaflets are preserved in several copies only. Polkovnikov believes it to be pulp. I am asking comrades to speak up whether we have a right to waste such material. Polkovnikov does not understand our production, and so there forms an incredible situation. People are doing their job and are accused of idleness. I think it necessary to put an end to this situation. From a great number of people that passed through our department Com. Eventova only managed to adapt herself to this work. To hire an employee for two months is impossible and inexpedient because as soon as we teach that person to work he must leave his job. It is necessary to write about this and to prove inexpediency of such a situation. Now I will move on to the question of keeping such material. In December I submitted a cost breakdown and an application where I asked the managerial department to produce closets for keeping mass material, like cartographic closets for keeping iconographic material. But the closets were not made. In connection with putting shops in order some more material was sent out. I invited Com. Silin and showed how the material was kept. Polkovnikov came, saw portraits and popular prints somewhat outdated and next day he is sending Zelenko to cut that material. I requested an order in writing from Zelenko. Fortunately, he had no such order. I urgently called Meinster and Yakovkin who saved material. YAKOVKIN. Please save time, let us limit speeches by 15 minutes.

192

Chapter Χ BORISOVA. As to the wrecking in the Collecting Department. Perhaps, personnel was instinctively vigilant, because in fact Borovinsky did not guide us, no one ever went with one's problems to him. We always preliminarily checked every question with Polnitzky. Correspondence always passed initially through Polnitzky. We reported to Meinster on Borovinsky's uselessness but were told that Borovinsky was our leader and we should involve him in the work. BOKHANOVSKAYA. There is dissatisfaction with ways of struggle with late arrivals. Inspectors roughly hoist personnel, not giving any possibility of explanations. Other disciplinary measures should be used on the latecomers. MEINSTER. What are these measures namely? BOKHANOVSKAYA. Put them on the black board, list them in an order, in the wall newspaper, deduct pay, but if one is not admitted to one's workstation production suffers. About paid leaves. Many are already on leave. The resolution on shortening leaves was sent in too late. One has to understand the position of workers and regulate this problem somehow. IOFFE. We have gathered together for the third time, but no one feels active. We should not be talking about mistakes only, it is necessary to point out what our defects are and what we did to get rid of them. Director of the library gave me an assignment but I did not carry it out. I am not brought to answer. That is irresponsible. There is no firm plan in the library. Consider for example checking stocks. Isakova took it up, found conduits and implemented this work, but if it would be in that firm plan, it would not have been done. That work was necessary, why was it not in the plan? On the system in Systematic Department. Systematizing counter-revolutionary leaflets (by Kamenev, Zinoviev, Trotzky and so on). On the Scientific-Bibliographic Department. One has to decide what to bibliograph and what not. They are afraid of self-criticism in the Library. There was that talk about cards. So it appears — do not wash your dirty linen in public. On new people. On attitude towards new people. Silin, Director of the Acquisition Department. During the production conference Isakova made a report, bypassed Silin, got an approval from Garshvo and they passed Silin over. It is very difficult to search for material in alphabetic index, systematisation took place there and, for example, you cannot find the Comintern Programme by the word "Programme", it resides in the Comintern sector. VOITZEKHOVSKAYA. I belong to the category of people who did not find thenplace in production. I entered the Complecting Deparment in September, was received well and was sent into bookshop Ν 1 to separate books from booklets. The section that suffered from lack of working hands could not employ me at all, they made me run hither and thither. Borovinsky sent me to work in shop Ν 19. It was terrible, but I worked there after all. It reached me (though working in shop Ν 19 I was isolated from everybody) that some serial publications are not received, so I thought that if the LOKA staff would transfer to BAN I would be given an assistant, and then one could work even in shop Ν 19 on filling lacunae. I.I. said that when complecting Russsian books one should pay special attention to academic publications. We were authorized to receive free academic editions for up to 10,000 rubles from publishing houses, but despite our repeated duns a proper order was issued too late and we had to make do with leftovers. Presently the premises are taken away and it is

The Other Library

193

impossible to do the work of complecting any more. Eventually clarity came to shop Ν 19, something was done, but it was absolutely inexpedient to send just one person to work there. There are card indexes that correspond to the material held there only in part. Now everything is at a standstill there growing over with dust. SUROVENKOVA. During last 'active' Bobrova spoke on the problem of workers agreeing to their functions. That is especially relevant to the department of special stocks which is growing various additional stocks very quickly now, their development requiring high personnel qualification. At present the department has 156 thousand items of various stocks of different coding. We keep working without a plan, we have no conditions for growth provided, because even studying books of the XVIII century in a training team has dwindled and is not conducted at all. If you have the reading hall, references and orders you cannot work to improve your qualification, we are just short of hands. Our management orders lack principal orientation. We still do not know who we have to serve and in what numbers, we kept issuing too many books until we found our old instruction on the department of special stocks, according to which it has to serve only the reader who failed to find the book he needs in any other stock of BAN. It is necessary to have information about the operations of the Reading Hall and of related departments in general. Closure of the Reference Department was a major surprise for us as well as inspection on readers debts. It is extremely desirable to have systematic self-reports by departments or even certain individual workers during general meetings. YERNSHTEDT. Unfortunately I belong to that sort of worker who carries out separate assignments by the order of management, and throw the library commission into the bargain. My work on library network was not too good. On the work of the library system in general. The level of library sytem is not what it should be. The library seizes everything but it never considers its own capabilities. When we were taking the library system up one had immediately to raise the issue of personnel. Currently separate libraries are offices dispatching and registering stations. Personnel are employed poorly. M.N. Pagireva says nothing of the network. Co-ordination in managenent is insufficient. Polkovnikov's actions towards the network. Polkovnikov has a strong grip but what does his incompetence lead to? I consider it my duty to advise the 'active' that Polkovnikov declared: throw to hell your unciphered stocks. Or he declares too, that training network does not lead to relocation [to Moscow], Meinster had to take an hour to explain him that the network works to prepare stocks for relocation. We have commom ground with Yakovkin and Meinster, but Polkovnikov displays an absolutely disgraceful attitude towards his work that he does not know and does not care to learn. It is obviously abnormal. We need to report contracted workers to the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, stating that because of lack of contracted workers such-and-such works cannot be done. We need to say at the top of our voice what we are doing, what the Library is busy with, and they will meet us halfway. If there are no means one has to lay this job off, otherwise it appears that we begin a job but have no means to finish it. Newspapers are all hanging in the air. Mass keeping should function. It is necessary to preserve material to do press-marks for it. On special keeping — we have direct subscription abroad, but the terms of book delivery did not decrease. This is, of course, improper. We have an increase in hard currency allocations, but cannot act promptly.

194

Chapter Χ SILIN. As a new person in the Library I shall sum up some speeches. This time our self-criticism goes better than the last, but it is still insufficient. One can feel specific substance in certain speeches, but there is still some fear that prevents proper statements. Our task is to expose the shortcomings that we have aplenty and besides to disclose the wrecking that we undoubtedly have too. It would be desirable to listen to our specialists: Berner and Polnitzky. No work on book sanitation is under way in the keeping department, and what is started is not brought to completion. At current pace they will have work to do for the nearest 75 years. Attiude towards the tasks of keeping are disgraceful, criminal and even saboteur. One book is infected by the other. We need to form a team urgently, and directorship must think this task through. About the right to enter shops. One needs to check the workers that have passes into shops, because not all of them come to shops on business; there are cases when those passes are used to select books for themselves or to leaf through fashion-magazines (employee Finogenova who expressed dissatisfaction when she was reproached). Receipts in the Servicing Department are kept chaotically and lay absolutely open, same as pass blanks, control is poor, books can be carried out without checking. Question to directorship. In several years we came to a state when we do not know how many books have disappeared. In shop Ν 10 there are receipts for some signal copies, but for many there are not. The enormous number of unciphered stocks (100,000 items in branches and several hundred thousand in BAN) makes it incumbent for management tö strive to increase the staff year on year; and liquidating uncoded stocks using contracted workers is not a way out, the question has to be propounded stronger. NOVIKOVA. Vigilance. Ioffe spoke much. Borisova claimed we are vigilant enough, but I have my doubts. The Complecting Department is a very sensitive sector. When subscribing for hard currency and exchanging books one must bear in mind that we reside in capitalist surroundings. Facts show that exchanges with foreign states double with Germany but grow only 30-40 % with democratic states. One has to think deeply about this. Readers assert that we have many unnecessary magazines. Borovinsky was a doubledealer and it is necessary to normalize the department atmosphere after him. We are doing a poor job in training specialists. The Geographical Society Brigade fell apart. The youth bibliographical team is considered to be forced labor. Shafranovsky often came unprepared to studies and failed conducting some of them. Shafranovsky's trips to Moscow also resulted in his non-attendance, but when we had to intensify our studies after, doing 4-6 hours in a six day term, department management protested. One should not think we are incapable of becoming bibliographers. One should support us, help and guide in a more serious manner. MEINSTER. A number of questions set forth here need answers not merely in words but in deeds. One has to instigate control of the masses over fulfilment. Bringing the 'active' together is not a campaign, it is systematic planned monthly work by the activists propounding the principal problems of life of the institution. Next time the management should provide answers to questions posed here and then discuss them topic by topic in the order of priority: Scientific-bibliographical Department, systematic catalogue, preservation of socialist property. Developing self-criticism in the activists organisation, in its work, real contact between management and masses. I heard so much new today. Maslovskaya's speech — she should have spoken up earlier and the wall newspaper had to cast the light on such problems. But it is not too late to do it right now.

The Other Library

195

How shall we fulfil resolutions of Plenum of the Central Committee? It is established that Borovinsky was a wrecker and that we displayed political irresponsibility towards him. We felt he was not one of ours, but we considered his length of service, his Party membership since 1919 and failed to unmask him in time. And we are not insured against ememies now. One needs to learn the ways of enemy wrecking work. Have we paid attention to the work of Borovinsky? No, we have not. Was his work in shop Ν 19 wrecking? One needs to run a thorough inspection of work in complecting, which Borovinsky sometimes engaged in closely. The tasks of mastering Bolshevism are raised very poorly duirng the 'active'. This is the work of trade union and the administration. We have means for the Marxist-Leninist education in our cost breakdown. We have a lot of counterrevolutionary literature on stock. Every worker must be politically vigilant. Hence, everybody must be politically competent and alert. Our collective shows its [vigilance], workers keep bringing books with Borovinsky's marks that should have never been let out. On reconstruction. IofFe erred speaking, he has not become a librarian (he does not know catalogue). But it is correct that we did not account for our capabilities when we failed to plan the work on conduits. Inner resourses always exist, and one must bear them as well as rationalization in mind when planning. Now we have to revise our plan for the second half-year. Indeed, we try to seize everything (bibliographic works), but fail to cope with our work. Bibliographic work can be planned as any other scientific work. We are doing large jobs, but have no list of publications. Take the problem of reviews. It is not normal that there are no reviews. First its quality was inferior, and now Feinstein is not carrying it at a proper pace. There are facts of nepotism and Feinstein himself is not suitable for the post of the director of Special Stocks Department. Bank's work turned out to be insufficient, but it was not Feinstein but Berner who revealed that fact. Feinstein's work is insufficient in the sense of its pace. As to mass keeping the reproach lies with I.I. Yakovkin. The job was agreed with the director of the Library, and now he changes his approach. A leaflet is the material most valuable, then follows newspaper, magazine, book. Further on not everybody should engage in planning. We never relinquished newspapers (3 employees are busy there now, 6 worked earlier) and we shall not give them up in the future either, even with two-month contracted workers. Top-priority work with newspapers is a point of discussion, depends on how one regards it. Moscow trainees praised our Library comparing it with the Lenin Library and SPL, and were surprised with our minute staff. Moscow often puts us in hard position. We received instructions concerning contracted workers for just a week. Now by [July] 25 we must present a cost breakdown for 1938, and executives will be delayed until its ending. Certain observations are true: it is necessary to give the reader's catalogue to the reader. The remark on systematic catalogue is true as well. One must inspect the biology catalogue. Gurevich's comment on the bibliography brigade was wrong. We thought of training specialists, and Shafranovsky must brace up. SHAFRANOVSKY. I have to be on leave from June 1. MEINSTER. The issue from Maslovskaya's statement has to be checked and work has to be distributed properly. Quota setting. Managenent failed to cope with this, it did not work out reporting formats. One has to pay attention to checking execution of orders. We have no perfect team-work of the whole collective and it does not promote proper organisation of work.

196

Chapter Χ YAKOVKIN. Our self-criticism has not yet reached its necessary height. Our work is not finished yet. We must provide the necessary conditions for administration functioning. Taking into consideration indications and proposals expressed during these meetings. We need to gather activists once more before presenting our plan to Moscow...

I do not know about you, my reader, but I myself cannot help shuddering when reading these minutes on dividing the first Russian national library into sectors and on self-flagellation. But the case never finished with discussing criticism and self-criticism problems for BAN personnel. Supressed with ideology itself, the Library was becoming an instrument for supressing dissidency as well. A month and a half later, on August 31, 1937 the "Pravda" newspaper publishes an editorial named "The Library Case". "One should neverforget—it emphasized— that the Party Central Committee and the Government always considered cultural, especially library work political", where a librarian is treated as a "propagandist and an agitator for the Bolshevik culture. All his work should be permeated with the spirit of the Bolshevik ideology and Party principles". And "where they tend to forget about this political aspect, enemy influences spread through the library, and library shelves become cluttered with hostile literature". The Library of the Academy of Sciences responded to "Pravda"'s editorial with its additional socialist commitments. K.V. Lyutova presents some of them as they were passed at production conferences19. "BAN personnel firmly remembers, that enemies of the people Trotzkyists, Bukharinists and other saboteurs· of all suits use every possibility and every technique to commit their heinous deeds in any field of our construction work. Remembering this, BAN personnel, regardless of individual status, post and qualification promise to strengthen revolutionary vigilance with respect to literature they handle... to strive for a maximum possible reduction of currency orders in fascist countries... ". And more: "Strengthening revolutionary vigilance and striving for politically correct orientation of the readers, the Collecting, Systematisation and Service Departments commit to: a) by October 15 revise the list of scientific institutions of fascist countries... b) by January 1 revise the content of the Library systematic catalogue, cleansing it of publications not suitable for the readers catalogue; c) not admit penetration of hostile literature to exposition and the reader ". As already mentioned in records of the meetings from June 1937 one of the "enemies of the people "was A.F. Borovinsky. In the first volume of the "Leningrad Martyrologue for 19371938 " one finds a reference on him on pp. 120-121: Borovinsky Alexander Frantzevich, born in 1875, native of the town of Lyublin, member of the Ail-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) from 1920, expelled in 1937 in connection with his arrest, Polish, Director of the Collecting Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. Prior to his arrest lived in Leningrad. Was arrested on March 31, 1937. On August 25,1937, sentenced to ultimate penalty by the Commission of NKVD and the Public Prosecutor's Office of the USSR as per clauses 58-6-11 of Criminal Code of the RSFSR. Sentense executed on August 27,1937". 19

Lyutova K.V. Spetzkhran Biblioteki Akademii nauk... P. 76.

197

The Other Library

I will add to this reference (data provided by A.N. Nesler) that Alexander Frantzevich had higher education (he was a mechanics engineer), engaged for a long time in lecturing, was sent twice to Siberian exile (1903 and 1910). Had a complete command of several foreign languages. Before he came to BAN he worked as assistant professor of the Chair of Social Pedagogics at Higher Pedagogical Courses with the Leningrad Technological Institute. From October 1,193 3 he was enlisted on the BAN staff as a head librarian and then appointed Director of the Collecting Department. Such a rank needed preliminary co-ordination [with Party and security bodies]. Simultaneously, from 1936 he held a post of the Director of Moscow branch of BAN (MSBAN). On April 1, 1937 his name was striken from the lists of the Library personnel. As mentioned in the documents, Borovinsky pursued his "wrecker's" work in the Library of AS in two directions: 1) subscription to fascist literature and 2) general ruining of work... Nevertheless even during those dreadful years the Library lived together with the country and the Academy of Sciences, replenished its stocks despite the criticism about their disagreement with scientific needs, serviced its readers. I remember stories by the BAN veteran readers about the creative atmosphere, benevolence and affability of the librarians, willingness of the personnel to help in finding indispensable publications, to carry out bibliographical search. Astonishing as it is, those people managed to keep up the BAN spirit, it remained inextinguishable even up to now! ...Work of the Library was interrupted by the war of 1941-1945. On June 27,1941 there appeared a joint Resolution by the Central Committee of the Ail-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Soviet of People's Commissars "On the Order of Relocation and Positioning of People Contingents and Valuable Property "(Chairman of the Special Commission N.M. Shvemik, Deputy Chairman—A.N. Kosygin). Here is one of the projects of evacuating libraries: The Lenin State Library of the USSR The State Public Library (Leningrad) The State Library of Foreign Literature The Historical Library The Polytechnical Library The MSU Library The Library of Stalingrad Oblast The Library of Tula Oblast The Library of Yaroslavskaya Oblast

the city of Gorky the city of Melekes (Bashkir ASSR) the city of Saratov Kirovsk oblast Udmurtia the city of Saratov the city of Chkalov the city of Kazan the city of Omsk

Unfortunately, I did not find the Library of the Academy of Sciences on that list, and it remains unknown whether they planned to evacuate it and where. Perhaps, it had been merely forgotten? Maybe they planned (after "re-profiling") to remove the remaining valuable manuscripts and rare books to the city of Melekes together with books from the Public Library? After all there is information that "manuscripts, incunabula and most rare books, stock of academic editions, Collection of literature from the XVIII century, materials of the Reference Department, foreign literature published in 1935-1941, cartographic materials and so on were packed into boxes and preparedfor dispatch in BAN. The number of boxes reached 2,500 "20. 20

Kukushkina M.V., Voronov V.N. Biblioteka AN SSSR za 50 let. .. P. 18.

Chapter Χ

198

There were 4,108 manuscripts, 41 books of old-print and all the hand-drawn maps were packed into boxes. And all that was kept preserved on the ground floor of the building until April 194521. But at the time on September 17,1941 there happened the most prolonged artillery shelling of besieged Leningrad. In 18 hours and 33 minutes 331 shells fell in the city. In November 1941 a shell broke off part of BAN's roof. As a result of bombardment in December 1941 about 30 % of window panes were knocked out. On February 14,1942 the Library building was damaged by three shells, one of which struck the coal yard (third yard), the second hit the main building, and the third holed the roof. Apparently during that, alredy fatal for me, day and month the Library had been a special target for the Germans22. BAN archives have in keeping notes by one of its workers — E.I. Vintergalter, then the director of the Pulkovo Obsevatory Library—on life duirng 1941 -1942. Elena Ivanovna wrote them (and it makes the notes particularly valuable) during the summer of 1943, when the war was still thundering and so much remained vague. They were never published since 23 .1 will quote some fragments here. The moment the war broke out there were three of us, workers of the library: beside me there was Kh. V. Belyaeva, my assistant and V. Sapozhnikov, a technical worker. Three days after the declaration of war Belyaeva and her family left Leningrad. We were left alone together with Volodya. There was a lot to do. We decided that we needed urgently, before any decision on the library to select most valuable books and hide them into safes built into thick (1,5-2 metre) walls of the round observatory hall. We selected about 150 books, mainly incunabula, and carried them there... In the middle of July it was decided: the Library should be moved to Leningrad and stored in the Library of the Academy of Sciences. According to insruction of BAN director I divided all the stock into three groups for different keeping: 1) Rare, unique books (the smallest group), 2) Books most actual, needed for the current astronomers work on various subjects and 3) the largest group — all the others... In the beginning of August it became clear that it was impossible to move the library from Pulkovo to Leningrad. It was very difficult to get trucks. Then it was decided to leave books in Pulkovo until better times. A commission was sent from Leningrad to inspect the Observatory basements. They turned to be suitable for keeping. It was ordered to carry all the books from the library to basements. It was a huge work. It was necessary to hurry, because the enemy started closing in on Leningrad and the Observatory intended to move into the city. They sent to me a team of fifteen library personnel that worked with me for about a month, until mid-August, in comparatively peaceful conditions yet. We took books off the shelves, tied them up in bundles and shifted them in basements. Because the distance from depositories to basements was long, we had to organize manual conveyors in 3-4 places. The basic depository was overhead, in the gallery of the fifteen-inch 21

Istoricheskij ocherk i obzor fondov rukopisnogo otdela... Vyp. 2. P. 60. "Why are they fatal?" - a reader will ask. Just because that 46 years later, on February 14, 1988, would start the third, most destructive for the Library of the Academy of Sciences fire for all its history of long standing. At the time I worked as a deputy director. Since then February 14 is always fatal day for me. 23 Let me add, that in 1944 E.I. Vintergalter was the only one conferred from BAN with a "Labour Heroism" Medal. In 1945, in the composite book "100 years of the Pulkovo Observatory" was published her article "Pulkovskaya biblioteka" (M.;L., 1945. P. 261-264). Among other materials about the life of the Library see an article by deputy director G.Ya. Snimschikova "A Year in the Siege. From the Notes of a Librarian" in the composite book "Devyat'sot dnej" (L.: Lenizdat, 1957. P. 321-323.) 22

The Other Library

199

refractor. First stage was the stairs to the round hall, then from the round hall into the garden, and at last through the garden into the basements. The other depository was in the Observatories East yard, even farther from the basements. Here we carried books from the first floor, loaded them onto carts and brought those through the yard and the front garden to the entrance to basements and through the basements it was a conveyor again. We worked well, in unison of course we got tired but understanding the need to hurry we never slackened the pace. We started at 7 in the morning and worked up until 8 in the evening with one break at 2 p.m. for lunch and rest. We managed to organise a sleeping place in a hayloft... I managed to rush to Leningrad the group of books that I selected as necessary for the current astronomers work, together with all the inventories and catalogues. Seamen helped me in this: every day they were sending trucks to the city and I begged them to transport books to the Library of the Academy of Sciences whenever possible. These trucks set off at 5 in the morning, and I never knew certainly whether they would be able to take my books the next day. So for a whole week I was on the watch for their departure from 3-4 in the morning, and when I had my luck I loaded the books put by the exit onto the truck at a lightning speed, and they left for Leningrad. During the week I managed to have 3 such dispatches and forwarded about 6,000 books. I could not accompany them myself because these were military trucks and it was absolutely impossible to get a permit to go with them. Shurely, I remained uneasy for the whole day worrying how they would make it there, but fortunately each time everything turned out all right, and all those books are in the Library of the Academy of Sciences. Work on transferring books into the basements during the daytime still continued. In the first days of September the military command told us it is impossible to stay there any more, that the Pulkovo heights were already a front line and that it was necessary for everybody to leave in a hurryThere was nobody in the Observatory any more, all the astronomers had left. From among the civil persons the only one retained was D.E. Ezhov, the door-keeper who had his service with the Observatory for more than 50 years. I said my good-byes to him telling that after the war we would be working together again. I went all around the library premises, the garden, came down the hill and could not set out for a long time. Ezhov walked with me for a while, I parted with him and went to Leningrad on foot — there were no buses already. D.E. only had a short term of keeping the Observatory left for him: several days later he was killed in the garden, near the main entrance... I was given work in the Library of the Academy of Sciences. And thus we lived until the middle of October... In the middle of October 1941 by the order of Academician I.A. Orbeli it was decided to try and go to Pulkovo so as to carry out the rest of the library and the instruments, if possible. The Leningrad Soviet gave us 5 trucks and fifteen young workers; as for the Observatory there went astronomers Deich, Berg, Pavlov and Messer, and of course I had to go from the Library. E.A. Kozak who also knew Pulkovo as she worked in my team, went together with me. It was impossible to assign nobody because the trip was to be dangerous, she volunteered to go herself courageously. Our expedition was lead by a worker from the Staff Political Department. By 8 in the evening, taking our sacks, ropes and crow-bars with us we gathered by St.Isaacs Cathedral where the trucks were sent up. We set out in absolute darkness, moved with long stops not taking a straight way,

200

Chapter Χ but from one headquarters to another because the highway was mined. We took 4 hours to drive the distance we would cover in 40 minutes by car in time of peace. By midnight we, at last, drove up to Pulkovo. It appeared that of the five trucks that had started only 3 reached the place. We stopped one kilometer from the hill, it was impossible to drive further ahead. The military warned us to speak in a whisper so as to make no noise. German trenches were too near; we could see flickers of light and heard voices from those trenches... At last we reached the basements, climbed in with two lanterns and began looking round. From the basements one could see the sky. Instead of the accurately arranged stacks we left there was an absolute chaos: battered, charred books together with bricks, stones, pieces of iron were a ghastly dust-heap. It appeared a shell breaking through the roof flew through the round hall, broke through the floor, and, unfortunately, made it into the basement through the only vent and burst there. Block-busting and incendiary bombs completed the destruction of the library. Feverish work started. We tried to save what remained undamaged. Seeing almost nothing we were putting books into sacks and dragging them to the exit. When all the sacks were filled up we began passing them on to the truck in a manual conveyer. We came down and went along the highway, while trucks with books had to overtake us. When they arrived, we quickly counted all our people, climbed into trucks, lay on the books and left for Leningrad. By 6 or 7 in the morning we arrived at the Hermitage, dumped the books with the help of the Hermitage's workers and went home tired, hungry and frozen. I got the task of sorting those books out, selecting the most valuable, checking them according to inventory and accounting for the approximate losses. A team was formed that worked together with me in the Hermitage until the middle of January 1943. Members of that team were workers from the Library E.A. Kozak, P.I. Shestakova and N.P. Surina. We had to work in unheated rooms, everybody had swelled chaped hands: it was a hard time. Books were dumped in a huge heap in the middle of the room. Despite the fact that Academician I.A. Orbeli kindly put a large room in the Hermitage secretariat at our disposal, there was not enough space for us. When we began sorting books out, first according to their press-marks so as to check them according to inventories, then by centuries so as to separate most valuable ones, we have had to carry each one several times from one place to another. Rare books, incunabula and books of the XVI-XVII centuries we packed in thirty boxes and we left them on keeping in the Hermitage. The rest (about 20,000 books) we decided to bring over into the Library of the Academy of Sciences, but since there was no transportation at all, we had to carry them on a handsleigh. (True, once we managed to get a horse-sleigh). But nothing came of this. We made some trips, transported, perhaps, only one twentieth of stock, and that was all we could do. Everybody was so weak, we could scarcely move without any handsleigh. Everybody has frost-bitten feet and our hands began to swell from exhaustion. After all it was the winter 1941 -1942. The books stayed in the Hermitage until better times. That was when my family began dying. I lost my mother, my sister, two aunts, my nephew (a student at the University), received a notification from headquarters that my younger brother was killed... My work in the Hermitage was finished and I started to work in the Library of the Academy of Sciences, not with the Pulkovo books left in the Hermitage, but partly in the Processing Department, partly in the Catalogue. Conditions were hard: no light, no heat

The Other Library

201

(there was no heat and all the windows were broken), temperature in the room was lower than low -8°... -10°. Sorting the cards out with one's bare hands was pure suffering, all the fingers were chaped and bled. But everything passes; winter also passed with its frosts and darkness, spring had come, it was becoming easier and easier. Only one thing was oppressing me — my own feebleness (I was 53). If only I could throw let us say 20 years off my shoulders. I was looking with envy at those young who were walking briskly, who stood firmly on their feet, could easily stand up from a chair and could even run; they never reeled. It pained me to be aware that old age and decrepitude came so early. But, to my surprise, summer came and with it my old age began to pass. Of course, I am not working now at the speed that I had before the winter of 1941-1942, but after all I can climb up and down stairs, carry books, rearrange quite a number of books and put them on the highest shelves. From summer 1942, fortified in health, we began to work quickly, vigorously. We wanted to do as much as possible. We had so many plans that we were short of hands to fulfil all we outlined. After all, our staff became very small. During the winter of 1941 -1942 so many of our workers went away, many died, some of them right at the workplaces — they had no strength to return home. I was charged to move books of the Pulkovo library from the Hermitage to BAN. We finally had a chnace to do it during autumn; books were already moved by trucks. During the winter of 1942-1943 I sorted them out by their codes, put them into bookcases, now I am finishing checking them against the inventory and soon I will be able to exactly account what remained and what was ruined, so that after the war ends one may immediately start restoring the losses... In the first months of war the foreign catalogue of BAN was temporarily closed, nailed into boxes and carried to the lower floor, either for evacuation, or for keeping in a safer place. But since beseiged Leningrad started coming back to life during 1942/1943, our readers developed a need for foreign books and without a catalogue it was very difficult to satisfy their requests or give references, so it was decided to open the catalogue. I was charged with this work. We had to reopen cubes, arrange boxes. The check showed that many boxes had been overturned, cards fell out of them and the alphabet order messed up. We were forced to check everything thoroughly for a long time, the temperature was still -6° - -8° and it was also dark and windows were broken for the second time again. Fingers got stiff with cold, they chaped; one could suffer through it for not more than an hour, then one had to run to temporary stoves that we had in two rooms only and shove one's feet and hands almost into the fire-box there. Partly I worked in the Processing Department. For the summer of 1943 I was also charged with receiving the Library of the Astronomy Institute (about 13,000-14,000 items) that was in the main block of the Academy of Sciences in a chaotic state. Besides, several times during that period I had to send books to Moscow for exposition, we had selected books on Copernicus, Newton and now are selecting literature on Lobachevsky. There is a lot to do, and the work is interesting. I want to put everything in order, finish all the jobs planned. If only I have strength enough, so that by the end of the war the Library is wellarmed and by the future furious reconstruction building of our country we are quite prepared with our books, catalogues, bibliography to satisfy all the demands of our readers who will come pouring in through the doors of our Library after the peace treaty".

202

Chapter Χ

Fifty seven workers of the Library became victims of the first siege winter includung B.V. Aleksandrov, director of the Manuscript department; N.N. Zarubin, scientific worker whose works I quoted above; S.A. Ryshkova, librarian, compiler of the personnel list for 1728-1928; L.A. Georgievskaya, bibliographer; V.P. Tikhomirova, library director of the Leningrad Branch of the Intitute of History; M.V. Stepanova, director of the Department of Special Keeping; N.P. Tikhonov, director of Laboratory for Restoration of Documents. The winter of 1941-1942 saw the lowest indices of reader's service (120 persons per 186 visits). I can not retell the feelings I experienced when I held the registers of attendance for this period of war in my own hands. The time of evacuation was hard for the Academy of Sciences as well. Many institutes relocated to the city of Kazan. "Here we are sitting half-starved and without news — Acad. P.L. Kapitza was writing to R.S. Zemlyachka, the Deputy Chairman of the Soviet of People's Commissars on December 8, 1941. — Central newspaper arrives with an 8-day delay and the radioset got a cold, it sneezes and wheezes and it is impossible to understand what it is telling"24. BAN never interrupted its work for a single day, living together with the citizens of Leningrad, with the besieged city, sharing their lot. On January 29, 1942 the "Leningradskaya Pravda" newspaper published a piece of information by TASS: "The Library of the Academy of Sciences organized mobile libraries for hospitals. It allocated two thousand books. Twelve qualificated members of staff were sent to service hospitals ". In the same 1942 Moscow "suddenly" recalled BAN. In January-May 1943 it was decided to have jubilee events dedicated to Newton's birthter-centenary and N. Copernicus death quatrocentennial, on the initiative of the Presidium of AS and its President S.I. Vavilov. Twelve boxes of books made it across the Ladoga Lake by a motor boat and then by rail to Moscow. Three members of the Library staff accompanied that cargo: K.I. Shafranovsky, E.P. Faidel and G.F. Podozerskaya 25 .1 suppose that the lifetime edition of N. Copernicus "De revolutionibus orbitum coelestium... ", published in 1543 in Nürnberg was among the books in those boxes (unknown criminals stole it from BAN stocks as late as 1999 and it has not been found up to now). I.I. Yakovkin, the Library director was in evacuation, in Moscow as many other leaders of that time. From August 1942 during his absence managing the Leningrad institution concentrated in the Moscow sector of special libraries. There remained a letter by Innokenty Ivanovich to Miron Moiseevich Gurevich, director of the BAN Servicing Department. Gurevich was a front-line soldier, he waged war at the "Oranienbaum spot" (the village of Iliki, Konovalovo district centre). "15.11. [1943]. Esteemed Miron Moiseevich, A couple days ago K.I. Shafranovsky told me that he received a letter from You, and yesterday evening they delivered Your post-card to me, so first of all I want to tell You at least some words about the grief that tore at my heart when I learned about Your wife's passing... It was a real genuine truth that You voiced when you named BAN fellow-workers inconspicious heroes... During my half a year here I had repeated opportunities to strengthen my confidence in what a complex machine our Academy of Sciences is and what a big role in 24 «Sidim golodnye i bez novostej». Akademiya nauk SSSR ν evakuacii. 1941-1943 gg. // Istochnik: Dokumenty russkoj istorii. 1999. Ν 2. P. 60. 25 See: Istoriya Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR... P. 441.

The Other Library

203

its work play not the driving belts, common to every machine, but strings weaved of personal ambitions, careerism and other things. Under such circumstances lots of things here depend not on the matter itself but on different reasons even not recognizable at first sight. Yes, dear Miron Moiseevich, half a year has passed since one August day I left my home at Kovensky and turned essentially into a homeless bum who dwells in other people flats, sleeps in strange beds, eats from others plates. I am trying as much as I can to immerse myself into work, have moved here not the members of staff not used in Leningrad, sent for — with great difficulties I ought to say — three workers and organized, it seems to me, the processing of deposit copies; essential bibliographic work of a large scope is creaking hard through, we are hoisting up collectting that went to pieces, and if I manage to, I shall get thejob going that the already late Nikolai Petrovich Tikhonov was so interested in — it concerns copying foreign articles necessary for our Academical institutes; one would want also to start anew our printed cards, except that I do not know whether we happen to start receiving cataloguing items soon — so far we are receiving periodicals only. It is harder to work here because we lack books — that is what is important; everything is differentfrom what we have: stocks are poorer and service is more sluggish. Now and again we used to do a lot of foolish things but would get a book after all, and here they will look indifferently, shake their heads, but the book is not there after all. That's how we subsist... Sincerely Yours (In. Yakovkin)" In April 1944 I.I. Yakovkin returned to Leningrad and resumed his work as the Director up to 1949. His was the longest tenure at the post of BAN head during Soviet times (19 years!). In 1944 the Warrant Stock of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences is introduced into the Library structure to include 827,133 items that had before that time been under the authority of the Leningrad Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences Publishing House. Literature from BAN warrant and reserve stocks went to stock libraries destroyed during the war: the Kiev State University, the BelorussianAS, the Latvian State Historical Library and so on26. Now I want to touch the subject that was considered not so much as prohibited but one not discussable widely in the press for a long time. We will discuss trophy and reparation stocks moved from Germany after the war. Here are two documents to begin with. Document Ν1. INSRUCTION Ν 457 THROUGH THE USSR ACADERMY OF SCIENCES Moscow September 7,1945 To ensure systematic distribution of book stocks transferred to the Academy of Sciences from Germany by way of natural reparations, charge the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences with direct management of these stocks and deposition at special libraries of Academic institutions. The Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences to carry out distribution of book stocks further to be approved by the Library Committee as per the topics of production plans of departments and institutes to which such special 26

See: Lyutova K.V., Tarasova Yu.M. Akademicheskie izdaniya ν fondah Biblioteki Rossijskoj Akademii

nauk. L.: BAN, 1992. P. 63-80.

204

Chapter Χ libraries are attached. Coordinate controversial questions with the Academician-Secretary of the appropriate department. President of the USSR Academy of Sciences Seal affixed Academician: IS. I. Vavilov/ SENT TO: Library of AS, Network Sector, Library Commission, Departments, VicePresidents, Secretariat of the President, Party Bureau, Case with materials. Document Ν 2 INSTRUCTION Ν 136 THROUGH THE USSR ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Moscow March 11,1946 In addition to Instruction Ν 457 of September 7, 1945 through the Academy of Sciences organise a special commission for distribution of books coming from abroad including members of the Library Commission: Academician Obnorsky S.P., Corresponding Member Artobolevsky I.I., Corresponding Member Kazansky B.A., D.D. Ivanov and Learned Secretary Mokievskaya Yu.R. Charge all the institutions of the USSR Academy of Sciences to inform immediately the above Commission on all the books received from abroad providing a general description of deposits at the same time. Upon exanining applications by libraries and institutions of the Academy of Sciences for book delivery the Commission to resolve what library these are to be sent to and report its resolution to the Vice-President Academician V.P. Volgin for his final visa. President of the Academy of Sciences Academician— S.I. Vavilov

In 1993 Oleg Vasilievich Dubrovsky, a scientific worker of the Acquisition Department carried out a special inquiry on my request and drafted a reference "On Receiving, Keeping and Dispatch of German Trophy and Reparation Literature Residing at the Library of AS USSR during 1946-1958. A group of specialists headed by Academician General-Major V.S. Kulebakin was sent to Germany from the Academy of Sciences. Further on O.V. Dubrovsky writes: Despite the fact that the Library of AS was notified in advance of the possibility of receiving considerable mass of literature from Germany (letter by I.I. Yakovkin to S.I. Vavilov, announcement by V.S. Kulebakin from April 23,1946 on sending an echelon of German literature to Leningrad, directly addressed to the Library of AS USSR) such information came as an absolute surprise for the Library according to BAN Deputy Director V.A. Petrov. The term allocated to prepare the premises for storing materials received was too short. So management was forced to use the premises suitable for temporary keeping only. 27

The reason to prepare this material is the extreme relevance of the theme lately not only in special literature, but in numerous mass media and the documents of the State Duma. See, for example, Mazuritsky A. M. Ocherki istorii bibliotechnogo dela perioda Velikoj Otechestvennoj vojny 1941-1945 gg. M.: Izd-vo Mosk. gos. un-ta kul'tury, 1995. 209 p.; Glazkov M. Bibliotekari Rossii ν dvuh velikih vojnah X X veka // Mosk. zhurn. 1995. Ν 12. P. 34-37; Frajtag Yu. Gde nahodyatsya kuPturnye tsennosti? // Biblioteka. 1998. Ν 10. P. 93-94; Zinich M.S. DeyatePnost' operativnogo shtata A. Rozenberga po vyvozu kul'turnyh cennostej iz SSSR // Otech. istoriya. 1999. Ν 4. P. 161-169.

The Other Library

205

On May 15 1946 the Library received information about the arrival of an echelon of 47 sealed railcars at the Moscow railway cargo terminal in Leningrad. Earlier the Library management sent its representatives to Brest to accompany the echelon to Leningrad and to receive accompanying documents from commander of the military party that escorted the railcars en route. However the train went through Belostok instead of Brest, so no documents were passed on. According to V.S. Kulebakin the echelon should have had 4,903 boxes (2,972 boxes with the Gotts Library materials and 1,931 with the editions of the German exchangeable stock from Wild-Park in Fridrichswerde, near Potsdam). The echelon arrived in Leningrad without any accompanying documents, so the Library had to go by facts laid out in the letter by V.S. Kulebakin — it indicated the marking of materials most valuable (manuscripts, early printed editions, catalogues and so on). Inventories of boxes, lists of missing manuscripts and incunabula, as well as some other materials arrived much (almost a year) later, and that, naturally, complicated checking, systematising and studying the materials delivered to a great extent. In fact, 4,766 undamaged boxes and a scatter of broken and crumbled ones were received, that is about 4,840 boxes all in all (instead of the 4,903 mentioned in the letter by V.S. Kulebakin). From May 16 to May 21,1946 the contents of boxes was placed partly in the Library itself, in cellars of the Institutes of Zoology and Ethnography as well as the basement floor of the Navy Museum, that is on premises not suitable for keeping such cargo for a long time (mainly due to high humidity). In the beginning of August 1946, two railcars more arrived with 160 boxes of the Gotts Library materials, moreover 46 of those were broken and books were partially scattered. No inventories and any other documents were available at all. What did the Gotts Library represent in reality? According to the "Yearbook of German Libraries "(v. 30, 1939) there were about 400 thousand items of keeping in it, including 1,700 incunabula and early printed editions, 7,800 manuscripts. Particularly valuable was the section of oriental manuscripts (mainly Arabian). The collection of manuscripts in European languages starting from the IX century represented exceptional value, together with most rare manuscripts from the Renaissance and XI century editions of ancient classics. Beside the collection located in the Friedenstein castle the Gotts Library included also the richest library of the Justus Gertes Geographical Institute and an old library of the gymnasium. The beginning of foundation of the Gotts Library goes back to the XVI century. Immediately upon unloading the echelons and arranging boxes in their temporary storage areas and in the building of the Library itself its management (I.I. Yakovkin) posed before the Library Commission by the Presidium of AS USSR the question of distributing literature received among the Academic libraries. In particular, it was suggested to hand over literature on philosophy, history, subsidiary historical disciplines, politics, law, pedagogics to the Fundamental Library of Social Sciences in Moscow (FBON). Pulications on art, fiction, part of books on bibliography had to be handed over to libraries of the appropriate institutions of the USSR Academy of Sciences. It was decided to hand books on oriental studies over to the Institute of Oriental Studies further passing duplicates to the FBON, those on astronomy to the Chief Astronomical Observatory in Pulkovo and so on.

206

Chapter Χ On July 27, 1946 in conformity with that plan the AS Library sent to the Moscow address of FBON 417 boxes with books from the Gotts Library, and these were received as confirmed by the FBON management. As a result by the end of July 19464,583 boxes remained in Leningrad, 2,764 of them in the basements of the Zoological and Ethnography Institutes and the Navy Museum. As for most valuable editions and manuscripts these were in the AS Library building (about 1,819 boxes, and approximately 1,000 of them had already been sorted out by August 15,1946). The premises provided were not fit for long term storage, so the Library kept insisting to have more suitable ones. According to resolution by the Leningrad Executive Committee of the City Soviet of July 25, 1946, 777 m2 of space in the building of the Vladimirsky Cathedral were subleased to the Library and 1,776 boxes were brought there at different times. However, that was not a solution of the problem, because one had to clear premises, allocated for temporary storage in the Navy Museum and the Zoological Institute. On April 24, 1947, the Leningrad City Executive Committee adopted a decision to hand over the building of the Sampsonievsky Cathedral to the Library (provided it would evacuate the space occupied in the Vladimirsky Cathedral). A plan was drawn to tranfer books from the Vladimirsky Cathedral, the Zoological Institute and the Navy Museum. The intention was first to transport 470 boxes from the Vladimirsky to the Sampsonievsky Cathedral, then 200 boxes affected with moisture had to go from the basements of the Navy Museum and 400 boxes from the Zoology Museum. Last to be moved were the remaining 1,300 boxes from the Vladimirsky Cathedral. All the transfer had to be finished within a month. In July 1947 a leasing was drawn on the Andreevsky Cathedral where the remaining boxes from the Navy Museum had to be transported. As a result the Andreevsky Cathedral concentrated 1,480 boxes, including 518 boxes with the Gotts Library books and 869 — from Wild-Park, while the Sampsonievsky Cathedral had 2,060 boxes, including 1,107 boxes with the Gotts Library books and 270 — from Wild-Park. Certain discrepancies in the data presented are explained by the fact that trophy literature continued to come to the AS Library during 1947 and 1948 as well. Last arrivals on which there is no exact information in archive materials were received in 1949. Checks of storage conditions of unpacked boxes in the cathedral, carried out in 1947 and 1948 testified to their unsatisfactory and even disastrous state. Leakages in the Andreevsky Cathedral, defects of the heating system resulted in registered high humidity of books, accompanied with intense moulding. 1,288 boxes of books were treated with formalin, and 109 boxes needed heavier treatment. The total number of library items of the Gott Library received to the AS Library is not known exactly and is not established since they were accepted by the box and no check against the inventories was made (except for the manuscripts and incunabula). The main cause of book damage on temporary storage was the unsatisfactory state of those premises, prolonged keeping in boxes or in piles, high humidity. As a result many books that belonged mainly to the Wild-Park stock were ruined. As opinioned by V.A. Petrov, the Deputy Director of the Library expounded in his report to the Minister of State Control of the USSR, the responsibility for damaging the bookstock of the greatest value brought from Germany lay first with the management of

The Other Library

207

the Academy of Sciences. Knowing about the difficult situation in which the AS Library was at the time, having not yet recovered from the effects of the siege, the management sent considerable bookstocks there, rendering no assistance to provide suitable storage premises for stocks. Insufficent funds for repairs of premises that the Library received from the city authorities with great difficulties were allocated. Certain mistakes were also made by the management of the Library (I.I. Yakovkin, I.P. Kharitonov, V.A. Petrov) especially in respect of checking the conditions of storage. Work on registering and describing stock as well as distributing the materials went on exhaustively slow. Let us try to estimate approximately the amount of literature received from Germany, since we failed to get any exact data. Academician V.S. Kulebakin reported that part of the Gotts Library books was left in its original place. That was literature of local significance — works on regional studies, writings on the history of the region, and so on. Part of editions on art were sent to Moscow, to the Committee on Arts even prior to their dispatch to Leningrad,. Hence, according to Kulebakin 270,000 items of storage were sent to Leningrad. 3,132 (2,972 + +160) boxes with the Gotts Library literature and 1,931 boxes with exchangeable stock from Wild-Park altogether arrived in Leningrad. So one box had about 87 editions on the average if one takes into consideration that there were 270,000 editions all in all. Then, following our assumptions we arrive at about 168,000 editions in exchangeable stock. Thus the total number of editions received to the AS Library could not be less than 440,000 copies. In the archive documents from the St.Petersburg Department of Archives of the Academy of Sciences, 1949-1953 one can find directives and instructions of the Library Council, the Council For Coordination of Scientific Activities of the Republican Academies of Sciences, orders by Vice-Presidents and the Chief Learned Secretary of AS on transferring part of the trophy and reparation literature on certain scientific disciplines to separate institutions of the Academy of Sciences. For example, stock 158, inventory 3 (1950) contains an order to pass part of literature at the disposal of the Karadag Biological Station of the Academy of Sciences. In conformity with these instructions books on medicine were handed over to the library of LP. Pavlov Institute of Physiology; a small number of catalogues on expositions of art — to the Moscow Institute of History of Arts, and rather a large consignment of theological books — to the Leningrad Museum of History of Religion (the Kazan Cathedral)*. Order of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of March 27, 1953 (stock 158, inv. 3 (1953), sheet 141) states that "literature received by special delivery in 1946 to the total of 5,000 boxes was kept in damp premises absolutely unfit for the purpose up to 1952, which resulted in damage and ruin of a considerable amount of books. That literature is not registered even up to now and is still kept in unsatifactory conditions". Order Ν 85 of the Presidium AS USSR of January 21,1954 (stock 158, inv. 3 (1954), sheet 17) offered to form a commission of BAN and FBON representatives "to draft proposals on distributing and putting in order the special delivery stock". That Commission carried out significant work and reported the following to the Chairman of the Library Commission with the Presidium AS USSR, Academician K.V. Ostrovityanov. * The former B A N ' s acting director D.V. Lebedev told me that this information by no means is complete, because large bulk of special literature had been sent to Leningrad academic libraries (for example, the Botanical and the Zoological Institutes) without any registration of these books by the staff.

208

Chapter Χ

In the framework of special delivery received by the AS Library in Leningrad in May, 1946 there were the Gotts Library materials. Stocks of that library consist of two parts: special collections and the main stock of printed editions — books, brochures, magazines published during the period from the XVI century up to 1945. The collections include West-European manuscripts (2,553 items), manuscripts in oriental languages (3,250 items), incunabula (1,684 units) and geographical maps and atlases. All the above-mentioned collections are kept in BAN in full order, while oriental manuscripts are in the Institute of Oriental Studies. The main stock is grouped into fields of science. From all the literature received in 1946 about 30 % are editions of the XVI-XIX centuries, and only less than 20 % of stock relates to the XX century. Of greatest value for replenishing BAN stocks are editions, published in 1914-1924, when international contacts of the Library were interrupted because of World War I and the Civil War, as well as editions published during the years of World War II during 1941-1944. The Gotts Library includes about 50 % editions in German, and others are in Latin, French and English. Selective check showed that about 30 % of editions of the Gotts Library are in BAN stocks. No full check on the existence of duplicates was made. By its order Ν 46-1495 of July 30, 1955 the Presidium of AS USSR directed the Library of AS USSR to prepare by March 1,1956 the Gotts Library stocks for passing over to the German Democratic Republic, to draw an inventory of books, manuscripts and other materials, and at the same time to identify books and manuscripts that are of significance for the Soviet science and microfilm them. A little earlier Order Ν 62-1310 by Presidium AS USSR of June 25,1955 gave a similar directive to BAN to prepare the stock of the German Chemical Society Library for passing over to GDR by Octoder 1,1956. During October-December, 1955 literature of special delivery from the town of Gota underwent processing in BAN, was sorted out according to fields of science by available ciphers and was packed into bundles, each having its own inventory. All in all it 15,498 packages containing the total of 282,244 editions were prepared for dispatch. BAN addressed a letter to management of the Institute of Oriental Studies and the Main Astronomical Observatory of AS USSR requesting them to prepare all the literature, manuscripts and other materials from stocks of the Gotts Library they had for transferring to GDR. The term to prepare materials for dispatch was the same—by March 1,1956. On September 25,1956 BAN Director, Professor GA. Chebotarev informed the general Director of the Gotts Library by his letter Ν 62-72/657 that 103 containers with literature of The Gotts Library (17,335 packages and 85 boxes of books) were addressed to him. In addition 1,317 packages with foreign literature belonging to GDR were sent together with that consignment. "Thus, — informs G.A. Chebotarev — dispatching literature is over". Same day G.A. Chebotarev informs the President of AS USSR, Academician A.N. Nesmeyanov about the completion of dispatching the library of the town of Gota (103 containers). On October 11, 1956 supplements and additions to packages of manuscripts were sent by the Institute of Oriental Studies of AS USSR to the address of the Gotts Library. We found no other document corroborating the dispatch of literature to GDR in the archive".

The Other Library

209

On p. 207 of my book I mentioned the Acting Director of BAN Daniil Vladimirovich Lebedev, who was "released from the system of the Academy of Sciences" according to Order of the Presidium of AS USSR, 27.03.1953. D.V. Lebedev's personality and his contribution to the development of BAN merits a special discussion. I was lucky to have met such a person as Daniil Vladimirovich on my road in life. Here are some moments of his biography related by himself 8 . "After the arrest of Nikolai Ivanovich [Vavilov] our teachers — G.D. Karpechenko, G.A. Levitsky, L.I. Govorov were arrested. As too active an opponent of the Lysenko doctrine I was expelled from post-graduate courses, from the Komsomol. And when I returned from front I had nowhere to go to work on genetics; I had experience and interest, and I was invited to run the library of the Botanical Garden. Apparently my work was not too bad, because three years later I was appointed a deputy director of BAN, and twenty days later, when the director died, I became an Acting Director of BAN. My immediate superior was Sergei Ivanovich [Vavilov]. And I had the good fortune to communicate with him repeatedly. It is necessary to say that Sergey Ivanovich related to librarianship with exceptional attention. If possible, he always attended meetings of the Library Commission of the Academy of Sciences and always spoke there. There were other Presidents of the Academy of Sciences after Sergei Ivanovich, persons who held that post in a fitting manner... But not a single of them paid so much attention to it and lived the life of the Library. And when coming to Leningrad Sergei Ivanovich very often came to our library and we arranged for him expositions of interesting books that he scrutinized with great attention and interest. More than once I was received by him: he was an accessible and democratic man. Twice had I had the occasion to report to the Presidium while Sergei Ivanovich was its Chairman. Here are some of our talks with him. I was an acting director for half a year already and so came to Sergei Ivanovich. After several questions I told him that it was necessary to appoint a director. He says: "I wish to return to the state of things that was there before". At the head of the Library of the Academy of Sciences there should be an Academician, and now D.V. Nalivkin, a distinguished geologist has no work29. Says then that at the head of fundamental library of social sciences one also needs to appoint an Academician, that is I.M. Maisky, currently he has no job either, and that is quite an intelligent man. When the President of the Academy of Sciences praises an Academician as quite an intelligent person to give him the highest praise, it certainly makes an impression. To last mention what Sergei Ivanovich could do and what he strived for. The point was that when I was appointed an acting director, plainclothes HR managers showed me that funny list of one hundred workers of the Library of the Academy of Sciences which told who among them was a Jew, who — a nobleman, whether some had been repressed, generally, "that sort" of people. And that was the time of the "Leningrad Case" and one of the paragraphs of accusation was 'polluting ideological personnel'. And I was told 28 See: Vospominaniya D.V. Lebedeva // Brat'ya Nikolaj i Sergej Vavilovy: Vecher vospominanij iz tsikla "Byloe i dumy" Leningradskogo otdeleniya Sovetskogo fonda kul'tury 6 yanvarya 1989 goda. M., 1991. P. 48-52. 29 About the work of Academician Nalivkin in B A N see: Skripkina T.I. D.V. Nalivkin ν Biblioteke AN SSSR // Dmitrij Vasil'evich Nalivkin: Nauchnaya deyatel'nost' ν vospominaniyah sovremennikov. SPb.: Izdvo Gornogo in-ta, 1997. P.231-235.

210

Chapter Χ that it was necessary to free ourseves from those comrades. And since I did a poor job freeing us from them because most of those workers were the best ones, it appeared that I was also an unsuitable person and the following happened. A Commission was nominated with Corresponding Member of AS USSR N.K. Piksanov at its head to inspect the library. Vice-President of the Academy, Chairman of the Library Commission V.P. Volgin told me: "He wants to win Academicianship over Your corpse, but he will not make it anyway". I saw that the matter was coming to a very bad end but I did not know the conclusions of the Commission. Then I was invited to Moscow together with the Commission and I was presented those [conclusions], and the very first paragraph there said: "Discharge Lebedev from work at the Academy of Sciences", then came deputy director V.A. Petrov, then K.I. Shafranovsky and on and on, ten to fifteen other best workers. The situation was that the very next day I had to report on the state of the human resourses at the meeting of the Learned Secretariat, and I understood that things were bad. I went to Sergei Ivanovich but I was told that he could not receive me, because that day he was going to Leningrad. I said that I would wait for him all the same. And when I got to him and told him about that case he said: "What is it, have they gone mad?" and called up A.V. Topchiev in my presence. And, first, I managed to shorten that list to four persons, and, second, I already had a different formula, not "discharge", but "point to". In short, there remained four persons only and towards the end I mananged to save one person more. But when on January 26,1951 1 was awakened at 7 in the morning by a telephone call I understood that my song was over. Indeed, soon I was discharged, expelled from the Party, and so on. And the man I had saved there was also discharged. Then everything ended well after the death of our 'leader and teacher'".

In D.V. Lebedev's archives there remained some copies of documents on the situation in BAN by the end of 1952-beginning of 1953.1 quote them in this book by his consent. One of the documents is a letter of December 13, 1952 from the co-workers of the Committee of Party Control (CPC) at CC CPSU Abramova and Mitin addressed to the Chairman of CPC M.F. Shkiryatov: "On Polluting of Staff of the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Leningrad with People, Commanding no Trust". In August, 1952 the Leningrad Regional Committee of CPSU expelled deputy director on science of the Library AS USSR Lebedev D.V. (Party member from 1943) from the Party for failing to take action to clear the library staff from politically alien people and to withdraw politically deleterious books from book stocks. When joining the Party Lebedev also concealed his contacts with relatives living in the USA. Reacting to resolution by the Party Regional Committee Lebebev appealed to CPC CC CPSU. By way of examining the question of Lebedev's Party membership the following was disclosed. In May 1949, Lebedev D.V. was appointed deputy director on science of the Library AS USSR. In July 1949, Vasileostrovsky CPSU District Committee of Leningrad while considering Lebedev's report on library work noted serious shortcomings in personnel selection and charged him to strengthen the library with highly skilled specialists reliable in the political and professional sense. As ascertained Lebedev failed to execute that resolution of CPSU District Committee and not only failed to carry out the necessary work of purging the library apparatus from persons having seriously compromising biography facts, but tried to keep them in key posts.

The Other Library

211

It is documentally confirmed that from 345 library workers of the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences more than 120 persons originate from socially-alien environment (nobles, merchants, religious ministers and so on), many of them have contacts abroad. There are some persons among the libraiy workers expelled from the Party on political accusations, repressed by the State security organs for their anti-Soviet activities. Especially bad is the situaiton with leading personnel. For a long time the library was headed by Academician Nalivkin — a non-Party ex-noble, his sister sentenced to 8 years, and her husband to 20 years of imprisonment for anti-Soviet activities. D. V. Lebedev — Deputy Director on Science — is a son of a noble, has relatives in the USA, corresponds with them, receives their parcels*. The second Libraiy Deputy Director on Science, Petrov V.A. — is an ex-noble, lived abroad in Germany, Italy, Switzerland for a long time. In 1935 as a socially dangerous element he was exiled from Leningrad. Senior research worker of one of the departments, Davidovich Ya.I. was arrested by the NKVD organs in 1941. In 1950 he was discharged from his teacher's work in the Leningrad State University for amoral behavior. Davidovich has relatives in America with whom he corresponded. Editor-in-chief of one of the departments is Khitrovo K.S., daughter of the General Director of Posts and Telegraphs of Russia, comes from nobles. In 1919 Khitrovo K.S. ran away to Yugoslavia with her parents, in 1927 she graduated from the Institute of Noble Maidens there, in 1946 returned to the USSR; her relatives live in Yugoslavia and France**. Akselrod M.M. works as a senior librarian of Secret Stocks Department, in 1939 he was expelled from the Party and the same year sentenced to three years of imprisonment for anti-Soviet statements. Belova-Pokrovskaya, daughter of the enemy of the people Blyukher worked in the library Reference Department, in 1951 was arrested by MGB organs; Shatelen M.— a hereditary noble, in 1937 her husband Aikhinger went on a business mission abroad and did not return to the USSR, lives in the USA. Shatelen only legalized her divorce with her husband, traitor to his country in 1950. Before the revolution she herself lived for a long time in England, Australia and Switzerland. Senior research worker of Bibliography Department Malyshev M.V., originating from merchants, is pro-American in his attitudes. Before 1939 Margules B.B. lived in Poland, her sister lives in Israel. Husband of the libraiy worker Kutuzova Z.A. was arrested and sentenced by the Soviet Power organs in 1949 as a participant of an anti-Party group. Wagner M.F. comes from among hereditary honorary citizens, his father is German. Toom V.A., Estonian, from 1942 to 1945 was in captivity in Germany. Gurevich M.M. in 1921 was expelled from the Party for disagreement with the new economic policy, and in 1936 was expelled from the Party again for his contacts with the enemies of the people. In 1940 Gurevich was reinstated in Party membership by the Leningrad City Party Committee then headed by A.A. Kuznetzov. Gurevich's sister lives in Israel. Finberg, a noble has relatives in France and corresponds with them. Liudevig, German on her mother's side, her uncle Dimmer is a German subject and lived in Germany. Surina N.P. originates from nobles, lived abroad before the revolution, in 1935 her brother was exiled from Leningrad on administrative grounds. Uspensky V.V. originates from the * There are many mistakes in this reference. For example, D.V. Lebedev had never been the son of a nolbleman. In his opinion it would be more properly to speak about not "of obstruction of BAN's staff', but about "another" staff — those who wrote these references. ** D.V. Lebedev verified that K.S. Khitrovo's permission to return to the USSR had been given by Stalin personally, because she was an offspring of another Generalissimo - A.V. Suvorov.

212

Chapter Χ nobles, in 1938 was arrested by the State security organs. Markova G.A. — daughter of a prominent tradesman, in 1935 together with her husband and his parents was exiled from Leningrad on administrative grounds. Aleksandrova D.K., originating from honorary citizens, in 1924 lived in England with her mother's parents—English subjects. Ryzhkova K.V., from the nobles, in 1924 her sister left for France for medical treatment and did not return to the USSR, Ryzhkova's uncle lives abroad. Borodina V.l. — her sister in 1932 left for Germany, where she lives at present. Cases are registered in the Library of the Academy of Sciences of dispensing books of hostile contents to readers. In 1951 a magazine "Soviet Asia" of 1927 was dispensed from special stocks with an article of people's enemy Trotzky published there. When organizing an exposition dedicated to V.l. Lenin a book already withdrawn from circulation as politically faulty was prepared for display. The library has a secret book stock closed to circulation, which, as it becomes clear, offered open access; books were discovered in it containing quotes by people's enemies and so on. The library was dispensing abroad some publications clearly inferior in the political sense. For example, a list prepared for sending abroad included a book "Soviet Orcheorgraphy" (as in the original-V.L.) edited by the people's enemy, Trotzkyist Awakumov. Cards on books by people's enemies were discovered in the catalogue "State and the Law" that Davidovich compiled. Things are not better in the Botanical Library of the Academy of Sciences, its director the same D.V. Lebedev. For example, there are no materials about eight Congresses of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in the Botanical Library. That library has a very limited supply of writings by Hertzen (one book), Lomonosov, Sechenov. At the same time "works" by Lebedev himself, his small reviews, bibliographies, references of no scientific value are presented very accurately and thoroughly. A rich assortment of works by Mendel, Morgan, Weissman unmasked by Soviet scholars. Moreover, D.V. Lebedev himself is a Weissmanist. The following fact is ascertained: pleading lack of space for keeping part of Soviet books reside unsorted, dumped in a heap. Among the books classified as a so-called group keeping, there are letters to comrade Stalin, literature published in connection with his jubilee. In 1951 a group of scientific workers organized some sort of a circle named "Medvedi" [the Bears], its motto being "A bear is a bear's friend" and "Never wash your dirty linen in public". When his case was investigated by the Committee of Party Control, D.V. Lebedev stated that the Library of the AS USSR not only failed to free itself from persons arousing political distrust, but that some of them were even promoted. We are hereby advising you of the facts of apparent human resourse troubles in the Library of the Academy of Sciences. 13.ΧΠ.52. Abramova Mitin"

Having acquainted himself with the letter M.F. Shkiryatov forwards it through all the levels to the Department of Culture and Science of the CC CPSU, and from there it goes to the Personnel Department of the Academy of Sciences. Death of I.V. Stalin in March 1953 confused everything. On May 13, 1953 the Personnel Manager of the Academy of Sciences S. Kosikov sends a round-up reference on the situation in the Library of the Academy of Sciences to A.M. Smimov in the Department of Culture and Science CC CPSU. This refefence already reads like a self-controlled statement.

The Other Library

213

"(Letterhead of AS USSR, May 13,1953) Secret. Copy Ν To the Department of Culture and Science, CC CPSU To Com. Smirnov A. M. In connection with Your requests on the situation in the Library of the Academy of Sciences I am reporting the following: 1. The resolution by the Presidium AS USSR of March 27 this year points to unsatisfactory situation in keeping, accounting and preservation of stock in the Library AS USSR and on the criminally negligent attitude of the Department of Manuscripts and Rare Books toward accounting and keeping of unique stocks. For this intolerable situation in the Library Presidium of the USSR AS dismissed and fired from the USSR Academy of Sciences: former Acting Director D.V. Lebedev, Deputy Director V.A. Petrov, former Learned Secretaries K.I. Shafranovsky and N.V. Novikov, former Director of Special Stocks M.M. Gurevich*. A strict official reprimand was given to Deputy Director on administrative management D.A. Semichev, reprimands to head librarians V.A. Sevastiyanova, A.M. Silin and Chief Accountant of the Library A.M. Kurgansky. 2. Presidium of the AS USSR additionally introduced the post of the Library Personnel Deputy Director... 3. On April 7, 1953 worker of the Library Com. Zavistovich addressed L.P. Beriya with a letter accusing the Library of AS USSR of anti-Soviet activities and wrecking, of suppressing criticism and persecuting honest workers. The author of the letter was claiming he was forced to appeal to L.P. Beriya because he had no faith in the Leningrad Party organization, which, in his opinion, protected rascals from the Library AS USSR management. On April 22,1953 the letter of Party member Com. Zavistovich was considered by the Party closed meeting at the Library... For three days the communists discussed the letter of Zavistovich. More than 40 persons took the floor. As a result the Party meeting recognized Zavistovich letter as slandering, and that was stated in the resolution of the meeting. Besides the Party meeting exposed significant shortcomings in the work of selection, training and arrangement of personnel, noted very poor political and enlightening work. The meeting showed that the Party Bureau work was unsatisfactory, that there were facts of Komsomol organisation opposing the Party organisation. At present a new Party Bureau is selected. 4. The Library of AS USSR is finishing the work of attesting its library workers. In the nearest days the materials by the attesting commission will be presented for approval by the Learned Secretariat of the Presidium AS USSR. Head, Department of the Presidium of AS USSR S. Kosikov" The Department of Culture and Science in its turn sends the documenta to the General Department of the CC Secretariat. On May 18,1953 the Secretariat CC resolves: assume examination of this case hereby finished". But that was not all. Receiving all the materials of inquiry the CPC Chairman at CC CPSU. M.F Shkiryatov reported to Yu.A. Zhdanov, Head of the Science * D.V. Lebedev tells that he and also V.A. Petrov, K.I. Shafranovsky, N.V. Novikov, M.M. Gurevich were later on rehabilitated according to the resolution of the court.

214

Chapter Χ

Department of CC CPSU: "Hereby I am sending You a reference by workers of CPC CC CPSU Corns. Abramova and Mitin "On Polluting of Staff of the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Leningrad with People, Commanding no Trust". (Stamp of receival of May 20, 1953)*. Now it was over—the circle had closed. ... More than thirty years had passed since October, 1917 when we were promised to "pave the right road" to the "realm of freedom". All that time appeared neigh enough. They kept paving and paving that road on and on, while the whole country and its population changed out of recognition. The powers succeeded in raising the prestige of science, culture and arts as a consistent part of the State policy, they managed to form a strata of educated people — the Soviet intelligentsia which promoted that upsurge: it created new machinery, space vehicles and the country nuclear shield. Scholars and writers had written their books, published them in newspapers and magazines, but they kept getting their instructions from the authorities on what and how to write, what was bad or good (remember the correspondence between P.L. Kapitza and the magazine editorship on Lomonosov!). The one personage forgotten, missed appeared to be the personality, the human being... And again I return to the question stated in the introduction to this book: just why is the "History of the Library of the Academy of Sciences" remained unnoticed by our press, why had there been no essential analyses and evaluation? And I think this is why. To write and publish such a book devoted to the 250-anniversary of BAN a particular spiritual and moral atmosphere of the 1960-1970-ies would be necessary, when hopes and aspirations of the young reading audience went to the depths of science, culture, arts — the spheres so prestigeous then (so different from current days). New information technologies offered no competition then, they were scarecely taking off the ground. A book in its traditional format seemed to remain indispensable — it was a long-long way to the Internet yet, and the library stepped out as some sort of a "reservation" where all outward relations were broken off, where people and documents lived according to particular laws of their own. (And that is God's truth, this will prevail forever, I believe). It was necessary to convince the reader that our Soviet science was superior to the West, that Russia, taught by Europeans for some centuries, developed its spiritual potential so much now that it appeared to outgrow its teachers. A reader was offered to "build himself into" that ideology, become a co-worker. So I consider "History of BAN... " published in 1964 a dream of Soviet academic science and Soviet library constructors that needed no special investigations, analyses or comments. That was a "library" monument to political expediency... How hard and long is the way to (even approaches to) comprehending historical truth! Recall Pushkin with his Saliery:" They say that there's no truth on Earth. But there isn't any even higher. It is so plain for me to see — a simple scale, and that's it.... " In the beginning of this chapter I took note of another discomforting conclusion or disillusionment to which I came in the course of my work in BAN — that of indifferece and unconcern of powers towards library, science and culture that formed in the 1990-ies. It is based on my private experience, on the experience of the consequences of a terrible fire of February 14-15, 1988 that we suffered together through with all our colleagues. And now twelve years * "It is very interesting, — was wtitten in D.V. Lebedev's materials, — because on March 25, 1953, Yu. A. Zhdanov was discharged from supervision of the Department of Science of CC CPSU. In June, 1954,— Daniil Vladimirovich adds, — I was restored to the Party by this authority. In a new record card was written "Had not been called to the Party account. Had not incurred the Party penalty", just the same as in a similar Nikolai's I resolution on a father's of a seduced girl complaint: "To consider a virgin".

The Other Library

215

later, I am fully confident that it was not an accident but arson. An arson aimed to conceal traces of misappropriation that accumulated after the documental checking of stocks conducted way back in the middle of the 1950-ies. Criminals wanted to kill two birds with one stone: conceal the losses from the Library for ever and deal with the disagreeable management of the Library. This twofold effect remained unreached. When the inquiry disclosed no culprits my opponents launched a spurious charge of selling rare books of the XVII century abroad. Thus appeared one more case, the third one after Schumacher and Platonov, the case of criminal actions of the Director of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. Seven months of inquiries ended in nothing, the case was closed because of a lack of crime in my actions. It was 1996.1 wrote a book about all that and named it"The Library Syndrome"..?0. Some words on the reaction to that book when published in Russia. "We need no Schumacher's book" — that was a laconic refusal by the administration of St.Petersburg House of Book in October 1996, that a representative of the "Oblik" publishing house heard in reply to his offer to take some extra copies of the "Library Syndrome " for sale. What a reaction and what a "knowledge" of history by the management of the principal book-shop in the city! Who remembers that marvellous German today? Shumacher's name has little to say to unsophisticated reader. "All right, — I thought having learned of that event — if they do not want to sell a book written by librarian about and for the Library, it means it really hurt somebody strong and painful. Apparently it stings ". Three months passed since the book presentation: thence the news must have reached the House of Book in the Nevsky. Woland's prophecy from Bulgakov's immortal novel was coming true*. The first, naturally collective — as is always the case — responses by my opponents, sharp and intolerable to any contradiction, reminding one of a tsunami or snow avalanche in the mountains that starts with a imperceptible sound and then sweeps everything in its path did not take one long to wait for. In the end of October-beginning of November 39 scientific workers of humanitarian institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences in St.Petersburg, having familiarized themselves with the book, demanded a harsh public auto-da-fe for me in their letter to the President of RAS. Here is its basic text. In October last year scholars of Academic humanitarian institutes of St.Petersburg (the Institute of Linguistic Research, the Institute of History, the Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, the Pushkin House) addressed their letter to the Presidium of RAS, protesting against restriction of their readers rights and an abnormal situation in BAN... This letter is reprinted in V.P. Leonov's own book (The Library Syndrome. SaintPetertsburg: Oblik, 1996.629 p.). The book evoked a stormy response from StPetersburg scholars: a letter by Dmitry Sergeevich Likhatchev "Intellectual with a single Ί'" (.Literaturnaya Gazeta of October, 2 1996) and an open letter "Never Shake His Hand" signed by 15 workers of the Old Russian Literature Department of the Pushkin House 30

Leonov V.P. Bibliotechnyj sindrom: Zapiski direktora BAN. SPb.. Oblik, 1996. 629 p. * "And to you I will say," he turned to the Master, smiling, "that your novel will yet bring You some surprises." "That's very sad," answered the Master. "No, no, it's not so sad," said Woland. "There is nothing to worry about." See: Bulgakov M.A. Master i Margarita. M.: Khudozh. literatura, 1988. P. 284-285.

216

Chapter Χ (.Nevsky Times of October 5, 1996) added last touches to the portrait of BAN Director. Publishing of the book definitely exhausted the patience of the St.Peterburg scientific world. Nervertheless authors of the Open Letter are absolutely right stating that publishing of V.P. Leonov's book in fact changes nothing in our attitude towards its author: we have formed our opinion of him already a long time ago. But scholars opinion had no influence on the decision by management of the Academy of Sciences and that is strange enough, because we are those who represent the "mass reader" that BAN is called to serve... Of course, it is far easier to invent non-existent problems of librarianship than to serve readers normally. In fact, under Leonov's leadership the Library actually happened to transform already into some appendage of the former Library Institute (now the Academy of Culture, not the most impressive educational institution in Petersburg). V.P. Leonov, being a graduate of that institution himself, apparently believes quite seriously that the theory of bibliography is a science, moreover a single one; and such traditional disciplines as archiving, philology, book histoiy, paleography and so on are neglected. It is no mere chance that Leonov calls library scientific workers nothing else but "narrow field BAN professionals" (P. 595) and systematically purges them from his "R&D Institute". Let us remember that the Libary belongs to the Academy: it is not an independent scientific institution but one of RAS "services". The term for book use is now limited to one month, the number of books that a library worker can use at home is also limited (to five), issuing scientific literature of the ΧΙΧ-the beginning of the XX centuries has stopped, post-graduate students of Academic Institutes and researchers without degrees are deprived of their right to use individual tickets. It is a real crime in the face of the future of science! When people of our generation studied on their post-graduates, we used to bring the books for re-registering by taxi-cabs, because it was impossible to carry them otherwise. And when a different reader needed the same book, the Libraiy informed us that we had to return it within five days, as it is done everywhere in the world... We fail to understand what is steadfast basis of our librarian confidence that the General Catalogue is a SERVICE catalogue always and everywhere, that is data closed to the reader. While this conviction of his running counter to all the world experience prevails, present generation of scholars has no hope left to live to see a time when they will have full information about the BAN book depository. Why should anyone put scolars on hunger rations under the conditions of constant informational deprivation? The St.Petersburg scientific community is insistently asking You, Mr. President to put before the Presidium of RAS the question of Leonov's retirement since that man appeared incapable of protecting the thing of the main human value — his good name and reputation of an honest person. Leonov further stay in the office, in the ranks of the Academy casts a shadow on all the Academy workers, damages international prestige of the Library and merely prevents work. From a professional point of view BAN management is disastrously dangerous for it: the Library is swiftly loosing ground both in servicing the readers and especially as a scientific institution. It hurts one to see how literally in just so many years such a fine library, built by the efforts of many generations of first-rate specialists was falling to pieces...

The Other Library

217

We also ask You to bring the list of our demands to the attention of the Presidium. It is rather short: 1. Bring BAN activities in agreement with the acting Charter of the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2. Rescind all limitations on issuing books, introduced by Leonov and return the readers service by individual ticket to a time-limit existent before the fire of 1988. 3. Separate all the boulevard literature and ladies' magazines into a special stock (for example at the BAN local trade-union committee) and start a separate ticket for it. 4. Inform scholars regularly on prospects of the Library development and on its program of technical upgrade of readers service (xeroxing, and especially in the field of computerisation where there are grounds to fear abuses and where director's declarations strikingly disagree with readers' experience) through RAS periodics, publish annual reports on the implementatiomn of programs planned. 5. Publish the minutes of the meeting dedicated to discussing demands we are hereby bringing up and to the issue of Leonov's fitness for the post he holds in Academic magazines. Open information on all these questions will help to avoid false rumours and media fuss in which we are absolutely not interested; we hope this will save us from an immediate accusation of slander, falsehood and perseqution of "an innocent victim". The Presidium of RAS did not answer our last address but we trust that it is not indifferent to the state of things in the chief Academic Library. We would not wish to suspect the Presidium of indifference or of direct connivance to systematic ruining of the Library. Leonov called the Epilogue to his book the "Library Syndrome" "The Last Word". We strongly hope that with Your assistance the Presidium of RAS will also utter its last word so that we shall never hear Leonov's scandalously known name within the walls of the Russian Academy of Sciences and that the fired "narrow-field BAN professionals" will have a possibility to return to their scientific work". Scientific workers of RAS institutions in St.Petersburg: The Institute of Linguistic Research: Vakhtin N.B., Voeikova M.D., Ghirfanova A.Kh., Golovko E.V., Kazansky N.N., Kozintzeva N.A., Kryukov I.V., Lauchyute Yu.A., Rusakov A.Yu., Sobolev A.N., Spatar N.M., Stepanova L.G, Sukhachev N.L., Shubik S.A. The Institute of Russian Literature (the Pushkin House): Belobrova O.A., Belousov A.F., Vodolazkin E.G, Lavrov A.V., Lobakova I.A., Ponyrko N.V., Rudi T.R., Savelieva N.V., Semyachko S.A., Sokolova L.A., Fedotova M.A. The Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (the Kunstkammer): Baiburin A.K., Pozdnyakov K.I., Uzunova V.G., Chernetzov S.B. The Branch of the Oriental Research Institute: Vasilkov Ya.V., Kabanov A.M., Neveleva S.L., Polosin V.V. The Branch of the Institute of Russian History: Bulgakova L.A., Mazhuga V.l. The Institute of Sociology: Egorov B.F. The Branch of RAS Archives: Panchenko Ο. V. This letter is interesting by the fact that it concentated the level of understanding of library problems by scholars of humanities*. And from the understanding of librarianship by * I do not want to comment it in detail. Dear reader! Re-read once more and compare statements of humanists with natural scientific scholar's speeches (Academicians I.V. Grebenschikov and D.S. Rozhdestvensky) at the BAN's General meeting (March, 1936) about organization of the BAN's work.

218

Chapter Χ

Candidates and Doctors of History and Philology that is reduced to simple things — immediate access to the General Service Catalogue for every reader, dispensing home literature of the XIX -the beginning of XX centuries — one really starts to feel uneasy. What commentaries do we need here? Maybe recommend them first to reread the forgotten fable by I. Krylov "Leaves and Roots"! What is interesting is a different thing: the letter written at the threshold of the third millennium bears the same authors style that prevailed sixty years ago and it was written by persons almost my age. I do not remember anybody coming to me with complaints or requests. In order to sign such a text one needs first to fancy at least an outward image of the opponent, that 'other'. I doubt very much that all 39 signees had read my book. Indeed that is quite a job, one needs a lot of time to get through 629 pages! I suppose, that the principle of collectivism snapped into action here — it is well-known in our belles-lettres: "I never read that book myself and do not know what it is about, but I am sure that if everybody is against it then its author is a dishonorable man". Apparently, symptoms of that syndromic illness never disappear by themselves with time, but deeply rooted in the chromosomes they are waiting for their own time, wait for years and decades. In the professional library environment among those for whom the "Library Syndrome" was intended the reaction was different. A Moscow magazine "Scientific and Technical Libraries" spent two years publishing fragments of the book and reactions to it. According to request by another capital magazine — "Bibliography" — we had a dialogue between Valery Fokeev, Doctor of Pedagogics (Sector of Book History, Librarianship and Bibliography of the Russian State Library) and myself: "The Diagnosis: Library syndrome "(1977. Ν 3. P. 42-55). Here are some excerpts from the material published. "The most unpleasant indication of the library syndrome is scornful attitude on the part of some scientific workers to our activities, incomprehension of the fact that this is a highly professional labour with scientific, methodology problems and a specific character of its own. In some of its manifestations our work is on the border of impossible. During the BAN fire about 300 thousand national and foreign editions perished. It was nesessary to save the remaining books partly burnt, charred, wet, stuck together, books without covers and bindings. Under the guidance of bibliographers from the ReferenceBibliographical Department work of attributing texts of the "Baer's stock" — the foreign part of the damaged collection was carried out. This work has no analogues, as if blindfold in a minefield, where intuition, experience, instinct of bibliographer and perfect knowledge substituted a mine-detector. One had to gather foreign books and serial editions without title pages or inventory numbers, without beginning and end; to identify maps, tables, engraving prints, indices. In the result of that unprecedented work 3 thousand reconstructed editions returned to the "Baer's stock". Now here is an example of another kind from practice of communication in academic circles, where, it would seem, the issue of professional library work with its specific character, order and certain rules of its own should not even appear, interference in it — is a risky step. In one of our meetings in early 1995 philologists, archivists took their turn accusing me of incompetence and nonprofessionalism for removing workstations from the manuscript depository, and then started to insruct me on what decisions I had to rescind first of all, what and where to move in the library, to what depositaries organize access and so on. Having worked in BAN for eight years by that time I could not restrain myself: "Why, just why everybody takes the liberty of judging what the library should

The Other Library

219

be? On what grounds? Only because they are its readers? Myself, I believe it indecent to instruct those experts who have it as their profession how to organize archives, run museums, pursue the historical science, linguistics or literature studies. But in librarianhip there appear to be no nonspecialists. It is the deepest delusion. A long time ago library studies have grown out of the shorts it used to wear a hundred years ago". Valery Fokeev (V. F.) What, in Your opinion, awaits the library? What conclusions did You draw during these hard "years of upheaval"? Valerii Leonov (V. L.) One learns from one's mistakes, you know. But apparently, we shall never learn to learn our lessons from the past. Anew disaster took quite a short while to come. In the night of February 4 to 5, 1997 the Pulkovo's obsevatory library (BAN's branch) went up in flames. Ten thousand books were damaged including 5,092 from the library of V.Ya. Struve — the founder of the main observatory of the country. Fire destroyed 1,5 thousand of books that belonged to him, and among those were editions from the XVI-XIX centuries. And again the kiln in BAN is running round the clock, and after drying come the already habitual cleaning, fumigation, description and phase conservation. Something happened to us during these nine years. In 1988 all the city, the entire country, the whole world stirred to respond to our misery. We were giving books damaged by fire out for drying to citizens on their passports, student cards, just on their word of honor. People carried them in their personal cars, stood night shifts, forgetting about their days off. Nothing went missing. Everything was returned to BAN. But what happens today? We had the greatest difficulties to get three lorries (thanks for this to administration of the Moscow district of Petersburg and cadettes of the Higher Fire Brigade Technical School!). And there are no more thanks for anybody except them and the workers of the Library of the Academy of Sciences and the Pulkovo Observatory. There is no money for chemicals, materials, equipment. The financial assistance promised by the Governor is still on its way. And all that are us as well... During press-conference at the "House of Journalists" dedicated to the fourth BAN fire in nine years there was an absurd question (asked by a young media lady): "Why is your library not privatized yet?" V. F. How do you see your further work in the Library of the Academy of Sciences? V. L. What is there to do, how to work further, how to save the inner independence of BAN director under this syndrome to which there is no end? I have no wonder-working recipes. I keep on doing what I believe is of vital importance for the library. In particular, I believe the time has come to raise the question of changing BAN status, of transforming it into an International Library of the Academies of Sciences. Experience from last years shows that the government through its Ministry of Culture, RAS are not able to maintain three giants in Moscow and St.Petersburg — two national libraries and BAN with a total stock of about 90 million stock items of documented information. Not to doom oneself to slow dying, one has to reach outside the Russian borders, strike direct international treaties on interchange of information with the Academies of Sciences, Ministries of Science and Culture of those countries that systematically co-operate with BAN (some are doing that from the XVIII century). One needs to offer foreign librarians a possibility to win our scientific and library posts in open competition, conduct special programs agreed with the goverment, for example on machine cataloguing of foreign history and culture stocks, on preparing and publishing facsimile editions, on preventive conserva-

220

Chapter Χ tion, on library security, on bibliographical service in remote access mode and so on. I am saying nothing about collaboration in book restoration, about BAN stock promotion, foreign expositions, fairs, conferences and seminars. Part of the means from concerted international programs may be used to develop the library material resources. This is not a Utopia, this is a long but practicable way. There are no precedents of such co-operation either in IFLA or in the UN libraries. I forsee the indignation of sceptics. There are fears that agreements concluded will remain on paper only. Another accuser from on top will be found who will inevitably see in my initiative an attempt — now already legal — to sell off national property. Now what — another "ring" plot?"

Do you remember, my reader, the story of Vinius Album and its restoration in the Netherlands that I mentioned in Chapter IV of this book? It might be worth to return to it again now. The theme of Vinius Album went through a stormy development against the background of sickly splashes of the syndrome during all this time. How much energy was spent by both 'narrow' and 'broad' scope experts in letters to the RAS President, to Secretary of the Security Council, to the President of Russia at last! How many publications, threats, inspections there were! And what for? Just to prevent taking the Album out of the country for restoration by a bilateral contract between the Amsterdam Historical Museum and the RAS Library. Let it stay another three hundred years in the House in Birzhevaya until it finally disintegrates. Is that the syndrome logic at work again? To mark and counterpoint the drama and foolishness of the situation I present briefly some facts as of March 1,1997. So, on March 1 A.S. Kolupaeva, an expert of the RF Ministry of Culture on exporting exhibits abroad informs BAN Deputy Director, Science I.M. Belyaeva on the following: on February 28, 1997acertain S.G Milyukov appealed to the Deputy Minister of Culture,M.E. Shvydkoi with a letter by Academician D.S. Likhatchev and demanded to forbid exporting the Vinius Album to Holland for restoration. When talking with Shvydkoi Milyukov added that BAN Director, V.P. Leonov is under investigation for an attempt to illegally export the Album; that RAS Presidium is considering Leonov's discharge from his post; that there is a document by RAS Presidium forbidding the export of Album; that the assistant to the Secretary of the Security Council, T.V. Chertoritskaya (!) is drafting a letter to the Ministry of Culture to be signed by I. Rybkin with a demand to forbid dispatch of the Vinius Album and, finally, that BAN Director Leonov took a bribe from the Dutch for his intention to dispatch the Album for restoration in the Netherlands. Sometimes I ask myself: "Ifyou would have imagined at least a part of those problems and difficulties that you would confront before it all began? Would you find your spirit with that knowledge? " It is a very difficult question. But what is there to do? In BAN administration we come to a decision to go to the end. What is there to be afraid of if our conscience is clear? Again we appeal following the order of command to the Minisrty of Culture, the RAS Presidium, and the Ministry again. On April 23, 1997 the truth triumphs and the Album flies away to the Netherlands. The correspondent of the "Russkaya mysl" (Russian Thought) Ilmira Stepanova thus expounded the "Case of Vinius Album "on the pages of her newspaper: "...the Academy was rained with letters of t he leading 'Dumtzi' (members of the State Duma), do-wellers for national property — Sergei Baburin and Stanislav Govorukhin. But

The Other Library

221

the matter took its course. Documents for conveyance were prepared. Confirmation in writing and guarantees from the Netherlands Deputy Minister of Culture were received. Then a permit from the Russian Archives Service. Permit by Deputy Minister of Culture RF Shvydkoi M.E. Worked with the 'Piter' Customs (another hassle: negotiations, papers, duties, sealing the valuable cargo). Booked tickets for March 5. A day before Miliukov calls from Moscow to speak to a BAN lady-worker who is to fly to Amsterdam and declares that a group is formed that will not permit exporting national property abroad, that she herself faces mishaps, a seizure "red-handed" at the customs, a solitary for the term of investigation... In the end of February Academician D.S. Likhatchev addressed B.N. Yeltzin: "Mr. Leonov is preparing to export to Holland a unique Vinius Album — a monument from theXVI-XVIII centuries — ostensiblyfor restoration. It is clear that when it lands abroad this yet unexplored monument will become an object for Dutch scholars and that Russia will lose its priority... Mr. President! We rely on You as the last authority. It is in Your will to stop the unprecedented devastation of BAN". The anxiety of our esteemed Academician is understandable, but it seems he did not know the details of the agreement, never saw the official documents. But the letter produced the desired effect. On March 4 in his telephone talk with BAN Director Mikhail Shvydkoi flatly rescined his own decision. Meanwhile the Dutch side that was sustaining considerable losses for overdue insurance resulting from that expressed distrust stated that it intends to declare the contract null and void. It meant that Vinius Album that had stayed in BANfor about 300 years would further stay in oblivion in its deplorable state (it was impossible even to turn its pages!). Speaking of priorities. Before that story nobody cared about that album at all: since there are no experts on drawings in BAN, the person that inspected it while the contract was drafted was Irina Vladimirovna Linnik, Doctor of Art Criticism from the Hermitage and she found ten works by Nikolaus Kniupfer, Rembrandt's contemporary, ealier unknown, in it. The Dutch party was asked to wait until March 26, then the last and final date — April 11 was named. On the 7-th the Presidium of the St. Petersburg RAS Scientific Centre was convened. But... the question turned out not even to be on the agenda. Then Leonov wrote a note to the presidium: "Ready to speak in 'miscellaneous' on adopting the decision on Album restoration ". The Presidium listened to his presentation and supported. Then quickly informed Moscow, the Academy of Sciences. April 8 came. Through all the day everybody was on their tiptoes. But no news from the 'prime-enthroned' capital. In the morning of April 9 he dials the number of RAS Presidium Member, Academician E.P. Chelyshev. Asks about the state of things. Chelyshev answers: 'Did not consider: it is outside the Presidium competence, it belongs to that of the Ministry of Culture... 'Nevertheless RAS Vice-President Academician Zh.I. Alferov informed in writing RAS President Yu.S. Osipov about the results of discussion of the 'Vinius Case' in Petersburg, and Yury Sergeevish officially addressed the Ministry of Culture: 'RAS Presidium sees no obstacles and asks to resolve the issue in its essence'. A day before departing to Germany with the President's team Deputy Minister of Culture, M.E Shvydkoi looks through all the papers and seems to agree. BAN telegraphed the Dutch: update the insurance immediately — there is still some hope. Those did the impossible and on April 18 dispatched an emergency confirmation of the earlier issued insurance policy

222

Chapter Χ

validity for two months extra (its expiry date was April 15). Shvydkoi returnedfrom Germany and on April 19 signed the export permit. Two days later in Moscow documents were prepared and sent — these were met in 'Piter' with an evening train. Now only trifles remained: pay the duty anew and hassle through the customs. On the noon of April 29 the aircraft steering for Amsterdam, carried album away to the Netherlands for two months". ("Russkaya Mysl", 1997, Ν 4174, May 15-21). Concluding this story I will add that after the Album returned to BAN restored all the interest to it on the part of defenders of the national culture instantly expired. There was no reaction from their side at the top. And the library Manuscript Department now possesses not only the restored Album itself, but also its photocopy made by the Dutch free of charge. It means that now not only historians and art-critics can go through its pages and look it over, but also all those readers and "writers" who, having never seen the Album, were so vehemently against its export for restoration. ...To imagine today the present crisis-ridden BAN in more detail, it is necessary to look back, to return if only to the 30-ies. The "Academy Case 1929-1931". An organization fabricated by the OGPU that had never existed — the "All-People Union to Struggle for Liberating Free Russia", headed by Academician S.F. Platonov, at that time BAN Director, is crushed. The Government decides to move the Academy of Sciences to Moscow. Its President, Academician A.P. Karpinsky took a long time getting ready, postponing, seeking for reasons, resisting, trying to put the relocation off. One of the latest reasons for delaying relocation that Alexander Petrovich, who used to live in the 'academic' house on the corner of 7-th Liniya, near the Leutenant Schmidt Bridge formulated was: "I want the Neva River to be seenfrom the windows of my home". The Academy management moved to Moscow and its main library — a scientific laboratory — remained in Leningrad. Soul and body turned appeared to be separated. Since then it is sharing the lot of many Petersburg academic institutions. Exceptions are so rare... Fate disposed of our library in its own way. One might, perhaps, wish it a different life, more peaceful and comfortable. Well, say, it could be a symbol of our science and librarianship, but instead of that it has to shift great lumps. It is not only the first to feel discomfort in servicing fundamental science, it is simply doomed to be the first by history itself! And that is its distinctive difference from other libraries, not less respected and fine. After the fire of 1988 the desire to guide BAN from the top, regardless of the library administration prevailed and is still alive in many a bureaucrat soul. (I present these materials in the second part of the "Library Syndrome ", named "The Years of Upheaval"). In our days the "executive" interest towards the Library strengthened: after all, isn't this object so attractive and prestigious, and, sitting there in Moscow or, let us say, in Novosibirsk, one may win one's laurels of a fighter for preservation of cultural legacy in St.Petersburg. Here is one of the latest "syndrome" splurges. On April 24,1996 Deputy Chairman of the State Duma RF Sergei Baburin addressed RAS President: "State Duma RF and I personally keep getting addressed on the unsavory situation in the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Authors of these addresses, in particular, pay their attention to gross violations of the acting legislation, of rules of keeping unique objects of cultural legacy, of shortcomings in managing human resourses. As far as I know the Commission formed by the order of RAS Presidium to check BAN administration activities, that worked in the Library during December-January, did not re-

The Other Library

223

veal any serious violations. This gives one grounds to believe that either the BAN administration mislead the Commission mentioned, or the Commission itself misinformed the RAS Presidium, since these were the very months when the leading workers of the Library performed quite specific actions with respect to relics kept there that may considerably damage the interests of our science and culture and the national interests of Russia. Documents placed at my disposal testify that violations of established rules by BAN management acquired a systematic character, at least during the lastfour-five years. It is quite remarkable that numerous appeals to the highest academic authorities from both the scientific community in general and separate scholars that are related to these developments remain without attention and reply, as a rule. I suppose that the fate of library Ν 3 in Russia that is the fifth largest in the world merits closer attention and should not be resolved using exclusively bureaucratic measures. In this connection I am asking You to present the necessary documents that give an understanding of the actual state of things in the Library. At the same time I am inviting You to a discussion aimed at detailed examination of the issue so as to work out the most optimal solution, appropriate to the existing order ". Chairman of the RAS Information-Library Council, Academician E.P. Chelyshev showed this letter to me. By way of an answer I told him what I think of Baburin's letter. Then Evgeny Petrovich came to express his dissatisfaction with my actions in response to a different letter — that by the St.Petersburg Public Prosecutor V.l. Yeremenko to RAS President. I answered again... A day before RAS General Meeting in Moscow, on May 29-30,1997 Academician Chelyshev informed me about the new letters now coming from RAS History Department with regard to actions by the BAN management. I am quoting a fragment from a letter by Academician N.N. Pokrovsky, who lives in Novosibirsk, to the Secretary of the Security Council of Russia of February 9,1997: "There developed a situation in one of the main depositories of historical and cultural treasures in Russia that really threatens their safety... Its management has now started a strange structural reorganization of a department and some more scholars of the highest qualification are losing their jobs... prominent scholars protested against such a course of events. Reply by the BAN Director was not trivial — he published a vast and quite disgusting lampoon in the genre of a pseudo-detective story against one of the protesters — Dmitry Sergeevich Likhatchev. It is apparent for all world of science — but not for BAN Director — that one cannot find a better expert on the keeping and studying old Russian books in Petersburg than D.S. Likhatchev. In the end of October, 1996 RAS History Department offered a compromise option to resolve the conflict that would provide for the rescue of [the Department] and its books — subordinate it administratively to one of the other three Petersburg depositories of old books — Institute of Russian Literature (the Pushkin House), Archives of the St.Petersburg Branch of The Institute of Russian History or the St.Petersburg Branch of RAS Archives. But this compromise did not work either, the influence of BAN Director was too strong... Therefore, the Director artificially created an objectively criminal situation, when for some time nobody is in fact responsible for the priceless folios. I repeat: the keys from depository of these books are in the hands of an outsider not responsible for them legally. Indeed, it is criminal and dangerous to leave such keeping in the hands of a diletante. The situation formed calls for immediate reaction ".

224

Chapter Χ

Academician-Secretary of the History Department A.A. Fursenko sided with Pokrovsky. On May 28, 1997 in his letter to the RAS Vice-President, Academician V.N. Kudryavtzev he states: "... the situation that developed in BAN is absolutely abnormal. Indeed, most experienced and authoritative workers of the Manuscript Department were dismissed and so the lot of the Manuscript Department itself is endangered. I agree with the opinion by Academician N.N. Pokrovsky's that the BAN Manuscript Department could be placed under one of institutions of the History Department in St. Petersburg that have experience in keeping collections of such sort. Bureau of the History Department RAS stated its opinion in the letter addressed to You back in October last year". Having read there letters I temporarily withheld from commenting them to Academician Chelyshev. Although I had never met N. Pokrovsky, I somehow easily "calculated" during the Academy General Meeting in 1997 and came up to him during a break. There followed a short conversation. "Excuse me, are You Academician Pokrovsky? "(He was drinking coffee in a buffet on the same floor..) " — "Yes, I am "— and he looked at me sociably. Of course, he never saw me before either. "I am the BAN Director, Leonov Valerii Pavlovich (there followed a mute scene) on whom You had written letters to I. Rybkin, E. Sidorov and Yu. Osipov. " — "Well, I wrote them pretty mildly, could do it differently", — he started and continued lively in a manner that leaves no place for contradiction on BAN Manuscript Department and its workers. - "But You never visited it, never got to know it personally, you are meeting me for the first time. BAN is not the Manuscript Department only. " — "Yes, I understand, but I believe Department workers ". "First of all — I continued — I am interested in the moral aspect of the issue. You wrote a denunciation, a pure denunciation on me! "He turned purple, put his glass down, and said that in such cases one throws down a challenge and goes away. "I can reply with the same — I added. — Why did You, knowing neither me personally nor the gist of BAN matter wrote this denunciation? " Pokrovsky repeated with approximately the same. We parted... In 1999 the "Library Syndrome" was published in English31. I received a letter from the distant Los Angeles, from Miguel Angel Corzo, former Director of the Getty Conservation Institute , currently a leading world expert in preserving cultural legacy, a person who knows and aids BAN, who spent more than 30 years working in the state and private structures of Mexico, Germany and the US. "I just finished your "Library Syndrome" that I read being in a state of shock from the very start. I do remember our conversations, first in Mexico, then in Los Angeles and finally in StPetersburg and your explanations to me of what was going on and how you were dealing with the situation. But I had never, even in my worst nightmares, imagined all the complexities and the incredible pressure that you were subject to during all that time keeping the post of the Director at the LibraryMany things came to my mind as I was reading Your book and although I made some notes they are quite haphazard. So I feel I must put them in order so that it becomes possible to send over to You some of the issues that I want to underline as a friend, a colleague and an observer. 31

Leonov V.P. The Library Syndrome. München: Saur, 1999. 295 p.

The Other Library

225

My first impression is one of the determination to succeed. From your very start in the capacity of the Deputy Director you were not only challenged by the catastrophic fire but even earlier by certain fractions of the staff and other fractions within the scientific community, those threatened by Your mere presence let alone Your actions... I tried while reading the book and reflecting on it, to understand why there would be such a tremendous opposition to you as a leader and an administrator. In truth, I cannot answer that question, though I read attentively page after page of Your narration, including comments and documents. I do remember a poster that was very much in vogue when I was attending the university in the 60's. It was a photograph of Albert Einstein standing in front of a blackboard with a caption that said: "Bright ideas always encounter violent opposition from mediocre minds". My suspicion is that this was one of the things that happened in the Library. Your determination to succeed, your quest for solutions to thorny administrative problems, your creative imagination, — all that encounters violent opposition from mediocre minds. My observations have been that some staff in Your organization is quick to embrace good ideas and to respond to them enthusiastically. They are there to support the organization. But others — more selfish, losers in their lives or malicious — feel threatened because they fear change, fear losing power and privileges, or are inherently lazy, indifferent, mediocre, or all three together. But, in some instances people are evil or jealous towards someone who succeed where they failed. In many cases these same people could not even aspire to the position or status of the person they envy, and then they turn their energies and efforts to the destruction of the leader. All this, of course, is cheap psychology on my part, but it is based on my observations of organizations over the past 30 years of professional life. It seems to me that people within the Library, those who have been creating all these problems for you, would fall into one of those categories with time. The same could be said of those outside the Library... But I must say that I am totally perplexed as to why an individual with a title of an Academician would not only refuse to come to the Library and see the facts for himself, but would also be the dupe of a small number of employees or other intellectuals harboring a grudge. Did he generate his own stupidity or was he only a vehicle for those outrageous irresponsible statements? Maybe the human vanity is so great that he could not see he was being played like a third rate violin. Or maybe he is just evil. Of course, my dear Valerii, I know you keep spending countless sleepless nights thinking about this and trying to find an answer. I also know there is no answer. It is just like the old fable of the frog and the scorpion at the river bank (You told it to me during our trip to Yucatan). "That's their nature". I must also add that I am absolutely disappointed by the incredible secrecy of the justice system in St.Petersburg. I know things take time to change, but I expected young prosecutors and investigators to become the agents of change. You — as well as those people who wrote articles and letters — are so right in making the parallel to the past. How can a society, any society aspire to be great, when the system is secretive, abusive and corrupt? Let me digress a little here: As you know, one of the reasons I left Mexico was because, among other things, I felt this way about the judicial system there. But I could also witness it in this country where the abuse of power by a prosecutor almost brought

226

Chapter Χ down the President of the United States, which many saw as a right wing coup d'etat. The harm done to the institution of the presidency by the special prosecutor here is, I think, irreparable and we are all left to regret it. My dear Valery, your extraordinary courage at all levels, from first confrontations, to interrogations, to writting the book is evident in every sentence and in every moment. You are a true example of dignity and of what Hemingway used to call "grace under pressure", a quality much admired by President Kennedy as well as by your friend Miguel Angel. Another aspect of your character that comes through not only in the book, but also in your demeanor with friends and strangers is your fortitude. I once told you one of my stories about the investigation of alleged malfeasance I had to suffer. My circumstances and my legal support were very different from yours and yet even so I was extraordinarily anxious and angry. I can only imagine what you must have been going through in those days and in those circumstances. And yet, to the outside world, you maintained an incomparable image of composure and serenity. This makes you meritorious of the Oscar as Best Actor! Perhaps your determination to not see your name smeared gave you the strength to continue. And your discipline to write the book and document the whole case in painstaking detail makes it absolutely evident that there was indeed bad blood after you. I don't know any of the characters in your oeuvre noire. Yet the one I know. Dr. Alferov comes shining through as a fair, righteous, courageous and true man. He knows you, he believes in you, he defends you. I wonder what the nameless academician thinks of this True Academician? The globalisation of sensationalist media comes forth irrefutable in your book. All the articles published by the press were meant to create a larger readership caring not about the truth. In this, the St.Petersburg and Moscow press are just like the rest of the press in the world. "To hell with the facts, as long as you sell newspapers". I used to believe that journalists were trained as investigators to better inform the public. I know otherwise and I see examples every day in every country in newspapers, magazines, radio and television of the same type of stories being run just to increase audience ratings. The lonely voices heard in your defence were very significant but I doubt whether they sold more issues. Perhaps it is a reflection of our societies that this symbolic relationship has developed between the media and the public and the two deserve each other. I know I am being a cynic, yet I cannot help but reflect on the sad state of affairs of the press today... Those of us who know you were outraged at the despicable manner in which you have been slandered and attacked. Those who are or have been your adversaries are not even worthy of that name, because they could never be put on an equal footing with you. They are so far beneath you, like scum, that no one should even pay attention to them, they are not worthy of anyone's interest. I wish I had had a better grasp of the situation as it was evolving. Perhaps I could have been of some assistance, in trying to support your efforts. As it was, I was only a rather remote spectator, very partially informed and of no help at all. I do admire your discretion and the way you always treat me as a friend. I must tell you, though, that I am also learning that sharing one's thoughts and problems with another human being is helpful and brings solace and respite to difficult times. On a more tactical and practical aspect, I think it is important that the book be publicly available in some places. I would like to purchase some copies so that I can

The Other Library

227

donate them to the NY Public Library, the Library of Congress, the L. A. Library, the Getty Library and the UCLA. Also there must be a journal of Library issues that is well respected and an authority in the field. I think the book should be reviewed there. Could you please tell me the name, so I can also send a copy there, with a letter from me? In all I need six additional copies. Would you be so kind as to send them to me? Or please tell me where I can order them in Germany, so that I can proceed immedialely to their distribution? What has happened to you and to your Library is, unfortunately, not an isolated incident. It has become more pervasive in our societies The weak and irrelevant, the angry and insignificant, the malicious and spiteful in the world are abusing the status of democracy and wallowing in their own ineptitude. But they are causing much harm by their actions. True intellectual pursuit cannot be achieved if these forces are not eradicated from whithin. The quest for truth must prevail. Publications such as your book, showing the specifics of a case, demonstrating without doubt the evil intents and the harm they produce is one very strong step in the right direction to provide a context where truth will triumph and honesty will prevail. I apologize for this lenthly letter. But it just reflects briefly some of my thoughts upon reading the "Library Syndrome"... Los Angeles, April 30, 1999

THE EPILOGUE On May 21,1996 the nameless square between BAN and the State University was called "Academician Sakharov Square". Speakers during the meeting devoted to the 75th anniversary of the eminent scholar and civic leader were the Mayor of St.Petersburg Anatoly Sobchak, State Duma Deputy Galina Starovoitova, Academician Dmitry Likhatchev and others. I was invited to participate as head of the institution that is overlooking that square with the central part of its enormous building. While speaking I noted that even during Sakharov's lifetime one square was already named after him, but it is at the other end of the world, in the capital of the USA, in Washington, D.C., on crossing of 16-th street and K-street—it is the space limited by Embassy of the former USSR (now of the Russian Federation), the National Geographic Society and the American Chemical Society. Americans called it "Sakharov Plaza". This served as a memento for us of the need to restore justice towards a Great Citizen in Russia as well. And more. I remembered Sakharov's greeting on the occasion of his visit to the Library of Congress in November, 1988: "It is a great pleasure for me to find myself in a library. A lot of institutions are of a relative value for mankind. But the library is an institution belonging to everybody, and its value was always absolutely indisputable, immense and wonderful for the culture. I am looking at this perfect building and reflect on all those countless people who entered here and, taking a book in their own hands got to know the world culture... After all, the main thing moving us forward is hope and ardent desire that relations between our countries become closer, that mutual confidence be strengthened. And in this case the assistance that one library can render another, that got in trouble, is a particular symbol"1. Almost four years have elapsed. A. Sobchak, G. Starovoitova, D. Likhatchev all passed away. One can see the evident lack of care for it, the buidings surrounding it that belong to different agencies, each living all by itself somehow strikingly remind one of the present-day Russia, where the power and the people, the Government and the State institutions, the Academy of Sciences and its institutes all live in parallel worlds. In order to try and see the future of our libraries, to look into and understand the sense of library problems in the beginning of the XXI century, one might find an easier base not in a historical yesterday, but in its day before. Rephrasing S. Freud one might say: "Study the childhood of an individual you are interested in — and you will understand everything ". And then the ideas of Peter I, Schumacher, Blumentrost, Lomonosov, their vision of the Library, general concept and rules that formed in the XVIII century will become useful and will probably serve the key to understand the present state of things. With this purpose in mind I undertook an attempt of theoretical "reconstruction" of the object known world-wide as the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 'See. Leonov V.P. Bibliotechnyj sindrom: Zapiski direktora BAN. SPb.: Oblik, 1996. P. 173-174. As an example A.D. Sakharov presented the Library of Congress, that helped B A N after the fire in February, 1988. This assistance became possible because of the "International foundation for survival and development of humanity" grant.

The Epilogue

229

In the process of study it became evident that at every turn of history people close to power and the power itself constantly changed, sometimes distorted the initial design and image of BAN as the national Russian library, adjusting it to its own interests and tastes. Interrelationships in the result of which all these changes occurred and still occur, may generally be "fitted" into a scheme clear as the simple scale, as Pushkin said in his "Mozart and Saliery". On the one side is BAN, as a memory deposit of mankind — and lack of spirit on the other; BAN as a national Russian library and departamental practicality; BAN providing a comfortable information environment — and the unfavourable "external atmosphere" (as S. Platonov noticed); BAN a community of professionals — and violence over personality. Apparently, this Library will hardly return to the model designed by its founder. BAN is the median of the Russian library history. It became the first national library of the new type because its inner nature corresponded to the needs of the XVIII century. In its creation there manifested itself not only the influence of the external conditions, but also a powerful individual element. It dynamically developed during the century obeying Peters' will and following the traditions he established. It was the time when the Imperial library was living through the "romantic" period of its history. It became the library that not only met the requirements of the environment, but rather represented that environment itself. BAN came to the XIX century changed, divided into two departments with two directors, with different finances and tasks of servicing the requirements of the Academy science. The romantic period changed to realistic. The orientation was towards a different, vague and unknown life. Nevertheless, because of its manuscripts and books the library gained such a stable place in the world that it was required by a wider community that before. BAN strived to meet those needs, was pushing forward, even leaving some of its original developments, such as K. Baer classification system unimplemented. And they remained single specimen, unclaimed by other libraries. National by birth, it did not forfeit its position but its official status appreciably decreased: in the eyes of the powers to be it became a departmental library only. Now all its life was determined by the role and significance of the Academy of Sciences in the society, the authority of its President. And that was insufficient to support and develop the potential of BAN. As a result its former stable relations with other large libraries weakened. Nevertheless, by the beginning of the XX century it still remained a first-rate library in which such distinguished scholars as A. Shakhmatov, K. Zaleman, V. Sreznevsky, N. Nikolsky, S. Platonov were working. In the beginning of the 20-ies the Library was again managed by one director. It seemed that the worst was behind and in a little while the good times will come. The "Academy Case 1929-1931" buried all the hopes of rebirth of BAN, and from the 30-ies it went gradually transforming (if we stick to the literature criticism terminology of "socialist realism ") into an official, even more isolated institution, the one that we had in our college days to study from the articles and text-books as the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences that performs the function of the chief methodology center for the libraries of academic system. It happened historically so that the Academy of Sciences in Russia never recognized the library-bibliographical problems, librarianship and bibliography for an academic science and does not now. To some extent the negative attitude to them is hidden in the fact that representatives of natural sciences, who are usually elected Presidents of the Academy of Sciences, do not consider librarianship a subject that merits a place in a section of RAS. In their estimation it is an applied field too subjective to be controlled. (Apparently, to control them better all the large

230

The Epilogue

academic libraries and information institutions were put under the rule of the Presidium and, as it always happens in such cases, all of them were left derelict and unprotected in front of new political and financial upheaval). That is why librarianship and bibliography traditionally developed and are still developing in nonacademic institutions: colleges of culture and art, teachertraining colleges and — hardly ever — universities. The erroneously implemented tendency to consolidate the academic library and information resourses in the country, scattering of scientific potential have led and are leading objectively to lowering the level of library science and that, in its turn, strengthens the old notion existent in the Academy of Sciences even today of librarianship as a trifle business, a non-science that only amateurs engage in but not true scholars. The phenomenon of BAN consists of almost three centuries of contemplations, disputes, fallacies, insights that started from its birth and went with A. Bogdanov, S. Kotel'nikov, K. Baer, A. Kunik, A. Shakhmatov, S. Platonov and other persons, not the "densest". Speaking about the present, comprehending the phenomenon of BAN starts with difficulties of defining its relations with the environment, the habitat where its opponents are not only the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences or the Academy as a whole, but also the city of St.Petersburg where the chief library of the Academy of Sciences found itself isolated from Moscow guidance starting from the 30-ies. As the result we, being inside BAN, were left face to face with our problems that we know and understand very well. (How could one otherwise explain the fact that despite our repeated appeals to grant BAN the status of an object of national property of the peoples of the Russian Federation, we failed to receive it so far?). In order to form an adequate notion of BAN at the top, it is necessary to have a foothold for 'external' analysis, but there is no such foothold. And it appears that the Academy of Sciences and the city influence BAN without understanding its inner life and change the Library in their own way. How, in what direction? To answer that question one should consider the situation from the "outside, from there". Now again, how to do it? The way out to a first approximation seems to lie in forming in the system of the Academy of Sciences an independent library agency, a department of RAS. It will offer an opportunity to organize constant intercommunication with academic science, to initiate a constructive dialogue with scholars so as to alter their vision of BAN activities in a favorable way. Then, I would assume, one might avoid strategic mistakes in defining the stages and ways of development for the chief Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences. ...The Library as a social institution is intended to bring together, draw closer persons of most various ages and professions under the same roof. In this respect it is similar to church, and that is not surprising — after all, the first depositories and popularizers of books were abbeys and churches — the sourses of forming of the library process. We have hundreds of examples when the library helped and still helps people to survive, save oneself and return to normal life. In its own turn, the same happened repeatedly to BAN, particularly during the periods of upheavals (the revolution, wars, the siege). By opening itself to thousands of souls, the library somehow reminds the people about their initial fellowship. And this comprises the bliss of working in the library and of loving it. But to love BAN is to bear one's weighty cross. A great library is also a great individuality. We vividly see the variety of great libraries. Having apparently common features they are still original and each of them has something peculiar and unique.

The Epilogue

231

Somehow the question arises: which of the national libraries of Russia has a happier lot: BAN or the Russian National Library, the Russian National or the Russian State Library? And what is in general a happy lot for a library? (An answer suggests itself immediately, that every library is unhappy in its own way). ... How to live further? Psychologists believe that the difference between the living and the dead matter consists, apart from all the physiological details, in the fact that the dead always remains equal to itself. The living matter doubles the world, and this new world is not a copy of the material one. And so is the library. It cannot be equal to itself. Sh. Ranganathan — an Indian library scholar stated this thesis in the form of the 'library law': "A library — he concluded — is a growing organism". There is a certain gap between the spiritual contents of the library process and its material supply, a difference the scholars call "delta". And this is what they are trying to take away from us, to delete. When the library harmony was checked with algebra, the librarianship gradually transformed into a functional appendage of culture and science. Spirituality vanished. A distinguishing feature of the Library of the Academy of Sciences always resided in the fact that at all times it offered us a possibility to feel that "delta", sense the difference between the living and the dead. Nowadays officials debating the issues of culture and science at the top are on their own; BAN also speeds up plummeting "all by itself'. It does not care for those discursions, the load of its own unsolved problems presses and weighs down. And I, its Director, feel very cold because these problems worry almost nobody up there any more. It was not the chance but the logic of life compromises that played a noticeable role in BAN's lot and the lot of its managers in particular. Working for the library common librarians compromise mostly when they pay no attention to this or do not ponder over its consequences. A manager finds himself in a more intricate situation. As a rule, his actions not only reflect in further activities of his colleagues, but reach outside the library. Here the ambiguity of his position with his personal attitude towards the events vs. his responsibility for the entrusted institution manifests itself... For almost three centuries the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences was alternatively set on a pedestal and thrown down from it. And nobody paid attention to the fact that somehow inconspicuously the first national Russian library, which merited to stand along with the National Library of France, the British Library, the Library of Congress, the Russian State and the Russian National Libraries, was substituted by its marble double, equally convenient for worship and abuse. But the history also gives us a lesson: it returns back all that it absorbed. Slowly but persistently BAN is coming back. Its main success in the XX century as well as that of our librarianship was not in the fact whether scholars managed to attain major scientific results, but in that the Library of the Academy of Sciences promoted and promotes the search for historical truth. Hence it possesses not only a great past, but also the present and the future. BAN at the Sakharov Square today — is the first national Russian library —a pass-ticket for new generations of readers to the past of librarianship, science and culture of the country. On the threshold of the XXI century BAN, the Russian National Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences stands as the message from the past to the present and future. St. Peters burg, September, 1996 - March, 2000.

232

Index

Index A Abd-al-Latif 36 Abdallatifal-Bahgdad 37 Abramov K.I. 173 AbramovM.P. 54 Abramova 210, 212, 214 Abu al-Faradge 37 AchkasovaV.N. 32 Adamovich 121 Adrian, Patriarch 52 Adrianova-Peretz V.P. 19, 20, 22, 23 Aeshylus 34 AfanasievYu.N. 166, 167 Afmogenov D.E. 26, 28 AgranovYa.S. 135-141 AkimovaA.A. 47 Akselrod M.M. 211 Aleksandrov B.V. 202 Aleksandrova D.K. 212 AlekseevA.A. 128 Alekseeva 187 Aleksei 60 AlekseiAlekseevich 45, 48 Aleksei Mikhailovich 48, 57 Alexander III 114-115, 123 Alexander the Great 27, 33, 37, 40 AlferovZh.I. 162, 221, 226 Alpatov V.M. 153 AmartolG 22, 28 Amman I.A. 70, 83, 107 AmosovA.A. 45 Amr ibn al-As 36 AnanichB.V. 162 Anderson 80 AndreevA.I. 50, 55, 69, 144, 146-149 Andronicus of Rhodes 40 AndrusovN.I. 124 Ankhial M. 27 Anna, Empress 105 Anna Ioannovna 60, 71 Anna Leopoldovna 72 Anna, Princess 85, 91 Antony 38

Antonii 147 Antony Rudomina 71 Apollo Eidographus 35 Apollonius of Rhodes 35 Archimedes 34 Areskin R.K. 58, 59, 64, 77 Aristarchus of Samothrace 35 Aristophanes of Byzantium 35 Aristotle 27, 34-35, 40 ArnautovP. 107 Arnold 96 AmoldiA.A. 150 Artobolevsky I.I. 204 Ashnin F.D. 153 Augustus 38 Avramov M.P. see Abramov M.P. 54 Awakumov 212 Β BaburinS. 220, 222 BaerK.M. I l l , 229-230 BaiburinA. K. 217 BakhA.N. 130 Bakhtin 148 Bakmeisterl.K. 66-67, 76, 107 BalosogloA.P. 151 BankV.E. 189 Baranovsky P.D. 153 Barkov I.S. 107 BarsovA. 107 Barsov P.P. 59 BartoldV.V. 123 Bayer GS. 66, 72 BayleP. 59 Bebel 145 BechVanderM. 67 Beechtold 80 Bek Mohammed 71, 72 Bekler 81 Belobrova O.A. 217 Belokurov S.A. 13 BelopolskyA.A. 123 Belousov A. F. 217

Index Belov 190 Belova-Pokrovskaya 211 Belyaev J.P. 107 Belyaev M.D. 146-148 Belyaeva I.M. 220 BelyaevaKh.V. 198 BelyiG 107 BerednikovYa.I. 111 BergN.A. 143 Berg 187 Berg 199 Bergier J. 33, 37, 165 BeriyaL.P. 213 Berkenheim 169 Berkgan N.Ch. 107 Berkhgoltz F.W. 64 Berkov P.N. 95 BernalJ. 34, 38, 74 Bemer 194-195 Bemulli J. 67 Beshenkovsky E.B. 95 Bespyatyh Yu. N. 64 BezobrazovV.P. 114 Bibikov I.I. 71 BibikovM.V. 26, 28 Bicilli P.M. 24, 26, 29 Bilyarsky P. 90 BironE.I. 105 Bloch M. 62 Blumentrost L.L. 52, 55, 58-59, 69, 74, 77, 81, 228 Blyukher 211 BobrovaE.I. 47, 57, 188, 193 BodleoT. 50 BogdanovA.I. 9, 62-63, 76, 107, 230 Bogdanovich P.I. 107 BogolepovN.P. 121 Bogucharsky 143 Boil L. 69 Boil R. 98 BokachevN. 31 Bokachev N.S. 31 Bokhanovskaya T.I. 192 Bolkhovitinov E. 33 BolotovA.T. 68 BolotovN. 107

233 Bonch-Bruevich V.D. 125-127 BondeN. 71 Booksbaum I.H. 69 Borisov N. S. 30 Borisova 192, 194 BorisyakA.A. 141 Borodin A.V. 150 Borodin I.P. 123 Borodina V.l. 212 BorodulinSt. 107 BorovinskyA.F. 181, 184-185, 188-189, 192, 195, 196 BrachevV.S. 133, 150 Bredal P.P. 71 BreinJ. 80 Brem I.F. 92, 107 BriusY.V. 82 Briusov V.Ja. 173 Brown J. 166 BruinK.de 58 Bukchvostov S.L. 107 Bukharin N.I. 148 BulfingerGB. 67 Bulgakov Μ.Α. 215 Bulgakova L.A. 217 BulichN.I. 101 BuntA. 39 Burhaven 81 Burman 81 BüshingA.F. 94 Busse J.F. 107 ButlerovA.M. 114 BuzhinskyG 57

c Caesar J. 36, 38 Callimachus of Cyrene 35, 38 Chachina O.I. 173 Chadov 88 Charles V, King of Spain 41 Chebotarev G.A. 208 Chelyshev E.P. 221, 223-224 Chernetzov S.B. 217 Chertoritskaya Τ.V. 220 Chervyakov A.G 129 Claudius Ptolemaeus 27

234 Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus 28 Copernicus N. 201-202 Corzo M.A. 166, 224, 226

D Dagger 152 Dali. 107 d'Alembert 66 Danten 81 DavidovichYa.I. 211-212 Dean 81 DeborinA.F. 148 Deich L.G 199 de'Kroz la 80 Del'IsleGN. 65, 67, 71-72, 81, 91 Demetrius of Phaleron 34-35 Demidov 72, 76 DeminA.S. 46 Denisov D. 107 DerevitskyA.N. 33-34, 36 Desakilier 81 Diakonov M.A. 128, 135-136, 138, 141 Diderot D. 11, 66 Dinord 81 Diocletian 36 Diuvernua 67 d'Korberon 66 DmitrievN. 107 Dmitrieva R.P. 15, 46 Dobiash-Rozhdestvenskaya O.A. 148 Dolgorukov 142 Dosenbre 81 Drutzkoi-Podberesky R.A. 151 Druzhinin N.M. 130, 150 Dubo 81 DubrovskyA. 107 Dubrovsky Ο. V. 204 Duke of Holstein see Bonde N. 71 Durnovo N.N. 153 Duvemey 81 DvornichenkoA.Yu. 133 Dzhunkovsky V.F. 134, 138-140, 142 Ε Efendy Mohammed 72 EgorovB.F. 217

Index EgorovD.N. 141 Einstein A. 225 Ekard 80 Ekaterinal 58, 65, 84 Ekaterina II 65, 72, 95, 105 ElisavetaPetrovna 47, 72, 87, 92 Empedocles 27 Engelgardt B.M. 151 Engels F. 165 EnukidzeA.S. 129 Erasmus of Rotterdam 54 Eratosthenes of Cyrene 35 Euclid 27 Eugene 80 Euler I.A. 106 EulerL. 100, 106 Euripides 34E Eustratius Nikeysky 27 Eventova 191 Ezhov D.E. 199

F Fabricius 80 Faidel E.P. 202 FamintzinAS. 123 FatervaldA. 107 Faust I. 37 FedorAlekseevich 48, 57 Fedorovskyl. 107 Fedotova M.A. 217 Fedotova Z.S. 106 Feinstein A.I. 188, 195 Feiten Y. 78 FersmanAE. 141, 145, 149 Fetisov 1.1. 151 FigatnerYu.P. 133-141, 145-146 Fine J. 40 Finogenova 194 FirsovGG 33, 38 Fisher GA. 74 Flavius J. 23, 26 FokeevV. 218-219 Fontenell 81 Formey 98 FrajtagYu. 204 Freeman Ch. 33

Index Freigang G 107 Freud S. 228 Friche V.M. 148 Fridericks 141 FursenkoA.A. 224 FyodorovI. 107

G Gaidorova 189 GallP. 107 Gallenkamp Ch. 37 GarelinN. 35, 38 Garkavi L.M. 187 Gartman 80 Gavrilov F. 107 GebelA.F. 83 Gebenschtreit I.E. 94 Geh H.P. 37 Gell M. 107 Geliert 88 Gelmold 96 Genkel 96 Genkel I.F. 83 Genshell. 107 Georgievskaya L.A. 202 GerrB. 107 Gertzenshtain 142 GhirfanovaA.Kh. 217 GilsonE. 171 Gintovt S. 33 GippiusZ. 153 GiubnerJ. 54 Glagoleva 186 GlazkovM. 204 Glebov 53 Glyuck 52 GmelinJ.G 91 GmelinPh. 83, 91, 107 GofmanJ.G 107 Gogol N.V. 10 GoldbergA.L. 30 Golikov LI. 51-52 GolitzinB.B. 123-124 Golovko E.V. 217 Golubinsky E.E. 32 Golubtzov I. 107

235 GorbunovN.P. 127, 130, 145, 168-169, 171 Gorlitzky I. 86, 107 Gorlovsky 189 Govorov L.I. 209 GovorukhinS. 220 Gramotinl. 52 Granfell B. 39 Grebenshchikov I.V. 174, 178, 181, 184-185, 190, 217 GrekovA. 107 GrekovD. 86 Grice 50 GrigorievP. 107 Grimm 169 Grinevsky O.A. 50 Grocius H. 54 GrotYa.K. 82, 83-84, 114 Gubkin I.M. 148 Guissen G 50, 58 GulygaA.V. 68 Gurevich M.M. 142, 177-178, 184, 195, 202, 211, 213 Gurevich S.S. 175, 188 Gurlyant 147 Gutenberg Joh. 37, 42 Gwinn 50 Η Hadrian 35 Haley 81 HamaviA.T. 37 Hannibal A. 53 Harley 80 HelalA.H. 37 HertzenA.1.212 Hevelius 67 Hipparchus 34 Hofinan 80 Homur 81 Humboldt A. 101 HuygensH. 54, 101 HydeT. 51 I Ierophei 33 Igor, Prince 22-23, 98

236 Ilarion 24 Ilinsky GA. 153 Ingulov S.B. 170-171 Ioffe 192 IoffeA.F. 132 Iornand 97 Isakova 187, 189-190, 192 IstrinV.M. 124, 128-129, 132, 147-148 Its R.F. 75 Ivan Grozny (the Terrible) 44, 49 IvanovA. 88 Ivanov D.D. 204 Ivanova Μ. 107 IzmailovN.V. 142, 147

J Jablonsky 80 Jeofre 81 Jose I, Emperor of Portugal 42 Jusie 81 Κ KabanovA.M. 217 KalishevskyA.I. 118-119 Kalmykov U. 107 KaluginV.V. 13, 16, 19 Kaiveit 186, 191 Kamenev L.B. 192 Kamer M. 86 Kantl. 68 Kantemir, Prince 70 KapitzaRL. 95, 100-102, 104, 202, 214 KaramzinN.M. 53, 95 Karataev N.M. 59 Karpechenko GD. 209 KarpinskyA.P. 114, 123-124, 129, 132-133, 145-147, 222 KarpovTh. 44 Karsky E.F. 148 Kartashov 148 Kashkin 152 Kautsky K. 145 Kavaleridze I. 32 Kazansky Β. A 204 Kazansky Ν. N. 217 KedrinP. 107

Index Keisler 80 Keleser S. 67 Kellermanl. 52 KhalturinD.N. 147, 149 Kharitonov I.P. 207 KhavkinaL.B. 173 KhiljiM.B. 40 Khitrovo K. S. 211 Khokhryakova T.N. 190 KhruschevN.S. 23 KikinA.V. 60 Kipriyanov V.A. 52 Kirov S.M. 133-135, 145 KirpichnikovA.N. 20 KiselevaM.S. 16, 29-30 Klementiev 98 Klerk 80 Klermont 80 KniupferN. 49, 221 KnorozovYu.V. 37 Koblenz I.N. 63 KokovtzevN.V. 147 KoltsovA.V. 123-124, 130-131 KolupaevaA.S. 220 Kondakov N.P. 124 KondratovichA. 107 Kondratovich K. 107 Konstantin Konstantinovich (K.R.) 114, 119, 123, 134, 142-143 Konstantinov A. 107 KopanevA.I. 126 Kopievsky I.F. 57 Kopylenko M.M. 26, 28 Korberon 66 Korfl.A. 81 KorfM. 70 KosikovS. 212-213 KostygovV. 66 KosyginA.N. 197 Kotel'nikov S.K. 106, 108, 230 Kotlyarevsky Ν. A. 136, 139 Koto ν Μ. 108 KovrinM. 88 KozakE.A. 199-200 Kozimo Mari 66 KozintzevaN.A. 217

Index Koznov 120 KrabeA. 108 Krachkovsky I.Yu. 112, 147-149 KraevichN.S. 147-148 Kraft I.V. 71 Kranz 97 Kraush 187-189 Krekshin P.N. 48 Kromer 96 Krylov 143 KrylovA.N. 147, 149 Krylov I. 218 Kiyukov I.V. 217 Krzhizhanovsky GM. 148, 168-169 Kubish E.M. 189 KudryavtzevA.P. 173 Kudryavtzev V.N. 224 Kukushkina M.V. 129, 174, 197 KulebakinV.S. 204-205, 207 Kulibin I.P. 152 Kulman 147 Kulyabko E.S. 95 KunikA.A. 115, 230 Kupreyanov Ya.P. 150 Kurakin 77 Kurbatov P.A. 60 KurbskyA. 44 KurganskyA.M. 213 KumakovN.S. 123-124 KuskovV.V. 17 Kutaisov P.I. 151 Kutuzova Ζ.A. 211 Kuzeneva 189 KuznetzovA.A. 211

L Lamotrait Obri de 67 Landa Diego de 37 LangL. 59, 71 Lappo-DanilevskyA.S. 123-124 LaskeevN.A. 10 Lauchyute Yu.A. 217 LavrovA.V. 217 LavrovP.A. 147 Lavrov P.L. 125 Lazhechnikov I.I. 105

237 Le Roy P.L. 91 LebedevD.V. 207, 209-214 Lebedev F. 108 LebedevV. 108 Lebion J. 152 Lefort F.Ya. 49 Leibnitz GV. 53, 56, 61 Leman 80 Lemanl. 106 Lenin V.l. 125-127, 172, 174, 177-178, 212 Leo the Mathematician 27 Leon the Gramm. 97 LeonovV.P. 7, 8, 133, 215-217, 219-221, 224, 226, 228 Lerzenius (Liurzenius) I.V. 108 Lesskis GA. 23 Levenvolde 71 Levinson-Lessing V.F. 50-51, 66, 68, 147 Levitsky GA. 209 Liebknecht K. 145 Liderlo 81 Likhatchev D.S. 15, 23, 45, 47, 215, 220-221, 223, 228 Likhatchev N.P. 13, 149-150 Likhatcheva L.D. 46 Limer 80 Lincoln A. 166 Link 81 Linnikl.V. 221 Liprandy I.P. 151 LiuberasI.L. 71 Liudevig E.G 211 LivenceYa. 49 Livshitz E.I. 188 Ljubavsky M.K. 149-150 LobachevskyN.I. 201 LobakovaLA. 217 LoewenJ.W. 166 Lomonosov M.V. 7, 74-76, 82-84, 88-91, 93-96, 99-102, 104-105, 132, 212, 214, 228 LopatinskyP. 53-54 LotmanYu.M. 53 Louis XIV 53 Ludvig, Duke Brawnschweig-Luneburg 72 Lukashevich Ya. A. 118

238 Lukin 148 Lukin E.V. 162 Lukomskaya A.M. 189 LunacharskyA.V. 133, 174 Luppov S.P. 13, 15, 45, 47, 55, 106 LurieYa.S. 17, 23 Luther M. 41 LyapinaL.E. 44 LyapunovA.M. 123 Lysenko T.D. 209 Lyutova Κ.V. 172, 196, 203 Μ MacaulayT. 50-51 MagnitskyL. 52 Maikov L.N. 114 Maisky I.M. 209 Makarov 53 MakarovV.I. 127 MakhaevM.I. 152 MaklakovV.A. 147 Maklenburg-Strelitzsky K.M. 134 Malinovsky 140 MalovA.F. 151 Malyshev M.V. 211 Mandelshtam O.E. 120 MarceauM. 75 Marchenko 147 Marfeld R.R. 116 Margules B.B. 211 Markov A.A. 123 MarkovaGA. 212 Marcus Aurelius 35 MarovI. 108 MarrN.Ya. 124, 153 Martini 80 Martinson F.F. 146 MarxK. 145, 166 Mashelius 79 Maslovskaya 194-195 Maslovsky 173 MavrodinV.V. 16 Maxim Greek 44 MazhugaV.I. 217 MazuritskyA. M. 204 Meier A.A. 148

Index MeinsterA.Ya. 176-178, 181, 186, 189, 191-195 Melgunov S.P. 23 Melissinol. 92 Mendel G 212 Mendeleev D.I. 104, 114 Menke 80 MenshikovA.D. 60, 152 Menshutkin 101 Menzhinskaya L.R. 174 Meschersky Ν. A. 26 Messer 199 Meyer 54 Mikhail Feodorovich 45 Mikhail Nikolaevich 133-135, 137, 141 Mikhalkov 134 Miliukov P.N. 147 MiliutinV.P. 130 Miller F. 108 Miloslavov P.G 118-119 Milovidsky V. 108 Milyukov S.G 220 MinikhB.X. 71 MislavskyS. 33 Mitin 210, 212, 214 Modzalevsky B.L. 135, 139 MokievskayaYu.R. 204 MolasB.N. 147-149 MolotovV.M. 167, 169-171, 185 Monfocon 79, 81 Monteverde P.A. 151 Morgan T.H. 212 Mozart W.A. 229 Müller 70 Müller GF. 54, 89, 91, 94 Muratory 97 Murzanova M.N. 47 Musin-Pushkin I.A. 54 Ν NalivkinD.V. 209, 211 NartovA.K. 75, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89 NekrichA.M. 166 NemirovskyE.L. 37, 51, 54 NeslerA.N. 197 NesmeyanovA.N. 208

Index Nestor 29, 96 Nettieton 70 Neveleva S.L. 217 Newton I. 56, 69, 201-202 NichmanD. 108 Nieps 152 Nikiforov 141 Nikitin I. 108 Nikitin P.V. 123 Nikolai 1214 Nikolai Π 133-137, 141-143 NikolskayaA.B. 153-154 Nikolsky B.V. 153 NikolskyN.K. 14, 24, 31, 112, 129, 138, 141, 149, 152, 229 Nikon, Patriarch 45 Nolde 147 NosovV. 86 NovikovN.I. 53 NovikovN.V. 213 Novikova 194 Novosadsky I.V. 178, 181, 186, 188, 190 Ο Obnorsky S.P. 204 Oldenburg S.F. 123-124, 130, 132, 134, 136, 139, 141, 143, 145-146, 148-149, 151 Oleg, Prince 98 Omar Victorious 37 Orbeli I.A. 199-200 OrdzhonikidzeGK. 133-135, 141-143, 145 Orfirey 80 Orlov 95, 99 OrlovA.S. 27 Orlov N.M. 82 Orlov V.G 106 0rsted H.K. 101 Osadchy P.S. 130 OsipovYu.S. 221, 224 Ostapov N. 108 Ostrovityanov K.V. 207 Ostvald 101 Ostwald-Richter K. 8 Ovidius 54

239 Ρ PagirevaM.N. 184-185, 193 Palauzov S.N. 151 Palchinsky P.A. 149 Panchenko O.V. 217 PaneyakhV.M. 133, 162 Parakramabahul, King 41 Paren Senior 37 Parent l'aine 37 Parshukov P. 108 PascaleB. 56 PashkeG 108 Paul, Deacon 97 Pause J.W. 52 Pavel Petrovich 98 Pavlov 199 Pavlov I.P. 104, 123 Pavlov-Silvansky Ν. 53 PcellM. 27 PecherskyF. 29 Pekarsky P.P. 52-53, 56, 58, 60, 76, 78, 8284, 89, 92, 94-95, 105 Perchenok F.F. 131, 133 Peretz V.N. 17, 33, 55, 147, 149, 153 PershchetskyA.I. I l l Peschyak M.M. 20-21 Peter Feodorovich, Grand Duke 72 Peter I 7, 9, 12, 44, 47-58, 60, 64, 66-67, 69, 73, 75, 77-78, 84-85, 90, 94-95, 98, 104-106, 228 Peter II 81 Peters Ya.H. 135, 137-141 Petrov 102 Petrov 147-148 Petrov F. A. 100 Petrov S. 108 Petrov V.A. 204, 206-207, 210-211, 213 Petrunkevich I.I. 168 Petzold I. 108 Pflug-Garttung I. 30 Pheophan, Conf. 97 Pheophan Prokopovich 53, 57, 82 Philadelphus 35 Philip I, King 42 Piksanov N.K. 210 Pilkin S.K. 129, 147-148, 151

Index

240 Pitirim, Archbishop 71 Platonov S.F. 112, 120, 129, 133-142, 144, 147-150, 164, 215, 222, 229-230 Plutarch 34 PodozerskayaGF. 202 Podsonov 148 Pogodin M.P. 13, 17 Pojot 81 PokrovskyA.A. 173 PokrovskyF.I. 141, 146, 189 PokrovskyM.N. 130, 144-145, 172-173 PokrovskyN.N. 133, 223-224 PolenovA. 108 Poliorkete 35 PolkovnikovV. 188-191, 193 PolnitzkyN.A. 189-190, 192, 194 Polonsky P. 108 PolosinV.V. 217 PolyakovA.I. 86 Polyakova S.V. 22 PonyrkoN.V. 217 Popov V. 126 Popovsky 96 Pospelov P.N. 127 Postnikov P.V. 50 Potapova N.D 133 Pozdnyakov K.I. 217 PresnyakovA.E. 30 Pretory 97 Prokopy 97 Ptolemy ISoter 33-35 Ptolemy II Philadelphus 33, 35, 38 PuffendorfS. 54 Purishkevich 143 PushkinA.S. 23, 51, 53, 55-56, 95-96, 99, 105, 123, 152, 214, 229 PutilovA.S. 150 Puzinsky V.F. 150

R RadischevA.N. 23 Radovsky M.I. 69-70 Radzivill, Karl II Stanislav 66 Raevsky V.N. 147, 149 Ranganathan Sh. 231 Rassokhin I. 72, 108

Razumovsky K.G 72, 92, 103 Reese H. 40 Regel V.E. 115 RichmannGW. 65, 91, 97, 100 Rimsky-KorsakovN.A. 152 Romanov K.K., see Konstantin Konstantinovich 114 Rostov A. 133 Rostovtzev M.I. 147 RozanovM.N. 147 Rozanov S.P. 151 RozenbergA. 204 Rozhdestvensky 141 Rozhdestvensky D.S. 175, 178, 181, 217 Rozhdestvensky S.V. 129, 147, 151 RozovN.N. 13, 15, 19, 31 Rudenko 149 Rudi T.R. 217 Rudovskaya 190 Rumovsky S.Ya. 106 Rurik 98 RusakovA.Yu. 217 Rutherford 168-169 RyazanovD.B. 130, 140 Rybkin I.P. 220, 224 Rykachev M.A. 123 RykovA.I. 129, 145-146 Ryshkova S.A. 106, 150, 202 Ryuisch F. 64, 77 Ryzhkova Κ. V. 212

S SafroneevN.S. 119 Sagromoso Ch.M. 72 Saint-Andrew 81 SakharovA.D. 228, 231 Saliery 214, 229 S amarin 71 SamodurovaZ.G 26, 27 Sappho 39 Sapozhnikov V. 198 Sapunov B.V. 13, 15, 17, 19 Sarabianov V.D. 20 Sarkisov G.S. 151 SavelievaN.V. 217 Scarlet 81

Index Schacher 80 Scheglova S.A. 153 Schegolev P.E. 144 Scherbatsky F.I. 147 Schletzer 99 Schmidt S.O. 45 Schoeber 77 Schubert F.I. 110 Schumacher J.D. 7, 58-60, 65, 67, 69-70, 72-78, 81-86, 88-94, 100, 103-106, 108, 120, 132, 215, 228 Schwartz A.N. 120-122, 132 Schwartz Yu. 35 Scribanovich F.F. 151 SdobnovN.V. 166 SechenovD. 99 Sechenov I.M. 114, 212 SelischevA.M. 153 SemencovS.V. 60 SemenovkerB.A. 33 Sementovsky N. 51 Semevsky M.I. 152 Semichev D.A. 213 Semyachko S.A. 217 SerebryanskyN.I. 151 Sevastiyanova V.l. 213 Sgravesand 81 Shafirov P.P. 49 Shafranovskaya T.K. 59 Shafranovsky K.I. 59, 106, 175-176, 178, 194-195, 202, 210, 213 Shakhmatov A.A. 14, 123-124, 126-129, 138, 141, 229-230 Shalaurov M. 108 ShamurinE.I. 32, 37, 44, 49, 54, 59, 63 Shangin M.A. 151 Shatelen M.N. 211 ShawB. 36 Shcherbakov D.I. 100 Shchurov 120 SheferP. 37 Sheid 81 Shertz 81 Sherwood-Jenkins M.A. 90 Shestakova P.I. 200 Shevyrev S.P. 31

241 ShishkarevP. 88 Shkiryatov M.F. 210, 212-213 Shmurlo E.F. 48, 124 ShpolskyE.V. 101-102 ShtelinYa. 50, 60, 95, 106, 108 Shubik S.A. 217 Shulgin 136 ShumskyP. 108 Shuvalov I.I. 47, 96, 99, 104 ShvernikN.M. 197 Shvydkoi M.E. 220-221 SidorovE. 224 SidorovV.N. 153 Siegesbeck J.G. 91 Sigrist S.V. see Rostov A. 133 SilinA.M. 190-192, 194, 213 Simoni P.K. 14, 31 Sinyavin U.Ya. 78 Siomushkin 142 Sivers P.I. 71 SkiadaA. 58 SkripkinaT.I. 209 Skriverius 79 Skrzhinsky Ch.K. 119 Sladkovsky 142 Sloan H. 69-70 SluhovskyM.I. 13, 32-33, 45, 47, 58, 64-67 Smelsky M.I. 151 SmirnovAM. 212-213 SnimschikovaGYa. 198 SobchakA.A. 228 SobolevA.N. 217 SobolevV.S. 114-115, 124-125, 129 SobolevskyA.I. 17, 141, 147 Sokolov F. 108 Sokolov I. 108 Sokolov P. I. 108 Sokolova 190 Sokolova L.A. 217 Sokolova L.V. 23 Soloviev S.M 90 SolovievaT.I. 71 Sophia Alekseevna 57 Sophia Paleolog 45 Sophocles 34

242 SopikovV.S. I l l SpatarN. Μ. 217 SpitzerA. Β. 166 SredinskyN.K. 151 Sreznevsky V.l. 125-127, 134, 136-138, 140-141, 143, 148, 229 Stadnitzsky 134 Stalin I.V. 133-134, 145-146, 191, 211-212 StaritzkyA. 135-137, 141-142 Starkov S. 88 Starostin 149 StarovoitovaGV. 228 Statkovsky 142 Schegolev 141 SteklovV.A. 123, 127 StepanovA.N. 148 Stepanova 190 Stepanoval. 220 Stepanova L. G 217 Stepanova M.V. 202 Stepashin S.V. 162 StoletovA.G 114 Stones 81 Strebkova 190 Strukov 151 StruveP.B. 147 Strove V.Ya. 219 Stupishin I.V. 105 Sukhachev N. L. 217 SumarokovA.P. 99, 108 Sunbulov 53 Sunderland 80 Surina N.P. 200, 211 Surovenkova 193 SuvorovA.V. 104, 211 SvetovV. 108 Sviridova K.A. 69 Svyatoslav 23, 28 Sychov P.N. 153 Τ Tamerlane 41 TarasovaYu.M. 203 TarleE.V. 133, 148-150, 164 TatishchevV.N. 53, 96 Taubert I.K. 65, 92-94, 106, 108

Index TeplovGN. 84, 89, 92 TeplovV. 108 Thebes 34 Theophilus 36 Theodotus 36 TikhomirovaV.P. 202 TikhonovN.P. 202-203 Timiryazev Κ. A. 114 Tolmacheva E.A. 147 Tolstoy D.A. 114 Tolstoy N.I. 153 ToomV.A. 211 TopchievA.V. 210 Trediakovsky V.K. 72, 91, 99 Treskov 88 TrofimovaN.S. 71 Trotzky L.D. 23, 128, 192, 212 TurgenevA.I. 152 TurgenevN.I. 152 Tvorogov Ο.V. 16, 20-22, 26, 28-29 TzamutaliA.N. 162 Tzeitler-de J. 108 Tzekhlin 147 Tziklinskaya 186-187, 190 Tzukotich N.A. see Vukotich N.A. 127 Tzvetaev I.V. 120-123, 132 Tzvetaeva M.V. 120 U UkraintsevY. 49 UlrichA. 72 Uspensky 176, 188, 190 Uspensky B.A. 25-26 Uspensky F.I. 112, 123-124 Uspensky V.V. 211 UstryalovN.G. 48 Utkina 186-187 Uzunova V. G 217 V VakhtinN. B. 217 Vakulovsky N.N. 119 ValdenP.I. 123 VaneevA.N. 13 Vanley 81 Vannovsky P.S. 121

Index VareniusB. 54 Varignion 81 VasenkoP.G 131, 150 Vasil'chenko V.E. 32 Vasilevsky V.G 115 VasilkovYa.V. 217 Vassiii the Great 17 VavilovN.I. 209 Vavilov S.I. 202, 204, 209 VedernikovaN.V. 69 Veisel 96 Venslow 81 Vergily Urbin 54 Vemadsky 144, 149, 171 Vemadsky GV. 168 Vemadsky V.l. 101, 112, 123-124, 144, 149, 167-171 Verzhbitsky J. A. 150 VeselovskyF. 52 Veselovskyl. 52 Veselovsky K.S. 114 ViktorovV.P. 189 Villers K. 108 Vilnitz 189 ViniusA. 49, 220-221 Vinogradov V.V. 153 VintergalterE.I. 198 Vitruvius 34 VitsenN. 49 Vittenburg 149 Vladimir (Monomakh) 23-24, 30 VnukovS. 108 VodolazkinE.G 217 VoeikovaM. D. 217 Voinich-Syanozhetsky A.R. 118-119 Voitzekhovskaya E.A. 192 VolensN.V. 148 VolgarP. 142 VolginV.P. 130, 204, 210 VolkovB. 108 Voltaire 47 Volter I.A. 119 VoronovV.N. 129, 174, 197 Vorontsov 152 Vorontsov M.L. 96, 99, 104 Voroshilov K.E. 191

243 Vratislav 71 VukotichN.A. 127 VyshinskyA.Ya. 130 VzdomovGI. 46

W Wagner 80 Wagner A.P. 190 Wagner M.F. 211 Weber Ch.F. 59 WeissmanA. 212 Weitbrecht J. 91 Wheeler M. 165 Wintzgeim H.N. 88 Wolf 80 WolfCh. 53, 61, 83 Wolfrat 80 Woodward 81 X Xenobia 36 Ximines, Cardinal 41 Xing Chi Huang Ti 40 Y YagodaGG 149 YaguzhinskyP.I. 50, 60 YakimovI. 108 Yakovkin I.I. 141, 152, 175, 185-186, 188-191, 193, 195-196, 202-205, 207 YaninV.L. 18-19 Yaroslav the Wise (Mudry) 9, 17, 24, 32-33 Yeltzin B.N. 221 YeremenkoV.I. 223 Yeremin S.A. 150 Yernshtedt O.K. 190, 193 YurovA. 53 Ζ Zabelin I.E. 48 ZakharovA. 108 Zaleman K.G 115-116, 118, 123, 229 ZaliznyakA.A. 18 ZaozerskyA.I. 148, 150 ZarubinN.N. 31, 44, 202

244 Zasulich V.l. 165 ZatochnikD. 23 Zavistovich 213 ZdobnovN.V. 54 Zederkreiz 65 Zeipell.G 108 Zelenev E.I. 37 ZelenkoN.M. 191 Zemlyachka R.S 202 Zenodotus of Ephesus 35 Zhdanov Yu.A. 213 Zhebelev S.A. 141

Index

ZhovtisA.L. 154 Zhukovskaya L.P. 15 ZiminAA. 13-14, 23, 44 Zinich M.S. 204 Zinoviev 192 Zisserman P. I. 150 Zonar 97 ZotovK.N. 53 ZotovN. 48, 51, 53 Zubov 188 ZumklenH. 71

Contents Foreword

7

Introduction

9

Chapter I Library Process: the Beginning

13

Chapter II The Originality of Russian Library Culture

24

Chapter III On the Library Life Cycle

32

Chapter IV Peter's Library: About the Library and Publishing Activity of Peter the Great

47

Chapter V Europeans on the First Russian Library

62

Chapter VI Schumacher and Lomonosov

74

Chapter VII The Disobedience of the Genius and the Library

88

Chapter VIII Under the Roof of the Academy of Sciences

109

Chapter IX The "Academy Case 1929—1931"

133

Chapter X The Other Library

165

The Epilogue

228

Index

232