I’ll say right off the bat that the history of Kharkiv from 1918 to 1930 doesn’t really grab me. Working with documents that describe in detail the bloody chaos unleashed during the Civil War by the Reds and the Whites, followed by the horrific repressions—that’s not for my nerves. Although there are a number of topics that undoubtedly interest me. For example, emigration or Skoropadsky’s Hetmanate. However, since I spent the entire summer wandering around the Sloboda Ukraine estates and admiring their fading beauty, I’ve developed a perfectly logical and sensible interest in the question: what exactly did those “damned bourgeois” have there? In the State Archives of the Kharkiv Region, pre-revolutionary files are designated with the code “f.” Files from the Civil War period and afterward, however, are designated with “r” (for example, r4365 or r6452). Driven by curiosity, I delved into those collections. Although most of the materials are stored at the archive’s branch at 7 Heroes of Kharkiv Ave., you can also find some interesting things at the branch at Myronosytska St., 41.
There were quite a few items of cultural and historical value in the homes and estates of Kharkiv landowners. During the revolution, of course, much was destroyed and looted, but what remained had to be preserved—the new government understood this perfectly well. Therefore, in 1919, a series of circulars and decrees were issued regarding measures aimed at preventing the looting of artistic treasures from libraries and book repositories.
In this case, we read the following:
Measures Against the Theft of Artistic Treasures / From the Committee for the Protection of Artistic and Historical Landmarks/
In a number of provinces, counties, and townships, the former members of the ruling class—having both the means and the free time—amassed a colossal amount of valuables belonging to the people, such as: paintings, portraits, engravings, furniture, and all kinds of decorative tableware: /vases, porcelain, marble, bronze, silver/, large and valuable libraries, and so on. Many works of art were looted and hidden during the revolution. All these treasures, accumulated over many years, constitute the nation’s heritage, which the Committee for the Protection of Art and Antiquities under the All-Ukrainian Department of Art collects, systematizes, and distributes for public use by organizing libraries, art galleries, museums, and so on. This work is hindered by a number of plunderers and looters who steal these treasures—vital to the young Socialist Republic—hide them in their homes, and, worst of all, smuggle them abroad to the White Guard camp.
The Committee will not tolerate the Soviets failing to prevent this, and in each such case, the items must be confiscated and transferred to the appropriate departments of the Soviets; if no such department exists within the Soviets, the Committee must be notified (Kharkiv, Myronosytska St., 48).
Reports began to surface that unknown individuals, without the Committee’s knowledge and without any authority to do so, had begun to confiscate items of artistic and historical significance on their own initiative. However, the authority to issue warrants for the requisition of the aforementioned items belonged to the All-Ukrainian Committee for the Protection of Art and Historical Landmarks. To hold the perpetrators accountable, all violations were to be reported immediately to the address we are already familiar with: Myronosytska St., 48.
For the purpose of registering, preserving, collecting, studying, and promoting works of art, the Committee for the Preservation of Art and Antiquities was established within the All-Ukrainian Department of Arts.
Established on April 24, 1919, GUBKOPIS (the Provincial Committee for the Protection of Art and Historical Landmarks) consisted of five sections:
1) museum,
2) architectural and monumental,
3) archaeological,
4) archival,
5) ethnographic.
In short, the main work was carried out in two areas:
1) Systematic expansion of the GUBKOPIS’s operations throughout the province.
2) Adoption of routine and emergency measures to protect works of art and historical landmarks.
Anyone interested can learn about the activities of the Kharkiv State Bureau of Criminal Investigation from the archive of the same name, which contains 72 case files from 1919–1922. There is a great deal of interesting material there.
Thus, the Lebedyn Executive Committee (resolution of March 10, 1919) forwarded to the provincial executive committee an appeal from Comrade Bazavluk, head of the Department of Public Education, regarding the intention of the All-Ukrainian Committee for the Protection of Art and Historical Landmarks to remove from Lebedyn and the district to Kharkiv itemsof artistic value, which were needed for the local museum. A copy of the letter—or, more precisely, an indignant protest—was attached:
Lebedyn Executive Committee of the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies
The Lebedyn Revolutionary Committee, represented by its former chairman, People’s Teacher Y. Bazavluk, proclaimed Soviet power in Lebedyn on January 14 and ordered the protection of landmarks and objects of artistic and historical significance, and organized a museum commission to collect paintings and works of art from the homes of landowning landowners who had fled, with the aim of establishing a People’s Museum in Lebedyn named after the Ukrainian singer T. G. Shevchenko. The objects that survived the senseless and ignorant looting are being brought to the Soviet House (formerly Kalugin’s) and put in order, so that the museum will soon open for public use for all time to come. Our people have lived their entire lives like yoked oxen before a manure pile or haystack, deprived of the opportunity to ennoble their very souls with works of folk art, and, due to a lack of understanding, have failed to appreciate the treasures of art. Now the All-Ukrainian Committee for the Protection of Art and Historical Landmarks, without consulting the founders of the folk museum in Lebedyn, intends to remove objects of artistic value from Lebedyn and the district to Kharkiv; As the custodian of the folk cultural heritage—a position to which I was appointed last year by the Executive Committee—I hereby express, on behalf of the entire population of the city of Lebedyn and the district, our protest and indignation against such intentions, even if they come from the Ukrainian Committee for the Protection of Art Monuments and Antiquities. I know that there is a vast collection of works of art in Kharkiv, hidden away in university storerooms, and, having been to Kharkiv ten times, I have not had the opportunity to see them—and has any hardworking farmer ever seen them? I have already sent away in disgrace one representative from Kharkiv who had come to remove valuable books from the Lebedyn District, and I believe he will not return. The Museum Commission intends to develop a plan to promote the museum so that all villages, villages, and hamlets may receive artistic education and cultivation, since the people’s appreciation of art has declined in recent years, and the recent destruction of book collections and paintings shows that we must focus all our attention on the villages and that our path is the right path toward the artistic education of the masses.
In May 1919, V. A. Borvinsky was sent from the Kharkiv State Archives and Library Service to Gievka—a place we are already familiar with—as part of a survey of the archives and libraries in the Kharkiv and Valkovsky districts. His task was to assess the condition of the extensive library of the Svyatopolk-Mirsky princes and to remove their archives (correspondence and other personal documents), which were of great historical interest to the new authorities.
Upon his return to Kharkiv, Borvinsky wrote a very detailed report on his business trip, in which he noted that the library, as well as the works of art (paintings, icons), were in danger because they were stored in completely open crates on the ground floor of the palace, which was nearly empty. Only the staff in charge of the dormitory lived on the upper floor of the estate. Despite obstacles from local authorities, Borvinsky was still able to remove Svyatopolk-Mirsky’s correspondence, which had been kept in the office, from Gievka. However, the report indicated that this was only a portion of the personal archive; the GUBKOPIS employee was unable to locate the rest.
Detailed descriptions of the archives and libraries were also compiled. They remain of interest to this day.
As for the private collections of Kharkiv landowners, which contain invaluable information about the history of our city and region, anyone interested can view them by visiting the Central State Historical Archive of Ukraine, located in Kyiv. For example, the archives contain the records of such famous figures from our region as:
— The Donets-Zakharzhevskys (1700–1843) — 211 cases;
— The Kondratyevs (1658–1897) — 1,947 cases;
— Passeki (1710–1870) — 3,529 cases;
— Vasily Nazarovich Karazin (1803–1883) — 88 cases;
— Prince Dmitry Ivanovich Svyatopolk-Mirsky (1831–1907) — 1,032 cases;
— Nikolai Fedorovich Sumtsov (1876–1921) — 1,647 cases.
And there are many others as well… I’ll share a couple of extremely interesting stories from Kharkiv related to the count’s treasures with you in the coming weeks.
So, as always, the best part is just getting started.
- About the military pilot school and the airfield in Kharkiv… - 04.11.2020
- Kharkiv Artisans and the 1887 Exhibition - 17.08.2020
- Nikanor Savich—A Political Career by Mistake - 13.07.2020