PUBLICATION OF DOCUMENTARY SOURCES IN UKRAINE IN THE ERA OF INDEPENDENCE
The purpose of the article is to summarize the experience of independent Ukraine in publishing collections of historical documents in the main areas and periods. The research methodology is based on comparison strategies, typology, principles of historicism. The logic of the presentation of the material is based on the problem-historical principle, which allows to reveal the main topics and directions of the published collections of documents on the history of Ukraine in a chronological order. The Scientific Novelty. The article covers archeographic publishing activity for 30 years of our state independence. Emphasis is focused on joint publications of archives with academic institutions and universities, regional centers, public organizations, foreign institutions and researchers. It has been shown that the volume of documentary materials published during the independence of Ukraine is quite large and has created thematic blocks with a very broad chronology in the information space of Ukraine. The authors single out two main periods: the 1990s and the 2000s, which differ in their thematic areas, accents and approaches to covering historical issues, involvement in publications of central, regional, foreign scientific and public centers, the use of modern information technology. The Conclusions. Historians and archivists generally cope with the task of showing an objective picture of historical events, but the issues of methodological plan, a qualified use of the latest information technologies, new types of sources remain topical. It is necessary to respond more quickly to the urgent information requests of the population, topics that are discussed actively, including in the world, and especially saturated with clichés, myths, and where there is an external informational influence on Ukraine. This response will increase the presence of the Ukrainian archeographic product in the national and global information space.
Key words: documentary editions, state archival institutions; collections of documents and materials.
Boriak, H., Lobuzina, K., & Yurkova, K. (2021). Tsyfrovyi arkhiv Holodomoru v Ukraini 1932–1933 rr. yak universalnyi dzherelnyi merezhevyi resurs: dokumentalnyi ta vizualnyi segmenty proektu [The Digital Archive of the Holodomor in Ukraine 1932 – 1933 as a Universal Source Network Resource: Documentary and Visual Segments of the Project]. Ukrains'kyj istorychnyj zhurnal – Ukrainian Historical Journal, 2, 138–153. Doi: 10.15407/uhj2021.02.138 [in Ukrainian]
Burim, D., Mavrin, O., Fedoruk, Ya. (uporiad.). (2011). Instytut ukrainskoi arkheohrafii ta dzhereloznavstva im. M. S. Hrushevskoho NAN Ukrainy (1991 – 2011) [M. S. Hrushevsky Institute of Ukrainian Archaeography and Source Studies National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (1991 – 2011)]. Kyiv: Ukrainskyi pysmennyk, 416 p. [in Ukrainian]
Carynnyk, М., Luciuk, L. Y. & Kordan, B. S. (Ed.). (1988). The Foreign Office and the Famine: British Documents on Ukraine and the Great Famine of 1932 – 1933. Kingston, Ont.; Vestal, N.Y : Limestone Press, 493 p. [in English]
Conquest, R. (1986). The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror – Famine. New York: Oxford University Press, 412 р. [in English]
Gamaliia, V., Dovzhuk, І. & Sichkarenko, H. (2021). Organization of Documentation in Ukraine during the Soviet Period. Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum ABHPS, 9, 2 (Autumn of 2021), 79–99. Doi: 10.11590/abhps.2021.2.04. [in English]
Kozlov, V. P. (2017). Dokumentalnaia pamiat v arkheograficheskom znaniy. [Documentary Memory in Archeographic Knowledge]. Moskva: Drevlekhranylyshche, 372 p. [in Russian]
Mavrin, O. (2008). Zavdannia arkheohrafii ta dzhereloznavstva v prohrami sotsiohumanitarnykh doslidzhen vitchyznianoi akademichnoi nauky. [Objectives of Archeography and Source Studies in the Programme of Socio-humanitarian Research of Domestic Academic Science]. Naukovi zapysky. Zbirnyk prats molodykh vchenykh i aspirantiv, 16, 5–16. [in Ukrainian]
Mavrin, O. O. (2017). Arkheohrafichna diialnist tsentralnykh derzhavnykh arkhivnykh ustanov Ukrainy u 1991 – 2011 rokakh. [Archaeographic Activity of the Central State Archival Institutions of Ukraine in 1991 – 2011]. Arkhivy Ukrainy, 5–6, 32–55. [in Ukrainian]
Musina, Z. Kh. (Ed.). (2021). 30 rokiv Hezalezhnosti Ukrainy: naukove osmyslennia [30 years of Independence of Ukraine: Scientific Understanding]. Bibliohrafiia. Kyiv : Vyd. dim “Vinichenko”, 635 p. [in Ukrainian]
Nestsiarovich, Yu. U. (1997). Prablemy klasifikatsіi arkheahrafichnуkh publikatsіi i belaruskiia arkheahrafichnуia vуdanni (hist.-arkheahr. narуs) [Problems of classification of archeographical publications and Belarusian archaeological publications (history and archeographical essay)]. Minsk: BelNDIDAS, 56 p. [in Belarusian]
Papakin, H. (2021). “Tsyfrovyi povorot” u dzhereloznavstvi: realnist, perspektyva chy iliuziia? [“Digital turn” in Source Studies: Reality, Prospect or Illusion?] Ukrains'kyj istorychnyj zhurnal – Ukrainian Historical Journal, 1, 153–169. [in Ukrainian]
Sabennykova, Y. V. & Khymyna, N. Y. (2016). Publykatsyia ystorycheskykh dokumentov v postsovetskyi peryod: analyz arkheohrafycheskoi praktyky. [Publication of Historical Documents during the Post-Soviet Period: Analysis of Archeographic Practice]. Istoryia i arkhivy, 1, 103–114. [in Russian]
Sokhan, P. (2001). Ukrainska arkheohrafiia ta dzhereloznavstvo: zdobutky, problemy, perspektyvy. [Ukrainian Archeography and Source Studies: Achievements, Problems, Prospects]. Pamiat stolit, 2 (28), 19–29. [in Ukrainian]
Sokhan, P. S. (1992). Stan i perspektyvy rozvytku ukrainskoi arkheohrafii. [Status and Prospects of Development of Ukrainian Archeography]. Ukrainskyi arkheohrafichnyi shchorichnyk, 1, 9–19. [in Ukrainian]
Ukhach, V. Z. (2021). Ukrainsky vyzvolnyi rukh yak napriam naukovykh studii 1987 – 1997 rr.: istoriohrafichnyi dyskurs [The Ukrainian Liberation Movement as a Direction of Scientific Studies in 1987 – 1997: Historiographical Discourse]. Storinky istorii: zbirnyk naukovykh prats, 51, 205–217. Doi: 10.20535/2307-5244.51.2020.220186 [in Ukrainian]
Yakubovskyi, І. (2021). The Genocide Intention in the Light of New Documents on the Holodomor of 1932 – 1933 in Ukraine. Skhidnoievropeiskyi Istorychnyi Visnyk – East European Historical Bulletin, 18, 127–134. Doi: 10.24919/2519-058X.18.226565 [in English]
Zhurzha I. V. (2018). Istoriia arkhivnoi spravy u dokumentakh TsDAHO Ukrainy [History of Archival Business in the Documents of the Central State Archives of Ukraine]. Arkhivy Ukrainy, 2–3, 176–192. [in Ukrainian]
Zvorskyi, S. (Comps.). (2013). Reiestr rozsekrechenykh arkhivnykh fondiv Ukrainy : mizharkhiv. dovidnyk [Register of Declassified Archival Funds of Ukraine: Interarchive. Directory]. Vol. 3. (2004 – 2010 rr.). Kyiv, 706 p. [in Ukrainian]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The authors published in this journal agree with following conditions:
1. The authors reserve to themselves the right to the authorship of their works and transfer the right of their first publication to the journal on the terms of Creatіve Common Attrіbutіon Lіcense which allows to freely extend to other persons the published work with an obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and its first publication in this journal.
2. The authors have the right to complete independent additional agreements concerning the not exclusive distribution of their work in the form in which it was published in this journal (for example, to place the work in the electronic storehouse of an establishment or to publish as a monograph component), under the condition of the preservation of the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal.
3. The journal’s policy allows and encourage the authors to place their manuscripts into the Internet (for example, in depositories of establishments or on personal web-sites) either before submitting of the manuscript for publication or during its editorial processing as it assists the occurrence of a productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of citing of the published work.