The Evolution of Librarianship in Russia: The Librarians of the Imperial Public Library, 1808-1868

The Evolution of Librarianship in Russia: The Librarians of the Imperial Public Library, 1808-1868Author(s): Mary StuartSource: The Library Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Jan., 1994), pp. 1-29Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4308895 .

Accessed: 18/06/2014 03:53

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheLibrary Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.141 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 03:53:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4308895?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


THE LIBRARY QUARTERLY

Volume 64 JANUARY 1994 Number I

THE EVOLUTION OF LIBRARIANSHIP IN RUSSIA: THE LIBRARIANS OF THE IMPERIAL PUBLIC

LIBRARY, 1808-1868

Mary Stuart'

Until the beginning of the nineteenth century, Russian librarians were typically confined to the roles of antiquarian and curator, and it was only with the founding of the Imperial Public Library in St. Petersburg (later the M. E. Saltykov- Shchedrin State Public Library, and renamed the Russian National Library in 1992) that the domain of the profession was enlarged. Created from the 300,000-volume Zaluski collection confiscated from the Poles in 1795, the new Russian national library posed unprecedented problems of organization and retrieval, and it logically became the locus of development of the library profession. Over the course of the next seven decades, the librarians of the Public Library elaborated a full complement of operating procedures and a working philosophy of librarianship based on principles of collegial organization, autonomy in the practice of the profession, service to society, and universal access.

Introduction

Although the first secular Russian libraries date to the beginning of the eighteenth century, the profession of librarianship began to emerge in Russia only toward the end of the century. The historian V. N. Tatish- chev offered the first written formulation of the concept in his Russian Historical, Geographical, Political, and Civic Lexicon, written in 1745 but not published until 1793 [1, p. 189]. Tatishchev adheres closely to what has been described as the "old bibliophilic model of the scholar learned in philosophy, the natural sciences, and philology," whose primary func-

1. Reference Department, University of Illinois Library, 1408 W. Gregory Drive, Urbana, Illinois 61801.

[Library Quarterly, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 1-29] ? 1994 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.

0024-2519/94/6401-000 s$0 1.00

1



2 THE LIBRARY QUARTERLY

tion is to organize the collection and ensure its physical integrity [2, p. 4]. J. V. Bacmeister, who began working in the Library of the Academy of Sciences in 1756 and served as assistant librarian from 1772 until his death in 1788, described his experience in that library in a work published first in French in 1776, then in German translation in 1777, and finally in Russian translation in 1779 [3]. This was a history of the library, as well as a detailed account of the present state of its organization and management, written to commemorate the fifty-year jubilee of the Academy of Sciences. It is valuable for its descriptive and historical detail but provides no theoretical framework or philosophical foundation for the profession [4].

It was only after the founding of the Imperial Public Library in 1795 that modern Russian librarianship began to take shape, in conjunction with the enormous task of organizing the new national library. Although there had been librarians in Russia, such as Bacmeister, long before the creation of the national library, they functioned chiefly as custodians and collectors, generally subsidiary to other scholarly or administrative activities. In contrast, the librarians of the Public Library elaborated an ideology and culture that emphasized autonomy in the practice of the profession, collegial organization, and a strong service orientation. Through a process of trial and error and collective deliberation, they created a body of procedures and policies for operating one of the world's largest libraries. In this work they were guided by a commitment to the cause of cultural progress and a shared belief in the library's singular mission in society.

Historiography of Russian Librarianship

Until very recently the early developments in the profession that will be explored in this article had been almost completely neglected in the general historiography of Russian library science. Early twentieth- century Russian scholarship tended to depict the profession even then as only just in its infancy. In 1904 in her book Libranres: Their Organization and Technology, the eminent activist in Russian librarianship L. B. Khav- kina asserted that the publication fourteen years earlier of a largely unnoticed brochure on library management by V. F. Freiman signaled the beginning of library science literature in Russia [5, pp. 97-98]. That same year the librarianship section of the Russian Bibliological Society in St. Petersburg proclaimed Khavkina's book the beginning of Russian library science literature [6, p. 16*]. Some six years later the prominent library specialist P. M. Bogdanov, who was editor of the first professional library journal in Russia, published a survey of Russian library



EVOLUTION OF LIBRARIANSHIP IN RUSSIA 3

science literature to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the first Russian work in the field [7]. This was a guide to library operations by V. I. Sobol'shchikov, a librarian at the Public Library, published in the Journal of the Ministry of Education in 1858 and in a separate edition in 1859 [8]. Khavkina adopted Bogdanov's view for the second edition of her book, published in 1911, now dismissing the Freiman brochure as shallow, dull, and lacking significance [9, pp. 92, 105].2

As they gained familiarity with the achievements of Western library science, many of these early twentieth-century specialists became in- creasingly harsh in their assessment of the Russian experience. The view that Russian library science was mired in a primitive stage of development pervades the writings of K. N. Derunov, another of the leading theorists of librarianship in Russia.3 In 1924, even though university courses in librarianship had already been offered for several years, Khavkina proclaimed that there was no Russian library science and that it would be necessary to create it on the model of the West.4

Soviet-era specialists continued to underestimate the level of sophisti- cation of the profession in the nineteenth century. At best Russian library science in mid-century was described as narrowly focused on technical processing, and there was little recognition of the theoretical contributions of the early Russian librarians [17, pp. 15-16, 205]. Li- brary science before the era of the Great Reforms has been generally characterized as rarefied, arcane, antiquarian, and, in political terms, formalist; librarians were preoccupied with acquiring and organizing collections to the total neglect of readers, especially nonscholars. In fact, it was typically implied or even asserted outright that it was the specific policy of the Public Library administration to serve only the privileged classes [18, pp. 50, 72]. According to the standard Soviet account, the democratization of Russian intellectual life in the second half of the nineteenth century and specifically the rise of the raznochintsy (literally, "persons of diverse ranks," that is, educated nonnobles, typically sons of priests, merchants, minor bureaucrats, and impoverished declasse nobles) put pressure on the library to address the needs of the middle and lower classes and to consider for the first time the question of the social and cultural role of the library [18, pp. 78-80, 88-89]. Only at

2. Recently a Soviet scholar observed that the chief value of the Freiman guide was its contribution to the spread of the term bibliotekovedenie, or "library science," which ap- pears in the subtitle. See [10, p. 181.

3. See, for example, [11, 12]. Elsewhere he describes the state of affairs as "utterly pathetic." See 113, p. 38].

4. See [14, pp. 179-80]. Grigor'ev discusses the same passage in Khavkina's writing in his 1973 biography in terms of her lamentable bourgeois liberal tendencies [15, pp. 37-38]. For a description of Khavkina's visits to the United States, see [16].




this time, in the third quarter of the nineteenth century, it was averred, did individual librarians at the Public Library, notably Sobol'shchikov and the great critic and art historian Vladimir Stasov, become commit- ted to such progressive democratic causes as the dissemination of knowledge among the masses [18, pp. 74-78]. Sobol'shchikov, himself a raznochinets, was enthroned as the founder of Russian library science [19, p. 127]. At the very end of the nineteenth and in the early years of the twentieth century, according to this view, Russian library science began to emulate the Western bourgeois liberal model, with its emphasis on the popularization of knowledge and its view of the library as a classless, apolitical vehicle for democracy, truth, and justice. Academistic, bibliophilic, universalist, and formalistic tendencies were said to have domi- nated Russian librarianship on the eve of the October revolution.5

In the era of glasnost' and perestroika, a revisionist account of the origins of Russian library science was first advanced with the posthu- mous publication of an essay by Iu. V. Grigor'ev, the eminent specialist in book studies who was associated with the Moscow Institute of Culture from its establishment in 1930 as the Moscow Library Institute until his death in 1973 [14]. Although Grigor'ev shared the view of his predecessors that until the rise of the raznochintsy in the middle of the nineteenth century Russian libraries remained preoccupied with technical issues and began to think about serving disparate clienteles only in the 1860s, he recognized the writings of late eighteenth- and early nineteenth- century Russian librarians as the beginnings of Russian library science. In an even more radical departure from received opinion, Grigor'ev maintained that the Russian librarians of the first half of the nineteenth century in many respects surpassed their West European counterparts [14, pp. 177, 180-81]. At the same time, he subscribed to the orthodox view that Sobol'shchikov was the first professional librarian in Russia [14, p. 170].

In his detailed notes and commentary to Grigor'ev's essay, Lu. N. Stoliarov, head of the department of library science at the Moscow Insti- tute of Culture, argued that there was in fact a concept of the profession of librarianship at the Public Library during the Olenin administration [14, p. 103, n. 47] and furthermore that Olenin himself strengthened the role of librarian. Stoliarov maintained that the librarians at the Pub- lic Library were guided by a maturing, multifaceted theory of library science in the first half of the nineteenth century [14, pp. 204-5, n.

491, but he concurred with his predecessors that it was the appearance in the late 1850s and 1860s of a new type of reader, the raznochinets, that gave rise to innovations in library services [14, pp. 205-6]. Although it

5. This was Derunov's assessment, described in [20, p. 63].




is not clear that it was in fact the rise of the raznochintsy that engendered the library's reforms, in other respects Stoliarov provides a balanced analysis of the origins of librarianship in Russia and a nearly nonideo- logical interpretation of the interplay of social and demographic forces that led to the reforms.

As the foregoing summary suggests, the issue of the development of librarianship in Russia .and especially the issue of its origins are characterized by a high degree of subjectivity. Little attempt has been made to define the elements of librarianship and apply such a definition to Russian conditions. Instead, different authors have simply placed vary- ing degrees of emphasis on certain events. Most of the Soviet discussions of the evolution of Russian library science were patently tendentious. These studies were typically predicated on the application of a single narrow standard of merit, the degree to which a given event or circum- stance contributed to an ideologically correct end, represented by the Soviet achievement. Class origins became the ultimate determinant of an individual's achievements.

With the collapse of the Soviet system, library specialists have begun to reexamine the assumptions underlying the Soviet historiography of Russian librarianship.6 Not surprisingly, opinion is divided on the question of how extensively the canon should be rewritten. A core of conser- vatives argues that Lenin's views on librarianship were basically sound but were distorted in their implementation and should be resurrected. More radical revisionists seek the complete repudiation of the socialist weltanschauung and the restoration of prerevolutionary liberal democratic ideals in the library profession and its historiography. Attention has been almost exclusively focused on the late imperial and early Soviet periods, and the early development of Russian librarianship still awaits reexamination.

The Social Context

Like the other professions in Russia, librarianship arose within a social and political system that severely inhibited formal corporate organization. The evolution of the professions in Russia followed a course in many respects fundamentally dissimilar to that of their counterparts in Western Europe.7 Without a strong middle class to serve as the infra-

6. See, for example, the roundtable discussion papers published in Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie in 1989 [211. Others in this vein include [10, 22-31].

7. For an overview of the literature on the sociology of the professions, see the bibliographic essay in [321 and the introductory chapter of [331. On the development of the professions in Russia, see [34-40].




structure for corporate organization, Russian doctors, lawyers, university professors, engineers, and others were slow to develop a group identity. They were severely constrained by "Russia's unique mix of state activism and social underdevelopment" [35, p. 183], and to a greater degree than their peers in the West, Russian professionals could practice their occupations only with the active support of the state. They depended on the state to provide their training, to finance the institutions that employed them, and, at the most basic level, to legitimate their work by granting it legal sanction [34, pp. 334-38]. To Russian professionals, the state embodied the sole opportunity for the attain- ment of professional goals. At the same time, most deeply resented state control. Constraints imposed by the government constituted an obstacle to the establishment of forms of corporate identity. Even after the turn of the century, professional associations were permitted only on a very limited basis by a government that regarded the professions with deep suspicion and sought to restrain them from serving any aims beyond the purely technical needs of the state [35, pp. 188-89].

The creation in 1864 of organs of local self-government, the zemstva, charged with providing essential services to an overwhelmingly rural population, vastly expanded employment opportunities for certain cate- gories of professionals [41]. Education was a primary mission of the zemstva, and with it, the spread of libraries. Over the ensuing half century, the zemstva served as a vehicle for the development of corporate identity among physicians, teachers, statisticians, and other occupational groups, including librarians. In contrast to the beneficiaries of these administrative reforms, university professors were relatively timid in their pursuit of corporate identity. Perhaps more than any other group, they were distrusted and regulated by the government.8

Throughout the nineteenth century, the librarians of the Public Li- brary were drawn from the same pool of scholars and writers who staffed the universities and learned societies. While highly enviable to large numbers of unemployed and underemployed intellectuals, the post of librarian at the Public Library undoubtedly carried less prestige than a professorship at Moscow or St. Petersburg University. When the library was opened to the public in 1814, the librarians received approximately two-thirds of the salary paid senior professors at the St. Petersburg Pedagogical Institute (later St. Petersburg University), and their compensation dropped to half of a senior professor's salary by the mid- 1860s [42-46].

Patronage was the cornerstone of the Russian civil service, and the Public Library was no exception. Entry into the ranks of the librarians

8. For an account of the professoriate in this period, see [36, pp. 1-47].




depended in part on personal connections. The surest route to employment was appointment (at the discretion of the director) as an unpaid intern, with first right of application for vacancies for salaried posts. Aspiring librarians sometimes remained in these volunteer positions for more than a decade. Still, the post of librarian in the Public Library was considered attainable by some who felt that a professorship was out of reach. The social critic N. G. Chernyshevskii observed in a letter to his father in 1854 that there were only two jobs he wanted in St. Peters- burg: a professorship at the university or the post of librarian in the Public Library. He speculated that "I can't count on the former, but I hope to get the latter somehow in a year or two" [47, p. 277].

What they may have lacked in status, the librarians made up for in corporate identity. Far fewer than the professoriate, the librarians of the national library were less regulated than university professors. They were further shielded from the scrutiny of the central bureaucracy by the close personal ties of the library's directors to the autocrat.9 Their smaller numbers probably worked to their advantage. In many respects the tiny elite of librarians in the Public Library outstripped the professoriate in creating a professional ideology and culture. They enjoyed striking success in defining their own goals and working conditions, implementing principles of collegial organization, and formulating a working philosophy of librarianship, as this article will demonstrate. With few exceptions, they were animated by the ideals of the intelligen- tsia culture that formed in Russia in the 1840s, which promoted social responsibility and positivist notions of progress. The belief in their moral obligation to educate and uplift the masses and to foster scientific progress on Russian soil was easily translated into a desire for professional autonomy. When the democratization of Russian intellectual life accelerated in the 1850s, they responded by claiming a central role in this process.

The Public Library: Organization and Administration

Founded by Catherine the Great in 1795, the Imperial Public Library was created from the 300,000-volume Zaluski collection seized by the Russian government after their victory over the Poles the preceding year.'0 The collection was transported from Warsaw to St. Petersburg,

9. As State Secretary, Olenin had direct access to Alexander I. He remained in the inner circle of high-ranking bureaucrats during the reign of Nicholas 1. Buturlin was also a trusted agent of the emperor Nicholas I, and Korf the emperor's close friend and adviser and tutor to his children.

10. On the early history of the Public Library, see [48, 491.




where it languished for several years under the jurisdiction of the De- partment of the Imperial Court. In 1800 the directorship of the library passed to the leading patron of the arts and letters, Count A. S. Stroga- nov. Already in his late sixties, Stroganov did not take an active part in the administration of the library, and it was only in 1808 with the appointment of A. N. Olenin as his assistant that a concerted effort was made to put the collection in order and open the library to the public. Olenin became director of the library three years later, after Stroganov's death, but in effect served as director from the time of his appointment as assistant director in April 1808 until his death in April 1843. Within a few years of his arrival at the library Olenin had furnished it with organization, legal status, and a mission, and by the end of his thirty- five-year tenure he had succeeded in popularizing the concept of a national library among educated society.

Olenin was succeeded by D. P. Buturlin, a career military officer and military historian.'1 The Buturlin administration signaled the marriage of the post of chief censor and director of the library, and it was as head of the April 2, 1848, censorship committee that Buturlin achieved notoriety. Following Buturlin's death in late 1849, Baron M. A. Korf, a former classmate of Alexander Pushkin's at the Lyceum in Tsarskoe Selo and former prottg# of the statesman M. M. Speranskii, was appointed director of the library.'2 The last half of the Korf administration coincided with dramatic changes in Russian society and a great upsurge of support for reform of Russia's social and political institutions.13

Korf left the library in 1861 to become head of the Second Section of His Majesty's Own Chancery and was replaced by I. D. Delianov, who had served as the superintendent of the St. Petersburg Educational District. "4 Delianov was director of the library and, beginning in 1866, also assistant minister of education, until 1881, when he became minister of education. He was known for his support of the reactionary policies of D. A. Tolstoi, minister of education from 1866 to 1880, and, subsequently, for his own repressive measures. For the most part both Korf and Delianov left the day-to-day operation of the library in the hands of their assistants, who were career employees of the library and neither contributed to the growth of the profession as directly and extensively as Olenin did.

Although these four directors represent a broad range of political and social views and widely dissimilar temperaments, there was considerable

11. On the Buturlin administration, see [50, 51]. 12. The Korf administration is discussed in [50, 52, 531. See also the biographies of two

important librarians from this period, published in one volume [54]. 13. This phenomenon and its impact on the Public Library are described in [551. 14. On Delianov's administration, see [50, 54].




continuity throughout their administrations. From the beginning, the Public Library enjoyed a relatively high degree of independence in com- parison with other intellectual institutions in Russia, and in spite of their differences in style, these directors made every effort to safeguard their autonomy [56, p. 2081.15 Although the Public Library was, like any other government institution, essentially hierarchical in structure, it was at the same time unusually democratic, as subsequent sections of this article will show. From the outset of the Olenin administration, the staff functioned in a highly collegial manner. Except for the Buturlin years, this remained the hallmark of the library's organization throughout the nineteenth century.

The library's charter of 1810, written by Olenin and revised by M. M. Speranskii, provided for a professional staff of eighteen (director, assistant director, seven librarians, seven assistant librarians, one curator of manuscripts, and one assistant curator), plus two clerks and thirteen guards [57]. The positions of director and assistant director were unsalaried, on the assumption that those persons would have sufficient income from private sources or from other posts in the civil service, since it was customary for persons in the middle and upper echelons of the tsarist bureaucracy to hold multiple appointments. The librarians' salary was set at 1,200 rubles per year and the assistant librarians' at 900 rubles. This remained in effect until a supplementary statute was promulgated in 1831 [58]. At that time the professional staff was cut to thirteen (director, assistant director, six librarians, one curator of manuscripts, and four assistant librarians). Salaries were increased to 2,700 rubles for librarians and 1,200 for assistant librarians. Buturlin sought unsuccess- fully to increase the number of librarians and assistant librarians to sixteen. Korf obtained permission to create the position of staff editor in 1850, and in 1851 was permitted to hire two additional librarians and a bursar. In 1853 several new positions were created, including reading room supervisor, four reading room attendants, and one accessions librarian. Another senior librarian, paid with nonlibrary funds, joined the staff in 1856.

Besides the Public Library there were several other important library collections in Russia in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Foremost among these was the Library of the Academy of Sciences. There was also the Hermitage Library (established in 1764), Moscow University Library (opened in 1756 and destroyed by fire in 1812), various libraries attached to government departments, and several major

15. For examples from Olenin's administration, see [48, 49]. Korf arranged the transfer of the library from the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education to the Ministry of the Imperial Court in 1850 with this very aim [53, pp. 7-8].




private collections, including the Rumiantsev Library (later donated to the state and eventually transformed into the Lenin State Library, renamed the Russian State Library in 1992). It was the Public Library, however, that served as the locus of development of librarianship in Russia. As the world's second or third largest library for most of the nineteenth century, the Public Library enjoyed a large staff, a relatively generous budget, and an extremely rich and diverse collection that posed major problems of organization and retrieval. Given these conditions, the librarians of the Public Library were uniquely suited to shape the professional culture of modern librarianship.'6

Librarianship before Olenin

Until the founding of the national library, the preeminence of the Li- brary of the Academy of Sciences in Russia was unchallenged.'7 Estab- lished in 1714 by Peter I and incorporated into the Academy of Sciences in 1725, the library held some thirty thousand volumes in 1776. J. D. Schumacher, a native of Alsace and graduate in philosophy of Stras- bourg University, was the library's first director, from 1714 until his death in 1761 [62]. He was also head of the Academy's chancery, and in the 1740s was accused of mismanagement of the library by a group of academicians [63, pp. 96-106]. Beginning in 1732 he was assisted by J. K. Taubert, who also performed other administrative functions in the Academy. From 1771 to 1797 the mathematician S. K. Kotel'nikov served as head of the library, in addition to his numerous other administrative and teaching responsibilities. Much of the work of the library under these directors was performed by assistant librarians A. 1. Bogda- nov and, subsequently, J. V. Bacmeister (described above). Bogdanov, who worked in the library from 1730 to 1766, devised a rudimentary classification scheme for use in his 1742 catalog of 727 Russian books and manuscripts from the library's collections [64]. He has been described as the first Russian book specialist [60, 1:301] (and the first Russian scholar of Japanese [65]). Because he was salaried in the post,

16. Outside the Public Library, significant contributions to the profession were made by the chemist F. F. Reiss, director of Moscow University Library, 1822-32; and the distinguished embryologist K. E. von Baer, head of the foreign division of the Library of the Academy of Sciences, 1835-62. On Reiss, see [14, pp. 130-31, 157-58, 164-65, 181; 59]. Von Baer's contribution to library science is treated in [60, 2:150-58; 61, pp. 162-224, passim].

17. On the history of this library, see its 250-year jubilee volume [61]. The achievements of the early Academy librarians are summarized in [14].




Schumacher is sometimes considered the first "professional" librarian in Russia [14, p. 193]. 18

At the time of the arrival of the Zaluski collection in St. Petersburg, librarianship was conceived mainly in terms of curatorial and preservationist functions. This view was expressed by one of the former staff members of the pre-Olenin era, M. I. Antonovskii, in his memoirs [66]. Hired in 1796 to sort the Zaluski collection, Antonovskii, a publicist and aspiring historian, evidently saw himself as the embodiment of Cather- ine's intentions for the library. Unfortunately for Antonovskii, his career in the Public Library was cut short by a conflict with the new director, the French emigr6 Count Marie-Gabriel-Florent-Auguste de Choiseul- Gouffier, who had emigrated to Russia in the wake of the French Revo- lution. Choiseul-Gouffier was a highly controversial figure, contemptu- ous of Russians and Russian culture in the extreme [49, p. 9], and an unlikely choice for director of the library (and probably a reflection of the indifference of Paul I to the library). Having insulted the emperor, Choiseul-Gouffier was forced to leave Russia in early 1800. For his part Antonovskii seems to have suffered from an excess of egotism, reflected in his memoirs, which were written in the third person and are highly flattering to the subject.

In these memoirs Antonovskii recorded what he claimed to be Cather- ine's intentions for the library, including her idea of the requisite qualifications for the staff. Not surprisingly, in certain respects these qualifications match Antonovskii's own self-description. The librarians were supposed to be Russians or meritorious foreigners with knowledge of the sciences and of Greek or Latin or Hebrew or Chaldean, and of two or three modern European or Asian languages. The head librarian was to be a native Russian and a patriot, intellectually gifted and quick- witted, with knowledge of at least six languages and an encyclopedic understanding of all the disciplines. He was to hold the rank of state councillor or higher. His chief duty was to have been the composition of a complete history of Russia.'9

Antonovskii viewed the librarian's role as essentially passive and custo- dial, and he did not address issues of management and control, collection development, or service to readers. In contrast, although he began his career as a librarian at roughly the same time Antonovskii was com- posing his memoirs, Olenin's writings and actions as director reveal a vastly more sophisticated grasp of the role and functions of librarian.

18. Stoliarov offers a more extensive (though not entirely convincing) justification for this judgment in his recent article on Schumacher. See [621.

19. It is interesting to note that the author of the entry for Antonovskii in the Russian Biographical Dictionary described Antonovskii's historical writings as extremely weak and lacking in basic concepts of historical analysis. See [67].




The Olenin Era

Olenin's contribution to the profession of librarianship in Russia was considerable, both to the formal structure of the profession and to the knowledge base. Shortly after his appointment he devised a classification system for the library, which was published in 1809 [68]. This was not only the first comprehensive classification scheme published in Russia, but the first Russian guide to bibliographic description and catalog production as well.20 Olenin conducted a systematic critical review of ex- isting European classification schemes prior to devising his own, and his analysis, also the first of its kind in Russia [69, pp. 123-24], was included in the 1809 publication. Olenin's system was praised by his contemporaries and has been described by modern specialists as ex- traordinary for its time [60, 2:134; 69]. The following year he drafted the library's first legal statute [57], which was revised by Speranskii and enacted into law the same year. In this document Olenin described the three primary functions of the librarians: preservation, classification, and reader services. By providing a legal definition of the functions of librarian, Olenin took the first steps toward forging a professional identity for the staff.

Less than two years later Olenin prepared a more detailed document on the governance of the library [70], which was enacted into law in March 1812. This document further regulated the functions of the librarians, established standards for professional conduct, and enhanced the autonomy of the librarians by claiming for them the right to propose changes in operations to the director. By stipulating that persons without civil service rank could be hired as librarians if they demonstrated the necessary knowledge and skills, Olenin sought both to control access to the profession and affirm its specialized knowledge. The service orientation of the librarians was highlighted in a provision stipulating that failure to extend all possible assistance to readers regardless of their origins would result in dismissal; in effect this constituted the first ethics code for the profession in Russia. Guidelines for the behavior of visitors to the library were included, which affirmed the profession's right to assert control over their clients. The statutes also provided for the creation of the institution of honorary librarians, or unsalaried interns, who enjoyed the right of first application for vacancies for assistant librarian, and established formulas for obtaining retirement pensions.

From the beginning Olenin devoted considerable effort to obtaining

20. In the eighteenth century several classification schemes, based on European models and designed for use in smaller, more homogeneous collections, were introduced in Russia, but Olenin's was the first original, comprehensive system.




awards for his staff, which was his primary means of augmenting staff salaries, since the imperial awards provided annual payments from the state treasury. He succeeded in securing promotions for many of his staff who were legally ineligible according to the elaborate civil service system. At one point Olenin petitioned the minister of education to waive the August 6, 1809, law on civil service eligibility for the librarians of the Public Library. His rationale was the 1811 amendment exempting persons from the examination requirement if they were already proven scholars. "Librarians," he wrote, "by the very nature of their work must have more knowledge than that required by the [law]. . . . They must have sufficient understanding of all branches of knowledge in order to classify books, (as well as] knowledge of the best works in every field in order to assist readers.... To subject them to further examination, therefore, would be superfluous" [50, pp. 147-48]. Elsewhere Olenin wrote that librarians must be knowledgeable in the subject areas represented by the division assigned to them but need not have encyclopedic knowledge of all disciplines. They must, however, be familiar with the contents of the books in their divisions [49, p. 106]. He complained that some persons outside the library erroneously considered library work insubstantial, more physical labor than intellectual endeavor, whereas in fact a librarian must possess special knowledge and skills and function as a living catalog of his division [49, p. 11].

By promoting the dual role of scholar-librarian Olenin managed at once to enhance the prestige of the new profession and engage talented scholars and writers in the organization and management of the library. Librarians were expected to utilize their particular expertise in serving the library and to utilize the resources of the library in their scholarly and creative endeavors. Although scholars had long been associated with other libraries in Russia, Olenin was first to institutionalize the principle and implement it on a relatively large scale [48, pp. 76-87, 138-39].

The record of accomplishments of the librarians in the Public Library attests to their success in meeting the standards set in the library's legal charter and Olenin's directives. For the most part better known for their individual scholarly and literary works, the librarians performed the work of the library with equal industry. As subject specialists, they were engaged in collection development, classification and cataloging, pre- paring exhibits, compiling bibliographies and special catalogs, and providing intensive reference service to readers, as numerous studies based on the library's archives have demonstrated [71-73].

From published sources it is possible to identify some ninety-six persons who held staff positions at the Public Library in the period from 1808 to 1868 [50, 52, 74-76]. Fifty-five were either already on staff at




the time of Olenin's appointment or were hired by Olenin during his thirty-five-year tenure as director. Eight were hired by Buturlin, twenty- three by Korf, and ten by Delianov. It is clear that from the beginning of the Olenin administration a significant number of persons of nonnoble origin were hired as librarians, including sons of merchants, priests, and serfs. This was accomplished at a time when the concept of a meritocracy was antithetical to the elaborate and pervasive civil service system based on class privilege. This significant nonnoble pres- ence on the library staff may have contibuted to the relatively democratic mode of operations.

Olenin also fostered a sense of professional identity among his staff by providing them with the opportunity to deliberate issues of policy and procedure as a group. He held regular staff conferences for this purpose, and in 1818, when faced with the enormous task of cataloging virtually the entire collection, he distributed a questionnaire to the librarians seeking their opinions on a variety of issues pertaining to catalog production [48, pp. 93-95; 49, pp. 38-47; 14, pp. 143-51; 69; 77, pp. 43-53]. This is the first known instance in Russian library history of collective deliberation and resolution of major issues of policy and procedure, and it was achieved at a time when collegial control over work routines was virtually unknown in the rigid hierarchy of the tsarist bureaucracy.

Over the course of his administration Olenin elaborated a multitude of procedures for such operations as shelving and binding, and these, together with his classification system and the cataloging rules, constituted a major contribution to the knowledge base of librarianship. He also provided a theoretical framework for this specialized knowledge by emphasizing that the mission of the library was the dissemination of knowledge in the service of scholarship and the arts. A recurrent motif in Olenin's reports and directives is the library's role in the advancement of Russian culture. Reader services were defined in Olenin's 1810 charter as one of the three primary functions of librarians.2' Underlying this service orientation was an ethos of democratic idealism. In 1814, the year the library was opened to the public, Olenin observed that the most remarkable development was the appearance in the library of people "not of means" who had no access to knowledge before the Public Library opened its doors [49, p. 52; 78, p. 14]. By Olenin's standards, even in its first year of operation the library was realizing its "true purpose," "that everyone, regardless of origin, can use all manner of books . . . for free" [50, p. 89].

As part of his plan to staff the library with some of the nation's most talented scholars and writers, in 1811 Olenin hired the bibliographer

21. Olenin's service orientation is discussed in a recent article [261.




V. S. Sopikov to work in the newly created Russian division. Born in 1765 into the merchant class, Sopikov received no formal education and began working in Moscow bookstores at an early age.22 Around 1790 he moved to St. Petersburg and opened his own bookstore, in which he organized a public reading room. In 1805 he began compiling his monumental bibliography of Russian imprints from the beginning of printing to the present day, the work that was to earn him the sobri- quet of father of Russian bibliography. Olenin was already familiar with Sopikov's unpublished bibliography before he hired him, and thereafter offered Sopikov his unqualified support. He obtained government fi- nancing for publication of the bibliography and petitioned the government to elevate Sopikov from the merchant estate to the fourteenth grade in the civil service.

In the introduction to his bibliography, entitled An Attempt at a Russian Bibliography, or a Complete Dictionary of Works and Translations Published in the Slavonic and Russian Languages from the Introduction of Pnrnting until 1813 [83], Sopikov enumerated the necessary qualifications for a librarian. He must possess encyclopedic knowledge of all subjects, a sound knowledge of history and the history of publishing, knowledge of the technical and artistic aspects of printing and book illustration, bibliographic skills, knowledge of paleography and numismatics, and he must be above all prejudices, including philosophical, theological, or political prejudices. He must also possess the ability to serve readers and, last but not least, show enthusiasm for library work. Although these qualifications are less concrete than those Olenin described, Sopikov did promote the exclusivity of the profession by emphasizing numerous special, chiefly technical, skills.

Within two decades of its creation, the Imperial Public Library was one of the world's great libraries. Faced with the task of organizing more than a quarter of a million volumes, the librarians of the Public Library elaborated a working philosophy of librarianship and a full complement of operating procedures. They formulated goals, defined their roles, and steadily enlarged the theoretical knowledge informing their work. Given the reactionary tendencies of his successor, Olenin's fore- sight in institutionalizing these early accomplishments may well be his greatest legacy to the library.

The Buturlin Administration

D. P. Buturlin could hardly have been more different from Olenin in temperament, character, philosophy, and professional interests, and the

22. On Sopikov, see [49, pp. 91-115; 79-82].




reason for his appointment as Olenin's successor has never been eluci- dated. Neither a scholar nor a littirateur nor an accomplished administrator, Buturlin retired from the military as a quartermaster general and served in the civil service for more than a decade before being named director of the Public Library. By all accounts, under Buturlin the library was in "the most pathetic state" [54, p. 19]; acquisition of new materials all but ceased, books lay in heaps on the floors and win- dowsills, and service to readers was virtually abandoned. Hours of operation were reduced and readers were permitted to page a maximum of two books [50, pp. 172-73]. As one of the library's future employees observed, "At that time the library was on a military footing.... [Butur- lin] had the appearance and all the qualities of a retired regimental commander.... To him the library was like a warehouse or barracks under his command, where every uniform and every sack of flour had to be duly inventoried and nothing more" [84, cols. 1514-15].

Immediately upon his appointment, Buturlin announced that library operations would henceforth be conducted in strict accordance with prescribed procedures. All librarians were required to sign a statement pledging their intent to comply with the rules [50, p. 161]. Buturlin then fired the curator of the manuscript division, the eminent philologist and paleographer, A. Kh. Vostokov, on grounds of incompetence [49, p. 230]. This was followed by an all-out campaign to catalog the manuscript collection, for which Buturlin conscripted librarians from other divisions without regard for their expertise and subjected them to harsh discipline and work quotas, with predictably poor results [51, p. 83; 54, p. 20]. Buturlin's death in 1849 was not mourned by the staff. At the funeral, according to the library's assistant director, there were no signs of genuine grief, but only malicious glee and contempt for the deceased [54, pp. 18-19].

Apart from demoralizing the staff, Buturlin did not undermine the achievements of the Olenin era. Moreover, by hiring talented staff, who put their skills to better use under future administrations, he made one lasting contribution to the library. Buturlin also wisely promoted V. I. Sobol'shchikov, hired by Olenin as a clerk in 1834, to assistant librarian in 1843. Over the years Sobol'shchikov became one of the library's most dedicated librarians.23 He was promoted to senior librarian in 1851, and served until his death in 1872 in a variety of posts in the library, including head of the division of fine arts, bursar, and architect.

Born into the merchant estate in Vitebsk in 1808, Sobol'shchikov received little formal education before entering the civil service. While employed by the library, he was trained at the Academy of Fine Arts

23. On Sobol'shchikov, see [51, 54, 55, 85, 86].




as an architect and in 1839 was elevated to the rank of free artist by the Academy council, which was chaired by Olenin. As a librarian So- bol'shchikov served three directors, Buturlin, Korf, and Delianov, and over the course of his long tenure with the library he formed strong opinions on all aspects of library management and a passionate commitment to the ethic of service. As noted above, he is widely viewed by Soviet specialists as the founder of Russian library science, largely because of his guide to library operations, first published in 1858, and also because of his social origins. Entitled On the Organization of Public Libraries [8], Sobol'shchikov's guide represents a distillation of his experience in the Public Library but was written for a wide audience. Without minimizing the importance of this work and his contribution to Russian library science overall, it is the continuity of his thought with that of previous generations of librarians of the Public Library, rather than its novelty, that must be emphasized.

In On the Organization of Public Libraries and throughout his memoranda to the library's directors, Sobol'shchikov's constant theme is the provision of service to readers, especially to bibliographically unsophisti- cated readers. Maintaining that libraries heretofore were "sacred tem- ples of science" and had now, happily, become a "refuge for all seeking information," Sobol'shchikov espoused a professional ideology based on the liberal values of free inquiry and free access to information. To fulfill the service ideal he identified six requirements for a librarian. First, he must be familiar with every work in the collection assigned to him. Second, the collection must be organized so that he can find a given title at any time. Third, the librarian must supply books and an- swer inquiries as promptly as possible. Fourth, he should maintain proper circulation records to ensure that all books are returned. Fifth, when transferring books from one room to another, he should keep them in order. Sixth, the system of organization in the library must be quickly apprehended by new staff. The guide also contains the cataloging rules observed in the Public Library, elaborated over the years and codified here for the first time. In 1910 the editor of the first professional library journal in Russia, The Librarian, noted that Sobol'shchikov's guide continued even then to exert an enormous influence on Russian library practice [7, p. 68].

While it would be inaccurate to state that Sobol'shchikov was first to address the issue of service to readers in Russian libraries, it is true that he was first to accord it highest priority. To Sobol'shchikov it was essential to be able to retrieve a book in the time it took to walk to the shelf, not because of some abstract principle of efficiency but in order to improve service to the public. What made Sobol'shchikov particularly attractive to Soviet specialists was not just the egalitarian strain through-




out his writings but also his remarks concerning the need to supply readers not only with materials they request but with all relevant material as well. This view approached the ideal of recommendatory bibliography, which was politicized and enshrined by specialists in library science after the October Revolution.

During the Korf and Delianov administrations Sobol'shchikov fre- quently submitted written recommendations to the director on library policies and procedures. In one memorandum he advocated hiring more nonnobles as librarians; in another he advocated specialization of work roles (acquisitions, cataloging, preservation).24 On more than one occasion he proposed the establishment of a collegial body, a "library council" or "staff conference," which would not only be empowered to deliberate policy and procedures but would also protect the library from the caprice of outside persons [54, pp. 96-97]. His desire to assert their autonomy reflects a major advance in the corporate identity of the librarians of the Public Library in the half century since Olenin first enunciated it.

The Korf Administration

When he became director of the library in 1849, M. A. Korf was "one of the most knowledgeable officials in the Empire about the manner in which its institutions functioned" [87], having served in the central administration of the government since his graduation from the Lyceum in Tsarskoe Selo in 1817. Korf was also "articulate, literate, and widely- read" [88, p. 123], highly ambitious, and a consummate politician. He did not hesitate to vilify anyone who stood in his way, and this included minister of education S. S. Uvarov, whose post Korf coveted but failed to obtain. In the library his legacy included the legend of his own unpar- alleled achievements, which earned for the library the affection of a grateful public, and the myth of the spiritual and intellectual poverty of the Olenin administration.25

His personal qualities notwithstanding, Korf did turn his considerable administrative talents to the library's benefit. He was a strong advocate for the library to the emperor, whom he apparently served with single- minded devotion. Immediately upon becoming director, Korf turned his attention to improving the library's position with respect to the upper

24. Several of these memoranda are quoted in part in [54, pp. 50, 54, 81, 93-96]. 25. This view is reflected in the library's centennial jubilee volume [50] (see, for example,

p. 184) and thus in many of the later writings about the library based on this official account. It also pervades Korf's memoirs [89]. See [49, pp. 89-90) for speculation on the sources of Korf's animosity toward Olenin.




administration of the government, and he arranged for its transfer from the Ministry of Education to the Ministry of the Imperial Court. Next he drafted a Supplementary Regulation for the library, which increased the authority of the director and proclaimed the mission of the library to be the common good [90]. This document was enacted into law on February 20, 1850. Fifteen years later when the librarians were drafting a new charter for the Public Library, Korf's Supplementary Regulation was credited with having gained a greater degree of independence for the library [91, p. 40]. Throughout his administration Korf lobbied for more support staff for the library, to free the librarians from "low-level or mechanical tasks" [53, p. 11]. Generally, however, he was little involved in the day-to-day operations of the library, which he entrusted to the assistant director, Prince V. F. Odoevskii, whom he described as his right hand [54, p. 200].

Like Olenin, with whom he was acquainted, Odoevskii cultivated diverse creative interests.26 He was a leading exponent of German roman- ticism in both his literary and philosophical writings, an accomplished musicologist and music critic, philanthropist, popular educator, and am- ateur scientist. According to his biographer, he affected the manner of a medieval alchemist and cultivated an "interest in the bizarre, the vio- lent, and the mildly obscene" [92, p. 26]. His administration of the library reflected his prodigious capacity for attention to detail. He approached his work in the library with the zeal of an efficiency expert and expected equal precision from other staff members. In one document he outlined the circulation of a book in a sixteen-step process from receipt of the page slip to return of the item to the shelf, allotting eighteen minutes for delivery of the material to its requestor [54, p. 186]. He was a strong advocate of specialization of work roles among librarians to enhance productivity. He was apparently viewed by some of his contemporaries as a pedant, and there were conflicts with other librarians who did not share Odoevskii's respect for formalities.

Although he did not publish any of his writings about the library, Odoevskii apparently left extensive notes and instructions in the library's archives, which were described in some detail in a recent study of his library career [54, pp. 138-216]. One of the most interesting documents was a detailed proposal for the creation of a public library in Moscow, written at Korf's request [54, pp. 166-72]. Odoevskii's rationale for the library was to support the needs of the expanding commer- cial sector in Moscow and thus to promote the scientific and industrial development of the country. The library was to have a "mixed collegial

26. On Odoevskii's life and work outside the library, see [92]. His career as librarian is chronicled in the second half of [541.




system" of administration, with regular meetings at which any staff member could present his ideas for the consideration of the director. This reflected Odoevskii's own practice at the Public Library, where he held meetings of the staff to discuss and decide various procedures. The proposal also reveals Odoevskii's strong commitment to public education in general and his belief in the role of the library in the dissemination of "positive information" among all classes, two of the primary tenets of the professional ideology of modern librarianship.

Odoevskii left the library in August 1861, and Korf also left shortly thereafter to assume a position as director of the Second Section of His Majesty's Own Chancery, where he became involved in drafting the regional self-government, or zemstvo, reform of 1864. Korf was succeeded in the library by I. D. Delianov, who also delegated the day-to- day operations of the library to his subordinates.

The Delianov Years

Delianov began his administration of the library just months after the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation. Although many educated Russians were keenly disappointed by the terms of the emancipation, there was still in late 1861 and early 1862 substantial support for liberal- izing the social and political institutions of the Russian state. Still to come were the zemstvo reform of 1864, the judicial reform of 1864, the educational reforms of 1863 and 1864, the new, more liberal censorship law of 1865, the municipal government reform of 1870, and the military reforms of 1874. In addition, many public institutions and bodies, including the universities and several learned societies, were drafting new legal charters at this time.

Against this background Delianov instructed the librarians to review the library's statutes and propose revisions [55]. Their discussions quickly converged on the issue of the library's role in society. Two camps formed. On the "progressive" side were Sobol'shchikov, Stasov, A. F. Bychkov, A. A. Stoikovich, and others, who wanted to effect major reform of library services with the aim of improving public access to the collections and aiding in the dissemination of knowledge. They were opposed by the "German faction," consisting of librarians Mintslov, Mu- ralt, Posselt, Walther, and Dorn, who viewed the library's mission above all as the preservation of recorded knowledge for scholars. They argued in one memorandum that "national libraries are archives of human knowledge of all time. Their significance far exceeds such concrete, practical purposes as the dissemination of useful information" [52, p. 78; 71, p. 53]. To this Sobol'shchikov replied with a scathing critique




of their motives: "Such a view of the library conveys, in the first place, total indifference to it, and secondly, a desire for peace and quiet" [52, p. 78; 71, p. 54]. Stoikovich charged that the antireform party sought merely to cloak their cynicism toward the library's nonscholarly clientele in sophistries about their own higher calling [71, p. 54; 72, p. 41]. An- other member of the "progressive" camp argued that the Public Library was obligated to supply the public with basic materials because of the lack of special libraries and local public libraries that should be serving their needs [52, p. 78; 71, p. 54].

In the debate over the spirit and letter of the charter the advocates of reform prevailed. The draft contained a number of provisions designed to enhance public access to the collections and made frequent reference to the common good. Ultimately the reformists lost the battle, however, in that the charter was never enacted. To become law the new charter would have required the approval of minister of education D. A. Tolstoi, a notorious reactionary and opponent of the liberal reforms. With the attempted assassination of Alexander II in April 1866, prospects for further reform became very bleak. Nevertheless, the draft charter, which was published in the Journal of the Ministty of Education in 1865 with a call for public comment [91], represents considerable progress on the part of the librarians in affirming their professional identity and establishing as the new theoretical foundation for library science the democratization of Russian intellectual life. Previous librarians from Olenin to Korf had stressed the importance of providing universal access to the collections and of placing the resources of the library in the service of the common good, and Sobol'shchikov had made this task his highest priority, but now for the first time this principle was to be incorporated into the legal instrument defining the library's purpose.

The centerpiece of the charter was the proposed library council. With governing rather than advisory powers, this body was to be composed of all the librarians and chaired by one librarian appointed by the director. The powers of the council were very broad, including allocation of acquisitions funds to the library's divisions, review of proposed acquisitions, supervision of operations in the divisions, resolution of cataloging problems, election of candidates to fill vacancies, hiring and firing of support staff, review of librarians' recommendations for changes in operations and procedures, and review of requests and complaints from readers. The charter also stipulated that all staff positions could be filled by persons lacking the designated rank if they otherwise met the qualifications. Although the charter was not enacted, this draft reveals a deep desire on the part of the librarians to exercise full professional autonomy. Pieces of the charter did find their way into administrative directives of 1870 and 1871, and the council was retained, although it




was reduced from an organ of collective governance to an advisory body. In practice the librarians had been holding weekly meetings since the early 1860s, with the same constraints on their authority.

Appended to the draft charter was an extensive, unsigned "explana- tory note" amplifying each provision. This section also contained a historical sketch of the library, with particular emphasis on chronic fiscal problems, which concluded that the library was facing the same problems that had plagued it fifty years earlier. There was also an acknowl- edgment of the importance of Korf's 1850 Supplementary Regulation in advancing the library's independence, which was the overarching if implicit aim of the charter.

The "note" also contained an appeal for more equitable remuneration for Public Library staff. Observing that librarians at other government agencies and institutions received higher salaries than the librarians of the Public Library, the author of this document proposed raises that would effect equal pay for comparable work [91, p. 53]. To strengthen the argument, comparative data on salaries of librarians at other major European research libraries were appended [91, pp. 73-75].

Published with the draft charter and supporting material was an essay by A. F. Bychkov, then curator of the library's manuscript division, entitled "On the Meaning of the Profession of Librarian."27 Born into the nobility of Iaroslavl province, Bychkov attended Moscow University and upon graduation in 1840 went to work for the Archaeographic Commission, with which he remained associated for the rest of his life.28 He later served as chief editor for six volumes of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles and several other editions of chronicles. He was hired as curator of manuscripts at the Public Library in 1844, and he continued in this post even after he became assistant director of the library in 1868. In 1882 he replaced Delianov as director of the library and served in that capacity until his death in 1899. He was the first director of the library to rise from the ranks.

In his essay Bychkov emphasized that although librarians must be first and foremost talented scholars, they are not archivists because their concerns go beyond preservation and bibliographic control. They must also be conduits for knowledge and culture. As such, they are entitled

27. In [91, pp. 75-77] ("O znachenii zvaniia bibliotekaria"). 28. Bychkov's work as one of the nineteenth century's premier archaeographers has gen-

erally eclipsed his career in the library, and the definitive account of his tenure as

director has yet to be written. His role in the library is discussed in the library's centennial jubilee volume [50] and in the biographies of his colleagues in the library, V. I. Sobol'shchikov (541, V. F. Odoevskii [54], and V. V. Stasov [93]. There is a long

biographical sketch and bibliography in [941.




to the support and encouragement of their government. Elsewhere in Europe, governments recognize that culture is the strength of the state and thus extend to their librarians commensurate rewards; this is the status that must be accorded Russia's librarians if Russia is to take its place among the nations of Europe.

Bychkov's identification with the reformist camp in this debate dem- onstrates that it was not simply a struggle to defend narrow professional interests between the antiquarians on the one hand and the librarians responsible for the acquisition of current materials on the other. The essence of the dispute was the philosophical foundation of the profession. Bychkov's essay represents the culmination of a sixty-year quest for corporate identity, a claim to absolute cultural authority, and a call for appropriate social rewards. As the librarians of the Public Library gained technical expertise and enlarged the knowledge base of their profession, they also developed a more sophisticated, mature sense of their professional identity and sought to institutionalize it.

Although the bulk of his career fell outside the parameters of this study, the preeminent art and music critic Vladimir Stasov played an important role in the professionalization of librarianship in Russia even in the earliest years of his tenure [95]. Born in 1824 in St. Petersburg, Stasov was the son of a prominent architect who had enjoyed the patronage of Alexander I. After graduation from the School of Jurisprudence in 1843, Stasov held a variety of posts in the civil service before he was hired by Korf in 1856 to serve as his research assistant in the compilation of an official history of the reign of Nicholas 1. Working at the library, from the outset Stasov performed a number of library functions unre- lated to his official capacity. Within a short period he became the de facto head of the fine arts division, and beginning in 1856 he wrote the library's annual reports on Korf's behalf. In 1860 he tried to block the transfer of the Rumiantsev Museum to Moscow, even though Korf had expressed his support for the project. In the ensuing conflict, Stasov frankly defended his right to independent action [96]. In 1870 he responded to a case of large-scale theft of library materials by a visiting scholar-librarian by ensuring that the perpetrator was brought to trial and publishing the court proceedings [86, 97]. These actions demonstrated to members of the profession and the general public alike that standards of professional conduct would be scrupulously enforced at the Public Library. In 1873 Stasov was made head of the library's fine arts division, where he served until his death in 1906. In the last three decades of his long career in the library, Stasov made important contributions to cataloging theory, set new standards of service to readers, and repeatedly asserted his professional autonomy.




Conclusions

In the span of seven decades the librarians of the Public Library advanced Russian librarianship from a passive bibliophilic, preservationist model to a dynamic, multifaceted profession. More than any other single event, the appointment in 1808 of A. N. Olenin as de facto director of the library marks the beginning of modern librarianship in Russia. Throughout his thirty-five-year tenure as head of the library, Olenin placed primary emphasis on defining the profession and institutionalizing it. By cultivating a sense of professional identity and cohesiveness among the librarians of the Public Library, he ensured that the library would retain some measure of independence even under adverse cir- cumstances. Over the course of successive administrations, these early gains were consolidated, and the librarians developed strong convictions about their role in society and their right to formulate and articulate policies and procedures. By the end of the era of the Great Reforms, the librarians of the Public Library enjoyed a professional culture based on principles of collegial organization, service to society, universal access to the collections, and intellectual freedom. This trend culminated in the appointment in 1882 for the first time of a director who was not a professional administrator, but a librarian who had risen through the ranks with thirty-seven years' experience.

Although it is true that a lack of resources severely retarded the spread of public libraries in nineteenth-century Russia, and the expertise and corporate identity of the library elite offered little to those vast segments of the population that were not served by any library, the obstacles to progress lay outside the library profession. No amount of professional cohesion and activism could compensate for the stark real- ity of economic underdevelopment. Nevertheless, the achievements of the librarians of the Public Library laid the groundwork for the subsequent expansion of library services in Russia. The professional culture that originated and matured in their midst eventually gave rise to training programs, professional associations, and a national library press.29 Without this infrastructure, Russian librarians could not have even con- templated the establishment of public libraries and reading rooms on a mass scale in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

29. In 1903 the librarianship section of the Russian Bibliological Society was established, which was reorganized in 1908 as the independent Society for Librarianship, and the first professional journal was founded in Russia in 1910. The first All-Russian Congress on Libraries was held in 1911. Short courses in library sciences were first offered in 1913, followed in 1919 by university courses. For an overview of these developments, see [98-108].




REFERENCES

1. Tatishchev, V. N. Leksikon rossiiskoi istoricheskoi, geograficheskoi, politicheskoi i grazhdan- skoi (s.v. "Bibliotekarii"). In his Izbrannye proizvedeniia. Leningrad: "Nauka," Lenin- gradskoe otdelenie, 1979, p. 189.

2. Winter, Michael F. The Professionalization of Librarianship. Occasional Papers, no. 160. University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Urbana- Champaign, 1983.

3. Bakmeister, 1. G. Uohann Vollrath Bacmeister]. Opyt o bibliotekie i kabinetie nredkostei i istorii natural'noi Sanktpeterburgskoi Imperatorskoi Akademii Nauk. [St. Petersburg]: V

tip. morskago shliakhetnago kadetskago korpusa, 1779. 4. Grigor'ev, Iu. V. "Ivan Grigor'evich Bakmeister (k 200-letiiu so dnia smerti)." Nauch-

nye i tekhnicheskie biblioteki, 1988, no. 8:25-29. 5. Khavkina, L. B. Biblioteki: ikh organizatsiiza i tekhnika. St. Petersburg: Izd. A. S. Suvor-

ina, 1904. 6. "Izviestiia Russkago bibliologicheskago obshchestva: zhurnaly Sektsii bibliotekovie-

dieniia." Literaturnyi viestnik 7, no. 3 (suppl.) (1904): 14*-16*. 7. Bogdanov, P. M. "Obzor russkoi literatury po teorii bibliotekoviedieniia." Bibliotekar'

1, no. I (1910): 66-80. 8. Sobol'shchikov, V. I. "Ob ustroistvie obshchestvennykh bibliotek i sostavlenii ikh

katalogov." Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnago prosvieshcheniia 100, sec. 2 (1858): 97-155. Separately published as Ob ustroistvie obshchestvennykh bibliotek i sostavlenii ikh ketalogov. St. Petersburg: V tip. Imperatorskoi akademii nauk, 1859.

9. Khavkina, L. B. Biblioteki, ikh organizatsiia i tekhnika: rukovodstvo po bibliotekoviedieniiu. 2d ed. St. Petersburg: Tip. B. M. Vol'fa, 1911.

10. Lukashov, I. V. "Razvitie predstavlenii o statuse bibliotekovedeniia v dorevoliutsion- noi Rossii." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1989, no. 6:17-23.

11. Derunov, K. N. "Tipichnye cherty v evoliutsii russkoi 'obshchestvennoi' biblioteki." In his Izbrannoe. Moscow: Kniga, 1972, pp. 62-141.

12. Derunov, K. N. "Tipichnye cherty v evoliutsii tsentral'nykh gosudarstvennykh kni- gokhranilishch." In his lzbrannoe. Moscow: Kniga, 1972, pp. 205-10.

13. Grigor'ev, Iu. V. "K. N. Derunov." Sovetskaia bibliografiia 99 (1966, no. 5): 37- 45.

14. Grigor'ev, Iu. V. "Istoriia russkogo bibliotekovedeniia (1700-1860 gody)." In Iu. V. Grigor'ev (1899-1973), edited by Iu. N. Stoliarov. Moscow: Knizhnaia palata, 1989, pp. 69-208.

15. Grigor'ev, Iu. V. L. B. Khavkina (1871-1949). Moscow: Kniga, 1973. 16. Kasinec, Edward. "L. B. Khavkina (1871-1949): American Library Ideas in Russia

and the Development of Soviet Librarianship." Libri 37, no. 1 (1987): 59-71. 17. Chubar'ian, 0. S. Obshchee biblliotekovedenie. 2d ed. Moscow: Kniga, 1968. 18. Abramov, K. I. Iston'ia bibliotechnogo dela v SSSR. 3d ed. Moscow: Kniga, 1980. 19. Gromova, A. A. "Pervoe rukovodstvo po bibliotechnomu delu v Rossii." Biblioteki

SSSR 16 (1961): 113-27. 20. Kirpicheva, I. K. K. N. Derunov (1866-1929): ocherk zhizni i dejatel'nosti. Moscow:

Izdatel'stvo Vsesoiuznoi knizhnoi palaty, 1963. 21. "Problemy istorii bibliotechnogo dela." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1989, no. 4:23-44;

1989, no. 5:15-34. 22. Khariamov, V. I. "Fenomen bibliotechnoi ideologii: s pozitsii istorika." Sovetskoe biblio-

tekovedenie, 1991, no. 2:41-46. 23. Stoliarov, Iu. N. "V. I. Lenin: Shveitsarsko-amerikanskaia sistema ili tsentralizatsiia."

Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1991, no. 5:24-35.




24. Benderskii, I. L., and Kharlamov, V. I. "Priglashenie k dialogu." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1991, no. 5:35-45.

25. Stoliarov, Iu. N. "Leninskoe nasledie-dostoianie sovremennosti." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1990, no. 6:16-25.

26. Vaneev, A. N. "Problemy rukovodstva chteniem v otechestvennom bibliotekovede- nii." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedente, 1991, no. 3:15-21.

27. Matlina, S. G. "Ne otkazyvat'sia ot dostignutogo." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1991, no. 3:21-23.

28. Lukashov, 1. V. "Vzgliady sovetskikh spetsialistov na status bibliotekovedeniia (20-e-30-e gg.)." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1991, no. 2:50-59.

29. Benderskii, I. L. "Bibliotechnoe delo v SSSR i voprosy ego istorii." Nauchnye i tekhnicheskie biblioteki SSSR, 1988, no. 10:14-20.

30. Mil'man, V. A. "Obshcheteoreticheskaia problematika v otechestvennom bibliotek- ovedenii nachala XX v." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1989, no. 6:9-17.

31. Vaneev, A. N. "Vzgliady na bibliotechnuiu professiiu v kontse XVII-nachale XIX veka." Nauchnye i tekhnicheskie biblioteki, 1992, no. 5:17-25.

32. Winter, Michael F. The Culture and Control of Expertise: Toward a Sociological Under- standing of Librarianship. Contributions in Librarianship and Information Science, no. 61. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1988.

33. Abbott, Andrew. The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.

34. Timberlake, Charles E. "Higher Learning, the State, and the Professions in Russia." In The Transformation of Higher Leatning, 1860-1930: Expansion, Diversificiation, Social Opening, and Professionalization in England, Germany, Russia, and the United States, edited by Konrad J. Jarausch. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.

35. Balzer, Harley. "The Problem of Professions in Imperial Russia." In Between Tsar and People: Educated Society and the Quest for Public Identity in Late Imperial Russia, edited by Edith W. Clowes, Samuel D. Kassow, and James L. West. Princeton. N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1991, pp. 183-98.

36. Kassow, Samuel D. Students, Professors, and the State in Tsarist Russia. Berkeley: Univer- sity of California Press, 1989.

37. Hinshaw, Christine Ruane. "The Soul of the School: The Professionalization of Schoolteachers in St. Petersburg and Moscow, 1890-1907." Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1986.

38. Frieden, Nancy M. Russian Physicians in an Era of Reform and Revolution, 1856-1905. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1981.

39. Seregny, Scott J. Russian Teachers and Peasant Revolution: The Politics of Education in 1905. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989.

40. Ruane, Christine, and Eklof, Ben. "Cultural Pioneers and Professionals: The Teacher in Society." In Between Tsar and People: Educated Society and the Quest for Public Identity in Late Imperial Russia, edited by Edith W. Clowes, Samuel D. Kassow, and James L. West. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1991, pp. 199-21 1.

41. Timberlake, Charles E. "The Zemstvo and the Development of a Russian Middle Class." In Between Tsar and People: Educated Society and the Quest for Public Identity in Late Imperial Russia, edited by Edith W. Clowes, Samuel D. Kassow, and James L. West. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1991, pp. 164-79.

42. Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii. 1st ser., v. 44, pt. 2, p. 195 (1804, no. 21,265).

43. Polnoe sobranit zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii. 2d ser., v. 10, pt. 2, pp. 286-87 (1835, no. 8,337).

44. Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii. 2d ser, v. 38, pt. 2 (suppl.), pp. 118-19 (1863, no. 39,752).




45. Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imper'i. 1st ser., v. 44, pt. 2, p. 182 (1810, no. 24,377). 46. Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii. 2d ser., v. 6, pt. 2 (suppl.), pp. 1-2 (1831,

no. 4,794). 47. Chernyshevskii, N. G. Polnoe sobranie sochinenji. Vol. 14. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe

izd-vo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1949. 48. Stuart, Mary. Aristocrat-Librarian in Service to the Tsar: Aleksei Nikolaevich Olenin and

the Impernal Public Library. East European Monographs, 211. Boulder, Colo.: East European Monographs, 1986.

49. Golubeva, 0. D. Khraniteli mudrosti. Moscow: Knizhnaia palata, 1988. 50. Imperatorskaia publichnaia biblioteka za sto liet, 1814-1914. St. Petersburg: [n.p.], 1914. 51. Sobol'shchikov, V. I. "Vospominaniia starago bibliotekaria." Istoricheskii viestnik 10,

nos. 10 and 11 (1889): 70-92 and 296-315, respectively. 52. Istoriia Gosudarstvennoi publichnoi biblioteki imeni M. E. Saltykova-Shchednrna. Leningrad:

Lenizdat, 1963. 53. Desiatilietie Imperatorskoi Publichnoi biblioteki (1849-1859). St. Petersburg: V tip. II

Otdieleniia Sobstvennoi E. 1. V. Kantseliarii, 1859. 54. Golubeva, 0. D., and Gol'dberg, A. L. V. I. Sobol'shchikov; 0. D. Golubeva. V. F.

Odoevskii. Moscow: Kniga, 1983. 55. Stuart, Mary. "'A Potent Lever for Social Progress': The Imperial Public Library

in the Era of the Great Reforms." Library Quarterly 59 (July 1989): 199-222. 56. Kalishevskii, A. [Review of Imperatorskaia Publichnaia biblioteka za sto liet, 1814-1914,

St. Petersburg, 1914.] Bibliotekar' 5, no. 2 (1914): 208-1 1. 57. "Polozhenie o upravlenii Imperatorskoiu Publichnoiu Bibliotekoiu." Polnoe sobranie

zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii. 1st ser., v. 31 (1810, no. 24,377), pp. 388-90, and Kniga shtatov, v. 44, pt. 2, p. 182.

58. Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii. 2d ser., v. 6, pt. 2, supplements, pp. 1-2 (1831, no. 4,794).

59. Grigor'ev, lu. V. F. F. Reiss (1778-1852): ocherk zhizni i deiatel'nosti. Deiateli knigi. Moscow: Izd. Vsesoiuznoi knizhnoi palaty, 1963.

60. Shamurin, E. I. Ocherki po istoni bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoi klassifikatsii. Vols. 1-2. Moscow: Vsesoiuznaia knizhnaia palata, 1955-59.

61. Istoriia Biblioteki Akademii nauk SSSR, 1714-1964. Moscow-Leningrad: Nauka, 1964. 62. Stoliarov, Iu. N. "Pervyi rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi bibliotekar' logann-Daniil Shu-

makher." Kniga: issledovaniia i materialy 61 (1990): 116-30. 63. Savel'eva, E. A. "Pervye katalogi Biblioteki Akademii nauk." In Kniga v Rossii XVI-

serediny XIX v.: materialy i issledovaniia, edited by A. A. Zaitseva, N. P. Kopaneva, and V. A. Somov. Leningrad: Biblioteka Akademii nauk SSSR, 1990, pp. 94-108.

64. Koblents, I. N. Andrei Ivanovzich Bogdanov, 1692-1766. Moscow: Izd. Akademii nauk SSSR, 1958.

65. "Bogdanov, Andrei." Russkii biograficheski: slovar'. Vol. 3. St. Petersburg: Tip. Glav- nago upravleniia udielov, 1908, pp. 139-40.

66. Antonovskii, M. I. "Zapiski Mikhaila Ivanovicha Antonovskago." Russkii arkhiv 23, no. 2 (1885): 145-78.

67. S. Tr. [S. S. Trubachev]. "Antonovskii, Mikhail Ivanovich." Russkii biograficheskii slovar.' Vol. 2. St. Petersburg: Tip. Glavnago upravleniia udielov, 1900, pp. 228-29.

68. Olenin, A. N. Opyt novago bibliograficheskago poriadka dlia Sanktpeterburgskoi Impera- torskoi Biblioteki. St. Petersburg: V tip. Gubernskago pravleniia, 1809.

69. Grigor'ev, Iu. V. "A. N. Olenin o klassifikatsii knig." Kniga: zssledovani4a i materialy 59 (1989): 12 1-29.

70. "Nachertanie podrobnykh pravil dlia upravleniia lmperatorskoiu publichnoiu bibliotekoiu." Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi impenii. Ist ser., v. 32, pp. 263-72 (1812, no. 25,069).




71. Efimova, N. A. Chitateli Publichnoi biblioteki v Peterburge i organizatsiia ikh obsluzhivaniia v 1814-1917 gg. Trudy Gosudarstvennoi Publichnoi biblioteki im. M. E. Saltykova- Shchedrina, vol. 6. Leningrad: Gosudarstvennaia publichnaia biblioteka, 1958.

72. Khotiakov, Ia. I. Spravochno-bibliograficheska'ia rabota Publichnoi biblioteki v Peterburge v 1814-1917 gg. Trudy Gosudarstvennoi Publichnoi biblioteki im. M. E. Saltykova- Shchedrina, vol. 7. Leningrad: Gosudarstvennaia publichnaia biblioteka, 1958.

73. Khotiakov, Ia. I. "Pechatnye bibliograficheskie raboty Publichnoi biblioteki v Pe- terburge v pervoi polovine XIX v." Trudy Gosudarstvenno: Publichnoi biblioteki im. M. E. Saltykova-Shchedrina 9 (1961): 153-76.

74. Otchet v upravlenii Imperatorskoiu Publichnoiu bibliotekoiu za [1808-17]. St. Petersburg: Tip. lmperatorskago teatra, 1813-18.

75. Otchet Imperatorskoi publichnoi biblioteki za [1850-69]. St. Petersburg: [various publish- ers], 1851-70.

76. Imperatorskaia Publichnaia biblioteka v epokhu perekhoda v viedomstvo Min'sterstva narodnago prosvieshcheniia. St. Petersburg: V Tip. 1. Ogrizko, 1863.

77. Giliarevskii, R. S. Razvitie sovremennykh printsipov knigoopisaniia: kratkii ocherk. Moscow: Izd. Vsesoiuznoi knizhnoi palaty, 1961.

78. Otchet v upravlenii Imperatorskoiu publichnoiu bibliotekoiu, predstavlennyi za 1814 god. St. Petersburg: V tip. Imperatorskago teatra, 1815.

79. Eikhengol'ts, A. D. "V. S. Sopikov-osnovopolozhnik russkoi bibliografii." Sovetskaia bibliografiia 26 (1949, no. 1): 58-74.

80. "Neopublikovannye materialy, sviazannye s zhizn'iu i deiatel'nost'iu V. S. Sopikova." Sovetskaia bibiografiia 142 (1973, no. 6): 40-70.

81. Sukhomlinov, M. "Bibliograf V. S. Sopikov." Drevniaia i novaia Rossita 1, no. 1 (1876): 6 1-68.

82. Choldin, M. T. "Three Early Russian Bibliographers." Library Quarterly 44 (January 1974): 1-28.

83. Sopikov, V. S. Opyt rossiiskoi bibliografit, ili polnyi slovar' sochinenii i perevodov, napecha- tannykh na Slavenskom i Rossiiskom iazykakh ot nachala zavedeniia tipografli, do 1813 goda. St. Petersburg: V Tip. Imperatorskago teatra, 1813-21.

84. Stasov, V. V. "Vospominaniia gostia Biblioteki." In his Sobranie sochinenti V. V. Stasova, 1847-1886. Vol. 3. St. Petersburg: Tip. I. N. Skorokhodova, 1894, cols. 1512-31.

85. Ivask, U. G. Zhizn'i tnudy Vasiliia Ivanovicha Sobol'shchikova. Moscow: I. E. Bukhgeim, 1914.

86. Stuart, Mary. "The Crime of Dr. Pichler: A Scholar-Biblioklept in Imperial Russia and His European Predecessors." Libraries and Culture 23 (Fall 1988): 401-26.

87. Lincoln, W. Bruce. "Korf, Modest Andreevich." In The Modern Encyclopedia of Russian and Soviet History. Vol. 17. Gulf Breeze, Fla.: Academic International Press, 1980, pp. 177-80.

88. Lincoln, W. Bruce. "Official Propaganda in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Russia: Baron M. A. Korf and The Accession of Nicholas L." Oxford Slavonic Papers, n.s., 21 (1988): 120-30.

89. Korf, M. A. "Iz zapisok barona (vposledstvii grafa) M. A. Korfa." Russkaia stanrna, 1899, no. 11:269-72.

90. "Dopolnitel'noe polozhenie ob Imperatorskoi Publichnoi Bibliotekie i Rumiantsov- skom Muzeumie." Polnoe sobranie zakoov Rossiiskoi impeni. 2d ser., v. 25, pt. 1, pp. 124-25 (1850, no. 23,930).

91. "Materialy dlia novago ustava Imperatorskoi publichnoi biblioteki i Moskovskago publichnago muzeia." Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnago prosvieshcheniia 125, sec. 4 (1865): 1-77.

92. Cornwell, Neil. The Life, Times, and Milieu of V. F. Odoyevsky, 1804-1869. Athens: Ohio University Press, 1986.




93. Stefanovich, V. N. V. V. Stasov (1824-1906): ocherk bibliotechnoi deiatel'nosti. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Vsesoiuznoi knizhnoi palaty, 1953.

94. Imperatorskaia Akademiza nauk, 1889-1914. Vol. 3, pt. 1. Petrograd: Tip. Impera- torskoi Akademii nauk, 1915, pp. 87-121.

95. Stuart, Mary. "Vladimir Stasov and the Professionalization of Librarianship in Rus- sia." Solanus, n.s., 7 (1993): 17-34.

96. Stasov, V. V. "Rumiantsovskii muzei: istoriia ego perevoda iz Peterburga v Moskvu v 1860-1861 godakh." In his Sobranie sochinenii V. V. Stasova, 1847-1886. Vol. 3. St. Petersburg: Tip. 1. N. Skorokhodova, 1894, cols. 1687-1712.

97. Stasov, V. V. "Strannyi biblioman." In his Sobranie sochinenii V. V. Stasova, 1847-1886. Vol. 3. St. Petersburg: V Tip. 1. N. Skorokhodova, 1894, cols. 1531-37.

98. Leich, Harold M. "The Society for Librarianship and Russian Librarianship in the Early Twentieth Century." Journal of Library History 22, no. 1 (1987): 42-57.

99. Gromova, A. A. "Deiatel'nost' pervogo bibliotechnogo obshchestva v Rossii." Trudy Leningradskogo bibliotechnogo instituta im. N. K. Krupskoi 8 (1961): 193-213.

100. Rubanova, T. D. "Pervyi s"ezd rossiiskikh bibliotekarei (80 let spustia)." Sovetskoe bibliotekovedenie, 1991, no. 6:43-51.

101. Bogdanov, P. M. "Obzor dieiatel'nosti Sektsii Bibliotekoviedieniia pri Russkom Bibli- ologicheskom Obshchestvie za 1903-1907 gg." Bibliotekar' 1, no. 1 (1910): 39-46.

102. "Ustav Obshchestva Bibliotekoviedieniia." Bibliotekar' 1, no. 1 (1910): 95-103. 103. "Otchet o dieiatel'nosti Obshchestva Bibliotekoviedieniia za 1-i (1908) god." Biblio-

tekar' 1, no. 1 (1910): 104-21. 104. Derunov, K. "Kosnovaniiu 'Obshchestva Bibliotekoviedieniia' v SP-burgie." Russkaia

shkola, 1908, no. 5/6 (sec. 3): 53-57. 105. Obshchestvo Bibliotekoviedieniia. Trudy pervago vserossizskago s"iezda po bibliotechnomu

dielu. St. Petersburg: Tip. M. Merkusheva, 1912. 106. "Vserossiiskii S"iezd po bibliotechnomu dielu." Bibliotekar' 1, no. 3/4 (1910): 61-69. 107. Gromova, A. A. Bibliotechnoe delo v Rossii (v 1908-1914 godakh). Moscow: Gos-

kul'tprosvetizdat, 1955. 108. Gromova, A. A. "O podgotovke bibliotechnykh kadrov do oktiabr'skoi revoliutsii."

Trudy Leningradskogo bibliotechnogo instituta im. N. K. Krupskoi 4 (1958): 49-60.



Date post:	15-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	mary-stuart
View:	223 times
Download:	5 times

The Evolution of Librarianship in Russia: The Librarians of the Imperial Public Library, 1808-1868

Documents