Journal articles on the topic 'Belarus – History – German occupation, 1941-1944'

Abstract The resistance of the Jews of the Eastern Belarus to the Nazi genocide is a chapter of World War II history to which little attention has been paid. This article deals with the position and resistance of the Jewish population of the eastern regions of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic (BSSR) to the Nazi genocide during the German occupation in 1941–1944. The material presented here is the first attempt towards a comprehensive coverage of the activities of Jews concentrated in places of isolation to resist Nazi actions against the Jewish population. Materials from Belarusian, Israeli, German and Russian archives have substantially supplemented data from the author’s personal archive.

The article investigates features of forced labor in the border territory of Belarus and the North-West of Russia during Nazi occupation of 1941–1944. The Wehrmacht used forced labor both in Germany by hijacking Soviet citizens there, and in industrial enterprises and in agriculture of the occupied territories. The civilian population was involved in the performance of certain work in favor of the occupation authorities. Peasants, in addition to traditional agricultural work and payment of in-kind taxes, were often forcibly involved in performing horse — drawn duties, peat and logging, railway protection, and mine clearance. Citizens were actively used by the occupying authorities to construct defensive structures and to work at industrial enterprises. Refusal to work was punishable by a fine, deprivation of ration cards, corporal punishment, and sentencing to a labor camp or shooting. Forced to work in enterprises, institutions, and agriculture, the population received meager wages and food rations, and the vast majority of workers lived below the poverty line. A special place among the crimes of Nazism in the territory of the North-West of Russia and Belarus, where the occupation went on the longest, is occupied by the forcible deportation of the population to Germany. From some settlements, the occupation authorities sent entire local populations to Germany without regard to age, health, or family circumstances. To provide the Nazi economy with labor, the occupation authorities paid considerable attention to propaganda among the population and the organization of recruitment campaigns. However, this did not contribute to raising the number of volunteers; instead, local residents in the occupied regions sabotaged the orders of the German-fascist command.

During the Second World War, the area of what is today the Białowieża/Belovezhskaya Forest was first controlled by the Soviet Union (in the face of its incursion into Poland in the years 1939‑1941) and then under German Occupation (in the years 1941‑1944). The management of the Forest’s resources during that period has remained one of the lesser-known aspects of this renowned site’s history, hence the justification for the present article considering the scope of exploitation and protection of the Białowieża Forest during the War, on the basis of newly-identified documentation, as well as the results of remote sensing and archaeological resources. In the process, this article is also in a position to address the cognitive potential of sources of these kinds; and there is an expounding of the usefulness of interdisciplinary research when it comes to expanding and fleshing out knowledge of the impacts WW II exerted on the Forest. In the event, our analysis reveals rather similar approaches to the protection and exploitation of the Forest under both Occupants. During the Soviet Occupation, scientists’ efforts at protection could not prevent stands from being exploited at an intensity equivalent to at least 2.5 times the annual increment of wood, even if examples of plunder-felling are left aside. With the arrival of the Germans, the Forest was granted a status as a Third Reich State Hunting District whose consequence was displacement of most inhabitants, but stands were anyway exploited at an intensity equivalent to more than 1.5 times the annual increment of wood – if most probably by way of sanitation cutting alone. A valuable result of studying documentation from the State Archives of the Russian Federation is the way this reveals the aforementioned efforts by nature-conservation institutions and scientists from the USSR to protect the Forest – in the face of intensive utilisation ordered by the authorities of the BSSR and the USSR. Associated data, especially cartographic in nature, combined with the results of remote sensing and archaeological resources to permit development of a historical or archaeological GIS (H-GIS or A-GIS), with this constituting the first spatial database of its type providing for further research into this Forest’s history. The diagnosis further helped indicate areas worthy of future cognitive exploration. Of particular relevance here are changes in the spatial structure of forest reflecting felling by both Occupants; changes in settlement structure resulting from the displacement action followed by post-War re-colonisation of destroyed villages; and identified sites of hostilities. Postulates of the kind set here proved pursuable thanks to a combined analysis of textual, cartographic, remote-sensing and archaeological materials. Of equal further value might be large-scale field survey, e.g. using geophysical methods; as this would serve to augment the inventory of traces of armed conflicts, adding detail to what the authors were able to determine from the research in the state archives of Germany, Russia and Belarus, as well as in the Polish resources of the Archives of New Records and Central Military Archives. Together, such activity has allowed and will allow for a more accurate recognition of the transformations taking place in the Białowieża/ Belovezhskaya Forest during World War II.

Everyday work of Belarusian citizens during the German occupation is explored on the basis of German trophy documents. The article is based on the materials of the Fund 378 of the National Archives of the Republic of Belarus. The documents give an idea of many aspects of occupational life through the prism of the activities of one institution – the Main Railway Directorate «Minsk» and shed light on many «white spots» of the everyday work of the population of Belarus. The presented study aims, first of all, to introduce into scientific circulation a significant set of factual material on the problem of everyday work and the use of local people labour by the occupation authorities. That shows the problem from a new perspective and creates factual basis for further conceptual study of the issue. The German occupation authorities gave exceptional importance to the issue of gaining the support of the population of Belarus. With this purpose, they developed directive documents, analyzed the mood and labour potential of local workers. Using the method of «carrots and sticks», the railway management in occupied Belarus understood that it depended on the local population, therefore, in addition to repressive methods and the organization of the control system, the issues of providing products and creating social guarantees were raised. The wage premiums, bonuses, rewards, delivery of products and delicacies, charity and assistance to the families of employees were supposed to increase productivity and stimulate the work of local railway workers. However, the occupation authorities regularly noted a low desire to work and the escape of local workers to the partisans. The introduction to the scientific turnover of the information of the unique documents of Main Railway Directorate «Minsk» can not only significantly extend the factual basis of the research of the period of German occupation of Belarus, but also pose a number of theoretical questions. New documentary sources make it possible to add to the currently existing assessment of the use of labour by the local population solely as betrayal or forced slave labor. Using new sources and modern methodological approaches, the survival strategies of ordinary people under occupation should be analyzed. Information sources of the сollection of documents of the Main Railway Directorate «Minsk» raise questions about the conditions of survival of local workers at other enterprises, in other fields of labour and regions of the occupied territory of Belarus.

The article deals with the Nazi occupation policy on the border territory of Belarus and the North-West of Russia during the Great Patriotic War. The study of this problem is based on the materials of the Extraordinary State Commission and acts drawn up by the partisan command or underground authorities, as well as on the recollections of eyewitnesses of a later time. Mass graves of victims of Nazism found in Belarus and North-West Russia serve as reminders of the terrible days of the occupation.

When Germany attacked the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941, it also conquered the territory of Estonia by the end of the year. The German occupation administration of the new territories ruled by the Germans needed the help of local residents everywhere. For this purpose, a semi-autonomous (or quasi-autonomous) Estonian Self-Administration was established. Similar administrative bodies were established in Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus as well. Based on previous studies, it is known that the Estonian Self-Administration worked closely with the German occupation administration. Thus, it is partially responsible for crimes committed in the name of the national socialist ideology in Estonia. It is clear that the Estonian members of the organization were German-minded and at least accepted the German rule for the time being. Otherwise, they would not have been able to join the Self-Administration. However, in previous studies, little attention has been paid to how Estonians tried to balance the interests of Germany and Estonia. Based on the preserved archival material, it seems that the Estonian actors also tried to promote the national interests of the Estonians while cooperating with the Germans and working for them. The article is mainly based on the materials of the German Security Police and other German and Estonian archival material. In addition, the presentation analyzes how the Estonians who worked in the organization later described their wartime activities in their memoirs.

The article deals with the problem of policy and propaganda in the field of culture of the German civil administration in the territory of the General District of Belarus. The aim of the research is to analyze the content of German propaganda materials in the field of culture, to determine its main directions, goals and effectiveness, as well as the content of the real occupation policy in the field of culture. Research methods-analysis and synthesis are applied in the article. The researcher comes to the conclusion that the true goals of German policy and propaganda in the field of culture were the desire to provide a calm rear, to attract the population of the district to solve their own economic problems. The author believes that the effectiveness of propaganda was leveled by the extremely brutal occupation regime, the policy of «scorched earth», methods of fighting partisans, recruiting ostarbeiters and partisan counter-propaganda.

The article is devoted to the study of materials of Ukrainian periodicals during the Nazi occupation as important components of coverage of local lore life of the population of Ternopil region during the war. The purpose of the study is а general review of the press during the German occupation of the region and a study of the problem-thematic component of the materials of the local history spectrum on the pages of these publications. The relevance of the study is that this press has recently become available to scholars, so this group of periodicals to this day remains poorly studied in journalism. It is shown that in the materials of local lore the geographical, economic, historical and literary-artistic themes are singled out as dominant. The conducted study showed that local lore in the periodicals of Ternopil region in 1941–1944 was one of the leading, through which the achievements of national thought were spread.

After the German campaign at the beginning of World War II (1939), Poland was divided between nazi Germany which occupied the west and center of the country, and the Soviet Union which occupying the Eastern regions. The controversial relationship with Moscow has seen several diametrical breaks from a positive alliance after the invasion of the Soviet Union by the Axis powers in 1941, to a very critical relationship with the USSR after the revelation of the so-called Katyn massacre in 1943. With the approach of the Eastern Front to the frontiers of pre-war Poland, massive Polish Resistance was also activated to get rid of nazi domination and to restore of pre-war Poland. The neutralization of possible claims by the Soviets on the disputed eastern areas (Western Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania), respectively to prevent the crushing sovietization of Poland, it was also intended to serve a clear and world-wide resistance act in the sense of liberating at least Warsaw from the German occupation. This was to prevent the repeat of the situation in the east of the country, where the Red Army and the Soviet authorities overlooked the merits and interests of the Polish Resistance and Polish authorities. The contribution will therefore focus on the analysis of the causes, assumptions, course and consequences of the ultimate outcome of the unsuccessful efforts of the Armia Krajowa and the Warsaw inhabitants to liberate the city on their own and to determine the free post-war existence of the country.

Between 1941 and 1944, the Spanish Division of Volunteers took part in the Russian campaign as a unit integrated in the German Wehrmacht. Post-1945 war memoirs and even some historians have suggested that the ‘Blue’ Division was exceptional for their benign treatment of civilians and prisoners, distanced from the German War of Extermination. This image has not been subjected to critical enquiry. To what degree were the Spanish troops different from other Wehrmacht troops? Was the collective behaviour of the Spanish soldiers determined by the circumstances they encountered at the front, or was it related to their prior political socialization?

The article examines the phenomenon of Belarusian women's collaboration in the context of the problem of German propaganda in the occupied Soviet territory during the Great Patriotic War. The study was conducted on the materials of the General District of Belarus, chronological framework – 1941-1944. The paper analyzes the materials of propaganda for women and the activities of Belarusian women's collaborationist organizations in the territory of the General District of Belarus. The district occupied about a quarter of the pre-war territory of the BSSR and included mainly western and part of the central districts. The object of the study was German propaganda for women and the occupation policy towards women in the territory of the General District of Belarus. Research methods: analysis, synthesis, comparison. The purpose of the work is to analyze the content of German propaganda for women and the activities of Belarusian women's pro-German associations, to determine their goals and effectiveness. The author comes to the conclusion that the long period of German occupation of a number of Soviet territories, in this case the BSSR, caused the appearance of some specific features of the occupation policy. The head of the German civil administration of the district, Wilhelm Kube, made the main bet on propaganda and encouragement of various kinds of nationalist collaborationist organizations that were supposed to carry out systematic ideological influence on the population of the district. In addition, W. Kube initiated the creation of special "women's" organizations in the district. A special place among them was occupied by the Association of Belarusian Women and the All-Belarusian Women's Committee. In general, the phenomenon of Belarusian women's collaboration had two components – political and cultural education. The first of them was mainly related to the activities of the "Union of Belarusian Youth" (SBM), built on the principle of the German "Hitler Youth". The second component of the Belarusian women's collaboration was cultural and educational, which took place in the context of the policy of "Belarusization". Art exhibitions, contests, concerts were organized under the sign of the national Belarusian symbols. Well-known Belarusian cultural activists, poetesses Natalia Arsenyeva and Larisa Geniyush, have shown themselves in this area. However, the actualization of the "women's issue" in German propaganda, as well as the participation in propaganda actions and campaigns of well-known representatives of Belarusian culture, did not bring the expected results to the occupation authorities. Propaganda contrasted sharply with the realities of the occupation regime. Punitive expeditions against civilians, methods of fighting partisans, the actual genocide of the peoples of Belarus, the looting and destruction of its cultural and historical heritage – all this together devalued the content of German propaganda, made obvious the false imitation nature of the policy of "Belarusization" and the activities of the collaborators themselves.

On the basis of documents from various archives, little-known pages of the history of the Orthodox Church in Belarus during the Great Patriotic War are being investigated. The main directions of activity of the Orthodox clergy during the years of the Nazi occupation, previously not of interest to the national historical science, are revealed. The author reflects the role of individual priests in the normalization and development of parish life and the salvation of parishioners. The examples show the forms of interaction of the Orthodox clergy with partisan and underground movements, the problems of relations with representatives of the occupying power and collaboration.

Summary The article explores the reflection of Lithuanian theatrical activities in the local press during the World War II. As the number of articles shows, theatre was an important part of the dailies’ content. The articles reveal that theatre activities were very important for the expansion of the Nazi culture. One can distinguish three general themes that the articles cover: promotion of Western theatre, especially German, promotion of Lithuanian repertoire and presentation of entertainment theatre. The latter can still be divided into entertainment for German soldiers and administration, and entertainment for Lithuanian audiences. The content of the articles reveals that journalists writing about theatre avoided Nazi propaganda clichés, such as hatred for Bolsheviks and Jews, but these clichés were nevertheless used by the representatives of theatre administrators.

This paper aims to explain why certain elements were present in the expectations of the Estonian people and how, in the end, Estonians perceived the activities of German administration. On the basis of the analysis it is evident that a few central elements were distinguishable. The expectations consisted of several universal elements while others derived their roots from local and time-specific conditions and the history of Estonian-German relations. Similarly, there were remarkable divergences as to how different levels and parts of administration were perceived by the local population. For instance, the highest German representative in Estonia, Generalkommissar Karl-Siegmund Litzmann was seen in a different light than the rest of the administration and different hopes were placed on him. The course of war also brought along changes in opinion and mood of the Estonians. The source material of this study mainly consists of the surveillance reports of the German Security Police and other relevant documents of the German occupation administration, including those of the Estonian Self-Administration. Revealing examples of both good and bad governance exist in the original material.

The article considers the position and activities of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC) under the German occupation. The authors analyzed the documents by Greek Catholics, German and Soviet authorities, and tried to understand the circumstances of the relationship between the UGCC hierarchy and the occupation regime. The transformation of the position of the Greek Catholics towards the German occupation authorities was studied. The work also highlights the social and socio-political activity of the Greek Catholic clergy in Galicia during this period, church activities to support those in need. In addition, we analyzed the connection of the UGCC with the Ukrainian nationalist movement - the church, on the one hand, supported the idea of independence, on the other, condemned terror. Finally, in the article we examined how, under the conditions of the German occupation, the UGCC tried to expand the union to the East, with the support of the Vatican.

In this article, from the standpoint of anthropocentrism, social history, the history of everyday life, the problem of energy supply to residents of Ukrainian cities during the years of Nazi occupation is analyzed. Energy in an industrial society is one of the most important sectors of the economy, ensuring the functioning of industry, transport, water supply and sanitation, lighting and heating of homes. It plays a particularly important role in the life of cities, because the city’s infrastructure is the center of population, industry and transport, high-rise buildings, and its normal operation without electricity is impossible. The study reveals the features of the restoration and operation of power plants, street lighting in cities, the cost of electricity, its availability for different groups of the urban population. Aspects of the functioning of urban electric vehicles are also discussed in the article. It is proven that the lack of electricity was felt throughout the entire period of occupation. Its absence restrained the restoration of communal services. Electricity was used primarily by German military units, Volksdeutsche, enterprises and official institutions. The methods of lighting and heating homes that were used by citizens during the years of occupation are considered. In the most difficult period in the winter of 1942, the local population was completely deprived of the right to use electricity at home. Violent measures (up to the execution) were threatened for violation of the order. The reverse situation was observed among the Wehrmacht soldiers who did not save electricity. In general, energy supply could not meet the needs of either the civilian population or industry, especially in the cold periods of the year. The reasons for this situation were the Soviet scorched earth tactics, the evacuation of all resources to the east of the USSR, the Reich’s policy of looting and removal of electrical equipment, the lack of fuel and the general energy crisis in Germany as a result of the failure of the blitzkrieg. In their turn, the Nazis themselves, when retreating, also resorted to scorched earth tactics, which, along with heavy fighting and moving of the front line, completely deprived the population of electricity at the final stage of occupation and the Soviet-German war.

The history of France's defeat, occupation and subsequent liberation may be read, and written, as a constant struggle for legitimacy. Here the diverse candidates for legitimacy are analysed (Pétain, de Gaulle and the internal Resistance) as well as the agents of legitimation, and the arbiters of that process of legitimation (French society, the German occupier, Britain and the United States). Four successive configurations are distinguished within that struggle for legitimacy: summer 1940 to spring 1941, the time of the defeat; summer and autumn 1941, when French society called into question the legitimacy of the Vichy French State; the crossroads of greatest legitimacy between late 1942 and mid-1943, which also marked the period of greatest fragility for de Gaulle; and spring to autumn 1944, when the key question was which state should be rebuilt.

The Holocaust was one of the major experiences of the populations, both Jewish and non-Jewish, of those European countries that were either part of the Axis or occupied by Nazi Germany. This was certainly the case for the inhabitants of Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina, and Transnistria. These regions remained under Romanian administration from June/July 1941 to spring/summer 1944. The Soviets had seized Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina from Romania in June 1940 under the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. These territories were then reoccupied (“liberated”) by the Romanian and German armies after the German attack against the Soviet Union in June 1941. From 1941 to 1944 they were Romanian provinces ruled by separate highly centralized administrations. Transnistria (meaning literally “territory across the Dniester” in Romanian), which lies between the Dniester and Bug rivers, though never formally incorporated into Romania, was ruled by the Romanians during this period under the agreement with Hitler. Romanian authorities deported practically all Jews from Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina to Transnistria, accusing them of both treason and collaboration with the Soviets in 1940–1941 during the Soviet occupation and hostility towards the Romanian state in general. Some Roma, together with other “hostile elements” from other Romanian provinces, were also deported to Transnistria.

Relevance. The article examines the actual problem of modern Russian historiography – the reaction of the population to anti-Semitic propaganda and the policy of genocide of Jews by the German occupation authorities (using the example of the General District of Belarus). The purpose: the aim of the work is to determine the specifics of the political sentiments of the population of the General District of Belarus during the period of the German occupation of 1941-1944 and its reaction to the propaganda of anti-Semitism and the policy of the Holocaust. Оbjectives: to identify historical factors that have determined the distinctive features of the mentality of the peoples of Belarus and their perception of military everyday life. Methodology: analysis, synthesis, comparison. Results. The specific features of the Belarusian mentality reflected in the perception of the population of the General District of Belarus of anti-Semitic propaganda and the genocide of Jews are determined. Conclusion. the political sentiments of the population of the district were formed under the influence of a number of objective historical factors, which include the long-term cohabitation of Belarusians and Jews, the tolerant perception of the Belarusian population of manifestations of Jewish culture and religion. The general tolerant attitude towards Jewish neighbors on the part of ethnic Belarusians was due both to the fact of their long-term cohabitation and to restrictions on their own ethnic rights both within the Polish state and within the Russian Empire. In addition, there was a rather low level of ethnic consciousness of Belarusians, who often called themselves "tuteyshy", that is, local, as a result, there were no manifestations of radical nationalism and chauvinism in the Belarusian environment. It was these circumstances that largely determined the specifics of the political sentiments of the population of the General District of Belarus. Anti-Semitic propaganda and the policy of genocide of Jews did not find support among Belarusians, most of the manifestations of anti-Semitism were characteristic of the more western regions of the occupied territory of the BSSR, which were not part of the district, with a predominantly Polish population.

The article dwells upon some social and moral consequences of the German-Romanian occupation in the Ukrainian SSR in 1941–1944. The source base are transcripts of conversations conducted by the staff of the Commission on the History of the Great Patriotic War of the Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union with residents of Donbass, Odessa, Melitopol, etc. at the end of 1943 – the first half of 1944. These were people of different ages, professions, social groups who had survived the occupation or had come to these areas immediately after their liberation. The policy of the German and Romanian invaders and their behavior, among other things, had negatively affected the state of legal culture, crime, labor and family relations, and the moral state of society. For example, the phenomenon of bribery had grown dramatically. For some people it was a means of enrichment, while for some others it was a way to survive the inhumane conditions of the occupation. Speculation had acquired a huge scale and had sometimes been a way to survive in the conditions of the socio-economic policy pursued by the invaders. Prostitution, legalized by the occupiers, and the moral corruption and sexual promiscuity imposed by them became a negative moment. These and many other negative aspects required from the Soviet government and from the people additional efforts to overcome the socio-ethical consequences of the occupation.

The author analyzed the daily life of the rural population of the eastern Galicia during the Nazi occupation relying on archival source materials of the periodical press and the previous achievements of historians. It is that today, despite a considerable number of works on the history of the second world war, this subject has not received adequate coverage in the national historiography. The majority of researchers are turning to the study of macro-historical topics. Instead, the study of history "from below" allows historians and society to learn the mechanisms of adaptation of the ordinary people to life in difficult socio-political conditions. The peasants of Galicia with the outbreak of German-Soviet war had hoped to improve the conditions of life and their political leaders – to proclaim an independent Ukrainian State. At the same time, the policy of the German occupiers no different from their predecessors – Bolsheviks. Farmers, deprived of political rights, pay significant taxes, performed a variety of duties while in the atmosphere of constant fear for their own lives. At the same time, gradually adapting to the conditions of the new political regime, people have managed to establish domestic economic life, to organize their own live, to arrange training of their children, leisure activities, etc. The libation of the eastern Galicia by the Red Army meant for local residents not desired freedom but return to life in the face of Soviet totalitarian reality.

The article shows the content of the Nazi occupation policy in the North-West of Russia during the Great Patriotic war. Features of the German command’s agricultural and tax policy in the occupied territory of the region are presented. To supply Nazi Germany and its armies, the economic resources of the occupied territories were used by exporting raw materials, food, equipment, and other material values. The local population was involved in mandatory work at enterprises, or sent to Germany. The occupation policy led to a significant deterioration of living conditions in the North-West of the Russia. The removal of food and warm clothing from citizens, their eviction from their homes, and the lack of medical care contributed to an increase in morbidity and mortality. The article shows the content of Nazi propaganda in the occupied territory of the North-West of the Russia.

During 1941–1944 the German occupation and intelligence services created an extensive network of training centers (schools and courses) in the occupied territories of the USSR. Mostly Soviet prisoners of war were involved in reconnaissance and sabotage work, although a significant number of agents were recruited from the civilian (non-military) population. First, people who were in active or passive opposition to the Soviet regime were attracted: former emigrants, those repressed or dispossessed, ideological opponents, criminals, and others. At the same time, a significant number of agents were recruited from the civilian population who remained in the occupied territories, especially from its most vulnerable categories (women and children). The recruited agents were used to carry out reconnaissance and sabotage missions, both in the rear of the USSR and in parts of the Red Army, and against the resistance movement. On the territory of the BSSR occupied by the Germans, sixteen training centers were opened where saboteur children were trained, and more than twenty were opened to train “agents in skirts”. Similar schools and courses were opened in Russia, Ukraine, and the Baltic states. The Soviet secret services and partisan counterintelligence bodies were well informed about such work of the German secret organs. The performance of agents trained from among the civilian population was low. There were some tactical successes and actions by enemy agents (especially on the eve and during the period of punitive operations), but strategically this work by the Germans actually failed.

In modern historiography there is no study that would give an adequate and precise picture of demographic changes in Odessa`s population during the Second World war. This study analyses existing monographies, data stored in archives of both soviet and Romanian sides and analyzes them in order to create complete overlook of what quantitative and qualitative changes did the population of Odessa went through during the period from 1939 to 1945.We have found out that during the Second World War the original Odessa population decreased more than by half. During the Odessa defense operation the main factor of population reduction was emigration to other regions of Soviet Union. During the Romanian occupation most victims were Jew victims of the Holocaust. When soviet army returned and freed the city, the population suffered losses from the conscription, but in general was growing due to immigration.As a result, we can state that during World War II, Odessa suffered great losses in population. One of the most important changes was a change of qualitative parameter – after war Jews were making much lesser part of the city`s population, which led to major cultural changes in this region in following decades.The study of population dynamics, its structure, number, vital activity of the city of Odessa, the capital of the Romanian-occupied and administered Governorate «Transnistria», a city with specific living conditions, national composition, unique historical experience, gives great space for scientific research. Relevant comprehensive and accurate analysis of migration and population loss in the city of Odessa in different periods of World War II. After all, this aspect is one of the most important components of social history, emphasizes the cultural and anthropological transformations in society as a consequence of war. Particular attention is drawn to the need to use the latest methods of calculating the population of the city on the basis of clerical documents, statistical reports, acts of various commissions that recorded losses and damage. The author makes a comparative analysis of the data of Soviet and Romanian documents, which made it possible to identify some contradictions. At the same time, based on a comprehensive study of all types of documents, the author made reasonable conclusions about the population dynamics of Odessa at different stages of World War II: during the defense of the city, the years of Romanian-German occupation and immediately after the liberation of Odessa from the occupiers.

Yuriy Shumovsky is a famous scientist, ethnographer, archaeologist, and priest who made a significant contribution to the material culture of his homeland. The urgency of the research topic lies in the fact that today’s existing knowledge does not provide full information about the foundation of museology by Yuriy Shumovsky in the Rivne region during the occupation period of 1941–1944. In the modern historiographical science, despite a significant number of publications, there are no scientific studies that would fully summarize and evaluate the importance of Yuriy Shumovsky’s hard work as the main founder of the museology in the Rivne region of this period. The purpose of the study is to disclose fully the participation of Yuri Shumovsky in organizing a museum in Rivne region during the German occupation (1941–1944). The archival documents and memoirs of the scientist concerning the activity of the Rivne Museum of Local History are presented in the article. The methodological basis of the research is the principle of historicism, systematicity and objectivity. The problem-chronological approach is applied while presenting the material. Particular attention was paid to the methodology of working with archival sources. According to the results received after the examination of the source base, a general picture of the functioning of the museum during the occupation period has been reproduced. The cultural-educational and research activity of the museum has been discovered. It included conducting regional studies and researches on the territory of the region and archaeological and ethnographic studies; replenishing museum collections by valuable findings; organizing educational activities; promoting the preservation and protection of the historical monuments, publishing scientific-popular works. Moreover, the staffing structure, financial support and budget of the museum have been examined and discussed. The article also mentions the availability of the museum inventory that has been found which is an important source for restoring information about the number of exhibits of five departments and the extent of the loss of museum valuables. The importance of Yuriy Shumovsky’s persistent work as the main founder of museology in the Rivne region of this period is determined. Yuriy Shumovsky's museological work in a particular collection, classification, conservation and description of exhibits has been also assessed. Photos of museum findings and expositions are presented. Key words: Yurii Shymovskyi, ethnographer, archaeologist, paleomastodon, embroidery, Volhynia, Rivne Regional Museum of Local History.

In this forum onNeighborsby Jan T. Gross (Princeton, 2001), four scholars respond to the book and to the issues of evidence, causality, and interpretation that it raises. Janine P. Holc summarizes the contents and the book's approach and explores the roles of individual choice, on the one hand, and ethnic identity categories, on the other, in Gross's presentation of the causes of the massacre of the Jewish residents of Jedwabne by their non-Jewish neighbors. She argues for an approach to readingNeighborsthat links the emotive mode in which some of the narrative is expressed to a productive engagement with traumatic or violent historical episodes. This type of history resists finality and closure and creates an avenue for active engagement by members of ethnic (or other) communities with violent and traumatic pasts. Wojciech Roszkowski discusses three aspects of the debate onNeighborsin Poland: the credibility of the book, the facts of 10 July 1941 and their moral meaning, and the representativeness of the Jedwabne case and the question of “innocence” or “guilt” of nations. While arguing that the credibility ofNeighborsis low and that Gross's thesis that “one half of the Jedwabne inhabitants killed the other half” has not been proven, he writes that it is impossible to deny Polish participation in the massacre. Yet, as with other documented cases of Polish wartime evildoing, it is unfair to blow this incident out of proportion and produce unwarranted generalizations. Past and present realities are always more complicated than simple stereotypes that “Poles” or “Jews” are to blame or that they have always been innocent. William W. Hagen argues that Gross vacillates between a robust positivism promising that “a reconstruction” of “what actually took place” is possible, such that guilt and motive may confidently be assigned, and an interpretive pessimism suggesting that “we will never 'understand' why it happened.” In his assignment of causality, Gross offers a largely unconnected, in part inferential or speculative, array of determinants and motives. Although some ofthecauses Gross adduces are certainly persuasive, his analysis does not address the Jedwabne perpetrators' and witnesses' perception of the cultural meaning of the inhuman violence their Jewish neighbors were suffering. Hagen offers some suggestive historical evidence on the Poles' subjective response to the Jewish genocide and to their own wartime fate, arguing that the Jedwabne Poles' participation in the mass murder of the Jews must be conceived as a response, mediated by the penetration of ideological anti-Semitism into the countryside, to profound anxiety over the individual and social death menacing Polish identity under Soviet and Nazi occupation. Norman M. Naimark argues that the appearance of Gross'sNeighborshas created an entirely new dimension to the historiography of World War II in Poland. The book demonstrated, as has no other work, the extent to which the Poles were directly involved in the genocide of the Jews. The clarity and force of Gross's presentation provides Polish historiography with an unprecedented opportunity “to come to terms with the past.” The essay also suggests that the Jedwabne massacre needs to be looked at in the context of overall German policy “in the east” and in comparison to similar horrors taking place roughly at the same time in Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, and Latvia. The Nazis intentionally (and surreptitiously) sought to incite pogroms in the region, filming and photographing the horrific events for audiences back home. Their own propaganda about the “Jewish-Bolshevik” menace both prompted and was ostensibly confirmed by the pogroms. In his response, Jan T. Gross replies to Roszkowski's criticism concerning historical credibility.

In this forum on Neighbors by Jan T. Gross (Princeton, 2001), four scholars respond to the book and to the issues of evidence, causality, and interpretation that it raises. Janine P. Holc summarizes the contents and the book's approach and explores the roles of individual choice, on the one hand, and ethnic identity categories, on the other, in Gross's presentation of the causes of the massacre of the Jewish residents of Jedwabne by their non-Jewish neighbors. She argues for an approach to reading Neighbors that links the emotive mode in which some of the narrative is expressed to a productive engagement with traumatic or violent historical episodes. This type of history resists finality and closure and creates an avenue for active engagement by members of ethnic (or other) communities with violent and traumatic pasts. Wojciech Roszkowski discusses three aspects of the debate on Neighbors in Poland: the credibility of the book, the facts of 10 July 1941 and their moral meaning, and the representativeness of the Jedwabne case and the question of “innocence” or “guilt” of nations. While arguing that the credibility of Neighbors is low and that Gross's thesis that “one half of the Jedwabne inhabitants killed the other half” has not been proven, he writes that it is impossible to deny Polish participation in the massacre. Yet, as with other documented cases of Polish wartime evildoing, it is unfair to blow this incident out of proportion and produce unwarranted generalizations. Past and present realities are always more complicated than simple stereotypes that “Poles” or “Jews” are to blame or that they have always been innocent. William W. Hagen argues that Gross vacillates between a robust positivism promising that “a reconstruction” of “what actually took place” is possible, such that guilt and motive may confidently be assigned, and an interpretive pessimism suggesting that “we will never 'understand' why it happened.” In his assignment of causality, Gross offers a largely unconnected, in part inferential or speculative, array of determinants and motives. Although some of the causes Gross adduces are certainly persuasive, his analysis does not address the Jedwabne perpetrators' and witnesses' perception of the cultural meaning of the inhuman violence their Jewish neighbors were suffering. Hagen offers some suggestive historical evidence on the Poles' subjective response to the Jewish genocide and to their own wartime fate, arguing that the Jedwabne Poles' participation in the mass murder of the Jews must be conceived as a response, mediated by the penetration of ideological anti-Semitism into the countryside, to profound anxiety over the individual and social death menacing Polish identity under Soviet and Nazi occupation. Norman M. Naimark argues that the appearance of Gross's Neighbors has created an entirely new dimension to the historiography of World War II in Poland. The book demonstrated, as has no other work, the extent to which the Poles were directly involved in the genocide of the Jews. The clarity and force of Gross's presentation provides Polish historiography with an unprecedented opportunity “to come to terms with the past.” The essay also suggests that the Jedwabne massacre needs to be looked at in the context of overall German policy “in the east” and in comparison to similar horrors taking place roughly at the same time in Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, and Latvia. The Nazis intentionally (and surreptitiously) sought to incite pogroms in the region, filming and photographing the horrific events for audiences back home. Their own propaganda about the “Jewish-Bolshevik” menace both prompted and was ostensibly confirmed by the pogroms. In his response, Jan T. Gross replies to Roszkowski's criticism concerning historical credibility.

In this forum onNeighborsby Jan T. Gross (Princeton, 2001), four scholars respond to the book and to the issues of evidence, causality, and interpretation that it raises. Janine P. Holc summarizes the contents and the book's approach and explores the roles of individual choice, on the one hand, and ethnic identity categories, on the other, in Gross's presentation of the causes of the massacre of the Jewish residents of Jedwabne by their non-Jewish neighbors. She argues for an approach to readingNeighborsthat links the emotive mode in which some of the narrative is expressed to a productive engagement with traumatic or violent historical episodes. This type of history resists finality and closure and creates an avenue for active engagement by members of ethnic (or other) communities with violent and traumatic pasts. Wojciech Roszkowski discusses three aspects of the debate onNeighborsin Poland: the credibility of the book, the facts of 10 July 1941 and their moral meaning, and the representativeness of the Jedwabne case and the question of “innocence” or “guilt” of nations. While arguing that the credibility ofNeighborsis low and that Gross's thesis that “one half of the Jedwabne inhabitants killed the other half” has not been proven, he writes that it is impossible to deny Polish participation in the massacre. Yet, as with other documented cases of Polish wartime evildoing, it is unfair to blow this incident out of proportion and produce unwarranted generalizations. Past and present realities are always more complicated than simple stereotypes that “Poles” or “Jews” are to blame or that they have always been innocent. William W. Hagen argues that Gross vacillates between a robust positivism promising that “a reconstruction” of “what actually took place” is possible, such that guilt and motive may confidently be assigned, and an interpretive pessimism suggesting that “we will never 'understand' why it happened.” In his assignment of causality, Gross offers a largely unconnected, in part inferential or speculative, array of determinants and motives. Although some ofthecauses Gross adduces are certainly persuasive, his analysis does not address the Jedwabne perpetrators' and witnesses' perception of the cultural meaning of the inhuman violence their Jewish neighbors were suffering. Hagen offers some suggestive historical evidence on the Poles' subjective response to the Jewish genocide and to their own wartime fate, arguing that the Jedwabne Poles' participation in the mass murder of the Jews must be conceived as a response, mediated by the penetration of ideological anti-Semitism into the countryside, to profound anxiety over the individual and social death menacing Polish identity under Soviet and Nazi occupation. Norman M. Naimark argues that the appearance of Gross'sNeighborshas created an entirely new dimension to the historiography of World War II in Poland. The book demonstrated, as has no other work, the extent to which the Poles were directly involved in the genocide of the Jews. The clarity and force of Gross's presentation provides Polish historiography with an unprecedented opportunity “to come to terms with the past.” The essay also suggests that the Jedwabne massacre needs to be looked at in the context of overall German policy “in the east” and in comparison to similar horrors taking place roughly at the same time in Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, and Latvia. The Nazis intentionally (and surreptitiously) sought to incite pogroms in the region, filming and photographing the horrific events for audiences back home. Their own propaganda about the “Jewish-Bolshevik” menace both prompted and was ostensibly confirmed by the pogroms. In his response, Jan T. Gross replies to Roszkowski's criticism concerning historical credibility.

In this forum onNeighborsby Jan T. Gross (Princeton, 2001), four scholars respond to the book and to the issues of evidence, causality, and interpretation that it raises. Janine P. Holc summarizes the contents and the book's approach and explores the roles of individual choice, on the one hand, and ethnic identity categories, on the other, in Gross's presentation of the causes of the massacre of the Jewish residents of Jedwabne by their non-Jewish neighbors. She argues for an approach to readingNeighborsthat links the emotive mode in which some of the narrative is expressed to a productive engagement with traumatic or violent historical episodes. This type of history resists finality and closure and creates an avenue for active engagement by members of ethnic (or other) communities with violent and traumatic pasts. Wojciech Roszkowski discusses three aspects of the debate onNeighborsin Poland: the credibility of the book, the facts of 10 July 1941 and their moral meaning, and the representativeness of the Jedwabne case and the question of “innocence” or “guilt” of nations. While arguing that the credibility ofNeighborsis low and that Gross's thesis that “one half of the Jedwabne inhabitants killed the other half” has not been proven, he writes that it is impossible to deny Polish participation in the massacre. Yet, as with other documented cases of Polish wartime evildoing, it is unfair to blow this incident out of proportion and produce unwarranted generalizations. Past and present realities are always more complicated than simple stereotypes that “Poles” or “Jews” are to blame or that they have always been innocent. William W. Hagen argues that Gross vacillates between a robust positivism promising that “a reconstruction” of “what actually took place” is possible, such that guilt and motive may confidently be assigned, and an interpretive pessimism suggesting that “we will never 'understand' why it happened.” In his assignment of causality, Gross offers a largely unconnected, in part inferential or speculative, array of determinants and motives. Although some ofthecauses Gross adduces are certainly persuasive, his analysis does not address the Jedwabne perpetrators' and witnesses' perception of the cultural meaning of the inhuman violence their Jewish neighbors were suffering. Hagen offers some suggestive historical evidence on the Poles' subjective response to the Jewish genocide and to their own wartime fate, arguing that the Jedwabne Poles' participation in the mass murder of the Jews must be conceived as a response, mediated by the penetration of ideological anti-Semitism into the countryside, to profound anxiety over the individual and social death menacing Polish identity under Soviet and Nazi occupation. Norman M. Naimark argues that the appearance of Gross'sNeighborshas created an entirely new dimension to the historiography of World War II in Poland. The book demonstrated, as has no other work, the extent to which the Poles were directly involved in the genocide of the Jews. The clarity and force of Gross's presentation provides Polish historiography with an unprecedented opportunity “to come to terms with the past.” The essay also suggests that the Jedwabne massacre needs to be looked at in the context of overall German policy “in the east” and in comparison to similar horrors taking place roughly at the same time in Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, and Latvia. The Nazis intentionally (and surreptitiously) sought to incite pogroms in the region, filming and photographing the horrific events for audiences back home. Their own propaganda about the “Jewish-Bolshevik” menace both prompted and was ostensibly confirmed by the pogroms. In his response, Jan T. Gross replies to Roszkowski's criticism concerning historical credibility.

In this forum on Neighbors by Jan T. Gross (Princeton, 2001), four scholars respond to the book and to the issues of evidence, causality, and interpretation that it raises. Janine P. Holc summarizes the contents and the book's approach and explores the roles of individual choice, on the one hand, and ethnic identity categories, on the other, in Gross's presentation of the causes of the massacre of the Jewish residents of Jedwabne by their non-Jewish neighbors. She argues for an approach to reading Neighbors that links the emotive mode in which some of the narrative is expressed to a productive engagement with traumatic or violent historical episodes. This type of history resists finality and closure and creates an avenue for active engagement by members of ethnic (or other) communities with violent and traumatic pasts. Wojciech Roszkowski discusses three aspects of the debate on Neighbors in Poland: the credibility of the book, the facts of 10 July 1941 and their moral meaning, and the representativeness of the Jedwabne case and the question of “innocence” or “guilt” of nations. While arguing that the credibility of Neighbors is low and that Gross's thesis that “one half of the Jedwabne inhabitants killed the other half” has not been proven, he writes that it is impossible to deny Polish participation in the massacre. Yet, as with other documented cases of Polish wartime evildoing, it is unfair to blow this incident out of proportion and produce unwarranted generalizations. Past and present realities are always more complicated than simple stereotypes that “Poles” or “Jews” are to blame or that they have always been innocent. William W. Hagen argues that Gross vacillates between a robust positivism promising that “a reconstruction” of “what actually took place” is possible, such that guilt and motive may confidently be assigned, and an interpretive pessimism suggesting that “we will never 'understand' why it happened.” In his assignment of causality, Gross offers a largely unconnected, in part inferential or speculative, array of determinants and motives. Although some of the causes Gross adduces are certainly persuasive, his analysis does not address the Jedwabne perpetrators' and witnesses' perception of the cultural meaning of the inhuman violence their Jewish neighbors were suffering. Hagen offers some suggestive historical evidence on the Poles' subjective response to the Jewish genocide and to their own wartime fate, arguing that the Jedwabne Poles' participation in the mass murder of the Jews must be conceived as a response, mediated by the penetration of ideological anti-Semitism into the countryside, to profound anxiety over the individual and social death menacing Polish identity under Soviet and Nazi occupation. Norman M. Naimark argues that the appearance of Gross's Neighbors has created an entirely new dimension to the historiography of World War II in Poland. The book demonstrated, as has no other work, the extent to which the Poles were directly involved in the genocide of the Jews. The clarity and force of Gross's presentation provides Polish historiography with an unprecedented opportunity “to come to terms with the past.” The essay also suggests that the Jedwabne massacre needs to be looked at in the context of overall German policy “in the east” and in comparison to similar horrors taking place roughly at the same time in Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, and Latvia. The Nazis intentionally (and surreptitiously) sought to incite pogroms in the region, filming and photographing the horrific events for audiences back home. Their own propaganda about the “Jewish-Bolshevik” menace both prompted and was ostensibly confirmed by the pogroms. In his response, Jan T. Gross replies to Roszkowski's criticism concerning historical credibility.

The purpose of the study: to identify information arrays, that reconstructed and interpreted the historical past of Ukrainians, based on the source analysis of the content of German occupation periodicals, thus forming an appropriate model of historical memory, in fact, turning the Ukrainian people into a historical process. The methodology and methodology of research involves a combination of the principles of historicism, objectivity and consistency, as well as historical criticism of the selected basic reconstructions of the past of Ukrainians widely promoted in the occupation period. The study systematizes various publications in the occupation periodicals, highlighting their thematic blocks, specific content, forms of presentation of the standard information materials, which, contrary to the strategic visions of the Third Reich leadership, were directed at the formation of the historical memory of Ukrainians. The author, on a systemic and comprehensive level, investigated the information potential of the main periodicals that were published in all occupation zones of Ukraine, namely: the District «Galicia», the Reichskommissariat «Ukraine» and the Military Zone of Occupation. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the first in modern domestic historiography complex selection of the model of historical memory of Ukrainians, which was formed during the establishment of the German occupation regime. A detailed analysis of the information potential of the content of occupation periodicals indicates that the historical past of Ukrainians was interpreted in terms of the gravity of state tradition and the constant struggle against external enemies. The basic information and thematic blocks that were used in all the occupation zones of Ukraine were the reproduction of the history of Kievan Rus’, Khmelnytsky region and liberation movements of the Cossack era. At the same time, an exclusively negative image of neighboring Moscow and Poland was formed. The internal enemy of Ukraine was declared to be the Jews, against whom the Ukrainians fought in the same way as they fought the Poles and Russians. The events of 1917–1920, when the Ukrainian state perished and was torn apart by neighboring Poland and Bolshevik Russia, were voiced in the context of betrayal by the democratic countries of Europe. The construction of a new national identity for Ukrainians in the context of their spiritual, psychological, historical, cultural, economic, and territorial unity, as well as the reinterpretation of the historical past, consolidated society at that time. This important process for Ukrainians was carried out in unison with the history of the people’s unceasing struggle for their own statehood and their desire to achieve synodality. By successfully manipulating historical facts, German propagandists actually reformatted the historical memory of Ukrainians, programming for the future, constructing and correcting national identity markers that even the following Soviet occupation of the country was unable to erase. However, the historical narrative widely promoted in periodicals downplayed regional differences and social contradictions of Ukrainian society, represented its internal national unity, and was presented equally in all German occupation zones of Ukraine.

In November 1943, shortly after the liberation of the occupied territories by the Red Army, three mass graves with 144 corpses were discovered in a former colony for disabled children in the Zaporizhia region. The disabled inmates had been shot in two mass murder actions by German SS and Wehrmacht units in October 1941 and in March 1943. During the course of the investigations into the case in 1944 by the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD), seven former Soviet employees of the colony, among them four women, were put on trial and convicted for complicity with the Germans in the crime. The trial not only condemned the murder of the disabled, but also revealed their sexual abuse under the German occupation and in Soviet pre-war times. This article combines three different research perspectives. First, the previously unknown context of the crime is described for the first time on the basis of newly accessible Soviet file material from the Ukrainian secret service archives. In the process, the differing logics behind both the locals and Germans’ roles in the events surrounding the murder are brought to light and examined in the broader context of the German occupation of the Ukraine. Second, the legal treatment of the crime by a Soviet military tribunal is viewed against the background of the general prosecution of Nazi criminals and Soviet collaborators in the Soviet Union. Third, the current handling of the crime in the local Ukrainian culture of remembrance is surveyed. This reveals in particular the consequences of the Soviet memory policies that continue to this day.

The Axis campaign in the Balkans resulted in the occupation of Greece (1941–1944) by German, Italian, and Bulgarian forces. During the occupation, a number of ethnic groups raised secessionist demands and aligned themselves with those, who they thought, would better serve their aspirations for greater autonomy. The Muslim minority of Western Thrace stands in sharp contrast to this paradigm, as despite its numerical strength and its proximity with the Turkish “motherland,” as well as its segregation from the Christian majority and the state authorities, it made no organized attempt to secede and followed a pacifist policy. The events of the Axis occupation of Greece have attracted a great deal of academic attention in recent years. The Muslim minority of Thrace by comparison has been the subject of less systematic investigation. In particular, its involvement in these turbulent events has been almost completely neglected by the literature. The present paper seeks to address this gap through the examination of the effect of the Bulgarian occupation on the Muslim population.

Unable to Hate? Some Comparative Remarks on the War Experience of Spaniards and Italians on the Eastern Front, 1941-44 The article addresses the similarities and differences between the Spanish and the Italian war experiences on the Eastern front (1941–1945) from a comparative perspective. Although both contingents, when seen from the German perspective, might have been considered to share similar characteristics, and they implemented relatively benevolent practices of occupation towards Soviet civilians, prisoners of war and Jews, there was also a huge imbalance regarding the figures of soldiers deployed on the East, as well as the numbers of prisoners of war. The Spaniards and the Italians fought on different sectors of the front, and were subject to quite diverse combat conditions, which set the condition for different degrees of brutalisation. Finally, the Italian withdrawal of 1942 left a tragic imprint on the memory of the Russian campaign of the survivors, while a comparable event did not exist in the Spanish case. Yet, the main similarity between the Spaniards and the Italians lies in the narratives and politics of memory regarding their participation at the Eastern front, which were developed by war veterans and the states of both countries during the post-war years. Regardless of the political differences between the Francoist regime and the Italian democracy, an enduring legend in the two countries emerged that presented the invading soldiers as «nice occupants», which were supposedly cleaner than the «clean Wehrmacht», while they attempted to detach themselves from the German war crimes in the East.

The article presents the facts of material damage caused by the German-Romanian invaders to the institutions of the Orthodox Church of Moldova. The analysis of the archives of the Republic of Moldova, the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic and the works of researchers revealed three stages of damage inflicted by the invaders on religious organizations. The total amount of damage amounted to 91.5 million rubles, including church buildings – 22,580,000 rubles (including the churches of Pridnestrovie – 4,192,423 rubles). The invaders destroyed the buildings of 44 churches and 2 chapels, partially damaged 22 churches. Dozens of valuable religious shrines were removed from Moldovan churches and monasteries. The most valuable loss is a copy of the Gerbovetsky Icon of the Most Holy Mother of God (worth 120 mln rubles). The invaders also stole church utensils and priestly vestments. The motive for these actions was the alleged desire to “save” the shrines from destruction by the Bolsheviks. The leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church has repeatedly raised the question of returning the valuables taken by the occupiers to the Romanian side. However, the problem has not been solved, though a small part of the property stolen by the invaders returned to the Moldovan churches.

Проблема дослідження полягає у відсутності знань про конкретний перелік і якість психолінгвістичних інструментів інформаційно-психологічного впливу (ІПВ) у підписах під фотографіями (на прикладі фашистських газет Рейхскомісаріату «Україна»). У статті автор ставить мету ідентифікувати, описати й класифікувати психолінгвістичні інструменти ІПВ в підписах під фотографіями, які були розміщені в газетах, що виходили в період із 1 вересня 1941 до 10 листопада 1944 року на території Рейхскомісаріату «Україна» (далі – РКУ) й фінансувалися фашистським режимом. Дослідник звертається до таких методів: спостереження, класифікація, узагальнення, контент-аналіз, інтент-аналіз, кількісно-якісний метод. Упродовж дослідження автор піддає аналізу 81 підпис під 85 фотографіями, опублікованими в газетах, що виходили в період із 1 вересня 1941 до 10 листопада 1944 року на території Рейхскомісаріату «Україна» й фінансувалися фашистським режимом. За результатами дослідження були описані й класифіковані на 8 груп (та 23 підгрупи) психолінгвістичні інструменти інформаційно-психологічного впливу в згаданих газетах РКУ. Установлено, що в газетах РКУ найчастотнішими є психолінгвістичні інструменти інформаційно-психологічного впливу, які відносяться до груп «Німеччина» (9 підгруп) і «Інші» (6 підгруп). Література References Воропаев С. Энциклопедия Третьего рейха [Текст] / С. Воропаев. – М.: Локид-Миф,1996.Voropayev, S. (1996). Entsiklopediya Tret'yego Reykha [The Encyclopedia of the ThirdReich]. Moscow: Lokid–Mif, 1996. Горевалов С. І. Фотокореспонденти й документальна фотографія періоду Другоїсвітової війни (до 70-річчя Великої Перемоги) / С. І. Горевалов // Наукові запискиІнституту журналістики. – 2014. – Т. 54. – С. 192–195.Gorevalov, S. (2014). Fotokorespondenty i Dokumental'na Fotografíya Períodu DrugoyiSvítovoyi Víyny (Do 70–Ríchya Velikoyi Peremogi) [Photocorrespondents andDocumentary Photograph During World War II]. Naukoví Zapyski Institutu Zhurnalistyki,54, 192–195. Горевалов С. І. Фотожурналістика в системі засобів масової комунікації: єдністьслова і зображення: навч. посіб. / С. І. Горевалов, Н. І. Зикун, С. А. Стародуб. – К.:КиМУ, 2010. Gorevalov, S., N. Zikun, S. Starodub. (2010). Fotozhurnalístika v Systemí ZasobivMasovoyi Komuníkatsíyi: Yedníst' Slova í Zobrazhennya [Photo Journalism in the Systemof Mass Communication: The Unity of Word and Image]. Kyiv: KiMU. Двірна К. П., Левченко Ю. І. Рейхскомісаріати «Україна» та «Остланд» в періоднімецької окупації: особливості територіально-управлінської системи та політики /К. П. Двірна, Ю. І. Левченко // Грані. – № 3(107). – Березень 2014. – С. 106–114.Dvírna, K., Levchenko, Yu. (2014). Reykhskomísaríaty “Ukraína” ta “Ostland” v PeríodNímets'koyi Okupatsiyi: Osoblyvostí Teritoríal'no–upravlins'koyi Systemy ta Polítyky[Reichskomissariats “Ukraine” and “Ostland” During German Occupation: The Specific ofAdministrative Government and Politics]. Grani, 3(107), 106–114. Жуковський А., Субтельний О. Нарис історії України. – Л.: Вид-во НТШ, 1991. –С. 123.Zhukovs'kyi, A., Subtel'nyi, O. (1991). Narys Istoriyi Ukrayiny [An Outline of Histrory ofUkraine]. Lviv: NTS Publishers. Залесский К. А. Кто был в Третьем Рейхе. Библиографический, энциклопедическийсловарь [Текст] / К.А. Залесский. – М.: Астрель, 2003. – 942 с.Zalesskiy, K. A. (2003). Kto Byl v Tret'yem Reykhe. Bibliograficheskiy,entsiklopedicheskiy slovar' [Who Was in the Third Reich]. Moscow: Astrel. Івлєв І. О., Юденков А. Ф. Контрпропаганда підпільників і партизанів на окупованійрадянській території (1941–1944 pp.) // Український історичний журнал. – 1985. –№ 6. – С. 42.Ivlev, I., Yudenkov, A. (1985). Kontrpropaganda Pidpíl'nykív í Partyzanív na OkupovaníyRadyans'kíy Terytoríyi (1941–1944 rr.) [Counterpropaganda of the Underground Activistsand Partisans on the Occupied Soviet Territory] Ukrayinskyi Istorychyi Zhurnal, 6, 42. Коваль М. В. Общественно-политическая жизнь трудящихся Украинской ССР впериод Великой Отечественной войны. – К.: Наук, думка, 1977. – С. 203.Koval, M. (1977). Obshchestvenno–politicheskaya Zhizn' Trudyashchikhsya UkrainskoySSR v Period Velikoy Otechestvennoy Voyny [The Social and Poloitical Life of Workers ofthe Ukrainian SSR During the Great Patriotic War]. Kyiv: Naukova Doumka. Коваль М. В. Фашистская политика духовного, морально-политического подавлениянаселения Украины и ее крах (1941-1944) // Общественно-политическая жизньтрудящихся Украины в годы Великой Отечественной войны: Сб. науч. тр. – К.:Наук, думка, 1988. – С. 157.Koval, M. (1988). Fashistskaya Politika Dukhovnogo, Moral'no–politicheskogoPodavleniya Naseleniya Ukrainy i Yeyo Krakh (1941–1944). [The Fascist Policy ofSpiritual, Moral and Political Oppression of Ukrainian Citizens and Its Collapse]. In:Obshchestvenno–politicheskaya zhizn' trudyashchikhsya Ukrainy v gody VelikoyOtechestvennoy voyny, Kyiv: Naukova Doumka. Літвінюк О. В. Періодична преса як інформативне джерело з історії повсякденногожиття населення Донбасу в роки Великої Вітчизняної війни / О. В. Літвінюк //Історичні і політологічні дослідження. – № 3(53). – 2013. – С. 77–86.Lítvínyuk, O. (2013). Períodichna Presa yak Informativne Dzherelo z IstoriyiPovsyakdennoho Zhyttya Naselennya Donbasu v Roky Velikoíyi Vítchiznyanoyi Viyny[Periodical Press as an Information Source from the History of Everyday Life of theDonbas Inhabitants During the Great Patriotic War]. Istorychni i PolitolohíchniDoslidzhennya, 3(53), 77–86. Мальчевський І. Українська преса під німецькою окупацією // На зов Києва:Український націоналізм у II світовій війні: 3б. статей, спогадів і документів. –Торонто; Нью-Йорк: Новий шлях, 1985. – С. 291–295. Malchevskyi, I. (1985). Ukraíyinska Presa píd Nímets'koyu Okupatsíeyu [The UkrainianPress Under German Occupation]. Na Zov Kyieva: Ukrayinskyi Natsíonalízm u DryhiySvitiviy Viyni, 291–295. Мюллер. Н. Вермахт и оккупация [Текст] / Н. Мюллер. – М.: Вече, 2010.Mueller, N. (2010). Vermakht i okkupatsiya [Vermacht and Occupation]. Moscow: Veche. Немецко-фашистский оккупационный режим (1941-1944 гг.) [Текст] / Ред.С. Бубеншиков. – М.: Политиздат, 1965.Nemetsko–fashistskiy Okkupatsionnyy Rezhim (1941–1944 gg.) [German FascistOccupation Regime (1941-1944)]. (1965). S. Bubenshikov, Ed. Moscow: Politizdat. Німецько-фашистський окупаційний режим на Україні. Збірник документів іматеріалів [Текст] / Ред. П. М. Костриби та ін. – К.:Державне видавництвополітичної літератури, 1963.Nímets'ko–fashists'kiy okupatsíyniy Rezhym na Ukrayini. [German Fascist OccupationRegime in Ukraine] (1963). P. M. Kostribi, Ed., Kyiv: Derzhavne VydavnytstvoPolitychnoyi Líteratury. Преступные цели – преступные средства: Документы об оккупационной политикефашистской Германии на территории СССР (1941-1944 гг.) [Текст] / Сост.Г. Ф. Заставенко. – М.: Экономика, 1985.Prestupnyye tseli – prestupnyye sredstva: Dokumenty ob okkupatsionnoy politikefashistskoy Germanii na territorii SSSR (1941–1944 gg.) [Crimnal Goals – CriminalMeans]. (1985). G. F. Zastavenko, Ed. Moscow: Ekonomika. Стафийчук И. П. Комсомол Украины в партизанском движении 1941–1944 гг.:(Полит, работа среди населения оккупированных районов). – М.: Мысль, 1968. –С. 26.Stafiychuk, I. P. (1968). Komsomol Ukrainy v Partizanskom Dvizhenii 1941–1944 gg .:(Politrabota sredi naseleniya okkupirovannykh rayonov), [The Komsomol of Ukarine inthe Partisan Movement 1941 – 1945]. Moscow: Mysl. Титаренко Д. М. Преса Східної України періоду німецько-фашистської окупації якісторичне джерело (1941–1943 pp.): дис. ... к. і. н.: 07.00.06. / Донецький нац. ун-т. –Донецьк, 2002. – С. 45–46.Titarenko, D. (2002). Presa Skhidnoyi Ukrayiny Periodu Nimets'ko-fashists'koyiOkupatsíyi yak Istorychne Dzherelo (1941–1943 rr. [The Press of Eastern Ukraine DuringGerman fascist Occupation as a Historical Source]. Ph.D. dissertation. Donetsk: Donets'kNational University. Толанд Дж. Адольф Гитлер / Дж. Толанд. – Том 1. – М.– Мн.– Калининград: Интердайджест, 1993.Toland, G. (1993). Adolf Hitler. Vol. 1. Moscow; Minsk; Kaliningrad: Inter-Digest. Толанд Дж. Адольф Гитлер / Дж. Толанд. — Том 2. — М.–Мн.–Калининград: Интердайджест, 1993.Toland, G. (1993). Adolf Hitler. Vol. 2. Moscow; Minsk; Kaliningrad: Inter–Digest. Холод О. М. Преса Рейхскомісаріату «Україна» і сучасні медіа: монографія /О. М. Холод. – К.: КНУКіМ, 2016.Kholod, O. (2016). Presa Reykhskomísaríatu “Ukrayina” í Suchasní Medía [The UkraineReichskommissariat Press and Modern Media]. Kyiv: Kyiv National University of Cultureand Art.. Черняков Б. І. Періодична преса на окупованій території України / Б. І. Черняков //Наукові записки Інституту журналістики [Електронне видання]. – Режим доступу:http://journlib.univ.kiev.ua/index.php?act=article&article=1648.Chernyakov, B. Periodychna Presa na Okupovaniy Terytoríyi Ukrayiny [ThePeridical Press on the Occupied Territory]. Naukovi Zapyski Institutu Zhurnalistyky. Retrieved from: http://journlib.univ.kiev.ua/ index.php?act=article&article=1648. Черняков Б. І. Окупаційна преса Рейхскомісаріату Україна / Б. І. Черняков // 3б.праць Науково-дослідного центру періодики Львівської національної бібліотекиімені В. Стефаника. – Л., 2003. — С. 152–159.Chernyakov, B. (2003). Okupatsiyna Presa Reichskomisariatu Ukrayiny [The UkraineReichskommissariat Press During the Occupation Period]. Bulletin of the Research Centerfor Periodicals of Lviv vasyl Stefanyk National Library, 152–159. Шаповал Ю. Г. Изображение и слово в журналистике / Ю. Г. Шаповал. — Львов :Вища школа, 1985.Shapoval, Yu. (1985). Izobrazheniye i Slovo v Zhurnalistike [The Image and Word inJournalism]. Lviv: Vyshcha Shkola. Die Presse im Reichskornmissariat Ukraine. The State Archive of Rivne Oblast. F. Р-22,on. 1 page. 149. 21–27.

During the war against the Soviet Union in 1941–1945, the German leadership turned to the idea of creating and using formations from the Caucasian and Turkic peoples living on the territory of the USSR to their advantage. They went down in history under the general name of the Eastern Legions. Details of their organization and combat use at the front are reflected in a number of works by researchers. The same cannot be said about the ties of the Eastern Legions with the Soviet partisans of Western Belarus. The purpose of the study is to identify cases of transitions from these units of the German army to the opposing side in this region and determine their total number. The article focuses on the motivation and contribution to the fight in the enemy rear of the former soldiers of the Eastern Legions, and also examines their fate after joining the Red Army units. The scientific novelty lies in considering the issue on the territory of a particular region with its own specifics.

This article is part of the special cluster titled Conceptualizations of the Holocaust in Germany, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine since the 1990s, guest edited by Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe. The Holocaust is the darkest page of Lithuanian history: Nearly the whole Jewish community in Lithuania was destroyed, while a part of ethnic Lithuanians participated in this destruction. This article discusses three layers and periods of the Holocaust in Lithuania that have made a considerable impact on the perception of this traumatic period in Lithuanian society. The first period deals with the Lithuanian–Jewish relations during the German occupation in Lithuania (1941–1944). The second one is related to the Soviet reoccupation of Lithuania and discussions among Lithuanian émigrés in the West (1944–1990), which shaped the history of the Holocaust in Lithuania from the ideological (Soviet) and defensive (Lithuanian émigré) perspectives. The final part of this article discusses the historiography and Holocaust memory in independent Lithuania after the 1990s. Almost thirty years of independence mark not only the re-creation of some old myths and stereotypes in Lithuania, but also new groundbreaking and open discussions in society, concerning the perception of this dark page of Lithuanian history.

The article is devoted to the problem of organizing church services in a Russian provincial church during the Nazi occupation of 1941-1944 on the example of the Church of the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste in the city of Pechora, Pskov region. Archival documents have been deposited in the church - accounting acts and books from the XVIIIth century allowed to trace its history, the organization of church life and the peculiarities of the administration of divine services. The rich library of old printed books that has been preserved allowed us to imagine in detail how the church service was organized, according to which books and notes were sung in the Pechora church in its various periods. Rich singing traditions, supported by talented regents, and a powerful large parish made it possible to preserve the male composition of the singing group, which worked through the entire occupation. Priests and regents were replaced, but the main choral group remained unchanged. The payment for the church choir has changed. Women's voices were transferred to the amateur cast, however, if possible, they were supported financially. Almost all the years of the war, worship was conducted according to the Gregorian calendar at the request of the German authorities, despite the Julian calendar adopted by the Moscow Patriarchate. At the first opportunity, the Russian parish of the Forty Martyrs switched to worship in the old style at the beginning of 1944

Santrauka. Straipsnyje lyginamos kaizerinės (1915–1918 m.) ir sovietinės (1940–1941, 1944–1990 m.) okupacijų laikais Lietuvoje susikūrusios politinės ekonominės Oberosto (Vokietijos Rytų fronto vadui pavaldžios okupacinės zonos, kurios didžiąją dalį sudarė Lietuvos teritorija) ir LTSR politinės ekonominės sistemos. Oberoste Vokietijos Rytų fronto kariuomenės vadai Paulius Hindenburgas ir Erichas Ludendorffas sukūrė pirmąją moderniausiais laikais planuojamo komandinio administracinio ūkio siste­mą, kurios pirmąja laboratorija tapo okupuota Lietuva. 1917–1918 m. tapę faktiniais Vokietijos diktato­riais, Oberosto įkūrėjai Lietuvoje išbandytą ūkio sistemą mėgino įdiegti metropolijoje. Nors šis mėginimas iki galo nepavyko, karinio socializmo kūrimas Vokietijoje jau 1917 m. pažengė pakankamai toli, kad taptų inspiracijos šaltiniu bolševikams, kuriant sovietinį valstybinio socializmo modelį, kuris 1940 m. „sugrįžo“ į Lietuvą. Kai 1990–1992 m. Lietuvoje buvo atkuriama kapitalistinė ūkio santvarka, tai mūsų šalies istorijoje įvyko jau antrą kartą, nes taip pat ir 1918–1922 m. kartu su nepriklausomos valstybės kūrimu buvo atkuriama kapitalistinė ūkio santvarka. Šiuolaikinė Lietuva yra pateikusi okupacijos žalos atlygi­nimo sąskaitą SSRS teisių perėmėjai Rusijai, o tarpukario Lietuva okupacijos žalos atlyginimo reikalavo iš Weimaro Vokietijos. Tačiau jeigu tarpukario Lietuva reikalavo atlyginti tik tiesioginę žalą, šiuolaikinė Lietuva siekia taip pat ir netiesioginės žalos atlyginimo. Pagrindinę šios žalos dalį sudaro 1940–1990 m. Lietuvos negautos nacionalinės pajamos, kurių dydžio įvertinimas priklauso nuo prielaidų, kokie būtų kontrafaktinės nepriklausomos kapitalistinės Lietuvos ūkio raidos rezultatai 1990 m. Straipsnyje patei­kiami du – optimistinis (1990 m. „dausų Lietuvos“ kaip „antrosios Suomijos“) ir pesimistinis (1990 m. kontrafaktinė Lietuva kaip „Baltijos Urugvajus“) modeliai. Pagrindiniai žodžiai: kapitalizmo restauracija, komandinė administracinė sistema, Hindenburgo programa, okupacijos žalos atlyginimas, kapitalizmo įvairovė. Key words: command administrative system, Hindenburg programme, restoration of capitalism, com­pensation of occupation damage, varieties of capitalism. SUMMARY HOW MANY TIMES CAPITALISM WAS RESTORED IN LITHUANIA? ON TWO OCCUPATIONS OF LITHUANIA AND THEIR DAMAGE CALCULATIONS The paper compares the political economic systems under German (1915–1918) and Soviet (1940–1941, 1944–1990 m.) occupations in Lithuania. During the World War I, Lithuania was part of the Ger­man occupation zone Ober Ost, ruled by the higher commando of the German Eastern front (Oberbefe­hlshaber Ost). The German military command of Eastern front under Paul Hindenburg and Erich Luden­dorff used Lithuania as a laboratory for large scale social experiment, creating the first planned command administrative economy in the world. After they were promoted to the higher commando of all German armed forced and established in 1917–1918 de facto military dictatorship over Germany, they made the attempt to establish the Ober Ost system in the metropole. Although the realization of the complete „Hin­denburg programme“ did fail, by 1917 Germany lived under military socialism (Kriegssozialismus) and coercive economy, which became the example and source of inspiration for Bolsheviks constructing Soviet model of state socialism. In 1940, this model came back to Lithuania, history making the full circle. This means that the market transition in 1990–1992 was second restoration of capitalism in Lithuania, because in 1918–1922 the capitalist economic system also was restored here jointly with the establishment of na­tional state. Contemporary Lithuania demands from Russia to pay for damage inflicted on Lithuanian economy by Soviet occupation, and interwar Lithuania did demand the same form Weimar Germany in 1922–1923. However, while interwar Lithuania did ask to pay only direct occupation damage, contem­porary Lithuania demands to compensate also the indirect damage. The main part of this damage is the loss of the national income which Lithuania did not receive in 1940–1990 because the efficient capitalist economic system was replaced by the less productive state socialist system during this time. However, the calculations of the indirect damage incorrectly assume that all varieties of capitalism are more efficient in the developing countries in comparison with command administrative system. The assumption that the variety of capitalism which existed in Lithuania by 1940 (state cooperative capitalism) was not less efficient than Stalinist Soviet socialism is politically correct one, as much as the expectation that under this system independent Lithuania would become advanced technological frontier country („second Finland“) by 1990. Nevertheless, the counterfactual development path of the independent capitalist Lithuania in 1940–1990 would include critical conjunctures and crossroads, which could end with Lithuania entering „low road“ development path. Tellingly, Latin American capitalist country Uruguay (similar to Lithuania and other Baltic culture by its size and economc structure) had higher GDP per capita level than Lithuania in 1940, but by 1990 this level was lower than in Soviet Lithuania. Importantly, Uruguay never was under Soviet Russian occupation, did not construct socialism or suffered war damage. Pastaba: Tyrimas finansuotas Europos socialinio fondo lėšomis pagal visuotinės dotacijos priemonę (Nr. VP1-3.1-ŠMM-07-K-01-010). The research for this paper was funded by European Social Fund under the Global Grant measure (Nr. VP1-3.1-ŠMM-07-K-01-010).

In 1830 farmers constituted the majority of the Greek population. Part of these was small landowners or small livestock farmers, while the largest part of them was landless. The large farms were few. In the 1920s the entrance of 1.5 million refugees from Asia Minor and the departure of 600 thousands Muslims (with the exchange of populations) had as a result the dissolution of the manors, which were in the hands of the Turks. In the year 1950 due to the German occupation (1941-1944) and civil war (1946-1949) the agriculture returned in the level of the 1930s. In 2000, almost twenty years from the Greece’s accession to the EU (in 1981), the massive subsidies and the clear agricultural policy, led to disruption of productivity of rural sector. The estimates for 2030 are formulated both from the changes that have occurred over time and from the consequences of the accession of Greece in the support mechanism (2010), after the silent bankruptcy of the country. The purpose of this paper is to reflect the changes in the social structure of agriculture from independence (1830) until today and to make estimations for 2030. The Greek case differs from that of European countries, as it has not developed the institution of manor and similar as extensive feudal relations. It also differs from the countries of the Balkans as it maintained the institution of the small private property. The methodology of this study uses the historical approach and is based on evaluation of secondary sources, but also in primary research by the author for the economic efficiency of agriculture. It uses also comparative analysis interpreting the social relations that existed in Greece and in the rest of the Balkans. The paper is structured in four parts. The first refers to the history of the research objective. In the second and the third, economic and social differentiations are presented. In the fourth the above findings are evaluated.

In the 1940s, the totalitarian occupying regimes of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union implemented the strictest control and ideological guidance of intellectual and spiritual life of all time in Estonia. Essentially, the mechanisms and results of control are known. Cultural life was subjected to strict pre-censorship and post-publication censorship, and in the Soviet era also to thematic dictation. The intellectual and spiritual resistance of Estonians in those years, in other words their refusal to accept the ruling ideology, has been studied very little. The most widespread way of putting up intellectual and spiritual resistance was to remain silent, in other words to avoid creating works that were agreeable to the authorities. Selective silence, that is the selection of one’s points of emphasis, and splitting, in other words writing for oneself works that one keeps in one’s drawer while at the same time writing for publication in print, are also placed in this category. Recording actual history in diaries through the eyes of contemporaries of events, reading intellectually and spiritually enjoyable literature, and other such actions were ways of putting up intellectual and spiritual resistance. The main objective of this study is to ascertain in historical context the attempts to put up intellectual and spiritual resistance in the comedies from the 1940s by Hugo Raudsepp (1883–1952), one of the most outstanding Estonian playwrights of the 20th century. Ideologically speaking, dramatic literature was clearly one of the most vulnerable branches of literature. It was created for public presentation in theatres, after all, for which reason authors had to be particularly careful in their wording. On the other hand, plays provided both authors and directors with opportunities to conceal messages between the lines. For this reason, theatre became exceedingly popular in Estonia by the final decades of the Soviet era. The ridicule and mocking of the Soviet regime were especially enjoyed. The subjugation of Estonian intellectual and spiritual life to the ideological requirements of the occupying regime was launched at the time of pre-war Stalinism (1940–1941). Its aim was to rear Soviet-minded people who would help to justify, fortify and enhance the Soviet regime. The systematic control of the activities of creative persons and the working out of dictates and regulations were nevertheless not yet completed during the first year of Soviet rule. Many outstanding cultural figures remained silent or earned a living by translating texts. At that time, Hugo Raudsepp wrote the non-political novel Viimne eurooplane [The Last European], which is noteworthy to this day, while his plays from the period of independent Estonian statehood were not staged in theatres. Starting with the German occupation (1941–1944), the point of departure for Hugo Raudsepp was writing between the lines in his comedies in order to get both readers and theatregoers to think and to give them strength of soul. In 1943, he wrote the comedy Vaheliku vapustused [Interspatial Jolts], which has later been styled as a masterpiece. He concealed numerous signs between the lines of this play referring to the fate of a small people, in other words Estonia, between its great neighbouring powers the Soviet Union and Germany. Performances of this play were soon banned. Performances in theatres of all other plays by Hugo Raudsepp were similarly banned, with one exception. During post-war Stalinism in 1944–51, the sovietisation of Estonian cultural life resumed. Hugo Raudsepp did not initially write on topical Soviet themes, rather he sought subject matter from earlier times. His first play from that period entitled Rotid [Rats] (1946) was about the German occupation during the Second World War and it ridiculed the occupying Germans. Raudsepp also skilfully wove messages supporting Estonian cultural identity into the play. The play was staged in the Estonia Theatre but was soon banned. Raudsepp’s second play from that period, Tagatipu Tiisenoosen (1946), earned first prize at the state comedy competition in that same year. The action in the play was set in the period of Estonian National Awakening at the end of the 19th century. It ridiculed Baltic Germans and the behaviour of parvenu Estonians. Similarly to his previous play, he demonstrated nationalist mentality in this comedy by way of nationalist songs. It is noteworthy that by the summer of 1947, Tagatipu Tiisenoosen had also reached expatriate Estonians and it was staged with an altered title as the only Stalinist- era play from Soviet Estonia in Canada (1952), Australia (1954) and Sweden (1956). The thematic precepts imposed on Estonian writers and the mechanism for ensuring that those precepts were followed became even stricter starting in 1947. Raudsepp wrote his next 7 plays on required Soviet subject matter: post-war land reform (Tillereinu peremehed [The Owners of Tillereinu], 1947), monetary reform (Noorsulane Ilmar [Ilmar the Young Farmhand], 1948), kolkhozes (Küpsuseksam [Matriculation Exam] and Lasteaed [Kindergarten], 1949, Mineviku köidikuis [In the Fetters of the Past] (1950) and his so-called Viimane näidend [Last Play], 1950 or 1951), and the beginning of the Soviet regime in Estonia in 1940 (Pööripäevad Kikerpillis [Solstices in Kikerpill], 1949). Hugo Raudsepp skilfully wove words of wisdom for Estonians on surviving under foreign rule through the mouths of his characters, or discreetly laughed about Soviet reality in a way that the censors did not grasp. Post-war cultural policy culminated with the 8th Plenum of the Estonian Communist (Bolshevist) Party (EC(B)P) Central Committee on 21–26 March 1950, where among other things, the EC(B)P Central Committee Bureau was accused of allowing the exaltation of the superiority of Western European science and culture. Cultural figures were branded bourgeois nationalists and they faced serious ordeals. The fate of the great figure of Estonian dramatic literature was very harsh. Hugo Raudsepp was depicted as a ‘fascist henchman’ in 1950. He was expelled from the Estonian Writers’ Union and was deprived of his personal pension. He was arrested on 11 May 1951. Opposition to the Soviet regime was stressed in the charges presented to him. His play Vaheliku vapustused, which the German occupying regime had banned, and his only play that was allowed at that time, Lipud tormis [Flags in the Storm], were named as the primary evidence supporting the charges. Hugo Raudsepp was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment in the autumn of 1951. He hoped to the last possible moment that he would be allowed to serve his sentence in Estonia. Unfortunately, on 18 February 1952 he was sent by train from Tallinn to Narva and on 19 February on to Leningrad. From there his journey took him to Vjatka, Kirov and finally Irkutsk oblast. This great man’s health was poor, and he soon died on 15 September 1952. Very few new literary works appeared in the 1940s. The historical nadir is altogether seen in post-war book production in the era of Stalinism. Estonian theatre was similarly in a most difficult situation due to censorship, shortage of repertoire, scarcity of funding, and layoffs and sackings of theatre personnel. Nowadays the survival of theatre at the time, regardless of difficult times, is appreciated, and actors are recognised for preserving Estonian identity and uniting the people. Hugo Raudsepp’s role as a playwright in supporting intellectual and spiritual resistance to foreign authorities has to be recognised on the basis of his occupation-era comedies. Hugo Raudsepp was one of the most productive authors of his day, writing a total of 11 plays in 1943–51. According to the assessment of scholars of literature, he never once rose with these works to the leading-edge level of his previous works. It was impossible to create masterpieces that would become classics in that time of strict ideological precepts and the monitoring of their observance. Taking into consideration the extremely restricted creative conditions, his works were still masterpieces of their time. As Hugo Raudsepp’s oeuvre demonstrates, spirit still managed to cleverly trump power regardless of censorship and official precepts. The denunciation of Stalin’s personality cult in 1956 once again opened the door to the theatre for Hugo Raudsepp’s best comedies from Estonia’s era of independent statehood. The witticism and laughter of Hugo Raudsepp’s comedies gave people renewed strength of soul.

Problem statement. Conductor is considered to be one of the most prestigious occupation in musical field, so there has always been a certain interest to its history. But, despite a large amount of literature, there are no musicologist’s scientific works, with the systematized and generalized materials on training conducting staff in Ukraine in the 1920s – 1940s. This is partly due to a shortage of primary documents at a difficult historical period: most of them were destroyed by the employees of state institutions before being evacuated behind the lines during the Second World War; the other part was burned down during the hostilities; the third one was lost in the territories temporarily occupied by the fascists. The most important information was restored in the postwar years on the basis of personal documents of the musicians and memoirs of the contemporaries. The names of many other talented performers, who were not high ranked in the hierarchy of Ukraine musical culture, were forgotten. Research and publications analysis. Dealing with this article, the author relied on the research of three scientists. For example, the episode devoted to the history of the Kuban State Conservatory is based on the materials of the book by V. A. Frolkin, PhD in musicology, Professor of Piano Department of Krasnodar University of Culture and Arts. (Frolkin, 2006 : 70–89). The Kharkov period of Ya. Rosenstein’s activity is based on the article by E. M. Shchelkanovtseva, PhD in musicology, Department of Orchestral String Instrument of I. P. Kotlyarevsky Kharkov National University of Arts (Shchelkanovtseva, 1992 : 178–179), as well as the memoirs of conductor S. S. Feldman (Feldman, 2006). Ya. Rosenstein activities in T. G. Shevchenko Kiev Academic Opera and Ballet Theater of the Ukrainian SSR was described in research of Yu. A. Stanishevsky – Doctor in musicology, Professor. (Stanishevsky, 1981 : 533–534). The objective of this article is to create Ya. Rosenstein’s complete and non-biased biography, to analyze various aspects of his activity, and, as a result, to revive the name of a talented musician who was at the forefront of Ukraine musical pedagogy. This is the urgency and novelty of this study. Core material. Yakov A. Rosenstein (1887–1946) – a cello player, conductor, professor. In1907–1912 he studied at St. Petersburg Conservatory specializing in cello. Until February 1917, he had served as a cello player in the Royal orchestra of the Imperial Mariinskyi Theater. During the Civil War, he moved to Yekaterinodar (Krasnodar), where in 1918–1919 he was a director of Russian Musical Society Conservatory. October 1, 1920 witnessed the opening of Kuban State Conservatory. The university was funded from the budget of the People’s Commissariat for Education, so the training of all students was free. Ya. Rosenstein taught the cello class. But at the end of 1921, the Kuban Conservatory was deprived of state funding, and in summer of 1922 the university was reorganized into the Kuban Higher Technical School. (Frolkin, 2006 : 74–89). In autumn of 1923, Ya. Rosenstein moved to Kharkov, where he was a cello player in Russian State Opera orchestra. Later Ya. Rosenstein became a theater conductor. Also, he was engaged in pedagogical activity: in 1925 he became a dean of the instrumental faculty of Kharkov State Higher Music and Drama Courses, and in 1926 he became the head of the courses. According to E. M. Shchelkanovtseva, since 1927, Ya. Rosenstein had been teaching at the Music and Drama Institute (currently – I. P. Kotlyarevsky Kharkov National University of Arts) – Professor of cello class, chamber ensemble, orchestra class, conducting; in 1929 he became an Academic Director. (Shchelkanovtseva, 1992 : 179). Opera-symphonic conducting class at Kharkov Music and Drama Institute, which was opened in autumn of 1927, is a merit of Ya. Rosenstein. During 8 years, he had been training such conductors as: P. Ya. Balenko, M. P. Budyansky, I. I. Vymer, F. M. Dolgova, K. L. Doroshenko, D. L. Klebanov, B. T. Kozhevnikov, V. N. Nakhabin, V. S. Tolba and others. In 1926–1927, the Orchestra of Unemployed Musicians in Kharkov was transformed into the First State Symphony Orchestra of All-Ukrainian Radio Committee, which in autumn of 1929 was integrated with the Ukrainian Philharmonic. In 1929–1932 Ya. Rosenstein acted as a chief conductor. Then he was replaced by German Adler, a graduate of German Academy of Music and Performing Arts in Prague, and a world-famous conductor. In 1937, this musical group was the base for creation the State Symphony Orchestra of the Ukrainian SSR in Kiev (nowadays the National Symphony Orchestra of Ukraine). (Pluzhnikov, 2016 : 358). In 1935–1941 and 1944–1946 Ya. Rosenstein was a conductor of T. G. Shevchenko Kiev Academic Opera and Ballet Theater of the Ukrainian SSR. According to S. S. Feldman, there he brilliantly showed himself in the ballet performances “Swan Lake” and “Sleeping Beauty” by P. Tchaikovsky, “The Fountain of Bakhchisarai” and “The Prisoner of the Caucasus” by B. Asafiev, “Lilaea” by K. Dankevich and “Raymonda” by A. Glazunov (Feldman, 2009 : 102). In summer of 1941 the War began, and the theater troupe was evacuated to Ufa. In 1942–1944 the United Ukrainian State Opera and Ballet Theater was created on the basis of the Kharkov and Kiev theaters in Irkutsk. More than 650,000 people visited 785 performances conducted by N. D. Pokrovsky, Ya. A. Rosenstein and V. S. Tolba in Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk and other cities! In June 1944, the theater troupe returned to Kyiv, and in 1946 Ya. Rosenstein died. He was buried at Baykove cemetery in Kyiv. Conclusion. The creative personality of Ya. A. Rosenstein, a cello player, conductor, teacher, one of the organizers of the First State Symphony Orchestra in Ukraine and the creators of the Kharkov school of orchestra conducting, deserves more attention on behalf of the scientists, musicians and all non-indifferent people. There is hope that Ya. A. Rosenstein’s memory will not be forgotten, and the name of this talented and noble person will take its rightful place in the annals of Ukraine and Russian musical culture.

<p><strong><em>The purpose of the study</em></strong><em> is to compile a database of printed publications of Zhytomyr region from the release of the first edition in 1838 to 2020.</em></p><p><strong><em>Research methodology.</em></strong><em> The following methods were used in the work: general scientific (traditional analysis, synthesis, induction, generalization) and specific scientific (historical, logical, calculations).</em></p><p><strong><em>Results</em></strong><em>. Sources have been collected that make it possible to establish a list of periodicals in the Zhytomyr Region. The following periods of their development have been identified: 1)</em><em> </em><em>the press, which was published during the existence of the Russian Empire (1838</em><em>–</em><em>1917); 2)</em><em> </em><em>the press, which was published during the existence of the USSR (1917</em><em>–</em><em>1991), or Soviet periodicals, with two subperiods: a)</em><em> </em><em>during the existence of the UPR (1917</em><em>–</em><em>1921); b)</em><em> </em><em>during the German occupation (1941</em><em>–</em><em>1944); 3)</em><em> </em><em>the press of independent Ukraine. In total, about five hundred publications have been described and analyzed. Periodicals are divided into five-year periods. The results of the study are presented in the form of a table and diagram.</em></p><p><strong><em>Novelty</em></strong><em>. The database of Zhytomyr Region publications in the Exel spreadsheet format is being compiled for the first time.</em></p><p><strong><em>Practical significance</em></strong><em>. The results can be used: a) to compile the history of the press of Zhytomyr region; b) to study the patterns of development of this press (periods of growth, stagnation and decline; trends of further development); c) to establish a functional relationship between the number of publications and the degree of freedom of the press, which was in the same five-year periods (subject to expert assessments of the degree of freedom of the press); d) in the educational process of training student journalists while studying the history of local (regional) media.</em></p><p><strong><em>Key words</em></strong><em>: periodicals, newspaper, magazine, bulletin, Zhytomyr region, 1838-2020.</em></p>

German propaganda in occupied Belarus (1941–1944) The Germans carefully prepared themselves to govern the conquered regions of the USSR. They used propaganda and terror as instruments of power over the local community. From the very beginning of occupation the inhabitants of Belarus were told that Hitler’s army had come to liberate their nation from the rule of the bloody Stalinist bolshevism. Visual propaganda presented Hitler as a symbol of goodness and honesty, a leader concerned about the nation’s happiness, while Stalin was portrayed as an embodiment of evil, crime and enslavement of millions of Soviet citizens. Pursuing the Third Reich government’s policy, the German propagandists demanded that Belarusians show gratitude for the “liberation” in the form of efficient work and planned deliveries of food supplies and labour. They promised peace and prosperity after the victorious war against the Soviet Union in a Europe of “free nations” led by Adolf Hitler. Huge funds were earmarked for the promotion of the attractiveness of daily life in the Third Reich to encourage Belarusian youth to go there to work in industry, agriculture and as domestic help. The propaganda proved ineffective when it came to provisions and attracting labour to work in the Third Reich. The occupiers were forced to top up the planned but not collected levies by pacifying the areas where the collection was the lowest. Usually these were areas with the most intense activity of the Soviet underground propaganda.

During World War II, the Soviet Union’s food supply was in a state of crisis. Hitler’s army had occupied the agricultural heartlands of Ukraine and Southern Russia in 1941 and, as a result, agricultural production for the entire nation had plummeted. Soldiers in Red Army, who easily ate the best rations in the country, subsisted on a daily allowance of just under a kilogram of bread, supplemented with meat, tea, sugar and butter when and if these items were available. The hunger of the Red Army and its effect on the morale and strength of Europe’s eastern warfront were causes for concern for the Soviet government and its European and American allies. The one country with a food surplus decided to do something to help, and in 1942 the United States agreed to send thousands of pounds of meat, cheese and butter overseas to help feed the Red Army. After receiving several shipments of the all-American spiced canned meat SPAM, the Red Army’s quartermaster put in a request for a more familiar canned pork product, Russian tushonka. Pound for pound, America sent more pigs overseas than soldiers during World War II, in part because pork was in oversupply in the America of the early 1940s. Shipping meat to hungry soldiers and civilians in war torn countries was a practical way to build business for the U.S. meat industry, which had been in decline throughout the 1930s. As per a Soviet-supplied recipe, the first cans of Lend-Lease tushonka were made in the heart of the American Midwest, at meatpacking plants in Iowa and Ohio (Stettinus 6-7). Government contracts in the meat packing industry helped fuel economic recovery, and meatpackers were in a position to take special request orders like the one for tushonka that came through the lines. Unlike SPAM, which was something of a novelty item during the war, tushonka was a food with a past. The original recipe was based on a recipe for preserved meat that had been a traditional product of the Ural Mountains, preserved in jars with salt and fat rather than by pressure and heat. Thus tushonka was requested—and was mass-produced—not simply as a convenience but also as a traditional and familiar food—a taste of home cooking that soldiers could carry with them into the field. Nikita Khrushchev later claimed that the arrival of tushonka was instrumental in helping the Red Army push back against the Nazi invasion (178). Unlike SPAM and other wartime rations, tushonka did not fade away after the war. Instead, it was distributed to the Soviet civilian population, appearing in charity donations and on the shelves of state shops. Often it was the only meat product available on a regular basis. Salty, fatty, and slightly grey-toned, tushonka was an unlikely hero of the postwar-era, but during this period tushonka rose from obscurity to become an emblem of socialist modernity. Because it was shelf stable and could be made from a variety of different cuts of meat, it proved an ideal product for the socialist production lines where supplies and the pace of production were infinitely variable. Unusual in a socialist system of supply, this product shaped production and distribution lines, and even influenced the layout of meatpacking factories and the genetic stocks of the animals that were to be eaten. Tushonka’s initial ubiquity in the postwar Soviet Union had little to do with the USSR’s own hog industry. Pig populations as well as their processing facilities had been decimated in the war, and pigs that did survive the Axis invasion had been evacuated East with human populations. Instead, the early presence of tushonka in the pig-scarce postwar Soviet Union had everything to do with Harry Truman’s unexpected September 1945 decision to end all “economically useful” Lend-Lease shipments to the Soviet Union (Martel). By the end of September, canned meat was practically the only product still being shipped as part of Lend-Lease (NARA RG 59). Although the United Nations was supposed to distribute these supplies to needy civilians free of cost, travelers to the Soviet Union in 1946 spotted cans of American tushonka for sale in state shops (Skeoch 231). After American tushonka “donations” disappeared from store shelves, the Soviet Union’s meat syndicates decided to continue producing the product. Between its first appearance during the war in 1943, and the 1957 announcement by Nikita Khrushchev that Soviet policy would restructure all state animal farms to support the mass production of one or several processed meat products, tushonka helped to drive the evolution of the Soviet Union’s meat packing industry. Its popularity with both planners and the public gave it the power to reach into food commodity chains. It is this backward reach and the longer-term impacts of these policies that make tushonka an unusual byproduct of the Cold War era. State planners loved tushonka: it was cheap to make, the logistics of preparing it were not complicated, it was easy to transport, and most importantly, it served as tangible evidence that the state was accomplishing a long-standing goal to get more meat to its citizenry and improving the diet of the average Soviet worker. Tushonka became a highly visible product in the Soviet Union’s much vaunted push to establish a modern food regime intended to rival that of the United States. Because it was shelf-stable, wartime tushonka had served as a practical food for soldiers, but after the war tushonka became an ideal food for workers who had neither the time nor the space to prepare a home-cooked meal with fresh meat. The Soviet state started to produce its own tushonka because it was such an excellent fit for the needs and abilities of the Soviet state—consumer demand was rarely considered by planners in this era. Not only did tushonka fit the look and taste of a modern processed meat product (that is, it was standard in texture and flavor from can to can, and was an obviously industrially processed product), it was also an excellent way to make the most of the predominant kind of meat the Soviet Union had the in the 1950s: small scraps low-grade pork and beef, trimmings leftover from butchering practices that focused on harvesting as much animal fat, rather than muscle, from the carcass in question. Just like tushonka, pork sausages and frozen pelmeny, a meat-filled pasta dumpling, also became winning postwar foods thanks to a happy synergy of increased animal production, better butchering and new food processing machines. As postwar pigs recovered their populations, the Soviet processed meat industry followed suit. One official source listed twenty-six different kinds of meat products being issued in 1964, although not all of these were pork (Danilov). An instructional manual distributed by the meat and milk syndicate demonstrated how meat shops should wrap and display sausages, and listed 24 different kinds of sausages that all needed a special style of tying up. Because of packaging shortages, the string that bound the sausage was wrapped in a different way for every type of sausage, and shop assistants were expected to be able to identify sausages based on the pattern of their binding. Pelmeny were produced at every meat factory that processed pork. These were “made from start to finish in a special, automated machine, human hands do not touch them. Which makes them a higher quality and better (prevoskhodnogo) product” (Book of Healthy and Delicious Food). These were foods that became possible to produce economically because of a co-occurring increase in pigs, the new standardized practice of equipping meatpacking plants with large-capacity grinders, and freezers or coolers and the enforcement of a system of grading meat. As the state began to rebuild Soviet agriculture from its near-collapse during the war, the Soviet Union looked to the United States for inspiration. Surprisingly, Soviet planners found some of the United States’ more outdated techniques to be quite valuable for new Soviet hog operations. The most striking of these was the adoption of competing phenotypes in the Soviet hog industry. Most major swine varieties had been developed and described in the 19th century in Germany and Great Britain. Breeds had a tendency to split into two phenotypically distinct groups, and in early 20th Century American pig farms, there was strong disagreement as to which style of pig was better suited to industrial conditions of production. Some pigs were “hot-blooded” (in other words, fast maturing and prolific reproducers) while others were a slower “big type” pig (a self-explanatory descriptor). Breeds rarely excelled at both traits and it was a matter of opinion whether speed or size was the most desirable trait to augment. The over-emphasis of either set of qualities damaged survival rates. At their largest, big type pigs resembled small hippopotamuses, and sows were so corpulent they unwittingly crushed their tiny piglets. But the sleeker hot-blooded pigs had a similarly lethal relationship with their young. Sows often produced litters of upwards of a dozen piglets and the stress of tending such a large brood led overwhelmed sows to devour their own offspring (Long). American pig breeders had been forced to navigate between these two undesirable extremes, but by the 1930s, big type pigs were fading in popularity mainly because butter and newly developed plant oils were replacing lard as the cooking fat of preference in American kitchens. The remarkable propensity of the big type to pack on pounds of extra fat was more of a liability than a benefit in this period, as the price that lard and salt pork plummeted in this decade. By the time U.S. meat packers were shipping cans of tushonka to their Soviet allies across the seas, US hog operations had already developed a strong preference for hot-blooded breeds and research had shifted to building and maintaining lean muscle on these swiftly maturing animals. When Soviet industrial planners hoping to learn how to make more tushonka entered the scene however, their interpretation of american efficiency was hardly predictable: scientifically nourished big type pigs may have been advantageous to the United States at midcentury, but the Soviet Union’s farms and hungry citizens had a very different list of needs and wants. At midcentury, Soviet pigs were still handicapped by old-fashioned variables such as cold weather, long winters, poor farm organisation and impoverished feed regimens. The look of the average Soviet hog operation was hardly industrial. In 1955 the typical Soviet pig was petite, shaggy, and slow to reproduce. In the absence of robust dairy or vegetable oil industries, Soviet pigs had always been valued for their fat rather than their meat, and tushonka had been a byproduct of an industry focused mainly on supplying the country with fat and lard. Until the mid 1950s, the most valuable pig on many Soviet state and collective farms was the nondescript but very rotund “lard and bacon” pig, an inefficient eater that could take upwards of two years to reach full maturity. In searching for a way to serve up more tushonka, Soviet planners became aware that their entire industry needed to be revamped. When the Soviet Union looked to the United States, planners were inspired by the earlier competition between hot-blooded and big type pigs, which Soviet planners thought, ambitiously, they could combine into one splendid pig. The Soviet Union imported new pigs from Poland, Lithuania, East Germany and Denmark, trying valiantly to create hybrid pigs that would exhibit both hot blood and big type. Soviet planners were especially interested in inspiring the Poland-China, an especially rotund specimen, to speed up its life cycle during them mid 1950s. Hybrdizing and cross breeding a Soviet super-pig, no matter how closely laid out on paper, was probably always a socialist pipe dream. However, when the Soviets decided to try to outbreed American hog breeders, they created an infrastructure for pigs and pig breeding that had a dramatic positive impact of hog populations across the country, and the 1950s were marked by a large increase in the number of pigs in the Soviet union, as well as dramatic increases in the numbers of purebred and scientific hybrids the country developed, all in the name of tushonka. It was not just the genetic stock that received a makeover in the postwar drive to can more tushonka; a revolution in the barnyard also took place and in less than 10 years, pigs were living in new housing stock and eating new feed sources. The most obvious postwar change was in farm layout and the use of building space. In the early 1950s, many collective farms had been consolidated. In 1940 there were a quarter of a million kolkhozii, by 1951 fewer than half that many remained (NARA RG166). Farm consolidation movements most often combined two, three or four collective farms into one economic unit, thus scaling up the average size and productivity of each collective farm and simplifying their administration. While there were originally ambitious plans to re-center farms around new “agro-city” bases with new, modern farm buildings, these projects were ultimately abandoned. Instead, existing buildings were repurposed and the several clusters of farm buildings that had once been the heart of separate villages acquired different uses. For animals this meant new barns and new daily routines. Barns were redesigned and compartmentalized around ideas of gender and age segregation—weaned baby pigs in one area, farrowing sows in another—as well as maximising growth and health. Pigs spent less outside time and more time at the trough. Pigs that were wanted for different purposes (breeding, meat and lard) were kept in different areas, isolated from each other to minimize the spread of disease as well as improve the efficiency of production. Much like postwar housing for humans, the new and improved pig barn was a crowded and often chaotic place where the electricity, heat and water functioned only sporadically. New barns were supposed to be mechanised. In some places, mechanisation had helped speed things along, but as one American official viewing a new mechanised pig farm in 1955 noted, “it did not appear to be a highly efficient organisation. The mechanised or automated operations, such as the preparation of hog feed, were eclipsed by the amount of hand labor which both preceded and followed the mechanised portion” (NARA RG166 1961). The American official estimated that by mechanizing, Soviet farms had actually increased the amount of human labor needed for farming operations. The other major environmental change took place away from the barnyard, in new crops the Soviet Union began to grow for fodder. The heart and soul of this project was establishing field corn as a major new fodder crop. Originally intended as a feed for cows that would replace hay, corn quickly became the feed of choice for raising pigs. After a visit by a United States delegation to Iowa and other U.S. farms over the summer of 1955, corn became the centerpiece of Khrushchev’s efforts to raise meat and milk productivity. These efforts were what earned Khrushchev his nickname of kukuruznik, or “corn fanatic.” Since so little of the Soviet Union looks or feels much like the plains and hills of Iowa, adopting corn might seem quixotic, but raising corn was a potentially practical move for a cold country. Unlike the other major fodder crops of turnips and potatoes, corn could be harvested early, while still green but already possessing a high level of protein. Corn provided a “gap month” of green feed during July and August, when grazing animals had eaten the first spring green growth but these same plants had not recovered their biomass. What corn remained in the fields in late summer was harvested and made into silage, and corn made the best silage that had been historically available in the Soviet Union. The high protein content of even silage made from green mass and unripe corn ears prevented them from losing weight in the winter. Thus the desire to put more meat on Soviet tables—a desire first prompted by American food donations of surplus pork from Iowa farmers adapting to agro-industrial reordering in their own country—pushed back into the commodity supply network of the Soviet Union. World War II rations that were well adapted to the uncertainty and poor infrastructure not just of war but also of peacetime were a source of inspiration for Soviet planners striving to improve the diets of citizens. To do this, they purchased and bred more and better animals, inventing breeds and paying attention, for the first time, to the efficiency and speed with which these animals were ready to become meat. Reinventing Soviet pigs pushed even back farther, and inspired agricultural economists and state planners to embrace new farm organizational structures. Pigs meant for the tushonka can spent more time inside eating, and led their lives in a rigid compartmentalization that mimicked emerging trends in human urban society. Beyond the barnyard, a new concern with feed-to weight conversions led agriculturalists to seek new crops; crops like corn that were costly to grow but were a perfect food for a pig destined for a tushonka tin. Thus in Soviet industrialization, pigs evolved. No longer simply recyclers of human waste, socialist pigs were consumers in their own right, their newly crafted genetic compositions demanded ever more technical feed sources in order to maximize their own productivity. Food is transformative, and in this case study the prosaic substance of canned meat proved to be unusually transformative for the history of the Soviet Union. In its early history it kept soldiers alive long enough to win an important war, later the requirements for its manufacture re-prioritized muscle tissue over fat tissue in the disassembly of carcasses. This transformative influence reached backwards into the supply lines and farms of the Soviet Union, revolutionizing the scale and goals of farming and meat packing for the Soviet food industry, as well as the relationship between the pig and the consumer. References Bentley, Amy. Eating for Victory: Food Rationing and the Politics of Domesticity. Where: University of Illinois Press, 1998. The Book of Healthy and Delicious Food, Kniga O Vkusnoi I Zdorovoi Pishche. Moscow: AMN Izd., 1952. 161. Danilov, M. M. Tovaravedenie Prodovol’stvennykh Tovarov: Miaso I Miasnye Tovarye. Moscow: Iz. Ekonomika, 1964. Khrushchev, Nikita. Khrushchev Remembers. New York: Little, Brown & Company, 1970. 178. Long, James. The Book of the Pig. London: Upcott Gill, 1886. 102. Lush, Jay & A.L. Anderson, “A Genetic History of Poland-China Swine: I—Early Breed History: The ‘Hot Blood’ versus the ‘Big Type’” Journal of Heredity 30.4 (1939): 149-56. Martel, Leon. Lend-Lease, Loans, and the Coming of the Cold War: A Study of the Implementation of Foreign Policy. Boulder: Westview Press, 1979. 35. National Archive and Records Administration (NARA). RG 59, General Records of the Department of State. Office of Soviet Union affairs, Box 6. “Records relating to Lend Lease with the USSR 1941-1952”. National Archive and Records Administration (NARA). RG166, Records of the Foreign Agricultural Service. Narrative reports 1940-1954. USSR Cotton-USSR Foreign trade. Box 64, Folder “farm management”. Report written by David V Kelly, 6 Apr. 1951. National Archive and Records Administration (NARA). RG 166, Records of the Foreign Agricultural Service. Narrative Reports 1955-1961. Folder: “Agriculture” “Visits to Soviet agricultural installations,” 15 Nov. 1961. Skeoch, L.A. Food Prices and Ration Scale in the Ukraine, 1946 The Review of Economics and Statistics 35.3 (Aug. 1953), 229-35. State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF). Fond R-7021. The Report of Extraordinary Special State Commission on Wartime Losses Resulting from the German-Fascist Occupation cites the following losses in the German takeover. 1948. Stettinus, Edward R. Jr. Lend-Lease: Weapon for Victory. Penguin Books, 1944.

IntroductionThe wandering narrator is a familiar figure in contemporary literature. This narrator is often searching for something abstract or ill-defined connected to the past and the traces it leaves behind. The works of the German writer W.G. Sebald inspired a number of theories on the various ways a writer might intersect place, memory, and representation through seemingly aimless wandering. This article expands on the scholarship around Sebald’s themes to identify two modes of investigative wandering: (1) wandering “in place”, through a city where a past trauma has occurred, and (2) wandering “out of place”, which occurs when a wanderer encounters a city that is a holding place of traumas experienced elsewhere.Sebald’s narrators mostly conduct wandering “in place” because they are actively immersed in, and wandering through, locations that trigger both memory and thought. In this article, after exploring both Sebald’s work and theories of place in literature, I analyse another example of wandering in place, in the Paris of Patrick Modiano’s novel, The Search Warrant (2014). I conclude by discussing how I encountered this mode of wandering myself when in Moscow and St Petersburg researching my first novel, The Memory Artist (2016). In contrasting these two modes of wandering, my aim is to contribute further nuance to the interpretation of conceptions of place in literature. By articulating the concept of wandering “out of place”, I identify a category of wanderer and writer who, like myself, finds connection with places and their stories without having a direct encounter with that place. Theories of Place and Wandering in W.G. Sebald’s WorkIn this section, I introduce Sebald as a literary wanderer. Born in the south of Germany in 1944, Sebald is perhaps best known for his four “prose fictions”— Austerlitz published in 2001, The Emigrants published in 1996, The Rings of Saturn published in 1998, and Vertigo published in 2000—all of which blend historiography and fiction in mostly plot-less narratives. These works follow a closely autobiographical narrator as he traverses Europe, visiting people and places connected to Europe’s turbulent twentieth century. He muses on the difficulty of preserving the truths of history and speaking of others’ traumas. Sebald describes how “places do seem to me to have some kind of memory, in that they activate memory in those who look at them” (Sebald quoted in Jaggi). Sebald left his native Germany in 1966 and moved to England, where he lived until his untimely death in a car accident in 2001 (Gussow). His four prose fictions feature the same autobiographical narrator: a middle-aged German man who lives in northern England. The narrator traverses Europe with a compulsion to research, ponder, and ultimately, represent historical catastrophes and traumas that haunt him. Anna MacDonald describes how Sebald’s texts “move freely between history and memory, biography, autobiography and fiction, travel writing and art criticism, scientific observation and dreams, photographic and other textual images” (115). The Holocaust and human displacement are simultaneously at the forefront of the narrator’s preoccupations but rarely referenced directly. This singular approach has caused many commentators to remark that Sebald’s works are “haunted” by these traumatic events (Baumgarten 272).Sebald’s narrators are almost constantly on the move, obsessively documenting the locations, buildings, and people they encounter or the history of that place. As such, it is helpful to consider Sebald’s wandering narrator through theories of landscape and its representation in art. Heike Polster describes the development of landscape from a Western European conception and notes how “the landscape idea in art and the techniques of linear perspective appear simultaneously” (88). Landscape is distinguished from raw physical environment by the role of the human mind: “landscape was perceived and constructed by a disembodied outsider” (88). As such, landscape is something created by our perceptions of place. Ulrich Baer makes a similar observation: “to look at a landscape as we do today manifests a specifically modern sense of self-understanding, which may be described as the individual’s ability to view herself within a larger, and possibly historical, context” (43).These conceptions of landscape suggest a desire for narrative. The attempt to fix our understanding of a place according to what we know about it, its past, and our own relationship to it, makes landscape inextricable from representation. To represent a landscape is to offer a representation of subjective perception. This understanding charges the landscapes of literature with meaning: the perceptions of a narrator who wanders and encounters place can be studied for their subjective properties.As I will highlight through the works of Sebald and Modiano, the wandering narrator draws on a number of sources in their representations of both place and memory, including their perceptions as they walk in place, the books they read, the people they encounter, as well as their subjective and affective responses. This multi-dimensional process aligns with Polster’s contention that “landscape is as much the external world as it is a visual and philosophical principle, a principle synthesizing the visual experience of material and geographical surroundings with our knowledge of the structures, characteristics, and histories of these surroundings” (70). The narrators in the works of Sebald and Modiano undertake this synthesised process as they traverse their respective locations. As noted, although their objectives are often vague, part of their process of drawing together experience and knowledge is a deep desire to connect with the pasts of those places. The particular kind of wanderer “in place” who I consider here is preoccupied with the past. In his study of Sebald’s work, Christian Moser describes how “the task of the literary walker is to uncover and decipher the hidden track, which, more often than not, is buried in the landscape like an invisible wound” (47-48). Pierre Nora describes places of memory, lieux de memoire, as locations “where memory crystallizes and secretes itself”. Interest in such sites arises when “consciousness of a break with the past is bound up with a sense that memory has been torn—but torn in such a way as to pose the problem of the embodiment of memory in certain sites where a sense of historical continuity persists” (Nora 7).Encountering and contemplating sites of memory, while wandering in place, can operate simultaneously as encounters with traumatic stories. According to Tim Ingold, “the landscape is constituted as an enduring record of—and testimony to—the lives and works of past generations who have dwelt within it, and in doing so, have left something of themselves […] landscape tells – or rather is – a story” (153). Such occurrences can be traced in the narratives of Sebald and Modiano, as their narrators participate both in the act of reading the story of landscape, through their wandering and their research about a place, but also in contributing to the telling of those stories, by inserting their own layer of subjective experience. In this way, the synthesised process of landscape put forward by Polster takes place.To perceive the landscape in this way is to “carry out an act of remembrance” (Ingold 152). The many ways that a person experiences and represents the stories that make up a landscape are varied and suited to a wandering methodology. MacDonald, for example, characterises Sebald’s methodology of “representation-via-digressive association”, which enables “writer, narrator, and reader alike to draw connections in, and through, space between temporally distant historical events and the monstrous geographies they have left in their wake” (MacDonald 116).Moser observes that Sebald’s narrative practice suggests an opposition between the pilgrimage, “devoted to worship, asceticism, and repentance”, and tourism, aimed at “entertainment and diversion” (Moser 37). If the pilgrim contemplates the objects, monuments, and relics they encounter, and the tourist is “given to fugitive consumption of commercialized sights”, Sebald’s walker is a kind of post-traumatic wanderer who “searches for the traces of a silent catastrophe that constitutes the obverse of modernity and its history of progress” (Moser 37). Thus, wandering tends to “cultivate a certain mode of perception”, one that is highly attuned to the history of a place, that looks for traces rather than common sites of consumption (Moser 37).It is worth exploring the motivations of a wandering narrator. Sebald’s narrator in The Rings of Saturn (2002) provides us with a vague impetus for his wandering: “in the hope of dispelling the emptiness that had taken hold of me after the completion of a long stint of work” (3). In Vertigo (2002), Sebald’s narrator walks with seemingly little purpose, resulting in a sense of confusion or nausea alluded to in the book’s title: “so what else could I do … but wander aimlessly around until well into the night”. On the next page, he refers again to his “aimlessly wandering about the city”, which he continues until he realises that his shoes have fallen apart (35-37). What becomes apparent from such comments is that the process of wandering is driven by mostly subconscious compulsions. The restlessness of Sebald’s wandering narrators represents their unease about our capacity to forget the history of a place, and thereby lose something intangible yet vital that comes from recognising traumatic pasts.In Sebald’s work, if there is any logic to the wanderer’s movement, it is mostly hidden from them while wandering. The narrator of Vertigo, after days of wandering through northern Italian cities, remarks that “if the paths I had followed had been inked in, it would have seemed as though a man had kept trying out new tracks and connections over and over, only to be thwarted each time by the limitations of his reason, imagination or willpower” (Sebald, Vertigo 34). Moser writes how “the hidden order that lies behind the peripatetic movement becomes visible retroactively – only after the walker has consulted a map. It is the map that allows Sebald to decode the ‘writing’ of his steps” (48). Wandering in place enables digressions and preoccupations, which then constitute the landscape ultimately represented. Wandering and reading the map of one’s steps afterwards form part of the same process: the attempt to piece together—to create a landscape—that uncovers lost or hidden histories. Sebald’s Vertigo, divided into four parts, layers the narrator’s personal wandering through Italy, Austria, and Germany, with the stories of those who were there before him, including the writers Stendhal, Kafka, and Casanova. An opposing factor to memory is a landscape’s capacity to forget; or rather, since landscape conceived here is a construction of our own minds, to reflect our own amnesia. Lewis observes that Sebald’s narrator in Vertigo “is disturbed by the suppression of history evident even in the landscape”. Sebald’s narrator describes Henri Beyle (the writer Stendhal) and his experience visiting the location of the Battle of Marengo as such:The difference between the images of the battle which he had in his head and what he now saw before him as evidence that the battle had in fact taken place occasioned in him a vertiginous sense of confusion […] In its shabbiness, it fitted neither with his conception of the turbulence of the Battle of Marengo nor the vast field of the dead on which he was now standing, alone with himself, like one meeting his doom. (17-18)The “vertiginous sense of confusion” signals a preoccupation with attempting to interpret sites of memory and, importantly, what Nora calls a “consciousness of a break with the past” (Nora 7) that characterises an interest in lieux de memoire. The confusion and feeling of unknowing is, I suggest, a characteristic of a wandering narrator. They do not quite know what they are looking for, nor what would constitute a finished wandering experience. This lack of resolution is a hallmark of the wandering narrative. A parallel can be drawn here with trauma fiction theory, which categorises a particular kind of literature that aims to recognise and represent the ethical and psychological impediments to representing trauma (Whitehead). Baumgarten describes the affective response to Sebald’s works:Here there are neither answers nor questions but a haunted presence. Unresolved, fragmented, incomplete, relying on shards for evidence, the narrator insists on the inconclusiveness of his experience: rather than arriving at a conclusion, narrator and reader are left disturbed. (272)Sebald’s narrators are illustrative literary wanderers. They demonstrate a conception of landscape that theorists such as Polster, Baer, and Ingold articulate: landscapes tell stories for those who investigate them, and are constituted by a synthesis of personal experience, the historical record, and the present condition of a place. This way of encountering a place is necessarily fragmented and can be informed by the tenets of trauma fiction, which seeks ways of representing traumatic histories by resisting linear narratives and conclusive resolutions. Modiano: Wandering in Place in ParisModiano’s The Search Warrant is another literary example of wandering in place. This autobiographical novel similarly illustrates the notion of landscape as a construction of a narrator who wanders through cities and forms landscape through an amalgamation of perception, knowledge, and memory.Although Modiano’s wandering narrator appears to be searching the Paris of the 1990s for traces of a Jewish girl, missing since the Second World War, he is also conducting an “aimless” wandering in search of traces of his own past in Paris. The novel opens with the narrator reading an old newspaper article, dated 1942, and reporting a missing fourteen-year-old girl in Paris. The narrator becomes consumed with a need to learn the fate of the girl. The search also becomes a search for his own past, as the streets of Paris from which Dora Bruder disappeared are also the streets his father worked among during the Nazi Occupation of Paris. They are also the same streets along which the narrator walked as an angst-ridden youth in the 1960s.Throughout the novel, the narrator uses a combination of facts uncovered by research, documentary evidence, and imagination, which combine with his own memories of walking in Paris. Although the fragmentation of sources creates a sense of uncertainty, together there is an affective weight, akin to Sebald’s “haunted presence”, in the layers Modiano’s narrator compiles. One chapter opens with an entry from the Clignancourt police station logbook, which records the disappearance of Dora Bruder:27 December 1941. Bruder, Dora, born Paris.12, 25/2/26, living at 41 Boulevard Ornano.Interview with Bruder, Ernest, age 42, father. (Modiano 69)However, the written record is ambiguous. “The following figures”, the narrator continues, “are written in the margin, but I have no idea what they stand for: 7029 21/12” (Modiano 69). Moreover, the physical record of the interview with Dora’s father is missing from the police archives. All he knows is that Dora’s father waited thirteen days before reporting her disappearance, likely wary of drawing attention to her: a Jewish girl in Occupied Paris. Confronted by uncertainty, the narrator recalls his own experience of running away as a youth in Paris: “I remember the intensity of my feelings while I was on the run in January 1960 – an intensity such as I have seldom known. It was the intoxication of cutting all ties at a stroke […] Running away – it seems – is a call for help and occasionally a form of suicide” (Modiano 71). The narrator’s construction of landscape is multi-layered: his past, Dora’s past, his present. Overhanging this is the history of Nazi-occupied Paris and the cultural memory of France’s collaboration with Nazi Germany.With the aid of other police documents, the narrator traces Dora’s return home, and then her arrest and detainment in the Tourelles barracks in Paris. From Tourelles, detainees were deported to Drancy concentration camp. However, the narrator cannot confirm whether Dora was deported to Drancy. In the absence of evidence, the narrator supplies other documents: profiles of those known to be deported, in an attempt to construct a story.Hena: I shall call her by her forename. She was nineteen … What I know about Hena amounts to almost nothing: she was born on 11 December 1922 at Pruszkow in Poland, and she lived at no. 42 Rue Oberkampf, the steeply sloping street I have so often climbed. (111)Unable to make conclusions about Dora’s story, the narrator is drawn back to a physical location: the Tourelles barracks. He describes a walk he took there in 1996: “Rue des Archives, Rue de Bretagne, Rue des-Filles-du-Calvaire. Then the uphill slope of the Rue Oberkampf, where Hena had lived” (Modiano 124). The narrator combines what he experiences in the city with the documentary evidence left behind, to create a landscape. He reaches the Tourelles barracks: “the boulevard was empty, lost in a silence so deep I could hear the rustling of the planes”. When he sees a sign that says “MILITARY ZONE. FILMING OR PHOTOGRAPHY PROHIBITED”, the cumulative effect of his solitary and uncertain wandering results in despair at the difficulty of preserving the past: “I told myself that nobody remembers anything anymore. A no-man’s-land lay beyond that wall, a zone of emptiness and oblivion” (Modiano 124). The wandering process here, including the narrator’s layering of his own experience with Hena’s life, the lack of resolution, and the wandering narrator’s disbelief at the seemingly incongruous appearance of a place today in relation to its past, mirrors the feeling of Sebald’s narrator at the site of the Battle of Marengo, quoted above.Earlier in the novel, after frustrated attempts to find information about Dora’s mother and father, the narrator reflects that “they are the sort of people who leave few traces. Virtually anonymous” (Modiano 23). He remarks that Dora’s parents are “inseparable from those Paris streets, those suburban landscapes where, by chance, I discovered they had lived” (Modiano 23). There is a disjunction between knowledge and something deeper, the undefined impetus that drives the narrator to walk, to search, and therefore to write: “often, what I know about them amounts to no more than a simple address. And such topographical precision contrasts with what we shall never know about their life—this blank, this mute block of the unknown” (Modiano 23). This contrast of topographical precision and the “unknown” echoes the feeling of Sebald’s narrator when contemplating sites of memory. One may wander “in place” yet still feel a sense of confusion and gaps in knowledge: this is, I suggest, an intended aesthetic effect by both authors. Reader and narrator alike feel a sense of yearning and melancholy as a result of the narrator’s wandering. Wandering out of Place in Moscow and St PetersburgWhen I travelled to Russia in 2015, I sought to document, with a Sebaldian wandering methodology, processes of finding memory both in and out of place. Like Sebald and Modiano, I was invested in hidden histories and the relationship between the physical environment and memory. Yet unlike those authors, I focused my wandering mostly on places that reflected or referenced events that occurred elsewhere rather than events that happened in that specific place. As such, I was wandering out of place.The importance of memory, both in and out of place, is a central concept in my novel The Memory Artist. The narrator, Pasha, reflects the concerns of current and past members of Russia’s civic organisation named Memorial, which seeks to document and preserve the memory of victims of Communism. Contemporary activists lament that in modern Russia the traumas of the Gulag labour camps, collectivisation, and the “Terror” of executions under Joseph Stalin, are inadequately commemorated. In a 2012 interview, Irina Flige, co-founder of the civic body Memorial Society in St Petersburg, encapsulated activists’ disappointment at seeing burial sites of Terror victims fall into oblivion:By the beginning of 2000s these newly-found sites of mass burials had been lost. Even those that had been marked by signs were lost for a second time! Just imagine: a place was found [...] people came and held vigils in memory of those who were buried there. But then this generation passed on and a new generation forgot the way to these sites – both literally and metaphorically. (Flige quoted in Karp)A shift in generation, and a culture of secrecy or inaction surrounding efforts to preserve the locations of graves or former labour camps, perpetuate a “structural deficit of knowledge”, whereby knowledge of the physical locations of memory is lost (Anstett 2). This, in turn, affects the way people and societies construct their memories. When sites of past trauma are not documented or acknowledged as such, it is more difficult to construct a narrative about those places, particularly those that confront and document a violent past. Physical absence in the landscape permits a deficit of storytelling.This “structural deficit of knowledge” is exacerbated when sites of memory are located in distant locations. The former Soviet labour camps and locations of some mass graves are scattered across vast locations far from Russia’s main cities. Yet for some, those cities now act as holding environments for the memory of lost camp locations, mass graves, and histories. For example, a monument in Moscow may commemorate victims of an overseas labour camp. Lieux de memoire shift from being “in place” to existing “out of place”, in monuments and memorials. As I walked through Moscow and St Petersburg, I had the sensation I was wandering both in and out of place, as I encountered the histories of memories physically close but also geographically distant.For example, I arrived early one morning at the Lubyanka building in central Moscow, a pre-revolutionary building with yellow walls and terracotta borders, the longstanding headquarters of the Soviet and now Russian secret police (image 1). Many victims of the worst repressive years under Stalin were either shot here or awaited deportation to Gulag camps in Siberia and other remote areas. The place is both a site of memory and one that gestures to traumatic pasts inflicted elsewhere.Image 1: The Lubyanka, in Central MoscowA monument to victims of political repression was erected near the Lubyanka Building in 1990. The monument takes the form of a stone taken from the Solovetsky Islands, an archipelago in the far north, on the White Sea, and the location of the Solovetsky Monastery that Lenin turned into a prison camp in 1921 (image 2). The Solovetsky Stone rests in view of the Lubyanka. In the 1980s, the stone was taken by boat to Arkhangelsk and then by train to Moscow. The wanderer encounters memory in place, in the stone and building, and also out of place, in the signified trauma that occurred elsewhere. Wandering out of place thus has the potential to connect a wanderer, and a reader, to geographically remote histories, not unlike war memorials that commemorate overseas battles. This has important implications for the preservation of stories. The narrator of The Memory Artist reflects that “the act of taking a stone all the way from Solovetsky to Moscow … was surely a sign that we give things and objects and matter a little of our own minds … in a way I understood that [the stone’s] presence would be a kind of return for those who did not, that somehow the stone had already been there, in Moscow” (Brabon 177).Image 2: The Monument to Victims of Political Repression, Near the LubyankaIn some ways, wandering out of place is similar to the examples of wandering in place considered here: in both instances the person wandering constructs a landscape that is a synthesis of their present perception, their individual history, and their knowledge of the history of a place. Yet wandering out of place offers a nuanced understanding of wandering by revealing the ways one can encounter the history, trauma, and memory that occur in distant places, highlighting the importance of symbols, memorials, and preserved knowledge. Image 3: Reflectons of the LubyankaConclusionThe ways a writer encounters and represents the stories that constitute a landscape, including traumatic histories that took place there, are varied and well-suited to a wandering methodology. There are notable traits of a wandering narrator: the digressive, associative form of thinking and writing, the unmapped journeys that are, despite themselves, full of compulsive purpose, and the lack of finality or answers inherent in a wanderer’s narrative. Wandering permits an encounter with memory out of place. The Solovetsky Islands remain a place I have never been, yet my encounter with the symbolic stone at the Lubyanka in Moscow lingers as a historical reminder. This sense of never arriving, of not reaching answers, echoes the narrators of Sebald and Modiano. Continued narrative uncertainty generates a sense of perpetual wandering, symbolic of the writer’s shadowy task of representing the past.ReferencesAnstett, Elisabeth. “Memory of Political Repression in Post-Soviet Russia: The Example of the Gulag.” Online Encyclopedia of Mass Violence, 13 Sep. 2011. 2 Aug. 2019 <https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document/memory-political-repression-post-soviet-russia-example-gulag>.Baer, Ulrich. “To Give Memory a Place: Holocaust Photography and the Landscape Tradition.” Representations 69 (2000): 38–62.Baumgarten, Murray. “‘Not Knowing What I Should Think:’ The Landscape of Postmemory in W.G. Sebald’s The Emigrants.” Partial Answers: Journal of Literature and the History of Ideas 5.2 (2007): 267–87.Brabon, Katherine. The Memory Artist. Crows Nest: Allen and Unwin, 2016.Gussow, Mel. “W.G. Sebald, Elegiac German Novelist, Is Dead at 57.” The New York Times 15 Dec. 2001. 2 Aug. 2019 <https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/15/books/w-g-sebald-elegiac-german-novelist-is-dead-at-57.html>.Ingold, Tim. “The Temporality of the Landscape.” World Archaeology 25.2 (1993): 152–174.Jaggi, Maya. “The Last Word: An Interview with WG Sebald.” The Guardian 22 Sep. 2001. 2 Aug. 2019 <www.theguardian.com/books/2001/sep/22/artsandhumanities.highereducation>.Karp, Masha. “An Interview with Irina Flige.” RightsinRussia.com 11 Apr. 2012. 2 Aug. 2019 <http://www.rightsinrussia.info/archive/interviews-1/irina-flige/masha-karp>.Lewis, Tess. “WG Sebald: The Past Is Another Country.” New Criterion 20 (2001).MacDonald, Anna. “‘Pictures in a Rebus’: Puzzling Out W.G. Sebald’s Monstrous Geographies.” In Monstrous Spaces: The Other Frontier. Eds. Niculae Liviu Gheran and Ken Monteith. Oxford: Interdisciplinary Press, 2013. 115–25.Modiano, Patrick. The Search Warrant. Trans. Joanna Kilmartin. London: Harvill Secker, 2014.Moser, Christian. “Peripatetic Liminality: Sebald and the Tradition of the Literary Walk.” In The Undiscover’d Country: W.G. Sebald and the Poetics of Travel. Ed. Markus Zisselsberger. Rochester New York: Camden House, 2010. 37–62. Nora, Pierre. “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Memoire.” Representations 26: (Spring 1989): 7–24.Polster, Heike. The Aesthetics of Passage: The Imag(in)ed Experience of Time in Thomas Lehr, W.G. Sebald, and Peter Handke. Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann, 2009.Sebald, W.G. The Rings of Saturn. Trans. Michael Hulse. London: Vintage, 2002. ———. Vertigo. Trans. Michael Hulse. London: Vintage, 2002.Whitehead, Anne. Trauma Fiction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004.