Similarities and Differences Between the Imperial and Early Soviet Commemorative Practices (The Case of Dmytro Bahalii and His Anniversaries)

Abstract

The article analyzes the observance of anniversaries of the prominent Ukrainian historian, educator, academic organizer, and public figure Academician Dmytro Bahalii as a kind of ‘serial case study’ in the evolution of commemorative practices. The author identifies continuity and change in the celebration of the scholar’s anniversaries during the imperial era (in 1905 and 1910) and in the early Soviet period (1927). It is found that all such occasions included ceremonial events (1905, 1910, 1927) and the publication of anniversary-themed articles dedicated to the renowned historian (some of them were printed in later collections, in 1906, 1912, 1927, and 1929). Bahalii’s anniversaries were not publicly observed at all in 1915 and the early 1920s, which can be explained both by changes in commemorative practices and by the difficult realities of the moment – World War I and political upheavals that ended in revolutions, civil wars, and the collapse of the Russian Empire. During the imperial era, it was customary to observe anniversaries of the beginning of academic career. In Soviet times, the most important anniversaries were those of birth. The seventieth anniversary of the birth of Dmytro Bahalii in 1927 stands out for the broadest press coverage and largest number of dedicated articles and ceremonial gatherings. In addition, the 1927 anniversary was marked by the publication of the scholar’s memoir Autobiography: Fifty Years of Safeguarding Ukrainian Science and a collection of works by other researchers on subjects closely related to Bahalii’s interests. The materials of the 1927 celebration were published in 1929. The pinnacle of the Soviet-era celebration of Bahalii’s life and work was the decision of the government of the Ukrainian SSR from 26 November 1927 to publish his collected works, rename the Department of the History of Ukrainian Culture in his honor, allocate space for the library that Bahalii had donated to the department, and grant him a personal pension. The 1932 anniversary was not observed on a large scale for two reasons: the historian’s death in February 1932 and active criticism (since 1929) of his apolitical stance. The publication in 1932 of several articles dedicated to Bahalii can be viewed as a continuation of the pre-revolutionary academic tradition.