Development of Archiving In the Russian Province in the End of XIX Century-1930 s ( Case Study : the Kazan Province and Tatar Republic )

Relevance of the study is conditioned by the fact that study of archiving history at regional level is important for the very sectoral science of archive studies, as well as for institutional history of Russia. In this connection this article is aimed at study of experience of formation and evolution of archiving in Tatarstan in the end of XIX century – 30s of ХХ century, since basic principles of the Russian archiving organization were developed and originality of its development in the republic was revealed precisely in this time, and correlating its features with common features peculiar to the Russian archiving in general is a relevant task. The object of this article is analyzing the trends of archiving development at All-Russian regional scale based on the materials of the Kazan Province and Tatar Republic. The historical-comparative method allowing to compare regional experience to the All-Russian one on the basis of history sources, is the leading approach to research of this problem. Results evidencing the influence of public, economic, political and cultural processes which occurred in the Russian Empire in the late imperal period and the first decades of the Soviet government on the process of formation of the very archive establishments structures and on formation of office work and archiving culture, are presented in the article. Materials of the article represent value for studies of institutional history of the late imperal period and the first decades of the Soviet government in the Russian history.


Background
At the moment the national archives go through a new stage of their development related to overcoming of secrecy of many archive funds since the time of the Soviet government, weak consideration of legal fundamentals of archiving functioning in the Russian Federation, insufficient financing of an archive service, underestimation of role of historical documents in reconstruction of authentic image of the past.
The archival documents are important for not only historian specialists, but many other categories of population of the Russian Federation.Only employees of state and department archives of the Russian Federation are able to restore and confirm officially the a work experience in the enterprise, organization, institution, can find out about fate of relatives who died on battle fields of the Great Patriotic War or in the system of Chief Political Administration -the Unified State Political Administration -People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs -the Ministry of State Security (CPA -USPA -PCIA -MSS) and answer a number of other questions.The archival document is not only a paper, scroll, tape recorder or a cine film stored in "dusty" archives, but a witness of an epoch that allows to connect the past and the present in the name of future.In that regard interest in history of archive establishments increases more than ever before at the All-Russian and regional level.

Status of a Problem
Several concepts for designation of this sphere of activity, such as: "science of archives", "archiving", "archive studies", are mentioned in the studies on issues of organization and functioning of archives.What is implied by these concepts, are they identical or do they signify various aspects of study of archives activity?
In the national reference-encyclopedic literature archive studies or science of archives were first mentioned in the encyclopedia dictionary by F.A. Brockhaus andI.A. Efron (1890 -1907).It is by no means accidental because the Professor I.E.Andreevsky -the author of "Science of Archives" lecture course which came out in 1885 -1887, was the chief editor of the encyclopedia dictionary.Since that time the concept "archive studies" is mentioned in some other encyclopedia editions as well (Yuzhakov & Milyukov, 1900).
But beginning with 1910s and after 1911 (according to the data of the national researcher T.I.Khorkhordina), this term was no longer used in the national science.There is no mention about archive studies in any Soviet encyclopedia edition (from the Great Soviet Encyclopedia edited by O.Yu.Schmidt (1047) which came out in 1926 -1947, to dictionaries of 1980s, including the Soviet Historical Encyclopedia edited by E.M. Zhukov).It is replaced by the term "theory and practice (technique and methodology) of archiving", scientific essence whereof was not defined.
In the Soviet Encyclopedia Dictionary (1983) the term "archive studies" is not defined as either science or a scientific or academic discipline.This dictionary contains the following definition: "Archive studies are engaged in development of methods of collection, systematization, and storage of documents, study of the history of archiving organization."Even the first specialized research institute in the world founded in the USSR in 1966 was called "All-Union Research Institute of Document Studies and Archiving", instead of the name " All-Union Research Institute of Archive Studies" proposed by its future director V.V. Maksakov.In 1980s attempts were made in the USSR (in particular, by V.N.Avtokratov -1983) for theoretical archive studies to be revived as a fundamental scientific discipline which would consider integral nature of archive studies as a history of science about archives and formation of its theoretical base -doctrine of archive fund as a natural history organism.But they failed.
At the present moment, some national researchers, in particular T.I.Khorkhordina (1996) and the others consider that archive studies lost its scientific standards as science.They relate this circumstance with the fact that in the proper time the state machinery imposed own "office work", institutional approach to archivists as to the "depositary" of department papers instead of a broader view on archives as a materially fixed image of evolutionary and co-existential unity of mankind.This thought is not new and original to the full extent, since a number of similar thoughts was expressed already in the period of emergence of the national archive studies.In particular, A.P. Voronov (1904) specified in the "Archive Studies" textbook that "the library is something, whereas the archive is someone", as well as spoke of eternally living essence of the archive organisms which must continue to live in archives on their own.Professor I.E.Andreevsky (1882) indicated in his paper "Science about Archives" published already in 1880s that "science about archives sought to give unity to all four views of archives (law, government, purely history and private archives) at that time.Achievement of this in a separate country can have lead to togetherness of archives of the whole world, being the provision of future scientific works.
One of the last national researchers who tried to join humanitarian principles of archive construction into harmonious science was I.L. Mayakovsky.In 1920s he tried to unite all "cultural strengths of Russia" over the idea of creating of a multilevel system of state, department, family and church archives, i.e. of all documentary funds and collections reflecting material and mental human life.But this attempt was also stopped on the part of the authority.
In modern national archive studies two basic tendencies are opposed to each other in interpretation of archiving: 1) archiving is an independent scientific discipline; 2) archiving is activity on service of requirements, firstly of government institutions for information contained in archival documents.
The latter approach found the legal enshrinement, in particular, in the document "Fundamentals of Legislation of the Russian Federation on the Archive Fund of the Russian Federation and Archives", the concept "archiving" is defined as activity on organization of storage, recording, and use of archival documents.
Thus one can state not only ambiguity of interpretations of "archiving" concept, but uncertainty of its future development.

The Research Hypothesis
Some western specialists state the following regarding the question about "national archives": as depositaries of history the modern archives along with libraries and museums have several important macro-social functions.Above all they help to save collective national memory and create national identification in this way, making own contribution to forming of national consciousness, some sense of moral solidarity (Echo of Centuries, 2000).Pre-revolutionary Russia was one of few large European states (together with Austria-Hungary) where centralization of archiving was not performed.It evidenced slow economic development, as well as low level of administration culture.Departmentalism of archives of governmental institutions, complete independence of archives of estate institutions and organizations, private and stock enterprises, and banks, religious institutions, and many archives "of personal origin" along with absence of legislation on protection and establishment of archives and special governmental institution for their management -it was just that incomplete picture of "archive formation failure", which we observe on the border of XIX -XX centuries in Russia.When speaking of the first activities of the Soviet authority on centralization of archiving in Russia, we should particularly note role of the Russian intellectuals who by insistent demands prompted central and local authorities to act more decisively in salvation of the archive heritage.It was shown very vividly in the course of work of the North-East Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, and of the Kazan Province Archive in 1919-1920.In the subsequent period -in the end of 1920s and 1930s there was a whole range of negative trends, one of which was maximally pragmatic attitude towards archival documents, striving to extract, first of all, material utility from archives which was most vividly expressed in the so-called "waste paper campaigns" .General negative attitude towards archives was conditioned by spirit of that time with its saving and pragmatism regime, striving to get profit, as they say, "now and at once".Radical, sharp change which occurred in political and public-economical spheres of the Soviet society development led to the fact that respectful attitude towards archives and archive documents not already established in consciousness of the broad masses underwent serious tests.

The Objectives of the Research
In the course of research the following problems were resolved: 1.To define specific character of archiving development in the Kazan Province in context of the All-Russian situation; to consider activity of scientific societies of the Kazan Province on collection and study of written sources in 70s of XIX century -the beginning of XX century.
2. To analyze nature of interaction of basic organizational and archive study tendencies of prerevolutionary and Soviet archiving in the republic; to show ratio of traditions and innovations in archiving of Tatarstan in 1920 -30s.
3. To define the main stages of formation and evolution of the Soviet archiving in Tatarstan, to give their characteristics, to reveal factors which conditioned features of each of them and overall orientation of development.

Theoretical and Empirical Methods
General science theoretical methods of analysis, synthesis, analogy, as well as special empirical methods of classification, historical-comparative method were used for testing of the hypothesis.

The Basis of the Research
Regional archives of Tatarstan of the end of XIX century -30's of XX century became basis of the study, the periods representing an example of the Russian system of archive institutions of the late imperial Russia -modernization of the first decades of the Soviet authority.

The Stages of the Research
Research was conducted in three stages: In the first stage we selected archival documents of those institutions and organizations which most vividly proved themselves in archive area in the pre-revolution period, namely of the Kazan University Society of Archaeology, History, and Ethnography and IV Archaeological Convention which took place in Kazan in 1877.
In the second stage peculiarities of archiving development in the first years of the Soviet authority were revealed on the basis of archive and published sources.This period is specific, first of all, by a combination of a pre-revolution and reformism principles in formation of archiving structure in the new Soviet Russia.
In the third stage we carried out comparative analysis of archiving development in the period of strengthening of the command-administrative model of the Russian society of 1930s which absorbed some characteristics of imperial Russia and new trends of development of the very archive science.

Evaluation Criteria
Testing of the hypothesis was conducted on the basis of such a criterion as efficiency of results of measures that are taken for removal of Russia's development delay in administration and office work culture.This efficiency must be evaluated on the basis of maintaining archive complexes as well as the rate of continuity in understanding value of documentary materials.

Proceedings and Description of the Experiment
In the initial stage of the experiment we selected the published sources, characterizing the activity of those organizations and institutions of Kazan, which proved themselves in archive area in the pre-revolution period, for conducting of analysis.Working with these materials was complex since very few archival documents remained safe by now, mainly we had to place emphasis on the reports which are not always distinguished by details and care in the characteristic of these or other processes.
In the course of the further study of the problem the amount of archive materials increased significantly.But it created additional difficulties as well because percentage of doublet, repeating information was significant in the mass of all this documentation.

Archiving in the Kazan Province in the End of XIX -the Beginning of ХХ Century
The end of XIX century -the beginning of XX century is defined as the time of emergence and activation of the Kazan scientific societies' activity which united detached efforts of provincial intellectuals, clergy, and some professional historians in the field of studying separate complexes of historical sources on history of the Kazan territory.IV Archaeological Convention which took place in Kazan in 1877 was the momentum for its emergence, and firstly for emergence of the Kazan University Society of Archaeology, History, and Ethnography (SAHE).
Summing up results on the first stage of research of the problem, we should note that pre-revolutionary Russia was one of few large European states (together with Austria-Hungary) where centralization of archiving was not performed.It evidenced slow economic development, as well as low level of administration culture.Extensive departmentalism of archives of governmental institutions, complete independence of archives of estate institutions and organizations, private and stock enterprises, and banks, religious institutions, and many archives "of personal origin" along with absence of legislation on protection and establishment of archives and special governmental institution for their management -it was just that incomplete picture of "archive formation failure", which we observe on the border of XIX -XX centuries in Russia.The scientific archive commissions represented an attempt to attract the public to improvement of archiving.As one of the forms of provincial historical societies, the commissions brought together forces of local intellectuals for study and collection of antiquity monuments.But they did not carry out and could carry out the tasks that were in front of them as archive institutions, since only a special government institution could afford these tasks.In the Kazan Province on the border of XIX -XX centuries the activity of the University SAHE and Church Historical-Archaeological Society was aimed at salvation of only some archive complexes (in accordance with the tasks set for them within scientific or other activities).I would like to cite the speech of the largest Russian historian and academician S.F.Platonov (1914) at the first convention of representatives of provincial scientific archive commissions held on May 6-8, 1914 in relation to significance of local archives for historical science: "...The materials which are kept locally are of major importance, but except for some of them, these materials are handled by very narrow circle of population or administration, and more often they do not circulate at all" (Stepansky, 1998).Meanwhile realities of the newest time required study of not only evidence "of distant antiquity traditions", but documentary materials of the recent past.

Archiving in Tatarstan in the First Years of the Soviet Authority
Summing up results for this period of archive formation in Republic of Tatarstan, we should note that although there was some tension in relations between the leadership of the Northern-East Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography and I.A. Stratonov personally, these people were engaged in a common task of saving the archive's heritage at the time when the current issues and political and public issues became major, when the country forgot about its history, art, and antiquity.Hostile attitude towards the old system was often the cause of loss of objects of antiquity, art collections, archives, ancient homesteads, etc. S.O.Schmidt (1977) noted: "Party's policy in relation to archives in the first post-revolution years can be considered in the broad perspective of implementation of the Lenin program of cultural construction and attraction of old intellectuals to the side of the Soviet authority..." (Schmidt, 1977).Actually, those were the intellectuals the first who by insistent demands induced central and local authorities to act decisively for salvation of the archive heritage.It was shown very vividly in the course of work of the North-East Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography and the Kazan Province Archive in 1919-1920.1920-1930s.In the end of 1920s the republic government just indifferently observed the disastrous state of Tatar Central Archive, and on occasion preferred to get rid of the onerous responsibilities of archiving maintenance at due level and already in September 1927 the College of the People's Commissariat of Workers' and Peasants' Inspectorate of the Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (PC WPI TASSR) issued a decree on transfer of Tatar Central Archive from the Tatar Council of People's Commissars (TCPC) to subordination of the Tatar People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs.Afterwards this decree was repealed upon a petition of the Tatar Central Archive of the RSFSR and resolution of the People's Commissariat of the Workers' and Peasants' Inspectorate of the Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic (PC WPI RSFSR), but it came into effect in 1938.

Archiving in TASSR in
So by the tenth anniversary of the Soviet archive formation the Tatar Central Archive was nearly degraded from the government (central) subordination to jurisdiction of the People's Commissariat which performed economic-administrative functions along with repressive-punitive ones in this period.The results of such actions on "proper" optimization of archiving in the republic were revealed by situation of "great change" in 1929.
Summing up the results, we can take risk to assume that not purposeful and deliberate desire to destroy archives was the main reason of deterioration of archives state, their oppression on the part of departments and the main masses of population, and the waste paper campaigns were not aimed at forcing archivists to obey any, even most absurd instructions of the party bodies".In this case everything was more ordinary and prosaic.General negative attitude towards archives was conditioned by spirit of that time with its saving and pragmatism regime, striving to get profit, as they say, "now and at once".Radical, sharp change which occurred in political and public-economical spheres of the Soviet society development led to the fact that respectful attitude towards archives and archive documents not already established in consciousness of the broad masses underwent serious tests.Since 1939 the state archives of the republic were passed to the system of bodies of the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (PCIA), and the Tatarstan Department of the Unified Party Archive (UPA) was transferred from jurisdiction of the Institute of Marx -Engels-Lenin (IMEL) to direct subordination of the Regional Committee of the All-Union Communist Bolshevik Party (RC AUCBP).
In general, development of archiving acquires more and more common features by the end of the indicated period in All-Union scale under influence of standardization and unification brought by a command-administration system that of course, significantly distinguishes the situation of regional national archiving of the pre-revolution period and the first half of 1920 from the boundary of 1920-30s.

The Process and the Results of the Experiment
Analyzing development of archiving in the Kazan province in terms of creation of a civil archive service we can note the following features.The first years of archive formation were noted by coincidence of centralization in the new Bolshevism edition taking place at this moment, pragmatism (with respect to human potential, and to written evidences of old and recent past events) peculiar to it and of the intellectuals' readiness caused "by the February democratic wave" to help in reorganization of archiving, i.e. there was temporary unification of the authorities and the competent forces.The activity of the Northern-East Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography and the Kazan Province Archive was mainly oriented at historical-cultural and scientific significance of documentary complexes.The main organizational-archive study activities of both organizations also evidence: salvation and study, first of all, of the archive materials which were under the threat of loss (and these were mainly pre-revolutionary archives), attempts of scientific description and publication of the focused materials.
Development of archiving in Tatarstan in 1921-1928 underwent significant changes.Maximum use of the past, pre-revolution experience determined mainly the nature of performed works (and here the archive institutions in the beginning work mainly in the scientific-exploratory direction), and successful functioning of an archive service in the republic in general.Inclusion of Tatar Central Archive to the structure of government apparatus caused assignment of the task to not only store, but also use the archival documents in scientific and promotional, operative-chekist and economic objectives of the state.The staff of the Tatar Central Archive was significantly simplified in the second half of 1920s due to dismissal of highly qualified, but non-party specialists, then it was replenished by party members, but did not acquire significant authority in terms "of the Soviet public".All the subsequent events that occurred after the "great change of 1929" demonstrated it clearly.
The next stage is the development of archiving in Tatarstan in terms of forced modernization undertaken by the state in 1929-1939, it also has specific peculiarities.An attempt to involve documentary materials from archives of functioning institutions, organizations, enterprises in the economic and scientific circulation became the new phenomenon distinguishing this period from the previous ones.It was in accordance with requirements of the party and public bodies about the finding of documentary reserves for premature fulfilment of tasks of the five-year plans.We consider that this circumstance is explained by assertion of psychology "of the besieged fortress" on the border of 1920-1930s in the USSR.There was no hope for outside help, they could to hope only for own resources.The information contained in archival documents could become one more source of resources so necessary to the country.In short, this was time of a maximum triumph of pragmatic, consumers' attitude towards archival documents.Amplification of plan fundamentals in its functioning had to become one of the most important directions of archiving perfection.Actual failure of too utilitarian approach to archival documents led to two most important results: 1) the main emphasis was done on perfection of the own structure of archive bodies, ordering of archival documents, 2) the society which did not see great use of archival documents indifferently perceived the fact of archives' transfer to jurisdiction of the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (PCIA).

Discussions
Being above all an archive study discipline, the history of archiving is nevertheless on the juncture of historical science, special historical and law disciplines.During studying development of archiving in the regions the following factors can be distinguished: emergence of archives in particular historical situation, causes and circumstances of their creation, development of forms and methods of the archives activity, changes of their work depending on historical conditions, situation with staff of archivists, and issues of its training; recruiting, selection of dossiers for storage and destruction, organization of document storage, development of an inventory-reference apparatus for archival materials; use of documents in political, practical and scientific purposes; influence of historical science on development of archiving (Samoshenko, 1989).
Taking into consideration extensiveness and extreme ambiguity of the subject of our research, we should note multi-dimensionality of available scientific literature.Issues related to history of development of local archiving were revealed in studies firstly on the problems of the Soviet statehood development, formation of local government authorities and management bodies because archive bodies formed the part of the state machinery; secondly -on the problems of formation of science and culture of the Soviet period since local archive bodies played important role in their formation; thirdly -on the problems on development of national archiving of the pre-revolution period, as well as of the post-revolution period; fourthly -on separate aspects of the history of local archive formation in RSFSR in general.
In 1960 -1980s the whole range of papers appeared by N.V. Brzhostovskaya (1971Brzhostovskaya ( , 1972)), V.I.Vyalikov (1976), V.V. Maksakov (1969) et al. which was devoted to pre-revolution archiving, as well as to Soviet archive formation.Literature of this period is significantly characterized by ideologizing, prejudice which reinforced on the eve of all revolution jubilees along with reassessment of some aspects (for example, the role of provincial scientific archive commissions was evaluated in the new way in this period, and the overall approach to pre-revolution archiving became less categorical).Besides research works with a new approach to study of archiving problems arise in this time.Among them I would like to single out the works by N.V. Brzhostovskaya (1972) and B.S. Ilizarov (1980), allowing to look at already known notions from an unexpected perspective.For example, B.S. Ilizarov in his small article "Archive as an Element of Social Memory" marks major social factors influencing the growth of document formation and the archiving in general: common growth of population and rates of its growth, the average life expectance of people in various historic epochs (rapid change of generations as a result of not high lifespan leads to the fact that social memory is of less depth, besides, the life is extremely homogeneous), vastness of social support of the ruling class and others.(Ilizarov, 1980).In the opinion of N.V. Brzhostovskaya (1971), establishment of archives always followed productive, social organization, etc. Therefore the types of archives which existed in this or that society were defined by peculiarities of its economic, state and ideological structures (Brzhostovskaya, 1971).
The modern stage in studying the history of national archiving began in years of the so-called "perestroyka" when significant changes occurred in public-political and economic life of the country, and they had significant effect on the activity of archive institutions of the country.The stage is quite clearly divided into two periods -the second half of 1980s -1991 and since 1992 to the present tense.All this stage is characterized by extension of the source base and confirmation of methodological, ideological pluralism.Singling out of the post-Soviet period in historiography of the topic is conditioned not only by such important events as a break-up of the USSR and abolition of the leadership of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union that influenced development of historical science.We consider that its standpoint was the more deliberate striving of researchers to restore a holistic picture of development of the national archiving.
There was a number of new facts and generalizations made within the existing and, undoubtedly, dominating in that time concepts about archive formation in the USSR as implementation of Lenin's ideas on centralization of archiving, presented in dissertations of the second half of 1980s (Chekmarveva, 1989;Sergeeva, 1985).
We would like to note the papers by T.I.Khorkhordina among the publications of this period, which were devoted to totalitarian nature of the Soviet archiving (Khorkhordina, 1996).Her reasonings about the activity of D.Ya.Samokvasov are important from the view of characterization of evolution of views of the very researcher.According to T.I.Khorkhordina, the reformer of the Russian archiving was aimed at creation of a small model of perfect organization, which could serve as a sample for improvement of all the state system of Russia in general (Khorkhordina, 2000).We consider that the author is ready to recognize dual character of archives: general, culturological and state, informational ones.This area of the problem was most actively and efficiently developed in the studies of the Head of the Federal Archive Agency V.P. Kozlov.
Study of history of archiving in the Kazan Province and Tatarstan became relevant in 1980s of ХХ century on the wave of increase of the society's interest in archives.The studies of historians and archivists themselves appear in the republican and Russian periodicals (Bobkov, 1989(Bobkov, , 1993;;Zaitsev, 1998;Shamsytdinova, 1999;Sadykova, Shamsytdinova, 2001;Piskarev, 2001;Echo of Centuries, 2003;Sharangina, 2005), made public at scientific and practical conferences.

Conclusions
The history of development of the national archiving is distinguished by huge work on salvation and increase of the people's greatest cultural heritage accumulated in the Government Archive Fund of the country as well as by difficulties, tragic collisions of the past decades.As any social phenomenon, the archiving is not a single-step phenomenon, but a long time process, which is clearly confirmed at close study of its regional specificity.The pre-revolution and post-revolution periods of archiving history in Tatarstan have features typical for all the national archiving, as well as their features conditioned by originality of historical, state and cultural development of the region.
Analyzing development of archiving in the Kazan province in terms of creation of a civil archive service we can note the following features.The first years of archive formation were noted by coincidence of centralization in the new Bolshevism edition taking place at this moment, pragmatism (with respect to human potential, and to written evidences of old and recent past events) peculiar to it and of the intellectuals' readiness caused "by the February democratic wave" to help in reorganization of archiving, i.e. there was temporary unification of the authorities and the competent forces.The activity of the Northern-East Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography and the Kazan Province Archive was mainly oriented at historical-cultural and scientific significance of documentary complexes.The main organizational-archive study activities of both organizations also evidence: salvation and study, first of all, of the archive materials which were under the threat of loss (and these were mainly pre-revolutionary archives), attempts of scientific description and publication of the focused materials.Development of archiving in Tatarstan in 1921-1928 underwent significant changes.Maximum use of the past, pre-revolution experience determined mainly the nature of performed works (and here the archive institutions in the beginning work mainly in the scientific-exploratory direction), and successful functioning of an archive service in the republic in general.The next stage is the development of archiving in Tatarstan in terms of forced modernization undertaken by the state in 1929-1939, it also has specific peculiarities.An attempt to involve documentary materials from archives of functioning institutions, organizations, enterprises in the economic and scientific circulation became the new phenomenon distinguishing this period from the previous ones.It was in accordance with requirements of the party and public bodies about the finding of documentary reserves for premature fulfilment of tasks of the five-year plans.We consider that this circumstance is explained by assertion of psychology "of the besieged fortress" on the border of 1920-1930s in the USSR.There was no hope for outside help, they could to hope only for own resources.The information contained in archival documents could become one more source of resources so necessary to the country.In short, this was time of a maximum triumph of pragmatic, consumers' attitude towards archival documents.Amplification of plan fundamentals in its functioning had to become one of the most important directions of archiving perfection.Actual failure of too utilitarian approach to archival documents led to two most important results: 1) the main emphasis was done on perfection of the own structure of archive bodies, ordering of archival documents, 2) the society which did not see great use of archival documents indifferently perceived the fact of archives' transfer to jurisdiction of the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (PCIA).