HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES - See also - Harvard University

Reviews 253belonged to Iosafat Ohryzko (1826-1890), who was arrested for his part in thePolish uprising. Sushchinskii continued the Ohryzko tradition, between 1864and 1874 printing more than 120 books in diverse fields, of which 12 were"arrested" and destroyed (pp. 101-102). The remainer of the essay is concernedwith an analysis of these titles, the best-known of which is perhapsBervi-Flerovskii's On the Condition of the Working Class in Russia and whichinclude works by Vodovozov, Cebrikova, Shashkova, and Toliverova, as wellas one literary miscellany.The last two essays in the collection are by S. P. Luppov and S. R. Dolgova.In his contribution Luppov publishes the uchetnaia kniga (register book) of theSynodal typography, which was kept by Sergei Sidorov from March 1739 toFebruary 1741. Although the publishing activities of the Synodal typographystopped temporarily in 1727, the bookstore remained open and large stocks ofduplicates were still available for sale. According to the register book, Sidorovsold 924 books and individual sheet maps for a total of 313 rubles, 41 kopecks.Information is given about the types of material sold, as well as the widevariety of individuals who bought it.Finally, Dolgova has published a portion of the Senate protocols, whichincludes a discussion of the early project of L. Blumentrost for the founding ofa Senate typography.While the overall quality of the contribution is high, the volume is flawedbysome of the traditional weaknesses of Soviet historiography, as well as by sometechnical shortcomings. This is evident in the essays by Sapunov, Barenbaum,and Martynov. In his attempt to characterize the long-standing relationsbetween Muscovy and the Ukraine, Sapunov claims that Muscovite censors"saw in the Ukrainian printed book an ail-Russian cultural phenomenon, closeand understandable to the Muscovite reader" (p. 17; cf. also pp. 11, 14). Onthe next page, he falsely identifies that which was anti-Catholic as progressive(although note his qualification on p. 20). The essays by Martynov (p. 92) andBarenbaum argue, on circumstantial evidence, that Vil'kovskii and Sushchinskiibelonged to the "democratic" camp in the Russian political spectrum.Unlike some of their better-known contemporaries (Radishchev and Chernyshevskii),neither Vil'kovskii nor Sushchinskii is known to have articulated hispolitical or social position early. Moreover, at the outset Martynov contendsthat one reason for Vil'kovskii's great interest to readers is his typicality. In yetanother place (p. 88, paragraph 2), he stresses that it was precisely his progressivepolitical and social views that made him atypical for the age. Anotherproblem is that some of the essays are far too cryptic. Luppov might haveconveyed to the uninitiated reader a fuller sense of the importance of his find.Many notables — for example, the Petrine polemicist Petr Krekshin (1684-1763) — are listed (p. 126) as clients of the Synodal book store: informationon some of these figures should have been given in the notes to the document.These shortcomings and some misprints (e.g., p. 22, line 13) should not