Censorship
Censorship. Control by state and other institutions of public expression of ideas and opinions. As in other countries, church censorship preceded state censorship in Ukraine. On 5 November 1591 the council of Orthodox bishops meeting at Berestia decreed that ‘bishops must inspect, sign, and stamp manuscripts before submitting them for printing.’ The reason for this prior censorship was ‘that nothing detrimental to God’s church be published.’ The Uniates acted in the same way: article 27 of the Church Union of Berestia of 1 June 1595 forbade printers to ‘print anything without the knowledge and permission of their bishops’ in order to prevent ‘various heresies from spreading.’ Sometimes the Polish authorities exercised postpublication censorship over Ukrainian publications. Thus, in 1647 the Lviv printer Mykhailo Slozka was summoned before the king’s court for publishing the catechism of Petro Mohyla in 1645. Muscovite church censorship disapproved of various Ukrainian books even before the Pereiaslav Treaty of 1654. In 1627 the Katekhizis (Catechesis) of Stepan Zyzanii and the Ievanheliie uchitel'noie (Didactic Gospel) of Kyrylo Stavrovetsky-Tranquillon were burned in Moscow for ‘heresies’ contained in them, and books of Lithuanian imprint (ie, Ukrainian-Belarusian books) could not be brought into Muscovy. When the Ukrainian Orthodox church became subordinate to the Moscow patriarch in 1686, his censorship was extended to the Hetman state. In 1689 the Moscow patriarch Joachim ordered all new church books to be sent to him for approval before printing. In 1690 the Council of Moscow anathemized the works of Petro Mohyla, Ioanikii Galiatovsky, Lazar Baranovych, Antin Radyvylovsky, Yepifanii Slavynetsky, and others. In 1720 Tsar Peter I ordered the two presses in Hetman state—the Kyivan Cave Monastery Press and the press of the Trinity–Saint Elijah's Monastery in Chernihiv (see also Chernihiv Press)—not to print any books without prior censorship by the Spiritual Collegium, which replaced the Moscow patriarchate and in 1721 was given the name Holy Synod. The purpose of this censorship was to suppress any religious heresy or deviation from the Great Russian books. In 1724 both presses were fined for disobeying this order.
At the end of the 18th century Russian authorities began to introduce secular censorship in Ukraine. The gubernia governments were given the responsibility of controlling publications. In 1804 Alexander I entrusted the task of censorship to the universities for a brief period. Nicholas I established a special censorship of Uniate publications in 1826. From 1828 local censorship committees, the Kyiv and Odesa committees among others, were subordinated to the Main Censorship Administration in Saint Petersburg. The progress of secularization in the Russian Empire made possible the printing of Ukrainian literature, first in Russia and then, from the beginning of the 19th century, in Russian-ruled Ukraine. When the Ukrainian awakening became politicized in the 1840s, the authorities began to use censorship to control Ukrainian literature: in 1847 Taras Shevchenko’s works were prohibited, particularly his Kobzar, the 1840 and 1844 editions of which came out with the censor’s excisions.
The Russian government launched a new offensive against Ukrainian publications in 1863 with a circular from the minister of internal affairs, Petr Valuev, which prohibited the printing of Ukrainian books with a religious content, Ukrainian school texts, and generally books for popular use. The church authorities prevented the publication of Pylyp Morachevsky’s Ukrainian translation of the Gospels. In 1865 publications entering Russia from abroad began to be censored. A special commission, chaired by the minister of internal affairs, was set up in 1875 to study the means of suppressing Ukrainophile activities. As a result of the commission’s recommendations, Alexander II issued the Ems Ukase on 8 May 1876, forbidding the printing of books in Ukrainian, the publication of Ukrainian translations, theatrical performances, musical texts in Ukrainian, and the importation of Ukrainian books from abroad. Because Ukrainian was banned from the stage, Ukrainian folk songs and art songs had to be translated into Russian. The prohibition of Ukrainian texts in musical compositions was so absurd that Mykola Lysenko, with the support of the Kyiv and Kharkiv governors-general (see Governor-general), succeeded in getting it lifted by 1881. At the same time Alexander III permitted Ukrainian dictionaries to be published and, under special conditions, Ukrainian plays to be staged. Grammar books, however, were not permitted to be published. In 1895 children's literature in Ukrainian was banned. In 1901 subscribing to the Lviv journal Literaturno-naukovyi vistnyk was prohibited. The censors banished the name Ukraine and its derivatives and replaced them with Malorossiia (Little Russia). They disapproved of such words as Sich and Cossack, eliminated neologisms that arose as the language developed, and even removed Ukrainianisms from Russian works. From 1895 to 1904, 70 percent of the manuscripts submitted to the censors were rejected. In some years (1866, 1877) not a single Ukrainian book was published in the Russian Empire. The ban on Ukrainian from 1863 forced writers in Russian-ruled Ukraine to publish in Galicia. It was easier to publish something in Ukrainian in Moscow than in Kyiv, where the censorship was particularly severe: in 1894, 14 Ukrainian books were published in Moscow and only 8 in Kyiv.
The Revolution of 1905 spontaneously abolished the restrictions on Ukrainian. The Imperial Academy of Sciences favored their abolition. Ukrainian publications began to be censored according to general standards, that is, on the basis of their content rather than their language. The legacy of Petr Valuev and Alexander II did not die out, however; in 1906 a complete Ukrainian translation of the Holy Scriptures and the importation of such translations were prohibited. Some newspapers were banned because of their contents: for example, Khliborob (Lubny) in Lubny in 1905, the Ukrainian Social Democratic Workers' party’s Borot’ba in Kyiv, Vil’na Ukraïna (Saint Petersburg) in Saint Petersburg, Dobra porada and Zaporozhzhia in Katerynoslav, Narodna sprava in Odesa, and Slobozhanshchyna in Kharkiv in 1906. The publication of Taras Shevchenko’s complete works was stopped in 1911, and Ukrainian newspapers could not be sent to village co-operatives. With the outbreak of the First World War strict restrictions were imposed on Ukrainian publications. Many publications were prohibited. The military censorship that came into force was particularly severe in Russian-occupied Galicia.
Under Austrian rule Ukrainian publications were subject to censorship not only from Austrian authorities but also from Ukrainian conservative circles, whose restrictions were more severe. This was the state of affairs up to the Revolution of 1848–9 in the Habsburg monarchy. In 1834 Rev Venedykt Rudolf Levytsky, the censor of Ruthenian books, as they were called then, bowed to the demand of the Greek Catholic metropolitan Mykhailo Levytsky and prohibited the publication of Zoria, a collection of poems by the Ruthenian Triad, although Y. Kopitar, the Viennese censor, had approved it. This collection of poems appeared in Budapest under the title Rusalka Dnistrovaia (The Dnister Nymph), but most of the copies printed were later confiscated in Galicia. The reason for its prohibition was the fact that its language was considered substandard, being too close to the vernacular. In 1838 Yosyp Lozynsky’s Ruthenian grammar was banned for a similar reason (it was published in 1848). When a constitutional order was established in Austria in 1867, the old system of censorship was abolished, and the public prosecutor was given the power to impound suspected publications (particularly in Galicia). To avoid financial loss, the economically weaker publishers submitted manuscripts to the public prosecutor for prior inspection (known as prophylactic censorship). Polish censors sometimes used censorship blackmail against Ukrainian newspapers; for example, Dilo and Hromads’kyi holos were confiscated. At the beginning of the 20th century Austrian censorship took a much more liberal attitude towards Ukrainian publications.
The February Revolution of 1917 brought eastern Ukraine freedom of the press. Censorship was introduced only under Hetman Pavlo Skoropadsky in 1918, because most of the press, both Ukrainian and Russian, was opposed to his government. Leftist papers were closed down, including Borot'ba and Narodnia volia in Kyiv; Mysl', Zemlia i volia, and Rabochaia bor'ba in Odesa; Mys'’ naroda and Narodnie dilo in Kharkiv; Nash luch in Katerynoslav; and Dnipro in Kherson. Under the Directory of the Ukrainian National Republic the Sich Riflemen in Kyiv first assumed censorship powers and closed down Kievskaia mysl’ and some other Russian newspapers because of their anti-Ukrainian stand. These powers were then transferred to the Supreme Administration of the Press and Propaganda, which was directed by Osyp Nazaruk at the end of 1918 and the beginning of 1919. Nazaruk demanded that the Russian press print one-third of its material in Ukrainian. The Western Ukrainian National Republic had no separate agency responsible for censorship.
After the Polish occupation of Western Ukraine in 1919, Ukrainian publications came first under prepublication censorship, but in the 1930s this was changed to postpublication censorship. In 1924 the Ukrainian representative Serhii Khrutsky declared in the Warsaw Sejm that ‘almost all issues of Ukrainian periodicals contain the eloquent heading “Second Printing after Confiscation.”’ In the 1930s it was forbidden to fill the confiscated spaces in newspapers with other material. Blank spaces stamped ‘confiscated’ served as a protest, contrary to the intention of Polish authorities. As under Austrian rule, censorship could be circumvented by reading the confiscated articles in the Sejm and reprinting them from the official stenographic record. In 1932–8, 11 editions of Taras Shevchenko’s works were prohibited by Polish censors. In general, the censorship of Ukrainian books was more liberal than that of Ukrainian periodicals.
In Bukovyna the Romanian authorities suppressed from the very beginning (1918) the newspapers Nova Bukovyna and Borba. Ukrainian editors had to submit to the censors twice as much material as they intended to print, because half of it was usually rejected. Blank spaces were not permitted. In spite of prepublication censorship the police sometimes confiscated publications that had been approved.
In Transcarpathia under Czechoslovak rule the press was censored after publication, while books were censored before publication. Several periodicals were closed down temporarily or permanently because of their oppositional or anti-Czech position. The Hungarians introduced prior censorship in 1939–44 for the press as well. Publications in literary Ukrainian and in phonetic orthography were prohibited.
In the Generalgouvernement (1939–45) German prepublication censorship of the Cracow press and books (restricting the number of titles to be published and copies to be printed) was very strict. Scholarly works were forbidden, and books on historical themes (particularly on the 1917–20 period) were limited. To facilitate control and censorship, the authorities granted the Ukrainske Vydavnytstvo (Cracow) publishers a publishing monopoly. In Galicia Ukrainian newspapers were published by a German semigovernmental publishing firm. Up to the German-Soviet war criticism of the Soviet Union was not allowed. The scanty Ukrainian press in the Reichskommissariat Ukraine and in Germany was usually under the direct control of the Germans. Almost no Ukrainian books appeared in Reichskommissariat Ukraine, but a few were published in Germany, where censorship was not as strict.
The Soviet government quickly restored censorship of the press, some of which was still privately owned or controlled by civic organizations. The Revolutionary tribunal, established on 2 August 1918, decreed that to use the press against the Soviet regime was a crime. On 29 December 1918 military censorship was introduced, allegedly to protect military secrets. This agency constantly abused its authority. In 1922 the Chief Administration for Literary and Publishing Affairs (Glavlit) was established and served as a model for similar republican administrations, which were set up within the people's commissariats of education as censorship agencies. In the USSR there was also the Administration for the Protection of State Secrets in the Press. Besides the special Soviet institutions of censorship, the Communist Party leadership exercised censorship in enforcing a single Party line. Even libraries were censored: their holdings were purged periodically, and certain books were destroyed or transferred to special sections (spetsfondy), to which admission is restricted. In contrast to tsarist censorship, Soviet censorship was directed not so much against the Ukrainian language as against specific subject matter: religious subjects, Cossack themes, and various persons, such as representatives of national communism. As a result of the sudden intensification of the anti-Ukrainian policy in 1933–4, a number of publication projects such as Mykhailo Hrushevsky’s Istoriia Ukraïny-Rusy (The History of Ukraine-Rus’) and his history of Ukrainian literature, the Soviet Ukrainian Encyclopedia, the Great Russian-Ukrainian Dictionary, and the Ukrainian Historical Dictionary were canceled.
In the Ukrainian SSR censorship was first exercised by the Ukrainian Chief Administration for Literary and Publishing Affairs (Ukrholovlit), and after 1963 it was exercised directly by the State Committee for Printing of the Council of Ministers of the USSR (not the Ukrainian SSR). As well, the Ideological Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine kept an eye on the press. Other areas of Ukrainian culture were censored by the State Committee for Radio and Television, the State Committee for Cinematography, and the State Committee for the Arts. All these agencies were responsible to higher agencies in Moscow.
The function of censorship wes not merely to prevent certain events and people from being mentioned, but also to distort the texts of Ukrainian classics. Excisions were often marked by three dots. Anti-Russian works by classic Ukrainian writers were banned (eg, Taras Shevchenko’s poem ‘Iak by to ty, Bohdane pianyi’ [If Only You, Drunken Bohdan] and Lesia Ukrainka’s play Boiarynia [The Boyar Woman]). Ukrainians who fought against Moscow could not be mentioned without being abused. Censorship criteria differed according to territory; for example, in 1944–5 when the Ukrainian Insurgent Army was active in Western Ukraine, the daily Radians’ka Ukraïna and other Kyiv newspapers had page-long inserts in issues distributed in Western Ukraine; these contained some material of local significance. Through samvydav and samizdat literature certain acts of censorship became public knowledge. The Moscow Chronicle of Current Events revealed, for example, that the Ukrainian films Kievan Frescoes (1966) by Serhii Paradzhanov and The Stone Cross (1968) by Leonid Osyka were banned.
The time a work spent at the censor’s was indicated on the last page of a book or journal; it was the difference between the ‘submitted for publication’ date and the ‘authorized for printing’ date. The average term was two months for journals and from a few months to a year for books. Every work was subjected to ‘self-censorship’ before it was submitted to the censor: authors and editors used every precaution to avoid deviations from the Communist Party line. One of the consequences of the suppression of free speech was the appearance of Ukrainian samvydav in the early 1960s.
In the Soviet bloc countries publications in Ukrainian on Ukrainian subjects came under prior censorship according to general standards and were liable to Soviet interference. Censorship in Yugoslavia was more lenient.
Following the 1991 Ukraine’s Declaration of Independence censorship in independent Ukraine was lifted.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Skabichevskii, A. Ocherki istorii russkoi tsenzury (1700–1863) (Saint Petersburg 1892)
Kotovich, A. Dukhovnaia tsenzura v Rossii (Saint Petersburg 1909)
Ob otmene stesnenii malorusskogo pechatnogo slova (Saint Petersburg 1910)
Ohiienko, I. Iak Moskva nyshchyla voliu druku Kyïvs'koï Pechers’koï Lavry (Tarnów 1921)
Miiakovs'kyi, V. ‘Iuvilei tsenzurnoho aktu 1876 r.,’ Bibliohrafichni visti, 1926, no. 3
Svoboda, V. ‘Shevchenko and Censorship,’ The Ukrainian Review, 1961, no. 1; 1962, nos 1–2
Butryn, M. ‘Do istoriï avstriis'koï tsenzury,’ Arkhivy Ukraïny, no. 5 (Kyiv 1970)
Balmuth, D. Censorship in Russia, 1865–1905 (Washington 1979)
Bohdan Struminsky
[This article was updated in 1995.]