Kompleks arygіnalaў aktaў agul'nadzjarzhaўnaga znachjennja arhіva Vjalіkaga Knjastva Lіtoўskaga ў saveckaj gіstaryjagrafіі. Tjermіnalagіchny aspekt

Abstract

The article deals with the issues of the state archive of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in Soviet historiography, in particular the approach to the terminology of the complex of original files of national importance. The author concludes that this problem in the USSR was not specifically investigated. It was raised indirectly in the context of another subject of research - the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania Metrica or the “Lithuanian Metrica”. The most significant contribution to the development of ideas about the complex of originals and their terminology was made by historians M.G. Berazhkoў, M.M. Ulashchyk, G.L. Harashkevіch, E.D. Banionis. In fact, by the mid-1980s, Soviet scholarship was dominated by the vision of a collection of original documents under the “Lithuanian Metrica”, and the latter as the actual state archive of the GDL. The GDL Metrica itself was mainly understood as an “archive”. The issue of the independence of the collection of original files in relation to the record in the Grand Duchy's system of documentary and archival holdings was not raised. This view corresponded to the basic assumptions of Russian pre-revolutionary historiography. From the mid-1980s, the ideas of Soviet scholars began to change. Originals of acts of national importance from the archive of the GDL as part of Soviet historical scholarship are gradually recognized as independent in the archival sense, part of the “state archive of the GDL” is separate from the collection of documents of the GDL Metrica, and the latter was denied the monopol of the state archive. In the second half of the 1980s, in the terminology of researchers with reference to the acts of the complex of originals, and in contrast to the GDL Metrica as copies, the word “original” is disseminated. It is synonymous with the term “real act” (Russian – “podlinnik”), which has been widespread in Russian scientific literature since pre-revolutionary times. These changes were influenced by the results of both Soviet research (the works of L.W. Czerepnin, A.A. Zimin, S.O. Szmidt) and foreign scientists (J. Jakubowski, I. Sułkowska-Kurasiowa, and also the American researcher P. Kennedy Grimsted).