GENERAL THEORY

DOCUMENTS and BOOKS

Tutorial

Moscow Kyiv

"Fishermen" "Knannya"

UDC 002.2(075.8)

Reviewers:

S.G. Kuleshov, Head of the Document Science Department of the Ukrainian Research Institute of Archiving and Document Science, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor;

^ II.P. Kushnarenko, Vice-Rector for Scientific Work of the Kharkiv State Academy of Culture, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor;

G.V. Silkova, Head of the Department of Documentary Communications, Rovepe State University for the Humanities, Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor

^ Shvetsova-Vodka G.N.

Sh35 General theory of documents and books: textbook. allowance / G.N. Shvetsova-Vodka. - M.: Rybari; K.: Knowledge, 2009. - 487 p.

ISBN 978-5-93763-008-7 ("Fishermen", Russia) ISBN 978-966-346-518-0 ("Knowledge", Ukraine)

The manual reveals the main theoretical issues of general document management - from the definition of a "document" to the classification of printed publications. The presentation of the educational material reflects the author's concept, consistent with the widespread ideas about the document and the book, as well as with the research of various scientists who have studied the problems of document science and book science. The manual contains theoretical materials corresponding to the program of the course "Document Science". The manual consists of two parts: "Fundamentals of the theory of the document" and "The book as a type of document".

The manual is intended for students, undergraduates, graduate students and teachers of documentation, book science and library science specialties of universities and academies, library and information faculties of universities of culture and arts.

BBC 73.031+76.110ya73

© Knowledge Publishing House

ISBN 978-966-346-518-0 ("Knowledge", Ukraine)

Foreword ................................................................ .................nine

PART I. FUNDAMENTALS OF THE THEORY OF DOCUMENT.................................13

Topic 1. The concept of "document": the historical development of its meanings........14

1.1. Empirical ideas about the document .......... 14

1.2. Meanings of the term "document"..................................17

1.3. The origin of the term "document" and the development of its meanings ............... 37

Conclusions................................................. ......................41

.41

Topic 2. The functional essence of the concept of "document" 43

2.1. The concept of "information" from the point of view of the theory of information communication. The structure of the information and communication system..44

2.2. The structure of the social communication process 48

2.3. The concept of "social information". Correlation of information and knowledge 49

2.4. Functional definition of the concept "document" .............................................. 52

Conclusions................................................. ......................56

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................................... 57

Topic 3. Definition of Document IV....................................58

3.1. Document definition in standards and dictionaries

On office work and archival business .............................. 58

3.2. Modern definitions of a document in informatics (in various areas of information activity). Document IV as "recorded information" ............................................. ......66

3.3. The definition of a document in librarianship. Document as an object of librarianship......74

Conclusions................................................. ......................80

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................................... 81

Topic 4. Functions, properties and features of the document .......... 82

4.1. The concept of "document functions". The main (essential) function of the document and its derivatives .............................................................. .................83

4.2. Other general document functions. The concept of special and specific functions of documents .............................................................. .................87

4.3. Document Properties..............................................99

4.4. Document Features..............................................113

Conclusions................................................. .........................115

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................... 116

Topic 5. Information component of the document ..... 117

5.1. The concept of social information...................118

5.2. Structure and properties of social information... 12 4

5.3. Requirements for social information ............... 130

5.4. Classification of social information (its types) ........................... 133

Conclusions................................................. ...................143

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................... 143

Topic 6. Significant and material components

Document IV................................................... 145

6.1. The Sign Component of Document IV....................146

6.2. The material (physical) basis of Document IV 153

6.3. Form (design) of the information carrier

Document IV..............................................156

6.4. Document structure .................................158

Conclusions................................................. ...................160

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................................... 161

Topic 7. Classification of Document IV....................................163

7.1. Tasks and features of the classification of documents .................... 165

7.2. Classification of Document IV according to the features characterizing the sign system of recording information .............................................. ....168

7.3. Classification of Document IV according to the features characterizing the material carrier of the document .............................................................. 181

7.4. Classification of a document according to its information component ... 184

7.4.1. Types of document according to the sphere of occurrence of information and the object of reflection ..186

7.4.2. Understanding Primary and Secondary Documents..............................188

7.5. Classification of Document IV according to the circumstances of its existence in the external environment ....... 193

7.5.2. Documents - Originals and Copies..............................200

7.5.3. Authentic (genuine) and false (fake) documents .... 202

Conclusions................................................. ...................203

Questions and tasks for self-control .............................. 206

Topic 8. Documentation as a science .......................... 208

8.1. The main stages of development and the main concepts of document management ........ 208

8.2. Object, subject and structure of documentation management 215

8.3. The place of documentation in the system of sciences .......... 227

8.4. Record keeping methods....................................236

Conclusions................................................. ...................245

Questions and tasks for self-control .............................. 246

^ PART. BOOK AS A TYPE OF DOCUMENT .....................247

Topic 9. Definition of a book........................................248

9.1. Differentiation of the concept of "book" according to the characteristics of the material carrier of information .... 249

9.2. Differentiation of the concept of "book" according to the features of the sign form and the way of perception by a person ...............252

9.3. The place of the book in the social communication and information process .............................................. 255

9.4. Correlation of the book with original and archival documents ..........................................................259

9.5. Correlation of the concepts "document", "book", "edition", "print work", "literature", "publication" .......................260

Conclusions................................................. ...................265

Questions and tasks for self-control .............................. 266

Topic 10. Functions and properties of the book..............................267

10.1. Comparison of Document and Book Functions.............268

10.2. Comparing document and workbook properties.......................272

10.3. Specific Functions and Features of the Book .....................281

Conclusions................................................. ...................291

Questions and tasks for self-control .............................. 294

Topic 11. General concepts of book typology.....................295

11.1. The concept of book typology....................................295

11.2. Ways of typological knowledge of the book ........ 299

11.5. Principles of book typology..............................316

Conclusions................................................. ...................317

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................................... 318

Topic 12. Types and genres of literature.............................319

12.1. The concept of "types of literature" .................................... 319

12.2. Types of Literature for Social Purposes....................................322

12.3. Types of Literature by Additional Features.............................................333

12.4. Genres of literary works: general characteristics .......... 337

12.5. Genres of political primary sources ........... 345

12.6. Genres of Legal Primary Sources...............346

12.7. Genres of fiction .............................. 354

12.8. Genres of non-fiction literature ...................... 358

12.9. Genres of mass information literature... 364

12.10. Genres of memoir literature ........................... 368

12.11. Genres of research literature... 372

12.12. Genres of popular science literature ........... 376

12.13. Genres of educational literature..............................376

12.14. Genres of industrial literature .............. 376

12.16. Genres of scientific information literature...383

12.17. Genres of Reference Literature ........................... 392

12.18. Types and genres of religious (spiritual) literature...............................393

12.19. Genres of entertainment literature ...................... 396

Conclusions................................................. ...................398

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................... 399

Topic 13. Types of printed publications.................................400

13.1. Classification of all publications

According to certain signs .............................. 403

13.2. Types of non-periodical publications ............................... 420

13.3. Types of Periodicals and Continuing Publications....................................425

13.4. Revision of Standards for Types of Publication..............................431

Conclusions................................................. ...................445

Questions and tasks for self-control ............................................... 446

List of references to help the study of the course .............................. 447

Appendix. Possible ways of developing the terminological system of document management……………………457

Name index .............................................................. ......472

Subject index.................................................475

FOREWORD

The concept of "document" is one of the most common in the professional activities of specialists in the documentary and information sphere of society. It is discussed when considering the main processes that make up the work of a librarian, bibliographer, employee of a scientific information institution, archive, museum and many other social institutions of documentary and information support of society.

The definition and classification of documents acquire not only scientific, but also purely practical significance. Ordinary, everyday ideas about the document and its types are insufficient for organizing the activities of information institutions. A scientific analysis of both the very concept of "document" and the concepts closely related to it, denoting the processes and operations of creating, processing and using documents in various spheres of public activity, is needed.

Therefore, in our time, great importance is given to the development and teaching of general professional discipline to employees in the field of social information communications.

"Document science", capable of providing unity in solving many issues related to the definition, classification and characteristics of documents.

The obligatory introductory part of document management should be the section "Fundamentals of the theory of the document". The general theory of the document is actively developing at the present time, there are various approaches and views on many scientific concepts, terms, concepts of document management. One of the tasks of the discipline "Document Science" is to acquaint students with them, to help determine the most acceptable, reasonable concepts, and draw appropriate conclusions. It is the fundamentals of the theory of the document that are the most general content of this discipline, necessary for training not only librarians-bibliographers, but also students of other specialties.

A significant component of the foundations of the theory of the document is the typology of the document. Typology is "the doctrine of types", as well as the definition of the main concepts (categories) that relate to the document and its types; about different ways of classifying documents; about the relationship between different types of document, etc.

For library science and bibliography it is also important to determine the relationship between the categories "document" and "book", the possibilities of their application in relation to the phenomena that a librarian or bibliographer deals with. Therefore, the second part of the course is the section "Book as a type of document". The construction of the second part of the course to a certain extent corresponds to the construction of the first part - from the general to the particular.

It should be noted that the characterization of the book from the standpoint of document management is also necessary for all workers associated with the information support of society, because it is in the book (according to its interpretation adopted in this manual) that the largest amount of publicly available information is located.

The content of the manual is limited to the main theoretical issues of document management: from the definition of a document to the classification of printed publications. Of course, many problems remain outside the manual, both theoretical and purely practical, concerning the characteristics of certain types, types, genres of documents. The author is aware that this manual does not cover all the issues of document management. Even the description of the book is not complete here, since the manual does not contain a description of non-text printed works and other types of publications, except for printed ones (in particular, electronic, audio, screen). But the general theory of the document and the book, presented in the manual, makes it possible to correctly orientate in all the variety of existing documents, using different sources to familiarize yourself with them.

The proposed manual aims to be a theoretical introduction to documentation and book science, to provide a unified approach to the classification of documents in general and books in particular. It reflects the author's concept, based on his own scientific research and consistent with common ideas about a document and a book, as well as with the research of many scientists who have studied the problems of document science and book science. The manual introduces the achievements of modern documentation science, discussions on documentary problems, offers alternative approaches to their solution, which should stimulate independent creative activity of students. The didactic potential of the manual lies in the sequence of presentation of the material (from general questions to specific ones), its division into specific topics, the presence of conclusions, questions and tasks for self-control on each topic.

This publication is a translation of the textbook "Documentation", published in Ukrainian, with some changes and additions. The changed name is more consistent with its content, which reflects not all document management, but only its introductory part. The absence of a detailed description of certain types of documents in this manual is explained by the need to create a system of document management academic disciplines and their corresponding educational and methodological support. Such academic disciplines as "Management Document Science", "Electronic Document Science", "Cinema Photo and Phono Document Science" and others devoted to different types of documents deserve an independent status. In addition to those listed, this system should also include such academic disciplines as "Social Communications", "Document Resource", "Document Streams and Arrays", etc.

^ BASICS OF THE THEORY OF THE DOCUMENT

THE CONCEPT "DOCUMENT": HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF ITS VALUES

The concept of "document" in our time is the most common in the sciences that study different ways of storing and transmitting knowledge (or information) in society. There are many definitions of a document that have fixed ideas about it.

First of all, we consider it necessary to consider empirical ideas about the document, the historical roots of the term "document" and the gradual development of its meanings until the 20th century; summarize the definitions of the document available in the literature; show the relationship between the meanings of the concept "document" that exist in our time.

1.1. Empirical ideas about the document

Empirical ideas arose as a consequence or as a result of observations, as a generalization of many real phenomena, but not as a consequence of theoretical knowledge, which requires certain methodological principles, a theory that would explain the meaning and origin of the phenomenon.

Empirically, the document is presented, firstly, as a certain thing, as a "material object" or "substantial" (material, as opposed to energy) carrier information. In other words, a document is a thing that can be seen, touched or felt by other senses.

Secondly, a document is such a thing that carries a certain information that is, it can convey something (some information, knowledge) to someone who will get acquainted with the document, study it, read it, or otherwise “consume information”. First of all, a person needs a document precisely in order to get acquainted with this information.

On the other hand, a document is created by a person (more precisely, by society) in order to preserve a certain knowledge in time and transfer it to other people (consumers of information).

In order to convey information using a document, a person uses different means. First, he chooses material objects, things that can be a "real carrier" of information. Secondly, it establishes how you can "fix information" on a given medium. Thirdly, it develops ways to extract information from this medium.

All of these document properties are reflected in its definitions. For example, in such: "a document is a material object containing information in a fixed form"; "a document is a material object containing fixed information, specially designed for its transmission in space and time and used in public practice"; "a document is a material object containing information in a fixed form and specially designed for its transmission in time and space"; "a document is a material object containing fixed information and specially designed for its transfer and use" 1 ; "documentary interprets the document in a broad sense as information recorded on a material carrier ..."; a document is "information fixed on a carrier that allows its transmission .... A document is information embodied in a physical form."

Some scientists in the definitions of the document emphasized that it is created and used by a person, that is, society, and therefore does not contain any information, namely "social" or "noo-information". For example: "a document is any material carrier on which social information is recorded (fixed)" 4 ; "a document is any noo-information fixed in space and time (information created by the human mind; in contrast to information fixed in natural phenomena, biology, etc.)" 5 ; "A document is any noo-information(information created by the human mind, as opposed to information recorded in the phenomena of inanimate nature, or biology), fixed on a special material carrier for the purpose of its use, transfer and storage. Any form and method of fixation are allowed here, that is, on paper, film, in the form of a code, tape, disk, etc. "6 (Highlighted by the author). In relation to the last two definitions, it should be noted that social or noo-information that is transmitted in society, that is, from person to person, can be recorded not only "on a special material carrier", but also on objects belonging to the sphere of inanimate nature (for example, stones in the mineralogical museum), and even on representatives of wildlife (animals in the zoo). The statement that "any form and method of fixation is allowed here" is refuted by the following list, which indicates that the materials and forms of the information carrier are meant, adapted only for recording information.

Of course, the clarifications regarding the fact that the document conveys social or noo-information are correct, but in reality they do not change anything in the above-mentioned interpretation of the document, because in any case, it is precisely such material objects that are used to transmit noo-information (as information, available only to the human mind) or "social information" if it is understood as any information that is created and transmitted in human society.

Along with such definitions of "document", which cover a very wide range of phenomena, there are other interpretations that connect the concept of "document" with certain limitations of its material or symbolic form, as well as functions.

DOCUMENTATION

UDC (316.28+316.774+007):002

G. N. Shvetsova-Vodka

Terms and concepts are considered,
characterizing documentary communication; properties, types of documentary communication and their structure; types of documentary communication systems; components of the system of documentary communications.

One of the distinguishing features of the development of science at the beginning of the XXI century. can be considered increased attention to the phenomenon of social information communication [ 1–6 ]. All authors note that the theory of communication arose much earlier, but developed without generalizations, in accordance with the requirements of various branches of knowledge (in linguistics, psychology, management, computer science, etc.), taking into account purely sectoral problems. And only recently, a general theory of information communication, which is also called communicology, has begun to take shape [ 6 ]. Consideration of the conceptual apparatus of communication is an urgent task of our time.

Librarianship, bibliography, bibliology, document science also belong to the communicative sciences, as evidenced by their unification in Ukraine in the complex of scientific specialties “social communications”. Therefore, the theoretical problems of communication are now becoming the object of attention of the relevant branches of science.

The purpose of this article is to consider the concept documentary communication characterize the types of documentary communication and the components of the system of documentary communications.

Before proceeding to consider the structure of the documentary communication system, it is necessary to pay attention to some terms and concepts that characterize documentary communication in general. concept documentary communication has recently become common and widespread. However, it cannot be said that this concept and the term that denotes it are interpreted and formulated by different authors unambiguously: they say both “documentary communication” and “documentary communication”. It seems that most authors do not think about the wording and do not consider it necessary to explain why this or that form of the term is chosen.

Based on the fact that the term element documentary should denote what consists of documents [ 8–10 , 15–19 ], the phrase “documentary communication” should be interpreted as “communication consisting of documents”. However, communication consists not only of documents, because the elementary structure of social information communication provides for at least three elements: a communicant, a recipient, and a communication channel between them. The document takes the place of a communication channel through which information is transmitted from the communicant to the recipient. This thesis can be confirmed by the fact that in the theory of journalism, printed periodicals (i.e. documents) are treated as communication channels that differ from channels transmitting “undocumented texts” (i.e. from radio and television) [ 3 , 4 ]. "Undocumented texts" here is information that is not recorded in the form of documents. Radio and television programs in the form in which they are received by the consumer of information are not documents. Another thing is that these transmissions can be recorded in advance or in the process of transmission and then used as documents.

term element documentary has several meanings, including these: "containing the document as one of the elements of its structure" [ 15. S. 22]; "having a document in its structure along with other elements (documentary system)" [ 18. S. 9]. Accordingly, communication in which one of the elements is a document should be called “documentary” and not “documentary”. So, documentary communication is communication that has a document as one of its elements.

Accordingly, we define the "documentary communication channel" as a channel inherent in documentary communication. Although, probably, in the case of the most general definition of a document (as a communication channel), this channel could be called "documentary", because it consists of document. If it's about document transfer as a material object, then such a channel of communication, of course, is documentary, because, in addition to the document itself, it provides for other elements that together form a communication channel: means and social institutions that ensure the storage and transmission of documents.

The properties of documentary communication are determined by the fact that the channel for transmitting a message in it is a document. The message (information) is formed in the mind of the communicant and is fixed on a material (material) carrier, physically separated from the communicant. This is the role of the communicant, the initiator of the transfer of information in documentary form. The ways of fixing a message can be different - with the help of various technical means created by man.

The message can be created not only in the form of a record (one-, two- or three-dimensional), but also in the three-dimensional form of a work of sculpture, architecture, model, sample, etc. Even the use of cultural objects not created specifically for transmitting information, or Samples of inorganic and organic nature as documents require the preliminary participation of a person in preparation for the transfer of the information that they contain, and the inclusion of the displayed object in the communication system.

The fixedness of the message on a material carrier provides the possibility of transmitting a message both in space and in time. The possibility of transferring a document in space may be limited by the features of the material form of the document, the relative availability or complexity of its movement (sending, transportation) in space. At the same time, any document ensures the transmission of a message in time, since the fixation of a message is the way of its preservation, transmission in time. The period for which a message can be transmitted in time depends on the characteristics of the material basis of the document, its ability to preserve its properties and the recorded message unchanged.

Along with the interpretation of the document as a communication channel through which the message is transmitted, there is another approach when the document itself or its content is considered as communicat (object transmitted in the process of communication), for the transmission of which in social communication a special channel is needed. In this case, the channels of communication are social institutions (or institutions) that ensure the collection, storage, search, and organization of the use of documents. This approach to understanding the structure of communication is due to the tasks of studying the activities of the relevant social institutions.

The selection of the type of documentary communication, in contrast to non-documentary, occurs in accordance with the characteristics of the communication channel. But the very understanding of the features of a channel in documentary communication can be different: it is a document as a channel for transmitting information or certain public institutions as channels for transmitting documents or documentary messages (that is, messages recorded in documents). We see the latter approach, for example, in the following statement: “In computer science, it is customary to distinguish between two types of information channels: documentary channels through which various documents are transmitted; non-documentary channels are channels of personal communication between people” [ 11 . S. 57]. From this statement, we can conclude that in documentary communication, the channels are social institutions through which the documents themselves are transmitted.

In bibliographic studies, the concept of documentary communications is widely used by O. P. Korshunov. He writes: “Documentary communications are processes or ways of disseminating (transferring) information in society, carried out with the help of documents (as opposed to, say, oral communication between people)” [ 7. S. 15]. It is not clear from this formulation whether the document acts as a channel of communication or as a communicat. The content of the expression is clarified when describing the "system of documentary communications", which is defined as "the system of the functioning of documents in society", which ensures the creation, analytical and synthetic processing, storage, distribution and use of documents as carriers of social information [Ibid.].

It clearly speaks of documents as messages, the transmission of which is provided by special channels - social institutions (editor-publishing, book trade, librarianship, archiving, scientific information activities, bibliographic activities). O. P. Korshunov limits the analyzed system with the elements “document-consumer”, i.e. considers not the entire cycle of social information communication, but only part of it. This is explained by the task of the theory of bibliography developed by him as an intermediary between the document and the consumer.

The document as a message functioning in “a system of social communication that ensures the public use of ideal (spiritual) products of all types and forms”, is also considered by A. V. Sokolov [ 12. S. 47]. In his opinion, “an information channel is the path along which a message moves from the sender to the consumer of information,” but such a channel has a material form only “in the case of wired or radio communications”; “in other cases, these channels are abstractions, not material things” [Ibid. S. 45]. The concepts of a documentary and non-documentary channel according to A. V. Sokolov “are thought of as information channels transmitting respectively documented and undocumented texts” [Ibid.].

In our opinion, the stated approach does not contradict the interpretation of the document as a material channel for the transmission of information. A communication channel is a really real or imagined line of communication between a communicant and a recipient. Taking into account the term elements proposed by O. P. Korshunov and Yu. N. Stolyarov, document channel- this is a communication channel, which is a document, or a document as a channel through which a message is transmitted; non-documentary channel - an information communication channel that does not imply fixing information in a document. The "documentary channel" of communication is the channel through which documents are transmitted as material objects; "non-documentary communication channel" - a channel through which documents are not transmitted.

The features of documentary communication, according to A. V. Sokolov, are as follows: “Documentary communication, which is generally a reflection of the ideal in the ideal, consists of three reflective processes: 1) the creation of a document (reflection of the ideal in the material); 2) storage of the document (self-reflection of the material); 3) perception, understanding of the document (reflection of the material in the ideal)" [ 12. S. 9].

It can be noted that in certain types of communication, a document is precisely and only a material communicative moving along a communication channel. For example, when sending letters in postal communication, transporting and selling publications in the book trade, etc. However, in these cases, the transfer (sending, sale, issuance) of a document is carried out in the same way as any material object in a material (non-informational in nature ) communications.

The characteristic of documentary communication takes on a slightly different shade if the document is considered a special form of a message transmission channel - a channel in which a message is transmitted in a form fixed on a material (material, substantive) carrier, i.e. in documentary form.

It would probably be more accurate to define documentary communication as one that uses the document as both a communication channel and a communicator at the same time. Documentary communication is communication mediated by a document, where a document is used to convey information (messages) from a communicant to a recipient. If we use the simplest scheme of information communication, then the document is primarily a communication channel that contains the communicat (transmitted message) in a fixed (fixed) form.

In general, we can say: documentary communication is a way of implementing information communication between a communicant And recipient through the document (with the help of the document). In this case, the document can perform different roles: 1) communication channel, through which the message is transmitted (the communicator is a message - an information object); 2) communication as a material object, transmitted in the process of material communication, where the channels of communication are certain social institutions; 3) communication as an information object, those. a certain part of the information (message) intended for transmission in the process of information communication.

Consider possible ways (channels) of information transfer in documentary communication (Fig. 1).

Rice. 1. Movement of information in documentary communications

The first and simplest version of documentary communication is one where information is transmitted from the communicant "K" to the recipient "R" through the document "D"; no additional means of movement of documents or information are used.

The second option: the document is transmitted by a communication intermediary (CP) - a means of transmitting a document, which is mail or a courier (or other social institutions).

The third option: the original D-1 document is used by a communication intermediary (CP) - a means of transmitting information from a document (telegraph, telefax, electronic document delivery centers, computer network providers) - to create a new document or reflect the contents of the original document in a non-documentary form ( e.g. on a computer screen). The consumer of information receives a new document - "D-2", identical in content to the original, or information from the document in an undocumented form.

The fourth option illustrates the movement of information in the publishing-bookselling-library system: the original document "D-1" is converted by the first communication intermediary "KP-1" (publishing house or editorial office of the periodical) into a derivative document "D-2", which arrives at the second communication intermediary "KP-2" (book trade system and libraries), and from here "D-2" gets to the consumer of information.

The fifth and sixth variants of documentary communication illustrate the relationship between a person and an institution, in which the initiator of communication is the client of the institution, who not only transmits information, but also counts on feedback in the form of a second (other) document.

In the fifth variant, the communicant is a client (user, subscriber, addressee) who applies to the institution with a request or application, drawn up as "D-1", and expects a response in the form of another document "D-2". The creation and transmission to the client of the second document is not guaranteed, because the answer may be given verbally or not at all.

The sixth option is that the client (user, subscriber, addresser) submits to the institution a request, application or proposal in a documented form - "D-1", and the response to the request (reaction to the application or proposal) may be contained in another document " D-2", which does not go directly to the client, but to the archive of the institution along with the original document. Subsequently, such documents, in case of their public significance, will end up in the state archive, from where they can be claimed by any other user.

In the last two versions of documentary communication, communicants and recipients alternate roles. However, it can be seen that in any communication the roles of the communicant and the recipient are not fixed forever; the same person acts either as a communicant or as a recipient.

The documentary communication system (DOCS) is characterized by A. V. Sokolov as one that organizes the publication of documents, as well as the preservation of unpublished documents in order to transfer the information contained in them to social memory through “social communication institutions” - “archives, bibliographic services, libraries, publishing and printing houses, book trade, abstract services" [ 13. pp. 157–162]. The documentary communication system is presented as a scheme that connects not only the communicant and the recipient, but also the world of empirical reality and social memory, including in the form of “reified social memory” (funds of documents) and non-reified social memory (NVSP). The documented part of social memory includes the “archival document fund” (FAD) and “public use documents” (PDO) consisting of publications.

The diagram shows that the world of empirical reality is a source of information for the communicant "K", who can transfer this information to the recipient "R" directly or fix it in an unpublished document (relatively speaking, in a manuscript). The manuscript is submitted to the publishing house or editorial office of the periodical, where they decide whether it is appropriate or not to publish the material presented (more precisely, to publish information from this document in another - published - document). In case of non-publication (or publication), the manuscript goes into the "fund of archival documents", and in case of publication, a new document is created - " public document, which goes to the DOP fund. In addition, information from the DOP enters the non-reified social memory, which transmits the relevant information to both the recipient and the communicant. The central part of the scheme is the materialized social memory, the main component of the documentary information system.

At first glance, the scheme seems somewhat complicated, but it generally correctly reflects the movement of information in society through documents, as well as the movement of documents themselves and the organization of their storage and use. The presented scheme reflects the full life cycle of documents, from the conception and creation of documents to the organization of their storage and use of information by consumers. DOKS according to A. V. Sokolov includes all the structural elements necessary for the life of the document. However, this diagram does not show all types of documents created and functioning in society, but only the movement of information through documents intended for publication, which can only accidentally remain unpublished.

One can note the importance of the presented DOS scheme for understanding the fundamental difference between the library in which the “DOP fund” is formed, i.e. published documents, from the archive, where unpublished documents are stored. Of course, in real life, the functions of a library and an archive can be “confused”: libraries create departments of manuscripts that function as an archive, and archives can also store published documents, for example, in the Print Archive of the Book Chamber or in archives where periodicals of the past are stored. . However, such facts are exceptions that only confirm the rule: published documents are sent to libraries, and unpublished documents are sent to archives.

A special and fairly significant part of all documents are unpublished documents. Among them may be those that were intended for publication, but for one reason or another remained unpublished, and those that from the moment of their creation were not intended for publication, but performed the functions of auto-communication or communication between individuals (i.e. interpersonal communication) , or between a person and a certain institution, or between different institutions, or divisions of the same institution. The latest documents are called “not intended for publication” or “clerical”, “business”, “official”. Note that the expression "published documents" refers only to those documents that are embodied in a material form intended for wide distribution. Documents from which the information was the basis of the published document, themselves remain unpublished. In some cases, they also publish such documents that were not originally intended for publication, more precisely: they publish information from them in new - published - documents. The unpublished documents themselves are stored in archives (personal or public) if their owners deem necessary such storage or it is provided for by state rules.

The person who addresses the institution is designated as a "client", although from the point of view of communication theory, he acts either as a communicant (addresser), or as a recipient (addressee). The same can be said about other elements of the system of movement of unpublished documents in the institution, except for the archive of the institution, where documents are transferred both from the office and from the structural divisions of the institution. At the end of a certain period, some documents from the archive of the institution are transferred for storage to the state archive, while others are subject to disposal (destruction). The period of storage in the archive of each type of documents is determined by special lists and a commission for the examination of the value of documents. We can say that this scheme also reflects the structure of the DOCS, which includes all elements of the life of the document - from its inception to use - but only in relation to unpublished service documents.

As the above examples show, DOKS is a system that combines all elements of a certain type of documentary communication. There is a DOKS of a publishing-bookselling-library type, in which unpublished documents are turned into published ones, their distribution and use are organized, and a DOKS of a managerial type, in which unpublished service documents function.

Alla Anatolyevna Solyanik suggested a different approach to structuring the system of documentary communications: “documentary communication (DC) is [these] processes and means of information exchange in society with the help of documents. It ensures the movement of social information in time and space through the creation, preservation and distribution of documents" [ 14. S. 5].

According to A. A. Solyanik, “the functioning of the DC provides for the constant movement of documents through communication channels from the communicant (creator of documented information) to the recipient (consumer of documented information)” [Ibid. pp. 6–7]. Note that here we are talking about the movement of documents, not information. This approach allows us to consider the document flow as "a set of documents distributed in time and space that move through communication channels from creators and producers to users" [Ibid.].

“Document systems (DS)” are defined as systems that “ensure the life cycle of documents, i.e. their production, transportation, collection, storage and use” [Ibid. S. 8]. Thus, A. A. Solyanik calls both communication and the corresponding systems “documentary”, but from the point of view of terminological consistency, “document communication” and “document system” should consist only of the documents themselves, while here we are not talking about only about documents, but also about various components of a communication system designed to transmit documentary information. Therefore, it is terminologically more accurate to call such communication and the corresponding systems documentary. Since each of these social institutions can be represented as a system, one of the elements of which is a document, they are documentary systems. Given the ultimate goal of these systems, they can be called communication, i.e. in general - documentary communication systems (DCS).

A. A. Solyanik offers the following classification of document systems (which, in my opinion, should be called documentary communication systems), referring to Yu. N. Stolyarov: generative, transit and terminal.

Generative Documentary Communication Systems- those that provide the production of documents. They include groups of authors, scientific and educational institutions, publishing houses, editorial offices of the media, printing houses, television and radio companies, recording studios, photo and film studios, video enterprises, manufacturers of products on optical discs, etc. As well as any person (member of the society) and any institution that documents its own activities.

Transit Documentary Communication Systems- those that organize the movement of documents, their transportation: subscription and intermediary agencies, electronic document delivery centers, book trade establishments, post offices, courier services, computer network providers, etc.

Terminal document communication systems – These are systems designed to collect and store documents, organize their use. They include libraries, archives, NTI bodies, information companies, museums, audio and video libraries, owners of computer servers, etc.

Thus, A. A. Solyanik calls documentary communication systems separate subsystems of documentary communications of society as a whole.

Unlike DKS (which reflects the full life cycle of a document), according to A. V. Sokolov, DKS, according to A. A. Solyanik, is a structural unit of the general life cycle of a document. A. A. Solyanik considers, within each specific DCS, not the entire life cycle of documents, but its certain stages. According to the correspondence to such stages, types of DCS are distinguished. Another difference is that A. A. Solyanik listed among the DCS those that reflect the movement of not only published text documents, but also other types of documents.

In general, the structure documentary communication systems can be shown as a set of DCSs that perform various functions in relation to the communicant and the recipient and only in their totality provide a full cycle of life of documents.

So, the documentary communications of society are diverse. They differ in the nature of the communication (only information from the document or the document itself is transmitted), the presence and types of communication intermediaries (mail, publishing house, book trade, libraries, offices, archives), the purpose of the document that is transmitted - (for publication or use with personal or official purpose).

It is possible to schematically show different variants of documentary communications, but, as a rule, these schemes are very generalized, devoid of specific details. If the author tries to show the complex structure of a documentary communication system in one diagram, the diagram becomes overloaded, its content becomes difficult to perceive.

Documentary communications system is a social system consisting of different authors (communicators) and consumers of information (recipients), as well as different channels of documentary communications. This system is quite complex, because it has several subsystems that differ in the types of documents and methods of their transmission, or the movement of information contained in these documents.

Despite the noted difficulties in generalizing the composition of the documentary communications system, its components are clearly defined. These are both the documents themselves, and their authors and users, as well as communication intermediaries between the communicant and the recipient - various social institutions that provide certain processes for creating, processing, storing, distributing and organizing the use of documents.

List of sources

1. Ivanov V. F. Aspects of mass communication. Part 1. Information and communication: monograph. / V. F. Ivanov. - Kyiv: Acad. Ukr. Press, Freedom Center. Presses, 2009. - 190 p.

2. Kashkin V. B. Introduction to the theory of communication: textbook. allowance / V. B. Kashkin; Voronezh. state tech. un-t. - Voronezh: Publishing House of VGTU, 2000. - 174 p.; The same [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: http://www.countries.ru/library/intercult/kash.rar

3. Konetskaya V.P. Sociology of communication / V. P. Konetskaya. - Moscow, 2004. - 201 p.; The same [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: http://www.i-u.ru/biblio/archive/koneckaja_sociologija/

4. Basics communication theory: textbook. for university students studying in the specialty 020300 "Sociology" / M. A. Vasilik, M. S. Vershinin, V. A. Pavlov, N. R. Barabanova, A. K. Bondarev; ed. M. A. Vasilika. - Moscow: Gardariki, 2003. - 615 p.

5. Sokolov A.V. General theory of social communication: textbook. allowance / A. V. Sokolov. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of Mikhailov V.A., 2002. - 460 p.; The same [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: http://www.i-u.ru/biblio/archive/sokolov_social_communication/2.aspx

6. Vasilyk M. A. Communication Science or Communication Theory? On the problem of theoretical identification / M. A. Vasilik // Actual problems of communication theory: Sat. scientific tr. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, 2004. - P. 4–11; The same [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: http://www.russcomm.ru/rca_biblio/v/vasilik.shtm

7. Korshunov O.P. Bibliography. General course: textbook. for bible. fak. in-t of culture, high fur boots and ped. universities / O. P. Korshunov. - Moscow: Prince. Chamber, 1990. - 232 p.

8. Korshunov O.P. Bibliography. Fundamentals of theory and methodology: textbook. for students of higher textbook institutions studying in the specialty 071201 - Bibl.-inform. activity / O. P. Korshunov, T. F. Likhovid, T. A. Novozhenova; ed. O. P. Korshunova. - Moscow: FAIR Publishing House, 2009. - 336 p.

9. Korshunov O.P. Bibliography. General course. Part 1. Fundamentals of the theory of bibliography: textbook. for bibl.-inform. fak. universities. Section 1 / O. P. Korshunov; Moscow state University of Culture and Arts. - Moscow, 2001. - 105 p.

10. Korshunov O.P. Once again about terminology / O. P. Korshunov // Bibliography. - 1999. - No. 5. - S. 156-157.

11. Main problems of informatics and library and bibliographic work: textbook. allowance for the Bible. fak. / ed. A. V. Sokolova; Leningrad. state Institute of Culture, Dept. informatics. - Leningrad, 1976. - 319 p.

12. Sokolov A.V. Information approach to documentary communication: textbook. allowance / A. V. Sokolov; Leningrad. state Institute of Culture. - Leningrad, 1988. - 85 p.

13. Sokolov A.V. Social communications: textbook.-method. allowance. Part 1 / A. V. Sokolov. - Moscow: Profizdat, 2001. - 222 p. – (Modern library; issue 16).

14. Solyanik A. A. Documentary streams and arrays: Navch. posib. for vishch. navch. zakl. culture and art / A. A. Solyanik; Hark. holding acad. culture. - Kh., 2000. - 109 p.

15. Stolyarov Yu. N. Documentary resource: textbook. allowance for students of higher education. textbook institutions / Yu. N. Stolyarov. - Moscow: Liberea, 2001. - 149 p.

16. Stolyarov Yu. N. Documentary resource: textbook. allowance for higher textbook institutions / Yu. N. Stolyarov. - Moscow: Liberea, 2009. - 223 p. - (Special series "Professional workshop").

17. Stolyarov Yu. N. Documentological thesaurus [Electronic resource] / Yu. N. Stolyarov. – Access mode: http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/Articles/crimea/2004/doc/310.pdf, free. - Zagl. from the screen.

18. Stolyarov Yu. N. Development of documentary terminology / Yu. N. Stolyarov// Nauch.-tekhn. inform. Ser. 1. Org. and methodology inform. work. - 2004. - No. 8. - P. 67–79.

19. Stolyarov Yu. N. Terms derived from the word "document" / Yu. N. Stolyarov / / Nauch. and tech. b-ki. - 2000. - No. 10. - P. 64–68.

The Shvetsov family, including the current Minister of Education, who was the rector of the richest non-state university before coming to state power, is associated in the Republic of Mari El primarily with paid educational activities and the “making together” of large capital at the expense of the parents of students and some government injections ...

Coming to G.N. Shvetsova to state power did not moderate the interests of this family in personal enrichment, but, on the contrary, increased her passion for money, gain, property, boundless power over people, their minds and souls. Today it is already clear what damage to the formation of the republic has been brought and is being brought by G.N. Shvetsova and her relatives(husband N.M. Shvetsov, children, brothers and sisters, etc.) ...

So what is this harm. Let's list the points:

1) Available fusion of the non-state sphere of education and the current government. The authorities support and help the Shvetsovs, and not the state education system of the republic, and the Shvetsovs take everything that the authorities allow them, brazenly, without looking back and not ashamed of anyone or anything: money, power, real estate ... And the authorities receive handouts from them through the MOSU, arrange to study in Moscow, the wife of the president, etc. Now no one separates from each other such names as the Shvetsovs, Garanins, Ushakovs and, obviously, the Markelovs.

2) Shvetsov time of education management is the time commercialization of education. There is no need to talk about the tilt towards non-state educational institutions - it is already clear to everyone. At the same time, in the first place is the benefit for the Shvetsovs. A new non-state university is being created, led by the son of G.N. The Shvetsov-Garanins, with the active support of President Markelov, are ready to bite everyone's throat, if only to destroy it, in order to open the way for non-state universities. Meanwhile, lawyers, economists, psychologists, accountants, etc., who are trained by non-state universities, are on the stock exchange more than teachers, despite the mass release of the latter in connection with the optimization of the education system ...

Given the broad interest of the authorities in non-state education, municipal schools are left to fend for themselves. Today, the Minister is forcing them to earn their own living by calling for the organization of paid additional services. There is a brazen withdrawal of the state from education.

3) amaze attempts to legally substantiate their malicious activities. Therefore, it is difficult to immediately understand their tricks, their organizational steps, transactions with property ... Not a single law enforcement structure will show interest in how the buildings of state, municipal organizations and institutions pass into the hands of the Shvetsovs. Cause? Either there is not enough intelligence and professionalism, or the chair is more important, or they simply do not know how to think freely and boldly ... Recall that the Shvetsovs now have not only the former building of school No. 25, but also PU No. 12, and also, they say, the building of the ministry itself education, which is in the city center, next to MarGTU (those who did not pass the competition for a state university can be caught right on the street, nearby, and dragged to their non-state one!). Shvetsov universities already occupy premises in the OPTs under the President of the RME (I wonder for what fee?). The building of the Museum of Public Education was sold. To whom? Isn't it through a third party?

It would not hurt to check how much and how all this was done, who among the government officials of the “gray house” is assisting in this.

The Shvetsov mafia also infiltrated the dissertation council of the Marpediological Institute, which is openly and secretly controlled by them, the Shvetsovs. They indulge their own (“protect” their children, “sons-in-law”, their graduate students who came from somewhere, etc.) and filter out strangers, objectionable. And a lot of money is spinning there, where and to whom does it go, through which official cash desk? Where is Rector V.E. Yegorov, after all, this council is attached to his institute?

6) G.N. Shvetsova purposefully and persistently, despite the resistance of the Mari national movement, conducts the policy of “squeezing” national schools and the national component out of the RTR Core Curriculum. Evidence of this is dozens of already closed rural schools, almost all of which are Mari national. Such a procedure is carried out even in the middle of the school year, which is prohibited by law. In other regions of the Russian Federation, even 4 students are taught, while maintaining a rural school, in order to save the village and the rural population, which still feeds the country and you too, gentlemen Shvetsov. Forced work to close rural schools is not only a complication of the already difficult conditions for the existence of the rural Mari population of the republic, but also purposeful work to destroy the economy of the republic and the state. And this is carried out under the flag of the optimization of educational institutions, proclaimed at the level of the Russian Federation. But how do local education reformers understand it? Certainly not how restructuring networks of educational institutions located in rural areas, as prescribed in Russian documents; they understand, first of all, as the possibility of their closure and financial savings on our poor education. And what is the meager money of education being saved for? Is it not for the enrichment of the already rich power?

7) A sign of the policy of G.N. Shvetsova, in fact, as well as President L.I. Markelova, is ruthless and consistent reprisals against dissidents and generally smart people, i.e. independent and therefore dangerous. The minister actively participated in the “witch hunt” after the election of the president of the RME and therefore has the most direct relation to the fact that after the elections dozens of professional mari, school leaders and teachers, were fired from their jobs for exercising their constitutional right of free will, lit up in ties with an opposition candidate hated by the authorities (Dolgov or Korotkov). The warped fate of these dismissed people is on your conscience, Galina Nikolaevna!

8) The entire policy in education, dictated today by the Shvetsovs, is based on education in people abnormal feelings and qualities: intolerance towards people of other views and other nationalities, fear, hypocrisy, servility, unhealthy pragmatism ... That is, those qualities that will never lead us to a civil society, where each person is interesting because he is an individual, individual, free in thoughts. The current minister's policy fundamentally contradicts the laws of a democratic state.

The institute of scammers is widely practiced and encouraged by the minister, a duty team of slanderers, critics from the field of education (a team for cracking down on objectionable people) and ostentatious leaders of education, defending all the actions of the minister with foam at the mouth and signing all the papers "rigged" by her (head of the Orsha regional public organization, director Verkh-Ushnur school, etc.).

Hence, trusting people like Shvetsova to lead the industry related to the education of young people is simply anti-state and inhumane.

9) Terrible harm to education is caused by window dressing and tinsel, which is used as a cover for Shvetsova's inaction in solving the real problems of education. The latter, coupled with selfish interests, give rise to this window dressing, which is so fond of the President of the RME. For example, the unwillingness to solve the real problems of the Mari national education and the desire to exclude the Mari state language from the educational process at all costs give rise to an ostentatious 18-variant Basic Curriculum. The desire to somehow cover up the mass closure of rural national schools gives rise to an ostentatious plan for the opening of a national preschool educational institution and a national school, which is approved in early October at a meeting at the Ministry of Education. And pushing through the USE turns out to be in reality a solid additional income for the top of the ministry and a lot of honors, Russian awards, which are prepared for future use in difficult times, when it will obviously be necessary to answer to society for the harm done to education.

More about showing off. During the visits of foreign guests, experts, inspectors of any rank always show the same districts, schools, leaders - reliable, kindly, devoted to the minister; build "Potemkin villages". The ambassadors of the Finno-Ugric states, who arrived to learn about the real situation of the Mari in the republic, their language and schools, were taken to one of these "duty" schools - Verkh-Ushnur. On the eve of their arrival, every movement and every word of every teacher and student was rehearsed; pies to demonstrate national cuisine were brought from Yoshkar-Ola.

The conclusion is the following: the educational sphere of the republic with the support of the Markelovs and Garanins has become nothing more than patrimony of the Shvetsovs. Isn't that harmful? Another one!!!

Independent source

100 great secrets of World War II Nepomniachtchi Nikolay Nikolayevich

THE STRANGE FATE OF GENERAL SMYSLOVSKII (According to N. Shvetsov)

THE STRANGE FATE OF GENERAL SMYSLOVSKII

(According to N. Shvetsov)

On the night of May 3, 1945, a group of people in German uniform appeared near the border of tiny Liechtenstein. The border guards were about to repel the attack of uninvited guests, when a man jumped out of the German car and shouted: "Don't shoot, there is a Russian general."

As it soon became clear, the military unit that came from Austria was part of the Wehrmacht and consisted of Russian white émigrés and Soviet prisoners of war who had gone over to the side of the Nazis. They were commanded by Major General Arthur Holmston. But in fact he was Russian, his last name was Smyslovsky. There, on the border, all the soldiers dressed in German uniforms were disarmed and interned.

Smyslovsky is not Vlasov, little is known about him in Russia. One of the first to write about him in the recently published book in Russia "Unknown Liechtenstein" was the former ambassador to Switzerland and concurrently in Liechtenstein A. Stepanov.

But in the West, the writing public paid a lot of attention to Smyslovsky. Of particular interest was the book published in 1996 by the Swiss historian Peter Geiger and the Austrian publicist Manfred Schlapi, which is called “Russians in Liechtenstein. Flight and internment of the Holmston Wehrmacht army. 1945-1948". In Belgium in 1993, a film by Robert Enrico “Wind from the East” was shown on television, dedicated to the appearance in Liechtenstein of the Smyslovsky detachment, played by Malcolm McDowell.

Count Boris Alekseevich Smyslovsky was born in 1897 in Finland, at that time part of the Russian Empire. His mother Eleonora Malakhova was the godmother of one of the emperor's sisters. Grandfather - Infantry General Malakhov, who in 1905 commanded the troops of the Moscow Military District. Solzhenitsyn mentions Smyslovsky's father, a "short, bearded officer" in the tsarist army, in his book August 14th.

Our hero was also a tsarist guards officer, during the years of the Civil War he fought on the side of the White Guards and then left Russia. It was established that in the 1920s he was associated with German intelligence. After the German attack on the Soviet Union, he headed the reconnaissance and sabotage service, whose agents, in particular, were used for subversive work in the rear of the Soviet troops.

In early 1945, Smyslovsky, having become a major general, under the pseudonym Arthur Holmston, led the 6,000th "1st Russian National Army", all command posts in which were occupied by emigrants. But for all the hostility to the USSR, he was quite prudent, quickly figured out that Germany was facing an inevitable defeat, and therefore, he had to think about his own salvation. But where to hide after the war? Smyslovsky understood that if he ended up in the location of the troops of the Western allies, then there was still a risk of being extradited to the Soviet Union. Therefore, I decided to look for a neutral state, and one where its appearance would be hardly noticeable. The choice fell on Liechtenstein.

Together with Smyslovsky, about 500 people ended up in the principality, including 30 women and two children. Most of them were Soviet citizens who at one time were captured by the Germans. It is interesting that, according to the recognition of Baron von Falz-Fein, who now lives in Liechtenstein, who, by the will of fate, turned out to be a participant in the events then taking place, Prince Vladimir Kirillovich Romanov, the son of Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich, was in the Smyslovsky group before it entered Liechtenstein. He also fled from persecution by the allies, especially the French. There were reasons for this.

During the occupation of France, Vladimir Kirillovich continued to stay in this country. Moreover, the Nazis, as a sign of special attention, assigned guards to him, which, of course, could serve as a pretext for subsequent accusations of the prince of collaborationism. Therefore, when the allies landed in France, the head of the Romanov dynasty left it in exile, filling the car with royal attributes taken with him. Once in Austria, he met Smyslovsky there and went with him to Liechtenstein. But they didn't let him in. Only the military were subject to internment, and the Liechtenstein authorities refused to accept all civilians, including the prince and his entourage. Vladimir Kirillovich continued to stay in Austria, where he met with Petain and Laval, whom he then betrayed to the allies ... Later he ended up in Spain, still calling himself the heir to the Russian throne.

The fate of those who, together with Smyslovsky, came to Liechtenstein, was being decided over the course of several years. Already in August 1945, representatives of the Soviet military mission appeared in the principality, who were instructed to achieve the repatriation of members of the Smyslovsky group to the Soviet Union. Difficult negotiations were held with representatives of the Liechtenstein government. The same von Faltz-Fein told about them.

I was attracted to the negotiations as a person who knew German and Russian well, - said Eduard Aleksandrovich. - I participated in them as an interpreter. Negotiations went on with raised voices. The Russians wanted all Soviet citizens, along with Smyslovsky, to be handed over to the USSR. Moreover, these demands were often accompanied by words that I did not dare to translate into German.

Members of the mission met with the internees, did not skimp on assurances that no one would threaten those who returned to their homeland. A festive evening was even arranged, during which Russian songs were sung and toasts were made for the return to their homeland. Many have decided to return. Some of them worked for Liechtenstein farmers. When parting, the Liechtensteiners asked to write how they got there, how they settled down. “But, as far as I know,” Eduard Aleksandrovich finished his story, “not a single letter has arrived.”

However, von Faltz-Fein is not the only living participant in those dramatic events. The editors of Trud received a letter from P. Astakhov, who lives in Pereslavl-Zalessky, who from August to November 1945 worked as an interpreter for the Soviet repatriation commission. According to Astakhov's memoirs, at first the internees greeted the Soviet military coldly, with remarks like: “Stop agitating, gentlemen! Look for volunteers elsewhere. One of the internees bluntly stated: “Know, we served in the Red Army, we love our homeland - Russia, we love our people, loved ones left there. But also know that as long as Stalin and a clique of his henchmen exist in the USSR, our return to Russia will not take place.

There were other opinions as well. A certain person by the name of Ankudinov spoke in favor of returning home. “Let it be difficult for us,” he said, “a devastated country awaits us, but we are its citizens, we will return to our native land, where everything is close and expensive. I'm not the only one who thinks so." Already in August, the return of internees to the Soviet Union began. As Astakhov writes, E.A. participated in the preparation of their departure. von Faltz-Fein. “On the day of departure, each departing person was “offered” a glass of vodka filled to the brim with the wish of a good trip.”

Not everyone left. Some still did not dare to return to their homeland, believing that they would not be met there with flowers. After all, they were not only captured, but also put on German uniforms and even fought against their country. The authorities of Liechtenstein did not feel very comfortable either, realizing that the remnants of the Wehrmacht army were located on the territory of their state. This, of course, caused an unpleasant international outcry. Therefore, the local authorities not only did not detain Smyslovsky's people, but also unambiguously hinted to them that their presence here was undesirable.

Smyslovsky himself, despite the demands of the Soviet side for his extradition, remained in Liechtenstein until August 1947, when, together with a group of his former subordinates, he moved to Argentina, where he became an adviser to President Peron "on the fight against terrorism." At the same time, he was very successful in business. But he did not like life in Argentina. In a letter to von Faltz-Fein, he said that he missed Liechtenstein. The accumulated capital allowed Smyslovsky to return in 1966 and finally settle in his dear principality. Here he died in 1988, at the age of 91.

Why did Smyslovsky manage to avoid the fate of Vlasov, Kaminsky, Krasnov, Semyonov, Shkuro and others who fought on the side of the Nazis against their country? With such a question, I turned to the author of "Unknown Liechtenstein" A. Stepanov.

Smyslovsky, - said Andrei Ivanovich, - of course, was lucky that he took refuge in Liechtenstein, which, although it was a tiny country, remained neutral during the war. Many in the principality still believe that by hosting Smyslovsky and his group, their country has clearly demonstrated to the whole world how much human rights are respected here. After all, it saved from the Stalinist camps and even the death of hundreds of people. It is no coincidence that in 1980, in the presence of Smyslovsky, the 35th anniversary of the internment was solemnly celebrated in the capital of the principality of Vaduz, and in 1995, the 50th anniversary of this event was celebrated with the same pomp.

But, according to A. Stepanov, there is a more important reason why Smyslovsky calmly lived to a ripe old age. During the war years, the count was closely associated with the military counterintelligence operating on the territory of the Soviet Union. What he knew was of great interest to the Western intelligence services, because they were not interested in extraditing him to the Soviet Union. It can be said that Smyslovsky was under their tacit patronage throughout his post-war life. Communication with foreign intelligence did not prevent him from often declaring his patriotism, his love for Russia. But for all Russians, Smyslovsky will forever remain a stranger - a man in a fascist military uniform ...