|
Belarusans in the United States
Vitaut Kipel
University Press Of America, ® Inc.
Lanham _ New York - OxfordContents
· Note Regarding Terminology and Spelling
· How it Began
· Introduction
· Conceptualizing Belarus
o The Location of Belarusans and General Information
o The Republic, of Belarus
o Belarusans in Poland
o Belarusans in Latvia and Lithuania
o Belarusans in Ukraine
o Belarusans in Estonia, Karelia, Kazakhstan, Kirgyzstan
o Belarusans in the Russian Federation
o Belarusans in the Western Diaspora
o The Historical Background
o Terminology
o The Early and Medieval Period
o Decline of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
o Belarus Under Russian Occupation
o Belarusan Survival During the Nineteenth Century
o The Political Revival at the End of the Nineteenth-Beginning of the Twentieth Centuries
o Nasa Dola and Nasa Niva
o The Establishment of the Belarusan Democratic Republic
o The Belarusan Soviet Socialist Republic (BSSR)
o Western Belarus: A Part of Belarus in the Polish State
o Belarusan Catastrophe
o Belarus During World War II: 1939-1941; 1941-1945
o Belarus After World War II
o Notes
· Chapter I: Research, Publications, and Pertinent Statistics on Belarusan Emigration/Immigration
o English-language Publications
o Foreign-language Publications
o Belarusan-language Publications
o A Few Remarks About Statistics
o Notes
· Chapter II: Some Ethnic Characteristics of Belarusans
o Belarusan Surnames
o National Costume
o Weaving and Embroideries
o Pottery, Straw, Woodcarving
o Belarusan Cuisine
o Music, Song, and dancing
o Folk Theatre
o Customs
o Observances of Saint's Days
o Language
o Notes
· Chapter III: Waves and Causes of Emigration from Belarus
o The Belarusan Province of the Society of Jesus in America
o Former Insurgents as Immigrants
o Agricultural Colonies
o A Belarusan Populist, A Territorial U.S. Senator and Others
o Mass Emigration
o The Economy-The major Cause of the Emigration
o Political Emigrants
o Post-World War I Arrivals
o The World War II Years and the Post-World War II Wave
o Notes
· Chapter IV: Distribution. First Jobs
o Notes
· Chapter V: Initial Contacts with Organizations and the Beginning of Ethnic Awareness
o Religious Contacts
o Labor Unions
o Insurance, Self-Assistance Organizations
o Emergence of Belarusan Awareness
o Notes
· Chapter VI: Origins and Development of Belarusan Organizations
o Initial Stage
o Formation of Belarusan Political Organizations
o Attacks on Belarusans
o Notes
· Chapter VII: The Belarusan Masses Prior to World War II, and the War Years
o Religious Affiliations
o Anarchist Groups
o Leftist Groups, including "Progressive Belarusan Organizations"
o Organizations with a Pro-Russian Orientation
o Belarusan Activities in World War II
o Belarusan-Americans Re-activate Notes
· Chapter VIII: The Post-World War II Wave of Belarusan Immigration
o Initial Post-War Contacts
o The Status of Belarusan Emigrants in Eastern Europe
o D.P. Camps
o Belarusan Political Representation
o A Sociological Profile of the Post-World War II Immigration
o Fresh Initiatives in the Post-World War II Era
o The Mass Arrival of Belarusans D.P. `s in America
o The Organizational Period
o New Organizations
· Notes Chapter IX: Religious Structures
o Eastern Orthodoxy in Belarus and in the Diaspora
o Belarusan Catholic Christians of the Latin Rite
o Belarusan Catholic Christians of the Eastern Rite
o Belarusan Protestant Christians
o Belarusan Jews and Muslims
o Beginnings in the United States
o Church-related Organizations
o Churches
o Belarusan Orthodoxy in America
o The Activities of Belarusan Roman Catholics
o Belarusan Protestants
o Belarusan Old Believers
o Belarusan Muslims and Jews
o Belarusan participation in Multinational Organizations
o The Vision of a Coordinated Effort
o Notes
· Chapter X: Activities
o Programs of Social Assistance
o Political Activities
o Observance of Belarusan Independence Day
o The Sluck Military Action Against the Soviets
o Kastus Kalinouski's Anniversary
o Anniversaries of Purges in Soviet Byelorussia
o The Anniversary of Janka Kupala's Death
o The Second Belarusan Congress, June 27, 1944
o Support for Dissidents and Political Rallies
o Naturalization and Passport Identification Struggle
o Continuous Contacts with Washington, DC
o Educational Activities
o Lectures for Youth
o Summer Programs
o Excursions
o Cultural Representation
o Professional and Semi-Professional Theatre
o School Theatrical Activities
o Representation Through Singing, Dancing, and Music
o Exhibitions
o Belarusan Representation at Large
o Major Events in the Life of Belarusan-American Communities
o Bi-Annual Conventions
o Other Events
o Sports Activities
o Leadership of Belarusan Activities
o Belarusan Elements in the Activities of Leftist Groups
o The Activities of "Lost Belarusans"
o Notes
· Chapter XI: Publishing, Belarusica in Print Media, Readership, Records, Radio, and TV Coverage
o Belarusan Publishing in Western Europe After World War II
o Belarusan Publishing in the United States
o Coverage of Belarusans and Belarusan-Related Activities in Non-Belarusan Print media
o An Observation About Readership
o Belarusans in Other Media
o Radio
o TV Programs
o Records, Tapes
o Distribution of Belarusan Materials
o Notes
· Chapter XII: Belarusan-American Heritage and Relations
o Belarusan Research in the United States
o Belarusan Printed and Archival Resources
o Belarusan-American Relations
o Relations on Governmental and Organizational Level
o The Cultural Domain
o Belarusan-American Literary Relations
o Contacts Through Returnees
o A Flare of New Relations, and Decline
o Notes
· Chapter XIII: Acquired Characteristics of Belarusan-Americans
o Political Behavior and Concerns of the Group
o Notes
· Conclusion
· Appendix: Belarusan Alphabets
NOTE REGARDING TERMINOLOGY AND SPELLING
This study deals primarily with activities, events, and organizations that took place prior to August 25, 1991, the day that the Supreme Soviet of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic declared independence. On September 19, 1991, the name of the country was changed to Belarus, or the Republic of Belarus.
The adjective derived from the country's name is Belarusan or Belarusian. In keeping with the wide adoption of the former spelling, we have consistently used Belarusan. A confusing aspect of dealing with Belarusan proper names, family names, and geographical terms is the matter of transliteration.
One of the difficulties involved with Belarusan proper names and geographical terms is the matter of transliteration. The origin of the problem is that such names and terms are frequently written according to Russian or Polish transliteration tables. In this volume, Belarusan proper names and geographical terms are generally transliterated according to the Belarusan version of Latin script, except that, for the sake of historical accuracy, the many variant spellings used by various authors and organizations have been retained in the form in which they originally appeared. We ask the reader's forbearance.
HOW IT BEGAN
The idea of writing a history of Belarusans in the United States occurred to me during the Christmas season of 1955, as a newly-arrived immigrant.
My first residence in this country was in the city of Passaic, New Jersey where my parents had lived since 1949. Passaic was then a multi-ethnic town made up primarily of Jewish, Hungarian, German, and Slavic populations. Passaic remains ethnically mixed at the end of the 1990s, although the demographic composition has changed significantly. The Slavs included Poles, Rusyns, Slovaks, Ukrainians, and Belarusans. Belarusan was spoken on many street corners, with a noticeable concentration in the downtown area around Market and Monroe Streets. I naturally became interested in these immigrants— when and how they had come and what they were doing now. I asked my father about them, after all, he was already an "old timer," since he had lived in America since 1949. My father, although he was very conscious of everything Belarusan, dismissed my questions with a wave of his hand. "Oh, these are our people, all right, but they're as dense as an autumn night. There's no sense in bothering with them."
Such an attitude didn't please me very much. But only much later, I realized, that wave of my father's hand "don't bother" was pretty much the attitude of his entire generation to their compatriots, earlier Belarusan immigrants. And my mind was made up then to do some research about my compatriots. They were, indeed, "our people." From my first day in Passaic, I conversed with them in Belarusan—even though there was a cultural-chronological gap of a half-century between us.
To learn more about my landsmen I went to the local library and was impressed—its holdings were quite extensive, easily accessible with a good catalogue and a friendly and helpful staff. But to my surprise I found myself unable to locate any information about Belarusans. Nor were the librarians able to assist me in obtaining any information in their collection about Belarusan immigrants. My visit to the New York Public Library was no more helpful, although there was a sizeable collection of Belarusan books, there was no heading for Belarusans or White Russians (then the library form) in the United States in their catalogue.
It was my disappointment at coming up against all of these deadends that triggered the idea of doing something to fill in these blanks. It was inexplicable to me that no one had written anything about a group that was so numerous. How little had I known that it would not be an easy project.
Soon after my arrival I married Zora, who had been my close school friend since the years of World War II in Minsk and later, when we had studied together in Belgium. She became my wife and colleague in work. And for a while life took us in directions away from our new-found topic of interest, but the goal of my researching Belarusans in the United States was never too far from my mind.
As our family grew, we started to travel all over the United States; we wanted our children to know the land of their birth. Over a period of about 15-20 years we visited in a planned manner all fifty states. This was a good time to search for Belarusans as well. Wherever we went we would check telephone directories, local newspapers, historical societies, churches, and museums. And everywhere we found traces of a Belarusan presence, although they always were hidden in non-Belarusan wrappings. Such findings only strengthened my resolve, supported by the entire family, to search out, document and unwrap the saga of the Belarusan presence in the United States.
Thus, I embarked on research. This work is the product of long research, although I am writing it, the design of it belongs to the Kipel family. Many dozens of people have contributed to assembling this information. The list of those who have helped is very long. My thanks go, first of all, to my family — Zora, Alice, and George — because there is not a single fact, idea, or observation in this book that I have not discussed with them at one time or another. A new member of our family, Lorraine Kipel, deserves my sincere thanks for her patience and willingness to be a learning and absorbing audience. And I am especially pleased to have three young readers of these pages, our grandsons, Ales, Andrej and Anton Kipel.
Next, to my closest friends and colleagues for half a century - Mr. Anton Shukeloyts and Dr. Jan Zaprudnik, who offered help with suggestions, analyses, and criticism of many chapters.
To Catherine Ballarene, a very closj? family friend and colleague at the NYPL for decades, for being the first American reader, who discovered that she grew up with descendants of Belarusan soil. A special word of thanks to my friend Professor Thomas E. Bird, a participant-observer, for his editorial guidance and assistance. His background in Belarusan affairs and his willingness to respond from "the other side, the broad American reading public," have made his advice invaluable. Messrs. Michas Sienka, Walter Pielesa, Kastus Mierlak, Vasil Scecka, Alex Silvanovich, George Naumchyk, Uladzimier Rusak, Pavel Kulesh, Vasil Puntus, Mikola Latushkin, Vitali Kazan, the late Siarhej Karnilovich, Kastus Kalosha, Michas Bielamuk, Jazep Arciuch, George Stankievich, Michas Tulejka, Janka Rakovich, Alex Mickievich, Aleh Latyshonak, Nikodym Zyznieuski, Mikola Hrebien, Nadzia Zaprudnik, Julia Andnisyshyn, Tamara Kolba, and Families: Vasil and Halina Rusak, Langina and Uladzimer Bryleuski, Juzefa and Caslau Najdziuk, Dr. and Mrs. Vitaut Ramuk, Dolores and Vasil Melianovich, Maria and Piotra Kazhura, Dr. Alia Romano, Rev. K. Star and Metropolitan Mikalay were all generous in sharing their knowledge, time, and talent.
My thank you also goes to many members of The New York Public Library and especially to Messrs. Edward Kasinec and Robert Davis of the Slavic and Baltic Division for their assistance in bibliographical research.
Introduction
The Republic of Belarus is a new independent country which the average American has known little about until recently. With the `breakup of the Soviet Union, the news media now discuss this new state on an almost daily basis. A nation that was submerged in a larger entity and virtually unknown yesterday is becoming a familiar part of America's (and the world's) understanding of the evolving configuration of the East European landscape. In light of this, it is not surprising that the very notion of Belarusans in the United States will come as a fresh concept for many. Notwithstanding the ethnic diversity of this country, Belarusans remain a novel entry on the demographic map of the United States, despite the fact that they have been a presence in this country for well over a century.
Due to an unfortunate combination of historical circumstances, including bureaucratic inertia and the lack of preparedness on the part of U.S. Government officials and clerks, Belarusans were not recognized as an independent nationality group for a number of decades following their first arrival on these shores. Immigrants who came from the Belarusan areas of the Vilna and Smalensk provinces, and from the Grodno, Vitebsk, Minsk, Mogilev, Pinsk, Brest, and Gomel administrative regions of the former Russian Empire were lumped under several "official" ethnic categories by American immigration authorities, demographers, sociologists, politicians, and, unfortunately, by numerous academics as well. These categories were: "Lithuanian" (a rough translation of Licviny, the historical name for Belarusans, used until the beginning of this century); "Poles" for Belarusans of the Catholic faith; and "Russians" for Eastern Orthodox Belarusans. In addition, many Belarusans were listed as "other Slavs" or simply "others."
The majority of Belarusan immigrants were assigned the broadly defined category "Russians." This label was affixed when they first entered the administrative offices of the Russian Empire. No one asked them their opinion as to this categorization, and they were in no position to protest. Even if they had been asked, they could not have replied accurately, as they were politically and historically ignorant of (or indifferent to) their own past, their own ethnic identity. Only one thing concerned them—getting to "promised America." For the record keepers and statisticians, these peasant immigrants from Belarus became "Russians."
Upon their arrival on American soil, they were greeted and, once again, recorded as Russians. Tens of thousands of them came, constituting yet another part of history's "immigrant masses." However, these "Russian" masses were the creation of bureaucratic officials in the Russian Empire and their counterparts in the United States. For the convenience of bureaucrats and owing to administrative lethargy, persons who originated on Belarusan soil, who spoke Belarusan, and who brought, along with their meager belongings, Belarusan customs and traditions, became "Russians." This turn of events was more than mere injustice—it is one of the tragedies of the twentieth century that bureaucracies possessed the power to usurp a people's identity and replace it with a gross untruth.
The label "Russian" stuck to many. They accepted it, for how could they know otherwise? What could they do? At every turn, some authority figure assured them they were indeed "Russians."
But today, something can be done—by sociologists and ethnologists who have access to the data that will permit a rectification of this historical miscarriage of justice. The portmanteau term "Russian," found in statistical-reference works must be carefully examined by scholars to reveal the numerous nationalities which this category masks. To update a familiar saying, "Scratch a Russian-American and find a Belarusan (or a Ukrainian, a Georgian, et al.)."
The purpose of this volume is to provide documented information concerning these mislabeled Belarusan-Americans from the 17th century through the early decades of the 20th, and about post-World War II emigrants as well. A major aim is to decipher the irregularities resulting from faulty categorization and to analyze mistakes made by authors and agencies in the past. It is also the author's desire to stimulate further research on Belarusans in the United States, for these chapters constitute only an introduction to this large subject. A comprehensive study jpf this group remains the task of tomorrow's scholars and researchers.
Hopefully, this book and future research will make it possible for Belarusans to be properly located, identified, and given appropriate credit for the contributions they have made as citizens and co-builders of these United States.
Conceptualizing Belarus
o The Location of Belarus and General Information
Belarus can be located on a map with no difficulty: it lies between Poland on the West and Russia on the East, between Ukraine on the South and Lithuania/Latvia on the North.
Belarus's capital city, Minsk, is situated along the railroad route linking Warsaw and Moscow. In geographical terms, Belarus lies almost in the middle of Europe.
Unfortunately, to the average American reader, Belarus's geographical location is not very meaningful since the geography of Eastern Europe does not have a large place in the curriculum of most American schools. While the name Belarus elicits a vaguely East European response, it does not generally prompt a clear notion of the country.
On the other hand, more positively, many Americans are familiar with the names of Andrei Gromyko and Olga Korbut. These two well-known figures—one a long-time statesman, the other a world-class athlete, "the darling of the 1972 Olympics"—are both Belarusans. Gromyko hailed from the southeastern corner of the country, near the city of Gomel; Korbut from the northwestern corner, the city of Grodno.(l)
The northeastern corner of Belarus, with the city of Vitebsk as its focus, is for many associated with the name of Marc Chagall, who was born there and immortalized the city in his paintings. Like thousands of Jews who came from the Belarusan portion of the Pale, his Jewish upbringing and his Belarusan roots are inexorably intertwined with his personality and work. Many of Chagall's early paintings reflect his life in Vitebsk as well as other Belarusan themes.(2) Every American has heard of General Thaddeus Kosciuszko, and know about his place in American history. Few, however, are aware that he was born in Belarus, the scion of an ancient Belarusan noble family, associated with Belarus throughout his life. (3)
Together with Kosciuszko must be mentioned the name of Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz who was also born in the Brest region of Belarus and reflects in his writings on his childhood in Belarus-Lithuania (Litva).(4) Numerous other names are even more familiar to the present generation. For example, in sports Vitali Shcherba, winner of six gold medals at the Barcelona Summer Olympics, is a Belarusan. Heavy-weight lifter Aleksandr Kurlovich is another world champion.(5) Generations of Americans have idolized Alex Wojciechowicz, an American of Belarusan descent and the center on Fordham University's famous "seven blocks of granite," offensive line in the 1930s and a member of both the College and Professional Football Halls of Fame.(6)
Numerous other names that are familiar to Americans are associated with Belarusan territory. Among them, American labor leader David Dubinsky was born near the city of Brest in Belarus.(7)
The American labor movement has included a number of other outstanding figures who were born in Belarus, including Samuel Wolchok, Fannia Cohn, and Bessie Hillman.(8) Among the contemporary figures who have roots in Belarus are Maurice Hindus, who wrote that he was born "in my native village in Byelorussia."(9) A.M. Rosenthal, The New York Times's former executive editor, is "...the son of a Byelorussian-born house painter..."(10)
An outstanding military figure, General Aleksandr Barmin, from Mogilev, authored an important book, One Who Survived, 1972.(11)
Many Americans have heard such place names as Minsk, Pinsk, Brest, Smolensk, Vilna, Gomel, Mogilev, Polotsk, Mozyr, and the region of the Pripet Marshes.* These are place names associated with various historical events, especially of World War II vintage; places where important battles were fought. A few Belarusan cities are known for world-significant historical events: the act of the Union between the Western and the Eastern branches of Christianity occurred in the city of Brest in 1596. The city of Vilna, an important place in the history of Eastern Europe and Judaism in that region, was the capital of the Belarusan-Lithuanian state for several centuries.
Belarus, or more precisely, the city of Minsk, the capital of the Republic, appears in the American press now and again in connection with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Some years before that tragedy, the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, spent some time as a factory worker in Minsk. This phase of his life continues to intrigue history buffs. Thirty years later, in 1993, American writer Norman Mailer spent time in Minsk researching Oswald's Belarusan sojourn.(12)
More recently Belarusan territory has been associated with the tragedy in Chernobyl and the mass graves of Kurapaty, near Minsk.(13)
As can be seen, the average American has been exposed to a considerable amount of information about the concept of Belarus, but often fails to make the connection between these names, places, and events in Eastern Europe and the country currently known as the Republic of Belarus [RB].
Nor is the average American citizen aware that among his neighbors are many thousands of fellow Americans of Belarusan descent. Most Americans would be surprised to learn that descendants of the country today called Belarus have lived in the United States since colonial times.
These aspects of the Belarusan presence in America will be considered in greater detail further on. For now let us discuss some general facts about Belarus and Belarusans.
o The Republic of Belarus
The Republic of Belarus, prior to 1991 known as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic (abbreviated as BSSR), includes approximately two-thirds of all Belarusan ethnographic territory; the bulk of the remainder belongs to the Russian Federation, with other portions located in present-day Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, and Russia.
The population of Belarus is over 10,000,000 people; over 2,000,000 Belarusans live in other republics of the former Soviet Union.
Minsk, the capital of Belarus, has a population of close to two million people. The majority of Belarusans, about 80%, profess the Eastern Orthodox faith; about 15% are Roman Catholics. The remainder are Baptists, Old Believers, Jews, and Muslims.
Until a few decades ago, Belarusans were engaged almost exclusively in agriculture, lumber and wood-processing industries. Flax, potatoes, wood products, agricultural commodities, and alcohol were the major items of export.
Today, Belarus is an industrial nation with diversified enterprises—the chemical industry, machine building, and electronics prominent among them. Its most important resources include forests, salt deposits, and good arable land. Belarus's production of potash is the largest in Europe, surpassing even the Russian deposits in the Ural mountain region.
The BSSR, like the entire Soviet Union, was governed by the Communist Party which directed a centralized economy. The complex difficulties involved in moving toward a market economy and a democratic form of government are enormous. But steps are being made in this direction.
o Belarusans in Poland
Bielastochchyna, i.e., the region of Bialystok in the Polish State, is a territory where Belarusans have lived since prehistoric times. Belarusans inhabit the eastern parts of the region, including such cities and towns as Bielastok, Bielsk, Sakolka, Hajnauka, Siamiatychy, Zabludava, and several other localities. The territory is approximately 10,050 square kilometers, with an estimated Belarusan population of between 300,000 and 500,000. This region formed part of the Russian Empire prior to World War I. It was incorporated into the newly-formed Polish State in 1919-20. In 1939, it became part of Soviet Byelorussia and, following the Yalta Conference in 1945, it was returned to Poland.
Belarusans in Poland enjoy some cultural freedom. There are several Belarusan organizations, some schooling is conducted in Belarusan, a weekly newspaper, Niva, is published, weekly and daily radio and T.V. programs are broadcast in Belarusan, and there is limited book publishing.
Aware of the strength of cultural polonization, the Belarusan population has become politically active and participates as a Belarusan bloc in regional and local elections.(15).
o Belarusans in Latvia and Lithuania
Belarusans in Latvia are concentrated around the cities of Dzvinsk and Lucina, in the region called Latgalia. Those in Lithuania live on Belarusan ethnic territory around the city of Vilna and within counties bordering on Belarus.
In excess of two decades, from the 1920s into the 1940s Belarusans were active in these regions, conducting their own schools and political parties, with the cities of Dzvinsk and Vilna serving as important political and cultural centers of Belarusan life. This situation changed dramatically after World War II. Until the mid-1980s Belarusans were not permitted to carry on any organized activities in these two countries. This policy has begun to change in the 1990s and Belarusans are making some gains in developing their cultural and community life in both states.
Older statistics and current research estimates indicate that the Belarusan population of Latvia is approximately 120,000 and that of Lithuania is in the neighborhood of 100,000.(16, 17)
o Belarusans in Ukraine
The indigenous Belarusan population of Ukraine, found in the Palessie region and near the city of Charnihau numbers between 50,000 and 100,000. Many Belarusans migrated at the beginning of the 20th century to the port of Odessa and other industrial and mining centers of Ukraine. Over 400,000 Belarusans presently live in Ukraine.(18)
o Belarusans in Estonia, Karelia, Kazakhstan, Kirgyzstan
The industrial centers of Estonia, especially Tallinn and Kokhtla-Jarve, attracted the Belarusan working class who continue to live in this northernmost Baltic republic, but retain very close ties with their homeland.
Belarusans in Karelia, Kazakhstan, Kirgyzstan, and other regions of Central Asia are the descendants of political prisoners and deportees who were uprooted from their homeland either during the tsarist period, or under the Soviets. They number in the hundreds of thousands.(19)
o Belarusans in the Russian Federation
As has been indicated above, various parts' of Belarusan ethnographic territory are found today in the Russian Federation, with a Belarusan population of about 500,000. These include such cities as Klincy, Navazybkau, Smalensk, Staradub, and areas northeast of Belarus. In addition, Belarusans are widely distributed throughout the remainder of the Russian Federation. Hundreds of thousands of Belarusans live in Siberia, descendants of immigrants who arrived at the beginning of the 20th century. Thousands more are the descendants of Belarusan prisoners who were not allowed by the Soviet authorities to return to their Belarusan homeland. Many others are migrant workers, deported during various periods of the Soviet reign, who remained there permanently. Over 150,000 Belarusans in Moscow and St. Petersburg, as well as the Belarusan population of other cities in the Russian Federation, are continuing to establish local Belarusan organizations to meet the needs and desires of their communities. Total Belarusan population of Russia is over one million persons.(20)
o Belarusans in the Western Diaspora
The Belarusan communities in the United States, Canada, some countries of South America, and France are of both pre-World War I, and post-World War II vintage. Large contingents of post-World War II emigrants also went to Australia, Belgium, England, Germany, and Italy.
The Belarusan National Council estimates that there were between 650,000 and 700,000 Belarusans living in the Western diaspora as a result of emigration.(21)
o The Historical Background for Belarusans
Even a sophisticated American reader is not apt to associate present-day Belarus with any state in that part of the world as he or she remembers it from the past. The geographical situation of a nation split among five administrative states certainly does not simplify an understanding of the concept of Belarusan state and nationhood. One can fault the educational system for not providing a clearer picture of Belarus in the past, but it must be admitted that the history of Belarus has not been simple. Complications lie not so much in the history itself as in the interpretation of that history by various authors and historical schools, pursuing widely varying agendas. Let us attempt to remedy this confusion to some degree by providing a contemporary point of view of Belarus's past, in outline fashion.
o Terminology
A good deal of the confusion surrounding Belarus lies in the area of terminology. The terms "Byelorussia," "Byelorussians," and, since 1991, "Belarus," "Belarusans," and "Belarusians" are all relatively recent, when understood as a political concept. While the term "Bielaia Rus"' (White Rus1) was used in a variety of historical documents, it was not employed in a sense that embraced the Belarusan nation. More commonly, "Bielaia Rus'" was used as a figurative and geographical concept applied to a territory that was not clearly defined.
The historical name for Belarusans was Licviny which usually is translated into English as "Lithuanians."(22) (This term was applied to Belarusans from the 12th to the end of the 18th century when the Russian administration began to apply the term to a Baltic tribe, the Samogitians). The term Licviny, when applied to Belarusans, is frequently found in belles-lettres and was also used by some in relation to Belarusans in the United States.(23)
The name "Belarus" was used in the 18th and 19th centuries by the Russian Imperial apparatus without giving it any national-ethnic significance. Pursuing its plans for the total Russification of the region, the Russian administration introduced a regional designation, and for the next sixty to eighty years Belarus was known officially as "the Northwestern Territory" (Severo-Zapadnyi Krai) of the Russian Empire.(24) Toward the end of the 19th century one of the outstanding leaders of the Belarusan Renaissance and a pioneer of modern Belarusan literature, Francisak Bahusevic, revived the term "Belarus" and began to apply it to the nation.
For most Americans, the term "Byelorussia" achieved visibility during World War II, and especially in 1945 when, in the process of establishing the United Nations, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic became a charter member of this world organization. Up to World War II the more familiar terms by which the country and the people living in that part of the world were known to Americans were "White Russia" and "White Russians," or "White Ruthenia" and "White Ruthenians." Both terms referred to the same country and nationality. The Republic officially changed its name on September 19, 1991, when it became the Republic of Belarus with adjectival forms Belarusan or Belarusian.
As is evident, confusion exists in the area of terminology. This brings us to the core of the problem: Why is there such confusion? What was Belarus before it was incorporated into the Russian Empire, before the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th centuries? How did it happen that Belarus is so little known outside of Eastern Europe? These questions cannot, obviously, be easily or quickly answered. They require a very short excursus into the historical past.
o The Early and Medieval Period
Historical sources reveal that the tribes who were the antecedents of present-day Belarusans began to organize into individual principalities around such cities as Polack, Smalensk, and Turau as early as the 9th and 10th centuries. During the 12th century, the individual principalities on Belarusan ethnographic territory moved towards a kind of unity, forming the nucleus or core of a state which gradually became an important commonwealth in Eastern Europe over the next several centuries, known through history as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Since it was Belarusan principalities which gave rise to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, it is not surprising that the Belarusan language was recognized as the official language of the Grand Duchy, and that the city of Navahradak in the earlier years, and later Vilna, served as the capitals of this large, influential state.(25)
o Decline of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
Gradually the Grand Duchy of Lithuania came under the strong cultural influence of Poland because of the unions of 1386 and 1569. The higher reaches of society became strongly Polonized and dissociated from the broader mass of the population. Polonization, religious inequality, and social unrest caused the internal destabilization of the Grand Duchy. The state became weakened militarily and politically. Meanwhile, further east, the state known as Muscovy grew stronger and began to expand to the east, south, and west. Muscovy moved into the territory of the Grand Duchy and further west into Poland.(26)
o Belarus Under Russian Occupation
Belarusan territories were among the first to fall under the impact of Muscovy's (Russia's) westward expansion. The beginnings of Russian domination over the Belarusan territories go back to the 16th and 17th centuries when the easternmost parts of Belarusan ethnographic territory were incorporated into the Russian Empire. Then, in a series of successful advances, Russia invaded and annexed Belarusan lands in 1772, 1793, and 1795. Thus, by the end of the 18th century, all Belarusan ethnographic territory had been brought under Russian rule. Administrative divisions were drawn, according to which Belarusan lands were split administratively among neighboring provinces. Russian policies towards Belarus were, from the end of the 1700s, clear and precise: the difference between Belarusans and Russians must disappear and those Belarusan territories should be made Russian not just in name but in heart and soul as well.
The aims of these policies were very specific-to secure the Western borders of the Empire and make a reality of the age-old tsarist goal of "uniting all the Russias," (i.e., Belarus and Ukraine [V.K.]).(27) This goal was alive and well through the reigns of various tsars and remained vigorous through the decades of the Soviet regime.
o Belarusan Survival During the 19th Century
The 19th century witnessed an active implementation of Russian policies in Belarus. During the first decades of the century, imperial Russian officialdom sent a considerable number of Russian administrative personnel and clergy from the central parts of Russia into Belarus. Numerous attempts were made to transport even Russian peasants with the intention of altering the ethnographic makeup of the area. (28)
The Russians began to act even more aggressively after the Uprising of 1830-31 which impacted on large parts of Western Belarus. In 1840 the term "Belarus," which was just beginning to be used by the administration, was officially abolished and replaced by the deliberately vague term the "Northwestern Territory." In the 1830s began the forced deportation of Belarusan to the northern regions of the Empire. (29)
The Uprising of 1863-64 in Belarus marks the beginning of unprecedentedly harsh policies of Russification, exploitation of land, and the distant resettlement of the populace. The uprising, led by Kastus Kalinouski, was prompted primarily by socio-economic factors - (the disparity between the peasantry and the petty nobility)~although national factors also played a role.(30)
The government undertook effective large-scale programs of confiscating the property of participants in the Uprising and their relatives. These properties were turned over to imperial dignitaries imported from Russia. In this manner vast tracts of Belarusan land passed to Russian ownership. The new governor, appointed for the Northwestern Territory, M.N. Muraviev, received his nickname, "Muraviev, the Hangman" for inaugurating a series of executions and a policy of extremely harsh persecution of the population. Muraviev wielded absolute power, surrounded himself with trusted Russian nationals, and reduced the local population to penury.(31)
Muraviev's task was the Russification of the population. Therefore, emphasis was placed on schooling, language, and the church. The Belarusan language was outlawed in 1859, and could not be used for any publication or even as a language of conversation among students. The number of schools allowed to be open was strictly controlled and the Muraviev administration made strenuous attempts to introduce more ethnic Russian teachers.
Muraviev's administrators were not willing to gamble on the loyalty of the local teachers to St. Petersburg's agenda. The principle was adopted that only teachers who came from Russia could be trusted to teach Belarusan children.(32)
The Russian administration also paid enormous attention to religion, using the Orthodox Church in a variety of ways in pursuit of their policy of Russification.
Economically, the administration pursued a policy of impoverishing the region, transferring ownership of lands to high-ranking officials imported from Russia, exporting natural goods such as flax, timber, etc., and not developing local industries favoring the emigration of the local labor force out of the region, especially to distant Siberia. Thus, beginning with the last two decades of the 19th century and through the early years of World War I, hundreds of thousands of Belarusan peasants emigrated to Siberia and to the United States. The authoritative Soviet Belarusan demographer, A. Rakau, gives an approximate figure of 1,387,000 as the total number of emigrants from Belarus during the half century preceding World War 1.(33)
o The Political Revival at the End of the 19th - Beginning of the 20th Centuries
Although the Russian administration exerted maximum effort to uproot any characteristics of Belarusan separateness—political or cultural—ethnic awareness among Belarusans began to emerge toward the last quarter of the 19th century. This, despite all policies of the Imperial administration. A very observant statement concerning Belarusan national awareness was made by a well-known historian:
Yet Russia did not succeed in destroying White Russian nationality. According to the census of 1897, there were 5,880,000 persons describing themselves as White Russians, though the official census was in the habit of falsifying the figures in favor of the Great Russian element on every possible pretext. The White Russians inhabit the governments of Vitebsk, Mogilev, Minsk, parts of Smolensk, the eastern part of the government of Vilna, and the government of Grodno.(34)
Somewhat resonant of this statement is the observation of James Reston, a prominent journalist of later decades. In his column in The New York Times, Reston said:
...Byelorussia is one of the ancient battlegrounds of Russian history. The Swedes have invaded it from the north. Napoleon and Hitler have overrun it. The Germans have destroyed its cities. The Poles have dismembered it in the west and the Tatars have invaded it from the south. But the land has never really been conquered, not even by the Russians.(35)
Organized Belarusan activities date back to the last quarter of the 19th century when Belarusan students began to establish "landsmen" circles (Hurtki) in various Russian universities. Toward the end of that century literary works in Belarusan began to appear, including works by Francisak Bahushevic, with his famous words "Don't abandon your native language lest you die," to an 1891 collection of his poetry, Dudka Bielaruskaja [The Belarusan Fife].(36)
In 1902 the first Belarusan political party, the Belarusan Revolutionary Hramada was established. This was soon followed by numerous cultural and religious organizations, publishing firms, and a teachers' union. Viable political leaders appeared on the scene: the Lutskievic brothers Anton and Ivan, Aleksandr Ulasau, Vaclau Ivanouski, and Ales Burbis, among others.(37)
o "Nasa Dola" and "Nasa Niva"
The real impetus for the revival of Belarusan consciousness and development of a mass movement was the appearance of Belarusan-language newspapers: first, the short-lived Nasa Dola (1906); and then its successor, Nasa Niva (1906-1915). The latter publication played a particularly important role, for around this newspaper assembled the most active leaders of the Belarusan intelligentsia. Under their political and spiritual guidance, this newspaper became the wellspring of Belarusan political thought, programs, and activities. Indeed, Nasa Niva became the seedbed of modern Belarusan literature and gave rise to a literary movement called Nasaniustva, which left a profound mark on Belarusan literature, and remained influential long after it had ceased publication.(38)
In the political arena, the pages of Nasa Niva reflected the multitude of problems one would expect to find in any political movement. Thus, the newspaper articulated the necessity of introducing the Belarusan langauge into the schools, and the need to establish a Belarusan university. It also identified significant dates in Belarusan history. For the first time a newspaper published materials which stressed that the history of Belarus was just that, the history of "our country" which was different from and separate from that of Russia or Poland. Nasa Niva emphasized the need for textbooks, dictionaries, and other useful literature. As one might have anticipated, the newspaper devoted considerable attention to the emigration process and reacted vigorously to it.(39)
Undoubtedly the newspaper Nasa Niva had some influence on the emigrant masses. If before 1905, thousands of emigrants considered themselves tutejsyja, i.e. "locals," the number of those who had abandoned such vague terms for a better understanding of their past and of themselves had increased considerably by the end of the decade. Unfortunately, the influence of the newspaper on those who emigrated was not lasting, and not strong enough to make full-fledged, nationally-conscious Belarusans of them.
o The Establishment of The Belarusan Democratic Republic
The high point of Belarusan political activities during the prewar period and World War I years was the convening of the All-Belarusan Congress in December 1917 in the capital city of Minsk. This Congress was attended by 1,872 delegates from each of the Belarusan provinces and from all walks of life and every social stratum of the population, including all the ethnic groups residing in Belarus. It was also attended by over 700 military delegates of Belarusan nationality serving in various units of the Russian Army. This was the largest democratic political assembly ever convened in Belarusan modern history. The Congress, in pursuing the rights of the peoples to self-determination, focused on working towards declaring the independence of Belarus. The Bolsheviks, who had seized power after the Revolution, could neither agree nor tolerate such an objective. Sessions of the Congress were interrupted by the Bolshevik armed forces. However, the Congress was able to elect a Council which, on March 25, 1918, passed a resolution declaring the independence of Belarus in the form of the Belarusan Democratic Republic, encompassing all Belarusan ethnic territory. The Council also elected an executive body which initiated a broad spectrum of political activities. The government of the Belarusan Democratic Republic established diplomatic relations with several sovereign states which recognized the Belarusan State either de jure or de facto.
This new democratic state, the Belarusan Democratic Republic, was short-lived, but the proclamation of Belarusan independence and consequent political activities had an enormous impact on the psychology of the Belarusans and served to elaborate the programs of the national movement to restore a modern Belarusan state.(40)
o The Belarusan Soviet Socialist Republic (BSSR)
Trying to catch up with the Belarusan national movement, the Bolsheviks who, up until this moment, had ignored Belarusan interests and sensibilities, now moved quickly. On January 1, 1919, in the city of Smolensk, the Soviets proclaimed the Belarusan Soviet Socialist Republic, the BSSR. The Soviet republic was proclaimed nine months after the establishment of the Belarusan Democratic State. The leadership of Soviet Belarus, then headed by a few Belarusan Communists, faced a difficult time laying the foundations of the new republic. However, they were relatively successful: they assembled cadres, and Belarusanization gave a moral boost to a new generation of Belarusans.(41)
o Western Belarus: A Part of Belarus in the Polish State
The term "Western Belarus" was applied to that portion of Belarus which, after the Riga Treaty of 1921 became part of the Polish state. Western Belarus had a population of slightly over three million, while Soviet Belarus (i.e., Eastern Belarus) had a population of about 5 million.
Despite the dangers posed by the Polonization, Western Belarus flourished during the early twenties. Belarusans in Western Belarus opened over 400 primary schools as well as seven high schools and teachers' colleges. Belarusans sent numerous representatives and senators to the Polish Parliament. Belarusan scholarship, publishing, and cultural life generally developed at a remarkable pace. The Belarusan national movement reached its peak in Western and Eastern Belarus during the mid-1920s.(42)
o Belarusan Catastrophe
Unfortunately this surge of Belarusan national revival was not destined to last long. The growth of Belarusan national cadres, the spread of Belarusan national awareness among the rural masses, and the Belarusanization of the cities (which essentially meant the growth of national political potential) were not viewed with a sympathetic eye either in Moscow or in Warsaw. Toward the middle of the twenties, in an obvious change of governmental policy, the Poles started to curb severely Belarusan activities. Soon the Polish authorities had declared a virtual pogrom against Belarusans. Schools and churches were closed, Belarusan organizations and representatives harassed, and newspapers outlawed. A mock trial of the largest Belarusan political party—the Belarusan Peasants' and Workers' Hramada - was staged and carried out. Hundreds of Belarusan activists were exiled to the Polish territories and thousands of others fled to Soviet Belarus and South America. The massacres of Belarusan activists, peasants, workers, and intelligentsia were in full swing in Poland in the late 1920s; by the beginning of the 1930s the Belarusan movement in Poland had been totally crushed.(43)
The Poles did not stop at destroying the Belarusan civic movement. They also totally annihilated the Belarusan Roman Catholic movement. Belarusan Catholic priests who, after the Russian Revolution had settled in Poland and established a Belarusan school and cultural center in the town of Druja, were ordered to close the school. The clerics were transferred to Polish territories or exiled abroad-to France and Manchuria.(44)
Developments in Soviet Belarus took a somewhat different turn. The pogrom against the Belarusans in Poland was carried out under the pretext that the Belarusan movement was Communist-inspired. This gave the Soviets an excellent opportunity to lure more Belarusans from Poland into Soviet Belarus. Meanwhile, the Soviet Republic of Belarus was continuing to develop along national lines in all areas of life; the influx of patriotic manpower had the potential, over time, of increasing national self-awareness. Thus, toward the end of the 1920s, there had emerged and developed in Soviet Belarus an unprecedented phenomenon: a large concentration of nationally self-conscious intelligentsia. Tragically, as it turned out, this occurred at a politically dangerous juncture. The Communist Party was simply waiting for the appropriate moment to liquidate the Belarusan national intelligentsia and to realign the Belarusan Republic on the course that the party needed, rather than along the lines that the Belarusan people desired.
The ax fell in June of 1930 with mass arrests in Minsk and during 1930-31, hundreds of teachers, cultural workers, scholars, writers, and administrators were imprisoned all over Belarus. Soviet Belarus lived through several waves of purges occurring intermittently, the peak years of arrests being 1930, 1933 and 1937-38. The official explanation for these purges was that the party was fighting with the "National Democrats," i.e., with the Belarusan national intelligentsia and nationally-conscious Belarusan citizens. During the late 1930s most of the Belarusan military cadres and the remaining Belarusan National Communists were arrested and executed by firing squads.(45)
Thus, by the outbreak of World War II in 1939, the Belarusan nation had lost all of its most seasoned, dedicated, and able leadership. Not one of the founders of the Soviet Belarusan Republic in 1918, not one of the pioneers of Belarusan activities in Western Belarus was at freedom in the late 1930s. All walks of life suffered: politicians, literary people, teachers, scholars, and scientists, as well as hundreds of thousands of ordinary Belarusan citizens whose only crime in the eyes of Polish and Soviet officialdom was their dedication to, and love of, their Belarusan homeland, and the maturity of their political outlook. For a politically emergent nation, this holocaust was a traumatic blow. The Belarusan nation has not recovered from that catastrophe to this day.
o Belarus During World War II
1939-1941
Two major parts of Belarus—the Belarusan Soviet Republic and Western Belarus-were united into a single republic in September 1939 when the Soviets invaded Poland in 1939. For a while, the Soviet authorities maintained the historical capital of Belarusan territories, Vilna, within the boundaries of Soviet Belarus. However, political maneuvering by the Soviet central administration soon made a gift of the city of Vilna to the Lithuanian state, which was shortly thereafter incorporated into the Soviet Union. The occupation of Western Belarus by Soviet troops cost the Belarusans dearly: thousands of Belarusans were deported to Siberia, prominent Belarusan leaders who lived in Vilna and other cities were deported or shot, and numerous objects of historical importance, memorabilia, and archives from the Lutskevic Museum in Vilna were confiscated and distributed among various learned institutions in several republics of the USSR. The city of Vilna ceased to exist as a social and cultural center for Belarusans.
At the outbreak of World War II, one can say that the Belarusan movement, a segment of which aspired to an independent Belarus, had reached its lowest ebb, with its leadership dispersed, exiled, or massacred. Other than in Prague, where a few political leaders maintained the symbolic office of the Belarusan Democratic Republic, no other significant Belarusan political center existed.(46)
1941-1945
While the Soviets and Poles were trying their best to diminish the political challenge of the Belarusans, the Germans looked upon the Belarusans as potential allies, studying many aspects of the country, and producing several analytical works.(47) A few of the Belarusan leaders had contacts in Berlin, and they wished to believe that Berlin was sympathetic to the cause of Belarusan self-determination and independence. A number of Belarusans emigrated to Berlin in 1939, and a Belarusan organization was established in Germany after the invasion of Poland, the main function of which was to locate and register Belarusan prisoners of war. A weekly Belarusan newspaper, The Dawn [Ranica], began in Berlin in December 1939, and continued publication until March 1945.
After failing to win over the Belarusan leadership in Prague, the Germans began to negotiate in earnest with the Belarusans in Berlin and other locations.(48)
Under these circumstances, it was only natural that some Belarusans would look upon the Germans as their political allies. This point of view was reinforced with the outbreak of the Soviet-German war, when the Germans began to occupy Belarus and encountered many Belarusans (and non-Belarusans) who had suffered under the Soviets and were willing to work with anyone who offered the opportunity of opposing the Soviets. However, in the wake of initial easy victories over the retreating Soviet Army, the Germans quickly changed their plans. They no longer considered the Belarusans a necessary factor in their military strategy, and began to view the situation altogether differently.(49)
The Belarusan political leadership—with whom the Germans had maintained a close relationship prior to the attack on the Soviet Union-was perceived to be a liability, `the Germans alone were "destined" to be masters of the occupied territories while the local population would be slaves.
This leadership group, however, had attempted to derive as much as possible from the Germans in terms of advancing the Belarusan cause. They were successful in obtaining permission to organize Belarusan schools, engage in limited publishing ventures, exercise some limited areas of jurisprudence, achieve a modicum of self-administration in civil matters, and empower a police force necessary to protect the population against Soviet guerrillas and maintain order in the cities. Although the Germans quite late agreed to the formation of some sort of Belarusan army, they were slow in equipping and arming it for a simple reason: the Germans did not trust the Belarusans. Finally, at the very end of 1943, the Germans consented to form a kind of government, and also reluctantly agreed that the Belarusans could convene a Congress which would have the right to confirm or disapprove the appointed government and its activities. The Belarusans convened the Congress in the city of Minsk on June 27, 1944.(50)
While a number of Belarusan political leaders cooperated with the Germans during World War II, there were many Belarusan patriots who were of the opinion that Belarusans should have an independent movement, not associated with the Soviets, Poles, or Germans. This group, facing insurmountable odds, attempted with some success to organize an anti-Nazi underground operation under the banner of the Belarusan Independence Party.(51)
On the Soviet side of the front, the Belarusans were serving in the Red Army and were counted upon as important anti-German fighters.
Although the partisan movement in Belarus was initiated and organized by a non-Belarusan leadership and directed from Moscow, it gradually engulfed a large segment of the Belarusan nation. The main reason for this was the Nazi policy towards the Slavic peoples. Communist propaganda was masterful, with the party even using national slogans to attract and please Belarusans.
In retrospect one can view the reactivation of Belarusan nationalism—after a decade of terror in the thirties—as a normal phenomenon which could have been anticipated. Belarusan nationalism played an important role on both sides of the front, and it was partially as a result of this heightened national consciousness and the consequent activities which it spawned that led to Belarus gaining its seat in the United Nations in 1945.
o Belarus After World War II
The Second World War devastated Belarus. Over 9,000 villages and settlements were wiped out; over 200 cities were burned to the ground. Over one million homes were totally destroyed. The demographic loss to the Belarusan nation numbers close to six million souls.(52) Belarusan territory was once again Balkanized: the city of Bielastok was given to Poland, while Vilna was awarded to Soviet Lithuania. Still other parts of Belarusan territory were included in neighboring states.
Hundreds of thousands of immigrants left Belarus and resettled in the Western world and began their political activities under the banner of the Belarusan Democratic Republic.(53)
The post-World War II years in Belarus were characterized by mass terror, deportations, violations of human rights, and, above all, Russification - which reached such proportions that any eighteenth-century tsar would have looked with envy at the professionalism of his successors' genocidal policies. (54)
It took Belarus almost two decades to heal the material wounds resulting from World War II. Only in the late 1950s and early 1960s did the Republic once again begin to reach pre-war economic levels, and gradually become an important manufacturing region in several fields. Industrial economic indicators placed Soviet Byelorussia in the ranks of the advanced technological nations. At the same time, however, it continued to lose its rural population at an alarming rate: about 24-25 persons per thousand per year.(55)
A particularly worrisome factor was the depopulation of the republic of its young native population through a federal policy of mobile employment which sent young people outside of their native republic. An equally troubling aspect was the concomitant influx of a variety of ethnic groups, a phenomenon that has been observed since the 1950s.(56)
Industrial and technological growth, unfortunately, does not imply or guarantee that Belarusan cultural and ethnic traditional values have been preserved, much less developed, at the same level. As an East Slavic nation, with linguistic roots close to the Ukrainians and Russians, Belarus has suffered more than any other people from Russification, Sovietization, and assimilation. A cause for particular alarm is the situation of the Belarusan language, whose use was purposefully decreased and eliminated from all areas of life. The number of Belarusan-language publications was kept very low, at the same time that the total circulation of Russian-language newspapers and journals was continuously increased. The official attitude toward the language of the republic and indeed all manifestations of Belarusanness was the claim that any attachment to one's own culture, history, or language was "nationalistic;" whereas, adoption of the Russian language was evidence of an enlightened "internationalist" attitude since "Russian is recognized as a means of communication around the world." The most damaging aspect of the policy of Russification was an accompanying attitude, implied and overt, that use of the native language of the nation was undignified and unworthy. The goal was a psychological reduction of esteem and respect for the Belarusan language.
It is noteworthy that, despite the strength of this campaign of denigration, the Belarusan intelligentsia and a sizable segment of the population at large never accepted its premises. Voices against the policy of Russification and public protests against the degradation of Belarusan culture were heard constantly from the 1960s on, and an open campaign for granting official ("state") status to the Belarusan language and favoring Belarusanization of the republic has been carried on vigorously since 1985.(57)
A British newsweekly, The Economist, wrote in 1987 that:
Byelorussia is where Russian has made its greatest inroads. A campaign in defense of the native language has developed in the republic press. Letters pouring in by the hundreds... Late in 1986, 28 leading Byelorussian cultural figures, including the writer Vasil Bykov, appealed to President Gorbachev to save their nation from "spiritual extinction. "(58)
A second document, signed by 134 leading Belarusan intellectuals was sent to Mr. Gorbachev, reinforcing the previous demands for the revival of Belarusan cultural independence. This topic became the agenda for an extensive discussion all over Soviet Byelorussia as well as in diasporan communities.(59)
A national revival can also be seen in the religious sphere, specifically in the demand that the Belarusan language be introduced into church services, both Orthodox and Roman Catholic. With the re-establishment of a Roman Catholic hierarchy in Belarus by the Vatican on July 25, 1989, and the inclusion of ethnic Belarusans in the Orthodox episcopate, those churches seem to be undergoing a slow renewal along national lines. Yet, this revival in Belarus is very, very slow.
The most encouraging signs of Belarusan awakening are the many and varied Belarusan activities in the organizational and political arenas. The variegated, typically small, "informal" patriotic groups such as Tutejsyja [Locals], Spadcyna [Heritage], Pachodnia [The Beacon], and larger groups such as the Tavarystva Bielaruskaj Movy [Society for the Belarusan Language], the Ecological Union, and others concerned about various aspects of social and national life, began to spring up and become important in the 1980s. These events contributed to the development of a political climate in which it was possible to form a national political movement, the Bielaruski Narodny Front [Belarusan Popular Front]. This movement, functioning in opposition to the regime, constitutes a truly historic landmark in the evolution of the nation.
An outstanding role in redirecting research priorities and establishing working contacts with scholarly communities of the Western world belong to new groups such as the International Association for Belarusan Studies (Miznarodnaja Asacyjacyja Bielarusistau) and the National F. Skaryna Center for Humanities and Education (Nacyjanalny Navukova-Asvietny Centr imia Franciska Skaryny), both headquartered in Minsk.
The introduction of pierabudova/perestroika in 1985 was, of course, an important factor in the evolution of political awareness and activity in Belarus. However, several other major events have exerted an influence on the life of the nation: the tragic nuclear accident at Chernobyl, the discovery of the mass graves of victims murdered in the village of Kurapaty, near Minsk, and the revival of national consciousness in the life of the religious communities of the republic.
The 1990s have seen the spirit of the nation reassert itself and grow stronger. A new modern nation-state has begun to appear on the map of Europe. However, many obstacles face the development of a truly democratic state in Belarus. The first free, democratic elections which were held July 10, 1994, in which Belarus chose its first President, Mr. Aleksandr Lukashenka, proved to be disastrous. Democratization processes virtually stopped, reforms ceased, the Constitution was violated dozens of times, and all indications are that a new dictatorial regime is on the rise. The referendum of May 1995, initiated by Mr. Lukashenka against the opinion of Parliament and against the Constitution, returned the Republic to the old Stalinist symbols and system of governing. Undoubtedly the nation envisages many challenges ahead. The future of the Republic of Belarus is very unclear: the nation has not yet spoken its last word as to whether it will join the democratic world as a free and independent nation, or choose a totalitarian regime in an unhealthy political union with its eastern neighbor. The choice is up to Belarusans to make.
o NOTES
1. Sports Illustrated, Oct. 31, 1989.
2. Bielaruskaja Savieckaja Encyklapedyja (Minsk, 1974), s.v. "Shagal,
Marka."
3. Bielaruskaja Savieckaja Encyklapedyja (Minsk, 1972), s.v. "Kasciushko, Tadeush."
4. V. Gritskevich, Puteshestviia nashikh zemliakov (Minsk, 1968), 77-95.
5. Bielarus, New York, September 1992.
6. Mrs. L. Bryleuskaja, correspondence with author, July 27, 1988.
7. D. Dubinsky and A. H. Raskin, A Life with Labor (New York: Doubleday, 1967), 17.
8. Biographical Dictionary of American Labor (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1984), 666.
9. M. Hindus, The Kremlin's Dilemma (New York: Doubleday, 1967), 181.
10. Time, Oct. 20, 1986. 77.
11. A. Barmin, One Who Survived (New York, 1972).
12. Zviazda, Minsk, Apr. 22, Dec. 10, 1993.
13. M. Carter and M. J. Christensen, Children of Chernobyl (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1993), 214.
14. Kurapaty (New York: Belarusan Institute of Arts and Sciences, 1993), 87.
15. J. Zaprudnik, Belarus at a Crossroads in History (Boulder: Westview Press, 1993), 278.
16. E. Mironowicz, Bialorusini w Polsce, 1944-1949 (Warszawa: PWN, 1993), 218.
17. P. Miranovich, "Bielarusy u Latvii, 1919-1944," Zapisy, 16 (1978): 92. Lietuviu Enciklopedia (Boston, 1974), s.v. "Bait Gudas."
18. Etnahrafija Bielarusi (Minsk, 1989), s.v. "Bielarusy."
19. Op. cit,p. 59.
20. Sibirskaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia (Moskva, 1929), s.v. "Belorussy."
21. "Faktycnyja dodzienyja ob stanie bielaruskaj emihracyi, 1.5. 1949," (New York Archives of the Council of the Belarusian Democratic Republic).
22. Encyklapedyja Litaratury i Mastactva (Minsk, 1986), 287.
23. Dilo, L'viv, no. 100, May 7, 1936.
24. J. Zaprudnik, "The Name of Byelorussia," East Europe, 24(3) (New York, 1975): 12-15. W. Ostrowski, About the Origin of the Name "White Russia" (London, 1975): 46.
25. R. Ostrowski, Fragments from the history of Byelorussia (to 1700), (London: Byelorussian Central Council, 1961).
26. J. Najdziuk, Bielarus ucora i siannia (Miensk, 1944).
27. V. Kipel, "Byelorussia under Russian occupation: past, present, future," Russian Empire. Some Aspects of Tsarist and Soviet Colonial Practices (Cleveland, Ohio: Institute for Soviet and East European Studies, John Carroll University, 1985): 72-99.
28. A. Pushkarevich, "Preobrazovanie dukha narodnosti," Izvestiia AN SSSR, Otd. Obshchestv. Nauk (Leningrad, 1932): 15-32.
29. V. Zacharka, "Bielarus na uschodzie," Iskry Skaryny, Praha, 1934, no. 4: 47.
30. T. E. Bird and J. Zaprudnik, The 1863 Uprising in Byelorussia: Documents (New York, 1980).
31. U. Ihnatouski, 1863 hod na Bielarusi (Minsk, 1930).
32. A. Cvikievic, Zapadno-Russizm (Minsk, 1929).
33. A. Rakov, Naselenie BSSR. (Minsk, 1969), 100
34. H. von Eckardt, Russia (New York: Knopf, 1932), 475.
35. New York Times, Oct. 18, 1957.
36. F. Bahasevic, Tvory (Minsk, 1991), 16-17.
37. A. Luckievic, Za 25-hadoupracy (Vilnia, 1928).
38. A. Nadson, "Nasa Niva," The Journal of Byelorussian Studies, no. 3, 1967, 184-206.
39. V. Kipel, "Nasa Niva i emihracyja," Zapisy, 19 (1989), 8-26.
40. V. and Z. Kipel, Byelorussian Statehood (New York, 1988).
41. V. Krutalevich, Rozhdenie Belorusskoi Sovetskoi Respubliki. (Minsk, 1975).
42. Bielaruskaja Savieckaja Encyklapedyja (Minsk, 1971), s.v. "Zachodnija Bielarus."
43. Political Prisoners in Poland (New York: The International Committee for Political Prisoners, 1927).
44. Archives of the magazine Bozym Slacham, London.
45. S. Kabysh, "The Byelorussians," Genocide in the USSR. (New York: Scarecrow Press, 1958).
46. E. Engelhardt, Weissruthenien; Volk und Land. (Berlin: Volk uud Reich, 1943).
47. С Regel, "Weissruthenien...," Geographische Zeitschrift, Heft 4/5 (1942), 121-157.
48. J. Turonak, Bielarus pad niamieckaj akupacyjaj (Minsk, 1993), 31-40.
49. A. Dallin, German Rule in Russia: 1941-1945 (New York: Macmillan Press, 1981. 2nd. ed.), 199-225.
50. I. Kasiak, National Independence of Byelorussia (London: The Byelorussian Central Council, 1960).
51. I. Kasiak, Byelorussia. Historical Outline (London: The Byelorussian Central Council, 1989).
52. A. Bahrovich, A Population of the BSSR in the 1959 Census (New York: Byelorussian Institute of Arts and Sciences, 1962).
53. R. Zuk-Hryskievic, The Life of Vincent Zuk-Hryskievic (Toronto, 1993).
54. Communist Takeover and Occupation of Byelorussia (Washington, D.C.: Select Committee on Communist Aggression, Special Report, H. Res. 346 and 438, 1955), 19-21.
55. The Soviet Review (Armonk, N.Y., Fall 1984), 38-39.
56. The Crimes of Khrushchev (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress, 86th Congress, First Session, Dec. 17, 1959).
57. Letter to a Russian Friend. A Samizdat Publication from Soviet Byelorussia (London: The Association of Byelorussians in Great Britain, 1979).
58. The Economist (London, May 16, 1987), 51.
59. Two Letters to Gorbachev from the Byelorussian Intelligentsia (London: The Association of Byelorussians in Great Britain, 1988).
Chapter I: Research, Publications, and Pertinent Statistics on Belarusan Emigration/Immigration
The questions which must be asked when one addresses the issue of Belarusan emigration/immigration are: 1) Has the fundamental research been done? 2) Has a systematic attempt been made to study Belarusan emigration to the United States and the life of Belarusan-Americans in this country? The answer, unfortunately, is negative in both instances, and research is confronted with numerous problems.
The first underlying difficulty is that, for the most part, Belarusans were not properly identified upon leaving their homeland, nor during their processing upon entering the United States. They were not recorded as Belarusans. The attitude of Russian officialdom is the main cause for this situation. One has to bear in mind, as was said in the introductory pages, that the Russian tsarist state, and the Russian Empire did not allow the formation of an administrative entity which would embrace all ethnic Belarusan territory. The Russian administration called Belarusans—Russians, although tie term Belarusans was used by Belarusans themselves in academic circles, and even by the 1897 Census administration. Russian officialdom, when faced with the problem of emigration, functioned under the assumption that Russian ethnic stock—i.e., Great Russians—do not emigrate. Therefore, neither statistical data, nor any other data were considered important. Imperial Russia was not concerned with recording data about inorodtsy, non-Russians. The term plemennoi sostav, translated literally as "tribal composition," as used in migratory Russian statistical terminology, placed all Belarusans in the category of "Russians." In addition, data on foreign emigration were not collected systematically. The second problem was that the religious affiliation was determinative of nationality, i.e., ethnic background: the Russian government considered Belarusans of the Roman Catholic faith to be Poles and Orthodox Belarusans to be Russians.
The obstacles, intentional and unwitting, set up by authorities in the Russian Empire and in the Washington bureaucracy have made identification of Belarusans in the United States an impossibly complicated task. Although the Russian Census of 1897 recognized Belarusans as a separate group, the tsarist emigration authorities did not record Belarusans as a separate nationality. And, as a consequence, neither did the United States Immigration Service. In fact, an authoritative government publication, the Dictionary of Races and Peoples published in Washington, D.C. in 1911, singled out Belarusans to say that they were not recognized as a separate ethnic group for the purposes of the immigration process. Although two different, indeed opposite philosophical concepts formed the basis of the two government bureaucracies—oppression and dictatorship in Russia and respect for human rights in the United States, they agreed on the final result: no statistics on many nationalities were kept on either side of the ocean. As a result of this policy, further studies based on official data, have been seriously handicapped. The student of Belarusans in the United States faces formidable difficulties: on the one hand, it is a demonstrable fact that Belarusans came to the United States in large numbers; on the other hand, no official statistics about them existed. This is one reason why hundreds of volumes dealing with Slavic Americans make no mention of Belarusans whatsoever. But the situation is even worse. Thousands upon thousands of pages of research and analyses exist in which Belarusans in the United States are mislabeled or otherwise misidentified. The study of Belarusans in the United States is no easy topic.
The following survey of literature on immigrants, research on the various Slavic groups, etc. will attempt to throw some light on these blank spots in American immigration history, and to show that the Belarusan presence was noticed, although it was often not clearly spelled out.
Some of the most visible obstacles facing the researcher of Belarusica in the United States as well as some of the existing sources of meager information about Belarusans were outlined by this author in an earlier article.(l) The present analysis enlarges on the topic of research by including not only English-language publications, but foreign-language materials as well.
o English-Language Publications
With the exception of some passages in a few general works about Slavs in America, brief articles in newspapers, and slight allusions in a very few reference works, the presence of Belarusans in the United States is not dealt with. Despite the wide variety of Slavic topics that have attracted the interest of the American scholarly community, the Belarusan phenomenon remains neglected. This neglect is further compounded by the fact that what has been printed has often been incorrect, incomplete, or offensive to Belarusans. The most frequent problem of this sort is using the term "Russian" to describe Belarusans, on the grounds that ethnic Belarusan territory was located within the boundaries of the Russian Empire. American textbook publishers bear a heavy responsibility for the enormous amount of carelessly researched material and outright misinformation that is steadily provided to school children and college students. Their lack of concern about distinctions in Eastern Europe constitutes a major disservice to the educational process.
Works about Slavic immigrants made their appearance at the beginning of the twentieth century. Information about Belarusans is typically limited to naming the nationality as a subdivision of the East Slavic group, sometimes mentioning the language, more often simply giving the geographical location of the country.
Some important writings about Slavs in America provide data about immigrants and the problems associated with the group of immigrants customarily labeled "Russians." Dr. Allan McLaughlin, one of the earliest students of Russian immigration to America includes some general statistics about Belarusans.(2) Unfortunately, tie does not mention Belarusans in America, or rather, he does not identify them as such.
Belarusans are not specified in an extensive survey of East European and Slavic immigrants in the series of articles in the magazine Charities, which says:
Charities makes this week what it is believed will be welcomed as a substantial contribution to such knowledge of some of the fragments of nationalities loosely known collectively as Slavs.(3)
However, individual authors of various analyses of East European and Slavic immigrants in this magazine focus on the problem of identifying "races" among the Slavs and the category "Russians," which often appears in quotation marks. Thus, the author Mary Buell Sayles writes:
First of all, however, it may be well to review briefly the race and religion of the two peoples referred to as Poles and Russians. Concerning the Poles facts seem clear enough. Some of them distinguish themselves as "German" and some as "Russian" Poles, but most of them make no such distinction in ordinary speech. With the so-called Russians, the case is more complicated. I shall continue to use the names ordinarily employed by these people in speaking of themselves, leaving to specialists the determination of their precise race and nationality. (4)
The author Kate Holladay Claghorn, in describing immigrants properly identifies on the map the provenance of "Russian" immigrants as "the extreme western portion" (of the Empire, V.K.) and says the following:
The greater number of these "new" immigrants, both from Austria-Hungary and Russia, may be grouped together under the general name of Slavs. That is, all the people thus grouped together speak languages of the general type known as Slavonic. This grouping also indicates roughly race affinities as well, and, in view of the importance nowadays attributed to "race" as a factor in social development, it may be well to get some idea of the race relations partly expressed and partly concealed by relations of language... The peoples in our table to be counted as Slavs by language and in the main by race, may be divided into the North Slavs, including the so-called "Russians," Poles, Bohemians, Moravians, Slovaks, and Ruthenians; and the South Slavs including the Bulgarians, Servians, Montenegrins, Croatians, Slovenians, Dalmatians, Bosnians, and Herzegovinians.(5) The Slavs of Russia are estimated at about one-half of the population of the country. Of these perhaps forty millions are found in Great Russia... These are the typical Russians or true Muscovites. As seen by the map, as well as the table, almost none of these emigrate.(6)
At this point Claghorn cites a footnote which says: Russians shown in the table are not even certainly known to be of this element, but probably are a group of various, undetermined affinities.(7)
One can be certain that Belarusan immigrants were included under this category of "undetermined affinities."
In a different publication which appeared years later, this latter term was substituted by a variant version of a nationality name: "The millions of immigrants who have come to America from Russia are of various racial stocks and peculiar nationalities."(8)
Although the earliest books dealing with Slavic immigrants to this country, e.g., by John R. Commons and Emily G. Balch do not specify Belarusans as an immigrant group, they do focus on the problems of the term "Russians." These pioneer researchers stated that the group which is widely known as "Russians" was in tact not a homogeneous group, but a mixture of peoples. Thus, John R. Commons wrote of the Russian group as follows: "The significant fact of this immigration is that it is only 2 percent Russian and 9 5 percent non-Russians."(9) Emily G. Balch specifies the Belarusan Language (White Russian) along with Great Russian and Little Russian (Ruthenian, Ukrainian) but considers the group "Russians" as the broad category of immigrants, making also this observation:
Russians form the smallest of the Slavic groups of immigrants... There have long been Russian religious colonists in the country... Mennonites, "Stundists,"... These are, however, "Little Russians" like the Ruthenians, not "Great Russians" or Russians proper... (10)
Since these early works on Slavic immigrants are thorough and authoritative, and certainly provide considerable informative material, it is the more unfortunate that they do not distinguish the Belirusans as a distinct national entity. Successive generations of scholars look these data at face value, accepted the term "Russians" without reservation, and thus perpetuated the original error.
Researchers have also been troubled not only by a confusing ethnic differentiation, but by the available statistical data pertaining to immigrants generally and particularly those immigrants who originated in the Russian Empire as well. Emily G. Balch remarked as follows:
The census figures for natives of Russia who, as we have seen, make up a very small percent of the immigrants from their country... As regards the number of Russians in the country, I have never found anyone bold enough to attempt an estimate. If then we neglect all Russians who entered the country before 1899 (both them and their descendants), we should still have at least sixty or seventy thousand among us, the total number who have entered the country since 1898 being, as said above, 66,282.(11)
Professor Carl Darling Buck wrote in a very forthright manner when he discussed U.S. Census data from the turn of the century in Chicago:
The Lithuanians, who in language and sentiment form a distinct people, and are represented by thousands of immigrants, are nowhere mentioned. In Chicago they were told by enumerators that, there being no provision for Lithuanians, they might be either Poles or Russians. Whether in other places they were classified under Poland or Russia, or both, it is impossible to say.(12)
Another researcher, Phyllis K. Metzler, writes in her article about the people of Detroit:
One other eastern group was represented in fairly large numbers, but the numbers are misleading. The census reports 669 Russians in 1890, but most of them probably didn't think of themselves as Russians. Some were undoubtedly Polish-speaking and should be considered part of the Polish community. Many were Jewish, expelled from Russia by the terrible pogroms... The fact that no Orthodox church was organized until 1910 would indicate that no sizable self-consciously Russian group existed in 1889.(13)
The attitude of American Officialdom to the ethnicity and nationalities in general contributed to confusion and misinformation.
The United States government produced an important work on immigration during the first decade of this century, published under the title Report on Immigration, as part of official U.S. research. This is a very thorough analysis of immigration, its causes and probable effects, on the U.S. economy. As a separate printed entity it also contains an important reference volume entitled Dictionary of Races and Peoples (1911). This provides authoritative information about Belarusans, using the then-current term "White Russians." Some passages will give the flavor of this significant work.
The White Russian is one of the three distinct branches of the Russian language and race, although of far less importance numerically and politically than either of the other two [i.e., the Great Russian and the Ukrainian, V.K.]. It is as much a "race" as the Great Russian ("Russian") or the Little Russian (Ruthenian), although usually considered simply as Russian in „. America. Unlike the term "Black Russia," "White Russia" is still found on the ethnographical map. It is a compact but small district roughly corresponding with what is now called "West Russia," though reaching somewhat nearer Moscow on the east... The White Russians constitute over three-fourths of the population of the Mogilev and Minsk provinces and about half of Vitebsk, Vilna, and Grodno. In Kovno and Courland they approach the Baltic.
The White Russians have long been in political subjection, first to Lithuania then to Poland, and, finally, to the Great Russians, although their lot now appears preferable to that of all the other subject peoples of western Russia. For this reason, among others, we hear little of them as a distinct race... They are usually considered to be of purer Russian stock than either the Great or the Little Russians. Both the latter are far more modified by Mongolian elements, Finnic, and Tataric...
They are... of the purest type of the so-called "Eastern" or "Celto-Slavic" race.
The White Russians number less than 6,000,000 or but little over one-tenth as many as the Great Russians. They are not counted separately as immigrants [emphasis mine, V. K.].(14)
This document says that the "Great Russians" emigrate chiefly to Siberia and that they emigrate to America to a smaller degree in proportion to their population than any other Slavic people.
It is clear from this publication that the U.S. Immigration authorities had an accurate idea of the ethnic origins of immigrants from the Russian Empire. It was precise, even subtle in its grisp of the various nationalities. It remains a mystery why these same authorities did not apply their data and understanding to these national distinctions as they compiled statistical materials. Stephanie Bernardo, one of the recent students of ethnic groups in the United States, provides a very frank and well-defined explanation for this attitude: convenience. Bernardo writes:
Over 200,000 Russians entered our country between 1881 aid 1890, and over 1.5 million more found their way to America between 1901 and 1910. Not all of them were technically "Russians," however—some were Jewish, Polish, Ukrainian, Byelorussian or Carpatho-Russian—but, for the sake of convenience, immigration officials listed them according to their country of birth or the passports they carried, without regard to their individual "ethnic" heritage.(15)
If one were to resort to modern-day terminology, this approach could be said to constitute discrimination. Seemingly, there were two reasons for the adoption of this policy by the Immigration authorities. The first was political: the majority of the Slavic immigrants came from imperial states, Russia or Austro-Hungary. The concept of nationality-which has undergone considerable clarification during the twentieth century—was just beginning to achieve visibility in these multinational imperial states, and the central authorities were not enamored of the concept. It represented an element of unknown implications. It is not surprising, therefore, that the United States, with an outlook that was profoundly conditioned by its English history and roots, acquiesced in the preferred views of emigrant-exporting states. The second reason for not using the nationality-ethnic criterion was that the United States, under the pernicious influence of the "melting-pot theory," was not sensitive to the problem of nationality, national identity, and nationalism and was not anxious to emphasize or perpetuate an awareness of such distinctions. Regrettably, this point of view prevails in the Washington, D.C. bureaucracy to this day.
In sum, one cannot find any government data on Belarusans in the early literature on immigrants, with the exception of the Dictionary of Races and Peoples, with its unfortunate statement that Belarusans (White Russians) do not count as a separate group of immigrants.
Professor Richard Boeckh has researched and analyzed in a very authoritative manner the attitudes of the American Immigration authorities and the data of the U.S. Census Bureau.
Boeckh refers to apparent terminological changes in the statistical immigration data claimed by the Immigration authorities in the 1890s: "[T]he three parts of the Russian Empire do not appear as separate headings."(16) He suggests that in order to have more realistic data on the "racial stock" of the immigrants, one should compare the American data with the data of local censuses, in particular with the Census of the Russian Empire of 1897, in which the mother-tongue played an important role in determining "racial stock" or ethnicity.
Unfortunately for the Belarusans, this did not happen. The U.S. authorities paid no attention to the Imperial Census of 1897, according to which Belarusans numbered over 6,000,000 persons.(17)
Frank J. Warne, in his pioneering analysis of Slavic immigrants in the anthracite region, does not specify Belarusans; he once again uses the term "Russians" with the remark appended "A peculiar type of Russian."(18) However, interviews conducted by this writer with third- and fourth-generation Americans, descendants of the pioneer-miners of the late 1890s, revealed that they were all emigrants from the Grodno or Vilna provinces of Belarus or from the Volyn region of Ukraine. Many of the Eastern Orthodox churches of the coal region were built by these Belarusan immigrants.(19)
In the book by D. L. Miller and R. E. Sharpless, Belarusans are hidden in the phrase: "Peoples of more than a dozen other nationalities, mostly from the empires of Czarist Russia and Austria-Hungary."(20)
E. A. Ross, in his article "Slavs in America," writes that the "Russian" immigrants in the United States, whom he numbers at 56,000, are not "true Russians." Anticipating a problem with this group, he states: "Still, these minor currents may be lost in the flood that is likely to roll upon us, once the great central Slavic mass of 80,000,000 `true Russians' is tapped."(21)
As the years passed, more publications concerning Slavic-Americans appeared, more questions were raised about the accuracy of the term "Russians," and more reservations were expressed about the data originating with the U.S. Census Bureau and the Immigration Service.
Writing about Slavs found on Southern farms, LeRoy Hodges noted, "For instance, within the term "Russians," as commonly used in the U.S., are included several Slavish races. They are the Lithuanians [sic] out of the great race of Letts, the Russians proper, who include Great Russians, White Russians, and Ruthenians or `Little Russians,'"(22)
Conde B. Pallen in his tribute to Andrew J. Shipman, states:
Russians are composed of Great Russians or Northern Russians, White Russians or Western Russians, and Little Russians (Ruthenians) or Southern Russians... The White Russians are so called from the prevailing color of the clothing of the peasantry, and inhabit the provinces of Vitebsl, Mohileff, Minsk, Vilna and Grodna.(23)
Jerome Davis accepted an inclusive definition of "Russians" in his research.
By Russian, as used in this study, is meant the Great Russian, inhabiting Central Russia, the White Russian, living between Poland and Russia, and the Little Russian, from what was formerly South Russia. We do not know exactly how many Russians and Ruthenians [i.e., Ukrainians—V. K.] there are in America. Guesses vary by the hundred thousand. The reason for this is apparent when we consider the complexity of the racial problem involved. Until 1898 the United States Census classified all who came from the territory controlled by tine Tsar's government as Russians. From that year on Jews were classified separately, as were also the Ruthenians. In 1910 all who called their native language Russian were considered Russians. When we turn to the last Russian census, we find that 2 percent of the entire European population were Jews who called Russian their native language. Since the great majority of emigrants to America from Russia were Jews, undoubtedly much more than 2 percent were so included in our census.(24)
In his other study, Jerome Davis writes:
Yet the 1920 census records 392,049 foreign-born Russians in the United States and, including those born in America of Russian parentage, a total of 731,949. Those familiar with the methods of census enumeration know that this number is open to a large possible error. Different authorities make widely varying estimates [...] Although these conjectures are of uncertain value, the official census figures would seem to justify accepting the number as about 700,000, although this is an increase of 700 percent since 1910.(25)
In his volume devoted to the study of Slavic immigrants during the pre-World War I period Fjeril Hess concludes:
Of these Russian immigrants, not counting the Carpatho-Russians and the Russian Jews, there are about 200,000. Of this number it is estimated that twenty-five per cent are Great Russians (coming from Central Russia), forty percent are White Russians (from Eastern [sic] Russia), and thirty-five percent are Little Russians (Ukrainians from Russia).(26)
Kenneth D. Miller makes brief mention of Belarusans in his book, published in 1925, but he spells out an important observation about them which has been totally missed by most other scholars. "There are many Roman Catholics among the White Russians," he writes. And he continues that the White Russian nationality was not recognized by the Russian administration, but that they presently have their own republic.(27)
Another interesting observation about Belarusans and other Slavic groups coming from the Russian Empire was made by Maurice R. Davie. This author, familiar with the question of nationalities, states that
American statistics do not distinguish between Great, White, and Little Russians, but there is reason to suppose that Great Russians predominated in the Russian emigration up to 190Д, while after that year Ukrainians and White Russians emigrated in largest number.(28)
The reason for this situation, according to Davie, was that tie Great Russian religious emigration, such as the Dukhobors and other groups, predominated prior to 1905; while after this year the non-Russian emigration became dominant.
The American authors Francis J. Brown and Joseph S. Roucek share Davie's point of view. (29)
Such Russian scholars as V. D. Bonch-Bruevich anl V. V. Obolensky also expressed the opinion that the Russian sectarians constituted the largest group of emigrants from the Russian Empire prior to 1905.* Obolensky, however, puts the number of Bfelarusan immigrants, even prior to 1905, at the same level as the number of Russian sectarians.(30)
This author agrees with Obolensky because sources, such as the 1905 year-book of the Grodno province reveal that the number of Belarusans who emigrated to the United States from this province is significant. (31) Moreover, the report of the Vilna province for the year 1903 states that the economic conditions within the province forced the peasants to emigrate chiefly to America.(32)
These conclusions are congruent with the data furnished by the U.S. Commissioner of Immigration for 1902, as Obolensky notes in the cited publication.
However, Mr. V. Paniutich, in his analysis of migratory processes in Belarus, reports that the officials of various regions reported an increase in emigration to America after 1906.(33)
With the passage of time, new works about Slavs in America appeared. The validity of the statistics concerning the "Russian" group was challenged, and many scholars suggested bluntly that these data were unreliable and should be disregarded. Thus, Carl Wittke states that statistics concerning nationalities from the former Russian Empire are meaningless because they do not differentiate between what he calls "real Russians" and other nationalities. The same author also expresses concern about the data for the Polish group when he writes:
By 1920, there were 3,000,000 of Polish parentage in the United States, although here again it must be remembered that the Poles were not always sharply distinguished for statistical purposes from the Ruthenian and similar groups.(34)
In some instances, authors, obviously realizing that there were many nationalities under the term Russian, stated simply "Whatever were the special, distinctive cultural characteristics of the various Russian groups in America, all these groups... no attempt was even made to outline the specific groups.(35)
Louis Adamic uses a vague and mischievous term, "Slavic-Russian," intending, apparently to cover all nationalities of Slavic descent who emigrated from the Russian Empire. Adamic writes that "The Slavic-Russian immigrants are estimated at about four hundred thousand. "(36)
Problems associated with the broad and undiscriminating use of the term "Russian" were taken note of in various places. In his publication about immigrant settlements in the State of Connecticut, Samuel Koenig writes:
Because of the lumping together of many ethnic groups under the caption of "Russians" by the United States Censuses, the popular impression is that Russians are very numerous in America. As a matter of fact, real Russians, and by this we mean Great Russians, have never come here in large numbers and, consequently, constitute a much smaller group than is commonly supposed. If mother tongue is an indication of the numerical strength of an ethnic group, then, according to the Bureau of the United States Census, there are 9,810 Russians in Connecticut. This number necessarily excludes the American-born and undoubtedly includes many Ukrainians and all of the White Russians.(37)
While some scholars expressed reservations about the correctness of calling any immigrant from the Russian Empire "Russian" in specific ethnic terms, other writers did not formulate their concern so precisely, but nevertheless questioned the use of the term "Russian" for so broad a spectrum of peoples. A number of American scholars who studied the speech of the Slavic immigrants to America underlined the fact that the majority of those immigrants did not speak Russian—they would frequently use the expression "proper Russian" - but rather, several different Slavic languages. This despite the fact that, if questioned, the immigrants were apt to claim that what they spoke was "Russian." This phenomenon was observed in court proceedings.
The petitioners are Russians seeking to enter the Unitedl States... [I]t appears that they were part of a group of illiterates laborers, only one of whom, it seems, Gegiow, speaks even the; ordinary Russian tongue... [T]heir ignorance tended to makes them form a clique to the detriment of the community. (38)
H. G. Wells, the well-known American writer, studied the distribution of the Russian language in the United States and wrote as follows:
It is commonly assumed that there are great numbers оf Russians in this country, and it is true that many millions of immigrants came to the United States from the Russian Empire between 1890 and 1910. Most of these, however, were Jews, principally Yiddish-speaking, though some of them spoke Russian as their native tongue; many of the remainder were Poles, who, of course, do not permit themselves to be confused with Russians of any sort. Only a minority were really Russian, Ukrainian, or Ruthenian Christians. Even of these, during the pre-war period, the Ukrainians and Ruthenians were the more numerous.(39)
A Mr. Peter Stepanovsky, writing from California, responded to Wells' article in a letter to H. L. Mencken with these observations.
It has occurred to me that you may wish to utilize H. G. Wells' article on Russian (Mercury, April 1932) in a future edition of The American Language. As your "constant" reader—and a rather warm admirer, if you please—since the days of Smart Set, I deem it my bounden duty to warn you against any such embalming of Wells' enthusiastic drivel. A few examples will suffice to convince you that I am not talking through my hat... All right, then, let's go. Page 448, Col. 1, par. 1: `Only a minority were really Russian, Ukrainian, or Ruthenian Christians.'
Mr. Stepanovsky notes: "The most numerous pre-war immigrants were the White Russians (from the wretched marshy lands of Western Russia)." And then he goes into the specifics which differentiate the Slavic languages.(40)
The work by Henry Pratt Fairchild exemplifies, however, the confusion which reigned in the terminology pertaining to ethnicity of the former Russian Empire. Thus, Fairchild describes a "regular" Russian peasant, meaning the Great Russian, and explains why the Great Russian peasant did not emigrate. Writing about Belarusans, he states:
The White Russians (the name has nothing to do with complexion) live on the central western border, and they and the Poles, or such part of them as war and revolution have left to Russia, complete the list of Russian Slavs.(41)
An article by Colgate Professor Albert Parry entitled "Artists of Wrecking" identifies Belarusans, specifies their working habits and, for the first time in an American periodical, uses the term "Belorussia." Parry writes:
Like most of the Russians in this country, they (i.e., Belarusans-V.K.) are called Pollacks. (It is the Russian Jews who are called here—Russians). They came to the States during the decade preceding the World War from the marshy villages of Belorussia, the western and most backward part of the ex-Empire. (42)
Some writers did include correct information alongside pure nonsense. For example, an article co-authored by Yaroslav J. Chyz and Joseph S. Roucek, "The Russians in the United States," correctly identified Belarusans in this country and noted that there was an organized Belarusan life in the United States. They continued, "This article endeavors to limit the discussion to immigrants and their descendants of the Great Russian and White Russian groups" with a footnote added that makes the clear and accurate observation "The White Russian group in three of the Western provinces of the old Russian Empire is a distinctive group in the East Slavonic family."
Unfortunately, after that good start, they make the peculiar comment that
No distinction is made between the Great Russians (Russians proper) and White Russians. The White Russians in America seem to be entirely dominated by the Russians. White Russian organizations in the United States are very few and scattered. The only newspaper in White Russian, Beloruskaya Trihuna; a weekly in Chicago, edited by J. J. Voronko, ceased to appear several years ago.(43)
So much for a scholarly analysis of the Belarusans!
Yet the publication "Manual of Slavonic Personalities" -past and present) includes a number of Belarusans in the fields of culture, politics, and research.(44)
The World War II years opened a new chapter in the history of Belarusans in the United States. The name "Byelorussia" began to appear on the front pages of American newspapers. Belarusan territory became an important battleground in the struggle against Nazi Germany. The Byelorussian S. S. R. was featured prominently in the press following the War when it became one of the founding members of the United Nations Organization in 1945. Although press coverage of World War II and post-war events gave the B. S. S. R. considerable visibility and made it a somewhat familiar term to many Americans, most did not associate the name of this distant country with their Slavic neighbors, who were, in any event, often mislabeled as "Russians" or "Poles."
Moreover, there continued to appear works which were misleading and harmful. One example is the Slavonic Encyclopedia, edited by Joseph S. Roucek. This mischievous volume had the following to say: "The White Russians, or, as they are at present referred to in the Soviet Union, Byelorussians, should be considered as Russians..." Roucek continues: "The White Russians have nothing in common (not even language) with the White Russians who used to drive taxis in Paris, speak a sort of Somerset Russian and write it phonetically."(45). Reference tools such as the Slavonic Encyclopedia belong in museums under the rubric "Curiosities," rather than on library shelves where they are a source of misinformation.
Materials on Belarus began to appear with greater frequency as the post-World War II wave of Byelorussian immigration arrived. A substantial analysis of Belarusans in the United States was carried out by the Common Council for American Unity which provided a reasonably accurate account of Belarusans in the United States and the structure of the Belarusan communities in this country.
Since the majority (between 60% to 75%) of the immigrants from pre-war Russia are estimated to have come from its northwestern Byelorussian part, it can be assumed that out of these 400,000 persons, some 225,000 to 275,000 were of Byelorussian origin. There are not even such general estimates regarding the proportion of Byelorussians among the 2,905,859 persons of Polish birth or parentage. But, probably not less than 75,000 to 125,000 of them were of Byelorussian origin. This would give a total of 300,000 to 400,000 persons of Byelorussian birth and origin now in the United States. If a similar calculation is applied to the mother-tongue statistics, it may be assumed that in 1940, 150,000 to 200,000 persons had Byelorussian as the "Principal language spoken in the home in earliest childhood" which is the United States definition of the mother tongue.
The Byelorussian American group, stimulated by the arrival of Byelorussian DP intellectuals from Europe, is now in the process of organization. Two rival Byelorussian organizations which are trying to assume leadership were formed only in February of this year [1951] and have had no time, as yet to show their relative strength. Nominally, they both support the idea of an independent, democratic Byelorussian Republic. The difference between them, as well as between their respective centers in Europe, seems to be, first, past orientations (the Abramchik group is friendly to the Poles; Astrouski collaborated with the Germans) and, second, general background. The followers of the Astrouski group are mostly natives of eastern Byelorussia and are refugees from the Soviet Union. They are, also, almost exclusively Orthodox. On the other hand, a considerable number of the followers of the Abramchik group are Catholics and many of them—if not the majority—are natives of the western part of Byelorussia, which between the wars, was part of Poland. In both groups, however, the desire to form a united front appears quite pronounced.(46)
Although brief, this report is the first meaningful analysis of the Belarusans in the United States.
Beginning in the 1950s, an important source for information on Belarusan-Americans became the Congressional Record, which included a substantial amount of material concerning Belarusans, their communities, organized activities, ideological views dealing with the establishment of a new Belarusan democratic state, historical and cultural development, leadership, etc. This agency produced also a number of important publications concerning the attitudes of Belarusans, including Belarusan-American attitudes towards the Soviet occupation of Belarus.(47) Undoubtedly, for a student of Belarusica the Congressional Record is an important research tool.
There are numerous references to Belarusans in several studies of Slavic-American communities during the sixties, seventies, and eighties, raising once again the problem of terminology for East European Slavic immigrants, as well as other aspects of Belarusan studies in America.
Thus, for example, Nancy Eubank specifically states that:
To most modern Americans, a Russian is a citizen of the vat country known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,. Americans are not always aware of the fact that the USSR is a state composed of people of widely varying backgrounds...(48)
Professor Paul R. Magocsi, a knowledgeable authority on nationalities in the American ethnic population, attempts to educate the American reading public very rightly and correctly. He writes.
Who exactly are the Russian Americans? Estimating tie population of North Americans with Russian roots is problematic because the term Russian was originally applied о many immigrants who came from the multinational Russian empire and Soviet Union. These people were in many cases actually Jews, Poles, Byelorussians, Ukrainians, Germans, or others.(49)
The Russo-centric approach, traditional in American schools and universities, has made it very difficult for scholars in the United States who research the Slavic people to make distinctions and judgments that differ from the "accepted wisdom," and distorted categorization that dominates American academic thinking.
The phenomenon of including Belarusans and others in the group of immigrants mechanically labeled "Russians" remains a common practice down to the present time. One recent author, Michael W. Tripp, studied a group which he called "Russians"" in San Francisco, but noticed that within this group there were White Russians from the Grodno, Minsk, and Mogilev provinces. He turned the concept of "Russianness" on its head with the following explanation:
One's "Russianness" became a question of where each individual or group perceived his loyalties to lie and a reflection of the political geography of the time. (50)
A different American student of "Russian" immigration and its adaptation to American society mentions Belarusans, however, in a rather unclear context, as a separate ethnic group, but as part of the "Russian" masses. This author even provides some statistics, following Davis's reasoning, that from 1888 to 1910 over 1.9. million immigrants came from the Russian Empire. Among them were 4.4% Belarusans (the term used is White Russians), which in numbers means close to 84,000 persons. Unfortunately, this study is of little use in obtaining a distinct picture of Belarusan-Americans, or of the number of Belarusan immigrants, because the peak of that immigration prior to World War I occurred after 1910.(51)
Some research has been done by students at various colleges and universities. One such work is a paper by Edith Rusconi Kaltovich, written at Rutgers University, the State University of New Jersey, "Roebling's Ethnology of Two Minority Groups: Byelorussians and Rusins." Writing of these two small ethnic groups which share a number of characteristics, Kaltovich says:
The Byelorussians and the Rusins were two small immigrant groups, who settled in the industrial regions of the Eastern States, particularly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. These people, who settled in Roebling part of Florence Township, N.J. had, besides the typical problems of an immigrant group, others which resulted from their relative smallness in number, the obscurity of the homeland, and ill-defined nationality, and their membership in a hybrid church. When Roebling was established in 1905, the Byelorussians and Carpatho-Rusins helped in the construction of the mill... because the Byelorussians were Russian Orthodox, they attended Saint Vladimir Church (1916)... Some of the Byelorussians attended the Holy Assumption Catholic Church in Roebling... The Byelorussians remain isolated because of the small number and did not build a church or cemetery... The settlers from Byelorussia founded their homes mainly around the urban area of Roebling... The new land was hospitable, the newcomers hardworking and persevering. While the first generation of immigrants remained mainly laborers or craftsmen, their descendants contributed outstanding specialists and professionals in all fields of activity. All have merged into the mainstream of American life and have richly contributed to the growth of this nation. The first Byelorussian settlers were: Steven Zitnik, Jadwiga Spirida, Julian Awdick, Harry Varvara, Alexandria Kozak's father John Zacharkov, and others...(52).
"Byelorussians in America" was the title of a seminar study presented by Victor Czartorysky and Roman Mardarewich at the City College, CUNY, under the guidance of Professor Peter Goy in 1975.(53)
Maria Paula Survilla presented an authoritative research paper on Belarusan musical traditions in North America, "Music and Identity: Byelorussians Making Music in North America," at the University of Michigan, Arm Arbor. (54)
The Bicentennial years and post-Bicentennial period witnessed a considerable increase in publications concerning Belarusan-Americans; they have been treated in several specialized studies.(55)
An interesting observation was made by Thomas J. Archdeacon in his book Becoming American. He refers to Belarusans in numerous places and, focusing on Slavic immigrants to this country, he writes:
The eastern Slavs, centered in what is today the Soviet Union, constituted the largest Slavic bloc at the time of the great migration. Their ranks included the Russians, the Byelorussians, the Ruthenians, and the Ukrainians, peoples who used the Cyrillic alphabet and were affiliated with the Eastern Orthodox church or the Eastern Rite of the Rontan Catholic... Most of the Slavs who left Europe went to the United States. The American republic absorbed approximately 83 percent of the total emigration between 1876 and 1910; Canada the next most frequent destination, took in only 8 percent. Determining exactly the ethnic affiliations of the departees is an impossibility, given the demographic and national complexities of the region.(56)
At this juncture, a very positive sign is manifest: Belarusans begin to be mentioned in publications designed for a broad reading public.(57)
The Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic G