In an Atmosphere of «Aimless Quarrels and Petty Strife»: Ukrainian National Life in Chernivtsi in the Summer of 1921 Through the Prism of Little-Known Sources

Abstract

The summer of 1921 marked a critical turning point for the Ukrainian national movement in Northern Bukovyna in general, and in Chernivtsi in particular, under the conditions of the Romanian occupation. Previously unused in historiography, archival materials from the Central State Historical Archive of Ukraine in Lviv (fond 581) — consisting of analytical reports and a political memorandum authored by Ukrainian students and public figures in June–July 1921 — elucidate Ukrainian national life under dual pressure: systematic repression by the occupation regime and destructive internal conflicts.

According to these documents, the Ukrainian student committee of Chernivtsi University planned an academic assembly (viche) for June 18, 1921, to address the deteriorating situation of Ukrainian students. Vice-Rector Vasile Tarnavschi refused to consider the written petition solely because it was composed in Ukrainian. When student delegates referenced the Austrian law of April 25, 1901, which obligated the administration to respect national languages, the authorities dismissed the reference, declaring Romanian the sole official language. The administration demanded that any assembly be conducted exclusively in Romanian or German and prohibited the discussion of political topics. The University Senate, led by Rector Ion Nistor, ultimately permitted the assembly only in Romanian, which effectively constituted a prohibition on freedom of expression. Simultaneously, the Ukrainian language was eliminated as a mandatory subject from secondary school graduation examinations.

As indicated in the published reports, certain representatives of the Ukrainian intelligentsia adapted to the new realities through what patriotic circles termed «khrunivstvo» (collaborationism). The head of the Zhinocha Hromada (Women’s Community) society and her colleagues actively participated in the regime’s «Day of Flowers» charitable event initiated by the Queen, collecting funds for Romanian patients while ignoring the needs of the Ukrainian community. Teacher Roman Ivasiuk, addressing students at the Ukrainian Teachers’ Seminary on June 5, 1921, during celebrations for the Romanian poet Vasile Alecsandri, publicly declared that Bukovynian Ukrainians owed their very lives to the Romanian government. He concluded his speech by pointing to the Romanian cockade and calling for the glorification of «our tricolor» On June 3, 1921, Regional School Inspector Antin Klym concluded a meeting of the Ruskyi Narodnyi Dim (Ruthenian National Home) society with the exclamation: «Glory to our King Ferdinand, and long may he reign!».

According to the sources, the most acute and painful issue for the Ukrainian national movement was the conflict between the democratic academic society Soiuz and the elitist dueling corporation Zaporozhe (led by Professor Izydor Tsurkanovych), which escalated into mutual accusations of cooperation with hostile governments. Izydor Tsurkanovych, a founding member of Zaporozhe, may have been the author of an anonymous denunciation accusing Soiuz of harboring suspicious elements and communists. His supporters systematically vandalized the premises of Soiuz, breaking windows to intimidate opponents. These denunciations triggered a wave of arrests: on May 24, authorities detained student Vasyl Uhrynchuk as «politically suspicious». Likely acting on the incitement of the Zaporozhe members, the Romanian secret police (Siguranța) arrested the editor of the local Ukrainian newspaper, Serhii Kaniuk, on the night of June 17–18, conducting a search that lasted from 2 AM until the evening of the following day. The police confiscated his entire private library despite a total lack of evidence of illegal activity. That same night, police raided the residences of Soiuz members in search of leaflets that, despite passing censorship, branded Tsurkanovych a traitor.

A memorandum signed by Volodymyr Yasenytskyi, Kasiian Bryndzan, Mykola Drahomyretskyi, and Teofil Drachynskyi exposed systematic abuses by the leadership of the Ruskyi Narodnyi Dim. The administration had not convened general meetings since 1913, preferring non-Ukrainian tenants (the Czech consulate, the German social-democratic newspaper Vorwärts) over Ukrainian cultural organizations. Board member Volodymyr Fedorovych blocked the placement of the «Ukrainian People’s Library» (approximately 7,000 volumes) in the Yurii Fedkovych dormitory despite available space. He annulled permission for the «Committee of Ukrainian Ladies» to establish an orphanage, leaving hundreds of orphans homeless after the women had already spent 1,800 crowns on renovations. The administration sold property of the Pilhuliak Fund for 18,000 crowns, despite its market value being 62,000. As owners of the «Bukovynian Printing and Publishing» joint-stock company, board members charged themselves reduced rent for the use of the Narodnyi Dim premises.

The administration systematically blocked membership applications from independent Ukrainians (approximately 70 rejections without explanation) while recruiting loyalists. The general meeting of June 9, 1921, scheduled clandestinely with invitations sent only to loyalists, was disrupted by thirty students from the Soiuz, Pravnycha Akademiia, and Zoria societies. When the youth refused to leave, board member Oleksandr Kupchanko summoned the Romanian police. All thirty students were arrested and held until late at night. During the chaos, eggs were thrown at members of the presidium, although the memorandum’s authors denied that these were organized actions by the students.

Source criticism reveals the dual nature of these documents: they reflect genuine repressions and conflicts while simultaneously containing subjective assessments, partisan rhetoric, and unverified or insufficiently confirmed rumors. The memoirs of Vasyl Rusnak confirm the fact of repression but present the scandal of June 9 as a planned provocation by Soiuz members. Internal contradictions and «aimless quarrels» consumed energy that could have been directed toward a consolidated opposition, significantly weakening the capacity of the Ukrainian national movement for effective resistance.

The full texts of the newly discovered sources are published in the appendices.