Formation of Ukrainian-Georgian diplomatic relations
at the Central Council of the UPR and the Ukrainian State
under the Hetmanate of P. Skoropadsky (1917–1918)
Опубліковано: Pavlo Hai-Nyzhnyk. Formation of Ukrainian-Georgian diplomatic relations at the Central Council of the UPR and the Ukrainian State under the Hetmanate of P.Skoropadsky (1917–1918) // Україна і Грузія: дипломатичні відносини, міжнародні зв’язки, культурна дипломатія До століття встановлення дипломатичних відносин. – Київ; – Батумі, 2017.
Освещается ход становления украинско-грузинских политических отношений во времена Центральной Рады в 1917 г. и установления дипломатических отношений между Грузинской Демократической Республикой с Украинской Народной Республикой и Украинской Державой в течении 1918 г.
Уже в 1917 г. представители грузинского народа были делегатами Украинского Национального Конгресса и Съезда Народов, созванном Центральной Радой в Киеве. Грузины, которые находились в то время в Украине, приветствовали провозглашение ІІІ Универсалом УНР в ноябре 1917 г. и ее государственной независимости IV Универсалом в январе 1918 г. В декабре 1917 г. И.Лордкипанидзе был уполномочен Национальным Советом Грузии выполнять обязанности военного комиссара при правительстве УНР, которого в январе 1918 г. сменил Д.Вачейшвили. В апреле 1918 г. военным комиссаром Грузии в Украине был назначен Н.Брегвадзе.
В начале сентября 1918 г. в Киеве было открыто дипломатическое представительство Грузии (посол – В.Тевзая), а вскоре – Генеральное консульство в Одессе и Консульство в Харькове. 20 июля 1918 г. гетман П.Скоропадский утвердил консульского агента I разряда в Тифлисе. Украинские дипломаты прибыли на Кавказ уже под «занавес» Гетманата. 5 декабря 1918 г. Украинская Держава установила официальные дипломатические отношения с Грузией, между государствами был заключён широкий двусторонний договор. 7 декабря 1918 г. стороны подписали Договор «О товарообмене между Украиной и Грузией», а также межправительственное Соглашение о межбанковских переводных операциях.
В октябре-декабре 1918 г. правительством Украины вынашивались планы создания объединенного военно-политического антибольшевистского блока из Украины, Дона, Кубани, Терека, Грузии, предкавказских и закавказских народов.
Висвітлюється перебіг становлення українсько-грузинських політичних взаємин за часів існування Центральної Ради у 1917 р. та налагодження дипломатичних відносин між Грузинською Демократичною Республікою Українською Народною Республікою та Українською Державою протягом 1918 р. Вже у 1917 р. представники грузинського народу були делегатами Українського Національного Конґресу та З’їзду Народів, скликаному Центральною Радою у Києві. Грузини, що перебували у ті часи в Україні, вітали проголошення ІІІ Універсалом УНР в листопаді 1917 р. та її державної незалежності IV Універсалом у січні 1918 р. У грудні 1917 р. І.Лордкіпанідзе був уповноважений Національною Радою Грузії виконувати обов’язки військового комісара при уряді УНР, якого в січні 1918 р. змінив Д.Вачейшвілі. У квітні 1918 р. військовим комісаром Грузії в Україні було призначено Н.Брегвадзе.
На початку вересня 1918 р. у Києві було відкрито дипломатичне представництво Грузії (посол – В.Тевзая), а незабаром – Ґенеральне консульство в Одесі та Консульство у Харкові. 20 липня 1918 р. гетьман П.Скоропадський затвердив консульського аґента І розряду в Тифлісі. Українські дипломати прибули на Кавказ вже під «занавіс» Гетманату. 5 грудня 1918 р. Українська Держава встановила офіційні дипломатичні відносини з Грузією, між державами було укладено широкий двосторонній договір. 7 грудня 1918 р. сторони підписали Договір «Про товарообмін між Україною та Грузією», а також міжурядову Угоду про міжбанківські переказові операції.
У жовтні–грудні 1918 р. урядом України виношувалися плани створення об’єднаного військово-політичного антибільшовицького блоку з України, Дону, Кубані, Тереку, Грузії, передкавказьких й закавказьких народів.
Ukrainian-Georgian relations have a long history and stretch back to their origins even in the times of Rus, but the newest revival and deepening of ties between these peoples could occur at a qualitatively higher level only with the liberation of the two countries from under the yoke of imperial Russia. The February 1917 revolution in Petrograd led to the fall of the autocracy of the Romanovs, the collapse of the empire, the intensification of the centrifugal processes in Russia, and the revival of national autonomo-federalist movements, which quickly acquired not only expressive cultural and educational features, but also isolated socio-political characteristics with certain centers seeking to achieve national sovereignty and state independence. The transient process of the formation of the former Russian colonies began on the path of the revival of their own national states. Both Ukrainian and Georgian peoples were not exception in these dynamic transformations.
The Ukrainian-Georgian political rapprochement began from the very beginning of the fall of tsarism. For example, on March 19, 1917, a representative of the Georgian organizations in Rostov, together with the French consul, welcomed the 10 thousand-strong demonstration of Ukrainians demanding the autonomy of Ukraine as part of the federal Russian Republic1. In early April, a delegate from Kyiv's Georgian organizations – Koiava was a delegate of the Ukrainian National Congress in Kyiv and on April 7, 1917, spoke on it in Russian2. On April 8, in his congratulation to the National Congress, in particular, he noted: «You, Ukrainians, and we Georgians are especially close to each other. Our past destiny is the same. Ukraine and Georgia joined Russia on the condition that they retain the full right of national self-determination, but unworthy Russian rulers violated the treaty and sought to strangle us. When they say: "Ukraine has risen," I say: "She never died, but only now are the bright days of her life". Our hearts, full of joy, shout together with you: "Long live free Ukraine! Long live the Federal Republic!"»3.
In early August 1917, the Committee of the Georgian Military Union sent a telegraph to the Ukrainian Central Council with a request to help inform the Georgian soldiers who were on the territory of Ukraine that an All-Russian congress of Georgian servicemen would be held in Tiflis on August 22. Therefore, the Minor Council (Mala Rada) of the Central Council decided to take measures so that a message about this congress could be published in newspapers4.
Representatives of the Georgian people participated in the Congress of Peoples, which took place from September 8 to 15, 1917 in Kyiv5. At this Congress, the representative of the Georgian National Democratic Party, I.Mochavariani, also recalled that both Georgia and Ukraine at one time agreed to an alliance with Russia, but the Romanovs turned this union into a yoke. «Now the yoke is dumped and we should not think about breaking old contracts, but about restoring these treaties", he said. "We need a strong organization and unification of nationalities in order to achieve the liberation of our countries, because no great power, and especially a little culture, does not recognize the free will of the rights of small nations"»6.
Another Georgian, the federalist socialist I.Baratashvili, in his inflammatory speech, pointed out that «the Georgian people lived in fraternal accord with all peoples, and above all, with the Muslim peoples of Transcaucasia. The new revolutionary government failed to remove the obstacles that make it difficult to build a new life. True, the old regime has left a difficult situation on its own, but the peoples of Russia are in power to solve those complex issues if they take it unanimously. To do this, we must unite all living forces under the slogan of equality, brotherhood and mutual love...
Ukrainian democracy has managed to rally all its aspirations around a single main task, namely, around achieving autonomy, which it already actually has. And it is the Council that convenes the Congress of Nations, and not the government, which is engaged in allegedly more important matters, but what, it is still unknown. We are facing a great danger, both from the outside and inside, and the way of salvation is the new decentralism of the state, which does not mean the collapse»7. Finally, he invited all those present, after all the peoples have achieved their goal of self-determination, to visit free Georgia8. Somewhat later, on November 7, 1917, at a meeting of the Minor Council, he, as a member of the Council of Peoples, welcomed such words only with the proclaimed proclamation of the Ukrainian People's Republic by the III Universal of the Central Council: «Words and speeches fade before the Universal, which was here proclaimed, but I can not refrain from congratulating this major historical act on behalf of the federal Georgians.
The Central Council has cut the Gordian knot with this act and the Ukrainian people are now free. That Centralism, which was the source of oppression of the peoples, the Central Council crushed and erased.
The pillar on which the imperialism of the Russian state stood... The revolution creates new laws, and on the basis of the laws of the revolution Ukraine has become free. The Ukrainian people chose their own way, from which a new life begins. Who wants to strengthen freedom and justice on the ground, he must go with the Ukrainian people and with the Ukrainian Republic... I want Ukraine to be that stone rock on which all nations would rely. Let the Ukrainian Republic live»9.
Soon, November 11, 1917, at an extraordinary meeting of the Minor Council on the bill on elections to the Ukrainian Constituent Assembly, Notadze spoke with a greeting on behalf of the Georgians of Kyiv. He read out a resolution in which the meeting of the capital's Georgians without any difference in parties showed «their sincere and boundless joy at the proclamation of the Ukrainian People's Republic», and then expressed confidence that «the flag you raised, a symbol of the federation, will not be left alone and other nations as well consciously and proudly raise this flag»10.
Attempts to establish diplomatic relations between Georgia and Ukraine date back to December 1917. It was then that I.Lordkipanidze, a deputy of the All-Russian Constituent Assembly, who was in Odessa, was authorized by the Georgian National Council to perform the duties of military commissioner under the government of the UPR. In January 1918, I.Lordkipanidze (in connection with his departure for Petrograd) transferred his powers to D.Vacheishvili.
January 9, 1918 D.Vacheishvili appealed to the head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry О.Shulgyn with a request to allow citizens of Georgia to retain personal weapons for self-defense. At the same time, the Georgian military commissar unequivocally noted that in his country «there are not one thousand Ukrainian citizens who have not yet been subject to any restrictions of civil rights and will not be subject to»11. Soon, on January 13, 1918, the Georgian Military Commissariat was established in Kyiv. The government of the UPR recognized it as the authorized body of the National Council of Georgia.
On the same day, a draft agreement was drawn up and adopted between the government of the UPR and the military commissioner of Georgia on the formation of Georgian military units in Ukraine and their relocation to their homeland to fight the Turkish troops and Bolshevik armed detachments12. During the talks, D.Vacheishvili suggested that the Georgian troops «preserve weapons, equipment, equestrian staff and other property», if this was available in part, if not, then they should be provided with all of this by the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense's own order. However, the head of the foreign policy department of the UPR O.Shulgyn, by his resolution, questioned the satisfaction of such a petition, as he did not agree to inscribe in the agreement, so that if the Ukrainian People's Republic signed a peace treaty with the Central Council, its government undertook to «provide a rolling stock in two months for the transfer of all Georgian soldiers and called citizens on the same conditions outside Ukraine»13.
But the members of the Ukrainian part of the commission put their demand that «all expenses related to the maintenance of both Georgian soldiers and newly-called Georgians are returned to Ukraine either from the national fund of the federation into which Georgia will enter or the National Council of Georgia in the amount determined by a special commission of representatives of both nations»14. In the agreement, in fact, there was a speech: a) on the formation of parts in the territory of Ukraine from the soldiers-Georgians, who were in the wartime conditions in Ukraine and on the Ukrainian front; b) on the transportation of these parts as they are formed on the territory of Georgia; c) in case of announcement of the mobilization by the National Council of Georgia, about the formation of commands from the drafted Georgians who were on the territory of Ukraine and their transfer to Georgia15. At the same time, a Georgian military detachment was formed in Kyiv, and all the Georgian servicemen switched over to the Georgian Military Commissariat, which was allowed to form military units (under the control of the UPR Military Ministry) for sending to their homeland.
After the arrival of the Central Council and the government of the UPR in March 1918, representatives of Armenian and Georgian detachments freed from the Bolsheviks of Kyiv again raised the issue of the return of their units to the Caucasus. Therefore, on March 13, 1918, the Council of People's Ministers of the UPR returned to the question of the stay of armed formations on its territory and decided that all national troops from the day of demobilization should be disbanded, and the existing military units should be disbanded by the order of the military minister of the UPR. These parts were guaranteed free travel outside Ukraine in echelons without weapons. As for financial security, the Ukrainian ministers decided that «this case can be arranged only in accordance with the national or regional government to which these parts are appointed»16.
Three days later, on March 16, the government of the UPR, having considered the introduction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs about the return of Georgian and Armenian detachments to the Caucasus, reaffirmed its previous decision and decided to invite the Armenian and Georgian armed formations «to leave Ukraine without weapons»17. On March 19, the echelon of Georgian servicemen, with the consent of the Ukrainian government and the German military command in Ukraine, set out on its way, but barely reached Znamenka station and stopped. In this regard, the Georgian Commissioner asked the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry to help «speedy and unhindered passage of the named train to the border of Ukraine» along with military equipment, as well as to issue «a certificate for unimpeded passage across the Ukrainian border of parliamentarians from the echelon for negotiations with the Bolsheviks». The then manager of the affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the UPR M.Lyubynsky reacted without delay and ordered to accept D.Vacheishvili's request «for immediate execution»18. In April 1918 N.Bregvadze was appointed military commissar of Georgia in Ukraine, and D.Vacheishvili became his deputy, and the secretary was N.Bokugava. It was these people who undertook in the future to directly solve the problems of their fellow countrymen in Ukraine and to decide the issue of their return to their homeland.
Meanwhile, on April 16, 1918, at a meeting of the political section of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the UPR, a report was heard by the member of the Central Council, M.Svidersky, who was evacuating the property of the Ukrainianized units of the 5th Army Corps from Trebizond. Touching upon the Georgian issue, the speaker expressed the opinion that the Georgians are not able to resist the advance of the Turkish forces, since they «do not have a real army». At the same time, he analytically substantiated the arguments about the advantage for Ukraine of the embodiment of self-determination and statehood of Georgia and the Caucasian peoples, which, however, did not have high hopes through a virtually continuous internal interethnic strife. M.Svidersky also affirmatively answered the question of the chairman M.Lubynsky regarding «conversations about the Black Sea Federation» during his stay in Transcaucasia, adding that there it is desirable with the center in Kyiv, or in Sevastopol, which can become a free city19.
At the same time, it should be noted that diplomatic, as well as economic, trade relations between Georgia and Ukraine in the first year and a half after the February revolution in Russia and its actual decentralization developed too amorphously and did not receive practical implementation, but rather existed sooner in the hypothetical form of the impractical imagination of the then international-federalist views of political romantics, at least among Ukrainian revolutionary figures. For example, the chairman of the Central Council, M.Hrushevsky, could not think of spreading Ukrainian political or economic influence in the Black Sea region, let alone «imperialistic whims to seize foreign markets, exploit culturally backward margins as their colonies, expansion»20. Instead, he expected the onset of a world federation in which economic and cultural cooperation, voluntary cooperation among the Black Sea peoples will take place, and thus «closely linking themselves, these Black Sea regions can create an unusually rich, large and multilateral economic base»21.
Quite soon the internal political structure of Ukraine changed radically, other people came to power in Kyiv, with a different worldview and ambitions. On April 29, 1918, as a result of the coup d'état, under the «active neutrality» of the German occupation administration, the power of the Central Council, and hence the Ukrainian People's Republic, was overthrown. There was a Ukrainian State with a liberal-bourgeois dictatorship in the form of the Hetmanate of General Pavlo Skoropadsky.
In Transcaucasia, on May 26 (June 8), 1918, the «Act of Independence» proclaimed the creation of the Georgian Democratic Republic*. In the «Act of Independence of Georgia», which was adopted by the National Council, it was proclaimed in particular that «the Georgian Democratic Republic wishes to establish good-neighborly relations with all members of the international community»22. The coalition Government of the state was headed by N.Ramishvili, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – A.Chkhenkeli23. Two days later, Georgia signed a military-political treaty with Germany, according to which allied (de jure), but in fact, all the same, occupation (de facto) German troops were stationed on its territory in order to ensure public order and state independence republic.
* After the Bolshevik coup in Russia, the Transcaucasian Commissariat, the joint government of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia, was established on November 28 (15), 1917, which on February 23 (10) 1918 convened the Transcaucasian Seimas for the legal registration of interstate relations of the peoples of Transcaucasia. According to the decision of the Diet from April 22 (9), 1918, Georgia, together with Azerbaijan and Armenia, became part of the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR). On June 8 (May 26), 1918, the Georgian National Council proclaimed the Georgian Democratic Republic (GDR). It should also be noted that from May to October 1918, most of the territory of Georgia was German, and from June to October 1918 in Adjaria and other lands of Georgia – Turkish troops.
Since then, Georgia, like a few months ago, Ukraine, had to be under the protectorate of Germany (in fact it became the military-political and financial-economic satellite of the Central Council), since on April 27 (May 10), 1918, official Berlin and Istanbul signed a secret an agreement on the division of spheres of influence in the Transcaucasus, according to which Georgia was recognized as the sphere of geopolitical interests of Germany24.
This fact, in fact, is not an unusual phenomenon in the then international policy (it is enough to recall the analogous agreement between France and Great Britain of December 23, 1917 on the division of former Russia into «zones of influence», in which the French was determined to the west of the line: The Kerch Strait – the mouth of the Don – Don – Tsaritsyn, the British – to the east of it, that is, including the Caucasus and Transcaucasia25).
Nevertheless, at that historic moment, the mutual stay of both Kyiv and Tiflis (Tbilisi) in the orbit of the power attraction of the Central States with the center in Berlin objectively facilitated geopolitical logistics for Ukraine and Georgia on the way to mutual rapprochement both on the international political plane and in the horizons of financial and economic cooperation, as well as in the direction of the birth of a military-defense project, where Kyiv from the obvious weight measurements a priori assumed a leading role. And the further course of events developed precisely according to this spiral and logic, and its collapse was due to the intrigue of historical circumstances of both objective and subjective character for both states...
June 6, 1918 the Georgian Minister of Foreign Affairs A.Chkhenkeli through the attorney in the affairs of the Ukrainian State in Germany О.Koziy appealed to the official Kyiv with a diplomatic note. She reported on the termination of the existence of the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic and on the self-dissolution of the Transcaucasian Seimas and the government «taking into account the events that arose with the onset of the Ottoman forces in the Caucasus»26. Another note, dated June 22, submitted by Minister A.Chkhenkeli, noted that the newly formed Georgian Democratic Republic, which «wants to organize its international relations in accordance with its vital interests and ensure its independence», asks for recognition of its Ukrainian State27. It is interesting that in a note the Georgians argued for the emergence of their statehood by the fact that «the political agreements concluded with Russia to provide Georgia with certain internal freedom and inviolability of its territory, Georgia quickly saw its rights trampled, its freedom under threat and its liberties replaced regime of complete annexation»28. Therefore, it was said in one of the notes, after the fall of tsarism, the collapse of the empire, taking into account the articles of the Brest Peace Treaty between the Central Council and the RSFSR, and the fact of the withdrawal of Russian troops from Transcaucasia «no connection links Georgia to Russia, it is free from all obligations in relation to another state»29. Both notes were already broadcast on June 9 by О.Koziy to the hetman government led by F.Lyzohub.
Soon, on July 4 (17), 1918, the new Georgian Prime Minister N.Zhordania sent a letter to the Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs D.Doroshenko stating that his government, with the aim of strengthening friendly relations between states, «appointed its representative in the Ukrainian the government of citizen Viktor Vasilievich Tevzai and his deputy – David Vissherionovich Vacheishvili, who was granted special powers»30.
As for contacts in the sphere of finance, for example, on June 29, 1918, the temporary minister of Ukraine in charge of Ukraine was asked by N.Bregvadze, the interim acting commissioner of Georgia, who asked for «petitions» before the Hetman Council of Ministers on the possibility of immediate submission to his disposal 50 thousand rubles. to the account of the Republic of Georgia to meet the basic needs of Georgian citizens, former soldiers on the Ukrainian front (referring to the Russian South-Western and Romanian fronts running through Ukraine), a huge number of which accumulated in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Rostov and for their transfer to their homeland31.
Already on July 15, 1918, a relevant report was submitted to the Ukrainian Government for consideration by the Ukrainian Minister, who reported on the appeal of the Georgian Commissioner and asked to support «former military personnel on the Ukrainian fronts, military prisoners and invalids, who, thanks to the anarchy reigning in the Russian Soviet Republic, do not have the opportunity to return to their homeland and suffer much from material insecurity, "while adding that they" participated in the last war on the Ukrainian fronts and so in their time about told the Ukrainian State not a small help»32. The Ukrainian Government has met the request of the Commissioner of Georgia (a magazine of meetings of the small Council of Ministers on July 16 and 17)33, and on July 20 Skoropadsky approved the Resolution adopted by the Council of Ministers «On allocating 50,000 rubles to the War Minister for loan to the Commissioner of Georgia», which also noted that the loan was being provided «at the expense of the Georgian Republic» to help Georgian citizens to return to their homeland34. This decision was subsequently published in the «State Gazette» in connection with which its editor was sent (July 29) the appropriate order35. Thus, Ukraine has been formally granted a cash interest-free and unlimited loan to Georgia.
Meanwhile, July 25, 1918, the Ambassador of the Ukrainian State to Germany, Baron F.Shteingel, was visited in Berlin by the «head of a special delegation in Germany», Prince Avalov and her member E.Gegechkori, who confirmed the fact and force of the aforementioned note by Georgian Foreign Minister A.Chkhenkeli (he was also in the capital of Germany, but he could not visit the hetman's ambassador because of illness). In turn, Prince Avalov and Е.Gegechkori again appealed to the Ukrainian representative (this time in the person of Ambassador F.Shteingel) with a request that Ukraine recognize the Georgian Democratic Republic as an independent state and, at the same time, they told him on behalf of their government that Georgia does not see any hindrance regarding its recognition of the Ukrainian State.
As a result of this meeting, Shteingel prepared a detailed report for the Ukrainian government and sent him with the first courier to Kyiv, and on July 30, 1918, sent a personal telegram to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Ukrainian State, in which he noted, in particular: «Given that it seems to me important to establish close and friendly relations with the Georgian people, I ask you, Mr. Minister, to present to the Most Serene Hetman the question of recognizing Georgia with your conducive conclusion. To establish diplomatic relations, Georgia can immediately send its permanent representative to Kyiv. About the results I ask you not to refuse to give me in reply by direct wire»36.
In the report, there were considerations regarding the Ukrainian benefits for the future development of Ukrainian-Georgian economic relations, namely:
• Georgia could become for Ukraine by way of the entire Transcaucasus and further into Persia;
• Baku–Batumi railway and kerosene pipeline as a convenient means for transportation and receipt of petroleum products from Caspian oil, and thus the Ukrainian State could not only receive these energy resources, but also become a transit supplier to the Black Sea region and Europe;
• the countries of Transcaucasia each year needed about 200 thousand poods of sugar and 3 million poods of wheat;
• an opportunity to become an exporter-monopolist in the supply of Ukrainian grain and raw materials through Georgia to Transcaucasia, Persia, to the eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire, etc.37
In August 1918, a Georgian diplomatic mission headed by a member of the National Council of the Georgian Democratic Republic, V.Tevzaya, a lawyer for education, departed from Tbilisi to Kyiv. The mission was to establish diplomatic, trade-economic and cultural relations with the Ukrainian State. Diplomatic routine work continued until September 1918. Eventually, at the beginning of September 1918, after thorough, but comparatively short, negotiations with representatives of the Ukrainian Government, the diplomatic representation of Georgia was officially opened and started operating in the Ukrainian capital. The head of by the Georgian Embassy in the Ukrainian State was V.V.Tevzaya, his deputy was D.V.Vacheishvili, government officials for special assignments were acting commissioner of Georgia in Ukraine N.Bregvadze and S.Asatilini, military attaché – Colonel Kavtaradze, temporarily acting as adviser – I.Moskalevsky, who was replaced by M.Skobelev on October 7, as well as other employees: A.Karpovych, A.Svanidze, G.Mamaladze, V.Makatsaria and others38.
On October 24, V.Tevzaya informed the Hetmanan Minister of Foreign Affairs D.Doroshenko about the appointment of G.Hundadze as the plenipotentiary representative of Georgia under the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR and assured the Ukrainian Minister that the Ukrainian Power «in the person of the competent bodies will facilitate the work of citizen Hundadze in carrying out his diplomatic duties»39.
The structure and staff of the Georgian Embassy in Ukraine was defined as follows: the first and second secretaries, the consular department, the military attache with the assistant, the economic department, the press bureau. Administrative and technical personnel included: the commandant of the building, typists, translators, the driver of the car, couriers, auxiliary workers (total – 20 people). The embassy was in Kyiv on Karavaevska Street,9 (now – L.Tolstoy Street).
In Kyiv, as early as the end of 1917, Georgian newspapers printed in their native language the newspaper «Zari» (Ukr.: «Dzvin», Eng.: «Bell»), which since 1918 was actively assisted by the Georgian diplomatic mission in Ukraine, and also press releases were issued, which disseminated information about Georgia in the Kyiv newspapers.
In September 1918, the General Consulate of Georgia in Ukraine in Odessa and the Consulate in Kharkiv* headed by K.Tsagareli were opened. However, this diplomatic establishment on the Black Sea coast of Ukraine was laid already on the prepared soil, and not from a clean slate. As early as May 9, 1918 the military commissar of Georgia in Ukraine N.Bregvadze40 approved the deputy attorney M.Jugeli as Georgia's commissioner for the Odessa Military District with the rights to «form Georgian units and transfer them to their homeland», and «to protect the interests of Georgia and the Citizens of Georgia within the Odessa Military District»41.
* In February 1919 in Kharkiv, the Bolsheviks shot the Georgian consul in Petrograd Cherkezishvili, who through Ukraine was returning to his Homeland.
It should be noted that the first public mention of plans to create a Georgian consulate in Odessa appeared in the city press in early July 191842. Officially, the foundation of the General Consulate of Georgia in Odessa, headed by A.Ushveridze, is considered September 11, 1918, but it began its wide-ranging activity only from October 191843. The Consulate General in Odessa was located first in a landmark Georgian point on the Polish Street,3, and from November 1918 – on the Gogol Street,15, from February to September 1919 (already with the UPR) – on the Sadova Street,4*. The acting consul general was temporarily appointed and approved by the government of the Georgian Republic by the sworn attorney Evsei Illarionovich Ushveridze (he was elected chairman of the consular board of diplomats of all countries accredited in Odessa). The employees of the Consulate General were also V.Zhorzholiani and L.Mujiri, who sometimes served as the Consul General; The first secretary was H.Mefert.
* In the ХІХ–ХХ centuries. Georgians in Ukraine lived mainly in cities where small colonies were founded. A significant percentage of them were employees, doctors, lawyers.
Concerning the opening of the Georgian General Consulate in South Palmira, the local newspaper Odessa leaf, for example, wrote that the immediate task of establishing a consulate in Odessa is to assist prisoners of war, subjects of the Georgian Republic returning to their homeland from captivity. Negotiations on their return were conducted in due time with the Central Council and led to positive results. The consulate provided people who returned from captivity with rest areas at the transfer station at the consulate, gave them clothes, food, money, and, on preferential terms, arranged trips to Poti. It should be noted that the consulate assisted prisoners of war and other nationalities, up to the organization of the relevant consular institutions44.
In practice, in fact, in Odessa, the Georgian Consulate General began with the purpose of protecting the rights of its citizens, first of all, from their registration (directly in the premises of the Consulate General on Polish Street,3), and also contributed to the self-organization of the Georgian community of the Odessa province, holding, after approval of the charter, the first meeting of the national community of the city in November 1918 (then – at Gogol Street,15). In September 1918, the Georgian Consulate General even managed to obtain from the Odessa customs the simplification of formalities when transporting Georgian goods45.
In the summer of 1918, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry stepped up its work, which, after the first months after the Hetman coup and the organization of its diplomatic missions in the Central States, tried to «escape» from the embrace of German-Austrian geopolitical trusteeship, which in fact was more of a policy international isolation of the Ukrainian State.
As a result, on July 4, 1918, Hetman P.Skoropadsky approved the Law «On the Establishment of Consulates General* and Consular Agencies Abroad» approved by the Council of Ministers46, and the corresponding governmental Decree «for the maintenance of Consuls General Consulars and Consular Agents of the Ukrainian Power outside Ukraine on territory of the former Russian Empire, according to the states approved on July 4, 1918» 321 thousand 255 rubles were allocated47. And already on July 20, 1918, by his order, the hetman approved Oleksiy Kulinsky**, consular agent of the 1st rank in Tiflis48.
* The Governmental Decree «On Temporary Diplomatic Representations of the Ukrainian State and on the Allotment of 1,127,072 rubles 26 kopecks. on their content» was approved by Hetman P.Skoropadsky on June 21, 1918 [Державний вістник. – 1918. – № 20. – 5 липня].
** Later in Tiflis on the Judicial Street, 33 a diplomatic mission (Extraordinary Diplomatic Mission) of the UPR in Georgia headed by I.Kraskovsky was opened. In February 1919, a Ukrainian diplomatic mission consisting of 19 people, led by L.Lisnyak, was already traveling from Vinnitsa to Tiflis through Odessa (February 18) [Украинская дипломатическая миссия в Грузию // Одесскій листокъ. – 1919. – 18 февраля]. It was then that the UPR consulates began to function in Tiflis and Batumi, and later in Gagra. The Consulate General of the Ukrainian State in Tiflis, which dealt with the affairs of the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia, was headed by O.Kulinsky (M.Chekhovsky – military attache) appointed under the Hetmanate. In April 1919 O.Kulinsky will be released from office due to lack of personal authority and activities incompatible with consular duties. One of the reasons for this decision was the Georgian accusation of speculation and bribery, as well as the groundless issuance of Ukrainian certificates [Лотоцький О. В Царгороді / Олександр Лотоцький. – Варшава, 1939. – С.125–126]. Therefore, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the UPR recognized its behavior as a compromise of the consular representation and anti-Ukrainian policy [Матяш І. Б. Українська консульська служба 1917–1923 рр. як державний інститут: становлення, функціонування, персоналії / І.Б.Матяш. – К.: Інститут історії України НАН України, 2016. – С.150]. The post of Consul General in Tiflis was entrusted to Lev Lisnyak. At the same time, his predecessor refused to deposit the archives of the consulate in the Ukrainian Commissariat in the Caucasus [Гасымлы М. Дж., Купчик О. Р., Дамиров А. У. Украинско-азербайджанские отношения: история и современность / М.Дж.Гасымлы, О.Р.Купчик, А.У.Дамиров. – К.: Изд. Дом Дмитрия Бураго, 2014. – С.77]. In Batumi E. Zasyadko led the vice-consulate of Ukraine, and E. Petrenko became a consular agent of the 1st class in Sukhumi [Бежуашвілі А. Від Дніпра до Кури: Україна і Грузія, дипломатичні відносини 1918–1920 рр. / А.Бежуашвілі // Голос України. – 1996. – 24 травня; Лашко О. Україна–Грузія, стратегічне партнерство: Геополітичні пріоритети з позиції національних інтересів / О.Лашко // Розбудова держави. – 1995. – №2].
On August 15, by order of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs «On the establishment of new consular agencies», the Minister of Foreign Affairs, D.Doroshenko, ordered, with the consent of the Minister of Trade and Industry and the Minister of Finance, to establish consular offices of the Ukrainian State (nominally on July 4) of I category in 10 cities* (including in Tiflis and Batumi) and II class in 20 cities** of the former Russian Empire49. However, the practical opening of the above-mentioned consular missions in the summer of 1918 actually did not happen. Their activities, states and funding began to be pledged only on September 1, 1918, and the corresponding Law «On the Formation of New Consular Institutions of the Ukrainian State and the Allocation 832.766 rubles. on their content» was approved by Hetman P.Skoropadsky only on November 6, 1918 (the previous law of July 4, 1918 was repealed). So, by subparagraph of the 17th paragraph of the third law of November 6, it was determined to form 25 consular establishments of the Ukrainian State, in particular «in the Caucasus – the Consulate General in Tiflis and the vice consulates in Baku, Yerevan and Batumi–Poti»50.
* It was about the creation of consular representations of the Ukrainian State of the 1st category in Minsk, Vilno, Riga, Helsingfors, Samara, Novocherkassk, Tiflis, Batumi, Omsk and Tashkent.
** It was about the creation of consular offices of the Ukrainian State of the 2nd category in Novo-Nikolaevsk, Kazan, Tsaritsyn, Astrakhan, Stavropol, Nizhny Novgorod, Saratov, Ekaterinburg, Orsha, Voronezh, Kursk, Penza, Baku, Semipalatinsk, Biysk, Khabarovsk, Vladivostok, Irkutsk, Arkhangelsk and Bukhara.
Ukrainian diplomatic assault arrived in the Caucasus already under the «curtain» of the Hetmanate and with the formation of the «second» UPR in the composition of only two people – the head of Ivan Ignatiyovych Kraskovsky and Count Mykhailо Benedyktovich Tyshkevych's official. Already on the spot, the official O.Evtukhov was accepted into the mission51.
However, it can not be said that all this time in the Transcaucasian region the Ukrainian State and its citizens did not have a representative. Ukrainian interests in Tiflis were represented by the Transcaucasian Ukrainian commissar Grygory Khymenko, and in Yerevan – by the chairman of the Council of the Yerevan Society «Prosvita» Volodymyr Hyrchenko authorized by him on May 22, 191852. I would also note that the Ukrainian Council played an important role in Georgia, that with the help of the Ukrainian representation issued its own newspaper (editor S.Chaly), which covered issues of mutual relations between the two peoples, the daily life of the Ukrainian community in Georgia, information from Ukraine and etc. In general, as the Ukrainian ambassador to Turkey O.Lototsky testified, then in the Caucasus there was a lot of the Ukrainian element – in big cities (Tiflis, Batum, Sukhum, Baku) and whole colonies – in the former Tiflis province, in Sukhumi district and especially in Muhani (near Azerbaijan), which was even called the third Ukraine. Here settled «mainly Ukrainian sectarians – the people are quite cultured and hardworking, that they settled on a fertile land, in conditions of a temperate climate, they achieved good livelihoods, sowed mostly bread and cotton»53.
Nevertheless, the Transcaucasian Ukrainians needed help and trade and economic preferences from the historical homeland. In addition, as reported by the Ukrainian Regional Council in the Transcaucasus, only from the export of sugar and bread to the local regional market, Kyiv could receive monthly profits amounting to 325 million 500 thousand rubles54. As early as September 1918, the Ukrainian Regional Council appealed to the government of the Ukrainian State with the proposal «to create, at least temporarily, in the center of the Transcaucasus in Tiflis the Ukrainian Government's entire Transcaucasus agency, so that later, when a diplomatic mission is established, this agency would be subject to it»55. November 27, 1918 with a similar proposal to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Ukrainian State G.Afanasyev addressed the Committee on Commodity Exchange of the Ministry of Trade and Industry of Georgia. In an effort to revive and strengthen commodity exchange between the countries, the Committee considered it expedient to establish at the Ukrainian consulate in Georgia «a commission that would allow the importation into Ukraine of goods allowed for export by the Commodity Exchange Committee of the Georgian Republic and, on the contrary, would allow the export from Ukraine of goods admitted to Ukraine import into the borders of Georgia»56.
During the short existence of the Ukrainian State in the form of P.Skoropadsky's hetmanate, both sides prepared and eventually concluded a number of interstate (Ukrainian-Georgian) treaties, both political and financial-economic. On December 5, 1918, the Ukrainian State established official diplomatic relations with the Georgian Democratic Republic. At the embassy, the Economic Council was established, which dealt with issues of ordering trade between countries.
On the same day, December 5, 1918, a broad bilateral agreement was concluded between the Ukrainian State and the Georgian Democratic Republic, consisting of 22 articles and 6 sections, in particular: on the common rights of citizens of both sides; about consular relations; about trade; about navigation; on transit, on special conventions, a mixed commission and the term of the contract.
In the section «On the Common Rights of Citizens» of the treaty, it was noted that citizens of each of the two contracting parties were granted, subject to their laws, complete freedom of arrival, travel or residence in any locality on the territory of both states (while guaranteeing comprehensive protection of laws and power as a personal (personality), and property) (Article 1). Citizens of each of the parties obtained the right to acquire, own, use and dispose of movable and immovable property, as well as land plots on the same grounds as local citizens (Аrt.2). They could enjoy the same rights as local citizens (Аrt.3), and also were exempted from any official service in court, administration or civil. Citizens of both countries were not subject to military service (both land and sea) and were also deprived of all duties imposed for wars or extraordinary circumstances, except when these duties were connected with the fact of possession of real estate and when these duties were due to citizens of other states (Аrt.4).
Citizens of each of the contracting parties had the right in the territory of the other party to establish joint-stock companies and all kinds of trade and cooperative societies, as well as to participate in existing institutions of this kind, using the same rights that are granted in these cases to local citizens. Joint-stock companies, as well as commercial, industrial and financial enterprises legally operating in the territory of one of the contracting parties, were recognized after registration of their statutes or regulations by the relevant authorities of another state that had the legal right to operate within the country (Art.5). Regarding literary and artistic property, as well as rights to patents, factory and trade drawings and stamps, the citizens of each of the contracting states could enjoy the same rights and protection as local citizens (Аrt.6).
The section «On consular relations» determined that each party had the right to appoint another consul general, consular and trade agent to all ports and areas of another state. All the benefits and rights of these representatives were determined on the basis of reciprocity (Art.7).
In the part «On trade» it was said that citizens of each of the two countries concerning bargaining and industry in the territory of another will enjoy the same rights as local citizens and will not be subject to additional or higher duties than local citizens (Art.8). As a principle, it was established for both parties not to interfere with mutual trade relations. However, for goods that are or could be subject to state monopoly, or for which it would be necessary to take measures of prohibition in the interests of hygiene, veterinary police or public security, as well as those for which it would be necessary to establish export on the basis of barter, could special conditions must be applied (Аrt.9). Imported from the territory of Georgia in Ukraine and vice versa – from the territory of Ukraine to the territory of Georgia, the goods were exempted from the export duty, but an import duty was collected (in the amount not less than the import duty on these goods with the second party to the contract (Art.10). The fee that could be levied by each of the contracting parties when registering goods exported from it was not considered a duty (the amount of the above registration fee was set at no more than 2% of the value of the exported goods (Art.11).
Traders and industrialists who live in another state, in the presence of legitimacy certificates issued by the relevant institutions of their province, and evidence that have received permission to carry out fisheries in their state, had the right to personally purchase through the territory of the other party or through purchases, and, with them samples of goods, accept orders in the territory of this region. Such traders and industrialists enjoyed the same rights in both states to exercise their activities as local citizens (Art.12). Both contracting parties were to formally notify each other of all important legislative projects in the commodity and industrial sphere (Art.13).
The section «On Navigation» stated (Art.14) that Ukrainian ships and their cargoes in the waters of Georgia, and Georgian and their cargoes in the waters of Ukraine – were used in all cases the same rights as vessels and cargoes are local. Any privilege or privilege that was envisaged by one of the parties in relation to a third state, thereby extending to the other side (the exceptions admitted from the above-mentioned decisions were recognized as privileges that were granted, or could be provided to the regional merchant fleet). The nationality of the vessel was established in accordance with the laws and regulations of each state on the basis of documents and patents issued by the relevant authorities (Art.15). They were at all exempted from payment of pinnacle fees at the ports of both states: 1) ships that arrived with cargoes and with them departed, and 2) ships passing from one port to another by one of the contracting states (if they have a certificate of payment of these charges in any from the ports of this country). The exemption did not apply to the charges: lighthouse, pilotage, tow and others, which were charged for the service and accessories for loading and which were paid by local courts (Аrt.16). At the same time, any ship of each side that ran aground or sunken off the coast of the other side enjoyed the same benefits as local vessels (Аrt.17).
In the section «On transit» it was pointed out that all kinds of goods transported through the territory of one of the parties for the other party should have been exempted from any transit fee, however, that the order established to protect the fiscal interests of the state through which the goods were transported, must be dated (Art.18). The Ukrainian State and the Georgian Democratic Republic mutually pledged to render assistance to transit (in accordance with Article 18) in all directions, which were not excluded for such transportation (Art.19).
The last section, «On special conventions, mixed commissions and the term of the treaty», noted that in order to regulate the relationship between financial and those related to communication, as well as postal, telephone and telephone communications between the two contracting states, a special consent must be entered into (Art.20). To develop the same issue of fees, a possible customs union, detailed development of customs relations, ways of registering exported goods and the amount of fees, a mixed commission of four members was to be formed: two from Ukraine and two from Georgia. The commission also had to resolve misunderstandings that could arise between Ukraine and Georgia in applying this issue. When, however, a decision of an issue in the commission did not gather a majority of votes, the issue should be decided either by lot (when the commission members agreed to this), or by transferring the issue to an arbitration court with appropriate application of the rules of the Hague Conference (Аrt.21).
The contract entered into force from the moment of its signing (with the exception of §10, which, prior to its ratification, was adopted in appropriate application only in respect of goods with which the importation and exportation of goods by one of the contracting parties to the second was offset in part or in full). After the ratification of the treaty, each of the parties retained the right to refuse the treaty (denounce it) at any time, and from the day the adverse party was informed of such denunciation, the agreement remained in force for another two months (Art.22). The document was signed by the representative of the Georgian Democratic Republic V.V.Tevzaya and the assistant (deputy) minister of trade and industry of the Ukrainian State S.V.Borodaevsky57.
On December 7, 1918, the parties also signed the Agreement «On the exchange of goods between Ukraine and Georgia», which regulated trade and economic relations between the two states, as well as an intergovernmental agreement on interbank transfer operations, which brought order to the relations between Georgian banks in Tbilisi, Tbilisi, Kutaisi, Batumi, Poti, Sukhumi in Georgia and Ukrainian in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa and Katerynoslav.
It should also be noted that in October–December 1918, Hetman P.Skoropadsky and his entourage conceived plans to create a unified military-political anti-Bolshevik bloc consisting of Ukraine, the Don, Kuban, Terek, Georgia, the pre-Caucasian and Transcaucasian peoples. This was said, in particular, during the personal meeting of the Ukrainian Hetman P.Skoropadsky with the Оtaman of the Great Don Army P.Krasnov in October 1918. After the November revolution in Germany, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Ukrainian State G.Afanasyev sent telegrams on November 4, the governments of the Don, Kuban, Terek, Georgia, as well as to the representative of the Volunteer Army with a proposal to hold a conference in Kyiv on issues related to the creation of a united anti-Bolshevik military bloc58. On November 16, the government even instructed G.Afanasyev to draft a program for the congress59. On 20 November, a repeated telegram was sent to the above-mentioned governments with a proposal to convene a conference on December 5, and on December 2 one more with a new date – December 18, 1918.
However, as P.Krasnov recalled, such a military-political union was aggressively opposed by the Denikin Volunteer Army, which, in addition to combating Bolshevism with the goal of restoring a united, indivisible Russia, also set itself the task of «destroying independent Ukraine, independent Georgia, encroachment on the full autonomy of the Crimea, The Don and the Kuban»60. Moreover, in the answer of general Dragomirov on behalf of the Volunteer Army, the Government of the South of Russia refused to send its delegates to Kyiv, proposed to hold a conference in Ekaterinodar or Simferopol, but ultimately stated that «the participation of the Georgian government, hostile to Russia and to the Volunteer Army, is unacceptable»61.
After the defeat of Germany in the First World War, its troops were withdrawn from the territory of Georgia, and under the terms of the Mudrosian armistice of October 30, 1918 – and the armed forces of Turkey. Since December 1918 there were British troops in Georgia. In Ukraine, on December 14, 1918, the Hetmanate of P.Skoropadsky was overthrown and the Directory of the Ukrainian People's Republic came to power in Kyiv.
Sources and Literature:
1. Робітнича газета. – 1917. – 1 квітня.
2. Вісти з Української Центральної Ради. – 1917. – №3. – Квітень.
3. Там само.
4. Нова Рада. – 1917. – 15 серпня.
5. Там само. – 10 вересня.
6. Там само.
7. Народня воля. – 1917. – 12 вересня.
8. Нова Рада. – 1917. – 10 вересня.
9. Там само. – 1917. – 9 листопада.
10. Народня воля. – 1917. – 14 листопада.
11. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.2592. – Оп.1. – Спр.28. – Арк.1–1 зв.
12. Матвієнко В. М. Українська дипломатія 1917–1921 років на теренах постімперської Росії / В.М.Матвієнко. – К.: Видавничо-поліграфічний центр «Київський університет», 2002. – С.163–164.
13. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.2592. – Оп.1. – Спр.28. – Арк.7.
14. Там само. – Арк. 6 зв.
15. Там само. – Арк. 6.
16. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3690. – Оп.1. – Спр.17. – Арк.15–15 зв.
17. Там само. – Ф.1064. – Оп.2. – Спр.18. – Арк.14.
18. Там само. – Ф.2592. – Оп.1. – Спр.37. – Арк.12.
19. Там само. – Спр.99. – Арк.23–23 зв.
20. Великий українець: матеріали з життя та діяльності М.С.Грушевського. – К.: Веселка, 1992. – С.156.
21. Там само.
22. Царцидзе Т. Діяльність Генерального консульства Грузії в Одесі (1918–1919 рр.) / Тимур Царцидзе // Одеські вісті. – 2015. – 25 липня.
23. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.134. – Арк.13.
24. Пипия Г. В. Германский империализм в Закавказье в 1910–1918 гг. – М.: Наука, 1978. – С.101–102.
25. Гай-Нижник П. Українська дипломатія й міжнародна фінансова політика урядів Центральної Ради, Української Держави (Гетьманату) та Директорії УНР (1917–1922 рр.) / Павло Гай Нижник. – К.: Дуліби, 2016. – С.45, 58; Horak S. The First Treaty of World War I. Ukraine’s Treaty with the Central Powers of February 9, 1918 / Stefan Horak. – New-York: Columbia University Press, 1988. – Р.30.
26. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.134. – Арк.13.
27. Там само. – Арк.11.
28. Там само. – Арк.12–13.
29. Там само.
30. Там само. – Арк.18.
31. Там само. – Ф.1064. – Оп.1. – Спр.274. – Арк.3–3 зв.
32. Там само. – Арк.2.
33. Там само. – Спр.24 а. – Арк.16 зв.
34. Там само. – Спр.274. – Арк.1.
35. Там само. – Арк.4.
36. Там само. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.134. – Арк.17.
37. Там само. – Спр.135. – Арк.39.
38. Матвієнко В. М. Українська дипломатія 1917–1921 років на теренах постімперської Росії / В.М.Матвієнко. – К.: Видавничо-поліграфічний центр «Київський університет», 2002. – С.175; ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.134. – Арк.25, 27, 33, 34.
39. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.134. – Арк.35.
40. Там само. – Арк.1.
41. Там само. – Ф.2592. – Оп.1. – Спр.28. – Арк.28.
42. Грузинкие консульства на Украине // Одесскіе новости. – 1918. – 4 июля.
43. В Грузинском консульстве // Одесскій листокъ. – 1918. – 4 октября; Генеральное консульство Грузии в Одессе // Одесскій листокъ. – 1918. – 17 сентября; Грузинский консул в Одессе // Одесскіе новости. – 1918. – 8 октября.
44. Царцидзе Т. Діяльність Генерального консульства Грузії в Одесі (1918–1919 рр.) / Тимур Царцидзе // Одеські вісті. – 2015. – 25 липня.
45. Торговые отношения между Грузией и Украиной // Одесскій листокъ. – 1918. – 24 сентября.
46. Державний вістник. – 1918. – №22. – 14 липня.
47. Там само. – №35. – 15 серпня.
48. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.1118. – Оп.1. – Спр.3. – Арк.114; – Спр.17. – Арк.143.
49. Державний вістник. – 1918. – №58. – 13 жовтня.
50. Там само. – №72. – 19 листопада.
51. Лотоцький О. В Царгороді / Олександр Лотоцький. – Варшава, 1939. – С.125.
52. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.125. – Арк.29.
53. Лотоцький О. В Царгороді / Олександр Лотоцький. – Варшава, 1939. – С.125.
54. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.135. – Арк.39.
55. Там само. – Арк.39 зв.
56. Там само. – Арк.53 зв.
57. Дорошенко Д. Історія України 1917–1923 / Дмитро Дорошенко. – Т.ІІ. Українська Гетьманська Держава 1918 року. – Нью-Йорк, 1954. – С.XXXV–XXXVIII.
58. Деникин А. И. Очерки русской смуты / А.И.Деникин. – Т.4. – Париж, 1921–1926. – С.191; ЦДАВО України. – Ф.3766. – Оп.1. – Спр.146. – Арк.8, 12.
59. ЦДАВО України. – Ф.1064. – Оп.1. – Спр.7. – Арк.47–47 зв.
60. Краснов П. Н. Всевеликое войско Донское / П.Н.Краснов // Белое дело. Дон и Добровольческая армия. – М.: Голос, 1992. – С.84.
61. Деникин А. И. Очерки русской смуты / А.И.Деникин. – Т.4. – Париж, 1921–1926. – С.192–193.