The academic work of historian Szymon Askenazy and its influence is still waiting to be properly investigated, with the notable exception of his most famous work — Książę Józef Poniatowski [Prince Józef Poniatowski]. This article is an attempt to fill this void and demonstrate the evolution of reception of his equally important work, Przymierze polsko-pruskie. The book was first published in Lviv in the year 1900. Its second edition was published in Warsaw in 1901, and both sold out quickly. The third (and so far — the last) edition was published in Warsaw, Lviv, and Krakow in 1919 — and not in 1918, contrary to a popular claim. Each edition of the work sparked off considerable debates among Polish historians, as its interpretation of the described events was different than those presented before. The book aroused strong emotions — both negative and positive. This was particularly evident in the first decades of the 20th century. After the Second World War, the response to the book changed. This was connected with a general diminished interest in the work of Askenazy, its archaic character and the difficulties it posed to contemporary readers. The recognition of the book was further reduced by the events of the Second World War, and by the new interpretation of the history of Polish-Prussian relations (not only in the time of the Four-Year Sejm) officially adopted in the historiography of the Polish People’s Republic after 1945. As a result, the main idea of Askenazy’s work, according to which Russia remained the primary threat to the independence of Poland, could not have been effectively acknowledged in the official historiography. Thus, there were no efforts to publish another edition of this work in the period of the Polish People’s Republic, even though Jerzy Łojek actively supportedthis idea in the 1970s as the promoter of Askenazy’s historical views at the time. Interestingly, the work of Łojek has recently been revived and published again in three vast volumes prepared by Marek Kornat. Owing to this, the historical thought of Askenazy was brought back to life, however indirectly, by Łojek, who was his great admirer and successor. Therefore, in a way, the new edition of Łojek’s works is a source of modern reception of Askenazy’s writings.

This article is yet another contribution to a history of music in Poznań. It focuses on the description and the story of the most exceptional organ in Poland — the “Muza” organ, which was housed in the “Słońce” cinema since 1927. The most technologically advanced cinema in Poznań was the proud owner of the first organ dedicated to cinema performances in Poland. It was made by a Polish company run by Dominik Biernacki (The Biernacki Brothers) based on the American design. It was equipped with a number of devices imitating the sounds of nature or of every day life, such as storms, sirens, or cuckoo calls. Unfortunately, no one knows what happened to it after the Second World War. So far, no other organ manufacturer has been able to recreate this unique piece of work. The article is complemented by a short description of music performed in the “Słońce” cinema, particularly by the famous Poznań announcer Ludomir Budziński who performed under the alias — Szeliga.

Seasonal emigration to Germany was a specific phenomenon taking place in Wieluń County since 1890. Every year in the interwar period, some inhabitants emigrated for work (legally or otherwise), most pursuing jobs in agriculture. It was also the county responsible for the greatest number of emigrants crossing the Prosna river in Poland. In 1926, 48,000 people temporarily moved to Germany, while the year 1931 saw a record number of seasonal emigrants — 62,000 people. The possibility of emigrating for work mostly depended on German policies, which — with certain exceptions, mainly during the great economic depression — strongly encouraged Polish workers to come there, whether they crossed the border legally or illegally. Germans also specified the number of people legally allowed in, which was always smaller than the actual numbers of those wishing to do so. The willingness to work abroad resulted from the difficult economic situation in Poland, especially in agriculture, withthe rural Wieluń County being one the most badly hit. Seasonal emigration was the quickest and the most efficient way of resolving the problem of unemployment and thus alleviating social tensions in the region.

The article presents the activity of Tadeusz Staniewski (1873–1940), a merchant and social activist, in the town of Swarzędz, near Poznań, in the years 1918–1939. The following sources were used for the purpose of writing this article: the collection of the State Archive in Poznań, as well as articles in Greater Poland press, mainly in periodicals. In 1919, Staniewski became the mayor of Swarzędz and held this position for nine months. In 1929, he was yet again elected mayor, but this time held this position for a decade. For the town, this was a time of a gradual rise to prosperity. Swarzędz became known as the “furniture capital of Poland”. In his town, Tadeusz Staniewski was a respected merchant and a dedicated civil servant. He was a supporter of the National Workers’ Party, and after the May coup, he joined one of its factions — the Left, which supported Józef Piłsudski. Later, he became a member the Nonpartisan Bloc for Cooperation with the Government. In subsequent years, he supported the activities of the Camp of National Unity. His attitude towards the representatives of the opposition remained respectful. Even though the representatives of the National Democracy gained majority in the Swarzędz City Council, Tadeusz Staniewski kept his position as mayor. His charitable activity and commitment towards combating unemployment in his town are particularly noteworthy.

The article demonstrates changes chich occurred in the system of legal protection of cultural property after the Second World War. This conflict caused unprecedented cultural losses, and became the starting point for work on solutions aiming at legal protection of cultural heritage. The importance of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict is particularly highlighted. The convention was the first concrete evidence of intensified international cooperation that occurred after the Second World War in the area of cultural property protection. The article also presents approaches to reparations for cultural losses sustained during the conflict.

Jehovah’s Witnesses have been active in Greater Poland for over a hundred years. Each sub-period of the last century was full of events affecting both the whole community and its individual members. The second part of the article presents the history of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Greater Poland during the years of the Polish People’s Republic (1950–1989): in the period of illegal operation and Stalinist persecution in the years 1950–1956, underground operation in the 1960s and 1970s, and in their pursuit of legalization in the 1980s. The article also discusses Jehovah’s Witnesses in independent Poland, when their operation was again legal, i.e. from 1989 until now. All these periods in the history of Jehovah’s Witnesses are intertwined and affect how they are now perceived in Greater Poland in the Third Polish Republic. Keywords: religious minorities, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Third Polish Republic, Polish People’s Republic, ban, National Committee, Charles Taze Russell, Bible Students, Free Bible Students, Epiphany, Office for Denominational Affairs, Security Office, Security Service, district servant, assembly servant, Watchtower.

In 1971 the authorities of the Polish People’s Republic implemented a new economic strategy, referred to as the strategy of dynamic growth. The strategy, which assumed rapid industrial growth in combination with an improvement in the living conditions for the general society, resulted in social and economic development, also in the city of Opole. The city grew both in territorial and demographic terms, gaining more housing resources and more jobs. However, this growth was extremely uneven. In the years 1971–1980 and later, enormous amounts of money and materials were wasted on ventures which were significantly delayed or never completed. In hindsight, some decisions regarding new investments turned out to be misguided. On the one hand, investments from the years 1971–1980 benefited the city, but on the other, they caused a number of serious social problems. In many cases, this legacy is still an enormous burden for the city and its residents.

In this article, the changes in the structure and the management of the archival branch of Ukraine during 1917–1960 are considered. The Archival service and archival branch of independent Ukraine began its history in September 1917 after the Library and Archival Division of the Ukrainian Central Council had been established, a date confirmed by a number of Ukrainian scholars, and one that allows us to state that the archival branch of Ukraine has a 100-year history. Changes in the structure of the archival branch and its management depended on the policy of the Communist Party, reforming the administrative and territorial division and public authorities’ structure, and also on the evolution of views on the role and place of archives in society. The history of the archival branch during the period of 1917–1960 can be divided into the following stages: in 1917–1921 the archivists of Ukraine proposed projects for the creation of a centralized archival system of Ukraine; in 1921–1928 the organs for governing of the archives of Soviet Ukraine were formed, and conducted a relatively independent policy in the archival sphere; the period of 1929-1938 marked by the struggle of Ukrainian archivists for independence from the archival organs of the RSFSR and the USSR, the integration of the Ukrainian archives into the archival system of the USSR, the beginning of repressions and the removal of documents from the archives of Ukraine to the central archives of the RSFSR. During this period the modern structure of the archival branch of Ukraine was divided into central, regional, district and city archives, and acquired its present framework, and a system of party archives was likewise formed; in 1938–1960 the archives of Ukraine were subordinated to the NKVS (the Ministry of Internal Affairs), archival documents were used for operational NKVS purposes, and many archivists were repressed. Only during the Khrushchev Thaw (1960) were the archives of Ukraine saved from the NKVS and a new stage of their history began.

The article presents the history, organization and operation of the State Archive in Poznań in the years 1939–1945. In the first part, the author describes how German archival organizations took control over the Poznań archive. This process involved several elements: changing the name of the institution to the Reich Archive in Poznań, dismissal of the previous staff, taking control over the state archival fond, and the introduction of a system of archival supervision. Subsequent sections highlight the problem of securing and recovering files removed from the archive before the start of hostilities, as well as collecting documentation belonging to institutions and offices that had been shut down. The German archival service was also interested in church archives, private collections or files collected in the municipal or communal archives. The article also discusses the stages of preparing archival materials, which differ slightly from the modern methods, as well as problems related to accessing and sharing archival documents.

The article discusses the issue of authenticity of a privilege granted by king Casimir III to Zbigniew of Brzeź and his family on September 7, 1370. The document confirms the earlier privilege granted by emperor Charles IV to Zbigniew and his brother Stanisław, giving them the title of counts of the Reich and a coat of arms, and also endows the sons of Zbigniew (Przedbor and Pakosław) with the Polish town of Włodzisław. The article provides evidence for the thesis that this bestowal was not canceled by Louis I of Hungary. The document was the basis for a much broader privilege, forged by father S. Wojeński in the mid-17th century. The article is supplemented by the previously unknown original text of the privilege, which is now part of the collection of the archive of the Institute of Manuscripts in the Vladimir Vernadsky National Library in Kyiv.

This study is devoted to the problem of town writers in private towns in Greater Poland. The starting point is the involvement of the town writer’s office, and primarily the head of the office, in the public life of towns and their governments. The key issue here is the emergence of this po264 Marcin Frąś sition and appointment of town writers, which resulted from ongoing needs of the town. The next part of the article focuses on town writers’ education. The required expertise and skills are analyzed based on responsibilities involved in the job, as well as the documents preserved to this day in the form of municipal books. The article also discusses issues such as the origin and social background of town writers.

For many years now, genealogy has been the subject of interest for an increasing number of individuals with different social and educational backgrounds and of different ages, and at present the largest group of archive users are people who are simply passionate about their family history. The article is an attempt to demonstrate professional geologists’ methods of work and challenges they encounter, as exemplified by the search for a real person for whom an arrest warrant was issued. This person came into possession of someone else’s documents, and completely changed not only their own identity, but also the identity of their descendants. Following this person all around the three partitions of 19th century Poland is not only fascinating — it also perfectly reflects the character of a geologist’s profession, which requires versatility, an inquiring and analytical mind, as well as a flair for detective work. The article details the sources used during the search, which came from multiple ecclesiastic and state archives, emphasizing the need to confirm facts by using more than one source. It has also been noted that archival documents and indexed online databases created by genealogy fans (i.e. people from outside of the archival circles) are mutually complementary and can determine the success or failure of an investigation.

The article describes the long-standing tradition of Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń to include legacies left by Toruń scientists in the fond of the University’s Archive. So far, 82 archival legacies left by the University’s staff and people associated with it were incorporated into the fond of the Archive of Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, including those of 59 professors, 4 docents, 8 scholars with a Ph.D. degree, 10 scholars with an MA degree, as well as one that had belonged to Henrietta and Friedrich Lange, members of the University’s administrative staff, whose level of education remains unknown. The author examined the selected legacies and then performed detailed analysis. In the conclusion, she emphasized that all these legacies are an excellent source for learning about the creative and academic work of their previous owners, and sometimes even the history of the entire institution. Files collected in personal archives can be used by researchers from many disciplines for various scientific purposes. The article is supplemented by a table containing a list of legacies left by the University’s staff and people associated with it in the years 1966–2020, in alphabetical order.