barid.p65


144  College & Research Libraries March 1999

 

Into the Dustbin of History? The 
Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic 
Materials 

Bradley L. Schaffner and Brian J. Baird 

One of the greatest challenges facing area studies librarians today is 
preservation of collections. Area studies collections in libraries, the back­
bone of international studies programs for most colleges and universi­
ties in North America, are in danger. Most materials in these collections 
were published on acidic paper and poorly bound leaving them suscep­
tible to rapid deterioration. Slavic collections, for example, appear to be 
in dire need of preservation treatment, but there is very little hard data 
on the scope of the problem. This research project, conducted at the 
University of Kansas Libraries, is the first step toward gaining a better 
understanding of the overall condition of Slavic collections. A survey of 
the Slavic holdings was conducted to provide statistical information on 
their physical condition. Results of the survey reveal that the condition 
of these collections should be cause for serious concern. However, the 
problems are not so great that they cannot be overcome through careful 
preservation planning and interlibrary cooperation. 

he “internationalization” and 
“globalization” of educational 
curricula and library holdings 
is currently of great interest to 

educators, scholars, and librarians. Bar­
bara J. Ford, who recently completed her 
term as president of the ALA, champi­
oned the theme “Global Reach—Local 
Touch” to draw attention to the impor­
tance of an international perspective for 
American librarians and library collec­
tions. Although globalization is currently 
a hot topic among librarians and schol­
ars, international area studies collections 
in academic and research libraries have 
effectively internationalized library hold­
ings for many years. These area collec­

tions, which include Slavic, Asian, Afri­
can, and Latin American studies, to name 
a few, have been actively developed since 
World War Two or earlier. Some of the 
publications held in these collections date 
to the eighteenth century. The age of these 
collections brings the issue of their pres­
ervation to the forefront. Ironically, it is 
not the age of the publication that deter­
mines its remaining life span but, rather, 
the quality of materials used in its pro­
duction. Unfortunately, most materials in 
area studies collections were published on 
acidic paper with poor-quality bindings. 
These factors, more than age, lead to their 
rapid deterioration. Today, area studies li­
brarians must face the challenge of pre-

Bradley L. Schaffner is Russian Studies Librarian at the University of Kansas Libraries; e-mail: 
bschaffn@ukans.edu. Brian J. Baird is Preservation Librarian at the University of Kansas Libraries; e-
mail: bbaird@ukans.edu. 

144 

mailto:bbaird@ukans.edu
mailto:bschaffn@ukans.edu


Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 145 

serving these collections or watching 
them turn to dust. 

This challenge is particularly evident 
in the field of Slavic studies. Scholars and 
librarians who work with Slavic materi­
als have long known of the generally poor 
physical quality of publications from East 
Central Europe and the countries of the 
former Soviet Union. During the Soviet 
period, and even up to the present time, 
publications were/are printed on poor-
quality acidic paper. This type of paper, 
which is often similar to newsprint, dete­
riorates rapidly and becomes brittle, of­
ten crumbling when touched. In addition, 
a poor binding can shorten a book’s us­
able life to between twenty and fifty years. 

Fortunately, there are many major 
Slavic collections in academic 
libraries outside the former Soviet 
Union where storage conditions are 
often more favorable. 

Exacerbating the problem of substan­
dard publishing materials is the environ­
ment in which materials are housed. Most 
libraries in East Central Europe, particu­
larly in the countries of the former Soviet 
Union, were not designed to preserve 
materials. Heating and cooling systems 
are inadequate or nonexistent, ventilation 
is poor, and many libraries have leaky 
roofs and plumbing problems. Moreover, 
many collections are located in buildings 
that were not intended to store books, 
such as private residences, churches, and 
office buildings.1 Poor storage conditions 
greatly accelerate the deterioration of any 
published material, and those produced 
with inferior materials have no chance of 
surviving under such conditions! If noth­
ing is done to improve the storage envi­
ronment, it is possible that many books 
published before, during, and after the 
Soviet period will not be available to fu­
ture generations of scholars researching 
Slavic studies—a sad irony given this new 
era of political and social liberalization 
and openness in East Central Europe. 

Fortunately, there are many major 
Slavic collections in academic libraries 

outside the former Soviet Union where 
storage conditions are often more favor­
able. However, although the physical con­
ditions of most Western library facilities 
that house Slavic collections are good, 
preservation is still a major issue. Storing 
acidic materials under optimal conditions 
will increase their usable life by decades, 
but this does not negate the need for a 
proactive approach to reformatting 
embrittled materials.2 

Reformatting is accomplished by trans­
ferring the information in the original 
item to microfilm, digital images, or pres­
ervation-quality photocopy facsimiles. 
Whatever the approach, it is clear that 
preservation activities must take place in 
both the countries of the former Soviet 
Union and abroad. Even though the larg­
est collections abroad have better storage 
facilities, they cannot rival the holdings 
of the major in-country libraries, such as 
the 40 million volumes in the Russian 
State Library in Moscow. Coordinated ef­
forts among countries, universities, and 
libraries would facilitate the preservation 
of a substantial portion of important 
Slavic publications. 

Most Slavic librarians would agree that 
the overall condition of materials in their 
Slavic collections is poor. This perception 
is based primarily on simple observation 
and anecdotal information. Very little 
work has been done to analyze the cur­
rent condition and quality of Slavic pub­
lications. A few recent published reports 
do outline preservation programs in Rus­
sia and Bulgaria but devote little or no 
space to an evaluation of the physical con­
dition of collections held by libraries in 
these countries.3 

The research project conducted at the 
University of Kansas Libraries is the first 
step toward gaining a better understand­
ing of the overall conditions of Slavic col­
lections. It is important to understand the 
magnitude of the problem before devel­
oping a comprehensive preservation pro­
gram. Information gathered in this sur­
vey will be used to help determine the 
best courses of action to preserve these 
important area collections. 



 

146 College & Research Libraries March 1999 

TABLE 1 
Call Number Table 

LC Call Numbers Dewey Call Numbers
Russia/Soviet/Former Countries of the Soviet Union

History
DK1 to DK293 947 to 947.9507
DK501 to DK973

Language and Literature
PG2001 to PG2847 491.7 to 491.799
PG2900 to PG3520 891.7 to 891.78
PG3801 to PG3957 891.79 to 891.798 

Poland
History

D765.A36 to D765.2.C446 914.38 to 914.38
D802.P6 to D802.P62 940.53437 to 940.53485
DS135.P6 to DS135.P63
DK401 to DK443.7
DK4010 to 4800 943.8 to 943.86

Language and Literature
PG6001 to PG7365 891.85 to 891.858 

The University of Kansas is home to 
one of eleven federally funded Depart­
ment of Education Title VI comprehen­
sive research centers for Slavic studies. 
The Slavic collections number more than 
300,000 volumes, with strengths in Rus­
sian, Serbian, Croatian, Polish, and Ukrai­
nian materials. Given the size of the col­
lection, it would have been impossible to 
inspect each volume physically. There­
fore, a statistically valid random survey 
was conducted. This Slavic survey is a 
modified version of a survey instrument 
previously used to evaluate the overall 
condition of collections at the University 
of Kansas Libraries. A description of the 
original survey process and its results was 
published in College & Research Libraries.4 
Because the general survey was devel­
oped to evaluate the condition of more 
than three million volumes, it did not pro­
vide sufficient detailed information on the 
physical condition of the Slavic collec­
tions. 

To simplify the survey process, the 
evaluation focused on an area of the col­
lection where a majority of the materials 
were published in Slavic countries. It 
would have been impossible to conduct 

a timely random sampling of 
the entire 300,000 Slavic vol­
umes housed throughout 
the University of Kansas li­
brary system, which would 
have required sampling ev­
ery thousandth Slavic vol­
ume distributed throughout 
the libraries’ three million 
volume collection. There­
fore, the survey focused on 
the history and literature col­
lections (DK, PG, and the 
Dewey equivalents) because 
most of the materials in these 
call number ranges were 
published in Slavic coun­
tries. The survey was further 
limited to Russian/Soviet/ 
post-Soviet history and lit­
erature and Polish history 
and literature (see table 1). 

Soviet/Russian materials 
were chosen because publishers prima­
rily used acidic paper and continue to do 
so. Polish materials were evaluated be­
cause the overall quality of their publica­
tions appears to have improved since the 
collapse of the communist-led govern­
ment. Therefore, the survey evaluated 
publications that could be considered 
among the “best” and “worst” of the Slavic 
publishing world. This was done to pro­
vide the most balanced view possible of 
the condition of Slavic publications. 

For each item in the survey, a number 
of factors were evaluated including type 
of volume and size; type of binding, in­
cluding leaf attachment and cover mate­
rial; quality of paper; condition of paper, 
text block, and binding; and overall con­
dition of the publication. To ensure that 
the survey results would be statistically 
valid, at least three hundred books pub­
lished in Poland and three hundred books 
published in Russia, the Soviet Union, 
and/or the successor states were evalu­
ated. In the end, 379 Polish and 476 Rus­
sian/Soviet items were randomly sampled 
from the collections. The results of the sur­
vey were rather surprising. To use an old 
saying, there is good news and bad news. 



 

Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 147 

TABLE 2 
Imprint Statistics

 Imprint Date Polish Russian 
1830-49 0.25% 0.42%
1850-69 0.76 0.84
1870-89 2.02 1.89
1890-1909 2.52 5.04
1910-16 0.76 2.73
1917-29 3.53 2.94
1930-49 3.27 4.62
1950s 9.82 9.66
1960s 18.39 18.28
1970s 28.21 14.71
1980-1984 7.30 7.14
1985-1990 11.08 13.66
1991- 12.09 18.07
1960- 77.08 71.85 

Results from the Condition Survey of 
Slavic Materials 
Based on the results of this survey, which 
must be emphasized as only the initial 
step in a fuller evaluation of Slavic mate­
rials, the overall condition of Slavic pub­
lications is not as bad as many in the field 
fear. The survey revealed that 84.1 per­
cent of Polish materials and 60.7 percent 
of Russian/Soviet materials are in over­
all good condition. This means that the 
publication is currently in no need of pres­
ervation treatment. The bad news is that 
over 95 percent of both the Polish and 
Russian/Soviet holdings are printed on 
acidic paper. Although the vast majority 
of this paper is not currently brittle, it will 
become brittle at some point in the fu­
ture—in perhaps as few as twenty years. 
These brittle and acidic materials must 
undergo treatment if they are to be pre­
served for use by future generations of 
scholars. 

Beginning with the imprint statistics, 
over 70 percent of the Russian and Polish 
collections were printed in 1960 or later 
(see table 2).5 However, it should be noted 
that an older publication date does not 
equate to the book being brittle. Many of 
the books published in the nineteenth 
century were published using high-qual­
ity materials. As a result, they remain in 

good condition. 
Table 3 compares the percentage of 

brittle volumes by publication date for the 
two collections surveyed. As can be seen, 
the date of publication is a very good pre­
dictor of paper condition. As expected, 
preindustrial paper (before 1869) is gen­
erally strong. By contrast, the oldest ma­
chine-made, wood fiber papers (1870– 
1909) and early Soviet-era papers (1917– 
1929) are the most embrittled. This infor­
mation should prove useful in generally 
predicting the condition of volumes 
printed during these various eras. 

The result that will be of most interest 
to librarians is the condition of the paper 
in Slavic collections. After all, poor bind­
ing and other physical problems can be 
readily corrected as long as the paper in 
the publication is not brittle. Table 4 
shows the results using a standard 
double-fold test for brittleness. Accord­
ing to these results, conditions are not too 
bad. Generally speaking, paper is consid­
ered brittle when it breaks after less than 
two double-folds. Only 2.26 percent of the 
Polish materials are brittle. This figure is 
actually lower than the amount of brittle 
materials found in the University of Kan­
sas Libraries’ overall collection. The Rus­
sian collection fares worse with 17.43 per­
cent of the collection rated as brittle.6 

TABLE 3 
Percentage Brittle Volumes, 

by Date 

Polish Russian 
1830-49 0.0% 0.0%
1850-69 0.0 0.0
1870-89 12.5 33.3
1890-1909 10.0 50.0
1910-16 0.0 61.5
1917-29 14.3 78.6
1930-49 7.7 27.3
1950s 5.1 17.4
1960s 1.4 28.7
1970s 0.0 22.4
1980-1984 0.0 2.9
1985-1990 0.0 0.0
1991- 0.0 0.0 



148 College & Research Libraries March 1999 

TABLE 4 
Paper Fold Test (paper breaks after) 

Polish Russian
(N = 379) (N = 476) 

Less Than 1 Fold 0-50- --10-
Less Than 1 Double-fold 0-50 5-67
Less Than - Double-folds 1--6 9-66
Less Than 3 Double-folds 1-76 6-09
Lore Than 3 Double-folds 95-97 76-47 

The pH balance of paper plays an im­
portant role in the quality and life span 
of a publication. The more alkaline the 
paper, the less likely it will become brittle 
and the longer the publication will last. 
Unfortunately, Slavic materials fared 
poorly on the paper pH test (see table 5). 
These statistics are similar to the results 
of a small survey conducted by the All-
Russian State Library for Foreign Litera­
ture in Moscow. That survey’s results 
showed that 93 percent of all Russian/ 
Soviet materials published between 1860 
and 1985 were printed on acidic paper. 
Between 1990 and 1995, this figured 
dropped to 84 percent of all items pub­
lished on acidic paper.7 

Fortunately, the trend to use acid-free 
paper is continuing, as indicated in the 
results of the University of Kansas sur­
vey. There has been a significant increase 
in the use of acid-free paper in both Po­
land and Russia. Since 1991, over 29 per­
cent of all volumes published in Poland 
and over 15 percent of all volumes pub­
lished in Russia have been printed on 
acid-free paper. Furthermore, a test evalu­
ating the condition of all new Polish and 
Russian acquisitions at the University of 
Kansas Libraries during spring 1998 re­
vealed an exponential improvement. 

TABLE 6 
Condition of Binding 

-n -ood -ondition
Sent to Stacks as is 
Seeds Preservation Treatment 

Polish
87.15%

5.79
7.75 

Russian
56.51%
39.71

3.78 

Over 86 percent of Polish and 43 
percent of Russian acquisitions 
were printed on acid-free paper. 
The sampled Polish books with an 
imprint date of 1996 or later were 
all produced on acid-free paper. 
However, Russian publishers are 
more sporadic. For example, some 
high-quality academic books are 
still being printed on acidic news­
print, whereas some short-run, 
pamphlet-type publications are 

printed on acid-free paper. 
Perhaps the sporadic use of acid-free 

paper in the Russian publishing indus­
try can be explained by two reasons. First, 
the current economic situation forces 
many Russian publishers to use any type 
of paper available. Second, Russian pub­
lishers in general are not overly con­
cerned about the life span of their prod­
ucts. In October 1997, very few publish-

TABLE 5 
Paper pH 

Polish Russian 
Acidic 94.71%
Slightly Acidic 1.71
Alkaline 4.53 

87.18%
8.82
3.99 

ers expressed interest in attending a con­
ference held in Moscow to discuss the use 
of permanent (acid-free) paper. Many 
publishers did not know about acid-free 
paper, and still others felt that preserva­
tion issues were not their affair.8 

Another factor that determines a 
publication’s durability is the quality of 
its binding. A good binding can extend 
the life of a publication, even if the publi­
cation is printed on acidic paper. The re­
sults of this survey indicated that bind­

ings of Slavic materials do not 
break down as quickly as one 
might expect (see table 6). Clearly, 
the Polish bindings rank far higher 
in quality to their Russian coun­
terparts. Although many of the 
Russian bindings were not in good 
condition, they remain strong 
enough to return to the stack for 



 

Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 149 

TABLE 7
 
Place of Printing
 

Polish 
Warsaw 56.93%
Wroclaw 13.85
Krakow 11.34 

Russian 
Moscow 61.34%
Leningrad/St. Petersburg 16.81
Kiev (Ukraine) 6.51 

further use before needing preservation 
treatment. 

Only a few cities in each country pub­
lished a majority of the volumes housed 
in the collections. This information will 
be useful for establishing future coopera­
tive preservation activities with publish­
ers and libraries (see table 7). 

As the final step in the survey process, 
each item received an overall preserva­
tion treatment recommendation. Again, 
these results show that things are not as 
hopeless as sometimes feared, with less 
than seven percent of items surveyed 
needing some kind of immediate preser­
vation treatment. This figure almost 
doubles the results obtained for the Uni­
versity of Kansas’s overall library collec­
tions but still represents a manageable 
number of volumes (see table 8).9 

The results of this survey should lend 
hope to preservation efforts. Most of the 
items sampled are in acceptable condition 
and can be preserved before it is too late, 
particularly if libraries make efforts to 
work cooperatively to maximize collec­
tive resources. 

What Is to Be Done? 
This survey is the first step in evaluating 
the quality of Slavic collections. Ad­
ditional work needs to be com­
pleted, including the evaluation of 
more sections of the Slavic holdings 
at the University of Kansas Librar­
ies. More important than this is the 
evaluation of Slavic collections held 
in other libraries. Evaluations of the 
condition of general collections in 

research and academic libraries have been 
conducted, but these surveys do not re­
port any specific findings on the condi­
tion of Slavic holdings. The results from 
these general evaluations indicate that the 
percentages of material needing preser­
vation vary by institution, based on geo­
graphic location of the library and the 
quality of the storage facility. This sug­
gests that surveys on Slavic holdings will 
produce similar varying results. Finally, 
the most important step will be to evalu­
ate holdings “in-country” (in Russia, 
Ukraine, Poland, and elsewhere in East 
Central Europe) to gain a true idea of the 
overall condition of Slavic collections. 
Information accrued from these evalua­
tions will enhance our understanding of 
the challenges inherent in attempting to 
preserve Slavic publications. 

Based on this initial survey, Slavic pub­
lications do not appear to be as fragile as 
often believed. Working to preserve col­
lections is not yet at the point of crisis, 
and there is still time to consider preser­
vation options. However, it is clear that 
preservation planning and work need to 
begin now, before materials deteriorate to 
the point where they cannot be saved. 
Steps must be taken to preserve these re­
sources collectively because it is not fea­
sible to expect each library to have the 
resources available to preserve all of its 
holdings individually. 

Currently, a number of vendors such 
as East View Publications, IDC, 
Chadwick-Healey, and Norman Ross ac­
tively film Slavic titles. However, vendors 
tend to focus on the preservation of big-
ticket items such as newspaper runs or 
multivolume publications. Naturally, the 
vast majority of Slavic publications do not 
fall into this category. Moreover, not ev-

TABLE 8 
Treatment Decision for Volume 

Polish Russian 
In good condition 84.13% 60.71%
Sent to stacks as is 9.82 34.03
Needs preservation treatment 5.54 6.72 



150 College & Research Libraries March 1999 

erything published in the Soviet Union 
and its successor states needs to be pre­
served, although much does. Thousands 
of publications provide valuable insight 
into the Soviet system and the develop­
ment of the subsequent independent 
states. It would be unfortunate for future 
students and scholars of the region if li­
braries allowed these books to disappear 
through neglect. 

Of course, the preservation of Slavic 
materials is not simply limited to vendor 
projects. Many libraries have preserva­
tion programs in operation. In addition, 
there are a number of cooperative pres­
ervation programs such as the Slavic and 
East European Microfilm Project 
(SEEMP) at the Center for Research Li­
braries and the independently operated 
SlavCopy cooperative program. 

SEEMP, like vendors, has thus far fo­
cused on the preservation of big-ticket 
publications. It provides libraries with the 
opportunity to pool their Slavic collection 
resources, both materials and money, to 
preserve items that individual libraries 
would be unable to save on their own. 
Member institutions of SEEMP propose 
and work on joint preservation projects. 
For example, a library may have an in­
complete run of a newspaper. Through 
the coordinated efforts of SEEMP, other 
libraries’ holdings can be used to fill in 
these gaps. 

SlavCopy is another coordinated pro­
gram that allows libraries to preserve 
Slavic publications cooperatively and 
economically on a title-by-title basis.10 

Books that cannot be preserved commer­
cially (i.e., that cannot be sold to recoup 
expenses and a profit for the vendor) can 
be saved through archival quality photo­
copying. Companies such as Bridgeport 
National Bindery in Agawam, Massachu­
setts, are willing to make as few as one 
high-quality copy of a book that is no 
longer covered by copyright laws. Par­
ticipation in SlavCopy allows libraries to 
coordinate their preservation activities 
and reduce Slavic preservation costs 
through group/volume discounts. Each 
library has the responsibility to identify 

important publications in its collections 
in need of preservation treatment and 
submit the title to the SlavCopy electronic 
mail list. Other libraries can then order a 
copy of the item, thus reducing costs for 
every institution involved. Currently, 
SlavCopy participants are limited to 
North America. The program needs to in­
vestigate ways to expand its efforts to in­
clude libraries in East Central Europe. 
These cooperative programs are the most 
efficient and cost-effective methods to 
preserve our collections and should be 
used to their fullest advantage. 

In general, the results of this prelimi­
nary study indicate that the majority of 
Slavic area materials are currently in ac­
ceptable condition. However, the statis­
tics prove that the majority of the publi­
cations are printed on acidic paper, which 
means they will deteriorate rapidly. Our 
tasks are to provide proper housing and 
maintenance to delay deterioration and to 
reformat those materials that have surpassed 
their usable shelf life. Libraries must work 
collectively to combat this problem be­
cause no one library can do it alone. 

In the history of mankind, there has 
never been greater period of publication 
than the twentieth century. The responsi­
bility for collecting the millions of vol­
umes of works includes the extraordinary 
task of preserving them for future gen­
erations. If this responsibility is taken 
lightly, important parts of our history will 
be lost in the dustbin. In the area of Slavic 
studies, acidic paper is statistically the 
greatest threat to preservation. Although 
the tide is turning and publishers are us­
ing acid-free paper more frequently, the 
damage is done on the Soviet-era publi­
cations. It is up to us to save what we can. 
As this study shows, only a few materi­
als are in need of immediate attention. 
This gives us time to devise collective 
preservation strategies for the majority of 
our Slavic collections before they begin 
to crumble on the shelves. Cooperative 
programs will provide the most efficient 
and cost-effective ways to preserve these 
collections. We must work to build these 
programs now. 

http:basis.10


Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 151 

Notes 

1. For an excellent short description of the condition of Russian libraries, see Galina 
Kislovskaya, Preservation Challenges in a Changing Political Climate: A Report from Russia (Wash­
ington, D.C.: The Commission on Preservation and Access, 1996), 4–5. 

2. See, for example, James M. Reilly, Douglas W. Nichimura, and Edward Zinn, New Tools for 
Preservation: Assessing Long-Term Environmental Effects on Library and Archives Collections (Wash­
ington, D.C.: The Committion on Preservation and Access, 1995). 

3. Ani Gergova et al, National Program for the Preservation of Library Collections (Sofia: Union 
of Librarians and Information Services Officers and Open Society Foundation, 1997); Kislovskaya, 
Preservation Challenges in a Changing Political Climate. 

4. Brian Baird, Jana Krentz, and Brad Schaffner, “Findings from the Condition Surveys Con­
ducted by the University of Kansas Libraries,” College & Research Libraries 58 (Mar. 1997): 115–26. 

5. Most of the material published between 1830 and 1869 would be housed in the KU Rare 
Books Library. 

6. The University of Kansas Libraries’ percentages of embrittled volumes is sure to be much 
lower than those found by other research libraries around the country. This conclusion is based 
on the fact that the University of Kansas Libraries’ overall condition survey showed that only six 
percent of its collections are brittle. Other libraries throughout the country have found that as 
much as 25 percent of their collections are brittle. Therefore, one can expect to see a proportional 
increase for the brittleness of Slavic materials. Such an increase will dramatically increase the 
number of brittle Slavic materials in some library collections. See Baird, Krentz, and Schaffner, 
“Findings from the Condition Surveys,” 122. 

7. Kislovskaya, Preservation Challenges in a Changing Political Climate, 18. 
8. “Permanent Paper Conference Aims to Raise Awareness in Russian,” Preservation & Ac­

cess International Newsletter, no. 1, Mar. 1998. Available at: http://www.clir.org/pubs/pain/ 
pain01.html. 

9. Baird, Krentz, and Schaffner, “Findings from the Condition Surveys,” 121. 
10. Libraries can participate in Slavcopy by sending an e-mail to: Slavcopy@ukans.edu. 

mailto:Slavcopy@ukans.edu
http://www.clir.org/pubs/pain