"The council was a conflict commission, not a governing body".
Activities of the Council of Curators of Suburban Palaces and Museums.

Bondarev Sergei Viktorovich ORCID: 0000-0002-4087-3557 PhD in History Postgraduate student, Saint Petersburg Institute of History of Russian Academy of Sciences; Head of department "Grand Palace", State Museum-Reserve Peterhof. 197110, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Saint Petersburg, Petrozavodskaya str., 7 bondarev_ml@mail.ru

When the autocracy fell, the society and the authorities faced the question: how to use the numerous former royal palaces? Among the many voices of public opinion of the post-revolutionary period, the position of a group of people who, after the February revolution, took on the most difficult task of protecting the tsar's property stands out. This group consisted of the chairmen and members of the artistic and historical commissions established by order of the Provisional Government. The commissions were engaged in saving the historical and artistic heritage in the palace residences. Representatives of the intelligentsia sincerely believed that yesterday's palaces should be preserved for posterity. After the Bolsheviks came to power, the People's Commissariat of Education, headed by A.V. Lunacharsky, set the task of creating historical museums open to the public on the basis of suburban royal palaces. At the same time, the issue of the fate of organizations inherited from the tsarist regime was being resolved at the state level. Thus, there was a dual power of the People's Commissariat of Property of the Republic and the People's Commissariat of Education. They shared among themselves the economic and scientific management of organizations operating in the imperial residences.

In August 1918, the artistic and Historical commissions of the suburbs of Petrograd, created under the Provisional Government, were transformed into new organizations: palaces-museums ^{[12, l. 151]}. The heads of these institutions began to be called keepers. To unite forces and actions, the Board for Museums and the Protection of Monuments of Art and Antiquity of the People's Commissariat of Education created a general Council of keepers of suburban palaces-museums. It became a platform for expressing opinions and discussing various kinds of problems concerning the fate of palaces in the suburbs of Petrograd-Leningrad. The Council 's work covers the chronological period from 1918 to 1925 . The activities of this body are important for studying the changes in the perception of the status of palace complexes by the new government and society in the context of socio-political transformations.

As a rule, researchers mention the existence of the Council in the context of studying the history of suburban palaces ^{[2, p. 134]}; ^{[13, p. 297]}; ^{[14, p. 298]}; ^{[15, p. 185]}; ^{[116, p. 66]}; ^{[18, p. 17]}; ^{[19, p. 194]}. For the first time, the activity of the Guardian Council becomes the object of a separate study. In the Central State Archive of Literature and Art of St. Petersburg?The minutes of the Council are kept in the fund of the State Museum Fund of St. Petersburg. Of the greatest interest are projects for the establishment of new organizations based on suburban palaces, biographies of employees, letters to the Council with policy statements, explanatory papers.

From the first days of the Council's work, the curators had a common opinion on the need to preserve yesterday's suburban imperial residences in the form of museums. The heads of the palaces shared their experience of the work done aimed at the development of museum organizations. Program documents were also prepared at the meetings and the texts of letters to various state organizations were compiled.

Questions concerning the future of the former palace residences and their collections were considered from the first meeting of the Council of Keepers. On August 14, 1918, the Gatchina Palace decided to open an exhibition of the Chinese Gallery. To achieve this goal, we came to the decision to free the interior from other valuable items placed there in storage, and to show the collection of the gallery itself ^{[11, L. 2]}.

Also at the first Council, G. S. Yatmanov, Commissioner for Museums and the Protection of Monuments of Art and Antiquity, raised the issue of transferring the numismatic collection of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich from Gatchina to the Hermitage. The members of the Guardian Council immediately took an unambiguous position on this issue. At the meeting, it was decided to reject the request of colleagues from the Hermitage, "until the suburban palaces-museums are put in order" ^{[11, l. 1]}. But the problem of transferring valuables from suburban palaces to central museums persists throughout all the years of the Council's work.

            The hospital continued to work in the Grand Oranienbaum Palace, which, according to A. A. Polovtsov, interfered with the creation of the exposition. In the words of the Chairman of the Council, the medical institution "prevents putting things in order." In this proposal, there is an unambiguous position of the custodians of suburban palaces: putting in order means creating a museum. The Council makes a Solomonic decision: the hospital should not be evicted, since it is a guard against encroachments of other institutions on the palace ^{[11, l. 2]}.

            In early September 1918, V. K. Makarov announced the beginning of work on the inventory of the property of Alexander III's rooms in the Gatchina Palace for the opening of these interiors ^{[11, l. 6ob.]}. F. G. Berenstam made a report on the rules created for the inspection of Peterhof Palaces-Museums for visitors. The Council of Curators approved these rules and recommended drawing up similar ones for all suburban palaces-museums ^{[11, L. 11]}.

At the meetings of the Council of Guardians, the problems of the administrative structure of the newly formed institutions in the former royal residences were discussed. November 16 , 1918 The Council adopted a regulation on the management of palaces-museums, approved by the People's Commissariat of Education ^{[11, l. 19]}. The new order was to lead to the centralization of administrative and scientific activities of suburban palaces-museums. But in reality, revolutionary disorder reigned in the imperial palaces. Already four days after the adoption of the new regulation, V. N. Taleporovsky asked the Council to issue an explanation that the room servants of the palaces obey the keepers, and not the councils of the employees ^{[11, l. 21]}. In Peterhof, Commissioner N. V. Lichkus, as required by the regulations on November 16, 1918, took over the management of the organization and issued an order to abolish the executive committee of employees only in February 1919 ^{[10, l. 18]} But the new regulation did not solve the key problem in the management of the former royal palaces. The People's Commissariat of Property of the Republic was transformed into a Department under the People's Commissariat. Despite subordination to one department, administrative problems were under the jurisdiction of the Property Department, and scientific and artistic issues were solved by the Museum Department.

In the autumn of 1918, at a meeting of the Council, a decision was made for the first time, to which the authorities from culture will repeatedly repeat during the XX-XXI centuries. On November 16, S. K. Isakov, the head of the Petrograd Department of Museums, proposed to transfer the palaces of Oranienbaum to the custody of the curator of the Peterhof palaces-museums. The Council decided that F. G. Berenstam should take over the temporary administration of Oranienbaum until the appointment of a custodian there ^{[11, l. 19ob.]}.

At the Councils, the problem of clashes between the guardians and representatives of the new government at various levels and departmental subordination was often discussed. The main problem was the desire of third-party organizations to solve their own problems at the expense of buildings and territories of suburban palaces-museums. At the beginning of October 1918, V. K. Makarov notified about the beginning of moving into the premises of the Gatchina Palace kitchen square-the museum of Gatchina orphanages. The curator was forced to send a telegram to A.V. Lunacharsky, in which he indicated that the palaces were museums and could not be occupied by outside organizations. As a result, the People's Commissar of Education canceled the relocation of the shelter to the Gatchina Palace ^{[11, l. 13]}. On October 16, 1918, F.G. Berenstam reported on negotiations with representatives of the postal and telegraph department on the establishment of a children's colony in Znamenka. The Council recognized it desirable to provide for these needs small structures on the territory of the estate, but not the premises of the palace, which is of artistic and historical value ^{[11, L. 16]}.

Artistic and historical objects were also the object of encroachments by various institutions. In the autumn of 1918, F. G. Berenstam at a meeting announced the intention of the Peterhof State Department to sell icons from palaces-museums, and also reported that the local Land Department had already removed furniture from the Farm Palace for its own use ^{[11, l. 21ob.]}.

The Board of Guardians discussed a wide range of issues that determine the current and future life of former suburban residences. At a meeting of the Council on November 27 , 1918 , V. I. Yakovlev has put on the agenda two serious problems that will be solved within the next few years. Firstly, the curator of the Children's Village Palaces-museums proposed to organize the re-evacuation of art treasures from Moscow as soon as possible. In the autumn of 1917, due to the advance of the Germans to Petrograd, an emergency evacuation to Moscow was carried out. Many valuable items were packed and removed from the palaces of the capital and its suburbs. In 1918, the absence of key masterpieces stopped serious work on creating expositions in suburban museums ^{[11, l. 23]}.

Secondly, V. I. Yakovlev stated the need to create a cadre of experienced guides to introduce visitors to the palaces-museums. The staff of the artistic and historical part introduced visitors to the decoration of the palaces as much as possible and with all their strength. To complete this task in full, there were catastrophically not enough free experts. The Council decided to contact the Museum Department of the People's Commissariat for Education to create special instructor courses ^{[11, l. 23]}. But in December 1918, the official of the Museum Department, M. B. Kaplan, again announced the need for excursions by persons working on the artistic and historical part in suburban palaces-museums. At the Council, the curators stated that such services on staff days off should be paid separately ^{[11, l. 25ob.]}. The museum management of the People's Commissariat of Education took the position of the palace staff and began to solve the problem of staff shortage for conducting excursions already at the state level.

In December 1918, at a meeting of the Board of Guardians, questions were discussed about the future of several suburban residences. A report was made that the palaces of the Red Village are being transferred to the jurisdiction of the Detskoselsky District Council of Deputies. The curators decided to petition the Board of Museum Affairs for the formation of a special group of Krasnoselsky palaces-museums to clarify their artistic and historical value ^{[11, l. 27]}. At the same meeting, V. N. Taleporovsky announced the return of the Bip fortress to the Pavlovsk Palace-Museum. It is proposed to create a museum in the front rooms of the fortress, and in other rooms to equip apartments for employees of the Management of the Pavlovsk Palace Museum ^{[11, l. 27ob.]}. In turn, V. I. Yakovlev announced his intention to create a museum on the second floor of the Alexander Palace ^{[11, l. 27ob.]}.

The first Council consisted of: G. K. Lukomsky (Tsarskoye Selo) ^[1], V. K. Makarov (Gatchina), F. G. Berenstam (Peterhof) ^[6], V. N. Taleporovsky (Pavlovsk) ^[4], A. A. Polovtsov ^[3]; ^[20]; ^[21]. The latter was entrusted with the duties of the head of suburban palaces-museums, as well as the position of chairman of the Board of Keepers. At the beginning of September 1918, G. K. Lukomsky stopped taking part in the meetings of the Council, but his messages were read out at them. At the beginning of October 1918 , the Council decided to petition G. S. Yatmanov for the appointment of V. Ya . Yakovlev acting as caretaker of Tsarskoye Selo ^{[11, l. 13]}. On October 16, 1918, A. A. Polovtsov reported receiving a petition from G. K. Lukomsky to relieve him of his duties as chairman of the Artistic and Historical Commission of the Tsarskoye Selo Palaces-Museums ^{[11, l. 17]}. The latter went to Kiev, where for two years he worked on the creation of the Khanenko Museum ^{[17, p. 88]}. In 1920, G. K. Lukomsky went abroad and never returned to his homeland.

In November 1918, G. S. Yatmanov raised the question of the expediency of retaining the powers of the former chairman of the Board of Guardians A. A. Polovtsov ^{[11, L. 19]}. November 20 , 1918 at the suggestion of S. K. Isakov's absence of A. A. Polovtsov was recognized by the Council as resignation from the post of chairman ^{[11, l. 21ob.]}. At the meeting of the next Council, V. N. Taleporovsky reported on the events that took place on November 23 in the Pavlovsk Palace Museum. At 23 o'clock, an armed detachment arrived to arrest A. A. Polovtsov on the warrant of the Commission for Combating Counterrevolution and Speculation in the city of Detsky Selo. The office and bedroom of the former Chairman of the Council were searched. Convinced of the latter's absence, the chekists left the palace ^{[11, l. 24]}. Fearing persecution, A. A. Polovtsev and his family at the end of 1918 illegally, in his own words, "like criminals", crossed the border with Finland. From there they moved to Paris for permanent residence ^{[21, p. 295]}. S. K. Isakov became the Chairman of the Board of Guardians.

In 1919, new changes took place in the structure of the state management bodies of palaces-museums. On June 28 , the Council heard a message from S. K. Isakov on the abolition of the Property Department of the People's Commissariat of the Republic and on the complete transfer of palaces-museums to the subordination of the Museum Department ^{[11, l. 40]}. The liquidation of the Property Department put an end to the parallel subordination of museum institutions to state structures. But a new conflict is breaking out on the ground. The keeper of Pavlovsk at the meeting reported on the dispute with the commissioner-inspector of palaces-museums. The Council decided that the clash was of a fundamental nature, and in connection with the abolition of the Property Department, it was necessary to develop a new regulation on palaces-museums ^{[11, l. 40]}. The Chairman of the Council asked to draft regulations by July 4.

Not only palace squares, but also garden and park lands became a stumbling block in disputes with various state structures. August 1 , 1919 V. I. Yakovlev and F. G. Berenstam pointed out the danger of the actions of the Garden and Park Department, suggesting to start cutting down trees in the Children's Village and Peterhof. At the meeting, the keepers recognized that parks are an integral part of palaces-museums, and therefore cutting down or changes in the layout of parks cannot occur without the consent of the Board of Keepers and the Museum Department of the People's Commissariat of Education ^{[11, l. 43]}.

As already mentioned, the documents of the Council of Curators reflect the difficulties of communication between employees of suburban palaces-museums and the authorities. At the same time, some of the officials' proposals reached the point of absurdity. On August 1, 1919, F. G. Berenstam reported that a "progressive" initiative had been received in Peterhof: to dismantle the pipes feeding the Samson fountain. They were proposed to be used to divert water to an electric lighting turbine near the Pyramid fountain. The Council decided to contact the Museum Department in case of further attempts to dismantle the pipes. There is no information in the protocol about the name of the organization that appealed to the Peterhof keeper with this proposal. But it is obvious that the "innovative" proposal came from the Peterhof State Department. The keepers unanimously expressed a negative attitude to the removal of pipes, "which is equivalent to the destruction of the most beautiful group of Peterhof fountains" ^{[11, l. 43ob.]}.

In 1919, the solution to the problem of providing museums with experienced personnel was developed. Special courses were created at the Museum Department and an excursion station was launched. Subsequently, seminars, organized on the basis of suburban museums of Petrograd by the forces of the Excursion Institute, became the flagships of excursion activities in the city.

At the beginning of 1920, the curators again discussed the issue of alienation of art and historical objects in the collections of central museums. A number of extended meetings of the Council were held, at which the fate of the ancient sculptures of Pavlovsk, which the Hermitage claimed, was decided. A. N. Benoit directly stated that the interest of world art museums, such as the Hermitage, should be recognized as dominant ^{[11, L. 49]}. In this regard, "the movement of things to which the Hermitage has the right, as the dominant museum, cannot be postponed" ^{[11, l. 54ob.]}. The result of a long debate between suburban curators and Hermitage staff was the removal of some sculptures from Pavlovsk.

At the same time, a significant event occurred in the life of suburban palaces-museums: objects returned from evacuation. In February 1920 V. I. Yakovlev reported at the Council meeting that the boxes with the re-evacuated works of art had been opened, but their contents did not always correspond to the inventories ^{[11, l. 69]}.

The suburban palaces-museums still received demands from third-party organizations for the issuance of property. In the summer of 1920, the curator of the Children's Village Palaces-museums conveyed the demand of the County Council to provide the sick servant Popov with an engine chair, which was used during the illness of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. The Council recognized that the specified device is not of historical interest, and allowed it to be issued for the needs of the patient ^{[11, L. 42]}.

In 1920, the clashes of researchers and proteges of the Soviet government on the ground received a new round of development. June 21 V. I. Yakovlev announced the closure of the Alexander Palace for visitors by order of the commissioner without prior notice ^{[11, l. 36]}. The Curator appealed to the Council with a request to develop a constitution that precisely defines the rights and duties of the curators of the palaces-museums, the commissioner-inspector and commissioners ^{[11, l. 36]}. The appeal of the curator of the Children's Village Palaces confirms that the management structure of suburban palaces-museums has not changed in a year. This problem was again addressed at the end of August 1921. V. K. Makarov urgently demanded a new constitution for the management of palaces-museums to differentiate the spheres of activity of the commissioner and the curators. He declared the readiness of all members of the Council to resign for the responsibility of preserving the museum property of suburban museums if the necessary changes are not implemented ^{[11, L. 78]}.

The confrontation between the curators and the commissars reached its climax in early 1922. A new charter for the management of suburban palaces-museums has not yet been worked out. On February 14, at a meeting of the Council, it was decided to revise the unapproved draft, since the absence of directives led to constant misunderstandings between the keepers and the commissioners ^{[11, L. 97]}. It should be noted that the draft regulations on suburban palaces-museums assumed full autocracy of the curator both on scientific and artistic, and on administrative and economic issues ^{[11, l. 115]}. Such a reform, of course, could not suit the commissars defending their primacy in museums. V.K. Makarov stated that the commissar from the Glavmuseum is a wall between the curator and the local authorities, interfering with their interaction ^{[11, l. 97]}. The Council decided to send a commission to Gatchina to clarify the conflict between the keeper and the commissioner.

At a meeting of the Council on February 22, V. K. Makarov, responding to the accusation of violation of the law on his part, pointed out that this could not have happened, because in fact there are no museum laws. V. N. Taleporovsky confirmed that such conflicts had arisen repeatedly in the Pavlovsk Palace ^{[11, l. 100]}. According to V. K. Makarov, the position of commissioner at the palace museum is necessary so that the curator can conduct scientific work. The Gatchina keeper pointed out that the scope of the commissioner's activities should be limited, he should perform the functions of a political commissar. Providing the commissar with the management of the economy leads to dual power, which negatively affects the work ^{[11, l. 100ob.]}.

On February 28 , 1922 , the report of V. I. was presented at the Council . Yakovleva on the results of the work of the commission to clarify the conflict between V. K. Makarov and the commissioner of Gatchina I. M. Ioffe. The collected material was sent to the Board of the Glavmuseum for consideration ^{[11, l. 99]}. Finally, an approved instruction on the management of palaces-museums was presented at the Council on March 14 ^{[11, l. 102]}. By order of the Department of Museums of March 8, the post of commissars of palaces-museums was abolished. Instead, they created the post of head of the management of palaces-museums in each suburb ^{[8, L. 2]}. Former commissars were appointed as heads ^{[7, l. 30]}.

On March 9, 1922, G. S. Yatmanov signed an order according to which the property of all palaces was divided into two categories: museum and utilitarian ^{[7, L. 71]}. Objects of artistic and historical significance could only be transferred with the permission of the curator. In fact, the order resulted in a new conflict between the heads of departments and the custodians now. On July 4, V. K. Makarov stated at the Council that the issuance of things bypassing the keeper continues, and he relinquishes responsibility for the protection of things ^{[11, l. 113ob.]}.

In August 1922, V. K. Makarov again spoke at a meeting of the Council with a report on the abnormal, from his point of view, organization of management of country palaces-museums. The Gatchina curator said that two parallel organizations have been created in the suburbs: a museum and an economic one. He called the Gatchina experience the worst variant of such a structure, where the museum part was subordinated to the economic one. V. K. Makarov reported on the inconsistency in the work, which creates an unhealthy atmosphere and hinders the implementation of the general work plan ^{[11, l. 118ob.]}. G. S. Yatmanov, in response, stated that the situation was caused by the lack of the ability to "provide instructions for all the accidents that are inevitable when working together" ^{[11, l. 118ob.]} The official explained that the decree of March 9, 1922 does not speak about subordination, but about friendly joint work. The Council decided to create a special commission in Gatchina to set deadlines for the end of the separation of museum property from the general household inventory. The Commission also had to develop a unified project for the management of suburban museums ^{[11, l. 118ob.]}. G. S. Yatmanov pointed out that responsibility for museum property should be assigned to the curator, and the economic part should be transferred to a person subordinate to him ^{[11, l. 118ob.]}.

At the meetings of the Council, work continued on changing the management structure of suburban palaces. On August 29, 1922, the deputy head of the Museum Department, A. P. Udalenkov, informed the Council about the new organization of the People's Commissariat of Education and the proposed form of unification. V. K. Makarov raised the issue of the further competence of the Council of Curators and stated that before that the Council was a conflict commission, and not a governing body ^{[11, l. 121]}. On December 26, G. S. Yatmanov informed the curators about the need to create a Management of suburban palaces-museums. According to the official, the unification of the work of the curators is long overdue, because there is a lack of a governing body and a unified plan in the work of museums. The Council decided on the appointment of A. P. Udalenkov as the head of the yet-to-be-created Department and its new structure. It was assumed that all fundamental and organizational issues for suburban museums would have to be discussed by the Board of Curators. Artistic and administrative issues are considered by the head of the Department, he is also the chairman of the Council. In case of disagreement between the Board of Curators and the head of the Department, the issues are considered by G. S. Yatmanov, and then transferred to the Council for Museums ^{[11, l. 148]}.

A. P. Udalenkov actually presided over the Councils of the Keepers until July 1923 . But in March 1923, G. S. Yatmanov reported that the issue of organizing a special department for suburban palaces-museums had not yet been finally resolved. The Council of Guardians remained the unifying body with the advisory right ^{[11, l. 165]}. From August 1923 to February 10, 1925, G. S. Yatmanov was the chairman of the meetings.

The Council continued to sort out the current day-to-day problems of suburban museums. In April 1923 V. I. Yakovlev said that the end of the analysis of the re—evacuated items will end by the new public holiday - by May 1 ^{[11, l. 172]}. The keeper expressed the opinion that on this day it is necessary to invite representatives of local authorities to demonstrate the scale of the volume of protected state property. It is obvious that in this way V. I. Yakovlev wanted to draw the attention of officials to the importance of museum work.

On April 17, 1923, the Council heard a message that the Peterhof City Council agreed to transfer the Lady-in-Waiting Building to the Management of the Peterhof Palaces only on general grounds, i.e. to lease it. In addition, in connection with the upcoming mowing, the City Council filed a petition to the Gubernatorial Executive Committee to transfer all Peterhof parks to its jurisdiction. The Council of Keepers drew up an appeal to the Glavmuseum about the inadmissibility of the arrangement of pastures in the park and the division of palace buildings between various institutions. F.G. Berenstam stated that otherwise, he was ready to absolve himself of all responsibility for the integrity of the property entrusted to him ^{[11, l. 170]}.

At the beginning of 1924, new permutations took place in the building of the curators of suburban palaces-museums. In May 1923, F.G. Berenstam presented a report on the current situation of the Peterhof Palaces-Museums at the Council for Museums of the People's Commissariat of Education. The members of the Council came to the opinion that the appearance of Peterhof is in terrible condition and it needs to be saved. In addition, in January 1924, violations were found in the acceptance of items re-evacuated from Moscow. A criminal case was opened against F. G. Berenstam ^{[5, L. 6]}. At the end of January 1924 he was removed from the position of keeper with the following formulations: "permanent malfunction in the performance of official duties" and "inconsistency of the position". On February 19, 1924, the Council decided to form a commission to prepare a work plan in Peterhof for the current year. G. S. Yatmanov informed the audience that the curator of the Peterhof palaces-museums, F.G. Berenstam, had moved to work in the Public Library ^{[11, l. 190ob.]}.

The next meeting of the Council took place only in autumn, on October 31, 1924, G. S. Yatmanov announced the resumption of the meeting of the curators of suburban palaces-museums, interrupted for several months due to the departure of two curators ^{[11, L. 196]}. The keeper of Pavlovsk V. N. Taleporovsky was absent at this meeting. He was dismissed from his post in May 1925. ^{[9, l. 4]} On October 31, N. I. Arkhipov and S. V. Dombrovsky, the new curators of the Peterhof and Pavlovsk palaces—museums, respectively, took part in the work of the Council for the first time ^{[11, l. 196]}.

At the end of 1924, the curator of the Children's Village Palaces-museums again raised the question of the need to combine the work of suburban Palaces-museums ^{[11, l. 230]}. At a meeting of the keepers of the mansions-museums on January 2, 1925, G. S. Yatmanov announced to the keepers of the Sheremetyevo, Shuvalov, Yusupov and Elaginoostrovsky mansions that the issue of unification with suburban palaces-museums was being worked out to create a single organization ^{[11, l. 236]}. On January 20, a meeting of the keepers of suburban palaces-museums and mansions-museums met for the first time ^{[11, l. 241]}. At the joint Meeting, G.S. Yatmanov said that there is a global project under which all suburban palaces-museums and mansions should be taken over by the Museum of the Revolution. He will develop a general plan of work on the palaces-museums and supplement them with illustrative material by prior agreement with the Political Light. But at the same time, G. S. Yatmanov pointed out that due to the huge amount of property and buildings of suburban palaces, there is no fundamental decision on this issue yet. According to the official, in order to carry out the reform, it is necessary to strengthen the local management apparatus and distribute funding to the palaces-museums. G. S. Yatmanov also noted that the former position of suburban palaces in relation to the artistic and historical appearance of gardens and parks should be preserved, and management in this area will be carried out by the Leningrad Branch of Glavnauki ^{[11, l. 244ob.]}.

It is known that the reform of subordination of suburban palaces and Leningrad mansions to the Museum of the Revolution did not take place. But the idea of centralizing the management of palaces-museums has been further developed. In September 1925, the Administration of Palaces-Museums and estates was established at the Leningrad Department of Glavnauki. The new structure was supposed to unite the activities of the former royal palaces in a single direction. One of the suburban curators, N.I. Arkhipov, was appointed to head the Management of the palaces-museums. The Management organization was the result of many years of work by the Council of Guardians to protect the royal palaces.

It should be noted that the daily activities of suburban palaces-museums throughout the entire period of the work of the Council of Curators were complicated by high staff turnover, criminal incidents and lack of funding. At meetings, the Council often considered numerous complaints from keepers about frequent layoffs and staff shortages. In addition, the criminogenic situation in the first years of Soviet power in the country totally deteriorated. Employees of suburban palaces-museums were forced to resist the characteristic phenomena of the revolutionary era: robberies, embezzlement, vandalism. In August 1918, a former valet took the chest out of the room where the numismatic collection of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich was kept, and disappeared with the loot in an unknown direction ^{[11, L. 6]}. In the autumn of 1918, the Council announced the facts of damage to the sculpture in Alexandria, in the Pavlovsk and Catherine parks ^{[11, l. 16, 17, 23 vol.]}. In the summer of 1919, F. G. Berenstam announced a low level of security and a lack of security in suburban palaces-museums ^{[11, l. 44]}. But the authorities left the problem of museum security without a solution. In June 1920 V. I. Yakovlev reported cases of theft of things in the palace and damage caused to the park sculpture ^{[11, l. 36ob.]}. In the winter and autumn of 1921, thefts occurred in Monplaisir, including six paintings missing ^{[11, l. 69, 93]}.

In 1922, an attempt was made to strengthen the security of the palaces-museums. Since February 1, round-the-clock armed guards have been installed in suburban residences. But the number of rates allocated for protection does not speak in favor of solving the security problem: in Peterhof — 14, in the Children's Village — 6, In Pavlovsk — 6, in Gatchina — 5 ^{[11, l. 96-96ob.]}. Moreover, in August 1922, G.S. Yatmanov announced the restriction of the supply of employees security guards. The Council decided to reduce the already small security staff, and assign responsibility for material support to the keepers ^{[11, l. 118]}.

In January 1923, the keepers petitioned the Council for the supply of revolvers necessary for night rounds. The request was really justified. In March of the same year, V. N. Taleporovsky reported a nighttime attempt to rob the Pavlovsk Palace. Thanks to timely measures taken, the crime was prevented, and the leader of the gang was arrested ^{[11, l. 160]}. On the same Council V. Ya . Yakovlev reported that the criminals who tried to steal lead from the roof of the Chapel were released. Due to the deterioration of the criminogenic situation, G. S. Yatmanov petitioned for the closure of palaces for visiting on weekdays, and also ordered to strengthen surveillance at night ^{[11, l. 160]}. In April 1923, a complaint was again received from F. G. Berenstam about the frequent cases of theft of lead parts, as well as the theft of an air pump cylinder ^{[11, l. 170ob.]}.

The work of suburban palaces-museums required a large amount of resources and, as a result, funding. Back in August 1918, G. K. Lukomsky proposed at the Council to draw up a report for the Board of the People's Commissariat of Education on the need to allocate funds for the maintenance of artistic treasures ^{[11, l. 1ob.]}. In the summer of 1922, V. N. Taleporovsky spoke at the meeting with a note about the unsatisfactory economic condition of Pavlovsk ^{[11, l. 112]}. In August, V. K. Makarov reported that at a museum conference in Moscow, it was decided to allocate funds for repairs, heating and operating expenses for the suburbs of Petrograd ^{[11, l. 119]}. In April 1923, A. P. Udalenkov stated that Moscow had reduced the amount of allocated money for repairs ^{[11, l. 172]}.

At the same time, an entrance fee was introduced in museums. From July 2, 1922, the state ordered to take money for the entrance fee in favor of Pomgol ^{[11, l. 112ob.]}. On November 28, 1922, the Council announced the introduction of entrance fees in all Petrograd and suburban palaces-museums ^{[11, l. 142]}. On April 28, 1923, the Presidium of the Board of the People's Commissariat of Education approved the instruction on charging entrance fees in museums. G. S. Yatmanov announced that the responsibility and control over the receipt of income lies with the keepers of the palaces-museums ^{[11, l. 174b.]}. In the middle of the summer of 1923, the problem of financing was still acute. V. N. Yakovlev reported at a meeting of the Council that in June 1923 the salary of employees was less than in May. The keeper of the Children's Village expressed his firm opinion that the work is more intensive in the summer season and the need to reward employees for processing is obvious ^{[11, l. 179b.]}.

            The activity of the Council of Guardians is of unquestionable interest in the study of changes in the status of royal palaces in the early years of Soviet power. The documents of the Council allow us to trace the fate of suburban palaces from the transformation of art commissions into separate museums to the centralization of their management in 1925 . Council meetings are also an important source for studying the daily activities of suburban palaces-museums. The keepers together with the authorities discussed a wide range of issues that determine the current and future life of suburban palaces. At the meetings of the Council, they looked for ways to solve the problems of the administrative structure of the newly formed institutions in the former royal residences. The Council often raised the issue of pressure from the authorities. The claims of various structures to buildings, territories and valuable historical objects of suburban palaces-museums were most often discussed. The advisory body was able to survive several administrative reforms on the management of palaces-museums. Until 1925, the new government created an infinite number of commissions, boards, councils, departments and other departments to manage the royal heritage. But during the first years of Soviet power, the Council of Guardians lasted the longest. Despite the lack of authority to make independent decisions about the fate of the palaces, the Council has become a platform for expressing the public opinion of a group of intellectuals — keepers. They were able to prove to the authorities the need to separate the palaces-museums into a separate group of artistic and historical organizations. And also achieved the creation of a separate state body for the centralization of suburban management.