The ghosts of Pereyaslav: Russo-Ukrainian historical debates in the post-Soviet era

Europe - Asia Studies

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 489-505

  Plokhy, Serhii ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0008849096     PISSN: 09668136     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09668130120045906     Document Type: Review

References (89)

1. The decision to accept the protectorate of the tsar of Muscovy was made by Khmelnytsky and his officers at a Cossack council in the town of Pereyaslav in January 1654, in the presence of the tsar's envoy, the boyar Vasilii Buturlin. In March of the same year Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich approved the conditions of the agreement brought to Moscow by Khmelnytsky's envoys. For an account of the events leading up to and following the Pereyaslav Agreement see Hans-Joachim Torke, 'The Unloved Alliance: Political Relations between Muscovy and Ukraine in the Seventeenth Century', in Peter J. Potichnyj, Marc Raeff, Jaroslaw Pelenski & Gleb N. Zekulin (eds), Ukraine and Russia in Their Historical Encounter (Edmonton, 1992), pp. 39-66 at pp. 42-48.
2. For the audio record of the BBC programme on Bohdan Khmelnytsky see 'Nash vybir' at «www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian». For the treatment of Khmelnytsky's image in modern historiography see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Changing Image of the Hetman', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 46, 4, 1998, pp. 531-545 (Ukrainian version: 'Minlyvyi obraz het'mana', Krytyka, 2, 14, 14 December 1998, pp. 4-8.
3. For the audio record of the BBC programme on Bohdan Khmelnytsky see 'Nash vybir' at «www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian». For the treatment of Khmelnytsky's image in modern historiography see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Changing Image of the Hetman', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 46, 4, 1998, pp. 531-545 (Ukrainian version: 'Minlyvyi obraz het'mana', Krytyka, 2, 14, 14 December 1998, pp. 4-8.
4. For the audio record of the BBC programme on Bohdan Khmelnytsky see 'Nash vybir' at «www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian». For the treatment of Khmelnytsky's image in modern historiography see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Changing Image of the Hetman', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 46, 4, 1998, pp. 531-545 (Ukrainian version: 'Minlyvyi obraz het'mana', Krytyka, 2, 14, 14 December 1998, pp. 4-8.
5. See 'Nash vybir' at «www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian». Cf. the following statement by the Ukrainian journalist and historian Serhii Makhun: 'They now talk about the Pereyaslav Council in somewhat subdued tones. But under whose "hand" was Bohdan Khmelnytsky supposed to go in that complex political situation, and under pressure from the absolute majority of the population of Ukraine? Perhaps [under the "hand"] of the Turkish sultans and the Crimean khan, who had caused great distress to Khmelnytsky himself?' ('Yak rozirvaty kolo vzayemnoho rakhunku obraz?', Den', 25 December 1999).
6. See 'Nash vybir' at «www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian». Cf. the following statement by the Ukrainian journalist and historian Serhii Makhun: 'They now talk about the Pereyaslav Council in somewhat subdued tones. But under whose "hand" was Bohdan Khmelnytsky supposed to go in that complex political situation, and under pressure from the absolute majority of the population of Ukraine? Perhaps [under the "hand"] of the Turkish sultans and the Crimean khan, who had caused great distress to Khmelnytsky himself?' ('Yak rozirvaty kolo vzayemnoho rakhunku obraz?', Den', 25 December 1999).
7. For one of the first attempts to reevaluate the legacy of Soviet historiography see Yurii Afanas'ev (ed.), Sovetskaya istoriografiya (Moscow, 1996). On the interrelation of national identity and historical memory in Ukraine see Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building (London and New York, 1998), pp. 198-229, and Catherine Wanner, Burden of Dreams: History and Identity in Post-Soviet Ukraine (University Park, PA, 1998).
8. For one of the first attempts to reevaluate the legacy of Soviet historiography see Yurii Afanas'ev (ed.), Sovetskaya istoriografiya (Moscow, 1996). On the interrelation of national identity and historical memory in Ukraine see Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building (London and New York, 1998), pp. 198-229, and Catherine Wanner, Burden of Dreams: History and Identity in Post-Soviet Ukraine (University Park, PA, 1998).
9. For one of the first attempts to reevaluate the legacy of Soviet historiography see Yurii Afanas'ev (ed.), Sovetskaya istoriografiya (Moscow, 1996). On the interrelation of national identity and historical memory in Ukraine see Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building (London and New York, 1998), pp. 198-229, and Catherine Wanner, Burden of Dreams: History and Identity in Post-Soviet Ukraine (University Park, PA, 1998).
10. See the text of the declaration in Slava ukraïns'koho kozatstva (Melbourne and Kyiv, 1999), p. 306.
11. Ibid. On the activities of the Ukrainian Cossacks and their links to political parties and the armed forces in Ukraine see Olexander Hryb, 'New Ukrainian Cossacks - Revival or Building New Armed Forces?' Ukrainian Review, 46, 1, Spring 1999, pp. 44-53. For the role of the Cossack heritage in the Ukrainian national revival in the late 1980s and early 1990s see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Reemergence of the Ukrainian Nation and Cossack Mythology', Social Research, 58, 4, Winter 1991, pp. 845-864; Serhii Plokhy, 'Historical Debates and Territorial Claims: Cossack Mythology in the Russian-Ukrainian Border Dispute', in The Legacy of History in Russia and the New States of Eurasia (Armonk, NY and London, 1994), pp. 147-170.
12. Ibid. On the activities of the Ukrainian Cossacks and their links to political parties and the armed forces in Ukraine see Olexander Hryb, 'New Ukrainian Cossacks - Revival or Building New Armed Forces?' Ukrainian Review, 46, 1, Spring 1999, pp. 44-53. For the role of the Cossack heritage in the Ukrainian national revival in the late 1980s and early 1990s see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Reemergence of the Ukrainian Nation and Cossack Mythology', Social Research, 58, 4, Winter 1991, pp. 845-864; Serhii Plokhy, 'Historical Debates and Territorial Claims: Cossack Mythology in the Russian-Ukrainian Border Dispute', in The Legacy of History in Russia and the New States of Eurasia (Armonk, NY and London, 1994), pp. 147-170.
13. Ibid. On the activities of the Ukrainian Cossacks and their links to political parties and the armed forces in Ukraine see Olexander Hryb, 'New Ukrainian Cossacks - Revival or Building New Armed Forces?' Ukrainian Review, 46, 1, Spring 1999, pp. 44-53. For the role of the Cossack heritage in the Ukrainian national revival in the late 1980s and early 1990s see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Reemergence of the Ukrainian Nation and Cossack Mythology', Social Research, 58, 4, Winter 1991, pp. 845-864; Serhii Plokhy, 'Historical Debates and Territorial Claims: Cossack Mythology in the Russian-Ukrainian Border Dispute', in The Legacy of History in Russia and the New States of Eurasia (Armonk, NY and London, 1994), pp. 147-170.
14. Ibid. On the activities of the Ukrainian Cossacks and their links to political parties and the armed forces in Ukraine see Olexander Hryb, 'New Ukrainian Cossacks - Revival or Building New Armed Forces?' Ukrainian Review, 46, 1, Spring 1999, pp. 44-53. For the role of the Cossack heritage in the Ukrainian national revival in the late 1980s and early 1990s see Frank E. Sysyn, 'The Reemergence of the Ukrainian Nation and Cossack Mythology', Social Research, 58, 4, Winter 1991, pp. 845-864; Serhii Plokhy, 'Historical Debates and Territorial Claims: Cossack Mythology in the Russian-Ukrainian Border Dispute', in The Legacy of History in Russia and the New States of Eurasia (Armonk, NY and London, 1994), pp. 147-170.
15. On the historiographical debates over the significance of the Pereyaslav Agreement see John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654: A Historiographical Study (Edmonton, 1982). On differences between Russian and Ukrainian historians in the interpretation of Ukrainian history see Stephen Velychenko, National History as Cultural Process: A Survey of the Interpretations of Ukraine's Past in Polish, Russian and Ukrainian Historical Writing from the Earliest Times to 1914 (Edmonton, 1992); Stephen Velychenko, Shaping Identity in Eastern Europe and Russia: Soviet-Russian and Polish Accounts of Ukrainian History, 1914-1991 (New York, 1993).
16. On the historiographical debates over the significance of the Pereyaslav Agreement see John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654: A Historiographical Study (Edmonton, 1982). On differences between Russian and Ukrainian historians in the interpretation of Ukrainian history see Stephen Velychenko, National History as Cultural Process: A Survey of the Interpretations of Ukraine's Past in Polish, Russian and Ukrainian Historical Writing from the Earliest Times to 1914 (Edmonton, 1992); Stephen Velychenko, Shaping Identity in Eastern Europe and Russia: Soviet-Russian and Polish Accounts of Ukrainian History, 1914-1991 (New York, 1993).
17. On the historiographical debates over the significance of the Pereyaslav Agreement see John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654: A Historiographical Study (Edmonton, 1982). On differences between Russian and Ukrainian historians in the interpretation of Ukrainian history see Stephen Velychenko, National History as Cultural Process: A Survey of the Interpretations of Ukraine's Past in Polish, Russian and Ukrainian Historical Writing from the Earliest Times to 1914 (Edmonton, 1992); Stephen Velychenko, Shaping Identity in Eastern Europe and Russia: Soviet-Russian and Polish Accounts of Ukrainian History, 1914-1991 (New York, 1993).
18. On the peculiarities of the nation-building project in Ukraine see Dominique Arel, 'Ukraine - The Temptation of the Nationalizing State', in Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed.), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, The International Politics of Eurasia, vol. 7 (Armonk, NY and London, 1995), pp. 157-188; Roman Szporluk, 'Nation-Building in Ukraine: Problems and Prospects', in J. W. Blaney (ed.), The Successor States to the USSR (Washington DC, 1995), pp. 173-183; and the relevant chapters in Alexander J. Motyl, Dilemmas of Independence: Ukraine after Totalitarianism (New York, 1993), and Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building.
19. On the peculiarities of the nation-building project in Ukraine see Dominique Arel, 'Ukraine - The Temptation of the Nationalizing State', in Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed.), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, The International Politics of Eurasia, vol. 7 (Armonk, NY and London, 1995), pp. 157-188; Roman Szporluk, 'Nation-Building in Ukraine: Problems and Prospects', in J. W. Blaney (ed.), The Successor States to the USSR (Washington DC, 1995), pp. 173-183; and the relevant chapters in Alexander J. Motyl, Dilemmas of Independence: Ukraine after Totalitarianism (New York, 1993), and Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building.
20. On the peculiarities of the nation-building project in Ukraine see Dominique Arel, 'Ukraine - The Temptation of the Nationalizing State', in Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed.), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, The International Politics of Eurasia, vol. 7 (Armonk, NY and London, 1995), pp. 157-188; Roman Szporluk, 'Nation-Building in Ukraine: Problems and Prospects', in J. W. Blaney (ed.), The Successor States to the USSR (Washington DC, 1995), pp. 173-183; and the relevant chapters in Alexander J. Motyl, Dilemmas of Independence: Ukraine after Totalitarianism (New York, 1993), and Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building.
21. On the peculiarities of the nation-building project in Ukraine see Dominique Arel, 'Ukraine - The Temptation of the Nationalizing State', in Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed.), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, The International Politics of Eurasia, vol. 7 (Armonk, NY and London, 1995), pp. 157-188; Roman Szporluk, 'Nation-Building in Ukraine: Problems and Prospects', in J. W. Blaney (ed.), The Successor States to the USSR (Washington DC, 1995), pp. 173-183; and the relevant chapters in Alexander J. Motyl, Dilemmas of Independence: Ukraine after Totalitarianism (New York, 1993), and Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building.
22. See the English translation of the 'Theses on the Three-Hundredth Anniversary of the Reunion of the Ukraine with Russia (1654-1954)' in Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 270-288 at p. 275.
23. In 1998, after prolonged discussion, the university was named for Oles Honchar, a prominent Ukrainian novelist and graduate of the university.
24. For Sanin's remarks see the recording of the BBC programme on Bohdan Khmelnytsky, 'Nash vybir', at «www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian».
25. See Lev Zaborovsky, 'Pereyaslavskaya rada i moskovskie soglasheniya 1654 goda: Problemy i issledovaniya', Rossiya-Ukraina: istoriya vzaimootnoshenii (Moscow, 1997), pp. 39-49 at p. 39.
26. Ibid., pp. 39, 45.
27. On Kulish's historical writings see Stephen Velychenko, National History as Cultural Process, pp. 167-172. For his literary biography see George Luckyj, Panteleimon Kulish: A Sketch of his Life and Times (Boulder, CO, 1983). For the reintroduction of the concept of 'reunification' into Russian émigré literature on the eve of World War II, in relation to Hitler's Anschluss with Austria, see Ivan L. Rudnytsky, 'Pereiaslav: History and Myth', in John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. xi-xxiii at pp. xx-xxi.
28. On Kulish's historical writings see Stephen Velychenko, National History as Cultural Process, pp. 167-172. For his literary biography see George Luckyj, Panteleimon Kulish: A Sketch of his Life and Times (Boulder, CO, 1983). For the reintroduction of the concept of 'reunification' into Russian émigré literature on the eve of World War II, in relation to Hitler's Anschluss with Austria, see Ivan L. Rudnytsky, 'Pereiaslav: History and Myth', in John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. xi-xxiii at pp. xx-xxi.
29. On Kulish's historical writings see Stephen Velychenko, National History as Cultural Process, pp. 167-172. For his literary biography see George Luckyj, Panteleimon Kulish: A Sketch of his Life and Times (Boulder, CO, 1983). For the reintroduction of the concept of 'reunification' into Russian émigré literature on the eve of World War II, in relation to Hitler's Anschluss with Austria, see Ivan L. Rudnytsky, 'Pereiaslav: History and Myth', in John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. xi-xxiii at pp. xx-xxi.
30. 1koho" ta "pol's'ku intryhu". Rosiis'ka nauka dolaye "amerykans'ki stereotypy shchodo Ukraïny" ', Den', 5 August 1997.
31. 1koho" ta "pol's'ku intryhu". Rosiis'ka nauka dolaye "amerykans'ki stereotypy shchodo Ukraïny" ', Den', 5 August 1997.
32. 1koho" ta "pol's'ku intryhu". Rosiis'ka nauka dolaye "amerykans'ki stereotypy shchodo Ukraïny" ', Den', 5 August 1997.
33. 1koho" ta "pol's'ku intryhu". Rosiis'ka nauka dolaye "amerykans'ki stereotypy shchodo Ukraïny" ', Den', 5 August 1997.
34. Ironically, Kostomarov's views on Khmelnytsky and the Pereyaslav Agreement were considered anti-Russian by 19th-century Russian historians. For Kostomarov's treatment of the Pereyaslav Agreement and a critique of Kostomarov by Gennadii Karpov, a student of Sergei Solov'ev, see John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 103-109. On Kostomarov's life see Thomas M. Prymak, Mykola Kostomarov: A Biography (Toronto, Buffalo and London, 1996).
35. Ironically, Kostomarov's views on Khmelnytsky and the Pereyaslav Agreement were considered anti-Russian by 19th-century Russian historians. For Kostomarov's treatment of the Pereyaslav Agreement and a critique of Kostomarov by Gennadii Karpov, a student of Sergei Solov'ev, see John Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 103-109. On Kostomarov's life see Thomas M. Prymak, Mykola Kostomarov: A Biography (Toronto, Buffalo and London, 1996).
36. For a political biography of Mykhailo Hrushevsky see Thomas M. Prymak, Mykhailo Hrushevsky: The Politics of National Culture (Toronto, 1987). On his historiographical views see Frank E. Sysyn, 'Introduction to the History of Ukraine-Rus', in Mykhailo Hrushevsky, History of Ukraine-Rus', vol. 1: From Prehistory to the Eleventh Century (Edmonton and Toronto, 1997), pp. xxi-xlii. For Hrushevsky's views on the history of the Ukrainian Cossacks see Serhii Plokhy, 'Revisiting the Golden Age: Mykhailo Hrushevsky and the Early History of the Ukrainian Cossacks', introduction to Mykhailo Hrushevsky, History of Ukraine-Rus', vol. 7: The Cossack Age to 1625 (Edmonton and Toronto, 1999), pp. xxvii-lii.
37. For a political biography of Mykhailo Hrushevsky see Thomas M. Prymak, Mykhailo Hrushevsky: The Politics of National Culture (Toronto, 1987). On his historiographical views see Frank E. Sysyn, 'Introduction to the History of Ukraine-Rus', in Mykhailo Hrushevsky, History of Ukraine-Rus', vol. 1: From Prehistory to the Eleventh Century (Edmonton and Toronto, 1997), pp. xxi-xlii. For Hrushevsky's views on the history of the Ukrainian Cossacks see Serhii Plokhy, 'Revisiting the Golden Age: Mykhailo Hrushevsky and the Early History of the Ukrainian Cossacks', introduction to Mykhailo Hrushevsky, History of Ukraine-Rus', vol. 7: The Cossack Age to 1625 (Edmonton and Toronto, 1999), pp. xxvii-lii.
38. For a political biography of Mykhailo Hrushevsky see Thomas M. Prymak, Mykhailo Hrushevsky: The Politics of National Culture (Toronto, 1987). On his historiographical views see Frank E. Sysyn, 'Introduction to the History of Ukraine-Rus', in Mykhailo Hrushevsky, History of Ukraine-Rus', vol. 1: From Prehistory to the Eleventh Century (Edmonton and Toronto, 1997), pp. xxi-xlii. For Hrushevsky's views on the history of the Ukrainian Cossacks see Serhii Plokhy, 'Revisiting the Golden Age: Mykhailo Hrushevsky and the Early History of the Ukrainian Cossacks', introduction to Mykhailo Hrushevsky, History of Ukraine-Rus', vol. 7: The Cossack Age to 1625 (Edmonton and Toronto, 1999), pp. xxvii-lii.
39. Samuilov, 'O nekotorykh amerikanskikh stereotipakh v otnoshenii Ukrainy', SShA: ekonomika, politika, ideologiya, 1997, 3, p. 93.
40. Ibid., 1997, 4, p. 93.
41. Ibid., 1997, 3, p. 95.
42. See the English translation of the 'Theses' in Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 270-288 at p. 275.
43. Samuilov, 'O nekotorykh amerikanskikh stereotipakh v otnoshenii Ukrainy', 1997, 4, p. 90.
44. On developments in Ukrainian historiography since independence see Orest Subtelny, 'The Current State of Ukrainian Historiography', Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 18, 1-2, Summer-Winter 1993, pp. 33-54; Mark von Hagen, 'Does Ukraine Have a History?' Slavic Review, 54, 3, Fall 1995, pp. 658-673 (with the following discussion of this article); and Zenon Kohut, 'Vidchytuvannya Het'manshchyny: Derzhavotvorchi derzhavoshukannya', Krytyka, 4, 6, June 2000, pp. 4-8 (forthcoming in the Journal of Ukrainian Studies). On the use of history in Russo-Ukrainian disputes see Andrew Wilson, 'The Donbas between Ukraine and Russia: The Use of History in Political Disputes', Journal of Contemporary History, 30, 2, April 1995, pp. 265-289.
45. On developments in Ukrainian historiography since independence see Orest Subtelny, 'The Current State of Ukrainian Historiography', Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 18, 1-2, Summer-Winter 1993, pp. 33-54; Mark von Hagen, 'Does Ukraine Have a History?' Slavic Review, 54, 3, Fall 1995, pp. 658-673 (with the following discussion of this article); and Zenon Kohut, 'Vidchytuvannya Het'manshchyny: Derzhavotvorchi derzhavoshukannya', Krytyka, 4, 6, June 2000, pp. 4-8 (forthcoming in the Journal of Ukrainian Studies). On the use of history in Russo-Ukrainian disputes see Andrew Wilson, 'The Donbas between Ukraine and Russia: The Use of History in Political Disputes', Journal of Contemporary History, 30, 2, April 1995, pp. 265-289.
46. On developments in Ukrainian historiography since independence see Orest Subtelny, 'The Current State of Ukrainian Historiography', Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 18, 1-2, Summer-Winter 1993, pp. 33-54; Mark von Hagen, 'Does Ukraine Have a History?' Slavic Review, 54, 3, Fall 1995, pp. 658-673 (with the following discussion of this article); and Zenon Kohut, 'Vidchytuvannya Het'manshchyny: Derzhavotvorchi derzhavoshukannya', Krytyka, 4, 6, June 2000, pp. 4-8 (forthcoming in the Journal of Ukrainian Studies). On the use of history in Russo-Ukrainian disputes see Andrew Wilson, 'The Donbas between Ukraine and Russia: The Use of History in Political Disputes', Journal of Contemporary History, 30, 2, April 1995, pp. 265-289.
47. On developments in Ukrainian historiography since independence see Orest Subtelny, 'The Current State of Ukrainian Historiography', Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 18, 1-2, Summer-Winter 1993, pp. 33-54; Mark von Hagen, 'Does Ukraine Have a History?' Slavic Review, 54, 3, Fall 1995, pp. 658-673 (with the following discussion of this article); and Zenon Kohut, 'Vidchytuvannya Het'manshchyny: Derzhavotvorchi derzhavoshukannya', Krytyka, 4, 6, June 2000, pp. 4-8 (forthcoming in the Journal of Ukrainian Studies). On the use of history in Russo-Ukrainian disputes see Andrew Wilson, 'The Donbas between Ukraine and Russia: The Use of History in Political Disputes', Journal of Contemporary History, 30, 2, April 1995, pp. 265-289.
48. On developments in Ukrainian historiography since independence see Orest Subtelny, 'The Current State of Ukrainian Historiography', Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 18, 1-2, Summer-Winter 1993, pp. 33-54; Mark von Hagen, 'Does Ukraine Have a History?' Slavic Review, 54, 3, Fall 1995, pp. 658-673 (with the following discussion of this article); and Zenon Kohut, 'Vidchytuvannya Het'manshchyny: Derzhavotvorchi derzhavoshukannya', Krytyka, 4, 6, June 2000, pp. 4-8 (forthcoming in the Journal of Ukrainian Studies). On the use of history in Russo-Ukrainian disputes see Andrew Wilson, 'The Donbas between Ukraine and Russia: The Use of History in Political Disputes', Journal of Contemporary History, 30, 2, April 1995, pp. 265-289.
49. See Yurii Mytsyk, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu 1648-1658 rr. (Pidsumky, problemy i perspektyvy doslidzhennya)', in Bytva pid Korsunem i natsional 'no-vyzvol'na viina seredyny XVII stolittya (Korsun'-Shevchenkivs'kyi, 1998), pp. 27-59 at pp. 34-35. Mytsyk also mentions the case of 'Kornilovshchina', but one could add to this list the official names given to all sorts of 'nationalist' deviations in the ranks of the Ukrainian Communist Party, such as Volobuevshchyna, Skrypnykivshchyna, Yavorshchyna and Shelestivshchyna. In contemporary Ukraine all these terms have a strong negative connotation.
50. See the records of the discussion among Ukrainian Marxist historians on Matvii Yavorsky's conception of Ukrainian history in Litopys revolyutsiï, 1930, 3-4, pp. 213-218; 1930, 5, pp. 295-297, 317-319, 322-323, and Volodymyr Sukhyno-Khomenko, 'Na marksysts'komu istorychnomu fronti', Bil'shovyk Ukraïny, 1929, 17-18, pp. 47-51.
51. See the records of the discussion among Ukrainian Marxist historians on Matvii Yavorsky's conception of Ukrainian history in Litopys revolyutsiï, 1930, 3-4, pp. 213-218; 1930, 5, pp. 295-297, 317-319, 322-323, and Volodymyr Sukhyno-Khomenko, 'Na marksysts'komu istorychnomu fronti', Bil'shovyk Ukraïny, 1929, 17-18, pp. 47-51.
52. See the records of the discussion among Ukrainian Marxist historians on Matvii Yavorsky's conception of Ukrainian history in Litopys revolyutsiï, 1930, 3-4, pp. 213-218; 1930, 5, pp. 295-297, 317-319, 322-323, and Volodymyr Sukhyno-Khomenko, 'Na marksysts'komu istorychnomu fronti', Bil'shovyk Ukraïny, 1929, 17-18, pp. 47-51.
53. See the English translation of the 'Theses' in Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, p. 273.
54. Reprinted in Petro Tolochko, Vid Rusi do Ukraïny: Vybrani naukovo-populyarni, krytychni ta publitsystychni pratsi (Kyiv, 1997), pp. 292-297 at p. 296.
55. Among Khmelnytsky's mistakes, Smolii listed the withdrawal of Cossack forces from western Ukraine in late 1648 and the deterioration of Cossack relations with Moldavia, Wallachia and Transylvania in 1654-55. See Valerii Smolii, 'Het'man Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi i ioho doba', in Doba Bohdana Khmel'nyts'koho (Do 400-richchia vid dnya narodzhennya velykoho het'mana): zbirnyk naukovykh prats' (Kyiv, 1995), pp. 7-25 at p. 15.
56. Instead, making reference to the writings of a Ukrainian nationalist ideologue, the interwar publicist Dmytro Dontsov, Smolii claims that Ukraine did not unite with Russia into a single state but instead joined a Russo-Ukrainian confederation. See Smolii, 'Het'man Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi i ioho doba', pp. 21-22; Valerii Smolii, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina v konteksti ukraïns'koho derzhavotvorennya', in Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu seredyny XVII stolittya: polityka, ideolohiya, viis'kove mystetstvo (Kyiv, 1998), pp. 9-25 at pp. 18-19.
57. Instead, making reference to the writings of a Ukrainian nationalist ideologue, the interwar publicist Dmytro Dontsov, Smolii claims that Ukraine did not unite with Russia into a single state but instead joined a Russo-Ukrainian confederation. See Smolii, 'Het'man Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi i ioho doba', pp. 21-22; Valerii Smolii, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina v konteksti ukraïns'koho derzhavotvorennya', in Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu seredyny XVII stolittya: polityka, ideolohiya, viis'kove mystetstvo (Kyiv, 1998), pp. 9-25 at pp. 18-19.
58. See Roman Solchanyk, 'Politics and the National Question in the Post-Shelest Period', in Bohdan Krawchenko (ed.), Ukraine after Shelest (Edmonton, 1983), pp. 1-29 at p. 12. For a summary and analysis of Braichevsky's views on the 'reunification' issue see Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 202-213. For the Ukrainian and English texts of Braichevsky's essay see Mykhailo Braichevs'kyi, Pryyednannya chy vozz" yednannya? (Toronto, 1972); Mykhailo Braichevsky, Annexation or Reunification: Critical Notes on One Conception, translated and edited by George P. Kulchycky (Munich, 1974).
59. See Roman Solchanyk, 'Politics and the National Question in the Post-Shelest Period', in Bohdan Krawchenko (ed.), Ukraine after Shelest (Edmonton, 1983), pp. 1-29 at p. 12. For a summary and analysis of Braichevsky's views on the 'reunification' issue see Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 202-213. For the Ukrainian and English texts of Braichevsky's essay see Mykhailo Braichevs'kyi, Pryyednannya chy vozz" yednannya? (Toronto, 1972); Mykhailo Braichevsky, Annexation or Reunification: Critical Notes on One Conception, translated and edited by George P. Kulchycky (Munich, 1974).
60. See Roman Solchanyk, 'Politics and the National Question in the Post-Shelest Period', in Bohdan Krawchenko (ed.), Ukraine after Shelest (Edmonton, 1983), pp. 1-29 at p. 12. For a summary and analysis of Braichevsky's views on the 'reunification' issue see Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 202-213. For the Ukrainian and English texts of Braichevsky's essay see Mykhailo Braichevs'kyi, Pryyednannya chy vozz" yednannya? (Toronto, 1972); Mykhailo Braichevsky, Annexation or Reunification: Critical Notes on One Conception, translated and edited by George P. Kulchycky (Munich, 1974).
61. See Roman Solchanyk, 'Politics and the National Question in the Post-Shelest Period', in Bohdan Krawchenko (ed.), Ukraine after Shelest (Edmonton, 1983), pp. 1-29 at p. 12. For a summary and analysis of Braichevsky's views on the 'reunification' issue see Basarab, Pereiaslav 1654, pp. 202-213. For the Ukrainian and English texts of Braichevsky's essay see Mykhailo Braichevs'kyi, Pryyednannya chy vozz" yednannya? (Toronto, 1972); Mykhailo Braichevsky, Annexation or Reunification: Critical Notes on One Conception, translated and edited by George P. Kulchycky (Munich, 1974).
62. The term was not officially accepted at that time, but clearly remained attractive in the eyes of leading Ukrainian historians. For the 1960s discussion see Olena Apanovych, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'ni viiny v epokhu feodalizmu', Ukraïns'kyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 1965, 12, pp. 29-38; Ivan Boiko, 'Shche raz pro kharakter natsional'no-vyzvol'nykh voyen v epokhu feodalizmu', Ukraïns'kyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 1966, 2, pp. 84-87.
63. The term was not officially accepted at that time, but clearly remained attractive in the eyes of leading Ukrainian historians. For the 1960s discussion see Olena Apanovych, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'ni viiny v epokhu feodalizmu', Ukraïns'kyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 1965, 12, pp. 29-38; Ivan Boiko, 'Shche raz pro kharakter natsional'no-vyzvol'nykh voyen v epokhu feodalizmu', Ukraïns'kyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 1966, 2, pp. 84-87.
64. See Valerii Smolii & Valerii Stepankov, Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st. (1648-1676) (Kyiv, 1999). On the use of outdated Soviet terminology and concepts by Smolii and Stepankov see Natalya Yakovenko's review of the book, 'V kol'orakh proletars'koï revolyutsiï', in Ukraïns 'kyi humanitarnyi ohlyad, 2000, 3, pp. 58-78. For a discussion of the term 'revolution' in relation to the Khmelnytsky Uprising see Frank E. Sysyn, 'War der Chmel'nyćkyj-Aufstand eine Revolution? Eine Charakteristik der 'grossen ukrainischen Revolte' und der Bildung des Kosakischen Het'manstaates', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 43, 1, 1995, pp. 1-18 (Ukrainian version: 'Chy bulo povstannya Bohdana Khmel'nyts'koho revolyutsieyu? Zauvahy do typolohiï Khmel'nychchyny', in Bohdan Yakymovych et al. (eds), Prosphonema: Istorychni ta filolohichni rozvidky, prysvyacheni 60-richchyu akademika Yaroslava Isaevycha (Lviv, 1998), pp. 571-578.
65. See Valerii Smolii & Valerii Stepankov, Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st. (1648-1676) (Kyiv, 1999). On the use of outdated Soviet terminology and concepts by Smolii and Stepankov see Natalya Yakovenko's review of the book, 'V kol'orakh proletars'koï revolyutsiï', in Ukraïns 'kyi humanitarnyi ohlyad, 2000, 3, pp. 58-78. For a discussion of the term 'revolution' in relation to the Khmelnytsky Uprising see Frank E. Sysyn, 'War der Chmel'nyćkyj-Aufstand eine Revolution? Eine Charakteristik der 'grossen ukrainischen Revolte' und der Bildung des Kosakischen Het'manstaates', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 43, 1, 1995, pp. 1-18 (Ukrainian version: 'Chy bulo povstannya Bohdana Khmel'nyts'koho revolyutsieyu? Zauvahy do typolohiï Khmel'nychchyny', in Bohdan Yakymovych et al. (eds), Prosphonema: Istorychni ta filolohichni rozvidky, prysvyacheni 60-richchyu akademika Yaroslava Isaevycha (Lviv, 1998), pp. 571-578.
66. See Valerii Smolii & Valerii Stepankov, Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st. (1648-1676) (Kyiv, 1999). On the use of outdated Soviet terminology and concepts by Smolii and Stepankov see Natalya Yakovenko's review of the book, 'V kol'orakh proletars'koï revolyutsiï', in Ukraïns 'kyi humanitarnyi ohlyad, 2000, 3, pp. 58-78. For a discussion of the term 'revolution' in relation to the Khmelnytsky Uprising see Frank E. Sysyn, 'War der Chmel'nyćkyj-Aufstand eine Revolution? Eine Charakteristik der 'grossen ukrainischen Revolte' und der Bildung des Kosakischen Het'manstaates', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 43, 1, 1995, pp. 1-18 (Ukrainian version: 'Chy bulo povstannya Bohdana Khmel'nyts'koho revolyutsieyu? Zauvahy do typolohiï Khmel'nychchyny', in Bohdan Yakymovych et al. (eds), Prosphonema: Istorychni ta filolohichni rozvidky, prysvyacheni 60-richchyu akademika Yaroslava Isaevycha (Lviv, 1998), pp. 571-578.
67. See Valerii Smolii & Valerii Stepankov, Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st. (1648-1676) (Kyiv, 1999). On the use of outdated Soviet terminology and concepts by Smolii and Stepankov see Natalya Yakovenko's review of the book, 'V kol'orakh proletars'koï revolyutsiï', in Ukraïns 'kyi humanitarnyi ohlyad, 2000, 3, pp. 58-78. For a discussion of the term 'revolution' in relation to the Khmelnytsky Uprising see Frank E. Sysyn, 'War der Chmel'nyćkyj-Aufstand eine Revolution? Eine Charakteristik der 'grossen ukrainischen Revolte' und der Bildung des Kosakischen Het'manstaates', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 43, 1, 1995, pp. 1-18 (Ukrainian version: 'Chy bulo povstannya Bohdana Khmel'nyts'koho revolyutsieyu? Zauvahy do typolohiï Khmel'nychchyny', in Bohdan Yakymovych et al. (eds), Prosphonema: Istorychni ta filolohichni rozvidky, prysvyacheni 60-richchyu akademika Yaroslava Isaevycha (Lviv, 1998), pp. 571-578.
68. For the latest version of Stepankov's argument on issues of terminology and chronology in the 'Ukrainian national revolution' see his 'Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st.: prychyny, typolohiya, khronolohichni mezhi (dyskusiini notatky)', in Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu seredyny XVII stolittya, pp. 26-45. See Sukhyno-Khomenko's remarks in the discussion of 1929 with Yavorsky in Litopys revolyutsiï, 1930, 5, pp. 322-323, and the chapter on 'The Great Ukrainian Bourgeois Revolution' in Sukhyno-Khomenko, Odminy i bankrutstvo ukraïns'koho natsionalizmu: istoryko-publitsystychni narysy (Kharkiv, 1929), pp. 28-51.
69. For the latest version of Stepankov's argument on issues of terminology and chronology in the 'Ukrainian national revolution' see his 'Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st.: prychyny, typolohiya, khronolohichni mezhi (dyskusiini notatky)', in Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu seredyny XVII stolittya, pp. 26-45. See Sukhyno-Khomenko's remarks in the discussion of 1929 with Yavorsky in Litopys revolyutsiï, 1930, 5, pp. 322-323, and the chapter on 'The Great Ukrainian Bourgeois Revolution' in Sukhyno-Khomenko, Odminy i bankrutstvo ukraïns'koho natsionalizmu: istoryko-publitsystychni narysy (Kharkiv, 1929), pp. 28-51.
70. For the latest version of Stepankov's argument on issues of terminology and chronology in the 'Ukrainian national revolution' see his 'Ukraïns'ka natsional'na revolyutsiya XVII st.: prychyny, typolohiya, khronolohichni mezhi (dyskusiini notatky)', in Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu seredyny XVII stolittya, pp. 26-45. See Sukhyno-Khomenko's remarks in the discussion of 1929 with Yavorsky in Litopys revolyutsiï, 1930, 5, pp. 322-323, and the chapter on 'The Great Ukrainian Bourgeois Revolution' in Sukhyno-Khomenko, Odminy i bankrutstvo ukraïns'koho natsionalizmu: istoryko-publitsystychni narysy (Kharkiv, 1929), pp. 28-51.
71. See Mytsyk, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu 1648-1658 rr.', pp. 30-31.
72. For the use of the term 'war of national liberation' in Tolochko's writings see his 'Pid mistechkom Berestechkom' (1991) and 'Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi' (1995) in his, Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 147-150. A prominent historian of Kyivan Rus' and a well-known political figure, Tolochko remains a strong supporter of independent Ukrainian statehood, but was 'lost' by the dominant Ukrainian elites at the 'nationalisation' stage of the Ukrainian state-building project. Since 1995 he has challenged many aspects of the 'nationalisation' of Ukrainian cultural life and historiography, becoming a villain in the eyes of the Ukrainian historical establishment. For his 'rebellious' ideas see his articles and interviews of 1995-97, including 'Imeet li Ukraina natsional'nuyu ideyu?' 'Shche raz pro ukraïns'ku natsional'nu ideyu', and 'Inakomyslyashchii Tolochko', in Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 334-395.
73. For the use of the term 'war of national liberation' in Tolochko's writings see his 'Pid mistechkom Berestechkom' (1991) and 'Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi' (1995) in his, Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 147-150. A prominent historian of Kyivan Rus' and a well-known political figure, Tolochko remains a strong supporter of independent Ukrainian statehood, but was 'lost' by the dominant Ukrainian elites at the 'nationalisation' stage of the Ukrainian state-building project. Since 1995 he has challenged many aspects of the 'nationalisation' of Ukrainian cultural life and historiography, becoming a villain in the eyes of the Ukrainian historical establishment. For his 'rebellious' ideas see his articles and interviews of 1995-97, including 'Imeet li Ukraina natsional'nuyu ideyu?' 'Shche raz pro ukraïns'ku natsional'nu ideyu', and 'Inakomyslyashchii Tolochko', in Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 334-395.
74. For the use of the term 'war of national liberation' in Tolochko's writings see his 'Pid mistechkom Berestechkom' (1991) and 'Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi' (1995) in his, Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 147-150. A prominent historian of Kyivan Rus' and a well-known political figure, Tolochko remains a strong supporter of independent Ukrainian statehood, but was 'lost' by the dominant Ukrainian elites at the 'nationalisation' stage of the Ukrainian state-building project. Since 1995 he has challenged many aspects of the 'nationalisation' of Ukrainian cultural life and historiography, becoming a villain in the eyes of the Ukrainian historical establishment. For his 'rebellious' ideas see his articles and interviews of 1995-97, including 'Imeet li Ukraina natsional'nuyu ideyu?' 'Shche raz pro ukraïns'ku natsional'nu ideyu', and 'Inakomyslyashchii Tolochko', in Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 334-395.
75. See Valerii Smolii, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina v konteksti ukraïns'koho derzhavotvorennya', in Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu, p. 10.
76. For a portrayal of Khmelnytsky as a state builder first and foremost see, apart from works by Smolii, Stepankov and Mytsyk, the text of the speech delivered by Petro Tolochko at one of the events commemorating the four hundredth anniversary of Khmelnytsky's birth, 'Bohdan Khmel'nyts'kyi', in Tolochko, Vid Rusi do Ukraïny, pp. 147-150.
77. See Smolii, 'Natsional'no-vyzvolna viina v konteksti ukraïns'koho derzhavotvorennya', p. 10.
78. The statist approach to the definition of the main goals of the Khmelnytsky Uprising in Ukrainian historiography was criticised by Russian historians at a scholarly conference held in Moscow in January 1995 to commemorate the 340th anniversary of the Pereyaslav Council. See Lev Zaborovsky, 'Rossiisko-ukrainskaya konferentsiya, posvyashchennaya 340-letiyu Pereyaslavskoi rady', Otechestvennaya istoriya, 1995, 5, pp. 217.
79. For the use of this term in Ukrainian historiography see Mytsyk, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu 1648-1658 rr.', p. 30. Cf. Valerii Smolii & Valerii Stepankov, Ukraïns'ka derzhavna ideya: problemy formuvannya, evolyutsiï, realizatsiï (Kyiv, 1997), p. 84.
80. For the use of this term in Ukrainian historiography see Mytsyk, 'Natsional'no-vyzvol'na viina ukraïns'koho narodu 1648-1658 rr.', p. 30. Cf. Valerii Smolii & Valerii Stepankov, Ukraïns'ka derzhavna ideya: problemy formuvannya, evolyutsiï, realizatsiï (Kyiv, 1997), p. 84.
81. Apparently, the same logic underlay the views of Ukrainian autonomists in the second half of the 18th century. One of them, the Cossack secretary Semen Divovych, represented the Russo-Ukrainian arrangement as a union of two equal partners, Great and Little Russia, under a common tsar. For a discussion of Divovych's views on the Pereyaslav Agreement see Rudnytsky, 'Pereiaslav: History and Myth', p. xvi. For a critique of the view of the Pereyaslav Agreement as an act of confederation see Philip Longworth, 'Ukraine: History and Nationality', Slavonic and East European Review, 78, 1, January 2000, pp. 115-124 at p. 117.
82. Apparently, the same logic underlay the views of Ukrainian autonomists in the second half of the 18th century. One of them, the Cossack secretary Semen Divovych, represented the Russo-Ukrainian arrangement as a union of two equal partners, Great and Little Russia, under a common tsar. For a discussion of Divovych's views on the Pereyaslav Agreement see Rudnytsky, 'Pereiaslav: History and Myth', p. xvi. For a critique of the view of the Pereyaslav Agreement as an act of confederation see Philip Longworth, 'Ukraine: History and Nationality', Slavonic and East European Review, 78, 1, January 2000, pp. 115-124 at p. 117.
83. See Viktor Zamyatin, 'Pereyaslavs'ka rada 2: Yakymy povynni buty ukraïns'ko-rosiis'ki vzayemyny?' Den', 19 January 1999.
84. Ibid.
85. Ibid.
86. According to Horobets, at the time of Pereyaslav Muscovy's boyar regime could not overcome the desire to dictate its will to Ukraine. He expressed his hope that democratic Moscow would prove more far-sighted in this regard. See Viktor Horobets', 'Ukraïns'ko-rosiis'kyi dohovir: vid ratyfikatsiï do denonsatsiï', Den', 27 March 1999.
87. See Valentyn Mohyla, 'Istoriya ne povynna staty "korolivstvom kryvykh dzerkal" ', Den', 24 April 1999.
88. See Serhii Makhun, 'Yak rozirvaty kolo vzayemnoho rakhunku obraz?', Den', 25 December 1999.
89. Anatol Lieven, Ukraine and Russia: A Fraternal Rivalry (Washington DC, 1999), pp. 89-90.