Yuriy M. F., Alexievets L. M., Kalakura Ya. S., Udod O. A. Ukraine of the oldest time-XVIII century: civilizational context of Cognition. - Ternopil: Aston, 2012. - Book I.-700 P.
The radical changes that the methodology of Ukrainian historiography has undergone since the independence of Ukraine include an increasingly noticeable transition from a formative to a civilizational interpretation of the historical process. This approach allows us to create a more holistic knowledge of the history of Ukraine as a component of European and world civilization, to focus not so much on socio-economic and political aspects, but on cultural and spiritual values. The research team consists of Yu. V. Pavlenko 1, M. E. Gorelov, A. P. Motsi, A. A. Rafalsky 2, V. E. Goncharevsky 3, and others. the first book of the large project "Ukraine: the Civilizational context of Cognition" by M. F. Yuriy, L. M. Alexievets, Y. S. Kalakura and A. A. Udod was published, which covers an extremely wide chronological layer of Ukrainian history-from the earliest times to the XVIII century inclusive. The authors set themselves a rather ambitious goal: to systematically and comprehensively describe the origins, origin and most important stages of the cognitive activity of the Ukrainian people in the context of a civilizational understanding of their ethnogenesis, the formation of the Ukrainian nation, the struggle for freedom, independence and their own state. The emphasis is placed on clarifying the place and role of culture and spirituality in the history of Ukraine and the world as a key component of the civilizational understanding of the historical process, the uniqueness of Ukrainian civilization due to the crosshairs of East and West. Realizing this goal, they drew on a wide range of concrete historical and historiographical sources, modern research methods, and suggested an original structure of the work. The book has a summative and systematic character, it is prepared as an interdisciplinary study aimed at integrating the latest achievements not only of historians, but also of ethnologists, cultural scientists, sociologists, psychologists, lawyers, philologists, etc. The research is based on the problem-chronological principle with an emphasis on the phenomenon of independent civilization of the Ukrainian people, their culture and spirituality against the background of world and Eastern European civilization.
Pavlenko Yu. In 1. History of the world: civilizational and socio-cultural development of mankind. 3rd ed., stereot. - K., 2001. - 360 p.
Gorelov M. E., Motsa A. P., Rafalsky A. A. 2 civilizational history of Ukraine. - K., 2005. - 632 P.; Their. Gosudarstvo i tsivilizatsiya v istorii Ukrainy [State and Civilization in the history of Ukraine].
Goncharevsky V. E. 3. Civilizational approach to history: modern Ukrainian experience (1991-2009). - K., 2011. - 219 p.
The epilogue of the work, in addition to the introduction, is the first section "The Ukrainian studies dimension of culture and the socio-cultural picture of the world", which sets out the methodological foundations of the study of the Ukrainian and world historical process on the basis of a civilizational approach. The authors considered in sufficient detail the essence and specifics of not only the formational and civilizational varieties of understanding history, but also others, in particular the synergetic one, convincingly showed the limited possibilities of the formational approach with its class interpretation of the historical process and proved the advantages of the civilizational one, which provides a holistic perception of world and national history, primarily the multidimensional nature of its socio-cultural and spiritual content. At the same time, the authors do not idealize, but rather question the universality of the civilizational interpretation of history, and advocate the synthesis of the theory of progress and cyclicity with the theory of local civilizations and mentalities. The author convincingly argues the concept of the socio-cultural dimension of history, according to which culture is the greatest wealth of man and humanity, and acts as an organized experience of the entire previous history. From this point of view, the cultural picture of the world and the place of Ukraine in it are depicted. The world picture is a map-diagram of the life space and time of a person and humanity, its evolution, which integrates all known images and concepts into a single system image, dynamically changing and enriching. Regarding the worldview of Ukraine as a state, ethnic and political community, scientists distinguish such components as: theoretical and applied problems of cultural and anthropological, ethnological, and ethnopsychological development of the Ukrainian ethnos; axiological foundations; historical memory and its conscious dimensions; ethnic identity; language phenomenon in the ethno-political field; spiritual potential of Ukrainians; current state of the titular state. ethnos, its resources (p. 67). They express concern that some political forces are trying to establish an "all-Russian" picture in Ukraine, to consolidate the provincial status of Ukrainian history and the periphery of the Ukrainian language.
The historiosophical vision and dialectic of knowledge in the context of the history of culture, civilization and the state are described in the second chapter. A comparative comparison of the phenomena of culture and civilization is noteworthy (pp. 87-89), which results in the conclusion about the cultural and civilizational interaction of life and consciousness of Ukrainians, the need to form the ethno-national, socio-cultural, and geopolitical integrity of Ukraine as a state, territory, and people, overcome modernization contradictions, and adapt to European values.
Analyzing the historical past of Ukraine, scientists sought to identify its civilizational affiliation, its own identity, to reveal the features of the transition from one civilization to another. At the same time, attention is drawn to the splits within the body of the Ukrainian people and its consequences for social relations, in culture, religion, in the content of reproductive activities, lifestyle, personal culture, and so on. We are talking about the consequences of the split of Christianity into Catholicism and Orthodoxy for Ukraine, the collapse of the Kievan state, the division of Cossack Ukraine under the Andrusovsky Truce, the process of forcible separation of Ukraine from Europe, starting from the time of Peter I, the division of Ukrainian lands
between the Russian and Austro-Hungarian Empires. The authors did not ignore the problem of the land area of Ukraine between East and West and the formation of peripheral cultures, traces of which can be clearly traced today. The study convincingly proves that from a civilizational perspective, Ukraine belongs to the Christian world, to the European whole, and this determines its choice of European integration today.
A significant place in the work is occupied by the problems of historical memory and consciousness of the Ukrainian people (section 3). In this connection, the features of the mythological thinking of Ukrainians and their ancestors, the ratio of religious and secular myths, the unconscious and archetypes, the interaction of creation and hero myths are considered. The authors have identified the most characteristic features of mythological thinking, using concrete examples to show its formal-logical-figurative, symbolic, metaphorical coloring with sprouts of scientific explanation of the world, with manifestations of paradigmatism and cognitivism, with elements of reality (pp. 145-146). Based on the analysis of proto-Ukrainian legends, myths, fairy tales, epics, their comparison with the works of other peoples, the origins and development of the consciousness of the Ukrainian ethnic group are modeled, which are entirely written in the stages of the formation of the consciousness of Europeans.
Of great interest is the fourth section devoted to elucidating the essence and characteristics of traditional society and the traditional picture of the world. It is noted that the history of mankind appears as a chain of traditions that are inherited and passed down from generation to generation and form the basis of its progress. They are reproduced in the historical consciousness and contribute to the establishment of the identity of society, its cultural difference from "others". Knowledge of traditions is the key to understanding traditional society as a social system and human life environment, and therefore traditional culture and consciousness, which combine the concepts of truth and truth, reality and authenticity. According to the chronological dimension of human history, traditional society occupies the largest period of time, in which three historical epochs are distinguished: primitive communality, slavery and the Middle Ages. With the split of the primitive communal system, the nature of traditionalism takes on a fundamentally different character, it is intertwined with contradictions and diversity. In turn, slavery and feudalism bring to life new forms of social regulation and translation of social experience: the state, the division of labor, the emergence and development of writing, the institutionalization of education, science, and art (pp. 256-257).
Starting from the characteristics of traditional society and traditional culture, the authors paid close attention to the analysis of the sacred and mental as a priority feature and phenomenon of Old Russian (read - Old Ukrainian) culture. Initiation rituals, rites of passage (initiation), initiations, calendar rites, and sacrifices are considered as a sacred aspect of the magical actions of proto-Ukrainians.
A distinctive feature of the peer-reviewed study is the sharpened attention to the problem of the socio-cultural dimension of the Ukrainian state. We are talking about the paradigm of historical conditionality of statehood in general and Ukrainian in particular, about finding out the origins of the Kiev-Russian state, its identity and Christianization,
the role of the Byzantine heritage in state-forming processes, etc. (section 6). Scientists did not avoid such a counterversion problem as "Russia and the Mongols", questioning the "feudal fragmentation" of Russia as the main reason for the defeat. The victory was due to the fact that the material and spiritual potential of a relatively small people turned into a military force, with the help of which the conquered countries of virtually all of Asia, their population, weapons and military art were set to realize the goal of conquest. The intervention of the Mongol factor complicated the situation in Russia, negatively affected the political, socio-economic and cultural development, the future fate of the principalities, and led to the formation of two centers: Vladimir-Suzdal and Galician-Volyn. Then there was a civilizational split between North-Eastern Russia,the center of the future Moscow state with all the attributes of eastern despotism, and South-Western Russia, the heir to the Kievan state and spiritual tradition, focused on those peoples, states and cultures that were on the threshold of forming a liberal civilization (p.473).
Perhaps the most interesting view is the place of Ukraine in the inter-civilizational space of the post-Renaissance era. Obviously for the first time in Ukrainian historiography (sec. 7) memorialization of the historical and socio-cultural trauma of the Ukrainian people received in the conditions of the Polish-Lithuanian conquest is considered. On the one hand, the causes and essence of the crisis of Ukrainian ethnic identity and its marginalization are comprehensively analyzed, and on the other hand, the process of preserving and resurrecting ethnic traditions, the civilizational identity of Ukrainians, the identity of their culture, the formation of the language picture of the world of the Ukrainian people and the formation of the Ukrainian nation is shown. A common thread is the "memorial paradigm" of historical and social (collective) memory, their interaction with cultural and professional historiography. At the same time, it is noted that post-modern criticism has significantly shaken the boundaries between historical science and cultural memory, the latter is interpreted as a form of translation and actualization of cultural contents. Cultural memory is the foundation on which the identity of an ethnic group, nation, and their stable existence in time and space is based. At the same time, it helped to overcome the crises of Ukrainian identity, in particular after the Polish-Lithuanian conquest, when, it would seem, an ethnic catastrophe of Ukrainism could occur, but this critical situation stimulated the motivational processes of survival of the Ukrainian people and their culture under the influence of the Renaissance and Reformation. In this regard, the authors ' view on the consequences of the Union of Lublin in 1569 is somewhat new. Despite its negatives, a favorable situation has emerged for the establishment of Ukrainian identity, since almost all the ethnic lands of the Ukrainian people were in a single political body, as part of one state, which at that time was quite culturally and civilizationally developed, the Crown of Poland. The main factors of civilizational identity of Ukrainians, such as their awareness of their identity and "differences from others", are: kinship of cultural traditions and views on a common origin and history; cognitive and emotional understanding of their community, uniqueness, belonging to a certain type of civilization; the presence of a single language, territorial and cultural-social borders (p. 542).
Socio-cultural, national-state and religious processes in the Cossack Ukraine of the XVI-XVIII centuries received a large share in the study. (Sec. 8). At the epicenter of the division-the emergence of the Cossacks as the boundary genotype of the Ukrainian people, a unique cultural and social phenomenon and the phenomenon of chivalry in European history. United in the Sich and calling themselves "society", the Cossacks emphasized the continuity of the traditions of princely times and European chivalry. At the same time, they developed their own model of knighthood, free organization of the army, republican structure and democratic principles of state life. The Ukrainian Cossacks represented the European ideas of freedom, equality and justice with the ancient Ukrainian understanding of the will. The authors agree with the opinion of D. I. Doroshenko that thanks to the Cossacks, the Ukrainian-Cossack identity began to be established as the basis of the modern Ukrainian nation (p. 608).
The liberation war of the Ukrainian people under the leadership of Bohdan Khmelnitsky is considered in the context of the reformation vector of the Thirty Years ' War. The article thoroughly analyzes the fate of the Ukrainian identity, which was under the pressure of political manipulations of Moscow and Warsaw and inter-confessional confrontation. Nevertheless, Ukraine, being part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for a long time, was somehow drawn into the Western European superethnos and, accordingly, it underwent the same changes in socio-cultural life as in the West (p.611). However, as a result of the Pereyaslav Agreements of 1654 and 1659, the implementation of geopolitical plans and the cynical policy of expansion of the Russian Empire at the end of the XVII-XVIII centuries, the process of marginalization and acculturation of Ukrainian society deepened, which did not bypass the fate of the Russian ethnic group.
Special attention should be paid to the author's approaches to the liberation war of the Ukrainian people in the context of the consequences of the Lublin 1569 and Beresteya 1596 massacres, the analysis of its causes, motives, essence and consequences for the socio-cultural split of Ukraine. Researchers see the roots of the Beresteya Union not so much in the plane of confrontation between Orthodox and Catholics, the relationship of Orthodox Russia with the Latin West, but in the general processes generated by the era of the Reformation, Counter-Reformation and Renaissance, as well as the spread of Protestant ideas. We can agree with the opinion that the Union was such a significant event that it cannot be assessed on a bipolar scale: "good-bad" (p. 653). The Counter-Reformation destroyed the principle of religious tolerance, did not allow the formation of a Protestant national church. The Polish state, led by Sigismund III, in response to Moscow's geopolitical strategy of creating an Orthodox world, set a course for the formation of a national church, which escalated the inter-confessional confrontation. The Beresteya Union was supposed to soften the confrontation on religious grounds, establish a "balance" between Catholics and Orthodox. However, the interference of politicians and state structures in the affairs of the church has led to an escalation of religious conflicts. The Cossacks also joined the anti-Union movement, since the mass consciousness did not distinguish "Lyakh Catholics" from Eastern Rite Catholics. The struggle of the Cossacks for the "Russian" faith was fueled by the Orthodox clergy and acquired the character of an interethnic confrontation between "Russians"and"Lyakhs". Patriarch of Moscow
Nikon called on Alexey Mikhailovich to expand the borders of the Orthodox kingdom" from sea to sea", who took advantage of the uprising led by Bohdan Khmelnitsky to take revenge and weaken Poland, and then take over Ukraine. It is no accident that at the Pereyaslavsky Council of 1659, the Moscow voivode Prince O. Trubetskoy cited an article of the treaty agreement, according to which the Metropolitan of Kiev was supposed to pass under the blessing of the Holy Patriarch of Moscow and all Great and Little White Russia. The subsequent annexation of the Kiev Metropolitanate to Moscow led to the loss of the religious identity of Ukraine, and then negatively affected the national identity and cultural and spiritual identity of Ukrainians.
Concretizing the phenomena of marginalization and acculturation of Ukrainian and Russian societies in the second half of the XVII-XVIII centuries, the authors quite rightly noted that during the XV - first half of the XVII century, the cultures of both peoples developed not only in different ways, but also appeared at different levels, which prompted tsarism to resort to the "Ukrainization" of Russian spiritual culture. Concrete examples of the development of education, literature, art, and architecture show the beneficial influence of Ukrainian culture and its figures on Russian culture. At one time, I. Lisyak-Rudnytsky noted that the cultural and spiritual potential of Ukraine, starting from the princely and Cossack-Hetman era, from the time of the Kiev-Mohyla and Ostroh academies, the appearance of universities, acted as a donor of other cultures, its spiritual juices "fed" foreign states, their cultural organisms. The researchers came to the conclusion that traces of marginality associated with an inferiority complex are also found in modern conditions, when part of the elite of Ukraine has not yet decided on the orientation of the East-West parameters (p.687).
Summing up a brief review of the collective work "Ukraine of ancient times-XVIII century: the civilizational context of knowledge", we note that the latest Ukrainian historiography has been enriched with valuable research that enriches knowledge not only about the ethnogenesis of the Ukrainian people, its socio-cultural development in ancient times, the princely and Cossack-Hetman era, the formation of the Ukrainian nation, the Ukrainian national-culturalthe liberation movement, the history of Ukrainian statehood, but also the methodology of historical research, asserting a civilizational understanding of Ukrainian history in the context of the European and world historical process. A civilizational view of the Ukrainian past allowed the authors to identify the most common approaches to the essence of traditional society and its interaction with traditional culture and public consciousness, to outline the features of the mythological thinking of our ancestors, its transformation during paganism and early Christianity, to comprehend the relationship between the sacred and the mental, the Byzantine tradition and the identity of the socio-cultural development of ancient and medieval Ukraine.
In general, the book is noted for its scientific novelty, has a historiosophical coloring and theoretical and methodological character. This does not mean that it is not without flaws, weaknesses and some omissions. What is striking in some places is the different style of presenting specific historical material, the level of polemics with other researchers, and the argumentation of individual propositions. Certain one-sidedness
It characterizes the content and role of traditions as a way of transmitting historical experience and ensuring continuity. Traditions should be considered as a process of development, renewal, and enrichment (pp. 248-249).
Given the predominance of the civilizational approach (which is indicated primarily by the title of the book) in the authors 'approaches to covering the issues under study, in subsection 6.8." Russia and the Mongols " it would be advisable to pay attention to the factor of stimulating the struggle for liberation and the creation of their own state formation (consolidation process) by the Mongol-Tatar invasion. In this case, we are not talking about the idealization of this period, but about the complexity and multifactorial nature in clarifying the historical significance of the events of that time, which are important factors in overcoming the remnants of the formational approach to the study of the history of Ukraine, including the period of the mid-13th century.
Also, to a certain extent, the approach to the Polish-Lithuanian period as an exclusively crisis period for Ukrainian identity seems to be overly categorical. At the same time, it is not entirely successful to transfer E. Erikson's theory of the "identity crisis" to the plane of Ukrainian society (p.495), if only because it is primarily a psychological theory. In addition, it is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of a particular historical time, which requires a more thorough study.
In our opinion, the authors 'desire to" debunk "the points of view common among Ukrainian historians about the Lithuanian period as a" golden age " has led to pronounced characteristics that are completely opposite to these approaches. However, in this case, any monopolarity inevitably leads to the leveling of other factors that took place. Therefore, of course, it is necessary to take an objective approach to determining both the positive and negative consequences of Lithuanian domination on Ukrainian lands. The same applies to such events as the signing of the Union of Lublin in 1569, understanding its significance not only through a straightforward positive / negative assessment (pp. 498-499), but also as a catalyst for the integration of Ukrainian lands and local elites into the Western European political and social community. At the same time, it is not necessary to focus on extremes, since this and subsequent historical periods (sec. 8) are important because being at the junction of different civilizations, interacting with them in political, social and economic relations, the Ukrainian lands have become an area of various cultural traditions and management systems.4
A more extensive interpretation requires a provision on the lack of understanding by Catholics and Orthodox of the differences between these confessions as the main factor in the deep confrontation in Ukrainian-Polish society after 1569 (p. 635).
The thesis about the marginality of the Ukrainian Cossacks seems insufficiently reasoned (p. 599), especially against the background of the fact that the American sociologist R. Park, whom the authors mention, is known for studying immigrant groups in the urban social environment. In this case, it is worth considering that modern
I. Vermenich . Administrative-territorial structure of Ukraine: evolution, current state, problems of reform. U 2 ch. - Ch. 1. - K., 2009. - p. 49.
approaches to the study of the phenomenon of "marginalization" suggest considering it as a kind of reflection of the contradictions of a certain environment, a powerful motivational system and a self-realization mechanism. 5 Consequently, the authors (regarding the Ukrainian Cossacks), in our opinion, paid little attention to such generally accepted signs of the concept of "marginality" as non-adaptation to new living conditions, non-recognition of generally accepted norms and rules of conduct (we are talking about moral and ethical principles) and so on.
Also, the book did not manage to avoid unnecessary repetitions in different chapters. This concerns the model and picture of the world (p. 54, 126), the role of traditional society, etc. There were also some printing omissions. In our opinion, such a thorough study should have been supplemented with personal and thematic indexes.
These and other comments are not of a conceptual nature and it is hoped that they will be taken into account in the next, second book. The work has already aroused great interest and will certainly be useful for professional historians, undergraduates and postgraduates, as well as for a wide range of readers.
5 see: Maslov A. A. marginal personality as a subject of socio-philosophical analysis: Abstract of the dissertation of the Candidate of Philosophical Sciences-K., 2004. - 19 p.
O. P. Reent (Kiev)
Permanent link to this publication:
LBelarus LWorld Y G