Go to ...

The Newspapers

News from Russia

RSS Feed

Monday, October 24, 2016

Stanislav Kulchytsky: we stole our name. Just we – Russian

“The Ukrainians had their own ethnic lands, and they colonized the same land, how many were ethnic. This is from Kharkov and to Odessa,” – said the newspaper VIEW Kyiv historian, Professor Stanislav Kulchytsky. He commented recently published in Kiev, Atlas, dedicated to the “three thousand years of history” of Ukraine. The Professor acknowledges that there are a lot of historical myths, but still considered the Atlas a useful.

At the weekend Ukraine will begin, the celebration of the next independence Day of the Republic. A month before that date, the Kyiv publishing house “Mapa” has released a new “Historical Atlas of Ukraine”, which contains 250 cards – from ancient times to the last year’s events on the Kiev Maidan and in Donbas.

Atlas fills a white spot and is therefore very useful. And the fact that some maps are too “Patriotic” and do not correspond to reality, is, I think, a secondary issue”

At the presentation the author, the chief editor of “MAPY” Yuri Loza said that the Atlas is conceived in three volumes. At this stage the publisher is working on the second volume, and later plan to release the third.

“We must not forget that the history of Ukraine is the last three thousand years, a million years before – a prehistory of Ukraine. The Atlas is the view of the Ukrainian lands from the moment of their peopling, about a million years ago”, – said at the presentation of historian, member of the Institute of archaeology of NAS of Ukraine Vitaliy Otroshchenko.

And head of the Department of history of Ukraine 20-30-ies of XX century the Institute of history of NAS of Ukraine Stanislav Kulchytsky noted that in the Atlas there are texts that should explain the essence of the card. “This Atlas refers to the entire history of Ukraine, it is very well made”, – quoted the historian “UKRINFORM”.

Doctor of historical Sciences, Professor Stanislav Kulchytsky known to almost every Ukrainian, because in his textbooks millions of students have studied the history of the Republic. Speaking at the presentation, he only praised George Vine, but in an interview with the newspaper VIEW Professor Kulchytsky admitted that not all agree with the content of the Atlas.

The statements of the Professor, of course, also proved controversial. VZGLYAD understands that Stanislav Kulchytsky also translates politicized rather than scientific understanding of Ukrainian history, but in a more relaxed in comparison with many of his colleagues embodiment. However, from that now in force the civil war did not free the whole of Ukraine, part of which is emphatically denied any links with Russia. Nevertheless, we believe it is important to give the word and this point of view is for understanding how historical myths today is guided by the Ukrainian intellectual elite.

OPINION: Stanislav Vladislavovich, some readers have perceived the Atlas as an example of the new historical mythology of the Ukrainian state, and politically motivated. The extent to which the views of Yuri Vines on the story coincide with yours?

Stanislav Kulchytsky (photo: history.org.ua)

Stanislav Kulchytsky: Actually, Yuriy Loza – the cartographer, not a historian, as he himself said at the presentation. But with the historians he communicates, cooperates. His previous maps were too Patriotic. For this there is a saying – “cartographic aggression”: the boundaries are shifted a bit and so on. When he did, as such, the historical approach had not been. But the Vine did what you couldn’t do we, I mean the whole institution history.

This Atlas fills a white spot and is therefore very useful. And the fact that some maps are too “Patriotic” and do not correspond to reality, is, I think, a secondary issue. Importantly, the Atlas is and what it is not the first work by this author. The Atlas gives a visual representation of historical reality. After all, can be long to read a book a volume of 400 pages, and you can just see it clearly.

The LOOK: Starting with the history of the 12th century, Yuri Loza is widely used in the Atlas, the terms “Ukraine”, “Ukrainian lands”. For example, on pages 174175, which is devoted to the late 18th century, “Ukrainian ethnic lands” encompass not only the entire territory of present-day Ukraine, but also the visible part of the current neighboring Russian regions. And as far as the scientific use the term “Ukraine” with regard to those times? The vast majority of scientific papers about the events on the territory of modern Ukraine until the end of the 18th century, the inhabitants are called “Russian” or “Cossacks”.

S. K.: the fact that we stole our name. We – Russian. Or Rusyns. “Russia” – the word “Rus”, of course. At its head stood – up to son of Ivan the terrible Rurik, that is, the dynasty that founded Kievan Rus. It all started Karamzin in the “History of the Russian state” – wonderfully written work – and the Russians have learned. Learned that everything comes from Vladimir, from Rurik, their princes, their dynasty. And where are we? And we are not. We didn’t until the 15th century. Byelorussians, Ukrainians, and Russians as a nation appeared later. Before that was the conglomerate. And the story they are in Moscow they began to dig right up to the eighth century, when the antes (the early Slavic tribes – approx. OPINION), that is taken from our national memory.

Kiev epic cycle about Vladimir the Red Sun remained at the shores of the White sea. Because there are nomads Masta, the people remained and there, on the White sea, people have lived from generation to generation, passed down folklore. Here and preserved. Of course, in the language which was spoken in the 18th century. So I am absolutely not advocating that Russians are strangers to us, that this “country moksel”, wrote recently the author of the eponymous book by Belinsky.

It was a process of “natatoria”, from unions and tribes to nationalities, ethnic groups from small to large, from large Nations to Nations, and nation – it is 19th century. This is when there is a collective memory, there is a coherent way when you can communicate and where people come together with something tangible and not just live by themselves.

They and we came from the same medieval state, but then we were conquered by others, they too were conquered by the Horde. But from the Horde they borrowed military equipment, the state organization and became very strong, and then conquered all of Eastern Europe and Northern Asia.

The Russians have taken the name, territory and national memory. That is all taken away and made Ukrainians little Russians – as if the same Russians, but of another kind.

OPINION: so, in your opinion, “Rus” is a Ukrainian name stolen by the Russians. But when it raises the concept of “Ukraine”? Is it true that it only happened 150 years ago?

S. K.: Well, “stolen” is still a strong word… the Concept of “Ukraine” is the ethnotoponym. Only in the 19th century the Ukrainian intelligentsia, because she wanted her people saw themselves as a separate nation, not the Russians, was forced to abandon the “Russia”. By the way, the name is not Slavic and Varangian, but it doesn’t matter, because the center of Rus is Kiev.

OPINION: AND how did the term “little Russians”, which the intellectuals, you say, considered offensive?

S. K.: Since the mid-17th century Ukraine was under the tsars, and the entire Cossack elite has turned into a ordinary nobility. They had documents to confirm its origin. They became the nobles and began to call themselves Russians.

The terms “little Russia”, “Great” – for a long time, and they are of ecclesiastical origin. Alexis once came to him Bohdan Khmelnytsky, a year later began to call himself “King of Great and Little and White Russia”. It entered the official title of king.

It is believed that Great Russia is the cornerstone. But actually it comes from the Greeks, because Orthodox priests were the Byzantines, the Greeks. Great Greece, called the colony of the Greeks in Italy and little Greece just parent Greece, Attica. This is a fundamental principle. It turns out that it’s an inverted concept.

The Era Of “Taras Bulba”

OPINION: the Vine, where is illustrated the 16th century and the activities of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, there is a huge section under the heading “the Cossack era. There’s detail on the maps, on several u-turns shows the “Cossack state”. And the “Cossack Ukraine” the Vine is designated as a normal state, along with others France, Austria, Poland, Lithuania. But everyone knows, including your textbooks, that itself is a community called the Zaporozhian host, and later little-Russian Cossack Army. “Cossack Ukraine” did not recognize the state nor one of the neighboring capitals. Textbooks mention at this time the Ukraine as only the outskirts of the Commonwealth, but not as a state.

S. K.: Cossack state in fact did not happen. It was a revolution that became a national-liberation war. It was led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky. No longer part of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth is a government founded by poles and Lithuanians. In fact two States in one. Ukraine first was all under Lithuania and after the Union joined the Polish crown. And the Polish crown, in turn, had already conquered part of Ukraine – Galicia. And then literally the whole of Ukraine for one hundred years had been under the poles. Of course, to be under the poles was not very nice – other religion, the poles were the gentry, and the Ukrainians to a greater extent fortified. And even the Ukrainian Polonized nobility, polonised. This all broke, there came Khmelnytsky and the Cossacks, and began a victorious peasant war.

In fact, the Cossack Ukraine was not. It lasted a couple of years. When it was near Moscow, appeared different services – diplomatic, fiscal, I mean there are signs of the state, but it was very flimsy state.

What language prefer to use in everyday communication the inhabitants of the several countries of the former USSRLOOK: Hence, the name “Cossack era that invented the Vine, we can say, too pompous?

S. K.: Of Course! See, Vine – the person who is interested in historical myths more than history.

OPINION: the Vine is not mentioned “Constitution” of Orlik, written in the early 18th century. But many in Ukraine call it the first Constitution in the world… How would you rate it?

S. K.: the Constitution of Orlik – it’s all trash, pleasing to our mentality. It is a historical myth. First, it was written abroad and nothing to do with Ukraine had not. It was emigre the Constitution. And secondly, it was between the Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk and those who were under his command the Cossack. Regarding elders and were all good, democratic points ratio, but what about the people, the peasants, there was nothing about them.

Offshore of the 16th century

OPINION: what Vine is based, when refers to as “Sloboda Ukraine 1798” modern earth regions of Central Russia, such as Belgorod, Voronezh? In another section of the Atlas, later, he again relates to lands populated by Ukrainians, part of the modern Volgograd, and Saratov regions and there Kuban, Kalmykia, North Ossetia, Adygeya?

S. K.: the settlement is a village, released for some time (10-15 years) from taxes. That is populated, expand your farm, and can yet pay nothing. And people were settled. Here is the territory of Sloboda Ukraine. There was created a band of these fortifications, which, to some extent, warned the raids of the Crimean khanate.

Know where the word “Bryansk”? From the word “jungle”. It was “Debryansk”, that is, a settlement in the wilds. Similarly, Kharkov. They say, there lived a Cossack Harco, and this began the town.

In the 16th century, most notably in the early 17th century, even before Khmelnytsky, the people fled from the Polish masters in Russia for freedom and landed on these shores. Fled there, by the way, and the serfs of Russia. And so was created Sloboda. A large part of Slobozhanshchina was populated by Ukrainians, for example, is present in Kharkiv and Sumy regions. Belgorod oblast was half inhabited by Ukrainians, in Voronezh – also half South, was inhabited by Ukrainians. In 20-ies even raised the question of the accession of these lands, but Moscow did not go for it, and the Ukrainians were assimilated completely.

A huge strip of Bessarabia and on to the Caspian sea – it was the land fertile, but uninhabited. There Pechenegs once walked, then Cumans, Nogais, and Crimean Tatars. And here all this territory at that time began to be settled, and Ukrainians, and Russian. There were Ukrainians from Kyiv, Volhynia, Russian went from Central Russia. Approximately at the border of the Kuban ended the dominance of the Ukrainians, began the domination of the Russians. Stavropol Krai, for example, consists of three-quarters of Russians, a quarter of Ukrainians. In southern Bessarabia, at the same time settled and the Germans, Moldovans, and Ukrainians.

OPINION: So what are the criteria you and the Vine refers to lands populated by Ukrainians, those of the earth, and not that one? How do we know that there lived the Ukrainians?

S. K.: Even in the first General population census in the Russian Empire (1898) was not “nationality”. But it was “religion” and “language”. And before the census of 1898 was held still any local census in the mid-19th century, where there were differences by language. Therefore, the Ukrainians, we can separate from the poles and the Russians in two ways: religion – Orthodoxy and the language is little Russian.

To all – to the poles, Chechens, Jews, the tsarist government were treated as strangers, and the Ukrainians are not treated as foreigners, they simply did not notice. Who arranged and who didn’t accept that they didn’t recognize that the map did not exist in Ukraine. Chechnya on the map has always existed, Yakutia existed, but Ukraine was not.


Str. 174-175 satin. “The device of Ukrainian lands” of the late 18th century. Recall that the leading historians, including Professor Stanislav Kulchytsky, believe that the term “Ukrainian” in fact appeared a hundred years later. Themselves the future of the Ukrainians then called themselves “little Russians” Ukrainians Have their ethnic lands, and they colonized the same land, how many were ethnic. This is from Kharkov and to Odessa, the belt that Putin called Novorossiya. Colonized, of course, together with Russian, I’d say there are more Russians than Ukrainians, but that was back in Ukraine, and the border of the Ukraine for the first time, pointed out Nikolai Vinnichenko in 1917 (the leader of the Ukrainian national Republic – approx. OPINION), when I went to Petrograd, and acknowledged that Russia, when it signed an agreement with Ukraine in 1998.

Plus the “indigenization” of the entire country

OPINION: You already wrote a lot about the policy of “indigenization” in the first years of Soviet power. As you say, at that time the authorities in Kiev began to defend national interests. But if so, if the Ukrainians defended Ukrainian interests in the framework of this country, if the Ukrainians were well represented in the state apparatus in Moscow, and in the field, if not lies and they are part of the responsibility for the General Soviet policy? Is it possible then to describe the Soviet regime as “occupation”, external, alien force? And if Moscow’s policy in the same way anti-Ukrainian, as, for example, and anti-Russian?

S. K.: That’s a difficult question. Now it becomes clear the behavior of the red army in East Prussia, generally in Germany in 1945, when there were hundreds of thousands raped German women. And the Red army by 25% consisted of Ukrainians. Man, if he is in a society, consciously or unconsciously begins to behave as required by the authorities. In this case we can speak about the responsibility of Ukrainians.

Ukrainians are very appreciated in the army. They were economic, well-obeyed and, of course, in comparison with the “curry-eaters” of all sorts, were his own. The Ukrainian attitude: we – we, the great Russians, and you, too, but close.

12-th Congress of the Bolshevik party in 1923 was held under the slogan of indigenization. This meant that the local Ukrainians were supposed to be security officers, tax inspectors, party secretaries, journalists – it was called “entrenchment of Soviet power”. And it meant that everyone should speak Ukrainian, to talk with the peasants. It Ukrainization of the apparatus. So it was in the 20-ies. Stalin in 1932, the Ukrainization divided into two parts: Petlura and the Bolsheviks. That began to eradicate Petlyura. Moved all tutorials from 1933 to Russian. It all ended up in the same year a famine.

S. K.: When Vynnychenko in 1917 he went to Petrograd to negotiate about the border, he got the certificates of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, where the materials of the population census 1898 it was possible to determine ethnic composition of the population.

Then there was talk about nine provinces: three provinces of the right Bank, the three counties of the South coast and three on the left Bank, including the province, which then split into two regions – Donetsk and Luhansk. Here and there the majority of the population was Ukrainian, but the fact that they were Russian-speaking, is natural (recall that higher Stanislav Kulchytsky stressed that the Ukrainian language defines Ukrainian ethnicity OPINION). Advanced assimilation, partially forced, but more natural.

Yuri Loza (photo: still from video posted on the Network)

Thus, the Ukrainians claimed only on your land on land on an ethnic criterion. Even the Tauride province was divided into two parts by the Third universal of the Central Rada, where the mainland is Ukraine. Crimea did not claim. Only then Skoropadsky began to lay claim to Crimea.

Here was a population census 2001 is the last that we had. Was supposed to go in 2011, but it transferred, then there was no money, now postponed to 2016. So the 2001 census is compared with the Soviet census of 1988. The number of Russians in Ukraine with 22%, fell to 17%, while the number of Ukrainians increased respectively. This means that the proportion of people who in 1988 identified themselves as Russian, when the next census is back to its original nationality. Five million people moved from one nation to another…

But now, I don’t know. For the first time in 350 years, Ukrainians and Russians are divided, separated by a front. It even bothers me, such hatred reigns on the Internet! This simply can not be!

Russia is much stronger than we are. Some of our saying: “Let’s nail him!” but what they press, when we have no resources? Nobody left, we don’t have a million-man army, which is in Russian.

Russia is now in the West is considered an enemy for the first time since 1991. And it means – to call it a cold war or not to call, but now the Americans will deploy their funds, the Reagan “star wars” to shoot down missiles on the fly at startup. This is a huge investment in the latest technology, which has no name yet, but sooner or later it will be done. And Ukraine will remain a piece between the two predators. And Russia could occupy Ukraine for second. That is why we do not declare war on Russia, and pretend that we are at war with terrorists.


1st Secretary of the Communist party(Bolsheviks) of Ukraine, Nikita Khrushchev (left) watches over the harvest on the farm in Zaporizhia region. Khrushchev was first Secretary and then head of the government of the Republic until 1949. In 1954, he initiated the transfer of Crimea to UkraineLOOK IN the Atlas on page 190191 specify “the Ethnic composition of the population of the Ukrainian and neighboring lands, and there again marked the entire territory of present-day Ukraine again plus almost all of the Kuban. Can we assume the Kuban Cossacks Ukrainians, if they are in the absolute majority consider themselves Russian? That’s what was required, for example, at a rally in Lviv in the summer of 2010 Hero of Ukraine, current Deputy of the Verkhovna Rada Yuriy Shukhevych: “Ukraine from the Tisza to the Caucasus States, Ukraine first needs to regain the Kuban”. How justified these territorial claims?

S. K.: He is a man uneducated, his words cannot be taken seriously… the Kuban is a special case. There Catherine gave the land to the Cossacks, when she disbanded the Sich. Zaporozhye Cossacks moved there as the don.

Ukrainization of the Kuban was a big. Officially it was also “indigenization”. I have been to the Kuban. There was famine, as we do. And the famine was not accidental, but just to beat all those who wanted to join Ukraine.

In 1939 he was a census of the population in the Kuban region, and Ukrainians felt there are 4% of the population that came during between 1926 (the previous census) and 1939, and all local, no matter what they themselves believed, were written in Russian. I met them, and when they talk among themselves – it is the Ukrainian language, and when slowly, thoughtfully spoken is Russian. And talk mostly older people. Among the youth I met there a lot of guys that are configured so as in our “Right*”.

But in General – Yes, it’s a lost for the Ukrainians of the earth.

OPINION: if distracted finally from Atlas, how would you rate the “Right sector”?

S. K.: the Current behavior of the “Right sector” is not a behavior in a democratic society. About democracy here at all. Our democracy grows in soil fertilized sovetchinoy. It is imperfect, we have. But under Yanukovich we had a democracy, but society is immature to do this. It is accustomed to the leaders.

I once voted for the party “Freedom” in the 2012 election, because I had someone to give a face to these regionals, but I do not support extremism. Extremism is in fact Bolshevism. It can be red, brown – whatever. Extremism is when everyone else is nothing but you and everyone else for you is all.

OPINION: how would you assess the bill of the party Lyashko, who faces criminal punishment simply for the use of the term “Russia” in relation to the Russian Federation?

S. K.: it is full of Idiots, and especially in the party Lyashko.

OPINION: How do you feel about the practice to appoint foreigners into power? The latest example is Maria Gaidar. There are also certain requirements to the officials, in particular the knowledge of Ukrainian language. Azarov, the opposition is constantly berated for his sloppy Ukrainian language. But Gaidar does not know Ukrainian. Isn’t that double standards?

S. K.: It’s not practice, it’s one person, two, ten, twenty. Think. It is impossible to make such a generalization. Azarov was not language skills, but he tried to speak. This, by the way, very smart, educated person.

Maria Gaidar – the beautiful Russian language. And immediately require knowledge of the Ukrainian language. It takes time to implement these requirements. Maybe in ten years will learn it. We have the bulk of the population is Russian-speaking, and I in the family talking in Russian.

* Organization, in respect of which the court accepted entered into legal force decision on liquidation or ban the activities on the grounds stipulated by the Federal law “On countering extremist activity”

Related posts:
Corruption scandal in Brazil is directed against interests of Russia
The situation in Syria raises serious concerns
The requirements of the Romanians confirm the need of federalization of Ukraine
The coup attempt forced Erdogan to reform intelligence


More Stories From World