Image of Europe in civilization ideas of Panteleimon Kulish: dilemma of choosing between "alien" and "civilised"

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Image of Europe in civilization ideas of Panteleimon Kulish: dilemma of choosing between “alien” and “civilised”

Ivan KUTSYI

PhD hab. (History), Professor of History of Ukraine, Archeology and Special Branch of Historical Science Department, Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University, 2 Maxyma Kryvonosa Street, Ternopil, Ukraine, postal code 46027

Larysa KUTSA

PhD (Philology), Docent of Department of Philological Disciplines of Elementary Education, Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University, 2 Maxyma Kryvonosa Street, Ternopil, Ukraine, postal code 46027

The purpose of the research is to study the collective image of Europe (the West) as a form of manifestation of spatial and civilizational ideas in the historical works written by Panteleimon Kulish; tracing the specifics of civilizational identity of this scholar; elucidation of his ideas regarding the relationship between the historical images of Russia-Ukraine and Europe-West in Kulish's historical texts. The methodology of the reseacrh is based on mental mapping as a strategy of cognitive reproduction of geographical objects in scholars ' imagination. The basic component of the used methodology is imagology as a method of studying one's own/another person's images. In the research there is used deconstruction of the semi-Orientalism as a specific way of recepting and describing Eastern Europe by representatives of the " Western ” intellectual thought. The scientific novelty of the research consists in the fact that it is the first attempt at a special historiographical reflection of the image of Europe-West in the historical works of Panteleimon Kulish. The Conclusion. In the research there has been summarized the specificity of the Slavic civilizational identity's conceptualization in the historical works written by Panteleimon Kulish with his view of Europe (the West) as an "alien" civilizational space. It has been substantiated that the Germans were the main representatives of the collective image of the West for the scholar. The signs of Eurocentric worldview and the beginnings of a tolerant reception of Western attributes can be traced in his late historical texts, which was expressed in the recognition ofEurope as a "civilized" and "cultural" environment and a positive interpretation of the European "enlightenment". It has been summarized that the worldview evolution of Panteleimon Kulish illustrates defining stage of civilizational identity genesis of the Ukrainian scholars of the 19th century - the beginning of the transition from the Slavic to European identity.

Key words: Panteleimon Kulish, West, Europe, East, civilization, image, identity, historiography.

ÎÁÐÀÇ ªÂÐÎÏÈ Â ÖȲ˲ÇÀÖ²ÉÍÈÕ ÓßÂËÅÍÍßÕ ÏÀÍÒÅËÅÉÌÎÍÀ ÊÓ˲ØÀ: ÄÈËÅÌÀ ÂÈÁÎÐÓ Ì²Æ “×ÓÆÈÌ” ÒÀ “ÖȲ˲ÇÎÂÀÍÈÌ”

²âàí ÊÓÖÈÈ

äîêòîð ³ñòîðè÷íèõ íàóê, ïðîôåñîð êàôåäðè ³ñòî𳿠Óêðà¿íè, àðõåîëî㳿 òà ñïåö³àëüíèõ ãàëóçåé ³ñòîðè÷íî¿ íàóêè Òåðíîï³ëüñüêîãî íàö³îíàëüíîãî ïåäàãîã³÷íîãî óí³âåðñèòåòó ³ìåí³ Âîëîäèìèðà Ãíàòþêà, âóë. Ì. Êðèâîíîñà, 2, ì. Òåðíîï³ëü, Óêðà¿íà, ³íäåêñ 46027

Ëàðèñà ÊÓÖÀ

êàíäèäàòêà ô³ëîëîã³÷íèõ íàóê, äîöåíòêà êàôåäðè ô³ëîëîã³÷íèõ äèñöèïë³í ïî÷àòêîâî¿ òà äîøê³ëüíî¿ îñâ³òè Òåðíîï³ëüñüêîãî íàö³îíàëüíîãî ïåäàãîã³÷íîãî óí³âåðñèòåòó ³ìåí³ Âîëîäèìèðà Ãíàòþêà, âóë. Ì. Êðèâîíîñà, 2, ì. Òåðíîï³ëü, Óêðà¿íà, ³íäåêñ 46027

Ìåòîþ ñòàòò³ º äîñë³äæåííÿ çá³ðíîãî îáðàçó ªâðîïè (Çàõîäó) ÿê ôîðìè âèÿâó ïðîñòîðîâèõ òà öèâ³ë³çàö³éíèõ óÿâëåíü â ³ñòîðè÷íèõ ïðàöÿõ Ïàíòåëåéìîíà Êóë³øà; ïðîñòåæåííÿ ñïåöèô³êè öèâ³ë³çàö³éíî¿ ³äåíòè÷íîñò³ öüîãî â÷åíîãî; ç'ÿñóâàííÿ éîãî óÿâëåíü ñòîñîâíî ñï³ââ³äíîøåííÿ ³ñòîðè÷íèõ îáðàç³â Ðóñ³-Óêðà¿íè òà ªâðîïè-Çàõîäó ó Êóë³øåâèõ ³ñòîðè÷íèõ òåêñòàõ. Ìåòîäîëîã³÷íîþ îñíîâîþ ñòàòò³ îáðàíî ìåíòàëüíå êàðòîãðàôóâàííÿ ÿê ñòðàòåã³þ êîãí³òèâíîãî â³äòâîðåííÿ ãåîãðàô³÷íèõ îá'ºêò³â â óÿâ³ â÷åíèõ. Çàñàäíè÷îþ ñêëàäîâîþ âèêîðèñòàíî¿ ìåòîäîëî㳿 ïîñòຠ³ìàãîëîã³ÿ ÿê ñïîñ³á âèâ÷åííÿ îáðàç³â ñâîãî / ÷óæîãî. Ó äîñë³äæåíí³ çàñòîñîâàíî äåêîíñòðóêö³þ íàï³âîð³ºíòàë³çìó ÿê ñïåöèô³÷íîãî ñïîñîáó ñïðèéíÿòòÿ òà îïèñóâàííÿ Ñõ³äíî¿ ªâðîïè ïðåäñòàâíèêàìè "çàõ³äíî¿" ³íòåëåêòóàëüíî¿ äóìêè. Íàóêîâà íîâèçíà ñòàòò³ ïîëÿãຠó òîìó, ùî âîíà º ïåðøîþ ñïðîáîþ ñïåö³àëüíî¿ ³ñòîð³îãðàô³÷íî¿ ðåôëåêñ³¿ îáðàçó ªâðîïè-Çàõîäó â ³ñòîðè÷íèõ ïðàöÿõ Ïàíòåëåéìîíà Êóë³øà. Âèñíîâêè ñòàòò³ ðåçþìóþòü ñïåöèô³êó êîíöåïòóàë³çàö³¿ ñëîâ'ÿíñüêî¿ öèâ³ë³çàö³éíî¿ ³äåíòè÷íîñò³ â ³ñòîðè÷íèõ ïðàöÿõ Ïàíòåëåéìîíà Êóë³øà ç éîãî ïîãëÿäîì íà ªâðîïó (Çàõ³ä) ÿê "÷óæèé" öèâ³ë³çàö³éíèé ïðîñò³ð. Îá´ðóíòîâàíî, ùî ãîëîâíèì ðåïðåçåíòàíòîì çá³ðíîãî îáðàçó Çàõîäó äëÿ â÷åíîãî áóëè í³ìö³. Ïðîñòåæåíî ó éîãî ï³çí³õ ³ñòîðè÷íèõ òåêñòàõ îçíàêè ºâðîïîöåíòðè÷íîãî ñâ³òîãëÿäó é ïî÷àòêè òîëåðàíòíî¿ ðåöåïö³¿ àòðèáóò³â Çàõîäó, ÿêà âèðàæàëàñÿ ó âèçíàíí³ çà ªâðîïîþ ñòàòóñó "öèâ³ë³çîâàíîãî" ³ "êóëüòóðíîãî" ñåðåäîâèùà é ïîçèòèâí³é ³íòåðïðåòàö³¿ ºâðîïåéñüêî¿ "ïðîñâ³òè". ϳäñóìîâàíî, ùî ñâ³òîãëÿäíà åâîëþö³ÿ Ïàíòåëåéìîíà Êóë³øà ³ëþñòðóº âèçíà÷àëüíèé åòàï ´åíåçè öèâ³ë³çàö³éíî¿ ³äåíòè÷íîñò³ óêðà¿íñüêèõ â÷åíèõÕ²Õñò. - ïî÷àòîê ïåðåõîäó â³ä ñëîâ'ÿíñüêî¿ ³äåíòè÷íîñò³ äî ºâðîïåéñüêî¿.

Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: Ïàíòåëåéìîí Êóë³ø, Çàõ³ä, ªâðîïà, Ñõ³ä, öèâ³ë³çàö³ÿ, îáðàç, ³äåíòè÷í³ñòü, ³ñòîð³îãðàô³ÿ.

The Problem Statement

In modem intellectual space of Ukraine, the opinion about its purely European cultural and civilizational affiliation is widespread. At the same time, quite often the position of those figures, or even entire scientific currents of the Ukrainian intellectual history, which did not share the foundations of the European identity, is not taken into account. Among them, one of the leading places belongs to Panteleimon Kulish. The scientific consideration of the image of Europe in his civilizational representations determines the relevance of our article.

The Analysis of the Recent Research and Publications

kulish image europe

Panteleimon Kulish belongs to renowned and already researched figures, as a significant figure in Ukrainian intellectual history. There were several attempts to assess the contribution of this figure to cultural and socio-political processes holistically nowadays. First of all, there should be noted the scientific works of a literary critic Yevhen Nakhlik, in particular his fundamental study “Panteleimon Kulish: Personality, Writer, Thinker” (Nakhlik, 2007a; Nakhlik, 2007b). In a separate study, Ye. Nakhlik made a survey attempt to outline civilizational images in the works by P. Kulish (Nakhlik, 2000). P. Kulish's contribution to the Ukrainian historiographical process is an issue, which wasn't studied properly. Separate aspects of the issue “Panteleimon Kulish as a historian” were analysed by the Ukrainian scholars. First of all, there should be noted the publications of Oleksiy Yas, in which the chief focus is on the peculiarities of P. Kulish's historical texts style (Yas, 2007; Yas, 2019). The analysis of P. Kulish's views on the Ukrainian Cossacks was carried out by Mykola Vysotin (Vysotin, 2016). However, despite a certain number of studies on the role of this scholar in the Ukrainian historiographical process, the issue of his civilizational ideas and orientations has not been clarified yet.

The purpose of the research is to do a comprehensive analysis of the civilizational identity of this scholar, primarily his views on Europe (the West), on the basis of a historiographical analysis of Panteleimon Kulish's historical works. In the framework of this article, first of all, we will answer the following question: was Europe (the West) in Panteleimon Kulish's worldviews and historical texts presented as “native” or “alien” civilizational environment?

The Results of the Research

Panteleimon Kulish had a unique civilizational orientation - he identified himself with Slovianshchyna (the Slavic world) as an independent and original civilizational community, like the majority of his contemporaries in the Ukrainian intellectual environment. Terminologically, “native” civilizational community was marked in his texts as the Slavs, the Slavic world, Slovianshchyna, etc. P. Kulish and his contemporaries singled out a somewhat narrower cultural and civilizational community - the rusky world, within the boundaries of the Slavic world. The Eastern Slavic lands in which the Orthodoxy was practiced were included within its borders. In general, the Slavic world in the understanding of intellectuals is treated as a civilizational opponent in relation to the West (Europe) or the Germanic world. The representatives of this movement formulated the history of the Slavic countries as a permanent struggle against the hostile expansion of the Germanic peoples. Hence, the West in general and the Slavic world were defined as primordial antagonists. The formation of P. Kulish as a scholar took place in an era when, as Andrzej Valitskyi noted, the way of recepting the“Western” values became the main prerequisite for ideological and worldview confrontations (Valitskyi, 1998, p. 69). In fact, we can consider P. Kulish a vivid representative of the Ukrainian Slavophilism, which is characterized by xenophobia and suspicion towards everything “alien”, that is “non-Slavic”. In his historical texts, we find almost all the components that determine the essence of the Slavic identity (Kutsyi, 2019b, pp. 89-90). There was characteristic such a typical feature of this identity as greater attention was paid to the conceptual delineation of primarily “alien' and not “his native” community for a scholar. We should emphasize that Ukrainian historians of the end of the 18th - at the beginning of the 20th centuries defined their own civilizational identity by a complete “inclusion” of their ethno-national space (Rus-Ukraine) in one of the civilizational images, which automatically meant complete “exclusion” and opposition to the image of “another” civilization (Kutsyi, 2019a, p. 156). That is, if P. Kulish included Rus-Ukraine in the image of the Slavic world, then he excluded it from the image of the West or Europe automatically.

As among the majority of Slavic identity carriers, in P. Kulish's ideas, Europe or the West acted as the main cultural and civilizational antagonists of “his native” civilizational community (i.e. the Slavic world). If the term Europe/European in many of his writings was used in a geographical and spatial sense, then he used the term West to denote the cultural and civilizational space. The scholar also used the ethnonyms the Germans, the Germanic tribe as a general name for the European peoples.

The historical texts analysed in the article, despite P. Kulish's inconsistent and mostly contradictory attitude towards the West, illustrate numerous considerations of that time about the “hostility” of Europe and the Slavic world. It should be noted that the rapid worldview evolution of this scholar-intellectual did not affect his reception of Europe as an “alien” environment for the Slavs radically. For example, metaphorically P. Kulish described the image of Europe as one of two antagonistic civilizations that expanded into the Slavic world since the ancient times. In the fundamental study “History of the Reunification of the Rus” we read that the ancient “Variahorusy” and later the Ukrainian Cossacks fought against the same forces that carried out aggression against the Rus: “one in the name of Europe, the other in the name of Asia”. The scholar found the influence of two civilizations - European and Asian - on the Ukrainian Ruthenians in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The Ukrainian (“Maloruska”) nation, summarized P. Kulish, generally found itself in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth between two opposing forces: “One was pulling it to the West, the other - to the East” (Kulish, 1874à, ð. 181). It should be emphasized right away that P. Kulish spoke about Europe as an “anti-Slavic civilization” in the Ukrainian historical opinion of the time the most clearly (Kulish, 1877, p. 263).

P. Kulish summarized that the experiences gained by Western Europe during the ancient civilization turned out to be “unsatisfactory”. That is, Europe was outlined in his texts as a “world” that was developing chaotically in a way of “dubious” progress. Therefore, the historian, based on numerous facts, expressed disbelief in this progress. He emphasized that the Western (“Latin”) culture had negative consequences for the development of the Slavic peoples. In his early work, “The Book of the Affairs of the Ukrainian People and the Glorious Zaporizhzhia Army”, he spoke rather cautiously about the cultural influence of “aliens” on “his native”: still the Rus cannot recover from “a foreign child” (Kulish, 1990, p. 67). As a result of comparing cultural and historical experiences of the ancient Rus and the Kingdom of Poland, the scholar came to the opinion: the eras of Volodymyr Monomakh in Kyivska Rus and Danylo Halytskyi in Red Rus (Red Ruthenia) illustrated self-sufficiency of the Slavic “enlightenment” without any intervention of the “Latin enlighteners”. The scholar stated that in the Rus this “enlightenment” functioned more successfully than among the “Latinized liakhy”. P. Kulish found the first impulse of the cultural expansion of the West to the East in the actions of Emperor Charles the Great. It is important that the historian paid attention to the “deceptive tricks” of the European culture, which often “seduced selfish minds” with various temptations. In this way, the elite of the Rus society was “tempted” by the “pink colour” of these promises. The scholar interpreted the Ukrainians of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as valiant people, but “stuck by Latin”, “influenced in a foreign way” (Kulish, 1877, pp. 319, 365). As you can see, P. Kulish did not hide his conviction that Western (“Latin”) cultural trends “corrupted” the Slavic and even more widely Christian values. The above mentioned concerned not only the Poles, but also the Ruthenians. The reception of Europe in the texts of the late P. Kulish falls under the following scheme: the West is “aliened” and to a large extent “hostile” for the Slavic world. However, in terms of “enlightenment” and “civilization”, it significantly surpassed Slovianshchyna, in particular during the post-Tatar era.

We should emphasize that the representatives of the Slavic identity did not conceptualize the holistic image of Europe scientifically, but focused their attention on the individual representative components of the Europeanness. Hence, P. Kulish's anti-Western prejudices were expressed in his interpretations of the European ethno-national traditions related to Ukrainian history. For instance, the historian interpreted the Italian court culture of the 16th century as “moral depravity” that “vices and villainy” were inherent in it. He also developed this opinion with an emphasis on the fact that the “political depravity of minds” was characteristic not only of the Italians, but of the Europeans in general. P. Kulish considered culture incompatible with the Slavicism, which “was first owned by the barons of the border German marks, then by the German clergy, brought up by feudalism, then belonged to the enlighteners of Italy, Popes and Cardinals, who did not allow the natural rotation of the Earth in the heavenly spheres, but human hearts - in the field of useless aspirations” (Kulish, 1874à, ð. 250). As the historian Kulish asserted, in the Polish state, “Latin Europe” was created from “Rus Asia” successively. He illustrated the spread of the European culture in the Ukrainian lands with the metaphorical plots of a military nature. Thus, according to his reasoning, the ruska elite had to overcome the centuries-old results of the “Latin” culture, which “advanced its trenches” far beyond the borders of the actual Catholic space - into the territory of the former state of Volodymyr and Yaroslav. P. Kulish's attitude towards Europe was expressed by the thesis that it “gave Russia two imposters”. The metaphorical nature of P. Kulish's statements about the image of an “aliened” civilization cannot fail to impress a modern reader. For instance, in the three-volume work “The Fall Away of Malorussia from Poland (1340 - 1654)” (1888) we read the following: “But wave after wave they invaded the rusky (Ruthenian) ruins from the West and applied to our native soil the garbage of someone else's life” (Kulish, 1888à, ð. 169).

If the collective image of Europe/the West in the writings of historians of the Slavic identity was characterized by blurring and indistinctness, then its main representative components were characterized by ambiguity, completeness, and figurative detailing. To the greatest extent, this concerns Catholicism, which was interpreted not only as a confessional factor, but much more widely. In the historical texts , written by P. Kulish, as well as in other scholars of the Slavic identity (M. Maksymovych, M. Kostomarov, O. Yefimenko), Catholicism was read as the broadest civilizational image, identified with the Europeanism in general. It was even recepted as a cultural and social megastructure. It should be added that the content of the image of Catholicism (i.e. its internal differentiation, colourful national, dynastic and political structure) was largely ignored by the historian. Hence, P. Kulish had subjective thought concerning the Catholic world as a homogeneous and integral entity, and not as a collection of antagonistic countries, ethnic groups or dynasties. The term Catholic world was often used in the writings of P. Kulish as identical to the concepts of the West and Europe. It mostly meant not a religious teaching or a confessional institution, but rather a civilizational entity. The synonymous series (Papism, Catholicism, Latinism) was imbued in P. Kulish's texts with ironic and contemptuous pathos. The administrative hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church was recepted by the historian as a factor in the institutional unity of the European civilization. The Pope of Rome appeared to P. Kulish not only as a spiritual, but primarily as a political leader of Western civilization. Rome in the historical texts of P. Kulish is seen not only as the administrative and spiritual centre of the Catholic world. This is most often an allegorical image of the West.

In the historical works of P. Kulish, we trace a rather colourful characteristics of Catholicism, whose representatives (the “Roman wolves”, the “Papists”, the “Latins”) separated the “Ruthenian flock”. In “The Tale of the Ukrainian People”, P. Kulish described Bohdan Khmelnytskyi's war as the Rus was“cleansing” from the Catholics (Kulish, 2005c, p. 51).

In his later historical works, he motivated persistently the thesis about “the mistake of the great Catholic idea - to turn our living Slovianshchyna into a religious petrification” (Kulish, 1874à, ð. 263). The Roman church structure was considered these works as the “conqueror” and as one that defiantly invaded Slovianshchyna in “all-armed political tyranny”. P. Kulish expressed his indignation regarding the “hidden thought” of the Roman Curia, which sought to “seize the head of the universe by subordinating the Orthodox East” (Kulish, 1877, ð. 209). The historian noted the ancient non-acceptance of the Eastern religious tradition of the Slavs by Catholicism: “Latinism”, he repeated, had cultivated “hostility” to the Eastern rite. The scholar described both the Latin creed and all the spiritual and cultural traditions of Europe with the metaphor of “darkness”. For instance: “The Ruthenian Church /.../ was still a light shining in the darkness; and all the same, it is necessary to give it honour that the darkness did not embrace its light, despite all the efforts of such angels of darkness, which were the preachers of the Papism in Rus” (Kulish, 1874à, ðð. 214-215). P. Kulish-historian often articulated unethical formulations, such as, for example, the “Catholic barbarism”. We should emphasize that he considered Polotsk Archbishop Josaphat Kuntsevych as the bearer of the “papal invasion” into the Orthodox Slavic world. P. Kulish's attitude to Catholicism was clearly illustrated by the thesis that “the Roman system of uniting the Slovianshchyna with the peoples of the old formation turned into nothingness our rich contribution to the treasury of the Polish spirit” (Kulish, 1877, ð. 50).

P. Kulish's reception of the Catholic spirituality was highlighted by one of his renowned works - “Khutirska Philosophiya i Viddalena od Svitu Poesiya” (1879). The author also emphasized the uncompromising confrontation between the Catholic Europe (“aliened”) and the Orthodox East (“native”). He wrote the following “The European God, was on the Earth in the person of the Roman Pope and bowed his head down; ours was in heaven and lifted heads and hearts up. /.../ Orthodoxy, which penetrated to us from Byzantium, did not oppress us, like Latinism did to Transcarpathian Europe” (Kulish, 2005a, ð. 215). The historian stated striking differences between the West and the Slavic world in the motivation for the introduction of Christianity: in Europe, as we read, Christianity was introduced to protect against the strong; in Rus, Christianity had the mission of “loyalty to the weakest”.

A similar tendency can be found in Kulish's interpretations of Western European scholasticism, originated from “Latinism”, which he called the “moral scurvy” and “drought” of human minds. According to the scholar's observations, at Kyiv St. Volodymyr University, this scholasticism gave way to the German scholasticism. In “Khutirska Philosophiya...” the author especially metaphorizes the trends of Western European cultural influences on Ukraine, comparing them to the “foreign plants”. As we found, these “foreign plantations, due to the ineptitude of the vertogradars themselves, were difficult to accept on the Ruthenian soil, grew stupidly, bloomed with empty flowers; and the wild plants of this soil were killed by the predators, they drowned in the shadows, they were trampled and even uprooted on purpose. It was the general character of what in our country corresponded to the European revival” (Kulish, 2005a, ðp. 221-222). The historian P. Kulish interpreted the European educational influences of the era of Petro Mohyla with no less prejudice, the content of which he assessed as the actions of the “sect of mental castrates”. The appeal to theological terminology also illustrated Kulish's reception of the Catholicized Ukrainians as “tempted”. As you can see, P. Kulish's historical texts illustrate the reception of Catholicism as the greatest antagonist of the Orthodox Slavic world repeatedly. It should be added that P. Kulish's image of the Islamic East, when compared with the Catholic world, appeared to be much less dangerous. It turned out that the Catholic world for P. Kulish is characterized by the same negative features as the West in general: aggressiveness, insidiousness, bellicosity, expansionist efforts, immorality, neglect of the principles of true Christianity, etc. While certain features of European civilization (such as “enlightenment”, culture, ethics, “civilization”) were interpreted favourably by P. Kulish, the Catholic (“Latin”) components were evaluated unequivocally negatively. In this way, “Latinism” in the collective image of the European West was outlined as the most representative feature of civilization. Therefore, P. Kulish's reception of Catholicism was to a large extent consonant with the views of M. Maksymovych (Kutsyi, 2018, pp. 11-12). In this aspect, we have reason to interpret P. Kulish as a typical representative of the Slavophile paradigm.

Another representatives of the collective image of the West were the Germans on the pages of Kulish's historical works. Actually, the scholar considered the Germans in the ethno- national sense to be the people, who the most clearly represented civilizational image of the West. The ethnonyms the Germans or German were articulated in the works of P. Kulish in three meanings: as a purely German people; as a collection of all ethnicities of the Germanic family; as a collective term for all Western European ethnic groups in general. We do not trace a certain sequence in the use of this ambiguous concept. The Germans were synonymous with the second version of the understanding of this concept (the Germanic family people). By its derivative form (Germanism), P. Kulish denoted the entire set of Western European cultural and civilizational features. The historian thought of Germanism as the antithesis of Slavism in the national past. In P. Kulish's texts we find another derived concept - the Germanic world as a terminological synonym of Western civilization. The scholar sometimes spread the content of the Germanic world beyond the borders of the Germanic peoples. We should clarify that it is precisely the Germanic world that most often appears in the texts of P. Kulish as a “hostile” civilizational space in relation to Slovianshchyna.

P. Kulish's image of the Germans absorbed the widest range of negative stereotypes of the Westernity. For the most part, P. Kulish interpreted the Germans not just as “alien”, but even as “hostile” to the Slavs. The German ethnic group, as the brightest representative of the Western European community, was depicted as belligerent, aggressive, cunning, insidious, and arrogant. The Germans were interpreted as the conquerors, who were constantly expanding into Slovianshchyna with the aim of conquering and assimilating it. The antagonistic position of the Germans in relation to the Slavs was interpreted in some places as their primordial or even innate characterological feature.

P. Kulish emphasized the fact of non-acceptance of representatives of the German ethnic group among the Slavic peoples. The scholar found the German expansionism in the Slavic world primarily in the fact of the resettlement of the Germans in Polish and Ruthenian towns, which became “half-German” as a result. This situation caused, according to the historian, “a feeling of disgust in rural Poland for urban Poland”. In this way, German cities got rid of their “burdensome and harmful” “unnecessity”, since the “worst” Germans were the first to find themselves in Polish and Ruthenian lands. At the same time, the Germans from the Slavic world lured young people to them (Kulish, 1888à, ð. 36). The anti-Germanic instructions of the historian were also manifested in his assessment of the Teutonic Knights (“kryzhaky”), whom he characterized as aggressive and “predatory” neighbours. At the same time, the scholar emphasized their ingratitude: after Poland gave them the lands of Baltic Pomerania, they “thanked” Poland for this with constant wars (Kulish, 1888à, ð. 37).

In everyday realities of the German settlers, P. Kulish found vivid manifestations of “democratic rudeness of customs” (Kulish, 1877, p. 250). Evidence of the “wickedness” of the “unholy aliens” newly arrived in the Slavic lands were behavioral facts, when during religious holidays they organized auctions in churches with various entertainments, which was unacceptable during the service. The historian traced the obvious “alienness” of the German settlers in their family life and social practices. For the Slavic autochthons, it was unacceptable that the Germans, being married, “concluded new marriages by pouring, i.e. drinking, and in this way had several wives. /.../ During handicrafts, the Germans dressed in such short and strange clothes that it was even considered indecent to look at them. Monday, celebrated by the Germans, was marked by extreme violence and debauchery, similar to a pagan bacchanalia” (Kulish, 1888à, ð. 36). P. Kulish justified the civilizational “otherness” of the Slavs and the Germans with similar examples. By analogy with other scholars-carriers of the Slavic identity (primarily such as M. Maksymovych or M. Kostomarov), P. Kulish made attempts to fit even the ancient Varangians into the image of the Germanic world. Thus, in his early essay “History of Ukraine from the Earliest Times” he described the Varangians as the “predators” (Kulish, 2016, p. 181).

The above-mentioned statements confirm that on the civilizational maps of the Slavic identity supporters, the image of Europe (the West) occupied the place not only of the main “alien”, but also of the “enemy”. The European attributes on these mental maps were sharply contrasted with signs of the Slavicness. The content of the generalized image of the West was based on the psychomental traits and cultural achievements of the first Germanic (and sometimes Romanic) peoples. P. Kulish considered the German expansion into the Slavic lands as a natural and primordial characteristic of the Germanic world, which had quite different manifestations in different eras. Here he attributed the arrival of the Gothic tribes to the Northern Black Sea region, and the penetration of the Germans into Baltic Pomerania in later times, and the Varangian campaigns on the Ruthenian lands, and the invasion of knightly orders into the Polish and the Lithuanian lands, and the commercial and economic colonization of towns by the German settlers, and even active presence of the Germans in administrative and military service in Poland and Russia. P. Kulish's arguments about the “antiquity” of the German expansion into the Slavic world were aimed at establishing among their readers the opinion about the genetically determined aggressiveness of the German-Europeans and their cultural and spiritual incompatibility with the Slavic mentality. P. Kulish contrasted a set of the representative Slavic traits (honesty, spirituality, peacefulness) with the psycho-mental traits of the Germans (insidiousness, aggressiveness, immorality). He substantiated the primordial “hostility” of the European West and Slovianshchyna by doing it.

A deeper analysis of P. Kulish's historical texts gives grounds to state that his reasoning regarding the West as a civilizational antagonist of the Slavs was not unambiguous and consistent. By focusing the scholar's attention on the Muslim (Asian) threat, the previous “hostile” West was transformed in his text into a supercivilizational community shared with the Slavic world, that is, the Christian world. In other words, former “Catholic enemies” were transformed into Christian accomplices textually. The degree of “hostility” of the West depended, as we can see, on the situational rhetorical strategy of the author; it could change dynamically within the framework of one and the same work. P. Kulish-historian, despite his distinct Slavic identity, sometimes articulated sympathetic, sometimes approving theses and considerations regarding individual components of the civilizational image of the West. Thus, the scholar fully recognized the European “superiority” in the spheres of culture, education, industry and technological development. As we can see, the civilizational “otherness” of Europe did not prevent Kulish from stating its achievements.

Despite the outlined prejudices of P. Kulish regarding the West, the influence of the typical mental map of the bearers of the Eurocentric worldview with their inherent beliefs about the European West as the embodiment of high culture and civilization can still be seen in his views. When in some fragments of the works the historian equated Europeanness almost with barbarism, then in other fragments of the same works Western Europe stood as the pinnacle of civilization. Such a changing reception of Europe as a model of cultural development can be seen in numerous fragments of the majority of historical works. It should be highlighted that it is precisely in his historical texts (as well as in the texts of M. Kostomarov) that we trace the beginnings of a positive reception of Europeanism. It should be emphasized that the reception of Europe as a model of civilization was traced in early P. Kulish's works. For instace, in the work “Povist pro Ukrainskyi Narod” (“The Tale of the Ukrainian People”) he already talked about civilization (in the sense of the highest degree of cultural development) as an attribute of Western Europe in particular (Kulish, 2005c, p. 75). Later, in the autobiographical essay “Moye Zhyttia” on the pages of Kulish's historical works (“My Life”) (1868), P. Kulish also expressed his pro-European sympathies, “surprised at the civilization of happy peoples and saddened that cunning people do not allow their native Ukraine to be so civilized” (Kulish, 2005b, p. 130). During this period of his work, the historian quite clearly presented his own assessment of Europeanness in the folkloristic work “Prostonarodnist v Ukrainskiy Slovesnosti”. In it, we read that Western European civilization was never as imperceptible for the Ukrainians as it was for the Russian Slavophiles, who even “declared the West rotten and invented a purely Russian view of science and art” (Kulish, 1862, p. 10). Numerous judgments of P. Kulish regarding the history of the Cossacks also show the Eurocentric principles in his worldview.

If we analyse P. Kulish's historical texts of different periods, then a comprehensive analysis of civilizational considerations in them does not give grounds to generalize about his complete rejection of Western European civilization. As we already indicated repeatedly, the historian had a negative attitude only to individual components of the collective image of the West. In the 1870s and 1880s, P. Kulish, generally remaining a bearer of the Slavic identity, began to quite openly publicize his views on Western Europe as a space of high civilization and cultural achievements. It should be emphasized that precisely the two mentioned criteria - civilization and culture - became priorities in the axiological hierarchy of P. Kulish values. Therefore, the civilizational views of the late P. Kulish's works violate the typical imagological regularity: “his” community (the Slavic world) was accused of uncivilization and barbarism; instead, an “alien” civilization (i.e. the European West) was represented as a model of the civilized world. As it was alredy mentioned before, in the scale of European cultural achievements, the greatest value for the historian was the “enlightenment”. In his reflections on Ukrainian culture, he was forced to admit its backwardness compared to “enlightened Europe”. On this occasion, Ye. Nakhlik came to the conclusion that for P. Kulish it was even characteristic of the desire to “Europeanize” the Ukrainians by “assimilating the achievements of Western and world civilization” (Nakhlik, 2019, p. 50). We can also enumerate many articles, written by P. Kulish, which testify to the first stage of the Slavic identity transformation, i. e. the direction of its carriers to identify themselves with European civilization.

The Conclusion

Hence, we consider P. Kulish's historical legacy as a significant source of research into the genesis of the civilizational thought of the Ukrainian humanitarian scholars of “the long 19th century”. The scientific historical and historiosophical legacy of this iconic intellectual conceptually reflects the worldview principles of the Slavic identity supporters in general and illustrates their attitude towards Europe clearly. P. Kulish took a key place in the transformation processes of the Ukrainian intelligentsia civilizational identity. He emerged as one of the leading conceptualizers of the Slavic civilizational identity with distinct ideas about the West (Europe) as a completely “alien” cultural and civilizational environment for the Slavs. Still, in P. Kulish's late historical texts, the signs of a Eurocentric worldview and the beginnings of a tolerant reception of Europeanism can be traced. It was expressed in his recognition of Europe as a “civilized” and “cultural” environment, the first in a positive interpretation of European “enlightenment”. The worldview evolution of P. Kulish should be stated as a turning point in the genesis of the Ukrainian civilizational thought - the initial stage of the transition from the Slavic identity to the European identity.

The outlined transformation of civilizational views did not involve a complete rejection of the foundations of the Slavic identity: P. Kulish did not renounce it. Worldview changes were primarily related to the reception of the image of the West - from a completely negative to a partially positive one. In the later texts of P. Kulish, the statement of “alienness” and “hostility” of Europe no longer dominated, but attention was also paid to its “enlightenment” and level of civilization. The outlined worldview transformation of P. Kulish's civilizational views gives grounds to talk about the first stage (the 1860s - the 1880s) of the establishment of European identity in Ukrainian intellectual thought. Later, at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, a similar formula of civilizational identity became common among the Ukrainian historians.

Acknowledgement. The authors would like to express sincere gratitude to all members of the editorial board for the given advice during the preparation of the article for publishing.

Funding. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Valitskyi, A. (1998). V poloni konservatyvnoi utopii: Struktura i vydozminy rosiiskoho slov'ianofilstva [Captive of Conservative Utopia: the Structure and Changes of Russian Slavophilism]. Kyiv: Osnovy. [in Ukrainian]

Vysotin, M. (2016). Evoliutsiia pohliadiv na ukrainske kozatstvo ta istoriiu Khmelnychchyny v istoriohrafichnii spadshchyni Panteleimona Kulisha [Evolution of Views on Ukrainian Cossacks and the History of the Era of Khmelnytskyi in the Historiographical Heritage of Panteleymon Kulish]. Ukrainoznovstvo, 4(61), 52-64. Doi: 10.30840/2413-7065.4(61).2016.140940_[in Ukrainian]

Kulish, P. (1994). Zapiski o Yuzhnoj Rusi: Reprintnoe izdanie [Notes on Southern Rus': Reprint edition]. Kyiv: Dnipro. [in Russian]

Kulish, P. (1874a). Istoriya vozsoedineniya Rusi. Tom pervyj: Ot nachala kolonizacii opustoshennoj tatarskim pogromom Kievo-Galickoj Rusi do nachala stoletnej kozacko-shlyahetskoj vojny [History of the Reunification of Rus'. Volume One: From the Beginning of the Colonization of Kiev-Galician Rus, Devastated by the Tatar Massacre to the Beginning of the Hundred-Year Cossack-Nobility War]. St. Peterburg. [in Russian] Kulish, P. (1874b). Istoriya vozsoedineniya Rusi. Tom vtoroj: Ot nachala stoletnej kozacko- shlyahetskoj vojny do vozstanovleniya v Kieve pravoslavnoj ierarhii v 1620 godu [History of the Reunification of Rus'. Volume Two: From the Beginning of the Hundred-Year Cossack-Szlachta War to the Restoration of the Orthodox Hierarchy in Kiev in 1620]. St. Peterburg. [in Russian]

Kulish, P. (1877). Istoriya vozsoedineniya Rusi. Tom tretij: Religioznoe, socialnoe i nacionalnoe dvizhenie v epohu Iova Boreckago [History of the Reunification of Rus'. Volume Three: Religious, Social and National Movement in the Era of Iov Boretsky]. Moskva: Tipografiya A. A. Gatcuka, 1877. [in Russian] Kulish, P. (2016). Istoriya Ukrainy od naidavniishykh chasiv [History of Ukraine from ancient times]. Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal - Ukrainian Historical Journal, 3, 178-200. [in Ukrainian] Kulish, P. (1990). Knyha o dilakh narodu ukrainskoho i slavnoho Viiska kozatskoho Zaporozkoho [A book about the deeds of the Ukrainian people and the glorious Zaporizhzhya Cossack Army]. Kyrylo-Mefodiivske tovarystvo: U trokh tomakh, (vol. 2, pp. 66-80). Kyiv. [in Ukrainian]

Kulish, P. (2005a). Khutirska filosofiia i viddalena od svitu poeziia [Village Philosophy and Poetry Remote from the World]. Kulish P. Moie zhyttia: Povistpro Ukrainskyi narod. Moie zhyttia (Zhyzn Kulisha). Khutirska filosofiia i viddalena od svitu poeziia, (pp. 139-278). Kyiv: Redaktsiia zhurnalu “Ukrainskyi Svit”. [in Ukrainian]

Kulish, P. (2005b) Moie zhyttia (Zhyzn Kulisha) [My Life (Kulish's Life)]. Kulish P. Moie zhyttia: Povist pro Ukrainskyi narod. Moie zhyttia (Zhyzn Kulisha). Khutirska filosofiia i viddalena od svitu poeziia, (pp. 95-138). Kyiv: Redaktsiia zhurnalu “Ukrainskyi Svit”. [in Ukrainian]

Kulish, P. (2005c). Povist pro Ukrainskyi narod [A story about the Ukrainian people]. Kulish P. Moie zhyttia: Povist pro Ukrainskyi narod. Moie zhyttia (Zhyzn Kulisha). Khutirska filosofiia i viddalena od svitu poeziia, (pp. 25-94). Kyiv: Redaktsiia zhurnalu “Ukrainskyi Svit”. [in Ukrainian] Kulish, P. (1888a). Otpadenie Malorossii ot Polshi (1340 - 1654). V treh tomah. Tom pervyj

[Separation of Malorussia from Poland (1340 - 1654). In three volumes. Volume one]. Moskva:

Universitetskaya tipografiya. [in Russian]

Kulish, P. (1888b). Otpadenie Malorossii ot Polshi (1340 - 1654). V treh tomah. Tom vtoroj

[Separation of Malorussia from Poland (1340 - 1654). In three volumes. Volume two]. Moskva:

Universitetskaya tipografiya. [in Russian]

Kulish, P. (1889). Otpadenie Malorossii ot Polshi (1340 - 1654). V treh tomah. Tom tretij [Separation of Malorussia from Poland (1340 - 1654). In three volumes. Volume three]. Moskva: Universitetskaya tipografiya. [in Russian]

Kulish, P. (1862). Prostonarodnost v ukrainskoj slovesnosti [Commonness in Ukrainian Literature]. Osnova: Yuzhno-Russkii literaturno-uchenyj vestnik, Sichen (Yanvar), 1-10. [in Russian]

Kutsyi, I. (2018). The reception of Europe/West in the scientific heritage of the Mykhailo Maksymovych. Skhidnoievropeiskyi Istorychnyi Visnyk - East European Historical Bulletin, 7, 8-15. Doi: 10.24919/2519-058x.7.132753 [in English]

Kutsyi, I. (2019a). Obrazy Skhodu y Zakhodu v ukrainskii istoriohrafii: mizh realnym ta uiavnym prostorom [The Images of East and West in Ukrainian Historiography: Between the Real and the Imaginary Space]. Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal - Ukrainian Historical Journal, 2, 144-160. [in Ukrainian]

Kutsyi, 1 (2019b). Slovianska identychnist ukrainskykh istorykiv XIX st.: kontseptualizatsiia obrazu “svoiei” tsyvilizatsii [The Slavic Identity of Ukrainian Historians of the 19th Century: Conceptualization of the Image of “One's” Civilization]. Problemy slovianoznavstva, 68, 88-98. Doi: 10.30970/sls.2019.68.3072 [in Ukrainian]

Nakhlik, Ye. (2007a). Panteleimon Kulish: Osobystist, pysmennyk, myslytel: U 2 t. T. 1: Zhyttia Panteleimona Kulisha: Naukova biohrafiia [Panteleimon Kulish: Personality, Writer, Thinker: In 2 volumes. Vol. 1: Life of Panteleimon Kulish: Scientific Biography]. Kyiv: Ukrainskyi pysmennyk. [in Ukrainian] Nakhlik, Ye. (2007b). Panteleimon Kulish: Osobystist, pysmennyk, myslytel: U 2 t. T. 2: Svitohliad i tvorchist Panteleimona Kulisha [Panteleimon Kulish: Personality, Writer, Thinker: In 2 volumes. Vol. 2: Worldview and Creativity of Panteleimon Kulish]. Kyiv: Ukrainskyi pysmennyk. [in Ukrainian] Nakhlik, Ye. (2000). Ukraina mizh Skhodom i Zakhodom, Aziieiu i Yevropoiu: pohliad Panteleimona Kulisha [Ukraine between East and West, Asia and Europe: the view of Panteleimon Kulish]. Panteleimon Kulish. Materialy i doslidzhennia. Lviv- Niu-York: V-vo M. P. Kots, 13-40. [in Ukrainian]

Nakhlik, Ye. (2019). Polityko-filosofski rozmysly Panteleimona Kulisha (do 200-richchia vid dnia narodzhennia pysmennyka, naukovtsia, myslytelia i hromadsko-politychnoho diiacha) [Political and Philosophical Reflections of Panteleimon Kulish (to the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of the Writer, Scientist, Thinker and Social and Political Figure)]. Visnyk Lvivskoho torhovelno-ekonomichnoho universytetu. Humanitarni nauky, 16, 43-51. Doi: 10.36477/2616-8510-2019-16-04 [in Ukrainian]

Yas O. (2019). Istorychne pysmo piznoho P.Kulisha yak predtecha konservatyvnoho proektu ukrainskoi istoriohrafii pochatku XX st. [The Historical Writing of the Late P. Kulish as a Forerunner of the Conservative Project of Ukrainian Historiography of the beginning of the 20th century]. Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal - Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 4, 61-87. [in Ukrainian]

Yas O. (2007). Istorychni pohliady Panteleimona Kulisha v svitli intelektualnykh metamorfoz 1870- 1880-kh rokiv [Historical Views of Panteleimon Kulish in the Light of Intellectual Metamorphoses of the 1870s and 1880s]. Istoriohrafichni doslidzhennia v Ukraini, 17, 78-105. [in Ukrainian]

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru