Pushkin, M. Lermontov, O. Blok, S. Esenin, M. Bogdanovich and a number of other masters of world poetry.
M. Dry-Khmara’s contribution to the development of Ukrainian literary criticism is also noticeable. In 1926 a separate edition of his thorough monograph was published "Lesya Ukrainka"… He also addressed the problems of the development of Shevchenko studies, collected new materials for the biography of V. Chumak, studied Slavic studies, and was interested in the achievements of Belarusian literature (works on M. Bogdanovich and J. Kupala).
M. Dry-Khmara could have done much more for the sake of Ukrainian literature, but in the heyday of his creative forces he was arrested in March 1933. The writer was soon released and deprived of all positions, without even being given the opportunity to get a job. The second arrest becomes fatal. The accusation leveled against him is standard: nationalist counterrevolutionary activity. And although M. Dry-Khmara denied everything, the punishment was not long in coming – five years in camps.
His slave path runs on Kolyma; here he works in the mines, washes the sand, kneeling in the icy water. Over time, the decision "threes" The UNKVD gives him another ten years for anti-Soviet propaganda in the camp. He died in 1939. There is a version in this regard, supported by memories that during one of the next shootings every fifth in a row, the writer took the place of a suicide bomber, thus saving the young man.
Thanks to the poet’s wife, the manuscript of his second collection miraculously reached us "Solar marches" and a tragic poem written in 1936 in Lukyanovka prison "And again charred matches …" The mentioned poem is a cry of pain and unspeakable longing for youth, happiness and will.
Hrushevsky was a person who not only had high ideological convictions, but also ordinary human traits, emotions and passions, ambitious ambitions, likes and dislikes, emotional upheavals, certain weaknesses and painful mistakes. And he was a man of his time – a time of sharp social contradictions and brutal national oppression by the imperial authorities against the Ukrainian people and its elite, to him personally as one of its most prominent representatives.
He and his associates worked under very difficult, often extreme, exhausting conditions (for example, in 1917-1918). "I was tired … – M. Hrushevsky recalled, – I was afraid for my strength, for my mental balance … returning from meetings in the evening, of course I could not fall asleep, except late at night … At the same time we all lived in constant anxiety, in the consciousness of the possibility of some unexpected catastrophe: arrests, armed attack, etc."
It should be added that neither Mykhailo Hrushevsky himself nor his closest associates in the Ukrainian Central Rada had any experience of parliamentary, let alone state-building. The basis of this victorious work were his political or political concepts, says the famous Grushevsky Lubomyr Vinar, "closely connected with his historiosophy and historical concepts, with an emphasis on the struggle of the Ukrainian people for freedom and independence"…
Apparently, precisely because his activity in Galicia, and since 1905 in Dnieper Ukraine for the unification of Ukrainians was subordinated to the spread of his individual ideas on the development of independent Ukraine, it was Hrushevsky and had a difficult fate to head not only the Central Council almost immediately after its uprising, but also all that great flow to freedom and liberation from the yoke of Moscow in the 1917-1920s.
One of Hrushevsky’s contemporaries, B. Martos, wrote that the choice fell on Hrushevsky because "everyone … knew his patriotism, honesty, erudition, efficiency and other qualities of his character"… In addition, among all the figures of the Central Council and the entire Ukrainian revival of the liberation struggle, he probably knew the political life of the West best, having spent many years abroad. It is also obvious that he was the highest authority among all those patriots of Ukraine who swore allegiance to the independent Ukrainian state.
Hrushevsky was a great patriot of Ukraine and Ukrainians, but he was also a great democrat-statesman, a socialist who could not be blinded by nationalist perversions. He consistently opposed national, in particular between the Slavic peoples, separation, against the propaganda of ideological nationalist extremes, but he, seeing through the tragic events of early 1918, consistently opposed "Moscow orientation"… He called on his contemporaries to be liberated "from "dog’s duty ” against the Muscovy"…
We must all remember that it is to him, Mykhailo Serhiiovych Hrushevsky, that we owe the fact that after almost 300 years of national enslavement and destruction, he proclaimed Ukraine an independent state, as recorded by the Fourth Universal.
Only taking into account all these moments and circumstances can we understand and objectively assess Hrushevsky’s relations with people.
It is quite natural that he had many friends, supporters, and many ardent enemies. But here we will not talk about the uncompromising political opponents of MS Hrushevsky "white" or "red" the defending camp "a single, indivisible Russia" with the corresponding differences of these colors "arrangement"… Under term "opponents" we mean those figures who embodied the alternative to Hrushevsky in the Ukrainian liberation movement itself. After all, not all of his closest associates, say in the Ukrainian Central Council and others in it, shared the views of their leader on all issues of history, theory and practice of building Ukrainian statehood.
The persons represented in this book belonged to various Ukrainian political parties, public organizations, and currents of public and historical thought. They interpreted the historical past of Ukraine differently "designed" its political future, in particular the solution of a complex intertwining of tasks of national and social liberation. They looked at many other problems of nation-building differently: Ukraine’s place in the international community, in particular its relations with its neighbor, and "older brother" – Russia, solving the problems of national minorities in independent Ukraine, creating its own armed forces, etc. The ways and means by which they sought to achieve their goal were also different.
Of course, all this had a corresponding effect on the personal relations of the above-mentioned figures with MS Hrushevsky, which developed in different ways, often underwent a certain evolution, and sometimes changed dramatically for objective and subjective reasons. Some of Hrushevsky’s supporters and associates over time and under certain circumstances of socio-political life found themselves in the camp of his opponents, and, conversely, former opponents became sincere friends and reliable associates. Many of these figures were both like-minded and opponents of MS Hrushevsky, unconditionally supported him in solving some problems and ardently argued with him about others.
Of course, this book does not contain information about all the people with whom MS Hrushevsky collaborated and communicated, with whom he studied and whom he taught himself, creating his own great school in Ukrainian historical science.
The personalities placed here only represent MS Hrushevsky’s entourage in different periods of his life and activity and those socio-political organizations and state institutions headed and https://123helpme.me/ethan-frome/ worked by this great Ukrainian (Shevchenko Scientific Society, Ukrainian Scientific Society, Ukrainian Party). Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Ukrainian Central Council, the All-Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, its institutes, commissions, departments, the Ukrainian Sociological Institute in Vienna, and other foreign scientific and educational institutions, etc.).
All these people, different in professions, ages, characters, are united first of all by the fact that they have dedicated themselves to serving the Ukrainian national idea, solving "Ukrainian issue" giving to this cause all his mind and work. All of them are outstanding personalities who have played a role of different sizes, but in general quite noticeable in the Ukrainian movement, creation and protection of independent statehood, its promotion in many countries of the world, writing its history, etc.
They all swore allegiance to Ukraine and its people "soul and body" at the foundation of its independence, and therefore worthy of the memory and honor of descendants. It is the professional and civic duty of historians, local historians, and artists to write and tell about them. This is all the more necessary because the vast majority of them are still little known to the general public, and some "not familiar" even historians. After all, official ideology and propaganda for many decades have done everything to "delete" them from history.
Many of them were physically destroyed in the grindstones of the repressive totalitarian state machine. Others escaped in exile. If the names of some of these figures (with essential labels "counterrevolutionaries" "bourgeois nationalists" etc.) were more or less known, the biographies of the vast majority of them were published only in literature published abroad. Unfortunately, not enough has been done in independent Ukraine to close this gap.
Philip Orlyk was born on October 11, 1672 in the village of Kosuta, Oshmyany district, Vilnius region. The Orlyk family comes from an old baronial family, common in the Czech Republic, Moravia and Silesia. One of the representatives of this genus during the Hussite movement of the fourteenth – early fifteenth century. moved to Poland and then to Lithuania. It is from this line that the ancestors of Philip Orlyk come. In 1673, during the Polish-Turkish war, his father died in the battle of Khotyn.