What do you think?
Rate this book
Книга буття українського народу
Книга подає своєрідний огляд нелегкої, почасти драматичної історії українського народу. її головною ідеєю є духовне і національне відродження народу, його прагнення сповідувати християнські заповіді.
Зміст книги органічно доповнюють програмні документи Кирило-Мефодіївського братства, що, як і «Закон Божий (Книга буття українського народу)», були визнані слідчими царської охранки особливо крамольними і стали причиною арешту Т. Г. Шевченка, М. І. Костомарова та їхніх однодумців.
Зміст книги органічно доповнюють програмні документи Кирило-Мефодіївського братства, що, як і «Закон Божий (Книга буття українського народу)», були визнані слідчими царської охранки особливо крамольними і стали причиною арешту Т. Г. Шевченка, М. І. Костомарова та їхніх однодумців.
Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1846
16 people want to read
About the author
Nikolai Kostomarov
80 books7 followersRussian Cyrillic profile:
Николай Иванович Костомаров
Historian, publicist, and writer. He graduated from the Voronezh gymnasium and then in 1837 from Kharkiv University. From 1844 to 1845 Kostomarov taught history at the Rivne and at the First Kyiv gymnasiums. In 1846 he was appointed assistant professor in the Department of Russian History at Kyiv University. That year, along with Vasyl Bilozersky, Panteleimon Kulish, Mykola Hulak, Taras Shevchenko, and others, he formed the Cyril and Methodius Brotherhood. In Knyhy bytiia ukraïns’koho narodu (Books of the Genesis of the Ukrainian People), Ustav Slov'ians’koho tovarystva sv Kyryla i Metodiia: Holovni ideï (The Statute of the Slavic Society of Saints Cyril and Methodius: Its Main Ideas), and two proclamations, Kostomarov formulated the society's program and basic ideas: Christian piety, democratic republicanism, a Ukrainian national renaissance, Ukrainian messianism, and Pan-Slavic federalism. In 1847 he was arrested along with all the other members of the society and sentenced to one year's imprisonment in the Peter and Paul Fortress in Saint Petersburg, followed by exile.
Until 1856 he lived in exile in Saratov, serving as a chancellery clerk. Three years later he moved to Saint Petersburg, where he was appointed to the Chair of Russian History at the university. Because of his political involvements he had to resign his university position in 1862 and could not accept offers from other universities. From then on he devoted himself exclusively to research.
Kostomarov wrote a number of fundamental works on the history of Ukraine in the 16th–18th centuries. Among them were Bogdan Khmel’nitskii i vozvrashchenie Iuzhnoi Rusi k Rossii (Bohdan Khmelnytsky and the Return of Southern Rus’ to Russia, 1st edn in Otechestvennye zapiski, 1857, vols 110–13; 2nd edn in 2 vols, 1859; 3rd edn in 3 vols, 1876), Ruina, istoricheskaia monografiia iz zhizni Malorossii 1663–1687 gg. (The Ruin: A Historical Monograph on the Life of Little Russia from 1663 to 1687, 1st edn in Vestnik Evropy, nos 4–9 [1879] and nos 7–9 [1880]), and ‘Mazepa i Mazepintsy’ (Mazepa and the Mazepists, in Russkaia mysl’ [1882–4]). These works are based on extensive documentary material that, as a member of the Saint Petersburg Archeographic Commission, Kostomarov collected in Saint Petersburg and Moscow archives and partly published in Akty, otnosiashchiesia k istorii Iuzhnoi i Zapadnoi Rossii (Documents on the History of Southern and Western Russia, 10 vols, 1861–78). He also wrote a series of books on Russian history. His historical monographs and articles were published by the Literary Fund in Saint Petersburg. Its last edition of his works, in eight volumes, came out in 1903–6. He was the author of Russkaia istoriia v zhizneopisaniiakh eia vazhneishikh deiatelei (Rus’ History in the Biographies of Its Important Figures, 1874–6), which was devoted mostly to Ukrainian historical figures. This work was translated into Ukrainian and published in the journal Pravda and separately under the title Rus’ka istoriia v zhyttiepysakh ïï naiholovnishykh diiateliv (1875–7), then republished as Ukraïns’ka istoriia v zhyttiepysakh ïï naiznamenytnishykh diiachiv (1918).
Kostomarov was the founder of the populist trend in Ukrainian historiography. He believed that the purpose of the historical sciences was to describe the past of human communities. In his historicophilosophical studies, such as ‘Mysli o federativnom nachale v drevnei Rusi’ (Reflections on the Federative Principle in Ancient Rus’), ‘Dve russkie narodnosti’ (Two Rus’ Peoples), and ‘Cherty narodnoi iuzhnorusskoi istorii’ (Characteristics of Popular South-Rus’ History), which were all published in Osnova (Saint Petersburg), nos 1–3 (1861), and in his journalistic articles, such as ‘Pravda moskvicham o Rusi’ (The Truth about Rus’ for Muscovites), ‘Pravda poliakam o Rusi’ (The Truth about Rus’ for Poles), and his letter to the editor of Kol
Historian, publicist, and writer. He graduated from the Voronezh gymnasium and then in 1837 from Kharkiv University. From 1844 to 1845 Kostomarov taught history at the Rivne and at the First Kyiv gymnasiums. In 1846 he was appointed assistant professor in the Department of Russian History at Kyiv University. That year, along with Vasyl Bilozersky, Panteleimon Kulish, Mykola Hulak, Taras Shevchenko, and others, he formed the Cyril and Methodius Brotherhood. In Knyhy bytiia ukraïns’koho narodu (Books of the Genesis of the Ukrainian People), Ustav Slov'ians’koho tovarystva sv Kyryla i Metodiia: Holovni ideï (The Statute of the Slavic Society of Saints Cyril and Methodius: Its Main Ideas), and two proclamations, Kostomarov formulated the society's program and basic ideas: Christian piety, democratic republicanism, a Ukrainian national renaissance, Ukrainian messianism, and Pan-Slavic federalism. In 1847 he was arrested along with all the other members of the society and sentenced to one year's imprisonment in the Peter and Paul Fortress in Saint Petersburg, followed by exile.
Until 1856 he lived in exile in Saratov, serving as a chancellery clerk. Three years later he moved to Saint Petersburg, where he was appointed to the Chair of Russian History at the university. Because of his political involvements he had to resign his university position in 1862 and could not accept offers from other universities. From then on he devoted himself exclusively to research.
Kostomarov wrote a number of fundamental works on the history of Ukraine in the 16th–18th centuries. Among them were Bogdan Khmel’nitskii i vozvrashchenie Iuzhnoi Rusi k Rossii (Bohdan Khmelnytsky and the Return of Southern Rus’ to Russia, 1st edn in Otechestvennye zapiski, 1857, vols 110–13; 2nd edn in 2 vols, 1859; 3rd edn in 3 vols, 1876), Ruina, istoricheskaia monografiia iz zhizni Malorossii 1663–1687 gg. (The Ruin: A Historical Monograph on the Life of Little Russia from 1663 to 1687, 1st edn in Vestnik Evropy, nos 4–9 [1879] and nos 7–9 [1880]), and ‘Mazepa i Mazepintsy’ (Mazepa and the Mazepists, in Russkaia mysl’ [1882–4]). These works are based on extensive documentary material that, as a member of the Saint Petersburg Archeographic Commission, Kostomarov collected in Saint Petersburg and Moscow archives and partly published in Akty, otnosiashchiesia k istorii Iuzhnoi i Zapadnoi Rossii (Documents on the History of Southern and Western Russia, 10 vols, 1861–78). He also wrote a series of books on Russian history. His historical monographs and articles were published by the Literary Fund in Saint Petersburg. Its last edition of his works, in eight volumes, came out in 1903–6. He was the author of Russkaia istoriia v zhizneopisaniiakh eia vazhneishikh deiatelei (Rus’ History in the Biographies of Its Important Figures, 1874–6), which was devoted mostly to Ukrainian historical figures. This work was translated into Ukrainian and published in the journal Pravda and separately under the title Rus’ka istoriia v zhyttiepysakh ïï naiholovnishykh diiateliv (1875–7), then republished as Ukraïns’ka istoriia v zhyttiepysakh ïï naiznamenytnishykh diiachiv (1918).
Kostomarov was the founder of the populist trend in Ukrainian historiography. He believed that the purpose of the historical sciences was to describe the past of human communities. In his historicophilosophical studies, such as ‘Mysli o federativnom nachale v drevnei Rusi’ (Reflections on the Federative Principle in Ancient Rus’), ‘Dve russkie narodnosti’ (Two Rus’ Peoples), and ‘Cherty narodnoi iuzhnorusskoi istorii’ (Characteristics of Popular South-Rus’ History), which were all published in Osnova (Saint Petersburg), nos 1–3 (1861), and in his journalistic articles, such as ‘Pravda moskvicham o Rusi’ (The Truth about Rus’ for Muscovites), ‘Pravda poliakam o Rusi’ (The Truth about Rus’ for Poles), and his letter to the editor of Kol
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 17, 2021
прекрасний історичний документ, що засвідчує, якими були уявлення інтелігенції першої половини ХІХ століття про майбутнє України - "нерозділимо і несмісимо" разом з іншими слов'янами (передусім поляками й "москалями" як християнської Трійці). Перераховані недоліки різних народів: французи більше шанували честь національну, аніж Христа; "англічане" кланялися золоту і мамоні, а інші народи мали своїх ідолів - "І вимислили одщепенці нового бога, сильнішого над усіх дрібних боженят, а той бог називався по-французьки егоїзм або інтерес". Але й слов'ян було два лиха (дві головні проблеми українських інтелектуалів): незгода між собою; і те, що вони, як менші брати, усе переймали од старших (назвімо це "комплекс меншовартості"). І насамкінець сум, але не безвідрадний "Лежить в могилі Україна, але не вмерла" і "буде Україна неподлеглою Річчю Посполитою в союзі слов'янськім".
Displaying 1 of 1 review