Putting Ukraine on the map: the contribution of Stepan Rudnyts'kyi to Ukrainian nation-building

Abstract

This paper examines the contribution of the founder of modern Ukrainian geography, Stepan Rudnyts'kyi, to Ukrainian nation-building. It demonstrates how Rudnyts'kyi put Ukraine on the mental map of the Ukrainian public before the declaration of Ukraine's independence in 1918. This is done by analyzing his key publications and showing how he formed a vision of Ukraine and delineated its territory to influence the perceptions of the Ukrainian public on the eve of the struggle for Ukraine's independence. Rudnyts'kyi's contribution is also viewed within the context of competition from rival modern nation-building projects in Eastern Europe, most notably Polish and Russian. The developments are also examined within Miroslav Hroch's periodization of national movements. Rudnyts'kyi played an important role in stage B (patriotic agitation) in Ukrainian national revival.

Keywords:

• Stepan Rudnyts'kyi
• Ukraine
• geography
• nation-building

Notes

Debates on the formation of nations have focused on the discussion between those who consider nations as something natural or perennial and those who claim nations to be a modern phenomenon. Anthony D. Smith, in his The Antiquity of Nations (4–15), referred to the former as primordialists or perennialists and to the latter as modernists. The importance of social communication in the formation of a nation was stressed by Karl W. Deutsch in Nationalism and Social Communication (188). The reference to a nation as a larger, collectively “imagined community” was coined by Benedict Anderson in his book, Imagined Communities (6–7). He also emphasized the symbolic importance of the census and its use for categorizing population, the map for shaping the imagination of the homeland, and the museum for evoking pride in the homeland's antiquities (163–85).

See Hroch, Social Preconditions xi–xv; also see Nationalities Papers 38.6 and especially Maxwell, “Twenty-five years of A-B-C” (773–76); Maxwell, “Typologies and phases in nationalism studies” (865–80); and Hroch's response in “Comments” (881–90).

In “Ukraine: From an Imperial Periphery to a Sovereign State,” Szporluk emphasized that in the competition of modern nation-building, one nation's rise also leads to the unmaking of another, already existing nation (92), with the former “othering” the latter (98). National movement may be complicated, as Magocsi pointed out (“The Ukrainian National Revival” 51), by competition between those who adhere to a hierarchy of multiple loyalties and those who believe in mutually exclusive identities that lend themselves to “othering.” Serhy Yekelchyk, in “Out of Russia's Long Shadow,” observed that it was the imperial collapse that provoked the popular movement toward sovereignty and not the other way around. He noted the role of Soviet Ukraine's Ukrainization policy in the 1920s for Ukrainian nation-building (10). On this point, Terry Martin (The Affirmative Action Empire 15) advocated adding phase D to Hroch's schema.

For more on this topic, see Magocsi, A History of Ukraine 450; Subtelny, Ukraine: A History 323–33, and especially Plokhy, Unmaking Imperial Russia 55–56.

The idea of mental maps, that is, perceptions and images that people have of places around them, was developed by Peter Gould. See Gould and White, Mental Maps.

For a brief overview of the life, work and significance of Taras Shevchenko, see Antokhii, Struk and Zelska-Darewych. The political inspiration of his writings is addressed more fully in Matthews and in Solovei.

See Magocsi, A History of Ukraine 440, and “The Language Question,” and Isaievych.

For more on Šafařik's work as a reaction to the Austrian Empire's Germanization, its publication in Russian (in 1843 in Moscow) and its influence on the Slavo-centric movement in Russia, see Petronis 116, and especially 176–80.

Pavel Šafařik, Encyclopedia of Ukraine (1993). His classification of languages employed a hierarchical structure with official Russian terminology: Under the Russian language group he placed the Great Russian dialects, Little Russian dialects and Belorussian dialects (řeč ruská, nářeči velkoruské, nářeči maloruské, nářeči béloruské). In the text he also identified the areas inhabited by each of the peoples. Šafařik, Slovanský národopis 6, 20–42.

Kossak's map, Karta etnohrafichna Malorusy, appeared as a supplement to his article “Rusyny” in L'vovianyn: Pryruchnyi i hospodars'kyi, mesiatseslov na rok 1862. L'viv: Stavropigiis'kyi Instytut, 1861. Qtd in Sossa, Istoriia 140–41. For a discussion of this map and its illustration, see Seegel 169–71.

The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had a long tradition of map-making. With Russian annexation, the collections in Warsaw were purloined, while map-making at Wilno (in Russian, Vil'na, now Vilnius) was restricted to serving Russian military needs. Consequently, many Polish maps and atlases found refuge in the Austrian Empire, notably in the Ossolineum Library in Lemberg (in Polish, Lwów, now L'viv). See Seegel 160, 162–63. A comprehensive list of nineteenth-century Polish maps and atlases, along with their description, are provided in Olszewicz, Kartografia Polska XIX wieku. Of particular interest are the historic maps and atlases of pre-partition Poland. The historical geography of Poland by Zygmunt Gloger, Geografia historyczna ziem dawnej Polski, was originally published in Cracow in 1903 and reprinted in Warsaw in 1991.

The Imperial Russian Geographical Society was formed in 1845. For details about the surveys, studies and ethnographic mapping of the western lands of the Russian Empire, see Petronis 117–72.

In Russian, Petr Ivanovich Kepen. He compiled a massive database on the population of the Russian Empire. On this basis he produced, in 1848, the first Ethnographical Atlas of European Russia (printed in 3 copies), and in 1851, the first ethnographical map of European Russia, which gained great popularity.

The expedition, conceptualized by Chubyns'kyi to gather and document the heritage, numbers and extent of settlement of the peoples of the region, was funded by the Tsarist government and conducted under the auspices of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, to provide the ethnographic substantiation for a broadly based Russian (Little Russian or Belorussian) ethnicity of the region and thus weaken the basis for Polish anti-Russian insurrections (1830–31, 1863). Also see Petronis 140.

After Mikail Iuzefovich, an imperial Russian administrator and founding member of the Southwestern Branch of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, reported his concern to St Petersburg (in 1875) that Kyiv had once again become a center of separatism, strict measures of the Ems Ukase (1876) were imposed and the Branch was dissolved.

Chubyns'kyi was the author of a poem that became the Ukrainian national anthem, “Shche ne vmerla Ukraina” (1862). For this as well as for singing Ukrainian songs at the Shevchenko grave in Kaniv and for speaking to the peasantry about their rights to freedom, he was exiled to Arkhangelsk guberniia (1862–69). His outstanding skills and demonstrated abilities on the Arkhangelsk guberniia statistics committee and in organizing the guberniia population census earned him the support of the Russian geographer and head of the Central statistical committee (1864–74), Petr Petrovich Semenov, and his freedom. See Kostrytsia.

These included systematic collections of songs and tales, folk beliefs, customs and rites, documentation of the folk calendar, codification of the common law and a survey of Ukrainian dialects. The effort included scholars such as Volodymyr Antonovych, Mykhailo Drahomanov, Oleksander Kistiakovs'kyi, Kostiantyn Mykhal'chuk and others.

The map, originally produced in 1871 (Senkus), was published later in Russian (Mykhal'chuk, Narechiia). His subsequent publication in Ukrainian (Mykhal'chuk and Tymchenko, Prohrama) laid out a program for more studies.

See Reclus 488. This map, drawn by the cartographer C. Perron, is devoted to Ukraine as an entity. It shows, with a solid shading, the contiguous Ukrainian ethnographic territory (based on Mykhal'chuk's map of Ukrainian dialects and other sources). Within that shaded area, it shows specific historic areas that experienced statehood or self-rule in their historic past: the fourteenth-century Principality of Galicia-Volhynia, the fifteenth- and sixteenth-centurys Mukachevo Land, the Ukrainian Cossack State in 1649, the Hetmanate (1667–1765), the Sloboda Ukraine (seventeenth and eighteenth centuries), Polish Ukraine in the eighteenth century, Zaporozhia (sixteenth to eighteenth century) and the Black Sea Cossack Lands (nineteenth century). A conventional ethnographic map of Eastern Europe, titled Peuples de l'Europe Orientale, was also included in this volume. Presented as a color fold-out between pages 846 and 847, it showed 36 different nationalities. The area occupied by Ukrainians (Petits Russiens) also showed enclaves of other nationalities there and elsewhere.

Of particular significance is his challenge to the imperial narrative, in which he deconstructed the traditional scheme of “Russian” history as it pertains to the history of the Eastern Slavs (Hrushevs'kyi, “Zvychaina skhema”). Also see the discussion in Plokhy 95–116, 554.

Hrushevs'kyi provided a framework for a Ukrainian historical continuum that began from before the Kyivan Rus' period and lasted past the Cossack era. He contributed a fundamental scholarly history of Ukraine in the form of many articles and monographs, including his ten-volume Istoriia Ukrainy-Rusy. A list of Hrushevs'kyi's publications may be found in Plokhy, Unmaking Imperial Russia, 548–55. With Ukraine's renewed independence since 1991, the Hrushevs'kyi scheme of Ukrainian history, also dubbed as the Ukrainophile historical writing, has gained a dominant position in the Ukrainian education system by 2006 (Kuzio).

See Magocsi, “The Scholar as Nation-Builder” 881, and especially Plokhy, “The Historian as Nation-Builder” in his Unmaking Imperial Russia 23–91. Hrushevs'kyi's articles that express his views on the situation in Ukraine and his government's policies when he was President are found in Hrushevs'kyi, Na porozi. For his biography, see Prymak, Mykhailo Hrushevsky.

Among its founding members and authors of the program was Ivan Franko. See Franko, “Prohrama Rus'ko-Ukrains'koi Radykal'noi Partii.”

See “Prohramovi zasady Bratstva Tarasivtsiv,” in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 19–25.

See “Materialy Druhoho Vicha Ukrains'koi Akademichnoi Molodi,” in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 75–79.

Ivan Franko, “Poza mezhamy mozhlyvoho,” in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 80–87.

Mikhnovs'kyi, “Samostiina Ukraina” [“Independent Ukraine”], speech, L'viv, 1900, reprinted in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 61–72. It was also in L'viv that his open letter to the Russian Minister of Internal Affairs, Siliagin, was published. In that letter he condemned the Minister's order forbidding the use of Ukrainian on the monument to the first Ukrainian national poet, Kotliarevs'kyi, and threatening a war of Ukrainian liberation. See his “Vidkrytyi lyst Revoliutsiinoi Ukrains'koi Partii do Ministra Vnutrishnikh Sprav Siliagina,” Moloda Ukraina, 1: 9–10 (L'viv, 1900), 388–89; reprinted in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 73–74.

For the protest of the Ukrainian representatives in the Vienna parliament in 1907 see: “Protest ukrains'koi reprezentatsii u videns'komu parliamenti,” in Kost' Levyts'kyi, Istoriia politychnoi dumky halyts'kykh ukraintsiv 1848–1914. Druha chast' (L'viv: Nakladom vlasnym, 1927), 446–48; reprinted in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 163–64. Also, for the 1913 program of the Ukrainian National-Democratic Party, which called for the establishment of one Ukrainian province in the Austrian Empire see: Stepan Baran, Nasha prohrama i organizatsiia. Prohrama i organizatsiia ukrains'koi natsional'no demokratychnoi (narodnoi) partyi. L'viv: np, 1913. 10–15; reprinted in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 191–96.

See the evaluation of the program of the Ukrainian Socialist Party by the Ukrainian Socialist Democratic Party in 1900 and the reply of the former, as presented Ukrains'ka, Vol. l, 88–98, 99–103.

See the programs of various parties, in Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1, 110–13, 114–24, 139–40, 141–46, 147–52, 153–59. Indeed, once the political parties were legalized, the Ukrainian representatives in the Russian First State Duma (April–July 1906) declared their intention to work for autonomy in all of Russia and “… the liberation of our Ukraine from slavery.” “Prohrama Ukrains'koi Trudovoi Hromady v Druhii Derzhavnii Dumi.” Ukraina Year I, Vol. II (June 1907): 80–83, as reprinted in Ukrains'ka, Vol. l, 160–62.

Dmytro Dontsov, “Suchasne politychne polozhennia natsii i nashi zavdannia.” Reprinted as “Dmytro Dontsov pro politychne polozhennia natsii na peredodni pershoi svitovoi viiny.” Ukrains'ka, Vol. 1. 168–90, but see especially 188. Originally from southeastern Ukraine, Dontsov studied law in St Petersburg, was persecuted for his involvement in the Ukrainian Social Democratic Workers' Party and fled from Kyiv to Galicia in 1908. He remained there (later under Poland) until World War II, engaged in polemics and journalism, authoring, among other books, Natsionalizm, in which he argued that Ukrainians should be more assertive.

The importance of territoriality in nationalist thought is discussed in Penrose.

An assessment of his map and the sources he used are provided in Hryhorii Velychko. “Deiaki zamitky do etnografichnoi karty Rusy-Ukrainy” [“Some notes on the ethnographic map of Rus'-Ukraine”]. Istoriia ukrains'koi heohrafii 11(Ternopil': 2005): 31–32, reprinted from Dilo (L'viv: 1893) 52 (6 (18) March): 1–2.

See Rovenchak 14. According to Velychko's calculations, the contiguous ethnic territory of Ukraine-Rus' was 855,227 sq. km (of which 769,396 sq. km. were in the Russian Empire and 85,831 sq. km. in the Austrian Empire). Even so, he included Crimea and the Caucasus as part of the physical geography of Ukraine. Hryhorii Velychko, Heohrafiia Ukrainy-Rusy 9, cited in Shtoiko 20–21.

For more details, see Shtoiko 6–10; on his academic appointment, see Oleh Shablii, Akademik Stepan Rudnyts'kyi 35–39. There were only two earlier appointments at L'viv University which included lecturing in the Ukrainian language: the Chair of Ukrainian History (Mykhailo Hrushevs'kyi) and a lectureship in the history of Ukrainian literature (Ivan Franko), both in 1894. A Chair of Ukrainian Literature was not established until 1900.

These included the geographers M. Dol'nyts'kyi, Iu Polians'kyi, Ye Forostyna, S. Shpytkovs'kyi, V. Cheredarchuk V. Kozak, S. Pashkevych and others. Shablii, Akademik 40.

Stefan Rudnyckyj, Ukraina und die Ukrainer 11, as summarized by Shablii, Akademik 53.

Gerynovych, “Nacherky ukrains'koi zapadnoi etnohrafichnoi hranytsi” 1, qtd. in Mendeliuk 40, 45.

In his word to the readers, the author complained about the many changes the publishers made to his text without his approval as well as their careless proofreadinging. He provided a 13-page list of corrections of the most fundamental errors that had changed the meaning of the text. Other errors in language and conversion of metric to Russian measures, as well as a very poorly reproduced map, he left to the publishers' responsibility. Rudnyts'kyi, Korotka geografiia Ukrainy 1, I–XIII.

Rudnyts'kyi expressed his frustration with the “Lan” publisher in Kyiv for losing his manuscript in the Foreword to his subsequent volume, Korotka Geografiia Ukrainy, Chast' II 1, and again in his expanded two-volume (1923, 1926) textbook on geography of Ukraine: Osnovy zemleznannia Ukrainy (1923) 1.

Rudnyts'kyi began by saying that, for any self-respecting Ukrainian, the Ukrainian nation is a separate nation equivalent to any other European nation. The latent national self-consciousness was ignited in the nineteenth century and had grown to become the will of the people that must be considered both by politicians and social scientists. He conceded that this was also an emotive issue, since there were neighboring nations that wanted to absorb the Ukrainians just as much as the Ukrainians wanted to be a separate nation (35). Rudnyts'kyi then presented the Polish claims (36) and then the Muscovite claims and their expansionist and assimilationist policies (37–40), Tsarist support of the Russophile movement on the Austrian side of the border (41–42), and the need for a Ukrainian to be able to demonstrate his/her knowledge of Ukrainian nationality and the imperative for Ukraine's independence (44–46).

Rudnyts'kyi, “Ukraina” 87–94.

The Union for the Liberation of Ukraine [Soiuz vyzvolennia Ukrainy] was an organization of Ukrainian émigrés from the Russian Empire, established in Austria-Hungary and Germany during World War I as an organization representing the Ukrainians under Russian domination. It sought to use the war as a means of securing Ukrainian independence. Its presidium was initially headed by Dmytro Dontsov and Mykola Zalizniak. It made representations to the Central Powers and neutral European governments, distributed information and supported publications about Ukraine. It also provided medical, religious, and cultural services for Ukrainian POWs of the Russian army held in camps in Austria, Hungary and Germany.

Rudnizkyj, Stefano, L'Ucraina e gli Ukraini; Rudnyckyj, Ukraina es az Ukrainiak; Rudnickij, The Ukraine and the Ukrainians; Part 3 in the book by Boczkowski; Rudnitskii, “Ocherki geografii Ukrainy” 361–80.

These included: Rudnyckyj, “Der östliche Kriegsschauplatz: I.”; Rudnyckyj, “Der östliche Kriegsschauplatz”; Rudnyckyj, Die Ukraine und die Krieg-Denkschrift des Bundes der Befreiung der Ukraine.

Since the original booklet was not available to this author, references here and subsequently are to the pages in the 1994 reprint.

This Social Darwinist viewpoint derives from Rudnytskyi's reading of Friedrich Ratzel, Politische Geographie and Alfred Kirchhoff, Darwinismus, whose books he quoted in his “Ukrains'ka sprava” 95.

See “Pliatforma Ukrains'koi Radykal'noi Partii,” Ukrains'ka 141–146.

The full text of the 1920 version of this booklet was reprinted in 1923 in Berlin as Ukrains'ka sprava zi stanovyshcha politychnoi geografii (Berlin: Vydavnytstvo “Ukrains'ke Slovo,” 1923). It is also available in a 1994 reprint as “Ukrains'ka sprava zi stanovyshcha politychnoi heohrafii,” in Stepan Rudnytskyi, Chomu my khochemo samostiinoi Ukrainy 93–208. The subject is treated in 10 parts. Part 1 provides a review of modern political geography and its application to the Ukrainian cause. Part 2 assesses the political-geographical significance of the location of Ukraine with particular reference to Ukraine's southern and eastern neighbors. Part 3 addresses the same with regard to Ukraine's western and northern neighbors. Part 4 looks at the political-geographical significance of borders in Ukraine. Part 5 reviews the physical-geographical factors in political geography of Ukraine. Part 6 analyzes the Ukrainian national statehood in relation to mosaic-like multinational states of Eastern Europe. Part 7 comments on the aggressive stance of Ukraine's western neighbors upon Ukraine's declaration of independence. Part 8 does the same regarding its eastern and northern neighbors. Part 9 considers Ukraine in relation to the powers of Central and Western Europe. Part 10 examines Ukraine's political significance from the standpoint of economic and especially transportation and communication geography.

Romer graduated from L'viv University, in 1894 with a PhD in Geography, and was a professor there from 1911 to 1931. In his works he treated Ukraine west of the Dnieper as an integral part of Poland on the ground that until 1772 it was part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. He did so in his Geograficzno-statystyczny atlas Polski and in his Annuaire statistique de la Pologne, T. 1.

For example, his brochure, Chomu my khochemo samostiinoi Ukrainy, was published in Stockholm in 1917 as authored by Sh. Levenko. Many were also published in Berlin, Vienna and even in Katerynoslav (presently Dnipropetrovs'k), Ukraine.

Mushynka 13, citing Dilo No. 10 (1928), 27–28.

Karta Ukrainy [Map of Ukraine] 1:2,000,000 (Vienna: Freitag and Berndt, 1918). Everything on the map, including the place and name of publisher, is in Ukrainian. This map was mentioned in Shtoiko (26) and is in the possession of Ihor Stebelsky.

Stinna fizychna karta Ukrainy [Physiographic Wall Map of Ukraine] 1:1,000,000 (Vienna: Freitag and Berndt, 1918). Everything on these maps, including the place and name of publisher, is in Ukrainian. A color reproduction of this map is in Sossa, Istoriia (2007) 198.

For maps and explanatory text in English regarding each government and its territory held, claimed or temporarily annexed, see Tiut'ko 112–23, or its earlier version in Ukrainian, Teslia and Tiut'ko, maps on pp. 55, 56, explanatory text on pp. 143–52. Maps of territories held, claimed and temporarily annexed by Ukrainian governments, as well as territories whose governments were in negotiation with Ukraine about joining Ukraine as autonomous units were first depicted in both English and Ukrainian in Kubiiovych, plate 58. In post-Soviet Ukraine this information appeared in the inset map, “Vidnovlennia derzhavnosti Ukrainy u 1917–1920 rr.” in Loza, Ukraina: Ohliadova mapa, and Loza, “Nezalezhna Ukraina u 1917–1921 rr.” in Polityko-administratyvnyi atlas Ukrainy, 8. The most detailed maps and explanatory notes on Ukrainian governments and the territories they claimed or held and the military actions they pursued against their enemies are found in Loza, Ukraina 2–11. For Ukrainian government documents on territorial claims and boundary issues see Serhiichuk.

Many of his publications – whether geography textbooks on Ukraine or political commentaries on the Ukrainian territory, its borders, and international relations – continued to be evocative in nature. See the list of his publications for 1918 to 1926 in Shtoiko 163–68.

Here Rudnyts'kyi cites Mémoire sur l'independence de l'Ukraine présenté a la Conférence de la paix par la délégation de la république ukrainienne (Paris: Imp. Robinet-Houtaix, 1919). Curiously, this official document does not name its authors or provide any sources. It states the area of Ukraine as a whole to be 850,000 square km, exactly the same as given by Rudnyts'kyi in many of his publications on the geography of Ukraine, including L'Ukraine, un aperçu sur son territoire, son peuple, ses conditions culturelles, ethnographiques, politiques et économiques. For specific lands of Ukraine, the document tabulated areas and their populations, most of which corresponded with those compiled later in Myron Kordouba, Le Territoire et la population de l'Ukraine: Contribution géographique et statistique, an expanded version of his original, Myron Korduba, Terytoriia i naselennie Ukrainy. Korduba's calculations of the contiguous Ukrainian ethnic territory excluded Crimea and mixed areas, where Ukrainians were in the plurality but did not constitute a majority, and thus came to a total of 739,162 square km. The total for the lands listed in the peace document was 779,000 square km (somewhat more than Korduba's calculations), and excluded Crimea, eastern Stavropol' and the Terek region, which Rudnyts'kyi included in his calculations. It should be noted that Korduba's map showing the contiguous Ukrainian ethnic territory corresponded to that in Stepan Rudnyts'kyi, Ukraina: Nash ridnyi krai. The map in the peace document, however, was different: it included Crimea as part of the claim, some small areas in the north along the border with Belarus and Russia, but excluded (as Rudnyts'kyi had pointed out) eastern Stavropol' and the Terek region.

Many issues confronted the Ukrainian delegation in Paris. The main one was that the Tsarist Russians and the Polish circles succeeded in undermining the Ukrainian delegation's effort by claiming that the drive for Ukraine's independence was a “German intrigue.” See Stachiw and Chirovskyy, 2: 212. Eugeniusz Romer, who was part of the Polish delegation, helped present the Polish territorial claims. See Romer's Versailles diaries Pamiętki paryski (1918-19), ed. Andrzej Garlicki and Ryszard Świętek (Wrocław: Ossolineum, 1989), qtd. in Seegel 166, 180.

For a general introduction to national communism in Soviet Ukraine, see Mace, especially Chapter 6, “Mykola Skrypnyk and Ukrainian Communism.” The policy of Ukrainization in Ukraine (1923–30), promoted by Mykola Skrypnyk, was accompanied by Ukrainian-language schooling. This proved to be rather superficial, involving a top-down process that did not take root in many regions (Pauly).

Among his dreams was the writing of a multi-volume Geography of Ukraine and the 14-volume System of Geographical Knowledge (Mushynka 19; Shablii, Akademik 135).

The directions and details are outlined in Rudnyts'kyi, “Zavdannia heohrafichnoi nauky na ukrains'kykh zemliakh” 102–12; Rudnyts'kyi, “Perspektyvy Ukrains'koho Heohrafichnoho Instytutu” 7–8; and Rudnyts'kyi, “Zavdannia Ukrains'koho Heohrafichnoho Instytutu i ioho vydavnytstva.” For an overview of his program, see Shablii, Akademik 114–29, especially 117–19.

Skrypnyk tried to justify a policy to build a Ukrainian nation-state within the Soviet framework, a state to which Western Ukrainians would be drawn as if by a magnet (Mace 211). He was even audacious enough to make territorial demands on the Russian republic, arguing for the inclusion in Soviet Ukraine of adjacent areas containing Ukrainian majorities (Mace 214; Serhiichuk 7). His policies were reversed by Stalin, and Skrypnyk committed suicide in 1933. For a fuller discussion of Skrypnyk, see Mace 192–231.