Abstract
The quotation included in the epigraph testifies for the growing interest towards the history of borderlands in recent scholarship. It reflects the tendency to reconsider the traditional historical narrative through the prism of frontier studies. Such an approach presumes the dialectical relationships between borders and their states — relationships in which border regions often have a critical impact on the formation of nations and states. This ‘view from the periphery’ coined by E. J. Turner in his innovative inquiries,2 was further developed by the generations of both historians and social scientists.3 These studies of border zones, being a very complex and problematic subject, got new impulses in European and American historiography after the Second World War.4 It refers particularly to the comparative studies that have been dominated by their revisions of E J. Turner. French experience about the rise and consolidation of the centralized state is particularly instructive as interpreted by the Annales school.5 Another research trend is connected with the studies of the symbolic geographies, namely the construction of imaginary borders between civilizations.6
The history of the world can be best observed from the frontier.1
(Pierre Vilar)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Cf. P. Sahlins, ‘State formation and national identity in the Catalan borderlands during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries’, in T. M. Wilson and H. Donnan (eds), Border Identities: Nation and State at International Frontiers ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998 ), p. 31.
F. J. Turner, The Significance of the Frontier in American History (New York: Free Press, 1975) (originally published in 1893 )
F. J. Turner, The Significance of Sections in American History ( New York: Henry Holt, 1932 ).
This approach was repeatedly criticized from the 1930s onward. An insightful overview is R. Hofstadter and S. M. Lipset (eds), Turner and the Sociology of the Frontier (New York, London: Basic Books, 1968), esp. pp. 3–8.
Among the latest contributions, A. Miller and A. J. Rieber (eds), Imperial Rule ( Budapest: CEU Press, 2004 )
A. Miller and A. J. Rieber (eds), Zapadnyie okrainy Rossiiskoi Imperil ( Moscow: Novoie Literaturnoie Obozreniie, 2006 ).
See also a review essay of Peter Gatrell, ‘Ethnicity and Empire in Russia’s borderland history’, The Historical Journal 38 (1995) 715–27.
A special issue of Ab Imperio. Studies of New Imperial History and Nationalism in the Post-Societ Space (1, 2003) journal was devoted to the problem of imperial boundaries. A brilliant comparison of the European Imperial powers from the borderland perspective is D. Lieven, Empire: The Russian Empire and Its Rivals (New Heaven: Yale University Press, 2002), chapters on geopolitics.
These approaches were often criticized for ignoring the Northern—Southern differences within the European cultural space. Burke, ‘Cultural Frontiers’, 215; E. Busek, E. Brix, Projekt Mitteleuropa (Wien: Ueberreuter, 1986 )
A. Podraza, ‘How should we understand the term “Central Europe” at the turn of the 21st century?’, in J. Purchla (ed.), Central Europe. A New Dimension of Heritage ( Krakow: Miçdzynarodowe Centrum Kultury: 2003 ), pp. 23–8
A. Miller (ed.), Tsentralnaia Ievropa kak istoricheskii region ( Moscow: Logos, 1996 ).
E. Andor and I. Gy. Toth (eds), Frontiers of Faith: Religious Exchange and the Constitution of Religious Identities, 1500–1750 ( Budapest: CEU Press, 2001 )
W. Schmale and R. Stauber (eds), Menschen and Grenzen in der Frühen Neuzeit ( Berlin: Verlag A. Spitz, 1998 )
M. Wojciechowski and R. Schattkowsky, Historische Grenzlandschaften Ostmitteuropas im 16.-20. Jh. Gesellscha ft-Wirtscha ft-Politik ( Torun: Wydawnictwo UMK, 1996 )
G David and P. Fodor (eds), Ottomans, Hungarians, and Habsburgs in Central Europe: The Military Confines in the Era of Ottoman Conquest ( Leiden: Brill, 2000 ).
The usage of the term ‘Ruthenian’ was requested by Ukrainian state officials and was recently adopted by leading centers of Ukrainian studies in the English speaking world. B. Gudziak, ’The Kyivan hierarchy, the Patriarchate of Constantinople and Union with Rome’, in B. Groen and W. van den Bercken (eds), Four Hundred Years Union of Brest (1596–1996): A Critical Re-evaluation, Acta of the Congress Held at Hernen Castle, the Netherlands, March 1996 (Leuven: Peeters, 1998), p. 17
footnote 1. On the etymology of ‘Ruthenia’, E. Nakonechnyj, Ukradene im’ja: chomu rusini stali ukrainciamy, 2nd rev. edn (L’viv: Naukova biblioteka im. V. Stefanika NAN Ukraiiny, 1998 ).
Yet, this term is not commonly accepted. Some historians follow the established tradition of national narratives deriving the ethnic names of the peoples from pre-historical times. For instance, A. S. Kaminski, Historia Rzeczypospolitej wielu narodôw, 1505–1795 ( Lublin: Instytut Europy Srodkowo-Wschodniej, 2000 ), p. 11.
This term was mainly applied to the territories of Kyiv, Braclav, Volyn’, and Podolia voievodships. On the term ‘Ukraine’ in the recent ethymological debates not without some ideological touch, see S. Sheluhin, Ukraina—nazva nashoi zemli z naidavnishih chasiv (Drohobych: Beskyd, 1992), pp. 107–8, 131–3, 135–42, 144–5, 247–8
G. Pivtorak, ‘Pohodzhennia ukraintsiv, rosiian ta bilorusiv ta ihnih mov’, in Mify i pravda pro trioh brativ slovianskih zi ’spilnoi kolyslky’ ( Kyiv: Vydavnychy tsentr Akademiia, 2001 ), pp. 117–21.
The term ‘Kresy’ first appeared in the Wincent Pol’s poems Mohort and Piesni o ziemi naszej (1854). In the later perceptions it referred to the eastern lands of the Second Polish Republic. J. Kolbuszewski, Kresy (Wroclaw: Wydawnictwo DolnoSlaskie, 1998).
A. Podraza, Problem pograniczy w Europie Srodkowo-Wschodniej (na przykladzie pogranicza polsko-ukrainskiego)’, Polska Akademia Umiejçtnosci, Prace Komisji Srodkowoeuropiejskiej IV (1995) 95–104
A. Podraza, Kresy i pogranicza. Historia, kultura, obyczaje ( Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo WSP, 1995 )
D. Beauvois (ed.), Les confins de l’ancienne Pologne, Ukraine, Lithuanie, Biélorussie, XVIe-XXe siècles ( Lille: Presses Universitaires, 1988 ).
Ch. von Werdt, ‘Halyc-Wolhynien-Rotreußen-Galizien: Überlappungsgebiet der Kulturen und Völker’, Jahrbücher flu—Geschichte Osteuropas 46 (1998) 69–99.
The term is borrowed from E. W. Zeeden, Die Entstehung der Konfessionen. Grundlagen und Formen der Konfessionsbildung im Zeitalter der Glaubenskämp fe (Munich, Vienna: Oldenbourg, 1965 ).
See the latest historiographical review in, J. Arnason, ‘Historians in Search of Borders. Mapping the European East’, in Themenportal Europäische Geschichte (2006) available at: http://www.europe.clio-online.de?2006/Article=165
B. Klich-Kluczewska and O. Seweryn, ‘Rediscovering ourselves. Frontiers and identities in Polish historiography of the 19th and 20th centuries (1989–2005)’, in L. Klusâkovâ and S.G. Ellis (eds), Frontiers and identities. Exploring the Research Area ( Pisa: Pisa University Press, 2006 ), pp. 87–100.
N. Iakovenko, ’ “Ukraina mizh Shodom i Zahodom”: proeiektsiia odniiei idei’, in N. Iakovenko, Parallel’ny svit. Doslidzhennia z istorii uiavlen ta idei v Ukraini XVI-XVII stolittia ( Kyiv: Krytyka, 2002 ), pp. 334–6.
Ibid., p. 345. A recent attempt to reconsider Ukrainian history in the light of the Turner’s concept belongs to the L’viv historian Ihor Chornovol: ‘Dyke Pole’ i “Dykyj Zakhid”: Ukraina v svitli Ternerovoji tezy’, Krytyka 6 (2006), available at: http:// krytyka.kiev.ua/articles/s.10_6_2006.html
Ihor Chornovol, ‘Seredniovichni frontyry ta moderni kordony’, Krytyka 10 (2006), available at: http://krytyka. kiev.ua/articles/s.5_10_2006.html.
Other voices in discussion belong to Serhii Plokhy and Andreas Kappeler: S. Plokhy, ‘Kozakoznaystvo bez kordoniv: notatky na koryst’ porivnial’noho analizu’, Ukrains’kyi humanitarnyi ohliad 10 (2004) 63–84.
A. Kappeler, ‘luzhnyi i Vostochnyi frontier Rossii v XVI-XVIII viekakh’, Ab Imperio 1 (2003) 51–53.
St. Stgpnien (ed.), Polska-Ukraina.1000 lat sgsiedstwa, vols 1–5 (Przemysl: Poludniowo-Wschodni Instytut Naukowy w Przemyslu, 1990–2000)
G. Babinski, Pogranicze polsko-ukrainski: Etnicznosé, zrdknicowanie religijne, tozsamosé ( Krakow: NOMOS, 1997 )
Z. Budzyriski and J. Kaminski-Kwak (eds), Dwa pogranicza. Galicja Wschodnia i Garny Slgsk. Historia-Problemy-Odniesienia ( Rzeszow: Wydawnictwo URz, 2001 ).
Another noted center of the border studies in Poland is the Institute of History, University of Maria SklodowskaCurie in Lublin. Among the recent publications: M. Mądzik and A.A. Witusik (eds), Na pograniczu kultur, jçzykaw i tradycji ( Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS, 2004 ).
T. Wünsch and A. Janeczek (eds), On the Frontier of Latin Europe: Integration and Segregation in Red Ruthenia, 1350–1600 (Warsaw: Institute of Archeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, University of Constance, 2004). See my review in Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas.
D. Roksandic, ‘The Triplex Confinium. International Research Project: objectives, approaches and methods’, in D. Roksandic (ed.), Microhistory of the Triplex Confinium: International Project Conference Papers (Budapest, 21–22 March 1997) ( Budapest: CEU Institute on Southeastern Europe, 1988 ), pp. 7–25.
A. J. Rieber, ‘The Frontier in History’, in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 9 (Amsterdam, New York: Elsevier, 2001), 5812–17; idem, ‘The Comparative Ecology of Complex Frontiers’ in Rieber/Miller, Imperial Rule p. 178.
Rieber, ‘The Comparative Ecology’, 185; Rieber, ‘Triplex Confinium in Comparative Context’, in D. Roksandié and N. Stefanec (eds), Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium ( Budapest: CEU History Department, 2004 ), pp. 14–18.
A brief outline of the Ruthenian history from the borderland perspective is presented in L. Berezhnaya, ‘Vvedeniie. Rusinskiie zemli y 13–18 vekah’, in M. Dolbilov and A. Miller (eds), Zapadnyie okrainy Rossiiskoi Imperil ( Moscow: Novoie Literaturnoie Obozreniie, 2006 ), pp. 15–32.
J. Ochmianski, ‘Organizacja obrony w Wielkim Ksiçstwie Litewskim przez napadami tatarow krymskich w XV-XVI wieku’, Studia i materialy do Historii Wojskowosci 5 (1960) 367–8
O. Apanovych, ‘Fortetsi ukrains’koi linii’, in Ukrainskyi istoryko-geogra fichnyi zbirnyk vol. 2 (Kyiv, 1972), pp. 105–12.
J. Wyrozolimski, ‘Zwischen Osten und Westen. Lemberg im Mittelalter’, in A. Czacharowski (ed.), Nationale, ethnische Minderheiten und regionale Identitäten in Mittelalter und Neuzeit ( Torun: Wydawnictwo UMK, 1994 ), pp. 7–14
P. Fässler, T. Held and D. Sawitski (eds), Lemberg-Lwow-Lwiw: Eine Stadt im Schnittpunkt europäischer Kulturen ( Köln: Böhlau, 1993 )
M. Kapral, Natsional’ni hromady L’vova XVI-XVIII stolit (sotsial’no-pravovi vzaiemyny) (L’viv: Piramida, 2003 ).
M. Smotryckyi, ‘Thrénos, tobto plach iedynoi svitoi vselens’koi apostol’s’koi tserkvy.. ’, in Ukrains’ki humanisty epokhy Vidrodzhennia, vol. 2 ( Kyiv: Osnovy, 1995 ), p. 313.
The most insightful biography of Meletij Smotric’kyi is D. Frick, Meletij Smotryc’kyj ( Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1995 ).
H. Litwin, ‘Catholicization among the Ruthenian Nobility and Assimilation Processes in the Ukraine during the years 1569–1648’, Acta Poloniae Historica 55 (1987) 83.
N. Iakovenko, Natys istorii seredniovichnoi ta ranniomodernoi Ukrainy, 2nd edn ( Kyiv: Krytyka, 2005 ), pp. 300–1.
G. Broggi Berkoff, ‘Rus, Ukraina, Ruthenia, Wielkie Ksigstwo Litewskie, Rzeczpospolita, Moskwa, Rosja, Europa Srodkowo-wschodniaPisaalizmie kulturowym’, Contributti Italiani al XIII Congresso Internazionale degli Slavisti (ljubliana 15–21 agosto 2003),a cura di Slavisti, 2003)
a cura di A. Alberti, M. Garzaniti and St. Gazonio ( Pisa: Associazione Italiana degli Slavisti, 2003 ), 325–87
Ia. Iseievych, Ukraina davnia i nova. Narod, religiia, kultura ( Lvviv: NAN, 1996 ).
A Ziçba, ‘Gente Rutheni, natione Poloni. Z problematyki ksztaltowania siç ukrainskiej swiadomosci narodowej w Galicji’, Polska Akademia Umiejçtnosci, Prace Komisji Wschodnioeuropejskiej 8 (1995) 61–8
T. Chynczewska-Hennel, Swiadomosé narodowa szlachty ukrairiskiej i kozaczyzny od schylku XVII wieku ( Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1985 )
T. Chynczewska-Hennel, ‘Gente ruthenusnatione polonus’, Warszawskie Zeszyty Ukrainoznawcze VI-VII (1998) 35–44
N. Iakovenko, Ukrains’ka shlakhta z kintsia XIV do seredyny XVI stolittia ( Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 1993 )
N. Iakovenko, Parallel’nyi suit. Doslidzhennia z istorii uiavlen ta idei v Ukraini XVI-XVII stolittia ( Kyiv: Krytyka, 2002 )
F.E. Sysyn, ‘The Problem of Nobilities in the Ukrainian Past: the Polish Period, 1569–1648’, in I. Rudnytsky (ed.), Rethinking Ukrainian History ( Edmonton: CIUS Press, 1987 ), pp. 29–102.
J. Krochmal, ‘Ethnic and Religious Integration and Segregation in Przemysl, 1350–1600’, in J. Krochmal, Krzyi i menora. Zydzi i chrzescijanie w Przemyslu w latach 1559–1772 ( Przemysl: Towarzystwo Przyjacibl Nauk w Przemslu, 1996 ), p. 207
J. Motylewicz, ‘Spolecznôsci etniczne w miastach wojewbdstwa ruskiego w XVI XVIII wieku’, in Studia Przemyskie, vol. 2 ( Przemysl: Poludniowowschodni Instytut Naukowy, 2004 ), pp. 13–36.
F. Sysyn, ‘Ukrainian Social tensions before the Khmel’nyts’kyi Uprising’, in S. H. Baron and N. Sh. Kollmann (eds), Religion and Culture in Early Modern Russia and Ukraine ( DeKalb: Nothern Illinois University Press, 1997 ), p. 58.
S. Lep’iavko, Velykyi kordon levropy iak faktor stanovlennia ukrains’koho kozatstva (XVI st.) ( Zaporizhzhia: Tandem-U, 2001 ), p. 49
Ia. Dashkevych, ‘Kozatstvo na Velykomu kordoni’, in Ukrains’ke kozatstvo: suchasnyi stan ta perspektyvy doslidzhennia (Materialy ‘krugloho stolu’), Ukrains’kyi istorychny zhurnal 2 (1990) 20.
For a detailed analysis of the Cossack Frontier in the comparative perspective see also V. Brekhunenko, ‘Typologiia stepovoho kordonu levropy i perspektyva doslidzhennia istorii shidnoievropeis’kykh kozatstv’, Ukraina v Tsentraino-Shidnii levropi 6 (1998) 453–86.
B. Varga, ‘Istorychni paraleli hardukiv Ugorschyny to kozakiv Ukrainy za period XVI-XVII st’, in Chetvertyi mizhnarodnyi kongres ukrainistiv. Istoriia ( Odesa, Kyiv, Lviv: Mizhnarodna asotsiatsia ukrainistiv, 1999 ) p. 178.
Lep’iavko, Velykyi kordon levropy iak faktor stanovlennia ukrains ‘koho kozatstva, p. 52; Lep’iavko, Ukrains ‘ke kozatstvo u mizhnarodnyh vidnosynah (1561–1591) ( Chernyhiv: Siverians’ka dumka, 1999 ), pp. 9–12
G. Ruthenberg, The Austrian Military Border in Croatia (1522–1747) ( Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1960 ).
V. Scherbak, Ukrains’ke kozatstvo: Formuvannia sotsialnoho stanu. Druha polovyna XV-seredyna XVII st. (Kyiv: Vydavnychy dim “KM Academia”, 2000), esp. ch. 5 ‘Zarodzhennia stanovoi to natsionalnoi svidomosti’.
O. Galenko, ‘Luk to rushnytsia v lytsars’kii symvolytsi ukrains’koho kozatstva: paradoksy kozats’koi ideologii I problema shidnoho vplyvu’, in Mediaevalia Ucrainica: mentalnist’ to istoria idei, vol. 5 ( Kyiv: Akademiia Nauk Ukrainy, 1998 ), pp. 93–110;
O. Galenko, Mappa Mundi. Zbirnyk naukovych prats na poshanu laroslava Dashkevycha z nagody Togo 70-richchia (L’viv: M.P. Kots’, 1996), N. Iakovenko, ‘Ukraina mizh Shodom i Zahodom’ in eadem, Parallel’nyi Svit p. 363.
The term ‘inner periphery’ in relation to early modern period is a subject of scholarly interest since the fundamental work of I. Wallerstein, The Modern World Systems, 3 vols (New York: Academic Press, 1977–89).
It is often applied to the metropoly/colonial economic relations (H.-H. Nolte, ‘Innere Peripherien. Das Konzept in der Forschung’, in H.-H. Nolte, ed., Innere Peripherien in Ost und West [Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2001 ], pp. 7–32
H.-H. Nolte, ‘Von Andalusien bis Tatarstan. Innere Peripherien der frühen Neuzeit im Vergleich’, in N. Boskovska-Leimgruber (ed.) Die frühe Neuzeit in der Geschichtswissenschaft: Forschungstendenzen und Forschungserträge [Paderborn: Schöningh, 1997], 127–44), although some recent contributions re-orient the scholarship toward the ethno-confessional, social, and cultural structures of the peripheries. See, the forthcoming book series A. Miller (ed.) Imperskiie okrainy Rossii which covers the history of such Russian ‘inner peripheries’ as Siberia and the Volga-Ural region.
An acclaimed example of such studies is O. Lattimore, Inner Asian Frontiers of China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989 ).
Some Polish scholars explain the rapid formation of ethnic and religious consciousness in Ruthenian lands by the psychological complex of periphery. W. Pawluczuk, ‘Pogranicze narodowe czy spoleczne’, in Pogranicze. Studia spoleczne, vol. 3 ( Bialystok: UB, 1999 ), p. 24
M. B. Topolska, ‘Kola wyznania w procesach kulturotworczych w Wielkim Ksigstwie Litewskim w XV—XVIII wieku’, in D. Dolariski (ed.), Religijnosé na polskich pograniczach w XVI—XVIII wieku ( Zielona Gora: Oficyna Wydawnicza Uniwersytetu Zielonogorskiego, 2005 ), p. 223.
A. Mironowicz, Prawoslawie i unia za panowania Jana Kazimierza ( Bialystok: Orthdruk, 1997 ), p. 319.
F. E. Sysyn, The formation of modern Ukrainian religious culture: the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries’, in G. A. Hosking (ed.), Church, Nation and State in Russia and Ukraine ( London: Macmillan, 1991 ), pp. 1–22.
I. Sevicenko, ‘Religious Polemical Literature in the Ukrainian and Belarus’ Lands in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’ in, I. Sevicenko, Ukraine between East and West: Essays on Cultural History to the Early Eighteenth Century (Toronto, Edmonton: CIUS Press, 1996), pp. 149–63; N. Iakovenko, Narys istorii pp. 221–4.
S. Golubev, Kievskii Mitropolit Petr Mogila i iego spodvizhniki (opyt tserkovnoistoricheskogo issledovaniia), 2 vols (Kyiv: Korchak-Novitskii, 1883–98).
I. Sevienko, The Many Worlds of Peter Mohyla ( Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985 )
A. Zhukovskyi, Petro Mohyla i pytannia iednosti tserkov ( Kyiv: Mystetctvo, 1997 )
N. Pugacheva, Ideino-polemicheskaia mysl’ restavratsionnoi deiatelnosti Petra Mogily in Chelovek i istoriia v srednieviekovoi filosofskoi mysli russkogo, ukrainskogo i belorusskogo narodov ( Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 1987 ), pp. 132–39
N. Nikitenko, Volodymyrs’ky memorial Sofii Kyivs’koi chasiv Petra Mohyly in Petro Mohyla, bohoslov, tserkovny i kulturny diiach ( Kyiv: Dnipro, 1997 ), pp. 159–67
N. Nikitenko, ‘Petro Mogyla — ktitor Sofii Kyivs’koi’ in L. Dovga and N. Iakovenko (eds), Ukraina XVII stolittia: Suspilstvo, filosofia, kultura ( Kyiv: Krytyka, 2005 ) pp. 387–94
L. Berezhnaya, ‘Topography of Salvation. Kyiv—the New Jerusalem in the Ruthenian Literary Polemics (end of the 16th—beginning of the 17th century)’, in L. Berezhnaya, ‘Topography of Salvation: “Kyiv—the New Jerusalem” in the Ruthenian Literary Polemics (end of the 16th—beginning of the 17th century)’, in D. Frick, S. Rohdewald, S. Wiederkehr (eds), Das Großfüfstentum Litauen und die östlichen Gebiete der Krone Polens als interkulturelle Kommunikationsregion (15–18. Jh.) (Forschungen zur osteuropäischen Geschicte, 71 ) ( Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz Verlag, 2007 ), pp. 253–78.
Ia. Isaievych, Bratstva i ich rol’ v rozvytku ukrains ‘koi kultury XVI—XVII st ( Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 1966 ).
The English version of the book is Ia. Isaievych, Voluntary Brotherhood. Confraternities of Laymen in Early Modern Ukraine (Edmonton: CIUS Press, 2006); S. Rohdewald, ’Von Polocker Venedig’ pp. 252–99.
See S. Plokhy’s review ‘Imagening early modern Ukraine’ on N. Iakovenko’s Parallel ‘nyi svit in Harvard Ukrainian Studies, vol. XXV, no. 3/4 (2001) 267–80.
S. Plokhy, The Cossacks and Religion in Early Modern Ukraine ( Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001 ).
T. Chynczewska-Hennel (ed.), Miedzy Wschodem i Zachodem. Rzeczpospolita XVI-XVIII w. ( Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Fundacji ‘Historia pro Futuro’, 1993 ).
J. Tazbir, Polska przedmurzem Europy, 2nd edn ( Warsaw: Twôj styl, 2004 );
W. Weintraub, ‘Renaissance Poland and Antemurale Christianitatis’, Harvard Ukrainian Studies 3–4 (1979–80) 920–30.
See also P. W. Knoll, ‘Poland as “Antemurale Christianitatis” in the Late Middle Ages’, Catholic Historical Review 60 (1974) 381–401
U. Borkowska, ‘The ideology of “antemurale” in the sphere of Slavic culture (13th–17th centuries)’, in The Common Christian Roots of the European Nations: An International Colloquium in the Vatican, vol. 2, ( Florence: Le Monnier, 1982 ) pp. 1206–21
H. Hein-Kircher, ‘Antemurale christianitatis. Grenzsituation als Selbstverständnis’, in H. Hecker (ed.), Grenzen. Gesellschaftliche Konstitutionen und Transfigurationen ( Europäische Schriften der Adalbert-Stiftung Krefeld Band 1) (Essen: Klartext, 2006 ), pp. 129–48;
M. Deszczy riska, ‘Wyobrazenie przedmurza w pismmiennictwie schylku polskiego oswiecenia’, Przegldd Historyczny 92 (2001) 285–300.
N. Davies, God’s Playground: A History of Poland vol. 1. The Origins to 1795 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 189.
More instances in: A. Kepiriski, Lach i Moskal. Z dziejôw stereotypu (Warsaw, Cracow: Paristwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1990 ).
See also, H. Grala, ‘O genezie polskiej rusofobii’, Przeglgd Historyczny 83 (1992) 135–53
D. Swierczynska, Przyslowia RI na wszystko ( Warsaw: PWN, 2001 ).
W. Romanow-Glowacki, ‘Kamieniec Podoiski: urbs antemurale christianitas’, Pamigtnik kijowski 3 (1966) 96–127
A. O. Mandzy, A City on Europe’s Steppe Frontier: an Urban History of Early Modern Kamianets-Podils ‘ky, Origins to 1672 ( Boulder: East European monographs, 2004 ).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2008 Liliya Berezhnaya
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berezhnaya, L. (2008). Ruthenian Lands and the Early Modern Multiple Borderlands in Europe: Ethno-confessional Aspect. In: Bremer, T. (eds) Religion and the Conceptual Boundary in Central and Eastern Europe. Studies in Central and Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230590021_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230590021_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-36202-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-59002-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)