While Europe was in flames of the Springtime of Nations 1848, and many romantic egalitarian republicans, like Hugo in France, and Mazzini in Italy, Mickiewicz in Poland, prepared new theories and questions for national movements, Ukraine wasn’t standing still, but deeply felt both the need for change and the influence of this new tradition overtaking the continent.
Ukraine had lived through a national tragedy: The Cossack state was destroyed, and the Cossack host as a political force dismantled. Nevertheless, the older generation still remembered the legacy of massive peasant rebellions and cossack uprisings. They would be retold in families, becoming legends of a glorious and free past — usually idealized — as an alternative to Polish and Russian rule.
Vladyslav Starodubtsev is an Ukrainian leftist activist & historian.
Having seen the plight of the peasantry, and the suffering from foreign lords, the Ukrainian intelligentsia forms the Cyril-Methodius brotherhood. For them, the legacy of Cossacks was a powerful mobilizational force to ensure the rebirth of the Ukrainian Republic: Free, Equal, and Democratic.
The Cyril-Methodius Brotherhood consisted of just 15 members, but its foundation nevertheless a defining moment for the whole Ukrainian movement. The 15 members, which included Taras Shevchenko, Mykola Kostomarov, Panas Kulish, Heorhii Andruzskyi and others layed the ideological groundwork in 1845 which would affect nearly all future Ukrainian political organization and accumulated in the Ukrainian People’s Republic 1917-1921.
Ukrainians, divided between Austria and Russia, lived under a slavery-like serfdom system. Their cultural, economic, and social rights were suppressed by foreign lords ruling over the vast land. The autocratic tsar and lords dominated the land and exploited the Ukrainian people. The ideology of Cyril-Methodius was formed in opposition towards these systems of oppression: against socio-economic exploitation of peasantry by lords, against autocratic rule, and against rule of foreign states over Ukrainian people. Ukrainian political identity, mostly formed under the influence of the Brotherhood, relied on this opposition. According to members of the Brotherhood, only the Republic, not an autocratic tsar, can represent the interests of the population. Only where there is no poor or rich, and no ownership and domination of one person over another, can true freedom bloom. And only in a Ukrainian state will foreign powers cease to exploit the Ukrainian people.
The ideology of the Cyril-Methodius Brotherhood was rooted in two concepts: slavic federalism and social republicanism. It was argued that Ukraine, due to its Cossack legacy, could become a new example for the Revolutionary change that would bring down the Polish lords and the autocratic Tsar in Russia. It set the goal of a de-facto liberazation of Ukraine. The final vision was of the social and political liberation of other Slavic states, too, and cooperation between them on the basis of humanist values. Federalist demands were argued to be necessary to preserve and defend both Slavic cultures and political republicanism.
Only where there is no poor or rich, and no ownership and domination of one person over another, can true freedom bloom. And only in a Ukrainian state will foreign powers cease to exploit the Ukrainian people.
A slavic federation would function as a coalition of de-facto independent states, with their parliaments and leaders governed by the republican system, that gathers in a pan-slavic parliament for common coordination. It was argued that Republics should preserve and develop their language and culture, their way of life, and «their truth». From that, the slavic federation would support freedoms and republican struggles of already existing republican states, while never espousing any ambitions of conquest or exploitation. Ukraine, experiencing occupation and foreign rule, developed deep hatred towards expansionist goals; this was one of the central points of Brotherhood agitation. This is a crucial difference from the popular Russian version of pan-slavism from the time, which strived to put other slavic nations under the control of the Russian state.
The Cyril-Methodiust Brotherhood justified their republican ideology with early Christian beliefs. It was argued that there couldn’t be any human above other humans, only one God. The lords, the rich, and the tsars veered away from that and only adopted Christianity to legitimize their rule, rather than actually following the deep social and democratic nature of Christian faith, as they argued. The Brotherhood explained previous political issues and social distress in the world with the wrath of God against tyrants. Christianity played a central role in the ideology of the Cyril-Methodius Brotherhood and was an important justification for its radical social republicanism.
While never calling themselves socialists, the Brotherhood program resembled similar ideas of utopian socialists at that time and was clearly influenced by different socialist authors. Arguably, the program and agitation of the Cyril-Methodius Brotherhood could be labeled as «Christian socialism» if not in word, then in spirit. Its sharp criticism was directed not only against monarchy, but against domination of any one person over another.
Kostomarov, a central ideologue of the Brotherhood, authored an important work entitled the Book of Genesis of Ukrainian people, a social republican and Christian work that became somewhat of a program for the Brotherhood. In it, he describes the history of the Roman Empire and Greek states, both corrupted. The elites and lords of Rome took Christianity and misused it to suit its needs. The Greeks, though they did not have a tsar, had «small tsars» and ruled over others and kept slaves which led to their demise due to the wraath of God, as the ideology goes. He described these histories, the «genesis» of Ukraine, Russia, Poland, structured in a set of theses, and provided past, current, and future perspectives for society.
§ 30 (32). And the Christians lived as brethren, everything was held in common among them and they elected elders and these elders were servants of all, because God said: whoever desires to be first, must be the servant of all.
§ 39 (41). […] Authorities, organization and government must exist on the earth, and this is power, and this power is from God, but the leader and the ruler must be subordinate to the law and to the popular assembly because even Christ commanded men to be judged before the popular assemblage; and since the leader and the ruler are the first persons, they must be servants and they must not do whatever comes into their heads but they must do what is established, and they must not magnify themselves and dazzle with their magnificence, but they must live simply and work zealously for society because their power is from God, and they themselves are sinners and the very last of the people because they are servants of all.
§ 40 (42). And this is another great lie: as if God would ordain that some should reign and wax rich while others should be in bondage and beggary, because this would not be so if they would quickly accept the Gospel: the masters are obliged to free the slaves and acknowledge them as brethren and the rich must share with the poor and the poor would also become rich; so would it be if a Christian love were in their hearts, because he who loves another desires that his beloved be as well off as himself.
§ (51). Because their political ideas were the same as idols and, although the French were baptized, they worried less about Christ than about their national honor, as their idol was called; while the English worshiped gold and Mammon, and the other nations likewise their idols; and their kings sent them to death for pieces of land, for tobacco, for tea, for wine, and the tobacco and the tea and the wine and the rest became their gods. Because it was said: where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. […]
§ 48 (52). And the heretics devised a new god, supreme over all petty little gods, and this god was called in French egoism or self-interest.
§ (76). Ukraine loved neither the tsar nor the Polish feudal lord and established a Cossack Host amongst themselves, i.e., a brotherhood in which each upon entering was brother of the others—whether he had before been a master or a slave, provided that he was a Christian; and the Cossacks were all equal amongst themselves, and officials were elected at the assembly […]
§ (108). Because the voice of Ukraine was not stilled. Ukraine will rise from her grave and again will call to her brother Slavs, and they will hear her call and the Slavic peoples will rise and there will remain neither tsar, nor tsarevich, nor tsarevna, nor prince, nor count, nor duke, nor Excellency, nor Highness, nor lord, nor boyar, nor peasant, nor serf, neither in Great Russia, nor in Poland, nor in Ukraine, nor in Czechia, nor among the Khorutans, nor among the Serbs, nor among the Bulgars.
§ 109. And Ukraine will be an independent Republic in the Slavic Union. Then all the peoples, pointing to the place on the map where Ukraine will be delineated will say: behold, the stone which the builders rejected, has become the cornerstone.
In Ukraine, those nostalgic of the glorious Cossack past often praise a period without a proper aristocracy, others say the the lack of nobility brought demise to the Cossack cause. Kostomarov approached this differently. He claims it that because Ukraine didn’t have a wealthy elite, it was not corrupted and it persevered. Kostomarov said: Ukraine «did not vanish because it did not know a King or a feudal Lord. There was a tsar, but a foreign one, and although there were lords, they were not of Ukrainian kind, did not speak Ukrainian, and were in essence bastards. A real Ukrainian does not like a king, nor a Lord and knows only God».
The strong religious foundation of the Brotherhood, however, didn’t deny a pluralist and inclusive republican vision. Members of Brotherhood placed the concept of «truth» at the heart of both republicanism and the Christian faith. For them, this meant the development of the individual and their community, in «holy freedom» and with natural rights. «Truth», which is most seen in Taras Shevchenko poetry, has the meaning of «justice». What is just, is also true. The Brotherhood interpreted «Justice» from the perspective of a universalist conception of national rights, equality between different nations and their millerianist interpretation of Christian ethics. In combination with this, they used the phrase «own truth», meaning every nation has its own truth. Here,«own truth» means the need of self-governance of nations in opposition to colonial rule and foreign occupation, the possibility to make ones own laws, and own system of justice. It is hard to say to which extent more universal views of the Brotherhood correlated with the appeal of every nation to decide for itself. In this interpretation, non-Christians who were fighting for freedom were closer to the «truth» than Christians that strived to dominate and oppress. In his famous poem Caucasus, Shevchenko writes about Muslims from Mountain nations, who waged a defensive national-liberation struggle against Christian Russian Empire.
Struggle on — and be triumphant» was a powerful anti-colonial slogan that later became a motto for Ukrainian national movement. In 1917, it would wave from many flags of the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries and supporters of the Ukrainian People’s Republic.
Caucasus was not only a statement of solidarity with Mountain nations, it was a profound criticism of Imperialism at its core. It is surprisingly modern in its complete disgust for the «Civilizationary» mission of those who kill and plunder. Shevchenko describes how Russia brings civilization to a colonized nation, but what civilization? He states in sarcastic tone, speaking from the side of Russian imperialism: «Come to us, and all you ought \\ To know will be made plain: \\ Prison building will be taught, \\ How to forge your chains, \\ How to wear them, how the knout \\ Is plaited—we’ll explain \\ All our science». For Shevchenko, the uncivilized were not Mountain tribes, but Russia, who brings slavery, exploitation, captivity, and death. Shevchenko has immense solidarity with peoples of the Caucasus: «Struggle on — and be triumphant! \\ God Himself will aid you; \\ At your side fight truth and glory, \\ Right and holy freedom». «Struggle on — and be triumphant» was a powerful anti-colonial slogan that later became a motto for Ukrainian national movement. In 1917, it would wave from many flags of the Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries and supporters of the Ukrainian People’s Republic.
The Republic that the Cyril-Methodius Brotherhood hoped would come to be in Ukraine and other Eastern European states should be opposed to xenophobic nationalism and help other nations to free themselves. In many ways, its vision was very similar to Mazzini’s, which was underlined, especially in The Duties of Men. Mazzini described the goal of the nations to benefit humanity, thus opposing closed nationalism. His goal of humanity is a brotherhood, Heaven on Earth, which was God’s design, according to Mazzini. This was also true for Cyril-Methodius' vision. However, rather than underlining the Heaven on Earth, the central theme for the Brotherhood was the idea of «truth» which was aligned with the struggle for freedom, rights, and liberties against social injustice and colonialism.
Some modern authors go further and also describe the Brotherhood as a part of an anti-racist legacy. In his Why Ukrainians should support the Black Lives Matter movement, Andriy Semotiuk tells a story of friendship and reflects on the personal experience between Taras Shevchenko, and the African-American actor, Ira Aldridge. Both African-American and Ukrainian nations shared a history and trauma of slavery. «Aldridge was the descendant of slaves, Shevchenko was a former serf».
The friendship brought about a deep bond of two people with a similar fate and introduced anti-racist perspectives to Shevchenko. Although serfdom and slavery differ, particularly Russian serfdom was known for its brutality. Legally, both Russian serfdom and American slavery were very similar, in the 19th century neither serfs nor slaves had civil or legal rights and were under total control of their masters. Unfortunately, for this friendnship, both Shevchenko and Aldridge died before the respective systems of abuse were abolished in the U.S. and in Russia. Even death got them just before the slavery was abolished in their subsequent countries: In the U.S., and in Russia.
The legacy of the Brotherhood and its strong call against inequality, colonialism, and imperialism, one for freedom, rights, democracy, and dignity still lives on everywhere where Ukrainians are today.
The Brotherhood soon shortly was repressed, its members arrested, and the structures dismantled by 1847. Despite having only been active for two years, its legacy lived on. The modern idea of Ukraine — a Republic of free people, neither rich nor poor, a state that shouldn’t strive to conquer, but to cooperate and understand, was formed during this time. On the backs of the Brotherhood, the whole Ukrainian political movement was built, and its beliefs were realized in the Ukrainian state. The Ukrainian People’s Republic (1917-1921), one of the first democratic socialist states in the world. The legacy of the Brotherhood and its strong call against inequality, colonialism, and imperialism, one for freedom, rights, democracy, and dignity still lives on everywhere where Ukrainians are today. There you can find statues of Shevchenko and monuments to heroes who lost their lives defending this early conception of freedom.
However, like many old tales, principles are forgotten and sometimes lost to time. It is important to still reflect on those, remember them, develop on them, and with the aspirations of the past to build a prosperous, social, republican, and democratic future for everyone.