Teachers of Yuriy Khmelnytskyi

Sergii Bagro
{"title":"Teachers of Yuriy Khmelnytskyi","authors":"Sergii Bagro","doi":"10.18523/1995-025x.2023.20.166-238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The distribution of social roles in the learning process has long been based on the student’s demonstration of respect for his or her teacher, who is in a patronizing position as a mentor. Over time, the social context changes, but past experiences certainly leave their mark on people’s memories. While the friendly relationship between Bohdan Khmelnytskyi and his teacher is well-known in historiography, we know much less about the teachers of his son, Yuriy. Therefore, it is obvious that there is a need to close this gap.The historiography is dominated by the stereotype that Yuriy Khmelnytskyi studied at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. However, an analysis of source evidence shows that there is no particular reason to assert this possibility. Such assumptions appeared in Polish historical and literary texts to reflect the character’s specific traits. Then they migrated to the so-called «Cossack chronicles», and through them passed into scientific historical narratives.Among Yuriy Khmelnytskyi’s teachers, researchers usually mention Ioanikii Galiatowskyi and Hilarion Dobrodiashko. Moreover, since the nineteenth century, there is evidence of Havrylo Oleshkovych, who also taught the hetman’s son. All of them were monks, but they had different career paths. A review of the biographies of each of them allows us not only to make a judgment about their teaching in the hetman’s house but also to see whether they later crossed paths with their former student.Galiatowskyi and Oleshkovych were under the protection of Lazar Baranovych. They were both later used as agents of influence in dealing with Yuriy Khmelnytskyi. In 1676, the former was asked by Hetman Ivan Samoilovych to appeal to his former student to give up his political ambitions. In 1661, Bishop Methodius engaged the latter in negotiations with Yuriy in order to persuade the hetman to return to the rule of the Moscow tsar. Dobrodiyashko, on the other hand, was a monk of the Pechersk Monastery. Therefore, he was most likely influenced by Innokentiy Gizel. However, he later left his monastery and found refuge in St. Sophia Monastery under the protection of Bishop Methodius. In this situation, he spoke extremely negatively about his former student for refusing to obey the Moscow tsar and praised the deeds of his new benefactor. By that time, however, Khmelnytskyi had already relinquished his hetman’s powers.","PeriodicalId":180564,"journal":{"name":"Kyivan Academy","volume":"13 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kyivan Academy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18523/1995-025x.2023.20.166-238","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The distribution of social roles in the learning process has long been based on the student’s demonstration of respect for his or her teacher, who is in a patronizing position as a mentor. Over time, the social context changes, but past experiences certainly leave their mark on people’s memories. While the friendly relationship between Bohdan Khmelnytskyi and his teacher is well-known in historiography, we know much less about the teachers of his son, Yuriy. Therefore, it is obvious that there is a need to close this gap.The historiography is dominated by the stereotype that Yuriy Khmelnytskyi studied at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. However, an analysis of source evidence shows that there is no particular reason to assert this possibility. Such assumptions appeared in Polish historical and literary texts to reflect the character’s specific traits. Then they migrated to the so-called «Cossack chronicles», and through them passed into scientific historical narratives.Among Yuriy Khmelnytskyi’s teachers, researchers usually mention Ioanikii Galiatowskyi and Hilarion Dobrodiashko. Moreover, since the nineteenth century, there is evidence of Havrylo Oleshkovych, who also taught the hetman’s son. All of them were monks, but they had different career paths. A review of the biographies of each of them allows us not only to make a judgment about their teaching in the hetman’s house but also to see whether they later crossed paths with their former student.Galiatowskyi and Oleshkovych were under the protection of Lazar Baranovych. They were both later used as agents of influence in dealing with Yuriy Khmelnytskyi. In 1676, the former was asked by Hetman Ivan Samoilovych to appeal to his former student to give up his political ambitions. In 1661, Bishop Methodius engaged the latter in negotiations with Yuriy in order to persuade the hetman to return to the rule of the Moscow tsar. Dobrodiyashko, on the other hand, was a monk of the Pechersk Monastery. Therefore, he was most likely influenced by Innokentiy Gizel. However, he later left his monastery and found refuge in St. Sophia Monastery under the protection of Bishop Methodius. In this situation, he spoke extremely negatively about his former student for refusing to obey the Moscow tsar and praised the deeds of his new benefactor. By that time, however, Khmelnytskyi had already relinquished his hetman’s powers.
尤里-赫梅利尼茨基的老师们
长期以来,学习过程中的社会角色分配一直以学生对老师的尊重为基础,而老师则处于导师的光辉地位。随着时间的推移,社会环境会发生变化,但过去的经历肯定会在人们的记忆中留下痕迹。博赫丹-赫梅利尼茨基和他的老师之间的友好关系在史学界众所周知,但我们对他的儿子尤里的老师却知之甚少。史学界普遍认为尤里-赫梅利尼茨基曾在基辅莫希拉学院学习。然而,对资料证据的分析表明,没有特别理由断言这种可能性。在波兰的历史和文学文本中出现过这种假设,以反映人物的具体特征。在尤里-赫梅利尼茨基的老师中,研究人员通常会提到伊万尼基-加利亚托夫斯基(Ioanikii Galiatowskyi)和希拉里翁-多布罗迪亚什科(Hilarion Dobrodiashko)。此外,自十九世纪以来,有证据表明哈夫里洛-奥列什科维奇(Havrylo Oleshkovych)也教过赫曼的儿子。他们都是僧侣,但却有着不同的职业道路。通过回顾他们每个人的传记,我们不仅可以对他们在赫特曼家的教学情况做出判断,还可以了解他们后来是否与自己以前的学生有过交集。他们后来都被用作与尤里-赫梅利尼茨基打交道的代理人。1676 年,前者受伊万-萨莫伊洛维奇(Ivan Samoilovych)赫曼之托,呼吁他昔日的学生放弃政治野心。1661 年,美多迪乌斯主教让后者与尤里谈判,以说服赫曼回到莫斯科沙皇的统治之下。多布罗迪亚什科则是佩切尔斯克修道院的一名僧侣。因此,他很可能受到了因诺肯季-吉泽尔的影响。不过,他后来离开了修道院,在圣索菲亚修道院找到了避难所,受到了美多迪乌斯主教的保护。在这种情况下,他对自己昔日的学生拒绝服从莫斯科沙皇的行为大加挞伐,并对新恩人的行为大加赞扬。不过,当时赫梅利尼茨基已经放弃了他的赫特曼权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信