Mark von Hagen's essay 'Does Ukraine Have a History?' (1995) initi­ated a new discussion of Ukrainian history in the pages of the Slavic Review.

A previous discussion appeared in the Slavic Review in 1965 with the participation of Omeljan Pritsak, John S. Reshetar, Jr., and Ivan L. Rudnytsky. All of them, according to von Hagen's definition, were 'professional ethnics,' and the discussion concerned the implica­tions of Ukraine's position between East and West and the problem of continuity in Ukrainian history.¹

Much has changed in the three decades between 1965 and 1995.

So much for the good news about Ukrainian history. The title of von Hagen's essay (if not the essay itself) forthrightly challenges the very fact of the existence of a Ukrainian history. This is a clear setback from the previous discussion on the pages of the Slavic Review, as well as an ironic turn of events. While the 'professional ethnics,' long disap­pointed by the unattractiveness of their field to 'non-ethnics,' finally achieved what they wanted, the long-awaited 'Varangians' questioned the very existence of the field almost immediately upon their 'arrival.' Von Hagen begins his essay with the statement that Ukraine certainly has a past, but he questions whether it has a history, which he under­stands as 'a written record... that commands some widespread accep­tance and authority in the international scholarly and political communities'² - an outrageously 'orientalist' approach to the problem.