The Modern Idea of Nationhood
Today nationhood is such a pervasive reality that it is difficult to imagine that in early 19th-century Eastern Europe, and indeed, in much of the world, it was only a hazy, slowly unfolding notion.
This is not to say that premodern peoples were oblivious to ethnic differences. People always felt a close attachment to their homeland, language, customs, and traditions. But until relatively recently, ethnicity was not considered to be a primary basis for defining group identity. Legal and socioeconomic distinctions embodied in the feudal estate system, that is, distinctions within a people, were generally thought to be more significant than differences between peoples. In other words, a Ukrainian, Russian, or Polish nobleman believed that he had more in common with noblemen in other countries than with peasants or townsmen in his own land. Only in the 19th century did a new concept of community – one based on common language and culture – begin to emerge. In Ukraine, as elsewhere, the evolution and slow dissemination of the idea of ethnically based nationhood would become one of the major themes of modern history.It was the French Revolution, which reflected the disintegration of feudal society and the advent of a new, mass-based political and socioeconomic system, that helped this idea gain prominence. In its wake, growing numbers of Europeans accepted the ideas of individual rights and of sovereignty being vested in the people, not in their rulers. The common folk began to come into their own – and their speech, customs, and traditions also gained recognition. In fact, these latter elements became the key integrating factors in the creation of national consciousness.
The most persuasive argument for the importance of native languages and folklore was provided by the German philosopher Johann Herder. Reacting against the “lifelessness” of the impersonal imperial systems and the artificiality of the foreign languages and fashions that dominated royal courts and noble salons, Herder focused his attention on the ethnic culture of the peasantry. The noted historian Hans Kohn wrote: “Herder was the first to insist that human civilization lives not in its general and universal, but in its national and peculiar manifestations; each cultural manifestation must be original, but its originality is that of the national community and the national language.
By nature and history men are above all members of the national community: only as such can they be really creative.”1 Among the intelligentsias of Eastern Europe, which was dominated completely by monolithic empires, Herder’s ideas found an especially appreciative response; and it was the intellectuals who would take the lead in developing and spreading the modern concept among East Europeans.While the ways in which national consciousness developed in every society varied considerably, modern scholars have discerned three general and partly overlapping stages in the development of East European national movements. The initial phase, marked by a somewhat nostalgic mood, generally consisted of a small group of scholarly intellectuals collecting historical documents, folklore, and artifacts in the belief that the individuality of their people would soon disappear with the onslaught of imperial culture. The second or cultural phase usually witnessed the unexpected “rebirth” of vernacular languages and their increasing use in literary and educational activities. And the third or political stage was marked by the growth of nationally-based organizations and the formulation of nation-oriented demands that implied, to a greater or lesser extent, the desire for self-rule. As we shall see, the evolution of Ukrainian national consciousness fits well into this general pattern.