Попередній перегляд:

 Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies Press

 The Hrushevsky Translation Project: History of Ukraine-Rus′

	ГРУШЕВСЬКИЙ МИХАЙЛО СЕРГІЙОВИЧ
	КАПРАЛЬ МИРОН МИКОЛАЙОВИЧ
	ОЛІЙНИК МАРТА ДАРІЯ
	ПАСІЧНИК УЛЯНА М.
	ПЛОХІЙ СЕРГІЙ МИКОЛАЙОВИЧ
	СИСИН ФРАНК ЕДВАРД
	СКОРУПСЬКА МАРТА

Зміст:

1. Foreword. - vii

Contents. - ix–xv
2. Editorial Preface to the Hrushevsky Translation Project. - xvi-xvii
3. Editorial Preface to Volume 5. - xviii–xxvi
4. Between Poland and Lithuania: Toward the Westernizing of Society, Law, and Religious Life in the Ukrainian Lands in the Fourteenth to Seventeenth Centuries / Myron M. Kapral. - xxvii–xlvi  
5. Glossary. - xlvii–liv
6. Maps. - lvii–lvix
7. A Note from the Author. - lxi-lxii

* * *
I. General Overview. - 1–17
8. General character of the evolution of the fourteenth through sixteenth centuries (1), influences of Polish law (1-2), territorial differences (2), transitional character of the influences of Lithuanian law (2-3). The Old Rus' basis of Lithuanian law (3-4), conservatism in the policies of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (4). Influences of the state evolution of the Grand Duchy on its law; the use of society in the interests of military needs (4-5); decentralization as an impediment to these influences (5); the Gediminian princes and their relations with the grand duke (5); the decline of the principalities (6); guarantees of the social order of the provinces—land privileges (7); privileges of the Ukrainian lands—Podlachian (7), Kyivan and Volhynian (8-9); the autonomy of lands in the Grand Duchy (9), its practice in Ukraine (9); the structure of the land (10) and of the system of self-government (11), successful achievement of uniformity in administration and law (12). The Ukrainian lands of the Kingdom of Poland: differing circumstances (13), the period of‘Rus' law’ (13) and its decline (13-14), the polonization of the system of governance and the law (14-15), the local nobility’s strivings for equalization with Polish lands (15), the uselessness of land autonomy to the Ukrainian element (15-16), disdain for Rus' (16-17), the polonization of the western provinces and Poland’s march eastward (17).

II. The Evolution of the Social Order: Lords-Nobles. - 18–68
9. The Old Rus' social structure (18). The princely-seigneurial aristocracy (in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania) (18) , ‘princes and lords,’ their prerogatives—the right to send troops to war under the family’s own banner (19) , princely banner families (19) and nobiliary ones in the sixteenth century (20), the extent of the aristocracy’s wealth (21). Volhynia as a princely land—its aristocratic families (21), the Buh region, Polisia, and eastern Ukraine (22). Aristocratic structure of offices (22), the hereditary nature of offices (23), the aristocratic structure of the Council of Lords of the Grand Duchy (24). The aristocracy’s judicial privileges (24-25). The magnate class in the Crown lands (25), grants based on princely law (26), emigre princes (26-27).
10. The nobiliary stratum in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: military service as its foundation (27), the practice of land grants and its origins (28), the formation of the military-service stratum (28), transfers to boyar service from other strata (29), putni boyars (30), armored servitors, castle servitors, Horde servitors (31). Attempts to restrict the boyar stratum—the privilege of 1387 (31) and the Horodlo privilege (31-32), the government’s policy aims and their failure (32), equalization of the Orthodox—the privileges of 1432 and 1434 (32-33), the formal abrogation of the Horodlo decrees in 1563 (33). The lack of criteria defining the nobility (34). The expansion of nobiliary liberties in the privilege of 1447 and subsequent ones (35); decisions of provincial privileges (35-36), the codification of nobiliary rights in the Lithuanian Statute (36), the nobiliary character of statutory law—the first [1529] and second [1566] statutes (36-37). Attempts at restricting the nobiliary stratum—terminology: boyars (37), landed gentry (38), nobility (38—39); the criterion for defining noble status (39); the criterion of prescription (39), the sorting of the boyar class (40); the formation of the nobiliary stratum (40-41); Polish influences on the formation of the nobility in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (41-42). Differences between the Lithuanian nobility and the Crown nobility: service obligations (42), restriction of ownership rights (43), the emancipation of nobiliary land tenure (43- 44), and the cancellation of limitations (44); the standardization of military service (45); other obligations (45-46); reforms of the mid-sixteenth century (46), the abrogation of the aristocracy’s prerogatives (47).
11. The nobility in the Crown’s Ukrainian lands: the formation of nobiliary rights in Poland in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries (47-48), the obligations of the nobility in Poland’s Ukrainian provinces (48), military service in Casimir’s land grants (49), the source of these obligations (49-50), the stipulations of Wladyslaw of Opole’s land grants (50), feudal law {jurefeodali) (51), the land grants of Jogaila (51-52), pledged landholding (52), similarities to Lithuanian landholding (53). The strivings of the nobility in the Ruthenian lands for equalization with the Polish lands (54), the privilege of 1425 (54-55), the Jedlnia privilege (55), the grant of Polish law in 1435 (55-56), vestiges of the nobility’s lack of full rights (56), the Belz nobility (57).
12. The non-privileged nobility (57-58), its two categories (58). The servitor nobility in the Crown lands (59), information about it from Galicia (59), its strivings for full rights (59-60), villages of grooms in the Peremyshl area (60-61). The servitor nobility of Podilia—the nobility of Bar (61), its obligations (61), the criteria for its service status (61-62), the nobility of Khmelnyk (63). The non-privileged servitor nobility in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania—Ovruch (63-64), Oster and Liubech (64). Boyars and nobles in the seigneurial lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: their obligations (64—65) and dependence (65). In the Crown lands: servitor leaseholds in the Iaroslav area (66), other information (67), the nobility of Szczebrzeszyn and Sharhorod (67-68).

III. The Peasantry. - 69–143
13. The general evolution of the peasant strata (69). The gradual disappearance of the unfree strata (69), their remnants in the sixteenth century in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (70), their status (71), the law’s views of them (72), their extinction in the second half of the sixteenth century (72). The gradual disappearance of slavery in the Crown’s Ukrainian lands—vestiges of slavery in the fifteenth century (73). The transition of the remaining slaves into the imposted peasantry (tiahli) (73-74), a retrospective look at this process in earlier times (74). Special categories of unfree and semi-free people: koimintsi (74), bondsmen (zakupy) (75), parallels with economically enserfed peasants (76).
14. Categories of peasants in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries (76-77). Tributary peasants (77), terminology for them (77); tributary peasants in the 1470 inventory of Kyivan state lands (77-78), in the Ratne starosta district in the early sixteenth century (79-80) and in the Volhynian-Pynsk region of Polisia in the 1560s (80), their obligations (81-82) and taxation assessment (82-83); vestiges of old practices from other lands (83-84), the reconstruction of the old taxation system of the fourteenth to fifteenth centuries (84), its evolution (85), the origins of labor obligations (86).
15. The labor-obligated peasantry—terminology (86), economic categories (87), their description in the Statute of 1529 (87), the expansion of the corvee system in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (87-88) and the lands of the Kingdom of Poland (88), the gradual disappearance of distinctions between the tributary and labor-obligated peasantry (89). Service peasants—their categories (89), servitors in the Kyiv region (89- 90), Polisia (90-91), in Volhynia and Galicia (92). The status of servitors (92), the connection with slavery (93), special categories: grooms, servitors of the Horde (93-94), kalanni (94), hundreders (95).
16. The limitation of peasants’ personal rights (96). Exclusion from general jurisdiction in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (96), the privilege of 1447 (96-97); the effects of German law in Poland (97); legal rights of peasants in royal domains (98). Restrictions of property rights—peasants’ right to own land in the Kingdom of Poland (98-99), traces of tolerance of the peasants’ right to own land (100); confiscation of peasants’ plots (100). The peasants’ right to land in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (101), the erosion of peasant rights (101), their legal recognition in the fifteenth to early sixteenth centuries (101-2), the right of inheritance (102), the restriction (103) and denial of peasant rights in the mid-sixteenth century (104). The connection between the right to own land and personal freedom (104). Restriction of the peasants’ freedom of movement in Poland (104-5), practices regarding the freedom of movement in Galicia in the fifteenth century (105), decisions on peasant movement in Galicia (106-7), the Krasnostav resolutions of 1477 (107); the abolishment of the right to depart in the early sixteenth century (107-8); rootless people (108). Freedom of movement in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (109), hereditary and mobile peasants (109), the right to depart and its gradual disappearance (110), the causes of enserfment (110-11), prescription as a criterion of enserfment (111), statutory legislation (112). The overall outcome—the disenfranchisement of the peasantry (113).
17. The corvee system—its evolution (113-14). Crown lands—the corvee system in villages under German and Wallachian law (114), the 14-day corvee (114); the corvee system in villages under ‘Ruthenian law’ (115); standardization of the corvee system—the Krasnostav (115-16) and Podlachian (116-17) resolutions, the resolutions passed by the Torun-Bydgoszcz Diets (117-18); the two-day norm in the second half of the sixteenth century (118-19); the corvee system in Galicia in the middle and second half of the sixteenth century (119), the burdens imposed by the corvee system (120-21), additional labor (122); rents and taxes (122), their evolution (123), taxation in the mid-sixteenth century in Galicia (123-24). The conservatism of villages under Wallachian law (124), their obligations in the middle and second half of the sixteenth century (124-25). Breaches of old norms (126), examples from the second half of the sixteenth century (126-27). Peasant complaints about oppression (127), the government’s powerlessness (128), the recalcitrance of tenancy-holders (derzhavtsi) (128— 29). The corvee system in southeastern Galicia (130), western Podilia (130-31), and eastern Podilia (131). The lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania—attempts at standardization from the first half of the sixteenth century (131-32); the ‘Statute on Voloky’ (132-34), its implementation in the Ukrainian lands (134); information dating to the second half of the sixteenth century from royal domains (135-36) and private estates—from the Brest region (136), Volhynia—villages not under voloka reform (137) and voloka villages (138); the Volhynian corvee system in the first half of the seventeenth century (138-39). Kyivan Polisia (139-40), the Dnipro River region (140). The eastward advance of the manorial economy (140—41); taxation in the Dnipro region and the Buh region in the first half of the seventeenth century (141-42); peasant opposition (142-43).

IV. Burghers. Clergy. - 144–186
18. The burgher stratum and its separateness (144). The reception of German town law (144-45), its beginnings under the Rus' dynasty (145), traces in Volodymyr and Lviv (145. - С. 6), the grant of German town law to Sianik (146); the political role of German communities and their promotion in Galicia (147). The spread of German law: its beginnings in Podilia and the Buh region (148) and Volhynia (149), its expansion in the sixteenth century (149). Models of urban organization (149). City immunity (150), the consequences of exclusion from the general organization (150-51), rivalry within the nobility (151), the restriction of burghers’ rights (151-52), competition from the nobility (152). The decline of the burgher stratum (153). Contempt for the Ruthenians (153), restrictions on offices (154-55). Typical examples: Ruthenians in Lviv (155), restrictions of civil rights (155), lawsuits brought by Lviv’s Ruthenians (156) and their failures (157), exclusion from guilds (157), the religious basis of this (158). Ruthenians in Kamianets (159), Ruthenian and Armenian jurisdiction (160), lack of equality (160). The polonization of cities (161-62). Armenian colonies (162), their statistics (162—63), the ruthenization of the Armenians (163), a church union and the polonization of the Armenians (163). Jews in Ukraine (164), their expulsion and return in the sixteenth century (164), restrictions on their rights (165) and the separateness of Jews (165-66). Jews dominate in city life (166), Christians’ complaints (166-67); cities that were closed to Jews (167-68).
19. Clergy: old categories of church people and the changes that took place in them (168). Monastic people— the multitude of monasteries in Galicia (169), Volhynia (170), the Kyiv region (171); the founding of monasteries—monasteries founded by the nobility (171), monasteries founded by burghers (172), ones founded by monks (172); monasteries known to us only later (173); the size of monasteries (173). The secular clergy—its numbers (174), reasons for the proliferation of churches (174—75), attempts to gather statistics (175). The founding of parishes (176), parish clergy (176-77), its familial character (177). The upkeep of the clergy (178), grants of land (178), grain taxes (179), imitation of tithes (179-80), other revenues (180). Taxation of the clergy (181), the clergy’s exemptions and their violation (181-82), the corvee system among the clergy (182), other revenues from priests (183), the sale of parishes (184). The clergy’s hereditary rights (184), their restrictions (185), priestly dynasties (186).

V. Civil Administration. - С. 187–251
20. Remnants of the Old Rus' system of governance (187), the system of ‘rotational’ holdings (188-89); the lower-ranking administration (189); changes in the Old Rus' administrative system (189-90), the disappearance of old offices (190). Provincial administration in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania until the midsixteenth century (190), the division of the Ukrainian lands into counties (191), vicegerents-starostas (191— 92), their economic management (192) and public functions (193), their subordinates (193-94); voivodes and palatines (195-96); special officials (196). Administration in the Crown lands: the evolution of a provincial administration in Poland (197), the decline of the old administrative system (197) and the formation of a starosta-based administration (198); court organization (199).
21. The transfer of the Polish administrative structure to Rus'—the transitional period (199-200), Old Rus' offices (200) and their decline (201), the office of voievode and its disappearance (201), the language of administration (202), starosta-based administration (202-3). The full-fledged introduction of the Polish system of governance in 1435 (203); lands and palatinates (204) institutions of the land and castle (204), judicial and non-judicial starostas (205), their gradual differentiation in Ukraine (206), the proliferation of non-judicial starostas (206) and the weakening of the public character of the office of starosta (206), mortgaging of starostaships (207); nobiliary self-rule (208), honorary offices (208). The development of parliamentarism in Poland (209) and the participation of the Ukrainian lands in the parliamentary system (210), parliamentary practice of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (210-11). Reforms of the sixteenth century (211-12), the judicial system (212-13), the establishment of tribunals (213); military affairs (213), the defense of Ukrainian borders (213); financial matters (213-14), taxation by the Diet (215), the ‘quarter’ tax (216) and the standing army (216), the state budget and military expenditures in the late sixteenth century (216-17), the organization of the army in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (217-18), payment arrears (218) and military confederations (219), the reform of 1717 (219). The organization of the eastern Ukrainian lands on the Polish model (220), the organization of palatinates (220), the division into counties (221), starostaships (221), tribunals and the law (221-22).
22. Urban organization: the office of reeve (222-23), the city council and bench court (223), various categories of reeveship—privileged reeves (224), the ‘incorporation’ of reeveships (224-25), appointed reeves (225). Types of municipal administration: broader self-governance—Lviv (225-26), cities with a high level of interference by the reeve—Kremianets (226-27), the starosta-reeve—Kovel (227-28); the illusory nature of municipal self-governance (228); private cities—Olyka (229). The judicial system: hierarchy of courts (229-30), codices of municipal law (230), German law in practice (231).
23. The rural system of governance: various types of organization (232). Vestiges of the old community organization (232), the domain (volost') system (233), the dissolution of domains (233-34), community courts (234), remnants of domanial organization in the sixteenth century (335), the village community (236), self-governing functions (237), village leaders under ‘Ruthenian law’ (237-38), village heads—starts і and tyvuny (238), heads of rural communities—otamany (239), their duties (239-40), the rural judicial system (240-41). Villages under German law: the office of reeve (241), judicial guarantees and higher courts (241–42), the buying up of reeves’ offices (242), the weakness of self-rule (243). Villages under Wallachian rule (243), origins (243–14) and development (244), forms of founding (245), village chiefs (kniazi) (245), district heads (krainyky) (246), village assemblies (246–17). Mixing types of rural governance (247). Uniformization—the Statute on Voloky (248-49). The evolution of rural governance in the sixteenth to seventeenth centuries (250); the vitality of community organization (250-51).

VI. Church Organization. - 252–332
24. The importance of church relations in national life during the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries (252).
25. Hierarchical relations:
26. The unity of the metropolitanate in the mid-fourteenth century and efforts at separation—Metropolitan Teodoryt (252), Roman’s candidacy (253), the separation of the Lithuanian metropolitanate (254), the rivalry between Aleksei and Roman in Kyiv (254), the death of Roman (255). The restoration of the Halych metropolitanate—Casimir’s letter (255-56), Antonii’s consecration as metropolitan (256), measures taken by Algirdas, Kypriian’s consecration as metropolitan (257), the merging of the metropolitanates (258), Kypriian’s measures concerning the Halych metropolitanate (258), Ivan’s candidacy (259), Kypriian takes control of the Halych metropolitanate (260). Metropolitan Fotii and his conflict with Vytautas (260-61), the election of Hryhorii Tsamblak (261), his past (261-62), rejection by the patriarchate (262), Tsamblak’s installation as metropolitan (263), Fotii’s extension of authority over the Lithuanian and Polish eparchies (264). Metropolitan Herasym (264). The consecration of Metropolitan Isidore (265), his fall (265), consecration of Hryhorii as metropolitan (265-66), Moscow’s opposition (266-67), patriarchal confirmation of Hryhorii (267), the final separation of the metropolitanates (267). Incumbency in the metropolitanate in the se.cond half of the fifteenth century, Mysail (268). Spyrydon (268), Symon (269), Iona (269), Makarii (270), Iosyf Bolharynovych (270). Incumbency in the metropolitanate in the sixteenth century—Iona and Iosyf Soltan (270-71), Iosyf and Makarii, the sale of the metropolitanate (271), Sylvester Velkevych and Ilia-Iona Kucha (272), Onysyfor Divochka and Mykhailo Rohoza (272-73). The weakening of the patriarchate’s role in installing a metropolitan (273), discontent with the patriarchate (274), the weakening of the patriarchs’ participation in the church affairs of Rus' (275-76), the government’s increasing involvement (275-76).
27. The status of the Orthodox Church in the Polish-Lithuanian state:
28. Radical changes produced by Polish occupation (276), the formation of the Catholic Church in Ukraine— bishops in partibus (276-77), Casimir’s position (277), plans for the latinization of Orthodox bishoprics (278), a turning-point in Casimir’s church policy (278), measures taken by Wladyslaw of Opole and King Louis of Anjou (279), the papal bull Debitum pastoralis and the founding of the Latin archdiocese of Halych (280), its transfer to Lviv (280), Catholic dioceses—Peremyshl (281), Kholm and Lutsk (281-82), Podilia (282). The decline of the Halych metropolitanate (282), claims to it by Latin archbishops (283), the clash over the Halych vicarship—Hdashytsky’s appointment (284), measures taken by the Halych Orthodox in the eparchy’s interests (285), the election of Makarii Tuchapsky (285-86) and measures concerning his confirmation (286-87), the restoration of the Orthodox bishopric (288), the Catholic archbishop’s claims (288-89). Restriction of the Orthodox faith in the Polish lands (289), restrictions on religious practices (289-90), prohibition of the construction of Orthodox churches (290), restrictions of burgher rights (291); the lack of privileges for the Orthodox (292); privileges for the Orthodox hierarchy (292-93). The Orthodox Church in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: relations between the grand dukes (293) and local princes (293- 94); legislative restrictions on the rights of the Orthodox (295), the privileges of equality of 1432 and 1434 (295), the principle of barring Ruthenians from holding offices (296), its confirmation in the sixteenth century (296-97), the formal equalization of the Orthodox in 1563 (298). The position of the government of the Grand Duchy with regard to the Orthodox Church (298), the lack of equality with the Catholic Church (298-99); privileges for bishops (299).
29. The internal organization of the Orthodox Church:
30. Metropolitanates (300) and eparchies (300). The decline of the metropolitan’s authority—the naming of bishops (301), their impunity with respect to the metropolitan (302), the metropolitan’s lack of executive power (302), helplessness before the secular authorities (303). Bishops’ councils (304), the resolutions of 1509 (304); the ineffectualness of council resolutions (305). Episcopal authority—the main ecclesiastical powers (306), the rivalry between episcopal authority and patronage (307), moral censorship (307-8) and the ecclesiastical court (308), rivalry between the secular authorities and the ecclesiastical court (308-9), lack of executive power (309). The cathedral chapter (krylos)—its composition and functions (310); vicars (311), officials of the episcopal administration (311). The procedure of installing priests (312); payments from priests (313). The monastic system of governance—self-rule (313), the community (314). Material resources, properties (315). The patronage system (315-16), treatment of it as a source of revenue (316), revenue from patronage—intercalary periods (317), payment of tributes (317-18), the snapping up of church properties by patrons (318-19), acceptance of the patronage system and its justification (319). The government’s non-canonical treatment of Orthodox ecclesiastical offices (319-20), ‘expectancies’ (320), conflicts between nominees (321), battles for the Lutsk bishopric and the Zhydychyn archimandriteship (322), the appropriation of properties by bishops (322-23). Disorganization of the Orthodox Church during the second half of the sixteenth century (323), the influences of the period—a picture of the disorganization of the Catholic Church in Poland in the mid-sixteenth century (323-24), characteristics of the Orthodox Church in the late sixteenth century (325), the invectives of Ivan Vyshensky (325-26), the demoralization of the episcopate (326-27), the grabbing of properties (327), armed raids (327), acts of violence (328), descriptive accounts in documents of the Lviv Brotherhood (329), disorder in the Peremyshl and Lviv eparchies (329), the demoralization of the lower clergy (330-31). Society’s attempts to institute reforms (331), an alliance with the patriarchate (331-32); the bishops’ dissatisfaction and the plan for a union (332).

VII. The Creation of the Uniate Church. - 333–406
31. Attempts at forging a union in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries:
32. Papal measures concerning union with the Rus' Church (333). The first plans for union in the Polish- Lithuanian state (333), Jogaila’s conference with Kypriian and the plan for a church in 1396 (334), opposition from the patriarchate (334-35). Tsamblak’s installation as metropolitan in connection with plans for a union (335), Tsamblak’s journey to the Council of Constance (335-36), his greetings to the council (336) and speech concerning the union (337), failure to resolve the issue (338), Jogaila’s hopes (338). An interruption in the union issue and Svitrigaila’s manifestations (339), Herasym’s letter (339). Byzantine plans for a union and Metropolitan Isidore (340), the Council of Ferrara-Florence (340–11) and the Union of Florence (341), Isidore’s circular letter (341-42), the hostile attitude of government and clerical circles in Poland and Lithuania (342—43), cool reception in Ruthenian circles (343), ignoration of the union (343), Moscow’s position, Isidore’s arrest and flight (344), his departure from the diocese (344-45), opposition to the union in Ukraine and Belarus (345-46), the collapse of the Union of Florence—Metropolitan Hryhorii (346) and his submission to the patriarchate (347). The difficult situation vis-a-vis the government and attempts to establish a modus vivendi with the patriarchate and the Curia (347), Mysail and his missive (347–48), his motives (348), the clergy’s lack of sympathy with these measures (349-50). Measures taken by Metropolitan Iosyf Bolharynovych (350-51), correspondence with the patriarchate (351) and a mission to the pope (351-52), Metropolitan Iosyf s letter and the pope’s response (352-53). An interruption in the efforts pertaining to union (353).
33. The realization of a union and the separation of the Uniate Church:
34. The revival of the Catholic Church of Poland (353). Favorable circumstances for a union and the revival of this idea (354), promotion of a union—Herbest (354-55), Skarga (355-56), Possevino and Bolognetto (356- 57), relations with the princes Ostrozky (357), attacks against the Orthodox Church (357) and vacillation among the Orthodox (358), the plan for a union in the form of a merger of the Churches (359). Conception of a plan for union among the bishops (360), bad behavior by Greek hierarchs (360), Patriarch Jeremiah’s arrival (360-61), his directives concerning the brotherhood issue (361-62), removal of the metropolitan (362) , the exclusion of twice-married people from ecclesiastical offices (362-63), appointment of an exarch (363) , the rescinding of charters (364), the directives issued upon departure (365), the bishops’ dissatisfaction with Jeremiah’s directives (365), Dionysios’s forgeries (366), confusion caused by Greek hierarchs (367), the bishops decide to escape the patriarch’s authority (368). The first stages of the bishops’ conspiracy (368), Balaban as the initiator (368-69), the congress in Belz (370), the synod in Brest (370), the declaration of union in 1590 (371), the bishops’ desiderata (371-72) and their motives (372), Terletsky’s delays (373), submission of the declaration to the king (374) and his reply (374). Changes in the episcopate—Kopystensky (374), letter proclaiming anathema against the metropolitan (375), Potii as bishop (375-76). Terletsky’s public declaration about the union (376), the congress in Sokal (376-77), the declaration (377) and articles of union of 1594 (378). Negotiations with the metropolitan (378-79) and his assent to the union (380). The Lviv synod in January 1595 (380). Opposition to the union—Prince Ostrozky (381), Potii’s endeavors on this account (381-82), the question of a council (382).
35. Unreliable evidence concerning the final stages of implementing a union (383), documents of union in 1594-95 and bishops’ signatures (383), a conference with the Catholic clergy in Cracow (384), the final redaction of the articles of union (384-85), their approbation in Cracow (385-86), the king’s letter to Prince Ostrozky (387), Ostrozky’s opposition (387-88), Balaban’s and Kopystensky’s disavowal of the union (388), Ostrozky’s circular (388-89) and his emissary to the congress in Torun (389), consternation at the king’s court (390) and conferences on the union issue (390-91), the dispatch of bishops to Rome (391). Potii and Terletsky in Rome (391-92), a public audience on 23-24 December (392-93), the bishops’ return and papal letters concerning the union (393-94). Agitation against the union by the Orthodox (394), their protests at the Diet of 1596 (394-95), the lack of help from the patriarchate (395), the protosyncellus Nikephoros and his arrival in Rus' (396). The scheduling of a council (397). The gathering in Brest (398), the formation of an Orthodox council (398-99), its negotiations with the Uniates (399) and the creation of two separate councils (400), the activities of the Orthodox council (400-1) and its documents (401), the proclamation of a union by the Uniate council (401-2) and protests from the Orthodox (402), the controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the councils (403), the accusations of Catholics and Uniates against the Orthodox council and its canonical justification (403-4). Measures adopted by the Orthodox to demolish the Uniate hierarchy (404), the king’s position (404-5), restoration of the Orthodox hierarchy and the separation of the Orthodox and Uniate Churches (405-6).

Notes. - 407–461
36. 1. Study of the Law of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Its Literature. - 407–422
37. 2. Theories of Feudalism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. - 423–426
38. 3. Study of the Sociopolitical Order in the Ukrainian-Ruthenian Lands of Poland and Its Literature. - 426–435
39. 4. The Date of Grand Duke Casimir’s Privilege. - 436
40. 5. Taxation Table for Pynsk Households prior to Land Redistribution. - 437–441
41. 6. Categories of Peasants and Terms for Them in the Kyiv Inventory of the 1470s. - 442–443
42. 7. Sources and Literature on the History of Cities. - 443–447
43. 8. Literature on Jewish Colonization. - 448–450
44. 9. Literature on the Ukrainian Clergy. - 450–452
45. 10. Church Organization and Relations in the Fourteenth to Sixteenth Centuries. - 453–456
46. 11. The Church Union. - 456–461

* * *
Bibliography. - 462–500
47. Abbreviations. - 462–463
48. Unpublished Sources. - 463–464
49. Published Sources. - 464–474
50. Secondary Literature. - 474–500
51. Appendix 1: Monetary Units. - 501–503
52. Appendix 2: Units of Measure. - 504–505
53. Tables of Rulers. - 506–515
54. Translations and Publications Consulted. - 516
55. Index. - 517–550

Ілюстрації:

1. Mykhailo Hrushevsky: [Photo]. - lv

---

Hrushevsky, Mykhailo

Sysyn, Frank E. (editor–in–chief)

Plokhy, Serhii (deputy editor)

Pasicznyk, Uliana M. (managing editor)

Yurkevich, Myroslav (senior editor)

Stech, Marko R. (project manager)

Plawuszczak–Stech, Tania (editor)

Horban–Carynnyk, Marta (associate editor)

Hornjatkevyč, Andrij (assistant editor)

Bednarsky, Dushan (assistant editor)

Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies

The Peter Jacyk Centre for Ukrainian Historical Research




Skorupsky, Marta (translator)

Olynyk, Marta Daria (translator)

Kapral, Myron M. (consulting editor)

Sysyn, Frank E. (editor-in-chief)

Pasicznyk, Uliana M. (assistant editor)

Галерея: