Discussion of the monograph of Tatiana Tairova-Yakovleva “Ivan Mazepa I Rossijskaya Imperia. A History of “predatelstva”. — Moscow: Centrpoligraph, 2011. — 525 s. ISBN: 978-5-227-02578-4 - Studia Slavica Et Balcanica Petropolitana

Posted in Discussion

Title of the article	Discussion of the monograph of Tatiana Tairova-Yakovleva “Ivan Mazepa I Rossijskaya Imperia. A History of “predatelstva”. — Moscow: Centrpoligraph, 2011. — 525 s. ISBN: 978-5-227-02578-4
Authors	Tairova-Yakovleva, Tatiana Gennadievna - Dr.Science, Saint-Petersburg State University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia, OrcID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1050-4264, Scopus ID 57193642116, SPIN-код 2728-2548, AuthorID 618584 Anisimov Eugeniy Viktorovich - Saint-Petersburg Institut of Russian Academy of Science Besov Alexander Grigorievich - Saint-Petersburg Institut of Russian Academy of Science Kamenskiy Alexander Borisovich - Saint-Petersburg Institut of Russian Academy of Science Karevin Alexander Semenovich? Kochegarov Kirill Alexandrovich - Institute for Slavic Studies RAS, 119334, Moscow, Leninskij prospekt, 32-A Кurukin Igor - Russian State University of the Humanities, Moscow Plokhiy Serhii - Harvard University (USA) Chukhlib Taras Vasylovych - Scientific Research Institute of Cossacks of the Institute of History of Ukraine at the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
In the section	Discussion
Year	2011	Issue	2	Pages	115-162
Type of article	RAR	Index UDK	94(477)	Index BBK
Abstract	Eugenij Anisimov notes the high level of research made by Tatiana Tairova-Yakovleva, in particular considering the pieces about Ukrainian history. He notes that the problem of treason by I. Mazepa can be interpreted more generally and the fact of treason undoubtly took place. Alexander Besov believes that the book about Hetman Mazepa by Tatiana Tairova-Yakovleva focuses rather on teleology than history. However, he fi nds the way of the author's interpretation of the «Russia- Ukraine relations» in late 17th - early 18th centuries quite mistakable. Alexander Kamenskii thinks that Tatiana Tairova's book is a serious attempt of constructing a scholar biography of Ivan Mazepa. In several cases she has managed to refute some myths in historiography. One may hope that the book will stimulate other historians to conduct further research. However, they will not be able to ignore Tairova's conception. A. S. Karevin considers that Tairova-Yakovleva's book is full of numerous mistakes, contradictions and baseless conclusions. The drawbacks make us not to regard the book as established scientifi c study. Kirill Kochegarov fi nds that Mrs. Tairova-Yakovleva's book combine several interesting observations with unacceptable and controversial points. In generally the very idea of the study seems to idealize the Mazepa personality as well as his policy. The author also overestimates the importance of the so-called Moscow clauses, grossly exaggerates Mazepa's participation in the Russian foreign affairs, and erroneously regards centralizing military administration measures of Russian government as large-scale administrative reform in Ukraine. Moreover, active role in Church reform of Peter the Great declared by Mrs. Tairova-Yakovleva Mazepa's has not been proved. Igor Kurukin: Despite the information on administrative reform of 1707 (s.322-330) given by the author, it isn't clear, was the Ukrainian autonomy liquidated or not. There is a disputable question on what extend was Mazepa supported by the Ukraine people as well as cossack «starshina». Provinces being attached to Russia Baltic were able to remain independent for one and a half centuries. Being different by birth Ukrainian elite did't manage to develop rules of corporate behavior and solidarity. Plokhii Serhii: The myth of Mazepa as betrayer have been solidly examined in Mrs. Tairova-Yakovleva's scientifi c and creative lab. The author has succeed in showing - and more carefully than her predecessor - the diffi culty of both personal and public, geopolitics, choice which Mazepa had to make. The book is, if it is a proper name, the most balanced judgment of the hetman I have ever read. Chukhlib Taras. The violation of oath to the Russian monarch by Ukrainian Hetmanstate was interpreted by Ivan Mazepa and his government as tyrannical action of Peter the Great. Therefore, the hetman received the right to refuse from «the high hand» of tsar and look for another suzerain to maintain his vassal autonomy. T. H. Tairova-Yakovleva fi nds this decision quite adequate and revealing us the logic of actions of the Ukrainian leader.
Keywords	IVAN MAZEPA, RUSSIAN IMPERIA, UKRAINE, PETER THE FIRST, HETMANSTATE
	Full text version of the article			Article language	Russian
Bibliography	Таирова-Яковлева Т.Г. Иван Мазепа и Российская империя. История предательства. -Москва: Центрполиграф, 2011. 525 с.

Tags: Ukraine, Ivan Mazepa, RUSSIAN IMPERIA, PETER THE FIRST, HETMANSTATE