The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine

This book comprehensively goes through history, with great detail and organization. The stories are written in such a way that it comes to life. As a result, this book became one of my reference books for Ukrainian history. The maps appendices - Historical Timeline, Who's Who in Ukrainian History, Glossary, and Further Reading - are also helpful. (For the next edition may I suggest including a current map of Ukraine with each major city labeled?) I have been recommending this book to anyone interested in Ukrainian and European history.

This is probably the most informative and comprehensive history of Ukraine I've ever read! It really helps put the current situation into context, and helps you realize just how much Ukraine has been dominated by major foreign powers. Very rarely in its history was Ukraine a fully independent state; it was most often a vassal of other powers such as the Byzantine Empire, the Mongols, the Polish nations, and eventually the Russian (Muscovite) Empire. However, it had long dreamed of independence and, despite what some major politicians and pundits are claiming, Ukrainians are their own unique people group, not just a bunch of Russians who got lost and picked up an accent. Fair warning, though: with the way this book is written, it's easy to get bogged down in details, especially in the chapters chronicling the Bolshevik Revolution. It may help to draw an outline/overview when reading this book to keep the bigger picture in context.

I believe John Herbst, former US Ambassador to Ukraine, best characterizes the book with his critique, quote “Serhii Plokhy offers a short yet comprehensive history of Ukraine that contextualizes Mr. Putin's current policies as aggression against the wishes of the Ukrainian people, as well as the order established at the end of the Cold War. A pleasure to read, The Gates of Europe will take those familiar with the Moscow narrative on a mind expanding tour of Ukraine's past." Prof. Serhii Plokhy, the Mykhailo Hrushevsky Professor of Ukrainian History at Harvard and the director of the university's Ukrainian Research Institute, has written a history not to offend. Which is almost impossible as Adoplhe Thiers, in his preface to “Histoire de la Révolution Française” in 1838 wrote…”I intend to write the history of a memorable revolution which profoundly disturbed men, and which still divides them today. I do not conceal from myself the difficulties of the enterprise ... whereas we have the advantage of having heard and observed these old men who, still full of memories, and still aroused by their impressions, reveal to us the spirit and the character of the causes, and teach us to understand them. The moment when the actors are about to expire is perhaps the suitable one to write history: one can glean their evidence without sharing all their passions ... “I have pitied the combatants and I have freely applauded the generous spirits.”… Quoted from “A Savage War of Peace, Algeria 1954-1962” by Alistair Horne. This quote is appropriate for the period of 1890 to 2015 in “The Gates of Europe, from page 175 to page 354. I have spoken with people involved in all of these periods of Ukrainian history. I listened to their experiences with great interest. Many of them, no longer are alive, but their tales are still vividly with me. My grandfather, born in 1881, Dr. Lew Hankewycz experienced this political drama at the age of 14 (1895) when he was expelled from the gymnasium (high school) for comparing the poetry of the Ukrainian Taras Shevchenko to the poetry of the Polish Adam Mickiewicz. Prof. Serhii Plokhy an erudite, careful and discerning researcher of primary sources, has written brilliantly on Eastern European and Eurasian history. This book is somewhat different. It is written for the general reading public, and therefore requires a different approach, a bit more excitement. After all, Ukrainian History is explosively exciting! The publisher writes that prof. Plokhy argues that “we must examine Ukraine’s past in order to understand its present and future.”… In which case you must first read Prof. Plokhy’s “The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus” to understand the Past, and in general Ukraine’s twisted historiography. I would then start reading from part III of this book, from page 131 “Between the Empires” to page 354, which ends the book in the spring of 2015. It is no small matter that his writing always gets good reviews from some of the most respected and prestigious members of his community. He is, after all, the best English writing historian on topics Ukrainian. His admirers, based on the book jacket include: • Andrew Wilson, professor of Ukrainian studies at University College London, author of “ Ukraine Crisis: What it Means for the West” • John Herbst, former US Ambassador to Ukraine, now Director of the National Defense University • Michael Ignatieff, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, author of “Fire and Ashes: Success and Failure in Politics” • Simon Sebag Montefiore, author of, “Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar” • Norman M. Naimark, Stanford University, author of “ Stalin's Genocides: Human Rights and Crimes against Humanity” • Peter Pomerantsev, is a senior fellow at the Legatum Institute in London and author “Nothing is True and Everything is Possible”. I was very surprised that Simon Sebag Montefiore, author of one of the best Stalin studies, “Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar”, claims Prof. Plokhy’s work is “revisionist”. What Montefiore tells me is he supports the Russian Imperial Historiography. This historiography was crafted for Peter I by Teofan Prokopvych. Prokopvych was first a supporter and sycophant to Hetman Mazepa and after Mazepa’s defeat at Poltava 1709, he became a sycophant and spiritual advisor to Tsar Peter I. This book is based on current knowledge and general agreement that the Russian Imperial Historiography is no longer workable, since it does not reflect today’s geopolitical reality. It is so refreshing to read an American scholar who does not transliterate from Russian. However, I question his consistency. He writes Dnipro as Dnieper. Why is Halychyna Galicia? I am puzzled why in most of the book he writes Moldavia and then near the end of the book he writes Moldova. These are quibbles, although the use of Dnieper is annoying, since historically this river is most important in Ukrainian history. Timothy Snyder in his review of this book uses the name Dnipro for this historic river!! The Spectator: The history of Ukraine — from Herodotus to Hitler by Timothy Snyder http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/the-history-of-ukraine-from-herodotus-to-hitler/ Crimea Prof. Plokhy gives the real reason for why Khrushchev in 1954 transferred Crimea to Ukraine, quote, “Despite the propagandistic effort to represent the transfer of the peninsula as a manifestation of fraternal amity between the two nations the real reasons were more prosaic. The key factor was geography. Cut off from Russia by the Kerch Strait and linked by communication lines to the Ukrainian mainland, the Crimea needed assistance from Ukraine to rebuild its economy, which not only the war and German occupation but also the expulsion of the Crimean Tartars undermined”. The second (1991) President of Ukraine, Leonid Kravchuk in a recent interview, said the same thing about Crimea as Prof. Plokhy. We can see the logic of Khrushchev’s reasoning by the current blockade of Crimea! It should not be forgotten that before 1954 the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (UkrSSR) transferred to the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic (RSFSR) its historic territories which bordered on the Smolensk, Kursk, Belgorod (Bilhorod) and Voronezh oblasts (regions). The Rostov region in 1924 was transferred to the city of Taganrog(Tahanrih). In the transferred territories the majority of the population at that time identified themselves as Ukrainian. Ukraine also transferred to Russia the region of Shakhty in Donbas and Starodub in the Chernihiv/Sivershchyna region. It resulted in the transfer to the RSFSR of land from Ukraine equal to the area of Crimea with a Ukrainian population of over 1.2 million people. Painful Subjects There are two painful topics covered in the book which need comment. One is the Holodomor. Prof. Plokhy prefers to use the term “Great Ukrainian Famine”! Why is the Holodomor not listed in the Index? What is the reason? The deposed President of Ukraine Yanukovych also delisted the Holodomor from his presidential web site!? The “Great Ukrainian Famine” is discussed on pages 249 to 254. The other is Ukraine’s fight for freedom during the period of 1940 to 1960, discussed on pages 245 to 305. On both subjects, it seems Prof. Plokhy’s early educational experience in the former Soviet Union have had an influence on his emotional historical world view. Holodomor On the topic of Plokhy’s “Great Ukrainian Famine” he puts his bet on 4 million Holodomor victims, whereas Timothy Snyder puts his bet on 2.4 victims Holodomor victims. What I don’t understand, is why historians ignore Duranty’s, Stalin’s, and Khrushchev's statements on the Holodomor, as well as the confirming census figures for the Soviet Union. In 1926 there were 31,195,000 Ukrainians within the USSR and in 1939 there were 28,111,000. A decrease of 11%! In 1926 there were 77,791,000 Russians within the USSR and in 1939 there were 99,591,000 Russians. An increase of 28%! In 1934 Walter Duranty, a reporter for the New York Times, privately reported to the British embassy in Moscow that as many as 10 million people may have died, directly or indirectly, from the famine in the Soviet Union (predominantly Ukrainian ethnographic regions) in the previous year. One should know that Duranty played a major role in shielding this massive horror from the rest of the world. The terror famine in Ukraine was one of the great crimes of the 20th century. Stalin told Churchill that 10 million starved to death in Ukraine! Khrushchev in his memoirs “Khrushchev Remembers” writes, quote “…I can't give an exact figure because no one was keeping count. All we knew was that people were dying in enormous numbers. ”. Khrushchev knows the numbers. He had intimate dealings with Kaganovich, the Project Manager of the Holodomor Project; they must have discussed it over horilka and salo (vodka and fat back). Khrushchev met Lazar Kaganovich as early as 1917 and when in 1925, Kaganovich became Party head in Ukraine, Khrushchev, fell under his patronage and thereafter rose rapidly through the Party ranks. That is why having close links to Kaganovich, Khrushchev as well as Stalin had reliable Holodomor Famine figures. Kaganovich survived to the age of 97, dying in 1991. Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom (1940 to 1960) Plokhy’s attitude to Ukrainian’s fighting for Independence reminds me of the Soviet attitudes of the Great Patriotic War (WW II). Plokhy’s unfortunate statement on page 284, quote …“securing Ukrainian Independence gave way to realities of Ukrainians wearing Nazi Swastikas and putting down the liberation movements of fellow Slavs”… What he is referring to is the Ukrainian 14th Waffen SS which fought Tito’s Communists. Throughout the War this unit only fought communists! Ukrainians fought in Polish, German and Soviet uniforms. None of them fought for Poland, Germany or Russia. The Ukrainians in the American Army did fight for the United States. The Swastika that Prof. Plokhy overly emphasizes was in a small insignia, of an eagle with a small wreath in its claws, in which you can barely see a swastika! Every German Army uniform had it. It should be noted that all Soviet military formations wore a Hammer and Sickle and under the Hammer and Sickle insignia and banners the Red Army went on to literally Rape “liberated Europe”. Ukrainians had the only military formations in WW II, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), to fight both Totalitarian Empires, German and Russian. In 1970 in Argentina I spoke with a young man from Volyn in Ukraine who told me, that in 1961 he was a witness to a military action by Ukrainian Insurgents in Volyn. All the Ukrainians that I had spoken with, told me that they fought for an Independent Ukraine, and not as Plokhy implies for the Nazis. See Michael O. Logusz “Galicia Division: The Waffen-SS 14th grenadier Division 1943-1945” and {Маців Б. “ У 45 Українська Дивізія << Галичина>> Історія у світлинах від заснування у 1943 р. до звільнення з полону 1949 р.} , ISBN 978-966-1518-19-2. Gorbachev There is also no bibliography, which does not allow me to verify Prof. Plokhy’s claim that Gorbachev’s father was Russian. There is a section called “Further Reading” but it is not a bibliography. In 1991 I met and spoke with a KGB General who came from the same Kuban Cossack Village as the Horbach family. The Russian version of the surname Horbach is Gorbachev. According to him Gorbachev was Ukrainian. Tatiana Lysenko the author of "The Price of Freedom" wrote about the Gorbachevs. She responded to my request for more information, quote..." Both ethnic Ukrainians! It was told to me by the well-known Moscow writer Nina Danhulova (deceased) who personally knew Raisa and Mikhail, and came from the same area as Mikhail Gorbachev. ... Michael's grandfather Andrey Horbach was of Ukrainian origin (Kuban Cossack).... Kuban Cossacks are ethnic Ukrainians, and it (Stavropol territory) was previously Ukrainian Kuban land ... So Michael was pure ethnic Ukrainian …”. Gail Sheehy, a contributing political editor to Vanity Magazine and the author of "The Man Who Changed the World (Gorbachev's biography)", 1990. Quote..."Gorbachev's ancestors were Ukrainian Cossacks...settling in the southernmost wilds of the territory of Stavropol...”. Notwithstanding my critical observations, “The Gates of Europe” is a must read for the informed American reader.

This book is a must read for anyone interested in learning about the roots of the current Russo-Ukrainian war. The Ukraine is situated at the center of the 'Old World' and as such has been invaded over the centuries from every direction and occupied by just about everyone, including the Vikings, Persians, Greeks, Byzantines, Romans, Mongols, Huns, Austrians, Poles, French, British, Germans and most recently, the Russians. I say this to make the point that there is no single strand of DNA that identifies someone as Ukrainian and no country that can claim possession of Ukraine by playing the 'We were here first,' card. What becomes obvious when reading this book is that the people who live there should determine if they want to be independent or to become part of another country. With that in mind, here are a few passages from the book that should enlighten readers. First, in a 1991 referendum on independence, "The turnout reached 84 percent, with more than 90 percent of voters supporting independence. Western Ukraine led the way, with 99 percent in favor in the Ternopil oblast of Galicia. But the center, south, and even the east were not far behind. In Vinnytsia, in central Ukraine, 95 percent voted for independence; in Odesa, in the south, 85 percent; and in the Donetsk region, in the east, 83 percent. Even in the Crimea, more than half the voters supported independence: 57 percent in Sevastopol and 54 percent in the peninsula as a whole. (At that time, Russians constituted 66 percent of the Crimean population." In short, every oblast (state) and region, including Donetsk and the Crimea, voted in favor of independence. Second, Crimea never decided of its own accord to reunite with Russia. "According to President Putin, he personally made a decision to “return” the Crimea to Russia at a meeting with his political advisers and military commanders on the night of February 22, 2014. Four days later, on the night of February 26, a band of armed men in unmarked uniforms took control of the Crimean parliament. Under their protection, Russian intelligence services engineered the installment of the leader of a pro-Russian party, which had obtained only 4 percent of the vote in the previous parliamentary elections, as the new prime minister of the Crimea. Then Russian troops, along with mercenaries and Cossack formations brought from the Russian Federation at least a week before the start of the operation, blocked Ukrainian military units at their bases with the assistance of locally recruited militias. "In mid-March 2014, the citizens of the Crimea were called to polling stations to vote for reunification with Russia. The results of the Moscow-endorsed referendum were reminiscent of Brezhnev-era polls, when the turnout was reported as 99 percent and the same figure was given for the percentage of voters supporting government candidates. It was now claimed that 97 percent of voters had supported the unification of the Crimea with Russia. In Sevastopol, local officials reported a pro-Russian vote amounting to 123 percent of registered voters. The new Crimean authorities declared the total turnout to be 83 percent, but according to the Human Rights Council attached to the office of the Russian president, less than 40 percent of registered voters had taken part in the referendum." Third, in the eastern Donbas region, which has a higher percentage of ethnic Russians than elsewhere in the country, only 30 percent voted for reunification with Russia, "so Russian intelligence agencies initiated the destabilization of Ukraine from the Donbas in the spring of 2014: "Paramilitary units often trained and financed by the Russian government and close to the Kremlin oligarchs showed up in the Donbas in April 2014. By May, they had taken control of most of the region’s urban centers. The ousted [Ukrainian] President Yanukovych used his remaining political ties and substantial financial resources to help destabilize his home region. Gangs in the pay of the exiled president attacked supporters of the new government in Kyiv, while corrupt policemen helped them by supplying names and addresses of potential victims." What is the source of all of these efforts to destroy Ukrainian independence? Vladimir Putin. Before beginning his second term as president in 2012, he declared that the reintegration of post-Soviet space was one of his prime objectives and the Ukraine is the largest and most valuable former Soviet republic there is. Plokhy's book does a magnificent job of spelling out the incredible suffering these people have endured in the last century. You owe it to yourself to read it.

El libro es excellente. Tomo el curso gratiuito de Timothy Snyder “History of Ukraine” de Yale University que se encuentra en YouTube (en inglés) y este libro es el texto principal para su curso. Estoy encantada con el libro, pero desgraciadamente se está deshojando y lo voy a tener que mandarlo a arreglar.

Too good a book to put down once you start reading it. How many of us even knew the early settlers in today's Ukraine were Vikings from the North? At least I didn't! On a serious note though, the author captures the Ukrainian history from the Viking period to the beginnings of Kievian Rus. Then he dwells onto the rise of the Cossacks, the influence of the Romanov dynasty after being assimilated as a part of Russia, wars with Poland & Lithuania and finally the two great wars of the 20th Century to the present Donbass region conflict. I would certainly recommend it to anybody who wants to understand the development of a country closely related to stability in Europe and Central Asia.

If you want to know how far back Ukrainian culture goes by the way 45,000 years before Christ, this book is for you. Yeah, it’s complicated but so is the history of Ukraine I must read for anybody needing to understand why the passion and spirit of these people run so deep, did you know they Domesticated the horse? A very well written, in-depth history of the region that any history buff should know and really just everybody should know not an easy read but necessary, one five stars

Rápida entrega e produto conforme previsto. excelente.

Packaging was great, when it comes to the book it's pretty good actually -- author is not biased has a great writing skill and it's full of interesting details.