Evhen Chikalenko on the agrarian component of socisal relations in Ukrainian village (1900–1920s.)

Purpose of the article: to deepen the understanding of the social status of Ukrainian peasantry, particularlyin Southern Ukraine and partly in the Poltava region, by using the memoirs, diary entries, and epistolary materials of YevhenChykalenko as ideological sources belonging to a prominent representative of the Ukrainian intelligentsia and the nationalliberation movement of the twentieth century.The scientific novelty. The article analyzes original sources that represent Ye. Chykalenko’s views on the ways to resolvethe land issue and contain assessments of agrarian and social relations in Ukrainian village. In addition, the place and roleof the peasantry in the Ukrainian Revolution is comprehensively covered, the land policy of Ukrainian governments is criticallyexamined, and the consequences of establishing pro-Bolshevik poverty committees and committees of poor peasants inUkrainian villages in Yevhen Chykalenko’s vision are critically examined.Conclusions. The author of the article claims that the motivational component of Ye. Chykalenko’s diary entries, epistolarywritings, and memoirs was conditioned by his involvement, as a representative of Ukrainian intelligentsia, in the liberationmovement in early 1890s, his creating and financing of the all-Ukrainian newspaper «Rada», participation in the activities ofpolitical parties, public organizations, the development of agrarian policy of state bodies and the authorities of the CentralRada, Ukrainian State and the UPR Directory.A large body of factual material, which reflect the specifics of land relations in the local dimensions of Southern Ukraineand, partly, in some villages of the Poltava province has been summarized and comprehensively studied.Based on the analysis of personal sources, the author of the article argues that in Ukrainian politics of the 1920s, YevhenChykalenko represented a center-right model of building Ukrainian statehood, which was based on land ownership of big andsmall producers, traditional values of self-government and peasant (folk) morality and ethics.