Europe's “Shadow Agent”: Rethinking Ukraine's Historical Role in the 20th Century

In the article the process of expansion by russia is analyzed, which, through the prism of the absolutist paradigm, for 400 years directed its efforts not only to the annexation of the territory of Ukraine, but also to the destruction of Ukrainian statehood and the Ukrainian nation. The purpose of article – analysis of political, economic, spiritual and cultural factors that illustrate the process of the implementation of russian expansion aimed at the destruction of Ukrainian statehood and the Ukrainian nation during the 17th – 21st centuries Scientific novelty – the implementation of Russia’s expansionist policy on the territory of Ukraine, starting from 1654 and up to the present time, is comprehensively investigated. The periodization of russian expansion during the 17th – 21th centuries is suggested. Conclusions. Taking into account the specifics of the chosen topic, we have highlighted five chronological periods during which russia pursued an expansionist policy with the aim of destroying Ukrainian statehood. The first period (17th –18th centuries) covers the stage of the initial phase of russian expansion, starting with the Pereyaslav Council, when all the top leadership of the Ukrainian Cossack state, led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky, swore allegiance to the moscow tsar, and to the aggressive policy of Peter I and his successors, as a result of which at the end of the 18th century 80% of Ukrainian lands were part of the russian empire. The second period (the 19th – the early 20th century) – was a time when the russian authorities directed their efforts to maintain the previously captured territories of Ukraine and tried to implement the «Novorossiia» project in the south of the country without much success. The third period (1922 – 1991) covers the history of Ukraine as part of the Soviet Union, the main characteristics of which were the complete occupation of the territory of Ukraine and the policy of persuasion of the population using such methods as repression, famine, deportation, total russification, destruction of national self-identification, etc. The fourth period (1991 – 2013) – the historical period that began with the declaration of Ukraine’s independence and was marked by difficult russian-Ukrainian relations, as a result of which the russian federation, seeking revenge, tried to politically, economically, and culturally weaken our country, at the same time compromising it in the eyes of its Western partners. The fifth period (2014 – nowadays) – the period of the russian-Ukrainian war, during which the aggressor is trying to conquer the territory of Ukraine, deprive it of its independence, and the Ukrainian people – to win back the lost territories and become a full-fledged player in the global world system. Thus, having studied the russian expansion during the 17th – 21st centuries, we can draw conclusions that during all the five periods we have highlighted or the last 400 years of the history of Ukraine, the policy of the north-eastern neighbor was aimed at the annexation of Ukrainian territories and the destruction of statehood. To achieve the goal set for himself, the aggressor used the entire set of military, political, cultural, and spiritual factors.

This article examines the contemporary revision in Mongolia of official narratives around what has been termed the ‘Mongolian People’s Revolution’ of 1921 and the subsequent establishment of communist rule in the country. It examines and deconstructs 20th century Soviet accounts of the role of the Soviet Red Army and the Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Party in this process. During the 20th century, these narratives created a transformative, ideological shift among Mongolian populations, disseminating Soviet Russian ideology in order to gain their active participation in the anti-imperialist movements that were emerging in an Asian context. These narratives still form the foundation for the teaching of national history in Mongolia today. The article presents information from a variety of archival sources in several languages and scripts, and from perspectives heretofore unheard from, including Mongolian voices, that challenge this standard account. By making these perspectives visible, an alternative account of Mongolia’s transition to communist role, at a key moment in its modern history, can be written and evaluated. This article is therefore framed within, and adds further evidence to, the ongoing historiographical debates regarding interpretations of the events of 1921 in Mongolia.

Coffee Culture in Dublin: A Brief History

The article analyzes the role of Ukrainian Studies in Ukraine's national security and the exposing of Russian fakes. It has been found that the Russo-Ukrainian War has become a huge challenge for Ukraine and Ukrainians, as it is being waged not only by military (conventional) means but also through information warfare and propaganda. It is revealed that Russian aggressors (Rashists) are attempting to defeat Ukrainian citizens not only on the battlefield but also in the information space, promoting a "Rashist" worldview and convincing Ukrainians of their inferiority. They also impose Putin’s ideology of the "Russian World" and imperial myths about the "single people," "blood brothers – Russians and Ukrainians," and similar narratives on the Ukrainian nation, thereby attempting to restore the USSR 2.0 in the format of "Great Historical Russia." It is shown that Russian myths are utilized as a powerful tool of hybrid warfare to falsify historical events, create false ideas about socio-political reality, and form a false social reality for the objects of information influence. As a result of these systemic actions, Ukraine's national security faces the threat of significant weakening. It is emphasized that Ukrainian Studies, as an interdisciplinary integrative science and an independent educational discipline, possesses great potential and real opportunities to actualize the intellectual achievements of Ukraine’s humanitarian elite to strengthen national security, reinforce national identity, and refute the propaganda myths and fakes of the Russian aggressors (Rashists). It is demonstrated that an important component of strengthening Ukraine's national security and national identity, and refuting Russian myths, is the creation of an appropriate legal framework that will enhance legal support for countering Russian propaganda narratives. It is established that Ukrainian Studies in the 20th and early 21st centuries contributes to the strengthening of Ukrainian national identity in Ukraine as a vital part of national security, thereby actualizing Ukrainian ethnic formation, state formation, nation formation, and ethno-cultural formation. It is concluded that Ukrainian Studies can become the national and worldview ideology of the Ukrainian Independent United State.

The theoretical and practical development of social pedagogy was influenced by many social, economic and cultural factors (e.g. industrial and cultural revolutions), which took place in Europe and America in the 19th century. In turn, in 1908 Helena Radlińska created the scientific bases of social pedagogy in Poland and initiated its disciplinary development. In her activities, the researcher emphasized the role of a human in the transformation of reality in which they live. Her concept had a lot in common with the theses of the then German and French philosophical and pedagogical thought, among others Paul Bergman, Jean-Marie Guyau, Paul Natorp, Gabriel Séailles (Theiss, 2018, p. 13). The key moment in the initial phase of the development of so-called Helena Radlińska’s school of social pedagogy was the creation of The Social-Educational Work Study of Free Polish University in 1925. It was the first university in Poland to educate, at the academic level, future social and educational workers and educators in the area of adult education, mother and child care , and organization of social life. Social pedagogy as a science of human education, upbringing, and social functioning is a discipline of humanistic and social science. It has an interdisciplinary character shaped on the basis of the knowledge of various sciences, that includes: philosophy of human life, psychology (experimental, social, clinical), general pedagogy, sociology of education, ethics, social policy, family and guardianship law, theory of environmental education (Kamiński, 1974).

Andrew Wilson. Ukrainian Nationalism in the 1990s: A Minority Faith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. xviii, 300 pp. Maps. Tables. Notes. Select bibliography. Index. $59.95, cloth. $23.95, paper. Andrew Wilson from the University of Cambridge is an expert on the post-Soviet era, specializing particularly in Ukraine. He has written extensively on various aspects of Ukrainian politics. His present volume's overriding argument is that the appeal of Ukrainian nationalism is severely limited by the country's inherited regional, ethnic, linguistic and religious differences. Before coming under Soviet rule, the regions of western Ukraine had been for many centuries part of various East-Central European states. Most notably Galicia, Transcarpathia, and northern Bukovyna had known neither Russian nor Soviet rule until World War II. During the interwar period Volhynia also remained outside Soviet borders. By contrast, other regions have been under very strong Russian influence. This is especially true of eastern and southern Ukraine, as well as the Crimea, which Russia acquired from the Tartars in the 18th century and which was settled by Ukrainians and Russians. As a result, there has developed a profound dichotomy between western Ukraine and the rest of the country. The dichotomy is clearly seen in the regional distribution of ethnic Russians. In no region of the western half of Ukraine, excluding Kyiv (i.e., Kiev), the Russian minority exceeds 10 percent of the population. By contrast, in southern and eastern Ukraine ethnic Russians make up respectively 24 and 36 percent of the population, while in Crimea they dominate numerically with 67 percent. Even more telling is the regional distribution of Russophones. While in no western region, excluding Kyiv, Russian speakers exceed roughly one quarter of the population, in the remaining regions they are either in the numerical majority or at about par with Ukrainophones. Across the country, the nationalist movement followed differing paths of historical development. Outside of the western regions the mainstream Ukrainian nationalist movement tended as a rule to be more cautious and moderate, seeking autonomy within the Russian and later Soviet state rather than outright independence. This approach was the corollary of a low level of national consciousness among the masses of local Ukrainians, and of the strong Russian control of, and influence in, the area. By contrast, Ukrainians of liberal Austrian Galicia achieved a high level of national consciousness and built the foundations of a bold and vigorous national movement. Subsequently, in interwar Poland, Galician and Volhynian Ukrainians developed two nationalist traditions. On the one hand, the Ukrainian national-- democratic party was strongly represented in parliament; on the other, a very influential underground terrorist network, the OUN, was created. The latter, along with its military wing, the UPA, led the nationalist movement in the region during World War II and its aftermath. Though eventually stifled by the Soviets, west Ukrainian nationalism was never completely uprooted, and many a dissident in Soviet Ukraine hailed from that region. Thus, various nationalist traditions were created in the country, resulting in a considerable diversity of Ukrainian nationalist political parties active in the 1990s. They can be divided into two groups: national-democratic and ultra-nationalist. The most popular nationalist party was Rukh, a national-democratic front. The other two important national-democratic parties were the Ukrainian Republican Party and the Democratic Party of Ukraine. Ultra-nationalist parties tended to be smaller but more numerous. Emigre veterans of the OUN were influential in establishing the most popular among them, the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists. The second in importance was the Ukrainian National Assembly with its paramilitary wing, the Ukrainian Self-Defence Force. …

The article addresses the most important issues of book publishing in Ukraine in the 19th century in terms of information and communication approach. The spread of book printing is defined by science as the second information revolution. This has radically changed society, contributing to its rapid development. In the conditions of Ukraine’s transition to the information society, the task of rethinking the historical processes related to informatization for the generalization of the accumulated experience is actualized. The purpose of the study is to highlight the features of the book publishing in Ukraine in the 19th century through prism of information and communication approach. Tasks – a re to show the specifics of the first and second stages of book printing development and analysis of its role in creating an information and communication space of society. In the 19th century, Ukrainian book publishing received its further development. However, he was hindered in Ukraine by the colonial policy of the Russian Empire, which sought to pursue an assimilationist policy toward the Ukrainian people and its language. Valuevskyi and Yemskyi decrees caused a number of long-term negative consequences for both the Ukrainian people and the tsarist government. Ukrainian book publishing has shown its unifying information and communication property. The ban on the distribution and publication of books in tsarist Russia slowed down Ukraine’s progress, but this contributed to the intensification of publications in Western Ukraine and abroad. In addition, the development of printing in Russia continued and the progressive intellectuals used it quite well. Book communication created an information space that brought the unity of Ukraine closer, the transformation of Ukrainians into a European nation, accelerated serious socio-political changes. Tsarist Russia, through its bans, contributed to the consolidation of conscious Ukrainians and the creation of a broad movement of resistance to anti-Ukrainian policies, which led to liberation struggles

The article is devoted to the study of the creative heritage of Oswald Spengler and his influence on the formation of European identity. The publication of Oswald Spengler’s “The Decline of the West” in 1918 was a cultural event of European scale. Research interest in Spengler’s book, which marks the point of reference of cultural and historical processes in the 20th century, continues unabated in the 21st century. The centennial of the first volume publication was marked by scientific events, a series of academic and educational publications that offer a new context for understanding the philosopher’s ideas.German researchers attribute the “Spengler effect” to the actualization of the cultural identity of Europe as a single communication space. The Russian reception of Spengler’s work allows us to actualize his ideas at a time of cultural ruptures and to comprehend the existence of a common cultural tradition. In contrast to Spengler’s hopelessly eschatological insights and the rationalistically determined, ideologized commentaries of German interpreters, the Russian tradition of understanding the philosopher’s cultural heritage has a personal sense of empathy and denies fatal predetermination.Russian scholars are critical of Spengler’s methodology, recognizing the symbolic significance of his mythological thinking. Considering “The Decline of the West” among the most important texts of the 20th century, which defined the development of European spiritual culture, domestic Thinkers and writers highlight the artistic value and original style of the treatise.The symptoms of Western culture weakening enumerated by O. Spengler in the early 20th century are manifested in the negative megatrends of our time. European culture and public identity of the 21st century are experiencing a systemic crisis. The cultural identity of modernity fixes spiritual losses, the loss of the semantic foundations of existence. Recent value orientations and creative practices confirm the productivity of the German philosopher’s predictions about the tragically preordained fate of the West. Spengler’s ideas correlate with the insights of European artists painfully experiencing a traumatic historical experience. The work of well-known German writers Peter Handke and Roland Schimmelpfennig embodies the destructive processes of modern society: the manias and phobias of the inhabitants of the “world city”, the formalization and cliched language, the devaluation of the value system.Spengler’s characterization of the “world city” is relevant to contemporary culture that formats the artistic space of virtual reality. The spectacular arts expand the digital format, institutionalize processes of alienation, and intensify the robotization of humans.KeywordsSpenglerIdentityConsciousnessVisualityCultural pessimismCrisisCultureCivilization“Faustian soul”

The struggle for language was an integral part of the activities of the Ukrainian intelligentsia of the 1960s–1980s, whose creative and scholarly works testified to the unfolding Ukrainian National and Liberation Resistance Movement of this period, aimed against the colonial practices of the Soviet state, Russification, denationalization, and language and cultural assimilation. Despite considerable scholarly attention to the topic of the Sixtiers and the Ukrainian Resistance Movement in general, there remains a significant need for research on the language self-awareness of the Movement’s participants, their value orientations concerning the language issue, and the intellectual contribution of its representatives to the protection of the Ukrainian language rights. Studying these issues is important for the history of sociolinguistics as well as for the history of the development and functioning of the Ukrainian language in the 20th and early 21st centuries. The aim of the article is to reveal the views of a Ukrainian intellectual – one of the most influential representatives of the Ukrainian Dissident Movement of the Sixtiers generation, literary critic, philologist, publicist, historian, and public figure, author of the seminal dissident text “Internationalism or Russification?” – Ivan Dziuba, on the problems of development and functioning of the Ukrainian language, the language situation and language policy in Soviet and post-Soviet Ukraine, and to highlight his activities in defending national values in the context of anti-totalitarian and decolonization processes of the second half of the 20th and early 21st centuries. The article establishes that the language issue occupies a central place in Ivan Dziuba’s intellectual heritage. His works present a holistic picture of Ukrainian language reality from the beginning of the 20th century to the first decades of the 21st century, covering nearly a hundred years of the Ukrainian nation’s life. The scholarly, journalistic, literary, and memoir texts of this prominent Ukrainian intellectual are marked by profound concern for the state and prospects of the Ukrainian language. The scholar reflects on the significance of language, analyzes the reasons for the provincial and secondary status of the Ukrainian language, highlights the scale and mechanisms of Russification policies pursued in Ukrainian lands by the Russian Empire, its successor the USSR, and the Russian Federation, and identifies manipulative strategies used by Russia for political pressure on Ukraine. He seeks and proposes ways to overcome the national and language crisis and to solve urgent tasks of language policy, emphasizing the need to free Ukraine from its de facto status as a language and cultural colony of the former metropole, to consolidate Ukrainians around shared values, to form and strengthen Ukrainian national and language identity, and to raise the prestige and ensure the necessity of the Ukrainian language. For many years, Ivan Dziuba has considered the language issue as one of the key factors in the life of the Ukrainian nation, creating texts that resonated widely in society and became significant milestones in the history of the Ukrainian Resistance Movement. Keywords: Ukrainian language, Dziuba Ivan Mykhailovych, Ukrainian National and Liberation Resistance Movement, Russification, denationalization, language situation, language policy, language issue, manipulative strategies.

Inji Efflatoun

The study examines the contribution of Y. Zaitsev to the study of the problems of dissidence, opposition and anti-regime movements of the second half of the twentieth century (before the declaration of independence) in Ukraine. The author notes his active participation in the work of national public organisations at the turn of the 80s and 90s of the 20th century, his rapprochement with former political prisoners, their influence on his choice of research topics - opposition processes in Ukraine after the Stalinist era and the first publications on dissidence. The study emphasises the development by the scholar of the problems of implementing the Ukrainian national idea as the core of state ideology and independent state-building. The work examines underground Ukrainian groups and organisations, including the Ukrainian National Committee, the Ukrainian Workers‘ and Peasants’ Union, and the Ukrainian National Front. The author highlights their publishing activities, the illegal distribution of their printed organs, and some practical implementation of their anti-totalitarian struggle, including, in addition to the distribution of underground literature, the display of national blue and yellow flags. The author reveals the struggle of the communist regime against Ukrainian political, literary, scientific, and artistic dissent, which resulted in a series of trials against members of the opposition movement and their sentencing to various terms of imprisonment. The paper highlights the role of women in the Ukrainian Resistance movement after the Stalinist period, emphasising their socio-political, national and cultural work, and their contribution to the struggle for Ukrainian statehood. The author points to the researcher's significant contribution to the implementation of the Oral History of Ukraine project and his work in the study of the political history of Ukraine. Keywords: opposition movement, dissidence, women dissidents, totalitarian regime.

          The Ukrainian state-historical tradition traces its roots back to the Kyiv state, which was the creature of the ancient Ukrainian tribes and, above all, of the most influential of them - the Polans. The Polans, who adopted the name of Rus in VI-VII centuries, were destined to play an outstanding role in the creation of the state, which developed on the territory of Kyivschyna, Chernigivschyna and Pereyaslavschyna, and in due course expanded its power to almost the whole of Eastern Europe.  By the middle of the XII century the state had entered into a state of feudal fragmentation and was actually split up into a dozen and a half principalities, ruled by different branches of the Rurikovich dynasty. Until the Mongol invasion (1237-1240) Kiev, which lost its influence in favour of the new centres of power, continued to be formally considered the main city of Ukraine.         In 1569 the The Union of Lublin (Polish: Unia lubelska; Lithuanian: Liublino unija) was proclaimed, which united the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland into one state, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Volhynia, Podlasie, Podolia, Bratslav and Kyivschina were under the authority of the new state. After the adoption of the Brest union, which legitimized the union of the Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Metropolitanate and the Catholic Church, many prominent Ukrainians began to move from Orthodoxy to Catholicism. In 1648 Zaporozhye Cossacks led by Bohdan Khmelnitsky rebelled against Polish magnates. Cossacks reached Lvov and occupied Kiev, but in 1651 they were defeated.  It was a turning point in the history of Ukraine and Russia. In 1654 at Pereyaslav Rada the transition to the protectorate of the Moscow Tsar was approved. It all led to a protracted Russo-Polish war, the outcome of which was the Truce of Andrusovo. The parties agreed that the lands on the left bank of the Dnieper River would go to Russia, and the right bank would belong to Poland. But there was no peace on this land for decades.         With the death of Bohdan Khmelnitsky a new round of struggle for a free Ukraine began. The new hetman of Ukraine, Ivan Mazepa, radically changed his foreign policy course.   During the Northern War hetman Mazepa decided to take advantage of the situation and get out from under the control of Peter I. Some of the Cossacks went over to the side of Sweden, but the Russian army won the decisive battle, and Mazepa was forced to flee.  Ukrainian lands at the beginning of the twentieth century were ruled by two empires: Russian and Austro-Hungarian. Current events on the territory of Ukraine are largely determined by its historical role. At different times different Ukrainian territories have been ruled by different states. The Ukrainian people have never been distinguished by nationalism or chauvinism; many nations of the world have lived in Ukraine at different periods of history, and none of them have felt oppressed. The historical tolerance of the Ukrainian people is reflected in both culture and ideology. Simultaneously, the Ukrainian people have constantly struggled for their own statehood. And it seems that this struggle is not over.        The Ukrainian people today have once again felt the perfidy of their neighbouring nation.  The Russian people have in fact abandoned Ukrainian statehood and the so-called DNR and LNR have been proclaimed on the occupied territories.  Nor could the Ukrainian people understand all this, and forgiveness is no longer possible! The pharisaism did not end there, Moscow recognised the so-called DNR and LNR as independent states. It is the consideration of these issues that is the purpose of this paper.

Countries are like people: they exist in time and space. Napoleon once said that ‘Geography is destiny’, and it is true with regard to Ukraine, whose destiny is influenced by both politics and geography. Its historical fate was to be established and develop between Russia and Europe. Like a planet that has veered off its course, Ukraine is stuck in the gravitational zone of two large geopolitical stars. One of them, Russia, has strong historical and cultural ties to Ukraine, and can be described as a close relative. The other centre of attraction is the European civilization. It is located at a greater distance from Ukraine and, unlike Russia, has not always been politically consolidated. However, the cultural, social and often political gravitational pull of that geopolitical giant has been stronger. This has led to a contradiction: Ukraine is located closer to Russia, but is leaning towards Europe, although at times it has seemed unable to make up its mind. Like an iceberg that broke off from an historical mainland, Ukrainian society is gradually drifting towards Europe. Yet it regularly makes a U-turn towards Russia, due to changes on the historical stage, but then leaves it again for its whimsical European neighbour. Ukraine is torn between a good but brutal husband and a desired but cold lover. Between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, Russia became establishedas an independent and powerful centre of geopolitical attraction. By the time when most European nations finished their evolution – between the late eighteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Ukrainian ethnos was already torn between the two: the Russian Empire and Austro-Hungary. The divide was reinforced after World War I. Ukraine as it exists now only appeared on the political map in 1939-40. These are the historical and geographical causes of differences in the identity and foreign policy targets of the residents of the western and eastern/southern regions of Ukraine. One part of the country is historically focused on the West and the European civilization, while the other part is predominantly pro-Russia because it has been connected to Russia for centuries. These ethno-cultural differences continue to influence Ukrainian policy.American political writer Samuel Huntington writes in his famous book on the clash of civilizations that ‘Ukraine is a cleft country’, that is, a countrywhere ‘large groups belong to different civilisations’. He writes: ‘Historically, western Ukrainians have spoken Ukrainian and have been strongly nationalist in their outlook. The people of eastern Ukraine, on the other hand, have been overwhelmingly Orthodox and have in large part spoken Russian’ (Huntington 1996: 138). This is true geographically, but the situation is much more complex and ambivalent ethno-culturally than Huntington saw it in the mid-1990s. Ukrainian society looks homogeneous in terms of formal statistics. Accordingto the 2001 census, Ukrainians constituted 77.8 per cent, the largest ethnic minority (Russians) 17.3 per cent, and all other ethnic groups made up 4.9 per cent.1 The largest minorities live in border regions. For example, Russians account for 58.3 per cent of the population in Crimea, which is an autonomous republic of Ukraine, where Tatars made up 12 per cent and ethnic Ukrainians only 24.3 per cent in 2001. In Sevastopol, 71.6 per cent were Russians. The largest group of ethnic Russians also lived at that time in the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine: Luhansk (39 per cent), Donetsk (38.2 per cent), Kharkiv (25.6 per cent), Zaporizhia (24.7 per cent) and Odessa (20.7 per cent).2 The proportion of Russians in the largest cities in eastern and southern Ukraine is even larger. Inter-regional differences are even bigger in the field of language. Accordingto the 2001 census, 67.5 per cent of respondents said their native language is Ukrainian, 29.6 per cent, including 14.8 per cent of ethnic Ukrainians, said it is Russian, and 2.9 per cent named other languages. The majority of Russianspeaking people in Ukraine live in the southern and eastern regions and large cities, including the Crimea (77 per cent), Sevastopol (90.6 per cent), the Luhansk region (68.8 per cent) and the Donetsk region (74.9 per cent). Russian speakers constitute nearly half of the population in several other regions: the Kharkiv region (44.3 per cent), the Zaporizhia region (48.2 per cent) and the Odessa region (41.9 per cent).3

This article is a continuation of the publications: Хренов Н. А. Искусство рубежа ХХ-ХХI веков в контексте повторяющихся эпох: новая чувствительность в художественной сфере как вызов. Часть I // Pan-Art. 2024. Т. 4. Вып. 3; Хренов Н. А. Искусство рубежа ХХ-ХХI веков в контексте повторяющихся эпох: новая чувствительность в художественной сфере как вызов. Часть II // Pan-Art. 2024. Т. 4. Вып. 4. In this part, the author continues to record in history the rises and falls in the emotional life of society. Observations of art make it possible to comprehend a certain logic in the ebbs and flows of emotional life at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. However, the causes of this were found in biology. Thus, N. Vasiliev, in the history of emotions, distinguishes two phases: the hysterical and the neurasthenic. If the hysterical phase is associated with a lack of emotional impressions, then the neurasthenic phase, which begins in cities at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, is associated with an overabundance of emotions. This circumstance affects the reception of art, contributing to the emergence and spread of mass culture, the functioning of which does not correlate with universal artistic styles. Seeking to identify this new logic at other levels, the author, drawing on the ideas of N. Vasiliev, resorts to a parallel between the culture of Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries, on the one hand, and the Hellenistic culture of antiquity, on the other. The shifts unfolding in antiquity along with the growth of the urban population and the consequences of these shifts on emotional life allow for a more precise understanding of the different forms of expression of emotions in urban culture. This circumstance allows for a deeper analysis of the situation that arises in European and Russian culture already in the 19th century, which is known as the situation of decadence. However, this problem is drawing attention in our time – in particular, an analysis is being conducted of some films of late Soviet cinema (“Mournful Unconcern” (1987) by A. Sokurov, “The Asthenic Syndrome” (1989) by K. Muratova).

Relevance of the study. The evolution and the very phenomenon of the Salzburg Festival go hand in hand with the history of music and theatre, the philosophy of art, and the global musical infrastructure of the 20th and early 21st centuries. On the one hand, it is their fair reflection; while on the other hand, it is an integral part of their development. That is why studying and understanding the role and place of the Salzburg Festival is essential for understanding contemporary musical culture in a current historical perspective.Relevance of the study is attributable to the fact that, for the first time in Ukrainian historical musicology, the development and implementation of the idea of holding the Salzburg Festival are considered, indirect relations between the festival ideologists and the Ukrainian cultural space at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries are discovered, and the century-old history of the main European music and theatre forum is systematized.Main objective of the study is to introduce the phenomenon of the Salzburg Festival as a historical and cultural integrity in the space of the Ukrainian musicological discourse, as well as to outline and systematize a one hundred-year path of the main music and theatre forum in Europe.Methodology of the study includes the use of historical, culturological, and systemic approaches.Results and conclusions. The study revealed that at the stage of shaping the idea of the festival in Salzburg at the beginning of the twentieth century, there were two fundamental visions of its implementation, namely, “Mozart-oriented” and “general theatrical”. They both entered the gene code of the Salzburg Music and Theatre Forum with varying interpretations of its concept and repertoire policy at each phase of its existence. The change of priorities in its fundamental triad, that is, drama — opera — concert, during forum varying periods is also traced.The hundred-year journey of the Salzburg Festival may be divided into three main stages: 1) the development and search of self-identity (1920–1954); 2) “stabilization” and formation of international prestige (1955–1990); and 3) “modernization” and expansion of cultural horizons (from 1991 until today). Each of them is well integrated into history of Western European music and culture of the 20th and early 21st centuries.