The image of K. Kalinowski and the reflection of the events of the 1863–1864 uprising in contemporary Belarusian historiography

Abstract

The article is a review of the development of the image of K. Kalinowski in Belarusian historiography. His appearance is associated with the activities of Vacłaŭ Justynavič Łastoŭski. In the 1920–1930s, the image of Kalinowski developed thanks to the activities of Usievaład Makaravič Ihnatoŭski — the founder of the nationally oriented Soviet school of Belarusian historians. The postwar stage in the development of Soviet historiography required new approaches to the study of the uprising of 1863–1864, which is now commonly called the national liberation for a number of peoples of the former Russian Empire. In this regard, Belarusian researchers reveal the figure of K. Kalinowski as a link between Russian revolutionary democracy and Polish rebels. The works of Anatol Pilipavič Smirnoŭ, Viačasłaŭ Fieliksavič Šalkievič, Michaił Vosipavič Bič, characterize this period. In the 1990s, Belarusian historiography got rid of censorship obstacles and published a number of Kalinowski’s works, which had been banned in the Soviet Union because of their explicit Russophobe orientation (the complete collection of K. Kalinowski’s works was published under the edition of Hienadź Vasilevič Kisialoŭ). The boundary of the first and second decades of the 21^st century is marked by the polarization of views on Kalinowski — in the works of Alaksandr Jurjevič Biendzin and Alaksandr Dźmitryjevič Hronski, Kalinowski appears not as a Belarusian national hero, but as a purely Polish figure. The second decade of the century was marked by the works of Zmicier Kuźmienka and Vasil Uładzimiravič Hierasimčyk, in which Kalinowski’s apologization is combined with attempts to use new approaches to the study of his personality.

For citation
Yalovega V. I. The image of K. Kalinowski and the reflection of the events of the 1863–1864 uprising in contemporary Belarusian historiography // Slavic Almanac. 2020. Issues 1–2. P. 88–104. DOI: 10.31168/2073-5731.2020.1-2.1.05