¹ Hroch, Miroslav, Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe: A Comparative Analysis of the Social Composition of Patriotic Groups among the Smaller European Nations (Cambridge, UK, 1985)Google Scholar. For the Galician connection in the context of debates about “nonhistoric” nations, see Rozdolski, Roman, Engels and the “Nonhistoric” Peoples: The National Question in the Revolution of 1848, trans. and intro. by Himka, John-Paul (Glasgow, 1986)Google Scholar. For the application of Hroch's scheme to the Ruthenian national revival in Galicia, see Magocsi, Paul Robert, “The Ukrainian National Revival: A New Analytical Framework,” Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism 16, no.1-2 (1989): 45–62Google Scholar.

² This was emphasized in: Himka, John-Paul, “The Galician Triangle,” Cross Currents 12 (1993): 125–46Google Scholar.

³ Himka, John-Paul, “The Construction of Nationality in Galician Rus': Icarian Flights in Almost All Directions,” in Intellectuals and Articulation of the Nation, ed. Suny, Ronald Grigor and Kennedy, Michael D. (Ann Arbor, 1999), 112Google Scholar.

⁴ Magocsi, Paul Robert did groundbreaking work in his: “Old Ruthenianism and Russophilism: A New Conceptual Framework for Analyzing National Ideologies in Late 19th Century Eastern Galicia,” in American Contributions to the Ninth International Congress of Slavists, vol.II: Literature, Poetics, History, ed. Debreczyn, Paul (Columbus, 1983), 305–24Google Scholar. Some of the works that further scrutinize these identity orientations are: Turii, Oleh, “‘Ukraïns'ka ideia’ v Halychyni v seredyni XIX stolittia” [The “Ukrainian idea” in Galicia in the middle of the nineteenth century], Ukraïna moderna [Modern Ukraine] 2–3 (1999): 59–75Google Scholar; Arkusha, Olena, Mudryi, Mar'ian, “Rusofil'stvo v Halychyni v seredyni XIX – na pochatku XX st.: Heneza, etapy rozvytku, svitohliad” [The Russophilism in Galicia from the middle of the nineteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century: The origins, stages of development, worldview], Visnyk Lvivs'koho universytetu. Seriia istorychna, [Bulletin of the Univeristy of L'viv. Historical series] 34 (1999): 231–68Google Scholar; Sereda, Ostap, “Natsional'na svidomist' i politychna prohrama rannikh narodovtsiv u Skhidnii Halychyni (1861–1867)” [National Consciousness and the Political Program of Early National-Populists in Eastern Galicia (1861–1867)], Visnyk Lvivs'koho universytetu. Seriia istorychna 34 (1999): 199–214Google Scholar; Ostap Sereda, “Aenigma ambulans: o. Volodymyr (Ipolyt) Terlets'kyi i ‘ruska narodna ideia’ v Halychyni” [Aenigma ambulans: Rev. Volodymyr (Ipolyt) Terlets'kyi and the “Ruthenian national idea” in Galicia], Ukraïna moderna 4–5 (2000): 81–104; Mudryi, Mar'ian, “Natsional'no-politychni oriientatsiï v ukraïns'komu suspil'stvi Halychyny avstriis'koho periodu u vysvitlenni suchasnoï istoriohrafiï” [The national-political orientations in the Ukrainian society of Galicia during the Austrian period in the light of present day Historiography], Visnyk Lvivs'koho universytetu. Seriia istorychna 37 (2002): 465–500Google Scholar.

⁵ “Communities are to be distinguished, not by their falsity/genuineness, but by the style in which they are imagined.” Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, 6.

⁶ These ideological differences were so important that the Russophiles in many cases can be seen not so much as proponents of a different national community, but as a conservative option inside the vaguer Galician Ruthenian community: Anna Veronika Wendland, Die Russophilen in Galizien. Ukrainische Konservative zwischen Österreich und Rußland 1848–1915 Studien zur Geschichte der Österreichisch-Ungarischen Monarchie 27 (Vienna, 2001), passim. The Russophiles, in turn, often represented Ukrainophiles as nihilists, revolutionaries, Socialists, and anarchists, or, at best, as social demagogues. For the recent emphasis on these ideological differences between Russophiles and Ukrainophiles, see Hrytsak, , Prorok u svoïi vitchyzni. Franko ta ioho spil'nota (1856-1886) [A prophet in his own motherland. Franko and his community (1856–1886)] (Kyiv, 2006), 415Google Scholar.

⁷ Sometimes the victory of the Ukrainophiles has been located even earlier. Paul R. Magocsi who contributed immensely to the revival of academic interests in Russophiles, initially claimed that “by the 1890s, it was evident that the Ukrainophile faction was going to win in the struggle for the allegiance of the population… .” Magocsi, Paul R., Ukrainian Heritage Notes: The Language Question in Galicia (Cambridge, MA, 1978), 15Google Scholar.

⁸ This view is grounded in the same social determinism tying national revival with the development of capitalism. The thesis of the Ukrainian “victory” is related to the notion that Ukrainian nation building in Galicia, unlike in the Russian Empire, was essentially “normal” and completed by the outbreak of World War I: Ivan L. Rudnytsky, “The Ukrainian National Movement on the Eve of the First World War,” in Rudnytsky, Ivan L., Essays in Modern Ukrainian History (Cambridge, MA, 1987), 375–88Google Scholar.

⁹ See, for example, a learned Russian observer: Iastrebov, N. V., Galitsiia nakanune Velikoi Voiny 1914 goda. S kartoi Galitsii i Bukoviny s Ugorskoi Rus'iu [Galicia on the eve of the Great War of 1914. With the map of Galicia and Bukovina together with the Hungarian Rus'] (Petrograd, 1915)Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Levyts'kyi, Kost', Istoriia politychnoï dumky halyts'kykh ukraïntsiv 1848–1914. Na pidstavi spomyniv [A history of the political thought of the Galician Ukrainians 1848–1914. On the basis of recollections] (Lviv, 1926), 734–35Google Scholar.

¹¹ The most important text in this respect remains: Himka, “The Construction of Nationality in Galician Rus': Icarian Flights in Almost All Directions,” in Intellectuals and Articulation of the Nation, ed. Suny and Kennedy, 109–64.

¹² The Kachkovsky Society, the most numerous Russophile organization for popular enlightenment with branches all over the province, claimed in 1878 to have 6,000 members but after that did not report numbers for total membership until 1892, when this number was given as 5,476; in 1894, membership was officially reported to decrease to 5,357. The society's report for 1911 discloses that the 1878 figure was actually the print run of the society's popular series. Otchet o deiatel'nosti Tsentral'nogo Komiteta i Filii Obshchestva imeni Mikhaila Kachkovskoho za 1877/1878 god [Report on the activities of the central committee of the Mikhail Kachkovsky Society for 1877/1878] (Peremyshl', 1878). Compare with the report for the years 1878–1879, 1892/3–1894/5, and 1911. Peak numbers were reported in 1909–1911—10,700 members—with a decrease to 9,500 in 1912–1913. In: Otchet [Report] for the years 1909–1910, 1910–1911, 1912–1913.

¹³ Anna Veronika Wendland, who has produced the most thorough study of the Russophiles in Galicia (Wendland, Die Russophilen in Galizien), does not answer these questions. The list of prominent Russophiles she provides at the end of her book deals only with the most important activists, who were overwhelmingly from the middle classes. Wendland's discussion of Russophile society for popular enlightenment is based on the documents of its two branches that had the most regular bookkeeping—those of Sokal' and Zolochiv districts. But even in the case of these two branches, the historian reports nothing about the society's influence among peasants.

¹⁴ This is powerfully argued in Brubaker, Rogers and Cooper, Frederick, “Beyond Identity,” Theory and Society 29, no.1 (2000): 1–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵ Brubaker, Rogers, Nationalism Reframed. Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (Cambridge, UK, 1996), 13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁶ Zaret, David, Origins of Democratic Culture: Printing, Petitions, and the Public Sphere in Early-Modern England (Princeton, 2000)Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Bradley, James E., Popular Politics and the American Revolution in England: Petitions, the Crown, and Public Opinion (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1986)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ These unique features of petitions are well pointed out in van Voss, Lex Heerma, ed., Petitions in Social History, International Review of Social History 46, Supplement 9 (Cambridge, UK, 2001)Google Scholar.

¹⁹ This is discussed in great detail in: Rozdolski, Roman, Stosunki poddańcze w dawnej Galicji [Servile relations in old Galicia], vol. 1 (Warszawa, 1962)Google Scholar.

²⁰ A concise account of the most important issues can be found in: Magocsi, Paul R., Ukrainian Heritage Notes: The Language Question in Galicia (Cambridge, MA, 1978)Google Scholar.

²¹ For the history of the compromise, see: Chornovol, Ihor, Pol's'ko-ukraïns'ka uhoda 1890–1894 rr. [The Polish-Ukrainian Agreement 1890–1894], (Lviv, 2000)Google Scholar.

²² Zhelekhovsky, Ievheny, Malorusko-nimetskyi slovar' – Ruthenisch-deutsches Wörterbuch, 2 vols. (Lviv, 1882–1886)Google Scholar.

²³ Smal-Stocki, Stepan and Gartner, Theodor, Minoritätsvotum in der vom k. k. Bukowiner Landesschulrathe behufs Regelung der ruthenischen Schulorthographie eigesetzten Commission abgegeben in November 1887 (Chernivtsi, 1887)Google Scholar.

²⁴ Smal'-Stots'kyi, Stepan and Gartner, Fedor, Hramatyka rus'koï movy [Grammar of the Ruthenian language] (Lviv, 1893)Google Scholar.

²⁵ Dymytrii Vintskovsky, Pravopysnaia sprava. Dlia chleniv Obshchestva imeni Mykhaila Kachkovskoho prystupno obhovoryl Dymytrii Vintskovsky [The case of orthography. For the members of the Mikhail Kachkovsky Society accessibly discussed by Dymytrii Vintskovskii], Izdaniia Obshchestva imeni Mykh. Kachkovskoho [Minutes of the Mikhail Kachkovsky Society], April 1892, chapter 197 (Lviv, 1892).

²⁶ “Shansy fonetyki” [The chances of fonetyka], Galichanin, 24 January 1893, no.7, 1–2.

²⁷ Stenograficzne sprawozdania z Peryodu 9 Sesyi 1 Sejmu Krajowego Królewstwa Galicji i Lodomeriii wraz z Wielkim Księstwem Krakowskim [Stenographer's report from period 9 session 1 of the national parliament of the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria together with the Free City of Cracow], 13 January 1910, 3515.

²⁸ Dymytrii Vintskovsky, Pravopysnaia sprava. Dlia chleniv Obshchestva imeni Mykhaila Kachkovskoho prystupno obhovoryl Dymytrii Vintskovsky [The case of orthography. For the members of the Mikhail Kachkovsky Society accessibly discussed by Dymytrii Vintskovskii], Izdaniia Obshchestva imeni Mykh. Kachkovskoho [Minutes of the Mikhail Kachkovsky Society], April 1892, chapter 197 (Lviv, 1892).

²⁹ Vintskovsky, Pravopysnaia sprava, 4.

³⁰ Vintskovsky, Pravopysnaia sprava, 22.

³¹ Petr Poliansky, Vopros o fonetytsi (Lviv, 1892).

³² Vintskovsky, Pravopysnaia sprava, 35. For the number of 40,000, see: Mykhailo Pavlyk, “V spravi reformy nashoï pravopysy” [On the matter of the reform of our orthography], Narod [The nation], chapters 7 and 8, 1 April 1892, 98–100.

³³ “V dili fonetyky” [On the business of fonetyka], Galichanin, 25 January 1893, no. 8, 3.

³⁴ “Petytsii k monarkhu” [Petition to the monarch], Galichanin, 1 March 1893, no. 39, 3.

³⁵ “Shansy fonetyki,” Galichanin, 24 January 1893, no. 7, 1–2.

³⁶ “Protyv fonetyky” [Against fonetyka], Galichanin, 1 March 1893, no. 39, 1.

³⁷ “V dili fonetyky,” Galichanin, 25 January 1893, no. 8, 3.

³⁸ “Znachenie fonetyki” [The significance of fonetyka], Galichanin, 9 August 1893, no. 166, 1.

³⁹ Drahomanov, Mykhailo, Chudats'ki dumky pro ukraïns'ku natsional'nu spravu [Peculiar thoughts on the Ukrainian national cause] (Kyiv, 1913)Google Scholar. First published in the radical newspaper Narod in 1891, the work was printed as a separate book by Ivan Franko in 1892 amid the battles around the issue of orthography.

⁴⁰ Ibid., 148.

⁴¹ Ibid., 152.

⁴² Mykhailo Pavlyk, “V spravi reformy nashoï pravopysy” [On the matter of the reform of our orthography], Narod, 1 April 1892, 98–100.

⁴³ “Ot Turky” [From Turka], Galichanin, 21 January 1893, no. 6, 2.

⁴⁴ “V dili fonetyky,” Galichanin, 21 February 1893, no. 29, 1.

⁴⁵ M. Ch., d'iak staroi daty [cantor of the old cohort], “V dili petytsii protyv vvedeniia fonetyky,” Galichanin, 25 February 1893, no. 33, 3.

⁴⁶ “Komu roskhodytsia o fonetyku?” [Who is interested in fonetyka?], Galichanin, 10 February 1893, no. 22, 3.

⁴⁷ “Ahitatsiia starostv” [Captaincies' Agitation], Galichanin, 13 March 1893, no. 47, 3.

⁴⁸ “Ot Ternopolia (Hromadskii nachal'nyki i pysari, a vydil povitovyi)” [From Ternopol (Community mayors and scribes, and district self-government], Galichanin, 1893, 30 March 1893, no. 61, 2.

⁴⁹ “Epiloh protesta protiv fonetyky” [Epilogue of the protest against fonetyka], Galichanin, 21 May 1893, no. 101, 1.

⁵⁰ “Petytsii politicheskoho Obshchestva “Russkaia Rada” vo L'vovi” [Petition of the political society, “Ruthenian Council,” in Lviv], Galichanin, 1893, 9 April 1893, no. 68, 1–2.

⁵¹ “Neudavshiisia eksperiment” [The unsuccessful experiment], Galichanin, 17 January 1893, no. 2,-3.

⁵² “Petytsii protyv fonetychnoi pravopysy” [Petitions against the phonetic orthography], Bat'kivshchyna [Fatherland], 28 January 1893, 11.

⁵³ Ibid.

⁵⁴ Ibid., 12.

⁵⁵ The text of this was published in Bat'kivshchyna 28 February 1893, 27-8. The elections to the parliament, as well as to the diet, were conducted on a curial basis. In this system, peasants, or “smaller landholders” in the official language, were the most discriminated against—not only did they elect a disproportionately small number of deputies, but they also did so indirectly through representatives themselves elected in so-called pre-elections.

⁵⁶ “Pro petytsii o bezposeredni vybory” [On petitions about direct elections], Spravy Potochni [Current affairs], Bat'kivshchyna, 28 March 1893, 42.

⁵⁷ These numbers can be found in: Manuscript Division of the Vasyl Stefanyk Lviv Scientific Library of the National Academy of Sciences, Omelian Terlets'kyi collection, sprava 131/I, arkush 87–88. For the peasants' unwillingness to sign: Kmit, Iuryi, “Z sil's'kykh vidnosyn u Halychyni v seredyni XIX v.” [From the village relations in Galicia in the middle of the nineteenth century], Zapysky Naukovoho Tovarystva imeny Shevchenka [Proceedings of the Shevchenko Scientific Society], 54 (1903)Google Scholar;8. For an account of the difficulties with gathering signatures by the members of the organized Ruthenian movement that demonstrates the dubious character of the reported numbers, see: State Archive of the Lviv Oblast' (Derzhavnyi Arkhiv Lvivs'koï Oblasti), fond 1245, opys 1, sprava 19.

⁵⁸ This was the case with the petition from Iablonka Nyzhnia, Turka district, TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1183, a.116.

⁵⁹ Central State Historical Archive of Ukraine in Lviv (Tsentral'nyi Derzhavnyi Istorychnyi Arkhiv Ukrainy u L'vovi (hereafter, TsDIAUL), fond (hereafter, f.) 178, opys (hereafter, o.) 1, sprava (hereafter, spr.) 1182, v.2, arkush (hereafter, a.) 154 backside (zvorot).

⁶⁰ TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1183, a.103.

⁶¹ TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1179, a.33–34.

⁶² TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1180, a.40.

⁶³ TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1180, a.204.

⁶⁴ According to the census, from 31 December 1890 among the population above the age of 6, the illiteracy rate in Galicia was 67.87 percent for men and 71.60 percent for women; in eastern Galicia, the rates were as a rule higher than in the west and ranged from 60.37 percent among men of the Zhydachiv district to 96.99 percent among women of the Bohorodchany district: Caro, Leopold, Studia społeczne [Social Studies] (Cracow, 1908)Google Scholar, table F (to p. 192).

⁶⁵ TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1183, a.116.

⁶⁶ TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1182, a.115.

⁶⁷ E.g. the petition from Rzhukhiv, TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1183, a.53.

⁶⁸ TsDIAUL, f.178, op.1, spr.1182, a.143.

⁶⁹ Lemkos, Boikos, and Hutsuls are ethnographic groups of Carpathian mountaineers distinguished by dialect, customs, and material culture.

⁷⁰ In 1890, people 20 years old and above constituted 47.4 percent of the entire Galician population. Extrapolated to the Greek-Catholic population of a given district, the number gives us the approximate number of adults. The ratio between sexes in this case was almost 50/50, and the differences between the western and eastern parts of Galicia were not significant. All the statistical calculations are based on Zamorski, Krzysztof, Informator statystyczny do dziejów społeczno-gospodarczych Galicji: Ludność Galicji w latach 1857–1910 [Statistical guide to the socio-economic history of Galicia: The population of Galicia 1857–1910], ed. Madurowicz-Urbańska, Helena (Kraków-Warszawa, 1989)Google Scholar.

⁷¹ Franko, Ivan, “P. Vakhnianyn sered “s'mitia” [Mr. Vakhnianyn among “trash”], Narod, 1 and 15 October 1893, 269Google Scholar.

⁷² Franko, Ivan, “A khto vyhrav?” [And who won?] Narod, 15 November 1893, 289–91Google Scholar.

⁷³ For another confirmation of Pochaïv's role and of the strength of the Russophile movement in the “northern belt,” see: Kleparchuk, Stepan, Dorohamy i stezhkamy Bridshchyny. Spomyny [On the roads and trails of the Brody region. Memoirs] (Toronto, 1971), 33Google Scholar. The author believes that the campaign against fonetyka strengthened the Russophiles in the Bordy district and that the Russophile struggle against fonetyka was very popular among the local peasants.

⁷⁴ Olesnyts'kyi, Evhen, Storinky z moho zhyttia [Pages from my life], vol.2, 1890–1897 (Lviv, 1935), 20–21Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ “Pro petytsii o bezposeredni vybory” [On petitions about direct elections], potochni, Spravy, Bat'kivshchyna, 28 March 1893, 42Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ Budzynovskyi, Viacheslav, Ruskyi straik v 1902 rotsi [The Ruthenian strike in 1902] (Lviv, 1902), 80–81Google Scholar.