Modern Ukrainian historiography of the white movement: characteristics and direction of research

Abstract

This article analyzes Ukrainian research from the first quarter of the 21^st century regarding the White Movement, specifically the Denikin occupation regime in Southern Ukraine (1918-1920). The historiographical analysis is organized into five distinct thematic blocks:

1. State and Administrative Activity. Researchers such as M.Hlibishchuk, A. Lysenko, and O. Liubovets reconstruct the structure of General Denikin’s government, specifically the Special Council (Osoboye Soveshchaniye). They argue the regime was a military dictatorship where the army performed atypical civilian functions. Despite democratic rhetoric, the government remained tethered to right-wing forces intent on preserving estate privileges.
2. Relations with the Ukrainian State. Studies by I.Pasichnyk and D. Arkhireiskyi reveal a deep ideological chasm between the Ukrainian state-building camp (under P. Skoropadskyi) and the Russian Volunteer movement. White leaders largely denied Ukrainian national identity, viewing the region either as a «German intrigue» or a temporary base to restore a «United and Indivisible Russia».
3. Socio-Economic and Agrarian Policies. Works by S.Kornovenko and M. Hlibishchuk prove that the land question was the primary cause of the movement’s political collapse. By favoring landlord ownership and failing to address peasant landlessness, the Denikinists lost the support of the rural masses.
4. The Anti-Denikin Insurgency. Historians like Yu.Kotliar and V. Shcherbatiuk interpret the insurgent movement as a natural response to occupation, looting, and terror. Research highlights regional resistance in Slobozhanshchyna, Mykolaiv, and Kyiv, where insurgents effectively countered both regular White troops and their special services.
5. Educational and Cultural Policy. Researchers (D.Kravchenko, H. Rudyi, et al.) document the overtly anti-Ukrainian nature of the regime. This included the systematic destruction of Ukrainian schools and libraries and the banning of Ukrainian studies – an attempt to forcibly return Ukrainians to a «Little Russian» status.

Thus, if the historiography of the 1990s of the 20^th century. suffered from insufficient scientific research into the development of the White movement due to prolonged Soviet influence, modern research by Ukrainian specialists has corrected this underestimation, providing a comprehensive understanding of the role of the Russian volunteer movement in the Ukrainian Revolution of 1917-1921.