Abstract

The formation of an independent Ukrainian state in 1991 posed some important historiographical questions to scholars. Starting with the collapse of the Ussr, the nation-building effort immediately involved history as well: it was necessary to separate the history of Ukraine from that common to the rest of the Soviet space and, at the same time, deal with national history. In the Ukrainian case, the attempt to employ the model of national histories – on which Western contemporary historiography was formed between the 19th and 20th centuries – was problematic, since the different territories of Ukraine came from multiple historical experiences. The essay analyzes the attempts made by historians to find an interpretative paradigm that would account for the complexity of Ukrainian history. Teleological vision, essentialism, ethnocentricity, ethnic exclusivity, linearity and absolutization of the historical continuity are the greatest risks that historiography has run into. Conversely, the regional approach and the inclusion of Ukrainian history in global history, seem to open new research perspectives and provide new interpretative keys