| Abstrakt: |
The distribution of social roles in the learning process has long been based on the student’s demonstration of respect for his or her teacher, who is in a patronizing position as a mentor. Over time, the social con- text changes, but past experiences certainly leave their mark on people’s memories. While the friendly relationship between Bohdan Khmelnytskyi and his teacher is well-known in historiography, we know much less about the teachers of his son, Yuriy. Therefore, it is obvious that there is a need to close this gap. The historiography is dominated by the stereotype that Yuriy Khmel- nytskyi studied at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. However, an analysis of source evidence shows that there is no particular reason to assert this possibility. Such assumptions appeared in Polish historical and literary texts to reflect the character’s specific traits. Then they migrated to the so-called «Cossack chronicles», and through them passed into scientific historical narratives. Among Yuriy Khmelnytskyi’s teachers, researchers usually mention Ioanikii Galiatowskyi and Hilarion Dobrodiashko. Moreover, since the nineteenth century, there is evidence of Havrylo Oleshkovych, who also taught the hetman’s son. All of them were monks, but they had different career paths. A review of the biographies of each of them allows us not only to make a judgment about their teaching in the hetman’s house but also to see whether they later crossed paths with their former student. Galiatowskyi and Oleshkovych were under the protection of Lazar Baranovych. They were both later used as agents of influence in dealing with Yuriy Khmelnytskyi. In 1676, the former was asked by Hetman Ivan Samoilovych to appeal to his former student to give up his political ambitions. In 1661, Bishop Methodius engaged the latter in negotia- tions with Yuriy in order to persuade the hetman to return to the rule of the Moscow tsar. Dobrodiyashko, on the other hand, was a monk of the Pechersk Monastery. Therefore, he was most likely influenced by Innokentiy Gizel. However, he later left his monastery and found refuge in St. Sophia Monastery under the protection of Bishop Methodius. In this situation, he spoke extremely negatively about his former student for refusing to obey the Moscow tsar and praised the deeds of his new benefactor. By that time, however, Khmelnytskyi had already relinquished his hetman’s powers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
