This is probably the best English-language survey on Ukrainian history in existence. At nearly 700 pages of text it is comprehensive yet easy to read, starting from pre-historic times until the post-Orange Revolution era (c. 2004).

Though this is the fourth edition of the book, Subtelny simply added chapters and a new introduction, while leaving the body of the previous work intact; thus a nice touch of historiography, as writing about Ukraine in 1988 is a lot different than 2009 for a multitude of reasons. It also notes, especially in regards to earlier eras, the Soviet view of events and details, again providing a nice addition to the historiography of Ukrainian history.

Subtelny writes in the introduction that he has two main themes for his book: the search for a Ukrainian identity and modernisation. Both of these remain at the forefront for the entire book, and he argues have driven Ukrainians for most of their history.

It is also quite relevant to the issues of today. There is extensive mentions of the issues regarding Crimea, and the division in Ukraine between (what he terms) Russophones and Ukrainophones; of particular note he mentions Donetsk and Luhansk as being very pro-Russian, and talks about both their and the Crimeans reluctance to join an independent Ukraine. It is so appropriate to the current crisis in Ukraine that Subtelny could have written that word-for-word for a contemporary audience and it would still be relevant.

I am also thrilled at his bibliography. It is extensive, naturally, but also organised into various topics of note, allowing for easy searching of more references. For someone who is likely to base their masters work on Ukraine, this is definitely a nice thing to have.

One thing I did notice though is the lack of attention he gives to Stepan Bandera and UPA as a whole. For those unaware, Bandera led a faction of UPA (Ukrainian Populists Army is a common translation), a Ukrainian nationalist group based out of Lviv/Lvov during the Second World War. They are quite controversial due to the fact that they tended to be pro-Nazi and anti-Jew and anti-Pole, in their quest to drive out the Soviets. However Bandera himself is given only a couple lines in the book, while UPA itself is only mentioned for its factionalism and resistance to the Red Army. I would have thought that it would get more attention, but am going to put that down to the difficulties of writing about it in the 1980s. ( )