Narrowing my Project concept’s exceptionally large scope

I am fairly confident I want to focus on global intellectual histories’ implications within the consolidation of ethnolinguistic nationalism in Slavic states and their effect on their respective nationhood origin histories. I am particularly looking at Soviet satellite states such as Belarus, Ukraine, and Poland from the late 19th century onwards. I have selected these three as I have interacted with their national histories the most in my previous modules. These states have very distinct cultural characteristics from one another making it easier to more clearly delineate major thematic tropes in their respective scholarship. These states’ differences present the opportunity for insightful comparison and analysis in relation to one another.

While I am (cautiously) confident in my ability to analyse and dissect Russian sources, I am a bit daunted by interacting with sources originally written in Belarusian, Ukrainian, or Polish. I am fortunate that Russia, and subsequently Russian scholarship, has had a heavy influence on much scholarship within these nations – in particular, Belarus. In one of my previous modules, I had done a good bit of research on the Belarusian national identity and origins of statehood. I am tempted to primarily focus on how influences external to Belarus have formed their conception of ethnolinguistic nationalism and their history of nationhood origins to examine the consequent effects on intellectual history (inside and outside Belarus). Although, in efforts to be more ‘transnational’, I am approaching my research with an open mind and trying to apply this template to Ukraine and Poland.

As we approach our Project Proposals, I am most concerned on how to manage the scope of my topic. I feel as though I am stuck in the infamous ‘Chicken or the Egg’ situation. Hopefully my transnational approach will decipher how each one of these concepts inform one another. I am sure that I will begin with how intellectual history specifically informed the key tenets of ethnolinguistic nationalism. Which forms of intellectual history, you ask? I am still not sure…

One of our teachers here at St Andrews, Dr. Tomasz Kamusella, has extensively researched the implications of ethnolinguistic nationalism in historical scholarship. As a Polish native, I believe he provides an invaluable perspective in analysing the historical implications language plays within the states I am examining. I am quite familiar with some of his publications, notably The Politics of Language and Nationalism in Modern Central Europe (2008), and intend to draw on his insights while engaging with my own research. I hope to situate the ideological roots of intellectual history within each of these states in effort to, perhaps, better comprehend the context behind the conflicts in Central and Eastern Europe today.