In his writings on Ukrainian historiography, Ohloblyn took a moderate position, positively evaluating the work of his former opponent Mykhailo Hrushevsky, who had been severely criticisized by the generations of the 1930s and 1940s, including Doroshenko, for his ostensible undervaluing of the strivings of the Ukrainian Cossack elite for statehood and independence. Ohloblyn tried to evaluate populist Ukrainian historians like Mykola Kostomarov, Volodymyr Antonovych, and Hrushevsky within the context of their own times rather than that of the next generations which had learned new lessons about the importance of statehood from their experiences during the revolution.