Convocation of the Pereyaslav Rada. Pereyaslav Rada

January 8, 1654 (January 21). - Reunification of Little Russia with Russia at the Rada in Pereyaslav

Pereyaslav Rada

The western lands of Russia, torn away from it by the Poles after, never ceased to consider themselves Russian. And as the Polish and Jewish oppression intensified, their desire for reunification in Moscow resulted in a whole insurrectionary movement.

Ukraine - that is Little Russia, Carpathian Rus, New Russia(mastered under Catherine II Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporozhye, Kherson, Nikolaev, Odessa regions), Cossack lands Don troops, Sloboda(Kharkov region) , Crimea(part of the ancient Russian Tmutarakan principality).

Most of this territory of present-day Ukraine, only by the decision of the Bolshevik authorities, who fought against Russian great power, turned out to be part of this never-before-existing state (with the exception of sham independence under German occupation in 1918). The history of Ukrainian separatism, encouraged by the enemies of Russia (Poland, Austria-Hungary and Germany, the Vatican, the USA) is described in the book "The Secret of Russia". Chapter III of this book ["To the Leader of the Third Rome"] spoke about the forced Ukrainization in the 1920s. After 1945, the Carpatho-Russians-Rusyns attached to the Ukrainian SSR were also Ukrainianized. .

The Yeltsin government unconditionally recognized the results of the Ukrainian independence referendum on December 1, 1991, in the ballots of which the alternative possibility of a unified statehood with Russia was not even mentioned, but it was stated that it threatened " deadly danger". "Independent" Ukraine was allowed to abandon its part of the Soviet debt (20 billion dollars) and seize part of the USSR armed forces, which was a violation of even the conditions that Kravchuk initially did not intend to fulfill, but only used to destroy the united state and seize power.

Even if separatists seized power in Ukraine, Russian authorities could in 1991 retain at least the Russian Crimea - for this there were sufficient international legal, democratic (plebiscite) and economic instruments. But the Yeltsin government recognized all the Bolshevik borders. Moreover, for some reason, even the remainder of the Tuzla Spit, which branched off from the Taman Peninsula, was given to Ukraine, and thus the navigable fairway Kerch Strait, for the passage of which Russian ships now annually pay Ukraine tens of millions of dollars. There is still a controversial issue with the division of the Azov waters, which the Russian Federation proposes to fraternally make common inland sea, and Ukraine - to divide on the basis of international law, turning it into international waters to open the Sea of ​​Azov to NATO ships.

Of course, the United States is doing everything possible to make the separation of Little Russia from Russia irreversible. The CIA directive for 1994–1998 stated that the US should not allow the reunification of Ukraine and Belarus with Russia; this is determined by the American goal of "establishing and defending a new world order", for which the use of force is not excluded .

The United States provides a guarantee of the integrity of Ukraine, provides assistance with money (200 million dollars annually), advisers (including Brzezinski's son), joint military exercises (in particular, to suppress the "separatist rebellion" in Crimea). The staff of the US embassy in Kyiv is 15 times larger than the Russian one. Brzezinski Sr. praises the Ukrainian leadership: “To thwart Russia’s attempts to use the CIS as an instrument of political integration, by the mid-1990s, a covertly Ukrainian-led bloc was formed unofficially, including Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and sometimes Kazakhstan, Georgia and Moldova ... Ukraine supported the efforts Georgia, aimed at ensuring that Azerbaijani oil is transported to the West through its territory. In addition, Ukraine has entered into cooperation with Turkey to reduce Russian influence in the Black Sea, and supported its [Turkey's] efforts to direct oil flows from Central Asia to Turkish terminals". There is increasing pressure on the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol, for which the Russian Federation pays Ukraine $100 million a year.

The leadership of Ukraine is speeding up its accession to NATO. President Kuchma announced the beginning of this process on May 23, 2002, on the eve of the US President's visit to Russia. European countries NATO is not eager to take on the maintenance of the dilapidated economy of Ukraine (its GDP per capita, according to the CIA, is half of Russia's), but the United States will not fail to take advantage of this to move its structures to the borders of Russia - the world behind the scenes does not need Ukraine in any other capacity.

A huge influence in the planting of anti-Russian ideology is played by Ukrainian emigrants lured by the United States during the Cold War as advisers, journalists, and authors of textbooks. The head of the Ukrainian branch of the Soros Foundation said that he had published dozens of "anti-colonial" textbooks, in which Ukraine is treated as a "colony" conquered by Russia during the four Russian-Ukrainian wars "., is honored as a national hero;. Against the Russians in Crimea, the Kyiv authorities encourages even the Tatars, expanding their structures with Turkish money - just to reduce Russian influence.

For the Ukrainian ruling stratum, the historiosophical alignment of forces in the world presented in our book is even less known than for the ruling stratum of the Russian Federation. After all, independentists can justify their power only on the basis of a common history with Russia. Distorting it in an anti-Russian spirit, closing Russian schools (in Kyiv in 1990 there were 150 schools, 10 remained), restricting access to the media in Russian, independent leaders replace the genuine spiritual culture of their people with Ukrainianized Western pop culture. With this, the independentists are trying to complete the murder of the memory of the Little Russians, which the Austrians began in the 19th century, in order to create a new people. They tear Little Russia away from the mission, although it is its original part. (Recall the origin of the name: Little Russia means a small, central core of the state of Kievan Rus, in contrast to Great Rus, that is, expanded to the northeast.) This is the true tragedy of Ukraine: it is deprived of understanding the meaning of history and forced to participate in the world battle on the side "secrets of iniquity". Orthodox Little Russians are fully aware of this.

The population of Ukraine is mainly Orthodox, most of it belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (9 thousand parishes, about 150 monasteries) - these are Little Russians who do not separate themselves from the common Russian destiny. Therefore, they are subjected to state pressure, about a thousand churches have been taken away from them. There are also non-canonical Ukrainian-speaking "churches": self-consecrated autocephalous (about a thousand parishes, mainly in Galicia) and the government-supported "Kyiv Patriarchate" of excommunicated Denisenko (3,000 parishes).

The Russian language is considered native by 54% of the population of Ukraine, the rest speak it, but not only is it not recognized as one of the state languages, but it is also being squeezed out of official life, the media and the education system. The Ukrainian language exists in two versions: Kiev-Poltava and Galician, the latter being imposed as the norm. Many speak a mixture of Russian and Ukrainian.

At the same time, the Russian government has done nothing to support the desire for reunification among a huge part of the population of Ukraine (and related political movements), not to mention the Russian Crimea. Moreover: in 1998, ratified (with the support of the opposition in the person of the Communist Party) by the State Duma legalized anti-Russian arbitrariness on the lands illegally belonging to it and opened the way for it to join NATO.

In relation to Ukraine, the leader of the Third Rome will be faced with a dilemma: whether to show fundamental firmness in solving the listed problems, which will be associated with their exacerbation by independentists, or whether to apply a patient and benevolent approach, working to awaken conscience and pride in the Russian birthright of Kyiv among the people of Ukraine , awareness of the need to resist the world behind the scenes and restore our joint holding role. From our point of view, one should not contradict the other, but the second approach is not only a means, but also the main goal. Even with honest Ukrainian nationalists, one can find common interests in resisting the New World Order, which threatens them much more than the "imperial intrigues of Muscovites."

* The "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine in late 2004 was a coup d'état to push US influence eastward against Russia. Congressman Ron Paul stressed that $65 million was illegally spent on US funding for the coup in Ukraine; glaring facts were published about the same by P. Buchanan and Western publications (eg: Guardian, 11/26/2004). To this, the US State Department said: "We did not finance Yushchenko, but the triumph of democracy."

The new President of Ukraine Yushchenko and his associate Tymoshenko were previously accused of financial fraud, in the Russian Federation they have a lot of criminal compromising evidence. However, both the "world community" and Putin recognized their power as legitimate. Yushchenko celebrated his victory by visiting the synagogue wearing a yarmulke, where he lit a Hanukkah candle, and then began to purge state structures of "Muscovites." Yushchenko's new wife, US citizen, young age participated in the emigrant Bandera organization.

The coup succeeded for three reasons:

1) the corrupt, and therefore vulnerable to blackmail, Kuchma's regime (similar to Yeltsin's) failed to take legal measures to counter the revolutionaries (the Americans blackmailed Kuchma by exposing his unseemly acts); and in the eyes of a considerable part of the people this regime proved unworthy of defense;

2) the pro-Russian part of the population of Ukraine expressed its will spontaneously, without due organizational structures because she hoped for the actions of law enforcement agencies;

3) the authorities of the Russian Federation, equally corrupt and vulnerable (Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Chernomyrdin again played a treacherous role) did not take advantage of the moment to support the attempt of the southeastern regions of Ukraine, feeding it, to separate from the illegitimate coup d'état. This could be done only by the people themselves on an ad hoc basis, for which appropriate structures of self-government and mobilization action are needed, which, unfortunately, was not created in advance (see Chapter VIII-3). Let's hope that this is still possible, since the majority of the population of Ukraine does not agree to be citizens of an anti-Russian state. - Approx. to the 2nd edition.

Discussion of the Ukrainian topic on our

Discussion: 14 comments

And where was the Moscow principality at that time?

By this time, the Moscow principality had long turned into Moscow Russia, a powerful state with the ideology of the Third Rome. It was the most healthy and Orthodox period in the history of Russia.

I approve, but it's soft, it needs to be tougher

KATSAPS, KHOKHOLS, BULBASH, WE ARE ONE RUSSIAN PEOPLE!!!

At the time of Bohdan Khmelnitsky, the name was Little Russia, but not Little Russia.
---Ukraine(Ukraine) vernacular name Russia (Kyiv) (Before White, Lesser and Muscovy). It is found on a letter in the Kyiv Chronicle of the 12th century. what outskirts or at the edge of what? What Poland (16th century)? What are the Tatars (14th century)? What is Russia (18th century)? Descended from the forefathers of the Land of Land, Krayina-country. The name Ukraine was used only to designate the native land. When asked where do you live? answered U or In Krajina (Krajina). The prepositions U and V in the Ukrainian language are equivalent in meaning, so Ukraine is In the Native Land, Land, In the Native Country.
--- The Ukrainian SSR, like the RSFSR, had equal rights to withdraw from the USSR through a referendum, which happened in 91. and only this made it possible to destroy the Jewish CPSU. What kind of separatism are we talking about?
--- There is gossip about Russian in Ukraine. Only there is not a single channel on the Move, and unfortunately you can’t find a book or magazine (everywhere mosizdat). There are more Russian-speaking schools than Ukrainian ones. And the separatists in the Crimea and the South-East of Ukraine are not favored in these regions, because. do not represent the opinion of the majority.
------ Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians-Russian people.

Muscovy with Russia was never associated under Russia in the 17th century, only the territory of Ukraine was understood, Ukrainians were called Rusyns, Bogdan Khmelnitsky called himself hetman Rusky, and the lands of Ukraine (Chernigov Kyiv and Pereyaslav) were the Russian Principality, which in 1654 came under the protectorate of the Moscow kingdom, a French engineer Boplan clearly calls the Ukrainians Rusyns, and the people of Muscovy are Muscovites, Muscovy will begin to communicate with the Russian people only in the middle of the 18th century, so you are not fucking Russian katsaps!

Your Majesty. Where do you think Princess Olga came from? And where is Ilya Muromets from? And from what cities did the Grand Dukes come in accordance with the order? In other words: look at the map of Kievan Rus, what Russian lands were included in it - and do not demonstrate your ignorance. I would like to advise the Slavic Aryan about the etymology and the so-called. "referendum" in 1991

Yes .. The Little Russians were brainwashed. Such a mess in the head and chaos from the pseudo-historical nonsense of modern Ukrainian military and pseudo-scientific brochures of amateurs who imagine themselves to be military. The Slavic Aryan and the "horizon" are typical examples of such a reformatting of self-consciousness. And there are more and more of them. The worst thing is that they believe in all this nonsense and nonsense written by sick people. What do they do with people? Pity them...

Slavonic-Aryan, "what outskirts or at the edge of what?" - at the edge of Kievan Rus (border territory), is first found in the annals of 1187 and denoted the Principality of Pereyaslav, which bordered on the lands of nomads in the south.

too harsh and a lot of lies, they rewrote it many times from toria, you don’t need to trust it, read the chronicles, and look at ancient maps, and not from textbooks, and if Kyiv was restored as an ancient capital, then there could be rights to all the territories of Kievan Rus, and if nationally, then 75% of those who call themselves Great Russians come from Little Russia, look at the migration of peoples to the desert lands of the north and Siberia from Little Russia, and who in Russia indigenous people, and all the Cossacks come from Little Russia, and Muscovy was also founded by the same princes from the same Kyiv and other cities, and look even in our time more than every second in Russia in relatives with Ukrainians, in our microdistrict I am the only Russian, probably because an orphanage, all others who consider themselves Russian admit that their grandmothers, great-grandfathers come from Ukraine, during the Patriotic War since 41, more than 50 million Ukrainians did not return to their indigenous lands, raised Siberia, so there is no division in the Russian people, all provocations - divide and rule, and the current Russia was supposed to be fragmented into 150 specific states at the end of Yeltsin’s reign, and don’t believe to whom we are grateful that this didn’t happen - the Chinese - they claim very large territories of Siberia right up to the Urals, well, there’s no desire to give Siberia to the Chinese, therefore they are afraid of ruining Russia, they hope to buy up all the real estate by the private sectors. r.z. do not succumb to the provocations of national hatred, and enmity, they deceive you, you were in Lviv and it was exactly, Rukh is not Ukraine, these are Poles, and even then they are not real, and enmity is sowed against Russia by deported people, and few people give in, and you don’t give in, maybe we will stand, there was something else.

New Russia (Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporozhye, Kherson, Nikolaev, Odessa regions, mastered under Catherine II. But what about the Kirovograd region? After all, the development of the steppes of the Black Sea region began with it. The fortress of St. before the revolution they were county centers of the Kherson province. For some reason, when mentioning the borders of Novorossiya, the Kirovograd region is always forgotten. Why are we worse? We are also Russians!

And what, under Catherine already knew and revered the name of the future Bolshevik Kirov?

"And what, under Catherine already knew and revered the name of the future Bolshevik Kirov?" I'm sorry, but I still don't understand this passage. I didn’t speak for Kirov, one of the authors of the law of 5 spikelets, at all. I'm talking about the fact that the current Korograd region is a fragment of the Kherson lips, and therefore part of Novorossia. what is that annoying tone?

the lands that you proudly call "Novorossia" belonged to the Zaporozhian army for centuries. And then the tsarist authorities liquidated the Zaporizhzhya Sich and made their own New Russia! Ukraine will not bend under you!

The autumn of 1653 came. The sixth year of the liberation war of the Ukrainian people led by Bogdan Khmelnytsky was drawing to a close. During this time, the Cossack army won a number of outstanding victories: on May 6, 1648, the Polish avant-garde under the command of Stefan Potocki was utterly defeated at Zhovti Vody; 10 days later, on May 16, the main Polish forces were defeated near Korsun, while the Cossacks captured huge trophies and captured both crown hetmans - Nikolai Potocki and Martin Kalinovsky; in September 1648, near Pilyavtsy, in Volhynia, the same fate befell a large Polish army under the command of Zaslavsky, Konetspolsky and Ostrorog.

But not only victories accompanied the Ukrainian people in the struggle against the rule of the Polish feudal lords. Bogdan Khmelnitsky's ally, the Crimean Khan, betrayed the Cossacks more than once. In August 1649, in the battle of Zborov, at the most critical moment for the Poles, he went over to their side and thus wrested victory from the hands of the Cossacks. He acted in the same insidious way in June 1651 near Berestechko: he not only fled from the battlefield with the entire horde, but also forcibly took Khmelnitsky with him. Because of this, the Cossacks suffered a heavy defeat. The Tatar khans, in addition, mercilessly plundered Ukraine and took the population into captivity in masses.

Polish feudal lords inflicted terrible disasters on the Ukrainian people: they burned entire cities and villages, and tortured and killed the population. The devastation of the country led to economic ruin and famine.

Gentry Poland was a strong state. It disposed of large funds and enjoyed the support of Western European states. Under such conditions, it was possible to get rid of its yoke only with the help of Russia, under the protection of which various sections of Ukrainian society had long been striving. Ukraine was connected with the Russian people by the historical past, the closeness of culture, the unity of faith and the common tasks of fighting against aggressive neighbors: Pan Poland, Turkey and the Crimean Khanate.

Already on June 8, 1648, immediately after the first victories, Bogdan Khmelnitsky sent a letter to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. “Zychili (wanted) byhmo sobi,” wrote the Ukrainian hetman, “an autocrat of such a ruler in his land as your royal greatness.” Khmelnitsky also asked the king for military assistance. Six months later, Khmelnitsky sent his ambassador to Moscow, Colonel Muzhilovsky, who repeated the content of this letter. However, the tsarist government for almost six years refrained from taking Ukraine under its rule and the inevitable war with Poland. There were many reasons for this.

From the first days of the liberation war in Ukraine, a mass demonstration began: the peasants declared themselves Cossacks - free from serfdom, killed or expelled landlords and introduced Cossack orders - they elected chieftains, judges, clerks and decided all public affairs at rural gatherings (radas). At the same time, armed detachments were created, pouring into the main Cossack army. Information about this constantly came to Moscow. Diplomat Kunakov, who visited Ukraine, reported, for example, to the government: “And many people, self-willed and plowed peasants, gathered in regiments to Bogdan Khmelnitsky, beating their lords in their estates (estates).” Kunakov advised to protect the borders of the Russian state from Ukrainian rebels more tightly.

But the flight of their peasants to the Ukraine to participate in the liberation war was even more frightening for the Russian feudal lords. Moreover, such fugitives often dealt with their landowners beforehand. In June 1648, a formidable popular uprising broke out in Moscow itself, which then spread to other cities. Having suppressed the uprising, the tsarist government convened the Zemsky Sobor, at which the Code of 1649 was adopted, which finally enserfed the peasants (see the article “Moscow uprising of 1648”). It is clear that the Moscow boyars and nobles were wary of providing direct assistance to the liberation war of the Ukrainian people.

In addition, Russia was not ready for a war with Poland and experienced great financial difficulties. Finally, the Russian government feared a blow from Sweden in the event of a war with Poland. Sweden, which seized from Russia (at the beginning of the 17th century) access to the Baltic Sea, tried to secure it for itself and took a hostile and waiting position.

Nevertheless, the Russian government established with the Ukrainian hetman diplomatic relations and began to provide assistance to Ukraine. Was allowed duty-free export to Ukraine of food and other goods, including weapons - guns. The Russian government did not prevent the participation of the Don Cossacks in the liberation war, in a number of cases it allowed Ukrainian troops to be transferred across Russian territory, and concentrated its troops on the Polish border in order to alleviate the situation of the Ukrainian Cossack troops in this way. The Russian government accepted Ukrainian peasants and Cossacks who fled from their homeland from the revenge of the Polish feudal lords. The fugitives received land, assistance to set up a household and settled as free people, most often Cossacks. During the war of liberation, these settlers formed a whole region, called Sloboda Ukraine (the main part of it is the modern Kharkov region). Such a policy consolidated the sympathy of the Ukrainian people for Russia.

Seal of the Zaporozhian army.

By the summer of 1653, gentry Poland, despite previous heavy defeats, had gathered huge forces. It hoped to crush the liberation movement in the Ukraine and restore cruel national-religious oppression and serfdom there. King Jan Casimir, at the head of a 60,000-strong army, went through Lvov to Kamenets-Podolsky and near it, near Zhvanets, became a camp. The Commonwealth (gentry militia) went to the aid of the king. At the same time, Hetman Radziwill was ordered to invade Ukraine from Lithuania, take Kyiv and go to Zhvanets to unite. At the end of September, a Ukrainian army led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky and his ally, the Crimean Khan with a horde, approached Zhvanets. A decisive battle was ahead.

At that moment, on October 1, 1653, the Zemsky Sobor in Moscow made a historic decision: to declare war on Poland and “to take Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky and the entire Zaporizhzhya Army with their cities and lands under ... the sovereign’s high hand.” Immediately after that, the great ambassadors were sent to Ukraine: the boyar V. Buturlin, the roundabout I. Alferyev and the clerk L. Lopukhin.

Military operations began near Zhvanets. The Tatars surrounded the royal camp. Khan was already preparing for a decisive blow to the Polish camp, as near Zhvanets they learned about the decision of the Zemskogr Sobor. The situation has changed dramatically. The Khan and the King, both enemies of Russia, made peace (December 15, 1653). However, they have so far refused to take active steps against Ukraine, since powerful Russia already stood behind it.

Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky.

Meanwhile, the Russian embassy was already approaching Pereyaslav. It brought the hetman a royal charter, as well as signs of hetman dignity: a banner, a mace, a feryaz and a hat. On December 31, five miles from Pereyaslav, the embassy was solemnly met by a local colonel, with whom, as an eyewitness recorded, there were “centuries and chieftains and Cossacks with six hundred people or more, with banners and trumpets, and timpani.” The Cossacks lined up at the entrance to the city greeted the ambassadors with rifle shots. The entire population of the city came out to meet the embassy. Church bells were rung.

January 8, 1654 came. At about 2 o'clock in the afternoon, drumming and the sounds of timpani were heard, calling the people to the city square. When “a great multitude of all sorts of ranks of people” gathered, a colo (circle) was formed. Despite wartime, representatives of almost all Ukrainian regiments, cities and residents of the surrounding area arrived in Pereyaslav. Many, unable to fit in the square, stood on the roofs of houses.

Forever with Moscow, forever with the Russian people. Painting by M. Khmelko.

Under the bunchuk, surrounded by a foreman, the hetman appeared. Stopping in the middle of the circle, Bohdan Khmelnitsky addressed the audience with a speech. He recalled the suffering of the Ukrainian people under the yoke of the gentry of Poland and the need to become under the power and protection strong power. Such a power, Khmelnitsky stressed, can only be Russia. The words of the hetman were covered with a roar of approval: "Let us command a strong hand under the tsar of the East, the Orthodox...". Two colonels, going around the ranks, asked if everyone agreed to this. The answer was: "All with one accord."

As the Ukrainian chronicler S. Velichko noted later in his chronicle, the Cossacks also welcomed the reunification.

From Pereyaslav, the tsarist ambassador V. Buturlin sent the stewards, lawyers and nobles who were with him to all regiments (districts), cities and towns of Ukraine to swear in the population. The Ukrainian people were filled with the hope that reunification would bring them peace and prosperity. The masses of the people - peasants, Cossacks, townspeople - hoped that as part of Russia they would retain freedom from serfdom and various oppressions, obtained at the cost of heavy sacrifices during the war. These hopes were supported by the fact that in Russia there were vast areas - Don, Yaik and others, which did not yet know serfdom and enjoyed self-government. As for the Cossack elders, the gentry, the landowners, they hoped to restore with the help of tsarism the serfdom that had shaken during the war and strengthen their position. ruling class.

The position of Ukraine within the Russian state was formalized by the so-called "Articles of Bogdan Khmelnitsky". They were submitted to the tsar by the hetman in March 1654 and approved, with some changes, by special letters. These charters preserved the electivity of the hetman and the military, administrative and judicial structure that had developed in Ukraine during the liberation war. military force Ukraine was 60 thousandth Cossack army. The hetman, head of the army and administration, had the right to receive and dismiss ambassadors from all states, except for Poland and Turkey. Thus, Ukraine received political autonomy. The position of the ruling class was assigned to the Cossack elders and the Ukrainian gentry. The tsarist government began to strictly protect his privileges: the right to own estates and exploit the peasants.

The reunification of Ukraine with Russia was of great historical significance. Unlike Poland, where feudal anarchy reigned, where large feudal lords not only fought with each other, but often took up arms against the king, Russia was a state with a strong central government.

Accession to Russia saved Ukraine from feudal wars that ruined the population and undermined economic life countries. At the same time, the restrictions and harassment that Ukrainian citizens were subjected to under Polish rule were abolished. All this created more favorable conditions for the economic development of the country.

Recognition of autonomy for Ukraine contributed to its political and cultural development. For the cultural development of Ukraine, the influence of progressive Russian culture was of great importance. The reunification of Ukraine with Russia united the forces of both peoples to protect the country from dangerous enemies - the Crimean Khanate and Sultan's Turkey. By reuniting with Russia, the Ukrainian people have preserved themselves as a nation. He was no longer in danger of being swallowed up by gentry Poland and Sultan's Turkey. At the same time, he found in the person of the Russian people a powerful friend and ally in the struggle against the autocracy, the landlords, and the capitalists.

(continuation)

Solemn embassy of boyar Buturlin to Ukraine. - Pereyaslav Rada on January 8, 1654 and the oath of allegiance. - Rejected by the ambassador of the requirement of mutual oath. - Awards to Buturlin and his comrades.

On October 9, 1653, after the service in the Assumption Cathedral and the kissing of the royal hand, the above-mentioned great and plenipotentiary ambassadors left Moscow for Ukraine. At the same time, the boyar Buturlin was named governor of Tver, and the devious Alferyev governor of Murom. They were accompanied by a large retinue: in addition to the clergy, it included up to 50 stewards, solicitors, tenants, nobles, clerks and translators and 200 archers of the order (regiment) of Artamon Matveev. With the archers was their head himself, that is, Matveev.

The ambassadors were provided with corresponding letters and detailed instructions, and for distribution to the hetman, the entire foreman of the Zaporizhian army and the higher clergy, they carried with them a rich sable treasury. On the way, a messenger overtook them with an order: to wait in Putivl for the mace, banner, feryaz and throated cap assigned to the hetman. Arriving in Putivl on November 1, the ambassadors, in accordance with the order, sent a clerk to Chigirin to find out where the hetman was. The latter, as you know, was in the Zhvanets campaign, and the great ambassadors, like Streshnev and Bredikhin, had to wait for his return for quite a long time. The ambassadors, however, did not waste time in vain, but by all means diligently collected news about the state of affairs in Ukraine, about the actions of the hetman, about the Poles, Crimeans, etc.; they were also sent with Streshnev and sent reports to Moscow about everything. By the way, they reported that an order had come to Mirgorod from Khmelnitsky to build a large house for his wife, for which up to 500 wagons were brought from different cities by disassembled mansions; and another yard is being built there for the clerk Vyhovsky.

On December 3, the Kalnitsky colonel Fedorenko with a Cossack retinue arrived in Putivl from a convoy near Zhvanets, brought sheets from the hetman to the ambassadors and offered to escort them to Pereyaslav, the hetman invited there, and not to Chigirin because this city is small and poor in bread and feed, for the reason locust and drought. The ambassadors released Fedorenko back, while they themselves remained in Putivl, still waiting for the hetman's regalia and further orders from Moscow. Having received all this, only on November 20 did the embassy move from Putivl abroad. Here, from the first Cossack town of Korybutov, solemn meetings began, according to the hetman's order. Ten miles from the town, the embassy was met by the son of Fedorenko with a hundred Cossacks under the banner and said a greeting. In the Nikolaevsky church of the town, Moscow clerics who traveled with ambassadors served; moreover, the Annunciation deacon Alexei “called many years” to the sovereign, empress and noble princesses; on the right kliros, the priests and deacons of the Chudov and Savva Storozhevsky monasteries “sang for many years”, and on the left, a local priest with clerks. The population gathered in the church prayed and wept with joy, "that the Lord God commanded them to be under the sovereign's hand." Then similar meetings and prayers continued. In Krasnoye, besides the Cossacks with a banner, priests also came out in robes with crosses, icons and holy water with bells and cannon fire. This was followed by the town of Ivonitsa, the regimental town of Priluki (where Colonel Voronchenko met), the towns of Galitsa, Bykovo, Baryshevka, etc. During their solemn procession, the ambassadors constantly exchanged messengers and letters with Khmelnitsky and Vyhovsky.

On December 31, the embassy reached Pereyaslav. Five miles away he was met by Pereyaslav Colonel Pavel Teterya with centurions, chieftains and 600 Cossacks at the sound of trumpets and timpani. Dismounting from his horse, the colonel turned to the boyar Buturlin and other ambassadors with a greeting that indicated his familiarity with rhetoric and began with the words: “The pious and pious pious sovereign of the tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich, autocrat of all Russia and many states of the sovereign and possessor, his sovereign majesty, the great boyar and other Lord! With joy, your safe coming is acceptable,” etc. At the city gates, the population with their wives and children and the city clergy with crosses and images were waiting. When the ambassadors and their retinue venerated the images and sprinkled St. with water, Archpriest Gregory also spoke to them a welcoming word, which he ended like this: “Rejoicingly enter into this God-saved city, advise peaceful, good and useful to all Christianity, as if by your well-being, under his royal majesty, quietly overshadowing wings, our Little Russia Orthodoxy will also rest” . From here, the embassy, ​​along with the procession on foot, moved to the cathedral Cathedral of the Assumption, where they brought in the Moscow image of the Savior, released by the tsar to Ukraine with ambassadors. In the cathedral, a prayer was made for the health of the king, queen and princesses. From the cathedral, the ambassadors, with cannon fire, accompanied by the Cossacks, went to the courtyard allotted to them.

The hetman at that time was in Chigirin and had not yet gone to Pereyaslav because of the difficult crossing of the Dnieper, along which ice caviar went, and the river had not yet become. January 6 on the day of Epiphany from Peredelana was procession to the Trubezh River, to the Jordan; together with the Pereyaslavl clergy, Moscow also served here, namely: the archimandrite of the Kazan Transfiguration Monastery Prokhor, the Christmas archpriest Andreyan, Savva Starozhevsky priest Iona and deacons. Before evening that day, the hetman arrived, and the next day the clerk Vygovsky. At the call of the hetman, many colonels and centurions gathered in Pereyaslav. On the evening of the 7th, Khmelnitsky arrived at the embassy compound with Vyhovsky and Colonel Teterya. Boyarin Buturlin and his comrades informed him of the sovereign's gracious decision or decree on his petition (on citizenship), and agreed with him that the next day the hetman would announce a decree on the moving court and then the oath of allegiance to the sovereign would be made.

And so it was all done.

On the morning of January 8, at first, a secret council of colonels and all the military petty officers took place at the hetman, who then confirmed their consent to Moscow citizenship. Then, for a long time, a drum was beaten in the city square, while the Cossacks and other inhabitants of Pereyaslav gathered in large numbers for the national council. They parted the crowd, arranged a spacious circle for the troops and foremen. In the middle of the circle stood the hetman under a bunchuk, and around him were judges, captains, clerks and colonels. The military captain ordered everyone to be silent. When silence reigned, the hetman addressed the people with a speech.

“Panov colonels, yasauls, centurions and the entire army of Zaporozhye And all Orthodox Christians! he began. - You all know how God freed us from the hands of enemies who are persecuting the Church of God and embittering all Christianity of our Eastern Orthodoxy, that for six years now we have been living without a sovereign in our land in incessant wars and bloodshed with our persecutors and enemies, who want to uproot the Church of God, so that the Russian name is not remembered in our land; which has already bothered us all greatly, and we see that it is impossible for us to live any longer without a king. For this purpose, now we have gathered together a clear council to all the people, so that you can choose with us a sovereign from the four of whom you want. This was followed by an indication of the Turkish Sultan, the Crimean Khan, the Polish King and the Moscow Tsar. The first two are infidels and enemies of Christians; the third acts in concert with the Polish lords, who cruelly oppress the Orthodox Russian people. There remains the pious tsar of the East, who is of the same faith, “Except for his high royal hands,” the hetman concluded, “the gentlest haven has not been converted, and if anyone does not agree with us, now the free road wants to be rough.”

At this speech, the whole people cried out: “Let us free under the tsar of the East, the Orthodox!”

Colonel Teterya, walking around the circle, asked in all directions: “Do you all agree so?”

“Vsi,” the people unanimously responded.

“Budi tacos,” said the hetman. - "May the Lord God strengthen us under his royal strong hand."

“God confirm, God strengthen, so that you may be forever one!” the people repeated.

Pereyaslav Rada 1654. Painting by M. Khmelko, 1951

Khmelnitsky with the foreman went to the congress yard, where the boyar Buturlin and his comrades were waiting for him. The boyar announced the sovereign's charter to the hetman and the entire army of Zaporozhye and handed him this charter. The hetman kissed it, opened it, and giving it to the clerk Vyhovsky, ordered it to be read aloud. After reading, the hetman and colonels expressed their joy and their readiness to serve, straighten and lay down their heads for the sovereign. Asking them in the royal name about their health, Buturlin turned to the hetman with a speech in which he briefly outlined the constantly renewed petition to His Royal Majesty to accept the Zaporizhzhya army under his high hand, about the tsar's futile attempts to reconcile the Cossacks with the Poles and keep these latter from persecuting the Orthodox faith , about the completed consent of the king to the petition. The boyar ended with a call to faithful service to the sovereign and a promise of royal favor to the army and defense from enemies.

From the congress court, the hetman and the tsar's ambassadors rode in a carriage to the cathedral church of the Dormition. Here, Moscow clergy with Archimandrite Prokhor and the local clergy with Archpriest Gregory were already waiting for them, who met them on the porch with crosses and censers. In the church, the clergy, dressed in robes, wanted to start reading the oath according to the official book sent from Moscow. But here a certain difficulty arose, or, more precisely, the first clash of the autocratic Moscow system with Polish concepts and customs occurred, to which the Little Russian Ukraine did not remain alien.

Khmelnitsky suddenly expressed a desire that the Moscow ambassadors, in the name of their sovereign, take an oath not to violate the liberties of the Zaporizhian army, to observe all his fortunes with their landed property and not to extradite him to the Polish king. Boyarin Buturlin and his comrades answered that in the Muscovite state, subjects swear an oath to their sovereign, and not vice versa, and then they hoped that the tsar would grant the hetman and the Zaporizhian army, would not take away their liberties, and whoever owned what powers, he orders them to still own.

The hetman said that he would talk about it with the colonels, and went to Pavel Tetera's yard. There was a meeting, and the ambassadors and the clergy stood in the church and waited. The sergeant-major sent Teteria and another colonel from Mirgorod, Sakhnovich, who repeated the same request; Buturlin repeated the same answer, saying: “It never happened that subjects take an oath for their sovereign, but subjects take an oath to the sovereign.” The colonels pointed to the Polish kings who swear allegiance to their subjects. The ambassadors objected that “it is obscene to put him as a model, because those kings are unfaithful and not autocrats,” and urged the colonels “not to speak such obscene speeches.” The colonels tried to refer to the Cossacks, who allegedly demand an oath. Buturlin recalled that the great sovereign accepted them under his high hand for their own petition Orthodox faith, and advised such people to calm down from obscene words. At the same time, the Moscow boyar-diplomat skillfully remarked that the sovereign would probably grant the Zaporizhian army even greater favors and benefits than the Polish kings themselves. The colonels are gone; soon the hetman and the entire foreman returned and announced that they were relying on the mercy of the sovereign in everything and “faith (oath), according to the gospel commandment, are wholeheartedly ready to do to the great sovereign.”

After that, Archimandrite Prokhor swore in the hetman and foreman according to the official book. At the end of it, the Annunciation deacon Alexei (probably having a good voice) called the sovereign for many years. Many of the coming people shed tears of joy. The hetman with the ambassadors rode in a carriage to the congress yard, where the colonels and other people went on foot. There, the hetman was given a banner, a mace, a feryaz, a hat and sables from the tsar; the boyar Buturlin, according to his order, accompanied the presentation of each of these things with a corresponding word. For example, giving a hat, he said: “To your head, enlightened from God with a high mind and a pleasing providence for the protection of Orthodoxy thinking, this cap is bestowed by the most radiant royal majesty in covering, but God keeps your head in good health, with all reason for the good of the army of the glorious structure admonishes” etc. For the hetman, the "sovereign's salary" (sables and other gifts) was distributed to Vyhovsky, the colonels, the captains and the escort. Khmelnitsky with the foreman returned to his yard on foot in the feryazi granted to him and a hat with a mace in his hand, and an unfurled banner was carried in front of him.

The next day, the archimandrite with the consecrated cathedral in the same temple took the oath of centurions, regimental captains and clerks, ordinary Cossacks and townspeople. Then the ambassadors demanded from the hetman a painting of the cities and places owned by the Zaporizhian army, in order to big cities go yourself to take the oath, and send stewards and nobles to others. In the subsequent conversations of the hetman with the ambassadors, he expressed his wishes, which he asked to bring to the sovereign. Namely: firstly, so that everyone remains in his rank, a gentry a gentry, a Cossack a Cossack, and a tradesman a tradesman, and after his death, his property should not be taken away from his wife and children, as the Poles did, who took these assets for themselves; secondly, to make a Zaporizhian army of 60,000 people, and even more than that, the better, because "they do not ask the royal majesty for those Cossacks." The ambassadors encouraged the hetman with the tsar's consent to these wishes. Nevertheless, the estates of the royal, pansky, Catholic churches and monasteries were agreed to be taken away by the sovereign.

The clerk Vygovsky continued to be zealous; assured that in Lithuanian cities, having learned about what had happened in Little Russia, many will also hasten to pass under the high royal hand, and volunteered to write about that in Mogilev to an Orthodox nobleman he knew, and the latter with the Mogilev people would write to other cities. However, this zeal did not prevent him on January 12, together with the colonels, to come to the ambassadors and ask them, in the manner of the Polish, for a written obligation that the Cossack liberties, rights and freedoms would not be violated. It was as if the colonels, having arrived in their regiments, needed to show the people, otherwise there would be doubt in the cities when the stewards and nobles began to take the oath. The ambassadors, of course, rejected this request, calling it "an insufficient matter." Local Orthodox gentry also came to the ambassadors with a request to leave behind them various orders, which they wrote for themselves. This request was also eliminated and labeled "obscene". The hetman said goodbye to the ambassadors and left for Chigirin.

As a seunshchik, i.e., a messenger, the archer’s head Artamon Matveev went to the sovereign with the replies of the ambassadors.

The ambassadors sent stewards, lawyers and nobles to the cities of all 17 Little Russian regiments to take the oath; and on the 14th they themselves went to Kyiv, where they arrived two days later. Ten miles from the city, even before crossing the Dnieper, the ambassadors were met by Kyiv centurions with banners and more than a thousand Cossacks. And before reaching the city wall a verst and a half from the Golden Gate, they were met by the Kyiv abbots and abbots, who left in wagons and sleighs with Metropolitan Sylvester, Bishop Zosima of Chernigov and Archimandrite Joseph of the Caves at the head. The Metropolitan, as you know, was not at all happy about the change of Polish citizenship to Moscow, but he had to hide his feelings. Coming out of the wagon, he said a welcoming word: in his face, - said Sylvester, - the ambassadors are welcomed Vladimir the Holy, Andrew the First-Called, Anthony, Theodosius and the Pechersk ascetics. Then we went to St. Sophia Cathedral, where they were met by all the cathedral, monastery and parish priests in robes, with crosses, images, banners and holy water. In the cathedral, the metropolitan served a prayer service for the health of the tsar and his family, and the archdeacon proclaimed many years to them. After that, the boyar V. V. Buturlin addressed the metropolitan with a word. Mentioning the past repeated petitions to the Sovereign Hetman and the entire army of Zaporozhye, regarding their acceptance under the sovereign's high hand, he said that the Metropolitan had never participated in these petitions and "did not seek royal mercy for himself"; and therefore the boyar asked, “that the metropolitan announce to them, for what measure did he not beat the brow of the great sovereign and did not write?” Sylvester responded with ignorance about these petitions. Buturlin, in the name of the sovereign, asked the metropolitan, the bishop, the archimandrites, and the entire consecrated cathedral “about a saved stay,” that is, about health; spiritual authorities thanked for this sovereign mercy.

The next day, the ambassadors took the oath of the Kyiv Cossacks and the townspeople. But in vain they sent stewards and clerks demanding the oath of the Metropolitan and Pechersk service gentry, courtyards and philistines. Sylvester Kossov and Iosif Trizna excused themselves by saying that they were free people, they were hired, there were no pretensions behind them, and therefore they did not need to swear an oath. For two whole days these spiritual authorities persisted; but the persistence of the Moscow ambassadors prevailed; the required people were sent and sworn in. In order to keep the favor of the Polish government just in case, the metropolitan started secret relations with him and pointed out that he had to submit to force.

Having finished with the oath in Kyiv, the ambassadors went to Nizhyn. Here, 5 miles from the city, they were met by Colonel Zolotarenko and Archpriest Maxim; the latter said a greeting, then a prayer service was served in the Trinity Cathedral; and the next day, January 24, the oath took place. The same thing happened in Chernigov, where a prayer service was served in the Cathedral of the Savior by his archpriest Gregory. Having sent Prince Danil Nesvitsky to swear in the cities and towns of the Chernigov regiment, V.V. On January 30, Buturlin and his comrades arrived again in Nizhyn, and here they awaited the sovereign's decree on his return to Moscow. He continued to carefully collect news from everywhere about what was being done in Ukraine, in Poland, and sent a report to the sovereign about everything; corresponded with the hetman, as well as with Prince Fyodor Semyonovich Kurakin, who was appointed governor in Kyiv, and, together with his comrades, in Putivl, waited for the arrival of military people.

On the night of February 1, Artamon Matveev arrived in Nizhyn with a royal letter, which ordered Buturlin and his comrades to go to Moscow. Togo. the same number they set off. The most gracious reception awaited them for the successful execution of the "sovereign's business." The steward A.I. was sent to Kaluga to meet them. Golovin, in order to ask about health on behalf of the sovereign and say a commendable word. Special praise was given to them for the fact that they with dignity and firmness rejected the insistence of the hetman and foreman on the oath to observe the Cossack liberties. They were generously rewarded. Boyarin V.V. Buturlin received the palace with the path a golden satin coat on sables, a gilded silver goblet with a roof, four forty sables and 150 rubles in addition to his salary, which was 450 rubles. (And on the way he was assigned half of the income from some Yaroslavl fish settlements and circle yards and ship duties, the other half went to the sovereign). Okolnichi Iv. V. Alferyev was granted the same fur coat, two forty sables and 70 rubles in cash addition to the salary (to 300 rubles); and to the duma deacon Lar. Lopukhin a fur coat, a goblet, two forty sables and some increase in salary (to 250 rubles). “Sables all for 100 rubles. forty”, that is, a relatively high price. These awards were announced to them by the Duma clerk Almaz Ivanov at the royal table on Holy Week, at the end of March. Such a solemn announcement was apparently delayed until the delicate negotiations with the hetman's embassy on the rights of the Little Russian people were brought to an end.

Meanwhile, on February 5, Tsarina Marya Ilyinichna gave birth to a son and heir, Alexei. This event immediately served as a means to unite in common joy both Great and Little Russia. The steward Paltov was sent to the latter with letters of notice and with a gracious royal word, namely to Chigirin and Kyiv. The hetman responded with a congratulatory message, the lower and higher Kiev clergy, i.e. the metropolitan and the Archimandrite of the Caves, performed thanksgiving prayers with the pronouncement of the usual many years to the king, queen, newborn prince and princesses.

As the economy was restored in Russia after the Time of Troubles, state institutions were strengthened locally and in the center, the country began to move from a passive defensive foreign policy to active actions outside its borders. And these actions were mostly successful.

As you know, from the time of Ivan III, Muscovite Russia began to express claims to the possession of Orthodox lands that were once part of Kievan Rus. The inhabitants of these western and southern Old Russian lands and in the XVII century. called themselves Russians. At the same time, from the XIV century. there was a process of folding independent Belarusian and Ukrainian nationalities, their independent languages, culture, customs were formed, national character. In the XIII-XIV centuries. Belarusian and Ukrainian lands became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and with the formation of the Union of Lublin in 1569 of the Commonwealth, the former Western and Southern Russia entered this single Polish-Lithuanian state.

By the 17th century Ukrainian and Belarusian population began to feel the growing triple pressure: national, social and religious. The entire set of rights and privileges was with the Catholic Polish and Lithuanian gentry (nobility), and especially among the large landowners of aristocrats - magnates. Severe Polish serfdom began to spread to the Ukrainian and Belarusian lands with the appearance of the estates of the Polish lords there. Polish law even allowed the lords to kill their serfs. Catholicism in the Commonwealth was the main religion, the Orthodox "Russian people", like the Protestants, were persecuted and forced to convert to Catholicism.

Naturally, in such conditions, the national-religious opposition of the "Russian people" to the Polish-Lithuanian domination was born. Russian claims and Moscow's assistance constantly fueled the forces of the discontented.

ZAPORIZHIA. FOR FAITH AND WILL

They themselves had a significant armed force. It was the Zaporizhzhya Cossacks, living in the southern, dangerous proximity to the Tatars, the outskirts. The capital of the Zaporozhye army - Zaporizhzhya Sich, served as a permanent center, where the Cossack freemen were, ready for raids on the Tatars, Turks and the Poles themselves. Although the Cossacks, recorded in the royal list - the register, were considered in the service of the king of the Commonwealth and received a salary for that with money, bread, gunpowder and weapons, they often rebelled when they believed that their rights were infringed. Moreover, with the growth of serfdom in Ukraine, peasants and serfs fled to the Dnieper, beyond the rapids. Non-registered Cossacks grew due to them. These new Cossacks lived by hiring to the wealthy Cossacks, were engaged in fishing, hunting, but, like the holocaust Cossacks of the Don, the non-registered Zaporozhye Cossacks more often hunted with military raids.

In 1630, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth suddenly realized that there was too much danger from this free border guard, and tried to keep the Cossacks in check. On the border with the Cossack lands, the Kodak fortress was built, and a German mercenary garrison was placed there. The purpose of the garrison was to prevent the penetration of the fugitives into Zaporozhye and to restrain the activity of the Cossacks themselves, striving to the north.

The fort was of little help. It was soon destroyed along with the garrison by the rebellious non-registered Cossacks, led by ataman Ivan Sulima. And 5 years before that, the uprising of the Cossacks of Taras Fedorovich died down. The Cossacks rebelled under the leadership of Pavlyuk and Ostryanin in 1637-1638. All these speeches were suppressed, but suppressed with difficulty.

The authorities of the Commonwealth destroyed the election of the supreme Zaporizhzhya ataman - hetman, as well as the election of other high Cossack posts. Now the king appointed Zaporizhian leaders. There was silence for ten years. It was a deceptive silence, the kind that usually comes before a storm.

The storm broke out in 1648, when another uprising of the Cossacks spilled out of the Zaporozhye Cossack region, engulfed the whole of Ukraine and turned into a national liberation war, the banner of which was the defense of Orthodoxy.

Bogdan Khmelnitsky led the fight. He came from Ukrainian gentry. Once Bogdan occupied the second most important position in the Zaporizhzhya army as a military clerk. The Poles deprived Khmelnytsky of this post. Bogdan had every reason to hate the lords: one Polish gentry burned his estate to the ground and marked his 10-year-old son to death.

Bogdan's army moved beyond the Sich. In May 1648, twice in the battles near the Zhovti Vody tract and near Korsun, it defeated the crown army of the Commonwealth. The news of the victories attracted rebels from all over Ukraine to Khmelnitsky. He had a massive people's Cossack army. Khmelnitsky's ally was the Crimean Khan. After the battles at Pylyavets (September 1648) and Zborov (August 1649), the king was forced to raise the issue of autonomy for part of the Ukrainian lands. Bogdan did not really want to go to these negotiations, but the khan, who received gifts from the Poles, insisted, threatening to take the side of the Commonwealth.

According to the Zboriv Treaty, the number of registered Cossacks increased almost 4 times (up to 40 thousand people). Khmelnytsky ruled Zaporozhye and Eastern Ukraine.

But Bogdan then already dreamed of a great Ukrainian principality, which included all the southern Russian lands. Fugitive peasants who were not included in the new register did not want to return to serfdom. They longed to fight with the lords for faith and will. The foreman and Orthodox Ukrainian gentry were not averse to completely ousting the Polish and Lithuanian landowners from the Ukrainian lands, they did not want to limit themselves only to equalizing their rights with the Catholic gentry.

As a result, a new war of Ukrainians with Polish troops began. It didn't go as well as the first one. In the decisive battle near Berestechko (in June 1651), the ally of the Ukrainians, the Crimean Khan, again let down. When it already seemed that the people's army was about to win, he forcibly took Khmelnitsky from the battlefield and withdrew his cavalry. The peace of Bila Tserkva, concluded in September 1651, reduced the territory covered by the hetman's administration; the register of Cossacks was reduced to 20 thousand people.

It is clear that this world was only a respite. Voices were heard in Poland demanding that the Zaporizhzhya robbers be finally put an end to. Bogdan and the foreman understood that a reliable ally was needed to continue the struggle. Khmelnytsky more than once sent messengers to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, whom he called only “the great king of the east,” with a request to take the rebel territories under his own hand. In Moscow, they hesitated, because the catastrophe near Smolensk was still fresh in their memory, and the adoption of such a decision meant an indispensable new war with the Commonwealth.

In 1653 the decisive moment came. The Ukrainians again fought with the lords. The Crimean Khan betrayed them again at the most decisive moment of the Battle of Zhvanets (1653). For a huge sum, the khan went over to the side of the Commonwealth. Without the support of Russia, Khmelnitsky's troops had no chance to win the war with the pans and Crimeans.

Zemsky Sobor assembled in Moscow. On October 1, 1653, he decided to join Ukraine to Russia. On January 8, 1654, the Ukrainian Rada in the city of Pereyaslavl also approved the reunification of Moscow and South (or, as they used to say, Little) Russia.

DECISION OF THE zemsky sobor on the reunification of Ukraine with Russia

Last year, on May 25, 161, by decree of the Grand Sovereign, the Tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of All Russia, Autocrat, the Council spoke about the Lithuanian and Cherkasy affairs. And this year, in the 162nd year of October, on the 1st day, the great sovereign, the tsar and Grand Duke Aleksey Mikhailovich of All Russia, the autocrat pointed out about the same Lithuanian and Cherkasy affairs, to establish a council, and at the council to be the great sovereign, His Holiness Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, and Metropolitan, and Archbishop, and Bishop, and black power, and boyars, and roundabout , and a thoughtful person, and a steward, and a solicitor, and a Moscow nobleman, and a clerk, and a nobleman, and a boyar (elected) child from the cities, and a guest, and a merchant and all kinds of people. And the sovereign instructed them to declare the Lithuanian king and the lords glad of the former and current lies, that on their part they are doing a violation of the eternal ending, and there was no correction from the king and the lords. And so that those of their untruths were known to the sovereigns of the Moscow state of all ranks. Likewise, the Zaporizhzhya hetman Bogdan Khmelnytsky sent an announcement that they beat the brow under the sovereign's high hand into citizenship. And that now the king and pans are happy with the sovereign’s great aftermath, according to the treaty, they didn’t make corrections and let them go without work.<…>

Yes, in the past years, the Zaporizhzhya hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky and the entire Zaporizhzhya Army sent their envoys to the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of All Russia many times, that the pans are glad and the whole Commonwealth is Orthodox Christian faith of the Greek law and the holy churches of the East rose up and persecuted great. And they, the Zaporozhian Cherkasy, were taught to excommunicate and captivate their Roman faith from the true Orthodox Christian faith, in which they have long lived. And they sealed the churches of God, and in some of them they did it to them, and they did all sorts of persecution over them, and reproach, and wickedness of non-Christians, which they do not do over heretics and over Jews. And they, Cherkasy, not even though the pious Christian faiths departed and the holy churches of God in ruin to see and seeing themselves in such an evil persecution, involuntarily, calling to help the Crimean Khan with the horde, they taught for the Orthodox Christian faith and for the holy churches of God against them stand. And they ask the royal majesty for mercy, so that he, the great Christian sovereign, pitying the pious Orthodox Christian faiths and the holy churches of God and them, Orthodox Christians, shedding innocent blood, had mercy on them, ordered them to accept a high hand under his royal majesty.<…>

And after listening, the boyars sentenced: for the honor of the blessed memory of the great sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Mikhail Fedorovich of all Russia and for the honor of his son of the sovereign, the great sovereign of the tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of all Russia, stand against the Polish king war news. And you can’t tolerate more than that, because for many years in the royal charters and foreign lists they wrote their state names and titles past the eternal end and the embassy agreement, with a lot of registration.

“GOD APPROVE, GOD STRENGTHEN, SO THAT WE ARE FOREVER ONE!”

“After such a verdict by the Zemstvo, the tsar sent the boyar Buturlin, the roundabout Alferyev and the duma clerk Lopukhin to Pereyaslavl to take Ukraine under the high hand of the sovereign. These ambassadors arrived at the place on December 31, 1653. Pereyaslav Colonel Pavel Teterya received the guests with due honor.

On January 1, the hetman arrived in Pereyaslavl. All the colonels, the foreman and many Cossacks gathered. On January 8, after a preliminary secret meeting with the foreman, at eleven o'clock in the morning, the hetman went to the square where the general council was assembled. Hetman said:

“Gentlemen colonels, captains, centurions, the entire Zaporizhian army! God freed us from the hands of the enemies of our Eastern Orthodoxy, who wanted to uproot us so that the Russian name would not be mentioned in our land. But we can no longer live without a sovereign. Today we have gathered a council open to all the people, so that you choose a sovereign from among the four sovereigns. The first is the Turkish king, who many times called us under his authority; the second is the Crimean Khan; the third is the king of Poland, the fourth is the Orthodox of Great Russia, the king of the east. The Turkish king is an infidel, and you yourself know what oppression our Christian brethren endure from the infidels. The Crimean Khan is also an infidel. Out of necessity, we made friends with him, and through that we accepted intolerable misfortunes, captivity and the merciless shedding of Christian blood. There is no need to remember the oppression from the Polish pans; You yourself know that they revered the Jew and the dog better than our Christian brother. And the Orthodox Christian Tsar of the East is of the same Greek piety with us: we, with the Orthodoxy of Great Russia, are a single body of the Church, having the head of Jesus Christ. This great Christian king, taking pity on the unbearable anger Orthodox Church in Little Russia, did not despise our six-year prayers, bowed his merciful royal heart to us and sent neighbor people to us with royal mercy. Let us love him with zeal. In addition to the royal high hand, we will not find the most benevolent haven; and if someone is not in the council with us now, he will go where he wants: free road.

There were exclamations:

“Let's go under the king of the East! it is better for us to die in our pious faith than to fall to the hater of Christ, the filthy one.

Then the Pereyaslav colonel began to bypass the Cossacks and asked: - Do you all agree? - All! - answered the Cossacks.

“God confirm, God strengthen, so that we are forever one!” The terms of the new contract were read. Its meaning was as follows: the whole of Ukraine, the Cossack land (approximately within the boundaries of the Zboriv Treaty, which occupied the current provinces: Poltava, Kyiv, Chernihiv, most Volyn and Podolsk), joined under the name of Little Russia to the Muscovite state, with the right to retain its own special court, administration, the choice of a hetman by free people, the latter's right to receive ambassadors and communicate with foreign states, the inviolability of the rights of the gentry, spiritual and petty-bourgeois estates. Tribute (taxes) to the sovereign must be paid without the intervention of Moscow collectors. The number of registered Cossacks increased to sixty thousand, but it was allowed to have more eager Cossacks.

WAR WITH POLAND

Moscow troops entered the territory of Ukraine and Belarus. The latter also rebelled against the lords, but, having no Cossacks, was deprived of the backbone around which a people's army could be created. Tsar Alexei was with the troops. In 1654, the Muscovites occupied Smolensk, 33 Belarusian cities, including Polotsk, and invaded Lithuania. The Russian-Ukrainian army successfully operated in the south. It seemed that the defeat of the Commonwealth was close. Especially since she has another enemy. Sweden attacked Poland in the summer of 1655 and captured many Polish lands along with the capital Warsaw.

In the Commonwealth, a number of magnates and part of the pans began to believe that it was better to negotiate with Muscovy, maybe even unite with it in a personal union, choosing Alexei Mikhailovich or his son Tsarevich Alexei to the throne of the Commonwealth. So the war with Russia can be ended, and the Swedish king Charles X can be defeated. These ideas appealed to the Moscow elite, despite the protests of Khmelnitsky, who did not want peace with the Commonwealth under any conditions.

WAR WITH SWEDEN 1656-1658

Expecting the death of the elderly Polish monarch and the election of a new king, Russia concluded a truce with Poland (October 1656) and began to fight with Sweden, hoping to regain access to the Baltic.

At first, the war went well. The Russians captured Dorpat, Dinaburg, Marienburg, laid siege to Riga. However, the Moscow regiments could not take Riga. In Poland, meanwhile, the opponents of orientation toward Russia triumphed. They made peace with Sweden and declared war on the Moscow kingdom. The plans of the union thus turned out to be buried, and Russia was facing a war on two fronts, which she could not afford. The weariness of both the troops and the people, crushed by taxes, the funds from which this long struggle absorbed, was already felt.

Russia had to make concessions to Sweden. In 1658 a truce was concluded, and in 1661 a peace was concluded in Cardisse. Russia did not lose anything on it from what it had before the Russian-Swedish war, but did not gain anything. The Muscovites returned the captured Baltic fortresses to the Swedish king.

CONTINUED WAR FOR UKRAINE

With varying success, the war between Russia and the Commonwealth in Ukraine began. Russian forces were forced out of Lithuania and Belarus. The Commonwealth controlled the Right-bank part of Ukraine. And in Moscow, the copper riot had already died down, it was restless in the Cossack Don and the outskirts.

Many Moscow governors and clerks came to the Left-Bank Ukraine, where the hetman's rule was preserved. Muscovites did not really consider Ukrainian identity, as they believed that Ukraine was already the same part of Russia as everyone else. All this upset those who did not see the union of Ukraine with the “great eastern king” at all. The discrepancy between his own and Moscow's views on relations between Moscow and Ukraine was felt even by Bogdan Khmelnitsky. When the hetman drank too much, he cried, got angry at the "Muscovites", said: "That's not what I wanted!" Many followers of the hetman, in particular the son of Bogdan - Yuri Khmelnitsky, tried to "set aside" from Moscow. Some of them hoped for autonomy (internal self-government) under Polish patronage (Hetman Ivan Vyhovsky), someone - under Crimean or Turkish (Hetman Ivan Bryukhovetsky), but Muscovy, relying on its Ukrainian supporters, firmly held the newly acquired lands. The main advantage of Moscow in the eyes of the common Ukrainian people was the disappearance from the Ukrainian land, subject to the Russian Tsar, of the Polish lords and their serfdom.

RESULTS OF THE WAR FOR UKRAINE

The war between Russia and the Commonwealth drained the resources of both countries. Finally, the Poles entered into lengthy negotiations. They ended on January 30, 1667 with the Andrusovo truce, concluded for 13.5 years. Negotiations from the Russian side were successfully conducted by Ordin-Nashchokin. Russia received Smolensk and all Ukrainian lands on the left east coast Dnieper. Kyiv, standing on the right bank of the Dnieper, was given to Russia temporarily, for 2 years. However, the Muscovite kingdom did not return Kyiv in due time, but secured it for itself. Zaporozhye was under the joint control of Moscow and the Commonwealth, but Moscow's influence was stronger there.

On January 18, 1654, a meeting of representatives was held in Pereyaslav Ukrainian Cossacks led by Hetman Bogdan Khmelnytsky. On this day, the Cossacks decided to unite the territories of the Zaporizhian Army with the Russian kingdom and swear allegiance to the king.

The armed struggle of the Ukrainian people against the power of the Polish gentry in 1648-1654 resulted in a broad liberation war led by hetman Bogdan Khmelnytsky. Then, as military allies, he considered the Ottoman Empire, the Crimean Khanate, the Commonwealth, Moscow state.

On October 1, 1653, the Zemsky Sobor in Moscow decided to accept the Zaporizhzhya Army "under the high sovereign's hand." For the legal registration of this act, the embassy of a Russian diplomat left for Ukraine. Already at the beginning of 1654, in Pereyaslav, it was decided that the Hetmanate would pass under the protectorate of the Russian kingdom, while maintaining the basic rights and liberties of the Zaporizhian Army.

In Pereyaslav itself, only 284 people swore allegiance to the Moscow sovereign. Despite the fact that representatives of the embassy of the Moscow kingdom eventually visited 117 cities and towns of Ukraine, where, according to their data, 127.5 thousand people swore allegiance to the king, there was a large-scale opposition to the agreement. Refused to swear allegiance to Moscow Bratslav, Poltava, Uman and Kropivyansky Cossack regiments, Colonel Ivan Bohun, part of the townspeople of Kyiv, Pereyaslav, Chernobyl. There was no unanimity about the union with Moscow in the church hierarchy of the then Ukraine.

What did the unification with the Russian kingdom give the Zaporozhian Host, was this event out of the ordinary, and how many times did the Ukrainians actually fight the Russians? 362nd anniversary of the Pereyaslav Rada on air Radio Krym.Realii discussed with a historian, an employee of the Institute of National Memory of Ukraine Vasily Pavlov.

– What is the Pereyaslav Rada really? How accurate is our information?

- In fact, this is a set real facts and facts that have turned into myths. The Pereyaslav Rada is a rather ordinary event, which in fact was quite a lot both before and after. It was the date of January 18, 1654 that became canonical, but for the Ukrainian historical science it is unremarkable, because Bogdan Khmelnitsky fought from 1648 to 1657. The events of January-March 1654 are just one of the episodes of that war. As for the allies, in addition to those named, Sweden, Wallachia, and Transylvania should also be mentioned - this is modern Hungary. That is, the Pereyaslav Rada was an important, but not a single event, although it entailed a whole chain of events.

– Why, then, did it become such an important historical point for Soviet historiography? In Soviet times, they taught this: Ukrainians have always dreamed of living together with Russians, and the main goal of the liberation war of Bogdan Khmelnytsky was reunification with the fraternal Russian people.

- Bogdan Khmelnitsky never set such a goal. He wanted to create public education in which it would be possible to establish the supremacy of the Cossacks as a social group with their own rights and obligations. Relations with the Moscow kingdom for the Cossacks were no less dramatic than with the same Commonwealth. These are constant border wars in the area of ​​the Seversky Donets, conflicts in the area of ​​Kursk and Belgorod serif lines. We should not forget the campaigns led by the hetman Sagaidachny in 1617-1618, when the suburbs of Moscow were captured by the Ukrainian Cossacks, when they, together with the Poles, stood in front of the gates of the Kremlin.

– Interestingly, after the 1917 revolution, the colonial past of tsarist Russia was perceived negatively. From the standpoint of Marxism, the Pereyaslav Rada was an act of colonial conquest. And only then did the theory of the lesser evil appear, which said that it was better to subordinate the Slavic peoples to tsarist Russia than to other colonizers. In 1954, the 300th anniversary of the Pereyaslav Rada was already celebrated with pomp, and, as we understand, many myths arose around it. One of them said that the Ukrainians fought with anyone, but not with the Russians.

- This is one of the most mythologized events, no matter how you look at it: from the side of Ukrainians - with a "minus" sign, from the side of Russians - with a "plus" sign. The Ukrainians fought with the Russians both before and after the Pereyaslav Rada - just like with the Poles, like with the Crimean Tatars. It was a state of permanent peace flowing into permanent war. The only caveat: I would not use the terms "Russians" and "Ukrainians" in the modern sense here. Firstly, the nations have not yet been formed, and secondly, the Cossacks who participated in the conflicts are only a social stratum. On the part of the Moscow State, service children, boyar children, fought. There were also border conflicts between the Zaporizhian Nizov Army and the Don Cossacks. The territory of modern Donbass was a zone of constant conflicts over land, trade routes and so on. For example, the aforementioned Colonel Ivan Bogun, who refused to swear allegiance to the Muscovite state, was one of the regular participants in the raids on the border areas of modern Kursk and Belgorod regions.

- Was the fact that not everyone swore allegiance to Moscow an ordinary phenomenon or something out of the ordinary?

- The concept of a collective oath did not exist at all then, there was only a personal oath. Even in the inner circle of Bohdan Khmelnitsky, not everyone swore allegiance to the Muscovite state. The arguments against this oath were no different from the arguments against the oath to the Polish king - this is the loss of self-government, the loss of independence. The same Ivan Bohun was dissatisfied with the fact that the Moscow governors came - for him they were no different from the Polish ones.

- Those lands on which people did not swear allegiance to Moscow continued to be considered independent?

– Here we move on to the now beloved term “hybrid warfare”. Everything is very difficult. The Muscovites are trying to win over the same Ivan Bohun to their side, the Poles are trying to manipulate him. At the same time, the Moscow regiments enter the territories of the Dnieper and Hetman regions and, together with the Cossack troops, enter the territory of the Commonwealth. During 1654-1655, the Cossacks and Muscovites will fight together against the Poles. There will be resounding victories and crushing defeats. Finally, this union will be broken in 1656, when the Moscow prince Alexei Mikhailovich signs the Treaty of Vilna with the Commonwealth. The Cossacks will consider themselves betrayed and from that moment on they will begin to fight the Poles themselves and more and more conflict with the Muscovites. Already after the death of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, under Ivan Vyhovsky, this conflict will result in an absolutely open war.

- But the Muscovite state still helped the Cossacks since 1648?

– It is very difficult to answer this question unambiguously. Documents from the Cossack archives were destroyed several times, so we cannot confirm or deny something based on our data. We have to use data or Turkish, or Polish, or Moscow. As such, we can see the military assistance of the Muscovites only once - in the battle of Berestechko. During archaeological sites there they found elements of equipment of the regular Moscow army - archers and Don Cossacks. But in the same way, German mercenaries and Crimean Tatars also participated in the battle.

- How possible were the options for other military-political alliances of Bogdan Khmelnitsky?

- If you follow the chronology, then back in 1648 he entered into an alliance with the Crimean Khanate. Bohdan Khmelnytsky at that time receives tremendous help - about 40 thousand high-class cavalry. In 1649, the Zborovsky peace treaty was concluded with the Poles, although the parties violated it from time to time. Again "hybrid war". Since 1650, Bogdan Khmelnitsky has been trying to negotiate with Wallachia - modern Moldova, since 1649 - with Ottoman Empire. In 1653, negotiations began with Transylvania, from 1655 with Sweden. This, mind you, is already after the Pereyaslav Rada. Bogdan Khmelnitsky as a diplomat was constantly on the move, his policy was multi-vector.

- That is, today we only remember Pereyaslav Rada just because Ukraine was under the control of Muscovy for more than 300 years, and then Russia?

- I would single out here not even the Pereyaslav Rada, but the visit of the Ukrainian Cossack delegation to Moscow in March 1654, when the parties signed the so-called March Articles. It was they who became the document that determined the position of the Ukrainian lands within the Muscovite state, or the Russian kingdom. In the future, the March articles will be rewritten a huge number of times.

- Did Ukraine just join, became a vassal or a full-fledged ally?

- In my opinion, it was an agreement on a military-political protectorate. “I took it under the sovereign’s high hand” is a very clear diplomatic expression. It did not mean that the Ukrainian lands automatically became part of the Muscovite state and became its property. It was only about the sphere of influence of Moscow. All subsequent adjustments to the March articles will reduce the role of Ukrainian hetmans, but not abolish them as such. Just like we have Minsk-1 and Minsk-2 regarding the Donbass, according to the St. Petersburg researcher Tatyana Yakovleva, was Pereyaslav-1 Bohdan Khmelnitsky and Pereyaslav-2, already signed by Yuri Khmelnitsky on completely different conditions. In the future, there will be Korsun articles by Ivan Vygovsky, Moscow articles by Ivan Bryukhovetsky, Glukhov articles by Demyan Mnogohrishny, and so on.

- In these articles, the rights of Ukrainians were steadily narrowed?

Yes, but not canceled at all. Little is said about this, but, for example, until 1750 there was a state border between the Zaporozhian Host and the Moscow state, and then Russian Empire. Customs worked, collected duties.

- Could the Zaporizhzhya Army even get out from under this intrusive protectorate? How tough were the conditions?

- Let's put it this way: it had no right to have diplomatic relations with the Commonwealth, with the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate. All the rest were not mentioned there, because the Muscovite state simply did not consider other players as rivals. Therefore, Bogdan Khmelnitsky was able to negotiate with Sweden and Transylvania without formally violating the March Articles.

- I understand that there is no subjunctive mood in history, but nevertheless: could events have developed differently if Bohdan Khmelnitsky had not made an alliance with Moscow?

- Already in 1654, the Zaporizhzhya Army would have had a pretty hard time. The Cossack army then could not alone resist the Polish.

- But after all, for 6 whole years, since 1648, the Cossacks resisted the Poles quite successfully. And they took Lublin, and they were near Lvov. How did it happen?

– It must be understood that this campaign was not uniform. Every year we clearly see spring and winter hikes. For the Cossacks, February-March were the most difficult. The Poles struck blows in February-March 1649, and in the same period of 1651, and in 1653. Exactly the same blow Bogdan Khmelnitsky expected in 1654. These were massive punitive expeditions of the Poles in the border areas. Their main task was to destroy the military forces of the Cossacks and intimidate the civilian population. The Cossacks were very afraid not to hold this line again. Although in December 1653 a peace treaty was even signed with the Poles, they did not really believe in it. In addition, then relations with the Crimean Khanate began to deteriorate significantly. Most likely, the territories of the Zaporozhye Host simply lost their economic attractiveness due to constant wars.

- Why did the Moscow army fight side by side with the Cossacks and against the Poles?

- This war will last for 13 years, until 1667. For the Muscovite state, this was one of the most serious and long-playing wars. There was no talk of any interests of the Cossacks. Moscow solved its problems and fought not only on the territory of modern Ukraine, but also on the territory of modern Belarus. As a result, in 1667, Ukraine will be divided in half along the Dnieper: the Right Bank will go to the Commonwealth, the Left Bank - to the Muscovite state. In fact, the Pereyaslav agreements of 1654 will no longer be valid. This is their global result: Ukraine will gradually lose its independence, and the Moscow factor will appear in its internal life for a long time.

- More than 100 years after the Pereyaslav Rada, the Zaporozhian Sich will be destroyed, the Commonwealth will be divided, and Russian troops will occupy Crimean peninsula. Who in the end received the greatest benefit, draw your own conclusions.