The role of Bogdan Khmelnytsky in the liberation movement. Liberation War of Bohdan Khmelnytsky. Ready-made works on a similar topic

Commonwealth. The population was subjected to double oppression: feudal and national-religious.

Remark 1

In $1596$ was adopted Union of Brest which led to the creation of the Russian Uniate Church. Those who joined the union united with the Catholic Church, preserving the rites according to the Greek Orthodox model.

Polish magnates forcibly annexed vast lands, becoming owners of huge latifundia. Also, Russian nobles who converted to Catholicism and were loyal to the Polish-Lithuanian authorities, such as the Vishnevetskys, Ostrogskys, and others, became large landowners. At the same time, the growth of extortions and various abuses from the townspeople and peasants increases.

The Cossacks were also not happy with their position. For protecting borders and repelling threats, they were put on a special list - registry. The registry was supposed to reward. However, the number of Cossacks in the Zaporozhian Sich was constantly growing, but the register did not change. This led to riots at the beginning of the 17th century in ordinary Cossacks against the pro-Polish hetmans.

Ready-made works on a similar topic

The immediate cause that led to the uprising of Khmelnytsky was another Polish lawlessness. Daniil Chaplinsky, the Polish captain and elder of the city of Chigirin took away the estate, kidnapped his beloved and killed the son of Bohdan Khmelnitsky, a registered Cossack, to death.

move

Bohdan Khmelnytsky was born in $1596$ and was of rather noble origin. He received a good European education, but did not convert to Catholicism. Participated in the Polish-Turkish war and was taken prisoner. Bogdan Khmelnitsky was on good terms with the king Vladislav IV.

Who hated the Khmelnytsky underage Daniil Chaplinsky attacked his farm Subotov, kidnapped his beloved Gehlen and married her. The ten-year-old son was severely beaten and died. Khmelnytsky's appeal to the authorities and even to the king personally did not help, on the contrary, he was imprisoned on charges of rebellion.

Not having achieved retribution according to the law, Khmelnitsky decided to act independently. In February $1648$ a group of Cossacks on the island Tomakovka decided to go to the Sich, where she defeated the Polish garrison.

Negotiations were held with the Crimean Khan, as a result of which the Khan did not declare war on Poland, but provided a detachment.

Bohdan Khmelnytsky was elected hetman of the Zaporizhian Army.

In May $1648$, the Cossacks defeated the army of the crown hetman Potocki in the battle near Yellow Waters and at Korsun. The victory provided an influx of participants, the war became liberation. For $1648$ the Poles were expelled from Left-bank Ukraine, as well as Kyiv, Podolsk and Bratslav provinces.

$5$ August $1649$ Khmelnitsky defeated the king at Zborov. was concluded Zboriv Treaty: formed autonomy - Hetmanate with its capital in Chyhyryn, with the only ruler in the person of the elected hetman and the supreme body - the All-Cossack Rada; the register was brought up to $40 thousand.

At the same time, uprisings were going on in Belarus, but much weaker. Khmelnitsky sent Cossacks to help.

From the beginning of the uprising, Khmelnitsky repeatedly asked the Russian Tsar to accept the Cossacks as citizenship, but he evaded an answer.

In June $1651$ Crimean Tatars in the battle near Berestechko, the Cossacks were betrayed, as a result they were defeated. By Treaty of Bila Tserkva the registry has been greatly reduced.

Finally, in the fall of $1653, the Zemsky Sobor approved the admission of Ukraine to Russia. In winter $1654$

Remark 2

The war with the Commonwealth began. In $1654$, Smolensk was occupied, as well as $33$ of Belarusian cities (including Polotsk, Vitebsk, Mogilev).

Sweden seized the moment and captured most of Poland, including Warsaw. The strengthening of Sweden did not suit Russia, so a truce was signed with the Commonwealth in $1656$, while Bohdan Khmelnitsky died in Chyhyryn from a stroke in $1657$.

Results

The war between Russia and the Commonwealth resumed in $1658$ and lasted until the conclusion of $1667$ in January. Andrusovo truce . According to it, the inclusion of Left-Bank Ukraine in Russia, the return of Smolensk was recognized. Then the eternal peace of $1686$ secured Kyiv for Russia. These achievements were made thanks to the dedication of Bogdan Khmelnytsky.

By the time of the uprising of Bogdan (or Zinovy) Khmelnitsky in the territory of Southwestern Russia, Polish influence had, in fact, turned into a pronounced feudal exploitation. Great dissatisfaction was caused by the signing and operation of the Brest Union, according to which the Ukrainian Church came under the jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic Church. Representatives of the nobility and magnates owned huge territories, the Russian nobles who became Polonized and converted to Catholicism did not lag behind them. For example, the Vyshnevetsky princes completely owned the entire Poltava region. The memoirs of contemporaries say that the local population "had fewer rights than galley slaves."

Beginning in 1625, they periodically flared up, which were quickly suppressed and did not give any noticeable results.

The beginning of the riot

Despite the fact that Bogdan Khmelnitsky was in the position of the Chigirinsky centurion, and he had to experience the boundless terror of the Polish lords.
The details of the incident are interpreted differently in the sources. In particular, information differs about the fate of one of his sons, who was flogged half to death or killed at the age of 10. It is known that the Subbotinsky estate, which Khmelnitsky owned, was ruined and taken away by the elder's assistants. The Polish woman, with whom the Chigirinsky centurion lived after the death of his wife, was taken away in an unknown direction. The Polish court refused to satisfy the centurion's claim on the pretext that the documents for the Subbotinsky estate were not properly executed, and the woman was not his married wife.
To restore justice, Khmelnitsky also met with the king, whom he knew, but he, not wanting to come into conflict with the influential gentry, did not take any action himself. In many historical books and even scientific articles it is mentioned that in response to Khmelnitsky's claims, the king replied: "You have your saber." One way or another, but after that the Chigirinsky centurion went to Zaporozhye.

Hetman Khmelnytsky

Bogdan Khmelnitsky belonged to a respected Cossack family, he received an excellent education and, according to historians, during his studies he demonstrated outstanding talents. Along with this, he was an excellent warrior and fought at the beginning of his military career together with his father. In one of the battles, his father was killed, and Bogdan was captured, from which he did not manage to get out immediately.
The uprising demonstrated not only Khmelnytsky's patriotism and his outstanding gift as a military leader, but also excellent organizational skills. Already on the way to Zaporozhye, he managed to create a small detachment, which, however, managed to defeat several medium-sized Polish military formations.

The course of the uprising and the most striking battles

One of the most acute problems in organizing the Khmelnytsky uprising was the lack of good cavalry at his disposal. Proclaimed hetman in Zaporozhye, Khmelnytsky in this respect counted on attracting the Tatars to his side. Having won Khan Islam-Giray over to his side under the patronage of familiar Tatar murzas, Khmelnitsky accomplished what his predecessors only dreamed of. However, the Tatars at that time had their own reasons to join fighting- Poland stopped paying them the agreed tribute. The beginning of the uprising dates back to January 1648.
The main battles of the first stage of the uprising can be considered the battles at Zhovti Vody and the Battle of Korsun. The main opponents of the proclaimed hetman were Stefan Potocki and Martyn Kalinovsky. Khmelnytsky ruthlessly defeated the Polish army near Zhovti Vody, deceiving the hopes of the commanders for the Kodak castle, which was a good fortification on the way of the Cossacks. The hetman and his army simply bypassed the fortress, wasting no time and incurring no losses.
The battle of Korsun became an even more difficult defeat for the Poles - not only the twenty-thousandth army was destroyed, but also its commanders were captured, who were later handed over to the Tatars for help and support.

The situation in the territory where the uprising took place periodically changed. In 1648, Vladislav IV, who was tolerant and loyal to the Cossacks, died. Along with this, independent pockets of rebellion broke out, more and more new forces joined the army of Khmelnitsky. Driven to extremes, the peasants and non-registered Cossacks were hardened and sometimes staged a real massacre. The Jews who lived in this area were especially affected. Khmelnitsky, fearing that he would not be able to control the rebellious force that had escaped to freedom, turned to Russia for protection. An additional problem was the internal discord and contempt of the Cossacks for the peasants.
The result of the first stage of the uprising was negotiations during the siege of Lvov and Zamostye. In order to give rest to the army that was tired and suffering from the plague, the hetman lifted the siege, taking an indemnity.
The second stage coincided with the end of the 30 Years' War. In addition, the Crimean Khan, who received gifts from the new king, Jan Casimir, refused to fight further and demanded a peace.
Jan Kazimierz was not going to satisfy Khmelnitsky's demands, but the result of the negotiations was the signing of peace on compromise terms, including:

the formation of an autonomous Hetmanate with an elected hetman and the supreme authority of the All-Cossack Rada,
formation of a register of 40 thousand sabers,
amnesty for the participants of the rebellion,
prohibition of Jews to stay on the territory of the autonomy.

Despite the careful preparation of the third stage, the battles during this period (since January 1651) went on with varying success. The defeat in the Battle of Berestets led to the need to sign the unfavorable Bila Tserkva peace. After the victory at Batog came the defeat at Zhvanets.
The end was put in place when, after Khmelnytsky's appeal for a protectorate in Moscow, the Zemsky Sobor decided to grant the hetman's request. At the Pereyaslav Rada on January 8, 1654, the Cossacks swore an oath to the Russian sovereign and passed under his hand with all possessions.
The uprising of Khmelnytsky was one of the few in history that were crowned with success. The long-awaited freedom from Polish oppression was obtained.

Commonwealth. The population was subjected to double oppression: feudal and national-religious.

Remark 1

Ready-made works on a similar topic

Coursework 440 rubles.
abstract Rebellion of Bogdan Khmelnytsky 260 rub.
Test Rebellion of Bogdan Khmelnytsky 200 rub.

move

Negotiations were held with the Crimean Khan, as a result of which the Khan did not declare war on Poland, but provided a detachment.

Bohdan Khmelnytsky was elected hetman of the Zaporizhian Army.

At the same time, uprisings were going on in Belarus, but much weaker. Khmelnitsky sent Cossacks to help.

From the beginning of the uprising, Khmelnitsky repeatedly asked the Russian Tsar to accept the Cossacks as citizenship, but he evaded an answer.

In June $1651$, the Crimean Tatars betrayed the Cossacks in the battle near Berestechko, as a result they were defeated. By Treaty of Bila Tserkva the registry has been greatly reduced.

Finally, in the fall of $1653, the Zemsky Sobor approved the admission of Ukraine to Russia. In winter $1654$

Remark 2

The war with the Commonwealth began. In $1654$, Smolensk was occupied, as well as $33$ of Belarusian cities (including Polotsk, Vitebsk, Mogilev).

Results

The war between Russia and the Commonwealth resumed in $1658$ and lasted until the conclusion of $1667$ in January. Andrusovo truce. According to it, the inclusion of Left-Bank Ukraine in Russia, the return of Smolensk was recognized. Then the eternal peace of $1686$ secured Kyiv for Russia. These achievements were made thanks to the dedication of Bogdan Khmelnytsky.

The unbearable social, religious and national conditions in which the population of Ukraine-Rus was during the period of the “golden rest” (1638-48) created all the prerequisites for an outbreak of popular anger and the beginning of a liberation struggle.

She did not keep herself waiting long. The immediate cause was the violence of representatives of the Polish administration over one registered Cossack - Chigirinsky centurion Bogdan Khmelnitsky.

In the absence of Bohdan Khmelnitsky, a Polish official, the underage Chigirinsky, Chaplinsky, attacked his farm Subbotovo, robbed him, took away his wife (according to some sources, she was not the legal wife, but the concubine of the widower Khmelnitsky) and ordered his servants to flog his young son, after which the boy died a few days later.

Such attacks were a common occurrence in the days of the "golden rest" and, as a rule, took place with complete impunity for Catholic Poles. Chaplinsky's attack also went unpunished. All Khmelnitsky's attempts to restore his rights and punish the rapist not only ended in failure, but Khmelnitsky himself was imprisoned by the Polish authorities.

Thanks to the intercession of influential friends from the foreman of the registered Cossacks, Khmelynitsky was released on bail, but he no longer returned to his duties as a centurion Chigirinsky, and with several "like-minded people" went "to the bottom." "Nizom" then called the center of the fugitives who did not obey the Poles, the Cossacks and Cossacks, located on the island of Butsky, lower along the Dnieper than the official Zaporozhian Sich, which at that time was completely under Polish control.

Having reached the "Niz", Khmelnitsky announced that he was starting a fight "with the gentry autocracy" and, according to a contemporary, "everything that is only alive" began to flock to him.

Biography of Khmelnitsky

Before proceeding to a description of further events, it is necessary to say a few words about Bohdan Khmelnitsky himself, who led the uprising and directed the events.

There are many legends, thoughts and tales about Bogdan Khmelnitsky, but accurate biographical data about this outstanding son of Ukraine are very scarce.

It is known with certainty that he comes from a minor Ukrainian Orthodox gentry, since he had his own family coat of arms, which only the gentry had. His father, Mikhail Khmelnitsky, served with the wealthy Polish gentry magnate Zholkevsky, and then with his son-in-law Danilovsky, with whose detachment he took part in the war between Poland and Turkey and died in the battle of Tsetsora in Moldova (in 1620). Together with him was his son Bogdan-Zinovy, who was captured and only two years later was redeemed by his mother from Turkish captivity.

Khmelnitsky received a good education for his time. He studied at one of the Jesuit schools. Which one exactly is unknown. Most likely, in Lvov, this statement is based on data preserved in the archives that the Poles, during negotiations with Khmelnitsky, included in the embassy the Lvov priest-Jesuit Mokrisky, who, as the chronicle says, at one time taught Khmelnitsky "poetics and rhetoric." Rhetoric was taught in the 8th grade of the Jesuit colleges. Consequently, Khmelnytsky completed a full eight-year college course. Further education in the college was already purely theological, and people who did not choose a spiritual career usually completed their education in "rhetoric", that is, in the 8th grade. For that time, this education was not small. Khmelnitsky spoke Tatar and Turkish which he learned while in captivity in Constantinople. In addition, Polish and Latin, which was taught at the college.

Khmelnytsky spoke and wrote in Russian, that is, in the then “bookish language” (common for Russians and for Ukrainians, with known, however, dialectical deviations), as can be seen from his surviving letters.

What positions did Khmelnitsky hold in Cossack army at the beginning of his career - is unknown. It is also unknown whether he took part in the uprisings of the 1920s and 1930s, although legends attribute him to active participation in these uprisings.

For the first time we meet the name of Khmelnitsky among the four ambassadors to the king after the suppression of the uprising in 1638. It must be assumed that he occupied a prominent position (according to some data of a military clerk), once he got to the embassy to the king. Somewhat later, there is information about his appointment as a centurion Chigirinsky. The fact that Khmelnytsky was appointed to this position by the Poles, and not chosen by the Cossacks, indicates that the Poles considered him loyal and casts doubt on the claims of the legend about his active participation in previous uprisings. If this really happened, then the Poles, of course, would have known about it and would not have agreed to his appointment.

Khmelnitsky was married to the sister of the Nizhyn Colonel Somka - Anna and had several children. Accurate information is about three sons and two daughters. Of the sons, one died from a beating by Chaplinsky, the second (eldest), Timothy was killed in battle, and the third, Yuri, after the death of Khmelnitsky was proclaimed hetman.

By the time of the uprising, Khmelnytsky was a widower and, kidnapped by Chaplinsky, his wife (and according to some sources, a cohabitant) was his second wife and stepmother of his children from his first wife.

The immediate reason for the rise of the Khmelnitsky uprising was, as indicated above, the violence committed against Khmelnitsky and left unpunished. But the reasons lay, of course, not in a personal insult and violence against Khmelnitsky, but in the violence, insults and humiliations that Ukrina-Rus experienced as a result of the social, religious and national oppression of the Commonwealth.

In the foregoing it has been described what exactly these oppressions consisted of, and how they increased all the time, making life unbearable, and therefore there is no need to repeat them.

Motives for the uprising

It is hardly necessary to engage in an analysis of which particular motives were predominant in the uprising: social, religious or national. Some historians stick out the social motive, believing that all the rest are subordinate to it; others, on the contrary, put the national question at the forefront, while still others, finally, consider the religious question to be the main motive for the uprising. In fact, it is most likely that all three causes acted simultaneously, being mutually connected and difficult to separate from one another.

Social oppression was experienced by the entire population, except for the feudal magnate Orthodox elite (such as Kisil, Prince Chetvertinsky), the highest hierarchs Orthodox Church and, in part, the Orthodox nobility and foremen of the registered Cossacks.

Everyone suffered from religious oppression and humiliation, not excluding the Orthodox magnates. There is a known case when Prince Ostrozhsky, who victoriously commanded the Polish army in the war with Moscow, was forced to endure humiliation during the celebration of victory only because he was Orthodox.

And, finally, national inequality, which the Poles have always emphasized in every possible way, equally offended all non-Poles, from a serf to a magnate or an Orthodox bishop.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the call of Bohdan Khmelnytsky to free himself from Polish violence found a warm response among the entire population of Ukraine-Rus.

Not all segments of the population understood this liberation in the same way: for the magnates and the gentry, it ended in a complete equation with the Poles magnates and the gentry; for part of the registered Cossacks, foremen and wealthy, the release ended in an equation with the gentry, with the preservation of both the first and second cases of social order; and only for the peasantry, the poor Cossacks and the philistinism, the liquidation of the existing social system was inextricably linked with liberation.

Depending on this, a conciliatory, compromise mood existed in a certain part of the population of Ukraine-Rus, which more than once led to capitulation during previous uprisings.

Purpose of the uprising

What was the ultimate goal of the uprising? Historians differ on this issue. The task was quite definite: to be released. What's next for liberation? Some believe that the ultimate goal of the uprising was to create a completely independent state; others believe that the goal of the leaders of the uprising was to create an autonomous unit within the borders of the Commonwealth, following the example of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania; still others, finally, are of the opinion that the ultimate goal was the creation of an autonomous federal unit with its entry into the Muscovite state.

The option of creating an independent state, which Grushevsky and his school adhere to, does not stand up to any criticism, because from the handwritten letters of Khmelnitsky preserved in the Moscow archives it is clear that already in the first months of the uprising, after brilliant victories over the Poles, Khmelnitsky asked Moscow not only for help, but also consent to the reunification of Ukraine with Moscow. This request for reunification is repeated in the future, both in Khmelnitsky's letters and in numerous documents of that time.

The second option: the creation of a Russian principality, following the example of Lithuania, without a break with Poland, undoubtedly had its supporters, but only among the upper strata of society - the ruling classes. The example of the unlimited freedom of the Polish gentry attracted not only the magnates and the gentry, but also part of the foreman of the registered Cossacks, who dreamed of "nobility", that is, to receive the rights of the gentry. Later, the desire of this group was realized in the so-called "Gadiach Treaty" (1658), according to which unsuccessful attempts to create a "Russian Principality" within the Commonwealth.

And, finally, the third option is reunification with Moscow with the preservation of broad autonomy or federation, which, as a result of the uprising, was carried out, although not completely.

This last option is not only historically accurate, but it was also logically inevitable, given both the foreign political situation and the mood of the masses. Having such neighbors as aggressive Turkey, which was then at the zenith of its power, and no less aggressive Poland - at that time one of the strongest states in Europe - Ukraine had no chance to withstand the struggle alone with them, which would have been inevitable if a separate state was created. . Khmelnitsky, regardless of his personal sympathies, about which there are different opinions, of course, understood this very well. He also knew the inclination of the broad masses of the people towards the same faith and consanguineous Moscow. And it is natural that he chose the path of reunification with Moscow.

The international situation at that time was extremely complex and stormy: in England there was a revolution, in France - internal turmoil, the so-called "Fronde"; Germany and central Europe were exhausted and exhausted thirty years' war. Moscow, shortly before the outbreak of the uprising, concluded with Poland an unfavorable "eternal peace" for itself. Count on the violation of this peace and the entry of Moscow into new war, which would have been inevitable if Moscow had actively taken the side of the rebellious Polish colony - Ukraine, was difficult.

Nevertheless, Khmelnitsky started the war: the patience of the people was exhausted. Organizing for a campaign on the "volost" (the populated part of Ukraine) the people who arrived to him, Khmelnitsky sent an embassy to the Crimean Khan with a request for help. It was a good time to ask. Crimea was dissatisfied with Poland, as she carelessly paid the annual "gift" with which she paid off the raids; and besides, due to the lack of crops and the loss of livestock, the Tatars were very inclined to replenish their shortcomings by robbery during the war. Khan agreed to help Khmelnitsky and sent at his disposal a detachment of 4,000 people under the command of Tugai Bey.

Khmelnitsky needed Tatar help at first, and he was forced to go for it, although he knew perfectly well that nothing would keep the Tatars from robberies and violence during the campaign. Khmelnytsky even had to send his son Timothy to the Khan as a hostage, because without this, Khan Islam Giray III did not want to send his army. In addition, the presence of the Khan's troops at Khmelnitsky guaranteed him against the possibility of bribery of the Tatars by Poland and a blow to the rear.

By the end of April 1648, Khmelnitsky already had at his disposal 10,000 troops (including the Tatars), with whom he was preparing to move to the “volost”, rejecting all attempts at reconciliation that the Poles made to him.

First of all, he expelled the Polish detachment from Zaporozhye, and the Cossacks proclaimed him hetman and joined his army.

The news of the uprising and the capture of Zaporozhye by the rebels alarmed the Polish administration and they decided to nip the uprising in the bud. Pretending that they want to make peace with Khmelnitsky and promising him mountains of gold, the Poles quickly gathered their forces to fight him. Meanwhile, all of Ukraine, having responded to the calls of Khmelnytsky, was preparing for a fight... The Polish hetman Potocki wrote to the king: would not prepare attempts on the life and property of their lords and owners "...

The crown hetman N. Pototsky, without waiting for the concentration of all his forces, sent a vanguard of 4,000 under the command of his son Stephen, and ordered the registered Cossacks to sail down the Dnieper, in the Kodak region, to meet with the Polish avant-garde and move together to Zaporozhye. The main Polish forces, under the command of the crown hetman himself and his assistant, the crown hetman Kalinovsky, slowly advanced behind the vanguard.

Yellow Waters

Khmelnitsky did not wait for the connection of all Polish forces. He went out to meet them and on April 19 attacked the advanced Polish units. The Poles could not stand the battle, retreated and built a fortified camp in the tract Zhovti Vody in order to expect reinforcements from the registered Cossacks sailing along the Dnieper to join them. But the Cossacks rebelled, killed their own, loyal to the Poles, foreman: General Yesaul Barabash, Colonel Karaimovich and others, and, having chosen Khmelnitsky's friend Filon Jalali as their hetman, joined not the Poles, but Khmelnitsky and took part in the battle that began, which ended in complete defeat of the Poles. Stefan Potocki and the commissar of registered Cossacks Shemberg, who was with him, were captured. Only one soldier survived from the entire Polish army, who managed to escape and bring the crown hetman Potocki in Cherkassy news of the defeat at Zhovti Vody and the capture of his son.

Potocki decided to "punish the rebels approximately" and, not doubting victory, moved towards Khmelnitsky, whose army (about 15,000 Cossacks and 4,000 Tatars) met in the Gorokhovaya Dubrava tract near Korsun.

Korsun

Thanks to the military talent of Khmelnitsky and the excellent reconnaissance of the rebels, who sympathized with the population, the Poles were forced to take the fight in unfavorable positions, and the Cossacks cut the possible retreat of the Poles in advance and made them impassable: they dug up deep ditches, filled up with cut down trees, dammed the river. As a result, in the battle of May 16, the Cossacks, as well as near Zhovti Vody, completely defeated the Poles and captured the Crown Hetman Potocki and his deputy, the Polish Hetman Kalinovsky. Only a single participant in the Battle of Korsun - the Poles managed to escape. All Polish artillery and huge carts went to the Cossacks as military booty, while the Cossacks gave the captured Polish hetmans to the Tatars, who expected to receive a rich ransom for them.

The news of the two defeats of the Poles quickly spread throughout Ukraine and, as the gentry Bankovsky writes in his memoirs, “not a single gentry remained on his estate in the Dnieper region.” Peasants and philistines began to rush in masses to Khmelnitsky, or, forming partisan detachments, to capture cities and castles with Polish garrisons.

The Lithuanian Chancellor Radziwill describes the situation in Ukraine at the beginning of the summer of 1648 as follows: “not only the Cossacks revolted, but all our subjects in Russia stuck to them and increased the Cossack troops to 70 thousand, and the further, the more they arrive Russian claps "...

Cleansing the Left Bank

The largest magnate of the Left Bank, Vishnevetsky, having learned about the uprising of Khmelnitsky, gathered a large army to move to help Pototsky pacify the uprising. But, approaching the Dnieper, he found all the pores destroyed and, not daring to linger on the Dnieper to cross his army, he moved north, to the Chernihiv region, and only north of Lyubech he managed to cross the Dnieper and lead his army to Volyn, where he arrived after the defeat under Zhovtiye Vody and Korsun. His residence, Lubny, was captured by the rebels, who slaughtered all the Catholics and Jews who were there, who did not manage to leave in time with Vishnevetsky.

About the retreat of Vishnevetsky from the Left Bank, where, being cut off from Poland by the Dnieper, he felt, according to the memoirs of a contemporary, “like in a cage”, many documents have been preserved, from which it is clear that this was not only a retreat of the troops, but also the evacuation of the entire Left Bank. Everything that in one way or another was connected with Poland and its social system was saved from the rebels and left with Vishnevetsky: the gentry, Jewish tenants, Catholics, Uniates. They knew that if only they fell into the hands of the rebels, then they would not be spared.

Rabbi Hannover, a contemporary of the events, describes in great detail, in colorful biblical style, this “exodus” of Jews from the Left Bank together with the Poles, who treated the Jews very well and protected and protected them in every possible way so that they would not fall into the hands of the Cossacks.

About the fate of those who did not have time to join Vishnevetsky, Hannover writes: “many communities that lay beyond the Dnieper, near the places of war, like Pereyaslav, Baryshevka, Piryatin, Lubny, Lokhvitsa, did not have time to escape and were destroyed in the name of God and died among terrible and bitter torments. Some have been flayed and their bodies thrown out to be eaten by dogs; others had their arms and legs cut off, and the bodies were thrown on the road and wagons passed through them and trampled on by their horses ...

The Poles were treated the same way, especially with the priests. Thousands of Jewish souls were killed on the Zadneprovya"...

The information given by Hannover fully coincides with the descriptions of events by other contemporaries, who also give the number of deaths. Grushevsky in his book "Khmelnychchyna in Rozkviti" speaks of two thousand Jews killed in Chernigov, 800 in Gomel, several hundred in Sosnitsa, Baturin, Nosovka and in other cities and towns. Grushevsky’s description of how these pogroms were carried out also survives: “some were cut down, others were ordered to dig holes, and then Jewish wives and children were thrown there and covered with earth, and then the Jews were given muskets and ordered to kill others”...

As a result of this spontaneous pogrom, on the Left Bank in a few weeks in the summer of 1648, all Poles, Jews, Catholics, as well as those from the few Orthodox gentry who sympathized with the Poles and collaborated with them, disappeared.

And the people composed a song that has survived until recently:

“There is no better yak in Ukraine
Nema Lyakh, Nema Pan, Nema Yid
There is no damned union”...

Of the Orthodox gentry, only those survived who joined the uprising, forgetting (albeit temporarily) about their estates and rights over the “claps”, or those who fled and took refuge in Kyiv, the only one of the cities of the Dnieper region, where at that time the power of the king.

One of these, who took refuge in Kyiv, an Orthodox gentry and an ardent supporter of Poland, Yerlich, left most interesting descriptions events of that time. In particular, he describes in detail the uprising of the inhabitants of Kyiv, during which everything that was somehow related to Poland was cut out in Kyiv and churches and Catholic monasteries were destroyed. Only those who hid in Orthodox monasteries or were part of the Polish Kyiv garrison survived, which, although they could not suppress the uprisings, were still not captured by the rebels led by the Kyiv tradesman Polegenko.

Organization of power

On the Right Bank, mainly in the Dnieper regions, the same thing happened as on the Left Bank. As a result, a vast region was left without administration and the only force and power in it was the rebel army led by Khmelnitsky.

With this in mind, Khmelnytsky immediately set about creating his own military administrative apparatus. Hetman owned the highest military, judicial and administrative power throughout the territory liberated from the Poles, which was divided into "shelves". “Regiment” was a certain territory, which, in turn, was divided into “hundreds”.

Under the hetman, there was an advisory “rada” (council) of the highest Cossack foreman: the general judge, the general convoy (head of artillery), the general treasurer (in charge of finances), the general clerk (administrative and political affairs), two general captains (hetman’s direct assistants), general horseman (guardian of horsetail) and general cornet (guardian of the banner).

The regiment was ruled by a colonel, chosen by the Cossacks of this regiment, with a regimental captain, a judge, a clerk, a cornet and a baggage officer, who were also chosen by the Cossacks.

A hundred was ruled by an elected centurion with a hundred foreman: captain, clerk, cornet, convoy.

In cities, both regimental and hundreds, there was an elected city chieftain - a representative of the Cossack administration, who managed all the affairs of the city, and in addition there was city self-government - magistrates and town halls, consisting of elected from the city population.

In the villages, which were usually a mixed composition of peasants and Cossacks, there was their own rural self-government, separately for the peasants and separately for the Cossacks. The peasants chose “voit”, and the Cossacks chose “ataman”.

It is curious that this separate self-government of peasants and Cossacks in the villages of the Left-Bank Ukraine survived until the very revolution of 1917, although the titles “voit” and “ataman” were replaced by “headmen”. But the elders were separate: for the Cossacks - the Cossack, for the peasants - the peasant.

Having thus organized the apparatus of power in the liberated territory, Khmelnitsky, on especially important occasions, gathered a “broad foreman’s council”, in which, in addition to the general foreman, colonels and centurions also took part. The archives preserved data on the convocation of such councils in 1649, 1653 and 1654.

Carrying out his administrative organizational measures, Khmelnitsky perfectly understood that the struggle had not yet ended, but was only just beginning. That is why he feverishly prepared for its continuation, gathered forces and created a disciplined army from them. It was difficult to count on an early open intervention of Moscow. The Tatars, on the other hand, were allies, both unreliable and undesirable: at any time they could change, and besides, they invariably engaged in robberies and violence even when they came as allies.

Poland did not waste time either. Having somewhat recovered from the defeats at Zhovtiye Vody and Korsun, she began to gather her forces to suppress the uprising.

At this time in Poland, after the death of King Vladislav, there was a period of queenlessness and the Polish gentry was completely absorbed in the election campaign. But, despite this, the Poles nevertheless gathered a 40,000-strong army, which moved from Poland to Volhynia, where Vishnevetsky, who had fled from the Left Bank, joined him with his army.

A collective leadership was placed at the head of the army - a triumvirate consisting of Polish magnates: the pampered, fat prince Zaslavsky, the scribe and scholar Ostrorog, and the 19-year-old prince Konetspolsky. Khmelnytsky ironically said about this triumvirate that “Zaslavsky is a featherbed, Ostrorog is a latina, and Konetspolsky is a child” (child).

In early September, this army, with numerous carts and servants, appeared in Volhynia. The Poles went on this campaign as if on a pleasure trip, confident in advance of an easy victory over the “rebellious slaves,” as they called the rebels.

Khmelnytsky moved out to meet them from Chyhyryn, where he spent the summer months working feverishly to build up an administrative apparatus and an army. Along with him is a detachment of Tatars.

Pilyavsky defeat

Under the small castle of Pilyavka (near the upper Bug), both armies came into contact and a battle began, ending on September 13 with the complete defeat of the Poles. The scattered remnants of the Polish army, leaving all the artillery and carts, fled in the direction of Lvov. Zaslavsky lost his mace, inherited by the Cossacks, and Konetspolsky escaped by disguising himself as a peasant boy. The Poles ran a long way from Pylyavtsy to Lvov in 43 hours, according to the chronicler, “faster than the fastest walkers and entrusting their lives to their feet.” The fugitives did not stay long in Lvov. We collected as much money and valuables as possible from monasteries, churches and townspeople “to pacify the rebellion” and moved on to Zamosc.

Khmelnytsky's army moved slowly behind the fleeing Poles. Having approached Lvov, in which there was a Polish garrison, Khmelnitsky did not take Lvov, which he could take without difficulty, but limited himself to imposing a large indemnity (ransom) and moved on to Zamosc.

The mood in Poland after the Pilyavitsky defeat was close to panic. Chronicler Grabinka describes these moods in the following way: “If there are many Poles gathered at Warsaw, both bunny ears having such a fear of Khmelnitsky’s insult, as soon as they hear the crackling of a dry tree, then without a soul they run to Gdansk and through a dream there are not a single river: “From Khmelnitsky!”

New King Jan Casimir

At this time, a new king, Jan Casimir, brother of the deceased Vladislav, was elected. The new king (a Jesuit bishop before being elected king), given the situation, began to make attempts to reach an agreement with Khmelnitsky, promising the Cossacks various favors and privileges and acted as if they were their protector against the willfulness of the magnates and the gentry. He subtly played on the fact that de and the whole uprising flared up because of this self-will and was directed not against the king, but against the magnates and the gentry. So Khmelnitsky and the foreman were persuaded by the emissaries sent to him by the king.

Khmelnitsky received and listened to the emissaries and assured them that the rebels personally had nothing against the king and that the possibility of an agreement was not ruled out. And he himself with his army, slowly, moved towards Zamost, where the Polish troops were concentrated and fortifications were created by the Poles.

Siege of Zamosc

Having surrounded Zamosc with the Poles in it, Khmelnitsky was in no hurry to unleash a battle, although he had all the data to repeat in Zamosc Pilyavitsy and move on to finish off the Poles in Poland itself, where outbreaks had already begun peasant uprisings against landlord oppression. Galicia and Belarus also began to rise, and insurgent detachments, which the Poles contemptuously called "bands", were already operating there. However, Khmelnytsky did not use the conjuncture, after several weeks he lifted the siege of Zamostye, and, leaving garrisons in Volhynia and Podolia, returned to the Dnieper region.

Kyiv celebrations

In December 1648, a solemn entry of Khmelnitsky into Kyiv took place. Accompanied by 1,000 horsemen, Patriarch Paisios of Jerusalem, who was then in Kyiv, rode out to meet him with Metropolitan Sylvester Kosov of Kyiv. A number of celebrations took place at which Khmelnitsky was glorified as a fighter for Orthodoxy, the students of the Kyiv Collegium (founded by Peter Mohyla), read verses in honor of Khmelnitsky in Latin, bells rang in all churches, shot from cannons. Even Metropolitan Sylvester, an ardent supporter of the magnates and a hater of the rebels, delivered a long speech praising the rebels and Khmelnytsky. The mood of the masses was so definitely on the side of the rebels that the metropolitan did not dare not only to speak out against them, but even to refrain from speaking.

The people then throughout Russia-Ukraine sang a new song, like “the Cossacks drove the Lyashka glory to the pid lava” (bench), called all Poles “pilyavchiks” and unshakably believed in the final overthrow of the Polish yoke and in reunification with Moscow of the same faith.

Without staying long in Kyiv, Khmelnitsky left for Pereyaslav and throughout the winter of 48-49 he was engaged in administrative and military affairs, having contact with both Poland and Moscow. From the first, ambassadors came to him and persuaded him to make peace; Khmelnytsky sent letters and ambassadors to Moscow asking for help and consent to the reunification of Ukraine-Rus with Moscow.

Plan
Introduction
1 Reasons and reason
1.1 Occasion

2 Beginning of the uprising
2.1 Preparation
2.2 The first victories of the Cossacks
2.3 Early results of the uprising

3 End of the first stage of the war
3.1 Rebel liberation movement
3.2 Letter from Bogdan Khmelnitsky to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich
3.3 Events at the end of 1648

4 Second stage
4.1 Attempted negotiation
4.2 Continuation of the war

5 Third phase of the war
6 Chronology of the rebellion
7 Interpretations of the uprising by historians
8 Mystical interpretations
Bibliography
Khmelnytsky uprising

Introduction

Ancient history Ukraine

The uprising of Khmelnytsky or Khmelnitsky is the name of the national liberation war against Polish domination on the territory of modern Ukraine, which lasted from 1648 to 1654 and was led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky, the hetman (ataman) of the Zaporizhian Grassroots Army. In a shaky alliance with the Crimean Khan, the Zaporozhye Cossacks repeatedly met on the battlefield with the crown armies and gentry mercenary detachments of the Commonwealth. The uprising broke out as a local rebellion of the Zaporozhian Sich, but was supported by other Orthodox strata (peasants, townspeople, nobles) and grew into a broad popular movement. Its result was a serious weakening of the influence of the Polish gentry and the Catholic clergy. The struggle against the Poles was carried out with varying success and led to the transfer of the Zaporizhian Army to the citizenship of the Russian kingdom and the beginning of the Russian-Polish war of 1654-1667.

1. Reasons and reason

The strengthening of the political influence of the "gentry oligarchy" and the feudal exploitation of the Polish magnates were especially evident in the territory of Western and Southwestern Russia. Huge latifundia of such magnates as the Konetspolsky, Pototsky, Kalinovsky, Zamoysky and others were created by violent seizures of land. So, Stanislav Konetspolsky owned 170 cities and towns, 740 villages in one Bratslav region. He also owned vast lands on the left bank of the Dnieper. At the same time, the large landownership of the Russian nobility also grew, which by this time was adopting the Catholic religion and becoming Polonized. Among them were the Vyshnevetskys, Kiselis, Ostrohskys and others. and city courtyards, to Adam Kisel - huge estates on the Right Bank, etc.

All this was accompanied by the growth of peasant duties, the infringement of their rights and religious oppression in connection with the adoption of the church union and the subordination of the church to the See of Rome. The French engineer Beauplan, who was in the Polish service from the early 1630s until 1648, in particular, noted that the peasants there are extremely poor, they are forced to give their lord everything he wants; their situation is "worse than that of galley slaves."

The forerunner of the war was the numerous Cossack uprisings of the 1620s and 30s:

Zhmailo uprising of 1625

Fedorovich's uprising of 1630

The Sulima Rebellion of 1635

Pavliuk's uprising of 1637

The uprisings of Ostryanitsa and Guni in 1638

However, all of them were defeated in 1638-1648. the so-called period of "golden peace" was established, when the Cossack uprisings ceased.

The reason for the beginning of the uprising was another manifestation of magnate lawlessness. Agents of the Chigirinsky headman, led by the under-starosta Danil Chaplinsky, took away his Subotov estate from Bogdan Khmelnitsky, ruined the economy, spotted his ten-year-old son to death and took his wife away. Khmelnytsky began to look for courts and justice for these outrages, but the Polish judges found that he had not been properly married to his Polish wife, and did not have the necessary documents for Subbotin's possessions. Then Khmelnitsky rushed to Chaplinsky and gave him a saber fight, but was treacherously stunned with a club by Chaplinsky's servants who came to the rescue and, as an "instigator", was thrown into the Starostinsky prison, from which only his friends released him. Appeal to Polish king, whom Khmelnitsky knew from previous times, turned out to be unsuccessful, as he replied: "You have your saber ...". Khmelnitsky took the hint in his own way. Irritated and frustrated, Khmelnitsky turned from a homely owner into a leader of the uprising.

2. The beginning of the uprising

2.1. Cooking

In January 1648, Bogdan Khmelnitsky went to the Sich (gathering a serious detachment along the way and even capturing the Polish garrison), where on January 24 he was elected hetman. At the same time, there was an influx of volunteers from all over Ukraine - mostly peasants - for whom the hetman organized "courses" of military training, during which experienced Cossacks taught the volunteers hand-to-hand combat, fencing, shooting and the basics of military tactics. The main problem of Khmelnytsky in terms of preparing for the uprising was the lack of cavalry. In this matter, the hetman counted on an alliance with the Crimean Khan. As a result of negotiations, Islam Giray sent several thousand Tatar horsemen to help the Cossacks. The uprising grew at a rapid pace. Already in February, the Grand Hetman of the Crown (Minister of War) of Poland, Nikolai Pototsky, reported to King Vladislav that “there was not a single village, not a single city in which calls for self-will were not heard and where they did not plan on the life and property of their lords. and tenants." Pototsky and his deputy, full crown hetman Martyn Kalinovsky, led a punitive army against the rebels.

2.2. The first victories of the Cossacks

Towards the army of Khmelnitsky, the son of Nikolai Potocki, Stefan, moved with his detachment. The army of Stefan Pototsky went deep into the steppe and met no resistance. On May 6, 1648, Khmelnitsky attacked her with all his army and utterly defeated the Polish army under the Yellow Waters. Battle of the Yellow Waters was the first significant achievement of the uprising. After the victory, Khmelnytsky's army went to Korsun, but the Poles got ahead of the rebels, attacked the city, plundered it, and slaughtered part of the population. Khmelnytsky decided to catch up with the crown army, and on May 15, 1648, the Polish army, led by Nikolai Pototsky and Martyn Zaslavsky, was ambushed near Korsun (on Gorokhovaya Dubrava) and suffered a crushing defeat. During Battle of Korsun almost twenty thousandth royal army was destroyed by the Cossack-Tatar army; Polish commanders Potocki and Kalinovsky were taken prisoner and given to the Tatars in gratitude for their help.

2.3. The first results of the uprising

As a result of the victories at Zhovti Vody and near Korsun, a significant part of Ukraine was liberated. The large military losses of the Commonwealth favored the further development of the uprising, which embraced new layers of the Ukrainian peasantry, Cossacks and philistines. Peasant and Cossack detachments arose everywhere; the peasants "turned out" in masses. The rebels occupied cities and lord's estates, destroyed the remnants of government and magnate troops. A liberation movement began in Belarus as well. The Cossack detachments sent by Khmelnitsky to Byelorussia played an important role in developing the struggle of the Byelorussian people. So the uprising of 1648 grew into a liberation war of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples against cruel feudal and national oppression.

On May 20, 1648, King Vladislav IV died in Warsaw. The period of "interregnum" began, which played a significant role in subsequent events.

3. Completion of the first stage of the war

3.1. rebel liberation movement

Throughout the summer of 1648, the rebel army, in alliance with the Tatars, almost unhindered continued to liberate the Ukrainian territories from the Polish presence. By the end of July, the Cossacks drove the Poles out of the Left Bank, and at the end of August, having strengthened themselves, liberated three right-bank provinces: Bratslav, Kiev and Podolsk. The liberation mission of the insurgents was accompanied by peasant pogroms: panorama estates were destroyed, lands were burned, and the Polish and Jewish populations were exterminated.

3.2. Letter from Bohdan Khmelnitsky to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich

Most clear, majestic and glorious to the Tsar of Moscow, and to us the lord of merciful pan and kindness.

Likewise, with the contempt of God, it has become that which we ourselves have made and tried about it, at the present time we could, through the messengers of our good health, your royal majesty, see and give our lowest bow. Almighty God has blessed us from your royal majesty, sending us, even if not to us, to Pan Kisel, messages in his needs, which our comrades, our Cossacks, have sent to us, to the troops.

Through whom joyfully your royal majesty has come to us, we can see that we are relieving our ancient Greek viria, for which from the old hours and for the waves of our crooked merit, from the kings of the old tribute we die and until quiet hours from the godless Aryans we can’t rest.

Our deliverer, Jesus Christ, having stung the crooked gods and the crooked tears of the orphans of the vigilantes, looked at us with kindness and mercy with his saints, likewise, having sent his holy word, he fought us. They dug up the hole under us, they themselves collapsed into the nusya, but the Lord God helped us to open two troops with their great camps and take three hetmans with live bait with their other sanators: the first one on Zholta Vody, in the field in the middle of the road Zaporozkoy, commissar Shemberk and blue Pan of Krakow did not flow in with a single soul. Then the hetman himself, the great pan of Krakow, from the innocent, kind man pan Martin Kalinovsky, the hetman of the full crown, both fell into captivity near Korsun, and the army of all their quarters is sparingly beaten; we did not take them, the Alethean people took them, who served us [in that world] world from the king of Crimea. It was good for us and your [royal] majesty to know about it, but the singing vision of us came from] Prince Dominik Zaslavsky, who sent begging for peace before us, and from Pan Kisel, governor of Braslav, but the song of the king, our pan, death took, so with reason, but from the cause of the same godless enemies, this is also ours, who eat a lot of kings in our land, for which the land is now empty. Zichim bihmo sobi the autocrat of such a ruler in his land, as your royal greatness, the Orthodox Chrestian king, azali bi, the pre-prophecy from Christ our God was fulfilled, that everything is in the hands of his holy mercy. In what do we accuse your royal majesty, if the will of God beat for that, and hasten your royal infection, do not be afraid, step on the panship of that, and with all the Zaporozky Army, we are ready to serve your royal majesty, to which we, with our lowest services, seem to be drunk given away.