SECTION E COSSACK CHIEF OFFICERS

When we talk about the Cossack Chief Officers — GeneraVna Starshyna — we have in mind both the higher military commanders as well as the high officers of the Ukrainian state. The functions of these commanders and officials were of special character.

That is why the term ’’officials” seems to be the most appropriate. In European countries of the early post-feudal period this term was applied to the higher retinue of the monarch, whose members had some functions of government as well as some managerial and ce­remonial duties in the royal court. In various European countries there existed positions of several court officials such as seneschals, constables, stewards, marszalki (Poland), koniushie, kravchie, and StoVniki (Russia), etc.

In Hetman Ukraine there were also some officials with cere­monial and managerial functions in the Hetman’s palace and estates: the marshalky and dvorets’ki (stewards), koniushi (equerries), shater- nychi (setting up the Hetman’s tent during military campaigns), etc. But the characteristic feature of Hetman Ukraine was that these officials of the Hetman’s palace did not become the higher officials of the state. This difference from other European countries can once more be explained by the fact that these other countries had expe­rienced uninterrupted political development since the feudal period, when there was no distinct delimitation between service to the mo­narch and to the state. As a result many of these servicemen of the kings gradually relinquished their original court functions and be­came, primarily, the high officials of the state.

The political development of Ukraine was interrupted several times. That is why instead of the former constables and stewards, the Cossack commanders became the higher officials of the Ukrainian state.

We have to separate the role of the Cossack chief officers as a distinct group, which (sometimes joined by the colonels) constituted a form of the upper chamber of the Cossack Officers’ Council, from the functions of each member of this group as an official of the Ukrainian state.

As a kind of upper chamber of the Cossack Officers’ Council the Collegium of the Chief Officers constituted a standing advisory coun­cil of the Hetman. In the most important cases this council was aug­mented by the colonels of the Ukrainian regiments. As such its functions are covered by our description of the Cossack Officers’ Council. But it also had its special duties. This collegium had the right to govern the state during the interregnums as a regency coun­cil of sorts. Thus the Collegium of Cossack Chief Officers ruled Het­man Ukraine in 1672 after Hetman Demian Mnohohrishnyfs fall. It also exercised governmental functions after Hetman Ivan Skoro­padsky’s death in 1722. The historians of Ukraine have usually re­garded this time as the rule of Paul Polubotok, the Colonel of the Chernihiv Regiment. But it was rather a period of government by the Collegium of Cossack Chief Officers. Polubotok himself, while describing the constitutional structure of his government, wrote in August 1722 that ”up to the election of the new Hetman we have to substitute him and govern Little Russia jointly with the Cossack Chief Officers.” At that time the problems of government were de­cided ’’after a joint discussion and by common consent.” In the sum­mer of 1733, in the closing hours of Hetman Daniel Apostol’s life, the Collegium of Cossack Chief Officers tried again to assume the reins of government. But by this time the situation had been changed and the permanent representative of the Russian Government in Ukraine nipped its action in the bud.

We have to remind our readers that the Cossack Chief Officers were usually elected by the General Cossack Assembly or by the Cossack Officers’ Council. However, in some cases they were appoin­ted by the Hetman. In the eighteenth century, after Hetman Ivan Skoropadsky’s death, as a result of the increasing dependence of Hetman Ukraine on Russia the Cossack Officers’ Council only nomi­nated a few (usually three) candidates for the open position of a Cossack chief officer. Then the Russian Government selected and appointed one of them.

There was no regular advancement of the Cossack chief officers from one position to another though in some cases the newly appoin­ted chief officer had held before that another position in this group (for instance, a chief standard bearer could be appointed to the po­sition of the chief justice or chief quartermaster). In other cases the colonels, the senior regiment officers, or the noble army fellows (as a rule members of the upper group — the standard fellows), were appointed to the position of Chief Officers. We have to note that, while the colonels were often appointed (or elected) to the positions of the quartermaster-general, chief justice or treasurer-general they were never appointed to the positions of chief aides-de-camp, the chief flag bearer or the chief standard bearer. On the contrary, there were quite a few appointments and elections from these positions to the colonels of Ukrainian regiments (we can name the well known historical fact when the chief standard bearer Ivan Skoropadsky — the future hetman — was appointed to the position of the colonel of the Starodub Regiment).

Each of the Cossack chief officers was — and we have always to remember that — not only the chief executive officer of a certain department of government, but also a member of the upper chamber of the Cossack Officers’ Council as well as the Hetman’s assistant and adviser. In addition, each of them, on the Hetman’s orders, carried out various assignments that very often were not in the least connected with their regular and direct functions.

The first and senior member of the Collegium of Cossack chief officers (officials) was the Quartermaster-General (general’nyi oboz- nyi). As an acting hetman (nakaznyi hetman), he usually substituted for the Hetman during the periods following the death or deposition of the previous ruler as well as during the Hetman’s trips outside the country. In the absence of the Hetman the Quartermaster-General presided also over the Cossack Officers’ Council. His main function was the command and administration of the artillery as a separate unit of the Cossack Army. The artillery officers as well as service­men were placed under his command; the artillery officers were appointed by him. The artillery was sustained from the income from the select towns and districts attached to it for this purpose. Such were the towns of Korop, Korsun, Lokhvytsia, with adjacent rural regions. The Quartermaster-General was the chief administrator of these districts.

The Chief Justices (general’ni suddi) were the next in rank. In the seventeenth century (with the exception of 1659) there was one Chief Justice; after 1690 there were always two. At that time the Supreme Court in most states was more or less separated from the executive organs of government. But in the sixteenth to seventeenth century Russia, the heads of the special departments of government (prikazy) were called ’’judges” and, in fact, in addition to their direct administrative functions, had the power to try their subordinates as well as the people of the regions which they controlled. The position of Chief Justices in Hetman Ukraine was of an intermediate nature between these two types. On the one hand they performed their special judicial functions, on the other hand they were the members of the Cossack Officers’ Council and its upper chamber — the Colle­gium of the Cossack Chief Officers.

It is interesting to note the similar position of the ’’Supreme Vornic” in Rumanian principalities to that of the Ukrainian Chief Justices. He was also the chief justice who, like Chief Justices in Ukraine, was a member of the ruler’s council (’’the Divan”) and quite often had various assignments of non-judicial character. We have to note that the Chief Justices had their special symbols of authority — the judge’s staffs (leski sudeis’ki).

The third place in the chief officials’ hierarchy, but only in the eighteenth century, belonged to the Treasurer-General (general’nyi pidskarbii). In the seventeenth century this position existed only in 1663-1668 during the rule of Ivan Brukhovetsky. Afterwards it was abolished and did not exist for a long time. Evidently there was no need for it because the treasury of the state and the personal finances of the Hetman were not separated, and the Hetman’s finances were usually managed by the personnel of his estates. A permanent posi­tion of the Treasurer-General was restored in 1728. At this time the separation of the public treasure from the Hetman’s personal finan­ces was accomplished by putting the Ukrainian treasury under the control of the Russian Government. The posts of the Treasurers- General were established for this purpose; one of them had to be a Russian. The work and functions of the Treasurers-General were regulated by special ordinances. The first ordinance was dated April 29, 1729, the second June 4, 1760. We learn from these regulations that the treasurers directed the collection of taxes (monetary as well as in kind), controlled the expenditures of the administrative organs, supervised the work of the tax collectors and financial activities of cities and towns. They directed the work of the central Treasury Office and the Auditing Committee.

The position of Secretary General (generdl^,nyi pysar) of Hetman Ukraine corresponds to that of chancellor in other states. He was the head and director of the General Chancellery. Like the chancellors of other countries, he conducted the foreign affairs of the state. In this capacity the Secretary-General usually received the envoys and representatives of foreign governments and carried out preliminary negotiations, so that later, when the envoys were introduced to the Hetman, the positions of the parties were clearly established. This was clearly shown in the work and position of Ivan Vyhovsky — the Secretary-General during Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s rule and later Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s successor.

The Secretary-General acted also as a secretary to the Cossack Officers’ Council when and if the proceedings of its meetings and sessions were recorded. He personally presented to this organ the letters and state documents.

Like chancellors elsewhere, the Secretary-General was the keeper of the state seal, and his function was to affix it to the docu­ments issued by the General Chancellery. However, the Ukrainian Secretary-General did not sign the documents of the Ukrainian state; they had but one signature, that of the Hetman. The Secretary- General, just as other chief officers, quite often carried out various commissions and errands ordered by the Hetman.

Starting from the position of the two Chief Aides-de-camp (Sing., general’nyi osaυul) we are passing to a somewhat lower group of the Cossack chief officers. As we already said it was possible to be appointed a Colonel from these positions but not vice versa. These positions were especially characteristic to Hetman Ukraine as it was difficult to find similar state posts in other countries; and even when they existed they were connected with the personal service and functions in the ruler’s court. In Ukraine these positions originated not from the ruler’s retinue but from the Cossack military organiza­tion. This position of the osavul was adopted from the East. We find similar officers and officials in Mongolia, Khiva, Kokand, and the Crimea. In these countries they had the same functions as the gene- ral’ni osavuly in Ukraine — they were the executors of the rulers’ personal commissions and errands. In Ukraine, in addition to the Hetman’s Chief Aides-de-camp there were also officers of this cate­gory in the administration of Regiments and Hundreds. Their name remained in the Ukrainian language after the incorporation of Het­man Ukraine into Russia; in the nineteenth century it, however, designated the managers of manorial estates.

The Chief Aides-de-camp were members of the Cossack Offi­cers’ Council and its upper branch. The source materials of that time show us that very often they were the trusted assistants of the Het­man. In 1751, when Cyril Rozumovsky began his rule, he requested the lower group of Cossack chief officers to prepare a written report describing their functions and duties. In this report the members of this group stated that ’’the Chief Aides-de-camp, the Flag-Bearer, and the Standard-Bearer remained in turns in the Hetman’s resi­dence for the execution of various assignments and commissions. During military campaigns they, as the other Cossack chief officers did sometimes by the Hetman’s request, held command over the Cossack regiments.”

Among ’’various assignments and commissions” carried out by the Chief Aides-de-camp were assignments of a military nature. More often than other Cossack chief officers we find them in the role of the ’’acting hetman” during the military campaigns not led by the Hetman himself. We can also notice their supervisory functions in regard to the mercenary units and regiments. At the meeting of the Cossack General Assembly the Aides-de-camp played the role of regulators and supervisors. Quite often they carried out the assign­ments of diplomatic nature as the Hetman’s envoys or couriers. Sometimes they investigated the judicial cases or determined the disputed boundaries of landed estates. During Demian Mnohohrish- nyi’s rule the general’nyi osavul, P. Hrybovych ’’went at nights to other people’s backyards and informed the Hetman about the over­heard conversations.” This shows that the Aides-de-camp’s functions evidently included some duties of a police character. In the eigh­teenth century the Chief Aides-de-camp often were members of the General Chancellery and (or) the Supreme Court.

On December 5, 1763 Hetman Cyril Rozumovsky issued special instructions establishing the functions of the lower group of the Cossack chief officers — the Chief Aides-de-camp, Flag-Bearer (the Sergeant-at-arms general), and Standard-Bearer (Adjutant-general). The Hetman stated that ’’their duties have not been clearly establi­shed” and that he decided to define them more precisely. According to this instruction they had annually to review the Cossack regiments — the first year, the Chief Aides-de-camp; the next year, the Chief Flag-Bearer and Standard-Bearer. They also had to supervise the mercenary units and regiments, examine the complaints of the Cossacks against the officers of their Regiments and Hundreds, keep the records of the assignments and commissions performed by the officers of Regiments and Hundreds and, finally, supervise the guards in the Hetman’s residence. A small office of three clerks had to handle the correspondence connected with these duties. As we learn from this document, the functions of the Chief Aides-de-camp as well as the Chief Flag and Standard Bearers, in general were still of a military character.

The description of the Aides-de-camp’s functions could to a considerable extent be applied to the two remaining positions of the Cossack chief officers: the Chief Flag-Bearer (general’nyi khorun- zhyi—the Sergeant-at-arms General) and the Chief Standard Bearer (general’nyi bunchu∑hnyi — adjutant-general of sorts). They were also members of the Cossack Officers’ Council and in the same man­ner as the Aides-de-camp carried out military and administrative assignments and commissions.

The Chief Flag Bearer was also the guardian of the Cossack Army’s Flag (viis’kova khorohva). He carried this flag before the Cossack units on solemn parades and ceremonies. The Chief Standard Bearer was the guardian of the bunchuk, a standard of oriental origin which was carried in front of Cossack units during military campaigns. In time of peace the bunchuk was placed in the Het­man’s palace. It is interesting to note that during the rule of Bohdan Khmelnytsky and his nearest successors the Standard Bearer did not belong to the Cossack chief officers and was called the ’’Hetman’s [not general’nyi] Bunchuk Bearer.” His place in the lists of the Cossack Army was rather low, after the officers of Cossack regi­ments. Only during Ivan Samoilovych’s rule the Standard Bearer joined the group of Cossack chief officers and their collegiums. We do not know why the guardians and bearers of the Hetman’s second ensign of authority — the bulava (mace) did not enter the ranks of Cossack chief officers. The bulava bearers (bulavnychi) were some­times mentioned in the documents of that time but they did not join the Cossack chief officers and remained only the personal attendants of the Hetman.

We should not be surprised by the relatively prominent role and position of such officers as the bearers of the flag and standard. We know that the position of ’’Great Flag Bearer” was a very prominent

one in the army and administration of Poland and Lithuania-Belo- russia. Also such a position as that of the Lord Privy Seal in Great Britain, which has survived to our time, is in nature the same as that of the Ukrainian chief flag and standard bearers.