SECTION A GENERAL FEATURES

Among the European states of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the Ukrainian state was a polity of a particular kind. The special features of its governmental system were in the first place due to the interruption of the socio-political development of the Ukrainian people by the revolutionary events of 1648 and after.

The form of the new state was determined by the organization of the Cossack Army which alone at the time of the victory had already the established forms of its own administration and hierarchy. The new state, which the Ukrainian Cossacks established in the middle of the seventeenth century, received the outward form of a military organization because the Cossacks tried to fit their own group’s previously established hierarchy and administration to the new political situation. In fact, they did not correspond to the new situation, where the ’’Zaporozhian Army” became just one compo­nent — the armed forces — of the new state. Only in the eighteenth century the name was changed and more and more often we see the term Mdlorossiia (Little Russia) which later completely replaced the old name of the ’’Zaporozhian Army.”

The state created by the ’’Zaporozhian Army” preserved its outward military form even after Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s victory. As a result the military commanders of the rebellious Cossack Army, its colonels and other commanders, became the rulers and officials of the new state.

In writing about the forms and features of the Ukrainian go­vernmental system we have to note its outward similarities to the organizations of the Don and Ural (Yaik) Cossacks in Russia. We can also find here, however, some essential differences. These organiza­tions were not developed into states (they were rather autonomous provinces), and the division of their population into social classes had not developed as many forms as in Hetman Ukraine. In the Don and Ural valleys we find only two social groups — the Cossacks and the peasants. These regions lacked the strong cultural tradition of European contacts which profoundly influenced the socio-political life of Ukraine.

Because the Cossack military commanders automatically became the officials of the new state, there was no proper delimitation of the jurisdiction of the different organs of government. It is true that a vague delineation of governmental functions was a rather general feature of the European states of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The political theorist, Baron de Montesquieu, saw a deli­mitation of governmental functions in the English state and recom­mended it as a model for the states of continental Europe, in the late phase of this period. But in Hetman Ukraine, especially in the seven­teenth century, the vague delimitation of governmental functions and the concentration of diverse functions in the same hands and same agencies was especially noticeable and, as we saw, was caused by a peculiar situation in the establishment of this state. We have to stress not only the insufficient separation of the legislative, exe­cutive and judicial functions but, at the same time, the fact the various organs of government competed, in their authority and functions, with other governmental organs whose tasks were partly, and sometimes largely, parallel.

Still we can state that the governmental organization of the Hetman Ukraine was sufficiently viable and efficient. It proved that by its rather long history and its ability to stand up against strong adversaries. Its leaders were not always equal to their tasks, and often sought to advance their personal interests. There were alliances with neighbouring countries which were detrimental to their own country. The names of Pushkar, Barabash, Opara, Sukhovii, Petryk, and others, with the most prominent of them — Hetman Ivan Bru- khovetsky, were linked with actions against their own people. But the Ukrainian state, often on the brink of ruin and destruction — was none-the-less able to defend itself during its long history. There were leaders who cared for the interests of their own people. The policy established by the Revolution of 1648 had developed a govern­mental system which gave it the strength to assert itself and often, fight for its existence.