THE ELECTION OF PYLYP ORLYK AS HETMAN
When the fortune was judged to be private property rather than part of the Host’s treasury, the office of Hetman-in-exile, already burdensome under the circumstances, became even less attractive.
And yet the position had to be filled or else the Cossacks would, as Voinarovskyi put it, “scatter like gypsies.” CharlesXIIalso had his reasons for wanting a new Hetman to be elected as soon as possible. The King had begun to think ever more seriously about another, Ottoman-supported thrust against the Tsar and he realized that in such a case the Zaporozhians, if capably led, would be of great use to him. Therefore, in the final months of 1709 and the early months of 1710, the problem of finding a suitable successor to Mazepa had become paramount.Initially, despite his recent disclaimers, it was thought that, with so much wealth at his disposal, Voinarovskyi might still accept his uncle’s office. But as he was anxious to enjoy the wealth at his disposal, he reiterated that he had no interest in the position. In fact, referring to himself as a Polish szlachcic rather than a Ukrainian Cossack, Voinarovskyi began to cultivate the company of Polish and Swedish aristocrats and made it clear that he wished to have little to do with the Ukrainians.19 Another possible candidate was Dmytro Horlenko, the aggressive and ambitious colonel of Pry- luky. His candidacy, however, did not find favor with CharlesXII. The choice of the Starshyna and the backing of the Swedish king went to Pylyp Orlyk, the Host’s chancellor—probably the most intelligent and certainly the best educated of the Mazepists.20
When he was approached in the matter, Orlyk’s response waS clearly unenthusiastic. The plight of the emigres was not encouraging and the Hetman’s office would only complicate the situation of the man who held it. Moreover, Orlyk feared—and with good reason—that the costs of the office, of carrying out diplomatic missions, of helping to feed and arm the Zaporozhians would drain the meager amounts of gold and jewels that he managed to preserve from “the rapacious fury of the enemy.” But Charles XII applied strong pressure and Voinarovskyi, anxious to have the entire issue of succession settled, provided Orlyk with the unimpressive sum of 3,000 ducats to defray some of the costs of the hetmancy.
Realizing that his options were limited and fearing to anger the King, Orlyk reluctantly accepted the office of Hetman. But he did so only on certain conditions: Charles XII had to agree, formally and explicitly, to strengthen his commitment to the Ukrainians. Specifically, Orlyk wanted the King’s assurance that he would not make peace with the Russians until “the Muscovite yoke was removed from Ukraine and the land returned to its ancient liberties.”21 Charles XII agreed and on May 10,1710, soon after the ceremony of election, he issued the Diploma assecuratorium pro duce et exer- citu Zaporoviensi in which he obligated himself to help the Ukrainians in their struggle against Moscow and to carry on the struggle for the rights and privileges of the Ukrainian people and the Za- porozhian Host.22
* * *
Orlyk was not, to use a favorite phrase of the times, a “true son of the fatherland,” that is, he was not born in Ukraine.23 His distant ancestors were Czech (Bohemian) nobles who had left their Bohemia during the Hussite wars of the 15th century, emigrated to Poland and settled in Cracow. Some time in the 17th century a branch of the family moved further east to Lithuania where it obtained lands near Vilnius (Wilno) in the county of Oszmiana. There, in the village of Kossuta, on 11 October 1672, PylypOrlyk was born. Respected but impecunious, his parents had formed a mixed marriage: the father, Stefan, was a Catholic who died fighting for the Commonwealth and the faith against the Ottomans at Khotyn (Chocim) in 1673 and the mother, Irene nee Malakhovska, came from an Orthodox family. This mixed religious background explains to a great extent why throughout his life Orlyk was fascinated with questions of religion and theology.
Many Ukrainian historians like to stress that the excellent education of the future Hetman-in-exile was the product of the Mohyla Academy in Kiev. This is only partly true. Orlyk’s diary, which was inaccessible to most of these historians, indicates that he began his formal studies in the Jesuit Collegium in Vilnius where philosophy was his favorite subject.24 It was with an educational background provided by the Jesuits that he came to Kiev—when and for what reason is unknown—to continue his studies in the Orthodox Mo- hyla Academy.25 There Orlyk’s native intelligence and knowledge of philosophy caught the eye of Stefan Iavorskyi, a leading professor at the school.26 Apparently, the relationship between student and professor became a close one, for throughout his life Orlyk always referred to Iavorskyi as his “beloved teacher, confidant and patron.” While at the Academy, Orlyk perfected his knowledge of Latin, poetics, stylistics, rhetoric and logic.
His poems were noteworthy enough to be included in a sampler of Latin poetry which was published in the Academy and to which such luminaries as Iavorskyi and Teofan Prokopovych contributed.27 In this connection, it ought to be mentioned that the stereotypical image developed by Western historians of Ukrainian Cossack Hetmans as rough, primitive “chieftains” certainly does not do justice to cultured and sophisticated men like Orlyk, Mazepa and, for that matter, most of the other Hetmans.As a result of his success at the Academy, career opportunities opened up for Orlyk in Kiev. In 1693, probably with lavorskyi’s aid, he obtained his first position as secretary in the consistory of the Kiev Metropolitan. Soon afterwards, he became associated with the Hetman’s chancellery and moved to Poltava. There the young foreigner began to cultivate his contacts with the Cossack elite. One of the ways in which he did this was by writing panegyrics for influential members of this elite. In 1695, Orlyk wrote a panegyric entitled Alcides Rossiiskii and dedicated it to Mazepa.28 Interestingly enough, the work was published in Vilnius, indicating that Orlyk still maintained contact with his homeland. Another panegyric appeared in 1698 and it was dedicated to Ivan Obidovskyi, colonel of Nizhyn, a relative of Mazepa and the son-in-law of Vasyl Kochubei who was at that time Chancellor of the Host and Orlyk’s immediate superior.29 On 6 November 1698, Orlyk established even closer contacts with the Starshyna when he married Anna Hertsyk, daughter of the colonel of Poltava. As a result of this marriage, the formerly indigent nobleman from Lithuania gained entrance into the highest circles of the Cossack elite.30
Always appreciative of men of education and culture, Mazepa was by now aware of and favorably impressed by the newcomer. In or about 1699, Orlyk was appointed to the position of senior chan- cellerist, a promotion that required him to move to the Hetman’s residence in Baturyn.
An even more direct indication of the Hetman’s favor came in 1702 when Mazepa agreed to be the godfather of Orlyk’s first born son, Hryhor. During this time, the landholdings of the senior Chancellerist began to grow as he acquired villages in the Starodub, Chernyhiv and Poltava regiments. In 1706 Orlyk’s career received a spectacular boost when, with the Hetman’s backing, he was appointed Chancellor (heneralnyipysar) of the Zaporozhian Host. This was one of the key positions in the Hetmanate since it involved carrying on the Hetman’s domestic and foreign correspondence, formulating his universals, and supervising the Host’s archives. It also provided the Chancellor with easy access to the Hetman and this in turn gave the Chancellor a great deal of influence. When Mazepa initiated his secret correspondence with the Poles and Swedes, Orlyk was not only aware of what was happening but he also facilitated these contacts. Later Orlyk claimed to have had doubts about the wisdom of the Hetman’s undertaking. Nevertheless, he faithfully obeyed his instructions and loyally adhered to Mazepa through all the ensuing misfortunes. Despite the tension which arose between the Chancellor and the Hetman shortly before his death, Orlyk retained a sincere respect for the memory of Mazepa, visiting his grave whenever he had the opportunity.Unlike the complicated personality of Mazepa which is only vaguely discernible from documents and fragmentary accounts, the basic features of Orlyk’s personality stand out much more clearly. To a certain extent this is because Orlyk’s was a less enigmatic individuality. And in part this is also due to the fact that the former Chancellerist faithfully kept a journal throughout his life which provides numerous insights into the nature of the man. What immediately strikes the reader of this journal is the author’s religiosity. Hardly a day went by without his going to Mass, commemorating a saint’s day or visiting with a priest. Especially during his later exile in Salonika, the emigre Hetman enjoyed nothing more, with the possible exception of hunting, than participating in a theological debate or discussion.
So intense was this commitment to religion—Orlyk never made it clear whether he preferred Orthodoxy or Catholicism—that it warped his perception of political issues, particularly where Muslims Wereconcerned.Given his educational background, it is not surprising that the new Hetman had bookish interests. During his far-ranging travels he rarely missed an opportunity to visit a library or book collection. Not only was he a voracious reader—Fenelon’s Telemaque was his favorite book—but as he grew older and his political fortunes sank lower, this amateur theologian planned to write a history of the Great Schism.31 The undertaking was not unrealistic for the countless manifestoes, universals, memorials and political letters which Orlyk formulated indicate that he was an indefatigable writer.
From the comments and personal notations which are scattered throughout the approximately 2,000 pages of Orlyk’s journal, an image emerges of a warm, mildly emotional, well-mannered man who liked good company and was especially fond of his huge family. Other sources suggest that he was a humane landowner: even after Poltava, Orlyk’s peasants fondly recalled his just and lenient treatment and when his Tatar allies invaded Ukraine he protested fiercely against their mistreatment of the villagers.32 These praiseworthy characteristics notwithstanding, the question arises of how this apparently virtuous but hardly forceful individual managed to rise to the positions of prominence which he held. The answer lies in Orlyk’s almost instinctive tendency to gravitate to the powerful and, more importantly, gain their favor.
First, at the Mohyla Academy, it was Iavorskyi who became his patron; then, Mazepa made him his confidant; and in Bender, Charles XII was very favorably disposed to him. An even more vivid illustration of Orlyk’s ability to establish close ties with the influential are the godparents which he arranged to have for his numerous children: in 1699, at the christening of his first child, Anastasia, the young newcomer from Lithuania had Pareskavia Iskra, wife of the current colonel of Poltava, and Ivan Levenets, soon to be appointed colonel of Poltava, serve as godparents; as mentioned earlier, in 1702 Mazepa was the godfather of the eldest son, Hryhor; in Bender in 1711, when another son, Iakub, was christened, it was Charles XII and Anna, the wife of Voinarovskyi, who attended at the ceremony; in 1713, Stanislaw Leszczynski and Michal Korybut Wisniowecki participated in the christening of Marta; in 1715 at the christening of Marina, Leszczynski, Ponia- towski and a noblewoman representing Sweden’s Queen Ulrika Eleonora did the honors; finally, in 1718 in Sweden, the godparents of Orlyk’s youngest child, Katherina, were the Swedish governor of Scania and a Swedish general.33
Much of this ability to attract favor was due undoubtedly to Orlyk’s intelligence, erudition and pleasing manner.
In fact, the diploma of his election to the hetmancy stated that he was “worthy of this high honor because... of his great wisdom and knowledge.”34 To be sure, in cultivating his relations with the influential, he could also be quite calculating. But it would be incorrect to think of him as a sycophant. Orlyk was loyal to a fault. He could easily have abandoned Mazepa after Poltava, but did not do so. When the Tatars and Ottomans attacked Charles XII during the Kalabalik in 1713, and Devlet Girei threatened Orlyk with death if he did not abandon the Swedish King, the Hetman refused to comply.35 But perhaps the most telling indication that the new Hetman was not only intelligent and skillful but a man of principle and determination, was that once he shouldered the burden of “freeing Ukraine from the terrible Muscovite yoke,” he would carry this burden—long after Ukraine’s “true sons” had abandoned it—for the next thirty-two years, until the day he died in 1742.