Belarusian Philip
Much is being written about Mazepa's ally, the oath-breaker Orlik in Ukraine. From his agreement with Sweden, they make an icon and almost an example of the world's first democracy and the rule of law. Orlik himself, probably, would have fainted if he had learned what was wrapped around his name and his vassal agreement with the Swedish king, who arose in the hope of Sweden's victory in the Northern War and had no chance of implementation after Poltava.
You need to start with a little thing - he is not a Pilip, but quite himself - Philip, both in baptism and in life. Here it is necessary to clarify a little - a significant part of the names came to us from Greece along with Christianity, and since the people in our mass were dark and did not speak languages, the names were distorted, especially in the villages.
Philip Stepanovich, the son of a Catholic nobleman and an Orthodox, a graduate of the Vilna Jesuit Collegium and the Kiev-Mohyla Academy, was a literate person and kept only such people around him, and did not distort his name. In the same way as he did not communicate in the Little Russian dialect - why would he? Firstly, near Minsk, where Litvin Orlik was born and grew up, he could not be, and secondly, where is the distorted language of the common people, and where is the gentry, and later - the Cossack foreman? If we really try on him a nationality that did not exist at the beginning of the 18th century, then he is a Belarusian.
And he didn’t free any Ukraine from “Moscow”, just like his hetman, Mazepa. It was about an attempt to create a vassal monarchy, similar to Moldavia and Wallachia, only as part of Sweden, later - France, well, or someone else who would agree. Mazepa and Orlik alternately saw themselves in the role of the monarch, the Cossacks in the role of the gentry, and the state system is a cross between the orders of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with its omnipotence of the gentry, and the Cossack orders, which have been formed since 1648. It did not take off for reasons purely external, Peter defeated Charles, and the rest of the European monarchs to fight the Russian Empire, for the sake of not understanding who, somehow did not break, and they could not break, why?
Well, and a vassal agreement, which, for some reason I do not understand, is called the constitution, and even the first in Europe? Probably because the title mentions the word "constitution", in the sense of "Covenants and Constitutions of the Zaporozhye Army." But, say, in the Zboriv Treaty or the March Articles of Bohdan Khmelnitsky - no. In general, there was such a tradition - the treaties of the Zaporozhye Army with the Empire were called articles, and in the agreement of the same Army with the Swedes, Orlik, apparently, decided to show off his literacy and inserted the Latin word constitutio, which in translation means - device. He did not mean any document defining human rights and the internal structure of an independent state, moreover, then the term "charter" was used in such situations.
He stubbornly calls Ukraine Little Russia
Yes, and with people it is somehow inconvenient - in fact, Orlik and the foreman considered Cossacks for people, who were never Russian, but descendants of the Khazars, and the rest for them were buckwheat - Russians, who must obey these Cossacks. He stubbornly calls Ukraine Little Russia, the language Russian, separating Russia from Muscovy, which was then a trend among the catholicized gentry, however, this was also the case before the Catholicization, since the time of the struggle between Moscow and Vilna for supremacy in Russia.
In a word, a man of his time and state - the Commonwealth, the very one where "every nobleman in the garden is equal to the voivode in everything" and has the right to send his monarch … far away and, if desired, go to another or overthrow him. In what, by the way, is similar to Mazepa, who began enslaving the peasants and built his own principality, where he thought to rule.
It did not take off, the Swedes did not help, Orlik picked up the baton, who also did not work out. Historically, he pulled Little Russia into the past, therefore, probably, he did not receive mass support, and after Poltava, only a person who was extremely dirty in treason, who had no turning back, could believe in the Swedes. The rest of the Little Russians did not support Mazepa even before the battle, with the exception of a part of the Cossack elders, and even more so after the terrible defeat of the Swedes, they were not going to change their minds.
And here is an excerpt from the alleged "Ukrainian constitution":
Such poradok obschim dogovorom үstanovlyaεtsya and nεprεmѣnno үzakonyaεtsya, anyhow ZA үvolnεnεm give Bg Ѡtchizny nshoy z yoke Moscow, uwagi Gεtmanskoyu and soizvolεnіεm obschim, byl obrany podskarbіy εnεralny, chlvѣk znachny and zasluzhony, maεtny and blgosovѣstny which would skarb Branch in svoεm dozorѣ mѣl, by the mlynas and all sorts of military parishes he zavѣdoval and these are for the demand of the public military, and not for his private, za in the house of Getmansky he turned over”.
Do you see Ukraine in this document?
No?
But in Kiev they see it as European and democratic.
Crimea does not consider Ukrainian
And another excerpt:
“The new-chosen Gestman, when Gd Bg, strong and strong in battle, will help the happy weapons of the Most Holy King of His Grace of Sweden, free Homeland nshu, Little Russia, from the tortured yoke of Moscow, must and obey to be, firstly, try and boldly stand, anyway greedy ε i new to Little Russia, our Fatherland, from no one it was possible that ε, which ε show yourself, then, by your dominion, it must be eradicated, preached and expanded to allow it."
If Orlik had been caught by Ukrainian nationalists, they would have killed him. Judge for yourself:
1. Crimea does not consider Ukrainian.
2. Writes in the language of the "land-aggressor".
3. Says that Little Russian.
4. Opponent of Uniatism and Judaism.
And the conclusion is simple - if you pull an owl on a stump, in the sense that the past is in our realities, it will come out funny and stupid. And if you invent the past, then sooner or later they will start laughing at the myths, and there are no options.
That is why a variant of the contract of that in Latin is being taken to Kiev. That is why on the website of the Rada the text was translated into Ukrainian, inserting, where possible, the word "Ukraine", which could not have been in the original. And that is precisely why the original from Moscow was never requested.
A very convenient myth: there is a craving for Western values, and European integration, and a war with Russia. That Orlik was different, like his era, can be ignored and not remembered.
Actually, why?
So…
And it's better not to write about Philip's real affairs:
In 1711, Orlik's supporters from among the Zaporozhye Cossacks (under the command of the Koshevoy Ataman Kostya Gordienko), having concluded the Treaty of Kaira with the Crimean Khanate, made a military campaign with his troops to the Right-Bank Ukraine and laid siege to the White Church. However, the Tatars went over to robbing the civilian population and getting the yasyr, and the Cossacks in Orlik's army began to defect en masse in order to protect their villages. As the troops of Boris Sheremetev approached, the Tatars went into the steppe with a huge Ukrainian population, and Orlik's enterprise failed.
The only campaign of the self-proclaimed hetman was the invitation to Little Russia of the Crimean Tatars and the deportation of thousands of unfortunate people from those whom he considered his subjects into slavery. Well, and that inconvenient moment that in 1721, when the Northern War ended, Orlik tried to make peace with Pyotr Alekseevich. True, this was not something that worked, or rather, it did not work at all, Peter was Great precisely because he did not forgive betrayal. Mazepa by that time was long as dead, but Orlik could well then become a candidate for a very real hanging on an aspen and for the Order of Judas.
Outcome
As a result, until 1742, Orlik was looking for someone who would return the mace to him, hoping first for the Turks, then for the French, then for Austria. As a result - zero and death in Iasi at 69 years old, forgotten and abandoned by everyone. His son, however, became an ordinary mercenary who, having replaced a number of armies, eventually settled in France and lived to see the Seven Years' War, ironically fighting in the army of allied Russia.
Philip was, of course, an extraordinary man, especially for those times, but he was neither a hero nor a creator of the alleged constitution.
His grave guilt in going over to the side of the enemy during the war, and this is beyond doubt. The rest is the inventions of current politicians in modern games, to which he has nothing to do and cannot have. Let's just say: Real Orlik and Drawn Orlik are different people, completely different.
