Territorial Fragmentation

For the Ukrainians, a positive aspect of the pre-1648 Commonwealth was that it brought almost all of them together within a single political system. After Russia and Poland partitioned Ukraine during the Ruin, this would not occur again for almost 300 years. Not only would important differences evolve between the Ukrainians in the Russian and the Polish spheres, but distinctions among Ukrainians living within each of these spheres were already becoming marked. The lands inhabited by the roughly 4 million Ukrainians at the end of the 17th century had distinguishable political, administrative, and regional features.

Russian-Controlled Lands

The Left Bank (The Hetmanate) Prior to the 1648 uprising, the territory on the left bank of the Dnieper had only recently been colonized and was therefore sparsely populated. Yet, because an autonomous, well-ordered Cossack system of government survived there and because of the massive influx of Right-Bank refugees, the Left Bank (which had an approximate population of 1.2 million in 1700) became the center of Ukrainian political and cultural life. In Ukrainian historiography, this region is often referred to as the Hetmanate (Hetmanshchyna). Because of its importance, it will be discussed in greater detail in a separate section.

The Zaporozhian lands As the Cossack system of government spread over much of Ukraine and the hetmans established their authority in the main population centers, the Zaporozhian Sich, once the center of Cossack life, lost its prominence. In the late 17th century, it no longer stood in the forefront of all-Ukrainian political, religious, and social causes. Instead, the

Zaporozhians tended to concentrate on their own affairs, that is, those of a relatively small (they rarely numbered more than 10,000), isolated Cossack fraternity based in the vast, empty steppes between the Hetmanate in the north and the Crimean Khanate in the south. The Zaporozhian lands were placed under dual Russian-Polish control in 1667, but from 1686, they came under exclusive Russian overlordship.

While the Left-Bank hetmans always considered the Sich to be subject to their authority, this issue had never been clearly resolved and the Zaporozhians were often at odds not only with hetmans but also with any other power that sought to control them. For much of the late 17th centuiy, they continued to conduct raids against the Tatars and Ottomans, although such actions did not prevent them from sometimes reversing their notoriously erratic political affiliations and joining the Muslims against a hetman, a Polish king, or a Russian tsar. An archetypical leader of the Zaporozhians during this period was Ivan Sirko, who gained a resounding reputation as an intrepid leader of numerous successful raids against the Turks and Tatars. Yet, quite typically, I.Sirko often ignored or even exacerbated some of the political problems that confronted Ukrainian society during the Ruin.

In socioeconomic terms, the Zaporozhian Sich also underwent major changes. No longer were booty or payments for military service the major source of income among the Zaporozhians. Many of them engaged in fishing, hunting, and beekeeping. They practiced trades such as metalworking and boatmaking, or partook in the extensive north/south trade. Some of the Zaporozhian officers obtained landed estates on the Left Bank or in the vicinity of the Sich, giving rise to the socioeconomic differences and tensions that were to plague the Zaporozhians. Nonetheless, it was at the Sich that the old Cossack customs and the ethos of the "Cossack brotherhood" still survived. And the isolated Sich continued to be a magnet and a refuge for the discontented elements in the north. Because of this role played by the Sich, the Zaporozhians retained widespread popularity among the Ukrainian lower classes.

Sloboda Ukraine This vast territory, located east of Poltava and centered around present-day Kharkiv, was technically within the borders of Russia. Because it was largely unpopulated and vulnerable to Tatar attacks, the tsarist government allowed several waves of Ukrainian refugees (who were fleeing the constant strife in their homeland) to settle in this region in the mid 17th century and to establish autonomous, Cossack-style self-government. By the end of the century, the region had a population of about 86,000 Ukrainian males, of whom 22,000 were liable for military service in their Cossack regiments. Like the neighboring Left Bank,

Sloboda Ukraine was divided into regimental districts, named after the five major settlements of Kharkiv, Sumy, Okhtyrka, Ostrohsk, and Izum. In contrast to the Left-Bank colonels, those in the slobody were elected for life. However, Moscow was careful not to allow the Ukrainian Cossacks on its borderlands to elect a common leader or hetman and thereby to create a strong, united presence, as they had done in the Commonwealth. Instead, the tsar appointed a governor (yoevoda), stationed in Bilhorod, who carefully monitored Cossack activities and with whom each of the five colonels dealt separately. Thus, while the Sloboda regions contained a significant and growing Ukrainian population, they were not able to play an autonomous political role.