Under Polish and Lithuanian Rule

For millennia Ukraine had been the crucible of mighty political conglomerates such as the Scythian, Sarmatian, and Kyivan realms. Its inhabitants controlled their own destinies and influenced, sometimes decisively, those of their neighbors. The civilizations that were based in Ukraine stood in the forefront of the cultural and socioeconomic developments in all of Eastern Europe. But after the decline of Galicia-Volhynia, an epochal transformation occurred. Henceforth, Ukrainian lands would no longer form the core of important political entities and, except for a few brief moments of self-assertion, the fate of Ukraine’s inhabitants would be decided in far-off capitals such as Warsaw, Moscow, or Vienna. During the Polish-Lithuanian period, Ukrainians called themselves Ruthenians (Rusyny), a name derived from Rus’. Belorussians were also called by this name. At this time, Russians were generally called Muscovites.

In cultural and economic terms as well, the status of Ukraine would decline to that of an important but peripheral province whose elites identified with foreign cultures and political systems. No longer dominant but dominated, the natives of Ukraine would have to struggle not only for their political self-determination but also for their existence as a separate ethnic and national entity. This effort became – and remains to this day – one of the major themes of Ukrainian history.

The flow and timing of events worked to Ukraine’s disadvantage in the 14^th century. Precisely at the time when it was sinking to a political, economic, and cultural law point, Ukraine’s neighbors – Lithuania, Poland, and Muskovy – were on the rise. Naturally these expanding societies were drawn to the power vacuum that existed in the south. There, ancient Kyiv was but a shadow of its former self. Abandoned in 1300 by the Orthodox metropolitan, who moved to the thriving cities of the Russian northeast and eventually settled in Moscow, Kyiv also lost many of its boyars and leading merchants. For extended periods of time it did even have a resident prince. And with the extinction of the native dynasty in Galicia and Volhynia, the West Ukrainian lands were also left leaderless and vulnerable. For about eighty years the titular overlords of the Ukrainian lands were the Mongols. But endemic internal conflicts within the Golden Horde prevented it, even during its relatively brief period of overlordship, from exerting extensive control in Ukraine. Consequently, the land lay ripe for the taking.

Among the first to take advantage of the opportunities that beckoned were the Lithuanians. In the mid 13^th century, their relatively primitive, pagan and warlike tribes were united by Prince Mindaugas (Mendvog) in order to withstand the pressure of the Teutonic Order of the German crusader-colonizers that established itself on the Baltic shores. From this struggle the Lithuanians emerged stronger and more united than ever. In the early decades of the 14^th century, under the leadership of Grand Prince Gediminas (Gedymin) they moved into Belorussia. And in the 1340s, during the reign of his son Algirdas (Olgerd), who flatly proclaimed, “All Rus’ simply must belong to the Lithuanians”, they pushed into Ukraine.

By the 1350s, Algirdas extended his sovereignty over the petty principalities on the left bank of the Dnieper and in 1362 his troops occupied Kyiv. After inflicting a crushing defeat on the Golden Horde in 1363, the Lithuanians moved into Podilia. At this point, with much of Belorussia and Ukraine under its control (roughly half of old Kyivan Rus’), the Grand Principality of Lithuania constituted the largest political entity in Europe. Its creation was a remarkable organizational feat, especially in view of the fact that it was accomplished in less than 150 years.

One ought not imagine the Lithuanian takeover of Ukrainian lands in terms of a violent invasion by hordes of fierce foreigners. Actually penetration, cooption, and annexation are more appropriate descriptions of the manner in which the goal-oriented Lithuanian dynasty extended its hold over the Slavic principalities. Frequently, Algirdas’s forces, which consisted largely of his Ukrainian subjects or allies, were welcomed as they advanced into Ukraine. When fighting did occur, it was usually directed against the Golden Horde.

So thoroughly did the Lithuanian rulers adapt to the local conditions in Belorussia and Ukraine that within a generation or two they looked, spoke, and acted much like their Riurikid predecessors. Indeed, they came to view their expansion as a mission “to gather the lands of Rus’” and used this rationale long before Moscow, their emerging competitor for the Kyivan heritage, also adopted it. It was for this reason that the Ukrainian historian Hrushevsky argued that the Kyivan traditions were more completely preserved in the Grand Principality of Lithuania than in Moscovy. Other historians even claimed that the Grand Principality of Lithuania was actually a reconstituted Rus’ state rather than a foreign entity that engulfed Ukraine.

Despite the Lithuanians’ impressive gains in Ukraine, it was Polish expansion that would exert the more lasting and extensive impact on the Ukrainians. The man who initiated it was Casimir the Great (1310-70), the restorer of the medieval Polish monarchy. In expanding eastward, the king had support from three sources: the magnates of southeastern Poland, who expected to extent their landholdings into the neighboring Belorussian and Ukrainian lands; the Catholic church, which was eager to acquire new converts; and the rich burghers of Cracow who hoped to gain control of the important Galician trade routes. In April 1340, the Polish king moved into Galicia. He did so under the pretext of protecting the Catholics of the land, who were mostly German burghers. But it was obvious that Casimir had been planning the move for some time, for in 1339 he signed a treaty with Louis of Hungary which stipulated that the two kings would cooperate in the conquest of Ukraine.

The aggrandizement of Ukrainian lands did not proceed as smoothly for the Poles as it did for the Lithuanians, however.

For more than two decades, the Poles, aided by the Hungarians, fought the Lithuanians, with whom most of the Ukrainians sided, for control over Galicia and Volhynia. Unlike the interprincely conflicts that were familiar to the inhabitants of the old Rus’ lands, this one had a new and disturbing dimension. Proclaiming themselves to be “the buffer of Christianity”, the Poles, partly from conviction and partly in order to gain papal support, represented their push to the east as a crusade against the heathen Lithuanians and the schismatic Orthodox Ukrainians. This view of their non-Catholic enemies as being morally and culturally inferior boded ill for future relations between the Poles and Ukrainians.

The Polish acquisition of Ukrainian lands and subjects was a crucial turning point in the history of both peoples. For the Poles, it meant a commitment to an eastern rather than the previously dominant western orientation, a shift that carried with it far-reaching political, cultural, and socioeconomic ramifications. For Ukrainians, the impact went far beyond the replacement of native rulers by foreigners: it led to the subordination of Ukrainians to another people of a different religion and culture. Despite certain positive effects produced by this symbiosis, eventually it evolved into a bitter religious, social, and ethnic conflict that lasted for about 600 years and permeated all aspects of life in Ukraine.

By the early 16^th century, it was evident that the Grand Principality of Lithuania was in a state of decline. In 1522, it lost Chernihiv and Starodub in north-eastern Ukraine to Moscow. And in 1549 and 1552 it was unable to fend off two major Tatar incursions. The mounting crisis reached a high point during 1562-70 when Lithuania became involved in another protracted war with Moscow. Burdened by the tremendous costs of the conflict and confronted by the threat of a Muscovite invasion, the Lithuanians turned to Poland for aid. The Poles were ready to provide it – for a price. Their main condition was that Poland and Lithuania, whose links at this point consisted basically of possessing a common monarch, now unite into a single political entity.

As a result of the union, a commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita) was formed that was to have a common, elected king, a common parliament (sejm), and common currency, tolls, and foreign policy. But the Grand Principality retained a measure of autonomy and preserved its own local administration, army, treasury, and legal system. However, all the Ukrainian lands that it possessed now became a part of the lands attached to the Polish crown.

For the Ukrainians, the Union of Lublin of 1569 was an event of tremendous import. Despite its shortcomings, for two centuries the Grand Principality of Lithuania had provided them with a hospitable environment in which to live. Although they were not independent, the Ukrainian princes did possess extensive control over their social, economic, religious, and cultural affairs. However, as the fate of Galicia (which had come under Polish rule earlier) indicated, once the Ukrainian lands and populace were transferred from Lithuania to Poland, their continued existence as distinctive societies would be put in question.

Task 2. Pronounce the words and learn their meanings:

neighbor [‘neibә] Lithuania [liθju:’einjә] Galicia [gә’li∫iә] Volhynia [vol’hinjә] Teutonic [tju:’tonik] Muscovy [‘m/\skәvi] occur [ә’kә:]

thoroughly [θ/\rәli] source [so:s] eager [‘i:gә] burgher [‘bә:gә] route [ru:t] crucial [‘kru:∫әl] incursion [in’kә:∫n]

environment [in’vaiәrәnmәnt]

Task 3. Give Ukrainian equivalents for the following word combinations and find the sentences with them in the text:

Precisely at the time; with the extinction of the native dynasty; lasting and extensive impact on smb; under the pretext of protecting; to be a crucial turning point in the history; despite (its) shortcomings.

Task 4. Give English equivalents for the following word combinations and find the sentences with them in the text:

Історичні події розвивалися…; скористатися можливістю; …щоб дати відсіч натиску; прагнути здобути; протистояти вторгненню (татар); створювати сприятливі умови для існування.

Task 5. Give synonyms for:

Realm, fate, legacy, ancestor, familiar, tolls.

Task 6. Give plural forms of the following nouns:

Millennium, status, vacuum, symbiosis, crisis.

Task 7. Pay attention to the pronunciation and translation of the following adjectives on -ible, -able :

Crucible, vulnerable, remarkable, inhospitable, unshakable, unreliable, impeccable, hospitable.

Task 8. Explain word-building of the following words:

Overlordship, warlike, leaderless, landholding, disadvantage.

Task 9. Find emphatic constructions in the text.

Task 10. Answer the following questions:

1. What epochal transformation occurred in Eastern Europe and in the 14^th century what was the cause?

2. How can you characterize Lithuanian expansion into Ukraine?

3. How long did Lithuanian expansion into Ukraine last?

4. The aggrandizement of Ukrainian lands did not proceed as smoothly for the Poles as it did for the Lithuanians, did it? Why?

5. Was the Union of Lublin of 1569 an event of tremendous import for the Ukrainians or not? If so, why?

Task 1. Read the text to yourself: