The article concerns the problem of the depreciation of the Zaporozhian Cossack by the nobility of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the Khmelnytsky Uprising. There has been made a detailed analysis of such sources as correspondence, resolutions of Polish parliaments, memoirs or, finally, occasional poetry, which clearly indicate the occurrence of the tendency to identify Cossacks with peasants and thus their rise to peasant rebellion. In addition, issues related to the depreciation of the leader of the uprising of Bohdan Khmelnytsky, who was perceived by the nobility of the Commonwealth as a peasant, were also raised. The article emphasizes that the tendency towards the depreciation of Cossack among the nobility of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the uprising led by Khmelnytsky strengthened its conviction that the events of 1648 were nothing more than the rebellion of the subjects – peasants who were mainly against the social and economic order of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. By identifying the Cossacks with the low-class population and perceiving them as peasants, trappers, slaves, simpletons, the nobility, by the same token, were conscious of their national state-creating power or even greater political ambitions and were convinced that they were primarily driven by low motives such as blood lust, destruction or even the desire for wealth and power.
PL
Artykuł dotyczy problemu deprecjacji Kozaka zaporoskiego przez szlachtę Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów podczas powstania prowadzonego przez Bohdana Chmielnickiego. Szczegółowa analiza dotyczyła takich źródeł, jak korespondencja, uchwały parlamentów polskich, wspomnienia, poezja okolicznościowa, które wyraźnie wskazują na występowanie wśród szlachty tendencji do identyfikowania Kozaków z chłopami, a tym samym ich dojścia do buntu chłopskiego. Podjęto również kwestie związane z deprecjacją przywódcy powstania – Chmielnickiego, postrzeganego przez szlachtę Rzeczypospolitej jako chłopa. Podkreślono, że tendencja do deprecjacji Kozaka wśród szlachty Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów podczas powstania Chmielnickiego wzmocniła jej przekonanie o tym, że wydarzenia 1648 r. były niczym innym, jak buntem poddanych – chłopów, skierowanym głównie przeciwko porządkowi gospodarczemu Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów. Identyfikując Kozaków z ludnością niskiej klasy i postrzegając ich jako chłopów, traperów, niewolników i prostaków, szlachta była świadoma swojej narodowej władzy państwowej lub nawet większych ambicji politycznych i była przekonana, że kierowały nimi przede wszystkim niskie motywy, takie jak żądza krwi, zniszczenie, a nawet pragnienie bogactwa i władzy.
The article shows the attitude the Cossacks presented on two Kiev synods in 1628 and 1629. Their strong position during the Synod of Kiev in 1628 led Meleciusz Smotrycki to give up his efforts not only to reconcile the Orthodox and Orthodox priests, but above all to persuade the latter to accept union. The Cossacks, opposing the presence of the followers of the Orthodox Church at the synod of Lwów, undoubtedly expressed their uncompromising stance on the issue of the Uniate-Orthodox reconciliation. The attitude of the Cossacks at the synods of Kiev in 1628–1629 also provides us with another argument for her independent actions in the religious field, which should be treated as a clear testimony of the importance of matters of faith in her activities. Just like during the Kiev events from the beginning of 1625, the Cossacks’ activity was at odds with the attitude of the then authorities of the Orthodox Church, which undoubtedly were both Job Borecki and Piotr Mohyła. The undeniable fact of the Zaporozhians’ influence on the change of their initially positive attitude towards the idea of re-entering the union with the Uniate Church, makes them increasingly self-supporting in defending the rights, privileges and, above all, the sovereignty of the Orthodox Church regardless of the weaknesses of its spiritual leaders.