Короткий опис (реферат):
The article examines the Black Sea vector of the foreign and domestic policy of the Cossack Hetmanate from the mid-seventeenth to the late eighteenth century. Drawing on a wide range of archival and published sources, including the documents of Bohdan Khmelnytsky, materials from the Central State Historical Archive of Ukraine and the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts, as well as Cossack chronicles and accounts of contemporary travellers, the study reconstructs the successive concepts and diplomatic strategies through which the Hetmanate sought to secure access to the Black Sea. Particular attention is paid to the policies of Hetmans Bohdan Khmelny-tsky, Ivan Vyhovsky, Petro Doroshenko, Ivan Samoylovych, and Petro Ivanenko (Petryk), whose treaties, universals, and military campaigns demonstrate the existence of two competing approaches to resolving the Black Sea issue: the “peaceful” approach, based on an alliance with the Crimean Khanate and the Ottoman Porte, and the “military” approach, which envisaged an armed struggle to secure access to the sea. These approaches were associated with competing projects of state-building: the “Principality of Rus” and the “Zaporozhian Host”.The article also examines the phenomenon of “Khanate Ukraine” – a distinctive Cossack polity under Crimean protection, successively led by Teodor Sulymenko, Stepan Lozynsky, Ivan Bohatyi, and Petro Ivanenko (Petryk). Its “Articles of Perpetual Peace” withthe Crimean Khanate, concluded in 1692, envisaged the establishment of an independent Ukrainian principality and re-main one of the most vivid manifestations of the Ukrainian state-building idea of the seventeenth century. The history of Khanate Ukraine istraced from its emergence in the last third of the seventeenth century through its administrative and demographic evolution in the eighteenth century to the final incorporation of these lands into the Russian Empire under the terms of the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca (1774) and the Treaty of Jassy (1791). The study demonstrates that the Black Sea region served as a strategic and communicative core of the state-building plans pursued by various hetmans, while successive attempts to consolidate control over the region consistently shaped Ukraine’s geopolitical priorities throughout the period under consideration. This perspective makes it possible to overcome the fragmented nature of the existing historiography on the subject.
