The Andrusov truce between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was signed. Information center "central house of knowledge" Truce of Andrusovo river border

Plan
Introduction
1 Representatives of the parties
2 Terms of the Andrusovo Treaty
3 Meaning
3.1 Significance in the history of Belarus
3.2 Significance in Ukrainian history
3.3 Significance in Russian history

Bibliography

Introduction

The Truce of Andrusovo is an agreement concluded in 1667 between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for 13.5 years. The truce ended the war that had lasted since 1654 over the territories of modern Ukraine and Belarus. The name comes from the village of Andrusovo (now Smolensk region), in which it was signed.

1. Representatives of the parties

The Truce of Andrusovo was signed on January 30 by Afanasy Ordin-Nashchekin and Jerzy Glebovich in the village of Andrusovo near Smolensk. Cossack ambassadors were not allowed to sign the truce.

2. Terms of the Andrusovo Treaty

· A truce was established between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for a period of 13.5 years, during which the states had to prepare the conditions for “eternal peace.”

· The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth returned Smolensk, Chernigov Voivodeship, Starodub Povet, Seversk Land to Russia, and also recognized the reunification of Left Bank Ukraine with Russia.

· Russia renounced its conquests in Lithuania.

· Right Bank Ukraine and Belarus remained under the control of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

· Kyiv was transferred to Russia for a period of two years. However, Russia managed to retain it and secure its ownership in a treaty with Poland in 1686 after paying 146 thousand rubles.

· The Zaporozhye Sich came under joint Russian-Polish control “for their common service from the advancing infidel forces.”

· The parties pledged to provide assistance to the Cossacks in the event of an attack on the Ukrainian lands of Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth by the Crimean Tatars.

· Special articles of the agreement regulated the procedure for the return of prisoners, church property and the delimitation of lands.

· The right of free trade between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, as well as the diplomatic immunity of ambassadors, was guaranteed.

3. Meaning

3.1. Significance in the history of Belarus

For the territories of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which included Belarusian lands, the conditions for reconciliation were as follows: Moscow renounced Lithuania and Belarus, acquired by its troops, but retained Smolensk with its surroundings, which were conquered by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the Time of Troubles. One of the articles of reconciliation gave Moscow the right to intercede for the Orthodox inhabitants of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Northern Belarus - Vitebsk region, Polotsk, as well as Livonia (Dinaburg) - conquered by the Russian kingdom, was returned by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The treaty reflected a compromise on both sides: Moscow, although unable to retain everything it had conquered, greatly increased its territory, and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, not being able to recapture everything it had lost, returned some important lands. Both sides also hoped that the Andrusovo truce was only temporary and that its terms would be revised after 13 years.

All the prisoners taken during the war years to the Russian kingdom (as well as the exported valuables) remained there for the years of reconciliation. Only the gentry, soldiers, clergy and Cossacks with Tatars - a small part of the total number of prisoners - received the formal right to return, but not everyone was able to use it. The Belarusian gentry served in the distant Siberian outskirts. Nobody was going to return ordinary people, who were usually turned into slaves in the Moscow state. In Moscow alone, after the war, prisoners taken out of Belarus accounted for approximately 10 percent of the townspeople's population. Many Belarusians were in other cities of the kingdom - in Astrakhan, Velikiye Luki, Novgorod, Toropets, Tver and others.

3.2. Significance in the history of Ukraine

According to the Small Encyclopedia of the Ukrainian Cossacks, by concluding the Truce of Andrusovo, Russia finally abandoned its 1654 obligations to assist Ukraine in the fight against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. However, the Truce of Andrusovo only consolidated the division of Ukrainian lands, which de facto had already taken place since the beginning of the 1660s. This division was finally approved by the Eternal Peace between Poland and Russia.

According to N.I. Kostomarov, the results of the truce were a blow to the Cossacks; legal confirmation of the actual division of Ukrainian lands occurred without their participation. The terms of the truce caused disagreement among the Cossack elders, which led to the betrayal of Hetman Ivan Bryukhovetsky. At the direction of the Hetman, the Russian administration was expelled from the territory of the Hetmanate and a decision was made to transfer Ukraine under Turkish protectorate. However, soon the Right Bank Hetman Pyotr Doroshenko spoke out against him. The colonels and Cossacks betrayed Bryukhovetsky, united with Doroshenko’s Cossacks and handed over their hetman to him. By order of Doroshenko, Hetman Bryukhovetsky was torn to pieces by the crowd.

3.3. Significance in Russian history

In the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, the Truce of Andrusovo, concluded in difficult external and internal conditions, is considered as an important step by Russia towards the unification of the three East Slavic peoples.

Although the Truce of Andrusovo did not resolve a number of complex issues (for example, Russia did not receive Livonia and access to the Baltic Sea), thanks to it Russia was able to return the lands that belonged to it before the Time of Troubles (and even more). It also led to a rapprochement between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth on the basis of a joint struggle against the Ottoman Empire.

Bibliography:

1. Boguslavsky V.V., Kuksina E.I. Article “Andrusovo Truce” // Slavic Encyclopedia. Kievan Rus - Muscovy. - M.: Olma-Press, 2001. - T. 2. - P. 56. - 816 p. - ISBN 5-224-02249-5

2. Ignatoski, U. Short stories of history of Belarus (Traditional periods of the 16th - 18th centuries) (Belarusian).

3. “Ukrainian Cossacks. Small encyclopedia" / Ch. ed. F. G. Turchenko. - Kiev: “Geneza”, 2002. - P. 15. - 568 p. - ISBN 966-504-244-6

4. Evidence from the history of Ukraine. // Truce of Andrussia 1667. Kiev: “Genesis”. - 2002. - side. 25.

5. Evidence from the history of Ukraine. // Bryukhovetsky Ivan Martinovich. Kiev: "Genesis". - 2002. - side. 89-90.

6. Kopylov L. N. Truce of Andrusovo 1667. Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 3rd edition .

7. Truce of Andrusovo. January 30, 1667. System of federal educational portals. Project "Pedagogy of secondary school". Publishing house "Prosveshcheniye".

Truce of Andrusovo

The war between Moscow and Poland, which began in 1654, continued with varying success. Vygovsky’s betrayal and the intrigues of the Cossack elders introduced an element of mistrust and gave Moscow reason to doubt its allies, depriving it of the opportunity to conduct offensive operations, as was the case at the beginning of the war.

As a result, Moscow and Warsaw concluded a truce in 1667 in the village of Andrusovo, according to which Little Russia was divided into Russian and Polish parts. Moscow received the Left Bank, and Poland received the Right Bank, with the exception of Kyiv and its immediate surroundings. The vast area of the Zaporozhye Cossacks, according to the Andrusovo Truce, remained under the joint “supervision” of Moscow and Poland. Instead of one hetman, there now appeared a separate hetman of the Left Bank, subject to Moscow, and a hetman of the Right Bank, subject to Poland. But the hetmans did not particularly take into account the division of Little Russia, and each of them laid claim to the whole of Ukraine, which led to endless clashes and political combinations that continued for almost 20 years.

Yuri Khmelnitsky, after the defeat of Moscow troops near Chudnov in Volyn in 1660, agreed to peace with Poland under the terms of the Gadyach Treaty and was recognized by the Poles as the Right Bank Hetman. Together with the Poles, he organized a campaign on the left bank of the Dnieper, but suffered a terrible defeat from the Russian troops and the Cossacks of Colonel Somko. According to some reports, the Polish-Cossack army lost only twenty thousand people killed. Yuri Khmelnitsky lost the remnants of his influence and at the beginning of 1663 he renounced the hetmanship and became a monk.

On the Left Bank, the Cossacks began electing their own, Left Bank Hetman. A struggle began between the parties of candidates for the hetman's mace, Yakim Somko and Vasily Zolotarenko. Each of them sought help and support in Moscow, but the tsar, having already seen enough of the betrayals of the Cossacks, was in no hurry to make a decision and took a wait-and-see attitude. This struggle dragged on for more than two years between supporters of Somko and Zolotarenok, until a third candidate appeared on the scene - the Zaporozhye Koshevoy Ataman Ivan Bryukhovetsky. Unlike the first two candidates, he came from the common people, he was supported not only by the Cossacks, but also by the broad masses of the lower Cossacks, the peasantry and the bourgeoisie.

In 1663, Moscow finally decided to publicly hold elections for a new hetman. All three candidates and their supporters gathered at the Rada in Nizhyn. Since the common people took part in the Rada, it received the name “Black”. A kind of free democratic elections. True, with a special local flavor. In general, when we have democratic elections, some kind of leapfrog begins. So Yushchenko in 2004 simply followed national traditions. To convey the atmosphere of the Black Rada, I will again quote Oles Buzina.

Yakim Somko arrived in Nizhyn in mid-June with a large, well-equipped Pereyaslav regiment - the most important on the left bank of the Dnieper. When Somko set up camp in front of the city gates, Nizhyn Colonel Zolotarenko and all his men joined him. For some reason (apparently to count the votes more accurately!) he also took guns with him. Prince Velikogagin, the tsar's representative in the elections, who was sent from Moscow, especially did not like this.

Bryukhovetsky retreated from the other side of the city and hastened to put in a good word for himself in front of Velikogagin. Like, I am a peaceful man, devoted to His Royal Majesty, I came without artillery and am ready to be elected. Moreover, each of the applicants called himself hetman and demanded that the council take place on the side of the city where he settled. Somko even threatened to return home to Pereyaslavl if the elections were not held at his headquarters. But Velikogagin, who really did not like such obstinacy, ordered the royal tent to be placed on the opposite side - closer to Bryukhovetsky.

The scandal that happened next is perfectly described in the diary of Patrick Gordon, a Scottish mercenary who served in the Russian army: “On the 17th at 10 am, the okolnichy came with an army to the royal tent. After the guards had been posted, Somko set out from his camp with arms and flying banners; Bryukhovetsky did the same. At this time, several ordinary Cossacks moved from Somko to Bryukhovetsky. Although the okolnichy ordered to tell them that they had to appear without weapons, they did not pay attention to this. Upon the arrival of the bishop, the okolnichy, taking with him the royal letter and leaving the tent, sent Somka and Bryukhovetsky an order to approach the tent unarmed with all the officers and the best Cossacks. Everyone carried out this order, except Somka, who left his saber and saydak with him.

When the infantry lined up on both sides, and the okolnichy, bishop, steward and clerks stood on the benches, the royal letter was read, in which the Cossacks were ordered to choose a hetman for themselves and indicated what should be done when elected. The document had not yet been read halfway when a loud noise arose among the Cossacks: some shouted - Somko! others - Bryukhovetsky! When these cries were repeated while removing their hats, Somko’s infantry, penetrating forward with his horsetail and banners, covered him with banners, sat him on a bench and proclaimed him hetman. During this confusion the okolnichy and the others were forced to leave the benches and were very glad when they reached the tent. Meanwhile, the Cossacks who made up Bryukhovetsky’s party brought his horsetail and banners to the place where Somko was with his horsetail, and, pushing him and his followers away from this place, broke the shaft of the horsetail and killed the one holding it. The excitement was so great that if, on the orders of Colonel Strasburg, several hand grenades had not been thrown, the Cossacks would probably have broken the tent; The grenades cleared the area in front of the tent, where only the dead and wounded remained. Somko jumped on his horse and returned with his frustrated detachment back to camp. His baton and kettledrums were captured by Bryukhovetsky’s detachment.

The next day, most of the Somka people went over to Bryukhovetsky. The elections are over. Ukraine received a new hetman. Democratically elected, but very nasty. He immediately carried out a political reform, placing his people everywhere, and ordered the execution of Somka, who lost the elections. For three days the mob robbed the rich Cossacks, and the foreman hid wherever he could, exchanging, in the apt expression of Samovidets, “karmazin zhupans for homespuns.”

Exactly five years later, as a result of similar “elections,” Bryukhovetsky himself was killed. His competitor is Petro Doroshenko, as the same Samovidets writes, “allowing Bryukhovetsky’s goal to be scored. And so Golota tyrannically scored and muzzled Bryukhovetsky.” After which it all ended in robbery again.”

The moment with grenades is worth paying special attention to. We were outraged by the Orange Revolution, but it turns out that everything could be even worse. If, of course, you follow national traditions...

But let's return to our... heroes.

Having become hetman, Bryukhovetsky immediately dealt with not only his rivals - Somko and Zolotarenko. According to already established tradition, the property of the losers was plundered. In domestic policy, Bryukhovetsky at first strictly adhered to the Pereyaslav Act and in every possible way emphasized loyalty to the tsar. For this, he received the title of boyar and royal letters of grant for eternal possession of the city of Gadyach with the surrounding villages and, of course, the population of these villages.

Meanwhile, on the right bank of the Dnieper, the Poles installed their faithful servant Colonel Pavel Teterya as hetman. In general, it seems that King Jan Casimir seriously decided to take revenge for all the defeats of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in recent decades. Having gathered a huge army of 120 thousand soldiers at that time, enlisting the support of the Tatars and counting on the loyalty of the Cossack units of Teteri, King Jan Casimir moved east. His goal was not only the return of the Left Bank to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but also the complete defeat of the Muscovite kingdom. The Pope tried to give the actions of the Poles the character of a crusade, for which the Catholic Church conducted active propaganda in Europe. As a result of this, Jan-Casimir's army included 10 thousand Germans, as well as a certain number of volunteers and mercenaries from all over Catholic Europe. Among the latter was the French Duke of Gramont, who left detailed notes on the fighting.

At the beginning of 1664, the Poles approached Glukhov, behind whose walls Russian troops took refuge under the command of Voivode Romodanovsky and Hetman Bryukhovetsky with the Cossacks. Jan-Kazimir tried to immediately take Glukhov by storm, but was repulsed with heavy losses.

After an unsuccessful attempt to take Glukhov by storm, the Poles began a siege, constantly making new attempts to take the city by storm. The siege dragged on. At this time, an uprising broke out in the rear and along the communication lines of the royal army. As in 1648, all Russian people took up arms. The rebels and detachments of the regular Russian army destroyed the garrisons left by the Poles and intercepted all the convoys. Soon the Polish army found itself completely cut off from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Constant bloody but ineffective assaults, food shortages, lightning strikes by Russian soldiers who exterminated small detachments of Poles and then disappeared without a trace, undermined the strength of the royal warriors. And from Moscow, a 50,000-strong detachment of Prince Cherkassky hurried to the aid of Romodanovsky. To save the remnants of his army, Jan Casimir began a hasty retreat, which turned into a living hell for the Poles. Hardly forty thousand hungry and exhausted people managed to escape from the devastated, rebellious Little Russia. It was a complete defeat of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, from which it never recovered. For almost eight hundred years in a row, Poland continuously advanced to the east, capturing one Russian land after another. From now on, Russia will attack, and its aggressive and arrogant Western neighbor will fight back until it completely disappears from the political map of Europe.

The victory over the Poles near Glukhov strengthened the position of the Russian-oriented Left Bank hetman Ivan Bryukhovetsky. On the Right Bank, uprisings and riots began in the Cossack regiments, supported by the Cossacks, against the Poles and their protege Hetman Teteri. As a result, in 1665, Teterya renounced the hetman’s mace and fled to the Poles, and Petro Doroshenko was elected to the vacant position of Right Bank Hetman.

From the book Independent Ukraine. Project collapse author Kalashnikov Maxim

Truce of Andrusovo The war between Moscow and Poland, which began in 1654, continued with varying success. Vygovsky’s betrayal and the intrigues of the Cossack elders introduced an element of mistrust and gave Moscow reason to doubt its allies, depriving it of the opportunity to lead

From the book History of Wars and Military Art by Mering Franz

4. Truce After his fall, Napoleon called the truce at Poischwitz the greatest mistake of his life, and, indeed, this truce gave much more advantages to his opponents than to himself. Still, he had serious reasons to propose it. Napoleon's position

From the book SS Division "Reich". History of the Second SS Panzer Division. 1939-1945 author Akunov Wolfgang Viktorovich

Truce A bad peace is better than a good quarrel. Russian folk proverb By evening, Weidinger was tired of waiting for the intermediaries to return. He was about to give the order for his self-propelled artillery to fire at the partisans on the bridge, but then the Czech and German officer returned,

From the book Napoleonic Wars author

Truce of Pleiswitz In this situation, on May 23 (June 4), the main forces of the opponents were caught by the Truce of Pleiswitz, concluded through Austrian mediation, according to which hostilities ceased until July 8 (20), 1813 (later extended until July 29). Demarcation line

From the book Winter War 1939-1940 author Chubaryan Alexander Oganovich

PEACE OR TRUCE? Border of Peter the Great© O. VehviläinenThe Moscow Peace Treaty put an end to a fierce battle that lasted three and a half months. In Finland it was seen as a dictate. The Finnish government was forced to submit to all the conditions that

From the book German Occupation of Northern Europe. Combat operations of the Third Reich. 1940-1945 by Ziemke Earl

From the book The Hundred Years' War author Perrois Edouard

From the book Field Marshal Rumyantsev author Petelin Viktor Vasilievich

Chapter 7 Truce At the end of March 1772, Rumyantsev summoned Major General Igelstrom. He had long known him as a skillful and efficient diplomat and commander. Even under Kolberg, Baron Igelstrom stood out for his enterprise and courage and was awarded for his diligence in service

From the book Saladin. Conqueror of the Crusaders author Vladimirsky A.V.

Truce with the Crusaders In the summer of 1192, immediately after the victory at Jaffa, Richard fell ill and decided to make peace with Saladin as soon as possible. The Itinerary of King Richard stated: “The king’s health was rapidly deteriorating, and he despaired of regaining his health. Therefore he

From the book Egypt. History of the country by Ades Harry

Armistice On November 11, 1918, the day the armistice was concluded, there was reason to hope that Egypt could finally gain independence. US President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed the "Fourteen Points" of a post-war settlement, emphasizing the ideals of democracy and

From the book German Occupation of Northern Europe. 1940–1945 by Ziemke Earl

Armistice On July 28, during a secret meeting at Mannerheim's dacha in Sairal, Ryti announced his intention to resign and persuaded Mannerheim to accept the post of President of Finland. Three days later, the resignation was accepted, and on August 4, parliament unanimously approved the law,

From the book All battles of the Russian army 1804?1814. Russia vs Napoleon author Bezotosny Viktor Mikhailovich

From the book The Missing Letter. The unperverted history of Ukraine-Rus by Dikiy Andrey

Truce with Poland The next year (1656) events occurred that interrupted the successful continuation of the liberation of Ukraine-Rus. The Russian state entered into a war with Sweden and concluded a truce with the Poles. The reason for the war with the Swedes was, on the one hand, Swedish aggression in

From the book History of Ukraine author Team of authors

Truce of Andrusovo 1667 At the end of January 1667, Russian-Polish negotiations (which lasted with short breaks for more than ten years) ended with the conclusion of a truce for a period of 13.5 years. It was signed in the village of Andrusovo. According to its terms, Russia retained

From the book Our Blood in Smorgon author Liguta Vladimir Nikolaevich

Offensive. Truce. At 5 o’clock in the morning, soldiers and officers of the 695th Novogrudok Infantry Regiment from the Smorgon positions heard the roar of hundreds of guns of unprecedented power and force of artillery preparation. To the south, gun flashes sparkled to the horizon, and in the German trenches

From the book The Dead End of Liberalism [How Wars Start] author Galin Vasily Vasilievich

truce The end of the war, on the initiative of the American president, was to begin with the signing of a truce between the fighting parties. This was not Wilson's first peace initiative; like the previous ones, it did not cause delight among the “allies.” “Isn’t it better to apply

REACHING A truce

On January 13, at the 31st Congress, treaty articles were written: a truce was concluded for 13 years, until June 1680; at this time, representatives from both sides should meet three times to establish eternal peace, and the third commission should already be with mediators. The following cities go to the royal side: Vitebsk and Polotsk with counties, Dinaburg, Lyutin, Rezitsa, Marienburg and all of Livonia, also Ukraine on the western side of the Dnieper, but the withdrawal of Moscow military men from Kyiv is postponed until April 5, 1669; During these two years, the outskirts of Kyiv for a mile distance remained in royal possession. The Zaporozhye Cossacks remain on the defensive and under the obedience of both sovereigns, must be equally ready to serve against royal and royal enemies; but both sovereigns must prohibit them, as well as all Cherkassy people in general, from going to the Black Sea and disturbing the peace with the Turks. The following are moving towards the Tsar's Majesty: the Smolensk voivodeship with all its districts and cities, the Starodub voivodeship, the Chernigov voivodeship and all of Ukraine from the Putivl side along the Dnieper, and the Catholics who remain here will freely conduct their services in their homes; The gentry, townspeople, Tatars and Jews have the right to sell their estates here and go to the royal side. The Cossacks of the eastern side should not take revenge for retreating to the royal side; they should not withdraw people from here to the Moscow state and should not build new fortresses. Prisoners, clergy, gentry, military people, Cossacks, Jews, Tatars, burghers, artisans, merchants are released on both sides unconditionally, but the release of arable people will be decided at a future commission. Both sovereigns will invite the Crimean Khan to begin a truce; if he rejects the offer and goes to war against the Moscow state, then the king will not give him any help; if he begins to devastate Ukraine on both sides of the Dnieper or persuade the Cossacks to join him, then both sovereigns with their joint forces will repel the Busurmans. they prevent Ukraine from going to the latter, and the Cossacks will not be allowed such arbitrariness.

REPORT A.L. ORDIPA-NASHCHOKINA ON THE NEED FOR PEACE WITH POLAND 1663

[…] Great Russia needs an alliance with Poland. The service people of Great Russia from long wars to service are careless and boring, and in Ukrainian places it is impossible to be without a good service from the Crimean Khan and the Kalmyks. Also, other places need to be kept on guard and executed with troops. And now in all the regions of Great Russia and in Siberia there is a lot of service. But the world was still as it was, and that many people returned to their land and until those places were destroyed, the world would not be destroyed until it came to life. And what will it do if it is not through an alliance that will strengthen and keep the peace constant?

Great Russia needs an alliance with Poland. The long-known enemy, the Swede, being close to Great Russia, always sees the decline of the Moscow state and causes many quarrels on the sides: and in due course comes all sorts of ruin. And just as it was before, so it is at the present time that ambassadorial congresses know how destructive the Swean lies are. And all of them were done so that the war with the Polish state prolonged and internal quarrels arose in Great Russia. But if we don’t create an alliance with the Polish state in the world now, great destruction will never come from the Swede. The obvious enemy of quarrels is the kamsar of Svei; That’s why he lives in Moscow and does what he wants. And how can we hold back without an alliance?

Great Russia needs an alliance with Poland because during the current war, many Eastern Orthodox churches and monasteries were destroyed, and many buildings were built by the great Moscow sovereigns. But peace between those great states is still being created, and not by an auxiliary alliance with each other, and not only can the devastated holy places be restored and revived by merciful instructions, but also the remaining churches and monasteries, angry Catholics for the current war, will be betrayed into slavery and their piety will be ruined . And for this reason there needs to be a union.

Great Russia needs an alliance with Poland for this reason: for the union of the joy of help in those neighboring states, by the chance of any friendly assistance against a common enemy, that piety could emerge from the ashes of desolation into the light and show the color of salvation to faithful Christians. And not only would the former piety become a desolate place, but truth would grow even more in the faith of Eastern piety. […]

On the history of the Andrusovo Truce of 1667 // Historical Archive, No. 6. 1959 http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokumenty/Russ/XVII/1660-1680/Andrus_perem/text.htm

SUCCESS OF RUSSIAN DIPLOMACY

This is how Moscow acquired Russian lands long lost by Russia. But it was not easy to retain these lands given the difficulties that were created by Little Russia itself and its neighbors. In Little Russia, the entire second half of the 17th century. was a time of turmoil; in this previously unsettled Cossack Ukraine in the 16th and 17th centuries. under the influence of the Polish-Lithuanian state, a certain social order developed; next to the Cossacks, free, recorded in the registries, the Polish gentry appears, enslaving the Cossacks who were not recorded in the registries; The urban population multiplied, receiving special rights from among the Cossacks themselves, a class of more prosperous and influential people emerged - the “elder”, who sought to identify themselves with the nobility. […] In this “war of all against all,” Moscow had to play the role of a conciliator and appeaser, satisfying some and arousing the discontent of others. […] Despite the constant unrest - the “betrayal” of Little Russians to Moscow, Moscow holds tightly to Little Russia and ties it to itself more and more tightly (especially the left bank of the Dnieper). […] According to the Truce of Andrusovo in 1667 between Poland and the Moscow state, left-bank Ukraine remained forever with Moscow. […] And this was already a huge success. The annexation of Little Russia was the first important offensive step of the Moscow state regarding Poland. Until now, Moscow has almost always been on the defensive and the preponderance of forces has been for the most part on the side of Poland; From that moment on, the neighbors' relationships completely change. Moscow, clearly, is stronger than Poland and is advancing on it, taking revenge for previous grievances and returning its ancient lands. At the same time, having recently been weakened by the turmoil, it is now growing every year in the eyes of its other neighbors and gaining more and more diplomatic weight, despite its internal difficulties. Moscow diplomats operating at that time could be quite satisfied with their activities.

In 1667, the military conflict between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia ended. The end of any hostilities is accompanied by the signing of a peace treaty. This was signed after the conflict between Poland and Russia in the village of Andrusovo - modern Smolensk region.

Historical terms of the agreement

The Russian-Polish War was the result of a confrontation between two states that had territorial claims to the lands. The reason for the outbreak of hostilities was the decision of the Zemsky Sobor to accept the Cossacks as Russian citizenship - Hetman and leader of the National Liberation Revolution Bogdan Khmelnitsky repeatedly asked for this.

The beginning of the war was successful for the Russian side, but suddenly Sweden attacks Poland. Under these conditions, he signed the Vilna Truce with Russia. Goal - It became easier for Poland to defend against Sweden. What did the other party to the contract receive? Russia was given the opportunity to begin its campaign against Sweden, which soon happened.

A significant factor in the end of the Russian-Polish War was the death of the Hetmanate and plunged into Ruin (civil war) - as a result of the split, one part of the Cossacks went over to the side of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In fact, the territory of Ukraine was divided along the Dnieper. The Andrusovo truce will cement the fact of the split in a few years.

The conduct of wars on different fronts by the parties to the conflict led to the complete weakening of both Russia and Poland. At the final stage of the war, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was defeated by Russian troops near Bila Tserkva and Korsun. The fighting died down due to the exhaustion of human and material resources. In this state, the parties approached the signing of a peace treaty.

Reasons for the truce

Any truce in history always has two reasons: one side is clearly weaker than the other and accepts the conditions of the winner. There is another option - the warring countries are equally exhausted and need a reasonable resolution of the conflict.

What can be called the reasons for signing the Andrusovo Truce?

The war had exhausted itself - there was no longer any strength or need to conduct military operations.
The Vilna Truce laid the foundation for a future major treaty.
The Russian-Swedish War began - Russia was inconvenient for military operations on two fronts.
The desire to take control of the Hetmanate, where a large-scale civil war had unfolded.
Strengthening and activation of a new enemy - the Ottoman Empire.

Signing of the agreement: representatives of the parties

The conclusion of a truce began to be discussed back in the 1990s. Territorial claims caused a lot of controversy, and grievances for the broken Polyanovsky Peace were recalled. Diplomatic battles could have lasted for several more years, but the situation in the Hetmanate changed the situation. Petro Doroshenko, who proclaimed himself hetman of all Ukraine, accepted the protectorate of Crimea. Thus, Poland lost the Khanate as its ally. In such a situation, Russia was able to strengthen its position in the negotiations.

The agreement was signed on January 30 (February 9), 1667. Russia was represented by the famous diplomat and politician Afanasy Ordin-Nashchokin. The Andrusovo truce with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is his idea. The diplomat insisted on signing an agreement in order to strengthen ties with Poland to fight against Sweden and spread Russian influence throughout Europe. This politician enjoyed influence at the court of Alexei Mikhailovich.

The Truce of Andrusovo, as a significant event in the 17th century, is known thanks to the documents of Ordin-Nashchokin. There are very few documents that could be used to trace the history of the signing of the treaty in detail, and they provide fragmentary information.

The Polish side was represented by Yuri Glebovich - politician, diplomat, statesman. The signing of the Truce of Andrusovo is also considered his merit, for which he was awarded by the king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Representatives from the Cossacks were not allowed into the negotiations regarding the treaty.

Truce terms

After the settlement of all controversial issues, the Andrusovo Truce was signed. The parties entered into an agreement for thirteen and a half years. This period was allotted for the preparation of the “Eternal Peace” project. Basically, the agreement concerned the division of territories and spheres of influence.

Under the terms of the agreement, Russia received control of the Chernigov region, Starodub region, Seversk land, and Left Bank Ukraine. The Lithuanian conquests were canceled. The Truce of Andrusovo in 1667 guaranteed Poland control over the territories of Right Bank Ukraine and Belarus. The joint administration of the two monarchies extended to Zaporozhye. In the event of an attack by the Tatars, the parties to the treaty were required to provide military assistance to the Cossacks. According to the terms of the truce, Kyiv was to remain under Russian control for 2 years.

The agreement regulated the procedure for the return of prisoners after the war and the division of church property. The agreement had clauses regulating economic relations between the countries - one of the articles secured the right to free trade between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

The meaning of entering into a contract

The Andrusovo truce with Poland is assessed ambiguously by Russian historians. Some call it a forced step, which was taken out of the need to end the military conflict. Others note the positive aspects of the signing of the treaty - rapprochement with Poland, which could become an ally in the fight against the Ottoman Empire. In addition, Russia regained some of its lost lands. The truce is responded to by the fact that it was not possible to gain access to the Baltic Sea, which was planned at the beginning of hostilities.

Consequences

The treaty is considered a significant step towards the unification of the Slavic peoples, although many foreign policy problems were not resolved. For the Ukrainian lands, the truce had negative consequences - the split of territories along the Dnieper was legally established. A significant blow was dealt to the Cossacks as a social stratum. The struggle for power in the Hetmanate intensified. Part of the Belarusian lands passed to Poland.

The Truce of Andrusovo is an important international treaty that marked the end of hostilities, but marked the beginning of some political strife.

13:24 — REGNUM

A.N. Ordin-Nashchokin. Unknown Russian artist. The end of the seventeenth century. Moscow, State Historical Museum

1667 On February 9 (January 30, old style), the Truce of Andrusovo was concluded between Russia and Poland.

Map of Poland in the 16th-17th centuries.

"The Truce of Andrusovo of 1667 between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for 13.5 years; ended the Russian-Polish war of 1654-67 for Ukraine and Belarus. Signed on January 30 by A. L. Ordyn-Nashchokin (Russia) and Yu. Glebovich (Poland) in the village of Andrusov near Smolensk. Poland returned the Smolensk and Chernigov voivodeships to Russia and recognized the reunification of Left-Bank Ukraine and Belarus under Polish rule. Kyiv was supposed to remain with Russia only until 1669, but Russia retained it, which was formalized. “The Eternal Peace” of 1686. The Zaporozhye Sich was declared under the joint control of Russia and Poland. The Truce of Andrusovo, concluded in a difficult internal and external situation for Russia, was an important stage in the struggle for the reunification of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples with Russia.”

Quoted from: Great Soviet Encyclopedia. M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1970-1977

“Afanasy Lavrentievich was the son of a very modest Pskov landowner; in the Pskov and nearby Toropetsk districts there was a whole family nest of the Nashchokins, which came from one prominent servant at the Moscow court of the 16th century. From this nest, which had become seedy after its founder, our Afanasy Lavrentievich came out He became famous under Tsar Mikhail: he was more than once appointed to ambassadorial commissions to demarcate borders with Sweden. At the beginning of Alekseev’s reign, Ordin-Nashchokin was already considered a prominent businessman and a zealous servant of the Moscow government in his homeland. That is why during the Pskov rebellion of 1650. the rebels intended to kill him. When the Moscow regiments pacified this rebellion, Ordin-Nashchokin showed a lot of zeal and skill. From then on, he went uphill. When the war with Poland opened in 1654, he was entrusted with an extremely difficult post: with small military forces. was supposed to guard the Moscow border from Lithuania and Livonia. He perfectly fulfilled the assignment assigned to him. In 1656, the war with Sweden began, and the tsar himself set off on a campaign near Riga. When Moscow troops took one of the Livonian cities on the Dvina, Kokenhausen (an ancient Russian Kukeinos, once belonging to the Polotsk princes), Nashchokin was appointed governor of this and other newly conquered cities. In this position, Ordin-Nashchokin does very important military and diplomatic affairs: he guards the border, conquers Livonian towns, corresponds with the Polish authorities; not a single important diplomatic matter is done without his participation. In 1658, through his efforts, the Valiesar Truce with Sweden was concluded, the terms of which exceeded the expectations of Tsar Alexei himself. In 1665, Ordin-Nashchokin sat as a governor in his native Pskov. Finally, he performed the most important and difficult service for the Moscow government: after tedious eight-month negotiations with the Polish commissioners, he concluded a truce with Poland in Andrusovo in January 1667, putting an end to the thirteen-year war that was devastating for both sides. In these negotiations, Nashchokin showed a lot of diplomatic acumen and the ability to get along with foreigners and extracted from the Poles not only the Smolensk and Seversk lands and eastern Little Russia, but also from the western Kyiv and the district. The conclusion of the Andrusovo truce placed Afanasy very high in the Moscow government and gave him great diplomatic fame. Doing all these things, Nashchokin quickly climbed the bureaucratic ladder. A city nobleman by birth, at the conclusion of the aforementioned truce, he was granted a boyar status and appointed chief administrator of the Ambassadorial Prikaz with the loud title of “the royal great seal and state great embassy affairs guardian,” i.e. e. became state chancellor."

Quoted from: Klyuchevsky V.O. Works in 9 volumes. Volume 3. Course of Russian history. Part 3. M.: Mysl, 1988. p. 315-316

History in faces

From a letter from Alexey Mikhailovich to A.N. Ordin-Nashchokin:

We sent the devious Prince the Great-Gagin to Vyazma with two regiments of reiters and with four orders of archers and with 33 cannons; from Vyazma they were ordered to go to Smolensk not for blood, but so that the Lithuanian troops would retreat. If the Polish troops leave the Smolensk district and the commissars are more kind to you than before, then you, chosen by God and faithful to our good will, will cede Dinaburg with Zaporozhye, except for the coast of the local side against Zaporozhye, because according to your agreement the commissioners cede all the Cherkassy cities of the local side , but they stand for Kyiv; if it is impossible to hold Kyiv by any means, the commissars will not agree, the army will not be withdrawn from the Smolensk district, and they want blood, then Kyiv should be ceded, but first insist on the withdrawal and detention of the troops, so that it is given by will, and not by necessity. Look closely to see if the commissars want to hold Kyiv through their service, but are they telling you on purpose that the decree was sent to them from the Sejm; and we truly know that the Sejm was torn apart without any action. Stand with all your might so that our titles continue to be written as Kyiv

Quoted from: Soloviev S.M. History of Russia from ancient times. Volume 11, chapter 3. M.: Mysl, 1989

The world at this time

In 1667, the War of Devolution broke out between France and Spain over territories in the Netherlands.

Portrait of Louis XIV. Charles Le Brun. 1668

“The war of devolution is the name of the war declared in 1667 by Louis XIV of Spain because of the Spanish possessions located in the Netherlands. According to the custom of these provinces, or rather, according to the custom of Brabant, children from a second marriage were disinherited after their father (this custom was known some lawyers call it devolution law). King Philip IV of Spain (d. 1665) left from his first marriage only his daughter Maria Theresa, who was married to Louis XIV; from his second wife he had a son, who ascended the throne under the name Charles II. Louis XIV demanded the application of the law of devolution to the Netherlands, according to which the possessions were to pass to Maria Theresa. Spanish lawyers argued that the law of devolution was only a private civil custom and could not be applied to inheritance in the state; moreover, when she got married, Maria Theresa certainly refused; from the rights to the paternal inheritance. French diplomats responded that the Netherlands was rather the private property of the Spanish kings than part of their state; as for the infanta's abdication, it is invalid because she was not of age when she married, and her dowry has not been paid. The French king soon supported his demands with weapons. In 1667, war was declared on Spain. Louis XIV ensured England's neutrality, persuaded some of the imperial princes to supply him with troops, and managed to sway the emperor from the Spanish alliance. Less than three months had passed before a significant part of Flanders was conquered. Such rapid successes worried Holland, which hastened to enter into negotiations with England in Sweden, which ended with the conclusion of the Triple Alliance in Gaga (1668), which offered its mediation to the warring parties. Meanwhile, the French troops occupied Francheconte in the depths of winter. The hope of soon succeeding Charles II, however, made Louis XIV more amenable to proposals for a triple alliance. Peace was concluded in Aachen. France retained its conquests in Flanders (Lille and Douai, by the way), but returned Francheconte (1668)."

Quoted from: Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron. St. Petersburg: Publishing Society F. A. Brockhaus - I. A. Efron. 1890-1907.