Mazepa Oathbreaker, awarded the Order of Judas. Part of 2

13
Mazepa gained confidence in Peter 1 and enjoyed great respect from him. He provided strong support to the king in his military campaigns. Took part in both Peter's campaigns to Azov. In February, 1700, Peter 1, personally awarded Mazepa with the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called No. 2 - “for many of his noble and hardworking faithful services in military labors”. The motto of the order was: "For faith and loyalty!" In 1704, taking advantage of the uprising against the Commonwealth and the invasion of Swedish troops in Poland, Mazepa occupied the right bank of Ukraine. In 1705, he made a trip to Volyn, to help Peter's ally, the Polish king Augustus II. In total, Mazepa on the Russian side conducted more than 20 military campaigns.

Mazepa Oathbreaker, awarded the Order of Judas. Part of 2




A well-known phrase of Mazepa, uttered by him in the 1707 year: "Without extreme, last need, I will not change my loyalty to the royal majesty." He explained that the “extreme need” could be: “... until I see that royal majesty will not be able to protect not only Ukraine, but also the whole of its state from Swedish potency.”

In 1706, Russia suffered a series of political failures, the Swedes inflicted a crushing defeat on the Saxon army, and Peter's ally, the Saxon Elector, and the Polish king Augustus refused the Polish throne in favor of the supporter of the Swedes Leschinsky and severed the alliance with Russia. During this period, Mazepa, apparently, plotted the transition to the side of Charles XII and the formation from Ukraine of independent ownership under the rule of the Polish king.

In September, 1707, Mazepa received from the Polish king Leschinsky a letter from a supporter of the Swedes, in which he asked Mazepa to “start a business” when Swedish troops approached the borders of Little Russia. Thus, a year before the betrayal, Mazepa prepared the ground for moving to the side of the enemy, if he would win.

Shortly before, Mazepa, obsessed with envy and malice towards the national hero, Colonel Paley, decided to eliminate him, accusing him of colluding with Karl XII and the Poles. Peter I believed Mazepa, and Paley was demoted and exiled to Siberia.

Mazepa was the subject of a number of denunciations to Peter I, who spoke of his treason, but Mazepa enjoyed the confidence of the king, and he did not want to believe the denunciations, punished the scammers, and the king’s trust in the hetman only increased.

In August, 1707 of the Year was followed by a dangerous denunciation of Mazepa by the General Judge Kochubey. But the report was considered false. In January 1708, Kochubey sent another notice of Mazepa’s treason. Peter I found the denunciation again false, having entrusted the trial to the friends of the hetman, who tortured Kochubey and Colonel Iskra, after which they were beheaded.

Frightened by this denunciation, Mazepa led the negotiations with the Polish king and Charles XII, which ended in concluding secret treaties with them, with even greater vigor. Mazepa provided the forts for the winter apartments with fortified points, pledged to deliver supplies and win over the Zaporozhye and Don Cossacks to the side of KarlNNX, providing troops to 12 thousand sabers.

In the autumn of 1708, Peter 1 invited Mazepa to join the Russian troops with the Cossacks, Mazepa hesitated, referring to his diseases and troubles in Little Russia. Menshikov decided to visit Mazepa, fearing exposure, he with the hetman's treasury fled in October to Charles XII. With Mazepa, the Swedes transferred 1,5 order to thousands of Cossacks and supported the Baturin garrison, which Mazepa promised to give to the Swedes as winter apartments. Later, a part of the Zaporozhye army under the leadership of ataman Gordienko in the number of 3 to 7 thousand people joined him. Most of the Cossacks remained loyal to the Russian Tsar.

The result of Mazepa’s infidelity was the invasion of Swedes into Little Russia, where they entered into the provisions promised by Mazepa provisions, winter apartments and 50 thousands of Cossack troops.

The rest of Little Russia refused to support Mazepa, remained loyal to the Russian Tsar and began a people's war against the Swedes. Fearing further betrayals, Peter I gave the order to destroy the Zaporizhian Sich, which was done, with 156 atamans and Cossacks executed, Menshikov was ordered to take the well-fortified residence of the hetman - Baturin, where there were large supplies of provisions and artillery, promised by Mazepa to Charles XII. The fortress was taken in a few hours, and the garrison was destroyed.

In April, 1709, Mazepa entered into an agreement with Charles XII, which Ukraine is now trying to interpret as “signing the Ukrainian-Swedish alliance”, under the agreement Mazepa was given the title of prince for life, a number of cities were transferred to the Swedes, and the parties even shared the conquered Russia!

Seeing the lack of support for Mazepa among the Cossacks and the population, supporters began to leave him, taking advantage of the amnesty announced by Peter I.

Mazepa, abandoned by his colonels, again contrives betrayal and tries to offer Peter I to hand over to him Charles XII and his generals, but the king rejects this offer, since he no longer trusts Mazepa.

Betrayal of Mazepa, who enjoyed the unconditional trust and support of Peter I, forced the king to take harsh public measures to punish the traitor. Four royal decrees were issued: on depriving Mazepa of titles and ranks, on depriving him of the Order of Andrew the First-Called, on the establishment of the Order of Judas and in absentee execution of Mazepa, and the church betrayed him anathema.

Decree depriving Mazepa of titles and ranks.

We, the Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, all Great and Little and White Russia are autocrat ... we have always punished and will punish the ungrateful for treason and betrayal of Our Tsarist Majesty.

Among our subjects there was an ungrateful dog, a villain and an oath-breaker, the hetman of Little Russia and the troops of his royal majesty Zaporozhian Ivashka Mazepa, who had spread to the side of our worst enemy of the Swedish king Karl.

We, the Great Sovereign, with our command we excommunicate the traitor Mazepa from our blessing and decide to our nominal decrees:

- to cancel our complaint to Ivashka Mazepa on the Hetman’s Order of Little Russia and the Zaporozhian troops;
- deprive Mazepa of the rank of a real secret adviser to Our Majesty;
- confiscate all his property in the royal treasury.

Let all my subjects of punishment imposed by our Tsar Majesty on the traitor Ivashka Mazepa be a lesson of the imminence of punishment for swearing and cheating.

It is given in 12 on the day of November, in the summer of the birth of Christ 1708.

Decree on depriving Mazepa of the Order of St. Andrew.

We are the Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, the All-Great and Little and White Russia autocrat, indicated with his name, the Great Sovereign, with the order to deprive the thief and traitor Ivashka Mazepa of the title of the gentleman of the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called, who are awarded the most worthy subjects to “Vera and loyalty "to our Royal Majesty.

By his godless deeds, he disgraced the high title of such an honorable Order, lost his honor by betraying our opponent, Karl, and meanly ran into his arms.

He broke the oath given on the cross and the Gospel to me, the Great Emperor, and took the oath of allegiance to the Swedish king Charles. Let the punishment of heaven fall upon him!

Disgracing himself with dishonor, Ivashka Mazepa is not worthy to be on a par with the glorious sons of our patronymic. And therefore, we command the Christopher and traitor Mazepa to strip the title of cavalier of the Order of St. Andrew, break at the scaffold the certificate awarded to him to the noblest order, publicly remove his ribbon of the order from the noblest of those who have the name of martial martial arts, and forever exclude him from the list of the most generous from the white martial arts.

Let the eternal damnation hang over the perjurer and may our descendants always remember the treachery of the dog Mazepa. Damn you!

It is given in 12 on the day of November, in the summer of the birth of Christ 1708.

Decree on the establishment of the Order of Judah.

We are the Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, the All-Great and Little Russia and the White Russia autocrat, indicated the Great Sovereign with his own name, ordering to mark the despicable betrayal of the former Hetman of Little Russia and the troops of His Royal Majesty Ivashka Mazepa of Zaporozhye with the establishment of the Order of Judah.

Make the same hour a silver coin weighing ten pounds, and on it cut Judah on the aspen of the hanged man and at the bottom thirty silversmiths lying and with them a sack, and behind the inscription: "The damn son of a perishing Judas for the crush of the crush."

To that coin, make a two-pound chain and send this coin to the military campaign by drug mail immediately.

With this order, to award the dastardly traitor and perjurer Ivashka Mazepa, in the image and likeness of Judas for thirty silversmiths who betrayed his master.

It is given in 12 on the day of November, in the summer of the birth of Christ 1708.

Decree on the tradition of Mazepa's execution.

We, the Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, the All-Great and Little and White Russia, autocrat, indicated with our own, the Great Sovereign, the order to change the perjurer Ivashka Mazepa and deprive him of all ranks and ranks.

This oath-breaker, an ungrateful dog who killed the innocent souls of Kochubei and Iskra, instead of faithful service to Us, the Great Sovereign, committed evil not only against Our Tsarist Majesty, but also betrayed Faith to Christ, his people and his land, surrendering to the non-believer who had encroached on freedom ours This enemy of the Cross of Christ is subject to eternal damnation, like Judas, who betrayed Christ.

Behind gold and power this flattering villain has spread to the side of our enemy, let the eternal damnation be his reproach.

Therefore, we command a thief and a traitor to the former hetman of Little Russia and the troops of his royal majesty Zaporozhye Ivashka Mazepa for:

- violation of the oath of allegiance given on the cross and the Gospel to me, the Great Sovereign;
- Taking the oath of allegiance to the enemy of the land of the Russian Swedish King Charles;
- invitation and admission to the lands of Little Rus Swedes, guilty of the destruction of temples and the desecration of shrines;
- an attempt to overthrow the existing state system of Great and Little and White Russia

bring the death penalty by hanging.

For these sins in people's memory, this damned dog will forever remain Judah, for thirty silver coins who betrayed the Great Sovereign, the Cross of Christ and our faith. With his godless deeds, he himself deserved himself on his business, his place on the scaffold, and the punishment of heaven will be rewarded to him by the executioner.

It is given in 12 on the day of November, in the summer of the birth of Christ 1708.


In November 1708 of the year in Glukhov, in the presence of Peter I, the clergy, sergeant and Cossacks, Metropolitan of Kiev, the archbishops of Chernigov and Pereyaslavsky betrayed Mazepa anathema, and then the traitor’s absentee execution was launched in the central square. In advance, a doll was made, depicting Mazepa in full growth in hetman's vestments and with the ribbon of the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called over his shoulder, which was brought to the attention of the assembled.

Andrew's cavaliers Menshikov and Golovkin ascended the constructed scaffold, tore the patent issued to Mazepa for the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called and removed the St. Andrew's ribbon from the doll. Then the doll was thrown into the hands of the executioner, which he dragged along the squares and streets on a rope, and then hung up.

At the same time, the locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne in Moscow proclaimed: “... a traitor to Mazepa, for the crime and treason to the great sovereign, be anathema!” The anathema is valid in the Orthodox Church until today.

The betrayal of Mazepa did not save the Swedes from defeat near Poltava in June 1709. Karl XII and Mazepa fled to Bender after the battle, where Mazepa died in September 1709.

The long memory of Mazepa has been preserved in folk songs, where the epithets “dog” and “damned” are usually used next to his name. Nevertheless, for the supporters of the Ukrainian "separatist" this traitor, traitor and perjurer was and remains an idol and a model of honor and dignity.

For all his long life, Mazepa, being only in the service of someone, betrayed and betrayed the Polish king, the right-bank and left-bank Cossacks, the Russian king and tried to betray the Swedish king, swore an oath to the Turkish sultan, the Russian king and the Swedish king. Mazepa did not win a single military victory and did not prove himself as a statesman anywhere, but in his cunning and double-mindedness he so often changed his oath that these betrayals became the meaning of his life.
13 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    9 December 2018 05: 32
    Thank you for the article ... What are all the same "heroes" of the current Ukrainian government ..... I hope they will someday be "holders of the Order of Juda"
    1. -1
      9 December 2018 05: 42
      Quote: 210ox
      Thank you for the article ... What are all the same "heroes" of the current Ukrainian government ..... I hope they will someday be "holders of the Order of Juda"

      we ourselves have such "heroes" - a column, there will not be enough medals.
  2. +2
    9 December 2018 07: 42
    Unfortunately, the tendency to betray is one of the properties of the "elite". At all times and for all peoples. Loyalty to duty and oath for those who got involved in politics are just words.
    1. +1
      9 December 2018 13: 52
      In my opinion, the concept of "betrayal" is not applicable to politics. In politics, there is not and cannot be fidelity, a necessary condition for betrayal, there are only interests: their own selfish and everyone else's, since every participant in the political process understands them. This, in fact, is the difference between politicians and other people. We can be indignant as much as we want: "traitor", "Judas", etc., he (the politician) simply does not understand such words, they are not in his lexicon. Interests coincide - we move together, we parted - goodbye. No sentimentality or regret. I would say this: a person becomes a politician when he learns to betray others without noticing it.
      The art of a politician, in my opinion, consists exclusively of three things: the ability to correctly understand one's own interests (the main and probably the most difficult one), the ability to correctly understand the interests of other participants in the process, and the ability, if necessary, to mislead these "other participants" about their own interests. ...
      There is something personal in Peter's hatred of Mazepa. A similar behavior can be demonstrated by a wife, from whom her husband unexpectedly left for another woman "for the wrong reason". Peter believed that Mazepa was the sovereign's husband who owed him service, not realizing that Mazepa was precisely a politician. And Mazepa was unable to correctly assess his own interests in the political game he had started and quickly lost. Well, the loser can already be bonded as you like - history will not provide him with any excuses, he missed his chances during his lifetime.
      This is the fate of Mazepa. There was such a song from the "Zero" group: The roulette is spinning, jazz is playing, I lost - I ... "Well, let's say," not respected by others, a person with a non-traditional sexual orientation. " smile
      1. +2
        9 December 2018 14: 49
        Quote: Trilobite Master
        In my opinion, the concept of "betrayal" is not applicable to politics.

        Applicable only when the king is betrayed laughing

        By the way, recently I met quite an interesting material on this topic, which can explain motivation even more and simplify understanding of the whole situation from the point of view of aftertaste. The fact is that the Zaporizhzhya Army grew up on the rules and traditions of the Commonwealth, and there, at a completely European level, legal and contractual practice was developed, and even when an agreement was concluded between the king and Cossacks, the gentry or any other party within the state, each of the parties had certain duties that needed to be respected - or the contract could easily be invalidated. And they considered the departure into citizenship of the tsar from the middle of the XVII century as a bilateral treaty, where the tsar guarantees to respect their rights in accordance with the March articles and all subsequent agreements, and the Cossacks - faithfully serve him. But we know that the Tsar / Emperor in Russia owes nothing to anyone laughing And the times of snuff boxes have not yet come to the temple, and the Cossack foreman is not at all the nobility of the times of Catherine, Paul and Alexander. This inconsistency in legal practice, non-observance (from the point of view of the traditions of the Commonwealth, for Russia it was the norm) by the tsar of the terms of the agreements, the attack on the autonomy of the Cossacks systematically caused the Cossacks to protest against the tsar, since the Ruins. And yes, for the tsar, it was clear that the stump was a betrayal, but for the Cossacks it was not - since they did not see compliance with the agreements from the other side. So Mazepa could think that Peter had already violated past agreements more than once, and that means he was free from loyalty to him. And Mazepa did not understand, or ignored the fact that the order in Russia was "a little" different, and Peter, all the more did not understand or ignored, for he is not someone there, but the tsar himself!

        Although this is all, of course, not accurate. But as far as the attitude to the treaties in the Commonwealth is concerned, the information is quite accurate, I have repeatedly mentioned this, when even with the rebels the king was obligated to conclude the Treaty and comply with its conditions.
        1. +1
          10 December 2018 01: 01
          For decent people the concept of "betrayal" is applicable to politics, for scoundrels it is not. There are simply more villains in politics than decent people, as well as everywhere where you can manipulate people, power and money.
  3. +5
    9 December 2018 07: 50
    Intrepid bastard ...
    But the other hetmans rushed either to the Turks, then to the Poles, then to the Russians.
    Peter was annoyed that, having believed Mazepa, he destroyed Kochubei’s truly loyal people... After all, if he had listened to them, perhaps the Swedish invasion of Little Russia would not have happened...
    1. +2
      10 December 2018 01: 48
      Quote: Olgovich
      After all, had he listened to them, maybe there would have been no Swedish invasion of Little Russia

      This is another myth. The Swedish invasion of Ukraine (historically, as it seems to me, Little Russia is still a part of it) occurred due to the policy of strategic withdrawal adopted by the headquarters of Peter I, in which they do not engage in a general battle with the enemy and at the same time carry out total devastation of the terrain in the invasion zone. The Swedes simply ran out of provisions and they could not replenish them from local sources - for which reason they unexpectedly turned to Ukraine...
  4. 0
    9 December 2018 09: 11
    In the Kursk region to this day there are three villages: Mazepovka, Ivanovka, Stepanovka. So the memory of Judah remained. They say it was his estate donated by Peter1.
  5. +1
    9 December 2018 09: 20
    And what is this jubilee medal dedicated to the betrayal of Mazepa depicted in the picture? Judging by modern spelling, this is not the order that was made under Peter.
  6. +1
    9 December 2018 13: 46
    There was nothing outstanding or demonic about him. It was a common practice of those times among the Cossack elders to "waver along with the party line" and profess "multi-vectorism". We can still see traces of this policy in our time. If you follow the life path of most Little Russian hetmans, you will see the same picture. Another thing is that Peter I believed in him and valued him, which, knowing the morals of the Cossack elders, was absolutely impossible to do. Perhaps he was somewhat more successful and skillful in his politicking than other hetmans. A long stay at the Polish court, among the Poles, is a good school of resourcefulness, unscrupulousness, intrigue and treachery. The infection of Polishness is capable of corrupting even a more steadfast and morally strong person.
  7. +2
    9 December 2018 14: 23
    No, I’m incorrigible, I can’t pass by.
    Shortly before this, Mazepa, obsessed with envy and anger towards the national hero, Colonel Paley

    Well this must be so distorted surname! Not Paley, but Paley (in Ukrainian - Paley). And yes, of course, the author distorted the story.

    Indeed, Paly was arrested and exiled to Siberia with the direct participation of Mazepa, only his Russian government signed this case. And there is no intrigue or conspiracy - in 1702-1704, Paly led a large-scale uprising on the Right Bank, and the king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at that time was Peter's ally, Augustus the Strong. Peter sent an order to Paly (who had once taken the oath to the tsar) to free the cities of the right bank, returning them to the Poles, but he refused, for which he was arrested and exiled to Siberia. Does history no longer unambiguously expose Mazepa as a goat? Alas, this is reality. However, there are different stories about the relations of Mazepa and Paliy, and personally I am inclined to the fact that their relationship was at least complicated. And I’m not defending Mazepu here - there are enough contentious issues behind him.

    As always, the situation with the Hetmanate in the time of Mazepa is somewhat simplified, which does not fully understand the motivation for the actions of the traitorous hetman. Everyone knows very well what kind of tsar Peter I was - ignoring all sorts of conventions, tough, stubborn. But at the same time, they are surprised when a rather tough policy is attributed to him in relation to the Cossacks, which could lead to Mazepa's betrayal! Yes, Christmas trees and sticks, the Don Cossacks, under the leadership of Bulavin, also rebelled at about the same years, for about the same reasons! He ignored the previous agreements with the Zaporozhian Army, he needed resources and control over the territories for the war with the Swedes and the implementation of his own reforms, and he began to draw them directly from the Left Bank, sent troops there, began to create, in parallel with the traditional Cossack vertical of power, the Russian military, which gradually took over all the reins of government. This is precisely what the Cossack foreman and Mazepa in particular did not like very much, and this was one of the reasons for Mazepa's betrayal - the fear that his beloved friend and tsar, Pyotr Alekseevich, would finally remove him from power, and after the death of the old hetman will abolish autonomy. These fears were also shared by the foreman, who was also "wiped off" from the real power in the same way. There were many more unpleasant little things that added fuel to the fire - on the eve of the Swedish invasion, Russian troops actively used the scorched earth strategy, actively ravaging settlements on the Swedes road, taking people and livestock in different directions, burning crops, and this is somehow not very positive adopted in a fairly densely populated Army. Russian generals gave orders to Cossack units to redeploy over Mazepa's head, even without notifying him - and meanwhile, it was Mazepa who was responsible for supplying these troops, as a result of which regiments were often sent on orders from generals on campaigns without rear, which could bring the situation to starvation and significant non-combat losses. And the Cossacks did not like such things.

    And no, I am only explaining Mazepa's motivation, but again I do not justify him, since he exchanged an awl for soap: according to the terms of the agreements with the Swedes (though the exact text of the agreement was not preserved), the Zaporozhye Army was to become part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth after the war. protection of Sweden, but by God, why the hell did the small Army at that time surrender to the Swedes (on the Right Bank Cossack autonomy had already been abolished by EMNIP)? Thrown out into the cold as soon as necessary. And the belief that the Poles will not revoke their autonomy at the first opportunity and will not arrange a sky in diamonds for the Cossacks is generally a fairy tale! The whole history of the XNUMXth century made it clear: the Poles have no faith, while in the Commonwealth Liberum Veto and the triumph of the headstrong gentry, the Cossacks will not have any autonomy, but the punitive troops are already running. In addition, Mazepa went to speak out against the tsar in an extremely ... Strange form: there were very few troops under his order, the bulk of his Cossacks were at the disposal of the Russian commanders, fought with the Swedes for several days, and it is clear that the stump was not eager to become abruptly their allies. Moreover, he did not even notify the foreman of the negotiations with the Swedes, fearing a leak of information, as a result of which the leak nevertheless occurred, but the betrayal was an unexpected event for most of the colonels, Mazepa simply did not know which of them could be trusted, and how many of his people will support even among the "top" .... Mess, in short. By the way, all this strongly strikes at the Ukrainian assertions that Mazepa was a skillful politician - alas, he was only a skillful intriguer, but the politician from him after all this is seen as mediocre. Well, he chose a very, very unfortunate solution to the issue of preserving autonomy - so that the Hetmanate was already shining with a non-illusory tryndet in the coming decades, only the option he chose only increased the losses associated with this process, i.e. Mazepa only made things worse. And for me, as a Ukrainian who does not indulge in jingoistic snot, it is difficult to assess these actions of his as something good. Although I understand his motivation, and I acknowledge the positive aspects of his earlier activities.
  8. +2
    10 December 2018 01: 39
    Dear Yuri, I would like to say that your well-written article contains some rather controversial, if not unsubstantiated, statements.

    Quote: Yuri Apukhtin
    Thousands of Cossacks passed to the Swedes with Mazepa about 1,5 and supported the Baturin garrison, which Mazepa promised to give to the Swedes for winter apartments. Later, part of the Zaporozhye army joined him under the command of the chieftain Gordienko in the amount of 3 to 7 thousand people. Most Cossacks remained loyal to the Russian Tsar.
    Almost everything in this paragraph is incorrect and has been analyzed many times. Baturin was the Hetman's capital, and the presence of arsenals and food supplies there is logical. Furthermore, of the 50.000 Cossacks who made up the Hetmanate army at that time, approximately 30% remained loyal to Russia, supported their Hetman, or took a wait-and-see position. The Zaporozhian Cossacks went over to the Swedes immediately because of the previous oppression of their freedoms and the beginning of a campaign against them by a corps led by one of Peter's generals.

    In general, at the peak of their numbers, under the banners of Mazepa, approximately 20.000 Ukrainian Cossacks gathered (approximately 12-15 thousand from hetman regiments and from registrars, and approximately 5-10 thousand zaprogets), which is numerically comparable to the list of the entire Swedish army, later concentrated in the area of ​​Poltava (24.000 people).

    Quote: Yuri Apukhtin
    The result of Mazepa’s infidelity was the invasion of Swedes into Little Russia, where they entered into the provisions promised by Mazepa provisions, winter apartments and 50 thousands of Cossack troops.
    The result of the WHOLE Ukrainian problem, both for Peter and for Charles XII, was the policy of total "exposure", which the Russian tsar began to carry out by the attacking army of Swedes. The Swedes literally had nothing to eat, and all the villages with supplies in front of them were burned, and the locals were driven away. Therefore, they turned to Ukraine ...

    Quote: Yuri Apukhtin
    The rest of Little Russia refused to support Mazepa, remained loyal to the Russian Tsar, and began a popular war against the Swedes. Fearing further betrayals, Peter I ordered to destroy the Zaporizhian Sich, which was done, while 156 atamans and Cossacks were executed, Menshikov was ordered to take the well-fortified residence of Hetman - Baturin, where there were large supplies of supplies and artillery promised by Mazepa Karl XII. The fortress was taken in a few hours and the garrison was destroyed.
    This paragraph of yours sounds somehow overly patriotic and optimistic, the reality, unfortunately, was different ... Most of the volosts of Ukraine took a wait and see attitude. Loyalty to Peter I was preserved mainly only by those cities where not local troops were located as garrisons, but regiments of the regular army from Central Russia. Unfortunately, there is no talk of any nation-wide war against the Swedes in Ukraine at that time.

    Precise data on the Cossacks executed in the Sich and the Zaporozhian Cossacks killed in the forts and fortresses along the Dnieper are unknown and are unlikely to ever be known. But, one way or another, we are talking about several thousand people (approximately half or more of the "Sich" went to join Mazepa and Charles, the other half remained in place), unfortunately killed with clearly excessive cruelty.

    In fact, it is a well-known fact that Baturin, despite its wood-and-earth fortifications, was well protected and equipped with artillery, and held out for quite a long time against the tsar's corvolant, sent "to punish the villainous rebels." According to some sources, if not for the "reverse betrayal" of one of the Ukrainian officers, a quick capture by storm without a serious artillery siege park would not have happened. So, once again, not everything was as optimistic as you write.