"Do not brag about your father, brag about your son who has done well."

Folk proverb.  

Etymology. Origin of the surname  

According to Professor Alexandra Cheslikova of the Institute of the Polish Language, the surname Gulevich is one of the most characteristic surnames of the Russian-Polish border since the 15th century and is likely one of the oldest Western Russian surnames. The Belarusian philologist Ivan Stankevich (Yanka Stankevich) emphasized that surnames ending in -ich or -vich are an original Slavic tradition, signifying either a blood relation or place of birth. Among the Slavic tribes, surnames were formed either in the form of simple personal nicknames that were passed hereditarily from one generation to the next without any change, or with the addition of the ending -ich (-vich), used in the sense of a full Russian patronymic. 

Similar examples can be found in ancient Russian chronicles, which mention Voivode Pretich (968), Luta - the son of Sveneld as "Svenaldich" (975), Jan Usmovich and Alexander Popovich (1001), etc. As Stankevich noted, surnames (or nicknames) in -ich began to appear even at that time in the life of the Slavic people, when tribal relations were still in place. For example, those from the Smala clan began to be called Smolichs, and those from the Baba clan were called Babichi, etc.  The same endings are also known in the names of the tribes that eventually formed the basis of the Belarusian people (Krivichi, Dregovichi, Radimichi) Surnames on -ich and localities (oikonyms) on -ichi on the Belarusian territory are generally found in a multitude, starting from the Disna povet (district) of the Vilna region (the northwestern part of the modern Vitebsk region). There are even more of them in the west, south and center of the Vitebsk region, and it is likely that there are quite a lot of these surnames in the east of the Vitebsk lands, quite often they are found throughout the Mogilev region, and little by little throughout the rest of Belarus.

Of all the Slavic nations, except for Belarusians, surnames ending in -ich are especially characteristic of Serbs (e.g. Pashic, Vuyachich, Stoyanovich). In Silesia, Moravia, and Saxony, where the now Germanized Slavs once lived, there are still many towns, castles, and villages ending in -ich or in German sounding -itz (by the way, surnames too). It should be noted that similar oikonyms were preserved in the eastern direction, with the meaning of generic nicknames. Later, on the territory of Russia, these were replaced by the ending -vo; for example, Dyatkovichi became Dyatkovo in the former Oryol province.  

This trend in the Muscovite state was clearly demonstrated by the evolution of nicknames ending in -vich, which gradually became patronymics, although not every boyar or privileged nobleman received one. During the "pre-Moscow period" in Russia, people converted their own names or nicknames by adding the ending -ich (-vich) to the first. However, in Muscovite Rus', this practice was abolished, in part due to the humiliation of one person over another, who was deemed superior.(the consequences of parochialism). In ancient Rus', family nicknames in the form of a full patronymic ending in "-vich" were expressions of respect and honor. In Muscovy, the "-vich" was truncated to give the nickname a diminutive-pejorative form. Moreover, the grand dukes continued to "vicitate" themselves as before, as well as their relatives and those persons who enjoyed their special grace. Slaves "vicili" gentlemen, ordinary people - noble persons.  

In Moscow, "vich" was added as a sign of honor to non-Moscow surnames. For example, the Radziwills were called the Radzivillovichs, just as Sapieha and Dovgerdov were. However, they did not stand on ceremony with those with whom they kept without fear. An example of this is the remarks to Hetman Khmelnytsky, who used his patronymic with "vich". Hetman Samoilovich was cut down to Samoilov, the same was done with the Mokrievichs, Domontovichs, Yakubovichs, Mikhneviches, and the Mokrievs, Domontovs, Yakubovs, Mikhnevs were obtained. Surnames ending in "-vich" existed for a long time in Novgorod and Pskov, where there were the following boyar surnames: Stroilovichi, Kazachkovichi, Doynikovichi, Raigulovichi, Ledovichi, and Lyushkovichi. These were truncated under the influence of Moscow. The "-vich" ending emerged at the end of the 16th century as a special, extraordinary award, with the sovereign himself indicating who should be written with "-vich". During the reign of Catherine II, a list of very few people was compiled who should be written with "-vich" in government documents. When the question arose of how to deal with patronymics in this case, the Empress issued an order: persons of the first five classes should be written with their full patronymics, those from the sixth to the eighth inclusive should be written with semi-patronymics (without "ich"), and all the rest should not have a patronymic, first name only. However, the "Smolensk" Gulevichs, as well as some others who, over time, found themselves in Russian citizenship, managed to keep their family name unchanged.

There are several versions explaining the origin of the surname Gulevich, or rather its root. In his work "Polish Surnames" ("Nazwiska Polakow"), Polish professor Kazimierz Rymut writes that names starting with "Hul-" apparently come from the verb "walk" in the sense of "to revel" or "to rebel". As another option, the professor suggested the origin of the noun "hul" - identifying it as "blow" or even "bulge". It is known that in Ukrainian, "gulya" means "bump", referring to a rounded bulge, such as a tubercle on the forehead. The Explanatory and Derivational Dictionary of the Russian Language   (T.F. Efremova. 2000) also indicates the same meaning (gulya - a colloquial version of “bump”, “swelling”, “swelling under the eyes”)  

The suffix "-vich" means "son", so the surname Gulevich, according to Professor Rimunt, would mean "son of Hula or Gul", i.e. literally, as an option, the son of a reveler or rebel.  The Belarusian writer and literary critic Vladimir Yurevich (Uladzimir Yurevich), in his work devoted to Belarusian surnames, directly wrote that such surnames as: Gul, Gulko, Gulich, Gulevich, Gulenka, Gulkevich, Gulitsky, Guleba, Gulyaka, Gulyakevich come from the word "walk", contrasting it with the verb "work".  

However, the compilers of the Dictionary of Russian Personal Names offer a different version: “The surnames Gulevich, as well as the same-root Gulyaev, Gulyai, Gulak, Gulevsky, Guleichik, Gulenko, Gulia, Gulichev, Gulyga, Gulkevich, Gulko, Gulchinsky and others could come from various forms of the name Sergei . This is a Roman generic name, possibly meaning "highly venerated". Among the diminutive forms from him there are also the following: Gulenka, Gulechka, Gulya, Gulyushka, Gulya, Gunechka, Gunechka, Gunka, Gunyushka, Gunya, Goose, Gusechka, Guska, Goose, Gusha, Gushka .... ”(source - A. N. Tikhonov, L. Z. Boyarinova, A. G. Ryzhkova "Dictionary of Russian Personal Names". M., 1995.). A different etymology for surnames with this root is offered by another dictionary, indicating that the stem Gul- is a diminutive of the name Yegor, George, or even goes back to a proper name - Gulyai, which is quite common in Rus'. (source - Russian surnames: a popular etymological dictionary / Yu. A. Fedosyuk. - 6th ed., Rev. - M .: Flinta: Nauka, 2006.  

Without stopping definitely on any of the interpretations of the proper personal name, which has become a patronymic for an extensive family, the following should be noted; among representatives of the Gulevich clan and adjacent clans in the 15th century. there are   such forms of proper names as: Mikhno (Mikhail), Vasko (Ivan), Senko (Semyon), Galshka (Elizaveta), Gulko ....    

Story Part 1. Volyn (Volhynia, Wolyn)  

Volyn is the oldest among the Christian lands of Ancient Rus'; following Kiev, one of the first, she would have the right to celebrate the millennium of her baptism. But, perhaps, the earliest preachers of the Word of God appeared here even earlier: according to legend, the western part of present-day Volhynia already at the end of the 9th century was part of the diocese of Equal-to-the-Apostles Methodius (+ 885), which stretched from Moravia to the Volyn rivers Bug and Styr. And who knows, if the first monks had already come here, who fell in love with the mountain, which later received the name Pochaevskaya, covered with dense forest and having many caves. History has not preserved for us any information about their lives. However, more than a century later, Grand Duke Vladimir Svyatoslavovich brought the Greek and Bulgarian clergy to Volyn and was accepted here for the baptism of the villages and cities subject to him. In these parts, he also founds a new city - Vladimir-Volynsky, where he builds a church consecrated in the name of Basil the Great, the saint, whose name he himself was named at his baptism. In 992, he established an episcopal see here and built a cathedral church in the name of the Assumption of the Most Holy Theotokos, and Vladimir-Volynsky became the center of the church and political life of the Western Russian outskirts. This is how   Volhynia enters the circle of Christian lands.  

The original population of Volyn is the Slavic union of Volyns (they are also Dulebs or Buzhans), represented, by the way, both in the center of Europe and in the Baltic (the island and the city of Volin at the mouth of the Oder). During the great migration of peoples, the duleb tribal union broke up into "Czech" dulebs and dulebs in the basin of the Pripyat and Bug rivers, which at the end of the 8th or at the beginning of the 9th century. moved beyond Pripyat to the lands of another Slavic tribe - the Dregovichi.  

Medieval written sources record dulebs in Volyn, in the Czech Republic, on the Middle Danube, between Lake. Balaton and r. Mursa, etc. They had 230 "cities" (castles). According to the Primary Chronicle, in con. 6 - beg. 7th century Dulebs suffered heavily from the invasion of the Avars (obrovs), with whom they waged a fierce struggle. In 907, their squad participated in the campaign of the Kyiv Prince. Oleg the Prophet to Constantinople. Dulebs and their "king" are mentioned by the Arab geographer al-Masudi. In the 10th century The association of the Dulebs, apparently, broke up, and they became part of Kievan Rus under the name of the Volynians ("Dulebs live along the Bug, where the Volynians are now") and Buzhans ("zane sedosha along the Bug"). Slavic toponyms and hydronyms presented in Volyn can serve as a kind of standard for Slavic topography.

The Volyn landscape is a fertile plain stretching from east to west with a wide belt cut through by many rivers (the southern tributaries of the Pripyat). To the north of the Volyn opolye, the vast forests of the Pripyat Polissya rustle. To the south, Volhynia cuts through a stone ridge from west to east, pointing the Carpathian massif to the east, to the center of Eastern Europe. The Slavic population in Volyn since ancient times lived along the banks of the upper reaches of the rivers Sluch, Goryn, Styr. Settlements and settlements of the Volhynians in the 5th-13th centuries. stood on the banks of the rivers, as on the side of a high road. There were also land routes in Volhynia, going from the middle Dnieper (from Kiev) to Przemysl and Berest with Drogochin and further to Krakow, to the Danube, to South Germany.  

The natural boundary of Volhynia in the west is the valley of the upper reaches of the Western Bug. In the east, from the lands of the chronicle meadows and the later Kyiv principality, Volhynia is separated by the valley of the Sluch River. The historical center of the union of the Volynians of the 5th-10th centuries, apparently, was located   in the city of Volyn, in the valley of the Western Bug near the modern city of Khrubeshuv (Poland). The chronicle mentions the city of Volyn under 1018. Archeology points to the 7th century as the time of the beginning of life in the settlement of Volyn. Around the middle of the 7th c. subjected to destruction, located nearby Zimnovskaya settlement. It could be the forerunner of historical Volhynia. In total, there were up to 70 cities and settlements in Volhynia.  

To the west of the upper reaches of the Western Bug there is a historical region called Chervonnaya Rus, the center of which was in the 9th-13th centuries. was the city of Cherven. North of the ancient Cherven, at the beginning of the 13th century. a new center arose - the city of Kholm (now Chelm in Poland), and the surrounding lands began to be called Kholm Rus.   In 10-13 centuries. The Volyn Principality included lands in the upper reaches of the Neman with the cities of Goroden (now Grodno), Volkovysk, Tureisk, Slonim and Novgorodok (now Novogrudok - all on the territory of modern Belarus). The connection between Volhynia and the upper Neman was carried out through the Berestey land, the center of which was the city of Berestye (now Brest). The valleys of the Pripyat, Yaselda and Shchara rivers, due to their extreme swampiness and impassability, were at that time a kind of land "Terra incognita" on the way from Volyn to Ponemanye and to this day are one of the most picturesque places in Belarusian Polissya. The cities of Berestye and Drogochin, standing on the banks of the Western Bug, served for Volyn and for Kievan Rus as a whole - the western gate to the center of Europe. In the last quarter of the 10th c. the old center of the union of the Volynians, Volyn, gave way to the new capital - Vladimir-Volynsky, which became a stronghold for the Kyiv dynasty, which planted its governors there. It is interesting that oikonyms with curious names are located south of Vladimir-Volynsky - Rusnov, Rusin (to the northeast of the city of Belz) and Varyazh, standing on the Verenzhanka River (the left tributary of the Western Bug). It is very likely that at the end of the 10th c. Kyiv princes-governors in Volhynia had to rely on the armed forces of Rus' and the Varangians. It is unlikely that toponyms with such eloquent names appeared in Volhynia by themselves.  

In the Gorodishche tract, on the site of Volyn, there is a barrow necropolis of the 9th-12th centuries. Under its earthen hills there are burials made according to the rite of burial on the back, oriented with the head to the west. In the large Christian cities of Kievan Rus of that time, the creation of barrow necropolises was hardly possible, because it contradicted Christian ideas. Consequently, under the burial mounds of ancient Volhynia in   the 9th-12th centuries. the nobility of the Volynians were buried, who stood apart from the princely dynasty of the Yaroslavovichs, and whom the metropolitan chronicles ignored.  

Mainly, it was on these lands - Volhynia, Polissya, Beresteyshchyna, that later settlements arose, which, with one degree or another, can be attributed to the family members of the Gulevich surname. Gulsk is a village a few kilometers south of the city of Zvyagel (now Novograd-Volynsky, Zhytomyr region) on the Sluch River. Guli is a settlement in the Vinnitsa region. Hulivtsy (Hulivtsi, Hulowce, Hulewce) - a village south of Rivne (now Khmelnytsky region, Bilogirsky district) was known earlier in 1552 as the possession of the Gulevich zemyans. Gulivka is a settlement in the Volyn region. Gulevichi - a village south of the city of Kalinkovichi (Mozyr Polesie) has been known since the 16th century Gulevichi - a village in the Beresteyshchyna (now the Kamenetsky district of the Brest region) Gulevichevo - a village, existed in the Lutsk district of the Volyn province in the middle of the 19th century. A little further, to the east, another settlement Gulevichi (now the Kirovograd region) The hydronyms are also indicative: the river Gulva and the lake of the same name with it.  

Part 2. Lutsk  

On an elevated cape formed by the bend of the Styr River and its right tributary, the Glusha River, stands ancient Lutsk, one of the most famous cities in Volhynia. The city most directly connected with the representatives of the large Gulevich family in Volhynia.  

Nature itself took care of making Lutsk a stronghold of the land of Volyn, surrounding it with water from everywhere, surrounding the city from the south, west and north with riverbeds and lakes of oxbow lakes, and from the east with impenetrable swamps. The peninsula thus formed consisted of three hills. On the higher of them, about 100 - 110 meters in size, there was a citadel of Lutsk. To the south, on a larger but lower hill, was a roundabout city. The area of ​​Lutsk surrounded by fortifications reached seven hectares.   It is known from archaeological research that the territory where Lutsk arose was inhabited during the Neolithic. Archaeologists have found the remains of dugouts dated to the 4th millennium BC. e. Material evidence of a later period was also found, in particular, the remains of land dwellings of Slavic origin, several groups of burial mounds, where samples of weapons, silver coins, etc. were found.  

There are several versions regarding the origin of the name Lutsk. Some   researchers believe that it is associated with the Luchanans, one of the tribes that were part of the Duleb union; later, the Luchians went to Eastern Europe and are known to sources among the tribes that became the basis of the future Czech nation.  

Another assumption is based on the name, which comes from the Old Russian word "bow" - "curvature", "bend", "bay", "shore of the bay", "bank of the river arc". Indeed, the river Styr near Lutsk bends like a bow under a stretched bowstring.   It is possible that both versions are related to each other, and the Luchan tribe, like most Slavic tribes, received such a name from the surrounding area, such as the Dregovichi-Draguvites from “drygva” (Old Belative: swamp) or the Drevlyans, whose etymology is also transparent.  

The most ancient settlements of Lutsk residents occupied only a small triangular cape between the rivers Styr and Maly Glushets (currently defunct), where the Lutsk castle now stands. In the times preceding the emergence of Kievan Rus, there was an ancient settlement on this territory, on the site of which a fortress was subsequently built.  

Settlement founded in the 7th or 8th c. Luchians, under the Kiev prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (as indicated by some Polish sources) turned into a well-fortified fortress. In the annals, the city is referred to as Luchsk or "Luchesk the Great in Styr". For the first time, we find information about it, as about an already existing city, in the Ipatiev Chronicle under 1083, when the   Polish army, led by King Boleslav the Bold, stood under the walls of Lutsk for 6 months.  

In 1085, the Volyn prince Yaropolk Izyaslavovich, who went to Kyiv, was forced to flee to the Polish lands, leaving his family in reliable and impregnable Lutsk.  

In 1097, the Grand Duke of Kiev Svyatopolk Izyaslavovich handed over Lutsk to the Chernigov prince Davyd Svyatoslavovich, who was soon forced to leave the city to the Volyn prince Davyd Igorevich. From then until the end of the 12th century. Lutsk remained part of the Vladimir-Volyn principality, and since 1199 - Galicia-Volyn. It was then that Lutsk was developing rapidly, gradually outpacing its older brother, the city of Vladimir. The navigable Styr through Pripyat connected Lutsk with Kiev, and further along the Dnieper - with Byzantium. In addition, trade routes that ran to the countries of the West and the Baltics crossed here. In the middle of the 13th c. the defense structures of the city are being improved.  

It is generally accepted that at the end of the 13th century. Lutsk was surrounded by a stone fortress wall. In the 14th century the upper part of the walls and towers of Lutsk was finished with bricks. But in Lutsk there are no traces of the oldest log-earth fortifications, which should have preceded the stone ones. This suggests that already in the 11th-12th centuries Lutsk had stone defensive walls and was practically impregnable. However, Lutsk residents themselves had to go on military campaigns more than once.  

Back in 1173, the then prince of Lutsk Yaroslav Izyaslavovich appeared at the walls of capital Kyiv with a huge army, wanting to establish himself as the eldest among the South Russian princes.   This campaign was repeated a year later, in retaliation for the desecration of their prince, betrayed along with his family by the people of Kiev. Then not only Kyiv and the property of its inhabitants were robbed, incl. abbots, priests, monks and nuns, foreigners, guests and even the cells of hermits, but also the cities of the neighboring Chernihiv land - Lutava and Moravsk. Yaroslav himself, having thus avenged the fullness of his wife and children, no longer wished to sit on the grand princely Kiev table and returned to his native Lutsk.  

In 1202 and 1214 already his son Ingvar Yaroslavovich, with the support of the Luchians and the influential Volyn prince Roman Mstislavovich (and in 1214 - Mstislav Mstislavovich Udaly), was twice installed in Kiev on the grand prince's table, however, also not for long.   Brother Mstislav Yaroslavovich Nemoy, who replaced him in Lutsk, together with the Lutsk militia, took part in the famous battle of the Kalka River in 1224, rescuing Daniel of Galicia in the battle. That battle with the soldiers of the Mongol commanders Dzhebe and Subedei ended very tragically for the Russian-Polovtsian troops. Of the 18 princes who participated in the battle, 9 perished. In the Russian squads, only one in ten survived.  

In 1240, Lutsk did not escape the fate of most other Russian cities and was destroyed by Mongol detachments moving into Western Europe, but was soon rebuilt by Daniel of Galicia and his brother Vasilko Romanovich.   In the early fifties, 13 Art. the rulers of the Golden Horde made an attempt to strengthen their power in Volhynia, which actually did not belong to them. In 1252, the army of governor Kuremsa took possession of the Lower River, and in 1254 broke into Volhynia. In 1255, a long siege of Lutsk began. Kuremsa bombarded the city with stones from ballistic machines (gunpowder), but the townspeople heroically defended themselves and forced the enemy to retreat.  

For several years there was a war with the hordes of Kuremsa, which did not lead to the submission of Southern Rus'. Prince Daniil of Galicia "keeps the army with Kuremsa and is not at all afraid of Kuremsa." Only in 1259, when Burundai came "with a multitude of Tatar regiments," Prince Daniel of Galicia was forced to submit. By order of Burundai, the fortifications of Lutsk, Danilov, Stozhesk, Lvov, Kremenets, Vladimir were destroyed.    

The second half of the 13th century was marked by the period of the rise of the city, when the son of Daniel of Galicia, Mstislav, ruled in the Principality of Lutsk. It was then that Lutsk was called Luchesky Bolshoy. Trade routes were concentrated here, which led from Lithuania (modern part of Belarus), North-Eastern Rus', Galich, Transnistria and the countries of Western Europe. As a result of a number of victorious campaigns, Mstislav Daniilovich managed to eliminate the threat of encroachments by neighboring Lithuania on Lutsk. To assert his power, the prince seeks the formation of a separate Lutsk episcopal see. He paid great attention to construction. Under him, the construction of the castle tower over the entrance gates of the city, as well as the Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist, began. Another building of that time - the Dmitrievskaya Church, or rather, its history, turned out to be closely intertwined with the Gulevichs (more on this in the following chapters).  

Built in 1132 in the eastern part of the Lower Castle, it also served as a defensive structure. In 1845 it was destroyed by fire. The remains of the walls with fragments of the original ornament and wall paintings were dismantled in 1893. But thanks to the sketches made by the Russian artist A. Strokov, who was in Lutsk in 1866, we can have an idea of ​​the uniqueness of this landmark of ancient architecture. One of the masterpieces of Ukrainian painting of the 12th-13th centuries has survived to our time. - the icon of the Volyn (Lutsk) Mother of God, now located in the State Museum of Ukrainian Art in Kyiv. Experts attribute this work to 1289 and believe that it was commissioned by Prince Mstislav Daniilovich for the Cathedral of St. John the Theologian.  

In 1320, the active expansion of "Belarusian" Lithuania to the former territories of the Volyn princes began, during which Lutsk was captured by supporters of the Lithuanian prince Gedemin. The last ruler of Lutsk from the "Rurikovich" Prince Lev Yuryevich died in 1323.  

Since 1340, Volhynia was completely under the control of the then risen principality of Lithuania, which united all the former Western Russian principalities on its base, the backbone of which was the territory of modern Belarus, and in cultural and linguistic terms, the new state became proto-Belarusian. Lubart-Dmitry Gediminovich, married to a Volyn princess from the defunct dynasty of Daniil Galitsky, became the prince of the Volyn land. Lubart chose Lutsk as his residence. The desire to gain a foothold in the city prompted him to continue strengthening the city, in particular, the Upper Castle. When in 1349 the Polish king Casimir occupied the Volyn and Galician lands, Lutsk became that stronghold that was beyond the strength of the Polish king, and from him Lubart began to win back the lands previously captured by the Poles bit by bit. After the death of Lubart (1384), his son Fyodor reigned in Lutsk.  

By the end of the 14th century, whole quarters appeared in the city, inhabited by immigrants from Lithuania (mainly the territories of Polissya and Ponemanya adjacent to Volhynia) and Polish lands. To a large extent, the last fact was facilitated by the Union of 1387, concluded between the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russian and Zhamoit. Then, the Grand Duke Jagiello, in exchange for the hand of the Polish princess Jadwiga and the Polish crown, added the lands of his country to the nascent Commonwealth of both peoples. The result of the Unia was the transition of Jagiello and many of his entourage from Orthodoxy to Catholicism, as well as the granting of special liberty to the cities, whose inhabitants, for the most part, converted to the Latin faith, the Magdeburg Law.  

Not all cities supported Jagiello and the Polish protectorate, and after a three-year war in 1392, the Grand Duke of Lithuania Vitovt achieved significant autonomy from the Polish crown lands, losing only to Galicia, which was annexed to the Polish crown immediately after the Union of 1387.   In 1410, the Lutsk detachment as part of the Polish-Lithuanian-Tatar army took part in the defeat of the knights of the Teutonic Order near Grunwald. In this battle, the backbone of the GDL army under the command of Vitovt was the banners of the Belarusian and Volyn cities, which made a decisive contribution to the overall victory.  

During the reign of Vytautas (1388-1430), Lutsk became the second capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania after Vilna. At the suggestion of the emperor of the "Holy Roman Empire" Sigismund, in 1429, a congress of monarchs of European countries was held here, at which the issue of common actions against the raids of the Ottoman conquerors, the unification of the Catholic and Orthodox churches was discussed. The congress was very representative. Lutsk, in addition to the emperor, was honored by the presence of the former Grand Duke of Lithuania - King of Poland Jagiello (Vladislav I Jagiello), Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily II with many specific princes and Metropolitan Photius, papal legate, King of Denmark, Grand Master of the Teutonic Order,  Wallachian ruler and ambassador from the Byzantine emperor. The Crimean Khan also came. Vitovt rebuilds Lubart's castle, promotes the resettlement of the Jewish, Tatar and Keraim population in Lutsk, giving them broad rights. The grand duke also takes care of the catholic church that was born here. Together with Jagiello, he founded the monastery of the "Dominicans" in Lutsk, the Catholic department of St. Trinity, and in 1428 transferred to Lutsk the Catholic episcopal see from Volodymyr Volynsky. In 1432, Lutsk finally won Magdeburg rights for itself...  

Speaking about the restructuring of the Lutsk castle and its maintenance, one cannot fail to note the following feature. The fortress walls and towers of the castle were divided between the ruling urban families, whose responsibility was to maintain and repair the wooden "gorodenny" located on them at the expense of funds from their estates. Among these families, by the way, are the Gulevichs. Later sources give an idea of ​​this.   For example, the first “gorodnya” from the Entrance (Gate) tower “on the right hand going to the castle” was assigned to the Gulevichs “from their patrimonial estate Sernik and other estates”; Mikhno Boratinsky from the Vishnevo estate, Semyon and Gavriil Gulevich-Voyutinsky from Voyutin are also listed there as “responsible”, and the roof of this town was built by the Drozdenskys (all representatives of different branches of the Gulevichs). Another gorodnya, which belonged to the Gulevichs, was located directly on the stone walls of the district castle. The first, in the order of calculation according to the source, is precisely “the town of Gulevich, from Sernik and from others, Drozdensky from Drozdyan, Voyutinsky from Voyutino, Mikhno from Brokhovich and from Vishnevo”.  

Directly at the moat of the castle, near the Entrance Tower, a unique architectural monument of the 16th-18th centuries has been preserved to this day. - a residential building of the Gulevichs, originally owned by the Orthodox Bishop A. Puzyna, and then passed to the Gulevichs.  

Part 3. Svidrigailo (Švitrigaila, Świdrygiełło)  

At the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries. most of the boyars of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania of Rusyn origin, were obliged to serve the Grand Duke of Lithuania. These were numerous boyar families - Glebovichi, Ilinichi, Nemirovichi, Olekhnovichi, Mitkovichi, Volodkovichi in Vitebsk, Korsakovichi and Radkevichi - in Polotsk, Polozovichi in Kiev, Shilovichi and Gulevichi - in Volyn, etc. The first information about the Gulevichs dates back to 1407, when Mikhail Gulevich was mentioned in Galicia.  

Another Gulevich, Ivan, received a loan letter from a certain Vasily Moshonchich in 1421 (written under the year 1000 of the Nativity of Christ, 421, at the house near Tsindl in Lvov). On May 1432, Ivan Gulevich was among the signatories of the truce between the great Lithuanian prince Svidrigailo and the crusaders, and he, along with his brother Masko Gulevich, was mentioned in Svidrigailo's privilege from 1438.  

It is likely that the first of the Gulevichs known to us were among the active supporters of Grand Duke Svidrigailo, to whom they owed their service. Their participation in signing agreements with the Order was likely due to the Grand Duke's desire to rely on urban communities and volosts, as cities, officials, and knights were also represented on the Order's side. The agreement specifies representatives of the GDL cities, called “landrichter” or “lantrichter”, which can be translated as “zemstvo judges”, “zemstvo administrators”, with a stretch - something like the heads of city magistrates.  

Confirmation of the active participation of urban communities in the war on the side of Svidrigailo is found in the Slutsk and Academic Chronicles, which   indicate that during the Vilkomir battle of 1435, “many ... princes, and boyars, and burghers (mestiches)” fell on the side of Svidrigailo.  

In order to understand the motives for which Orthodox residents, including the Gulevich brothers known to us, united around Svidrigailo, we need to go back to 1413. In that year, the so-called Horodel Union between the Crown of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was concluded by King Vladislav-Jagiello of Poland and his cousin Vytautas. The very nature of the Union of Gorodel was largely anti-Orthodox, which was regarded by the local Orthodox population as an encroachment on its ancient spiritual foundations. The gentry of the “Lithuanian lands” was granted a number of privileges, which, as it was repeatedly emphasized in the privilege, could only be used by “... admirers of the Christian religion, subject to the Roman Church, not schismatics or other unbelievers.” In particular, Orthodox nobles were denied the right to hold public office and sit in the grand ducal council when discussing matters relating to the "good of the state." It was assumed that the very act of the union had to be approved by each successive Grand Duke of Lithuania or the King of Poland. After the death of Vitovt, Svidrigailo was elected Grand Duke in Lithuania and approved by Jagiello without "advice" from the Polish gentry, however, the Polish gentry was even more dissatisfied with the fact that the approval of the new act of the union depended on the newly elected Grand Duke, which the son of the Tver princess Ulyana never was not going to do as a person committed to Orthodoxy.  

The Polish gentry at the Sandomierz Sejm even suspected their king Jagiello of treason and secret patronage of the Lithuanian "schismatic" prince. They force Jagiello to unleash hostilities in Podolia and Volhynia. 1430-1431 were marked for Svidrigailo by an alliance with the Livonian   Order, the struggle with the Kingdom of Poland for Podolia and Volhynia (the so-called "Lutsk War").  

In the summer of 1431, Polish troops crossed the Bug, captured Vladimir-Volynsky and besieged the Lutsk castle. Having met with the Poles near Lutsk, Svidrigailo evaded the battle, but the governor Svidrigailov - Yursha managed to repulse several assaults on the city and the siege of Lutsk dragged on. The inhabitants of Lutsk withstood the siege from the royal army with amazing courage; despite the fact that, according to the assurances of the Polish historian, the city would have to surrender soon and the war would have ended with benefit and honor for the king and kingdom, if Jagiello himself did not interfere, favoring Svidrigailo and his subjects, with whom he hastened to conclude a truce, and there was a time and a place for negotiations for perpetual peace. The king lifted the siege of Lutsk, and the Russians celebrated the retreat of the enemy by destroying all the Catholic churches in the Lutsk land.  

Since 1432, a civil war broke out in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Svidrigailo was opposed by his cousin Sigismund (Zhigimont) Keistutevich. Sigismund, who overthrew Svidrigailo from the throne in 1432, was a "creature of the Poles", received military and political assistance from them in exchange for humility in matters relating to Podolia and the resumption of the union. As the order spy reported to the master: “The whole Lithuanian land is against the Poles, and common people say that they submitted to Zhigimont, not knowing that Svidrigailo is alive, many residents, having left their wives and children, flock to Svidrigailo.”   Forced to flee to Polotsk, or to the so-called Lithuanian Rus, Svidrigailo, as before, relied mainly on the Russian Orthodox population of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. It is no coincidence that, according to the Belarusian-Lithuanian chronicles, Svidrigailo, who found support there, was declared "Russian princes and boyars" - the Grand Duke of Russia.  

All Eastern Belarus, Volyn and Podolsk lands, Kiev, Chernigov, Putivl, Novgorod-Seversky, Trubchesk, Starodub, Serpeysk, Tula, Kursk, Vyazma, Smolensk, Oskol, Pinsk submitted to Svidrigailo. The Grand Duchy split into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Grand Duchy of Russia.   Confrontation between "Catholic Lithuania" "Lithuanians and Poles" Sigismund Keistutyevich and "Russian nationality", which   included "a wide front of the Russian population: princes, boyars, petty feudal lords ... petty bourgeois", as well as "natural" Lithuanian princes and gentry who adhered to Orthodoxy; determined the confessional component of the civil war of the 1430s. The war became a prologue to future confessional contradictions   of the late 16th - early 17th centuries. The fact that it was mainly of a political and confessional nature is evidenced by   the chronicles of those years. So Stryikovsky, in relation to one of the events of the Lutsk war (1431), writes: In the Lutsk castle "... the Russians and Lithuanians, who were with them of the Greek religion," killed all the Poles and Catholics. During the struggle for Podolia, the Orthodox population "turned to ashes" Catholic churches and destroyed the Catholics themselves. In turn, at one appearance of the Polish Catholic army, the “Rusyns” (that is, the same Orthodox) fled and hid in the forests with all their families and property. Dlugosh noted that during the siege of Lutsk, both sides were filled with bloody cruelty towards the captives.  

Trying to attract the Orthodox population of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania to the side of Sigismund, on October 15, 1432, Jagiello issued a state-legal act (privilege), according to which representatives of the most ancient families of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania of the Orthodox faith were equalized in rights with Catholics. After the death of Jagiello in 1434, despite the fact that Sigismund on May 6 of this year confirmed the privileges of the Orthodox nobility proclaimed by Jagiello, the war continued. The 9th paragraph of the Gorodel Privilege of 1413, which deprived persons of the Orthodox faith of the right to occupy the highest government posts in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, was not canceled.  

The brutal defeat near Vilkomir (now Ukmerge in Lithuania), as a result of which more than 30 Orthodox princes were captured, as well as the defection of prominent military leaders of Svidrigailo, led by Fedor Ostrozhsky, to the side of Sigismund, significantly weakened the position of the "Orthodox party" in the GDL. For some time, Svidrigailo himself thought about introducing a church union, but this step did not find support among his allies - the Orthodox magnates of Volhynia and other Ruthenian lands.  

In 1435, on the orders of Svidrigailo, the head of the Western Russian church, Metropolitan Gerasim, was burned alive in Vitebsk. Previously, Gerasim himself advocated the extension of the union with the papal throne to the Grand Duchy. The Pskov chronicles indicate the reason for the execution: some “letters of passage” from Gerasim to Sigismund Keystutevich were intercepted, in other words, Gerasim was preparing a conspiracy against Svidrigailo. It can be assumed that friction between the head of the Orthodox coalition and Metropolitan Gerasim could arise on the basis of the unpopularity of the church union among Svidrigailo's supporters, which the prince could not ignore.   Lutsk for several years played the role of a strategic point in the struggle of Svidrigailo against the Poles and Sigismund Keystutevich. For this reason, the leaders of the enemy camps of the civil war vying with each other tried to attract its inhabitants with their favors. Svidrigailo gave Lutsk burghers the right to free use of local forest land, including logging for construction, mowing hay and grazing livestock. The Polish king Jagiello granted the Lutsk land of Privilei, according to which princes, prelates, boyars, “milites nobiles ceterique ...” (i.e., “nobles and gentry”) were equalized in rights with the king’s Polish subjects, regardless of religion. However, this  privileges had no practical significance, since the city soon came under the control of supporters of the Orthodox party of Svidrigailo, among whom were Gulevichi.  

In 1437, Svidrigailo was actually forced to recognize vassal dependence on the Polish king Vladislav III. Two years later, he finally lost influence in the lands of the GDL and was forced to seek refuge in the territory of Wallachia and Hungary.  

Upon returning, Svidrigailo regained his lands in Volhynia and Podolia, but already as a vassal of King Sigismund, who was reigning in Lutsk. When in 1450 Sigismund Keistutovich fell at the hands of the conspirators, Svidrigailo was again called to the Grand Duke's table, but, not being able, due to old age, to do something energetic, he remained until his death in the Podolsk and Volyn lands, which were behind him in 1442 city ​​approved by the Poles. He died a natural death on February 10, 1452, at a very advanced age, which was an extremely rare occurrence for that time.   

He transferred his possessions to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. After Svidrigailo's death in 1452, the Poles from Lesser (southern) Poland tried to capture Lutsk, but their actions were not supported by the nobility of Greater (northern) Poland or the monarch himself. In 1453, Casimir IV at the Sejm in Petrikov (now the Gomel region of Belarus) swore to the Poles that the lands belonging to it, including Lithuania, Rus' and Moldavia, would not be alienated from the Polish crown. Casimir's speech caused a negative reaction from the aristocracy of the GDL. The Litvins defiantly renounced the Polish emblems and privileges that were associated with them, and expressed their readiness to start a war with Poland. A fierce rebuff forced the Polish king to renounce his claims to Volhynia. In 1456, Casimir IV reaffirmed the state sovereignty of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.  

The sons of Ivan (Ivashko) Gulevich—Vasko from Voyutin and Mikita from Dublyan, as well as their sister Nastasya—laid the foundation for the next generation of Gulevichs known from the sources. Only Vasko continued the line of the future family, leaving behind his sons: Parkhom (Pavel), Mikita (Dimitr) and Yatsko. The middle of them was destined to become the founder of the most famous branches of the Gulevichs - the Volynian noble family clan, who played an active role in the course of the future confrontation between the Orthodox and Catholic Uniate parties in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.  

In the 1528 census of the troops of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania ("Popis of the Volyn land"), two brothers, Mikhailo and Fedor Gulevichi, fielded 3 and 4 fully-armed horsemen for the army, respectively. I must say that arming and equipping even one rider was not an easy task and required a lot of money. By that time, the Gulevichi family had probably begun to gain prominence in the Volyn land, both in terms of wealth and influence.  

Part 4. The Union  

By the end of the 16th century, the Gulevichi clan was fairly branched, consisting of six main branches, namely: Voyutinskaya, Drozdenskaya, Dolskaya (Dolzhetskaya), Zaturkishskaya, Perekalskaya and Gulevichevskaya proper. The latter, with their property status, belonged rather to the magnates, while the rest of their relatives were content with a more modest role, being located among the middle and fractional gentry. However, the entire Gulevich family enjoyed well-deserved authority among the Volyn nobility, as evidenced by the presence of various representatives of the Gulevich family in high elected positions, matrimonial ties with representatives of princely families and a prominent place for their representatives among the higher and middle clergy of the Orthodox Church.  

On July 1, 1569, in the city of Lublin, the formation of the Commonwealth, the federal state of the "two peoples" of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which merged into a "single inseparable body", was proclaimed by the Act of the Unifying Seim. Volyn, and with it Lutsk, fell under the rule of the Polish Crown for more than two centuries and became the center of the Volyn province.  

Like many other ancient Russian families, the Gulevichi were forced to participate in religious and confessional conflicts at the turn of the 15th-16th centuries, which had engulfed the territory of the western Russian lands that were dependent on the Polish Crown and the papal throne. Although different members of the family expressed sympathy for all the active confessional groups at the time, such as Catholics, Uniates (Greek Catholics), and Protestants, the Gulevichs were principled and consistent champions of Orthodoxy for a long time - the faith of their ancestors, and defenders of the rights of the Orthodox population.  

The "Orthodox group" of this surname was numerous, according to the documents; more than thirty representatives of the surname were identified who supported Orthodoxy in various ways, such as participating in sejmiks, signing protests and collective statements, stood at the foundation of the Lutsk Orthodox Brotherhood or acted as patrons of Orthodox churches, monasteries and schools.   By the time the Union of Brest was proclaimed, the Orthodox gentry of Volhynia actively employed various methods of political confrontation in their struggle against the Uniates. (those who agreed to go under the pressure of the state machine of the Commonwealth under the patronage of the Roman Church). One of the most effective strategies was the "parliamentary struggle," during which the rights of the Orthodox gentry were defended at povet sejmiks and sejms. It should be noted that the state structure of the Commonwealth, unlike the neighboring states of that time, despite the obvious dominant role of the Catholic Church, allowed this to be done. And the role of the Gulevich family in this struggle was quite noticeable.  

In the Lutsk diocese, and Volhynia in general, the union began to spread among the Orthodox nobility, or gentry, immediately. In 1598, several noblemen from the Voivodeship of Volyn and other counties gathered in Lutsk and wrote a statement, or request, to the Senate and the king. In this statement, they said that they thanked God, who had enabled them to live until the union of the Eastern Church with the Roman Church, they also thanked the spiritual persons who zealously labored for the union, and recognized them as their bishops, and asked that the holy union should not be violated in any way. “And besides,” the nobles added in conclusion, “we humbly ask for a new calendar, so that there will be no confusion and separation between us, since the calendar is not a member of the faith, but that we, as happened before, celebrate and celebrate holidays of our Greek faith all together and with one accord; these nobles not only themselves agreed to accept the new calendar, but asked that it be imposed by the government and all the Uniates, although during the adoption of the union in Brest, according to Metropolitan Ragoza, who will rise to the new." Up to 33 nobles, or landowners, signed and affixed their seals to the king and the senate, including Stanislav Radziwill, Yury Chartoryisky, Mikhail Myshka, the castellan of Volyn, the headman of Kamenets, Abraham Myshka, the headman of Ovruch, Ivan Gulevich, Gabriel Savitsky, protopresbyter Dedinsky, Sasin Rusinovich Berestetsky, judge Grodsky Lutsky, Zakhary Yalovitsky, clerk of his royal grace, Ivan Tyshkevich and others. these nobles not only themselves agreed to accept the new calendar, but asked that it be imposed by the government and all the Uniates, although during the adoption of the union in Brest, according to Metropolitan Ragoza, who will rise to the new." Up to 33 nobles, or landowners, signed and affixed their seals to the king and the senate, including Stanislav Radziwill, Yury Chartoryisky, Mikhail Myshka, the castellan of Volyn, the headman of Kamenets, Abraham Myshka, the headman of Ovruch, Ivan Gulevich, Gabriel Savitsky, protopresbyter Dedinsky, Sasin Rusinovich Berestetsky, judge Grodsky Lutsky, Zakhary Yalovitsky, clerk of his royal grace, Ivan Tyshkevich and others. so that it be imposed by the government and all the Uniates, although during the adoption of the union in Brest, according to Metropolitan Ragoza, "they kept the calendar and Paschal in the old way, but whoever will grow up in a new way." Up to 33 nobles, or landowners, signed and affixed their seals to the king and the senate, including Stanislav Radziwill, Yury Chartoryisky, Mikhail Myshka, the castellan of Volyn, the headman of Kamenets, Abraham Myshka, the headman of Ovruch, Ivan Gulevich, Gabriel Savitsky, protopresbyter Dedinsky, Sasin Rusinovich Berestetsky, judge Grodsky Lutsky, Zakhary Yalovitsky, clerk of his royal grace, Ivan Tyshkevich and others. so that it be imposed by the government and all the Uniates, although during the adoption of the union in Brest, according to Metropolitan Ragoza, "they kept the calendar and Paschal in the old way, but whoever will grow up in a new way." Up to 33 nobles, or landowners, signed and affixed their seals to the king and the senate, including Stanislav Radziwill, Yury Chartoryisky, Mikhail Myshka, the castellan of Volyn, the headman of Kamenets, Abraham Myshka, the headman of Ovruch, Ivan Gulevich, Gabriel Savitsky, protopresbyter Dedinsky, Sasin Rusinovich Berestetsky, judge Grodsky Lutsky, Zakhary Yalovitsky, clerk of his royal grace, Ivan Tyshkevich and others.  

The Orthodox did not cease taking measures to protect themselves and their faith from the Uniates and Papists. Patriarch Meletios of Alexandria resigned in 1599 the locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne of Constantinople, but even after that he did not stop his pastoral care for the Western Russian Church, with which he had been in contact for a long time. In 1600, he sent here, through his protosyncell Cyril Lukaris, several messages to various people. There were messages: to Prince K.K. did not know about his fall into the union), Mikhail Gulevich, Andrey and Alexander Zagorovsky and others, now with praise for firmness in the Orthodox faith, now with the conviction to keep it in the future.  

Zemsky ambassadors of those voivodeships where Orthodoxy prevailed were instructed by the sejmiks to insist on improving the position of the Orthodox faith, on eliminating the injustices tolerated by the Orthodox.   As an example of such instructions, one can point to the instruction to the Sejm ambassadors of the Volyn Voivodeship. It says that the nobility of the ancient Greek faith, under the obedience of the Patriarch of Constantinople from 1596, complains about the violation (orpressia) of their ancient rights, approved by the privileges of the Polish-Lithuanian sovereigns and the confederations of the previous kingdoms. The mentioned violations consist in non-observance of peace among those scattered in faith, in the distribution of benefices, connected with the Kiev Metropolis, dominions and archimandrites, not to local natives, in accordance with the rights and privileges of the union (Lublin 1569), but to outsiders (extraneis) and those who succumbed to the Roman church, and not to their own pastors, who were subordinate to the Patriarch of Constantinople - in that - The ambassadors had to demand thorough reassurance, namely: that benefices be distributed to the metropolitan, who obeys the Patriarch of Constantinople, and to the bishops consecrated to him, and for the future, always and everywhere in this way, and not otherwise, and, upon the release of the metropolis or diocese, it was provided to worthy people, local natives, in accordance with the privilege given at the conclusion of the Union of Lublin, and what is violated must be restored again, so that there is no reason for further violations, but so that everyone remains in peace with their rights. Without such reassurance, the ambassadors should not proceed to any business, and even more so to the coronation (do coronaciey) of the king. The same nobility instructs its ambassadors to insist that the priests should not be burdened by any taxes (podatkami) either personally or from their churches, to the Lutsk castle church of St. Demetrius, built by the pans Gulevich, who do not recognize the union, was returned to them from the Uniates and so that their surname would forever have the right to submit to this church a priest who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. built by the pans Gulevich, who do not recognize the union, was returned to them from the Uniates and so that their surname would forever have the right to give to this church a priest who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. built by the pans Gulevich, who do not recognize the union, was returned to them from the Uniates and so that their surname would forever have the right to give to this church a priest who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. was returned to them from the Uniates and so that their surname would forever have the right to submit to this church a priest who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. was returned to them from the Uniates and so that their surname would forever have the right to submit to this church a priest who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. who is in obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Volhynian ambassadors also had to strive for the diocese of Vladimir to be taken away from the metropolitan (Rutsky) and given to a special bishop, since the concentration of the metropolis and dominion in the same hands is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. since the concentration in the same hands of the metropolis and dominion is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith. since the concentration in the same hands of the metropolis and dominion is contrary to the law de incompatibilibus. The same ambassadors were charged with the duty to try to ensure that the oath by the future king was pronounced literally (intacte) in the form in which it was pronounced by the last three kings (i.e. Henry of Valois, Stefan Batory and Sigismund III), because it is well defined the position of those divided in faith.  

In order to attach greater importance to their demands and achieve their satisfaction as soon as possible, the Orthodox of the Volyn Voivodeship order their ambassadors to act in concert with the Protestants. The envoys had to point out the violation of the rights of the dissidents, confirmed by the kings, which resulted in various places for the churches of the Greek religion and for dissident gatherings and prayer houses great falsehoods and violence; at the same time, they must demand, for the sake of inner peace, the establishment of due process and execution for persons of every rank and state, both spiritual and secular, for violating the religious peace and ensuring the free exercise of religion for everyone and everywhere, which should be expresse discussed in the assembly laws (in codice legum) and is included in the formula of the oath of the future king.  

The first to stand up for the Orthodox among the Gulevichs was one of the grandsons of the Lutsk Orthodox Bishop Theodosius Gulevich, Demyan Romanovich, who himself was a supporter of the Protestant Church, which was gaining strength in Western Europe. Demyan Gulevich took part in the work of the Orthodox (anti-Uniate) cathedral in Brest in October 1596. Being a member of the Sejm in 1597, he spoke at it from the Orthodox group, and in 1598 he was sent to Warsaw with the same mission, delegating him to Orthodox electors.  

Four months after the Brest Council, which adopted the union, the General Seim opened in Warsaw (in February and March 1597). The Russian Orthodox ambassadors who arrived first of all announced that they would not start any business until they received satisfaction in the case of their faith, demanded that their rulers, who did not want to obey the pope, remain in their old rights and that pacta conventa be sacredly performed in general, approved by the oath of the king.   Especially sharply, which the royal chroniclers did not use to note, Demyan Gulevich spoke to the king on March 7, insisting that the Russian lords remain with their ancient faith, and the lords who accepted the union were overthrown. Chancellor Sapega answered Gulevich that all the Orthodox in Brest wanted the union and accepted it, except for Nicephorus the Greek, according to Sapieha, a rebel and a vicious person. With these words, another influential Orthodox magnate, Prince K. K. Ostrozhsky, was deeply upset and entered into a strong altercation with Sapieha ....  

In 1601, the statement of the Orthodox Volyn gentry about their readiness to support the Lublin Orthodox Brotherhood was already signed by four representatives of the Gulevich family: the Lutsk Zemstvo clerk Mikhailo Gulevich-Voyutinsky, Andrei Gulevich, Mikhailo Gulevich and Yuri Gulevich. Andrei was the most active, who twice more - in 1608 and 1616 signed special instructions from the Volyn gentry to his ambassadors to the Sejm, in which they were ordered to protect the rights of the Orthodox Church.  

Among such instructions are 1608, 1616, 1632, 1639. in defense of Orthodoxy, we find the signatures of the above-mentioned Mikhailo Gulevich, as well as Fedor, Luka and Danila from the Gulevich-Voyutinsky branch.  

But the struggle of the Orthodox gentry for the restoration of their own rights was expressed not only by instructions to the ambassadors. The members of the sejmiks filed protests with the district courts on various issues that, in their opinion, infringe on the Orthodox population. One such protest, dated 10 September 1607, concerned  nominations for the chair of Lutsk Bishop - Ostafiy Yelo-Malinsky, signed by Gnevosh Gulevich-Drozdensky and Ivan Gulevich. Another protest dated September 1, 1635 concerned the candidacy of Joseph Bakovetsky for the Vladimir-Volyn episcopal see. This statement was signed by the Lutsk subcommissar Yuriy Gulevich, the Lutsk Zemsky clerk Semyon Gulevich-Voyutinsky (the future Orthodox Bishop of Przemysl Sylvester), as well as Pavel Gulevich - Voyutinsky and Ivan Gulevich. Probably, both applicants did not meet the interests of the Orthodox gentry.  

An important contribution to the political struggle of the Orthodox gentry against the union was the active participation of the Guleviches in the founding of the Lutsk Orthodox Brotherhood. It is known that among its founders   in 1617-1619. there were seven representatives of the Gulevich family, namely: the Lutsk tribunal Mikhailo Gulevich - Voyutinsky, Yatsko Gulevich - Voyutinsky, Semyon Gulevich - Voyutinsky, Fedor Gulevich - Voyutinsky, as well as Ivan, Roman and Peter Gulevichi.  

But the struggle between the Uniates and the Orthodox often developed into military actions. In a number of cases, one of the parties (both Uniates and Orthodox) staged military raids on their opponents, seeking to restore their rights to churches or possessions where, due to the weakness of the current local authorities, court decisions on this matter were not implemented. And here it could not do without the Gulevichs, who spoke on the side of the Orthodox. So, during the struggle of the Orthodox Bishop Sylvester Gulevich with the Uniate Bishop Athanasius Krupetsky, Alexander and Danilo Gulevich "distinguished themselves". For active participation in the storming of the monastery of the Holy Savior, these Gulevichs were given infamily. The Gulevichs also took part in anti-Uniate actions in Volhynia and became their target themselves.  

During the uprising of Severin Nalivaiko, when in October 1595 the Cossack detachments operated on the territory of Volhynia, they found supporters, mainly among the opponents of the Union. The side of the rebels was also held by some nobles, so Prince Janusz Voronetsky gave a brothel to Nalivaiko's associates in his estate Omelnik. Another accomplice of the Cossack ataman was Alexander Gulevich, the son of Demyan Gulevich mentioned above. In 1599, father and son were killed as a result of a robbery on the road to the Sejm in Warsaw, probably organized by their opponents from the camp of the Uniates.  

In October 1637, the Orthodox Bishop of Lutsk Athanasius Puzina tried to annex the possessions of the Lutsk Uniate Chapter, which, after the death of Bishop Jeremiah Pochapovsky, were to go to the Orthodox. Since the Uniates themselves did not want to voluntarily retreat from these possessions, Bishop Athanasius used force. On October 30-31, an armed detachment led by Jan Gulevich captured the town of Rozhishchi, as well as the village of Vodirady, driving out the Uniate priests and viceroys of the Uniate chapter.  

The most effective method of struggle between supporters and opponents of the union was to obtain the right of patronage for the gentry over churches and monasteries in their possessions. The struggle for the Church of St. Demetrius in Lutsk between the Lutsk episcopate and Gulevichi - Zaturkishki is a confirmation of this. The history of this opposition dates back to the 16th century, when the ancestor of these Gulevichs, the already known to us Bishop Theodosius of Lutsk (in the world Fyodor Gulevich), rebuilt this temple, known since the 13th century. Prior to the adoption of the Unia, the conflict with the ownership of the Church of St. Demetrius and the adjacent village of Korshovets had a sluggish character. The Lutsk episcopate proceeded from the fact that the activity of the Lutsk Bishop Theodosius was in itself proof that the Dimitrov Church and Korshovets should be in the possession of the Lutsk episcopate. Against, the descendants of Theodosius - Gulevichi-Zaturkursky (nickname from the family property - the village of Zaturtsy, now the Lokachinsky district of the Volyn region) insisted that the temple was founded as a family one and, according to family legends, since the time of the "Russian princes"; whose heirs, the Grand Dukes of Lithuania and the kings of Poland, confirmed the right of the Gulevichs to patronage over this temple, together with the village of Korshovets. The situation was complicated by the lack of reliable documents from both sides confirming their rights and was unresolved, giving rise to enmity between the Guleviches and subsequent Lutsk Orthodox bishops. However, the severity of the problem became apparent after the Brest Cathedral in 1596, which announced the Union of the Orthodox lands with the Catholic Church. The Gulevich-Zaturksky family from the very beginning took an anti-Uniate position,  

In addition to the religious, the Gulevichs also had economic reasons to fight against the Lutsk Uniates in the late 16th - early 17th centuries. One of the richest representatives of the Gulevich family of that time, Vasily Fedorovich Gulevich - Zaturkishsky (one of the younger sons of the Lutsk Bishop Theodosius), shortly before his death, joined the fight against the supporters of the Union: in November 1600, he finally captured the village of Korshovets by force and annexed to his possessions of land in the Lutsk castle, together with the church of St. Demetrius. Attempts of the Lutsk Bishops-Uniates to challenge the actions of Vasily Gulevich in court  were not successful. The influence of this Gulevich (since 1561 - the elder, and from 1566 - the troops (voivode) of Vladimir) was too great, and the possessions were quite extensive. Therefore, until the founding of the Lutsk Orthodox Brotherhood, the Dimitrov Church became the only Orthodox church in Lutsk that was not subordinate to the Uniate bishops.  

Obviously, the temple itself became the center of the struggle between supporters and opponents of the Unia in Lutsk. Orthodox priests, with the direct support of Vasily's son, Andrey Gulevich - Zaturetsky, openly agitated the Uniate parishioners against the Uniate clergy. The activities of the Orthodox community of the church of St. Demetrius aroused the indignation of the Uniate rulers, but after the death of the patron of all Orthodox Lutsk - Andrey Vasilyevich Gulevich (died no later than 1623), the situation changed dramatically. Andrei's eldest sons, Alexander and Mikhail Gulevich, died young, and the younger Dmitry went to the Catholic Order of the "Dominicans", taking the name "Hippolit" and transferring his "ancestral estate" - the Orthodox Church of St. Demetrius - to the possession of the Dominican Catholics. The reasons that prompted the last representative of this branch of the Gulevichs to take such a step are not known for certain.  

In 1610, Melety Smotrytsky, under the name of Ortologist, in the book "Lament of the Eastern Church" complains about the loss of the most important Russian surnames. These are the lines, expressed  consciousness in the successes that Catholicism had already won among the noble Russian nobility at that time. “Where is that priceless stone,” asked the Orthodox Church, mourning her losses, “which I, among other pearls, like the sun between the stars, wore in a crown on my head, — where is the house of the Ostrozhsky princes, which shone more than all others with the brilliance of its ancient faith? Where and other precious stones of the same crown - the families of the princes of Slutsk, Zaslavsky, Vishnevetsky, Zbarazhsky, Sangushek, Czartorysky, Pronsky, Ruzhinsky, Solomeretsky, Golovchinsky, Krashinsky, Masalsky, Gorsky, Sokolinsky, Lukomsky, Puzynov and others, which would take a long time to list? Where are my other treasures - where are the ancient, well-born, strong, famous throughout the world for their courage and valor Khodkevichi, Glebovichi, Kishki, Sapieha, Dorogostaisky, Voyny, Volovichi,  

“The villains took away this precious clothes from me and now they are cursing my poor body, from which everyone came out!”   What impression Smotrytsky's book made can be seen from the fact that the famous Jesuit Peter Skarga himself hurried to publish in the same year his "Warning for Russia of the Greek Faith Against the Lamentation of Theophilus Orthologue", and two years later (1612) and the learned Uniate Ilya Morokhovsky, royal secretary, published in Vilna his "Consolation, or Satisfaction, of the Weeping of the Eastern Church by Theophilus Orthologue". Both authors fiercely attacked Smotrytsky, called him a disciple of Luther and Calvin and tried to prove, contrary to his evidence, that the Roman Church always preserved and retains the true teaching of the faith, but on the contrary, the Eastern evaded it as soon as it broke off communication and unity with the Roman.  

It should not, of course, be understood that all these Russian noble families betrayed Orthodoxy already during the period of the union and in their entire composition or in all their branches: some adopted Protestantism and then Catholicism or directly Catholicism even before the union, and in other genera (which   are : Skumin, Solomeretsky, Gulevich) there were still branches that still adhered to Orthodoxy.  

Wishing to prevent the spread of Smotrytsky's "Frinos", the enemies of the Orthodox informed the king, who was then near Smolensk with an army, that books filled with libels were being secretly printed in the Vilna drukarna of the Holy Spirit Brotherhood and inciting a revolt against spiritual and civil authorities. And Sigismund issued a decree (May 7, 1610) that no one should buy or sell those books under fear of a fine of five thousand zlotys, and ordered the Vilna voit and the magistrate to take away that drukarny, books also to be taken away and burned, as well as printers and authors those libels, as well as "their proof-reader Logvin Karpovich, especially if he is not a gentry", put him in the town hall or in some kind of prison until further notice. The Vilna Burmisters soon (June 13) selected 36 books of Frinos, to which at the same time the elders of the Orthodox Vilna Brotherhood brought a complaint to the Tribunal. But the brotherhood probably managed to save its drukarny and font and move it to the town of Evie (now Vevis in Lithuania), the estate of his brother and former headman, Prince Bogdan Oginsky (35 versts from Vilna). At least here it was, as in the printing house of the "Vilna brotherhood of the Holy Spirit", from 1611 the monks of the Vilna cenobitic monastery of the Holy Spirit began to print their books, some with "cost and overhead" of the noble pan Oginsky, and others with their own, and for three years (1611 - 1613) published the Psalter and the New Testament (in one book), Book of Hours, Dioptra and Anthologion. managed to save and transfer to the town of Evie (now Vevis in Lithuania), the estate of his brother and former headman, Prince Bogdan Oginsky (35 miles from Vilna). At least here it was, as in the printing house of the "Vilna brotherhood of the Holy Spirit", from 1611 the monks of the Vilna cenobitic monastery of the Holy Spirit began to print their books, some with "cost and overhead" of the noble pan Oginsky, and others with their own, and for three years (1611 - 1613) published the Psalter and the New Testament (in one book), Book of Hours, Dioptra and Anthologion. managed to save and transfer to the town of Evie (now Vevis in Lithuania), the estate of his brother and former headman, Prince Bogdan Oginsky (35 miles from Vilna). At least here it was, as in the printing house of the "Vilna brotherhood of the Holy Spirit", from 1611 the monks of the Vilna cenobitic monastery of the Holy Spirit began to print their books, some with "cost and overhead" of the noble pan Oginsky, and others with their own, and for three years (1611 - 1613) published the Psalter and the New Testament (in one book), Book of Hours, Dioptra and Anthologion.  

The fall of the last stronghold of the Orthodox population in Lutsk contributed to the formation of a new direction in the activities of the representatives of the Gulevich family who remained faithful to the Orthodox Church. At the head of this struggle are now representatives  The Voyutin branch of this family, in particular, the Lutsk clerk Semyon Gulevich-Voyutinsky, as well as Pavel and Andrey Gulevich-Voyutinsky. In the city of Lutsk, in which there were eight Orthodox churches before the union, now there was not a single one, and the surrounding Orthodox nobles, who often visited this city on business, did not find a place in it where they could pray on holidays. Only half a verst from Lutsk, on an island across the Styr River, there remained a small Orthodox monastery Chernchitsky or Cherchitsky, where the Orthodox resorted to for their spiritual needs. The pious schemnik Grigory Mikulich labored here, formerly hegumen of the Chernchitsky monastery and was called Gerasim. He proposed to the Orthodox the idea of ​​founding a church brotherhood in Lutsk, and in 1617 In addition to Gregory himself, his successor as abbess, Hieromonk Isaakiy Boriskovich, several priests and secular persons, including Prince Fyodor Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky, Mikhail Gulevich, the Lutsky court, Lavrenty Drevinsky, the cup of the land of Volyn, Vladimir Zubtsevsky, the mayor of Lutsk, signed up as members of this brotherhood. The reason for the establishment of the brotherhood was that during a strong fire that was in Lutsk, the Russian almshouse, or hospital, burned to the ground, and there was no place for the sick and poor of the Russian faith. The brotherhood was formed with the aim of rebuilding a Russian almshouse in Lutsk, and with it to build a church, both for the sick and the poor, and for all Orthodox, and a school for raising children. The king, at the request of the nobles of the Volyn province and the inhabitants of Lutsk, approved (February 20, 1619) ) the newly formed Russian "brotherhood of mercy" and allowed the brotherhood to build not only an almshouse, but also a church and a school, take care of them and freely support the clergy at the church. When the place for the proposed buildings in Lutsk was chosen by the brotherhood, the members of the brotherhood from the nobility, pointing out that they did not live permanently in the city, instructed their younger brothers - Lutsk burghers - to supervise the buildings and at the end of them to manage the church, school and hospital, and they themselves pledged to help these philistines in everything, intercede for them and protect them everywhere.  

Part 5. The Founders

Early 17th century inscribed another famous name from the Gulevich family in the history of Western Russian lands. In 1615, on October 15, Anna (Galshka) Gulevichevna, the wife of the marshal of the Mozyr povet, Stefan Lozka, appeared in the Zemstvo court of Kiev together with her husband and, with his permission, asked to write the following entry in the Zemstvo Kiev books: "I, Anna Gulevichevna ... living constantly in the ancient Orthodox faith of the holy Eastern Church and burning with pious zeal for it, for the spread of the glory of God, one in the Trinity, out of love and devotion to my brethren, the Russian people, for a long time I thought to do good for the Church of God. I give the fulfillment to the faithful Christians of the Russian people, who are in the districts of the provinces of Kiev, Volyn and Bratslav, consisting of spiritual and secular estates, princes, nobles and everyone, no matter what rank they may be, but only invariably abiding in the Orthodox faith,under the blessing of the most holy Patriarch of Constantinople, for eternity I give, donate, record and refuse my own hereditary estate, enjoying the rights and liberties of the gentry: my court and land, received by me as an eternal gift from my husband and located in Kiev between famous streets, with all land and income belonging to that court ... And all this I assign to the monastery of the patriarchal stavropegic cenobitic, according to the order of Basil the Great, and to a school for children, both noble and petty-bourgeois, and to a hotel for spiritual wanderers of the faith of the Eastern Church, with so that that monastery, and the school, and the whole rite, be organized according to the law of the catholic Eastern Church ... And so that my real foundation would have its effect, I immediately brought spiritual and secular Orthodox into that courtyard with the land,it was the holy monk Isaiah Kopinski and other monastics who also introduced the school, transferring to them equally to all Orthodox, spiritual and secular, which I donate to the actual possession and management of the wagon and the nobles appointed for that ... 1615, the month of October, fourteenth day."  

The wife of Mozyr marshal Stefan Lozka, Galshka (Alzhbeta, Gamika, Anna) Gulevichevna from Kiev, was the daughter of the already mentioned Vasily Fedorovich Gulevich - Zaturetsky and in her first marriage was married to Christopher Potiy, the son of the future Uniate metropolitan. Unlike the Poti family, which was dominated by Uniate sentiments, Galshka remained faithful to Orthodoxy. For this reason, she seriously quarreled with the relatives of her first husband. It is possible that the transfer of her own hereditary possession to an Orthodox monastery was conceived by Galshka Gulevichevna as a kind of compensation for the damage inflicted on the Orthodox people of Kiev by her father-in-law, Uniate Metropolitan Ipatiy, who seized a number of Orthodox churches in Kiev. The property transferred by Galshka was located in Kiev Podil - the center of concentration of Kyiv life of that era.   The motives for such an act of Gulevichevna have rather deep roots, connected not so much with the principled family tradition of the Orthodox Gulevichs, but with the general political situation that developed at a time when Russian Orthodox culture, under the pressure of the Roman Catholic authorities, began to give up its positions even in its own, it would seem, unshakable centers, which, of course, were the ancient Volyn land and, of course, the Kiev region, with the once capital city of all Old Russian lands. “The local Orthodox gentry, unorganized and flooded from the very beginning by the Polish gentry flood, already at first was knocked down from all positions, pushed aside and removed from everything so that only by adjusting to the dominant Polish element, and only by becoming Polonized and becoming Catholic could they achieve actual equality. By the beginning of the 16th century. everything that was outstanding, striving for power and importance among the local gentry of Galicia, Podolia, Kholmsky land - with a few exceptions - was already completely Polonized, and in the 16th century. the same thing begins to repeat itself in Volhynia and the Dnieper region, ”Mykhailo Grushetsky wrote in his History of Ukraine.  

The upper strata of the local population understood that they could not resist the state machine of Catholicization, and even in Volhynia, in this nest of Orthodox aristocracy - princes and magnates, they began to quickly become Polonized, depriving the Orthodox Rusyns of the only class that could have at least some influence and significance in the existence of the Russian political nation within the Commonwealth. The same processes took place on the territory of the so-called White Rus', which completely bled and Polonized the Litvins - the once powerful local aristocracy. The peasantry, unable to take the place of the state-forming national force instead of the polonized gentry who left it, was forced to be content with that local national-social niche that  subsequently, the Belarusian people - a people who, despite the processes of polonization on the one hand and Russification on the other, have retained and still retain the core of the Litvinian nation, the descendants of the GDL that has sunk into oblivion.  

So in Volhynia, the former Orthodox lords quickly became Polonized, and the next generation even exposed them as direct enemies of Orthodoxy, which were the children of the zealots of the Orthodox faith themselves - the son of Kurbsky Dimitry, the son of Ostrozhsky Yanush. The sons of Konstantin-Vasily Ostrozhsky were already Catholics, only Alexander remained Orthodox, but he died during the life of his father, and the elder Janusz, who inherited the rich Ostroh estates along with the well-known Ostroh Orthodox school and printing house organized there, converted early to Catholicism - for which received the high position of the Krakow castellan. Janusz Ostrozhsky completely destroyed the activities of the Ostrog circle and its institutions, which fell into decay under him.   And in Slutsk, in the lands of White Rus', with the death of the founder of the Slutsk Orthodox school, Prince Yuri Semenovich Slutsky (d. 1587), his possessions passed into the hands of his successors from among the Catholics, and all the beginnings of Orthodox educational work died. The children of magnates and wealthy gentry went to Catholic schools, especially to the Jesuits, who founded their schools in Vilna, Yaroslav, Lublin and other cities, where the young generation of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania flocked. In these schools, the Jesuits attracted children from the upper classes and raised them as zealous Catholics. Similar processes partly affected the gentry branches of the Gulevichs, subsequently absorbing into Catholicism almost all of their descendants who remained on the land of their ancestors, giving over time, by the way, true patriots of the Polish state.  

“Russian (Ukrainian and Belarusian) patriots watched this horrific decline of their nationality with fear,” Mikhailo Grushetsky wrote. Such losses forced the remaining Orthodox to unite their efforts in strengthening their nationality and faith, founding Orthodox brotherhoods, the main purpose of which was to enlighten, which was so necessary in this difficult period for Orthodox Rusyns. In addition to the oldest brotherhoods, Lvov and Vilna, brotherhoods arose in Przemysl, Slutsk, Minsk, Mogilev, Lutsk and other cities. Such associations of Orthodox tried to defend the Orthodox dioceses given by the central royal government to the supporters of the union.   Since 1599, the Uniates were headed by the Metropolitan of Kiev Ipatiy Potiy (Potey), who, when he was bishop of Vladimir and Brest, became the main character in the Union with the Roman Catholic Church. Born in 1541 into an Orthodox family, the future father-in-law of Galshka Gulevichevna, Adam Lvovich Potiy, was educated at the Calvin College of the Princes Radziwills, higher education at the Krakow Academy. He served for a long time in the affairs of the Radziwill princes and at that time openly accepted Protestantism. Moving along the line of public service, he reached the rank of pan-radets, i.e. senator. He married the daughter of a prince, through which he became related to Prince Konstantin-Vasily Ostrozhsky. Around 1574, apparently in an atmosphere of family kinship, he again accepted his natural Orthodoxy from the cradle. Then he was widowed, and at this time in 1588   Lutsk Roman Catholic Bishop Bernard Matsievsky wrote in 1588 to the papal nuncio in Poland, Archbishop Annibal: “In June, when I went to Podlyakhia, to the other half of my diocese, Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople was passing to Moscow there. In excess of my expectation, he very soon passed the city where I was. The falling night prevented me from overtaking him. And I hurried to Brest, where it seemed that he would stop. But even from there he left before my arrival. A few days later, Mr. Brest judge (Adam Potiy), although a schismatic, but by authority, education and experience, an outstanding person and in religious matters, apparently, the most knowledgeable among his own. After several conversations about religion with Fr. a Jesuit, Potius came to me more than once and with the greatest perseverance convinced me, that we, along with other Catholic theologian bishops, take care of the union of the Russians with the Roman Church, especially at the present time, when such an opportunity presents itself, which is unlikely to happen again. Potiy said that God's providence itself arranged so that the Patriarch of Tsaregrad arrived in our region. He added that more effort should be made in interviews with the Greeks than in publishing essays against Russians, or than in objections to Russians, such as are found in our sermons. If the patriarch agrees to a conversation and is defeated and convicted of error, then he is a judge (Potiy) and many others, distinguished by birth and virtues, desiring nothing more than that our conversation with the patriarch should take place in the spirit of love and meekness, not they will want to obey him more and follow his error. If he refuses to compete, then he will fall under the suspicion of a real schism and the sooner he will be abandoned by the Russians. The venerable husband also reported that he and his people would observe very carefully: whether the patriarch had arrived to rob his lords and priests, or to take care of the salvation of the souls entrusted to him. Believe that what we heard greatly comforted and encouraged us. And I am convinced that your Eminence will by no means miss this, such an opportunity to support our Russians in their jealousy, with which they are burning.  

Suspecting nothing, Adam Potiy's father-in-law, Prince Ostrozhsky, recommended him to the King as a brilliant candidate for the position of Bishop after the death of Bishop Meletiy Khrebtovich.. The Orthodox Bishop of Lutsk, Kirill Terletsky (another supporter of the union), tonsured Adam himself and named him Ipatiy. In 1593, King Sigismund III notified Prince Konstantin Ostrozhsky that he "gave the dominion of Vladimir to the Brest castellan Adam Potey for his services to the king and the Commonwealth." A high educational qualification, fluency in Latin, family ties with noble families and a conscious plan for a union made Hypatius Potius a fatal figure for the Russian Orthodox Church, which was exhausted from above. So Hypatius Potius became the personal creator of the union.  

After the death of Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople, at the end of 1594, several higher exarchs of the Orthodox Church, including Bishop Ipatiy Potiy of Vladimir, Bishop Kirill Terletsky of Lutsk, Bishop of Turov Pelchitsky, Bishop Zborovsky of Kholm, as well as Bishop Gideon Balaban of Lviv and Metropolitan Mikhail Rogoza of Kiev made a declaration to the Pope and the King, in which they announced their decision to surrender themselves under the authority of the pope and bring the rest of the clergy and their Orthodox flock to this. At the end of 1595, Potius and Terletsky went to Rome and on December 23, at a solemn meeting in front of the entire papal court and cardinals, on behalf of all the bishops, they testified their submission and took an oath of allegiance to Pope Clement VIII and the Catholic Church.  

On October 6, 1596, a unifying council was convened in Potiy's possessions in Brest to sign the Church Union. In the camp of opponents, Prince Konstantin-Vasil Ostrozhsky and his son Alexander, the bishops of Lvov Gedeon Balaban and Przemysl Kopystensky (originally among the supporters of the Union), many monastic clergy, gentry, representatives of fraternities and philistines who were unfavorable to reunification, such as the prince Yury Czartorysky and princes Olelkovichi (from Slutsk), or supporters of the Calvinist Radziwill. All of them, not wanting either to talk with the "papezhniks" or to take part in joint meetings, held their own Council in parallel in Brest under the leadership of a protosinkel who had come from Moldova  Nicephorus, who called himself an authorized representative and deputy of the Patriarch of Constantinople. In the end, the Unia was accepted by: Metropolitan Mikhail Ragoza of Kiev, Bishop Ipatiy Potiy of Vladimir, Exarch Kirill Terletsky of Lutsk, Archbishop Hermogen of Polotsk, Bishop Ivan Gogol of Pinsk, Bishop Denis Zborovsky of Kholmsk, and, in addition, three archimandrites - Bratslav, Lavrishevsky and Minsk, a significant part of the diocesan clergy and gentry. The Latin Bishops Jan Solikowski, Bernard Maciejowski, Stanisław Gomolinsky were present as papal delegates, as well as the well-known Jesuit preacher Piotr Skarga, Justin Rab, Martin Lyaterna and Kasper Nehaj as theologians. In Vilna, the stavropegial Brotherhood came out with a condemnation of the Union, and with it the famous priests Vasily,  

Despite opposition to the union and mutual curses, the king strongly supported the Uniates.   Ipatiy Potiy became the Metropolitan of Kiev after the death of Mikhail Ragoza, who did not show much zeal for spreading the union (it was even said about him that he died of grief, because the Orthodox cursed him with betrayal). Potiy, on the other hand, was a talented preacher, polemicist, administrator, but in the struggle for union he acted mainly by force. A sharp reaction from the Orthodox was caused by Potii's attempts to prove that the Western Russian Church had always been Catholic, as well as his intention to transfer the ancient Orthodox shrines to the Uniates. Actually, this explains the fact that Ipatiy Potiy, having the title of Metropolitan of Kyiv, was forced to stay in Vilna. The Cossacks and the Orthodox nobility did not let him into Kyiv.    As Mikhailo Grushetsky wrote: “... The king with the local bishop Potius completely defeated the Berestey brotherhood. In Vilna, the center of Belarusian church and cultural life, by force, with the help of troops, churches were taken from the Orthodox - locks and doors were broken, and the churches were handed over to the Uniates. The king happened at this time in Vilna; Orthodox, surrounding him in the street, with their wives and children, fell on their knees before him, praying that their consciences would not be violated, that churches would not be taken away from them, but this did not stop the violence. It is noteworthy that one of these churches was located in the "Rossa" area, the Church of St. George, after which the Orthodox Russian Yuryevsky Brotherhood in Vilna was named. Even then there was a large tsmentar (cemetery),  the Orthodox and “Russian part” of Vilnius was significantly erased in the minds of the people living there, mostly identifying themselves with the Polish nation or, simply, Tutai (aboriginals)…   

When Metropolitan Potiy, encouraged by the defeat of the Orthodox Vilnius, tried to do the same in his other metropolitan capital, Kiev, and sent his viceroy there, the Cossack hetman Tiskinevich warned the latter not to take it into his head to force the local clergy into obedience, since in case of this he , hetman, has already given the order: this governor “wherever it happens, kill like a dog (1610).  

When the king wanted to take the Pechersk Lavra from the Orthodox Archimandrite Nicephorus of Tours, Konstantin-Vasil Ostrozhsky, being the Kyiv governor, did not react to the royal order in any way. And when the king sent his nobleman with an order to seize the Caves Monastery from Tur by force and hand it over to Metropolitan Potiy, Tur defended the monastery with weapons in his hands, and then, with various “Nalivaikas”, as the Uniates complained, defended the Pechersk estates with armed force.   In the same way, the Orthodox defended the Zhydychinsky Monastery, the most prominent among the Volyn monasteries. Ipatiy Potiy died on July 18, 1613 and was buried, according to his will, in the Cathedral Church of the Assumption in Vladimir-Volynsky "in front of the royal gates, between the pulpit and the door." From marriage he had three sons - Jan, Peter and Christopher. The younger Christopher Potey (d. before 1615) became the first husband of Galshka Gulevichivna (1575-1642), from whose marriage he had a daughter, Katerina Potiivna, wife of the Orsha cornet Mikola Mlechko. Galshka Gulevichevna and Christopher Potiy lived in the town of Nesvich, given to her by her father Vasily Gulevich.  

Halshka's second husband, Stefan Lozka, had a rich house with lands in Kiev, which Elizaveta Vasilievna, "jealous of the Orthodox faith", donated in 1615 "to the monastery of the patriarchal stavropegy of a common life, according to the rank of Basil the Great", to a school, as for children nobility, and petty-bourgeois, and a hotel for wanderers. The condition of this gift was that this place with its institutions should in no case leave Orthodox possession. Galshka left her descendants the right to take away from the brotherhood the place she had given, if by some means it passed into the hands of the non-Orthodox, and obliged them in such a case to separate another place on their own land for the same purpose.  Having accepted such a generous donation from Gulevichevna, the Orthodox immediately formed a church brotherhood in Kiev "with the blessing", as they themselves say in their register, of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Timothy, in accordance with the charters of other brotherhoods, Lvov, Vilna, Mogilev, and kissing the cross " each for all and all for everyone", assumed the obligation to serve - to comfort and affirm in the faith the sons of Eastern Orthodoxy, the inhabitants of the Kiev voivodeship, to educate cherished disciples, both spiritual and secular, - to protect widows, orphans and to help all the poor people. This happened probably on January 4, 1616, or somewhat earlier, judging by a note made by one of the clergy who then entered the register of the new brotherhood. Brotherhood is in the church,   In 1620, the Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophan approved the charter of the brotherhood and blessed it so that this brotherhood with its church would be a patriarchal stauropegee, i.e. was not subject to any other spiritual authorities, except for the Patriarch of Constantinople. At the same time, at the request of the Volhynian nobles and petty bourgeois, the patriarch blessed the Exaltation of the Cross Church in Lutsk with the right of stavropegy, under which the Lutsk brotherhood with a school was founded, and the Patriarch of Constantinople Kirill Lukaris, for his part, gave a letter, which approved the statutes of the fraternal schools in Lutsk and Kiev.  

This is how a monastery and a school got their start, the first of which was known as the Kiev Brotherhood School Epiphany Monastery, whose patron was a graduate of the Ostroh Schools, Hetman of the Registered Cossacks Pyotr Konashevich-Sagaydachny. He decorated the monastery with the magnificent Epiphany Cathedral (the construction of the temple was completed around 1620, later it was rebuilt at the expense of Hetman Mazepa; destroyed by decision of the Soviet authorities in 1935). But the school at the monastery was destined to develop into the famous Mohyla Collegium, and further - into the Kiev-Mohyla Academy. Galshka Gulevichevna herself, having returned at the end of her life to Lutsk, her native family, according to the testament of April 2, 1641, handed over to the local Orthodox brotherhood 200 gold for the fraternal church, the same amount for the fraternal monastery and 50 gold for the hospital attached to it.  

She supported Galshka and the Chernchitsky nunnery, donating 30 gold pieces to it, and 10 gold pieces to the priests of the Chernchitsky and Prechistensky monasteries. Other Gulevichi were also noted for patronage in favor of Orthodox compatriots. So Galshka's cousin-niece, Anna Gulevicheva-Dolzhetskaya (her grandfather Janusz was the brother of Galshka's father, Vasily) also lived in Kiev, and donated to schools and monasteries, in particular to the St. Cyril Monastery (1629).  

A generous gift   in the amount of 1 thousand gold pieces, provided by the town of Ivankov and neighboring villages in the Kiev province, was donated by Anna to the Orthodox Lutsk Brotherhood. Danilo Gulevich-Voyutinsky donated 300 gold coins to the brotherly church in the same Lutsk with a testament from 1642. Raina Gulevich-Drozdenskaya conveyed  50 gold coins to the priest of the Church of the Prechistenskaya in the town of Pavoloch (Podolsk Voivodeship) and 30 gold coins to the Pavoloch "Russian" hospital (testament dated 1617). Prince's wife Christopher (Krzystofa) Kozeki - Anna Gulevichevna (d. no later than 1634), buried in the Zimnensky monastery, bequeathed 70 gold coins to this monastery. Donated to the Church of the Intercession in Voyutin: 20 gold pieces Yatsko Gulevich-Voyutinsky (testament dated 1626), 10 gold pieces Ivan Gulevich-Voyutinsky (testament dated 1627). In 1647, Semyon Gulevich-Drozdensky donated 200 gold coins for the church in Gudcha Brod, and 10 gold coins for wine and incense to the local priest. In 1613, Gnevosh Gulevich-Drozdensky allocated an island and land near the village of Drozdy to his confessor, ktitor of the Lutsk Brotherhood, hermit Gerasim Mikulich, to establish an Orthodox hermitage there.  

Part 6. Orthodox and Catholic clergy of the 16th-18th centuries.  

Among the Gulevichs who took holy orders in the bosom of the Orthodox Church,   Bishop Theodosius of Lutsk (in the world Fyodor Gulevich), Bishop Sylvester of Przemysl (in the world Semyon Gulevich-Voyutinsky - clerk of the Lutsk Zemstvo Court) and Archimandrite of the famous Pochaev Monastery Petroniy (in the world Pyotr Gulevich -Voyutinsky).  

Theodosius Gulevich, the Orthodox Bishop of Lutsk and Ostrog, took the priesthood after being widowed. Before that, Fedor (Fedko) Gulevich was mentioned as one of the ruling nobles, who, together with his brother, exhibited and maintained several horsemen for the ON troops, which testified to his solid financial capabilities.  

In the list of Lutsk-Ostroh bishops, he was probably erroneously placed between bishops Dionysius I (circa 1416) and Evfimy (circa 1450). In the sheet (deed of gift to the servant Strechenovich) of the Lithuanian-Russian prince Shvitrikgail (Svidrigaila, 1355-1452), dated September 2, 1438 in Ostrog, it is said: "And at the same time, our council had information - Bishop Theodosius of Lutsk" and others. In another sheet of the same prince, about "given to his servant" Olfer or Olyifer the villages of Glukhni and the settlements of Stan, on July 14, 1446 in Lutsk, it is again said: "And at the same time, there were reports of our faithful glad: Bishop of Lutsk Theodosius, pan Ivan Gulevich "and others (see H. I. Teodorovich, "The city of Vladimir, Volyn province., in connection with the history of the Volyn hierarchy", Pochaev, 1893 - Archivum ks. Lubartowiczow Sanguszkow w Slawucie", t. I (in Lvov , 1887), 35, 42-43; right there in the explanations to the documents there are references to the Meter. lit. (25), to the Archive of Yu.-Z. Russia (II) and letters of the Lithuanian prince). However, according to the now generally accepted opinion, Theodosius Gulevich ruled his diocese from 1540 to 1548. (according to other sources - until 1558). It is with the name of Theodosius Gulevich that the restoration and resumption of the activity of the ancient church of St. Demetrius in Lutsk, which the Gulevichs considered their ancestral possession from the time of the "ancient" Russian princes. It is with the name of Theodosius Gulevich that the restoration and resumption of the activity of the ancient church of St. Demetrius in Lutsk, which the Gulevichs considered their ancestral possession from the time of the "ancient" Russian princes. It is with the name of Theodosius Gulevich that the restoration and resumption of the activity of the ancient church of St. Demetrius in Lutsk, which the Gulevichs considered their ancestral possession from the time of the "ancient" Russian princes. It is no coincidence that one of his sons, the voivode (military) Vladimirsky Vasily Gulevich, took it for granted to recapture the church and the property adjacent to it, when the threat of its eternal falling into the hands of the Uniates turned out to be quite real.  

The active son of Bishop Theodosius, Vasily Fedorovich Gulevich, is often mentioned in documents of that time. He was constantly in conflict over property and possessions, both with neighbors and relatives, and with church hierarchs. For example, the complaint of Vasily and his mates: Mikhailo Drozdensky (Gulevich-Drozdensky), Olekhno Oliezarovsky, Ivan Seletsky that the Bishop of Vladimir and Brest Theodosius, personally leading a large armed detachment and leading more than a hundred plows of his peasants, ordered them to plow the fields already sown by the complainants, near the village of Lyubitovo (1574). On another occasion, some conspirators, with the support of the Cossack hetman Kosiński, tried to “pull away” the property of Vasily Gulevich “in Suteski’s estates in favor of Pan Mikhail Gulevich…”  

After a hundred years, the significantly expanded surname Gulevich gave rise to another church leader, who marked the uncompromising struggle between the Orthodox tradition and the union with the Roman throne.  

After the Seim, which opened in February 1635, adopted the so-called "Articles of Reconciliation", signed by King Vladislav IV, the Przemysl and Lutsk diocese returned to the Orthodox, while the Uniates should have remained forever: the archbishopric of Polotsk, the bishoprics of Vladimir, Pinsk, Kholmsk , Smolensk with monasteries, churches and estates belonging to them, the Vilna monastery of the Holy Trinity with the brotherhood and the church of St. Fridays, monasteries - Grodno, Zhidichinsky, Mogilev, Minsk, Novogrudsky, Onufrievsky, Mstislavsky, Plytinsky, Polotsk, Bratslavsky and others. And in Vitebsk, Polotsk, Novogrudok, "non-Uniates" should never have had a single church.  

And even the return of two dioceses to the Orthodox was associated with certain conditions. Thus, the Lutsk bishopric, according to the royal privilege of the Orthodox, was to remain with the current Uniate bishop until his death, and after his death it will be transferred with all the estates belonging to it from ancient times to the non-Uniate bishop, elected by the Volyn inhabitants and already consecrated. If this non-Uniate bishop dies first, then the king will give the Lutsk bishopric to the one who is already offered by the Volyn inhabitants. And when the Lutsk bishopric is transferred to the non-Uniate, the Zhydychyn archimandry must immediately be transferred to the Uniate with all its estates, with the Church of the Rev. Trinity and with a house belonging to the archimandry in the city of Lutsk.    

Similar conditions were placed on the return of the Przemysl diocese to the Orthodox. To top it all off, the Orthodox faced the problem of resistance to the king's decisions on the part of the Uniates.   For the transfer of churches to the Orthodox, the king appointed special commissars, but the Uniates everywhere resisted them. In Vilna, for example, it was ordered (by a letter dated March 16) to return to the Orthodox two churches: St. John the Baptist and Pyatnitskaya, or, rather, the dances of these churches with accessories, since the churches themselves no longer existed. But when the royal commissar of the Vilna mayor Konstantin - Evstafiy Zalessky, having invited with him several spiritual persons from the Holy Spirit Brotherhood, appeared (July 11) at the aforementioned dances, then on one of them he met Father Nikolai Rubitsky, presbyter of the Prechistensky Cathedral, and on the other - Father Sylvester Kotlubay, who protested verbally on their own behalf and on behalf of Metropolitan Rutsky and submitted their protest on paper to the commissar. Zalessky did not dare to commit violence, but reported everything to the king and left both sides to deal with the king himself. The same thing happened in Minsk. When the appointed commissar Christopher Volodkovich, Zemsky clerk of the Minsk Voivodeship, together with the abbot of the Minsk Orthodox Peter and Paul Monastery Feofilakt and other Orthodox monks and nobles came (June 2) to the Holy Trinity Church, which was ordered to be returned to the Orthodox, he saw a lot of Uniates around it, and among them are the abbot of the Minsk Uniate monasteries and the viceroy of Metropolitan Josaphat Bokia. After listening to the king’s letter, they did not want to submit to it and submitted their protest to the commissioner, in which they declared: in the diploma that the king gave to the Orthodox during his coronation on behalf of the entire Commonwealth, he undertook to begin to fulfil the “Articles” approved by him during his election, not before the first Diet to be; consequently, then the transfer of the churches appointed by him to the Orthodox may follow, but by no means now. The commissar accepted the protest and reported everything to the king. Apparently, things turned out better in Pinsk. Here, on May 14, the Uniate priests and the entire chapter opposed the transfer of St. Theodore Tyrone to the Orthodox Church in the presence of the wagon and the gentry and told the royal commissioner Theodore Korsak that this transfer was not at all mentioned in the diploma, which was given by the Orthodox king and the entire Commonwealth at the coronation Sejm. The commissioner accepted the protest and left, but meanwhile, when from May 15 to 16 the priest of the Fedorov Church came at three in the morning to the morning service, he saw that the church gates and the church itself were unlocked, that there were many Orthodox people in the church and Orthodox services were performed. Then the Bishop of Pinsk Raphael Korsak (the future Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev (1637-1640) recorded this protest in the Pinsk city books.   Even more successful, it seemed, was the transfer of the Church of the Epiphany in Belsk to the townspeople, who once, before the appearance of the union, constituted an Orthodox brotherhood. Commissar Semyon Gulevich-Voyutinsky Zemstvo clerk of Lutsk, accompanied by a cart and many noblemen of the Podlyashsky voivodship, having come to this church (August 3), freely unlocked it and handed it over to the Orthodox philistines with all utensils, also with a school, a hospital, a priest's house and church grounds, and the Orthodox calmly began to celebrate their worship in it. But as soon as the Uniate Bishop of Vladimir Joseph Bakovetsky found out about this, he sent his viceroy Simonovich to Belsk, who, having gathered crowds of Latins and Uniates armed with various weapons, attacked the Church of the Epiphany (September 8) and took it from the Orthodox with all its belongings.   The newly elected ruler of Przemysl had to face similar resistance. In 1636, the Orthodox gentry chose a Volhynian nobleman as a candidate for the Przemysl episcopate, Simeon Gulevich-Voyutinsky, a Zemstvo clerk already familiar to us, who took the name of Sylvester in monasticism. He was ardently supported by the then Metropolitan of Kyiv, Peter Mohyla. Sylvester Gulevich received the privilege of the king and was promoted to the bishopric of the Przemysl diocese and, accompanied by royal commissioners, went to his diocese. However, the Uniate Bishop Krupetsky did not want to give up his residence in the Spassky Monastery to the newcomer. The dispute that arose was settled by force. As a result of the attack, the monastery was captured by supporters of Sylvester Gulevich, and the Uniate bishop  was captured and nearly killed. Sylvester personally saved his opponent, taking him to the sacristy under the castle, and secretly took him out at midnight, giving him the opportunity to hide. However, Krupetsky brought a complaint against Gulevich, and the tribunal that met in 1637 condemned Gulevich and his accomplices in absentia to infamia - dishonor, a very heavy punishment, equated to banition, or expulsion from the region, with the deprivation of all civil rights. The Volhynian gentry tried in vain to have the verdict overturned, instructing their ambassadors to intercede at the Seimas of 1638 and 1639. for Gulevich. Sylvester himself petitioned for the annulment of the verdict while in Warsaw. After the diet of 1640 at Sylvester  they completely took away the monasteries and church estates assigned to him. But at the next Diet, he was probably freed from infamily, since it was decided to bring him into possession of those very monasteries and estates. However, a repeated attempt to establish itself in the Przemysl diocese again ran into Krupetsky's unwillingness to liberate the Spassky Monastery, which Gulevich decided to make his residence as well. After the arrest   of the ambassadors by the Uniate bishop, Sylvester in 1644 again resorted to force. This protracted struggle ended, in the end, with the death of Sylvester Gulevich, probably in the following year 1645.  

Another representative of this branch - Petronius (in the world Pyotr Gulevich - Voyutinsky) made a successful spiritual career. His name is found in documents under 1617, when, being the archimandrite of the Pochaev Monastery, he received under his control, on the basis of royal privilege, two more monasteries in Ovruch (Uspensky and Vasilyevsky), along with adjacent possessions. The Pochaev Monastery itself, from the time of the abbess of St. Job (in the world Ivan Zhelezo) (1551-1659), becomes the main defender of Orthodoxy in Western Rus' from Catholics and Uniates.     

Representatives of the Drozden branch of the Gulevichs were also looking for spiritual dignity   . It is known that the family of Gnevosh Gulevich and Anna Vitanskaya had at least five children, four of whom took monastic vows. The name of one of them, the monk Athanasius (in the world Andrei Gulevich - Drozdensky) is associated with a scandal in the history of the Lutsk Brotherhood. This refers to the fact when, while still a secular person, Andrei, who had the intention to take vows in the near future, presented the Lutsk fraternal monastery in 1642 with ancestral possessions in the villages of Drozdny, Dovge, Semerenki and Gudchy Brod, about which there was a donation record. However, other documents give grounds to conclude that there was in fact no donation to the monastery.  

On October 9, 1643, the monk Athanasius filed a protest against his abbot, who, as it turned out, deceived him when in 1642 he put a donation for the monastery for his signature, and Gulevich, being a gullible person, without reading, signed this document, not at all assuming to give gifts to anyone. As a result, Athanasius got into an unpleasant situation - his possessions were illegally taken away, and relations with relatives who protested the record of the donation were ruined. It is clear that Athanasius spoiled relations not only with his relatives, but also with the abbot of the monastery. Maybe that's why, at the end of 1643, Afanasy Gulevich was no longer in the monastery monastery, but in his possessions, where, by the way, he treated the villagers cruelly. As for the possessions transferred to him under a pseudo-deed of gift from 1642, they are probably   The path of monastic life was also chosen by the sisters of the aforementioned Athanasius (Andrey) - Anna, Galshka and Kristina Gulevichevna - Drozdensky. The first two became nuns of the Solovitsky Chestnokhrestsky, and Kristina - of the Kyiv Pechersky Ascension Monastery. Little is known about them. In 1641, Galshka and Kristina gave their father a receipt for payment of 500 gold coins based on the testament of their relative, Filon Gulevich. Nun Anna in 1644 gave a receipt to her brother Semyon Gulevich-Drozdensky for the payment of a part of the amount (200 gold) from a donation   in the amount of 600 gold, which her mother, Anna Witanska, determined for her with her testament.  

In 1623, Marina Gulevichevna was mentioned among the nuns of the Chetvertinsky Orthodox Monastery. Later, in 1634, she lived in the women's Resurrection Monastery in Zhydychyn and, obviously, owned substantial sums. At the beginning of 1639, she lent the Lutsk Orthodox Bishop Athanasius Puzfna 4,000 gold pieces for the needs of the cathedral church of St. John the Theologian, for which she received the village of Dubishchi along with the local monastery. It should be noted that the testament of Fyodor Gulevich-Voyutinsky dated 1622 mentions his sister, the nun Marusha, who was probably Orthodox, but more detailed information about her has not yet been found.  

Beginning in the 17th century, the Volhynian Guleviches, who for the most part gradually converted to Catholicism, like other most important families of the former Russian outskirts; nominated from their ranks the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church.   Dmitry Andreevich Gulevich, the last representative of the “Zaturkskaya” line of the Gulevichs, having become a member of the Catholic Order of St. Dominic, took monasticism with the name "Hipolit", signing off his ancestral possessions to the order along with the "family" church of St. Demetrius in Lutsk (1624,1625). A member of the same order in Lutsk was also a representative of the "Radoshchinskaya" branch of the Gulevichs, the son of Yan Yuryevich Gulevich - Yuri (Jerzy) Gulevich in the monastic "Tomasz". The most important activity of the Dominicans was the in-depth study of theology in order to prepare competent preachers. Their main duty was to preach and convert infidels into the bosom of the Roman Catholic Church.  

Another well-known Catholic order of the "Society of Jesus" (lat. "Societas Jesu") accepted into its ranks a representative of the "Poddubice" branch of the Gulevichs, the son of Andrzej Romanovich Gulevich - Pavel Gulevich (1730). Members of the order, known as "Jesuits", were often referred to as "foot soldiers of the Pope", in part because they swore direct and unconditional obedience to the Pope and actively assisted the See of Rome in missionary activities wherever they were.   The nun of the Order of St. Brigid in Lutsk was the daughter of Yuri (Jerzy) Demyanovich Gulevich (from the "Radoshchinskaya" branch) - Marianna Gulevich (up. 1640), and the nun of the Order of the Basilians in the same Lutsk was also Marianna (1693), the daughter of Peter Grigorievich Gulevich from the "Poddubice" branch of this surname.  

The daughter of Marek Mikhailovich Gulevich - Dolzhetsky - Marina, who in her first marriage became the wife of Samuel Gansky (d. 1661), in the second marriage to Alexander Shostakovsky, after her death in 1682, was buried in the monastery of the "Dominicans" in Lutsk. The scholastic of Brest and the canon of Lutsk was a representative of the "Poddubice" branch of the Volyn Gulevichs, the son of Roman Romanovich Gulevich - Gulevich Eliash. Also known is the priest in the church of St. Jacob in Lutsk (c. 1700) - a representative of the same "Poddubice" branch - Peter Gulevich (son of Roman Petrovich Gulevich).   At a later time, in the Zhytomyr deanery of the Lutsk Catholic diocese in 1843, a certain Primus Ulevich (probably from the Drozden branch of the Gulevichs), who was a vicar in the monastery of St. Francis, was listed.  

Part 7. Gentry and Cossacks  

After the former lands of Kievan Rus voluntarily joined the power of the Lithuanian Gedeminovich dynasty, under Olgerd (1345-1377), the consolidation of its individual regions into certain branches of the new princely dynasty began. 

In the northern part of Volhynia, near Kovel, Fedor Olgerdovich, the ancestor of the princes Sangushko, received land;  Koretsky and Ruzhinsky. Vladimir Olgerdovich became the master of Kyiv and the lands to the north of it, up to Slutsk, giving rise to the Olelkovich dynasty. Vigund-Vasily and Andrey Olgerdovichi received inheritances in the Seversk land, and Konstantin Olgerdovich (the founder of Prince Czartoryski) - Chernihiv and Czartoryia in Volhynia. Finally, the sons of Koryat Gedeminovich (Olgerd's brother) established themselves in Podolia, giving rise to the Koryatovich and Kurtsevich families. However, the latter from Podolia were forced out by representatives of Polish clans who arrived there.   In Volyn and in the western part of Podolia, the newly-born princely families had to deal with rather strong local boyar families, which had mainly taken root there since the time of the Galician princes, i.e. long before them. And if the local population and small proprietors accepted the change of dynasty calmly, then the former privileged class tried to resist. Even Gedemin made attempts to get rid of the local boyar elite, expelling them or simply expelling them from the lands. So, after the transfer of the city, the Zhytomyr headman was sent to Lithuania together with the “Russian chivalry”, and the headman and the “Lithuanian chivalry” were imprisoned in Lutsk and its suburbs. The lands acquired by the Litvins were distributed by the Grand Duke in the form of fiefs to service people - the “Lithuanian chivalry”. Among them were the Guleviches (see previous chapters), shortly before this (end. 14 - beginning. 15th century) who moved to Volyn from the neighboring Galician land.   Owing to their elevation to the Lithuanian Grand Duke, the Gulevichs naturally took the side of the local dynasts (in particular, Prince Svidrigailo) in their confrontation with Poland, which, for its own purposes, tried to take advantage of the contradictions among the newly arrived princes and their assistants with still quite strong and independent local boyars. .  

In 1434, Podolia, and 20 years later, Volhynia were torn away from Lithuania in favor of Poland, but this did not bring fatal consequences to the Guleviches. By that time, the Grand Duke of Lithuania was at the same time the King of Poland, and the local Russian and Lithuanian boyars (their origin did not matter, since the Gulevichs themselves are characterized in later genealogical works as an ancient Russian family) received the rights of the Polish gentry. However, not all representatives of the family were probably equal in rights with the crown nobility. Definitely, we can only talk about the descendants of Alexander "Zbrokh" Gulevich and his brother Mikita (Dmitry), whose descendants were assigned the coats of arms "Nawina" and "Sokola", despite the fact that many of these descendants did not change Orthodoxy for a long time   and probably, only with the transition to Catholicism were they granted Polish coats of arms. This is probably why, among the Gulevich clans, there are those that belong to the other three coats of arms "Nalecz" "Szeliga" and "Wieniawa". This can be explained by the fact that the representatives of these most likely were not the descendants of the above brothers and converted to Catholicism, acquiring all the rights of the Polish gentry either earlier or (more likely) later and independently of each other.  

However, it can be assumed that there were also branches that, due to their insignificant position, remained outside the Polish gentry and even preserved Orthodoxy. And if the more or less prosperous Orthodox nobles gradually converted to Catholicism or left their lands, seeking happiness outside the Crown, then the less prosperous Orthodox clans became even smaller and passed into the category of single-palaces, practically no different from the villagers, and often being in the service of the richer childbirth, lost for themselves and their own yard.  

Among the brothers Alexander and Dmitry there are at least two more brothers - Parkhom (Pavel) and Yatsko, about whose offspring practically nothing is known. It is not known about the offspring of their uncle Mikita from Dublyan and great-uncle Masko (Mikhail) Gulevich. All of them (and these are only known from sources), theoretically, could become the founders of various branches of the Gulevichs (and without them they had grown quite a lot), which did not become part of the Polish gentry, or entered it independently of other branches of this kind, joining various " armorial brotherhoods. And if we consider that the surname itself has already been recorded in sources since the 11th century(!), then such a stratification could have happened much earlier.   Belonging to the Polish gentry after the annexation of Podolia and Volhynia, of course, gave certain benefits to the serving nobility, therefore, the former boyars and Lithuanian warriors (i.e., smaller owners, to which various branches of the Gulevichs adjoined) preferred to settle there rather than   stay in the lands ruled by the descendants of the Lithuanian princes. On the lands of the latter, they remained only in the role of princely servants, while in Volhynia they could enjoy certain liberties, moreover, for a long time, defending their antiquity - adherence to the Orthodox tradition and some other local privileges.  

This can explain the huge number of gentry, rich and small, which is evidenced by all the acts relating to Volhynia in the 16-17 centuries, with the small number and almost insignificance of the gentry in the Kiev, Bratslav and Chernigov voivodships.  

But this sentiment was not shared by members of the less privileged classes. Moreover, a reverse movement is observed - from all the lands seized from Lithuania by Poland, ordinary inhabitants, villagers, as well as lone adventurers, flee to the free Dnieper steppes, finding there a standard of living that suits their benefits and concepts and is protected by weapons of the same, as they are militant brothers.   

The princes, on whose lands such paramilitary communities settled, were also interested in such an influx, since they relieved them of the obligation to keep a mercenary army on their own money and support the formation of an aristocracy, in whose favor it would inevitably have to cede some of their rights to patrimonial possessions over time.

Such communities are formed in the patrimonial estates of the princes Koretsky, Vyshnevetsky, Ruzhinsky, Czartorysky, partly Olelkovich and Polish gentry Lyantskoronsky, who established themselves in South Podolia. Representatives of these families often lead such paramilitary groups themselves.  

Thus, in the 15-16 centuries. on the lands of the Dnieper region, on the basis of the local, native, Turkic-Slavic population preserved from pre-Mongolian times (black hoods, torks, brodniks, etc.), with a tide of various elements that fled from the Polish expansion to the freemen, but for the most part representing the unprivileged class of elements, such a social order, which further forms the concept of the Cossacks - a paramilitary people who owe their service to the owners of patrimonial lands. There were also those who went further, settling behind the Dnieper rapids, getting rid of any, even formal guardianship of those in power.  

Starting from the 16th century, separate Cossack detachments under the leadership of the patrimonial owners of the book. Dmitro Vishnevetsky (Baida) (deceased in 1564), Preclav Lyantskoronsky and Prince. Evstafy Ruzhinsky successfully operate against the Tatars and Turks. The latter is already leading not only his Cossacks, but also extends power to the Cossack communities that are in the destinies of others. Such, for example, are the regiments Lubensky, Kanevsky and Pereyaslavsky, which are in the possession of Prince. Vishnevetsky, Bratslavsky from the patrimonial lands of the Lyantskoronsky, Kiev Olelkovich, whose inheritance in 1471 was turned into a voivodeship directly dependent on the Grand Duke. The owners of the appanages tried to protest, appealing to the Grand Duke and King of Poland Sigismund I, but the successes of Ruzhinsky against the Tatars and Turks showed that how useful a military force such an organization of Cossacks can be for the state. After the death of Ruzhinsky, the electoral beginning finally triumphs over the patrimonial and the military commander-hetman is chosen by the Cossacks themselves from the Cossack environment, but taking advantage of the unrest, the former land owners more than once try to assert their former rights among the Cossacks.   With the signing of the union between Lithuania and Poland in 1569, the Lithuanian and Russian boyars were equalized in rights with the Polish gentry, as a result, the entire previous structure of power in Lithuania, consisting of a system of princes, boyars and service people (nobles) dependent on each other - collapsed. All in the face of the law were equal in rights and became on the same level of the noble gentry. The entire non-noble population was given to the nobles, who still owned them on the basis of the Lithuanian, limited, fief right to unconditional ownership. Only three estates were recognized - gentry, cotton (forced) and petty-bourgeois (these were concentrated in a few cities endowed with Magdeburg law and even for Poland were considered foreign borrowing). The Cossacks, in general, did not fit into this structure and therefore were considered an anomalous phenomenon, which did not at all contribute to the establishment of a new Polish order of things in the lands annexed to the Crown as a result of the union. Classifying them as serfs could cost the newly formed Polish-Lithuanian state dearly, since securing the status of forced laborers for them should have trampled on their rights to personal freedom and to the primordially established communal order, which would undoubtedly lead to decisive opposition from the numerous and paramilitary Cossack communities . On the other hand, the expansion of the gentry class at the expense of the Cossacks would have caused it was supposed to trample on their rights to personal freedom and to the primordially established communal order, which, undoubtedly, would lead to decisive opposition from the numerous and paramilitary Cossack communities. On the other hand, the expansion of the gentry class at the expense of the Cossacks would have caused it was supposed to trample on their rights to personal freedom and to the primordially established communal order, which, undoubtedly, would lead to decisive opposition from the numerous and paramilitary Cossack communities. On the other hand, the expansion of the gentry class at the expense of the Cossacks would have caused  the opposition of the nobility itself, jealously cherishing their exclusive privileges and reluctant to share their advantages, fearing to drop their significance.   King Sigismund Augustus, the initiator of the union, decided to act gradually in the direction of adding individual Cossack communities to the nobility. Entire villages of free community members received gentry rights, starting from areas in which villages were not numerous and located mainly in the northern part of the Kyiv and Volyn provinces. Such “nobilized” villages retained their noble status: these are the so-called gentry villages or outskirts, whose inhabitants, having noble rights, have nothing in common with the rest of the gentry, neither in their way of life, nor in language, and sometimes even in religion, remaining Orthodox.  

It is likely that this ennoblement would also affect individual members of the Gulevich family. For example, Joseph Ivanovich Gulevich (born in 1769, of the gentry and of the Roman Catholic faith) lived in the village of Buzhanka in the Voznesensky Governorship (later the Kyiv Province) in 1796. together with other gentry, which can be suspected in the aforementioned gentry outskirts.   However, the successor of Sigismund Augustus, King Stefan Batory interrupted this practice and divided the Cossacks into categories, giving the nobility and all rights to only six thousand selected families (at the discretion of the Cossack foremen), while the rest had to merge with the serfs and become subjects of the gentry who were given their land by the king. The king's calculation was for the all-round weakening of the Cossack freemen, but was not fully justified, not satisfying anyone and causing only grumbling and opposition. The gentry did not want to accept 6,000 newly elected into their ranks, calling into question the very right of the king to such actions. Not a single Seimas wanted to approve this innovation, the Cossacks refused to be allowed to elect a king and were denied the right to send deputies to the Seimas, citing the lack of their citizenship rights, considered the essence as a mercenary army in the service of the Polish-Lithuanian state. Having never achieved the nobility and the privileges associated with it, the registered Cossacks (officially recognized army) began to draw closer to the non-registered, on whom the whole burden of the reform fell and whom the government considered a priori as serfs. The latter, from the very beginning, became the driving force behind all Cossack uprisings, drawing into their ranks both the peasant serf class and  and representatives of prominent Orthodox families who are dissatisfied with the restriction of their rights by the Crown.  

Representatives of impoverished gentry families often molested the Cossack army, seeing them as a way to improve their plight or avoid responsibility, wanting to hide personal interests under the guise of a common legitimate struggle.  

The actions of the government aimed at pacifying the Cossack freemen caused even greater persistence on the part of the Cossacks. In 1593, King Sigismund III, with his wagon, calls on the gentry of the Kiev, Volyn and Bratslav voivodships to form a general militia to suppress the Cossack uprisings led by Krzysztof Kossinsky, a gentry from Podlyakhia, who defected to the Cossacks for unknown reasons.  

During their speech, the Cossacks of Kossinsky occupied the lands and cities of the royal and gentry, burned them and ruined them, took property from the gentry and stole cattle, took away guns and weapons. The gentry were killed or imprisoned or forcibly sworn in and thus declared a desire to break away from the Commonwealth and destroy the hegemony of the gentry class. But in addition to general performances, or separate raids made on the lord's estates for the purpose of robbery, the Cossacks also intervened in the disputes of the lords among themselves, helping either one or the other side for a fee or part of the booty.  

Everyone, dissatisfied with their social or personal position, even the gentry themselves, taking advantage of the general confusion, and receiving help from Kossinsky, tried to assert their rights and claims. The following fact is known: the gentry Mikhail Gulevich (we are talking about the son of Janusz - Mikhailo Gulevich-Dolsky) begged two hundred Cossacks from Kossinsky and recruited many servants, rushed to take away the estates from his own uncle - Vasily Gulevich, Vladimir military, father of the famous Galshka Gulevichevna. Vasil was one of the richest representatives of the Gulevich branch and caused displeasure of many envious people, including the closest relatives. At the same Mikhail, resourceful uncle, shortly before the famous events  he bargained for the part of the Dolgoye estate belonging to him, at the same time buying out other parts from his relatives - the Gulevichs. Apparently with weapons and with the help of the Cossacks, Mikhail decided to return the lost paternal inheritance and teach his uncle a lesson. Mikhail managed to occupy Vasil's estates in the Bratslav Voivodeship, but not for long. With his excessive vehemence, Michael incurred the indignation of the peasants and was driven away. But his own niece Anna, also distinguished herself in the field of patronage, like Vasily's daughter (for her and Halshka, see previous chapters). Meanwhile, according to some information, the son of Vasily Gulevich (unless, of course, we are talking about Alexander Gulevich, the son of Demyan) was in the detachments of Nalivaiko, who raised an uprising some time later. (Sergiy Lepyavko. Kozatsky viyni kinets of the XVI century in Ukraine, Chernihiv, 1996, pp. 89,187,188).  

Volyn was the center of attraction for noble families, partly because Volyn was one of the first to enter the possessions of the Polish Crown. But, lured here by advantageous rights and privileges, numerous gentry, proud of their influence on the political affairs of the state, their civil rights and awareness of superiority over other classes, were often in complete poverty. They could not engage in any trade, for fear of losing the acquired nobility, but they could not be hired for military service, as it required large outlays for equipment, weapons, and so on. Civil positions were filled by choice exclusively by representatives of wealthy families - the gentry, who had significant land ownership. Therefore, who did not have it, and sufficient funds for their education.  

Often, representatives of the same surname could be in one or another group of the gentry. In this sense, the fate of the Gulevichs is indicative: According to the census of 1528, the troops of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania included 9 representatives of the family from 6 of its branches. In the 16th century, sources already testify to 16 branches of the Gulevichi house: the Gulevichi proper, as well as the Voyutinskiye, Dolzhetskiye (Dolskiye), Drozdenskiye (there is also the form Drozdetskiye), Dublyanskiye, Zaturkishskiye, Zbrokhovichi, Zglobitskiye, Zubilenskiye, Perekalskiye, Poddubetskiye, Radoshchinskiye, Sernitsky, Smoligovsky, Tverdinsky and Tsevonsky, who received their nicknames from their possessions in the Lutsk povet of the Volyn province.   Below is a fragment of the register of the nobility for 1569, in which some representatives of the already overgrown Gulevich family appear: Volyn province, Lutsk county, gentry, 1569, June 6: - Drozdetsky Mikhailo z Drozden (Gulevich branch) - Drozdetsky Bogdan z Drozden (Gulevich branch) - Zhuravnitsky Vasily z Zhuravnik - Yury's bubble, Volynsky the hunter - Mikhailo's bubble, gentry - Gulevich Ivan z Smoligova - Gulevich Gavrilo z Sernik - Gulevigovaya Polagia z Bokoymy   However, in the first half of the 17th c. many of these industries fell into decay, some (for example, Gulevichi - Zaturkishki, to whom Vasil Gulevich belonged and his daughter, philanthropist Galshka) stopped, and only the most significant in their position Gulevichi - Voyutinskiye, Gulevichi -Dolsky, Gulevichi - Drozdenskiye remain at the hearing of the sources. and Gulevichi - Perekalsky. According to the Pobor Registry of the Volyn Voivodeship for 1629, 28 Guleviches were named, the owners of 45 settlements, in which there were 1129 households. In the 15th-17th centuries. representatives of the Voyutyn branch alone held various positions in Volhynia in other lands of the Commonwealth:  city ​​and zemstvo clerks (9), stewards (5), sub-commissaries (5), troops (4), judges (4), cornets (3), captains (3), elders (3), city and zemstvo judges (3) , trapping (2), sub-tables (2), kashtelyan (1), elders (1). There were also representatives of the three other aforementioned branches in office, but, probably, not all branches of the Gulevichs retained their original status and gradually passed into the category of the poor gentry.  

Such a situation significantly limited the rights and freedoms of the gentry and, of course, weighed on him. Therefore, many representatives of the nobility, hired as servants, often waited only for the right moment to rob the owner and dispose of his funds in their own way. And then, whole crowds of gentry servants who fled from their masters gather in gangs, call themselves Cossacks (this despite the fact that they have no connection with the Cossacks and are in an area where the Cossacks never had time to develop).   

They rob and ravage, ruining local residents indiscriminately, often prompted only by personal revenge or greed. Finally, to avoid responsibility, they join the Cossacks, thereby replenishing their ranks with the gentry class. Such fugitives often attacked the estates of the gentry, in whom they had previously been in the service. So, in the complaint filed by Vasily Gulevich against his servant Ivan Putoshinsky, it is said that he sent his servant on an errand, giving him two horses, but Putoshinsky used them for his own benefit, did not return to his master, and taking advantage of Gulevich's departure to Krakow, appeared in his estate Sutessy and, on the basis of a false power of attorney, accepted it into his management ...

After a while, the newly-minted manager completely ruined the estate, using all his belongings for his own benefit, set up a brothel in it for robbers like him, with whom he hunted around the surroundings. Finally, he killed one runaway Cossack for the purpose of profit, which brought prosecution on the owner of the estate, Gulevich, and, fearing his arrival, fled to no one knows where.   In the fight against the adherents of the union, the former winner of Kossinsky, Prince Konstantin Ostrozhsky, an Orthodox magnate and the richest man in Volhynia, attracted his former opponents to his side. True, he did not openly call on such masterful people from the Cossack and gentry environment, but in every possible way showed them his favor, giving them a safe haven on his estates and targeting individuals who, in his opinion, deserved punishment in the matter of planting the union.  

In 1592-93, a 12-year-old Fedko Gulevich from the village of Voyutin escaped from the Ostroh school and joined the Nalivaiko detachment to fight against the Poles. In 1595, the Cossacks visited Lutsk, where Nalivaiko invited hunters to become Cossacks; hundreds were formed, centurions and chieftains were elected. Those who did not want to indulge the Cossacks were robbed. Nalivaiko himself went north to Lithuania, to the territory of modern Belarus. And there the Cossack detachments were able to take Mogilev. The uprising of the Cossacks also found sympathy in the Lithuanian lands; the lord's servants and peasants fled to the Cossack horde ... The rebels saw the cause of their discontent in the union and, above all, attacked its supporters. Just as in the Pinsk povet they avenged the union that had arisen on the estates of the Bishop of Lutsk, so in Lutsk the headman Alexander Semashka, also one of the leaders of the union, got it.   Unlike Kossinsky, the Nalivaiko uprising had a pronounced anti-Polish and anti-Uniate character, therefore it was also supported by broad sections of the Orthodox gentry, mostly poor. But in Volyn openly took the side of the rebels and some wealthy nobles; by the way, Prince Yanush Voronetsky gave refuge to Nalivaiko's associates in his estate Omelnik; Another accomplice of Nalivaiko is Alexander Gulevich from the ruling Gulevich family. Probably, we are talking about Alexander Demyanovich Gulevich (a branch of the Gulevich-Radoshinsky) - one of the leaders (centurion) of the detachment of "free" (as they called themselves) Cossacks. Being close to Prince Konstantin Ostrozhsky, Pan Alexander Gulevich, together with Prince Peter Alexandrovich Voronetsky and Severin Nalivaiko's brother Damian, set out from Ostroh to the estates of the Lutsk headman-Uniate. Severin Nalivaiko followed them with the main forces, but did not take a direct part in the attack on the lands of Alexander Semashko. In the town of Tuchin, which belonged to the headman, Damian Nalivaiko spread a rumor that his brother Severin did not intend to attack Semashko's estates, thereby misleading the Tuchin police officer, he himself attacked the yard and took away all the cattle and horses, which, due to his carelessness, the officer did not hide. 

Alexander Gulevich and Prince Voronetsky with their hundreds finally plundered both the yard and the inhabitants of the town, then accompanied Damian with booty, and they themselves moved to the village of Semashkovo-Korostyatin, robbing the yard there and mocking the villagers ... but he did not take a direct part in the attack on the lands of Alexander Semashko. In the town of Tuchin, which belonged to the headman, Damian Nalivaiko spread a rumor that his brother Severin did not intend to attack Semashko's estates, thereby misleading the Tuchin police officer, he himself attacked the yard and took away all the cattle and horses, which, due to his carelessness, the officer did not hide . Alexander Gulevich and Prince Voronetsky with their hundreds finally plundered both the yard and the inhabitants of the town, then accompanied Damian with booty, and they themselves moved to the village of Semashkovo-Korostyatin, robbing the yard there and mocking the villagers ... but he did not take a direct part in the attack on the lands of Alexander Semashko. In the town of Tuchin, which belonged to the headman, Damian Nalivaiko spread a rumor that his brother Severin did not intend to attack Semashko's estates, thereby misleading the Tuchin police officer, he himself attacked the yard and took away all the cattle and horses, which, due to his carelessness, the officer did not hide . Alexander Gulevich and Prince Voronetsky with their hundreds finally plundered both the yard and the inhabitants of the town, then accompanied Damian with booty, and they themselves moved to the village of Semashkovo-Korostyatin, robbing the yard there and mocking the villagers ... he himself attacked the yard and took away all the cattle and horses, which, due to his carelessness, the police officer did not hide. Alexander Gulevich and Prince Voronetsky with their hundreds finally plundered both the yard and the inhabitants of the town, then accompanied Damian with booty, and they themselves moved to the village of Semashkovo-Korostyatin, robbing the yard there and mocking the villagers ... he himself attacked the yard and took away all the cattle and horses, which, due to his carelessness, the police officer did not hide. Alexander Gulevich and Prince Voronetsky with their hundreds finally plundered both the yard and the inhabitants of the town, then accompanied Damian with booty, and they themselves moved to the village of Semashkovo-Korostyatin, robbing the yard there and mocking the villagers ...  

In 1596, the uprising still managed to be suppressed. Nalivaiko, along with another Cossack leader Loboda and Colonel Mazepa, were executed in Warsaw. But, Alexander Gulevich did not even think of laying down his arms. An adherent of the Orthodox party and a principled enemy of the supporters of the union, he continued to attack his enemies by their servants and peasants.   In 1599, Alexander, together with his father Demyan, broke into the estate, which belonged to the then deceased Lutsk headman, and killed Prince Jan Nesvitsky. I must say that such gentry wars were a common occurrence of that time. The gentry-neighbors fought for each other's property and did not disdain attacks on servants, plundering yards and even killing their opponents. Thus, the well-known Moscow emigrant Prince Kurbsky, who received land from the king in the Kovel region, first experienced the oppression of his neighbors, and then completely adopted their tactics and acted in the district like a real robber. It got to the point that during the prince's trip from Lutsk to Kovel on June 5, 1573, he received news of an assassination attempt being prepared on him from Demyan Romanovich Gulevich (father of the aforementioned Alexander) who had settled in the nearby forest. Kurbsky was ready to fight, but for some reason the attack did not take place. But such threats did not stop either Kurbsky or other gentry. Litigation between the gentry did not stop either in court or on the battlefield. And although the government tried to curb the instigators with the help of the law, it did not always succeed.  

In 1599, thirsting for revenge, the youngest son of Alexander Semashko from his second marriage, Marcian, ambushed his father and son Gulevich on the way to the Sejm in Warsaw. Both were killed, but the answer was not long in coming. Two other sons of the murdered Demyan Gulevich, in turn, dealt with Marcian.   The 17th century is the next stage in the development of the Cossacks, the apotheosis of which was a grandiose uprising led by Zinovy-Bogdan Khmelnitsky, a native of the small Galician gentry. At this time, the Gulevichs declare themselves from both sides.   From the register of 1649 for the Kyiv regiment, the Khodosovsky hundred, Oleshko Gulevich and Fesko Gulevichenko, probably his son, appear.  

On the Polish side, we meet Jan Gulevich, the captain of the district of Lutsk voivodship (1649) and better known from the sources, Lukash Gulevich-Voyutinsky, the headman of Zvenigorod, the captain of the district of Lutsk (1649), and then the royal. He took an active part in campaigns against the troops of Bogdan Khmelnitsky; participated in the Battle of Korsun in 1648, the defense of Zbarazh (1649), the siege of Vinnitsa (1651), in the Battle of Berestey (1651) and in many other skirmishes and battles with the rebellious Cossacks. In March 1651, when the crown army surrounded the detachment of Ivan Bohun near Vinnitsa, Lukash Gulevich-Voyutinsky was chosen as an envoy to negotiate with them.   “... On Monday   evening, the Cossacks sent out parliamentarians, asking for peace. From Polish  Captain Gulevich, the author of an interesting report about this Vinnitsa siege, left from the side, with another gentry, the Braslav understudy Rzhevuski; with the Cossack several centurions. They negotiated until late, then continued the next day (Tuesday), almost agreed.   Lukasz Gulevich himself, a participant in the siege of Vinnitsa, described the events of March 1651 near Vinnitsa as follows: “... We went further and approached Vinnitsa, where we found Bohun, a Vinnitsa colonel, a man of gentry, but at the same time very rude… On March 11, in the morning, we found a place ... and Bogun himself in the Monastery with the Cossacks ... at the same time, the townspeople of Vinnitsa and the local common people locked themselves up. He also reported that from the beginning of the siege of Vinnitsa, Bohun with several hundred comrades tried to escape, crossing to the other side of the Bug, but the Polish banners standing in the field noticed this movement and blocked their path. In the battle, someone was killed, someone was taken prisoner, and Bohun himself, wounded in the face, returned to the monastery, hiding behind its walls.   Gulevich and Rzhevussky sought the extradition of Bohun, the transfer of weapons and banners. The Cossacks were in no hurry to extradite Bohun, but agreed to give up the previously captured Polish banners (banners), horses and captives, were ready to pay an indemnity, and hand over their weapons upon exit. Gulevich agreed on these terms to release the besieged Cossacks, opening the way for them to retreat, but the question of the fate of Bohun remained open. Finally, the chiefs of the crown army, Kalinovsky and Lyantskoronsky, agreed, however, they planned to violate the agreements as soon as the Cossack army left the citadel and, having surrounded them, force them to hand over their foreman and officers, and if they did not obey, then beat them. But first, they approved the agreements, took the oath and exchanged mortgages. As hostages, several Cossack centurions went to the Polish camp, and to the Cossacks - two gentry. Whether these gentry were the same Gulevich and Rzhevussky is not known exactly, but it is quite likely. However, the Cossacks set the withdrawal of the crown troops from Vinnitsa for at least a mile as a condition for their exit, and after the refusal of the Poles, they broke the agreements.  

On the Polish side, it was believed that the gentry was to blame for everything, which was with the Cossacks (about 70 people), for whom it was unprofitable to accept surrender, since they could reasonably fear for their fate as traitors to the Crown.  

All attempts by the Polish army to seize the fortress by force were in vain. As Gulevich wrote in his report: the Cossacks retreated to the third line of their fortifications, part of the horses drove out and destroyed the Polish intelligence officers who tried to catch them. The Poles tried to deprive them of water, but failed. They fired from garmats, with fiery bullets, but the Cossacks extinguished them and did not suffer much damage. It got to the point that in the Polish camp itself, due to intrigues and failures, the army was gradually demoralized, and the authority of the elusive Cossack leader Bohun grew every day. When the main forces of the Cossacks came to the rescue of the besieged, the Poles launched an attack on the fortifications for the last time and, having not achieved their goal, began to retreat to Brailov and further to Bar and Kamenets. Lukash Gulevich in the same year took part in the battle with the Khmelnitsky Cossacks near Berestechko, which also turned out to be unfortunate for Polish weapons. The royal captain found his death in 1655, when Poland not only could not overthrow Khmelnitsky, but at the same time experienced an invasion from the Muscovite tsar and the Swedish king. This time in Polish historiography is called briefly - the Flood, in Ukrainian - Ruin.  

Active participation in the war of 1648-1757. the closest relative of Lukash, his uncle Gabriel Bogushevich Gulevich - Voyutinsky (c. 1595 - 1672) also accepted. But unlike his nephew, he is on the side of the Cossacks. Many representatives of the fractional Orthodox Volyn gentry preferred to fight against the Crown, among them was the Calvinist Gabriel and several lesser-known representatives of the Gulevich family. A native of a fairly well-to-do and significant in Volhynia branch of the Gulevichs - the Voyutinskys, Gabriel received a good education and, as a deputy from the Volyn nobility, four times, starting in 1637, represented them at the Diets of the Commonwealth. Being a Calvinist by religion, i.e. adhering to the reformist trend of Western Christianity,  

In 1621, Gabriel took part in the Khotyn war, where, along with the crown army, the Zaporozhian Cossacks of Hetman Sahaidachny fought against the Turks. In 1642, Gabriel Gulevich took the post of the Chernigov cornet, took part in the diets and, as an ambassador from the Chernigov province, was also a deputy of the Radom tribunal. In 1644, he was delegated by the Volyn gentry to the synod of Calvinists, held at the initiative of Prince Janusz Radziwill in Lithuanian Orly. In 1645 he became an ambassador from the Bratslav province. After the start of the all-Ukrainian uprising in 1648, Gabriel Gulevich, as a cornet from Chernihiv, took the side of the Cossacks, against the king. At the invitation of Khmelnitsky, he arrived at his headquarters in Chigirin together with Yuri (Jerzy) Nemirich. During the invasion of Swedish troops into Poland in 1655 (the so-called Northern War of 1655-1660). ), Gabriel, together with his son Paul-Erasmus, was one of the first to go over to the side of the Swedes. Later, he joined the troops of the Transylvanian prince Gyorgy II Rakoczy. For betrayal of the Crown, both representatives of the Gulevich family were banned, i.e. deprivation of all gentry rights and positions.  

At the Diet of 1659, the lowest request was submitted to the king to restore the noble dignity   of these persons. But only in 1662, taking into account the merits of the Gulevich family, and the fact that 13 representatives of this family died in wars during the reign of King Jan-Kazimir, the banition was removed by a special royal wagon, and Gabriel Gulevich was restored to the gentry dignity and the position of cornet , which he held until 1668. The post of cornet of Chernigov was also occupied by his sons - Krzystof and Pavel-Erasmus (later - the subcommittee of Chernigov).  

Among those Gulevichs who firmly stood on the positions of serving the Crown of the Commonwealth, and, as mentioned above, who often died for the glory of the king, was the royal captain (captain) Vaclav Gulevich, a Lutsk podshenk (1646), a colonel of the Lutsk Zemstvo militia, who led one of the equestrian armored banners of the crown army in the Chudnovskaya company in 1660. 94 cavalrymen were under his command. After the beginning of the Cossack uprising of Khmelnytsky, the former crown Cossack banners, who remained faithful to the Commonwealth, were called panzers. It should be noted that this Wenceslas was the native nephew of the Cossack leader Alexander Gulevich, the son of his brother, Yuri (Jerzy). The owner of the Konyukha estate, from 1661 - sub-commissary of Lutsk, Seim Marshal and Ambassador of the Volyn Voivodeship to the Seimas in 1658-1670, in 1643 he was a deputy of the Crown Tribunal. As a trusted royal person, he signed with the Voivodeship of Volhynia the election of kings Jan Casimir and Jan III Sobieski. By the end of his life, Wenceslas took the prestigious post of castellan of Bratslav (1679).

In the next century, another Gulevich - Josef (Józef na Drodniach y Hończybrodzie Nowina-Hulewicz (c.1698 - 1770) Hulewicz Volynsky, captain of the banner of the armored troops of the royal troops (1734), who came from the Drozden branch of the Gulevich family of the Nowina coat of arms, showed himself a loyal ally of the Polish king Stanislav Leshchinsky.  

On September 12, 1733, the Sejm re-elected Leshchinsky to the Polish throne. In response, his opponents, having gathered in the territory occupied by Russian troops (in Vilna), on October 5, 1733, they elected another king - Elector of Saxony Friedrich August (under the name Friedrich August III).  

During the outbreak of hostilities, Russian troops occupied Torun in January 1734, and Gdansk on July 7, 1734. Leshchinsky had to flee from his kingdom to Konigsberg, and most of the Polish magnates went over to the side of Augustus III. Joseph Gulevich, who once supported Leshchinsky and brought his banner of 60 horsemen under his banner in 1731, remained faithful to him this time as well.  

According to family traditions preserved by descendants, Josef followed the aforementioned monarch after his abdication to Lorraine (where Leshchinsky was given the title of duke), and then, returning to the country, Josef lingered along the road in Greater Poland, which was dictated by the desire to tie himself up in marriage with Joanna of Bajerza of the Vogelvander coat of arms.   From other sources it follows that in 1739 the couple rented the estate of Mlodziewiczy (Mlodziejeowiecke), located east of Wrzesnia (Wrzesnia) in the Poznań Voivodeship, establishing a local branch of Gulevich there.  

Among the numerous descendants of the captain are his son Ignacy, judge of Wroclaw (1787), who was awarded the Order of the White Eagle by the last Polish king Stanislaw Poniatowski; grandchildren - the captain of the troops of the Principality of Warsaw Klemens Gulevich (1785-1826) and his brother, second lieutenant of the cavalry of the Polish army, a participant in the Polish uprising of 1830-31. Joseph Gulevich (1803-1869); infantry colonel and one of the leaders of the Wielkopolska uprising Bogdan-Josef-Florian Gulevich (1888-1968).   Starting from the 17th century. Gulevichi receive positions outside Volhynia, primarily in Chernihiv, Bratslav and Kiev provinces, and starting from the 18th century and later in other lands of the Commonwealth. Those from the Gulevichi who settled on the Ukrainian lands, which later became part of Russia, were able to achieve the right to the nobility of the Russian Empire and in the 19th century had their estates not only in Volhynia, but also in the Podolsk, Kiev and Chernihiv provinces.  

After the Treaty of Zboriv in 1649, concluded by Bohdan Khmelnytsky with the Polish king Jan-Kazimir, which actually recognized the rights of Ukraine to a special status in the lands of the Commonwealth, a new administrative-territorial division of voivodships appeared, from where the Polish administration was expelled. The entire territory of free Ukraine was now divided into regiments and hundreds.  

The regimental division itself arose back in the 20s of the 17th century. But then it determined only the territory, the population of which was obliged to maintain at its own expense the Cossack Registered Regiment, which was stationed on this land. However, starting from 1638, up to regiments and hundreds as territorial units, the entire population was reckoned, and the power of regimental and hundred governments extended to it. According to the Zboriv Treaty, the territory of the free Dnieper Ukraine covered three provinces - Kiev, Bratslav and Chernihiv, which were divided into 16 regiments and 272 hundreds. In 1650, there were already 20 regiments. It was the territorial core of the Ukrainian state, where about one and a half million people lived. Following the next, Bila Tserkva Treaty, the territory of Ukraine was limited only to the Kyiv Voivodeship.   Local administration was carried out by regimental and hundred governments. The regimental government consisted of a colonel and a regimental council, which elected the regimental and hundreds of foremen. The hundredth government was represented by a centurion and his assistants.  

As mentioned above, according to the Register of the Zaporizhian troops of 1649, Oleshko Gulevich and Fesko Gulevichenko were registered in the Khodosovsky hundred (the territory near Kyiv) behind the Kiev regiment. The ending in   -enko in Ukrainian surnames testified to the relatedness of its bearer to the native surname, in this case - Gulevich. Usually, sons were called like this (compare Yuras Khmelnichenko - the youngest son of Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky). Therefore, it can be assumed with some degree of probability that the indicated Fesko Gulevichenko was related to Oleshko Gulevich, and, apparently, could be his son.  

In 1725, when listing the personnel of the Little Russian Cossack foreman of all regiments and hundreds,  Danilo Gulevich is mentioned - asaul of the Olishevsky hundred, Nezhinsky regiment. The position of Yesaul implied the command of the Cossack hundred, but if there was the position of the centurion himself, it can be assumed that the Yesaul acted as an assistant or adjutant of the latter. The regiment itself was created in 1648, and occupied the left bank of the Desna, approximately between Chernigov and the future Sumy; starting from the Saltykova Divitsa metro station to the confluence of the Ivotka river with the Desna and - both banks of the Seim, from its mouth to the confluence of the Kleven river, which served as the eastern border of the regiment, and finally - both banks of the Ostra (a tributary of the Desna), starting from the Mrinado metro station, the source of this rivers. In 1663, the northern part of the regiment became part of the Starodubsky Regiment (in 1648-49 and in 1654-55, the Borznyansky regiment was detached with its center in the town of Borzna). In the 18th century consisted of 22 hundreds.   Until the 17th century, the area that was assigned to the Nezhinsky regiment was a sparsely populated border between Muscovy and the Commonwealth, which was also a springboard for attacks by Tatar detachments on the Putivl and Chernigov borders of both states, respectively. The area was open, and there was practically nowhere for the settled population to hide. Only since the 17th century did the first fortified settlements appear there. Nizhyn in the charter of 1625, is called the "new-growth settlement". In the same year, 1625, Baturin also "sat down"; a few years later, the Konotop “town” was founded, and around the same time the settlement of ancient Glukhov was settled; Borzna, Ivangorod, Krolevets arose at the same time. Under the protection of these towns, villages began to appear. The basis of the population was made up of newcomers from beyond the Dnieper, who were looking for better   living conditions in the settlements of the left-bank Ukraine than in the lands dependent on the Polish lords.                                                                        

After the Deulinsky truce (1618) between Moscow and Warsaw, this part of the Seversk land was seized by the pan gentry in the person of the Pyasochinsky, Ossolinsky, Tsatseya, Kisel and others, who asked the king for vast areas of Zadneprovskaya Ukraine.    But already in June 1648, the Putivl voivode reported to Moscow that “hetman Khmelnytsky sent colonels and centurions with stubby Cossacks on this side of the Dnieper, “to Ukrainian cities, and ordered them to clean up (i.e. recruit) Kozaks; and the officers, and the derzhavtsy, and the Poles, and the Jews ordered to be beaten ... And the gentlemen and the Poles, and the Jews, all flee to Poland ... "By the fall of 1648, the territory of the Nezhinsky regiment was completely cleared of the Poles and then there is no information, so that they would return here after the Treaty of Zboriv.   How representatives of the Gulevich family appeared in the Nezhinsky regiment is still not known for certain. It is only certain that in the register of the Cossack   army for 1649, no Guleviches were yet listed for this regiment.   But in 1725, among the foremen of the Olishevsky hundred, there was the already mentioned Yesaul Danilo Gulevich, and in 1767, the badge comrade (corresponds to the hundredth officer) Rodion Gulevich, apparently a relative, and perhaps the son of the previous one. Speaking about the title of Rodion, it should be noted that such honorary titles-positions were granted to wealthy Cossacks who did not occupy military administrative positions in the Cossack army, but carried out special assignments of colonels.  

In the spring of 1767, after a meeting of the gentry in Nizhyn and the signing of an order to elect a hetman, Rodion was arrested. Based on the "notes" of Yakov Markovich, the riots consisted in the fact that the Cossack foremen who had gathered in Nizhyn on March 29 and April 28, 1767 to select a deputy to the commission for drawing up a new code, put in their order to him, to ask for the election of a hetman, institute which in the Russian Empire had been cancelled by that time.   For such free-thinking, many participants in the meeting were arrested and kept in Glukhov until a special trial. On this occasion, Empress Catherine II was drawn up a complaint from those arrested, among others, signed by Rodion Gulevich.   The further fate of the Cossack foremen arrested in this case is unknown, but it is known that the deputy of the Little Russian province in the Commission for drafting the code of 1767 was the son of Rodion, the Nezhin clerk Lev Rodionovich Gulevich; in the Monthly Book for 1773, he also appears as Novenogulevich, i.e. belonging to the coat of arms "Nawina". The last clarification is very important, since it directly connects his family with the Volyn gentry Gulevich, bearers of the same coat of arms. Councilor of State in the Chernigov province, adviser in the Treasury (data from the same Monthly Book for 1773); The Mogilev provincial secretary, Lev Gulevich, among other things, was the compiler in March 1776 of the description of the palace of P.A. Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky in Gomel. In the description of the city of Chernigov and its environs in 1810, there is also a farm belonging to Lev Rodionovich.

The family of Lev Rodionovich Gulevich was included in the nobility and included in the II part of the genealogical book of the Chernihiv province.  

One of his sons, Major Nikolai Lvovich Gulevich, was a mayor in Borzna (1802); since 1817 court councilor (also mentioned in 1847). Another, colonel of artillery, hero of the Patriotic War of 1812, Knight of St. George - Lavr Lvovich Gulevich (1782-1814) distinguished himself at Austerlitz (1805) and Brailov (1809), Borodino and Vyazma (1812). Participating in the foreign campaign of the Russian army, he was seriously wounded in the battle of Bar-sur-Aube (02/15/1814) and soon died.  

Among the descendants of Lev Rodionovich, who linked themselves with a military career, are: Captain Petr Nikolayevich Gulevich (born 1814) - his grandson, son of the mayor of Borzny; great-grandchildren of staff captain Nikolai Petrovich Gulevich (born 1858); district military chief of the Odessa Military District, Simferopol military chief (1909, 1910), Colonel Sila Petrovich Gulevich (born 1861); their brother Vladimir Petrovich Gulevich (born 1862) is the captain of the Voronezh disciplinary battalion. Finally, the next generation of soldiers from this family was represented by the second lieutenant of the 58th Infantry Regiment of Prague - Petr Silovich Gulevich (born 1887) and his brother, Lieutenant General of Artillery (1944) - Sergey Silovich Gulevich (born 1892). ) during the Great Patriotic War, the commander of artillery of the 18th Army.  

Written by Gulevich Sergey Petrovich.

P.S. At present, based on archival documents, DNA research, and genogeography data, it is possible to a certain extent to confidently talk about the earlier appearance of representatives of the Gulevich family: on the island of Rügen in 700 - 900; the lands of Pomerania in 900 - 1100; the lands of Kashubia, Slavic Pomerania, Galicia, Volhynia, Wallachia, Transylvania, the Moldavian Principality, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Commonwealth, Muscovy and Russia in 1000-1400.