Mazepa is the hero of which work. A short biography of Ivan Mazepa is the most important thing in the life of a political figure. Image in the work

The article is devoted to a brief biography of Ivan Mazepa, a Ukrainian hetman and prominent political figure. Mazepa's personality is assessed ambiguously; he is presented as both a national hero and one of the greatest traitors.

Brief biography Mazepa: stages of life

Ivan Stepanovich Mazepa was born near Kyiv into a noble family. The exact date of his birth is unknown, presumably the years are from 1629 to 1644. He received his education in Warsaw, after which he was accepted into the royal court of John Casimir. Thanks to connections in high society, Mazepa was able to improve his education in European countries.
Mazepa's career as a military man began. In 1674, under Hetman Samoilovich, he became general captain of the Zaporozhye Cossacks. Later, Mazepa was appointed hetman of the Zaporozhye army on the left bank of the Dnieper, after the unification of Ukrainian territories - hetman of the united army (1687-1708). Mazepa was among the close associates of Peter I for a long time. Unquestioning obedience to all orders Russian Emperor contributed to strengthening confidence in Mazepa.
Mazepa was hetman for more than 20 years. During this time, he achieved significant economic and cultural growth in Ukraine. He provided patronage to black and white clergy. Mazepa generously endowed his supporters with estates and lands, thereby continuing the policy of enslaving the peasant population.
The Northern War became decisive factor in Mazepa's political moods. He enters into secret negotiations with the Polish and Swedish kings against Peter I. During the successful completion of the war, Mazepa plans to create an independent state in Ukrainian territories. The first years of the war strengthened the hetman's ambitious plans. The Russian army suffers severe defeats, its unpreparedness and backwardness are revealed. Peter I was repeatedly sent denunciations about the conspiratorial activities of the hetman. But the emperor was so confident in his supporter that he applied severe punishment to the informers themselves. Pushkin's poem "Poltava" uses the plot of Mazepa's execution of V. Kochubey, who tried to open the eyes of Peter I to a dangerous conspirator and paid for it with his life.
The energetic activities of Peter I to modernize the army did not dispel Mazepa’s separatist sentiments. In 1708, he finally went over to the enemy’s side. For his betrayal, Mazepa is deprived of all Russian titles and awards and is anathematized by the Russian church. And already in next year In the decisive battle of Poltava, the army of Peter I utterly defeats the troops of Charles XII. The former hetman was forced to flee to Turkey, where he died in 1710.

Brief biography of Mazepa: personality characteristics

Traditional Russian historiography presents Mazepa as a traitor who violated his oath to the emperor. This is true, but it is worth recognizing that politically the hetman acted in the interests of creating his own state. The question is whether there were opportunities to create such a state. The alliance with Poland and Sweden took into account real forces warring parties and foreshadowed success. It is unknown on what terms this alliance was concluded, so it is impossible to say whether the population of the Ukrainian territories would have received benefits or harm by changing the power of the Russian emperor to another.
However, Mazepa's life and work are full of deceit and betrayal. From the beginning of his service, he easily moves from one patron to another, taking advantage of bribery and betrayal. His actions do not have clear aspirations for the independence of the Ukrainian people; they are subordinated exclusively to personal gain. Mazepa maintained his longest loyal relationship only with Russia, realizing its power. The weakening of Russian positions in Northern War immediately brought the hetman to the enemy camp.
It is noteworthy that after the discovery of treason and anathematization, Mazepa had the courage to again turn to Peter with a request for clemency in exchange for the extradition of Charles XII. Double betrayal has always been considered the most shameful thing, so making Mazepa a national Ukrainian hero is simply shameful.

In history and literature there are two opposite points of view on the peculiarities of this people: in the minds of some (mostly Russians) Mazepa is a self-lover and a convivial person, in the minds of others (most importantly Ukrainians, but not all nations) onal hero. It is not necessary to present evidence of these and others, the deliberately inflamed spirits of the most authoritative authors: the Russian historian Mikoli Ivanovich Kostomarov (among others, Ukrainian historians) and the Ukrainian historian Gnat Khotke HIV.
Mikola Ivanovich Kostomarov (1882). – Hetman Mazepa, as a historical feature, was not a representative of the same national idea. This is exactly what this word means. The Poles, following their education and ways of life, moved from Little Russia and there, having built a career for themselves, progressed, as they expected, to Muscovite rule and do not hesitate at all to any immoral ways. The most significant value of this particularity would be to say that it was a lie. He lied in front of everyone, deceiving everyone - the Poles, the Little Russians, the Tsar, and Charles, all the while ready to work evil, as soon as it seemed possible for him to take away his own benefit or get out of trouble. Little Russians soon became determined to preserve the autonomy of their land and their nationality, and by deceiving the elders, their plan was to acquire independence for Ukraine. But it’s true, as his secret thinking with Leszczynski shows, he was thinking of giving Ukraine under the rule of Poland, in other words, in his old age, having robbed those who had robbed him of his youth, when King John Casimir sent him as an agent in Ukraine and carry out a plan for the return of what fell from the Polish region until the end of the day. He cannot and cannot argue with the Swedish and Polish kings for the independence of Ukraine: Stanislav, as a Polish king, cannot and is not guilty of interfering with the rights of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Ukraine; Moreover, Mazepa himself knew well that the people, who hated him, would not reproach the new dynasty, as it was their fault to begin with him, Mazepa. He prudently captured the Volodina in the Belarusian region, and gave Little Russia a victim of the internecine war, which would inevitably have burned down if Ukraine had come under Polish rule, - and Mazepa knew with good fortune that the rose all in Right Bank Ukraine. (Kostomarov is respectful of the uprising under the leadership of Colonel Paliya - author). Alas, it was a shame for the people from whom, during the 20 years of their reign, they could not acquire love. That they were only deceiving their Russian accomplices with the pretense of independence, but in reality were planning to plunge their entire country into slavery - of which there can be no doubt, and Petro, who accused Mazepa of that before us by the Little Russian people, who was absolutely right...
It is clear that Mazepa did not change Tsar Peter, but it was not clear to him that, so to speak, the Tsar’s shares were falling, and Karl’s shares were rising... And not a month had passed before Mazepa had relented and had mercy. And most of the Cossacks, and the entire Little Russian people - everything went not for him, but against him. ... Without even thinking about changing my new ally, I plotted, as we had planned, to buy him and ruin my reconciliation with the image of the king. Never in all my life have I shown myself to be a human being in all its fullness, as in this new idea...
As if the Little Russian people were satisfied with the names of their hetman and the glory of their victory, Peter would not have gotten into trouble with his rival. And since who was the true culprit of the Russian state, then these are the Little Russian people...
It is impossible to say that at this time the Little Russian people are alive with apprehension towards the Russian state and before uniting with the “Muscovites”, however, we come across the skin, so to speak, on the facts of mutual unfriendliness and our There are guardians between the two Russian nationalities. It is also impossible to say that the Little Russian people were not aware of their national identity and national independence. There were a lot of minds that made it possible for the Little Russians to fall allegiance to the Russian Tsar. And, prote, it turned out wrong... The people are instinctively eager to drag them into destruction, and don’t go there. The people have lost their loyalty to the Tsar, not through any kind of priggishness, not from a godly position to the monarch, but simply to the one who needs to choose the lesser of two evils. As if it didn’t matter to him under the yoke of Moscow rule, he knew with good fortune that the oppression of the Polish gentlemen had become more important to him. For the Russian rule, it is understood, the spiritual joy was lost for a new time - the faith of his fathers, so that the “Muscovites” could no longer be disrespected, if the stench did not reach all the decisions of people's rights. Just one was already enough.
Gnat Khotkevich (b. 1917). – ... Only the combination of facts and their twisting have been used by historians to show the hetman in a negative light. But in reality - why hasn’t Mazepa come yet? Honors? If he had been the first person in a great land, neither the tsar nor the king could have rewarded him with anything else. Riches? There is plenty of money, pennies, coins, and everything. Come on, when you are already a 70-year-old man, what else would you need for yourself? And how could people, at that religious hour, kiss the life-giving cross, seeming to be clearly untruthful? Only these psychological circumstances suggest that a single impulse of his action could bring about a wave of goodness to the local region. When there is a lack of doubtful circumstances, it is more virtuous for political minds to talk about it. Mazepa is not Rodzianko, or Tereshchenko, or Skoropadsky, who would not have said “we are a great people who have not been conquered”... Then the living people were sick for the share of their native land, they realized that they had sold themselves into bondage for nothing and thought about those who died, fell ill, and suffered for the share of their people...
And for us, Mazepa is not a holidaymaker and not a self-lover - but a hero of the hour, a man, as in the remaining days of Ukrainian freedom, Ukrainian autonomy, before the growing onslaught of the tsars - still pishov, obeying the voice of the people's conscience, pishov with the remaining sword in his hands, with The remaining guard is for myself. And the Mazeppian colonels are NOT wretched people, but the faces of death, who gave their lives safely, and peace, and whole soul for the idea, for the bright ideal of national independence.
Deyaki vysnovki.
What can I say here? The beginning of the 18th century was dramatic for both Russia and Ukraine; The stench determined the character of their relationship for a century. Let the reader learn for himself about the role and significance of Mazepa. The author stands on the position of a true politician, who studies history not for the sake of finding the guilty and not for mutual accusations, but through the method of obtaining historical lessons. The Ukrainian National Empire - being an independent power - must be respected or, at least, accepted and taken advantage of. It's so simple. How important it is for this lesson to be given to active Muscovite politicians, including those whose nicknames are evident in their Ukrainian behavior.
Many Ukrainians, analyzing the behavior of the Moscow authorities in Ukraine, base their ideas on presenting the Russian people as a traditional slave, and their king as a cruel and uncivilized despot. It should be noted that in the era of Tsar Peter, the idea of ​​concentration of power in the hands of the monarch was a popular theory of power management. Everyone knows the phrase of Louis XIV “Power is mine.” It was not the tyrannical ruler who suddenly burst out, it was the system of views, apparently, that the power of the monarch is not guilty of anything but is not limited by anything due to her divine approach. The German lawyer of the late 17th century, Pufendorf, propagated to the reigning persons the formula that a sovereign, unparalleled in its actions, is superior to human laws and not to the rules of any other power. You have the undivided right to care for the spiritual lives of people. This formula captured all of Peter’s activity, greatly valuing the German lawyer. This formula was reflected in the military statute of that time: “His majesty is an autocratic monarch, who is not responsible to anyone in the world for his official record, but has power and authority, like a Christian sovereign, from the power of And to govern with kindness.” The theory of absolutism was preached and stolen by the Pskov metropolitan Feofan Prokopovich, to say the least, the Ukrainian followed suit, who majesticly poured into Peter.
This theory embraced the development of nature’s instillation in Tsar Peter of such risks as independence, dedication to innovation and persistence in achieving set goals. He saw himself as a father of the nation, a teacher and a commander, which demanded his allies to learn to live in new minds, and at the same time to gain support. Bo, according to Peter, tell the doctor what he will do when treating a patient’s pain, and bring him to the final order. Peter’s critics are absolutely right to condemn him for the introduction of surveillance police systems into the state, for the prohibition of regulation, for the state’s intrusion into the privacy of life. In an effort to speed up the process of transition from the fully developing Russian empire to an aggrieved European power, Petro, with his father’s lord, instructed his subjects, telling them how to lay stoves, how to work steles, do not take off your hats in front of the palace to avoid colds, there will be no parking in front of the booth and no one else fence and boundary.
For this very reason, Petro put himself in such a position before the Little Russians, whom he respected with his subjects, since the people’s leader, Hetman Bogdan Khmelnytsky, himself, himself, brought the honor under the high hand of his father, Tsar Oleksiy Mikhailo. HIV. Therefore, having respected the right to rule the position of the hetman and his senior elder, he was brutalized to the next when submitting skargs. Therefore, at the hour of extreme tension of the forces of the entire power, in the heart of 1707 Petro directly defended violence against his subjects - the Ukrainian political authorities: “Do not repair the ugly image and ruin of the Little Russian land, under the fear of the cruel our wrath and passion." Vin, as an autocrat, who respected himself as the father of the nation, simply could not behave differently, and for these reasons, he was restless during the military operations. What is written is not a justification of the cruelty of the Ukrainians on the side of Russian rule, just a guess that when analyzing such subtle matters as the analysis of historical phenomena, one cannot help but believe in the spirit and evidence of a specific historical period ode.
I will stay. From the point of view of the development of industry and trade, government regulation could not ensure the ongoing progress of European progress. Moreover, the theory of absolutism soon showed its impossibility, and for a very long time it became a hindrance to the development of both Russia and Ukraine.
“Hetman at Vignanna” Orlik against Russia. The stunning victory at the Battle of Poltava did not yet mean further victory over the Swedes - the war lasted until 1721. Now there are two hetmans in Ukraine: the Left Bank Ivan Skoropadsky and the gathering in the year 1710 in Bendery by the emigrant Cossacks Pylyp Orlik. Orlik was recognized by the Swedish king and the Turkish sultan. From now on and until the rest of his day, Orlik had one enemy in front of him - the Tsar of Moscow and did not hesitate in the choice of allies. And the choice of the new ruler is still the same Swedish king and Turkish sultan. In general, the “hetman of the ousted” group of special agreements. The theoretical foundation for them was Orlik’s dissection of the “Pact and the Constitution of the Rights and Liberties of the Zaporozhye Army”. This is, indeed, a unique document in two parts. In the first significant world, the history of Ukraine was mythologically presented, in which the positive role of Sweden and Turkey was reinforced and, naturally, the Muscovite state was shown in a rotten light. The 16 articles of the “Constitution” presented the requirements for establishing the sovereign status of Ukraine, its internal structure, the priorities of the international orientation (although, obviously, not Russia), democratic interaction He was in power, divided power between the hetman and the people. To tell the truth, the Constitution was ahead of its time, it was a more precise formulation of the national Ukrainian idea, which was formed under the influx of historical evidence of the remaining decades. The Constitution confirmed the supremacy of the three warehouse officials of the legal partnership, and itself: the unity and mutual relations of the legislator (broad general), the Vikonau (Hetman, bounded by law) and the judicial power, lying under the hetman. This Constitution would have been truly unique for the entire civilized world, as it would have been accepted by the entire Ukrainian consortium, which rests on the power of power behind the minds of their inviolable entity. This document was adopted by thousands of Cossacks and elders who were on foreign territory. Before that, one of the clauses of the Constitution recognized the independence of Ukraine “under the eternal protectorate of the King of Sweden.” And the only possible way to realize this potential realization was support from Sweden, Turkey and Crimea.
After the approval of the Constitution between Orlik and the Crimean Khan of Gravity-Girey on April 10, 1710, an agreement was formed, according to which the Khan promised to liberate Ukraine, Slobidska Ukraine And the Hetmanate from the Moscow panic and unite them. In Bereznya 1711 Orlik was in alliance with the Crimean Khan of the Uviyshov within the borders of Ukraine. The allies collapsed in two wings: Pylyp Orlik from Belgorod and Budzhatsky Tatars marched to the left bank of Ukraine, and the Crimean Tatars to Slobidska Ukraine. The Poles, henchmen of King Stanislav Leszczynski, also took part in the campaign. The Tsar ordered Hetman Skoropadsky to march against Orlik. There was a quick wave of confusion to divide the army: part of the general osavul Butovich sent against Orlik, and he and General Buturlin went to Slobidska Ukraine - against the khan. From the beginning, everything turned out to be on the offensive’s side, Orlik and Devlet-Girey achieved a number of victories, defeats, and defeats against Osavul Butovich. Most would like to confirm that the population of the right bank of Ukraine has little to do with Orlik’s burials. Tsar Petro, fearful of the colonels' defection to Orlik's side, was taken to Glukhov as guarantors of the colonel's squads. Nezabar territory, controlled by the tsar's troops, was reclaimed by the White Church, and the fortress was so well fortified that Orlik began to prepare for the worst. But the Tatars simply left Orlik and scattered across the vastness of Ukraine, robbing the population and taking away civilians. Orlyk will march for the Dniester, calling out to the Tatars until the end of their treaty battles. They also traveled to Slobidsky Ukraine. The Crimean Khan, having buried a few places, turned back and walked home, plundering and taking away full of inhabitants and thinness. Durham Orlik and Karl convinced their allies to resort to violence. Mass protests against Orlik and the Tatars began on the right bank of Ukraine.
King Charles finally succeeded in defeating the Turkish Sultan Ahmet II, and in the spring of 1711 the 120,000-strong Turkish army and the 50,000-strong Crimean Tatar army destroyed the Dniester. The hope for help from Orthodox Christians (Moldavians, Volokhs, Bulgarians and Serbs), which the Russians relied on, did not materialize. As a result of the unfortunate actions of the Russian generals, the Tsar's army was crushed by the Turkish-Tatar army, and the Tsar himself suffered little loss. Russia was hesitant about the petty Prut Peace Treaty, for which the Tsar was willing to turn Azov to the Turks, who, with such difficulties, managed to see the Taganroz fortress and protect the Azov fleet. In addition, Russia vowed to withdraw its troops from the right bank of Ukraine. The most incredible efforts went to waste, and again, at the mercy of the Tsar, Ukraine was to blame.
And Ukraine suffered again due to the Tatars and the short-sightedness of the hetman blinded by evil. The streams of human grief from the desolate Tatar raids yielded only one result - a curse on Orlik. The Tsar, in the end, managed to make arrangements with Turechchina about savings at the warehouse of Russia, the left bank of Ukraine and Kiev. The Tatars, on their way, deprived the Right Bank to the Cossacks, and they, without sufficient strength, surrendered to the Poles, and are not going to be denied rights to this territory. In a word, a reasonable scheme for the release of Ukraine by the equal government, conceived “in the office,” did not yield anything. For Ukraine, everything has been lost as before.
Orlik lived together with King Charles XII in Sweden, and after the death of the king, he moved to France, then to Greece, where he died in 1728, outliving Tsar Peter by three years. The entire hour spent in exile, Orlik called on the European monarchs, the Turkish Sultan and the Crimean Khan to unite the Zusil in the fight against Russia. But history moved forward at its own pace, without losing respect for the humble political science fiction writer.
Terminological respect. Over the course of many pages, the author brings to life the names Ukraine and Little Russia, giving no advantage to either one. This is how it was in those distant days.

Composition. 20 small sections

Historical ideas that are depicted in the work. The defeat of the Swedes by the Russian troops of Peter I near Poltava in 1709 and the confluence of Mazepi with Charles XII to Turecchin

Genre features. The poem is a whole literary-epic poem, a monologue-speech. The author tsikavit plin pochuttiv, the collapse of the hero’s thoughts, the flight of his awakening.

The image of Mazepa in Byron's poem

Hetman of images at the beginning of his work as a man of old age, 70 years old. Strong, brave, capable of maintaining self-control in difficult situations. You cannot change the course of history, otherwise, protecting your honor and worthiness will be lost to people. The image of Mazepi is richly nuanced. At the same time, one’s appearance changes under the weight of past fates, but saves the head: masculinity, strength, firmness of mind, nobility.

– Picture of a romantic hero in the image of Mazepa. He is gloomy, self-sufficient, loyal to high ideals (khanna, friendship, freedom, fidelity to the witch), willing, internally independent.

– Rise of the “Byronic hero” in the character of Mazepa.“The noble wicked man,” self-motivated, unhurried, strong-willed, a rebel with a suffering soul, in which the mood of “light sorrow” is stirred up; brave delivery, mighty will, titanic stand

Symbolic images of “Mazeppa” Byron

“Wild country”, such as “wild steppe”, “wild pralis”, “wild plain” are symbolic images that create an emotional, romantic image of Ukraine, which is a free, yet undeveloped land.

Image of a share, which retraces all the heroes. The fate turned out to be from the Swedes near Poltava, from King Charles XII, who ordered him to die, the fate brought together Mazepa and Teresa, who gave him such a strong cohan, and then separated them (even though Mazepa knows nothing about the further share of his cohan ї), share vryatuvala yogo, brought to Ukraine, she made Mazepa hetman.

Horse image. In romantic literature, kine is a symbol of giving, of human share. Therefore, it becomes reasonable that Charles XII wastes his horses (the share turned out to be new), and Mazepa saved his horse (the share is still safe).

The image of the “wild horse” that carried Mazepa through the forests and steppes from Poland to Ukraine is a symbol of the uncontrollable passion of the future hetman, and the fatal fate, and the death that struck Mazepa, and the heavenly punishment for his oh fidelity), and symbol the incomparable will that Mazepa has and how to bring him to hetmanship. In this way, the image of Ukraine, which remains a free country that is guilty of collapsing in the future, is inextricably linked.

Turbulent streams, heavy winds, strong winds highlight the passions that buried the hero.

The crow symbolizes death.

Step is Mazepa’s freedom-loving spirit.

A lush chagarna, a forest - the webs that were traversed on his life's path.

The evening cold, fog, gloom, darkness, the wind, the gloomy sky intensify Mazepa’s suffering. The morning, the white sun, the disappearance of the sun is a symbol of hope.

Image of the leader Mazepi symbol of a restless soul; – unaccelerated force; permanent insecurity; isolation of the free people; symbol of freedom, nation.

The poem “Mazeppa” is a romantic poem

1. “Mazepa” is a whole lyro-epic poem. The appearance of so-called mixed genres was characteristic of romanticism.

2. The legend itself sang, saying that it was mysterious, effective, unforgettable.

3. Romantics have always been distinguished by extraordinary features and large-scale statements. Mazepa is like that himself.

4. Expressive expressions of experience, clear logical positions, antithesis (violence - hopelessness, tyrant - victim, conqueror - conquests) - all this indicates affiliation with romanticism.

The poem is inspired in the form of a speech by the main character of the work, the old hetman Mazepa, about the love interest that she had with him. The poem consists of 20 small sections; The hour of the day is important for Charles XII and Mazepa, the days after the defeat near Poltava.

The history of writing and singing “Mazeppa”

Therefore, Byron wrote “Mazeppa” during his stay in Italy (near Venice and Ravenna) in 1818 or 1819. During Mazepa's speech about his marriage to the young beautiful Teresa, the squad of the old rich count-voivode, Byron himself was revealed to be in a relationship with the young squad of Count Guicciolli, also called Teresa. At the beginning of his speech, Byron presented the idea that the basis of his position was one of the episodes from the “History of Charles XII” by the French writer Voltaire about those like the “gentry” Mazeppa in his youth for his affairs with the wife of a Polish nobleman in punishment - attachments to the wild horse that was released into the steppe. Todi “Mazepa never died from suffering and hunger.” This will become the main food we eat. Mazepa tells the Swedish queen about her Charles XII, if after the defeat of Peter I at Poltava in 1709, the stinks reached Turechchina.

POLTAVA

(Poem, 1828)

Mazepa — main character, Ukrainian hetman, a “strong old man”, with whom the daughter of the judge general of Little Russia Kochubey, Maria, falls in love.
The composition of “Poltava” is multi-figured, which corresponds to its dual genre nature (both a romantic short story and a heroic epic). But that's it storylines converge to one point - to the image of the “gloomy” Mazepa. After Maria's parents refuse him their daughter's hand in marriage, she runs away from home; Kochubey and his wife are plotting revenge; but the denunciation he sent to Peter returns to M.; After her father dies on the chopping block, Maria goes crazy. Superimposed on the love affair is a political intrigue: M. slowly and secretly, not succumbing to the persuasion of the ardent Ukrainian youth to immediately oppose Peter, together with the Jesuit, Orlik, Bulavin, prepares treason, conducts secret negotiations with Sweden, Bakhchisarai (Turks), Warsaw, Ochakov; In the end, together with Karl, he is defeated on the Poltava field. As the hero of the novel, he (in the first and second parts) confronts Kochubey; as the hero of the epic (in part three) - Peter; in both cases he acts in accordance with his strong character- energetic, vindictive, power-hungry. However, the passions boiling in M.’s heart are hidden from outside view - for the hetman is old, which means he is cunning, careful, and firm. (Pushkin compares him to a flaming stone.) And most importantly, unlike M. in Ryleev’s poem “Voinarovsky,” he is indifferent to everything (both to freedom and to the Fatherland) except power. And although during a decisive explanation, revealing the plan of “betrayal” to his mistress (part 2), he swears that he loves Mary “more glory, more power,” this is a false oath. On the night before Kochubey’s execution, he reflects on the sleeping - and unaware - Maria: “Whoever is destined by fate / The worries of life, / Stand alone before the storm, / Do not call your wife to you.”

But this is the paradox that, losing Maria, M. loses some invisible support of his power over fate, the “everyday” source of his political power; that, defeating Kochubey, he is obviously doomed to be defeated by Peter. Moreover, and worse than that, becoming an enemy of the Russian Tsar, the Ukrainian hetman loses his independence and becomes dependent on the weak, weak-willed Charles. Strength goes into the service of powerlessness. And it’s not without reason that after M. and Karl shamefully flee from the Poltava field and Pushkin “forces” them to drive past the ruined Kochubey estate, Maria appears to him in the final scene. She is mad - and therefore, through her “childish” lips, the truth speaks: “I mistook / You, old man, for someone else.” In Peter, whom she saw at the celebration of the Poltava victory, she “identified” the ideal ruler, the ideal “man of war” whom she had previously seen in M.

Hetman Mazepa is a real historical figure, the hero of the poem by A.S. Pushkin "Poltava". The work itself is also based on real events.

Pushkin describes Mazepa as an elderly man over sixty: “He is old. He is depressed by the years, / By war, by worries, by labors...”, “...His mustache is whiter than snow...”, “His curly gray hair, / His deep wrinkles, / His brilliant, sunken gaze, / His sly conversation. .." The author builds the work around the personality of the hetman, his relationship with Maria and smoothly leads the narrative to Peter’s main victory - the battle of Poltava.

Characteristics

Pushkin does not spare gloomy colors in his description of Mazepa, justifying such a characterization with fidelity historical facts. In the poem, the hetman appears as a dishonest, evil, immoral and vindictive, treacherous hypocrite, ready to betray both love and his people for the sake of personal ambitions. “...he does not know what is sacred, / ...he does not remember charity, / ...he does not love anything! / ...he is ready to shed blood like water, ...he despises freedom, /...there is no homeland for him” - all this is about Mazepa. And indeed, hiding behind the desire to “liberate” the Ukrainian people from power Russian Empire, he weaves intrigues, negotiates with the Swedish King Charles. At the same time, Mazepa does not mention, and perhaps does not even think about, that then Ukraine will be under the influence of the Swedes and Poles.

Just like patriotism and loyalty to one’s people, love is an empty phrase for Mazepa. Although he tells Maria that he loves her “more than fame, more than power,” it is all a lie. Without thinking about the feelings of the girl who really loved him, he sends her father to the chopping block, after torturing her to find out where he hid the gold.

Image in the work

Initially, Pushkin called his poem “Mazepa,” but then deliberately changed the name to “Poltava.” The new title has a double meaning. The poem begins with a description of the peaceful life of the Kochubey family in Poltava, and ends with a picture of the Battle of Poltava. Although the lion's share of the narrative is indeed devoted to describing the history of Mazepa and Maria, it is the battle of Poltava that is the key ideological core of the entire work. " Battle of Poltava is one of the most important and happiest incidents of the reign of Peter the Great. She saved him from his most dangerous enemy; established Russian rule in the south; secured new establishments in the north; proved to the state and its inhabitants the success and necessity of the transformation carried out by the tsar,” Pushkin wrote in the preface to the first edition of the poem.

So what did the author want to say with his work? He made a contrast between Mazepa and Peter. Pushkin, in fact, himself answers this question in the epilogue, asking: “What remains after a hundred years of these strong, proud men, so full of willful passions?” The answer is obvious. Peter left behind himself the glory of a great tsar, as well as a strong, enlightened Russia. Those who put personal interests above public ones did not leave any memory in history, and if they did, it was a shameful one. This is exactly how Mazepa is presented in the work.