AN INTERESTING PAINTING: ZAPOROZHIAN WEAPONS
 

A friend of mine sent me this link and I thought it worth posting here. Many edged and other weapons to be seen.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reply_o...zhian_Cossacks

This is an amazing and most colorful painting Stu!!! and this work by Repin is probably one of the most iconic illustrations of this Cossack host ever !!

I still have a figurine of the main figure in red, the jovial character with the white hat, beautifully crafted by Martin Merks, a member here.

There have been great discussions on the weapons used by the Zaporozhians, and what is unusual is that they typically did not have the familiar shashkas of other Cossack hosts. Actually they used arms of Tatar, Lithuanian and other groups and often used shamshirs as well as East European type sabres.

Perhaps we might put together a collective group of weapons used by these Cossacks?

It is a great painting and it is one of the pictures I have in rotation for my wallpaper on my computer. I enjoy searching out all of the different weapons and looking at all of the fierce faces. Some of those guys are scary even while laughing.

The issue of Cossack weapons has been a topic of many a heated discussion on Russian Forums ( Fora?)

There is a great book by Denis Toichkin, an Ukrainian weapon historian, describing virtually all weapons belonging to Zaporozhian Cossacks that were either preserved in the muzeums or dug out at the sites of major Cossack-Polish battles. He concludes that there was no such thing as the indigenous Cossack saber: all are Turkish, Polish, Tatar or Persian, ie acquired one way or another from enemies and neighbors. The few made in the Ukraine are just faithful but crude copies of the above.

Not a surprise: Cossacks shunned all and any manufacturing jobs and had no material base of weapons manufacture. Any Cossack acquiring a productive profession instead of fighting was ( literally!) beaten and ostracized. They were a purely fighting host: akin to Caribbean pirates. Toichkin's analysis of the occupations of local inhabitants and the existence of smithies, import of steel etc. confirms it 100%.

Looking for a shashka among the Zaporozhian Cossacks is just as fruitful as searching for nimchas in Japan. In contrast, Kuban, Terek and Black Sea Cossack Hosts used shashkas left and right. Not a miracle: they lived among the true Caucasians :-)


BTW, re. Forum/Fora:
A Roman goes into a bar and asks for martinus.
"You mean martini?",- the barman corrects him. " No. Had I wanted a double martinus, I would have asked for martini".

Further to my first post above, I attach here, for the benefit of those who do not like to open links, another version of The Cossacks by the same artist, which to my mind is not anywhere near as interesting in terms of weapons etc. Also a portrait of the artist Repin himself.
Stu

This is a hugely interesting subject of which I know absolutely nothing. It would be good to expand into the detail ...This artwork is fascinating and a great way to portray the weapons...I note it even became a postcard! Whilst I press into search on library and hit the web~
Here's another.

Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Somewhere on this forum from many years ago with many great paintings mostly by a French artist.

One was an old Arab warrior at rest with his hookah, with yataghan & shamshir featured.

Sadly I cant recall the artist name or the thread. {Different computer files lost...}

Spiral

Hi,
Here are some more, prints, paintings etc.
Regards,
Norman.

And again.

Again.


P.S. A search for Orientalist Paintings will bring up images from this artistic movement many with images of weapons.

I wonder if it might be in Elgood's book on Islamic firearms, there is some great art in there.
It seems often overlooked how important art can be in the study of weapons, and I think the late Nick Norman proved that beautifully in The Rapier and the Smallsword" . Here he used period portraiture to illustrate and assess dates and periods for many hilt forms and pommels .

While it seems that portraits typically offer reasonably reliable images as subjects usually wore their own arms, as with most art a degree of caution must be observed. Artistic license is virtually inherent and in many cases of dramatic illustration there can be certain latitude expected, case in point of course Rembrandt's Biblical works using Indonesian keris etc.
In much the same way many classical paintings in Italy with Biblical subjects used contemporary arms and armour.

By the same token, Ariel makes very good points about the various hosts of Cossacks, and along with not being an 'ethnic' group, but assemblages of various ethnicities, they indeed used a wide variety of personally favored arms.

Excellent image on that postcard Ibrahiim!!! I often forget that Cossacks were often in boats and ships in addition to their prowess of course on horseback . I think some of the most impressive exhibitions of their riding skills are with the 'djigtovka'(?) as I believe some scenes in the classic movie epic "Taras Bulba" showed. Naturally, all manner of exception can be taken with the better part of the movie, but I think the riding was authentic.

We crossed posts Norman, WOW!! there are some fantastic illustrations!!!!

Hi Jim,
Thanks, I find these illustrations/paintings helpful in understanding how weapons were worn and seeing the accessories carried in support e.g. powder horns etc. As always these types of images can be subject to artistic license but if you look at a lot of different ones you can usually get a good general idea of what is in all probability correct.
My Regards,
Norman.

Absolutely excellent point Norman!!! As with most research, several concurrences usually will strengthen the proof factor. Most importantly as you well note, these works offer fantastic context to the weapons we collect and study, as well as perspective into those who used them.

All the best,
Jim

Heres some of the paintings I was thinking of...

linky

The "living" quality of the art is amazing!


Also One of my favourites by Gerome...{bad photo sadley...}

No one still living can paint like these men did .... sadley the Same as many other lost craft skills we admire on this forum including including jewellery & steel forging metal working skills.. {IMHO] { I realise not everyone agrees...} :shrug:

Spiral

The Battle of Berestechko (Polish: Bitwa pod Beresteczkiem; Ukrainian: Берестецька битва, Битва під Берестечком) was fought "after a two-year truce", between the Ukrainian Cossacks, led by Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, aided by their Crimean Tatar allies, and a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth army under King John II Casimir.

Fought over three days from 28 to 30 June 1651, the battle took place in the Polish province of Volhynia, on the hilly plain south of the Styr River. The Polish camp was on the river opposite Berestechko and faced south, towards the Cossack army about two km away, whose right flank was against the Pliashivka (Pliashova) River and the Tartar army on their left flank. It was, very probably, the world's largest land battle of the 17th century.

This description of the battle comes from Wikepedia and the actual report contains superb order of battle diagrams I show below thus, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berestechko though I should go on to unroll the entire battle here ~

The number of Polish troops is uncertain. One of the senior Polish commanders on the day, Duke Bogusław Radziwiłł, wrote that ~

The Polish army had had 80,000 soldiers, which included "40,000 regulars and 40,000 nobles of the levy en masse, accompanied by roughly the same number of various servants, footmen, and such." Modern historians Zbigniew Wójcik, Józef Gierowski, and Władysław Czapliński have reduced this figure to 60,000-63,000 soldiers.

The Cossack army totaled 80,000 men, including 28,000-33,000 Tatars and an uncertain number of Ukrainian peasants or as much as 100,000 men, most of them low-grade foot troops, plus 40,000 to 50,000 allied Crimean Tatar cavalry and a few thousand Turks and Vlachs, for a total of 200,000.

Both sides had about 40,000 cavalry. Fighting was close, with the core of excellent Cossack infantry making up for the weakness of their cavalry; much of the decisive fighting was by the infantry and dismounted dragoons of each side.

To be continued... :shrug:

The Battle of Berestechko Part 2.

The Armies
On 19 June 1651, the Polish Army numbered 14,844 Polish cavalry, 2,250 German-style cavalry, 11,900 German-style infantry and dragoons, 2,950 Hungarian-style infantry (haiduks), 1,550 Lithuanian volunteers, and 960 Lipka Tatars. In addition there was a huge militia force, of limited value, numbering 30,000 noblemen of the levée en masse.

The Polish commanders were hoping to break into the Cossack ranks with an impetuous charge of the famous Polish 'Winged' Hussars - a tactic proven effective in many previous battles, including Kircholm, and Kłuszyn (and which would later prove successful at the 1683 Battle of Vienna against the Turks). The Cossack army were well acquainted with this Polish style of war fare, having much experience of fighting against the Poles and alongside them. Their preferred tactic was to avoid an open field battle, and to fight from the cover of a huge fortified camp.

First day of battle
2000 Polish cavalry (one regiment under the command of Aleksander Koniecpolski, supported by Jerzy Lubomirski, six pancerni cavalry companies of Jeremi Wiśniowiecki and Winged Hussars under the command of Stefan Czarniecki ) repulsed the Tatars, who suffered heavy losses. During the first day of "skirmishes by the Tatar and Cossack vanguard regiments", the Poles were victorious "since their army sustained that first attack cheerfully and in high spirits".

Second day of battle
The Poles, encouraged by their success on the first day, deployed all their available cavalry against the "main Tatar horde" and "Cossack vanguard regiments". The Polish infantry and artillery remained in camp and didn't support the cavalry. This time, Tatar cavalry gained the upper hand, pushing the Poles back to their camp but were then "barely repelled" by heavy fire from the Polish infantry and artillery. The Poles lost 300 soldiers, including many officers of "caliber", and the "escort troop of Hetman Mikolaj Potocki". During the second day of the battle, the rebels were victorious, although "the Tatars, too, were unpleasantly surprised by the determination and endurance of the Polish army in both battles and, having suffered rather painful losses of their own; they lost heart".

Third day of battle
The "king insisted, at a night council, on engaging the enemy in a decisive battle the next day, Friday, 30 June". The Polish army appeared out of the "morning mist in full strength" but only the Tatars engaged in skirmishes which were met by the Polish artillery. At 3 p.m. Duke Jeremi Wiśniowiecki led a successful charge of 18 cavalry companies against the right wing of the Cossack-Tatar Army and "the zealous cavalry attack was a success: it broke up the rows of Cossack infantry and the wagons moving in coraal formation". The Polish infantry centre, under the personal command of King John Casimir, advanced slowly forward and "drove the Tatars from the field". During the fighting, a Polish nobleman called Otwinowski noticed the Tatar Khan's standard, and Polish artillery was directed to fire at it. A Tatar standing next to the Khan fell dead. With the battle already turning badly, the Tatar forces panicked, "abandoning the Khan's camp as it stood", with the Khan taking Khmelnytsky and Vyhovsky hostage. With their cavalry support gone, the Cossack wagon-fort, containing the vast bulk of the Cossack army now stood isolated on the battlefield, and in effect was under siege by the Polish army.

The siege of the Cossack wagons
The Polish army and Cossack camp exchanged artillery fire for ten days while both sides built fortifications, the Polish intent to establish a blockade of the camp. Their leadership being without Khemlnytsky, the Cossacks were commanded by Colonel Filon Dzhalalii, but after a few days he was replaced by Ivan Bohun but some accounts state it was Matvii Hladky. When terms for surrender failed and the Poles dammed the Pliashivka River so as to flood the Cossack Camp, the Poles prepared to attack on July 10, while the Cossacks prepared to flee across the river.

When Bohun "went to the crossing point with two thousand cavalrymen and several cannon", the Cossacks thought the officers were fleeing and "everyone panicked in desperation and began to flee wherever he could, worse than at Pyliavtsi". The Polish forces attacked the panicked Cossacks and the battle turned into a slaughter with more than 20,000 killed or drowned. "Khmelnytsky's tent was captured intact, with all his belongings", which included two banners, one he received from John II Casimir's 1649 commission and one from Wladyslaw IV in 1646.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi. :shrug:

One of the most significant yet little known tactics employed by the Cossacks was the mobile fortress. This system of wagons created a defensive square or triangular perimeter of collosal proportions and able to withstand bombardment and attack ...with all round defence depth mutual support and interlocking\overlapping arcs of fire, principles still used by modern armies to this day. In many ways this was the fore runner to the devastating Waterloo Square formations. They looked like this~

:shrug:

Norman McCormick, I don't see Zaporozhian cossacks on your images. I see only greek and ottoman warriors.

Generally Repin's painting causes great controversy in its historicity. In any case, that's funny reconstruction of this famous painting:

Hi KraVser,
I know, the intention was to show that paintings/prints/drawings can be useful to a degree in showing how weapons and the accoutrements used to complement those weapons were worn in many different areas.
Regards,
Norman.

P.S. Indian warriors as well.

A few items
 

A few Cossack type weapons............

Outstanding grouping there Ricky!!!! Thank you for posting it,
Ibrahiim, as always fantastic historic data which adds great perspective here .
Naturally there are those who will express concerns about the depth of the material added, and extensive text.....but I would remind everyone this material is simply context for readers who are researching subject matter.
This comprehensive data is there for those who chose to read it or use it....it is not required reading nor will there be a quiz!!! :)

I for one, very much appreciate the intriguing and helpful contributions you take the time to assemble and enter on these topics . Thank you.

KraVseR, as Norman well explained, these images comprise various subjects and individuals which indeed provide context with which to view the general topics here. While Zaporozhian Cossacks have become a focal point in much of the discussion the objective has been showing the usefulness of many artworks in learning more on weapons we study.
Its great to have your input however, as you are from these regions we find so intriguing and these fascinating Cossack groups.

Salaams Jim, I think a quiz would be a great idea !!! :p

I have certainly learned a lot myself about The Cossacks from bulling up on the considerable material available simply by pressing a few buttons on the web. Of course our own resource is very good and similarly that takes only a few seconds to display a vast quantity of excellent detail. What this means is that anyone can march into one of these debates and discussions fairly well tuned up on the basic facts...often without the luxury of books and documents to hand. (Jelous though I am that you drive in the worlds biggest .. veritable Ethno Library ..and it must be great to flick open the relevant pages at will...when you get a chance to stop.) You lead by example and it must inspire everyone; as I know it does me.

With that in mind I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to respond with the common courtesy to look up a few relevant details rather than just plunk down "the dreaded one liner"...( hopelessly inadequate ) ... onto these pages.

I always ask myself...Is library served in my reply or addition to Forum ? To that end Forum is advanced, educated and informed whilst those beginners get the news in depth and concentrated.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams all~ Jozef Brandt painted this in about 1880... showing a rearguard Camp of the Zaporizhian Cossacks, probably set in the late 16th or early 17th century. The logistic resupply for horses alone must have been huge.
Note the lead trooper carrying his trusted Shashqa.

Ibrahiim al Balooshi. :shrug:

Photos
 

Thanks Jim. Took a while to assemble all that. :D

Thanks to everyone for posting the above photos - all of which I've never seen before. I've added a few to my library. Thanks again. Rick.

And this is exactly the problem with paintings: the shashka is a much later form, which became popular only in the 19th century. Obviously, it was well adopted towards the end of the 1800s, when the painting was created, but is not reflective of the armament of 16/17th century Zaporozhian Cossacks.

Teodor

Salaams TVV, Thank you for the note.

However, the rich legacy of ethnographic evidence left to us by the famous artists ...Orientalist, Romanticist and others cannot simply be a closed box because some of them may have employed artistic licence in creating such masterpieces...Here on canvas is the record of life as they saw it ... not through the eyes of the not yet invented camera..but in paint...The distinct difference being one of feeling, character and atmosphere... portrayed by the artist... and brilliantly comparable in the photo and similar painting earlier on this thread.

Whilst you may have a point on Shashqas regarding the timeline...Albert Seaton in his book ...The Cossacks may have a different perspective...at page 34 plate A3 Zaporozian Cossack. C 1700.

Quote" The Zaporozian Cossack wore Turkish or Tartar dress and used Turkish weapons; sometimes because he stripped the Tartar dead and wounded and raided Turkish settlements sometimes because he was in the pay of the Ottoman Sultan on whom he relied for weapons''.Unquote

Perhaps this is illustrated in the painting I posted and explains the presence of the Shashqa..(spoils of war?)and further that no spot, precise date is noted for the period being painted... and anyway who is this trooper... possibly a Circassian? Who can tell?
Perhaps you could elaborate with a description to library of the timeline of the Shashqa weapon etc ? I have some notes on the weapon from Antony Norths Islamic Arms ...which I can dig out later.

There are a few examples(also type in the other spelling Shashka at Forum Library and indeed a great interchange of ideas involving your Shashqa at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=17990

..and great later examples at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...hlight=Shashqa

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

As noted by Teodor, there are certain issues in relying on artwork for investigation of historic arms, which I also mentioned in my post (#11) and as I had mentioned, a degree of caution using these resources is of course necessary.
I do believe that in many cases there is a good degree of reasonable accuracy prevalent, and as with any investigation, items or elements in question should be researched independently for corroborating evidence.

I think Ibrahiim has followed that approach well in seeking more evidence in other sources to discover just what type of weapons might have been used by the Zaporozhian Cossacks in the rather broadly described period suggested for that of Brandt's painting. I think perhaps the degree of license employed by Brandt might be revealed in knowing more about him, his nationality, and circumstances pertaining to him (the painting is dated c.1880).

As Ibrahiim has noted, the author Albert Seaton in his book "The Cossacks" has noted that the Zaporozhian Cossacks wore Turkish and Tatar dress and used these weapon forms, and puts that reference to c.1700.
I can recall being surprised many years ago in research which revealed that Zaporozhian Cossacks were exceptional among Cossack hosts as they DIDN'T wear shashkas. I do not recall further details, but am grateful that Ibrahiim found this information and cited the source...as always good to recheck notes!

Here is where the most exciting part of our shared interest here comes in, and what is often referred to as 'historic detection'.
In looking at this painting, the lead figure in these images of Zaporozhian Cossacks, said to be of late 16th-17th c. , is clearly wearing a shashka.
This is instantly recognized as anomalous as (1) it is typically held that the shashka was not a favored weapon among these Cossacks, and (2) the timeline of these sabres seems to date much later than the period represented in the painting.

Certainly the most obvious answer to this curious detail is, the artist in rendering his painting in 1880 (s) was likely familiar with the shashka, which was broadly associated with 'Cossacks' and presumed this 'key' weapon at the forefront would instantly identify the figures as such.

While such art works are not of course completed in 'real time', the accuracy must always be suspect, but still we wish to determine the validity of the elements represented. So we ask, 'could a Zaporozhian Cossack have been using a shashka?'
We must consider that this host of Cossacks was effectively dissolved and assimilated into other groups and regions under Russian influence in the 18th c.

Since the timeline for the painting is set in the 17th century, or largely so, the question set forth by Ibrahiim on the timeline of the shashka, as a weapon form, is well placed. We know that most examples of this guardless sabre seem to be of early 19th century, some perhaps into 18th, as far as surviving examples and primarily in Caucasian regions. While examples of this 'type' of sabre seem to occur in other regions as well, mostly Central Asian but apparently even wider into even Bulgaria (?) and others, the timeline is far from clear. What we do know is that the shashka was well known in the 19th century, and had become predominantly associated with Cossacks, especially of course, those in Russian service.

These things considered, probably the most important to remember would be that these early Cossack hosts were widely diversified as to their ethnic components. This is key as they of course favored and used their own types of arms. They are also, like most relatively unregulated groups (as far as 'uniformity' ) prone to use weapons obtained through many means. There were no dress codes nor uniform patterns for arms for Cossacks (aside obviously from later when they became Russian army units) much as there were none for auxiliary units like 'Pandours' etc. in European armies.

Therefore I would presume that in the painting by Brandt, it is most likely that artists license prevailed, and the shashka was quite possibly placed in a key location to emphasize or distinguish these as 'Cossacks'. It seems that Rembrandt used weaponry distinctively in some cases (as in the 'Night Watch') as well as fancifully (as the keris in the painting of Samson and Delilah).

Salalams all ~

For an interesting report with pictures etc please see http://www.slavorum.com/forum/index.php?topic=266.0 This website opens itself to questions and answers on some difficult issues and is an excellent resource.

Quote."Towards the end of the 15th century, the Ukrainian Cossacks formed the Zaporozhian Sich centered around the fortified Dnipro islands. Initially a vassal of Poland-Lithuania, the increasing social and religious pressure from the Commonwealth caused them to proclaim an independent Cossack Hetmanate, initiating by a rebellion under Bohdan Khmelnytsky in the mid-17th century. Afterwards, the Treaty of Pereyaslav brought most of the Ukrainian Cossack state under Russian control for the next 300 years."Unquote.



Ibrahiim al Balooshi :shrug:

The Zaporozhian Cossack Battle at Korsun.
 

The Zaporozhian Cossack Battle at Korsun.
by Michael Meusz. For the full account see http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...musket/korsun/

In this account I have tried to outline some of the characteristics, traits, weapons, tactics, clothing and even the hairstyles of The Zaporozhian Cossacks. :shrug:

Quote.”In the mid 17th Century unrest in the steppes of Ukraine was on the rise. The Polish-Lithuanian empire dominated an area from Warsaw to Moscow, and the Ukrainians were tired of their exploitation and abuse. At the little town of Korsun, virtually in the middle of nowhere, an army of Zaporozhian Cossacks supported by Crimean Tatars overwhelmed a Polish army sent to crush them, and started a revolutionary fire that would sweep across the steppes and make Ukraine a nation.

"The Zaporozhian Cossacks" were not your typical disorganized horde or "cannon fodder" as described during Napoleon’s time. These Cossacks were defined by their horsemanship, proficiency with the saber and their level of organization during time of oppression. An analogy could be made between the Zaporozhian Cossacks and the American Indians. They knew the terrain, and how to use it to ambush or evade their enemies. They were very religious in there belief in God. The Zaporozhian’s were known for their exceptional honesty. "According to the Catholic priest Kitovich, in the Zaporozhian Sich "(meaning-"clearing beyond the rapids") one could leave his money out in the street, not worrying that it would be stolen". With this reputation, it’s not surprising that the Polish crown hired them to maintain order within the vast open spaces of the Ukrainian steppes.

The weaponry of the Zaporozhians consisted of mainly muskets, swords and knives-often acquired from raids on traveling caravans between the Tatars and Turks or between Polish regions. The Zaporozhian musket did not have a bayonet, so a five-foot lance was also carried. Cannons were of small caliber and portable enough that they can be carried by horses within the army. Both wheels and the cannon itself could be easily mounted on the backs of horses and carried to battle with ease. The typical cannon in those days would cost the Zaporozhian Cossack 442 head of cattle and one cannon ball with powder a mere 9 heads of cattle. So, purchases of such magnitude would typically be done by other means such as gold, food or trade of nobleman from raids. It would be very difficult to herd some 4,500 cattle to a stronghold for an exchange of 10 cannons and munitions.

The dress of the Zaporozhians was light. To keep cool during hot summer days loose baggy pants were worn. They were colorful varying from red, blue, black, or yellow. They were matched with an off white loose shirt over top. At times a vest or light jacket accompanied the look. This was complimented with a large sash around their waste. The sash color typically depicted a rank within the Cossack order. Black being the most common and Red being one of nobility or stature within the group. This light clothing made the Cossacks very agile when in combat or conducting duels.

The Cossack Zaporozhians would shave their heads only leaving a long lock of hair to one side depicting the brotherhood of the Zaporozhian’s and dawning of the long burly moustache. A symbol to which today distinguishes the true Zaporozhian Cossack from other Cosacks

*The Cossack Zaporozhian army typically fought with their men in a mass, formed around a unit called a mobile camp. Zaporozhians would fight by surrounding themselves with a moving perimeter of wagons. At every other wagon a small cannon was positioned for support. The cannons were not only small but could be moved around quickly and easily to other wagons. Within the mobile camp were the Cossack foot soldier armed with musket, pike or swords. Mobile reserves were formed from the different groups of cavalry armed with sword, lance or pistol. The way the Cossack mobile camp would operate is that the entire camp would move in unison. They would approach their enemy, using the wagons as both a shield and to move the artillery closer to fire as opportunities presented themselves. As the mobile camp moved closer to a charge range, certain wagons would be pulled away and the cavalry and/or foot would then proceed to attack. If the attack was unfavorable to the Cossacks they would simply retreat back into the mobile camp and the wagons would close like doors to a fort. The Cossack’s would then immediately take up a defensive position. As the enemy would approach they would unleash a hail of cannon and musket fire. If the enemy retreated then the wagons can be pulled away at any point within the perimeter and another attack could be launched.

The Polish army had numerous functions throughout the steppes such as squashing local rebellions, escorting nobility and guarding caravans between regions. Polish domination became very harsh and punishment came quickly. It was not uncommon for peasants to be slain or beaten. To appease such concerns to local nobility in Ukraine the Polish crown would hire Cossacks as mercenaries and attach them to their army. They were given the task to help the Poles in maintaining order throughout the steppes. These were known as registered Cossacks. Allowing the presence of Cossacks ensured some stability. Registered Cossacks were not only paid but had an opportunity to own land and be given recognition when retired from service.

Bohdan Khmelnitsky, a young lieutenant was a wealthy landowner who kept to himself. However, he was not isolated against the harsh Polish rule under the local regent Czaplitski. In a retaliatory raid, the regent ordered his troops to punish several local peasants by burning their homes and taking their livestock. This incursion was to subdue recent Cossack raids within the area. But the raid fell upon Bohdan Khmelnitsky’s land. Czaplitski’s troops burned his farm, killed his son and abducted his wife. (This story sounds similar to the movie "Gladiator") Khmelnitsky sought justice through the Polish government’s courts but was rebuked and rejected for his claim. He escaped and found refuge in the Zaporozhian Sich along the Dnepro River where he once learned all the ways of the Cossack in his earlier career.

"The basis of authority in Zaporozhye was peace, fellowship of Cossacks. When there was a need to solve some important issues, kettledrums summoned all the Cossacks to the Sich square, where Rada (Council) or the Host Council would take place. During Rada every Cossack, regardless of his rank or means, could openly tell his opinion and had a right to vote. But after the decision was taken by the majority of votes, every Zaporozhian and all the hosting generals had to abide by it." Thus through the Rada, Khmelnitsky became the Hetman of the Cossacks. He successfully rallied for Cossack support in 1647 and raised an army of over 20,000 Cossacks. His cause was not only for revenge but also for the social and religious persecutions of all Cossacks. His political savvy even won him favor with the Crimean Khan, Tuhai-Bey, he convinced Tuhai-Bey that the Poles were going to attack and force the Tatars out of the Crimea. Khmelnitsky would send the Khan gifts of wine, mead, gold, and cattle to persuade Tuhai-Bey to become an ally. For Tuhai-Bey too disliked the Polish crown. With this the Khan gathered over 20,000 Tatars to support the Zaporzhian’s in their quest for revenge. And the battles to follow would catch the Polish Crown by surprise.

On the morning of May 26, 1648 near the town of Korsun, The Polish Grand-Hetman Mukola Pototcki had learned of the death of his son, Stephan Pototcki, at the battle of Yellow River two weeks before. Worse, 6000 Registered Cossacks defected to Bohdan Khmelnitsky’s and 40 Polish Nobles and other leaders were taken prisoner. The Cossacks taunted and starved the nobles to gain valuable information, and later sell them to the Tatars as slaves. Later on the morning of the 26th, M. Pototcki camped across the River Rosh just 10Km from Korsun. His encampment across the Rosh gave his army some terrain advantage if attacked. Pototcki knew that a large force was moving forward so he was desperately reorganizing and gathering other Polish troops within the region.

On the Cossack side, Khmelnitsky knew he had to make another strike in order to maintain his momentum. He sent forward a detachment of 6,000 Cossack cavalry 6Km ahead of his main 20,000-man force. The Khan, Tuhai-Bey, broke up his 20,000-man army into three cavalry detachments and then proceeded to advance. Hidden, Tuhai-Bey hoped for surprise. M. Pototcki reviewed his situation and decided to split his army in two giving of 1200 horse and 10,000 foot to one of his Nobles and keeping some 8000 for himself. But before the command was issued The Tatars began moving into position (See Map 1). At that time a small Cossack scouting detachment of 50 men arrived and formed up in front of the Polish army.

Khmelnitsky’s main force was still 12 kilometers away. The Polish army began forming a defensive camp surrounded by wagons. In the middle of all the maneuvering the skirmishing Zaporozhians would disperse and begin taunting the Polish nobles. They would yell out insults to them, such as: "You cavaliers ride on asses as your mighty steeds!" or called them "cowards hiding behind your mother’s apron".

For the Polish nobleman to tolerate such insults was a fate worse then death. The Cossacks would begin laughing at them, egging them on to come out and conduct personal duels or jousts. Some Cossacks would dance in front of the Polish army and roll around on the ground laughing at the Poles. Some would play flutes or parade around taunting the soldiers. The Cossacks would display their derriere and whistle at the Polish Cavaliers. Some Poles found this so insulting that few did break ranks to go forth and honor the duel set forth only to be killed quickly by the Cossacks swordsmanship. Not only did this become a morale booster for the Cossacks but a demoralizing scene for the Polish troops.

The insults and thirst for revenge from the loss at Yellow River finally caused the Polish Nobles to move their troops to attack the skirmishing Cossacks. A volley of musket fire failed to scatter the Cossack rabble-rousers. The forced Polish response led to the morning attack of three detachments of the Tatar cavalry from near Korsun. As the Tatars closed, the Cossack skirmishers withdrew allowing the Tatars to fire their bows. The first volley proved deadly, striking down hundreds of Polish foot and cavalry. The Polish nobles would then fill the ranks and begin firing into the oncoming Tatar cavalry. But the gunfire did not stop the Tatars. The Tatars engaged the Polish foot and began fighting man to man. Some Poles were purposely decapitated and Tatar soldiers would place the heads on their lances to display their prize. Also, during the frenzy of the fight some would toss the heads back into the Polish lines to demoralize the troops.

By midday there was no clear victor until Khmelnitsky arrived on the battlefield. He moved his mobile camp across the Rosh River, and began engaging the Polish right flank. This was far too much for the Polish army to endure. They were now facing a force twice their size. Immediately Pototcki ordered his wagons to be moved to force a breakout. They maneuvered the wagons such to create a corridor for the soldiers to move into the cover of woods. By late afternoon the entire Polish army successfully moved into the wooded area. It was a short triumph. Tatar and Cossack soldiers harassed them continually, both sides, now exhausted after a day of fighting, settled in the wooded area. Fighting slowed with the exception of some minor skirmishes entering into the evening hours.

Unknown to Pototski one of Khmelnitsky’s general, Maxim Krivonic (means - Crooked nose), took 6,000 Zaporozhians with their artillery at midday, guessing correctly that if the Polish army withdrew, he would cut off their escape route. By early evening Krivonic was able to place guns on an embankment and through the night harass the Polish position by lobbing shells into the woods. The cannon fire kept the Poles on edge and further demoralized the remaining army.

On the morning of May 27, 1648 the Polish army tried to attack the embankment to make way for another breakout, with a plan to take the high ground. Yet the Cossacks and Tatars resumed their assault. Khmelnitsky began his attack in line formation and harassed the right flank while the Tatars harassed the left flank. Krivonic supported both assaults and rushed his Cossacks in a pincer maneuver to deliver the final blow. It did not take long to smash through the Polish wagons and lines. causing the Polish army to rout, essentially eliminating the Polish army as a fighting force. Both Cossacks and Tatars captured weapons, food and clothing within the camp. Some Polish soldiers were killed when they offered to surrender.

Mukola Pototcki and many Polish noblemen were killed that day. Those that did survive were put into chains. The Polish Corp was decimated after the second day. Some 8,500 massacred and the rest routed. The Zaporozhian Cossacks and Tatars sent a chilling message to the Polish crown, forecasting a change in balance. Bohdan Khmelnitisky became a hero to the Cossack, and the victory lured peasants to join the ranks of the Cossacks. The Zaporozhian and Tatar armies, strong and well supplied, soon became unstoppable.

The revolution had received such a momentum that it was difficult to stem it. It would take several more years of fighting and negotiations before Poland would finally recognize Cossack independence and to restore ancient privileges, bestow Cossack independence, and recognize Khmelnitsky as Hetman.

The battle cemented Khmelnitsky as one of the fathers of the Ukrainian nation. His Campaign freed Ukraine from Polish domination, and, in the process, fulfilled his quest for personal revenge. Although stability in Ukraine would take many more decades, the birth of a nation had begun.”. Unquote

* My previous post refers to this special tactic; The Mobile Fort.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.