MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Free Forum Hosting
 
Important Announcement Important Announcement
The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
The History Page[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  Message Boards  
  For New Members  
  On This Day....  
  General  
  American History  
  Ancient History  
  British History  
  Current Events  
  European History  
  The Civil War  
  War  
  World History  
  Pictures  
    
    
  Links  
  Militaria Board  
  Cars/Motorcycles  
  
  
  Tools  
 
European History : The Cossacks Part 1 Who are the cossacks
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
(1 recommendation so far) Message 1 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameArnie-113  (Original Message)Sent: 11/1/2003 5:34 PM

The Cossacks

Part 1. Who are the Cossacks

Mobalisation 1914

It is very, very difficult to give a definition of what is the Cossack. The Cossacks know/sense who is a Cossacks and who is not, the way any members of any "tribe" know/sense who is one of them and who is not. But historians, anthropologists and even politicians are trying to come up with their own explanations and theories. And there so many of those... Here are just a few examples of definitions and descriptions of the Cossacks I've met:
- Russian/Ukrainian sub-tribe
- a mix of Slavs living on the steppe borders with the Turkic clans of the Golden Horde that made choice to become Christian
- a race group
- communities which had existed on the frontiers of the Russian Empire, forming a social and cultural entity without being a specific national group
- indigenous population of Dnieper and Don areas, descendants of Scythians, Sarmatians, Torks, Klobuks, Brodniks, etc., who experienced strong Slavic influence under the Kievan Rus
- russified leftovers of Genghis Khan's and Genghisides' undefeatable horsemen
- a "peasant-warrior" tradition
- a nationality
- military service people, something like a warrior cast
- run-away serfs who established their free communities on the borders back in 15th century
- pioneers of new lands
- descendants of all the waves of invaders who passed the route from Asia to Europe (through the area known as The Great Steppe), who settled down in the steppes of Southern Russia and Ukraine where they mixed with the Slavic people
- "Robin Hoods" of Russia and Ukraine
- the knights of Orthodoxy
- trappers with special duties to guard the borders
- legendary fighters on the service to the Tsars
- farmers with special duties to guard the borders
- leaders of all the major revolts against the tsars (Kondraty Bulavin, Stepan Razin, Emelyan Pugachev, etc.)
- major supporters of the tsars
- military tribesmen
- many other, sometimes very wild definitions and theories

As you can see, some of those definitions contradict to each other. Some of those definitions are ridiculous, some are partially true. Historians and anthropologists are arguing. Some consider the Cossacks to be a nationality, some think of them as a military service people, something like a warrior cast, some say it's just another group of Russians with their specific customs and traditions. But in fact, you can find inconsistencies in all those definitions, they are, at best, only partially correct. There were thirteen Cossack hosts by 1917, and they were all predominantly Slavic. At the same time, there were significant groups of Non-Slavic Cossacks, of Kalmyk, Caucasian and Turkic origin. The majority of the Cossacks, all the Slavic Cossack Hosts practiced the Orthodox Christianity, but later created Cossack units had Buddhists (Lamaists of Tibetan tradition) and Moslems. Therefore, you can't define the Cossacks simply by the ethnic or religious background.

The bottom line is, while historians and anthropologists are arguing, the Cossacks are not concerned that much with definitions. They perceive themselves as a special entity within Russia, and instead of definitions there is a simple sense of their unity, from the Black Sea to the Far East, and all over the world (wherever life brought them after all the revolutions and wars that hit Russia this century), regardless of the time zones and landscapes they live in. When a Russian Cossack meets another Cossack, let's say of Kalmyk or Bashkir origin, he doesn't see Kalmyk or Bashkir, he sees his Cossack Brother. There is something there that can be sensed but can't be defined. No matter what is the origin of the Cossacks back in the history, these days they represent a very strong segment of Russian society.

However, governments always want precise definitions. For the purposes of dealing with the Cossack phenomena on the state level, even Russian parliament deputies came up with a way to define the Cossacks. The bill on the Cossacks describes them as "a community of people...with their own traditions, areas of residence, culture, economic system, and a special attitude toward army service and their relationship with the state."

 

  language=JavaScript></SCRIPT>



First  Previous  2-8 of 8  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 2 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nickname--sundaySent: 11/2/2003 12:15 AM
That's interesting, Arnie.  I always thought the Cossacks were simply the warrior caste in Russia. 
 
--sunday

Reply
 Message 3 of 8 in Discussion 
From: froglampSent: 3/12/2004 10:17 PM
Hello, Arnie,
 
Do you have any information on the medieval Polish cavalry? I've just started looking for information and drawings. I think Michener stated they had a Mohawk-like haircut (shorn sides of the head).
 
Here's one link I found
 
 
froglamp

Reply
 Message 4 of 8 in Discussion 
From: froglampSent: 3/12/2004 10:21 PM
I also remember reading that they had these lances or banners that made a great racket when they charged...
 
froglamp

Reply
 Message 5 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameMOREREPETESSent: 3/13/2004 4:59 AM
SIMPLY CALLED HORSEMEN OR CALVARY I THOUGHT. KNOWN FOR THEIR RIDING SKILLS. GYPSIES ON HORSES.
                                                              ........PBA

Reply
 Message 6 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameInclinedNickelSent: 1/29/2005 3:05 AM
Red Cossacks and White Cossacks are hated and loved by different Russians.  Anyone know why or what the difference is between them?
 
The Hamidiye (made up of Kurds) were consciously Cossack-like and patrolled the frontiers of Turkey.  They were dissolved by Attaturk in the 1920's, but their leaders formed the clandestine Azadi, or Freedom Party.
 
Nickel

Reply
 Message 7 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknamerabbibnw1Sent: 1/29/2005 11:14 PM
Dear Nickel:
 
    The Red Cossacks and the White Cossacks got their labels because during the Russian Revolution (1917-1921), they favored the Communists (the Reds) and the Tsarists (the Whites), respectively.
 
    The Cossacks have people the southern and centrals Russian plains for centuries.  When Islam broke out of its Arabian homeland in the late 7th century and headed east and west in a fit of conquest, central Russia, along with India, China, the Philippines, and Indonesia, all fell under Muslim rule.  In what used to be the central Soviet republics of Armenia, Turkmenistan, Tadjikstan, and Khirgizstan, 95% of the population remains Muslim today.
 
    Although the Tsars used Cossacks in their armies because of their ruthlessness--especially toward the Jews of the Ukraine--they always kept one eye on them because of their tribal and religious loyalties.  That policy was continued by the Soviet Union, which kept a heavy KGB presence in the Muslim republics.  It's also one of the reasons why the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979:  they didn't want the revolution occurring in Iran to leak across the borders into Soviet territory.  One of the greatest nightmares of the Soviet Union--as it was for the Tsars before them--is civil war.  After years of internal warfare under the Tsars, and after the four years of the Russian Revolution, nobody wants the famine, starvation, and diseases that inevitably follow in the wake of war to haunt the land again.  That's why the Russians have always preferred a one-man or one-party rule as opposed to the type of Republican government we're used to, no matter how corrupt it might be.  If it's effective, it'll keep starvation and war away, and food on the table.  That's why Putin's government is starting to head down the same road.  With 50% to 75% unemployment, homeless people starving on the streets of Moscow, and people losing their jobs and homes, it's time for the central government to take firm action to stop it.
 
    In the Soviet period, we always used to preach the important of individual freedoms to the Soviet leaders; in return, the Soviets would reply that the people of the Soviet Union had individual rights, but the people of the United States didn't.  In those days, we were simply talking right past each other.  In the United States, the phrase "individual freedoms" is inevitably linked to the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights, which are civil freedoms.  In the Soviet Union, "individual freedoms" to everybody from the top down means substantive freedoms--in other words, the right to have a job that pays a living wage; the right to have food on the table; the right to have a roof over your family's head; and the right to stay warm during the nine-month-long Russian winters.  Over here, everybody is free to starve to death because they can't find a job, although they can get up on a soapbox and complain about it all they want.  In the Soviet Union, they may have had free elections consisting of only Communist Party candidates, but they and their families were provided with the basic necessities of life.  After being unemployed for the past six years, I'm not quite sure which one I prefer.
 
    The Cossacks and the Kurds are related, both religiously and biologically, as are all the peoples of the Russian steppe.  The Kurds, however, follow a slightly different version of Islam than their neighbors on every side, which makes them apostates.  That's why the Turks--until it became necessary to enter the European Union--had banned their political parties, forbade their language to be taught in the public schools, and basically tried to legally destroy their culture; it's also why the Sunni and Shi'a Muslims in Iraq hate their guts, too.  The Kurds have been fighting every other Muslim in existence for centuries.  It'll be interesting to see how long they last in the new Iraqi government.
 
Rabbi.

Reply
 Message 8 of 8 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameFenian_soldierSent: 5/3/2005 4:37 PM
the best way to describe them, simple, "Mercennaires" a cossacks loyality only lies with the cossacks. they have been known to fight for the Germans in WW2, I remember reading where some american tanker had to engage cossacks in France in WW2. if they're tinkers, it wouldn't surprise me any. legionnaire

First  Previous  2-8 of 8  Next  Last 
Return to European History