|
|
|
Reply
| (1 recommendation so far) | Message 1 of 8 in Discussion |
| From: Arnie-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
| |
That's interesting, Arnie. I always thought the Cossacks were simply the warrior caste in Russia. --sunday |
|
Reply
| |
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
| |
I also remember reading that they had these lances or banners that made a great racket when they charged... froglamp |
|
Reply
| |
SIMPLY CALLED HORSEMEN OR CALVARY I THOUGHT. KNOWN FOR THEIR RIDING SKILLS. GYPSIES ON HORSES. ........PBA |
|
Reply
| |
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
| |
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
| |
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
|
|
|