In recent times, it is generally accepted that the Cossacks have been an integral part of the Russian monarchy since it took on a permanent form. However, this is not true. The history of the Cossacks contains many events that, for one reason or another, it was not profitable to cover the authorities that existed to this day, both tsarist and Soviet. The Cossacks, in one way or another, have always been disliked by every existing government, but over time, the authorities were forced to recognize them more and more. What is the secret here? Obviously in the constant desire of the Cossacks for a certain independence. To independence, for which they were ready to pay any price, and for which they paid with service, devotion, and lives. In exchange for all this, independence was not granted to them by the authorities. The authorities put up with them, or rather they pretended to agree with the Cossack independence, but in fact they could not eliminate it. If they could, they liquidated it. The Cossack freemen existed independently of the power of the tsar, and the tsar was forced to pretend that he was pleased with her existence. In the history of Russia, there came a time when the kings began to create family ties with the most prominent representatives of the Cossacks, as a guarantee of mutual devotion. So profitable was the alliance with the Cossacks. For example, the godfather of the son of Nicholas II, Tsarevich Alexei, was a Terek Cossack. In fact, the very fact of the existence of a free Cossacks was a symbol of the desire for freedom of the serfs, who every year became more and more difficult to keep in check. It is quite obvious that the tsarist government was forced to put up with the existence of Russian lands inhabited by free people. The king could not grant these lands to one of the aristocrats for certain merits. The Cossacks did not fit into generally accepted concepts. They had to put up with him. They had to be reckoned with. They were forced to resort to their help in difficult times for Russia. And no matter what, the Cossacks never forgot that they were Russian people. Russian people who have never been slaves and who have never had slaves. And in order for the serfs to have fewer questions, the Cossacks were singled out, at best, into a separate estate, and at worst, they were generally recognized as a different, non-Russian people. Well, the lands on which the Cossacks lived, and which they conquered, and watered with sweat and blood, the kings graciously transferred to them for eternal use. The famous charter of Catherine 2 to the Cossacks is known, officially granting them the lands that they conquered. That is why the current Krasnodar in those days was called Ekaterinodar.

The birth of the Cossacks.

There is no exact date of the birth of the Cossacks and cannot be. The process of origin took place spontaneously and long before the appearance of any state acts that mention, establish or recognize certain Cossack formations. Peasants began to leave for the Cossacks from the moment of the birth of serfdom in Russia. Perhaps this happened even before the appearance of the word itself, Cossack. However, in the Turkic language this word occurs. It translates as - a thief, a robber. Or maybe this word appeared in the Turkic languages ​​after the Cossacks began to instill fear and horror in their neighbors with their military victories and, accordingly, robberies. But such a phenomenon as the Cossacks is not found in the history of any country in the world. There was nothing like it anywhere. The Cossacks are a purely Slavic phenomenon.

The fact is that all over the world serfdom appeared after the slave system as more progressive in comparison with slavery. There was no slavery in Russia. In our country, serfdom has replaced the free communal relations, which the peasants liked more than serfdom. That is why serfdom in Russia was imposed slowly, gradually and against the will of the people, and the authorities were able to destroy the peasant community only in 1905-1912, after the Stolypin agrarian reform. If in Europe slaves were turned into serfs, then in Russia free community members were turned into serfs, but not immediately. With the introduction of serfdom, the slaves received some kind of independence, the opportunity to have a family, that is, they acquired something. Free community members, after the planting of serfdom, on the contrary, lost their independence and independence. They lost their freedom without gaining anything in return. Perhaps the dubious protection of the princely squad from the raids of nomads, but, in general, the Russian community members themselves were excellent warriors. Russian infantry in the Middle Ages was considered one of the best both in terms of tactical characteristics and weapons.

THE APPEARANCE OF serfs.
In Europe, a slave who had no family, no home, no land was told that he would become a serf who would have it all, subject to the payment of taxes. He could not be satisfied, although in this case, he remains a slave. Yes, and it's not that simple. There were those who became a slave, and before that they were free, and there were those who were born a slave. For a free man, the prospect of becoming a serf could not be liked. And for a man born into slavery, it was a chance to become a little freer. He received a small property, even if only for use and disposal, but he received. It was profitable for him, although by and large no one asked him. It belonged to the feudal lord along with the land on which he lived and fed. It was more profitable for a slave owner to deal with a peasant than with a slave. In the Roman Empire, the first serfs were serfs and columns. They were little different from slaves.

It was not profitable for a free community member to become a serf. He also had land only in use, but only because his land was not registered at all. The land did not belong to him, but he belonged to the land on which he lived. It never occurred to anyone to determine ownership of the land. The land was considered property by the right of residence on it of those who cultivated it. It belonged to the peasant as long as he defended it from the encroachments of possible applicants. But he had a family, housing and freedom, and he was ready at any moment to defend them with arms in his hands on any land. It was not profitable for him to become a serf. His situation deteriorated sharply. He had to pay taxes, and this was more than a general tribute to the prince. So he protested in every way available to him. When the strengthening princely power began to register communal lands for themselves and distribute them to the property of those close to them, ordinary community members, together with their families, began to leave for free, yet “unregistered” lands, not wanting to become slaves of their former fellow tribesmen. It is very important that the Russian people accepted Christianity being free. For some, Christianity was considered the faith of slaves, but for us, the Orthodox faith was the faith of free people.

Perhaps it was the arbitrariness of the newly minted Russian feudal lords that pushed many community members to organized withdrawal to free lands, since there was enough land then. Probably, these were the first Cossacks, only they did not call themselves Cossacks then. Many of the free community members remained, because formally they were still free, but apparently there were a lot of those leaving for the Cossacks. The nation was divided, but no one mentions this fact. There was no census, no land registry, and much more. In order to reduce the number of peasants leaving the estate, one term for leaving the estate was invented. (Yuriev day). It was autumn, after the harvest. This period included a week before November 26, the day of St. George the Victorious, and a week after it. To make it difficult for the peasant to leave the land he occupied, he was charged with a special tax. It was called "old". Only by paying the "old" peasant could go to another landowner or wherever he wanted, but where would you go on the eve of the coming winter? And the peasants began to run away in the spring. This could only be done by young men who did not have children. They were declared fugitives and tried to catch them legally. Such a basis in the 16th century was the law defining the "lesson years". At first it was 5 years from the moment the peasant escaped, during which the landowner could return the peasant. Subsequently, this period was increased to 15 years. Then the "lesson summer" was canceled altogether. Caught peasants were severely punished, beaten and their nostrils pulled out, after which they were returned to the landowner with such a mark, noticeable to everyone. And, nevertheless, the aspirations of a free life lived in the Russian peasants, which they very much regretted. They fled by the thousands. Many were caught. Many died. But many became Cossacks. However, the backbone of the Cossacks was precisely those community members who left the landowners at the very beginning of the land appropriation by the princes. Not wanting to have anything to do with this incomprehensible "privatization", and not being able to resist, free community members simply left for unoccupied places, of which there were a lot. When serfdom intensified and in the best case only a healthy man could run away to the Cossacks, the Cossacks could not be born in this way. It was the free community members who created the Cossacks, who retained their faith, their way of life, administration, organization, crafts, culture, and families. The main problem for them was the power of the princes, constantly pressing from the north, from which they simply had to leave for other territories. However, it was the mobility of the Cossacks that could help them survive the claims from the north, and even the invasion of the Mongols - Tatars. Apparently, during the time of the Tatar invasion, and in later periods, the Cossacks retained in their settlements such a quality as mobility. Being farmers, they were always ready to leave their villages and evacuate to safe places, fleeing the invasion of a stronger enemy. Those who were weaker did not pose a threat to them.

The Cossacks found themselves between two fires. From the north, they were pursued by Russian landlords and tsars, and in the south they were opposed by nomadic tribes, who were always not averse to profiting from raids on foreigners. However, the Cossacks managed to organize themselves into communities that were a serious force. However, the Cossacks not only defended themselves. They themselves began to raid, possibly on Russian settlements. Robbery helped them to improve their lives and organize themselves into a certain military structure with strict subordination of ordinary Cossacks to Yesauls, atamans. This organization helped them subsequently to establish life and peculiar communal relations between the Cossacks. In particular, the division of land by lot. In the north, serfdom became more and more tightened, and in the south and east lived free people who conquered and developed new lands. Their lands were seized by the government, but the Cossacks went farther and farther away. Their way of life did not fit into serf relations. There were attempts to win the right to a particular region from the king, and some of them ended successfully, but the main thing was that in the entire history of the Cossacks, the Cossacks did not have landowners or slaves. They retained freedom as the main condition for intra-Cossack relations. The Cossacks have not been defined ownership of the land. Cossack land has never belonged to anyone in particular. It has always been common and divided by lot, by the number of men, including minors, for a period of 3 or 5 years. This position remained until the revolution of 1917. The Cossacks did not even support the Stolypin reform, arguing that the assignment of communal land to individual Cossacks would weaken the combat effectiveness of the Cossack army. And this was not an invention of the Cossack leadership. Equality reigned among the Cossacks. Ataman was elected. Legally, each Cossack was equal to the ataman. All men were military men, and, accordingly, guarantors of the equality of all community members. If a man was the last man of his kind, they took care of him, not letting him into combat fights. An earring in the ear of a Cossack served as a sign for any Cossack chieftain that this Cossack was the last in the family and with his death the Cossack family would die out. There will even be no one to draw lots for the land. Moreover, history does not mention such a phenomenon among the Cossacks as "purchase", i.e. a man who sold himself for debt. Apparently, the freedom of an ordinary community member, for the Cossacks, was directly proportional to the freedom of the entire community. Freedom among the Cossacks was not an empty phrase, but a real asset. In other words, the Cossacks, not recognizing serfdom, followed the path of development of old communal relations. Their social structure can be safely called a communal, patriarchal democracy. Who knows, maybe the Cossack government was akin to the people’s council that existed in Russia, or maybe the constant danger rallied the Cossacks so much that, combined with freedom, developed in people a special responsibility for making decisions and choosing chieftains from among the most capable Cossacks? One thing is clear. The Cossacks, for a long time, did not have a sufficiently strong centralized Cossack power. If choosing an ataman from among the villagers was a common thing, then choosing an ataman for all the villages was not an easy task. Everyone would vote for their chieftain. In this regard, the Cossacks were satisfied that the Russian Tsar would become their head. You don't have to choose. His authority is indisputable, the anointed of God, and he does not encroach on the freedom of the Cossacks. Let it be now. And the Cossacks would begin to create a centralized power themselves, and they would come to the same thing as all the ancient democracies came to. To tyranny. And this would have happened if the Russian Tsar had tried to destroy the Cossacks. But that didn't happen. The tsar recognized the Cossacks, and they got the opportunity to live without changing their way of life in exchange for recognizing them as the Russian people.

Cossack communal democracy was like a bone in the throat of the monarchs, who stifled any seeds of free thought even when they appeared among the aristocracy. But it was not possible to strangle the Cossacks. Their power was too great. Therefore, any information about the Cossacks was not disclosed. In addition, if official historiography would truthfully describe the history of the birth of the Cossacks, then one would have to admit the fact that the birth of the Cossacks was the result of the unparalleled greed policy of the Russian princely government aimed at appropriating communal land, brazenly trampling on the interests of their own people. Turning its people into serfs, dependent people. Here, in order not to recognize this, it is easier to say that the Cossacks are a completely different ethnic group. And even better, an ethnic group alien to Russians, having roots of origin from the Tatars themselves. If there were someone more terrible than the Tatars, perhaps the Cossacks would be counted from their roots.

THERE IS AN OPINION that the Cossacks were just robbers. Allegedly, their life credo was the desire to rob, attack a defenseless settlement with all the ensuing consequences, as it was inherent in nomads. I am not inclined to idealize the Cossacks, but such a categorical opinion is probably wrong, and here's why.
If the Cossacks put robbery and a wild way of life at the forefront, there would be no Cossack settlements. The Cossacks, without exception, were believing Orthodox Christians. They were farmers, not nomads. They built their villages and temples. Christian principles were cultivated in their families. The Cossacks systematically walked towards this, sacredly kept Christian values. They accepted Christ being free, and they kept their faith while remaining free. Of course, not all of them. Among them were lovers of war, many of whom laid down their lives in various dubious, and not very, campaigns, but the bulk of the Cossacks strove to create new families. It was these Cossacks that made up the main force of the Cossacks. It was they who were the main component of the Cossack army. For the settled Cossacks, the main task was to save the life of their own village and the villages of their neighbors. And there was someone to protect. The entire population of the villages was ready at any moment to defend their homes. Even women and children knew how to hold weapons in their hands. That was the main goal of the Cossacks, to survive.

But there were Cossack raids on the highlanders, on the nomads. From time to time they were committed and were no less cruel than raids on the Cossacks, but this was a necessary condition of that time. The Cossacks strictly followed the laws of the highlanders (and in general all those who lived in their neighborhood) adopting their customs and even clothes. According to these laws, one could live only by forcing oneself to be respected. The Cossacks also took hostages and gave them for ransom in the same way as the highlanders did. Even the corpses of the highlanders killed in battle were given for a ransom, knowing full well that a ransom would be paid in order to bring the deceased relative to the ground. And they themselves paid the highlanders a ransom for their dead. And all this was done in order to both frighten the enemies and make them respect themselves. At the same time, the Cossacks did not part with weapons even while working in the field. Actually this work was their main occupation. main source of income. The Cossacks were peasants.

OFFICIAL APPROVAL OF THE COSSACKS.
FOR THE FIRST TIME, the Cossacks declared themselves as a powerful political force during the time of Boris Godunov. Before that, they also made risky campaigns, including with the knowledge of the sovereign, but not on his direct instructions, like Yermak. Nevertheless, the authorities began to reckon with them when they showed that they could pose a huge danger to the authorities. It was the Cossacks who supported Grigory Otrepyev. Without their support, the Polish army would not have been able to carry out an invasion of this magnitude. It is unlikely that the Cossacks wanted to betray Boris Godunov for the sake of an impostor. It is unlikely that they were delighted with the miraculous rescue of Tsarevich Dmitry, the son of Ivan the Terrible, who did not recognize the Cossacks. After all, for them, he, too, had to be considered the personification of the danger to their Cossack freemen. It’s just that the Cossack chieftains for the first time received a promise, albeit a false one, but still the heir to the throne, to recognize their right to a free life as part of Russia. In exchange for this recognition, many Cossacks were ready to serve faithfully even to an impostor. But it's not just them. False Dmitry was sworn allegiance to many, even high-ranking, aristocratic nobles, seduced by his boundless promises. These were people who had both land and power, and a position at the court of the Rurik dynasty. Formally, on their part, the recognition of False Dmitry would be logical if False Dmitry were not an impostor. But they knew that he was an impostor. They were present at the funeral of the real Tsarevich Dmitry. Therefore, their oath to False Dmitry was a betrayal. Unlike them, the Cossacks did not know anything for certain, and had nothing but permanent disgrace. Their use of the land was spontaneous. They were not recognized. They were not considered, and they strove for power in the same way as the aristocrats standing at the court. At the same time, they were not at all embarrassed by the fact that they were not well-born. These then "field commanders" did not suffer from an inferiority complex regarding their origin, rightly believing that the aristocrats did not crawl out into the "princes" from the prince's chambers. They didn’t care who recognized them, as long as they were recognized by the Russian authorities as free, especially since from the time of Yaroslav the Wise, when the main stratification of society was determined, they were separated by only some 600 years. They wanted this recognition at any cost. And even when False Dmitry was publicly killed and False Dmitry 2 came to his place, the Cossacks, knowing full well that a substitution had taken place, recognized him. What difference does it make who will give recognition of the Russian royal throne to the Cossack people?

But not all Cossacks stood under the banner of impostors. Approximately the same reasoned and those Cossack chieftains who fought on the side of Russia. By the way, the Don Cossacks fought against the Poles, like mercenaries, for money. There is a known case when the Cossacks refused to go into battle without payment and the monks of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra brought them gold and silver salaries from icons, as well as utensils made of precious metals as payment. The Orthodox Don people appreciated such a sacrifice and refused to accept it. On this day, they went into battle without waiting for money.
In other words, the native Cossacks, infringed in their rights, and striving for recognition, were a rather large driving force behind the Russian unrest. If Boris Godunov could have negotiated with the Cossacks before the Polish invasion, it most likely would have been impossible. The Poles and Swedes were interventionists, but they themselves could do nothing. No wonder the 23-year-old Prince Skopin-Shuisky smashed the Swedes, despite their political and military superiority. If the Poles had not had Cossack support and a troubled time in the history of Russia, in fact a civil war, they would hardly have been able to do anything. These factors were used by the interventionists. However, this did not help them. But the Cossacks achieved their goal. After the defeat of external enemies, the Cossacks were recognized by the Russian authorities. The Cossacks guilty of treason, of course, were executed or roughly punished, but they had to be reckoned with. After all, it is better to have such strength among your allies than to have such dangerous enemies in their person. However, it happened in an interesting way. Klyuchevsky (if I'm not mistaken) describes the election of a new Russian tsar, Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov. Many well-born contenders for the throne spoke at the eminent meeting, but the speech of one nobleman is also described, who made a “written opinion”, in which Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was presented as a contender for the throne. A very young guy, whose father was the future Patriarch Filaret. (At the time of his son's election as king, he was in Polish captivity.) Before being tonsured, Fyodor Romanov, who was forcibly tonsured a monk. So Boris Godunov got rid of a smart and well-born contender for the royal throne. Boris Godunov himself came from a family of Mongol-Tatar khans. So the first who immediately supported the candidacy of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was the ataman of the Don Cossacks present at the meeting. After that, the rest voted.
History is silent about whether there was an agreement between the Cossacks and the Romanovs, but if it was, then one of the main conditions for such an agreement could be the unconditional recognition of the Cossacks. It was at this moment that the element of the future contradiction was born in Russia.
According to the well-known Soviet historian, Professor A. L. Stanislavsky, a well-known specialist in the history of Russian society of the 16th-17th centuries, an important role in the accession of Michael was played by the Great Russian Cossacks, free Great Russian people, whose liberties the tsar and his descendants took in all possible ways.

Along with the slave-owning - serf order, in Russia, the communal-democratic Cossack way of life peacefully coexisted. Whether the authorities liked it or not, it was already impossible to change something. The most reasonable thing was to separate the Cossacks into a separate estate, or rather into a separate ethnic group, different from the Russian peasantry, which was done so that the peasants would not aspire to become Cossacks. The Cossacks willingly served in the tsarist army and, in addition, guarded the borders of the vast empire from encroachment. It was they who began to develop new territories, conquering them from the indigenous population or peacefully adjoining it. It was the Cossacks who annexed Siberia, the Far East, the Urals and the Caucasus to Russia. True, the Cossacks did not have democratic governing bodies. They did not have their own Areopagus, their historians, legislators, philosophers. For military life, they had no time for this, and history gave them too little time for development, unlike the Greeks or Romans. However, the Greeks in the period of ancient democracy had classical slavery. The Cossacks did not even have a hint of slavery. The history of the Cossacks is certainly of great interest in order to study one of the options for the socio-political development of the people. Freedom hidden in the shadow of tyranny.

However, cooperation with the Romanov dynasty was not always serene. It is known that Peter 1 tried to deprive the Cossacks of their salt mines. A conflict arose, which degenerated into an uprising of the Cossacks led by Kondrat Bulavin. The ataman was killed by traitors from among the Cossacks, who were seduced by the reward announced by Tsar Peter, and the entire army of Kondrat Bulavin, under the leadership of another ataman, Ignat Nekrasov, with their families, went first to the Kuban, which then belonged to Circassia, and later to Turkey, where the Nekrasov Cossacks settled and survived until the end of the 20th century. The tsarist authorities after Peter 1 repeatedly offered the Nekrasovites to return to their homeland, but the Nekrasovites remained abroad. Their descendants returned to the USSR to the territory of the Kuban and the Stavropol Territory. Collective farms were created, which were distinguished by good profits and labor discipline. This fact speaks volumes. First of all, that the Cossacks did not just return to their homeland. For several centuries they have not lost their belonging to Russian culture. Preserved language, faith, traditions. This refutes those historians who are so eager to separate the Cossacks from the Russian people.

However, it would be unfair not to note that serfs also participated in the development of the Caucasus and other territories. As a rule, these were peasants settled in the territories of their landowners, to whom these lands were granted by the tsar after they were conquered from the highlanders. Including during the Caucasian war. For example, the village of Vorontsovo - Aleksandrovskoe (and not only it) in the Stavropol province, was founded by serfs of Prince Semyon Mikhailovich Vorontsov, who came to the settlement from the Voronezh province, at the suggestion of the prince himself, who received these lands as a reward. The village was founded in 1781, long before the abolition of serfdom. (“Stavropol Province, 1897. Printing House Koritsky Stavropol. A. Tvalchrelidze) In such cases, the peasants were exempted from some duties, and there were cases that they were given freedom. If the resettlement of peasants in the Cossack regions took place after the abolition of serfdom, then this allowed the landlords to allocate land to the peasants not at home, but in the distant Caucasus, the Urals, etc. These people also replenished the Cossack community, adopting customs, traditions, and culture from the Cossacks. For joining a community in the Siberian Cossacks, a community fee was due, about 30 rubles. A lot of money, but they could have been taken a few years after the peasant settled in the community. Observed. The resettlement of peasants to the southern lands was directly related to the development of the Caucasus and other lands, and the displacement of local residents from there. As soon as the next Azov-Mozdok line of fortresses appeared in the Caucasus, pushing the highlanders to the south, it became necessary to populate the designated space with Russian people. And then the authorities allowed the transformation of peasants into Cossacks, based on political necessity. By the way, the "Caucasian war" (from 1761 to 1863), which lasted for 101 years, contributed to the fact that the Russian authorities encouraged such resettlements. In other words, no one can say with certainty that all the Cossacks inhabiting the south of Russia have a deep Cossack ancestry. The main population of the current Stavropol Territory (not to be confused with the Terek Cossacks) are the descendants of resettled serfs. Once south, they faced the same problems that the Cossacks had lived with throughout their history. They had to adapt and learn to protect themselves and their families. The peasant settlers did not have Cossack freedoms, but, like the Cossacks, they were forced to become warriors. All this, it would seem, should not have had any effect on the life of the Cossacks, but by creating peasant settlements, the tsarist government, consciously or not, laid the contradictions that inevitably had to arise between the Cossacks and the peasant settlers over time. Cases of decossackization became a precedent for such contradictions. “The village of Sablinskoe was founded in 1782 on government land. In 1832, the village was renamed into a village, the inhabitants of which were assigned to the Khoper Cossack regiment, and in 1880, by the Highest command, the Sablin Cossacks were again turned into a civilian department. (A. Tkvalchrelidze. "Stavropol province" 1897, Art. 157) The land is state-owned, and the Cossacks divide it by lot among themselves all. Disorder. Allotments of small sizes were allocated to the peasant settlers. The main land remained either for the treasury, or for the owner-landlord. However, this time bomb was already used by the Bolsheviks during the civil war. The Bolshevik agitators promised the peasant settlers all the land at their disposal. Such a proposal could be of interest to the peasant settlers, who in the second or third generation had already learned to ride and fight on horseback. This statement was not documented by me, but there is an assumption that the basis of the first cavalry army and the entire cavalry of the Red Army was precisely the peasant settlers, whom the Bolshevik agitators managed to oppose to the settled Cossacks fighting on the side of the White Army. The latter did not want to change anything in their way of life. That is why they faithfully defended their lands from possible claimants. That is why they became an obstacle in the way of the peasant migrants, seeking to acquire ownership of the land of their former owners. Soviet historiography is silent about this, because the Cossack social order did not contradict the ideas of building socialism. It contradicted the conditions for the existence of the dictatorship of the "proletariat". Years later, the peasant settlers could still be deceived by taking away the land given to them by the Soviet government and declaring that this was being done because the country was carrying out collectivization. Cossacks could not be deceived. They did not own their land. They did not fit into the framework of the emerging socialist society. Their way of life was fair and just. It did not imply any hypocrisy and therefore remained stable and almost unchanged for centuries.

It should be noted that the Cossacks considered themselves a class higher than the serfs. To call a Cossack a peasant meant to insult him. However, the difference between their way of life was insignificant. The Cossacks were just as industrious and their life depended to no lesser extent than that of the peasants on the harvest, but not on successful raids. The peasant peasants, who form the basis of the Russian infantry, were no less courageous than the Cossack peasants. The Cossacks were farmers, and all farmers are alike. But freedom and communal democracy favorably distinguished the Cossacks from the peasants and was the cause of the burning envy of the latter. But this freedom was won by the Cossacks at the cost of several centuries of struggle. Moreover, Cossack freedom was recognized by the authorities at a time when it was already impossible not to recognize it, but its recognition promised and gave a lot of political benefits.

It is not surprising that at the moment when the authorities decided to recognize the Cossacks and their right to legal existence, the question arose before them: how to explain the origin of the Cossacks? In this regard, a variety of theories of the origin of the Cossacks were presented. In tsarist Russia, it was necessary to explain to everyone that it was impossible to become a Cossack. Their special position is due to historical features that are not akin to the traditions of serf Russia. In other words, everything had to be done to keep the huge empire in balance on one side, which was serfdom, due to which the aristocracy lived, and on the other end, the communal democracy of the Cossacks. The Cossacks did not particularly try to restrain the imagination of the tsarist historians, they were far from official science, and therefore the entire historiography of the Cossacks developed in the same direction. Cossacks are anyone, but not Russians, or not quite Russians, although their development was influenced by a lot of factors that are not inherent to a Russian person. However, they obeyed the king and serve him faithfully.

Today, the historiography of the Cossacks has taken on a variety of colors, but in general, two directions are visible:
1. Theories designed to separate the Cossacks from the Russians as a separate ethnic group. In this regard, it is proved that this ethnic group has a very ancient history, even more ancient than the history of Russia, but alien. What is it for? Probably in order to somehow play the Cossack card. Sow separatist sentiments among the Cossacks? Why not. In the era of color revolutions, one can expect such deep preparation from provocateurs. Why was this done before? In order to isolate the Cossacks from the rest of Russia and forget that the Cossacks are the descendants of those who did not want to lose their freedom and whose communal and national interests were infringed by the existing government, the kinship with which the descendants of all generations of the Russian aristocracy were and are proud of.
2. Theories that explain precisely the Russian origin of the Cossacks. Where all those factors of foreign interference that influenced the development of customs, traditions, and culture of the Cossacks are not excluded. Where are all those Russian customs, traditions, features that the Cossacks preserved, carrying through the centuries and which they developed in their own way, based on their way of life, indicated. This group of theories may be suspected of an attempt to enhance the greatness of the Russian people, if the Russian government itself did not seek the opposite. Basically, it's just a statement of facts. If several foreign words are found in the language of one or another people, then the assumption that these peoples are related is just a hypothesis, as timid as it is bold. But the fact that these people speak their own language is a statement of their originality and independence.

In favor of the 2nd group of theories is the fact that the Cossacks voluntarily and willingly submitted to the Russian authorities. Moreover, they achieved it. That is, not only her recognition, but also her leadership. I think that the Cossacks would willingly recognize any other authority of any other country, if the Cossacks applied for it. (An example is the organized departure of rebel Cossacks to Turkey, led by Kondrat Bulavin. After he was killed by traitors from the Cossacks, the rebels were led by the Cossack Nekrasov. After almost 250 years, the descendants of the Nekrasovites returned to the USSR in the territory of the Stavropol Territory.) For many reasons. , they did not think of themselves away from Russia. Could anyone force the Cossacks to submit to force? The history of such facts does not know. But to serve under the contract. These facts are numerous. However, consider the theories of the origin of the Cossacks offered to the reader.

1 Group of theories:
- A.A. Gordeev, the author of the "History of the Cossacks" traces the origin of the Cossacks to the "blood tribute" - "tamga" collected by the Golden Horde from conquered Russia. The Russian youths taken to the Horde were used to guard the steppe borders and carry out the pit service, perceiving ready-made forms of the military and social organization of the steppes (Mongols and Polovtsians).

S.D. Okhlyabinin raises the first Cossacks to the avant-garde detachments of the Mongol-Tatar troops - familyless daredevils. These scouts, guards are then in the regular service of the Tatar Baskaks, who levied tribute from the Russian lands, and a century later, together with the owners, they go to the service of the Russian princes, becoming a special kind of troops 29.

It was not only Mr. Gordeev who adhered to this theory. This is the official theory of the origin of the Cossacks still tsarist historiography. Purpose: to show the citizens of Russia that the Cossacks are not entirely Russian. That this is not a derivative of the original Russian people, since the entire Russian people has a different way of life, unlike the Cossacks. Moreover, the Cossacks are a people who are akin to the original Russian enemy, the Tatar. This theory, for sure, was cultivated as a counterbalance to the opinion living among the people that the Cossacks were able to achieve freedom for themselves, but most importantly, to exclude the version of involvement in the formation of the Cossacks of the Russian authorities themselves. Or rather, its injustice during the transformation of ordinary community members into the property of princes and feudal lords. In order not to discredit the "Russian Truth" Yaroslav the Wise.
The theory itself does not stand up to scrutiny. Speaking about the Tatar "tamga", and that Russian youths were used to guard the borders of the Golden Horde, Mr. Gordeev forgets that the borders in those days were not demarcated by anyone. In other words, they simply did not exist, especially among the huge and powerful Golden Horde. Border formations didn't make sense at all. Sentinel reconnaissance units made sense, but they were formed from the most dedicated warriors. It would be foolish to form such responsible detachments from captured Russians, and the Tatars were not fools. Why did they take the "tamga"? Perhaps even before the Turks they invented their Janissaries and Mamluks, making them from captive boys. When the boys, brought up in obedience to the khan and unparalleled cruelty, grew into warriors, they ceased to be carriers of their native culture. These people could already be entrusted with responsible assignments, but they could no longer become the founders of the Cossacks. Fight for power within the horde under the leadership of any of the khans, perhaps. But not a single Janissary became a Cossack.

According to the prominent Russian historian R. Skrynnikov, the Cossacks arose from the merger of a few Russian settlers with the population of the Tatar villages in the steppes.

What just can not happen in life. Here, according to the largest Russian historian R. Skrynnikov, the Tatars had villages. It turns out that the nomads could and wanted to lead a sedentary lifestyle. True, they are still wandering in Mongolia, and all of Mongolia would have wandered if the Russians had not built cities there, but even in this case the Mongols remained Mongols. However, it can be assumed that the Tatars had villages. The word "stan", in general, is not Russian, although it does not mean a permanent settlement, but a camp. However, there are suggestions that this word got into the Turkic dialects from the Russian language. What's the difference? Another thing is interesting. How could it be? A few Russian settlers came, merged with the population of the Tatar villages, so much so that this population spoke and sang in Russian, and became Christian. It is hard to imagine that the Tatars loved the Russians so much that they not only gave birth to children for them, but also began to teach them to speak Russian. So who were these few Russians then? If the Tatars, of their own free will, ceased to be Tatars and became Cossacks. In general, it is also a very convenient theory for tsarist historiography. Yes, the Cossacks are a free people. But not very Russian. Or rather, not even Russian at all. However, the monarchy no longer exists. The question is, whose interests does Mr. Skrynnikov's theory represent today? Maybe the interests of the separatists?

P.N. Lukichev and A.P. Skorik declare the thesis about the ethnic independence of the Cossacks obvious.
- V.P. Trut considers the belonging of the Cossacks to an independent ethnic group and its characterization as an ethnic group (people) quite justified and beyond doubt.

Again, the ethnic independence of the Cossacks haunts someone. An independent ethnic group can be considered a society of people who have a common culture, their own, constantly improving language, territory, self-government bodies, etc. What did the Cossacks have?
Culture, the basis of which was and is the Russian national culture.
The language of communication is Russian. The Cossack dialect, if different from the Central Russian, is no more than any other native Russian dialect. As for linguistic borrowings from other peoples, in this the Cossacks are just as susceptible to new words as all Russian people. The Russian dictionary of foreign words contains more than 10 thousand words borrowed by Russian people from the languages ​​of other peoples. The Cossacks in the lexicon have more words of those peoples with whom they had to coexist. Moreover, different Cossacks have different borrowings. However, this could not prevent any of them from preserving the original Russian basis in their language in order to understand each other.
The Cossacks, for a long time, did not have a territory permanently assigned to them, the existence of which would have to be reckoned with by powerful neighbors. So it was until the moment of their recognition by the Russian authorities. From that moment, all the territories occupied by the Cossacks, not only began to be perceived as a country, but also began to expand. And all this thanks to the Russian centralized power. The same government, which did not really like communal Cossack democracy, as the antipode of serfdom, but which, not unreasonably, understood that without the active participation of the Cossacks it was not possible to expand the borders of the empire.
What were the organs of Cossack self-government? At the time of the recognition of the Cossacks by the Russian Tsar, each village elected an ataman by direct voting. This was done loudly and frankly. The Cossacks had hetmans, but they could not be called kings in the conventional sense. It seems that the descendants of those who left the nascent princely power, and the princely arbitrariness associated with it, sacredly protected the personal independence of each community member throughout their history, which prevented the creation of their own centralized power. However, it would be wrong to say that the Cossacks had no generally recognized leaders at all. They were. But they united the Cossacks not on an ethnic or socio-social basis, but on the establishment of some, sometimes adventurous, goal for the Cossacks. It could be big campaigns for the purpose of robbery. It could be popular uprisings. Finally, support for contenders for power. Etc. Such Cossack leaders are captured in the documents of national history, but not Cossack. As a rule, Russian national history. The Cossacks began to write their history relatively recently.

L.N. Gumilyov repeatedly emphasized the origin of the Terek Cossacks from the Khazar-Christians, and in general raises the Cossacks to the baptized Polovtsy.
- I. Yakovenko, already mentioned by us, is convinced that the Cossacks arose as a result of the Polovtsian-Russian mixing with the obvious dominance of the Polovtsian substrate. In his opinion, anthropological (the shape of the skull, bodily constitution) and ethnographic (features of everyday culture and songs) data are given out in the Cossacks of the natural steppes.

An amazing thing. The last mention of the Polovtsy dates back to the beginning of the Middle Ages. Assumptions that the Polovtsy mixed with the Russians and the Cossacks descended from them remains only an assumption, however, the fact of the resettlement of the Polovtsy to the territory of the Kingdom of Georgia during the reign of King David, nicknamed the builder "Agmashenebeli", is absolutely known. It was with him that the Polovtsians concluded an agreement, on the basis of which they received land for resettlement, and King David received in return one equestrian warrior from each family. And the Polovtsians came to Georgia because they were actively pushed from the north by stronger tribes of nomadic Tatars. Obviously, they did not leave without resistance. They certainly fought with their enemies, which led to a decrease in their numbers. At the time of the conclusion of the agreement with King David, there were more than 40 thousand families of Polovtsians in Georgia. Is it a lot or a little? Not enough for a people who need to survive in difficult military conditions. But for the Georgian king David, it was a lot. Having received in addition to his army another 40 thousand cavalry soldiers !!! , he was able to seriously improve the position of his state. It was during the years of his reign that Georgia reached its peak and managed to occupy the largest territory on the world map in the entire history of its existence. Georgians are among those who care about the purity of the nation and do not like to remember it. In the history of Georgia, there is never any information about the Polovtsians. Obviously, they became so close to the Georgian people that they simply assimilated and ceased to exist as an independent people. 40 thousand families could be from 250 to 500 thousand people. The population of Georgia at that time was more than 2 and a half million. Georgians do not like to talk about this assimilation. We are talking about this because it is a historical fact. Or maybe the Polovtsians laid the foundation for one of the Georgian peoples? Mengrel or Svans, for example. But why isn't anyone talking about it? Why is the Polovtsian version played out in Cossack genealogies?

However, this fact is of interest to us precisely as it is related to the emergence of the Cossacks. The Polovtsy had the power of the khans. That is, they had a nominal monarch who led tens of thousands of families, hundreds of thousands of people. This is precisely the power from which the Russian people fled, who later became Cossacks. The language and culture of the Polovtsians had very few points of contact with Russian culture. It was a language that had Turkic roots, and a culture of nomads, in no way similar to the culture of farmers. If we assume that the Polovtsy really mixed with the Russians and laid the foundation for the Cossack ethnic group, then the dominant force in this case, judging by the Russian cultural heritage of the Cossacks, was precisely the Russian component. The Polovtsy in this case, could not only establish their power among the Russian people, but could not even change the language of the Russians. So there were very few of them. It is possible, most likely, that the Cossacks won women from the Polovtsians in order to procreate. Perhaps those Polovtsians who did not want to recognize the authority of their khan, like the Russians who left the power of their princes, merged with the Cossacks. It is possible that those of the Polovtsy who remained in the old territories after the bulk of their fellow tribesmen migrated to Georgia united with the Cossacks. In any case, the Polovtsy could not become the dominant component in the formation of the Cossacks. And the Cossacks accepted into their ranks everyone who wanted to live with them according to their customs and traditions. All the strangers who came to the villages, who converted to Christianity, eventually became their own for the Cossacks. At the same time, two generations of newcomers were not considered Cossacks. They said about them "they walk in Cossacks." Only a representative of the third generation of a new kind of alien people was considered a Cossack. As for the anthropological features that give out steppe dwellers in the Cossacks, one should not forget that the Cossacks lived in the steppes. They were dashing riders, and all the surrounding nature left the same imprints on them as on the notorious Polovtsians.

As for the Khazar-Christians, who became the ancestors of the Terek Cossacks, it is difficult for me to say anything about this. The history of the Khazars is even more obscure, as is the history of the Cossacks. But it is known for certain about the Khazars that they had their own state formation - the Khazar Khaganate. Accordingly, the head of state kagan. Again, the same circumstances as the Polovtsians. The fact that the Khazars were Christians is confirmed by some sources, but they are very scarce. It is known that the Khazars replaced the Pechenegs, with whom Prince Svyatoslav fought and defeated. The Pechenegs, in retaliation, attacked his squad at night and killed the prince. From the bones of his skull was made a goblet set in silver. But after that, traces of the Pechenegs are lost. The Khazars appear, who posed no less danger to Russia than the Pechenegs.

Attempts to explain the origin of the Cossacks by Polish or other foreign scientists for the most part show their superficial approach to this topic. The lack of necessary information and distance from this topic in general affects. In addition, one cannot discount the fact that the Polish interpretation of the origin of the Cossacks is probably connected with the desire of Polish historians to find their own explanation for the participation of the Cossacks in the militia of the Polish protege, False Dmitry.
In addition to these, the most well-known modern theories, there are a number of historically older hypotheses that have not lost their relevance. The first who tried to clarify the issue of Cossack ethnogenesis were in the 17th century. the Poles Piasetsky and Kochovsky, who believed that the Cossacks (or Cossacks) were those people who were fast and light on their horses like goats.
In the XVIII century. in the same purely external philological way, based on the consonance in the names, they begin to see in the Cossacks the remnants or descendants of various peoples. Grabyanka, followed by A. Rigelman produced Cossacks from the Khazars. 14 Jan Pototsky saw in the Cossacks the descendants of those scythes whom the Grand Duke Mstislav Vladimirovich settled in the 11th century. in Chernihiv region.
All of these theories deserve attention. But they are more like hopeless attempts to explain something about which there is no information.

The Polish chronicler Martin Belsky, whose uncle was the first foreman in the Cossack army at the beginning of the 16th century, says that the Cossacks stood out from the people, thanks to the mental make-up and character of certain individuals and living conditions. In general, Belsky's view of the Cossacks as a class of knights was shared by the French engineer Beauplan 18, who spent about 20 years in Ukraine, and by the Ukrainian chronicler Samoil Velichko.
What is it? An attempt to idealize the Cossacks?
If we talk about the Cossacks as a knightly order, then I would like to draw the reader's attention to the fact that the knightly order has a specific purpose for its existence, attributes, means, a complex governing structure, official and unofficial ties with the leadership of various countries, documentation, annals ... Everything something that the Cossacks did not have in sight.

“And, finally, according to I.M. Kamanin, the Cossacks are “the original landowning and agricultural native South Russian population, aware of their national identity and devoted to their faith, which, having first voluntarily recognized the power of the Tatars, and then passing under the rule of Lithuania, when alien gentry-Catholic principles invaded his life, he began to strive for isolation, for developing his own forms; but due to the lack of a strong central authority, united Polish-Turkish pressure from outside, constant unrest inside, it was forced to develop only in a multilateral struggle that weakened it, which is the hallmark of Cossack history. The author's opinion is that the originality, the peculiarity of the Cossacks, in any case, allows us to speak of them as something ethnically specific: be it an independent ethnic group, an ethnographic group of Russians or a special ethnic group of the population. After all, it is remarkable that for all their differences, almost each of these theories and hypotheses emphasizes the originality of the Cossacks, its deep difference from the rest of the Russian population. Sopov.

The opinion of such an authoritative author as Kamanin I.M. can be considered the most objective among the theories of all the listed authors. However, given the fact that he wrote his works at the end of the 19th century, it is easy to assume that his opinion should have coincided with the official state concept regarding the formation of the Cossacks as a community different from the Russian people. From a people who lived in a completely different way, being subjugated and oppressed by the Russian aristocracy. Actually, this was the reason for the emergence of a whole group of theories that separate the Cossacks from the entire Russian people, if not into a separate ethnic group, then at least into a separate service class. Moreover, this isolation of the Cossacks rather looked in the official historiography as a lack of the Cossacks, and not as the Cossack will, suffered and won by the Cossacks.

2 group of theories:
This group of theories, which explains precisely the Russian and Ukrainian origin of the Cossacks. I believe that the authors of such theories cannot be suspected of either separatism or extremism, and it is useless to look for any political background in their writings.
- AND I. Kutsenko believes that the Cossacks are a peculiar and "original people's democracy ... which has turned into a service class."
- L.M. Galutvo considers the Cossacks to be a single population with a certain household way of life, traditions and culture.
- A.I. Kozlov sees (not without reason) extremism in attempts to revive the Cossacks as an ethnic group, finding new arguments to substantiate the "estate" theory.
N.I. Kostomarov, considered the Cossacks for the bourgeoisie, who went south first to the crafts, and then by the conditions of life they were forced to arm themselves and lead a military lifestyle. Karpov and Tumasov connect the Cossacks with the princely squads, Professor P.V. Golubovsky - with wanderers, who occupied the steppe places even in pre-Mongolian times (XI - XII centuries).
A special point of view on the origin of the Cossacks was held by Professor V.B. Antonovich and the largest and most authoritative historian of the Kuban Cossacks F.A. Shcherbina. They connected the origin of the Cossacks with the ancient Russian veche communities. "There is no doubt that the Cossacks appeared to replace the veche way of life of the people, although, of course, under the influence of economic reasons. The thirst for freedom and the desire for people's rule were a direct legacy of the veche ways..."
A.S. Pushkin and M.K. Lyubavsky considered the Cossacks a part of the Russian people who had developed their own identity: "The Cossacks are not the remnants of some ancient Slavic free communities on the border of the Russian settled way of life, but armed artels of industrialists, drawn out of the limits of this settled way of life by the emptiness of the steppes" . A.P. Pevnev sees in the Cossacks the descendants of Ryazan and Meshchera guards who defended Russian settlements from Tatar raids in the era of the Golden Horde.

It is quite obvious that the history of the Cossacks can be divided into two periods. The period "before the recognition of the Cossacks by the Russian authorities", and the period "after recognition".
The period “before recognition” is the period of the birth of the Cossacks, about which there are no documents due to the fact that the Cossacks did not have their own centralized authority, which would issue normative acts, would write history. It is this circumstance that now allows the most incredible speculations regarding the origin and existence of the Cossacks to exist. However, if the Cossacks had a described history, then this would prevent them from being recognized by the authorities. I believe that the appearance of the Cossacks can be attributed to the time after the baptism of Russia and until the complete enslavement of the peasantry, after the abolition of St. George's Day.

The period “after recognition” is more understandable to us because information about the Cossacks appears in the official history of Russia. They are docked and inaccurate, but they are there. There are later regulations of the Russian government directly related to the Cossacks. These are real documents, based on which one can draw specific conclusions.

However, it is the history of the Cossacks "before" that is of the greatest interest. I repeat that the tsarist historiography traditionally reduced the history of the birth of the Cossacks to the fact that the Cossacks are a completely different ethnic group, at best, something connected with Russian culture. With the same success, we can say about the people who did not have their own historical written monuments that these are aliens who accidentally landed on Earth.

What speaks in favor of the hypothesis that the Cossacks are the descendants of those free Russian communities that lived according to veche laws?
1. Novgorod Veche was abolished by Ivan the Terrible in 1570. It was the last large veche city in Russia. He survived the power of many princes using the letter of grant of Yaroslav the Wise, which he granted to Novgorod for help in his struggle for power in Kyiv. However, later in Russia, the veche power was brutally destroyed, as it successfully competed with the centralized power. However, attempts to destroy it have not stopped ever since the emergence of a somewhat individual, strong princely power. In fairness, it must be admitted that the sole power of the monarch, for all its shortcomings, had one important advantage over the veche way of life. This is the speed of decision making. It doesn't matter if they are correct or not. This mobility of power made it possible to set such tasks for society that ordinary people did not even think about. (The development of new technologies, political claims, the strengthening of the army, the construction of strategically important cities, the capture of Novgorod ...)
2. The Cossacks retained all the features of veche government. After all, all issues in the villages were decided publicly. However, the society was unipolar. During the veche discussions in Novgorod, there were whole battles with those who were "against". The interests of different groups of people clashed on the square. The rich and the poor are more often mentioned, but people in Novgorod were also divided according to their guild affiliation. There were interests of merchants, artisans, warriors, townspeople, etc. Cossacks were not divided into estates. Each Cossack family had the same living conditions as everyone else. That is why the interests of the community members did not intersect.
3. Did the Cossacks leave prospects for the development of society as a whole? And judge for yourself.

Who are the Cossacks? There is a version that they trace their lineage from fugitive serfs. However, some historians argue that the origins of the Cossacks go back to the 8th century BC.

Where did the Cossacks come from?

Magazine: History from the "Russian Seven", Almanac No. 3, autumn 2017
Rubric: Mysteries of the Muscovite Kingdom
Text: Alexander Sitnikov

The Byzantine emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus in 948 mentioned the territory in the North Caucasus as the country of Kasakhia. Historians attached particular importance to this fact only after Captain A.G. Tumansky in 1892 in Bukhara discovered the Persian geography Gudud al Alem, compiled in 982.
It turns out that Kasak Land, which was located in the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov, is also found there. It is interesting that the Arab historian, geographer and traveler Abu-l-Hasan Ali ibn al-Hussein (896-956), who received the nickname of the Imam of all historians, reported in his writings that the Kasaks who lived beyond the Caucasus Range were not mountaineers.
A stingy description of a certain military people who lived in the Black Sea region and in the Transcaucasus is also found in the geographical work of the Greek Strabo, who worked under the “living Christ”. He called them cossacks. Modern ethnographers provide data on the Scythians from the Turanian tribes of Kos-Saka, the first mention of which dates back to about 720 BC. It is believed that it was then that a detachment of these nomads made their way from Western Turkestan to the Black Sea lands, where they stopped.
In addition to the Scythians, on the territory of the modern Cossacks, that is, between the Black and Azov Seas, as well as between the Don and Volga rivers, the Sarmatian tribes ruled, who created the Alanian state. The Huns (Bulgars) defeated it and exterminated almost all of its population. The surviving Alans hid in the north - between the Don and Donets and in the south - in the foothills: the Caucasus. Basically, it was these two ethnic groups - Scythians and Alans, who intermarried with the Azov Slavs, formed the nationality, which received the name "Cossacks". This version is considered one of the basic ones in the discussion about where the Cossacks came from.

Slavic-Turanian tribes

Don ethnographers also connect the roots of the Cossacks with the tribes of northwestern Scythia. This is evidenced by burial mounds of the III-II centuries BC.
It was at this time that the Scythians began to lead a sedentary lifestyle, intersecting and merging with the southern Slavs who lived in Meotida - on the eastern coast of the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov.
This time is called the era of "the introduction of the Sarmatians into the Meotians", which resulted in the tribes of the Torets (Torkov, Udz, Berenger, Sirakov, Bradas-Brodnikov) of the Slavic-Turanian type. In the 5th century, the Huns invaded, as a result of which part of the Slavic-Turanian tribes went beyond the Volga and into the Upper Don forest-steppe. Those who remained submitted to the Huns, Khazars and Bulgars, receiving the name "kasaks". After 300 years they converted to Christianity (approximately in 860 after the apostolic sermon of St. Cyril), and then, by order of the Khazar Khagan, they drove out the Pechenegs. In 965, Kasak Land came under the control of Mstislav Rurikovich.

Darkness

It was Mstislav Rurikovich who defeated the Novgorod prince Yaroslav near Listven and founded his principality - Tmutarakan, which extended far to the north. It is believed that this Cossack state was not at the peak of its power for long, until about 1060, and after the arrival of the Polovtsian tribes, it began to gradually fade away,
Many residents of Tmutarakan fled to the north - to the forest-steppe and, together with Russia, fought with the nomads. This is how the Black Hoods appeared, which in the Russian chronicles were called Cossacks and Cherkasy. Another part of the inhabitants of Tmutarakan was called Po-Don wanderers.
Like the Russian principalities, the Cossack settlements ended up in the power of the Golden Horde, however, conditionally, enjoying wide autonomy. In the XIV-XV centuries, the Cossacks were talked about as a formed community, which began to accept fugitive people from the central part of Russia.

Not Khazars and not Goths

There is another version, popular in the West, that the Khazars were the ancestors of the Cossacks. Its supporters argue that the words "Khusar" and "Cossack" are synonyms, because in both the first and second cases we are talking about fighting horsemen. Moreover, both words have the same root “kaz”, meaning “strength”, “war” and “freedom”. However, there is another meaning - it is "goose". But here, too, the champions of the Khazar trace speak of horsemen-hussars, whose military ideology was copied by almost all countries, even Foggy Albion
The Khazar ethnonym of the Cossacks is directly stated in the “Constitution of Pylyp Orlik”: “The ancient fighting Cossack people, who used to be called the Kazakhs, were first raised by immortal glory, spacious possessions and knightly honors ...” Moreover, it is said that the Cossacks adopted Orthodoxy from Constantinople (Constantinople) in the era of the Khazar Khaganate.
In Russia, this version in the Cossack environment causes fair abuse, especially against the background of studies of Cossack genealogies, whose roots are of Russian origin. So, the hereditary Kuban Cossack, academician of the Russian Academy of Arts Dmitry Shmarin, spoke out in this regard with anger: “The author of one of these versions of the origin of the Cossacks is Hitler. He even has a separate speech on the subject. According to his theory, the Cossacks are Goths. Visigoths are Germans. And the Cossacks are the Ostrogoths, that is, the descendants of the Ostrogoths, allies of the Germans, close to them in blood and in a warlike spirit. By militancy, he compared them with the Teutons. Based on this, Hitler proclaimed the Cossacks the sons of great Germany. So what, should we now consider ourselves descendants of the Germans?

Cossack circle: what is it?

6 misconceptions about the Cossacks

Probably not a single Russian ethnic group, there are so many fictions, legends, lies and fairy tales - as about the Cossacks.
Their very origin, existence, role in history - serves as an object of all kinds of political speculation and pseudo-historical machinations.

Let's try calmly, without emotions and cheap tricks, to figure out who the Cossacks are, where they came from, and what they are today ...

In the summer of 965, the Russian prince Svyatoslav Igorevich moved his troops to Khazaria.
The Khazar army (reinforced by detachments of various Caucasian tribes), together with their kagan, came out to meet him.

By that time, the Russians had already defeated the Khazars more than once - for example, under the command of the Prophetic Oleg.
But Svyatoslav put the question differently. He decided to eliminate Khazaria completely, without a trace.
This man was not like today's rulers of Russia. Svyatoslav set himself global tasks, acted decisively, quickly, without delay, hesitation and looking back at someone's opinion.

The troops of the Khazar Khaganate were defeated and the Russians approached the capital of Khazaria, Sharkil (known as Sarkel in Greek-Byzantine historical documents), located on the banks of the Don.
Sharkil was built under the guidance of Byzantine engineers and was a serious fortress. But apparently the Khazars did not expect that the Russians would move deep into the Khazars, and therefore they were poorly prepared for defense. Speed ​​and onslaught did their job - Sharkil was taken and defeated.
However, Svyatoslav appreciated the advantageous location of the city - therefore he ordered the foundation of a Russian fortress on this place.
The name Sharkil (or, in Greek pronunciation Sarkel), in translation means "White House". The Russians, without further ado, simply translated this name into their own language. So the Russian city of Belaya Vezha was born.

Aerial photograph of the former Belaya Vezha fortress, taken in 1951. Now this territory is flooded with the waters of the Tsimlyansk reservoir.

Having passed the entire North Caucasus with fire and sword, Prince Svyatoslav achieved his goal - the Khazar Khaganate was destroyed.
Having conquered Dagestan, Svyatoslav moved his troops to the Black Sea.
There, in parts of the Kuban and the Crimea, there was the ancient Bosporan kingdom, which fell into decay and fell under the rule of the Khazars. Among others, there was a city there, which the Greeks called Hermonassa, the Turkic nomadic tribes - Tumentarkhan, and the Khazars - Samkerts.
Having conquered these lands, Svyatoslav transferred a certain amount of the Russian population there.
In particular, Germonassa (Tumentarkhan, Samkerts), turned into the Russian city of Tmutarakan (modern Taman, in the Krasnodar Territory).

Modern excavations in Tmutarakan (Taman). 2008

At the same time, taking advantage of the fact that the Khazar danger had disappeared, Russian merchants founded the Oleshye fortress (modern Tsyurupinsk, Kherson region) at the mouth of the Dnieper.

So Russian settlers appeared on the Don, Kuban and in the lower reaches of the Dnieper.

Exclaves Oleshye, Belaya Vezha, and Tmutarakan on the map of the Old Russian state of the 11th century.

Subsequently, when Russia broke up into different principalities, the Tmutarakan principality became one of the strongest.
The princes of Tmutarakan took an active part in the inter-princely civil strife of Russia, and also pursued an active expansionist policy. For example, in alliance with the North Caucasian tribes dependent on Tmutarakan, they organized, one after the other, three campaigns against Shirvan (Azerbaijan).
That is, Tmutarakan was not just a remote fortress on the edge of the Russian world. It was a fairly large city, the capital of an independent and fairly strong principality.

However, over time, the situation in the southern steppes began to change for the worse for the Russians.
In place of the defeated and destroyed Khazars (and their allies), in the deserted steppes, new nomads began to penetrate - the Pechenegs (ancestors of the modern Gagauz). At first little by little - then more and more actively (does this remind contemporaries of anything? ..). Year after year, step by step, Tmutarakan, Belaya Vezha and Oleshye were cut off from the main territory of Russia.
Their geopolitical situation has become more complicated.

And then, the Pechenegs were replaced by much more militant, numerous and wild nomads, who in Russia were called Polovtsy. In Europe they were called Cumans, or Comans. In the Caucasus - Kipchaks, or Kypchaks.
And these people have always called themselves and still call themselves - COSSACKS.

Take an interest in how the republic is CORRECTLY called today, which we, Russians, know as Kazakhstan.
For those who do not know, I explain - KAZAKHSTAN.
And the Kazakhs themselves are called - COSSACKS. We call them Kazakhs.

Here on the map - the territory of the Kazakh (Polovtsian, Kypchak) nomad camps, at the end of the XI - beginning of the XII centuries.

The territory of modern Kazakhstan (correctly - Kazakhstan)

Cut off by nomads from the main territory of Russia, Oleshye and Belaya Vezha began to gradually decline, and the Tmutarakan principality eventually recognized the sovereignty of Byzantium over itself.
It should be especially taken into account that in that era, no more than 10% of the total population lived in cities. The bulk of the population, even in the most developed states at that time, consisted of peasants. Therefore, the desolation of cities did not entail the death of the entire population, cleanly - especially since none of the nomadic peoples ever set a goal to arrange genocide for Russians.
Russians, as an ethnic group, on the Don, Kuban, Dnieper (especially in remote, secluded places) never completely disappeared - although, of course, they mixed with different peoples and partially adopted their customs.

Plus, it should be borne in mind that the Pechenegs and Polovtsy sometimes drove into slavery the inhabitants of the border Russian lands - and mixed with them.
And later, having become relatively civilized, the Polovtsy began to slowly adopt Orthodoxy, concluded various agreements with the Russians. For example, Prince Igor (whom "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" tells about) was helped to escape from captivity by a baptized Polovtsian named Ovrul.

A certain number of Russian vagabonds, people with a dubious past - always flowed in thin streams into the Polovtsian steppes. There, the fugitives tried to settle in an area where a certain number of Russians were present.
Such an escape was facilitated by the fact that it did not require knowledge of the road - it was enough just to go along the Don, or Dnieper.

It certainly didn't happen in one day. But as they say, a drop wears away a stone.

Gradually, there were so many such marginal vagabonds that they began to allow themselves organized attacks on some areas. For example, in 1159 (note that this was still the PRE-MONGOLIAN period), Oleshye was attacked by a strong detachment of such vagabonds (at that time they were called "berladniks", or "wanderers"; as they called themselves - it is not known) who captured the city and inflicted serious damage to merchant trade. The Kyiv prince Rostislav Mstislavovich, as well as the governors Georgy Nesterovich and Yakun, were forced to go down the Dnieper with a navy in order to return Oleshya to princely power ...

Of course, that part of the Polovtsians who roamed east of the Volga (in the region of modern Kazakhstan) had contact with the Russians to a much lesser extent, and therefore better preserved their national features ...

In 1222, on the eastern borders of the Polovtsian nomad camps, immeasurably wilder and more formidable conquerors appeared - the Mongols.
By that time, relations between the Polovtsy and the Russians were already such that the Polovtsy called the Russians for help.

On May 31, 1223, the Battle of the Kalka River (modern Donetsk region) took place between the Mongols and the combined Russian-Polovtsian forces. Due to disagreements and rivalry between the princes, the battle was lost.
However, then, the Mongols, tired of a long and difficult campaign, turned back. And for 13 years nothing was heard about them ...

And in 1237 they returned. And everything was remembered to the Polovtsy, who were staged a uniform genocide.
If on the territory of modern Kazakhstan, the Mongols treated the Polovtsy relatively tolerantly (and therefore the Polovtsy, they are Kazakhs, survived as a nation), then in the southern Russian steppes, between the Volga, Don and Dnieper, the Polovtsy underwent a total massacre.
At the same time, the events that took place were of little concern to the Russians (all these berladnik roamers), because such vagrants lived mainly in hard-to-reach places that were simply uninteresting to nomads - for example, in floodplains, on islands, among swamps, floodplain thickets ...

One more detail should be noted: after the invasion of Russia, the Mongols themselves sometimes resettled a certain number of Russian people in places where there were important roads and crossings. These people were given certain benefits - and the settlers, in turn, were required to maintain roads and crossings in good condition.
It happened that Russian peasants were resettled in some fertile area so that they would cultivate the land there. Or they didn’t even resettle, but simply gave benefits and protected them from harassment. In return, the peasants supplied a certain part of the harvest to the Mongol khans.

Below I give verbatim an excerpt from the 15th chapter, the book "Journey to the Eastern Countries of Wilhelm de Rubruck
in the summer of Goodness 1253. Message from William de Rubruck, Louis IX, King of France.

“So with great difficulty we wandered from camp to camp, so that not many days before the feast of the blessed Mary Magdalene we reached the great river Tanaida, which separates Asia from Europe, like the river of Egypt Asia from Africa. In the place where we landed, Batu and Sartach ordered to arrange on the eastern coast a village (sasale) of Russians who transport ambassadors and merchants in boats. They first transported us, and then carts, placing one wheel on one barge, and the other on another; they moved, tying the barges to each other and so rowing. There our guide acted very stupidly. It was he who thought that they should give us horses from the village and let go on the other side of the animals that we brought with us to return to their owners; and when we demanded animals from the inhabitants village, they replied that they had a privilege from Batu, namely: they were not obliged to do anything, but to transport those traveling back and forth. Even from merchants they receive a large tribute. So there, on the river bank, we stood for three days . On the first day they gave us a large fresh fish - chebak (borbotam), on the second day - rye bread and some meat, which the ruler of the village collected, like a sacrifice, in various houses, on the third day - dried fish that they had there in a large quantity. This river was there the same width as the Seine in Paris. And before reaching that place, we crossed many rivers, very beautiful and rich in fish, but the Tatars do not know how to catch it and do not care about fish if it is not so big that they can eat its meat, like sheep meat .. So, we were there in great difficulty, because we could not find either horses or bulls for money. Finally, when I proved to them that we were working for the common good of all Christians, they gave us bulls and men; we ourselves had to walk. At that time they were harvesting rye. Wheat was not born well there, but millet they have in abundance. Russian women remove their heads in the same way as ours, and decorate their dresses on the front side with squirrel or ermine furs from legs to knees. Men wear epanchi, like the Germans, and on their heads they have felt hats, pointed at the top with a long point. So we walked for three days, not finding people, and when we ourselves were very tired, as well as the bulls, and did not know in which direction we could find the Tatars, two horses suddenly ran up to us, which we took with great joy, and on them our guide and interpreter sat down to find out in which direction we could find the people. Finally, on the fourth day, having found people, we rejoiced, as if after a shipwreck we landed at the harbor. Then, taking horses and bulls, we rode from camp to camp until, on July 31, we reached the seat of Sartakh.

As we can see, according to the testimony of European travelers, it was quite possible to meet completely legal Russian settlements in the southern steppes.

By the way, this same Rubruk testifies that those Russians whom the Mongols drove away from Russia were often forced to graze cattle in the steppes. It is understandable - the Mongols did not have such institutions as hard labor, prisons, or mines. Slaves did the same thing as their masters - grazing cattle.
And of course, such shepherds often ran away from their owners.
And sometimes they didn’t run away - they simply remained without owners when the Mongols began to cut each other during civil strife ...
And these strife occurred - the farther, the more often.
Companions of civil strife were often all kinds of epidemics. Medicine, of course, was in its infancy. The birth rate was high, but children often died.
As a result, there were fewer and fewer nomads in the steppe.
And the Russians kept coming. After all, the stream of fugitives from the Russian lands never dried up.

It is clear that the fugitives themselves, having looked around a little, began to navigate the local realities. Of course, they found a common language with the remnants of the surviving Polovtsians. They were related to them - after all, men predominated among the fugitives.
And they quickly learned that, in fact, there were no Polovtsians - there were COSSACKS.
Even those Russians who did not mix with the Cossacks (Polovtsy) still actively used such a word as a Cossack.
After all, this was still the land of the Cossacks, albeit subjected to genocide, albeit interfering with the Russians.
They went to the Cossacks, they lived among the Cossacks, they became related to the Cossacks, they themselves eventually, albeit not immediately, began to call themselves Cossacks (at first - in a figurative sense).

Gradually, over time, the Russian element in the basins of the Don and Dnieper began to prevail. The Russian language, which was already familiar to the Polovtsy in pre-Mongolian times, began to dominate (not without distortions and borrowings, of course).

It is pointless to argue today - where exactly the "Cossacks" originated: On the Dnieper, or on the Don. This is a pointless debate.
The process of development by the new ethnic group of the lower reaches of the Dnieper and Don took place almost simultaneously.

It is equally pointless to argue who the Cossacks are: Ukrainians or Russians.
The Cossacks are a separate ethnic group that was formed as a result of mixing people from the territory of Russia (however, people from other countries were also present) with those peoples with whom they neighbored (for example, through mutual abductions of women). At the same time, some groups of Cossacks could cross from the Dnieper to the Don, or from the Don to the Dnieper.

A little slower, but also almost simultaneously - the formation of such groups of Cossacks as the Terek and Yaik was going on. It was somewhat more difficult to get to the Terek and Yaik than to the lower reaches of the Don and the Dnieper. But slowly they got there. And there they mixed with the surrounding peoples: on the Terek - with the Chechens, on Yaik - with the Tatars and the same Polovtsy (Cossacks).

Thus, the Polovtsy, who were present in the vast expanses of the great steppe, from the Danube to the Tien Shan, gave their name to those settlers from among the Slavs who settled on the former Polovtsian lands, west of the Yaik River.
But to the east of Yaik, the Polovtsians as such survived.
Thus, two very different groups of people appeared who call themselves the same, COSSACKS: the Cossacks proper, or Polovtsy, whom we call Kazakhs today - and the Russian-speaking ethnic group, mixed with the surrounding peoples, called the Cossacks.

Of course, the Cossacks are not homogeneous. In different territories, mixing went on with different peoples and with varying degrees of intensity.
So the Cossacks are not so much an ethnic group as a group of related ethnic groups.

When modern Ukrainians try to call themselves Cossacks, it causes a smile.
Calling all Ukrainians Cossacks is the same as calling all Russians Cossacks.

At the same time, it is pointless to deny a certain relationship between Russians, Ukrainians and Cossacks.

So - gradually, from different groups of the mixed population of the outskirts (with a clear predominance of Russian blood and the Russian language), various hordes were formed, so to speak, partly copying the lifestyle of neighboring Asians and Caucasians. Zaporizhzhya horde, Don, Terek, Yaik ...

Meanwhile, Russia was recovering from the Mongol invasion and began to expand its borders - which eventually came into contact with the borders of the Cossack hordes.
It happened during the reign of Ivan the Terrible - who came up with the idea, simple as everything ingenious, - to use the Cossacks as a barrier against Asian raids on Russian lands. That is, semi-Asians, close to Russia in language and faith, were used as an airbag against real Asians.

Thus began the gradual domestication of the Cossack freemen by the Russian state ...

After the Black Sea region was annexed and the danger of Crimean Tatar raids disappeared, the Zaporozhian Cossacks were resettled in the Kuban.

After the suppression of the Pugachev rebellion, the Yaik River was renamed the Ural - although, in general, it has almost nothing to do with the Urals as such (it only starts in the Ural Mountains).
And the Yaik Cossacks were renamed into Ural Cossacks - although they live, for the most part, not at all in the Urals. Some confusion results from this - sometimes the inhabitants of the Urals, who have nothing to do with the Cossacks, are considered to be Cossacks.

When the Russian possessions expanded to the east, part of the Cossacks was resettled in Transbaikalia, on the Ussuri, on the Amur, in Yakutia, on Kamchatka. However, in those places, sometimes purely Russian people were enrolled in the category of Cossacks, who had nothing to do with the Cossacks. For example, the pioneers, associates of Semyon Dezhnev, people from the city of Veliky Ustyug (that is, from the Russian North) were dubbed Cossacks.

Sometimes representatives of some other peoples were enrolled in the category of Cossacks.
For example - Kalmyks ...

In Transbaikalia, the Cossacks pretty much mixed with the Chinese, Manchus and Buryats, learned some of the habits and customs of these peoples.

In the photo - a painting by E. Korneev "GREBENSKY COSSACKS" 1802. Grebensky is an "offshoot" of the Terek.

Painting by S. Vasilkovsky "ZAPORIZHIA ON PATROL".

"Enrollment in the Cossacks of the captured Poles of Napoleon's army, 1813" The drawing by N. N. Karazin depicts the moment the captured Poles arrived in Omsk after they, already deployed among the Cossack regiments, under the supervision of the Siberian army of the Cossack captain (esaul) Nabokov, one by one change into Cossack uniforms.

Officers of the Stavropol and Khoper Cossack regiments. 1845-55

"BLACK SEA COSSACK". Drawing by E. Korneev

S. Vasilkovsky: "HARMASH (COSSACK ARTILLERIST) IN THE TIMES OF HETMAN MAZEPA".

S. Vasilkovsky: "UMAN'S SENIOR IVAN GONTA".

Cossacks of the Life Guards of the Ural Cossack Hundred.

Kuban Cossacks in May 1916.

It must be said that gradually, with the development of progress, wars have become more and more man-made. In these wars, the Cossacks were assigned a purely secondary, and even a third-rate role.
But the Cossacks were increasingly involved in the dirtiest, "police" work - including for suppressing uprisings, dispersing demonstrations, for terror against potentially dissatisfied, even for repressive actions against the unfortunate Old Believers.

And the Cossacks-quite justified the expectations of the authorities.
The descendants of the fugitives from captivity - became royal lackeys. They zealously slashed with whips and slashed the dissatisfied with sabers.

Nothing can be done - mixing with Caucasians and Asians, the Cossacks also absorbed some features of the Asian-Caucasian mentality. Including such as cruelty, meanness, cunning, deceit, venality, hostility towards Russians (or, as the Cossacks say, "outsiders"), a passion for robbery and violence, hypocrisy, duplicity.
Genetics is a tricky thing...

As a result, the population of Russia (including Russians) began to look at the Cossacks as foreigners, bashi-bazouks in the service of the autocracy.
And the Jews (who do not know how to forgive at all and in terms of cruelty will surpass any Cossacks) - they hated the Cossacks to the point of trembling in the knees.

It is believed that after the October Revolution of 1917, the Cossacks resolutely sided with the autocracy and were the backbone of the white movement.
But here much is exaggerated.
In fact, the Cossacks were not at all eager to fight for the interests of the whites. There were strong separatist sentiments in the Cossack regions.
However, when the Bolsheviks came to the Cossack lands, they instantly set the Cossacks against themselves with the wildest repressions and extreme cruelty. It quickly became clear that the Cossacks did not have to wait for mercy from the Bolsheviks. Jewish commissars, who in other situations were afraid of Great Russian chauvinism like fire, in this case on the contrary, they actively fueled the hostility of Russian peasants towards the Cossacks.
If the Bolsheviks willingly gave autonomy to other peoples (even those who did not ask for it at all), proclaiming a bunch of all sorts of national republics (however, as a rule, Jews were at the head of all these republics) - then no one with the Cossacks on this topic didn't even try to talk.
That is why, and only therefore, the Cossacks were FORCED to support the white movement. At the same time, they brought the White Guards - how much good, so much harm.
Cossack intrigues behind the backs of the Russian leaders of the white movement never stopped.

In the end, White was defeated.
Repressions fell upon the Cossacks. Up to the point that in other areas the entire male population over 16 years of age was shot.
Until 1936, the Cossacks were not drafted into the Red Army.
Cossack regions - were carefully renamed. No Transbaikalia - only the Chita region! No Kuban - only the Krasnodar Territory. No Don region, or Don region - only the Rostov region. No Yenisei province - only the Krasnoyarsk Territory.
And the lands of the Semirechensky and Ural Cossacks - generally became part of other republics (Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan).
For some time, the very word "Cossack" was excluded from everyday life. Cossacks in the media and literature were called purely Kazakhs.
The attitude towards the Cossacks warmed up only after Stalin consolidated his power and firmly stood on his feet, defeating all his enemies ...

Later, under the late Soviet regime, the Cossacks were completely loyal to her and, along with the Ukrainians, were one of her most faithful lackeys.

Today it is generally accepted that the Cossacks are assimilated into the Russian environment.
In reality, nothing of the kind. If an ethnic group does not have national-political autonomy, this does not mean that there is no ethnic group.
Cossacks are clearly different from Russians - both in mentality and appearance.

Often some disguised clowns pretend to be Cossacks, who seriously think that the Cossacks are just such a military class. Therefore, they say, it is enough to put on a uniform, a bunch of orders (it is not clear why received) and take a certain oath - that's it, you have already become a Cossack.
Nonsense, of course. It is impossible to "become" a Cossack, just as it is impossible to "become" a Russian or an Englishman. You can only be born a Cossack...

The role of the Cossacks in Russian history is often exaggerated.
And sometimes the opposite is true - the misfortunes brought to our country by the Cossacks are exaggerated.
In fact, the Cossacks brought significant benefits to Russia, at a certain stage of its development. But even without them, Russia would not have perished at all.
There was harm from the Cossacks - but there was also a benefit.

Cossacks are not heroes and not monsters - they are just a separate ethnic group, with their own advantages and disadvantages. More precisely - a group of closely related ethnic groups.
And it would be nice if the Cossacks had their own state - for example, somewhere in Australia, Africa, or Latin America. If they all moved to this state, I would wish them happiness and prosperity in their new homeland.
Still, we are different. Really different...

P.S. At the top is I. Repin's painting "COSSACKS WRITE A LETTER TO THE TURKISH SULTAN". 1880 Stanitsa Pashkovskaya.

In the foreseeable retrospective, the roots of such a phenomenon as the Cossacks are unequivocally Scythian-Sarmatian, then the Turkic factor was strongly superimposed, then the Horde factor. In the Horde and post-Horde periods, the Don, Volga and Yaik Cossacks became very Russified due to the massive influx of new fighters from Russia. For the same reason, the Dnieper Cossacks not only became Russified, but also became heavily littered due to the influx of new fighters from the lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. There was such a kind of ethnic cross-pollination. The Cossacks of the Aral Sea region and from the lower reaches of the Amu-Darya and Syr-Darya could not become Russified by definition, for religious and geographical reasons, therefore they remained Kara-Kalpaks (translated from Turkic as Black Hoods). They had very little contact with Russia, but diligently served Khorezm, the Central Asian Genghisides and Timurids, about which there is a lot of written evidence. The same is true of the Balkhash Cossacks, who lived along the shores of the lake and along the rivers flowing into Balkhash. They became strongly mongolized due to the influx of new fighters from Asian lands, strengthening the military power of Moghulistan and creating the Cossack khanates. So history de facto separated the Cossack ethnic group into different ethno-state and geopolitical apartments. In order to de jure divide the Cossack sub-ethnic groups, only in 1925, by a Soviet decree, the non-Russified Central Asian Cossacks (called Kirghiz-Kaisaks in tsarist times, i.e. Kyrgyz Cossacks) were renamed Kazakhs. Oddly enough, but the roots of the Cossacks and Kazakhs are the same, they are pronounced and written in Latin (until the recent past and Cyrillic) the names of these peoples are absolutely the same, but ethnohistorical pollination is very different.

****
In the 15th century, the role of the Cossacks in the regions bordering Russia increased sharply due to the incessant raids of nomadic tribes. In 1482, after the final collapse of the Golden Horde, the Crimean, Nogai, Kazan, Kazakh, Astrakhan and Siberian khanates arose.

Rice. 1 The collapse of the Golden Horde

These fragments of the Horde were in constant enmity among themselves, as well as with Lithuania and the Muscovite state. Even before the final collapse of the Horde, in the course of intra-Horde strife, Muscovites and Litvins placed part of the Horde lands under their control. Anarchy and unrest in the Horde was especially remarkably used by the Lithuanian prince Olgerd. Where by force, where by intelligence and cunning, where by bribe he included many Russian principalities in his possessions, including the territories of the Dnieper Cossacks (former black hoods) and set himself broad goals: to put an end to Moscow and the Golden Horde. The Dnieper Cossacks made up the armed forces of up to four topics or 40,000 well-trained troops and proved to be a significant support for the policy of Prince Olgerd. And it is from 1482 that a new, three-century period of Eastern European history begins - the period of the struggle for the Horde inheritance. At that time, few could have imagined that the supernumerary, although dynamically developing, Moscow principality would ultimately be the winner in this titanic struggle. But already less than a century after the collapse of the Horde, under Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible, Moscow would unite all the Russian principalities around itself and conquer a significant part of the Horde. At the end of the XVIII century. under Catherine II, almost the entire territory of the Golden Horde would be under Moscow rule. Having defeated the Crimea and Lithuania, the victorious nobles of the German queen put a fat and final point in the centuries-old dispute over the Horde inheritance. Moreover, in the middle of the 20th century, under Joseph Stalin, for a short time, the Muscovites would create a protectorate over the entire territory of the Great Mongol Empire, created in the 13th century. labor and genius of the Great Genghis Khan, including China. And in all this post-Horde history, the Cossacks took the most lively and active part. And the great Russian writer L. N. Tolstoy believed that "the whole history of Russia was made by the Cossacks." And although this statement, of course, is an exaggeration, but, looking at the history of the Russian state with a careful look, we can state that all significant military and political events in Russia did not go without the most active participation of the Cossacks. But all this will come later.

And in 1552, Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible undertook a campaign against the most powerful of these khanates - the heirs of the Horde - Kazan. Up to ten thousand Don and Volga Cossacks participated in that campaign as part of the Russian army. Reporting on this campaign, the chronicle notes that the Sovereign ordered Prince Peter Serebryany to go from Nizhny Novgorod to Kazan, "... and with him the boyar children and archers and Cossacks ...". Two and a half thousand Cossacks under the command of Sevryuga and Elka were sent from Meshchera to the Volga to block the transportation. During the assault on Kazan, the Don ataman Misha Cherkashenin distinguished himself with his Cossacks. And the Cossack legend tells that during the siege of Kazan, the young Volga Cossack Yermak Timofeev, disguised as a Tatar, entered Kazan, examined the fortress, and, returning, indicated the places most advantageous for blowing up the fortress walls.

After the fall of Kazan and the annexation of the Kazan Khanate to Russia, the military-political situation changed dramatically in favor of Muscovy. Already in 1553, Kabardian princes arrived in Moscow to beat the tsar with their foreheads so that he would take them into citizenship and protect them against the Crimean Khan and the Nogai hordes. With this embassy, ​​ambassadors arrived in Moscow from the Grebensky Cossacks, who lived along the Sunzha River and neighbored the Kabardians. In the same year, the Siberian king Edigei sent two officials to Moscow with gifts and pledged to pay tribute to the Moscow king. Further, Ivan the Terrible set the task for the governors to capture Astrakhan and conquer the Astrakhan Khanate. The Muscovite state was to be strengthened along the entire length of the Volga. The next year, 1554, was full of events for Moscow. With the help of the Cossacks and Moscow troops, Dervish-Ali was placed on the throne of the Astrakhan Khanate with the obligation to pay tribute to the Muscovite state. After Astrakhan, hetman Vyshnevetsky joined the Dnieper Cossacks in the service of the Moscow Tsar. Prince Vishnevetsky came from the Gediminovich family and was a supporter of Russian-Lithuanian rapprochement. For this, he was repressed by King Sigismund I and fled to Turkey. Returning from Turkey, with the permission of the king, he became the headman of the ancient Cossack cities of Kanev and Cherkasy. Then he sent ambassadors to Moscow and the tsar accepted him into the service with "Cossackism", issued a safe-conduct and sent a salary.

Despite the betrayal of the Russian protege Dervish-Ali, Astrakhan was soon conquered, but shipping along the Volga was in the complete power of the Cossacks. The Volga Cossacks were especially numerous at that time and “sit” so firmly in the Zhiguli mountains that practically not a single caravan passed by without a ransom or was plundered. Nature itself, having created the Zhiguli loop on the Volga, took care of the extreme convenience of this place for such fishing. It is in this regard that the Russian chronicles for the first time specifically note the Volga Cossacks - in 1560 it is written: “... Cossacks to thieves along the Volga ... The pious Sovereign sent his governor to them with many military men and commanded them to imati and hang .. .". The Volga Cossacks consider the year 1560 to be the year of seniority (formation) of the Volga Cossack Host. Ivan IV the Terrible could not jeopardize the entire eastern trade and, put out of patience by the attack of the Cossacks on his ambassador, on October 1, 1577, sends the stolnik Ivan Murashkin to the Volga with the order "... thieves' Volga Cossacks to be tortured, executed and hanged." In many works on the history of the Cossacks, there is a mention that, due to government repressions, many Volga free Cossacks left - some to the Terek and Don, others to Yaik (Ural), others, led by ataman Yermak Timofeevich, to the Chusovsky towns to serve to the Stroganov merchants, and from there to Siberia. Having thoroughly defeated the largest Volga Cossack army, Ivan IV the Terrible carried out the first (but not the last) large-scale decossackization in Russian history.

VOLZHSKY ATAMAN YERMAK TIMOFEEVICH

The most legendary hero of the Cossack atamans of the 16th century is undoubtedly Ermolai Timofeevich Tokmak (by the Cossack nickname Ermak), who conquered the Siberian Khanate and laid the foundation for the Siberian Cossack Army. Even before making into the Cossacks, in his early youth, this Pomeranian resident Yermolai son Timofeev, for his remarkable strength and fighting qualities, received his first and not sickly nickname Tokmak (tokmak, tokmach - a massive wooden beater for ramming the earth). Yes, and in the Cossacks Ermak, apparently, also from a young age. No one knew Yermak better than his comrades-in-arms - veterans of the "Siberian capture". In their declining years, those who were spared by death lived in Siberia. According to the Esipov chronicle, compiled according to the memoirs of Yermak's still living comrades-in-arms and opponents, before the Siberian campaign, the Cossacks Ilyin and Ivanov already knew him and served with Yermak in the villages for at least twenty years. However, this period of the ataman's life is not documented.

According to Polish sources, in June 1581, Yermak, at the head of the Volga Cossack flotilla, fought in Lithuania against the Polish-Lithuanian troops of King Stefan Batory. At this time, his friend and associate Ivan Koltso fought in the Trans-Volga steppes with the Nogai Horde. In January 1582, Russia concluded Yam-Zapolsky peace with Poland and Yermak got the opportunity to return to his native land. Yermak's detachment arrives on the Volga and in the Zhiguli unites with the detachment of Ivan Koltso and other "thieves' Atamans". To this day there is the village of Ermakovo. Here (according to other sources on Yaik) they are found by a messenger from the Stroganovs, a wealthy Permian salt merchant, with a proposal to go to their service. To protect their possessions, the Stroganovs were allowed to build fortresses and keep armed detachments in them. In addition, a detachment of Moscow troops was constantly located within the boundaries of the Permian land in the fortress of Cherdyn. The conversion of the Stroganovs led to a split among the Cossacks. Ataman Bogdan Barbosha, who had previously been Ivan Koltso's chief assistant, resolutely refused to be hired by Perm merchants. Barbosha took with him several hundreds of Cossacks to Yaik. After Barbosha and his supporters left the circle, the majority on the circle passed to Yermak and his villages. Knowing that for the defeat of the tsar's caravan, Yermak had already been sentenced to quartering, and the Ring to hanging, the Cossacks accept the invitation of the Stroganovs to go to their Chusovskie towns to protect themselves from the raids of the Siberian Tatars. There was another reason as well. At that time, a grand uprising of the Volga peoples had been blazing on the Volga for several years. After the end of the Livonian War, from April 1582, the tsar's ships began to arrive on the Volga to suppress the uprising. Free Cossacks found themselves, as it were, between a hammer and an anvil. They did not want to take part in actions against the rebels, but they did not take their side either. They decided to leave the Volga. In the summer of 1582, a detachment of Yermak and chieftains Ivan Koltso, Matvey Meshcheryak, Bogdan Bryazga, Ivan Alexandrov, nicknamed Cherkas, Nikita Pan, Savva Boldyr, Gavrila Ilyin in the amount of 540 people along the Volga and Kama rises on plows to the Chusovsky towns. The Stroganovs gave Yermak some weapons, but they were insignificant, since Yermak's entire squad had excellent weapons.

Taking advantage of the convenient moment when the Siberian prince Aley with the best troops went on a raid on the Permian fortress of Cherdyn, and the Siberian Khan Kuchum was busy fighting with the legs, Yermak himself undertakes a daring invasion of his lands. It was an extremely daring and bold, but dangerous plan. Any miscalculation or accident deprived the Cossacks of any chance of return and salvation. If they had been defeated, contemporaries and descendants would easily write it off as the madness of the brave. But the Yermakovites won, and the winners are not judged, they are admired. We will also admire. Stroganov's merchant ships had long plowed the Ural and Siberian rivers, and their people were well aware of the regime of these waterways. During the days of the autumn flood, the water in the mountain rivers and streams rose after heavy rains and the mountain passes became accessible for transport. In September, Yermak could cross the Urals, but if he lingered there until the end of the floods, his Cossacks would not be able to drag their ships back through the passes. Ermak understood that only a swift and sudden attack could lead him to victory, and therefore he hurried with all his might. Yermak's people more than once overcame the multi-verst crossing between the Volga and the Don. But overcoming the Ural mountain passes was associated with incomparably greater difficulties. With an ax in their hands, the Cossacks made their own way, cleared the rubble, felled the trees, cut the clearing. They did not have the time and energy to level the rocky path, as a result of which they could not drag ships along the ground using rollers. According to the participants of the campaign from the Esipov chronicle, they dragged the ships uphill "on themselves", in other words, on their hands. Through the Tagil passes, Yermak left Europe and descended from the "Stone" (Ural Mountains) to Asia. In 56 days, the Cossacks covered more than 1,500 km, including about 300 km upstream along the Chusovaya and Serebryanka and 1,200 km along the Siberian rivers and reached the Irtysh. This was made possible thanks to iron discipline and a solid military organization. Yermak categorically forbade any minor skirmishes with the natives on the way, only forward. In addition to the chieftains, the Cossacks were commanded by tenants, Pentecostals, centurions and captains. With the detachment there were three Orthodox priests and one priest-defiant. Yermak in the campaign strictly demanded the observance of all Orthodox fasts and holidays.

And now thirty Cossack plows are sailing along the Irtysh. In the front, the wind rinses the Cossack banner: blue with a wide red border. Kumach is embroidered with patterns, in the corners of the banner there are bizarre rosettes. In the center on a blue field are two white figures standing opposite each other on their hind legs, a lion and an ingor horse with a horn on its forehead, the personification of “prudence, purity and severity”. Yermak fought with this banner against Stefan Batory in the West, and came to Siberia with it. At the same time, the best Siberian army, led by Tsarevich Aley, unsuccessfully stormed the Russian fortress of Cherdyn in the Perm region. The appearance on the Irtysh of Yermak's Cossack flotilla was a complete surprise for Kuchum. He hastened to gather Tatars from nearby uluses, as well as Mansi and Khanty princes with detachments, to defend his capital. The Tatars hastily set up fortifications (notches) on the Irtysh at Cape Chuvashev and placed a lot of foot and horse soldiers along the entire coast. On October 26, on the Chuvashov Cape, on the banks of the Irtysh, a grandiose battle broke out, which was led by Kuchum himself from the opposite side. In this battle, the Cossacks successfully used the old and favorite technique of the “rook rati”. Part of the Cossacks with effigies made of brushwood, dressed in a Cossack dress, sailed on plows clearly visible from the shore and continuously exchanged fire with the shore, and the main detachment quietly landed on the shore and, on foot, swiftly attacked Kuchum's cavalry and foot troops from the rear and overturned it . The Khanty princelings, frightened by the volleys, were the first to leave the battlefield. Their example was followed by the Mansi warriors, who took refuge after the retreat in the impenetrable Yaskalba swamps. In this battle, Kuchum's troops were utterly defeated, Mametkul was wounded and miraculously escaped capture, Kuchum himself fled, and Yermak occupied his capital Kashlyk.

Rice. 2 Conquest of the Siberian Khanate

Soon the Cossacks occupied the towns of Yepanchin, Chingi-Tura and Isker, subjugating the local princes and kings. The local Khanty-Mansiysk tribes, weighed down by the power of Kuchum, showed peacefulness towards the Russians. Already four days after the battle, the first princeling Boyar with fellow tribesmen appeared in Kashlyk and brought with him a lot of supplies. The Tatars, who fled from the vicinity of Kashlyk, began to return to their yurts with their families. The dashing run was a success. Rich booty fell into the hands of the Cossacks. However, it was premature to celebrate victory. At the end of autumn, the Cossacks could no longer set out on their way back. The harsh Siberian winter has begun. Ice bound the rivers, which served as the only means of communication. The Cossacks had to pull the boats ashore. Their first difficult winter hut began.

Kuchum carefully prepared to inflict a mortal blow on the Cossacks and free his capital. However, willy-nilly, he had to give the Cossacks more than a month's respite: he had to wait for the return of Aley's detachments from behind the Ural Range. The question was about the existence of the Siberian Khanate. Therefore, messengers galloped to all ends of the vast "kingdom" with an order to assemble military forces. Under the khan's banners, everyone who was able to carry weapons was called. Kuchum again entrusted the command to his nephew Mametkul, who had dealt with the Russians more than once. Mametkul went to liberate Kashlyk, having at his disposal more than 10 thousand soldiers. The Cossacks could defend themselves from the Tatars by planting in Kashlyk. But they preferred offense to defense. On December 5, Yermak attacked the advancing Tatar army 15 versts south of Kashlyk in the area of ​​Lake Abalak. The battle was difficult and bloody. Many Tatars died on the battlefield, but the Cossacks also suffered heavy losses. With the onset of night darkness, the fight stopped by itself. The innumerable Tatar army retreated. Unlike the first battle at Cape Chuvashev, this time there was no enemy stampede in the midst of the battle. There was no question of the capture of their commander in chief. Nevertheless, Yermak won the most glorious of his victories over the combined forces of the entire Kuchumov kingdom. The waters of the Siberian rivers were covered with ice and impenetrable snow. Cossack boats have long been pulled ashore. All escape routes were cut off. The Cossacks fought furiously with the enemy, realizing that either victory or death awaited them. For each of the Cossacks there were more than twenty enemies. This battle showed the heroism and moral superiority of the Cossacks, it meant the complete and final conquest of the Siberian Khanate.

To inform the tsar about the conquest of the Siberian kingdom in the spring of 1583, Yermak sent a detachment of 25 Cossacks led by Ivan Koltso to Ivan IV the Terrible. It was not a random choice. According to the Cossack historian A.A. Gordeev, Ivan Koltso is the nephew of the disgraced Metropolitan Philip, who fled to the Volga, and the former tsar's okolnich Ivan Kolychev, the offspring of the numerous but disgraced boyar family of the Kolychevs. Gifts, yasak, noble captives and a petition were sent with the embassy, ​​in which Yermak asked for forgiveness for his previous faults and asked to send a voivode with a detachment of troops to Siberia to help. Moscow at that time was hard pressed by the failures of the Livonian War. Military defeats followed one after another. The success of a handful of Cossacks who defeated the Siberian kingdom flashed like lightning in the darkness, striking the imagination of contemporaries. Yermak's embassy, ​​headed by Ivan Koltso, was received very solemnly in Moscow. According to contemporaries, there has not been such joy in Moscow since the conquest of Kazan. “Ermak with his comrades and all the Cossacks were forgiven by the tsar for all their previous faults, the tsar gave gifts to Ivan Koltso and the Cossacks who arrived with him. Yermak was granted a fur coat from the tsar's shoulder, battle armor and a letter in his name, in which the tsar granted ataman Yermak to write as the Siberian prince ... ". Ivan the Terrible ordered to send a detachment of archers of 300 people, led by Prince Semyon Bolkhovsky, to help the Cossacks. Simultaneously with the Koltso detachment, Yermak sent Ataman Alexander Cherkas to the Don and Volga with Cossacks to recruit volunteers. After visiting the villages, Cherkas also ended up in Moscow, where he worked long and hard and sought to send help to Siberia. But Cherkas returned to Siberia with a new large detachment, when neither Yermak nor Koltso, who had returned to Siberia earlier, was already dead. The fact is that in the spring of 1584 great changes took place in Moscow - Ivan IV died in his Kremlin palace, unrest took place in Moscow. In the general confusion, the Siberian expedition was forgotten for a while. Almost two years passed before the free Cossacks received help from Moscow. What allowed them to stay in Siberia with small forces and resources for such a long time?

Ermak survived because the Cossacks and chieftains had the experience of long wars both with the most advanced European army of that time, Stefan Batory, and with the nomads in the "wild field". For many years, their camps and winter quarters have always been surrounded by the gentry or the Horde. The Cossacks learned to overcome them, despite the numerical superiority of the enemy. An important reason for the success of Yermak's expedition was the internal instability of the Siberian Khanate. Since Kuchum killed Khan Edigei and took possession of his throne, many years have passed, filled with incessant bloody wars. Where by force, where by cunning and deceit, Kuchum humbled the recalcitrant Tatar murzas (princes) and imposed tribute on the Khanty-Mansiysk tribes. At first, Kuchum, like Edigey, paid tribute to Moscow, but having entered the force and received news of the failures of the Moscow troops on the western front, he took a hostile position and began to attack the Permian lands belonging to the Stroganovs. Surrounding himself with a guard of Nogais and Kirghiz, he consolidated his power. But the very first military failures immediately led to the resumption of internecine struggle among the Tatar nobility. The son of the murdered Edigei Seid Khan, who was hiding in Bukhara, returned to Siberia and began to threaten Kuchum with revenge. With his help, Yermak restored the former trade communication of Siberia with Yurdzhent, the capital of the White Horde, located on the shores of the Aral Sea. The neighbor Murza Kuchum Seinbakhta Tagin gave Yermak the location of Mametkul, the most prominent of the Tatar military leaders. The capture of Mametkul deprived Kuchum of a reliable sword. The nobility, fearful of Mametkul, began to leave the khan's court. Karachi, the chief dignitary of Kuchum, who belonged to a powerful Tatar family, ceased to obey the khan and migrated with his soldiers to the upper reaches of the Irtysh. The Siberian kingdom was falling apart before our eyes. The power of Kuchum was no longer recognized by many local Mansi and Khanty princes and elders. Some of them began to help Yermak with food. Among the allies of the ataman were Alachey, the prince of the largest Khanty principality in the Ob region, the Khanty prince Boyar, the Mansi princes Ishberdey and Suklem from the Yaskalba places. Their help was invaluable for the Cossacks.

Rice. 3.4 Ermak Timofeevich and the oath of Siberian kings to him

After long delays, the voivode S. Bolkhovsky arrived in Siberia with a detachment of 300 archers with a great delay. Yermak, weary of the new noble captives led by Mametkul, hastened to send them immediately, despite the approaching winter, to Moscow with the archer's head Kireev. Replenishment little pleased the Cossacks. The archers were poorly trained, they squandered their supplies along the way, and severe trials awaited them ahead. Winter 1584-1585 in Siberia was very severe and was especially difficult for the Russians, supplies ran out, famine began. By spring, all the archers, along with Prince Bolkhovsky, and a significant part of the Cossacks, died of hunger and cold. In the spring of 1585, Kuchum's dignitary, Murza Karacha, fraudulently lured a detachment of Cossacks led by Ivan Koltso to a feast, and at night, having attacked them, he slaughtered them all sleepily. Numerous detachments of Karachi kept Kashlyk in the ring, hoping to starve the Cossacks. Yermak patiently waited for the moment to strike. Under the cover of night, the Cossacks sent by him, led by Matvey Meshcheryak, secretly made their way to the Karachi headquarters and defeated it. Two sons of Karachi were killed in the battle, he himself barely escaped death, and his army fled away from Qashlyk on the same day. Yermak won another brilliant victory over numerous enemies. Soon, messengers from Bukhara merchants arrived at Yermak with a request to protect them from the arbitrariness of Kuchum. Yermak with the rest of the army - about a hundred people - set off on a campaign. The end of the first Siberian expedition is shrouded in a dense veil of legends. On the banks of the Irtysh near the mouth of the Vagai River, where Yermak's detachment spent the night, Kuchum attacked them during a terrible storm and thunderstorm. Yermak assessed the situation and ordered to board the plows. Meanwhile, the Tatars had already broken into the camp. Yermak was the last to withdraw, covering the Cossacks. A cloud of arrows was fired by Tatar archers. The arrows pierced Yermak Timofeevich's broad chest. The swift icy waters of the Irtysh swallowed him up forever...

This Siberian expedition lasted three years. Hunger and deprivation, severe frosts, battles and losses - nothing could stop the free Cossacks, break their will to win. For three years, Yermak's squad did not know defeat from numerous enemies. In the last skirmish of the night, the thinned detachment retreated, having suffered few losses. But he lost a tried and tested leader. Without him, the expedition could not continue. Arriving in Kashlyk, Matvey Meshcheryak gathered the Circle, on which the Cossacks decided to go to the Volga for help. Yermak brought 540 fighters to Siberia, and only 90 Cossacks survived. With ataman Matvey Meshcheryak, they returned to Russia. Already in 1586, another detachment of Cossacks from the Volga came to Siberia and founded the first Russian city there - Tyumen, which served as the basis for the future Siberian Cossack Army and the beginning of the incredibly sacrificial and heroic Siberian Cossack epic. And thirteen years after the death of Yermak, the tsarist governors finally defeated Kuchum.

The history of the Siberian expedition was rich in many incredible events. The destinies of people underwent instant and incredible changes, and the zigzags and frills of Moscow politics never cease to amaze even today. The story of Prince Mametkul can serve as a vivid example of this. After the death of the Terrible, the nobility ceased to reckon with the orders of the feeble-minded Tsar Fyodor. The boyars and the nobility of the capital, for any reason, started local disputes. Everyone demanded higher posts for himself, referring to the "breed" and the service of his ancestors. Boris Godunov and Andrei Shchelkalov eventually found a way to reason with the nobility. By their order, the Discharge Order announced the appointment of serving Tatars to the highest military posts. On the occasion of the expected war with the Swedes, a list of regiments was drawn up. According to this painting, Simeon Bekbulatovich took the post of the first governor of a large regiment - commander in chief of the field army. The commander of the regiment of the left hand was ... "Tsarevich Mametkul of Siberia." Twice beaten and defeated by Yermak, captured and put in a pit by the Cossacks, Mametkul was treated kindly at the royal court and appointed to one of the highest posts in the Russian army.

In the development of any nation, there were moments when a certain ethnic group separated and thereby created a separate cultural layer. In some cases, such cultural elements coexisted peacefully with their nation and the world as a whole, in others they fought for an equal place under the sun. An example of such a warlike ethnic group can be considered such a stratum of society as the Cossacks. Representatives of this cultural group have always been distinguished by a special worldview and very acute religiosity. To date, scientists cannot figure out whether this ethnic stratum of the Slavic people is a separate nation. The history of the Cossacks dates back to the distant XV century, when the states of Europe were mired in internecine wars and dynastic upheavals.

Etymology of the word "Cossack"

Many modern people have a general idea that a Cossack is a warrior or a type of warrior who lived in a certain historical period and fought for their freedom. However, such an interpretation is rather dry and far from the truth, if we also take into account the etymology of the term "Cossack". There are several main theories about the origin of the word, for example:

Turkic (“Cossack” is a free man);

The word comes from kosogs;

Turkish (“kaz”, “cossack” means “goose”);

The word comes from the term "goats";

Mongolian theory;

Turkestan theory - that this is the name of nomadic tribes;

In the Tatar language, "Cossack" is a vanguard warrior in the army.

There are other theories, each of which explains this word in completely different ways, but it is possible to single out the most rational grain from all definitions. The most common theory says that the Cossack was a free man, but armed, ready to attack and fight.

Historical origin

The history of the Cossacks begins in the 15th century, namely from 1489 - the moment the term "Cossack" was first mentioned. The historical homeland of the Cossacks is Eastern Europe, or rather, the territory of the so-called Wild Field (modern Ukraine). It should be noted that in the 15th century the named territory was neutral and did not belong to both the Russian Tsardom and Poland.

Basically, the territory of the "Wild Field" was subjected to constant raids. The gradual settlement of immigrants from both Poland and the Russian Kingdom on these lands influenced the development of a new estate - the Cossacks. In fact, the history of the Cossacks begins from the moment when ordinary people, peasants, begin to settle in the lands of the Wild Field, while creating their own self-governing military formations in order to fight off the raids of the Tatars and other nationalities. By the beginning of the 16th century, the Cossack regiments had become a powerful military force, which created great difficulties for neighboring states.

Creation of the Zaporozhian Sich

According to the historical data that are known today, the first attempt at self-organization by the Cossacks was made in 1552 by the prince of Volyn Vyshnevetsky, better known as Bayda.

At his own expense, he created a military base, the Zaporizhzhya Sich, which was located on it. The whole life of the Cossacks flowed on it. The location was strategically convenient, since the Sich blocked the passage of the Tatars from the Crimea, and was also in close proximity to the border of Poland. Moreover, the territorial location on the island created great difficulties for the assault on the Sich. The Khortitskaya Sich did not last long, because in 1557 it was destroyed, but until 1775, such fortifications were built according to the same type - on river islands.

Attempts to subdue the Cossacks

In 1569, a new Lithuanian-Polish state was formed - the Commonwealth. Naturally, this long-awaited union was very important for both Poland and Lithuania, and free Cossacks on the borders of the new state acted against the interests of the Commonwealth. Of course, such fortifications served as an excellent shield against Tatar raids, but they were completely out of control and did not take into account the authority of the crown. Thus, in 1572, the king of the Commonwealth issued a universal, which regulated the employment of 300 Cossacks in the service of the crown. They were recorded in the list, the register, which led to their name - registered Cossacks. Such units were always in full combat readiness in order to repel Tatar raids on the borders of the Commonwealth as quickly as possible, as well as to suppress periodically arising peasant uprisings.

Cossack uprisings for religious-national independence

From 1583 to 1657, some Cossack leaders raised uprisings in order to free themselves from the influence of the Commonwealth and other states that tried to subjugate the lands of the still unformed Ukraine.

The strongest desire for independence began to manifest itself among the Cossack class after 1620, when Hetman Sahaidachny, together with the entire Zaporozhian army, joined the Kiev Brotherhood. Such an action marked the cohesion of the Cossack traditions with the Orthodox faith.

From that moment on, the battles of the Cossacks carried not only a liberation, but also a religious character. The growing tension between the Cossacks and Poland led to the famous national liberation war of 1648-1654, headed by Bohdan Khmelnitsky. In addition, no less significant uprisings should be singled out, namely: the uprising of Nalivaiko, Kosinsky, Sulima, Pavlyuk and others.

Decossackization during the Russian Empire

After the unsuccessful national liberation war in the 17th century, as well as the unrest that began, the military power of the Cossacks was significantly undermined. In addition, the Cossacks lost support from the Russian Empire after switching to the side of Sweden in the battle of Poltava, in which the Cossack army was led by

As a result of this series of historical events, a dynamic process of decossackization begins in the 18th century, which reached its peak during the time of Empress Catherine II. In 1775, the Zaporozhian Sich was liquidated. However, the Cossacks were given a choice: to go their own way (to live an ordinary peasant life) or join the hussars, which many took advantage of. Nevertheless, a significant part of the Cossack army (about 12,000 people) remained, which did not accept the offer of the Russian Empire. In order to ensure the former safety of the borders, as well as in some way to legitimize the "Cossack remnants", on the initiative of Alexander Suvorov, the Black Sea Cossack Host was created in 1790.

Kuban Cossacks

The Kuban Cossacks, or Russian Cossacks, appeared in 1860. It was formed from several military Cossack formations that existed at that time. After several periods of decossackization, these military formations became a professional part of the armed forces of the Russian Empire.

The Cossacks of the Kuban were based in the region of the North Caucasus (the territory of the modern Krasnodar Territory). The basis of the Kuban Cossacks was the Black Sea Cossack army and the Caucasian Cossack army, which was abolished as a result of the end of the Caucasian war. This military formation was created as a border force to control the situation in the Caucasus.

The war in this territory was over, but stability was constantly under threat. Russian Cossacks became an excellent buffer between the Caucasus and the Russian Empire. In addition, representatives of this army were involved during the Great Patriotic War. To date, the life of the Cossacks of the Kuban, their traditions and culture have been preserved thanks to the formed Kuban military Cossack society.

Don Cossacks

The Don Cossacks is the most ancient Cossack culture, which arose in parallel with the Zaporozhye Cossacks in the middle of the 15th century. Don Cossacks were located on the territory of the Rostov, Volgograd, Lugansk and Donetsk regions. The name of the army is historically associated with the Don River. The main difference between the Don Cossacks and other Cossack formations is that it developed not just as a military unit, but as an ethnic group with its own cultural characteristics.

The Don Cossacks actively collaborated with the Zaporizhian Cossacks in many battles. During the October Revolution, the Don army founded its own state, but the centralization of the White Movement on its territory led to the defeat and subsequent repressions. It follows that the Don Cossack is a person who belongs to a special social formation based on the ethnic factor. The culture of the Don Cossacks has been preserved in our time. About 140 thousand people live on the territory of the modern Russian Federation, who write down their nationality as "Cossack".

The role of the Cossacks in world culture

Today, the history, life of the Cossacks, their military traditions and culture are actively studied by scientists around the world. Undoubtedly, the Cossacks are not just military formations, but a separate ethnic group that has built its own special culture for several centuries in a row. Modern historians are working on recreating the smallest fragments of the history of the Cossacks in order to perpetuate the memory of this great source of a special Eastern European culture.