Military Review

How Turkey tried to invade Ukraine

17
How Turkey tried to invade Ukraine
The capture of the tsarist and Cossack regiments of the Turkish and Tatar fortresses. Engraving by L. Tarasevich


340 years ago, Russia, Turkey and the Crimean Khanate concluded the Bakhchisarai Peace.

The Russian state repulsed the onslaught of the Ottoman Empire to the north. The Turks recognized the power of Moscow in the Left-Bank Ukraine. Kiev remained with Russia. However, Porta temporarily took Podillya from the Poles and established itself in the Right-Bank Ukraine, which turned into a desert.

War for Ukraine


During the national liberation war led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky and the Russian-Polish war of 1654-1667. The Russian kingdom was able to return the lands that were lost during the Troubles, including the Novgorod-Seversk land (with Chernigov and Starodub) and Smolensk.

The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth recognized Russia as the right to the Left-Bank Ukraine. Kiev temporarily retreated to Moscow. But he was kept by the Russian state. That is, Moscow was able to return part of the lands of the Old Russian state, to reunite parts of the single Russian people.

However, they have not yet been able to fully solve the problem of uniting all Russian lands.

During a series of bloody uprisings, revolts of the gentry, wars with Russia and Sweden, the Commonwealth experienced a severe crisis and was in decline. The Polish elite could not use this period to reform the system of government and liquidate the "gentry democracy", which led the state to disaster.

Turkey decided to take advantage of the weakening of Poland. In Istanbul, they planned a wide expansion to the north. The time was favorable. Austria was recovering for a long time after the terrible Thirty Years' War.

The Turks landed in Crete and after a long struggle with the Venetians captured the strategic island. Austria tried to intervene, but in 1664 it was forced to conclude an unprofitable peace with Porte.

In Ukraine (in Little Russia-Russia), the struggle for power continued.

In 1665, Petro Doroshenko (1627-1697) became the hetman of Right-Bank Ukraine. As a registered Cossack, Doroshenko was promoted to the ranks of the Cossack foreman during the Khmelnytsky war against the Commonwealth. During the reign of hetmans Bogdan Khmelnitsky and Ivan Vyhovsky, he was a prilutsk and later a Cherkasy colonel. Under Hetman Pavel Teter, since 1663, he became the general chieftain in the right-bank army. After defeat and flight, Teteri became hetman.

Doroshenko relied on the Cossack foreman (the Ukrainian "nobleman", which took over the worst qualities of the Polish population) and the clergy, led by Metropolitan Joseph of Kiev, who were guided by Turkey and the Crimean Khanate. Doroshenko's supporters believed that the Port was relatively far away, the Crimean Khanate was weak. Therefore, with their help, you can fight off Poland and Russia and achieve a relatively high autonomy under the auspices of the Ottomans and Crimeans.


Hetman of Right-Bank Ukraine Pyotr Dorofeevich Doroshenko (1627-1697). Portrait of the early XNUMXth century

Polish-Cossack-Tatar war


Doroshenko ordered the expulsion of the Poles from the Right-Bank Ukraine.

And at the same time he attacked the Left Bank. But he did not succeed. The Right Bank Hetmanate was too weak to unite all the Western Russian lands, to throw back Warsaw and Moscow.

In 1666, Doroshenko recognized himself as a vassal of the Port, and the Crimean horde under the command of Devlet-Girey came to his aid. In December 1666, Cossack-Tatar troops defeated a Polish detachment under the command of Makhovsky near Brailov.

In 1667, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth concluded the Andrusov armistice with Russia, but its forces and resources were depleted by a long war and rebellions of the gentry. Warsaw was unable to provide significant assistance to the population of Podillya and Lublin region.

The resistance was headed by the full crown hetman (deputy commander-in-chief) Jan Sobieski. Soon he became the great crown hetman (commander in chief).

Sobieski mobilized everyone he could, including the peasant militias (Russian-Rusyns), for whom the Tatar invasion was worse than the lord's power. The garrisons of the fortresses were reinforced. Cossacks and Tatars did not succeed and turned to Lvov. Sobieski blocked their way.

In a ten-day battle at Pidhaitsy (October 1667), 9 thousand Sobieski's detachment (most of the peasants) repulsed the attack of 30-35 thousand Cossack-Tatar army of Kyrym-Girey and Doroshenko.

Sobieski took a comfortable position, reinforced by field installations. Cossacks and Tatars could not interact and use their numerical advantage. Therefore, the Polish infantry and artillery repelled enemy attacks, and the cavalry successfully counterattacked.

Kyrym-Girei and Doroshenko tried to organize a siege of the Polish fortified area, but at this time the Polish troops intensified in the rear of the Cossack-Tatar army. And the Cossacks broke into the Crimea and ruined it so that they remained there

"Only dogs and cats."

This demoralized the Tatars. They quickly became discouraged when they could not immediately succeed.

Kyrym-Girey concluded a treatise with Sobieski on

"Eternal friendship and unbreakable peace."

The Cossacks had to follow the Tatars.


Cavalry attack. Artist Jozef Brandt

Hadyach treason


Western Russia at that time was divided into four parts: the Zaporozhye Sich, the Left Bank controlled by Russia, and the Right Bank Ukraine. And on an insignificant part of the Right Bank, hetman Mikhail Khanenko, who was subordinate to the Poles, held power.

Zaporozhye occupied an independent position and did not support any of the hetmans. The koshevoy atman was chosen in it for a year. This post was occupied by either Sukhoveenko or Sirko.

The Andrusov armistice led to the partition of Little Russia, and to the emergence of a mass of dissatisfied.

The Cossack foreman did not want to obey Moscow, dreamed of the rights of the Polish gentry. Now it seemed to the Ukrainian elite that it was better to formally submit to a weakened Poland or Turkey, which was overseas, than to Moscow, where there is rigid centralization, order and hierarchy.

The hetman of the Left Bank Ukraine Ivan Bryukhovetsky (1663-1668) was offended by Moscow, as he hoped to establish his power on the Right Bank with Russian help.

The Polish lords were outraged by the loss of most of the Ukraine. They did not abandon their attempts to embroil Moscow with the Cossacks. In the lands that they were able to return, the gentry began to restore the usual order with the help of massive vice, gallows. There they were fighting three skins from the peasants. The common people howled.

This was used by Doroshenko, who announced that

"Muscovites sold our brothers to the Lyakhams."

Doroshenko came up with a plan on how to take the Left Bank from Russia with the help of Bryukhovetsky.

The narrow-minded and stupid left-bank hetman was deceived like a child. He was persuaded to leave Moscow, promising to make him hetman

"Both banks of the Dnieper"

under the auspices of Turkey and the Crimean Khanate.

At the same time, Doroshenko promised that he would give up his hetmanate.

The second Metropolitan of Kiev Methodius, offended by Moscow, also betrayed him, dreaming of being independent from the Moscow Patriarchate.

Methodius began to help Doroshenko. He announced that he was allowing the Cossacks and Bryukhovetsky to take the oath to the tsar.

The left-bank hetman took the bait, gathered his secret parliament in Gadyach. They decided to expel the tsarist governors and officials, sent delegations to Bakhchisarai and Constantinople to ask for patronage.

Provocations began.

In Crimea, the assassination of the tsar's ambassador Lodyzhensky was organized. The local West Russian population was turned against the tsarist tax collectors. Like, now instead of Poles we are being enslaved by "katsapi".

On the unspoken order of the hetman, Ukrainian cities refused to pay taxes, the hetman's and colonel's henchmen beat the collectors, bullying the tsarist warriors.

Disturbing news poured into Moscow. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich decided to visit Kiev in order to visit holy places and show the people the unity of the Russian state, to listen to the complaints of the local population. This spurred the conspirators, their designs were threatened.

There were rumors that the tsar would lead an army and deprive Ukraine of the remaining "liberties". The uprising was scheduled for the end of winter, so that the spring thaw would give a gain in time.

On February 8, 1668, the hetman summoned the tsarist governor Ogaryov to his residence in Gadyach and demanded to get out. He promised free passage, otherwise death to all "aliens".

Ogarev had only 280 warriors, and he left the city. In the field, supporters of Bryukhovetsky attacked a small detachment. In an unequal battle, half of the soldiers fell, the governor and the other part were captured.

After that, riots broke out in other cities. The Tsar's governors were captured, the warriors were killed.

So, in Starodub Ignatius Volkonsky died with the entire garrison. In Novgorod-Seversky, Kvashnin's detachment fell in an unequal battle.

In total, 48 cities and towns were deposited from the Russian state.

The death of Bryukhovetsky


Bryukhovetsky tried to negotiate with the Sultan and swore allegiance to him.

The hetman tried to raise the Don, sent an appeal to the local Cossacks:

"Moscow with the Lyakhams decided to destroy the glorious Zaporozhian Army and the Don."

Here the lie did not pass. Donets tied envoys and gave them to Moscow.

And in Ukraine, the uprising did not work out for the whole people.

Many simple Cossacks were simply confused, confused by the rapid and overwhelming events. They simply did not have leaders to oppose the outrageous hetman and colonel troops.

In Kiev, the townspeople took the side of Russia, and the governor Sheremetev held the city. Nizhyn and Pereyaslavl with strong garrisons also held out. They did not fall for the bait "to leave freely". In Chernigov, voivode Tolstoy also held the old city and beat many of the besiegers.

The Russian government ordered the governor Grigory Romodanovsky in Belgorod to lead an army to the Ukraine. During the war with Poland, he commanded our troops in the south. But the traitors' calculations for the spring thaw were fully justified.

The spring of 1668 was late, in April there was still snow, then the roads became limp. Angry letters came from Moscow. In May, despite the bad roads, the governor had to set out. The carts and guns were immediately stuck tightly. The warriors were exhausted.

In this situation, Romodanovsky decided not to go deep into the rebellious territory and stopped at the border. He surrounded Kotelva and Oposhnya, sent on light cavalry detachments. The cavalry of Prince Shcherbatov and Likharev defeated the enemy at Pochep and near Novgorod-Seversky.

Romodanovsky lured the enemy away and his plan worked.

Bryukhovetsky decided to speak. Shelves from the Right Bank were pulled up to him, which allegedly fell away from Doroshenko. The ambassador of Turkey and Crimea arrived and took the oath of allegiance to the Sultan. Tatar troops also came, but they immediately demanded money, otherwise the Crimeans did not want to fight. Doroshenko also arrived.

In June 1668, Doroshenko and Bryukhovetsky met on the Serb field near Dikanka. Here the deception was revealed that Doroshenko was not going to give up the hetman mace in favor of Bryukhovetsky. On the contrary, Doroshenko demanded that Bryukhovetsky surrender the signs of hetman power. He asked for help from Murza Chelibey, who dismissed it. They say that the internal disassembly of the Sultan's Cossacks does not concern. By order of Doroshenko, Bryukhovetsky was beaten to death.

However, this dastardly murder angered ordinary Cossacks.

The army seethed, shouted that Doroshenko was infidel and sold out to the Tatars. The hetman and the foreman had to persuade and water the Cossacks for a week in order to recognize Doroshenko as hetman of both parts of Ukraine. But the unrest continued.

The Crimeans, having received gold ahead, returned home. The Cossacks left, who nominated their candidate for the place of hetman - clerk Sukhovienko. And the Left Bank Cossacks, not wanting to serve as the henchman of the Sultan, were unreliable. As a result, Doroshenko thought about it and returned to Chigirin.


Ivan Martynovich Bryukhovetsky (1623-1668). In the portrait of the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries.

Hetman the Sinful


Before leaving, Doroshenko appointed Chernigov Colonel Demyan Mnogogreshny as a hetman in the Left Bank Ukraine.

He had to confront the tsarist army. Meanwhile, Romodanovsky still did not go deep into the territory of Ukraine. Obviously, he did not want to use the strategy of the Poles - to burn village after village, city after city, drown the uprising in blood, embittering the people. He only provided assistance to the surviving garrisons.

In September, Doroshenko's supporters were still able to deploy an army and moved to the Severshchina. Romodanovsky waited for the moment when he could defeat the enemy with one blow.

Some of the rebels were approaching Nizhyn. They threatened the governor of Rzhevsky. And then they learned that the Russian army was already nearby. The rebels scattered.

The sinful man led his army to Chernigov, where Tolstoy's garrison was still defended. The Cossacks went to storm. The royal warriors, under the onslaught of superior forces, retreated to the city castle. But at this time Romodanovsky approached Chernigov. His appearance was so unexpected that the tsarist troops blocked the rebels.

The Cossacks did not want to die. Immediately there were supporters of Moscow, they persuaded the hetman to start negotiations. The sinful man promised to leave Chernigov if released. The tsarist commander proposed reconciliation. In the end, we agreed.

The Cossacks left the city and sent a delegation

"Hit with the forehead."

The hetman took the oath to the tsar and sent an embassy to Moscow.

As soon as a second center of power emerged in Ukraine, which wanted peace with Moscow, the uprising began to fade.

The colonels deferred from Doroshenko, negotiated forgiveness. The Cossacks announced that Doroshenko -

"Hetman of the khan's majesty"

and also entered into negotiations with Romodanovsky.

Metropolitan of Kiev Joseph Tukalsky asked Moscow on what conditions he could keep his post.

In December 1668, the mandated hetman Mysogreshny was elected hetman of the entire Left-Bank Ukraine at the Cossack council in Novgorod-Seversky. And on behalf of the entire foreman, he took the oath to Emperor Alexei Mikhailovich.

In March 1669, the Rada in Glukhov again elected him hetman. The new hetman concluded the Glukhov articles with Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich.

According to them, the tsarist garrisons could only stand in five Western Russian cities - Kiev, Pereyaslav, Chernigov, Nizhyn and Ostra. The register of Cossacks increased to 30 thousand.

Only a Cossack foreman could collect taxes in Little Russia and Zaporozhye. The Hetman could not have diplomatic ties with other powers.

But at the same time, a new threat arose.

The Ottoman army completed the capture of Crete, defeated the Arab rebels and returned Basra. Istanbul is aiming north.

The Sultan made an official statement that he was taking Doroshenko into citizenship from all over Ukraine.

To be continued ...
Author:
Photos used:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/
17 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 14 January 2021 04: 50
    0
    The army seethed, shouted that Doroshenko was infidel and sold out to the Tatars. The hetman and the foreman had to persuade and water the Cossacks for a week
    The price of loyalty, and after all these are real warriors, not the current "mummers".
    1. Profiler
      Profiler 14 January 2021 05: 55
      +1
      The Polish lords were outraged by the loss of most of the Ukraine. They did not abandon their attempts to embroil Moscow with the Cossacks.

      The Cossack foreman did not want to obey Moscow, dreamed of the rights of the Polish gentry.

      Doroshenko came up with a plan on how to take the Left Bank from Russia with the help of Bryukhovetsky.

      Provocations began.

      Bryukhovetsky tried to negotiate with the Sultan and swore allegiance to him.


      You read this, and you realize that Ukraine today's lives in the 17th century ...

      What did they call it - "Ruin"?

      Symptomatic yes - Ukraine-Ruin.
  2. Cowbra
    Cowbra 14 January 2021 05: 34
    +1
    "Everyone is stealing, strangling each other, in general a normal civilized life is going on" - "An ordinary miracle". Here at close range I do not see a difference from 1991 or 2014 in the same place.
  3. Olgovich
    Olgovich 14 January 2021 07: 28
    +2
    During the national liberation war led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky and the Russian-Polish war of 1654-1667. The Russian kingdom was able to return the lands that were lost during the Troubles, including the Novgorod-Seversk land (with Chernigov and Starodub) and Smolensk.

    Part of the Pskov region was also returned.

    The results of the war of the war were recorded by the Andrusov armistice of 1667
  4. Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 14 January 2021 07: 54
    +5
    Here is the typical cunning of saucepans, already in the blood.
    Doroshenko's supporters believed that the Port was relatively far away, the Crimean Khanate was weak. Therefore, with their help, you can fight off Poland and Russia and achieve a relatively high autonomy under the auspices of the Ottomans and Crimeans.

    All my life we ​​maneuvered between Poles, Austrians, Russians, Turks, Krymchaks. And now, after the collapse of the USSR, they decided that "the US is relatively far away, the EU is weak, and with their help it is possible to fight off Russia and Turkey and achieve a relatively high autonomy under the auspices of Americans and Europeans."
    1. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 14 January 2021 09: 30
      +1
      How does the author know what Doroshenko's supporters thought? = Doroshenko's supporters believed that the Port was relatively far away, the Crimean Khanate was weak. =
      It is even impossible to know this in principle.
      It's just a figure of speech, so no conclusions can be drawn from this.
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 14 January 2021 11: 55
        +1
        Quite a logical "figure of speech". An objective balance of power plus subsequent actions, and between the first and the second - the opinion of Doroshenko with the colonels, which is easily modeled and formulated. Plus the "taste of the gentry," which the Cossack foreman of the Hetmanate liked very much, who wanted to saddle the population instead of the expelled Polish lords. As the saying goes, "The dragon is dead. Long live the Dragon!" - nothing new. On the other hand, how do you know that "Doroshenko's supporters did not" think so "-?
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk 14 January 2021 13: 45
          -2
          Quote: andrew42
          On the other hand, how do you know that "Doroshenko's supporters did not" think so "-?

          Quote: Krasnoyarsk
          It is even impossible to know this in principle.
          1. andrew42
            andrew42 15 January 2021 13: 14
            0
            I understand your point of view. That is, there is a chain of actual events, but they cannot be assessed! So you can get to the point that Caesar conquered Gaul not by the decision of the Senate, but simply went on a tour to Alesia.
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 15 January 2021 14: 45
              -1
              Quote: andrew42

              I understand your point of view. That is, there is a chain of actual events, but they cannot be assessed! So you can get to the point that Caesar

              You did not understand anything. Of course, you can give an assessment of "actual events". She, the assessment, can be correct or not correct.
              A - "Doroshenko's supporters believed that the Port is relatively far away, the Crimean Khanate is weak" - this is not an assessment of "actual events", this is the author's assumption, sucked from the thumb. Can you catch the difference?
              The author not only does not know all the supporters of Doroshenko by name, but also cannot know what they believed on this or that occasion.
  5. Doliva63
    Doliva63 14 January 2021 18: 09
    +1
    So when did the state of Ukraine appear, about which the author writes? wassat
    1. Profiler
      Profiler 15 January 2021 05: 23
      -2
      Quote: Doliva63
      So when did the state of Ukraine appear, about which the author writes?

      In general, the malignant quasi-state neoplasm "Ukraine", in different historical periods, tried to create both external players and local, dependent on them, forces.
      And only after the collapse of the USSR, the "Svidomo revived", under the approving instigations of the West, who saw in this process a pledge to the impossibility of re-creating the Union, finally achieved their goal.
  6. OlegVK
    OlegVK 15 January 2021 09: 56
    -2
    Judging by the title and the last phrase of the text, the author is from the community of ukrov. This is not ethnic, but sectarian affiliation. His questions of the emergence of the name "Ukraine", "Ukrainians" are not interested.
  7. Anar
    Anar 15 January 2021 14: 20
    0
    The author is an incitement to ethnic hatred.
  8. Byurer
    Byurer 16 January 2021 00: 40
    0
    "The second Metropolitan of Kiev Methodius, offended by Moscow, also betrayed, dreaming of being independent from the Moscow Patriarchate ..." And what, he was subordinate to the Moscow Patriarch, was it not Constantinople?
  9. Svidetel 45
    Svidetel 45 23 January 2021 17: 59
    0
    In Soviet times, they talked a lot about Khmelnytsky, but about such freaks of Ukrainians, periodic betrayals and betrayals were not particularly widespread, much of that was unknown. So everything that is happening with Ukraine today and with its attitude towards Russia is quite natural, it seems that nothing has changed there since the 17th century, we must forget all these myths about the brotherly people and build our relations with such a neighbor exclusively on the pragmatic base without any pink saliva.
    1. Uralean
      Uralean 7 February 2021 18: 16
      0
      Quote: Svidetel 45
      - "In Soviet times, they talked a lot about Khmelnytsky, but about such freaks of Ukrainians, periodic betrayals and betrayals were not particularly widespread, much like that was unknown. So everything that is happening with Ukraine today and with its attitude towards Russia is quite natural, it seems that nothing has changed for them since the 17th century, we must forget all these myths about the fraternal people and build our relations with such a neighbor exclusively on a pragmatic basis without any pink saliva.

      - Well, different sources are stupid ... If you speak with disdain about the fraternal people of Ukraine (but in reality it is one people divided under Batu Khan, and then taken up by the Polish-Lithuanian Union), and consider this people not from the 1690s years, and much later, after the defeat of the Swedes by Peter I, and the removal from power of the hetmans of the Cherkasy Mazepa, We see that Russian regiments were sent to the Little Russian lands to the cities of Little Russia, landowners, with their Russian peasants (from the central and northern Russian lands), which settled in these lands among the Little Russians and the Dnieper Cherkassy (Kozaks) - is that not a brotherly people, not a Russian? But an even greater settlement by Russian people came after the victory, Under Empress Catherine, over the Crimean Khan and the Turks, and the acquisition of the whole TAVRIA of Crimea, And Little Russia. The creation of Novorossia along with Little Russia, the resettlement of all 40 kurens and five palangas of the Cherkasy Dnieper (Little Russian and Zaporozhye Cossacks) from their places on the right bank of the Kuban.
      And the settling in Little Russia and Novorossia of Russian landowners of the nobles, from central Russia, with their serfs. The division of Little Russia and Novorossa lands among the Russian landowners and nobles, with the settlement of peasants and settlers from Russia. And what happened in the end? Doesn't the Russian people live there? Not brotherly in blood? Moreover, under Soviet power, there was a resettlement from the western regions of nationalist Ukrainians from the western regions to Siberia, beyond the Urals, Kazakhstan, and Russian settlers moved from Russia to their place. New industrial cities were built, which required literate people, they were resettled by recruitment (recruitment) from all over Russia - there were huge flows of Russians to Little Russia and Novorosiya (the Soviet government called it all Ukraine - the outskirts of the USSR). At this time, an even greater mixing of the population became during and after the War of 1941-45. Huge masses of people left Ukraine deep into the country, and after the war people who had already been mixed returned there .. And what do you want to say that Ukrainians and Russians are not one people? Mixed hundreds of times for centuries? First you have to think, and then broadcast.