Battle of Kuruk Lake

Joseph Brandt. Cossack camp

Zhmailo uprising

During the Troubles in the Russian kingdom, the Cossacks took an active part in the activities of the impostors and in the campaigns of the Polish troops in order to subjugate the Russian lands. Also detachments of Cossacks supported the Polish troops in the fight against the Ottoman Empire. The Cossack elite hoped for a reward from the royal power.

However, the Polish authorities continued their colonial, anti-Russian policy in southwestern Rus' (Russian resistance to Polish occupation; War for Russianness: the uprising of Nalivaiko and Loboda). They attacked the Russian faith (Orthodoxy). The Poles demanded from the Cossacks to submit to the landowners on whose lands their settlements stood, to refrain from sea voyages to Turkish and Crimean possessions, to destroy flotilla. This aroused the resistance of the Russian Cossacks, who were joined by the lower classes of the city, part of the clergy and the peasantry.

On the other hand, the wars between Poland and Turkey contributed to the deterioration of the position of the peasantry. The villages were ravaged by troops and various gangs, deserters. The lords came up with new requisitions to improve their position. The peasants fled to the east, looking for happiness in the Cossacks. This annoyed the big landowners. The Seimas in 1623 decided to dissolve the Cossack army, located on the lands of the Middle Dnieper.

The Cossacks refused to obey and revolted. He was supported by the Kyiv Metropolitan Job. The Kiev clergy asked Moscow to take Little Rus' into their citizenship. Such appeals and embassies from the Cossack hetmans, chieftains and clergy came to Moscow more than once.

In the Russian capital, such embassies were cordially welcomed, they provided material assistance to the rebels, but they were in no hurry to take "under the sovereign's hand". This meant a new war with the strong Commonwealth, whose king during the Time of Troubles almost became the sovereign of the Russian kingdom. On the other hand, the Cossacks and peasants seemed to the Russian government not very successful allies. It also happened that in Moscow they were just about to start negotiations, and the uprising was already crushed.

Battle on Kuruk Lake

In September 1625, a 30-strong Polish army led by hetman Stanislav Konetspolsky invaded the Kiev region. Registered Cossacks retreated and united with the army of the Cossacks. The Cossack army met the Poles on October 25 near the town of Krylov on Tsibulnik. Negotiations began. The Cossacks asked to protect the Orthodox Church from the attacks of Catholics and Uniates, to destroy all government decrees directed against the Cossacks, and to grant them broad self-government, a special status.

Konetspolsky accused the Cossacks of unauthorized raids in the Black Sea, relations with Moscow and the Crimea to the detriment of Poland and the reception of various suspicious and undesirable persons. The hetman demanded surrender, limiting the register to 6 people, and extraditing the criminals. The Cossacks refused to submit to these demands.

On October 29, Polish troops stormed the Cossack fortified camp. Zaporizhzhya infantry was famous for its field fortifications and their defense skills. The Cossacks repulsed the attacks of German mercenaries, whom the Polish commanders used as infantry. The gentry themselves preferred to fight on horseback. In turn, the Cossacks made sorties, but they were repelled.

On October 30, both armies were preparing for a new battle. Deciding to take a more advantageous position, the Cossacks left the old camp at night and went to the Medvezhya Vine tract near Kurukovoe Lake (the current Poltava region). The Poles noticed the withdrawal and directed the pursuit, but it was delayed by the rear detachments, which suffered heavy losses, but completed their task. The Cossacks managed to build a new fortified camp.

On October 31, Polish troops stormed the positions of the Cossacks. However, they clearly overestimated their strength and failed reconnaissance. The area was wooded, swampy, which fettered the actions of a strong Polish cavalry. The frontal attacks of the Poles and Germans were repulsed, the enemy suffered heavy losses from rifle and cannon fire. The Cossacks settled in the lakeside thickets and contributed to the disorder of the Polish army. Hetman Konetspolsky himself wrote to the king that the Cossacks "did a good defense."

However, the Cossacks were still outnumbered by the enemy, there was no hope for help, as well as supplies to sit in a siege for a long time. Therefore, in early November, negotiations resumed.

Kurukovsky treaty

The Cossacks chose a new hetman - Mikhail Doroshenko, who had previously been marked by participation in the campaign of Peter Sahaidachny against Moscow in August 1618, when the cities of southern Russia were taken and plundered. Doroshenko was supported by the Cossack foreman, who sought a compromise with the Polish authorities. The further fate of the former Cossack hetman Mark Zhmailo (Pavel Izmail) is unknown, apparently, he was killed during stormy "negotiations".

On November 6, 1625, the commissars of the Commonwealth, Sobieski and Balaban, were solemnly greeted in the field in front of the camp and escorted to Doroshenko's tent, where they took the oath of the common Cossack circle. The Cossacks promised to protect royal citizenship,

“We will give all kinds of obedience to our elders: do not go to the sea from the Dnieper, do not run into the Turkish Caesar, burn all sea boats, arrange with third-party gentlemen, except with the consent of the king ... do not create ... "

As a result, the Cossacks gave up the right to sea and land campaigns without the permission of the king and the opportunity to conduct an independent foreign policy. The register was reduced to 6 thousand soldiers who carried the border guards. One thousand Cossacks remained in Zaporozhye, the rest were located within the Kyiv, Chernigov and Bratslav voivodeships, obeying the authorities. The Cossacks entered in the register retained a number of liberties, the rest returned to their estates. The hetman was appointed by the Polish authorities.

Attack on Russianness

It is worth noting that, although the Russian uprisings in Little Rus' were large-scale and posed a certain threat to Poland, but in general, for the time being, the Poles successfully crushed them. Popular hatred splashed out on the local lords and their managers (Jews), then the crowds of the rebels dispersed to their huts. The Poles went with fire and sword, burning out even a hint of resistance. They also acted by cunning, deceit and persuasion, splitting the rebels. Many Russians (Rusyns) believed in a "good king" who would curb predatory pans.

The Cossack foreman was quite satisfied with the Polish order and "freedom". But on the condition that they also become free lords. Ordinary Cossacks and peasants demanded an improvement in their situation. Inclusions in the registry and its extensions. So that Cossack deputies sit in the Sejm, and Orthodoxy is protected at the legislative level. The problem was that the Polish magnates, lords and the Catholic clergy did not want to make any concessions to the "schismatic heretics." They longed to eradicate the Russian faith and destroy the Cossacks as a masterful military force.

The Cossacks were too restless. Previously, it was useful for the border magnates, the Cossacks were needed to fight the Turks and the Crimean Tatars, other steppe dwellers, were used for the war with the Russian kingdom. The Cossacks brought rich booty, which flowed to their patrons.

But now the war with Turkey and the Crimea frightened the Polish magnates, they suffered losses. Their peasants fled to the Cossacks, who did not extradite the refugees. The Cossacks were ordered not to touch the Ottomans and Crimeans. And the Cossacks, even promising to fulfill the requirements of the authorities and local nobles, immediately violated all agreements, since they contradicted their fundamental interests. The Cossacks could not change their way of life, essence. They lived in war.

A total war between Poland and the Russian Cossacks was becoming inevitable.

Comments

[Nik2002]

"People's hatred splashed out on the local lords and their managers (Jews), then the crowds of the rebels dispersed to the huts. The Poles went with fire and sword, burning out even a hint of resistance. They also acted with cunning, deceit and persuasion, splitting the rebels. Many Russians (Rusyns) believed into a "good king" who will curb the predatory lords.
That's right, Alexander, you deduced a real formula that allowed Catholic Poles and Orthodox Russians to somehow exist in the Commonwealth. Here are also the reasons for persistent anti-Semitism, which then splashed out during riots and uprisings.

[north 2]

these three surnames mentioned in the article should be singled out. Pyotr Doroshenko, Sahaydachny and Khmelnitsky. All of them were Russophobes and in every possible way, with the help of Russia's enemies, they tried to tear off the lands of the outskirts of Russia from Russia itself and give them the status of independence. And only when they saw that these enemies of Russia and from the subjects of these hetmans would tear three skins, and the hetmans themselves would have to bow to any Polish gentry or Turkish murza, only then they crawled to the Russian Tsar with a cry of "advocate", while still holding a fig in their pocket and stone in the bosom.
In short, the dynasty of hetmans Doroshenko is a vivid example of this. From the grandfather of Mikhail Doroshenko, hostility and treachery towards Russia was passed on to his son Dorotheus, and Mikhail's grandson, hetman Pyotr Dorofeevich, is already valued in Ukraine by the weight of Mazepa ...
About Hetman Sagaidachny and his hostility to Russia and too lazy to write ...
The Romanovs did a strange thing with perpetuating the memory of Khmelnitsky. In Kyiv, a monument to Khmelnitsky was erected on the occasion of the 900th anniversary of the baptism of Rus'. But where does Hetman Khmelnitsky and the baptism of Rus'? On the pedestal of the monument, one cannot find bas-reliefs of very many important people for Russia. The same with the Millennium of Russia monument in Veliky Novgorod. There, among the many figures on the pedestal, we also will not find, for example, the figure of Ivan the Terrible, as the founder of the sovereignty of the Russian state and the first Tsar of Russia to be crowned king. By the way, both monuments were created almost simultaneously by the same sculptor Mikeshin. Obviously, the Romanovs had not only the court historian Karamzin, but also the court sculptor Mikeshin. The true role of Khmelnytsky, like Petro Doroshenko and Ivan Mazepa, was appreciated by the current government of Ukraine, which is why Russophobes do not demolish a monument to him in Kyiv. And what praises the communists sang for Khmelnitsky for seventy years!!!

[iouris]

All this is interesting, but only from a deeply historical point of view. Patamushta then did not have the United States or even Germany as factors of geopolitics. Where was China? Correctly.

[Monster_Fat]

Funny article. A mixture of "it is not clear what" with a clear bias towards "Russianness". Well, I am not a "historian", and therefore I do not sum up the "patriotic" background for certain events. Shirokoradov's interpretation is closer to me, which consists in the fact that at that time history was driven by a thirst for profit, influence and personal ambitions. Yes, in fact, nothing has changed even now - the reasons for modern historical events are caused by the same ....

[Antey]

The topic is important, but written from the TK of an amateur, not a historian. Moreover, it is written with an ideological bias. And the historical approach involves considering events as they were perceived by contemporaries. There was no Russian Empire yet, there was the Commonwealth, and Ukraine for the most part was part of the Rzech. No one then considered Ukraine as part of Russia. Yes, many understood the common faith and ethnic closeness of Russians and Ukrainians. But this is not the main thing. That is why the Ukrainian Cossacks went on campaigns against Moscow, because they considered themselves subjects of the king. "Russianness" in the modern ideological sense simply did not exist then! This is the medieval world view. Even calling themselves "Russians", and their Orthodoxy "Russian faith", the Cossacks calmly robbed and killed Russians. In all European and not only countries of that time it was similar.
Therefore, when the author writes about Doroshenko and Sagaidachny as some kind of "traitors", he writes nonsense! The only betrayal is going against your king. Polish king! From the TK of Ukrainians, these hetmans are heroes. Yes, robbers, but their main "robbery" is the campaigns in the Crimea and the Turech region, accompanied by the mass expulsion of Christians, especially Orthodox.
And yet - they were "separatists" with the TK of modern politics, because they defended the rights and privileges of the Cossacks, and, in part, the Orthodox Ukrainian peasantry. In fact, they did not want to obey anyone, neither Warsaw nor Moscow.
Centuries passed, Ukrainians and Russians reconciled and became, in fact, one nation within the framework of one state. But a small piece - Zapadenschina remained in the same position of "eternal internal separatism" within Poland. And Stalin, having annexed Galicia, made the wrong move. There would be no bloodshed if Bandera was not part of the USSR. But in NATO Poland there would be an eternal source of evil.