Military Review

Polish freemen in the Russian "occupation"

Amazing historical a feature of the Russian authorities at all times of the existence of the state (under different names and with different formulas of power) was the peculiarity of the manifestation of policies in relation to those peoples and states that, by the will of fate, happened to be part of Russia. In the vast majority of cases, the very peoples and territories that have been part of the Russian state over the past 200 years received much more advantages from their entry than the rest of Russia received these advantages from this entry (well, except for territorial growth). “Military Review” this time will not raise the topic of the Soviet “occupation” of the Baltic republics (several articles have recently been published about this recently). Today we turn to the topic of the peculiarity of Russian intervention in Polish affairs, which (intervention) happened immediately after the defeat of the Napoleon’s troops by the Russian army.

As is well known, during the Eastern march of Napoleon Bonaparte, the Poles actively supported the latter and took the most active part in the battles with the Russian troops. Polish historians explain this participation by the fact that Napoleon granted Poles freedom from Prussian and Russian domination, which manifested itself after a series of divisions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the 18 century. However, Polish historians are to a certain extent cunning. The fact is that Napoleon Bonaparte did not intend to give Poles any independence. He went the other way: he restored the state according to the formula of the duchy (the official name was the Duchy of Warsaw), which, subject to the Saxon king, was de jure subordinate to Bonaparte himself. It turned out sort of management through an intermediary vassal. Therefore, the words about the independence of the Polish state, allegedly obtained in 1807 by the works of the French army, are an ordinary fiction, designed to justify the participation of the Polish army on the side of the French, who rushed to Moscow in 1812.
By the way, it is worth mentioning that the “Polish independence” of 1807-1815 was so unique of its kind, that according to the new likeness of the constitution, proposed personally by Napoleon, in Poland, even the use of the words “Polish”, “Polish” and derivatives from them. Many Polish historians are deceptively silent about this. Why would ...

Moreover, the local currency was withdrawn from circulation by Napoleon, with the simultaneous introduction of one of the German currencies of the time, French business and judicial codes were imposed, which gave management rights to non-local representatives of the nobility and intellectuals. About 100, thousands of Polish young people were “barred” into Napoleonic soldiers to help the French troops in the war against the Russian Empire.

Polish freemen in the Russian "occupation"

Polish Ulan regiment of Napoleon's army

Polish forces began to show special agility in terms of helping Napoleon after the French army was expelled from Russia, and the Russian soldiers moved straight to the West. Obviously, the Poles were afraid of revenge against Poland on the part of Emperor Alexander I after his victory over the French.

In the end, the Polish military formations didn’t help Napoleon, and the Russian soldiers in May 1814 celebrated the complete surrender of Paris, and with it the entire Napoleonic army.

War is war. It has its victorious winners, and there are its losers. The main triumph of 1814 of the year was the Russian emperor Alexander I, but among those who were to be in obvious failures - the Polish state, which, it is worth recalling at the time of 1814, neither de jure nor de facto existed. But in the most surprising way, Alexander not only does not begin to show any repressive measures against Polish commanders and local Polish nobility, but rather the opposite - he is taking an unprecedented move at that time. Alexander amnestied Polish soldiers and officers who took part in military operations against the Russian army and its allies and were defeated and captured by Russian troops. And the most unbelievable: he bestows on Poland, most of which, following the results of the great war and the Congress of Vienna, passed into the possession of the Russian Empire, an absolutely non-monarchist constitution, having read the main provisions of which, in Russia itself, supporters of liberal reforms swallowed saliva.

To begin with, Alexander I returned their self-name to the Poles, having eliminated from the map of Europe such a territorial unit as the Duchy of Warsaw while simultaneously renaming the country into the Kingdom of Poland. Precisely - Polish! Yes - he placed himself at the head of this state, but this Polish reign of Alexander I, as further developments showed, was rather a purely formal principle. The emperor (he was also the Polish king from 1815) appointed his viceroy in Warsaw, who, according to Alexander himself, was to be a representative of local political elites or a member of a large Imperial house. In fact, it turned out that it was the Poles who received the posts of the original Polish governors. The first governor was the Polish prince and General Joseph Zayonchek. The same Zayonchek, which Napoleon Bonaparte personally produced as a brigadier general, and who actively fought with the Russian army in the battle of Berezina, having lost a leg. In December, 1812 Zayonchek in Vilna was captured by the troops of Alexander I.

Joseph Zayonchek

The next revolutionary principle for the Russian Empire was the separation of powers with a bicameral parliament with the upper house of the nobility and the lower house - the so-called Embassy Izba - a kind of embodiment of the representation of people's deputies. Alexander in the constitution prescribed the existence of courts free from other authorities for the Polish Kingdom, with particular emphasis on the election of judges. A variant of a large Senate court was even designated for those who broke the law, being a major government official.

If we add here also articles on the development of the Polish language, Polish educational institutions, freedom of speech, individual freedom, non-interference of St. Petersburg with the Roman Catholic faith, and even the point of preserving the Polish army, the final document can be called truly phenomenal. Why is "phenomenal"? - some readers will say, - unless anything of the kind existed in Europe. That's the highlight that in Europe, perhaps, existed, and in some places - several hundred years, but only in Russia itself the word "constitution" was, if not banned, then the power elites looked at it with obvious concern .

If you return to the Kingdom of Poland, it turns out that the territory actually occupied by the Russian Empire in 1815 year receives from the same Russian Empire rights and freedoms ten orders more than the rights and freedoms of the average Russian citizen. In the wake of changes in Poland, constitutional changes were expected in Russia itself. It was rumored that Alexander was imbued with European liberalism and could, by the 1818-1820 years, transfer Russia to the status of a constitutional monarchy. But, as you know, nothing like this happened in Russia (as a metropolis).

As a result, thanks to the actions of the “occupier” Alexander I, it turned out that the Kingdom of Poland from 1815 of the year became the only state of the Old World where the electoral system was developed to such an extent that the parliament was elected by absolutely all property classes on the basis of direct and direct elections. Even the peasants (albeit to a lesser extent) had the opportunity to participate in the elections to the legislators of the Sejm. The contemporaries of Alexander I called this phenomenal situation the most incredible gift that the Russian emperor could afford.

However, the so-called Polish middle class decided that Russia would still utterly infringe upon the rights of the Polish people and state (during the existence of the Duchy of Warsaw under the administration of Saxon monarchs, the middle class could not afford statements about infringement of rights ...) and therefore more and more voices were heard about the need for reactionary movements. At the same time, the “dissatisfied gentlemen” to the Polish majority, in fact, could not explain what exactly they were dissatisfied with: maybe the fact that Alexander I returned the Poles the actual right to govern their country, or that the Poles from peasant to nobleman had the opportunity to participate in the formation of the country's political system, or the fact that Poland had its own currency (Polish zloty) again ... The only argument: The Polish state is occupied by the Russian Empire, and therefore measures must be taken to release it. The Vatican rendered active support to those eager to take “liberation measures”, who decided to treat the Polish elite with statements that they, being under Russian power, lose their face, avoiding the religion of their ancestors. The Polish elite became thoughtful, but obviously did not want to lose its new status. I did not want to - well-wishers helped ...

Taking Arsenal in the Kingdom of Poland

Help in the face of revolutionary ideologues from Europe came in the 1830 year (already under Nicholas I), and when relying on the very dissatisfied middle class in the Polish Kingdom, an uprising began. In the first days of the uprising, an arsenal was captured, and Russian officers and generals were killed by representatives of the revolutionary side. After two months of revolutionary pogroms, the Poles decided to “depose” the Russian Emperor in Poland, documenting the title of the Polish tsar and simultaneously declaring that the Polish people wanted to restore the borders of their ancient state, which once reached Kiev and Smolensk. However, it would be better for the Poles not to mention the word “Smolensk” ... Yes, and with deposition, they clearly got excited ... After all, with liberalism, Nicholas I was much worse than his older brother Alexander, and therefore, after his "deposition" Polish freemen completely and irrevocably. In August 1831, the Polish army was defeated, Warsaw taken by Russian troops, and the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Poland ordered to live long.

From the speech of Nicholas I to the Poles:
“Emperor Alexander I, who did more for you than the Russian Emperor followed, who showered you with good deeds and who patronized you more than his natural subjects, who made you the most flourishing and happiest nation, Emperor Alexander I paid black ingratitude.

I know that correspondence is being conducted with foreign lands, that reprehensible writings are being sent here, and that they are trying to corrupt minds ... Among all the troubles that trouble Europe, and among all the teachings that shake a public building, Russia alone remains powerful and inexorable.

You never wanted to be content with the most advantageous position and ended up destroying your happiness yourself ... ”

But history, in fact, often repeats its past turns. In different countries, on different continents and with different forms of power ...

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Castor oil
    Castor oil 18 March 2013 08: 02
    Correctly the classic said:
    "I don't believe in the honesty of the player,
    In love for Russia, a Pole "(c)
  2. treskoed
    treskoed 18 March 2013 08: 12
    There is an old saying: "Friendship is friendship, and tobacco apart"
    1. Castor oil
      Castor oil 18 March 2013 08: 32
      Quote: treskoed
      There is an old saying: "Friendship is friendship, and tobacco apart"

      Well, how can this be "applied" to Poland and the Poles? It's clear with tobacco, but what the fuck is "friendship" !? belay
      1. treskoed
        treskoed 18 March 2013 16: 22
        Diplomacy, however ...
  3. fenix57
    fenix57 18 March 2013 08: 39
    And now Poland is "independent" in the absolute (with an eye on the EU). For seed:
    Two old Poles reason:
    - Do you remember the film "Four Tankers and a Dog"?
    - Of course I remember, a true film, before not so much truth was shown about the Poles.
    - And what do you think, if we had two of these tanks, what then?
    - Yes, then we would have won the war without the Russians, and not only the Germans, but the Japanese would have won, you imagine, Polish tanks in the center of defeated Tokyo, both ...
    “No, I think the Russians knew all this from the very beginning, and that's why they gave us only one tank.” hi
    1. Castor oil
      Castor oil 18 March 2013 09: 02
      Quote: fenix57
      Two old Poles reason:

      laughing laughing laughing good
    2. smile
      smile 18 March 2013 13: 41
      The Poles have a saying, it sounds something like this- The Polish army took Berlin, and helped the Russian. :))))) And yet many people truly believe in it! :))))
  4. 120352
    120352 18 March 2013 09: 56
    Poland, whether she wants it or not, is constantly complexed before Russia. This is called the "Little Brother Complex". It can be relatively independent only as part of Russia, since the Poles, like us, are Slavs. And the Germans and others do not need it. Only as a buffer between us and them.
    1. smile
      smile 18 March 2013 14: 31
      A significant part of the Poles consider Poland the main US ally in Europe, they are terribly proud of it, and hope to take Germany's place soon ... therefore, they believe that they do not need anyone on their way to greatness .. :)))))
  5. Gari
    Gari 18 March 2013 10: 10
    The local currency was withdrawn from circulation by Napoleon with the simultaneous introduction of one of the German currencies of that time, the French business and judicial codes were enforced, which gave the right to control not to local representatives of the nobility and intelligentsia. About 100 thousand Polish young people were “shaved” into Napoleonic soldiers to help French troops in the war against the Russian Empire; in Poland, even the use of the words “Pole”, “Polish” and their derivatives was not allowed at the official level, and vice versa, Alexander I returned their names for the Poles, having eliminated such a territorial unit as the Duchy of Warsaw from the map of Europe with the simultaneous renaming of the country into the Kingdom of Poland. Precisely - Polish! Yes - he put himself at the head of this state, but this Polish reign of Alexander I, as shown by the further development of events, was, rather, a purely formal principle. The emperor (also known as the Polish king since 1815) appointed his governor in Warsaw, was the Polish prince and general Joseph Zayonchek. The same Zayonchek, whom Napoleon Bonaparte personally made into brigadier generals, and who actively fought with the Russian army at the Battle of Berezin, having lost his leg. In December 1812 Zayonchek in Vilna was captured by the troops of Alexander I.
    Here is real democracy, and who called Russia ,, prison of nations ,,!
    And what else did the Poles want?
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 18 March 2013 11: 17
      Quote: Gari
      And what else did the Poles want?

      Great Litlovsko-Polish principality from "Mozha to Mozha". Well, also Moscow to boot, where Marina Mnishek was the "queen" ... laughing
      1. smile
        smile 18 March 2013 13: 57
        This slogan Pilsudski concretized - from Helsinki to Tiflis! By the way, he stated that his main dream is to go to Moscow and write on the Kremlin walls-speak Russian is forbidden ..... here are strange people, these Europeans-dreams end in Moscow, the limit .... forgetting that the first a step towards Moscow is always for them the beginning of the end ... always!
  6. xan
    xan 18 March 2013 10: 35
    when there is a lot of democracy, then political games begin, and all sorts of populists and demagogues come to the top. In the case of Poland, the arrogant nobles remembered Poland from sea to sea and began to pour balm on the souls of notorious Poles. In the Kingdom of Poland there were even troops formed from Poles, overwhelmingly poisoned by demagogues and joined the uprising. But there were also units that remained loyal to the Polish tsar - the Russian emperor. There were also military men from the Poles, especially among the well-informed elite, who perfectly understood the existing situation and the harmful prospects of the uprising for Poland, and who refused to participate in the uprising. They were executed by the rebels. After the suppression of the uprising, democracy in Poland was curtailed. As the tsarist minister Velepolski said, a natural Pole - "something can be done for the Poles, but nothing with the Poles"
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 18 March 2013 11: 20
      Quote: xan
      After the suppression of the uprising, democracy in Poland was curtailed.

      But it was these Poles who awakened the "Ukrainians", which we are still unraveling! am
  7. Begemot
    Begemot 18 March 2013 11: 21
    Poland, Poland, Poland are a "garbage dump of Europe", "Catholic backyards" and many other offensive nicknames that were given to it not by Russia, but by enlightened Europe. The whole history of Poland is at first the struggle of the Vatican, together with the Venetian, Genoese and Dutch merchants for influence on the Slavic world, then the Scandinavians joined there, 200 years ago the British joined this topic and 100 years ago the Americans. And the Poles, easily sold to the Pope, and the British desperately needed Poland as a buffer between Russia and Germany, because these countries, not being great maritime powers, demonstrated the status of great continental powers, undermining the omnipotence of the mistress of the seas and later the United States. It was for the sake of preventing the union of Germany and Russia that two world wars were unleashed, it was Churchill who was more concerned about the fate of the pro-Western government of Poland during the war years, it was in Poland that new methods of fighting the influence of the USSR were first applied and a coup d'etat in 1982 was carried out. Having broken away from the Slavic, Orthodox community, Poland found itself in the position of a prostitute, which is only used for a pittance by the new owners, and neither past "merits" nor
    the "holy" belief that they are part of Western civilization, enlightened and successful, and only the intrigues of Russia do not allow it to become such in life.
  8. Slevinst
    Slevinst 18 March 2013 11: 31
    here we had emperors, eh, to return that time, in terms of the political system, that aristocrats would serve the state, that they would all work as a single mechanism for the sake of one goal, the country's development, democracy is by and large it is useless.

    as for Poland, I perceive it as a flea on a dog, like it’s kind of biting, but somehow it’s not so serious that you shouldn’t pay attention, that it is there that it’s absolutely parallel
    1. smile
      smile 18 March 2013 14: 14
      In the 17th century, this flea numerically exceeded us twice.
      If you are not too lazy and read the diaries of Nikolai 2, you will be surprised how insignificant he was a little man and you will understand why he miscalculated 2 wars and an empire. Not everything was good with the emperors, as Zlotnikov thinks, although the writer is good .. :))))))
  9. viruskvartirus
    viruskvartirus 18 March 2013 13: 01
    "Czech, Lech and Rus are one of the most famous and widespread legends about three Slavic brothers, the founders of the Czech Republic, Poland and Russia, respectively. According to one version, the three brothers hunted together, but each of them decided to go in his own direction. Rus went Cech moved west to Mount Rjip, near Bohemia, while Lech went north until he met a huge white eagle guarding its nest, he founded the settlement of Gniezno and chose a white eagle as his coat of arms. " I think when the enmity between the Slavs ends, the Anglo-Saxons will have a hard time.
    1. smile
      smile 18 March 2013 14: 19
      Oh, unfortunately. it seems that communism will triumph in the USA rather than the Poles stop hostility with us ...
      1. mamba
        mamba 18 March 2013 23: 44
        Quote: smile
        communism will triumph in the USA rather than the Poles stop hostility with us ...

        No matter how you feed the Pole, you still look at the wolf.
    2. stroporez
      stroporez 18 March 2013 20: 57
      your words, yes ....... lyahu in the ears.
  10. Lee
    Lee 18 March 2013 13: 35
    ... where the electoral system was developed to such an extent that the parliament was elected by absolutely all property classes on the basis of direct and immediate elections. Even the peasants (although to a lesser extent) had the opportunity to participate in the elections of the legislators of the Sejm ...

    This is not forgiven.
  11. kamakim
    kamakim 18 March 2013 15: 26
    still sigh about the Commonwealth, sunk into oblivion ... here they are trying to show their independence and strength = D
    1. The cat
      The cat 18 March 2013 15: 33
      Quote: kamakim
      still sigh about the Commonwealth, sunk into oblivion ... here they are trying to show their independence and strength = D

      She hasn’t gone anywhere. Rzeczpospolita Polska is the modern name of Poland.
  12. dark_65
    dark_65 18 March 2013 16: 48
    Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Baltic States in bulk ..... and other territorial shit..n, that’s numbing, they themselves probably won’t say under torture, that’s to be their enemy, and that’s all.
    and from him and dance, "we could, but our enemies hindered us ..."
    1. The cat
      The cat 18 March 2013 21: 30
      Quote: dark_65
      Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Czech Republic, Hungary
  13. Navy7981
    Navy7981 18 March 2013 17: 32
    The same story with Finland. If Russia had not defeated the Swedes, Finland would have been a Swedish province. Liberated Bulgaria from the Turks, they fled under the wing of the Britons, and so on. I wrote something on this topic. We always wanted to "be friends" with those who, by the will of history, fell into the area of ​​the Russian Empire, and then the USSR. And, as the author correctly noted, the occupied and conquered territories lived better than the metropolis. What is the motivation behind this policy?
    1. homosum20
      homosum20 18 March 2013 18: 09
      Inferiority complex?
      1. Navy7981
        Navy7981 18 March 2013 19: 28
        Well, hardly an inferiority complex. Usually, with an inferiority complex, they begin to cut more quickly and break everything, but here I can’t even imagine. Won in 1814, when they arrived in Paris, they did not plunder it, like Europeans civilized soldiers, although they had the full moral right to do this, but organized the first fast-food restaurants smile
        It seems to me that the policy towards the "occupied" should be benevolent and tough. One country, one laws, one state language with a limited right to use territorial languages, so that there is no confusion in understanding the meaning.
        ps On the whole, you can only dream about the Russian occupation! At first they give everything to you, then you pull it, but if it is possible, you can send it, and make claims as well - they say we should be destitute and robbed!
  14. Galan
    Galan 18 March 2013 18: 11
    ... In the minutes of the meeting No. 25 of 3.10.1935/XNUMX/XNUMX, the Chief of the General Staff of the Polish Army noted, in particular: "The rule is - we develop the" East ", and after that we will try to solve the" West "within the framework of the" East "plan." (Plan "East" is a plan of war with the USSR, plan "West" is a plan for waging war with Germany.).

    The report of the 1938nd (intelligence) department of the Polish General Staff, dated December 2, emphasized: “The dismemberment of Russia is at the heart of Polish policy in the East ... Therefore, our possible position will be reduced to the following formula: who will take part in the partition. Poland should not to remain passive at this wonderful historical moment. The task is to prepare well in advance physically and spiritually ... The main goal is to weaken and defeat Russia "(Z dziejowstosunkowpolsko-radzieckich.Studia i materialy. T.lll. Warszawa, 1968. S .262, 287).
    And in the 20th century, nothing has changed.
  15. Hemi cuda
    Hemi cuda 18 March 2013 19: 11
    Such friends (Poland, the USA, etc.) for hell and to the museum.
  16. The centurion
    The centurion 18 March 2013 19: 35
    The zigzags of Russian-Polish relations cannot be considered without regard to the peculiarities of the Polish mentality. In terms of mentality, Poles are a unique people, even by the standards of unlimited European bigotry, hypocrisy and political prostitution. They fiercely hate all their neighbors, and the Russians, contrary to our common opinion, are far from the first place in this hatred. It is very difficult and very dangerous for them to live in such an environment, therefore for their safety they have traditionally been looking for sponsors and patrons over the sea, over the ocean for many centuries. Under their patronage and patronage, the Poles furiously and with impunity spoil all their neighbors, causing them no less fierce dislike. But life is striped, the strip is light, the strip is black. And in the period of the black band, when foreign patrons of Poland are very busy with themselves and their problems, for example, the North American War, Poland’s neighbors quickly begin to be friends against her and clean up her face. Approximately in this almost everyday scenario, in the second half of the 18 century, Poland’s neighbors staged her 3 section. But the Poles are still craving, their face is constantly chronically scratched. So it's not over yet. As soon as their current patron uncle Sam breaks his leg or arm somewhere, the Polish neighbors will immediately write out another pill for chronic face scabies. And as always, their old doctor, Germany, will speak here as the main doctor. And despite my already middle-aged age, for some reason it seems to me that I still have time to attend.
  17. Yura
    Yura 18 March 2013 20: 22
    Volodin Alexei, a brilliant article. Many of my acquaintances and friends have an attitude towards Poland from indifferent to condescending to wary in the sense that they can be dirty from the blue, it seems to be where it came from, so your article shows that there is historical memory in the people.
  18. Bosk
    Bosk 18 March 2013 21: 25
    The phenomenon of the Russian occupation is quite unique, because thanks to this very phenomenon, such peoples as Georgians, Latvians, Estonians, Poles, etc. and so on ... retained their culture, language, traditions ..., it remains to be regretted that Alexander did not "occupy" the same Russia ... because here he was always strained with freedoms ...
  19. bublic82009
    bublic82009 18 March 2013 22: 32
    how many wolves do not feed all one he looks into the forest
  20. Skuto
    Skuto 18 March 2013 23: 14
    If we take a purely historical Poland, then it actually didn’t climb particularly into the territory of Kievan Rus (there were no aggressive ambitions, but this or that party was supported). All the dirty tricks and attempts to seize the eastern lands began after a union with Lithuania (which did not unreasonably consider itself the successor and the nucleus for gathering Russian lands), Rzeczpospolita simply continued the policy of the Principality of Lithuania (3 / 4 lands of Rech belonged initially to Lithuania). In the 15-17 centuries, Poland was reckoned with and afraid of its army and strength (remember who the Turks drove from the walls of Vienna), but due to weak central authority and insolent nobility, they got what they got: first they lost Ukraine, the vector of their national policy was moved purely to East, stopped developing the army and even more so the fleet. They were not lucky; their Peter the Great was not at the right time.
    Today, Poles are a people who remember the great imperial past, but devoid of all imperial ambitions. What is left for them except with envy to look at the eastern neighbor, who is still stubbornly walking and reviving the empire in one form or another.
    1. mamba
      mamba 19 March 2013 00: 43
      Quote: Skuto
      If we take a purely historical Poland, then it actually didn’t climb particularly into the territory of Kievan Rus (there were no aggressive ambitions, but this or that party was supported). All the dirty tricks and attempts to capture the eastern lands began after a union with Lithuania

      In fact, Kievan Rus began to fight with Poland from the 11th century for the territory of Red Rus: these are the lands of the Galician and Volyn principalities, the so-called. "Cherven cities".
      The first Russian-Polish war. 1018 - the campaign of Boleslav I to Kiev. He defeated Yaroslav the Wise and took Kiev, declaring himself the Prince of Kiev. The rebellious Kiev expelled the Poles from the city. However, as a result of the campaign, Boleslav retained the Cherven cities.
      The second Russian-Polish war. 1031 - Mstislav Vladimirovich the Brave, together with Yaroslav the Wise, set off on a campaign against Poland and return the Cherven cities to Russia.
      The third Russian-Polish war. 1069 - Boleslav II made a trip to Kiev. Many Kievites were killed or blinded.
      The fourth Russian-Polish war. In 1077, at the request of the pope, Boleslav II made a second trip to Kiev. The city was taken.
      Fifth Russian-Polish war. 1085–1138 Boleslav III repeatedly intervened in the strife of the Russian princes and fought with Vladimir Monomakh, though without much success.
      The Sixth Russo-Polish War. 1349–1352 - Occupation of the territory of Ukraine by the Poles, Lviv became part of Poland. The capture of the Polish feudal lords of Galician Rus.
      Seventh Russo-Polish War. 1558-1583 Livonian war. 1596 Brest Union.
      The eighth Russian-Polish war. 1600-1638 Cossack wars for the liberation from the yoke of the Polish feudal lords and accession to the Russian state.
      The ninth Russo-Polish war. 1605-1618 The Time of Troubles in Russia, the Russo-Polish War, the Polish intervention in Russia.
      The Tenth Russian-Polish War. 1648–1654 Popular uprising against the Polish yoke led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky, reunification of Russia and Ukraine.
      Eleventh Russo-Polish War. 1654–1667 for control over Ukrainian and Belarusian lands.
      The Twelfth Russian-Polish War. 1733-1734 Russia's participation in the “war for the Polish heritage” in Poland.
      The Thirteenth Russo-Polish War. 1768 "Barskaya Confederation", partisan war against pro-Russian forces in Poland. 1772 the first partition of Poland between Russia, Prussia and Austria.
      The Fourteenth Russian-Polish War. 1792 Second partition of Poland.
      The Fifteenth Russo-Polish War. 1794 Polish liberation uprising led by Kosciuszko. 1795 Third partition of Poland. 1814-1815 Partition of Poland and the incorporation of most of it into the Russian Empire.
      Sixteenth Russian-Polish war. 1830-1831 "November uprising" of the Poles.
      Seventeenth Russo-Polish War. 1846 uprising in Poznan.
      The eighteenth Russian-Polish war. 1863-1864 Polish uprising.
      The nineteenth Russian-Polish war. 1919 −1921. Many soldiers are captured by the Poles, where, according to various estimates, up to 40 thousand Red Army soldiers are deliberately destroyed in concentration camps. According to the Riga Peace Treaty of 1921, the western part of the Ukrainian and Belarusian lands goes to Poland.
      Twentieth Russo-Polish War. 1939 the introduction of Soviet troops into Poland.
      The Twenty-First Russian-Polish War. 1956 Poznan uprising.
      As a result, we have been at war with Poland for over a thousand years. Tatars, Turks, Germans, and other stricken conquerors nervously smoke on the sidelines.
      Thus, in a series of Russian-Polish wars, the Russians won with a score of 13: 8.
      1. Skuto
        Skuto 19 March 2013 00: 54
        Quote: Skuto
        If we take a purely historical Poland, then it actually didn’t climb particularly into the space of Kievan Rus (there were no aggressive ambitions, but this or that party was supported).

        the Poles did not have the goal of taking and joining the land; no, they supported a loyal regime or party. what I wrote about. for this purpose and climbed. This is politics, not expansion.
        1. mamba
          mamba 19 March 2013 11: 24
          Quote: Skuto
          the Poles did not have a goal to take and attach land

          But somehow it happened so accidentally that Russia lost all its western lands, including Smolensk. Apparently, the Poles considered them a draw and annexed it to themselves. Do not the good disappear? wink
          Quote: Skuto
          they supported a loyal regime or party. for this purpose and climbed. This is politics, not expansion.

          I agree. Feeding the opposition in neighboring states in order to spread its influence is political expansion, but expanding its territory at the expense of neighboring states is territorial expansion.
          Another thing is that in these games all the actors were noted: Poland, Lithuania, Russia, as well as those states that had an indirect influence on their policies.
  21. jury08
    jury08 19 March 2013 01: 40
    Pay attention - all the soldiers were predatory from the side of Russia!
    1. mamba
      mamba 19 March 2013 10: 48
      Quote: jury08
      Pay attention - all the soldiers were predatory from the side of Russia!

      It’s not for nothing that I gave a detailed list of the Russian-Polish wars, so that such comments would not appear. But, as Jewish wisdom says through the mouth of Sholom Aleichem: "If you can't, but you really want to, then you can ..." wink
      There is no beast of Russia? So what jury08? Well, share with us your Russophobic thoughts. wassat
  22. knn54
    knn54 20 March 2013 23: 59
    Continuing the theme, about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
    The border between Soviet Russia and Poland was defined along the "Curzon Line." But Poland snatched off a piece to the east of the agreed borders.
    In 1939, when everything was clear with Poland, the Soviet troops stopped at the border established by the chief of the British Foreign Ministry .. And who is the occupier?
  23. owner
    owner April 11 2016 18: 27
    The Kingdom of Poland with already reduced rights became understandable after the uprising of 1830-31. Before that, the Kingdom of Poland, with its currency, customs border, its universities and schools, and the 30-strong army commanded by the brother of Tsar Constantine, who also represented the emperor as king of Poland, was also viceroy. The uprising of the gentry, stupid and hard to explain, wished, along with complete independence, the borders of 1772 (!)
    As the children say, if you want a lot, you will get little!
  24. The comment was deleted.