Talk:Don Cossacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

This article should be conected to History of Ukraine, rather than Russia.

Cossacks, to begin with, were run-away Ukrainian peasants in defiance of their serfdom to foreign - primarily Polish and Muscowy occupation of Ukraine. Don Cossacks, are Cossacks who settled the area of what is a modern day Russian Federation after anti-Ukrainian or Anti-Cossack campaign of Muscowy. During that period and later on Cossacks were manipulated into service of Russian Empire - a cruel irony of Ukrainian history...

POV statement...nothing more--Kuban Cossack 02:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Their traditional homelands (so far as is known from written references) is within both (what is now) Russia and (what is now) Ukraine. There's a Cossack DNA project that's just getting started - I hope the article is revised as scientific data comes in.76.172.3.233 (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Of course, there were different groups of cossacks connected to different ethnical groups an through that countries. The DonCossacks for example were mostly russian and tatar by ethnicity, most of them lived north of the kaspian sea originally, but came later than the "original" cosacks. the Original Cossacks, or the Zaporozhian as they were called, are the ones who the Kuban Cosacks consider their forefathers. A lot of cossacks were from persian or turkish(spelling?) descent and therefore it is wrong to say it should be connected only one country, but it is indeed interesting to connect to both ukraine and russia, as well as other countries(france?? we DID kick Napoleons butt once or twice (jk) ;-). But yes, our people were forced into servitude, but they also fought with honour to uphold deals they made. It is a complex history, that of our people.

//V


There is a lot of confusion due to terminology. The name “Cossack” was used to describe “free people” as opposed to others with different standing in a feudal society (i.e., peasants, nobles, clergy, etc..) As a result, there were several groups of different origin who came to be known as Cossacks. Zaporozhian Cossacks (козаки) were completely different from Don Cossacks (казаки). The difference in name is more noticeable in the Russian language. I personally thought that Don Cossacks originated as groups of run-away peasants. However, there were some unexplained things such as “Don Cossack nationalism“ (it is blamed for the failure of the White movement after the Revolution of 1917), unique culture, the well-known fact that Cossacks did not blend with other Russians, and had rather privileged status in Imperial Russia. I changed my opinion regarding Don Cossacks' origin after my DNA testing which triggered my interest in this subject and caused me to do some research. My Y-DNA comes from the line of Don Cossacks that lived in Novocherkassk. My DNA results showed an overwhelming number of matches with people from Central Europe (predominantly Germans). This caused me to believe in the theory that Don Cossacks are descendants of Goths. This theory was very popular before WWII and was completely discredited by the concept of “Aryan superiority” (Cossacks were considered "true" Aryans) preached by fascists that makes people question absolutely everything endorsed by Hitler, regardless if it is true or not. In Soviet times, it was important to keep nationalism under control and promote internationalism. I think that for this reason the emphasis in the history of Don Cossacks was made on the fact that some run-away peasants found shelter in Don Cossack land. Indeed some of the Russian peasants escaped to the Cossack area for different reasons (mostly religious, as Cossacks were old-believers for a very long time).

Don Cossacks have no connection to the history of Ukraine. Zaporozhian Cossacks and Kuban Cossacks (some of whom are descendants of Zaporozhian Cossacks and others are descendants of Don Cossacks) is a different story.

Melehov. —Preceding unsigned comment added by G Melehov (talk • contribs) 01:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC) --G Melehov 04:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That shows the fallacy of DNA research. There enough contemporary sources indicating that the Don Cossacks were a mix of many different groups. The Goth theory was advanced by Nazi collaborators seeking to establish a Cossack autonomy. They couldn't do so if they were mere Slavs, like the rest of the Russians. AllenHansen (talk) 01:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are no "mere Slavs." There are some predominantly "Slavic" markers on chromosomes, but there is no set of markers that indicates a Slav (pure or otherwise). However, when a Y chromosome marker known to have appeared at a particular time in particular place (say Germany) appears in great numbers and in lineal fashion someplace else, since these marker mutations have so little chance of being duplicated through sheer chance, and if the second group is chronologically after the first group, Occam's razor says they are related. WHether they were "Goths" is impossible to say, as the labels we use today for Germanic tribes are historically problematic (except in cases where we have written records and genealogies; it's not clear that the hundreds of German tribes viewed themselves as having strict boundaries - much like Native Americans). Imposing current linguistic and political norms on the past is always problematic and a good article would reflect that complex background.76.172.3.233 (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Allen, could you please share your sources “indicating that the Don Cossacks were a mix of many different groups” ? I found only old soviet versions of Don Cossack history, which, in my personal opinion, are not complete. I agree that a DNA result of only one person is not enough to make global conclusion about the Don Cossack’s origin. However, there are couple things why I do not easily accept a theory that the Don Cossacks are just simply a mix of different ethnic groups that settled in Don area (I do not deny the fact that mixing was taking place as with any other nation, just do not believe that it explains the Don Cossack’s origin): 1) A theory that the Don Cossacks are descendants of Kurgan people (aka Aryans)=> Goths => Ostrogoths was known before WWII and nazi Goebbels propaganda only adopted, put their spin, and used this theory for their wacky political goals; 2) If the Don Cossacks were accepting people of different origin, why there was a strict division between the Don Cossacks and “tufties” (хохлы / Ukranians) and “muzhiks” (мужики / Russians) that lived side by side with the Don Cossacks after they run away from their homeland and found shelter in the Don Cossack land ? Why Mikhail Sholokhov, who wrote a number of books about the Don Cossacks and popularized Cossack culture and history was not considered a Cossack himself? If everyone could become a Cossack, he should be one for sure, but he was not. Thank you. Melehov G Melehov (talk) 00:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1)There were Ostrogoths living in the Don area, but they had mixed with the Greeks, Alans and others locals who lived there and were in turn swallowed up by the various nomadic and Slavic tribes which inhabited the Wild Plain. From about the 15th to the 18th centuries Don Cossacks were mixing with Armenians, Greeks, Ukrainians, Turks, Persians, Germans, Kalmyks and others.

2)The distinction was one of status, not nationality. Volya, freedom to roam and bear arms, set you apart from others. One of the ways Pugachev gained a massive following was by promising volya to the serfs and other muzhiks, which were despised by Cossacks because of their servility. In "And Quiet Flows the Don" the worst insult Mitka Korshunov knows of is muzhik. Sholokhov was born long after the Don Cossacks had established themselves as a special group. Conservatism and closed-mindedness had set in. Sholokhov wasn't of Cossack stock, his father was lower-middle class, had never even fought, IIRC, and his mother Ukrainian. AllenHansen (talk) 09:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allen, first, I should say that your point of view is most popular and has very good grounds. However, I still have my doubts about Don Cossacks first being a melting pot of different nationalities that populated Don area and later becoming an exclusive cast. I do not see how such dramatic transformation could happen. Another reason why I have my doubts is religious aspect of Don Cossack lifestyle. Assuming that Cossacks were of Russian, Turkish, German descent how would you explain that all of them were Russian Orthodox by religion? More than that, Don Cossack’s motto was “For Faith, Tsar and Fatherland ”. Notice that faith is placed first. Russian Orthodox religion was extremely important for Cossacks. I would expect that people of different descent, coming from Protestant, Muslim and other countries would prefer to keep their believe system or at least would not make religion an important issue, otherwise they would not be able to blend.

You made very good point about distinction between status against nationality. Similar process is happening in our times to Russians. Would you disagree with me that Russian is a nationality not only a person who has a citizenship of Russian Federation ? The neologism “Rossiyanin” supposed to take care of the difference. I believe that very similar process happened to the Don Cossacks in the last couple centuries, when the word “Cossack” was loosely used to describe a military unit, a certain lifestyle, anyone who came from the Don Cossack land. Over time distinction between nationality and status was eroded and now some people do not even believe that such nationality ever existed. Probably the same will eventually happen to Russians. G Melehov (talk) 20:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a candidate wasn't Pravoslavny, either by birth or conversion, he couldn't be accpeted. Religion played a far greater role than ethnos.

In the early days of the Don Cossack history, they were just forming, so, of course they welcomed anyone who wanted to join with them. Otherwise, you'd be small and weak and would die on the frontier. As years went by, their power and rights increased, so they became less-inclined to accept others. Make sense? AllenHansen (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it is possible. However, I believe I have few arguments to defend my opinion. If I understood your comment correctly, a German or Turkish candidate was only required to convert to Russian Orthodox religion and he would be accepted to be a member of Don Cossacks’ society and over time to be called a Cossack. Though in my opinion it was not the case, but OK, let’s assume that it is what was happening. So, a German or Turkish peasant escapes to the Don Cossack land, denounces his religion and adopts his Russian Orthodox first name. What about last name? I would expect to see numerous foreign last names or at least Russified derivatives of foreign last names. However, all Don Cossacks have either ancient last names that end –ak, -ik or last names with a Russian root and ending -in, -ov, -sky. I have hard time imagining a Don Cossack with a last name like Fritzov or Magomedin. Only in XIX- XX century there were Don Cossack officers with German last names, but to my knowledge these officers were appointed and did not consider themselves to be Cossacks.

I agree with you that religion played extremely important role. There is one interesting moment as well. Though all Don Cossacks were Russian Orthodox, they belonged to all the different movements within this religion. There were Molokans, Hlysts and numerous others (even Scopecs). Cossacks, especially in Siberia, started few of these movements. So, I think that if Don Cossacks were just asking to convert to Pravoslavie, they would either stick with one branch, or there would be a branch or two that would merge Muslim, Catholic or Protestant believes with traditional Orthodox believes. Such movements did exist relatively close to Don Cossacks, for example Uniats on the territory of Ukraine. However, it looks like they did not have sympathizers in Don Cossack area. The variety of different branches none of which was influenced from outside of Pravoslavny world tells me that: 1) Don Cossacks were relatively open-minded; 2) They were immune to outside of Pravoslavie religious influence. They definitely had plenty of exposure to foreign cultures as they were involved in military campaigns all around Europe and Near East. In my opinion such immunity could be possible only because Don Cossacks did not associate themselves with any other culture and it could only happen if they did not have any connections to other cultures. Thank you. G Melehov (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relation between Don cossacks and Ossetians really? I don´t understand, but reading about ossetian history gave me a hint, there it said ossetians in the middle ages migrated from the Don area!! to the Caucasus. But they are different peoples are´nt they?. And when the georgian-south ossetian war broke out many Don Cossacks wanted to help their "south ossetian brothers". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.89.115.207 (talk) 21:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that the Ossetians migrated to Caucasus in the Middle Ages. They lived in this area for thousands of years. See Alania.

My understanding is that in the context of the Gorgian-Ossetian war of 2008, the Don Cossacks were helping “brothers” meaning “compatriots”, rather than anything else. However, there is one interesting detail that might imply that there is a connection between the Ossetians and the Don Cossacks. Before Peter the Great the coat of arms of the Don Cossacks was a deer with an arrow in its side. Indo-European for deer is /*el-n-/, ancient Slavic /*lan/ modern Russian /alen‘/. Sounds very much like alan => Alania. If the Don Cossacks and the Ossetians indeed have the same totem animal, and considering that they do live in geographical proximity, I believe that it would be reasonable to suggest that many thousands of years ago they were one tribe. G Melehov (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


There are many theories about the origins of the Cossacks: One among them is that it originally was a Scythian or Slavonic-Scythian tribe. But the most common seems to be that the Cossacks originated as runaway serfs from northern- and central Russia. Maybe there is some truth in both these theories: Originally a Scythian-Slavic tribe, that later assimilated runaway serfs from central Russia.

Now to the question about the Cossack-Ossetian connection. Reading R. WixmanA Handbook of hte peoples in the USSR it´s mentioned that "many Ossetians" where members not in the Don- but the Terek Cossack group, under the 19th century. The Ossetians speaking a Indo-European language, are orthodox christians, and are believed to be descended from Scythians or Alans. Some historians believe that the Slavonic peoples are partly descended from Scythians, but these suggestions are not within the scope of this discussionpage about Don Cossaks. witho—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.237.145.125 (talk) 20:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are the Don Cossacks (or Cossacks in general) Russians or a people of their own?, although, so far as i know they don´t speak any other language than Russian.

The Don Cossacks speak a dialect of Russian. The Russians is a big group that evolved from different Slavic tribes such as the Rusichi (русичи), the Wiatichi (вятичи), the Slovens (словене), the Crivichi (кривичи), the Berendei (берендеи) and many more including the Don Cossacks (I believe that it is a separate ethnic group and the fact that they do not speak any other language but Russian is in my opinion another prove that the Don Cossacks were not comprised of run-away serfs from different countries). However, due to geography and the autonomous status within Russian Kingdom the Don Cossacks kept their identity, culture and traditions longer than other tribes that completely blended together.G Melehov (talk) 22:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Past tense[edit]

In the International reaction to the 2008 South Ossetia war article, reference is made to the ataman of the Don Cossacks Host. So why is this whole article in the past tense, if the Don Cossacks Host still exists? Scolaire (talk) 18:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the wiki-article it says “The Host was revived in the early 1990s and was officially recognized by the government in 1997.” Current Ataman of the Don Cossack Host is General Viktor Vodolatsky. At the same time, after many decades under the Soviet regime and the communist policy of decossackization directed to destroy the Cossack lifestyle and suppress the Cossack nationalism by promoting idea that the Don Cossacks are just run-away peasants, hence they are not different from any other Russians, the majority of people believe that the Don Cossacks do not even exist as an ethnic group and as a military organization it is a thing of the past and cannot be reestablished in any meaningful capacity. G Melehov (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Host'?[edit]

Why are Cossack political entities called 'hosts'? Are these clans, states, or something in between? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, 'host' is an archaic term for 'army'---is that the sense involved here? MJM74 (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the confusion is due to the usage of the word “Cossack” to describe both the ethnic group and the military unit. The military unit got its name after the ethnic group that formed it. Over the time the distinction between two is almost completely gone and “host” is used sometimes meaning army, sometimes clan. Having said that, there is the officially recognized volunteer military formation "the Don Cossack Host". G Melehov (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origins[edit]

Okay, this seems to have been discussed before. I've deleted the long blurb about how Cossacks allegedly are descended from the "Kurgan people" (and not from East Slavs), as it not only fails in linguistic, historical and genetic arguments, but it also was badly cited: none of the cites it gave actually said that Cossacks were descended from the original inhabitants of the area, rather than from Slavs. I could go into a long explanation of why this can't be the case (using linguistic, historical, ethnic-cultural or even genetic arguments with sources and all) but I don't think I have to seeing as there was a SYN violation. Please provide a source at least (and I'm not saying its impossible- they could be partly assimilated by language replacement many times, the most recent being the adoption of Russian, but I don't see any sources supporting this). --Yalens (talk) 14:16, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To Yalens: Multiple theories should be discussed, in addition to the "peasant theory" advocated by communists and Russian chauvinists, but I certainly have never heard of "Kurgan hypothesis". A historian Lev Gumilev traces origins of Don Cossacks to Brodniks (Slavic population of the Khazar empire). There are also interesting studies by historian Evgraf Saveliev (who links Cossacks to Cherkassians, not to be confused with Cherkessians) and historian Alexandre Shennikov (who asserts that proto-Cossack societies were mixtures of Tatars and Slavs). The latter theory is somewhat similar to the claim made by Alexandre Pushkin that Cossacks might have originated from the Slavic groups serving in the Army of the Golden Horde. The Don Cossack language, Gutar, also has a great variety of Turkic words that are not present in the Russian language at all (starting with such basic words as ataman, adaty, bunchuk, esaul, chigi, etc.) Also democratic culture of ethnic Cossacks (Don, Kuban, Terek, Yaik) is quite unique and is not shared by Russians, Ukrainians, Cherkessians, Chechens... anyone. Genetic evidence is also interesting. There are no published genetic studies on Don Cossacks, so I am not sure what "genetic arguments" you are referring to. (However, there will be a release of one study by RAS this summer.) Moreover, a study by Dibirova (Russian Academy of Sciences) asserts that Terek Cossacks have a higher frequency of haplogroup G2 (Osetian/Circassian) than haplogroup Ra1a (commonly present in Slavs). ViktorC (talk) 05:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the DNA (I think you meant R1a for being present in Slavs- fyi, it is also typical of Indians and some Turkic peoples, lower levels across Europe and Central Asia), I was referring to a genetic study by Balanovsky in 2008 which tested Kuban Cossacks and found that although it was clear they were a defined subgroup of Russians due to not matching the "trends" of Russian DNA identified by Balanovsky, they were still closest to Russians and Ukrainians. Also, I'd like to say that I'm glad that for once someone posted on the talk page and stated cited and veritable theories rather than this "Kurgan" idea. When will this study be released, anyhow, just curious...? --Yalens (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Feel free to add these theories you noted on the page if you can cite them. --Yalens (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Two things more, first democracy: you're not really correct about the uniqueness of Cossack democracy: the Chechens had a democratic system starting with a revolution in the 16th century until the Russian conquest, though it was of a different nature than the Cossack incarnate- it was based on three branches of government, and the Chechen equivalent to the parliament (the Mexk-Khel or Mexk-Kheli- National Congress) was based on representation on the basis of clans rather than the basis of geographical regions.
Second, I got the Y-DNA results for the Kuban Cossacks, if they hold any significance here:
(out of 90 Kuban Cossacks): 3.3% E1b1b, 1.1% G2, 1.1% I*, 4.4% I1, 16.5% I2a, 2.2% I2b, 4.4% J2, 1.1% T, 1.1% N1b, 6.6% N1c, 1.1% Q, 47.3% R1a, 8.8% R1b... so as you can see, you can make the case for them as being either a Russian or Ukrainian population (or both) with this, though you could also make the case for heavy Turkic admixture (R1a could be Slavic or Turkic, but the presence of Q, generally absent in Russians and Ukrainians and at low levels among Western Turkic peoples, attests to Turkic influence, as does the presence of N1b). However, I don't see "Kurgan" here. --Yalens (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to the National Geographic magazine, Nov. 1998 article on the Cossacks, the people were diverse, and have some earlier Asiatic and later added western European admixture.

There were, and are, Cossacks of other faiths. A few Muslim Cossacks live in south-central Russia. There are even Buddhist Cossacks west of the Caspian Sea - the Kalmyks, who migrated from Mongolia in the 1500s. They, too rode to Paris in the war with Napoleon, some bring back French women. The Don Cossacks were migratory, and were known to performed acts of bride capture of enemy subjects in some battles they fought in. 71.102.3.122 (talk) 10:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Don Cossacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Don_Cossacks&oldid=1201602465"